BTR-80/82A and variants: News

Hi all. I am new to the forum and would like to say hello to every one.

I am reading an artitle about BTR-82A. In which they explaned how the TKN-4GA-02 sighting system remotely control and set time fuse by laser pulse for 30mm airburst rounds fired from 2A72 gun. This source written by Russian so I have to translate to English and some translation are not clear enough for me to I understand. Could some Russian members here help me please?

This artitle here: http://tvzvezda.ru/news/forces/content/201503291027-casm.htm

What I need to help is "«При отлете снаряда на 50 метров отправляется первая кодовая посылка, еще через 20 метров – вторая, и т.д. " that explained how the TKN-2GA-02 send the laser pulse to projectitle to set the undermining time.

Thank you very much in advance.

I read it (used Yandex) as: range from laser rangefinder (+ windspeed?) + muzzle velocity go into fire control computer -> time to target comes out (variable in 1-2m increments out to 1km) & electronically set on the shells as they are shot.
Pretty sure that kind of thing has been around for a while.

That specific bit

With the departure of the projectile 50 meters sent the code first package, another 20 meters – the second, etc.

I think means each shell/burst can have different ranges set.

Interesting.

The 125mm HE shells in the T-90 tanks use ANIET to set the time fuses when they are loaded into the main gun, but this system seems to arm and set the fuses while the rounds are in flight towards the target...

Very interesting.

For 30mm shells the muzzle devices on the Tunguska are specially designed for 30mm cannon shells where one barrel of each gun has a shield and the other has an induction coil.

The barrel with the coil measures muzzle velocity which is added to the calculations to make the rounds more accurate.

hoom wrote:I read it (used Yandex) as: range from laser rangefinder (+ windspeed?) + muzzle velocity go into fire control computer -> time to target comes out (variable in 1-2m increments out to 1km) & electronically set on the shells as they are shot.
Pretty sure that kind of thing has been around for a while.

That specific bit

With the departure of the projectile 50 meters sent the code first package, another 20 meters – the second, etc.

I think means each shell/burst can have different ranges set.

Thank you Hoom.

As I understand but not sure is the system will send two commands through laser pulse to the flying projectile in order to set the detonation time, the first is sent within 50 meters from departure and the second is sent 20 metter after that. What I am still confusing is why they set to send 2 commands instead of 1. Is the second command for backup in case the first one failed to be received by the projectile?

Hard to say... the first signal will probably arm the fuse and the second signal will set the time based on the ballistics of that round and its velocity.

GarryB wrote:Hard to say... the first signal will probably arm the fuse and the second signal will set the time based on the ballistics of that round and its velocity.

Thank you Garry. Normally the projectile uses its acceleration and rotation to generate ignition energy and open the axial lock and S&A (put the detonator to the arm position) so I think the TKN-4GA-02 will not need to send command to arm the fuse anymore.

That would be an impact detonator... these rounds wont contact the target... they will detonate in mid air after a period of free flight... the time of detonation being determined by calculation of target position and intercept location and time of flight of the round.

I would assume they don't use a radio or laser proximity fuse... they use likely a time and impact or graze fuse to set off the main charge...

This is a serious improvement on older shells of this type that used a simple set time fuse where they detonated about 1km from the muzzle for use against ground targets.

I suspect if it sends two signals that one is clearly the count down time to detonation... the other could be an arming signal... what else could it be?

GarryB wrote:I suspect if it sends two signals that one is clearly the count down time to detonation... the other could be an arming signal... what else could it be?

I am not so sure. The first signal may be for programing the detonation time and the second one may be for locking to avoid being re-programed by enemy interference after that?

magnumcromagnon wrote:No worse than BTR-4...are you freaking serious lol?  That's an insult more than a compliment...the BTR-4 was notorious for it's Hohol-low design of poor weld quality, and pathetic quality control, which is a notorious/infamous trait of the Ukrappy's lmao!!!

You forgot about BTR-4 being dangerously overweight and unstable in driving. As they increased the size and mass of the hull but maintained pretty much the same suspension system and wheels... it is a complete disaster of an APC.

I am not so sure. The first signal may be for programing the detonation time and the second one may be for locking to avoid being re-programed by enemy interference after that?

If it communicates via laser beam with the rounds in flight then the light sensors that detect the signal from the laser must be in the base of the 30mm projectile and therefore looking back at the launch platform rather than forward at the enemy.

This should make it rather difficult for the enemy to send false commands as the round wont see them.

GarryB wrote:

I am not so sure. The first signal may be for programing the detonation time and the second one may be for locking to avoid being re-programed by enemy interference after that?

If it communicates via laser beam with the rounds in flight then the light sensors that detect the signal from the laser must be in the base of the 30mm projectile and therefore looking back at the launch platform rather than forward at the enemy.

This should make it rather difficult for the enemy to send false commands as the  round wont see them.

One signal for programming distance, second signal measures how far -off it is, then cycle repeats for second round with corrective time fuze to make it better and cycle repeats and repeats.

Werewolf wrote:

GarryB wrote:

I am not so sure. The first signal may be for programing the detonation time and the second one may be for locking to avoid being re-programed by enemy interference after that?

If it communicates via laser beam with the rounds in flight then the light sensors that detect the signal from the laser must be in the base of the 30mm projectile and therefore looking back at the launch platform rather than forward at the enemy.

This should make it rather difficult for the enemy to send false commands as the  round wont see them.

One signal for programming distance, second signal measures how far -off it is, then cycle repeats for second round with corrective time fuze to make it better and cycle repeats and repeats.

Thank you Werewolf. Why don't they do this much simply and more accurately by equipping a muzzle velocity sensor in gun muzzle like 2A38?

It is extremely likely that the electronic device inside the 30mm projectile is very simple and small because there is very little room in there for a laser beam detector and any electronics as well as some HE and fragmented shell case that does the damage on target.

In that regard I suspect the two signals from the firing vehicle are timed at a specific interval so the fire projectile can determine its own speed and the time at which it needs to explode over the target.

If one laser flash armed them and a second set them off that would not work as a stream of dozens of shells in flight would all be armed at different distances and explode at different distances.

A coded laser beam must therefore signal the rounds to indicate to them the flight time to the target so they detonate at the same range position.

Russian Military to Receive BTR-82 Armored Vehicles Designed for Arctic

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20161005/1046041432/russia-military-arctic-armoured-btr.html

Which units in russian army use BTR80/82 and which use heavier vehicles like BMP? Tank brigades should be using IFVs along their tanks, right? Does that mean that infantry brigades mostly use BTRs? Or do they too use a mix of BMP and BTR? IF so, in what ratio?

2 or 3 maneuver battalions per brigade? 3 companies per battalion, 3 platoons per companies, 3 BTR/BMP per platoon?
Are BMPs and BTRs mixed, like 1 batallion of each, or are there simply "heavier" brigades equipped solely with BMP serving alongside "less heavy" brigades equipped solely with BTRs?

eridan wrote:Which units in russian army use BTR80/82 and which use heavier vehicles like BMP? Tank brigades should be using IFVs along their tanks, right?  Does that mean that infantry brigades mostly use BTRs? Or do they too use a mix of BMP and BTR? IF so, in what ratio?

2 or 3 maneuver battalions per brigade? 3 companies per battalion, 3 platoons per companies, 3 BTR/BMP per platoon?
Are BMPs and BTRs mixed, like 1 batallion of each, or are there simply "heavier" brigades equipped solely with BMP serving alongside "less heavy" brigades equipped solely with BTRs?

1. Motor Rifle, Spetsnaz, Naval Infantry and Reconnaissance units use the BTR80/82 in a combat role.
2. Tank brigades & regiments use BMP's.
3. Presently there is the following Ground Forces brigade & regiment usage; 16 use MT-LB's, 9 use BTR-80/82, 4 use BMP-3, 10 use BMP-2 and 5 use BMP-1. Naval Infantry battalions uses MT-LB's and BTR-80/82 plus 1 battalion of BMP-2's. These represents prime usage. There would be a mix of all types within brigades end even battalions.
4. Brigades are generally 3 battalions of Motor Rifle and 1 of Tank or vice versa in a Tank brigade / regiment. Specialized brigades / regiments (mountain, arctic, naval infantry, machine gun) may have only 2 battalions of motor rifle and no tanks.  
5. Brigades usually fight as BTG's or Battalion Tactical Group(s). This would generally be a motor rifle battalion (3 companies and a mortar battery)  supported by a company of tanks and SP Artillery. Plus additional Air Defense, Anti-Tank, Engineers, Rocket Artillery, Reconnaissance, etc as required. Brigades / regiments generally have 1-2 of these BTG's made up of totally professional soldiers (contract) and the other units are made up of mixed contract soldiers with conscripts.
6. There are 6 Tank brigades / regiments and they would just reverse the motor rifle / tank ratio in their BTG's. They use BMP-3's and BMP-2's in their Motor rifle units.

Thank you! That was a very in depth explanation.

That'd amount to some 2000 IFVs in active use maneuver units. Plus probably a few hundred more in various training centers?

And roughly 2500 APCS (both tracked and wheeled) in maneuver units. Though total of these might be significantly higher, as one would expect even non-maneuver unit personnel (Support personnel in various brigades) are driving around in these? So totals might be even twice as high?

Who would then be using various Tigr-like, typhoon-like armored cars and vehicles? Would they be seen in numbers in maneuver brigades or only in support/spec ops units?

eridan wrote:Thank you! That was a very in depth explanation.

That'd amount to some 2000 IFVs in active use maneuver units. Plus probably a few hundred more in various training centers?

And roughly 2500 APCS (both tracked and wheeled) in maneuver units. Though total of these might be significantly higher, as one would expect even non-maneuver unit personnel (Support personnel in various brigades) are driving around in these? So totals might be even twice as high?

Who would then be using various Tigr-like, typhoon-like armored cars and vehicles? Would they be seen in numbers in maneuver brigades or only in support/spec ops units?

Probably mix of around 200+ APC / IFV per brigade (combat and support). A battalion would have 40 BMP and 43 BTR/MT-LB for their combat element.

Tigr's are in Spetsnaz and Reconnaissance units. But there are not many around yet. Typhoons are in Spetsnaz, Reconnaissance and the 56th Airborne brigade. There would be less then 200 of each of these types presently active. Would expect that production which has only been around 50-60 vehicles a year to now double as kinks are worked out.

Further to the above discussion. A BTR-80AM/82A equipped with the 30mm cannon has technically become an IFV. The same as the MT-LBM which is equipped with the BTR-80A turret. With the announced plan to convert another ~350 BTR-80 to BTR-80AM. That should make all BTR brigades & regiments along with the Naval Infantry battalions so equipped. That along with the 4-5 brigades of MT-LBM equipped units increases your IFV / APC unit ratio.

I found this site interesting:

http://balagan.info/soviet-order-of-battle-and-doctrine-in-the-cold-war

If anyone has any better information I would be interested in reading that myself...

I have books, manuals and copied pages of books coming out of the ying yang. You'll have to come over and check them out

Thanks for the link. I'll check it out later.

In the interim, have you checked out this site; http://www.milkavkaz.net/2015/12/vooruzhjonnye-sily-rossii.html

Thanks... will fire up my Yandex addon to Firefox and have a look.

Some "well" made welds on BTR-82A. Arzamas machine-building factory is in deep shit if all their welders work like this.