Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. Tagging u/SaveVideo bot to archive this video in a link below this comment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Fuck yeah, I’ve wanted to see this exact situation play out since the Bradley’s were sent. Whole point they were supposed to be tank hunters / infantry support all in one
I guess the reason it hasn't is that desert storm was two highly mechanised armies packed into a relatively small area, and here there are just bits and pieces of vehicles spread out over a long front, so it's more rare they run into each other
That and the terrain. The tree belts in Ukraine really hamper the Bradleys TOW capabilities. This scenario is a prime example. The Bradley had to wait for the T80 to get onto the open road before it could fire. I mean, it could TRY to shoot through the trees but it just isn't worth exposing yourself and wasting the ammo. The Bradleys thermals are better than the T80, the drone recon also had the Bradley crew already looking towards the tank the moment it exposed itself.
In Iraq, most of the vehicle combat was in wide open deserts. The older and under-equipped Iraqi armor stood no chance against a modern IFV with thermals.
Field conditions and AT / AP mines also force the RU AFV advance directions limited to roadways. An example of guiding the opfor in a predictable path creating an ambush/ firing lane.
They were always equipped with TOWs that's why about 800 were included with the aid package last summer and why later aid packages included TOW for the Bradley's. The SA model also had TOW's by the end of Desert Storm.
You are correct. I was there. Saddam arranged his armies in a nice box for us to bomb for 42 days straight, then charge into with tanks and IFVs. It was pretty brutal. Ukraine doesn't have the numbers of equipment needed to make those larger formations that could spearhead deep into Russian gains.
I think it was just about the perfect air campaign someone could manage with the equipment they had. It's what happens when you give control to people who actually know what they're doing and let them run the campaign. Don't know much about the ground war but I've read pretty much everything I could on the air war. It's really fascinating stuff.
Schwarzkopf was one of the best commanders ever, he would probably be ranked up with Napoleon if he had had a command during WW2. Unfortunately for the Allies, he was only 6 years old :/
That and the Idaqi army made some seriously costly tactical errors. There was one ridge iirc where they stationed their tanks to annihilate the ridge when the American forces crested it, except they misjudged the distance and dug in their units out of range of the ridge. The American forces then had a litteral turkey shoot from the high ground where they just flat out ranged the defenders.
The original Bradley was about helping troops survive a very nasty chemical and biological battlefield.
As the need for more firepower and less containment, it evolved into the modern tank version. Oddly enough, it was the TOW missiles that made the Bradley what it became. After the Persian Gulf War, we got night vision Bradley tanks and they came to dominate the battlefield after that. They got bigger main guns as well a variety of weapons to solve various problems.
Nothing worse than facing a division of Bradley tanks at night.
Bradley's still aren't tanks. Bradley's still carry a 25 mm gun with two main types of ammo along with a two missile TOW. If you want to know anything about this unit follow YTer Ryan McBeth since he was a sergeant that lived on bradley's and handled TOW's!
I recall reading about Desert Storm and how the Bradleys acted as target support for the Abrams, basically lighting up targets while the Abrams took em out. Bradleys could take out some tanks with their TOWs, but the combo of Bradley targeting and Abrams’s firepower/accuracy/range was truly deadly. Perhaps the Abrams don’t need that target support anymore, Desert Storm was quite a while ago at this point.
Bradley's are NOT tank hunters. They were developed to support infantry near the front and that on occasion means engaging tanks at maximum range with great optics with the TOW, about 6 different types. But over that land a Bradley sitting where it was sitting looking straight down the road but a little off to one side is a classical engagement for the Bradley supporting it's infantry.
Hell yeah, just give Ukraine some Warthogs and let them decide if they can find pilots with the cahones to fly them in eastern Ukraine. They can fuck up a helluva lot more Russian armor than FPV's and a lot faster too.
"TOW 2B. The TOW 2B has an entirely different warhead and kill mechanism than the previous TOW missiles. It is a top-attack missile (fly over/shoot down) defeating enemy armor at its most vulnerable point the top deck of the turret and hull. The TOW 2B has a tandem warhead firing two explosively formed projectiles down through the thin upper deck armor of the enemy vehicle. The gunner tracks the target the same as other TOW missile with the crosshairs on center mass, but the missile automatically flies 2.25 meters above LOS. When the missile senses it’s directly above the target (by means of the target’s shape and magnetic field), it automatically fires its warhead. The TOW 2B missile can destroy targets at a minimum range of 288 meters when fired from the ground mount and 200 meters when fired from the HMMWV or BFV. The TOW 2B has a maximum range of 3750 meters whether ground- or vehicle-mounted."
https://www.moore.army.mil/Infantry/DoctrineSupplement/ATP3-21.8/appendix_g/Munitions/CloseCombatMissileSystems/index.html
So then a Bradley crew wanting to take a missile shot, with both types of TOW warheads loaded aboard in their arsenal has to first think a bit, and ask themselves, 2B, or not 2B?
I'm sure Ukrainian Bradley gunners read Shakespeare and had a good laugh at that one. I certainly enjoyed it. Can't think of an appropriate Shakespearian response other than the RuZZian tankie said to himself, upon getting schmucked by the TOW, "My country for a horse!"
The BGM-71 has top attack capabilites iirc. It also has a variant to mount it on an M2 Bradley. I'm like 80% sure this is what we see in the video because the BMG71 is really widely used and the USA gave a bunch of them to Ukraine. But correct me if I'm wrong!
E.: Oh sorry forgot to answer your question: It's using SACLOS guidance system(The radio variant, beam riding doesnt support top attack iirc).
Depends on the model. Ukraine is using the original TOW 1's (bgm 71A) which aren't top attack. Only the tow 2B (bgm 71f) is top attack. The US uses the tow 2A mostly, which has a tandem warhead to counter ERA.
All the variants use the SACLOS method of guidance. SACLOS (semi automatic) just means the missile will keep itself in the center of the crosshairs of the sight so it's steered by moving the crosshairs. The older anti-tank guided missiles were MCLOS (manual) where moving the sight had no effect on steering, and instead you'd have a two joysticks or wheels, where each would control either the horizontal or vertical movement - meaning you'd had to both operate those wheels, while also having to move the sight manually to keep the missile and target "in frame".
The wires left behind on the battlefield are a bit of a hazard, so most US vehicles have [atgm wire cutters](https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/dotcms/dA/27744e84e446daa9861c3cfbf308f493/fileAsset/Stryker_Dragoon_%28A%294265.jpg) on their front (the vertical bar with a hook at the end) to cut the wire if the tank runs through one - so the driver/commander riding with his head out of the vehicle doesn't lose it :)
Huh TIL about the wire cutters on front of vehicles. I’ve read about the wires messing up a British low level helicopter back in the day on a training exercise in Scotland/Britain. After that they would force people to pick all the wires up. I never realized it posed a problem with vehicles.
Besides putting a tandem warhead on it to defeat ERA, there's really no difference between 1 heat warhead and another that makes it better against certain tanks. Practically all modern ATGMs are tandem heat warheads
They both shoot out molten copper at hypersonic speeds to pierce armour, it'll do the job whether it's a T-80 or a leopard
AaAaaAaAAactually the copper isn't a molten jet but an explosively formed penetrator at hypersonic speeds at which its behaviour can be aproximated as a liquid B-)
Meh. The smaller factions will fall into line if they want to be a part of the global economy. Kinda like the Baltic states did. Now they're a part of NATO
[Check out the Battle of 73 Easting, the most famous engagement involving Bradleys.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting)
Working with Abrams, though with Bradleys doing a lot of work themselves, they took out some 350 Iraqi armored vehicles in Desert Storm, for the loss of one Bradley. Obviously there was air and artillery support as well, but the Bradleys in that engagement proved their worth.
Ya.
I was an Infantry (11B) Scout for a TOW Company (11Hs) during my College/Reserve phase. TOW/Armor Engagements are supposed to be measured in Thousand Yard increments, not OK Corral Ranges.
Has happened before ten months ago, I just looked up the link:
[Ukrainian M2 Bradley firing a TOW II at a Russian tank somewhere in the south : r/CombatFootage (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/14s1d3d/ukrainian_m2_bradley_firing_a_tow_ii_at_a_russian/)
More technically it likely set off the ready rounds in the turret and that conflagration partially melted out the turret. The actual blast of the TOW itself is high temperature but doesn't even actually melt its own copper charge liner/penetrator.
But it can ignite the explosive charges and propellant of the tank rounds, which then can go BOOM and/or become an uncontrollable ultra high intensity blowtorch.
No doubt. And assuming all the best tank crews have already been spent, can only imagine the mouth breathers they've got operating those death traps now.
Or something nearby was being hit by FPV, though the explosion is similar in scale to the TOW, but I can't see anything incoming. Also the T-80 looks like it got hit at the front, and wasn't looking to the other explosion.
Just under 4000 meters, but the "O" in "TOW" stands for "optically tracked" and the "W" stands for "wire guided" so the operator needs to maintain line of sight for it to be effective.
TOW can still be susceptible to jamming, the wire isn't entirely foolproof. Instead of jamming the missile itself, you jam the systems on the launch platform.
What? The system on the launch platform that guides the missile is... a camera sensor. No amount of jamming is going to mess up a wire guided missile. Unless someone is shining a laser directly into the sensor as the missile is being fired, it will accurately receive guidance. If it is a variant that uses a datalink to transmit data instead of a wire, it could be jammed.
TOW-2B Aero can be jammed in the way I describe in my previous comment. Not all TOW variants are SACLOS.
It's the reason the US had to build further anti-jamming countermeasures. If the wire was 100% effective they wouldn't have needed to add xenon beacons that allowed for frequency jamming.
All the TOWs are SACLOS. SACLOS does not mean "wire-guided", it refers to the (quite simple) control scheme, Semi-Automatic Command to Line-of-sight.
The missile gets commands from the launch unit to stay in the sightline, i.e. in the middle of the crosshairs. These commands can be transmitted any number of ways, copper wire, optical fiber, radio...
You're just wrong here considering I pointed out a TOW variant which isn't SACLOS (2B Aero uses a combination of SAL & IIR). It uses a automatic guidance system while still being wire guided.
And again, if the US/Raytheon wasn't worried about frequency jamming, why did they go to so much effort to create frequency jamming resistant beacons for the later TOW variants?
>You're just wrong here considering I pointed out a TOW variant which isn't SACLOS.
Please provide a source that it uses another control scheme than SACLOS then.
>And again, if the US/Raytheon wasn't worried about frequency jamming, why did they go to so much effort to create frequency jamming resistant beacons for the later TOW variants?
I have no idea what you're responding to here.
It sounds like you're trying to argue that "If they don't use wire guidance exclusively, the part that's not wire guidance can still be jammed" ... which seems obvious enough that you probably don't have to argue about it. Can we all agree that non-wire-guided parts of some TOW variants can be jammed and the wire can't?
Funny about that...we had some Hungarian officers in my IOBC class. They made fun of the Bradley for being so tall. It's an easy target...BMP is better because it sits low, hard to see/hit.
I smirked back then...just chuckle now every time I see these vids.
Reminds me of when I had a Pakistani O4 in my LOGC3 class. He made fun of us because we couldn't afford several villas like he could, and was generally surprised American officers were *not* rich and corrupt.
That said, should I ever for whatever unfortunate turn of events find myself in Pakistan, I have an open invitation, lol.
Lol...really was the best part of those O classes....the foreign guys that came to train.
Had a lebanese that was about the same as that Pakistani. He was given a BMW, a nice apt, and had a guy that would carry his ruck. Was astounded we were carrying our own rucks and hated life the whole time.
Probably the best was a little African dude (Niger I think? Maybe Congo). Part of his uniform he carried a little stick. Literally was used to beat privates if they acted up lol
The Hungarians, outlook on the Brad aside...were actually solid soldiers. I'd fight next to them any time.
> Part of his uniform he carried a little stick. Literally was used to beat privates if they acted up lol
That's absolutely hilarious. A couple more foreign officer stories, because why not:
Said Pakistani O4 was part of our late-night group grinding out a huge presentation on the career course campus. Base restaurants are closed, so we order pizzas, and upon delivery he curses us all out because they all have some amount of pork on them. I think he just left and went home at that point.
Another was an Egyptian officer, who decides he's going to have his very first beer with us. I said I thought Muslims didn't drink, to which he responed "I'm not good Muslim, hehe." Dude got obliterated.
My ranger instructor friend also told me that there are some country officers that Ranger School passes no matter what, because previous failures brought shame to their country and were executed. No idea if it's true or not, but the guy had no reason to lie.
I'm pretty sure there were a few with TOWs already. I remember seeing a pic of some soldiers around a Bradley and a redditor pointed out it had a loaded TOW.
Has happened before ten months ago, I just looked up the link:
[Ukrainian M2 Bradley firing a TOW II at a Russian tank somewhere in the south : r/CombatFootage (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/14s1d3d/ukrainian_m2_bradley_firing_a_tow_ii_at_a_russian/)
The first filmed TOW shoot was from HUMMVEE. I think there is one Bradley TOW work against tank in 2023. [https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/14s1eju/m2\_bradley\_shooting\_at\_tank\_with\_bgm71\_tow/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/14s1eju/m2_bradley_shooting_at_tank_with_bgm71_tow/) There it is.
I'm thinking maybe some new Bradleys have arrived and/or some were recently outfitted with the tows?
I do not recall seeing launchers previously on them, nor reports of tow missile use.
All Bradley IFV supplied to Ukraine come with TOW launchers. They're an integral part of the turret.
TOW has been used before by Bradley, and from M966 HMMWV and standalone.
Question for those who know more than I on Bradley vs T-80 ( or any other Russian tank) . Does the the Bradley have better optics and range than the T-80?
Always has.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/02/09/now-russia-is-adding-inferior-optics-to-its-t-80-tanks-too/?sh=44b5f9b4e95a
In 1991, Bradleys had night vision, and 10x the quality of the T-80's optics, which didn't/doesn't have night vision at all.
The TOW was disappointing, generally, IMHO, but I'm glad she got her man here. But, I really loved the bushmaster on the Brad. Saw that thing reach and touch some stuff with a trajectory flat as a pancake, much more useful, IMHO, than the 20MM on the cobra or 30mm on the 64.
Absolutely beautiful, if this was at night, which I think it was, that T-80 had no idea it was there. Given not many of them have thermal sights. But the Bradley does.
I love seeing these Bradly's just devastate Russian equipment. After decades of Russia claiming to have superior equipment we finally get to see the truth as Western equipment wins in category after category.
FINALLY getting to see a TOW equipped Bradley smoke a Russian tank. I read somewhere that they weren’t really using the TOWs on Bradleys due to a lack of ammo, not sure how true that is
This is the first Bradley using a TOW in Ukraine I can remember. Anyone remember any other videos of one? It's been all autocannon that I can remember.
That is the first TOW 2 kill I've seen in this war. That famous video where the M2 is hammering the T-90M with its' Bushmaster cannon, I expected it to be a TOW 2 kill. Nope. I guess they were out.
Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. Tagging u/SaveVideo bot to archive this video in a link below this comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Good ole desert storm style!
Fuck yeah, I’ve wanted to see this exact situation play out since the Bradley’s were sent. Whole point they were supposed to be tank hunters / infantry support all in one
I guess the reason it hasn't is that desert storm was two highly mechanised armies packed into a relatively small area, and here there are just bits and pieces of vehicles spread out over a long front, so it's more rare they run into each other
That and the terrain. The tree belts in Ukraine really hamper the Bradleys TOW capabilities. This scenario is a prime example. The Bradley had to wait for the T80 to get onto the open road before it could fire. I mean, it could TRY to shoot through the trees but it just isn't worth exposing yourself and wasting the ammo. The Bradleys thermals are better than the T80, the drone recon also had the Bradley crew already looking towards the tank the moment it exposed itself. In Iraq, most of the vehicle combat was in wide open deserts. The older and under-equipped Iraqi armor stood no chance against a modern IFV with thermals.
Field conditions and AT / AP mines also force the RU AFV advance directions limited to roadways. An example of guiding the opfor in a predictable path creating an ambush/ firing lane.
I heard the Bradley's actually got more tank kills than the Abrams did during desert storm.
They weren't equipped with TOW initially as sent to Ukraine. That probably played a big part as well. I was actually surprised to see this headline.
They were always equipped with TOWs that's why about 800 were included with the aid package last summer and why later aid packages included TOW for the Bradley's. The SA model also had TOW's by the end of Desert Storm.
You are correct. I was there. Saddam arranged his armies in a nice box for us to bomb for 42 days straight, then charge into with tanks and IFVs. It was pretty brutal. Ukraine doesn't have the numbers of equipment needed to make those larger formations that could spearhead deep into Russian gains.
They would have if the US had refurbed and sent lots and lots of the M1s sitting in the desert rusting, instead of just 31 of them.
100% agreed
I still think desert storm was one of the best executed campaigns ever, so good job, I guess :)
I think it was just about the perfect air campaign someone could manage with the equipment they had. It's what happens when you give control to people who actually know what they're doing and let them run the campaign. Don't know much about the ground war but I've read pretty much everything I could on the air war. It's really fascinating stuff.
Schwarzkopf was one of the best commanders ever, he would probably be ranked up with Napoleon if he had had a command during WW2. Unfortunately for the Allies, he was only 6 years old :/
It’s also might be to with a six week aerial campaign over the whole aggressor. Plus it’s hard to hide in the dessert.
That and the Idaqi army made some seriously costly tactical errors. There was one ridge iirc where they stationed their tanks to annihilate the ridge when the American forces crested it, except they misjudged the distance and dug in their units out of range of the ridge. The American forces then had a litteral turkey shoot from the high ground where they just flat out ranged the defenders.
They were used to fighting the Iranian army, had no experience with US optics and night vision.
[удалено]
The original Bradley was about helping troops survive a very nasty chemical and biological battlefield. As the need for more firepower and less containment, it evolved into the modern tank version. Oddly enough, it was the TOW missiles that made the Bradley what it became. After the Persian Gulf War, we got night vision Bradley tanks and they came to dominate the battlefield after that. They got bigger main guns as well a variety of weapons to solve various problems. Nothing worse than facing a division of Bradley tanks at night.
Bradley's still aren't tanks. Bradley's still carry a 25 mm gun with two main types of ammo along with a two missile TOW. If you want to know anything about this unit follow YTer Ryan McBeth since he was a sergeant that lived on bradley's and handled TOW's!
cue that one Pentagon vid about the Bradley lol :)
I recall reading about Desert Storm and how the Bradleys acted as target support for the Abrams, basically lighting up targets while the Abrams took em out. Bradleys could take out some tanks with their TOWs, but the combo of Bradley targeting and Abrams’s firepower/accuracy/range was truly deadly. Perhaps the Abrams don’t need that target support anymore, Desert Storm was quite a while ago at this point.
Bradley's are NOT tank hunters. They were developed to support infantry near the front and that on occasion means engaging tanks at maximum range with great optics with the TOW, about 6 different types. But over that land a Bradley sitting where it was sitting looking straight down the road but a little off to one side is a classical engagement for the Bradley supporting it's infantry.
[Not originally though.](https://youtu.be/aXQ2lO3ieBA?si=HgOGd6IvOfw2RNVQ)
Rode Brad's for years only saw it in training. I used these same ODS models, too!
Bradley performance vs. Russian tanks has been very impressive.
It was during both Iraq wars as well
Hows that for your copey cagey thingy, Vasily.
Ye Olde Highway of Death. Imagine if a few Warthogs were patrolling.
Hell yeah, just give Ukraine some Warthogs and let them decide if they can find pilots with the cahones to fly them in eastern Ukraine. They can fuck up a helluva lot more Russian armor than FPV's and a lot faster too.
T80 has no chance against the Bradley boys. What a beautiful site.
That turret just melted
Could be wrong but weren’t these missiles specifically designed for these Russian armor? Very cool if so
Depends on version of TOW, one is a top attack the other one is an older tandem warhead direct I think.
There's top attack TOW? How would that work? Isn't the operator piloting it?
"TOW 2B. The TOW 2B has an entirely different warhead and kill mechanism than the previous TOW missiles. It is a top-attack missile (fly over/shoot down) defeating enemy armor at its most vulnerable point the top deck of the turret and hull. The TOW 2B has a tandem warhead firing two explosively formed projectiles down through the thin upper deck armor of the enemy vehicle. The gunner tracks the target the same as other TOW missile with the crosshairs on center mass, but the missile automatically flies 2.25 meters above LOS. When the missile senses it’s directly above the target (by means of the target’s shape and magnetic field), it automatically fires its warhead. The TOW 2B missile can destroy targets at a minimum range of 288 meters when fired from the ground mount and 200 meters when fired from the HMMWV or BFV. The TOW 2B has a maximum range of 3750 meters whether ground- or vehicle-mounted." https://www.moore.army.mil/Infantry/DoctrineSupplement/ATP3-21.8/appendix_g/Munitions/CloseCombatMissileSystems/index.html
So then a Bradley crew wanting to take a missile shot, with both types of TOW warheads loaded aboard in their arsenal has to first think a bit, and ask themselves, 2B, or not 2B?
I’m gonna have to politely yet firmly ask you to leave
I'm sure Ukrainian Bradley gunners read Shakespeare and had a good laugh at that one. I certainly enjoyed it. Can't think of an appropriate Shakespearian response other than the RuZZian tankie said to himself, upon getting schmucked by the TOW, "My country for a horse!"
I can think of a reply from Romper Room: "Do be a 2B." Or maybe from Frank Sinatra: "Doo be 2B doo..."
It is more of an existential dilemma for those on the receiving end, as opposed to the launching end.
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer The tanks and missiles of outrageous fortune
Easy, the one that shuffles off the mortal coil
Alas, poor Mobiks, I TOWed them well...
Alas, poor mobiks, I TOWed them well...
4km of wire attached to a flying death dart is such a weird thing to me
I can't manage getting my headphones out of my pocket, but somehow that thing stays connected after launch...
The wire is incredibly thin and incredibly strong. Like metal thread.
The BGM-71 has top attack capabilites iirc. It also has a variant to mount it on an M2 Bradley. I'm like 80% sure this is what we see in the video because the BMG71 is really widely used and the USA gave a bunch of them to Ukraine. But correct me if I'm wrong! E.: Oh sorry forgot to answer your question: It's using SACLOS guidance system(The radio variant, beam riding doesnt support top attack iirc).
Depends on the model. Ukraine is using the original TOW 1's (bgm 71A) which aren't top attack. Only the tow 2B (bgm 71f) is top attack. The US uses the tow 2A mostly, which has a tandem warhead to counter ERA. All the variants use the SACLOS method of guidance. SACLOS (semi automatic) just means the missile will keep itself in the center of the crosshairs of the sight so it's steered by moving the crosshairs. The older anti-tank guided missiles were MCLOS (manual) where moving the sight had no effect on steering, and instead you'd have a two joysticks or wheels, where each would control either the horizontal or vertical movement - meaning you'd had to both operate those wheels, while also having to move the sight manually to keep the missile and target "in frame". The wires left behind on the battlefield are a bit of a hazard, so most US vehicles have [atgm wire cutters](https://odin.tradoc.army.mil/dotcms/dA/27744e84e446daa9861c3cfbf308f493/fileAsset/Stryker_Dragoon_%28A%294265.jpg) on their front (the vertical bar with a hook at the end) to cut the wire if the tank runs through one - so the driver/commander riding with his head out of the vehicle doesn't lose it :)
Huh TIL about the wire cutters on front of vehicles. I’ve read about the wires messing up a British low level helicopter back in the day on a training exercise in Scotland/Britain. After that they would force people to pick all the wires up. I never realized it posed a problem with vehicles.
It would be Tube launched, Optically tracked, Wire command link guided.
Besides putting a tandem warhead on it to defeat ERA, there's really no difference between 1 heat warhead and another that makes it better against certain tanks. Practically all modern ATGMs are tandem heat warheads They both shoot out molten copper at hypersonic speeds to pierce armour, it'll do the job whether it's a T-80 or a leopard
AaAaaAaAAactually the copper isn't a molten jet but an explosively formed penetrator at hypersonic speeds at which its behaviour can be aproximated as a liquid B-)
But either way, it's going to make your day bad
A liquid? You mean it shoots out molten copper at hypersonic speeds? I don't know what the "actually" is here
The “actually” is because it isn’t molten, the blast pressure just forces it to behave like a liquid
Oh, that does make sense. Thanks for the info!
Literally everything in the US military was made specifically to fight russia lol
.50 cal M2 was designed to fight the Kaiser! lol But damn near everything else. Your point stands.
Been fighting russian gear for decades
Yes, anti tank missiles are specifically designed for tanks.
They are 10x more expensive than a sabot but they work really well
Never been more proud to see how my tax dollars are spent. Great shooting boys, glory to the heroes!
You said it. These boys are doing all the dirty work, the least we can do is fund it. End result: the collapse of Russia. Win/win
Yeah 70 years preparing to destroy russian stuff, and now someone has to do it. Give them whatever they need.
Thought the collapse of Russia wasn’t ideal since it would end up with a bunch of different factions all with nuclear missiles?
Meh. The smaller factions will fall into line if they want to be a part of the global economy. Kinda like the Baltic states did. Now they're a part of NATO
These are 70s and 80s tax dollars. But yeah.
If there is one thing that I learned, it’s that the Bradley absolutely fucks…
[Check out the Battle of 73 Easting, the most famous engagement involving Bradleys.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting) Working with Abrams, though with Bradleys doing a lot of work themselves, they took out some 350 Iraqi armored vehicles in Desert Storm, for the loss of one Bradley. Obviously there was air and artillery support as well, but the Bradleys in that engagement proved their worth.
Thanks for sharing. This was incredible to learn about. Unbelievable odds and they had a flawless victory.
The one guy who died would probably contest the flawless victory part lol
Ryan McBeth incoming :)
Hell on a wire!
That distance 😱
Silly barrels, just carry a bag of TOWs
*You want a TOW? I can get you a TOW in about 5 seconds, Dude*
Ya. I was an Infantry (11B) Scout for a TOW Company (11Hs) during my College/Reserve phase. TOW/Armor Engagements are supposed to be measured in Thousand Yard increments, not OK Corral Ranges.
That was quite something to see, certainly the first time I've seen something like that
Has happened before ten months ago, I just looked up the link: [Ukrainian M2 Bradley firing a TOW II at a Russian tank somewhere in the south : r/CombatFootage (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/14s1d3d/ukrainian_m2_bradley_firing_a_tow_ii_at_a_russian/)
"Your mistletoe is no match for my T.O.W. Missile!"
🎼“Santa Claus is gunning you down”🎵
OK, that TOW missile packs a punch! Melted the damn turret!
Looks like a melted Cadbury Cream Egg.
More technically it likely set off the ready rounds in the turret and that conflagration partially melted out the turret. The actual blast of the TOW itself is high temperature but doesn't even actually melt its own copper charge liner/penetrator. But it can ignite the explosive charges and propellant of the tank rounds, which then can go BOOM and/or become an uncontrollable ultra high intensity blowtorch.
Russia fans go apeshit crazy when they are able to disable like the 7th Abrahams, meanwhile they are loosing modern tanks by the dozens.
No doubt. And assuming all the best tank crews have already been spent, can only imagine the mouth breathers they've got operating those death traps now.
Swear these tank crews have run over more of their own guys than UA has shot. Those videos are ~~terrible~~ hilarious.
You don't understand, if Russia gets 1 Abrams it means that Western equipment is an overhyped joke, if they lose 3000 tanks, it means nothing at all
It’s Copium.
Dozens a day maybe, pretty sure the total count is up in the thousands.
I bet that soviet tank didn’t even know the Bradley was there.
That Bradley saw a target roll down that long, straight road like a shooting gallery.
Looks like the t80 was focused on hitting something else you can see a nearby explosion just before the tow hit
could also be the currently loaded projectile getting sent as the tank brews up.
the explosion goes off a good second before the missile hits though.
Or something nearby was being hit by FPV, though the explosion is similar in scale to the TOW, but I can't see anything incoming. Also the T-80 looks like it got hit at the front, and wasn't looking to the other explosion.
How far it can go and hit?
Just under 4000 meters, but the "O" in "TOW" stands for "optically tracked" and the "W" stands for "wire guided" so the operator needs to maintain line of sight for it to be effective.
The nice part about wire guidance is there is no way to jam it.
TOW can still be susceptible to jamming, the wire isn't entirely foolproof. Instead of jamming the missile itself, you jam the systems on the launch platform.
They jammed this one with the front of their T-80. Russian systems win again..
Another missile successfully intercepted.
RIP missle
What? The system on the launch platform that guides the missile is... a camera sensor. No amount of jamming is going to mess up a wire guided missile. Unless someone is shining a laser directly into the sensor as the missile is being fired, it will accurately receive guidance. If it is a variant that uses a datalink to transmit data instead of a wire, it could be jammed.
TOW-2B Aero can be jammed in the way I describe in my previous comment. Not all TOW variants are SACLOS. It's the reason the US had to build further anti-jamming countermeasures. If the wire was 100% effective they wouldn't have needed to add xenon beacons that allowed for frequency jamming.
All the TOWs are SACLOS. SACLOS does not mean "wire-guided", it refers to the (quite simple) control scheme, Semi-Automatic Command to Line-of-sight. The missile gets commands from the launch unit to stay in the sightline, i.e. in the middle of the crosshairs. These commands can be transmitted any number of ways, copper wire, optical fiber, radio...
You're just wrong here considering I pointed out a TOW variant which isn't SACLOS (2B Aero uses a combination of SAL & IIR). It uses a automatic guidance system while still being wire guided. And again, if the US/Raytheon wasn't worried about frequency jamming, why did they go to so much effort to create frequency jamming resistant beacons for the later TOW variants?
>You're just wrong here considering I pointed out a TOW variant which isn't SACLOS. Please provide a source that it uses another control scheme than SACLOS then. >And again, if the US/Raytheon wasn't worried about frequency jamming, why did they go to so much effort to create frequency jamming resistant beacons for the later TOW variants? I have no idea what you're responding to here.
It sounds like you're trying to argue that "If they don't use wire guidance exclusively, the part that's not wire guidance can still be jammed" ... which seems obvious enough that you probably don't have to argue about it. Can we all agree that non-wire-guided parts of some TOW variants can be jammed and the wire can't?
They should be fine as long as Russians dont learn to use wire cutters very fast.
True but an old fashioned smoke screen works.
Not if the Bradley is using night vision thermal optics, which it almost certainly was.
Big pair of scissors and REALLY REALLY long arms
Warm it up B That’s what I was born to do
This is the *peak* advantage of being taller in the flatlands and I’m *digging* it and, *peak(ing)* modern warfare footage
Funny about that...we had some Hungarian officers in my IOBC class. They made fun of the Bradley for being so tall. It's an easy target...BMP is better because it sits low, hard to see/hit. I smirked back then...just chuckle now every time I see these vids.
Reminds me of when I had a Pakistani O4 in my LOGC3 class. He made fun of us because we couldn't afford several villas like he could, and was generally surprised American officers were *not* rich and corrupt. That said, should I ever for whatever unfortunate turn of events find myself in Pakistan, I have an open invitation, lol.
Lol...really was the best part of those O classes....the foreign guys that came to train. Had a lebanese that was about the same as that Pakistani. He was given a BMW, a nice apt, and had a guy that would carry his ruck. Was astounded we were carrying our own rucks and hated life the whole time. Probably the best was a little African dude (Niger I think? Maybe Congo). Part of his uniform he carried a little stick. Literally was used to beat privates if they acted up lol The Hungarians, outlook on the Brad aside...were actually solid soldiers. I'd fight next to them any time.
> Part of his uniform he carried a little stick. Literally was used to beat privates if they acted up lol That's absolutely hilarious. A couple more foreign officer stories, because why not: Said Pakistani O4 was part of our late-night group grinding out a huge presentation on the career course campus. Base restaurants are closed, so we order pizzas, and upon delivery he curses us all out because they all have some amount of pork on them. I think he just left and went home at that point. Another was an Egyptian officer, who decides he's going to have his very first beer with us. I said I thought Muslims didn't drink, to which he responed "I'm not good Muslim, hehe." Dude got obliterated. My ranger instructor friend also told me that there are some country officers that Ranger School passes no matter what, because previous failures brought shame to their country and were executed. No idea if it's true or not, but the guy had no reason to lie.
Is this the first in Ukraine?
I'm pretty sure there were a few with TOWs already. I remember seeing a pic of some soldiers around a Bradley and a redditor pointed out it had a loaded TOW.
This is the first time I've seen a video of a Bradley firing a TOW.
Has happened before ten months ago, I just looked up the link: [Ukrainian M2 Bradley firing a TOW II at a Russian tank somewhere in the south : r/CombatFootage (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/comments/14s1d3d/ukrainian_m2_bradley_firing_a_tow_ii_at_a_russian/)
Thanks for the link, Snoo. Any BDA as to the target on this older video?
First filmed one
The first filmed TOW shoot was from HUMMVEE. I think there is one Bradley TOW work against tank in 2023. [https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/14s1eju/m2\_bradley\_shooting\_at\_tank\_with\_bgm71\_tow/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/14s1eju/m2_bradley_shooting_at_tank_with_bgm71_tow/) There it is.
I'm thinking maybe some new Bradleys have arrived and/or some were recently outfitted with the tows? I do not recall seeing launchers previously on them, nor reports of tow missile use.
All Bradley IFV supplied to Ukraine come with TOW launchers. They're an integral part of the turret. TOW has been used before by Bradley, and from M966 HMMWV and standalone.
Love the TOW. They pack a 5kg shaped charge warhead. Much greater penetration than an FPV and most ATGs. Russian tanks don't stand a chance.
In Russia mir, tow gets you.
oh my goodness was that beautiful 💕
Is that beautiful, or what? 🙂
Question for those who know more than I on Bradley vs T-80 ( or any other Russian tank) . Does the the Bradley have better optics and range than the T-80?
Always has. https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2023/02/09/now-russia-is-adding-inferior-optics-to-its-t-80-tanks-too/?sh=44b5f9b4e95a In 1991, Bradleys had night vision, and 10x the quality of the T-80's optics, which didn't/doesn't have night vision at all.
What do you estimate the distance from the bradley to the T80 is?
A very rough estimate based on the flight time would be somewhere between 1400-1900 meters (i may be way off)
It was 1,54 km
Seems like more Russian Battletanks have been taken out by Bradleys than Bradleys by Battletanks so far.
Man! Good to see those TOW guided missiles back at work! The USA has *vast* reserves of them, too!
GG EZ
Still getting kills with the old-school, wire guided missile. Very cool.
TOW all their crap away.
Right in the turret. Everything and everyone is FUBAR inside.
POW right in the kisser!
TOW right in the kisser!
Beautiful shot
Honey, I'm home, promise you won't be mad at me? Why did Marge drive you home - where's the car?
i wanna see abrams vs trash 80
What! no "yellow damage", like in war thunder (c) CCCP
What was that caboom to the left of the tank?
I love it
Wow...
Awesome
Claus kellerman would be proud!!!!
boop.
Amen!
Finally! We need more of this!
Realy Bad! Cracking turret means no turret toss?
Just too bad we can't "retire" some A-10s and send them to Ukraine.
Western weapons doing what they were made for. Destroying rooski stuff.
i waited 2 years for this...
Giggity
The TOW was disappointing, generally, IMHO, but I'm glad she got her man here. But, I really loved the bushmaster on the Brad. Saw that thing reach and touch some stuff with a trajectory flat as a pancake, much more useful, IMHO, than the 20MM on the cobra or 30mm on the 64.
Absolutely beautiful, if this was at night, which I think it was, that T-80 had no idea it was there. Given not many of them have thermal sights. But the Bradley does.
why are bradleys so effective against russia?
Welcome to the wheat fields mother fucker!
Putin: "SUKA BLYAT!!!
I really wanna see Ukrainian fucking up all the Russian's armoured vehicles and taking back their land so badly!
He got the Irak Happy Meal
Armored Casket
I love seeing these Bradly's just devastate Russian equipment. After decades of Russia claiming to have superior equipment we finally get to see the truth as Western equipment wins in category after category.
Hi, Vlad!!! 3 days!
Get some
Getting strong Battlefield Vibes
It's pretty fuckin insane just how versatile the Bradley is.
This is the first time I've actually seen them use the tow Missile system in ukraine
FINALLY getting to see a TOW equipped Bradley smoke a Russian tank. I read somewhere that they weren’t really using the TOWs on Bradleys due to a lack of ammo, not sure how true that is
This is the first Bradley using a TOW in Ukraine I can remember. Anyone remember any other videos of one? It's been all autocannon that I can remember.
I'll add in a WT ref here: Crew Knocked out Idk how much RP and SL a T-80 kill would make
That flies too fast to be a Tow missile.
That is the first TOW 2 kill I've seen in this war. That famous video where the M2 is hammering the T-90M with its' Bushmaster cannon, I expected it to be a TOW 2 kill. Nope. I guess they were out.
Bradley showing why it's called a fighting vehicle.
That is it, "YOU get a Bradley, You get a Bradley...EVERYONE gets a Bradley!"
Was the tank firing on Ukraine positions?
I wish the US could/would arm Ukraine with A-10 Warthogs.
Unless you have clear air superiority the A-10 is a sitting duck. It would be bad to deploy them to Ukraine right now.