As much as I love the classic Bradley, yet I'm happy its having an upgrade, Beautiful 50mm.

@omnianti0

3 жыл бұрын

it will make the bradley live for 40year more

@MrRjizz

3 жыл бұрын

@@omnianti0 it was dogshit when it was introduced and it's even more dogshit today, one of the worst IFV's that exist

@HeronMarkedBlade-ef7zz

3 жыл бұрын

@@MrRjizz lived through 4 different IEDs and an RPG strike in one. I got nothing but love for the Bradley. The HUMVEE i rode in got taken out with a single hand grenade.... Sadr City Baghdad 04-05

@Jakezillagfw

3 жыл бұрын

@@MrRjizz It's outlived 2 different attempts to replace it. If it was as bad as you say it would have been replaced its first go around.

@user-cz4jg2rq4x

3 жыл бұрын

🇬🇧🇺🇸🇷🇺😈😈😈👈

Out of all the "US Military News" channels on the Tube, this is the first I've seen written and narrated by an actual person in competent English.

@fiendishrabbit8259

3 жыл бұрын

Are you sure it's an actual person? It could be a robot designed to spew out random military buzzwords.

You had me at high explosive, fin stabilized, with tracer.

Spelled SABOT, pronounced Say-Bow, it's a French thing.

@cavaleermountaineer3839

3 жыл бұрын

@Roger Wilco Hahahaha

@MichaelSmith-fg8xh

3 жыл бұрын

Correct pronunciation in French is « sa - bo »... it’s the name for a peasants clog/shoe. It sorta makes sense as in English I’d probably call it a boot for the projectile. We also get “sabotage” from that same shoe getting thrown into machines by workers wanting to destroy the machine.

@dlew223

3 жыл бұрын

I’ve heard it pronounced Suh-Bow too, not sure which is right, but I know for sure it’s not “Sabbit”

@patmancrowley8509

3 жыл бұрын

I prefer the miss-pronunciation actually.

@playoffmodesp2536

3 жыл бұрын

It's not pronounced say-bow. I speak french.

Every timer i hear something on the bradley my mind goes to "Pentagon Wars"

@hagenissen666

3 жыл бұрын

At least it's not a thermite-bowl, anymore.

@robertmurry1442

3 жыл бұрын

its all i could think about for this.... "we still using this aluminum can with wheels wtf?"

@nlomas

3 жыл бұрын

I came to make the same comment. Great tank

@thisguy7175

3 жыл бұрын

Spookston debunked that movie Still funny tho

@williamt.sherman9841

3 жыл бұрын

Pentagon Wars is full of shit. The author of the book did not no what he was talking about.

The rebirth of the light/medium tank as WW2 tank calibres get added to IFV's that can't carry a useful troop compliment.

@zaab-yaoh9302

3 жыл бұрын

One of the requirements for the new ground combat vehicle is a decent troop capacity. Also, if the Israelis can figure out how to put dismounts in an actual tank, the American can with an IFV.

@piotrd.4850

3 жыл бұрын

@@zaab-yaoh9302 There's difference between 'putting' and 'effectively employing'. Case in point is BMP-3. Light, obscenely high firepower and it does carry troops.... kind off. Have you ever seen how troops mount&dismount BMP-3?

@zaab-yaoh9302

3 жыл бұрын

@@piotrd.4850 yeah and it only takes a Humvee with a .50 cal to turn a BMP into Swiss cheese

@integraxnine745

3 жыл бұрын

@@zaab-yaoh9302 I've seen Iraqi BMPs survive rounds from 14.5 mm up to 23 mm. Videos were on LiveLeak.

@MrChickennugget360

3 жыл бұрын

@@zaab-yaoh9302 no its not. US Army has gone away from troop capacity being a core job of an IFV. reason being you don't need lots of boots on the ground for conventional war. Any war worth fighting is not going to be decided by lots of guys with pee shooters. Germany's Puma only carries 6 dismounts, US will stick with the 7 dismounts from the Bradley.

2:10 It went right through that plywood!! Mind blown! 🤯

@rxonmymind8362

3 жыл бұрын

🤣

@ICCUWANSIUT

3 жыл бұрын

@@rxonmymind8362 I wanna see it go through paper 12km away

@Vincent98987

2 жыл бұрын

I wanna see it penetrate 60 mm of metal.

@nasuegaming1255

2 жыл бұрын

@@Vincent98987 hopefully it can penetrate 60mm of Cesium.

@weegeepootis430

Жыл бұрын

That plywood ain’t nothing for it

3:46 Imagine being the bad guy in this scenario. The cannon can fire from several kilometers away and airburst detonate a shell right in front of your face. Ouch.

@izil1fe

Жыл бұрын

It's funny how Muricans can call someone else a "bad guy". Other than ISIS and such groups.. it's usually you who is the bad guy. Fk your military and fk your imperialist government.

@kingsleyzissou5881

Жыл бұрын

@@izil1fe Our people have lost control over our government long ago. We Patriots are trying to take it back via legislative means.

@CarlosDiaz-je1bg

Жыл бұрын

That airburst would work really well in Ukraine clearing out all the trenches.

@screwstatists7324

Жыл бұрын

Your constitution is a compromise with authoritarians.

The Bradley has seen its time. Its definitely time for a replacement vehicle. I just hope they put as much focus on making the new vehicle easy to maintain and repair as they are on making a working weapons system. You can have all the boom boom you can pack into a turret you want. But if the thing breaks down constantly or the mechanics cant quickly swap parts and service them. Then you have a multi million dollar gun emplacement guarding your maintenance yards. The Bradley is a hard running machine if the crews do their PMCS and the mechanics know their shit. Then yeah you can see them run like raped apes. Trying to keep parts in stock as a maintenance team was our biggest challenge in Iraq. But that was more due to the Army's view on how parts should work than actually the Bradleys fault. But the Bradley while very deadly in head to head fighting. It is very weak to IEDs from below as everyone found out in Iraq. I hope the new designs fix that problem.

@orlock20

3 жыл бұрын

There is still the mater of physics. Replacing the Bradley requires certain trade offs that the U.S. Army may not want. For example the new vehicle could be much larger in order to handle a large carrying capacity while keeping the same amount of armor.

@candle1122

3 жыл бұрын

I digress, I am a gunner on the vehicle. My driver and I go through the TM word for word, Item for item and yet on the very moment we are about to SP from the field our final drive shits the bed and the sprocket carrier falls off, all the bolts were either stripped or split. I understand why you say the vic is very good at head to head combat but that’s only because it is typically fighting along the Abrams a much deadlier target for the enemy to focus on. The brad would loose against a bmp. The vics’ profile is waaaay too high, You can’t raise TOW if you are on the move and if you do you better be moving below 5kmh, the thing screams at FLIR the 25mm is only good enough for BMPs (if it’s not already looking at you), BDRMs (Hoping it’s not the version with ATGMs and is also not already looking at you),Technicals or light wheeled vics, and any unlucky bastard standing in view of my IBAS.

@lbco5229

3 жыл бұрын

You have loose lips.

@Soulessdeeds

3 жыл бұрын

@@lbco5229 It's not a secret when the world already knows about it. And news flash insurgents knew about it so well that they were pin point hitting the Bradley's weakest point regularly in Iraq. Now if you seriously think they never told anyone else what I said here then you will find it shocking to know we didn't win Vietnam.

@Soulessdeeds

3 жыл бұрын

@@orlock20 I disagree. Primarily due to the advancements in metal compounds and strength. The Bradley was made of aluminum and magnesium. At the time it was a light weight solution. But the I have personally recovered multiple Bradley's that had caught fire due to IEDS over in Iraq. 4 of which melted down to open shoe boxes. The magnesium only made it worse. The biggest challenge would be to remove the turret basket and instead used a remote controlled turret with just 1 operator and 1 driver for the vehicle. Then you have allot more room for more dismounts. A redesign of hulls on tracked vehicles is definitely required or else we will see more of what happened in Iraq due to IEDs. Casualties were kept down due to the crews being in Bradley's. But the tracks themselves were lost in numbers the Army wasn't ready to see. Before people here comment about never seeing anything said about this in the media. Yeah no shit it was never said in the media. But I have personally seen the boneyards in Kuwait for destroyed vehicles coming out of Iraq and doing convoys in and out of Iraq. Hummvs alone would make most veterans cry seeing how many were blown to hell. Bradley's and tanks were there as well. But the media never showed this because it would have been a really hard thing to cover up once it was known how badly we were really getting hit by IEDs.

Whenever you see a Bradley in a game You don goofed up

It definitely makes sense for the Marines to want as much gun as possible on the Bradley since they are giving up on tanks. Here in Canada we field something very close to the Dragoon and it is quite good.

@joehughes5177

2 жыл бұрын

Marines do not field Bradley's. Ever. They have the l.a.v. and other amphibious vehicles

@t.sorvig3540

2 жыл бұрын

The Marines are looking to get the MPF Light Tank, which is very much a mini Abrams. Light tanks and IFVs are more the Marines' style of rapid deployment and maneuvering, anyways.

"A couple more months they could get this thing flying" -Pentagon Wars

@painiscupcake5433

3 жыл бұрын

AC-130 Spectre

I can see this being used on an AC-130...the bofers 40mm needs replacing because of the ammo and parts are hard to get..

@gp556by45

3 жыл бұрын

Not only that, the bofors is fed with what are basically rifle type charger clips requiring two men to feed it to maintain a useful fire rate. You can take the man power requirement out of the equation, and have a larger round at the same time.

@richardbearden7889

3 жыл бұрын

@@gp556by45 the ac-130 has a different feed system for that..

@richardbearden7889

3 жыл бұрын

@colonel 100 there's several variants... about 3 I believe...

@jedironin380

3 жыл бұрын

I was thinking it would be a good gun for the Navy on the smaller ships as well.

@richardbearden7889

3 жыл бұрын

@@jedironin380 the navy uses the 25 bushmaster chain gun on most of it's ships for close support...I'm sure a few would be upgraded to this... since it has farther standoff range.

Man, things have changed. We went to Iraq in Dessert Shield and our Bradleys had 25mm Bushmaster chain guns and now they have a 50 mm. The 25 mm gun was killing T55s.

@carkid7640

Жыл бұрын

No way really? The 25 destroyed 55s?

@naawakweoseindizhinakaaz2052

Жыл бұрын

@@carkid7640 you’d be surprised. There’s Ukrainian combat footage of 30mm auto cannons destroying t62’s

@justinperry3791

Жыл бұрын

The Bradley's knocked out more armor than our Abrams during desert storm those tow missles are tank killers

I wish I would have had one of those when I was gunning on the Bradley. That is a thing of beauty.

It looks like they've really maximized the firepower within size and weight limitations for this general vehicle type. They're going to maximize availability of ammunition at the same time they offer efficient options for the type.

I saw a 20 mm Bradley in combat.. I was very impressed... I can only imagine a 50 mm Jesus Christ LOL

@orlock20

3 жыл бұрын

Sherman tanks had 75mm cannons. I guess it is a case of what goes around comes around.

@HaqqAttak

3 жыл бұрын

@Achronic Deth 8000 series alloys are not your soda can aluminum.

@MajCyric

3 жыл бұрын

@miky carney The slang is 25 Mike-Mike (25mm).. I was 11M stationed at Ft Stewart GA (2-7 INF).. I was a Driver and then as a dismount (we rotate roles).. But Bradley's normally carry AP (APDS-T) and HE (HEI-T) rounds with a 70-80% HE to 20-30%AP ratio (300 rounds in 2 ready boxes with another 600 in the floor storage.. They can also use DU rounds in place of standard AP rounds (M919 APFSDS-T Depleted Uranium) if such a need/mission is warranted (they cost more than standard AP rounds but also have less wear on the barrel)... The Bradley IFV normally is used in supporting roles with M1 Abrams.. With the M1's targeting hard targets and the M2 targeting soft targets.. M2's also have a pair of TOW missiles for hard targets if needed and chauffeurs 6 dismount soldiers (1 squad) which can be used to secure or clear an area of enemy infantry... There is also the M3 Bradley, which is the Recon version of the M2.. The M3 has the same loadout as an M2's weapons (Carries more 25mm rounds and extra TOW reloads) and also doesn't carry 6 dismounts like the Infantry M2 does..

@mikycarney5779

3 жыл бұрын

I started off as 11m... Then 11b then 19k.. people give me s*** when I say I was 11m like they don't believe it existed or something.. you ever get that LOL

@zachprouty8595

3 жыл бұрын

Nobody say don't use the lords name in vain because this sure as hell isn't in vain

As a 1970s M113A1 ( Aussie) driver and gunner (.50/.30), I am amazed at the Improvement in IFV construction and armaments...in VN, and RPG 2 or7 could easily take out an APC, and landmines until an added 1" steel belly plate was added. ( did not help tracks, though, although protected crewfor a while longer. We still have ( Canadian) Bushmaster APC, with25mmgun, but Rheinmettal will be building a local version as we write, gun???. I still reckon tracks are better than runflat tyres, especially for Aussie tropical conditions, though.

I grew up at ft hood....saw the first Bradley at a live fire when they still held them. ‘81 I think...got to ride in one few months later at a family field day....cool for a 8 year old.

@bphilbac

3 жыл бұрын

I was at Aberdeen Proving Grounds in 1981 when I first saw one go through it’s paces and live fire. It was very impressive.

we always said in Germany the 25mm looked too small for the vehicle.. Glad to see they are upgrading to something that can actually go to to toe with russian and chinese APC's..

@fordhipo1493

3 жыл бұрын

We used to have M113's with only .50cal.

@osmacar5331

3 жыл бұрын

Ok so 25mm is fine

@riesenfliegefly7139

3 жыл бұрын

@@fordhipo1493 The M113 is barely an IFV, more like an armored transport. So it doesnt need a big gun. Also we have the Puma since about 2010 (if they are working). I hope our Puma also gets a 50mm sometimes in the future.

@DerpyTurtle0762

3 жыл бұрын

I've always wondered why we haven't upgraded to at least a MK-44 30mm that not only is chambered for the ame round as the GAU-8 but is ALSO MADE BY BUSHMASTER

@MrChickennugget360

3 жыл бұрын

@@DerpyTurtle0762 The Stryker Dragoons have 30mm rounds.

Wow! And I thought the Swedish CV90 was brutal with its 40mm canon for an IFV 😱

@omnianti0

3 жыл бұрын

cv90 weight half this

@askingstuff

2 жыл бұрын

@@omnianti0 no it doesn’t.

@omnianti0

2 жыл бұрын

@@askingstuff depending of the version both weight 22 to 33tons

@tomeng9520

Жыл бұрын

Lets just put this out there. The CV90, especially the later models are far more dangerous than the Bradley, Puma, Lynx or K21 fighting vehicles. They are more modern, the cannon is much larger, the types of ammunition 3p programmable ammunition is deadly as hell. It can air-burst at set ranges, it would annihilate every single Russian in ANY trench with ease from kilometers away. The weight of this IFV is almost as much as the Russian MBT (main battle tanks). Close to 40 Ton. I kind of hope a few gets sent to Ukraine I want to see it in action. In Afghanistan it was apparently tremendously deadly. The Danish or Norwegians were caught in some kind of fight/ambush and they annihilated the enemy.

"....We already got the Turret,We ought to get the biggest bang we can up there"

The first time I seen this me was when we graduated basic in Ft Benning n it’s so cool this was 2005 and they come screaming into the parking lot and did a little spin out omg I couldn’t of been more proud of what was going to be a great run in the army . I did see them used in Iraq and they work great

I love the Bradley, it's so cute at 1:35 scale. I'm building a copy at the moment.

you look at the current bradley guns and then you look at this and know G I R T H.

@demonlordomegaacepilot7090

3 жыл бұрын

I know this is literally a fing upgrade. This makes the bradley even more deadly

Col. Robert Laurel Smith: That's one hell of a cannon. Jones: That's the problem. Col. Robert Laurel Smith: What is? Jones: You go out on the battlefield with this pecker sticking out of your turret, and the enemy's going to unload on you with everything they got. Might as well put a big red bullseye on the side. Col. Robert Laurel Smith: But it's a troop carrier, not a tank. Jones: Do you want me to put a sign on it in fifty languages, "I am a troop carrier, not a tank. Please don't shoot at me?"

@justinthomas85

3 жыл бұрын

When i hear IFV programs, that's all i can think about. They should make everyone involved in this program watch that movie, weekly.

@MS-jc4ir

3 жыл бұрын

Is the movie Pentagon Wars?

@kevinwhitaker119

3 жыл бұрын

WELL SAID..!! YEAH.. IT AIN'T A ( MBT ) MAIN BATTLE TANK BUT A TROOP CARRIER .. IT'S JOB IS TROOP SUPPORT.. SHOOT AND SCOOT , FIRE SUPPORT FOR THE TROOPS ,AND IF THE COMMANDER WANT'S TO PLAY AT TANKS.....HE I/ SHE IS A FOOLISH AND PROBABLY A DEAD COMMANDER..😟☹️🤬💥💥💥....STAY SAFE WORLD 🌈 🌈🏳️‍🌈🇧🇴🇧🇴🌈🌈🌈🏳️‍🌈🇧🇴🇧🇴🇧🇴🇧🇴☮️❤️☯️🏴🏴💣💥💥🇬🇧🇷🇺🇦🇺🇺🇲🇨🇳🇻🇳🇮🇷 🇻🇪🇷🇺 MAKE PEACE FOOLS BEFORE WW3 IS APON US....!!?????☢️☢️☢️🇪🇭🇪🇬🇮🇶🇮🇷🇲🇼🇳🇪🇸🇦☢️☢️☢️

@whoisjoelsmith

3 жыл бұрын

Jones can go to war in the Bradley with the smaller out dated hardware.

@firestarter-eo8ws

3 жыл бұрын

@@justinthomas85 being a troop carrier ain't gonna stop the enemy from shooting at you.

HELL YEAH! This thing is way cooler than having things like roads and electricity where I live in Indiana! If you cut off our food awhile can you make it levitate?!

I'm ready to see a 120mm bushmaster now. With the same firing rate. On a main battle tank. With a 3 man crew.

@p51mustang24

3 жыл бұрын

Youre much more likely to see something in the 125-140mm range as competing tanks improve significantly.

@M60gunner1971

2 жыл бұрын

F@cking fungular man... F@cking fungular!

50mm guns. That's gotta be some fire power! Nice..

@marvintiger9631

3 жыл бұрын

Compromise. 35mm is good enough against typical enemy vehicles your own IFV will fight, for all heavier enemies you use 2x2 Spike-ER II. You CAN't carry much 50mm ammo ... And in the end, IFVs (tracked) should always fight with own MBTs side by side.

@Thomas-fz9xw

2 жыл бұрын

@@marvintiger9631 Note that the rounds used here are just necked-up 35mm cartridges, so they'll take up the same space. Only difference is a trade-off of velocity/range with payload, but clearly the military is OK with that.

50mm is huge for a chain gun! I can't imagine being the target!

@shanerooney7288

2 жыл бұрын

Not mini-gun type of chain gun. Just a normal auto-cannon. The reload mechanism uses a chain instead of gas piston. Hence the name.

Than you for your service

That XM913 50mm is one awesome gun, yes indeed!

Someone has finally seen the great advantage of the CV9040 with its air burst, and so forth, capabilities.

@omnianti0

3 жыл бұрын

you mean the radar version or not

@Svenmpa

3 жыл бұрын

@@omnianti0 no what I meant was the caliber of the 9040 variant, i.e. 40mm.

@omnianti0

3 жыл бұрын

@@Svenmpa yes but the advantage of radar mean that can program 3P fuze in bad weather condition when a laser range finder cant

@Svenmpa

3 жыл бұрын

@@omnianti0 yes yes, I am just referring to the increcement of the caliber of the gun in the video. With increced caliber your gun can do other things, as air bursts. A 40 (or 50) mm round can deal such damage more effectively than a 20 or 30 mm round.

@omnianti0

3 жыл бұрын

@@Svenmpa from report programmable fuze will be added to the 50mm gun its optional and the soviet used 57mm since 1940

@5:15 those generals better put on full battle rattle and sit there for 12 hours before they even THINK of purchasing that "pentagon warz" lookin ass fighting vehicle

@malcolmcloete8892

2 жыл бұрын

Well look we in a new century not Spartans fight ing rocks used to much fuel an looks like a. kids Xmas toy goodnight

@chrisandrews414

2 жыл бұрын

@Dick Izzinya you people need to understand is that's beside the point. I ain't trying to talk about a movie, talking about some desk jockys

The man just breezed through "unmanned GUNNING"!

I need one of...two of these for home defense.

This gon' be the "Bushgrandmaster"

@omnianti0

3 жыл бұрын

yea after 40y service n retirement

@frenchtoad1308

3 жыл бұрын

Flash

@omnianti0

3 жыл бұрын

g.w.bush

its shocking to see how the lens of the sight who was previously in the deep of a 30mm armor are now unprotected

That is a very scary gun! Turns a AFV APC chassis into a light tank. I assume there are anti personnel shells available for soft target suppression. But oh man that ROF in a 5cm round.

Great upgrade for the Bradley, i think it has always needed bigger firepower fast rate hard hitting.

Love to have one of those in the backyard. Man...

@bradleyweiss1089

3 жыл бұрын

Or front doors now days.

That sabot round look wicked. Would like to hammer on a tank with that to see how it would perform. May be able to knock out the older T62 Russian tanks.

incredible New XM913

Those airburst rounds are utterly terrifying

30 mm way better than 25 mm.That 5 mm makes a huge difference.The 50 mm also looks great.

@nikolakaravida9670

Жыл бұрын

Eh really not much difference between 25 and 30. The 50 though, that's a big difference.

@cjb5003

Жыл бұрын

@@nikolakaravida9670 Don't get me wrong ,that 50 mm is a huge difference and that 'rapid' fire on a big round will be devastating.I saw a documentary about US navy testing 25mm and 30mm rounds and the difference was exponential taken only 5mm.The 30mm was way more effective than 25mm.Having said that it does not mean a 25mm won't do extreme damage in the right hands.

“Against the pacing threat.” My god that is some military sounding defense industry blarney right there.

@paulwswift5226

3 жыл бұрын

Games of military bingo in committee meetings must be over so quick.

I like how they show a HEAT shell when talking about APFSDS ammo lol

Thats a major improvement ! 50

50mm is what is needed now. I would like to see that fire rate uprated so it can be used to attack all air threats within 3500 meters. A radar for that would not be an issue. The lightest ones weigh less than 100kg all in. That's dish (well phased array these days) driver electronics and electronics in the turret with screens.

@Schwarzvogel1

3 жыл бұрын

Do you mean that that this system doesn't need radar guidance, or that radar guidance isn't too heavy? 100 kg is still pretty damned heavy, though--consider that unless the vehicle is designed with that extra weight in mind, it will put more stress on the suspension and engine. However, the idea of making an SPAAG variant with 5 cm autocannon is an interesting one, especially since the US Army no longer has a single SPAAG in service. I don't think this chaingun has the rate of fire necessary to really deal with air threats, though--it would probably need to be in a double or quadruple mount to be able to pump out those shells fast enough to truly threaten aircraft. And that leads back to the problem of ammo storage--unless they have figured out a working system for caseless ammo, those 5 cm shells take up a lot of space.

@gordonlawrence1448

3 жыл бұрын

@@Schwarzvogel1 100kg on a vehicle that weighs about 40,000 is 0.25% hardly a large increase in weight. Also against rotary wing and whatever the next type of Frogfoot would be, you dont need a massive rate of fire. In WWII using proximity fuzed shells (40mm) the USN were taking out a lot of aircraft with L60 Bofors never mind the higher velocity types and that,s without todays sophisticated fire control. Just a single 50mm chain gun would be way more effective than a twin Bofors due to four factors. 1 larger lethality radius from the shell, 2 higher fire rate, 3 higher muzzle velocity, and of course 4 automated fire control with dedicated Radar.

Hi All, The Air Force has or had some C-27J Spartans mothballed out west, I wonder if they have tried fitting one of these in one of those? Thanks, take care

@petertimmins6657

3 жыл бұрын

The Air Force had those on Howard AFB, Panama assigned to the 24th Wing. I was in C 1/508 (ABN) and jumped from them many times. When I was moved to be the S-3 Air NCO for the 193rd IN BDE I helped the wing certify their new pilots for air drops. I got our Engineer company to help out by setting up small DZs and also having a few Soldiers go on the aircraft with me as we flew multiple leg patterns to hit the DZ on time and in target and kicked out bundles to see if they had correctly calculated for the winds. Great aircraft with really great short field capabilities, which was why they had them down here.

Genious realisation great useful canon.

Glad to see that the german Rheinmetall 35/50 mm Cannon system of the late 1980s planned for the Marder 2 successor of the Marder APC (not realized after prototype phase because of the end of the cold war) has finally found a lover after 30 years. Watching your vid one might almost think it's a pure US-idea ;)

@c4blew

2 жыл бұрын

Not really. Apart from the caliber they are not too similar. The XM913 is basically a modernized and upscaled 25mm Bushmaster chaingun, while the RH503 was neither a chain gun or a revolver cannon but something inbetween. In contrast to the RH503, the XM913 also doesn´t have the capability to change the caliber just by changing the barrel and the XM913 uses 50x228mm ammo while the RH503 used the more powerfull 50×330mm ammo, when equipped with the 50mm barrel, or 35×228mm with the 35mm barrel. It´s a diffferent concept. The RH503s 50mm was more powerfull and flexible with the ability tho change calibers, but on the other hand it was heavier and required external energy to work like a GAU-8/A. It´s a diffferent concept with both advantages and disadvantages.

@papaschlumpf5894

2 жыл бұрын

@@c4blew You are right. I did not mean the very system but the concept itself. Inaccuracies that occur when not talking in your native tounge ;)

Oh no next gen ammo... You know what happened to the Zumwalts Ammo

@PugilistCactus

3 жыл бұрын

Zumwalt should be a stealth missile platform anyway. Seems odd to put guns on it.

@jimnielsen4076

3 жыл бұрын

Good one! The Zumwalt gun / ammo was a HUGE waste of money. A gun that you cannot fire & it won't be replaced with another weapon for years. It looks good (lol). Its as bad as a F-35A's gun that doesn't hit targets & the F-35C not yet being deployed.

@MrChickennugget360

3 жыл бұрын

comparing an IFV to a Stealth destroyer that is 16,000 tons is not a good idea.

The Pentagone wars !

Everyone gangsta until someone said "Bradley on the field"

@babyyoda3497

3 жыл бұрын

Depends on innehat Tank you are. If you are in a Puma you say bye to the bradley

Nice video and very informative and very entertaining and very satisfaction more videos.

Do you want me to put a sign on it in fifty languages, "I am a troop carrier, not a tank"?

@matthiuskoenig3378

3 жыл бұрын

that must have been one of the dumbest lines in that movie, combat experience has taught us that the enemy will shoot at vehicles on the battlefield regardless of whether they have a turret on them or not.

@wino0000006

3 жыл бұрын

"Can you make portholes?"

@joostdriesens3984

3 жыл бұрын

@@matthiuskoenig3378 What movie is that? Is it implied that troop carrier vehicles should be not fired upon by the enemy? That would be the dumbest thing I've ever heard..

@MrMattumbo

3 жыл бұрын

@@joostdriesens3984 I'm pretty sure that's from The Pentagon Wars. What's equally stupid about it is that the Soviets had had IFVs like the BMP for decades prior to the creation of the Bradley so it's not like it was a new or radical concept to put a big turret on a troop carrier. Plus the Soviets were trained to shoot even medical vehicles bearing the red cross so they weren't exactly going to hold back no matter what the vehicle looked like.

@Nimori

3 жыл бұрын

MrMattumbo I mean, they obviously targeted hospitals a bunch in every conflict they have been involved in.

Honestly this is more accurate than Rheinmetal gun.

@gnomechild3248

3 жыл бұрын

Well to be fair, this is brand new technology. Doesn't surprise me. I'm sure if it was a new M1 cannon, it would be vastly more accurate.

@edgardoromero9607

3 жыл бұрын

The Germans in ww2 made the mistake for not made a 55mm antiaircraft or antitank tank too, like the 57mm soviet gun, with today tech 50mm is an ecellent gun!!

@gnomechild3248

3 жыл бұрын

@@edgardoromero9607 What? Nazi's had the Panzer III, Equipped with 50mm L/42 cannon. They had 50 to 55mm FlaK cannons as well.

OUTSTANDING

Those are gonna be some heavy ass belts

Wow, finally somebody noticed it existed! Meanwhile armor forums *a year ago* were full of discussions about "is new russian 57mm and development of american 50mm autocannon a sign for new generation of IFV?" "Are they doing it because using missiles to shoot down drones is too expensive and more powerfull caliber allows to increase distance and effectivenes of AAA fire?" and so on.

@riesenfliegefly7139

3 жыл бұрын

Pretty much yes. Relying on rockets has become more and more unpractical. Besides the cost, you also have hard- and soft kill active defense systems getting more commen. Even tho, direct fire cannot make up the range of rockets, but it will always be sheaper and deliver damage more directly/reliably. I also think there cooler :D

2:10 Oh good. It's effective against thin sheets of plywood.

@aidansetias5591

3 жыл бұрын

Basically a Bmp right there haha

@billwhoever2830

3 жыл бұрын

that was the HE projectile the apfsds should be enough to even penetrate mbt side armor the apfsds should also have a range closer to 1500-2000m/sec which is much faster than a standar 30mm round and should result to much better accuracy against moving targets

@beibei93

3 жыл бұрын

3:30.

A great advance, in guns of medium caliber; effective, multipurpose and precise, in a useful range of up to 5 km. Allows both AA and Armored Motorized cavalry; increased firepower and survivability. As well as combining them with chain armored vehicles, replace Heavy armored cars; Of the transported air forces, of the Marine Corps, of the Marines, and for environments with complicated orography or urban environments... Or a major joint force with armored cars; to break the front or paralyze an offensive of the adversary. Greetings and thanks for your excellent work. 🇪🇸 ❄️

Yeah make it even higher, heavier and reduce carried troops count even more for required ammo storage.

Someone is going to try to mount this in an A-10, I can already see it.

@tomsmith3045

3 жыл бұрын

Pretty sure the A-10's gun is more lethal.

@anyoneanywhere8212

3 жыл бұрын

A-10 warthog? I don't think it would carry that much ordnance to be useful with this honestly.

@Slim_Ch4rles

Жыл бұрын

The vulcan is perfect as is. The high angle of attack means targeting the weaker armor with very high rate of fire is just about as effective as it gets in that role. 50 mm would have a few issues: 1 making a new gun that can fire the 50 mm in a similar rate of fire would be almost impossibly big to be able to fit into a Warthog. 2: the recoil would likely be too much for the plane. In ww2 different airforces tried high caliber cannons for ground attack aircraft and found that it was too heavy and destabilized the the plane when firing, making it innacurate after the first shot and dangerous for the pilot

First like first view and first respect to usa from india

@marza339

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you brother. Respect right back at you

@brady9618

3 жыл бұрын

@@marza339 not from India but respect for you too

even more Awesome fighting machine! Not afraid of MBT!

Awesome that's so kool. Glade we have something to hold that at bay. But please show use more. Like to see so of the other cannons and missiles. Glade we don't need these items normally

Now that is a sexy machine.

@omnianti0

3 жыл бұрын

a more larger hole

Bloody hell...here we go again. Let's build an infantry carrier that can act like a tank.

@jkiker7918

3 жыл бұрын

Organic armor support is not a bad thing.... but the real punch of an infantry unit is in being infantry. If it's treated as a tank with lots of extra crew, then there is no point

@MrChickennugget360

3 жыл бұрын

Stop quoting Pentagon wars. they guy who wrote it is wrong and he is dangerously wrong. the Idea that putting fire power on APCs makes them a target is laughable. Taking away fire power from Mechanized infantry just makes them sitting ducks. ALL MEN ON A BATTLEFIED ARE TARGETS- taking away fire power just makes them helpless.

The 50mm gun on the bradley reminds me of the begleitpanzer

I need one of those mounted on my car to clear traffic🤔🤣

I'm surprised the author didn't mention one of the key advantages that Griffin fighting vehicle brings to the table, and that is it's ground braking camouflage technology in the form of those haxagones tiles littered all over the top of the vehicle. Those are new, yet not seen material tiles which almost completely make the vehicle invisible to the infrared seeker. Since most of the MANPADS have infrared seekers, this is an almost must have technology for any current Infantry fighting vehicle or even a tank of the future. Of course we must ask how resistant these tiles are against everything from the small caliber assault rifle up to MANPADS (and anything in between).

@jonathanpfeffer3716

Жыл бұрын

You’re thinking of ATGMs, not MANPADS, MANPADS stands for man portable air defense system, for aircraft.

I want a dummy 50mm round or at least an empty case. Somebody please tell me where to get one.....please!!!!

Beautiful military vehicle, I want it to be back in operation for many more decades and never need to be replaced by the useless omfv. And I want it to be upgraded from M2a3 Bradley to M2a4 Bradley.

Need an ankle or IWB holster for this.

@omnianti0

3 жыл бұрын

look at the size of an empty case the ratio is even less than a 40mm grenade

@merguetroidrittzlesnat2287

3 жыл бұрын

Seems like lotsa cool weapons are *just barely* sized out of IWB fits. A couple of my former duty weapons needed shoulder rigs. Might be the case here, too. Perhaps will need a bit of creativity with fabbing up a spare mag carrier for it, too. 🤓

Bradly fighting vehicle "a troop transport that can't carry troops, a reconnaissance vehicle that's too conspicuous to do reconnaissance, and a quasi-tank that has less armor than a snowblower, but has enough ammo to take out half of D.C." - Pentagon wars

@MrChickennugget360

3 жыл бұрын

i would not take a quote that is total BS from a movie that is a bunch of lies from an author who is wrong about everything. It makes me sick to see so many people quoting this- just because Hollywood makes a movie does not make it the truth. Most everything that comes out of them are lies.

Enjoyed your video so I gave it a Thumbs Up

The great advantage of the chain gun is that it does not break down if one shell is not fired, it is simply replaced by the next one!

@DailyFrankPeter

Жыл бұрын

And it stores all the duds in the hull or does it eject them?

This is starting to feel like the prelude period to WW1, when armies were building rifles that could "fire" at ranges over 1000 yards and everyone thought that wars would be fought at extreme ranges.

@locust4472

3 жыл бұрын

future war will be fought in dark tunnels because everyone will be too scared of what is above.

@bluemeriadoc

2 жыл бұрын

typical firefight today occurs at 400 meters. WWI artillery fired 10-20km

@HanSolo__

2 жыл бұрын

@@bluemeriadoc You mean engagements of infantry equipped with scopes? Yes it went from 150m to more than 300m.

@HanSolo__

2 жыл бұрын

@@locust4472 This is only partialy true. The tunnels fights idea came from the vast and fast development of the new UAVs. The main threat is and will stay the self-propelled missile and cannon artillery. You would need to double the current numbers of the UAVs around the world and at least triple the volume of the tunnels.

@GuardDog42

Жыл бұрын

To be fair 60% of death dealt in WW1 was from indirect fire and the like. Plus snipers were a huge factor to demoralize the enemy. Think of the 50mm like the dual sport of IFV weapons. Can if fight infantry, yeah, can it fight tanks? yeah. Keeping the platform as tactically fluid as possible is a good idea. The bradley took out more tanks in the gulf war than tanks did. I don't see a reason for the next generation of armored vehicles to stray from this multi-purpose philosophy. Also, don't be shocked when that 50mm starts shooting indirect guided air burst rounds that are data linked to drones in ten years. Everyone isn't saying that combat is fought at range with this weapon, everyone is just saying the enemy can field different types of threats.

A 50mm gun means more recoil, greater weight and fewer rounds per square foot of ammo storage. What it does not mean is the ability to engage tanks in their frontal arcs or dug in infantry. The 25mm gun will open up an APC very nicely and the Bradley carried enough round to hang in a fight for a good long time. Bigger and newer does not always mean better.

@pokemon1093

2 жыл бұрын

just put a 152mm on it instead :'3

@Crosshair84

2 жыл бұрын

You do realize that there are things on a battlefield other than tanks. Correct? Try breaching a concrete wall for infantry with a 25mm. Try engaging infantry inside a building with a 25mm vs just putting a 50mm HE through a window.

@Waltham1892

2 жыл бұрын

@@Crosshair84 APDS does a great job on concrete and TOW explodes pretty damn well.

@Crosshair84

2 жыл бұрын

@@Waltham1892 No it doesn't. It takes way too long to open up a hole and it tends to leave any reinforcing rebar intact. So any hole is useless for infantry. TOW is both expensive and has a 200 yard minimum range. So you can't afford to fire them as often as a cannon shell or you can't fire it anyway due to the minimum range. Mounting Hydra rockets in place of the TOW would be a relatively quick upgrade, depending on what it takes to make the fire control system compatable, and provide an option with only a 50 yard minimum range.

@Waltham1892

2 жыл бұрын

@@Crosshair84 TOW is to expensive, but a whole new vehicle with its own supply chain is cheap? 25mm APDS and HE are less effective, and the answer is cutting the round count by 2/3rds? Not sure how that works... I think the real answer is a combined arms team, which includes M1's using that fancy new multipurpose HEAT round.

Hi All, Textron builds a light attack aircraft, propeller driven, called the AT-6. Take two of those engines, one of those cockpits, one of these guns, you have yourself a modern version of a Lockheed P-38. Or just take two of the planes and make a F-86 out of it. (That was the twin Mustang.)Thanks, take care.

So Bradley gonna be less pew pew now and more BOOM BOOM

So the Army's going from an APC with a small gun and too high a vehicle profile to an even bigger gun? APCs only need defensive armament, Should think the heavier the gun invariably the more inclination to use it in an armored vehicle role for which it will be ill-suited. The worst part is, some politician will see it as an excuse to phase out Armored Vehicles like the M-1 and the Next-Gen AV.

@patriciareid437

3 жыл бұрын

it sure ain't a tank

@drmartin5062

3 жыл бұрын

Yea, like it or not the modern battlefield will probably be a lot of running into shit you didn't expect. a hence 50 mm

@bradleyweiss1089

3 жыл бұрын

Personally I think it’s a great idea. It’s an awesome vehicle just made better.

@tomsmith3045

3 жыл бұрын

@@patriciareid437 Yeah, but the HMMVWV wasn't designed to be used in combat, and look how that went. Was a great replacement for the jeep as transportation, became a miserable excuse for a wheeled APC or weapons platform.

@andrewmoore7022

3 жыл бұрын

You're confusing APCs with IFVs

02:58 some of those 40mm rounds look suspiciously like buttplugs. So does the 50mm XM1202. What are ya boys doin' in the army eh?

@hanskrebs4298

3 жыл бұрын

Lmao you have good eyes

@bradleyweiss1089

3 жыл бұрын

Puttin em up the enemy’s ass.

Perfect for the morning commute!

"We already got the vehicle, we gotta get the biggest bang out there" " Bang, sir?" "You can't hurt anyone with that pansy ass gun, add on some American Firepower!!!"

Just build a tank similar to the Merkava, tank and troop carrier in one. All this thing will be is a giant target that draws fire like a mbt but can't take a hit.

@iota515

3 жыл бұрын

Merkava is only a troop carrier when it doesn't have ammunition stored

@KevinWilliams19723

3 жыл бұрын

That's like saying an M1 isn't a tank when it runs out of ammo.

@iota515

3 жыл бұрын

@@KevinWilliams19723 it has literally no space in the back for any troops when there's ammo loaded in there, which usually is. Even then, there's only enough room for two additional people. Merkava has become an extremely obsolete design.

@MrChickennugget360

3 жыл бұрын

everything draws fire. what does not? You saying you would not shoot at an enemy truck? or APC? At least with a gun like that you can hit the enemy at greater range than the Enemy can hit you (unless they are a tank) But tanks are not the most common vehicle on the battlefield.

@KevinWilliams19723

3 жыл бұрын

@@MrChickennugget360 You prioritize targets based on proximity and the threat level they present, main battle tanks are higher priority targets than say a truck. I served as an armor crewmen, put this thing on the battlefield, if it looks like a tank to my eyes, it becomes enemy number 1. That gun doesn't outrange a MBT main gun, but it looks like it could. See where i'm going with this? It looks like a big fucking gun...KILL IT!

You want us to put a sign on the thing saying I am a troop carrier, please don't shoot me?

@MrChickennugget360

3 жыл бұрын

the Enemy shoots anything regardless. Anyone saying anything else is dangerously naive. Don't quote an idiot comment from a dumb movie

@andrewmoore7022

3 жыл бұрын

Would you rather get blown up at the enemies earliest convenience with almost no chance to retaliate as you have no means to defend yourself?

The U.K. needs to watch this

The strikers need this in their lives...

That thing looks like it shoots fekin plasma bolts Suweet

50mm Auto Cannon. Put this thing on the bottom of an AC 130.

@omnianti0

3 жыл бұрын

or something ever more old

@piotrd.4850

3 жыл бұрын

Rather these C-27J Spartans that US bought could use conversion...

This stuff is so old I almost forgot about it until I watched this video

Kinetic energy is still the king of weapons. "Get a bigger hammer" can't compete with "Get a faster projectile".

@arcturus4762

3 жыл бұрын

A simple mass value can’t possibly compete with a square

When I trained on them in 1988, we, the Infantry, already felt it was a “tank.” All they are doing is turning an IFV into a “MFV” (Mechanized Fighting Vehicle), which should evolve separate the 11B/11C respectively. The Stryker will replace the role of the IFV in the 11B/11C fields. Well, at least in my opinion. LOL

@gabetaylor28

3 жыл бұрын

Strykers are APC’s and are strictly meant for transportation, and that’s it. Never compare a Stryker to a Bradley. Strykers have practically no armor. It’s barely rated for .50 cal fire.

@toddjenest3212

3 жыл бұрын

@@gabetaylor28 Yes, boss.

@joehughes5177

2 жыл бұрын

It did, 11M

The Bradley started out as an armored personnel carrier. But that role seemed to have drifted to the Humvee, which was not designed with enough armor for that role.

@fordhipo1493

3 жыл бұрын

The Bradley started out as an Infantry Fighting Vehicle. The HumVee replaced the M151 Jeep.

@MrChickennugget360

3 жыл бұрын

in iraq everyone used humvees for patroling. thats why they were so common.

@fraleo2192

3 жыл бұрын

brad was always an IFV, the apc role falls to the 113/Stryker/new AMPV

Based on the British Ajax chassis? Good luck! We've had years of problems with that

That is badass hate to be on the receiving end of that bushmaster.

Wasn't the Bradley supost to be troop carrier.....

@845835

3 жыл бұрын

It can just as long as those troops don't mind hanging on the outside.

@mr.r080t3

3 жыл бұрын

Its more like an infantry support vehicle.

@PorWik

3 жыл бұрын

No it was designed as an IFV since the beginning. There are other much more mobile troop carriers

@845835

3 жыл бұрын

@@PorWik When it was originally designed it was designated an APC with only a driver and almost a dozen troops so yes it was meant to be a troop transport more than an IFV but when it was finally put into production it was barely a troop carrier and much more an IFV with its turret and tow missiles and minimum amount of space for troops. One driver became a crew of 3 and only enough room for 4 troops. As was explained in the book The Pentagon Wars the military is really good at taking simple things that do something well and eventually turning them into complicated messes.

@stunningandbased5516

3 жыл бұрын

@@845835 >Pentagon Wars Bruh