-------------------------------------------- On Tue, 6/16/15, Greg Chalik <xxxxxx@gmail.com> wrote: Subject: Re: [TML] Question To: "xxxxxx@simplelists.com" <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> Date: Tuesday, June 16, 2015, 10:09 PM On 17 June 2015 at 11:59, Phil Pugliese (via tml list) <xxxxxx@simplelists.com> wrote: I've always figured that those soviet wheeled APC's compared favorably to the US M-113 tracked APC but always wondered how the later versions would compare against 'Bradleys'. But then that's probably what the BMP tracked vehicle was for. Although it did enter service some years before the 'Bradley' did. Phil, The wheeled APCs were designed for the entirely different reasons to those of the M113. The Bradley was designed to 'outdo' the BMP-1, but its designers didn't realise what the BMP-1 design mission requirements were. The Bradley was therefore a failure not just in that it was unaffordable, but it was also inappropriate to requirements, and not exactly elegant in design. And of course it took almost two decades to put into production. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Yeah, the Bradley was expensive but that was to be expected. Expense was also the big rap against the Abrams &, in fact, the army even reduced the standard # of tanks w/i a standard armored batt as a response. But, I don't think anyone calls the Abrams a failure. At least not credibly. Also, what about the ACAV version of the Bradley for the armored cav regiments & armored recce batts? From what I remember it was pretty much the same vehicle but would instead carry about 1/2 the personnel but increased ammo esp anti-tank missiles. ============================================================================================
