Jump to content

BMP-3 vs Bradley


Recommended Posts

Hi all,

 

I have recently played several matches where mechanized infantry units fought each other. The most unsettling situation Always came on the BMP-3 vs Bradley side. I have found two matters of interest.

 

1) The main problem I see in this is that the BMP-3 Always fires an AT-10 ATGM with the gun as the first act of any engagement against enemy IFVs (provided it has more than a couple in storage) and this happens at 1000m as well as less than 500.

This would be a correct act against an MBT or at ranges of over 2000m, where the other weapons lose either penetration or precision, or both.

 

In any case this fact is emphasized a lot when the enemy Bradley is equipped with APS, thus giving the Bradley a double advantage. Add the fact that the missile is very imprecise (I personally registered a 50% accuracy ratio, nothing more, on nothing less than veteran crew on BMP-3M) and you got an estimation of the result, if the two vehicles spot at similar times, the BMP-3 will fire its less prices weapon at its enemy, while the Bradley will fire a single burst of 25mm, with a 100% precision result and a guaranteed catastrophic result for the BMP-3. In more than a situation the 30mm gun would be a better choice, I would say Always when it comes to enemy IFVs of any kind.

Even more, consider that the Bradley rarely uses a TOW2 on a BMP-3, thus preferring the 25mm gun aven at 1000m+.

 

2) survivalability. I understand that the BMP-3 has weak armor, lots of ammunitions, and all the negative elements we know, but I recognized that while a Bradley can destroy or heavily incapacitate a BMP-3 with a single (or maximum two) bursts of 25mm; on the other hand the BMP-3 more often than not, needed an entire minute to destroy a Bradley, using the 30mm gun and sometimes firing another AT-10 (even at less than 500m), when I say a minute I mean that it took several long time bursts of 30mm, not just 4 or 5 rounds.

 

The sensible difference of sensor and spotting ability (which favours the Bradley) emphasizes the importance of the first shots.

 

I know that the game is not about balance, but I belive that the multi-Platform BMP-3 is not capable of fighting other IFVs at its best possibilities. The use of an ATGM is more often than not out of place against enemy IFVs and calls for a handicap start at any engagement.

Edited by Kieme(ITA)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree about the fact that the BMP-3 crews seldom employ their weapons systems wisely.

I don't know, maybe it's a rather complex vehicle for the game engine to manage, having so many different weapons.

Yet I didn't notice the weak terminal effects of the 30mm autocannon when engaging Bradleys - so far seems to me that a couple of 30mm burst would disable the M2 80% of the times.

 

One thing I'm rather skeptical though, its the ability of reactive armor (especially the "regular" one found on american AFVs) to defeat incoming ATGMs basically all the times.

 

Although I don't know if the AT-10 on the BMP-3 has a tandem wh (If it's not there in the original version, I'm pretty sure they would make a "AT-10M" version with tandem wh), I see many ATGMs supposed to have that (AT-13, AT-14, Krizh, AT-5B, AT4-C) way too often defeated by ERA

 

 

edit: I looked around the web and the 9m117m "kan" and the 9m117m1 "arkan" have tandem warheads. Should defeat any reactive armor present in game; and also 600 to 850mm RHA after that..

Edited by whitehot78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 30mm on the 2a72 would be saboted so it would negate the effect of the ERA on the Bradley.

Yes BMP-3 is made of paper, but how much better off is the Bradley?

 

As an aside where was the Bradley getting hit? I think its the unfortunate Bradley model that the AI targets targets the hardest parts due to the aiming mechanic, If the BMP-3 was firing at the turret then im sure it would be different.

Hopefully we can see a few more versions of the 3M in later expansions, like this one with Bakchka-U and Composite armour addons. Gurdy is working on this for us at RHS at the moment. Seems to be an older turret module as it lacks the commanders independent viewer.

 

http://s53.radikal.ru/i142/1004/8c/424c0d4dd288.jpg

Edited by Stagler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main hitting point of the 30mm BMP-3M gun against the Bradley appears to be the turret (unless the distance is over 1000m).

 

 

 

I am conducting some "dry" testing. I am not a big fan of these, but I am wondering now how the BMP-3 can perform in general against the Bradley.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A first test (both tanks with same details, and regular crews/ perfect weather conditions/not a single obstacle etc.).

At 2000m

 

Bradley spots BMP-3 in a time between 1 to 10 seconds.

Bradley Always fire TOW2

 

BMP-3 spots Bradley in 2 to 4 (!) minutes (Bradley had restricted cover arc to force it not firing)

BMP-3 Always fire AT-10

 

Seems pretty huge difference to me, even considering you want to give the Bradley a net advantage on that. But with these numbers a BMP-3 will never be able to engage directly a Bradley.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second test, same conditions

At 800m

 

Bradley spots BMP-3 in a time between 1 to 5 seconds

Bradley Always fire 25mm

 

BMP-3 spots Bradley in 30 to 60 seconds

BMP-3 Always fire AT-10

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Third test, same conditions

At 500m

 

Bradley spots BMP-3 in a time between 1 to 5 seconds

Bradley Always fire 25mm

 

BMMp-3 spots Bradley in 25 to 30 seconds

BMP-3 Always fire AT-10

 

As you can see, despite any range, the BMP-3 fires an AT-10 as first reaction to the Bradley spotted. As I mentioned in the first post, if the Bradley has an APS that shot is most probably wasted, thus giving the Bradley a reaction time that is the sum of 1)time needed for the BMP-3 to aim and shoot + (2) flight time of the missile + (3) missile intercepted by APS, during which the Bradley will Always use the 25mm gun with 100% precision.

 

***But the most astonishing result is in my opinion that while the BMP-3 spotting ability grows with the reduction of distance to the target (something which appears to be "realistic"), the Bradley ability to spot practically does not degrade with the increse of the distance to the target; this last effect is at its extreme point at 2000m, where the BMP-3 takes at least 12 times the time the Bradley needs to spot it.

 

Overall:

-Bradley will Always spot BMP-3 first

-Bradley does not suffer from catastrophic explosions (while BMP-3 will get one most of the time)

-Bradley APS can intercept AT-10 (while BMP-3 APS can intercept TOW2 as well)

-Bradley is more resistant than BMP-3 to 30mm fire than the BMP-3 to 25mm fire

-Bradley takes less time to aim and shoot than BMP-3.

 

BMP-3 is incapable of beating the Bradley in direct spotting (I will try a 200m or less test) or in any direct engagement.

The fact that BMP-3 will use an AT-10 as first rule of engagement will make the Bradley with APS, de facto, a guaranteed winner of any engagement.

 

At 140m of distance, the BMP-3 finally decides to use the 30mm gun first,. Always.

At 140m though, the BMP-3 will Always take 5 or more seconds to spot the Bradley, while the Bradley will spot in 1 to 2 seconds.

Bradley spotting ability seems practically instant, whatever the range.

Edited by Kieme(ITA)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just ran a test at 1000m...

 

BMP3M got an ID in 10 sec from start.  M2 got a ? at 8 sec and a solid at 14 sec.  I have run it a few times and there are huge swings in variability in the spotting.

 

The difference in my test is that I had spotters loaded in each IFV.  The BMP3 with a two man crew is at a big disadvantage to the M2 with a three man crew.  Load a an infantry unit in the BMP3 and the leader of the infantry unit becomes the commander of the IFV and uses the optics at that station.  There is whole thread on this issue down further, but,  more related to the BMP2M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, I made a mistake in my test.  I left the infantry at Veteran and +1 leadership for the Russians.  When I evened everything out, it took 20-40 sec to spot the M2 and the BMP3 fired the AT-10 first and then fired a few bursts of 30mm.  So leadership and experience have an impact on what weapon to employ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing interesting with this whole complaint is what weapon should the BMP3 use first when engaging  a Bradley.

 

Or carry it on to any other duel in the game when there is a multiple choice as to which weapon to use.

 

For sure the AI should be programmed to select the most deadly choice.

 

I would think BF has tried to program that choice.

 

What is needed here is to run some test that shows what is the best weapon to use to get results with the BMP3 vs Bradley duel. (And if it can be shown to be more affective in using the  30MM then I would think BF would make the adjustment.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for sharing TheWood, I will try a few other iterations with and without the "commander" in BMP-3, and also some variations with additional leadership and/or experience levels for the BMP.

 

 

-changing the training level of the crew

(800m engagement)

With the same settings as above I tried to see what an ELITE crewed BMP-3 can do at 800m. The spotting times were slightly reduced, from 30/60 seconds to 20/30. Yet, the regular crewed Bradley still spots the BMP-3 much faster, Always destroying it before the BMP-3 can spot, unless the rare occasions where the BMP-3 laser causes the Bradley to use smoke and save itself. 

 

The same test, this time depicting an ELITE crew BMP-3M against a CONSCRIPT crew Bradley, repeated 10 times, showed that the Bradley still spots first, but takes longer to aim the gun, resulting in most cases in the BMP-3 being hit by a 25mm salvo, but winning the fight thanks to the AT-10 it can launch. Alternatively, when the BMP-3 spots first the Bradley, even conscript, deploys the smoke fast enough (probably the system is automatic).

 

Anyway, the only situation when the result of the engagment seems really undecided was achieved with an ELITE BMP-3 against a CONSCRIPT Bradley. But it's Worth to note that even the elite BMP-3 will shoot an AT-10 first, while even a conscript Bradley will shoot the 25mm gun first. Thus, as stated in the open thread, the Bradley with APS has a double advantage on the BMP-3 thanks to the fact that an AT-10 will be fired first.

Edited by Kieme(ITA)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-changing the presence of additional crew on BMP-3 +  ELITE crew

(2000m engagement)

 

Seems that the presence of a transported crew + ELITE vehicle crew indeed lowers the spotting time for the BMP-3 at this distance, from the 2-4 minutes to the 1.5-2 minutes.

Edited by Kieme(ITA)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would think BF has tried to program that choice.

What is needed here is to run some test that shows what is the best weapon to use to get results with the BMP3 vs Bradley duel. (And if it can be shown to be more affective in using the 30MM then I would think BF would make the adjustment.)

Yes, absolutely they have. And yes absolutely they would make adjustments on the basis of evidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ran a couple firing tests and the BMP3M fired its 30mm every single time at 1000m. Only ran three tests though.

I have a test that I run on every build that includes some BMP3 on Bradley action. It is about ERA blocks and not able weapon choice but having the BMP3 use its 30mm under 1000m is what I see as more common.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand, in the future I will keep some infantry units inside the BMP-3 and see if there's a better result.

I understand also what you mean by apple and oranges, but I also wonder the nightmare that is using BMP-3s then, if you need to keep someone inside with the crew, to get a decent spotting ability, you will need at least a rifle platoon sniper team inside a vehicle, or sacrifice a scout team out of each rifle squad to get those two more men on each of the platoon BMP-3... maybe this is intended, but looks like a big problem for the player. Not only it takes out two AK riflemen from each rifle squad, it also takes out any kind of potential split for the remaining teams because you already split the men for your BMP-3.

If we talk About the entire infantry unit then, then problem is much bigger, as that unit will be completely destroyed if the BMP-3 is hit (no chance of survival).

 

 

Meanhwile the problem of AT-10 as preferred weapon engaging enemy IFV is still a big handicap for the BMP-3. At the same distances, like 500m, the Bradley has the advantage to be using the 25mm, while the BMP-3 disregards the 30mm gun for a much riskier shot with the at-10.

Edited by Kieme(ITA)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The BMP-3 is beginning to seem like a really poorly designed weapon system. I mean why would they not have permanent vehicle commander if the gunner's spotting ability is so poor? I could understand if it only had a 50. cal or less, or maybe even a 40mm; but all that munition and then lacking the ability to spot targets. When mounted by its infantry squad the bow gunners spot better (yes they really do. Infantry hiding in forests).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong, I am glad the game represents the BMP-3 bad problems.

There are some issues anyway that could be ironed out with ease (such as the weapon choice depending on target type and range), and maybe the spotting could be improved to make it slightly worse than the Bradley -not such a huge difference-, if not for a 360° (the Bradley has a CITV), at least for the front arc where the BMP-3 turret is facing. Because, as it stands now, I really don't see how this asset can be used in a direct confrontation.

Edited by Kieme(ITA)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The gunners optics has a very narrow field of view.  That kills for spotting abilities and rightly so.  Think about all the disadvantages 2-man turrets have in other CM games.  Go play steel beasts and try to use the gunner sight for spotting.  It is not easy.  Switch to thermal commander system and its a world of difference.  I think the BMP-2M actually has the full 360 deg. CITV system and can outperform the BMP-3M in spotting.  I might be confusing the -3 with the 3M though.

 

As to weapon choice, it seems very spotty.  I get AT-10 sometimes and 30mm sometimes.  I think that is already on the docket for the next patch.

Edited by Thewood1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1) The main problem I see in this is that the BMP-3 Always fires an AT-10 ATGM with the gun as the first act of any engagement against enemy IFVs (provided it has more than a couple in storage) and this happens at 1000m as well as less than 500.

I'll look into it, but in a PBEM I am playing with the latest beta patch my BMP-3Ms are using 30mm exclusively against Ukrainian BMP-2s.

 

edit: I looked around the web and the 9m117m "kan" and the 9m117m1 "arkan" have tandem warheads. Should defeat any reactive armor present in game

That's not true. For example, the ARAT on the Abrams hull is a multiple layer ERA designed to stop tandem warheads.

 

Yes BMP-3 is made of paper, but how much better off is the Bradley?

BMP-3M combat weight: 22t

Bradley combat weight: 33t

Those TOW missiles must be HEAVY! ;)

Edited by Vanir Ausf B
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Understood, the problem with the BMP-2M is that the 30mm can't get reliable penetrations on Bradley like the BMP-3's gun.

 

Thanks Vanir,

I really hope that's the case against Bradleys too. Even if the american IFV is better protected (and has ERA layers) with respect to the ukrainian IFV, the 30mm seems quite the best weapon for IFV duelling.

Edited by Kieme(ITA)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...