MTLB is indeed very difficult to get stuck (not impossible, of course, but very, very difficult). But it is not only due to its tracks but also due to the transmission. Basically, it has low-range gear always enabled. So it is not particularly fast, but it has plenty of torque. As for "loads of Russian SAM systems named "Strela"" - there are only two =) Well, two families of SAM systems. Initially, "Strela-1" (short-range SAM) and "Strela-2" (MANPADS) were developed together as parts of a single order. And then they branched off - "Strela-2" was developed into "Strela-3", "Strela-1" - into "Strela-10".

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

Ah, that all makes sense!

@burningphoneix

7 ай бұрын

Basically, it's like if the United States named every vehicle that mounted Stinger missiles as a "Stinger"

@zanaduz2018

7 ай бұрын

Not completely, Strela-1 and-2 both were originally intended to be MANPADS but as their design process progressed, Strela-2 was developing into a much smaller missile (and thus more suitable as a MANPADS). Strela-1 was then allowed to grow in weight to a vehicle-based system, thus allowing a much larger missile that could perform much better (as it didn’t need to compromise as much to keep acceptable weight and performance characteristics to be man-portable). Strela-1 (SA-9 in the West) would be later developed into the Strela-10 (SA-13); the Strela-10 is mounted onto a modified MTLB chassis. (Strela-1 is mounted on a modified BDRM-2 wheeled TEL.)

@robertkalinic335

7 ай бұрын

​@@burningphoneixNo, i dont speak russian but slavic languages are somewhat similar. Strela is something like shot or missile, so it would be like US naming its missiles as missile 1,2,10...

@Temeluchas

7 ай бұрын

@@robertkalinic335 "Strela" means "Arrow"

10:28 I have two theories on why the Mortar is so high up here. #1: The benches where the crew sits house internal fuel tanks and they could not be removed. #2: The thin Armour of the MT-LB necessitated several support beams being welded inside the cargo/passenger compartment. With the roof hatch creating a weakness, the floor was considered too weak to hold the recoil of a mortar.

@michaelbourgeault9409

7 ай бұрын

#3: the mortar is over the ammunition These possibilities are not mutually exclusive, so I'm going with #4: a combination of any 2 of the above, or maybe all 3 of them.

@Temeluchas

7 ай бұрын

The reason for such high mounting is that the designers had to "marry" two very annoying requirements: a) 360-degree arc of fire b) The thing had to use an unmodified infantry mortar, mounted in such a way that within a couple of minutes, the crew could dismount it and use it as a normal man-portable mortar. So the high mounting gives the mortar the space to rotate and clears standard infantry mortar scope out of the hull. This thing (technically - 2K32, 2S24 is the vehicle without the mortar) is a niche solution developed specifically for mountain troops. It isn't officially a self-propelled mortar, It is "man-portable\vehicle portable mortar system". Basically, it is just a transport for an infantry mortar with an option to shoot mounted. And the thing is pretty rare. A much more common "mortar MTLB" in the Russian army has 2B9 "Vasilek" (full-auto 82-mm) mounted on the roof. There is also a version with 120-mm mortar mounted directly on the floor, but it is made in Kazakhstan.

4:34 it is a fully armored machinegun so pretty hard to suppress I guess, unlike an M113

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

True

@The2ndFirst

7 ай бұрын

That's fair. I never figgured out why they didn't put solid gunshields on ACAV varients

@gerfand

7 ай бұрын

Project Reality feels

Combat Mission Units: Shitbox

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

Absolutely.

@bigboi7817

7 ай бұрын

Does it have the same nickname in every game?

@marrs1013

7 ай бұрын

To be somewhat fair to the platform, it fell into the same trap(s) as pretty much every Soviet equipment: complete lack of development over the decades, and endless misuse in roles the designers never visioned the vehicle to perform. It's an arty tractor for the '60s. It sucks at everything else it forced to do 60 years later? No sh*t Sherlock...

@VynalDerp

7 ай бұрын

@@bigboi7817 yes, it even shares the name IRL. Although, granted, the term tends to apply to vaguely box shaped vehicles which are old, antiquated, and are probably APCs.

Pancake (infantry), pancake (ATGM) and pancake (SAM)

Ah, the M113's Slavic and hardworking but perhaps not as photogenic cousin.

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

I dunno, it's at least as photogenic as the M113

@kersacoft

7 ай бұрын

I think it nails the shitbox aesthethic fairly well.

Btw, MTLB is a big meme in Russian community. It's believed MTLB can be turned into any vehicle up to a Baneblade using some insulation tape

@arandomperson7713

7 ай бұрын

There’s a comedic video (in ARMA, I think?) of basically this, just everything and anything bolted on an MTLB in escalating order, from simple Technical weaponry, to tank turrets, to full-on S-400 SAM’s, to a massive commercial radio relay tower with multiple PANTSIR-S1 systems parked on various levels, and finally a comically monstrous abomination of over fifty MTLB’s assembled together with a battleship cannon and multiple smaller weapons on it. A weapon to surpass a Metal Gear, truly. It is said Arch Magos Ivanovichostanovichaslavomich Rus’ (not to be confused with Leman Russ) passed many a sleepless night contemplating these holy blueprints, and he hasn’t been seen since, rumoured to have started his own holy crusade of mind-breaking firepower on the backs of these monstrous war machines…

@riflemen9057

7 ай бұрын

@@arandomperson7713 they say in M34 when magos Mihalych added Kontakt-1 STC to Ivanovich's creation, the machine cleared the entire Ultima segmentum out of xenos and heretics in a few solar days.

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

@riflemen9057 To be fair, the original Baneblade STC may actually be 4 MTLBs welded together.

MTLBs are neat, especially the variants. A lot of Russian/Soviet vehicles are very neat but the MTLB tries really hard and its very endearing. Definitely not the #1 APC to kill U.S. infantry though, that honor would go to the M113.

I have never played even one second of this game but I find it infinitely interesting and your videos very entertaining

I don’t even have this game but I have to watch your videos. Keep it up please!

@The2ndFirst

7 ай бұрын

Dude. His videos literally sold me on the game.

Where PKM gunner defending his glorious shitbox through his opened up hatch?

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

I'd forgotten about that! He's here: kzread.infoQA_1NVwgsLQ?feature=share

No matter what the content is, I want more Usually Hapless explaining key points in history and Combat Mission bits!

I LOVE MTLBS. YES MTLBS ARE MY FAVORITE MODE OF TRANSPORTATION

Thanks for introducing me to this game series.

@jimmydesouza4375

7 ай бұрын

If you want a similar but in many ways better game series that is (at least for now) limited to WW2, look up the Graviteam Tactics series. Most current one I am aware of being Mius Front.

Love these Unit review videos, keep up the great work!

Love it when you go into details of force specific kit!

Your uploads make my day

Omg new hapless unit guide. Thank you hapless for feeding my military vehicles addiction

The only reason we don't have the MT-LB with ERA/dazzlers/active-defense systems/etc. is probably because Iran doesn't have very many. Iran put ERA on BTR-60. Give them a platform and some time, and they'll modernize that baby beyond all sense, which I respect a lot.

I don't think there are any Syrian MTLBs in Shock Force 2 but excellent video anyways, I love your unit breakdowns!

@robertkalinic335

7 ай бұрын

I think they are there but i didnt play sf for a long time.

I want those in CMSF2! And really, most of the cool stuff from cold war as well.

It's a COMBLOCK M113.

Great vechicle for its time

Love!!!!!❤

Combat mission units: Sherman's when ???

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

When I figure out how to cover about a millions Sherman variants :P

@xahmadx6442

7 ай бұрын

@@usuallyhapless9481 You need to only cover the important changes or just make a episode about let's say the M4 Sherman then make another episode let's say about the firefly when you feel like it you don't need to cram them in one video you can just make a video about one variant when you feel like it

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

Where's the fun in that? :P

@xahmadx6442

7 ай бұрын

@@usuallyhapless9481 Fair enough

mtlb with depth charges when

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

Would actually be pretty devastating

@forcea1454

7 ай бұрын

Given the Soviet developed a dedicated naval version of the Grad designed to launch depth charges to defend harbours, honestly not that hard. Just take the launcher from that, and place it on an MTLB.

@wojszach4443

7 ай бұрын

@@usuallyhapless9481 i know they are deployed, question is is that any good, i mean trench clearng with mine disposal equipment worked well too

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

The current problem appears to be that being within 30km (or more) of the front line is extremely dangerous. The actual armament on combat vehicles is somewhat secondary if they're hit by drones or precision artillery before they have a chance to shoot at anything themselves. Would MTLBs with naval hedgehog projectors be an effective means of clearing trenches? Probably. But you could do the same thing with artillery delivered cluster munitions with a greater rate of fire and considerably more safety so...

@wojszach4443

7 ай бұрын

@@usuallyhapless9481 though currently they are installing so many jammers on everything that you could probably use harm missiles against them

I do find it weird how little ammo the CMBS Russian APCs and IFVs carry. At least when you compare to a Bradley or LAV in CMSF2.

@robertkalinic335

7 ай бұрын

I think bmp's 2 and definitely 3 carry enough ammo, its only btr and mtlb conversions that have so little.

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

The main difference is the cannon ammo calibre. The 25mm Bushmaster rounds for Bradley and LAV are noticeably smaller than 30mm cannon rounds.

@arandomperson7713

7 ай бұрын

The reason is the difference in platform. The BMP‘s carry sufficient amounts of ammunition, since they were designed to carry that much ammunition of that size. If a BMP could carry a full autoloader for 73mm projectiles, it sure can carry a belt of autocannon rounds. The MTLB was designed to carry 7.62 ammunition and RPG rounds for the troops and armoured turret and the BTR was designed to carry 50 cal rounds for its turret, plus 7.62 and RPG‘s for the troops. The difference in platform means that making the vehicle capable of carrying more ammunition that links to the main belt in a mechanically sound way would be too expensive to be practical (there may be more belt reloads in the vehicle, but the amount of time it takes to reload it IRL would put it outside CM‘s timeframe). Also, as Hapless has mentioned, 30mm AC rounds are noticeably larger than 25mm.

Is it Friday already?

I wonder what the point difference from the 30mm MTLB vs the BTR82a. Once im home i will check this, could find a new rat strategy haha

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

Quick check says the 30mm MTLB is a bit more expensive. You do get more transport capacity though...

@dob7343

7 ай бұрын

@usuallyhapless9481 the extra team per vehicle will help a lot, as well as the MTLB will be less likely to get stuck than the BTR. I assume it has less ammo though.

Can you take weapons? From dead people in the game?

@usuallyhapless9481

5 ай бұрын

Yes

A surprisingly (to me at least) large amounts of these are currently being used by the Russians in Ukraine right now. A note about the "view ports".... @4:40 Combat Mission only has 2 states: buttoned up and unbuttoned. If they are unbuttoned-the crew are supposed to have their heads sticking out... but the graphics do not always match ...not sure how the game works under-the-hood (that is the question), or if it is just a graphics bug (example: I have noticed some BTRs never show the crew exposed at all, regardless of setting...odd...a bug?)

@arandomperson7713

7 ай бұрын

I don’t think you are correct here. I believe there are two cases of seeming open up failure. The first is in a vehicle that cannot open up at that time, be it due to suppression, lack of available crew or other factors. The second one is more important, I believe. In some vehicles like BRDM’s, “opening up” the crew does not in fact make them pop their heads out, but makes them open up the armoured flaps protecting the bulletproof glass for the driver. My reference here is the BRDM-2 and its ATGM carrier variants in CM:SF2. I’m not sure if the BTR’s do it, though, as the BTR-60PB, the only one in SF2, does have a crew member open up out of a hatch when ordered so.

@GrumblingGrognard

7 ай бұрын

@@arandomperson7713 You are referring only to the "graphics" when imho are (practically meaningless). I am referring to the actual "state" of the crew for under-the-hood calculations and as far as I know CM has only two states: Buttoned and Unbuttoned (regardless of what the graphic shows).

@arandomperson7713

7 ай бұрын

@@GrumblingGrognard I would personally disagree, as the differences are far from purely graphic. An opened up ATGM carrier BRDM is much less vulnerable than an opened up BTR-60PB, as in the BTR, the crew member physically stands up on his seat, exposing himself (unnecessarily much, though. He pretty much has his full torso outside the hatch) to small arms fire, shrapnel and light artillery. In the BRDM, the armoured glass offers protection against the aforementioned threats while increasing crew visibility, but lacks the crucial situational awareness boost given by poking a head out the hatch. This is modelled in CM, and offers a substantial difference in performance other than a purely visual one. CM models each crew‘s view cones, with modifiers given for their method of observation. Buffs in range are given in optics, but those usually come with debuffs in situational awareness. Eyeball Mk.1 from the hatch comes with debuffs in range, but buffs in situational awareness. This usually works unless you‘re working with pre-T-64/72 Soviet vehicles, where the optics are god-awful in every aspect. Periscopes and vision slits probably give negative modifiers all round, as they mostly offer no magnification while still limiting view cones.

@GrumblingGrognard

7 ай бұрын

@@arandomperson7713 We are talking about a 'game'. How the game itself models the effect(s). What you postulate above has no bearing at all on what Battlefront put into their code.

I believe there are a few mistakes in the video. Where is the Khrizantema ATGM carrier? I also don’t believe there are MTLB’s in CM:SF2. Otherwise, excellent video!

@zanaduz2018

7 ай бұрын

Khrizantema is based on the BMP-3 chassis, not the MTLB.

@usuallyhapless9481

7 ай бұрын

Yep, zanaduz is right- the Krizantema is based off the BMP-3. But otherwise, yeah there are no MTLBs in Shock Force. Not that it would make that much difference, but yep. That's a mistake.

@arandomperson7713

7 ай бұрын

@@usuallyhapless9481 My bad, then. To my defense, it does get blurry between the lines of one armoured box with rockets and another armoured box with rockets… anyway, love the videos! Keep it up,

I wish the Russians just kept its artillery role...

btw there's a game called firefight it exists on all platforms even mobile and it has a cold war mod it's a deep RTT

@americanidiot6580

7 ай бұрын

What?

This thing would struggle against the house robots in robot wars.