Why are Slav riding oursite of their APC?

>>31956925
Because they stock the vodka inside it.

Protects tank from RPGs

File: file.png (1MB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x960px

>>31956929
so that is why they have a guy to protect the APC door with ballistic shield

>>31956925
>>31956929
This... Also ruskies travels even larger packs than romanians or niggers.

>>31956925
Better visibility from ambush, not as cramped and hot, faster dismount.

>>31956925
Poverty

>>31956925
well usually you don't have everyone in an APC

better to use a few of them to move troops across open areas, or to go in front of a truck in a convoy

ergo not everyone in the convoy is protected anyway

so you sent the APC in, when it comes under fire troops riding it jump out an set up a position to provide return fire
the APC moves the other men to a position they can counter-attack, or just charges them

the APC doesn't provide much situational awarenes for the driver, so why would you send on in by itself?

russians use light armour and troop transport very differently to americans

>>31956935
Point man for when they offload.

File: bmp3_00.gif (6KB, 250x150px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 250x150px

Because riding in Russian deathtraps sucks and you can dismount faster from on top.

Most Russian IFV's are fucking abysmal to get in and out of.

>>31957018
This.

You don't want to be inside that thing when it gets hit by an RPG. At least if you're riding on the top you have a chance of surviving.

>>31956925
If you are fighting in a unconventional war where you most likely will be ambushed then hit by artillery so it is better to ride outside since you can dismount faster.

If you are fightin NATO then best option is to ride inside since the BTR series are infact nothing more then a battle taxi and being outside during an artillery barage you most likely would die very fast.

or maybe just maybe:
IT'S A PHOTO OP

>>31957049
kek

why not just walk then?
would you rather risk being killed by an RPG, or by literally anyone with a gun?
snipers would take pot-shots at you, someone a half mile away would try to light you up with an AK

these guys are all photographed in safe areas, which is why you are seeing footage of them in the first place

>>31957089
>why not just walk then?

Because that's not at 30mph?

File: VrZAXkx.jpg (833KB, 3088x2056px) Image search: [Google]

833KB, 3088x2056px

>>31957089
They do it pretty much anywhere

BTR's are a nightmare to get in and out of, one tiny door on the side that all your equipment is going to catch on

>>31956929
>infantry protection

>>31957089
>why not just walk then
Because that would be incredibly slow.

>would you rather risk being killed by an RPG, or by literally anyone with a gun?
BTR armour is weak as fuck. A light machinegun at close range i.e. ambush, will wreck a BTR.

>these guys are all photographed in safe areas, which is why you are seeing footage of them in the first place
Russian rode into Grozny like this, because if everyone is inside, you have limited eyes looking out for threats, plus can do nothing to protect against close targets on roof tops, basements.

File: haji car.gif (2MB, 340x256px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 340x256px

>>31957094
*sigh*

>>31957109
soldiers do a lot of things, sometimes there is a rationale
but sometimes it is learned stupidity, or lazyness

riding hatch protects you from driving straight into an ambush to some extent because you have more eyes
and it means you get a faster dismount to set up a defensive position
and it means you avoid the risk of everyone being stuck in the vehicle when you are under fire, or having one sniper pit a whole squad inside

but at the same time, if those things are more important than the protection of the armor, maybe you should all just be in an open truck and take the cost saving

drive around unbuttoned and every sniper within range is going to engage you
then what do you do, drive through?
stop so the men can get in?

I sort of get why they do it, but what I'm left asking is why they are deployed with a BRT if thye just sit on the roof

>>31956925
to use it as spaced armor against HEAT and HE shells and RPG's

>>31956929

This, plus the infantry protects the vehicle against enemy infantry, as vehicles tend to be semi-blind. That's why you have Panzergrenadiere and such.

>>31957170
>open truck
A truck isn't going to provide fire support, and the frontal armour of the BTR can withstand a much higher volume of small arms fire.

Reminder that they can't sit on top now because of sensors in the Kurganets and Bumerang.

>>31956925
They ride outside of it when they need to dismount fast.
>why not use bicycles
Because a gun on the APC is useful and the APC is useful for transporting a wounded soldier and/or heavier equipment.

>>31957170
>I sort of get why they do it, but what I'm left asking is why they are deployed with a BRT if thye just sit on the roof

Because thats what their unit is deployed with. Besides, what kind of grunt would rather ride around on a truck instead of a BTR? They use these things as big mobile shields when they dismount, afterall.
Plus, that BTR has a fucking 30mm cannon on it if the shit hits the fan. A Ural truck doesn't.

File: 14316789686240.jpg (211KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 960x720px

>>31957236
the new vehicle is also too high

falling from that mean instant dead

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SD9JKa0WcBk

>>31957170
Options. Sure, you might use it more like a truck 90% of the time. But if you are in a situation where armored (even lightly armored) protection for your infantry is desireable, wouldn't it be better to have it than not? Most militaries are willing to sacrifice cost-effectiveness for troops' safety and versatility, at least to some extent.

How much more expensive than trucks can these things really be, anyway?

>>31957236
They're not really allowed to ride on top anyway, and aren't officially trained to do so.

But circumstance dictates.

because of ieds made of 3x152mm shells on the side of the road.
because it helps detecting ambush earlier
because armor is shit
because space is very tiny
because doors are very small
why the fuck nobody asks why hueys flew without doors? its seems pretty obvious even for such retard as me, why do i see this question about riding on top of apc's so often?
t. russian

>>31957170
>*sigh*
I don't know if anyone's told you, but you're a huge faggot.

>>31957270
*roll's eyes*

>>31957259
also if anyone will ask why btrs and bmps have shitty armour you should check the potential war they were made to fight in
their armour was just enough to ride behind together with tanks through nuked germany under artillery shelling straight to english channel

>>31957255
>>31957245
>>31957236
The new machines are much better design than the previous BTR / BMP.

So hopefully there shouldn't be any reason for the troops to ride on top.

>>31957135
>BTR armour is weak as fuck. A light machinegun at close range i.e. ambush, will wreck a BTR.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xK2gwLNBPxw

But it cant stop a RPG which was the prime weapon the chechen fighters used.

>Russian rode into Grozny like this
They did not. They were inside if there were any infantry at all and they were pinned down by sniper fire and machine guns if they tried to dismount since they were surrounded.

They stayed in their BTR and died to the RPG's

In the second chechen war the russians had changed their tactics. They surrounded grozny and fought building to building, room by room instead of driving staight into grozny like they did before.

File: 254C1D3E553C9C380EDF19[1].jpg (165KB, 736x1139px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 736x1139px

>>31956925
>Why are Slav riding oursite of their APC?
Reasons didn't change since 'Nam much, bro.

>>31956925
Faster to dismount.

>>31957231
yes there are a whole range of definite advantages of BTR over a truck

but none of those things require (or even work when) you sitting on the roof of the vehicle

>>31957240
it's a neat vehicle for sure, I'm not knocking it

but the way I see it being used/deployed doesn't make much sense to me

I mean if the russians go to all the effort of making it resistant to small arms to the point that there is only one silly little door at the back; and therefore troops just ride on the roof
someone must be doing it wrong

>>31957248
>How much more expensive than trucks can these things really be, anyway?
no idea, but I bet it is a fuck ton

the versatility would be great for COIN type shit where you have to be really mobile and fight all over the place

but for an army with access to the shit it needs, I'd only use these to front a truck convoy or to move troops to fire positions

>>31957170
Fucking hell learn brevity

>>31957259
all the things you say have been mentioned, and they make sense

but would you rather get IED'd inside one of these things, or on the roof of one?

would you risk driving into an ambush (driver can still see, also aren't there some hatches on the side?)
or the vehicle being lit up by people firing inacurately when you are on the roof?

would you get out slowly under fire from one exit point, or be unable to get into one quickly to drive out of an ambush

>>31956925
They were bred for it.

>>31957170
At least I got a good gif out of it.

Because .308 and 7,62x54R goes straight through side of APC

APC: Armored personnel carrier
The carrier is armored, not the personnel.

>>31956925
in soviet russia apc doesnt protect conscript, conscript protect apc.

File: assaultofgrozny001-14.jpg (82KB, 700x494px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 700x494px

>>31957330
Russians definitely rolled round Grozny on top of APCs.

>>31957442
would have post a webm, but the file size limit seems to have been reduced here

File: infantry protection.png (191KB, 800x510px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 800x510px

It works like this.

>>31956925
>>31957313
>>31957259

welp, the main reason for soldiers riding on top of vehicles throughout history is that there are way more soldiers tan vehicles... its not like the vehicle is empty inside, it's usually at full capacity when then they start stacking up niggers in the roof. make 'em run? they get to where they are going both much more slowly and much more tired.

The whole "faster to dismount" "tactical deployment when recieving fire" and "better spotters than sole driver in tin can" where probably merely built around the fact that i stated at the beginning. Should we allow our soldiers to ride on top of vehicles? these are the pros... these are the cons... the pro's outweigh the cons, plus they are going to do it anyway. Develop tactics and trainning to make it more effective.

>>31957400
these are very specific scenarios, one could develop similar ones for being inside the apc or being on foot.

>>31956925
1. You lose less people if BTR is hit with RPG or trigger anti-tank landmine which is abundant in Chechen campaigns. Drawback: personnel is vulnerable to sniper fire and shrapnel IEDs on the trees. So you need extra eyes on top to provide 360 degree view. It is up to commander to order soldiers to sit inside or outside based on tactical situation.
2. BTR compartment is very cramped and was not meant to carry the whole listed lot of ammo, rations and heavy weaponry of modern troopers. Also it's usually more convenient to take extra ammo, MREs, extra water and "travel" outside if you go at remote FOB. Cause the supply is shit - the more ammo you get with you, the better.
3. At all the public shows soldiers sit outside with guns up cause it looks cool.

>>31956925
Their the armor man.

File: Silt_Strider_by_mage_116.jpg (62KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 600x450px

>>31957089
>why not just walk then

Why walk when you can ride?

>>31957805

>*huuuuuuuuuuuuaaaaauuuuuu*
>*quuuu quuuu quuuuu*
>Welcome, Outlander

File: 1395687362880.jpg (215KB, 898x600px) Image search: [Google]

215KB, 898x600px

>>31957481
Not during the first battle of grozny.

I think I missunderstood you when you wrote "rode into".

Because BTRs have fuel tanks right by the troop doors, so if it catches fire you have basically zero hope of getting out.

>>31957805
I thought that was an Advisor.

>>31957276
what the fuck

>>31957245
That ukie didn't die, apparently he just broke his arm and hurt his back a bit.

>>31957805
kek'd

>>31957245
Oh come on... Artem spends his whole service under influence and nobody cares. Ivan gets drunk one time, falls off of an APC and sudenly it's on Russia Today.

>>31957248
>How much more expensive than trucks can these things really be, anyway?

Without the weapon systems ?
About 15000 $USD for a BTR-60

File: 1478246122663.png (31KB, 552x464px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 552x464px

>>31957805
Fuck, great memories.

File: ak 218.png (191KB, 903x1000px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 903x1000px

In a linear battlefield riding inside is fine, they are armoured against threats like long range machine gun fire, shell splinters ect

in a non-conventional conflict then an ambush situation with light anti-tank weapons or ATGM is alot more likely, and that will kill you if you are inside.

Also being inside is NBC protected as well, again for conventional battlefield

>>31958117
Diesel does not ignite when burnt or shot idiot

>>31956925
>Why are Slav riding outside of their APC?

cheap reactive armor

>>31962147
It's not reactive armour unless it reacts somehow to mitigate damage from hits (classically you'd use ERA which explodes).

>>31957276
>>/tumblr/

>>31962179
get hit, reacts by falling off and getting run over.
driver feels bump and reacts by hauling ass away from threat.
like i said cheap reactive armor.

>>31962254
>driver feels bump and reacts by hauling ass away from threat.
You have the mind of a slav engineer anon.

>>31962276
no slavic heritage here.
implying from the reference you mean i have dumbed it down for easy understanding or was it my disregard for human life that prompted the comment?

>>31957481

That was after the main resistance was pacified. Those are OMON troops, basically militia.

>>31962408
>my disregard for human life that prompted the comment?
That and the simplicity of the system.

>>31956925
Why they wear DPM?

>>31965022

They did what commies do and copied the pattern. I think they called it "smog" or some shit like that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RodrZ2we_hQ&list=FLIsBla_CFe04m2z1UFoEokg&index=149

>>31956925
US troops in Nam used to ride on tip, I heard it's because mines could get the inside, but they were safe on top. Depending on the model some Russian IFVs had the troops climb over the engine compartment. Sometimes it's just laziness.

>>31956925
simply because of the unholy noise and smell of rotten wet feet

>>31956935
>join the army they said

>>31957276
*unzips dick*
Your move, tumblrina

>leaving a bunch of slavs unsupervised in a very fast and destructive piece of military hardware
yeah i dont think so

>>31957574
Panzerfausts for everyone comrade.

>>31968943
your dick shouldn't unzip. its sounds like you need a doctor

>>31957805
Nice

File: 1393485249799.jpg (96KB, 626x817px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 626x817px

>>31956935

>>31957574
It took this long to post it.

File: slavaboo_suicide_watch.png (980KB, 1752x1342px) Image search: [Google]

980KB, 1752x1342px

>>31957574
>someone got so upset he spent the time to draw this

If the armor is too weak, and it's such a pita to get in and out of, doesn't it mean the whole thing is pointless? If the only advantage is being faster than walking, why don't they just ride in unqrmored pickup trucks?

>>31972915
see:
>>31961745

File: M1A1_desant.jpg (632KB, 1728x1152px) Image search: [Google]

632KB, 1728x1152px

>ITT: its okay when amerifats do it

File: 011228-N-2383B-509_U.S._Marines.jpg (148KB, 640x976px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 640x976px

>fcuking russians are so shit lol