Military Review

Draft heavy two-link armored personnel carrier DBTR-T

Frequently used abbreviations and abbreviations in the article:

BTR - armored personnel carrier;
TBTR - heavy armored personnel carrier;
DBTR - two-tier armored personnel carrier;
PU - launcher;
DU - remote-controlled installation;
MTO - engine compartment;
EMT - electromechanical transmission.

Draft heavy two-link armored personnel carrier DBTR-T

Photo 1. Russian heavy armored personnel carrier BTR-T

Photo 2. Russian two-link transporter DT-30PM

Inspired by the publications posted on the Courage website, I also decided to try my hand at proposing the concept of promising armored vehicles. Since I’m very interested in the two-link layout of armored vehicles (in particular, proposed by R. Ulanov), I tried to portray it as an alternative two-link heavy armored personnel carrier based on the Russian chassis tank T-55 (-54). Please do not judge very harshly.


The combat vehicle proposed by the author with the conditional name DBTR-T (Two-link Armored Personnel Carrier - Heavy) can be considered as one of the promising alternative options for the modernization / conversion of old T-55 (-54) tanks into heavy tracked armored personnel carriers. (At one time, quite a large number of T-55 and T-54 tanks were produced - approximately 95 000 units, so this chassis is the most accessible). An example of such a implemented modernization is the Russian heavy BTR-T armored personnel carrier that exists in a single copy (photo 1).

BTR-T has clear advantages in armor protection over light BTR. Its main disadvantages are the small number of troops and the impossibility of dismounting the troops through the aft doors, which limits the possibility of using the BTR-T.

Theoretically, it is possible to eliminate these shortcomings on the BTR-T due to the front deployment of the logistics, but this will solve only the question of the possibility of more secure dismounting of the landing, the amount of which will still not be enough. Yes, and the alteration of a classic tank chassis into a platform with a front-mounted MTO is more like the creation of a heavy armored personnel carrier almost from scratch.

On the one hand, the proposed model by the author of the DBTR-T is devoid of the main shortcomings of the BTR-T, on the other hand, it is incorrect to fully compare these machines because of their main difference - the number of links: the DBTR-T has two of them at BTR-T.

The “relative” of the DBTR-T by the number of links is the two-section DT-30 “Vityaz” all-terrain vehicle (photo 2) generally known for its super-permeability, although its purpose is quite different.

Therefore, I will try to compare the characteristics of the DBTR-T with the same characteristics of the BTR-T, and also, in principle, to argue for the creation of such a vehicle, moreover, its cost will be equal to the cost of three BTR-T, and maybe more ...

The two-unit armored personnel carrier DBTR-T proposed by the author (drawings and text) is a sketchy author's work that does not pretend to any exact technical and tactical conformity. The author is not an expert in this field.


DBTR-T - high-security off-road armored personnel carrier with armor protection, not inferior to the protection of the BTR-T, but with almost twice as many crews - 13 people. The landing force has the possibility of leaving the link No.2 of the vehicle through the rear doors and upper hatches.

Due to the two-unit design, the DBT-T should significantly outperform all existing heavy tracked armored personnel carriers in all terrain and functionality. The base of the DBTR-T is universal and can serve to create a whole family of two-link machines with increased security and throughput.

Figure 1. Heavy two-link armored personnel carrier DBTR-T, appearance


Comparative technical characteristics of the existing heavy armored personnel carrier BTR-T and proposed by the author DBTR-T:




Original chassis

T-54 / 55

T-54 / 55

(2 chassis)

Combat weight, tons


60 (28 + 32)

Full crew, people



- including landing




4-stroke, 12-cylinder turbo diesel

Engine make

B-55B / B-55U


Motor Power, hp

580 / 620


Power density, hp / t






Speed ​​forward / back, km / h

50 / 5

50 / 50

Cruising on the highway, km



Obstacle obstacles:



- rise, hail



- roll, hail



- wall, m


0,8 – 1,5 (maybe more)

- ditch, m


3 – 3,5 (maybe more)

- ford without OPVT / with OPVT, m

1,4 / 5

1,4 / 5

Ground pressure, kgf / sq. Cm




Automatic gun

1 x 30-mm 2A42

2 x 30-mm 2A72

Twin machine gun:

1 x 7,62-mm PCT

2 x 7,62-mm PCT;

2 x 7,62-mm coursework control PCT

ATGM (ammunition)



Frontal armor protection equivalent to homogeneous armor, -mm eq.

At least 600

Dynamic protection

Built-in "Contact-5"

Dismounting assault

Only upper hatches

Top hatches and stern doors

Main dimensions, mm:



- length



- width (on removable side screens)



- height



As we can see, the main advantage of the DBTR-T over the BTR-T is the increased maneuverability, more landing force and a wide range of weapons. The main disadvantage of the DBTR will be its cost - presumably 3 times the cost of the BTR-T (according to some estimates, the cost of reworking the T-55 in the BTR-T is 600 000 USD).


Similar heavy armored personnel carriers have been actively used by the army of Israel since the end of the 1980s. The number of the first TBTR “Akhzarit”, created on the basis of the captured T-55 tanks, according to various data, ranges from 500 to 1000 pcs. In addition to the Akhzarit, there are two other models of TBTR in service with Israel: the 51-ton Puma based on the Centurion tank and the NaN 60-ton Namer based on the Merkawa Mc4 (photo 3). The creation by Israel of a new, more expensive and protected TBTR “Namer” on the basis of their most modern tank, once again confirms both the value and effectiveness of these armored personnel carriers in the army and the value of the lives of the crews of these vehicles for their leadership.



TBTR "Ahzarit" (Mk-2),

TBTR "Timer"


T-55 (-54)


Merkava Mk4

Year of construction


November 1988, XNUMX

November 2008, XNUMX

Combat weight, t




Full crew, people



11 – 12 Feet

Of them landing, pers.

Until 10


8 – 9 Feet

Motor Power, hp




Power density, hp / t




Speed ​​km / h




Power reserve, km




Main armament

2 x 30-mm AP +
2 x 7,62-mm machine gun

1 x 7,62-mm DU machine gun

1 x 12,7-mm DU machine gun / or:
1 x 40-mm AG or
1 x 30-mm AP

Auxiliary weapons

2 x 7,62-mm course machine gun

1 x 7,62-mm machine gun

1 – 2 x 7,62-mm machine gun:
1 x 60-mm mortar


2 pc



Frontal armor protection




Dynamic protection of front and side armor:





11 mm


No accurate data

Photo 3. Israeli heavy armored vehicle "Timer"

Comparative data in the table show that the estimated characteristics of the DBTR-T are at the level of one of the most protected TBTR “Namer” in the world. The alternative DBTR-T is inferior to the Israeli vehicle in armor protection (especially in the upper and side projections of the hull), but surpasses it in maneuverability, armament and functionality.

It’s not possible to follow the “Namer” booking level in the two-link DBTR, since “Namer”, with its length of almost 7,5, already has a mass of 60 tons, and a similar booking of 11-meter DBTR-T will make it at least 80 tons .

When modeling the DBTR-T, the author set the upper mass limit of the machine in 60 tons. This is the mass that the standard engine of the T-90CM tank should take in view of reducing the maximum speed from 60 to 50 km / h.


Let us consider theoretically possible variants of the DBTR-T, which can potentially be in demand in the army:



Armament (ammunition)


The basic or most budget model, roomy troop compartment allows you to use the machine as a TBTR and as a flamethrower fighting machine. There are loopholes in the stern doors of link No. 2 for firing from inside the machine

2 x 7,62-course headings PCT (2 x 1000 ammo);

2 x12,7-mm remote control NSVT (900 ammo / 6 stores).


Combat model with reinforced weapons for fire support of the landing force and tanks. In fact, the car is similar to BMPT "Terminator-1" with a crew of five people + 8 paratroopers. The armament complex on the scheme without change was borrowed from one of the prototypes of the BMPT, created in 1980-s. A machine can hit different targets at the same time with 4.

2 x 7,62-course headings PCT (2 x 1000 ammo);

2 x 30-mm AP 2A72 (2 x 300 shells);

2 x 7,62-mm paired FCT (2 x 1000 cartridges);



The combat model with advanced weapons in function is more like a heavy BMP. The difference from the previous model in the fully remote prospective combat module installed above the troop compartment of the link №2. The 2А11 cannon is taken as a temporary solution, with the goal of mastering the remote-exploding projectiles until the new automatic guns of the 40-45-mm caliber appear.

2 x 7,62-course headings PCT (2 x 1000 ammo);

1 x 37-mm AP 2A11 (in the future 40-45-mm AP);

1 x 7,62-mm paired PKT;

1 x 40-mm paired AG;

4 ATGM “Attack”


Intelligence vehicle

2 x 12,7-mm control NSVT.


Repair and recovery vehicle. For this machine, a full-size X-NUMX-roller T-5 / 55 chassis for the 62-link can be used, the necessary limitation in this case is the weight of the link - up to 2 tons

2 x 12,7-mm control NSVT.


Command vehicle

2 x 12,7-mm control NSVT.


Sanitary evacuation vehicle

No armament

Figure 2. Modifications DBTR-T

All of the above machines differ only in the link number XXUMX. Link number XXUMX remains almost unchanged in all versions, which increases the unification of these alternative machines. In variants DBTR-TR, BREM and KSHM, exchange rate 2-mm machine guns are removed from the fenced shelves of chassis No.1, instead of them one or two 7,62-mm NSVT machine guns are installed (standard T-1 and T-12,7 tank commanders). Replacing machine guns due to the impossibility of course machine guns to provide all-round protection for the machine, which can be provided by an all-round tank revolver.

Next will be briefly considered two options for possible power plants. The proposed transmission - electromechanical (EMT), however, understanding its complexity and high cost, the layout of the DBTR-T is designed in such a way that it is possible to use both purely mechanical and electromechanical transmissions.


Link No.1 in the version DBTR-T / Т1 and Т2.
The armament of the No. 1 link in the DBTR combat models consists of two course 7,62-mm PKT machine guns, they are remotely controlled by two operators. An important issue will be the angles of horizontal guidance of machine guns, so that they provide a good zone of fire, to the maximum protecting not only the frontal projection, but also the side. Ammunition consists approximately of two tapes of 1000 cartridges each.

The location of the machine guns on above the track shelves is determined by the location of the link arms No. XXUMX, which has a circular rotation.
Theoretically, it would be correct to create universal remotely controlled installations that can equip both 7,62-mm FCT and 30-mm AGS-17D, as was done at the Terminator-1 BMPT, only with large pointing angles.

The advantages of such weapons: large ammunition in the 1 tape (1000 ammunition);
Disadvantages: limited pointing angles.

Photo 4. Anti-aircraft machine gun caliber 12,7-mm

Link number XXUMX in other versions. The link No.1 in the “auxiliary” modifications of the DBTR-T is armed with a standard tank anti-aircraft machine-gun installation (ZPU) of 12,7-mm caliber (photo 4).

The use of standard machine gun installations from T-64A and T-80 tanks is assumed, as they allow the operator to fire a machine gun without protruding from the vehicle. The machine gun installation has an electromechanical drive and provides horizontal circular guidance in the 360 sector of degrees and horizontal in the range from -15 to + 85 degrees. The unit has day and night sights, there is no two-plane stabilizer. The range of the machine gun - 1500 m, ammunition - 3 box on 150 ammunition for each machine gun.

The author chose the ZPU machine-gun installation for reasons of crew security, since for firing from the anti-aircraft machine gun of the T-72 tank, the arrow must be protruded from the hatch.

On the link number XXUMX can be installed one or two ZPU above hatches shooters. The advantages of such weapons: excellent pointing angles; disadvantages: limited ammunition in 1 cartridges.

Link №2 basic model DBTR-T. This modification of the link can be used as an armored personnel carrier, and as a combat vehicle flamethrower. Given the lack of loopholes in the side armor of the second link of the vehicle, two commander's turrets of T-64 / 80 tanks, which have a circular rotation, are mounted on its roof. The turrets are equipped with standard NSVT-12,7 machine guns. Estimated ammunition - on 4 boxes on the machine gun (1 on the machine gun, 3 in the troop compartment).

DBTR-T in the base configuration provides simultaneous destruction of 4's of various targets. In terms of this indicator, it surpasses the BMP-3, BMD-3 / 4 and BMPT "Terminator-1". In the rear doors of the troop compartment provides loopholes to be closed with a lid for firing from personal weapons in the direction of the stern.

Photo 5. One of the prototypes of BMPT with two gun installations

Link №2 combat model DBTR-T1. The link has more powerful armament, consisting of two independent gun installations of caliber 30-mm with paired 7,62-mm PKT machine guns. On the right (in the direction of travel) a gun installation mounted launcher for two anti-tank guided missiles. The cannons were completely borrowed from the prototype BMPT 2-th modification (photo 5).

Why is this weapon chosen? The compact dimensions of the links required to increase the maneuverability of the vehicle (the total length of each link is 5000 mm) do not allow simultaneously with the landing force to place in the link 2 the fighting compartment of a two-seat tower with more powerful weapons, for example, with C-57 or “pairing” X-gun. from 60-mm 100A2 and 70-mm 30A2. In addition, the double tower must have a powerful armor protection at the level of protection of the hull, which will inevitably weigh down the tower itself, and the entire machine as a whole.

Unlike the two-man inhabited tower, the weapons complex of an experienced BMPT with the conventional name No. XXUMX can provide several advantages at once:

+ additional protection of the roof of the troop compartment at the location of the weapon;
+ two different targets hit at the same time, for example, if the DBTR-T falls under simultaneous fire from two opposite sides;
+ the possibility of hitting one target (or a cluster of targets) from 2-x guns and 2-x machine guns at the same time;
+ in case of failure of one tool, there is the second;
+ Armament carried out reduces the gas contamination of the troop compartment.

Disadvantages of this option:
- guns overlap each other sector of fire at certain angles of rotation,
- the lack of a modern MSA and limited capabilities in the fight against highly protected targets (tanks, pillboxes, bunker tanks, etc.).

Figure 3. Modification DBTR-T1 with two combat modules from the prototype BMPT

Thanks to its powerful booking DBTR-T1, if necessary, it can be used as a full-fledged BMPT, or accompany tanks while performing the tasks of the APC and BMPT. According to its weapons, DBTR-T1 can fully substitute two infantry fighting vehicles for the BMP-2 or two BMD-2 infantry.

Link №2 combat model DBTR-T2. A promising set of weapons.

In this case, the author provides for the installation of a fully automatic tower, which will not “eat up” the useful volume of the troop compartment. The tower is commanded by the commander and the operator, who “permanently” sit under the tower and receive information on the monitors. The armament of such a module consists of an 37-mm anti-aircraft gun 2А11 from ZSU “Yenisei” with air-cooled barrel and correspondingly lower rate of fire (200-300 rds / min). Power feed two tape. 7,62-mm PKT machine gun and AGS 40-mm grenade launcher are paired with a gun.

Why caliber 37-mm? It is believed that for promising 30-mm artillery systems is no longer enough, for a 57-mm you need a volume turret section. The author considers the 37-mm "golden mean", or rather the "temporary" middle, while there is no automatic gun caliber 40-45-mm.

Even in its current form, the 37-mm OB shell has almost twice the mass than the 30-mm OB shell. In addition, according to various information - 35 ... 37-mm minimum caliber, which is already appropriate to equip with a remote fuse.

The gain of 37-mm BPS in front of the 30-mm projectile in the thickness of the pierced armor is visible only at a distance of 1000 m.

As a guided weapon, the BMPT Terminator-2 complex of four Ataka-T missiles is used.

Figure 4. Modification DBTR-T2 with a promising combat module

The advantages of such weapons: a modern weapons complex and MSA, fully automatic ammunition, the ability to hit more complex targets such as tanks and combat helicopters of the enemy;
Disadvantages: a bulky tower, which can not be given the level of body armor, similar to the body of the armored personnel carrier. The tower will theoretically be very vulnerable even to small-caliber automatic guns.


The considered type of transmission for DBTR-T is an electromechanical transmission. On the one hand, the use of such a transmission contradicts the basic concept of the DBTR-T - a budget and simple machine made on the basis of old T-55 tanks. On the other hand, its presence significantly expands the capabilities of the DBTR-T, as a result of which, it should significantly exceed all existing heavy armored personnel carriers in terms of maneuverability, functionality and other performance indicators.

Figure 5. Transmission scheme DBTR-T

Figure 6. The scheme of disassembly of the transmission DBTR-T

The transmission shown in the sketch is the same for links №1 and №2. On link number 1, it is installed “classically” in the rear part of the logistics, instead of the old mechanical transmission of the T-55 tank. Link №2 - a similar unit is installed in the front, as there are two doors in the stern for dismounting the landing.

What are the benefits of an expensive EMT dual armored personnel carrier?
+ The ability to quickly disengage the links for loading / unloading DBTR on road or rail transport.

The length of each unlinked link is no more than 6000-mm. Disengagement is performed by the crew. Both links independently call in on platforms / tractors / wagons, etc. using a special power cable with a length of 10-15 m, through which power is supplied from the driving link (No. 1) to the driven link (No. 2). To control the slave link, the driver goes to the link number XXUMX, to the place of the commander, where there are direct controls for the transmission of the link number XXUMX. At the time of the maneuvers of the link №2, the link №2 still works in the mode of the generator of electricity.

Figure 7. Loading of DBTR-T links to the railway platform

+ Evacuation of damaged links separately from difficult road sections (mountain roads, narrow streets, forest, etc.) due to the possibility of separation of links and the possibility of towing these links using an external generator or other DBTP-T.

+ Applications of various types of engines without changing the transmission. The author proposed two versions of DBTR-T with diesel engines of the “B” series of the T-90 tank and with gas turbines (GTE) of the T-80 tank.

In the future, in the course of development and availability of alternative fuels and energy sources, the integration of a power unit based on fuel cells that generate electricity due to the chemical reaction of the fuel is possible.

Figure 8. Three degrees of freedom of the two-link car

+ “Flexibility” DBTR-T. As is known, two-link articulated machines have three degrees of freedom of movement relative to each other, respectively, and three ranges of restrictions of this movement. For example, the DT-30P “Vityaz” two-link conveyor (with a mechanical transmission - a cardan shaft) has the following range of degrees of freedom of movement:
- angles of rotation of the links relative to the longitudinal axis: +/– 38 hail;
- angles of lifting links relative to each other: 35 hail;
- the angle of "twisting" of the links relative to each other: 8 deg.

The absence of a rigid mechanical transmission of torque (propeller shaft) of the DBTR-T engine from the link No. 1 to the transmission of the link No. 2 may allow increasing the range of these limitations. Given the functional purpose of the DBTR-T, the most important is to increase the ranges of angles of rotation of the links relative to the longitudinal axis (No. 1 in the diagram), in this case, the EMT flexible power cable will not be any limitation to this degree of freedom of movement. The sketch layout of the DBTR-T is drawn with regard to the maximum range of angles of rotation of the links: ± 45 ... 50 deg.

+ Reversing. The long length of the DBTR-T (11 000-mm) significantly limits its mobility in a combat situation in comparison with other combat vehicles (TBTP, BMPT, BMP), whose body length does not exceed 6 500 – 7 500-mm. Thus, DBTR-T is almost completely deprived of the possibility of a turn on mountain roads or on the streets of cities and settlements.

This design flaw can be partially compensated by increasing the maximum speed in reverse to the value of the maximum forward speed - 50 km / hour (for comparison, the speed of reversing BTR-T on the basis of T-55 is only 5 km / hour).
The increase in reverse speed for EMT DBTR-T is not particularly difficult. In the machine control compartment, a rearview video monitor and a reverse camcorder are provided, mounted on the stern armor plate No. XXUMX.

+ Traction characteristics. The main unique advantage of the DBTR-T is its increased maneuverability in case of “heavy armor”.

Given that all the most difficult obstacles (trenches, anti-tank ditches, walls, steep climbs, forest belts, off-road, low load bearing soils, etc.), the DBTR-T will overcome at low speed, it needs the highest rate of torque. at these low speeds. It is known that EMT provides high torque at low speeds, which is its main advantage.

Of stories. Even during the Great Patriotic War, EMT was used on the heaviest tanks and SPGs: serially installed on the German heavy self-propelled gun Ferdinand weighing 68 tons, the prototype super-heavy tank Maus weighing 180 tons, on the Soviet experimental heavy tank EKV (version KV -1) and post-war heavy tank EC-6

+ Towing equipment. Taking into account the alleged high characteristics of cross-country DBTR-T, it will be entrusted with the task of towing damaged equipment or simply stuck combat vehicles on difficult terrain. In any case, towing will be done at low speed, at which high torque will also be needed.

+ Ability to connect 3-th link. For individual modifications of the DBTR-T, it is theoretically possible to connect the 3 of the lightweight link (similar to the DT-30P transporter).

In case the DBTR-T will be used as a repair and recovery vehicle or a high-performance vehicle for the transport of infantry and weapons / ammunition, it is possible to add the link No.3 (with a similar transmission), which will be between the link No.1 and No.2.


The author proposes to create a promising DBTR-T based on the chassis of the T-55 tanks with diesel engines of the “B” series, as a result, the power plant based on the “B” series engine is also supposed to be used as the basic power unit; 92 hp, tank T-2CM.

Figure 9. Engine "standard" modification DBTR-T

The use of the “top-end” version of the engine of this series increases the cost of the potential production of DBTR-T, but it is this power that is necessary to ensure the high mobility of the rather heavy DBTR-T, whose armor is equivalent to the tank one.

As an alternative power unit without a fundamental change in the transmission (in the case of EMT), a gas turbine of a gas turbine engine, a T-80 tank, can be used. It is quite obvious that the use of a more expensive gas turbine can be justified only for special machines, for example, intended for permanent service in colder regions where the "winter" advantages of gas turbine engines are necessary.

You can consider two modifications DBTR-T by type of power plant:
- “Standard” modification DBTR-T with a tank engine B-92, power 1130 hp;
- “Northern” modification with a gas turbine tank engine, power 1250 – 1400 hp

Some parameters of engines for comparison:






Engine make



engine's type



Gas turbine


Engine starting

Electric, compressed air, from the tug


Power, hp



Specific power DBTR-T, hp / t



fuel type



Specific fuel consumption, g / hp * hour



Engine weight



Resource of the engine before repair, motochas



Overall dimensions, mm:












Minimum engine start operating temperature

-20 ° C

-40 ° C

In terms of weight and dimensions, the engines are almost identical, in addition to the high cost of a gas turbine and greater fuel consumption, it will also be necessary to resolve the issue of removing the hot air from the cooling system and exhaust, which cannot be sent back, as is done on T-80 tanks.

Figure 10. Layout of MTO DBTR-T

It is likely that if the DBTR-T will be produced, it will be mainly in one more “budget” standard modification with the B-92C2F2 engine, since the problems associated with the simultaneous presence in the army of main tanks with fundamentally different power units (T-80 and T- 72 / 90) everyone is well known.

Another argument in favor of the B-92 may be its untapped potential for increasing power. The use of improved fuel systems, modern air purification systems, a more efficient cooling system, friction reducing additives, etc. could theoretically increase the power of this engine to 1200 hp and maybe more ...

The B-92C2F2 engine is located transversely to the longitudinal axis of the hull (that is, similar to the T-44 / -54 / -55 / -62 / -72 / -NNXX) tanks. Torque from the engine is transmitted to the generator through an intermediate gear, similar to that used on T-90 tanks… .44. Power generator - 90 kW (900 hp) in case of a possible diesel boost with 1215 hp to 1130 hp The total power of the 1200-x traction motors is 4 x 4 = 250 kW, which is enough for a standard T-1000CM tank engine as well as for a well-forced (in perspective) HP 90.


Figure 11. Link №1 in section

Link number XXUMX. For maximum simplification of the alteration of the original T-55, the link No.1 has a classic “tank” layout. The crew of three people is in front of the hull, its location is completely identical to the location of the crew of the Terminator-1 BMPT (mechanic drive and two AGS operators). When reworking, the standard T-55 body is shortened by an 1 roller, the total length of the shortened body is approximately 5000-mm. Here the reader's question is “why shorten?”, I will try to answer from my point of view:

"Initially, the author drew two articulated full-size 5-roller T-55 chassis - visually, the DBTR-T turned out to be very long and therefore less manoeuvrable, and in terms of mass, with normal armor (the BTR-T level), its mass with that length would be 70 -75 tons. It is clear that the "top" B-92 in 1130 hp it is unlikely to pull this colossus at a speed of more than 30-35 km / hour ... ".

The internal fuel tanks are located behind the control compartment, they are separated from the crew by a reinforced armored barrier, which increases the rigidity of the control compartment design, which, in essence, becomes like an armored capsule. The seats of the driver and two crew members are attached to the roof of the office. For landing-disembarking the crew there are three hatches in the roof of the hull and one emergency in the bottom of the hull behind the driver’s seat between the seats of two other crew members.

External fuel tanks are located on the right and left fenders.

Internal fuel tanks are isolated from the crew and MTO two armored bulkheads. In the MTO section there is a B-92C2F2 engine (transversely to the longitudinal axis of the housing) an electric starter is located parallel to the engine. The transfer of engine power to the generator is carried out through an intermediate gear ("guitar"), similar to that used on T-54 ... 90. The cooling system fan is driven from the main generator shaft through a variator that changes the frequency of rotation of the fan impeller depending on the engine load. Behind the generator there is an 1 unit of EMT and a hydraulic system of the rotary mechanism actuators of the links.

In all trim levels DBTR-T on NLD link number XXUMX is a standard tank dump for self-digging. If necessary, the installation of a dozer blade with hydraulic drives is assumed.

To force water barriers along the bottom, it is planned to install two OPVT pipes - one on each link 1-m and 2-m.

Figure 12. Layout DBTR-T, top view

Link number XXUMX. Link No.2 is also converted from the hull of the T-2 tank, shortened to four track rollers on board (approximately 55 mm in length). The unit EMT link №5000 is similar to the unit EMT link №2 it is only located in front of the link №1. In the transmission compartment there is an auxiliary diesel generator, with a capacity of 2 – 10 kW for autonomous power supply of two links. In the same department is supposed to place the air conditioner.

Behind the transmission compartment there is a combat and amphibious compartment, designed for 10 people. The height of the link №2 in the area of ​​BO and the troop compartment is slightly higher than the link №1.

Embarkation / disembarkation of the crew can be carried out through two stern doors and 4 upper hatch.

The crew seats are placed along the sides (5 on each side) of the link and are attached to the compartment roof. Tanks with fuel in the troop compartment no. External fuel tanks are located on the fences, the fuel from them is transmitted through flexible hoses to the link number XXUMX.
Each link is an individual FVU, which differs in performance depending on the number of crew.


Frontal projection. The armor durability of the DBTR will be presumably at the level of the existing Russian BTR-T. Persistence of frontal armor against CS is equivalent to 600-mm homogeneous armor (in perspective - 1000 mm). The VLD of the link body No. 1 is “covered” by the built-in DZ “Contact-5”. The NLD hull consists of a homogeneous armor sheet with a thickness of 100-mm inclined at an angle of 55 hail (similar to the T-55 tank) and additionally “covered” with a blade for self-digging. Frontal armor link number XXUMX should provide protection from:

- cumulative rocket-propelled grenade launchers RPG-7;
- BPS guns caliber 100-105-mm at a distance from 1000 m and more;
- BPS 57-mm guns at any distance.

Unlike the BTR-T, the landing of the new two-link armored personnel carrier DBTR-T is much better protected, since the entire frontal strike will be taken over by the link No.1 covering the troop compartment with its body. Even in the event of defeat and failure of the link №1, the landing force can easily leave the link №2 and also fire from the weapons installed on it.

Side armor. Protection of the machine from the sides is provided by the side armor, 80-mm thick (thickness of the side armor T-55), side removable screens with remote elements are additionally installed. The side armor complex should protect the DBTR-T board from:

- rocket-propelled grenades RPG-7 grenade launcher with a tandem cumulative warhead;
- armor-piercing shells (BPS) automatic guns caliber 30-37-mm at any distance;
- BPS 57-mm C-60 guns at a distance from 1000 m and more.

The distance between the side screens and the inner side armor sheet is approximately 600-650 mm. The outer, protected fuel tanks are located between the removable screen and the main armor, providing additional protection against the CS.

Roof. Taking into account the fact that the control unit of the link №1 will be under the gun of a grenade launcher, the roof of the control unit is additionally protected by a DZ and hatches have additional protection similar to the protection of hatches of the operators of the grenade launchers of the BMPT Terminator-1.
The roof of the troop compartment unit No. 2 is also additionally protected by DZ blocks.

The bottom in the area of ​​the branch of the management of the link №1 is additionally reinforced by the welded armor with internal filler. Due to the reinforced reservation of the bottom in the area of ​​the management office, the clearance is reduced by 100-mm. The internal armored partition with additional spacers behind the driver’s seats and two crew members are a stiffener between the bottom and the roof of the hull, which increases the stability of the bottom in the area of ​​the separation of control from the explosive effect of mines and land mines.

Stern. The thickness of the No. 1 and No. 2 feed armor links is 45-mm, they provide protection against armor-piercing bullets of the 14,5-mm caliber released at close range and BPS of the 30-mm caliber at a distance of 500 m and further. Aft doors of the troop compartment are equipped with protivokumulyativnye trellis screens installed at a distance from the door for the premature actuation of the charges of cumulative ammunition.

Automatic high-speed software is installed in each link and operates independently of each other. Additional software is located in the MTO link number XXUMX.

On the roof of the link No. 1 and the link No. 2, sensors for warning about laser irradiation of the machine are installed for automatic ejection of smoke grenades.
The system of active protection of KAZ by the author is not yet provided, since this is a separate work.

New security features. Finally, the new heavy tracked vehicle gets a unique opportunity to independently evacuate from the shelling when the track breaks. In the event of damage and destruction of any of the tracks of the link №1, the DBTR can be independently evacuated at the expense of the driving propeller of the link №2, the transmission of which can be removed from the main engine-generator to 500 kW of power (675 hp).


+ high permeability;
+ specific pressure at the level of 0,8 kgf / cm2 with a mass of 60 tons;
+ Increased crew protection level number XXUMX, which is actually in a powerful armored capsule;
+ large troop compartment on 10 people;
+ the possibility of landing dismounted through the rear doors;
+ powerful weapons;
+ Multifunctionality DBTR-T and the potential to create a family of machines based on it;
+ fuel and fuel were removed from the control compartment and the landing compartment, which reduces the fire / explosion hazard of the machine;

- the high cost of the car (approximately 3 times more expensive than the BTR-T);
- large mass of the machine (60 tons);
- forward speed - 50 km / h, which can lead to lagging DBTRs on the march from other, faster combat vehicles;
- the absence of lateral embrasures in the link number XXUMX;
- the lack of a commercially available military version of EMT, which could be used in DBTR-T;
- the need to use the most powerful version of the engine "B", which excludes the possibility of using old engines with 580 / 620 / 780 / 840 and 1000 hp.
- the need for an additional cooling system for the traction motors and the generator;
- a driver and two arrows, when leaving the car through the upper hatches get under fire;
- the need to install two systems PPO, FVU and two air conditioners;
- Side exhaust increases the visibility of the car.

Possible prospects for further modernization:
• installation of a promising X-shaped diesel generator, power from 1200 hp;
• increasing the speed of movement up to 60-70 km / h due to the use of a more powerful engine;
• installation of KAZ to increase the security of the machine;
• installation of a promising 40-45-mm automatic cannon instead of the “temporary” 37-mm 2-11 for the DBTP-T2 model;
• use of a simpler mechanical or hydromechanical transmission to reduce the cost and ease the machine. At the same time, the DBTR-T will lose some advantages in cross-country ability, but also win a couple of tons of weight that can be used to increase armor or increase power density at the same reservation level;
• installation in the aft section of the No. 2 of two remote control guns, caliber 5,45 – 7,62-mm for additional protection of the machine from the sides.


At the end of this article, it would be right to once again return to the question “Does the army of the DBTR-T need at the price of three BTR-T?”, As during the simulation of the possible characteristics of the DBTR-T the idea of ​​a budget rework of old T-55 tanks almost disappeared , perhaps, is the main disadvantage of this machine.

Of the other "pluses" / "minuses" of the machine, not included above:
+ One DBTR-T by the number of troops (10 people instead of 5 people) is already equal to two BTR-T, and the troops have more chances to safely leave the car through the rear doors, which are not on the BTR-T.
The undermining of the DBTR-T on an anti-tank mine or a powerful land mine also gives the landing party a much better chance of salvation - the main attack is taken by link #1, which does not have a tight connection with link #2.
+ If a caterpillar breaks up on a mine, the DBTR can independently go backwards in ambush, while maintaining the lives of the crew and the landing party.
+ Breaking frontal armor with modern ammunition will be disastrous for the entire crew of the BTR-T (7 man) while the landing compartment of the link № 2 DBTR-T (10 man) will remain intact.
+ If we count by the criterion of crew survival (if such a criterion exists), it turns out:

With a complete set of vehicles crews and frontal defeat:
• one DBTR-T will be equal to the 2,33 BTR-T if the 1 of the person is in the 3 link (7 / 3 = 2,33);
• one DBTR-T will be equal to 3,5! BTR-T, if the 1 person is in the 2 link (7 / 2 = 3,5);

- In the case of side or stern lesion of the link No. 2 DBTR-T (10 man), the proportion unfortunately changes in the opposite direction: 1 DBTR-T = 0,7 BTR-T.

+ In weaponry, the DBTR-T1 model fully exceeds two BTR-Ts at once, both in the number of trunks and in the number of simultaneously hit targets.

Despite the last point, it turns out that the above comparisons cannot fully justify the high cost and feasibility of the DBTR-T.

Perhaps the main trump card remains - one DBTR-T will pass where there are not three or more BTR-T!
And if this argument becomes decisive - there is a chance that similar machines will still be developed and produced.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. smershxnumx
    smershxnumx 14 August 2014 10: 10
    The idea is not new. It seems to me that if there were no "pitfalls" (for example, maneuverability, controllability, maintenance difficulties, etc.), then such products would have been adopted long ago. By the way, "civilian" versions of articulated transporters were not widely used either.
    1. Alekseev
      Alekseev 14 August 2014 15: 04
      Quote: smerx24
      It seems to me that if there were no "pitfalls"

      Yes, yes, namely stones, and not especially underwater ones. laughing
      Well this is not an armored train! laughing
      Yes, and the T-55 case, are they fucking?
      Does the author of the proposals know what mechanisms are in the transmission of this tank?
      How firm is its suspension?
      What efforts can occur in the coupling device and power transmission units, the engine when this monster moves?
      For example, there is no question of any regular towing of a tank by a BTS tractor, and another tank even more, at distances greater than 5-10 km, if your BPS (tank) is dear to you.
      It is probably possible to create such a miracle-yuda at a new technological level.
      But why? Gigantomania, the Mouse tank, however.
      1. svp67
        svp67 14 August 2014 17: 12
        Quote: Alekseev
        Yes, and the T-55 case, are they fucking?
        hi Salute KrasKomam! In point, the author proceeds from the wrong decision to use the hulls of the t54-55 tank, apparently not being a specialist. Two questions immediately come to mind:
        - on the territory of the Russian Federation there is no longer a sufficiently large number of these tanks, therefore, their modernization can only be offered for export ...
        - the hull of these tanks is quite small, it would be better to use the T62 base, but in general the T72, here it is best ...
        Further, in fact, "lightening" the tank by removing the turret and the lack of ammunition for the main gun, the author makes it heavier with an electric transmission (alas, this is a fact, our ETs are heavier than MTs) and by adding a trailer with a small "engine", and after that he wants to get the same dynamic quality as on the original sample of the tank ... ???????? Will not receive ...
        If we decide, then the "first link" should be a tank, but back to front, that is, with an engine in front, due to this, it will be possible to improve traction properties and slightly reduce weight, while increasing the protection of the crew. And we will have all this on the new "Armata" basic tracked chassis. What is the point of making a garden with old equipment? Apparently it will be, only in the aspect of converting old tanks into the "second link" of this coupling ...
    2. Sevastopol
      Sevastopol 14 August 2014 17: 37
      apparently it is a matter of price and fuel consumption. but on the cross - in general a monster.
  2. sso-xnumx
    sso-xnumx 14 August 2014 10: 13
    - the lack of a modern MSA and limited capabilities in the fight against highly protected targets (tanks, pillboxes, bunker tanks, etc.).

    About the tanks. The SRI BT tested the resistance of the T-72 to the effects of OFS and BS of the 30-mm 2A42 gun designed by A. G. Shipunov and V. P. Gryazev BMP-2. Result - almost all attachments, including and blocks DZ, optics, machine gun and core BS jammed tower. Having in stock ATGM tank can be finished. In general, the proposal is very interesting, it is necessary to interest the potential customer and further development in R&D on the options for modifications.
    1. svp67
      svp67 14 August 2014 17: 32
      Quote: sso-250659
      About the tanks. The SRI BT tested the resistance of the T-72 to the effects of OFS and BS of the 30-mm 2A42 gun designed by A. G. Shipunov and V. P. Gryazev BMP-2. Result - almost all attachments, including and blocks DZ, optics, machine gun and core BS jammed tower. Having in stock ATGM tank you can finish off
      Cool and how cool ... Especially considering that the BMP2 also has ATGMs, everything is END to the tank !!!!!
      Listen, do you have any information about the BMP? What is its resistance to a SINGLE hit of a 125 mm projectile from a tank gun, and is it worth it then to "finish off"?
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 14 August 2014 18: 00
        Quote: sso-250659
        The SRI BT tested the resistance of the T-72 to the effects of OFS and BS of the 30-mm 2A42 gun designed by A. G. Shipunov and V. P. Gryazev BMP-2. Result - almost all attachments, including and blocks DZ, optics, machine gun and core BS jammed tower. Having in stock ATGM tank can be finished.

        Quote: svp67
        Listen, do you have any information about the BMP? What is its resistance to a SINGLE hit of a 125 mm projectile from a tank gun, and is it worth it then to "finish off"?


        Sergei, along the way, "sso-250659" gave the history of the BMP-3 test, when the T-55 was removed from storage and put it as ... a stupid TARGET at a distance of 1500 m.
        Yes, all the attachments were demolished, the sights were broken and the barrel of the gun was pierced in 4 places ... 30 on the BMP-3 gives good accuracy due to the attachment with the "hundred".

        There is only one question - who will allow Behe ​​to frolic at a distance of one and a half kilometers from the tank?
        wink laughing
        1. gross kaput
          gross kaput 20 August 2014 22: 42
          No, he correctly stated everything, it was this episode that incited the military to adopt the BMP-2 in parallel with the BMP-1.
  3. padded jacket
    padded jacket 14 August 2014 10: 45
    DT-30 knight, all the same, beautiful and amazing machines were built in the USSR:
    1. insafufa
      insafufa 14 August 2014 11: 20
      And right now the Republic of Bashkortostan is building the main customer in Siberia in Ishimbay.
      1. Nagaibak
        Nagaibak 14 August 2014 16: 27
        insafufa "And right now the republic of Bashkortostan is building in Ishimbay, the main customer of Siberian oilmen.
        He will serve us for a long time.))) Exactly for our winters.)))
    2. Nagaibak
      Nagaibak 14 August 2014 16: 26
      quilted jacket "DT-30 knight, all the same wonderful and amazing machines were built in the USSR."
      I regularly cut through this.))) In the swamps, it’s the most. There was still Canadian, well, it was painfully flimsy. We ride in the second link where the excavator.)))
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 14 August 2014 16: 42
        Quote: Nagaibak
        Regularly on this dissect.

        On the DT-30?
        Andrey, explain, please:
        - How capricious is it in service?
        - How often do you have to get drunk with such an unusual goose?
        He himself did not have the opportunity to work on the DT-30, just the guys from the 200th brigade spoke warmly about him, but he also delivered enough matyuk to them.

        Your opinion as an operator is just interesting ...
        1. Nagaibak
          Nagaibak 14 August 2014 19: 13
          Aleks TV "Just interested in your opinion as an operator ..."
          Alex, welcome !!! You are a little at the wrong address ...))) I am not an operator, they deliver me to the place of the accident on it. I'm just a passenger.))) And unfortunately not a techie. When we are brought to it in place, the excavator digs a pipe, and the operators eliminate the impulse.
          But, according to the words I drove, I know that he is better than the Canadian all-terrain vehicle, which for some reason was called Husk. I can’t explain anything to you regarding maintenance issues. The only thing is that with me there have never been any breakdowns. And I’ve been working for several years. If I were on duty I would ask those who manage it. But now I am resting and I will not be there soon. So, sorry I could not help.)))
          1. Michael_59
            Michael_59 15 August 2014 09: 46
            Quote: Nagaibak
            they take me to the scene of the accident. I'm just a passenger.))) And unfortunately not a techie. When we are delivered to it in place, an excavator digs a pipe

            Man is a mystery ... Who are you, if you are not a techie at the gas and oil pipelines?
            Medic? Security guard? Or a psychic dowser? laughing
            1. Nagaibak
              Nagaibak 15 August 2014 18: 37
              [quote = Mikhail_59] A man of mystery ... Who are you, if you are not a techie at gas and oil pipelines?
              Medic? Security guard? Or a psychic dowser?
              Not a techie in relation to the device of this machine.)) And I understand my devices.) By the way, the psychic-dowser is very close to my profession.))) If you consider it with a sense of humor.))) Guess.)))
    3. svp67
      svp67 14 August 2014 17: 13
      Quote: quilted jacket
      all the same, beautiful and amazing cars were built in the USSR:
      No one argues, only his armor is not tank ...
    4. Oblozelo
      Oblozelo 14 August 2014 23: 31
      "Vityaz" is cool, I saw it at VDNKh 25 years ago,
      I liked it, I was surprised by the rubber rollers ... I was still young ... so.
      He reminded me "Vityaz" our self-propelled gun 2S7M "Malka" is called,
      it is on the "Review", "Military".
      here is a rare Beauty!
      and still there is a civil MIRACLE!
      look what a charm!
      That’s it all on one SELF-PROPELLER
      so it’s not enough for her twenty tons of armor and weapons can’t be attached?
      And if she will be with a "tail", like "Knight"?
      And we do not need to swim, we WATER on the water.
    5. Oblozelo
      Oblozelo 14 August 2014 23: 51
      RESPECT for the plot
  4. Klim2011
    Klim2011 14 August 2014 10: 59
    The author is not just a plus, but PLUS! hi for high-quality presentation of the idea and excellent presentation of the material.
    I do not quite understand why, in the absence of a cardan, the second degree of freedom is limited to 8 degrees?
  5. qwert
    qwert 14 August 2014 11: 04
    Hero and now produce. For oil industry workers, geophysicists, etc. Of course, the volumes are not the same. And the army does not buy it. Although the same TCP also does not have a reservation, it is operated in the army.
  6. arthur_hammer
    arthur_hammer 14 August 2014 11: 22
    the effectiveness of such a scheme on the battlefield is questionable, otherwise everyone would have rushed to make military equipment on such a platform (specifically for the battlefield) in our country and not only such a scheme has been tested for a long time and is used mainly in "rear" units or in the Arctic belts, here even an idea was considered for transportation (takeoff and landing from the car) of the yak-38 gdp aircraft ...
  7. SIT
    SIT 14 August 2014 11: 47
    In general, the 2x link scheme is used for transporters not intended for direct participation on the battlefield. This also applies to the NATO 2x link Volvo with a Mercedes diesel or native gasoline, and our Knights. These are lightweight cars capable of sailing at full load even in a non-stormy sea. They have plastic rollers and wider rubber tracks. Due to this, they have minimal ground pressure and high traffic. The use of the 2x link scheme directly on the battlefield was not used primarily because it is impossible to reserve an articulation unit. Even the fragments of a nearby explosive ordnance can damage it. Well, as far as your development is concerned directly, your calculations show that the fuel consumption of the regular version of your machine will be 178,54l of fuel per hour, and that of the northern version 281,25l. Such values ​​are obtained by multiplying the engine power by the specific fuel consumption given by you per l / s per hour. What is the capacity of the fuel tanks? How long will the 1 refueling last? Or do these transporters need to be transported to something on the battlefield?
  8. wanderer_032
    wanderer_032 14 August 2014 12: 46
    The length of the proposed DBTR-T 11 m ...
    But what about the requirements of the GABTU for transportability by water, rail and air transport?
    So the option is interesting in general.
    Such a technique could possibly be useful in difficult conditions of the Far North and the Arctic.
  9. Klim2011
    Klim2011 14 August 2014 12: 50
    The use of the 2x link scheme directly on the battlefield was not applied primarily because it is impossible to book the articulation unit

    It seems to me that this is not a difficult task from a technical point of view, for example, in AREMs quite a lot of nodes are located on the case.
    1. wanderer_032
      wanderer_032 14 August 2014 13: 04
      Quote: SIT
      The use of the 2x link scheme directly on the battlefield was not used primarily because it is impossible to reserve an articulation unit.

      This is technically possible, but unlikely to be justified since if this unit is damaged (anything can be damaged or broken), repair repairs will take a lot of time.
      1. Klim2011
        Klim2011 14 August 2014 13: 33
        In the current armor technique, and now there are enough nodes that you can’t repair in the field.
        (especially if Zampotech does not imagine how to change the support roller crying )
        I want to say that to consider the articulation vulnerability as the main minus of such machines in my opinion is not entirely correct. IMHO
  10. ramsi
    ramsi 14 August 2014 15: 10
    the car turns out to be more bulky and less pivoting than a single-link one, and if we take such a scheme, then it is better to have two less powerful engines with their transmission in each part.
  11. Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 14 August 2014 16: 16
    Of course, the idea is interesting.
    Thanks to the author for the detail and thoughtfulness of the new fundamental decision.

    Everything is too bulky.
    The machine becomes too vulnerable both in size and maneuverability, and in the presence of an unprotected joint.
    Those. to apply it directly in battle formations is unreasonable.
    Even an untrained grenade launcher won't miss it, it is a large and vulnerable coffin on the battlefield (I just imagined if I had them in the unit in "recent times").

    But to apply such a scheme for supporting units and support units - a very interesting concept can emerge.
    - Installation of MLRS with transportable additional ammunition,
    - Art, system,
    - UAV control and transportation machine,
    - A transport vehicle for transporting ammunition of various fire systems to the front edge, and sometimes even PTSku had to be driven through impassable dirt, since there is no normal conveyor (except for the engine mount, of course).
    - Yes, anything.

    Yes, and alteration into a combat vehicle (except for the aforementioned BASIC reasons) is also too expensive.
    It’s much easier to take a BMO-T and throw two racks out of it (leave one), lure another seat and get a pretty tolerable BTR-T.
    And if you stick a light BM Cleaver into it, then you get a generally tolerable BMP-T.
    Of the minuses, only landing and disembarkation: "a la BMP-3", but the side niches partially cover the landing, and it is possible to hide behind them if it becomes necessary to ride "on horseback" (the tasks are different).

    This option is quite acceptable and REAL, as a transitional model to the "normal" BTR-T (BMP-T).
    IMHO, of course.
    To the author - good luck in the search for optimal and interesting solutions.

    Photo: the dream of many - BMO-T, Krasotulya ...
    1. svp67
      svp67 14 August 2014 17: 21
      Quote: Aleks tv
      But to apply such a scheme for supporting units and support units - a very interesting concept can emerge.
      - Installation of MLRS with transportable additional ammunition,
      - Art, system,
      - UAV control and transportation machine,
      - A transport vehicle for transporting ammunition of various fire systems to the front edge, and sometimes even PTSku had to be driven through impassable dirt, since there is no normal conveyor (except for the engine mount, of course).
      - Yes, anything.

      hi Alex
      I believe that there are prospects, and it is in those areas that you noted ... it especially seems to me that this machine would not refuse to have a replaceable "second link" ...
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 14 August 2014 17: 39
        Quote: svp67
        this car, would not refuse to have a replaceable "second link" ...

        Good day, Sergey.
        Glad to hear that.

        Those. to Pinocchio to turn up the second link with additional ammunition? Covering it with good armor from sin away?
        A very good thought.
        Better not even "additional ammunition kit", but immediately place the SECOND rail in the second link, doubling the vehicle's fire salvo ... although it is already a giant explosives warehouse.
        But then you will have to drive less cars to the leading edge, thereby reducing noise, because Pinocchio too close to the front edge have to be customized ...
        Is there only the power of dviglu?

        It would be nice to hear the opinion of the gunners.
        1. svp67
          svp67 14 August 2014 18: 07
          Quote: Aleks tv
          But then you will have to drive less cars to the leading edge, thereby reducing noise, because Pinocchio too close to the front edge have to be customized ...
          Is there only the power of dviglu?
          Yes, there are a lot of things to think about, just in such a configuration, it would be possible to "lighten" the "second link" by removing the "extra armor" in the front projection, then increasing the bk and fuel, by the word "VZ" I use the "universal coupling device "to act as a" tanker "to replenish the" PZ "fuel and lubricants ... In general, it would be interesting to model and process this scheme.
          And it turns out that the vehicle proposed by the author is more suitable for the "first echelon" support and supply echelon than as combat vehicles ... And it would be interesting to think of something like this to ensure the actions of the promising Armata, something type "supply machine". Crawled up from behind, connected with an automatic coupler and quickly pumped fuel, replenished the BC and the rest ...
          1. Aleks tv
            Aleks tv 14 August 2014 18: 15
            Quote: svp67
            more suitable for "first echelon" support and supply echelon

            To the point of every word.
            1. svp67
              svp67 14 August 2014 18: 21
              Quote: Aleks tv
              To the point

              Here's the question, Alex, what do you think, if BMO-T had the opportunity to use RPO "out of armor", like an ATGM, would that be a plus, or is it "unnecessary"?
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 14 August 2014 18: 51
                Superfluous. But to use BMO-T as a carrier for a robot using RPO, that's it.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 14 August 2014 18: 59
                  Quote: Spade
                  But to use BMO-T as a carrier for a robot using RPO, that's it.
                  Again, you have to turn the media back and forth, then it will be possible to release such robots through the rear ramp and take them the same way ...
                  1. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 14 August 2014 19: 10
                    It's too hard. The trailer is in a combat situation, the body of "KamAZ" when moving. It will simply be possible to install a more powerful, and therefore heavier, control system for the robot on the BMO-T.
                    1. svp67
                      svp67 14 August 2014 19: 21
                      Quote: Spade
                      Too complicated.
                      You drop Armata from your shields. I am more and more convinced that this "chassis" can really become very promising ...
                      1. Lopatov
                        Lopatov 14 August 2014 19: 55
                        Of course I do. "Armata" is expensive, and therefore, first of all, we need tanks and maybe an ACS. And on BMO-T and other things, in my opinion, the T-72 should go. Until the vehicles on the basis of "Armata" appear, they will have time to develop their resource.
                      2. svp67
                        svp67 14 August 2014 20: 12
                        Quote: Spade
                        "Armata" is expensive, and therefore, first of all, we need tanks and maybe an ACS.
                        "Armata" will go into production at several factories and in various modifications, including as a heavy infantry fighting vehicle, but it will not be difficult to make such "carriers" out of it ...
                2. Oblozelo
                  Oblozelo 15 August 2014 00: 36
                  MONSTER! belay
                  such an add-in ... firebox lol
                3. Oblozelo
                  Oblozelo 15 August 2014 00: 38
                  A soldier has no right to give up his weapon, otherwise the tribunal!
              2. Aleks tv
                Aleks tv 14 August 2014 20: 31
                Quote: svp67
                if BMO-T had the ability to use RPO "out of armor", like ATGMs, would that be a plus, or is it "unnecessary"?

                On the extension bar like Chrysanthemum? And the nickname is different.
                Too many troubles for hand weapons, which is Bumblebee.
                IMHO, of course.
            2. The comment was deleted.
        2. Lopatov
          Lopatov 14 August 2014 18: 47
          Quote: Aleks tv
          Those. to Pinocchio to turn up the second link with additional ammunition? Covering it with good armor from sin away?

          Not worth it, a separate TPM is much better. Here it is, by the way, and can be articulated. As well as TPM for a promising "Coalition"

          Quote: Aleks tv
          But then you will have to drive less cars to the leading edge, thereby reducing noise, because Pinocchio too close to the front edge have to be customized ...

          The modernized "Solntsepёk" will not need to be driven out to the cutting edge at all. In fact, this is the most accurate Russian MLRS.
          1. Aleks tv
            Aleks tv 14 August 2014 20: 31
            Quote: Spade
            a separate TPM is much better. Here it is, by the way, and can be articulated. As well as TPM for a promising "Coalition"

            Good use.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 14 August 2014 20: 52
              In my opinion, the best use of this kind of machine is in the mountains and the north. That is, a niche that is now occupied by very weakly protected MT-LB and MT-LBv. On which to hang extra. armor is impossible - they will immediately lose their "all-terrain" capabilities.
    2. Oblozelo
      Oblozelo 15 August 2014 00: 33
      fervor is not always good.
      need to tear down the superstructure
      reclining landing
      armaments do not lift high, they will see from far away,
      but the most powerful and fully automatic.
      Landing by "unfastening", without injuries, ejection of the troop compartment.
      landing should be anatomically protected
      lobeshnik maximally protect
      force the engine
      the crew remaining in the vehicle must SUPPRESS the enemy.
      1. Oblozelo
        Oblozelo 17 August 2014 23: 08
        Marshal minus is equal to thirty-one ROW!
        Very grateful!
  12. Free wind
    Free wind 14 August 2014 19: 06
    1130 hp it's 831 kilowatts. Such an engine, pull the generator. power 900 kilowatt, can never. author. ... well, read at least physics. for 7 - 8 class. what idiocy. How did you study at school?
  13. Crang
    Crang 14 August 2014 19: 18
    I had such a two-link conveyor at my last job. Wow and we are tormented with him. Such a colossus - she does not have enough space to turn around. Articulated layout is not for military equipment IMHO.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 14 August 2014 20: 52
      And whose production was the device?
      1. Crang
        Crang 15 August 2014 08: 58
        Ours. Here is such a one:
  14. Denimax
    Denimax 14 August 2014 20: 34
    I saw a similar car when I served in the Bundeswehr. Wash the Swedish car was.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 14 August 2014 20: 57
      Bv206. A common machine, even to the Balts N pieces were given / presented.
      1. Denimax
        Denimax 14 August 2014 21: 42
        Exactly, she is.
  15. Denimax
    Denimax 14 August 2014 21: 50
    As a combat vehicle, this unit is hard to imagine. For some reason, the main armament is located on the rear platform, the dead angles will be significant.
    And not really fond of the side machine guns on the front platform, I do not like them on the BMP-3. If there is a weapon, then it should work unrestrictedly in all planes.
  16. The comment was deleted.
  17. Oblozelo
    Oblozelo 14 August 2014 23: 41
    there can’t be any flames around people, BURN!
  18. Hawk2014
    Hawk2014 15 August 2014 11: 30
    Quote: Pavel Skorohod
    “Does the army need a DBTR-T at the price of three BTR-T?”, Since in the course of modeling the possible characteristics of the DBTR-T, the idea of ​​a budget alteration of old T-55 tanks almost came to naught, which is perhaps the main disadvantage of this machine.

    The author himself understands the most important drawback of his idea. It is only necessary to add that at one time the BTR-T project was recognized by the Russian army as unsatisfactory. He was not accepted for service. Only in Bangladesh, presumably 30 T-54A tanks were converted to BTR-T in 2013.
    I think that the idea of ​​articulated BBT is contrived. For a start, it would not hurt to decide whether heavy armored personnel carriers are needed at all? what So far, only debates are going on around this idea, and far from the most "hot" ones. Apart from Israel, no one produces heavy armored personnel carriers, as mentioned in the article. But the Israelis are few, they even call women into the army! (hardly from a good life). The life of a representative of the "chosen by God" people is worth its weight in gold. They have a heavy armored personnel carrier, perhaps, and have a justification, although it is not known how many lives of Israeli soldiers "Namers" actually saved? what In other countries, about heavy infantry fighting vehicles / armored personnel carriers, I repeat, so far only sluggish talk.
    The articulated circuit has worked well on all-terrain vehicles designed for use in extreme climatic and road conditions. The domestic industry produces two types of such machines - GAZ-3344 and DT-10
  19. Asgard of Iry
    Asgard of Iry 15 August 2014 14: 49
    Good day, Colleagues! Since the end of the 70s, practically "from the first peg", that is, from the very beginning of construction, I had the good fortune, with some interruptions, to work on the Ishimbay "Swamp" (that's how the locals called, and still call OJSC "Machine-building company" Vityaz "- in the old days called" IZTM "," Ishimbaitransmash "and OJSC Ishimbay transport machine-building plant" Vityaz "). Participated in the development, fine-tuning, putting into production, serial production and modernization of articulated tracked vehicles of the snow and swamp class - two-link tracked transporters of the "Vityaz" family: DT-10P, DT-20P, DT-30, DT-30P and their various modifications intended both for "national economy" and for TT and TZ MO. Therefore, I can, enough to competently and competently answer, practically, any questions related to this topic, and also, if someone is specifically interested in it, share photos, videos and "pictures" from your personal archive ...
  20. Clueless
    Clueless 15 August 2014 16: 13
    Quote: quilted jacket
    DT-30 knight, all the same, beautiful and amazing machines were built in the USSR:

    They are now successfully being built, and a lot of new modifications have appeared. Buy them just as well :)
  21. xomaNN
    xomaNN 15 August 2014 22: 01
    The illustrations are excellent! And set out sensibly and harmoniously. Respect to the author.