According to the US Army ATP7 Chinese Tactics. China’s medium brigade is an up-gunned SBCT. The two have the same type of vehicle and mobility, but the Chinese version has four additional things: (1) four maneuverable battalions instead of three in the SBCT (w/ proper IFVs instead of .50 Cal APCs ). (2) organic air defense, of which SBCT has none. (3) Larger organic artillery battalions with MLRS, and long-range ATGMs, which SBCT lacks and relies on division attachments. (4) double the size of support elements with separate combat support and sustainment battalions. China’s medium CA-BDE is more orthodoxy than the US SBCT in the medium formation concept. Every platform in it is based on the same chassis, something Stryker failed to achieve.
Excellent post. Yes, all true. I didn't want to do a comparison briefing, but you have summed up key differences. A lot of direct fire support with calibres above 30mm. To be fair to the SBCT, it was designed to be air transportable by C-130s with all the constraints that come with that, the PLA's Medium Combined Arms Brigade does not have this constraint.
I think the issue with Stryker is the US fixation on air lifting capacity in C130 which China does not need. As it turns out, the US army choose to deploy these machines closed enough to the frontline storage facility which is more than enough for fast deployment. The most interesting things right now is that the war in Ukraine teach the US army and the Chinese might deploy more L7 105 as mobile artillery pieces than its original role as anti-tank pieces. And we might see more mobile mortar-howitzer like 2A60/2A80 as well. If the artillery plays much more important roles in the war, then we are going to see the support troops is going to increase as well. The question becomes is that how the infantries going to adapt to the new war under the following conditions 1. the infared-NV immersion goggles can be on every drones/personnel 2. the drones are nearly impossible to jam (DJI, Autel and many other drones all equipped with agile frequency hopping software-defined radio)
@@MultiYlin I believe the US Army prepositioned six heavy brigades worth of equipment in European warehouses so that the heavy brigades and divisions could also be deployed rapidly. A concept was recently tested when the entire US Army's 1st Cavalry Division, one of the Reinforced Heavy Divisions, was deployed to Europe on a military exercise. There was a proposal to preposition equipment to equip a US Army Heavy Division in Poland.
About PLA’s Medium Combined Brigade, there are two very interesting theories 1, If one ZBL08 could maneuver to a location, with very high success chances the entire brigade could maneuver to the same location. 2, However, in some situations, few MBTs even one, could stop the entire brigade for hours
Correction: at around the 07:55 mark I mentioned that the BN has around 15 ZBL-08 IFVs and armed variants in the BN. This should of course be around 50. Also a shout out to Battle Order for their work on PLA vehicle numbering system. See link in description.
The MANPADS teams strike me as either very forward thinking about future drone threats, although seemingly lacking EW and AA guns, or the PLA plans to push their medium battalions forward enough to face ground attacks from fast jets. Based on their armor and mobility some form of radar based GBAD seems essential.
@@Strategy_Analysis You are wrong, the real purpose of paper 625 is not to deal with drones, but GBU type of small diameter precision-guided munitions, the PLA is really worried about this kind of weapons, fighter jets can be carried in large numbers, and the way to deal with drones the PLA thinks is electronic interference soft kill
I think that the medium brigade concept is simply misunderstood especially amongst anglophone nations. These formations provide a capability that is very much needed in 21st century warfare.
@@Strategy_Analysis yea one could look at the French and Italian wheeled vehicles; they have better ballistic protection than the Stryker vehicle while still retaining mobility. The Boxer and Eitan vehicles also show that wheeled vehicles can have good protection as well.
@@andrewwiggins9262 You do realize how much of a stretch that first statement is? You're comparing a general APC that was picked as an interim vehicle to wheeled firesupport vehicles that will be on the front lines with infantry. The Stryker wasn't built to be that type of weapon, the Centauro and AMX were specifically built for that purpose. And have you seen the weight differences?
@@Austin-cx2xe that’s exactly what I was getting at. I feel that the primary source of hate for wheeled vehicles stems from the Stryker. If peoples were aware that more capable wheeled vehicles existed it may change their minds.
@@andrewwiggins9262the misunderstanding is the doctrinal use of both. Strykers have a strategic mobility that is better then boxer or other wheeled afvs
Keep in mind that a lot of that is on paper, but not in reality. China is also a net food importer despite a full quarter of their population working in the agricultural sector, so their gear doesn't really mean much if they can't feed their soldiers.
@@cstgraphpads2091 I like how you immediately think of starvation as a tactic. You must either be Israeli or American. This is in your blood, isn't it?
@@cstgraphpads2091lmao, I invite you to China, not Shanghai or Beijing, but any city you choose, i will pay all of your expense. Is thay okay for you😅 Just hope you dont live a world weaved by a lie stroy, ultimately you just fool yourself only😅
@@wlyiu4057 and where are you from? i like how you immediately think bias thinking. and he is correct, logistics is everything and that includes food. again, where are you from?
I love you beyond my ability to express for uploading these Chinese unit capabilities videos. Especially What the one that you uploaded about ground forces aviation. I sincerely request to upload something about naval aviations present capabilities after major Reshuffling
It looks more like a wheeled version of the PLA heavy brigade. The Stryker Brigade will be combined with 2 heavy brigade to form a US Army Heavy Divsion. The Stryker Brigade are supposed to be wheeled self propelled artillery. It is also supposed to get armor support from the two heavy brigades.
Both the Germany army and the South Korean army are creating medium brigades based on the Stryker model. Even more interesting is the structure of their two Panzer Divisions have one of these divisions with 2 heavy and 1 medium brigades. While the other Panzer division have two medium and 1 heavy brigades. This is iike the how the Stryker brigades are now incorporated into a US Army Heavy Division with two heavy and 1 Stryker brigades.
Interesting, I reckon good size arm force but tactical battlefield nightmare, I do wonder what fighting vehicles do they take for overseas deployment can the different vehicles be fitted on their planes or warships?
Good questions. The ZBL family is used by the Marine Corps and deployed to Djibouti, but rapid air deployability is not a capability requirement for them. Most, if not all, of the BDE can be transported on a Y-9 transport aircarft. Not sure what you mean about a tactical battlefield nightmare?
china do not have enough plane now i am chinese but i should be honest here, the biggest limitation to deploy by air is the planes, china have few planes deploy these army by sea is a good idea, in a recent drill with Djibouti land forces, china deploy more than 30 ZBL family vehicle one time useing a type 071 LPD, alone with 800 soilders China now have more than 10 LPD and LHD, which means deploy one whole brigade over sea is possible, that is enough for chinese army in recent years
A showpiece and nothing else. There are more than 6000 ZBL-08 and ZTL11 (probably close to 10000 if counting all variants), which have only been in service for about a decade. Bumerang was showcased with T-14 Armata, and just like Amerta, Russia only built a dozen of them. Without sufficient quantity, it’s just a concept vehicle without real combat potential.
china design ZBL family as a infantry fighting vehicle, or IFV, however the BTR in russian is same as APC armored personal carrier russian are now working on some wheeled IFV also, however not a single model of wheeled IFV are massively entered service now russians always want to put more high tech part on a developing model, and are very interested in sending their concept model to show every where, maybe they want to find some sponser however, there are more than 3000 ZBL and ZTL vehicle now entered service in PLA, but not a single russian wheeled vehicle are entered service now, and russians still rely most on old school btr-80
I go back and forth on whether armor of non-MBTs is irrelevant on the modern battlefield. On the one hand, mobility might be the only long term counter to the ATGM threat and on the other, reports of lightly armored vehicles being hit by ATGMs are devastating. An ATGM hitting a Stryker will probably be result in a full crew kill.
it's the typical "glass cannon" approach, and it works well if you can maneuver into position before the enemy - and more importantly in the use case - outnumber them
@jameslooker4791 It should be obvious that good armour is very much a requirement. Especially now with various types of loitering munitions and cheap bomb dropping drones increasingly dominating the sky over modern battlefields with little available in the way of effective defence against them. Not to mention that the Ukraine conflict has been a bit of a wake-up call insofar as how troublesome mine's can be these day's to advancing armoured columns if employed in sufficient numbers around strategically relevant locations.
@@hollowgonzalo4329The primary killer of armoured vehicles is the same thing its been for most big wars. Artillery and mines. ATGMs aren't as important as people think they are.
@jgw9990 I think it can be more nuanced and specific than that. Artillery and mines serve as ground area defense, while ATGMs serve as ground and low-air point defense.
You mention the probable objective of these being used in China itself (on road networks). Do you think they can be deployed for littoral warfare against Aus or in the South Pacific islands?
They could be, and the PLA Marines do operate them. The areas in question would need a decent road network to make full use out of them, otherwise tracked vehicles and air mobile troops might be better in that scenario.
well russian new 122mm MLRS can also reach range around 40km now both china and russia changed the fuel of the rocket, replace the old school bm21 rocket fuel with 21centry new fuel, so the range doubles i am chinese here and i know a bit more, there was a test to replace the fuel with a more powerful one, and make the range of 122mm rocket 70km, however at that range those unguided rocket loss accuracy, and the minium range of the rocket extended to around 30km, so finally both china and russia choose the 40-50km range all kind of mlrs have a minium range, which is very unconfortable
new Chinese stryker IFV must be like us stryker's dragoon. Chinese brigade Air defence force powerful than us air defence force. Us m-shorad company have 12 air defence vehicle, but China brigade air defence force have 26 vehicle. Chinese army's grow up is too dangerous to south Korea.
Suggestion: I would really like a general overview on how you think new Zealand should prepare (make changes) to its defense force assuming it has a desire to support a US lead alliance towards maintaining peace and freedom of navigation in Asia pacific region.
i honestly think it depends on the political situation in the US. their next election could completely turn any partnership on its head depending on the outcome. we all thought it would be last time around, but that fizzled quite spectacularly. it's not outside of the realms of possibility that we cozy up to china and play switzerland in the event of conflict between china and "the west". And it's not like we have the budget or mandate to increase spending on defence forces, although that could easily be engineered with a little grease.
..the large variety of equipment points to a lot of experimentation with lots of different concepts. The life long career combat arms nco in me sees the cons..a lack of unified doctrine, a bewildering variety of different calibers in ammunition, it's borderline schizophrenic so probably slim to no chance of tactics,techniques or procedures being shared pla gf wide. Decentralized operations at the battalion level is well and good if you don't have a top-down leadership structure. As even their recent operations in Africa even their special operations troops failed disastrously. Against India or weaker power, they may achieve parity in combat power, but nowhere near enough against a modern, well trained force in equal numbers.
According to the US Army ATP7 Chinese Tactics. China’s medium brigade is an up-gunned SBCT. The two have the same type of vehicle and mobility, but the Chinese version has four additional things: (1) four maneuverable battalions instead of three in the SBCT (w/ proper IFVs instead of .50 Cal APCs ). (2) organic air defense, of which SBCT has none. (3) Larger organic artillery battalions with MLRS, and long-range ATGMs, which SBCT lacks and relies on division attachments. (4) double the size of support elements with separate combat support and sustainment battalions. China’s medium CA-BDE is more orthodoxy than the US SBCT in the medium formation concept. Every platform in it is based on the same chassis, something Stryker failed to achieve.
Excellent post. Yes, all true. I didn't want to do a comparison briefing, but you have summed up key differences. A lot of direct fire support with calibres above 30mm. To be fair to the SBCT, it was designed to be air transportable by C-130s with all the constraints that come with that, the PLA's Medium Combined Arms Brigade does not have this constraint.
ATGMs are organic in Stryker battalions.
@@GoonyMclinux I think ATP was referring to long range ATGM or ATGM with NLOS launching ability like HJ-10.
I think the issue with Stryker is the US fixation on air lifting capacity in C130 which China does not need. As it turns out, the US army choose to deploy these machines closed enough to the frontline storage facility which is more than enough for fast deployment. The most interesting things right now is that the war in Ukraine teach the US army and the Chinese might deploy more L7 105 as mobile artillery pieces than its original role as anti-tank pieces. And we might see more mobile mortar-howitzer like 2A60/2A80 as well.
If the artillery plays much more important roles in the war, then we are going to see the support troops is going to increase as well.
The question becomes is that how the infantries going to adapt to the new war under the following conditions
1. the infared-NV immersion goggles can be on every drones/personnel
2. the drones are nearly impossible to jam (DJI, Autel and many other drones all equipped with agile frequency hopping software-defined radio)
@@MultiYlin I believe the US Army prepositioned six heavy brigades worth of equipment in European warehouses so that the heavy brigades and divisions could also be deployed rapidly. A concept was recently tested when the entire US Army's 1st Cavalry Division, one of the Reinforced Heavy Divisions, was deployed to Europe on a military exercise.
There was a proposal to preposition equipment to equip a US Army Heavy Division in Poland.
在讲2020年代解放军编制的时候没有故意塞进大量早已淘汰的老旧装备和稀奇古怪的外贸only装备，你已经赢了其他osint视频作者太多太多了
Bro you are amazing, keep it going!
Thank you. Much appreciated.
About PLA’s Medium Combined Brigade, there are two very interesting theories
1, If one ZBL08 could maneuver to a location, with very high success chances the entire brigade could maneuver to the same location.
2, However, in some situations, few MBTs even one, could stop the entire brigade for hours
True.
Correction: at around the 07:55 mark I mentioned that the BN has around 15 ZBL-08 IFVs and armed variants in the BN. This should of course be around 50.
Also a shout out to Battle Order for their work on PLA vehicle numbering system. See link in description.
The MANPADS teams strike me as either very forward thinking about future drone threats, although seemingly lacking EW and AA guns, or the PLA plans to push their medium battalions forward enough to face ground attacks from fast jets. Based on their armor and mobility some form of radar based GBAD seems essential.
It will be interesting to see how widely the new Type 625 Gun/Missile air defence system is deployed. Would seem to help address the drone threat.
@@Strategy_Analysis You are wrong, the real purpose of paper 625 is not to deal with drones, but GBU type of small diameter precision-guided munitions, the PLA is really worried about this kind of weapons, fighter jets can be carried in large numbers, and the way to deal with drones the PLA thinks is electronic interference soft kill
I think that the medium brigade concept is simply misunderstood especially amongst anglophone nations. These formations provide a capability that is very much needed in 21st century warfare.
As long as the vehicles aren't too lightly protected, agree.
@@Strategy_Analysis yea one could look at the French and Italian wheeled vehicles; they have better ballistic protection than the Stryker vehicle while still retaining mobility. The Boxer and Eitan vehicles also show that wheeled vehicles can have good protection as well.
@@andrewwiggins9262 You do realize how much of a stretch that first statement is? You're comparing a general APC that was picked as an interim vehicle to wheeled firesupport vehicles that will be on the front lines with infantry. The Stryker wasn't built to be that type of weapon, the Centauro and AMX were specifically built for that purpose. And have you seen the weight differences?
@@Austin-cx2xe that’s exactly what I was getting at. I feel that the primary source of hate for wheeled vehicles stems from the Stryker. If peoples were aware that more capable wheeled vehicles existed it may change their minds.
@@andrewwiggins9262the misunderstanding is the doctrinal use of both. Strykers have a strategic mobility that is better then boxer or other wheeled afvs
Another great analysis mate! I think we(the ADF) should develop something similar using 7th brigade for example
Thank you. Yes, I can see 7th BDE becoming a wheeled armoured formation. Perhaps based on the Boxer or similar vehicle. Briefing coming on that issue.
As an American, China honestly has some pretty hi speed equipment, won’t lie. Amazing video by the way
Thank you, much appreciated. The U.S. does too, and the Germans.
Keep in mind that a lot of that is on paper, but not in reality. China is also a net food importer despite a full quarter of their population working in the agricultural sector, so their gear doesn't really mean much if they can't feed their soldiers.
@@cstgraphpads2091 I like how you immediately think of starvation as a tactic. You must either be Israeli or American. This is in your blood, isn't it?
@@cstgraphpads2091lmao, I invite you to China, not Shanghai or Beijing, but any city you choose, i will pay all of your expense. Is thay okay for you😅 Just hope you dont live a world weaved by a lie stroy, ultimately you just fool yourself only😅
@@wlyiu4057 and where are you from? i like how you immediately think bias thinking. and he is correct, logistics is everything and that includes food. again, where are you from?
I love you beyond my ability to express for uploading these Chinese unit capabilities videos. Especially What the one that you uploaded about ground forces aviation.
I sincerely request to upload something about naval aviations present capabilities after major Reshuffling
Thank you for the support. I have done a short briefing on the PLAN Air Force. I will be doing more on the PLANAF soon.
It looks more like a wheeled version of the PLA heavy brigade. The Stryker Brigade will be combined with 2 heavy brigade to form a US Army Heavy Divsion. The Stryker Brigade are supposed to be wheeled self propelled artillery. It is also supposed to get armor support from the two heavy brigades.
Both the Germany army and the South Korean army are creating medium brigades based on the Stryker model. Even more interesting is the structure of their two Panzer Divisions have one of these divisions with 2 heavy and 1 medium brigades. While the other Panzer division have two medium and 1 heavy brigades. This is iike the how the Stryker brigades are now incorporated into a US Army Heavy Division with two heavy and 1 Stryker brigades.
Thanks for the information. So the Germans are still focused on the divisional structure, rather than independent combined arms brigades?
Interesting, I reckon good size arm force but tactical battlefield nightmare, I do wonder what fighting vehicles do they take for overseas deployment can the different vehicles be fitted on their planes or warships?
Good questions. The ZBL family is used by the Marine Corps and deployed to Djibouti, but rapid air deployability is not a capability requirement for them. Most, if not all, of the BDE can be transported on a Y-9 transport aircarft. Not sure what you mean about a tactical battlefield nightmare?
@@Strategy_Analysis I mean trying communicate with all vehicles especially multiple fronts.
@@jamieshields9521 Yes, a challenge indeed. The PLA makes extensive use of 5G technology and its satellite constellation.
china do not have enough plane now
i am chinese but i should be honest here, the biggest limitation to deploy by air is the planes, china have few planes
deploy these army by sea is a good idea, in a recent drill with Djibouti land forces, china deploy more than 30 ZBL family vehicle one time useing a type 071 LPD, alone with 800 soilders
China now have more than 10 LPD and LHD, which means deploy one whole brigade over sea is possible, that is enough for chinese army in recent years
What's your opinion on the Russian "Bumerang" BTR?
A showpiece and nothing else. There are more than 6000 ZBL-08 and ZTL11 (probably close to 10000 if counting all variants), which have only been in service for about a decade. Bumerang was showcased with T-14 Armata, and just like Amerta, Russia only built a dozen of them. Without sufficient quantity, it’s just a concept vehicle without real combat potential.
china design ZBL family as a infantry fighting vehicle, or IFV, however the BTR in russian is same as APC armored personal carrier
russian are now working on some wheeled IFV also, however not a single model of wheeled IFV are massively entered service now
russians always want to put more high tech part on a developing model, and are very interested in sending their concept model to show every where, maybe they want to find some sponser
however, there are more than 3000 ZBL and ZTL vehicle now entered service in PLA, but not a single russian wheeled vehicle are entered service now, and russians still rely most on old school btr-80
🤝❤
👍🏼
I go back and forth on whether armor of non-MBTs is irrelevant on the modern battlefield. On the one hand, mobility might be the only long term counter to the ATGM threat and on the other, reports of lightly armored vehicles being hit by ATGMs are devastating. An ATGM hitting a Stryker will probably be result in a full crew kill.
it's the typical "glass cannon" approach, and it works well if you can maneuver into position before the enemy - and more importantly in the use case - outnumber them
@jameslooker4791
It should be obvious that good armour is very much a requirement.
Especially now with various types of loitering munitions and cheap bomb dropping drones increasingly dominating the sky over modern battlefields with little available in the way of effective defence against them.
Not to mention that the Ukraine conflict has been a bit of a wake-up call insofar as how troublesome mine's can be these day's to advancing armoured columns if employed in sufficient numbers around strategically relevant locations.
@@hollowgonzalo4329The primary killer of armoured vehicles is the same thing its been for most big wars. Artillery and mines. ATGMs aren't as important as people think they are.
@jgw9990 I think it can be more nuanced and specific than that. Artillery and mines serve as ground area defense, while ATGMs serve as ground and low-air point defense.
@@ragabara1031 The best usage of guided missiles is in the form of those dropped by helicopters or aircraft.
You mention the probable objective of these being used in China itself (on road networks). Do you think they can be deployed for littoral warfare against Aus or in the South Pacific islands?
They could be, and the PLA Marines do operate them. The areas in question would need a decent road network to make full use out of them, otherwise tracked vehicles and air mobile troops might be better in that scenario.
Sorry how does the 122mm mlrs reach 40km for standard unguided rounds? When you have bm21 same calibre, only ~20km
well
russian new 122mm MLRS can also reach range around 40km now
both china and russia changed the fuel of the rocket, replace the old school bm21 rocket fuel with 21centry new fuel, so the range doubles
i am chinese here and i know a bit more, there was a test to replace the fuel with a more powerful one, and make the range of 122mm rocket 70km, however at that range those unguided rocket loss accuracy, and the minium range of the rocket extended to around 30km, so finally both china and russia choose the 40-50km range
all kind of mlrs have a minium range, which is very unconfortable
i think you can play them in squad
Interesting. Thanks.
can see china new armor birgade?
I have done a briefing on that some time ago. Check my videos. But I need to do an update at some time.
They can swim, so yeah
I like the russian trench digging vehicles.
So its basically how Chinese marines works except theyre now wheeled?
While some Marine formations use the same vehicle, they operate in a different way.
new Chinese stryker IFV must be like us stryker's dragoon.
Chinese brigade Air defence force powerful than us air defence force. Us m-shorad company have 12 air defence vehicle, but China brigade air defence force have 26 vehicle.
Chinese army's grow up is too dangerous to south Korea.
As you say, the air defence element in the Medium Combined Arms Brigade is more significant than that of the Stryker Brigade.
@Strategy_Analysis I think because of usa's air force powerful than Chinese airforce.
Worry about your north brothers first then China
@toryxiao8698 no, because North Korea armed force's logistic is too bad.
@@이하늘-c3g Well that's true
Sagger ATGW missiles are almost useless.
Suggestion: I would really like a general overview on how you think new Zealand should prepare (make changes) to its defense force assuming it has a desire to support a US lead alliance towards maintaining peace and freedom of navigation in Asia pacific region.
Interesting idea. I'll give it some thought.
😅😂
i honestly think it depends on the political situation in the US. their next election could completely turn any partnership on its head depending on the outcome. we all thought it would be last time around, but that fizzled quite spectacularly. it's not outside of the realms of possibility that we cozy up to china and play switzerland in the event of conflict between china and "the west". And it's not like we have the budget or mandate to increase spending on defence forces, although that could easily be engineered with a little grease.
@@Strategy_Analysisnew Zealand army is under served on youtube
@@jackmiller8851great comment and paradigm but our politicians are all bought and standing by for the red phone to ring to know what to do next..
not good
..the large variety of equipment points to a lot of experimentation with lots of different concepts. The life long career combat arms nco in me sees the cons..a lack of unified doctrine, a bewildering variety of different calibers in ammunition, it's borderline schizophrenic so probably slim to no chance of tactics,techniques or procedures being shared pla gf wide. Decentralized operations at the battalion level is well and good if you don't have a top-down leadership structure. As even their recent operations in Africa even their special operations troops failed disastrously. Against India or weaker power, they may achieve parity in combat power, but nowhere near enough against a modern, well trained force in equal numbers.