M2 Bradley VS T-90M | Armour Piercing Simulation 

Бредли поцарапали Т90М. Привод выбил дрон, если ты об этом.

There was definitely some pen. All three crew of the t90 survived however. The Bradley crew was nailing the turret ring and if you watch the full video the turret was just wildly spinning for a bit. The nail in the coffin for the t90 was the atgms from the tow up top.

@@BullThunder It got hit by a ATGM/FPV, more likely that dmg the turret.

@@Zacho5 no I watch the whole video it just got damaged by the Bradley since it probably hit something electronic on the drive for the tank turret since it's electric, and not hydraulic run

@@Zacho5 The FPV hit the top of the turret on reactive armor likely not doing anything. And the explosions seen in the video were the T90 popping IR smoke to get the fuck out of there, it's very likely the 25MM seriously damaged the optics and turret ring as the T90 as soon as it was hit by a burst of the 25MM lost all sight of it's target and couldn't find nor hit the Bradley.

Or everything russia produces is just a piece of garbage. Have you considered that?

I'm not sure it might have been all that compromising, the earliest I think Bradleys were issued APFSDS was Desert Storm. Reportedly it went through both sides of T-72Ms, although I doubt either current tanks and ammo could be comparable

It's been said the Bradley crew was utilizing APHE rounds. Not very effective on MBT armor, but shredded the optics. A great mobility kill leading to the eventual loss of the tank.

Ukraine has depleted uranium and APFSDS. Russia made a giant deal about it being a "huge escalation"

This wasnt about luck, it was about well trained and profesional soldiers. In contrast with the crew of the T-90. Id correct your quote to "in war we see things we don't like to see". Get over it.

So the armour was ineffective as the crew bailed out of fear.

There will be always fear , even if you are in a powerful tank , because of Anti tank missiles or that another tank shows up. To feel relaxed in a battlefield just because you are in a tank doesn't exist.. All tanks can be damaged by anti tank weapons , top attack missiles or another tank., The two bradleys in no moment put in danger the tank.. the t-90 tank video , what sealed its fate was two kamikazi drones that jammed the turret out of control and then a crash on a tree. In the end the 3 crew members were perfectly alive and abandon the tank when it was stuck in the tree. And they later take the tank for repair its turret. So while the videos made viral , appears as if bradleys stopped a t-90 , it reality it did not ,bradleys were never designed to duel heavy tanks.. nobody in their right mind will do that. THe bradleys engage the tank only when they knew the tanks was out of ammo and could not hurt them. @@petefrys545

​@@petefrys545they just left the tank because optic destroy

@@AprezaRenaldy 🤣

@@petefrys545 The m3 Bradley that attacked the t90 was destroyed by a drone a Week later. In Ukrainian-Russian ,war great weapons are not enough. Quantity has its own quality. Russia opened a new drone and tank factory in January 2024. while the west did not double the military budget for Ukraine in 2024. so over the course of this year we will see where Ukraine loses territory little by little

If you watch the follow up the commander orders (presumably) as the commanders optics are likely not destroyed compared to the drivers. To drive the tank into a tree to stop the turret spinning and allow the crew to escape.

I doubt you can spin the turret without knowing about it and most likely reason they drove into a tree is to jam the drive to bail from tank as it was already crippled to keep fighting.

the t-90m ram into a tree and finally stopped turret from spinning then the crew escaped, shortly after a fpv drove dropped a grenade into the open hatch and the turret went space program (from the full video with 2 drones)

@slavchansidorov32 The 2 crew members are in the turret the whole ordeal would have been terrifying

It got a kill... it was a KILL ASSIST but its still a kill.

Hardly matters since modern tankers use earmuffs for comms.

​@Paronak vibration is more of a concern. Especially if Russia has been skimping out on quality control for the electronics, a loose connection could be shaken out resulting in malfunctions that forced abandonment of the vehicle.

​@@nerd1000ifyI don't think a 40-50ton tank will get much noise and vibration from the tiny 30mm. There are multiple metal layers with rubber in between. Adding the ear protection of the crew and I think they were doing just fine.

@@billwhoever2830 oh, here you are very mistaken, being hit by a projectile is not a blow with a hammer, there is much more energy here. There were cases when tanks failed simply because 152mm shells hit them. without breaking through the armor. recently the Ukrainian army lost a Leoprad 2. It attacked Russian positions, Russian artillery fired a couple of shots without a direct hit and the tank crew went back on foot

@@juryfilatov4520 I hope you do realize that a 152mm projectile is 225 times larger (asuming same shape) than a 25mm one. Its the equiveelant of getting hit by 225 projectiles instantly. 152mm and 155mm HE projectiles from howitzers are a guaranteed kill if they score a direct hit on any tank and have a kill probability even if they land nearby. This doesnt happen because of the noise inside, this happens because of the fragments of the round or fragments of the tank's armor launching inside due to the strong impact. Losing a track, your engine or your sights is much more likely without a direct hit and is what most likely happened to the Leo 2 tanks. Apart from that, Russia also uses 203mm (8inch) howitzers in the front line, these have enough HE to even flip a tank if they land near it. The Pion although called "outdated" still fires 110kg shells filled with 17.8 kg of A-IX-20 explosives (27.4kg of TNT equivelant). Just for comparison, a 155mm M107 projectile is 43.2kg, contains 6.86kg of stanard TNT explosives.

Not entirely accurate. We don't actually know what damage was inflicted. The gunner of the Bradley only stated that he blinded the T-90.

@@zehbush7468 Its the best we can assume from the video alone.

@@zehbush7468 also the T90M was hit by a FPV drone before the fight. and was rendert completly useless after it got hit again with another drone after the bradley had its time with it. But yes. the bradley crew only could do this much but it was more than enough. i mean, who the hell wants to sit in a tank or any other vehicle while a damn 25mm auto cannon hits you non stop. must be terrifying.

@@zehbush7468 just watch full video, where you could see how turret is spinning without control

@@zehbush7468 there was a reason why turret was spinning and only stopped when they blocked gun barrel with a tree

The tank's optics and external hardware were damaged, including smoke launchers that detonated. T-90M itself remained intact though and its crew successfully scuttled the vehicle later. I'd say "kill" is a huge exaggeration.

the T-90 wasn't killed as you say, you're exaggerating

@@tatianapreobrazhenskaya9777 The T-90M wasn't scuttled. A drone dropped munitions into the hatch. This is a mission kill.

@@alexacojo Learn what the term "Mission Kill" means. Then come back to this discussion.

@@tatianapreobrazhenskaya9777 Kill is exactly how this is called. If you're scared shitless because you're getting pummeled by a puny 25mm and you can't see because it took out every single targeting device you have, then there's nothing else you can do in that tank. It's over!

No Armor basically, no era only steel with some texolite squashed between

Yeah, but the armor doesn't really matter in the case of Mobility kills. Hits to the track will immobilize a tank.

One Iraqi T-72 was destroyed by a Bradley's gun, in this instance the Bradley was in an elevated firing posistion firing down into the roof of the tank.

@@Parthocside Not possible to penetrate the composite even if there's only textolite, it's too angled and thick. They were shooting the weak spots on the rear of the turret and the lower side hull.

Those BRadleys did not immobilize any tank at all , it just a 25mm round its turret. The famous super edited propaganda video made viral on internet recently , of a bradley vs a t-90 , did not show that the T-90 when the filming started did not respond a single time to the bradley , and that there was 2 bradleys attacking it ,not just one and it was a very close distance.. So such situation is highly unusual . On top of that , what they western media propaganda cut ,was the attack of two drones that jamm the turret. and the explosions that appears in the tank ,are not explosions at all , but thermal decoys that the tank can release to blind heat seeking anti tank missiles that could damage the tank. So the tank did not respond a single time to any of the bradleys ,which is a clear indication that either the tank was out of ammo ,when the Bradleys attack it from close distance.. Had that tank was armed with ammo , the story will have been totally different and no bradley ever will due a t-90 tank if they know they can fire back. What most likely happened is that the Tank T-90 used all his ammo and the ukranians knew about it and this is when the bradleys engage the tank.. Had there was another tank to help the T-90 near ,they will have never dare to try to damage the tank at all , because the tank cannon all that it needs is just one hit ,and you those bradleys explode in a million of pieces each one. So the ukranians were simply lucky the tank was alone and was out of ammo or with optics damaged ,. Tanks usually don't engage other tanks from so close distance ,they engage at 3km of distance , the tanks was simply taken by surprise and when it was out of ammo . in a dual between one T-75 or t-90 vs a two dozen of bradleys at such long distances , the Tanks wins.. Simply it was a highly unusual scenario with a tank alone and that did not saw the bradleys , reason why he was engaged when the tank was looking in a nother direction.. Probably the tank crew inexperience is the one to blame ,for going alone in such a place withoout any support from groound troops or another armor.

его и в лобовую деталь никто не будет трогать

Там вообще все удивительно было, что не применялся встроенный ПТРК.

@@СуНаиль так может запретили стрелять, типа дорого. мыколок сбросил - и в тыл

@@andreychuvakov5329 обычный бофорс пробивает 10 см брони, в борт любой танк пробиваеться чем угодно современным

@@andreychuvakov5329tow is an old system that they are phasing out completely so unlikely its banned. It would have melted t90. Like stugna does with all russian tanks.

the explosions were from the ERA i think

yup, i totally thought that. Like there is no way of bradly penetrating t90m with 25 autocannon.

the T90s smoke canisters got hit and went off @@Fred_the_1996

@@Fred_the_1996None of the ERA panels went off. The explosion would be much less sparky than it was and more smokey.

@bolshevik1017 They raised moral in Ukraine and their military. That's at least one thing. I can only imagine Russian moral at this point, but Putin doesn't care.

Tungsten carbide is brittle, it would just sheer

@@anderoo9260 They can place it inside a metal box if that helps. A hydraulic press channel used an old tungsten carbide core from some type of ww2 ammo and had no problems ramming it into things that depleted uranium could not. Same with a ceramic ball. Before having seen that I would have guessed the same as you, but now I want to see a test/sim.

@@MAZEMIND I mean sure but it would still work like ceramic bodyarmor. It will disintegrate and the whole glacis would become unusable. And stopping shrapnel would also come into play- So maybe it would work in the similar form to active armor- as in small plates on top of actual armor. A single plate becoming unusable is much better than the whole glacis being compromised. Tungsten carbide core rounds have much trouble with layered armor because of the fact that the core gets compromised by the external layer of the armor and then looses much penetrating capability in a way that depleted uranium penetrators don't.

@@progoku196 if the turret was out of control I think it for sure penned lol

@@is-3shchuka765 It cannot pen the side, the whole crew for the tank bailed from the tank alive

@@is-3shchuka765 The turret got bugged due to the targeting system being destroyed.

@@reahs4815 They used explosive rounds not sabot.

You missed out - 2023; Bradley’s destroy Russia’s “best” tank. Completely succeeds in resisting soviet weapon, Bradley doesn’t explode, T90 gets added to Freedom square museum in Kyiv. Dumb troll….

2022: Kyiv in 3 days.

@@str8ballinSA The original about 3days is: Gen. Milley says Kyiv could fall within 72 hours if Russia decides to invade Ukraine 🧠🦠🔬

@@VVV85650 Sure thing.

Hey while Russian tanks and BMPs continue to be absolute deathtraps when hit, tell me again how many Ukainians died when their Bradley was hit? Oh yeah that's right, zero. Bradleys mean surviving crews can take lessons learned to their new armored vehicle, while Russian garbage means another bag of charred meat that used to be 3 or 4 Russian men gets sent home to mommy. The dead don't gain combat experience, sucker.

Still, Ukraine vehicle defeats russian

@@qweasdoUAttgl5300well i mean ITS war. There will be loses from both sides. But i cant sed Ukraine winning. Their territories are still captured lol. And vehicle is not even Ukrainian

@@Geskawary234 The cope just oozes from this comment

@@qweasdoUAttgl5300 no 😭 ukraine lost all of the leopards the west gave them while russia has basically has much has when the war started. People are just very misinformed.

@@Geskawary234 And what is "winning" for Russia? Taking some more farm land since 2014 and tens of thousands of deaths and casualties? Seems hardly worth it 2 year plus in.

There is nothing that the Russians can learn from simple 25 mm AP rounds that they don't already know themselves. A fin stabilised depleted uranium sabot round is is not some fancy secretive high tech, not anymore anyway. Unlike, say, an intact Javelin, Himars or ATACMS missile. The advanced electronics and the software routines in those devices would be prime "information loot" for the Russians. The gunner stated in an interview afterwards that the Bushmaster cannon had a feeding issue with the AP rounds, so he had to resort to non-AP rounds.

@bolshevik1017 Rate of fire has nothing to do with the rounds themselves. It only depends on the autocannon system, in particular its feeding system.

@@Hydrazine1000 oh, haven’t you watched the new video of the Russian blogger? He recently left the javelin. that is, the Russians received so many of these trophies that they even made a review of Javelin shooting on RU-vid.

The Russians have already captured a bunch of Javelin missiles and launcher units a while back that were abandoned by Ukraine soldiers. I think they also got a few NLAWS in that abandoned equipment. No going back now. @@Hydrazine1000

@bolshevik1017 LOL Commie, You sound like one of those Gangsters in the hood with a Glock switch. High rate of fire aint worth shit, if you can't hit anything with it.

No, 3 Bradleys with drone operators won the fight. There are videos of both sides behaving this way like Russian crew with T90M, driving alone without any support.

2. @@uroskostic8570

there would not have left the t90 if that was the only damage there could just drive it home, the Bradley messed up the turret (spinning out of control) and that's what made them abandon the tank the FPV drone came in later to finish the tank

@michael-gb3rn There's a sensor on the T90 that when detecting an incoming "painting" laser, it will automatically turn. The turret is designed to face the incoming threat (likely a laser-guided ATGM) upon detection. The belief is that this ill-conceived sensor was damaged and caused the turret to "rotate to intercept" indefinitely.

No it did not finnish him off. Its not even scratch him like in video. Cant destroy tank with 25mm !

@@stolek6908 Edited video. The main thing remains behind the scenes

This simulation doesn't even feature relikt era the apfsds didn't even penetrate the first plate , a 25mm can not pen the frontal armor of the t90

Russian space program!

It wins and liberates ukrn land thats what matters keep coping with equipment

The leopards already have the first place on this competition.

Propaganda. In reality the 2 Bradleys ran out of ammo before they could penetrate the t90. But the t90's turret control system was damaged and all its optics were gone. So the tank was basically useless since the crew couldn't see anything outside. So they abandoned the tank because if they stayed there, eventually they would be destroyed by Artillery or NLAWs and Javelins. But if you can make the crew abandon the tank behind enemy lines, that means it's effectively destroyed in combat.

**newsflash** War Is a Mess

Any people having basic knowledge of armor warfare knows that a tank can be crippled by an IFV shooting with an auto-cannon its flank or rear. MBT are strongly armored in the front only.

Source?

Did any of those rounds hit the turret ring?

The tank was outmaneuvered and ambushed in an urban area. Its long range capabilities meant nothing there.

⁠@@JAnx01 yup another reason why the Bradleys did not use any tows, to keep moving to keep from being hit, just fog of war is all

You just don't understand what kind of war this is. Infantry simply cannot survive in this area, since they cannot move at the speed of a tank and will be overwhelmed by artillery. the tank, on the other hand, has some mobility in order to get close to the enemy and fire at positions and provoke return fire in order to identify the enemy’s heating positions. At the same time, a huge number of mines are placed on both sides, which greatly reduces the space for maneuver, and thanks to the drones, there is a chance to catch a mine in the deep rear. Both sides use this when, instead of grants, they attach a mine to the drone and place it directly on the road; snow and dirt will cover it no worse than a professional sapper in 3 hours. As a result of this battle, Russia lost one T-90M knocked out, Ukraine lost two Bradleys (this Bradley was soon found by Russian drone operators) But if Russia subsequently repairs its tank or makes a new one, then Ukraine has huge problems with getting a new Bradley .

@@juryfilatov4520 rly ? Last i heard they where fine and made it back

He just played war thunder he know where the shell can pen And tank got destroyed by tow missile on the tank and drone

​@@BLOXLIN what TOW? I've watched the video but I didn't see any missile hitting the tank during the battle

@@hoshyro but I saw it somehow

It wasnt one Bradley but 3 and drones which attacked T90 before Bradley started shooting. i think 3 drones hit the tank in total. By the stories on internet, one Bradley was damaged, and this Bradley was also destroyed some days after this fight. T90M was recovered later.

Or side armor.

I think the gunner said he was aiming for the turret ring and optical devices

@@thedirtyhalfdozen4269 below the cannon.

@@gaiofattos2 that's where the turret ring would be

@@thedirtyhalfdozen4269 Yep, they shot at it and made the turret spin.

The purpose of this simulation is to demonstrate that even multiple 25mm APFSDS rounds cannot penetrate the frontal armor of the T-90M. This is particularly intended for non-expert peoples who mistakenly believe that the T-90M was destroyed by the M2 Bradley.

​@@SimulationPlus Thats make sense😊

Because TOWs arms the warhead at a certain distance

Not going to happen on the front hull armour. That frontal hull armour is designed to stop 120mm APFSDS rounds.

Before anyone wants to judge my comment go do the research. As I'm not saying the bradly destroyed the tank. It manage to take out the sights and that is why the t90m had to retreat. And yes there were 2 Bradley's and a drone that was attacking the t90m. At the end of the day the tank is lost. The crew manage to escape.

no tank in the world is a miracle, for example, Western-style tanks are designed for defense, not offensive

@@cenbka there isn't a tank labeled defensive tank. Every tank can go on the offensive. It's just poor tactics by the russian side. As we have seen over and over. Russian tanks are being destroyed, due to poor planning and poor training, moral is low on the russian side. They've show that Ukraine can deal with majority of what russia throws at it on the ground.

Ah yes, judging a whole tank by some video. I mean like any tank is not invulnerable. leopards and abramses gets destroyed or damaged often too

​@@travismccraw6013id argue that some tank destroyers (like the slat Swedish one) are made for defence, but i agree that no MBT is built for defence.

The M2 Bradley has a rather low fire rate... its just a simulation of how the 25mm APFSDD round does against the frontal armor.

I still find it funny how it's multiple rounds in one spot though @@zehbush7468

Yeah, the simulation is literally about 0.15 seconds long lol

it wouldn't be worth the effort speeding the simulation up after every round is 'finished'

The computational time for this simulation is approximately 40 hours, with an additional 21 hours required for rendering the animation and 3 hours for editing. The fire rate has been neglected as it does not affect the results. It's worth noting that my channel is not monetized; I simply enjoy sharing these simulations.

есть же видео где 2 бредли расстреливают из своих пушек одного т90, и он уже не может ответить как прицелы и вообще приборы наблюдения выведены из строя , и в конце вообще получает неконтролируемое вращение башни

@@Evgeniy.Aleksandrovi4.K ты про то видео где брошенный т90 который уже давно не на ходу бредли типо расстреливает и снимали это на камеру со штатива чтобы показать мол США ваша техника типо супер пришлите ещё мы её продадим? В реальном бою т-90м выстрелит лишь раз и конец бредли, для т-90м бредли как консервная банка будет

Ansys

Thanks! @@queerthing3028

That armor was not even scratched lmao

No, the Bradley magdumped HE shells into it, destroying the viewports and gun sights and pretty much everything outside of the armor plating. The crew couldn't see or do much of anything at that point, so they bailed.

The purpose of this simulation is to demonstrate that even multiple 25mm APFSDS rounds cannot penetrate the frontal armor of the T-90M. This is particularly intended for non-expert peoples who mistakenly believe that the T-90M was destroyed by the M2 Bradley.

Woud a 25mm HEAP go through the main gun barrel ?

Unless 90 degrees broadside no, too thick to through. But it can go through the engine compartment which is way thinner. But in the video they don't seem to target that area so it's not relevant.

Probably not

Were you sitting inside that T-90M?

This is the dumbest bro

Clearly you don't know what actually happened after, the T-90M crashed into a tree stopping its turret from rotating, after this all crewmembers where able to get out alive, later the tank was targetted by drones.

ты идиот? На видео был не взрыв внутри танка, а подрыв дымовых шашек.

Yes, it was. Oh, KаZаp will say that it was fake, right? 😂

you do know that dolphins kills sharks lol

По фактам

or the turret drive got messed up or the gunner got panicked

@@tietieno4890it was messed up cuz of drone

@@Geskawary234 I personally didnt see any drone impact the tank at all, there is still a high chance the bradley managed to fuck up the turret ring

потому что защиты погона башни нету никакой. от патронов пистолета макарова если. ну и от свд может. была бы там нормальная защита, то никакого заклинивания механизма не произошло бы. слава Богу для экипажа эта броня отличная.

When you are firing the autocannon at maximum rounds per minute I don’t think there was much time to aim. It was all about hitting centre mass as often as possible. 75% of the ERA on the front was destroyed as shown by a drone shot at the end of the long form video of the engagement. After the 3 crew escaped.

Partly but I'm sure the Ukrainians knew what they were doing