Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Share

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 05, 2011 2:34 am

    At 0:22, that's a very small bomb

    It was just a show pyrotechnic... it is still a fairly new toy so I doubt they would want to scratch it... yet. Smile

    Why not have both anti-radiation liner and kevlar anti spall liner ? One
    never know when they would encounter operating against a nuclear
    backdrop or going into places that have been nuked few hours back.

    For all we know they might have left the anti radiation liner in place and put the anti spall liner over top. Most exported vehicles didn't have anti radiation liners anyway.
    As long as they are keeping their tactical nukes I guess it makes sense to keep preparing for such things.
    After all in Desert Storm the threat of bio and chem warfare was very real.

    I'm guessing it's more likely to encounter fragmentation than it is to encounter NBC environments.

    Yeah... looking purely mathematically at it I would say odds are any real use of the vehicles will likely involved the real threat of fragmentation and penetration, while any NBC environments might be faced once if ever.
    The spall lining is useful against HESH warheads because the kevlar captures any of the armour that peels off and would normally do internal damage. It is also useful against 90% penetrations where the incoming round almost but doesn't quite penetrate as that can lead to parts of the armour on the surface where the penetration would have occurred from spalling. And of course with an actual penetration the kevlar can sometimes stop the projectile but more often will at least stop the particles of armour coming into the vehicle with the penetrator so internal damage is reduced.

    Does BTR-82 have better mine resistance comparing to older BTRs? For
    sure kevlar liner will improve armor capabilities, how much, depend on
    the ticknes of kevlar liner.

    It all depends on the type of mine. The average anti tank mine or anti personel mine with most of the BTR series just resulted in a wheel being blown off. The vehicle could usually drive away... because the tire took most of the force and damage. For a mine that might explode under the belly... either a magnetic mine or remote controlled mine the vehicle is not so well protected. Fitting the seats to the walls or ceilings of the vehicles improve the chance of survival for the crew and troops because a seat directly fixed to the floor will channel the energy of the explosive right up through anybody sitting on those seats and most likely crush their spines and kill them. A seat fixed to the wall or ceiling will break and the distance between the seat and the floor will absorb a lot of the energy of the explosion... so the person sitting in that seat will be able to survive more powerful explosions. Obviously if the bomb is a 500kg aerial bomb with a remote fuse then nothing will walk away. Kevlar liners will reduce spall and any fragmentation from entering the troop compartment and might also slightly soften the impact as the seat hits the kevlar. For its weight and cost kevlar lining is very much well worth it.

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5671
    Points : 6077
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  Austin on Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:04 am

    IronsightSniper wrote:The BTR-90 however, is STNAG 4569 level II protection v.s. explosives, which means it can handle a 6 kg AT mine going off under it.

    Do APC around the world have better protection level ? Like is there a Level 3 or 4 protection ?

    Thanks

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  IronsightSniper on Tue Apr 05, 2011 4:39 am

    Different countries use different standards. STANAG 4569 is only a European standard, I wouldn't know about everyone else's.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STANAG_4569 for the descriptions of the various levels.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Apr 05, 2011 5:05 am

    The experts in mine resistent vehicles were the South Africans with the Buffels and Ratales, the ideal shape is the V body shape to direct the blast away from the hull.

    Most countries have copied their designs... ie V shaped hull, seats not attached directly to the floor, spaced armour under the floor and extra steel plates to protect certain vehicle positions like the driver and the engine etc.

    Improved mine resistance is something all new designs will likely address... including Boomerang.

    The problem is worse for tracked vehicles if the explosive is powerful enough to destroy the track as it suddenly loses mobility. A wheeled vehicle is more likely to just lose a wheel but still be able to move. This is the advantage of an 8 wheeled vehicle over say a 4 wheeled vehicle.
    With the extra weight it could be possible that the Boomerang could be a 10 x 10 vehicle.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  TR1 on Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:12 pm

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=R2kAot5QpGg

    Speaking of BTR-82 on the firing range...

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:35 am

    Looking at that video it looks perfectly stable firing its 30mm gun.

    Perhaps the problems were with a particular vehicle having problems with aiming?

    The above video showed a target sheet covered with hits but there was no indication as to the range at which they were shooting, but the fact that the vehicle was perfectly stable while firing suggests to me perhaps criticism of accuracy could either be based on laying accuracy of the mount, a ranging mistake for the ballistic computers calculated aim point, or perhaps they were firing while moving and the stabilisation system isn't good enough.

    Nice video anyway... thanks for posting. Smile

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  TR1 on Fri Apr 06, 2012 1:42 am

    I was thinking about that target sheet as well, it do those look like 30mm holes? Or maybe from the machine gun on the turret?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:30 pm

    Wasn't sure myself so I looked again and you can clearly see when you freeze the frame there are large holes and there are much smaller holes, with the larger holes being 30mm and the smaller holes looking like rifle calibre rounds in comparison.

    The different calibres giving us a scale for the shooting pattern, but we don't know what range they fired at it from.

    It might have been 500m or 1,000m.

    The size of the piece of paper compared with the 30mm holes suggest to me the accuracy is very good

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  TR1 on Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:30 pm

    http://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/21534/

    54 BTR-82 have entered service with a brigade @ Sevastopol.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ZtacwsUfnZM

    Nice video, dumb commentary.
    "To move into this machine from the BTR-80, is the same as moving to a space ship". Exaggerate much ?

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  medo on Fri Sep 07, 2012 4:19 pm

    54 BTR-82 have entered service with a brigade @ Sevastopol.
    [quote]

    Good news. I hope they will get more of them. 54 is not enough for 2 battalions.


    Nice video, dumb commentary.
    "To move into this machine from the BTR-80, is the same as moving to a space ship". Exaggerate much ?

    Depend who they have in mind. In old BTR-80 gunner have to aim and turn the turret and the gun manually and could work only in day light. In BTR-82A there is stabilization, electric move of turret and gun, ballistic computer, day/night sight. For gunner it is a big difference, but for other members of crew there is no big difference.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Sep 08, 2012 1:11 am

    More importantly after every 50 round burst with the 14.5mm HMG they had to change belts...

    In BTR-82 and BTR-82A the ammo belts are continuous...

    Add to that better armour, anti spall liner, and lots of minor things that make it easier to operate, and I wouldn't say it is a starship, but it is a significant step in the right direction.... I wouldn't mind one myself...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 991
    Points : 1144
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    BTR-90 News:

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:16 pm

    Theres a pathetic number of them in service compared to the BTR-80 but are they still being built? Do they have an upgrading future or will be replaced by the boomerang and BTR-82 completely when theyre  available in large numbers?

    Are there any potential customers for them or is everybody going for the more versatile patria AMV?


    BTW Have any BTR-90s seen action in the chechnya or dagestan?

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  TR1 on Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:25 pm

    Pathetic number?

    There are zero in service as it was never purchased beyond a few testing units.
    New unified vehicles have made BTR-90 obsolete.

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 991
    Points : 1144
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:41 pm

    Well thats a sad story about my favorite APC No cry angry Sad

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  TR1 on Thu Sep 13, 2012 9:56 pm

    KomissarBojanchev wrote:Well thats a sad story about my favorite APC No cry angry Sad

    Yep, but Boomerang is around the corner.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu Sep 13, 2012 11:38 pm

    The idea behind the BTR-60/70/80 APCs was light and very cheap and simple troop transport. Better than a truck because it is bullet resistent, and it is also more mobile and amphibious and with its own firepower.

    The early models had two engines and a complex and not too reliable transmission because the available engines weren't powerful enough and it was cheaper to just use two underpowered standard truck engines than develop a more suitable engine.

    For the 70 and 80 they not only developed single engined models they shifted to diesel engines which are safer and offer better fuel economy.

    The BTR-90 was a completely different concept, but it was too late.

    Very simply there was the BMP and there was the BTR.

    The BMPs were expensive but had good armour and good to very good fire power. They were tracked, sot their mobility was better across rough country, but on hard roads they weren't so great and of course the tracklayers used more fuel and required far more maitainence and were more expensive to buy, to operate and to maintain.

    The BTRs were APCs and the BMPs were IFVs. The difference is that BTRs dropped off troops and then withdrew from the fighting, while the BMPs retreated a little and then used their firepower to support their own troops on the attack.

    The BTR-90 was an attempt to make a wheeled IFV, it had the turret of the BMP-2 and much heavier armour. Instead of being about 14 tons like previous wheeled BTRs in the 60 family the 90 was 20 tons.

    The problem was that it was still based on the BTR-60 design with the engine in the back so no possibility of a rear ramp exit.

    The new Boomerang will reportedly have side doors and a rear ramp exit so getting in or out should be easy and fast.

    The problem with the BTR-90 was that it was as expensive as a BMP, but not quite as well armed or armoured. The BTR-90M with the BMP-3M turret was interesting, but the lack of rear entry/exit meant it just wasn't quite what it promised.

    The Boomerang should fix all the issues, while at the same time offering a standard chassis that can be used throughout the medium and light wheeled brigades.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  TR1 on Thu Sep 27, 2012 4:06 am

    http://bmpd.livejournal.com/340891.html?view=6945435#t6945435

    Looks like new BTR-82s will have gun sheath to help with stability.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  GarryB on Thu Sep 27, 2012 5:21 am

    Despite what it says there I rather suspect it is mainly to reduce heat signature. Would be interesting to see it fire as the 2A72 gun recoils quite a bit during firing, so it would be interesting to see if this external cover recoils with it... in which case it should add mass to the barrel and therefore make it more stable, or if the shroud remains fixed and the barrel recoils inside.
    By the look of some of the comments it sounds like the barrel itself has a cooling system added to it.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  medo on Sat Sep 29, 2012 8:55 pm

    http://www.vestnik-rm.ru/news-4-2602.htm

    Arzamaz improved BTR-82A and it got gun barrel placed inside new tube to fixate it. It could also get new Agat-MDT sight, which will have thermal imager and laser range finder inside.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 30, 2012 12:41 am

    Well that is excellent news.
    It is strange that they had no mentioned accuracy problems regarding the Lynx (The recon model of the BMP-3 which only has a 2A72 cannon and no 100mm gun).

    Of course they are talking about accuracy at 4km range which would be the max effective range of the weapon against ground targets.

    The introduction of new thermal sights is interesting too... previously the BTR series was the cheap transport option, so the fact that it is getting modern thermal sights suggests pretty much every vehicle in the Russian military will be able to fight at night and all weather.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  TR1 on Sun Sep 30, 2012 2:24 am

    Now I don't know how much this plays in, but Lynx has the gun mounted in the turret, which I imagine is a much stiffer base than the BTRs mounting arm.

    Also there were very few reco BMP-3s bought, so who knows if it was ever even an issue.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 30, 2012 4:33 am

    What I don't understand is that the 2A72 was designed from the outset to have a long recoil stroke... the idea being to delay the opening of the chamber. The 2A42 had problems at its higher rate of fire of filling the crew compartment with fumes. The solution for the BMP-2 was to just fire at the lower rate.

    The 2A72 with its longer recoil stroke and delayed opening of the chamber was supposed to have eliminated the problem completely, but clearly they have designed the weapon assuming that will be attached to a 100mm gun barrel as a sort of barrel weight to further improve accuracy.

    Note there was nothing wrong with the accuracy of the 2A42, which is also used on external mounts like on the original BMPT and of course on the current Russian attack helos of Ka-52 and Mi-28N, where there is of course no fumes problem possible due to the external nature of the mounts.

    If all it takes is a simple barrel shroud to fix the problem then that is great... they can apply that to the Lynx and it has the added advantage of reducing the IR signature of the weapon too and also protecting it from small arms fire as well.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3051
    Points : 3149
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  medo on Sun Sep 30, 2012 9:58 am

    I think the problem of 2A72 is, that it is too light gun, what means gun barrel is also light and weaker than the one on 2A42 gun. Maybe outside additional tube will also help with cooling the gun, what is quite important for longer fire.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15468
    Points : 16175
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 01, 2012 1:57 am

    It is certainly a very light weapon at 85kgs, but I would assume that a proper mount should be able to support it properly during firing.

    I rather suspect it is more of a case that the original sights are set up to allow for the fact that it was attached to a large heavy 100mm gun and when fitted without that gun the harmonics are different leading to a wider spread of impacts at long range.

    Adding a shroud to improve accuracy and allow for better cooling and presumably reducing the signature of the weapon seems to be a good thing.

    I just wonder why they went for something you'd see over a SMG barrel instead of the supporting structure as seen on the Kliver turret. I suspect it has more to do with cooling than with support.

    The 2A72 has a slightly higher muzzle velocity with standard rounds (970 vs 960m/s) compared with the 2A42, but also has a much lower rate of fire at 330rpm compared with the 2A42s 200-300 rpm at its low rate and 550rpm+ at its high rate.

    The strange thing for me is that the 2A42 was OK as long as you fired at the lower rate. If the replacement weapon has a similar low rate of fire then why replace it?

    Ahh well... both seem to be powerful and accurate weapons in their standard mounts.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  TR1 on Mon Oct 01, 2012 3:24 am

    I wonder how they can justify purchasing BTR-82 when Bommerang is around the corner...all the meanwhile denying the VDV new vehicles.
    Cost is certainly much higher for BMD-4M than BTR-82, but then again, the VDV doesn't need as many vehicles either.

    Sponsored content

    Re: BTR-80/82 APCs and variants: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 3:08 pm


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 06, 2016 3:08 pm