Military Review

The military-industrial company expands the production of BTR-82A

89

The military-industrial company (MIC) announced the start of construction of a new BTR-82А armored personnel carrier for the Russian army. It is planned to build from 200 to 300 machines per year. About this ARMS-TASS reported the representative of the MIC.


Compared to the BTR-80, the new car has a number of advantages: it is equipped with an 300-strong KamAZ turbo diesel engine, which allows it to reach a maximum speed of 100 km / h, which is 10-20 km / h more than the previous version BTR-82. Improvements received transmission and suspension, with the result that the mass of the new BTR has grown to 15,4 tons.

An electrically controlled combat module contains an 30-mm automatic 2-42 automatic cannon stabilized in two planes and a PKTM machine gun coupled to it. The armament is controlled with a TKN-4GA-02 sight. On both sides of the turret, 2 units of the smoke cloud system grenade launchers of the 3 grenade launcher are placed in each.

The structure of the module is also an innovation - thanks to a special layout weapons gunpowder gases do not get into the fighting compartment of the car. The angle of vertical alignment of the main armament ranges from -7 to + 70 degrees. The Russian army, however, did not refuse to purchase the previous modification of the BTR-82, the armament of which consists of a KPVT machine gun of the 14,5-mm caliber and a PKTM machine-gun of the 7,62-mm caliber.

The security of the BTR-82A is estimated at the level of its predecessor, the BTR-80A, but the design of the protection system includes a number of improvements: armor damage, protected from shock waves when the crew seat is undermined, and an improved fire extinguishing system. The armored personnel carrier is equipped with a system of protection against nuclear, chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction (WMD), as well as an air conditioning system.

The simultaneous development of a long-term replacement of the BTR-80, called the "Boomerang". It is assumed that the MIC assembled the first prototypes of the machine. It is known that its further development will take into account western experience and, in particular, the location of the engine in front of the car. Deliveries of the new BTR are expected from the 2015 of the year.
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/
89 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. fzr1000
    fzr1000 9 October 2013 10: 35
    +6
    Well, that’s good, I hope!
  2. alone
    alone 9 October 2013 10: 39
    +6
    one thing is good, but somehow everyone forgets that the BTR-82 is just the BTR-80, which has been modernized.
    1. PROXOR
      PROXOR 9 October 2013 10: 47
      20
      Quote: lonely
      one thing is good, but somehow everyone forgets that the BTR-82 is just the BTR-80, which has been modernized.

      And why you are not satisfied with BTR 82. Its task is as simple as an orange. Delivery of soldiers to the battlefield, and not engage in battle in the forefront. BTR-82 has everything you need to support your fire.
      1. танк
        танк 9 October 2013 11: 19
        12
        Does it have underbody protection against landmines? Or will it deliver fighters through the air?
        Its real task is to drive out fighters from their homes, or lay them down 30 mm to prevent the house from completely collapsing, there are a lot of tanks.
      2. AVV
        AVV 9 October 2013 11: 47
        0
        Rather, this equipment to the troops, and then for sale !!!
      3. Andrey57
        Andrey57 9 October 2013 13: 25
        +4
        Well, yes, precisely because of the "excellent security characteristics" in the army, no one drives inside these miracle machines, but exclusively on armor, maybe then it is worth making armchairs on armor, and not inside, where no one is eager to be, because you can quickly slide down from above during shelling, but inside, there are definitely very few chances.
      4. Growler
        Growler 9 October 2013 15: 12
        +3
        Quote: PROXOR
        And what you are not comfortable with the BTR 82. His task is as simple as an orange. Delivery of soldiers to the battlefieldinstead of joining the battle in the front row. BTR-82 has everything you need to support your fire.

        According to the 1973 Geneva Convention terrorists commit themselves Do not attack the APC until they approach the battlefield.
        1. PROXOR
          PROXOR 9 October 2013 15: 47
          +3
          Quote: Growler
          According to the 1973 Geneva Convention, terrorists undertake not to attack the APC until they approach the battlefield.

          Respected!!! Your sorcasm looks stupid. If you fight in science, the APC should not meet with the enemy in close combat. That you hinted at, I want to note to you, these are columns without proper cover. The column should include heavy reconnaissance units (Tanks) reconnaissance platoons that advance in advance along the route, sappers and ALWAYS air cover. Spirits are also not fools and engage in battle, provided that in response they will not rake from above. YES, I would also put infantry in heavy armored personnel carriers based on a tank chassis, as the Jews did by remaking the captured T55. BUT!!!! Such armored personnel carriers are heavy, cannot swim, have less mobility and are not able to move quickly.
          If you consider some kind of replacement 82mu, then there are also not many options. Even if a convoy is made up of 3 armored personnel carriers, immediately if there is a competently deviation detachment with a bunch of means for setting fire to equipment, no one will have a chance.
      5. alone
        alone 9 October 2013 17: 47
        0
        Quote: PROXOR
        And why you are not satisfied with BTR 82. Its task is as simple as an orange. Delivery of soldiers to the battlefield, and not engage in battle in the forefront. BTR-82 has everything you need to support your fire.


        The question is not whether the BTR suits me or not. The problem is that this BTR is indicated in the article as new. But we know that this is just a deeply modernized BTR-80. We are trying to hang noodles on your ears.
    2. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 9 October 2013 11: 14
      +5
      Quote: lonely
      one thing is good, but somehow everyone forgets that the BTR-82 is just the BTR-80, which has been modernized.

      So what, they brought only one to Ukraine, and the result is all Natsik's ears. A good car, and I think you will soon begin to buy it yourself
      1. alone
        alone 9 October 2013 19: 05
        0
        already Alexander, already bought. and not one. just claims that this is not new, as they try to prove it to us in the article)))
  3. leon-iv
    leon-iv 9 October 2013 10: 39
    +5
    BTR-82AM is purchased, and LTP-82A is already 2 years old. ADMINISTS demand smiles hand litzo.
    1. klimpopov
      klimpopov 9 October 2013 10: 50
      0
      Counting "rukalitso" - I have also been waiting for a long time, but apparently censorship ... !!!
      Sometimes he is so lacking
    2. Rustam
      Rustam 9 October 2013 12: 06
      +5
      leon-iv BTR-82AM purchase


      Interesting not heard about this wink and this is probably 82a at the Black Sea Fleet exercises? Less colleagues listen to zhurnalyug who like to tell fables and fables
    3. Avenger711
      Avenger711 9 October 2013 18: 12
      +2
      I also do not have enough matyugov. Especially from the stupidity of the people, to whom every day report on the delivered vehicles, and still the memory is like a goldfish.
  4. Dwarfik
    Dwarfik 9 October 2013 10: 40
    +1
    Good news, long-term production!
  5. Russ69
    Russ69 9 October 2013 10: 47
    +5
    It feels like news, year 2, probably. BTR-82A and so in decent quantities enters the army. We can once again be the journalist that you have beguiled and the conversation was about expanding production or concluding the next contract.
    1. marder4
      marder4 9 October 2013 11: 21
      +2
      I’m probably talking about a new contract ...
  6. Airman
    Airman 9 October 2013 10: 47
    +1
    If the mass rose to 15,4 tons without a crew, did he stay afloat or not? Plus ammunition.
    1. chunga-changa
      chunga-changa 9 October 2013 10: 57
      +2
      There is a reflective shield in the photo. In other photos there is a water-jet shutter, obviously floating. In general, this is a machine for explosives and marines, why it is not very clear in the army.
      1. Airman
        Airman 9 October 2013 11: 10
        +1
        Quote: chunga-changa
        There is a reflective shield in the photo. In other photos there is a water-jet shutter, obviously floating. In general, this is a machine for explosives and marines, why it is not very clear in the army.

        After all, almost 2 tons were added, and without an increase in overall dimensions, it will float very poorly. Dimensions could not find.
        1. Zlodeey
          Zlodeey 9 October 2013 13: 05
          +8
          Worth seeing if you haven’t seen
  7. Tot-enot
    Tot-enot 9 October 2013 10: 49
    +2
    Not a bad car, but still the protection is almost the same as 20 years ago, I hope the Boomerang will appear soon and will be better protected.
  8. mamba
    mamba 9 October 2013 11: 08
    +4
    At the same time, a long-term replacement for the BTR-80 is being developed, dubbed Boomerang. It is assumed that the military-industrial complex has assembled the first prototypes of the machine.
    Two years ago on this forum there was a discussion of the medium wheeled platform "Boomerang" as a whole family of combat wheeled vehicles (BKM) of the medium weight category: http://topwar.ru/8523-gilza-i-bumerang.html. But things are still there ... There were only assumptions about the possible assembly of only one of the types of the BKM family - armored personnel carriers. Harnessing for a long time!
  9. tilovaykrisa
    tilovaykrisa 9 October 2013 11: 17
    +6
    Everything is fine, but now it’s time to put onboard protection from RPG 7 at least by the gratings for a long time already put regularly on cars, and not leave it on crews that will do everything handicraft in the form of boxes.
    1. nemec55
      nemec55 9 October 2013 13: 32
      +4
      I don’t understand the elementary protection in the form of a grid either. Either dunce or as usual (they’d like to finish working with a file) And the fighters in the houses call in BTR EPT and if someone is a shmall from RPG. Damn ,,,,, ????? ???????
  10. Vitali-46
    Vitali-46 9 October 2013 11: 17
    +1
    It’s good that for the RUSSIAN ARMY! Otherwise, they like to saturate someone else’s army first, and then how it goes.
  11. SkyMaXX
    SkyMaXX 9 October 2013 11: 21
    +5
    A 30 mm 2A72 gun is a completely different matter compared to a powerful 14,5mm machine gun. The truth is that the barrel of the gun is long and it will fluctuate when shooting, which will greatly reduce accuracy.
  12. avt
    avt 9 October 2013 11: 29
    +3
    Quote: SkyMaXX
    The truth is that the gun barrel is long and it will fluctuate when fired, which will greatly reduce accuracy.

    The Tulyans made a kind of protection, "casing" as in MG 34, but something did not go into the series request
  13. The comment was deleted.
  14. phantom359
    phantom359 9 October 2013 12: 31
    +5
    82nd, of course, is good, but 90th will be better. It only needed to be brought to mind.
    1. BIGLESHIY
      BIGLESHIY 9 October 2013 16: 27
      +2
      The 90th does not need to be brought to mind, it was completely ready and recommended for the adoption of the armored personnel carrier.
    2. Avenger711
      Avenger711 9 October 2013 18: 15
      -1
      From the point of view of armament and transport capabilities, this is not a fact, while the BTR-82 has long been overcapitalizing existing cars, and the 90s would have to do everything from scratch. The weight of 21 tons also raises questions in terms of traffic on roads and soft soils, and although the size of the machine made it possible to make a more adequate turret for a gun, it makes you think about how much the protection has really increased.
      1. BIGLESHIY
        BIGLESHIY 10 October 2013 13: 30
        0
        and the 90s would have to do everything from scratch.

        So it’s necessary, once, to start making equipment from scratch and not to shovel the old stuff and push in like a new one !!! Take for example AvtoVAZ, how the hell have riveted a penny for many years under various guises, and put the latest designs on a bit, so they got stuck to the point where it comes out of the assembly line. With AZLK, the same story only he is already alive.
  15. arb0905
    arb0905 9 October 2013 12: 59
    +3
    Good car, good reviews
  16. VohaAhov
    VohaAhov 9 October 2013 13: 48
    +4
    200-300 cars are 2-3 brigade sets.
  17. Growler
    Growler 9 October 2013 15: 02
    0
    Security BTR-82A is evaluated at the level of its predecessor BTR-80A

    That is none. Another mobile coffin for soldiers.
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 9 October 2013 18: 34
      +2
      But the soldiers are not in the know.
      1. Growler
        Growler 9 October 2013 18: 57
        -2
        Quote: Avenger711
        But the soldiers are not in the know.


        What kind of soldiers? Those in contra?
        The "new" armored personnel carrier is only suitable for overclocking.
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 9 October 2013 20: 40
          +1
          Is it okay that all foreign models of a comparable class have about the same weight and level of protection? The American "striker" with its pitiful 12.7 mm machine gun and the absence of anti-fragmentation lining (2/3 of the personnel being hit upon penetration is struck by just secondary fragments) is not even close. Nobody in the world except Israel builds the notorious heavy armored personnel carriers.
          1. Growler
            Growler 9 October 2013 21: 40
            0
            Quote: Avenger711
            Is it okay that all foreign models of a comparable class have about the same weight and level of protection? The American "striker" with its pitiful 12.7 mm machine gun and the absence of anti-fragmentation lining (2/3 of the personnel being hit upon penetration is struck by just secondary fragments) is not even close. Nobody in the world except Israel builds the notorious heavy armored personnel carriers.

            In Western countries, they are striving to modernize them in accordance with modern requirements.
            http://www.ruag.com/de/Defence/Land_Systems/Ballistischer-Schutz/FS_SidePRO_RPG_
            e.pdf
            RPG-7 VL holds
            1. Avenger711
              Avenger711 10 October 2013 00: 34
              +1
              RPG-7 penetrates several hundred millimeters of monolithic steel armor, that is, there is basically no protection from such weapons in the 20-30 ton class. Grilles also do not save, only to make a tank with composite armor of a meter equivalent and then only in the forehead, 80 mm side under the DZ on the T-72 is still bold compared to the Abrams, which is pierced into the side of 30 mm. Or add extra protection and pray to reduce damage. But you can hang it on anything, even the BTR-60.
              1. Growler
                Growler 10 October 2013 01: 07
                0
                Quote: Avenger711
                RPG-7 penetrates several hundred millimeters of monolithic steel armor, that is, there is basically no protection from such weapons in the 20-30 ton class. Grilles also do not save, only to make a tank with composite armor of a meter equivalent and then only in the forehead, 80 mm side under the DZ on the T-72 is still bold compared to the Abrams, which is pierced into the side of 30 mm. Or add extra protection and pray to reduce damage. But you can hang it on anything, even the BTR-60.

                Did you open the PDF file before replying? Can you hang 113 tons on the M40?

                SidePRO-LASSO is not a grille, but a grid that has less chance of grenade explosion. The file shows that both SidePRO-LASSO and SidePRO-RPG are installed on the M113.
    2. Ziksura
      Ziksura 9 October 2013 21: 11
      +1
      Quote: Growler
      Another mobile coffin for soldiers.

      Whenever I read comments of this kind I want to ask: Can you name a TANK guaranteed to be protected from detonation and fire damage? What do you want from the APC then? What kind of armored personnel carrier is not afraid of "meeting" with RPG-7 and Co.? What kind of BT of any country and manufacturer that was ambushed was practically invulnerable? Do you personally want to be under fire without covering up with armor? Or ride in a convoy in a combat area in conventional trucks?
      The answers are obvious.
      1. Growler
        Growler 9 October 2013 21: 56
        -3
        Quote: Ziksura
        Quote: Growler
        Another mobile coffin for soldiers.

        Whenever I read comments of this kind I would like to ask: can you call a TANK guaranteed to be protected from undermining and fire damage? And then what do you want from the armored personnel carrier? What kind of armored personnel carrier is not afraid of "meeting" with RPG-7 and Co.? What kind of BT of any country and manufacturer that was ambushed was practically invulnerable? Do you personally want to be under fire without covering with armor? A ride in a column in the area of ​​hostilities in conventional trucks?

        Namer + Trophy
        Quote: Ziksura
        The answers are obvious.

        Not always...
  18. Seventh
    Seventh 9 October 2013 15: 10
    +2
    Quote: SkyMaXX
    A 30 mm 2A72 gun is a completely different matter compared to a powerful 14,5mm machine gun. The truth is that the barrel of the gun is long and it will fluctuate when shooting, which will greatly reduce accuracy.

    The gun is excellent, with an accuracy higher than 2A42, with proper maintenance and adjustment, reloading is a disaster, the ammunition load is small.
  19. bddrus
    bddrus 9 October 2013 15: 38
    +2
    and what is supplied to wax? it’s kind of put a lot
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 9 October 2013 18: 34
      0
      So they are delivered, new and redone. The news was 2 years late by at least.
  20. Armata
    Armata 9 October 2013 16: 11
    +1
    Not cool. Where is the Kurganets? Where is the boomerang? Whose are they all looking forward to? In the light of new events, I no longer want to talk about anything new.
    too many connoisseurs showed up.
    1. Growler
      Growler 9 October 2013 19: 11
      +1
      Quote: Mechanic
      Not cool. Where is the Kurganets? Where is the boomerang? Whose are they all looking forward to? In the light of new events, I no longer want to talk about anything new.
      too many connoisseurs showed up.

      Where are we to the "experts" and Eunjnerov who thought of placing ammunition around the crew.
      1. Basarev
        Basarev 10 October 2013 10: 29
        0
        So what? On the T-34, the commander was sitting right on the shells. However, no one dares call the thirty-four a bad tank
        1. Growler
          Growler 10 October 2013 11: 16
          +2
          Quote: Basarev
          So what? ”On the T-34, the commander was sitting right on the shells.However, no one dares to call the thirty-four a bad tank

          And here's what:
          Watch from 0: 34
    2. alexpro66
      alexpro66 10 October 2013 13: 51
      0
      Yes cool! Your opinion is very cool! And to turn on the brain in an elementary way and not think about destiny? Or do you think that the Boomerangs and Kurganians (and Artmat at the same time) will immediately go for export ?? But should we cover production for the export of armored vehicles? (or continue to sell only old options) in anticipation of when it will be possible to export new-generation cars ???? In general, almost 100 percent of Kurgan residents’s readiness for state-owned bureaucrats is not even one option .. in addition, in the Caucasus, replenishment with new armored personnel carriers is necessary now and not in 2015. This opinion is an indicator not only of your awareness but also of simple logical thinking. And what events? You simply proved on your fingers that you are a storyteller and no more ..
  21. vietnam7
    vietnam7 9 October 2013 17: 41
    +3
    However, protection from landmines and RPGs for many is already becoming a mania, it is adjusted to any technique. the people climbed into the armor, since the 360-degree view "is the best armor, if the fathers of the commanders will of course assign the view sectors and control the" slowly blinking ", if the dismounting and reaction to the threat of each soldier is brought to automatism, then our armored personnel carriers are still many akhzarites they will give a head start with them.
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 9 October 2013 18: 37
      +3
      So the infantry is obliged to dismount before the battle and does not lead the battle inside the vehicles. Just saboteurs and amateurs all yell that you still need to do some crap weighing 60 tons.
    2. Growler
      Growler 9 October 2013 22: 30
      -1
      Quote: vietnam7
      However, protection from landmines and RPGs for many is already becoming a mania, it is customized for any equipment. people climbed on the armor, as 360 view "best armor, if the fathers of the commanders, of course, appoint the review sectors and control the "slowly blinking", if the dismounting and reaction to the threat of each soldier is brought to automatism, then our armored personnel carriers will still give many akhzarites and others like them a head start.

      hmm ... shooting down RPGs with a look is something new ...
  22. Avenger711
    Avenger711 9 October 2013 18: 10
    +2
    Wait a minute, there were already 82 news about the delivery of the BTR-100500A parties to the troops, and there was also a trial to disrupt the delivery time. Filming directly assembly in the shops. At the same time, the process of converting the existing BTR-80 to BTR-82A during overhaul has long been established and a number of cars have been exported. In the army, this machine has long been no longer exotic.
    So what is the news about? She was at least 2 years late, and even more.

    Here is one of the May shipments for the Marines. http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/33064/
  23. michajlo
    michajlo 9 October 2013 19: 17
    +1
    Hello dear experts and experienced!

    I can not discuss with you on equal terms all the pros and cons of this armored personnel carrier.
    The old BTR-60 (or 80?) Itself, I was about 30 years ago, examined from all sides, clicked on the tongue and covered everything when we were students at the summer camp “military / b fitted and seated on the body from sweat and the sun "in the field.

    In any case, new, old, modified or modified by “left-handed people” in the BTR’s army workshop, they should have been faster in the Russian army, and spare parts in warehouses and technicians in units were enough for 3-6 months.

    All Soviet and "Russian" equipment of the Russian army will soon be needed not only for exercises ...

    And if its formidable appearance and the results of continuous exercises frighten the adversaries / enemies of Russia from a direct attack, so much the better !.

    I do not understand only about the content of the Notes, that this article and much in it and the discussion are old 2 years old information?

    Please explain to me someone civilized person (not yet bespectacled).
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 9 October 2013 19: 34
      +2
      What is there to clarify, the BTR-82 has long been manufactured and delivered both by the Russian Armed Forces and for export.
      1. michajlo
        michajlo 9 October 2013 20: 45
        0
        Avenger711 (6) RU Today, 19:34 _131009 / Wed New

        Thanks for clarifying! good

        I’ll look at other links and models.

        Goodbye, Michael.
  24. krpmlws
    krpmlws 9 October 2013 19: 36
    +1
    They buy armored vehicles, it is necessary to buy tanks, thereby supporting their manufacturer.
  25. xAskoldx
    xAskoldx 9 October 2013 19: 57
    +3
    Interesting post. The car is far from new and actually a number of comments indicate this.
    How bad is it? as anyone, the school is sustained as required for the wheeled armored personnel carriers of the USSR --- cheap, maintainable, amphibious, the possibility of using the reserve for the BTR-80 (the previous model) both in terms of training personnel and a number of units and components, an offer to partners for export and use by both the Army and internal troops. Unfortunately, there is no photo on the placement of the landing, but it is possible that the ergonomics were somewhat improved, it is unambiguous that after filling the bumps on the BTR-80 A with the placement of the main weapons from the 2A72, the module was redone (how well we learn soon enough) Separately, I wanted to clarify where some members of the forum got information about the accuracy of the 2A72 ? !!!!!! since personal practice has an extremely negative assessment of this system, especially without the "stiffening rib" in the form of a 100 mm BMP-3 gun.
    Most likely, the landing defense from mines was strengthened because the weight of the machine increased (I did not look at the difference externally), Protection from RPGs - only KAZ comes to mind since the gratings will deprive the car of amphibiousness (and so on to the limit) and a very weak guarantee of protection against modern warheads.
    Performance characteristics will probably be on top.
    In general, a decent and not expensive taxi for infantry (and no more)
    1. Avenger711
      Avenger711 9 October 2013 20: 43
      0
      If we talk about protection against RPGs, then there can be no question of any built-in protection, and is it necessary, everyone simply hangs on the Puma if necessary, the bars on the "striker" weigh 2 tons, but the KAZ is hardly lighter will be.
  26. Tourist Breakfast
    Tourist Breakfast 9 October 2013 20: 10
    +2
    You can almost sit inside. Website with virtual panoramas of Russian technology:

    http://defendingrussia.ru/

    BTR-82A is also present. I liked the KAMAZ Typhoon more.
    1. xAskoldx
      xAskoldx 9 October 2013 20: 16
      +1
      Thanks for the link
      1. bask
        bask 9 October 2013 20: 46
        +4
        Quote: xAskoldx
        The military-industrial company expands the production of BTR-82A

        Why not the BTR-90 ,, Rostock ,, I still don’t understand. Although it was put into service, it went through the whole cycle of military tests.
        Although the BTR-90, This is a machine of the 90s, designed taking into account local wars.
        BTR-80,80A, 82, a machine developed in the 80s and that’s it. That’s it. (There is no anti-mine protection, it is protected from monoblock RPGs.)
        On a modern armored personnel carrier should be installed DZ, not explosive action.
        And yet, the landing should be covered with armor. And if you plan to ride in advance only on armor. Then the BTR -152 variant, with an open top.
        1. bask
          bask 9 October 2013 21: 11
          +1
          We need a variant of an armored personnel carrier, on a tracked chassis.
          For the Airborne Forces, an APC ,, Shell ,, was created.
          Motorized riflemen also need such a platform. There are soils on which the wheeled armored personnel carrier simply will not pass.
          BTR, SV-90.
          1. Zhenya
            Zhenya 9 October 2013 21: 14
            0
            But the car will not be too heavy?
          2. Avenger711
            Avenger711 9 October 2013 21: 31
            +1
            BMP-3 is your choice.
          3. max702
            max702 10 October 2013 11: 07
            0
            Heck! Well, why do they always drive in advertisements on licked landfills !!! And you will never see equipment in real conditions, which hints at all ..
        2. Aleks tv
          Aleks tv 9 October 2013 21: 26
          +1
          Quote: bask
          Why not the BTR-90 ,, Rostock ,, I still don’t understand. Although it was put into service, it went through the whole cycle of military tests.

          Greetings, Andrew.

          I got the same question ...
          Before the Boomerang appeared, the BTR-90 could also be riveted. The defense is different in every way, and the car is more serious.
          1. Alex 241
            Alex 241 9 October 2013 21: 35
            +4
            Quote: Aleks tv
            I still do not understand
            Hi guys, the official wording is inexpedient, but simply, as usual, there is a problem with financing. A small batch was purchased by the FSO.
            1. Aleks tv
              Aleks tv 9 October 2013 22: 44
              +1
              Quote: Alex 241
              A small batch was purchased by the FSO.

              Hi Sanya.

              Is this a photo of a BTR-90 "inside"?
              Interesting ... everything is different.
              And they sat down on the sides and to the ceiling ... and there were just more places.
              1. Alex 241
                Alex 241 9 October 2013 22: 52
                +1
                Hi Lesh, this is BTR-90 Rostock.
          2. bask
            bask 9 October 2013 21: 41
            +1
            Quote: Aleks tv
            about the appearance of the Boomerang could rivet and BTR-90.

            Hi Lesh.
            That's yaz about that. Save again, and ordinary soldiers will pay with their lives.
            How do you think the wheeled armored personnel carrier needs a tracked one? With unification of units and assemblies by 65-70%.
            If we now modernize MT-LBU, MTO in the nose, strengthen mine protection, remove tanks from the airborne squad, we can get an armored personnel carrier at the General Staff, before the Kurgan people appear.
            1. Alex 241
              Alex 241 9 October 2013 21: 55
              +1
              Andryukh, well, why not. Remember in Kharkov they produced the T-150 wheeled tractor and the T-153 tracked, there the level of unification is 80 percent, even the army T-154 was made.
              1. bask
                bask 9 October 2013 22: 05
                0
                Quote: Alex 241
                why not. Remember in Kharkov they produced the T-150 wheeled tractor, and the T-153 tracked, there

                Good evening Sash. But this is a tractor plant. And at the Arzamast plant only wheeled armored personnel carriers were produced (narrow specialization).
                In the USSR, on the General Staff, BMP, wheeled armored personnel carriers.
  27. serezhasoldatow
    serezhasoldatow 9 October 2013 21: 33
    0
    As always, EVERYTHING justifies ... t. Probably a storm in the sun !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  28. Sochi
    Sochi 9 October 2013 21: 43
    +1
    I think the BTR 90 was better, to date it could be brought to mind and based on new materials to reduce weight to 16-18 tons.
    1. bask
      bask 9 October 2013 22: 00
      +1
      Quote: Sochi
      and to the mind and on the basis of new materials to reduce weight to 16-18 tons.

      If you apply, new composite materials can be reduced. But why?
      But what about the bourgeoisie? Everyone is just promoting Patria AMV.
      But there is an APC created by an Irish company, Timiney Technologia. A mass of 25 tons.
      FV 81 Terrex license from Singapore.
      Yavuz 82-, Turkey.
      MkCM 32 Yong P10-Taiwan.
      The Irish have done, a modern armored personnel carrier, and we, release a product of the 80s and pass it off as a “new” car.
      1. Alex 241
        Alex 241 9 October 2013 22: 10
        +1
        Deputy Minister of Defense Colonel-General Oleg Ostapenko said that by 2014 a promising armored personnel carrier chassis with a hybrid power system, the code "Krymsk", from components of domestic production should be created. This task was set by the Minister of Defense. In response to a question from Rosinformburo, he explained that the demonstrated model was seen as further development of the direction for creating a promising “electric” platform, “which is in demand by the Ministry of Defense”. “We are conducting very active work in this regard and next year we will have a subject for discussion in order to show examples of our production,” said Ostapenko.

        Earlier, Rosinformburo announced the development and testing of a new wheeled vehicle (code Krymsk) with a hybrid power plant and electric transmission based on the BTR-90 Rostok. The machine was created in the interests of the Ministry of Defense as a chassis for a promising armored personnel carrier.
        1. bask
          bask 9 October 2013 22: 33
          +1
          Quote: Alex 241
          power plant and electric transmission based on the BTR-90 Rostock. Machine create

          Sasha, how many prototypes we created before this.
          A hybrid powerplant, that's great, but it's the future.
          There was a project, modernization of the BTR-90 ,,,, Sleeve ,,.

          "" BTR-90 in 2008 successfully passed acceptance tests of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, however, for reasons beyond the control of the enterprise, only a few samples of a new type of armored personnel carrier were received by the troops. "" Http://www.r52.ru/index.phtml?rid=1&fid = 31 & sid = 6 & nid = 35726
          So, taburetkin and KO, they chopped off a great car.
          The BTR-90 has a load capacity of up to 7,5 tons. The BTR-80-1,5 tons. Therefore, it is possible to install any system on it, be it anti-aircraft missile and artillery weapons.
          1. Alex 241
            Alex 241 9 October 2013 22: 36
            +2
            The main FSO bought Andryukh, in the Kremlin they can sleep peacefully!
            1. Alex 241
              Alex 241 9 October 2013 22: 37
              +1
              Quote: bask
              BTR-90 has a load capacity of up to 7,5 tons
              If my will, wow, I would push there!
          2. Avenger711
            Avenger711 10 October 2013 00: 43
            0
            Darling, can you even imagine the recoil force of a cannon of caliber 85 mm and above? Not a low-pulse, like BMP-3 gun, spitting with high-speed guns at a speed of about 400 m / s, but a really serious barrel like the good old western L7 or our 2A46? Amer MGS from its tank 105 mm when fired, even with a muzzle brake jumps, although there the charge power is reduced. Well, heap heels and tons on the BTR-80 is possible, and he is clearly still going quite well. And yes, the same mortar on the BTR-80 chassis exists, as do a number of other special vehicles and self-propelled guns.
            1. max702
              max702 10 October 2013 11: 27
              +1
              What do you need on the BTR 2A46? for what purposes are you going to shoot? Again with tanks sometime, maybe, if suddenly, to fight? In recent decades, with whom is infantry fighting on an armored personnel carrier? That's right with the light infantry of the enemy, guerrillas, bandits and stuff, can we still return to the realities? And there is a low-pulse gun spitting landmines about 400m \ s behind the eyes! If only the pickup angles are bigger and the ammunition safe is sickly ..
        2. Basarev
          Basarev 10 October 2013 10: 40
          -1
          It’s a very interesting machine, just to make it completely electric, and not limited to half measures like a hybrid power plant and electric transmission ...
          1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Sochi
        Sochi 9 October 2013 23: 58
        0
        In my opinion, such a heavy car is no better. The speed at the intersection is not very good for her, and even on soft soils ... and then she is not in a fight (this is kraynyak), but delivery and support are worthless to anyone. Tanks and infantry go into battle, and armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles from behind shelters support fire ... here the nomenclature of weapons and their power are more important. Yes, the ability to swim is also not the last place, the bridges will be demolished in the first place, even the most seedy. But the protection of the crew from defeat is needed harder and more modern. The main defeats of such a technique on marches, that is, a crude weapon (figuratively) here is the main field of activity of designers, without increasing mass, to increase security.
        1. Avenger711
          Avenger711 10 October 2013 00: 45
          -1
          According to the charter, the BMP moves behind the tanks. EMNIP without a stabilizer, the machine, in principle, cannot be an infantry fighting vehicle, since an infantry fighting vehicle involves action in conjunction with tanks.
  29. The comment was deleted.
  30. xAskoldx
    xAskoldx 9 October 2013 22: 32
    +1
    Why is the Russian Ministry of Defense purchasing BTR-82 and not BTR -90? The idea is simple ...
    1. how a taxi to the battlefield BTR-82 will be cheaper per person than BTR-90
    2. fewer problems with amphibiousness in BTR-82
    3. an armament complex according to the criterion of price quality for solving the tasks of the BTR-82 is more consistent than almost the same but harder and more expensive for the BTR-90
    4. Hodovka near BTR-82 is almost not inferior to BTR-90 being simpler, more reliable, maintainable and cheaper + the accompanying bonuses for training personnel indicated above
    BTR -82 is the usual evolutionary model of the school once chosen for the USSR, and BTR-90 is an attempt to combine a number of directions and currents with the peculiar Russian version of the South African wheeled BMP Ratel only without mine resistance and almost complete amphibiousness.
    probably at this stage it is not life-like (or not requested)
    IMHO ...
    1. bask
      bask 9 October 2013 22: 50
      +1
      Quote: xAskoldx
      Why is the Russian Ministry of Defense purchasing BTR-82 and not BTR -90? The idea is simple ...

      But this is just the idea.
      The BTR-90, was created taking into account the experience of the Afghan war in the first place. (To ,, Ratel ,, has no relation whatsoever). These are the creators of the “BTR”, “Ratel”, learned a lot from the Soviet school.
      The life of one soldier, more expensive than all, man-places.
      If you follow your logic, why do you need an armored armored personnel carrier?
      A simple lorry, the man-seat on it is even cheaper and the chassis is simpler and more reliable and the view from the body is excellent.
      At this stage in Russia, the rulers put the soldiers on their lives, and so the sekhenhand is being purchased.
      Myself that they buy armored Mercia in ml .. $$$ doesn’t save **** IMHO.
      Object 1200, wheeled infantry fighting vehicle of the USSR.
      1. bask
        bask 9 October 2013 23: 20
        0
        Now, for the safe transportation of soldiers, it’s cheaper to make an armored car.
        According to the MRI technology, on the nodes and units of serial cars ...
    2. BIGLESHIY
      BIGLESHIY 10 October 2013 13: 41
      +1
      Quote: xAskoldx
      The BTR-90 is an attempt to combine a number of directions and currents with a distinctive Russian version of the South African wheeled BMP Ratel only without mine resistance and almost complete amphibiousness.
      probably at this stage it is not life-like (or not requested)
      IMHO ...

      BTR-90 has anti-mine defense, before writing, first take an interest in the object of criticism !!!
  31. xAskoldx
    xAskoldx 9 October 2013 23: 13
    0
    What has been done in the armored personnel carrier -90 such that life will be guaranteed for the landing party?
    A V-shaped bottom with a resistance of at least the old Ratel approaching? In my opinion, there is no mention of this at all, since in the given parameters it is difficult to achieve.
    What did the Ratel learn in the Soviet school? wheels, then yes, a lot! The photo you provided has played a contest in my opinion no the line went exclusively along the BTR-60 -70 80 82 Everything else was weeded out.
    The same BTR 90 was tested in the Caucasus, the result was the BTR-80A and not the BTR-90, since there are tasks and they are specifically spelled out by BUSV and to sculpt a "universal soldier" on a light chassis and so that on the scale of such an army as in Russia what gas is not enough for the country
    I welcome constructive criticism in my address ...
    1. bask
      bask 9 October 2013 23: 42
      +2
      Quote: xAskoldx
      What has been done in the armored personnel carrier -90 such that life will be guaranteed for the landing party?

      Yes, everything is caught, read the TTX data.
      Quote: xAskoldx
      A V-shaped bottom with a resistance of at least the old Ratel approaching?

      V-shaped bottom, and mine protection was laid in ,, Rostock ,, in the performance specification task.
      Quote: xAskoldx
      no, the line went exclusively along BTR-60 -70 80 82 Everything else was weeded out.

      In addition, there were many objects. And the South African students studied the Soviet school well. (Unlike us).
      Quote: xAskoldx
      are registered by BUSV and to sculpt on a light chassis of a "universal soldier"
      yes and so

      the Americans were able to upgrade their Commando, 60s release, to the modern multi-purpose armored personnel carrier 4/4 with Textron TAPV mine protection.
      It is not a matter of means, but in relation to the lives of soldiers with them and with us.
      1. Alex 241
        Alex 241 9 October 2013 23: 52
        +3
        Andrey look at least the first 3 minutes, I have no words!
    2. Aleks tv
      Aleks tv 9 October 2013 23: 53
      +2
      Quote: xAskoldx
      What has been done in the armored personnel carrier -90 such that life will be guaranteed for the landing party?

      Yes all.
      Protection is better. Armament is better. The suspension is better. Comfort is better.
      It is heavier, longer and wider.

      I do not say that it is a child prodigy. Of course not.
      Simply, it is preferable to the BTR-80.
      1. xAskoldx
        xAskoldx 10 October 2013 00: 37
        +1
        Thanks for the criticism.
        There is no full V-bottom on the BTR-90 (resistance against 2 kg of TNT is not serious)
        it is undoubtedly heavier (a full-fledged tower shifted to the bow), and this is like an ice with the distribution of weights and the load on the chassis and navigability and exit after a water barrier.
        less troop compartment for 2 people, landing "non-working"
        Sophisticated chassis design (still unreliable and expensive)
        Excuse me how much thicker the armor rental on the BTR-90? or did I miss something with ceramics or other extra protection?
        1. Aleks tv
          Aleks tv 10 October 2013 01: 23
          +1
          Quote: xAskoldx
          less troop compartment for 2 people, landing "non-working"

          ??
          In the 80s, there are two shops for 3 soldiers each. Back to back. Total 6. Plus in the "face".
          In the 90th (in the photo) in the troop compartment: two "suspended" rows of individual seats at the sides. In each row, it seems, even 4 seats.

          Where is less then?

          And betr is quite normal. But because of the suspension will obviously be more expensive.
          If you choose between 82 and 90, I would choose 90. The choice is not great.
          IMHO, of course.
        2. bask
          bask 10 October 2013 16: 56
          +1
          Quote: xAskoldx
          There is no full V-bottom on the BTR-90 (resistance against 2 kg of TNT is not serious)

          2 kg in t / e is very serious.
          And the bottom of the BTR ,, Rostock ,, is almost identical to the bottom of the SMP-3,, Bear ,,.

          BTR-90., Rostock ,,.
          1. Alex 241
            Alex 241 10 October 2013 17: 12
            +1
            Hi Andrew, here, check out the photo in all projections http://www.primeportal.net/apc/yuri_pasholok/btr-90/index.php?Page=8
            1. bask
              bask 10 October 2013 20: 06
              +1
              Quote: Alex 241
              hi, look here, photos in all projections

              Hi Sash.
              Thanks for the info.
              BTR-80A. Where is the one in the photo ...?


              BTR-82A.
              The only thing that distinguishes them: a stabilizer on a 30 mm gun.
              This ,, new ,, armored personnel carrier ???
              1. Alex 241
                Alex 241 10 October 2013 20: 24
                +1
                Andryukh, you can’t tell them apart until you get inside, and as they say, feel the difference.
      2. Avenger711
        Avenger711 10 October 2013 00: 50
        +1
        Protection there is no better, something may be optimized, but the growth of the size of the machine eats up the increase in mass. The same weapon, 30 mm. At the same time, the BTR-82 in front of 80 is also progressing with just one weapon and anti-fragmentation.
    3. Sochi
      Sochi 10 October 2013 00: 04
      +1
      What do you think - maneuverability of such a machine is needed? so in Rostock it is many times higher ... You can arm the same Rostock much more powerful. Dee with a comfot for a landing there is better.
      1. xAskoldx
        xAskoldx 10 October 2013 00: 55
        +1
        the fact that there are more steering wheels, yes it is positive for maneuverability, but this does not increase it significantly. what increases maneuverability is the ability to drive back and forth at high speed (so that in case of trouble you can leave without turning out of the fire by substituting a more protected "snobel", this function is implemented in the BTR-90? if not right then correct.
        and so we have a car that is more expensive, heavier and less reliable than the existing BTR 80-82 and not as versatile as the planned car on the topic of Boomerang.
        During the transition period, it is an overhead and doubtful pleasure to have a discrepancy between BTR 70-82, BTR -90 and the planned Boomerang.
    4. Avenger711
      Avenger711 10 October 2013 00: 46
      +2
      And in South Africa everything is on wheels, there are savannas with relatively dense soil, this is their unique school.
  32. xAskoldx
    xAskoldx 9 October 2013 23: 53
    +1
    Undoubtedly, MRIs have proven their necessity.
    But ...
    For whom and how much to develop this model of wheeled military equipment? (it is necessary in modern realities it is 100%)
    questions only:
    1. where should he register?
    2. Who will compile the ToR for the defense industry?
    3. Who will pay for their development of testing and putting into service?
    Since the machine is extremely expensive and costly in everyday use, the additional expense in this column must be taken into account and laid down.
    ... she, as you understand, does not pretend to be "universal"
    This is from certain attempts to promote this class in the Armed Forces of Ukraine ... (peacekeeping requested)
  33. Anton Nakhimov
    Anton Nakhimov 10 October 2013 01: 33
    +1
    A good armored car, 80 - rarely can fail)
  34. vietnam7
    vietnam7 10 October 2013 07: 24
    +1
    Quote: Growler
    hmm ... shooting down RPGs with a look is something new ...
    With a look you will see the spirit.
    1. Growler
      Growler 10 October 2013 11: 25
      +1
      Quote: vietnam7
      Quote: Growler
      hmm ... shooting down RPGs with a look is something new ...
      With a look you will see the spirit.

      When moving on armor, military personnel can be destroyed by the striking elements of an explosive device planted on the road.
  35. darksoul
    darksoul 10 October 2013 09: 13
    0
    200-300 a year, this is already a conveyor belt and not piece sausages. Well done
  36. Basarev
    Basarev 10 October 2013 10: 47
    0
    But still, all this pampering in comparison with the planned heavy assault armored personnel carrier based on Almaty ...
  37. Jackofshadow
    Jackofshadow 8 June 2014 23: 33
    0
    BTR-82A, a good car ...