Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Question Thread: Russian Army

    Share
    avatar
    Vladimir79

    Posts : 2180
    Points : 3072
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Oct 04, 2011 2:51 am

    You can contact the makers at Arzamas...

    http://www.amz.ru/

    You have a surplus BTR-80?

    ehtesham

    Posts : 3
    Points : 7
    Join date : 2011-10-03

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  ehtesham on Tue Oct 04, 2011 3:41 am

    Thanks for the reply. In fact, I want Parts seller of APC BTR 80. I do not have surplus any.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 06, 2011 12:45 pm

    If you are considering buying a second hand BTR-80 and you want to make sure you can get parts for it can I suggest you contact Rosoboronexport, their webpage is http://www.roe.ru/

    They will likely have lots of BTR-60s, BTR-70s, and BTR-80s available for sale, or know who to contact with a serious interest.

    It is pretty unlikely you will get a super cheap bargain one, but also less chance you will end up double crossed.

    If you don't buy you vehicle from them then it is unlikely they will feel obliged to help you with support.

    Keep in mind the BTR-60s and BTR-70s had two engines and had a complicated drive train, but with the right manuals and training they should be relatively simple to maintain.

    The BTR-80 will have just one larger single diesel engine.

    AFAIK they might have options like custom civilian modifications on new or old vehicles.

    Obviously there are also other issues like getting it road legal and even just getting it into your country.

    I have seen some interesting civilian modifications of the BRDM-2 with enlarged windows and side doors, but retaining the belly wheels and central tire regulation system and amphibious capability.

    Looked fun, but were not cheap.

    Of course as Vlad pointed out the makers of the BTR-80 would be the best people to contact for spare parts.

    http://www.amz.ru/

    Of course because you are in Bangladesh, perhaps contacting your local Army base to enquire who they have their spares supplied by might be worth a crack... the worst result is they don't reply...

    If you are after a cheap vehicle, then Rosoboronexport might be a good place to start... Russia is moving from a mish mash of BTR-60s, BTR-70s, and BTR-80s, to BTR-82 and later Boomerang ( a 25 ton wheeled vehicle), so they will likely be thinking about what they are going to do with their older vehicles.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10215
    Points : 10703
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  George1 on Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:16 pm

    BMP-3 is going to be replaced with a more modern IFV?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:46 pm

    Yes.

    The Kurganets-25 will be a tracked 25 ton amphibious vehicle family similar to the current BMP-3 in role but likely with newer firepower options (talk of 45mm and 57mm guns) and a rear ramp door.

    In medium tracked brigades the tank, the APC, the artillery, the Air defence, and all the other vehicles in the unit will be based on the Kurganets-25.

    In medium wheeled brigades the Boomerang wheeled 25 ton amphibious vehicle family similar to the BTR-90 but 5 tons heavier and with a rear ramp and side doors will be used as the tank, the APC, the artillery, the air defence etc etc vehicles.

    The Navy is also getting a developed version of the Kurganets-25 with better rough sea keeping capabilities and propeller drive in water.
    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3203
    Points : 3317
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  flamming_python on Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:59 pm

    I wonder what the VDV will get. Somehow they need to get something with enough armour that they won't be afraid to stay inside of, but at the same time something that won't drop like a stone through water when it's paradropped from the back of an Il-76.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Thu Feb 16, 2012 12:57 am

    Amphibious and air dropable and with excellent firepower.

    There was a video somewhere where the makers of the new medium vehicles were interviewed and they talked about Kurganets-25 and Boomerang, and they mentioned that these "light" vehicles were made of expensive materials that gave them added protection above the level current vehicles enjoy.

    First off the BMP-3 is 18 tons so the 25 ton Kurganets-25 is 7 tons heavier... and I really don't see how the armament of the Kurg can be heavier than the BMP-3 as it is already rather heavy, so the vast majority of the extra weight will be a bigger engine and extra armour.

    The BMD-4M is probably in the 18 ton weight range too.

    The Kurganets-25 will be designed to operate in rivers and lakes without modification, but to operate in heavy sea states the Navy is ordering their own version of the tracked vehicle with propeller drive for use in the water and the ability to operate in rough water.

    It would not be beyond imagination that the VDV do something similar and order a Kurganets-25 that is perhaps slightly redesigned to suit airborne operations.

    I suspect with Slat armour and NERA fitted they will actually be very capable vehicles.

    In the mean time the last report I read said the vast majority of VDV vehicles were BMD-2s, so I think a purchase of BMD-4Ms is overdue... and when any new vehicle based on the Kurganets-25 is ready then the BMD-4Ms in service could be transferred to other duties... with excellent firepower and communications and vision devices and excellent mobility I am sure they will find another use for them... even as a border patrol vehicle in arctic regions...

    Of course they could always go the other way and look at the Typhoon light vehicle and go for a combination of speed and firepower
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Μilitary Questions & Answers

    Post  ahmedfire on Sun Mar 25, 2012 5:55 pm

    I think starting a threat to discuss about military questions that anyone ask and all members try to answer questions to increase military Knowledgement ,

    I'll start  Wink ,

    Did russian army ever put a Self-propelled gun on 8X8 wheeled chassis ?

    I just saw Italian Army make it and it might be the first try around world without problems ,



    I saw some opinions that said this gun can't be put on t-55 or t-62 chassis , why ?  
    Is it about power/weight ratio issue ?

    thanks
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  TR1 on Sun Mar 25, 2012 7:29 pm

    http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/east_europe/russia/wheeled_armoured/2s23/2s23_nona_self-propelled_wheeled_armoured_vehicle_Russia_Russian_640.jpg

    There were a bunch of BTR anti-tank gun prototypes too, never entered service though.

    Russian army has no interest for a heavy SPG on wheels though.

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:19 am



    The 2S14 is a BTR-60 with an 85mm gun fitted.

    As far as I am aware there were a few planned vehicles that had tank guns mounted on wheeled vehicle chassis like the Stryker in the US army with a 105mm gun.

    None of them have been enormous successes AFAIK and their mobility on roads is not usually matched across country.

    The tank gun and turret plus a decent amount of ammo generally makes these vehicles very poor cross country vehicles and they are pretty much limited to hard flat surfaces, which in most places means roads... which is very limiting.

    Having said that the Russians have the Sprut, which is based on the tracked BMD-3 chassis for use as light amphibious tank and before that they had the PT-76 series of amphibious light tank, which both have excellent mobility and are fully amphibious. It is certain that with their plans for new armoured vehicle families that in the medium brigade role they will have a wheeled and a tracked vehicle family.

    The concept is that every vehicle in the unit shares the same chassis base so there will likely be wheeled medium brigades and tracked medium brigades, which means therefore there will be 25 ton class amphibious tracked vehicles with a tank gun on a Kurganets-25 chassis and there will be a 25 ton class amphibious wheeled vehicle with a tank gun on a Boomerang chassis. The deployment of the different types will likely depend on terrain with wheeled vehicles in western europe and tracked in the bogs of siberia and deep snow in winter.
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  ahmedfire on Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:34 am


    Thanx guys,

    Garry, but Why t-55 or t-62 chassis can't withstand the Shock reaction
    after firing (many times ) by this 155 mm gun , after some experiments in my country there were some shocks appeared on the chassis ,

    and in the same time , this italian vehicle withstand the shoots of that 155 mm gun and no problems appeared on the vehicle hull, why ?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Mon Mar 26, 2012 1:13 am

    The ability to absorb force is a ratio of ring size/area.

    A smaller turret ring will limit the amount of recoil that can be absorbed by any turret fitted.

    A turret ring is generally optimised to handle the recoil power of the gun fitted... if you put the 100mm rifled gun of the T-54/55 in a T-34 you would find you had problems with cracking or even serious damage during firing.

    A good example was the BMP-3 which was designed to use an off centre 100mm rifled gun of low pressure.

    The gun could fire a heavy HE shell 4km, but with improved optics and systems they decided to increase propellent and make the gun a bit more powerful and reach out to 7km, but because the turret ring wasn't designed for the extra recoil in addition to the fact that the recoil was off centre they had serious problems with the turret ring cracking.

    A modern 155mm gun generates a lot of recoil and the T-54/55s turret ring was not designed for that sort of energy.

    The ability to take a powerful gun has more to do with turret ring size and design than the weight of the vehicle.

    The 125mm gun used in the Sprut is a standard 125mm gun with normal velocities and can use the full range of ammo types any other modern 125mm gun can use, the only difference is that it can recoil back further than standard guns and this spreads the recoil force over a longer period, which makes it able to be used in lighter vehicles.

    On the 155mm gun you can also have a huge muzzle brake to help with recoil.

    A T-54/55 could be modified to carry an artillery calibre weapon, the MSTA uses a T-80 chassis as a base, though of course the T-80 is a 125mm calibre gun carrying vehicle which is a few steps up in power over the 100mm rifled gun of the older T models.
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 704
    Points : 876
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  ahmedfire on Thu Mar 29, 2012 1:39 am


    Thanx Garry ,you always have answers Smile

    I also found what ensure that

    By the late 1950s, Soviet commanders realized that the T-55's 100 mm gun was incapable of penetrating the frontal armor of newer Western tanks like the Centurion and M48 Patton with standard armor-piercing shells. While 100 mm HEAT ammo could have accomplished the task, they were considerably more expensive and required more training of tank crews for proper use. It was decided to up-gun the T-55 with a 115 mm smoothbore cannon, capable of firing APFSDS rounds. Experimental trials showed that the T-55 was inherently unsuited to mount the larger new cannon, and work therefore began on a new tank. The bigger gun required a bigger turret and turret ring to absorb the higher recoil. This in turn necessitated a larger hull, as the T-55 hull was simply too small to accept the new turret. The T-62 thus took shape, marking an evolutionary improvement upon the T-55. (Perrett 1987:38)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-62




    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Thu Mar 29, 2012 3:20 am

    I would add that in the late 1970s and early 1980s the preferred anti armour round for the Russians was the HEAT shell rather than the APFSDS.

    The whole concept of a smoothbore gun for the T-62 and later tanks was that HEAT shells are less efficient if they are spinning rapidly and long narrow penetrators like the APFADS rounds fired by modern tanks... being long and narrow can't actually be spun fast enough by rifling to stabilise them in flight.

    The solution was to not stabilise them with spin, to use small fins to stabilise them in flight, so you don't need rifing in modern tank guns.

    The lack of rifling reduces internal friction and makes the gun barrel lighter and easier to clean. You can either get better performance from the same length of barrel or you can shorten the barrel and make the gun lighter still.

    The fears of gross inaccuracy in the west when they first heard the 115mm gun of the T-62 was a smooth bore were found to be largely irrational and of course the next western gun copied the Soviets and was also a smoothbore.

    The Soviets and Russians are much more practical in regard to tank use and don't expect their tanks to spend all their time killing other tanks. Fully half the ammo carried by a Soviet/Russian tank is HE Frag ammo to deal with soft targets, and of the remaining half, half of that (a quarter of the full load) is HEAT which is fully dual use against bunkers and other hard targets. The APFSDS rounds are kept for those rare cases where the target is very hard because against many targets the APFSDS is largely ineffectual.
    avatar
    Mr.Kalishnikov47

    Posts : 293
    Points : 336
    Join date : 2012-02-25
    Age : 29
    Location : U.S.A

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Mr.Kalishnikov47 on Wed Apr 04, 2012 1:16 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    The fears of gross inaccuracy in the west when they first heard the 115mm gun of the T-62 was a smooth bore were found to be largely irrational and of course the next western gun copied the Soviets and was also a smoothbore.

    That's super advanced modern American ingenuity for you thumbsup All your inventions are belong to us. Cool

    Okay back on topic. What happened to those Vodnik light armored vehicles everybody was talking about a few years back? They seemed very useful, a lot of modification options and flexibility. Any photos of them in service?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Wed Apr 04, 2012 11:53 pm

    Have seen a few photos of them in service in South Ossetia I think.

    They seem to use them as replacements for BRDM-2s.
    avatar
    Mr.Kalishnikov47

    Posts : 293
    Points : 336
    Join date : 2012-02-25
    Age : 29
    Location : U.S.A

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Mr.Kalishnikov47 on Thu Apr 05, 2012 12:35 am

    Nice, thanks for the info Garry.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 05, 2012 7:31 am

    Actually I found a few of the photos I remembered from South Ossetia and they were BPM-97s and not Vodniks.

    I do however remember photos with quite a few Vodniks lined up for training I think, but can't remember where it was...
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 05, 2012 10:27 am

    Now I think I remember... I think I last saw Vodniks being used to escort TOPOL-Ms and were being used by the FSB...
    avatar
    Mr.Kalishnikov47

    Posts : 293
    Points : 336
    Join date : 2012-02-25
    Age : 29
    Location : U.S.A

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Mr.Kalishnikov47 on Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:58 pm

    I found this just now

    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16276
    Points : 16907
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:37 am

    That is one of the photos I remember seeing... Smile

    I am sure I have also seen 2-3 Vodniks escorting a TOPOL-M vehicle down a road through a forest too.
    avatar
    Mr.Kalishnikov47

    Posts : 293
    Points : 336
    Join date : 2012-02-25
    Age : 29
    Location : U.S.A

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Mr.Kalishnikov47 on Fri Apr 06, 2012 2:39 am

    Well at least I know it's being used, that's all I wanted to know. Thanks for the help Garry Very Happy
    avatar
    KomissarBojanchev

    Posts : 1170
    Points : 1329
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    What does C4I mean?

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:15 pm

    What does C4I mean? I assume it has nothing to do with explosives?
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10215
    Points : 10703
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  George1 on Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:09 pm

    C4ISR is a term used by the U.S. military (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance)
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5699
    Points : 5735
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  TR1 on Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:38 pm

    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=C4I

    Sponsored content

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Aug 17, 2017 7:51 am