BTR-80/82A and variants: News

There should be space for reloads in the BMP-3 version as well. But not for additional soldiers.

Looking at the size of those missiles I rather doubt there would be room inside the vehicle for reloads. Perhaps saddle mounts on the rear deck of the hull...

The issue would be the length of the missiles... with only roof hatches and the little side door you couldn't put them in or take them out.

The BMP-3 with the rear walkway also wouldn't be able to carry spare missiles... the engine is in the back with a narrow walk way over top with a small troop area behind the turret... it simply does not have the rear space like a BMP-1 or BMP-2 with the seats removed which could store long spare missiles.

You would also need the additional troops to load the missiles... AFAIK in their tubes they are between 40 and 50kgs or so each.

Strapped to the sides and top of the rear hull you might carry a reload, but a reload vehicle would make more sense... a truck perhaps or a modification of the BTR-87 with the front mounted engine with a rear deck for reload missiles... perhaps with a turret mounted 30mm cannon that could have airburst shells to operate with these vehicles....

It will be a long way until most of the units will be equipped with Bumerang. Until then the BTR-82 will fill the gaps, just like the BMP-3 forms now the base for new tracked vehicles in supporting roles.

I don't agree... wheeled vehicles are much quicker and easier to make and much cheaper to operate too, so I rather suspect Boomerang based vehicles will enter service rather quicker and in much larger numbers than the other types.

I think the BTR-82 and BMP-3 will continue to operate and be produced for export because they are still better than some alternatives or nothing...

But it will still take years to make them and the first priority is the BMP version. Sosna on BTR-82A can be put into service in the next two years.

And the russian army wouldn´t buy so much BTR-82A´s if the Bumerang could be supplied in large enough numbers in the next 5 years or so. There is also a new recon version of the BTR-82 in the pipeline.

It is going to be a few years before complete divisions are unified with one vehicle chassis... there are 26-27 different vehicle types that need to be developed to put together a full division, and while some are very similar and many only differ in their turret and hull fittings they wont be putting Armata divisions into service any time soon.

Perhaps what they will start doing is putting Armata tanks and Armata IFVs in service in a current tank or motor rifle division and gradually replace the non Armata types with Armata based vehicles.

They will likely do the same with Kurganets and Boomerang divisions too though the tanks in those divisions could remain T-90AMs until more of the vehicles are changed.

The advantage of having all Boomerang vehicles in a Boomerang division is being able to drive at 90km/h for four hours and then go straight in to battle... not destroying roads and bridges on the way, and not costing a fortune in maintenance.

While you still have tanks in your unit running at 90km/h would start fires...

There are going to be priority areas and non priority areas and even in those priority areas there are going to be vehicles that suit and vehicles that don't suit...

To fight in built up areas then Armata is a good choice but not cheap. To fight in wide open places with good road networks then wheeled vehicles are best, while wet areas with soft ground and not so many roads would suit the Kurganets amphibious tracked vehicles...

Just like now there will be tank heavy forces and troop heavy forces... both forces will have tanks and both forces will have BMPs, but the infantry forces will have AT components and will have more troops.

There is a financial cost to replacing all your armour with new armour and it wont be cheap... even the Boomerang have state of the art up to date optics and the guns and fire power of the Armata forces... they trade armour for mobility and reduced weigh... but they aren't 14 ton BTR-80s any more... these are 25 ton vehicles with protection levels better than current BMPs, and more importantly will also have APS systems and NERA and cage armour too when going in to combat...

You might argue that a Boomerang doens't have the protection of a T-90AM, well that is true , but in a tank division that is 31 tanks or so... the rest of the vehicles are BMP-3 or BTR-80 or BRDM-2 or MTLBu level protection... so a Boomerang division will have 31 less well protected tanks but how many vehicles in a division???? 250? That would be 220 vehicles with better protection than the current tank division... and not just that... fully net centric communications levels, much better mobility... fully amphibious... much faster and much cheaper to operate... and with night vision and communications equipment and guns and ammo every bit as good as the latest T-90AM and as good as any of the newest upgraded other vehicles like the BTR-82 and BMP-3M and BMP-2M etc etc.

The Kurganets has better armour, and of course the Armata gives all the vehicles in the force tank level armour better than T-90AMs... what is not to like?

Hole wrote:But it will still take years to make them and the first priority is the BMP version. Sosna on BTR-82A can be put into service in the next two years.

And the russian army wouldn´t buy so much BTR-82A´s if the Bumerang could be supplied in large enough numbers in the next 5 years or so. There is also a new recon version of the BTR-82 in the pipeline.

Bumerang in air defense version will not come that quick in armament. Russia now need wheeled air defense complexes to slowly replace old Osa. Sosna with 10 km range is conditionally in this case SHORAD, while Gibka-S is VSHORAD. Practically all russian army SAMs are tracked: Strela-10, Tunguska, Tor, Buk, S-300V. Osa is only wheeled SAM for now as Strela-1 was retired long ago. Russian army need such cheaper and lighter wheeled SAMs to protect logistics and convoys behind the lines (to give basic protection in peace keeping missions as well). Boomerang is bigger and heavier, so it would be better to install actuall SHORAD in it like Pantsir or Tor-M2, to protect wheeled brigades on the battlefield. Of course alternative to BTR-82 could be Typhoon-U or Typhoon-K MRAPs, but they are too high and could be unstable, what mean, they could fire only from short stops. BTR-82 is just fine for that job. It have enough armor and is stable enough to fire on the move.

I agree with Medo.

Wheeled shorad are needed also to protect some infrastructures from cruise missiles. Russia will never have enough s-400/pantsir/tor because they are quite expensive. There are lot of sensitive stuff to protect but that are less likely to be protected by higher level SAM systems.

Mars-2000 recon vehicle

Btr-82AT. The missiles are not kornet but older ones.

franco wrote:NOTE: this is for the 5th Army which up until now has been equipped with BMP-1's and MT-LB's.  

What, there are still BMP-1s in service??
you sure it's not reserve?

And not just APCs, there are lots of BTR based vehicles... many based on older versions with two engines that could be replaced by newer BTRs

If you want to create variants for carrying missiles and missile reloads a larger side door could be created to allow them to be carried, but equally a reload vehicle could be developed on the basis of the BTR that is lighter and cheaper and simpler and has the engine moved to the front with driver and engine in a cabin at the front and the entire rear of the vehicle a flat deck for missile reloads to be stacked with a light shell of armour protection or just exposed and open... the missiles are protected from the elements by their launch tubes anyway.

Another option could be the same but with a central turret with a 30mm cannon and a rear deck that could have reload missiles with 30mm ammo in the turret and the area below the turret and the rear deck which could be used for even more 30mm cannon ammo or missile reloads for Sosna with a small crane arm for lifting them in bundles of 6 at a time maybe... or the 30mm cannon ammo on to the vehicle...

As I mentioned with small roof hatches and crew in the front end and engine in the rear and the small side doors it is not practical to carry long narrow missile tube reloads inside a BTR-82 or a BMP-3 type vehicle, but I think a Tigr version would actually be fine for MANPADS type missiles or ATGMs like Kornet.