KISS technology-keep it simple stupid-even a yank would be competent in this and probably but I wouldn't rule out friendly fire.If you have ever been to war you do not want to face any armored vehicle! A good vehicle in any conflict, pity fuel tanks are in rear doors,but 1113's fuel tanks are in the side ,they all burn eventually when hit.Nothing glorious about armored warfare.
You just gotta love Russian mechanized infantry. You have MBT's, BRDM's, BMP's and BTR's all with the kind of firepower to take on even the hardest of tasks. It's just a well armed men army not to be reckoned with. Of course just like anywhere else though there's always room for improvement.
The BMP-1 is considered also a threat to tanks like the Abrams, Leopards, and other modern tanks. Its main gun is a version of the recoilles cannon SPG-9 and can penetrate up to 400mm of armor including the front of the Leopard1 and M1 Abrams' front armor, a Cuban veteran from angolan war claimed to destroy an Oligant's hull with one shot. Also it is a fast machine. The only problem is its thin armor.
T-72 And BMP were the worst nightmare for the western Allies in the Cold War era! In fact the Russian military was superior in number and even in military technology!
@gosciu555 You are right my friend, but in conventional war the superior number of vehicle counted. The 34 was no match for Tiger and the Germans lost the WW2! The T-72 was a real nightmare for the western allies during the Cold War, even the technology was very good, with that auto loader! I was a soldier in those times on a tank and Romania was keeping in action the T-34/85, in order to keep a high superiority of tanks for the Warsaw Treaty against the NATO! So, superior number counts!
@gosciu555 Actually i believe that they were really close in technology. The Mig-29 was also a terrible nightmare that was way ahead of its time.... you know that all russian tanks and planes were better than our equipment. The only good and best we had was that we were more prepared and our navy...
Well to be honest the Mig-29 was better than F-16s, but worse than F-15s. On the other hand the Su-27s had comparable performance to the F-15, much more fuel and more missiles.
Until the western block (NATO) fielded the Challanger, the Abrams and the Leopard 2 the Warsaw pact had superior attack tanks which would due to sheer numbers and comparable performance to western vehicles overrun underdefended positions. The order of battle of the RA was to call in the wrath of god on any strongly defended position by using divisional artilery, which would grind anything in the target area to dust. If Russians were good at something, its judicious use of artilery
The rear doors hold extra fuel for on the march. They are used to get better range to get to battles. Alot of people say this is the Achilles heel of the BMP-1 and BMP-2 but I personally think they are just trying to discredit the design. It a great design especially since this is the first true IFV. Main problem with the BMP 1 and 2 is lack of armor. .50 caliber will penetrate sides and rear. I think it will fiend off 14.5mm to the front not sure.
Ale za to jaka zajebista frajda jest tym jeździć ... Ja tym w MON -ie jeździłem i na stanie miałem takie trzy cacka ... z wielką chęcią bym wsiadł za wolant i się tym znowu karnoł po bezdrożach
Not a Tank.The BMP1 have a weight of 22 tons.only the vehicel body have a weight of 12 tons.maybe a light tank.The biggest Problem by the BMP1 Tank is the back Doors.Its a part of Tank and filled with Diesel.One hit from back and you have a nice fire.I have repair this tank in the 90 years for the german army.I have driving this vehicle,its very agile and very fast.We have removed the last gear for the german army.:-)
I was a crew leader in on of these while in the Army. They are wickedly fast - not too reliable though. Still, a bloody pleasure to drive them. A lot better than the M-113s we also had. Hard to imagine now, it mst have been a shock to the US when it appeared. Back then the US would only use halftracks and at best M-113s.
@scylaros yeah...the US pretty much shat a brick when it saw these. They have only a 300hp engine though, and poor alloys, which is probably why they're so unreliable (soviet vehicles always seemed kind of underpowered and overstressed. the CCCP never really got a good heavy duty modern diesel, and good tracks came late in the game for them. The T-55s tracks originally lasted for less time than a single tank of fuel, and after 500km the powertrain was shot)
@135twilight It has a modernized version of the SPG-9 recoil-less cannon shooting a great variety of rounds like HE, HEAT and Armor Piercing... but it has a relatively thin armor that makes it almost vulnerable to every tank.
The Abrams uses basically every type of fuel it can get its hands on. It can use diesel/jp-8, gasoline, and kerosene. It does use gas but is not as efficient.
Hey buddy you dunno what you're talking about. Please watch this clip.....watch?v=gI1iZRjBzhM&feature=related....... Fast foward to about 3:40, then try to argue with me. Oh, and diesel is fucking flameable, and the bradley uses a diesel engine you fag....it's a cummins 600-horsepower engine. Learn your stuff before your stupid foreign ass tries to give me an education.
altough old. the bmp still is one of the most widely used tank/personel carriers. it is reliable effective and most of all very cheap compared to western counterparts. in afrikan or middle eastern conflicts this is a vehicle of choice. altough for todays standards it lacks decent armour plating to overcome IED's or modern anti tank weaponary. But it still is more then effective enough for most of its duties.
@ixyoux1 No apc will withstand more than this old bmp 1 would if really, todays apcs are all basicly paper armor, the stryker sides and back can be penetraded by ak rounds from a close distance... Any apc that will get hit by Ied or any sort of anti tank weapon will most likely die in it's place. A IFV/ APC is what it is, it's meant to carr infantry and support it when there's no threats around it, if there ir they must retreat or they will get destroyed instantly, doesn't matter if its us or ru
@Aaidas2 IVF/APCs are armored with aluminium alloy and few like the Bradley M2/M3 has no heat absorbing skin. Several times it was reported that Bradley was destroyed from few Molotov Cocktails. Aluminium become weak at 400 degrees a Molotov can burn till 700 degrees.
yup low target profile, but there is just one slight problem with this vehicle.....the rear door is a fucking fuel tank, that will get ur ass killed real quick!
and just for the record, that piece of shit does not- irepeat- does NOT go 80km/h. with luck it goes 60-70km/h on highway. and it's hard to control in such speeds.
i wouldn't say thats always true. A lot of times in combat, vehicles need to travel far without a fuel truck convoy. I'm sure they use them or they wouldnt be on the bmp in the first place.
The BMP is a IFV not a AFV. IFV stands for Infantry Fighting Vehicle.
xProPlay 1 week ago
I love the originality of the BMP design. The BMP started the whole IFV revolution. Bradleys, Warriors etc. are just BMPs on steroid.
Wanderer359 1 month ago
GARBEGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
stalkertt1 4 months ago
KISS technology-keep it simple stupid-even a yank would be competent in this and probably but I wouldn't rule out friendly fire.If you have ever been to war you do not want to face any armored vehicle! A good vehicle in any conflict, pity fuel tanks are in rear doors,but 1113's fuel tanks are in the side ,they all burn eventually when hit.Nothing glorious about armored warfare.
Angus762 6 months ago
where was extremme offroad ? buhahahahahah GÓÓWNOO
elveezultra 9 months ago
I've actually considered ordering the bmp1 with trailer from hungary... It's all very tempting
Potatonaught 10 months ago
@Potatonaught shit, it'd be one helluva bulldozer...
redreaper2020 4 months ago
the bmp 1 is a death trap from what i know.
Skycheif 10 months ago
@Skycheif
Only 3rd world countries use the BMP-1. Modern armies use The BMP-3, witch is modernized.
Dude1337jeeb 10 months ago
@Skycheif any IFV/APC is...
AKAtheA 7 months ago
You just gotta love Russian mechanized infantry. You have MBT's, BRDM's, BMP's and BTR's all with the kind of firepower to take on even the hardest of tasks. It's just a well armed men army not to be reckoned with. Of course just like anywhere else though there's always room for improvement.
strizhi 1 year ago
The BMP-1 is considered also a threat to tanks like the Abrams, Leopards, and other modern tanks. Its main gun is a version of the recoilles cannon SPG-9 and can penetrate up to 400mm of armor including the front of the Leopard1 and M1 Abrams' front armor, a Cuban veteran from angolan war claimed to destroy an Oligant's hull with one shot. Also it is a fast machine. The only problem is its thin armor.
zerocker45 1 year ago
@zerocker45
:blankface:
gosciu555 1 year ago
T-72 And BMP were the worst nightmare for the western Allies in the Cold War era! In fact the Russian military was superior in number and even in military technology!
dumitrescusa 1 year ago
@dumitrescusa
Not really. It was supperior in numbers and maybe in a certain ruthlessness but not in technology thats for sure.
gosciu555 1 year ago
@gosciu555 You are right my friend, but in conventional war the superior number of vehicle counted. The 34 was no match for Tiger and the Germans lost the WW2! The T-72 was a real nightmare for the western allies during the Cold War, even the technology was very good, with that auto loader! I was a soldier in those times on a tank and Romania was keeping in action the T-34/85, in order to keep a high superiority of tanks for the Warsaw Treaty against the NATO! So, superior number counts!
dumitrescusa 1 year ago
@gosciu555 Actually i believe that they were really close in technology. The Mig-29 was also a terrible nightmare that was way ahead of its time.... you know that all russian tanks and planes were better than our equipment. The only good and best we had was that we were more prepared and our navy...
zerocker45 10 months ago
@zerocker45
Well to be honest the Mig-29 was better than F-16s, but worse than F-15s. On the other hand the Su-27s had comparable performance to the F-15, much more fuel and more missiles.
52111centrumcz 6 months ago
@gosciu555
Until the western block (NATO) fielded the Challanger, the Abrams and the Leopard 2 the Warsaw pact had superior attack tanks which would due to sheer numbers and comparable performance to western vehicles overrun underdefended positions. The order of battle of the RA was to call in the wrath of god on any strongly defended position by using divisional artilery, which would grind anything in the target area to dust. If Russians were good at something, its judicious use of artilery
52111centrumcz 6 months ago
Really fun to drive.
schnaq 1 year ago
френк рулит!!! спасибо ему за саундртек к red2alert
Stormidze 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The rear doors hold extra fuel for on the march. They are used to get better range to get to battles. Alot of people say this is the Achilles heel of the BMP-1 and BMP-2 but I personally think they are just trying to discredit the design. It a great design especially since this is the first true IFV. Main problem with the BMP 1 and 2 is lack of armor. .50 caliber will penetrate sides and rear. I think it will fiend off 14.5mm to the front not sure.
JIMY45GR 1 year ago
look like pt 76
druisteen1 1 year ago
Ale za to jaka zajebista frajda jest tym jeździć ... Ja tym w MON -ie jeździłem i na stanie miałem takie trzy cacka ... z wielką chęcią bym wsiadł za wolant i się tym znowu karnoł po bezdrożach
pimpek06 1 year ago
Not a Tank.The BMP1 have a weight of 22 tons.only the vehicel body have a weight of 12 tons.maybe a light tank.The biggest Problem by the BMP1 Tank is the back Doors.Its a part of Tank and filled with Diesel.One hit from back and you have a nice fire.I have repair this tank in the 90 years for the german army.I have driving this vehicle,its very agile and very fast.We have removed the last gear for the german army.:-)
pankowroman 1 year ago
@pankowroman
I was a crew leader in on of these while in the Army. They are wickedly fast - not too reliable though. Still, a bloody pleasure to drive them. A lot better than the M-113s we also had. Hard to imagine now, it mst have been a shock to the US when it appeared. Back then the US would only use halftracks and at best M-113s.
scylaros 1 year ago
@scylaros yeah...the US pretty much shat a brick when it saw these. They have only a 300hp engine though, and poor alloys, which is probably why they're so unreliable (soviet vehicles always seemed kind of underpowered and overstressed. the CCCP never really got a good heavy duty modern diesel, and good tracks came late in the game for them. The T-55s tracks originally lasted for less time than a single tank of fuel, and after 500km the powertrain was shot)
redreaper2020 1 year ago
@pankowroman diesel's not that flammable bro.
redreaper2020 1 year ago
It has 73mm cannon.
fiapilot 1 year ago
What is the main armament on the BMP? As in what calibre?
135twilight 1 year ago
@135twilight It has a modernized version of the SPG-9 recoil-less cannon shooting a great variety of rounds like HE, HEAT and Armor Piercing... but it has a relatively thin armor that makes it almost vulnerable to every tank.
zerocker45 1 year ago
@zerocker45
Every IFV is vulnerable to every tank. Start off with an infantry squad and compare that to a BMP.
gosciu555 10 months ago
thnx for the video i drive BMP1 at the army
<3<3<3<3
nikolas270 1 year ago
The BMP is not a tank it is an armored fighting vehicle. There is a significant difference.
135twilight 2 years ago 27
@135twilight ye this is a heap in war lol
xXTURBOZDXx 1 year ago
@135twilight
Hehe a tank *is* an AFV, and an IFV is a combination of tank and APC, but w/e.
gosciu555 1 year ago
Comment removed
awwwwnaaaa 2 years ago
Comment removed
awwwwnaaaa 2 years ago
oh, and the abrams can also burn, diesel, kerosene, or pretty much anything that burns. Not just simple gasolene
awwwwnaaaa 2 years ago
Comment removed
awwwwnaaaa 2 years ago
The Abrams uses basically every type of fuel it can get its hands on. It can use diesel/jp-8, gasoline, and kerosene. It does use gas but is not as efficient.
32degrees50 2 years ago
Comment removed
awwwwnaaaa 2 years ago
Hey buddy you dunno what you're talking about. Please watch this clip.....watch?v=gI1iZRjBzhM&feature=related....... Fast foward to about 3:40, then try to argue with me. Oh, and diesel is fucking flameable, and the bradley uses a diesel engine you fag....it's a cummins 600-horsepower engine. Learn your stuff before your stupid foreign ass tries to give me an education.
iLOVEhairyASSHOLES 2 years ago
It's Molotovs, you dumb fuck!
PKSnsk 2 years ago
LOL@stupid foreign ass-are you American by any chance?
fusilier45 2 years ago
Great video.
MokomaSusi 2 years ago
altough old. the bmp still is one of the most widely used tank/personel carriers. it is reliable effective and most of all very cheap compared to western counterparts. in afrikan or middle eastern conflicts this is a vehicle of choice. altough for todays standards it lacks decent armour plating to overcome IED's or modern anti tank weaponary. But it still is more then effective enough for most of its duties.
ixyoux1 2 years ago 14
@ixyoux1 No apc will withstand more than this old bmp 1 would if really, todays apcs are all basicly paper armor, the stryker sides and back can be penetraded by ak rounds from a close distance... Any apc that will get hit by Ied or any sort of anti tank weapon will most likely die in it's place. A IFV/ APC is what it is, it's meant to carr infantry and support it when there's no threats around it, if there ir they must retreat or they will get destroyed instantly, doesn't matter if its us or ru
Aaidas2 7 months ago
@Aaidas2 IVF/APCs are armored with aluminium alloy and few like the Bradley M2/M3 has no heat absorbing skin. Several times it was reported that Bradley was destroyed from few Molotov Cocktails. Aluminium become weak at 400 degrees a Molotov can burn till 700 degrees.
Talshet 3 months ago
yup low target profile, but there is just one slight problem with this vehicle.....the rear door is a fucking fuel tank, that will get ur ass killed real quick!
awwwwnaaaa 2 years ago 2
in battle those tanks are empty. those are just for reserve.
SaMyVaiS 2 years ago
and just for the record, that piece of shit does not- irepeat- does NOT go 80km/h. with luck it goes 60-70km/h on highway. and it's hard to control in such speeds.
SaMyVaiS 2 years ago
i wouldn't say thats always true. A lot of times in combat, vehicles need to travel far without a fuel truck convoy. I'm sure they use them or they wouldnt be on the bmp in the first place.
awwwwnaaaa 2 years ago
well whatever u say. it seems that u know better.
SaMyVaiS 2 years ago
That's a real badass machine!
Nikotts 2 years ago
o... by the way wat does ifv stand for?
iBllue 2 years ago
Infantry Fighting Vehicle.
vtkrey 2 years ago
Teh bmp1 is a beast vehicle...Nice vid
iBllue 2 years ago
nice vid ....;-)
tacticalbattledroid 2 years ago