Comments by "" (@charlesmartin1121) on "BTR-80 Russian Army Vehicle is Worse Than You Think" video.

  1. "Tracked vehicles struggled in the mountainous terrain?" Tracked vehicles typically have much better mobility in virtually all terrain/substrates. Wheeled vehicles in Afghanistan were primarily restricted to roads or open desert. Don't believe me ask the British who had great success climbing steep slopes with their BAE/Hagglunds articulated tracked armored carriers. Ever see a BTR or a Stryker climb even a moderate mountain slope? I didn't think so.
    23
  2.  @lucagerulat307  The reference here was operating in the mountains. Not driving on roads that go through the mountains. And armored tracked vehicles (especially articulated tracked vehicles) have a lot of advantages that armored wheeled vehicles do not in steep terrain. Advantages that justify the higher maintenance costs.
    7
  3.  @Taskandpurpose  Hello Cappy. I think a better definition of 'operating in mountainous terrain' would help. Because their is operating on crappy dirt roads in mountainous terrain. In which case, an M-ATV would be the way to go. Then there is actually operating in steep, trackless mountainous terrain. Like the Afghan opposition forces did at Tora Bora, driving T-54/-55 tanks to the tops of mountains.  If we are talking about 'armored' vehicles in that environment----tracks rule. PS I am not aware of Bradley Fighting Vehicles being used in Afghanistan, however the US Marines employed a limited number of M1A1 and M1 Assault Breachers in Helmand Province.
    4
  4.  @bkane573  I stand corrected. Where was that by the way?
    3
  5.  @GhostScout42  So 'it goes everywhere' except that poor German farmer's muddy field? Haha. Just kidding. The Stryker and vehicles like it definitely have their place on the battlefield, but as good as they have become, commenters who think they can fully replace tracked vehicles are sorely mistaken.
    2
  6.  @VacuumJockey  Agree. Add the articulated design, to the relatively light weight and wide tracks, and you would be hard pressed to name any other armored vehicle in the world which can match it's mobility.
    2
  7.  @jPlanerv2  Thats what I thought. Thanks.
    2
  8. They ride on the top of BMP's and BTR's for the scenic views. Duh.
    1
  9. https://youtu.be/l4liWsxhHzc This is the older model Hagglunds in the video. But somebody tell me which wheeled service vehicle could pull this shit off. And one which can be fitted with armor protection (the video example is unarmored).   Note: please don't tell me a swamp buggy with gigantic tires--thats not a service vehicle.
    1
  10. "The 30mm projectiles from the BTR can penetrate just over 8 inches of armor?" I don't have references in front of me. But that sounds wrong. Anybody got the actual specs out there?
    1
  11. Better choice in the mountains than the BTR? How about the BAE/Hagglunds articulated tracked armored carrier. In any terrain.
    1
  12.  @vencdee  The BvS 10, also known in British service as the Viking.
    1