Military Review

Posted image of the new armored personnel carrier BTR-87

50
After several months of waiting, the general public was able to see the newest domestic armored personnel carrier. In one of the recently published documents describing the activities of the defense industry, there is still the only known photograph of the BTR-87 vehicle. This machine was developed no later than the beginning of last year, and was soon demonstrated to specialists. However, the general public was only able to see the new armored personnel carrier now.


The first public information about the BTR-87 project appeared less than a year ago. This machine was present in the list of equipment, which was planned to show at the upcoming forum "Army-2015". However, the details of the project were not disclosed. In addition, a new type of car was placed in a closed exposition of the exhibition, because of which only a narrow circle of specialists and the military could see it. Other technology lovers had to wait until the spring of the year 2016.

Not so long ago, the Corps Factory plant (Vyksa), which assembles armor units for the production of military equipment, published a presentation on the development of production. Together with a mass of graphs and other information revealing the achievements of a production nature, a significant number of photographs and drawings got into the presentation. The presented photographic materials depict the equipment of the plant, as well as some of its products. On one of the pictures captured the latest armored personnel carrier BTR-87.

Posted image of the new armored personnel carrier BTR-87
The only published image of the BTR-87. Photo from the presentation of the "plant buildings"


Thus, the presentation on the development of the "Corps Plant" was the first officially published document, which presents an image of a promising armored vehicle. Unfortunately, while in the public domain there is only one photo of the new armored personnel carrier, however, it can also tell quite a lot. In addition, it can also be the subject of much controversy.

According to reports, the BTR-87 project was developed by Military Industrial Company LLC as part of a deep modernization of the existing BTR-82A armored personnel carrier. The project was created on its own initiative and is intended primarily for export. At the heart of the new machine are some of the ideas and solutions characteristic of modern armored vehicles. This led to a serious change in a number of features of the machine, from the layout to the hull design. It is reported that for the construction of new technology had to develop a new armored hull, which is based on the basic units of the BTR-82A.

The main innovation of the BTR-87 project, which had the most serious impact on all the features of the car, is the new layout. In accordance with the latest trends in the field of armored vehicles for infantry, the new armored personnel carrier received aft troop compartment. Thus, the landing had the opportunity to dismount through the stern doors under the cover of the whole machine. It is believed that in such a case the disembarkation is safer than with the use of side doors characteristic of existing domestic armored personnel carriers.

In connection with the transfer of the troop compartment from the center of the hull to the stern, the authors of the new project had to change the placement of all the other units and compartments. In front of the body of the BTR-87 there is a control compartment (left) and the engine compartment (at the starboard side). Directly behind the engine compartment placed the fighting compartment with a swivel tower. The substandard units of the combat compartment, apparently, are located in the same volume as the landing places, as was done on other domestic armored personnel carriers.

As can be seen in the existing photo, the body of the new armored vehicle has a lot of differences from the basic design. One of the most notable is the lack of side doors of the troop compartment. It should also be noted that in connection with the use of the front engine compartment, the corps lost a commander's hatch and a right armored glass with a cover. The overall configuration of the frontal part of the body, in general, remained the same.

In connection with the transfer of the engine forward, the location of the crew seats was changed. The driver remained in his place, ahead on the left. Workplace commander, in turn, shifted back and to the left. The commander is now behind the back of the driver and must monitor the environment with the help of optical instruments on his hatch.

In the central part of the hull, with a certain shift to the stern, a turret machine gun-gun installation borrowed from the BTR-87А was installed on the roof of the BTR-82. The tower has a monitor layout and is equipped with a set of barreled weapons. The 30-mm 2А72 automatic cannon is used as the “main caliber”, the additional armament consists of a PKTM 7,62-mm machine gun and several smoke grenade launchers. Also, the tower is equipped with a set of necessary means of observation and guidance.

The hull feed is given for the placement of the landing force. Exact data on the size of the troop compartment is not available. It can be assumed that in terms of capacity it does not differ from the central troop compartment of the base BTR-82А. Landing and landing assault offered through the stern door.

In connection with the transfer of the engine to the front of the case, the design of the transmission had to undergo noticeable changes. In this case, the chassis remained the same - four axles with wheels on an independent suspension. In connection with the use of the stern doors, the armored personnel carrier received new propulsion for moving through the water. Instead of a single central jet, two separate ones are now used, placed behind the wheels.

The characteristics of the BTR-87 have not yet been disclosed. It can be assumed that the use of the developments of the BTR-82A project and the use of some ready-made units led to the preservation of characteristics, however, there are no exact data on this subject yet. They will probably be published in the foreseeable future, when the car will be offered to potential customers from third countries.

***

As follows from the available data, the main objective of the BTR-87 project was to increase the level of protection of the landing force when dismounting. It is widely known that the landing of domestic armored personnel carriers under enemy fire has always been quite a challenge. It was proposed to make the landing through the hatches of various shapes and arrangements. Only on the BTR-80 appeared side doors that can partially protect the infantryman. However, this did not lead to a significant increase in safety. At present, it is believed that the landing of the landing force should be made through the stern doors, thanks to which the soldiers are protected by the entire body of the vehicle with a corresponding decrease in the probability of their defeat.

The project BTR-87 completely fits into this concept. At the same time, it is based on the developments on the existing BTR-82A vehicle, which led to the appearance of several peculiar features. Nevertheless, the finished sample seems to combine the positive features of its predecessors and the advantages associated with the stern layout of the landing.


The project of modernization of the BTR-60 from "Muromteplovoz". Photo Muromteplovoz.ru


According to reports, the BTR-87 armored personnel carrier is primarily intended for export deliveries. From this point of view, the main advantages of this machine are comparative cheapness, unification with other Russian-made equipment and a noticeable improvement in the basic combat qualities associated with the re-assembly of internal volumes. Thus, after the official entry into the international market of military equipment, the new machine is quite capable of finding its buyer.

Interestingly, the BTR-87 project is not the first national attempt to improve the capabilities of existing armored personnel carriers by changing their design. Thus, a relatively long time ago, the Muromteplovoz enterprise proposed a project for the modernization of an outdated BTR-60 armored personnel carrier, implying the use of some new units. The use of the new engine allowed the authors of the project to move the engine compartment to the center of the hull, thereby freeing up space for paratroopers in the stern. For disembarking it is proposed to use two doors opening to the side.

Another significant innovation of the modernization project of the BTR-60 from Muromteplovoz is the use of a machine-gun turret based on the BTR-80A units. After installing such a combat module, the armored personnel carrier receives an 30-mm automatic gun 2А42, a 7,62-mm PKTM machine gun and an 30-mm automatic grenade launcher AGS-17, which greatly increases its firepower and allows you to choose the most suitable for current tasks weapon.

Also in the context of the modernization of relatively old Soviet / Russian armored personnel carriers, one should recall the Romanian projects of the Saur family. The aim of these projects was the deep modernization of the B33 Zibmru armored personnel carrier, which is a copy of the Soviet BTR-80. When creating a new technology, some new ideas were used, and nodes and aggregates of new types were used. The first car of this family, Saur-1, has a layout similar to that of the BTR-87, but it differs in approach to armament and other features. Its further development was the Saur-2 armored personnel carrier, which was seriously different from both B33 and Saur-1.

It should be noted that domestic and Romanian projects for the modernization of obsolete equipment have not yet led to the expected results. As far as is known, the BTR-60 renewal project and the Saur family cars have so far failed to interest potential buyers and, as a result, have not yet become the subject of contracts for the repair and renewal of equipment. With all their advantages, these developments for some reason have not yet been able to attract the attention of potential customers in the face of countries that need to update their equipment and are not able to purchase completely new machines.

The lack of orders for the existing modernization options of the Soviet / Russian armored personnel carriers makes it alarming to assess the future of the new BTR-87. With significant advantages, this machine may face the banal reluctance of potential buyers. In addition, from the order of the new technology, these states can repel economic problems.


Romanian BTR Saur-1. Photo alternathistory.com


Thus, the real prospects of the BTR-87 can still be the subject of discussion and controversy. Until a certain time, one can only try to make estimates and build forecasts that can later be confirmed or be refuted. At the same time, confirmation or refutation of current versions may appear both in the coming months and in a few years.

In some discussions of the BTR-87 project, there is an opinion that this vehicle was developed as a cheap and simple alternative to the promising armored personnel carrier "Boomerang". However, this version contradicts the available information on the export destination of the project. In addition, it is not consistent with the current plans for the development of armored infantry. At present, in our country, the modernization of the existing armored personnel carriers BTR-80 under the project BTR-82А. This allows you to significantly improve the fighting qualities of equipment, although it does not solve some of the existing problems: the project does not imply the transfer of side doors.

Modernization of the existing equipment will allow to maintain the required fighting efficiency of the subdivisions until the appearance of a sufficient number of new Boomerang-type machines. Thus, an additional order for the BTR-87 is redundant and redundant.

The appearance of the project BTR-87 is of great interest from a technical point of view. At the same time, the future prospects of this development are still foggy. With equal probability, this machine may either become the subject of an order or not receive the due attention of customers. Nevertheless, the emergence of this project demonstrates the desire of the Russian defense industry to take into account current trends and to occupy unused niches in the armament and military equipment market, using finished products and new ideas.


On the materials of the sites:
http://zavodkorpusov.ru/
http://vestnik-rm.ru/
http://muromteplovoz.ru/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/

Presentation of the "plant enclosures":
http://zavodkorpusov.ru/data/objects/2/file.1458726418.pdf
Author:
50 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. The comment was deleted.
  2. Volga Cossack
    Volga Cossack 25 March 2016 06: 53
    +6
    modernization - more precisely, its plans are not bad - I propose modernization services -60-70- for export - there are still them in the world, right up to sets, do it yourself - and buy new equipment for yourself ....... . well and parts of inconsistent readiness - the same explosives in the internal districts to equip modernized — my vision is that Vyksa — that Arzamas retained specialists — worked there a little — it pleases. Well, Muromteplovoz- makes good modules.
    1. ICT
      ICT 25 March 2016 07: 09
      +9
      Quote: Volga Cossack
      Muromteplovoz- makes good modules.




      well generalizing videos
      1. proud
        proud 25 March 2016 23: 23
        0
        MTLB modernized smartly, as for the BRDM - was it really difficult to make side doors?
    2. SU69
      SU69 25 March 2016 10: 42
      +6
      What is the safety margin of the Soviet heritage.
      25 years as the country collapsed, and the modernization potential does not run out!
      1. marlin1203
        marlin1203 25 March 2016 11: 07
        -1
        Has the Boomerang been completely buried?
      2. aba
        aba 26 March 2016 00: 09
        +2
        What is the safety margin of the Soviet heritage.

        But it would be even better if the modernization concerned armor protection, that is, its increase due to new materials and another set of measures.
        1. Basarev
          Basarev 31 May 2016 09: 36
          +1
          All shamanism around the eightieth ... A truly breakthrough BTR-90 was buried forever.
  3. Приговор
    Приговор 25 March 2016 07: 04
    +3
    It is a worthy and interesting project. It is foolish not to use the modernization capabilities of existing equipment. If not for the needs of their own army, then as an option of modernization in the armies of the countries where the BTR-80 was delivered. These are orders, this is money for the country's defense enterprises. I wish good luck to the developers, and to our officials of mind, vision of prospects and quickness.
    1. EvgenyRB
      EvgenyRB 25 March 2016 23: 27
      -3
      and as soon as we see that in Ukraine they are engaged in the modernization of Soviet technology, then this is rubbish, and we give out our rubbish as smart decisions. Double standards "sir"
    2. Gray brother
      Gray brother 26 March 2016 07: 29
      +2
      Quote: Sentence
      . It is foolish not to use the modernization capabilities of existing equipment.

      I do not think that this can be called modernization. The case is new, the transmission has been redone, this is a new car.
  4. aszzz888
    aszzz888 25 March 2016 07: 16
    +1
    This machine with equal probability can both become the subject of an order and not receive due attention from customers.

    With competitors in the arms market, and will be competing armored personnel carriers. Time will tell the marketability of this machine.
    1. ICT
      ICT 25 March 2016 07: 17
      +6
      Quote: aszzz888
      With competitors in the arms market,

      wink lol


      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 25 March 2016 14: 00
        0
        Quote: TIT
        Quote: aszzz888
        With competitors in the arms market,

        wink lol

        another upgrade ...
      2. Gray brother
        Gray brother 26 March 2016 07: 21
        0
        Quote: TIT
        Quote: aszzz888
        With competitors in the arms market,

        wink lol

        Salon even leather?
  5. Aleksandr72
    Aleksandr72 25 March 2016 07: 17
    15
    According to reports, the BTR-87 project was developed by the Military Industrial Company LLC as part of a thorough modernization of the existing BTR-82A armored personnel carrier. The project was created on an initiative basis and is intended primarily for export.

    Outwardly (pictured), this armored personnel carrier reminded me of the old development of the BTR-90, which was never put into service. The landing in the stern is of course correct. But in the presence of a large number of publicized import competitors, the expert prospects of the BTR-87 look somehow doubtful. Although ... if only countries that had previously ordered openly unsuccessful Ukrainian armored personnel carriers (with their problems with workmanship) would suddenly agree to buy it. For its own Russian army, this development has no prospects (in the presence of the same BTR-82A and "Boomerang", which, I hope, will soon go to the troops).
    I have the honor.
    1. nikowolf
      nikowolf 25 March 2016 10: 11
      +2
      Good afternoon.
      I agree with you, but while we are waiting for the Boomerang, the army must be provided with equipment. In addition, the experience of using it in the army may come in handy in the future.
      Suddenly they return to us in the form of trophies, who knows. hi
    2. PSih2097
      PSih2097 25 March 2016 13: 52
      +5
      there is no news about Boomerang yet, but it makes sense to upgrade the BTR-60 in long-term storage warehouses.
      about the similarity with "Rostock"


  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. inkass_98
    inkass_98 25 March 2016 07: 23
    +4
    As an upgrade option - a great offer. But here is how the new equipment for the infantry is a rather controversial and outdated solution, KMK. We need to go forward, work for the future.
    1. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 25 March 2016 08: 46
      +2
      I agree, just as an option for modernization ... probably even now, if you scrape along the bottom of the barrel, there will be a lot of BTR-60 and BTR-70 ... There are, for example, in Syria in storage warehouses. These armored personnel carriers have never been recognized by the Syrians. ; and even when the Syrian army was in dire need of "infantry" armored vehicles, no one was in a hurry to reanimate the armored personnel carriers (the Syrians believed that these armored personnel carriers would be more "hassle" than benefit). But they say that there is a silver lining! And why then "good" to disappear? Take, for example, the body of the BTR-60/70 ... it's made of iron! And there are wheels! It can roll! To remove all the old "insides" (and "externals"!)! Bring in different things "oh, I can't, how cool!" and offer them at a reasonable price ... but even for bananas! ("You know, Benya, how much are bananas on Russian markets anyway? ....)
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 25 March 2016 13: 50
        +5
        Quote: Nikolaevich I
        Take, for example, the body of the BTR-60/70 ... it's iron! And there are wheels! It can roll! To remove all the old "insides" (and "outside"!)! Bring in different things "oh, I can't, how cool!" and offer at a fair price ...

        You just described the BTR-3. smile
    2. PSih2097
      PSih2097 25 March 2016 13: 55
      +2
      Quote: inkass_98
      As an upgrade option - a great offer. But here is how the new equipment for the infantry is a rather controversial and outdated solution, KMK.

      Tell it to the figures who order the T-72B3 ...
  8. Adik89
    Adik89 25 March 2016 07: 43
    0
    The main thing is shooting and pulling people! Just right in anti-terrorist operations use
  9. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 25 March 2016 07: 56
    +2
    Some time ago, a message about the creation on the basis of the BTR-82A of a more "developed" BTR under the name-BTR-88 (!) "Slipped" on the Internet (!) ... so when did the mistake happen? Then (BTR-88 ...)? Or now (BTR-87 ...)?
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 25 March 2016 09: 20
      +8
      Different companies:

      BTR-87 is Vyksa, the main feature is the landing of the landing back and the front MTO.
      BTR-88 is Arzamas, the main feature of the new combat module.
      1. Nikolaevich I
        Nikolaevich I 25 March 2016 13: 43
        +1
        Well, finally! hi This is my "problem"! Often I skim through the text without going into (not remembering) the details! Well ... sometimes I just don't have enough time!
      2. cosmos111
        cosmos111 25 March 2016 19: 40
        0
        Quote: donavi49
        BTR-87 is Vyksa, the main feature is the landing of the landing back and the front MTO.

        BORN NORINCO VP10 8x8.
  10. Engineer
    Engineer 25 March 2016 09: 10
    +1
    I didn’t understand something, but how will a driver mechanic manage it if he doesn’t see anything because of the missing front windows? Only on camera? Or how will the Romanian Bosko stick out through the top hatch?
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 25 March 2016 11: 48
      0
      Quote: Engineer
      I didn’t understand something, but how will a driver mechanic manage it if he doesn’t see anything because of the missing front windows?

      Left armored driver’s armored glass left.
      It should also be noted that in connection with the use of the front engine compartment the case lost the commander's hatch and right armored glass with a cover. The general configuration of the frontal part of the body, in general, remained the same.

      In connection with moving the engine forward, the location of the crew seats was changed. The driver remained in place, front left.
    2. cosmos111
      cosmos111 25 March 2016 19: 58
      0
      Quote: Engineer
      I didn’t understand something, but how will a driver mechanic manage it if he doesn’t see anything because of the missing front windows? Only on camera? Or how will the Romanian Bosko stick out through the top hatch?


      And not only the Romanian.

      BAE Systems and IVECO Defense amphibious fighting vehicle ACV.
  11. terehvlad
    terehvlad 25 March 2016 09: 30
    0
    some kind of hoot-work - "unnecessary side doors"
    1. spech
      spech 26 March 2016 07: 52
      0

      long neighing when this miracle fell into the hands bully
  12. erased
    erased 25 March 2016 09: 51
    +2
    Grandmas rule! Modernization of equipment of 60-80 years of the last century will come down only for export. For the RF Armed Forces, the main armored personnel carrier - Boomerang - has already been selected. Well, to hell with something else to buy?
    Separately encouraged by the ongoing attempts to cook up heavy armored personnel carriers from armored personnel carriers. A tank gun would still stick ...
  13. MORDVIN13rus
    MORDVIN13rus 25 March 2016 09: 53
    +5
    But I'm wondering why when cutting through the aft hatches, they did not keep the side hatches? After all, aft hatches for dismounting are not the ubiquitous panacea for attacks from the flanks, since some of the fighters can be aft, and some can be unloaded to the side hatches.
    1. nikowolf
      nikowolf 25 March 2016 10: 08
      +1
      Most likely the main units were transferred there. But you are right, without the side ramps of the BTR, not the BTR.
      If the enthusiasm does not end and it will be fixed on the next versions of the machine.
    2. Nikolaevich I
      Nikolaevich I 25 March 2016 13: 47
      +1
      Duc .... drafts tady will be more!
  14. TOR2
    TOR2 25 March 2016 10: 09
    0
    In connection with moving the engine forward, the location of the crew seats was changed. The driver remained in place

    But this is in vain. In the event of a detonation, the main strike should, if possible, be taken over by the engine compartment. Of course, if you move the driver, you need to not reduce visibility if possible.
    And of course, armored personnel carriers really need quick-detachable cermet screens. With their help, it will be possible to quickly adapt the machine to specific conditions.
  15. AlNikolaich
    AlNikolaich 25 March 2016 10: 39
    +2
    Looked at the photo, some kind of crap! Overcooked body from sixty, new wheels and side. MTO on the side of the mechanical drive. The complement seems to have been ripped off from the BMP1. The same awkward! Could it really be for export for bananas? If anyone buys ... I don’t want such a machine for our army! Maintaining and repairing the engine is a problem, with transmissions, I have no idea what kind of mess there is! On the starboard side, the driver and commander are blind! God bless her, they would have done it like on a "motorcycle", but this will lead to an increase in the length of the body. In short, some kind of shushpanzer. In a hurry, and ill-considered!
    1. avt
      avt 25 March 2016 12: 04
      +2
      Quote: AlNikolaich
      I looked at the photo - some kind of fucking!

      Quote: erased
      Grandmas rule!

      Yeah - easy to cut the dough, nothing more. There was a proposal of the same order for the Airborne Forces and on the website, or in the files it was laid out, they say, there are a lot of motorcycle leagues, so we quickly hang the modules on them and we don't have to bother with BMD-4 and other shells. Here is the same crap instead of - "Boomerang", as well as the great ukry, to reshape an old Soviet armored personnel carrier. Okay, there is a new module to put on weapons, but spend money to alter the ALL car of the last century, just to get out of the ass !? Natural sexual perversion and drank the dough.
    2. pofigist_26_rus
      pofigist_26_rus 25 March 2016 16: 38
      +3
      I completely agree that the rear position of the landing is a rather controversial decision. Since it protects exclusively from fire from the front, it seems that the developers of this "miracle" have completely forgotten the experience of fighting on BMPs in Afghanistan and Chechnya. It would be better if they put ceramic panels on the armor and strengthen the chassis, there would be more benefits. Although it seems that it is unlikely to go beyond prototypes.
  16. Petrik66
    Petrik66 25 March 2016 11: 09
    0
    And how is the problem with mine protection resolved? Or ride on the roof again? What about the reservation? As the saying goes: pennies again for fish
  17. Sukhoi
    Sukhoi 25 March 2016 14: 11
    -1
    This is not modernization, but shit. The level of the bedside workshop. And export prospects are slightly less than zero. Who is armed with 80s? How are they going to upgrade them if
    had to develop a new armored hull
    Will the wheels and steering wheel remain from the old ones? If someone decides to buy new armored personnel carriers, then what's the point of throwing money away at this cardboard monster?
  18. Bassoon
    Bassoon 25 March 2016 14: 24
    +2
    Modernization is certainly good, but you still need to take the Boomerangs into service as quickly as possible.
  19. PKK
    PKK 25 March 2016 15: 43
    -1
    Quote: Volga Cossack
    Volga Cossack

    There are no such Volga Cossacks. As for the armored personnel carrier, I would go to the T15 with great pleasure. Therefore, the funds went to new weapons. The modernization will wait.
    1. Volga Cossack
      Volga Cossack 25 March 2016 23: 24
      0
      http://passion-don.org/tribes/tribes_19.html
    2. Volga Cossack
      Volga Cossack 25 March 2016 23: 24
      0
      http://passion-don.org/tribes/tribes_19.html
  20. rennim
    rennim 25 March 2016 17: 46
    +3
    Refusing side hatches is stupid. An armored personnel carrier is not a tank for frontal attacks. The crew must dismount from several hatches. This increases the survivability of l / s. If ambushed, there will be no possibility of evacuation from the opposite side of the battle. In general, the concept of protecting armored personnel carriers must be changed. Surely he should swim. But its security should also be higher. At least from manual anti-tank weapons.
  21. klopik4
    klopik4 25 March 2016 21: 39
    -1
    25.03.2016
    Rogozins and an apartment for half a billion: an investigation of Transparency International - Russia

    Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, possibly owns an apartment worth 500 million rubles.
    After the son of Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin in charge of the military-industrial complex, Alexei Rogozin, was appointed to the position of Deputy Director of the Department of Property of the Ministry of Defense, we drew attention to the declarations of the Rogozin family.
    [media = http: //transparency.org.ru/special/rogozin/]
    1. Victorio
      Victorio 25 March 2016 22: 29
      0
      Quote: klopik4
      25.03.2016
      Rogozins and an apartment for half a billion: an investigation of Transparency International - Russia

      Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, possibly owns an apartment worth 500 million rubles.
      After the son of Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin in charge of the military-industrial complex, Alexei Rogozin, was appointed to the position of Deputy Director of the Department of Property of the Ministry of Defense, we drew attention to the declarations of the Rogozin family.
      [media = http: //transparency.org.ru/special/rogozin/]

      =====
      said "a", say "b". there was already infa about the ownership of an apartment / such apartments to the state
    2. SAG
      SAG 25 March 2016 22: 36
      +1
      Small bug, but smelly! No.
      1. klopik4
        klopik4 25 March 2016 23: 47
        0
        Russians get poorer at a record pace
        In 2015, another 3,1 million people crossed the poverty line
        [media = http: //www.vedomosti.ru/economics/articles/2016/03/22/634505-rossiyane-be
        dneyut]

        Dakrymashi b ... b!
  22. Volga Cossack
    Volga Cossack 25 March 2016 23: 16
    0
    Quote: PKK
    Quote: Volga Cossack
    Volga Cossack

    There are no such Volga Cossacks. As for the armored personnel carrier, I would go to the T15 with great pleasure. Therefore, the funds went to new weapons. The modernization will wait.
    Recommend History
    to learn- 2 Volga Tersky Cossack Regiment speaks about something ???? about the reason- it doesn’t happen- YOU tell my great-grandfather Lavra- complete Georgiev Cavaler. I have the honor !!! http: //passion-don.org/ tribes / tribes_19.html
  23. cth; fyn
    cth; fyn 26 March 2016 05: 51
    +1
    It became like cattle 2ar, it turned out to be an excellent machine, although I would like to see a good stern ramp instead of a door, like on a striker, this would make it possible to dismount the landing party more conveniently, push in bulk cargoes and carry the wounded on a stretcher without any special care.
  24. SiberLight
    SiberLight 26 March 2016 18: 46
    0
    Why abandoned side hatches? But if they are mainly prepared for delivery to other countries ...
    To foreigners, and so it will do ...
  25. Div Divich
    Div Divich April 6 2016 02: 45
    +2
    The armored personnel carrier is an armored bus; now typhoons based on Kamaz and the Urals have been made for these needs. Their advantage is that there is no need to sit on the roof - there is protection against mines, there is air conditioning.

    And the old APCs have long been used as infantry fighting vehicles, so they need to be retrained into wheeled infantry fighting vehicles.
  26. Div Divich
    Div Divich April 6 2016 03: 11
    +1
    BTRs are created for transportation, but used for battle.
    Stop getting confused, rename the wheeled infantry fighting vehicle and everything will fall into place, will be created for combat and used for combat.