Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

unhappycamper

(60,364 posts)
Fri Nov 16, 2012, 09:54 AM Nov 2012

Bradley Replacement to Outweigh Abrams Tank

http://www.dodbuzz.com/2012/11/15/bradley-replacement-to-outweigh-abrams-tank/




Bradley Replacement to Outweigh Abrams Tank
By Matthew Cox Thursday, November 15th, 2012 1:18 pm
Posted in Land

The new weight estimate, released by the Congressional Budget Office, mean that the service’s replacement for the outdated Bradley fighting vehicle would be heavier than an M1 Abrams tank and weigh more than two current Bradleys.



unhappycamper comment: Be sure to read the comments following the article.
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Bradley Replacement to Outweigh Abrams Tank (Original Post) unhappycamper Nov 2012 OP
OMG what a boondoggle! 84 tons of target. Jackpine Radical Nov 2012 #1
I don't know if you've had any experience with the Bradley in real life Victor_c3 Nov 2012 #3
Just the old M113 APC's, and then only in the States. Jackpine Radical Nov 2012 #4
I hope it'll have a softer look to it Victor_c3 Nov 2012 #2

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
1. OMG what a boondoggle! 84 tons of target.
Fri Nov 16, 2012, 10:13 AM
Nov 2012

My favorite comment:

"Might I suggest a name for the GCV {Ground Combat Vehicle}? How about "The Mobile Maginot Line"? Assuming it actually proves to be mobile at 84 tons, of course.

Victor_c3

(3,557 posts)
3. I don't know if you've had any experience with the Bradley in real life
Fri Nov 16, 2012, 07:23 PM
Nov 2012

Speaking of mobile targer, the Bradley is one of the tallest vehicles on the battlefield. The height is striking when you compare the Bradley and a BMP (the Soviet/Russian equivalent) side by side.

I have nothing bad to say about the Bradley though. I loved mine and felt absolutely secure in it. I had a car bomb blow up on me and it only put little pieces of shrapnel into the reactive armor. However, some weirdo did think it was a cool idea to fire an RPG through the ramp on the back My driver got a bunch of shrapnel in his back, but nothing else. Maybe they could stand to improve the 360 degree armor protection...

Jackpine Radical

(45,274 posts)
4. Just the old M113 APC's, and then only in the States.
Fri Nov 16, 2012, 10:31 PM
Nov 2012

I was 1st Cav in 'Nam, jumped out of Hueys a lot (sometimes into places I'd really rather not have gone), but no PC action.

Victor_c3

(3,557 posts)
2. I hope it'll have a softer look to it
Fri Nov 16, 2012, 02:03 PM
Nov 2012

We had to install some of those KC lights with the smiley faces on our brads to soften the look a little bit.

[IMG][/IMG]

I was getting nervous that the Army was going to phase out the BFV (Bradley Fighting Vehicle) when they started to field the Stryker around 2003-2004. I had two tanks and two BFVs in my platoon and I was involved in some pretty intense urban fighting. Heavy armored vehicles are invaluable in urban settings. They are great for breaching buildings, eliminating snipers, and for drawing fire. I loved the hell out of my BFV.

As much as I would love to see a bigger and better replacement for the Bradley, I didn't experience any major shortcomings in combat.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Veterans»Bradley Replacement to Ou...