Interested in a Doculock Franchise? Click below: doculockllc.com/mcbeth Like my T-shirts? www.bunkerbranding.com/pages/ryan-mcbeth If the Bradley Fighting Vehicle is a very potent and capable platform that will give the Ukrainian Army a way to spot Artillery rounds, as well as carry infantry troops into battle and retain some anti-tank capability. Connect with me on Twitter: @ryanmcbeth Watch my long form videos: th-cam.com/play/PLt670_P7pOGmLWZG78JlM-rG2ZrpPziOy.html Join the conversation: discord.gg/pKuGDHZHrz Want to send me something? Ryan McBeth Productions LLC 8705 Colesville Rd. Suite 249 Silver Spring, MD 20910 USA Rights and References: The Pentagon Wars HBO 1998 Army FM 7-7J (Bradley) Bradley Swim Pictures forums.kitmaker.net/t/m2a0-bradley-swim-barrier-reference/16330 Reddit thread: www.reddit.com/r/WarCollege/comments/erpmjm/having_just_watched_the_pentagon_wars_how_has_the/ www.battleorder.org/us-bradley-platoon Modern Dragoons - Bradley Mechanized Infantry, CPT Christopher E. Lockhart, Infantry Magazine, Nov-Dec 1992/ AVAC www.keymilitary.com/article/track-changed-tactics Development of the American Tank-Infantry Team During World War II in Africa and Europe by Captain J. L. Mudd Armor Magazine, September-October 1999. Swim capability: www.upi.com/Archives/1987/04/14/Army-suspends-combat-vehicle-swim-operations/1004545371200/ Desert storm: www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m2.htm M2A2 ODS-SA www.nationalguard.mil/News/Family-Programs/Article/575543/pennsylvania-army-guard-upgrades-to-latest-version-of-the-m2-bradley-fighting-v/ M2A4 www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/04/25/first-unit-gets-modernized-bradley-fighting-vehicle/ Half Life Bradley th-cam.com/video/wyYMQ6cFjFY/w-d-xo.html Panzer By Bundesarchiv, Bild 101I-783-0110-12 / Dörner / CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0 de, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5413676 Tankers do tanker things: th-cam.com/video/O9f38CrCR5w/w-d-xo.html By RIA Novosti archive, image #1274 / RIA Novosti / CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15579759 By Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-1988-1007-009,_Berlin,_39._Jahrestag_DDR-Gründung,_Parade.jpg: Mittelstädt, Rainerderivative work: Hohum (talk), CC BY-SA 3.0 de, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7497732 By Pibwl - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15512587 By Konflikty.pl, Attribution, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=49673858 "Soviet soldier's on a combat mission ww2" by Za Rodinu is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0. "Vietnam War 1960s - Soldiers on dirt road in M113 APC" by manhhai is licensed under CC BY 2.0. "File:RIAN archive 644460 First stage in the Soviet troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.jpg" by Yuriy Somov / Юрий Сомов is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 "DONG HA 1972 - South Vietnamese troops move up on M113 APC." by manhhai is licensed under CC BY 2.0.. "Vietcong models with RPG" by Der_Henk is licensed under CC BY 2.0. "Vietnam War Photo" by manhhai is licensed under CC BY 2.0. "1963 M113 APC. Bavaria, Germany" by mcdolan79 is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0. "Tên lửa chống tăng Maljutka AT-3 Sagger của Nga" by manhhai is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0. "17 Mar 1973, Saigon, South VN --- Vietcong Lt. Gen. Tran Van Tra gestures during Press Conference" by manhhai is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0. "Near Quang Tri on the DMZ border -- patrol along the 17th Parallel. Vietnam, 1971" by manhhai is licensed under CC BY 2.0. "BMP-1 Jüterbog / Altes Lager" by 270862 is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0. egyptindependent.com/first-egyptian-soldier-to-raise-egyptian-flag-in-sinai-during-october-war-dies-at-72/ BMPs 4 wheeling th-cam.com/video/f44JIUD5IWk/w-d-xo.html By Steve F-E-Cameron (Merlin-UK) - Self-photographed, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2121564
The British designed an IFV in 1918. It was to be used in 1919 if the war had continued. It basically was a stretched version of the Mk.5. The infantry compartment was basically standing room only. There is an example of one at the Bovington Tank Museum. During WWII the British and Canadians devised a IFV by removing the turret of a Sherman which allowed for about a squad of men to ride protected with the tanks. This was found to be better than riding in a truck with its canvas sides.
Was in the back of a Bradley that was hit by massive IED in Iraq on two different occasions. Both times I walked away with nothing more than bruises. This thing saved my life twice and I loved it!
@@johnsmith-ce2tq it's not designed to take a hit from.any modern main battle tank. Nor should it be expected to. No weapon or defense system.can make a soldier immortal.
Did you get a concussion or other kind of brain injury from the blast? I've read about CTE being a big problem with vets especially those who hit an IED.
@@Clumrat Bradley is fully sealed so shockwave and concussive force shouldn't be able to reach the inside as long as armor plating stays intact. The only way I can see concussion being inflicted on troops inside is if the blast is strong enough to lift the vehicle up several feet into the air or roll the vehicle over, causing the soldiers within to tumble - that'd almost certainly risk a concussion or other brain injury. However, Bradley weighs up to 30 tonnes, so it would take an absolutely massive IED to roll / lift a Bradley.
I swam an M-2 Bradley across a lake in Fort Hood, Texas, as my unit transitioned into 11 Mikes. The squad had to go through the operation to check if the vehicle was float worthy before the next driver crossed the lake. All I remember is checking the gasket seals to the ramp and back door, the condition of the screen and supports, and making sure the sump pump worked. We had no sinking during our adventures.
We cut the swim barriers off the A2 variants in Korea in 96 because they just didn’t work. The A1 has a trim vane along with the swim barrier and lighter armor, but no commander was willing to risk it. I used to leave my drain plugs halfway open and the bilge pump on when we forded and it would spray the MP/cav scout road guards as we drove by
And I keep saying this to people who are convinced russian IFVs are able to swim. If its this hard to keep western amphibious stuff floating, imagine the state of those things in the water
While I was in them about 4 years ago they had a big sticker that says "DO NOT SWIM" I always found it amusing while waiting for the mechanics to come tell me that the track was fucked.
I was watching the chieftan do a run down on the early BMPs. Truly they were revolutionary at the time. The turret was state of the art . But obviously as newer , better IFVs and anti tank weaponry came out it kinda became obsolete fast.
Yep especially when they come at night, both have targeting systems on board that are far superior to 90% of Russian armours sensors suites. I'm waiting for the Chieftain to give his to cents on this issue, he's recently trained with the French and speaks the language. On top he was a Bradley troop commander.
@Philippos field repairs shouldn't be a problem, with the units having maintenance packs. Everything else is handled by contractors in Poland and the Baltics, or it goes on a train to the manufacturer or original depot. A bit of a pain in the butt, could be worse though. Post war this will have to be streamlined of course.
Circa 1989 I was in Fort Hood. It was a Bradley driver. We swam it across a river. We did indeed ride on top with hatches open . One Bradley was leaving the river and the water came over the curtain and down she went. Fortunately everyone bailed out and no one was injured😂
That excites me It’s the whole reason I used to wake up and go to work in the morning. The sound of Bushmasters and TOWs is akin to Angels welcoming you with song and wine
@@sergeantklein6026 Akin to "I love the smell of napalm in the morning, it smells like victory" (Col. Kilgore ) from the movie "Apocalypse Now", the greatest Army recruiting film ever made.
ORO: MAD concept had no effect on the strategy of tactical nukes on the battlefied. MAD concept did/does NOT mean that a single nuke will be retaliated with a massive full scale volley. Go do more reading.
Except for the rocket belt, it was pretty darn forward thinking and pretty much every aspect of the concept is now fairly standard for US Army and Marine infantrymen. Fortunately the Chemical and Radiological protection hasn't been needed much over the years.
Just learned a whole lot about the history of IFVs and the Bradley. Thanks from a Navy veteran who used a 20 mm mg on the canals, rivers near Cambodia in 1968 - 69 on an Armored Troop Carrier (T112-8). We jigged the 20 mount so I could use a back up Browning .30 cal. mg in case the 20 went down, which they could when old and used: stirrup cables breaking when charging the weapon, rounds not firing and not ejecting (which happened on my last fire fight.....if we'd had another ambush that night I'd have jammed another round on top possibly.
I love watching your videos Ryan. They are very well done and so nostalgic. I was there when we went from M113's to Bradleys. It was love at first sight when I saw them roll in to Benning.
Former driver and gunner here. This is probably the best run down of the Bradley I've ever seen. Great job! My only doubt is that these Ukrainian soldiers will need some serious training on these tracks. You just don't jump in them and ride off into battle. Where will they be able to train in them and not make themselves targets once that location is known?
I remember how I 1st saw Bradley IRL. It pulled up right behind us on a highway and this thing is JUUUGE as f*! It doesn't seem that high on pictures but when you sit on the back seat of a car and look out of the back window, it's towering over you like a damn mothership of death. I will never not forget that sight, that was scary. In a good way.
@@herrhaber9076 not really a problem when you can hide 90% of the silloute behind a hill in a defelade position and still shoot where the BMP both BMP 1 and 2's have to expose 95-100% of their silloute to fire out of a defilade position so in other words. if a bradley is shooting at a BMP the BMP won't be able to hit it. but if a BMP is shooting a Bradley you know its at the top of a hill or fully exposed. unless its in a dug in position but that just makes it too easy. it can't exactly maneuver when its in a hole in the ground.
Ryan, it is just another amazing video. I had no idea about Bradley's laser spotting capabillities, it is now so simple and clear. You got the knowledge bro!
Good for you discussing bradley's "bad rep" through this video. Suggest lazerpigs video for a more detailed understanding why the Pentagon wars and the mafia behind these kind of "refomation" are frowned upon.
@@psychoaiko666 Good point, I have lived in Korea too long and got myself confused. Over here it is “scissors, rock, paper” in Korea you would say: “gawi, bawi, bo“. Does anyone remember the one with Spock in it?
I was a dismount inf and I've spent my fair share of time in a Bradley. They're beautiful beasts indeed. I definitely remember the port weapons when I was in Korea back in 02'
The pentagon wars is (or at least was in 2018) required watching in the US Army Sergeant Majors Academy in the module about procurement. I was a 19D Bradley commander and cav scout. Got love for thr Brad!!!
Look dog, IFV's were a good idea, but today's infantryman expects to arrive in more comfort than that. A better idea is the *armored RV.* You simply buy a *Winnebago Horizon with every option box ticked,* stock it full of brandy & beer kegs, and weld on 1/2" thick steel plates to cover the exterior surfaces. Each one can deliver 10+ soldiers with a much higher blood alcohol level than that damn Bradley can. Party on!
I remember reading somewhere the only reason the Bradley was given the amphibious requirement is because they found out the BMP is (supposedly) able to swim across rivers... (turns out it's not much more amphibious in reality than the Brad lol but would have been better if that wasn't made a requirement in the first place)
All Russian IFVs can float. It is a doctrinal requirement for them. You’ll notice if you check them all out closely on the front end, they all have an extra metal plate on the front end. That is their trim vane that folds up when in water that prevents water from rushing over the front of the vehicle and swamping it.
@@mathewcarson364 Your right, but unfortunately there's a lot of prep work that goes into getting an IFV to float. You can't just on a whim take your IFV for a swim. You need to check seals, make sure everything's greased up etc. Also if I'm remembering right BMPs were capable of floating in the same vain of the M113 and M2 Bradley are capable of floating(Providing were talking about the original iteration of the two). Yes, you can do it but its a royal pain in the ass and god help you if its a fast river or shitty weather.
Great vid! Definitely interested to see how/if Bradleys influence the war in Ukraine. I learned about Bradleys from a third source though: 8th grade social studies teacher was a Commander in one and said it was like family to him - he bought a Tamiya 1/35 scale kit of his model machine and a friend and I built it and painted to spec, even gave it the fluted Bushmaster barrel option to match his vehicle. He had it up in the classroom in a little case and I always appreciate that - hope you're well Greg Mittman.
In the name of the Ukrainian people I thank all true Americans, whose hearts are beating in unison with freedom, democracy and liberty - you are our best supporters and friends. Thank you for the guns, and all the military stuff. You are investing into Ukraine victory which will help keep the whole European continent safe. I welcome you to my country, and my home after the victory! God bless America! Glory to Ukraine!
Enjoy the latest Aid(s) package from yours truly! When Putin is shattered into pieces, it will be good to see Ukraine under the fold of our international agenda. Slava Ukrani!
Brad is not a tank by name but it is a light tank by definition. I crewed M2 in Iraq its cannon can penetrate any soviet Armour, had 3 Kills with M242 in Kuwait, 2 kills on the end of wire
@@divoulos5758 he probably was talking about the AUTOCANNON which can have I think by that point either APDS or APFSDS although I don’t know when the Bradley would have gotten the APFSDS for it’s 30
@@divoulos5758 he mentioned "2 at end of wire." That's the atgm. Basically (and he can correct me if this is a misrepresentation) he's saying the cannon killed 3 the tows got 2.
I always thought the Bradley had a high profile compared to the Soviet/Russian IFV's. I was in during the '80's when the Army had the 11M mos for the Bradley. The running joke was that they had to hook a tow cable up to the Bradley's when trying to do a water operation. Still a big improvement over the M113.
@@drewschumann1 Good point, I was thinking of from a defensive standpoint that they could be identified and targeted more easily. Coming from a light infantry standpoint, I wasn't mechanized. I guess there's a tradeoff
@@jmarc1 Even a BTR is big enough of a vehicle to be easily seen and targeted. Forget the size issue. The Bradley’s tall turret is actually a combat advantage. Better view, targeting, and ability to shoot from behind cover. Plus it provides more interior space. The BMP was designed with its low profile to be a fairly light amphibious vehicle for the Russian Naval Infantry. Similar to the Marine LAV. Once they saw its lack of armament and armor, they made it too heavy to swim. A low profile was an advantage back when gun sights were purely optical. Less surface area to hit meant more misses, but thermal sights and heat-seeking missiles killed that notion.
@@afcgeo882 Well you go from shooting cheap plentiful ammo out of the BMP to down bradley and the like to using more expensive missiles on a cheap BMP. Keep in mind a brand new BMP-3 is 1million, the same cost of an MRAP. While a Bradley costs over 3 million per.
Former armored cavalryman here, the Bradley was one of the most effective CFVs I've ever used, they took a bunch of hits in iraq I had two destroyed under me over there, every one walked away every time.
I remember hearing about two Bradley's that ran into a group of tanks in Iraq. The pair used a natural hill for cover and worked in tandem with one popping up over the hill to fire a TOW missile to destroy a tank and then duck and cover behind the hill to reload while the second Bradley would pop up and fire. Brilliant improvised tactics that enabled them to engage and win against the far better armored tanks. The staggard continuous fire of the TOW won the engagement for them, as the TOW proved its efficiency and was able to disable the tanks, while the hill provided effective cover from any returned fire.
Well I must say this was a very good video. I myself remember swimming the Bradley and even seeing one sink 😂. If I remember correctly, they lost the ability to swim shortly after the first armor upgrade. Overall it is a good vehicle, it’s biggest drawback is its size. The optics, thermal and regular along with the TOW missile system will be a great help in Ukraine 🇺🇦 as long as they keep it in the support role.
Ryan, thanks for a very interesting & informative video on the background history of the development of the M2 Bradley IFV. I learned something new today!
Great show. The M2 and M3 Bradley was produced in 4050 M2 and 2050 M3. The USA has over 40,000 fighting vehicles. MRAP could be very useful in Ukraine.
Ukraine is already using MRAPs but i think its the worst vehicle to send there. MRAPs have a very large profile which makes them a big target on a generally large open terrain. MRAPS are ok on roads but not so much off roads bc of its high center of gravity they are easy to roll and flip and a lot of the fighting in Ukraine is happening away from roads. MRAPS armor is not sufficient to compensate for their "firepower" which are only mounted crew serve weapons such as MARK-19s, .50 CAL and M-240s at best. MRAPS were good at providing protection against mines and IED bc of their "V" shaped haul and frankly built as solution to a very specific problem (COIN ops) and not for a conventional war with a peer or even a near peer foe
@@ukraine-war-update Besides the high profile, MRAPs are pretty great vehicles. More comfortable and reliable than Humvees, with more troop capacity and armor. They aren't made for fighting other vehicles, they aren't IFVs. They're made for shoot and scoot missions in Conventional wars. Drive in, light up some buildings and light vehicles, and drop off a squad, drive out. When combined with IFVs and heavier armor, like they should be in Conventional wars, they're about perfect. Nothing is a stand-alone system.
@@brandondavis7777 Nobody cares about the comfort level in this type of the war (its not COIN) I get your point but i disagree; 12.7mm will chew right through MRAPs or at least make an easy mobility kill (and BTW nazi ruSSkis have bigger killsticks than that deployed forward) ; MRAPS cant keep up with a tank or any track vehicle when offroad and its a bad vehicle for an open terrain with wide fields of view and little terrain to hide behind; off-road MRAPs will roll over even on a tiny slope. it is somewhat better than an armor HMMWV as far as armor but is nowhere near its mobility; i would prefer the HMMWV for scouting with an LRAS on top for indirect CFF missions (we should give those Ukraine BTW if we haven't done it yet). But LAV would be the best IMHO for the type of combat there is currently.
@@ukraine-war-update Which infantry is more effective, the infantry who wasn't tossed around and beat up on the ride over, or the infantry who had no leg room and got their spines compressed? Comfort is more than just "Ah, an AC feels good". The LATV(An MRAP) is the perfect vehicle for Ukraine. Lower profile than other MRAPs, quicker and lighter than a humvee(with more armor), made for off roads. You're also cherry picking something like 40 accidents for your "roll over" rhetoric.
@@brandondavis7777 where did you get the "40" number from? also what is LATV? i was referencing MRAPs which Ukraine did already get. these vehicles are terrible at off-roading i used them personally and i believe for COIN (inferior enemy that is using IEDs) this vehicle is great but i would not want to be to fight conventional forces even if they have BMP-1 or 2 or even BTRs not to mention tanks. MRAPS are better than nothing but can provide much better armor to Ukraine to defeat nazi ruSSia
Excellent video, sarge! I was mech inf in Nam 69-70 Spot on about reluctance to shoot at M113s plus tanks. They only fucked with us during rainy season when mobility was limited or we did convoy support. BTW Big Red One forever!
11B love their Bradleys. Bradleys will be an awesome addition to Ukraine. I saw a group of them live fire TOWs at the firing table at Ft. Hood back in '88 when I worked for the Killeen newspaper.
The Bradley Linebacker seems more like what they could use now. It’s ADA on the M2 chassis, still has the 25mm, instead of a TOW system it has a quad surface to air launcher.
I was on an air defense Bradley in South Korea when we still dismounted with Stingers after a year in South Korea I went to Ft. Stewart Ga I was in the first Bradley Linebacker class we went to Kuwait with the Linebackers half the time the M6 didn’t work properly I think that’s why they were discontinued the avenger does the job good enough.
Infantry officer here. Big Red One Vietnam. I have no experience with the Bradley but I like the concept. To me the IFVs are better than tanks. They have firepower, mobility and shock action. Especially with the TOW system. Does the Stryker have TOWs also? If not then why not? The only protection we had were jungle fatigues hahaha. I did do a few operations with tanks. The VC would plant a mine in the road and drop a tree over it. This was done over and over. We infantrymen liked this easy operation . Mine detectors found the mine and we would blow it up with c4. The tankers loved it but we knew it was slowing us down. It was a waste of time but nobody got hurt so it was easy.
I know the M2 Bradley got shit on in Pentagon Wars and that in reality the development phase was a huge clusterfuck and cost overruns, but when it FINALLY came into combat in the Gulf War it became a swan from an ugly duckling. It killed more Iraqi armor than the M1 Abrams did. Still did very well in Iraq even though it can't handle IED's well. As a fighting vehicle, the M2 Bradley is really good. It is heavy and it cannot "swim". As a fighting vehicle, it has done very well. Even though the Stryker vehicle is trying to take over, the US Army is not going to let the m2 Bradley's go away in the future.
as a 19D we had to swim test our 1x a year, and we were often solo doing recon LRRPs w/o tanks, just our 4.2s for support. Our unit tested the ODS variant for the army when it first came out. They are still extremely loud, puff smoke when u hit the gas, and are like trying to hide an elephant behind a coffee table. As a gunner I had to sit on the turret floor to shoot because there wasnt enough room for me at 6'3 to use the seat and reticle effectively. As a commander I usually ran with my head out of cuppola and my Aux site flipped up. recon variant M3 is set up for only 2 dismounts and a lot more TOW missiles. Death Trap is my final analysis after many years both as 11M on the M2 IFV and 19D on M3 CFV. ODS was a result of all us that were literally stuck on our tracks in the desert for month for GW1 surrounded by mines sitting on a screen line while our clothes rotted off of us in the heat. The swim capability was a useful option if you had time, to ford a river as recon, when there were zero other support elements usually nearby. We were the ones that had to classify routes and bridges for any following vehicles before anything heavier arrived. I prefered scouting in a 113 with a mk19 or minigun or ITV over bradleys.
From personal experience I can attest that dismounting is a fun expertise with lots of need for repetition. Mounting seems to work much better, especially when the outside is not nice.
Good summary. In the 80s I was a USAF Targeting Officer working with the Munitions Effectiveness programs. During one trip to Aberdeen Proving Grounds, I met an Army Officer that worked in munitions testing and survivability. Even some years later he would get absolutely livid about the stupidity of hitting a fully combat loaded Bradley with a Main Tank Gun. It blew up! Well Duh! Rumor was he filed a Fraud Waste and Abuse complaint against everyone involved in forcing that test. (which apparently didn't go very far. Congress Critters seem to take exception to being named in such complaints).
as a former 19D i was dreading the M2 and managed to be light for over 20 years but sure liked its firepower in Iraq when it was needed and didnt really see it in Afghanistan prob due to the terrain. I always wondered how it would do in a conventional battle against a peer unit due to its high profile if compared to the Warsaw Pact IFVs
probably pretty well. as you know the BMP's can't fire in any kind of defilade position. Their entire silloute will be exposed if not its in a dug in position and makes it even easier shooting at targets that can't move. because they're dug in.
Depends which ones - I would assume it would be quite close to BMP-2 and touch inferior to BMP-3 while clearly superior to BMP-1 in most situations. Its main drawback is its luck of amphibious ability and heavy weight.
@@tomk3732 What are you comparing and why? The BMP-2 and above have no amphibious capability, just like the M2 above the A1 variant. The M2A2 and above are superior to the BMP-3 in most ways. The Kurganets-25 promises to be a big leap forward, but even that’s below the M2A4 level.
@@afcgeo882 All Russian / Soviet IFV are amphibious, i.e. BMP-2 and BMP-3 are amphibious as well as new stuff based on Armata family, both wheeled and tracked. BMP-3 is superior in almost all missions to all versions of M2. Its newer design. All armata platform vehicles, which are not accepted into service and a bit experimental promise to be vastly superior to any M2 in all known configurations of battlefield - i.e. there is no situation where M2 could be considered superior. They have better armor, firepower, sensors and are amphibious. One can argue for say crew comfort but that appears to be at most a tie. Again, this is a bit unfair comparison as M2 is simply old.
I would imagine that how you crane uses these with largely be dependent on the number they receive and how many they receive at any given time. If we're only giving Ukraine 50 in two shipments, they're going to be used very differently than for going to give them 250. I suspect that the Ukrainians will try to integrate them into units that have m113s to give them support and better artillery support.
Yes, they swam back then with kits, Year 2000 while in AIT they tried that in Ft. Knox Kentucky, and again, it sank. Before leaving BAE SYSTEMS we’re considering replacing the 25 mm with 30 mm being tested at Aberdeen Proving ground. Two companies are working with PM Bradley to replace the TOW missile with fire and forget such as Javelin Missiles.
Everyone also overlooks the timeframe of the original procurement for Bradley. Smaller platoon and squad sizes was seen as a feature, as TRADOC was not certain that they could field 11-man squads with an all-volunteer army. The trade-off of smaller platoons, but each platoon organically armed with 8 TOW launchers, vs larger platoons, but having to attach ITVs from battalion seems like an easy decision. Also, the number of ATGM tubes that can be brought to the fight increased significantly with Bradley. The downside was reloads. ITVs carry 10 reloads, which is far more than an M2 can carry and have room for troops.
The biggest problem with the Bradley is the light armor. The problem is the US, unlike most countries, has to be able to airlift much of its fighting forces across the world, This requires strict weight restrictions. That means less armor than most others. It will stop small arms fire, but that is about it.
I assume most of us here have seen Lazerpig's video on the Bradley IFV, and if you've not seen it, I highly recommend you watch it. For those that are aware, I'm sure you all just squirmed a little bit inside at the mention of "The Pentagon Wars." 😂
cav scout here. the bradley could be very helpful in this conflict. but just like you mentioned...combined arms. there's no tank support. second. it takes years to become proficient in gunnery and to become a vehicle commander. last. the ukes are out of men. 150k KIA and three times that wounded/out of the fight. they're conscripting boys now. the ukes are dead in the water. this equipment is better spent on taiwan.
RPG M113 Pot Shots? @7:55 Would agree not likely. However, it did happen on Nov 27 1968 as C Troop 1/11th ACR Attacked the 141 Regiment of NVA. A Silver Star recipient of that day was laying the hurt with his 50 cal on fortified positions, when an RPG slammed into his M113 knocking him off and spraying his arm with shrapnel. Subsequently, he remounted the the 50 Cal and continued to lay the suppressive hurt, as well as rallying the attack while wounded (resulting in the Silver Star).
i was a gunner on an M3A1 during Desert Storm - the 25mm is a legit canon that will go head to head with anything up to an original t72 - which the russians seem to be using a lot of these days. these will be a gamechanger for the UAF. loved my time in the Brad
I always look forward to your videos ryan they're both interesting and a bit funny at the same time and shows how much effort u put into them. Respect from the UK 🇬🇧
fast, lightly armoured, HEAVILY armed. Can defeat any Russian tank, should be used in ambush roles, probably will not because of lack of training and too much courage.
@@QuizmasterLaw while most of your point are true, the part about the gun i dont believe. The gun is a 105 mm gun. I dont think it will have enough firepower to deal with russian mbt’s from the front
@@maartenvanderpoel5804 No unless very short range and that's not what you want... AMX10 RC is a recon vehicle that can defend itself against IFVs, infantry etc. in tandem with Bradleys however, that have TOWs, then that would be a great combo for in-depth breakthrough
@@maartenvanderpoel5804 It depends on the ammunition type used, but France being France they made it only able to fire French ammunition and I don’t know what the max pen is for those APFSDS rounds. Probably won’t be penning the front but it being a wheeled vehicle it’s easier to flank enemy tanks with. I’ve also seen plenty of dope vids of Ukrainians pulling off perfect tank ambushes… so something like that being hidden in a first or behind some kinda of foliage would be insane.
@@maartenvanderpoel5804 i don't favor sending depleted uranium munitions but even without DU you're wrong. Remember: a lot of Russian reactive armour is full of bribes and cardboard. The rolled steal underneath isn't much better. 105mm can defeat T-90 from the front.
My son is a FSTer and drives a model of the Bradley specifically for fire support teams. It’s pretty impressive how it can locate targets and quietly turn those into fire missions for the big guns.
Pentagon Wars is a funny movie and is a good ego-check on the Brad but it's an ego check it needs as it's a great vehicle. Its "hard factors" like gun caliber, speed, armor and weight aren't amazing but its soft factors like sensors, stabilization, accuracy, flexibility, elevation and depression make the vehicle strong where it counts.
I listened to a audiobook years ago about a Bradly Crew in the beginning of the war in Iraq. I think the book was called "carnivore". My take away from that book was that the Bradley is a odd mismatch of capabilities that make it perfect for killing a bunch of people. On paper it doesn't sound great, AT weapons go right through it, it has a weak gun and only 4 wire guided missiles... But apparently that's all you need, plus air support and pseudo magical logistical capabilities.
Ryan, thank you so much for sharing your knowledge and expertise! You are a great teacher! You are good at breaking things down into easily understood concepts and doing it in a fun to learn way! I appreciate what you’re doing bro! Best wishes and keep up the great work!
Do a safety brief on a very little known subject a bunch of professionals don’t know about. “Static from multiple lines causing instant detonation mid flight” You might think firing off multiple tows is a good idea right? Not if your too close to any other wire guided missle system. Thor shows you a theramin on the very short lighting ride.
These IFV's (also from other countries) mean only one thing - Ukraine is about to do a full scale attack. I am not sure where they will use these initially, but in the end, Crimea is one sure place they need this. Regardless, these IFV's will surely shock the Russians as these will afford the Ukrainians speed in troop movements, maneuver, and spotting capabilities. These are essential in attacking.
I still laugh at the line ‘What do you want me to do? But a sign that says ‘I’m not a tank, don’t shoot me in 80 languages on it?’ from The Pentagon Wars.
we swam our m3 one time and it was mostly just to match the m113 we had - which actuallly swam well -so it was more of a 'well the old one did it' - but i never swam it in either the 2nd cav or the 3rd cav that i served in (and like you said - who would? the rest of the gear (m1s, and m88s and howitzers coudn't)
I know of Dragoons via JRPGs like Final Fantasy. So to me, a Dragoon is someone who jumps into the air for a full turn before power-landing on one of the enemy monsters, dealing extra damage.
I currently test the new M2A4 and M7A4 turrets. They arent much different from A3s. Also the new IFV program "OMFV" will soom to down to its last 2 contract competitors which are slotted for a working delivery by 2028
We either equip the Ukrainians properly including things like Bradley’s or we watch this war of attrition play out with Russia simply having far greater numerical superiority in the sheer number of bodies they can stand to lose. Ship ‘em.
25mm can't go through armor? Maybe a full plate of it, but they always have weak points that can be exploited. 4 Brads spamming at a T-72 will find a weak point.
I grew up in Detroit with a dad who worked at the tank Automotive command we talked about this extensively what he said was that they knew main battle tanks were a waste of money back in World War II because the Nazis were spending all their money on Giant panzers that ran out of gas could get hit by artillery cuz they are easy to spot and they could only make a thousand of them or as the Americans built 40,000 Sherman's? So during the M1 development they knew that they couldn't use them in Europe because they wouldn't fit through tunnels or over all the bridges which would be blown out then when atgms came out they also knew that the main battle tanks would be essentially worthless because you wouldn't be able to keep enough of them on the battlefield especially if the Russians had Coronet. So the Bradley was actually a tank. Just like the Sherman was used with the 76 against pill boxes and hardpoints more than against other tanks the Bradley was set up to do the same thing. The Infantry will pop out and bird dog for the machine guns of the enemy and then the Bradley would either tow them out or Bushmaster them you're also didn't mention that in Vietnam the armored cavalry version of the m113 was used as a light tank to reduce enemy strong points also so it's kind of not exactly correct to say that it's not a quote unquote tank the British call there fighting Vehicles tanks and they invented the tank LOL it is an interesting discussion it goes right up there with whether or not you can call an M16 a gun LOL
I also wish that at the end of it attack you could be allowed to prepare for Counterattack, that never happened with us we either had to immediately attack the next objective because the enemy was on the Run or we had to withdraw because they were going to either hit us with artillery or our own artillery was going to hit them once they reoccupied
Heh! While the US was Yutza-klutzy-putzing around in their M113s, as from 1977 the Dutch had a fully functional AND amfib IFV. The YPR-765 with a 25mm dual-ammo autocanon and 7.62 NATO as coax, carrying an 8 man dismount squad of infantry.
Having watched a vid of an American volunteer working with Ukrainian raiders using Humvees to do fast in and out assaults on Russian positions, I think Ukraine would use the Bradley in this role also with its ability to fire on the move and better cross country ability and armor than the Humvee. In the engagement I saw, the group of several Humvees were primarily tasked with eliminating a Russian BTR that was believed to be in the village. They rode in using .50 cal to suppress the just waking up Russians while the "Anti tank" Humvee was going to use a Javelin from the 50 cal cupola to hit the BTR and then high tail it out. Later, with the BTR knocked out, the Ukrainian infantry would advance on the town. It turns out that the BTR wasn't there and the Humvees were in and out in 5 minutes with a couple RPG almost being fired at them (yay 50 cal). However, this could be done much safer with a Bradley. One could be used as a command or spotting vehicle both to use thermal and laser to look for and range any vehicle targets or suppress infantry at range while another 1 or 2 could move into the town to to knock out a vehicle if there wasn't line of sight from outside the town. "Town" being a small collection of houses, basically. At that time, and since they learn slow probably now, Russia didn't keep a night watch and the vehicles were unmanned and parked near wherever the men were sleeping. There's a couple things to consider. First, not every Russian position has a tank defending it. BMP and BTR are being used as "heavy weapons squads" to give the infantry more firepower as well as mobility. Using a Bradley to knock out a BTR or BMP is a heck of a lot better than using a Humvee with Javelins being passed up to the 50 cal gunner who needs to take a shot while taking small arms fire (assuming the Russian IFV isn't awake yet) from the open cupola. Also, that raid could eliminate the vehicle threats while also using American doctrine of several Bradley to dismount their troops secure the area. Essentially, combining what the Humvees and later foot infantry were doing into one go. The guy who left the comment about a Bradley being ineffective because even tanks aren't effective is just dumb. Ukraine has been using its BTR-4 as well as the Humvee raid described above to knock out Russian armor in ambush or raid. With artillery ammo starting to be at a premium, being able to engage targets with safe direct fire capability as well as move infantry with fire support will become critical, especially when Ukraine is on the offensive. Bradley had growing pains, for sure. However, it does overmatch the BMP, BTR, and T-62 antiques Russia is pressing into service. Also note, that the Bradley uses the engine in front as "armor" incase it does take a tank round to the face. I haven't looked into if that design feature has saved any crew in our various invasioneering adventures.
Hmm Ryan I wonder how familiar you are with COBie, kinda related to your sponsor about digitising information, given that it orginated from US Army Corps of Engineers should be an interesting topic for people intrested in logistics and maintenance.
Supposedly BFVs have actually killed some T-72s with just their 25mm autocannon. Now, that don't mean a BFV firing at the front of a T-72 is always going to kill it -- usually won't -- but the chain gun is not totally useless against at T-72. And they have those TOW missiles, which definitely will kill a T-72. I think the Ukrainians will take to those vehicles very nicely, and squeeze every bit of utility out of them. Problem is, I see "50" being the reported number that are being sent. That's a little bit pathetic. Ukraine needs a couple hundred, at least.
No. Drones serve the purpose of artillery spotting far better than a Bradley that is relying on direct line of sight can. This will be used in the same manner as the bmp- 2
Interested in a Doculock Franchise? Click below:
doculockllc.com/mcbeth
Like my T-shirts?
www.bunkerbranding.com/pages/ryan-mcbeth
If the Bradley Fighting Vehicle is a very potent and capable platform that will give the Ukrainian Army a way to spot Artillery rounds, as well as carry infantry troops into battle and retain some anti-tank capability.
Connect with me on Twitter:
@ryanmcbeth
Watch my long form videos:
th-cam.com/play/PLt670_P7pOGmLWZG78JlM-rG2ZrpPziOy.html
Join the conversation:
discord.gg/pKuGDHZHrz
Want to send me something?
Ryan McBeth Productions LLC
8705 Colesville Rd.
Suite 249
Silver Spring, MD 20910
USA
Rights and References:
The Pentagon Wars
HBO 1998
Army FM 7-7J (Bradley)
Bradley Swim Pictures
forums.kitmaker.net/t/m2a0-bradley-swim-barrier-reference/16330
Reddit thread:
www.reddit.com/r/WarCollege/comments/erpmjm/having_just_watched_the_pentagon_wars_how_has_the/
www.battleorder.org/us-bradley-platoon
Modern Dragoons - Bradley Mechanized Infantry, CPT Christopher E. Lockhart, Infantry Magazine, Nov-Dec 1992/
AVAC
www.keymilitary.com/article/track-changed-tactics
Development of the American Tank-Infantry Team During World War II in Africa and Europe
by Captain J. L. Mudd Armor Magazine, September-October 1999.
Swim capability:
www.upi.com/Archives/1987/04/14/Army-suspends-combat-vehicle-swim-operations/1004545371200/
Desert storm:
www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m2.htm
M2A2 ODS-SA
www.nationalguard.mil/News/Family-Programs/Article/575543/pennsylvania-army-guard-upgrades-to-latest-version-of-the-m2-bradley-fighting-v/
M2A4
www.armytimes.com/news/your-army/2022/04/25/first-unit-gets-modernized-bradley-fighting-vehicle/
Half Life Bradley
th-cam.com/video/wyYMQ6cFjFY/w-d-xo.html
Panzer
By Bundesarchiv, Bild 101I-783-0110-12 / Dörner / CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0 de, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=5413676
Tankers do tanker things:
th-cam.com/video/O9f38CrCR5w/w-d-xo.html
By RIA Novosti archive, image #1274 / RIA Novosti / CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15579759
By Bundesarchiv_Bild_183-1988-1007-009,_Berlin,_39._Jahrestag_DDR-Gründung,_Parade.jpg: Mittelstädt, Rainerderivative work: Hohum (talk), CC BY-SA 3.0 de, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=7497732
By Pibwl - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=15512587
By Konflikty.pl, Attribution, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=49673858
"Soviet soldier's on a combat mission ww2" by Za Rodinu is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0.
"Vietnam War 1960s - Soldiers on dirt road in M113 APC" by manhhai is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
"File:RIAN archive 644460 First stage in the Soviet troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.jpg" by Yuriy Somov / Юрий Сомов is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0
"DONG HA 1972 - South Vietnamese troops move up on M113 APC." by manhhai is licensed under CC BY 2.0..
"Vietcong models with RPG" by Der_Henk is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
"Vietnam War Photo" by manhhai is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
"1963 M113 APC. Bavaria, Germany" by mcdolan79 is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.
"Tên lửa chống tăng Maljutka AT-3 Sagger của Nga" by manhhai is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0.
"17 Mar 1973, Saigon, South VN --- Vietcong Lt. Gen. Tran Van Tra gestures during Press Conference" by manhhai is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0.
"Near Quang Tri on the DMZ border -- patrol along the 17th Parallel. Vietnam, 1971" by manhhai is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
"BMP-1 Jüterbog / Altes Lager" by 270862 is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0.
egyptindependent.com/first-egyptian-soldier-to-raise-egyptian-flag-in-sinai-during-october-war-dies-at-72/
BMPs 4 wheeling
th-cam.com/video/f44JIUD5IWk/w-d-xo.html
By Steve F-E-Cameron (Merlin-UK) - Self-photographed, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=2121564
Sos
M2s are already in Poland and some have been sent into western Ukraine already.
You should pin this up top, it was pretty far down the comments list for me.
The Soviet BMP-1 was introduced 8 years after the very similar Schützenpanzer Lang HS.30 was introduced by the Federal Republic of Germany.
The British designed an IFV in 1918. It was to be used in 1919 if the war had continued. It basically was a stretched version of the Mk.5. The infantry compartment was basically standing room only. There is an example of one at the Bovington Tank Museum. During WWII the British and Canadians devised a IFV by removing the turret of a Sherman which allowed for about a squad of men to ride protected with the tanks. This was found to be better than riding in a truck with its canvas sides.
Was in the back of a Bradley that was hit by massive IED in Iraq on two different occasions. Both times I walked away with nothing more than bruises. This thing saved my life twice and I loved it!
an IED is quite different than a tank round or RPG , would it survive one of these ??.
@@johnsmith-ce2tq it's not designed to take a hit from.any modern main battle tank. Nor should it be expected to. No weapon or defense system.can make a soldier immortal.
@@cr4zyj4ck so in this theater of battle its not going to survive??as i don't think the Russians use IED ?
Did you get a concussion or other kind of brain injury from the blast? I've read about CTE being a big problem with vets especially those who hit an IED.
@@Clumrat Bradley is fully sealed so shockwave and concussive force shouldn't be able to reach the inside as long as armor plating stays intact. The only way I can see concussion being inflicted on troops inside is if the blast is strong enough to lift the vehicle up several feet into the air or roll the vehicle over, causing the soldiers within to tumble - that'd almost certainly risk a concussion or other brain injury. However, Bradley weighs up to 30 tonnes, so it would take an absolutely massive IED to roll / lift a Bradley.
I swam an M-2 Bradley across a lake in Fort Hood, Texas, as my unit transitioned into 11 Mikes. The squad had to go through the operation to check if the vehicle was float worthy before the next driver crossed the lake. All I remember is checking the gasket seals to the ramp and back door, the condition of the screen and supports, and making sure the sump pump worked. We had no sinking during our adventures.
Sank an M2A2 before they told us that it was no longer a feature.
@@xrobertcmx the m2a3 has the pumps as well as the seals, but the pumps don’t get PMCS, nor would I ever put it in water higher than the tracks
I swam an M2 across a pond in ‘95. Set up and breakdown was horrendous. It really didn’t swim. Just slowly floated while taking on water.
The took the amphib ability away long ago.
We cut the swim barriers off the A2 variants in Korea in 96 because they just didn’t work.
The A1 has a trim vane along with the swim barrier and lighter armor, but no commander was willing to risk it. I used to leave my drain plugs halfway open and the bilge pump on when we forded and it would spray the MP/cav scout road guards as we drove by
"Just slowly floated while taking on water". In other words, it sank slower than it normally would.
And I keep saying this to people who are convinced russian IFVs are able to swim. If its this hard to keep western amphibious stuff floating, imagine the state of those things in the water
While I was in them about 4 years ago they had a big sticker that says "DO NOT SWIM" I always found it amusing while waiting for the mechanics to come tell me that the track was fucked.
I was watching the chieftan do a run down on the early BMPs. Truly they were revolutionary at the time. The turret was state of the art . But obviously as newer , better IFVs and anti tank weaponry came out it kinda became obsolete fast.
I hope he does send them. They'll look nice riding into battle next to the French AMX-10RC's that Emmanuel Macron just agreed to send. 👍 🇺🇦
Yep especially when they come at night, both have targeting systems on board that are far superior to 90% of Russian armours sensors suites.
I'm waiting for the Chieftain to give his to cents on this issue, he's recently trained with the French and speaks the language.
On top he was a Bradley troop commander.
The problem is with the zoo of different vehicles the Ukraine has now, maintenance is going to be a huuge headache.
@@philippos5547 it is already
@Philippos field repairs shouldn't be a problem, with the units having maintenance packs. Everything else is handled by contractors in Poland and the Baltics, or it goes on a train to the manufacturer or original depot.
A bit of a pain in the butt, could be worse though.
Post war this will have to be streamlined of course.
I can already hear the French dong jokes.
Circa 1989 I was in Fort Hood. It was a Bradley driver. We swam it across a river. We did indeed ride on top with hatches open . One Bradley was leaving the river and the water came over the curtain and down she went. Fortunately everyone bailed out and no one was injured😂
TY for your service.
Like the dual drive Shermans at Normandy.
Sank like a rock eh?
A Brad is the only thing that is intended to swim but swims worse that an M9 ACE
You should do a in-depth video on the tow missile, capabilities and versions. Like the differences on the tow2a and tow2b, and how they differ.
That excites me
It’s the whole reason I used to wake up and go to work in the morning.
The sound of Bushmasters and TOWs is akin to Angels welcoming you with song and wine
He did a very short one on the TOW
Did one on the TOW, he named it hell on a wire
Out of stock on Amazon 😭
@@sergeantklein6026 Akin to "I love the smell of napalm in the morning, it smells like victory" (Col. Kilgore ) from the movie "Apocalypse Now", the greatest Army recruiting film ever made.
I love the aesthetic of the pre-MAD early-arms-race atomic soldier. So horrifying yet nostalgic.
ORO: MAD concept had no effect on the strategy of tactical nukes on the battlefied. MAD concept did/does NOT mean that a single nuke will be retaliated with a massive full scale volley. Go do more reading.
Except for the rocket belt, it was pretty darn forward thinking and pretty much every aspect of the concept is now fairly standard for US Army and Marine infantrymen. Fortunately the Chemical and Radiological protection hasn't been needed much over the years.
Just learned a whole lot about the history of IFVs and the Bradley. Thanks from a Navy veteran who used a 20 mm mg on the canals, rivers near Cambodia in 1968 - 69 on an Armored Troop Carrier (T112-8). We jigged the 20 mount so I could use a back up Browning .30 cal. mg in case the 20 went down, which they could when old and used: stirrup cables breaking when charging the weapon, rounds not firing and not ejecting (which happened on my last fire fight.....if we'd had another ambush that night I'd have jammed another round on top possibly.
Bradley crew member here. I loved the Bradley.
TY for your service.
I love watching your videos Ryan. They are very well done and so nostalgic. I was there when we went from M113's to Bradleys. It was love at first sight when I saw them roll in to Benning.
Former driver and gunner here. This is probably the best run down of the Bradley I've ever seen. Great job!
My only doubt is that these Ukrainian soldiers will need some serious training on these tracks. You just don't jump in them and ride off into battle. Where will they be able to train in them and not make themselves targets once that location is known?
Probably UK or Poland, both of which have been providing training and support for Ukraine.
I remember how I 1st saw Bradley IRL. It pulled up right behind us on a highway and this thing is JUUUGE as f*! It doesn't seem that high on pictures but when you sit on the back seat of a car and look out of the back window, it's towering over you like a damn mothership of death. I will never not forget that sight, that was scary. In a good way.
That is actually it's major problem. It's huge = it gets shot at more often.
If you look at Soviet equivalents (BMP series) they are much lower.
It’s over Vladimir, I have the high ground.
@@herrhaber9076 not really a problem when you can hide 90% of the silloute behind a hill in a defelade position and still shoot where the BMP both BMP 1 and 2's have to expose 95-100% of their silloute to fire out of a defilade position so in other words. if a bradley is shooting at a BMP the BMP won't be able to hit it. but if a BMP is shooting a Bradley you know its at the top of a hill or fully exposed. unless its in a dug in position but that just makes it too easy. it can't exactly maneuver when its in a hole in the ground.
theres your problem! get a big truck.
@@herrhaber9076 You have NO data to prove it gets shot at more often. That’s not how combat works. You don’t shoot at things based on size.
Ryan, it is just another amazing video. I had no idea about Bradley's laser spotting capabillities, it is now so simple and clear. You got the knowledge bro!
No he has Google.Just like the rest of us.Some are just to lazy to read so they rely on watching a video and let someone else so it for them !
@@Spyderz-xo9rz grrrgrrrrgrrrgrgrrrr :)
Good for you discussing bradley's "bad rep" through this video. Suggest lazerpigs video for a more detailed understanding why the Pentagon wars and the mafia behind these kind of "refomation" are frowned upon.
Please stop recommending that drunk fools videos, he already has a big enough cringe fan base
with the French AMX-10RC Tanks being sent, Bradley's are almost a given already
WHAT DID I FUCKING SAY!? AND MARDERS, TOO!
And the Bradleys are conveniently due for replacement in the US over the next decade, the program actually appears to be going somewhere this time.
Lets hope they go for CV90.
Those things just work and arent too tall
@@dwwolf4636 They did go with the CV-90.
Yessss!!!!
Sounds like overmatch is the adult version of rock scissors paper. Awesome video as per usual.
That's always been the way of war, especially when you look at the napoleonic era.
Pokemon Go.. to War
Ryan needs to play 'Rust' to know the most infamous use of Bradley in a video game....
I don't mean to be an asshole, but how the hell do you get rock paper scissors backwards?
@@psychoaiko666 Good point, I have lived in Korea too long and got myself confused. Over here it is “scissors, rock, paper” in Korea you would say: “gawi, bawi, bo“. Does anyone remember the one with Spock in it?
I was a dismount inf and I've spent my fair share of time in a Bradley. They're beautiful beasts indeed. I definitely remember the port weapons when I was in Korea back in 02'
TY for your service.
The pentagon wars is (or at least was in 2018) required watching in the US Army Sergeant Majors Academy in the module about procurement. I was a 19D Bradley commander and cav scout. Got love for thr Brad!!!
Look dog, IFV's were a good idea, but today's infantryman expects to arrive in more comfort than that. A better idea is the *armored RV.* You simply buy a *Winnebago Horizon with every option box ticked,* stock it full of brandy & beer kegs, and weld on 1/2" thick steel plates to cover the exterior surfaces. Each one can deliver 10+ soldiers with a much higher blood alcohol level than that damn Bradley can. Party on!
Definitely a morale booster and get away from the trenches during freezing weather.🥶🥶🥶🥶🥶🥶
Man, I’m not super into “military stuff” but I really like these video. I can see the amount of effort put into them. Great work man and thank you!
Love what you're doing. It is always so refreshing to hear an opinion from someone with an actual military background.
I remember reading somewhere the only reason the Bradley was given the amphibious requirement is because they found out the BMP is (supposedly) able to swim across rivers... (turns out it's not much more amphibious in reality than the Brad lol but would have been better if that wasn't made a requirement in the first place)
All Russian IFVs can float. It is a doctrinal requirement for them. You’ll notice if you check them all out closely on the front end, they all have an extra metal plate on the front end. That is their trim vane that folds up when in water that prevents water from rushing over the front of the vehicle and swamping it.
@@mathewcarson364 Your right, but unfortunately there's a lot of prep work that goes into getting an IFV to float. You can't just on a whim take your IFV for a swim. You need to check seals, make sure everything's greased up etc. Also if I'm remembering right BMPs were capable of floating in the same vain of the M113 and M2 Bradley are capable of floating(Providing were talking about the original iteration of the two). Yes, you can do it but its a royal pain in the ass and god help you if its a fast river or shitty weather.
Great vid! Definitely interested to see how/if Bradleys influence the war in Ukraine. I learned about Bradleys from a third source though: 8th grade social studies teacher was a Commander in one and said it was like family to him - he bought a Tamiya 1/35 scale kit of his model machine and a friend and I built it and painted to spec, even gave it the fluted Bushmaster barrel option to match his vehicle. He had it up in the classroom in a little case and I always appreciate that - hope you're well Greg Mittman.
In the name of the Ukrainian people I thank all true Americans, whose hearts are beating in unison with freedom, democracy and liberty - you are our best supporters and friends. Thank you for the guns, and all the military stuff. You are investing into Ukraine victory which will help keep the whole European continent safe. I welcome you to my country, and my home after the victory! God bless America! Glory to Ukraine!
Glory to the Heroes!
Enjoy the latest Aid(s) package from yours truly! When Putin is shattered into pieces, it will be good to see Ukraine under the fold of our international agenda. Slava Ukrani!
As a kid in Louisville, KY, I remember hearing on the news about Bradleys sinking during swim tests near Ft. Knox.
Brad is not a tank by name but it is a light tank by definition. I crewed M2 in Iraq its cannon can penetrate any soviet Armour, had 3 Kills with M242 in Kuwait, 2 kills on the end of wire
Nice!
Its cannon?
You mean missiles
@@divoulos5758 he probably was talking about the AUTOCANNON which can have I think by that point either APDS or APFSDS although I don’t know when the Bradley would have gotten the APFSDS for it’s 30
@@areyouserious866 is the barrel rifled? If it is its not apdsfs
@@divoulos5758 he mentioned "2 at end of wire." That's the atgm. Basically (and he can correct me if this is a misrepresentation) he's saying the cannon killed 3 the tows got 2.
I always thought the Bradley had a high profile compared to the Soviet/Russian IFV's. I was in during the '80's when the Army had the 11M mos for the Bradley. The running joke was that they had to hook a tow cable up to the Bradley's when trying to do a water operation. Still a big improvement over the M113.
Former 11 Mike here
o7 🇺🇸
The high profile thing is b.s. BMPs are so low profile to be worthless in combat. That high profile allows the Bradley to fight more efficiently
@@drewschumann1 Good point, I was thinking of from a defensive standpoint that they could be identified and targeted more easily. Coming from a light infantry standpoint, I wasn't mechanized. I guess there's a tradeoff
@@jmarc1 Even a BTR is big enough of a vehicle to be easily seen and targeted. Forget the size issue. The Bradley’s tall turret is actually a combat advantage. Better view, targeting, and ability to shoot from behind cover. Plus it provides more interior space.
The BMP was designed with its low profile to be a fairly light amphibious vehicle for the Russian Naval Infantry. Similar to the Marine LAV. Once they saw its lack of armament and armor, they made it too heavy to swim.
A low profile was an advantage back when gun sights were purely optical. Less surface area to hit meant more misses, but thermal sights and heat-seeking missiles killed that notion.
@@afcgeo882 Well you go from shooting cheap plentiful ammo out of the BMP to down bradley and the like to using more expensive missiles on a cheap BMP. Keep in mind a brand new BMP-3 is 1million, the same cost of an MRAP. While a Bradley costs over 3 million per.
Former armored cavalryman here, the Bradley was one of the most effective CFVs I've ever used, they took a bunch of hits in iraq I had two destroyed under me over there, every one walked away every time.
I remember hearing about two Bradley's that ran into a group of tanks in Iraq. The pair used a natural hill for cover and worked in tandem with one popping up over the hill to fire a TOW missile to destroy a tank and then duck and cover behind the hill to reload while the second Bradley would pop up and fire. Brilliant improvised tactics that enabled them to engage and win against the far better armored tanks. The staggard continuous fire of the TOW won the engagement for them, as the TOW proved its efficiency and was able to disable the tanks, while the hill provided effective cover from any returned fire.
Well I must say this was a very good video. I myself remember swimming the Bradley and even seeing one sink 😂. If I remember correctly, they lost the ability to swim shortly after the first armor upgrade. Overall it is a good vehicle, it’s biggest drawback is its size. The optics, thermal and regular along with the TOW missile system will be a great help in Ukraine 🇺🇦 as long as they keep it in the support role.
Ryan, thanks for a very interesting & informative video on the background history of the development of the M2 Bradley IFV. I learned something new today!
1:45 Dude,
The Most Iconic appearance of the Bradley was in Battlefields Bad Company 2.
Great show. The M2 and M3 Bradley was produced in 4050 M2 and 2050 M3. The USA has over 40,000 fighting vehicles. MRAP could be very useful in Ukraine.
Ukraine is already using MRAPs but i think its the worst vehicle to send there. MRAPs have a very large profile which makes them a big target on a generally large open terrain. MRAPS are ok on roads but not so much off roads bc of its high center of gravity they are easy to roll and flip and a lot of the fighting in Ukraine is happening away from roads. MRAPS armor is not sufficient to compensate for their "firepower" which are only mounted crew serve weapons such as MARK-19s, .50 CAL and M-240s at best. MRAPS were good at providing protection against mines and IED bc of their "V" shaped haul and frankly built as solution to a very specific problem (COIN ops) and not for a conventional war with a peer or even a near peer foe
@@ukraine-war-update Besides the high profile, MRAPs are pretty great vehicles. More comfortable and reliable than Humvees, with more troop capacity and armor. They aren't made for fighting other vehicles, they aren't IFVs. They're made for shoot and scoot missions in Conventional wars. Drive in, light up some buildings and light vehicles, and drop off a squad, drive out. When combined with IFVs and heavier armor, like they should be in Conventional wars, they're about perfect. Nothing is a stand-alone system.
@@brandondavis7777 Nobody cares about the comfort level in this type of the war (its not COIN) I get your point but i disagree; 12.7mm will chew right through MRAPs or at least make an easy mobility kill (and BTW nazi ruSSkis have bigger killsticks than that deployed forward) ; MRAPS cant keep up with a tank or any track vehicle when offroad and its a bad vehicle for an open terrain with wide fields of view and little terrain to hide behind; off-road MRAPs will roll over even on a tiny slope. it is somewhat better than an armor HMMWV as far as armor but is nowhere near its mobility; i would prefer the HMMWV for scouting with an LRAS on top for indirect CFF missions (we should give those Ukraine BTW if we haven't done it yet). But LAV would be the best IMHO for the type of combat there is currently.
@@ukraine-war-update Which infantry is more effective, the infantry who wasn't tossed around and beat up on the ride over, or the infantry who had no leg room and got their spines compressed? Comfort is more than just "Ah, an AC feels good". The LATV(An MRAP) is the perfect vehicle for Ukraine. Lower profile than other MRAPs, quicker and lighter than a humvee(with more armor), made for off roads. You're also cherry picking something like 40 accidents for your "roll over" rhetoric.
@@brandondavis7777 where did you get the "40" number from? also what is LATV? i was referencing MRAPs which Ukraine did already get. these vehicles are terrible at off-roading i used them personally and i believe for COIN (inferior enemy that is using IEDs) this vehicle is great but i would not want to be to fight conventional forces even if they have BMP-1 or 2 or even BTRs not to mention tanks. MRAPS are better than nothing but can provide much better armor to Ukraine to defeat nazi ruSSia
Excellent video, sarge!
I was mech inf in Nam 69-70 Spot on about reluctance to shoot at M113s plus tanks. They only fucked with us during rainy season when mobility was limited or we did convoy support. BTW Big Red One forever!
TY for your service.
11B love their Bradleys. Bradleys will be an awesome addition to Ukraine. I saw a group of them live fire TOWs at the firing table at Ft. Hood back in '88 when I worked for the Killeen newspaper.
The Bradley Linebacker seems more like what they could use now. It’s ADA on the M2 chassis, still has the 25mm, instead of a TOW system it has a quad surface to air launcher.
I was on an air defense Bradley in South Korea when we still dismounted with Stingers after a year in South Korea I went to Ft. Stewart Ga I was in the first Bradley Linebacker class we went to Kuwait with the Linebackers half the time the M6 didn’t work properly I think that’s why they were discontinued the avenger does the job good enough.
The BMP-1 was expected to also fight tanks at short distances with it's 73mm gun.
There's footage of Ukraine doing that. But it only seemed to work against other BMP's.
the bmp gun is shit, i still am puzzled why the soviets didnt just stuff 15 more saggers in place of the stupid 73mm
Is realy bad to hit anything that comes from. GREECKS had more than 500 BMP1.
@@gamingrex2930 The 73mm was used for infantry support purposes as well.
Its only has about 300 to 350 mmRHA pen IIRC with its HEAT.
Infantry officer here. Big Red One Vietnam. I have no experience with the Bradley but I like the concept. To me the IFVs are better than tanks. They have firepower, mobility and shock action. Especially with the TOW system. Does the Stryker have TOWs also? If not then why not?
The only protection we had were jungle fatigues hahaha. I did do a few operations with tanks. The VC would plant a mine in the road and drop a tree over it. This was done over and over. We infantrymen liked this easy operation . Mine detectors found the mine and we would blow it up with c4. The tankers loved it but we knew it was slowing us down. It was a waste of time but nobody got hurt so it was easy.
I know the M2 Bradley got shit on in Pentagon Wars and that in reality the development phase was a huge clusterfuck and cost overruns, but when it FINALLY came into combat in the Gulf War it became a swan from an ugly duckling. It killed more Iraqi armor than the M1 Abrams did. Still did very well in Iraq even though it can't handle IED's well. As a fighting vehicle, the M2 Bradley is really good. It is heavy and it cannot "swim". As a fighting vehicle, it has done very well. Even though the Stryker vehicle is trying to take over, the US Army is not going to let the m2 Bradley's go away in the future.
as a 19D we had to swim test our 1x a year, and we were often solo doing recon LRRPs w/o tanks, just our 4.2s for support. Our unit tested the ODS variant for the army when it first came out. They are still extremely loud, puff smoke when u hit the gas, and are like trying to hide an elephant behind a coffee table. As a gunner I had to sit on the turret floor to shoot because there wasnt enough room for me at 6'3 to use the seat and reticle effectively. As a commander I usually ran with my head out of cuppola and my Aux site flipped up. recon variant M3 is set up for only 2 dismounts and a lot more TOW missiles. Death Trap is my final analysis after many years both as 11M on the M2 IFV and 19D on M3 CFV. ODS was a result of all us that were literally stuck on our tracks in the desert for month for GW1 surrounded by mines sitting on a screen line while our clothes rotted off of us in the heat. The swim capability was a useful option if you had time, to ford a river as recon, when there were zero other support elements usually nearby. We were the ones that had to classify routes and bridges for any following vehicles before anything heavier arrived. I prefered scouting in a 113 with a mk19 or minigun or ITV over bradleys.
A superb video watched all the way through. Thank you very much Ryan. Cheers from Ft. Meade!
From personal experience I can attest that dismounting is a fun expertise with lots of need for repetition. Mounting seems to work much better, especially when the outside is not nice.
Good summary.
In the 80s I was a USAF Targeting Officer working with the Munitions Effectiveness programs. During one trip to Aberdeen Proving Grounds, I met an Army Officer that worked in munitions testing and survivability. Even some years later he would get absolutely livid about the stupidity of hitting a fully combat loaded Bradley with a Main Tank Gun. It blew up! Well Duh!
Rumor was he filed a Fraud Waste and Abuse complaint against everyone involved in forcing that test. (which apparently didn't go very far. Congress Critters seem to take exception to being named in such complaints).
as a former 19D i was dreading the M2 and managed to be light for over 20 years but sure liked its firepower in Iraq when it was needed and didnt really see it in Afghanistan prob due to the terrain. I always wondered how it would do in a conventional battle against a peer unit due to its high profile if compared to the Warsaw Pact IFVs
probably pretty well. as you know the BMP's can't fire in any kind of defilade position. Their entire silloute will be exposed if not its in a dug in position and makes it even easier shooting at targets that can't move. because they're dug in.
Again, the M2s job is to be alongside tanks.
Depends which ones - I would assume it would be quite close to BMP-2 and touch inferior to BMP-3 while clearly superior to BMP-1 in most situations. Its main drawback is its luck of amphibious ability and heavy weight.
@@tomk3732 What are you comparing and why? The BMP-2 and above have no amphibious capability, just like the M2 above the A1 variant. The M2A2 and above are superior to the BMP-3 in most ways. The Kurganets-25 promises to be a big leap forward, but even that’s below the M2A4 level.
@@afcgeo882 All Russian / Soviet IFV are amphibious, i.e. BMP-2 and BMP-3 are amphibious as well as new stuff based on Armata family, both wheeled and tracked.
BMP-3 is superior in almost all missions to all versions of M2. Its newer design. All armata platform vehicles, which are not accepted into service and a bit experimental promise to be vastly superior to any M2 in all known configurations of battlefield - i.e. there is no situation where M2 could be considered superior. They have better armor, firepower, sensors and are amphibious. One can argue for say crew comfort but that appears to be at most a tie. Again, this is a bit unfair comparison as M2 is simply old.
I would imagine that how you crane uses these with largely be dependent on the number they receive and how many they receive at any given time.
If we're only giving Ukraine 50 in two shipments, they're going to be used very differently than for going to give them 250.
I suspect that the Ukrainians will try to integrate them into units that have m113s to give them support and better artillery support.
I remember when the TOW 2B first came into service
TY for your service.
Yes, they swam back then with kits, Year 2000 while in AIT they tried that in Ft. Knox Kentucky, and again, it sank. Before leaving BAE SYSTEMS we’re considering replacing the 25 mm with 30 mm being tested at Aberdeen Proving ground. Two companies are working with PM Bradley to replace the TOW missile with fire and forget such as Javelin Missiles.
Everyone also overlooks the timeframe of the original procurement for Bradley. Smaller platoon and squad sizes was seen as a feature, as TRADOC was not certain that they could field 11-man squads with an all-volunteer army.
The trade-off of smaller platoons, but each platoon organically armed with 8 TOW launchers, vs larger platoons, but having to attach ITVs from battalion seems like an easy decision. Also, the number of ATGM tubes that can be brought to the fight increased significantly with Bradley. The downside was reloads. ITVs carry 10 reloads, which is far more than an M2 can carry and have room for troops.
The biggest problem with the Bradley is the light armor. The problem is the US, unlike most countries, has to be able to airlift much of its fighting forces across the world, This requires strict weight restrictions. That means less armor than most others. It will stop small arms fire, but that is about it.
I assume most of us here have seen Lazerpig's video on the Bradley IFV, and if you've not seen it, I highly recommend you watch it.
For those that are aware, I'm sure you all just squirmed a little bit inside at the mention of "The Pentagon Wars." 😂
cav scout here. the bradley could be very helpful in this conflict. but just like you mentioned...combined arms. there's no tank support. second. it takes years to become proficient in gunnery and to become a vehicle commander. last. the ukes are out of men. 150k KIA and three times that wounded/out of the fight. they're conscripting boys now. the ukes are dead in the water. this equipment is better spent on taiwan.
RPG M113 Pot Shots? @7:55 Would agree not likely. However, it did happen on Nov 27 1968 as C Troop 1/11th ACR Attacked the 141 Regiment of NVA. A Silver Star recipient of that day was laying the hurt with his 50 cal on fortified positions, when an RPG slammed into his M113 knocking him off and spraying his arm with shrapnel. Subsequently, he remounted the the 50 Cal and continued to lay the suppressive hurt, as well as rallying the attack while wounded (resulting in the Silver Star).
i was a gunner on an M3A1 during Desert Storm - the 25mm is a legit canon that will go head to head with anything up to an original t72 - which the russians seem to be using a lot of these days. these will be a gamechanger for the UAF. loved my time in the Brad
I always look forward to your videos ryan they're both interesting and a bit funny at the same time and shows how much effort u put into them.
Respect from the UK 🇬🇧
Can you do a video on the french amx 10 RC? Since this vehicle is going to be sent to ukraine by france.
fast, lightly armoured, HEAVILY armed. Can defeat any Russian tank, should be used in ambush roles, probably will not because of lack of training and too much courage.
@@QuizmasterLaw while most of your point are true, the part about the gun i dont believe. The gun is a 105 mm gun. I dont think it will have enough firepower to deal with russian mbt’s from the front
@@maartenvanderpoel5804 No unless very short range and that's not what you want... AMX10 RC is a recon vehicle that can defend itself against IFVs, infantry etc. in tandem with Bradleys however, that have TOWs, then that would be a great combo for in-depth breakthrough
@@maartenvanderpoel5804 It depends on the ammunition type used, but France being France they made it only able to fire French ammunition and I don’t know what the max pen is for those APFSDS rounds.
Probably won’t be penning the front but it being a wheeled vehicle it’s easier to flank enemy tanks with.
I’ve also seen plenty of dope vids of Ukrainians pulling off perfect tank ambushes… so something like that being hidden in a first or behind some kinda of foliage would be insane.
@@maartenvanderpoel5804 i don't favor sending depleted uranium munitions but even without DU you're wrong.
Remember: a lot of Russian reactive armour is full of bribes and cardboard. The rolled steal underneath isn't much better. 105mm can defeat T-90 from the front.
My son is a FSTer and drives a model of the Bradley specifically for fire support teams. It’s pretty impressive how it can locate targets and quietly turn those into fire missions for the big guns.
I loved th B-FIST variant.
Pentagon Wars is a funny movie and is a good ego-check on the Brad but it's an ego check it needs as it's a great vehicle. Its "hard factors" like gun caliber, speed, armor and weight aren't amazing but its soft factors like sensors, stabilization, accuracy, flexibility, elevation and depression make the vehicle strong where it counts.
I listened to a audiobook years ago about a Bradly Crew in the beginning of the war in Iraq. I think the book was called "carnivore". My take away from that book was that the Bradley is a odd mismatch of capabilities that make it perfect for killing a bunch of people. On paper it doesn't sound great, AT weapons go right through it, it has a weak gun and only 4 wire guided missiles... But apparently that's all you need, plus air support and pseudo magical logistical capabilities.
I loved my Bradley as a scout, Stryker, not so much, especially the dragoon version. The javelin one was cool, though
TY for your service.
Great analysis Ryan
10:37 you can see the heat coming off the 25mm lol
Excellent video Ryan! Thanks.
Ryan, thank you so much for sharing your knowledge and expertise! You are a great teacher! You are good at breaking things down into easily understood concepts and doing it in a fun to learn way! I appreciate what you’re doing bro! Best wishes and keep up the great work!
Do a safety brief on a very little known subject a bunch of professionals don’t know about.
“Static from multiple lines causing instant detonation mid flight”
You might think firing off multiple tows is a good idea right? Not if your too close to any other wire guided missle system.
Thor shows you a theramin on the very short lighting ride.
I like the Union Jack in the back ground but I count make out weather you where flying it the correct way around.
These IFV's (also from other countries) mean only one thing - Ukraine is about to do a full scale attack.
I am not sure where they will use these initially, but in the end, Crimea is one sure place they need this. Regardless, these IFV's will surely shock the Russians as these will afford the Ukrainians speed in troop movements, maneuver, and spotting capabilities. These are essential in attacking.
I still laugh at the line ‘What do you want me to do? But a sign that says ‘I’m not a tank, don’t shoot me in 80 languages on it?’ from The Pentagon Wars.
Yea if they learn recon with a Brad. And keep armor ready to breach after some idf they could quickly take land and trench systems
Thanks for the effort!
Nice job, thanks!
we swam our m3 one time and it was mostly just to match the m113 we had - which actuallly swam well -so it was more of a 'well the old one did it' - but i never swam it in either the 2nd cav or the 3rd cav that i served in (and like you said - who would? the rest of the gear (m1s, and m88s and howitzers coudn't)
I know of Dragoons via JRPGs like Final Fantasy.
So to me, a Dragoon is someone who jumps into the air for a full turn before power-landing on one of the enemy monsters, dealing extra damage.
Love your commentary, accuracy and honesty.
Thank you for your experience.
Thank you for your continuation of excellent content that his really well presented.
I currently test the new M2A4 and M7A4 turrets. They arent much different from A3s. Also the new IFV program "OMFV" will soom to down to its last 2 contract competitors which are slotted for a working delivery by 2028
Love Breitling watches, you have a nice piece there!
We either equip the Ukrainians properly including things like Bradley’s or we watch this war of attrition play out with Russia simply having far greater numerical superiority in the sheer number of bodies they can stand to lose. Ship ‘em.
there already in europe since last week for nat execises... lots of abrams also. I bet not one vehicles will cross back the atlantic
Ryan this was excellent! When are you coming to Utah?
25mm can't go through armor? Maybe a full plate of it, but they always have weak points that can be exploited. 4 Brads spamming at a T-72 will find a weak point.
Thank you for the great video Ryan
That was really informative, thank you.
I grew up in Detroit with a dad who worked at the tank Automotive command we talked about this extensively what he said was that they knew main battle tanks were a waste of money back in World War II because the Nazis were spending all their money on Giant panzers that ran out of gas could get hit by artillery cuz they are easy to spot and they could only make a thousand of them or as the Americans built 40,000 Sherman's? So during the M1 development they knew that they couldn't use them in Europe because they wouldn't fit through tunnels or over all the bridges which would be blown out then when atgms came out they also knew that the main battle tanks would be essentially worthless because you wouldn't be able to keep enough of them on the battlefield especially if the Russians had Coronet. So the Bradley was actually a tank. Just like the Sherman was used with the 76 against pill boxes and hardpoints more than against other tanks the Bradley was set up to do the same thing. The Infantry will pop out and bird dog for the machine guns of the enemy and then the Bradley would either tow them out or Bushmaster them you're also didn't mention that in Vietnam the armored cavalry version of the m113 was used as a light tank to reduce enemy strong points also so it's kind of not exactly correct to say that it's not a quote unquote tank the British call there fighting Vehicles tanks and they invented the tank LOL it is an interesting discussion it goes right up there with whether or not you can call an M16 a gun LOL
I swam the Bradley back in 92 at Fort Benning AIT
Great video. Thanks for making me smarter!
I also wish that at the end of it attack you could be allowed to prepare for Counterattack, that never happened with us we either had to immediately attack the next objective because the enemy was on the Run or we had to withdraw because they were going to either hit us with artillery or our own artillery was going to hit them once they reoccupied
Heh! While the US was Yutza-klutzy-putzing around in their M113s, as from 1977 the Dutch had a fully functional AND amfib IFV. The YPR-765 with a 25mm dual-ammo autocanon and 7.62 NATO as coax, carrying an 8 man dismount squad of infantry.
The Dutch were not transforming their entire military after the Vietnam war 1975. Air power is what the U.S. has and always be dominant.
Having watched a vid of an American volunteer working with Ukrainian raiders using Humvees to do fast in and out assaults on Russian positions, I think Ukraine would use the Bradley in this role also with its ability to fire on the move and better cross country ability and armor than the Humvee.
In the engagement I saw, the group of several Humvees were primarily tasked with eliminating a Russian BTR that was believed to be in the village. They rode in using .50 cal to suppress the just waking up Russians while the "Anti tank" Humvee was going to use a Javelin from the 50 cal cupola to hit the BTR and then high tail it out. Later, with the BTR knocked out, the Ukrainian infantry would advance on the town.
It turns out that the BTR wasn't there and the Humvees were in and out in 5 minutes with a couple RPG almost being fired at them (yay 50 cal).
However, this could be done much safer with a Bradley. One could be used as a command or spotting vehicle both to use thermal and laser to look for and range any vehicle targets or suppress infantry at range while another 1 or 2 could move into the town to to knock out a vehicle if there wasn't line of sight from outside the town. "Town" being a small collection of houses, basically.
At that time, and since they learn slow probably now, Russia didn't keep a night watch and the vehicles were unmanned and parked near wherever the men were sleeping.
There's a couple things to consider. First, not every Russian position has a tank defending it. BMP and BTR are being used as "heavy weapons squads" to give the infantry more firepower as well as mobility.
Using a Bradley to knock out a BTR or BMP is a heck of a lot better than using a Humvee with Javelins being passed up to the 50 cal gunner who needs to take a shot while taking small arms fire (assuming the Russian IFV isn't awake yet) from the open cupola.
Also, that raid could eliminate the vehicle threats while also using American doctrine of several Bradley to dismount their troops secure the area. Essentially, combining what the Humvees and later foot infantry were doing into one go.
The guy who left the comment about a Bradley being ineffective because even tanks aren't effective is just dumb. Ukraine has been using its BTR-4 as well as the Humvee raid described above to knock out Russian armor in ambush or raid.
With artillery ammo starting to be at a premium, being able to engage targets with safe direct fire capability as well as move infantry with fire support will become critical, especially when Ukraine is on the offensive.
Bradley had growing pains, for sure. However, it does overmatch the BMP, BTR, and T-62 antiques Russia is pressing into service.
Also note, that the Bradley uses the engine in front as "armor" incase it does take a tank round to the face. I haven't looked into if that design feature has saved any crew in our various invasioneering adventures.
Well I didn't know much about the Bradley but I sure know a heck of a lot more now. Thanks for this interesting video.
Honestly Ryan! I like Spike IR and Javelin A lot more than any wired TOW!
Hmm Ryan I wonder how familiar you are with COBie, kinda related to your sponsor about digitising information, given that it orginated from US Army Corps of Engineers should be an interesting topic for people intrested in logistics and maintenance.
So if the Dnipro doesn't freeze solid enough for tanks, could it support Bradleys?
Bradleys were spotted on a train in Wroclaw, Poland today. Russia's fucked.
Supposedly BFVs have actually killed some T-72s with just their 25mm autocannon. Now, that don't mean a BFV firing at the front of a T-72 is always going to kill it -- usually won't -- but the chain gun is not totally useless against at T-72. And they have those TOW missiles, which definitely will kill a T-72.
I think the Ukrainians will take to those vehicles very nicely, and squeeze every bit of utility out of them.
Problem is, I see "50" being the reported number that are being sent. That's a little bit pathetic. Ukraine needs a couple hundred, at least.
Good book called"Carnivore" about a Bradley in Iraq. True story.
Great information! Thank you Ryan.
Love the history lessons and how the past is reflected in the present. I've heard the term but never knew what a dragoon actually did.
No. Drones serve the purpose of artillery spotting far better than a Bradley that is relying on direct line of sight can. This will be used in the same manner as the bmp- 2