Stryker Armored Fighting Vehicle Tactics

The only investment platform dedicated to art investing: www.masterworks.art/taskandpu...
“Net returns” refers to the annualized internal rate of return net of all fees and costs, calculated from the offering closing date to the sale date. IRR may not be indicative of Masterworks paintings not yet sold and past performance is not indicative of future results. See important Reg A disclosures: www.masterworks.com/about/dis...
I was deployed as a US army infantryman to Iraq in a Stryker brigade combat team so I actually have first hand knowledge and experience with its tactics capabilities, logistics concerns, training and of course many of its controversial weaknesses that we will get into. For once I’m qualified to speak on something! The United States of America recently announced they would send 90 of the Stryker Infantry Carriers to Ukraine and that’s no small amount, it's enough for basically a whole battalion of 1,000 troops.
Video Editing by: Michael Michaelides
Task & Purpose is a military news and culture oriented channel. We want to foster discussion about the defense industry.
Email [e-mail] for inquires.
#EXPLORE #WAR #ukraine

[@Taskandpurpose]

Maybe a Ukrainian soldier got my actual 1-111th old Stryker. The only investment platform dedicated to art investing: www.masterworks.art/taskandpurpose

[@timothypavlick76]

Cappy what do you say to Col. MacArthur and those other people who say that the war in Ukraine is being won by the Russians? Their arguments and data seem to make sense to me.

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

I remember signing for a Caiman+ in 2010 only to find it was the exact same one I had on my last deployment, but parked in JBB. Found my SOP book under the seat with my name on it. And then I remember signing it over to some Iraqi officer when we left forever at the end of OND in 2011. Who knows. Maybe I'll be re-mobilized and shooting at it in Iranian hands by 2025.

[@matthenderson345]

What’s the difference between the Stryker and the M1117s that were also sent?

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

@@matthenderson345 The M1117 Guardian (what we called the MP Cadillac) is not a troop hauler per se. It's EXTREMELY cramped inside if you've ever been in one. But I loved the almost barbarically simple 1940's era-tech turret packing a Mk19 and Ma Deuce. It's enough to do security overwatch during Checkpoint operations and run some on-road convoy security, but not much more.

[@dickdastardly488]

We're going to send them the trucks that GDLS taught us to beat the shit out of at the Gap.

[@Ikbeneengeit]

"What does it do?" "Everything except attacking, sir." "Excellent. Let's call it the 'Stryker'."

[@blackpowderriflehunter7573]

Agreed, they should have called it the "battle taxi".

[@druegnor1703]

~That one general "All armored vehicle with guns are TANKS"

[@McNubbys]

It's named after a pair of Medal of Honor recipients that had the same last name(Stuart S. Stryker and Robert F. Stryker)😊

[@SeanDTanker]

It can Attack As its quite Multi purpose it can kill a Tank,Aircraft,and Infantry

[@forzajuve4845]

maybe it's on strike and not working

[@Ludovit110]

The purpose of the slat armor is not simply to detonate the shaped charge further away - which wouldn't prevent the penetration - but to damage the cone of the shaped charge before the detonation, so it wouldn't form the penetrative jet once it detonates.

[@theellis8951]

In Afghan we had mine rollers to set off the mines early, but the enemy would just set the explosive closer in so when the mine roller hit the trigger the bomb was right under the hull of the truck, many lost vehicles due to this.

[@HollowBurden]

@The Ellis Quite true. Otoh, if a vehicle without minerollers hit these offset mines they often made it out relatively unscathed. Not a perfect solution, but it presented mine layers with a bit of a dilemma atleast.

[@michaelsibson7941]

Righteous thanks combined arms together mobility mutual support. The french a cars are fast and carry 90mm gun . Hunter killer heavy tank and bradleys. Some air cover?

[@robertpella2389]

@@michaelsibson7941 Yeah! Combined arms means Air Force nerds are a force multiplier also ! A super tucano maybe? just one pleasseee !

[@ernestpaul2484]

@@theellis8951 That is called adapting to the enemies TTP's. One of the things that many civilians didn't understand when the IED became popular and trendy was that its use wasn't an act of cowardice, it was an act of necessity. Knowing they couldn't go toe to toe, it was time to go and use guerilla tactics. The same type of tactics we in the US would use if an overwhelming ground force were to somehow manage to get boots on the ground here in the States. So changing the length of detonation was a no brainer once they saw the change in tactics. Never underestimate your enemy and their ability to adapt.

[@rickwightman2366]

The expertise he brings is valuable, easily differentiating from an armchair warrior, and making the channel worth watching. I always learn something from this above-average infantryman. Cheers from Canada.

[@ashtonv418]

Old ds/ds bradley unit combat medic here. Glad I found your channel and glad you got out alive. Your contribution to the military hardware and strategy conversation is greatly appreciated. In this vid, your Private vs Commander skits were hilarious : - )

[@yokotaashi]

Ya many tubers don't do the skits well but his are actually funny! I was a stryker combat medic myself and I remember sometimes we would drive past the motorpool full of old forgotten bradleys and think "man at least im not in one of those" ahaha

[@Sniperboy5551]

@yokotaashi If you think he’s funny, you should see Angry Cops!

[@JJ-bg1ym]

We got the Stryker up to 80mph in a chase south of Baiji Iraq. Their Caterpillar engines are incredible.

[@angelsalcido9449]

IRAQ. This is Ukraine. Strykers do not function well if at all in Arctic conditions

[@Josh-op8wj]

@@angelsalcido9449 source?

[@gryph01]

@@angelsalcido9449 That's a negative. The Stryker is based on the Canadian LAV III. That platform functions well in Arctic conditions. Besides, I would hardly call Ukraine as an Arctic zone.

[@angelsalcido9449]

@@Josh-op8wj I ran an evac platoon of strykers at fort wainwright Alaska for 3 years in -30 to -45f

[@angelsalcido9449]

@@gryph01 that's a negative ghost rider, strykers rely on roads. Take them up more north to Alaska and you'll see strykers cannot menuever in tundra, muskag, or snow. Only take a couple snow machines to decimate a battalion of strykers. The only thing strykers are good for in Arctic conditions are being a slightly warm place for troops to sleep.

[@SirRecon]

STRYKER units were the only units that gave me trouble when I was OPFOR at the NTC, good thermals, lotsa dismounts, they quickly rolled over desert terrain well over 45MPH, with great suspension.

[@wecanhelpnowatunited24]

Ok

[@ubaidullah2342]

Joke of century USA is fighting for peace😂😂😂😂

[@notcrazy6288]

@@ubaidullah2342 Religion of Peace 😂😂😂😂

[@unbiased1023]

I appreciate your more realistic perspective on the Stryker, accepting that it's not perfect, but also not useless as some say. Thanks Cappy.

[@Overunity357]

That was a great episode. I think Chris really enjoyed making this one as much as we loved watching it.

[@Taskandpurpose]

I did ! I could talk about the Stryker all day haha

[@YenZenBamboo]

Great episode. Nice

[@calholli]

@@Taskandpurpose If you think them sending the light weight/ light armor/ "air craft transferable" version was not intentional, then you're not paying attention. They are purposely sending them into the slaughter, so then we can go with yet another wave of escalation; again and again. They are here to spend more and more money, which will "justify" more and more budget allocations for new equipment. They DO NOT want to send in the big hammer meta to get the job done quickly. This is about the slow and steady burn of old equipment. They are not sent there for the purpose of winning.

[@cpt-cheese3489]

@@Taskandpurpose do it 🔫

[@jannarkiewicz633]

I was going to say almost the same thing.

[@jameshoopes6467]

You, of course, have great points given your substantial experience. My one caution is to not underestimate the Ukrainian military’s adaptability. They find amazing, novel ways to use much of what they’re supplied.

[@Taskandpurpose]

thanks! I was thinking of going more into this, like how Strykers could be used in new ways with drones, but I didnt want the video to get too too too long

[@timmoles9259]

Most of AFU personnel will have a heck of time learning US English manuals and tools. Who is going to process the NSN's parts and logistics? One thing I've seen about this war is the lack of maintenance. Might be fine for rugged Russian gear but not sensitive western equipment. M88 commander Desert Storm.

[@classifiedad1]

@@timmoles9259 Never underestimate Slavic field engineering. If they can crack and bypass John Deere’s DRM to fix their tractors, they probably can maintain the Stryker.

[@Shaneyesss]

@@Taskandpurpose I think a lot of people can listen to you talk about Strykers for hours and won't get bored, you could always make a part 2!

[@dwaneanderson8039]

@@timmoles9259 Luckily, a sizable percentage of Ukrainians can speak and read English.

[@kriscerosaurus]

Can't tell you how valuable the first-hand perspective is in fleshing out topics like this. Keep up the great work, bud.

[@martinenglish6641]

Being a retired Warrant Office for Armor maintenance and servicing at the depot level, I started my army career as a turret and systems technician and mechanic for the M1 Abrams tank, I was responsible for All armored, wheeled, or tracked vehicles, including the striker. I served mostly in Armored Cavalry units and was pivotal to Calvary Tactics to deploy a range of vehicles from HUMMVs to M1 Abrams Tanks. The number of parts and equipment needed to service many wheeled and tracked vehicles was a challenge, to say the least. I liked the Striker and the Bradly. By the time a Striker arrived at the depot, it was trashed and a good number of them were earmarked to be sent to the factory for a total rebuild and/or refit. We would pull the power pack and weapon systems out to service to go back in another vehicle as a quick field swap instead of trying to troubleshoot a power train issue. I was an engineer when I joined the ARMY and was enlisted as an Spc. 4. I knew I wanted to be a warrant officer so I declined officer candidate school. The ARMY tried to get me to go into OCS from the start and I nearly missed my window to go to warrant school. I liked my job and liked the hands-on of my job. If it was broken, I would fix it. I entered with 2 engineering bachelor's degrees and several more associate's degrees in the applied sciences of several maintenance disciplines. I retired with 2 master's and other degrees. I love hands-on work and school. I liked receiving a deadline vehicle and fixing it and watching it leave to go back on the line. The striker was and is a good vehicle. Just do not use it to go toe to toe with a tank. LOL.

[@68Tboy]

Repurposing broken or damaged vehicles is one of the US Army's secret weapons. Thank you for the work you did.

[@lesterburkes5962]

I deployed as a 63S heavy wheeled mechanic with the first stryker deployment in 2003. I love strykers and agree with everything you said here.

[@johnnycaps1]

Really nice to hear about some your personal experiences with the Stryker while you were in Iraq. So glad you made it back safely. I have a plastic model of the Stryker sitting on my book shelf. Although it seems this is one of your longer segments it seemed very short. Great job.

[@garethjones4742]

"You can make it go faster than that" The limiter of the aus army unimog was a literal bolt in the accelerator pedal. Smart drivers gave it a good few adjusting turns

[@joshlittle3613]

Where exactly is that bolt?

[@Caffeine_Addict_2020]

I'm sure removing it doesn't cause ANY issues, like engine overheating, or exponentially increased engine wear

[@WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq]

​@Caffeine addict 2020 But are you sure that matters more then taking a direct strike from artillery meant to bust a bunker under less the optimal circumstances, where your just trying to make do?

[@WhatHappenedIn-vt3vq]

​@Caffeine addict 2020 It might be unacceptable if you need to keep it in prolonged use, but the order is for fried orc not the occupation of supply routes this time and we're not planning on keeping thr old stockpile on reserve anymore. Their job is to do their job, get what they can done and hopefully return their driver home until a better peace keeper can take its place

[@commanderrazor]

Great vid, though I would provide a small correction, one Stryker soldier to another; overpressure absolutely was a problem. Got tagged by a SVBIED on RTE Tampa in Mosul that had about 400lbs of HE stuffed into it. I was driving, suddenly fireball took up a 4 lane road for a split second. That was enough to sheer through the combat locks of my driver's hatch. And I'm sure you remember what those latches look like; pretty thick pieces of steel. Popped hatches like a pressure cooker. Nobody in the vic bought it, so vic did her job, but unless there's been overhauls to that aspect of the platform's ruggedness since 2010, it's still something to bear in mind.

[@Relyt345]

The American Stryker is basically a replacement for the M113’s. It is a good vehicle, but it’s a transport vehicle, not a frontline combat vehicle. For the LAV/Stryker it’s not about the destination, it’s about the journey. Even the LAV3’s aren’t meant to be used like a Bradley, but it does make them more flexible and capable in unexpected situations than the base Stryker.

[@hatze4120]

God bless Switzerland for making the greatest APC ever...

[@nvelsen1975]

So.... how do you explain the M113 being used as an effective IFV during the Cherson counteroffensive? Look around you: It's not 1970. The M113 is not a thin aluminium box. They're proof against a lot AND most got cannons of the 20 or 30 mm variety that allow them to trade punches with BMPs and win. The Stryker has sufficient armour for the IFV role, and after that is a huge gap towards MBT levels of protection where more armour is basically detrimental: You won't ever defeat dedicated anti-tank weapons and you're already proof to anything that's not.

[@slkjvlkfsvnlsdfhgdght5447]

@@nvelsen1975 "You won't ever defeat dedicated anti-tank weapons and you're already proof to anything that's not." of course, so why exactly do they keep making heavily armored vehicles?

[@slkjvlkfsvnlsdfhgdght5447]

it is also a frontline combat vehicle, just not in open terrain. it is suitable for offensive operations in urban environments, especially counter-insurgency

[@ilikehardplay]

To put the Stryker (& M113) into historical context, It plays the same role as horse cavalry & mounted infantry during the American Civil War. It's a great way to move an INFANTRY force out of contact with any other force, skipping past strong-points to get around flanks and grab key terrain, or repositioning forces to block the enemy from doing the same......but is really unsuited for engaging any formed unit , which will maul it when its infantry is mounted unless completely surprised. The advantage of the Stryker is that it is wicked fast....and while not providing a lot of protection against armor, airpower, anti-armor, or heavy weapons, will shrug off infantry weapons and near misses by artillery for long enough to leave leg infantry in its dust.

[@randomvariable1836]

The Stryker is militarily just a really good horse, very capable yet very vulnerable.

[@JiveCinema]

Great analogy

[@specialnewb9821]

I keep thinking back to Ukraine's thunder runs in October where they did this with Humvees. Stryker seems like it would be an upgrade aftera break through when you want speed to keep spreading panic among the Russians.

[@majungasaurusaaaa]

Mobility is both an offensive and defensive asset. Don't get hit.

[@koghs]

Horses!

[@LordOceanus]

US army cavalry may be rolling in Bradley's but the Stryker is the true horse of the battlefield. Or more accurately an armored horse drawn carriage.

[@turkeytrac1]

Great vid, and your experience shows in your presentation. Thank you!

[@herrhaber9076]

"For once I'm actually qualified to speak on something" I laughed so hard ! :) Dont undersell yourself. You always do your research (somtimes very extensive and educational for us viewers) so your opinion or analysis is always interesting. Thank you for that !

[@caper2x]

Cappy, can you do an episode with the mix-and-match forces that the Ukrainians are receiving and the possibilities for synergy? Like matching Strikers with the French AMX10-RC armored cars and other wheeled armored vehicles.

[@TheRockofEasyCo]

It’s like the pro bowl over there, cool thought

[@bradsims7089]

I would like to see that too.

[@davidconnellan6875]

You know not all "All Star Teams" work out well together

[@pasquinomarforio]

The correct term for that is 'herding cats'.

[@wilfredoarmas_]

Thats a great idea!!!

[@beesod6412]

one of my favorite videos on the stryker, really appreciate your take on it and the humor was legit. Thanks Cappy!

[@tobiasfunke3357]

I was in a Striker unit, 2nd Calvary Regiment. The Stryker is very smooth!

[@Olddog1776]

VERY well done young man! I Love Hearing from someone who’s actually tried one of these things on. All other opinions are worthless as far as I’m concerned. You have a talent for this and I’m glad you found your way here!

[@loduke3905]

To be honest I've been shocked people aren't talking more about this. Strykers are amazing and they're sooo many variants that offer some great options for the Ukrainian's. Bradley's are great but strykers have their place and hold their own well, combine them all together and that's a winning scenario right there.

[@dominikmartinez7398]

Fuck no, I work with stykers and dragoon everyday and let me tell you, they're the worst thing we could have given them Them shits are gonna flatline leaving the motor pool

[@nationalsocialism3504]

Really expensive Artillery targets is all they are... if Strykers get anywhere never the frontline then they will just cease to exist

[@SFCzeus202]

​@@nationalsocialism3504Exactly right. These guys are totally delusional... These vehicles (as well as western tanks)only work well with air superiority. In Ukraine they will burn real fast.

[@lanceb7288]

Why would you say it's amazing if it's never entered battle?

[@wilfdarr]

Yup, way better than the 113. It's not a Bradley and shouldn't be confused with one.

[@ckm-mkc]

They already have the Australian Bushmasters deployed in combat, I'm sure they have already figured out any weaknesses in this type of vehicle. The Bushmasters were used in the Kharkiv offensive.

[@stinkypete891]

And got destroyed in the Kherson Offensive 🇺🇦🤡🇺🇦

[@sinisterisrandom8537]

@@stinkypete891 says the country that donated free equipment to the Ukrainians. Who mind you also trains their troops for a few hours at best cough cough aging planes cough cough.

[@johnlavery3433]

You’re talking about the Kharkiv offensive that saw the Ukrainians utterly humiliate the Russian army

[@stinkypete891]

Bushmasters got bushwhacked cough cough worthless junk cough cough

[@stinkypete891]

@@johnlavery3433 sure dude 🇺🇦🤡🇺🇦

[@VideoClam]

I drove for nine hours today and the entire time I was hoping a new Task and Purpose episode would drop, but alas it never did while I was on the road. Get home, pour a drink, sit down at the laptop and BAM. THERE IT IS. 30 minutes, on the STRYKER, your WHEELS BRO. It's been worth the wait and I congratulate you on the upward trajectory of your channel. Keep up the great work.

[@TheLuketh1990]

This aged well

[@clacks78]

Considering your history with the Stryker, this was an incredibly objective dissertation of its capabilities. Thank you.

[@sergeigogenko919]

The main advantage Stryker has over a BTR or BMP is night vision and thermal imagery. In a defensive role it would identify enemy troops at a longer distance, suppress them or relay information to dismounts or artillery. In offensive it’s use is much limited, but it can be used to conduct night operations. But as you’ve said, it require a great amount of planning to get things right.

[@kaulumapaulus9234]

No it won't... 1 word,, terrain... Its not Iraq....

[@dogetothemoon223]

The new BMP versions are equipped with good quality thermals and the Russians are currently equipping their old tanks with low cost, older gen thermals. They are good for detecting targets at about 2km and from what I heard, most of the engagements happen at a much closer range. The Stryker would make a difference if they would start receiving hundreds of them. But so far, the Ukrainians have been getting a handful of this, a handful of that.

[@prolifeunity]

The main disadvantage of a Stryker is that it will be destroyed from 30 - 100 mi away before they can even get close to Russian troops.

[@Vinter9k]

@@prolifeunity Nah, we haven't been seeing a lot of that, bud

[@michaelswagson4457]

Btr alsp has thermals lol

[@specialnewb9821]

I watched the whole thing and didn't even feel the time pass. You talked for 30 minutes and it was great the whole time. Awesome work Cappy!

[@viewer3412]

Cappy is getting into honest-to-god journalism. The extended clip gave him a chance to stretch out his wings in reporting.

[@Michael-dr6ev]

Hope the editing helped! 😉

[@user-qr2gd7me6c]

A big thumbs up ! Excellent introduction to the Stryker for us airborne types.

[@bryancook7398]

Small error, none of the LAV I AVGP models had a 25mm autocannon. The Grizzly had a M2 browning, Cougar had a 76mm gun and the Huskey had a ring mounted MAG. the 25mm Bushmaster was added on the LAV-25, which was the first of the LAV II.

[@just_a_turtle_chad]

After losing thousands of troops and hundreds of tanks the Russians managed to capture the bus stop in the outskirts of Bakhmut. This bus stop is an important traffic hub, 4 times a day a bus is driving from there to Kiev. ^^

[@Valorius]

It only took 100,000+ dead Ukrainians to defend that bus stop before losing it.

[@marniusvanderlubbe]

@@Valorius it must be so sad to actually think russia isn't just sending the last young generation of men they will ever have to die for a former KGB agent's ego and delusional dream of recreating the Soviet union

[@kameronjones7139]

​​@@Valorius what? That isn't from one area but the whole war and even then there isn't much supporting it

[@ahsokatano5798]

@@Valorius Zero evidence for such numbers, a single retracted sentence from Leyen or a Turkish newspaper claiming they share Mossad statistics is not evidence, show me your factually supported data.

[@ahsokatano5798]

@@Valorius How’s the attack on Vuhledar going? Are you volunteering for the 155th marine brigade by any chance? I heard they are in serious need of strong men for their glorious advance.

[@williambarnebee40]

AAV-P7. The book says it has room for 24. We took that as a challenge.

[@thomaspinney4020]

One of your best postings yet. Well done, Cappy, Well Done

[@dalestark3343]

Nice in depth report Mr. CC. Keep up the good work!

[@patricklyman864]

Sounds like the Stryker became the NEXGEN of the M113's only with tires instead of tracks. The Ukrainians have a lot of those, so I think they'll figure out the Stryker's uses too.

[@theellis8951]

The Stryker came about because of our dessert wars they will not survive in Ukraine period

[@capt5656]

@@theellis8951 the Stryker brigade was a concept born before the US got stuck in COIN for decades. It has a specific role in LSCO, and it will do it better than MTLBs and BTRs that Ukraine is using (both of which are barely 7.62 all round protected)

[@theellis8951]

@@capt5656 then why are we fazing them out?

[@tranvinhnhat1289]

@@theellis8951 you mean “fading” ?

[@cacogenicist]

@@tranvinhnhat1289 - They mean "phasing."

[@SubvertTheState]

I was on the same deployment with 28th ID. I am also biased toward the Stryker ICV. They do not stand up to pressure plate IEDs or tank mines, but direct small arms or indirect fire I felt alot safer. And they are effing fast haha.

[@richardthomson4693]

yeah australia withdrew their LAV's due to poor IED resistance, I liked the Aslav and I would have no issues if I had to go into in a classic war with it, but felt safer in the bushmaster for COIN type operations

[@MIALanfear]

Very informative, thank you for your hard work.

[@pickleballer1729]

I love hearing about things from the standpoint of someone who has actually used it, and from people who can talk about nuances, rather than just a shallow "thumbs up" or "thumb down" raring. You've done both. Thanks.

[@nicholasblack8515]

The m1133 mev variant Stryker was a phenomenal ground ambulance. The Stryker has its place in a fight, much like the hmmwv. It's not to replace heavy armor, but to supplement it. The ability to flex reinforcements quickly to hot spots, or as light reconnaissance, or for hip shot mortar targeting.

[@angelsalcido9449]

Not in Arctic conditions

[@nicholasblack8515]

@@angelsalcido9449 I never used one in artic conditions, so I'll take your word for it.

[@yokotaashi]

Hell yea I was a cav medic too those things were awesome! Except when you had to drive through mud. Biggest weakness IMO

[@yokotaashi]

@@angelsalcido9449 I bet they have a variant for that

[@puterausman7682]

The only reason that M113 mev didn't go boom is that the Russians didn't shoot at it while it sped up the road, Russia saw the red cross on the side of that APC and honored the no-shooting at the ambulance.

[@Morpheus187]

Thank you for your service and your videos. Keep doing what you’re doing.

[@LomLaLay]

I normally dont comment this kind of videos. But this was actually very good with pros and cons. 10 out of 10 :)

[@T8RTOTS]

Chris thank you for your service and the videos. 👍

[@paulwilson8672]

The problem with the getto modifications is that exceeds design limits of the vehicle. But you do what you have to do to be able to come home. The Army may have thought of this, but approach it like air defense. Air Defense is set up in layers. I would use armor and armored vehicles in lawyers. You would need tanks, Bradly's and strikers. The strikers would be in different configurations. Some with lasers for drones, some with chain guns, some TOW's, and some with 50 cals. Strikers linger in the back to rapidly advance when it is advantageous. Once Armor and Bradly's punch a hole the Striker can take advantage of that to get to rear area targets. They can also be use to rapidly regress, with the tanks and Bradly's being used as rear guards. You would know more about this. Great Video's!!!!

[@Taskandpurpose]

very true, it's interesting to see how little the tolerance and leeway is , 10,000 - 15,000 extra lbs of cage armor and skirts and the thing is a real struggle bus

[@paulwilson8672]

@@Taskandpurpose Think of what happen when they upgraded the Humvee's. When they added armor the frames were cracking. It goes back to requirements. Need a requirement for extra weight for Getto modifications.

[@bkane573]

Still danced rings around everything else. Mraps getting sunk in mud we thought was a puddle. Hmvvs rolling over because they couldn’t make turns…. Meanwhile the Stryker just went from being a track start to a linemen. Still stupidly fast.

[@nvelsen1975]

@@paulwilson8672 That's because the humvee was a poor design to begin with. In their original form I think they weighed more than 50% more than our old cars while offering less protection AND less fuel efficiency. If it's then 2005 and you HAVE to work with such a shoddy platform and ask "Hey AM General, it's 2005, you guys want to step into the 1990's in terms of technology?" and the answer is "No, that would mean less payouts for our shareholders", then you're double-handicapped. We didn't really use something like that. It was either the cars or proper armour like the Patria, which although designed to transport dwarves does shrug off more damage than an uparmoured humvee does. It always seemed to me like the US fell into a mediocrity trap: They didn't have a real 'car type car' with only nominal armour for fast reliable low-fuel transport because the humvee is too heavy and had some armour AND they didn't really have light armour for against smallarms because the humvee had to be made to fit into that role too. I mean, can't say I liked getting shot at in those cars when the risk assessment went to hell, but there's no denying they hold a significant advantage over the humvee in terms of contact with locals, vision, speed and logistics. If we expect worse, roll out something that's safer than a humvee.

[@bkane573]

@@chuckyxii10 You don't put them in the same BDE obviously

[@CharliMorganMusic]

Yeah, as we all know, the biggest problem with the humvee was that it wasn't a tank.

[@TheBooban]

Well, frankly, all the necessary pimping means something is seriously wrong and much money is being wasted. If they need APCs as tough as tanks, then just do it. Like the Israelis have done. They use the chassis of MBTs for their APCs. The generals are completely wrong in their doctrine and budget if the grunts had to pimp out their Strykers like they once did their humvees.

[@koghs]

That it was a giant mine and IED magnet*

[@Seth9809]

@@TheBooban You have no idea what you are talking about and are vastly over-estimating your own understanding. Every single nation in the world either has a vehicle identical to the Stryker, a worse counterpart, or nothing. Covering an Abrams to an HAPC is an unbelievably bad idea. It would require 10 times the work to get it to work, and it would just break bridges and fall off cliffs in the Middle East / Ukarine. Even the Bradleys were mostly shit during the Insurgency period.

[@chrissmith7669]

A vehicle never meant for the role it was used in.

[@oldphart-zc3jz]

The problem was every prior lesson was IGNORED including the gun trucks of Viet Nam. HMMWV was never designed for urban combat but senior idiots refused to send armor to Mogadishu because it might hurt the feelings of people we had to kill. That lesson was ignored and more Americans died because until Force Protection (with South African inspiration) build MRAP on its own initiative there was no alternative. Every combat vehicle should be armored to AFV standards because there is no front line, and that includes ubiquitous SHORAD now drones are a threat.

[@alexyandukin768]

Your knowledge of these beautiful war machine is beyond impressive

[@kermitcook8498]

CAPPY! What a concept. Personal knowledge. Almost nuttin' beats it. Love your work, man. Much better than a sharp stick in the eye. As R LEE might have said, "Outstanding! Semper Fi. Carry-on. " I'll just say I couldn't have done it better. No, seriously, I don't know diddly 'bout no Strykers. Well done.

[@neighborhoodjackal]

I think the Stryker could also be a valuable asset to Ukraine's Special Forces. It could provide a fast and quiet (very) lightly armored vehicle for raids and reconnaissance. In this role it could also be supported by the French AMX-10 RC to provide additional firepower. They still would lack the armor and firepower to face off against tanks or larger formations. They might be able to avoid them though trough an intensive use of small UAVs, night vision capability and their high mobility. The benefits of dedicating a small number of vehicles to increasing the effectiveness of your SF could outweigh the relatively little costs of decreasing the number of troops you can transport in a larger operation. SF would only need a couple of vehicles. The Stryker in this role wouldn't be used in the static warfare of attrition in the Donbas. It would be used ahead of an armored assault in the south towards the Sea of Azov. A problem for this use of the Stryker could be logistics for a small group far away from the main group of Strykes. The need to train together with the western trained crews would take their SF out of action for some time. Integrating the soldiers from different units could also be a challenge. But Ukraine has been very creative so far.

[@trevorshea1930]

missile sponges. great vehicle but not enough to make a difference for Ukraine. they've taken too many casualties and can't sustain their losses.

[@timmoles9259]

What an IR target.

[@jimmysbell6226]

@@jack99889988 dude are you stupid? You do realize that BTR-4 and BTR-82 are equipped with a 30mm auto cannon that was made for infantry fighting role, while the Stryker it more like troop carriers and infantry supporting role.

[@clintonj5954]

They are used for raids

[@clintonj5954]

@@timmoles9259 might not look too different from a BTR on thermal...

[@bryanmcdermott4204]

Greatly appreciate your use of personal anecdotes in regard to speed, quality of ride, and best way to deploy. Also, it's always good to see the MST3K shirt in your ad.

[@michaelmarkspersonal]

Well done and very informative!

[@Blacksun169]

I was a medic in Iraq and rode the Mev and Atgm platforms in 2007-2009, and I hated the thin slots for driving and often times soft brakes but it was a fun and cozy vehicle lol

[@nickjohnson811]

Your presentations are really excellent - much more useful information without fluff than most other KZbin videos.

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

It's a less flawed MRAP. Because it won't roll over if you so much as look at a dirt road. Use accordingly.

[@TheBooban]

No. MRAP has V shaped hull. Stryker had to retrofit this and many still do not have the V hull and are weaker than MRAPs.

[@theellis8951]

@@TheBooban I think the USA wants to faze out Strykers so we are giving them ones from active units, were are the 90 coming from

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

@@TheBooban You don't say.

[@danl.909]

That was terrific. Thanks!

[@robertdutcher8081]

I finally had to sub. Your videos are so well done and informative. I don't often sub and hit notification. Job well done sir.

[@palmermonsen9098]

Loved the stories! Thanks for your service.

[@charlesrichardson8635]

You did it, Cappie! I asked for this and you did it! I wanted to know how Stryker fit in and now I have at least minimal level! AND we got to see videos of you in service and the sergeant who is always yelling at you in your videos! I hope the slat ammo is going over and that AFU doesn't try using them like Bradley's as your sergeant said because we don't want 9 baby Cappies getting killed at a time! I was impressed that you could pass a security review EVEN with your Toyota Camry! It will be interesting if the AFU can use the Stryker in a way that maximizes it mobility and keeps it safe. You did mention that it can take 152 mm shrapnel which is one of the most important ability since it would probably take 30 or 40 shells blowing up nearby, the Russians have no idea how to fire precision.

[@JoeSpeed]

Chris’s best episode! Incredibly enjoyed it.💯

[@deathangellink]

as a ex- serv-op for the LAV-25, one of the way we had to have a slight advantage in case of armored vehicle or facing a reinforced building was to carry in the back a carl gustav recoiless gun.

[@CharliMorganMusic]

The name of the game with the Stryker is operational mobility.

[@theellis8951]

I have seen Strykers cut in half during my deployments

[@Goerge-lu3ok]

US should somehow pass the knowhow of every vehicle to ukranian officers either by deploying military advisors directly to ukraine or with extensive training. This is something completely new to ukranian military and mistakes could lead to high casualties

[@capt5656]

@@theellis8951 and the Ukraine war has seen literally every Tank and AFV in use cut in half. What about it?

[@werner.x]

@@theellis8951 What's your point? You'll see Leos turn to graves soon too. Combat survival time is already part of the construction design. If an anti tank missile evades air defence, a leopard is gone too. If soldiers want to die old, they better not fight. Everybody knows the grinding style, Russia fight their wars. So, if you want to make a valid point - should the west retreat, wait and see, what Russia makes out of a successful attack or do we think the tactics of letting the grinding of both sides go on until Russia also gets weak enough for negotiations is a better one? And yes, we surely will see, that all of them 90 Strykers including their crews will be completely used up by then too. Let's hope, they all die for a good reason.

[@JamesPhieffer]

In terms of the need to go with lighter weaponry on the Stryker to maintain air transport capability, it's interesting that the Canadian Army has similar requirements, and no equivalent to the C-5 (just C-17s and C-130s) but equipped its LAV-IIIs with a 25-mm autocannon. There's been a lot of pressure put on the Canadian government to donate a number of our LAV-III and LAV-6s. It will be interesting to see if those are eventually sent.

[@wilfdarr]

How much cabin space does the turret displace?

[@nvelsen1975]

And justified pressure too. We sent the YPR-765 (uparmoured and ussually upgunned M113) and those made incredibly effective IFVs during the Cherson counteroffensive. Most of what we sent was the PRI variant with a 25 mm cannon. They have everything an IFV needs: It's proof against smallarms, shrapnel etc, it's tracked to go offroad and avoid minefields, it has enough firepower to trade punches with anything short of an MBT and win, and nothing short of MBT levels of armour will ever defeat dedicated anti-armour weapons so more armour would be useless anyway. A concept furhter illustrated by the humourously-named PRAT. Basically the same vehicle except there's two TOW missiles strapped to the turret and it's a dedicated tank hunter. It can deal with anything it meets, and doesn't need more armour anyway.

[@jordansmith4040]

A number of brand new LAV 6s were sent. A small number, but some were sent. Likely, they will keep them with the strykers for heavier firepower.

[@alexdunphy3716]

​@@nvelsen1975 not justified. They shouldn't send anymore weapons. We need them and it's just leading to more dead Ukrainians in the end

[@alexdunphy3716]

​@@nvelsen1975 do you have any idea how many people Ukraine lost trying to take back Kherson??? It was not an effective offensive

[@ghemminger1]

I was in the directorate of training at Knox in the late 90s when this came out. The infantry school at Benning was the proponent for the vehicle and to not mount a 25 on top. There was some discussion for the reason that during the first gulf war, the Bradley's did too much fighting instead of being an infantry maneuver vehicle.

[@JnSobre]

Probably they did much fighting with the Bradley because it was used as an infantry Fighting vehicle, not an infanty maneuver vehicle... just say.

[@leewood331]

When you are moving and have Iraqi foot running all over with RPGS you better shoot.

[@oldphart-zc3jz]

Reality doesn't care about doctrine.

[@ghemminger1]

@@oldphart-zc3jz what we wrote was directly from what units did and do based on field maneuvers, testing, lessons learned, sme interviews with NCOs and EMs

[@paulkelly9250]

Thanks for your humble expertise and your service.

[@user-gs6bc4kz2x]

I like the use your guest suggested for offense: follow armored formations through a breach and help consolidate gains. Sounds like the use for patrols along supply lines was a perfect fit for it.

[@fallinginthed33p]

Strykers protected by Bradleys?

[@sanityunknown6958]

I was a Stryker MEV driver for a while when I was in, this was like, 2020-2021 that I focused entirely on driving. DVE was very good for me personally. Could tell the difference between fresh tire tracks and hold, and I had enough visual to safely drive in pouring rain with all the hatches shut and no TC.

[@fluffybunnyslippers2505]

The APC version of the LAV in Australia is called the "AUSLAV" it also lacks the turret mounted cannon that appears only in the "recon" Variant here in Aus.

[@janakbahadursharumagar154]

Really, 1 Kornet ATGM & Job is done Comrade

[@alexpascal5403]

Yo. That 10 seconds of your experience. Thank you for your service to our country.

[@johnknapp952]

I think for anti-armor you're going to rely more on the infantry squads and their ATGM's that they carry in the vehicle.

[@Caffeine_Addict_2020]

I was going to say - the entire point of the Stryker appears to be that it is not burdened by the systems required for anti-armor capability, and so it excels in an anti-infantry focus

[@scotthazelton519]

Thanks for sharing Cappy

[@STB-jh7od]

In 2001, I was stationed with soldier reclassing from Cav Scout to Intel, and his previous unit had the one used to test the different vehicles vying for the Stryker contract. He said that straight up the LAV was much better than all the other vehicles submitted for testing.

[@garrettharriman6333]

The Striker seems great for counterinsurgency operations. I'm not convinced it's the weapon for near-peer conflict.

[@dmoney8602]

What the fuck do you know?

[@capt5656]

near-peer conflict where the peer is using the far worse protected BTR as a frontline AFV. I really don't understand where this thought comes from. The MOWAG family the Stryker originated from is literally a cold war design, and thus built with the soviet army in mind. Built for COIN my ass

[@displacedyankee7819]

Got to ride in Strykers alot when my reserve psyop unit got to support them in sadr city. They even pulled my maxx pro out of a median when I got it stuck one day. They were great guys to work with.

[@XenophonAnabasis]

Fantastic work brotha, i was in 2scr you gave a really good analysis.

[@callenclarke371]

Excellent content.

[@jjmbeausoleil]

Canada gave 39 of the new super bison LAV. Canadians just say the word Lav as opposed to saying each letter L.A.V. Which could mix with the strykers depending on their armaments configuration.

[@the1truth517]

When in doubt, whatever happens, I'm sure that we have some of the best combat hardened strategists doing joint planning that you can't find in books. People who know how to highlight the strengths and turn anything into a force to move forward, hold the line, or bound backwards. No one thought thunder runs was even an option except for them. I'm also prettttyyy sure there's a variant for IEDs now too - with V-hulls.

[@jonbong8547]

Our man really defended the first highway, what a hero

[@nigeldeforrest-pearce8084]

Excellent and Outstanding Analysis!!!!

[@eric8515]

I was proud too of served in a Stryker unit In the 28th ID , I understand the capabilities and limitations too these vehicles. hope it works well for those boys !

[@bdub0983]

During the battle of sadr city I saw many a Stryker come in burnt to a crisp. Most everyone inside usually survived and hopped to a different vehicle. But as soon as it started taking fire, it had a tendency to actually catch fire. Soldiers were terrified to go out in them and it wasn't really useful for the small, narrow streets of the city.

[@ironmantooltime]

A bit better than a humvee though

[@commanderrazor]

Stryker vet myself, and I know we were able to get our vics into places like Dead Girl Road in Baghdad okay enough (Sadr City was a shitshow for my unit, however, we got multiple vics stuck in the mud around that place in a single night once). We were able to go most places the humvees could, though certainly not all. And going by what I saw in Baqubah, I'd say the Brad was more vulnerable to the nasty AT-grade IEDs AQIZ and company set up all over Baqubah after one of 1st Cav's BCTs basically handed half the city to them. Stryker wasn't intended to handle AT mines, but it had a generous enough clearance and robust enough transmission and other things underneath that unwittingly helped a bit. What really started fucking us up was EFPs handed to the insurgents by Iran. That's when we resorted to strapping fuel/water cans full of mud to the lower sections of slat and do the sandbags and kevlar blanket treatment that Cappy brought up. As for catching fire, it normally wasn't a problem for us unless the engine got fucked and/or rounds cooked off. Had that happen to the vic I was crewing in Anbar.

[@bdub0983]

@@commanderrazor I saw so many come in after being hit (they were a different company so idk exactly what happened) but they ALL were fuckin cooked. There at cop Callahan.

[@bdub0983]

@@commanderrazor where were you at during sadr city? I was at cop Callahan. Place was a shithole but I've stayed in Worse.

[@commanderrazor]

@@bdub0983 , my unit didn't have it as an AO (we got whored out to everyone else's AOs within Baghdad, but based in Camp Taji), but we supported some shit there, though didn't push in much. IIRC, we did that out of COP Apache. 2007 is a long ass time ago.

[@BrutalHamlet]

"He drove like he was nearly blind" had me laughing really hard.

[@dab42bridges80]

Comprehensive overview, thanks.

[@RaulFelixINC]

I drove Styrkers in Iraq. I love that thing. I'm glad the Ukraine's are getting them!

[@Johnny_Kanuk]

Back in '04 to '06 I hauled drive train parts for the Striker from London, ON, Canada down to Fort McClellan in Anniston, AL. Hope they help Ukraine out and they get them in time.

[@Starsky3022]

The Stryker seems to me like a vehicle that would be great to have to counter an insurgency, but in a peer-to-peer conflict it looks like it would probably be relegated to defensive operations and mostly as a combat taxi

[@orlock20]

WW1 tanks weren't much and since the Russians like WW1 tactics, this vehicle might be good enough for fast penetration to get to the enemy's rear, especially at night.

[@jakemonkey7]

People need to remember that Strykers are all about the operational and strategic mobility but otherwise are essentially light infantry. Think of them as the equivalent of WW2 motorized infantry or even the early mechanized infantry (when their vehicles couldn't really stop anything larger than small arms fire) Their job is to move faster than anyone else and then stop short of any combat zone or occupy ground before anyone else can get there and then fight as light infantry. If they are to fight with the Strykers then they are only really meant to engage other motorized infantry since they are supposed to get to where they are going long before any heavier units arrive

[@clutteredchicagogarage2720]

I have no idea what I'm talking about since I never served in the military. With that said, I'm going to weigh in with some thoughts because, hey, this is KZbin. When Ukrainians liberated Kharkiv, I remember seeing footage of lots of infantry troops being moved quickly with Toyota pickup trucks behind enemy lines. I'd imagine that the stryker could be an upgrade here. Once Ukraine can pierce through lines with Leopards and Bradleys and they mostly secure an area, I wonder if they could move large numbers of infantry troops through the compromised lines to sometimes get behind enemy dugouts and attack weaker defensive positions. I do worry that Ukraine will face huge mine fields when they launch their southern offensive, and I'd probably rather be in a stryker with sandbags than a Toyota pickup or Humvee when trying to navigate through an area that might be mined. I guess. If I were in a stryker crew, I'd also be pretty worried about getting hit by an RPG or kornet, but I think kornet missiles will even be a threat to Leopard 2 tanks. When I hear former soldiers from the USA and other NATO countries sometimes analyze the matchup between Ukraine's new military vehicles and Russian IFVs and tanks, one thing that came to my mind several times is that Ukraine just doesn't have the resources that a full NATO army would have. These guys have to improvise a lot. I HAVE seen some videos of Ukrainian infantry riding around in pickup trucks with machine guns in the back. So is a stryker the perfect platform for an offensive -- probably not, but Ukraine's other alternatives aren't necessarily better. At some point, they just need a lot of vehicles to move around a lot of troops, and something military-grade is better than that pickup truck with the machine gun in back or a van. The other thing that I think we may not always consider -- although I could be wrong about this -- is that I think Ukraine may, at times, not be facing Russia's latest BMP2 terminator and their upgraded T72s. There may be plenty of battles in which Ukrainians manage to knock out some of Russia's newer vehicles from a distance with a variety of systems, and then they might be storming Russian positions where they're facing infantry with RPGs plus some already-broken-down tanks and IFVs. In these cases, I think speed could give Ukrainians a big advantage. Defeat the best Russian armor with drone recon + artillery + javelins + TOW missiles + Leopard 2 main guns from long range. Create a weak spot in the defensive line. Then quickly drive large numbers of infantry past the first layers of defenses and put some Russian infantry into a cross-fire to encircle them. If Ukrainians don't have strykers for these roles, I think a lot of guys would probably be forced to resort to pickup trucks. I bet we'll still see videos of Ukrainian soldiers moving quickly through enemy lines in pickup trucks at some point in the Spring or Summer. Otherwise, your analysis of how it could be used for troop evacuation makes a lot of sense to me. I've seen Ukrainians using vans and SUVs for evacuation, and the stryker sounds like it would be an upgrade.

[@Mortablunt]

You must not have paid much attention to what happened last fall. Russian flexible defense doctrine is built entirely around being able to deal with this sort of attack. It combines fixed hard points with armored and aerial reaction elements. The main defense are the infantry positions which have fortification and an internal supply of weapons. They are mutually supporting fire bases and not a continuous trench network . Their main weapon is calling for artillery. These hard points are quite resilient which encourages bypassing them. Forces which bypass these are targeted for interception by armor and air forces. And moving rapidly to get out of the artillery calzones enemy forces on the attack make themselves very vulnerable to being flanked and engaged from defilade by the reaction elements. Due to the high mobility posture attacking elements need to be in order to get past the first layer they are exceptionally vulnerable here. If they go into a combat posture to be ready for the army response then they slow down enough to become vulnerable to artillery again. And if they decide to stay mobile and penetrate deeper than they run up against the actual rear defensive line which is a network of fortified trenches. This defensive line comes with heavy weapons, artillery kill zones, and also reaction elements which are already on their way. The Russian flexible defense is a series of dilemmas and multilayered options which all forces any attacker to choose to make a cell phone or bowl to at least one measure in order to combat at least one of the others. And because it offers fewer fixed targets and an array of options for responses it is very difficult to crack successfully. At no point is the Russian defense concentrated into a definitive position which needs to be cracked in any one spot as much of it is mobile and can also be quickly evacuated. And if any position is put a fight it is well supplied and also has heavy weapons support. This is how we saw during the fall so many Russian positions seemingly get surrendered and cut off but still hold for prolonged periods of time before either emerging victorious or being successfully rescued by relief forces. This was how also how it seemed Ukrainian forces could get deep behind lines very easily but then fail to hold anything.

[@nanObytez-kb5ru]

As someone who used to drive the German GTK Boxer I can emphasize with almost everything that was pointed out here. The Boxer shares almost all its strengths and weaknesses with the Stryker. It's an absolutely fantastic vehicle in counter-insurgency operations. I absolutely wouldn't take it anywhere near an actual frontline. Most of what both the Stryker and the Boxer excel at within the setting of a traditional war can be performed almost as well at considerably lower cost in material and maintenance by trucks. I'd feel a lot better even having the limited protection of the Stryker while shifting troops around behind the frontlines rather than an unarmored truck but at the en of the day neither will survive getting shot at for long by the ordnance even just a platoon of modern infantry would have at its disposal.

[@brunonikodemski2420]

Several comments. I am one of the original design engineers on the Gen-1 and -2 LAVs, before the name change. During development we tried all sorts of variants of guns, missiles, IR sights, etc. The 105 was a total loser, and it actually rolled over a vehicle in a river, when firing sideways. Out test teams refused to be in the vehicle if it was being tested in this mode, and the firing was done remotely, using a cable. 30 & 40's were tried, but had various issues. The best ever cannon on the LAV's was an Israeli hypervelocity 75, which could kill any piece of armor then on the battlefield. The TOW versions seemed to work, but had limited range since wire guided. This was tried for air-defense also, but again too limited range. The early LAVs had a hydraulic power turret system, whose noise was so loud that the tankers got deaf. Our electric-drive turret solved some of these problems, and improved the cannon accuracy. Also, we tried various night sights, and the I2Ts had greater range and could work without IR heat signatures from the target. However these had major blooming problems during the daylight, and damage, to the point where they could not be used in any day or low-level lighting. Iraqui's defeated these with simple fires. The original versions were supposed to be air transportable on C130's. After our company abandoned these programs, your vehicles seem to have acquired some kind of mutant designs, which have almost changed the vehicle to some kind of never-ending species, whose evolution is driven by ideas which someone pulled out of their brain. The only thing good now is the road-capability, and basic reliability. Everything else is a crap-shoot.

[@alexbuckenham1663]

Cappy is an above-average infantryman on this one. Way to go Cappy Hooah

[@sonar357]

There's also the API rounds (Raufoss) for the M2HB which can penetrate 11mm or armor, and make mincemeat of anyone on the other side

[@browntigerus]

Pretty cool, thanks.

[@herrlogi]

thanks for adding info in meters too!

[@maxschmiemann6623]

Regarding a combined force with other vehicles, how do you think the French AMX-10RC would match with this in a grouping, tactically? Strong mobile force, or mismatch of assets?

[@deansmits006]

I could see the amx supporting light infantry, providing a big punch when needed

[@blackstone777]

100% spot on. Stykers with the AMX-10s make complete sense.

[@kenhelmers2603]

Thanks Chris :)

[@rowlandisbeautiful]

Excellent report.

[@wouven4517]

How did it go?????

[@cleoarchwhiza9006]

I saw 1 got stuck in a trench.