Combat Mission Units: BMP-2

[@Circle-247]

Everybody gangsta until BAMBAMBAMBAMBAM

[@artemisfowl7191]

Worth noting that the CMSF2 and CMCW BMP-2 is not armed with 30mm APDS, realistically neither would the CMBS BMP-2, full bore APBC is the most common anti armor projectile issued to Russian 30mm. The Russian 14.5 is a relatively spicy projectile, and the 30mm APBC is a bit lackluster. Which is to say the baseline M2/M3 Bradley's intended resistance to 14.5mm API at short range translate to a shockingly high degree of resistance to 30mm at reasonably short ranges.

[@andrewsterge4089]

Interesting thing I found in testing the AT-5, it seems to always target the lower front hull from long range. That makes it useful for tanks without ERA on the lower front hull!

[@keegandalthorp7813]

Great video as always Hapless! I am always frustrated/confused when watching footage of infantry dismounts riding on top of Russian APCs and IFVs. I understand the ergonomic issues and the lack of protection, but it just seems like such a disconnect between the idea of an armored transport/support vehicle for infantry who then don’t even use/have armor to protect them. I say this as someone who’s 6 foot 3 inches, so I would probably be riding on top anyway 😅

[@usuallyhapless9481]

It was very popular with M113s in Vietnam too. The logic apparently being that if the vehicle hits a mine and you're inside, you'll get mulched.

[@keegandalthorp7813]

@@usuallyhapless9481 I definitely wouldn’t argue with that logic. I imagine the fix for that would be to have similar mine protection to that of an MRAP. Hell increase the armor all around so you have protection from HMGs, but then you definitely aren’t amphibious which is a major issue. Thankfully I’m not an armored vehicle designer!

[@decimated550]

riding on top has been done ever since APCs and IFVs were invented. infantry knows first hand the fear of being trapped in a box that is a big target that protects against nothing. a man wants to see and feel things, and be able to scamper to safety on his own decision, instead of eating vaporized aluminum and fuel fumes as he tries to crawl over the dead and thrashing bodies of four men as he tries to get to the back door or ramp . I saw a ukraine video in which a bradley was hit, and the helmet camera clearly showed the toxic smoke filled cabin, and the damn ramp was stuck. My heart pounded as long seconds passed until the small door was opened. How many panicked lungfuls of that stuff .... If an infantryman sees a ATGM sizzling towards him, he can jump off the vehicle and try to survive. In a big no holds barred war, he's going to get killed anyway, he'd rather die with a chance, than trapped inside. in short, it's seen often because it's "the market working, people voting with their feet". its' the less worse option.

[@larsdejong7396]

Not neccesarily. ATGM's have a much greater range than small arms, and being on top, they can leave much faster, whilst also helping the BMP with spotting.

[@keegandalthorp7813]

@@decimated550 it’s less of a “why is the infantry not doing the correct thing” and more of a “why can’t we get a vehicle that feels safe to be transported in”. The answer to the second statement being that armoring everything like a tank is impractical and still not safe enough in many combat environments. That being said, being trapped in a box is scary but I would personally rather conduct an assault on a trench in a Bradley then a truck or buggy like some units do. That is a rather obvious statement though. Thankfully I’m not the poor guy going into an assault having to make that choice

[@romulus310]

Hapless vid just before friday-night dinner? Great start to the weekend :)

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Touch late this week ;) Too much time blowing up BMPs

[@romulus310]

@@usuallyhapless9481 don't mind at all, I'm happy you still provide us with your work so regularly. Enjoy your weekend!

[@d.c.6065]

No, I definitely didn’t plan my Black Friday around a Hapless video. Why do you ask?

[@arandomperson7713]

I think it would be important to note that for at least CM:SF2 (I’m not sure if CM:CW’s BMP-2’s get it in lower quality formations), the BMP-2 uses the inferior 3UBR6 APBC-T solid-shot round instead of the 3UBR8 APDS round, which puts the BMP-2’s firepower solidly below certain important penetration thresholds for opponents that it faces. A very important one (that I learned the hard way when I first downloaded the demo for CM:SF2) was that the Republican Guard BMP-2 cannot penetrate the Bradley, with or without BUSK, from the front AND the sides, at *point-blank ranges*. I had a BMP-2 sitting around a corner, a Bradley stopped ,side-on, ten meters away, and the BMP proceeded to dump three long bursts of AP into the Bradley’s side armour to no effect, pop smoke and reverse for a few meters before being Swiss-cheesed by the Bradley. The BMP-2 in CM:SF2 cannot compete against Western IFV’s in most cases, in both long (Western IFV’s both have thermals and can reliably hit BMP’s with their auto cannons at ATGM engagement ranges, plus the BMP’s cannot do both ATGM and AC at the same time) and short-range engagements, so it is better used either against lighter formations, such as Stryker infantry (LAV’s too, if you’re feeling lucky and have good positioning) or Humvees. They can also be used as pretty competent building-crushers, as its autocannon wasn’t conceptualized by a British man high on tea leaves. The BMP-2, in REDvRED combat, is also extremely vulnerable. In CM:SF2, the infamous 58-point MI-24 with both rockets and 12.7 Gatling guns can be spammed to great effect against BMP-2’s, with BMP-3’s being slightly more resistant to the torrents of .50 cal fire (they, like the others, often explode anyways front he compounding effects of dozens of partial pens, spalls and full penetrations) On the bright side, Syrian infantry do not have HEDP warheads on thei AGL’s and rifle grenades, which means that infantry lose much of their anti-armour threat when out of RPG’s. Unfortunately, the BMP-2 gets pretty hard-countered by cheap Kontakt-1 kits, as the vehicles are cheap enough to be plentiful yet highly resistant to the AT-5 (although they are vulnerable to even 30mm AP to the side, so BMP’s aren’t totally helpless.) (Also, may you consider sharing the sources you have for Soviet Cold War tactics/strategy? I’m looking to do some more detailed reading on the subject)

[@danielfield2570]

Always a good day when hapless uploads

[@larsdejong7396]

I appreciate the wider look into the reality of the modern battlefield. With the benefit of hindsight, the extra protection of IFV's like the Bradley doesn't really make a lot of difference in direct engagements, because any kind of LAW/RPG can punch through them. Keep in mind that they all have tandem warheads nowadays. And let's be real, if you are close enough to be blown up by an underslung grenade launcher, you probably deserve it. That said, the paperthin armor of the BMP-2 does make it more vulnerable to artillery fragments then the Bradley, Puma or CV-90, so keep that in mind. (Redeffect made an excellent video about this a while ago. And like you pointed out, the Russians are aware of it's limitations, which explains why the upgraded variant is virtually absent in the Russian army. It makes much more sense to skip ahead to the BMP-3M. I expect it would do decently well with the same kind of organisation as the BMP-3 (2 BMP platoons and 1 tank platoon), but it is certainly behind the curve. At some point, it sort of turns into an apc with inferior capacity, because it can't engage anything without being spotted and hit first. (a slight correction; the vehicle commander also being the squad leader is also present in Canadian LAV formations in shock force 2, and possibly some others as well) Anyway, excellent video. :)

[@usuallyhapless9481]

Yeah, modern AT Weapons are no joke. I may have focused in too much on infantry AT, as opposed to AT in general, but the modern battlefield is a scary place for metal boxes.

[@larsdejong7396]

@@usuallyhapless9481 And yet, at the same time, those tin cans are needed more then ever, because we can see more then ever before. A footmobile infantry force, is going to be obliterated by indirect fire. Especially when you consider that, in Ukraine, at least every company has a drone with a thermal, or even each platoon.

[@usuallyhapless9481]

@@larsdejong7396 Yep. It's a tough one. My money's on Powered Armour being the gamechanger (ie. infantry with boosted stamina and speed) but that's a way off

[@larsdejong7396]

@@usuallyhapless9481 That's Halo level stuff, hapless. XD

[@usuallyhapless9481]

@@larsdejong7396 *Ahem* Heinlein level stuff, thank you very much!

[@an_odd_one5184]

God I love these videos!

[@briansmithwins]

It’s the core problem with IFVs. In the defense do I keep the infantry close and risk disclosing their position early? Do I position them as a remote base of fire but then have infantry that’s on foot and separated from their ammo resupply, armor cover from arty, and maybe radios? In the attack do I stay mounted and risk losing whole squads or platoons or do I dismount early and accept the loss of tempo?

[@dynamo4844]

Wake up babe, HE just dropped another Unit Video!

[@RipVanWhinkle]

Maaan i wish I knew this came out before my lunch was about to end 😭. I'll be back

[@GradyA14]

Love your work Hapless!!! Where did you get all your historical info on the BMP?

[@abc-py2ms]

I was thinking of getting combat mission Black Sea but are there any drones in the game?

[@omegacentauri73]

both sides have recon drones, the US has one large drone that can fire Hellfire missiles (MQ-1C Gray Eagle) there are no FPV or drones dropping grenades

[@daveyhavik2689]

could you make one on the dutch or german forces in cmsf 2 thank you