Ukrainian Bradley vs Russian BMP
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 вер 2024
- Go to ground.news/re... to get the latest news on Russia and Ukraine. Try it out or subscribe through my link before Sept 25, 2023 for 30% off unlimited access to avoid media bias.
Ever since the introduction of the Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle to the war in Ukraine, a lot of debate has sparked on the internet, about it’s effectiveness, especially when compared to the Soviet and Russian BMPs...
Patreon: / redeffect
Sources:
"M2/M3 Bradley At War" - M. Green & J.D. Brown
"Боевые машины пехоты БМП-1, БМП-2 и БМП-3" - Сергей Суворов
thesovietarmou...
thesovietarmou...
www.dieselrebu...
Go to ground.news/redeffect to get the latest news on Russia and Ukraine. Try it out or subscribe through my link before Sept 25, 2023 for 30% off unlimited access to avoid media bias.
have you seen lazerpigs vid:?
How’s that Bradley mine protection panning out?
@@war8036 not very good haha but they upgraded it with didmounted infantry up frony
I thought its light weight is because it have to swim in water?
Still worth clarifying:
11:42 bmp-2 hit in the roof of the tower above the breech of the 2A42 cannon, probably an 82mm mortar
11:45 this is NOT a BMP-3! this is a BMD-4, the side of which serves as protection only from 7.62. Pay attention to the welded faceted tower, this is a BMD.
The old problem with the supply of spare parts and additional solutions, when only new cars are fully equipped.
The BMP vs Bradley showdown will probably come down to the one that shoots first. The autocannons on both will rip the other apart.
Not,who shoot first. But the one who gets the first hit first. Just because you shoot first doesn't mean you get the first hit. Retired 11B 1996-2020.
i think the BMP would kill faster because it shoots 3 times faster with a bigger round than bradley
Guess the comparison should be more of wichs is more successful in it's role than in a 1x1 battle between both.
@@diverr69 The bradley got better sights and other electronics. You will most likely spot the BMP before it spots you, then it doesent matter if the bmp shoots faster
@@rafaelgoncalvesdias7459 It aint gonna shot a thing when its in water however probably, almost all battles takes place on open fields and forests aswell, then it doesent matter if it can go thrue water or not
Having served over 23 years as an 11B. Over half of my career was with the Bradley. It's a great IFV. However, with extra armor, the transmission isn't tough enough to handle the extra weight. The 25MM is not enough. The Tow missiles are top-notch. The sightings system is top-notch as well. However, it's not amphibious, extremely heavy, under gunned. And extremely huge target. US ARMY needs a new replacement.
Yeah the “new” solution here is decades old yet still classified anti gravity “propellent less propulsion” tech. This white/black world nonsense needs to stop. I’m tired of tax dollars being wasted on IFV’s while OUR manmade 🛸‘s of all shapes n sizes zippin around while the military keeps telling us lies that they know nothing. What a joke.
Wtf is your username, you get dishonorably discharged?
Replace the bradley for the CV90 or Puma ;)
Bmp-3 with better protection and fcs would be able to go toe to toe aginst the bradleys bmp2 must be phased out
@@LewisB3217 Don't do drugs
Sounds like a classic russian problem with the bmp3, good design with less emphasis on survivability but suffers from lack funding for the electronics
The something i call "Human is replacable, tank is not." issue
Well , at least it doesnt suffer from poor reverse speed .... 🙄🙄 yes i am looking at you T-72 and T-80 dont you hide from me ....
@@nektarkir4220t-80 literally has the best reverse speed of all current russian tanks
@@Random-nf7qb T-90M ? Also i think the Armata has that record ( not sure tho )
@@nektarkir4220 T 64, T 72 and T 90 have the 4km/h reverse.
T 80 has 10+
Odličan video kao i uvijek.
@@u2beuser714 Za Blajburg spremni
I'd also like to mention how either side uses their IFV's. The Russians are using them to great effect during trench assaults as they are designed: move infantry into position, suppress the trench for a short time, then leave. Ukranians use their Bradleys as breakthrough vehicles, or as sentries. These are constantly getting hit by mines, missiles, and FPV's, which is exactly why the Russians evacuate their BMP's once the infantry is in place.
As a side note, the BMP-3 outranges the Bradley's TOW's. I doubt that the optics could identify a target at the listed range of 5500 meters (9M117M1-3), but that's still more that the TOW 2B Aero RF's 4500 meters, and the Ukranians don't even have those.
The only time IFV'S can support infantry is when theg are escorted by tanks but primarily the Bradley's and BMP'S are supposed to be the Uber of the battlefield transporting the infantry to Assault enemy positions also according to American Doctrine of Armored warefare the M1A2 Abrams are supposed to work hand in hand with the Bradley's and because of the Bradley's superior fire control they can scout targets for the tanks or helicopters or Artillery the Ukrainian Army does not know how to utilize that because they dont have years of training to do so they are basically a Soviet Army using Soviet doctrine with a western spin on it
Yes.
It explains why Bradleys are suffering a (relatively) higher rate of attrition, they are kept in active combat much longer (lower quality/shorter training also plays a factor)
Russians are getting their shit together. At this point NATO should call it quits.
They tried that nato method but back off and switched to troop transport
I've seen the bradleys also seen as infantry support. For evacuating the wounded and for quick response to an counter attack or flank.
Russian IFV seem to give birth like a mama turtle and scoot out. Leaving the infantry to fend for themselfs.
Different mindset.
Well, I always thought that mobility is much more than the declared top speed, you`ll have to take into account fording, trench crossing, swim, weight (bridge crossing), secundary transportation into battlefield, all terrain capabilities in general. There are logistical considerations also. I'd guess BMP series would be quite better at all of those... then is doctrinary use to take into consideration. These comparatives are fun to watch but could be quite deceptive, in my opinion.
Полностью с вами солидарен
BMP can swim, Bradley can’t
@@andrewezjevikovthe BMP can BARELY swim, but its so unreliable at doing so that as far as i know, east germany forbade its use for crossing rivers
Ive seen BMPs sink like a brick because the water almost reaches thw drivers hatch while swimming, if the water isnt completely still or the vehicle isnt fully sealed, it just cant swim
@@joseaca1010it definitely can swim well, though slow.
@@jade7631 like i said, it cannot swim in rough waters or if its not properly sealed, and it shows considering how much both sides have used pontoons
Red Effect, can we get a video on the CV90's performance and maybe a comparison between the CV90 and the BMP platforms used by the Russians? As for what CV90, naturally the one used is the Strf 90E, which is the successor version (upgraded) Strf 90C.
That’s just overkill at that point.
The CV90 would just rip through all BMP variants like a 1000 degree knife through butter.
@@PeterMuskrat6968 does that include BMP-KSh based on object149 chassis? because no way any CV90 variants has the firepower to go through that include the CV90-120
@@itsuk1_1 the armata is never going to see combat so they dont matter
@@einar8019 wishful thinking
@@itsuk1_1 no, its realistic thinking
It worked be interresting to hear about the value of the amphibian capability, and ground pressure considering the muddy seasons of eastern europe, and poor bridge infrastructure in Ukraine, especially since many bridges have been blown up. The BMPs have light armour specifically to retain amphibious performance
The ground pressure of the two vehicles are on paper, very similar, even though there's a 10 ton weight difference (BMP tracks are thin). This quickly goes south for the Bradley considering add-on armor and ERA they've equipped it with.
I've seen elsewhere that due to poor maintenance, the BMP's amphibious capabilities are not being used. Which is unfortunate and fortunate for Ukraine.
@@VilamusEven with good maintenance it can only be used in very good weather on calm rivers
The BMP floats. It was developed for Europe. With a lot of rivers and water obstacles. Therefore, her armor is thinner.
A useless feature (they can only really 'technically' float, and no one uses that feature cuz it sucks [eg. in Ukraine, both sides always use pontoons]), that doomed its protective capabilities, making BMPs thin-shelled death traps.
nice video as always, but you also need to factor in cost of purchase and cost of operating as these as have both strategic and tactical impact.
I think you forgot to indicate the main plus of any bmp.
This vehicle is very good off-road and can overcome water obstacles without crossing.
In simple terms, the BMP will move into position faster than its opponent (if they move there at the same time) and will provide infantry support in places where Bradleys and other non-amphibious infantry fighting vehicles cannot reach allied infantry positions
so much water in ukraine
@@Jokubas124U highest density of rivers and streams of any nation outside of russia its self and southeast asia, the country of Ukraine is one massive river delta of the Volga why do you think i produces 50+% of the worlds wheat
Yes and no, the Bmp is ampibious yes but that required all Rubber seals to be in place and in good condition, something that is difficult in the best of times and almost never the case in wartime.
This is why you never actually see any bmp's swimming
They rarely ever use its amphibious capabilities in Ukraine, they mainly try and use pontoon bridges instead of fording
@@nilasferm1239 see BMP-3 swimming ua-cam.com/video/Z8ZmgoYJVr0/v-deo.html
One interesting thing to note is that the Chinese BMP3 counterpart (ZBD04) does have conventional doors at the back unlike the BMP3. In some of the early war pictures, quite a few BMD troops were killed trying to exit their vehicles through the top. It's quite telling that both the T15 and Kurganets have conventional doors as well.
One interesting thing is that both the US and Russia do agree on is that a large calibre autocanon seems to be the future (instead of a 100mm canon) as seen on the T15/XM30 MICV.
rather than agree, this is more likely due to technological advances.
There is a saying, China is the biggest fan of US.
Yeah, basically all of the pluses of an Autocannon with more damage to enemy vehicles.
I never liked the Idea of the 100mm on a BMP-3, mainly because I don’t think it’s really needed in an IFV.
If it were an Infantry Support platform that is up armored… sure.
probably because chinese are very small people in general.
A Bradley without infantry is like a horse without a rider
Gen Milhouse Cotton 1986.
And yet Lazerpig's audience will still call this guy a vatnik. Insane.
The BMPs are meant to float to cross rivers or lakes on their own. This might explain the light conception to keep the floatability
What about the bmp 4 thats been around for a while ? Im suprised he didnt go into the newer version
I would also take into account the fact that the BMP-2/3, like the BMP-1, are able to cross small rivers and lakes by swimming
True but only the BMP-3 is reliably able to do this, with 1 & 2 rubber seal’s having issue staying in good condition.
Also the fact that they barely use that feature
To be honest the Bradley's hostory is really weird. You hear that it was supposed to be an APC but when you look at it you have to wonder what happened to turn it into an IFV that it is today.
The Bradley was never meant to be an APC. I've only ever heard that claim from the movie Pentagon Wars and that movie is... the furthest thing from a documentary. The Bradley was designed from the beginning as a counter to the BMP-1. The Soviets invented the IFV and the US wanted one of their own.
And the us developed a superior ifv bc only thing the US had close to it was the M113 which was just a Apc with a .50cal
@@stephenvz7852Ahh the One size fits all M113.
You want to fight infantry? M113.
You want to move infantry? M113
You want to love wounded? M113
You want to fire mortars and move quickly? M113
You want to move cargo… guess what… M113
@@chaosXP3RTso many people quoting fucking Pentagon Wars.
It’s a comedy, made using the diary of the dumbass who wasted the designers time with tests that an IFV is not supposed to face.
M2A2 ODS comes out as better. But he does not use his abilities when he remains dead in a minefield, 52 M2A2 of the Ukrainian army are destroyed or damaged and these are only confirmed losses. They are destroyed by artillery, mines and ATGM. they didn't even get into the fighting with the BMP. there are several places called Bradley Cemetery.
It boils down to how they are used. In Iraq, where tank battles were still a thing, Bradleys destroyed more Iraqi tanks than the Abrams did.
52 M2A2? Source: Trust me Bro, Wagner told me
@@713TankbusterThose numbers have not been updated for a while, oryx straight up does not record ukrainian losses anymore so that number might be well over 70
@@Vagab0nd12 You're not intelligent
@@Vagab0nd12 Oryx is still updating Ukrainian losses, it's just that Ukrainians have become much more conservative with their usage of heavy equipment. After suffering heavy casualties in the early stage of the counteroffensive they abandoned attempting large-scale armored breakthroughs and switched to infantry assaults, which is why we're not seeing so many losses of UA tanks/IFVs lately.
Bruh, it's so hard to find info on PT-91 performance in Ukraine. If yyou are able to, you should totally do a vid on that.
Bradley also has kevlar to stop splinters inside
I like watching this head to head comparisons where no one talks about price of each unit. I mean if data in open sources is correct 1 Bradley costs as 2 x BMP-3 or 6 x BMP-2 and thats a big deal
8:26, 11:47 - БМД-4М
Тоже резануло глаз. Тут "иксперды" не очень высокого уровня- так, для любителей
I know its probably been answered before but what is the song in the outro?
Face away -svard
@@MuhammadAli-255 thank you
@@MuhammadAli-255Crappy songs
Idk why slat armor wouldn't be prevalent on bmp. All u need to do is fine some flat steel and a welder an make it yourself in the field. Uvwould think bmp crewmen could use a welder and steel would be found everywhere on the field of battle
Your videos are fun to watch, thank you for making them. :)
but he lies are many and intended.
The Bradley is the Char B1 and the BMP is a Panzer II
As with all weapon systems, they all have +'s and-'s. Their effectiveness is down to how they are employed, and the crews training and professionalism!
I think the protection of the Bradley is why so few have been destroyed vs damaged compared to the BMPs. The BMPs all range from like 64% destroyed to 76% destroyed while the Bradley is at 51% according to Oryx.
Bmps have also seen more intense combat from both sides including the early russian blunders when no one on the ground knew what they were doing and things were getting blown up left and right
It means you are only watching CNN or maybe censorship had limited your view.
You nato countries live in bubble internet, it's funny to me as Indian when you laugh at Chinese
You and Chinese have same environment
@@OSTemli Lol yeah because having better artillery and mine protection in a war like this just wont do any difference in the losses. I'm totally a brainwashed western chauvinist for even thinking that.
@@lumberjackagies5158 Yeah that matters as well. Hard to know exactly what matters most. They have used the bradleys during some hard assaults also.
@@OSTemliand you Indians don't? Lmao. You have stuff like hindustan times....
Bradleys are very much more survivable than those crappie bmps 1 2 or3
11:37 Can you give some sources in the side protection of the BMPs? To my understanding the BMP-2 can withstand 12.7mm Ball rounds (close range shots or with AP round can penetrate) to the sides, and BMP-3 can withstand 14.5mm to the sides.
Does anyone have information on Ukrainians using captured BMP-3s? I know they have captured some but I have no clue if they use them in larger numbers.
I have seen some ukrainian use of BMP-3s on drone footage being used singular in combination with wheel-based APC, most likely as firesupport or recce in front of the main column. There was also a platoon sized formation (atleast 4) from one of the Azov-units equipped with BMP-3s driving past the camera. Overall, their number seem limited and they are parcelled out in small numbers.
I remember when people said the Bradleys would be game changers. Now they fertilize the ground in Zaporozhye.
I remember when people thought you were based l0l. Bad turtle.
@@myfacern7232 In perun he mocks russia , here he comments these. Clearly a bot
All NATO weapons are game changer they said
@@u2beuser714 Yeah I've noticed that l0l. He also goes back and forth on political commentators too.
Most of 50 Bradley’s knocked out crews survived, the same can’t be said for the 2,000 plus burned out BMP crews.
Whose really fertilizing the ground?
Great video! Informative and not biased 👍
lol
Any of those IFVs would rip each other to shreds. 73mm HEAT cannon on BMP 1 would turn the Bradley into confetti and a TOW or long burst from the 25mm would turn either one of the BMPs/BMDs into seasoning salt for the next batch of borscht.
I reckon if more BMP-3s would be equipped with add on armor, they would be even more formidable and quite comfortable to the Bradley
Bradley is heavy, high profile and clumpsy. BMP has almost no armor, but is fast and short. You make the conclusion.
Bradley only has one less horsepower per ton than the BMP 1 and 2. The one in Ukraine is quite a bit slower but thats because it has a lot more armor, on top of this the vehicle survivability is better.
The BMP 3 and BMD 4 do have a clear mobility advantage but at the expense of protection and survivability. I'll take the Bradley
Edit: further thinking about this I think the BMP 3 and 4 might have better fire power (however with how the turret is set up, how much this impacts the crews ergonomics is unclear to me) than the Bradley currently being used in Ukraine
they have lost 1/3 of all the bradleys sent@@jammygamer8961
@@Melkor54and what? It's about the crew who survived. And even in really bad situations crew usually survive
BMP when hit is almost certainty a mass grave (BMP3 esp.). Bradley as we all saw can even survive tandems and tank shells and crew survives in 90% of vehicle loss cases.
@@jammygamer8961 Can't fire on the move. I'll take the BMPs.
8:26,11:28 this BMD-4M
Use the plus sign to help with research. Bmp1+thermal sight+. As example
I would be interested in hearing your thoughts about the Ukrainian BTR-4. As it was made quite famous early on in the war due to the videos from Azovstal, but hasn’t seen much appearances in the past few months.
Because they have lost 41 of the 50-70 BTR-3 and 85 of 200 BTR-4 visually confirmed in nearly 2 years of war
Attrition
@@Archer89201 I understand why not many videos of them are appearing. I'd just appreciate it if RedEffect made a video on the vehicle. Personally I quite like the BTR-4. Ukrainian, and NATO standard configurations of the vehicle. I'd like to see how it fairs up against the BMP-3, and maybe some western vehicles such as Puma, Bradley, Ajax, etc.
@@gdtacos7082 BTR-3/4 is more comparable to Stryker, BTR-80/82 etc wheeled IFV/APC
@@Archer89201 Yes sorry, you are right. It's quite late at night and I'm not thinking the best 😅
Even though I am part Russian the Bradley is definitely a vehicle I would want to be in then any BMP.
The fucking bradley weighs 32 tons?!?!?!
A T-55 weighs 36 lmfao
It makes no difference. They still burn the same when hit.
Bradly crew and infantrymen survive, BMP riders usually die or are crippled.
Pretty much end of story.
Being a smaller target is not an unimportant issue. I remember everyone was saying that nowdays it's mute topic. But in this conflict I saw enough videos when ATMG operators miss targets that are far away. And since atmg are one of the main armour killers - being small is a big plus
M2 Bradley crew survivability high
BMP crew survivability..... none
Short fotage of a Leo 2a6 fighting 2 T-80s has been released. Would be nice to see analysis.
I think we would all appreciate a deep dive into the T-72 Burlak some time
The Bradley "gamechanger" was opened like a tin of beans by Russian loitering munitions and tandem charge HEAT rounds in ukraine. A lot of hot air was spoken about its performance in Iraq, against a military equipped with systems from the 1960s.
„Bradley isn’t an invincible tank“ as if anyone claimed it
You shouldn't laugh. Look at Russian IFV and tank losses.
The BMP was made to be amphibious, but lack of maintenance has made the Russians dependent on bridges to cross rivers.
The money that was meant for the BMP-3's armor probably was spent on an Oligarch's Yacht.
>Khorne Group
holy fuck, "right side of history" is a hell of a drug.
well you can only compare it if you include a river crossing before the engagment.
Awesome work, as always!
people : watching humvee bradley leopard 2 challenger 2 being destroyed in ukraine and thinking that abrams will be next too
abrams : SAIIIIKE
Abrams will be te next if they send, we thought that about the leos más Challengers anda that is what is happening.
it will be good for Russia to at least make their BMP's side armor be able to withstand 12,7 mm from 200 meter or what not. And when compare any IFV with BMP family we should notice that BMP sacrificed a lot of its protection for the amphibious capability. Bradley is surely better in protection but it can't swim, which is kinda demanded for any Russian armor vehicles ecxept for SUV, tanks, MRAP or something similar. BMP will definitely need a proper extra protection package in certain combat situation, or a completely replacement at all, like the Kurganets 25.
The professional crew gonna win the battle in the end no matter if the crew using bmp or Bradley
Random ahh anti tank mine manufactured in 1950's:
"...who?"
*_Nice!_* Less than an hour ago watched good doco on _history of _*_IFV,_* dating all the way back to WWI.
Wtf the M2 has the mobility of a ww2 medium tank
i think additional ammo on bmp-3 made it impossible to float, it be cool if they have options to add armor and lost amphibiousness, because not every situation need this.
I wouldn't give too much credit to the TKN-3B commander sight. It's got a fixed 4x magnification and old active infrared night vision. being able to slave the gun to the direction of a target is the only advantage it has, but it's by no means an accurate system, and doesn't move the gun vertically.
Also to add to the mobility point, BMP-2 has a manual mostly unsynchronized transmission. Engaging reverse, 1st or 2nd gear is sometimes extremely difficult and can take precious seconds that you don't have in combat. I would argue any raw enginepower advantage is midigated by the terrible transmission.
Hence T-72 criticisms.
Low weight, shitty transmissionz
You added the BMD-4 in some photos? Is BMD-4 and BMP-3 the same thing for the video?
No
@@mbtenjoyer9487 then why did he also have pictures of BMD-4?
@@abram4806 probably by mistake
У18.29 у бмд тоже такая подвеска
A common speculation for BMP-3 not being heavier armored is it will impede the amphibious ability of the vehicle. But how much the Russians weigh for the usefulness of that feature over survivalbility is not something I can understand.
Dang, the Bradley ODS SA outclasses the BMP-2 and 3 so much that is almost superior and every possible angle. But how come it has so many losses? And with so much tech and advanced stuff inside it, how come their always seen destroyed when they can absolutely eat most if not many of what Russia can throw at them?
Is it just due to the sheer volume of artillery and mines? But even still, how come its not doing more? Its like a Chiron vs a 65' Mustang GT and yet, its not really doing much changes.
The Bradleys have been used in the most intense fighting for Ukraine, despite the better protection they're still having to cross huge minefields under constant observation by drones with artillery zeroed in and attack helicopters launching ATGMs at long range.
Bradley is better than BMPs in many ways, but that doesn't help against mines/artillery fire/helicopters/atgms/tanks.
It really just comes down to mines on both sides. The vast majority of losses Ukraine has seen in the counter offensive have been mobility kills, which leave the vehicle in either a recoverable state or to be later picked off by artillery. Russians have been running into the same issue as well in their assaults. However, Ukrainians *have* consistently reported that Bradleys and western armor boasts considerably higher crew and troop survivability, which is one of the reasons Bradley losses are so high, they're the only vehicles that the primary assault forces in the offensive feel "safe" running into RU positions with.
They use BMPS to taxi people around but Bradleys, Strykers, and CV90s as the "assault" vehicles meant to contest enemy lines and support attacking infantry, so their losses are much higher, but so is their survivability ratio.
Man, i would rather go into battle on a Bradley than BMP. NO DOUBT, 100%
get off from ur chair at first lmao
Both are moving coffins
Nahhhhhh fam.... ones literally a ticking time bomb. The BMP's carousel loader is one penetration from the entire IFV going jack in the box and my body never being seen again, lol. At least with the Bradley, they might be able to send my body back home to mama.@@ali-haider5788
so can the bradley protect against 30mm all around or just in the front??
I think a majority of the engagements that IFVs get into will not be IFV vs IFV anyways
doesn't the Bradley have APFSDS or is it just not being used?
the BMP-3's price for Rus. Min. of Defence is about 1.5 million USD, and 0.3-0.4 mil. USD for the BMP-2 (brand new modernized version "Berejock"), comparing to Bradley export price for Ukraine is about 6 mil. USD.
Great video!
Battle of Medina Ridge was a reality check for this topic 30years ago.
I do have a question ? Does the autoloader of the bm3 lock the gun during loading, because if it the case that mean you can't use the 30mm
I think so Bcause 100mm is zeroed while loading
You can see it when bmp-3 rapid fires
@@ukuskota4106 then the 30mm is zeroed, meaning a impossibility too fire ?
Over 70 Bradleys have been lost since February. These are only the numbers that the west had acknowledged and it may be higher.
Over 70 bradleys were destroyed AND DAMAGED. Most of which only damaged.
Lol, oryx has only 54 losses of Bradley. Only 27 destroyed.
@@tetispinkman9135 oryx is propaganda.
@@cdgncgn and russians claims arent? didnt russsia claim to have destroyed like 500 himars
I like both cause they're neat
Also hope your doing well redeffect!
CV 90 easily beats both of them. Why even comparing these ancient vehicles? In the Bradley the crew survives more often than not, cannot say the same about the meat grinder country. Nothing like Nazi symbols on a Sunday.
The most modern CV90 of course beats them. But nobody will ever spend 5 million $ on top of the line ifv that can be destroyed by fpv drone.
I really think ukraine will buy the simplest cv90 versions just with the gun and simplier optics, no drone capability and etc. Because numbers do matter. Better have big amount of decent vechiles, than very little of top of the notch
Outro is face away by svard.
I enjoyed every second in this video! Thank you @RedEffect! ❤💙🤍
Bradley spotted - lancet launched
And it calmly absorbs the impact and drives on.
You do realize a lancet drone has the capacity to destroy any Russian vehicle as well right? Saying lancet will kill Bradley doesn't say anything about Bradley in this comparison with BMP.
Bye bye Bradley 😂😂
@@DerpyFox sure buddy
@@DerpyFoxin a Hollywood movie ? Sure
In real life ?
Lancet's will wreck tanks
Western or eastern
The real "game changer" that happened in this war was finding out exactly
*how valuable* drones are
Expect drone swarms in the future
Using the US armor claims for the Bradley is also pretty stupid. Yes they "claim" the base Bradley can stop 14.5mm hmg fire and the upgraded version can stop 30mm AP, however both claims are completely false. There was an incident in Iraq where up armored Bradleys came under 12.7mm HMG fire from around 600 meters away and were penetrated from the front. One had it's transmission disabled and the other had it's turret penetrated and gunner and commander injured and radio station destroyed. I can't remember the name of the battle but I'll look it up again if I can find it.
Point being if the up armored Bradleys can't even stop 12.7mm HMG fire how can anyone claim they can stop 14.5mm which has like 30% more penetration, or 30mm AP which has more than double the penetration.
The penetration of 30mm AP from the bmp2 is around 60mm RHA at 90 degrees, apds is around 80mm and apfsds is over 100mm. The Bradley has like an inch of aluminum with half an inch of steel over that with the armor package. That's maybe equivalent to 30mm if I'm being generous.
So the up armored version can stop 14.5mm hmg fire in some areas (although there lots of areas that cannot). As to the light ERA it's impossible to tell, but I doubt it does enough to reduce the penetration for apfsds by over 50%, which it would need to do to protect the Bradley from a single hit, and 30mm autocannons put out a lot more than 1 shell...
Also, you're trying to discount modifications like the BMP-2M with add on armor or BMP-3M because they're available in much smaller numbers despite the fact that there's less than 50 Bradleys left in Ukraine after their losses in the failed offensive...
Regarding protection and usability russian presented BMP-3 Manul. Where they add more protection to sides, moved engine to the front and adding new turret. So there are changes question is when these will be produced if at all.
Bradley more than proved its capability in the hands of the US Army clearly showcasing that it's a beast when used properly. On the other hand, BMPs are being lost in troves even when operated by their "native" army against what is on paper supposed to be an inferior opponent. I have no doubts which one is superior.
It came out superior because of air support and artillery and tank support as well. Retired 11B 1996-2020
@@jorgefloyd6989 You mean basic combined arms like virtually all armies have done since WWI?
@@jorgefloyd6989 The Russians have/had all of those same advantages in Ukraine as well, and despite that they have lost 1300+ BMP 2s and 3s while completely failing to accomplish their objectives. So yeah, I'd take a Bradley over a BMP any day of the week.
@blasty137 You sure about that? Russian Airforce has yet to use their full capability . I don't know what they're waiting on. From what I'm reading now Russian is purposely in the defense. They are decimating the Ukrainian force. Have you seen these articles about how Ukrainians are being drafted right out their house and jobs? With very little to no training? I read the left and right. No Russians have different MO when it comes to military tactics. So it's not the same.
@jic1 Nope. How do you think most of the infantry tactics were learned? From WW2. As you might have read, WW1 was a trench war. Hey, you run to me, and I'll shoot you. Then next week I'll run to you. And then you shoot me. Being a retired infantryman myself, i had the pleasure of listening to retired veterans of WW2, Korea, and Vietnam. Hey, what do I know? I only served over 23 years and have 5 combat deployments under my DD214.
The BMP-3 is king. The BMP-2 is still useful though, being light, nimble, handy, and easy to use, operate, and keep serviceable. The Bradley is heavy, complex, expensive, and is a lot taller, making itself a bigger target.
the bmp 3 is worse then bmp 2..... its maybe better in war thunder but that it it a really bad ifv
However its missile is the most effective of the three unless you have a 2m which you dont see. I think overall the Bradley is currently the most useful. Soeed is useful but the lack of armor really prevents the bmp3 from shining which is a shame since its such an interesting design
I'm not sure where he got the stuff about the uparmored Bradley not resisting APDS rounds from the 30mm. It virtually certainly can.
First off he shouldn't be making declarations like that to begin with given that there is no acutal precise information regarding what exact type of 30mm rounds are resisted so his claim it definitively can't resist APDS is full of shit to begin with, but let's move beyond that.
Frankly we can very easily gauge that he's virtually certain to be wrong just by considering the acutal performance of this type of round. Small caliber APDS rounds of that vintage aren't honestly that impressive with estimated penetrations of something like 60-70mm against flat plate basically at the muzzle, but less then half of that against even mild obliquity at battle ranges. This is because none of them have any form of cap to protect the penetrator against oblique impacts or spaced armor due to their compact size and APDS rounds loose velocity much more rapidly then long rod type projectiles.
The end result is that 3UBR8 like others of it's ilk is deeply unimpressive against life life targets at combat ranges. It probably can't defeat more then maybe 25 to 30mm of RHA at 30 degrees (aka the front plate of a Bradley) at around a 500 meters. Which is a problem because a fair estimate of the frontal protection of the A2 Bradley is like ~50mm of RHA at the above mentioned angles, and given that the steel applique is fitted over the existing hull it also may well have a degree of spaced armor effect as well which would make it even worse.
The Bradley would thus almost certainly resist APDS at medium range, the real question is at what range it might be penetrated (it's possible the answer is "never"). It would also be stupid because the US was well aware of the APDS going into service at the time of the uparmoring and projected it to become more common and be exported during the period when the uparmored Bradley would be coming along. The reality is that APFSDS rounds are what it can't defeat as that type of round in those calibers is known to be able to approach 100mm of penetration, but those are pretty much vaporware.
So yeah given that APDS is the best round the BMP has it renders pretty much the entire section of the video about armor protection extremely flawed.
Bradley has a chance of keeping it's passengers alive.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
What’s should be considered here is that tank on tank or Bradley vs BMP3 or BMP2 battles are rare in the war in Ukraine. Protection and survivability from artillery shrapnel, mines, and drones is what matters in the Ukraine war and the Bradley comes out on top with regard to these. The psychological effect on crew members that survivability has should not be underestimated. If the crew is confident of the protection it provides it increases their performance and aggressiveness.
Ukrainian crewmen that have used both vehicles testify that Bradley is better, main advantages are night vision which is of good quality and survivaability. Bradley is just way more survivable than BMP.... One thing that surprised me was praise of Bradley main gun by Ukrainian crew men. Yes they are aware that Bradley comes with rather low calibre gun, however what they love about this gun is it's ability to put out lot's of fire fast in short peririod of time. Sometimes you just need lots of fire fast...
iirc bradley gun has issues if it goes above certain firerate
2A42 puts way more weight than 25 mm. They have to say praise of Bradley since they have to praise western egos. Way more survivable means any ATGM hits you and properly goes boom, then it is still worse than a T-34 from ww2 that had 45 mm front and side sloped armor.
@@cdgncgn but bradley has better sights and T-34s are going to go boom even when hit by rpg from the 60s
@@cdgncgn 25 mm is FASTER! So it will put rounds on target first. There was Instance of Bradley surviving direct hit from T-72 tank. You think 2A42 compares to T-72 main gun? I'm not sure why you do not read my statements correctly and missing what I wrote. I did mention that Ukrainian gunmen mentioned that Bradley has rather small cannon....BUT IT'S FASTER!
BMP’s are a disaster. The Russians learned that lesson in Afghanistan. But they forgot and now they learn it again in Ukraine.
16:25 what episode of combat approved is that
You forgot to mention the fire rate of the 30mm autocanons ,there is the biggest difference in firepower.
The height of the IFVs play a HUGE role when facing artillery. Non-air burst artillery shells throw their shrapnel in a V-pattern, which is why laying low dramatically reduces exposure to shrapnel for infantry. The same is true for vehicles. The BMP's hull is about 600mm lower than that of the Bradley, meaning that the dismounts and crew are much less likely to be hit by shrapnel in the first place.
As for up-armoring the side armor, there's not a huge benefit because most of the side armor is filled with the rollers from the tracks, so any add-on armor has to overhang the tracks. The side hull armor above the tracks is quite a small section. Add-on armor that overhangs the tracks are a huge pain because they block access to the tracks when the crew needs to do maintenance. This is a particularly bad problem if the side armor is ERA, because it means the crew will have to detach and attach explosives that may have been damaged but didn't yet detonate.
his analysis is like it came from US MIC annals.
I need the name of your outro music
What i don't get on the BMP-3 at all is the side protection design.
If you look at the BMP-3 it has mudguards over the track on the side, had this been a western vehicle the armor would have extended out to where the mudguard ends and had side skirts hinged down over the top of the tracks. Just look at the Cv90 to see the contrast, not only is the side armor thicker the sides effectively has spaced armor as anything needs to penetrate the outer armor then the storage bins or the tracks before it hits the inner armor layer. Only after that does it get into the fighting compartment.
The only weak point is the rear door but on all Cv90's past mk2 it has been switched to a thick hydraulic ramp.
IMO, both did good on what they're suppose to do, transportation and fire support, and all got destroyed regardless. The best comparison between both would be, which vehicle provide higher survivability for the crew? Most video I've watched of Bradley being destroyed is usually the empty abandoned ones. Russia need to step up their armour protection since they're heading away from their Cold War mass army method.
at the end of the day it's just a vehicle. Doesn't need to be fancy just needs the job done. won't matter if Ukraine can't get enough of them or have adequate combined protections for them
Ones thing I'd like to ask though if both countries had the same budget who would win, I.e 20 million USD worth of Bradleys and BMP's, Advanced tech is worthless if you can't produce them en mass
The Bradley has FAR better occupant protection than the BMP3. This makes the Bradley better overall, plus theBradley has much better thermal sights and automatic targeting. In the Ukraine two Bradleys blinded and defeated a Russian T-90 tank.
that bradley at 6:05 just shot that other bradley.