Military Review

How is the newest military KAMAZ

83

Kamaz trucks and tractors repeatedly and in different historical periods recognized as the best army car in the world. Even the authoritative American analytical magazine Defense Review in its ranking of military vehicles had to put it in first place. But, as it turned out, this is not the limit at all - this year a new development of the Kama plant, which has no analogues in the world in terms of armor protection and versatility - KAMAZ 63968 Typhoon, will go to state tests. This machine withstands explosions of up to 10 kg of TNT, can be controlled remotely from a satellite, quickly launch unmanned aircraft from its roof, and even set up ambushes under water. The Typhoon project is in the top 10 list of US military intelligence priority objectives. The new Kamaz is planned to be adopted by the Russian army next year.


The history of the Typhoon family begins with the 2010 of the year when it was approved by the Minister of Defense “The Concept for the Development of Military Automotive Equipment of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation for the Period Until the 2020 of the Year”. The concept provides "the development of highly standardized families of armored vehicles." As a result, a single wheeled cargo platform "Typhoon" was created, which provides high protection for the crew, cargo and vehicle components from small arms and land mines. And also on which you can mount various target equipment and create on its basis the necessary modifications - communication vehicles, mobile artillery systems, truck cranes, launch vehicles of unmanned aerial vehicles, tow trucks, excavators and others.

However, this is not a project of the Kama plant, but a cooperative development of more than 120 enterprises of various industries and science. Under the general coordination of the Military Industrial Commission, specialists for the URAL automobile plant, GAZ Group’s Avtodiesel OJSC, KAMAZ OJSC SEC, Steel Research Institute (machine armor), the Federal Nuclear Center in Sarov worked on the creation of Typhoon (calculation of security armored case), Magistral-LTD (creation of an armored glass), MSTU. N. E. Bauman (hydropneumatic suspension) and dozens of other companies and research institutes.

The task of the Ministry of Defense included the requirement of booking a car body in accordance with the 3b level of the NATO STANAG 4569 classification, according to which the car withstands explosive high-explosive fragmentation devices with a mass of 8 kg in TNT equivalent anywhere in the car. Today, this standard is the most complex in the world, only two military vehicles (both American) correspond to it, and their armor technologies are kept secret even from their allies (the Pentagon classification category 1А). But the developers of the Scientific Research Institute of Steel have surpassed the order - tests have shown that our new KAMAZ is able to withstand a blast of up to 10 kg of TNT.

In addition, the bulletproof defense demonstrated compliance with the highest — fourth — level of the NATO classification. A combined ceramic and steel nanostructured armor has been installed, which protects against 14,5 × 114 caliber armor-piercing bullets. - an unsurpassed figure for analogues in the countries of the world. The Typhoon cab is equipped with bulletproof glass 128,5 — 129,0 mm thick with transparency in 76%. Note that the future armored vehicle project for the US Army, which is scheduled for state tests at the end of this year, involves only 72% transparency. Miracle glass, developed by Magistral LTD and tested at Steel Research Institute, withstands 2 shots with a distance between them in 280 — 300 mm when fired from KPVT with a speed of 911 m / s bullet at the time of contact with glass.

How is the newest military KAMAZ

Bullet resistance exceeds the highest requirements for the existing GOST (GOST P 51136 and GOST P 50963), as well as the requirements for the 5 generation armored vehicles to which NATO countries will move in the next 10 years. By the way, according to GOST, the highest level is the shelling of armor-piercing cartridges B-32, 7,62 × 54 mm from the SVD, which the new machine also withstood. Well, of course, it complies with Western standards of the latest level IV STANAG 4569 — guaranteed protection when shelling B-32, 14,5 × 114 mm armor-piercing ammunition from the 200 distance m with a 891 bullet — 931 m / s. Tests have shown that the new Kamaz is not afraid even hit 30-mm ammunition. His tires are also bulletproof - 16.00R20 - with anti-explosion inserts that divert the blast wave, with automatic air inflation and adjustable pressure to 4,5 atmospheres. In the armored module there are embrasures for shooting and equipment for the work of a special machine gun, remotely controlled via satellite communication channel or independently carrying out search and destruction of enemy targets.

In addition, the military noted a special level of comfort and safety inside the case - the seats are equipped with personal weapons, seat belts and head restraints. To reduce the impact of impact from mines / mines, they are attached to the roof of the module. In case of an attack with the use of chemical weapons or a gas attack, inside the filtering unit FVUA-100A is installed, automatically destroying poisonous substances in the air. There are emergency hatches on the roof in case of overturning of the vehicle, as well as a launch-launch complex for unmanned aircraft and helicopters.

The onboard Information and Control System (BIUS) GALS-D1М is installed in the car for monitoring and controlling engine operation, calculating the car’s roll, inclining the road, driving speed, position, etc. It can drive on autopilot and perform combat tasks independently. Independent hydropneumatic suspension allows the driver to change the ground clearance on the go, using the remote control within 400 mm. KAMAZ-63968 is equipped with five video cameras for all-round viewing in the troop module and cockpit integrated into the target detection system, including in the infrared range. When any threat appears in the 5 radius, the system automatically transmits information to the monitors in the cockpit and through the protected satellite channel to the headquarters.
Author:
Originator:
http://expert.ru/
83 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. sscha
    sscha 29 January 2014 09: 15
    +11
    Exactly what is needed! But how military tests will show themselves. hi
    1. Civil
      Civil 29 January 2014 10: 52
      +2
      What kind of remote control from satellite ????? They joked chtoli,
      1. Retx
        Retx 29 January 2014 11: 05
        +12
        some kind of child prodigy ...
        ambush under water

        can ride on autopilot and perform combat missions on their own.

        equipment for the operation of a special machine gun remotely controlled via a satellite communication channel or independently searching and destroying enemy targets.

        If there is any threat in a radius of 5 km, the system automatically transmits information to the monitors in the cockpit and through the secure satellite channel to the headquarters.

        PS this machine, according to liberal lemmings, was created for the war with its own population.
        1. AVV
          AVV 29 January 2014 11: 33
          +18
          Quote: RETX
          PS this machine, according to liberal lemmings, was created for the war with its own population.

          If the Vakhabits from Dagestan and Chechnya are considered their own population, then of course !!! But no one considers these ubl.yudkov for their people !!!
          1. saturn.mmm
            saturn.mmm 29 January 2014 13: 25
            +2
            Quote: AVV
            If the Wahhabis from Dagestan and Chechnya are considered their own population

            And Wahhabis from Volgograd how to count?
            1. Moon bird
              Moon bird 29 January 2014 21: 18
              +1
              Do you want to send troops to Volgograd and arrange a full-scale theater on the streets?
          2. Moon bird
            Moon bird 29 January 2014 21: 16
            +5
            in order to fight successfully against Wahhabis, not an army is needed, but a competently delivered ODS of law enforcement agencies - one, planned ideological work with the population, especially with young people - two.
            the word cannot be defeated with the sword; the word is defeated by the word. it will be cheaper.
    2. demon184
      demon184 29 January 2014 13: 03
      +3
      as always, it will be expensive to manufacture, reduce the cost and get g at the exit. how the form came about.
  2. ramsi
    ramsi 29 January 2014 09: 22
    +5
    two axles in front, one in the back - this is competent, but "for undermining" the bonnet layout is preferable
    1. Evgeny_Lev
      Evgeny_Lev 29 January 2014 09: 51
      +1
      Of course, of course, he is holding 10 kg in ANY part.
      1. ramsi
        ramsi 29 January 2014 10: 42
        +1
        well, I don’t know how to convince you ... Compare the explosion (under the front wheel) under the engine - with the bonnet layout, or under the driver’s asshole - with this
        1. pawel57
          pawel57 29 January 2014 16: 37
          +2
          It depends on which mine, under the ass, a mine with various fuses can also work.
        2. bask
          bask 29 January 2014 19: 20
          +1
          Quote: ramsi
          well, I don’t know how to convince you ... Compare the explosion (under the front wheel) under the engine - with hood components

          ramsiBut this is true when using a land mine.
          Quote: pawel57
          It depends on which mine, under the ass, a mine with various fuses can also work.

          That is what the militants used in Chechnya. And apply now in Syria.
    2. Basileus
      Basileus 29 January 2014 11: 00
      +1
      This is if there is no mine protection. At the MRI, in accordance with the declared mine resistance, it is not particularly important.
      1. ramsi
        ramsi 29 January 2014 12: 20
        +1
        Well, miracles do not happen, of course, you can do it, but it transforms into additional efforts, weight and cost
    3. Fedya
      Fedya 29 January 2014 22: 43
      +1
      This is not Gas-66, it must withstand, moreover, the cabin is in front of the front axle!
  3. La-5
    La-5 29 January 2014 09: 30
    0
    It is not clear why, according to GOST, the shot from the SVD is taken as the standard, the Kalashnikov machine gun gives the same energy to the bullet.
    1. Freemason
      Freemason 29 January 2014 10: 07
      +3
      everything is very simple smile SVD is a single, accurate shot. And with a machine gun it’s hard to make a single aimed shot. There are very few such specialists. Mainly at weapon testing ranges. Hence the guest smile
    2. tank 34
      tank 34 29 January 2014 23: 26
      -4
      very simple. In SVD, a cartridge of the 1908 model is used, and in PKT an intermediate cartridge. And to be honest, looking at this "monster", it's a little offensive for our today's designers. They've created some kind of freak. In the USSR, all military equipment was not only reliable and unpretentious, but was very elegant and beautiful. After all, beautiful technology works reliably. It's a pity that they forgot about this common truth, and let the Americans choke!
  4. Evgeny_Lev
    Evgeny_Lev 29 January 2014 09: 51
    +6
    I did not know about ambushes under water))

    Cool however.
  5. Volodya Sibiryak
    Volodya Sibiryak 29 January 2014 09: 57
    +2
    I read and take my breath away from the listed characteristics of protection and the abundance of high-tech bells and whistles.
  6. Freemason
    Freemason 29 January 2014 10: 03
    +9
    I saw the machine live, so to speak. Only seen externally! I don’t know how inside, but from the outside it makes an impression. The first thing that came to mind was that for the sarcophagus armor and how to move around in such a way ... However, the machine ran briskly for its dimensions. I love all sorts of large cars winked but this monster made me very happy.
    1. Mister X
      Mister X 29 January 2014 20: 07
      +4
      Quote: Farmason
      I don’t know how inside, but from the outside it makes an impression.

      I read this article by Sergei Tikhonov a week ago.
      Was published in “Expert Online” 21 January 2014

      The article is clearly missing a photo.
      I will add a series of photos from the international exhibition "Interpolitex-2013"
      The author of the photo report Vitaly Kuzmin





      1. Mister X
        Mister X 29 January 2014 20: 13
        +1
        Airborne compartment and cabin







        1. Mister X
          Mister X 29 January 2014 20: 16
          +2
          Torpedo and automatic transmission lever







          1. Mister X
            Mister X 29 January 2014 20: 20
            +2
            KAMAZ 63968 Typhoon: top view



            1. Mister X
              Mister X 29 January 2014 20: 31
              +3
              KAMAZ "Typhoon" video
  7. Basileus
    Basileus 29 January 2014 10: 50
    +3
    unparalleled in the world in terms of armor protection and versatility

    Casspir excels at least in mine protection.

    To date, this standard is the most difficult in the world, it corresponds to only two military vehicles (both American)

    Casspir Mk.6 based on the Urals holds 21kg under the wheel and 14kg under the bottom. Designed by South Africa / WB. Both are American, you say?

    The article definitely lacks links to sources.
    1. wanderer_032
      wanderer_032 29 January 2014 11: 07
      +3
      It is also designed and built on the chassis of our "Ural".
      And already commercially available.
    2. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 29 January 2014 12: 56
      +5
      Quote: Basileus
      The article definitely lacks links to sources.

      She does not need them, one of which is worth it:

      "Project Typhoon entered the TOP-10 list of priority targets for US military intelligence."

      if the author already knows what is included in the priority goals of military intelligence, then any links there are already nonsense. smile
    3. brainkiller
      brainkiller 30 January 2014 16: 39
      +1
      Quote: Basileus
      The article definitely lacks links to sources.

      this is copy paste from an expert and not the first freshness.
  8. wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 29 January 2014 10: 57
    +2
    We continue to suck articles on the MCI about the appropriateness of their appearance in our armed forces, in this form.
    New design solutions embodied in this machine, such as a new ballistic and PM protection, a system for changing the clearance, a new video surveillance system, an armament module with remote control,
    certainly deserve a very positive assessment.
    But the truck itself is very skeptical about the tactical feasibility of its implementation in production and a niche in its application.
    If you say in simple human language, Che do with it?
    Where can he find application?
    Despite all the positive design decisions, a promising wheeled armored personnel carrier cannot replace this machine anyway.
    Like a transport truck, it is too expensive.
    And I’m not sure that his ballistic and mine protection will remain so effective for a long time, in the competition of armor and shell, the shell is ahead of the armor much more.
    And the funds for the implementation and debugging of its production, as well as the cost itself will cost a lot of money.
    There is also a nuance. This is an automatic transmission (GMP), these cars are equipped with an American "Allison".
    Its not like that.
    Perhaps even more imported components and assemblies are used, which are not produced in Russia.
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 29 January 2014 11: 05
      +3
      And why should he replace the wheeled armored personnel carriers? And the lives of soldiers are expensive, so it is transport trucks in conflict zones that he must replace.
      1. wanderer_032
        wanderer_032 29 January 2014 11: 13
        0
        Can you imagine how many transport trucks are needed for at least one motorized rifle brigade (explosive brigade) in order to meet its needs for freight and personnel transportation?
        1. Basileus
          Basileus 29 January 2014 11: 17
          0
          Imagine. You will need a lot. But the Americans have solved this problem.
          1. wanderer_032
            wanderer_032 29 January 2014 11: 32
            +1
            Quote: Basileus
            Imagine. You will need a lot. But the Americans solved this problem

            It seems not quite, I explain:
            (state No. 5/060, approved by the National High School of the Armed Forces in December 2008)
            CAR TECHNOLOGY

            Cars - total 752

            including:

            cars 2

            freight 315

            special (general purpose) 12

            special (military branches and services) 423
            Source: http: //www.pandia.ru/text/77/287/41398.php
            Pay attention to the freight figure.

            The cost of one such machine will be approximately 32 to 45 million rubles.
            For comparison, the approximate cost of the BTR-82A is 22-25 million rubles.
            1. wanderer_032
              wanderer_032 29 January 2014 11: 53
              0
              The cost of one army truck:
              Ural-4320 costs ~ from 2-3,5 million rubles per unit (depending on configuration).
              Kamaz-5350 (4310,105) ~ from 2-3 million rubles per unit (depending on configuration).
          2. wanderer_032
            wanderer_032 29 January 2014 12: 02
            0
            And in battles and campaigns, equipment has the ability to receive damage (sometimes after which it is impossible to recover) and simply break down.
        2. Pimply
          Pimply 29 January 2014 23: 27
          0
          A lot. And what's the problem?
      2. wanderer_032
        wanderer_032 29 January 2014 11: 26
        0
        Quote: Basileus
        And why should he replace the wheeled armored personnel carriers?

        Well, in general, this is exactly what they want to do in the future.
        Otherwise, what the hell is such protection.
        1. the47th
          the47th 29 January 2014 11: 56
          +2
          To replace the APC, he needs at least a gun module. A "hole for a gun" will never replace the 2A72.
          1. wanderer_032
            wanderer_032 29 January 2014 12: 09
            +5
            Is it worth it to change the flea?
            I’ve been talking to everyone about this for a long time.
            The new armored personnel carrier is needed not only for the MVD Ministry of Internal Affairs, it is also needed for the SV MO and for the Navy marines.
            For explosives, it is possible to assemble on the same platform and on the same units (only different options should be provided for 8x8, 6x6 or 4x4), but taking into account the fact that there really are no such tasks as SV and marine corps, make a simplified version (without water cannons, etc. equipment unnecessary for the MVD).
            And believe me, such an APC is much better suited for military (CTO) operations than an armored car. And thereby we will unify the fleet of wheeled combat vehicles to nodes and units to a large extent. Only armored corps will be different.
            An armored car does not have any advantages when compared to armored personnel carriers if they are compared as vehicles for delivering infantry to the battlefield, moreover, an armored car loses armored personnel carriers in overall dimensions (remember a good saying that the larger the cabinet falls louder), cross-country ability, mobility ( An armored personnel carrier can swim, i.e., sappers do not need to wait, but simply choose a suitable place for crossing and cross under its own power), as well as to protect the crew and the landing force from WMD (all armored personnel carriers have HLF and equipment and devices for radiochemical (bacteriological ) intelligence of the surrounding area).
            In addition, the armored personnel carrier is routinely provided for the installation of support and defense weapons (14,5mm KPVT, 7,62mm PKT or 2A42 (72) 30mm, PKT 7,62mm, in addition, it is possible to install other options) for a good armored personnel carrier, only a new one needs to be developed an armored hull with mine protection (although it already exists, like a new vehicle of this class, it is the BTR-90 "Rostok") and with a more thought-out entry-exit layout for faster landing and disembarkation or loading and unloading. in this class, and all these armored cars are all from the evil one, for transport units, ordinary trucks with an armored cab are enough (and then if they work to deliver goods directly to the units on the front line or in the DB zone).
            1. wanderer_032
              wanderer_032 29 January 2014 12: 20
              +1
              I will add that with regards to the BTR-82A:
              The armor is strengthened, the anti-fragmentation lining is installed and the updated forced engine is 300l / s, and not 260l / s like on the 80-ke, the lower part of the armored hull from mine detonation and IEDs is reinforced (albeit from low power, but still better than nothing) .
              The gunner still remained in his place, only he was given a remote control for faster guidance (he used to only use the flywheels) and the stabilizer was set to fire on the move. The sights were also updated.
            2. ramsi
              ramsi 29 January 2014 13: 37
              +4
              by and large, you're right. Such vehicles have a "right to life" only if their price is two times less than the price of an armored personnel carrier, otherwise it is easier to "maneuver" a fleet of armored personnel carriers and conventional trucks
            3. bask
              bask 29 January 2014 17: 34
              +3
              Quote: wanderer_032
              An armored car does not have any advantages compared to an armored personnel carrier if we compare them as vehicles for delivering infantry to a battlefield, moreover, an armored car loses an armored personnel carrier in overall dimensions (

              Overall width of the BTR-82 case is 2,9 m. Without special escorts, he cannot move along public gifts.
              KamAZ and the Urals ,, Typhoons ,,, no problem.
              But if you are such a supporter (classic BTR 8x8)))).
              Not just armored personnel carriers are needed, multi-purpose wheeled armored platforms are needed.
              With a different wheel formula from 4x4 to 10x10, and carrying capacity.

              But unified by nodes and assemblies is not a minority of 70% -80%.
              For the Marine Corps and the Airborne Forces in the first place.

              A bit of information about high technology in the world ...
              Yesterday I posted about the company GPV (which created BTR-Pars for Turkey).
              In 2007, the company, GPV (General Purpose Vehicles (GPV), ceased to exist.
              GPV founder James L. March 1, 2007 founded a new company, ADVS (Advanced Defense Vehicle Systems).
              In 2010, ADVS, has already created a new armored personnel carrier (for 3 years) wheeled armored personnel carrier-module platform, ,, Desert Chameleon ,,.
              Base model: Desert Chameleon has a 6x6,2 wheel crew, 7 landing troops.
              The modularity of the design allows the production of armored personnel carriers with a wheel formula from 4x4 to 10x10.
              Inputs and outputs include a rear ramp, 2 side doors, in the front of the hull, and 4 hatches in the upper part of the hull ((as in the Ural Federal M armored car))).
              There are 6 loopholes on the sides and 2 in the rear doors.
              The structure of the armored hull: an armored personnel carrier has a V-shaped bottom.
              V-shaped armor plate, the bottom is removable.
              If necessary, it can be replaced or reinforced with additional invoice armor.

              So, on modern armored personnel carriers, mine action and ballistic protection are enhanced.
              It would be nice on our ,,, Boomerang ,, there was something like that.


              Firm APVS ((Advanced Defense Vehicle Systems)))).
              1. bask
                bask 29 January 2014 17: 41
                +1
                BTR-modular platform developed by GPV ((General Purpose Vehicles)) in 2003.
                Licenses sold to Turkey BTR-Pars and Malaysia -....
                Wheel formulas.
                4x4.


                6x6

                8x8 (in 2 versions with a shortened base and standard).


                10x10

                HERE THAT THIS SIMILAR IS NECESSARY AND IN THE Navy ARMY (((MARINE) RUSSIA !!!
                1. wanderer_032
                  wanderer_032 29 January 2014 17: 58
                  +1
                  Quote: bask
                  Overall width of the BTR-82 case is 2,9 m. Without special escorts, he cannot move along public gifts.

                  What are the problems?
                  You insert bulletproof glass into the armored corps in front and on the sides and drive unaccompanied, Ukrainians have solved this problem on BTR-4 and are not buzzing.
                  Quote: bask
                  Not just armored personnel carriers are needed, multi-purpose wheeled armored platforms are needed.

                  "Boomerang" let's wait and see what they do there. But I think all these problems in it will already be solved.
                2. wanderer_032
                  wanderer_032 29 January 2014 18: 08
                  0
                  Quote: bask

                  Overall width of the BTR-82 case is 2,9 m.

                  I will add about the dimensions.
                  When I wrote this, I primarily meant the height, which is 2 times greater than that of the BTR-82 (90).
                  Imagine how much labor it takes to dig such a camouflage machine (they are also planning to mount weapons) and much will become clear to you here.
                  In addition, a large height greatly increases the visibility and vulnerability of the enemy.
                  1. bask
                    bask 29 January 2014 18: 25
                    +1
                    Quote: wanderer_032

                    I will add about the dimensions.
                    When I wrote this, I primarily meant the height, which is 2 times greater than that of the BTR-82 (90).

                    wanderer hi
                    Dimensions are an important thing on not the main one.
                    I already posted yesterday and today the post is higher. "" "Classic armored personnel carrier 8x8" "" but modular. And for marines, airborne forces, interior ministry.
                    Mrap, multipurpose armored cars .. like KamAZ, the Urals, Typhoons, are needed.
                    This armored vehicles for asymmetric wars, anti-terrorism.
                    And not for a big, world war.
                    The cost of BTR-82, about 1 ml $$$, is comparable with the cost of Typhoon U K,.
                    But the armor protection and, most importantly, the mine defense of Typhoons is an order of magnitude higher than the BTR-80/82.
                    Seaworthiness is not a decisive factor here.
                    The only thing that bothers: a lot of imported parts and ceramic armor. (I repeat) Especially the automatic transmission ,, Elisson ,, made in the USA.
                    1. Alex 241
                      Alex 241 29 January 2014 19: 26
                      +1
                      Quote: bask
                      Especially automatic transmission
                      Andrei, hi. How do you think the use of automatic transmission is justified, in my opinion, mechanics are more preferable.
                      1. wanderer_032
                        wanderer_032 29 January 2014 19: 49
                        +1
                        Automatic transmission (GMF) is preferable, because when driving in difficult road conditions there are less shock loads on such units as ICE and other transmission units (drives, axles).
                        Greetings! hi
                      2. Alex 241
                        Alex 241 29 January 2014 19: 53
                        +1
                        Hi Sash, thank you, but in case of failure towing is possible, or how with civil cars partial hanging, or on a tow truck?
                      3. wanderer_032
                        wanderer_032 29 January 2014 20: 11
                        +2
                        Quote: Alex 241
                        and in case of failure towing is possible?

                        Quite on a rigid hitch and with a limited speed of ~ 30km / h.
                        When I worked in the bus fleet many times I witnessed and participated in such towing, technical assistance dragged into the park in such a way buses that got on the line with technical malfunctions, you hook the coupler and the emergency air supply hose (if your engine does not work) from technical assistance and forward.
                        So both Karosa and Merca were dragged, and Liaza. And now nothing has changed.
                      4. Alex 241
                        Alex 241 29 January 2014 20: 18
                        +1
                        Sasha thanks, the question is removed!
                  2. ramsi
                    ramsi 29 January 2014 20: 38
                    +1
                    Quote: wanderer_032
                    Automatic transmission (GMF) is preferable, because when driving in difficult road conditions there are less shock loads on such units as ICE and other transmission units (drives, axles).
                    Greetings! hi

                    this is not entirely true: in the automatic transmission, in addition to the hydrostatic first gear, there is also a block of gears of all the others, on which this "lafa" with loads will no longer be; and loads do not cause problems. A manual gearbox is cheaper, a rigid connection provides better cross-country ability (not relevant for MRAP), it is easier to drive with an automatic transmission (especially in traffic jams)
                  3. wanderer_032
                    wanderer_032 29 January 2014 21: 52
                    +1
                    Here the opinions are ambiguous and disputes about what is better than GMF or manual transmission have not subsided so far.
              2. bask
                bask 29 January 2014 20: 22
                +1
                Quote: Alex 241
                AKP, mechanics in my opinion is more preferable.

                Quote: wanderer_032
                Automatic transmission (GMF) is preferable, because when driving in heavy road conditions, less shock loads

                Yes, I agree, automatic transmission is preferable.
                But, in conversations with drivers working on contact, mainly on
                KAMAZ, about automatic boxes and do not want to hear.
                The main organization: you can’t get it all right.
                And most importantly, Russia does not have its own AKP, only import.
                But all Amer’s MRAPs are 100% equipped with automatic transmissions ,, Alison ,,.
              3. Alex 241
                Alex 241 29 January 2014 20: 23
                +2
                Yazov said the same thing about tanks with a gas turbine engine: Everyone is good, but they won’t start with a pusher!
              4. ramsi
                ramsi 29 January 2014 20: 50
                +1
                Quote: bask

                But, when talking with drivers who work by contact, mainly in KamAZ trucks, they don’t want to hear about automatic gearboxes.
                The main organization: you can’t get it all right.
                And most importantly, Russia does not have its own AKP, only import.

                At least the old Liaz (677, in my opinion) started up with the pusher, at a speed of 40-50 km / h
              5. wanderer_032
                wanderer_032 29 January 2014 20: 57
                +1
                Quote: ramsi
                At least the old Liaz (677, in my opinion) started up with the pusher, at a speed of 40-50 km / h

                I plowed it on my darling 2 year old and didn’t even hear about it.
                Yes, and why start it from a tugboat, if there is a trigger handle?
                When the battery died, I started it like that.
              6. ramsi
                ramsi 29 January 2014 21: 06
                0
                Are you talking about a "curve starter" one and a half meters? .. I envy your health. As for starting from the tug, it was my personal contribution to the "operating experience"
              7. wanderer_032
                wanderer_032 29 January 2014 21: 36
                0
                Quote: ramsi
                are you talking about a "curve starter" one and a half meters ?.

                About him dear, hehe laughing
                "When I served as a coachman at the post office, I was young, I had the strength ..."
                from the famous folk song.
          2. bask
            bask 29 January 2014 21: 52
            +1
            Quote: ramsi
            at least the old Liaz (677, in my opinion) started up with the pusher, at a speed of 40-50 km / h


            LiAZ-677 — was released since 1967.
            I posted about today. What and where are automatic transmissions produced in Russia?
            But whatever, from a tug, the car would start, with automatic transmission, I hear for the first time.
            In addition to personal experience, there is something.
          3. wanderer_032
            wanderer_032 29 January 2014 22: 20
            0
            Quote: bask
            .What and where are automatic transmissions produced in Russia?

            There is nothing in the internet about the production of GMF for heavy equipment in the Russian Federation, but Kamaz has the same production capacities in Miass, too, there is Yaroslavl and Kurgan. We have a checkpoint plant in Omsk.
            Thank you, engineers too.
            So I think there is someone to develop and make their GMF.
            Quote: bask
            But whatever, from a tug, the car would start, with automatic transmission, for the first time I hear.

            In all instructions for use. it is strictly forbidden to do this because the box is not designed for such loads and can easily just fall into pieces.
          4. bask
            bask 29 January 2014 22: 42
            0
            Quote: wanderer_032
            So I think there is someone to develop and make their GMF.

            Hope to be developed.
          5. Tommygun
            Tommygun 1 February 2014 19: 49
            0
            Gelik with a "military" box can be started from the pusher.
            There is an additional pump driven by a universal joint drive specifically for this.
            I think there are other automatic transmissions with this capability.
        2. ramsi
          ramsi 30 January 2014 07: 17
          0
          there is nothing but personal experience, and I have not heard of such cases either; besides, all this was so long ago that, probably, it’s already not true ... (joke).
          But seriously, that is, only general reasoning
        3. Tommygun
          Tommygun 1 February 2014 22: 57
          0
          http://gelandewagen.org/index.php?topic=3382.15
          One friend brings a page from RE
  • wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 29 January 2014 19: 45
    +1
    Quote: bask
    bask
    hi

    Quote: bask
    The cost of BTR-82, about 1 ml $$$, is comparable with the cost of Typhoon U K,.

    Do not share the link at prices, just interesting.
    Quote: bask
    The only thing that bothers: a lot of imported parts and ceramic armor. (I repeat) Especially the automatic transmission ,, Elisson ,, made in the USA.

    Yes, this may become an obstacle to the introduction of the "TAIFUN-U, K" platform, but I think they have already begun to develop their own automatic transmissions of this class. Armor also has its own developments.
    1. bask
      bask 29 January 2014 20: 36
      0
      Quote: wanderer_032
      Do not share the link at prices, just interesting.

      A reference at prices, unfortunately I will not share.
      All prices are taken from LJ, bloggers. Dear and not very.
      I’ll certainly get rid of it.
      Quote: wanderer_032
      but I think my automatic transmission of this class

      According to automatic transmission, I don’t agree yet everything is deaf. About developments, modern info .. ZERO.
      Quote: wanderer_032
      With armor, too, have their own achievements.

      With armor, but there are achievements, several companies and research institutes of Steel are developing something. But also without specifics.
    2. wanderer_032
      wanderer_032 29 January 2014 20: 53
      +2
      There’s a secrecy regimen.
      And there are developments since Soviet times.
      Here's the movie in the subject. If you discard all unnecessary from this film and leave the essence (interview with the designers), then much can be gained.
  • wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 29 January 2014 20: 40
    0
    Quote: bask
    Not just armored personnel carriers are needed, multi-purpose wheeled armored platforms are needed.
    With a different wheel formula from 4x4 to 10x10, and carrying capacity.

    So I’m talking about what. I’m talking about this.
    Boomerang is being developed for this very purpose. I hope so.
  • Basileus
    Basileus 29 January 2014 18: 25
    +2
    Why did you get this at all? An armored personnel carrier is an armored personnel carrier, it is designed to transport soldiers, including across the battlefield. MCI is a protected truck, it should not participate in battles - it should transport soldiers on roads in low-intensity conflicts. No one is giving up armored personnel carriers, moreover, they are developing new ones. Boomerang - in Russia, for example. So stop misleading people. If you are not satisfied that our soldiers will be transported in well-protected vehicles, it is better to tell them in person. It is better to find those whose convoy was ambushed in Chechnya or Afghanistan.
    1. bask
      bask 29 January 2014 18: 54
      0
      Quote: Basileus
      An armored personnel carrier is an armored personnel carrier, it is designed to transport soldiers, including across the battlefield. MRAP is a protected truck, it should not participate in battles - it should transport soldiers on roads in low-intensity conflicts

      Respected hi Question No. 1 armored personnel carrier with a 30 mm gun is this BMP?
      Already abandoning the "" classic "" concepts of armored personnel carriers / infantry fighting vehicles, now BATTLE MODULAR PLATFORM. With variants of names, this type.
      MCI, this is an armored car (usually created on the basis of a commercial truck), but not always. There are, originally created MPA.

      BAE Systems RG-35 4x4,6x6, is it MRAP or BTR ???
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 29 January 2014 19: 10
        +1
        Question # 1 - have you heard of people like the "military"? So, they set the task to manufacturers based on their requirements. And the requirements are such that for the continuum of wheeled BA-BTR-BMP they set two different tasks and launched two different programs - Typhoon and Boomerang.

        It’s clear that now the concept is blurry, I myself think so, but almost all typhoons, including the subject KAMAZ-63968, are trucks, which, if they can be used as armored personnel carriers, are only for great need. The only Typhoon, which is more likely an armored personnel carrier than a truck, is KAMAZ-63969, but I can not judge its prospects as an armored personnel carrier in a competition with Boomerang.
        1. bask
          bask 29 January 2014 19: 42
          +1
          Dear Basileus hi
          Do not spoil the air with verbiage. If you want to talk; Speak specifically.
          That’s it, adults.

          I asked you two simple questions.
          1.BTR-82 (commercial name) with a 30 mm 2A72 gun, became a wheeled BMP?
          2.RG-35 is MRAP, (KamAZ-63969) is an armored personnel carrier or armored car?
          And why, with (please organization).
          1. Apollo
            Apollo 29 January 2014 19: 46
            +5
            Quote: bask
            Do not spoil the air verbiage

            I apologize for the flood.
            By the way, about air damage.
            In the city of Rasdorf in the central part of Germany, a cowshed exploded, reports Reuters, citing local police.

            According to city law enforcement agencies, the explosion occurred due to the fact that methane, which was found in the waste products of cows, accumulated in the building in dangerous quantities. Due to the discharge of static electricity, the gas ignited, reports Lenta.ru.

            In total, there were 90 cows in the barn at the time of the incident. One of them received burns, she received veterinary care. An explosion in the barn damaged the roof.
            http://www.vesti.az/news/190535
            laughing
          2. Basileus
            Basileus 29 January 2014 19: 53
            0
            I have already argued. If you are interested, you can read my message - everything is there, and then get to the bottom.
            1. bask
              bask 29 January 2014 20: 29
              +1
              Quote: Basileus
              my message - everything is there, and then dig in

              Yes I do not dig dear hi
              Quote: wanderer_032
              And also so that they return home alive and healthy.

              This is what we all want from our defense industry.
              What would our armored vehicles be, advanced, technological, ergonomic.
              And THE MOST IMPORTANT: SAVED THE LIFE OF OUR SOLDIERS !!!!
              The rest is a trifle. Disputes expressing one's opinion.
              1. Basileus
                Basileus 29 January 2014 20: 43
                0
                Then I will answer. BTR-82A has a good SLA, so it can support troops well. Yes, this is a BMP.

                An armored car in general or an armored truck? I am too lazy to google the characteristics, but if it is designed to transport infantry across the battlefield and partially support it, this is definitely an armored personnel carrier. If his main task is to transport infantry, and weapons are defensive, then an armored car for transporting infantry in dangerous directions, and partisans are its main enemies, then this is a truck with ballistic and mine protection)
                1. bask
                  bask 29 January 2014 21: 24
                  0
                  Quote: Basileus
                  Then I will answer. BTR-82A has a good SLA, so it can support troops well. Yes, this is a BMP.

                  Let's move away from the international name.
                  Domestic updated: BTR is intended for transportation of personnel (((only for transportation)))) infantry under the protection of armor in the deployment area.-EVERYTHING !!!!! This is an armored personnel carrier.
                  For the armored personnel carrier is not provided for entry into battle, in a contact battle, duel against other armored vehicles.
                  Accordingly, its weapons, only the defensive KPVT ,,, Kord ,, AGS.

                  For infantry fighting vehicles: for transporting personnel, destroying identified firing points, supporting infantry with fire, acting in conjunction with main tanks. Armament is an automatic medium-caliber gun of 23-57 mm.
                  Armor should have protection against small-caliber guns and RPG-7.

                  BTR-82, with a 30 mm gun, does not fit the role of a wheeled infantry fighting vehicle, due to weak bulletproof booking.
                  As soon as it approaches a distance shot from an RPG, they will immediately burn it.
                  LAV-25, with a 25 mm Bushmaster gun. Armor and mine protection is similar to BTR-82.


                2. Alex 241
                  Alex 241 29 January 2014 21: 35
                  +1
                  Andrey Ukrainian developments.
                3. bask
                  bask 29 January 2014 21: 59
                  +2
                  Quote: Alex 241
                  Andrey Ukrainian developments.

                  Sasha, great idea.
                  Execution is not so hot. It is striking that there is a lack of appropriate equipment and skilled workers.
                  And ours could reconfigure the MBT corps.
                  But I’m closer to the Israeli campaign, BTR-T ,, Ahzarit, with a smaller, more compact diesel engine.
                  Type BMP-3.
                  Equipped with a diesel engine V-shaped UTD-29 with a capacity of 500 l / s. combined with hydromechanical transmission in a single power unit.

                4. Alex 241
                  Alex 241 29 January 2014 22: 12
                  +1
                  BTR-T ,, Ahzarit ,, Andryush 44 tons, how to deal with water barriers?
                5. bask
                  bask 29 January 2014 22: 48
                  0
                  Quote: Alex 241
                  how to be with water barriers?

                  Sash, as always.
                  Equip the engineering troops with modern technology.
                  The main theater of operations will be in the Caucasus, and there rivers on average 1,5 meters deep.
          3. wanderer_032
            wanderer_032 29 January 2014 21: 49
            +1
            bask

            Quote: bask
            Domestic updated: BTR is intended for transportation of personnel (((only for transportation)))) infantry under the protection of armor in the deployment area.-EVERYTHING !!!!! This is an armored personnel carrier.
            For the armored personnel carrier is not provided for entry into battle, in a contact battle, duel against other armored vehicles.
            Accordingly, its weapons, only the defensive KPVT ,,, Kord ,, AGS.

            Not quite so, the purpose of the APC:
            An armored personnel carrier is designed to transport personnel of motorized rifle units and for their fire support.
            Source: TOIE for BTR-70, "Voenizdat" 1988.
          4. bask
            bask 29 January 2014 22: 23
            0
            Quote: wanderer_032
            and for their fire support. Literally.
            Source: TOIE for BTR-70, "Voenizdat" 1988.

            I agree read.
            Here is another definition.
            Definition of armored personnel carriers: Armored personnel carrier (armored (armored) transporter, armored personnel carrier) - an armored fighting vehicle designed to deliver personnel (riflemen) of motorized rifle (infantry, motorized infantry, and so on) units to the place of performance of a combat mission.

            BTR, in comparison with BMP, has lower security personnel.
            Here's the pricing.
            Taken from here:
            http://twower.livejournal.com/1194178.html
            "" "The new BTR-82A, produced at the plant from scratch, costs 22 million. And the state is ready to pay 80 rubles for the modernization of the BTR-82 into the BTR-20AM this year."
        2. Basileus
          Basileus 29 January 2014 23: 00
          0
          You contradict yourself. Or do you show the domestic BMP, which has protection from 20 + mm guns and RPGs?
  • wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 29 January 2014 19: 39
    +1
    I did not want to mislead anyone, but rather, on the contrary, sort out what is needed for what.
    If I am confused, I apologize.
    As for our soldiers, I’m just for the fact that they moved on the normal and really needed equipment to perform their tasks.
    And also so that they return home alive and healthy.
  • pawel57
    pawel57 29 January 2014 16: 42
    +1
    I think the use of specialists: signalmen, Rebovtsy, engineers of all stripes, sappers, maybe the military police, air defense as a control machine.
    1. wanderer_032
      wanderer_032 29 January 2014 19: 21
      0
      But this niche in automotive military equipment is called special-chassis, they go mainly for mounting on them RZSO, tactical missiles and other artillery systems, special communications equipment and electronic warfare, are used as mobile command posts and UAV control centers, etc. .like functions.
      If "Typhoon" is adopted, then first of all these machines will go there, and this is quite justified, because no one produces special chassis of this class.
      And all these armored modules for motorized rifles are sweet noodles on the ears of the general public.
      Fighters from the infantry of the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and other branches of the troops, both drove armored personnel carriers and army trucks with a tented onboard platform, will continue to ride.
      That's it. (IMHO)
      I fully agree with your proposed options. pawel57 (3)
  • Pimply
    Pimply 29 January 2014 23: 26
    0
    Why should it occupy the BTR niche?
  • Gray 43
    Gray 43 1 February 2014 12: 43
    0
    The origin of the units is very important, where is the guarantee that their supply will be stable?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • 120352
    120352 29 January 2014 12: 26
    0
    Good machine. It would still somehow arm ...
    1. shurup
      shurup 29 January 2014 13: 53
      0
      Uh-huh. The radar station also begs for it. But the price will then reach the "crocodile". And the latter will have better mine resistance, but, however, the issue of underwater ambushes has not been worked out.
  • nnz226
    nnz226 29 January 2014 13: 40
    +1
    Bulletproof and resistance to landmine explosions - a good thing! And what about RPGs forgot ??? After all, our soldiers began to ride not inside, but on the armored vehicles of armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, primarily due to the action of the RPG on this equipment. And what is KAMAZ? invulnerable to a grenade from the good old RPG-7 ??? not to mention all the other news ...
    1. Crang
      Crang 29 January 2014 16: 08
      +1
      This KamAZ in this sense has many advantages over an armored personnel carrier. Firstly, on top, and not inside, BTRs began to ride not only because of RPGs, but also because of mines. And KamAZ in this regard is much more secure than the armored personnel carrier. Secondly, in it, unlike an armored personnel carrier, it is spacious and when hit by an RPG grenade, you can quickly get out. Thirdly, because of the same space, there is enough space there for both people and equipment. Whereas in the armored personnel carrier the airborne squad was littered with things so that there was simply no room for people. In the third, KamAZ is much more protected by an armored personnel carrier. This KamAZ can withstand 14,5-30 mm of ammunition, while the armor of an ordinary BTR-80 breaks through already 12,7 mm (easy) and even 7,62 mm if you try.
    2. Basileus
      Basileus 29 January 2014 18: 55
      0
      KAZ. I think the military have more detailed statistics on the use of various types of weapons by militants than our sofa experts?
      1. Apollo
        Apollo 29 January 2014 18: 59
        0
        Quote: Basileus
        Basileus Today, 18: 55 ↑ New
        KAZ. I think the military have more detailed statistics on the use of various types of weapons by militants than our sofa experts?


        The military concept is extensible, rather the GRU and the FSB.
        1. Basileus
          Basileus 29 January 2014 19: 12
          0
          Well, I'm talking about end-users developing tasks for the design of various machines.
  • Bezz
    Bezz 29 January 2014 15: 32
    0
    I’m afraid to arouse the anger of the professionals, he himself served in the CA, but the question still revolves in the language. More truly two. 1. How much does it cost? 2. Why is this machine, allegedly unparalleled, unique? Which was attended by the very intelligence department of the US Department of Defense (RUMO) - Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).
    What side did an armored car from Russia get into it?
    Who will ride it?
    It's like a crawler control point for Shoigu. Single orders may be from abroad, but the question is the price, which the authors of such articles neglect. But in vain.
  • Crang
    Crang 29 January 2014 16: 04
    0
    Cool technique. Buy one, go fishing or something.
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN 29 January 2014 16: 18
    +1
    Outwardly produces the appearance of a powerful fighting vehicle. If they break in the troops in a year, a good gift will be for motorized infantry!
    1. Bezz
      Bezz 29 January 2014 16: 50
      +1
      Quote: xomaNN
      Outwardly produces the appearance of a powerful fighting vehicle. If they break in the troops in a year, a good gift will be for motorized infantry!

      The Russian army has 85 mobile brigades. The brigade has 700 vehicles for various purposes. One such toy will cost 1-1,5 million dollars. Remember the 1st grade of the Soviet school. Multiplication. A crazy figure is obtained if you replace at least 100 cars. And is automotive technology a priority now? Another toy for parades. It will not replace either an armored personnel carrier or an airborne "auto horse".
      1. Basileus
        Basileus 29 January 2014 18: 52
        0
        Well, if you do not care about soldiers' lives, then yes - not a priority.

        By the way, why did you get the idea that they all will be transferred to Typhoons at once?
        1. Bezz
          Bezz 29 January 2014 19: 43
          0
          Quote: Basileus
          Well, if you do not care about soldier’s lives, then yes - it’s not a priority. By the way, why did you get the idea that they all will be transferred to Typhoons at once?

          Dear Vasily, or Basileus! You contradict yourself. If I decided that the soldiers would be transferred to Typhoons, then this does not in any way indicate my bloodthirsty desire to give a damn about the soldiers' lives. Decide.
          1. Basileus
            Basileus 29 January 2014 19: 56
            0
            Well, you write in plain text that this is expensive and is not the main direction of rearmament. We can conclude that you want our soldiers to ride in the old tent Urals or on horseback in armored personnel carriers.
            1. Bezz
              Bezz 29 January 2014 22: 20
              0
              Dear Basileus! We, rather, I wrote carelessly. I repent. I myself served, however, for a long time. The army is sacred to me, or rather, people in uniform. So sorry. Simply, maybe I don’t understand what is happening in the RA. According to the media, calls from friends from the Far East, Pomoskovye - not everything is going smoothly. Therefore, I thought that it would not come to mass deliveries of such expensive cars. First - BTR 80 modified, new BMP. Maybe I'm wrong.
  • ramsi
    ramsi 29 January 2014 19: 47
    0
    Quote: bask
    ramsiBut this is true when using a land mine.

    But is this not the most frequent case? ..
  • AlNikolaich
    AlNikolaich 29 January 2014 19: 49
    +3
    Almostal, I thought. Again, I remain in my opinion! For many years of its existence, Kamaz did not offer anything new and interesting! All that is created is scrap metal and! Which, moreover, are unmeasured! Kamaz-typhoon-another pearl! Well armored, but what is this armor worth against the cheap and widespread RPG! Projection - a shooter’s dream, you’ll miss the hell! The price is like for two BTR-82! Protection against the explosion of 10 kg of TNT is good. But who checked? And is a car capable of moving after a blast like the Urals? Given the quality of Kamaz, what is the mean time between failures? What is maintainability? And many more questions!
    And yet, any motorist operating cars in extreme conditions will say that compared to the Urals, KAMAZ is full of trash!
    Perhaps the Ural-typhoon will find its niche in the troops, for transporting special items, etc. But first of all, we need normal, simple and maintainable armored trucks, without unnecessary "tuning", and a normal wheeled combat vehicle (armored personnel carrier or BMP)!
  • Vadim12
    Vadim12 29 January 2014 21: 42
    0
    Why are all the indicators in the NATO standard? Is it universally recognized in Russia too? Why bother with left-wing standards for Russian technology ..
    1. Basileus
      Basileus 29 January 2014 23: 02
      +1
      Because we have no experience in creating such a technique. Your cap.
  • Legate
    Legate 30 January 2014 00: 59
    +1
    And to increase comfort, you need Wi-Fi in the cabin and charging for mobile phones in the troop compartment :)
  • Sledgehammer
    Sledgehammer 30 January 2014 16: 55
    0
    Such machines are called occupational. That is, their place of action is hot spots, of low intensity.
    For these purposes, Kamaz created an excellent car (capacity, versatility, level of protection).
    In the case of the glob. Conflict makes sense to produce the BTR-8x-9x series, but it is unlikely.
  • Michael_59
    Michael_59 30 January 2014 23: 40
    +1
    It’s great in general that such cars begin to appear. Military design thought cannot stand still - brains should work.

    I am only puzzled by the relatively large area of ​​glazing without the ability to hide expensive bulletproof glass under metal armor (removable, folding).
    AKP is good only in a situation where a fighter driver is injured and one healthy leg. The rest of the minuses are still more. First of all, on the road. Although, again, so, given the weight and size characteristics (a high center of gravity of the device due to the armor), it is better not to move off the asphalt)
  • tchoni
    tchoni 2 February 2014 15: 42
    0
    In general, the machine is certainly good, but there are a few questions:
    1) a very weak review for the landing (of course they try to improve it with the help of triplexes and screens, but I’m afraid it’s a poultice.)
    2) the location of the fighters face to face greatly complicates the use of personal weapons.
    3) with a 6X6 scheme and a mass of 25 tons - patency is some concern. If a truck with the same wheel formula and loaded to a similar mass can be unloaded and pulled out, then here FIG.