Military Review

BTR-82A and BTR-4 are among the ten best armored personnel carriers in the world

97
BTR-82A and BTR-4 are among the ten best armored personnel carriers in the worldThe Russian BTR-82A and the Ukrainian BTR-4 entered the top 10 of the best armored personnel carriers in the world in terms of protection of firepower and mobility, according to the influential international magazine Army Technology.


The top ten also included Finnish Patria, German Boxer, Swiss Piranha V, Austrian Pandur II, American Stryker, Turkish ARMA and AV8, Singapore-based Terrex (developed by the Irish company Timoney), reports Ukraine Industrial.

BTR-4 is an armored personnel carrier developed by the state enterprise Kharkov Design Bureau of Mechanical Engineering named after O.O. Morozov.

The armored personnel carrier can carry three crew members and seven paratroopers. The design features of the BTR-4 armored personnel carrier make it possible to create on its base a family of combat vehicles of different purposes: commander, command and staff, reconnaissance, repair and evacuation, sanitary and evacuation, fire support vehicles and others.

The diesel engine of the STA with 500 horsepower provides the armored vehicle with a maximum speed of up to 110 – 120 km / h with a power reserve of up to 700 km.

BTR-4 has enhanced armor protection. You can also install additional protection against automatic small-caliber guns.

In October of this year, the Chief of Staff of the Indonesian Navy, Admiral Marceti, said that the Indonesian Navy would receive five Ukrainian BTR-4. They will get to the troops along with the 37 Russian BMP-3F, which were ordered by contract in May 2012.

BTR-82A only in February officially adopted by the Russian army. It is a deep modernization of the armed BTR-80A and surpasses its predecessor in almost all indicators.

The mass of the BTR-82A is 16 tons. The machine is equipped with a 300 horsepower turbocharged diesel engine. Armored personnel carriers also have auxiliary diesel generators, which allow the on-board equipment to operate even when the main engine is off.

The BTR-82A is armed with a 30mm 2A72 automatic cannon and tank machine gun PKTM caliber 7,62 mm.
Originator:
http://www.vz.ru/
97 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Chicot 1
    Chicot 1 27 December 2013 12: 09
    +24
    But actually I was not particularly surprised by this circumstance ... For my class (BTR), more than excellent cars ...
    1. seller trucks
      seller trucks 27 December 2013 12: 11
      +14
      Ukrainian BTR-4 entered the top 10


      such a statement sounds strange against the background of the scandal with the Iraqi stand.
      1. Algor73
        Algor73 27 December 2013 12: 28
        +14
        I don’t know what you meant, but it really looks more like a setup. How many discussed this topic - no one has provided any confirmation of defective APCs. The East is a delicate matter, and everyone loves money. Take advantage of the weakness of the Ukrainian government. More precisely, they do not take it into account. And the APCs are good. To them would be normal managers
        1. seller trucks
          seller trucks 27 December 2013 13: 04
          +3
          Quote: Algor73
          Take advantage of the weakness of the Ukrainian government. More precisely, they do not take it into account. And the APCs are good. To them would be normal managers


          I'm embarrassed to ask, but with what fright, here is the weakness of the Ukrainian authorities and the armored personnel carrier? Should the authorities deal with PR? And the managers, well, yes, that's the problem, Fedosov alone at ZIM is a real "tanker"
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. sledgehammer102
            sledgehammer102 27 December 2013 15: 35
            +6
            Quote: seller trucks
            I'm embarrassed to ask, but with what fright, here is the weakness of the Ukrainian authorities and the armored personnel carrier? Should the authorities deal with PR? And the managers, well, yes, that's the problem, Fedosov alone at ZIM is a real "tanker"


            Selling weapons is always a policy. Another question is what the hell those responsible for this did not calculate all the risks. As a result, they lost a client and their reputation cracked along with armored personnel carriers. By the way, Iraq has now decided to purchase them in Russia. They will say again that they bought everyone ..
            "Cracked Ukrainian armored personnel carriers return to Odessa. Iraq will buy Russian ones instead."
            http://cripo.com.ua/?sect_id=10&aid=168080
            1. Basarev
              Basarev 27 December 2013 18: 19
              +8
              Perhaps they will inferno me for this, but I’ll say: after all, this whole story is in our hands.
              1. vell.65mail.ru
                vell.65mail.ru 27 December 2013 20: 44
                +2
                All right_if you want a tasty meal do not catch the fuck .... oh flies. hi
          3. 1goose3
            1goose3 27 December 2013 21: 39
            0
            Well. ooh! Nah ...! Generally ...
            A question the answer. hi
        2. Yuriwhite
          Yuriwhite 27 December 2013 14: 01
          +5
          Photos on the internet to look for?
          http://s019.radikal.ru/i613/1312/2e/b461815fad2b.jpg
          Is it apparently nanotechnological holes for a hot climate?
          1. Semen Semyonitch
            Semen Semyonitch 27 December 2013 14: 15
            0
            The shells are clearly not new, as if shot.
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Algor73
            Algor73 27 December 2013 20: 44
            +1
            At your recommendation, I looked at a lot of pictures in the internet. There are no specifics, bindings, etc. in them, so that one could confidently say - yes, these are cracks, and these are cracked with BTR-4.
        3. Evgeny_Lev
          Evgeny_Lev 27 December 2013 14: 01
          +4
          You don’t worry, the ship with BRMi is returning to Odessa, they are expecting January 3rd - 4th. Then what is called and see.
        4. The comment was deleted.
        5. Hudo
          Hudo 27 December 2013 22: 30
          0
          Quote: Algor73
          To them would be normal managers


          To remove the current, and you are new. One Fedosov of what only costs.
      2. svp67
        svp67 27 December 2013 12: 30
        +13
        Quote: seller trucks
        such a statement sounds strange against the background of the scandal with the Iraqi stand.

        Normal APCs, it’s more about PRODUCTION PROBLEMS, rather than design and capabilities ...
        1. Alekseev
          Alekseev 27 December 2013 12: 55
          +7
          Quote: svp67
          Normal APCs, it’s more about PRODUCTION PROBLEMS, rather than design and capabilities ...

          Absolutely accurate definition! good
          But ... I think you will agree with me as a practical armored comrade, that all such ratings are a notion of journalists with a large fellow share of conventionality. So, just for fun.
          1. shuhartred
            shuhartred 27 December 2013 18: 58
            +3
            Quote: Alekseev
            all similar ratings notion of journalists

            And yet whose is recognized as the best then? Although in reality only a real battle can show this, it’s better to get along.
            1. svp67
              svp67 27 December 2013 20: 18
              +4
              Quote: shuhartred
              And yet whose is recognized as the best then? Although in reality only a real battle can show this, it’s better to get along.

              An armored personnel carrier is not so much a heavily armored vehicle, it is quite possible to destroy it, therefore the OPERATIONAL indicators and the SECURITY indicators of the crew, especially the explosion safety, come to the forefront ...
          2. svp67
            svp67 27 December 2013 19: 47
            +1
            Quote: Alekseev
            So, just for fun.
            Well, not really ... Any ADVERTISEMENT, and this is it - SALES ENGINE ...
        2. washi
          washi 28 December 2013 10: 57
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          Normal APCs, it’s more about PRODUCTION PROBLEMS, rather than design and capabilities ...

          What kind of production? And who will trade in the markets, on the Maidan (Bolotny) stand, improve their landscapes abroad?
      3. A.YARY
        A.YARY 27 December 2013 13: 41
        -1
        Iraqi-destined BTR-4 return to Ukraine
        what
        on the background of the scandal with the Iraqi stand.
        "What's the pop ..."
        First, order should be brought in the country, then about trade, and even weapons of thought !!!
        And what oddball came to mind to put a non-competitive product in the rating? Or type "5" for participation?
      4. StolzSS
        StolzSS 27 December 2013 18: 29
        +1
        Yes, you just count the number of proposed models of armored personnel carriers on the market and everything will become funny and clear to you)))
    2. Civil
      Civil 27 December 2013 12: 16
      +2
      BTR-4 how it got into the rating, or the rating of the curve
      1. Alexander Petrovich
        Alexander Petrovich 27 December 2013 13: 26
        0
        ZTD diesel engine with a capacity of 500 horsepower

        Maybe diesel engines, doesn’t he have two of them?
        1. bistrov.
          bistrov. 27 December 2013 14: 39
          +8
          Quote: Alexander Petrovich
          Maybe diesel engines, doesn’t he have two of them?

          It was the first models of Soviet armored personnel carriers that had two carburetor automobile engines: one for BTR-60 2 GAZ-40, one for BTR-70 2 ZMZ-4905. On the following models, such a scheme was abandoned, already on the BTR-80 there is one KAMAZ diesel engine.
          1. Vadivak
            Vadivak 27 December 2013 16: 26
            +3
            Quote: bistrov.
            It was on the first models of Soviet armored personnel carriers two carburetor automobile engines:


            In 1943-44, ZIS built an experimental 12-seater B-3 armored personnel carrier (sometimes referred to in the reports as AT-3) with prototype armor (boiler steel 6 - 16 mm thick), armed with a large-caliber machine gun DShK on an open turret. With a total weight of 7100 kg, he could reach a speed of 40 km / h. Passed the tests but did not go into the series - low reliability of transmission units, overheating of the engine, constantly working at the limit
          2. Alexander Petrovich
            Alexander Petrovich 27 December 2013 23: 33
            +1
            Thank you for informing, I did not take an interest in this, I thought everyone was standing on two, well, for every 4 wheels, one engine. You are a plus.
      2. mirag2
        mirag2 27 December 2013 13: 36
        +3
        Well, in this "rating" and completely unknown devices, and the production of countries that previously were not seen in the development of such technology at all ...
        So there is clearly a rating curve.
        How without experience, from scratch, you can create a decent machine?
        Although the armored personnel carrier is not a tank, but still, some developments are necessary.
        Then the Georgian armored personnel carrier could easily enter this rating, or were other armored personnel carriers compared to such ones as the Georgian one?
    3. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 27 December 2013 13: 54
      +3
      yes both OUR SLAVIC "things" are not bad !!! good
    4. Horde
      Horde 27 December 2013 15: 48
      +2
      Ukrainian will be abruptly Russian good, and although there is no German motor, I thought they put their own ...
      1. GastaClaus69
        GastaClaus69 27 December 2013 15: 58
        +4
        In the "kosher" version it costs 3TD, but the customer can choose anyone, even a German, even a Honduran. As the saying goes: Any whim for your money.
        1. Horde
          Horde 27 December 2013 16: 11
          +3
          Quote: GastaClaus69
          The "kosher" version costs 3TD


          is kosher Jewish? and where is it?
          1. seller trucks
            seller trucks 27 December 2013 17: 11
            +5
            Quote: Horde
            is kosher Jewish? and where is it?


            it's a slang word, kosher - fit, good, right.
    5. rumpeljschtizhen
      rumpeljschtizhen 27 December 2013 19: 18
      -2
      But actually I was not particularly surprised by this circumstance ... For my class (BTR), more than excellent cars ...

      Were in due time
    6. lelikas
      lelikas 27 December 2013 23: 15
      +1
      It’s just that there aren’t many cars of this class, and already it is much inferior in booking to its colleagues.
      1. alone
        alone 27 December 2013 23: 47
        +2
        Dozens of countries produce armored vehicles all over the world. Many did not really participate in conflicts. Their capabilities are estimated according to the technical specifications. This list can be called theoretical. But it’s still unknown how they will behave in practice under bullets and shells.
  2. ReifA
    ReifA 27 December 2013 12: 10
    +1
    It was already written, it seems, that the rating there is crooked, armored personnel carriers are mixed with infantry fighting vehicles.
    1. Alex_Popovson
      Alex_Popovson 27 December 2013 12: 26
      +1
      Mixed up due to the difference in classification between Western and ours. For NATO, BMPs are also an armored personnel carrier, regardless of whether it is an amphibious vehicle or a wheeled / tracked vehicle, since it still carries personnel. This comes from the concept of "mobile war"
      Z.Y. I understand it this way, because there’s nothing more
  3. svp67
    svp67 27 December 2013 12: 14
    +2
    BTR-82A and BTR-4 are among the ten best armored personnel carriers in the world
    I don’t even want to discuss it somehow. Already, all that could be said earlier, in the comments to the previous article ...
  4. Akim
    Akim 27 December 2013 12: 38
    +10
    We already sucked this article here, moreover, I translated it especially for VO.
    http://topwar.ru/37594-desyatka-luchshih-bronetransporterov-po-versii-army-techn
    ology.html
    1. Roman 1977
      Roman 1977 27 December 2013 13: 33
      +3
      Dear Akim, I read that the Finns hesitated between the BTR-80 and the armored personnel carriers of the XA-180 own development and seemed to be ready to choose the BTR-80 if it were not for the collapse of the USSR:
      In July 1990, two BTR-80s were purchased by Finland for testing. The Finns were just looking for new "armored horses" instead of the outdated BTR-60 for their jaeger brigades. "Eightieth" from this point of view was quite cute. The second participant in the tests was to be the XA-1983 (150x180) armored personnel carrier, nicknamed Pasi (from the Finnish panssaroitu Sisu - "armored Sisu"), produced since 6 by the Sisu company on the basis of the Sisu SA-6 commercial truck.
      Comparative persecution of GAZ-a and Sisu devices in Finnish shit and landfills revealed the following:
      - cars have an equivalent reservation;
      - XA-180 is more capacious, comfortable and has a higher maximum speed on the highway;
      - BTR-80 but faster on the ground, much better equipped (14,5-mm and 7,62-mm machine guns mounted in the tower against the mounted on the turret 12,7-mm or 7,62-mm machine guns), and most importantly - much cheaper!
      The preference was given to the car of Gorky residents. The Finns have already begun negotiations with the Soviet side on the acquisition of a large batch of BTR-80, when the Union collapsed. After that, things began to happen on its former territory that, despite all the assurances of the Russian representatives about the guaranteed supply of armored personnel carriers and spare parts for them, the Finns hammered a bolt on the BTR-80, and remained with only a couple of "eighties". These two vehicles served in Suomi until 2007, when one of them went to scrap, and the other to the Parola tank museum.

      http://u-96.livejournal.com/3103964.html#comments


      BTR-80 during tests in Finland, above the engine compartment is visible trellised basket for the transport of goods, a purely Finnish invention.

      BTR-80 in Parola
  5. standby
    standby 27 December 2013 12: 51
    +14
    On my own I will add, perhaps very good "Boxers" began to be supplied to the German army since 2009, before that gallant German soldiers moved, mainly on TPz 1 Fuchs (in the series since 1979), in different configurations with different weapon options, but the main version, of course, did not have such a powerful weapon as our KPVT ..., differed in a high profile (one and a half times higher than 80tk), a small angle of inclination of the armor, and in general when compared with the BTR-80 (in the series since 1984) , to a greater extent resembled a mass grave for the crew and troops (shown in the photo). In a visual comparison, the BTR-80 impressed the same Germans and their allies in the NATO bloc in Bosnia and Kosovo, with its speed, maneuverability, stockiness, graceful forms, even though they did not even know about the combat qualities of the KPVT, but they were terrified the fact that our device has a large-caliber machine gun in the tower, and they only have a 7,62mm machine gun without one smile , (they speak with a 20mm cannon, but not enough), the Finns have them in service with our "Utes", by the way! This was the backlog of Soviet industry! Therefore, the 82nd on the list is very good indeed! laughing
  6. Archikah
    Archikah 27 December 2013 12: 57
    +1
    And on the BTR-4 that the inhabited turret remained. This is frankly a step in place. In the BTR-82, automatic weapons are mounted on top of the hull. Using "advanced" terminology, this is the main trend now. And on the Armata everything on top will be automatic. Therefore, even for such a powerful (500 hp) engine - not ah. hi
    1. morpex
      morpex 27 December 2013 13: 11
      +8
      Quote: Archikah
      And on the BTR-4 that remained the inhabited turret.

      So modifications depending on the tasks performed are different. Here, for example, without a turret
      1. GastaClaus69
        GastaClaus69 27 December 2013 13: 46
        +5
        On all modifications of the BTR-4 are uninhabited combat modules. The turrets of Ukrainian gunsmiths ceased to sculpt on equipment back in the 90s.
    2. Alekseev
      Alekseev 27 December 2013 21: 20
      +8
      Quote: Archikah
      And on BTR-4 that remained the inhabited turret. This is honestly a step in place.

      And what, the "uninhabited turret" will save the armored personnel carrier from being hit by fire weapons?
      Where to live there, a meter in diameter.
      Our mistake sometimes is that (including with regards to remotely controlled weapons systems on BTT) we do not remember the old saying: "make a fool pray to God, he will pierce his forehead." yes
      DUMV are not used at all to "fight" from enemy fire. Their use simply makes it possible to place more efficiently more powerful weapons and more convenient gunner-operator. Use the place for the gunner's head (body) to place weapons and ammunition. Sometimes, as in the case of tank ZPUs, the security of the shooter is dramatically improved. And in promising tanks, heavy infantry fighting vehicles (but not light armored personnel carriers), thanks to this, the crew can be placed in a protected "armored capsule". At the same time, the DUMV must be absolutely reliable, because in order to eliminate any delay in firing, it is necessary to get out of the combat vehicle with all the consequences.
      And sometimes the best machine gun on the bipod. It all depends on the tasks.
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 27 December 2013 21: 31
        +3
        Quote: Alekseev
        It all depends on the tasks.

        hi

        Lesh, I’m already tired of reading comments in this thread ... Ches-a word.
        A lot of good and useful information to read is useful in itself, but this, unfortunately, is not the case ....
        Here today some kind of mess has turned out, but no offense to the forum users will be told:
        - turbidity of keyboard characters and normal real komenty - this is already familiar,
        - but there is a feeling that there is some misunderstanding in communication in principle ...
        request
        Maybe this Christmas party has already begun?
        And the nursery today ...
        lol

        This is IMHO.
        drinks
  7. EvilLion
    EvilLion 27 December 2013 13: 15
    -2
    The BTR-82 automatic weapons are mounted on top of the hull.


    It just doesn’t work to put a normal tower, as they did on the larger BTR-90.
    1. Hudo
      Hudo 27 December 2013 22: 48
      +1
      Space for the installation of the tower there is redundant.
      http://russianarms.mybb.ru/viewtopic.php?id=1168
  8. Prapor-527
    Prapor-527 27 December 2013 13: 26
    0
    BTR-82A and BTR-4 are among the ten best armored personnel carriers in the worldBut as a matter of fact, BTR 80 raped everyone ...
  9. Sharingan
    Sharingan 27 December 2013 13: 30
    +1
    BTR-82 is good for everyone, except for the side hatches. On fire you have to turn the car sideways, which is not good.
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 27 December 2013 14: 08
      +3
      how tired of these expert inferences. Look at the statistics, "head-on" are often attacked by armored personnel carriers, or is it all the same on the sides from an ambush?
      1. Sharingan
        Sharingan 27 December 2013 14: 50
        +4
        Quote: Evgeny_Lev
        how tired of these expert inferences. Look at the statistics, "head-on" are often attacked by armored personnel carriers, or is it all the same on the sides from an ambush?

        As I understand it, you are a supporter of the "police" army. I believe that the army is only for large-scale wars. Therefore, the side hatch is bad. And in an ambush, no hatch will help, Xpert.
        I would look at you as I find you will jump out between the wheels.
        1. Vadim12
          Vadim12 27 December 2013 16: 26
          +3
          I jumped on the go with 80s. Nothing good, uncomfortable, but nothing can be done, only from above if you sit.
        2. Algor73
          Algor73 27 December 2013 20: 54
          0
          Yes, even under fire ...
    2. svp67
      svp67 27 December 2013 20: 28
      +2
      Quote: Sharingan
      BTR-82 is good for everyone, except for the side hatches. On fire you have to turn the car sideways, which is not good.

      An armored personnel carrier, by and large an "armored bus", for transporting personnel in the zone of possible enemy fire, side doors have their advantages, for example, when attacking a column, such an arrangement of doors will make it possible to disembark people from a safer side ...
      1. Alekseev
        Alekseev 28 December 2013 12: 12
        0
        Quote: svp67
        An armored personnel carrier, by and large an "armored bus", for transporting personnel in the zone of possible enemy fire, side doors have their advantages

        Absolutely accurate definition! good
        They clung to these doors, "like a dog to a bastard." More on the pictures, especially, nothing is visible. request wink
  10. Santa Fe
    Santa Fe 27 December 2013 13: 44
    -4
    Russian BTR-82A and Ukrainian BTR-4 entered the top-10 of the best armored personnel carriers in the world in terms of firepower protection and mobility, according to the influential international magazine Army Technology.

    But nothing that the main quality of the armored personnel carriers is security
    Armored vehicles that do not provide protection even against 12,7 mm bullets of the old DShK (and in some cases penetrate 7,62 with a tempered core) are not armored vehicles. These are guaranteed coffins.

    But the designers of the Russian armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles are not at all ashamed that the soldiers do not trust their "unparalleled" creations and sit astride the armor - so there is at least some chance of surviving an explosion.

    And the security rating will be slightly different:
    1. "Namer" (heavy armored personnel carrier on the chassis of the MBT "Merkava Mk.4" of the Israel Defense Forces)
    2. "Puma" (heavy armored personnel carrier on the chassis of the "Centurion" tank of the Israel Defense Forces)
    3. "Akhzarit" (heavy armored personnel carrier on the chassis of captured T-54/55 tanks of the Israel Defense Forces)

    Three heavy tracked vehicles in masses (44-60 tons) stand on a separate line. They provide an unprecedented level of security at the level of MBT - these will be the armored personnel carriers of the future


    50-ton "Puma"



    NAME


    Among the other "outsiders" are:
    4. German "Boxer" (30 tons)
    5. Terrex Army of Singapore (25 Tons)
    6. family of wheeled vehicles М1126 "Stryker" (USA, MEXAS armor, weight 16,5 tons)
    7. British tracked "Bulldog" with reinforced armor (weight> 20 tons)
    8. American tracked floating M113 - the car has passed 60 years, but it is still relevant and effective on the battlefield, used in dozens of countries.
    9. American MRAP - armored analogs of trucks and "Hummers"

    ... that’s probably all - all the other armored personnel carriers are not armored vehicles


    Bulldog (with dynamic protection)



    Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) with heavy armor and a V-shaped explosion-proof bottom


    The results of an RPG grenade falling into the tin board of a domestic armored personnel carrier. Words are superfluous.
    Nowadays, RPG-7 is on the shoulder of every self-respecting basmach
    1. pawel57
      pawel57 27 December 2013 14: 07
      +6
      RPG and Abrams take on board and that of this, the Americans did not remove it from service. You need to fight wisely, use the technique skillfully, a hole does not mean the death of the crew. Our service armor was carried regularly.
      1. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 27 December 2013 14: 14
        -15%
        Quote: pawel57
        RPG and Abrams takes on board and what of this

        A rare exception rather than a rule.
        Quote: pawel57
        You need to fight properly, use the technique skillfully

        Give you buggy instead of armored vehicles - and fight skillfully. Buggy has some mobility and patency !! wow!
        Quote: pawel57
        a hole does not mean the death of the crew

        made fun of
        Quote: pawel57
        Our service armor was carried regularly.

        a familiar picture?
        shame and shame on the designers of such ARMORED cars
        1. pawel57
          pawel57 27 December 2013 14: 38
          +21
          Firstly, I had cars with RPG holes from side to side. There were not heavy injured from this, they didn’t fall under the stream and small pieces of armor were. How to get there.
          They drive on armor because there is noise, gas contamination in the car and this happens on the march and you can quickly find a mine or an ambush, a circular view. No one sits on the armor during a direct battle.
          Thirdly, we have some of the best infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers in the world, ask the same Syrians.
          Fourth, you are probably from the liberals who are harassing our scientists and designers, or you are a foreigner doing subversive work among users trying to inspire the inferiority of our weapons.
          1. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe 27 December 2013 15: 11
            -3
            Quote: pawel57
            Firstly, I had cars with RPG holes from side to side. There were not heavy injured from this, they didn’t fall under the stream and small pieces of armor were. How to get there.

            The chances of surviving inside "Akhzarit" when hit by an RPG are an order of magnitude higher than in a tin can by a misunderstanding named "armored personnel carrier-80".



            44-ton machine based on the T-54 / 55 with the tower removed - instead of additional screens and sheets of armor on the sides, aft ramp and dynamic protection. Only! - no nanotechnology and high costs. But the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation desperately does not want to acknowledge the deficiency of the existing approach to the creation of such equipment - what difference does it make?

            Secondly, the RPG is still an extreme case. Domestic tin cans do not even protect against PRIMITIVE weapons of destruction (handguns, DShK, home-made WU from clay pots with TNT)
            Quote: pawel57
            because the car noise, gas contamination

            whose miscalculations are these?
            the same BTR-80 designers
            Quote: pawel57
            ask the same Syrians

            Do the Syrians have any choice? Did they compare in practice the protection of the same Akhzarit and the Soviet-style armored personnel carrier?
            Quote: pawel57
            Fourth, you are probably from the liberals who are harassing our scientists and designers, or you are a foreigner doing subversive work among users trying to inspire the inferiority of our weapons.

            "... I planted a bomb in the pendulum of St. Isaac's Cathedral to activate it with a radio signal from America, when Comrade Zhdanov was standing next to me."
            (from the delusional verdict to Lev Termen, a Soviet physicist, the creator of the "Zlatoust" eavesdropping device (Theremin resonator), the disguised Chrysostom hung on the wall in the office of the US Ambassador for 7 years)

            good domestic development - an analogue of Ahzarit, BMO-T on the T-72 chassis. bad that in a single copy. and there’s no money for her purchases
            1. GastaClaus69
              GastaClaus69 27 December 2013 15: 53
              +7
              Do you compare heavy armored personnel carriers and combat vehicles of flamethrowers?
            2. Setrac
              Setrac 27 December 2013 17: 45
              +7
              Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
              The chances of surviving inside "Akhzarit" when hit by an RPG are an order of magnitude higher than in a tin can by a misunderstanding named "armored personnel carrier-80".

              And how many azarchites are produced? For each azarchite, you can make 5 (five) BTR-82, and even more.
              One branch will go to TBTR and four will go on foot, all five branches will go to BTR-82. As a result, when shelling artillery, everyone who walks will die (figs, Jews will give birth), we all will survive. Here is the math.
              1. Santa Fe
                Santa Fe 27 December 2013 17: 54
                +1
                Quote: Setrac
                And how many azarchites are produced?

                500+

                (the valiant Syrian tankers were very fond of throwing serviceable tanks on the battlefield)
                Quote: Setrac
                For each azarchite, you can make 5 (five) BTR-82

                not true, ahzarit - just a rework on the basis of the old Soviet T-54 tank, of which we have preserved an immeasurable number
                1. vladkavkaz
                  vladkavkaz 27 December 2013 19: 55
                  +4
                  Valorous Jewish tankers, with undoubted respect for an example such as Gal, sometimes threw the same equipment and draped, as well as suffered terrible losses by the standards of Israel. At the same Sinai.
                  So less blather, at the expense of supposedly poorly fighting Syrians.
                  1. Aaron Zawi
                    Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 20: 05
                    0
                    Quote: vladkavkaz
                    Valorous Jewish tankers, with undoubted respect for an example such as Gal, sometimes threw the same equipment and draped, as well as suffered terrible losses by the standards of Israel. At the same Sinai.
                    So less blather, at the expense of supposedly poorly fighting Syrians.

                    An example? I know about the heavy losses of the Israeli tankers, when they counterattacked the Egyptians in the first days of the fighting, not counting the death of vehicles and crews, but I do not know of a single case when the Israelis "threw equipment and skidded." You made a statement and are obliged to confirm this statement with an authoritative link, otherwise you are simply retelling the OBS.
                    1. vladkavkaz
                      vladkavkaz 27 December 2013 20: 19
                      +2
                      Aaron Zawi
                      Personally, I owe you nothing and do not owe anything, but leave my Ura-patriotic cries about the last car and crew for internal use in Israel.
                      On the Sinai, your troops suffered huge losses and your soldiers Fled from the battlefield, and did not "retreat in an organized manner," propaganda, as in the best traditions of propaganda from the time of Goebbels, trumpet all over the world.
                      War is not a knock on clavs, so if you want to knock to the point of insanity, find yourself another object for this.
                      1. And Us Rat
                        And Us Rat 27 December 2013 20: 44
                        +3
                        Quote: vladkavkaz
                        War is not a knock on clavs

                        And just this (at least to me) is known from personal experience.
                        Ours do not run for a trivial reason - there is nowhere to run, each of those wars was a war squeezed into a corner, because the Arabs wanted (and many still want) the physical destruction of the entire population of Israel and the flight was tantamount to death, every soldier knew this - therefore not fled.
                        But you, apparently, know about military operations only by computer games - otherwise you would know that fighting = loss of tactical initiative = defeat. And for Israel, defeat = death, and therefore - impermissible luxury.
                        So do not flaunt your amateurism in front of people with combat experience. negative
                      2. Aaron Zawi
                        Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 21: 21
                        +2
                        Quote: vladkavkaz

                        On the Sinai, your troops suffered huge losses and your soldiers Fled from the battlefield, and did not "retreat in an organized manner," propaganda, as in the best traditions of propaganda from the time of Goebbels, trumpet all over the world.
                        War is not a knock on clavs, so if you want to knock to the point of insanity, find yourself another object for this.

                        in short, you cannot prove your statements with anything? Well, let's write it down. Another fan of boltology without facts. The Yom Kippur War has been sorted out by leaps and bounds, and nowhere is it recorded that the Israeli soldiers would "RUN from the battlefield." Moreover, even the Egyptians never said this.
                        And what a war is to me, a soldier, of the "Asaf" battalion in the emergency service and the "Eshkol" battalion in the reserve service, I know a little bit.
                      3. antibanukurayza
                        antibanukurayza 28 December 2013 09: 02
                        +1
                        Do you know Aaron why Jews are not liked? Not because they are Jews and not because they killed the prophets, did not recognize God's messengers. And they do not love them, not because they think they are "God's chosen ones." They do not like them because in the history of mankind they became known for their cunning, treachery, treachery, amazing ability to break promises and agreements and passionate love for money and profit. Do not all Jewish jokes revolve around this topic?
                      4. Pimply
                        Pimply 28 December 2013 09: 19
                        0
                        Quote: antibanukuraza
                        do you know Aaron why Jews are not liked? Not because they are Jews and not because they killed the Prophets, did not recognize God's messengers. And they do not love them, not because they think they are "God's chosen ones."

                        Jews do not like because you have to not love someone. Many people imagined themselves to be God's chosen ones. But for some reason, it is the Jews that annoy you, no? If you are a Christian or Muslim, then de facto recognize the concept of the Jewish people being chosen. Well, simply because it lies at the heart of both Christianity and Islam. And, by the way, both Islam and Christianity imply the wisdom of Christians and Muslims. Will we also hate them all? Maybe the Druze too.
                      5. antibanukurayza
                        antibanukurayza 28 December 2013 09: 56
                        +1
                        Well, it means that someone whom you need to not love became Jews. So they deserve to not be loved. For no reason they do not make someone unloved.
              2. antibanukurayza
                antibanukurayza 28 December 2013 08: 58
                +1
                Yeah. Jews are good when they kill children, women and the elderly. Their policy is fascist - for one soldier killed 1000 Palestinians. Jews draped and will drape. A lot of historical facts. And there is no need to demand a link, etc. This is an argument of the weak. The Jews were still draping themselves from Pharaoh, and this continues to this day. Squishy Jew such a professor, with a pile of books in his hand and glasses. In the forehead and immediately darts. And why? Yes, because he doesn’t have Uncle Sam behind him. Uncle Sam will crash and a brother will start a drape.
                1. And Us Rat
                  And Us Rat 28 December 2013 09: 18
                  -2
                  Quote: antibanukuraza
                  In the forehead and immediately darts.

                  Oahahahahaha laughing Tell it to my army melee instructor. laughing
                2. antibanukurayza
                  antibanukurayza 28 December 2013 09: 56
                  -1
                  Are you Jewish too?
                3. And Us Rat
                  And Us Rat 29 December 2013 00: 55
                  0
                  Quote: antibanukuraza
                  Are you Jewish too?

                  Count up laughing
              3. Aaron Zawi
                Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 10: 48
                0
                Quote: And Us Rat
                Quote: antibanukuraza
                In the forehead and immediately darts.

                Oahahahahaha laughing Tell it to my army melee instructor. laughing

                Well, why. Let him tell Alexander Rosenbaum or the younger Vitorgan. They are not young people, and even artists. Well, what can they do to this hero.
            3. Pimply
              Pimply 28 December 2013 09: 20
              0
              Quote: antibanukuraza
              Yeah. Jews are good when they kill children, women and the elderly. Their policy is fascist - for one soldier killed

              A little more specific. And your opinion - who and how, and for whom you can kill, and by what methods.
        2. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 27 December 2013 20: 25
          -2
          Quote: vladkavkaz
          sometimes throwing the same technique and draping

          And of course you are ready to confirm your words with a concrete example? am (culturally speaking)
          1. vladkavkaz
            vladkavkaz 27 December 2013 20: 37
            +2
            And Us Rat
            And you are on us.
            Leave your matzah patriotism for internal use.
            1. And Us Rat
              And Us Rat 27 December 2013 20: 46
              0
              Quote: vladkavkaz
              And Us Rat
              And you are on us.
              Leave your matzah patriotism for internal use.

              Not hami imbicil No. not matured yet.
      2. Setrac
        Setrac 27 December 2013 20: 08
        +2
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        500+

        And the BTR-60,70,80 - 4000+ is only available, but several times more is produced.
    2. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 17: 59
      +1
      Quote: Setrac

      And how many azarchites are produced? For each azarchite, you can make 5 (five) BTR-82, and even more.
      One branch will go to TBTR and four will go on foot, all five branches will go to BTR-82. As a result, when shelling artillery, everyone who walks will die (figs, Jews will give birth), we all will survive. Here is the math.

      First of all, Oleg is a Russian, not an Israeli. Secondly, "Akhzarit" is an armored personnel carrier of the battlefield. This vehicle is intended for movement in tank formations. By 2003, by the time Namer was put into service, three brigade sets had been manufactured. But since the infantry does not always have to break through enemy SDs, there are 6000 M113s with enhanced armor to deliver the rest of the infantry. But these machines will not go to the battlefield. They will land a trooper and he will already move with his legs along the folds of the terrain.
      1. vladkavkaz
        vladkavkaz 27 December 2013 19: 57
        +2
        So explain it- SWEET_SIXTEEN
        "And the security rating will be somewhat different:
        1. "Namer" (heavy armored personnel carrier on the chassis of the MBT "Merkava Mk.4" of the Israel Defense Forces)
        2. "Puma" (heavy armored personnel carrier on the chassis of the "Centurion" tank of the Israel Defense Forces)
        3. "Akhzarit" (heavy armored personnel carrier on the chassis of captured T-54/55 tanks of the Israel Defense Forces) "- PUBLISHING this, without the slightest understanding of what you just wrote about.
      2. Setrac
        Setrac 27 December 2013 20: 06
        +2
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        Secondly, "Akhzarit" is an armored personnel carrier of the battlefield. This vehicle is intended for movement in tank formations.

        For the first time I hear, armored personnel carriers are not designed to move in the same order as tanks, maybe only in the Israeli army.
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        But these cars will not go to the battlefield. They will land an assault force and it will already move with its legs along the folds of the terrain.

        This is exactly the BTR (BTR-60,70,80). And the fact that on the battlefield is the BMP, but even they move behind the tanks.
      3. Setrac
        Setrac 28 December 2013 00: 19
        +2
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        Secondly, "Akhzarit" is an armored personnel carrier of the battlefield.

        This whole dispute is because we are putting a different concept in the word "armored personnel carrier".
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 00: 26
          +1
          Quote: Setrac
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          Secondly, "Akhzarit" is an armored personnel carrier of the battlefield.

          This whole dispute is because we are putting a different concept in the word "armored personnel carrier".

          Dispute? But did I write that armored personnel carriers of the Republic of Armenia are bad or worse than Israeli ones? I just explained the concept ТBTR in AOI.
          1. Setrac
            Setrac 28 December 2013 00: 40
            +1
            Quote: Aron Zaavi
            Dispute? But did I write that armored personnel carriers of the Republic of Armenia are bad or worse than Israeli ones?

            Monologue, conversation, treatise wink
            1. Aaron Zawi
              Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 00: 59
              +2
              Quote: Setrac
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              Dispute? But did I write that armored personnel carriers of the Republic of Armenia are bad or worse than Israeli ones?

              Monologue, conversation, treatise wink

              Well, no argument at all. TBTR and BTR are really different cars and we clearly distinguish between them. The first is a battlefield car, and the second is just an armored bus / truck.
    3. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 27 December 2013 18: 03
      0
      Quote: Setrac
      One branch will go to TBTR and four will go on foot

      AOI Ground Forces: 3 657 main battle tanks (including 1 681 Merkava, 711 M60A1 / 3, more than 100 T-55, over 100 T-62, 111 "Magah-7") near 10 420 BMP and armored personnel carrier hi
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 19: 12
        +4
        Quote: And Us Rat
        Quote: Setrac
        One branch will go to TBTR and four will go on foot

        AOI Ground Forces: 3 657 main battle tanks (including 1 681 Merkava, 711 M60A1 / 3, more than 100 T-55, over 100 T-62, 111 "Magah-7") near 10 420 BMP and armored personnel carrier hi

        have not been corrected for a long time. lol In reality, today in service about 1400 MK 2 / 3 / 4, up to 400 MAGAX-7, and the rest has already been written off. The armored personnel carrier remains to 6000 of which by 2019 it is planned to 1000 TBTR.
        1. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 27 December 2013 21: 05
          -1
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          have not been adjusted for a long time

          I'll do it laughing It is not written off, part is modernized and sold for export, part is waiting for this in warehouses, but in an emergency it may well get into operation. wink Nobody cut them to metal.
          1. bask
            bask 27 December 2013 21: 19
            +4
            Quote: And Us Rat
            Nobody cut them to metal.


            Israel Tank Cemetery, which is located near the town of Kiryat Gat.
            More than 700 tanks, which were used by various Arab-Israeli wars, stand and rust here.
            Offered for sale at a price of 0,25 $$ per kilogram. request
            1. Aaron Zawi
              Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 21: 36
              +2
              Well yes. By the way, Kiryat Gat is not a bad town. This is the center of the Intel Corporation in Israel. There is such a small complex that produces 40% of all processors manufactured by Intel in the world. wink
            2. bask
              bask 27 December 2013 21: 48
              +4
              Quote: Aron Zaavi
              which produces 40% of all Intel processors in the world

              Aaron, and what does it have to do, armored vehicles, for remelting? request
              In a couple of years, all 100% processors will be produced in China. fellow
            3. Aaron Zawi
              Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 22: 11
              0
              [quote = bask]
              Aaron, and what does it have to do, armored vehicles, for remelting? request
              In a couple of years, all 100% processors will be produced in China. fellow[/
              Yes so. By the way. repeat By the way, about China, you have no idea how wrong you are. You look after this town. There, interesting things will be done.
        2. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 28 December 2013 00: 24
          0
          Quote: bask
          more 700 tanks

          And we are talking about armored personnel carriers. wink
        3. bask
          bask 28 December 2013 01: 04
          +3
          Quote: And Us Rat
          And we are talking about armored personnel carriers.

          But the BTR-T ,, Ahzarit ,, was not a T-55? request
        4. Pimply
          Pimply 28 December 2013 09: 21
          +2
          In a very distant childhood. De facto, the bottom and part of the chassis remained from the tank.
  • Setrac
    Setrac 27 December 2013 20: 11
    +1
    Quote: And Us Rat
    near 10 420 BMP and armored personnel carrier

    That is, as in the Russian army, the bulk of armored personnel carriers are lightly armored armored personnel carriers that are inferior even to the BTR-80 and some (small) heavy armored personnel carriers.
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 27 December 2013 21: 07
      -3
      Quote: Setrac
      lightly armored armored personnel carriers that are inferior even to the BTR-80

      Are these for example? request
  • Setrac
    Setrac 28 December 2013 00: 58
    +1
    Quote: And Us Rat
    near 10 420 BMP and armored personnel carrier

    Of which 6131pcs M113A1 / M113A2, as of 2010 year
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 01: 18
      +1
      Quote: Setrac
      Quote: And Us Rat
      near 10 420 BMP and armored personnel carrier

      Of which 6131pcs M113A1 / M113A2, as of 2010 year

      Look below in the same discussion there are photos of the M113 with replaced engines and enhanced armor. As an armored troop carrier of the near-field, he quite suits the IDF.
  • Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 27 December 2013 17: 52
    +5
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    good domestic development - an analogue of Ahzarit, BMO-T on the T-72 chassis. bad that in a single copy. and there’s no money for her purchases

    Oleg, BMO-T is in service.
    Several teams have them available.

    But there are few of them, and they are only at the "chemists".
    Eheh ...
  • Alexei
    Alexei 27 December 2013 19: 15
    +2
    You do not shine Oleg. You stubbornly claim that the whole chip is in the armor. Like if the armor is thicker, then the crew is more intact (if I understand you correctly). In fact, all the APCs and other armored vehicles that you listed (which are correct) will still break through the RPG, not the first time, but the eighth. Moreover, with their weight, getting into them is much easier than in a lighter and more maneuverable one. These brilliant cars of yours are expensive, and so no one will be too lazy to spend more grenades on them. And war is a very expensive business, very much. Or maybe we’ll calculate how much fuel these miracle machines of yours will survive? Or maybe we’ll figure out how fast they can get from point A to point B? You are somewhere else where the Hamer mentioned (the analogue is a couple truck there). Do you have any idea what a hamer is? (Well, except that he is handsome and his armor is thick) Yes, he eats like a breakthrough! It should be a tank always at hand, and armored too, and it will also be eating fuel. But then - Oh YES, the first grenade will not bring damage to the personnel of truly armored vehicles.
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 27 December 2013 21: 09
      +1
      Quote: Alexej
      not the first time, so from the eighth

      The difference is colossal!
      After all, you still have to live up to the eighth arrow, or will your armor sit like a duck in a dash and wait for it to still be pulled? lol
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. Impact
      Impact 27 December 2013 21: 12
      +2
      AHTUNG !!! AHTUNG !!!

      Quote: pawel57
      All yours the Jews innovations burned

      WHERE VISIBLE APOLLON ???????
      1. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 27 December 2013 21: 17
        0
        Quote: Impact
        AHTUNG !!! AHTUNG !!!

        Quote: pawel57
        All yours the Jews innovations burned

        WHERE VISIBLE APOLLON ???????

        Already notified laughing
      2. Hudo
        Hudo 27 December 2013 23: 17
        +3
        Quote: Impact
        WHERE VISIBLE APOLLON ???????

        He studies the works of Vladimir Dahl on the subject of their moderation. crying
  • Massik
    Massik 28 December 2013 00: 50
    +1
    Ahahah, when the command in this armored box takes you to a wonderful f *** y, where neither aviation nor an armored group will save you, you will get a lot of pleasure listening to how a 100 kilogram landmine is clinging to your box with broken tracks or hammering at one point from grenade launchers . You can try to go out and decide for everyone right away by evaporating from a rocket-propelled grenade flying into the hatch, or by scattering into pieces from the line of a large-caliber thresher, there are many ways to control people in armored vehicles. Sitting on the armor there is at least some chance to jump off, take up some kind of shelter and shoot at least a little.
    1. bask
      bask 28 December 2013 01: 01
      0
      Quote: Marssik
      then a chance to jump, take some kind of shelter and at least shoot back a little.

      Massik
      If you sit on the armor, then you need to build specialized open-top armored personnel carriers (I repeat).
      It’s more convenient to sit in an armchair than to earn money with non-steel armor.

    2. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 01: 08
      +2
      If the situation is as tragic as you described, the landing party outside would be destroyed in the first seconds of the battle. Indeed, according to the conditions set by you, a platoon / company on an armored personnel carrier under the command of idiots, without reconnaissance and organization of interaction with a higher headquarters and neighboring units, got into a prepared ambush, where the enemy also has an overwhelming fire, and possibly numerical superiority, over your unit. So for the landing located outside, immediately will be fired machine gun fire to destroy.
      1. bask
        bask 28 December 2013 01: 26
        +1
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        machine gun fire to destroy.

        IED, RPG 7, sniper fire. Yes to destruction.
        I wrote that it is better to have specialized armored cars ...
        For a few minutes of battle, there is a chance to get out of the shelling.
      2. Massik
        Massik 28 December 2013 01: 40
        +1
        Well, where then is the armored vehicle ??? I can’t understand this ??? What is there to find out and defend ??? In these conditions, everyone is equal, why is this obscure bodyagi about the thickness of the armor ??? wink
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 02: 04
          +3
          For an ambush, saturated ATGMs and RPGs are all the same. And for the battlefield where an armored personnel carrier must allow its infantry to overcome the distance with minimum losses before it comes into fire contact with the enemy, it has.
      3. The comment was deleted.
    3. Impact
      Impact 28 December 2013 01: 22
      +2
      Quote: Marssik
      Ahahah, when the command of you in this armored box will lead you to a wonderful w *** y

      This attitude towards military personnel is characteristic only for Russia ...

      Quote: Marssik
      where neither aviation , no armored group will save you

      Where is such a place? In a black hole?

      Quote: Marssik
      you will get a lot of pleasure listening to how 100 kilogram landmine clings to your box with broken tracks

      How much pleasure does an enemy A-10 / AH-64 bring overhead?

      Quote: Marssik
      Sitting on the armor there is at least some chance to jump off, take up some kind of shelter and at least shoot back a little.

      Sitting on the armor there is a chance to catch the trim of the fittings / balls from the bearings from the roadside IED.
      1. Massik
        Massik 28 December 2013 01: 36
        0
        Do you think all these 19-20-year-old boys decided to commit sophisticated suicide ??? Is there an order ??? THERE IS . And then you do not want *****, do not want, you can, you can not, the merit lies not with the worthless armored vehicles, but with the smart father of the commander.
    4. Pimply
      Pimply 28 December 2013 09: 23
      +3
      The armored box is designed to deliver fighters to the battlefield with the highest degree of probability without the risk of being hit before they complete their main combat mission.

      If you jump for the concept - do you need an APC on a fig? Enough truck with a gun.
  • And Us Rat
    And Us Rat 27 December 2013 17: 58
    -1
    Quote: pawel57
    Thirdly, we have some of the best infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers in the world, ask the same Syrians.




    1. pawel57
      pawel57 27 December 2013 21: 10
      +10
      Do not listen to enemy agents about the unsuitability of our technology. I heard these screams from the end of the 80s the collapse of the USSR. This is from the Novodvorskaya opera. Now they overwhelm the Russian Federation and inspire youth with inferiority in relation to our country and the army. Amers BTR M113 and on its base are still serving. And he is older than our BMP, Americans are also burning.
    2. Alexei
      Alexei 27 December 2013 22: 11
      +3
      And Us, you, at the sight of these pictures, along the way, your pants are full of joy.
      1. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 28 December 2013 00: 21
        0
        Quote: Alexej
        And Us, you, at the sight of these pictures, along the way, your pants are full of joy.


        Do not judge everyone by yourself, I'm just allergic to this empty-headed pathos:
        Quote: pawel57
        ask the same Syrians

        I still gently reacted, the same Syrians would have simply lynched him for these words, especially those hundreds of families who lost relatives of those burned in these ...
        Quote: pawel57
        some of the best infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers in the world
        1. phantom359
          phantom359 29 December 2013 01: 41
          0
          Quote: And Us Rat
          Quote: Alexej
          And Us, you, at the sight of these pictures, along the way, your pants are full of joy.


          Do not judge everyone by yourself, I'm just allergic to this empty-headed pathos:
          Quote: pawel57
          ask the same Syrians

          I still gently reacted, the same Syrians would have simply lynched him for these words, especially those hundreds of families who lost relatives of those burned in these ...
          Quote: pawel57
          some of the best infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers in the world

          I try to just read and not get into conversations, but sometimes you cross all borders. Of course, all the best is done only in Israel and America.)
    3. Patton5
      Patton5 27 December 2013 23: 14
      +3
      I wish I watched if Israel fought for 3 years)))) 1000000% I give such pictures would be no less, so do not la la .... Presented
      your photos prove only that there is no invulnerable equipment, and only hi
      1. atalef
        atalef 28 December 2013 00: 09
        -1
        Quote: Patton5
        I wish I watched if Israel fought for 3 years)))) 1000000% I give such pictures would be no less, so do not la la .... Presented
        your photos prove only that there is no invulnerable equipment, and only hi


        why do we fight3 of the year? We somehow finished all this turbidity faster, it’s only the valiant Syrian army with the best armored vehicles in the world that can afford the 3 of the year to have fun
        1. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 28 December 2013 00: 12
          +2
          Quote: atalef
          why do we fight3 of the year? We somehow finished all this turbidity faster, it’s only the valiant Syrian army with the best armored vehicles in the world that can afford the 3 of the year to have fun

          Killed wassat laughing laughing wassat
        2. Patton5
          Patton5 28 December 2013 15: 41
          +1
          All this is demagogy, Israel has never been in a similar situation, but the world is changeable .... I'm sure you will still have the opportunity to prove your words by practice.
          with the best armored vehicles in the world
          The best technology in the world is certainly not Israeli, although no, the USA ... or all the same, Israel. Although I tell you, you yourself know this very well fellow
        3. Alexei
          Alexei 28 December 2013 16: 35
          0
          Quote: atalef
          , this is only the valiant Syrian army with the best armored vehicles in the world can afford 3 of the year to have fun

          What are you saying? It’s convenient to argue when you see the enemy and how he is trying to cross your border — don’t fight like that ... And if the enemy is already in the country and democrats are attacking your economy, and nearby states provide assistance to your enemy, and countries have far less material assistance ? When thugs are constantly gathering, replenishing the ranks of the terrorists who shit here and there, they jump like fleas, and the army tries to pinch them. Clamps, and they across the border and on the other hand again shit with renewed vigor. Do you seriously think that you got into an Israeli tank and that’s it - VICTORY !? Here's how to explain it to you? How to get through to you if you are in armor ...
          1. atalef
            atalef 28 December 2013 19: 24
            +1
            Quote: Alexej
            Quote: atalef
            , this is only the valiant Syrian army with the best armored vehicles in the world can afford 3 of the year to have fun

            What are you saying? It’s convenient to argue when you see the enemy and how he is trying to cross your border — don’t fight like that ... And if the enemy is already in the country and democrats are attacking your economy, and nearby states provide assistance to your enemy, and countries have far less material assistance ? When thugs are constantly gathering, replenishing the ranks of the terrorists who shit here and there, they jump like fleas, and the army tries to pinch them. Clamps, and they across the border and on the other hand again shit with renewed vigor. Do you seriously think that you got into an Israeli tank and that’s it - VICTORY !? Here's how to explain it to you? How to get through to you if you are in armor ...

            Another cry of Yaroslavna,
            we at one time fought not less and more successfully than Syria laughing
            Israeli tank is not a victory, today - an Israeli soldier is a victory, it is a fact
          2. And Us Rat
            And Us Rat 29 December 2013 01: 01
            -1
            Quote: Alexej
            and nearby states provide assistance to your enemy, and countries that are far away from financial assistance? When thugs are constantly gathering, replenishing the ranks of the terrorists who shit here and there, they jump like fleas, and the army tries to pinch them. Clamps, and they across the border and on the other hand again shit with renewed vigor.

            So we live exactly the same - or is this news for you? request
            1. phantom359
              phantom359 29 December 2013 01: 42
              0
              Quote: And Us Rat
              Quote: Alexej
              and nearby states provide assistance to your enemy, and countries that are far away from financial assistance? When thugs are constantly gathering, replenishing the ranks of the terrorists who shit here and there, they jump like fleas, and the army tries to pinch them. Clamps, and they across the border and on the other hand again shit with renewed vigor.

              So we live exactly the same - or is this news for you? request

              So live. And let's live for others.
  • Chicot 1
    Chicot 1 27 December 2013 14: 47
    +6
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    shame and shame on the designers of such ARMORED cars

    It is an expensive pleasure to have heavy armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles such as "Namers" or GCVs. Yes, and the fashion for them appeared relatively recently ...
    And the designers with the task set (to put it down by the customer in the form of TTZ, in which all the main TTX and D are indicated) did the job perfectly. I don’t think their Western colleagues would do better in a similar situation....
    And by and large, all our light armored vehicles were created not for local conflicts (in which she had to fight a lot and often lately), but for the "big war" with the notorious "throw to the English Channel" ...

    So for its class BTT (light wheeled armored personnel carrier) BTR-82A is a good enough car ...
    1. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 27 December 2013 15: 21
      +5
      Quote: Chicot 1
      It is an expensive pleasure to have heavy armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles such as "Namers" or GCVs.

      Namer is still a specialized machine.
      Ahzarit is much simpler and more efficient - remaking from an old tank
      Quote: Chicot 1
      Yes, and the fashion for them appeared relatively recently ...

      Ahzarit - serially produced since 1988. A quarter of a century has passed
      Quote: Chicot 1
      And by and large, all our light armored vehicles were created not for local conflicts (in which she had to fight a lot and often lately), but for the "big war" with the notorious "throw to the English Channel" ...

      Armored vehicles need different
      But the armored vehicles, whose board makes its way out of the DShK and hand small arms - DO NOT a priori
      and it doesn’t matter whose miscalculation of the designers or those who produced the obviously meaningless TTZ
      1. Chicot 1
        Chicot 1 27 December 2013 17: 04
        +9
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        Ahzarit is much simpler and more efficient - remaking from an old tank

        And it’s still necessary to calculate what will cost cheaper - remaking an old tank or building a specialized machine from scratch ...
        For example, the Americans did not bother with rebuilding the outdated M60, but designed a completely new machine (GCV) ... The Germans also did not convert outdated tanks into heavy infantry fighting vehicles, but made the Puma ... Both are very good at counting money. ..
        Yes, and Israel has appeared "Namer" on a tank base, although the experience of rebuilding old tanks into heavy transporters there will be more than in other countries ...
        And therefore, I personally see the following - the conversion of outdated tanks into heavy armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles is a temporary (and by and large optional) measure. More logical would be the production of a heavy infantry fighting vehicle based on a serial tank (the same "Armata" for example). This vehicle, in principle, can take on the functions of a tank support combat vehicle (BMPT), which will exclude spending money on the production of a highly specialized vehicle (such as the so-called "Terminator") ...
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        Ahzarit - serially produced since 1988. A quarter of a century has passed

        The BTR-60 / 80 family has been produced since the 60's. last century, and wheeled armored personnel carriers (as such) and even longer ...
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        Armored vehicles need different
        But the armored vehicles, whose board makes its way out of the DShK and hand small arms - DO NOT a priori

        The fact that the armored vehicles need different agrees 100% ... But the fact that the light BTT is struck by the fire of small arms is a fee for low weight, mobility and buoyancy. After all, floating conveyors are also needed, aren't they? ..
        Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
        and it doesn’t matter whose miscalculation of the designers or those who produced the obviously meaningless TTZ

        I think that in the context of this conversation it is still important. No need to blame and pour all the bumps on the designers. They did what they were asked to do. And they did very well ...
        If the design bureau had been given TTZ for a heavy transporter, then they would have made it ... But the military doctrine at that time did not provide for such equipment in the SA. Now times are changing and the approach to the types and types of armored personnel carriers that should be in service with infantry units is changing. So let's wait for what the coming day is preparing for us ...

        And from the "alterations" I still prefer the Kharkov BMPT-64 based on the MBT T-64 ...
        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 27 December 2013 18: 14
          +1
          Quote: Chicot 1
          And it’s still necessary to calculate what will cost cheaper - remaking an old tank or building a specialized machine from scratch ...

          The alteration is different - there is a tricked-out NAMER, there is Akhzarit from the captured T-54
          Quote: Chicot 1
          The BTR-60 / 80 family has been produced since the 60's. last century, and wheeled armored personnel carriers (as such) and even longer ...

          So what?
          Since their appearance - from the 60-s - criticism of their low security has accumulated. The avalanche-like appearance of an RPG. Towards the end of the 80's, Israel made a strong move in this direction, putting an 44-ton armored personnel carrier on the battlefield.
          Quote: Chicot 1
          After all, floating conveyors are also needed, aren't they? ..

          Buoyancy is not a hindrance to high security - all parts of the tank will mutually increase, the total weight of the vehicle will increase slightly (maybe tons of 25-30 will be obtained).
          Quote: Chicot 1
          that light BTT is struck by small arms fire, this is a fee for light weight, mobility and buoyancy

          Then why such a BTT? You can ride on buggies - even less weight and higher mobility

          And how not to remember BTR-T - a direct analogue of Ahzarite, based on the T-55!
          1. Chicot 1
            Chicot 1 27 December 2013 20: 03
            +2
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            The alteration is different - there is a tricked-out NAMER, there is Akhzarit from the captured T-54

            "Akhzarit" is a rather radical alteration of the T-54/55. Moreover, it is more impressive than the domestic BTR-T ... Yes, it is constructively easier to turn the Merkava into Namer than the Tyran into Akhzarit ...
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            So what?

            And the fact that (returning to the above voiced) -
            Quote: Chicot 1
            fashion appeared on them relatively recently

            unlike wheeled armored personnel carriers ...
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            Since their appearance - from the 60s - criticism of their low security has accumulated

            Almost all armored personnel carriers were criticized for low security. But they did not stop releasing, putting into service and use in hostilities. Moreover, all over the world, and not only here ...
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            By the end of the 80s, Israel made a strong move in this direction, putting a 44-ton armored personnel carrier on the battlefield

            However, they were not in a hurry to follow his example. And primarily because of the cost of the heavy conveyor ...
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            Buoyancy is not an obstacle to high security - all parts of the tank will mutually increase, the total weight of the machine will increase slightly

            Hindrance. And what a hindrance. Since, the law of Archimedes has not yet been canceled ...
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            Then why such a BTT?

            For example, to force water barriers on the move. Or for parachute landing ...
            In general, for everything where there are severe restrictions on weight ...
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            how not to remember BTR-T - a direct analogue of ahzarite, based on the T-55

            If it is an analogue, then it is very modest. "Akhzarit" will be more sophisticated ... Yes, and there is no BTR-T in the troops. And most likely it will not be ...

            Heavy armored personnel carrier "Akhzarit". The illustration shows very well why it is structurally more complicated (but at the same time more convenient) than our BTR-T ...
          2. bask
            bask 27 December 2013 23: 12
            +5
            Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
            Then why such a BTT? You can ride on buggies - even less weight and higher mobility

            Not everywhere BTR-T, BTR-S are needed (average 25-30 tons).
            Intelligence and special forces, the Naglosaksaks and the United States, generally driven by open, armored vehicles.
            Which have only mine protection.

            General Dynamics will deliver a light 4x4 Flyer reconnaissance vehicle.


            Supacat Jackal 4x4 .
            1. Aleks tv
              Aleks tv 27 December 2013 23: 39
              +3
              Quote: bask
              Intelligence and special forces, the Naglosaksaks and the United States, generally driven by open, armored vehicles.

              Andrew, hello.
              hi

              Where do you find such carts?
              laughing

              I recalled an interesting Israeli mafynka:
              M-626 / G Desert Raider
              3 man in front, two swivel brackets.
              2 human rear and the ability to install heavier weapons.
              Base: 6X6, mass 1,5t.
              Apuple the first time I saw.
              Heh.
              1. bask
                bask 28 December 2013 00: 24
                +2
                Quote: Aleks tv

                I recalled an interesting Israeli mafynka:
                M-626 / G Desert Raider

                Good evening Lesh.
                Beautiful buggy, on stony-sandy soil to drive.
                Like our BTR-82, all the same, everyone is sitting on the armor, it's better to open Jackal 4x4 Flyter 4x4.
                At the training ground in Bronnitsy, they showed only one car - the Israeli Zibar MK2 buggy jeep. With a capacity of 430 horses, a speed of 176 km per hour, a group capacity of 2 tons.
                The cost of 6 million rubles.
                For specialists are going to buy.?
                1. Aleks tv
                  Aleks tv 28 December 2013 00: 36
                  +6
                  Quote: bask
                  For specialists are going to buy.?

                  That bogeyman knows that they are going to buy there again ...
                  ... jeeps, buggies ...
                  -Operation and maintenance: here are two sober moments about which all sorts of "air" intentions are destroyed.

                  For humor:
                  For me, a tanker, the best jeep is the floating "Ukhtysh" -ka ...
                  wink
                  Refine a little, she will not have a price.
                2. bask
                  bask 28 December 2013 00: 48
                  +2
                  Quote: Aleks tv
                  Refine it a bit, it will not be priced.

                  There are dozens of such semi-handicraft products. (The Russian land did not become rich in talents).
                  Quote: Aleks tv
                  -Operation and maintenance: here are two sober moments about which all sorts of "air" intentions are broken.

                  Maintenance costs and maintainability + base of motors, gearboxes, bridges, independent suspensions.
                  The more good this is produced in the country, the lower the cost of armored vehicles and the higher its quality. (We still need to calculate the corruption component).
                  What ours will do in the world, no one can repeat. laughing
                  Scuba diving in a homemade jeep.
            2. bask
              bask 28 December 2013 00: 30
              +3
              Here is another one. good
              Light SUV .ITV Growler.
              It is used in two versions - as a tractor, 120 mm mortar and as a light patrol car.
              It has mine protection.
              1. And Us Rat
                And Us Rat 28 December 2013 00: 56
                +3
                And here is another "spaceship" from Plasan Sasa Ltd, AVA-1.

                And something else strange, with a ride height like a race car belay
              2. bask
                bask 28 December 2013 01: 16
                +2
                Quote: And Us Rat
                And something else strange, with a ride height like a race car

                Independent suspension with variable clearance.
                JLTV Navistar Defense delivered for the US Army and the Marine Corps.
                But he dropped out of the program.
                Remained Oshkosh, AM General, Lockheed Martin.
                Multipurpose ADVS.
              3. Aaron Zawi
                Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 01: 22
                +2
                Oh what a miracle yudo? Nah / nah. I am a conservative person to change Hammer for this for IDF not burning. Let them at least 100 times Plasan.
              4. bask
                bask 28 December 2013 02: 59
                +2
                Quote: Aron Zaavi
                Oh what a miracle yudo? Nah / nah. I am a conservative person to change Hammer for this for IDF not burning.

                Hammer is already the day before yesterday.
                Upgraded with Oshkosh Independent Suspension
      2. phantom359
        phantom359 15 January 2014 19: 42
        0
        The concept has remained old. All the same M2 on the roof. Which is the best, though it wedges at the most inopportune moment.
  • pawel57
    pawel57 27 December 2013 21: 12
    -1
    Then tanks are unnecessary a priori pierced by a gun. You are an amateur in military matters.
  • Massik
    Massik 28 December 2013 01: 31
    +3
    SWEET_SIXTEEN
    Oh, you fought ??? Or judge by theory ??? If, like a dol ****, cross the marching order along the mountain serpentine, when not a single dominant height is controlled, the route has not been checked by the IRD and there is no strike aircraft or artillery batteries in contact, ride at least a BMPT "Terminator" competent ambushes will smash the column to the last screw with minimal losses. This is often proven by everyone's favorite examples of the 1st and 2nd Caucasian companies. There are no photos of the burned armored personnel carriers and tanks of the Israelites, because they are fighting competently, their commanders of all echelons are much better than ours, each operation is sensibly planned for them, unlike ours - "Start cleaning the village, and we'll see!" For example: 2003, an armed clash in the Argun district, 2 PCs, converted from a tank NSV, 1 RPG and a sniper + several machine guns are operating from the facade of a residential building, from 250-300 meters they begin to crush them with APC fire, grinding the floor with KPVT fire, but for some reason the enemy I could not destroy an armored vehicle NOT NECESSARY a priori, although the upper frontal part of the hull and the turret stuck out in plain sight for about 30 minutes.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 01: 48
      +2
      Anything can happen. For the assault on Beit Jabel, I really wanted to hang the 91 division commander for eggs. Lost 11 guys, why? It was necessary to block one company and continue to measure. Although then in 2006 was the worst option for warfare. The war has begun, the military leadership is waiting for the installations, and the politicians do not even know what they want to achieve. In short, only the enemy you wish.
      1. Massik
        Massik 28 December 2013 01: 54
        +2
        The war has begun, the military leadership is waiting for the installations, and the politicians do not even know what they want to achieve
        Completely analogous to the whole of 1994 and 1999. To fight, what we are fighting for is unknown.
      2. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 28 December 2013 02: 08
        +2
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        and politicians don’t even know what they want to achieve.

        Aron, precisely noticed.
        This is the crappiest position for all the military ...
        MOST FUCKING.
        Eheh.
  • pawel57
    pawel57 27 December 2013 14: 50
    0
    I also add that riding on armor gives a chance to survive an anti-tank mine or a land mine explosion. A mine bag with fertilizers on top is an anti-personnel mine or an unexploded bomb. Tank towers fly like balls.
    1. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 27 December 2013 15: 33
      +3
      Quote: pawel57
      riding on an armor gives you a chance to survive an anti-tank mine or high-explosive mine explosion

      this you list the problems of weakly armored domestic armored personnel carriers

      enhanced booking, V-shaped bottom and other MRAP technology receptions - all this helps protect the crew from anti-tank mines buried on the side of a landmine or clay pot with TNT
      Quote: pawel57
      Tank towers fly like balls.

      This is the power of 200-300 kg tnt; such super-mines are rare

      And here’s the usual mine - everyday life of war

      The blown up M1126 "Stryker" in Iraq, the Yankees claim that the crew remained unharmed - at least, an external examination of the car allows you to make sure of this: the hull is intact, there are no traces of fire, fuel explosion and ammunition
      1. pawel57
        pawel57 27 December 2013 21: 21
        +3
        There is little salvation from a grammatically placed mine. Here you can see the error of miners, a small explosive charge. The explosion only swelled the road and turned the armored personnel carrier and coating, look, the concrete did not fly out, but collapsed inside. From a decent anti-tank mine of 10-12 kg, the armor of the armor is hardly tired. If it is also anti-underneath, then in a figurative form of the bottom does not help. Yes, anti-personnel, anti-vehicle armored personnel carrier is on duty, the wheels fly 20 meters up, a weak anti-tank mine can withstand. All this is from practice.
        1. Impact
          Impact 27 December 2013 21: 31
          -1
          Quote: pawel57
          Here you can see the error of miners, a small explosive charge.

          You are right, it was necessary to lay a tactical nuclear charge, then it would work!
    2. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 27 December 2013 18: 10
      +2
      Quote: pawel57
      I will add that riding on an armor gives a chance to survive in the event of a detonation of an anti-tank mine or a land mine ...

      And also an even greater chance of being killed by an ordinary bullet, RPG high-explosive shot fragment, RPO, mortar round, hand grenade and even banal "Molotov cocktail" successfully thrown around the corner. request
      1. pawel57
        pawel57 27 December 2013 21: 23
        +2
        Read the comments carefully. They don’t sit on armor in battle, only in cases described in combat manuals.
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 21: 40
          +3
          Quote: pawel57
          Read the comments carefully. They don’t sit on armor in battle, only in cases described in combat manuals.

          Pavel, what happens to the landing on the armor when the group opens fire from a closed position from a distance of 30-50m, well, as part of one PKK and three to four AK? Even without RPGs.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Setrac
    Setrac 27 December 2013 17: 40
    +1
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    shame and shame on the designers of such ARMORED cars

    The cavalryman is also sitting on top of the horse, what a shame, shame. I have to go under my belly so that they don’t kill me.
  • antibanukurayza
    antibanukurayza 28 December 2013 08: 52
    -3
    You are clearly Yankee and your nickname is Yankovsky: there is even a suite with a sextin. Wouldn't it be better for you to sit more often on topics about Euromaidan and Syria and mourn the failure of your colleagues. I say this because you look like a provocateur and an envious person. Products of "shameful" designers crush and crumble terrarugs in Syria and, if necessary, will smear the guts of your colleagues at Euromaidan. If you envy - envy in silence. I would like to pour out bile - there are many sites. The same "Discovery" puts the rating of our combat vehicles below their own. There you pour out your bile. Your bile on the bourgeois resources will come in handy. To help, so to speak.
  • seller trucks
    seller trucks 27 December 2013 14: 24
    +8
    Vaabsche then, RPG is not something that BTR tanks flashing
    1. Mairos
      Mairos 27 December 2013 16: 09
      +3
      Well .. RPGs .. they are different in the first place, from them you still need to get into the tank where you need to. Did you shoot any RPGs at all? In the city, the tank does not climb forward, follows the infantry and supports it with fire. Well, if you manage to plant from the "Agleni" or from the RPG-7 "tandem" from the roof about 50 meters, then there in parallel .. Abrams, Merkava or Akhzarit. Everything will pass. And in a classic war it will be very difficult for you to shoot effectively - firstly in the forehead, and secondly .. again the infantry behind the tank
      1. seller trucks
        seller trucks 27 December 2013 16: 57
        +6
        Quote: Mairos
        Did you shoot from any RPG?


        this is not me, this is in Lebanon 2006, it seems, but I am all "over the seas, over the waves"

        but thanks for the cultural enlightenment

        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Mairos
          Mairos 27 December 2013 17: 13
          +2
          "but thanks for the cultural education"))))
          As a "cultural enlightenment" .. do not shoot closer than 15 meters to Abrams - the detonator will not be cocked)) And if there is an obstacle behind you - you will shoot the "exhaust" in the back)))) And also open your mouth when firing or keep a match in your teeth - it will jam less ...
          1. Kars
            Kars 27 December 2013 17: 23
            +4
            Quote: Mairos
            do not shoot closer than 15 meters
            1. Mairos
              Mairos 27 December 2013 17: 34
              +2
              And how did you determine the distance from this angle? 10..20 .. ??
              Well, do not believe me, ask those who dealt with different types of RPGs and their ammunition. They will confirm to you - 10-15 meters minimum, which must be taken into account.
              And in the video there is a 72-shed without a DZ on the armor, and the arrow was lucky, the tank went ahead of the infantry - which is unacceptable according to the canons of warfare in the city.
              1. Kars
                Kars 27 December 2013 18: 06
                +2
                Quote: Mairos
                And how did you determine the distance from this angle? 10..20 .. ??
                Well do not believe

                Why don’t you believe? I personally see that the grenade was re-shelling from the frontal armor of the tank and got into the car on the side of the road, and most likely because it did not explode. Where it exploded.
                And the distance there is up to 10 meters.
                1. Mairos
                  Mairos 29 December 2013 19: 36
                  0
                  Sorry, I thought that you were trying to prove with a clip that the grenade at the point of view of the tank worked. I didn’t see the rebound in the video, sorry. Then he sat at work - he was busy. drinks
            2. The comment was deleted.
          2. pawel57
            pawel57 27 December 2013 21: 25
            +1
            Just open your mouth and insert when fired and insert into the ears of the cartridge with a sleeve into the ears.
  • bubla5
    bubla5 27 December 2013 18: 54
    +2
    It is necessary for the Jews to intervene and praise their cows
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 18: 59
      +1
      Quote: bubla5
      It is necessary for the Jews to intervene and praise their cows

      Well, why not. We like our armored personnel carriers. At the same time, we fully accept that TBTR does not fit into the concept of your army.
  • Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 27 December 2013 14: 11
    +4
    Comrade, can you tell us how widespread infantry weapons with thermobaric ammunition are among our "partners"?

    About intentions and stuff ... a million times discussed. As I understand it, if it were your will, you would generally have made the device at a speed of 5 km per hour but with 1,5 meter armor made of special steels.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. agbykov
      agbykov 27 December 2013 17: 11
      +5
      + remote control, completely without crew and landing :) = security 100%
      1. Impact
        Impact 27 December 2013 17: 33
        +3
        Quote: agbykov
        remote control, completely without crew and landing :) = 100% security


        -------------------------
        Watch from 13: 45
      2. The comment was deleted.
  • Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 27 December 2013 14: 11
    +1
    Comrade, can you tell us how widespread infantry weapons with thermobaric ammunition are among our "partners"?

    About intentions and stuff ... a million times discussed. As I understand it, if it were your will, you would generally have made the device at a speed of 5 km per hour but with 1,5 meter armor made of special steels.
    1. Santa Fe
      Santa Fe 27 December 2013 14: 33
      -2
      Quote: Evgeny_Lev
      As I understand it, if it were your will, you would generally have made a device with a speed of 5 km per hour but with 1,5 meter armor made of special steels.

      The speed of the T-72 - 5 km / h? (on the highway)

      Comrade, can you tell us how widespread infantry weapons with thermobaric ammunition are among our "partners"?

      Domestic armored personnel carrier enough queue DShK



      or buried on the side of the IED in the form of a clay pot with TNT

      Tin board BTR-90. If successful, break through from SVD. This is not an armored car, but a posture
      1. Roman 1977
        Roman 1977 27 December 2013 14: 41
        +8
        Hello Oleg, the armor-piercing bullet of the Kalashnikov assault rifle, caliber 80x7,62, penetrates the side of the BTR-39, not to mention the SVD and PKM bullets 7,62x54 9, they are not interchangeable), and the thin upper armor plate on which the tower is installed does not allow firing from KPVT on the move, i.e. you can shoot, but it is extremely difficult to aim. A side exit from an armored personnel carrier, exiting in a bulletproof vest, especially in winter, is extremely problematic, but the truth is on a mountain road, it allows you to exit, in the opposite direction from enemy fire, hiding behind the side of an armored personnel carrier. However, as they say, there are no impenetrable cars, look what a bottle of gasoline from the English "Warrior" has created in Iraq:


        1. Santa Fe
          Santa Fe 27 December 2013 14: 52
          +1
          Good day, Roman.
          Quote: Novel 1977
          as they say there are no impenetrable cars, look what a bottle of gasoline from the English "Warrior" in Iraq created:

          You throw an exception as a rule

          We have the opposite. Armored vehicles that make their way from small arms .50 or less are mockery of common sense. No attention is paid to the mine threat at all.

          Foreign MRAPs reliably protect their crew from these primitive weapons. Ahzarit, Puma and Bulldog are able to withstand a shot from an RPG. We have an assault on horseback and that’s it.

          Ossetia, 2008
          1. Roman 1977
            Roman 1977 27 December 2013 14: 57
            +5
            Well, in the 888 war, such distinguished veterans as the T-62, BMP-1, BMD-1 who were older than their crews participated:


            [/ Center]
            Now, as far as technology is concerned, I completely agree with you that Russia needs heavy infantry fighting vehicles, such as the Israeli Nammer or Akhzarit, since we have a little more than a dofig of tanks in storage, the same T-55 or unmodernized T-72 , especially since a similar project already had an armored personnel carrier-T on the T-55 chassis with a 30-mm automatic cannon, but as always, for some reason, it did not reach the troops.
            1. Strashila
              Strashila 27 December 2013 15: 35
              +5
              This once again demonstrates ... that there is no obsolete equipment, there is it without proper use. People decide.
          2. rereture
            rereture 27 December 2013 15: 05
            +4
            Expert damn, you are told that when a vehicle takes part in hostilities, no one drives. I would look at those fools who in battle ride astride armor.

            If a soldier rides on armor, this does not mean that inside is more dangerous than from outside, as this contradicts common sense.

            And since you are such a whistleblower, please confirm with documents, and not with a couple of photos with soldiers on the armor.


            As they say on the Internet, Leo Tolstoy, but in fact, forge a simple one.
            1. Santa Fe
              Santa Fe 27 December 2013 15: 26
              -3
              Quote: rereture
              If a soldier rides on armor, this does not mean that inside is more dangerous than from outside, as this contradicts common sense.

              No, everything is right here.
              Excruciating death from barotrauma in a mine explosion or fractures in the fall, shrapnel wounds and a slight fright if you are sitting astride the armor
          3. pawel57
            pawel57 27 December 2013 15: 14
            +3
            Do not steal our technology. You are nonsense and for what? Incidentally, not a foreigner or from colochosts. Your foreign armored personnel carriers are distributed from side to side from RPG7, DShK, KPVT at a time.
            1. Horde
              Horde 27 December 2013 16: 00
              +4
              Quote: pawel57
              You are nonsense and for what? Incidentally, not a foreigner or from colochosts.



              you read his articles, agent of influence in all its glory ...
            2. And Us Rat
              And Us Rat 27 December 2013 18: 18
              0
              Quote: pawel57
              Do not steal our technology. You are nonsense and for what? Incidentally, not a foreigner or from colochosts. Your foreign armored personnel carriers are distributed from side to side from RPG7, DShK, KPVT at a time.

              And also from ovens and slingshots lol wassat
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. Aaron Zawi
                  Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 22: 04
                  -2
                  Quote: pawel57
                  Jew! Your technique is g ... and why are you trying so hard to spit on us here. Go to your sites and sing praise there. The Jews have nothing good, everything is stolen.

                  (thoughtfully: "Why am I so kind today?") Young man, although you dishonor your fellow citizens with your behavior, I will try to explain to you again. No one decries Soviet equipment, especially since in the 60-70s, on the basis of captured Soviet equipment, a separate tank brigade on the T-62 and a tank division on the T54 / 55 were formed, which served quite well until the end of the 90s in the IDF, RPG - 7 was a regular IDF RPG until the early 2000s, PT-76s were part of the landing across Suez in 1973, which turned the tide of the war. So the Israelis fully respect Soviet weapons. As for the armored personnel carriers, we have a different concept of their use. Therefore, we prefer our models. Perhaps our concept does not suit you in any way.
                  As for rudeness, this is a moral privilege, and on the Internet it is often physically weak. Do not humiliate yourself.
                  1. Setrac
                    Setrac 28 December 2013 00: 15
                    +4
                    Quote: Aron Zaavi
                    Nobody fucks Soviet technology

                    Still how you groan. Praise yours (someone doubted), but the workhorse in your army is the American armored personnel carrier.
                    1. Aaron Zawi
                      Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 00: 29
                      -1
                      Quote: Setrac
                      Quote: Aron Zaavi
                      Nobody fucks Soviet technology

                      Still how you groan. Praise yours (someone doubted), but the workhorse in your army is the American armored personnel carrier.

                      I don’t remember the first one. I agree with the second. Exactly "working horse ", and they have not been allowed to the battlefield for a long time.
                    2. Setrac
                      Setrac 28 December 2013 00: 50
                      +1
                      Quote: Aron Zaavi
                      I don’t remember the first one. I agree with the second. It is a "workhorse", and they have not been allowed to the battlefield for a long time.

                      Exactly, you are right as always, because what is admitted to the battlefield is no longer an armored personnel carrier, but an infantry fighting vehicle.
                      This one of yours, not an armored personnel carrier or even an infantry fighting vehicle, is a passenger tank. There is an agreement on the limitation of conventional weapons in Europe, so your Namer there would be classified as a tank and it doesn’t matter that it doesn’t have a gun. And comparing your nedotank with armored personnel carriers is ridiculous.
                    3. Aaron Zawi
                      Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 01: 12
                      +1
                      You know, "Namer" has nothing to do with tanks. And it does not even apply to "nedotanks". This is a clean APC.
                    4. Setrac
                      Setrac 28 December 2013 01: 31
                      +1
                      Quote: Aron Zaavi
                      You know, "Namer" has nothing to do with tanks. And it does not even apply to "nedotanks". This is a clean APC.

                      You know, the British used to have cannon tanks - males and machine guns - females. So your intention is a female tank, and even if you call it a starship, it will not change anything.
                    5. Aaron Zawi
                      Aaron Zawi 28 December 2013 02: 09
                      +1
                      Quote: Setrac
                      Quote: Aron Zaavi
                      You know, "Namer" has nothing to do with tanks. And it does not even apply to "nedotanks". This is a clean APC.

                      You know, the British used to have cannon tanks - males and machine guns - females. So your intention is a female tank, and even if you call it a starship, it will not change anything.

                      Well, you can search the Internet for "Namer's troop compartment". Which tank?
                    6. Setrac
                      Setrac 28 December 2013 13: 07
                      0
                      Quote: Aron Zaavi
                      Well, you can search the Internet for "Namer's troop compartment". Which tank?

                      This does not change anything, in terms of weight and level of protection, this is a tank. And what narrow-minded "negros" did not put a gun on him, "the sheriff" do not care.
      2. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 28 December 2013 00: 37
        -1
        Quote: pawel57
        Jew! Your technique is g ... and why are you trying so hard to spit on us here. Go to your sites and sing praise there. The Jews have nothing good, everything is stolen.

        Go play in front of the mirror, draw swastikas, read in front of the photo of the Fuhrer mantra - you look and calm down laughing Fascist room.
        1. smile
          smile 28 December 2013 01: 34
          +1
          And Us Rat
          Do not offend us - it is not a room, it is a courtyard - who will let such a person into the room? In the corners of the same shit :)))

          I admit, I really hope that the guy just drank and got pissed .... the girdle fell under his tail ... suddenly he oversleeps and he will be ashamed ... although, probably, hardly ...: (((
        2. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
      3. smile
        smile 28 December 2013 01: 28
        +2
        pawel57
        Forgive me, but, to be honest, I personally got sick of your appeals, like "little Jew" and the like ... you could not swear more calmly and without touching your nationality, eh? What's the difference, what is the opponent's nationality? You argue with the text, and not with the nationality ... I wonder how you still have not remembered the Freemasons and the fact that the Jews, bastard ... such a thing, our Christ was crucified ... :)))

        Your nervous cries greatly devalue your comments ... regardless of whether you are right or wrong.

        And the phrase "Well .. there is nothing good, everything stolen" generally looks like the squeak of a mouse strangled by a cat ... you either talk about business, or keep quiet, do not disgrace ... I am ashamed to read you, honestly ...
        1. Aleks tv
          Aleks tv 28 December 2013 01: 58
          +2
          Quote: smile
          What is the difference, what is the opponent’s nationality? You argue with the text, and not with nationality .....

          Vladimir - good
        2. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 28 December 2013 09: 11
          0
          Quote: smile
          And the phrase "Well .. there is nothing good, everything stolen" generally looks like the squeak of a mouse strangled by a cat ... you either talk about business, or keep quiet, do not disgrace ... I am ashamed to read you, honestly ...

          Ohhh, what kind of people are in our garden laughing , I see - I liked the joke wink As you can see, here the pop is already full, and here it’s miniscule, but in general all the mess was brewed by SWEET_SIXTEEN which ... not even under our flag laughing Insider wassat
  • Mairos
    Mairos 27 December 2013 17: 18
    +4
    "Akhzarit, Puma and Bulldog can withstand a shot from an RPG" - from which RPG ??
    If I put the same Akhzarita in tandem from a hundred meters in the side .. I will not stand it. About "Aglen" or even more so "Vampire" generally keep quiet.
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 17: 46
      +4
      Quote: Mairos
      "Akhzarit, Puma and Bulldog can withstand a shot from an RPG" - from which RPG ??
      If I put the same Akhzarita in tandem from a hundred meters in the side .. I will not stand it. About "Aglen" or even more so "Vampire" generally keep quiet.

      In 2006 "Akhzarit" held the RPG. I saw a car with three hits, no penetration. I'll make a reservation at once what were the grenades that got into the car, I certainly don't know. But the engineering "PUM" "ATGM pierced through and one of the 11 soldiers of the engineering troops who were inside died, and two were wounded.
    2. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 27 December 2013 18: 22
      0
      Quote: Mairos
      "Akhzarit, Puma and Bulldog can withstand a shot from an RPG" - from which RPG ??

      Any charge RPG-7 and RPG-16 including tandem.
      1. Mairos
        Mairos 29 December 2013 19: 40
        0
        As for the tandem, let me doubt it. )))
  • stas52
    stas52 27 December 2013 18: 12
    +4
    americans in vietnam
  • Algor73
    Algor73 27 December 2013 21: 09
    0
    So summer, heat ...
  • pawel57
    pawel57 27 December 2013 15: 03
    +2
    Where do you get all this from? You fought in the BTR 80, shot at you?
  • URAL72
    URAL72 27 December 2013 15: 19
    +3
    "Look, what a bottle of gasoline with the English" Warrior "did in Iraq:"

    NICE PHOTO! I love fried Anglo-Saxons!
    1. Horde
      Horde 27 December 2013 16: 02
      +6
      Quote: URAL72
      NICE PHOTO! I love fried Anglo-Saxons!



      you are just a foodie, what kind of fried saxons do you like British or American? laughing
  • vladkavkaz
    vladkavkaz 27 December 2013 20: 04
    +2
    Roman 1977
    Hey, American citizen, you should have flooded less here, at the expense of the impossibility of firing from the BTR-80 tower machine guns.
    In the same way, do not fornication about the allegedly bad exit from the side doors, it’s only yours, laden with mules that barely barely move, and something always bothers them like a shitty dancer.
    And last, armor do you say breaks through?
    And you yourself tried to pierce the armor without risking getting it in the forehead, or where will the plop with 14,5mm be?
    1. pawel57
      pawel57 27 December 2013 21: 34
      +4
      Correctly. Israel's voice in action. The struggle for the minds of youth. Climb right on boorishly to us.
    2. Roman 1977
      Roman 1977 28 December 2013 11: 17
      +2
      Hear "eksperd" - ANALiteg, I see you drove a lot on armored personnel carriers, and fired from KPVT at speed, you don't even have enough sense of a personal profile to see where it says that I'm from NIZHNY NOVGOROD, and if for some reason I have from a working computer the mattress flag pops up, then these are not my problems, but the problems of the site.
  • PLO
    PLO 28 December 2013 01: 18
    +1
    the BTR-80 board is pierced by the armor-piercing bullet of the Kalashnikov assault rifle, caliber 7,62x39, not to mention the SVD and PKM bullets 7,62x54 9 they are not interchangeable

    do not carry nonsense
    any intermediate cartridges of 7.62x39 caliber do not penetrate the armor of the BTR-80
    BTR-80 can only penetrate 7.62x54 armor-piercing incendiary bullets and probably only at right angles, otherwise it can ricochet
    1. Impact
      Impact 28 December 2013 01: 34
      -1
      Quote: olp
      BTR-80 can only penetrate 7.62x54 armor-piercing incendiary bullets and probably only at right angles, otherwise it can ricochet

      Will this thing strike?
      The new "manual" machine gun Lightweight Medium Machine Gun under the .338 Norma Magnum
      http://topwar.ru/19184-novyy-ruchnoy-pulemet-lightweight-medium-machine-gun-pod-
      338-norma-magnum.html
  • pawel57
    pawel57 27 December 2013 15: 01
    +7
    For a long time I hear this nonsense from incompetent people. BTR90 with SVD does not even penetrate the b32 bullet. Where do you have this information from? From Abramovich?
    1. rereture
      rereture 27 December 2013 15: 15
      +3
      I hear such a fucking sound from schoolchildren who replayed computer games.
      1. Roman 1977
        Roman 1977 27 December 2013 16: 01
        +2
        And they didn’t hear from the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation:
        The Eighties, with its bulletproof protection, earned a not-so-flattering assessment in Chechnya: “It’s good to go to the bazaar.” Intolerance of the situation has been repeatedly noted at the highest level, up to the Minister of Defense. So, at a conference in Kubinka in March 1995, he directly set the task of improving the survivability and security of armored vehicles. Nevertheless, the matter practically did not budge and there is no doubt that overcoming these obstacles by the “defense industry”, as usual, will rest against a chronic lack of funds, buildup of enterprises and an outflow of qualified personnel from design bureaus and factories. Without waiting for the prolonged support, the soldiers and officers directly in the units have to invent all kinds of improvised options to increase the security of their vehicles. Most often, all sorts of improvised means are used - fastening gratings from fittings and wire nets that protect against RPG grenades, hanging on the case of boards, cartridge boxes, and even old tires, covering the sides from the cumulative stream and fragments.

        http://otvaga2004.ru/bronya-pehoty/advanced-apc/btr-dlya-specnaza/

        The armored personnel carriers, with high cross-country ability and good high-speed characteristics, were assigned the functions of communication, reconnaissance and escort vehicles. In one of the reports from the battle site on the 25 central battlefield on January 1995, an BTR-80 from the West group was shown, the lower frontal part of which looked like a colander, it was so plentifully littered with through holes from bullets of a heavy machine gun.

        http://www.warchechnya.ru/news/kak_ehto_bylo/2011-04-07-981

        Drawings of sections of armored vehicles, which accounted for 90% of striking hits from the experience of fighting in Chechnya 1994-1996 gg.


  • Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 16: 51
    +4
    "PUMA" is a vehicle of the engineering troops. As an armored personnel carrier, it should not be used. T / e can, but only if the cobrig throws the engineering battalion to play the role of the infantry. And so the engineering troops have their tasks, at least eat the fifth point
    1. Roman 1977
      Roman 1977 27 December 2013 16: 56
      +2
      Aron, I wanted to ask you, during the existence of the state of Israel, the IDF never received wheeled armored personnel carriers of their own design. True, there was a project "Shoet", similar to our BTR-152, but it remained an experimental vehicle, and also used the captured BTR-40 and Egyptian "Walid".

      BTR "Shoet"

      BTR-40 in Israel

      BTR "Walid"
      I don’t mention the Ramt company of Ramta, because it is more like a reconnaissance vehicle.

      Do not tell me what caused this?
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 17: 37
        +3
        In Israel, wheelchairs were used exclusively as patrol cars. The battlefield is given to tanks and armored personnel carriers. The fact is that we always had one tank battalion per infantry battalion, and two in a number of operations. In connection with such tank saturation, tactics developed when tanks and infantry almost do not work without each other. Well, since the armored personnel carriers are more adapted for movement in tank orders, the BMPs did not take root with us.
  • Setrac
    Setrac 27 December 2013 17: 38
    +5
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    But nothing that the main quality of the armored personnel carriers is security

    I’ll pay attention to the fact that this is an armored TRANSPORTER, the main quality is cargo capacity. Soviet armored personnel carriers protect against fragments of artillery shells.
    What you put in first place is not an armored personnel carrier, this is a tank, only a toothless one.
    It's strange that your M113 is better than the BTR-82.
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    ... that’s probably all - all the other armored personnel carriers are not armored vehicles

    That's probably all the BMPs that you compare with the APCs.
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 27 December 2013 18: 34
      -1
      Quote: Setrac
      It's strange that your M113 is better than the BTR-82.

      The trick is that the M-113 is flat and square - it's easy to hang modules on it.


      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 19: 01
        +1
        The lower one seems to be not a drill, but a demonstrator of a 30mm Samson module from "RAPHAEL".
      2. bask
        bask 27 December 2013 22: 44
        +4
        Quote: And Us Rat
        The trick is that the M-113 is flat and square - it's easy to hang modules on it.

        Actually, the BTR M113, rectangular.
        And additional reservations can be (if desired) and the load capacity of the main gearbox or wheeled chassis, hung on any building.
        Even MT-LBU can be equipped with mounted armor for all 4 tons of its payload.
        And if you upgrade, strengthen the chassis, the transmission, the diesel engine of 1000 horses. And it will be no worse than the BTR-T ,, Ahzarit, and maybe much better.
  • Basileus
    Basileus 27 December 2013 18: 16
    +3
    Oh, comrade, you will go far with comparing TBTR and MRAP with a classic floating armored personnel carrier. I look forward to deep analysis from you when comparing the T-34 with the Tiger or the Merkava with the T-62.
  • bask
    bask 27 December 2013 21: 33
    +6
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    And the security rating will be slightly different:
    1. "Namer" (heavy armored personnel carrier on the chassis of the MBT "Merkava Mk.4" of the Israel Defense Forces)
    2. "Puma" (heavy armored personnel carrier on the chassis of the "Centurion" tank of the Israel Defense Forces)
    3. "Akhzarit" (heavy armored personnel carrier on the chassis of captured T-54/55 tanks of the Israel Defense Forces)

    Actually, an article about wheeled armored vehicles (classic armored personnel carriers 8x8).
    If you follow your logic, then the T-6,, Tiger ,,, will always be better than the BA-10 armor, with bulletproof booking.
  • wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 28 December 2013 11: 07
    +2
    Such will be the armored vehicles of the future.

    If the country that uses them has a small territory and does not need to make long marches in military operations, to transfer troops.
    As well as the high density of settlements on km.2 where you can build a defense on the principle of the Manerheim line.
    BTR-60,70,80 are just lightly armored wheeled all-terrain vehicles with decent maneuverability and power reserve, they were not originally created as assault armored personnel carriers like Israeli photos and the names of which you gave in your comment.
    1. bask
      bask 28 December 2013 12: 40
      0
      Quote: wanderer_032
      were not originally created as assault armored personnel carriers as Israeli photos and the names of which you gave in your comment.

      Good deal photoshop.
      T-5., Panther ,, BTR-T. Only in plastic.
  • washi
    washi 28 December 2013 11: 08
    +3
    Quote: SWEET_SIXTEEN
    But nothing that the main quality of the armored personnel carriers is security

    Or maybe the emphasis will change a little on the armor of the TRANSPORTERS, i.e. the main task is transportation of l / s until it comes into contact with the enemy, and then the increased impact on the enemy?
  • Druid
    Druid 27 December 2013 13: 54
    +1
    Quote: seller trucks
    and with what fright, is there a weakness of the Ukrainian authorities and armored personnel carriers? should power be engaged in PR?
    Ask the French president who was flying to Brazil to support Dassault and their Pafal, though to no avail.
    1. seller trucks
      seller trucks 27 December 2013 14: 07
      +2
      Quote: Druid
      Ask the French president who was flying to Brazil to support Dassault and their Pafal, though to no avail.


      bad manager? not? request
  • Yves762
    Yves762 27 December 2013 13: 57
    0
    BTR-82A and BTR-4 entered the top ten best armored personnel carriers of the world

    Well, I don't even know ... "Ten" is a long thing. what :
    - HZ what are they in her account;
    - Very many competitors divorced with a not-so-worse product. The same Ukraine;
    - From the point above, the more all sorts of "Honduras" will rivet their own, the less our sales market;
    - HZ what arshin was measured, making up this rating;
    - the dubious neighborhood of BTR-82A and BTR-4: because of the story of Iraq's refusal from the latter (it must first be lit up);

    .........

    much more. This news is empty.
  • pawel57
    pawel57 27 December 2013 13: 57
    +5
    The best one is 90. The Ministry of Defense, and now Rogozin, hacked a car.
    1. Roman 1977
      Roman 1977 27 December 2013 14: 04
      +4
      I agree with Pavel, let's start with the fact that the BTR-82A is a highly modernized version of the BTR-80, or rather its version of the BTR-80A with a 30-mm cannon, created back in 1986, which continued the line of Soviet armored vehicles: BTR-60PB, BTR-70 ... For its time, the BTR-80 was an excellent fairly cheap car that fully met the requirements, at the level of the German "Fuchs", the French VAB, the Spanish BMR-600, the Swiss "Pirana", and in many respects surpassing them. However, a little time passed and new cars began to appear: "Stryker", "Boxer", "Pandur-2", "Pirana-5", which are no longer armored personnel carriers, but rather "wheeled BMP" and against their background even BTR-82A , not to mention the BTR-80 does not look like that anymore. Well, they are developing a new "Boomerang", they threaten to show it to the public next year. But how much time will still pass before bringing it to a series, eliminating "childhood diseases", etc. etc. Therefore, I believe that it was necessary to adopt the BTR-90, which would just be a transitional stage from the BTR-80 to the Boomerang, having the BTR-80 layout and much stronger weapons, especially the Berezhok. Moreover, on its basis it was possible to create a family of other machines. But as the saying goes: "the damned furniture maker reached out ...". So it remains for our motorized infantry to ride on the armor of the BTR-80, especially since the adoption of the BTR-82A is also not shaky, not roll. As you can see from the text of the article, it was officially adopted in February of this year, production began in September, and delivery to the troops is expected already in 2015.

      BTR-90 with "Berezhkom" and additional booking

      BTR-90M with "Bakhcha-U"
      1. sataha666
        sataha666 27 December 2013 14: 44
        +3
        Quote: Novel 1977
        adoption of the BTR-82A is also not shaky, not sweeping. As can be seen from the text of the article, it was officially adopted in February this year, production began in September, and delivery to the troops is expected already in 2015.


        I do not agree, judging from today's article http://topwar.ru/37854-pod-samaroy-ispytali-v-dele-novye-btry.html:
        "In the Samara region, firing took place with the participation of new armored personnel carriers, which were at the disposal of the soldiers of the 23rd motorized rifle brigade. Thirty armored personnel carriers have already been tested and fired, and another 25 will be delivered to the unit the other day." The article says that this is the BTR-82 AM.

        So until 2015, you won’t have to wait with the beginning of the entry into the troops.
        And as for the BTR-90, if it had been accepted earlier, it would be worth it to continue to produce until the new Boomerang, and so it makes sense to change production under the BTR-90, and soon again to change it only under the Boomerang. Of course, maybe I don’t know something, sorry of course, I will be grateful for the clarifications
    2. Horde
      Horde 27 December 2013 16: 09
      +5
      Quote: pawel57
      The best one is 90. The Ministry of Defense, and now Rogozin, hacked a car.


      what interesting reasons do they find that would not accept such a handsome BTR90?
      Putin, for example, did not take a new zil, the car is just a sight for sore eyes
      1. Roman 1977
        Roman 1977 27 December 2013 16: 26
        +3
        Dear Horde, what do we have at the end? The army also drives Soviet T-72, BIP-2 and BTR-80. And I will modestly keep silent about the epic with IVEKOV's "Lynx". I will also not say anything about Makarov's statements that one of our tanks costs as much as 3 German "Leopards". I would understand if Serdyukov offered something in exchange for the above machines, so no ... "Armata", "Kurganets", "Boomerang", while still at the level of models, information about them is the most contradictory, all the more unknown what will come of this, remember the sad fate of the "Black Eagle" (aka Object 640), he also cheerfully rode around the training grounds, demonstrating power and strength, but he never entered service and did not appear in the army. And how long will it take from the start of their serial production to their transfer to the troops.? Minimum 2-3 years. And then the elimination of childhood "diseases", the development of the crews. So count, and the T-90, BMP-3, BTR-90 would allow filling this temporary vacuum. The BTR-82A, with all my deepest respect for the BTR-80, is just a new attempt at reincarnating the BTR-80, model of 1986, during the Cold War, when the massive wedges of the T-80 and T-64, together with them, in the conditions of use The weapons of mass destruction were supposed to reach the English Channel within 72 hours, and the motorized riflemen were to sit in the armored personnel carrier and dismount in front of the enemy's line of defense. And now there is no war, others, there is no front line, the enemy attacks suddenly, during the day he is a civilian, and at night he took an AK and RPG and a militant, and for them the BTR-80 is already coming up with a creak.
        So they hang boxes on them, weld nets from beds, etc.
        1. Horde
          Horde 27 December 2013 17: 17
          0
          Quote: Novel 1977
          Well, consider, and T-90, BMP-3, BTR-90 would fill this temporary vacuum. BTR-82A, with all my deepest respect for the BTR-80, is just a new attempt to reincarnate the BTR-80, a sample of 1986,


          it’s so BTR-80-82, whatever one may say, anyway the car from TOGO time and the main drawback of TOO NARROW DOORS has remained, not disappearing anywhere, but it would be necessary to expand, just to look at our guys with a little pleasure jumping upside down.
          But the situation with the t-90 is probably different, the newest tank shown in Nizhny Tagil is VERY GOOD and of course in armor, speed, and armament, this is now the BEST WORLD SAMPLE.
          The situation in general is such OUR DESIGNERS were able to lay so many opportunities in our equipment that MODERNIZATIONS rank our cars among the best and it could be further, but DEVELOPMENT OF A NEW TANK OR BTR is years, maybe decades of REFINING TO PERFECTION ...
      2. Setrac
        Setrac 27 December 2013 17: 55
        0
        Quote: Horde
        Putin, for example, did not take a new zil, the car is just a sight for sore eyes

        But where did you see a feast for the eyes? The monster on wheels.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Horde
          Horde 27 December 2013 18: 35
          +6
          Quote: Setrac
          But where did you see a feast for the eyes? The monster on wheels.


          and what limos do you like?
          Merc is already FINISHED in appearance and nothing changes, it may be longer or shorter, but this is the style

          the American, on the contrary, as if has left its roots and just came to an ABSTRACT car, neither a clan nor a tribe.

          the Frenchman seems to have tribal features, but overall does not look like the FIRST CAR, in my opinion the car did not work.

          Well, ZIL, just demonstrates the CONTINUITY, STYLE- strict seasoned and of course has POROUS FEATURES ...


        3. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 27 December 2013 18: 41
          +4
          Quote: Setrac
          Quote: Horde
          Putin, for example, did not take a new zil, the car is just a sight for sore eyes

          But where did you see a feast for the eyes? The monster on wheels.

          And I personally liked the car, strictly, representatively, not like the new "licked" under the Japanese Merciers, behi and Cadillacs. winked
      3. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 27 December 2013 18: 44
        +1
        Quote: Horde
        the car is just a peek ...

        Classic good
      4. pawel57
        pawel57 27 December 2013 21: 39
        0
        The reason for the bottom, the increased power of the Russian Armed Forces and corruption in the echelons of power.
    3. Setrac
      Setrac 27 December 2013 17: 53
      +2
      Quote: pawel57
      The best one is 90. The Ministry of Defense, and now Rogozin, hacked a car.

      They tell you, work is underway on the Boomerang, xs why such a name for the APC.
    4. Warrawar
      Warrawar 27 December 2013 20: 16
      0
      Quote: pawel57
      The best one is 90. The Ministry of Defense, and now Rogozin, hacked a car.

      there will be a brand new Boomerang car.
      1. pawel57
        pawel57 27 December 2013 21: 42
        -2
        What a new one. Walking from the French, our weapons and all this have long been there.
        1. Warrawar
          Warrawar 28 December 2013 09: 28
          0
          Quote: pawel57
          What a new one. Walking from the French, our weapons and all this have long been there.

          Who told you this?
          You mean this:




          Well, this is the Russian-French "Atom"
          http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Атом_(БМП)

          And he has nothing to do with "Boomerang"

          Mistakenly adopted for the Bumerang BTR, whose photos were published by many military sites, it turned out to be a French-Russian hybrid created on the basis of VBCI.
          http://www.military-informant.com/index.php/army/3733-1.html


          "Boomerang" is an exclusively Russian armored personnel carrier and has not yet been shown to anyone (except for a narrow circle of people).
          http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Бумеранг_(колёсная_платформ
          a)
  • servant
    servant 27 December 2013 14: 49
    0
    Not a bad reference to an authoritative publication ... I myself could not find this top!
  • shark
    shark 27 December 2013 15: 19
    +3
    It seems to me that it is necessary to divide the APC into classes. Heavy, light armored personnel carriers. And based on this, choose tasks. Urban battles, large-scale military operations are for heavy armored personnel carriers, which are able to provide comparative safety for hp and not burn out in the first minutes of the battle. An off-road reconnaissance raid, a march roll is already for wheeled lightly armored vehicles. And a friend is wrong saying that these vehicles cannot be called armored personnel carriers. They just have to have their own tools for each task. You must be able to correctly use a variety of military equipment. Time for lava attacks with a drafts barely passed ...
    And I think the rating is a little wrong. Already very different cars were put on one list.
    1. nazgul-ishe
      nazgul-ishe 27 December 2013 15: 34
      0
      I think that we need to agree with you, "I wax my own fruit for everyone." The task of the APC is to deliver the troops to their destination.
    2. nazgul-ishe
      nazgul-ishe 27 December 2013 15: 34
      0
      I think that we need to agree with you, "I wax my own fruit for everyone." The task of the APC is to deliver the troops to their destination.
  • servant
    servant 27 December 2013 15: 33
    +1
    Quote: shark
    Already very different cars have been reduced to one list.

    Where can I see this list in the original?
  • Strashila
    Strashila 27 December 2013 15: 36
    0
    What to be surprised ... the design school is the same.
  • Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 15: 59
    +1
    I don’t know, but can these vehicles be considered APCs? Rather, it is wheeled infantry fighting vehicles. All the same, the task of the armored personnel carrier to a greater extent is the safe transportation of the landing force as close as possible to the line of contact with the enemy with the support of tanks, and fire support is already secondary. Whereas the BMP is focused on fire support of the landing and independent actions outside the tank units. T / e are machines that are hardly interchangeable and from different niches on the battlefield.
    1. Jarserge
      Jarserge 27 December 2013 16: 35
      +5
      The respected infantry fighting vehicle was created specifically for infantry operations. Together with tank units, this is its main infantry fighting vehicle.
      1. Aaron Zawi
        Aaron Zawi 27 December 2013 16: 53
        +1
        Quote: Jarserge
        The respected infantry fighting vehicle was created specifically for infantry operations. Together with tank units, this is its main infantry fighting vehicle.

        In Israel, we have BMP, as there is no class of vehicles at all, so I can only judge these vehicles from books.
  • intsurfer
    intsurfer 27 December 2013 16: 00
    0
    Quote: pawel57
    The best one is 90. The Ministry of Defense, and now Rogozin, hacked a car.

    Well, so Serdyukov said he should take imported equipment, so a bolt was hammered into the domestic one. I know firsthand, in the sense of the developers of the APCs.
  • Jarserge
    Jarserge 27 December 2013 16: 31
    0
    Armored personnel carrier (armored personnel carrier, armored personnel carrier) - an armored fighting vehicle, a carrier designed for the delivery of personnel (riflemen) of motorized rifle (infantry, motorized infantry, landing and so on) units, materiel to the place of the mission and evacuation of the wounded and injured battlefield.
    This may be true for certain indicators, but in essence there is one drawback in the design of these machines, a significant one - dismounting of the assault occurs through the upper and narrow side hatches located on the frontal projection most shot by the enemy. Armored personnel carriers with this arrangement of hatches have long become ANACHRONISM. And our designers continue to lay down personnel losses in the design. Well, production should not be the task ... They passed this already
    1. pawel57
      pawel57 27 December 2013 21: 48
      +3
      What would you need to know military affairs and puff delirium. Everything is described in tactics and combat manuals if you can read. For a long time here to chew about the boundaries of dismounting, safe removal, deployment. There is military science and there is a military use of techniques that you do not know. Chat like a parrot from someone else’s opinion.
  • Sochi
    Sochi 27 December 2013 17: 31
    +2
    As far as I understand, our armored personnel carriers correspond to TTZ and are justified. The rating is of course dubious, with the same success it is possible to make a rating of shovels ... In the world there is no single rating, everything comes from the doctrine of the state (in the sense of predicting the nature and meta of the impending war), and how it will actually show only war.
  • nikcris
    nikcris 27 December 2013 18: 17
    0
    [quote = Sochi] As far as I understand, our armored personnel carriers comply with TTZ and are justified. The rating is of course dubious, with the same success it is possible to compile a rating of shovels ... In the world there is no single rating, everything comes from the doctrine of the state (in the sense of predicting the nature and meta of the impending war), and how it will actually show only read and
  • Christian
    Christian 27 December 2013 19: 29
    +2
    But actually I was not particularly surprised by this circumstance ... For my class (BTR), more than excellent cars ...
  • kelevra
    kelevra 27 December 2013 20: 02
    +1
    Why be surprised, the APCs are great!
  • waisson
    waisson 27 December 2013 20: 23
    0
    BTR was not surprised either. I remember the Americans. Having examined the BTR, they were delighted. They didn’t like the operator’s place. They said a little, well, we would have noticed a 200 kilogram bug climbed and an officer inspected it. It was 150 kilograms and two meters tall.
  • Kulneff2009
    Kulneff2009 27 December 2013 21: 31
    0
    Ukraine is developing. Ukraine is doing. And where is the technology? Everywhere, but not in Ukraine!
  • individual
    individual 27 December 2013 22: 06
    0
    The international market is filled with offers of armored personnel carriers.
    We kind of advertised some special qualities of Italian armored cars. Armored car Iveco LMV in the sense of protecting the crew and landing. Something about the capsule scheme was being broadcast. It turns out that here doesn’t roll? Well, let's say with the problem of cross-country ability of imported products in Russian snows, and the question arose: really - why do these purchases at all?
    So it is here.
  • Strong
    Strong 27 December 2013 22: 43
    +1
    There you have it, comrades, an authoritative assessment. Especially lovers of shame, discussing the creations of schools of the same Country mixed with very useful crests :)
  • Pimply
    Pimply 27 December 2013 23: 52
    0
    This is one of the strangest ratings I've seen. Only wheeled armored personnel carriers, well, and many other oddities and nonsense.
    1. Alekseev
      Alekseev 28 December 2013 12: 14
      0
      Quote: Pimply
      This is one of the strangest ratings I've seen.

      Yes, what a rating in FIG!
      We took it, embossed the article, we read, discuss, others too, and they profit. yes
  • Matias
    Matias 27 December 2013 23: 52
    +2
    Although, when Russian and Ukrainian baeters hit the top, there is no fucking srach about Maidan-Anti-Maidan. Hurray, comrades (:
  • Egor69
    Egor69 28 December 2013 01: 39
    +1
    Gentlemen, one cannot compare armored personnel carriers of Israel and Russia, since they have completely different purposes. If you look at the Russian, they are designed to move to great depths on the territory of the enemy. As planned during the Soviet era. This concept also has a place to be, since since the mass release of new systems has not been established. In the days of the USSR, the scenario of a war in Europe was played out on NATO computers. It turned out that, even with the use of tactical nuclear weapons on the GSGV, SGV, TsGV and YuGV, the Russian tank divisions reached the English Channel, two days after the start of hostilities. For this purpose armored personnel carriers 60, 70 and 80 are intended. I have a poor idea of ​​which of the Israeli armored personnel carriers, with their weight, will cover a distance of 1500-2000 km in two days.
    Armored personnel carriers of the Israel Defense Forces are imprisoned for defense. Where are they going there then? He got up and shoot back from the Arabs.))) Armor is the most. Almost a pillbox on the tracks.
    1. Matias
      Matias 28 December 2013 01: 46
      -1
      It is impossible to compare the Soviet (Russian), Chinese MBT, which are essentially breakthrough tanks due to the concept, with samples of a similar military equipment of the same IDF (IDF), they already have a purely "armor", a defense tank, not otherwise ... and so with all used equipment of blocks and countries of the ex-social camp.
      With the GSVG, in the event of aggression by NATO and the bloc countries against the Union, the group had to hold out for 2 days, "throw to the English Channel", hmm))) ... our people knew that in the FRG (not the GDR) and the lower reaches of North-Western Europe the dams are mined, the Soviets' rate for OBT and similar actions are exaggerated on the Internet with the media.
    2. Aleks tv
      Aleks tv 28 December 2013 02: 03
      0
      Quote: Egor69
      even with the use of tactical nuclear weapons on the GSGV, SGV, TsGV and YuGV, the Russian tank divisions reached the English Channel, two days after the start of hostilities. For this purpose, the 60, 70 and 80 armored personnel carriers are intended. I poorly imagine which of the Israeli APCs, with their weight, will cover the distance of 1500-2000 km in two days.
      Armored personnel carriers of the Israel Defense Forces are imprisoned for defense. Where are they going there then? He got up and shoot back from the Arabs.))) Armor is the most. Almost a pillbox on the tracks.

      Hooray...
      Thanks for the comment, Igor.
      And then the topic is so erased to the holes, and tired of repeating the same thing:
      - each equipment has its own TVD, where it must be applied with MIND.
    3. Pimply
      Pimply 28 December 2013 09: 15
      0
      Quote: Egor69
      I poorly imagine which of the Israeli armored personnel carriers, with their weight, will cover a distance of 1500-2000 km in two days.


      The concept of Israel’s defense, dear - well, if you don’t know - in the war on the territory of the enemy and in the active and rapid advance deep into his defense. Just because Israel has no tactical depth to have a different strategy.
  • LINX
    LINX 29 December 2013 03: 08
    0
    Photo of BTR4 from the exhibition in September 2013



    Department of Management



    Combat compartment



    Landing



    On the doors you can see the anti-shatter plate



    Bottom



    Armor

  • Matias
    Matias 29 December 2013 17: 26
    0
    And they don't need a different concept for their Armed Forces, the army is a defense, as a result, and their MBTs are not "breakthrough tanks", but for defense, and the same armored personnel carrier, yes, the base with their mk.
  • Mairos
    Mairos 29 December 2013 19: 44
    0
    Quote: Aron Zaavi
    ATGM pierced through and through

    belay and that, cumulative jet, breaking one side, retained its configuration in the outboard space ?? You’re fantastic. Rather, it was a hit from two sides.
    In general, strictly speaking, I have always been impressed by the attitude towards the life of a soldier in Israel. They would rather demolish the block in gas and rake up a lot of indignation from the "international community" than send soldiers there to die. We should so value the life of our soldiers.
  • Jackofshadow
    Jackofshadow 8 June 2014 23: 30
    0
    The evolution of armored personnel carriers ... a good car
  • air wolf
    air wolf 24 December 2014 17: 02
    0
    Add dynamic armor and cumulative screens to our BTR-82, huh?
  • dzeredzavkomimu
    dzeredzavkomimu April 26 2015 16: 00
    0
    Ukrainians hang up Dynamo does not help, like screens, they don’t help from a fast-flying blanket (large-bullet bullet), so that they would rip off -24 and screw titanium sheets onto armored personnel carriers))) they write that they hold the 20 mm shells, I cut them gaz.gorelkoy like aluminum honeycombs, maybe they would go to the canopy)))