Old US Bradleys becoming ‘legend’ in Ukraine show what the country can do when it gets enough of the weapons it needs

Ukrainian soldiers patrol with a Bradley Fighting Vehicle as the Russia-Ukraine war continues in Avdiivka, Donbas, Ukraine.

Anatolia

• Ukraine’s success with Bradley vehicles has led to a new “legend” surrounding it, a war expert has said.
• He said his victories are partly due to the fact that Ukraine has enough, while other equipment is drip-fed.
• Experts criticize Western delays and trickle-down aid, saying it makes Ukraine less effective.

Ukraine’s success using aging American Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles against Russia shows what Ukraine can do when given enough of the weapons it needs, a war expert told Business Insider.

The US has provided Ukraine with more than 300 Bradleys, far more than other armored fighting vehicles such as Abrams tanks; The US sent Ukraine only 31 of them.

Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, former commander of the UK’s joint chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear forces, said the numbers available gave Ukraine the ability to use its Bradleys far more effectively than tanks.

“They’ve got loads of them,” Hamish said of Bradley. “And if they had a lot of Abrams and a lot of Challengers, they would use them differently.”

A US-supplied M1A1 Abrams tank at an undisclosed location in Ukraine.

47 Mechanized Brigade via Telegram

The manner in which Ukraine’s Western partners have provided weapons, often in small numbers and after significant delays, has been criticized throughout the war.

Having enough weapons is important to the military because it allows them to use those weapons in a more flexible way. It means being able to put weapons in risky situations where they could make big progress, and if it misses, it’s not a major tactical and PR disaster.

With the US-supplied Bradleys that Ukraine uses, “because they have a lot of them, they can afford to lose a few. When you only have 14 Challenger 2s, you can’t afford to lose a lot,” de Bretton-Gordon said. “So I think that’s the key.”

He said it was a lesson for the West, where there was a growing belief that fewer, highly technical pieces of kit would beat a larger number of weaker pieces. “Now we realize you need a balance,” he said.

Bradleys were built as a response to Soviet infantry fighting vehicles and first entered service in the 1980s. They are not the most advanced armored vehicles available, but they are versatile and very capable. And Ukraine’s combat successes with the vehicle have led to a “Bradley legend,” de Bretton-Gordon said.

“So when you look at Bradley, it’s their mass and how they’re used that’s why they’re so successful,” he said. In Ukraine, Bradleys fought infantry in bunkers, troop carriers, drones and even top tanks.

Ukrainian soldiers of the 47th Mechanized Brigade drive an M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle.

Vitalii Nosach/Global Images Ukraine via Getty Images

He said he thought the “Bradley legend is very, very good for the Ukrainians,” adding that it “strengthens the resolve of the Ukrainians and, no doubt, it’s also an added fear for the Russians.”

“Drip feeding” Ukraine

Many war experts, soldiers and even some allied governments have criticized the way many of Ukraine’s partners give it aid. The weapons often arrive after months of debate (during which Russia can prepare), in small numbers and in packages that do not give Ukraine a clear picture or certainty of future deliveries.

“Drip-feeding the kit into Ukraine,” said de Bretton-Gordon, means “they fought with one hand behind their backs.”

A US soldier fighting in Ukraine told BI earlier this year that Western aid was arriving “in pieces” and after long debates, with different levels of support arriving in different packages.

He said that “it seems like everything we got was either too late or just enough to barely last. It feels like whenever they donate stuff, it’s just enough to keep Ukraine afloat, but without thinking about the long term. term.”

That means Ukrainian soldiers often can’t develop long-term strategies, he said, adding that he believes Ukraine would be better off without the problem.

Two Ukrainian soldiers of the 42nd Brigade in training at an undisclosed location.

Narciso Contreras/Anadolu via Getty Images

De Bretton-Gordon said that when it comes to weapons like Western tanks, “if we didn’t wait a year and give them tanks right away and if we gave them hundreds of tanks, not a hundred, of course it would make a huge difference. .”

“And I think that’s frustrating The thing is, there are thousands of western tanks sitting in tank sheds rusting all over Europe, either German American or whatever,” he said.

The greater number of Bradleys at their disposal gave the Ukrainians more to work with in varied operations and the ability to lose them. According to the open-source tracking tool Oryx, Ukraine has lost at least 90 of these vehicles. It is not clear if any of these have been recovered and repaired. Ukraine still has to be smart with them, and it has been, but it has the option to take some risks.

The numbers just aren’t there for other weapons like the Abrams, which even Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said came in insufficient numbers to make a substantial difference.

Bradley excels

As such, Bradleys have sometimes proven more useful than Abrams tanks, BI previously reported, with warfare experts noting that their light frames make them particularly well-suited to the style of warfare seen in the Russian invasion.

Despite having lighter armor, they were effective against Russian tanks. Experts previously told BI that Ukraine has adapted well with vehicles to the needs of this war.

Ukrainian soldiers of the 47th Mechanized Brigade on an M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle in Donetsk region, Ukraine.

Global Images Ukraine | Getty Images

Nicholas Drummond, a former British army officer who now works as a ground warfare analyst, told BI that they are effective because they are lighter than tanks and can go where these tanks struggle to go, and have a flexible gun with a high rate of fire that can provide fire support and immobilize tank sensors.

De Bretton-Gordon described them as “a very good kit because it’s reliable, it’s easy to use, it moves quickly and it’s pretty well protected”.

As a result of their successes in Ukraine, they are seen as better weapons than they were before this war, he said, with people talking about it “in very positive terms, which I wouldn’t have done four or five years ago.”

“When I was a tank commander in the first Gulf War, there were Bradleys around and I didn’t think they were that great then,” he said, but now, “they’re creating a legend.”

De Bretton-Gordon said Ukraine’s Bradley victory against Russian tanks came because it “worked out the real vulnerabilities of Russian tanks”. Ukraine surprisingly used Bradleys “to actually hunt tanks as well,” he noted.

He said there were times when “two or three Bradleys would attack a T-90 or a T-80” — some of Russia’s most advanced tanks. A video earlier this year showed two Bradleys hitting a T-90M before its crew abandoned the tank. A drone appeared to finish him off.

De Bretton-Gordon said Ukraine exploited weaknesses that exist in many Russian tanks. On these tanks, the places where the turret meets the hull “are very vulnerable because there is virtually no armor there.”

Therefore, even though Bradleys have small rounds compared to what a tank can fire, “if you fire enough of those in the right place can take out a tank.”

And again, having more Bradleys to use means Ukraine can be very effective.

“And of course if you have two or three Bradleys firing at a T-90 — and the Russians weren’t very smart in the way they used their tanks — that overwhelming firepower means they take those. The T-90 comes out and the Bradley becomes somewhat of a mythological beast.”