APC Development and related topics.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Well it's been over 1/2yr. since I posted anything here but that's when things really went to as noted elsewhere so all I had was a reminder (R1.) note for the APC/IFV world in Patch Thread Post #2 for the 2012/2013 campaign. I promise there will be more next year in this area, Jets/Planes, SPA/SPAA and MRAPS to a lesser degree mostly in the Middle East, Africa and Near Asia. So...

APC Development…

R1. ADD/RUSSIA/JAN 2010/BTR-82/C3 P7 Both/TI/GSR 50 (3Km) Both/Weapons Turreted 14.5mm w/500Rds and coupled coaxial 7.62mm w/2K Rds/6 Smoke Dispensers and EW Both/BTR-82A/Weapons 2A72 30mm cannon w/500Rds and coupled coaxial 7.62mm w/2K Rds//These are Russia's most advanced APCs. It will replace the
BTR-70/80 series APCs. It is supposed to be fully amphibious. The 30mm ammo of the BTR-82A is supposedly a high density ramjet type projectile to allow it to inflict greater damage on targets. I keep coming up with 500 Rds for the 30mm on the NET. Sounds almost like the UK/French case mounted 40mm round of the FRES. Better armor protection then any BTR-80 variant.
Protection to the level of the BTR-90M for armor?
http://www.armyrecognition.com/russi...res_video.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/russi..._pictures.html
http://www.deagel.com/Wheeled-Armore...000348008.aspx
Pic:

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Please cue the Monty Python intro...And now for something a little different. A little Spring cleaning is in order as the 2013/2014 Campaign is to start soon.

1) First up the CORPS in it's search to replace the EFV Program. Any more it seems the programs are running together. So by way of updating and cleaning up, here's where the CORPS is in the testing and evaluation process. The HAVOC 8x8 based on the coverage it's getting seems to be the front runner for now.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/us_ar...s_picture.html
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/article/article_2504.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/augus...o_1708121.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/april...n_0504133.html
Pic:

TRACK.

2) UPDATE: As submitted in the game, after all the legal issues as reported prior to and when submitted SWEDEN had recieved the first of it's PATRIA AMV's a slight date adjustment might be needed but will verify from the Patch Post and the game later.
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/article/article_2625.html
http://www.armyrecognition.com/march...s_0503133.html
VERIFY DATES.

3) UPDATE: Well the following is another example of everyone reports the "x equipment is being delivered..." Until unreported issues as R&D problems, Customer modifications (Think THAI OPLOT here as just addressed in a second Patch.), Contract issues, Economics, Order Cancellations etc. etc. make the "equipment submission business" such a PITA. I think Don and some others now understand why I work the way I do in trying to follow up on equipment I've "signed" my name to just because of the following. MAYLASIA UNITS 30-32 will need to be renamed and dates moved out to around 6/2015. However there is an upside. A. We know now it's the better protected AV-8 (PARS 8x8 stronger brother.) and have more specific data on it's capabilities and types ordered. B. It was customer modified. C. It will have an ATGW now mounted which was just conjecture when submitted in 2010(?). D. More on the FCS is now known as well. E. BETTER PICTURES!!! Alright that was reaching a bit. Anyway here's the data sheet...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/malay...res_video.html
MODIFY DATES AND WEAPONS/ADD NEW UNITS AS NOW IDENTIFIED.

4. UPDATE: As now in the USA OOB with a couple of issues already noted by Imp (John) and acknowledged by Don, I was going to submit this for the coming Campaign based on some of the info used to get the M1A2 SEP V2 into the game along with posts from the MBT Thread concerning the increased TI/GSR of some tanks in the game. Anyway I was looking to combine the BUSK III package and TI/GSR 50 issue into one BRADLEY submission. PLEASE PLEASE understand that beyond reading Johns thread on the topic I do not know nor have I checked at this time whether the two "new" BRADLEY's in the game have the BUSK Protection package or not.
So here's what I was going to submit for that unit.
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/bradley/
http://www.army.mil/article/82060/Br..._under_budget/
http://www.baesystems.com/article/BA...3D1aljhv29un_4
Pic:

FYI for modifications(?)

5. RUSSIA and that darn BOOMERANG APC again. Prototype for 2013, this is older from last summer. No news of it to this point.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/july_...3_0707122.html
TRACK.

6. POLAND the ANDERS front has been quite for sometime now, however, last August they ordered 200 more 8x8 ROSMAKS.
http://www.dmilt.com/index.php?optio...rope&Itemid=57
FYI.

7. RUSSIA likes wheels better then tracks a growing tread in the APC world.
http://www.dmilt.com/index.php?optio...rope&Itemid=57
http://en.rian.ru/military_news/20120716/174633902.html
FYI.

8. USMC and it's MPC Program has selected SINGAPOREs TERREX 8x8 for testing as well, among others. I reported on TERREX in one of my first posts in this thread (Then as a 6x6.) It was developed by TIMOTHY...of Ireland and is one of the most advanced APC out there you probaly never heard about. Anyway...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/novem...m_0711121.html
http://www.dmilt.com/index.php?optio...rica&Itemid=59
TRACK.

9. UPDATE: I believe we were right on target for the BTR-82A. Don thanks for getting it in early.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/april...a_2104131.html
FOLLOW UP.

10. UPDATE: That darn EFV still in the news, but again for all the wrong reasons for this dead program. The issue is when the manufacturing equipment will be moved to Ga. to support the FANG Program (Just go with the flow here, the USMC has more "APC" programs going then most countries do!?!)
more jobs for us. Good background on how a fully supported project got out of control. F-35 fans pay attention here.
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/...v-aav-slep-mpc
FYI.

Alright been a busy week and not helping my cause by staying up any later, so for some have a good night and others have a great day or evening!

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

A couple of "tail end charlies" that are an extension of the previous post. For me thank god, are FYI issues. The BRADLEY BUSK III one for Don will be of some use as we have a "full on" picture to use for ICON purposes. Sorry I missed these but it's the "vampire hours" I keep after work normally.

1. BRADLEY BUSK III...
http://www.armyrecognition.com/july_...t_1007126.html
If you missed it in the first refs provided earlier, you'll have noticed the first units equipped with them were in S. Korea. Don unless you see something I missed, it appears USA UNITS 305 & 899 will just need to be renamed, protection upgraded and require a new icon for one or both units and I hear you that's enough work!?!
ASSIGN REMINDER # in PP.

2. More on the USMC "Everything Future APC Amphib Program" or EFAAP. This is team BAE/IVECO with the SUPERRAV 8x8.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/may_2...d_1005131.html
If you haven't noticed, click on the yellow highlighted for links to the data sheets for the equipment and other info.
Gotta go, GOT is coming on! Day off priorities don't you know!?!

Regards,
Pat

[sabresandy]

Thanks for the information! It's nice to find a clearinghouse for the news from the defense industry.

I'd like to bring up some issues with the Russian APCs and IFVs in their OBAT, which is obat11. Patch 7.0 did a nice job of trimming out some of the cancelled BTR-90 variants; I'd like to take it a few steps further. First, let's look at the many MT-LB mods. Specifically, OBAT11 numbers 213 (MT-LBM-6M1A3), 332 (MT-LBM-6M1B2), 800 (MT-LBM-6MA), 801 (MT-LBM-6MB), and for that matter 872 (MT-LBM). To the best of my knowledge, these vehicles showed up once at an arms expo, and were promptly never heard from again. I find no reports of any of the MT-LB modifications actually coming into service.

Likewise, there are a number of programs that never seem to have taken off: they are units number 305 (BTR-70M), 787 (BMP-2 Berezhok), 788 (BMP-2M), 850 (BMP-2M (-)), and the heavy APCs 343-345 (all the BTR-Ts). While I believe the BMP-T is on order by the Russian army, I find no indication that the BTR-T is actually being produced. The rest, the BMP and BTR modification programs, appear to exist only in advertisements; the Russians don't look like they've bought off on them.

Pending confirmation, so far as it's possible with Russian military equipment, I think it's fair to delete all of these from the OBAT for Russia and for the RED force (wherever they overlap).

[DRG]

Originally Posted by sabresandy

Thanks for the information! It's nice to find a clearinghouse for the news from the defense industry.

I'd like to bring up some issues with the Russian APCs and IFVs in their OBAT, which is obat11. Patch 7.0 did a nice job of trimming out some of the cancelled BTR-90 variants; I'd like to take it a few steps further. First, let's look at the many MT-LB mods. Specifically, OBAT11 numbers 213 (MT-LBM-6M1A3), 332 (MT-LBM-6M1B2), 800 (MT-LBM-6MA), 801 (MT-LBM-6MB), and for that matter 872 (MT-LBM). To the best of my knowledge, these vehicles showed up once at an arms expo, and were promptly never heard from again. I find no reports of any of the MT-LB modifications actually coming into service.

Likewise, there are a number of programs that never seem to have taken off: they are units number 305 (BTR-70M), 787 (BMP-2 Berezhok), 788 (BMP-2M), 850 (BMP-2M (-)), and the heavy APCs 343-345 (all the BTR-Ts). While I believe the BMP-T is on order by the Russian army, I find no indication that the BTR-T is actually being produced. The rest, the BMP and BTR modification programs, appear to exist only in advertisements; the Russians don't look like they've bought off on them.

Pending confirmation, so far as it's possible with Russian military equipment, I think it's fair to delete all of these from the OBAT for Russia and for the RED force (wherever they overlap).

I am still digging into this and some details are clear and others .....not so clear but I DO find references to the BTR-70M.

http://www.armyrecognition.com/russi...res_video.html

indicates that vehicle exists

BTR-70M: Modernized version with turret, diesel engine and rear hull section of the BTR-80.

The BTR-T though does seem to be a concept no one has wanted. The best I could find was........" state-run production association developed and manufactured a prototype of the BTR-T"

I am happy to remove things especially in that OOB as there aren't a lot of free spaces left for legitimate additions but I'm hesitant to rip things out without digging further..especially things like the BTR-70M


Don

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

The BTR-T is shown below...
http://www.military-today.com/apc/btr_t.htm
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/product1021.html
Now that there's some info for others to look at...The concept was developed in ~1997 based on the need that arose from the Checeyan campaign where Russias weaknesses were exposed in the APC/IFV vehicles used at the time. Prototypes were built, but as ref 1 above shows the "Entered Service" block is blank for a reason from this primarly Russian source. Isreal also ran a similiar development program at about the same time and I believe so did the Ukraine. Companies are still ofering this conversion as it is estimated there are as many as a 100,000 T-55
tanks world wide which of course includes foriegn manufactured ones as well. Russia would look into the concept with the T-72 and T-90 hulls as well but these were never fielded ethier. However as I've posted already, you will see or there are plans to have an IFV based on the ARMATA tank. These will be designed and built from the ground up though as opposed to being a modification.

The BTR-70M RUNNING OUT OF TIME but...
Russia has them basically added 4 smoke dischagers per side, has a single engine from the BTR-80 vice two GAZ ones as you've noted. Ref is proof of life for the type. Aberbyzan (Sorry for spelling.) ordered modified ones (130) using South African turret/FCS. If you need more I'll give it to you later-I need some sleep.
http://en.ria.ru/video/20110926/167136762.html

Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

BTR-70M...
There are so many mods out there it'll make your head spin!! They gotem. Ref 1 added because he's very through especially dealing with "hard to find" items. I've crossed referenced different equipment issues many times against his info with no problems over the years.
http://www.pmulcahy.com/wheeled_apcs...eeled_apcs.htm
http://www.army-guide.com/eng/produc...18&printmode=1
http://www.minotor-service.com/en/bt...0m-a1-apc.html
http://international-defence-review....ri-armour.html
http://www.afv-news.com/2012/10/btr-70-apc/

Regards,
Pat

[DRG]

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH

1. BRADLEY BUSK III...

If you missed it in the first refs provided earlier, you'll have noticed the first units equipped with them were in S. Korea. Don unless you see something I missed, it appears USA UNITS 305 & 899 will just need to be renamed, protection upgraded and require a new icon for one or both units and I hear you that's enough work!?!Regards,
Pat

??? Pat... why would unit 305 be involved with this at all ?


Don

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Don,
Simply misinterpreted Johns post in the USA OOB Thread. I thought he mentioned both units were improved with TI/GSR 50 as a "side bar" to his core issue. So in the near term, only USA UNIT 899 will need to be changed. However remember I believe initially 250-285 units were converted with the BUSK III pkg. All others are to follow but don't remember when that deadline was, except it is in the "near term". I already have info that the BRADLEY A3 will be converted (Like earlier mods.) to carry more troops. This is due to budget issues and delays in the GCV Program. So there's another slot down the road and toilet. As I've mentioned already in various posts basically is..."The new will be the old/current types modified" i.e. T-90 something anybody!?! Sorry for delay.

Added edit... These two refs combined provide an overview of the BUSK III pkg. First ref just scroll down to BUSK. Next ref was the one posted earlier for the picture and mentions BUSK III fixes not mentioned in Ref 1. None mentioned the add on armor in the picture of Ref. 2, and nor have I seen that add on armor configuration in earlier models, similiar yes, but this is something different I believe at least in coverage of the hull if nothing else. Don't you hate it when I get tired? I hear you, one more to go, so again good night.
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/bradley/
http://www.armyrecognition.com/july_...t_1007126.html

Good Night and have a great weekend everyone!

Regards,
Pat