M1134 Strykers Coduct Live Fire Anti-Tank Training

US Soldiers/Marines conducting anti-tank training. TOW missiles fired from M41 Sabers mounted to the turrets of Stryker Combat Vehicles. Video also includes shots with the LAV-25 (Light Armored Vehicle), M1128 Stryker (Mobile Gun System) and M1126 Infantry Carrier Vehicle.
M1134 Anti-Tank Guided Missile Vehicle is a US armored fighting vehicle from the Stryker family of vehicles. As the brigade's primary tank destroyer system, the ATGM reinforces the brigade's infantry battalions, reinforces the brigade reconnaissance squadron and provides long-range direct fires.
►Subscribe Now -- / @military_archive

[@richardmaxwell4923]

The Stryker is pretty much the AR15 of American "Tanks". Fully customizable and capable of "Fully semi automatic"

[@jacobsetser6572]

Capitalist Painter Pyro you sir are 100000% correct, never thought of it that way

[@GOD_O_WAR]

@@jacobsetser6572 and then they have the nerve to call it a build

[@mcplisken1093]

the right rear tyre needs to be pumped up

[@buckymacdoodles7674]

StevexNYCperformance I'm pretty sure it does have automatic inflation/deflation. And I am quite positive these are Canadian made (American armed/modified). It is a variation of the LAV III produced in Ontario, Canada. The US has made many awesome variants though and cheers to y'all for that.

[@AboxoroxRoxursox]

MC Plisken Shit crew failed pmcs.

[@chaosXP3RT]

US special forces were deployed in Syria on some Strykers. Awesome vehicle

[@DaLizMs]

Love those Gen2 LAVS

[@RangerJesse]

@War Clashes, where do you get the footage at? Just wondering because I want to start a channel like yours, but I don't know where to get the footage at. Also do you want to collaborate. =)

[@LipitzanerStallion29]

Notice that these Strykers are the older LAV II'S(Light Armored Vehicle) and that they have eight wheels whereas the newer LAV III's only have six wheels. The newer six wheeled LAV III version of the Strykers are a major improvement over the older eight wheeled LAV II's because they have a smaller yet more powerful eight cylinder engine and most notably a vastly superior Caterpillar transmission system and that both the front two wheels as well as the back two wheels are independently steerable giving the newest iteration of the Stryker or LAV III unparalleled mobility and speed ranges both on and off road. Also consider that the latest and newest iterations of the Stryker's incorporate ceramic ablative armor giving them the toughness and survivability akin to that of an Abrams or Leopard main battle tank. Today with all their modern upgrades to the armor, fire control, communications, and command systems the Stryker's have become almost invulnerable to individual small arms and tactical anti-tank weapons. One can be pretty much guaranteed that it's almost impossible or at the very least highly unlikely to destroy/kill a newer six wheeled Stryker with an RPG - 7G. One would need a Javelin anti-tank missile system to destroy one of these Strykers and that would pretty much only be possible by using the Javelin in indirect fire mode meaning the missile would drop down onto the weaker top armor instead of launching straight into it's thicker side armor. At any rate the Strykers irregardless of their type/generation are absolutely badass and are much easier, quicker, and cheaper to produce then the older slower Bradley infantry fighting vehicle.

[@tarnapolsky4593]

I hate to be that guy but irregardless isnt a word its a double negative

[@michaelmaryn5718]

LipitzanerStallion29 what? Hang on, so your telling me the composite armor package gives the bloody thing armor comparable to a Abrams? If that is the case, then i hate to tell you that the composite armor package only adds a good ‘resistance’ to 14.5mm rounds, and not anything more or else the dam thing would get bogged down and look stupid with a good extra one and a half feet of extra armor on the vehicle.

[@brendencampbell2092]

DICE and EA . Please take notes.

[@ibrahimsafwat]

Brenden Campbell huh?

[@TheUnorthodoxx]

Abe The Egyptian Pharaoh Note to the maker and publisher of the Battlefield series video game.

[@DraconX3]

Yeah, wishful thinking. Games by those companies will never be this close to reality. All in the name of "balance"

[@atakan462]

Play arma 3 if you want to be closer to reality than bf series, it is full of bugs but at least more realistic. + it will be the toughest game your pc will ever run so expect low fps even if you have quantum pc

[@Grenadier-]

Atakan Pars it's not too bad, but you'll get weird things like on medium getting 34 fps then on ultra getting 36.

[@krisduwe2371]

enjoyed .... thanks for posting

[@superfamilyallosauridae6505]

5:50 and on is actually just US Marine Corps LAVs, not Strykers. Related vehicle though.

[@renesaez773]

exelente los vídeos, reales y concreto en lo que Sequere ver

[@IronManXXX]

You guys rock...SALUTE!

[@bigpapi3636]

Looks like a swimming pool on wheels

[@altay6320]

Russia has many more tanks than the United States but these armored vehicles are no joke they come in many different models to perform different tasks and most of them can easily take out a tank and they're very fast so any country with a large tank Arsenal should worry

[@luisarruda3061]

Al Tay Especially when you take into account, that the vast majority of Russian tanks are old cold war models, such as the T-72, T-62, And T-80.

[@freethinker713]

Tube launched Optically tracked Wire guided

[@tonbig6908]

Pretty effective... if you can get it to work

[@mm-bo8mc]

thank you for your service an scarifices god bless you all be safe us strong proud of the troops

[@jakehayes1998]

jajajah86 What absolute horseshit.

[@Hadrexus]

How well does it work against modern tanks with reactive armor like the Arena?

[@mohdsadiq9458]

Very very enjoy ful vedio. Love from jammu kashmir❤❤❤

[@900stx7]

Millions of dollars worth of hardware an no tin snips to open the boxes !

[@robertarnold6192]

Don’t lift with your back. Lift with your Soldiers.

[@mustafaalqamar5553]

بوركتم وبوركت يلا سنت👍👍👍👍

[@dennisschmidt975]

AKA "TGST"......"The Get Stuck Truck"

[@craigbigelow8382]

Well , thats real nice ya'll have all that highly technological equipment! Why dont you win a war now and then?

[@nikolahusch22]

Okay, I have a question, please. TOW missiles are stationary fired. Isn't there a system that can fire a Hellfire missile? Hellfire missiles are fire-and-forget plus they can be fired on the move. They are used on the A-10 and on helos which are moving pretty fast compared to a vehicle. What's the difficulty firing a Hellfire from a vehicle? Thanks in advance! :)

[@Tagadarealty]

Because of the bad FOV, All ATGM with a "good" range are generally guided by wire. It's not a problem to be stationary, it's just a +weap, (for heavy support, escort, hunting), not really a frontline system where you stand in front of 3 armored division...

[@nguquaxanguyen5224]

look up IM-SHORAD

[@georgioskoroneos9272]

Hit & run in a fair number were used in Syria to test them in a true strangle of combat to find out how stand up of course newer models I'm sure are more solid & can penetrated thicker armor but that of course is a military secret .

[@pault5947]

Better to make the enemy watch this video then sneak past after they've fallen asleep!

[@josegarciacalle8138]

Diferencias entre el Stryker y el LAV

[@michaelreed5416]

0:56 looks like a sti in front of it is that what it is

[@LeadsTheFallen]

Whose tanks are they going to destroy?

[@aa12fordays87]

ok guys strykers are not meant to be frontline vehicles they're mainly used to get soldiers to places quickly so don't expect a stryker platoon to go up against any tanks

[@jamestheotherone742]

Except... that is a "tank destroyer" that carries anti-tank missiles. It is very much designed to go up against tanks.

[@robertarnold6192]

Not an Infantry Fighting Vehicle platoon. But this is an Anti Tank Guided Missile Vehicle platoon and we absolutely do.

[@knightlife98]

No thanks! Give me the 120mm cannon, Syrykers!!!!

[@hulagu3068]

the M1134 is a tank destroyer

[@XHGC5]

Mega súper.

[@Thebramforpresident1]

loaded manually???

[@erlikkhan4686]

SüperGüç olucaz Bor madeni çıkarıcaz. Altay Tankı buna bin basar (!)

[@emperornazuz1205]

Nashoba 24 there are meant to transport personnel don't compare them to tanks lol and just so u know altays suck ass

[@AussieStandsWithRussia]

Maybe some tin snips would be easier

[@bluedog0012able]

Ok now try in on a tank moving at you while you have no cover!

[@EmperorEdu]

ATGMs outrange tank guns anyways

[@shittyG1]

Was the destroyed tank at 4:00 a chieftain?

[@saberboi1526]

Centurion

[@jamestheotherone742]

@@saberboi1526 Chieftain.

[@saberboi1526]

@@jamestheotherone742 Idk what my brain was thinking 7 months ago but that is definately a chieftain

[@jamestheotherone742]

@@saberboi1526 Tis ok. It took me a while to ID it because you would never expect to see an old British tank on an American gun range.

[@thomaslewis7883]

these are little different that what the mideast rebels have.These don't miss and your moving the vehicle 10 feet,while watching the missile coming at you.

[@ibrahimsafwat]

Thomas Lewis you mean the FSA terrorists?

[@redegeldunit420]

When The US Government attacks the Syrian Army that means there are helping support Terrorism 100% there's no way around it! I feel sorry for the american people SHAME US Terrorist Regime SHAME SHAME SHAME!

[@405boy4]

redegeldunit420 So you say when the US attacks Syria that aides Terrorists? What do you say when Syria and Russia drop chemical weapons and barrel bombs on its own people? Of course Syria is run by a Terrorist president so I guess my statement wasn't strong enough. You know what I mean though. The US at times has to keep Syrian troops away from US troops to deter Military confrontations. The last US strike was to back pro-regime forces up of us.ml

[@synysterdax1593]

redegeldunit420 the last attack was Syria's fault. They were told not to cross the deescalation zone they even had warning shots fired at them. Syria decided to keep going after the multiple warnings so we called in an airstrike in fear of what they would do

[@davidgalloway45]

nothing new i worked on these systems in the late 80's

[@Maurizio4672]

u niaru spara?

[@jomamma9261]

Mexico just declared war on Washington we all will be eating tacos soon

[@GlaDi02]

Meenwhile in (not soviet) Russia they have Kornet EM Tank destroyer system which is able to fire 2 kornet missiles at diffrend targets. The system is able to fire 4 rockets at once (2 for each target) and has 8 missiles ready to fire. Range: up to 10 km. This is scary shit. And no, I'm not Russian troll. Their system is just waay better.

[@b1k3hobo54]

Eeek. Ye olde LAV-AT with the even older Emerson ITV TOW turret.

[@Principator]

How dare they use a Centurion for target practice

[@mafmaf6417]

Looks more like a Chieftain.

[@jamestheotherone742]

@@mafmaf6417 Is a Chieftain. I wonder where they got it from to use as an iron target? The Iraqis?

[@elitecassidy8258]

Why can't they just add the tow launcher to most stryker variants, like with most Bradley varients? This thing has no weapons besides a tow launcher, while a Bradley has a cannon, machine guns and the same launcher. At LEAST give it more launch tubes instead of only two, otherwise this just seems like such a waste of a vehicle

[@isaactrujillo76]

Why don't they add hell fires already? Fire and forget seems a lot better!

[@throwaway4827]

Isaac Trujillo Manually aimed missiles are more effective when dealing with an Active Protection System on the enemy tank. F&F missiles see,more susceptible to being jammed and deflected with an APS.

[@throwaway4827]

*are more

[@jamestheotherone742]

@@throwaway4827 Not really. There are well established countermeasures for SACLOS ATGMs. FAFATGMs have the benefit of allowing the launch platform to displace or engage another target while the missile is doing its thing.

[@nbayounguzi4083]

I GOT A SAUDI ARABIA AD WITH DONALD TRUMP IN IT

[@user-ml4ql9ie3p]

t 55 че блять?

[@Brian_yeah_that_brian_Strang]

Looks like fort Carson

[@jamestheotherone742]

Lewis.

[@eturner4940]

F it. Bring on the VBIEDs

[@jesusgranados166]

ONE comentarie

[@logicalspartan]

Every time the spendagon creates one of these frankenstein multi purpose weapons systems, they are ineffective and a waste of money.

[@osmancanyaln]

Turkish army

[@emperornazuz1205]

YALIN are u dense it's clearly The Us your shit would jam due to kebab overload

[@daughterofzion9183]

🇺🇸👍👌✌💪💪💪💪💪💪💯💯

[@Putins-mustache]

A good trophy from the 20th century ☻☻☻

[@soulbrothers7789]

Then look at Russian Hrizantema tank killer ....

[@saberboi1526]

Rip centurion

[@jamestheotherone742]

Chieftain.

[@ruez]

OBSOLETED! The missiles failed to kill a T-72 and T-90 in Syria.

[@juanpabloalvarezmartinez6514]

comentario en español

[@ehglerpaw1174]

karn new radio

[@RICH-di8ct]

should be very proud to kill enemy equipment from the 1950's outstanding

[@Exorcist-kd3dy]

thats an old weapon design from the 60s. Only two shots and some1 has to climb out and reload it by hand under enemy fire. what a waste of money. Even 40 years ago they developed auto loading ATGM systems!

[@Exorcist-kd3dy]

The TOW is also wire guided. So no electonic Counter devices would help

[@AG-jh1ky]

Markus Schneider the t90 has IR jammers and two dazzlers mounted on the front of turret...the chance of this missiles taking out a t90 are pretty low

[@superfamilyallosauridae6505]

TOW missiles have hit T-90s before in Syria, operated by rebel groups with quite little training. I'm fairly certain this has also been done with Javelins.

[@verdebusterAP]

I have to agree with Markus. Despite the TOW-2B top attack ability can still is able to defeat modern MBT, The Army needs to invest in longer range fire and forget missile. with embedded measures to deal with APS. An improved model of the AGM-176 would work with bigger warhead and 8 mile range

[@bronco5385]

Incorrect. The flare in the tail of modern TOW is not a flare, it is an electronic beacon, and it is encoded. If the IR jammer is not operating on the same encoded pulse pattern, it will not fool the missile tracker.

[@muayboran5152]

These will d3stroy any russian tank

[@geaneameneses4739]

like

[@paulbendon9455]

hellfire, stryker, it is still game over for the tank,how's about trying it on the new Russian, T90 tank

[@saberboi1526]

TOW missiles can still take out T90s

[@saberboi1526]

Newer TOWs have a shaped charge that can change direction inside the missile so the charge will fire downwards when flying over the tank where the armor is weakest.

[@saberboi1526]

Heres an example kzbin.info/www/bejne/e2K5iIOFpb6Vh6s

[@saberboi1526]

And dont tell me that isnt realistic because just about every russiann tank after the t54/55 have autoloaders with a huge ammo carousel sitting right under the turret

[@thebarakz21]

If you only knew how shitty these trucks are..

[@caboose69]

Wouldnt be easier to bring a javelin than this shit?

[@bronco5385]

You mean, like the CLU and 3-5 missiles basic load carried by every single ICV and RV Stryker in the SBCT formation? Why yes, they ARE very effective. But the TOW has somewhat longer range and can engage before the targets enter engagement range for the Javelin. ....not that it matters, because Russian optical suites are physically incapable of detecting even minimally competently concealed Javelin teams beyond a kilometer. Even the vastly superior 3rd-gen thermal imagers on the A2 Abrams cannot detect infantry much beyond 1500 meters. By the time a tank gets that close, Javelin's already in the air and the tank's already dead.

[@PeninnahMarksz]

#9299913*

[@user-nj7tq8ts2v]

ок

[@stanleygutierrez9153]

search movement main girl clean important.

[@bestamerica]

' oh noo... stop watch this video at 020... dont need to show this video about military vehicle with armor weapons... dont do that... keep hide and private... enemy countrys can watchs this video, learns, copys, makes, trainnings, return revenges

[@Tagadarealty]

You have nothing to learn from a video of some guys fired some missile... Nothing secret here

[@kanekikaneki908]

La France va bientôt avoir mieux

[@user-cu6xc1jx9k]

Los

[@cansunay127]

No Show anything joust Thema notheron

[@argento1430]

😴😴😴😴😴

[@AlexSeligerX]

Праве задне колесо спустило, якщо хто помітив)

[@hpfs]

Подкачать забыли

[@karlmarxwasright6006]

hey russkie

[@AlexSeligerX]

@@karlmarxwasright6006 no

[@user-ln7wx5il9w]

الاسسستأذ // الدكتورت // كممال محمد آلنزار أحمد عبد الطألبأن و الطالبأني الهدايات الكل القوأت اني العم آلرىيس الجمهوريأت القدر كممأل النخبة الذهبيأت الحكمومكامات ششششمسسس المششششأت الشششهداآراءءء الشششركات المحمتدت اني عمم برهم صالح عمر خطاب الطألبأن و الطألبأ ني // ( حفظة اللة ورووعأورورت ) س خ. ج و. و. ن. @ شخصشسسييات الاسسواسسخسسسيخسسيييورخييييورور سسسسشخيييوروري @ اف الباآراءءء الام رأدشش و المششششأت ///// مرأد الاساسسيات حمكمومات البيأن البيأنيات دحام جأسسسم محمد أحمد خلف حسسسن العيكيدأي //عمر الغرأيراي العالم الطألبأن و الطألبأني و مأكو المصألحات سسحب الدو ل ابطال سمسمال اراسسنال الى العمصاصصمة المدييينة الجويأت الغواصصيات المشششأت الاسسستجرايجيت

[@kadu2be]

The striker was made to move infantry to the battle field. The striker is for protection same goes for the Bradley IFV. Our Army needs to take a hard look again on Russia's IFV family of vehicle murdering bad asses. The Russians equip thier IFV's with every gun or missile ya can put in those types of vehicle frames. Thier shit is just mean and rugged. They use thiers to fuck any standing enemy in front of them to the fullest. I like our striker but it looks weak in my opinion.

[@dancujo5591]

It says 2017. Takes a long time. Load up in a ditch, come out, take 2 shots and then what? Your in an open area now?

[@1moderntalking1]

wow they still using these bloated overweight trucks!

[@seojtoni7949]

Love watching military videos but still wonder why US still dont have those kind of devastating firepower the russians have

[@doogleticker5183]

And the Russkies show their latest gear??

[@bronco5385]

Whatever, slavaboo. I'll give you the (SHORAD) SAMs; the US never bothered to develop them because their air force is so superior they had no need to worry about contested airspace. Of course, on the LORAD side, Patriot and S400 are practically identical in performance (oh, except that Patriot has vastly superior ABM performance). As for ATGMs, Javelin> any manpack Russian unit to include AT-14; the Russians can't even make a functional fire and forget missile, it seems, because AT-14 is STILL a laser beam-rider which requires guidance from the launcher ALLLLLL the way to the target. AAMs? AIM-9X has greater range, maneuverability, seeker gimbal limits, CM resistence, and warhead performance than AA-11. AMRAAM -120C7 has greater range and kinetic performance than AA-12, and that's assuming the VVS even FIELDED AA-12, which they do not. They still use obsolete AA-10/ R-27ERs, drastically inferior to AMRAAM (to say nothing of Meteor!) Cruise missiles? Not really Russia's strong point. They have good ASCMs, but not LACMs. And unlike the newer US missiles, the Russian ones are a) not low-observable, and b) do not have adaptive on-board flight pathing to reroute around pop-up threats. Ballistic missiles? Not much functional difference between late-block ATACMS and SS-26. Iskander has slightly more range. Not exactly terribly pertinent, though. Better radars? You must be shitting me, because the Russians are barely struggling to get PESAs into service, while the US is putting AESAs into old F-15s (and every F-22 and F-35 and F/A-18). Hell, the Japanese are even putting AESA into their MISSILES. The Russians are nothing special.

[@Whiskey4myHoz]

Seoj Toni there's nothing in the Russian inventory that the US doesn't already have and with better quality, accuracy as and electrons

[@tarnapolsky4593]

Us has a dif military strategy, using a combination of overwhelming land air and sea power they dont need to have so many land systems because the us airforce will use precise air strikes to destroy all of that land equipment

[@saberboi1526]

What firepower are you trying to compare these to?

[@472water]

thats pretty useful. lots of enemy tanks like to get right in the open to confront overwhelming american firepower. what a stupid use of money like wtf

[@chongli8409]

...and you expect it to hover while destroying 1 tank per second with plasma cannon? wtf dude, just wtf

[@redegeldunit420]

The US Terrorist Regime likes to waste money on killing women and babies!

[@chaosXP3RT]

472water I'm sure you know better than the entire US military

[@472water]

chaosXP3RT the entire us military has entrenched interests that diverge from that of the public. lol i like how you couldnt even give me a reason as to why this was a good idea.

[@472water]

redegeldunit420 no they dont i sidnt say that i just said that this is a poor use of money much better to cut taxes

[@BigWater59]

Boring....real action please. Not training vids.

[@405boy4]

Not all that impressive if you ask me

[@rtth4378]

You're not inside the tank being hit.

[@OdinsHenchman]

Old ass tech

[@TheBestGamer319]

LoL what shell velocity.. its crap if enemy tank moving no worth shooting you gonna miss

[@TheOnlySgtRock]

Bosnian Boss the TOW missile is wire guided, meaning it can receive updated target information and change course up until the moment of impact. Even if the target moves, you can make the missle follow the target.

[@TheBestGamer319]

ahh yes autoaim.. im still in ww2 ;)

[@benakiba3292]

+Bosnian Boss hahahah ludakuuu

[@benakiba3292]

ne u NATO

[@TheBestGamer319]

Samson Labradorski stoo NATO je extra

[@VINCENTFWO999]

Vs russian terminator tank..... Stand no chance ... Just get fried like chicken ..

[@luisarruda3061]

VINCENTFWO999 The terminator will be destroyed by an ATGM from kilometers away, the crew will never know what hit them. Now, go cry in the corner.