Engineering plant in the city of Arzamas


The world's most famous armored personnel carriers - the BTR-80 - have visited many of the hot spots and are located on a vast number of countries.
But few people know where they are produced. To your attention is a report on the Arzamas machine-building plant in the Nizhny Novgorod region - the only place where they are produced.

Unique training class. Inside is a training copy of the BTR in the section.

Engineering plant in the city of Arzamas

Many various knots of this car

And here is the BTR-80 - perhaps the most famous car of the entire model range of the plant. Photos from the training ground of the plant, where the demonstrative tests of this machine took place.

This amazing armored personnel carrier can even swim. Behind it is a screw, with the aid of which it floats.

The screw is located behind the valve, which, if necessary, removed.

Also, the plant has its own pool. Priched for armored personnel carriers. It is huge, occupies the whole workshop area and reaches to the depth of 6м.

A few photos of the factory:

And here are the various modifications of the BTR-80 as well as new models of the plant:

BTR-90 is preparing to replace the BTR-80 in service:

One of the innovations of the BTR-90 is the 2 powerful turbines located on the sides, instead of a screw.

This makes it possible not only to swim over water obstacles but also to develop a decent speed.

And here is one of the armored jeeps that are starting to produce in this factory. "Tiger"
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    3 November 2011 07: 58
    Arzamas is spelled with one "s". Live here.
  2. +11
    3 November 2011 08: 58
    The pool for armored personnel carriers is a good thing smile
    These photographs, it was necessary to see, the zampotech of our regiment (for the man piously believed that it’s unthinkable, and at the mention of passing the standards for shooting "afloat", he fell into an extreme degree of psycho-emotional excitement, dangerous for subordinates).
    Part of this negative energy, apparently transmitted to the personnel and the equipment itself (BTR-70), as a result of 2 out of 3 carefully selected and solid-weighted bets, they sank safely 5 meters from the coast, having already shot and overcome 95% of the water barrier ....
    1. itr
      3 November 2011 09: 08
      It's funny about the pool But the armored personnel carrier hasn’t really changed and it’s sadly strange that it is still the best in the world (what engine is 90?)
      1. +5
        3 November 2011 09: 53
        don’t be afraid, in 2013 we’ll imagine such an armored troop carrier that you’ll download.
        1. Alexey Prikazchikov
          3 November 2011 10: 27
          Well then, good luck, and we are its main users hope for you.
        2. KASKAD
          6 November 2011 01: 17
          When people go on an excursion to Mars at the weekend, AvtoVAZ will install a 6-speed automatic transmission on the VAZ 2106 ..............
      2. Joker
        3 November 2011 14: 36
        Quote: itr
        which engine is 90?

        There are different versions, the last of the presented MTO was unified with BMP-3 / BMD-4M.
      3. kesa1111
        7 November 2011 01: 54
        510 l / s
    2. +5
      3 November 2011 10: 37
      One "military expert" served in the regiment, who managed to sink an armored personnel carrier, PTS, and PT-76 during his service. No village can do without a local clown. So it is in the army. wink
      1. Ion coaelung
        3 November 2011 11: 03
        That's why they are skillful hands! If you try, then this can not be drowned :)
  3. +5
    3 November 2011 12: 51
    Ludsheb photographs of the workshops were laid out as they are assembled. It's interesting to see how technologically advanced the production is.
  4. +2
    3 November 2011 15: 00
    I am very happy for our Arzamas Engineering Plant that they were able to survive the difficulties of the 90s and the past crisis. It is no secret, the plant was on the verge of bankruptcy. For example, at the beginning of last year, the mass of workers was forced to go on administrative leave for several months. Now the work seems to be enough.
    About 20 years ago, I often watched as these new armored vehicles, pieces of 5-10 each, flew from the factory to the firing range, to firing. Now this is already a rarity.
    But even now the plant has problems. For example, according to a friend of mine who works at this plant, the assembly is carried out literally on the knee, the mechanics of the machines seem to be nothing, but there are problems with the electronics. BTR 90 in fact, only 2 copies were produced, one of which is periodically taken to exhibitions. Now a new modification of the BTR-82 is being tested. The difference from the BTR-80 in engine power, armament, guidance and weapon stabilization. While there is a problem with the strength of the tower structure, because on tests from the power of the gun, the structure does not withstand the load.
    The Moscow Region periodically allocates money for the development and modernization of products, but, as usual, these funds do not reach the destination in full. And simply put in a pocket.
    For information, one instance of the BTR-80 costs a little more than 20 million rubles.
    By the way, every year, at the bottom of the city of Arzamas, you can see the products of AZM and even sit inside)))

    I visited the site of the plant, clicked on the link to the price list and found this joke:
    As it turned out later, this director is selling his car))) Does this already mean something?)))
    1. Sergh
      3 November 2011 15: 31
      Ha, funny! Ask the men, at night, an armored personnel carrier on the roof of the Cruiser ride, though it is a pity, damn .., because a new one will buy ...
  5. gunship
    3 November 2011 17: 57
    Quote: itr
    strange that he is still the best in the world

    he is far from the best
    1. KASKAD
      6 November 2011 01: 21
      I completely agree with how many people in this coffin who are shot by small arms were killed
  6. mishan
    4 November 2011 13: 59
    No one considers the BTR-80 or BTR-90 to be absolutely the best in the world. But according to a number of parameters, foreign analogues are far from * opera, and they fought much less than our armored personnel carriers (with the exception of the 90th).
    The BTR-90 is a completely different machine than the 80, but as ANY mechanism, it is not without its drawbacks. If anyone is interested, I advise you to watch the film "Impact Force" about Sprout.
    1. +2
      4 November 2011 14: 05
      You may not be supported in your statements. smile Now in fashion three fetishes - V-shaped bottom, aft exit for the infantry, and the desire to book against all the weapons in the world. All other qualities are not interesting to many bloggers ...
      1. kesa1111
        7 November 2011 02: 00
        Still fixing the seats to the roof or sides.
    2. KASKAD
      6 November 2011 01: 22
      Still watching this show visiting a fairy tale?
  7. 0
    4 November 2011 17: 25
    Attention! You do not have permission to view hidden text.

    and the amphibious assault troops are also vryatli interesting
    1. 0
      4 November 2011 17: 26
      Why are the landing parties not interested?
      1. andreypilot
        9 November 2011 00: 57
        I think because they are mainly interested in security ..
  8. +1
    4 November 2011 17: 41
    Because they are primarily interested in surviving, and this provides a quote from the V-shaped bottom, aft exit for infantry, and the desire to book against all weapons in the world
    1. -1
      4 November 2011 17: 47
      As for the bottom, I can try to agree, but it’s impossible to book from everything in a row, even with tanks. And about the stern hatch, it’s not very clear at all - someone hopes to run through the convoy all the time after their armored personnel carrier?
      1. The comment was deleted.
  9. 0
    5 November 2011 15: 12
    Either you, a condom full of semolina, are normally trying to talk to me, or I will shove you in your face again. Choose.
    1. -3
      5 November 2011 17: 22
      Do you even know the word rationality? Most likely not ... I will try to explain - the tank is the most armored vehicle because it is the first line vehicle in battle. It accounts for the bulk of shots from anti-tank weapons and enemy tanks. He just has to be well armored. its main task is to overcome the enemy's defense with its relative defense and fire. BMP is a second line vehicle in battle. Its main task is to deliver the infantry to the combat area and provide fire support to the infantry in battle, moving behind the TANKS. With all this, the infantry generally operates on foot, that is, OUTSIDE the BMP corps. The BMP is mainly affected by small arms, machine guns, and fragments of artillery shells. Therefore, the armoring of the BMP is not so serious, while maintaining high mobility. Tanks and infantry fighting vehicles have different tasks in battle, different positions in battle. The tank is a more specialized vehicle, the BMP is more versatile. You can, of course, bring the armoring of the BMP to the level of tanks, but is it necessary? In this situation, the infantry will still be on foot, but we will get a very heavy and sedentary vehicle. Analyzing the battle in the city, we can also say that booking a heavy infantry fighting vehicle is not a panacea for all ills. All the same, in the city there will be no infantry sitting in a car or hiding behind it. She will have to, moving from shelter to shelter, cover her car, destroying grenade launchers, ATGM crews and other evil spirits, with the support of BMP weapons. Otherwise, like a tank, a heavy infantry fighting vehicle will be shot at vulnerable projections. In the city this is not a problem at all - there is an opportunity to hit from above, from behind, from basements, from close range. In the city, not armor is important, but tactics of action. Any, the most armored vehicle, without infantry cover, in the city is easy to immobilize, blind, shoot from all sides, or just throw Molotov cocktails from the upper floors. So to rest on one armor, in my opinion, is not entirely true.
      1. ereke
        5 November 2011 20: 58
        It is in your head a compromise between the mind and the madness, how do you like to say your rationality is to be b-l-i-du (I do not mind you) and a man on the other hand. Now engineers and manufacturers of armor have achieved considerable success in creating new types of armor. your knowledge that there is only clearly homogeneous (homogeneous) was awesome in the 60s. when there was little TCP in the infantry. Now, in addition to the main armor, the Tank, BMP, and BTR armored combat modules of additional and light weight armor are still mounted on top. But as persistent as the main one. Result of armor protection increases significantly. This additional reservation can be composite (basically it is) from Kevlar, rubber, plastic, ceramics and an aluminum layer. in different combinations, All of this can be reinforced either in the biotechnology together with the high generativity of technology in the form of separate modules. Or embed on top of the main one, making the armor spaced, layered, and still covering with thin armor. From this, the weight will not increase too much, but security is essential.

        And at the expense of your vyser to throw a Molotov cocktail, so it is only at demonstrations that they throw armored vehicles into police that have no weapons. (footage from Europe, in particular in Ireland in the recent past, this happened, armored "Land Rovers" police demonstrators Catholics threw, well, there were cases in Paris)

        But try in a battle in the city to throw a Molotov cocktail into a real combat vehicle during the battle. Let's see if you can fagot approach the throw distance (30 meters)
        1. -3
          6 November 2011 01: 17
          Do you hear, saxaul-bala, why are you so stupid? Do you really lacquer brake fluid? With you, and in truth, it becomes zapadlo to communicate because of your frank denseness. But I will answer you, slow gas - I know perfectly well what space armor is, what composite materials are, what is dynamic protection, and what are various lattice screens. And I'm only FOR their use on vehicles such as BMP or armored personnel carriers. I am opposed to armoring this vehicle on a tank type, when there is explosive reactive armor and composite materials, and thick armor steel. As a result, all this leads to an increase in post weight up to 40 tons. And about the Molotov cocktails in battle: firstly, I said that they can be used from the upper floors, when the infantry tries to sit inside the BMP or hide behind the vehicle. And secondly, this tool was successfully used during street battles in Grozny. By the way, the BTR-60 received an armored roof after the events in Hungary, when a grenade or a "Molotov cocktail" was thrown into this vehicle from the top. You either read more attentively what you are not far off, normal people write, or hire yourself a translator. I already got your woodiness.
          1. ereke
            6 November 2011 07: 08
            Hear a fagot you are not just a fagot, but also a serf who was left unattended by the owner and drunk on quietly.
            And what, fagot, you suddenly came out for the reservation, the roof began to be booked with the BTR-60, which means that you still need armor.

            Cases are different now in the morning in the parking lot in the parking lot my taxi driver drove into my car, as it turned out to have 30 years of experience, and in theory it should not happen with such a maneuver a collision will occur, and the incident came out, as an exception. So it is with Molotov's "cocktails". Isolated cases with a favorable moment for an infantryman and also depends on his personal qualities that he took advantage of the moment and an unfavorable moment for military equipment can be thrown in the Molotov cocktail, but still extinguished, play no role and thus no result in the confrontation between the parties will be achieved ... But even during the Second World War 1941-42. the Soviet army had the most powerful anti-tank artillery and anti-tank defense since the end of 1941, from the winter when the Wehrmacht stood near Moscow and no one even hoped for anti-tank grenades, let alone incendiary bottles, there were isolated cases, but replicated, in order to increase the military spirit and to combat the fear of tanks among the infantry, and also replicated for people like you slaves who still continue to believe that the war was won with Molotov cocktails.

            And the tanks were knocked out by anti-tank artillery guns of calibers 45, 57, 76, starting from the 44th year, the most powerful anti-tank gun created in the entire war, 100 mm, joined the fight with the enemy's armored vehicles. BS-3, which from a distance of 1 kilometer pierced the armor of the "tiger" and which is still in service with the CIS countries and the Russian Federation (in the Russian Federation it was modernized and under the name MT-12 "Rapier" it was in the SV and was used by the Chechens against the armored vehicles of the federals in Grozny 94-95 and also in many third countries available in CB

            Now the TCP for infantry also does not stand still, more and more guided cumulative missiles are being served by one person, hand-held grenades of disposable and reusable use have spread in large numbers

            And military equipment must be protected to the maximum extent possible using all the achievements of science and technology.
            You need to strangle you fagot, for such words, it’s a shame for motor riflemen, be it your way, it’s certain that you will inevitably lose big losses in people in any war

            Fagot stop drinking, otherwise you see bottles everywhere
            1. -3
              6 November 2011 09: 02
              Again you, donkey, donkey's son, began to shit on the air. Are you suffering from bouts of diarrhea? Take some pill for diarrhea, and stop splashing loose stools on your keyboard. Why are you writing me a bunch of text about "Rapier" and RPG again? I found out about them when you were still shitting on sliders, walking saxaul. When will you learn to read normally? You only have to play backgammon with your rams with a score of 2: 2, and not talk about military topics with normal people. I cited a Molotov cocktail as an example of the most elementary way to destroy your heaviest armored personnel carrier, if your infantry stuck inside the vehicle, relying only on its armor. I'm not talking about RPGs and ATGMs at all, your iron coffin with the thickest armor, without infantry, will still be burned. Why did the tanks in Grozny initially have 6-8 hits? Because they were used insanely. Such as you, thinking that heavy armor would save them, and did not try to cover their vehicles with infantry. I repeat especially for you, deserter from the army, in the city everything is decided not by armor, but by the ability to fight. Will you grunt me something else, magazine dreamer. And I gave you the roof of the BTR-60 as an example of the fact that in the city and in the mountains the upper hemisphere becomes very dangerous. You in the army should have been sent to the regimental stoker or to the pigsty until the demobilization.
              1. ereke
                6 November 2011 19: 49
                Heard you're not just a fagot. A cattle fagot. Unfortunately, there are a lot of such people in Russia. For one brilliant or talented and not only Mikoyan or Gurevich, but also Russian Mendeleev for example, there are millions of such cattle. Now it’s true that people like you cattle have also become fagots who haven’t disappeared from their hole. You are confusing us with someone, we don’t keep donkeys, and pigs too, here you are fagot and grunt. At the expense of your father, you're so vain pig. Hearing someday the time will come.

                Will stick around a member in your ass

                I at the expense of Chechnya, such as you fagots thought, the motorized rifle did not arrive even when they were not in armor but on the streets of a foreign city, they simply fell under enemy fire, and it was not anyone who defended them with fire and armor, all armored vehicles failed, that's because such an idea that you are a fagot and support. While you fagot sat out, young guys perished. and now I’ve come out and want to prove something. Although it has long been clear that you are stupid, because a fagot. And fagots, as you know, cannot think like real men
                1. 0
                  7 November 2011 01: 12
                  After your words, everything became clear - you are an ordinary, stupid, near apricot. Dumb reindeer herder Beldyev. In the army, such hemp with eyes was called a little pig. And not even because of nationality, but because of hopeless stupidity. Here again, you try to bear all sorts of crap with a smart look, although it has long become clear that you know nothing, have never been anywhere, have not seen anything, and subtract all your thoughts from children's magazines, comics, and computer games. I’m not going to argue with you anymore, because I think that it makes no sense for me to a normal person who gave the army twenty-five years to talk with a crazy, inappropriate person. You don’t have a brain under the skullcap, there’s one horse dung. That's it, Vakutagin, go play further backgammon with your rams and don’t shine. Ushlepok.
  10. 0
    6 November 2011 00: 01
    Respected erix-xnumx all that you gave as an example the first line the second, etc. was characteristic of a big war in which the USSR could participate but not for current realities
    1. 0
      6 November 2011 00: 58
      And what kind of modern realities do you see? Try to give an example of Chechnya or Libya? The realities of the war will be determined by the objectives of this war and the composition of the warring parties. And if the aggressor side is met with a worthy rebuff, then it will be forced to either withdraw or increase its efforts through the use of more troops in a wider space. Then the scale of hostilities will increase significantly. And shooting some rebels from the air is not a confrontation of equal opponents. What role do you lead the Russian army in, as rebels or as police forces?
  11. 0
    6 November 2011 21: 25
    Well, we turned the discussion of the article into another messenger (((
  12. +2
    7 November 2011 01: 11
    erix-xnumx I understand that you still see columns of tanks going into deep breakthroughs ... through the vast expanses of Siberia or the central part of Russia ??????????????????
    and in response we are deploying the same grouping (as by the way on most of our exercises. judging by the photo reports presented here) ...
    Dream ............ and not war :-))))))))))))))

    I see our army in a heap of minor conflicts ... where it will be more necessary to shoot rebels from the air .. and yes ... NOT a confrontation of equal opponents, FOR this is a nuclear WAR !!!!!!!!!!!!!
    1. -3
      7 November 2011 01: 24
      So, in your opinion, what role will Russia play in these minor conflicts? In the role of the one who shoots, or in the role of rebels? And if the rebels are not us, then who? Speaking about the columns of tanks, they are seen not only by me, but by many others on this planet- China is improving its tanks, India is creating its tanks, Pakistan is creating its tanks, South Korea is creating its tanks, NATO countries are modernizing their tanks .... In addition , It would be very useful for you to find out the subject and orientation of the exercises of the armed forces of Western states.
  13. 0
    7 November 2011 11: 08
    It’s better of course that we shoot the rebels than us.
    I specifically didn’t have anything against the tanks, and as far as I remember, we started discussing with the topic of strengthening the protection of infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers ... and you erix-xnumx started to paint rainbow pictures of attacks from the second world war. (I think you are a military man?)
    1. -2
      7 November 2011 12: 38
      I did not draw any pictures, especially rainbow ones. Here are your thoughts that our armed forces will be engaged only in pursuit of some kind of basmachi or half-bombs, can be called more rosy. And can you clarify the most likely nationality or territorial affiliation of these partisans in your opinion?
  14. +1
    7 November 2011 13: 41
    erix-xnumx we moved away from the topic does not seem ????
    dispute about reinforcing armored personnel carriers and aft exit for infantry
    1. -2
      7 November 2011 14: 26
      No, we’re just getting close to her. A correct understanding of the conditions in which it is necessary to operate the equipment will allow us to create the most successful construction of the equipment for these conditions. This also applies to the type of reservation and location of the exit for the infantry. Do you agree that the infantry will perform all its main tasks outside the BMP or BTR corps?
  15. 0
    7 November 2011 14: 57
    It may just be desirable to have gunpots with MRAP and BMPs like pumas with mounted reservations (for each situation). And do not suffer in disputes, only economically it is difficult.

    PS And to stoop to insults (first of all it concerns ereke) is not worthy of a man.
    1. 0
      7 November 2011 15: 19
      Here, in order not to fall into hysterical disputes and not spit poison into each other, I suggest that we gradually, step by step, consider the situation in which our soldiers will have to act. Can you answer my question that I asked my interlocutor above?
  16. +1
    7 November 2011 16: 03
    Ok let's consider dear erix-xnumx
    So, the conflict in the Far East with China .... if this is possible in the future .... will immediately develop into an exchange of nuclear strikes .. why do not stop them
    In the West, what threats do you see?
    and in the south first of all MRAP will be needed
    1. +1
      8 November 2011 01: 23
      You see, your reasoning immediately contradicts the real situation in the country. I explain that in Soviet times, in the USSR, on each strategic direction in peacetime, almost self-sufficient groupings of troops were created to repel a well-defined enemy. These groups were armed with their own type of equipment and all the corresponding stocks of materiel and ammunition. In the western districts, the country had, for example, T-80 and T-64b tanks, BTR-80 armored personnel carriers, and T-55 tanks and BTR-50 armored personnel carriers in Transbaikalia and the Far East. The same happened with artillery ... Under this technique, huge reserves of spare parts and ammunition were created. But the Soviet Union did not and we cannot now contain such groups purely for a particular enemy. The country's leadership announced the creation of a small, but well-armed, and highly mobile army. That is, our connections should be ready for inter-theater transfer in the shortest possible time, in various ways. And in these conditions, the ability of equipment to fight in various climatic and geographical conditions, as well as the high unification of combat platforms, becomes very important. Moreover, the option is provided when personnel can arrive in the area of ​​possible military operations without their equipment at all, getting it at the storage bases at the place of arrival ... And then all your MRAPs will be absolutely unnecessary in the open spaces of Siberia against the mechanized armies of China.
  17. +1
    7 November 2011 16: 19
    But China must be stopped without nuclear weapons. Aviation and VET. But with what to stop them, this is a big question.
  18. 0
    7 November 2011 16: 49
    But China must be stopped without nuclear weapons. Aviation and VET

    I think this is not possible, otherwise I will have to keep a huge army in this direction

    But China must be stopped without nuclear weapons. Aviation and VET

    I think this is not possible, otherwise I will have to keep a huge army in this direction
  19. 0
    7 November 2011 16: 50
    And how much is huge?
  20. +1
    7 November 2011 17: 17
    :-)))))))) kagorta
    i understand your sarcasm
    China has one of the most powerful armies in the world .. (the number of the first) Well, I'm not an expert on how many troops it will take to contain such aggression without nuclear weapons.
    But it seems to me that all of our current army will not be enough .. (and we will not have air superiority)
    1. -2
      8 November 2011 02: 38
      And why are you sure that we will not have air superiority? Of course, if we build our Armed Forces for the sole purpose of solving the tasks of exterminating some Indians, then we will not have superiority anywhere near the normal army, either in the air, on land, or at sea. And then already in these conditions they will destroy us like any rabble of armed bandits.
  21. 0
    7 November 2011 18: 23
    Enough with air superiority, I think (although not an expert either). And the fact that we will not see him in five years. If the t-50 will fly in series and how many will order. And the question was about the BMP and the armored personnel carrier (in my opinion, it should be developed like a German puma with hinged reservation and that would have sailed necessarily in an easy version).
    Yes, and such a theoretical question, how do you evaluate humanity for resources will fight or not in the medium term.
    1. 0
      8 November 2011 11: 42
      There are a couple of questions about the outboard booking - how many additional trucks will be needed to transport this reservation? And how long will the removal and installation of this reservation in the field by the crew take?
  22. 0
    7 November 2011 18: 27
    I think we’ll probably live to see these days of the war for resources of 20-30 years
    but about armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, everything has already been decided, sort of ... there will be unified platforms for tanks and heavy infantry fighting vehicles as well as a single wheeled platform, so let's see
  23. +1
    8 November 2011 03: 10
    Of course, if you build your Armed Forces only to solve the tasks of extermination of some Indians

    I did not say this .......... the army should be ready for all threats.
    for some nuclear weapons ...
    but you also need to drive the "Indians" with something ..
    I can’t imagine yet ... how to restrain the Chinese with conventional weapons ... and .... WHY ??????????? when there is nuclear weapons
    I also agree that tank brigades are needed.
    but we will never bring their numbers for an equal combined battle with China
    1. 0
      8 November 2011 03: 34
      We are a little out of the way of a consistent discussion of technology ... Have you read my thought, which I set out in my previous message today at 01:23?
    2. 0
      9 November 2011 07: 15
      Do you realize that the use of nuclear weapons in relation to China will make half the territories of Russia unsuitable for life? And also if Russia is the first to use nuclear weapons, it will untie the hands of all other countries?
  24. 0
    8 November 2011 13: 12
    erix-xnumx your thought (and of our leadership) as I understood about the unification of platforms .. in view of the difficulties of transporting equipment over long distances, it is supposed to transfer personnel .. and since the equipment is unified, it will not be necessary to retrain the time ... this is the idea of ​​the development of our armed and not It is necessary to create powerful groupings in all directions.
    With this I agree ........
    But what are we arguing about ...... as the teachings of the past in the Far East have shown, this is still not enough! WITHOUT NW can not do
    Unified platforms are being created.
    And since you erix-xnumx see a wheeled platform?
    1. +1
      8 November 2011 13: 43
      I propose in our conversations not to consider the use of nuclear weapons, but to limit ourselves to discussing promising platforms ... Speaking about these platforms, they should, in my opinion, be two-wheeled and tracked. Although, ideally, one ... But this will most likely be impossible to achieve. Both vehicles must be floating, having protection from 30 mm of projectiles in the frontal projection and at least 12,7 mm of bullets from other directions. It should be possible to install dynamic protection against portable RPGs. Among other things, it should be possible to install replaceable modules of the fighting compartment and the troop compartment. The wheel platform should have an 8 by 8 formula.
  25. 0
    8 November 2011 13: 56
    it turns out that two light platforms, one wheeled and the other tracked. And in the plans of our Moscow Region, only wheeled light. Although you're erix-06 right, I think so too. Only in a circle of 14,5 mm (except for the forehead).
    1. 0
      8 November 2011 14: 08
      I know about these plans. But I think that a heavy platform is impractical. Our conversation began with a discussion of the likely nature of possible hostilities. Not in vain did I strive at the very beginning to determine the enemy and his goals in the fighting. The nature of possible hostilities will depend on this. And this, in turn, will affect the operating conditions of military equipment. It’s one thing to shoot basmachi in the steppe on the move, and quite another to move along heavy off-road, bypassing the fortified areas of the enemy, destroyed or mined sections of roads and bridges. It is one thing to fight at roadblocks along the roads and it is another thing to repel the onslaught of an armored enemy under the fire of his artillery and air strikes.
    2. Mr. Truth
      8 November 2011 14: 14
      It will be heavy with two MTO options (front and rear), an average platform weighing up to 25 tons, a wheeled and tracked unified BO SUO and an engine, there will be no light caterpillar tracks, except for a two-link conveyor for two Arctic brigades.
      It is better to build additional production facilities and make the average caterpillar equipment the main one.
      Our country is big, I can’t imagine the Omsbr brtr in battles in the mountains, in the taiga or on the hills near the Sikhote-Alin.
      1. 0
        8 November 2011 14: 20
        I propose the technology of the Arctic brigades, marines and airborne forces so far not to touch because of the specificity and stop on motorized rifle, as the most numerous troops?
        1. Mr. Truth
          8 November 2011 14: 41
          The use of a single BBM model will facilitate the work of the rear organs, and the repair units of battalions and brigades. Therefore, I am for a single medium tracked platform for the Airborne Forces, MPs and NEs and a two-link conveyor for the Arctic grouping. For the Airborne Forces and MP, you can use slightly lightweight modifications of cars or a lightweight complex of cars as a whole.
          1. 0
            8 November 2011 14: 51
            Your idea is clear, but for the Airborne Forces and the MP half measures may not help ...
            1. Mr. Truth
              8 November 2011 15: 34
              Nevertheless, it will be better than the current BMD, even the latest shielded ones.
              1. 0
                8 November 2011 15: 57
                Heavy vehicles in the Airborne Forces are not quite suitable - the aircraft has a load limit ...
      2. 0
        8 November 2011 15: 11
        That is, in the Far East, a heavy (tanks) and medium tracked platform.
        1. 0
          8 November 2011 15: 16
          What is the average tracked platform in your understanding?
          1. 0
            8 November 2011 15: 24
            And Mr. Truth wrote about it with a weight of up to 25 tons, if BMP-3 is 18,7 tons, then 6 tons can be hung with a lot of delicious.
            1. 0
              8 November 2011 15: 31
              I propose not to be attached to the parameters set by the Ministry of Defense, but to figure out for ourselves what kind of car we need? That's why exactly 25 tons? Is it a lot or a little? Will such a machine float? And such a machine can be transferred Mi-26? And can two such vehicles be transported on a 4-axle platform or only one, like a tank?
              1. Mr. Truth
                8 November 2011 15: 43
                25 tons is the optimal weight for a tracked vehicle with acceptable armor and a complex of weapons, I personally for replacing 100 mm +30 mm with 57 mm AP without ATGM, combat vehicles of the battalion’s fire support units and companies can be limited by KKP + AGS, with this option more space for ammunition and fire calculations.
                1. 0
                  8 November 2011 15: 47
                  Why exactly 25 tons is the optimal weight? Can you answer my questions in a previous post?
                  1. Mr. Truth
                    8 November 2011 16: 16
                    The weight of the machine without BO bases will be about 20 tons, this is enough to protect the circular protection from the CCP, shell fragments and forehead from 25-30 mm up, if more protection does not increase much the machine will no longer be floating and at the same time will be inferior to the armored personnel carrier / BMP (T).
                    Yes it will swim)
                    MI-26 can transfer such machines to external load, but this is already in overload.
                    As for the railway platforms, 2 are placed right up to the butt, but now even trucks actually carry one at a time.
                    1. 0
                      9 November 2011 00: 38
                      That's about it - a machine weighing more than 20 tons will most likely not be floating, cannot be transferred by helicopter, and it will take twice as many platforms to transport it by rail. And to overcome water barriers in the brigade will require twice as much engineering ferry equipment. In addition, a more powerful engine will be required, which will lead to an increase in fuel consumption, which means there will be more tankers in the rear. In general, problems will increase.
        2. Mr. Truth
          8 November 2011 15: 29
          And also throughout Siberia in the south of the Urals and the Caucasus, caterpillars are needed everywhere.
    3. 0
      8 November 2011 14: 16
      Of course, I would like the car to be able to hold 14,5 on board, but this is a rather serious reservation and it can significantly make the car heavier. You need to figure out which caliber is more common with a potential enemy. If 12,7, then it makes no sense to hang up extra armor, since the BTR is not a tank, every kilogram of weight on the account.
  26. +1
    8 November 2011 14: 24
    Yes, our thoughts converge, but where will we use the wheeled? wink
    1. Mr. Truth
      8 November 2011 14: 45
      Auxiliary and easy connections.
      A sanitary machine, a communications vehicle, a convoy vehicle, an ammunition and fuel transportation vehicle.
      Preferably on the basis of a truck from a family of medium trucks.
      1. 0
        8 November 2011 14: 59
        What is a convoy car? Though kill, I can not understand this !!! I hear this term, but I can’t understand. What kind of escort troops will ride them?
        1. Mr. Truth
          8 November 2011 15: 26
          No, these are the same Urals and Zils with the ZU-23-2 installed in the back, but brought to mind and put on the conveyor.
          1. 0
            8 November 2011 15: 33
            What are they for? And which units will ride them?
            1. Mr. Truth
              8 November 2011 15: 46
              No matter how stupid it may sound, they are designed to suppress ambush fires and fire comb through alleged firing points and sniper positions.
              The security department of the transport platoon of the battalion MTO company and, accordingly, the convoy platoon of the brigade.
              1. 0
                8 November 2011 15: 54
                That is, do you propose creating additional security units for the rear of battalions and brigades? And why on trucks with ZUShki, and not on an armored personnel carrier or infantry fighting vehicle?
                1. Mr. Truth
                  8 November 2011 16: 31
                  I propose actually to have in the rear of the battalions an additional platoon of armored vehicles for the transportation of fuel and lubricants and armored vehicles in wartime, and a compartment for convoy vehicles at the same base.
                  Because the wheelbase of a truck is cheaper, easier to manufacture and repair, it eats less fuel.
              2. kesa1111
                8 November 2011 16: 35
                More rational drones - helicopters with thermal imagers for search and target designation (3 4 per column). And in the future, and the defeat of discovered targets with their weapons or caused by aircraft. And yet, it’s better to have an armored personnel carrier with Bahcea than an unarmored truck.
                1. Mr. Truth
                  8 November 2011 16: 48
                  This is already a bit greasy, but drones it goes without saying.
  27. +1
    8 November 2011 14: 25
    Respected erix-xnumx
    Attention! You do not have permission to view hidden text.

    Well, come back to this later
    as I understand it, you are considering a technique capable of withstanding the Chinese threat, so to speak, in a classic war ?!
    So we decided on the enemy CHINA.
    And for action in this direction, we are considering a wheeled paltform
    8 by 8 protection against 30 mm shells in the frontal projection and at least 12,7 mm bullets from other directions.
    And what will be the mass? plus she still has to swim?
    and how much landing?
    1. Mr. Truth
      8 November 2011 14: 42
      Wheel equipment for databases in the Far East is not suitable, all connections on the Far East are equipped with BMP and MTLB.
      1. His
        8 November 2011 16: 01
        It is strange that wheeled vehicles are considered poorly passable. Type on the y-tube the word road and stumble upon such wheeled all-terrain vehicles that go through the swamp be healthy. It all depends on the genius of designers
        1. Mr. Truth
          8 November 2011 16: 38
          Again, this is not a combat vehicle, for a combat vehicle the most compromise option is a caterpillar mover. And let wheeled all-terrain vehicles be in the rear.
    2. 0
      8 November 2011 14: 50
      The landing is a standard infantry squad. And about the enemy, why only China? Do we have resolved all the problems in the Caspian? Is Turkey heading for disarmament? Fukushima finally finished off Japan? And the struggle for the north is just beginning to unfold ... The fact is what goals the enemy sets for himself. Yes, and you wrote off the West too soon. As said, in my opinion. Churchill politicians evaluate intentions, and military potentials ... Or do you suggest that we have an army only to confront Georgia or Latvia?
      1. Mr. Truth
        8 November 2011 14: 54
        Moreover, you called possible theaters of operations where only tracked vehicles will give almost complete freedom of maneuver.
        1. 0
          8 November 2011 15: 00
          Mostly yes. An exception may be the south of the country.
          1. Mr. Truth
            8 November 2011 15: 28
            The mountains? Caterpillars are needed there again.
            1. 0
              8 November 2011 15: 35
              Why only mountains? There are also enough Caspian plains. And what is better than lumber wheels in the mountains?
              1. Mr. Truth
                8 November 2011 15: 51
                The pieces can rotate in place, the wheels too, but with tracks it is easier to stir up. Off-road patency is higher and access to shore afloat easier can be in some cases.
                1. 0
                  8 November 2011 15: 55
                  We are talking about mountains, it’s difficult to swim in mountain rivers ...
                  1. Mr. Truth
                    8 November 2011 16: 35
                    Well, I didn’t mean only the mountains.
                    1. -1
                      9 November 2011 02: 16
                      The mountains? Caterpillars are needed there again.- here is your phrase. There are only mountains in it.
                  2. ereke
                    13 November 2011 21: 23
                    We are talking about mountains, it’s difficult to swim in mountain rivers ...

                    Here again, he wrote off my comments. And in the topic about the BTR -90 to the army on this resource. You argued and proved to me that in the Russian Federation there are many rivers and in the mountains there are also many rivers and you need a water-based armored personnel carrier.

                    You are a waterfowl duck, when I told you that in the mountains of the river it is rare and the mountains are not abundant in rivers, I personally know that the source of water in the mountains is not easy to find. And what kind of rivers are in the mountains, then they are with a strong current i.e. turbulent and there BMPs and armored personnel carriers afloat at best turn upside down if it is not a ford (where you can drive like this without swimming) You still did not agree

                    And now I look, I made conclusions and already on a different poosh, well, if you are a man pi-gift
                    1. 0
                      16 November 2011 12: 51
                      What kind of wood are you ... Re-read carefully what I wrote, and then you will quack on the Internet. I see, you really escaped from the shelter, for the insane ... I talked about the territory of the European part of Russia, Siberia, and the Far East. I did not speak about swimming in mountain rivers. You confused everything again because of your stupidity ... And you, wooden, need to understand that the mountains occupy a fairly small part of the country. In addition, motorized rifle brigades should be ready for use on any theater. In general, go to the toilet, close there, and no longer crawl out with your schizophrenia.
                      1. ereke
                        20 November 2011 23: 57
                        I am friends with memory for now, and I remember your denials in kamenty, pe-dik and duck swimming.

                        And what kind of modern realities do you see? Try to give an example of Chechnya or Libya? The realities of the war will be determined by the objectives of this war and the composition of the warring parties. And if the aggressor side is met with a worthy rebuff, then it will be forced to either withdraw or increase its efforts through the use of more troops in a wider space. Then the scale of hostilities will increase significantly. And shooting some rebels from the air is not a confrontation of equal opponents. What role do you lead the Russian army in, as rebels or as police forces?

                        When you change your nickname to ped ir-06? I do not propose a more vulgar on P.

                        So the rebels will give themselves to shoot through the air.

                        In general, pa-dik is so far from the army and military operations. What amazed that sits in front of the monitor

                        When I was working on the topic of the "Merkava" tank, I fully realized who the rebels or the so-called irregular armed formations are. tank "merkava" is considered one of the most protected tanks in the world. But they were beaten by Hezbollah on the streets of Beirut and in southern Lebanon. And the point is not that they did not correspond to the given parameters that the Jews advertised to the whole world. Here it is implicitly understood that Hezbollah is essentially a professional and ideologically well-grounded regular army with great morale, well-armed with proven and best weapons from around the world ATGM "Fogot" and "Tou", RPG-7, M79, "Karl Gustav" MANPADS " arrow "of various modifications, light portable mortars. According to its potential. Hezbullah can be compared to the Army of Switzerland or Austria

                        So it is in Chechnya. Here are the data, unaware of what the armed military formations of Dudaev were by 1994

                        T-72 about 40, BMP-36, Btr-70 -30, MT-LB-44, artillery systems including anti-tank 100 mm. cannon "Rapira" - 153, ATGM "Fogot" "Competition" -26, ATGM "Metis" -51, RPG-7- 113, RPG-"Net" RPG-26 Aglen RPG-27 "Tavolga" - 80000. AGS -17-138, NSVT-678 heavy machine guns, and 319 old KPVT and DShK machine guns, not counting small arms, including Lee-Enfield sniper rifles mod. 4 MK.1 (t) 7,71-mm callibre and ammunition for them Plus to this add high moral and professional qualities, good health (those with poor mental and physical abilities do not join the rebels), knowledge of the area and support of the local population.
  28. +1
    8 November 2011 14: 46
    By the way, I agree with Mr. Truth
  29. Evil Tatar
    8 November 2011 15: 23
    In vain you guys are so ...
    Will China or not become a potential adversary ... In the short, medium or long term, it is being decided today, now ...
    The SCO met yesterday, today in Khabarovsk an important event is
    militarists gathered almost from all over the world ...

    Are you discussing how to beat China, SNW or "Rubber Bomb" ...
    They read us, translate and sit to plan sticks for our wheels ...

    Not all so good...
    It should be more politically correct.
  30. 0
    8 November 2011 16: 08
    Evil Tatar I think we can talk to ordinary people on these topics.
    Moreover, we will generally attack them and in the long run we will not. We must prepare for all potential threats and call a spade a spade

    erix-xnumx Mr. Truth
    Even in the confrontation with China, we need two platforms in Siberia on caterpillars ..... if they rush through Kazakhstan then the wheeled vehicles are more mobile.
    it is also suitable against Turkey.
    And by the way, doesn't the BMP-4 weaponry seem excessive to you ??
    in a guided combat module, 30 mm and AGS are enough, and is there an option with anti-tank missile systems (principle of modularity)
    and I also noticed ours when they do not put mortars on an armored personnel carrier BMP how much? (they are all we have)
    1. Mr. Truth
      8 November 2011 16: 24
      Caterpillar vehicles can be transported on trailers if you want, and so the speed of the car and the armor of the columns does not exceed 50 km per hour.
      I say that the connection on the wheeled armored personnel carrier will be strongly tied to its deployment.
      Moreover, a single combat vehicle will greatly facilitate the work of the rear and repairmen.
      In the combat module, only self-propelled anti-aircraft guns should not have a tank, for a promising bmp there will be enough towers with a 57 mm cannon and a coaxial machine gun.
      for an armored personnel carrier based on it, there will be enough module with a machine gun and ags, read above all described.
      1. -1
        9 November 2011 02: 18
        The trailer is still the bottom of the convoy structure. At this pace, we will create such a cumbersome structure. What are you not comfortable with having a vocational school?
  31. +1
    8 November 2011 16: 42
    Mr. Truth and for an armored personnel carrier a hybrid engine do you think will be more appropriate?
    1. Mr. Truth
      8 November 2011 16: 44
      Too heavy and again inferior to both wheeled and tracked.
      Wheels are the destiny of the rear and air assault units. but again this is purely my opinion.
  32. 0
    8 November 2011 17: 14
    So, for the Airborne Forces, a wheeled platform for motorized rifles a tracked platform?
    I agree perhaps .. with you Mr. Truth
    but why a 57 mm gun ???????
    1. Mr. Truth
      8 November 2011 17: 32
      For the Airborne Forces is also a tracked platform, light wheeled (assault vehicles, buggy and LBM) for the DShV (airborne assault troops).
      For motorized rifles of type 2 vehicles, heavy caterpillar (based on MBT) and medium caterpillar (amphibious (the same for marine infantry and airborne infantry rifle))

      57 mm cannon will be enough to disable or defeat all armored vehicles that can be found on the battlefield now or in the foreseeable future, the weight of the tower with the gun will be about 3,5 tons, while the "melon 100 + 30" weighs 4 tons and takes large internal volume, it is better to include batteries of universal guns in the composition of all mechanized battalions of the type of the modernized "Host", their combined firepower will be very high.
      1. -1
        9 November 2011 02: 21
        You have recently spoken out about the presence of a single platform for motorized rifles. Now heh, you're already talking about two platforms - heavy and medium. Why is heavy?
  33. -1
    8 November 2011 19: 26
    I agree with light automotive technology, especially since there are no developments in this area .. from bugs and what kind of gun is this 57 mm about which you are talking about and why such persistence towards the inhabited tower
  34. 0
    8 November 2011 20: 38
    Mr. Truth question to you
  35. Mr. Truth
    8 November 2011 23: 04
    57x348 mm automatic gun (the S-60 anti-aircraft gun was equipped with such a shot), its penetration rate with a modern sub-caliber projectile will be a sub-caliber projectile of at least 150 mm per 1 km normal, a rate of fire of about 250 rounds per minute, an ammunition load of 200 rounds will be sufficient.
    A two-seat turret is needed to accommodate a squad leader or platoon / company commander in it for more effective combat and ensuring a high elevation angle of the gun and machine gun; ATGM is not needed.
  36. 0
    8 November 2011 23: 12
    Okay, I agree with the ATGM not to assign the BMP to unusual tasks, but an inhabited tower with a zentine floor machine based on a transportable S-60 ..... why is this ............. 30 mm automatic with all lightly armored targets
    why .... then put this joke?
  37. Mr. Truth
    8 November 2011 23: 32
    I don’t think about installing the S-60 on a car, I think it’s possible to come up with a lighter and faster gun, 30 mm can’t cope with the promising BBMs of China and Turkey, and a 57 mm shell will grind them even into dust, especially of 30 mm weaker AGS grenades and in 57 mm of how far I remember 150 gr of explosives.
    This gun will definitely hit any upgraded armored combat vehicles of this and the previous generation and will hit promising armored personnel carriers.
  38. 0
    9 November 2011 00: 00
    Attention! You do not have permission to view hidden text.

    but how can you compare them ?????????? AGS is not a gun ... mounted shooting
    ... it’s easier to think about the range of ammunition to 30 mm
    But what about the Turks and Chinese in the future reservation? in BMP
    1. Mr. Truth
      9 November 2011 00: 18
      Comparisons for the full disclosure of the insignificant potential of 30 mm ofs, that's all, but the infantry also needs to work, and here 57 ap will be better than 30 mm.
      What is the perspective? forehead from 30 mm ... Already 30 mm is not enough.
      I believe that 30 mm should be left to aviation and air defense.
  39. -1
    9 November 2011 00: 22
    ...... so we will get to the short-shot 76? ...
    1. Mr. Truth
      9 November 2011 01: 03
      No, that certainly won't happen.
  40. 0
    9 November 2011 00: 41
    Something you were carried away by the details .... We still have not decided on the level of protection of the armored personnel carrier or infantry fighting vehicles ...
  41. 0
    9 November 2011 00: 55
    ..I would start
    1.with mass
    2.from court security
    3. then the engine
    4pot weapons
    5 optional swimming
    1. Mr. Truth
      9 November 2011 01: 14
      base mass
      22-23 tons (excluding weapons)
      from 12,7 mm board and feed
      frontal armor from 30 mm
      Diesel 700 l / s MTO front right.
      a turret with a 57 mm cannon and a coaxial machine gun, a turret with a 120 mm mortar cannon, a turret with a long-range anti-tank system, a remote module with AGS and KKP.
      Floats by rewinding tracks
      Crew - 3 people (squad leader at the same time car commander)
      Landing 8 people.
      1. 0
        9 November 2011 18: 48
        No, the BMP should have a mass like a tank and not swim
        Armament 57 mm automatic, landing 9 people.
        But the APC must swim!
        Armament is already fading into the background.
        The main thing is protection.
        The staff of the motorized rifle squad should be increased to 9 people.
        1. Mr. Truth
          9 November 2011 20: 47
          Re-read comrade above, I wrote that it is advisable for the Russian armed forces to have two tracked vehicles, one based on a tank, the other a medium floating vehicle, wheeled armored personnel carriers do not need this direction, which is a dead end for the Russian Federation.
          As for the landing, just 9 people get it.
  42. andreypilot
    9 November 2011 01: 40
    The plant is beautiful, the cars are good, the photos are also interesting .. The BTR-90 wasn’t accepted, it’s a pity, but if the Moscow Region believes that the BTR-82A is enough for now, and then the next generation equipment and concepts will go, they probably know better .. It’s interesting only with a feed exit -Many people think that 2 lateral ones are also needed (when they are ambushed and shelling of the column is carried out from one of the lateral sides) -engineers will probably come up with something ..
  43. Artemka
    16 November 2011 17: 10
    It seems that there are already developments of the BTR-100 Boomerang.
  44. Gorodets
    27 October 2013 17: 40
    The forum of the city of Gorodets and the Gorodets district has opened Приглашаем всех, кто связан с этим городом!!!