Thats not surprising, since the russians have 1980’s technology with vehicles, so the bradley is that american rival to that technology. The russians havent upgraded majority of thier armored elements, so the bradley is fighting enemy vehicles that it was designed to go up against.
Against largely USSR era Russian analog scrap metals --- with no modern, electronic technologies ---- loaded with powerful shells, sure. But the future requires light armored vehicles, like the German and British BAE platforms that are modular and driverless, if some dangerous missions needed them to be so. BAE and the Germans are finishing their next gen 40mm cannon ---- likely to be adopted by most NATO nations, if proven successful in the next 2-3 years ---- that is said to be up to 4 times as powerful as today's average 30mm cannons.
@@Headloser usa army only uses 3700 of the 6000 they have so your richt bud they also need to keep alot for conscripts and replacments for destroyed ones for when a war starts bud as they are already making a replacment for the bradley i think they should fix up all there oldest and most broken bradleys about 300-500 to send to ukrain it would be a win-win
You have to design for the wars you will be fighting in 40 years. The Bradley was first planned in the 1970's and it looked like a ridiculous cluster at the time and had detractors same as you now who poo poo'd the idea of the military needing something new.
The analysis of the Brad's short-comings was also BS. It's a 1970 design and electronics weren't a thing. The size issue is about the number of fighters it holds, not cramped crew quarters. The armor was never designed for artillery or anti-tank, and it was praised as the first tracked vehicle to exceed 45 kph. Where do you get your facts?
So there are no electronics at and in a car's engine block how did the Sherman's tank work how do you think car batteries work how do you think the Sherman actually operates do you think it was just purely combustion engine and mechanical where did the spark in the engine come from without electricity you can't just spontaneously make fuel combust into flame you need a spark plug. Somehow the new engines today don't generate more power. And no what he's showing is the m10 Booker not the Bradley replacement. the Griffin chassis with 105 mm turret
And no the new Ifv chassis have better speed than the Bradley chassis. The Bradley replacement is more likely to use the Griffin 2 with the far better drive train and power pack look up the advanced combat engine and hybrid power pack tell me the Bradley is still going to be just fine in the future with a current engine no improvements to the drivetrain or transmission at all. The m10 Booker in other words the light tank will probably use the Griffin 3 chassis
I hope the US Army doesn't fall into the trap of trying to make a vehicle thats so advanced its over budget, late to production, overly complex and unreliable. The KISS principle rules on the battlefield.
It seems stupid to use a vehicle designed to carry men as an unmanned vehicle. How about two different vehicles and the unmanned one being significantly smaller, more deadly, better protected.
Nothing was mentioned about the amount of the dismounted team about these vehicles. As a former Bradley dismounted crew member, I think this would be important. If no Infantry is to be transported then they don't have a replacement for the Bradley but a light tank. I know the M-10 Booker is not a tank but is an assault gun ? 🤔
Look at some of the Brad’s in Ukraine, they have eaten tank and anti armor rounds and spit out the crew in one piece! Cramped? The Ukrainians put 17 in one last summer! Plus another 15+ riding on top holding on. It’s old, that’s it. I can tell you that my Ukrainian friends, including a Mech Inf Bn Cdr can tell you how many hundred(s) of his soldiers are still in the fight because they were in Bradley’s vice the old BMPs.
@@gerdmeyer1601 I actually just talked with Artem, one of the reasons that they love the Bradley is because early in the war, they were hosed because they were trying to mount local counterattacks using UNARMED & UNARMORED HMMV’s! Artillery ate their lunch, then they got 113’s and then the Bradley to team up with the Abrams. They got a ton more Brad’s so they formed Hunter/Killer teams of 3-4 Brad’s doing what is essentially a drive by meets Thunder Run and they will do what I coined as counter armor Whack-a-Mole. They will have 2-3 teams per track and tons of smoke, they will run around a village and keep stopping at different t points. The drones can’t always catch exactly where teams exited because they will stop 10-15 times and let the crunchies have at the Orks. Then they just reverse the maneuver to extract them. And between the TOW’s, and man packed kit, they put a hurting. Quick war story. For whatever reason the military of the Clinton Era was enamoured with Corporate Think. So they had this wonderful idea for streamlining the logistics tail, instead of the old way when you r direct and general support maintenance units had all of the spare parts they needed, the brain test came up with “ just in time logistics” where there is nothing on the shelf and you order it and it magically appears just in time. Oh that shit didn’t work, because once again American soldiers don’t look at the freaking clock and they attacked until the bad guys are dead, however that leaves great distances between the gunfighter and, the sharpest. If you go back and look closely at the Iraq armoured units in and around back, you will see most of the T 55/54’s, some of the T62’s and all of the A PCs and IFV’s or not catastrophic kills. When you see them there are holes and scorch marks; and that is because a significant amount of the 3ID’s we’re having to fight their way up the roads. That meant that the Abrams were running low on main gun rounds and therefore they did not engage anything that was not a T72 or modified T62’s, all of the other armour, mech and wheeled vehicle kills were all done by Bradleys using their gun or from an anti-armour teams organic. Many of those soldiers were having to squeak by with only 1-2 liters of potable water! There were officers that went into Iraqi stores, threw down $40-60 and buying bottled water for their troops! They used “other” water to get chilled and used to pour down the back. Anyway back to the point. Target identification, designation, location and destruction was very carefully managed by the Sergeants and lieutenants who knew the deal, they let the tanks kill tanks and let the IFV’s kill everything else. If this wandered I’ve been up for three days.
All next generation systems come with active protection and most with anti drone measures. And i am not talking cope cages. Our CV-90-35MLU, upgrade to MK-IV with local electronics, comes with EW systems and active protection. It comes with the attachment for hard kill anti drone too but those aren't installed until it is tested. It is between the Australian and a German system. My guess is that the US is taking the lessons from the AFU to heart like we are and the upgrade of the Bradley is already getting active protection. So they are likely to put hard kill anti drone measures on its replacement together with the active protection.
I wouldn't ax the bradley yet. I'd upgrade it. That's exactly what the Army did, and it appears to be working. The good ol M2 has a lot of fight left in it. Don't retire it yet.
Similar to the B52. That bomber entered service in 1952, has been continually upgraded and still serving to this day. The Bradley and the M1 Abrams can be upgraded. So can the Merkava. I understand the Merkava Mk. 5 has been revealed and the Mk. 1 has been converted to the IDF's first IFV: the Namer.
So let's spend 10s of billions to develop and build another vehicle. The abradley was never designed to fight tank to tank, but to give adequate protection while chauffering troops to the front line or to be a Cavalry scout fighting vehicle to support dismounted soldiers.
Anyone who has ever deployed in a Bradley will tell you this video misses the mark a little bit. While we need to keep modernizing, the Bradley was king.
The Bradley has been updated several times and is a great system. Interesting fact: A single Bradley Fighting Vehicle in 2003 in Iraq, in the the initial March attack, mistakenly destroyed three Abrams heavy tanks. Fortunately the soldiers in the tanks survived.
Historically the Bradley has fought and won against tanks in real life battles. From desert storm to the Ukraine war, the Bradley has out matched many armored vehicles opposing it. Add in overly well trained operators and now you have the best the USA will have for the next decade. Bradleys are like American Marines. Don't ever go up against American Marines.
The Hanwha Redback armored vehicle offers several advantages over the German Puma (Lynx) vehicle. It provides superior protection with advanced composite armor and an active protection system (APS) that enhances defense against modern threats like ATGMs and RPGs. The Redback's mobility is optimized with a robust suspension system and powerful engine, ensuring high performance across diverse terrains. Its modular design allows for flexible mission configurations and quick upgrades. The ergonomically designed crew compartment improves crew comfort and safety. Redback’s lower maintenance costs and global logistical support offer long-term operational advantages over Puma.
Excellent comparison of contenders for the future OMFV and good explanation of features. Ukrainian troops love the Bradley for its protection and more advanced targeting capabilities even though it is outdated otherwise. The Griffin 3 has BAD noise and fumes problems - AS THE BRITS KNEW. I'd take the LYNX over the Griffin. Really I think the CV90 is the best - but sadly it's supposedly out of the competition.
@3:09, that is not the Griffin III....that is the M10 Booker...The gun tube is a 105mm....thats not even remotely close to the .50 Cal gun hes mentioning.
I'd like to see a wheeled version of the bradley or cv90 that doesn't have a troop compartment. That'd probably be an interesting light tank/ MPF vehicle.
So you want our troops to wait years if not decades before an American made option is developed tested and deployed? Or we can buy the best of the market, modified to suit our needs.
If all countries were so narrow-minded and nationalistic, where else would your defence industry sell? The domestic market isn't big enough and the US defence industry also sells its shit to the biggest scumbags. Besides, you always want the best. And what if it doesn't come from the USA?
What really needs to change are the outdated tactics employed by the US Army. The US Army employs the Bradley like semi mobile pillboxes. Moving from static position to static position, only firing when stationary. The Ukrainians revolutionized their employ and true mobile assault vehicle. Using its speed and mobility to outmaneuver their opponents. The maximized the stability and power of the main auto cannon. Get mobility kills on MBT. Ukraine Bradley’s move too fast to wait for infantry support, to walk along side them.
Don't follow the premise that Bradley's obsolete and needs replacing . Absolutely invaluable opportunity to study it in action. Operated by trained and aggressive crews it has performed great. Give Ukraine more Bradley's, parts and ammo. You can piddle with a future replacement, but right now it's designers are proud.
Bradly does well against Russia, yet the Upgrades in weaponry, situational Upgrades, room (+ extra Troops), Hybrid (Fuel and power economy). Will make them better. 🫡 the Bradly, yet is time to Upgrade. Knowing the shortcomings of battle tested operations. My opinion.
Us army - "we spent a Billion dollars to develop a replacment for the bradly" Also US army - "just slap some more electronics on that bad boy and caller good for tbe next 10 years"
We can tell you've never been on one. I was a Driver, Gunner and Track Commander and I would take it over this new vehicle any day. I wasn't worried about a tank not worried about to much on the ground. I'll tell you this some hybrid isn't the answer
Lynx was shown to have serious technical issues, the tech and 50mm were selling points, now downgrade that to 35mm and still issues, cv 90 is a proven chassis we just don’t wanna pay that $ .
It certainly ain't obsolete, but is aging. Ukraine demonstrates its strength, but also weaknesses. The bradley does a great job against enemy infantry. However, I do want to see the bradley upgraded with these 3 technologies: hard kill and passive active protection system (redundancy is key), irst, small aesa radar, or passive radar for anti drone warfare (detecting drones with the naked eye is difficult especially through a periscope), and fire and forget munitions. I also want to bring back the anti air bradley (linebacker), but with certain upgrades like the addition of a radar which the linebacker lacked. The reason is because helicopters are a major threat to an armored column because helicopters have way more range and ground personnel lack the ability to detect or combat them because we haven't developed an SPAAG, heavily relying on our airforce, which means when the air force is down for whatever reason or isn't in the vicinity, bradleys are vulnerable to enemy attack. However, all these systems require a new power plant, but the bradley has a limited space and would be unable to fit all these upgrades.
This Vehicles was made to help own Tanks and defend them. But in Ukraine , we see a complete another Bradley. This Infantry can go alone one by one against other Tanks. They are Tankkiller and every Army should have this in their inventory. I never seen such a agressive Vehicle, and how fast they shoot "Brrrrrrrrrrrttttttt" its unbelivable. The Russian made it first with BMP and then the Amis make their own version. but this Machines can 1meter perforate Tank Armor.
They are a junk by fpv drone standards.. you do not need more armour and bulkier apc. You need drone protection and that does not mean more frontal armour.
The "modern battlefield" isn't very modern. The unmodified Bradley sent to Ukraine is doing a hero's level of operations based on a 40-year-old design.
Not sure why we another vehicle ro deliever troops in combat ? How many now is it, humvee, mrap, jtac, Stryker, unfantry squad vehicle. Are there more?
Stopped watching at 3:16. What the hell is going on. That is no 50mm cannon and that is no IFV. That is a Booker light tank. If they are getting that wrong what else is coming?.
You could half the profile if you removed the 'tankers'. Autonomous, remote control, no human risk operation is where it's all going. The success of drone warfare in Ukraine is where future combat is heading.
These criticisms of the Bradley are short sighted. In Ukraine the most popular vehicle in the war is the Bradley and unlike the Abrams it’s easy to repair. Sometimes newer isn’t better. Military industrial complex liked to spend money. Improve Bradley for less money. It’s like the Warthog.
This is just another reason the pentagon managers need firing . How many times has the Army had to totally scrap the Bradly replacement programs over the last 20-25 Years . Both civilian and military program managers desperately need firing . Clean the place out . All four services need a thorough delousing and accountability . In this case the Army could have just bought the CV 90 a decade ago BUT BAE systems had Way To Much say in that . They need to be put on notice as does Astral . The parties over it's time to be accountable
Not how it works and it'd take over a decade maybe longer. Bids get put in and the military decides which is best, y start from scratch when you have IFV's pretty much rdy to go?
Whatever the knew tanks or IFV that are going to be introduced. They need to fight against drone attacks that you see in Ukraine. That's what the most important thing out there is facing these cheap drones that can slam right into you.
Well, Bradley is old but it's working wonders in Ukraine!
Thats not surprising, since the russians have 1980’s technology with vehicles, so the bradley is that american rival to that technology. The russians havent upgraded majority of thier armored elements, so the bradley is fighting enemy vehicles that it was designed to go up against.
So. Who else will we be facing? Chinese crap?
@@jaypenha5352 Yeah, and with Russian and Chinese crap being all they are likely to face, I don't see that changing.
Against largely USSR era Russian analog scrap metals --- with no modern, electronic technologies ---- loaded with powerful shells, sure. But the future requires light armored vehicles, like the German and British BAE platforms that are modular and driverless, if some dangerous missions needed them to be so.
BAE and the Germans are finishing their next gen 40mm cannon ---- likely to be adopted by most NATO nations, if proven successful in the next 2-3 years ---- that is said to be up to 4 times as powerful as today's average 30mm cannons.
you haven't heard of Bradley square in ukraine 😂
BS. The Ukrainian Army loves them. They use Bradley's against russian MBTs all the time.
give them over 500 since USA got over 6500 of them.
They’re reliable as hell, M10 better be worth it….
@@Headloser usa army only uses 3700 of the 6000 they have so your richt bud they also need to keep alot for conscripts and replacments for destroyed ones for when a war starts bud as they are already making a replacment for the bradley i think they should fix up all there oldest and most broken bradleys about 300-500 to send to ukrain it would be a win-win
@@MilitaryPlayer141 the m10 wont replace the bradley
Yeah.. Russian lancet drone love M2 bradley too
Yeah, the Griffin 3 footage is a m-10 booker
For the Bradley to be "obsolete" it's doing a hell of a job of taking out Russian armor for the Ukranian military......
All obsolete US military tech can single handedly win the next world war, so imagine the stuff they haven't made public...
You have to design for the wars you will be fighting in 40 years. The Bradley was first planned in the 1970's and it looked like a ridiculous cluster at the time and had detractors same as you now who poo poo'd the idea of the military needing something new.
Russia has mostly run out of the new stuff and mostly uses ancient Soviet era equipment and even that is running out.
The Bradley is still able to take out Russian tanks :)
The analysis of the Brad's short-comings was also BS. It's a 1970 design and electronics weren't a thing. The size issue is about the number of fighters it holds, not cramped crew quarters. The armor was never designed for artillery or anti-tank, and it was praised as the first tracked vehicle to exceed 45 kph. Where do you get your facts?
So there are no electronics at and in a car's engine block how did the Sherman's tank work how do you think car batteries work how do you think the Sherman actually operates do you think it was just purely combustion engine and mechanical where did the spark in the engine come from without electricity you can't just spontaneously make fuel combust into flame you need a spark plug. Somehow the new engines today don't generate more power. And no what he's showing is the m10 Booker not the Bradley replacement. the Griffin chassis with 105 mm turret
And no the new Ifv chassis have better speed than the Bradley chassis. The Bradley replacement is more likely to use the Griffin 2 with the far better drive train and power pack look up the advanced combat engine and hybrid power pack tell me the Bradley is still going to be just fine in the future with a current engine no improvements to the drivetrain or transmission at all. The m10 Booker in other words the light tank will probably use the Griffin 3 chassis
@@danielsnook7362-- It's a Diesel engine, Casey Jones.
Facts from pentagon wars movie😂😂
@speterj -- sounded like it.
Video Footage not the correct IFV, the actual choice was not revealed, no new info.
I hope the US Army doesn't fall into the trap of trying to make a vehicle thats so advanced its over budget, late to production, overly complex and unreliable. The KISS principle rules on the battlefield.
No, the USMC did this, EFV
Sadly, our Army is well-exercised in building systems to win the last war.
It seems stupid to use a vehicle designed to carry men as an unmanned vehicle. How about two different vehicles and the unmanned one being significantly smaller, more deadly, better protected.
Nothing was mentioned about the amount of the dismounted team about these vehicles. As a former Bradley dismounted crew member, I think this would be important. If no Infantry is to be transported then they don't have a replacement for the Bradley but a light tank. I know the M-10 Booker is not a tank but is an assault gun ? 🤔
Look at some of the Brad’s in Ukraine, they have eaten tank and anti armor rounds and spit out the crew in one piece! Cramped? The Ukrainians put 17 in one last summer! Plus another 15+ riding on top holding on. It’s old, that’s it. I can tell you that my Ukrainian friends, including a Mech Inf Bn Cdr can tell you how many hundred(s) of his soldiers are still in the fight because they were in Bradley’s vice the old BMPs.
The Bradley is old, but the BMP´s are even older and in case of armor are BMP´s worst than the Bradley. The Bradley is an upgrade to an BMP.
@@gerdmeyer1601 I actually just talked with Artem, one of the reasons that they love the Bradley is because early in the war, they were hosed because they were trying to mount local counterattacks using UNARMED & UNARMORED HMMV’s! Artillery ate their lunch, then they got 113’s and then the Bradley to team up with the Abrams. They got a ton more Brad’s so they formed Hunter/Killer teams of 3-4 Brad’s doing what is essentially a drive by meets Thunder Run and they will do what I coined as counter armor Whack-a-Mole. They will have 2-3 teams per track and tons of smoke, they will run around a village and keep stopping at different t points. The drones can’t always catch exactly where teams exited because they will stop 10-15 times and let the crunchies have at the Orks. Then they just reverse the maneuver to extract them. And between the TOW’s, and man packed kit, they put a hurting. Quick war story. For whatever reason the military of the Clinton Era was enamoured with Corporate Think. So they had this wonderful idea for streamlining the logistics tail, instead of the old way when you r direct and general support maintenance units had all of the spare parts they needed, the brain test came up with “ just in time logistics” where there is nothing on the shelf and you order it and it magically appears just in time. Oh that shit didn’t work, because once again American soldiers don’t look at the freaking clock and they attacked until the bad guys are dead, however that leaves great distances between the gunfighter and, the sharpest. If you go back and look closely at the Iraq armoured units in and around back, you will see most of the T 55/54’s, some of the T62’s and all of the A PCs and IFV’s or not catastrophic kills. When you see them there are holes and scorch marks; and that is because a significant amount of the 3ID’s we’re having to fight their way up the roads. That meant that the Abrams were running low on main gun rounds and therefore they did not engage anything that was not a T72 or modified T62’s, all of the other armour, mech and wheeled vehicle kills were all done by Bradleys using their gun or from an anti-armour teams organic. Many of those soldiers were having to squeak by with only 1-2 liters of potable water! There were officers that went into Iraqi stores, threw down $40-60 and buying bottled water for their troops! They used “other” water to get chilled and used to pour down the back. Anyway back to the point. Target identification, designation, location and destruction was very carefully managed by the Sergeants and lieutenants who knew the deal, they let the tanks kill tanks and let the IFV’s kill everything else. If this wandered I’ve been up for three days.
This vid is BS. Since when is a Booker a IFV????
When you strap lawn chairs to the top.
If it doesn't have drone defense, IT WILL NOT MATTER.
All next generation systems come with active protection and most with anti drone measures. And i am not talking cope cages. Our CV-90-35MLU, upgrade to MK-IV with local electronics, comes with EW systems and active protection. It comes with the attachment for hard kill anti drone too but those aren't installed until it is tested. It is between the Australian and a German system.
My guess is that the US is taking the lessons from the AFU to heart like we are and the upgrade of the Bradley is already getting active protection. So they are likely to put hard kill anti drone measures on its replacement together with the active protection.
You’re exactly right. Unless they can protect against drones- they’re just expensive targets!
I wouldn't ax the bradley yet. I'd upgrade it. That's exactly what the Army did, and it appears to be working. The good ol M2 has a lot of fight left in it. Don't retire it yet.
Similar to the B52. That bomber entered service in 1952, has been continually upgraded and still serving to this day. The Bradley and the M1 Abrams can be upgraded. So can the Merkava. I understand the Merkava Mk. 5 has been revealed and the Mk. 1 has been converted to the IDF's first IFV: the Namer.
The old Bradley’s were disabling T-90’s in Ukraine. That 40mm chain gun upgrade will be a nice test.
So let's spend 10s of billions to develop and build another vehicle. The abradley was never designed to fight tank to tank, but to give adequate protection while chauffering troops to the front line or to be a Cavalry scout fighting vehicle to support dismounted soldiers.
Bradley are working pretty good in Ukraine
Upgrades can do a lot, but a redesigned platform is the way forward.
Anyone who has ever deployed in a Bradley will tell you this video misses the mark a little bit. While we need to keep modernizing, the Bradley was king.
Great unmanned tanks, aircraft, robot troops. Did anyone watch the terminator?
The Bradley has been updated several times and is a great system. Interesting fact: A single Bradley Fighting Vehicle in 2003 in Iraq, in the the initial March attack, mistakenly destroyed three Abrams heavy tanks. Fortunately the soldiers in the tanks survived.
I would sure love to own for my commute to work every day.
then where do you park it? :))
Who would argue? lol
@@WeaponTheory-j5hanywhere you want to. 😈
@@WeaponTheory-j5hany damn where I want😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Gives "the daily grind" an entirely new meaning, eh?
I think Ukraine would disagree....
Historically the Bradley has fought and won against tanks in real life battles. From desert storm to the Ukraine war, the Bradley has out matched many armored vehicles opposing it. Add in overly well trained operators and now you have the best the USA will have for the next decade. Bradleys are like American Marines. Don't ever go up against American Marines.
The Hanwha Redback armored vehicle offers several advantages over the German Puma (Lynx) vehicle. It provides superior protection with advanced composite armor and an active protection system (APS) that enhances defense against modern threats like ATGMs and RPGs. The Redback's mobility is optimized with a robust suspension system and powerful engine, ensuring high performance across diverse terrains. Its modular design allows for flexible mission configurations and quick upgrades. The ergonomically designed crew compartment improves crew comfort and safety. Redback’s lower maintenance costs and global logistical support offer long-term operational advantages over Puma.
put port holes on it and make it amphibious! And a bigger gun. With some anti tank missles. And make it haul troops
Excellent comparison of contenders for the future OMFV and good explanation of features.
Ukrainian troops love the Bradley for its protection and more advanced targeting capabilities even though it is outdated otherwise.
The Griffin 3 has BAD noise and fumes problems - AS THE BRITS KNEW. I'd take the LYNX over the Griffin. Really I think the CV90 is the best - but sadly it's supposedly out of the competition.
@3:09, that is not the Griffin III....that is the M10 Booker...The gun tube is a 105mm....thats not even remotely close to the .50 Cal gun hes mentioning.
We need the M577 APC from Aliens.
Hybrids also give off a lower heat signal
Hmmm, maybe just maybe, you should look into Rheinmetell Lynxs ….
Looks like something out of Warhammer 40K
I'd like to see a wheeled version of the bradley or cv90 that doesn't have a troop compartment. That'd probably be an interesting light tank/ MPF vehicle.
What’s obsolete is the profit per unit.
The US should not order foreign made vehicles all US Equipment should be American made period!!
So you want our troops to wait years if not decades before an American made option is developed tested and deployed? Or we can buy the best of the market, modified to suit our needs.
They would be built in the U.S.
As a veteran, I believe our troops deserve the best, most effective and survivable vehicles available, no matter WHERE they are made.
If all countries were so narrow-minded and nationalistic, where else would your defence industry sell? The domestic market isn't big enough and the US defence industry also sells its shit to the biggest scumbags. Besides, you always want the best. And what if it doesn't come from the USA?
@@waltsears Agree 100% and also feel U.S. industry needs to do better in general.
What really needs to change are the outdated tactics employed by the US Army. The US Army employs the Bradley like semi mobile pillboxes. Moving from static position to static position, only firing when stationary. The Ukrainians revolutionized their employ and true mobile assault vehicle. Using its speed and mobility to outmaneuver their opponents. The maximized the stability and power of the main auto cannon. Get mobility kills on MBT. Ukraine
Bradley’s move too fast to wait for infantry support, to walk along side them.
The "old" versions of the Bradley fighting in Ukraine right now disproves the assessment in this video.
mo engine power and double the armor protection, Maximum anti drone jamming gear . 40mm chain gun .
US Army couldn't design an AFV if you paid them 😂
Fun fact… since it’s original conception in 1968 it cost 14 billion dollars to develop this weapon.
Hard for me to watch a replacement to the Bradley. I was in a European based Infantry Division when our Scout Platoon received the first ones.
Don't follow the premise that Bradley's obsolete and needs replacing .
Absolutely invaluable opportunity to study it in action.
Operated by trained and aggressive crews it has performed great.
Give Ukraine more Bradley's, parts and ammo.
You can piddle with a future replacement, but right now it's designers are proud.
That’s a booker
Girffin 3 looks good not gonna lie
Bradly does well against Russia, yet the Upgrades in weaponry, situational Upgrades, room (+ extra Troops), Hybrid (Fuel and power economy). Will make them better. 🫡 the Bradly, yet is time to Upgrade. Knowing the shortcomings of battle tested operations. My opinion.
Us army - "we spent a Billion dollars to develop a replacment for the bradly"
Also US army - "just slap some more electronics on that bad boy and caller good for tbe next 10 years"
Manned - unmanned don’t make sense we take up a lot of space and weight for protection. just pick one instead of one size fits all
This out of date, the competition is over, the griffin 3 is now the m10 booker and moving forward….
We can tell you've never been on one. I was a Driver, Gunner and Track Commander and I would take it over this new vehicle any day. I wasn't worried about a tank not worried about to much on the ground. I'll tell you this some hybrid isn't the answer
Well! That bull@#£% sold me 😮 I'll take the 3 😁
Well, what defenses do these have for 100 drones coming all at once?
Wood slat turtle armour for explosive 💣 projectiles 😮.
Modern equipment with more avance technology means more downtime in war conditions. More to go wrong..
Limited survivablity when deployed against a savvy opponent using sophisticated attack drones.
Lynx was shown to have serious technical issues, the tech and 50mm were selling points, now downgrade that to 35mm and still issues, cv 90 is a proven chassis we just don’t wanna pay that $ .
I read somewhere that the Bradley took out more tanks in the Gulf war then the Abrams
I'd rather have a Tiger I.
It certainly ain't obsolete, but is aging. Ukraine demonstrates its strength, but also weaknesses. The bradley does a great job against enemy infantry. However, I do want to see the bradley upgraded with these 3 technologies: hard kill and passive active protection system (redundancy is key), irst, small aesa radar, or passive radar for anti drone warfare (detecting drones with the naked eye is difficult especially through a periscope), and fire and forget munitions. I also want to bring back the anti air bradley (linebacker), but with certain upgrades like the addition of a radar which the linebacker lacked. The reason is because helicopters are a major threat to an armored column because helicopters have way more range and ground personnel lack the ability to detect or combat them because we haven't developed an SPAAG, heavily relying on our airforce, which means when the air force is down for whatever reason or isn't in the vicinity, bradleys are vulnerable to enemy attack. However, all these systems require a new power plant, but the bradley has a limited space and would be unable to fit all these upgrades.
It's perfect, just like all american weapons. Until it gets to the warzone, then reality kicks-in hard.....
This Vehicles was made to help own Tanks and defend them. But in Ukraine , we see a complete another Bradley. This Infantry can go alone one by one against other Tanks. They are Tankkiller and every Army should have this in their inventory. I never seen such a agressive Vehicle, and how fast they shoot "Brrrrrrrrrrrttttttt" its unbelivable. The Russian made it first with BMP and then the Amis make their own version. but this Machines can 1meter perforate Tank Armor.
HDMI’s they do against drones?
They are a junk by fpv drone standards.. you do not need more armour and bulkier apc. You need drone protection and that does not mean more frontal armour.
Rome was a great powerful country dude.
Rome was and is a city and not a country. It was the Roman Empire
M2 "not-a-tank-don't-shoot-at-me" bradley
The "modern battlefield" isn't very modern. The unmodified Bradley sent to Ukraine is doing a hero's level of operations based on a 40-year-old design.
Drones have made tanks obsolete.
Not sure why we another vehicle ro deliever troops in combat ? How many now is it, humvee, mrap, jtac, Stryker, unfantry squad vehicle. Are there more?
Stopped watching at 3:16. What the hell is going on. That is no 50mm cannon and that is no IFV. That is a Booker light tank. If they are getting that wrong what else is coming?.
There’s been no single tracked or wheeled weapon system as successful or impactful as the Bradley in Ukraine.
Why not a Bradley upgrade ?
I thought they selected the booker?
Thumbnail of the video is lame.
3 Minutes in. Talks about the Griffin 3 but shows the M-10 Booker.
Go with the NATO version for standardization
You could half the profile if you removed the 'tankers'.
Autonomous, remote control, no human risk operation is where it's all going. The success of drone warfare in Ukraine is where future combat is heading.
These criticisms of the Bradley are short sighted. In Ukraine the most popular vehicle in the war is the Bradley and unlike the Abrams it’s easy to repair. Sometimes newer isn’t better. Military industrial complex liked to spend money. Improve Bradley for less money. It’s like the Warthog.
Soon its gonna be a SKY Skrapper!
And the M10 Booker will be used alomg side with one of these?
Drones, dudes...drones. Only the mega-million dollar corporations are pushing for more armor.
Wow easy target for invisible drones😅
it's an IFV, not a tank.
This is just another reason the pentagon managers need firing . How many times has the Army had to totally scrap the Bradly replacement programs over the last 20-25 Years . Both civilian and military program managers desperately need firing . Clean the place out . All four services need a thorough delousing and accountability . In this case the Army could have just bought the CV 90 a decade ago BUT BAE systems had Way To Much say in that . They need to be put on notice as does Astral . The parties over it's time to be accountable
I like the CV90
I very much enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up
big fail. NONE of them list an anti MBT capability. Thus NOT a replacement for the Bradley
Us military should design their own.
Not how it works and it'd take over a decade maybe longer. Bids get put in and the military decides which is best, y start from scratch when you have IFV's pretty much rdy to go?
The bigger threat comes from above such as drones and guided munitions instead of infantry and armoured vehicles.
Whatever the knew tanks or IFV that are going to be introduced. They need to fight against drone attacks that you see in Ukraine. That's what the most important thing out there is facing these cheap drones that can slam right into you.
Is it just me or did the cannon on that first vehicle look much larger than 50 mm? More like 105.
Bradley looks like Luchs also Sherman
Can’t really comment specifically but a lot that he said about the drawback of the Bradley is total BS.
no anti drone system? goodluck
Does he ever get to the point and state the replacement? Title is BS apparantly
Is this a hit piece?
Etu the best for phil. Military wish lng naman
From what I hear they been kick Russian infantry ass
Showing the booker as an IFV come on
Is the Bradley good for what it is? Yes! But we can do better.
who made this video?
PR claptrap.........
How come you didn't mention that the CV90 is operating in Ukraine?