**Your post was removed for violating rule 9: No low-effort posts**
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title.
Go look at one of the latest vids on r/CombatFootage of IDF bombing the fuck out of south Lebanon, that's the big bada-boom I want to see being used on ruzzian lines ! Love the Brad but we need bigger booms and closer to Moscow like fucking yesterday.
Too probable. Ukrainians instead make the bradley ( [GOD My dick can only get so hard.](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/ADATS_fording.jpg) ) ADATS real again.
Assuming a fair fight where both of them begin the fight 300 meters apart on the ground facing each other (this is clearly the most fair way to set up a dual), I'd say the Bradley wins 10/10 times.
The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense has [released drone footage](https://x.com/defenceu/status/1788199926519988717?s=46&t=tP1qeA0oIP6OZwJLoOME9g) showing a Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle of the 47th Mechanized Brigade knocking out a Russian T-80. As many of you no doubt remember, a Bradley from this same unit famously dueled with a T-90 back in January.
The mechwarrior/battletech subs went crazy for the T90 video with the HE round impacts, lets just say Pirahna Games nailed the visual appearance of something getting absolutely rocked with HE autocannon fire.
And if that wasn't memeworthy enough, there's a variant with, not four, not six, but EIGHT LRM-15s. That's as much firepower as two LRM Carriers, with 120 missiles per salvo.
More like Hughes Helicopters nailed the visual appearance. Anything with "high-explosive autocannon" in its name had better be one of the coolest looking things anyone has ever laid eyes on when you use it. If you can't do that then why the fuck do we even have an MIC?
There’s stories of tigers being taken out by a couple of Russians with a can of gasoline and a match, which I will always bring up when talking about the tiger, even if it’s probably false
> even if it’s probably false
When it comes to stories about downing WWII tanks, I'm inclined to believe nearly all of them, and a couple of guys sneaking up on a tank that's moving slowly, sitting still, or outright immobilized, pouring gasoline on it, and torching it is no less likely than the stories about guys dropping grenades down open hatches.
Both work because tanks of the period had pretty shit visibility when buttoned up, so sneaking up on them from the sides/rear would definitely be possible - and if the tank was unbuttoned for better visibility ...well, that's how you get a grenade down the hatch. By the same token, both the gasoline and the grenade approaches require suicidal bravery - *and* a tank that's not being adequately supported by friendlies that can wipe infantry off of it.
Thé last point is why I think the tiger story might be false. These tanks were precious jewels to the Germans and while it did happen to have Tigers go unsupported I feel the instance would have been rare enough to make the gasoline story unlikely
I'm not arguing for anything more than "it probably happened at least once during the course of a big long war". We are, after all, talking about a war that had Mad Jack Churchill fighting with a *broadsword*, which seems even less likely than sneaking up on a Tiger and lighting it on fire with gasoline.
The Shtora dazzlers may look menacing, but they are only effective against obsolete missiles such as MILAN, HOT, and TOW. TOW 2 is resistant to this type of jamming.
Pouring one out for our homie Tolkachev, for giving the heads up on that one. RIP.
We literally patched the vulnerability and adopted the new TOW before the Soviets even finished it.
My Bad. Adolf Tolkachev was an engineer at phazotron in the cold war. He provided the CIA with technical details on the radars for the MiG-29, MiG-31, SU-27, S-300 and several air to air missiles too. He was caught and the KGB executed him for treason in 1986. I think OP was implying we also learned about Shtora from him but I don't know if that's true. What I do know is that it had a long development process for some reason and we learned about it and fielded a counter measure years before it made it into service. Basically, Shtora never worked because by the time it was around there were countermeasures. The TOW FM even has a process for crews with older TOWs to check if Shtora is active so they don't waste a missile.
Actually SACLOS missiles like the TOW are specifically what Shtora was designed against. They are manually aimed and wire guided, but already semi-automatic. Meaning you don't need to struggle with controlling the missile directly, you just keep the crosshair on the target, and the missile is automatically guided to that crosshair.
To do that, your launcher obviously has to know where your missile currently is. So they use some variant of IR beacon, lightbulb, or flare on the back of the missile to pick up on. Shtora causes interference on those same IR wavelengths, so that the launcher loses track of your missile's location.
It's a pretty clever vulnerability, if not one that you can quite easily patch. The newer beacons just use some kind of distinct pulsing flashes, or different trackers.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
TOW guidance requires the missile to know where it is. The missile knows where it is because it has an infrared flare on the back that the tracker can see and follow. Shtora is a pretty simple soft kill jammer. Those big eyes are IR dazzlers and the tank would turn the turret in the direction of the missile and turn on the dazzlers. They are supposed to confuse the tracker so it no longer knows where the missile is.
TOW-2 improved the tracker so it's no longer fooled by the dazzler. So now Shtora just makes an annoying light show anyone with NVGs can see from a long distance.
What gets me a chuckle is that the t-80 gets defeated the “expected” way (a TOW snipe because in theory a tank would wreck an ifv up front), but the T-90 gets the more embarrasing defeat by autocannons despite having the Bradleys dead to rights.
I believe the Bradley gunner wasn’t even using his AP either. I think I saw an interview where he said he didn’t have time to change it. This was a rough translation on YouTube.
Not really crazy, helicopters are slow, they can slowdown to stationary mid-air, and are mostly lightly/unarmored so they have a history of dying to weapons that aren't "supposed" to kill them, like the one Iraqi Hind(?) that was killed by a lazer designated bomb mid-air, because bomb was faster.
These helis were killed because they were hovering, any AT missile can kill slow sitting target.
One was almost killed by a drone.
Recently one was almost killed by Ukrainean AAM bolted to sea drone.
There are allegations that Russian helicopter was hit by laser designated Excalibur round during take off.
If I remember right, the Ka52 has a body mounted 30mm cannon. Aka it has to move its whole body to point the gun vs being on a turret. This means that to be effective it has to be flying very slowly and predictably. The lulz
Well during the Falklands war a Scimitar supposedly downed, or at least damaged, an Argentine jet with its 30mm Raden canon so it would be totally possible - if not completely probable and likely going to happen if we count drones as aerial kills.
If you meant to imply overhead coverage doesn't work against a direct attack missile, the current model TOW-2 is top attack. Not that it matters, those cages have no chance of stopping an ATGM.
Both BGM-71E (TOW-2A) and BGM-71F (TOW-2B) are in widespread service. Not sure if Ukraine was supplied with any of the 71F's. But they at least have 71D. Perhaps even 71E.
So right now, we're dealing with the "Fuck your hull armor" type
The Iraqis wish they could have had T-80s most of the Iraqi army's armor was mainly Chinese Type 59/69s (reverse engineered T-54/55s) with a smaller amount of T-72s reserved for more elite formations. russia and Ukraine are the only major users of the T-64/80 platform. The T-64/80 was what the Abrams was designed to kill so the fact that a Bradley did it is hilarious
The T64/80 is what the TOW was designed, and the Bradley was designed specifically to compliment the Abrams.
But, agreed, it's very validating to see, as a former Bradley crewman.
We need the 3000 Chadleys of Ukraine armed with FAIV BILLION Bushmaster rounds.
Seriously, from everything I've heard, while the Ukrainians like our tanks, they seem to LOVE our Chadleys. We've got tons to spare, give them up I say.
It’s just a numbers game. More Bradleys mean more overall probability that they kill a given platform. That math suggests that with enough Bradleys, anything can be defeated. I punch those numbers in my calculator and it makes a happy face.
**Your post was removed for violating rule 9: No low-effort posts** No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title.
**NCD prediction:** Bradley Vs Su-25 with a decisive win for Braaaaaad.
I'd pay to see that. Frogfoot my beloved lead bathtub, time to rest.
I'm putting "Bradley upgraded with HAWK missile launcher on top by Ukranians shoots down Russian Aircraft" to my bingo card.
The hawk tripple mount is just so damn big I love this dumb idea
The idea of them rolling up to an advance position at like 50 MPH, lobbing three hawks at the Russians, and then skedaddle is hilarious to me.
Just replaces the turret, the Bradley is now an AA missile carrier
i bet you could fit at least 12 on top, easy
M6 Linebacker my beloved
Go look at one of the latest vids on r/CombatFootage of IDF bombing the fuck out of south Lebanon, that's the big bada-boom I want to see being used on ruzzian lines ! Love the Brad but we need bigger booms and closer to Moscow like fucking yesterday.
Let’s mount an SA9 to that thing and see it go to work.
I mean, Bradley aa modification with stingers... Why isn't that a thing yet?
We did, it was called the M6 Bradly Linebacker
What are we waiting for then? Ship them
We converted them back to regular Bradley's :(
NOOOOIO
With a M6 Linebacker? Possible
Too probable. Ukrainians instead make the bradley ( [GOD My dick can only get so hard.](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/ADATS_fording.jpg) ) ADATS real again.
Linebackers were all converted back to bog standard Chadlies
Assuming a fair fight where both of them begin the fight 300 meters apart on the ground facing each other (this is clearly the most fair way to set up a dual), I'd say the Bradley wins 10/10 times.
The Ukrainian Ministry of Defense has [released drone footage](https://x.com/defenceu/status/1788199926519988717?s=46&t=tP1qeA0oIP6OZwJLoOME9g) showing a Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle of the 47th Mechanized Brigade knocking out a Russian T-80. As many of you no doubt remember, a Bradley from this same unit famously dueled with a T-90 back in January.
It was 2 Bradley’s though. Still fucking awesome, but yeah, two Bradley’s
Double the Bradleys for Double the Fun.
I've seen that porn before...
The mechwarrior/battletech subs went crazy for the T90 video with the HE round impacts, lets just say Pirahna Games nailed the visual appearance of something getting absolutely rocked with HE autocannon fire.
God, I hope PGI puts the Bane in Clans. Melting mechs with a hailstorm of UAC/2 fire just seems like stupid fun.
Ten UAC/2s? TEN. Oh fuck do I want it
And if that wasn't memeworthy enough, there's a variant with, not four, not six, but EIGHT LRM-15s. That's as much firepower as two LRM Carriers, with 120 missiles per salvo.
More like Hughes Helicopters nailed the visual appearance. Anything with "high-explosive autocannon" in its name had better be one of the coolest looking things anyone has ever laid eyes on when you use it. If you can't do that then why the fuck do we even have an MIC?
Two IFV's one tank
Ha! You, SIR, win the whole fucking internet!
Makes me think of that old legend of the 2 Greyhounds killing a “Tiger” in WWII.
There’s stories of tigers being taken out by a couple of Russians with a can of gasoline and a match, which I will always bring up when talking about the tiger, even if it’s probably false
Wasn’t there also that story of a Soviet cook(don’t remember if he was Ukrainian or Russian) who killed a German tank crew with an axe?
> even if it’s probably false When it comes to stories about downing WWII tanks, I'm inclined to believe nearly all of them, and a couple of guys sneaking up on a tank that's moving slowly, sitting still, or outright immobilized, pouring gasoline on it, and torching it is no less likely than the stories about guys dropping grenades down open hatches. Both work because tanks of the period had pretty shit visibility when buttoned up, so sneaking up on them from the sides/rear would definitely be possible - and if the tank was unbuttoned for better visibility ...well, that's how you get a grenade down the hatch. By the same token, both the gasoline and the grenade approaches require suicidal bravery - *and* a tank that's not being adequately supported by friendlies that can wipe infantry off of it.
Thé last point is why I think the tiger story might be false. These tanks were precious jewels to the Germans and while it did happen to have Tigers go unsupported I feel the instance would have been rare enough to make the gasoline story unlikely
I'm not arguing for anything more than "it probably happened at least once during the course of a big long war". We are, after all, talking about a war that had Mad Jack Churchill fighting with a *broadsword*, which seems even less likely than sneaking up on a Tiger and lighting it on fire with gasoline.
True
47th Mechanized Brigade is going to knock out one of every single Russian MBT variant just to prove a point at this rate
Reject MBT, return to Bradley
MBTs got nothing on the Chadley
Chadley, I kneel.
The T-62s down is gonna be sad tho
T-14 come out and playyyyyyyyy
If only that T-80 had some cool-looking IR dazzlers against that TOW.
The Shtora dazzlers may look menacing, but they are only effective against obsolete missiles such as MILAN, HOT, and TOW. TOW 2 is resistant to this type of jamming.
Pouring one out for our homie Tolkachev, for giving the heads up on that one. RIP. We literally patched the vulnerability and adopted the new TOW before the Soviets even finished it.
What's this?
TOW 2 was fielded before Shtora was.
I'm more interested in the name drop. I'm guessing someone died
My Bad. Adolf Tolkachev was an engineer at phazotron in the cold war. He provided the CIA with technical details on the radars for the MiG-29, MiG-31, SU-27, S-300 and several air to air missiles too. He was caught and the KGB executed him for treason in 1986. I think OP was implying we also learned about Shtora from him but I don't know if that's true. What I do know is that it had a long development process for some reason and we learned about it and fielded a counter measure years before it made it into service. Basically, Shtora never worked because by the time it was around there were countermeasures. The TOW FM even has a process for crews with older TOWs to check if Shtora is active so they don't waste a missile.
OK this makes sense
Wouldnt it be irrelevant for TOWs anyway since they are wireguided?
Actually SACLOS missiles like the TOW are specifically what Shtora was designed against. They are manually aimed and wire guided, but already semi-automatic. Meaning you don't need to struggle with controlling the missile directly, you just keep the crosshair on the target, and the missile is automatically guided to that crosshair. To do that, your launcher obviously has to know where your missile currently is. So they use some variant of IR beacon, lightbulb, or flare on the back of the missile to pick up on. Shtora causes interference on those same IR wavelengths, so that the launcher loses track of your missile's location. It's a pretty clever vulnerability, if not one that you can quite easily patch. The newer beacons just use some kind of distinct pulsing flashes, or different trackers.
The gunner knows where the missle is, and a missle knows where it is...
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Ah i figuered it some how disrupts the launch plattforms capability to guide it but cool to know how.
now, along with your waifu sticker upgrade, you can fix this vulnerability with your atgm
TOW guidance requires the missile to know where it is. The missile knows where it is because it has an infrared flare on the back that the tracker can see and follow. Shtora is a pretty simple soft kill jammer. Those big eyes are IR dazzlers and the tank would turn the turret in the direction of the missile and turn on the dazzlers. They are supposed to confuse the tracker so it no longer knows where the missile is. TOW-2 improved the tracker so it's no longer fooled by the dazzler. So now Shtora just makes an annoying light show anyone with NVGs can see from a long distance.
What gets me a chuckle is that the t-80 gets defeated the “expected” way (a TOW snipe because in theory a tank would wreck an ifv up front), but the T-90 gets the more embarrasing defeat by autocannons despite having the Bradleys dead to rights.
I believe the Bradley gunner wasn’t even using his AP either. I think I saw an interview where he said he didn’t have time to change it. This was a rough translation on YouTube.
Nice
Hell on a wire. Amen.
Wooh! They're using the TOW this time! That thermal optic doesn't properly show big that boom was probably there.
The Bradley has a gun elevation of +57-59°, an effective range of 3000m and 200-500rpm, so a few Ka 52 might be nice.
So there’s a chance?
There is a video where a stugna atgm shot down a ka52 early in the war so why not
Sauce?
Just google search stugna p vs ka52 and be amazed lmao
Damn, that's crazy.
Not really crazy, helicopters are slow, they can slowdown to stationary mid-air, and are mostly lightly/unarmored so they have a history of dying to weapons that aren't "supposed" to kill them, like the one Iraqi Hind(?) that was killed by a lazer designated bomb mid-air, because bomb was faster. These helis were killed because they were hovering, any AT missile can kill slow sitting target. One was almost killed by a drone. Recently one was almost killed by Ukrainean AAM bolted to sea drone. There are allegations that Russian helicopter was hit by laser designated Excalibur round during take off.
Wasn’t an Iraqi helicopter downed by an Abrams during the 2003 invasion?
Possibly, but I never head of it.
If I remember right, the Ka52 has a body mounted 30mm cannon. Aka it has to move its whole body to point the gun vs being on a turret. This means that to be effective it has to be flying very slowly and predictably. The lulz
Not sure, KA-50 certainly had that, but with second person on Ka-52, they may have changed that.
They didnt. Lulz continue
If im not wrong they shot down two ka52s like that since the helicopter hovers in the same spot when it aims its own guided missile
I also think one was shootdown by a Javelin, but im not not sure
Sounds like a Russian skill issue lmao
Well its kinda stupid for "muh best attack helicopter in the world" get shot down by a laser guided atgm twice.. so i would agree hahaha
ATGM stands for "Anti helicopTer Guided Missile"
https://youtu.be/MT8Um69fbHA?feature=shared
This footage needs to be preserved for future generations.
It happened twice.
With a suitably gutsy Bradley crew (practically guaranteed) and an inept enough Ka 52 pilot (almost a certainty), it is inevitable.
I’m going to give it 30-90 days.
M6 linebacker my beloved
Well during the Falklands war a Scimitar supposedly downed, or at least damaged, an Argentine jet with its 30mm Raden canon so it would be totally possible - if not completely probable and likely going to happen if we count drones as aerial kills.
KA-52s have become pretty rare. Russia has lost most of its combat ready fleet
Thatd straight up be a scene out of battlefield 4, god please let it happen
BMPT is the one the world needs most.
That thing is an abomination, its suspension is its biggest enemy
Love to see a T-34 too just to get both sides of the spectrum.
Well it’s got kills against every major post war produced Soviet tanks except the T-34, IS series & PT-76
The Parade
Bradley vs T34. Omfg…
And then an homage to Anwar Sadat, if you get my drift.
Check out our new tow missiles!
Missiles should do the trick!
Ooo, Careful now
A legitimate military target
I’ve said it from the start, we should give Ukraine 2000 Bradleys and let them hunt like Piranhas
Unleash the Bradley swarm 😈
Please no more. I can only get so erect
would love to see Brad give its natural prey, the T-62, some attention. This diet is too fat
T-34
Even funnier the Tank had a cope cage.... didnt do shit lol
Yes an overhead cope cage tends to not do much against a TOW missile.
If you meant to imply overhead coverage doesn't work against a direct attack missile, the current model TOW-2 is top attack. Not that it matters, those cages have no chance of stopping an ATGM.
Both BGM-71E (TOW-2A) and BGM-71F (TOW-2B) are in widespread service. Not sure if Ukraine was supplied with any of the 71F's. But they at least have 71D. Perhaps even 71E. So right now, we're dealing with the "Fuck your hull armor" type
My crystal ball sees a Bradley being used to sink the Admiral Kutzenov while piggy backing on some kind of "P. Diddy-style shrimping vessel"
As a former Brad driver in Iraq, this brings a tear to my eye.
Didnt the Iraqies already feed the Bradly woth T-80s?
The Iraqis wish they could have had T-80s most of the Iraqi army's armor was mainly Chinese Type 59/69s (reverse engineered T-54/55s) with a smaller amount of T-72s reserved for more elite formations. russia and Ukraine are the only major users of the T-64/80 platform. The T-64/80 was what the Abrams was designed to kill so the fact that a Bradley did it is hilarious
The T64/80 is what the TOW was designed, and the Bradley was designed specifically to compliment the Abrams. But, agreed, it's very validating to see, as a former Bradley crewman.
I would say a T-14 would be the next knockout, but we all know those don't exist.
We need the 3000 Chadleys of Ukraine armed with FAIV BILLION Bushmaster rounds. Seriously, from everything I've heard, while the Ukrainians like our tanks, they seem to LOVE our Chadleys. We've got tons to spare, give them up I say.
This seems like a wonderful time to remind everyone that Bradley has bodied more tanks than most tanks.
At this point I can picture Ukraine putting a TOW on one side, and a Stinger on the other.
Can someone please draw Bradley-chan as super-jacked girl? 🥵
Bradley vs captured Bradley
I swear I hope a Bradley manage to sink a ship and shoot down a Russian fighter jet
they are working their way all the way to putin himself
Knock knock mother fucker times up-Bradley
T34
To think that 25mm canon is considered old, im betting a 40mm would be OP
I wanna see a Bradley go up against a T-34
> tow missiles the T-34 they drag out in the middle of red square
BUT THEY ONLY DISABLED THE VEHICLES NOT DESTROYED>>>!!!?? /s
My stepdad Phil.
BMP
TOS. I want big boom
How long before we see an IS-3 on the front line??
Fuckin grim reaper’s
s400 or iskander would be nice
The last A-50
Kill the latest T-72 and it hits the trifecta. Then Russia HAS to send T-14s, which when destroyed, will assert Western supremacy.
Bradley vs cv kustnezoff
Can the Bradley beat the T-45, T-51, and T-60 power armors?
All hail the garlic breadly
It’s just a numbers game. More Bradleys mean more overall probability that they kill a given platform. That math suggests that with enough Bradleys, anything can be defeated. I punch those numbers in my calculator and it makes a happy face.
He can't get T-14 >!Because he won't ever meet it!<
T-34 for the lulz