Military Review

Modern "bus" for the infantry

62
The military conflicts of recent decades, the center of military clashes in which has mostly moved to city quarters, have made adjustments to the development trend of armored vehicles. In addition, the rapid development of anti-tank weapons and the appearance of large-caliber sniper armaments in the armies of many countries, or as they are called “antimaterial guns” in the West, which can be translated as rifles against technology, played a role. In this regard, the designers of armored vehicles took up the development of armored vehicles, designed to equip motorized infantry (motorized rifle) units, with a higher level of protection, approximately the same as tank. The most rational way to create such combat vehicles for infantry was to remodel obsolete tank models into armored personnel carriers. By a strange set of circumstances (and maybe quite naturally) the Soviet T-55 became the most common tank model that served as the basis for the creation of heavy armored personnel carriers. In this issue, we offer readers materials on the transformation of the T-55 into an infantry car, and also talk about some other examples of heavy armored personnel carriers.


ISRAEL. HEAVY-DUTY ACHZARIT.

Modern "bus" for the infantry

Israeli heavy tracked armored personnel carrier "Ahzarit" Mk1 created on the basis of the tank T-55


Creation

A pioneer in the creation of heavy armored personnel carriers is Israel. This Israeli engineers pushed the experience of the war in Lebanon in 1982, most of the battles which was conducted in urban environments. If the American-made МХNUMXА60 tanks, which are in service with the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), were to some extent defended by the dynamic defense (MD) used for the first time, the American M1 armored personnel carriers became easy targets for Arab grenade launchers. On the Israeli tanks "Merkava" Mk113 dynamic protection was not installed. It was believed that the level of protection and survivability on the battlefield of this machine is already quite high. And in vain. The Merkava from the fire of the grenade launchers were burning, as were all the other tanks. But still the armored personnel carriers and the infantry sitting in them got the most.

Having studied the experience of that war, the SOI leadership developed a tactical and technical assignment for the development of a heavy armored personnel carrier, which later received the name "Achzarit". In accordance with them, this was supposed to be a highly protected machine capable of operating in local conditions in conjunction with the main Merkava tanks. The idea of ​​creating such a machine was prompted by the successful use in urban areas as a means of delivering infantry to the battlefield of an engineering PuMA detachment machine, made on the chassis of the main tank Centurion.


Israeli heavy tracked armored personnel carrier "Ahzarit" Mk1 created on the basis of the tank T-55


The development of heavy armored personnel carriers in Israel initially envisaged the use of a variety of chassis, including the chassis of the Merkava and Centurion tanks. The first prototypes of the Achzarit BTR were built in 1987. Later, the option of creating a vehicle on the chassis of the T-55 tank, which the Israeli army took in large quantities as trophies during the Arab-Israeli wars and then for several years, was worked out. reinstated for pd

The tests of the prototypes of the Achzarit machines based on the T-55 showed some advantages over the previously worked out variants and especially the lower cost of the machine. Their adoption by the Israel Defense Forces as a heavy armored personnel carrier and the beginning of their mass production took place in 1988. Production of heavy Achzarit armored personnel carriers was carried out in the workshops of the IDF and at the Military Plant located in Tel-Aviv.

According to various estimates, about 400-500 of such vehicles are currently in the Israeli armed forces.


Heavy Akhzarit BTR Mk1 overcomes the descent


Machine design

When rebuilding a T-55 tank into a heavy BTR, its chassis is completely disassembled and then restored, but with some modifications. The turret of the tank is also dismantled and an additional superstructure is brewed on the body of the machine in the habitable compartment, which forms the control compartment and the troop compartment. The engine-transmission compartment is located in the stern of the car, but instead of the standard engine and transmission, it is installed the power plant of the Israeli company NIMDA, which has a slightly smaller height and a more powerful engine.

An additional reservation developed in Israel is installed on the car case, which, according to the developers, provides this car with the best protection among all the available cars in the world of this type.

In the habitable compartment of the car can accommodate up to 10 people, including a crew consisting of three people: the commander of the machine, the driver and the gunner of the machine gun. Place the driver left front left. Above it there is a separate hatch, the lid of which opens to the left. Four periscopic daytime observation devices are installed in front of the hatch, one of which in the center can be replaced by a passive night observation device for night driving.

The car commander is located to the right of the driver and has a rotating periscope daytime surveillance device mounted on the roof of the car and a square hatch, the lid of which opens back. On the right, in front of the machine, there is a machine gunner, who manages the installation of the RAFAEL Overhead Weapon Station with the M7,62 240-mm machine gun mounted on it. The machine gun has a stabilization in two planes and is induced by remote control from inside the machine. The aiming set of the installation is equipped with day and night thermal sights.


Aft door with a ramp for the exit of infantry.


In addition to the remotely controlled machine gun on the Achzarit BTR, there are also three additional 7,62-mm machine guns mounted on pivot rigs: one on the hatch of the vehicle commander and two in the rear of the troop compartment of the vehicle. For firing from these machine guns it is necessary to open manhole covers and protrude out of them.


Akhzarit Mk1 armored personnel carrier with additional commander turret


Seven infantrymen are placed in the rear of the manned compartment of the vehicle: three on the continuous bench seat on the left side, three on the individual folding seats on the right, and one in the center at the rear of the troop compartment.

The driver, commander and gunner of the machine-gun installation each have their own hatch. The commander's manhole cover can be opened in half for surveillance. Behind the hatches of the crew members there are two additional hatches: one in the center of the troop compartment and the other a little to the left and behind.

Established diesel engine B-55 and manual transmission were removed and installed powerplant company NIMDA. This unusual and extremely compact power plant made it possible to make an exit for the assault on the stern of the car on the right side, closing with an armored hinged door using a hydraulic drive. The lower part of it leans down and serves as a ladder, and the upper part opens upwards. The aft exit for the landing force was carried out without changing the configuration of the vehicle hull. In addition, infantry can land and disembark through hatches in the roof of the habitable compartment.


Interior interior


The power plant combines various units, the main of which are identical to those used on the modernized in Israel version of the Soviet T-55 tank, which received the name "Samovar", as well as on the American 155-mm SAU M109. Both of these sample machines are used in large quantities in the Israel Defense Forces.



The power plant of the Achzarit Mk1 BTR, supplied by the Israeli company NIMDA, consists of the American two-stroke diesel engine of liquid cooling Detroit Diesel 8V-71 TTA, developing the power of the 650 hp. The engine is installed across the body of the car and is connected to the hydrodynamic automatic transmission Allison XTG-411-4, also produced in the United States.

Air intake by the engine is carried out either through the combat compartment or through the engine compartment. In both cases, the air enters initially through a pre-filter with a dust blower, and then through a paper air cleaner, similar to those installed on cars.

The chassis of the T-55 tank, consisting of five road wheels, a driving wheel at the rear and a guide wheel on the front of each side, was also upgraded. The suspension rollers of the road wheels are equipped with new torsion shafts, which allowed to increase the dynamic course of the roller, and the first and last suspension nodes are equipped with hydraulic stops from Israel Aircraft Industries, which are also used on Merkava tanks. Such a modernization of the suspension provides the car with better mobility over rough terrain and allows it to operate in conjunction with the main tanks.



The combat mass of the Achzarit BTR has increased to 44 tons compared to 36 tons in T-55 tanks. As already mentioned, the T-55 tower, when reworked in the Achzarit BTR, is dismantled. The main difference in mass between the mass of the Achzarit BTR, having 44 t and the mass of T-55 hull in 27 t, is explained by the installation of additional armor protection to increase the survivability of the vehicle on the battlefield. The total height on the roof of the enclosure is approximately 2 m, and the width of the machine is 3,64 m.

On both sides of the hull, six CL-303Q smoke grenade launchers manufactured by Israel Military Industries were installed in the front part of it. Such grenade launchers were originally mounted on Israeli Centurion, M48 / M60 and Merkava tanks. They can shoot different types of grenades in the direction of the car.

The standard equipment of the Achzarit BTR includes the Spectronix fire detection and extinguishing system, a system for collective protection against weapons of mass destruction and smoke-relief equipment for setting smoke screens using the fuel injection principle in the engine exhaust manifold located on the left side of the body.



Currently, the IDF has a version of the heavy Achzarit Mk2 armored personnel carrier. This machine has a new power plant, also supplied by the Israeli company NIMDA. It includes the American diesel engine “Detroit Diesel” 8V-92 TA, which develops the power of the 850 hp, combined with the American automatic transmission “Allison” XTG-411-5. This power plant provides the machine with a higher power density and better acceleration characteristics. To date, the model "Achzarit" Mk2 is still the latest example of this heavy armored personnel carrier.


Israeli heavy armored personnel carrier "Ahzarit" Mk2


In addition, on the basis of the heavy armored personnel carrier “Achzarit”, a version of the command and staff vehicle was created, which differs from the standard type of armored personnel carrier by the absence of machine guns on the roof of the vehicle and the equipment of additional radio stations to perform specialized control functions.

The main tactical and technical characteristics of the heavy Bch Achzarit
Combat weight, t - 44
Crew + landing party, people - 3 + 7
Maximum speed, km / h - 50
Engine
- brand - "Detroit Diesel" 8V-92 TA
- power, hp - 850
Armament:
- basic - 7,62-mm machine gun M240 with remote control
- additional - two 7,62-mm machine guns FN MAG
Armor Protection - Provides RPG Protection

RUSSIA. HEAVY ARMORED RESPONSE BTR-T.


Russian heavy armored personnel carrier BTR-T, armed with an 30-mm automatic cannon and Kontrik ATGM


Creation

To provide a higher level of protection for infantry troops of motorized rifle subunits operating together with tanks, a prototype of a new heavy armored personnel carrier, designated BTR-T (heavy armored personnel carrier), was developed in Russia on the basis of the T-55 tank chassis of the Omsk Transport Engineering Design Bureau (KBTM). For the first time it was demonstrated at the exhibition of arms VTTV-97 in Omsk in 1997.

The construction of the heavy armored personnel carrier BTR-T was carried out at the Omsk Transport Engineering Plant (Omsktransmash).

According to the designers, a large number of T-55 tanks available in Russia, which can be converted into BTR-T, would provide the army with relatively inexpensive and highly protected combat vehicles for infantry. According to some sources, the export value of the BTR-T is 600 thousand USD, respectively, and the re-equipment of the T-55 tank in the BTR-T is much cheaper.

Design

The new heavy armored personnel carrier BTR-T is based on the chassis of the T-55 tank, from which the turret was removed and the hull was raised to provide additional space for the crew and landing force in front of the vehicle and the engine compartment stored in the rear part of the vehicle.

The crew of the car consists of two people. The driver is in front of the same place and the commander-gunner is in the tower. In the troop compartment can be transported five fully equipped infantrymen.



For landing and landing assault there are hatches in the roof: front right and behind the tower. Since the roof of the habitable compartment above the level of the roof of the hull, two more hatches were made at the rear of the wheelhouse. The covers of these hatches open upwards and have built-in prism blocks for observation. With the same purpose, the troop compartment is also equipped with periscopic instruments.

The BTR-T heavy armored personnel carrier has a combat mass of 38,5 tons (compared to 36 tons of a standard T-55 tank). If we consider that the body of the BTR-T has a mass of 27 T, then it becomes clear that the main part of the mass of the BTR-T that was increased by more than 10 tons went to strengthen the armor protection of the vehicle.

Frontal armor parts and sides are equipped with the latest generation Kontakt-5 dynamic protection package, which provides a high level of protection not only against cumulative, but also against armor-piercing sub-caliber ammunition. Similar DZ is used on modern Russian tanks T-80U and T-90С.

In addition, the BTR-T reinforced the bottom of the hull to increase the survivability of the machine when undermining anti-tank mines. This is provided by additional reservation of the bottom, which is welded to it with a gap, forming an air gap between the additional armor and the bottom itself, which significantly reduces the impact of the blast wave during a blast on a mine.


Modification of the BTR-T with 12,7-mm machine gun installation - DMP (patrol patrol vehicle)


In order to compensate for the increased mass and maintain mobility at the same level, not lower than it was on the T-55 tank, a more powerful B-46-6 engine was installed on the machine, which develops the power of the 780 hp. The transmission of the car has also been improved.

In front of the case, a low-profile turret is installed, on which elements of the weapons complex are mounted.

The armament complex on the BTR-T may have a different composition, since it is implemented in the form of various modules that can be installed on the machine depending on its purpose or customer requirements.



The following options for weapons BTR-T:

1. 30-mm automatic gun 2А42 and two PU-ATGM "Competition";
2. 30-mm automatic gun 2А42 and 30-mm automatic grenade launcher AG-17;
3. Two double-barreled 30-mm machine gun 2А38;
4. 12,7-mm machine gun NSVT-12,7 "Rock" (or "Kord") and two PU ATGM "Competition";
5. 12,7-mm machine gun NSVT-12,7 "Rock" (or "cord") and 30-mm automatic grenade launcher AG-17.

In addition, in addition to the use in the composition of the modules with a complex of weapons weapons Russian development and production, they can also be installed and samples of weapons of Western production.

Like many Russian-made armored combat vehicles, the BTR-T has a thermo-smoke equipment for the installation of smoke screens through the injection of fuel into the exhaust path. In addition, there are four blocks (three launchers each) for launching smoke or aerosol grenades. The placement of smoke (aerosol) air curtains from these blocks is carried out ahead of the machine.

Main tactical and technical characteristics of heavy BTR-T
Combat weight, t - 38,5
Crew + landing party, people - 2 + 5
Maximum speed, km / h - 50
Engine
- brand - B-46-6
- power, hp - 780
Armament (option):
- basic - 30-mm automatic gun 2А42
- additional - 7,62-mm PKT twin machine gun
- a complex of guided weapons - PU PTRK "Competition-M"
Ammunition, (shots):
- for 30-mm guns 2А42 - 200
- for PKT machine gun - 2000
- for ATGM - 3
Armored protection - provides protection against RPG and ATGM

INDIA. HEAVY BOOKED TRANSPORTER TBHA.


Heavy indian BTR


In India, which also has a large number of Soviet-built T-55 tanks, also decided to turn to the experience of building heavy armored personnel carriers. Not without the influence of Israel, they also took the good old T-55 tank, removed the turret, welded multi-layer thick armor on the hull, and was ready. So it turned out the Indian heavy armored personnel carrier TBHA - T-55 Based Heavy APC (APC - armored personnel carrier - our armored carrier).

The spacious "saloon" of the car can accommodate up to 11 people (along with two crew members - a driver and commander, he is also the gunner of the machine-gun installation). I must say, the "salon" is equipped comfortably, you can stand to its full height, inside it is trimmed with carpet.

To monitor the surrounding terrain, the commander uses the sighting system of a remote-controlled machine-gun installation, which stands on the roof of the vehicle. The image from the combined sight is displayed on the LCD screen. The unit is equipped with an 12,7-mm machine gun, the NSVT-12,7 “Rock” type, stabilized in two planes, which allows for targeted fire from a machine gun on the move. According to the developers, "the armor of the cabin is able to withstand a grenade hit from RPG-7 from all sides," which looks very doubtful. True, the developers of the RPG-7 declare something else: "To date, there is no sample of armored vehicles whose armor has not been pierced by the RPG-7 grenade."

The transmission and engine of the T-55 tank were replaced by the Israeli power plant of the NIMDA company, just as the Israelis did on the Achzarit Mk2 APC. It is a bit more compact than the previous one, combines American 850-strong diesel “Detroit Diesel” 8V-92 and automatic transmission “Allison” XTG-411-5. Such is the Israeli assembly of American components. The new power plant made it possible to make an exit for the transported infantrymen on the stern of the car. When you open it, its armored door also serves as a ladder for getting into and out of the car.

Naturally, the TBHA is equipped with collective protection systems for weapons of mass destruction, fire extinguishing, air conditioning and smoke screens. At the request of the customer, it can be installed additional weapons systems, surveillance, etc.

The disadvantage of this version of the heavy armored personnel carrier is the impossibility of firing from the personal weapons of the assault force inside the vehicle and the presence of only one machine gun. So only two people will be involved in the business - the driver and the commander, the rest will simply ride along the indicated route by passengers.

The main tactical and technical characteristics of the heavy armored personnel carrier TBHA
Combat weight, t - about 45
Crew + landing party, people - 2 + 9
Maximum speed, km / h - 50
Engine
- brand - Detroit Diesel 8V-92 TA
- power, hp - 850
Armament - 12,7-mm machine gun NSVT-12,7 "Rock" with remote control
Sighting system - combined with optical and thermal channels, with remote control
Armor Protection - Provides RPG Protection

JORDAN. HEAVY BTR AB14 TEMSAH.


[Center]

Jordanian heavy armored personnel carrier "Temsah" with a superstructure (turret of the driver) and without armament


If another two decades ago the construction and even modernization of armored vehicles was the fate of only a small number of states with a high level of industry, then recently there has been an increase in the producers of such equipment. The Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan has recently joined them. For almost the last ten years, the Jordanian company KADDB (King Abdullah II Design and Development Bureau) has presented its developments in the field of armored vehicles at international arms exhibitions.

With respect to tanks, KADDB was engaged in their modernization, but with respect to heavy combat vehicles for infantry, it was able to present a new development. However, this is understandable, heavy armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles were born in the Middle East, however, they first appeared on the other side of the Jordan. Due to certain circumstances, the Arab countries do not learn from Israeli experience and do not invite specialists from this country. In addition, there are no tanks built in Jordan of Soviet construction. With the participation of the Mechanology Design Bureau (MDB) from South Africa, the US General Dynamics Land Systems and the Jordanian CLS, a highly-protected combat vehicle for infantry AB14 Temsah was created. It is designed on the basis of the chassis of the tank "Centurion". However, it had to be significantly re-arranged, so we can say that “Temsah” is already a purely Jordanian brainchild.

Layout

The layout of the machine is made with the front of the power plant. In other words, the hull of the tank "Centurion" was deployed at 180 degrees. In the power plant of the machine used American diesel engine AVDS 1790, power 950 hp, which is also used when upgrading tanks M60A1 in Jordan. Transmission automatic CD 1000, has two gears forward and one reverse. Suspension armored personnel carrier hydropneumatic balancing. The dynamic course of the roller is + 350 and -100 mm.



Reservation of the car is significantly enhanced compared with the base chassis of the tank "Centurion". It provides protection for the crew inside and inside the vehicle, not only from small arms fire, but also from artillery ammunition. The hull design provides for the installation of dynamic protection that will make a heavy armored personnel carrier more resilient in the face of exposure to fire with anti-tank grenade launchers. However, it is not reported whose development formed the basis of the proposed dynamic protection. In addition, the developers believe that the front location of the power plant increases the survival of the crew of the car on the battlefield during the shelling in frontal projections. The body of the BTR has a relatively small height, just over two meters, which also, in the opinion of the creators of the vehicle, increases its survivability on the battlefield. Superstructures of the hull - towers with different variants of armament complexes - are uninhabited and remotely controlled from the hull of the vehicle.

Recently, the KADDB company presented another sample of the heavy Temsah BTR without any weapon systems at all. On the roof of the car body there is a small superstructure which has relatively large armored glass on all sides, providing good visibility from the car. If necessary, these glasses are closed armored plates in which there are gaps for observation.


View through the rear window of the superstructure to the driver’s control panel


The crew of the armored personnel carrier "Temsah" consists of two people: a driver and commander, he is also an operator of the armament complex. The assault unit of the BMP is designed to accommodate 10 infantrymen in full gear. It should be noted, it is quite spacious and has a length of 3350 mm, width 1770 mm and height 1455 mm.

Loopholes for firing from personal weapons in the car are not equipped. However, television cameras can be installed to monitor the terrain of the landing force, and inside the troop compartment of the 4 liquid crystal television monitor. Infantrymen in the car are located along the sides, with his back to them. For landing and landing troops machine is equipped with a folding ramp in the aft with a mechanical drive. There are also hatches in the back of the roof of the troop compartment. Their number, depending on the version of the machine, can vary from one to six.



Inside the car, under the assault seats, pallets are installed for dry rations and water for all people in the car. According to the developers, the water and food supplies allow the machine to operate autonomously for 48 hours.

options

Armament machines may be different. So far, two variants of the Temsah BTR were demonstrated: in one, the armament complex used a large-caliber machine gun mounted in a remote-controlled tower module, and two INGWE anti-tank guided missiles, manufactured in South Africa. In another version, with an automatic 20-mm cannon, a machine gun paired with it, and an INGWE ATGM anti-tank missile system, also installed in a remote-controlled tower module.



Armament "Temsah" stabilized in two planes. The rate of fire of an automatic cannon is 200 shots per minute, its ammunition - 300 shells, of which only 150 are ready for use. The rest are laid in the car and they need to be charged, after using up the tape with ammunition on the turret. The target range of the cannon is 2000 m. The fire from the cannon can be fired by single shots or bursts.


Temsah armed with an 20-mm cannon and 4-container ATGM launcher


The 7,62-mm machine gun M240, paired with a cannon, is a tank variant of the famous Belgian FN MAG. Sighting range of shooting - 1200 m, 2600 ammunition ammunition, of which only 600 is ready to use. The remaining 2000 pcs. laid in laying inside the troop compartment of the machine. ATGM ammunition is 4 missiles - only those that are in launchers. INGWE ATGM firing range from 500 to 5000 m.

Smoke grenade launchers are mounted on the tower module for the installation of smoke screens.

Pointing weapons is carried out remotely from the body of the machine. Monitoring the battlefield and aiming is carried out on the LCD television monitor installed in the workplace of the commander of the machine. The elevation angles of the weapon range from -8 to + 40 degrees, which, in my opinion, is not quite sufficient, since the machine is designed to operate in the city and mountainous terrain, which is more than enough in Jordan.


"Temsah", armed with 20-mm automatic gun and two-container ATGM launcher (ZT-35 "Ingwe") in the turret


As standard, the machine is equipped with collective protection systems, air conditioning and fire protection system.

The main tactical and technical characteristics of the heavy armored personnel carrier "Temsah"
Combat weight, t - 49,5
Crew + landing party, people - 2 + 10
Sizes, mm:
- length - 7962
- width - 3766
- height on the roof of the case - 2080
- clearance - 500
Engine
- brand - AVDS 1790
- power, hp - 950
Specific power, hp / t - 19,2
Permissible payload, t - 4
Armament (option):
- main - 20-mm automatic gun
- additional - 7,62-mm machine gun M240
- guided weapons complex - INGWE ATGM
Ammunition, (shots):
- for 20-mm guns - 150 + 150
- for the machine gun M240 - 600 + 2000
- for ATGM - 4
Fuel stock, l - 950
Armor Protection - Provides RPG Protection

*****

Thus, there is a worldwide tendency to use obsolete types of tanks (mainly “Centurion” and T-55) for further service as heavy armored personnel carriers. At the same time, such BTRs are significantly lower in the cost of new combat vehicles, which allows many armies to have in their composition a sufficient number of such BTRs. The main purpose of heavy armored personnel carriers is to transport and support infantry units with fire during independent or joint operations with tank units in special conditions (combat in mountainous and wooded areas, in the city, etc.). Powerful booking of heavy armored personnel carriers makes it possible to reduce losses both of personnel and of the vehicles themselves from the fire of large-caliber rifles and machine guns, small-caliber automatic cannons, and also from detonation of mines.

At the same time, for the acquisition of mobile forces, light combat vehicles will be used, that is, conventional infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, whose mass does not exceed 30 t.

Options are provided for using the Temsah BTR chassis as a tracked armored medical vehicle, a command post, as well as for a base for self-propelled guns and mortars.
Author:
Originator:
http://otvaga2004.ru
62 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Mikhado
    Mikhado 10 June 2013 08: 26
    +9
    Sergei Suvorov is an intelligent expert, I have known him for a long time from his publications in "Technology and Armament". There is a tendency towards heavy armored personnel carriers, we have no implementation and, apparently, will not.
    Everything is clear with Israel - people are in constant combat readiness, the concept is to save people, there are resources - that’s what makes such machines.
    1. Greyfox
      Greyfox 10 June 2013 08: 35
      +5
      As for the implementation, you are not quite right - it was made by BMO-T. And it even seems to be accepted into service. Another thing is that, again, it is not mass-produced (like many good things for the army).
      1. Georgs
        Georgs 10 June 2013 15: 57
        +2
        Quote: Greyfox
        As for the implementation, you are not quite right, made by BMO-T. And it even seems to be adopted.

        BMO-T done. But it seems that it was casually designed (I can be mistaken, like a nonsense, and if I am mistaken, let knowledgeable comrades correct me). If you compare with the Israeli machine, the latter’s gain, it seems to me, is obvious. Of course, the BMO-T has more powerful weapons, but it throws much less personnel, an incomplete separation. So, these machines need more for delivery acc. units. If it is mainly a vehicle, is such firepower so necessary? And further. It seems like landing from ours is necessary on top? Well, this is until you get out of the hatch, while you roll off the armor, and here they will put you. Especially if in urban conditions. There is a sniper or machine gunner from the building. Not very correct, IMHO. Israel put a compact diesel engine, but ours, therefore, left a regular one, or what? Then of course, such an ancient fool takes up how much space; you cannot make a passage to the stern past her.
        1. Greyfox
          Greyfox 10 June 2013 16: 36
          +2
          Apparently you confused the BTR-T based on the T-55 and the BMO-T based on the T-72. The BMO-T has a crew of 2 + 7 (and there are also flamethrower "pipes" that I would not count in the vehicle's armament). So if you want, ordinary infantrymen can be crammed more. Another thing is that ours did not fool around like the Israelis with rearrangement , therefore, the landing is not through the stern, but through the upper hatches. Compared to the stern ramp, there is no gut.
        2. Alekseev
          Alekseev 10 June 2013 21: 11
          0
          Quote: GeorGS
          such an ancient fool takes up how much space; you cannot make a passage to the stern past her.

          For your information, the "ancient fool" has a very high overall capacity in the world ... wink Yes Yes! Especially in the options of B-84, B-92, etc.
          The question is different - the engine in the T-55 is located across the hull. For tank that's better.
          For armored personnel carriers (bmp), you can, of course, do it along. And, in general, replace the MTO. But the costs, however. The meaning of remaking 55s is lost.
      2. Pamir210
        Pamir210 22 June 2013 10: 41
        0
        Yet Mikhando is right: we have no implementation.
        Yes, we created our similar car, but ... or rather, BUT ...
        The Israelis and others have a larger landing compartment.
        Our division does not enter our BTR-T. So it’s good that this car is not mass-produced. It is necessary to modify.
    2. LION
      LION 10 June 2013 21: 16
      0
      I would like to remind you that the first vehicles of this class appeared at the Americans and Canadians during the landing in Normandy. BTR "Kangaroo". Converted from Shermans and REMs 2, or rather from SPG PRIST on their own chassis. True, there was no roof of the troop compartment. In general, read about Hobart's funny things during the landing. Very interesting.
    3. biznaw
      biznaw 10 June 2013 22: 49
      +5
      Hmm, with the Israelis the story "when the cat has nothing to do, he licks the eggs" paid time dofig, there is money, the mechanics also have a desire to experiment, so they "skolkhoz" an incomprehensible car from battle tanks. Think if this heavy armored personnel carrier is intended for battle in the first line, then it must be an infantry fighting vehicle or a tank. If this is a "minibus" then the BTR-80 is "behind the eyes." If, after all, the first line and protection from machine-gun fire, spears and arrows, then there is no point in TBTR, even the T-34 will cope with these tasks, not to mention the T55, which it makes no sense to convert into BMPs, are not intended to carry infantry? the infantry does not fit? Yes nah. you need this property. In the ENTRANCE OF THE HOUSE, the APC cannot climb the stairs and the landing will not protect it with armor, but the T-55 will not even try, unload the whole house from the cannon, and then the infantry itself will slowly approach the ruins without unnecessary risk. The best armored personnel carrier from the T-55 is the T-55 tank itself, the Jews troll our Serdyukovs with their crafts.
      IMHO, in an attempt to do b. a support machine for tanks like Terminator makes sense, armor protection at the tank level, another 3-4 paratroopers for armor to land, so that there would be someone to put a flag in the ruins of the Reystag ...
  2. cth; fyn
    cth; fyn 10 June 2013 08: 45
    +1
    Well, Israeli warriors do not quite understand why an armored personnel carrier is needed and use it as a BMP, i.e. at the very front edge for covering infantry.
    The task of the armored personnel carrier is somewhat different - the delivery of people and cargo to the front line, therefore it must be mobile, not crawl at a speed of 50 km / h, it must withstand explosive bombing by a mine or a landmine, and then move on (which the tracked chassis cannot provide), it must have weapons capable of hitting infantry behind improvised shelters (parapet, stones, sandbags).
    The probability of meeting an enemy with heavy weapons for an armored personnel carrier is small (if used correctly), its main opponents will be saboteurs, derelicts and partisans, none of these groups will be able to move a gun or equipment, because It will be quickly noticed, and therefore the maximum that threatens the armored personnel carrier (if used correctly) is Mines / landmines, RPGs, KSV, large-caliber machine guns (maximum KPV), grenades, machine guns.
    Therefore, the APC should have protection against short-range CPV and good protection against RPGs, have excellent mine protection (and given the proverb that the best fight, which was not ...). The armament should consist of a small piece of 20-30 mm (with the possibility of anti-aircraft fire) and a PC, and ideally also a pair of air defense systems, it may not be a bad AGS, but then the car will already claim BMP, not even a very bad BMP.
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 10 June 2013 15: 40
      +2
      Protection from RPGs will still require tank armor, perhaps non-combustible aluminum alloys will do, like the M113 holds RPGs well. And steel at least 20, at least 50 mm, when breaking through hundreds of millimeters, little will change.

      The problem with armored personnel carriers now is that they are constantly ambushed, although IMHO bandits are much more effective in crushing timely planting and liquidating the main ringleaders than then hanging tons of armor on armored personnel carriers and driving heavy-armed divisions into mountains and forests. They will win the war, but there is no adequate protection against snipers and bombings. The most unpleasant thing is that the burnt equipment, which is difficult to destroy, is not annoying for society, but a soldier can have one bullet and every loss is extremely unpleasant.
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 10 June 2013 17: 52
        0
        Heh, the 64st century in the yard, steel is antediluvian, composites are everything! ceramics, by definition, are heat-resistant, besides, they have good armor protection, but they weigh a lot and are prickly, you mentioned aluminum, that’s good, various composites have been used in tank building for a long time, the famous T-80 was the first in the USSR, and T -72 and 90/XNUMX.
        KDZ does not help badly, "Relikt", for example, also holds shells, and does not fly off if the car touches a building, there is a KAZ that knocks down an RPG grenade even on approach, only it takes up a lot of space and is expensive, KDZ weighs decently (1,5 tons of kit and more).
        So there are a lot of ways, even the most ordinary lattices are effective.
        Therefore, a modern armored personnel carrier should have a body capable of carrying KAZ, KDZ or be equipped with grilles (although not everything is clear with them either), perhaps an acceptable protection will be created by the lining of the cabin, or the infantry themselves will be dressed in something similar to the "Cowboy" kit, especially since it is now being tested set "Warrior",
        A rework of the tank will give a largely losing machine.
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 11 June 2013 14: 52
          0
          Composites are not repairable, at least.
          1. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 11 June 2013 20: 48
            0
            You tell it to those tanks that took Grozny.
      2. Alekseev
        Alekseev 10 June 2013 21: 20
        +1
        Quote: Avenger711
        like M113 holds RPG pretty well.

        It is unlikely! laughing
        On the BMP, the upper frontal sheet, the so-called "ribbed", made of aluminum armor, sometimes burns out due to malfunctions of the power plant (ignition of oil ejected from the old engine's cylinders in the ejector). Without any RPG. request
        And if someone had thought of a light machine like the old M113 that could "hold" the RPG well, the Nobel Prize for such a genius would be negligible. smile
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 11 June 2013 14: 54
          0
          Which BMP? And aluminum alloys are different. It’s on the BMD’s corps themselves that are burning, the BMP-3 doesn’t have such a problem, as far as I know.
          1. Alekseev
            Alekseev 12 June 2013 12: 51
            0
            Specifically, I had to evacuate a BMP-1 that was burned in this way, although partially.
      3. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 11 June 2013 19: 31
        +1
        Quote: Avenger711
        M113 is not bad at holding RPGs.


        Respected! M113 RPG does not hold - it generally does not hold any armor. Protects only DZ, Lattice, and AZ systems.
    2. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 11 June 2013 19: 29
      0
      I can’t understand one thing - for a long time I came across the opinion in the sources (and I profess it myself) that all the APCs described in the article are nothing but Heavy IFVs - like APCs they do not fit very well with the generally accepted doctrine, but like BMPs they do not time.
  3. bairat
    bairat 10 June 2013 09: 02
    +9
    For landing and landing there are hatches in the roof: front right and behind the tower. Since the roof of the inhabited compartment is higher than the roof of the hull, two more hatches were made in the rear of the cabin. The covers of these hatches open up
    Is there a normal exit for the landing?
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 10 June 2013 09: 11
      10
      only hardcore! just under the bullets!
      1. Rider
        Rider 10 June 2013 11: 15
        +2
        Quote: cth; fyn
        only hardcore! just under the bullets!


        Well, actually in another way.
        to exit through the stern, it is necessary to redo the MTO.
        and even install another dvigun.
        almost a new car turns out.
        and Kharkovites quite decent happened (photo below)
        but, as already mentioned, they used T 64.
      2. Alekseev
        Alekseev 10 June 2013 21: 36
        +3
        It is impossible to make a rear hatch in the 55-hull housing without a complete overhaul of the MTO.
        But, it seems, the covers of the exit hatches themselves must be made sufficiently bulletproof, kind of shields when landing infantry. It is easier.
        Yes, "pregnant cockroaches" will be somewhat uncomfortable.
        But the back door does not always save. Especially when ambushed. After all, they can shoot at the back.
        Only the bottom hatch! laughing But he will weaken the "anti-smoke" fortress of the APC request
        1. cth; fyn
          cth; fyn 11 June 2013 20: 50
          0
          You can deploy the tank, in front of the back, and stern to make the bow.
    2. Avenger711
      Avenger711 10 June 2013 15: 29
      0
      Alteration of the tank, in principle, does not imply otherwise.
  4. roial
    10 June 2013 09: 23
    10
    With thousands of old tanks, it was possible to make such an option
    1. Per se.
      Per se. 10 June 2013 09: 52
      +2
      Quote: roial
      With thousands of old tanks, it was possible to make such an option
      Of all that was converted on the basis of Soviet tanks to heavy armored personnel carriers (BMPs), this is the best that is. But, here you need T-64 tanks and their engines, on the T-54 / 55 / 62 and T-72 such a chip will not work with moving the engine forward. The Israelis do not put heavy weapons on their APCs so that they do not try to use these vehicles instead of tanks. The Israeli army mainly performs the police functions and tasks of the internal troops. There are no marshes and numerous rivers in Israel. Yes, they need a heavy armored personnel carrier, and we? To operate with tanks, work from under the armor, remake old tanks, there is a unique machine, which, in its misfortune, was called the BMPT ... Fools and traitors do everything to prevent it from being in our army, but the Israeli idea from them wars with heavy armored personnel carrier, goes with a bang. Let’s first understand where and what equipment is needed, against whom, in what geographical environment, and then decide what a heavy armored personnel carrier is, a savior of poor infantry, such as a bomb shelter, or a mass grave for the first line.
      1. svp67
        svp67 10 June 2013 09: 59
        +1
        Quote: Per se.
        But, here you need T-64 tanks and their engines, on the T-54 / 55 / 62 and T-72 such a chip will not work with moving the engine forward.

        T64 because of the engine is not the best option, very smoky ...
        [img] http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=dfnWdMFVGr8 [/ img]
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 10 June 2013 10: 34
          +2
          Quote: svp67
          T64 because of the engine is not the best option, very smoky ...
          Nevertheless, it was on the basis of the T-64 that they made, everything else from the alterations, somehow, is not impressive. For a good car, then a special layout of the armored personnel carrier (BMP) is needed, where there will be enhanced protection. If only it does not become an end in itself, otherwise we will come to the semblance of "fur bras".
        2. Avenger711
          Avenger711 10 June 2013 15: 46
          +3
          The T-64 is fundamentally defective, the refinement of one motor, albeit very compact, does not change the overall picture. Actually, it was not in vain that he was discontinued in the 87th for 20 years without having solved the problems.
      2. svp67
        svp67 10 June 2013 10: 06
        +2
        Smokes, smokes and smokes again ...
      3. svp67
        svp67 10 June 2013 11: 03
        +1
        Quote: Per se.
        Of everything that was converted on the basis of Soviet tanks to heavy armored personnel carriers (BMPs), this is the best that is
        In pictures and in advertisements - everything is WONDERFUL. And who will answer whether this "pepelats" was tested with a landing party for a run? At one time, even on BMP1 and 2, there was enough exhaust gas from the FTD, so that the landing would eventually become - NOT READY, but here is such a "cloud". Have pity on the boys, they don’t remove the vomit from the uniform for the whole year's service ...
        1. Alexander D.
          Alexander D. 11 June 2013 23: 54
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          Quote: Per se.
          Of everything that was converted on the basis of Soviet tanks to heavy armored personnel carriers (BMPs), this is the best that is
          In pictures and in advertisements - everything is WONDERFUL. And who will answer whether this "pepelats" was tested with a landing party for a run? At one time, even on BMP1 and 2, there was enough exhaust gas from the FTD, so that the landing would eventually become - NOT READY, but here is such a "cloud". Have pity on the boys, they don’t remove the vomit from the uniform for the whole year's service ...

          And who told you that the final version of the engine is on the video you quoted? Any 5TDF (700 h.p.) lying around in the warehouse could put in there - it’s clean to check whether it will eat or not. These were tests exclusively for designers to check the operation of the converted housing.
          1. svp67
            svp67 16 June 2013 13: 07
            0
            Quote: Alexander D.
            Any 5TDF (700 hp) lying around in the warehouse could put in - cleanly check whether it will eat or not. These were tests exclusively for designers to check the work of the converted
            well convinced - went, now, what? What engine will be installed on this "object"? I think the answer is obvious - from the "TD" family. which are still more or less new, but with each kilometer, due to high operating speeds, they wear out more and more and, accordingly, consume more and more oil, and hence the exhaust becomes more and more toxic ...
      4. Avenger711
        Avenger711 10 June 2013 15: 45
        +2
        And the T-64 itself is a bunch of scrap metal, despite the compactness of the engine. It is necessary to design from scratch.

        BMPT can not carry people and is rightly criticized as blinded from what was. 2 Add. a crew member for auxiliary weapons is something wrong, a 30 mm cannon, this is again achievable on the BMP-2 and such combat modules are a dime a dozen. The gun mount itself has no turret and is vulnerable.
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 11 June 2013 06: 52
          0
          Quote: Avenger711
          BMPT can not carry people and is rightly criticized as blinded from what was. 2 Add. crew member on auxiliary weapons
          BMPT and should not carry people to the battlefield, namely, to replace them on the battlefield. This is something that the heaviest armored personnel carrier does not give. You are sickened by the 2 additional crew members on the BMPT grenade launchers, but there are no 8-10 infantry in the heavy armored personnel carrier. For you, "something is wrong" is time for 30 mm cannons in an uninhabited installation, but the machine gun on the roof of the reference-heavy "Namer", apparently, does not bother, as well as the fact that any possible armament of the armored personnel carrier will be weaker than the BMPT. Modifications of the BMPT are possible, in which it can be with 3 crew members, and even with two. A 57 mm cannon can also stand on it, and the armament can be covered with additional armor screens, if necessary, the main thing is different - the BMPT must save soldiers' lives by working on the battlefield with tanks (or without them) instead of infantry, which is better the thickest armor of armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles. In general, the BMPT would be more correctly called a heavy BMP. This is a real COMBAT VEHICLE instead of infantry, and there is no need to fence gardens with armored personnel carriers on the battlefield. Sorry if abruptly.
          1. Avenger711
            Avenger711 11 June 2013 15: 01
            +1
            Infantry has a key ability that no other kind of troops have. It can occupy territory. Tanks cannot occupy territory. Therefore, the main method of infantry combat, on foot, and the task of armored personnel carriers to bring it to the battlefield. The battle from the car by the charter is provided only in cases when the enemy has almost no resistance. Because no armored car can clean the house occupied by the enemy, or detect a grenade launcher that has sat in a ravine.

            BMPT is essentially a replacement for anti-aircraft guns, which from time immemorial have been used in conditions where the tanks lack the elevation angle of the gun.
            1. Per se.
              Per se. 11 June 2013 21: 25
              +1
              Quote: Avenger711
              Infantry has a key ability that no other kind of troops have. It can occupy territory. Tanks cannot occupy territory.
              I completely agree with you here, but does BMPT prevent this, on the contrary, it greatly contributes. You, after all, will not send infantry ahead of the tanks, the second line, along with the armored personnel carrier. BMPT is not a substitute for anti-aircraft guns, although in street battles its guns are useful for fire on the upper floors, frontal grenade launchers for shot through the streets, tank armor to cover its infantry. From old tanks, instead of mediocre heavy armored personnel carriers, you can make good, excellent vehicles that are necessary for both tankers and infantry.
          2. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 11 June 2013 20: 59
            0
            So I agree with you, BMPT is needed, but not in the form in which the Ural designers presented it. if the armor protection is at the level of the tank, so let it be in all places at this level, if they put two more grenade launchers, then let them not infringe upon them, otherwise what is the use of them when they cannot conduct effective fire? In general, BMPT "object 199" is extremely unsuccessful.
    2. svp67
      svp67 10 June 2013 09: 54
      +2
      Quote: roial
      With thousands of old tanks, it was possible to make such an option

      Only not on the basis of T64 - the entire crew will suffocate ...
      1. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 10 June 2013 17: 54
        +2
        Well, the customer may require the installation of another power plant, right?
        1. Genady1976
          Genady1976 10 June 2013 20: 36
          +1
          why argue no one needs this BMP would be needed would have been done a long time ago
    3. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 11 June 2013 19: 32
      0
      Quote: roial
      With thousands of old tanks, it was possible to make such an option


      It was the USSR that had thousands of tanks, and what is now standing at the storage bases requires not even a mothballing, but a major overhaul.
      1. roial
        16 June 2013 13: 00
        -1
        so the alteration includes a complete re-arrangement with the digestion of a durable body
  5. alex67
    alex67 10 June 2013 09: 28
    +8
    RATIONAL USE OF OLD EQUIPMENT AND CREATION ON ITS BASIS
    TECHNIQUES OF NEW APPOINTMENT.
    THANKS TO THE AUTHOR FOR AN INTERESTING ARTICLE
  6. AK-47
    AK-47 10 June 2013 10: 23
    +5
    If we compare the heavy BTR “Ahzarit” production of Israel and the heavy BTR-T production Russia, which is also based on the chassis of the T-55 tank, it is obvious that Israel is better.
    Was it worth the effort to create a technique inferior to the 80 analogue of the last century?
    1. Corsair
      Corsair 10 June 2013 10: 48
      +1
      Quote: AK-47
      Was it worth the effort to create a technique inferior to the 80 analogue of the last century?

      This model is just a stage, and passed, we will wait for the "appearance in the light" of products on the platform "Kurganets 25" ...
    2. Rider
      Rider 10 June 2013 11: 21
      -2
      Quote: AK-47
      Israel is obviously better.


      except weapons (which is completely solvable)
      our gun is clearly better.

      Vaabsche, unarmed military equipment, this is a crime.
      1. Hudo
        Hudo 11 June 2013 18: 57
        0
        Quote: Rider
        Vaabsche, unarmed military equipment, this is a crime.


        It was for this phrase of yours that I put +.
  7. The comment was deleted.
  8. Matt eversmann
    Matt eversmann 10 June 2013 10: 31
    +2
    Many thanks to the author for the material provided. A lot of information about heavy armored personnel carriers of different countries. There is something to read, there is something to compare.
  9. cartridge
    cartridge 10 June 2013 11: 14
    +6
    44 tons ?! Is it every time for the transfer of a dozen soldiers, along with this heavyweight monster, you need to plan a separate Il-76 flight?
    How much will it cost to transfer a motorized rifle regiment from Taman to Khabarovsk? Well, comrades, fans of the Israeli experience, count and announce the numbers.
    And why are these hippos in general?
    They are not needed in the city. All the same, the infantryman is fighting in the city outside the car for his two inside the houses, in basements and attics.
    Fire support is akin to a tank shot from them you will not wait.
    And in case of failure, how to evacuate him from the battlefield?
    And if he is corny stuck in a swamp? BTR-80 pulled a regular truck and pulled out. I hooked a tekashka with the Remrotovsky Urals and dragged it off instantly to the right place. And what to do with a crawler elephant? What kind of fleet of BREMok and trawls should be in stock? And again, how to deliver these tractors and trawls to an unequipped theater?
    And what to do if they knocked him out near Khabarovsk, but they are repairing it in Omsk. This is again at least two flights by plane.
    Yes, such machines will cost in operation as fighters.
    No, friends, there are no fools in the GABTU. And the designers are not silly either. The success of the battle is determined by speed and maneuver. This is taught in all modern combined arms military schools and academies. On the battlefield, mobility is key. And this has been done since antiquity. Light warriors always end up defeating heavily armed ones. And today the American adversary is not in vain focusing on the Stryker brigades, and not on heavy armored personnel carriers based on tanks.
    It’s easier and better to fly over the air with one MSB flight to the BTR-80 or BMP-3, than one such elephant that eats tanning salons as a full tank and is not repaired on site.
    In general, heavy armored personnel carriers are the choice of microscopic countries such as Israel and the creacles who consider themselves military experts.
    Reliable countries and real armies do not deal with such garbage.
    1. Pimply
      Pimply 10 June 2013 11: 46
      +2
      As practice has shown, it is precisely such hippos that save lives.
      1. Avenger711
        Avenger711 10 June 2013 15: 50
        +3
        As practice has shown, mass technology saves more lives.
        1. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 11 June 2013 19: 34
          0
          It helps - the presence of competent officers :)
      2. cth; fyn
        cth; fyn 10 June 2013 17: 58
        +6
        as practice has shown, if the commander is not able to think (although he is trained), then no technique will help
        And on the border with China, even the old armored personnel carrier showed its best side, with its support they took the heights, mastered the ambushes and generally used it as soon as imagination was desired, and didn’t stand it, withstand it. The main thing is that the commander should be good, but there even though the grass does not grow.
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 11 June 2013 15: 06
          +1
          What the fuck are you all looking at through "either-or"? Only "and-and" is permissible, if the army is poorly prepared, then good equipment will only replenish the enemy's army in the form of trophies, or it will burn out, but even if the army is perfectly prepared, then constantly breaking machines, or simply does not correspond to the level of the enemy, then it will also fight sucks.
          1. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 11 June 2013 20: 52
            0
            Well, an armored personnel carrier against the Chinese was a brilliant machine, since there was nothing higher in terms of performance characteristics on the border, because China was armed with copies or Soviet weapons.
      3. Alekseev
        Alekseev 10 June 2013 22: 23
        +4
        Quote: Pimply
        hippos save lives.

        They don’t save the lives of the military in the war, they only value life in the war, so that they, the military, can fulfill the task, and thereby save their country and the lives of its citizens.
        War, unfortunately, is a mean thing.
        This principle was reflected with high artistic force by the front-line soldier Yu. Bondarev in "Battalions are asking for fire" and "Hot Snow"
        As everyone remembers, the commander of the army (who has his own son at the front) in response to the statements of the tanker that he had two holes in the car, there was no ammunition, crew members were killed and wounded and, therefore, he, de, should not withdraw, did not fall into enthusiasm for the endurance of the equipment and people, did not become interested in how the kick-out panels worked, did not even ask how many German tanks our unit destroyed.
        He ordered the special forces to shoot the commander for unauthorized departure from their positions.
        And only the intervention of a member of the military council, and the general’s humanity, forced him to change his mind.
        Yes, heavy equipment is needed. But it is not entirely correct to say that for "saving lives." To maintain combat effectiveness. That's more accurate.
        And then many have the illusion that you can sit in a heavy armored personnel carrier and from there ta-ta-ta, beat enemies. And you can’t get anything in him ...
        It does not happen.
        I agree with Avenger711 and cth; fyn.
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 11 June 2013 15: 09
          0
          "Battalions are asking for fire" did not need to be filmed at all, because people only see that people were simply thrown, to understand the cruel logic of war, when in order to complete the task, units are sent to certain death, like units in RTS. Because it is necessary, we will not complete the task now, even if 1000 will die, tens of thousands will die tomorrow.
          1. cth; fyn
            cth; fyn 11 June 2013 21: 04
            0
            it is understood by those who served, so those who will defend understand, but no more is needed.
    2. Avenger711
      Avenger711 10 June 2013 15: 51
      +2
      The German "Marder" is close in weight, it can be made for tank divisions, the rest on light vehicles.
  10. Lalaloa
    Lalaloa 10 June 2013 12: 38
    -2
    It seems to be so bad, but no, we have to do worse. The authorities do not cease to amaze. This site recently came across: http://w2c3d.tk where information about each of us is publicly posted. I don’t know why to do this, but it personally scares me. Nevertheless, I somehow managed to delete my data, though I had to register, but no one could "dig up" anything on me.
  11. jandjella
    jandjella 10 June 2013 13: 02
    +1
    They did not write about the Israeli Namer. Now, Ahazarit must replace Namer - the tiger), who passed all the necessary operational assessment in a separate 84th brigade of the Israeli defense forces. The prototype BMP "Namer" was made on the basis of the Merkava Mk1 tank by removing from it a turret with mounted cannon armament and technical equipment in the rear of the hull to prepare places for transporting 8 equipped infantrymen. It is equipped with a 12,7 mm twin machine gun installation of radial rotation "Katlanit" of the company "Rafael" and a 7,62-mm machine gun with manual control. In BMP applied diesel power plant AVDS with a capacity of 900 hp previously installed on the tank "Merkava" Mk1. In the bow there are fastenings for suspended bulldozer equipment or a mine trawl. The BMP has reinforced armored protection for the bottom (equipped with a mine protection system) and the upper hemisphere of the hull (multilayer and spaced reservations). Frontal reservation is completely redesigned and reinforced, and the aft ramp is also reinforced. The chassis and sides are locked with folding iron screens. In the future, the BMP is planned to be equipped with the Trophy active defense system. It is assumed that the serial version of the Namer BMP will be equipped with an armament module with remote control by the state-owned company Rafael, which includes (in various versions) 7,62 mm or 12,7- mm machine gun, 30 mm mechanical cannon, 40 mm mechanical grenade launcher. With all this, the installation can be installed both on the roof of the direct landing compartment, and on the turrets in the area of ​​hatches. The operation “Cast Lead” became the baptism of fire for the new machine. As of July 2009, the IDF received 15 Namemer armored personnel carriers and placed an order for 130 more. The meter passed tests in the US for the needs of the American army in the spring of 2012.
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 10 June 2013 18: 06
      +2
      If still trophies hang things!
  12. Algor73
    Algor73 10 June 2013 13: 07
    0
    Sooner or later, they will come to heavy armored personnel carriers. Unless, of course, human lives are considered to be cannon fodder.
    1. Georgs
      Georgs 10 June 2013 16: 17
      +4
      Quote: Algor73
      Sooner or later, they will come to heavy armored personnel carriers. Unless, of course, human lives are considered to be cannon fodder.

      Well I do not know. For me, it’s not a specialist, if it’s really pripero to fight, as amers have been doing lately. Pre-jamming all the enemy with heavy means, and then using infantry to clean up the insignificant. So, first with "buratin" and / or "sunshine" some, and then, when it cools down in front, just drive the "Urals" lightly to the front edge, bypassing the burnt enemy's iron and repeat the process cyclically until an acceptable result is achieved. And no heavy armored personnel carriers.
      1. Avenger711
        Avenger711 10 June 2013 16: 35
        +1
        Damage decides.
  13. Avenger711
    Avenger711 10 June 2013 16: 12
    +5
    We somehow do not think about the fact that the money spent on heavy armored personnel carriers will be taken from somewhere. The fighter regiment will not be rearmed here, the hospital will be closed there. And somewhere in the area of ​​hostilities, something is simply not enough. The reality is generally unpleasant, tanks in the army make up a very small percentage of its armored vehicles. At the same time, for some reason, the Americans generally thought of "striker" brigades, units that do not have serious combat value in combined arms combat. But nevertheless, since the Americans manage not to lose so many people, then the matter may not only be in the use of vehicles of the BTR-80 level (I don’t even compare with the BTR-82A, it’s not close), but in the whole complex, from reconnaissance to the timely evacuation of the wounded and qualified honey. help? In general, as usual, it is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick.

    Regarding losses, I have never seen statistics on the losses of motorized riflemen, it is possible that the losses when moving on the available transport are very small compared to the losses of dismounted motorized riflemen in battles. Well, add to this the trucks, which are literally tens of thousands and which can neither be protected from grenade launchers and mines, nor off the roads, which makes their movement easily predictable. Armored trucks may be simpler than the BTR-82A, and due to the lack of weapons, they have better armor, but in principle they do not change anything. This is generally transport for those who are not supposed to have normal armored personnel carriers.
    1. Blackgrifon
      Blackgrifon 11 June 2013 19: 37
      +1
      I completely agree - you can’t interfere in one basket Heavy infantry fighting vehicles (fighting vehicles for combat) and armored personnel carriers (fighting vehicles for transporting infantry).
  14. 1c-inform-city
    1c-inform-city 10 June 2013 16: 56
    +6
    Quote: Pimply
    As practice has shown, it is precisely such hippos that save lives.

    It’s good to say that when your country is the size of the region of our region. Just estimate the cost of operating an extensive fleet of such cars with our distances and lack of roads. In general, if you only have a couple of hundred.
  15. old rats
    old rats 10 June 2013 17: 17
    +1
    they may not be needed in the army. what about the morning troops?
    I think they need such cars.
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 10 June 2013 18: 01
      +2
      BB? yes what for they they? they need something like MRAP trucks, x = otya if you take into account the specifics of the Jewish army, it is possible that something like intention can come in handy, but not the miracle that ours did.
  16. jandjella
    jandjella 10 June 2013 17: 58
    +2
    It seems to me the matter of course is sewn up. Of course, the armor is greater than that of the 80th armored personnel carrier. But why not use the BMP.
    1. cth; fyn
      cth; fyn 10 June 2013 21: 50
      +1
      So it seems to me and it seems that the author confuses the concepts of armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles.
  17. gallville
    gallville 10 June 2013 18: 28
    +2
    I always like screams about the security of Israeli soldiers, and the fact that we have armored personnel carriers, but they are all protected.
    So comrades read the simplest links:
    Armored personnel carrier akharit: As of 2011, up to 500 tanks have been converted into armored personnel carrier [1].
    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D1%85%D0%B7%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8%D1%82
    BTR M-113: Israel - 6131 M113A1 / M113A2, as of 2010 [94]
    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/M113#.D0.9D.D0.B0_.D0.B2.D0.BE.D0.BE.D1.80.D1.83.D0

    .B6.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B8
    500 armored personnel carrier / 31 in a battalion = 16 battalions or about 5 regiments / brigades (about 12-20 thousand people) for the entire army of Israel, numbering:
    The total number of regular armed forces: 176,5 thousand people.
    Reserve: 565 thousand people, including the SV - 380 thousand, the Air Force - 24,5 thousand, the Navy - 3,5 thousand
    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D1%80%D0%BC%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D

    1%80%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%8B_%D0%98%D0%B7%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BB%D1%8F#.D0.A1.D1.83.D

    1.85.D0.BE.D0.BF.D1.83.D1.82.D0.BD.D1.8B.D0.B5_.D0.B2.D0.BE.D0.B9.D1.81.D0.BA.D0

    .B0
    So, now compare TTX BTR-80 and TTX M-113.
    1. Alekseev
      Alekseev 10 June 2013 21: 52
      +3
      Quite rightly noticed!
      Place heavy armored personnel carriers (BMPs) in special units.
      Strengthen for the assault. districts, cities, engineering reconnaissance, escort of convoys, in case of special danger of an attack using hand-held vehicles and supporting tanks in battle. (BMPT, etc.)
      Light armored personnel carriers and army vehicles should carry troops.
      How much more fuel is needed, how much more complicated are those. provision, less motor resources, speed of movement, higher requirements for bridges, etc.
      Heavy machines are not able to perform the amount of work that is entrusted to simple "workers of war".
  18. bublic82009
    bublic82009 10 June 2013 23: 03
    +5
    if these machines do not fight then why are they needed? just ride them expensively consume a lot of fuel and the engine life is generated quickly.
  19. ivanovbg
    ivanovbg 11 June 2013 16: 03
    0
    And why do all armored personnel carriers have such ugly driving wheels? Is it so expensive to install a normal wheel or a horizontal steering wheel, on which you could lower your hands during a stop? Everyone trumpets about "ergonomics", and in the parts comes one pancake ... disgusting.
  20. sergey158-29
    sergey158-29 11 June 2013 16: 48
    0
    It has long been said that modern combat platforms are needed that would be equipped with weapons and security depending on the conditions of use: escort / convoy, urban battle, guerrilla war or a front-line classic war ... and of course, tactics and methods of using this weapon in these conditions are needed .. .
  21. Tot-enot
    Tot-enot 11 June 2013 21: 27
    0
    It seems that they want to make a heavy BMP based on Almaty, and again talk about the need for buoyancy ... why ??? For mobile units, this is important, but they need other infantry fighting vehicles and vehicles, as a rule, work together with tanks and other heavy equipment that does not float, so what's the point?
    Maybe it makes sense to have mobile parts on armored personnel carriers and other wheeled vehicles and heavy ones with MBT and infantry fighting vehicles based on them? Then everyone will be able to do their own thing with technology adapted to these specific tasks.
  22. Karah
    Karah 2 July 2013 15: 39
    0
    Great review of heavy infantry fighting vehicles! The author is well done!