41 replies to this topic

[CoLT]

The Bradley is out-dated by today's standards. The bushmaster is good, but the Bradley is only one in a large number of Western APCs and IFVs that carry the weapon.

It has weak armor although the latest models have been fitted with ERA. But RPGs and other weapons still bust through it quite easily.

[AZZKIKR]

in combat please. i read it somewhere but forgot from what source. the BMP-3 is well liked for Eg. UAE bought 600+ to support their leclerc tanks

[narboza22]

Quote

Oh, yes... It is very good proven as a target for RPGs and even 12,7 mm MGs. TOW missiles are very hard to guide and unreliable. Armor of bradley easily penetrated by 12,7 and 14,5 mm machineguns (in Iraq, at least 3 Bradleys was lost by such way). It haven't ERA, so one RPG is enough to kill vehicle with crew and infantry inside.

If you hit the right spot, an RPG-7 can kill any armored vehicle.

Unless you have proof that M2's were killed by .50 caliber rounds, I think that you're just making that up.

Quote

BMP-3 fighted in Chechnya, showed their high combat effectivness, and, unlike Bradley, no one vehicle was lost

I don't know what world you live on, but Russian armor took quite a beating in Chechnya. That attack on Gronzy was not the best move the Russian military ever made. 225 armored vehicles were lost.
http://www.amina.com.../mil_waste.html
http://www.fas.org/m...d/row/rusav.htm

Quote

During the fight, Russian mechinfantry sit inside BMP and fires through loopholes. Even if they marching outside... you think it is better to lose vehicle, trained crews than few infantrymen injured?

Uhh, if a HEAT shell and ERA go off while there are infantry using the vehicle as cover, those guys are not going to get injured, their going to get killed. If your ERA kills your infantry squad, who is going to go after the guys that just fired the missile at you?

Quote

No one problems with Arkan. It have more powerfull warhead than TOW and easily guide system.

As the RPG-7 shows, size doesn't really matter. The TOW and Arkan are both SACLOS guided weapons, so I fail to see how one would be easier than the other.

Quote

P.S. American vehicles, as usuall, are too advertised. If operate the facts, Bradley is expensive, unreliable, have weak (for modern fight) armament and paper armor. Then it is developed (in 1983) it was good vehicle, but now... It is not correct to compare old Bradley with such modern monsters as BMP-3M or CV-9040. They are differnt generations, if possible to say so.

And yet, these over advertised Western weapons have an almost universally better record in actual combat compared to their counterparts.

Quote

The figures vary from various sites. Most sites say 5000 m, some American - 4000...
However it's still enough to make Javelin's 2500 m look pity tounge.gif

The Javelin is an infantry weapon, so it makes sense that it would have a shorter range than a vehicle launched weapon.

Quote

Oh yeah, it's maybe the only advantage of Bradley - it's 'battle proven' and gained a reputation of a moving tomb.

Sources or can you just not separate your own biased opinion from fact? Everything I ever read has said that the M2 performed remarkably well along side other coalition armor in both Gulf Wars.

Quote

Old ERA could injure surrounding infantry, modern - much less chance of it
And it's a small pay, after all, for making the vehicle invulnerable against light AT weapons. Also I heard the most modern ERA's protect as against missiles as against tank shells. Bot bad at all smile.gif

ERA means an added layer of protection. It is not some divine armor as you make it out to be. Chances are that if a tank gets hit, regardless of whether the round penetrates, there will be damage to the vehicle, like losing a track, or knocking the targeting computer out.

Quote

Quote

i read somewhere that there are various problems with the Arkan missiles.

For ex.?

Well, it doesn't have a top attack warhead for one, and its still a SACLOS guided weapon for two.

[AZZKIKR]

narbozza22. what about providing links over what you said. nice argument to quiten the "your equipment suck because you're american!" by someone here

AL_HASSAN, 1 of the websites has a few russian sources.

the chenchen war was expensive: Former Russian Finance Minister Mikhail Zadornov estimated that the Chechen offensive was costing from 115-million to 150-million dollars a month.

Edited by AZZKIKR, 12 December 2007 - 23:51.

[Ilves]

Quote

I don't know what world you live on, but Russian armor took quite a beating in Chechnya. That attack on Gronzy was not the best move the Russian military ever made. 225 armored vehicles were lost.

Under such leader as Eltsin it is a wonder that we won their anyway. It was a hard time: armoured colomn entered Grozny without ERA, without any supporting infantry and with kerosine (dunno the English equivalent) instead of conventional fuel. Eltsins commanders had very little desire to do anything to lose less troops than its possible.
Also the enemy was well-trained, well commanded and well equipped (Chechens served in the Red Army and supported by the West). In all this conditions a loss of only 225 is a wonder already.

BTW: I handn't found here a word about BMP-3 and that it was lost. Offtop?

Quote

Uhh, if a HEAT shell and ERA go off while there are infantry using the vehicle as cover, those guys are not going to get injured, their going to get killed. If your ERA kills your infantry squad, who is going to go after the guys that just fired the missile at you?

Read again: the infantry usually seats inside the BMP. In this case it is better for both infantry and IFV to have ERA on it. During the attack they usually go far enough from BMP for many reasons, not only ERA (like enemy mortar bombardments and frag shells).
And read again to notice that modern ERA (not that invented in 1985) is specially designed to be moderately-safe for infantrymen. At least if you aren't sitting right on the vehicle...

Quote

As the RPG-7 shows, size doesn't really matter.

..RPG-7 (40 mm) can't kill a modern tank in FRONT side. RPG-29 (105-mm) can do that. And RPG-28 (125-mm) would be able to kill any concept AFV for nearly next 30-40 years

Quote

And yet, these over advertised Western weapons have an almost universally better record in actual combat compared to their counterparts.

Congratulations! You've answered your own arguement!

Quote

The Javelin is an infantry weapon, so it makes sense that it would have a shorter range than a vehicle launched weapon.

1) The Kornet, which is also an infantry weapon, has a range of 5,5 km
2) The fact that Javelin is an infantry weapons, doesn't makes 2500 m better than 5000

Quote

ERA means an added layer of protection. It is not some divine armor as you make it out to be. Chances are that if a tank gets hit, regardless of whether the round penetrates, there will be damage to the vehicle, like losing a track, or knocking the targeting computer out.

Quite strange arguement against ERA as for me o_O. Of course, it's not "GodMode=1", as everything else in the world. But do you really believe that your statements annulates the following advantages:

- up to -90% damage effect of HEAT warheads
- -90% damage reduction of kinetic shells
- ability to mount it on as light as heavy vehicles

Yes, that's the parametres that gives the newest "Nozh" (Knife) ERA

Quote

Well, it doesn't have a top attack warhead for one, and its still a SACLOS guided weapon for two.

..as almost all today's ATGMs. To say that this is problems is the same as to say that human is a biological failure because he needs to eat.


Also I can't figure out one thing. How does your statements prove that Bradley is the best IFV? It's vehicle comparable by time and capabilities to BMP-2, not BMP-3M

Quote

Former Russian Finance Minister Mikhail Zadornov estimated that the Chechen offensive was costing from 115-million to 150-million dollars a month.

bugaga, omg
Never say this again, this will make laugh for hours anybody who knows who's Zadornov actually :rotfll:

PS: when US leaves Iraq the summary military expanses that they wasted on it will grow up to 3 (hope I know the right Eng. equivalent) trillion dollars!

Quote

"your equipment suck because you're american!"

I don't think that the statement "our equipment is uber-cool because it is American, everything other sucks" is better :\

Edited by AL_Hassan, 13 December 2007 - 03:53.

[Whitey]

"our equipment is uber-cool because it is American, everything other sucks"

I don't think that has ever been said on these boards. And with that, I refuse to justify the rest of your post.

[CoLT]

Side-note: Mikhail Zadornov is a former politician and finance minister. He has the same 1st and last name as a stand-up comedian.... so I'm very sure what you are saying is wrong. Or at least, there's nothing funny about it.

[Rot Front]

Quote

The Javelin is an infantry weapon

So, why (according to some sources) Bradleys are rearming from TOWs to Javelins now?

Quote

Quite strange arguement against ERA as for me o_O. Of course, it's not "GodMode=1", as everything else in the world. But do you really believe that your statements annulates the following advantages:

By the way, don't forget that BMP-3M3 (also known as BMP-4) have Arena active defense sysrem, which can intercept missile coming to BMP... I heared that possibility of intercept is near 60%. Not bad, right? Anyway, West haven't such systems in service.

Quote

Former Russian Finance Minister Mikhail Zadornov

LOL Muhahahahaha... I didn't laughet so much for long time

[Whitey]

http://www.russiaprofile.org/author_biogra...ikhail+Zadornov ?

Edited by Boidy, 13 December 2007 - 06:34.

[Rot Front]

Yes, you are right. I confused Mikhail Mikhailovich Zadornov (economist and politician) with Mikhail Nikolaevich Zadornov (humorist)... Sorry. I forget about first, because he had left politics long time ago.

[AZZKIKR]

[QUOTE] Also I can't figure out one thing. How does your statements prove that Bradley is the best IFV? It's vehicle comparable by time and capabilities to BMP-2, not BMP-3M [QUOTE]

at least the Bradley doesn't have fuel tanks for doors.

[CoLT]

I think the only reason the Bradley won is because it's the most featured. It's in the most games and everyone knows the Bradley.

A lot of people who post here also have questionable knowledge of military technology.

Just putting this out there.

[LCPL Carrow]

Rot Front, on 13 Dec 2007, 1:25, said:

Quote

The Javelin is an infantry weapon

So, why (according to some sources) Bradleys are rearming from TOWs to Javelins now?

Are they? Why would they want to do that? The Javelin isn't as versatile as the TOW, because you can't really use the Javelin against buildings, like you can with the TOW, and given that we aren't facing any armored threats in Iraq, why would we be replacing the building-busting TOWs on our Bradleys with non-building-busting Javelins? If I may, I'd like to request those sources, not as a matter of argument but rather as a matter of curiosity, because I just can't fathom why the Army would do something like that. I think your sources may be questionable, and that's part of why I'd like to see them. I'd also just like to see why they think we're doing it.

And to whoever said the TOW is hard to shoot, you've obviously never watched one fired. I'm here to tell you, it's not. I bet I probably coulda learned how in around ten minutes. I'm no TOW gunner, but it's not that hard. The hardest part is not overcorrecting when you're guiding the missile, and even that's not that bad.

[Eddy01741]

Wow, this is becoming a spam fest, patriotism has taken over...

Anyways, the Bradley is pretty good, but it is basically an IFV, the BMP is basically the father of all APCs, but I'd vote for the M113, may not be the best, but it's been damn proven in combat to be good.

[Whitey]

Yes. Proven to be a screaming metal death trap.

Edited by Boidy, 27 December 2007 - 17:30.

[Eddy01741]

Well, obviously if a RPG hits it it is, but then again, an rpg vs. any of the ones listed above is most likely going to turn them into a deathtrap.

[CommanderJB]

So much for the second line of the topic description...
I'm voting the BMP-3M as well because it has about twice the armament of the other APCs on display here. It's simply a more modern design. They will all be defeated by ATGMs and heavy RPGs, so you might as well get what weapons value you can out of it while it's alive, right? They have a more powerful autocannon as their secondary weapon, and can fire ATGMS from the 100mm cannon as well as a large variety of other rounds. This negates the need for an external launcher box, reducing vulnerability considerably. And HEAT or HE shells (which are being phased out anyway) will kill infantry anywhere, not just outside a vehicle. Not only that, but I've seen stats that suggest you can cram more people into a BMP-3.
The extreme of this weaponised APC concept is the BMT-72, but I really wouldn't want to be a poor infantry soldier that has to ride in one of those.