Russian analysts have praised the M2A2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle more than other Western-made platforms. What makes this controversial vehicle so special in their eyes?
The American military’s M2 Bradley infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) has been controversial ever since it was first conceived following the Vietnam War. It was the subject of the now-infamous HBO movie The Pentagon War, which chronicled the platform’s testing.
Still, the Bradley proved quite successful in the 1991 Gulf War, destroying more Iraqi tanks and armored vehicles than the U.S. military’s M1 Abrams main battle tanks (MBTs).
But many of the original concerns became apparent during Operation Iraqi Freedom and its aftermath when the Bradley proved to be vulnerable to improvised explosive device (IED) and rocket-propelled grenade (RPG) attacks. In 2007, the Army stopped using the Bradley in combat in favor of the MRAPs.
The M2A2 Bradley in Ukraine
The upgraded M2A2 Bradley now appears to be among the Western-made armored platforms that Russia has been able to evaluate after being captured on the battlefield in Ukraine.
The United States provided more than 300 of the IFVs to Kyiv. As Brandon J. Weichert previously wrote for The National Interest, the Bradley has performed better than some might have expected, considering its shortcomings in Iraq.
“The Bradley Fighting Vehicle provides rapid troop transport combined with massive firepower. For example, it has a 25 mm chain gun and TOW missiles. These two systems have been essential in fighting the Russian armies in Ukraine. Battles fought near Robotyne and Donetsk have seen the Bradley perform admirably,” Weichert explained, adding that even with its weaker armor, the IFVs have been able to stand up against Russian MBTs.
The fighting in Ukraine is a war of attrition in the absolute most genuine sense, and the Bradley is a reminder of that fact. Nearly a third have already been destroyed and/or abandoned—yet, as was seen in Iraq, in many cases, the crew was able to escape.
The Russian Views on the M2A2 Bradley
As the Ukrainian military news outlet Militarnyi recently reported, the Bradley has received more praise from Russian analysts than other Western-made platforms. It cited a study prepared by Russian analysts A.V. Mushin and V.V. Konyuchenko, which researcher Andriy Tarasenko subsequently posted to Telegram.
Unlike the Western MBTs, which Russian forces captured and sent to the Uralvagonzavod research and development facility for evaluation, the Bradley was analyzed “by the 38th Research Institute of Armored Vehicles of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, located in Kubinka, near Moscow,” Militarnyi added.
The “Results of Research Trials of the M2A2 ODS SA (USA) Infantry Fighting Vehicle” study found that the M2A2 Bradley IFV outperformed the Russian-made BMP-3 in almost all key categories. It noted that the U.S.-made platform’s aluminum and steel armor, which is reinforced with polymer mine-protection mats, provided greater survivability for the crew and passengers against both ballistic strikes and mines.
The Bradley’s frontal armor also withstands 30mm 3UBR8 rounds, which the BMP-3 cannot, while the side armor on the IFV protects 30mm 3UBR6 shells. The Bradley explosive reactive armor (BRAT) tiles are further shown to counter direct hits from anti-tank guided missiles. The study noted that one of the IFVs survived a dual ATGM strike in March 2024.
“The frontal projection with dynamic protection blocks withstands hits from PG-9VS and PG-7VL type cumulative grenades. The side projection with DZ protects only from PG-9VS grenades but does not withstand PG-7VL,” Militarnyi noted, citing the study’s findings.
The Russian analysts found that the M2A2 had greater firepower than the BMP-3, as the 25mm M242 automatic cannon, the IFV, was nearly twice as accurate as the 30mm 2A42 and 2A72 cannons on the Russian-made armored vehicle. The armor penetration from a 25mm armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile was twice that of a 30mm 3UBR8 projectile.
Other considerations noted were that the Bradley provided better ease of access from the troop compartment to the fighting compartment, allowing more unrestricted movement within the vehicle.
The Bradley was also easier to maintain, with better access to onboard components. The BMP-3 was superior in its range, ability to operate on uneven terrain, and “ability to overcome water obstacles afloat,” as the Russian vehicle has amphibious capabilities that the Bradley lacks.
The report did offer some suggestions, including the use of “30-mm 3UBR8 shells with an armor-piercing subcaliber core; development of feathered armor-piercing subcaliber shells (BPOS) for 30-mm guns,” yet that is unlikely to mean that much.
As seen in the fighting in Iraq and Ukraine, the Bradley has already been shown to be capable of standing up to MBTs in the right situation.
Moreover, this report may highlight that the Bradley does very well in its original role, namely, countering Soviet-designed IFVs. A sequel to The Pentagon Wars is in order.
About the Author: Peter Suciu
Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer. He has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers, and websites with over 3,200 published pieces over a twenty-year career in journalism. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity, politics, and international affairs. Peter is also a Contributing Writer for Forbes and Clearance Jobs. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu. You can email the author: [email protected].
Image: Shutterstock/ Karasev Viktor.
