>gen 1 FLIR
>dual I-TOW
>25mm autocannon when the international standard is 20mm/23mm
>resistant to 14.5mm on all sides
>organic support for Dragon or Javelin cav scout teams
>fantastic P/W ratio, much faster than an M60 and on par with the Abrams. Reverse speed superior to any Russian tank
>all of this in 1980
>meanwhile the Russians have not quite finished the BMP-2
On a scale of 1-10, how much of a slam dunk was this one?
We'll get to see soon when they have to fight against an actual semi-competent military force instead of a bunch of arabs in the desert
already got one
>We'll get to see soon when they have to fight against an actual semi-competent military force instead of a bunch of arabs in the desert
Are we invading Mexico?
Russians are less competent than Arabs. We've already established that.
>against an actual semi-competent military force
What, like the 1st Guard's "routed to humvees" Tank Army?
it all depends on the crew really.
steppe isn't that much different than desert.
The dunked on Iraq back when they were the worlds 4th largest military and had more working T-72s than Russia.
The only difference is this time they are going to be forced to fight at much closer ranges due to terrain. There will be losses but anyone expecting to fight a war without losses is moronic.
I honestly think that the Iraqi Army in 1991 was a more powerful and professional force than the majority of the Russian forces are in 2023.
It'll be interesting to see how the Bradley performs against Russia instead of the Iraqi Army, which was largely poorly-trained conscripts equipped with T-62s and BMP-1s... oh wait.
it will probably get shot at a lot more due to the closer terrain if ukraine actually goes on the attack with it
>fantastic P/W ratio
It can only do 32mph. It couldn't even keep up with a Challenger 2, let alone an Abrams.
shut the frick up dumbass
acceleration & mobility is more useful in war than top speed
moron
You said it could keep up with Abrams, it can't. Why lie? or are you stupid?
not me moron
>max speed of Bradley: 65 km/h
>max speed of Abrams (first variant): 72 km/h
>implying an Abrams is going to be doing 72 km/h in battle
Maybe in the fricking Saudi desert but not in Europe.
well 72 km/h was always its road speed. Its much more like 55-60 km/h off road
Even that is over the top lmao. You're looking at that speed for sprints between overwatch positions, a Bradley is going to be a few hundred meters back popping shit with its autocannon and looking for spots to drop its dismounts. Like really if the tanks are at the front dealing with things that can kill other tanks the Bradley has no business loitering or worse kicking out its infantry.
I know what you're saying and I'm not arguing with you anon, just pointing out that the vatnik is moronic.
>You're looking at that speed for sprints
Don't think you know how gas turbines work, it's more efficient to run them flat out.
I can't wait to see your friends get popped by 25mm vanya
I don't have to wait to see Bradley getting rekt
Dennis stop shitposting or you'll be late for moron school
>abrams hit
>moves to safety
>crew gets out, hurt but alive
>vodkawagen hit
>turret and crew in orbit
daily reminder this was a hit with the hatch literally left open
If the hatches were closed the overpressure would have killed them.
pic
the average ifv in 1980 did not have a 30mm
Shitty western design forcing the wounded crew to climb out of the tank, superior Russian tanks eject the crew at the moment of impact.
BAWHAWHAHAHA
>vatniks think the crew surviving is a design flaw
Many such cases
Anon, he's not at school he's been a mentally ill adult for almost a decade
I bet I can post more dead BMPs with dead churkas next to them than exist pictures of destroyed bradleys
I'm sure you can, post away, i love dead vatniks
Of course Bradley's are going to be fricking destroyed in Ukraine, they're not some magic wunderwaffen. There will also definitely be destroyed Leo 1's, 2A4's, probably a few Abrams when they get there... stuff goes wrong in war and it's impossible to keep everything and everyone alive. BUT that being said, all those Western vehicles are going to be leaps and bounds better than their Soviet era counterparts. You at least have a chance of surviving in a piece of NATO equipment instead of absolute certain death in a Soviet piece of shit. And the optics/night vision/thermals in Western equipment are so superior to Soviet shit that you can't even put them in the same ballpark.
It's going to be a really annoying day when the pictures of the first destroyed Leopard or Bradley comes out of Ukraine because Russia is going to parade it around for months as if it's somehow a sign they're winning while completely ignoring the THOUSANDS of pictures of destroyed Russian equipment.
When I was in a Mechanized Infantry unit. I brought this up to my Battalion Master Gunner. He told me they have governor's on them for when they're not down range. Similar to the blue screw on a PEQ15 you take out when you deploy for more power. Apparently they can push 40+.
Personally, fastest my driver ever got us was 39mph (going down a hill lol)
>He told me they have governor's on them for when they're not down range.
That applies to Abrams too. They can get up to over 100 km/h on road without the governor. This does of course wear a lot on the tracks and roadwheel bearings.
Couldn't imagine the fuel consumption on an Abrams Turbine engine going 60 mph.
All in all it was a good choice not just for capability which is a pretty significant jump to the BMP/BTR variants Ukraine has mostly been using but also because there's a frickload of them so it would be much easier to get replacement vehicles and spare parts. The only downside is really the older thermals. 30mm resistance to the front will be great against Russian light armor.
Is there any info on what TOW missile they're operating? I don't think the US announcements mentioned what specific type. I know they have the FGM-148C javelin variants which IIRC where late 1990s. The TOW tandem charge and top attack variants are also from around that time period so I'm assuming they are probably being supplied those versions.
very good vehicle. it's high, fairly lightly armored, but the capabilities it has are frankly insane
>Capabilities
Anon. Good optics and a stable gun platform/ATGM aren't the wonderwaffen you think they are, outside of that it's a pretty mediocre vehicle, if you don't only compare it to only Russian vehicles anyway, but it's an IFV box in tracks so who cares outside of autists like Dennis and Warriortard.
>Anon. Good optics and a stable gun platform/ATGM aren't the wonderwaffen you think they are
Better than unstabilzed and No ATGM by a mile
Tall as shit and for it's size has very lackluster passenger capacity
>meanwhile the Russians have not quite finished the BMP-2
the bradley could not fulfill the same role a BMP-2 does, it is why nobody really uses it outside of the US, and even in the Ukraine it is kind of a meme
if i was a crewman i would want to be in a bradley, if i was a commander trying to invade a country i would want a BMP
>>25mm autocannon when the international standard is 20mm/23mm
The international standard is actually 30 mm.
far less than bmp 1 was when it was launched
10
CHADV90 REPORTING IN
Genuinely better than bradley
>On a scale of 1-10, how much of a slam dunk was this one?
I'd say... Second to none.