Deciphering the armored personnel carrier - "armored" or is it still a "transporter"?

2024 Author: Howard Calhoun | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 10:16

Many are interested in the question of how to translate the APC spelling. The confusion often arises from the fact that only two words are indicated by three capital letters. Deciphering the abbreviation BTR looks like "armored transporter". A lowercase "r" would have made more sense. It does not designate a separate word in the abbreviation BTR. Decoding, by analogy with the BMP, would also look more understandable. BMP - infantry fighting vehicle. And the BTP could mean an armored infantry transporter, which better reflects the essence of a vehicle that carries motorized riflemen, not cargo. However, such an abbreviation has historically developed.

First experiments

The first armored personnel carriers in the usual sense appeared during the First World War, when the British began to produce tanks with the ability to transport infantry. However, the level of mechanization of the army was then low, and equipment with tanks was much more important.

Indeed, armored personnel carriers began to be used en masse during the Second World War. The Germans used special ingenuity in their production, creating many modifications of wheeled and caterpillarconveyors.

It is characteristic that many armored personnel carriers of those years, like the first Soviet post-war vehicles, did not have an armored roof. This does not quite correspond to the decoding of the armored personnel carrier. This led to a high risk of destroying the entire landing force with one grenade. On the other hand, it is easy to parachute from cars with an open roof, and a box of a modern armored personnel carrier engulfed in flames usually becomes a mass grave for the crew. Be that as it may, all modern armored personnel carriers are of a closed type.

The Arab-Israeli wars and the widespread use of anti-tank grenade launchers, before which the armored personnel carrier was defenseless, became the moment that raised a fat question in the development strategy of the armored personnel carrier.

Soviet and American paths

In questions of the development strategy of armored personnel carriers, the USSR and the USA diverged even more than in tank building. The USSR quickly switched to light eight-wheeled vehicles that could be transported by air. The United States also relied on armored personnel carriers. Their choice fell on a caterpillar propulsion system, such as the incredibly popular M113. In addition, the Americans also produce light four-wheeled command and reconnaissance armored personnel carriers. European companies used both Soviet and American formulas, depending on the purpose and buyer of the car.

Special attention should be paid to Israel. The Israelis were the first to make really heavy transporters, paying special attention to the word "armored" in decoding armored personnel carriers.

Prospects

This questionremains debatable. Many analysts see the future in heavy armored personnel carriers comparable in armor protection to tanks. But this leads to the actual merging of the classes of armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, to a decrease in the mobility and cross-country ability of transporters, as well as to a serious increase in their price. However, in a military conflict with a comparable enemy, relying on expensive, high-quality, but small equipment does not always work. In most cases it is better to combine light and heavy weapons.

After all, in deciphering the armored personnel carrier, the main word is "transporter". As it should remain.