Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Bradley or Warrior

Discussion in 'Post-World War 2 Armour' started by Lone Wolf, Oct 30, 2006.

  1. Lone Wolf

    Lone Wolf New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Merseyside, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Hi

    Two very similar vehicles which both saw action in Iraq etc. Which one's best ?

    Not just another one of those one country's gear vs another debates as both are actually made by the same parent company (BAE Systems Land & Armaments) but have been made with slightly different thinking behind them.
     
  2. Ebar

    Ebar New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    On a space station in geosynchronous orbit above y
    via TanksinWW2
    M2 Bradley IFV
    General characteristics
    Crew 3 + 6
    Length 6.55 m
    Width 3.6 m
    Height 2.98 m
    Weight 30.4 tonnes
    Armour and armament
    Armour Aluminium / Steel
    Main armament 25 mm M242 Chain Gun

    900 rounds
    TOW Anti-Tank Missile
    7 TOW Missiles

    Secondary armament 7.62 mm M240C machine gun
    2,200 rounds



    FV 510 Warrior

    General characteristics
    Crew 3 (commander, gunner, driver) + 7 troops
    Length 6.3 m
    Width 3.03 m
    Height 2.8 m
    Weight 24 tonnes
    Armour and armament
    Armour Aluminium & applique ERA
    Main armament 30 mm L21A1 RARDEN cannon
    Secondary armament L94A1 coaxial 7.62 mm chain gun
    7.62 mm machine gun


    Source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warrior_apc (not the greatest I know)

    The presence of the TOW system on the Bradley is probably the biggest indication that the two vehicles do have slightly different rolls.
     
  3. Grieg

    Grieg New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    2,625
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    IIRC the M2 Bradley is more for infantry carrying and the M3 Bradley is configured for an anti-tank role. Both have received upgraded armor with spaced applique armor on the sides and rear.
     
  4. FNG phpbb3

    FNG phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    why are modern APC/IFV's fitted with armour to stop kinetic penetrators?

    Presumably most western forces will only see attacks for RPG's, mines and improvised roadside bombs?

    Could they then design the armour specifically for that role reducing it's head on protection against kinetic penetrators on the basis that if they actually fight a decent opponant they will still have their M1's to rely on for tank vs tank combat

    FNG
     
  5. Ebar

    Ebar New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    On a space station in geosynchronous orbit above y
    via TanksinWW2
    Your talking about vehicles that were developed in the late 1970's effectively to fight WW3. Roadside bombs were probably not a big feature in the designers thinking.
     
  6. Grieg

    Grieg New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    2,625
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    I know that the armor upgrades to the Bradley included bottom anti-mine armor as well. Spaced armor is designed to defeat chemical energy penetrators (like RPGs).
     
  7. Lone Wolf

    Lone Wolf New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2006
    Messages:
    788
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Merseyside, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    I read somewhere that more Iraqi tanks were knocked out by Bradleys than by Abrams including at leat one T72. I also read that the main armament (as well as the TOWs) is effective against tanks. Anyone know anything about this ?
     
  8. FNG phpbb3

    FNG phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    I can't see the main gun doing anything but superficial damage to any tank. As in knocking out optics, radios jamming the turret and making the crew button up.

    But a TOW will easily put a hole through an export T72 without difficulty. whether it would work with a modern russian T72 or T80 I don't know.

    FNG
     
  9. Grieg

    Grieg New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    2,625
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    The M242 Bushmaster on the Bradley has taken out armor up to and including some MBTs accordin to several sources. (fas.org for example)
     
  10. FNG phpbb3

    FNG phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2005
    Messages:
    1,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    I find that hard to believe that a 25mm chain gun can penetrate the front or side armour of a MBT even when firing AP sabot.

    Armoured cars yes, tanks no

    FNG
     
  11. smeghead phpbb3

    smeghead phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,269
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Melbourne, Orst-Ray-Lia
    via TanksinWW2
    I believe there is a viedo on Youtube which shows a Javelin missile destroying (and I mean dest-roy-ing) a T-72...

    Are there any records at all of an APC knocking out a tank? In this war or any other war? I am aware that several Bradleys have been destroyed by Iraqi tanks in the early days of both wars, however I have never heard of any Iraqi tank being destroyed by a Bradley... For me this is no suprise as it is like expecting a Hannomag to defeat a T-34... I personally believe the Bradely to be excellent in the APC role, but I don't see the rationale for labelling it an anti-tank weapon
     
  12. Blaster

    Blaster New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2006
    Messages:
    1,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Canada
    via TanksinWW2
    Aluminum armor on a Warrior? Can't bullets penetrate aluminum?
     
  13. Siberian Black

    Siberian Black New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,097
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Hunting Panzer IV's
    via TanksinWW2
    It's still metal. If it's thick enough it can still be pretty good. especially since it'd be lighter than steel or titanium.
     
  14. Grieg

    Grieg New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    2,625
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    I hadn't heard of Iraqi tanks destroying Bradleys in either Iraq war.
     
  15. Siberian Black

    Siberian Black New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2006
    Messages:
    1,097
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Hunting Panzer IV's
    via TanksinWW2
    Perhaps not eh vehicle itself but rather a sub-class armed with anti-tank ordinance (Hellfire, Javelin....that kind of thing)
     
  16. smeghead phpbb3

    smeghead phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,269
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Melbourne, Orst-Ray-Lia
    via TanksinWW2
    A quick google search is all it takes :wink:

    http://nucnews.net/2000/du/92du/920118wp.htm
    http://www.garmin.com/products/rino/testimonial.html
    et cetera et cetera

    Still I'll be dammned, apparently some Bradleys have managed to destroy Iraqi T-72's, however this was done with support from M1A1's and M109 artillery fire... No doubt it would be impossible for Bradleys (or any onther APC for that matter) to successfully engage MBT's by themselves... then there really would be no point to producing tanks
     
  17. Grieg

    Grieg New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    2,625
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    You're joking right?
    The first link is about friendly fire destroying a Bradley, M1A1 120mm main gun fire and the second is some testimonials about a GPS product that the company sells. We hear from a "Sgt. C.F." that his Bradley was destroyed by a T-72...no full name, no unit, nothing.
     
  18. smeghead phpbb3

    smeghead phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,269
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Melbourne, Orst-Ray-Lia
    via TanksinWW2
    Thats the spirit Grieg! :D If it can be dismissed as propaganda, or if no references to tinfoil hats can be made... then we can ask for a unit and veritable proof! The follwing account has a unit, a date, and is taken from the words of U.S. Brigadier General Scales...

    It really is not a fair comparison at all, however... If anything credit should be given to the Bradley for having claimed a T-72 (albeit with support... Which demonstrates that the Bradley hits above its weight. Nevertheless not even a good APC is going to stand much chance against a poorly crewed MBT... Would you be equally suprised to hear if I had told you that a German Pz.IV had knocked out an M3 halftrack? I thought not.
     
  19. Ricky

    Ricky New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,708
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    No more of this please. Any further examples from anybody will result in editing of posts and (if it continues) an official warning.
     
  20. Grieg

    Grieg New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 25, 2005
    Messages:
    2,625
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Better than the other links but still not very convincing. Wikipedia cannot be taken as an authoritative source. I don't claim that nothing of the sort ever happened just that unless it is in official after action reports one cannot give too much credit. Some such reports as listed there were later found out to be inaccurate after investigation revealed that the damage was due to friendly fire in the confusion of battle. I certainly have no doubt that a direct hit by an MBTs main gun would destroy a Bradley it's just that there were very few instances in which the crew of an Iraqi MBT survived long enough, or fought back longenough to accomplish the task.

    ps..you seem to have changed from direct insults to taunting and an extremely patronizing tone when addressing me. If I were you I would just knock it off and post your comments without referencing me personally at all.
     

Share This Page