Stryker Armored Fighting Vehicle Tactics 

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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 : - )

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

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

"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

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.

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.

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.

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.

Chris thank you for your service and the videos. 👍

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

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.

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.

Very informative, thank you for your hard work.

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.

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

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.

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

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!

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

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!

Thanks for sharing Cappy

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

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.

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.

Well done and very informative!

Thanks for your humble expertise and your service.

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

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

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

Comprehensive overview, thanks.

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

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!!!!

That was terrific. Thanks!

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.

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.

Loved the stories! Thanks for your service.

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

Chris’s best episode! Incredibly enjoyed it.💯

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.

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

Excellent report.

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.

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.

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.

thanks for adding info in meters too!

Excellent and Outstanding Analysis!!!!

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

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.

Excellent review

Excellent content.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

Pretty cool, thanks.

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?

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.

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

"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 !

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

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.

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

Thanks Chris :)

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

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 !

Really, 1 Kornet ATGM & Job is done Comrade

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.

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. ^^

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

Awesome video. I was in Iraq 2005 when they started to arrive. 👍👍👍

Hello there Mr Infantryman. Good vehicle i see you drive uh i mean your with this tanks. You did pass background check thats a plus👍. May the force be with you 👊🙏👍

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 RU-vid. 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.

Hello Cappy, can you check to see if Textron is researching transitioning its CT ammunition for the 6.8 mm to a similar concept for 155 mm artillery shells? The technology is brilliant and would solve the issue of using 19th century technology for artillery ammunition production.

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

Thanks!

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

I think the Stryker would be good for exploitation roles. Have the armor punch a hole in the line, and have the strykers run through to deposit troops to create roadblocks and general havoc behind the lines.

In love that your officer is a specialist. The best rank in the Army!