WELCOME BACK TROOPS! We're finally getting back to regular uploads on this channel, after having been away for roughly six months! I absolutely did not mean to take that much time off, but with several issues delaying this video until February, and then... ... well yeah. Would have been a bit dicey to upload it then. Instead we decided to completely remake it with a different feel and focus, and hopefully nobody will take this as any sort of alignment with Russia or support for their invasion of Ukraine. We on this channel absolutely do not support the actions of the Russian government or armed forces in this time, but that should remove all discussion of parts of history like this, from the Soviet era. I hope you'll welcome us back as we return to regular content here, and look forward to the next episodes of Koala Explains and YFTS (Episode 3: Challenger 2!)
Glad to have u guys back, but plz just ignore the conflict and don't talk on about it. It's quite obvious this channel is informative videos. 👍not showing support or whatever
my dad served in a BMP-1 as a motor infantry platoon leader in the Soviet reserves. he told me he would make the gunner sit in the troop compartment during marches so he could sit in the more comfortable gunner's seat and sleep on the scope cushion.
The BMP-3 was controversially adopted by the Russian forces. I remember from the time of my service that the BMP-2 is more of a mobile platform for infantry. It's a place where you can sleep, eat, and easily carry the stretcher with the wounded through the back doors. Such a tiny mobile base for a motorized rifle squad. A home in a field. That, despite the shortcomings mentioned in the video, the BMP-1/2 carried and carries with dignity. BMP-3, well... That's another story. This is the history of weaponry: you can't get something without paying the right price. Just like the BMP-1/2 paid for its mobility and amphibiousness with thin armor and cramp interior, the BMP-3 paid for its firepower by reducing its capabilities as a actual "combat taxi".
@@northcat8941 The BMP series of vehicles is not necessarily used for aerial drops, the BMD series is however. Both look about the same but I would guess the BMP would be more heavily armoured than the BMD vehicles
@@C4Cole05 The BMD gains most of its weight reduction by simply making it smaller. The dismount element is smaller and not even all in thr troop compartment (6 man dismount squad, with only part of those in the rear - the squad leader and one trooper sit up front next to the driver, and have to exit via front hatches.) The troops in the back have to exit via top hatches - there is no rear or side doors in the troop compartment. It is more than 1.3 meters shorter in length and half a meter in width, compared to the BMP. The armor is also lighter, using aluminum instead of steel like the BMP uses.
However the BMP-3 now has a much more powerful 100mm gun which can lobby 100mm HE shells which is arguably better for infantry support especially against enemy infantry and fortified positions.
Reloading the BMP 2's ATGM could be done from inside the turret by elevating the mount and using a special hatch built into the turret roof similar to BMP 1's. This made it simple given a spare ATGM was stored vertically in the turret center.
@@nikolai877 Not sure what you mean, but the missile is used via a sight within the turret, there isn’t any controls on the outside of the vehicle that would allow usage from outside.
@@yoloman3607 That's basically what I was asking about yea. In the video there was someone standing up and aiming it, and having to shoot it unprotected was also mentioned as a drawback with the upgrade. But maybe they upgraded the upgrade later?
@@nikolai877 That’s probably a bit from the BMP1 upgrade variants, where the new missile was mounted away from the gun. He does also mention the BMP 2 can fire from inside but can’t reload ATGM’s from inside, which is wrong hence my original comment.
Either the TC or gunner would rotate the launcher hard right/left, then swing it up and reload the missile, but its very arkward and complicated proces
7:10 One small edition. BMP commander is not a part of vehicle crew. He is a squad commander of infantry that is riding BMP into the battle. Commander would stay inside only if he is in charge of a platoon armored group, comprising of all BMPs of this regiment. In all other situations, he would dismount and lead his squad, while gunner of BMP would become a commander of the vehicle.
Depends on the vehicle itself - in general the squad leader (sergeant) is also the vehicle's commander, barring the platoon commander's vehicle, which will see a deputy platoon commander and squad commander (NCO) fill that role instead, allowing the platoon commander to focus on overall management of the group. This has worked differently between the old BMP-1's in the Soviet era and the newer BMP-2's and 3's in the 80's, 90's and beyond however
@@copter2000 im pretty sure most western army doctrines have a dedicated commander for an IFV. Russia is one of the few with the commander of the vehicle going outside
@@aanders1990 For the most part you are correct. It is worth noting, the BC will dismount depending on the situation. No Dismount Sergeant and/or a lack of Enlisted types. A Bradley CFV platoon that is light in crew, doing Infantry stuffs, someone is going to have to dismount.
To keep with the theme of a revolutionary vehicle marking the beginning of a new era of AFV design, perhaps you could do a similar video on the T-64, and how it layed the groundwork for pretty much every other Soviet/Russian MBT to come afterwards.
T-64 will be a very interesting one to cover... but perhaps another time. We want to distance ourselves from Russian tech for a little while, given the events in Ukraine right now. There's a whole world full of other content for us after all!
@@ArmorCast hmm yes I do understand your position on Russia, and morally it's definitely not wrong. Though, I'd like to criticize it. In such times, the war in Ukraine is a very valuable source of information, which can and, at least in my eyes, should be taken into consideration. Of course it is a difficult and very controversial topic, but not talking about russian vehicles at all feels a little bit too obedient to such people, who take it as an insult to do so. Please, reconsider your treatment of this situation, as after all, this channel is a legitimate source for information about military technology and entertainment, and as such should treat the current situation a bit more professionally, in my opinion, that is. Sincerely, me ^^
how _do_ you embark/disembark from a BTR-60? I used to walk up to them and press "E" but I'm realising real life isn't quite the same as Battlefield Vietnam
I remember seeing this vehicle for the first time in Call of Duty 4. Laughed my ass off when I saw guys spill out of the back like a clown car. Couldn't imagine fitting so many men in that little thing. Since I started playing War Thunder, I've gained a huge appreciation for it. Combines firepower, mobility, and infantry support into a really cool and interesting vehicle. Plus, let's be honest, it just looks awesome. Only played the Chinese Type 86 in War Thunder, but I'm looking forward to the Russian selection when I get back to that tech tree in a few decades.
Same, I always found that the turret on the BMP 1 looked ridiculous, not understanding the what and why. I really love the BMP 1 and 2 designs, BMP 3 not as much though
@@thehigherman9918 The small turret is probably to make it a smaller target, I mean, the hull itself already looks pretty juicy and big, so the squished turret is probably an attempt to make the overall shape as low as possible and prevent more space to be taken up, and in turn, be a potential target. It’s like someone draws a character with the head and body proportions fine, but then they run out of space on the paper, so they squeeze in the legs and give the character janky-looking leg proportions 😂
It always amazes me how few subscribers this channel has. These videos are so incredibly well done. Thorough, detailed, on topic with a smooth story curve. This is incredible quality.
Thanks lad, always means a tonne to hear. Honestly, I'm SUPER impressed with how far this channel's come in a single year, and if it hadn't been for the few months' hiatus where we didn't feel comfortable talking about this type of stuff with the invasion of Ukraine happening, we'd most likely be over 100k by now!
Ya like the BMP? Their early work was a little too new wave for me but when the BMP2 came out in ‘80 I think the IFV really came into their own, both Domestically and internationally. The BMP2 has a whole new turret with a 30 mm canon that really gives the vehicle a big boost. Its been compared to the Bradley but I think the BMP is suited to a far more different kind of doctrine. In ‘87 the Soviets released this the BMP 3 their most accomplished IFV. I think the best addition is the 100 mm canon. An addition so different that most people probably look over the shortcomings of the vehicle. But they should because its not just about being able to solve the problems with the new vehicle. Its also about considering the doctrine of the Russians themselves. Hey Paul!
The main line issue with the BMP-3 in my opinion is that it was too little too late, the key issue with Russian IFVs in general is that the while the BMP-2 was extremely respectable in service, especially given how many countries use it and its track record in Afghanistan, there was no reason to use spend the money on producing the BMP-3, they honestly should have just modernized the BMP-2 with more advanced systems to increase its fighting ability
I feel like the 100mm cannon might make the vehicle worse. The BMP already had a missile launcher for more armored targets, and a 100mm gun means way more ammo inside of this lightly armored vehicle. Its a lighter vehicle, but I remember seeing footage of a captured BMD-4, which had 100m+30m cannon as well. The entire basket under the turret was an ammunition depot, openly stored shells everywhere. Considering how easy the armor gets penetrated, that has to be terrifying.
@@termitreter6545 I think it has it's place. The 100mm gun shouldn't be used to shoot at tanks I think, its a low velocity gun so it would be better off lobbing HE/frag/incendiary shells at firing positions. A HE shell into an occupied building would probably rattle the occupants pretty good, given you can lob these at pretty good range I'd say its perfect for supporting an approach to an urban area. You're doing the same thing as an AGM but from better range, safer from AT weapons. I think the 100mm gun was underrated, as long as you don't drive the BMP into close quarters like the russians are currently doing in Ukraine, its a great fire support platform. You definitely won't be killing western tanks with this thing, but you'll rip into lighter vehicles in a pinch.
My dad served in a BMP 1 and BMP 2 and BMP 3 during the libyan civil war (he was on the libyan jamahirya side) and he used a T90 he said that he liked the BMP 3 the most im hoping one day I could use them
"The tank is on fire!" Flashed to The Chieftain immediately. It really is a wonder that this doesn't have self-sealing fuel tanks with fire-suppressive foam, the former existed during World War II, and the latter has existed on boats for a while!
Small critique: @0:42 you reference the Kalashnikov rifle yet the footage used is of Czechoslovakian soldiers carrying VZ-58s, which resemble the AK-47 at a glance but are mechanically very different weapons with no parts compatibility aside from ammunition.
This vehicle is really fascinating and if upgraded to amphibious capabilities while still maintain it's equipment (like probably autocannon) it's great for amphibious assault vehicles. Basically AK-47 of IFV/AFV modifications what you want
The Indonesian Marine Corps use the Czechoslovakian variant of BMP-2 the BVP-2 as Amphibious SPAAG, while the BMP-3 is used as their main Amphibious IFV/Tank alongside the older but upgraded/improved & upgunned PT-76 with Cockerill 90mm
the problem and the reason why western nations dropped it for your average ifv/afv and instead reserve this option for only light armour, is well the thing needs to be light in the first place, or really fucking massive like the american and most western countries use the amphibious assault vehicle or something like it. enough armour to protect the soft bodies on the inside but can still technically float. and carry guns. which is a problem for an IFV, because it needs to be with the infantry in a fight. and if its light that means no armour. and no large armaments, or ammo for said guns. and being fucking massive is a bigger problem because, well its easier to hit. its fine for the amphibious assault vehicle and the like because well. they arent actually design to go that much farther than the beach itself. and rarely are you landing right ontop of a city so ambushing the things wont be easy. this is the reason why both the BMP and Bradley just dropped it. you give up to much for the ability to swim. instead switching to light vehicles to get across. open a beach head so a bridge can be deployed and heavier units can take over. or just use infantry.
30:55 Please, look up Manul and Dragoon modifications of BMP3. There troops disembark in a traditional way through a single drop-down door in the rear.
Take care, and take your time as you wish Koala. But to be a credible and respected content creator, especially in a sensitive matter like military, never give a shit about what are you gonna say as long as it's a fact. Don't pick side, stay neutral, just deliver the facts, everyone will respect this channel. Don't let the ongoing conflict limit your great videos.
I wonder if the implementation of an IFV as part of a mechanized squad was met with as much resistance in Russia as the Bradley here in America. If you know anything about the "Bradley Wars" there was a gigantic misunderstanding over the role of an IFV, with opponents to the Bradley not understanding that the Bradley stays on the battlefield, supporting the disembarked squad.
I can imagine that there were a few critics that would be against it like the Bradley's. It happened with tanks when the calvary were still in heavy use and it'll happen in the future when we have space travel.
I do remember stumbling upon memoirs of a mid rank officer who was confused by the incredibly vague and unformulated role of the BMP in the military manual for it. It was supposed to "give fire support to the troops and destroy armored vehicles it met" but there was no concrete instructions on how those support should have been organized. I was lately unable to find those memoirs though, so it could, in theory, be a giant brain fart.
@@justiron2999 there are always critics to changes in doctrine. The major issue about the Bradley was that it didn't seat a full squad, fully ignoring the fact that the Bradley was intended for mechanicanized infantry and that the rest of the squad was operating the vehicle.
Probably not soviet doctrine was all about offensive action, so it's all about mass and tempo. They need these armored vehicles to maintain a quick offensive and they need a lot of them to effectively conduct a offensive.
I would imagine not, as tank riding was a widely practiced thing since WW2 and IFVs just moved the infantry from the tanks, to a dedicated vehicle that could provide better protection and some extra firepower with its own guns. Essentially the first line of offense is MBTs, second line is infantry and behind them the IFVs during a combat operation
'Armor Cast', thanks for the posting of this video, I TRULY Enjoyed it for its historical attributes of this vehicle!! You put in a LOT of Hard work, researching this SO Versatile IFV, I was very impressed with the MANY modifications. I am a model builder and I have an older BMP-1 that I'll build some day, But YOUR history was quite fascinating!! Again, thanks for the video!
dont be afraid of posting soviet/russian military content. the ppl that watch this are mature enough to see it as an educational video and not some propaganda
The point of this vehicle is not only to be able to attack but also to be effective in ambush and defense. The small frame can be camouflaged faster and easier. It is also quite normal for these machines to fail in southern nations. The difference in temperatures is just way too big for designers to take into account. These machines are primarily designed for the Russian climate, so upgrades and modifications are needed. Great video, thanks!
00:42 Is it a meme or something that when mentioning the AK, you show footage of troops from the only warpac nation that didn't use the AK? I've seen this a few times
Point of order but the BMP wasn't the first of its kind. The Schützenpanzer Lang HS.30 was in production almost a decade before the BMP. Carried troops, armored against small arms and HMGs, had an autocannon as its primary weapon, and was meant to fight with the troops.
By "of its kind" we're specifically talking about the standard IFV concept still seen today, which includes an anti-tank missile system to give it that multi-role capability. HS.30 predated the BMP, yes, but without that ATGM, it isn't really the same kind of vehicle and can't be used in the same types of roles.
@@ArmorCast If we're getting that into the weeds then the BMP is an outlier in itself with its 73mm gun. Autocannon+ATGM has become the standard (though some exceptions exist) and both the HS.30 and BMP have one half of that armament puzzle. Of course these things always get a bit in the weeds and clean lines seldom exist. I'm generally of the opinion it beats the BMP in the chronology as the core feature that created the IFV was the idea that it fights with the infantry and not simply be a "battle taxi" that gets them through a hot zone and drops them off. That's the doctrinal shift, the exact capabilities and armament would change as experience dictates. (Not that these discussions have tons of weight, they're mostly academic. Thanks for the reply and keep up the good content!)
@@ArmorCast So the Swedish CV9040s without ATGMs are not IFVs then, okay. HS-30 is considered to be the first IFV in service by experts. The Germans invented the IFV. ATGM is not essential to a IFV.
Having qualified on the BMP-1 in the NG, I was surprised at the handlebar steering control and column-mounted gear shifter. And remember to always shut the air starter bottle below your right knee after the engine cranks over.
the soviets main idea of armour units is "if it runs, can block bullets,can shoot bullets and can build 1,000 units in a month then its good enough"
2 ปีที่แล้ว +5
Another great Video. Very nice to see you back. Also thank your for searching 9hrs for 1 Photograph :) Nice that you acknowledge the HS30. It certainly had some theretical potential. But when the reason for procurement is corruption, that can go down the drain pretty quickly. I recently read a German book on the Marder for my own channel and it is fascination how similar some of the design challanges are and where the Germans went a different way. For example the commanders seat behind the driver was a feature on early Marder Prototyps, but the commanders position was changed because the commanders vision was to obsucured by the turret. But the seat remaind in the first pordution models as the "Observer" Seat. It is also interesting how the choice of gun and its position were handled so differently. Personally I think that the soviets did in general put to much emphesis on amphibious crossing capabilities. They just had to make to many tradeoffs that hampered their designs greatly. And of course a low profil. Which were also a topics during the design of the Marder and Leopard 1 by the way.
There is also the Yugoslavian half copy M-80. They wanted to copy it due to not being a Warsaw pact federation, improved a few things, messed up some other. Looks the same on first glance, though.
@@piotrd.4850 They had to really. With the wattered down scrap Soviets were selling to non-Warsaw pact nations. Not their fault that they managed to improve it beyond the full spec original.
excellent video, thank you. A couple minutes in I knew I had to watch it, not just listen, because of the excellent accompanying video. I'm always curious where that sort of thing comes from, since it seems like it'd be arduous to find. I particularly appreciated the explanation of why the BMP-1's armament was unsuccessful, and I'm going to share it just for the part about why IFVs are doctrinally successful, since a friend questioned the concept in light of recent events and I'm not sure he'll watch the whole thing.
BMP-3 should just be made into a infantry support tank. I mean it got fire power to deal with everything with 100 mm HE for infantry auto cannon for soft armor and helies and ATGM for more heavily armored targets.
Having seen footage of it in the Ukraine war i think its pretty good to be honest, have seen a Russian BMP take two direct hits from a anti tank launcher and protect the crew, i think line every armoured vehicle its all about where its hit, i have seen BMP's wiped out by a single hit from a RPG and seen others taking multiple hits and everyone bangs on about Russian tanks being useless but there is only so much you can do to vehicles and anti tank weapons and mines are way ahead of armoured vehicles! you could replace all Russian tanks with challenger 2 tanks and Abrahams it wouldn't make a difference no tank is designed to take multiple hits from launchers and drones.
Yes and no, a lot of modern tanks are designed for taking lots of hits: Like how the Russian ERA is in small blocks instead of large, so that it can work multiple times (among other reasons). Challie's have been able to survive many, many RPG shots, as I'm sure abrams and leopards can aswell. Need only take a look at this quote from a redditor, who cites the wikipedia page on Challenger 2's, who themselves have sources: "TIL a British Challenger 2 tank was hit directly by 14 RPGs and an anti-tank missile in Iraq. The crew was uninjured and the tank was back in operation 6 hours later. Another survived 70 RPG hits. Only 1 Challenger 2 has been destroyed in combat; by another Challenger 2 in a friendly fire incident." Swedish Strv 122 models have added composite armour on the roof of their tanks, showing they don't exactly like the idea of a drone dropping ordinance onto them, and most hardkill APS's can shoot sky-ward for a reason. Yes, taking lots of shots is undeniably not fun, but I'd argue that they are infact designed to take multiple shots from launchers, drones, IFV's etc.
@@obopixel4550 Being hit by outdated RPGs isn't the same as getting targeted by Javelins and NLAWs. Let alone a heavy round from a howitzer, which will kill even the most armored tank on the battlefield and were responsible for as much if not more Russian tank losses than ATGMs.
@@revanofkorriban1505 This is true, I would NOT like to be sitting in a tank about to be hit by a javelin. This doesn't mean that modern tanks aren't designed to take hits from anti-*tank* weapons - especially on the Ukrainian side, where you're sitting in a (slightly older variant of) a modern western MBT facing (mostly) heavily outdated russian AT weapons.
We had that sort of tone for this video originally, but it sounded a little too… friendly I guess, toward Russia and the Russian military, which right now, we worried would be a bit dicey
@@ArmorCast that's a petty excuse honestly. And kind of ridiculous. Plz just be yourself, I've been watching you since ur war thunder videos, personalitie matters too in a youtuber
@@ArmorCast Talking about, admiring and researching a vehicle shouldn't be affected by the fact it's being used in a war. A machine is a machine, nothing more nothing less. It could be used for good or for evil but that doesn't change the fact.
I agree that the BMP is an infantry fighting vehicle (IFV). However, the video title is: "BMP | The Industry Fighting Vehicle" How does this vehicle fight what industry?
Cool, well made Koala. The respectfull/dark voice pierced right into my mind. Were supporting our own way to the grave now over Mach2.0! Can't think in a good way about our own species. But anyway like i said, good work. o7
That’s actually precisely the tone we were going for. Very different to our usual upbeat tone, but we didn’t want to come off as particularly “upbeat” toward Russia right now
@@ArmorCast A lot of nations use the BMP. Ukraine was also part of the USSR. Talking about a piece of tech objectively has basically nothing to do with support of any current government/political structure unless you make it so.
Id love to see the BMP-3M in war thunder someday, sounds like a good IFV. And also the Kurganmashzavod BMP-2M (the one we have is made by KBP Instruments)
the first time i even know about BMP/BMD was around the time i played Armored Warfare, i got a ERA retrofit package which made the vehicle look funny, the package wrap around the vehicle and made it look hella fat (the ERA look like thicc sandbag than era plates you put on tanks), it had 20 mm autocannon, 100 mm cannon and of course the obligatory missile launcher (idk where they put that cuz i never see one) , overall interesting vehicle. Edit : Ok i just google it, it was BMP-3M variant
Yeah, the missiles are launched from within the 100mm gun barrel. Basically you fire them like any other shell and then the rocket motor and guidance system takes over
@@danielkol477 Yes, you do bring up a wonderful point, but I feel that they're different enough in design to be discussed in something like their own video or shorts. They have different requirements and sub designs, like the Nona platform. It could be interesting.
@@CookieCommandGaming Bro it's literally smaller and lighter BMP series, which means same downsides but larger(protection even more shit, crew comfort even more shit) and no upsides. Battle of Kiev decisively buried the wet dreams of VDV generals of mass Il-76 drops behind enemy lines for good, as well as good portion of russian BMD vehicle stock. Whats left of BMD series is fighting along the remainder of VDV like regular troops. Stuff like Nona, SPRUT light tank and so on is interesting but judging by the fact that we hardly saw any NONA and no SPRUT, which means that the platforms are either not combat ready or deemed unfit for the modern high-intensity battlefield.
@@danielkol477 dude chill, I'm just saying it'd be a cool video. I'm very aware of the non-existence of the VDV, along with the failure of the Kyiv assault. Chill out over a suggestion.
@@CookieCommandGaming Meh why repeat the same things twice. VDV still going strong tho, altough as line infantry, maybe expect 45th Bde, whcih is used as SoF. Battle of Kiev was a UA strategic victory, but nobody will take the heroic victory at Gostomel from VDV and army aviation - largest heliborne assault in history and succeded with minimal losses despite UA knowing the plans in advance.
Low velocity 100+30 combo if perfect for IFV, less so for light tank. Russians have 2S25 Sprut as their designated light tank, which has the same cannon as their MBTs.
@@danielkol477 Not really, because that much armament takes up a lot of space within the tank. It's also their least popular IFV, so there's that as well.
@@CallanElliott In theory russian army was supposed to be rolling into Ukraine on Armatas and T-15/Bumerang/Kurganets APCs and IFvs which have more than 15mm of wet toilet paper equivalent of armor, but an ukrainian saying goes "we have what we have". In case of BMP-3 it's firepower for survivability tradeoff. Sure, your final moments in BMP-3 as the carousel full of 100mm HE is cooking off won't be pleasant, but that's compensated by it's ability to evaporate firing positions. Not good when running on a mine, pretty good when evaporating that pesky hohol sitting with a 12.7 on 5th floor.
Unfortunately my conscription was spent on a light infantry highlands acclimatised regiment with motorised support attached, we never got to work with BMPs though there are a substantial number of them in service in our armed forces... despite that fact, with the amount of fire a simple pick-up technical could dish out in our support I can only imagine how it would feel to have one of these tagging along a forward push maneuver...
Loved the video, I had no idea the extensive history the BMP platform has; I'm looking forward to more videos like this. I did want to mention as well, for your commentary style shift; I didn't care for it myself. It felt stiff and forced, I personally prefer commentaries to feel more relaxed and not like your reading from a script (even though you are) I've found that it's easier to follow the information when it's presented like your having a friendly conversation as the flow of the video feels smoother and more natural. If you can adjust your reading to feel less forced it'll probably be perfect for these videos, keep up the great work Koala.
We'll definitely be going back to our more upbeat and cheerful nature in future vids, just thought this more serious tone fit more with discussing a Russian vehicle being used in Ukraine right now, given the situation... people be real touchy around this, and understandably so. Might not have quite hit the nail on the head with this one, but that's okay, there's always more videos to make!
Quesation: How can the chinese BMP drive without the log or is there a special system to replace it? My understanding is that soviet tracked vehicles need that log even to start the engine?! A russian tanker once told me, the log is the most important crew member.
Great video as always. I like it fully its very informative and well done. And yes you were right about the T-90 as well. I wonder though what value it is to have IFVs as APCs. Looking at how vulnerable armour is to ATGMs and top attack from cheap drones with cheap munitions. I think dedicated IFVs and APCs with more space dedicated to hard kill APS systems is more important. So 3 crew tanks, 3-4 crew IFVs and APCs with 2 crew and dismounts and large APSs with 360 degree coverage are the way to go.
Active defence systems like Iron Fist Light should be very helpful for future IFV's. It's also interesting to note that on future IFV's, the first thing to go will be the ATGM system. The Griffin 3 mounts only a 50mm, the Boxer and Stryker Dragoon use a 30mm... The Russian Kurganets 25 and T-15 Armata mount quadruple Kornet missiles alongside 30mm's. Judging by recent events, I think we can safely consider Russia's military design as... a little backwards. They don't even have top-attack ATGM's to compete with the Javelin in service
@@ArmorCast good points! Especially after this conflict its safe to say there are a lot of issues with Russian armored vehicle designs even for their Armata series. I was surprised the T-90M didn’t even last a week after it was first spotted in Kharkiv. On the other hand ukranian BTR-4 with 30mm cannon has performed excellently. Now if only the west can create a universal 360 APS system.
Plenty of firepower and sensor upgrades have been on the market over the years, but it seems like there's not much to be done about the protection on the -1 and -2.
@@zinjanthropus322 Nah, there's nowhere to put them and APS probably costs like 10x the vehicle. Most that can be done is extra applique armor with anti RPG grills. BMP-2 is outdated along with the mass assault doctrine with which in mind it was produced.
@@zinjanthropus322 Its easy to say that, but in reality, there is always a resource crunch when trying to modernize military equipment. You have the $$$ to pay, train and house your troops but somehow the $$ needed to equip them always fall short. At least that is how it is with countries outside of NATO. Especially so in the developed world.
@@zinjanthropus322 Mate the military budget is a number and it's finite. If USA with 770B does not deem necessary to put APS on every single APC/IFV then is sure as hell isn't worth for russian with 66B budget. The BMP stock inherited by USSR has to be ridiculous and I bet that one IFV made during Brezhnev era and few troops whose families receive 5M roubles as a compensation after they die aren't worth APS on every single vehicle which costs god knows how much. It's just very simple maths that is done in MoD. Also, for better illustration let me tell you a little story. Once upon a time in russia there was a single T-80 prototype with Drozd APS installed. It was sent to Ukraine. Do you know how it was destroyed? That's right, artillery. APS isn't a panacea for AFVs, it's an expensive solution still in development and will be available to cover a noticeable amount of IFVs only for small armies or USA/China.
Do one on the K2 and K1 korean tanks. No way anyone could call you an american or russian shill. Also would be interesting to see how it stacks against Type 10 and ZTZ-99.
They are decent vehicles. The point is that no vehicle is immune to ATGM and mines, not even western ones (despite the massive propaganda that revolves around them)
So just because better armored vehicles can be damaged and destroyed too it is okay to barely have any armor? Do you wear a seatbelt? Because people die in accidents despite seatbelts, so there is no point in using them, right? 2 IQ take.
@@jonny2954 why would NATO even need armored vehicles if in the past 70 years it mostly engaged goat herders and peasants? These bmps have been facing real combat zones for decades, unlike the western junk.
@@ErickMarcelloni Bradleys in Ukraine have withstood hits from 125mm HE rounds... BMP-1s and BMP-2s have been destroyed by 7.62mm MGs penetrating the rear fuel tanks and detonating the bloody things! Don't underestimate 1990 Iraq. They were closer to parity with the West at that time than Russia is today! They had a larger standing army than the US, had been the top importer of foreign arms for a decade straight, and had some of the most relevant combat experience in the world having fought a ten year war with Iran (and come out on top). They had 4th gen fighter jets, T-72M tanks, self-propelled artillery systems, SA-6 and SA-8 SAM systems, modern ATGM systems and MANPADS... And the US bodied them in four days!
They are now of course outdated, but half a century ago they were designed specifically for nuclear war! The experts of that time believed that even after the nuclear bombings the remaining forces would continue to fight despite the radiation! The BMP is designed for such conditions! Since the soldiers inside will be safe from radiation and the vehicle itself has increased mobility, cross-country ability and is amphibious! But because of such capabilities the car sacrifices protection and armor! And that's why they get a bad reputation in modern warfare!
The number of BMP's of all variants deployed by both sides in the current conflict is just astounding, and the BMP-1 has definitely shown itself to be a death trap. If I had to be in one of those things, I would definitely prefer that it didn't carry any rounds for the Grom.
I saw a BMP at the Soviet weapons range in Graffenwier Germany while i was stationed in West Germany in 1984/85. Tho less technical than Bradleys it seemed a capable vehicle. Funny but we were instructed that if ever assaulting one, to attack from the direction of the large spot light because they couldn't lower the 75 mm gun low enough to engage infantry. That being said Russia has a multitude of these things. Quantity has a quality all it's own.
India recently introduced another variant called Namica , which is basically a ATGM carrier for the indigenously developed Nag ATGM. It can carry up to 12 ATGMs with 6 in ready to fire state and 6 in storage. It also has a remote controlled machine gun for self defence.
@@teemuvesala9575 hahaha, 😄 yeah, thats why we used tog be vikings and has an large empire up to 1800 century. We danced us to Theese territories, you are so well informed...
@@christianpethukov8155 Sweden chose to buy more CV90 instead, due to much smaller fighting Force. I know to Little to say anything of the desicion. In large perspective i think se should have done the same as Finland. Im not saying what i think about BMP1 in Sweden, just what i heard was the reasoning. I was in Infantry/intelligence not in pansar/armour. Within time Finland and Sweden Will complement each other well on the battlefield. Sweden must fast train as much conscripts as Finland (like we used to).
This aged like fine cheese. Basically anything you said about what Russia actually had was - looking back at what we saw in the War so far - massively overstated.
The BMP has really always been the "budget option". It does its job well, for cheap. BMP's among other vehicles have been slaughtered in Ukraine... ... so would the Bradley, Warrior or Marder if used in the same way, I guarantee it.
@@ArmorCast it's more that from your video one could get the impression Russia had these things in good repair in mass, which they don't. Basically all of them have busted water sealing and are not capable of amphibian operation just to name a single prominent problem. It's coming off as a BMP ad, and almost exclusively focusing on hard factors. Whereas the actual deficiencies of the vehicle and russian IFV doctrine are almost exclusively in the soft factors.
"well user X" It's a video about the platform, friend. End user maintenance or employment aren't within the scope of the video; neither is the social media Kool Aid regarding either side of the conflict.
BMP industry is sucesfull only because the machines are very cheap. Yes the guns are great(30mm canon, MG, AT missles), but the armor can't even protect the crew against a 50cal. (and some smaller caibers as well.)
Only if you yourself are wearing nvg. I don't know about you but during my time in Afghanistan I could count on one hand the amount of times I had nvg.
this might sound crazy, but you don't actually have to pander to the current trends when you make youtube videos, people will naturally assume you're on their side unless you make a public statement, in which case you're 100% sure to upset some people, if you care that much about upsetting people, then don't say anything.
WELCOME BACK TROOPS! We're finally getting back to regular uploads on this channel, after having been away for roughly six months!
I absolutely did not mean to take that much time off, but with several issues delaying this video until February, and then... ... well yeah. Would have been a bit dicey to upload it then. Instead we decided to completely remake it with a different feel and focus, and hopefully nobody will take this as any sort of alignment with Russia or support for their invasion of Ukraine. We on this channel absolutely do not support the actions of the Russian government or armed forces in this time, but that should remove all discussion of parts of history like this, from the Soviet era.
I hope you'll welcome us back as we return to regular content here, and look forward to the next episodes of Koala Explains and YFTS (Episode 3: Challenger 2!)
Finally, a new video from you guys. Have been waiting for few months. Noice!
Looking forward to the new your favourite tank sucks series
good to have you back!
thanks to come back sir your videos are always amazing
YFTS (Episode 3: Challenger 2!), Prepare the TEA with extra salt.
Glad to have u guys back, but plz just ignore the conflict and don't talk on about it. It's quite obvious this channel is informative videos. 👍not showing support or whatever
my dad served in a BMP-1 as a motor infantry platoon leader in the Soviet reserves. he told me he would make the gunner sit in the troop compartment during marches so he could sit in the more comfortable gunner's seat and sleep on the scope cushion.
That's an officer for you.
Your dad served in one of the worst infantry fighting vehicles ever
Sounds like what an officer in a Soviet military would do, couldn’t blame him tho those seats are probably comfy af compared to the commander seat.
Smart man.
@@ironstarofmordian7098 FYI conscripts arent officers....
The BMP-3 was controversially adopted by the Russian forces. I remember from the time of my service that the BMP-2 is more of a mobile platform for infantry. It's a place where you can sleep, eat, and easily carry the stretcher with the wounded through the back doors. Such a tiny mobile base for a motorized rifle squad. A home in a field. That, despite the shortcomings mentioned in the video, the BMP-1/2 carried and carries with dignity. BMP-3, well... That's another story. This is the history of weaponry: you can't get something without paying the right price.
Just like the BMP-1/2 paid for its mobility and amphibiousness with thin armor and cramp interior, the BMP-3 paid for its firepower by reducing its capabilities as a actual "combat taxi".
@@northcat8941 The BMP series of vehicles is not necessarily used for aerial drops, the BMD series is however. Both look about the same but I would guess the BMP would be more heavily armoured than the BMD vehicles
@@C4Cole05 The BMD gains most of its weight reduction by simply making it smaller. The dismount element is smaller and not even all in thr troop compartment (6 man dismount squad, with only part of those in the rear - the squad leader and one trooper sit up front next to the driver, and have to exit via front hatches.) The troops in the back have to exit via top hatches - there is no rear or side doors in the troop compartment. It is more than 1.3 meters shorter in length and half a meter in width, compared to the BMP.
The armor is also lighter, using aluminum instead of steel like the BMP uses.
However the BMP-3 now has a much more powerful 100mm gun which can lobby 100mm HE shells which is arguably better for infantry support especially against enemy infantry and fortified positions.
BMP 3 Manul changes the rules.
The BMP-3 really best as a fire support weapon for cracking bunkers. It should ideally be a 1 BMP-3 with 3 BMP-2's armour mix....not all BMP-3's.
Reloading the BMP 2's ATGM could be done from inside the turret by elevating the mount and using a special hatch built into the turret roof similar to BMP 1's. This made it simple given a spare ATGM was stored vertically in the turret center.
Nice. But you still had to get out (stand out) to actually shoot the damned thing?
@@nikolai877 Not sure what you mean, but the missile is used via a sight within the turret, there isn’t any controls on the outside of the vehicle that would allow usage from outside.
@@yoloman3607 That's basically what I was asking about yea. In the video there was someone standing up and aiming it, and having to shoot it unprotected was also mentioned as a drawback with the upgrade. But maybe they upgraded the upgrade later?
@@nikolai877 That’s probably a bit from the BMP1 upgrade variants, where the new missile was mounted away from the gun. He does also mention the BMP 2 can fire from inside but can’t reload ATGM’s from inside, which is wrong hence my original comment.
Either the TC or gunner would rotate the launcher hard right/left, then swing it up and reload the missile, but its very arkward and complicated proces
7:10 One small edition. BMP commander is not a part of vehicle crew. He is a squad commander of infantry that is riding BMP into the battle. Commander would stay inside only if he is in charge of a platoon armored group, comprising of all BMPs of this regiment. In all other situations, he would dismount and lead his squad, while gunner of BMP would become a commander of the vehicle.
Depends on the vehicle itself - in general the squad leader (sergeant) is also the vehicle's commander, barring the platoon commander's vehicle, which will see a deputy platoon commander and squad commander (NCO) fill that role instead, allowing the platoon commander to focus on overall management of the group. This has worked differently between the old BMP-1's in the Soviet era and the newer BMP-2's and 3's in the 80's, 90's and beyond however
Now that you said it. I don't think there's even a dedicated commander for any IFVs.
@@copter2000 im pretty sure most western army doctrines have a dedicated commander for an IFV. Russia is one of the few with the commander of the vehicle going outside
@@copter2000 Bradley Fighting Vehicles have a dedicated three man crew (driver, gunner, commander)
@@aanders1990 For the most part you are correct. It is worth noting, the BC will dismount depending on the situation. No Dismount Sergeant and/or a lack of Enlisted types. A Bradley CFV platoon that is light in crew, doing Infantry stuffs, someone is going to have to dismount.
Ayyy I was actually there behind the camera man filming the first clips of the BMP-2 from the video.
Thats Georgia, Exercise Agile Spirit 2019
Always a pleasure to have personnel watching and commenting, hope you'll stick around! :D
To keep with the theme of a revolutionary vehicle marking the beginning of a new era of AFV design, perhaps you could do a similar video on the T-64, and how it layed the groundwork for pretty much every other Soviet/Russian MBT to come afterwards.
T-64 will be a very interesting one to cover... but perhaps another time. We want to distance ourselves from Russian tech for a little while, given the events in Ukraine right now. There's a whole world full of other content for us after all!
@@ArmorCast fair enough, I look forward to any new content from you man, keep it coming please.
@@ArmorCast hmm yes I do understand your position on Russia, and morally it's definitely not wrong. Though, I'd like to criticize it. In such times, the war in Ukraine is a very valuable source of information, which can and, at least in my eyes, should be taken into consideration. Of course it is a difficult and very controversial topic, but not talking about russian vehicles at all feels a little bit too obedient to such people, who take it as an insult to do so. Please, reconsider your treatment of this situation, as after all, this channel is a legitimate source for information about military technology and entertainment, and as such should treat the current situation a bit more professionally, in my opinion, that is.
Sincerely, me ^^
@@ArmorCast in that case the T95 (the MBT not the TD) was actually first over the T-64 and is definitely not Russian in origin
@@ArmorCast it might not be a bad idea considering that Ukraine is the most prominent modern user of the vehicle.
how _do_ you embark/disembark from a BTR-60? I used to walk up to them and press "E" but I'm realising real life isn't quite the same as Battlefield Vietnam
Roof hatch , you can sreach TH-cam Vietnam BTR 60 and see how they get in and out
It is holding "F" for 3 seconds for me
Hold F, it's a more universal standard of entering a vehicle.
I remember seeing this vehicle for the first time in Call of Duty 4. Laughed my ass off when I saw guys spill out of the back like a clown car. Couldn't imagine fitting so many men in that little thing.
Since I started playing War Thunder, I've gained a huge appreciation for it. Combines firepower, mobility, and infantry support into a really cool and interesting vehicle. Plus, let's be honest, it just looks awesome.
Only played the Chinese Type 86 in War Thunder, but I'm looking forward to the Russian selection when I get back to that tech tree in a few decades.
Same, I always found that the turret on the BMP 1 looked ridiculous, not understanding the what and why. I really love the BMP 1 and 2 designs, BMP 3 not as much though
@@thehigherman9918 that ridiculous turret and appearances are so attractive
@@thehigherman9918 The small turret is probably to make it a smaller target, I mean, the hull itself already looks pretty juicy and big, so the squished turret is probably an attempt to make the overall shape as low as possible and prevent more space to be taken up, and in turn, be a potential target.
It’s like someone draws a character with the head and body proportions fine, but then they run out of space on the paper, so they squeeze in the legs and give the character janky-looking leg proportions 😂
@@thehigherman9918 I agree
In my opinion, the BMPs especially the BMP-2M are very fun to play. Like, the BMP-2M is basically a PUMA just with ridiculous overpowered rockets.
It always amazes me how few subscribers this channel has. These videos are so incredibly well done. Thorough, detailed, on topic with a smooth story curve. This is incredible quality.
Thanks lad, always means a tonne to hear. Honestly, I'm SUPER impressed with how far this channel's come in a single year, and if it hadn't been for the few months' hiatus where we didn't feel comfortable talking about this type of stuff with the invasion of Ukraine happening, we'd most likely be over 100k by now!
Ya like the BMP? Their early work was a little too new wave for me but when the BMP2 came out in ‘80 I think the IFV really came into their own, both Domestically and internationally. The BMP2 has a whole new turret with a 30 mm canon that really gives the vehicle a big boost. Its been compared to the Bradley but I think the BMP is suited to a far more different kind of doctrine.
In ‘87 the Soviets released this the BMP 3 their most accomplished IFV. I think the best addition is the 100 mm canon. An addition so different that most people probably look over the shortcomings of the vehicle. But they should because its not just about being able to solve the problems with the new vehicle. Its also about considering the doctrine of the Russians themselves. Hey Paul!
The main line issue with the BMP-3 in my opinion is that it was too little too late, the key issue with Russian IFVs in general is that the while the BMP-2 was extremely respectable in service, especially given how many countries use it and its track record in Afghanistan, there was no reason to use spend the money on producing the BMP-3, they honestly should have just modernized the BMP-2 with more advanced systems to increase its fighting ability
Impressive, very nice. Let's see Paul Allen's IFV.
@@jtpal12 suck it, Patrick. My superior IFV will morb yours
I feel like the 100mm cannon might make the vehicle worse. The BMP already had a missile launcher for more armored targets, and a 100mm gun means way more ammo inside of this lightly armored vehicle.
Its a lighter vehicle, but I remember seeing footage of a captured BMD-4, which had 100m+30m cannon as well. The entire basket under the turret was an ammunition depot, openly stored shells everywhere. Considering how easy the armor gets penetrated, that has to be terrifying.
@@termitreter6545 I think it has it's place. The 100mm gun shouldn't be used to shoot at tanks I think, its a low velocity gun so it would be better off lobbing HE/frag/incendiary shells at firing positions. A HE shell into an occupied building would probably rattle the occupants pretty good, given you can lob these at pretty good range I'd say its perfect for supporting an approach to an urban area. You're doing the same thing as an AGM but from better range, safer from AT weapons. I think the 100mm gun was underrated, as long as you don't drive the BMP into close quarters like the russians are currently doing in Ukraine, its a great fire support platform. You definitely won't be killing western tanks with this thing, but you'll rip into lighter vehicles in a pinch.
My dad served in a BMP 1 and BMP 2 and BMP 3 during the libyan civil war (he was on the libyan jamahirya side) and he used a T90 he said that he liked the BMP 3 the most im hoping one day I could use them
I was in Kyrgyzstan when that conflict happened with Tajikistan. I have some clips of it, including the use of the bmp2s, it’s quite fascinating
When you posting them?
Post it please
Post them please.
@@grimskid posted
@@ShubhamPatel-kh4vk posted
The BMP is absolutely my favorite light armored vehicle, as long as it's not on fire.
"The tank is on fire!" Flashed to The Chieftain immediately.
It really is a wonder that this doesn't have self-sealing fuel tanks with fire-suppressive foam, the former existed during World War II, and the latter has existed on boats for a while!
Yes, and in the rear tanks, one can load them with home-made booze - “… like Masandra (wine)….”
That little drone changed everything didn't it!!
Small critique: @0:42 you reference the Kalashnikov rifle yet the footage used is of Czechoslovakian soldiers carrying VZ-58s, which resemble the AK-47 at a glance but are mechanically very different weapons with no parts compatibility aside from ammunition.
Good catch.
Came to the comments to see if somebody else caught this, was not disappointed
Nerd
@@tonygokk3876 náhuj - eto tam.
Mags were compatible and the grips.
This vehicle is really fascinating and if upgraded to amphibious capabilities while still maintain it's equipment (like probably autocannon) it's great for amphibious assault vehicles.
Basically AK-47 of IFV/AFV modifications what you want
The Indonesian Marine Corps use the Czechoslovakian variant of BMP-2 the BVP-2 as Amphibious SPAAG, while the BMP-3 is used as their main Amphibious IFV/Tank alongside the older but upgraded/improved & upgunned PT-76 with Cockerill 90mm
the problem and the reason why western nations dropped it for your average ifv/afv and instead reserve this option for only light armour, is well the thing needs to be light in the first place, or really fucking massive like the american and most western countries use the amphibious assault vehicle or something like it. enough armour to protect the soft bodies on the inside but can still technically float. and carry guns.
which is a problem for an IFV, because it needs to be with the infantry in a fight. and if its light that means no armour. and no large armaments, or ammo for said guns. and being fucking massive is a bigger problem because, well its easier to hit. its fine for the amphibious assault vehicle and the like because well. they arent actually design to go that much farther than the beach itself. and rarely are you landing right ontop of a city so ambushing the things wont be easy.
this is the reason why both the BMP and Bradley just dropped it. you give up to much for the ability to swim. instead switching to light vehicles to get across. open a beach head so a bridge can be deployed and heavier units can take over.
or just use infantry.
30:55 Please, look up Manul and Dragoon modifications of BMP3. There troops disembark in a traditional way through a single drop-down door in the rear.
Polish military is said to have enough spare parts for the BWP-1 (local designation for BMP) to field them all the way till 2050
What do you mean by that? That they stock spares cause they can't produce them?
@@death_parade they inherited so many after the Warsaw Pact fell
Take care, and take your time as you wish Koala.
But to be a credible and respected content creator, especially in a sensitive matter like military, never give a shit about what are you gonna say as long as it's a fact. Don't pick side, stay neutral, just deliver the facts, everyone will respect this channel.
Don't let the ongoing conflict limit your great videos.
Great video and great presentation style.
Keep them coming and we will keep watching.
Keep well and stay safe,
Joe
I wonder if the implementation of an IFV as part of a mechanized squad was met with as much resistance in Russia as the Bradley here in America. If you know anything about the "Bradley Wars" there was a gigantic misunderstanding over the role of an IFV, with opponents to the Bradley not understanding that the Bradley stays on the battlefield, supporting the disembarked squad.
I can imagine that there were a few critics that would be against it like the Bradley's. It happened with tanks when the calvary were still in heavy use and it'll happen in the future when we have space travel.
I do remember stumbling upon memoirs of a mid rank officer who was confused by the incredibly vague and unformulated role of the BMP in the military manual for it. It was supposed to "give fire support to the troops and destroy armored vehicles it met" but there was no concrete instructions on how those support should have been organized. I was lately unable to find those memoirs though, so it could, in theory, be a giant brain fart.
@@justiron2999 there are always critics to changes in doctrine. The major issue about the Bradley was that it didn't seat a full squad, fully ignoring the fact that the Bradley was intended for mechanicanized infantry and that the rest of the squad was operating the vehicle.
Probably not soviet doctrine was all about offensive action, so it's all about mass and tempo. They need these armored vehicles to maintain a quick offensive and they need a lot of them to effectively conduct a offensive.
I would imagine not, as tank riding was a widely practiced thing since WW2 and IFVs just moved the infantry from the tanks, to a dedicated vehicle that could provide better protection and some extra firepower with its own guns. Essentially the first line of offense is MBTs, second line is infantry and behind them the IFVs during a combat operation
Something about the BMP-2 in particular. Always loved it. And the varients and derivatives good golly.
'Armor Cast', thanks for the posting of this video, I TRULY Enjoyed it for its historical attributes of this vehicle!!
You put in a LOT of Hard work, researching this SO Versatile IFV, I was very impressed with the MANY modifications.
I am a model builder and I have an older BMP-1 that I'll build some day, But YOUR history was quite fascinating!!
Again, thanks for the video!
Man i love your videos and your work we all missed you welcome back
dont be afraid of posting soviet/russian military content. the ppl that watch this are mature enough to see it as an educational video and not some propaganda
First time watcher , great work with your editing and handling of the subject matter. You bagged me as a sub!
The point of this vehicle is not only to be able to attack but also to be effective in ambush and defense. The small frame can be camouflaged faster and easier.
It is also quite normal for these machines to fail in southern nations. The difference in temperatures is just way too big for designers to take into account. These machines are primarily designed for the Russian climate, so upgrades and modifications are needed.
Great video, thanks!
Well done. Love the commentary style. Thoroughly enjoyed it!
Our Marsupial lord and saviour returns.
Gotta love that Star Citizen Main Menu Music in the Backround
00:42 Is it a meme or something that when mentioning the AK, you show footage of troops from the only warpac nation that didn't use the AK? I've seen this a few times
Liar
8:39 did i just really see that the gun discharges toxic fumes right into the face of the loader?
God have I been waiting for this XD
Point of order but the BMP wasn't the first of its kind. The Schützenpanzer Lang HS.30 was in production almost a decade before the BMP. Carried troops, armored against small arms and HMGs, had an autocannon as its primary weapon, and was meant to fight with the troops.
By "of its kind" we're specifically talking about the standard IFV concept still seen today, which includes an anti-tank missile system to give it that multi-role capability. HS.30 predated the BMP, yes, but without that ATGM, it isn't really the same kind of vehicle and can't be used in the same types of roles.
@@ArmorCast If we're getting that into the weeds then the BMP is an outlier in itself with its 73mm gun. Autocannon+ATGM has become the standard (though some exceptions exist) and both the HS.30 and BMP have one half of that armament puzzle.
Of course these things always get a bit in the weeds and clean lines seldom exist. I'm generally of the opinion it beats the BMP in the chronology as the core feature that created the IFV was the idea that it fights with the infantry and not simply be a "battle taxi" that gets them through a hot zone and drops them off. That's the doctrinal shift, the exact capabilities and armament would change as experience dictates. (Not that these discussions have tons of weight, they're mostly academic. Thanks for the reply and keep up the good content!)
@@ArmorCast So the Swedish CV9040s without ATGMs are not IFVs then, okay.
HS-30 is considered to be the first IFV in service by experts. The Germans invented the IFV. ATGM is not essential to a IFV.
Having qualified on the BMP-1 in the NG, I was surprised at the handlebar steering control and column-mounted gear shifter.
And remember to always shut the air starter bottle below your right knee after the engine cranks over.
thank you so much for such a interesting and well documented video, its really informative and well researched
Squad can also give you good footage of certain vehicles, if you ever need footage of any in the game I'd be happy to.
the soviets main idea of armour units is "if it runs, can block bullets,can shoot bullets and can build 1,000 units in a month then its good enough"
Another great Video. Very nice to see you back. Also thank your for searching 9hrs for 1 Photograph :)
Nice that you acknowledge the HS30. It certainly had some theretical potential. But when the reason for procurement is corruption, that can go down the drain pretty quickly.
I recently read a German book on the Marder for my own channel and it is fascination how similar some of the design challanges are and where the Germans went a different way.
For example the commanders seat behind the driver was a feature on early Marder Prototyps, but the commanders position was changed because the commanders vision was to obsucured by the turret. But the seat remaind in the first pordution models as the "Observer" Seat.
It is also interesting how the choice of gun and its position were handled so differently.
Personally I think that the soviets did in general put to much emphesis on amphibious crossing capabilities. They just had to make to many tradeoffs that hampered their designs greatly.
And of course a low profil.
Which were also a topics during the design of the Marder and Leopard 1 by the way.
My father was a senior Sargent and he operated in a BMP 2 when he served in the Soviet army. The BMP family are all beautiful machines.
9:26 BMP-1 or 2 has no rear mounted water jets.
Correct - it has small 'vanes' at the rear of the mudguards, called, 'waterborne propulsion augmentation devices'.
Koala lecturing about military hardware for half an hour? Christmas came early!
There is also the Yugoslavian half copy M-80.
They wanted to copy it due to not being a Warsaw pact federation, improved a few things, messed up some other. Looks the same on first glance, though.
M-80 was inspired by both the BMP-1 and the AMX-10
@@BabyGreen162 Hmmm true, I'd still say calling it a "half copy" is legitimate.
Yugoslavians had improved many soviet designs.
@@piotrd.4850 They had to really. With the wattered down scrap Soviets were selling to non-Warsaw pact nations. Not their fault that they managed to improve it beyond the full spec original.
This is my first time seeing a video from your channel, and the subject matter is one of interest to me. Thank you for posting this.
Great to hear mate, be sure to check out the rest of our channel then, plenty there for ya!
excellent video, thank you. A couple minutes in I knew I had to watch it, not just listen, because of the excellent accompanying video. I'm always curious where that sort of thing comes from, since it seems like it'd be arduous to find.
I particularly appreciated the explanation of why the BMP-1's armament was unsuccessful, and I'm going to share it just for the part about why IFVs are doctrinally successful, since a friend questioned the concept in light of recent events and I'm not sure he'll watch the whole thing.
Love the BMP family! Was happy to see the PRP getting mentioned in there with everyone else, another great video! Looking forward to the next one!
BMP-3 should just be made into a infantry support tank. I mean it got fire power to deal with everything with 100 mm HE for infantry auto cannon for soft armor and helies and ATGM for more heavily armored targets.
These long videos are really good, exceptional.
Having seen footage of it in the Ukraine war i think its pretty good to be honest, have seen a Russian BMP take two direct hits from a anti tank launcher and protect the crew, i think line every armoured vehicle its all about where its hit, i have seen BMP's wiped out by a single hit from a RPG and seen others taking multiple hits and everyone bangs on about Russian tanks being useless but there is only so much you can do to vehicles and anti tank weapons and mines are way ahead of armoured vehicles! you could replace all Russian tanks with challenger 2 tanks and Abrahams it wouldn't make a difference no tank is designed to take multiple hits from launchers and drones.
The Abrams is easy meat for the RPG7 hundreds have been destroyed Iraq says the T80 is far superior.
Yes and no, a lot of modern tanks are designed for taking lots of hits: Like how the Russian ERA is in small blocks instead of large, so that it can work multiple times (among other reasons).
Challie's have been able to survive many, many RPG shots, as I'm sure abrams and leopards can aswell.
Need only take a look at this quote from a redditor, who cites the wikipedia page on Challenger 2's, who themselves have sources:
"TIL a British Challenger 2 tank was hit directly by 14 RPGs and an anti-tank missile in Iraq. The crew was uninjured and the tank was back in operation 6 hours later. Another survived 70 RPG hits. Only 1 Challenger 2 has been destroyed in combat; by another Challenger 2 in a friendly fire incident."
Swedish Strv 122 models have added composite armour on the roof of their tanks, showing they don't exactly like the idea of a drone dropping ordinance onto them, and most hardkill APS's can shoot sky-ward for a reason.
Yes, taking lots of shots is undeniably not fun, but I'd argue that they are infact designed to take multiple shots from launchers, drones, IFV's etc.
The question now is which one?
@@obopixel4550 Being hit by outdated RPGs isn't the same as getting targeted by Javelins and NLAWs. Let alone a heavy round from a howitzer, which will kill even the most armored tank on the battlefield and were responsible for as much if not more Russian tank losses than ATGMs.
@@revanofkorriban1505 This is true, I would NOT like to be sitting in a tank about to be hit by a javelin. This doesn't mean that modern tanks aren't designed to take hits from anti-*tank* weapons - especially on the Ukrainian side, where you're sitting in a (slightly older variant of) a modern western MBT facing (mostly) heavily outdated russian AT weapons.
a bit more enthusiasm in your voice would be nice. either way I'm glad ur back lookin forward to more videos
We had that sort of tone for this video originally, but it sounded a little too… friendly I guess, toward Russia and the Russian military, which right now, we worried would be a bit dicey
@@ArmorCast that's a petty excuse honestly. And kind of ridiculous. Plz just be yourself, I've been watching you since ur war thunder videos, personalitie matters too in a youtuber
@@ArmorCast Talking about, admiring and researching a vehicle shouldn't be affected by the fact it's being used in a war.
A machine is a machine, nothing more nothing less. It could be used for good or for evil but that doesn't change the fact.
I agree that the BMP is an infantry fighting vehicle (IFV).
However, the video title is: "BMP | The Industry Fighting Vehicle"
How does this vehicle fight what industry?
It's a play on words, it can mean the cheap production cost of the BMP or its need to fight for the protection of the Russian industry.
Cool, well made Koala.
The respectfull/dark voice pierced right into my mind.
Were supporting our own way to the grave now over Mach2.0!
Can't think in a good way about our own species.
But anyway like i said, good work. o7
I think you guys would've been fine to publish it earlier, since it might help people understand the war better
damn man last video was 7 months ago, I used to occasionally check if you would post something and today you did.
Great to see you back.
Your voice cadence sounded like the Templin Institute's new narrator, Steven, and I did not necessarily like that.
That’s actually precisely the tone we were going for. Very different to our usual upbeat tone, but we didn’t want to come off as particularly “upbeat” toward Russia right now
@@ArmorCast A lot of nations use the BMP. Ukraine was also part of the USSR. Talking about a piece of tech objectively has basically nothing to do with support of any current government/political structure unless you make it so.
Title:
BMP
Thumbnail: BMᴰ
Id love to see the BMP-3M in war thunder someday, sounds like a good IFV. And also the Kurganmashzavod BMP-2M (the one we have is made by KBP Instruments)
Superb video, thank you.
the first time i even know about BMP/BMD was around the time i played Armored Warfare, i got a ERA retrofit package which made the vehicle look funny, the package wrap around the vehicle and made it look hella fat (the ERA look like thicc sandbag than era plates you put on tanks), it had 20 mm autocannon, 100 mm cannon and of course the obligatory missile launcher (idk where they put that cuz i never see one) , overall interesting vehicle.
Edit : Ok i just google it, it was BMP-3M variant
Yeah, the missiles are launched from within the 100mm gun barrel. Basically you fire them like any other shell and then the rocket motor and guidance system takes over
@@ArmorCastthat'd have to be one hella thin missile compared to normal ones...
Great video! I enjoyed it thoroughly, now I just can't wait for a BMD family:)
BMD family is BMP family but lighter and smaller, zero difference in armament effectively zero difference in protection.
@@danielkol477 Yes, you do bring up a wonderful point, but I feel that they're different enough in design to be discussed in something like their own video or shorts. They have different requirements and sub designs, like the Nona platform. It could be interesting.
@@CookieCommandGaming Bro it's literally smaller and lighter BMP series, which means same downsides but larger(protection even more shit, crew comfort even more shit) and no upsides. Battle of Kiev decisively buried the wet dreams of VDV generals of mass Il-76 drops behind enemy lines for good, as well as good portion of russian BMD vehicle stock. Whats left of BMD series is fighting along the remainder of VDV like regular troops. Stuff like Nona, SPRUT light tank and so on is interesting but judging by the fact that we hardly saw any NONA and no SPRUT, which means that the platforms are either not combat ready or deemed unfit for the modern high-intensity battlefield.
@@danielkol477 dude chill, I'm just saying it'd be a cool video. I'm very aware of the non-existence of the VDV, along with the failure of the Kyiv assault. Chill out over a suggestion.
@@CookieCommandGaming Meh why repeat the same things twice. VDV still going strong tho, altough as line infantry, maybe expect 45th Bde, whcih is used as SoF. Battle of Kiev was a UA strategic victory, but nobody will take the heroic victory at Gostomel from VDV and army aviation - largest heliborne assault in history and succeded with minimal losses despite UA knowing the plans in advance.
The BMP-3 really seems like it should've been a light tank rather than an IFV...
Low velocity 100+30 combo if perfect for IFV, less so for light tank. Russians have 2S25 Sprut as their designated light tank, which has the same cannon as their MBTs.
@@danielkol477 Not really, because that much armament takes up a lot of space within the tank. It's also their least popular IFV, so there's that as well.
@@CallanElliott In theory russian army was supposed to be rolling into Ukraine on Armatas and T-15/Bumerang/Kurganets APCs and IFvs which have more than 15mm of wet toilet paper equivalent of armor, but an ukrainian saying goes "we have what we have". In case of BMP-3 it's firepower for survivability tradeoff. Sure, your final moments in BMP-3 as the carousel full of 100mm HE is cooking off won't be pleasant, but that's compensated by it's ability to evaporate firing positions. Not good when running on a mine, pretty good when evaporating that pesky hohol sitting with a 12.7 on 5th floor.
War thunder just gave its in game BMP3 OP ammo, and it now make a lot more sense lol
I’d love an essay video like this on the A10
Actually one of our upcoming plans, should be two weeks 👍
Overrated
@@trofchik9488 I watched his video but I want a Koala version
HE HAS RETURNED!
Unfortunately my conscription was spent on a light infantry highlands acclimatised regiment with motorised support attached, we never got to work with BMPs though there are a substantial number of them in service in our armed forces... despite that fact, with the amount of fire a simple pick-up technical could dish out in our support I can only imagine how it would feel to have one of these tagging along a forward push maneuver...
Know thy Opponent. That was a fantastic demonstration, A+.
Very cool video, I love the BMP-3 in particular. Was kind of sad the BMD-4 didn't get a mention, since it's my favourite IFV, but oh well.
BMD series will get their own video, don’t you worry 👍
@@ArmorCast Glad to hear it; I can't wait!
He’s back!
Loved the video, I had no idea the extensive history the BMP platform has; I'm looking forward to more videos like this.
I did want to mention as well, for your commentary style shift; I didn't care for it myself. It felt stiff and forced, I personally prefer commentaries to feel more relaxed and not like your reading from a script (even though you are) I've found that it's easier to follow the information when it's presented like your having a friendly conversation as the flow of the video feels smoother and more natural.
If you can adjust your reading to feel less forced it'll probably be perfect for these videos, keep up the great work Koala.
We'll definitely be going back to our more upbeat and cheerful nature in future vids, just thought this more serious tone fit more with discussing a Russian vehicle being used in Ukraine right now, given the situation... people be real touchy around this, and understandably so. Might not have quite hit the nail on the head with this one, but that's okay, there's always more videos to make!
Thank you for the hard work put it this and the 9 hours searching
Quesation: How can the chinese BMP drive without the log or is there a special system to replace it? My understanding is that soviet tracked vehicles need that log even to start the engine?! A russian tanker once told me, the log is the most important crew member.
Log is love, log is life
In all seriousness though... well,
th-cam.com/video/y-6vLJi4xOs/w-d-xo.html
man holding up the video out of us pet is respectable in of itself i salute you soldier
Great video as always. I like it fully its very informative and well done. And yes you were right about the T-90 as well. I wonder though what value it is to have IFVs as APCs. Looking at how vulnerable armour is to ATGMs and top attack from cheap drones with cheap munitions. I think dedicated IFVs and APCs with more space dedicated to hard kill APS systems is more important. So 3 crew tanks, 3-4 crew IFVs and APCs with 2 crew and dismounts and large APSs with 360 degree coverage are the way to go.
Active defence systems like Iron Fist Light should be very helpful for future IFV's. It's also interesting to note that on future IFV's, the first thing to go will be the ATGM system. The Griffin 3 mounts only a 50mm, the Boxer and Stryker Dragoon use a 30mm... The Russian Kurganets 25 and T-15 Armata mount quadruple Kornet missiles alongside 30mm's. Judging by recent events, I think we can safely consider Russia's military design as... a little backwards. They don't even have top-attack ATGM's to compete with the Javelin in service
@@ArmorCast good points! Especially after this conflict its safe to say there are a lot of issues with Russian armored vehicle designs even for their Armata series. I was surprised the T-90M didn’t even last a week after it was first spotted in Kharkiv. On the other hand ukranian BTR-4 with 30mm cannon has performed excellently. Now if only the west can create a universal 360 APS system.
@@rsKayiira
-Universal- 360 APS system
Modular 360 APS system
@@rsKayiira the t 90M was destroyed by russian forces to prevent capture ?
@@ArmorCast the t 15 is gonna use the kinzhal 57mm gun and the kurhanets 25 and the boomerang will use the Epoch lsho 57mm gun..
It's good to have you back!
I cant imagine playing on 200+ ping
We learn to live with it. It really sucks when you fire at the same time as another player but due to ping, you die and they carry on.
First i put a like for the image. And the style of commentary is great, i like it.
Plenty of firepower and sensor upgrades have been on the market over the years, but it seems like there's not much to be done about the protection on the -1 and -2.
Active protection systems.
@@zinjanthropus322 Nah, there's nowhere to put them and APS probably costs like 10x the vehicle. Most that can be done is extra applique armor with anti RPG grills. BMP-2 is outdated along with the mass assault doctrine with which in mind it was produced.
@@danielkol477 They can be put right on top of the turret. APS isn't 10x the cost of 8 soldiers lives.
@@zinjanthropus322 Its easy to say that, but in reality, there is always a resource crunch when trying to modernize military equipment. You have the $$$ to pay, train and house your troops but somehow the $$ needed to equip them always fall short. At least that is how it is with countries outside of NATO. Especially so in the developed world.
@@zinjanthropus322 Mate the military budget is a number and it's finite. If USA with 770B does not deem necessary to put APS on every single APC/IFV then is sure as hell isn't worth for russian with 66B budget. The BMP stock inherited by USSR has to be ridiculous and I bet that one IFV made during Brezhnev era and few troops whose families receive 5M roubles as a compensation after they die aren't worth APS on every single vehicle which costs god knows how much. It's just very simple maths that is done in MoD.
Also, for better illustration let me tell you a little story. Once upon a time in russia there was a single T-80 prototype with Drozd APS installed. It was sent to Ukraine. Do you know how it was destroyed? That's right, artillery.
APS isn't a panacea for AFVs, it's an expensive solution still in development and will be available to cover a noticeable amount of IFVs only for small armies or USA/China.
Been yonks since you did a video
Do one on the K2 and K1 korean tanks. No way anyone could call you an american or russian shill. Also would be interesting to see how it stacks against Type 10 and ZTZ-99.
K1 plagued with transmission problems
Another interesting BMP 2 variant exists with India which is unmanned and used for Chemical, Biological and Nuclear response.
They are decent vehicles. The point is that no vehicle is immune to ATGM and mines, not even western ones (despite the massive propaganda that revolves around them)
No, but at least western IFVs like Marder, Bradley or Warrior can’t be taken out by a 7.62!
@@ArmorCast lol where did you get the idea that BMPs can be taken out by 7.62? thats definately not true lol
So just because better armored vehicles can be damaged and destroyed too it is okay to barely have any armor?
Do you wear a seatbelt? Because people die in accidents despite seatbelts, so there is no point in using them, right?
2 IQ take.
@@jonny2954 why would NATO even need armored vehicles if in the past 70 years it mostly engaged goat herders and peasants? These bmps have been facing real combat zones for decades, unlike the western junk.
@@ErickMarcelloni Bradleys in Ukraine have withstood hits from 125mm HE rounds... BMP-1s and BMP-2s have been destroyed by 7.62mm MGs penetrating the rear fuel tanks and detonating the bloody things!
Don't underestimate 1990 Iraq. They were closer to parity with the West at that time than Russia is today! They had a larger standing army than the US, had been the top importer of foreign arms for a decade straight, and had some of the most relevant combat experience in the world having fought a ten year war with Iran (and come out on top). They had 4th gen fighter jets, T-72M tanks, self-propelled artillery systems, SA-6 and SA-8 SAM systems, modern ATGM systems and MANPADS... And the US bodied them in four days!
They are now of course outdated, but half a century ago they were designed specifically for nuclear war! The experts of that time believed that even after the nuclear bombings the remaining forces would continue to fight despite the radiation! The BMP is designed for such conditions! Since the soldiers inside will be safe from radiation and the vehicle itself has increased mobility, cross-country ability and is amphibious! But because of such capabilities the car sacrifices protection and armor! And that's why they get a bad reputation in modern warfare!
The number of BMP's of all variants deployed by both sides in the current conflict is just astounding, and the BMP-1 has definitely shown itself to be a death trap. If I had to be in one of those things, I would definitely prefer that it didn't carry any rounds for the Grom.
I saw a BMP at the Soviet weapons range in Graffenwier Germany while i was stationed in West Germany in 1984/85. Tho less technical than Bradleys it seemed a capable vehicle. Funny but we were instructed that if ever assaulting one, to attack from the direction of the large spot light because they couldn't lower the 75 mm gun low enough to engage infantry. That being said Russia has a multitude of these things. Quantity has a quality all it's own.
It was in good taste to delay the release. Well done.
India recently introduced another variant called Namica , which is basically a ATGM carrier for the indigenously developed Nag ATGM.
It can carry up to 12 ATGMs with 6 in ready to fire state and 6 in storage. It also has a remote controlled machine gun for self defence.
The Nag is honestly pretty impressive. Fire-and-forget top-down-attack? Powerful, especially when it's mounted on a relatively mobile carrier.
😮 welcome back
Sweden used it a very short time 10yrs or so, it was more or less deemed both useless and a Hazard for the crew. Same with MT-LB…
Yet Finland has decided to retain and update their BMP-2s.
Swedes were never really that good in war anyways. Much better at just running away.
@@teemuvesala9575 hahaha, 😄 yeah, thats why we used tog be vikings and has an large empire up to 1800 century. We danced us to Theese territories, you are so well informed...
@@konsum949 Those are long gone times buddy. You haven’t fought wars in the last 200 years. You hid behind Finland in winter war too.
@@christianpethukov8155 Sweden chose to buy more CV90 instead, due to much smaller fighting Force. I know to Little to say anything of the desicion. In large perspective i think se should have done the same as Finland. Im not saying what i think about BMP1 in Sweden, just what i heard was the reasoning. I was in Infantry/intelligence not in pansar/armour. Within time Finland and Sweden Will complement each other well on the battlefield. Sweden must fast train as much conscripts as Finland (like we used to).
Nice to see a return by Armor Cast.
This aged like fine cheese. Basically anything you said about what Russia actually had was - looking back at what we saw in the War so far - massively overstated.
It’s a cheap easy yo use vehicle that countries. With low amounts of money can use to equip their militaries with. What sort did he exactly get wrong
The BMP has really always been the "budget option". It does its job well, for cheap. BMP's among other vehicles have been slaughtered in Ukraine... ... so would the Bradley, Warrior or Marder if used in the same way, I guarantee it.
@@ArmorCast it's more that from your video one could get the impression Russia had these things in good repair in mass, which they don't. Basically all of them have busted water sealing and are not capable of amphibian operation just to name a single prominent problem.
It's coming off as a BMP ad, and almost exclusively focusing on hard factors. Whereas the actual deficiencies of the vehicle and russian IFV doctrine are almost exclusively in the soft factors.
@@Argosh not really
"well user X"
It's a video about the platform, friend. End user maintenance or employment aren't within the scope of the video; neither is the social media Kool Aid regarding either side of the conflict.
I was wondering how much armor protection these BMP's carried. I guess a 25 mm cannon would go right through it.
BMP industry is sucesfull only because the machines are very cheap. Yes the guns are great(30mm canon, MG, AT missles), but the armor can't even protect the crew against a 50cal. (and some smaller caibers as well.)
The 30mm gun is not really that great as most often they have no APDS and use solid AP instead. But for suppressing infantry it does a great job
I was not aware you made War thunder content , Gonna have to jump on that! Fellow creator !
Haven't for several months now actually, but I'll be coming back to War Thunder soon!
@@ArmorCast awesome. Great videos. Looking forward to more!
>says "Kalashnikov"
>shows Vz. 58
WOO THEY ARE BACK!
Im sad about the fact that you didn't talk about ukrainian modernisation varients. Especially because they are the most diverse in my opinion
That infrared searchlight makes a wonderful shooting mark when it's turned on...
Only if you yourself are wearing nvg. I don't know about you but during my time in Afghanistan I could count on one hand the amount of times I had nvg.
this might sound crazy, but you don't actually have to pander to the current trends when you make youtube videos, people will naturally assume you're on their side unless you make a public statement, in which case you're 100% sure to upset some people, if you care that much about upsetting people, then don't say anything.
right. im seriously over people simping for some corrupt ass slavic country they couldnt identify on the map.
Considering your pfp, nobody should be taking your advice.
I need more of these videos.