@@joebenson528especially with serious discussions of ceasefire about to take place. Trump said he's going to address that after inauguration. We'll see. He's already making moves on a Gaza ceasefire so that's a plus but tensions are higher with Russia.
Yeah we spent many resources on them the tax payer would hate it if it went to waste vs spending and fraud practices for future technologies experimentation (where waste is considered acceptable)
"Sir, this thing looks more like an IFV than a troop transport." "What's another word for troop, son?" "Infantry, sir" "And what does Infantry do?" "They fight, sir" "And what's another word for transport?" "A vehic... oh I see where you're going with this."
@@LeonardTavast Its a spectrum. But at one end is less transport capability and more firepower and on the other is more transport capability and less firepower. Another try of definition could be: IFV - What the Name Says APC - Battle Taxi Also IFVs were expected to keep up with the tanks, APCs were expected to follow the tanks. But yeah in the end it is a spectrum. In Ukraine for example we see many "classic APCs" like the M113 pressed into an IFV role. So what is it now? I am as confused as you are.
IFV is meant to fight abd suppress enemy light armor and infantry. APC have a 50 Cal maximum and aren't meant for direct combat. Just get in delivery troops and supplies and get out.
The improved mortar is probably the most useful. US mortar vehicles have just been a mortar inside with a hatch open which is very obsolete, but gun mortars allow for spicy stuff like 50% better range and multiple round simultaneous impact firing.
I wished they made PERSONAL defense cannons. That is the future. Also a single man Ripsaw with the craziest optics, hybrid engine for stealth mode, and a 30mm cannon with a few loiting explosive drones. (Or ATGM). Imagine a tiny tankette like thay, with enough armor for 20mm under. That is driven by one man like a video game with a controller. Including a 3rd person selfie stick driving mode. Sensors like Isreals newest tank. Audio/thermal/whatever. Imagine what kind of mayhem a scout vehicle with a huge offense punch can do behind enemy lines. They'd be able to destroy all, but the heaviest stuff. Yet fast enough to hit and run. We got the unammened version. We need the manned version. Also PD cannons on every vehicle. (Think automated gun trophy system slaved to radar, able to shoot down slower ordance. From drones to ATGMs. Perfect for tanks secondary or helicopters primary. We have the technology. Just need to pair it all).
crazy how BAE actually managed to manufacture these instead of planning to make plans and then delaying it for 10yrs. Almost feels like the days there was still competition in defense contracts and output actually expects out of a gov contract
Well this program is also designed to expedite retirement of current systems... which means they can be shipped off to Ukraine. This is the real face of Ukraine war aid - using aid funds to pay for new systems by writing off current systems and sending them off to fight Russia. Expect to see (or we have already seen) similar upgrades in artillery and especially munitions manufacturing capacity.
@@davidmclean357And it’s all sorely needed, because politicians never want to pay for new weapons unless you tell them that the old ones can’t get the job done under any circumstances.
@@davidmclean357 Sending the old stuff off is ironically often cheaper than having to retire _and disassemble_ it. Scraping an armoured vehicle cost money, the local junkyard can't do it.
I been inside of one of these and spoken with the head of Engineering on the project. He explicitly stated that this was supposed to replace both the Bradley and M113. He also said that they had tested it against artillery and was able to take a direct hit from a 155 shell and there was no hull breach. The fuel is stored externally (the tanks are armored) to increase survivability and as a bonus, it has power outlets so you can charge your phone.
If I know anything about military contracting...you should be concerned when companies start competing with logical, modular, cost-cutting stuff. When defense companies are throwing around "New 7th Gen automated systems-fluid mega-laser destroyer world platform integral systems!"...we're at peace and everything is fine. When you start seeing "Well, we could make these simpler, cheaper, and more quickly...". That. That should concern you.
It means they are being told to plan for the 4th of July party. "But sir, this is Janurary- in a month its..." "I said what I said and the 4th of July can be anytime and any day"
its all about funding. When the US began to send aid to Ukraine it was basically "we send our stuff to Ukraine and the money we spend is spent buying ourselves new stuff. Its like if your next door needed a gun so you convinced your wife that you would buy yourself a new one so you could give your current gun to him.
@@Thanksforaskingme its very true actually- with adversaries being near/peer- attrition and replacement manufacturing is key on a larger global stage. The more you can churn out, the more you can throw into the fight- both via your forces as well as allied forces. And that edge can be night and day when talking near peer. Those that are in power realize the threats are a bit more modernized than those we faced within the last 30 years- and adjustmwnts have to be made ASAP as you dont want to be caught pants down with no immediate response ability.
Ukraine has proven the Bradley is still an extremely good and most importantly very survivable platform against anything russia throws at it so making a new gen vehicle based on it makes good sense.
Ukraine has proved nothing, If you believe the pro Ukraine propaganda they would have conquered Russia and be moving on China by now. Just like if you believe the pro Russian propaganda the Russians Should have taken the whole country a year ago. Meanwhile LA is burning up Carolinian are still living in tents and you knuckle draggers are cheering on the prospect of nuclear war.
Россия не вытаскивала свои новинки ещё.хватает обычных фпв дронов с гранатой рпг и нету брэдли.Всё горит не важно в такой войне как на Украине.На передовой техника долго не живёт как и их экипажи.
I feel like the single piece hull design may be a double edged sword. On hand, yes, it's always great to be able to reduce weight and improve protection. On the other hand, these types of vehicles are regularly damaged while still being recoverable and then easily repaired in the field. Haveing what essentially amounts to a "unibody" will mean that even in cases where the extra protection wasn't needed, the damage is bad enough to mean that A: The chassis is scrapped taking the vehicle out of the fight or B: They fix it with welds and replacement panels, leading to a false sense of security and the negating of the benefits in the first place.
If the unibody is just the "frame" of the hull with the armor and suspension added on later, that *might* (not always) meant that such repairs aren't as big of an issue for integrity, but it certainly will complicate repairs. It certainly is going to be patch repaired I think, at least some of the time. Being able to just replace the whole thing sounds great, and with our current logistics system we might be able to do the transportation to the front part, but the issue will be production needing to scale up in the event of a real war. (Much like how we were suddenly running into production capacity issues just selling ammo to Europe and Ukraine).
We could make a positive speculation though, maybe they'll have stacks of unibodies and you just pull the parts from the damaged AMPV, green the spares for what got junked and slap it on a new frame. Maybe it's just quicker, cheaper and easier to just discard bent frames. Training certainly would be cheaper, as their job is make the AMPV Legos go, no need to train up expensive metal fabricators as it's more like a factory line than repair shop
Honestly, this program is just like an ACE in the hole for U.S Army. Maintenance, Firepower, Mobility, Modularity, Familiarity, Future Proof, Availability. No bells and whistles but very effective.
Great episode! Glad to see the M113 being put out to pasture. It was getting downright embarrassing to see these still fielded. The design was almost 30 years old when I went in; and that was 35 years ago. They're antiques. And they weren't all that to begin with. As for its modularity of this new vehicle, we've heard that before. But based on this video it looks like they might be on to something this time. When you mention 30 different turret designs, the first thing that came to mind was training, as every version will have its learning curve for the soldiers operating it. If you're just dealing with a handful of options, like on the Stryker and Bradley, that's not so bad. But 30? Of course, you have to consider logistics is supporting all the variants' ammunition needs as well. All that aside, it still looks pretty good and might be what we need.
I was there when the Bradleys were first built by FMC in the 1980's in a factory located in Santa Clara, California next to San Jose airport. FMC also built the M113 and the Marine AAV. The Bradley was unfairly maligned in the movie The Pentagon Wars. Glad to see in this video the advent of one-piece body construction. When they were being built in the 1980's, construction was time-consuming because each weld caused the aluminum plates to buckle. Each plate had to be pushed back into shape using wooden 2x4s as levers.
I suspect that the reports of Bradley’s with 25mm auto cannons outfighting Russian tanks had something to do with this push for MPVs. I note that 30mm is the same round as used in the GAU-8. Include some tungsten or DU penetration magazines and you can take on most tanks.
funny considering the GAU8 wasnt even capable of destroying a T55 after six passes in test conditions and the USAF had to overinflate the A10s kill count in the Gulf War and Iraq war
Seems like Bradley's are making much more of a difference in Ukraine than any western tank, carries the homies to the trench line, can at the very least disable a T90 and fast, so many vids of them piecing up russian apcs
@@nicholasbrown668 this may have less to do with the 30mm round of the GAU-8 itself, and more to do with GAU-8's accuracy and the platform it's mounted in. Whenever the A-10 fires it's gun the whole plane vibrates, and where ever the pilot is aiming, realistically there's s 20 meter area around that point where the bullets will land (which is why F-111s and F-15Es did better at killing tanks, using laser guided missiles and bombs). Performance is probably much better when fired on a stabilized, land-based platform with a much lower fire-rate that can actually, accurately hit the parts of the tank it can actually pen.
@@nicholasbrown668 the A10 is more effective against armor as a missile platform. The whole 30mm cannon thing is way overblown. That’s why they’re phasing out the A10. I’ve heard F16s can do just as well with their cannon in the infantry support role.
@@barrag3463 I mean its also the round itself, it just doesn't have the penetrating power to kill a tank, of the rounds that landed on the T55 in testing, next to none of them were able to pierce the top armor and only a handful were able to pierce the armor on the rear top of the tanks engine compartment The GAU8 is a great anti infantry weapon in open settings, but it's not a heavy armor killer like the USAF wanted it to be
Regarding monolithic hulls.... I'm not sure of the complete wisdom of such an approach. Yes, it theoretically saves cost and improves survivability.... for the first shot. Most of the time, armored vehicles aren't completely destroyed following an engagement. Instead, they take minor damage where they've been hit. Traditionally, repair meant swapping out the damaged panel for a new one. But if it's all one piece, that means the vehicle can't be as easily repaired or even need to be scrapped and replaced in its entirety.
Also worth noting that the AMPV could just eliminate the need for the OMFV/XM30 while using the ideas paid for in the XM30 development (as the US Army has the rights to ALL that is developed in that project and even made it clear that XM30's could be built using both the Rheinmetall and GDLS parts ... like the Rheinmetall Lynx hull and the GDLS turret...) That means the unmanned functionality developed for the XM30 could easily placed within the AMPV too. Same with some of the drone and weapon ideas. And the AMPV could mount an autoloading and quick firing 50mm (or even 75mm, like the one first shown in the 1970's) cannon as there is no reason to believe such turrets would be too big for the platform.
No it wouldn't-the AMPV has the same issues that the Bradley has that is currently driving the development for the XM30. If you replaced the Bradley with an AMPV with a turret, you'd basically have a Bradley again. It would be a lateral move with no meaningful improvement
As a combat Vet that served Desert Storm to the mid 2000’s, in the new spectrum of warfare, this armor means nada without overwhelming anti drone and anti missile superiority. The battles will be fought drone v drone then drone vs armor before the first tank or APC sees an enemy APC or tank.
BTW, did you know that BAE is now more American than British? They do more business in the USA, than in any other country. Did you know they actually made a movie about the search for getting a new SP mortar system for the US Army? It's called "Finding NEMO"
Its British, 44% of its revenue comes from USA sales, the USA is a customer. Over 50% of Apple, Google, Ford, Mcdonalds, Nike etc's sales are outside of the USA. Does that make them non-American? No.
so under-rated for its predictions. * hunter-seeker drones * cyber-attacks * IFVs and Brads dominating the light armor of the 90s and early 21st century * non-state actors being viable as military/geopolitical threats * twin towers getting hit * commie china being a major global threat * live overhead battle direction by commanders * impending ecological collapse due to reliance on one of the world's key energy resources...
M113-2 electric boogaloo Legit tho, if they can make sure it generates enough power for future systems and manage similar modularity to the M113, it's a very good system.
How didn't you know? We're good at keeping our budget and equipment secret until we want to show off at how bad or good it is. Just look at the hundreds of vehicles we sent to other countries
history has always shown that "multi purpose" use military vehicles usually come with high casualties as well. you have to give up something to do everything. that balance triangle applies still
@ozone-xv7hk “Jack of all trades, master of none…” However I’d argue this isn’t really the case, as is two separate modules. The base is designed for one thing: be an armored cargo box, whether that cargo be people, supplies, or weapon systems. The top is also specialized to its job
You know, if Russia or China said they made something like this I’d laugh it off. But since it’s the USA, I’d pray for anyone on the opposite side of the USA
I remember watching this channel years ago and I’m not pleased to see how well your videos perform now. 135,000 views in just 5 hours!!! Keep up the good work Cappy - Spare parts army member
Compared to European IFV (Lynx, CV90,Puma) it still looks like a APC. If you compare the German (schwere Kräfte) and French army using its IFVs, then I would say US Army fits perfectly in the middle of it. And yes, it seams to me that they are heavily looking at western European actual equipment while trying to produce this vehicle. For example Pumas RCT30 turret. Building a Variant family like Lynx does, inspired by the versatility of Boxer family.
its kind of like what russia has been doing with the T-72 chassis, taking a bottom and mad maxin' different turrets on it. Except this is actually made for the purpose and might actually be actually good at it. As seen with the SM missiles, Having one unified chassis base simplifies the manufacturing and spreads the cost of development out.
Chris, your enthusiasm for the tech and passion for knowing/ explaining U.S. tactics in warfare have made this channel a joy. I feel like you should be on payroll for accidentally helping recruitment numbers. I know this channel has made me less pessimistic about our odds a future conflict. I imagine for others, it’s done the same!
I think it's crazy that anyone would make an argument that it's "just" and upgraded Bradley. Lol Bradley has been clapping cheeks in Ukraine and is still a high quality armored vehicle so improving on that as a base is already good, I mean sure it's not as "new". I mean it's not like it's some sort of new hover tank but improving on a good thing is a much safer swing than creating something brand new for the sake of being new.
As a Cav Trooper I am not surprised to see these being used for Cav units. I am also very happy to see that a mortar unit is part of this. To me that type of platform will replace some of the direct fire roles that the M-10 Booker would have filled. As someone that was around with the M113 family, it is good to see this following in its track prints. For any hate that they might get now they were great vehicles for the time. And really gave us Cold War folks something that could be the backbone of an armor force in all of its roles. I really hope the ABCT's have as good of a run, and become as respected as there granddads.
FINALLY! This looks like the best "Modular" program I have seen. The point is to have a single platform with several build-outs being used to their strengths. Not an All-In-One vehicle. The past attempts at common/modular platforms for vehicles, boats and planes have been executed...interestingly
The "Op" being getting the budget passed without civilian protests. It has been public information since 2014 - literally everyone in the world except the average US civilian knows about its existence. The recent push to pay for the program means that republican lawmakers will need to justify helping Ukraine when they have been very loudly hating on any help given to Ukraine at all. Liberals hate all military and the conservatives have been programmed by their leaders to hate assistance for Ukraine.
its one of the most public widely disclosed programs in military history. no ones talking about it because it didnt have a 30mm autocannon until last year and was considered boring until now
Yeah, for us too. In the Gaza war, they have been sent in unmanned and remotely operated, often as VBIED's against booby-trapped buildings. I hope there will still be some of the latest versions left unblown-up, so that us tree-hugging civilians can get a few that will be converted to QR all-terrain fire trucks, remotely piloted of not. That'll give a chance to our next generation to see what Mediterranean woodlands look like. The French Army never had any M113's, yet they've used repurposed ones for forest firefighting on the Isle of Corsica. And so should we!
I saw that same sort of multi product single line production with Volvo cars. We toured the factory in Göteborg Sweden and they had a line that could build multiple lines of cars and customized versions and trims concurrently on one line. Computerized with barcodes or NFC tag on parts the parts would come down the line in the correct order at each station for each vehicle. I assume they do something similar with their line here.
Cheap compared to what? Are you talking about Chobham armor? You know, the armor that isn't covering the whole tank because it is too expensive? Or are you talking about Epsom armor, which is insanely new and even more expensive? Or are you talking about something else, which isn't even being used by the Brits to cover their entire tank? Also, the more modular something is, the more it sucks. Modularity briefs well, but has NEVER (in the history of military procurement) performed well. Modularity is for video games, not real life. "Slabs" sounds a lot like "Modular armor". The whole reason this vehicle will suck is because it is modular and "future proof". That has always meant "this product sucks and the soldiers will hate it."
@Chris-fn4df You told the stuff but I'm not sure but it looked like a little notch on the armor at four points that a piece of armor could be attached on to and it would be also slightly spaced off of it from the original armor if that makes any sense and/or helps 😅
@@dankdaze42069British challenger tanks have a combat armour package that gets added to the tank when it gets deployed to combat environments. Adds a lot of weight (makes it 11t heavier) but drastically improves it protection.
A lot of US light vehicles now have additional armor packages- just not chobham. Chobham is heavy and expensive, and by doctrine is kinda overkill for what an IFV / APC is meant to do. Even armored up these things are still supposed to be light vehicle that will cost less and be numerous than a tank. If they encounter a tank, their job is to zipper (disable) the optics while popping smoke and getting out of sight, then maybe ambushing the tank with an ATGM if it can.
Cappy, do a video on CTAI's 40CTC autocannon. Its APFSDS round will punch through 140mm of RHA It's standard round goes through 210mm of concrete, dry round to point penetrate or airburst And it's Anti Aerial Airburst for drones etc Reach out up to 8.5km
This is precisely why war can be regarded as a good thing, as these advances are necessary for the future of defense and warfare. I applaud this crafty bit of development.
it seems like the ol Bradley is holding its own against the orcs! unless this new one has exponentially better armor, better firepower, speed, and take a blast better its a waste of money! you can always upgrade vehicles for a a lot less and we already have thousands of Bradley's! how about a Bradley with an RWS?
Yeah, the main thing that it has is. It has a much a stronger automated weapon system. If you take that in combination with mechanized infantry and antitrone measures on them. We should be looking at some pretty good antidrone. Anti armor anti air infantry units in the near future, supported by lots of robo firepower
Not to mention all of the space for javelin stingers and the like in that hull, which means one of these housing, a firepower to take down hundreds of millions of dollars in russian aircraft just by ensuring the infantry survive
Thanks for watching spare parts army, remember to Elevate your business with Odoo today. www.odoo.com/r/pah
Thanks for the great video 😊
hilarious to watch that odoo hahahah u love using odoo eh? ahahahahah
At some point it should become obvious that it's not near peer vs near peer, it's peer vs peer and one peer has overpriced equipment.
Thanks for covering this Chris! I usually follow the defense stuff pretty closely, but hadn't heard about this at all.
I accept your apology but mainly because that wasn't a British accent.... It just wasn't
Sir were getting 3,000 AMPV
The army: shhhh....
This program was well known, unless you're a zoomer. We'll fail to get funding for it for a 4th time and the program will dissolve by the deadline.
@@joebenson528Dissolved by the deadline is a bit ambitious.
@@joebenson528especially with serious discussions of ceasefire about to take place. Trump said he's going to address that after inauguration. We'll see. He's already making moves on a Gaza ceasefire so that's a plus but tensions are higher with Russia.
Damn we’re finally graduating from armor that was current in the 80s? Let’s gooo
Same Bradley lower, just a new turret.
LAV-25 :( all the money went to the AAV replacement
Yeah we spent many resources on them the tax payer would hate it if it went to waste vs spending and fraud practices for future technologies experimentation (where waste is considered acceptable)
Yeah right. It's big, it's slow, and incredibly expensive. Russia is laughing, wanting us to build these moronic AMPV's.
Yummy Lancet food.
@@chad_8313 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 How much are they paying you, guy?
"Sir, this thing looks more like an IFV than a troop transport."
"What's another word for troop, son?"
"Infantry, sir"
"And what does Infantry do?"
"They fight, sir"
"And what's another word for transport?"
"A vehic... oh I see where you're going with this."
I never really understood the difference between an IFV and an APC if both are tracked.
@@LeonardTavast armanent. a IFV needs to have a autocannon or other large calibre gun. apc generally uses a machine gun like a.50.
One has more room for carrying people
The other has more room for carrying ammo
@@LeonardTavast Its a spectrum. But at one end is less transport capability and more firepower and on the other is more transport capability and less firepower.
Another try of definition could be:
IFV - What the Name Says
APC - Battle Taxi
Also IFVs were expected to keep up with the tanks, APCs were expected to follow the tanks.
But yeah in the end it is a spectrum.
In Ukraine for example we see many "classic APCs" like the M113 pressed into an IFV role. So what is it now? I am as confused as you are.
IFV is meant to fight abd suppress enemy light armor and infantry. APC have a 50 Cal maximum and aren't meant for direct combat. Just get in delivery troops and supplies and get out.
Army: "Is it finally time to replace the M113 with the Bradley?"
Military Industrial Complex: "No we're going to replace the M113 with MORE Bradley!"
Well, the M2A4 is a beast
Yes, could yo please compare this vehicle to a Bradley?
I think that's pronounced "Chadly".
The improved mortar is probably the most useful. US mortar vehicles have just been a mortar inside with a hatch open which is very obsolete, but gun mortars allow for spicy stuff like 50% better range and multiple round simultaneous impact firing.
The CV90 mortar variant Mjolner is awesome 👍🏻
@@petter5721just the name alone is literally legendary.
I wished they made PERSONAL defense cannons. That is the future.
Also a single man Ripsaw with the craziest optics, hybrid engine for stealth mode, and a 30mm cannon with a few loiting explosive drones. (Or ATGM).
Imagine a tiny tankette like thay, with enough armor for 20mm under. That is driven by one man like a video game with a controller. Including a 3rd person selfie stick driving mode. Sensors like Isreals newest tank. Audio/thermal/whatever.
Imagine what kind of mayhem a scout vehicle with a huge offense punch can do behind enemy lines. They'd be able to destroy all, but the heaviest stuff. Yet fast enough to hit and run.
We got the unammened version. We need the manned version.
Also PD cannons on every vehicle. (Think automated gun trophy system slaved to radar, able to shoot down slower ordance. From drones to ATGMs. Perfect for tanks secondary or helicopters primary. We have the technology. Just need to pair it all).
And spotter drones are a massive force multipler for mortars.
Their battlefield utility has drastically increased...
@casbot71 newer Abrams can launch drones which show over head views inside the tank. Been out for few years. Not sure about production though
crazy how BAE actually managed to manufacture these instead of planning to make plans and then delaying it for 10yrs. Almost feels like the days there was still competition in defense contracts and output actually expects out of a gov contract
the UK issue with defence contracts is the gov constantly moving the goal post and asking for more crap leading to redesigns
it's almost like we'll have to fight a war
Well this program is also designed to expedite retirement of current systems... which means they can be shipped off to Ukraine. This is the real face of Ukraine war aid - using aid funds to pay for new systems by writing off current systems and sending them off to fight Russia. Expect to see (or we have already seen) similar upgrades in artillery and especially munitions manufacturing capacity.
@@davidmclean357And it’s all sorely needed, because politicians never want to pay for new weapons unless you tell them that the old ones can’t get the job done under any circumstances.
@@davidmclean357 Sending the old stuff off is ironically often cheaper than having to retire _and disassemble_ it.
Scraping an armoured vehicle cost money, the local junkyard can't do it.
Cappy: Whatchu got there?
US Army casually kinda in front of their new armored vehicle: A smoothie.
"Stryker clown car convertible" 😂
You're getting better at this, Kappy.
I been inside of one of these and spoken with the head of Engineering on the project. He explicitly stated that this was supposed to replace both the Bradley and M113. He also said that they had tested it against artillery and was able to take a direct hit from a 155 shell and there was no hull breach. The fuel is stored externally (the tanks are armored) to increase survivability and as a bonus, it has power outlets so you can charge your phone.
thats cope lol, no way it takes a direct hit from arty shell. even mbts are not safe from that...
You had me at "power outlets". Gotta charge up the handheld game console while you're out pulling barbed wire.
Is there a shower inside? 😂
Weird, wasn’t the fuel outside thing a bad thing before? Also idk about the shell
@@rybolov considering those console controls are used for drones half the time.... yeah charging makes a lot of sense
If I know anything about military contracting...you should be concerned when companies start competing with logical, modular, cost-cutting stuff. When defense companies are throwing around "New 7th Gen automated systems-fluid mega-laser destroyer world platform integral systems!"...we're at peace and everything is fine. When you start seeing "Well, we could make these simpler, cheaper, and more quickly...". That. That should concern you.
Yeah, it means that the MIC is realizing that playtime is over...
It means they are being told to plan for the 4th of July party.
"But sir, this is Janurary- in a month its..."
"I said what I said and the 4th of July can be anytime and any day"
its all about funding. When the US began to send aid to Ukraine it was basically "we send our stuff to Ukraine and the money we spend is spent buying ourselves new stuff. Its like if your next door needed a gun so you convinced your wife that you would buy yourself a new one so you could give your current gun to him.
The US has noticed that mass and quantity matter a lot.
@@Thanksforaskingme its very true actually- with adversaries being near/peer- attrition and replacement manufacturing is key on a larger global stage. The more you can churn out, the more you can throw into the fight- both via your forces as well as allied forces.
And that edge can be night and day when talking near peer. Those that are in power realize the threats are a bit more modernized than those we faced within the last 30 years- and adjustmwnts have to be made ASAP as you dont want to be caught pants down with no immediate response ability.
"I read that in a British accent because..."
You really didn't, but we appreciated the effort anyway. Cor Blimey, Guv'nor.
I like it when Perun drops by to give his own analysis 🧐
Yeah, he definitely sounded like he impersonating an Ozzy. And not any well at that! 😆
I thought he was trying for South Carolina.
Idk if Cappy really knew what he was going for 😂
I think he spelt radar as rader in an attempt to anglicise his video even more … you have to say it, when Chris takes on a character, he goes deep!
As a person who watches alot of youtube....you make a good video every time...good perspective and information
Ukraine has proven the Bradley is still an extremely good and most importantly very survivable platform against anything russia throws at it so making a new gen vehicle based on it makes good sense.
With the exception of AT mines
Why you lie? There is cemeteries if braldeysquares
Ukraine has proved nothing, If you believe the pro Ukraine propaganda they would have conquered Russia and be moving on China by now. Just like if you believe the pro Russian propaganda the Russians Should have taken the whole country a year ago. Meanwhile LA is burning up Carolinian are still living in tents and you knuckle draggers are cheering on the prospect of nuclear war.
Россия не вытаскивала свои новинки ещё.хватает обычных фпв дронов с гранатой рпг и нету брэдли.Всё горит не важно в такой войне как на Украине.На передовой техника долго не живёт как и их экипажи.
@@vladimir08090 like the t-90? ok putinbot
I was waiting for ... "MODULAR" ... And I wasn't disappointed.
I could only hold out so long haha it becomes inevitable
Alas, modular in this case actually matter a lot. But the phrase has been worn out so much from past PR.
I feel like the single piece hull design may be a double edged sword.
On hand, yes, it's always great to be able to reduce weight and improve protection. On the other hand, these types of vehicles are regularly damaged while still being recoverable and then easily repaired in the field. Haveing what essentially amounts to a "unibody" will mean that even in cases where the extra protection wasn't needed, the damage is bad enough to mean that A: The chassis is scrapped taking the vehicle out of the fight or B: They fix it with welds and replacement panels, leading to a false sense of security and the negating of the benefits in the first place.
If the unibody is just the "frame" of the hull with the armor and suspension added on later, that *might* (not always) meant that such repairs aren't as big of an issue for integrity, but it certainly will complicate repairs.
It certainly is going to be patch repaired I think, at least some of the time. Being able to just replace the whole thing sounds great, and with our current logistics system we might be able to do the transportation to the front part, but the issue will be production needing to scale up in the event of a real war. (Much like how we were suddenly running into production capacity issues just selling ammo to Europe and Ukraine).
We could make a positive speculation though, maybe they'll have stacks of unibodies and you just pull the parts from the damaged AMPV, green the spares for what got junked and slap it on a new frame.
Maybe it's just quicker, cheaper and easier to just discard bent frames.
Training certainly would be cheaper, as their job is make the AMPV Legos go, no need to train up expensive metal fabricators as it's more like a factory line than repair shop
If it's replacing the M113, some guy is going to try and get it to fly at some point
Honestly, this program is just like an ACE in the hole for U.S Army.
Maintenance, Firepower, Mobility, Modularity, Familiarity, Future Proof, Availability.
No bells and whistles but very effective.
😅😅😅😅
get me over the edge, I'm almost there....
LETHALITY
OOOOOOHHHH YYYYEEAAAAH BABAYYYYY
Patria NEMO 🇫🇮🇫🇮 mentioned Thank you from Finland!
Thanks to Finland from Latvia. Patrias are amazing
Great episode! Glad to see the M113 being put out to pasture. It was getting downright embarrassing to see these still fielded. The design was almost 30 years old when I went in; and that was 35 years ago. They're antiques. And they weren't all that to begin with. As for its modularity of this new vehicle, we've heard that before. But based on this video it looks like they might be on to something this time. When you mention 30 different turret designs, the first thing that came to mind was training, as every version will have its learning curve for the soldiers operating it. If you're just dealing with a handful of options, like on the Stryker and Bradley, that's not so bad. But 30? Of course, you have to consider logistics is supporting all the variants' ammunition needs as well. All that aside, it still looks pretty good and might be what we need.
I was there when the Bradleys were first built by FMC in the 1980's in a factory located in Santa Clara, California next to San Jose airport. FMC also built the M113 and the Marine AAV. The Bradley was unfairly maligned in the movie The Pentagon Wars.
Glad to see in this video the advent of one-piece body construction. When they were being built in the 1980's, construction was time-consuming because each weld caused the aluminum plates to buckle. Each plate had to be pushed back into shape using wooden 2x4s as levers.
0:37 that’s a wild thing to put into the video 😭🙏
One minute ago is DIABOLICAL, thank you T&P
An APC with IFV-level protection, and an IFV with APC-level passenger capacity. So you get the best of both worlds.
also ModUlAriTY
BAE CV90 is a good example of how to do modularity properly.
@@LeonardTavastor the Boxer
I love all the cool rundown of the gear and tech and weapons on these things from him 👌...
Amazing work! This all new to me. Outstanding!
I suspect that the reports of Bradley’s with 25mm auto cannons outfighting Russian tanks had something to do with this push for MPVs. I note that 30mm is the same round as used in the GAU-8. Include some tungsten or DU penetration magazines and you can take on most tanks.
funny considering the GAU8 wasnt even capable of destroying a T55 after six passes in test conditions and the USAF had to overinflate the A10s kill count in the Gulf War and Iraq war
Seems like Bradley's are making much more of a difference in Ukraine than any western tank, carries the homies to the trench line, can at the very least disable a T90 and fast, so many vids of them piecing up russian apcs
@@nicholasbrown668 this may have less to do with the 30mm round of the GAU-8 itself, and more to do with GAU-8's accuracy and the platform it's mounted in.
Whenever the A-10 fires it's gun the whole plane vibrates, and where ever the pilot is aiming, realistically there's s 20 meter area around that point where the bullets will land (which is why F-111s and F-15Es did better at killing tanks, using laser guided missiles and bombs).
Performance is probably much better when fired on a stabilized, land-based platform with a much lower fire-rate that can actually, accurately hit the parts of the tank it can actually pen.
@@nicholasbrown668 the A10 is more effective against armor as a missile platform. The whole 30mm cannon thing is way overblown. That’s why they’re phasing out the A10. I’ve heard F16s can do just as well with their cannon in the infantry support role.
@@barrag3463 I mean its also the round itself, it just doesn't have the penetrating power to kill a tank, of the rounds that landed on the T55 in testing, next to none of them were able to pierce the top armor and only a handful were able to pierce the armor on the rear top of the tanks engine compartment
The GAU8 is a great anti infantry weapon in open settings, but it's not a heavy armor killer like the USAF wanted it to be
Thanks! Love your content!
Love that the new Army has essentially just adopted the Rhino from 40k and will use it for everything
If only they'd call it the RH1-N0
Just as the god emperor intended
Finally. I was waiting for another video to listen to. Thank you
Man, I’m so happy I found your channel! Really like the Contant and explanations… Peace out
"Wait so this whole thing is just a work around to upgrade the Bradley?"
"Always has been."
Regarding monolithic hulls.... I'm not sure of the complete wisdom of such an approach. Yes, it theoretically saves cost and improves survivability.... for the first shot. Most of the time, armored vehicles aren't completely destroyed following an engagement. Instead, they take minor damage where they've been hit. Traditionally, repair meant swapping out the damaged panel for a new one. But if it's all one piece, that means the vehicle can't be as easily repaired or even need to be scrapped and replaced in its entirety.
Totally loved the diagram of the A113 inside of the AMPV!!! It transmitted so much insight in such a small amount of time!
You had my attention at airburst 30mm auto cannon.
Your channel is TopGear for Military gear
Also worth noting that the AMPV could just eliminate the need for the OMFV/XM30 while using the ideas paid for in the XM30 development (as the US Army has the rights to ALL that is developed in that project and even made it clear that XM30's could be built using both the Rheinmetall and GDLS parts ... like the Rheinmetall Lynx hull and the GDLS turret...) That means the unmanned functionality developed for the XM30 could easily placed within the AMPV too. Same with some of the drone and weapon ideas. And the AMPV could mount an autoloading and quick firing 50mm (or even 75mm, like the one first shown in the 1970's) cannon as there is no reason to believe such turrets would be too big for the platform.
I wanna see more militaries use CTAI's 40CTC 40mm Cased Telescope Cannon.
Those things are bad ass
No it wouldn't-the AMPV has the same issues that the Bradley has that is currently driving the development for the XM30.
If you replaced the Bradley with an AMPV with a turret, you'd basically have a Bradley again. It would be a lateral move with no meaningful improvement
As a combat Vet that served Desert Storm to the mid 2000’s, in the new spectrum of warfare, this armor means nada without overwhelming anti drone and anti missile superiority. The battles will be fought drone v drone then drone vs armor before the first tank or APC sees an enemy APC or tank.
Directed energy weapons can take drones down real easily
BTW, did you know that BAE is now more American than British? They do more business in the USA, than in any other country.
Did you know they actually made a movie about the search for getting a new SP mortar system for the US Army? It's called "Finding NEMO"
Its British, 44% of its revenue comes from USA sales, the USA is a customer. Over 50% of Apple, Google, Ford, Mcdonalds, Nike etc's sales are outside of the USA. Does that make them non-American? No.
much love brother keep up the great work
>New vehicle
>Looks inside
>M113 upgrade
bradley if it got beheaded
Yup
12:25 once again Command and Conquer predicts the future. This is just the Guardian IFV.
so under-rated for its predictions.
* hunter-seeker drones
* cyber-attacks
* IFVs and Brads dominating the light armor of the 90s and early 21st century
* non-state actors being viable as military/geopolitical threats
* twin towers getting hit
* commie china being a major global threat
* live overhead battle direction by commanders
* impending ecological collapse due to reliance on one of the world's key energy resources...
As always, great video and infos.
Thanks
M113-2 electric boogaloo
Legit tho, if they can make sure it generates enough power for future systems and manage similar modularity to the M113, it's a very good system.
How didn't you know? We're good at keeping our budget and equipment secret until we want to show off at how bad or good it is.
Just look at the hundreds of vehicles we sent to other countries
That same chassis was used in the M270 MLRS launcher. Super fun to drive, and the ability to get gone made Me feel like a stealthy hippo.
Great report!
history has always shown that "multi purpose" use military vehicles usually come with high casualties as well. you have to give up something to do everything. that balance triangle applies still
Care to elaborate? I’m not too familiar with multi purpose vehicles.
@ozone-xv7hk “Jack of all trades, master of none…”
However I’d argue this isn’t really the case, as is two separate modules. The base is designed for one thing: be an armored cargo box, whether that cargo be people, supplies, or weapon systems. The top is also specialized to its job
Damn i was just watching your old videos then now i see u uploaded a new vid, perfect timing!!
I heard about this 10 years ago when i was in the army using a M113.
There was always a program to update the M113. Most of them failed or the government/army lost interest in them.
@emileblanche5868 im talking about this program specifically
This video is prime Cappy and exactly why I subscribed to his channel. Enjoyable watch
Jesus, that mortar, no more farting about with baseplates and sights, just unpack the lawnchairs and beer cooler and let the system do its work.
Thanks!
You’re building something special. Keep moving forward!
Thanks for covering the ampv
This video truly speaks to me. Thanks for sharing!
Welcome back! Great episode!
The M113 may be as old as me but I wouldn’t throw one out of my garage.
Welcome back Chris and great video very informative
@14:00: "modular". Just sayin for those who were waiting for it...
Tks Cappy!
Entertaining and interesting. Great to have you back.
You know, if Russia or China said they made something like this I’d laugh it off.
But since it’s the USA, I’d pray for anyone on the opposite side of the USA
I remember watching this channel years ago and I’m not pleased to see how well your videos perform now. 135,000 views in just 5 hours!!!
Keep up the good work Cappy - Spare parts army member
Bout to eat a bowl of corn flakes to this
I'm drinking tobasco sauce.
And eating pickled onions.
Compared to European IFV (Lynx, CV90,Puma) it still looks like a APC.
If you compare the German (schwere Kräfte) and French army using its IFVs, then I would say US Army fits perfectly in the middle of it.
And yes, it seams to me that they are heavily looking at western European actual equipment while trying to produce this vehicle. For example Pumas RCT30 turret.
Building a Variant family like Lynx does, inspired by the versatility of Boxer family.
i actually think this is the best video you put out. for whatever thats worth.
its kind of like what russia has been doing with the T-72 chassis, taking a bottom and mad maxin' different turrets on it. Except this is actually made for the purpose and might actually be actually good at it. As seen with the SM missiles, Having one unified chassis base simplifies the manufacturing and spreads the cost of development out.
Doesn’t SM stand for “standard missile”?
This was great video! Didnt even know this existed! Looks promising!
*ANYONE IN 2055 !?! ✨💖✨*
Chris, your enthusiasm for the tech and passion for knowing/ explaining U.S. tactics in warfare have made this channel a joy. I feel like you should be on payroll for accidentally helping recruitment numbers. I know this channel has made me less pessimistic about our odds a future conflict. I imagine for others, it’s done the same!
They need 30mm cannons with airburst ammo for small drone defense.
Too expensive and slow. Need something smaller and cheaper
@@gregoryfilin8040 Give it a co-axle Mossberg 590a1
Fabulous video - you have my favorite type of tism! 😊
I think it's crazy that anyone would make an argument that it's "just" and upgraded Bradley. Lol Bradley has been clapping cheeks in Ukraine and is still a high quality armored vehicle so improving on that as a base is already good, I mean sure it's not as "new". I mean it's not like it's some sort of new hover tank but improving on a good thing is a much safer swing than creating something brand new for the sake of being new.
been waiting 2 weeks for this 🙏
Ayooo cappy what with the clapping 🤨🤨🤨 0:37
Another excellent video. Lots of interesting information and I like having all the photos, film clips and reference information.
New light tank be dope AF
As a Cav Trooper I am not surprised to see these being used for Cav units. I am also very happy to see that a mortar unit is part of this. To me that type of platform will replace some of the direct fire roles that the M-10 Booker would have filled. As someone that was around with the M113 family, it is good to see this following in its track prints. For any hate that they might get now they were great vehicles for the time. And really gave us Cold War folks something that could be the backbone of an armor force in all of its roles. I really hope the ABCT's have as good of a run, and become as respected as there granddads.
I really hope the top minds in the US military are finding ways to defend against cheap drones.
That’s the air-burst 30mm rounds, plus a lot of jamming.
FINALLY! This looks like the best "Modular" program I have seen. The point is to have a single platform with several build-outs being used to their strengths. Not an All-In-One vehicle. The past attempts at common/modular platforms for vehicles, boats and planes have been executed...interestingly
Oh yeah? It can stop a drone? How about 300 of them
Happy New year Chris
Keep up the great work Chris!!! I always look forward to your updates 😊
The military more than likely wanted people not to notice for opsec reasons
lol!! Sure thing
The "Op" being getting the budget passed without civilian protests. It has been public information since 2014 - literally everyone in the world except the average US civilian knows about its existence. The recent push to pay for the program means that republican lawmakers will need to justify helping Ukraine when they have been very loudly hating on any help given to Ukraine at all. Liberals hate all military and the conservatives have been programmed by their leaders to hate assistance for Ukraine.
its one of the most public widely disclosed programs in military history. no ones talking about it because it didnt have a 30mm autocannon until last year and was considered boring until now
Great episode
The M113 had a good run.
At least for the US Army.
Yeah, for us too. In the Gaza war, they have been sent in unmanned and remotely operated, often as VBIED's against booby-trapped buildings. I hope there will still be some of the latest versions left unblown-up, so that us tree-hugging civilians can get a few that will be converted to QR all-terrain fire trucks, remotely piloted of not. That'll give a chance to our next generation to see what Mediterranean woodlands look like. The French Army never had any M113's, yet they've used repurposed ones for forest firefighting on the Isle of Corsica. And so should we!
Armoured Cav to the rescue!
10:30- 10:36 Exactly why I don’t understand why we aren’t giving them more weapons. It’s a lot of no cost upgrades and avoided disposal fees.
@0:08 under the RADER 😂
Great job Chris
When will the M113's be for sale to the public & where?
They've been for sale for quite some time. Google it.
I saw that same sort of multi product single line production with Volvo cars. We toured the factory in Göteborg Sweden and they had a line that could build multiple lines of cars and customized versions and trims concurrently on one line. Computerized with barcodes or NFC tag on parts the parts would come down the line in the correct order at each station for each vehicle. I assume they do something similar with their line here.
I love your funny commentary on these videos. Keep it up lol
Stoked they are being made in York PA!
Awesome and awesome video be safe out there
I don't understand why no armor these days has those cheap but effective and easy to mount armor designs from the British that you could put slabs on
Cheap compared to what? Are you talking about Chobham armor? You know, the armor that isn't covering the whole tank because it is too expensive? Or are you talking about Epsom armor, which is insanely new and even more expensive?
Or are you talking about something else, which isn't even being used by the Brits to cover their entire tank?
Also, the more modular something is, the more it sucks. Modularity briefs well, but has NEVER (in the history of military procurement) performed well. Modularity is for video games, not real life. "Slabs" sounds a lot like "Modular armor". The whole reason this vehicle will suck is because it is modular and "future proof". That has always meant "this product sucks and the soldiers will hate it."
@Chris-fn4df You told the stuff but I'm not sure but it looked like a little notch on the armor at four points that a piece of armor could be attached on to and it would be also slightly spaced off of it from the original armor if that makes any sense and/or helps 😅
@@dankdaze42069British challenger tanks have a combat armour package that gets added to the tank when it gets deployed to combat environments. Adds a lot of weight (makes it 11t heavier) but drastically improves it protection.
A lot of US light vehicles now have additional armor packages- just not chobham.
Chobham is heavy and expensive, and by doctrine is kinda overkill for what an IFV / APC is meant to do.
Even armored up these things are still supposed to be light vehicle that will cost less and be numerous than a tank. If they encounter a tank, their job is to zipper (disable) the optics while popping smoke and getting out of sight, then maybe ambushing the tank with an ATGM if it can.
Lot of comments about aluminum body not holding up. Isn't the design of the hull made to deflect the blast?
Cappy, do a video on CTAI's 40CTC autocannon.
Its APFSDS round will punch through 140mm of RHA
It's standard round goes through 210mm of concrete, dry round to point penetrate or airburst
And it's Anti Aerial Airburst for drones etc
Reach out up to 8.5km
Under the Rader and Javellin?
This is precisely why war can be regarded as a good thing, as these advances are necessary for the future of defense and warfare. I applaud this crafty bit of development.
it seems like the ol Bradley is holding its own against the orcs! unless this new one has exponentially better armor, better firepower, speed, and take a blast better its a waste of money! you can always upgrade vehicles for a a lot less and we already have thousands of Bradley's! how about a Bradley with an RWS?
Yeah, the main thing that it has is. It has a much a stronger automated weapon system. If you take that in combination with mechanized infantry and antitrone measures on them. We should be looking at some pretty good antidrone. Anti armor anti air infantry units in the near future, supported by lots of robo firepower
Not to mention all of the space for javelin stingers and the like in that hull, which means one of these housing, a firepower to take down hundreds of millions of dollars in russian aircraft just by ensuring the infantry survive
It's holding up well enough that there's even a Bradley Cemetery
@badguy838 And there’s a dozen odd tank cemeteries dedicated to the Russians
@mcarrowtime7095 They lose 100 tanks and then make 300 new tanks. Ukraine is done lmao