Help support TMP


" Russia Toros tracked armoured vehicle" Topic


6 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Remember that you can Stifle members so that you don't have to read their posts.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2014-present) Message Board


Areas of Interest

Modern

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Workbench Article

Painting Copplestone Castings' Corporate Babes

I supplied Stronty Girl Fezian with some 'babes', and she did the rest...


Current Poll


Featured Movie Review


1,184 hits since 17 Jun 2016
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP18 Jun 2016 2:01 p.m. PST

"Russian Armed Forces (RAF) urgently need new armoured personnel carriers (APC), according to Russian defense analysts.

Since the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, Russia`s Land Forces have not changed the military doctrine for the motor rifle troops. They retained two types of organic armoured vehicles, namely, BTR armoured personnel carriers and BMP infantry fighting vehicles (IFV). Hence, RAF had two types of motor rifle battalions, in particular, battalion armed with APCs and the one armed with IFVs. In the late 1980s – early 1990s all ageing armoured vehicles intended for mounted soldiers (such as BTR-60PB/BTR-70 APCs) were phased out. BTR-80 APC and BMP-2 IFV became the organic armour of motor rifle troops.

Both vehicles were developed for traditional war, in which mobility and firepower are the main success factors. Therefore, they lacked ballistic and counter-mine protection. For instance, BTR-80 could resist to 7.62mm steel-core bullet (Level 2 (K) NATO STANAG 4569) and to blast of hand grenades and unexploded artillery fragmenting munitions (Level 1 (M) NATO STANAG 4569). Upgraded BMP-1 (designated as BMP-1P) and BMP-2 have Level 3 (K) (all-round protection against 7.62mm hard steel/tungsten alloy armour-piercing (AP) bullet at 30 m distance) and Level 1 (M) protection in accordance with STANAG 4569 Edition 2. The recent conflict (including the First and the Second Chechen wars) obviously demonstrated insufficiency of BTR-80, BMP-1 and BMP-2 ballistic and especially counter-mine protection. For instance, 12.7mm DShKM heavy machinegun obtained by Chechen rebels could easily pierce BMP-1/BMP-2s sides at 200 m distance, using B-32 steel core AP bullets. Mounted troops did not have anti-blast seats and seatbelt systems to cushion the blast effect. Chechen rebels frequently used Soviet 152mm high-explosive (HE) artillery munitions as improvised explosive devices (IED). For instance, VOF39 HE round contains approximately 7 kg of hexal (Russian designation: A-IX-2, 73% of RDX). It could produce heavy fragmentations, being able to pierce even modern body armour. The explosion of round of such type under belly of BTR-80 or BMP-1/2 guarantees the destruction of the vehicle and casualties among the mounted soldiers and the vehicles crew.

picture

picture

More here
link

Amicalement
Armand

Rod I Robertson18 Jun 2016 5:26 p.m. PST

What Russia really needs now is some BMP/BTRMRAPMICVASAP's!
Cheers.
Rod Robertson.

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP19 Jun 2016 1:43 p.m. PST

Agree!

Amicalement
Armand

per ardua21 Jun 2016 1:58 p.m. PST

And a better graphics designer. . .

FatherOfAllLogic22 Jun 2016 5:45 a.m. PST

Gosh! That bottom one seems very boxy.

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP22 Jun 2016 10:20 a.m. PST

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.