My dad (Retired Brigadier General, Bangladesh Army) was the CO of a mechanized inf battalion that used 60 of these. They were deployed against several government and rebel forces in Western Africa (I know the location is confusing, western Africa is 7000 km from our country, we were deployed in an UN supervised mission) Now from what I gathered from my dad, the biggest asset of these APC's was mobility. You could get your troops literally any where you wanted to, and hit the enemy from any angle. The groups we were up against had a big stock of RPGs (Which this APC can't survive against) but even on the very few occassions of a direct hit, the occupants were not harmed. These were even used in hostage-rescue operations in area that were too 'hot' for helicopters, which is a pretty impressive feature. Now the downside is that it is vulnerable to 15+ mm fire in close range if the terrain doesn't provide enough cover. 12.7 can also damage it enough to send it to the repair shop, but usually not enough to disable it. The most important feature of this APC is it's ability to travel on water unhitched. This is a very important feature in my country, where you can't go more than a 2-3 kms without crossing a river.
for a mechanized unit it would be best to be a mix between IFVs and APCs... with no V-hull and modular armor system these older APCs dont offer much protection against IED and RPGs...
Then I am pretty much sure that those RPGs with the African rebels were Chinese made and not the original russian made....RPGs knocked out many BTRs 60s and 70s in Afghanistan during 1980s literally roasting the Soviet troops inside....
Some years ago, I see a TV show, where a former Russian Officer, I think he was a colonel, show videos that he filmed with private camera, back in the 80s in Afghanistan. One time he was on an inspection with an afghan Officer, when their convoi was attacked by the Mudshahedin. A Grenade of an RPG penetrate the armour of their BTR on the opposite site where the afghan had his place, killed him and go outside on the other side. Either the Russian officer, then any of the crew members or soldiers was seriously wounded.
Patel Rohan Could be a dud, could be that they used the wrong type of warhead, could be they simply hit a part that doesn't matter much, and the damage is therefore minimal, or even could be they field modified it with cage armor. Quite a lot really
@@cfranko1860 I want to imagine it's a magical place where retired BTRs enjoy their evening of life. But it's probably just an amphibious training facility.
I would love to own one of these. After the fall of the Soviet Union in early 1990's I had some contacts who went to Russia and was offered these things brand new for almost nothing by one of the army base commanders. This thing and a Hind D would make me ruler of my Cul de sac.
we used btr80 in palmyra desert , isis members fired all kinds of weapons including atgm but they couldnt hit us being moving at speed of 70 km per hour
@42 it is a truce both our forces and the terrorists must back few kilometers and leave the matter to mother russia to patrol lattkia aleppo high way and keep it working, and believe it or not even in the most intense fighting against isis at alhajar alaswad damascus we had communictions and internet and so for 90% of places there is internet except of palmyra the cell towers were destroyed by bombading hill tops
Highly underrated vehicle. The key point imo is the fact that you can keep it low. you can keep it very silent, very good for urban warfare or in thick terrain. There was a few modernized once in the army when i was in and it was a good vehicle.
USAF here; I stumbled upon your channel some weeks ago and have been continually entertained and informed throughout. I appreciate the apparent research you put in to doing trhese; and I for one am grateful to ya! Keep up the Great Work! SSgt Toby
By the way, there is no evidence of ERA being implemented on BTR-80. The main reason for this is its relatively thin armour which can easily be damaged when ERA goes off. Other reasons can be sheer weight of ERA which can reduce the mobility of the vehicle as well as potential danger of dismounting troops being hit by ERA fragments. All in all, it's dangerous. And we should keep in mind every soldier's worst enemies -- accountants (ERA is costly, and military spending has its limits). Greetings from Russia!
There are additional booking kits. Overhead armor sheets, ceramic panels, grating screens, ERA for light armored vehicles are, but it is quite expensive and dimensional, so screens are more common. The usual ERA contact-1 will simply break through the armor when triggered, it is.
Just for info BTR-80 plays a role of Humvee don't not play a role for IFV like Bradley, its intent is the use as primary transport. In cases were USA army uses Humvee, BTR-80 is to be used instead by those armies that have it.
@Nikola Poiukov However, the US has not had a good fleet of wheeled armored vehicles, and have use the HUMVEE in places of what it really should have. Just the stupid US military still fighting WW2. The HUMVEE was a terrible decision. Should have stuck with a light liaison vehicle like the Willy's Jeep, and developed a number of armored wheeled vehicles. Heavy tracked vehicles are fine for wars like WW2, but generally overkill for the wars the US has been involved in since WW2. Most countries do have a wide range of light armored vehicles and so do not have to use an oversized liaison vehicle like the HUMVEE in cases where an armored vehicle is the solution. The BTR series is just one of many light armored vehicles, and something like the Russian BDRM should have been used instead of the oversized HUMVEE. The US has to move vehicles into a theater since seldom will the next conflict actually be where the vehicles are stationed, so big vehicles mean a lot more transport capability it needed, and also bigger vehicles have larger logistics tails. This makes heavy armored vehicles less than ideal, and also means that a massive liaison vehicle like the HUMVEE are ridiculous, and it is being replaced by something even more massive. US military is a corrupt disgrace. Another problem with the HUMVEE is that it is too big. It cannot be manhandled at all easily, and is to wide for a lot of unimproved roads.
Clifford Nelson - I can tell you have never served in any military or been in combat because you comment was extremely stupid. So either you are stupid or ignorant when it comes to military vehicles and their use. The Humvee as you say was one of the best light wheeled vehicles of all time and performed it's job very well. There is a reason why so many countries have copied it or still trying to develop a similiar vehicle. I spent 11 yrs in the US army with 2 tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan, so please try to say you know more about military vehicles and combat than i do lol!
EpicHunter117 Gaming - I'm assuming you were never in the military and in combat right? Ok so first off a Humvee isn't made to with stand a hit from an RPG, but the up armored Humvee has no issues in stopping small arm rounds (AK's and any other rifle round). You do realize that an RPG or AT4 will easily destroy and BTR or BMP? Most APC's aren't designed to withstand a hit from anykind of RPG. I did two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. During my first tour I was in an up armored humvee and when being shot at I could barely tell when a round hit the vehicle. During my second tour was a TC (truck commander/team leader) and I was in a M117 Guardian. It's a big 4 wheeled armored vehicle. During my last tour the humvee was pretty much totally replaced by MRAP's.
@@mississippirebel1409 Are you that ignorant to tell everyone who comments " im going to assume you never served" ?. Well Mr.Know it all im just stating what i saw in the videos. 7.62rounds were going right through the driver's door in the Humvee, both window and door panels.
A small correction: BTR platform will be replaced by Boomerang APC, and not by T-15 Barbaris that's built on Armata platform. My father served as a Driver-Mechanic of a BTR-60PB. He was stationed not far off Chinese border. According to him the tyre pressure control system was able to maintain pressures in tyres in case of up to 10 penetrations of the wheels. The ones he was working on, when he was in the army in 1980s, were by then thoroughly flogged out. When he arrived there were only 2 drivable ones in the whole unit. He repaired a few while he was in: by telling his superiors to simply let him climb into the sucker in the morning and not bother him for the day. He was left to go about his job of repairing them simply because he was the only one that could be bothered. Once the power steering let go on a march. He drove the damn thing at some speed to be able to wrench the big steering wheel. By the time he made it to the base and close to the garage his arms were dead. What let go was a connection which wasn't possible to fix out where they were as no backup was around. But everything was within easy reach and didn't require awesome brains to maintain. One of the reasons for the thin armor is the fact that Russian military specified the ability of "swimming" across rivers. Thus Russians made it able to float, but the cost was the armor thickness. New Boomerang is claimed to have multi-layered armor with ceramics that is both lighter and stronger than what is used on BTRs now. And it ALSO can float across rivers.
Indeed. This vehicle used in it’s intended role is a winner. You’re transporting infantry to the fight while protecting them from small arms fire and artillery fragments. You don’t need too much armor for that. You’re also not using this vehicle to go head to head with tanks and IFVs. You have the 14.5mm to provide fire support for the dismounted infantry and local security of the vehicle. I imagine this vehicle would close to 1 to 2km from the assault position, out of range of most enemy direct fire weapons, and then it provides overwatch for the squad with the 14.5mm as they dismount and assault the objective on foot. As the infantry clear the area the BTR can move forward and extend coverage deeper into the objective with the 14.5mm.
@@darthamerica9119 I believe the 30mm variant is the dominant one in the russian front line troops but they have more vehicles one the way based on the Armata chassis
The 14.5mm MG is no joke. It fires the same round as the anti-tank rifles of WWII and can punch through a fair bit more armour than a .50 cal can. Certainly enough for tearing up other IFVs. The high rate of fire and sheer volume of rounds should get past any ERA.
it can punch through more armor than a .50cal but the difference is between around 35 at the high end for .50 and 45mm for the 14.5mm machinegun. in the case of armored vehicles the armor is typically rarely in the range where a .50 would stop but a 14.5 wouldn't. still a nasty weapon though and I am sure it has a brutal effect on hard cover being used by enemy infantry, I can imagine those rounds blow through multiple cinderblocks with ease and have more than enough power to lance whoever might be behind them.
Mobility is the most underrated aspect of ALL combat!! You cannot make a tank at a reasonable price point that can survive air attack, artillery and antitank crews. However, you can make something fast and that means it's hard to hit.
At 7:58 - it`s no just T-15 the RFAF are looking forward to. There are now 3 different platforms in development: the heavy T-15, the medium Kurganets-25 and the light VPK-7829 Boomerang. The first two are tracked, and the last one is wheeled. So it is really the Boomerang that is the successor of the BTR series. Unfortunately there are some rumours on the net, that the development of the Boomerang is stalled. One of the reasons suspected is that the forward-right mounted engine is so hot that it does not only give a huge IR signature, but even destroys the paint on the outside of the vehicle.
Any military successes of Russia cause attacks of hysteria in the United States. Therefore, our military decided that it is better to do everything quietly, in order to preserve the nerves of many politicians.
I think you might upgrate the BTR armor and weapons. You can add some cage-armor on the sides of the vehicle or another armor plate, and these can whithstand 12,7 mm shots and RPG and you can add the 30 mm autocannon from the BMP 3. Pretty good for an APC designed vehicle which price is below the 1 million dollars or even 0,5 million for new vehicle and nowadays and this is pretty rare in today western APC vehicles market.
I wish they would import these to US for surplus sale. Also I don’t get why people complain about armor and weapon systems on board this thing, it’s not meant to be used as a IFV it’s a APC which serve very different purposes, APCs drop you off on the outskirts of the battle. IFVs drop you off inside the thick of the battle. Do people just not understand the need for diversity of equipment and sometimes you don’t always need a heavy armored heavy weapon vehicle?
Nice analysis mate. It is quite a impressive little vehicle and was cool to see inside as they operate it. As a gamer i think we can say we have all come across this vehicle, and as an infantryman it was quite a scary prospect.
Great video as always :-) I like the BTRs they are good for what they are designed for. The casualties start racking up when they are used in ways they are not designed for, i.e.putting them up front alongside the heavy armour. This is the same problem the American's experienced with the Humvee, which was designed as a replacement for the jeep, not as a front line vehicle. One problem I have heard about the early manned turret versions of the BTR is that the gasses from the 14.5mm KVPT enter the fighting compartment. This can overcome the crew if they use it too much, which reduces it's suppressive fire ability. Not sure if this had been corrected by the time the BTR-80 had come out. Later versions with unmanned RWS would have no such trouble of course. Google BTR-4 with combat unit "GROM" (Ukraine) to see this taken to the nth degree ;-)
The worst problem with the BTR-60s was they used two unreliable 6 cylinder gasoline engines each powering 4 wheels. If either of them jammed up( something that happened a lot) you only had about 100hp.
the only update for increase protection for BTR80 is the addition of a kevlar layer on the inside to prevent splinters from jumping if the armor is penetrated + additional armor plates attached with space in between the hull's armor and the plates+cage armor in places. That's it. NO ERA or whatsoever since reactive armor can damage the vehicle itself.
When it appeared it would have been limited by SALT 2. Vehicles with guns of 20 mm or larger were a separate calibre. For a straight APC 14.5 mm was excellent.
I have seen it fighting with out at least a wheel and Just engaging and covering foot soldiers like its another day at the job. Was during the chechen wars, battle of Grozny. I dont think there is anything bad about this vehicle if it's used according to its characteristics, coz it sure is better than a humvee with a fifty cal and sterdier than those 4 wheeled Renaults that r designed for the same roll, though both r good. As for the 14.5 mm gun, it had its days being smaller ammo faster bullet straighter shooting than any other caliber ever which makes it great against infantry, yet the bullet is small so not much effective explosive bullets, and its worth it to say that this 14.5 mm bullet being first developed as an anti armor ammunition became the standard for apcs armor of the west, in that they have to be able to resist it. Yet i still have mixed feeling about it. I mean it is far faster and straighter bullet and small and light. It is sexy one has to admit. There , enough rambling
I was a 63Y/B. thats a track , wheel, coffepot mechanic. I have ridden in the older versions of this and the M113. This is one of the times when Russia got it right. remember it takes 1 grunt to kill 1 battle tank.
Hi everyone. I did my draft sevice 32 years ago in Bulgarian Army and up until the time I turned 40 I had a desire to buy an original BTR-60 from army surplus sales, and I probably would if the goverment would made them road legal, which they did not, although this vehical does not have guns and is in fact a cabriolet :) I've always imagined driving to the sea and going off road to a wild beach and straight into the sea :) I had the bad luck to have a very intense training in simulated close to combat environment and I can surely tell that in regards of a real war you would probably never chose a BTR as your combat vehicle, but even more so you would never embark a tracked vehicle during training exercises. BTR does not ride on a rough terrain - it floats on it, like a Mercedes limousine with an active suspension and if it has been quieter inside you wouldn't mind riding inside a whole day.
The BTR did it's main role well: Getting troops and equipment to the frontline fast and safely from the rear to the front and then dropping them off, then leaving to do another round. It's not meant to get into fights with enemy positions or armour or even well equipped infantry. For it's role as a battle Taxi it works well and it capable getting through difficult terrain. People misjudge it and mock it since it is easy to pierce and destroy, but it was never meant to be used like a IFV and get into fights, that is the BMPs role. By that logic then people should laugh at the M113s when they get easily destroyed.
NOT PsiSyndlcate and if so that not accurate the first models could stop 7.62mmAP on the side and 12.5mmAP on the front.....the one used today can stop 14.5mmAP in the front and not much better.........and for you to say there not impressive is inaccurate
I've seen people hit with the 14.7mm KPVT rounds from BTR-80 and they were still in one piece while others were torn to pieces with a few 30mm rounds from 2А72 on BTR-4, so I'd pick the latter if I had a choice.
There ya go Squad players ! What the dealio is with the BTR-80 in real life. Matsimus Gaming - Good videos that you want to watch, in an accent you can understand ;-)
7-8 passengers is really pretty measly for a vehicle this size. This vehicle was tested against the XA-180 back in the day, and the only advantage this one had was the machine gun and lower price. The XA-180 was faster, had greater operational range and carried twice the number of passengers. And with the USSR/Russia being in the state it was, it was simply easier to acquire more XA-180s. edit: some details
Pros: -Has wheels (faster and quieter than track,also saves fuel) -Better armament than M112 -Amphibious Cons:-Paper armor but can withstand 7.62mm -Cramped and small door
Personally I like the design. I think they are useful and practical. The Swiss army knife of military vehicles. The BTR 82 for what it is, is excellent. The adage 'assume variation and preserve options '.
The idea of the vehicle i think is great, it being a lightweight and mobile apc capable to running a good range of weapons. But it needs more armor, because i get you can over armor a vehicle. But the armor should be capable of withstanding short range small arms fire, especially since it's an APC. Since it can be expected to operated in close quarter situations, where enemy infantry can show up within 100 meter ranges. And honestly 12.7mm machine gun fire it should be able to deal with to some degree as well, due to how common such machine guns are.
There are kits for city operations. Overhead booking, ceramics, steel. Http://www.rosinform.ru/assets/files/photosets/photos/IMG_3816.jpg.896x604_q90.jpg
BTR-90 was a better armoured one. However, it became too heavy and its mobility worsened and that's something you don't want to have on a wheeled vehicle.
That 14.5mm KPTV machinegun will be more than enough for infantry and maybe the occasional low flying helicopter. I'm a tad worried about wether or not that armour can stand up to an RPG or other infantry anti-tank weapons though
definitely they understand the statement that "perfect is the enemy of good enough" so they get something good enough and produce it rather than wait for the perfect system... at least the soviets did but it seems Russia has forgotten that now considering how long they have been dumping money into the Su-57 and T-14 with almost nothing to show for it still.
@@dominuslogik484 they need to re learn that lesson. I have been doing research and we can produce a full upgraded m60 Patton and a next gen F36 king snake and Halifax class destroyers for 1/4 the cost. We could literally flood the battlefield with decent weapons...would be great if playing strict defense
@@HermitagePrepper the thing is that we aren't using an enormous conscript army so swarms of cheap expendable equipment is not well suited to our needs.
@@dominuslogik484 how would you feel in USA had mandatory service like Switzerland...or...small standing army with massive reserves..like 5 million troops
I don't know about the BTR-80, but here's a predecessor, the dual engined BTR-60 for sale. www.mortarinvestments.eu/products/armoured-vehicles-4/btr-60-8 $17k
A very impressive APC from Russia, one of its success stories much like the AK-47, it does have some drawbacks in terms of firepower and protection but its overall performance makes it a winner !
I saw a BTR 60 for 16k. I mean that's a great deal regarding the fact that it might be an OldTimer and also how you stand out from other people. Like imagine driving into the Parking lot with a BTR.
Maybe a Canadian episode about the LAV III, id really love to see that, going into BMQ in a couple of months , id join the reserves here in Edmonton but the fucking RECRUITMENT SYSTEM IS A FUCKING JOKE THAT IS BEYOND REPAIR AND NEEDS TO BE FUCKING BLOWN UP ALONG WITH ALL THE RECRUITERS AND REPLACED WITH MANDATORY SERVICE, im only venting of course, you think you've had it tough 3 years? ive been trying to join for 6, and in that time ive gotten my trade in electrician , Red seal as well. but none the less as a 28 year old man i feel its my duty to give back my time and service. Its not like they cannot use me, im a 6'4 220 Lb man and i am pretty fit and okay in the muscles category have a trade and am single and an immaculate health record and nearly perfect cadet record and have worked privately on the LAV III in business that i have worked for PLUS I CAN SPEAK AND WRITE IN ENGLISH AND FRENCH. im sorry for venting on your video my dude but i cannot explain this to anyone else and have them not know how frustrating it is . atleast you can understand.
BlackDolphin90 it's almost as outdated as this apc, still would love to know more, especially why they went with the L7 rifle. I get that most threats on the continent can be countered by a 105mm, still a curious case.
I am seeing 80s up for sale by Czech, UK and Russian wholesalers from time to time, working on getting brokers and import bonds and the Form 6 to import one to the US. When I was in the Army, I spent my time with the 101st before going special operations so I never spent time around Bradleys or Strykers, but always had a soft-spot for the BTRs, they're just aesthetically pleasing.
Well, the armor on these things isn't much of an issue, they are APCs not IFVs, so usage and mobility, if properly employed, are it's main advantages. I have been up against those things on one "government sponsored adventure trip", almost 30 years ago, and in that case, they deserved more respect than the MBTs they were accompanying (T-55/62). The MBTs could not elevate their main guns high enough to effect us on the high ground, and they could not use their 12.7mm DShK machine guns without being shot at by us. However, the 14.5mm KPVT of the BTRs has a range of almost 3000m, which was well beyond our range, and quite devastating as a HE round. We still got the better of them as they have fairly bad vision from inside the turret and we would aim at their optics first, which had them firing blind. at best, before beating the retreat...
This is necessary for the correct weighting of the machine. Otherwise, it will not be able to swim or be much more difficult to manufacture and will lose mobility.
Good video. You need to show more of the interior, where are the foot soldiers were held and more about the commanders and drivers area with some description of the controls in this area. Good job!
And remember, in '60/70s there almost werent' any other 8x8 APC outside WarPac, just trucks or 4x4 or 6x6 APCs, with even thinner armour except the Ratel family (S.Africa).
Its armour is paper and it has flat belly, which means it has horrible protection against IED and mines..........if your country is poor and has no money, then its fine. But if you have money, you buy something else.
No, he is very resistant to undermining. Several times such machines survived undermining on anti-tank mines and remained on track. This does not mean that the crew is intact, but the car is very tenacious in itself. But she does not fully protect the crew. Its task is to protect omp, fragments, hand weapons.
Combat use of BTR-60 The BTR-60PB, hit a mine in Afghanistan before withdrawal - January 23, 1989. www.pynop.com/btr-6021.jpg BTR-60 is quite actively used during the Afghan war, showing a rather large mine durability: blowing anti-tank mine from the APC , as a rule, tore off one wheel , without which he could continue to move and participate in combat. There were cases when the APC lost two wheels while maintaining mobility. Many argue that the APC was vulnerable from small arms fire, though not only from rifle, but the automatic bullets. in fact, in combat, rifle bullets penetrated the APC is extremely rare, the machine-gun did not break at all, and if he had holes from small arms, mainly from fire of heavy machine guns. The greatest loss of the BTR-60 was carrying a fire grenade. So in real combat conditions, the Marines did not fire through the loopholes, and when the first shots were dismounted. In the APC, he was only the driver and gunner, who were supported by the fire of the dismounted troopers. "The chassis of the BTR-80 made by Noah wheel formula 8×8 with two pairs of front steering wheels . Suspension is independent, lever-type, torsion bar type with telescopic shock absorbers bilateral action. Wheel with demountable rim. Wheel KEY 80Н - tubeless, thick-walled, bullet-proof, with adjustable pressure. Allow for short-term movement without excessive pressure. The APC is equipped with a system of centralized control of air pressure in the tires. Operating pressure 50 to 300 kPa. BTR-80 can keep moving in the complete failure of one or two wheels."
Джо Неуловимый I would find it very hard to believe a btr could run over a anti tank mine and survive maybe a ap mine or possible the mine didn't catch it right or it was old or home made but anti tank mines can destroy a MBT
Destroy the tank? Mines can be different, pressing work under the wheel or roller, tearing off the wheel or damaging the roller and torsion bar. Of course, tearing the caterpillar. Their charge is usually not enough to damage the tank fatally. There are also completely different types, more complex with electromagnetic sensors, which are undermined under the bottom in the most vulnerable place. Usually possess a shaped charge. They may well undermine the tank, but it's an expensive toy and they are easy to deceive.
My dad (Retired Brigadier General, Bangladesh Army) was the CO of a mechanized inf battalion that used 60 of these. They were deployed against several government and rebel forces in Western Africa (I know the location is confusing, western Africa is 7000 km from our country, we were deployed in an UN supervised mission)
Now from what I gathered from my dad, the biggest asset of these APC's was mobility. You could get your troops literally any where you wanted to, and hit the enemy from any angle. The groups we were up against had a big stock of RPGs (Which this APC can't survive against) but even on the very few occassions of a direct hit, the occupants were not harmed. These were even used in hostage-rescue operations in area that were too 'hot' for helicopters, which is a pretty impressive feature.
Now the downside is that it is vulnerable to 15+ mm fire in close range if the terrain doesn't provide enough cover. 12.7 can also damage it enough to send it to the repair shop, but usually not enough to disable it.
The most important feature of this APC is it's ability to travel on water unhitched. This is a very important feature in my country, where you can't go more than a 2-3 kms without crossing a river.
for a mechanized unit it would be best to be a mix between IFVs and APCs... with no V-hull and modular armor system these older APCs dont offer much protection against IED and RPGs...
Nomoskar Dada. Apnar babake ekjon Bharatbasi thuri Bangalir torofh theke selam janai. Valo thakben.
Then I am pretty much sure that those RPGs with the African rebels were Chinese made and not the original russian made....RPGs knocked out many BTRs 60s and 70s in Afghanistan during 1980s literally roasting the Soviet troops inside....
Some years ago, I see a TV show, where a former Russian Officer, I think he was a colonel, show videos that he filmed with private camera, back in the 80s in Afghanistan.
One time he was on an inspection with an afghan Officer, when their convoi was attacked by the Mudshahedin. A Grenade of an RPG penetrate the armour of their BTR on the opposite site where the afghan had his place, killed him and go outside on the other side. Either the Russian officer, then any of the crew members or soldiers was seriously wounded.
Patel Rohan Could be a dud, could be that they used the wrong type of warhead, could be they simply hit a part that doesn't matter much, and the damage is therefore minimal, or even could be they field modified it with cage armor. Quite a lot really
That BTR bumper boats pool is probably the coolest thing i will see today.
LaserAirsoftWeapons lol watch until the very end
Matsimus what is that place anyway?
@@cfranko1860 I want to imagine it's a magical place where retired BTRs enjoy their evening of life.
But it's probably just an amphibious training facility.
Did I just witness an indoors swimmingpool for APC's? God bless Russia. 😛
DaOneJoel you should see the maneuvers we can pull off with them
Well when you've got the space.
Seriously though there's tonnes of space...
@@PugilistCactus yeah, but lot of this space is behind 60° parallel. It is fucking tundra.
Does anyone know where that pool actually is and what what it’s called? I would like to know
@@cfranko1860 I think it's called Tank Enthusiast Valhalla.
Mechanized Infantry for the win
I would love to own one of these.
After the fall of the Soviet Union in early 1990's I had some contacts who went to Russia and was offered these things brand new for almost nothing by one of the army base commanders.
This thing and a Hind D would make me ruler of my Cul de sac.
u can buy unarmored and with no weapons version without any problem in russia. just 1.8million rub
@@Stormidze That's about $14,000.00 dollars U.S..
That's fantastic!
Where can you buy it?
@@jimhenry1262is that 14 thousand of million?
BTRs taking a casual swim in a indoor swimming pool
And of course the BTR ballet
This should be a thing. APC/IFV vs APV/IFV watersports.
BTR Russian Duma
we used btr80 in palmyra desert , isis members fired all kinds of weapons including atgm but they couldnt hit us being moving at speed of 70 km per hour
Awesome
@42 SAA
@42 yes front line but it is a truce now
@42 it is a truce both our forces and the terrorists must back few kilometers and leave the matter to mother russia to patrol lattkia aleppo high way and keep it working, and believe it or not even in the most intense fighting against isis at alhajar alaswad damascus we had communictions and internet and so for 90% of places there is internet except of palmyra the cell towers were destroyed by bombading hill tops
@42 amen
Highly underrated vehicle. The key point imo is the fact that you can keep it low. you can keep it very silent, very good for urban warfare or in thick terrain. There was a few modernized once in the army when i was in and it was a good vehicle.
USAF here; I stumbled upon your channel some weeks ago and have been continually entertained and informed throughout. I appreciate the apparent research you put in to doing trhese; and I for one am grateful to ya!
Keep up the Great Work!
SSgt Toby
By the way, there is no evidence of ERA being implemented on BTR-80. The main reason for this is its relatively thin armour which can easily be damaged when ERA goes off. Other reasons can be sheer weight of ERA which can reduce the mobility of the vehicle as well as potential danger of dismounting troops being hit by ERA fragments. All in all, it's dangerous. And we should keep in mind every soldier's worst enemies -- accountants (ERA is costly, and military spending has its limits). Greetings from Russia!
There are additional booking kits. Overhead armor sheets, ceramic panels, grating screens, ERA for light armored vehicles are, but it is quite expensive and dimensional, so screens are more common. The usual ERA contact-1 will simply break through the armor when triggered, it is.
Just for info BTR-80 plays a role of Humvee don't not play a role for IFV like Bradley, its intent is the use as primary transport. In cases were USA army uses Humvee, BTR-80 is to be used instead by those armies that have it.
@Nikola Poiukov However, the US has not had a good fleet of wheeled armored vehicles, and have use the HUMVEE in places of what it really should have. Just the stupid US military still fighting WW2. The HUMVEE was a terrible decision. Should have stuck with a light liaison vehicle like the Willy's Jeep, and developed a number of armored wheeled vehicles. Heavy tracked vehicles are fine for wars like WW2, but generally overkill for the wars the US has been involved in since WW2. Most countries do have a wide range of light armored vehicles and so do not have to use an oversized liaison vehicle like the HUMVEE in cases where an armored vehicle is the solution. The BTR series is just one of many light armored vehicles, and something like the Russian BDRM should have been used instead of the oversized HUMVEE.
The US has to move vehicles into a theater since seldom will the next conflict actually be where the vehicles are stationed, so big vehicles mean a lot more transport capability it needed, and also bigger vehicles have larger logistics tails. This makes heavy armored vehicles less than ideal, and also means that a massive liaison vehicle like the HUMVEE are ridiculous, and it is being replaced by something even more massive. US military is a corrupt disgrace.
Another problem with the HUMVEE is that it is too big. It cannot be manhandled at all easily, and is to wide for a lot of unimproved roads.
Clifford Nelson - I can tell you have never served in any military or been in combat because you comment was extremely stupid. So either you are stupid or ignorant when it comes to military vehicles and their use. The Humvee as you say was one of the best light wheeled vehicles of all time and performed it's job very well. There is a reason why so many countries have copied it or still trying to develop a similiar vehicle. I spent 11 yrs in the US army with 2 tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan, so please try to say you know more about military vehicles and combat than i do lol!
I wouldnt feel safe in a humvee. Ive seen some videos where AK-74s and RPKs were shooting right through the doors of the Humvee.
EpicHunter117 Gaming - I'm assuming you were never in the military and in combat right? Ok so first off a Humvee isn't made to with stand a hit from an RPG, but the up armored Humvee has no issues in stopping small arm rounds (AK's and any other rifle round). You do realize that an RPG or AT4 will easily destroy and BTR or BMP? Most APC's aren't designed to withstand a hit from anykind of RPG. I did two tours in Iraq and one in Afghanistan. During my first tour I was in an up armored humvee and when being shot at I could barely tell when a round hit the vehicle. During my second tour was a TC (truck commander/team leader) and I was in a M117 Guardian. It's a big 4 wheeled armored vehicle. During my last tour the humvee was pretty much totally replaced by MRAP's.
@@mississippirebel1409 Are you that ignorant to tell everyone who comments " im going to assume you never served" ?. Well Mr.Know it all im just stating what i saw in the videos. 7.62rounds were going right through the driver's door in the Humvee, both window and door panels.
A small correction: BTR platform will be replaced by Boomerang APC, and not by T-15 Barbaris that's built on Armata platform.
My father served as a Driver-Mechanic of a BTR-60PB. He was stationed not far off Chinese border. According to him the tyre pressure control system was able to maintain pressures in tyres in case of up to 10 penetrations of the wheels. The ones he was working on, when he was in the army in 1980s, were by then thoroughly flogged out. When he arrived there were only 2 drivable ones in the whole unit. He repaired a few while he was in: by telling his superiors to simply let him climb into the sucker in the morning and not bother him for the day. He was left to go about his job of repairing them simply because he was the only one that could be bothered. Once the power steering let go on a march. He drove the damn thing at some speed to be able to wrench the big steering wheel. By the time he made it to the base and close to the garage his arms were dead. What let go was a connection which wasn't possible to fix out where they were as no backup was around.
But everything was within easy reach and didn't require awesome brains to maintain.
One of the reasons for the thin armor is the fact that Russian military specified the ability of "swimming" across rivers. Thus Russians made it able to float, but the cost was the armor thickness. New Boomerang is claimed to have multi-layered armor with ceramics that is both lighter and stronger than what is used on BTRs now. And it ALSO can float across rivers.
It’s always a battle between mobility and protection
Indeed. This vehicle used in it’s intended role is a winner. You’re transporting infantry to the fight while protecting them from small arms fire and artillery fragments. You don’t need too much armor for that. You’re also not using this vehicle to go head to head with tanks and IFVs. You have the 14.5mm to provide fire support for the dismounted infantry and local security of the vehicle. I imagine this vehicle would close to 1 to 2km from the assault position, out of range of most enemy direct fire weapons, and then it provides overwatch for the squad with the 14.5mm as they dismount and assault the objective on foot. As the infantry clear the area the BTR can move forward and extend coverage deeper into the objective with the 14.5mm.
@@darthamerica9119 I prefer the 30mm turret version personally
@@jesseterrell9354 that’s a big firepower upgrade. It would allow you to engage most things on the battlefield.
@@darthamerica9119 I believe the 30mm variant is the dominant one in the russian front line troops but they have more vehicles one the way based on the Armata chassis
This thing was the coolest looking APC of the cold war, i still love the looks of it
BTR 60 Moderna, BTR 70 Moderna, BTR80 M,BTR 82, BTR87, BTR 90 Rusiia tech army. RESPECT!!
6:20The Red Army ceased to be called so in 1946 when it was officially renamed into the Soviet Army.
really does it matter now 🙄
The 14.5mm MG is no joke. It fires the same round as the anti-tank rifles of WWII and can punch through a fair bit more armour than a .50 cal can. Certainly enough for tearing up other IFVs. The high rate of fire and sheer volume of rounds should get past any ERA.
it can punch through more armor than a .50cal but the difference is between around 35 at the high end for .50 and 45mm for the 14.5mm machinegun. in the case of armored vehicles the armor is typically rarely in the range where a .50 would stop but a 14.5 wouldn't.
still a nasty weapon though and I am sure it has a brutal effect on hard cover being used by enemy infantry, I can imagine those rounds blow through multiple cinderblocks with ease and have more than enough power to lance whoever might be behind them.
Usally seen with troops on top instead of the inside in IED/mine thread enviroments.
That's because it's not made for that type of war theater.
Flat bottom vehicles dont mix well with mine protection unless very heavy.
14:10 who's a good btr?
Mobility is the most underrated aspect of ALL combat!! You cannot make a tank at a reasonable price point that can survive air attack, artillery and antitank crews. However, you can make something fast and that means it's hard to hit.
Really funny to hear the same background music in this video as in the Commander Binkov videos
Forest Rivers He is more interesting to listen to than president Trump imo so why should I care?
Tim de Boer I spotted another fan, we're slowly spreading
Tim de Boer you are one of us
At 7:58 - it`s no just T-15 the RFAF are looking forward to. There are now 3 different platforms in development: the heavy T-15, the medium Kurganets-25 and the light VPK-7829 Boomerang. The first two are tracked, and the last one is wheeled. So it is really the Boomerang that is the successor of the BTR series. Unfortunately there are some rumours on the net, that the development of the Boomerang is stalled. One of the reasons suspected is that the forward-right mounted engine is so hot that it does not only give a huge IR signature, but even destroys the paint on the outside of the vehicle.
Any military successes of Russia cause attacks of hysteria in the United States. Therefore, our military decided that it is better to do everything quietly, in order to preserve the nerves of many politicians.
I think you might upgrate the BTR armor and weapons. You can add some cage-armor on the sides of the vehicle or another armor plate, and these can whithstand 12,7 mm shots and RPG and you can add the 30 mm autocannon from the BMP 3. Pretty good for an APC designed vehicle which price is below the 1 million dollars or even 0,5 million for new vehicle and nowadays and this is pretty rare in today western APC vehicles market.
The 14.5mm KPV cannon is a friggin monster!
Warthog says "crunchy on the outside and soft on the inside, YUMMY".
I really love armored vehicules more then tanks
I wish they would import these to US for surplus sale. Also I don’t get why people complain about armor and weapon systems on board this thing, it’s not meant to be used as a IFV it’s a APC which serve very different purposes, APCs drop you off on the outskirts of the battle. IFVs drop you off inside the thick of the battle. Do people just not understand the need for diversity of equipment and sometimes you don’t always need a heavy armored heavy weapon vehicle?
I've always liked the look of this apc
"Kamaz", not KAM-AZ
One of my favourite vehicles thanks for the video btw great job.
Damn great video! I never thought this beast could go in water
Nice analysis mate. It is quite a impressive little vehicle and was cool to see inside as they operate it. As a gamer i think we can say we have all come across this vehicle, and as an infantryman it was quite a scary prospect.
Whats the song you use around 4:00 ?
Great video as always :-) I like the BTRs they are good for what they are designed for. The casualties start racking up when they are used in ways they are not designed for, i.e.putting them up front alongside the heavy armour. This is the same problem the American's experienced with the Humvee, which was designed as a replacement for the jeep, not as a front line vehicle. One problem I have heard about the early manned turret versions of the BTR is that the gasses from the 14.5mm KVPT enter the fighting compartment. This can overcome the crew if they use it too much, which reduces it's suppressive fire ability. Not sure if this had been corrected by the time the BTR-80 had come out. Later versions with unmanned RWS would have no such trouble of course. Google BTR-4 with combat unit "GROM" (Ukraine) to see this taken to the nth degree ;-)
The worst problem with the BTR-60s was they used two unreliable 6 cylinder gasoline engines each powering 4 wheels. If either of them jammed up( something that happened a lot) you only had about 100hp.
Our army is the largest operator of this beast, having around 645 of these
I love the BTR-80 platform, specifically the BTR-82A variant. Could you review the French VBCI next?
the only update for increase protection for BTR80 is the addition of a kevlar layer on the inside to prevent splinters from jumping if the armor is penetrated + additional armor plates attached with space in between the hull's armor and the plates+cage armor in places. That's it. NO ERA or whatsoever since reactive armor can damage the vehicle itself.
*slaps roof of APC*
"This baby can fit so many spetznas"
When it appeared it would have been limited by SALT 2. Vehicles with guns of 20 mm or larger were a separate calibre. For a straight APC 14.5 mm was excellent.
In my rather limited experience with the BTR-80, they are perfectly capable as an APC and Recon vehicle as well as for Border Guard and MP Duties.
Thanks Max, always enjoy your videos and overview.
I have seen it fighting with out at least a wheel and
Just engaging and covering foot soldiers like its another day at the job. Was during the chechen wars, battle of Grozny.
I dont think there is anything bad about this vehicle if it's used according to its characteristics, coz it sure is better than a humvee with a fifty cal and sterdier than those 4 wheeled Renaults that r designed for the same roll, though both r good.
As for the 14.5 mm gun, it had its days being smaller ammo faster bullet straighter shooting than any other caliber ever which makes it great against infantry, yet the bullet is small so not much effective explosive bullets, and its worth it to say that this 14.5 mm bullet being first developed as an anti armor ammunition became the standard for apcs armor of the west, in that they have to be able to resist it. Yet i still have mixed feeling about it. I mean it is far faster and straighter bullet and small and light. It is sexy one has to admit.
There , enough rambling
Gracias
I was a 63Y/B. thats a track , wheel, coffepot mechanic.
I have ridden in the older versions of this and the M113.
This is one of the times when Russia got it right.
remember it takes 1 grunt to kill 1 battle tank.
Do a review of the Russian KAMAZ 5350 truck
These would be pretty handy for transportation in northern Canada if we weren't so stuck up about who we traded with.
Its cheap as well.
04:20 That's actually Matsimus showing us BTR's features
I almost died looking at the APC swimming pool!
I love Russian weapons. By far my favorites, T-72, T-80, T-55A, BTR-80, SU-33, AK-47, AK-74u.
Hi everyone. I did my draft sevice 32 years ago in Bulgarian Army and up until the time I turned 40 I had a desire to buy an original BTR-60 from army surplus sales, and I probably would if the goverment would made them road legal, which they did not, although this vehical does not have guns and is in fact a cabriolet :) I've always imagined driving to the sea and going off road to a wild beach and straight into the sea :) I had the bad luck to have a very intense training in simulated close to combat environment and I can surely tell that in regards of a real war you would probably never chose a BTR as your combat vehicle, but even more so you would never embark a tracked vehicle during training exercises. BTR does not ride on a rough terrain - it floats on it, like a Mercedes limousine with an active suspension and if it has been quieter inside you wouldn't mind riding inside a whole day.
You should do the OT-64/SKOT, or OT-62/TOPAS. Love the Cold War stuff.
Maybe KTO Rosomak variant of the Patria AMV for something more modern.
please
The BTR did it's main role well: Getting troops and equipment to the frontline fast and safely from the rear to the front and then dropping them off, then leaving to do another round.
It's not meant to get into fights with enemy positions or armour or even well equipped infantry. For it's role as a battle Taxi it works well and it capable getting through difficult terrain.
People misjudge it and mock it since it is easy to pierce and destroy, but it was never meant to be used like a IFV and get into fights, that is the BMPs role. By that logic then people should laugh at the M113s when they get easily destroyed.
ahh this beloved apc im always getting slaughtered in squad when we only have humvees :(
Nice item. Old but functioning. One hat to respect Your fairness in presenting equipment from all nations.
Hey matsimus can you do an overview of the lav-25?
Sauron The Deceiver yea i was just thing about that beast lol.
TWD115
It's not impressive you know, this apc Is old as shit
Sauron The Deceiver
And his armor is so weak that a few shots from a 7.62 caliber rifle would make an hole in it.
NOT PsiSyndlcate what apc are you talking about the lav25
NOT PsiSyndlcate and if so that not accurate the first models could stop 7.62mmAP on the side and 12.5mmAP on the front.....the one used today can stop 14.5mmAP in the front and not much better.........and for you to say there not impressive is inaccurate
Ilyenben voltam toronylövész! Hungary.🇭🇺
Fantastic video I only came on here to show my 8 year old son what his toy BTR actually is.. He now wants the real one to drive about.
What about the BTR-90? And it's new turret?
Jerrod Volkov as far as i understand it's basically an upgraded BTR80
No, different designs with similar chassis layout.
Doesn't the troop access door on the BTR-90 open differently as well?
BTR-80 is more similar to BTR-70 from a technical point of view than BTR-90 on BTR-80, but the layout is similar, this concludes the coincidence.
BTR-90's the one with a BMP-2 turret right?
Love this channel. I learn so much. Subscribed👍
BTR mating courtship starts at 7:53
Also can you do an overview on the Mi-24 Hind
I've seen people hit with the 14.7mm KPVT rounds from BTR-80 and they were still in one piece while others were torn to pieces with a few 30mm rounds from 2А72 on BTR-4, so I'd pick the latter if I had a choice.
There ya go Squad players ! What the dealio is with the BTR-80 in real life.
Matsimus Gaming - Good videos that you want to watch, in an accent you can understand ;-)
El BTR 80 es uno de los mejores transportadores blindados en todo el mundo
7-8 passengers is really pretty measly for a vehicle this size. This vehicle was tested against the XA-180 back in the day, and the only advantage this one had was the machine gun and lower price. The XA-180 was faster, had greater operational range and carried twice the number of passengers. And with the USSR/Russia being in the state it was, it was simply easier to acquire more XA-180s.
edit: some details
BTR operator here, pretty good video
isnt there a btr 90?
wait nvm xD
Code[Sixx] it has been canceled to costly and another reason
i see
455cui It has been cancelled due to being too heavy as well.
82
Joshua Ngau Ajang It’s just too heavy. It will sink and won’t be able to get up the hills.
in MW2 the BTR 80 has dope aesthetics. Im kinda in love with that model.
Pros: -Has wheels (faster and quieter than track,also saves fuel)
-Better armament than M112
-Amphibious
Cons:-Paper armor but can withstand 7.62mm
-Cramped and small door
That was a great video. Really informative. Lots I didnt know and I served during the cold war in Europe.
Do the mt-lb next
Personally I like the design. I think they are useful and practical. The Swiss army knife of military vehicles. The BTR 82 for what it is, is excellent. The adage 'assume variation and preserve options '.
The idea of the vehicle i think is great, it being a lightweight and mobile apc capable to running a good range of weapons. But it needs more armor, because i get you can over armor a vehicle. But the armor should be capable of withstanding short range small arms fire, especially since it's an APC. Since it can be expected to operated in close quarter situations, where enemy infantry can show up within 100 meter ranges. And honestly 12.7mm machine gun fire it should be able to deal with to some degree as well, due to how common such machine guns are.
There are kits for city operations. Overhead booking, ceramics, steel.
Http://www.rosinform.ru/assets/files/photosets/photos/IMG_3816.jpg.896x604_q90.jpg
BTR-90 was a better armoured one. However, it became too heavy and its mobility worsened and that's something you don't want to have on a wheeled vehicle.
It is supposed to be protected from 12.7mm fire on the frontal arc, and 7.62 class threats all round.
That 14.5mm KPTV machinegun will be more than enough for infantry and maybe the occasional low flying helicopter. I'm a tad worried about wether or not that armour can stand up to an RPG or other infantry anti-tank weapons though
I like the Russian practice of finding an acceptable design and then producing it in mass quantities
definitely they understand the statement that "perfect is the enemy of good enough" so they get something good enough and produce it rather than wait for the perfect system... at least the soviets did but it seems Russia has forgotten that now considering how long they have been dumping money into the Su-57 and T-14 with almost nothing to show for it still.
@@dominuslogik484 they need to re learn that lesson. I have been doing research and we can produce a full upgraded m60 Patton and a next gen F36 king snake and Halifax class destroyers for 1/4 the cost. We could literally flood the battlefield with decent weapons...would be great if playing strict defense
@@HermitagePrepper the thing is that we aren't using an enormous conscript army so swarms of cheap expendable equipment is not well suited to our needs.
@@dominuslogik484 how would you feel in USA had mandatory service like Switzerland...or...small standing army with massive reserves..like 5 million troops
i love this than sportscar
Thanx for video :) Always pleasure to watch your videos.
I won't to convert one in to a camper van now much are they.
Bloody good idea!!!!
More like 30K IMO
I don't know about the BTR-80, but here's a predecessor, the dual engined BTR-60 for sale.
www.mortarinvestments.eu/products/armoured-vehicles-4/btr-60-8
$17k
A very impressive APC from Russia, one of its success stories much like the AK-47, it does have some drawbacks in terms of firepower and protection but its overall performance makes it a winner !
I saw a BTR 60 for 16k. I mean that's a great deal regarding the fact that it might be an OldTimer and also how you stand out from other people. Like imagine driving into the Parking lot with a BTR.
Maybe a Canadian episode about the LAV III, id really love to see that, going into BMQ in a couple of months , id join the reserves here in Edmonton but the fucking RECRUITMENT SYSTEM IS A FUCKING JOKE THAT IS BEYOND REPAIR AND NEEDS TO BE FUCKING BLOWN UP ALONG WITH ALL THE RECRUITERS AND REPLACED WITH MANDATORY SERVICE, im only venting of course, you think you've had it tough 3 years? ive been trying to join for 6, and in that time ive gotten my trade in electrician , Red seal as well. but none the less as a 28 year old man i feel its my duty to give back my time and service. Its not like they cannot use me, im a 6'4 220 Lb man and i am pretty fit and okay in the muscles category have a trade and am single and an immaculate health record and nearly perfect cadet record and have worked privately on the LAV III in business that i have worked for PLUS I CAN SPEAK AND WRITE IN ENGLISH AND FRENCH. im sorry for venting on your video my dude but i cannot explain this to anyone else and have them not know how frustrating it is . atleast you can understand.
TheGamingCanadian TGC oh trust me sir I understand. 6 YEARS?! WTF?!!
Lol, that Preobrazhensky guard regiment music in the beginning:)
Can you talk about the South african main battle tank??
BlackDolphin90 it's almost as outdated as this apc, still would love to know more, especially why they went with the L7 rifle. I get that most threats on the continent can be countered by a 105mm, still a curious case.
BlackDolphin90 it's no tank
I am seeing 80s up for sale by Czech, UK and Russian wholesalers from time to time, working on getting brokers and import bonds and the Form 6 to import one to the US. When I was in the Army, I spent my time with the 101st before going special operations so I never spent time around Bradleys or Strykers, but always had a soft-spot for the BTRs, they're just aesthetically pleasing.
During the cold war it was king. Fast transport and low cost. And the indoor swimming pool, greatest thing I’ve ever seen for training a Tank.
Okay now I want one! You know for hog hunting and such. 😁👍
you are welcome atvbtr.ru/catalog/Prodazha_BTR_vseh_modelej_i_ih_cena_73/BTR-80_241.html
Probably my favorite APC
Well, the armor on these things isn't much of an issue, they are APCs not IFVs, so usage and mobility, if properly employed, are it's main advantages. I have been up against those things on one "government sponsored adventure trip", almost 30 years ago, and in that case, they deserved more respect than the MBTs they were accompanying (T-55/62). The MBTs could not elevate their main guns high enough to effect us on the high ground, and they could not use their 12.7mm DShK machine guns without being shot at by us. However, the 14.5mm KPVT of the BTRs has a range of almost 3000m, which was well beyond our range, and quite devastating as a HE round. We still got the better of them as they have fairly bad vision from inside the turret and we would aim at their optics first, which had them firing blind. at best, before beating the retreat...
third iteration and still doors on the sides.
This is necessary for the correct weighting of the machine. Otherwise, it will not be able to swim or be much more difficult to manufacture and will lose mobility.
but try getting a wounded man into that through that side door. OT-64 didn't have that problem. or BMP.
That's a really clean engine compartment.
They do one in blue with Adidas stripes too... 👌 👌 👌
The BTR-90 has the ability to use an ATGM and AGS also i believe.
Russia has some good stuff
IMMORTAL CLASSIC!
Good video. You need to show more of the interior, where are the foot soldiers were held and more about the commanders and drivers area with some description of the controls in this area. Good job!
6:49 It had a little winch onboard.
Pirate: "What be the winches name? Argh." 😄
The BTR 80 (and it's variants) have always been my favourite apc, ALWSYS
BTR-80a or the BRDM-3 are sexy af
Cough cough squad
Liked the video because of the look and most importantly the power it has
And remember, in '60/70s there almost werent' any other 8x8 APC outside WarPac, just trucks or 4x4 or 6x6 APCs, with even thinner armour except the Ratel family (S.Africa).
Do the LAV-25
The spartan111 soon ;-)
The best "Gun Truck" in the world.
Its armour is paper and it has flat belly, which means it has horrible protection against IED and mines..........if your country is poor and has no money, then its fine. But if you have money, you buy something else.
No, he is very resistant to undermining. Several times such machines survived undermining on anti-tank mines and remained on track. This does not mean that the crew is intact, but the car is very tenacious in itself. But she does not fully protect the crew. Its task is to protect omp, fragments, hand weapons.
Джо Неуловимый are u claiming this vehicle has run over a anti tank mine and survived?
Combat use of BTR-60
The BTR-60PB, hit a mine in Afghanistan before withdrawal - January 23, 1989.
www.pynop.com/btr-6021.jpg
BTR-60 is quite actively used during the Afghan war, showing a rather large mine durability: blowing anti-tank mine from the APC , as a rule, tore off one wheel , without which he could continue to move and participate in combat. There were cases when the APC lost two wheels while maintaining mobility.
Many argue that the APC was vulnerable from small arms fire, though not only from rifle, but the automatic bullets. in fact, in combat, rifle bullets penetrated the APC is extremely rare, the machine-gun did not break at all, and if he had holes from small arms, mainly from fire of heavy machine guns. The greatest loss of the BTR-60 was carrying a fire grenade. So in real combat conditions, the Marines did not fire through the loopholes, and when the first shots were dismounted. In the APC, he was only the driver and gunner, who were supported by the fire of the dismounted troopers.
"The chassis of the BTR-80 made by Noah wheel formula 8×8 with two pairs of front steering wheels . Suspension is independent, lever-type, torsion bar type with telescopic shock absorbers bilateral action. Wheel with demountable rim. Wheel KEY 80Н - tubeless, thick-walled, bullet-proof, with adjustable pressure. Allow for short-term movement without excessive pressure. The APC is equipped with a system of centralized control of air pressure in the tires. Operating pressure 50 to 300 kPa. BTR-80 can keep moving in the complete failure of one or two wheels."
Джо Неуловимый I would find it very hard to believe a btr could run over a anti tank mine and survive maybe a ap mine or possible the mine didn't catch it right or it was old or home made but anti tank mines can destroy a MBT
Destroy the tank? Mines can be different, pressing work under the wheel or roller, tearing off the wheel or damaging the roller and torsion bar. Of course, tearing the caterpillar. Their charge is usually not enough to damage the tank fatally.
There are also completely different types, more complex with electromagnetic sensors, which are undermined under the bottom in the most vulnerable place. Usually possess a shaped charge. They may well undermine the tank, but it's an expensive toy and they are easy to deceive.