So basically, the reason why the Bradley filled so many rolls is because the more programs for specific tech closed, the more shit the Army put onto the Bradley so it can cover those rolls.
Ah yes. An experimental vehicle that barely even made it out of the drawing board, that never even had a chance of being service, going against a vehicle from the 80s thats designed to be an IFV, not a warthunder light tank.
"They thought they could bully us into submission... they thought we would just watch and fall... but today we'll show them the might OF THE SOVIET UNIOOOON!" (Polyushka polye plays in the background)
@@GHOSTOFONYX10 not kidding, but that’s Russian bias for ya, and that’s why they nerfed the APDS on the bradley to 81mm penetration, because the side armor of Russian tanks is 80mm thick, so you’ll never actually penetrate it
@@TheRealPatrick_Star that wasn't russian bias. that was spook not knowing how to aim. The T-62 was on a slope and spook was aiming downwards. He was blatantly missing and wasting ammo.
As for why the 2nd TOW missile wouldn't fire, I found that after the update, if you're too close to a target it won't fire. I don't have a specific distance measurement, but on level ground it's about at where your gun can depress to on the ground and closer.
Although I haven't played War Thunder that explanation sounds very likely as the explosion from a missile at that range would also damage the vehicle launching it.
@J Sailer For the more recent crowd the P.W. movie no doubt had an influence. Back when I was riding my dinosaur against the Soviets, a lot of my brothers in arms and myself were "umm, no thanks. We should stick with the 113." Now, with the passage of time, I have come to appreciate the M2 and M3 Bradleys.
As a scout and firm fan of the Brad i have found the perfect description of this amazing vehicle. The M2A3 Bradley is the Platypus of the United States Armored Community. It is a bunch of pieces that don't look like they belong together, but it will mess you up!
I'm relatively new to this channel, found it from the "Everything wrong with (insert fictional sci-fi tank here)" videos, and despite knowing literally nothing about tanks, I love these videos. Would love to see something about the largest tanks ever built, unless there's already a video on that and I'm just too dumb to find it. Mainly the Landkreuzer and the Maus.
I was a m3a3 driver then gunner, Its a direct lay gun sight. Kinda like direct lay gun sights on a artillery system. The brad has a manual mode where you turn the turret and gun individually incase the power goes out, you would use that to manually aim while manually turing the turret and gun. Its a huge massive pain in the ass
Thank you very much for this work you have done. I really liked your video about delusions, which are being spread by the book and the homonymous movie "Pentagon Wars" about this IFV. Glad you did even more research on its developement!
In terms of learning something: I didn't know about the up-armored M-113 designs. I hadn't known about, even though it is how I have been recently employing the Bradley in the game, about the doctrinal idea of rapid counter-attack. So, thanks for those insights.
My dad served in these. He held every position at some point. Although it seemed to not be what the U.S. wanted, still feels awesome to have a connection to this vehicle. Glad to see it in a video too.
First the US adds a built in heating system to the M3 Lee/Grant, the next they add a toilet and a stove to a prototype IFV? Damn, I guess our military really is better than everyone else’s.
Hey I was in your game last night on the desert map in the first 2 minutes man you nailed those guys on left flank I was watching you while I was trying to wait to go to A you did a great job
Netherland AND Belgium ! We call them "AIFV" and they made a very good career, very reliable, equipped with a 25mm Oerlikon KBA, they were very appreciated by infantry Made my basics on it, was great fun and the 25mm gave us a good feeling of "support" !
Well done again, Spooky. Love how informative these specials of yours are. Lots of useful info. And there was also the problem of money. Had they made the Bradley better it would also have been more expensive. In 1984 one Bradley cost $1.5 million. One of my late Dad's magazines has an article in this, saying that the price is worth the supremacy over the BMP, though another suggests the Marines' LAV-25 is a better but at one third the price.
I feel that quite a few of the current nato military vehicles might need replacement soon as new engine designs and other technologies have seen a few interesting updates. Like the 3 cylinder 6 piston diesel engines.
Correction, 40mm, to cohere with the other NATO IFV. US likes to keep everything NATO interchangeable. For instance, Brits are rocking some new 40mm cannons
Always cool to hear "pacific car and foundry", I work for them, also known as PACCAR, parent company of Kenworth and Peterbilt. :D They also made the T28/T95 superheavy tank prototype!
@@vitorion007 think the m35 mako is the choice for video as the grizzly never moved in any game. here a quote from The Art of Mass Effect, this vehicle was an early concept for the Mako, but the developers didn't like how it performed in gameplay. They liked the look of it and kept it in the game as a static object.
4:39 this hurts me, the fact that they nurfed the Bradley to the extent where it can pen the side of soviet MBT's. This is the main reason I don't use the Bradley anymore, give its old stats back!
The main problem associate with the Bradley IFV is the organizational structure of a combined arms battalions. This means they have to operate in mass battalion sized maneuvers. Unfortunately, such need rarely arises these days. So dispatching combined arms companies, platoons, or even squads would be more practical than dispatching the whole battalion. The new IFV needs to be a fusion vehicle between MBT's and IFV's classes that can classified as its own armored fighting vehicle "AFV". That means a IFV hull with a 105mm gun that has enough cargo space to dismount 6-10 personnel with 3 crew members integrated to the squad unit. This kind of consolidation of small units and equipment would be critical in urban warfare where small dispatches can easily be isolated and vulnerable along with our logistical supply chain being simplified and more distributed evenly. Such operational flexibility will keep armored warfare relevant and prevent "doctrine decay" for the next 30 to 50 years. Even then, there are many other challenges not mentioned that could prevent any of these changes from happening like another sequester.
So the Bradley took over 20 years to develop because they took completely different vehicles and said they were all the Bradley in development. I would think the timeline would be when they merged all those different roles into the 1 vehicle that should be the start of the clock of how long it took to develop the Bradley. Otherwise, the same argument could be used that the MBT-70 is really the Abrams and all the development time and effort thrown into it should be added into the total time and development of the Abrams, since they used a lot of developments and features as the basis starting point of the Abrams.
after oxford dictionary: tank: armoured fighting vehicle carrying guns and moving on a continuous articulated metal track. Bradley very much fits the description and calling it a tank isn't a mistake even though it is an IFV.
Nice, my HS senior was a Bradley driver until the engine caught on fire because the mechanics never told him how to properly oil the engine.... that and it was a cursed Bradley that had SEVERAL incidents where people almost died. So after an investigation which ended in, "well.... we are to proud to say we fucked up but, you weren't at fault so you won't get in trouble". He is now a Humvee driver who serves as a major's (best cushy job he's ever had) chauffer. He finishes his contract and is basically going to fail his final PT due to being too fat so he won't be recalled or extended (at least that is his plan).
Beautiful military vehicle, I want it to be back in operation for many more decades and never need to be replaced by the useless omfv. And I want it to be upgraded from M2a3 Bradley to M2a4 Bradley.
the M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System would not be a good fit in that game at all. the MGM-166 LOSAT use HMMWV for there platform. the linebacker is doable. the A2 can be just skipped over as it just an A1 with little better armor against small cannon rounds (30mm)
@@phoenixraider42 WTF!? The M270 would be a glorified Type 75 MLRS and deserves to be in game. The Bradley LOSAT would be much better than the Humvee version due to overall better mobility on all terrains while being better protected while having thermals. The Linebacker would be a nice addition before the ADATS at 9.7 and is the most iconic AA Bradley. Why write off the A2? It was the first variant of the Bradley that could fire the M919 DU APFSDS-T round and properly fire TOW-2s. It would be an awesome bridging gap between the A1 (TOW then I-TOW) and A3 (TOW-2A and TOW-2B). The A2 would get I-TOWs stock and TOW-2As as an upgrade.
Ahh i remember i had to work in an AHA once and was playing around with the 25 mike mike armor piercing shells that had blue plastic caps over top of what i can only say was an exact copy of the armor piercing lances used by the Romans back in the day! A few Bradley's did watch while the engineers built a bridge in Hawas at a small cob in the western side of Iraq
@@starliner2498 just search up “Blacktaildefense” in the UA-cam search bar. You’ll see the channel at the top. He makes videos on military vehicles, mostly tanks
Glad too see I'm not the only one who the game wont let shoot tow missiles when side scraping. I'm pretty sure that's the issue but you can never really be sure with this game. . .
The thing is that it’s jack of all trades design compromises it’s ability to be a troop carrier. As it only can carry 6 soldiers rather than entire squad. You have to make two Bradley’s for that and not to mention they’re slower than they could have been to enable rapid deployment of troops.
5:00 had some keyboard-smashing moments due to the new bug that prevents my Bradley from firing the tow for no apparent reason. Someone wanna tell me how improving the lighting breaks a guided missile? Good job, Snail.
Here's the reality: the Bradley is taller than the Abrams, and every time someone in it guns the engine it sends a plume of black smoke ten feet straight up in the air. We in the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment hated it as a scout vehicle, because it was useless as a scout vehicle. The Abrams is legitimately stealthier. It is not even notably faster or more maneuverable than an Abrams; one of my most enjoyable moments in the Army was during a training exercise where my Abrams was OPFOR versus a Bradley in West Texas scrubland and neither vehicle's MILES (laser-tag for tanks) gear was functioning properly. It was a matter of who could close with the other and manually throw - by hand - a smoke "safety kill" grenade to settle the matter. Our tank won. In practice, the Bradley is effectively a light tank with a high profile and the ability to deploy scouts on foot - who, because of the Bradley's high profile and ten-foot-tall smoke plume on top of that, generally have to deploy on foot a lot further away from the enemy than when they were using M113s. The TOW missile launcher is the thing's only saving grace, giving US cavalry units a collective anti-armor punch far in excess of what just about any cavalry force in the world otherwise does.
I remember seeing the M113A1, although looking back, it could easily be an AIFV, but I'm mostly certainly the plate bolted to it said it was the prototype, over at the Benning Restoration yard. It weirded me out because I remember only seeing it halfway under a tarp, seeing these weird flutes and bulges to the hull, looking like a stretched, malformed 113 and Bradley thing. Neat vehicle, at least from the looks. But if it was based on the 113, I hate it, because that vehicle is a pain to work with. Edit: Also, pretty sure we had an Xm723 but can't totally say.
The Army gets new Bradley's every year with extra armor slapped on the sides. It is basically the defense industry's version of having a Season Pass for cosmetics.
I wonder what would be the next step in tank combat/development. Better guns, better armor, better ammo and better speed and reliability? I wonder if and what the limit of tanks will be eventually?
Taking a guess from developments I've seen, it's likely a firepower upgrade first like the 140mm, then later active tank camouflage. For protection, likely unmanned turrets like the T14.
I wonder, Spook: what're your thoughts on the LAV-25 the Marines use instead of the M2 Bradley. Could the LAV-25 (or a modified version specific to the army) be a better suit for the Army instead of the Bradley?
I like how earlier prototypes look supiciosly similiar to bmp 1/2... But glad that its only earlier prototypes, dont want any people to lirally seat on fuel tanks and accamulators.
US 1945: Wins WW2 with quantity over quality tanks US 1955: So we are going to try and win the cold war with better quality tanks against superior numbers
It's offensive vs defensive tactics. The NATO expected the USSR to attack so they had the advantage of being the defensive force. Without the element of surprise it takes superior numbers to overcome a defending force
The Bradley IS being replaced... The OMFV porgram will select a platform sometime within the next year. Mounting the 50mm bushmaster autocannon and laser anti munitin system as well as having the ability to function without a crew.
Do you think the Griffin 3 will be adopted as replacement for the Bradley? On paper it seems to have everything required for it's approval, and after the adoption of the Super AV it seems the Pentagon is more keen on adopting new vehicles without tip toeing for ages around a problem.
talking about the XM913? likely that going to the stryker. if the Bradley is going to be update. remove the whole caring troops idea. use that new space for little more armor and better engine and rearmed it with a bushmaster II or III.
When in doubt, TOW missile.
or more 50 cals
@@deggerfiredegg2178 you can never have enuff M2s
not with that last clip though, ATGM the Maus then thump the the others.
If one is not enough, two. If two are not enough, THREE.
@@sergeantmarcusstackerM1903 ah an ork
No turret -> smol turret -> smol turret -> small turret -> Medium Turret -> *THICC TURRET*
Until you try working on the gun inside
small -> my p
"Sloped for additional protection" has the same vibe as "ribbed for her pleasure"
There's a line between Booty Call and But Dial
Whhaat
Ironically enough ribbed armour for tanks does exist
@@arjunmadan318 It means that it is pretty much useless :)
@@ofekk213 and ied:s
And while it doesnt handle heat ammo it has spall liners and some times cages to reduce the heats damage and effectiveness.
2:58 imagine you’re in a battle and someone just making scrambled eggs
You have to eat well even in tough time.
egg
Dat boy cookin, dont be hatin on him
So basically, the reason why the Bradley filled so many rolls is because the more programs for specific tech closed, the more shit the Army put onto the Bradley so it can cover those rolls.
Yeah basically.
Like the F-35
*Closes a program*
Army to the Bradley: “I’m sorry little one”
"so we don't have a SHORAD vehicle"
"bolt a quad of Stingers onto the M2, it'll be fine."
5:44 ah yes, the Maus going up against a vehicle from the 80s. Thank you Gaijin very cool
Ah yes. An experimental vehicle that barely even made it out of the drawing board, that never even had a chance of being service,
going against a vehicle from the 80s thats designed to be an IFV, not a warthunder light tank.
@@honkhonk8009 maus was fully built and fired from its cannons
Ahh World in Conflict flashbacks.
The true CHADS played world in conflict
"They thought they could bully us into submission... they thought we would just watch and fall... but today we'll show them the might OF THE SOVIET UNIOOOON!" (Polyushka polye plays in the background)
I've wanted to play this game for so long but they took it off steam, does anyone know how to get it nowadays?
@@baronentertainment362 GOG
@@baronentertainment362 Its on GOG for 10USD. Its totally worth it.
lmao me getting bullied by spookston in my t-62 at 4:40
lol, gaijin blessed his second tow
Stop, *STOP*, he's already dead!
It was driving me insane watching him dump rounds into your track for seemingly forever
@@GHOSTOFONYX10 not kidding, but that’s Russian bias for ya, and that’s why they nerfed the APDS on the bradley to 81mm penetration, because the side armor of Russian tanks is 80mm thick, so you’ll never actually penetrate it
@@TheRealPatrick_Star that wasn't russian bias. that was spook not knowing how to aim. The T-62 was on a slope and spook was aiming downwards. He was blatantly missing and wasting ammo.
“They would be outnumbered by about 3-1”
Then it is an even fight
If defending, yeah
And I get the reference
Nah, the Germans had 4 to 1 in WWII.
@@darkoneforce2 the Germans had what where? It’s a halo reference
@@looinrims WWII. eastern front Soviet Union.
@@darkoneforce2 when were they outnumbered 4-1 at any point that mattered?
I remember 3-1 during 1944 offensives, 6.2m to approx 2m
As for why the 2nd TOW missile wouldn't fire, I found that after the update, if you're too close to a target it won't fire. I don't have a specific distance measurement, but on level ground it's about at where your gun can depress to on the ground and closer.
Although I haven't played War Thunder that explanation sounds very likely as the explosion from a missile at that range would also damage the vehicle launching it.
To be honest, I think Pentagon Wars is the biggest reason for people thinking the Bradley sucks.
@J Sailer For the more recent crowd the P.W. movie no doubt had an influence.
Back when I was riding my dinosaur against the Soviets, a lot of my brothers in arms and myself were "umm, no thanks. We should stick with the 113."
Now, with the passage of time, I have come to appreciate the M2 and M3 Bradleys.
@@pauld6967 the bradly is GOOD, its just not a troop carrier.
should have been designed alongside a version with only a remote-20mil.
@@thebravegallade731 Are you on crack or something
@@AmericanIdiot7659 No no, he's got a point.
@@AmericanIdiot7659 He has a point. An up-armored and up-gunned M113 would be a great APC companion to the M2/M3.
It survived the reformers. Thats impressive enough.
Great video. Ny chance you'll be able to do a video on the M1128 stryker development history?
is not that great history they just borrow some italian centauro tank destroyer and them turn it in their own design wich
@@the_bane_of_all_anti_furry not really. The M1128 was designed to be an infantry support vehicle.
@@the_bane_of_all_anti_furry No, but I’ll give you credit for the joke, it was funny.
As a scout and firm fan of the Brad i have found the perfect description of this amazing vehicle.
The M2A3 Bradley is the Platypus of the United States Armored Community. It is a bunch of pieces that don't look like they belong together, but it will mess you up!
That double kill at the beginning was so clean
I'm relatively new to this channel, found it from the "Everything wrong with (insert fictional sci-fi tank here)" videos, and despite knowing literally nothing about tanks, I love these videos.
Would love to see something about the largest tanks ever built, unless there's already a video on that and I'm just too dumb to find it. Mainly the Landkreuzer and the Maus.
Hey spookston what’s that piece of glass above the bushmaster gun
That is a backup gunsight believe it or not. The commander can manually control the gun and use that sight to fire.
@@bwshadowfang6160 the commander can also use the gunners IBAS(Primary sight) assuming the computers are working
I was a m3a3 driver then gunner, Its a direct lay gun sight. Kinda like direct lay gun sights on a artillery system. The brad has a manual mode where you turn the turret and gun individually incase the power goes out, you would use that to manually aim while manually turing the turret and gun. Its a huge massive pain in the ass
TOWs look soo good after the update
What was the update exactly?
@@TheAmazingCowpig the whole 2.0 update with the updated graphics
I’ve fired TOW2’s off of the M151 and 1045 humvees in the Corps years ago so much fun
Thank you very much for this work you have done. I really liked your video about delusions, which are being spread by the book and the homonymous movie "Pentagon Wars" about this IFV. Glad you did even more research on its developement!
In terms of learning something:
I didn't know about the up-armored M-113 designs.
I hadn't known about, even though it is how I have been recently employing the Bradley in the game, about the doctrinal idea of rapid counter-attack.
So, thanks for those insights.
"You mighty have heard of it, y'know called the Vietnam war."
Smol itty bitty little war, nothing too significant. Just a footnote in history, really.
My dad served in these. He held every position at some point. Although it seemed to not be what the U.S. wanted, still feels awesome to have a connection to this vehicle. Glad to see it in a video too.
3:13 this is an amazing bit, got a good chuckle
First the US adds a built in heating system to the M3 Lee/Grant, the next they add a toilet and a stove to a prototype IFV? Damn, I guess our military really is better than everyone else’s.
British put kettles and stoves into their tanks
The IDF puts a really good AC in the merkava,come on you can’t beat that.
What if we put the toilet, stove, and AC in one tank/IFV?
US had a ship basically just to make ice cream for troops in the late stages of the Pacific theater during WW2.
Hey I was in your game last night on the desert map in the first 2 minutes man you nailed those guys on left flank I was watching you while I was trying to wait to go to A you did a great job
3:09
You channelled a little bit of Arcade Gannon there, didn't ya...
Netherland AND Belgium ! We call them "AIFV" and they made a very good career, very reliable, equipped with a 25mm Oerlikon KBA, they were very appreciated by infantry
Made my basics on it, was great fun and the 25mm gave us a good feeling of "support" !
0:02 wow the first thing I said when I saw this was "oh look a TOW Missle"
And here I was expecting a complaint on how the HSTVL isn’t accurate enough
Good video chief
I love IT when he says about vietnam war.
The way he does it.
Well done again, Spooky. Love how informative these specials of yours are. Lots of useful info.
And there was also the problem of money. Had they made the Bradley better it would also have been more expensive. In 1984 one Bradley cost $1.5 million. One of my late Dad's magazines has an article in this, saying that the price is worth the supremacy over the BMP, though another suggests the Marines' LAV-25 is a better but at one third the price.
You should def do more of these types of videos! Quick dives into vehicle development!
Pentagon wars *exists*
Spookston: I'm gonna end this man's whole career
I feel that quite a few of the current nato military vehicles might need replacement soon as new engine designs and other technologies have seen a few interesting updates. Like the 3 cylinder 6 piston diesel engines.
the bradley is getting an upgrade, they are improving it with a new 50mm
Correction, 40mm, to cohere with the other NATO IFV. US likes to keep everything NATO interchangeable.
For instance, Brits are rocking some new 40mm cannons
IFV*
Actually the Bradley wont get a 40mm cannon (or maybe he will), but primarily his successor will get one. (or 50mm, Im not sure about that)
@@snazapples4079 im pretty sure its a 50mm
@@snazapples4079 Pentagon and General Dynamics both say it’s gonna be a 50mm.
MOAR MOAR HISTORY! I really enjoy these history videos they are very informative nice work
Always cool to hear "pacific car and foundry", I work for them, also known as PACCAR, parent company of Kenworth and Peterbilt. :D They also made the T28/T95 superheavy tank prototype!
Hey Spookston, can you do a video review of the ground vehicles from the Mass Effect series? Please
I'd really like to see him talk about the M29 Grizzly, it's an interesting IFV.
@@vitorion007 think the m35 mako is the choice for video as the grizzly never moved in any game. here a quote from The Art of Mass Effect, this vehicle was an early concept for the Mako, but the developers didn't like how it performed in gameplay. They liked the look of it and kept it in the game as a static object.
Why does the T90As anti missile laser sensor work on the Bradley if it’s guided by cable?
4:39 this hurts me, the fact that they nurfed the Bradley to the extent where it can pen the side of soviet MBT's. This is the main reason I don't use the Bradley anymore, give its old stats back!
To be fair, Spookston was firing down on the side armor, thus giving it an angle of at least 15°
Yes. Please. More longer videos!!!
I've got a love for this vehicle, but only because I've worked in both the drivers seat and gunners seat. It can be temperamental at times.
The main problem associate with the Bradley IFV is the organizational structure of a combined arms battalions. This means they have to operate in mass battalion sized maneuvers. Unfortunately, such need rarely arises these days. So dispatching combined arms companies, platoons, or even squads would be more practical than dispatching the whole battalion. The new IFV needs to be a fusion vehicle between MBT's and IFV's classes that can classified as its own armored fighting vehicle "AFV". That means a IFV hull with a 105mm gun that has enough cargo space to dismount 6-10 personnel with 3 crew members integrated to the squad unit. This kind of consolidation of small units and equipment would be critical in urban warfare where small dispatches can easily be isolated and vulnerable along with our logistical supply chain being simplified and more distributed evenly. Such operational flexibility will keep armored warfare relevant and prevent "doctrine decay" for the next 30 to 50 years. Even then, there are many other challenges not mentioned that could prevent any of these changes from happening like another sequester.
More of this series please
So the Bradley took over 20 years to develop because they took completely different vehicles and said they were all the Bradley in development. I would think the timeline would be when they merged all those different roles into the 1 vehicle that should be the start of the clock of how long it took to develop the Bradley. Otherwise, the same argument could be used that the MBT-70 is really the Abrams and all the development time and effort thrown into it should be added into the total time and development of the Abrams, since they used a lot of developments and features as the basis starting point of the Abrams.
"Bradley - Tank History"
Are you a Squad player?
after oxford dictionary: tank: armoured fighting vehicle carrying guns and moving on a continuous articulated metal track. Bradley very much fits the description and calling it a tank isn't a mistake even though it is an IFV.
@@Archid11 It's 2020.
@@Archid11 You being in this comment section is a mistake for sure
The modified M113a1 known as the "YPR" here in the Netherlands, is shockingly, still in service.
Is that a bad thing or not?
Your tow missiles didn't have enough depression so it prevents it from being fired I get the same thing on the bmp 2M
4:52 atgm wouldn't fire coz u too close to target. Obviously
As a Bradley operator, I appreciate this video
Thanks for your service good sir
Nice, my HS senior was a Bradley driver until the engine caught on fire because the mechanics never told him how to properly oil the engine.... that and it was a cursed Bradley that had SEVERAL incidents where people almost died.
So after an investigation which ended in, "well.... we are to proud to say we fucked up but, you weren't at fault so you won't get in trouble". He is now a Humvee driver who serves as a major's (best cushy job he's ever had) chauffer. He finishes his contract and is basically going to fail his final PT due to being too fat so he won't be recalled or extended (at least that is his plan).
@@crocidile90 well that’s fucking pathetic
Beautiful military vehicle, I want it to be back in operation for many more decades and never need to be replaced by the useless omfv. And I want it to be upgraded from M2a3 Bradley to M2a4 Bradley.
Awe...I miss my M2A2 Bradley ODS (Operation Desert Storm) named A-22 "Dirty Duece"! Gunner... Coax troops, sabot PC!
You should do a video on how the Yom Kippur War changed tank/apc/ifv design across the board. That would be interesting to see.
What a great summary
America needs WAY MORE Bradley variants in the game!! Warhammer? LOSAT? Linebacker? M270? A2? A3? and more!!
the M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System would not be a good fit in that game at all. the MGM-166 LOSAT use HMMWV for there platform. the linebacker is doable. the A2 can be just skipped over as it just an A1 with little better armor against small cannon rounds (30mm)
@@phoenixraider42 WTF!? The M270 would be a glorified Type 75 MLRS and deserves to be in game. The Bradley LOSAT would be much better than the Humvee version due to overall better mobility on all terrains while being better protected while having thermals. The Linebacker would be a nice addition before the ADATS at 9.7 and is the most iconic AA Bradley. Why write off the A2? It was the first variant of the Bradley that could fire the M919 DU APFSDS-T round and properly fire TOW-2s. It would be an awesome bridging gap between the A1 (TOW then I-TOW) and A3 (TOW-2A and TOW-2B). The A2 would get I-TOWs stock and TOW-2As as an upgrade.
Ahh i remember i had to work in an AHA once and was playing around with the 25 mike mike armor piercing shells that had blue plastic caps over top of what i can only say was an exact copy of the armor piercing lances used by the Romans back in the day! A few Bradley's did watch while the engineers built a bridge in Hawas at a small cob in the western side of Iraq
I always love the Blade Runner music
Ah, the Predator Tank without those sponsons.
One of my fav.
spook, have you by chance heard of blacktaildefense? I feel like your videos practically destroy all of his.
Oof, it's been a long time since I've heard that name. I totally agree with you.
@@Silavite yeah I stumbled upon him a few months ago. An interesting individual indeed
@@atomicspartan131 Gib explanation? I'm curious
Who's this individual?
@@starliner2498 just search up “Blacktaildefense” in the UA-cam search bar. You’ll see the channel at the top. He makes videos on military vehicles, mostly tanks
Glad too see I'm not the only one who the game wont let shoot tow missiles when side scraping. I'm pretty sure that's the issue but you can never really be sure with this game. . .
The M1A3 was talked about in the early 2000s, but nothing has come of it yet.
The thing is that it’s jack of all trades design compromises it’s ability to be a troop carrier. As it only can carry 6 soldiers rather than entire squad. You have to make two Bradley’s for that and not to mention they’re slower than they could have been to enable rapid deployment of troops.
But it does give increased firepower and presence, you can always mix a Bradley with a troop carrier
hey spook, could you do a video like this one for the mbt 70 and the kpz 70?
Strv 9040 Bill
*secretly smiles in the background*
Its the cute thing that is the Nod light tank from Tiberian Dawn, and I like it for that reason.
5:00 had some keyboard-smashing moments due to the new bug that prevents my Bradley from firing the tow for no apparent reason.
Someone wanna tell me how improving the lighting breaks a guided missile? Good job, Snail.
I realy like Spook and i started playing war thunder through his videos i like the game a lot and thanks Spook for your awesome content
TOW missiles have a minimum engagement distance, glad to see they got that right and trolled you at 5:00 lol
Your end credits sounds like a snip from AC5 ( Ace combat 5) with the ark bird docking in one of the cinematic scenes.
If Swedish vehicles were historically accurate
THEN THEY WOULD ALL WORK FLAWLESSLY AND EVEN BETTER THAN IN GAME, THERE IS NO PROBLEM WITH SWEDISH VEHICLES THEY ARE GREAT. BUY OUR PRODUCTS. :)
@@thelonewolf9603 Calm down, Carolus
Here's the reality: the Bradley is taller than the Abrams, and every time someone in it guns the engine it sends a plume of black smoke ten feet straight up in the air. We in the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment hated it as a scout vehicle, because it was useless as a scout vehicle. The Abrams is legitimately stealthier.
It is not even notably faster or more maneuverable than an Abrams; one of my most enjoyable moments in the Army was during a training exercise where my Abrams was OPFOR versus a Bradley in West Texas scrubland and neither vehicle's MILES (laser-tag for tanks) gear was functioning properly. It was a matter of who could close with the other and manually throw - by hand - a smoke "safety kill" grenade to settle the matter. Our tank won.
In practice, the Bradley is effectively a light tank with a high profile and the ability to deploy scouts on foot - who, because of the Bradley's high profile and ten-foot-tall smoke plume on top of that, generally have to deploy on foot a lot further away from the enemy than when they were using M113s. The TOW missile launcher is the thing's only saving grace, giving US cavalry units a collective anti-armor punch far in excess of what just about any cavalry force in the world otherwise does.
I remember seeing the M113A1, although looking back, it could easily be an AIFV, but I'm mostly certainly the plate bolted to it said it was the prototype, over at the Benning Restoration yard. It weirded me out because I remember only seeing it halfway under a tarp, seeing these weird flutes and bulges to the hull, looking like a stretched, malformed 113 and Bradley thing. Neat vehicle, at least from the looks. But if it was based on the 113, I hate it, because that vehicle is a pain to work with.
Edit: Also, pretty sure we had an Xm723 but can't totally say.
"Besides, portholes? What are we in now, the Navy?"
Could you do one like this on the m1a1 abrams?
Tank👏 review👏
The Abrams doesn't need replacing. It could benefit from a modernization though.
Everybody gets scared by the T14, "Russia gets superior" etc. - without looking how many T-14 there are actually in service
The Army gets new Bradley's every year with extra armor slapped on the sides. It is basically the defense industry's version of having a Season Pass for cosmetics.
I wonder what would be the next step in tank combat/development. Better guns, better armor, better ammo and better speed and reliability? I wonder if and what the limit of tanks will be eventually?
Taking a guess from developments I've seen, it's likely a firepower upgrade first like the 140mm, then later active tank camouflage. For protection, likely unmanned turrets like the T14.
The us army is already working on a program to replace the Bradley. Can't wait to see gijan add it.
You really bullied that T-62 😂
This type of video is really good and I enjoyed it
I wonder, Spook: what're your thoughts on the LAV-25 the Marines use instead of the M2 Bradley. Could the LAV-25 (or a modified version specific to the army) be a better suit for the Army instead of the Bradley?
I really like your videos
I like the bradley
I like how begleit has NO FUCKING HULLBREAK, but somehow hitting Stryker with HEATFS into fence cage hullbreaks it. . .
This thing is a monster in Squad
Cause it fulfills its intended roll perfectly there. Infantry support
As a person who mostly plays on russians that cannon fucking gives me nightmares for days
Ahh...pentagon wars flashbacks
I like how earlier prototypes look supiciosly similiar to bmp 1/2... But glad that its only earlier prototypes, dont want any people to lirally seat on fuel tanks and accamulators.
Finaly back to good content. Was getting tired of all the whining and complaining. Great vid
its not whining and complaining if its valid criticisms of the game
Its funny cuz the Bradly was meant to replace the M-113 but that 60 year old vehicle still remains in service.
Maybe the history of the bmp series of ifv? For next video
Any chance you'll be doing the history of other vehicles in the future?
It sure would be nice, if we got the modern version of the M2 and not the 1980s version.
US 1945: Wins WW2 with quantity over quality tanks
US 1955: So we are going to try and win the cold war with better quality tanks against superior numbers
It's offensive vs defensive tactics. The NATO expected the USSR to attack so they had the advantage of being the defensive force. Without the element of surprise it takes superior numbers to overcome a defending force
Can you do a similar vid about the FV510 Warrior IFV.
The Bradley IS being replaced... The OMFV porgram will select a platform sometime within the next year. Mounting the 50mm bushmaster autocannon and laser anti munitin system as well as having the ability to function without a crew.
watch as it a Bradley II that takes it.
Do you think the Griffin 3 will be adopted as replacement for the Bradley? On paper it seems to have everything required for it's approval, and after the adoption of the Super AV it seems the Pentagon is more keen on adopting new vehicles without tip toeing for ages around a problem.
Buying brand new German Puma IFVs and Leopard 2A7s would be cheaper than the cost of upgrading the old platforms. They definitely need replacing.
But they leopard 2 itself would need replacing as it is little (if any) better than the Abrams
* sigh * Cue the music.
*Andy Clark - World Beater* plays *
I believe the Bradley is getting a new more powerful 50 mm canon
talking about the XM913? likely that going to the stryker. if the Bradley is going to be update. remove the whole caring troops idea. use that new space for little more armor and better engine and rearmed it with a bushmaster II or III.
@@phoenixraider42 Your both wrong the XM913 50mm is going on the OMFV which will be the bradleys replacement. Strykers will be getting the XM813 30mm.