Why didn't the Bradley use TOW against T-90?
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 05. 2024
- #ukraine #military #russiaukrainewar #russiaukraine
All vehicles shown in the video used in a safe environment. No one was injured in their use. The video was made for journalistic purposes
PayPal: warmysupp@gmail.com
BTC: 1LnVY3rqpyMkgdGA1Q8opM97gh8ZsraMXj
ETH (ERC20): 0xa323a7d7ec48fe90dbd5a7d548f88104ccacc133
USDT (TRC20): TCwDm1PAQ5yHEJrCKrkYECRahXW3kagFxR
This documentary video is investigative journalism and is not intended as a call to action or political agitation. All shocking and sensitive scenes have been hidden or processed in accordance with ethical standards. The purpose of the video is to inform viewers about the events in Ukraine based on available data and evidence. The opinions and conclusions expressed in this video are those of the authors and do not reflect the position of the channel or its partners.
Members-only videos:
czcams.com/play/UUMONyH_tBz6Hyzqx-tIfQJIKQ.html
Become a sponsor:
czcams.com/channels/NyH_tBz6Hyzqx-tIfQJIKQ.htmljoin
This is really an elementary question for anybody who has any familiarity at all with the Bradley or the TOW Missile. There are multiple reasons to not use the TOW Missile at close range. First of all, it takes 800 m for the warhead to arm. Secondly, the chain gun can be fired instantly and can likely disable a tank by striking all of the rangefinders and external site aperture. Another reason is that the TOW missile launcher takes a lengthy period of time to get into the firing position as compared to the chain gun which already stated can fire instantly.
It is way less than 800m for warhead to arm. About 65m is minimum distance. Bradley could definitely use it at that distance shown in this video. My bet is that they didn't have any missiles, so they chose to use gun instead.
Awesome reply 🎉🎉
800m to arm is ridiulous, no military company whatsoever would build that
I think its more likely cause of tows re ineffective with their tandem warhead against era and AP systens
The man knows what he's talking about
Simple tow is for longer ranges when u know ur target hasn't spotted u
No it's for heavy armor
@aurane24 ur dumb so by ur explanation t90m isnt heavy armor 🤣 plus the tow foes over the too of the tank to avoid the armor
@@aurane24 Both right
Don't you mean T. O. W lmao, ai bs short I just fucked my algorithm commenting on
@@robert48044 you can't even handle writing a normal English sentence that anyone can understand.... And you're complaining about someone writing 'tow'. Just saying...
I saw a video where a Bradley used its TOW missile on a Russian tank, I believe it was a T-80 if I remember right.
For a small cannon, it looks very effective.
Those 25mm bushmasters pack a hella of a punch..easily can damage vital equipment on enemy’s armor with enough rounds suppressing the gunner from getting his sights ..add the shock effect of having multiple 25mm cannon rounds explode in your face and you got a blind and disabled T90M on your hands
Yes I am pro Russia but man those Bradley's are amazing
Also the a10, fathom and f-14/16 are beautiful
@@AnmolX-jw8jr I strangely feel like I could have a decent conversation with you as some one who strongly disagree Russias government..
@@AnmolX-jw8jrHow can you be Putiny Gobbler😂😅 Bit of Moron , Correct ✅
From what I’ve come to understand is the guy who took out the t90 with the Bradley knew how to disable that tank because of a game he played.
Most likely he played War Thunder
def warthunder, it may not have realistic physics but you can find all the weakspots on any tank
When you say Immobilised you mean stationary . They mean different things .
It be selection of words like that that make me cringe as a armored vehicle enthusiast
🥷🥷💪💪❤️❤️❤️🇺🇦🇩🇰🇺🇦🇩🇰🇺🇦❤️❤️❤️
The new IFV has a gun twice the size 😂
Ei tarvii isompaa asetta.
its still a prototype though
@@user-nx7vb7ur1o a bigger gun is a very big difference, the 25mm is an extremely weak caliber even with APFSDS, a 50mm would be able to take out tanks with a single shot to the side
Or they didnt have one and it was empty
sometimes it's a targeting computer. Instead of a TOW system.
Hard to use them when you don't have them. They got very low on TOW at one point and many of the Bradleys they were supplied did not have TOW fitted.
No mystery, the gun could do it. I worked on the bradley turret asmy line supplying parts to the assemblers😊
I didnt know bradley shipped to ukraine with TOW
Theres a good possibility they were out of tows. A mechanical failure with bringing them up to fire, but more than likely, they were going for a mobility and vision kill. If their able to destroy the tanks sensors it jas no way of seeing, nor shooting.
Right now, as we speak, approximately 100 Bradleys are on their way to Ukraine 🇺🇦
Also, approximately 100 of our 🇺🇸 M113s are also on their way to Ukraine 🇺🇦, the M113s predominantly for CasEvac...
A lot, and I mean A LOT of other American Weaponry and Munitions are on their way to Ukraine. Unfortunately, that is taking a little longer to arrive in Ukraine 🇺🇦, and the Ukrainians have to try to hold on a bit longer.
⚔️🇺🇸🫱🏻🫲🏼🇺🇦⚔️
Won't matter what is sent..thus is an existential thread for Russia...they won't tolerate Ukraine in Natoma on their border. I'm betting they're willing to go all out...they have nukes let's not forget.
Прекрасно. Украинцы должны помирать, в ожидании помощи, чтобы получить боеприпасы с техникой от США, чтобы война затянулась, и умерло ещё больше людей.
Or maybe they already used them and resolved with what they had at hand
A better question why didn’t the T-90 use its main gun to destroy the Bradley
Because the bradley destroyed its ability to
On other words, the Bradley saw the tank first and they couldn't see the Bradley
bradley saw it first, and the gunner said he shot the optics, which meant they couldnt aim or see
I can see them not using it, is tow tandem?
TOW has a minimum range if I'm not mistaken. The Bradley was well within that minimum range.
most missiles have min ranges, from that range the missiles rocket didnt have time to fully activate and it would probably fall onto the ground or just hit the tracks
Ne reason is simple. The tow is wire guided. If the wire touches anything. It breaks. Tracking past a tree will break the wire. Trees in this video.
Already used the tow
Bro is begging for likes
They were killing it with the bushmaster cannon
It's really simple
Alot of people played too many games and don't know that TOW won't arm at close range.
Besides distance being an issue for arming you also have to have a pretty clear area the wire can get disconnected or broken very easily on bushes, trees, etc. When that line is broke the warhead will just drop and then you end up having a uxo
Saving TOW missiles or were out of them.
they didn't have missiles nour at rounds, only HE rounds
Maybe because the t90 would just jam the TOW
You can’t jam a tow, it’s wire guided.
Why didn't i get something better in my box of crackerjacks because they didn't put anything special in the box to start with they didn't have any missles to fire A hole
Unlike the CV90 but that is not even needed, it has a 40mm autocannon. But you'll never hear about that in this channel even though the CV90's are more plentiful and used a lot more because they have far better armour, a radar, a 40mm autocannon and is so far ahead it's not even funny... for the US industry and that last part is why it's never mentioned. Nor are NLAW's nor leopards even though those are the only tanks in use by Ukraine now because "they are saving the US tanks for later" and absolutely not because the Abrams were getting slaughtered on the battlefield. A turbine engine is great, but you can either run it really high or you can wait for 45 seconds for it to move.
That is why they are adding electrical motors to the next rendition but that is not the only problem.
In reality, Abrams and Bradleys are kinda shit compared to the CV90 and even the leopard 1.
it looks cooler!
Cause there's no tow missiles on it, just the same way Abrams didn't have a dynamic protection, sadly but true.
you mean depleted uranium armor or APS?
@@kyizelma APS, the same way leopard 2 tanks
the real reason is that they were having to much FUN shredding that tank with the 40.
what 40? 40mm? bradley has a 25mm your confusing it with the swedish cv90 with a 40mm
"уничтожать"? Они не нанесли танку никакого урона.
We didn’t sell them any. We rarely sell them.
That's entirely false lol
we did, we litteraly gave them abrams and leopards, have you been living under a rock
@@kyizelma отдали, а не продали.
TOE's need 800 meters to arm the warhead.😊
TOW arms in 65 meters. But he would have needed to be stationary and at that range it was a bad idea
That’s wrong the arm distance is 15 to 35 m and 1700 to 3000 m max distance . Depends on variation . 800 m is nearly a kilometer that makes zero sense . When they will be engaging in short ranges at the most part .
@@ZiGGi03 the TOWIIA armed at 65 meters and was good for 3750 meters (21.5 seconds of flight time at that distance. It's amazing what the brain won't forget)
@@ZiGGi03yeah that was a ignorant ass take on his part there are even videos of Brads shooting tows within 800 meters and taking out enemy armor and infantry
No military company whatsoever would produce something that is armed after 800m
Way to long of a distance reagrding combat readiness and effectiveness
They didn’t want to be sitting ducks and firing one TOW is very expensive using them on better targets
better targets than a t90? i mean each TOW costs around 90k while the T90 costs around 4.5M depending on version
There were 2 tag teaming the t90. Makes you wonder why one didnt let loose a TOW while the other hammered away with the b master. Two of thr biggeat reasons i can think of, 1) couldnt be sure there wasnt another t90 fuckin about somewhere close by. 2) drones/arty
WRONG AGAIN, TOWS ALSO HAVE A FAF VERSION.AND A WIRELESS VERSION THAT IS SELF GUIDED ONCE LOCKED ON.. MAYBE UKR DIDNT GET THESE..TOWS ALSO HAVE CLOSE RANGE SAFETY TO PREVENT SELF DAMAGE.
No way people think 😂reactive armor going off means the bradley destroyed the T 90😂😂😂0 IQ
they shot out the optics, damaged the turret ring and iirc the tracks, also reactive armor doesent have that big of an explosion
So TOW is not toh woo ...?
I was US Army mech infantry. Stop saying the TOW doesn’t arm for 800 meters. It arms at around 65 meters, except the TOW-2B top down attack tandem EFP warhead, that arms closer to 200 meters. My guess would be neither Bradley had any missiles at all. If they did they’d still want to disable the optics with the HEI-T rounds first considering the distance and the tank being very aware of their presence, but if they had missiles they would have used them eventually.
KA BOOOM! 😅😢😂😢😊
TƏİR istifadə etmək üçün məsafə çox qısa idi, üstəgəl bunun üçün Bredli hərəkətsiz dayanmalı idi. TƏİR istifadəsi mümkün deyildi.
السؤال الاكبر لماذا تكذب الدبابة الروسية لم تنفجر ونما واصلة القتل وهذا الانفجار انما انفجار للدروع التفاعلية فقط فالتعرض الفيديو كامل 😂😂 لكي يشاهدر الدبابة الروسية وهي تواصل القتل وتدمر البرادلي
it didnt? they litteraly interviewed the crew after it happened, also reactive armor doesent have explosions that large they usually dont have any explosion
Because they dont have any?
Ukrop
Fjb
they already said that they didn’t wanted to stop
The same video over and over again, it's embarrassing .
херня
Cry harder