Military Review

Israeli army modernizes heavy armored personnel carrier Achzarit

33
Israeli army modernizes heavy armored personnel carrier Achzarit


Achzarit heavy armored personnel carrier based on an upgraded hull tank T-55, which has a power unit developed by Nimda


The Israeli company Nimda reported details of its new power unit, designed for the heavy armored personnel carrier Achzarit of the Israeli army.

In accordance with the program of sales of military equipment abroad, the Command of the Naval Systems of the US Navy issued a contract worth 20,784 million dollars to the US division of Nimda, Diesel Engineering Inc, for the supply of new power units.

The engine of the modernization program is carried out by the United States (71%) and the Czech Republic (29%).

Information on the number of new power units under this contract has not been disclosed.

The newest power unit includes a turbocharged diesel engine 8V-92TA horsepower 710. (with upside potential to 750 hp) from Detroit Diesel Corporation, an Allison XTG-411-5A automatic transmission, and a new cooling system developed by Nimda and Donaldson that is essential when working in a hot Middle Eastern climate. The company declares that the power unit allows to increase the acceleration rate to 200%, with the combat mass of the Bch Achzarit 44 tons, this gives the specific power of the 16,3 hp / t.

New engines are designed for vehicles in operation, their installation is engaged in the Israeli army.

A heavy armored personnel carrier Achzarit was developed by Israel to meet the requirements of the Israeli army. It is based on the body of the Soviet tank T-55, a large number of which was captured in the war with Egypt. A new power unit, remotely-controlled combat modules from Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, are installed in the hull, and the level of reservation has also been increased.

As a rule, the car has a crew of three people: the commander, the gunner and the driver, plus seven more infantrymen. In the right part of the stern, the machine has a hinged door of an interesting hydraulic design, the diesel power side is installed to the left of the door.

Nimda also offers new power units for a wide range of tracked combat vehicles, including the M113 BTR and the Russian T-72M1 MBT.
The T-72M1 tanks upgraded by Nimda are in service with the Czech Republic under the designation T-72CZ M4, the power unit from these machines is also installed on the Czech armored repair and recovery vehicles VT-72M4 CZ.


New power unit 8V-92TA mounted on a heavy BTR Achzarit




The layout of the heavy armored vehicle Achzarit in two interpretations


Materials used:
Jane's International Defense Review
http://www.nimda.co.il
Author:
33 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. PROXOR
    PROXOR 14 March 2014 09: 06
    +13
    Pancake!!! What other positive experience do our strategists need in order to understand that the Russian Army also needs heavy armored personnel carriers. How many Russian soldiers should still ride on the armor? That we have few old tanks. Let us help Kharkov, they have so much at their repair plant. The Izravites not in vain realized the expediency of having heavy armored personnel carriers.
    1. Nayhas
      Nayhas 14 March 2014 09: 25
      +3
      Quote: PROXOR
      Pancake!!! What other positive experience do our strategists need in order to understand that the Russian Army also needs heavy armored personnel carriers.

      Duc desire, it may or may be, where is the compact engine to take, is it the Americans or the Germans? Compare American Detroit diesel in the photo in the article with our B-55

      Of course, it is not entirely true to compare a modern diesel engine with a diesel engine of the 50s, but our new diesel engines did not become smaller in size, the same V-92 that the T-90 is from the same V-2 series.
      1. PROXOR
        PROXOR 14 March 2014 10: 30
        -2
        Quote: Nayhas
        Duc desire, it may or may be, where is the compact engine to take, is it the Americans or the Germans? Compare American Detroit diesel in the photo in the article with our B-55

        And what does the 5TDF engine not suit you? The same 700 hp Very compact and run on the T-64.
        Quote: Nayhas
        Of course, it is not entirely true to compare a modern diesel engine with a diesel engine of the 50s, but our new diesel engines did not become smaller in size, the same V-92 that the T-90 is from the same V-2 series.

        This is what. That X-shaped engine that is planned to be installed on the common Armata platform will be even more.
        1. Nayhas
          Nayhas 14 March 2014 14: 11
          +1
          Quote: PROXOR
          And what does the 5TDF engine not suit you? The same 700 hp

          He is foreign, while this foreign country is with us in contra.
          Quote: PROXOR
          That X-shaped engine that is planned to be installed on the common Armata platform will be even more.

          With 12CHN15 / 16 someone’s muddy. A lot of questions that give silly answers.
          1. PROXOR
            PROXOR 14 March 2014 15: 27
            0
            Quote: Nayhas
            He is foreign, while this foreign country is with us in contra.

            The 5TDF engine was created at the Kharkov Engineering Bureau in the early 60s. I REMEMBER to you the fact that Kharkov was part of the USSR.
            At the same time I bring to your attention that the Russian Federation is the legal successor of the USSR and will inherit all the technologies.
            Consequently, the 5TDF engine is Russian and Ukraine has as many rights to it as ours.

            Quote: Nayhas
            With 12CHN15 / 16 someone’s muddy. A lot of questions that give silly answers.

            Information on the new engine should not be. At one time, the same 5TDF engine caused the same bunch of questions. At the moment, no one in the world has assembled a normal X-shaped multi-fuel engine. All use either standard in-line or V-type diesel engines or gas turbine engines. Generally we are waiting. Everything has its time.
            1. Nayhas
              Nayhas 14 March 2014 20: 20
              +3
              Quote: PROXOR
              At the same time I bring to your attention that the Russian Federation is the legal successor of the USSR and will inherit all the technologies.

              So it is understandable, but we do not have a factory for the production of 5TDF.
              Quote: PROXOR
              Information on the new engine should not be.

              It is declassified and ChTZ offers to buy it to everyone.
              Quote: PROXOR
              At the moment, no one in the world has assembled a normal X-shaped multi-fuel engine.

              Let's just say that world practice shows that the V-shaped circuit is the most optimal for high-speed engines with limited dimensions.
              Quote: PROXOR
              Generally we are waiting. Everything has its time.

              My suggestion. The problem with Armata (the reason for the delay) is precisely with the engine.
      2. Professor
        Professor 14 March 2014 11: 57
        +11
        Quote: Nayhas
        Duc desire, it may or may be, where is the compact engine to take, is it the Americans or the Germans?

        There is only one problem - desire. Everything else excuses. so this desire is just not observed. sad
        1. gregor6549
          gregor6549 14 March 2014 15: 22
          +3
          Uv Professor, It's not a matter of desire, but in what method the soldiers count. If by the piece, as in Israel, then there is desire and everything else, and if instead of the piece count, statistics are used, i.e. laws of large numbers, then where does the same desire come from, like everything else. And the experience of Israel's many years of continuous war with its restless neighbors would not be shameful to learn. Or even to transfer military technical cooperation to a normal level. After all, Israel would gladly get off the needle of "drug addiction" from the United States. Still, an extra friend, albeit a "bad" one, is better than an extra enemy, albeit a "good" one. Stalin did not put his bet on Israel for nothing. Whatever you say, he was a politician with a capital letter. The fact that then the idea did not come out does not mean that it should be abandoned altogether. And the events in Ukraine provide a solid basis for resetting relations between Israel and Russia. And do not rush to put a minus.
        2. tchoni
          tchoni 14 March 2014 23: 33
          -1
          here. small hot and from izya-land but modern realities (Rushenland's cuts "at once") our alegators have no shit, sorry "alikarchs" desire to protect the life of russishen zoldaten. women give birth.
    2. just exp
      just exp 14 March 2014 09: 56
      +2
      TBMP is planned on our Armat platform, but for now there is a BMO-T, basically the same TBTR.
      1. PROXOR
        PROXOR 14 March 2014 10: 31
        +1
        Quote: just explo
        TBMP is planned on our Armat platform, but for now there is a BMO-T, basically the same TBTR.

        And how many BMO-Ts are in the troops now? At the same time, I note that this machine is made on the basis of the T-72, which in our troops are being upgraded to the state of T-72BM3. In other words, there is no basis, and if you collect them, then collect them from scratch. In this light, of course, it’s more pragmatic to wait for the new BMP Kurganets. And in this post we are talking about using the chassis of old tanks such as the T-54, T-55, T-62 and, well, the T-64.
    3. Nagaibak
      Nagaibak 14 March 2014 12: 04
      0
      PROXOR "Let's help Kharkov, they have so much there at their repair plant. The Izravites did not understand the expediency of having heavy armored personnel carriers for nothing."
      We and our factories have enough to help with orders. Now, if East Ukraine and South were = both within the Russian Federation or at worst in the TS, then another thing.
      And so we help them, and they are in Europe and NATO to join? Help is needed when they have already decided where they will go.
      1. PROXOR
        PROXOR 14 March 2014 12: 20
        0
        Quote: Nagaibak
        We and our factories have enough to help with orders. Now, if East Ukraine and South were = both part of the Russian Federation or, at worst, in the TS, then another thing. And so we help them, and they join Europe and NATO? Help is needed when they have already decided where they will go.

        I meant to buy back the remains of tanks that are stored on the territory of the Kharkov plant. And naturally they will redo it. For according to military purchases, everything MO purchases should be produced in the Russian Federation. And only rare things are bought by zakordon.
        1. Nagaibak
          Nagaibak 14 March 2014 13: 01
          +1
          PROXOR "For according to military purchases, everything that the Ministry of Defense purchases should be made by the Russian Federation. And only rare things are purchased by Zakordon."
          Clear. I agree.
    4. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 14 March 2014 16: 15
      +6
      Quote: PROXOR
      Pancake!!! What other positive experience do our strategists need in order to understand that the Russian Army also needs heavy armored personnel carriers. How many Russian soldiers should still ride on the armor? That we have few old tanks. Let us help Kharkov, they have so much at their repair plant. The Izravites not in vain realized the expediency of having heavy armored personnel carriers.

      All right, but I would not recommend going along the path of converting old tanks into TBTR. Completed stage. Israel went for it out of necessity and out of poverty. Today "Akhzarit" is only in service with reservists. "Namer", created on a single chassis with MBT, comes to the personnel unit.
      1. PROXOR
        PROXOR 14 March 2014 16: 22
        +2
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        All right, but I would not recommend going along the path of converting old tanks into TBTR. Completed stage. Israel went for it out of necessity and out of poverty. Today "Akhzarit" is only in service with reservists. "Namer", created on a single chassis with MBT, comes to the personnel unit.

        I will open the "military" tan. Russia is also creating a heavy infantry fighting vehicle on the same platform as the tank. But it is worth waiting for in mass quantities in 3-5 years. And such a car is needed now. The guys ride on the armor. Simply put, the ground forces do not now have a car on which it is relatively safe to move inside. ONLY TANK !!!!
        1. Aaron Zawi
          Aaron Zawi 14 March 2014 23: 44
          +3
          Quote: PROXOR

          I will open the "military" tan. Russia is also creating a heavy infantry fighting vehicle on the same platform as the tank. But it is worth waiting for in mass quantities in 3-5 years. And such a car is needed now. The guys ride on the armor. Simply put, the ground forces do not now have a car on which it is relatively safe to move inside. ONLY TANK !!!!

          I read about the Armata project quite promising. Therefore, I do not understand where the RA should hurry? It seems, unlike the IDF, city battles do not threaten it, well, in the coming years.
  2. ramsi
    ramsi 14 March 2014 12: 28
    +1
    I could not understand why it was impossible to immediately deploy the T-55 backwards - to the front
    1. PROXOR
      PROXOR 14 March 2014 13: 31
      +1
      Quote: ramsi
      I could not understand why it was impossible to immediately deploy the T-55 backwards - to the front

      Torsion bar suspension. If I correctly remember the course about the suspension after training at the MASK, then the torsion suspension should be tilted towards the movement of the object. At high speeds, the deployed torsion bar arms can stupidly crank and the oporn will meet with the oporn. And so I agree with you. MTO more logical to put in front. But such an alteration will pull the alteration of the entire driver's seat. Starting with the T-54, the driver-mechanic sits in the middle.
      1. ramsi
        ramsi 14 March 2014 13: 37
        0
        it’s logical, but can’t you swap the right and left torsions ... the seats are the same?
  3. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 14 March 2014 12: 32
    +3
    So far, alas, infantry is cheaper for the state than tanks ... BMPTs are not a cheap pleasure (like any other weapon), but people are "free". A zinc box is thousands of times cheaper than an armored box.
    I hope that at least a hundred will be made for local use in "local" conflicts. And I hope they will do it on the basis of the T-72. And they will not start with the T-54 ... T-54 hulls can be offered to the same Israel to buy (if they need it. And with the money raised to make TBMP on the same platform with MBT. And now and for a long time it will remain so 72. If the mythical armata will appear in the sky, it will not be soon. When the first samples arrive in the army, it will take years. When their number reaches one hundred three or four, alas, it will already be hopelessly outdated ... So you need to "work" with what is (t-72).
    1. PROXOR
      PROXOR 14 March 2014 13: 44
      0
      Quote: Aristocrat
      So far, alas, infantry is cheaper for the state than tanks ... BMPTs are not a cheap pleasure (like any other weapon), but people are "free". A zinc box is a thousand times cheaper than an armored "box". I hope that at least a hundred will be made for local use in "local" conflicts. And I hope they will do it on the basis of the T-72. And they will not start with the T-54 ... T-54 hulls can be offered to the same Israel to buy (if they need it. And with the proceeds, they will make TBMP on the same platform with the MBT. And now and for a long time this will remain t- 72. If the mythical armata will appear in the sky, it will not be soon. When the first samples arrive in the army, it will take years. When their number reaches one hundred three or four, alas, it will already be hopelessly outdated ... So you need to "work" with what is (t-72).

      Armata is not as mythical as you think. Worth the deadline. Parade of 2015. And I ask you to be sympathetic to the fact that they are preparing to release the tank from full ZERO !!!! The engine is new, the lineup is a new, uninhabited fighting compartment, a new automatic loader, a new 2A82 gun (although it is a modernization of the 2A46, but the parameters have changed. The gun has become longer, recoil more and weight more), a new system of sight sights, reviews. It is not known what heaped up there with armor and active protection and in which weight and size parameters you need to fit. So wait. If all that is known at present will be executed in metal. The whole world will again be in the role of catching up.
      Now about the basics of the T-72. It would be more logical to use a nominal this basis. Since the T-72 tank in various modifications is the main one in our army. There is also a ready-made BMO-T machine. The only one I would still add a turret paired with Cord and GP-30.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 14 March 2014 23: 37
        0
        Well, bro: it was smooth on paper - but on the Delarmat-T-90, this was all.
    2. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 14 March 2014 15: 40
      +6
      Quote: Aristocrat
      ... T-54 cases can be offered to Israel to buy the same (if they need it.

      Unless for rework, with subsequent sale to the banana republics.
  4. AlexA
    AlexA 14 March 2014 16: 59
    +3
    Quote: gregor6549
    And the events in Ukraine provide a solid basis for a reset of relations between Israel and Russia.

    Yes, what's the minus. In the office, where I worked at one time, I had experience working with a manufacturing company from Israel. Very productive experience. And they are determined to cooperate. And their competence, in particular in precision mechanics, is very complementary to the Russian technological backlog.
    You can only greet.
  5. rezident
    rezident 14 March 2014 18: 08
    0
    Now there is probably no sense. Soon it will be ready, the platform for the armor of Ducs is easier to invest in its mass production than to build a new armored personnel carrier on the basis of the old tank. There you need a diesel short as a Detroit diesel, a new box. And this is to make the passage through the stern to the middle of the tank. It's worth it?
  6. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 14 March 2014 19: 31
    +1
    Quote: PROXOR

    The whole world will again be in the role of catching up.
    Now about the basics of the T-72. It would be more logical to use a nominal this basis. Since the T-72 tank in various modifications is the main one in our army. There is also a ready-made BMO-T machine. The only one I would still add a turret paired with Cord and GP-30.

    God grant that would be ahead. All the same, very much behind, and in many ways.
    As for the BMO-T, it is not a very successful car, I would even say unsuccessful. What is the landing and disembarkation through the "roof". Climbing a car under enemy fire ...

    GP-30? You mean something else. GP-30 is a grenade launcher.
  7. ruslan207
    ruslan207 14 March 2014 20: 36
    0
    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%9C%D0%9E-%D0%A2
    That's what is not heavy armored personnel carrier
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 14 March 2014 23: 28
      +2
      Quote: ruslan207
      http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D0%9C%D0%9E-%D0%A2
      That's what is not heavy armored personnel carrier

      BMO-T
  8. Soldat schwejk
    Soldat schwejk 14 March 2014 21: 43
    +4
    I understand that modernization will affect only the engine?
    In my opinion, it’s high time to strengthen the MAG-Rafael with something more powerful and preferably also with the ability to control from the landing compartment.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 14 March 2014 23: 34
      +4
      Quote: Soldat Schwejk
      I understand that modernization will affect only the engine?
      In my opinion, it’s high time to strengthen the MAG-Rafael with something more powerful and preferably also with the ability to control from the landing compartment.

    3. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 14 March 2014 23: 47
      +2
      Quote: Soldat Schwejk
      I understand that modernization will affect only the engine?
      In my opinion, it’s high time to strengthen the MAG-Rafael with something more powerful and preferably also with the ability to control from the landing compartment.

      They will not make TBMP from TBTR. The AOI’s concept of combat consists of reinforcing tank brigades with mechanized battalions, and not vice versa. Therefore, in AOI there are more tank brigades than mechanized ones.
      1. Soldat schwejk
        Soldat schwejk 15 March 2014 13: 51
        +3
        It's a pity. Probably everyone who happened to sit in Ahzarite somewhere in the gas remembers long hours waiting for more or less secure positions just sticking them into an iPhone (since there’s nothing more to do)
        but they could at that time drive the joystick in front of the screen for more. Plus, at least a 30mm cannon can give a tact if not at a great financial cost. Efficiency. As a minimum, the passages in the walls for the infantry may well be done 30th.
        cheap and cheerful.
  9. pawel57
    pawel57 14 March 2014 23: 32
    0
    Our, under the impression of large losses in the Second World War at the crossings, created a series of floating armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles. Manstein has held us back for more than a year using the competently river and lake network of Europe. There are recollections of Warsaw and Budapest. Where whole brigades a German mowed our troops. We have a very good BTR90, Rogozin did not let him in for an incomprehensible Armata for parades. And the morally obsolete BTR80 was given out as a new BTR82a, though now they let it slip and began to talk about modernizing the BTR80. Serious publications write about the creation of a number of vehicles based on the tank for equal mobility. Heavy BMP, self-propelled guns, ZSU. Everything should work in a single b. order to have the same mobility on all the theater and in different conditions and terrain. To do this, review the staff and officer training system. Features: BMP gun of type 57mm C60, ATGM, PKT, SUO like a tank infantry of 7-5 people and the possibility of fire through manholes; SAU-152-203mm firing range 6-8km, possibly mortar; ZSU Tipo Tunguska, base tank. States as an option 3 tanks, 2 infantry fighting vehicles, 2 self-propelled guns, 1-2 ZSU. or 3 infantry fighting vehicles, 2 tanks, etc. Armament of tanks and infantry fighting vehicles must fire at air targets, and ZSU at ground targets (infantry, and light armored targets.) Combat coordination together. In the Bundeswehr, something similar happened, and the EXPERIENCE of the Great Patriotic War of the German battle groups was especially evident in Belarus at 44m ..
  10. tchoni
    tchoni 14 March 2014 23: 41
    0
    To be honest - the article did not deliver. Well, changed the engine - and why? instead of 14 hp per tonne became 16 ..... where? instead of 30 s. to 30 km per hour became 15. - guys, I’ll get into such a target (about km per hour) from any normal distance (up to 300 m) from 7. do not go to the fortuneteller. and I'm not a special rocket launcher. what's the catch of the upgrade - I did not catch up .....
    1. Aaron Zawi
      Aaron Zawi 14 March 2014 23: 49
      +5
      Quote: tchoni
      To be honest - the article did not deliver. Well, changed the engine - and why? instead of 14 hp per tonne became 16 ..... where? instead of 30 s. to 30 km per hour became 15. - guys, I’ll get into such a target (about km per hour) from any normal distance (up to 300 m) from 7. do not go to the fortuneteller. and I'm not a special rocket launcher. what's the catch of the upgrade - I did not catch up .....

      RPG-7 against Akhzarit does not work. It is vulnerable to either ATGM or RPG-29. And then the loss inside with a single penetration is no more than 2-3 people, and not the entire crew.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 15 March 2014 12: 11
        0
        You know, if you suffer for a long time, then something will turn out. Moreover, you most likely mean the old PG-7V or VM grenade or their Chinese counterparts, with armor penetration up to 300 mm. And if you take PG-7VL or BP, I think that the side and aft projections - please. In addition, you can shoot from above. Moreover, I was not talking about the power of the seven as such, but about the meaning of modernization.
    2. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 15 March 2014 05: 03
      +3
      Quote: tchoni
      I’ll get into such a goal (about km per hour) from any normal distance (up to 300 m) from 7. do not go to a fortuneteller ...

      This raises 2 problems:
      1. Get close to 300m (all the assaults in the Lebanese war of the 2006 of the year were from ATGMs, from distances over 2 km)
      2. Leave alive after starting. (Hizbala modestly kept silent about the fact that the survivability of ATGM calculations in 2006 was no more than 15% and practically no one calculation had more than one launch)
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 15 March 2014 12: 13
        +1
        This is another question. And, as I understand it, such a low survivability of ATGM calculations was provided not by the speed of the Israeli armored personnel carriers, but by competent tactics of using forces and weapons.
        1. And Us Rat
          And Us Rat 15 March 2014 16: 30
          +1
          Quote: tchoni
          This is another question. And, as I understand it, such a low survivability of ATGM calculations was provided not by the speed of the Israeli armored personnel carriers, but by competent tactics of using forces and weapons.

          Well, of course, the army is worthless today, which does not know how to act as a single organism.
    3. Aristocrat
      Aristocrat 15 March 2014 08: 48
      +1
      Quote: tchoni
      instead of 14 hp per ton was 16.
      I’ll get into such a target (about km per hour) from any normal distance (up to 300 m) from 7 matches. do not go to the fortuneteller. and I'm not a special rocket launcher. what's the catch of the upgrade - I did not catch up .....

      The power-to-weight ratio is an important parameter. An increase of 14,3% is, to put it mildly, "not a little".
      Suspicions creep in that you won’t get anywhere ...
      Can I ask you a question? More precisely a few?
      1. Served? If so, in what years, by whom.
      2. Have you shot from RPG-7?
      3. How much will you take the lead under the conditions described by you?
      4. Describe how the side wind affects the flight of the shot?
      5. Can you hit an object in the conditions described by you with a tandem grenade?

      The conditions you described are the limit for RPG-7. And therefore, your statement is "easy", and even with the indication that you are a "mediocre grenade launcher" raise huge doubts that you even held a grenade launcher in your hands ... So forgive my doubts.
      1. Professor
        Professor 15 March 2014 09: 43
        +3
        Quote: Aristocrat
        The conditions you described are the limit for RPG-7. And therefore, your statement is "easy", and even with the indication that you are a "mediocre grenade launcher" raise huge doubts that you even held a grenade launcher in your hands ... So forgive my doubts.

        Come on. Well, let it hit. Give the person a chance. But the protection of such an infantry fighting vehicle is stronger than that of a tank (even without a KAZ). So not every hit of the "seven" will mean defeat. hi
        1. tchoni
          tchoni 15 March 2014 12: 31
          0
          I agree completely. Typically, in these cases, concentrated fire of several RPGs is used.

          Simply, if we talk about the modernization of Ahzarite - then, I believe that the main emphasis should be on increasing its reliability and overhaul runs.
          But this is my humble opinion ...
      2. tchoni
        tchoni 15 March 2014 12: 28
        +3
        There is some. He served from 2004 to 2010. At the test site in various positions. Last senior engineer.
        From seven shot from case to case.
        When fired, the grenade deflects "to the wind"
        I did not describe any conditions: but in the conditions of shooting "into the boron" at a distance of 300 m at a target moving at a speed of about 10 m / s with a PG-7VS grenade I will take somewhere 3 body lengths - more or less depends on the wind.
        I didn’t shoot a tandem grenade - sorry.
        But in general, you are right - the shot is complex. Yesterday I wrote under a fly, so I overestimated my capabilities. Excuse me :-)
        1. kplayer
          kplayer 15 March 2014 21: 01
          -1
          You can’t do without a tandem warhead, and the PG-7VR tandem shot is more than twice as heavy as the standard cumulative shot of the PG-7V (4,5kg / 2,2kg), their firing range will be 200m. and 500m. respectively, so that you can’t get by without distance preemptions, to get to a distance of 300m. in combat, just without trenches.
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. kplayer
            kplayer 16 March 2014 09: 53
            +2
            Someone wants to hit a heavy armored personnel carrier "Akhzarit" (44 tons) in motion with a conventional cumulative round? It is not yet clear that the armored personnel carrier was specially created and tested as capable of withstanding this type of weapon (RPG).
            According to the experience of the 1st Chechen campaign, to destroy one T-80 tank, the militants needed 7-8 hits from RPG-7, in 2003 in Iraq one of the British Challenger-2 tanks received 15 hits from RPG-7 without breaking through the armor.
        2. The comment was deleted.
  11. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 15 March 2014 17: 44
    +3
    Quote: tchoni

    When fired, the grenade deflects "to the wind"
    I did not describe any conditions: but in the conditions of shooting "into the boron" at a distance of 300 m at a target moving at a speed of about 10 m / s with a PG-7VS grenade I will take somewhere 3 body lengths - more or less depends on the wind.
    I didn’t shoot a tandem grenade - sorry.
    But in general, you are right - the shot is complex. Yesterday I wrote under a fly, so I overestimated my capabilities. Excuse me :-)


    Now I see that you are an adult. The spoken words "under the fly" looked more like the speech of a boastful schoolboy. First of all, excuse me for having this opinion of you in my mind. Now I see that you are definitely "familiar" with the 7th.
    For the readers of the posts, I will still answer my question about the tandem grenade. After asking him, he tested you. More precisely, the "schoolboy" whom I imagined myself at the other end of the "web"))) Now I see that this is not so.
    The tandem grenade due to the mass of the leading charge (more precisely, the increased total mass of the shot) flies 250 meters. So the question was a catch))). To claim that they can hit the equipment (and even in motion) at a distance of 300 meters would be a public statement of incompetence in this matter)))
    I put you + for an adequate answer to my question.
  12. Kus Imak
    Kus Imak 15 March 2014 20: 42
    +4
    In fact, Russia, it seems to me, could well agree with Israel on the acquisition of Ahzarit, and not for money, but for barter, for example, Israel’s participation in Russian space programs.
    These couple of hundred cars, until Russia develops its machines, could be sent immediately to the Caucasus and they would have saved many lives of Russian soldiers.
    As a foreign car, Ahzarit is very maintainable in Russia, many components from T-55 tanks are suitable for it, and it would be possible to agree on the supply of the remaining components.
  13. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 15 March 2014 20: 55
    +2
    Quote: Kus Imac
    In fact, Russia, it seems to me, could well agree with Israel on the acquisition of Ahzarit, and not for money, but for barter, for example, Israel’s participation in Russian space programs.
    These couple of hundred cars, until Russia develops its machines, could be sent immediately to the Caucasus and they would have saved many lives of Russian soldiers.
    As a foreign car, Ahzarit is very maintainable in Russia, many components from T-55 tanks are suitable for it, and it would be possible to agree on the supply of the remaining components.


    The machines are designed. The problem is that they are not purchased. BMO-T is a great car. Armed in much the same way. Two additional machine guns don't count. If desired, you can put them on the BMO. Only without remote control, you can shoot from them only if there is no immediate threat to the car ... For me, if the enemy is not closer than 1000 meters. Otherwise, the shooters can be "removed".
    I think it's worth putting on the BMO either an uninhabited tower with 2A42 + Kord + ATGM, or Kord + ATGM + AG-17, or another combination. The T-72 base is ideal for the Russian Armed Forces, and the protection is higher than that of a vehicle based on the T-54 medium tank. The only "omission" is the landing on the roof of the engine compartment.
    Of course, you can put an imported engine on Ahzarite, but in this case there will be a dependence on the country of manufacture of this unit.
    Well and less landing. Although 7 people is a standard motorized rifle squad.
    1. Kus Imak
      Kus Imak 15 March 2014 22: 19
      +1
      Quote: Aristocrat

      The machines are designed. The problem is that they are not purchased. BMO-T is a great car. Armed in much the same way. Two additional machine guns don't count. If desired, you can put them on the BMO. Only without remote control, you can shoot from them only if there is no immediate threat to the car ... For me, if the enemy is not closer than 1000 meters. Otherwise, the shooters can be "removed".
      I think it's worth putting on the BMO either an uninhabited tower with 2A42 + Kord + ATGM, or Kord + ATGM + AG-17, or another combination. The T-72 base is ideal for the Russian Armed Forces, and the protection is higher than that of a vehicle based on the T-54 medium tank. The only "omission" is the landing on the roof of the engine compartment.
      Of course, you can put an imported engine on Ahzarite, but in this case there will be a dependence on the country of manufacture of this unit.
      Well and less landing. Although 7 people is a standard motorized rifle squad.


      Typically, these machines are built on the basis of obsolete tanks. Of course, I’m not a big specialist in Russian tank divisions, but I read that T-64 tanks took part in the last Ossetian war. That is, the T-72 is not an outdated model of a tank for Russia, so it might be necessary to saturate your own T-72 tank divisions first, and then build other combat vehicles based on them.
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 16 March 2014 12: 32
        0
        Well, 72 has done quite a lot. The troops simply do not need so much. Yes, and it will be much more convenient if all the equipment of, say, a tank division has one base. (do not forget that the T-90 on the chassis and engine is very unified with the T-72, and they promise to do the armature on the basis of the same components and assemblies)
    2. tchoni
      tchoni 16 March 2014 12: 45
      0
      BMO-T seems to me not quite right. One of the requirements for armored personnel carriers is the simplicity of landing and disembarkation. And there, I really didn’t see it live, but judging by the photographs, 5 roof hatches and everything, besides, the hatches are rather narrow ...... I liked the Ukrainians' solution more (this is about their heavy BMP based on T -64).
      1. kplayer
        kplayer 16 March 2014 13: 35
        +2
        In the photo, the BTR-T is not on the T-64 chassis, but the BMP-55, but Kharkiv residents have a variant BMPT-64 (not to be confused with the Nizhny Tagil BMPT) with an uninhabited tower and without a tower with a weapon module.
        1. tchoni
          tchoni 18 March 2014 12: 44
          0
          By the way, yes. Hodovka from the T-55 - was worn out.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. figter
        figter April 26 2014 05: 08
        0
        A really good idea to turn the car 180 degrees. Simple, practical and cheap. By and large, what's the difference for a tank to drive in front or back. The only thing is that the drive wheel still needs to be covered more reliably. Of course, in my opinion, "Bakhcha" is more suitable for a heavy infantry fighting vehicle. If there was additional protection on the armor, there would be no price at all. If the brigade structure in the RF Armed Forces still remains, then it would be nice to have the 4th SMB for tbmp in each brigade. Considering that the ISBR is of 4-company composition, then by reinforcing the ISB at the TBMP with a tank company, you can end up with a very powerful armored personnel carrier for actions at the NSU in the first echelon or the vanguard on the march. Such a btgr will drag the entire brigade along with a powerful ram.
  14. Aristocrat
    Aristocrat 16 March 2014 21: 49
    +1
    Quote: Kus Imac

    Typically, these machines are built on the basis of obsolete tanks. Of course, I’m not a big specialist in Russian tank divisions, but I read that T-64 tanks took part in the last Ossetian war. That is, the T-72 is not an outdated model of a tank for Russia, so it might be necessary to saturate your own T-72 tank divisions first, and then build other combat vehicles based on them.


    Russia has no deficit in the T-72. The rather large fleet of T-72 is worn out. So their enclosures are ideal for conversion to TBMP. Again, unification and greater protection (rather than the T-54, T-62, etc.).
    Israel was forced at one time to use captured T-54 "out of poverty." More precisely, from the fact that with inhuman efforts and all the possibilities, Israel that appeared on the maps of the world fought for existence. He made weapons from water pipes in artisanal conditions, homemade large-caliber mortars, by hook or by crook imported cartridges, obsolete weapons, Nazi armored vehicles and aircraft left over from World War II, stole warships from the French, etc.
    I used everything and everything economically. Competently changed the basic engines on the technology to their own or available for procurement and maintenance.

    As for the landing through the stern, it is true. It would be much better. But there will be more alterations for this. It is necessary to "digest" the frontal armor at the stern, to conjure with the transmission. It is certainly worth the candle, but only we all know about the desire to allocate finance for this technique (and in general for armament), not to mention the diversion of funds by all bureaucrats of different ranks ...
  15. kplayer
    kplayer 17 March 2014 00: 31
    +1
    Quote: Aristocrat
    Israel was forced at one time to use captured T-54 "out of poverty."

    Rather from practicality, not because of poverty. The Akhzarit armored personnel carrier was put into service in 1988 (at that time, Israel was not a poor state). The T-54 / -55 tanks that served as the basis for the creation of the armored personnel carrier were captured during the Six Day War (1967) and the Yom Kippur War (1973), i.e. they were safely stored for 15-20 years (or modified ones were in service with reserve units, which is the same thing).

    Heavy armored personnel carriers were also created on the basis of the Centurion tank: Nagmashot (1982), Puma and Nagmakhon (1988-1989), Nakpadon (BREM, 1993)
    Although the Israeli modified M113 armored personnel carriers had enhanced protection, they were not suitable as ultra-protected heavy armored vehicles, i.e. did not have the resource for such modernization.
  16. kplayer
    kplayer 18 March 2014 00: 23
    +3
    It is noteworthy that the Israelis are guided not only by considerations of unification in the issue of equipping armored vehicles, but above all by NECESSITY, otherwise they would be limited only to MBT "Merkava", and from heavy armored personnel carriers only BM "Namer" (based on MBT).
  17. Oleg Gor
    Oleg Gor 14 June 2014 03: 33
    0
    But for me this is better