DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**otheloComRole** · 08-04-2011, 04:45 PM

The Bradley Fighting Vehicle is one such example of an unnecessary project that cost hundreds of millions to develop and is the most useless vehicle in the arsenal.

R&D costs were ridiculous, as were the survivability issues with early models.

As far as uselessness is concerned, the BFV was a MASSIVE improvement over its predecessor. If you made the transition from M113 to BFV as an Infantryman, as I did, you wouldn't call the BFV useless.

When you consider that during Operation Desert Storm (the last great armored battle of the 21st century and one of the biggest) the BFV racked up more kills, as a vehicle, than did the M1 tank while suffering only 4 vehicle killed as a result of enemy fire, you see that it's lethality and survivability under enemy contact isn't exactly useless.

As it stands there are really very few threat armored vehicles in the world that can go toe-to-toe with a BFV in its element, and when you throw Divisonal assets needed to build a combined team there are probably no armoered forces in the world that could beat American armor.

The M2 may not be suited for the modern urban battlefield, but it wasn't designed for the modern urban battlefield. At the time it was developed the main threat was from the 8th Guards Army rolling down the Fulda Gap. There probably weren't enough of them in Europe at the time of that threat to serve as more than a speed bump but, again, I'd have much prefered weathering Russian artillery in a BFV than in a Gavin.

I'd love to see how "modern" wheeled armored vehicles handle weeks in the German mud in October/November. If you've never been stuck in German mud in an armored vehicle you haven't lived. There are mud puddles that will literally swallow a BFV or an M1. As a driver of a BFV I had to crawl out of the turrett once because the vehicle was so far under the mud that everything other than the turrett hatches were submerged. The mechanics and I went swimming in mud with some tow cables, hooked the Brad up to an M88, pulled the bitch out, and drove it away. In a M113 I would have been dead - literally dead.

Not "useless".

08-04-2011, 04:45 PM	#15
otheloComRole Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 433 Senior Member	The Bradley Fighting Vehicle is one such example of an unnecessary project that cost hundreds of millions to develop and is the most useless vehicle in the arsenal. R&D costs were ridiculous, as were the survivability issues with early models. As far as uselessness is concerned, the BFV was a MASSIVE improvement over its predecessor. If you made the transition from M113 to BFV as an Infantryman, as I did, you wouldn't call the BFV useless. When you consider that during Operation Desert Storm (the last great armored battle of the 21st century and one of the biggest) the BFV racked up more kills, as a vehicle, than did the M1 tank while suffering only 4 vehicle killed as a result of enemy fire, you see that it's lethality and survivability under enemy contact isn't exactly useless. As it stands there are really very few threat armored vehicles in the world that can go toe-to-toe with a BFV in its element, and when you throw Divisonal assets needed to build a combined team there are probably no armoered forces in the world that could beat American armor. The M2 may not be suited for the modern urban battlefield, but it wasn't designed for the modern urban battlefield. At the time it was developed the main threat was from the 8th Guards Army rolling down the Fulda Gap. There probably weren't enough of them in Europe at the time of that threat to serve as more than a speed bump but, again, I'd have much prefered weathering Russian artillery in a BFV than in a Gavin. I'd love to see how "modern" wheeled armored vehicles handle weeks in the German mud in October/November. If you've never been stuck in German mud in an armored vehicle you haven't lived. There are mud puddles that will literally swallow a BFV or an M1. As a driver of a BFV I had to crawl out of the turrett once because the vehicle was so far under the mud that everything other than the turrett hatches were submerged. The mechanics and I went swimming in mud with some tow cables, hooked the Brad up to an M88, pulled the bitch out, and drove it away. In a M113 I would have been dead - literally dead. Not "useless".
	Quote