yah, a real sense of humor Putin has, unless you happen to be inside of one of those jack-in-the-box torture chambers for men. War really sucks for men. When do the men ever get equal rights to say home and watch the war on TV?
We must have upgraded the ammo or Bushmaster because I saw an interview where a Gulf War Bradley commander, using his commander's override, engaged a T-72 and he said he just watched his rounds bounce off the turtle with no effect.
Bradley vs T-90 is like the ancient Greek story of Cyclops; you don't have to kill a fearsome beast outright, you just have to blind it, then deal with it at leisure.
The Bradley vs T-90 is almost a fair fight (if the Bradley has TOW missiles). The TOW missile was designed to destroy Soviet tanks in the 1970s and the T-90 has a T-72 chassis. During the Chechen wars 3-4 RPG-7 shots fired within 50m could destroy them (or firing down from an elevated position like apartment complex). T-90 has an advantage but if the chassis was better, it wouldn't even be a competition.
@GenuineAccounting So you actually believe188 Bradleys have been destroyed? Where's the evidence of that ridiculous claim? There must be plenty of different photos of burning Bradleys on Russia State Television. Wouldn't they want to crow about that the same way Ukraine crows about killing T-90s? Maybe keeping it secret is part of Pootler's military genius? Speaking of IF's.
Damn youre still stuck on tha gender qu33r one liner from bacin in 2022, lol!? Ru$$ia is the number 1 military on the planet, so get off the table, dear, your two free drinks are used up!
The Bradly vs T-90 is the perfect example of when you steal your parent's credit card to get the highest-tier vehicle without having any idea how to use it versus someone who's stuck to the same vehicle from day one and has mastered its abilities.
@@michaelwilliams9574, Ukraine has been using BFV's, (Bradley Fighting Vehicles) since 4/23 when the first M2A2 arrived. The US started providing Bradley's to Ukraine 1/23.
@@dankdaze42069 They have gone for the cheaper the better and they don't train they tank crews like NATO does. Russia doesn't care about their crews while NATO puts a premium on protecting the crews of armored vehicles. Tanks and IFVs can be replaced easily while a well trained crew is not.
@@Lonewolfmike That's my point and that's also kind of sad and depressing if you think about how little they care about their own people that they play off their communist propaganda garbage
2 หลายเดือนก่อน +297
Everything the T90 had when it was brand new was ten year old tech to the US. Russia will never be equal to the Us in tech. They can not even be considered " near pier" to the US.
Their tanks are fine. Their training and tactics, though? Not so much. Ukraine has the same tanks, mostly, and they're not having nearly the loss rate russia has. (yes. They have western tanks, but those make less than 10% of their entire tank force. Most of Ukraine's tanks are old soviet and captured Russian tanks.)
@@Canthus13 -- you forget that they had the first satellite and space station. Also when the shuttle quit it was the poor backwards Russian space program that kept things going.
Ahh were doing this again, no one told me: Putin has cancer and he is unpredictable. Ru$sia is using washer machine chips, and has no missiles left. They have no ammo so theyre using their shovels. Ru$$isa has old tech and are not near pier? Are we talking boat docks, or the media pundit? I think you mean PEER, dear. You can barely communicate and were supposed to buy your parroted propagand4!? When any of you are ready for the adult table let me know and school will be in session. Most of you are drooling, Homo Erectus
Curious about the T-90's armor. The assumption is the T-90's armor is built to spec. But what if it was not and substituted with inferior materials in order to skim the cost difference to pad some other guys' wallets. Interested if intelligence assets took some apart for study.
The military complexes of Russia and China are very similar. They've built everything to look good on paper, then relying on heavily marketed campaigns to do the selling. That's why they can make their hardware cheaper. Now, they're getting a reality check.
The Bushmaster is an Australian designed and built Protected Mobility Vehicle that serves extensively in Ukraine. It’s similar to an up-armoured Humvee. The completely unrelated M242 Bushmaster is a 25mm autocannon used on the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. Confusing isn’t it!
I was Bradley operator. We call gun, 25mike Mike. No one really says the bushmaster for the 25mm. I was confused one day when a civilian told me to get in the M242 bushmaster to use a targeting system during maintenance. I stared at him and said… what?
As Americans we ourselves dont know which weapons work well in situations vs other weapons in other situations. The himars bradleys and javilins surprised our military too. The Ukrainians have taken theses tanks and other modes of transport and tweeked them a little and man . In the future westpoint will be asking Ukrainian generals to come make speeches on that. Just watch. Ukrainians operate these weapons flawlessly
This is true, but when your tanks are famous for rapid disassembly every time they get penetrated, its pretty much impossible to get good crews for them.
It's the skill of the commanders and the entire Russian tank doctrine that's at fault. Russia doesn't protect their tanks with infantry. They're just now learning how to counter anti-tank squads, and with their attrition rates, the lessons aren't sticking. Add Ukraine's superior drone warfare tactics and they're not just not learning lessons, they're actually losing their collective skills as they lose experienced troops.
@@Canthus13 Russians, unsurprisingly, haven't "moved" in sync with Western Europe people and society, despite THEM being a part of Europe for endless generations, with inter-marriage and royal "blood" lines. The last time the Russians were with other Europeans were the Tzar years... and possibly extending a bit into the WW1 era.... when ALL of Europe still fought war more or less the same: by sending endless men into the most contested & smallest space, to "overwhelm"... By WW2, Americans and Western Europeans shifted their tactics substantially. They literally started applying Sun Tzu's many still-valid teaching... about "surprising" your enemies in ways they're least expecting. For example, Sun Tzu recommended that you pull back, slowly & methodically, if the enemy concentrates too much men/fire power at any one place... by drawing them out, stretching their supply line. That you also attack where they least expected: deep into enemy territories, for example. War is about MANAGING CHAOS and DEATH. That, BTW, is the tactic Zelensky's using in Kursk, to relief pressure on the southern and eastern Ukrainian fronts...... because over 2.5 years, the Russians built up very solid DEFENSE down there, robust positions that allow them to slowly, methodically take Ukrainian land, a few hundred square meters and then a few square miles, at a time... by throwing endless cannon fodder at lightly manned Ukrainian positions. In reality, Kyiv just doesn't have the fire power & soldiers Russians do, so it's just common sense NOT to always engage, HEAD-ON, very persistent Russian onslaught with all that Kyiv has, which is VERY MINIMAL and it's 90% from the West now... A slow, methodical pull back... by exacting a very high price (using very precise NATO equipment and drones)... is the smartest tactic for Kyiv... Even with 10's of thousands of 1940 - 80 WW2/Cold War equipment and 4 times the man power Ukraine has, Russia IS SLOWLY RUNNING LOW on both aspects... With modern fire power (even sparingly used, due to supply) & superior tactics.... attrition INSIDE Ukraine doesn't favor the Russians... as most Russians and their supporters may think. One accurate bomb (Scalp) or missile (ATACMS), for example, could easily erase 10 to 200 Russian soldiers, along with valuable, hard to produce equipment... A well equipped, NATO grade Bradley --- with night vision, modern telecommunication equipments, etc --- could easily damage or destroy a powerful T-90 Russian tank, even with just 25mm shells. Imagine the same Bradley, in 3-5 years, firing the up-coming 40mm shells that the British, French & Germans are using in their up-coming Ajax/Bradley equivalent light armed vehicles!, a 40mm that has up to 5 times the FIRE POWER of the Bradley's current 25mm fire power! Tests have tentatively shown, for example, that with the NEW DESIGNED CT cannon --- from cannon mechanics to the shells/ammunition explosives parts --- that the British defense giant BAE is finishing, along with their French & Germans partners, their 40mm cannon has 4 times as much power as a current 30mm cannon in today's US and Western European light armored vehicles... With one of the new, revolutionary capabilities that the CT-40 weapon have being able to do mini-ATACMS style/shot-gun shells, traveling ~Mach 3, close to ATACMS territory... with the cannon barrel raised 80%, against low helicopters or normal drones, with each shell containing hundreds of tungsten pellets, timed to explode near their targets...
The war in Ukraine has shown Russia to be a laughing stock. Russia may “win” this war, but won’t be feared by NATO - probably indefinitely! IMHO, this knowledge has been worth the billions we have sent to Ukraine.
Was Mechanized Infantry. There was a love hate relationship with the M2A2/3. If you were lucky you got the A3 model with "air conditioning". Most of us were in A2 models and just baked inside waiting for the ramp to go down. The Bradley crew on the other hand, "Death before Dismount".
And that is the problem though. The idea is to get the troops to the field to dismount where they can protect the vehicle flanks and punch back with anti tank and anti air systems. If the troops stay inside the vehicle, they either get blown up with the vehicle, or remain useless as a ground force. Not having air conditioning may have been an advantage in the eyes of the Generals. If the troops don't dismount, may as well convert the Bradley into a lightweight tank killer with more antitank systems and no troop ramp or seating.
@mutanthybrid3466 out was never a problem. 6'2", out was better. Yes I did gun too. Felt like I was wearing the turret lol. Served in every position save LT and PSG. Shot for 4 Lts, 1 PSG, and my CO in Korea. Had one Bradley with A/C, but that's only because the heater was deadlined during hoenfels maneuvers( LTs track has no troops so we can do without?lmao) in Germany.
@steveoborne2297 The design flaws are numerous for the T90, first they opted for a carousel auto loader, so all the rounds are in the weakest part of the tank, the turret in the crew area where all new ATGMs are now designed to target. Secondly Russia decided not to include air-conditioning on any of their armored vehicles, thats why we are constantly seeing armor get taken out with a drone and a grenade down the hatch. Even on a cold day youd be surprised how fast an 1100 horsepower engine with turn the crew compartment into an oven. And like you said the target acquisition systems are also lacking.. But if you're gonna drive around all day with hatches open and get hit with a guided missile you might as well not be driving in any armor at all, the pressure that will be created in the crew area will be enough to end your life. Its a long list of failures, and tank commanders have even claimed reactive armor blocks have been just replaced by rubber blocks. Its corruption up and down the entire chain of command, Russia really was not prepared for a modern conflict they have a lot of house cleaning to do to get themselves in order.
@sussybaka8732 Who gets spotted first and who gets spotted driving with their hatches open for a drone grenade.. None of Russias armor is equipped with AC so they all drive with the hatches open... Armor means nothing if you have an open hatch.
@@AgentSmith-x9p I believe the new Armata has a nuclear biological protection system. Although it doesn't seem like it's made it into mainstream production, due to unreliability issues. Around 30 have allegedly been manufactured, and are believed to be considered as working prototypes rather than combat ready vehicles....
Because it's not the machine that matters but the weapon being used. If Ukraine mounts AT weapons on light platforms, they can be dangerous if they get the flank on a tank, duh.
And as the correct hammers are not available (sold for profit on black market) the crew have to use the Chinese-made commercial hammer, which often fails. ;)
Which is precisely why Putin can't/won't stop the war. He knows he'd be a laughing stock on the World stage, and the sheer humiliation would be unbearable.
Them lying so hard is the reason Ukraine, NATO, USA and EU is winning so hard. I can see why you are laughing. The Russians seems to be doing TERRIBLE. (On the YT channels you watch)... However, on other channels, we see a different reality. And the ones of us that pay attention to the politics as well, we know that Ukraine is history...
Just judging by Russia's military inability in Ukraine to adjust to changing tactics used by Ukraine shows their weaknesses. The 1940's tactics don't work, but they try, try and try again. Apart from the nukes they are pretty much a paper tiger. What worries me the most is that they could actually learn from this, but up to the present moment they don't seem to have. Meat wave tactics, and are now using north Korean soldiers, missiles and artillery shells. I shudder to think what Putin has, is, or going to give them in return.
no but 2024 tactics work. ask UAF how modern tactics deleting their manpower is going. the same tactics are being used by and against them. it works. why? according to Penfold its a paper tiger. actual war generals- furiously scribbling it down.
Yes, Russia pre Ukraine invasion was seen as a at par adversary, after they tried to invade Ukraine it is clear Russia cannot do combined arms warfare while the west train for combined arms warfare and have excellent communications.
What kind of propaganda are you feeding yourself? You don’t know shit about the ruzzians tactics…they evolving their advancements and tactics day by day and they are very much winning on every ground , all the taxpayers dollars are gone now, aint no way ukros could win. Only 69’th TikTok and propaganda brigades of Ukraine and NAFO are winning on the Internet.
The tactical plans have not changed. Its always been quantity over quality. In their minds, as long as they hold enemy territory, they are winning regardless of losses.
Every future IFV should have a drone dispenser that can be operated from the inside of the vehicle. Basically a pez dispenser that shoots out a disposable drone that’s very fast, small, and hard to detect. Each vehicle should have 5 or more drones onboard.
5? 5! I am thinking 100 or more drones. You did say "disposable". Probably needs a dedicated space for a drone operator. And more drones from operators in other positions, maybe a mile or more from the front line. A whole swarm of drones all with many different capabilities. Some high with optics to distinguish hidden material, some low flying anti-personnel, some that are succulent targets for anti-drone measures, etc.
One story about older model Soviet tanks was that a key piece of equipment was a short-handled sledge hammer, used to force the gear shift into position. Crude production values, especially clearances, can turn equipment which is superior in design into junk which hinders more than it helps.
I served in vietnam on a M48 with 90mm main and 7 diffrent flavors of ammo. Being a jungle buster always carried a cluster round in the breech. Never liked mud in the highlands alwayss worked good on rock/ dirt roads. 30MPH and 48 tons the only thing to hold reale state.. 2 corps 4th div ARMOR RECON.
I used to work at a Army base in an undisclosed location. We had to receive store and ship out HUMVE, MRAPs, HEMITs, Strikers, APCs, Bradleys, Palidins, M1A1 main battle tanks and a lot of others and the Bradleys were always my favorite to fuck with and drive. Not too big not too small and they just look cool. 🇺🇲
I was on active duty during the initial development of 5he Bradley and as an Armor officer, us company grad3 officers studied everything we could on the Bradley and its implementation. Ukraine is using the Bradley as designed for European warfare, and it has been successful. The TOW made it it great during Desert Storm, and the cannon and machine gun in the latest Iraq war. Go Ukraine!
@mrschuyler Why bother if a Bradley ca take a lousy Russian tank. A ressersceted 70 year old tank. What a laugh. 70 year old tanks are the best Dictator Clownshoes can do
@@rogerwilco5918 What? If the Bradley is knocking out T90s on a regular tank to tank basis, that is the comparison. Some engineer's designation has no bearing.
6:10 The Ukrainians have proven to be smart, adaptable, and fierce combatants. The USA spent more than 10 years in Afghanistan and, once they left, the Afghans capitulated almost immediately…
Normally I would like this video, having been a Gunner on an M3 CFV, the cavalry version of the M2. However, the video, while describing the M2, repeatedly uses clips from other vehicles, German Marders, etc.,. There are tons upon tons of videos to use, so disappointed that the poster didn't stay true to the article.
That is more tanks that they had and more than was on the battlefield by both sides - Ukraine has reported losing about 800 tanks of all types at the last report I saw.
@jim.franklin if you say something like that, and don't follow it up with why... it proves your emotional investment in this conversation is preventing you from being rational. You are the same as 80% of people... that is to say, you don't rate talking to me because you lack intellectual honesty. Get to the point where you can stop lying to yourself, then you can talk to me. For now, I'll just talk at you.. so it's even.
@jim.franklin did you forget about this conversation? I think you are an adult, and you think you can ignore this, like it doesn't matter. The hole in your character is right here, and you aren't man enough to look. Don't talk to me about warfighting, when you can't handle a fuckin' honest conversation.
Our Bradley troop carrier is defeating their main battle tank. At this point I’m convinced there’s a very real possibility that they don’t even have functioning nuclear weapons.
there is a real possibility all nukes are just filled with water at this point seeing as most are past their half-life and their shelf life is mostly done...
Used to be a video knocking around on the interwebs back in the 90's, when the cold war ended. It was the interior of a silo and they were disarming one. Dude dropped a wrench. The wrench went through the outer shell of the rocket. Cut to snow. Why? They used liquid fuel for their delivery systems. Liquid fuel, as it turns out, will just eat through its containment (the rocket) eventually. Highly unstable, but cheap and easy to make. It's what they used almost exclusively for a very long time. They also have an extremely poor track record of maintaining their "modern" solid fuel rockets, even for smaller systems. It's how you get funny clips with the munition going return to sender.
@@chipmartin7608 I called to him right now, and he said that he was referring to the T90M tank. He also noted that Europe supports the terrorist regime in Kiev, which organized a coup d'etat. Violent change of power is stopped by the security forces of Great Britain, the United States and Germany in their countries - and should be condemned as a crime.
No it wasn't. It was designed to kill soft targets and light fortifications. The TOW was designed for anti-tank work. That Bushmaster can't punch through MBT armor. What it does, though, is strip all the sensors off the outside of the enemy tank with ease, leaving them blind in the middle of a pack of enemies. It was never EVER intended to do that. That wasn't even an idea in the 70s when the Bradley was designed.
No it wasnt. 25mm is NOT designed to be used against a MBT. It absolutely is unexpected that they are so effective against Russian MBTs. 25MM was designed for use against lightly armored targets (not heavy tanks) and infantry. The TOW was DESIGNED for use against heavier targets.
@@SnarkyMcsnarkles24 Right, but it's not surprising that 25mm HE rounds would destroy the optics and sensors on the T-90. What was actually unexpected was that a tank crew could be so ineffective, and a Bradley crew could have such huge balls.
Please, don't tell the Ruzzians, but the ERA, funktions only, if it's not replaced with egg carton! I hope those "maintenance" guys, got well paid for the stuff. from a Finn in Diaspora
One captured Russian tank - a T72 I believe - had thick sheets of rubber in it's ERA casings...... and some Russian "bullet proof" body armour had sheets of printed tin from road signs in it, rather than composite material... 9mm bullets went straight through it when the Ukrainians tested it.
It is hard to take this seriously when the video can't tell the difference between a Marder and a M2. Or a Striker and a Bradley. Or a German G-3 MG and a M242 Bushmaster 25mm cannon.
The T2 is a tricycle with a big galvanized garbage can over the top. A head hole cut through the bottom and the lid is used as a helmet tied on with twine
You speak of long term weakness in Russia’s military industrial complex but the much more important long term factor is the strain that it places on the whole of Russian society. And this is the point. Peace between Russia and Ukraine can only come if there is a transformation of Russian society.
In close quarters combat..... With proper crew training, those Bradley's probably should not have survived. I'm saying that as a former Bradley crew member. It is not a tank.
@@michaelwilliams9574 Agreed. As it was, the 2 Bradleys were hammering on the T-90 from 2 different directions while steadily changing their position & targeting the T-90s sights, so it was never able to fire the single kill shot required to regain the upper hand. The T-90 didn't pop it's top. It was just blinded & virtually hamstrung leaving the crew the rare option of leaving the vehicle. One on one, the odds are seriously against the Bradley.
@@michaelwilliams9574 exactly why i call it an SUV. It has multiple usus and excels at all of them like troop transport, anti tank capability and infantry. I assume it has some effectiveness against helicopters. Unlike its competitors which are just glorified taxis, basically troop transport with the same or similar functionalities to Bradley, but dont excel at those uses on an individual basis, at least not reliably.
@@michaelwilliams9574 ive seen too many t72 survive himars head on……… 3 in total. Maybe they wernt himars weapons being used but thats what it looked like
When did we bring back the 25mm BushMaster ? I was under the distinct impression that the 25mm BM was replaced by a 30mm version, to make ammo common to more/all units. I can see sending redundant 25mm to allies, but the article says these are new units.????
How did that 25 mm cannon disable that Main Battle Tank? Did it just pepper it with enough rounds so it took out all that T-90 electronics? Maybe even knocked the tracks off? Could that 25 mm disable the T-90 main gun?
@@theelmonk as many as they required to get their adsense money. bet they had as many adverts as they mininum required only to maximise their returns. which should be less than 2 adverts p-10 mins. but... LOL.
@theelmonk The clips in the video absolutely sucked! But I loved hearing the full story about how the "Might" T-90 got slapped down by a Bradley! Lol 🤣
The featured video (although not shown here) is actually 2 Bradleys attacking in tandem, taking turns. The footage is a from 1 battle in Stepova, north of Avdiivka, early 2024. They took out optics and the HE rounds were detonating the reactive armor causing damage and fire inside the tank.
The only one not understanding here, is _you._ Just because one Bradley disabled one T-90, doesn't mean the Bradley is better. If you pull your head out of the sand, and look at the trends instead of isolated examples, you'd realize you're just the victim of propaganda.
All nice and well, but since you are talking about the Bradley, why is there footage of the German Marder IFV woven I to the video?? It somehow undermines your point.
Australia has or had Bushmaster armoured vehicles. USA made and uses Bushmaster 25mm auto-cannon. Which Bushmaster are you referring to? One is a vehicle, one is a gun....
Two things are using the same name in Ukraine you have the Australian IMV Bushmasters and M242 Bushmaster chain gun which is used on the Bradly IFV you best crib your facts before running your mouth.
America sent 200 Bradleys out of the 2000+ in stockpile and you think BICS (minus Ruzzia) wants to join? Russia is bleeding their own population dry and are resorting to sending African mercenaries and NK conscripts.
@@briandoherty8337 it was by design. The experiment in self governance was always designed to fail. It's so they can say we let you try it and you ruined everything when it was always them. RightPike?
I was on tanks in the 80's and 90's and 2000's and used to get frustrated with how badly we knew Russia's tanks and equipment would perform compared to ours until at a certain point in my career, I was taken aside and told, that if the American people knew we had the best equipment already, they'd stop funding for future equipment. I was told to shut my trap and let everyone think Russia was top dog. Loose lips sink ships and all that crap. That is why I could never play any games that pitted American tech against Russian tech. In reality, it would be a slaughter fest, not in Russians favor. But in the games, they always had the advantage. In Desert Storm, we were blowing up their crap every time we saw one and everyone said it was the 'export' version. I guess these are all export versions too?
What was done to that T90 could be the same with any western tank. Their optics are also not protected by armor. What was against the T90 was there were more than one Bradley there. If there was another T90 there or even infantry with some anti tank weapons, (even the lowly RPG-7) as prudent tactics dictated since WW2, those Bradleys will not get off so easy.
The T-90 has never ever been considered the "best tank" in the world by anyone. 😂😂😂
it IS the best tank in the world, just ask putin and a couple of the crews.
Only in Putin's eyes. 👀
Ruzz "the best technology".
Not true, Russia holds it in high regard…..😂
Jack in the boxes 😂
Russia's T-90 was once hailed as above average. Now it's more of a weapon's training target for the Bradley or any drone.
"Now it's not even that. "
-According to... _you?_ LOL
@@NotSure723 A Russian bot has joined the chat.
@@bigpuppy9923 a drone entered the chat- we like any tank western or soviet/russian.
drone swarm proceeds turning tanks into scrap steel.
T90 is very good at turret ejection....
@@bigpuppy9923
"A Russian bot has joined the chat."
-Wow, good one!
I like the jack-in-the-box turrets. It shows that Russia does have a sense of humour.
yah, a real sense of humor Putin has, unless you happen to be inside of one of those jack-in-the-box torture chambers for men. War really sucks for men. When do the men ever get equal rights to say home and watch the war on TV?
It's not just the T90 it's self. But the crews operating the tank and the tactics the Russians use which makes it more vulnerable.
Add in the fact the Russian military is one of the most corrupt in the world and their command structure is extremely top heavy doesn't help either.
Typo: itself.
Whereas the Ukrainian crew in this case, used the terrain like they knew every nook and cranny on the map.
"Russia's T90 tank was once hailed as the best in the world."
By absolutely NO ONE in the world except Russian Propagandists.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂,,russian losser ahahahah
Military industrial complex and CIA has been known to exaggerate others capabilities to get more money for their toys
Iraq war Bradley Driver here. Good experience. Better than up armored HMMV's. Plenty fast. Good maneuverability, Great gun.
Right on, brother.
Here captain of enterprise, good worp power.
We must have upgraded the ammo or Bushmaster because I saw an interview where a Gulf War Bradley commander, using his commander's override, engaged a T-72 and he said he just watched his rounds bounce off the turtle with no effect.
@@d.f.9064 you aren't Bradley driver, maybe in game because everyone in army know that Bradley is tank for any HMMVs.
Well you heard wrong the bradley took out many russian made tanks in iraq. It actually has more tank kills than the Abrams tank does.@@oxide9679
Bradley vs T-90 is like the ancient Greek story of Cyclops; you don't have to kill a fearsome beast outright, you just have to blind it, then deal with it at leisure.
The Bradley vs T-90 is almost a fair fight (if the Bradley has TOW missiles). The TOW missile was designed to destroy Soviet tanks in the 1970s and the T-90 has a T-72 chassis. During the Chechen wars 3-4 RPG-7 shots fired within 50m could destroy them (or firing down from an elevated position like apartment complex). T-90 has an advantage but if the chassis was better, it wouldn't even be a competition.
@@TheFivegoodemperors search up what chassis mean and the hull is different compared to the t72
@@TheFivegoodemperors I saw a movie called "IF" once. Lots of great s**t happens, IF.
Great analogy
@GenuineAccounting So you actually believe188 Bradleys have been destroyed? Where's the evidence of that ridiculous claim? There must be plenty of different photos of burning Bradleys on Russia State Television. Wouldn't they want to crow about that the same way Ukraine crows about killing T-90s? Maybe keeping it secret is part of Pootler's military genius? Speaking of IF's.
Russia‘s army - the second best army inside Russia.
True but still killing thousands of people.
Z
@@Charles-k9g5y and because of that the ruzzian military MUST be stopped!
Damn youre still stuck on tha gender qu33r one liner from bacin in 2022, lol!?
Ru$$ia is the number 1 military on the planet, so get off the table, dear, your two free drinks are used up!
@@Charles-k9g5y Where?
The Bradly vs T-90 is the perfect example of when you steal your parent's credit card to get the highest-tier vehicle without having any idea how to use it versus someone who's stuck to the same vehicle from day one and has mastered its abilities.
Except that they just got Bradley's a few months ago. That's a very poor analogy.
@@michaelwilliams9574, Ukraine has been using BFV's, (Bradley Fighting Vehicles) since 4/23 when the first M2A2 arrived. The US started providing Bradley's to Ukraine 1/23.
In that Russian weapons and technology just suck compared to ours and are still decades probably a century almost behind😂
@@dankdaze42069 They have gone for the cheaper the better and they don't train they tank crews like NATO does. Russia doesn't care about their crews while NATO puts a premium on protecting the crews of armored vehicles. Tanks and IFVs can be replaced easily while a well trained crew is not.
@@Lonewolfmike That's my point and that's also kind of sad and depressing if you think about how little they care about their own people that they play off their communist propaganda garbage
Everything the T90 had when it was brand new was ten year old tech to the US. Russia will never be equal to the Us in tech. They can not even be considered " near pier" to the US.
Their tanks are fine. Their training and tactics, though? Not so much. Ukraine has the same tanks, mostly, and they're not having nearly the loss rate russia has. (yes. They have western tanks, but those make less than 10% of their entire tank force. Most of Ukraine's tanks are old soviet and captured Russian tanks.)
@@ProAhead Waitwhat? First on the moon... Are you in an alternate universe?
There are piers in the aleutians/bering strait that are fairly near.
@@Canthus13 -- you forget that they had the first satellite and space station. Also when the shuttle quit it was the poor backwards Russian space program that kept things going.
Ahh were doing this again, no one told me: Putin has cancer and he is unpredictable. Ru$sia is using washer machine chips, and has no missiles left. They have no ammo so theyre using their shovels. Ru$$isa has old tech and are not near pier? Are we talking boat docks, or the media pundit?
I think you mean PEER, dear. You can barely communicate and were supposed to buy your parroted propagand4!? When any of you are ready for the adult table let me know and school will be in session. Most of you are drooling, Homo Erectus
Curious about the T-90's armor. The assumption is the T-90's armor is built to spec. But what if it was not and substituted with inferior materials in order to skim the cost difference to pad some other guys' wallets. Interested if intelligence assets took some apart for study.
That is for sure the reason we arent seeing the Armata in action
There were many early videos showing the reactive armor boxes were empty.
😂Their reactive armor is made of shoes 📦 boxes 😅.
The military complexes of Russia and China are very similar. They've built everything to look good on paper, then relying on heavily marketed campaigns to do the selling. That's why they can make their hardware cheaper. Now, they're getting a reality check.
Glorified t72.
The Bushmaster is an Australian designed and built Protected Mobility Vehicle that serves extensively in Ukraine. It’s similar to an up-armoured Humvee. The completely unrelated M242 Bushmaster is a 25mm autocannon used on the Bradley Fighting Vehicle. Confusing isn’t it!
A very popular name, and don't forget the Bushmaster XM15 Rifle to add to the confusion.
Exactly.
I was Bradley operator.
We call gun, 25mike Mike. No one really says the bushmaster for the 25mm.
I was confused one day when a civilian told me to get in the M242 bushmaster to use a targeting system during maintenance. I stared at him and said… what?
And "Bushmaster " is a subsidiary of Remmingto Arms . The other Bushmaster is a large ,aggressive pit viper from central america .
Not a bit. No one's heard of the Australian vehicle outside of Australia.
As Americans we ourselves dont know which weapons work well in situations vs other weapons in other situations. The himars bradleys and javilins surprised our military too. The Ukrainians have taken theses tanks and other modes of transport and tweeked them a little and man . In the future westpoint will be asking Ukrainian generals to come make speeches on that. Just watch. Ukrainians operate these weapons flawlessly
I watched a member of the US army talking about how the Ukrainians were using the Himars so much better than the system they believe could be used.
@@Blayda1 Necessity is the mother of invention.
Don't worry. Trump will destroy our military advantages.
I don't think so. American weapons worked as designed.
@@chineduokonkwo5777yes sir
The words best and Russian should never be used in the same sentence, ever.
Vodka, caviar and borscht.....n maybe TRE45ON'S fourth wife!!!
Vodka.
@@chipmartin7608 Polish is better. They can't even get that right.
First man in space first supersonic passenger plane
Alcoholics. They’re the best.
To paraphrase “It’s not the tank it’s the skill of the crew.”
The best crew cant make garbage equipment effective, nor can the best equipment make a garbage crew effective.
.
This is true, but when your tanks are famous for rapid disassembly every time they get penetrated, its pretty much impossible to get good crews for them.
It's the skill of the commanders and the entire Russian tank doctrine that's at fault. Russia doesn't protect their tanks with infantry. They're just now learning how to counter anti-tank squads, and with their attrition rates, the lessons aren't sticking. Add Ukraine's superior drone warfare tactics and they're not just not learning lessons, they're actually losing their collective skills as they lose experienced troops.
@@Canthus13 Russians, unsurprisingly, haven't "moved" in sync with Western Europe people and society, despite THEM being a part of Europe for endless generations, with inter-marriage and royal "blood" lines.
The last time the Russians were with other Europeans were the Tzar years... and possibly extending a bit into the WW1 era.... when ALL of Europe still fought war more or less the same: by sending endless men into the most contested & smallest space, to "overwhelm"...
By WW2, Americans and Western Europeans shifted their tactics substantially. They literally started applying Sun Tzu's many still-valid teaching... about "surprising" your enemies in ways they're least expecting.
For example, Sun Tzu recommended that you pull back, slowly & methodically, if the enemy concentrates too much men/fire power at any one place... by drawing them out, stretching their supply line.
That you also attack where they least expected: deep into enemy territories, for example.
War is about MANAGING CHAOS and DEATH.
That, BTW, is the tactic Zelensky's using in Kursk, to relief pressure on the southern and eastern Ukrainian fronts...... because over 2.5 years, the Russians built up very solid DEFENSE down there, robust positions that allow them to slowly, methodically take Ukrainian land, a few hundred square meters and then a few square miles, at a time... by throwing endless cannon fodder at lightly manned Ukrainian positions.
In reality, Kyiv just doesn't have the fire power & soldiers Russians do, so it's just common sense NOT to always engage, HEAD-ON, very persistent Russian onslaught with all that Kyiv has, which is VERY MINIMAL and it's 90% from the West now...
A slow, methodical pull back... by exacting a very high price (using very precise NATO equipment and drones)... is the smartest tactic for Kyiv...
Even with 10's of thousands of 1940 - 80 WW2/Cold War equipment and 4 times the man power Ukraine has, Russia IS SLOWLY RUNNING LOW on both aspects...
With modern fire power (even sparingly used, due to supply) & superior tactics.... attrition INSIDE Ukraine doesn't favor the Russians... as most Russians and their supporters may think.
One accurate bomb (Scalp) or missile (ATACMS), for example, could easily erase 10 to 200 Russian soldiers, along with valuable, hard to produce equipment...
A well equipped, NATO grade Bradley --- with night vision, modern telecommunication equipments, etc --- could easily damage or destroy a powerful T-90 Russian tank, even with just 25mm shells.
Imagine the same Bradley, in 3-5 years, firing the up-coming 40mm shells that the British, French & Germans are using in their up-coming Ajax/Bradley equivalent light armed vehicles!, a 40mm that has up to 5 times the FIRE POWER of the Bradley's current 25mm fire power!
Tests have tentatively shown, for example, that with the NEW DESIGNED CT cannon --- from cannon mechanics to the shells/ammunition explosives parts --- that the British defense giant BAE is finishing, along with their French & Germans partners, their 40mm cannon has 4 times as much power as a current 30mm cannon in today's US and Western European light armored vehicles...
With one of the new, revolutionary capabilities that the CT-40 weapon have being able to do mini-ATACMS style/shot-gun shells, traveling ~Mach 3, close to ATACMS territory... with the cannon barrel raised 80%, against low helicopters or normal drones, with each shell containing hundreds of tungsten pellets, timed to explode near their targets...
To paraphrase "its both the tank and the skill of the crews".
There, i fixed it for ya.
It's not the size of the dog in the fight it's the size of the fight in the dog
I need to eat. I read that as "it's not the size of the HOT dog in the fight..." 😅😂
The war in Ukraine has shown Russia to be a laughing stock. Russia may “win” this war, but won’t be feared by NATO - probably indefinitely! IMHO, this knowledge has been worth the billions we have sent to Ukraine.
'wont be feared by NATO'????
🤦🏻♀️
Who has one of the largest stocks of nuclear weapons on the planet chief???
@@Andrew-is7rs last weapon tests destroyed the silos and a large area around of them.
@@Andrew-is7rs Nobody cares about their 70yo, unmaintained, clapped-out nukes.
They may not win.
@@tyrson2445
🤦🏻♀️
Was Mechanized Infantry. There was a love hate relationship with the M2A2/3. If you were lucky you got the A3 model with "air conditioning". Most of us were in A2 models and just baked inside waiting for the ramp to go down. The Bradley crew on the other hand, "Death before Dismount".
Started with them when there was a West Germany lol.
And that is the problem though. The idea is to get the troops to the field to dismount where they can protect the vehicle flanks and punch back with anti tank and anti air systems. If the troops stay inside the vehicle, they either get blown up with the vehicle, or remain useless as a ground force. Not having air conditioning may have been an advantage in the eyes of the Generals. If the troops don't dismount, may as well convert the Bradley into a lightweight tank killer with more antitank systems and no troop ramp or seating.
@mutanthybrid3466 out was never a problem. 6'2", out was better. Yes I did gun too. Felt like I was wearing the turret lol. Served in every position save LT and PSG. Shot for 4 Lts, 1 PSG, and my CO in Korea. Had one Bradley with A/C, but that's only because the heater was deadlined during hoenfels maneuvers( LTs track has no troops so we can do without?lmao) in Germany.
Isn't that basically the Cav Scout variant though? They have another four TOW missiles instead of a squad of troops.
You are quite right between 90 has a very impressive gun unfortunately the targeting systems are way below those of NATO countries
@steveoborne2297 The design flaws are numerous for the T90, first they opted for a carousel auto loader, so all the rounds are in the weakest part of the tank, the turret in the crew area where all new ATGMs are now designed to target. Secondly Russia decided not to include air-conditioning on any of their armored vehicles, thats why we are constantly seeing armor get taken out with a drone and a grenade down the hatch. Even on a cold day youd be surprised how fast an 1100 horsepower engine with turn the crew compartment into an oven. And like you said the target acquisition systems are also lacking.. But if you're gonna drive around all day with hatches open and get hit with a guided missile you might as well not be driving in any armor at all, the pressure that will be created in the crew area will be enough to end your life. Its a long list of failures, and tank commanders have even claimed reactive armor blocks have been just replaced by rubber blocks. Its corruption up and down the entire chain of command, Russia really was not prepared for a modern conflict they have a lot of house cleaning to do to get themselves in order.
"Unfortunately"?)
its a who gets spotted first war nowadays
@sussybaka8732 Who gets spotted first and who gets spotted driving with their hatches open for a drone grenade.. None of Russias armor is equipped with AC so they all drive with the hatches open... Armor means nothing if you have an open hatch.
@@AgentSmith-x9p I believe the new Armata has a nuclear biological protection system. Although it doesn't seem like it's made it into mainstream production, due to unreliability issues. Around 30 have allegedly been manufactured, and are believed to be considered as working prototypes rather than combat ready vehicles....
T90 is the best putinland can knock up, yet fears a 44 year old Bradley.
eXPECT THE POOR SOD OF A DRIVER STILL HAS TO CHANGE GEAR WITH A BIG HAMMER
Because it's not the machine that matters but the weapon being used. If Ukraine mounts AT weapons on light platforms, they can be dangerous if they get the flank on a tank, duh.
And as the correct hammers are not available (sold for profit on black market) the crew have to use the Chinese-made commercial hammer, which often fails. ;)
No T series tank has ever been considered superior to the likes of Abrams and the leopards lol
Thanks!
Largest country in the world struggling with a much smaller... Must be embarrassing.
the embarassing thing is your folks letting you use the internet unsupervised whilst they partake in smoking crack.
@@UltraRealTrueJesus You mad bro?
@@colinf.1198 Just a bot exclusively trained on twitter.
Which is precisely why Putin can't/won't stop the war. He knows he'd be a laughing stock on the World stage, and the sheer humiliation would be unbearable.
@@colinf.1198 какой крэк? - беломор и пьют горилку
According to Russia all their systems are unbeatable 😂😂😂🤪
drones? ask a UAF/UFA soldier. both sides employ loitering munitions and dragons. ask yourself if you'd find those beatable in drone swarms? LOL
Them lying so hard is the reason Ukraine, NATO, USA and EU is winning so hard. I can see why you are laughing. The Russians seems to be doing TERRIBLE. (On the YT channels you watch)...
However, on other channels, we see a different reality.
And the ones of us that pay attention to the politics as well, we know that Ukraine is history...
On paper, but paperwork can brazenly lie.
Like their T 72 tanks?
So is the intensity of their bullsh*t barrages......
Gotta be embarrassing to get your ass kicked by a glorified taxi.
Gotta be embarrassing to make that argument, while being completely ignorant of Ukraine is getting it's ass kicked...
@@NotSure723 That's why Trump's sugar daddy is several years into his three-day war? 🤣
@@NotSure723 Gotta be embarrassing to be a Russian.
@@NotSure723 that's not what I'm seeing in news reports. Maybe that's just mainstream propaganda though.
@@NotSure723 The 3 day incursion is in year 3. Sucks to be you!
Pretty much all Russian equipment has turned out to be junk.
Also their airfoce has lots of non operational aircraft, hence their reliance on drones and missiles.
It was all a Bluff...A pathetic Top Down Dictatorship that needs a Regime Change
And I am sure the same can be said about Chinese tanks and other weapons.
Ouch. Yes, quite a revelation.
Presne tak je to odpad,ale hlavne ze sa s nimi chvastaju.
The T-90 hasn’t even seen the A-10’s yet
Just judging by Russia's military inability in Ukraine to adjust to changing tactics used by Ukraine shows their weaknesses. The 1940's tactics don't work, but they try, try and try again. Apart from the nukes they are pretty much a paper tiger.
What worries me the most is that they could actually learn from this, but up to the present moment they don't seem to have. Meat wave tactics, and are now using north Korean soldiers, missiles and artillery shells. I shudder to think what Putin has, is, or going to give them in return.
no but 2024 tactics work. ask UAF how modern tactics deleting their manpower is going. the same tactics are being used by and against them. it works. why? according to Penfold its a paper tiger. actual war generals- furiously scribbling it down.
Yes, Russia pre Ukraine invasion was seen as a at par adversary, after they tried to invade Ukraine it is clear Russia cannot do combined arms warfare while the west train for combined arms warfare and have excellent communications.
What kind of propaganda are you feeding yourself? You don’t know shit about the ruzzians tactics…they evolving their advancements and tactics day by day and they are very much winning on every ground , all the taxpayers dollars are gone now, aint no way ukros could win. Only 69’th TikTok and propaganda brigades of Ukraine and NAFO are winning on the Internet.
Russia has actually very much changed their tactics since the beginning of the war.
The tactical plans have not changed. Its always been quantity over quality. In their minds, as long as they hold enemy territory, they are winning regardless of losses.
Once hailed as the best in the world???? By who????
Pootin,💩
By Putintang....
by Russians. LOL
Only by Russians and Russian's mindless nut huggers. All of Russian touted "super weapons" have been exposed as junks in actual combat.
Russia
What you mean by unexpectedly? The Russians reusing the cooked up chassis, so the armor has the quality of a Lotus cake.
....said Adolf
@@111076tom Ypu should not cry over me, but over your wasted fellow Russians😉
T-90 is only expensive scrap.
All Russian tanks are ancient scrap.
Yeeeeerp.
Why don't you go to Ukraine, and show us how "crappy" the T-90's are. I dare you!
@@NotSure723 Why don't you?
@@NotSure723 Some of us have, so just watch what you infer.
The Bradley is basically a light tank. Nimble and Fast and Armored and Armed enough to wreak havoc on many classes of foes.
500+ Russians are sad because their T90 turned out to be a joke. Just like the T14 Armata lol
I "love" these videos where no actual footage is shown and everyone somehow gets on board haha
Every future IFV should have a drone dispenser that can be operated from the inside of the vehicle. Basically a pez dispenser that shoots out a disposable drone that’s very fast, small, and hard to detect. Each vehicle should have 5 or more drones onboard.
5? 5! I am thinking 100 or more drones. You did say "disposable". Probably needs a dedicated space for a drone operator. And more drones from operators in other positions, maybe a mile or more from the front line. A whole swarm of drones all with many different capabilities. Some high with optics to distinguish hidden material, some low flying anti-personnel, some that are succulent targets for anti-drone measures, etc.
One story about older model Soviet tanks was that a key piece of equipment was a short-handled sledge hammer, used to force the gear shift into position. Crude production values, especially clearances, can turn equipment which is superior in design into junk which hinders more than it helps.
"The Bushmaster Protected Mobility Vehicle or Infantry Mobility Vehicle is an Australian-built four-wheel drive armoured vehicle"
Yeah i was thinking it was an aussie vehicle. the name is a dead giveaway.
Also the name of a gun.
And?
@@tonylam9548 The gun was designed and developed in Australia as well.
It's talking about the bushmaster 25mm cannon on the Bradley you pleb
I served in vietnam on a M48 with 90mm main and 7 diffrent flavors of ammo. Being a jungle buster always carried a cluster round in the breech. Never liked mud in the highlands alwayss worked good on rock/ dirt roads. 30MPH and 48 tons the only thing to hold reale state.. 2 corps 4th div ARMOR RECON.
I used to work at a Army base in an undisclosed location. We had to receive store and ship out HUMVE, MRAPs, HEMITs, Strikers, APCs, Bradleys, Palidins, M1A1 main battle tanks and a lot of others and the Bradleys were always my favorite to fuck with and drive. Not too big not too small and they just look cool. 🇺🇲
California mohave. 13:43
I was on active duty during the initial development of 5he Bradley and as an Armor officer, us company grad3 officers studied everything we could on the Bradley and its implementation. Ukraine is using the Bradley as designed for European warfare, and it has been successful. The TOW made it it great during Desert Storm, and the cannon and machine gun in the latest Iraq war. Go Ukraine!
These dudes are not messing around. Rang the bells big time.
The great Russian bear too busy, hibernating than fighting
Seem's plenty of fighting going on in the Donbas.
@@happycarnivore5481 And making what kind of progress years into it?
Bradley isn't even a tank. Compare the T90 to the Abrams.
lIKE COMPARING A pushbike to a motorbike
@mrschuyler Why bother if a Bradley ca take a lousy Russian tank. A ressersceted 70 year old tank. What a laugh. 70 year old tanks are the best Dictator Clownshoes can do
Why?
@@rogerwilco5918 What? If the Bradley is knocking out T90s on a regular tank to tank basis, that is the comparison. Some engineer's designation has no bearing.
Correct
6:10 The Ukrainians have proven to be smart, adaptable, and fierce combatants. The USA spent more than 10 years in Afghanistan and, once they left, the Afghans capitulated almost immediately…
Normally I would like this video, having been a Gunner on an M3 CFV, the cavalry version of the M2.
However, the video, while describing the M2, repeatedly uses clips from other vehicles, German Marders, etc.,.
There are tons upon tons of videos to use, so disappointed that the poster didn't stay true to the article.
I just wonder what caused the turret to spin around? What was hit on the T90?
Apparently the Ukraine has lost 90 of these tanks so far and various reports of 16,374 other tanks lost😬
That is more tanks that they had and more than was on the battlefield by both sides - Ukraine has reported losing about 800 tanks of all types at the last report I saw.
I mean, they probably have. They also inflict 3-1 casualties on the enemy, so I fail to see your point.
@@ATBatmanMALS31 That comment shows your ignorance of the subject and warfighting.
@jim.franklin if you say something like that, and don't follow it up with why... it proves your emotional investment in this conversation is preventing you from being rational.
You are the same as 80% of people... that is to say, you don't rate talking to me because you lack intellectual honesty. Get to the point where you can stop lying to yourself, then you can talk to me.
For now, I'll just talk at you.. so it's even.
@jim.franklin did you forget about this conversation? I think you are an adult, and you think you can ignore this, like it doesn't matter.
The hole in your character is right here, and you aren't man enough to look. Don't talk to me about warfighting, when you can't handle a fuckin' honest conversation.
Why does the T-90 have an enormous shell trap as the base of its turret? Isnt that a thing anymore?
the Abrams saw and fired on that pos. T 90 before the T 90 even knew the Abrams was there.
arty hit and zapped a Abrams. it didn't get seen.
source when where? NONE
That was a Bradley, two of them in fact. Not an Abrams.
A lot of people in America want Ukraine to be successful. We are here to support you and sending prayers 🙏❤️ 🇺🇲🇺🇦❤️
Our Bradley troop carrier is defeating their main battle tank. At this point I’m convinced there’s a very real possibility that they don’t even have functioning nuclear weapons.
Only in isolated incidents. The trend is the other way around.
there is a real possibility all nukes are just filled with water at this point seeing as most are past their half-life and their shelf life is mostly done...
@@UltraRealTrueJesus But the west maintains their own
@@UltraRealTrueJesus
I want some of whatever you are smoking...
Used to be a video knocking around on the interwebs back in the 90's, when the cold war ended. It was the interior of a silo and they were disarming one. Dude dropped a wrench. The wrench went through the outer shell of the rocket. Cut to snow. Why?
They used liquid fuel for their delivery systems. Liquid fuel, as it turns out, will just eat through its containment (the rocket) eventually. Highly unstable, but cheap and easy to make. It's what they used almost exclusively for a very long time. They also have an extremely poor track record of maintaining their "modern" solid fuel rockets, even for smaller systems. It's how you get funny clips with the munition going return to sender.
Why are you discussing the Bradley, but keep showing library footage of the W. German Marder?
Not the tanks it’s the operators !
A Bad workman always blames his tool
Is there still a similar video with the T90 and Bradley - or is it just an accident?
Never ever in history was the t90 ever hailed as the best tank LOL
yes T72 is better
It was, too! Ask Putin!
@@chipmartin7608 I called to him right now, and he said that he was referring to the T90M tank.
He also noted that Europe supports the terrorist regime in Kiev, which organized a coup d'etat.
Violent change of power is stopped by the security forces of Great Britain, the United States and Germany in their countries - and should be condemned as a crime.
Whose and which one tank is the best and by what indicators? and in what area and at what time of year?
** Curious … why do you keep intermittently showing German APC’s while talking about the Bradleys?
In 1981 they was laughing at the Bradley.
Not Laughing now
Early Brads had insufficient armor fer their roll...and other problems...The Brad 2 is a different beast...
They are still laughing now!🤡🤣
@@NoWoke6981 the crew of that t-90m was giggling whilst leaving their tank being peppered by those 2 bradleys i bet lmaooo XD
@@NoWoke6981 Where?
Russia learned in WW2 that tanks employed by themselves were highly vulnerable.
Unexpectedly? The 25mm was designed for exactly that. DUH.
No it wasn't. It was designed to kill soft targets and light fortifications. The TOW was designed for anti-tank work. That Bushmaster can't punch through MBT armor. What it does, though, is strip all the sensors off the outside of the enemy tank with ease, leaving them blind in the middle of a pack of enemies. It was never EVER intended to do that. That wasn't even an idea in the 70s when the Bradley was designed.
No it wasnt. 25mm is NOT designed to be used against a MBT. It absolutely is unexpected that they are so effective against Russian MBTs. 25MM was designed for use against lightly armored targets (not heavy tanks) and infantry. The TOW was DESIGNED for use against heavier targets.
uh uhh, it was not.
@@SnarkyMcsnarkles24 Right, but it's not surprising that 25mm HE rounds would destroy the optics and sensors on the T-90. What was actually unexpected was that a tank crew could be so ineffective, and a Bradley crew could have such huge balls.
@@jaimilynstewart1854
"that a tank crew could be so ineffective"
-"ineffective"??? Because they didn't see one of their enemies??? Sure thing Pal.
Why are they showing pictures of the german Marder 1 A3 while talking about the Bradley? :)
Please, don't tell the Ruzzians, but the ERA, funktions only, if it's not replaced with egg carton!
I hope those "maintenance" guys, got well paid for the stuff.
from a Finn in Diaspora
One captured Russian tank - a T72 I believe - had thick sheets of rubber in it's ERA casings...... and some Russian "bullet proof" body armour had sheets of printed tin from road signs in it, rather than composite material... 9mm bullets went straight through it when the Ukrainians tested it.
Disabling a tank is not the same as destroying it. Remember what Guedarin once said "Smash the enemy don't tickle him"
A tank is only as good as it's armor.
and the crew training, tactic.
A tank is only as good as the crew trained to operate it.
apparently the t-90 armour in general is good......... but they are susceptible to strikes coming downwards onto the top of the lid.
If you are strong, make your enemy believe you are weak.
It is hard to take this seriously when the video can't tell the difference between a Marder and a M2. Or a Striker and a Bradley. Or a German G-3 MG and a M242 Bushmaster 25mm cannon.
Right👍
Thnk you for the video. Well done. 👏 👍 ✌️🇺🇦☝️
The T2 is a tricycle with a big galvanized garbage can over the top. A head hole cut through the bottom and the lid is used as a helmet tied on with twine
Rapid stabilized pinpoint fire. Now upsize the shell size so as to use airburst mode
Can't listen to these anymore with the AI voice. Sorry, I loved the channels with the original voice.
when it comes to tanks in war, tactics is just as important as a good tank. How tanks are used is the secret to effective tank tactics.
Clean video.
🇺🇦🇺🇦👍
📸🎬🎥
You speak of long term weakness in Russia’s military industrial complex but the much more important long term factor is the strain that it places on the whole of Russian society.
And this is the point. Peace between Russia and Ukraine can only come if there is a transformation of Russian society.
1:00 Are you sure about that?
Very slack on truths from this channel
Norway here, yes its spot on at that time😂😂
Unless russia buys old soviet tanks from the chinese they would most likely stay at around a number of 1000 advanced tanks consistently
Tell the truth. It took a pair of Bradleys tag teaming that T-90 with the spinning turret.
In close quarters combat..... With proper crew training, those Bradley's probably should not have survived. I'm saying that as a former Bradley crew member. It is not a tank.
@@michaelwilliams9574 Agreed. As it was, the 2 Bradleys were hammering on the T-90 from 2 different directions while steadily changing their position & targeting the T-90s sights, so it was never able to fire the single kill shot required to regain the upper hand. The T-90 didn't pop it's top. It was just blinded & virtually hamstrung leaving the crew the rare option of leaving the vehicle. One on one, the odds are seriously against the Bradley.
The warrior is a glorified taxi. The bradley is like an SUV
As a former Bradley crew member, I can assure you it's more than an suv. It killed more vehicles in Operation Desert Storm than the Abrams did
@@michaelwilliams9574 exactly why i call it an SUV. It has multiple usus and excels at all of them like troop transport, anti tank capability and infantry. I assume it has some effectiveness against helicopters. Unlike its competitors which are just glorified taxis, basically troop transport with the same or similar functionalities to Bradley, but dont excel at those uses on an individual basis, at least not reliably.
@@michaelwilliams9574 ive seen too many t72 survive himars head on……… 3 in total. Maybe they wernt himars weapons being used but thats what it looked like
Training, training, training, not the tank, always the well trained crew.
The ai is soo shit
When did we bring back the 25mm BushMaster ? I was under the distinct impression that the 25mm BM was replaced by a 30mm version, to make ammo common to more/all units. I can see sending redundant 25mm to allies, but the article says these are new units.????
The narration is repetitive.
They all are. Its to manipulate the algorithm . All about the benjamins.
How did that 25 mm cannon disable that Main Battle Tank?
Did it just pepper it with enough rounds so it took out all that T-90 electronics? Maybe even knocked the tracks off? Could that 25 mm disable the T-90 main gun?
Loved the video and hated the AI narrator!
Voice synthesizer.
The content was worse. How many times was the same point repeated ? How many times were the same clips shown ?
@@theelmonk as many as they required to get their adsense money. bet they had as many adverts as they mininum required only to maximise their returns. which should be less than 2 adverts p-10 mins. but... LOL.
@thomashenebry8269 Whatever it is, I hate it!
@theelmonk The clips in the video absolutely sucked! But I loved hearing the full story about how the "Might" T-90 got slapped down by a Bradley! Lol 🤣
BRADLEY'S ARE BEASTS, DONT MESS WITH BRADLEY'S TANKS
Russia has at least two major problems in this aspect; lack of decent tank crews and corruption.
The featured video (although not shown here) is actually 2 Bradleys attacking in tandem, taking turns. The footage is a from 1 battle in Stepova, north of Avdiivka, early 2024. They took out optics and the HE rounds were detonating the reactive armor causing damage and fire inside the tank.
Technology is such a force multiplier.
Russia still doesn't understand.
Iraq learned that multiplier the hard way! Unfortunately China is learning that the easy way.
tell thet to the ukros that are getting FABulous experience in the trenches and basements
Dictator Clownshoes thinks human wave attacks are the way to go.
The only one not understanding here, is _you._ Just because one Bradley disabled one T-90, doesn't mean the Bradley is better. If you pull your head out of the sand, and look at the trends instead of isolated examples, you'd realize you're just the victim of propaganda.
@@NotSure723 cope harder
All nice and well, but since you are talking about the Bradley, why is there footage of the German Marder IFV woven I to the video?? It somehow undermines your point.
Australia made the Bushmaster. That's why it's called Bush.
Which Bush is it? Plant or George? 😃
The 25mm version?
Australia has or had Bushmaster armoured vehicles.
USA made and uses Bushmaster 25mm auto-cannon.
Which Bushmaster are you referring to? One is a vehicle, one is a gun....
Good name for a vehicle. A Bushmaster is a fast attacking snake. You don't ever want to meet one.
Err mate, they are *our* 🇦🇺bushmasters actually. Don’t expect anything original from this channel but at least crib your facts properly.
Bushmaster (US company) made the 25mm cannon on the Bradley, which is what is being referenced
Two things are using the same name in Ukraine you have the Australian IMV Bushmasters and M242 Bushmaster chain gun which is used on the Bradly IFV you best crib your facts before running your mouth.
No mate, you have put your foot in your mouth.
Great analogy Matt! Well stated!
None of this matters. The second brics goes live America lost the war.
Already has.
America sent 200 Bradleys out of the 2000+ in stockpile and you think BICS (minus Ruzzia) wants to join?
Russia is bleeding their own population dry and are resorting to sending African mercenaries and NK conscripts.
@@briandoherty8337 LOL. What war is America going to "lose"? You pootiebots are hilarious.
@@briandoherty8337 it was by design. The experiment in self governance was always designed to fail. It's so they can say we let you try it and you ruined everything when it was always them. RightPike?
What a fool you are. Just because you babble nonsense doesn't make it true.
I was on tanks in the 80's and 90's and 2000's and used to get frustrated with how badly we knew Russia's tanks and equipment would perform compared to ours until at a certain point in my career, I was taken aside and told, that if the American people knew we had the best equipment already, they'd stop funding for future equipment. I was told to shut my trap and let everyone think Russia was top dog. Loose lips sink ships and all that crap. That is why I could never play any games that pitted American tech against Russian tech. In reality, it would be a slaughter fest, not in Russians favor. But in the games, they always had the advantage. In Desert Storm, we were blowing up their crap every time we saw one and everyone said it was the 'export' version. I guess these are all export versions too?
See what hundreds of Billions of Us taxpayers money can do
Someone should tell Bumblebrain Biden to stop wasting it.
And see the hundreds of billions of rubles flushed down the toilet?
@@thomashenebry8269wtf are you crying about??
@@rogerwilco5918 That's about all the rouble is worth now, toilet paper. Billions of roubles? What's that worth? $1.28?
@@rogerwilco5918 I'm not going to waste my time trying to educate you.
The M-2 crew was fighting desperately for their lives and got lucky….aggressive fighting spirit can sometimes overcome technical superiority.
Nobody calls russias equipment the best in the world it's soviet leftovers 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
All while Ukraine uses WWI leftovers 😅😂🤣😅🤣😂🙂🙃🤣😋😘😅😹🤤🤣🤣😁😃😉😂🐻🍍🍸🍸🍸🤣😂
3:25 “over 100 t90s lost in Ukraine” WTF! in the first month of the war, you mean?!
What was done to that T90 could be the same with any western tank. Their optics are also not protected by armor. What was against the T90 was there were more than one Bradley there. If there was another T90 there or even infantry with some anti tank weapons, (even the lowly RPG-7) as prudent tactics dictated since WW2, those Bradleys will not get off so easy.
Bradley was like “thins goes against the codex astartes…. But I look forward to it.” 😂😂😂
How many game changers are there??
If not for failure on the T 90, the Bradley can use the 25mm to strip the reactive armor, the use the tow against bare armor