This is the BTR-82AT. The latest generation of 8x8 APC that Russia made. Unveiled in 2021.
The BTR-82AT is armed with a 30mm 2A72 automatic cannon and a 7.62mm PKTM coaxial machine gun, both of which are mounted on a remotely operated weapon station (ROWS). The ROWS is equipped with advanced targeting and surveillance systems, which allow the vehicle to engage targets with greater accuracy and at longer ranges. It can be also armed with two anti-tank guided missile (ATGM) launchers on both sides of the turret that can fire the 9M133M Konkurs-M missile capable of penetrating modern main battle tanks
Unlike the baseline BTR-82A, the BTR-82AT is fitted with the TKN-4GA sighting system with a thermal imager and stabilized field of view. The APC carries a 9K129 tripod-mounted anti-tank guided missile system for the 9M133 Kornet missile in its troop compartment.
The BTR-82AT is motorized with a KamAZ-740.14-300 Turbo Diesel Engine coupled to a manual transmission with 5 forward and 1 reverse gear. The vehicle can run at a maximum road speed of 75 km/h with a maximum cruising range of 600 km. The BTR-82AT is fully amphibious and propelled to the water at a maximum speed of 8 km/h thanks to a single water-jet mounted at the rear of the hull.
Say something nice about it!
Why Russia never made anything BTR with back doors?
Back door= homosexual
It doesn't have a mounted ATGM ready to fire which makes is D-tier at best. I am curious about how good the sight picture is on this thermal upgrade though. I have seen the old sight and I was not impressed in the slightest
Why does an APC need to have an ATGM? Why does every vehicle need an ATGM?
IFVs (not APCs) require ATGMs to maximize their effectiveness on the modern battlefield. Not have one is akin to equipping your infantry with ten-round magazines. Sure, they could still fight, but at a distinct advantage that could easily be overcome by the additional firepower of a thirty-round magazine
I meant to say distinct DISADVANTAGE
This comes entirely down to doctrine. How you use the vehicles.
how does it compare to the BTR4
Why was the T-80 unsupported?
>to the BTR4
I miss those little bros like you wouldn't believe
stil kicking butt
The current BTR4 production model is an upgrade over the BTR80 series because it has superior crew comfort and ergonomics but it suffers from having the same problem of paper thin armour and poor mine/IED protection as it's Russian counterpart. However, the newer BTR4MV1 variant resolves most of these problems.
Little upsetting that quite a few were stuck in Mariupol
> with a thermal imager and stabilized field of view
Good job Russia. You’re finally catching up!
Because there are times when your main gun can’t compete with enemy armor such as tanks and the APCs. An ATGM can get the job done quick. And as another anon said, doctrine.
Imagine if the Bradley didn’t have TOWs in desert storm.
>Why does an APC need to have an ATGM? Why does every vehicle need an ATGM?
so enemy tanks fear anything that moves
>The latest generation of 8x8 APC that Russia made. Unveiled in 2021.
>Ukrainian Markings and camo
Read the name of the image
> Say something nice about it!
The most I have seen of this variant had kinda bit rusty colour and featured very little of non flammable materials. It also had railroad wheels. Never knew why...
Why it has pigger camo?
Engage your Russian semen soaked brain for a second.
Because it's being used to sneak behind enemy lines.
Yeah man that's why the filename of OP is from an article saying Ukraine captured it.
That's what the crew inside want you to think 🙂
Perfidy is a war crime.
Never heard of it, so it doesn't exist.
You could have really made this joke by going
>And even if it did, the holhols deserve it anyway
Look at the name of the file bro
This thread is clearly a test bed to see
1. How many people can recognise Ukrainian camo and symbols
2. How many people read filenames fully
Good idea by OP tbf.
>2. How many people read filenames fully
I already know it's fuck-all, no test required -- phoneposters are a scourge, have been for years.
Something nice... lets see.... I guess BTR-82AT will take Oryx a lot longer to type than T-62.
This is an MT-LB with 25mm naval AA turret welded on top of it. Unveiled in 2023.
Say something nice about it.
the gepard at home.
It gave me a good laugh.
>pic doesn't have BTR-BM turret
That was a technology demonstrator turret. Your regular production upgrade BTR-82AT has the regular BPPU turret with supposed thermals.
wait so it can't mount the two ATGMs on the turret then?
The original T-80AT upgrade had the BTR-BM turret with two launchers for 9K111-1M Konkurs-M. But as it usually happens with Russian upgrades, they went the cheaper way and just added a thermal sight to the regular BDDU BTR-82A turret which doesn't have ATGM launchers.
why... WHY are they always like this. I know why, but why. they suck so bad man. why.
Their technology demonstrators are always very good if not even on par with the West sometimes. But then corruption comes inbetween....
They sell to thirdies so they don't actually have to *be* good, just good at presenting.
>The APC carries a 9K129 tripod-mounted anti-tank guided missile system for the 9M133 Kornet missile in its troop compartment.
WTF is with Russia putting a fuckton of ammo/explosives in a vehicle but then giving it paper thin armour?
>Say something nice about it!
I can't as it was a meh APC when it came out but now it is a death trap:
>terrible crew ergonomics, passengers have to dismount from the sides
>paper thin armour (only good for ball 12.7mm frontally, 7.62mm all around), Russia claims it has better IED protection then previous versions but anyone with half a brain would doubt that
>does not have a naval turret
it still has to be destroyed in ukraine
It has been captured.
So, it's like a shitty off brand brand Styker? Cool, I guess.
still no backdoor
>still no networking capabilities
Russia really is a turdworlder