Israeli defense: thousands of Bradley will not receive ADZ


In the face of an increasing threat to armored vehicles on the modern battlefield, the Pentagon decided to bet on giving its combat vehicles active dynamic protection. To help in this endeavor, Israel spoke out. However, the improvement process went far from smoothly. About it writes The War Zone.


Problem protection


According to the publication, the Pentagon in recent years has noted an ever-growing threat of the use of anti-tank weapons, especially in the event of a conflict with a great power such as Russia. At the same time, Israel is a pioneer in the development of anti-tank missile defense technologies. His KAZ Trophy from Rafael is already installed on the US Abrams M1 tanks.

In these conditions, the U.S. Army in December 2018 chose the Israeli company Elbit to equip the Bradley BMP with an active protection system (ADZ) Iron Fist Light. However, in 2019, the Pentagon discovered problems with its placement on this type of military equipment.

Bradley A3 does not generate enough power to operate ADS

- said in a report by the DOT & E department, while noting that the A4 modification is suitable for equipping with Israeli protection, but only after its completion.

At the same time, a limited number of the Bradley fleet is being upgraded to level A4, which has an auxiliary power unit. The company BAE Systems, responsible for improving the BMP, was tasked to improve only 641 units of equipment. This represents less than 15% of the total number of Bradley currently in operation.

Israeli defense: thousands of Bradley will not receive ADZ

Arrangement of the various components of the Iron Fist Light system on the Bradley


"Bradley" with active dynamic protection will be released during the upgrade in the amount of only four "brigade sets." They are not intended for specific units and will be available to the units in need. One of these “kits” is supposed to be constantly kept in Europe.

The Bradley family currently has two main options: "the M2 infantry fighting vehicle and the M3 cavalry fighting vehicle." Among the American units, about 4,5 pieces of equipment of these two types are scattered, and about 2 thousand are in storage. Some of them were brought to version A3, which is not suitable for the placement of the Israeli defense.

According to The War Zone, the limited scale equipment of the "Bradley" ADZ can be dictated by the Pentagon's desire to say goodbye to this BMP. The U.S. War Department intends to focus on creating a combat vehicle of the future - OMFV. Especially considering that Bradley, developed many years ago, is getting worse at updating its capabilities. This proves история with the installation of Israeli protection.

Photos used:
https://www.thedrive.com/
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

47 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Victor_B 4 February 2020 03: 47 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    Pleasure is expensive even for warriors of the world!
    I think around this and the installation of KAZ on our armored vehicles stalls ...
    At the same time, it seems that the Israelis successfully tested the Trophy system in battle.
    In general - money rules a tank the world!
    1. Private-K 4 February 2020 09: 36 New
      • 1
      • 2
      -1
      Expensive, yes. Even very expensive. And it requires special maintenance. Which is also additional to the existing one.
      But if we talk about the Russian Ministry of Defense, then, as soon as it found out that it is possible to make such a KAZ, that it will bring down subcaliber crowbars, only such a KAZ wants it.

      And do not forget about the laws deduced by Clausewitz, who, in our case, will get the following reading: the sooner one side begins to equip its BTZ KAZ, the faster the other side takes care of the development and delivery of means to overcome this KAZ. Dialectic, unified.
      Therefore, from a certain point of view, it is simply advantageous to bustle-twist-twirl-confuse, and then it’s quick and easy to equip BTZ KAZ.

      Yes, still, I can, here, be mistaken, but it turns out that one of them was growing. KAZ manufacturers are better at one element and another at the other. Combining them is a non-trivial task - but it seems that they are doing it.

      PS By the way, we note that, again, the American high-tech megacorporations again "didn’t", and the key components of KAZ were created, according to unverified data, by small Israeli firms - in fact, clubs of engineers.
      1. stone 4 February 2020 10: 03 New
        • 4
        • 1
        +3
        small Israeli firms - in fact, clubs of engineers? So you are interested in the revenue of these firms at your leisure, that is, the Internet. More than many Russian corporations will be!
  2. Uncle lee 4 February 2020 03: 52 New
    • 6
    • 2
    +4
    Beautiful cartoons! The fly will not fly ....
    1. Lexus 4 February 2020 05: 14 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      I dare to express doubts that the reaction time of the rotary launcher contributes to the confident interception of the BOPS (it’s the last one in the video) ... Unless it is preliminarily aimed at the identified source of danger or laser radiation, for example, a tank rangefinder.
    2. Victor_B 4 February 2020 07: 02 New
      • 4
      • 1
      +3
      Quote: Uncle Lee
      Beautiful cartoons!

      Well, you are a padded jacket!
      Cartoons from Putin, and here are super weapons!
      1. Uncle lee 4 February 2020 07: 06 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Quote: Victor_B
        padded jacket!

        You know better ! Although, I have this item of clothing for special occasions ... good
        1. Victor_B 4 February 2020 07: 08 New
          • 0
          • 1
          -1
          Quote: Uncle Lee
          I have this item of clothing for special occasions ...

          But I do not have ....
          Sorrow ...
          1. Karaul73 4 February 2020 07: 57 New
            • 0
            • 6
            -6
            Horse Get it.
  3. eklmn 4 February 2020 04: 00 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    “The Pentagon in recent years has noted an ever-growing threat of the use of anti-tank weapons, especially in the event of a conflict with great power such as Russia. ”
    And these are the words of the Pentagon? “Great Power”? Unbelievable! I got scared, I guess! It’s just a good time to bomb it!
    1. Krasnodar 4 February 2020 04: 19 New
      • 9
      • 4
      +5
      Only after the fall of the dollar and the eruption of Yellowstone!
      1. bessmertniy 4 February 2020 05: 45 New
        • 3
        • 2
        +1
        The vulnerability of armored vehicles is today's reality. Here it is not a matter of whether the Pentagon was frightened or not. Modern protection systems are needed so that in the event of a serious conflict not to lose armor in a matter of days, as has happened more than once in modern history. The fact that the problem seriously affected the US Army is indicative. This is probably not without the prompting of the Ishilovites who successfully burned the Abrams in Iraq. Well, we need to keep up with this issue. hi
        1. Krasnodar 4 February 2020 06: 45 New
          • 7
          • 2
          +5
          Good morning!
          Abrams punched from the side or from the back - so you can burn any technique that exists in the world today. The question is, what is more expensive - training a new crew + equipment repair (if it is to be repaired after being hit) or KAZ.
  4. letinant 4 February 2020 04: 30 New
    • 9
    • 3
    +6
    At the same time, Israel is a pioneer in the development of anti-tank missile defense technologies.

    Fuck off! Development of KAZ in Israel began in the late 90s. Development in the Soviet Union began in the 70s and spilled over into the Rain complex, then the 80s Drozd, then the beginning of the 90s Arena.
    1. stone 4 February 2020 10: 08 New
      • 3
      • 4
      -1
      So what?! Was there anything in the series? The question is, who on serial tanks, in the army has been introduced KAZ for many years? Israel has Merkava, and now they have gone to other Western armored vehicles, and very actively!
      1. Xenofont 4 February 2020 10: 56 New
        • 2
        • 4
        -2
        Thrush stood on serial in limited quantities. Take an interest first, and then say out loud. It was produced for 6 years and was installed on the T-55A. So, screwed up!
        1. stone 4 February 2020 14: 43 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          How many divisions? Where, as shown, there is nothing! In limited quantities, is it like 2 pieces or 3? Well assigned the name T-55AD and so what? So you yourself ...
          1. Xenofont 4 February 2020 15: 15 New
            • 1
            • 2
            -1
            Look and find ... 6 years of the series are not impressive. Then further is pointless.
            1. stone 4 February 2020 17: 32 New
              • 1
              • 2
              -1
              Previously, everything was pointless for you too hi
              1. Xenofont 4 February 2020 17: 35 New
                • 0
                • 2
                -2
                Just decided to scratch your tongue without arguments and facts? They found a good place ... Divorced you ...
                1. stone 5 February 2020 08: 54 New
                  • 1
                  • 1
                  0
                  And how much you got divorced! 6 years of production - how many thousands, or at least hundreds of produced tanks? laughing Where in and in what units in the troops were these tanks operated? Will the answers or scratch your tongue?
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. honest people 4 February 2020 05: 02 New
    • 2
    • 8
    -6
    The article is just about nothing.
  7. rocket757 4 February 2020 05: 06 New
    • 5
    • 3
    +2
    And yet, what are the Yankees preparing for?
    If suddenly the war with the “Great Power”, the variety of weapons of destruction of armored vehicles will be great, you can’t protect much from everything and these “firewood” of Bradley will burn, like everything else, however.
    But for use in a small, small-town conflict, it can all be more, less effective.
  8. Thrifty 4 February 2020 05: 32 New
    • 7
    • 5
    +2
    Firstly, the obvious lie-Israel is in no way a "pioneer in the development of KAZ" !!! He is so far the leader in the number of installed and sold KAZs! Secondly, as long as there are no exact facts, except for the video of dubious quality, and the statements of the Israeli military confirming the effectiveness of these complexes of Israeli production. And field tests are for show, they can not imitate a real battle. ..
    1. Krasnodar 4 February 2020 05: 37 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      Come on you - Americans want to buy - so let them buy laughing
      Maybe they were given a rollback ..
  9. rotmistr60 4 February 2020 06: 23 New
    • 2
    • 1
    +1
    One of these "sets" is supposed keep constantly in Europe.
    So it is clear - next to a great power, with which the Americans are still planning to fight sooner or later. I doubt that they think about Russia's plans to seize Europe (nevertheless, there are sensible people in the Pentagon). So they themselves are waiting for the opportunity that our country vryatli provide them.
    Bradley A3 does not generate enough power to operate ADS
    Then the question is - why start an expensive event if it requires additional improvements? Or really pressed, or corruption component.
  10. Vitaly Tsymbal 4 February 2020 06: 35 New
    • 5
    • 2
    +3
    Thoughts aloud ... There is much to write about the need to install the latest, sophisticated and MOST IMPORTANT ROADS in the FINANCIAL PLAN of active protection systems for armored vehicles, though forgetting that the current generation of the same infantry fighting vehicles (in all armies) was developed on the concept of front-line combined arms combat, and not in raid operations, which (not counting military clashes in the Donbass) are the main tactical actions of ground units. The Israeli system is quite suitable for tactical raids when a group of militants of 3-7 people fires at an armored vehicle (fired and fled), but it’s hard to say how such protection will lead in a frontal battle. It’s one thing when 1 ATGM (or RPG) calculation is fired against BT, another thing is if the fire is fired not only from ATGMs or RPGs, but also from artillery systems (including MLRS) using a battery or a battalion at “distant frontiers” - a march , and in close combat, except for ATGMs (RPGs) with large-caliber rapid-fire small arms that do not penetrate armor, but can disable sensors, sights, etc. mounted on armor, turning military equipment into a tractor or "armored vehicle". Whether modern systems are capable of actively resisting to be effective in frontal combat is a question to which there is no answer today, a proven battle. Therefore, all these troubles with active protective equipment are quite suitable only for raid ground operations. Therefore, the Americans do not equip all BMPs with such systems, probably realizing that a strong enemy (Russia, China, India) cannot be defeated by raids.
    1. Maki Avellevich 4 February 2020 06: 59 New
      • 2
      • 3
      -1
      Quote: Vitaliy Tsymbal
      It’s one thing when 1 ATGM (or RPG) calculation is fired against BT, another thing is if the fire is fired not only from ATGMs or RPGs, but also from artillery systems (including MLRS) using a battery or a battalion at “distant frontiers” - a march

      there are statistics of defeats. repel from it.
      I think so! (from)
      1. Vitaly Tsymbal 4 February 2020 07: 15 New
        • 4
        • 3
        +1
        Dear Dmitry, statistics is not a military science ... According to statistics, the Hussites with their primitive drones should not have “punched” the American “patriots” in Saudi Arabia ....
        1. Operator 4 February 2020 10: 13 New
          • 5
          • 2
          +3
          Dmitry is right - the statistics of successful / unsuccessful use of anti-tank weapons is the basis for the development of a particular defense.

          The incomplete equipment of the available fleet of BMD "Bradley" "Iron Fest" is associated with the limited capabilities of the latter to intercept the attacking PTRS and RPGs - a relatively long reaction time to turn the launcher towards the approaching munition.

          The U.S. Army is clearly expecting a better solution.
          1. Vitaly Tsymbal 4 February 2020 14: 47 New
            • 2
            • 2
            0
            Dear Andrey! At one time, I had to shoot a lot from the RPG-7 range and a couple of times from the 9M14M Malyut ATGM on the BMP 1, so I know that the successful or unsuccessful use of the RPG-7 and ATGM largely depends on the experience of the grenade launcher, and not from the grenade launcher itself. The human factor, unfortunately, statistics are not able to fully take into account. This is the first. The second - the tank and infantry fighting vehicles for combat use, and armor are completely different vehicles. It is much easier to create a tank with an airborne squad than an infantry fighting vehicle with tank armor ....
            1. Operator 4 February 2020 15: 11 New
              • 4
              • 3
              +1
              From the moment the KAZ is designed to intercept RPGs, ATGMs, homing aviation ammunition and BPS, tanks and infantry fighting vehicles will need armor that can withstand small-caliber shells and fragments of large-caliber shells.

              The Soviet KAZ Shater at the end of the 1980s already intercepted artillery caliber shells at a speed of 900 m / s.

              The developers of "Afganita" and "Iron Festa" claim that they have already learned how to intercept BOPS - they lie, don’t they? laughing
              1. Vitaly Tsymbal 4 February 2020 16: 17 New
                • 1
                • 2
                -1
                All my only "life experience" with active protection of the tank was in 1990 (T-55a modernized in Czechoslovakia with active protection installed). When the deputy commander of the regiment (and he had just arrived from the academy) I asked - "How does it work?" He answered; "And who knows, it’s better not to press this red button, from sin on. laughing "But it’s not about KAZ itself, but its need for infantry fighting vehicles, is it worth protecting what is being pierced by a large caliber of small arms, detonating a mine or a land mine, burning not only from a flamethrower, but also from a bottle with a Molotov cocktail and it’s really simple way - scrap into the drive wheel laughing So is it worth it to spend huge amounts of money on what can be hit or incapacitated besides ATGM by other types of weapons or improvised means ?????? BMP, as I wrote earlier, this technique was created for frontal combat, and not for raid operations. If BMP is used for a raid against small groups of "barmalei" - KAZ may come in handy, but in frontal combat - no protection will help .... sorry, but I'm a fatalist. You cannot run away from fate, and even KAZ will not help.
                1. Operator 4 February 2020 16: 21 New
                  • 5
                  • 3
                  +2
                  BMP T-15 is not penetrated by bullets, small-caliber artillery and fragments of artillery shells / min.
            2. Maki Avellevich 5 February 2020 07: 32 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: Vitaliy Tsymbal
              important Andrey! At one time, I had to shoot a lot from the RPG-7 range and a couple of times from the 9M14M Malyut ATGM on the BMP 1, so I know that the successful or unsuccessful use of the RPG-7 and ATGM largely depends on the experience of the grenade launcher, and not from the grenade launcher itself.

              dear Vitaliy.
              we will chew in place.
              at the end of any war / operation, data analysis is carried out. soot is knocked down (how) the table is lost (how?)
              All aspects of military operations are checked. databases were also built from which you can often draw a lot of useful information.
              you probably shoot well from RPGs and babies, but you probably weren’t an analyst in the army, although you speak very categorically on topics you don’t know.
              1. Vitaly Tsymbal 5 February 2020 13: 51 New
                • 0
                • 1
                -1
                Dear Dmitry! Yes, you are right when you did not hold the positions of military analysts or military analysts in the army ... But I know how the information from the military is created from below. Example. Afghan. Column of tankers. Kamaz with a trailer. Two wheels are jammed at the trailer. Repair is possible only at the place of permanent deployment, but it is impossible to drag. We push the trailer off the road and shoot it from the PC (caliber 7,62 - if you suddenly find and want to check the holes) - well, do not leave a gift to the spirits - the trailer and aviation kerosene ... And on the radio station we inform you that we came under enemy fire as a result of which " lost "trailer with kerosene. Here you have the statistics !!!! According to statistics, it will be indicated that the trailer was "destroyed" as a result of enemy fire from small arms - which is not known (the spirits did not report what they shot at the shuravi), no one will check. They did it because writing off a trailer with fuel that failed for "peaceful" reasons is much more "troublesome" than blaming it on spirits.
                At the same time, read the information of company commanders about how many enemies were destroyed during the battle. It so happens that during the fighting of the enemy’s personnel and equipment, 2-3 times more were destroyed than this enemy was actually .... So, according to military statistics, I can speak out quite specifically. Yes, about analytics and statistics. After he retired from the army, he worked as a civilian analyst, and also taught statistics to students ... This is so that you, dear Dmitry, understand why I can express my attitude to statistics at the expert level.
        2. Maki Avellevich 5 February 2020 07: 24 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Vitaliy Tsymbal
          Dear Dmitry, statistics is not a military science ...

          as well as optics, psychology, history, etc., etc. Yes?
          statistical analysis is applied (successfully) also in the military industry, you comment without thinking.
  11. eklmn 4 February 2020 07: 32 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    Blah blah blah...
    The editors are trolling readers.
    Article almost a year, June 2019:
    https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28454/army-hits-setbacks-in-search-for-active-protection-system-to-go-on-its-strykers
    “... developed many years ago by Bradley coping worse with updating its capabilities. This is proved by the story of the installation of the Israeli defense. "
    And from this they would start talking right away - Bradley is impossible to improve, so the Army, right now, is in full swing looking for a replacement for them (on Google there are a lot of options for a new car). But what systems will be put there, then ... then the classic “when they replace it - then we'll talk ...!”
  12. Zaurbek 4 February 2020 07: 37 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    Complexes may not be enough for a war with the Russian Federation. The main goal is to reduce losses in local conflicts. The main threats are RPGs, Soviet anti-tank systems and their licensing options, Tou 1 and 2.
    1. Viktor Sergeev 4 February 2020 08: 02 New
      • 0
      • 3
      -3
      And what is there to be enough if the RPG 30 is already in service, he has active protection on the drum.
      1. borberd 4 February 2020 08: 25 New
        • 3
        • 1
        +2
        Trophies were tested on tandem ammunition, he destroys them. So do not "drum"
        1. Zaurbek 4 February 2020 09: 48 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          There are two ammunition. One small-caliber, the second tandem. I don’t know how to shoot from all this. First shoots the first, then the second at some interval. KAZ reacts to the first, the second affects DZ and Armor.
  13. Viktor Sergeev 4 February 2020 08: 01 New
    • 3
    • 3
    0
    We shoot simultaneously from two, three RPGs and a kaput tank, no KAZ will help.
  14. Viktor Sergeev 4 February 2020 08: 03 New
    • 1
    • 4
    -3
    RPG 30 and no Bradley or Abrams.
  15. letinant 4 February 2020 11: 02 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    Quote: stone
    So what?! Was there anything in the series? The question is, who on serial tanks, in the army has been introduced KAZ for many years? Israel has Merkava, and now they have gone to other Western armored vehicles, and very actively!

    For those who are in the tank! We read carefully!
    At the same time, Israel is a pioneer in the development of anti-tank missile defense technologies.

    It is time.
    Complexes "Drozd" were installed in the 80s on the T-55, armed with regiments of the Western District. True, then they were already actively replaced with T-64, T-72 and T-80, so the number is small. Arena was developed for the T-80, but why didn’t it go into the series in the “golden 90s” (curl them to the left!), You probably don’t need to remind.
  16. Grading 4 February 2020 16: 55 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Quote: bessmertniy
    The vulnerability of armored vehicles is today's reality. Here it is not a matter of whether the Pentagon was frightened or not. Modern protection systems are needed so that in the event of a serious conflict not to lose armor in a matter of days, as has happened more than once in modern history. The fact that the problem seriously affected the US Army is indicative. This is probably not without the prompting of the Ishilovites who successfully burned the Abrams in Iraq. Well, we need to keep up with this issue. hi

    Change the training manual
  17. The comment was deleted.
  18. lvov_aleksey 6 February 2020 01: 31 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    the mustache understood everything, I like it, I hope it will not happen again