More information about the park here: www.parkvojaskezgodovine.si twitter.com/pvz_pivka, facebook.com/parkvojaskezgodovine, ruclips.net/channel/UCYzz0BwnsGzkfsogc9I54_Q and instagram.com/parkvojaskezgodovine/
Couldn't give a monkeys about Russia's fighting vehicles. They're only good for one thing. Burning their crews. Why are you glorifying those horrific monsters?
My understanding is that the MT-LB has gained popularity in the post-Soviet Russian Army because it has slightly better mobility off-road than the BMP series thanks to having wider tracks, especially in places with softer ground or heavy snow. With a reduction in towed AT guns presumably extra vehicles were available to be used as APCs, and possibly also to allow conversion of some MRR from BTRs to fully tracked formations.
They seem to be used in either armored or formations or lower priority formations like arctic rifle brigades because they are lower priority for equipment but still need an apc.
The better mobility was also noticed by the swedish army, which bought several from former East Germany, and the type was used in northern Sweden because of it's better mobility than the BMP-1 (which also was purchased), especially in deep snow.
M113 is a dedicated APC suitable for that purpose only. i know it have variants for Mortar carrier , SPAAG (M163 VADS) etc . but not comparable to MT-LB. MT-LB is a multipurpose Armored vehicle whose primary role is to serve as an Artillery tractor and recovery vehicle, which also serves as APC too, and in cases 23mm SPAAG. IMO, The Only American vehicle that is comparable to MT-LB in every criteria (Rather, this vehicle inspired and helped in making the vehicle of MT-LB and BTR-50) is the M3 and M5 series of Half-tracks. I know they are different, but the Soviets were very much happy with the American halftracks on land lease programs during ww2, which served all their purposes and conditions . and later they wanted to have their own version.
@@christianwilson5956 the 80th arctic motor rifle brigade is not a low priority unit. it is a 100% professional unit with 2 BTG´s, equipped with MT-LB and T80UM or T80BVM.
In finland we still use MT-LB alot. One of the things about people dont talk about how versitale the use of this vechile is. We use it to transport troops, tow granade launchers and light artillery and other goods. All this for a semi armored platform that can go almost everywhere and costs less than a truck.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized I'm 192cm. I fit inside. and I easily fell asleep in the back during final maneuvers. It's just that our logistics vehicle (ammo, med and recovery combined) didn't have a working heater. It only shot flame.
I drove a MTLB when I was younger and in the military. It did easily över 80 km/h and we had one in the garage doing over 100km/h after some modifications.
As a swedish strf 90 commander in the military we felt really sorry about those that had to use that MT-LB death trap. Very easy to spot (on heat cameras), seemed very slow or hard to maneuver and also seemed nearly blind without infantry on the outside . Might be ok as a battle taxi but should not be used close to the front. (That was in the 1990:s , nowadays any armor seems to be a death trap)
I went thru infantry school in the early 90s, and was trained as an M-47 Dragon gunner, spent a lot of time looking at vehicle ID flash cards and remember thinking how old the LBS looked 30 years ago. Have been amazed to see how many are still being used.
I drove a wide-track variant of this in my time during conscription! It's such a nice off-road vehicle Don't know how it'd fair in combat though, being a battle taxi and all
@@MrSheduur Nah, nothing is as bad as M113. When your APC is crap made by worst US auto maker for lowest bid (but big bribes to far right politicians) that was obsolete even before Vietnam war, you might as well walk, it's safer...
Such machines were build in my home town in Bulgaria. My father used to be engineer in the factory. I will never forget riding in them during test runs in the near test field.
Älli-tälli was a nice enough vehicle to fall asleep in. No joke, during exercises in transit I fell asleep in the back on top of the camo net. On the way back I rode on top with my boot on the hatch edge and holding on to one of the cargo lines. And that was the basic MT-LBv, not the fancy command models.
yee the command ones are nice with leather seats sadly as the driver i rarely get to use em but hey i get to drift with a MT-LBu so its fine and yes ive drifted with a command post was fun and scary at the same time
The MT-LB was produced in the "9th of May" plant near Cherven Bryag in Bulgaria, as well as the 2s1 SPH, and BMP-23 IFV's. In the 1980's, around 200 vehicles per month were produced there.
”In this image there are three MT-LB prime mover-cum-armoured personnel carriers, and they cannot be seen. Due to their low sillouette they may be hiding behind the shed, inside the shed, behind the hill or inside any of a dozen shrubberies. However, geopositional data we aquired from the drivers' use of walkie-talkies informed us where they were.” **bushes and the shed explodes with comical screaming**
The high losses of MT-LB can also be attributed to both the 80th and 200th Russian Arctic Brigades that use the MT-LB as their main infantry vehicle as it is more suited to arctic warfare. Both brigades contributed Battalion Combat Teams around Kharkiv and suffured heavy losses.
@@spetsnazar4948 according to who? Sure, they make mistakes and there are certainly a few duplicates and fake pictures that slip through the cracks but they have given neither sides casualty claims credence and are seeking to document only equipment losses with photographic confirmation. There are of course limitations on the data as it cannot be complete by the nature of how it is collected but there's no evidence of deliberate fabrication of data by the authors.
If you know Vitaly V. Kuzmin personally, please thank him for putting up so many pictures of tanks for the world to use. I think the MT-LB is an intriguing vehicle. Simple and with many uses. A bit like the M113. It is a case in point that an army is not just flashy tanks and aircraft, but a whole lot of supporting vehicles aswell.
Every news outlet has been calling these tanks recently lol. Deeply familiar with the MT-LB myself being recently retired US Army. Extremely mobile and agile, it's one of the most useful APC's due to it's design including towing both AT guns and Heavy (120mm and above) mortars. Make great recovery vehicles too. I've been watching the improvement program for these with great interest!
An all-around OUTSTANDING CHASSIS. Just outstanding. As prolific as an M113, and probably more versatile CHASSIS (PT76, ASU57, ZSU-23-4, SAM transporters, towing cannons, civilian vehicles), etc. I would submit that it is probably the BEST CHASSIS in the tracked vehicle family World-wide.
Well you got that in somewhat different order, than it happened - MT-LB, BTR-50, ASU-85, ZSU-23-4 and Kub were on modified chassis from PT-76 light tank
The MT-LBv variant also has wider tracks, it can literally drive through a bog! It was quite a shock to US army when we did that during exercises in Finland
Love the sympathetic little PKT turret on these things. But yeah, it's a multipurpose APC/Tractor thing with decent carrying capacity, especially with that nice flat roof, without ridiculously high silhouette like M113. It can resist small arms fire, so that's a nice thing to have compared to a truck.
During my decade as an infantry officer in the 90s I can honestly say we never heard of less considered this vehicle. Maybe my memory is failing but this was clearly always considered a rear echelon utility vehicle by the west, never something to really concern the arms corps.
Indeed they were produced in Bulgaria. My father was working on these in the Karlovo Traktor Plant. I think there was one more factory in Bulgaria, but I'll have to check again. Edit: As another commenter said, it was the "9th of May" plant near Cherven Bryag.
During conscription my company (but different platoon) had several communication vehicles of the MT-LB type. Depending on which factory had produced it, the length of the vehicle could vary with up to half a meter and cables could run on different sides of the interior of the vehicle, making repairs annoying for the mechanics.
when they decided that towed artillery is not good enough the Russians just slapped a cannon on the MT - LB and called it 2S1 'Gvozdika' 122mm Self Propelled Gun. yes there was production of МТ - ЛБ in Bulgaria and we have also made an IFV out of it. its called "BMP 23".
When I use to teach VACR-Visual Aircraft Recognition and AVR-Armored Vehicle Recognition, the MT-LB was a snoozer to those who take out vehicles. I could see the A-10 pilots shutting down and turning away disinterested. "I'd rather shoot a truck". This was before they started slapping a lot of crap on them, like ADA systems.
My old M577 had a drop down table mounted on the side of the vehicle originally. My FDC used it once then dismounted it and tossed into the storage shed with the camo net.
Planned several times to come back, but generally I can make about 2-3 trips to museums a year, since they take a lot of time. 2019 I did more, but then we also started to write books (2019: H.Dv. 470/7, 2020: Sturmzug, 2021: Stukabook), which basically means I can do 1-2 museum trips per year. » The Assault Platoon of the Grenadier-Company November 1944 (StG 44) - sturmzug.com
Yes, as mentioned in earlier comments, this vehicle has some of the best cross country ability of any Russian vehicles. This is especially true given that we are coming into the mud season in Ukrainian!
I drove a MT-LB back in the 90s at the US National Training Center. My National Guard unit was tasked to be OpFor in the training of otehr National Guard units scheduledfor deployment in Desert Storm. I was shocked at how crude was the vehicle. It uses laterals (two levers that you use to steer), but still had a manual transmission. In mountain or killy switchbacks, you use two hands to steer while you shifted with the otehr hand. LOL Also, tehr ewas no clutch. YOu basically slammed the vehicle into gear. If the gearing got jammed, you openned up the engin hatch and bang teh transmission into gear with a mallet. In the US, if you have to change tracks or track pads, you would unbolt the pad pins, repalce the track pads, reinsert the pin, and bolt it tight. For the MT-LB, you sawed off the pin head, replace your track pad, insert a new pin and on person would hold a mallet against the head of the pin while the otehr guy mushrooms the other end. If anyone asks what I did during Desert Storm, I can say I was part of a missile team creditted with the destruction of 23 American armored vehicles. Of course, it was all simulated during an exercise with MILES gear. LOL
@@omegacentauri73 It could be that I had a stripped version, but it did not even seem to even allow a NBC system. Ome guy in our unit was over 6' tall. He could not even sit in the drivers seat and drive. He had to drive almost standing up with his head and shoulder out of the hatch. lol.
MT-LBs do have a clutch (at least the ones I served with). What makes the gear shifting hard is that the transmission is non-synchronous transmission, meaning that you have to manually match and synchronize the rotation speeds of the engine and transmission shafts with the help of vehicle forward movement and gas pedal. Takes a bit of practice (and enough space on road) to master the gear shifting and it's way more tedious to operate compared to a 'normal' synchronous manual transmission you see on ordinary cars. Having to use mallet or just ramming the gear in sounds like negligent use which will just make the matters even worse. I'd also like to point out that the transmission is not housed in the engine compartment, but instead in its own compartment in front of the crew compartment. Engine compartment is located between the crew compartment and the cargo compartment, meaning that you can't access the transmission from engine hatch. I have also never seen any MT-LB tracks that have track pads, only just full metal track links/shoes held together with long pins.
@@zenith144 The model I drove was probably a much older version. I would not be surprised if it was originally an Arab vehicle that the US acquired from the Israelis. LOL You are right. The engine is behind the driver. Just the transmission is in the front.
I bought a truck 1/48 of the British RAF, on its description it said that it was one of the forgotten workhorses of the armies, where everyone was talking about tanks and planes but nobody would talk about the trucks that made them able to drive or arrive to combat
Perhaps some of the knocked-out MT-LB (& MT-LBu) are in such poor condition that they are being mistaken for blown-up BMP pattern vehicles? ...or the other way around, if they're opened-up like a flower and burnt to the ground, the only real obvious difference would be the width of the tracks.
It may be relevant to note that the Russian Military released a statement a few years ago on their intent to replace MT-LBs in service with an entirely new replacement. Since then I haven't seen much reported on this - so assume that its likely an ongoing project, or has been deemed unnecessary within the current budget. Whilst the MT-LB is considered primarily a prime mover, within Russian and Ukrainian doctrine it could be used as a replacement for BMPs within a platoon. Where there's been plenty of evidence of this occurring since the vehicle entered production and as part of recent events. As far as I'm aware, there has been no production vehicle that has received an armour package to bring it in line with modern IFVs - though there has been prototypes displayed at military expos and of course plenty of field modifications that added various types of add on armour. Similarly, and this is a point perhaps intentionally only briefly covered in this video, MT-LBs have been up-armed. It may be significant to mention that Russian modernised MT-LBs (which of course aren't every vehicle in service with them) replace the turret with a hatch fitted with a 12.7mm machine gun. As have vehicles with rear mounted turrets shared with the BTR-82A been recorded in Ukraine in use by Russian forces. The Ukrainians operate a similar vehicle - fitted with a remotely operated turret. Additionally there are mortar armed variants and distinctively a multiple rocket launcher system variant - fitted with rockets taken from helicopters -, a variant that fits a howitzer to the roof (in the style of a self propelled anti-tank gun, as one might have seen in WWII), among others, that have been formally produced by factories. Oh, and one last detail that's relevant. The MT-LB shares parts with common Soviet trucks - which was intentional. Which made it popular within the Eastern Bloc and beyond for its ease of maintenance (similar to many other Soviet era vehicles that did this and continue to chug along to this day...).
Thanks for commenting on the less glamorous but nevertheless not less important part of the equipment relevant to the contemporary events. I was wondering about their ever-presence in the news, and now it makes sense.
Nice video. Actually, would be good to see a review of key tanks, AFVs, IFVs and other equipment being utilized in the current conflict in Ukraine. Both equipment being used by both sides, as well as equipment unique to each side. Such sober analysis/narration would be very helpful. And as events/time/facts allow, would be interesting to gain insights on the conflict in terms of effectiveness of equipment, formations, tactics, strategies, logistics of the adversaries- again, if remotely possible, in cutting through the fog of war and propaganda.
@@bobfg3130 you are probably right unfortunately. This channel and similar ones - like Military Aviation History or Tank chats or the Chieftain's one - help put in into perspective, provide the context and convey more of the reality of equipment, organizations and practices in conflict for the laymen that I think is helpful. Help people appreciate the reality, or likely reality of a situation/topic versus viewing these conflicts as mere news items, or some kind of live video game.
The high loss ratios of MT-LB is also due to, for example, the 80th Arctic Motor Rifle Brigade, that operates around Kharkiv, wich is equipped with MT-LB as IFV Over the last few videos i get the impression, that there as been a change in austrian law due to your regular insistence on being the sole owner and producer of the material
@@castor3020 No as IFVs, because of arctic conditions. There are no BMPs in the units that are meant to fight in the arctic. The 80th and 200th brigades are arctic units and located in nothern Russia
as a driver of 1 mtlb, i can say it was a fun little "tank" to drive in winter, when u learned not to gear down to turn i sharp turns... just drift hehe, and the best thing in winter was the driver had the controls of the heating system, and the idiots in the back always froze XD ,
MT-LB used to be produced in Poland (since 1976) but almost exclusively for export. Most of them went to USSR. So somewhat ironically some of those Russian MT-LBs might have been produced in Poland. Polish Armed Forces didn't accept the base version of MT-LB into service mostly because Polish artillery doctrine already then rejected towed artillery as obsolete thus there was no need for this kind of vehicle. But there were some small numbers of support vehicles based on MT-LB chassis ordered.
The MT-LB is good for one thing. You can shove as much stuff as you want inside and then ontop of the vehicle and it will still get through any mud area. A great vehicle when you need to get something to somebody holding a defence off the roads. Ive seen people complain about its armor , but again , was never meant to go into combat. At most maybe go in and carry wounded out. But not more then that.
Great video, thank you Military History not Visualized! Very comprehensive and great to get some original footage of this vehicle up close - I hope you enjoyed the journey but bet it was very bumpy! I'm a long time subscriber - first time commenter - One thing that I didn't get about your narration was the reference to John Cleese - I know he's renowned for being tall and ungainly but is your reference from a film or something? Keep up the good work and thanks!
Looks like a very useful utility vehicle for the rear echelon. Not so good near the leading edge of the battle. The fact that from a distance it looks like an AFV makes it an easy target for every portable anti tank weapon in Ukraines arsenal including the M72 LAW.
Another difference is that you can attach a seed spreader, grain hopper, insecticide tank and other useful agriculture attachments to the MTLBu but not the MT-LB. Don't believe me? Ask a Ukrainian farmer
2s1 Gvozdika SPH base is based on MT-LB, Poland tried to create light Anti-aircraft platform out of it in Sopel and Stalagmit systems, now it's a base for many Polish command vehicles like Łowcza-3, medical evacuation vehicles, engineering vehicles like WPT Mors TRI Durian, mine layer Kroton, and in 2009 new LPG (light tracked carrier) was created based upon MT-LB and it's basis for 120mm mortar, command vehicles and so on.
I'm offended by this title and description. It's not Russian, it's Soviet. It was designed in Kharkiv, Ukraine, by mostly local engineers, one of them was my grandpops. And fun fact, it's the workhorse of the Ukrainian Army too.
@@Kozak806 Oh cool, here's the "you can't be upset about upsetting things" squad. Be sure to keep your cool next time you get fact checked. Fuck Russia. An entire country built off the tears of their neighbors, with nothing but addiction and rape to show for it. This is a Ukranian creation and Ukraine has right to claim it.
> It's not Russian, it's Soviet. It was designed in Kharkiv, Ukraine, by mostly local engineers All points are addressed in the video. And if you think I use titles like "The Soviet-Russian-Ukrainian AFV..." then you are on the wrong channel. And even if I would use that title, I am very certain that you or someone else would complain about that too.
I can asure you that the MT-LB is talked about in the Norwegian military, since the 200th MIB in Pechenga is (or was) equipped with the MT-LBV. The 200th mechanized infantry brigade is the largest unit, close to the Norwegian border. Of course in 2022 the 20th MIB has been more or less annhiliated in the Ukraine. The MT-LBV is a version with wider tracks for better mobility on snow.
trololo driven that in highway around 55-60kph and my commander checked that with GPS :D (the speedometer went haywire in those speeds). And my MT-LB was V variant with wider tracks.
earlier this year Patria unveiled a concept vehicle for a EU tracked APC programme, Patria says it's based on the XA-300 (aka. Patria 6x6) but to me it looks like someone actually started from the silhouette of MT-LB & put the passenger compartment of XA-300 inside it.
What made me surprised though is how really widespread this vehicle was used by the Russian in the Ukraine War compared to BTRs as frontliner. Like what u said i thought this was more likely used as logistic and field gun carrier way behind frontline.
I strongly suspect these numbers are also including Ukrainian losses. To suggest otherwise would imply the Russians have lost something like ten percent of their total mechanized forces, which is dubious in the extreme. We have two armies here using mostly the same equipment, and half the stuff we see is so blown up so badly there's no real way to tell. Nearly all of this information is going to age like milk left outside on a hot summer day.
It would be nice to know the Ukrainian losses. Supposedly two months ago they had some 1800 tanks and thousands of other armoured vehicles (BMP, BTR, MT-LB and such).
The site that was mentioned in the video - Oryx - also provides Ukrainian losses. According to Oryx, the: list only includes destroyed vehicles and equipment of which photo or videographic evidence is available. ... All possible effort has gone into avoiding duplicate entries and discerning the status of equipment between captured or abandoned. Many of the entries listed as 'abandoned' will likely end up captured or destroyed. Similarly, some of the captured equipment might be destroyed if it can't be recovered. When the origin of a piece of equipment can't be established, it is not included in the list. The Soviet flag is used when the equipment in question was produced prior to 1991." So right now, for Russian tanks, that site gives a count as follows: Tanks (453, of which destroyed: 222, damaged: 6, abandoned: 41, captured: 184) For Ukraine tanks, the following is given: Tanks (98, of which destroyed: 39, damaged: 2, abandoned: 9, captured: 46) So a 4.6 to 1 ratio of total Russian losses to Ukrainian ones. I suspect both counts are higher given the criterion of requiring photographic evidence. My guess is the count for Ukraine would also be higher because I wouldn't be surprised if Ukrainian civilians are being encouraged to keep quiet on any documentation for such losses. Otherwise, doesn't seem like the Russian troops have pursued such photographic / videographic documentation via smartphone with as much enthusiasm.
@@michaeldunne338 Russian troops are not allowed to use their smartphones in Ukraine, to prevent giving away information to the enemy. Makes sense, considering the number of westerners that made posts on tiktok and twitter, shortly before the arrival of an Iskander. The Russian MoD said a few weeks ago they destroyed well over a thousand armoured vehicles in Ukraine so far. I can't remember the exact numbers cited. Not that it matters, the MoD stopped uploading videos two weeks ago, and by now all their uploads, reports about the conflict have disappeared. No censorship at all.
@@Shatnerpossum Where exactly do you think they exhibited poor judgement? Not sure that indications of large equipment losses for the Russians are necessarily unreliable, given the comments by Dmitry Peskov, and the fact that Russian forces had to retreat from Kyiv, Chernihiv Oblast, Sumy Oblast.
Sweden got these at the same time they got the BMP-1s/Pbv501s you made a video about, also former East German ones. Sweden liked these better then the BMP-1s, both for it better terrain capability in deep snow and for its vesitility. I guess by the 90s the BMP-1 was already so obsolete that the versitility provided by the MT-LB outshined the nominally higher combat capabillity of the BMP-1. Sweden did us them as APC:s, since the units that got them would otherwise have been mounted in trucks.
I have feeling that many MT-LBs will be converted into drone carriers in the near future. It's got the space and if Russians can shove jammers in it and turn the MT-LB into a mobile command post, then one or even a few drones with an operator on-board won't be a problem.
Only a few. Russia is crippled in the production of semi conductors and computer chips. Drone captured in ukraine used american components, proving russian technological manifacturing inferiority.
i would go for the bold claim, t hat russia will not convert anything to modern equipment anymore in the next 2 decades. they can barely reproduce outdated chips from the mid 2000´s.
To the Author: While an interesting video of the real thing (which I've never seen in person), I learned about Russian army equipment from a MilSim game. So I thank you for confirming my limited knowledge on this equipment. With that said however, another (unnamed) RUclips'r who's covering the Russo-Ukraine War doesn't seem to be too knowledgeable on their equipment either. I attempted to correct his mistake(s) when he called a BTR a BMP. So... I think it would be a great idea for you to help correct this ignorance too! 😅 I would like to see something covering the general differences between: - Tanks (T-62, T-72, T-80, T-90) - BMP - BTR - MTLB (covered here, thanks!) - BDRM For me, the easiest way to tell them apart was by their tracks (BMP) and wheels (BTR & BDRM). I found them to be highly effective vehicles in the MilSim, but you had to know how to use them too! 😉👍
i had my training with the mt-lb in year 2000 with the swedish army for 10months .i started with the mt-lb and later i was moved to the mt-lbu . one of the big diffrences is the engine ,the mt-lbu has a turbocharger and is much more powerful then the mt-lb ,what i can remind is that the mt-lbu almost did 90km/h as max speed and almost impossible to keep it on the road :😁
Are towed artillery going away? Aside from having some lightweight artillery that can be rapidly deployed by a helo it seems towed arty is disadvantageous to self-propelled arty. Or am I missing something?
Well, another plus would be the low cost of towed artillery. Less that can break, easier logistics etc. If you arent a bigger country with s lot of funds, you will still use them
Sweden bought a bunch of the MT-LB as a battle taxi filler but it was only used for a few years. It was sold off/scrapped like the the bmp 1 (also ex ddr surplus) now partly sent by Czech republic to the Ukraine. It has better terrain capability then wheeled
When I went to the Parola Tank Museum in Finland recently I got to climb in the MT-LB they have parked in front of the main building entrance. I was astonished by how small the interior is. Granted I'm probably taller (1m75/5ft9) than the standard Soviet mechanized infantryman of the time and I have quite broad shoulders for my size. In addition this not being my first time getting in a tank I was overly cautious with my head making the whole thing probably feels artificially smaller. But damn I had to move on all four to get anywhere inside and I went through the path around the engine compartment to go from the Driver/Commander compartment to the infantry compartment by a mix of growling on my side and inevitably knocking my head on something. This in full gear would have probably get me some time to get used to, but at least I would have got a helmet.
We called these "meat by the pound" during Task 14: Vehicle Recognition. I only ever saw them in Bosnia-- painted UN white, usually-- or in armor museums.
Might not be the best looking or well armored vehicle, but it does seem quite versatile given its large, flat roof and spacious interior. Everything from ATGMs to AT guns to naval AA turrets have been slapped onto these. Oh, and the funny Ukrainian one with helicopter rocket pods.
The Ukrainians love these so much , i saw an interview with ukrainian soldier and they said they prefer it over the M113s and other armored transport and personal carriers that its western neighbours sent. The Russians to use these for multiple roles to. Its kinda funny now that all the shit people talked about it because it was related to the old PT-76 and was considered old , russian , cheap and inferior to other APCs and transport meanwhile its being a true workhorse out in the UkrainianRussian war carrying troops on top into battle, rescuing injured soldiers, pulling heavy artilleries into position, logistical runs or mounting giant anti tank weaponry such as 100mm cannons. Definitely earned my respect
If you are struggling to pronounce some russian/ukrainian/slavic words, especially the big ones, try breaking them up into syllables. Like, mno-go-tse-le-voi tya-hach. Sure, you sound like a first grader but every russian did it at some point in his/her life and imho its still better than giving up and dropping half the word like so many people do.
there are a variety of interesting armament packages that can be mounted in one of these to turn them into a IFV or fire support vehicle. the likly reason for smaller losses is that its is not as photogenic as it is mainly a utilty vehicle used in various trasnport and command functions so twitter warriors ignore it.
Ironischerweise habe ich heute ein Video von "Covert Cabal" gesehen, welches das Verschwinden des MT-LB aus den russischen Gerätekammern thematisiert. So in ein, zwei Jahren werden die meisten produzierten MT-LBs rostende Wracks in der Ukraine sein.
More information about the park here: www.parkvojaskezgodovine.si
twitter.com/pvz_pivka, facebook.com/parkvojaskezgodovine, ruclips.net/channel/UCYzz0BwnsGzkfsogc9I54_Q and
instagram.com/parkvojaskezgodovine/
Couldn't give a monkeys about Russia's fighting vehicles. They're only good for one thing. Burning their crews.
Why are you glorifying those horrific monsters?
I have been to the park several times, and it also has been a blast. nice to see this park getting some recognisition
My understanding is that the MT-LB has gained popularity in the post-Soviet Russian Army because it has slightly better mobility off-road than the BMP series thanks to having wider tracks, especially in places with softer ground or heavy snow. With a reduction in towed AT guns presumably extra vehicles were available to be used as APCs, and possibly also to allow conversion of some MRR from BTRs to fully tracked formations.
They seem to be used in either armored or formations or lower priority formations like arctic rifle brigades because they are lower priority for equipment but still need an apc.
The better mobility was also noticed by the swedish army, which bought several from former East Germany, and the type was used in northern Sweden because of it's better mobility than the BMP-1 (which also was purchased), especially in deep snow.
M113 is a dedicated APC suitable for that purpose only. i know it have variants for Mortar carrier , SPAAG (M163 VADS) etc . but not comparable to MT-LB. MT-LB is a multipurpose Armored vehicle whose primary role is to serve as an Artillery tractor and recovery vehicle, which also serves as APC too, and in cases 23mm SPAAG.
IMO, The Only American vehicle that is comparable to MT-LB in every criteria (Rather, this vehicle inspired and helped in making the vehicle of MT-LB and BTR-50) is the M3 and M5 series of Half-tracks. I know they are different, but the Soviets were very much happy with the American halftracks on land lease programs during ww2, which served all their purposes and conditions . and later they wanted to have their own version.
@@christianwilson5956 the 80th arctic motor rifle brigade is not a low priority unit.
it is a 100% professional unit with 2 BTG´s, equipped with MT-LB and T80UM or T80BVM.
In finland we still use MT-LB alot. One of the things about people dont talk about how versitale the use of this vechile is. We use it to transport troops, tow granade launchers and light artillery and other goods. All this for a semi armored platform that can go almost everywhere and costs less than a truck.
The MT-LB family is a bit like the M113 family , a kind of tracked Swiss army knife.
Yeah, good point, it just looks way less comfortable.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized It's not much fun being inside, loungin topside in the commanders hatch is actually suprisingly comfotable.
@@margusgrenzmann3977 better yet, lounging in the back while evading wörk
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized I'm 192cm. I fit inside. and I easily fell asleep in the back during final maneuvers. It's just that our logistics vehicle (ammo, med and recovery combined) didn't have a working heater. It only shot flame.
@@Tounushi Hauling ammo in that thing sounds really bad.
I drove a MTLB when I was younger and in the military. It did easily över 80 km/h and we had one in the garage doing over 100km/h after some modifications.
As a swedish strf 90 commander in the military we felt really sorry about those that had to use that MT-LB death trap. Very easy to spot (on heat cameras), seemed very slow or hard to maneuver and also seemed nearly blind without infantry on the outside . Might be ok as a battle taxi but should not be used close to the front. (That was in the 1990:s , nowadays any armor seems to be a death trap)
"Some modifications" or "the boys had some spare time, spare parts and not-completely-crazy idea", right?!
@@drosendahl
„Any armor is a death trap“
I don‘t know about that… a bit extreme, don’t you think?
@@aspielm759 Where have you been the last six weeks??
@@johanj3674 you don't send a tank army into urban combat as simple as that. But tanks in general aren't obsolete, no. Quite the contrary.
I went thru infantry school in the early 90s, and was trained as an M-47 Dragon gunner, spent a lot of time looking at vehicle ID flash cards and remember thinking how old the LBS looked 30 years ago. Have been amazed to see how many are still being used.
The good old vehicle ID cards. Now I'm going to have to dig them out of storage to get a blast from the past.
good way to remember the MT-LB: Mini-Turret Long Body
+ tactical meat cube armor. Nothing absorbs Americans munitions like a russian can.
@@MsJuggaletteforever1 cope😅
I drove a wide-track variant of this in my time during conscription!
It's such a nice off-road vehicle
Don't know how it'd fair in combat though, being a battle taxi and all
There's a variant with the 30mm turret from the BMP-82A, and at least you'd be better armored than a BMD-2...
@@polygondwanaland8390 A toyota hilux would probably have about the same armour as a BMD-2 =P
@@polygondwanaland8390 That takes a lot of room from troop compartment though, and Infantry is vital
@@belliduradespicio8009 "probably as bad as a M-113" fixed it for you.
@@MrSheduur Nah, nothing is as bad as M113. When your APC is crap made by worst US auto maker for lowest bid (but big bribes to far right politicians) that was obsolete even before Vietnam war, you might as well walk, it's safer...
Such machines were build in my home town in Bulgaria. My father used to be engineer in the factory. I will never forget riding in them during test runs in the near test field.
You need to do more of these ride-alongs. That grin tells me all I need to know about how much fun it was.
Älli-tälli was a nice enough vehicle to fall asleep in. No joke, during exercises in transit I fell asleep in the back on top of the camo net. On the way back I rode on top with my boot on the hatch edge and holding on to one of the cargo lines.
And that was the basic MT-LBv, not the fancy command models.
Yeah, but us soldiers can sleep anywhere. I once had a refreshing nap while standing.
yee the command ones are nice with leather seats sadly as the driver i rarely get to use em but hey i get to drift with a MT-LBu so its fine and yes ive drifted with a command post was fun and scary at the same time
@@hafor2846 With enough sleep deprivation one can sleep anywhere and anyhow, unfortunately or not, depending on the situation.
The MT-LB was produced in the "9th of May" plant near Cherven Bryag in Bulgaria, as well as the 2s1 SPH, and BMP-23 IFV's. In the 1980's, around 200 vehicles per month were produced there.
”In this image there are three MT-LB prime mover-cum-armoured personnel carriers, and they cannot be seen. Due to their low sillouette they may be hiding behind the shed, inside the shed, behind the hill or inside any of a dozen shrubberies. However, geopositional data we aquired from the drivers' use of walkie-talkies informed us where they were.”
**bushes and the shed explodes with comical screaming**
I feel like the title of this video perfectly sums up the vehicle, I see it all the time, but have never seen anybody talk about it lol
Thanks Bernhard from NZ 🇳🇿. Another extremely useful video. Keep up the good work.
The high losses of MT-LB can also be attributed to both the 80th and 200th Russian Arctic Brigades that use the MT-LB as their main infantry vehicle as it is more suited to arctic warfare. Both brigades contributed Battalion Combat Teams around Kharkiv and suffured heavy losses.
He is citing Oryx as a source witch is proben to be highly unrelieble as one
@@spetsnazar4948 according to who? Sure, they make mistakes and there are certainly a few duplicates and fake pictures that slip through the cracks but they have given neither sides casualty claims credence and are seeking to document only equipment losses with photographic confirmation. There are of course limitations on the data as it cannot be complete by the nature of how it is collected but there's no evidence of deliberate fabrication of data by the authors.
@@spetsnazar4948 VDV ! *gets obliterated by Ukrainian drone strike*
@@josephahner3031 probably according to Pravda and RT :)
@@jwenting that'd be my guess
If you know Vitaly V. Kuzmin personally, please thank him for putting up so many pictures of tanks for the world to use.
I think the MT-LB is an intriguing vehicle. Simple and with many uses. A bit like the M113. It is a case in point that an army is not just flashy tanks and aircraft, but a whole lot of supporting vehicles aswell.
I don't know him, I dropped him an email for the BMPT photos and the MT-LB photos.
Every news outlet has been calling these tanks recently lol. Deeply familiar with the MT-LB myself being recently retired US Army. Extremely mobile and agile, it's one of the most useful APC's due to it's design including towing both AT guns and Heavy (120mm and above) mortars. Make great recovery vehicles too. I've been watching the improvement program for these with great interest!
An all-around OUTSTANDING CHASSIS. Just outstanding. As prolific as an M113, and probably more versatile CHASSIS (PT76, ASU57, ZSU-23-4, SAM transporters, towing cannons, civilian vehicles), etc. I would submit that it is probably the BEST CHASSIS in the tracked vehicle family World-wide.
Well you got that in somewhat different order, than it happened - MT-LB, BTR-50, ASU-85, ZSU-23-4 and Kub were on modified chassis from PT-76 light tank
The MT-LBv variant also has wider tracks, it can literally drive through a bog! It was quite a shock to US army when we did that during exercises in Finland
Thank you for this! As a kid, for some reason my favourite soviet vehicles were always the MT-LB and MT-LBu
Great video!
Love the sympathetic little PKT turret on these things. But yeah, it's a multipurpose APC/Tractor thing with decent carrying capacity, especially with that nice flat roof, without ridiculously high silhouette like M113. It can resist small arms fire, so that's a nice thing to have compared to a truck.
During my decade as an infantry officer in the 90s I can honestly say we never heard of less considered this vehicle. Maybe my memory is failing but this was clearly always considered a rear echelon utility vehicle by the west, never something to really concern the arms corps.
That's exactly how it is seen by everyone else
@@sodinc and how it should be. this is a death trap for infantry if you actually drive anywhere near the enemy.
@@MrSheduur yeah, and it is very frustrating when journalist call everything "tanks"
Holy crap, our favorite RUclipsr just played the Monty Python/John Cleese "MTLB trying not to be seen" card (6:40).
;) not the first time, likely not the last.
Indeed they were produced in Bulgaria. My father was working on these in the Karlovo Traktor Plant. I think there was one more factory in Bulgaria, but I'll have to check again.
Edit: As another commenter said, it was the "9th of May" plant near Cherven Bryag.
During conscription my company (but different platoon) had several communication vehicles of the MT-LB type. Depending on which factory had produced it, the length of the vehicle could vary with up to half a meter and cables could run on different sides of the interior of the vehicle, making repairs annoying for the mechanics.
I want one, as a unique offroad/camping setup.
also very useful for getting around in the inevitable zombie apocalypses
Thanks for this video with good info about mt-lb.
Greetings from Slovenia; not from Pivka but anyway
when they decided that towed artillery is not good enough the Russians just slapped a cannon on the MT - LB and called it 2S1 'Gvozdika' 122mm Self Propelled Gun.
yes there was production of МТ - ЛБ in Bulgaria and we have also made an IFV out of it. its called "BMP 23".
The unfailing MTLB, the best cheap transport of Wargame
Also Redfor mortar support.
Really nice to see some modern stuff!
When I use to teach VACR-Visual Aircraft Recognition and AVR-Armored Vehicle Recognition, the MT-LB was a snoozer to those who take out vehicles. I could see the A-10 pilots shutting down and turning away disinterested. "I'd rather shoot a truck". This was before they started slapping a lot of crap on them, like ADA systems.
Yeah it would be a a shock when that MT-LB shoots 23mm rounds or heatseekers at you
My old M577 had a drop down table mounted on the side of the vehicle originally. My FDC used it once then dismounted it and tossed into the storage shed with the camo net.
Its so nice to hear that you were in Pivka. You should come back, some things have changed since 2017.
Planned several times to come back, but generally I can make about 2-3 trips to museums a year, since they take a lot of time. 2019 I did more, but then we also started to write books (2019: H.Dv. 470/7, 2020: Sturmzug, 2021: Stukabook), which basically means I can do 1-2 museum trips per year.
» The Assault Platoon of the Grenadier-Company November 1944 (StG 44) - sturmzug.com
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Wow, keep up your amazing work. Thank you for your videos.
The question is: do you really want a table if you don't need one?
The inside of these vehicles are pretty cramped as it is.
Table is only available in the NBC-protected variant: "Duck 🦆 and cover" ;)
Maps are much nicer on a table than half-folded in your lap lol
Yes, as mentioned in earlier comments, this vehicle has some of the best cross country ability of any Russian vehicles. This is especially true given that we are coming into the mud season in Ukrainian!
Good old Battle Frog.
I drove a MT-LB back in the 90s at the US National Training Center. My National Guard unit was tasked to be OpFor in the training of otehr National Guard units scheduledfor deployment in Desert Storm. I was shocked at how crude was the vehicle. It uses laterals (two levers that you use to steer), but still had a manual transmission. In mountain or killy switchbacks, you use two hands to steer while you shifted with the otehr hand. LOL Also, tehr ewas no clutch. YOu basically slammed the vehicle into gear. If the gearing got jammed, you openned up the engin hatch and bang teh transmission into gear with a mallet. In the US, if you have to change tracks or track pads, you would unbolt the pad pins, repalce the track pads, reinsert the pin, and bolt it tight. For the MT-LB, you sawed off the pin head, replace your track pad, insert a new pin and on person would hold a mallet against the head of the pin while the otehr guy mushrooms the other end.
If anyone asks what I did during Desert Storm, I can say I was part of a missile team creditted with the destruction of 23 American armored vehicles. Of course, it was all simulated during an exercise with MILES gear. LOL
@@omegacentauri73
It could be that I had a stripped version, but it did not even seem to even allow a NBC system.
Ome guy in our unit was over 6' tall. He could not even sit in the drivers seat and drive. He had to drive almost standing up with his head and shoulder out of the hatch. lol.
MT-LBs do have a clutch (at least the ones I served with). What makes the gear shifting hard is that the transmission is non-synchronous transmission, meaning that you have to manually match and synchronize the rotation speeds of the engine and transmission shafts with the help of vehicle forward movement and gas pedal. Takes a bit of practice (and enough space on road) to master the gear shifting and it's way more tedious to operate compared to a 'normal' synchronous manual transmission you see on ordinary cars. Having to use mallet or just ramming the gear in sounds like negligent use which will just make the matters even worse.
I'd also like to point out that the transmission is not housed in the engine compartment, but instead in its own compartment in front of the crew compartment. Engine compartment is located between the crew compartment and the cargo compartment, meaning that you can't access the transmission from engine hatch. I have also never seen any MT-LB tracks that have track pads, only just full metal track links/shoes held together with long pins.
@@zenith144
The model I drove was probably a much older version. I would not be surprised if it was originally an Arab vehicle that the US acquired from the Israelis. LOL
You are right. The engine is behind the driver. Just the transmission is in the front.
I bought a truck 1/48 of the British RAF, on its description it said that it was one of the forgotten workhorses of the armies, where everyone was talking about tanks and planes but nobody would talk about the trucks that made them able to drive or arrive to combat
In Finland we call MT-LBv "Taistelusammakko"/Combat frog.
Perhaps some of the knocked-out MT-LB (& MT-LBu) are in such poor condition that they are being mistaken for blown-up BMP pattern vehicles?
...or the other way around, if they're opened-up like a flower and burnt to the ground, the only real obvious difference would be the width of the tracks.
It may be relevant to note that the Russian Military released a statement a few years ago on their intent to replace MT-LBs in service with an entirely new replacement. Since then I haven't seen much reported on this - so assume that its likely an ongoing project, or has been deemed unnecessary within the current budget.
Whilst the MT-LB is considered primarily a prime mover, within Russian and Ukrainian doctrine it could be used as a replacement for BMPs within a platoon. Where there's been plenty of evidence of this occurring since the vehicle entered production and as part of recent events. As far as I'm aware, there has been no production vehicle that has received an armour package to bring it in line with modern IFVs - though there has been prototypes displayed at military expos and of course plenty of field modifications that added various types of add on armour.
Similarly, and this is a point perhaps intentionally only briefly covered in this video, MT-LBs have been up-armed. It may be significant to mention that Russian modernised MT-LBs (which of course aren't every vehicle in service with them) replace the turret with a hatch fitted with a 12.7mm machine gun. As have vehicles with rear mounted turrets shared with the BTR-82A been recorded in Ukraine in use by Russian forces. The Ukrainians operate a similar vehicle - fitted with a remotely operated turret. Additionally there are mortar armed variants and distinctively a multiple rocket launcher system variant - fitted with rockets taken from helicopters -, a variant that fits a howitzer to the roof (in the style of a self propelled anti-tank gun, as one might have seen in WWII), among others, that have been formally produced by factories.
Oh, and one last detail that's relevant. The MT-LB shares parts with common Soviet trucks - which was intentional. Which made it popular within the Eastern Bloc and beyond for its ease of maintenance (similar to many other Soviet era vehicles that did this and continue to chug along to this day...).
Tooled around for a while in one of these ( actually in the MT-LB/v variant) in the FDF, it's been creepy seeing so many burned out or peeled open.
I'am one of these people.I was aware that this Vehicle exists, but was surprised that it is still so widely used
How not too be seen. Epic!!!
Thanks for commenting on the less glamorous but nevertheless not less important part of the equipment relevant to the contemporary events. I was wondering about their ever-presence in the news, and now it makes sense.
Nice video. Actually, would be good to see a review of key tanks, AFVs, IFVs and other equipment being utilized in the current conflict in Ukraine. Both equipment being used by both sides, as well as equipment unique to each side.
Such sober analysis/narration would be very helpful. And as events/time/facts allow, would be interesting to gain insights on the conflict in terms of effectiveness of equipment, formations, tactics, strategies, logistics of the adversaries- again, if remotely possible, in cutting through the fog of war and propaganda.
This is a great idea. A lot of these vehicles would benefit from this clinical analysis. Such as the t72b3.
The last part will be doable in a few years.
@@bobfg3130 you are probably right unfortunately. This channel and similar ones - like Military Aviation History or Tank chats or the Chieftain's one - help put in into perspective, provide the context and convey more of the reality of equipment, organizations and practices in conflict for the laymen that I think is helpful. Help people appreciate the reality, or likely reality of a situation/topic versus viewing these conflicts as mere news items, or some kind of live video game.
The high loss ratios of MT-LB is also due to, for example, the 80th Arctic Motor Rifle Brigade, that operates around Kharkiv, wich is equipped with MT-LB as IFV
Over the last few videos i get the impression, that there as been a change in austrian law due to your regular insistence on being the sole owner and producer of the material
You probably mean as APC, IFV's are generally better armed. (BMP-2 is an IFV)
@@castor3020 No as IFVs, because of arctic conditions. There are no BMPs in the units that are meant to fight in the arctic. The 80th and 200th brigades are arctic units and located in nothern Russia
as a driver of 1 mtlb, i can say it was a fun little "tank" to drive in winter, when u learned not to gear down to turn i sharp turns... just drift hehe, and the best thing in winter was the driver had the controls of the heating system, and the idiots in the back always froze XD ,
A very interesting video coming from a current MT-LB/v driver in the Finnish Army 🇫🇮
MT-LB used to be produced in Poland (since 1976) but almost exclusively for export. Most of them went to USSR. So somewhat ironically some of those Russian MT-LBs might have been produced in Poland.
Polish Armed Forces didn't accept the base version of MT-LB into service mostly because Polish artillery doctrine already then rejected towed artillery as obsolete thus there was no need for this kind of vehicle.
But there were some small numbers of support vehicles based on MT-LB chassis ordered.
The MT-LB is good for one thing.
You can shove as much stuff as you want inside and then ontop of the vehicle and it will still get through any mud area.
A great vehicle when you need to get something to somebody holding a defence off the roads.
Ive seen people complain about its armor , but again , was never meant to go into combat. At most maybe go in and carry wounded out. But not more then that.
It is being used at small arms range lol, being hurt and confused by MG fire and finished off by RPGs when the driver makes a mistake
There is also a MT-LB 6MB fitted with the 30mm autocanon from the BTR 82.
Great video, thank you Military History not Visualized! Very comprehensive and great to get some original footage of this vehicle up close - I hope you enjoyed the journey but bet it was very bumpy! I'm a long time subscriber - first time commenter - One thing that I didn't get about your narration was the reference to John Cleese - I know he's renowned for being tall and ungainly but is your reference from a film or something?
Keep up the good work and thanks!
It is a reference to this sketch: ruclips.net/video/VokGd5zhGJ4/видео.html
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized Great! :-)
Danke for the Cleese!
Looks like a very useful utility vehicle for the rear echelon. Not so good near the leading edge of the battle. The fact that from a distance it looks like an AFV makes it an easy target for every portable anti tank weapon in Ukraines arsenal including the M72 LAW.
Another difference is that you can attach a seed spreader, grain hopper, insecticide tank and other useful agriculture attachments to the MTLBu but not the MT-LB. Don't believe me? Ask a Ukrainian farmer
Thanks 👍
2s1 Gvozdika SPH base is based on MT-LB, Poland tried to create light Anti-aircraft platform out of it in Sopel and Stalagmit systems, now it's a base for many Polish command vehicles like Łowcza-3, medical evacuation vehicles, engineering vehicles like WPT Mors TRI Durian, mine layer Kroton, and in 2009 new LPG (light tracked carrier) was created based upon MT-LB and it's basis for 120mm mortar, command vehicles and so on.
I'm offended by this title and description. It's not Russian, it's Soviet. It was designed in Kharkiv, Ukraine, by mostly local engineers, one of them was my grandpops. And fun fact, it's the workhorse of the Ukrainian Army too.
@@Kozak806 Oh cool, here's the "you can't be upset about upsetting things" squad. Be sure to keep your cool next time you get fact checked.
Fuck Russia. An entire country built off the tears of their neighbors, with nothing but addiction and rape to show for it. This is a Ukranian creation and Ukraine has right to claim it.
> It's not Russian, it's Soviet. It was designed in Kharkiv, Ukraine, by mostly local engineers
All points are addressed in the video.
And if you think I use titles like "The Soviet-Russian-Ukrainian AFV..." then you are on the wrong channel. And even if I would use that title, I am very certain that you or someone else would complain about that too.
@@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized It was a silly comment, but surely calling it "soviet" would be more accurate?
Our staff sergeant used to say, that it was a shame that vodka was invented before the MTLB, because the design is pretty weird in some places.
@@castor3020 ruclips.net/video/ssURn2sxJJY/видео.html
I can asure you that the MT-LB is talked about in the Norwegian military, since the 200th MIB in Pechenga is (or was) equipped with the MT-LBV. The 200th mechanized infantry brigade is the largest unit, close to the Norwegian border. Of course in 2022 the 20th MIB has been more or less annhiliated in the Ukraine. The MT-LBV is a version with wider tracks for better mobility on snow.
trololo driven that in highway around 55-60kph and my commander checked that with GPS :D (the speedometer went haywire in those speeds). And my MT-LB was V variant with wider tracks.
earlier this year Patria unveiled a concept vehicle for a EU tracked APC programme, Patria says it's based on the XA-300 (aka. Patria 6x6) but to me it looks like someone actually started from the silhouette of MT-LB & put the passenger compartment of XA-300 inside it.
What made me surprised though is how really widespread this vehicle was used by the Russian in the Ukraine War compared to BTRs as frontliner. Like what u said i thought this was more likely used as logistic and field gun carrier way behind frontline.
I strongly suspect these numbers are also including Ukrainian losses. To suggest otherwise would imply the Russians have lost something like ten percent of their total mechanized forces, which is dubious in the extreme.
We have two armies here using mostly the same equipment, and half the stuff we see is so blown up so badly there's no real way to tell.
Nearly all of this information is going to age like milk left outside on a hot summer day.
It would be nice to know the Ukrainian losses. Supposedly two months ago they had some 1800 tanks and thousands of other armoured vehicles (BMP, BTR, MT-LB and such).
The site that was mentioned in the video - Oryx - also provides Ukrainian losses.
According to Oryx, the: list only includes destroyed vehicles and equipment of which photo or videographic evidence is available. ... All possible effort has gone into avoiding duplicate entries and discerning the status of equipment between captured or abandoned. Many of the entries listed as 'abandoned' will likely end up captured or destroyed. Similarly, some of the captured equipment might be destroyed if it can't be recovered. When the origin of a piece of equipment can't be established, it is not included in the list. The Soviet flag is used when the equipment in question was produced prior to 1991."
So right now, for Russian tanks, that site gives a count as follows: Tanks (453, of which destroyed: 222, damaged: 6, abandoned: 41, captured: 184)
For Ukraine tanks, the following is given: Tanks (98, of which destroyed: 39, damaged: 2, abandoned: 9, captured: 46)
So a 4.6 to 1 ratio of total Russian losses to Ukrainian ones.
I suspect both counts are higher given the criterion of requiring photographic evidence. My guess is the count for Ukraine would also be higher because I wouldn't be surprised if Ukrainian civilians are being encouraged to keep quiet on any documentation for such losses. Otherwise, doesn't seem like the Russian troops have pursued such photographic / videographic documentation via smartphone with as much enthusiasm.
@@michaeldunne338 Russian troops are not allowed to use their smartphones in Ukraine, to prevent giving away information to the enemy. Makes sense, considering the number of westerners that made posts on tiktok and twitter, shortly before the arrival of an Iskander.
The Russian MoD said a few weeks ago they destroyed well over a thousand armoured vehicles in Ukraine so far. I can't remember the exact numbers cited. Not that it matters, the MoD stopped uploading videos two weeks ago, and by now all their uploads, reports about the conflict have disappeared. No censorship at all.
@@michaeldunne338 I don't trust the site and what they describe as credible. This is the whole point of my comment, that they exhibit poor judgment.
@@Shatnerpossum Where exactly do you think they exhibited poor judgement?
Not sure that indications of large equipment losses for the Russians are necessarily unreliable, given the comments by Dmitry Peskov, and the fact that Russian forces had to retreat from Kyiv, Chernihiv Oblast, Sumy Oblast.
Sweden got these at the same time they got the BMP-1s/Pbv501s you made a video about, also former East German ones. Sweden liked these better then the BMP-1s, both for it better terrain capability in deep snow and for its vesitility. I guess by the 90s the BMP-1 was already so obsolete that the versitility provided by the MT-LB outshined the nominally higher combat capabillity of the BMP-1. Sweden did us them as APC:s, since the units that got them would otherwise have been mounted in trucks.
We were taught the MTLB was more of a lightly armored troop transport for field artillery and such, more than a "Armored Fighting VEH".
I have feeling that many MT-LBs will be converted into drone carriers in the near future. It's got the space and if Russians can shove jammers in it and turn the MT-LB into a mobile command post, then one or even a few drones with an operator on-board won't be a problem.
Only a few. Russia is crippled in the production of semi conductors and computer chips.
Drone captured in ukraine used american components, proving russian technological manifacturing inferiority.
i would go for the bold claim, t hat russia will not convert anything to modern equipment anymore in the next 2 decades.
they can barely reproduce outdated chips from the mid 2000´s.
Comparing pop cans to Red Bull cans. Nice video.
Zsu - 57 - 2 man that's awesome!!
The MT-LB is also the basis for the 122mm 2S1 Gvozdika howitzer that is one of the most numerous artillery pieces worldwide with thousands produced
if you didnt know MTLB means "shitbox"
To the Author: While an interesting video of the real thing (which I've never seen in person), I learned about Russian army equipment from a MilSim game. So I thank you for confirming my limited knowledge on this equipment.
With that said however, another (unnamed) RUclips'r who's covering the Russo-Ukraine War doesn't seem to be too knowledgeable on their equipment either. I attempted to correct his mistake(s) when he called a BTR a BMP. So... I think it would be a great idea for you to help correct this ignorance too!
😅
I would like to see something covering the general differences between:
- Tanks (T-62, T-72, T-80, T-90)
- BMP
- BTR
- MTLB (covered here, thanks!)
- BDRM
For me, the easiest way to tell them apart was by their tracks (BMP) and wheels (BTR & BDRM). I found them to be highly effective vehicles in the MilSim, but you had to know how to use them too!
😉👍
Had chance to drive one at APG, easy to drive and agile
I was always wondering what the turretless bmp like vehicles where, now I know
Lots of visualization recently on the MHnV channel
Also often used for specialists (e.g. engineers, etc.).
The ATGM and Shorad variants are perfect uses for this vic
i had my training with the mt-lb in year 2000 with the swedish army for 10months .i started with the mt-lb and later i was moved to the mt-lbu . one of the big diffrences is the engine ,the mt-lbu has a turbocharger and is much more powerful then the mt-lb ,what i can remind is that the mt-lbu almost did 90km/h as max speed and almost impossible to keep it on the road :😁
How was the cross country performance?
Does this one light up like a fire cracker too ?
Are towed artillery going away? Aside from having some lightweight artillery that can be rapidly deployed by a helo it seems towed arty is disadvantageous to self-propelled arty. Or am I missing something?
Well, another plus would be the low cost of towed artillery. Less that can break, easier logistics etc. If you arent a bigger country with s lot of funds, you will still use them
They are bringing this relic out to use now.
I have read somewhere,
that these vehicles are
nick named "the mass grave" in the Russian
army. 💥
Sweden bought a bunch of the MT-LB as a battle taxi filler but it was only used for a few years. It was sold off/scrapped like the the bmp 1 (also ex ddr surplus) now partly sent by Czech republic to the Ukraine. It has better terrain capability then wheeled
Love the Monty Python reference.
When I went to the Parola Tank Museum in Finland recently I got to climb in the MT-LB they have parked in front of the main building entrance.
I was astonished by how small the interior is.
Granted I'm probably taller (1m75/5ft9) than the standard Soviet mechanized infantryman of the time and I have quite broad shoulders for my size. In addition this not being my first time getting in a tank I was overly cautious with my head making the whole thing probably feels artificially smaller.
But damn I had to move on all four to get anywhere inside and I went through the path around the engine compartment to go from the Driver/Commander compartment to the infantry compartment by a mix of growling on my side and inevitably knocking my head on something.
This in full gear would have probably get me some time to get used to, but at least I would have got a helmet.
2017...do the submarine do the submarine. was it there yet in 2017?
Did that already in 2016: ruclips.net/video/nWVQlGPQvtU/видео.html
We called these "meat by the pound" during Task 14: Vehicle Recognition. I only ever saw them in Bosnia-- painted UN white, usually-- or in armor museums.
Might not be the best looking or well armored vehicle, but it does seem quite versatile given its large, flat roof and spacious interior. Everything from ATGMs to AT guns to naval AA turrets have been slapped onto these. Oh, and the funny Ukrainian one with helicopter rocket pods.
These are those vehicles where you can only see the bottum chassis is left on the road like a rusted bath tub?
My math/science teacher was an afv crewman inside an mt lb in sweden
I was noticing the knocked out MT-LB’s. Interesting
this is the same vehicle as the Shit-Sturm?
Assuming you mean the Shturn-S then yes, it is based on an MT-LB.
Pancake
hello :)
The Ukrainians love these so much , i saw an interview with ukrainian soldier and they said they prefer it over the M113s and other armored transport and personal carriers that its western neighbours sent. The Russians to use these for multiple roles to. Its kinda funny now that all the shit people talked about it because it was related to the old PT-76 and was considered old , russian , cheap and inferior to other APCs and transport meanwhile its being a true workhorse out in the UkrainianRussian war carrying troops on top into battle, rescuing injured soldiers, pulling heavy artilleries into position, logistical runs or mounting giant anti tank weaponry such as 100mm cannons. Definitely earned my respect
If you are struggling to pronounce some russian/ukrainian/slavic words, especially the big ones, try breaking them up into syllables. Like, mno-go-tse-le-voi tya-hach.
Sure, you sound like a first grader but every russian did it at some point in his/her life and imho its still better than giving up and dropping half the word like so many people do.
wheres the engine located ?
Looks like a BTR except it's got tracks n stuff
there are a variety of interesting armament packages that can be mounted in one of these to turn them into a IFV or fire support vehicle. the likly reason for smaller losses is that its is not as photogenic as it is mainly a utilty vehicle used in various trasnport and command functions so twitter warriors ignore it.
Hey how do those things work as coffins? Or chicken coops?
Ironischerweise habe ich heute ein Video von "Covert Cabal" gesehen, welches das Verschwinden des MT-LB aus den russischen Gerätekammern thematisiert.
So in ein, zwei Jahren werden die meisten produzierten MT-LBs rostende Wracks in der Ukraine sein.