The Ministry of Defense ordered another batch of BTR-82A

The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation signed a contract for the purchase of the next batch of BTR-82, reports MIC with reference to the press service of the department.

“As part of the implementation of the state defense order, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and Military Industrial Company LLC signed a contract for the delivery of the next serial batch of BTR-82A armored personnel carriers”,

says release.

Under the terms of the contract, the military department should be transferred “before 20 new armored personnel carriers” to the military, the press service said.

According to the Ministry of Defense, "the BTR-82А armored personnel carrier has increased combat survivability, is equipped with a unified combat module, air conditioning system, modern communication and orientation systems."

The machine is delivered to troops from 2011.

Comments

[Michael67]

It is always good to hear that technology is being updated.
Only alarming. Armaments are growing. All this is not good.
But you need to!

[Themi30]

Increase? 20 bought by the end of the year, there’s nothing to grow .. I wonder how much the 80-current will be written off? 100 - 200? For the rest, the same thing, the weapons are very outdated, so with all these purchases, the quantity does not increase, everything is too old already.

[Vladimirets]

Quote: TheMi30

20 bought by the end of the year, there’s nothing to grow .. I wonder how much the 80-current will be written off? 100 - 200?

In service "620 BTR-82A / AM as of 2016"

80-k in service with 1600 without explosives. I think a good percentage.

[Lt. Air Force stock]

Quote: TheMi30

Increase? 20 bought by the end of the year, there’s nothing to grow .. I wonder how much the 80-current will be written off? 100 - 200? For the rest, the same thing, the weapons are very outdated, so with all these purchases, the quantity does not increase, everything is too old already.

What I don’t like is that there is no modernization of land equipment, but a new one is being developed instead of the old one.
For example, there is a T-72, which prevents it from upgrading by installing the following:
1) More powerful engine
2) Dynamic protection "relic"
3) KAZ "Afganit"
4) Modern tank combat information management system
5) Modern optical systems
6) Lattice around the perimeter of the tank
The same thing could be done with the BTR-82, installed mounted modules with dynamic protection, thereby increasing the survival of soldiers when hit from a grenade launcher, modern optical surveillance systems, etc. etc.
The Americans are constantly modernizing their ground forces. ACS Paladin has probably been upgraded 20 times, the same thing with the Bradley BMP. And we always have "new instead of old".

[Velizariy]

Cost ... And some other factors.
PS And what about the lattice around the perimeter of the tank ???

[Lt. Air Force stock]

Quote: Velizariy

PS And what about the lattice around the perimeter of the tank ???

For guard. For example, they use anti-tank systems with a tandem warhead. The grill destroys the first charge, and the dynamic protection second charge.

[Mister22408]

Only PG-7 ... not a tandem, on the rest - a manupe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qU4JcGtL7I

[KSLip]

Quote: Lt. air force reserve

For guard. For example, they use anti-tank systems with a tandem warhead. The grill destroys the first charge, and the dynamic protection second charge.

yes it is nonsense. literally at the weekend on the star about the borders showed, googled. lattice. this is from the field of "psychological" protection. you can't spoil porridge with butter ...

[pv1005]

Quote: Lt. Air Force stock

Quote: Velizariy

PS And what about the lattice around the perimeter of the tank ???

For guard. For example, they use anti-tank systems with a tandem warhead. The grill destroys the first charge, and the dynamic protection second charge.

Where did you see dynamic protection on the BTR-82?

[Velizariy]

The commentary is ONLY about tanks, and the armored personnel carrier, even 82A! Not a tank at all.

[Berber]

The modernization potential of 72 is at the limit. Where to put all this?

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Lt. air force reserve

For example, there is a T-72, which prevents it from upgrading by installing the following:
1) More powerful engine
2) Dynamic protection "relic"
3) KAZ "Afganit"
4) Modern tank combat information management system
5) Modern optical systems
6) Lattice around the perimeter of the tank

March 06, 2016:

The public procurement website hosted the F.E. Uralvagonzavod Scientific and Production Corporation JSC Dzerzhinsky "information about the intention to conclude a contract" Author's support and technical assistance during the overhaul with the modernization of 154 tanks of the T-72B type (T-72B, T-72B1, T-72BA) bringing to mind T-72BZ with additional protection". The initial (maximum) contract price is 32,262 million rubles. The contract is valid until December 31, 2017. Purchase should be made from a single supplier, with work in Nizhny Tagil.
It is indicated that on the basis of TT and TK, the Contractor from 01.10.2015 started the actual performance of work.

(c) bmpd

Quote: Lt. Air Force stock

The same thing could be done with the BTR-82, installed mounted modules with dynamic protection, thereby increasing the survival of soldiers when hit from a grenade launcher, modern optical surveillance systems, etc. etc.

And does the BTR-80 suspension stand it all? For the DZ on the standard armor does not rise: either we put under the DZ modules the overlays on the armor, or the DZ modules, when triggered, will themselves pierce the armored personnel carrier and cripple the crew with the landing.

[Lt. Air Force stock]

Quote: Alexey RA

And does the BTR-80 suspension stand it all?

The suspension can be strengthened.

Quote: Alexey RA

For the DZ on the standard armor does not rise: either we put under the DZ modules the overlays on the armor, or the DZ modules, when triggered, will themselves pierce the armored personnel carrier and cripple the crew with the landing.

Not necessarily dynamic protection. You can install containers with composite armor. In the likeness of those that were hung on Kurganets-25.

[opus]

Quote: Alexey RA

, or DZ modules, when triggered, will themselves penetrate armored personnel carriers and cripple the crew with the landing.

DZ same directional action. BB will go there "much easier", out. Why would she "pierce the armor" of an armored personnel carrier?
the explosive mass is about 280 grams.

.... and indeed

[Alexey RA]

Quote: opus

DZ same directional action. BB will go there "much easier", out. Why would she "pierce the armor" of an armored personnel carrier?
the explosive mass is about 280 grams.

Breach of the BMP-2 side with the detonation of the DZ block and the PG-9V grenade, 1988:

As a result, DZ 4S24 with a weakened effect on the main armor had to be invented for the LME. Here are just the dimensions of the DZ blocks at the same time increased epically:

[Muvka]

Quote: Lt. Air Force stock

Quote: TheMi30

Increase? 20 bought by the end of the year, there’s nothing to grow .. I wonder how much the 80-current will be written off? 100 - 200? For the rest, the same thing, the weapons are very outdated, so with all these purchases, the quantity does not increase, everything is too old already.

What I don’t like is that there is no modernization of land equipment, but a new one is being developed instead of the old one.
For example, there is a T-72, which prevents it from upgrading by installing the following:
1) More powerful engine
2) Dynamic protection "relic"
3) KAZ "Afganit"
4) Modern tank combat information management system
5) Modern optical systems
6) Lattice around the perimeter of the tank
The same thing could be done with the BTR-82, installed mounted modules with dynamic protection, thereby increasing the survival of soldiers when hit from a grenade launcher, modern optical surveillance systems, etc. etc.
The Americans are constantly modernizing their ground forces. ACS Paladin has probably been upgraded 20 times, the same thing with the Bradley BMP. And we always have "new instead of old".

Please read the modification of the T-72B3 sample 2016. You will be pleasantly surprised. Of course, there is no KAZ, but everything else seems to be there.

[sharp-lad]

These upgrade! The same T-72 was upgraded to T-90. But not everything can be upgraded! T-72 of the first issues is easier to send for remelting than to hang built-in dynamic protection on outdated armor! Well, with the rest as well.

[evgenii67]

Quote: TheMi30

Increase? 20 bought by the end of the year, there’s nothing to grow .. I wonder how much the 80-current will be written off?

Stop the panic. on the approach of a new generation of armored vehicles. and probably from the age of 17 they will begin to enter service.

[satellite24]

don't say gop until you jump over

[73bor]

The bulk of the armored personnel carrier has already been produced, in the future the volume of deliveries will be reduced! This was riveted in the thousands by the Soviet Union, practically no longer needed equipment, now no one will do it, and it's expensive!

[cniza]

Alarmingly - yes, but if there is a process of constant combat readiness then it’s calmer.

[jjj]

Rehearsals for the Parade began. "Armata" is already taken for granted weapon

[Berber]

Not good when updated with potential opponents. And we have good for everything.

[marlin1203]

20 BTR - a small build-up of military power. And this technique is not fundamentally new.

[Lt. Air Force stock]

Rather, they would have already begun to purchase modern Boomerangs ...

[Hon]

Quote: Lt. air force reserve

Rather, they would have already begun to purchase modern Boomerangs ...

abandoned them, the layout is inappropriate, the engine is behind. the fact that the 82A also has a rear engine that doesn’t bother anyone

[Lt. Air Force stock]

Quote: Hon

abandoned them, the layout is inappropriate, the engine is behind. the fact that the 82A also has a rear engine that doesn’t bother anyone

Is there a link to the news? The first time I hear that they refused to boomerang ... But what about Kurganets-25 and BMP T-15?

[Hon]

Quote: Lt. air force reserve

Is there a link to the news? The first time I hear that they refused to boomerang ... But what about Kurganets-25 and BMP T-15?

relax, I was mistaken, mixed up with the BTR-90

[ravend]

Quote: Hon

Quote: Lt. air force reserve

Rather, they would have already begun to purchase modern Boomerangs ...

abandoned them, the layout is inappropriate, the engine is behind. the fact that the 82A also has a rear engine that doesn’t bother anyone

where does infa come from?

Here are the tests:
http://rg.ru/2016/02/08/ispytaniia-neubivaemogo-bronetransportera-bumerang-nacha
lis-v-armii.html

[Kibalchish]

Is the BTR-82 converted from an old BTR-80 with a new module? In a sense, they hang a new module on the old body and that's it?

[Nevsky_ZU]

Quote: Kibalchish

Is the BTR-82 converted from an old BTR-80 with a new module? In a sense, they hang a new module on the old body and that's it?

Plus, the engine is more powerful and anti-splinter "bags" in the inner case are installed, as I understand it, they have a purely symbolic mission.

[PHANTOM-AS]

Quote: Kibalchish

Is the BTR-82 converted from an old BTR-80 with a new module? In a sense, they hang a new module on the old body and that's it?

Kaneshno, this is a modernized version of the eighties with all the advantages and disadvantages.
The upgraded model was assigned the BTR 82 index. In 2010, the “eighty-second” were published, and in 2013 they were adopted.

[Dam]

Everything is great, but very very slow! Twenty in a year, very few.

[Oleg Lavrov]

Good car, in demand in our time!

[almost demobil]

Quote: Oleg Lavrov

Good car, in demand in our time!

Is it possible in more detail than she is so good especially in our time? Could it be that a new module was installed on the box of Afghan times? In a similar article, I was told cons for criticizing these armored personnel carriers, namely, for cardboard armor. But I won't calm down even now. At the parade we saw both the "Kurgan" and the "shell" + "boomerang" How long will the soldiers move in mass graves? With a successful hit, 7.62 breaks them. After all, there is a positive example of the use of heavy infantry fighting vehicles by the Israelis (Namer). When the lives of the fighters are worth more than money!

[almost demobil]

I think that only 20 pieces were ordered because heavy BMPs / BTRs have not yet been finalized and have not yet matured to serial production. A 82-ki ordered to capitalize the loot. There is such a trick among financiers - the entire budget did not capitalize before the end of the fiscal year, next year the budget will be cut by this amount)))

[max702]

Quote: almost demobilized

Their successful hit 7.62 breaks.

I punched 7.62 old boxes from 60ki to 80ki at 82A. There is a Kevlar lining that does not allow this ..

[Wolf173]

Another batch 82A is good, but you also need to carefully check the machines when accepting teams. When we changed 70 to 82A, bring it from the factory with several defective parts.

[mojohed2012]

About Boomerangs - I have not heard that they were abandoned ...
I only heard that their production was being transferred to Arzamas.

[tchoni]

Oh ... I won’t say that the 82nd miracle of technology. He retained all the shortcomings of the previous series ... But only the anti-shatter and conder have serious advantages.

[demiurg]

Quote: tchoni

Oh ... I won’t say that the 82nd miracle of technology. He retained all the shortcomings of the previous series ... But only the anti-shatter and conder have serious advantages.

Stabilized combat module with a 30mm cannon and suo if ordered with a letter A. The body is the same, but the thickness of the armor is redesigned, the engine and transmission are new. This is an armored personnel carrier, the rear ramp is not so important for him. There is a military acceptance video about him, just like an armored personnel carrier, he’s very good. When else Kurgan will go into a series. A new technique is needed now.

[tchoni]

As an armored transporter, the Ural "federal" is not bad, and a bullet and 20 people will fit into the body, and if necessary, mom will pick up the junk. And the entrance to the exhaust is quite convenient. And you can find spare parts in any repair ... You will decide, pliz, if the main function is transport, then why then a gun and an MSA with a minimum of free space and terrible inconveniences when loading an oversized cargo (boxes with bk and cans with solarium never have not met the armored personnel carrier?)? And if combat, then what for do we then have cardboard armor, an inconvenient and slow exit? ... Something like this. Specifically cited the "federal" and not the typhoon as an example ... What would I say, more clearly

[kugelblitz]

Meanwhile, the brothers revealed details on Tirex. The phenomenon of ukroengineering!

[Yegorchik]

So I always thought why UVZ did not begin to apply this layout? In my opinion, it’s a very successful solution. Three people in front like a coalition with a chassis based on the t-90, the tower is freed up and can be re-arranged for longer crowbars, batteries, etc. under the tower, the result is a car in the dimensions of a standard truck with an uninhabited tower. the sides of the armata do not twist almost twice as much because of the greater height and length.

[52]

Alas, I want something new. The family has exhausted its capabilities, but money doesn’t appear out of thin air, and it’s not a sin to bring the used structure to the limit of possibilities. Better to have 100 BTR-82s than 5 Kurgan troops at the moment. And as new technology becomes available, you can sell the not very "used" 82s to someone. MO move is correct, "stretch your legs" on clothes.

[Algetxnumx]

Quote: almost demobilized

Their successful hit 7.62 breaks.

It was like that, I confirm, sometimes they dabbled in the guard, the hulls were understaffed, though there were 70 ki, from 20-30 meters, AKM 7.62, but the truth was not often and it was necessary to get in strictly under 90 degrees to the armor.

[demiurg]

Quote: kugelblitz

Meanwhile, the brothers revealed details on Tirex. The phenomenon of ukroengineering!

Laying is upright. Good thing, 3d max: you can draw anything.
Even if they give money, who will produce it? Or again on chocks grinders to cut out, as a Watch?

[Vadim237]

It will be made by the same designers - entertainers who built "Azovets"

[Aleksey_K]

Interestingly, who knows why the BTR-90 was not adopted for service, were its tests successful?

[demiurg]

Quote: Алексей_К

Interestingly, who knows why the BTR-90 was not adopted for service, were its tests successful?

Because it is no longer an armored personnel carrier. It is heavier than BMP-3, 22 tons. The point was to produce a second serial BMP if the T-15 is on the way, and the BMP-3 is quite a good car?
Here is eighty, even with the letter a, this is another armored personnel carrier. Relatively cheap and simple.

[Aleksey_K]

Quote: demiurg

Here is eighty, even with the letter a, this is another armored personnel carrier. Relatively cheap and simple.

Thank you, everything is clear.

[made13]

The old horse will not spoil the furrow. The truth does not plow deeply :-)

[Verdun]

Purchasing new equipment is a good thing. That would be even with its maintenance to resolve the issue. And then most of the repair factories are in full touch. In order to repair the T-90, experts are already going to the Taman Division from the Uralvagonzavod. Well, how is the war really?

[From Samara]

A very uncomfortable car for the shooter, where you need to pick up small ones ... Our Designers are impenetrable!

[demiurg]

Quote: From Samara

A very uncomfortable car for the shooter, where you need to pick up small ones ... Our Designers are impenetrable!

Are you talking about the operator of the combat module? So now everything is new, the host of military acceptance for 100 kg weighs 185+ growth. Normally shot.

[From Samara]

But how did you really manage to increase the space?

[wanderer_032]

Under the terms of the contract, the military department should be transferred “before 20 new armored personnel carriers” to the military, the press service said.

At such a snail's pace, our army will be reequipped for a very long time. It’s sad. Until the end of the year, only 20 BTR. And that is at best.

[Vadim237]

It was possible not to buy them at all - they would have waited for the Boomerang and bought in large quantities.

[Muvka]

And typhoons U and K is not the same? maybe it is better to order them? They have at least mine and bulletproof protection. And it seems from fairly large calibers. Glass withstands 14,5.

[Vadim237]

Typhoon W is worth 56 million rubles - one thing, and to see from this they are not particularly bought.

[almost demobil]

The typhoon is designed for other purposes. The BTR / BMP is needed for delivery to the combat zone and support for the landing, and the typhoon is only for transporting l / s.

[demiurg]

Quote: From Samara

But how did you really manage to increase the space?

Honestly, I haven’t seen it like in 80, in 82a there is a real suo (with a ballistic computer and auto tracking of the target), the operator looks at the periscope. And it seems he’s not even clean under the tower, it makes no sense.

Quote: Muvka

And typhoons U and K is not the same? maybe it is better to order them? They have at least mine and bulletproof protection. And it seems from fairly large calibers. Glass withstands 14,5.

The body height of an armored personnel carrier is 180 cm like the Typhoon 250 centimeters, or even more. This is even if passability is not remembered.

[Muvka]

[quote = Muvka] And typhoons W and K is not the same? maybe it is better to order them? They have at least mine and bulletproof protection. And it seems from fairly large calibers. Glass so 14,5 withstands. [/ Quote]
The body height of an armored personnel carrier is 180 cm like the Typhoon 250 centimeters, or even more. This is even if passability is not remembered. [/ Quote]
And what does not suit patency? Do not remember the maximum speed? Convenience? Maybe protection against mines and bullets? Not, the main thing is the height of the hull and patency (debatable).

[demiurg]

[quote = Muvka] [quote = Muvka] And typhoons U and K is not the same? maybe it is better to order them? They have at least mine and bulletproof protection. And it seems from fairly large calibers. Glass so 14,5 withstands. [/ Quote]
The body height of an armored personnel carrier is 180 cm like the Typhoon 250 centimeters, or even more. This is even if passability is not remembered. [/ Quote]
And what does not suit patency? Do not remember the maximum speed? Convenience? Maybe protection against mines and bullets? Not, the main thing is the height of the hull and cross (debatable). [/ Quote]

How much typhoon presses on the ground and how many armored personnel carriers? More than 20 km / h on the battlefield is not necessary. Once under fire, every centimeter of height with a curse, remember that you can’t hide in every hollow, you can’t hide behind a pebble. What about comfort? On an armored personnel carrier, inside they only get to the battlefield, then dismount. More or less long-distance travels only by train, or aircraft. Typhoon is not made for this.
By the way, does a typhoon swim?

[Muvka]

I do not know. As for me, when a mine explodes beneath you, turning an APC into a mass grave, I would choose a Typhoon. You can go round the river or build a bridge. And getting to the desired point at 110 km \ h is also a big advantage. And it is better to let the bullets hit and not pierce than if there is nowhere to hide, you will be riddled with armor.

[demiurg]

An armored personnel carrier delivers infantry to the battlefield and supports it with fire. Infantry under fire in armored personnel carriers is not. In the minefields do not advance. But the rivers force. In Europe, a bunch of small rivers with a depth of about 1.5-2 meters. And not all there are descents to the water, or just the banks are swampy.
A typhoon can well evacuate the wounded, bring up the BK. Well, it's just that he really has nothing to do on the battlefield, a barn under 3 meters high, not even shelter from shelling. Staff car, again, good.

[proud]

I’m reading all this, but I still don’t understand one thing: why did I have to abandon the BTR-90 with the Stool in favor of the slightly modernized and practically exhausted 80s potential? After all, the 90th was an order of magnitude better than the BTR-82-can anyone enlighten me?

[Buffet]

Give already "Boomerang"!