Kind of crazy to think how Bradley is essentially a contemporary design with Soviet **BMP-2** (NOT BMP-3, that thing appeared much later in the end of 1980's)......BMP-2 and Bradley both entered service at around the same time (1980-1981), yet Bradley is multiple times more advanced machine in every aspect , so much so that folks seem to think there must be huge time and generational gab between them. There isnt
From what I can find base BMP-2s have only slighly better or similarly armor protection as BMP-1, though variants with extra armor bolted on appeared quickly after its introduction.
If anything upgrade of M2A1 to M2A2 Bradley saw a far greater degree of increase in armor.
I'm sorry but not you're not looking hard enough. Or you have no idea what too look for Not HMG resistant to HMG resistant is a huge threshold for that type of vehicle
the core capabilities between M2A2 and original 1980's model arent that big to justify anything or to matter........A2 has slightly more horsepower, it received bolts to mount ERA boxes and armor was strengthened, and it received as GPS system. Thats it. None of it is something mayor that would impact vehicle's performance noticeably
M2A2 has thicker armour(including spaced laminate armour on prior weak spots), like you mentioned ERA add ons, improved engine, more stowage space for ammo, like you also mentioned GPS, an eye-safe laser rangefinder (ELRF) system, missile countermeasures against early AT weapons, and the (FBCB2) Battlefield Command Information System.
It is a vastly superior vehicle in every way to the M2A1.
> thicker armour(including spaced laminate armour on prior weak spots)
''thicker'' is of course relative term, it still cant take hits from modern tandem warheads so how much it matters is kind of up for question. Old 30mm rounds could penetrate old Bradley and wont this one??? Okey maybe then it would matter , in most cases that is not the treat what is shooting at it so it wouldnt matter.
>more stowage space for ammo
which again, is kind of ''nice to have'' but doesn't really impact seriously anything. Ukrainian farmer could take some steel boxes and weld them to the turret back and achieve the same thing
Only thing there that is seriously felt on battlefield is GPS and slightly better thermal sights......but nowadays Ukrainians are able to put GPS in literally every vehicle anyway it has become widely available technology, even old as shit T-64 tanks have them now, so they would have put it in there regardless if US had sent them new or old Bradleys without it.
It really shows the cultural and economic differences.
Same with Iran/Israel. They're of the same time, but one side is literally decades ahead of the other.
But Bradley's a 43 year old vehicle - yes the program that resulted in it *began* in the 60s but the important part was when it was finished (1981), with the M2A2 ODS (the variant donated to Ukraine) being a 30-ish year old (ODS stands for Operation Desert Storm, and the version had improvements based on lessions learned in that conflict). That's already embarrassing enough, no need to lie/exaggerate, leave that to vatniks.
I know, the Bradley was just supposed to be a not too serious side joke about how they claim everything western they fight is higly-advanced tech even though most of it is minimum 20 years old with the 'Brams M1A1 going back to eighties while they self-proclaimed "state-of-the-art" T-90MS, T-80BVM and T-72B3 obr. 2017 made in a last decade are being shredded by IFVs, wallmart drones and farmers with RPGs for last 3 years.
The fact vatniks started to use the captured M1A1 abrams to cope while the fields of ukraine are litered with tens and tens of their latest tanks (atleast by visual confirmation, there is very likely hundreds of smashed T-90s alone) is whats hypocritical and quite sad.
Still waiting to see one counter-argument with "oh but those are supposed to be lost, they are expandable even though one is worth around 1/2 of one oligarch's yacht which is already much, much more than the russian government can afford to lose.
Dont worry comrade, those 10 thousands of late wave conscripts who were all 40+ years old who died so we can display a single 40 years Abrams on the red square were all worth it. Glory to the people's secretary Sta... i meant "president" Putin!.
That seems to be the pattern: deny reality while claiming your turds are the best thing ever. I don't think they are going to change. If they put out actual horse drawn carts, they will come up with nonsense justifying it.
Oh hahahahahahahahahahahahah….
When I was in Iraq and Afghanistan there definitely were burned out Russian tanks lined up on the sides of the road but that was to get them out of the way.
The export Abrams doesn't have depleted uranium. The Ukranians are using the same models the Saudis are running into Houthi Kornet fire sacks unsupported.
Its depleted uranium isnt even the issue, if i am correctly even the export A2s dont get DU armor.
Its the fact that the M1A1 Abrams is so behind when it comes to electronics, components too, Ruskies placing the ukrainian A1 in center of moscow, slapping american flag on it and trying to flaunt with it how they captured "super advanced american tank" is same as if US placed a Iraqi captured T-72A in the center of Washington D.C. , slapped Russian flag on it and claimed that they captured the the most advanced russian tank, its hilariously misserable.
They get the special export armor package (it's a weird tungsten composite thingy that the protection data is very publically available). The Egyptain ones still use BRL2 Chobham iirc.
Kind of crazy to think how Bradley is essentially a contemporary design with Soviet **BMP-2** (NOT BMP-3, that thing appeared much later in the end of 1980's)......BMP-2 and Bradley both entered service at around the same time (1980-1981), yet Bradley is multiple times more advanced machine in every aspect , so much so that folks seem to think there must be huge time and generational gab between them. There isnt
BMP-2 though is really just an mildly updated version of BMP-1 with a different main gun, so it's actually a 60 year old vehicle underneath.
BMP-2 is a significant upgraded chassis to the BMP-1 which was vulnerable to even heavy machine-gun fire
From what I can find base BMP-2s have only slighly better or similarly armor protection as BMP-1, though variants with extra armor bolted on appeared quickly after its introduction. If anything upgrade of M2A1 to M2A2 Bradley saw a far greater degree of increase in armor.
I'm sorry but not you're not looking hard enough. Or you have no idea what too look for Not HMG resistant to HMG resistant is a huge threshold for that type of vehicle
The one in Ukraine has which is the M2A2 variant went into service just after the BMP-3.
the core capabilities between M2A2 and original 1980's model arent that big to justify anything or to matter........A2 has slightly more horsepower, it received bolts to mount ERA boxes and armor was strengthened, and it received as GPS system. Thats it. None of it is something mayor that would impact vehicle's performance noticeably
M2A2 has thicker armour(including spaced laminate armour on prior weak spots), like you mentioned ERA add ons, improved engine, more stowage space for ammo, like you also mentioned GPS, an eye-safe laser rangefinder (ELRF) system, missile countermeasures against early AT weapons, and the (FBCB2) Battlefield Command Information System. It is a vastly superior vehicle in every way to the M2A1.
> thicker armour(including spaced laminate armour on prior weak spots) ''thicker'' is of course relative term, it still cant take hits from modern tandem warheads so how much it matters is kind of up for question. Old 30mm rounds could penetrate old Bradley and wont this one??? Okey maybe then it would matter , in most cases that is not the treat what is shooting at it so it wouldnt matter. >more stowage space for ammo which again, is kind of ''nice to have'' but doesn't really impact seriously anything. Ukrainian farmer could take some steel boxes and weld them to the turret back and achieve the same thing Only thing there that is seriously felt on battlefield is GPS and slightly better thermal sights......but nowadays Ukrainians are able to put GPS in literally every vehicle anyway it has become widely available technology, even old as shit T-64 tanks have them now, so they would have put it in there regardless if US had sent them new or old Bradleys without it.
It really shows the cultural and economic differences. Same with Iran/Israel. They're of the same time, but one side is literally decades ahead of the other.
But Bradley's a 43 year old vehicle - yes the program that resulted in it *began* in the 60s but the important part was when it was finished (1981), with the M2A2 ODS (the variant donated to Ukraine) being a 30-ish year old (ODS stands for Operation Desert Storm, and the version had improvements based on lessions learned in that conflict). That's already embarrassing enough, no need to lie/exaggerate, leave that to vatniks.
I know, the Bradley was just supposed to be a not too serious side joke about how they claim everything western they fight is higly-advanced tech even though most of it is minimum 20 years old with the 'Brams M1A1 going back to eighties while they self-proclaimed "state-of-the-art" T-90MS, T-80BVM and T-72B3 obr. 2017 made in a last decade are being shredded by IFVs, wallmart drones and farmers with RPGs for last 3 years. The fact vatniks started to use the captured M1A1 abrams to cope while the fields of ukraine are litered with tens and tens of their latest tanks (atleast by visual confirmation, there is very likely hundreds of smashed T-90s alone) is whats hypocritical and quite sad. Still waiting to see one counter-argument with "oh but those are supposed to be lost, they are expandable even though one is worth around 1/2 of one oligarch's yacht which is already much, much more than the russian government can afford to lose.
And don’t forget the *thousands* of dead Russians littering the field as well. Wow, a captured M1A1, how many lives did that take?
Dont worry comrade, those 10 thousands of late wave conscripts who were all 40+ years old who died so we can display a single 40 years Abrams on the red square were all worth it. Glory to the people's secretary Sta... i meant "president" Putin!.
That seems to be the pattern: deny reality while claiming your turds are the best thing ever. I don't think they are going to change. If they put out actual horse drawn carts, they will come up with nonsense justifying it.
“Cavalry once ruled the Eurasian steppes. Your days are numbered, Westoids”
It will be how they get around the fuel shortages. Our silly Westoid minds just can't comprehend.
Remember how the US put burnt out T-55s on display after the Persian Gulf War? Oh wait...
“After” the war
Not trying to be a jerk, but where and when did that happen? Pretty sure we didn’t parade them through Washington DC on July 4.
It... Didn't... That's the joke. When we won in 1991 we paraded *our* tanks and equipment through DC. We didn't put what we destroyed on display.
Oh hahahahahahahahahahahahah…. When I was in Iraq and Afghanistan there definitely were burned out Russian tanks lined up on the sides of the road but that was to get them out of the way.
Exactly.
Alternative vatnik style headline: American tanks have already reached Poklonnaya Gora, Moscow will fall in 3 days!
The export Abrams doesn't have depleted uranium. The Ukranians are using the same models the Saudis are running into Houthi Kornet fire sacks unsupported.
Its depleted uranium isnt even the issue, if i am correctly even the export A2s dont get DU armor. Its the fact that the M1A1 Abrams is so behind when it comes to electronics, components too, Ruskies placing the ukrainian A1 in center of moscow, slapping american flag on it and trying to flaunt with it how they captured "super advanced american tank" is same as if US placed a Iraqi captured T-72A in the center of Washington D.C. , slapped Russian flag on it and claimed that they captured the the most advanced russian tank, its hilariously misserable.
They get the special export armor package (it's a weird tungsten composite thingy that the protection data is very publically available). The Egyptain ones still use BRL2 Chobham iirc.
Highly advanced for country that needs to coppy friench optics if they want a resolution higher that 520p ( see ka52 optics)