The funny thing: initially all the APC's were open top nowadays almost all of them have a roof so that soldiers can comfortably sit on top of it

My father told me he and friends would always pick the top because how common ambush was in chechnya they would use rpg you would get thrown off and be fine instead of being trapped inside dying from burning to death

Truly a battle wagon for the ages. There's something so photogenic of a bunch of soldiers atop an APC.

US troops rode on top of M113s in Vietnam , a lot of the time , because the 113 was vulnerable to mines .

Roof riding goes back to the Afghan war, carried on with the first and second Chechen wars. If something is not broke, don’t fix it! 😂

The US has flexible 2qt plastic water bladders you can crush up to reduce the size of so you always have a "full" water bladder. This keeps the water from slushing around when you're moving. Although the regular canteen and the newer South African style square 2qt bottles are hard plastic so you can't do that.

Most APCs have a common nickname : Grunt Coffin.

That's an old practice and american troops did that too in Vietnam war. Old armored troop carriers have very cramped, hot and noisy interiors, so it is not a nice place to stay for several hours. When entering a combat zone they would get inside the vehicle though, to get better protection against firearms and artillery splinters. More modern armored vehicles normally made to be somewhat ambush protected, so they must have interiors with better ergonomics so people can stay inside for a much long time.

Thank you so much for presenting this information without being sensationalist, biased or just downright derogatory. It's just the history and facts, truly a rare breed.

I crewed on various M113 variants. It quickly became apparent that the "armor" of that vehicle was useless against anything more than a rifle and small shell fragments and the vehicle was simply a very effective way to kill a whole squad with one shot. I do however think these lightly armored APCs give much needed protection from air-burst artillery and wonder what the Russian/Ukrainian "tank riders" do when engaged by such?

Because it looks hard af

When i joined the US Army in 1982, the Vietnam Vets taught us to ride in the roof of the M113. But the Safety Nazi's eliminated that practice by 1985.

Another thing with the BMP specifically, the rear doors also serve as additional fuel storage. So, in the event the vehicle is hit, the very way out for the passengers could be on fire. This is also why you see the butt pads, riding on top is not very comfortable, so they created the butt pads to help a bit

I think despite danger soldiers do enjoy fresh air on top of their vehicles instead of being cramped uncomfortable inside the armed vehicles. I am a Namibian who grew up during the war in my country. South African soldiers usually rode on top of their armed vehicles during thrir patrol despite ambushes and land mines.

Desant tactics are still widely in use among Eastern European armies especially those that operates Soviet era equipment. However due to the much more spacious, ergonomic and armored Western IFVs like the Bradley, CV-90, Warrior and others, this tactic is not very common and usually results in much better survivability for the troops in a surprise attack like ambush or suicide drone attack. Of course if sit on top like that they defeat the whole point of the IFV/APC which was to protect them, the infantry. Can’t express enough how important it is that the men sit INSIDE the vehicle that is supposed to protect them, sitting outside is not only lazy but DANGEROUS, and the mental gymnastics needed to justify this desant tactic is insane. Reminds me of the Vietnamese armed forces trying to explain to its troop why they don’t have armor so they can “move around faster in the jungle” instead of “we can’t afford to give you all armor so make do”.

If we were in a convoy, we built a sandbag fort on top and sat there. You had a 360 degree view and you could shoot back. It was all about firepower back then. You put as much high speed metal in the air as possible. Mines were another consideration. There was no real armor on anything so you ended up sandbagging floors and sides of everything except solid rock. You can never fill too many sandbags.

From the days of the old tank rides of WWII, Russia had no APCs at their disposal so riding on tanks into combat was a fast way to have infantry support to those tanks. The tradition of tank riding of their grandfathers and great-grandfather's today lives on, as well with the knowledge that most APC aren't that great to protecting those inside. Vehicle riding isn't that new.

Brilliant, thank you.

This is great content. Thank you

It must be very uncomfortable to be wanting to carry less water. Less water, no way!

Finally a channel dedicated to answering these questions about the RU army

This practice is done mostly close to the contact zone for ease of transport and sync, nobody wants to leg it on foot through mud and grass, as soon as the engagement starts all of them disperse

great video, very informative

its called reactive armor ofc....if one gets hit the group reacts!

2:28 OMG. I can't imagine myself in this situation. That picture shows that war is so scary

The doors on Russian APC/AFV's are incredibly small! Getting the squad out in a hurry will get the vehicle destroyed while in loiter mode!!!

One BTR-80 carries one Squad inside, i.e. about twelve men well squeezed. It has the power to carry several more on the top and this may be advantageous. Actually they are not much more vulnerable than the grunts inside. They are safer from an antitank mine and fire but far more exposed to rifle and MG fire and shrapnel. Facing outwards they have far better awareness in a counter ambush situation. They also risk to fell and be overrun by the vehicle behind, or be abandoned where they fell. Or get pneumonia. In the end of the day it makes no great difference. I believe this stems from the time in WW II where the Soviet Army had no APCs and had to make do with Infantryman riding in Tanks, which has several advantages too.

US troops sat on top of the M113 in Vietnam. Mines were a problem there too.

Casper, you sure is on purpose ? I have carried the flask for 2 years and it squashed itself alot, throwing it into the meshok when empty, forgetting about it, i threw my bag after few hours of walking thru forest and that throw dented it ALOT. The material is very thin, good for weight and price of manufacture but they dent alot that way, especially in the middle

They ride on top to avoid being inside when mines brew up the vehicle. US troops did this in Vietnam. Some canteens are collapsable like the US 2 QT

nice video!

You mention mines, RPG-hits was also a situation you would not like to experience from the inside. I read that the rule among soviet soldiers in Afghanistan was not even a foot inside the compartment. As long as the RPG didn't hit you directly, you would likely escape with shrapel and bruises. If you was inside you would get horrible burns.

They ride on top of the AFV in case they hit a landmine. We did same in VietNam.

You figure squashed flasks a major concern?!

Because it looks cool

So when they hear that anti tank missile coming they can jump off and run

That Javelyn’s gonna turn them into mincemeat

They refused to pay for the ticket and ride inside, sitting in comfy chairs

because there is a chance for them to bail. They can't quickly do that if they chill within the APC.

in ww2 the soviets would put big handles on their T34 tanks so the red army could ride them into battle (the fact that t34 turret is situated in the front of tank also helps) and hang on to the tank during the ride...back then they didnt have APCs and this is actually a good method to get directly into the action quickly. nowadays i guess they just dont like how small the BMP1 and 2 are, BMP3 should be a bit better but similar since they like to have the exit hatch open in the rear during the ride. and sitting inside and outside might not make that much of a different since its gg anyway with a direct hit on the crew compartment by say an artillery shell....

But of an issue with drones now, but it had to change at some point. Or when enemies have afv’s with 20 mm plus. Seen multiple videos of a squad getting shredded by explosive shells. What isn’t mentioned is that the horrible design of the tiny entry doors on the vehicles ,want they were slow to get out.

The only russian canteen worth a shit is the VDV one, the other one from world war two only carries about 700ml of water

👍👍👍 Interesting and factual. Yep, interiors of the Armoured Troop Carriers can carry lots of additional 'stuff' .. most important 😏. In a potential combat area, I was never comfortable 'cooped up'. I would rather take my chances outside .. better to be shot than burn. 'Flat-ish' water bottles sit more comfortably on the belt / body. In the hot Southern African Bush, NOBODY .. with any common sense, 'gyppo'd their bottles to carry less water.

Where are you from man?

And now with top attack anti tank missiles like the tow, they kill everybody on top with a bit of luck.

Human reactive armor is way cheaper than explosive reactive armor - and Russia do got a lot of people.

Same reason as they have done since anti tank mines came out.

The answer is Afgan and both Chechen campaigns were anti-guerilla wars, with no a) combat line b) heavy weapon from enemy side. Ukranian war is totally diffdrrent, it is "the war of artillery" and we do not see any more troops on the top of armored wehicles

Human reactive armor

That thing on barrel is not water flask. It is used flare. Protects barrel from dust and mud.

Safer outside than put-in !

simple answer : it beats walking

Roof riding goes back to WW II, when Russian soldiers rode on tank roofs.

Even if the armor you ride on can survive a mine or an IED - you don't want to be inside when it goes off The cold war APCs used by Russia & America have very little armor on the underside. The shape of the undercarriage focuses the blast energy up & into the hull. The South African Kaspir had the right idea

FPV drone says hello to them

the 4 wheeled vehicle at 2:27, what's it called? thx

American soldiers did the same thing in Vietnam riding on top of their M-113 APC’s.

Well their AFVs are literal death traps, I wouldn't want to ride _inside_ one either

Russia is so big, what do you want them to march?

most of the world use reactive armor to protect their vehicles, russians use russians as their reactive armor. (it is safer for the troops to ride on top of BMP/BTR then inside cuz they offer no anti mine/ied protection)

Should have just brought back half tracks

Simple army rounds? Like steel-cored Chinese surplus AK-47 rounds?

Problem now is drone attacks from above

The USA soldiers on Vietnam stay up of their APC for the temperature of the weather (Vietnam have Tropical weather)..

This video is only partially true. Russian troops do ride on the tops of their vehicles due to the ease of dismounting. However, that's heavily influenced by the fact that the doors on the BTR are horribly placed in the middle of the wheels and have been known to kill/seriously injured soldiers in the past. The older BMP doors are also unpowered, meaning they can be difficult to open in a hurry. In addition, the poor situational awareness of Russian vehicles is in part due to their poor optics and the overall low visibility afforded to vehicle crews. This is something that modern NATO vehicles work very hard to avoid, providing commanders with 360 degree situational awareness provided via a range of optics that are normal light, thermal and night vision. While Russia has touted similar systems, an analysis of vehicles we've seen in Ukraine shows that few Russian vehicles actually have these systems equipped and on many of them the systems were found to be inoperable. This is possibly due to Russian commanders selling off critical systems before the war as optics system components tend to fetch a high price at resale and corruption has long been a bugbear for the Russian military. It may also be due to the normal issues of faulty systems coming from the factory (as anyone from any military can relate to) or, most likely, a combination of factors.

Because you get deaf at the inside when an explosion bangs on the outside

reminds me of WW2 photos.

It could also conceal the number of troops. An opponent can't tell if the BMP is full or not.

Fear of Drones

THE MEN ALL OVER THE TOP OF THE TANK WERE MAYBE FOR ADDED TRACK TRACTION????

Sitting on top makes them extremely exposed to drones however.

The reason is simple. Those vehicles were designed for an average Soviet soldier in the '70, short, thin and with no bulky armour whatsoever.

The main killer of the iron horse is mines and rpg, so why trap yourself in that tin can.

its the special body armor for special operations 😂

WW2 nostalgia

Thanks!

*infantry protection*

Russian soldiers sat on the engine deck of t-34's in WW2!

Interesting. I knew some of this. But you filled in a lot of blanks. I have heard some refer to the russian light armor as a mobile coffin/crematoria also.

Because their vehicles suuuuck!!!!

Same way the English opened up their jeeps in Ireland.

Mines!

Tank riders are old Russian TRADITION! At least from the beginning of the Winter War.

Forgot to mention that riding inside sucks.

No armor is best armor. If youre on the roof at least you can escape

Ok just say that there no space inside

They are like a half cat, have 3 life to live.

Landmines

Russia really need to built APC like bradley, something that use REAL armor

Flesh armor.

Maybe they just want to get it over with.

also: the driver farted

Also russians like to fly on tank turrets in space...

That's the bravery of Russian soldiers.

They teach the soldiers to ride on top to become organic armor!

Cause they have run out of body bags

Why ride? Because who the fuck wants to walk 23 kilometers?

That's easy . So they don't have to walk .

I thought they kept troops on top to protect tanks and armored vehicles.

Russians might as well use pickup trucks then