"Bradley vs T-90" Topic

Saw this on Denys Davidov's vlog – YouTube link

Russian T-90 is firing to the side, Ukrainian Bradley finds itself in vicinity of T-90, drives across the front of the T-90 while firing at pointblank range, T-90 fires but misses

Bradley engages again at medium range, just pours fire into the T-90, T-90 has some kind of damage, crashes into tree, turret keeps rotating (crew evacuated). T-90 finished off by drones.

Seems to have been two Bradley's and the T-90 crew missed three times in total. Opinion seems to be that side penetrations did for the driver – hence the somewhat erratic final movements and that the optics and turret controls were also probably wrecked.

Sounds like the title for an Osprey book….

FWIW – The M2 packs 2 TOW missiles in a sponson on the turret. With max. range of 3750m. The T-90's main gun may have a max. range of 2500m + or -.

Plus, the M2's 25mm chain gun can pour out a lot of fire with AT & APERs rds. The rounds hitting an MBT will do some damage and keep the crew from operating effectively. With all that fire coming in. Regardless, this demonstrates the poor crew quality of the Russian armor … again …

And of course, drones again prove their usefulness.

I have seen several Bradley videos out of Ukraine and it seems to be doing a good job in combat.

Bunkermeister

In war there are various accidents. One should not draw general conclusions from individual situations. Consider the destruction of an American B-52 Abrams tank from the 64th Tank Regiment of the 2nd Brigade, 3rd Infantry Division during the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The tank was destroyed by fire from an ancient Soviet DShK machine gun.

The Russians already have a lot of captured, serviceable Bradleys; I've seen videos of at least six of them. Some were sent to design bureaus for study, some to museums, and the rest were sent to the troops. Here is a video about another recently captured car. The guys from the repair battalion took her right out of no man's land under enemy fire, for which they received awards. The vehicle is currently undergoing repairs and will soon take its place in the ranks of the Russian army.

link

"Bradley" in Russian service:

link

I have never heard of a DsHk knocking out an M1 ? BTW It's not a B-52 Abrams, a B-52 is a USAF bomber still flying missions. But yes a few M1s were lost in the Gulf Wars.

It is no doubt that some of Ukraine's M2 Bradley IFVs were captured. However, the US is replacing it with a better IFV.

As I noted the M2 IFV in Iraq, their TOW missiles were taking out Russian made tanks, APCs, etc. very easily at ranges over 3000m.

And again never heard about a Heavy MG like the DshK KO'ing an M1.

B-52 is the tactical number of the tank in the unit. You can see it in one of the photos. A DShK bullet damaged the auxiliary gasoline engine on the turret, after which burning fuel leaked into the engine-transport compartment. There was a fire.
Miracles happen)))
The fact that you have not heard about this story is natural. Any army does not like to advertise its failures.

By the way, the "Bradley" in the video with the repairmen is the newest one – it was released last year and at the time of capture had a mileage of only 240 km. Captured in December last year.

And yes, Arabs are unimportant soldiers. Perhaps, except for the Houthis. For example, I would not draw conclusions about the qualities of American equipment based on the results of operation in the Arab armies ;-)

As far as one can judge from the war in Ukraine, even the old Soviet technology has shown itself to be very worthy – no worse than Western models (it is used by both sides of the conflict). And the Ukrainian tank crews were delighted with the captured Russian T-90, judging by their interviews.

I don't see the tank's "bumper" or turret number in any of the photos. You did not make that clear ?

If the DShK hit a gas tank it was a very rare occurrence. We call that a "luck shot" … But to use a Hvy MG as an AT weapon is not always a good idea. However, it can do minor damage on the hull and turret external devices, etc. BTW the US M2 .50 cal. HMG can take out BMPs on the flack and rear. We used to practice on plywood outlines on the range. Those would not be luck shots …

Interestingly the M1 has a fire suppression system to automatically spray foam to stop the fire in a few seconds. Must not have been working ?

Yes, the USA is still producing M2 Bradleys as a replacement has not been selected yet.

link

As what occurred like the older US M60 MBT series, the M2 is being sent/bought by some US allies etc.

Croatia: 22 delivered of 89 units ordered in M2A2 ODS variant costing $196.4 USD million

Lebanon: 32 M2A2

Russia: One Bradley captured by Russian troops with some Bradley Reactive Armor Tiles (BRAT) explosive reactive armor bricks. [That number may have changed]

Saudi Arabia: 400

Ukraine – 186 M2A2 ODS SA Bradleys were delivered from April 2023 onwards.

United States: 6,230 total, 1420 M2 Bradleys in operation with the US Army as of August 2023

The photo shows the same tank (in fact, there are several more photos of this episode). The bottom photo on the side of the tank is number 52. I am not familiar with the American tactical designation system, but I suspect that the letter "B" is a designation for a squad or platoon…
On new modifications of the Abrams, the auxiliary gasoline engine is replaced by electric batteries. It is possible, taking into account the incident described.

It's funny that Wikipedia says that one Bradley was captured, although two Bradleys and one Leopard were captured immediately (back in the summer, at the beginning of the Ukrainian offensive). Even then I posted a video where one of the Bradleys was standing with the engine running.

By the way, there are rumors that the other day two Abrams were destroyed. But I have not yet seen any reliable confirmation of this information.

B = Company, i.e. Bravo Co.

52 = is the actual vehicle number.

the auxiliary gasoline engine is replaced by electric batteries. It is possible, taking into account the incident described.

Yes the new M1 upgrade has a number of improvements. They are upgraded/rebuilt at a big factory about an hour from where I live. I had heard about the replacement of batteries instead of gas. As since 2003 many improvements have
occurred.

As we know, no weapons system is invulnerable, so some M1s, M2 Bradleys, Leos, etc. could have been KO'd or captured.

Naturally… I read one award document from the Second World War, which describes an episode when a soldier, with a single shot from a rifle, in front of many witnesses, shot down a Messerschmitt 109, which was storming ground troops. Lucky shot.
Anything can happen in war. Even something that cannot exist)))

A lucky shot being a mortar bomb that landed in the drivers hatch of a Tiger in Normandy, they do happen. The Bradly vs T-90 was not luck, good skills on the part of the Ukrainians verses the slack fascist invaders,

Tally Ho!

I've read about similar Cuprum … Big Sky … Little Bullet it is said … but sometimes 💩 happens …

nick +1

Once again, we see a weapon system is only as good as its crew …

No one in Russia ever believed that Ukrainians were bad soldiers. This time they behaved very well and I hope they will be rewarded according to their merit. Underestimating the enemy is a direct path to defeat.
The more valiant and professional the enemy, the more glorious the victory will be)))

So, Ukraine's victory isn't going to be glorious, is what I'm hearing.

Cuprum +1

Yeah, at this point on both sides' losses will be high. With the body count/losses much heavier for the Russians. There will be no parades. Putin may have small parade in Red Square with the remnants of his forces. Maybe … ?

May they all RIP …

Oh… How tired I am of fairy tales about "huge Russian losses")))

B52? I don't think so unless the Army seriously changed stuff since I've been out. B IS B company, but 52 is silly. The digit where the 5 is should be the platoon designation. US tank companies don't have 5 platoons. 65 and 66 were used for the CO and XO, but beyond that it 1-3 platoon and 1-4 tank. IE D34 is Delta company's 3rd Platoon, 4th tank (the platoon sergeant's track)

Oh, and it's said Delta three four.

Another angle of T-90M being hit by M2A2 "Bradley" in Stepove

link

Errr..sorry to burst your bubble there Cuprum but that tank was not "destroyed " by a Dshk .. it could have been repaired but with the speed of the US advance, they chose to make it inoperable… Russian tanks normally pop their turret at the first sigh of fire

Oh… How tired we are of fairy tales about "huge Ukrainian losses")))

Tally Ho!

This is how I remember it. Back '79-'90 …

B = Company, i.e. Bravo Co.

52 = is the actual vehicle number.

Now how they came up with 52 I don't know. Some units may do things a little differently at times. But I was not there. None of us were. So more intel is needed … and/or better pictures …

Backstab +1

If that is an accurate assessment of the damages on "B-52". Yes, it certainly can be repaired. When the time permits.

backstab, a lot can be repaired. But for this you need to have such an opportunity)))
If American tanks are so wonderful, then why are they still kept in Ukraine so far from the front lines? Perhaps because they don't want the myth to collapse, as happened with the German "Leopards" and the British "Challengers", which in reality did not show themselves in any way?

By the way, the rumors about two destroyed Abrams turned out to be false – they were the unfortunate Leopards again.

nickinsomerset, we cannot know anything reliably about Ukrainian losses. But we can see that in Ukraine people are being caught en masse on the streets to be sent to the army, that disabled and sick people are being drafted into the army, that Ukraine is demanding the extradition of refugees of military age… These are facts. And what they mean, everyone can draw their own conclusions)))
Oh yes, and Zaluzhny also said that he lacks 500 thousand soldiers. Before last year's "Counter-Offensive" he did not have such a need, as far as I remember ;-)

No one here has ever said Western Equipment was invulnerable… but it is a hell of a lot better than the claptrap used by the Nazis..ooops Russians. You do understand that the reason why the western equipment is generally held back is for training and used to counter Russian breakthroughs… rare as they be ….

"… which in reality did not show themselves in any way?…"

Because there are a side of this war that is not that stupid…

Armand

Tango +1

backstab +1

And again, the Russians do Not know how to fight modern combined arms maneuver warfare. It was clear on the first few days of this conflict.

"These are facts" ,anything coming from Russian or pro Russian sources can hardly be assessed as fact,

Tally Ho!

nick +1

One can see most Russian reports, comments, etc. carry more lies than the truth. Much of what they say is clearly propaganda and yes, lies.

Good job here…

More here

link

Armand

Oh I like it ! Love the digital camo ! The Army is planning on replacing the TOW missiles carried in the M2's turret sponson. The TOW came out about 50 years ago. First used in Vietnam mounted on AH-1 Cobra Gunships. Killed many NVA tanks that were deployed toward the end of the war. E.g. at the Battle of An Loc in 1972 …

The TOW's long range of 3750m on the M2s in Iraq reportedly killed more enemy MBTs, etc. than US MBTs killed. As the range of the MBTs was about 2500m. But … the MBT has a higher rate of fire …

The US is also going to replace the M2 Bradley as well in the future.

Love the digital camo !

Me too, but I think the Ukrainians typically cover it up with reactive armor blocks.

Face To Face With A Russian T-90 Tank, A Ukrainian M-2 Fighting Vehicle Ran Out Of Armor-Piercing Ammo. So Its Gunner Got Creative.

Forbes: link

* the Bradley crew was fresh out of training
* the T-90 driver was captured
* the Bradleys are having some issues due to cold weather

I think you are correct Bill. I've seen them with ERA too in photos from there.

* the Bradley crew was fresh out of training

They are very much more well trained, motivated and led than the Russians, as we see.

* the T-90 driver was captured

He must be very relieved …

* the Bradleys are having some issues due to cold weather

That should be an easy fix. They were designed to fight in Western Europe and Korea. Both have cold winters. I'd like to see how this maintenance situation works out.

RTX contract boosts US Army's Bradley Fighting Vehicle with battlefield vision

link

Armand