My dad served in one of these during his military service in east germany. When we talked about the BMP, he also noted that for training they used a computer simulation, as ammo was apparently to expensive to train with.
We fire sharp rounds to the end, in Czech Republic.....BMP is the same amazing platform like Hind or T72 was....not the best, but ....one feel so mean to be there with this machinery....
@@localmilkman3917 I meant in War Thunder, I think I'd rather be in a Bradley in real life. In game though the Bradley has better depression and thermals, other than that, the BMP is a better anti tank weapon.
I served in a Finnish panzerjaeger company in 2010s and my Command platoon had a single BMP-1 attached as a command tank. Having driven it, I can attest that it is very easy to drive, though it's cramped if you are above 180cm tall. Vision is pretty good using periscopes, though probably not up to modern standard like a CV90 or a similar vehicle. Carrying 8 jaegers is impossible and even 6 fully armed guys is a stretch. It was a command tank so we didn't need the capacity that much but it can't compete with more modern IFVs in this regard. Protection is also lackluster, we were told 7.62×54R armorpiercing can penetrate the side armor at close ranges, though it's still better than the MT-LBs. Finnish BMP-1s had their ATGMs detached and that role is instrad relegated to jaegers. Thus the tank only operates its main gun and the MG, but it's perfectly fine against IFVs and emplacements. The explosive power should not be underestimated. Never had any breakdowns and the mechanics said its pretty easy to maintain. It has plenty enough power to pass through forested areas and the top speed can be reached on roads easily. It's still a perfectly serviceable vehicle, though it really can't be upgraded. I wish there were more light cannons like the 76mm on IFVs, autocannons are great but a bit more punch here and there never hurts
@@jintsuubest9331 19mm at 60° is gonna stop a lot more than just 12.7mm AP, which is rated to pen like 6mm at 60°. Unless the BMP-1s armor value in-game are incorrect, which it seems they are.
It took many years for me to learn that BMP is Boyevaya Mashina Pekhoty, which literally just means Infantry Fighting Vehicle. I guess it really was the first, so that's a deserved name.
Wow, the fact that I, a pole, could figure out what the russian means. Like, the words are so similar. The polish equivalent would be bojowa maszyna piechoty (though we don't call it that)
@@seemslegit6203 News flash kid, the Eastern/Central European countries share a common ancestry which are the Thrace and also thanks to Medieval Bulgaria to spread language and culture to your region and Russia's, many things in the culture and language are the same. What is hleb in Polish? Bread, right? Same here.
People often give it BS cos of fuel tanks in back door... BUT... Those were ADDITIONAL fuel tanks, for prolonged drives. It was clearly stated not to go into battle with those full. There were some records that the crews before the engagement would empty those and put sand bags inside sometimes. So, it was perfectly safe. Plus, on top of it all, the fuel is not that easy to ignite despite what people think. For example, Swedish S-tank has additional fuel canisters on its side as additional - armor! They clearly stated that never during the testing did any of the hits set it ablaze, despite testing it with all available ammo types at the time.
@@AHappyCub it does make for some hilarious team kills in sim battles though when I try and confuse enemies who aren't paying attention and catch them with their own spells 😂😂
Fuel is a very wide term. We need to distinguish diesel from gasoline. One is hard to light on fire and second can explode just from ignition of its gases.
My dad was a BMP-1 Driver in the GDR in the late 80s. From what he told me , was that the BMP-1 REALLY loved to jump. If you went over a hill crest a bit too fast , you would have your Training officer siiting in the commander seat , rigth behind the driver , bash you over the head for damaging the vehicle. And there was also a problem with the tracks. Due to their design , they could easily slip off on quick turns in mud or soft dirt. But would be just as easily put back on. In general , my dad loved driving the thing. Funny part is. He received his training for the BMP-1 in Lithuania , arrived in the GDR and found out that his base , didnt have BMP-1s , so he had to be retrained for a Rescue vehicle based on a T-72A. Pretty much a tank without a turret with towing equipment. Mastered it aswell.
Clearly it was good enough to create an entire class of AFVs, so my guess is it was goddamn terrifying when it came out-not because of what the vehicle could do, but because of the doctrine the vehicle enabled.
But honestly BMP look like soviets looked at LVT (landing vehicle, tracked) and thought ...if this thing is an amphibious vehicle with some land driving capabilities... what if we have a fire-support vehicle that also has some amphibious capabilities?
BECAUSE of what these vehicles can do. Keep in mind that this is from the 70s, when USA only had M113 APC to contend against it. You dont see many of these in service, but this, even though poorly treated, still runs, that speaks volumes about this vehicle. BMP-1 is terrifying, for its time. Ofcourse it cant match modern IFVs, but for that time, it was the most advanced thing in the world in its class.
@@plasticide4095One on one it’s inferior to the Marder IFV, which was developed around the same time as the BMP-1. (Development of the Marder started in 1959 to address the shortcomings of first true IFV, the HS 30)
The BMP-1 is probably my favorite Cold war vehicle. They look awesome, they are small, but pack a huge punch. I recently painted a 15mm motor rifle platoon complete with three BMP's. Love em!
My dad was a motor infantry platoon commander in the USSR. his platoon used BMP-1s and he said it was god-aweful to ride in the crew compartment so he would climb to the gunner position and sleep there leaning on the padded scope.
I was in the US Army and before the M-2 Bradley. I drove the M113 APC. It was easy to drive and maintain and was fun to drive. A good driver learns how to use tricks for smoothing out rough terrain and making the ride much smoother than the BMP. The APC wasn't an IFV, but the M-2 .50 cal wasn't a slouch when covering the infantry. Like all light armored vehicles, if you acted like a tank, the odds were you would catch an RPG and end up a hunk of melted aluminum.
There was a lag factor too between mechanized infantry and the tanks. A lot of the mechanized infantry vehicles would go slower than the mbt's. You were often restricted in speed to the speed of your slowest vehicle. So they had to make something fast that had some survivability until it reached the enemy trench line. They wanted it to arrive when the t62's and 72's were engaged with the front positions of whoever they were fighting. I was a passenger in a BMP as part of our training in the 90's. It must have been gotten from Egypt or another client state. It was very cramped inside. The rear door has the fuel tanks on them, and they were made to swing out and be held open to the sides, so that someone with an RPK or something else could stand behind them and give covering fire as the vehicle advanced. You couldn't really see much out of them. A riser stood in the middle of the crew compartment with a bunch of batteries mounted on it. The tracks were kind of narrow. It could support a squad and knock down buildings with its main gun. Main gun in turret seemed cramped, hard to use and cheaply made.
Meh, swimming is kind of an overrated ability. Yes with all the European rivers but meanwhile Nato could literally pull bridges out of their ass so swimming was deemed pointless
I've always dug the BMP just for looks. It's low design and those sharp angles just give it a nice presence. And for sure like you said Spookston, the historical importance can't be understated. Even if not the best IFV, the Russians got their first, and forced everyone else to start developing them. Great vid and look forward to the next one.
Another excellent video! On the subject of auto-loaders, David C Isby in his Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army, relates that the auto loaders on Soviet tanks was the primary source of sopranos in the Red Army chorus. Thanks again!
Please tell me, did that American ever been in a russian tank. The carrocels were reliable that even United kingdom while projecting the ENT MBT they decided to put a carrocel like on the soviet tanks. But the project didnt went anywere. But they used a lot of it in Challenger 2 built
That joke doesn't make sense, though... I presume it's trying to imply that their testicles got caught in the autoloader, but that would have to happen before puberty.
the west german already made the first IFV with the SPz 12-3, although the American and British ended up responding to the soviet BMP rather than their german ally's IFV
Its still kinda actively used in some reserve units here in Poland bc our ministry of defence has this bs policy that all ifvs should swim as first priority and "Bewup swims!!! 1!" is a huge meme here. Edit: Bewup comes from the translated name Bojowy Wóz Piechoty and is just phonetical way of staying BWP. It is literaly translated Bajowyj Mashyna Piechotyj (BMP)
When the BMP first stormed the battlefields of Egypt, western designers were so taken aback by it that many designs were modified. For example the marder was modified to take a Milan missile in the commanders position due to the BMPs malutka missile being shown in Egypt to have…some effect.
My dad was an anti-tanksman in the coldstream and said you can always identify a bmp from its cigar shape at the time they used the Wombat and Milan to shoot tanks
I served in Finnish army when first BMP-1's entered Service. In 30 + years, problems were fixed but they were originally crap. 76 mm electric firing system was apalling. It was soon taken out from service. One BMP 1 burned because of electric fire. Design consept was (and is) good. Mechanical execution was not. Appart from vertical fuel tank inserted to rear doors, insanity or engineers revenge of not getting paid or something....
Thanks for a new Video!! and I believe that I can say on behalf of the Community Thank You for all the super hard work you put into research of the Vehicles IRL not in War Thunder and that this series is both Informative and just really cool Thanks Again!!
@Kwoney True, but the reason for that is the ground is soft enough in those areas to sink tanks, so they use the very light ones to have heavy fire support anyway. The heavy modern MBT's they do have are not numerous and cannot be used all over.
@Spookston Great video! Only one thing though, 02:03, Object 911 was also a wheel and track combination vehicle. Rather than having deployable tracks like the Object 19, it had deployable wheels.
I'm learning English and this channel seems to be the place to challenge my listening skills, Spooks talks so fast I can't even hear sometimes, like in the 2:21 part Still it's an interesting channel tho, instantly subbed.
Yes he has very good information to put forth on this channel, but he continues to handicap the general quality of the channel by butchering the meter of his speech and smearing words together, especially when specifically describing technology. I have found by adjusting the speed setting on channel it makes it possible to digest the information and get all the dialog. And English is my native language. But it is nevertheless a fine channel and he puts out excellent content.
3:12 this makes me angrier than it should because it happens so often If you stay still you can't guide the missile If you move it will flail about with the hull wobble
I have to say, i really like your Videos, because you dont only compare the tank on a tactical Level, but also on the other 3 Level a tank needs to be good in. Namely strategical, economical and operational Levels which are often overlooked by other content creators. Just to clarify the diffrent Levels: - Tactical: How good it the tank against other tanks? - Strategical: Logistics and relaibility. - Ecomomical: How easy are losses to replace? Is the tank easy to produce? - Operational: What is the task of the tank? How good was it in that role?
Fun little fact. During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan soldiers would use those rear door tanks to make wine. They'd fill them up with fruits and water, wait a couple weeks and drain the alcohol.
In real life we used to want to see these on the battlefield. I flew gunships and scouts in a prior life and seeing them helped us understand what unit we were fighting. Also easy to kill with tows.
@@nemo5335 My job at the time was with the 2dACR...I was an Attack Helicopter Commander. My job wasn't to survive...it was to find and fix any enemy penetration. I expected to live about 48 hours max. By then the balance of forces would be in place to deal with anything. BTW...it worked out in the end because Germany was reunited (I was on the line when the wall came down), and the Soviet Union failed. So yes, the BMP was a forerunner of all fighting vehicles...but it was easily defeated.
@@nemo5335 yup...I was also a personnel planning operations officer at USAEUR HQ in Heidelberg prior to my 2ACR time and our replacement planning models (lotus 123 spreadsheets baby) were rough to look at.
@@fuzzdad2 both sides were prepearing for enemie's attack, spending billions of dollars that could be used to enhance people's life. Just because both sides lived in utter paranoia of each other.
@@jiridrapal7512 in many ways i suspect it was the american military industrial complex wanting a bad guy so they could continue to make lots of money with weaponary.... rather than actual soviet aggression being realistic.
Ask Iraqi forces that served in the Iran-Iraq War and most notably in the Gulf War. This of course assumes you can find some of them still alive. They faired very poorly against the M1A1 and the M60A3. CAS took care of many of the rest.
@@hhale Iraqi T-72's were dogshit. They were downgraded T-72A's with the USSR only exporting 3BM9 to Iraq for use on the T-72M. Even with those setbacks they did quite a number on Iranian Chieftains when those two encountered eachother. Though against the Abrams and Chally 2 their poor performance is to be expected. Iraq had poorly trained crews with Tanks from the early 70's with mid 70's ammunition, compared to the excellent US/UK crew training and most modern Tanks + Ammunition at the time.
@@hhale The T-72 performed very well against Iranian M60A1s. WDYM? Mentioning CAS is worthless because its completely irrelevant and has nothing to do with how good or bad the T-72 was.
@@hhale Iraq T-72 performed well during the Iran-Iraq War against Iranian Patton and Chieftain tanks. With most sources noting them as "nearly invulnerable" to rounds fired by Iranian tanks from the front.
Vehicles tend to always go from revolutionary but flawed, to slightly more ironed out, to having all the kinks worked out and immediately becoming obsolete
What I love about the BMP-1 is that is that it only weighs half as much as a Marder 1 probably even less when considering the later versions with more armor.
Fun fact, the BMP-1 was more expensive to produce than early models of the MiG 21. I also think BMPs, without factoring in their fuel load and mileage, would make great daily drivers. A respectable top speed, plenty of room for passengers/cargo, the ability to become a (very slow) boat and it isn't too heavy or huge. Plus, I think it looks great. It might even do well in search and rescue when floods happen
The rollers are garbage and break down constantly, the stock shocks fail weekly, the upper rollers fail, tensioning is a pain, the engine is a pain, the diesel pump is a pain, adjusting the clutch is a pain, the electrics can burn and kill you, using original tools to cut or close the track is a pain and the screwclamps to close the track fail often, the gearbox sucks (a friend who drove on said so), theres no stock heating and atleast the finnish modification sucks for the driver (basically only heats the turret), the compressor gave me ptsd (its much harder to access on bmp 2, atleast as a 188cm tall person), but i love them, they look unique and are fun when they work. For your purpose id recommend an mtlb. Theyre a lot more reliable than bmps. I only had to once change thermostats on an mtlb and nothing else, bmps were constant hassle. Though the track on the mtlb sucks if you need to take it off or cut it for any reason, compared to the bmp. (and im actually not sure if the finnish version of the bmp has the original track or not, but judging the tolerances it is atleast soviet in that way.) Also preheating the bmp is a pain. And normally spews flames under the vehicle lol.
@@TheIdiotPlays Thanks for your detailed reply. And wow, that's the reality of things huh! I've worked on cars and bikes before, but having to do that much maintenance on a vehicle almost 15 tons would require...well, an army. I guess newer isn't always better. Based on your experiences of upkeeping a BMP it seems like the only advantage it holds over the MTLB for a civilian is looks. If I ever decide to purchase an old Soviet APC or AFV I'll keep this in mind!
@@3.9L_V8 Yeah well that was mostly me rambling about things we had to deal with during service :'D Though if not used in combat training the bmp could probably last longer and have less faults, as we abused them quite a lot.
I really do like this series of "tanks" I have played this one in other video games, and it was a personal favorite of mine. Just in form and function, it one of the best armored vehicles around tracked or no.
I crawled around in one on static display at Ft Irwin in 87. I was impressed at the layout, compared with the M113. And the sharp wedge shape to the frontal armor gave it good protection.
One of the more interesting flaws in the design of the early models was the driving light on the front left of the vehicle was high enough that the gun barrel could knock it off. So the solution was to incorporate a "hump" in the turret ring that would force the barrel upward when in that position and protect the light from damage. It also made that forward part of the turret arc a dead zone where none of its weapons could be brought to bear. A flaw later fixed on future models. "Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army" By David Isby.
At the time it was designed and built, it was one of the first IFVs. Though by today's standards, it is very crude and inadequate. But that being said, it is good for what it was made for. That being an armored tracked vehicle that the crew didn't have to depart off of unless forced to. Its biggest problems come from the way they are used. The Russians too often treat it like a tank and seem surprised when they get destroyed by the bucket full.
My father had his compulsory military year in communist Czechoslovakia (dudes who didn´t study at the university had 2 years of compulsory military service) in Czech part of the country, close to then West German border (Slovaks were mostly send to serve in the Czech part of the country and vice versa). He ended up in a mechanic team of BVP´s (BMP 1s and 2s, BTR-70 and their Czechoslovak version mostly, some Hungarian BRDM 1s and 2s). He witnessed pretty sick things there - one BMP 2 crew shooting dead another BMP 2 crew on night shooting practice, the crew of the first mistaking the other for a target as it lost its way and got lit by the target searchlights, illuminating the targets for the crews, another BMP 2 crew drowning while crossing a river and sinking, another time, crews of BMP 2s being sent out during the harshest winter and one crew freezing to death in their BMP 2. One BMP 1 or 2 crew taking their BMP for a ride to a local pub and intoxicated, leaving it in front of a pub, guns fully loaded and unlocked, another crew yet tried to cross to West Germany in theirs, to be pursued by half of their group (my dad wasn´t there, though), the crew surrending after a shootout with the pursuing BMPs in the Šumava/Bavarian woods, bulldozer hitting a V3S truck´s side, cracking it open and sending the left row of V3S travelling soldiers on the road, some simpler Darwin prize candidare peeps there heating up the ammunition-loaded V3S truck with gas torches and welding equipment, dudes who were Toluen-depended before the military service and couldn´t be entrusted an AK-47 rifle or a grenade - one dropped it in the middle of his group while throwing it - everyone ran for the nearest ditch quite quickly, stuff like that. The BMP2s are considered Slovak main battle tanks/light tanks to these days, with just some T72s in garages are last resort tanks, but some modernisation of the tank force is supposedly under way.
fun fact: The BMP 1 was often called Kotzkübel by NVA/GDR soldiers, what translate so something like vomiting bucket. Apparently driving in difficult terrain was a bit of a rough one for the guys in the back. :D
would love to see some of your gameplay from time to time tbh, pretty usefull for new players as it can help you to learn maps and gameplay of the tanks, just a thought!
At a fairly hefty 6'1", that troop compartment makes me cringe... Given that there are vehicles that use fuel tanks for armor, the fuel on troop doors complaint seems a bit weak. ALSO, if an enemy is where he can get shots at the troop doors, the crew has worse problems...
I have come to love the bmp more and more...I would say if upgraded with modern optics, data links and keept in good condition. The bmp-1 with a 30mm of course and the bmp-2's are great vehicles if used right... The bmp-2m with 4 ATGM and a AGL is insane firepower like the bmp-3 has a 100mm HE/ATGM, 30mm, 7.62mm just in the turret. With some having 2- 7.62mm MG in the front hull with 2000rds each it's a suppressive fire nightmare. Lacking in armor is made up by firepower not the best way to go but for sure deadly.
Spookston I have a suggestion to make There is this Game called Sprocket and the Game is all about designing your own Tanks and such, I think it would be a cool video to have to see you make your own design Tank For example, you can make the "Perfect Sherman", a old video of yours going through all the Sherman models and their pros and cons to the previous model
Not currently or as a main or important part and not as much it’s a Apc that isn’t being made rn or gonna be used in the future in Any serious measure as for the BMP1 that’s obsolete and a piece of junk in 2023 it’s a far from wanted or loved at all and used as a last and empty resource aka result hell there’s BMP2s-BMP3s Kugernats 25 and you pull out the ancient antique BMP1 something ain’t right using 60+ Year old IFVS.
@@Channel-23s Apparently, you haven't read the memoirs of people who fought in the Donbas. Besides, where do such conclusions come from? And you judge by logic: "old means useless." Then why are some NATO countries still using the "death boxes", the M113, which were used in the Vietnam War. The answer is simple - there are plenty of them in warehouses, as well as Soviet BMP-1/2 and BMD-1/2. Therefore, it is incorrect to call the BMP-1/2 a piece of junk, and "Kurganets-25" is written the way I wrote it.
@@Channel-23s Old weapons are never useless, they are always used. For example, many military engineers thought that the RCG-3 grenade, developed in the 1950s, had already outlived itself by the appearance of the RPG-18 "Fly" anti-tank grenade launchers, but the war in Iraq showed otherwise. This pathetic grenade forced the Americans to carefully use HMMVW and install additional protection from the damaging cumulative jet (In 2008 alone, 79 successful cases of the use of RCG-3 by Iraqi insurgents were recorded). Now the RCG-3 is also being used, and by two sides in the conflict. In the Russian army, they are often dropped from quadrocopters on Ukrainian T-64BV, from which tanks Ukrainian tankers throw their damaged tanks.
@@rikstanken3048 old does mean bad in a way and the APC is still used as it’s a armored car basically and better then nothing but far from happy aka why Bradley and others are being sent and rn no same person will say IFVS or MTLBS from 60+-73+ years ago are great and what soldiers want due to how worst the technology is and hence why 2-3 replacements and upgrades were added it’s being thrown out when you’ve got little to nothing or want to save the better equipment for something important rather then a meat grinder or stalemate
@@rikstanken3048 you bring up a grenade and I agree and don’t at the same time as a weapon is different from a IFV with outdated use or else they wouldn’t have made so many variants Russia has the BMP Terminators it’s another spin on it and the different Kinds Russia has made but when you have more getting blown up or captured and it takes some time to make of course you’ll pull the relics out it’s like America using Sherman’s in 2005 or 2010 rather then different tanks or the M1 Abrams Russia is using alotta T-62S when the T-72 T-80 T-90M and T-14 are already made and replaced it that’s 4 different Tanks after the T-62 (Ukraine has its own BTR-4 quite unique)
Good video, that being said Object 911 isn't really a fully tracked design. It would move only on its track in combat, sure, but it actually had four retractable wheels while it would use for redployments and such on road. As such it basically is a convertible wheel-cum-track vehicle like some had existed during the interwar
In-game, this thing is nice to have. I always love swimming/unorthodox vehicles and in games, they don't get the recognition they deserve, because people only ever care if one of two conditions are met: >One, said vehicle has a crazy good reputation beforehand, or >Two, said vehicle is busted out of its mind, and can be abused in-game. Outside of this, you'll never see people give a shit unless you're the miniscule minority who likes it, just because its cool. That said, the BMP is nice to drive, and I like playing it. I wish it was stabilized somehow, but then again, the thing is perfect as-is.
The problem of cramped infantry room comes clear if you look to the evolution of infantry equipment. Nowadays infantryman has tactical vest, a lot of pouches, that makes him much wider, while in 60s, when the vehicle was being designed, none of these existed and grunts were expected to have just some pouches on their belt and a helmet
They gave many BMPs to other nations too. In Iraq convoy of only 5 m998A1a I was in the rear as a commo guy and we came up to one parked in the road. The main cannon and mg was pointed at us and I grabbed the AT-4 slammed on the break. Jumped out in a roll while setting it up, popped up a fired. It disabled the thing. I still to this day never found out if it had a crew. I was quick so there could have been. It would have shredded us so I was not taking chances.
Something about Ob'yekt 19 is really cool to me. The combination of wheels and tracks stands out, even though it is totally inefficient. Also, Is there any possibility you could do the AMX-13 and AMX-30 for your next "If "x" was historically accurate in War Thunder" videos? I miss those a lot, and I'd love to see those two tanks broken down.
Once I was in the infantry compartment of an BMP-2 (i think they are the same size hull wise) without any equipment whatsoever and it was VERY cramped, especially for the feet. Note that im just 170cm tall and I wasnt wearing any equipment
It does have the amphibious capability, and the large cannon is better for infantry support than something like a 30mm. For independent operation without tank support, maybe the 30mm makes more sense, but if you plan to engage armored target, just have a tank. Amphibious does keep it a little more flexible, but of course limits armor. I think the problem with most western APC's is having a weapon that is optimized for anti-armor instead of one that can lob a large HE round, which is better for supporting the infantry in assaults. Generally keep your infantry carrier out of harms way, and use something better intended for being in harms way when engaging targets that can hurt you.
0:32 why does everyone forget Schützenpanzer Lang HS.30 that predate BMP-1? BMP-1 is probably a better IFV, then HS.30. But that do not stop HS.30 to be the first "modern" IFV.
My dad served in one of these during his military service in east germany. When we talked about the BMP, he also noted that for training they used a computer simulation, as ammo was apparently to expensive to train with.
around what year was he trained in?
@@randomname4522 in the late 80's
probably around 88-89
@@iszox2973 makes sense , soviets were running on fumes at that point
@@iszox2973 yea that checks oout
We fire sharp rounds to the end, in Czech Republic.....BMP is the same amazing platform like Hind or T72 was....not the best, but ....one feel so mean to be there with this machinery....
This is the boy right here. Even if he ain't that good; he is still the boy.
>w
Ain't that good? I find it's honestly better than the Bradley once you get the missile upgrade.
@@DarthCody700 bradleys much safer and more space
@@localmilkman3917 I meant in War Thunder, I think I'd rather be in a Bradley in real life. In game though the Bradley has better depression and thermals, other than that, the BMP is a better anti tank weapon.
@@DarthCody700 nah the bradleys auto canmon is a beast
I served in a Finnish panzerjaeger company in 2010s and my Command platoon had a single BMP-1 attached as a command tank. Having driven it, I can attest that it is very easy to drive, though it's cramped if you are above 180cm tall. Vision is pretty good using periscopes, though probably not up to modern standard like a CV90 or a similar vehicle.
Carrying 8 jaegers is impossible and even 6 fully armed guys is a stretch. It was a command tank so we didn't need the capacity that much but it can't compete with more modern IFVs in this regard.
Protection is also lackluster, we were told 7.62×54R armorpiercing can penetrate the side armor at close ranges, though it's still better than the MT-LBs. Finnish BMP-1s had their ATGMs detached and that role is instrad relegated to jaegers. Thus the tank only operates its main gun and the MG, but it's perfectly fine against IFVs and emplacements. The explosive power should not be underestimated.
Never had any breakdowns and the mechanics said its pretty easy to maintain. It has plenty enough power to pass through forested areas and the top speed can be reached on roads easily. It's still a perfectly serviceable vehicle, though it really can't be upgraded. I wish there were more light cannons like the 76mm on IFVs, autocannons are great but a bit more punch here and there never hurts
The armor rating of bmp1 are
20mm AP of it's time at the upper slope point blank.
12.7mm AP at is belly 100m.
762nato AP at the side less than 100m.
@@jintsuubest9331 19mm at 60° is gonna stop a lot more than just 12.7mm AP, which is rated to pen like 6mm at 60°.
Unless the BMP-1s armor value in-game are incorrect, which it seems they are.
The BMP 3 takes the firepower to the next level
@@khahinmetameta7826 100mm HE+ATGM gun and 30mm autocannon coax
With 7.62 coax too... that's a lot lol
@@kajmak64bit76 light tank
It took many years for me to learn that BMP is Boyevaya Mashina Pekhoty, which literally just means Infantry Fighting Vehicle. I guess it really was the first, so that's a deserved name.
Military hardware tends to be named either in a very self-explanatory and simple style or pompous and flashy fashion for propaganda purposes.
Wow, the fact that I, a pole, could figure out what the russian means. Like, the words are so similar. The polish equivalent would be bojowa maszyna piechoty (though we don't call it that)
@@seemslegit6203 we kinda do, mashina can mean car, which could make it Bojowy Wóz Piechoty
@@seemslegit6203 News flash kid, the Eastern/Central European countries share a common ancestry which are the Thrace and also thanks to Medieval Bulgaria to spread language and culture to your region and Russia's, many things in the culture and language are the same. What is hleb in Polish? Bread, right? Same here.
@@seemslegit6203 these words are also semi-modern military terms and hence why you can understand easily. "Machine" is universal term.
People often give it BS cos of fuel tanks in back door... BUT... Those were ADDITIONAL fuel tanks, for prolonged drives. It was clearly stated not to go into battle with those full. There were some records that the crews before the engagement would empty those and put sand bags inside sometimes. So, it was perfectly safe. Plus, on top of it all, the fuel is not that easy to ignite despite what people think.
For example, Swedish S-tank has additional fuel canisters on its side as additional - armor! They clearly stated that never during the testing did any of the hits set it ablaze, despite testing it with all available ammo types at the time.
That fuel could save you as it slows down the bullet.
So thats why my German BMP-1 survived a hit to the rear by a Soviet BMP-1, it didnt even caught fire
@@AHappyCub it does make for some hilarious team kills in sim battles though when I try and confuse enemies who aren't paying attention and catch them with their own spells 😂😂
That plus if you get hit from behind your all dead or near death anyway.
Fuel is a very wide term. We need to distinguish diesel from gasoline. One is hard to light on fire and second can explode just from ignition of its gases.
My dad was a BMP-1 Driver in the GDR in the late 80s.
From what he told me , was that the BMP-1 REALLY loved to jump. If you went over a hill crest a bit too fast , you would have your Training officer siiting in the commander seat , rigth behind the driver , bash you over the head for damaging the vehicle. And there was also a problem with the tracks. Due to their design , they could easily slip off on quick turns in mud or soft dirt. But would be just as easily put back on.
In general , my dad loved driving the thing. Funny part is. He received his training for the BMP-1 in Lithuania , arrived in the GDR and found out that his base , didnt have BMP-1s , so he had to be retrained for a Rescue vehicle based on a T-72A. Pretty much a tank without a turret with towing equipment. Mastered it aswell.
"When you have acute radiation poisoning, it's a BIT difficult to fight"
Does dying in your own vomit count as fighting though?
Fighting yourself, yeah
Fighting for your life
Clearly it was good enough to create an entire class of AFVs, so my guess is it was goddamn terrifying when it came out-not because of what the vehicle could do, but because of the doctrine the vehicle enabled.
But honestly BMP look like soviets looked at LVT (landing vehicle, tracked) and thought ...if this thing is an amphibious vehicle with some land driving capabilities... what if we have a fire-support vehicle that also has some amphibious capabilities?
That was my take away from it. It was the doctrine, not the vehicle itself.
The BMP was made in response to Soviet doctrine at the time of planning on having to fight in a chemical or nuclear environment.
BECAUSE of what these vehicles can do. Keep in mind that this is from the 70s, when USA only had M113 APC to contend against it. You dont see many of these in service, but this, even though poorly treated, still runs, that speaks volumes about this vehicle. BMP-1 is terrifying, for its time. Ofcourse it cant match modern IFVs, but for that time, it was the most advanced thing in the world in its class.
@@plasticide4095One on one it’s inferior to the Marder IFV, which was developed around the same time as the BMP-1. (Development of the Marder started in 1959 to address the shortcomings of first true IFV, the HS 30)
The BMP-1 is probably my favorite Cold war vehicle. They look awesome, they are small, but pack a huge punch. I recently painted a 15mm motor rifle platoon complete with three BMP's. Love em!
M1 all the way for me
My dad was a motor infantry platoon commander in the USSR. his platoon used BMP-1s and he said it was god-aweful to ride in the crew compartment so he would climb to the gunner position and sleep there leaning on the padded scope.
I was in the US Army and before the M-2 Bradley. I drove the M113 APC. It was easy to drive and maintain and was fun to drive. A good driver learns how to use tricks for smoothing out rough terrain and making the ride much smoother than the BMP. The APC wasn't an IFV, but the M-2 .50 cal wasn't a slouch when covering the infantry. Like all light armored vehicles, if you acted like a tank, the odds were you would catch an RPG and end up a hunk of melted aluminum.
There was a lag factor too between mechanized infantry and the tanks. A lot of the mechanized infantry vehicles would go slower than the mbt's. You were often restricted in speed to the speed of your slowest vehicle. So they had to make something fast that had some survivability until it reached the enemy trench line. They wanted it to arrive when the t62's and 72's were engaged with the front positions of whoever they were fighting.
I was a passenger in a BMP as part of our training in the 90's. It must have been gotten from Egypt or another client state. It was very cramped inside. The rear door has the fuel tanks on them, and they were made to swing out and be held open to the sides, so that someone with an RPK or something else could stand behind them and give covering fire as the vehicle advanced. You couldn't really see much out of them. A riser stood in the middle of the crew compartment with a bunch of batteries mounted on it. The tracks were kind of narrow. It could support a squad and knock down buildings with its main gun. Main gun in turret seemed cramped, hard to use and cheaply made.
For that time this was great vehicle. Could take out MBTs while other nations had 50cals. Also the ability to swim is underrated imo.
Everything Russian/Soviet can swim because of European rivers and stuff... there's plenty and being able to swim is a huge strategic advantage
@@seanmurphy7011 With 3km range atgm you have much better chance than 50 cal
@@kajmak64bit76 the brazil gang agrees with this mentality
@@jacaredosvudu1638 oh bruh xd
Meh, swimming is kind of an overrated ability. Yes with all the European rivers but meanwhile Nato could literally pull bridges out of their ass so swimming was deemed pointless
I really love your historical videos, keep up the good work man 👍
I remember playing amra 2 on that weird random game mode just cruising in my bmp doing those random missions. Pretty damn fun.
I've always dug the BMP just for looks. It's low design and those sharp angles just give it a nice presence. And for sure like you said Spookston, the historical importance can't be understated. Even if not the best IFV, the Russians got their first, and forced everyone else to start developing them. Great vid and look forward to the next one.
The hull of this thing is anything but low, lol. It's a blimp with a tiny turret on top
Another excellent video! On the subject of auto-loaders, David C Isby in his Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army, relates that the auto loaders on Soviet tanks was the primary source of sopranos in the Red Army chorus. Thanks again!
no, the tank autoloaders were very reliable.
Please tell me, did that American ever been in a russian tank. The carrocels were reliable that even United kingdom while projecting the ENT MBT they decided to put a carrocel like on the soviet tanks. But the project didnt went anywere. But they used a lot of it in Challenger 2 built
@@ausintune9014 I think it would depend upon the model, these were early devices.
@@76456 I think it depended upon the model. These were the very early devices.
That joke doesn't make sense, though... I presume it's trying to imply that their testicles got caught in the autoloader, but that would have to happen before puberty.
Before the video: BMPs are moving gas tanks/ coffins.
After the video: They are decent I guess.
I love them
Engineers knew what they are doing, who would have thought.
"If the BMP didn't exist, we likely wouldn't have a Bradley or Warrior today"
Alright lads, that's #2 on the time traveler list
Please no
What’s number 1?
@@TheCurrentRacerReal Depends on who you ask, but everyone has a number 1.
Don't you dare hurt my BMP
the west german already made the first IFV with the SPz 12-3, although the American and British ended up responding to the soviet BMP rather than their german ally's IFV
Its still kinda actively used in some reserve units here in Poland bc our ministry of defence has this bs policy that all ifvs should swim as first priority and "Bewup swims!!! 1!" is a huge meme here.
Edit: Bewup comes from the translated name Bojowy Wóz Piechoty and is just phonetical way of staying BWP. It is literaly translated Bajowyj Mashyna Piechotyj (BMP)
Huh, guess that's why we never got them Bradley bois.
If you’re going to make something light it might as well float I suppose
@@jacplac97 or literally any other country on Earth, for other reasons as well
When the BMP first stormed the battlefields of Egypt, western designers were so taken aback by it that many designs were modified. For example the marder was modified to take a Milan missile in the commanders position due to the BMPs malutka missile being shown in Egypt to have…some effect.
My dad was an anti-tanksman in the coldstream and said you can always identify a bmp from its cigar shape at the time they used the Wombat and Milan to shoot tanks
I served in Finnish army when first BMP-1's entered Service. In 30 + years, problems were fixed but they were originally crap. 76 mm electric firing system was apalling. It was soon taken out from service. One BMP 1 burned because of electric fire. Design consept was (and is) good. Mechanical execution was not. Appart from vertical fuel tank inserted to rear doors, insanity or engineers revenge of not getting paid or something....
There's nothing watching with the fuel tanks.
Always been one of my all time favourites with the M8 AGS.
Lol, coincidentally, iv'e just re-read the main source of your information while taking a dump 2 hours ago. Thanks Mr. Zaloga!
Thanks for a new Video!! and I believe that I can say on behalf of the Community Thank You for all the super hard work you put into research of the Vehicles IRL not in War Thunder and that this series is both Informative and just really cool Thanks Again!!
BMP ain’t that bad if it’s still in service in some countries.
So is the M5 Stuart, so the Stuart isn’t a bad tank?
accessible does not mean good
@Kwoney True, but the reason for that is the ground is soft enough in those areas to sink tanks, so they use the very light ones to have heavy fire support anyway. The heavy modern MBT's they do have are not numerous and cannot be used all over.
some?? there are thousands still in service
Poland has a few of them. But they are (at least planning) going to modernise them.
Hey Spook, would love to see you do videos for the rest of the BMP family too! theyre such awesome and unique vehicles
1:49 the chat lmao
@Spookston Great video! Only one thing though, 02:03, Object 911 was also a wheel and track combination vehicle. Rather than having deployable tracks like the Object 19, it had deployable wheels.
Congrats on 150k!
I'm learning English and this channel seems to be the place to challenge my listening skills, Spooks talks so fast I can't even hear sometimes, like in the 2:21 part
Still it's an interesting channel tho, instantly subbed.
Yes he has very good information to put forth on this channel, but he continues to handicap the general quality of the channel by butchering the meter of his speech and smearing words together, especially when specifically describing technology. I have found by adjusting the speed setting on channel it makes it possible to digest the information and get all the dialog. And English is my native language. But it is nevertheless a fine channel and he puts out excellent content.
The flaring barrel on that tiger II that you ammorack in the last few seconds of footage is pure art
3:12 this makes me angrier than it should because it happens so often
If you stay still you can't guide the missile
If you move it will flail about with the hull wobble
I have to say, i really like your Videos, because you dont only compare the tank on a tactical Level, but also on the other 3 Level a tank needs to be good in. Namely strategical, economical and operational Levels which are often overlooked by other content creators. Just to clarify the diffrent Levels:
- Tactical: How good it the tank against other tanks?
- Strategical: Logistics and relaibility.
- Ecomomical: How easy are losses to replace? Is the tank easy to produce?
- Operational: What is the task of the tank? How good was it in that role?
Fun little fact.
During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan soldiers would use those rear door tanks to make wine.
They'd fill them up with fruits and water, wait a couple weeks and drain the alcohol.
In real life we used to want to see these on the battlefield. I flew gunships and scouts in a prior life and seeing them helped us understand what unit we were fighting. Also easy to kill with tows.
@@nemo5335 My job at the time was with the 2dACR...I was an Attack Helicopter Commander. My job wasn't to survive...it was to find and fix any enemy penetration. I expected to live about 48 hours max. By then the balance of forces would be in place to deal with anything. BTW...it worked out in the end because Germany was reunited (I was on the line when the wall came down), and the Soviet Union failed. So yes, the BMP was a forerunner of all fighting vehicles...but it was easily defeated.
@@nemo5335 yup...I was also a personnel planning operations officer at USAEUR HQ in Heidelberg prior to my 2ACR time and our replacement planning models (lotus 123 spreadsheets baby) were rough to look at.
@@fuzzdad2 both sides were prepearing for enemie's attack, spending billions of dollars that could be used to enhance people's life. Just because both sides lived in utter paranoia of each other.
@@jiridrapal7512 in many ways i suspect it was the american military industrial complex wanting a bad guy so they could continue to make lots of money with weaponary.... rather than actual soviet aggression being realistic.
Could you do: "How bad was the T-62/T-72?"
Ask Iraqi forces that served in the Iran-Iraq War and most notably in the Gulf War. This of course assumes you can find some of them still alive. They faired very poorly against the M1A1 and the M60A3. CAS took care of many of the rest.
@@hhale The T-72 performed well in the Iran-Iraq war. The Gulf war was a different story, for many reasons.
@@hhale Iraqi T-72's were dogshit. They were downgraded T-72A's with the USSR only exporting 3BM9 to Iraq for use on the T-72M. Even with those setbacks they did quite a number on Iranian Chieftains when those two encountered eachother.
Though against the Abrams and Chally 2 their poor performance is to be expected. Iraq had poorly trained crews with Tanks from the early 70's with mid 70's ammunition, compared to the excellent US/UK crew training and most modern Tanks + Ammunition at the time.
@@hhale The T-72 performed very well against Iranian M60A1s. WDYM? Mentioning CAS is worthless because its completely irrelevant and has nothing to do with how good or bad the T-72 was.
@@hhale Iraq T-72 performed well during the Iran-Iraq War against Iranian Patton and Chieftain tanks. With most sources noting them as "nearly invulnerable" to rounds fired by Iranian tanks from the front.
i love it, one of my favorite IFVs of all time.
What a fascinating vehicle, great video!
The bmp is my favorite afv, I just love the look and the capability (tho I prefer the bmp 2). Sadly I don’t know too much about it. Great video!
enjoyed the video , you cover it well , have lots of experience with BMP2 , love, them
Vehicles tend to always go from revolutionary but flawed, to slightly more ironed out, to having all the kinks worked out and immediately becoming obsolete
Loved watching the engine on the BMP eat the shell from the Tiger 2.
It's possible tho?
What I love about the BMP-1 is that is that it only weighs half as much as a Marder 1 probably even less when considering the later versions with more armor.
You can’t expect the revolutionary thing to be perfect from the start
The wheeled bmp looks kinda cool. Would be cool to see in game
Fun fact, the BMP-1 was more expensive to produce than early models of the MiG 21.
I also think BMPs, without factoring in their fuel load and mileage, would make great daily drivers. A respectable top speed, plenty of room for passengers/cargo, the ability to become a (very slow) boat and it isn't too heavy or huge. Plus, I think it looks great. It might even do well in search and rescue when floods happen
The rollers are garbage and break down constantly, the stock shocks fail weekly, the upper rollers fail, tensioning is a pain, the engine is a pain, the diesel pump is a pain, adjusting the clutch is a pain, the electrics can burn and kill you, using original tools to cut or close the track is a pain and the screwclamps to close the track fail often, the gearbox sucks (a friend who drove on said so), theres no stock heating and atleast the finnish modification sucks for the driver (basically only heats the turret), the compressor gave me ptsd (its much harder to access on bmp 2, atleast as a 188cm tall person), but i love them, they look unique and are fun when they work.
For your purpose id recommend an mtlb. Theyre a lot more reliable than bmps. I only had to once change thermostats on an mtlb and nothing else, bmps were constant hassle. Though the track on the mtlb sucks if you need to take it off or cut it for any reason, compared to the bmp. (and im actually not sure if the finnish version of the bmp has the original track or not, but judging the tolerances it is atleast soviet in that way.)
Also preheating the bmp is a pain. And normally spews flames under the vehicle lol.
@@TheIdiotPlays Thanks for your detailed reply. And wow, that's the reality of things huh! I've worked on cars and bikes before, but having to do that much maintenance on a vehicle almost 15 tons would require...well, an army.
I guess newer isn't always better. Based on your experiences of upkeeping a BMP it seems like the only advantage it holds over the MTLB for a civilian is looks.
If I ever decide to purchase an old Soviet APC or AFV I'll keep this in mind!
@@3.9L_V8 Yeah well that was mostly me rambling about things we had to deal with during service :'D
Though if not used in combat training the bmp could probably last longer and have less faults, as we abused them quite a lot.
I really do like this series of "tanks" I have played this one in other video games, and it was a personal favorite of mine. Just in form and function, it one of the best armored vehicles around tracked or no.
bmp was made for close quarters in city fights it was decent cheap and effective that makes it great tank
If ground vehicle which supposed to be disposable costs more then a jet fighter, certainly it is not cheap.
@@nikitajukov4915 bmp-1 has that only bmp-2 and others going on was effectively cheap
I crawled around in one on static display at Ft Irwin in 87. I was impressed at the layout, compared with the M113. And the sharp wedge shape to the frontal armor gave it good protection.
I love how this video uses the same thumbnail as the "if the bmp-1 was historically accurate" video but mirrored.
So do you just add the crew sounds during editing or is there a pack to change the crew voices?
It's a mod but it's private
@@KommissarH i wonder if the game comes out if the mod will go public.
its just Gunner HEAT PC voices right? I'd assume it's all done while editing the video and such.
@@w4t3rsn3k5 It Is GHPC voice, but It Is a mod
@@w4t3rsn3k5 no look at the description
I just realized that you killed me in my AMX 10rc , thats crazy
3:10 that IS-6 had no clue what was going on.
The most important think is that it swim :D
Last shot was a good shot, very enjoyable 😄
Using the object 911 in warthunder would have made a lot of people chuckle
I’ve always fantasize driving one of these in real life. Man it looks cool but I think I might be too tall for it
great vid! perfect level of detail :))
The first of anything is expected to be flawed. But the fact the changes were (relatively) easy to fix show’s they had a good thing going.
Except it wasn't the first. He literally says at 0:22. The first IFV was the West German HS-30.
And here I thought that obj.911 would be a plane
About the gun's inaccuracy, it was meant just to cover the 500m deadzone of the missile, so accuracy wasn't essential.
Oh how nice the damage used to be on the BMP's main cannon. And how straight the missile used to travel. I miss the old BMP-1.
One of the more interesting flaws in the design of the early models was the driving light on the front left of the vehicle was high enough that the gun barrel could knock it off. So the solution was to incorporate a "hump" in the turret ring that would force the barrel upward when in that position and protect the light from damage. It also made that forward part of the turret arc a dead zone where none of its weapons could be brought to bear. A flaw later fixed on future models. "Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army" By David Isby.
good outro music, and good info
Very solid video! Such a thorough and balanced review of a vehicle in just 5 minutes. Top!
At the time it was designed and built, it was one of the first IFVs. Though by today's standards, it is very crude and inadequate. But that being said, it is good for what it was made for. That being an armored tracked vehicle that the crew didn't have to depart off of unless forced to. Its biggest problems come from the way they are used. The Russians too often treat it like a tank and seem surprised when they get destroyed by the bucket full.
swimming military vehicles always have such pleasing lines
My father had his compulsory military year in communist Czechoslovakia (dudes who didn´t study at the university had 2 years of compulsory military service) in Czech part of the country, close to then West German border (Slovaks were mostly send to serve in the Czech part of the country and vice versa). He ended up in a mechanic team of BVP´s (BMP 1s and 2s, BTR-70 and their Czechoslovak version mostly, some Hungarian BRDM 1s and 2s). He witnessed pretty sick things there - one BMP 2 crew shooting dead another BMP 2 crew on night shooting practice, the crew of the first mistaking the other for a target as it lost its way and got lit by the target searchlights, illuminating the targets for the crews, another BMP 2 crew drowning while crossing a river and sinking, another time, crews of BMP 2s being sent out during the harshest winter and one crew freezing to death in their BMP 2. One BMP 1 or 2 crew taking their BMP for a ride to a local pub and intoxicated, leaving it in front of a pub, guns fully loaded and unlocked, another crew yet tried to cross to West Germany in theirs, to be pursued by half of their group (my dad wasn´t there, though), the crew surrending after a shootout with the pursuing BMPs in the Šumava/Bavarian woods, bulldozer hitting a V3S truck´s side, cracking it open and sending the left row of V3S travelling soldiers on the road, some simpler Darwin prize candidare peeps there heating up the ammunition-loaded V3S truck with gas torches and welding equipment, dudes who were Toluen-depended before the military service and couldn´t be entrusted an AK-47 rifle or a grenade - one dropped it in the middle of his group while throwing it - everyone ran for the nearest ditch quite quickly, stuff like that.
The BMP2s are considered Slovak main battle tanks/light tanks to these days, with just some T72s in garages are last resort tanks, but some modernisation of the tank force is supposedly under way.
fun fact: The BMP 1 was often called Kotzkübel by NVA/GDR soldiers, what translate so something like vomiting bucket. Apparently driving in difficult terrain was a bit of a rough one for the guys in the back. :D
the 9 11 desing is the best ngl
Can't diss on the chariot of nuclear carnage
would love to see some of your gameplay from time to time tbh, pretty usefull for new players as it can help you to learn maps and gameplay of the tanks, just a thought!
Finally somebody made a video very impartial...
At a fairly hefty 6'1", that troop compartment makes me cringe...
Given that there are vehicles that use fuel tanks for armor, the fuel on troop doors complaint seems a bit weak. ALSO, if an enemy is where he can get shots at the troop doors, the crew has worse problems...
If enemy gets to those positions you are kinda fucked anyway
Exactly.
@@petesheppard1709 oh you edited your comment
@@esanahka9284 Actually, no. I emphasized the last part because, like you, I saw a bit of a problem there... 🙂
you're sitting.
I have come to love the bmp more and more...I would say if upgraded with modern optics, data links and keept in good condition. The bmp-1 with a 30mm of course and the bmp-2's are great vehicles if used right...
The bmp-2m with 4 ATGM and a AGL is insane firepower like the bmp-3 has a 100mm HE/ATGM, 30mm, 7.62mm just in the turret. With some having 2- 7.62mm MG in the front hull with 2000rds each it's a suppressive fire nightmare. Lacking in armor is made up by firepower not the best way to go but for sure deadly.
nice soundtrack you have in the back
Cool thanks for reading the wiki page for us 😎
when your enemy shapes their entire armoured doctrine around your vehicle, you know you struck gold
Spookston I have a suggestion to make
There is this Game called Sprocket and the Game is all about designing your own Tanks and such, I think it would be a cool video to have to see you make your own design Tank
For example, you can make the "Perfect Sherman", a old video of yours going through all the Sherman models and their pros and cons to the previous model
Its rare that the first of its kind is the the best the BMP-1 had flaws but showed how successfull and usefull the concept of an IFV can be
when people say that the BMP-1 and BMP-2 are outdated, you remember that a huge part of the states still use the M113...
Not currently or as a main or important part and not as much it’s a Apc that isn’t being made rn or gonna be used in the future in Any serious measure as for the BMP1 that’s obsolete and a piece of junk in 2023 it’s a far from wanted or loved at all and used as a last and empty resource aka result hell there’s BMP2s-BMP3s Kugernats 25 and you pull out the ancient antique BMP1 something ain’t right using 60+ Year old IFVS.
@@Channel-23s Apparently, you haven't read the memoirs of people who fought in the Donbas. Besides, where do such conclusions come from? And you judge by logic: "old means useless." Then why are some NATO countries still using the "death boxes", the M113, which were used in the Vietnam War. The answer is simple - there are plenty of them in warehouses, as well as Soviet BMP-1/2 and BMD-1/2. Therefore, it is incorrect to call the BMP-1/2 a piece of junk, and "Kurganets-25" is written the way I wrote it.
@@Channel-23s Old weapons are never useless, they are always used. For example, many military engineers thought that the RCG-3 grenade, developed in the 1950s, had already outlived itself by the appearance of the RPG-18 "Fly" anti-tank grenade launchers, but the war in Iraq showed otherwise. This pathetic grenade forced the Americans to carefully use HMMVW and install additional protection from the damaging cumulative jet (In 2008 alone, 79 successful cases of the use of RCG-3 by Iraqi insurgents were recorded). Now the RCG-3 is also being used, and by two sides in the conflict. In the Russian army, they are often dropped from quadrocopters on Ukrainian T-64BV, from which tanks Ukrainian tankers throw their damaged tanks.
@@rikstanken3048 old does mean bad in a way and the APC is still used as it’s a armored car basically and better then nothing but far from happy aka why Bradley and others are being sent and rn no same person will say IFVS or MTLBS from 60+-73+ years ago are great and what soldiers want due to how worst the technology is and hence why 2-3 replacements and upgrades were added it’s being thrown out when you’ve got little to nothing or want to save the better equipment for something important rather then a meat grinder or stalemate
@@rikstanken3048 you bring up a grenade and I agree and don’t at the same time as a weapon is different from a IFV with outdated use or else they wouldn’t have made so many variants Russia has the BMP Terminators it’s another spin on it and the different Kinds Russia has made but when you have more getting blown up or captured and it takes some time to make of course you’ll pull the relics out it’s like America using Sherman’s in 2005 or 2010 rather then different tanks or the M1 Abrams Russia is using alotta T-62S when the T-72 T-80 T-90M and T-14 are already made and replaced it that’s 4 different Tanks after the T-62 (Ukraine has its own BTR-4 quite unique)
I love this subnautica soundtrack!
Good video, that being said Object 911 isn't really a fully tracked design. It would move only on its track in combat, sure, but it actually had four retractable wheels while it would use for redployments and such on road. As such it basically is a convertible wheel-cum-track vehicle like some had existed during the interwar
In-game, this thing is nice to have. I always love swimming/unorthodox vehicles and in games, they don't get the recognition they deserve, because people only ever care if one of two conditions are met:
>One, said vehicle has a crazy good reputation beforehand, or
>Two, said vehicle is busted out of its mind, and can be abused in-game.
Outside of this, you'll never see people give a shit unless you're the miniscule minority who likes it, just because its cool.
That said, the BMP is nice to drive, and I like playing it. I wish it was stabilized somehow, but then again, the thing is perfect as-is.
I live in Brazil, my neighbor is a former Soviet militar born in Leningrad ho served on a bmp3. Never heard him say a single bad word about it.
The complement troop looks like it would be hell to be stuck in for any period of time. So crampred .
Good vid. Anyway, i gotta schleep
0:50 paid actor xD
I talked with one old guy that server in BMP and to my surprisement he never saw the fuel tanks in rear doors as an issue
because they weren't filled with fuel in combat, crews were always told to drain them beforehand
@@louisbarraud7853 ah, good to know thanks
Goodness! I haven't seen one of these tanks since playing Operation Flashpoint.
It wasnt bad, *Evrything was going according to plan.*
The problem of cramped infantry room comes clear if you look to the evolution of infantry equipment. Nowadays infantryman has tactical vest, a lot of pouches, that makes him much wider, while in 60s, when the vehicle was being designed, none of these existed and grunts were expected to have just some pouches on their belt and a helmet
They gave many BMPs to other nations too. In Iraq convoy of only 5 m998A1a I was in the rear as a commo guy and we came up to one parked in the road. The main cannon and mg was pointed at us and I grabbed the AT-4 slammed on the break. Jumped out in a roll while setting it up, popped up a fired. It disabled the thing. I still to this day never found out if it had a crew. I was quick so there could have been. It would have shredded us so I was not taking chances.
Something about Ob'yekt 19 is really cool to me. The combination of wheels and tracks stands out, even though it is totally inefficient.
Also, Is there any possibility you could do the AMX-13 and AMX-30 for your next "If "x" was historically accurate in War Thunder" videos? I miss those a lot, and I'd love to see those two tanks broken down.
Once I was in the infantry compartment of an BMP-2 (i think they are the same size hull wise) without any equipment whatsoever and it was VERY cramped, especially for the feet. Note that im just 170cm tall and I wasnt wearing any equipment
I'm a BMP-1 and all of this is true.
It does have the amphibious capability, and the large cannon is better for infantry support than something like a 30mm. For independent operation without tank support, maybe the 30mm makes more sense, but if you plan to engage armored target, just have a tank. Amphibious does keep it a little more flexible, but of course limits armor. I think the problem with most western APC's is having a weapon that is optimized for anti-armor instead of one that can lob a large HE round, which is better for supporting the infantry in assaults. Generally keep your infantry carrier out of harms way, and use something better intended for being in harms way when engaging targets that can hurt you.
0:32 why does everyone forget Schützenpanzer Lang HS.30 that predate BMP-1? BMP-1 is probably a better IFV, then HS.30. But that do not stop HS.30 to be the first "modern" IFV.
You said it yourself, it's forgotten about because it was kind of terrible.
Not forgotten about in professional circles. It's regarded as the first IFV in the world by experts.
Anybody else half expect to see him using his decal on his newer videos?