Military Review

BMP-3 vs. Bradley: Armored Infantry Combat

18
Military expert, reserve colonel Vladimir Murakhovsky compared the potentials of two infantry fighting vehicles - the Russian BMP-3 and the American Bradley.

18 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. svp67
    svp67 3 September 2017 16: 59
    +1
    Military expert, reserve colonel Vladimir Murakhovsky compared the potentials of two infantry fighting vehicles - the Russian BMP-3 and the American Bradley.
    Everything is correct, but one ... Dear expert, compared their number for each of the parties. And in what parts are these BMPs used ... None. Their "Bradley" with our BMP-2 must be compared.
    1. woron333444
      woron333444 3 September 2017 20: 39
      +1
      The United States last year had 4500 and 2000 in storage. Russia has about 500 BMP-3, BMP-2 - 4500 and BMP-1 - 1600
  2. Zefr
    Zefr 3 September 2017 20: 58
    +1
    While BMP 3 will try on 100 mm (and what if it’s past? You can’t immediately take a second shot) Bradley stuffs him from his fart.
    1. Disorder
      Disorder 3 September 2017 21: 29
      +5
      laughing Too bold for Bradley to shoot from a hundred, from thirty will perforate.
    2. Dart
      Dart 3 September 2017 21: 51
      +6
      To write, just to write? Our plus to the main one has another twin gun, an automatic gun 2A72 / 30 mm .. And it stuffs even more notably ... than Bradle, 25 mm.
    3. LASER73
      LASER73 4 September 2017 06: 33
      +3
      Zefr, but nothing that a 30 mm automatic gun paired with a 100 mm will smash this nonsense to shreds from one line
      1. Zefr
        Zefr 4 September 2017 07: 03
        0
        I think 30mm Bradley won't take it. Rather, it hurts, but does not destroy.
    4. Captain Pushkin
      Captain Pushkin 4 September 2017 12: 19
      +7
      And what to compare them? For long-range combat, both have ATGMs. For the neighbor - a good automatic gun.
      Whoever gets first is the champion.
      In general, BMP survival depends more on tactics of application, on the quality of interaction of diverse forces, on the quality of staff planning, and, naturally, on the training of crews, than on some design features.
      1. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 6 September 2017 00: 33
        +1
        Well, even if it fires from a 100 mm landmine, 1,6 kg of explosives doesn’t seem enough to blow up on the tower — this is guaranteed to break everything that breaks
  3. Disorder
    Disorder 3 September 2017 21: 32
    0
    What are they hanging on the M3? M2 was about ten tons lighter and swam.
  4. zarus
    zarus 3 September 2017 22: 27
    0
    Military expert, reserve colonel Vladimir Murakhovsky apparently did not watch the comedy "Pentagon War", which was put on a book whose author was a participant in documentary events.

    After acquaintance with such a masterpiece of a respectable person, such a crazy idea how to compare Bradley with anything at all would simply not appear.
  5. datur
    datur 4 September 2017 00: 24
    0
    Bradley created as a counterweight BMP-1 !!! BUT with an American bias !!!! wink
  6. kikot7777777
    kikot7777777 4 September 2017 00: 30
    0
    I’ve seen BMP 3 only in the parade, are they even in the troops? Or is it all exported ??
    1. Valery Saitov
      Valery Saitov 4 September 2017 06: 19
      +1
      Russia - 500 BMP-3; not less than 22 BMP-3s were transferred to ZVO in 2016 under a contract providing for the supply of more than 200 vehicles by the end of 2017. It is also planned to redeem up to 70 BMP-3s, delivered against the public debt of South Korea.
  7. NickiShnapi
    NickiShnapi 4 September 2017 12: 02
    0
    I advise you on the topic to watch the movie "Pentagon Wars" telling about the history of the creation of the BMD "Bradley". According to the author of the film, everything was so))
  8. Boris Chernikov
    Boris Chernikov 6 September 2017 00: 31
    0
    the problem is that the BMP-3 melon is not in the army
  9. Comrade Glebov
    Comrade Glebov 6 September 2017 04: 41
    +2
    I saw this video a hundred years ago. Something not new news. And I don’t see much point in comparing, Russia and the United States will not meet in battle until either side has adequate measures against WMD, and on the battlefield, ultra-precise weapons now rule the ball. If we assume that the BMP-3 will be sent to some particularly "allied allies" who may meet with the US Army, then these vehicles will only have time to leave the parking lot and be immediately shot from the air. If the United States will deliver "Bradley" to the Armed Forces, then in a week they will ride on them militias. Something like this...
  10. IQ12NHJ21az
    IQ12NHJ21az 9 September 2017 13: 04
    +2
    The roller is old. In my opinion, the meaning of comparing BMP-3 and "Bradley" in comparing concepts is more important: armor or weapons. Ideally: tank armor and cannon and floats + 6-8 paratroopers. The West went the way of strengthening armor, we increased firepower with weaker armor, but floating. Which is better difficult to say, different theater requirements have different requirements: for the Middle East, the ability to swim is unnecessary, for the European - a necessity. "Bradley" has turned into a well-protected conveyor with weak weapons, the opposite of our BTR-82A - equal weapons (slightly more powerful), anti-shatter armor. The presence of the ATGM at Bradley does not make it more armed, since the portable ATGM can also be brought to the BTR-82A.