>ukrainian bradley operator from the T-90M video claims the brad ERA stopped 2 kornets and the vehicle was alright, only getting a concussion

>ukrainian bradley operator from the T-90M video claims the brad ERA stopped 2 kornets and the vehicle was alright, only getting a concussion

>no subtitles, have to use auto-generated
thoughts?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Seems to be pretty good battle data for the american MIC.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The biggest takeway is that Bradley should be able to fire TOW on the move

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I guess we're migrating the Brad discussion from the CASEVAC thread to here.

        Per the Kornet claim, here is an purported aftermath of BRAT (Bradley Reactive Armor Tiles) neutralizing the Lancet warhead.

        I betcha it would be possible to fit a rudimentary seeker into the head of a fat TOW, to enable a guidance mode select. For deliberate defense, human-guided to avoid spoofing. For hasty defense or react to contact, fire-and-forget with seeker.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Ahh nothing makes thirdies seethe quite like the Bradley. Glad to see that it has the best armor of any IFV in service with the BRAT upgrades

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        There is that.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/A2Otkq3.jpeg

        I guess we're migrating the Brad discussion from the CASEVAC thread to here.

        Per the Kornet claim, here is an purported aftermath of BRAT (Bradley Reactive Armor Tiles) neutralizing the Lancet warhead.

        I betcha it would be possible to fit a rudimentary seeker into the head of a fat TOW, to enable a guidance mode select. For deliberate defense, human-guided to avoid spoofing. For hasty defense or react to contact, fire-and-forget with seeker.

        I think the limitation has to do with TOW's wireguided nature. Firing on the move could break the wires. I doubt they are going to develop a fire and forget TOW. There was one tested years ago and abandoned. Looks like the Army plans to replace it with newer missiles like JAGM. But they seem to be prioritizing the air launched version. I haven't heard news of JAGM upgrades for the Brad yet.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Wireless TOWs (Aeros) exist already.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Seems to be pretty good battle data for the american MIC.

      The big test was the Gulf War like 30 years ago, so this is not anything new. It's performing as well as we thought. Prettty much every IFV and AFV designed after it takes lessons from the Bradley. The CV90 is meant to be a bigger badder Bradley with a bigger badder gun.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        the cv90 version that ukraine got doesnt have a tow. mark v should get one.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >The big test was the Gulf War like 30 years ago
        This war is a much better test case.
        >actually going up against Russia proper instead of their hand-me-downs
        >fighting without the overwhelming support of the USAF
        >in a more obscured environment than perfectly flat desert, mitigating its superior optics somewhat
        >being used by hastily trained eastern europeans instead of "the army built for WW3"
        >in a combat space littered with drones and atgm's, a grim preceding of what's to come in future wars
        If you want to see what something is capable of, you need to give it the shit test, not a cake walk.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          i love how both iraq wars 'dont count' because of how 'easy' they were.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            because they were air wars. Ukraine is a ground war where neither side has much of an airforce and a lot of AA.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            ieds, soviet era rockets and abu hajar are technically dangerous but theyre not the cutting edge of danger.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          i love how both iraq wars 'dont count' because of how 'easy' they were.

          And thats the thing, it was "easy" because of one sided superiority. If you have to take a big exam - like the bar to be an attorney or your board exams to become a CFA - and you over prepare and get fantastic results, its not that it was "easy", its that you over prepared.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          going up against Russia proper instead of their hand-me-downs

          ... but Iraqis had Soviet gear and were well equipped.

          without the overwhelming support of the USAF

          Abrams + Bradley segments fought and won without the airforce in their engagements many times.

          >>in a more obscured environment than perfectly flat desert, mitigating its superior optics somewhat

          A lot of it is flat plains and you can see for several KM. No battle situation has ever expected there to never be cover or places to hide. The superior optics is a HUGE advantage, as they can accurately fire upon the Russians from a distance before they even know they were targetted.

          >being used by hastily trained eastern europeans instead of "the army built for WW3"

          Both Russian and Iraqi armies faced systemetic corruption and serious problems with logistics and leadership.

          >>in a combat space littered with drones and atgm's, a grim preceding of what's to come in future wars

          Yes, they are facing heavier losses, which is to be expected, and could have been extrapolated from the Iraq wars.

          GULF WAR WAS 30 YEARS AGO WE ALREDY KNEW IT WAS GOOD.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            not to mention in the head-on fights, western armor won because they out-ranged the T-72s

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Truth be told, the Gulf War WAS in fact a realistic depiction of late 80's USSR vs. America. I think the USSR would have been a bit better led in terms of leadership and logistics, but the head vs. head would have been just as lopsided.

              Even USA seems to have accepted that the Gulf War wasn't a "real" fight, and somehow the Iraqis were just that incompetent. Nope, American gear is really just decades ahead of Soviet gear.

              I really wish the Russians had learned thelessons and did a massive refurbishing project, starting with BMP tin boxes with a massive armor improvement.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >but the head vs. head would have been just as lopsided
                Iraq main tank was T-55, they had no T-64 or T-80, only few T-72. But MOST importantly they had third grade air defense systems, USA wouldn't be able to just fly everything with zero problems

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >third grade air defense systems
                Mathias Rust says "hallo"

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >thoughts?
    Without knowing points of impact it's not possible to make conclusions.
    Missiles may hit vehicle on edge and while technically it's an impact there can be no vehicle insides on the jet path. So even armor fails damage doesn't reach inside

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      he said one impact was the turret and one was middle of the hull

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Kornets penetrate both sides of Bradley right through. So when the troop compartment is empty it counts as "allright"

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      So why didn't it penetrate turret right through?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Where? Post the timestamp.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So why didn't it penetrate turret right through?

          Timestamp of what? This is like the 5th time you posted this itt

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >This is like the 5th time you posted this itt
            So you should know of what.
            > claims the brad ERA stopped 2 kornets

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >the brad ERA stopped 2 kornets
    why say such obvious lie?
    post timestamp in the video

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    [...]

    You think falseflagging like this really fools anybody?

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Survivable

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don’t know of a single other western IFV that would be able to tank 2 kornets

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    You only just figured this out? There is no warriortard

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    QRD on the T-90M engagement
    >engagement was at 150m
    >the first bradley already shot him up and might have blinded the tank
    >they first loaded AP, but seen that it had no effect so they switched to HE to knock out the sensors
    >then they tried to disable the enigne block but it didnt work out
    >they fired about 250 rounds of HE
    >he didnt fire the TOW because they were constantly moving

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Why is the thread low effort? I think it’s pretty cool that the brad survived two kornet hits?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It’s just one guy that’s terminally butthurt about the Bradley

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Judging by its recent performance, I can see why

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      listen anon this far into the war you're basically not allowed to be objective about anything involving US or russian equipment. your thread will be attacked by people taking offense every time.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >the brad ERA stopped 2 kornets
    Judging by the moronic shill seething, this was a lie.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >xaxaxaxaxa T-90M stronker than any weak wectoid tank-ACKKKK

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Is it really that bad to question whether or not a cardboard-tier IFV stopped 2 of Russians highest quality ATGMs?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Let me guess, you too saw Pentagon Wars and took it as the gospel truth?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I've never seen Pentagon Wars because I don't watch shitty war movies. I don't need a Lazerpig shill to suck the Bradley's wiener because they're a contrarian moron.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              oh you gave the game away you fricking moron, now everyone knows exactly how you came to form "your" opinion

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You mentioned Pentagon Wars, it's obvious your opinion isn't yours either, you fricking hypocrite. I'm tired of ukrainetards coming into the board and shitting it up with politics that doesn't belong here. Frick. Off.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I read this in a silly moron's voice.

                Maybe you could just ignore the threads and post in thread #2485245 about waking up in an alternate universe with the last gun you used or thread #6835496 about what MREs you pack when larping.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It's almost every thread at this point. When I blacklist, the threads are all dead. All of the posting is concentrated on pookraine.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >gave the game away
              lol

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Bradley’s have really good armor, especially with BRAT

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Let me guess, you too saw Pentagon Wars and took it as the gospel truth?

        still not posting that timestamp moronic shill

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/mQBIqp4.jpeg

        >gave the game away
        lol

        moron, what do you think you are achieving with this?
        Post the timestamp or shut up moron.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >moron, what do you think you are achieving with this?

          i read this is a silly russian accent

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I read this in a silly moron's voice.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >a Brad and tank two kornets but an abrams can't
    All that shit talking at the motor pool and you perform worse than a box made from beer cans.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > claims the brad ERA stopped 2 kornets
    still no timestamp morons

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You're absolutely buck broken

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        We don’t need to spoonfeed you. It’s funnier this way.

        Because it's a lie you morons.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >it’s a lie
          Do you have anything to back that up? I’ll believe the Bradley crew in Ukraine over you

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >it's a lie because I said so
          How stupid are you?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We don’t need to spoonfeed you. It’s funnier this way.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >still no timestamp
      >still no timestamp
      >still no timestamp>still no timestamp>still no timestamp
      >still no timestamp>still no timestamp>still no timestamp>still no timestamp>still no timestamp>still no timestamp>still no timestamp>still no timestamp
      Watch the video mindbroken zigger
      lol lmao

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        He’s so mad that the Bradley has good armor. Can’t tell if seething Russian or insecure euro

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Its hilarious really. Russians have spent years circle jerking about their armor and how great it is. And when we finally see it in action, their own old cold war era sabot rounds go straight through. And at the same time they were shitting on the Brad when its ERA completely no sells their modern ATGM.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Dont you fricking lump us in with him
          >t. euro

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Where? Post the timestamp.

      [...]
      moron, what do you think you are achieving with this?
      Post the timestamp or shut up moron.

      [...]
      still not posting that timestamp moronic shill

      >the brad ERA stopped 2 kornets
      why say such obvious lie?
      post timestamp in the video

      They start talking about it around 9:35. He got hit once in the turret, gunner got a light concussion, they decided to fall back and reload (says that their onboard atgm didn't work the first time), then came back after a short break and got hit again on the side. It didn't do much as he says they returned on their own power. Claims active armor works real well vs russian atgm. You may now proceed to seethe and call this fake news.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That speaks to how well the Bradley is armored

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    BTW for the seething zigur - I watched video, there is indeed part with kornet, so zigur just mad

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    All I'm getting from this is Americans are very insecure and easily butthurt. Especially when it comes their wonderwaffles.
    lol

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Bradleys perform great
      >americans are butthurt
      ???

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >xaxaxaxaxa PUCCIA is the mighty second army of the world, crush Zelensisraelite in 3 days and take over Kiev

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >wonderwaffles
      Decades old equipment is a wonderweapon now?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >ok fine the ukie crew praised the Bradley’s armor but your mad

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Americans are very insecure and easily butthurt.
      but it's u Ranej who is posting "gim me timestamp reeeeee"x10 itt tho

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >cold war equipment is a wunderwaffe to ziggers
      sad!

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    tonk 🙂

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *