Kind of surprised no one suggested it yet. Armed with a 30mm 2A72mm autocannon and a 7.62mm PKTM coaxial machine gun, thermals, and LRF; It would fill a similar role to the VBC (PT2). Would be a good vehicle to folder with the future BTR-82A. The BTR-82A could be 9.0 and this could be 9.3.
BTR-82A
Definitely a much needed add. Armed with a 30mm 2A72mm autocannon and a 7.62mm PKTM coaxial machine gun, thermals, and LRF.
BTR-82AT (BTR-BM)
A unique add. Armed with a 30mm 2A42mm autocannon, 2x Konkurs-M ATGM’s and a 7.62mm PKTM coaxial machine gun, thermals, and LRF.
BTR-82AT (BPPU)
A more armored version of the BTR-82A. Armed with a 30mm 2A72mm autocannon, and a 7.62mm PKTM coaxial machine gun, thermals, and LRF.
Not sure how the truck-mounted variant could fit in; since the same portable module was utilized in the XM975 we currently have at 10.3, all statistics of the launcher including the ammo count should be the same.
Polish vehicles remind me of the BWP 2000, which probably would be an amazing tank in war thunder if it got a decent ammo load for the main gun.
There’s this one, and a version with the same turret as the Italian VCC 60/80 and no missile launchers.
60mm APFSDS autocannon, missiles and your standard 7.62 coaxial MG. Protection from 30 or 35mm ammo frontally, and 12.7mm ammo from side and rear arc. Not sure what ATGMs it used, but they’re probably the usual SACLOS ATGMs.
I believe BTR-82AT (the actual AT that is produced, the BPPU version you mentioned) will be better due to having faster speed, cage armour is optional, would help with speed if you take it off. So it would be more logical to place it higher BR than BTR-22.
This is Obj 167TM on pictures, original Object 167 would look like T-62 with T-72 suspension, the more interesting part being inside, as it would have 115mm gun and autoloader for it, which later would be upgraded for 125mm gun and placed onto T-72 Ural.
IIRC it has 19 rounds autoloader, but I have never got to see it from insides, so that’s another issue.
Correct, the American Roland launcher was designed so that it could work as a static emplacment, hence the large base plate. I don’t believe the National Guard ever used it in this way though, as there were already plenty of other static SAM sites with longer range missiles, so utilizing its portability to fit it on trucks was simply a more effective use.
sir , the only BMP-3 dynamic protection complex (EDZ) upgrade IS the Cactus («Kaktus»/«Кактус») , there is no such thing as KARKUS (and KAKTUS i’m asuming you miss-spelled)
I was responding to someone else who referred to the armor as “Karkus” which I had never heard of before. Hence, why I was questioning the difference to see if it was a misspelling.
“In addition to protection against monoblock shaped charges, the complex successfully protects against B-32 armor-piercing bullets, 23-mm BZT shells and 30-mm armor-piercing shells. The inertness of explosives in 4S24 is chosen in such a way that the blocks do not detonate when hit by BZT bullets, shells up to 30 mm, large-caliber OFS fragments and various incendiary mixtures up to napalm.”
