Military Review

Israel will retain its armor Namer, but will reduce their production

63



Israel is reducing the production of its new BAT Namer to 170 units. Initially, back in 2010, Israel planned to purchase 600 armored personnel carriers. Budget cuts and a reduction in the military threat have made adjustments to these plans. Now its production will cease in the 2017 year, and not in the 2019 year, as it was previously planned. The first 200 Institutions were produced in Israel, the rest are manufactured in the United States, since their production is cheaper there. The American company General Dynamics has signed a contract for the construction of most of the Interers and has already begun their production this year.



Several infantry battalions are already equipped with Israel’s built Namers, mainly the Golani brigade in the north of the country near the Lebanese border. At the start of 2010, Israel used several Namer armored personnel carriers in the Gaza Strip. This was the first combat experience for Namer, and the BTR justified all the expectations placed on it. One of them was used as a forward command post, allowing officers to be close to the combat area. Several radio stations and sensors placed on the Nadera allowed operational control of units and calling for air support.



The intention is based on the chassis of the old tanks Merkava I and Merkava II series. Currently, these tanks are withdrawn from service, so they must be either disposed of or converted. Thus, Namer has the same armor protection as Merkava. The place of the dismantled tower was taken by a remotely controlled turret with a heavy machine gun. The front location of the power plant and the armored door in the stern of the Merkava tank allowed for a fairly simple upgrade.

Despite the fact that the Israelis liked the speed of the Stryker, the purchase of which they are considering, they are confident that over the next ten years they will still have to fight with Palestinian terrorists in urban areas. There Namer has the advantage due to its thicker armor. Outside the urban development has the advantage of Stryker. In the event that the Israelis cannot afford to build enough Interes, they will reinforce their M-113 armored vehicles with additional armor protection. Nevertheless, on the basis of the test results, as well as the first experience of hostilities in the Gaza Strip, it is clear that the troops prefer Namera.

Israel will retain its armor Namer, but will reduce their production


Namer is able to hold twelve fighters (driver, gunner, commander and nine infantrymen). The troop compartment is also equipped with a stretcher, which allows, in addition to the full load, to transport one wounded man. In addition to the remotely controlled 12,7-mm machine gun in the left front of the machine is the top hatch, allowing the commander to use the 7,62-mm machine gun. The armored vehicle also has a Merkava tank control system and four cameras that provide external all-round visibility of the vehicle. The remotely controlled machine gun is equipped with a night vision system. At the request of the fighters, the car was also equipped with a toilet (in many operations, the fighters had to remain on board continuously until 24 hours per combat exit).



Israel has more than 200 Merkava I tanks, the oldest of which is at least 25 years old. In addition, there are more 500 decommissioned Merkava II tanks. The dismantling of the tower and the reinforcement of the bottom armor make the 54-ton Namer the heaviest armored personnel carrier ever built. Each Namer costs about $ 3 millions. New production cuts will increase the cost of each machine by about $ 200,000.



Earlier, Israel experimented with refitting T-55 and Centurion tanks into armored personnel carriers. It was not an easy job, since the engines in these tanks were located in the stern, where the exit doors of combat vehicles are usually located. When the retired Merkava tanks appeared, their conversion into heavy armored vehicles turned out to be more obvious. In addition, Israeli troops were not happy with their old and poorly protected M113 armored personnel carriers and were seeking a safer vehicle.
Originator:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htarm/articles/20140223.aspx
63 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 31231
    31231 26 February 2014 07: 49
    +6
    I completely agree with the Jews. Arabs knead themselves, respectively, and large-scale restraining forces are not needed.
    1. mirag2
      mirag2 26 February 2014 07: 57
      +3
      Instead of money in the assembly of Nameers, money for the Arab feud.
      Conveniently.
      1. cosmos111
        cosmos111 26 February 2014 10: 29
        +1
        Quote: mirag2
        Namerov-money for the Arab feud.

        money for the construction of the T-BTR "Namer" is given by the United States and for the war in Syria, the United States + Arab monarchies (Saudis and Qatar))))
        1. Ataman
          Ataman 26 February 2014 16: 14
          -2
          The next modernization of the BTR Namer, this equipment of the machine is not one, but twelve toilets, in case of shelling. wink
          1. Professor
            26 February 2014 16: 16
            +9
            Quote: Ataman
            The next modernization of the BTR Namer, this equipment of the machine is not one, but twelve toilets, in case of shelling. wink

            For this there are regular diapers. laughing
            1. Ataman
              Ataman 26 February 2014 19: 50
              +1
              however, a plus! hi
  2. Sars
    Sars 26 February 2014 08: 17
    +1
    Quote: 31231
    I completely agree with the Jews. Arabs knead themselves, respectively, and large-scale restraining forces are not needed.


    I do not agree, the Jews have less money (Obamych is stingy).

    Let me remind you how the Jewish plans for tanks have changed over the past three months:
    - we are building a new tank;
    - we (they) do not need a new tank as the old one is "the best in the world"
    - We are removing the "best tank in the world" from the army (without it we will beat the Arabs).
    1. Professor
      26 February 2014 09: 59
      +6
      Quote: SarS
      I do not agree, the Jews have less money (Obamych is stingy).

      Nonsense, American aid (approximately 3 billion) comes in time.

      Quote: SarS
      - we are building a new tank;

      They are building, it will be in ten years, 35 tons, 2 crew member and not quite a tank.

      Quote: SarS
      - we (they) do not need a new tank as the old one is "the best in the world"

      "the best in the world" is spoken in only one country.

      Quote: SarS
      - We are removing the "best tank in the world" from the army (without it we will beat the Arabs).

      Again nonsense, nobody is going to clean the tanks at all, but they also punch them like crazy.
      1. cosmos111
        cosmos111 26 February 2014 10: 18
        0
        Quote: Professor
        five bullshit, nobody is going to clean the tanks at all, but to stamp them like crazy too.


        reduction in production of T-BTR related first of all, with the massive use of tzahal, drums and reconnaissance .. UAV!!!!!
        and more, with nothing ((((

        in Israel, take care of the lives of their soldiers !!!
        the main blows are inflicted by the Air Force, in advance of reconnaissance .. ... targets !!
        !
      2. And Us Rat
        And Us Rat 26 February 2014 14: 14
        0
        Quote: Professor
        They are building, it will be in ten years, 35 tons, 2 crew member and not quite a tank.

        Where is the droushka? bully
        1. Professor
          26 February 2014 14: 44
          +1
          Quote: And Us Rat
          Where is the droushka?

          For you: from one "entertainment portal" or, if you want, from my doctorate "somewhere between astrophysics and neurosurgery". wassat
          For the rest: from an interview with Project Manager Merkava at the Ministry of Defense two weeks ago on Tuesday, Army Radio in the Rezuat Ha-Bitachon program
          1. And Us Rat
            And Us Rat 26 February 2014 22: 34
            -1
            Quote: Professor
            Quote: And Us Rat
            Where is the droushka?

            For you: from one "entertainment portal" or, if you want, from my doctorate "somewhere between astrophysics and neurosurgery". wassat

            Set aside clowning fighter bully
  3. inkass_98
    inkass_98 26 February 2014 09: 44
    +1
    With the protection of such a powerful reservation, it is illogical to use such weak weapons. A 20/30 mm cannon + machine gun would be more appropriate, incl. and in urban conditions, especially since "Raphael" has a lot of decent developments.
    1. Professor
      26 February 2014 10: 02
      +2
      Quote: inkass_98
      With the protection of such a powerful reservation, it is illogical to use such weak weapons. A 20/30 mm cannon + machine gun would be more appropriate, incl. and in urban conditions, especially since "Raphael" has a lot of decent developments.

      There would be a desire

      1. cosmos111
        cosmos111 26 February 2014 10: 25
        +1
        Rafael DBM, with 25-30 mm Bushmaster guns === excellent T-BMP, which can independently support infantry in the landing zone with fire !!!!

        but in the tzahal, the same is the bone of thinking and they don’t want to enter T-BMP into the bundle of OBT + T-BTR (((
  4. uhu189
    uhu189 26 February 2014 11: 43
    +1
    We can only rejoice for our pragmatic Jewish friends. One trouble - it’s a bit heavy, of course, but the armor is reliable and there is a toilet wink
    1. Prohor
      Prohor 26 February 2014 13: 57
      +2
      Well, even if it’s heavy, they, tea, shouldn’t ride along the Kalinov bridge across the Smorodinka river! wink
  5. gallville
    gallville 26 February 2014 11: 54
    +1
    Quote: cosmos111
    but in the tzahal, the same is the bone of thinking and they don’t want to enter T-BMP into the bundle of OBT + T-BTR (((

    In order to draw such conclusions, you must first pay attention to the structure, doctrine and military operations of the army. So the structure is saturated with tanks, perhaps even oversaturated, if we have a proportion of 1 tank per platoon, then they often have 1 tank per squad, the doctrine is still more defensive, the Sinai Peninsula, which is 1.5 times the size of the Moscow region.
    As for the high-rise buildings with their control system, it is easier for them to demolish the floors to which the tank is missing with artillery (this is not counting that the further the tank, the higher the floor it hits) than to make a colossus out of the walls out of a 30mm fart. They cannot rebuild these floors and pay tribute to any "leaders" they have bought, former militants.
  6. Tourist Breakfast
    Tourist Breakfast 26 February 2014 11: 57
    +2
    It seemed like there was infa that converting the first Merkava into Namer was unprofitable, and Namers are being produced from scratch on the Merkava-4 chassis.
    1. Professor
      26 February 2014 11: 59
      +2
      So it is, in the US they will do them from scratch.
    2. MACCABI TLV
      MACCABI TLV 26 February 2014 12: 43
      +8
      Quote: Tourist's Breakfast
      in "Namer" the first "Merkava"

      An armored personnel carrier based on MK1 was generally called "NamerA".
      Quote: Professor
      So it is, in the US they will do them from scratch.

      intem and we did it from scratch.
      Quote: cosmos111
      but in the tzahal, the same is the bone of thinking and they don’t want to enter T-BMP into the bundle of OBT + T-BTR (((

      Quote: cosmos111
      Rafael DBM, with 25-30 mm Bushmaster guns === excellent T-BMP, which can independently support infantry in the landing zone with fire !!!!

      it makes no sense to enter what is not required. The BTR + MBT bunch works great.
      Why provoke the hotheads of the commanders of intentions to enter the battle, with heavy features, if his task is not to pose as a tank or infantry fighting vehicle, but only armored personnel carrier?
      1. cosmos111
        cosmos111 26 February 2014 18: 44
        +1
        Quote: MACCABI TLV
        it makes no sense to enter what is not required. The BTR + MBT bunch works great.

        and yet, Israel makes the main bet in the fight against Palestinian armed forces on strike UAVs !!!!

        here is the latest UAV "Avenger" ((((
        1. MACCABI TLV
          MACCABI TLV 27 February 2014 11: 14
          0
          with Palestinians, the IDF performs police functions, not military ones. In a war with any hostile state, the stake will be placed on all conventional DB methods, which include UAVs for a long time.
  7. dvvv
    dvvv 26 February 2014 12: 13
    0
    in many operations, fighters had to remain on board continuously for up to 24 hours in one combat exit). - more precisely, going to war) The exits were earlier and only out of necessity) now you can fight with comfort and not risking anything at all) If a kid doesn’t throw a stone out of harm, he has nothing to fear).
  8. loki565
    loki565 26 February 2014 12: 15
    +2
    We ourselves need a heavy BMP with swearing tanks.
    Here you can see how the ancient RPG7 does not just penetrate BMPs, but breaking through the side armor explodes inside the airborne compartment. The result of the seriously wounded landing of the BMP was completely burned out.

  9. Siberia 9444
    Siberia 9444 26 February 2014 12: 38
    +2
    It’s not for nothing that our infantry fighting vehicle was nicknamed the Mass grave of the infantry! And we need to radically change the concept of the machine, and hanging screens is not a solution, as there are modern RPGs
  10. Tatarus
    Tatarus 26 February 2014 13: 21
    +1
    We have outdated tanks, too, the sea. Why not use the experience of Israel. True, we have an engine behind. Maybe this is the difficulty?
    1. Kyrgyz
      Kyrgyz 26 February 2014 14: 20
      0
      Quote: Tatarus
      We have outdated tanks, too, the sea. Why not use the experience of Israel. True, we have an engine behind. Maybe this is the difficulty?

      The complexity of the conversion and transportation for us is comparable to the creation of a new machine, and the armor on the Merkava is larger and heavier, the heavy armored personnel carrier is necessary, but the conversion of the tank in the TBTR is rational for Russia
    2. rolik2
      rolik2 26 February 2014 14: 53
      +3
      Quote: Tatarus
      We have a rear engine. Maybe this is the difficulty?

      Well, that didn’t stop them.
    3. MACCABI TLV
      MACCABI TLV 26 February 2014 15: 15
      +1
      Quote: Tatarus
      We have outdated tanks, too, the sea. Why not use the experience of Israel. True, we have an engine behind. Maybe this is the difficulty?

      Quote: Tatarus
      heavy armored personnel carrier is a necessary thing, but alteration of the tank in the TBTR is rational for Russia

      A good example of what can be arranged from the old MBT.
      Ahzarit (cruel) engine from behind, rework from the tank.
      1. Tatarus
        Tatarus 26 February 2014 16: 19
        0
        Thank you for the video hi
    4. Kus Imak
      Kus Imak 26 February 2014 23: 23
      +2
      In Ahzarit, the engine is also behind (which is not surprising at all)
  11. Pimply
    Pimply 26 February 2014 13: 34
    0
    The military budget is cut, including exercises, the second Lebanese, damn it, they did not learn anything
  12. dvvv
    dvvv 26 February 2014 16: 48
    -9
    Quote: loki565
    We ourselves need a heavy BMP with swearing tanks.

    --- nope ... with the "abuse" of the tank BMP is no longer needed, I suppose. Sitting in an infantry fighting vehicle, the infantry is only inactive and serves as cannon fodder. BMPTs are reasonably built and tanks are what you need, and BMPs in the form they were or with thick armor are not needed. Here are well-protected, primarily from detonation, and RPG armored personnel carriers and wheeled is needed to carry the infantry to where it is needed on foot. In the city, only BMPT where there is a minimum of people but with good weapons and protection from RPGs is needed. The Jewish big bus in which the infantry only sits and eats and poops as a combat unit is worthless. On narrow streets, he will not solve anything with his machine gun and there are few observation devices. It costs nothing to demolish his armament using various weapons, and if you drop a couple of bottles with Molotov cocktails to him, all the guys there will burn out at the toilet.
    1. tchoni
      tchoni 26 February 2014 18: 15
      +2
      And how do you imagine the process of scrubbing the basements of an entire city using BMPT?
  13. tchoni
    tchoni 26 February 2014 18: 21
    +3
    The infantry must go after the tanks and you can’t replace it with any BMPT. We tried (remember at least the concepts of different tanks of the 30s). And TBTR is a very necessary thing in OUR army. And then it turns out the tanks are all armored, and the infantry behind them in zinc coffins moves (I exaggerate of course, but nonetheless ...). Who told you that the infantry in the TBTR is useless - there are no respected ones, it is simply very well protected. And from mine explosions, too. And it can be delivered to any place necessary for the command without unnecessary losses. For example, to the entrance of the building where the adversary was entrenched and where the machine gunner (sniper) works from. Yes, just bring the wounded and bring the BC in the city where the devil himself can’t figure out where his own and where strangers ... And you say BMPT .....
    1. rezident
      rezident 26 February 2014 20: 04
      0
      Well, the infantry should also ride on an armored troop carrier, especially in a city where a gunman who accidentally sees a fighter is blundered from an RPG and scattered all fighters in the area, and so will be blundered on this heap of armor, but for now reload the armored troop-carrier
  14. kplayer
    kplayer 26 February 2014 21: 34
    +1
    Quote: rolik2
    Well, that didn’t stop them.

    Kharkiv residents were not too lazy to reconfigure their BMPT-64 (34,5 tons) as a result, the engine-transmission compartment is located in front (700/900 hp - optional), and the landing has decent landing capacity (up to 12 people, in the uninhabited version tower, probably less), i.e. landing and disembarkation is more convenient and safe (compared to BMP-3 / BMO-T) and does not prevent circular firing from the main BMP weapon system (the aft is equipped with double-leaf doors; it is possible to install a wide ramp instead of doors).
    1. AGM-114
      AGM-114 26 February 2014 22: 01
      -2
      There was no rearrangement. Kharkov cretins made the car go "backward but forward", which is evident from the chassis.
      1. Kus Imak
        Kus Imak 26 February 2014 23: 31
        +3
        They also moved the armor back. In general, it seems that Kharkov is considered a very worthy manufacturer of armored vehicles.
      2. sapran
        sapran 27 February 2014 09: 44
        +1
        I don't agree about the "cretins" - the idea has the right to life.
        There are a number of issues for execution, but these are more likely issues related to the limited budget and what was at hand.
        As a matter of fact, the conclusion is simple of what has already been received and in reserve with the army’s head is enough (with whom to butt in the near future?)
        All the forces and means will be thrown into the prospective development (most likely into drones) and the maintenance of special forces (after all, why not save ...)
  15. schizophrenic
    schizophrenic 27 February 2014 00: 35
    +1
    Quote: Kus Imak
    There was no rearrangement. Kharkov cretins forced the car to go "backwards but forward

    And what they wanted budget execution, people need to earn money. Question to specialists with running problems will not be?
  16. dvvv
    dvvv 27 February 2014 01: 01
    -4
    Quote: tchoni
    Who told you that the infantry in the TBTR is useless - there are no respected, it is just very well protected. And from mine explosions, too. And it can be delivered to any place necessary for the command without unnecessary losses. For example, to the entrance of the building where the adversary was entrenched and where the machine gunner (sniper) works from

    - This is a purely Israeli system of warfare when they go to war and bring brave warriors there. If the machine gunner works, the BMPT from the 30mm cannon will easily spread all the firing points and there will be no sense from the Israeli camper. There, brave warriors are afraid to go outside and their light rifle can’t get beyond the walls of machine gunners. The experience of the 30s of the last century does not fit here.
    1. tchoni
      tchoni 27 February 2014 13: 51
      +1
      And what the Israelis did not please you with - they have not lost a single war yet .......
      I wanted to write in detail, but comrade Aristocrat saved from knocking on the keys.
      1. dvvv
        dvvv 27 February 2014 15: 27
        0
        the Israelis did not please me and therefore did not please me) But to fight as they do, no one will succeed) We will not consider here an unsuccessful "trip" to Lebanon, there simply did not coincide with the traditional sonary, well, they confused how and where to go)
        1. tchoni
          tchoni 27 February 2014 18: 19
          +1
          Please explain why it will not work? How did the same formidable sample of the early 2000s differ from the gas sector?
          1. dvvv
            dvvv 27 February 2014 21: 41
            -3
            Quote: tchoni
            How did the same formidable sample of the early 2000s differ from the gas sector?
            - I will not answer ... the level of your knowledge in this matter makes the discussion not interesting
            1. tchoni
              tchoni 28 February 2014 08: 54
              +2
              And what does not suit you with my level?
  17. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 27 February 2014 11: 56
    0
    Quote: dvvv
    Quote: loki565
    We ourselves need a heavy BMP with swearing tanks.

    --- nope ... with the "abuse" of the tank BMP is no longer needed, I suppose. Sitting in an infantry fighting vehicle, the infantry is only inactive and serves as cannon fodder. BMPTs are reasonably built and tanks are what you need, and BMPs in the form they were or with thick armor are not needed. Here are well-protected, primarily from detonation, and RPG armored personnel carriers and wheeled is needed to carry the infantry to where it is needed on foot. In the city, only BMPT where there is a minimum of people but with good weapons and protection from RPGs is needed. The Jewish big bus in which the infantry only sits and eats and poops as a combat unit is worthless. On narrow streets, he will not solve anything with his machine gun and there are few observation devices. It costs nothing to demolish his armament using various weapons, and if you drop a couple of bottles with Molotov cocktails to him, all the guys there will burn out at the toilet.


    You are deeply mistaken.
    1.In BMP infantry does not "eat" as you put it. On BMP infantry (without dismounting) suppresses resistance, destroys and pursues an enemy inferior in strength.
    In a pedestrian formation under cover (corps, weapons of infantry fighting vehicles), it fights in settlements, etc., and, if necessary, takes refuge in an infantry fighting vehicle and is evacuated.
    2. Wheeled cars? And patency to combat vehicles is not important?
    3. Wheeled vehicles with weak armor? Show you pictures from a formidable street? Or will you find it yourself? Would you like to play the role of mincemeat in these cans? Or are you only ready to sit at the computer to send someone into battle for cardboard armor? Imagine yourself in their place. Will you remain with the same opinion?
    4. BMPT is invulnerable? There may be more devices, but the eye is much smaller. I don’t think that a crew of 3 people in BMPT will be able to effectively observe and hit numerous targets in the upper hemisphere with different angles and azimuths, all at the same time. Fantastically. If not to say - utopian.
    5. Read about bottles. Even during the Second World War, their use was a very difficult matter, difficult and extremely risky, and not nearly as successful as it seems. Modern technology is not susceptible to arson (at least most). Our Israeli "friends" posted a video here where the Arabian Molotov cocktail macaques used. The Israeli armored vehicles did not even pay attention to them. Well it burns to itself and burns. It soon went out. Burnt paint is certainly not aesthetically pleasing, but not fatal either ...
  18. dvvv
    dvvv 27 February 2014 15: 12
    -1
    So, we clarify the subject of the dispute! If this is Hamer described in this article, then this is an armored personnel carrier with very solid protection and the convenience of living brave warriors during punitive operations against a very weak enemy. The landing party is not able to conduct hostilities while sitting inside, even with its weak small arms, but this is not required of it. Israel is now leveling UAVs and aircraft for previously explored targets and with a good supply, and therefore there’s practically no one to fight with there. A ride in comfort for the “combat” privileges is quite possible, but not to fight! Palestinians do not have basements due to the lack of tradition of storing potatoes under a residential city house. The fact that the Israeli army refused to purchase this camper indicates its usefulness, and the export of Israeli armored vehicles never succeeded despite the special trading talents of the Jews. Just such an expensive and useless miracle nobody needs. Yes, in addition, the brave warriors of the IDF have no tradition of running after tanks or infantry fighting vehicles in order to clean the city from the enemy, this is too fast and dangerous business
    1. tchoni
      tchoni 27 February 2014 18: 31
      +1
      quote dvvv time of punitive operations against a very weak opponent - our 80 ka aksakal is also against the weak, but against well-armed anti-tank vehicles, our 80 ka wax does not forgive me, which is on the offensive.
      quote dvvv Palestinians have no basements Yeah, and in general they are cardboard these Palestinians.
      The Israeli army did not refuse to purchase, but simply reduced them (perhaps just due to the development of UAVs) The same article talks about the saturation of the Israeli TBTR wax, perhaps they considered it more reasonable to extend the life of existing equipment and not change it to a new one.
      As for the lack of sales - nothing surprising - expensive and Israel, unlike America, does not give loans to buy its trash.
      Regarding courage ..... - it’s rather wisdom not to substitute a fool!
    2. Professor
      1 March 2014 16: 11
      +1
      Quote: dvvv
      The fact that the Israeli army refused to purchase this camper indicates its usefulness, and the export of Israeli armored vehicles never succeeded despite the special trading talents of the Jews.

      You read and you are amazed. Obscurantism in full growth. The USA is the first in the export (if you want trade) of arms, Russia is in the second, but "special trading talents" are not among the Americans or the Russians, but among the Jews. "If there is no water in the tap .." fool

      Quote: dvvv
      Yes, in addition, the brave warriors of the IDF have no tradition of running after tanks or infantry fighting vehicles in order to clean the city from the enemy, this is too fast and dangerous business

      You would have at least a little understanding of the topic on which you are trying to defecate and you look would not look so funny. Hint. How many km is a Hiking march in an ordinary infantry brigade of the IDF to receive a brigade beret?
  19. dvvv
    dvvv 27 February 2014 15: 22
    -1
    Quote: Aristocrat
    On infantry fighting vehicles (without dismounting) suppresses resistance, destroys and pursues an inferior enemy in strength. On foot, under cover (corps, weapons of infantry fighting vehicles), conducts combat in settlements, etc., and, if necessary, takes refuge in an infantry fighting vehicle and evacuates.

    Quote: Aristocrat
    Show you pictures from a formidable street? Or will you find it yourself? Would you like to play the role of mincemeat in these cans?

    ---- I think you have something mixed up) What does Grozny have to do with and what kind of infantry fighting vehicles are you discussing here? There is an article above and there you need to read what the conversation is about)
  20. kplayer
    kplayer 27 February 2014 17: 09
    +1
    Quote: AGM-114
    There was no rearrangement. Kharkov cretins made the car go "backward but forward", which is evident from the chassis.

    Something on the suspension arms of the track rollers is imperceptible! The drive wheel is in front, and the guide wheel at the rear is logical with the front location of the engine compartment.
    1. alex86
      alex86 27 February 2014 20: 22
      0
      Quote: kplayer
      it is logical

      He meant -
      Quote: kplayer
      drive the car "backward but forward"
      it is this - the driving wheel was in the back - it became in the front - that's back-to-front. I do not agree with the "cretins" - a normal decision.
  21. kplayer
    kplayer 27 February 2014 21: 49
    +1
    Quote: alex86
    it is this - the driving wheel was in the back - it became in the front - that's back-to-front. I do not agree with the "cretins" - a normal decision.


    View the message history, and then decide for whom and what you want to explain (if for yourself, then do not).
    And figure out who you are quoting.
  22. kplayer
    kplayer 27 February 2014 23: 10
    +3
    Quote: cosmos111
    reduction in production of T-BTR related first of all, with the massive use of tzahal, drums and reconnaissance .. UAV!!!!!
    and more, with nothing ((((

    It was thought that the matter was in saturation with armored vehicles, plus reasonable sufficiency and economy.
    UAVs (at first only reconnaissance ones) have been actively used by Israel since the 80s, they "ate the dog" on them, and since then the decline of the Israeli armored corps has never been observed.
    The goals are actually not all and not always static, they tend to hide and get lost and the conditions for their defeat may change (for a densely populated urban area, for example). UAVs do not know how to block and clear the area / terrain.
  23. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 28 February 2014 07: 06
    0
    Quote: dvvv


    ---- I think you have something mixed up) What does Grozny have to do with and what kind of infantry fighting vehicles are you discussing here? There is an article above and there you need to read what the conversation is about)


    Read carefully. My answer is with a quote. With a quote of your words, and only yours. Where are you, declare that good protection (booking) is useless. It is only enough to protect the infantry from mines (bottom).
    I gave you an example that your statement is utopian. Moreover, on the example of the experience of our country (to make it closer and more understandable). So before you see "matches" in the eyes of your opponent, deal with the "logs" in your own eyes. Hopefully after re-explaining ferstein?
  24. dvvv
    dvvv 28 February 2014 10: 35
    -1
    Quote: Aristocrat
    Read carefully. My answer is with a quote. With a quote of your words, and only yours

    --- Good advice to read carefully! So read again!
    Quote: dvvv
    Well, first of all, armored personnel carriers and wheeled armored vehicles that are well protected primarily from undermining and RPGs are needed to carry infantry to where it is needed on foot. In the city, only BMPTs where at least people but with good weapons and protection against RPGs are needed.

    - where did I suggest to armor the TRANSPORTER for combat in the city? This is a protected vehicle and not a combat unit for the city! I am a supporter that it is necessary to separate combat and transport, although protected vehicles! Infantry is also needed, but after the BMPT comes ahead where all the soldiers are protected and well armed, and in the BMP of any known versions, the landing parties and the crew are insufficiently protected, and the landing parties, usually not has the ability to fire fully and even more so in the city! And forget Grozny, where not an example of the use of bad armored units, but a negligent and irresponsible command! With such an approach as in Grozny no technology will help! Do not confuse the sour with the hot and watch what is at stake
    1. tchoni
      tchoni 28 February 2014 20: 27
      0
      Here with this komentom I almost agree. At least in terms of separation of transport and combat functions. but here, in my opinion, a TBTR-tank pair would be more appropriate than BMPT-Mrap.
      and about the dope prturme formidable - yes, the main reason for the large losses is about

      П
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 1 March 2014 07: 37
        0
        It’s clear that during the New Year’s assault on the Haykop brigade, there wouldn’t be anything special, but in the subsequent assault actions (when tactics were changed in the direction of the use of DShG + support for armored vehicles) I think that TBTR would be very useful.
  25. kplayer
    kplayer 28 February 2014 18: 39
    +3
    Cities are either stormed or marching through them (usually through a suburb where there are no multi-storey buildings) sending reconnaissance ahead, or they are patrolled by occupying garrisons in "police" (NOT MILITARY) MRAPs.

    MRAP (as you know, it comes from South Africa) was created for conflicts of "low" intensity and is not a standard transport and combat vehicle of motorized rifle / motorized infantry units (including in the USMC) in any army of the World, unlike BMP and armored personnel carriers (only motor transport units of formations and separate autobats, some engineer-sapper and towed artillery units) and is intended for regions with dry soils and movement on highways and dirt roads, the rubble of a dilapidated city is insurmountable for him, but to organize infantry delivery points (stops with the "A" sign) with No one will be the "final stops" for MRAP, which means that the infantry will operate on regular infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers.
    I don’t know the ratio of the BMPT to the one-shot MBT, but there are no tactical standards where the MBT / BMP / BTR is ahead of the infantry combat formations during combat operations in urban conditions, another thing is on the approaches to the city.
    In quarters, infantry is always ahead, caterpillar armored vehicles should be at a distance in readiness to maintain fire, or to advance and cover, in a city where there are enough open areas to overcome which is possible only under cover, or inside armored vehicles. A full-time armored personnel carrier (not MRAP) in urban conditions is necessary for each rifle division, especially during many-hour / multi-day assault operations.
    Israel and the adjacent Arab territories are quite urbanized, so they are right when preferring caterpillars.
  26. kplayer
    kplayer 1 March 2014 15: 05
    +1
    Quote: dvvv
    ... and the export of Israeli armored vehicles never succeeded despite the special trade talents of the Jews. Just such an expensive and useless miracle nobody needs ...

    To buy an armored personnel carrier, you need to buy a tank (a single base), and Israel, for obvious reasons, does not banter and never offered it to anyone.
  27. dvvv
    dvvv 1 March 2014 15: 58
    -3
    Quote: kplayer
    and never offered anyone.

    - where does infa come from? Everyone who builds still sell them to everyone for a sweet soul, but here such a misfortune). It has been said many times on the forums that their merkava is unsuitable for other regions and TVD
    1. MACCABI TLV
      MACCABI TLV 1 March 2014 16: 31
      0
      Quote: dvvv
      It has been said many times on the forums that their merkava is unsuitable for other regions and TVD

      Well ... the secret has revealed ... a person draws knowledge in forums. good
    2. The comment was deleted.
  28. dvvv
    dvvv 1 March 2014 16: 05
    -3
    Quote: kplayer
    Israel and the adjacent Arab territories are quite urbanized, so they are right when preferring caterpillars.

    - I do not understand how the decoration requires a caterpillar? It seems they’ll generally be used for complete off-road use)
    And yet .. I can’t understand how it can be used for war, and even more so in the city of BTR-80? Any modern MRAP and they were started to be done by all and sundry and massively brought to Afghanistan surpasses the BTR-80 in mine and armored protection, but does not swim and, probably, travels worse in the swamp. Over in Kiev, the BTR-80 was instantly burned with bottles, it was already scary
  29. kplayer
    kplayer 1 March 2014 17: 18
    +2
    Quote: dvvv
    - where does infa come from?

    How do I know? already forgot, in my opinion from the journal ZVO.
    For example, "Merkava Mk.1" was put into service in 1979, the Internet did not smell yet.

    Quote: dvvv
    - I do not understand how the decoration requires a caterpillar? It seems they’ll generally be used for complete off-road use)
    And yet .. I can’t understand how it can be used for war, and even more so in the city of BTR-80? Any modern MRAP and they were started to be done by all and sundry and massively brought to Afghanistan surpasses the BTR-80 in mine and armored protection, but does not swim and, probably, travels worse in the swamp. Over in Kiev, the BTR-80 was instantly burned with bottles, it was already scary

    Did you try to read the WHOLE post from the very beginning?
  30. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 1 March 2014 18: 34
    0
    Quote: dvvv


    - where did I suggest to armor the TRANSPORTER for combat in the city? This is a protected vehicle and not a combat unit for the city! I am a supporter that it is necessary to separate combat and transport, although protected vehicles!

    Do you think that war is going according to plan?
    According to you, the fighters on the "watch" go to "work" without incident, no one shoots at them, because they seem to be not at work yet. That is, not at the forefront. Then they walk behind the BMPT on foot, finishing off the moving halves of the militants (after the Terminators have ironed them out). At 17-00 will they wash their hands and again go to the barracks without incident? Absurd? I agree with you! Absurd.
    Why do you think that no one will "attack" the "transport" cars? Oh yes! You offer to protect them from mines and RPGs. How?
    How can you reliably protect infantry from RPGs? Probably the best defense would be something like Ahzarit or Namer. T / e heavy infantry fighting vehicles (or, if you like, a transporter). So why are you then against a heavy infantry fighting vehicle?
    And don't you think it is at least a little expensive to have a set of vehicles for the infantry: combat, "rotational", for the parade, everyday, for golf? Sorry, I'm exaggerating. But how do you even imagine a herd of cars serving a handful of people?

    Infantry is also needed, but after the BMPT comes ahead where all the fighters are protected and well armed, and in the BMP of any known versions, the landing parties and crew are insufficiently protected, and the landing party, usually, does not have the ability to fire fully and especially in the city!

    Something does not fit in your words. Or are you confused or cannot formulate your thoughts ...
    The BMPT has no "fighters" at all, and even well-armed. The BMPT is well armed and has only a crew.

    Do you find booking Namera insufficient?!? Do not confuse anything? Tank armor does not count ??! ??
    What about the possibility of an assault firing from a car. Not very good of course. But this is due to protection.
    In addition, the infantry is needed for actions "outside" the body of the machine (you yourself are talking about it). And the body is protection while moving, including on the battlefield.

    And forget Grozny, where not an example of the use of bad armored units, but a negligent and irresponsible command! With such an approach as in Grozny no technology will help! Do not confuse the sour with the hot and watch what is at stake


    Forget? It is impossible to forget such shame and betrayal. In addition, it is at least foolish to forget (or rather criminally) the experience gained with such blood. Why do you suggest replacing the infantry in cans? Why do you think it is safe for an infantryman to move around the battlefield on foot? The courts are to blame for this youthful fantasies about the "super-duper terminator" and how you smash everything around.
    Fantasies are my young friend. Those whose bones were ground into dust by caterpillar tracks on the streets of Grozny also had dreams and fantasies. Only fantasies are broken on reality.
    But in reality, bullets whistle. Shards tear the flesh. And brains scatter from the exact fire of snipers.
    Armor protects from this. As well as from RPGs (though not always). I am already silent about the fire cover from weapons mounted on a heavy infantry fighting vehicle.

    So collect what you have in your head in a bunch. And stay in adequate.
  31. dvvv
    dvvv 1 March 2014 18: 44
    -2
    Quote: MACCABI TLV
    Well ... the secret has revealed ... a person draws knowledge in forums.

    - probably you occupy a responsible post in the Israeli defense ministry and then bring knowledge to the masses)
  32. dvvv
    dvvv 1 March 2014 18: 47
    -4
    Quote: Aristocrat
    But in reality, bullets whistle. Shards tear the flesh. And brains scatter from the exact fire of snipers. Armor protects from this. As well as from RPGs (though not always). I am already silent about the fire cover from weapons mounted on a heavy infantry fighting vehicle.

    - Yes, you are just a warrior with a rich fighting experience! And what a beautiful syllable you have! About the bullets that whistle I liked it very much)
    1. Aristocrat
      Aristocrat 1 March 2014 19: 13
      +1
      Quote: dvvv

      - Yes, you are just a warrior with a rich fighting experience! And what a beautiful syllable you have! About the bullets that whistle I liked it very much)

      Warrior. It happened in the 90s.
      Yeah. The syllable (whatever) was by no means a schoolboy. But don't be discouraged. Age is a disadvantage that passes over time ...
      Confused by the wording? In fact, they do not whistle. They squeal when they ricochet from the walls near you.
      "Whistle" is figuratively, literary, if you please.
      You wanted to catch me on "non-professionalism"? Not for you to catch. I cannot know everything. But trust the scout sergeant (although they are now in reserve), they, scouts know much more than schoolchildren.
  33. dvvv
    dvvv 1 March 2014 19: 26
    -5
    In order not to waste time chatting with self-proclaimed professors and aristocrats, I will summarize this article on Israeli hamer
    All Israeli armored vehicles were created under their own theater of war very optimized for its use against Palestinians and therefore not in demand on the international market. Why the guys from Israel and their sympathizers once again extol the usefulness and superiority of their armored vehicles I don’t understand, no one will ever buy it, and all the more so since buyers do not hang out here. The question of a heavy or new infantry fighting vehicle has been hanging in the air for a long time and neither the Amer nor the German gunsmiths succeeded in bringing anything new to the armies, due to the senselessness of this type of weapon in the current realities of hostilities. I fully admit that the Jews were very good at producing and selling drones, both in terms of creation time and in quality of execution, but with armored vehicles they have complete joints and even their military have already eaten this good. My point is that Russia, like the USSR, once a BMP, successfully proposes the introduction of a BMPT to address today's challenges facing the troops. The fact that in South Africa they came up with and successfully used the paramilitary and semi-police MRAP armored car is really a find and the United States as well as its allies quickly caught the trend and riveted them enough so that the troops in Afghanistan moved to them, and not to heavy and yet mythical infantry fighting vehicles.
    Therefore, I believe that tanks, BMPTs, MRAPs and other things that the Airborne Forces or the Marine Corps, if any, will survive. As a combat module, I prefer what is on the BMP-3, although I'm not so special to say that this is the only true set of weapons that will allow the BMPT to be the best for different combat options. On the sim, I finish the useless exchange of remarks with incompetent people)
    1. Professor
      1 March 2014 20: 57
      +2
      Quote: dvvv
      In order not to waste time chatting with self-proclaimed professors and aristocrats, I will summarize this article on Israeli hamer

      To summarize, you must at least understand the topic under discussion.

      Quote: dvvv
      All Israeli armored vehicles were created under their own theater of war very optimized for its use against Palestinians and therefore not in demand on the international market.

      You’d better not say anything, you would be smart. An Israeli tank, for example, was created on the basis of the experience of fighting with the Arab armies equipped with the most modern Soviet armored vehicles for that day. Moreover, technology superior in quality and quantity to all that Israel had at that time. The Palestinians then did not indulge in stone throwing. But you are special and already know everything. wassat By the way, when did the current "Palestinians" begin to be called Palestinians? wink
      At the expense of demand, you as an expert certainly know when the Israeli Defense Ministry lifted the Merkava export ban? laughing

      Quote: dvvv
      Why the guys from Israel and their sympathizers once again extol the usefulness and superiority of their armored vehicles I don’t understand, no one will ever buy it, and all the more so since buyers do not hang out here.

      You are also a prophet. wassat

      Quote: dvvv
      but with armored vehicles they have a complete seam and even their military have already eaten this good.

      Besides Merkava, Akhzarit and Namer, what kind of Israeli armored vehicles do you know? About "their military" who "ate" - I will not even comment on this.

      Quote: dvvv
      My point is that Russia, like the USSR

      The word Russia must be capitalized, no matter how great a power.

      Quote: dvvv
      The fact that in South Africa came up with and successfully used the paramilitary and semi-police armored car MRAP

      As an expert, it would not hurt you to know that the MRAP was not invented in South Africa and that it was not they who "successfully applied" it, but Rhodesia.

      Quote: dvvv
      although I'm not so special to argue

      Yes, you are generally no special that would have anything to say here.

      Quote: dvvv
      On the sim, I finish the useless exchange of remarks with incompetent people)

      But not this - who else but you we (incompetent) gain knowledge?
  34. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 1 March 2014 21: 41
    0
    Quote: dvvv
    In order not to waste time chatting with self-proclaimed professors and aristocrats, I will summarize this article on Israeli hamer


    And you decided to build yourself a self-proclaimed spessialist?

    In general, our Middle Eastern "friend" explained to you here so lucidly that there is nothing to add.
    Nevertheless, theorist you are our unfinished:

    The question of a heavy or new infantry fighting vehicle has been hanging in the air for a long time and neither the Amer nor the German gunsmiths succeeded in bringing anything new to the armies, due to the senselessness of this type of weapon in the current realities of hostilities.

    Who told you (and at what forum of grief-specialists) that the promising technique is meaningless?
    The realities of modern warfare are such that the most fierce battles take place in cities. Watch YouTube. Evaluate how and what equipment the Syrian army uses against monkeys. These are mainly tanks. BMP-1 and BMP-2 are also forced to use. But tank weapons (mainly because of the low elevation angles of the guns) are not the best way to fight in conditions of dense buildings (and even multi-story). BMP-2 weapons are dangerous to use because of cardboard armor. If the T-BMP Syrian army had confidence, it would have shown itself in the best possible way.


    My point is that Russia, like the USSR, once a BMP, successfully proposes the introduction of a BMPT to address today's challenges facing the troops. The fact that in South Africa they came up with and successfully used the paramilitary and semi-police MRAP armored car is really a find and the United States as well as its allies quickly caught the trend and riveted them enough so that the troops in Afghanistan moved to them, and not to heavy and yet mythical infantry fighting vehicles.

    Rave. Under the influence of what flora did your fauna think that T-BMP is a myth? The successful use of the T-BMP has been around for decades (with more than one Israel).

    Therefore, I believe that tanks, BMPTs, MRAPs and other things that the Airborne Forces or the Marine Corps, if any, will survive.


    Believe one. Reality determines.


    As a combat module, I prefer what is on the BMP-3, although I'm not so special to say that this is the only true set of weapons that will allow the BMPT to be the best for different combat options.


    You are ours, dear! You can like anything. But if you like the M-16 in pink and with rhinestones on the butt, this does not mean at all that this particular design determines the combat value of a particular model.
    On the sim, I finish the useless exchange of remarks with incompetent people)


    I do not believe. I do not believe that pimple trolls with low self-esteem would so easily disappear from the imaginary Olympus to which they exalted themselves.
    However, such an "Olympus" may seem like an "Olympus" only under the smoke of one plant (which is held in high esteem by those who have not reached puberty). The fetid pile of slops does not seem so attractive to everyone around)))
    Think better about your future.
    The tiler’s life in the Mother See is boring and monotonous)))
  35. dvvv
    dvvv 1 March 2014 22: 25
    -3
    it was nice to know that both the aristocrat and professor are self-proclaimed personalities who have nothing to do with the war))) And moreover ... this is one person with different nicknames ... with megalomania)
  36. kplayer
    kplayer 1 March 2014 22: 43
    +2
    Quote: dvvv
    it was nice to know that both the aristocrat and professor are self-proclaimed personalities who have nothing to do with the war))) And moreover ... this is one person with different nicknames ... with megalomania)

    Why do you expect someone to "pound themselves on the chest", proving something to you about themselves?
    Quote: dvvv
    ... In Kiev, the BTR-80 was instantly burned with bottles, it became already scary

    ... patrol the occupying garrisons in "police" (NOT MILITARY) MRAPs.

    Those. they patrol after the rubble has been cleared and the barricades removed, it’s reasonable to recall the BTR-80 in Kiev, it was enough just to stop it and then finish it off, the same would happen with MRAP.
    ... the rubble of a dilapidated city is insurmountable for him, but no one will organize infantry delivery points (stops marked "A") with "final stops" for MRAP ...

    Wheeled armored personnel carriers (8x8, for example) are certainly suitable for "quick" (short-term) assault operations in the n / a, the question is: what is the intensity of the database, the nature and density of the building and the degree of destruction.

    In military operations, it happens that tank units operate in isolation from motorized rifle units, which do not keep pace with tank units, because busy with other tasks, but you can’t lose initiative in the course of the database, so the idea of ​​creating a BMPT appeared.
    BMPT - the name itself speaks for itself, the machine is designed to provide tank units with fire weapons in the absence of motorized rifle units supported by them (having 30 mm BMP automatic guns, 30 mm AGS and PU ATGMs), i.e. the machine was intended to equip bank battalions and heavy reconnaissance (in the West - armored cavalry) battalions armed with MBT and BRM, but not to equip motorized rifle battalions.
    Hence the question: why did you decide that the BMPT was the panacea for successful assault operations in the city, well, the tank is a great assault gun, but what does the BMPT have (if you discard the coaxiality of the guns and two AG-17s) and what the BMP and motorized riflemen don’t have? ?
    In the presence of modern infantry fighting vehicles (30-mm cannon, + portable ATGMs, AGS, mortars), motorized infantry should have enough firepower without BMPTs, but you are talking about the fact that infantry fighting infantry fighting vehicles / armored personnel carriers are unnecessary (like let them work in hell, carrying weapons on the ridge !?). It is worth noting that with an overabundance of armored vehicles (extremely vulnerable in urban conditions), the infantry will not be able to ensure its safety, or will be more occupied with its protection, rather than by storm and mopping up (a platoon of enough full-time infantry fighting vehicles + attached MBT).

    The Israelis are even simpler, small-caliber cannons of armored personnel carriers are not in demand, for the Arab quarters they cost including heavy mortars, artillery and aircraft, or simply demolish them with army bulldozers for unruly obstinacy, which is understandable ("in war, as in war").
  37. Sledgehammer
    Sledgehammer 2 March 2014 01: 25
    0
    Israel has a special theater of operations and the total number of soldiers is less than that of the enemy.
    Security takes precedence, and here the chassis of the old Merkavs are so well drawn.
    Most likely the dist.upr.module is more powerful and the heavy bmp is ready.
  38. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 2 March 2014 06: 46
    +1
    Whether BMPT is necessary or not, the question is still open. Do I need a T-BMP? The obvious answer is yes.
    But if there is a T-BMP in the troops, the BMPT is completely unnecessary, because the BMP was initially created for close interaction and support of tanks. Having received tank armor, an infantry fighting vehicle can fulfill its function 100%. But the BMPT will never be able to fulfill the functions of the BMP.
    So with all the apparent advantages of BMPT, the T-BMP has the right to life. She (BMP) and will survive the evolutionary debate.