Get Binkov plushies here: crowdmade.com/collections/binkovsbattlegrounds/products/binkovs-battlegrounds-plush

@EnigmaHood

3 ай бұрын

A plushie for men who are military buffs.

@trumanhw

3 ай бұрын

GOOD JOB: FIRST time you've offered a measured analysis of Ukraine. (Let's hope it's not your last).

@tasman006

3 ай бұрын

Still it is a way more capable vechile for protection of troops over the older Russian BMP series of IFV tincans.

@sheldoniusRex

3 ай бұрын

Lol

@herrhaber9076

3 ай бұрын

Got mine ! Well, it'll be a gift for a friend who has an extensive library on the atlantic wall :)

The funniest thing about that 2 Bradley vs T90M engagement was that in the interview, Bradley crewman said that he aimed for T90M weak spots that he knew from WarThunder.

@user-wm8er7gx4s

3 ай бұрын

What a time to be alive. And place.

@createdforthemoment6740

3 ай бұрын

Thats what they should include in their ads. "The Ukraine-Russian war, sponsored by War Thunder...."

I'm a former bradley gunner. That viral video had more to do with a difference in crew skill than equipment. The T-90 was equipped to absolutely smoke the pair of brads, but the bradley crews improvised and pulled off a win. HE is not our first choice against an MBT, and indeed not a single round penetrated. They did what they could with what they had, and they pulled it off.

@CaptRR

3 ай бұрын

Yep, basicly some good choices by the brads, some bad ones from the T90, and allot of luck. I mean lets be honest how often does a pair of Bradleys meet up with a T-90 too close to use their own Tow missiles? This was just an odd engagement all the way around.

@user-dl4kr5fs8j

3 ай бұрын

Your a former Bradley driver, you would be shutting bricks if u fighting in Ukraine right now. Whatever u did as a Bradley driver was no where as dangerous or deadly as the tank crews fighting in Ukraine lol.

@user-dl4kr5fs8j

3 ай бұрын

@@CaptRR funny cause that same Bradley got destroyed a week later lol 😂 .

@rick7424

3 ай бұрын

​@@user-dl4kr5fs8jObvious bot is obvious

@conradmeek5142

3 ай бұрын

I was a Bradley gunner in a past life as well. Absolutely lucky they blinded the T-90 early on. I am still not sure why the second Bradley chose to re-engage after the first left. Maybe they "knew" it was damaged. Luck and skill counts for something I suppose.

The number 1 factor in winning an engagement is who accurately engages fire first

@zej8777

3 ай бұрын

thats any engagement which is not the topic of the video

That 25 mm autocannon is Star Wars level of cool as it is engaging targets

Not mentioned is that the Bradley can remain in turret defilade and fire the TOW while a tank has to come up to hull defilade to fire it’s main gun. If you’ve got a tank crew that is untrained in berm drills or stays up a little long to get that extra shot, the Bradley can smack them without exposing itself.

@user-dl4kr5fs8j

3 ай бұрын

I never seen a single video of Ukraine using the tow in combat lol.

@Seth9809

3 ай бұрын

People bitch Bradley too tall, but Bradley can see all and kill all.

I think you're forgetting the MAIN weapon a Bradley has. It has troops inside, that can go outside, and do things too. Like fire a Javelin. This is like comparing a Battleship to an Aircraft Carrier but not giving the carrier any planes.

Something implicit here is quality of crews. Who are better trained and motivated can make a difference as well

@noelsoong777

3 ай бұрын

Warthunder 😂

@Salty_Balls

3 ай бұрын

Well both sides are crewed by slavs, so... Make of that what you will. And bring tracksuits.

The US is looking at a Bradley replacement, XM30, and also a 50mm autocannon, for it's increased range(4km I think) and, I suspect, they want to use a lot of airburst ammo. It just occured to me, if you could get those rounds to go boom close enough to a tank, the fragments might wreak the sights.

It’s all about crew training and courage. Those two Bradley crews had…stones of solid brass. But they also fought smart. Shoot and scoot. They clearly exploited the weaknesses of the Russian tank.

If a tank gets first accurate shot, tank wins. If Bradley gets first accurate Tow launch, Bradley wins. Simple. EDIT: I'm getting that plushy. xD

@riskinhos

3 ай бұрын

except there's countermeasures and active and passive protections. so no. who gets the first shot doesn't win most times because the tow and shells can be destroyed easily by any modern active protection.

@thebubbclub

3 ай бұрын

What about when latest russian 2016 MBT misses first shot from literal knife fighting distance? seems they get swiss cheesed

@Spotcats

3 ай бұрын

@@riskinhos Sure sure. lol ;)

@hiteshadhikari

3 ай бұрын

​@@riskinhosno aps can destroy an KP/APFSDS

@noelsoong777

3 ай бұрын

​@@riskinhos nope the amount of fire a chain gun has cannot be stopped by active protection

Even though I was in a unit of US Army Light Infantry, I have always been fascinated with IFV, and APC's after seeing the Marine LAV's in Panama. This was an excellent video which really explained alot, thank you for your excellent research on the topic!

The Bradley is not used in a vacuum, its designed to support infantry. So the infantry dismount usually a treeline, hill, (obscuring terrain feature) from expected contact. The infantry moves forward and calls the Bradley for support against tanks or infantry since the Bradley has weapons to handle either. If the enemy tanks have infantry support, (which the Russians rarely use for whatever reasons) then the Bradley has a more challenging task. Source: assigned to a TOW team in the 82nd airborne, talked to mechs during cross training about their baby tank.

@warfarenotwarfair5655

3 ай бұрын

Im a former a Crew Chief on C-130s and even I know Bradley's are designed to work alongside tanks or engage on recon. The Bradley protects tanks from infantry so the tanks can do their magic.

i have been following you for years thank you for all you have taught your videos are so unique and well done i always look forward to your content and i have learned about things id never bother to learn if it was not for your videos

@gooldii1

3 ай бұрын

Me too

If your kid sleeps with a Binkov Plushie the monsters under their bed will not be prepared for his tactical insights.

@user-xe8zj6rc3o

3 ай бұрын

baba yaga

The Bradley's in Ukraine were using their mobility and the terrain to avoid taking a main gun round from the T90. Attempting a TOW shot would have meant slowing down to below 5mph and keeping the sights on the tank during the launch which would have been suicidal. Perhaps if the third Bradley had made it to the fight it could have used the distraction of the other two to maneuver for a shot but that proved unnecessary.

The Bradley has killed more tanks than tanks have killed Bradleys

@123456qwful

3 ай бұрын

True, but to be fair most Bradley that have been killed are by artillery or rpgs

@jdreyes3745

3 ай бұрын

​@@123456qwfulWhen the infantry fighting vehicle has more deaths fighting infantry than when fighting tanks

@TroIIingThemSoftly

3 ай бұрын

@@123456qwful So do most tanks, so 🤷‍♂🤷‍♂

Binkov; you should do an evolution on friendly fire over time and the impact it has on wars

The laser range finder giving a Bradley away is largely overstated in this video when using a TOW. Absolutely necessary when engaging with the 25mm, not so much with a TOW. Also any lasing is likely to be very brief, a second or two only long enough to get the range. The Russian tank operator better be on the level. Overall a good presentation though. A Bradley should never initiate an attack against MBTs without significant tactical advantage. In truth the Ukrainians got lucky in that the T-90 mentioned in the video was immediately rendered blind in the engagement. The T-72 engagements mentioned in Ukraine were likely at night with a disadvantaged Russian vehicle with older or non-existent night vision.

@warfarenotwarfair5655

3 ай бұрын

Russian stuff is junk and the crews are poorly trained conscripts. You give way too much credit to junky Soviet equipment.

@conradmeek5142

3 ай бұрын

With respect I am not. The biggest issue in this war is not the equipment. Ukraine's armor is predominantly of the same capability with few exceptions, ie Bradley's and a limited number of Leopard IIs, Challengers, and M1s. I will also note that in Ukrainian service the tank performance has been similar regardless of capability. Look at the losses during Ukraine's offensive as an example of my point, Western armor was destroyed or disabled in droves primarily due to poor tactics and freshly trained crews. To their credit they adjusted. Training (and some luck) is the real difference in the T-90 engagement we are speaking of, and you are doing your own objective analysis a disservice by not acknowledging the real difference here. A properly employed T-90 should have had no problem dealing with both of those Bradley's. The night vision in this case are of the same generation and there is no question on where the firepower and armor advantages were. The Russian anti-armor shells are of excellent capability when they score a hit and their guns are known to be quite accurate. The T-90 was alone with no support and lacked situational awareness in what looks like a meeting engagement where it was surprised at very close range. This indicates poor training and poor doctrine as the key failure point on the Russian side. @@warfarenotwarfair5655

@warfarenotwarfair5655

3 ай бұрын

@@conradmeek5142 Ukraine's army is made up of garbage conscripts just like the Russian military.

Also congrats to the Bradley commander and his enormous balls for fighting a battle tank with an autocannon.

@user-ku4yh4xc9s

3 ай бұрын

If you stumble across a MBT, than doing anything is better than doing nothing...

@DerDrecksack87

3 ай бұрын

One of the Bradleys & crew from the video was smoked a week later, but dunno wich one.

The fact of the matter is that Bradely has proven to be a bane to Russian forces

@cstgraphpads2091

3 ай бұрын

Proven in what way? The T-90 had already been damaged by drones.

@verdebusterAP

3 ай бұрын

@@cstgraphpads2091 Sure it was

@redaerf2b414

3 ай бұрын

Ukraine brigades armed with bradleys, failed to show any meaningfull advancements in counteroffencives. They are proven to be on same level of vulnerability as any soviet/russian ifv. We have seen exactly one bradley vs t-90 battle. In that battle tank was hit by FPV drone and endured ifv autocannon. It wasnt lost, crew escaped.

@missk1697

3 ай бұрын

@@verdebusterAP its literally shown on the full video, deny it all you want

@verdebusterAP

3 ай бұрын

@@redaerf2b414 Thats funny as the Ukrainian forces as saying the exact opposite Praising its vastly superior optics which allow them to attack effectively at night The fact videos have been shown of Bradley surviving direct hits missiles and from tanks main gun

I rarely appreciate a good ad. Well done.

we support your work, binkov.

@thebubbclub

3 ай бұрын

- the russian fsb

This is good quality, balanced analysis. I learned a lot.

Bradleys have pretty good track records. I feel like in some ways they are kinda the modern day Sherman. Not the best for tank on tank (i know they are not technically tanks), but with smart use they hold their own just fine and very user friendly and versatile.

@tylersm0723

3 ай бұрын

Are the Bradley's not the ifv with the air ride system that needs regular maintenance or you'll end up riding on the tires and shredding them?

@paul-jr4kc

3 ай бұрын

​@@tylersm0723Bradley's are tracked they do not have tires

@tylersm0723

3 ай бұрын

Thinking of a different ifv they got from USA then

@paul-jr4kc

3 ай бұрын

@@tylersm0723 usa only has one ifv

@paul-jr4kc

3 ай бұрын

@@tylersm0723 Bradley is the only ifv that the usa has you may be thinking of apc. The difference between a apc and a ifv are that apc get you to a fight the ifv stay and fight. The apc's that the usa gave Ukraine is the m113 (tracked vehicle) and the Stryker. The Stryker is what you are probably talking about. I've never served with the Stryker only ridden in one a handful of times so I dont know if your claims are accurate but even so those strykers can just about go anywhere you want and fit a squad inside

Bradley has some impressive desktop KZread results being absolute winner on internet disputes. Especially against Russian shovels.

@peterpanini96

3 ай бұрын

But loses against digging trenches ural tractors. 😂

Love the graphics! Really cool

Bradleys consistently win because the guys inside don't know any better.

The mystery - to me - is what happened to the turret drive. The M2 had, by the crew's account, already switched to HE, and there were only cannon hits - the turret ring, by the book, will *not* be penned by 25mm HE. It made me wonder about exactly how the T-90 turret ring is protected. With saucer turrets, or any turret with overhand, it's been posited that explosive reactive armor might be counterproductive, due to lensing of concussion in the cavity. Now, IMHO, I think that's a stretch. It's more likely that someone jury rigged a wire bundle outside of the armor protection, where it got shredded. Hell, could even be a crewman just hanging on to something or leaning on something inside the capsule, possibly a fire or fluid leak making things uncomfortablre, and then accidentally pushing the rotate button. Hit a tree, got stuck, abandon. Barring any other evidence, that's the most likely conclusion, that of "crew/OPFOR error". Fitting, as this engagement was in some ways already decided with the sentence "sent a tank into a village alone without support". If you want to know what caused the T-90 defeat, don't need to read any further than that.

@dwightk.schrute8696

3 ай бұрын

25mm HE can still cause a lot of "discomfort" if you manage to hit the periscopes/vision blocks. Another possibility might be that the destruction of some of the outside electronics caused a short in the turret traverse control unit, who knows how these things are wired.

@Pechenegus

3 ай бұрын

Gunner station was blasted by FPV drone, thats what happened to turret drive. That 90M was recovered, it have like 5 FPV drone hits on it in different parts.

@mogilews

3 ай бұрын

@@dwightk.schrute8696 Agree, one of the more likely options, IMHO, is "wack-ass wiring" that doesn't compartmentalize circuits inside armor protection from those outside of it. So shredding something in the outside pod disables a thing inside the armor protection. As a systems guy, I feel for the izhmash (or whatever) office worker that gets to sort that out.

@DerDrecksack87

3 ай бұрын

In the extended video it can be seen that the T90M takes a huge hit by a drone or ATGM right before the Bradleys pop up & open fire. Most think that was the cause for the turret spin and why the T90M didnt smoke the first Bradley. That 25mm did little to no damage, especially because most of it hits the front plate & turret cheeks. That T90M was then later destroyed by a drone after the crew bailed, all on video. Strange things do happen in intense combat, apparently yesterday the 4th M1A1 Abrams was destroyed, this time by a T72 variant.

Great presentation

Oh man here we go again in the comment sections of X is better than Y, remember the majority of vehicle losses are from landmines, artillery, drones, ATGM...

@Seth9809

3 ай бұрын

In their defense, we see a lot of 1 v 1s in this war.

i want a Bradley IFV for Christmas

Its the same with tank to tank fighting, the one that's sees the enemy first wins, Most of the time as no RNG, Warthunder,wot, hit it in the right place you wins.

Looks like drones have made life in any armor more difficult. Kinda reminds me of aircraft and battleships back in the day. What do you say Binkov?

@snapdragon6601

3 ай бұрын

Great analogy. 👍

@aymonfoxc1442

3 ай бұрын

I think the effectiveness of civilian grade commercial drones is probably a phase in the warfare of nation states. Non-state actors however, will probably rely on them for a long time - if they can secure a reliable supply or big stockpiles.

The caveats: 1. Play War Thunder 2. Scream over the radio "Fuck it, we ball"

I've read plausible people commenting about that video. A TOW has a min range of about 60-70 metres. And you have to be still when you launch it. If the tank can see you, don't be still.

I think the Bradley is a glimpse of the future of tanks. A greater focus on guided missiles and infantry teamwork than tanks tend to have now. Modern precision weapons such as drones, smart missiles, etc. have made traditional tanks unreliable without having established dominance already. Although, to be fair, the use of drones is unreliable when there are soldiers escorting a vehicle as they can pretty easily shoot it down.

Hey Binkov, I love your videos 😊 Can you do "Bradley versus T-90: Which Can Transport More Infantry?" I think some commenters could use the reminder...

@ADB_UWIM_2807

3 ай бұрын

Ummm should someone tell him?😅

@hfarthingt

3 ай бұрын

Would a bradley be more effective against tanks if it transported troops ready with javelins? lol

Thanks!

Love Binkov!!!

If the Bradley gets first hits on a tank with the chain gun, would exploding receive armor obscuring views, and potential hits on viewing ports effectively take the tank out of action by limiting its visibility?

Damn I want one of those plushies

At 16:15 when comparing the height you did not include the cope cage on the T-90.

During the Gulf war a Bradley unintentionally stopped next to an entrenched Iraqi MBT (Either a T-55 or t72 I forget) and fired its chain gun at it point blank with no penetration or apparent damage. Luckily for them the Iraqi crew were slow to respond and the Bradley was able distance itself from the tank and take it out with a TOW.

@HalfLifeExpert1

3 ай бұрын

Yeah that was during the Battle of 73 Easting, I believe the tank was a T-72, and it backed out of it's dugout to engage the Bradley, but as you said, the Bradley was able to open the distance and blast it with a TOW.

@thebubbclub

3 ай бұрын

the russian crews are slow too until their ammo explodes! then they go 150+ m/s!

@drewschumann1

3 ай бұрын

Bradley's could penetrate T72s from the flank up to 1200m with armored piercing ammo from their 25mm. I know Bradley crewmen who killed T72s during the Gulf war who did this

@barneyklingenberg4078

3 ай бұрын

Meanwhile the Russians took ahdivka. Never underestimate nor ridicule your enemy in war. Makes you sloppy.

@Seth9809

3 ай бұрын

Except the side of the T-72 has basically no armor.

Didn't the KZreadr ryan mcbeth talk about a clip of a Bradley attacking a russian tabk with the tge auto cannon uf i remember ut didn't kill the tank but looked to haved damaged it/ made in non combat effective so it retreated. If i remember correctly

@Seth9809

3 ай бұрын

The turret was spinning without control, which meant it was broken or the gunner was dead.

@user-tv7fg7wt2d

3 ай бұрын

@Seth9809 The turret stopped spinning after some time, and later on in the original video, 3 men were seen coming out of the tank. The horizontal drive likely didn't break. Maybe just a brief malfunction or an error from the gunner or commander. It's hard to tell exactly what happened. And the gunner most definitely didn't die

For the record M2ODS-SA *does* have seperate sights for commander & gunner. Just the commander doesn't have IR.

back in 1991 Bradley wiped the floor of T-72's in daylight

@stevenwunder8187

3 ай бұрын

in a sand storm.

@The-AmericanPatriot

3 ай бұрын

@@stevenwunder8187 More than one time on a plain clear day as well

Yeah, coming up against a tank with a tank is dicey. With anything smaller it is downright sporty.

One man with a butter knife, hopped up on amphetamines vs a t-90? My money's on the Florida man, every time

@B.D.E.

3 ай бұрын

Nah, Florida man would be a maga republican, so they'd raise a white flag, spread their cheeks, and immediately defect to russia.

I want that Plushy!!!!!

War Thunder players: tracks and cannon torture (and sights)

In my honesty with how many tanks the Bradly has killed , I say we stop saying it’s not a tank and start saying “Tanks aren’t Bradlys”. Because the dam thing is deadly against most targets

@ericp1139

3 ай бұрын

How many tanks have Bradley’s killed?

@miriamweller812

3 ай бұрын

Bradleys get slaughted by pretty much everything, even worse than tanks.

@aymonfoxc1442

3 ай бұрын

Plus, tanks don't transport infantry and equipment like Bradleys... unless you want them to sit on top of it.

@Romires007

3 ай бұрын

Cost of Bradley is 4 million dollars, cost of T72 is one million dollars, Bradley has worst cost efficiency

@Seth9809

3 ай бұрын

@@Romires007 Russians not use T-72s, and T-72s get slaughtered by Bradleys during Gulf Wars.

My unit got friendly fired by Bradly's. T72 vs Humvee thru the thermal

Question: Why don't Bradley use the top down attack to disable the engine of the enemy tank. It seems to be an efficient way to pin point a tank so an allied abrams for example can shoot it with more favorable angles. Or take out the tow trucks/tanks which have to save it if they value their tanks

@MaxIsStrange1

3 ай бұрын

Bradleys absolutely can attack the enemy’s roofs but they need to be equipped with the TOW 2B (the top-attack variant) to do it. And it seems to me that the 2B is powerful enough to go through the turret roof and disable the entire tank on its own but I guess knocking out the engine and waiting for an Abrams would also work 😉

Bradley 😻

In wars, cheating is mandatory - fair play is for idiots

The question is why did Russia send a T90M alone?

@prfwrx2497

3 ай бұрын

Large concentration of AFVs get shelled right away. Why can't Russia conduct proper fire suppression and counterbattery? Why do their zooparks keep getting wrecked? How come Russia's greatest weapon so far are US politicians withholding artillery ammunition from Ukraine? These are the questions that should be raised. War is a system that spreads from the contact line, to industry, to the halls of political power.

@B.D.E.

3 ай бұрын

Because they are incompetent. They almost always use tanks poorly. Not exactly the first video of a tank getting cut off like this.

@looinrims

3 ай бұрын

Could’ve had a tank platoon or section broken up, it could’ve been the last operational vehicle in its unit, or just caught in transit

@mrdumbfellow927

3 ай бұрын

​@@prfwrx2497 When it comes to artillery rounds there are shortages that are affecting ALL NATO members and manufacturing has not yet caught up. Aside from the recent debate regarding aid to Ukraine, which btw could be resolved immediately if the current US president would simply secure our southern border (something nearly 80% of ALL voters support), US politicians have given MASSIVE support to Ukraine. I support supplying Ukraine with weapons as long as we are doing it effectively while keeping an eye on corruption in Ukraine. Finally, you saying the US not supplying Ukraine with artillery is the ONLY effective weapon Russia has against Ukraine is hyperbolic and ridiculous (as well as false, for the reasons i give above). Ignoring areas where Russia has seen success is NOT a good idea! If you think Russia has ONLY seen failure in this war, you need to get new sources of media for some balance.......just not the Russian Ministry of Defense...... unless you are only after comedy😅

@danieldaviddasilva5187

3 ай бұрын

​@@B.D.E.It seems they forgot about the Leopards 2 and Bradleys destroyed in last year's failed Ukrainian offensive

I saw a video of two Bradley's dominanting a T-90.

@Asofe17

3 ай бұрын

watch redeffect video of it. You saw a cut version. Before bradleys engaged t90m it got hit by atgm or fpv drone; then the whole fight happens, t90m retreats and gets hit by fpv drone again, only then its disabled. So in reality a recon drone/atgms/anti tank drones/bradleys destroyed a lone t90m tank. ANy tank in that situation would have been destroyed.

@thenonameguy7756

3 ай бұрын

@@Asofe17 come on mann. That tank was disabled when that turrent started spinning like crazy

@Asofe17

3 ай бұрын

@@thenonameguy7756 and either fpv drone or the tree stopped spinning or they figured out whats wrong, maybe some lever malfunctioned or commander took control of the turret. because the turret got back to a place which is suitable for driver to get out. which means its lucky it got unstuck from rotation to a perfect position to escape or the rotating issue was solved by a tree or whatever

@Asofe17

3 ай бұрын

@@thenonameguy7756 you can claim bradleys could have temporary disabled a t90m forcing it to retreat, but claiming it got destroyed is a real stretch. If not the fpv drone, they most likely would have driven away

@thenonameguy7756

3 ай бұрын

@@Asofe17 that tree was their best friend. It was the tree who stopped the turret of spinning

Bradley needs fire and forget missiles to replace ToW

@bobh9492

3 ай бұрын

There’s already a new tow missile.

@toughspitfire

3 ай бұрын

There are still some benefits to a cabled TOW system, there are some counter-measures to fire and forget weapons that won't effect TOW missiles.

@HalfLifeExpert1

3 ай бұрын

@@bobh9492 A TOW missile, by-definition, is not Fire-and-Forget, as the "W" in that acronym stands for "Wire-Guided".

@ry4n737

3 ай бұрын

@toughspitfire that is a good point. ..just thinking a javelin could be a good alternative.

@verdebusterAP

3 ай бұрын

No, the Bradley's replacement need to learn from this engagement Using 25mm fire , it was luckily able to suppress the T-90 but the larger 50mm XM913 would have been able to inflict far more damage The Bradley's replacement needs a missile able to be fired even if the IFV is moving at high speed

As far as I am aware tanks typically have a higher magnification on thier sights which also gives the Bradley an edge at close ranges

@ydnark83

3 ай бұрын

the video details the sights, ranges, manufacturers, quality and generational advances. You would be a lot more aware if you watched the video your commenting on

Crew training > hardware Hence why Ukraine Bradleys are dunking on Russian tanks

If the Bradley can fire at a moving target but the tank cannot, then the Bradley has a chance of shooting at the sights of the tank to blind them. Saw some Ukrainian footage that seemed to show this; eventually the Russians abandoned their tank and the Ukrainians disabled it with a drone. Apparently the Bradley's missiles only work when it's stationary.

@sheeksipedia

3 ай бұрын

I've done some training on TOW launchers, it's significantly easier to hit a moving target while you're stationary, unless you're on a smooth and flat road or something moving at a consistent speed

I don’t think they were out of TOWs but totally unprepared to engage the tank until it was too late

@TB-zf7we

3 ай бұрын

Too close and the Brad needs to be stationary. Not a good idea to stay still for too long at that range in that Ukrainian town ( "Stepove") surprise engagement.

who sees who first wins

@sirxavior1583

3 ай бұрын

Correction. Who sees who first and fires a well aimed shot wins. Otherwise you just make yourself known.

IFVs are just one component of combined arms. You force multiply the power of a Bradley by combining it with other components.

tow missile doesn't give a laser warning

@Kuraimizu9152

3 ай бұрын

Because it uses a cable... Thus needing the unit launching to remain stationary... And vulnerable...

@mikeunger4165

3 ай бұрын

While the TOW doesn't give a laser warning, the laser range-finder might. If you tried to engage at maximum range without using the range-finder to determine the range, your guess probably isn't perfect resulting in either a missile loss or a closer range engagement. At least that's the most generous interpretation.

@ConvetionalHeretic

3 ай бұрын

@@mikeunger4165you don’t always have to lase the tank. You can lase buildings or other objects close to it. Also you van usually estimate range with your optics if you know the height of your target. And as long as your target is withing the TOWs max range… the big problem as stated above is the exposure time. A conventional mbt round will reach you in a couple of seconds at long ranges, you however have to sit there for much longer.

@Flamechr

3 ай бұрын

​@@ConvetionalHereticbingo. Plus tow out range the gun on Russian tanks

@override367

3 ай бұрын

which would matter if battles occurred in infinitely sized flat white rooms. If that was true, british challengers and abrams would be chewing through Ukraine but tanks are not the winner in this war@@Flamechr

Against tanks, the Bradley is a glass cannon. A highly manuverable, highly agile, highly adaptable and high tech glass cannon. But a glass cannon nonetheless. In a 1 v 1 fight, whoever gets the first on target shot (tank main cannon or Bradley TOW) will win. The difference is that a Bradley is both ranged enough to engage past a tank cannon's optimum range with its own TOW, and after firing it can reposition fast enough to have a decent chance of avoiding retalliatory fire. A russian tank in the Ukranian bogs just signed its death warrant if there's any other Bradleys around and it smoked one.

Bradley could be much deadlier if they had a fire and forget missile. (Like the javelin.) Then shoot and scoot tactics would be viable. It might not have been designed to take on mbts but on todays battlefield it is much more likely to meet an mbt then during a cold war scenario (armored formations are much more dispersed and used as infantry support instead of big concentrated armored formations of the past). So having an effective AT weapon able to attack a tank from the front is becoming more important.

@e21big

3 ай бұрын

For sure, but it's an IFV first and foremost. The missiles it carried is for self defence not tank hunting. Even if you give it a much more advanced missiles, there are only so many shots it can fire while still having to use the vast majority of the space for troops.

@ConvetionalHeretic

3 ай бұрын

@@e21big in the US army I agree since they follow or support mbts. In the Ukrainian army however they are employed far more offensively.

A better Bradley trained crew with tow missiles will always beat a tank w an inexperienced crew. 9/10

@loke6664

3 ай бұрын

Always is a bit much, there is a lot of things going on a battlefield. Yeah, experience is a huge factor in any battle but an inexperienced crew can still surprise an experienced one and the Bradley is a glass canon. You can't always avoid putting your vehicle in risky situations and even bad luck affects a battle. Using mechanized infantry vehicles to hunt actual tanks is not the preferred tactic to use, even when you have a really good crew. It is not built for that even if it certainly can do the job if you don't have another option. You also have a limited number of tow missiles and might not be able to re-arm quickly. The terrain matters a lot too, and certainly what kind of tanks you are phasing. Some of the tanks the Russian's fields should basically be museum pieces but you can also run into a few T-90s which is far harder to take out. Usually you would have some of your own tanks in the battle as well who hopefully draw fire which would significantly improve your chances. A couple of Abrams, Leopard II or Challengers on your side is certainly preferable. The Bradley isn't a tank and shouldn't really be used as one if you have access to tanks.

A greyhound knocked out a Tiger in WW2, it's nothing new but the odds aren't good for the Bradley or any IFV facing a tank

@thebubbclub

3 ай бұрын

the odds seem great for western IFVs, theyre destroying Russian tanks by the dozens before sent back for repairs

@cstgraphpads2091

3 ай бұрын

@@thebubbclub That doesn't seem to be supported by evidence.

@miriamweller812

3 ай бұрын

@@thebubbclub You do geht that reality does not care about your delusion and will just crush you?

@johnhonker437

3 ай бұрын

Exactly. The exception MAKES the rule. In perfect conditions the Bradley can win, but it's not recommended. The main autocannon is designed to fight infantry, IFVs, Helicopters, and soft-skinned vehicles. The TOW is a last ditch option.

@Seth9809

3 ай бұрын

Even people like Laser pig say there is no proof of that story. Man who told it said four other people saw it and they said it never happened.

Latest TOW can engage at 4.5 km. But training and tactics are important.

You forgot to mention the situation when Ukrainian BTR-4 with 30mm gun completely penetrated the new russian tank. That is if breadly had just slightly more powerful gun and shoot it on the sides of the tank it could have penetrated it.

@Seth9809

3 ай бұрын

Wait where?

clearly new missiles will be self guided i imagine with ai (for the new vehicles )

30mm apfsds round is scary... depleted uranium penetrator... the density of the slug alone but then the fact it burst into fire when vaporized due to reactivity

@jackfletch2001

3 ай бұрын

The uranium in thr round isn't reactive anymore, that's why it's called *depleted* uranium.

@ydnark83

3 ай бұрын

your thinking of magnesium bud

How many millimeters of top armour does a bradley have?

@Hunter_Bidens_Crackpipe_

3 ай бұрын

0

@conradmeek5142

3 ай бұрын

Armor on top is largely irrelevant since the best MBT in existence will fail against any modern missile or even RPG without reactive armor or an active kill system. The number is not zero. It is more than an inch thick, albeit aluminum. A little more than the typical piece of self propelled artillery.@@Hunter_Bidens_Crackpipe_

If the Bradley is using HE rounds, shrapnel glancing off the turret and glacis can also hit and mar the sights. A direct hit is not necessary. Nevertheless, my money would still be on the tank as long as it had a capable crew (which may not be the case in Ukraine).

Bradleys or it`s replacement should be upgraded or complemented with SPIKE NLOS or JAGM.

War thunder tells me from the flank a bradley can dominate 7 tanks at once.

1:33 Is that tattoo a RetroArch icon?

Look at that plushie!

Been so tempted on the adjutant.... he just doesnt have the same piercing gaze and captivating cadence..

You should talk about M10 Booker as well! It uses Bradley's chassis w/105 mm gun🔥🔥

@Demoncorp

3 ай бұрын

got me all wet 🤣

@Demoncorp

3 ай бұрын

iirc its autoloaded too.

It is lot about information charring and not to much about amour or gun size. In WWII German light tank did kill lots of Russian tank by training and communication. Russian KV or T34 was with superior armour and gun was killed by weaker German panzar III. Russian use different tactic and could only communicate flags while the German used radio. Detection is still very important in modern warfare.

@armyaj

3 ай бұрын

most of the time they'd bring up flak 88s from the Luftwaffe detachment to destroy them or just go around them and infantry would fuck them up later on. panzer 3s were on do not engage orders with kv's

Could you do a video about cv9040c?

RAD!

Training, logistics and doctrine are as important as vehicles and weapons systems

So now how about a time travelling Bradley in WW2??

@mirceapintelie361

3 ай бұрын

night vision+drone reconaissance=massacre🧐

@ligmasurvivor5600

3 ай бұрын

logistics:

@Necromancer_88

3 ай бұрын

@@mirceapintelie361 no infinite ammo

The Bradley is quite impressive! It can carry troops, provide fire support against enemy infantry and light vehicles, and even have some chance of killing enemy tanks! That recent video from Ukraine with the Bradleys defeating the T-90 was pretty amazing.

@Romires007

3 ай бұрын

Cost of Bradley is 4 million dollars, cost of T72 is one million dollars, Bradley has worst cost efficiency

@Seth9809

3 ай бұрын

@@Romires007 T-72 with nothing on it, sold used is one millilion dollars. Brand new T-90 or T-72B3 from factory 10 years ago was 4.5 million. Everything is a lot cheaper in Russia, except luxury goods or democracy.

@Romires007

3 ай бұрын

@@Seth9809 no, new T72 cost 1 millions dollars for Russian army, 1.5 millions for export

The closer the Bradley is the better its chances. Russian MBT turrets can't spin fast enough to keep up with a Bradley circling at a few hundred meters.

@pipsqeak7104

3 ай бұрын

Not true, also stupid

@hisvin

3 ай бұрын

no, it's true. The Bradley's turret turns faster. But it's a bit suicidal. @@pipsqeak7104

@uranusismightybig5111

3 ай бұрын

​@@pipsqeak7104can you prove that it is not true?

@HyzersGR

3 ай бұрын

@@pipsqeak7104 Speaking for yourself? It was pretty entertaining seeing 2 Bradleys chew up Russia's most advanced tank LOL

@pipsqeak7104

3 ай бұрын

@@uranusismightybig5111 yes I can prove it. The circumference of a 100 meter radius circle is 600 meters. At a speed of 20mph or 9 meters per second, a Bradley takes 67 seconds to circle a tank. This means the Bradley can travel about 6 degrees per second. A t-72 has a turret traverse speed of 24 degrees per second. This means the barrel of the t-72 could easily catch the Bradley. This is assuming the Bradley is going at 20mph which is extremely fast in combat, and is only 100m while which the comment says a few hundred meters.

Watch it backwards and there is a whole different dialogue

Guess

The American domestic version with the new armor would stand a better chance than what's given to Ukraine. Just like with the Abrams we gave.

@warfarenotwarfair5655

3 ай бұрын

There is little point in given them much, the Ukranians already allowed the Russians to dig in and engage in artillery duels. Ukraine and Russia lost the initiative long ago.

TOW Missiles outrange the inaccurate 125mm Russian cannons

@miriamweller812

3 ай бұрын

Russian tanks got up to 8km firing range depending on ammunition they use. TOW got

@user-tv7fg7wt2d

3 ай бұрын

Because it's a missile. TOWs and other ATGMs can also outrange "inaccurate" 120mm guns in a direct fire, but it can't outspeed the usual ammo that those "inaccurate" 120mm and 125mm guns use. In an indirect fire, however, the missile is outranged and outspeed

@Seth9809

3 ай бұрын

@@miriamweller812 if they want to break the barrel and not hit anything.

Nawalny is dead. May He rest in Peace! ❤

How come you've stopped making country vs. country type videos?

@ASlickNamedPimpback

3 ай бұрын

politics, and because now they can actually hhappen

@looinrims

3 ай бұрын

Probably because since that war lots of armed forces have been depleted from foreign purchases for one side or the other, and everyone is pretending it didn’t happen to hide it

They really need to fit bradleys with javelin. Or maybe convert more the SHORADs

@marioiglesias9018

3 ай бұрын

Why javelin? It has a shorter range and the TOW 2Bs they have do top attack already.

@EnigmaHood

3 ай бұрын

They used to use TOW missiles, but yeah Javelin would be much better.

@EnigmaHood

3 ай бұрын

@@marioiglesias9018 I just checked, and you're right, it does. But it's still wire-guided, and isn't fire and forget, which is vital for shoot and scoot tactics!

@Mortablunt

3 ай бұрын

I’m not parking a 10 foot tall priority target out in the open for more than a minute with an enemy with a gun that can shoot for miles and has thermal vision!

@EnigmaHood

3 ай бұрын

@@Mortablunt Didn't realize the Bradley was that tall. Interesting. But Javelin missiles have the advantage of fire and forget. So an armored vehicle could get close enough to fire a missile, then run away immediately, i.e. shoot and scoot. While a lighter vehicle can do the same thing, and would be faster, an IFV can also carry troops, is better protected, and has better all terrain mobility.

Every non-tank and non-tank hunter armed with anti-tank weapons should instead be measured in the chances they have to kill tanks. With the Bradley normally capable of two chances to kill a tank, regardless of how high or low the chance itself is, in a single fight. Yes, they can reload safely, but that means that the turret cannot move, leaving it vulnerable. The same with certain BMPs that have four chances to kill a tank or other armored vehicles, only that they cannot be reloaded safely if they too close to a firefight.

Bradley is a troop carrier... not a tank. It needs a sign in 50 languages saying "I am a troop carrier not a tank. Please dont shoot at me."

@nitrous_god

3 ай бұрын

literally nobody said that. one of the first things he said in the vid was “the bradley INFANTRY FIGHTING VEHICLE”. so while yes it does carry troops, “troop carrier” is not the correct term here

@samuelcaballero9966

3 ай бұрын

Goated pentagon wars reference

@wilhelmheinzerling5341

3 ай бұрын

The Bradley has more tank kills than the Abrams, Leopard, Leclarc, Challanger, T90, T80 etc. etc.

@swissarmyknight4306

3 ай бұрын

@@samuelcaballero9966 You're getting your facts from a Hollywood comedy now? And one "based" on lies? The Bradley has the firepower to kill any person or vehicle on the battlefield. TOW missile launcher means it can kill a tank. Bradleys are not passive, they are aggressive and they are never alone.

@PeterMuskrat6968

3 ай бұрын

The M113 is a troop carrier, the Bradley is a battle bus. This ain’t yo grandpa’a BTR-50 (coincidentally it’s also being used by the Russians now LOLOLOLOLOL)

The notion that one cheeki lad firing HEI-T out of a bushmaster can blind and mission-kill a T90M is highly amusing.

@talscorner3696

3 ай бұрын

The ultimate sneaki breeki

@Rokaize

3 ай бұрын

Could happen to any tank.

@DerDrecksack87

3 ай бұрын

That T90M was hit in the turret by something with HE right before those Bradleys engaged in the extended video, either a drone or ATGM that damaged its optics and turret controls, that 25mm did nothing to it.

Ur voice is the pillar of this channel l just imagined how we will play out without ur voice so l suggest you find a new voice to get used to if you are not around someday