Hold on, hold on....are you daring to imply that slavs will be less than exacting and impeccable in their maintenance of equipment? Where is there any evidence of soviet block countries treating their equipment with anything less and completely loving care and replacing parts as needed with the correct parts?
No I'm implying that Russian AFV's can operate with more bits missing and poorer maintenance programs. Of course they will still brake down and suffer losses from poor maintenance as we've all seen. But not at the rate the Bradleys/Marder will if they are neglected. Also as I've already covered it's much easier to work on a lighter vehicle especially in the field without proper equipment. Soviet AFV crews can do most repairs inhouse with what they have. Bradleys require workshops with proper lifts/equipment. Sure you can fix road wheels and track links. But try replacing an engine and gearbox on a Bradley in the field or diagnosing a hydraulic failure. On the other hand this is not such a problem for BTR/BMP's especially when there is plenty of donor vehicle's laying around and you don't need as much specialist gear to remove engines etc (a block and tackle with suffice).
Fun fact in WW2 soviet T34 crews would carry extra gearboxes or engines on their rear decks to swap out during battle, apparently the thing was a bastard for gearbox failure.
Again, its bradleys hit by IEDs usually of the daisy chained 155 variety. anything short of an MBT won't take that. That's not 30mm autocannon, or even RPGs. No BMPs are armed with 155mm guns, so modern ATGM asside, the odds of a bradley crew walking away from an encounter with a BMP vs the opposite heavily favor the bradley vs. the rolling coffins of a BMP.
No one is saying the bradley is a tank; you detonate a 155 under a BMP and I doubt there is enough to take pictures of. That's also not saying that Yook officers won't be retarded and deploy it AS a tank instead of a recon vehicle as intended. But those are faults of retarded officers, not the vehicle. Its not designed to take even a direct T-72 hit, the T-72 is supposed to be too worried about the big tank the bradley is directing to try to put rounds on the bradley.
Solid agree that if the conflict drags on I don't see Ukraine getting enough spare parts to keep over half of them running after a year. But if they are smart about how they use them, they could do a lot damage.
yeah, yeah, "smart" and "slav" in the same sentance.
It entirely depends on the variant of BMP and crew skill.
Yes the Bradley has the advantage in being able to engage at longer distances but only if the crew are capable, it's not a video game where you point a crosshair and pull the trigger (even though that's what you do) at 3000m the M242 is going to be near the limit of its effective range and a fresh crew will be missing target by meters.
The BMP 1 - Has a low pressure 76mm gun and under 1800m with a HEAT round will mission kill a Bradley (worse if it has stored TOW's), but that low pressure gun was never meant for AFV's more soft skinned vehicle's and dug in infantry positions. So Bradley wins at range but is venerable within close distances. Especially a rear or side shot, also their turret has a terrible shot trap.
BMP 2 - Single 2A42 30mm auto cannon. Similar scenario as BMP 1. If the Bradley gets within 2000m its smoked. If it engages at range it wins all day. You know what a A-10 Warthog is right? well the 2A42 fires a round only 8mm smaller in length than it's GAU8 .. you do the math on how it works on armoured vehicles.
BMP3 - 100mm low pressure gun capable of firing ATGM and a co-axel 2A42 30mm cannon. This thing will fuck up Bradley's all day... can engage at superior ranges and has a much smaller target silhouette. It can comfortable engage targets out to 4500mm with its rifled cannon and that's with shells. It's ATGM's can hit out to 6000m (weather and terrain permitting of course). The BGM 71 TOW has an effective range of 3000m (4500m if fired from an air platform ie helicopter), Same for the 25mm bushmaster at 3500m.
Regarding IFV's and IED's of course they get fucked up, nothing is surviving even a single 155mm going off underneath it.
The US lost 150 Bradley's in Iraq most to IED's but also recoilless rifles and later RPG systems (rpg 29 etc).
Fair enough the Bradley is going to be fine tanking RPG 7 hits. But its not going to soak up 30mm cannon fire from a 2A42...
Also remember soon as the Bradley's optics system is knocked out its done same thing if it's tracked. The Bradleys main problem is not going to be catastrophic kills but mission kills.
I'm not shitting on the Bradley far from it. It's just not going to get used correctly and too its full potential where it would be a massive threat especially combined with MBT support. It needs the in field support that only the US can provide.
I will agree the BMP is a death trap, if you didn't already know the fuel tanks run along either side of the troop compartment, and tend to flood said troop compartment with fiery death when hit. It's also extremely cramped so getting out under duress isn't exactly easy especially if your on fire...
Sorry in advance for the essay.
markets.businessinsider.com
