First of all, thanks for the link. I heard about it this movie that covered the problems with the Bradley development and have wanted to see it for a long time.
I found it well made and even quite funny. Of course watching it also left me wondering how much the issues portrayed were true to reality. It was clear that the issues in the film were simplified for public consumption and the characters made into stereotypical good and bad types.
After doing a little research, I want to share the following findings
Apparently the original book is more accurate while much artistic license was used in the movie to make it entertaining and easy to grasp by the general public.
Despite the portrayal in the movie, USAF Col James Burton had already served for several years in the Pentagon and was well experienced in the reality and politics of the Pentagon and weapons development
The core of the disagreement is that he wanted to run live fire tests with heavy weapons on fully loaded vehicles while the "bad" guys, representing the Aberdeen Ballistics Proving Lab (BRL) preferred to use computer based modeling. BRL preferred to test it only against smaller RPGs because this was seen as the most relevant threat and against which the Bradley had been designed to protect. In their defense, the BRL engineers did not see the value of shooting the expensive vehicle with heavy ATGMs like the TOW because it was clear that such weapons would destroy it (as it would much heavier armored vehicles like contemporary main battle tanks). They claimed Burton was after sensational headlines
As a result of the live fire tests mandated by Congress some of Burton’s proposals (additional armor, which covered up the useless side firing ports—sorry Shiryoer Miruba) were added to the A2 version in time for the 1991 Desert Storm war. Others like external fuel tanks (like on IDF M113A2s) and external ammo storage were not.
The vaporization issue with aluminum armor as portrayed in the movie is overblown. Apparently, this happens primarily when the vehicle is hit by heavy warheads that would cause a catastrophic effect on the vehicle and crew anyway. It can also occur with steel vehicles. There was no evidence of vaporization poisoning with the numerous American or Israeli M113 crews that were hit by RPGs
So in the end, the Bradley, at least from the uparmored A2 version, was not that vulnerable. Certainly not any worse than other IFVs like the BMPs that are full of ammunition, fuel and soldiers. It proved quite capable in the two Iraq wars
ראשי
צ'אט
30-09-2010, 02:52
מר רוג - כי החיים קצרים מדי לשמות מלאים 
מצב כלאיים
