Infantry Brigade Combat Team 2028 

Being both in the Army and an avid ArmA player throughout the years, these videos are a treat.

SLA is back and Queen Isabella is feeling the pressure...

@@RHphoto I absolutely agree.

It is a shame too since it was a game changer for those who wielded it in Afghanistan. Engagement time were reduced significantly and no casualties during the time they were engaged with the weapon.

@A dude with a flashlight There was a reported accident where the gun blew up and there were lingering reliability issues so they canceled the program. Funny enough, a new request for a similar gun is being sought by the Army.

@@Cain-x It was also heavy, cumbersome, and a general pain in the ass to carry around. It quickly became something you just throw in the back of a humvee instead of carrying it around, like the AT4, Carl Gustav, etc. But I mean, when it worked it worked really well.

That thing was a piece of junk. Airburst 84mm rounds are much more useful, on a proven weapon

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KhVbr0OyAOE.html

You Fr?

I read that For simulation training, the army literally uses software made by the same company that develops Arma, soo…

@@SIickTurtIe there is a video of Chinese troops using Arma 3 to train lol

What do you expect? It’s just a video showing the troops while the audio describes the plan.

You are not wrong. Specifically, its VBS3 simulations made by Bohemia interactive for US armed forces, based on arma2 engine.

Bro on the infantry rifle that is not the m16 variant is real bro and being advocated for the us milltary check the ngsw XM5 AND XM250

This aged well. Lol.

It's literally all happening, built and developed. It'll be years before it comes up to scale but it looks well apace.

@@Knight_Kin Very true... but after decades of false promises, I won't fully believe it until the armorer is shoving a brand-new rifle into my sticky little fingers and making me sign for it. XD

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KhVbr0OyAOE.html

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KhVbr0OyAOE.html

Well they’re not exactly meant to face a Russian motor rifle brigade head-on. Thats the ABCT’s job. IBCT’s are meant for low intensity stuff like this

Well its downrigjt unfair to the russians for a modern one See ukraine war.

it's realistic though. Russia, if it will still exist, will be extremely degraded and will have technologically regressed by 2028. They are already fighting with restored museum inventory. It's more like 1894-1964 equipment

I'm surprised they weren't using modernized Chinese forces since that's what I thought the US was preparing for.

I cant fathom how deeply delusional people must be to think Russia is a inept, outdated military when theyre pushing Ukraine to collapse and causing NATO to freakout on military and civilian fronts (economic/industrial capabilities).

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KhVbr0OyAOE.html

Ivas? They're amazing... And cheap comparatively. Plus at least 100 degree fov color NV with thermal overlay

Oh they're also lighter than envgb

VBS (Virtual Battlespace), you might be familiar with Bohemia Interactive's Armed Assault series of games this is based on.

You can, VBS is the commercial version of Bohemia Interactive's Armed Assault series.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KhVbr0OyAOE.html

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KhVbr0OyAOE.html

The program these visuals are from is the military version of Arma. Believe me when I say they already have. Additionally, Arma groups are too small to really have a lot of this stuff become a factor, this from a guy who plays platoon sized operations in Arma 3 every other week. You need to go to at least battalion level for most of this to be remotely relevant.

@@EvilTwinn ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KhVbr0OyAOE.html

@@EvilTwinn Very interesting. I think perhaps the Army should invest more in that kind of virtual training for actual personnel. Would kill two birds with one stone! As a member of the Army, I've always thought realistic FPS games like those I mentioned would be extremely effective training for certain aspects, namely communication and tactics. It'd basically be the equivalent of a flight sim like pilots use.

@@gardnert1 Yeah, virtual training is undoubtedly the way of the future, the problem is coming up with ways for it to be as relevant for the infantryman as they want it to be and as economical as they'd like. Perhaps VR headsets can help with that at some point.

​@@gardnert1 I mean, you are already seeing it. It's VBS 3, a "training simulator" built on top of the engine (Real Virtuality 3) that runs ArmA 2 (last time I checked anyway). One of the problem is that up until recent versions of ArmA3 (Real Virtuality 4), the control scheme is really clunky. Hell, even with improvement in controls and animations, it's still pretty awful. And I doubt "they" have backported the improvements back to VBS 3, given that BIS and BISim have officially separated. And because all o this training is obviously done on government computers, you can't have Joe messing around with settings, which means they are stuck with (I kid you not) controls and animations inherited straight from 2001. So what will end up happening is that you are forcing bunch of Joes to play a "video game" that has crap graphics, clunky animation that gets in the way (e.g. your virtual avatar insists on walking forward while throwing grenade because the walking animation doesn't stop even after you stopped pressing the forward key), awful control scheme that they are not familiar with, all while going through a scenario that is completely divorced from reality. The Joes will not care and get hemmed up, and entire training day was wasted. And at the end of the day, they'll go back to their barracks and play the newest version of Call of Battlefield Honor with fancy graphics, silky smooth animations and controls. And maybe, just maybe, some of them are motivated enough to play ArmA 3 (which has relatively modern graphics, animations, and controls) with a few realism mods (e.g. ACE3, ACRE2) with similarly motivated people online (whom may or may not even be in the military), and unironically get better training from that than whatever VBS 3 could offer. Let's not even mention "America's Army", which was another can of worms lol.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KhVbr0OyAOE.html

To give the light formations more punch

@@seanmac1793 That's why we have Stryker brigade combat teams. Strykers can be equipped with 30mm cannon or the 105mm cannon. I have seen them in action in Iraq.

@@ht-sneakers80 because there are different standards for strategic airlift time and requirements. I can't remenber the exact numbers but IBCT supposed to a faster call in with less restrictions on airfield size

@@ht-sneakers80 105mm has be retired. And this is Light Infantry with only a single Bn of tracks. So much more strategicly mobile.

Yeah this is a brigade vs a batallion, for some reason? And the brigade has plenty of armor (despite being air-dropped nearby) but the "home team" doesn't have so much as a single tank? It's nonsense, may as well show a tiger beating up a puppy

The idea would be that those are taken care of by the airforce this would be mop up

That’s what I’m saying, that’s why the Army created the Stryker BCT to fill in the gap between a light infantry regiment and a armored regiment. Stryker = Fast mobile & a little fire power.

One company of Mobile protected firepower 14 light tanks . For direct fire support to the Infantry. Not meant to go toe to toe with T-80s, 90s etc. Army selected GDLS MPF and is designated the M10 Booker. Given a long drawn out slugfest with Russia, China, Iran, Norks- take your pick of combos, the Army should also get the M8 Buford Armored gun system/ MPF, light tanks .

VBS (Virtual Battlespace), the military version of the software based on Armed Assault.

No idea, it's not on the real deal Griffin II tank.

That is the whole point of having mpf its a light tank like the old sheridans

@@coreyjacobs2718 not c130 transportable, not air droppable, not sling loadable, not amphibious, so all of the fights it can get to, you could bring actual tanks.

@@username_3715 False, you can air transport 2 of them on a c130. It's the "General Dynamics Griffin II" that was selected as the new light tank MPF. It's 38 tons unlike the Abrams which is much heavier. The Army will have about 100 of them by the end of next year (end of 2023).

​@@Knight_Kin you can fit 2 on a c 17. a c130 cantfit these or take off even if it could, their max load is like 20 tons.

Apparently, the Standard Division, Heavy will have Stryker BCTs and the Standard Divsion, Light is leg infantry with motorized transport. Evidently, they won't fight from the ISVs, but will dismount short of the objective to advance on foot. Now, whether that will happen in actual pratice, is something I doubt.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KhVbr0OyAOE.html

No it's not, that's russian Flora or VSR one of the two from the 80s

@@TheSynchronizer copy that

cool story