What is the Stryker AFV the US is Sending Kyiv 

Perfect

Germany is the new France

I was on an M-901 doing Recce when I was young and dumb. I felt WAY too exposed in an M-113 hull. We got through one with an AP 7.62... NOT very reassuring. Basically only there to stop shrapnel and the elements. I couldn't wait for dismount and sneaking on foot time. The Strykers use basically the same hull as our LAV 6, which is a LOT more protection than those boxes were. Especially with all of the add-ons that GDLS-Canada improved it with using after-action reports and battlefield experience. I love that vehicle. Tracks are fine for really bad terrain, but when you throw one, you are a dead duck. On a LAV chassis, you can drive away with over half of your wheels blown out. Cheers and have a good one..

Coming from the towed artillery, with full support like met and ground radar we'd have rounds out and coming at you in about a minute. You'll be able to shoot and scoot, just not scoot very far.

The mortar version would be great. Was in a Stryker unit and got pulled for a deployment with an ACR. Got did the 113 suck compared to the Stryker. Slow. Very narrow fields of fire. Worse off road, and no, I don’t care what people say about tracks va being better.

The got Bradly, Stryker, and now Abrams, patriot. Next AH-64, the F-18, why stop there give them Ohio class sub? Burke Class Destroyer?

These are incredible, wow that with the Bradley, (50+ I think) I think there are 50+ Stryker also which would be106+ already on the way to Ukraine thank god And Canada, France, Sweden have agreed to send similar type I think. All this with 300+ tanks Ukraine are now close to being ready for push once again Slava Ukraine 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦

Maybe you should drive it self to the Russian scrapyard. Only the missinformed / evil thugs support Kiev regime....

@@blownapart100 If all that is required to put the Russian military in its place and teach Pukin a lesson he will never forget...why not?

😂 this aged like fine milk.....

God Bless the people of Ukraine and freedom to the people F Russia ! love from the USA

USA don't not support anyone for the sake of humanity, they support you because the enemy is Russia remember the afghan and the soviet war ? they supported Muslims which they hate, because the enemy was Soviet\Russian .

You Bet!!👍👍 🇺🇸🤝🇺🇦

мыколо, тоби сало выслать гумпомощью для натираний причинных мест?!:)

The Mobile Gun System is a beaut; but, transferring that into a country's hands that has little experiencing in using it will just end up destroyed far faster.

@@ImJunCenaI’m sure I‘left Ukraine can operate T90s and other Soviet tanks they can operate a 105 cannon. No secret technology in the vehicle so I don’t see why this would be a problem

It's crap, which is why the US Army is getting rid of it

Ukraine will only get the basic

@@TKUA11 the Stryker AFV isn’t a Soviet vehicle so yea it’s gonna be very different

Thanks for watching!

Thank you.

Doesn’t make much sense what you said . When you say to be more consistent you have to say consistent with what ..”Against being a shadow of an empire”?That makes no sense whatsoever. It fights against a shadow of an empire eventually

@Luke Skymaster Kiev is the Russian version used when ukraine was part of the USSR, Kyiv is the Ukrainian translation. I believe they mean ukraine is also fighting against the image of being a part of a Russian block if that makes sense

@@GigiDuruDuru Russian vs Ukrainian language.

@@alannajones330 language a reason for war ? Why don’t you people take notes from UNITED STATES? We speak all the languages on the planet , we look like all mankind combined,and we are still tight as a close fist and that’s the reason we are the strongest in the world. You people are idiots . This is not a war between Russian vs Ukranian , it’s a war started by a dictator scared not to lose power. He needs his people behind him and to do so he always invented internal (Chechnya) or external threats, US , NATO , EU , Soros the gays etc. A prosperous democratic Ukraine close to the west was a bad example his russians and a mortal danger for him. Russians would have realized that there are better options in freedom and democracy. The only thing that scares Putin is his people. As long as he’s at war people are behind him , war over , his dead

Dont forget, the right version has better thermals and optics and will most likely nearly always get the first hit versus Ruzzky BMPs. I guess it will be put in very good use in Ukraine.

The enemy always gets a vote

Where do I begin with this comment.... First off the Stryker is a basically a troop carrier. They do not roll in first to start an attack especially when they have no idea what awaits them. The Stryker is not a Tank nor is it a self-propelled howitzer. Its an armored troop carrier. The laser range finder is part of its targeting system. So how would the laser range finder on the Stryker make a M777 more effective? How do you think they use the Stryker? Do you think that a Stryker drives in first with troops in the back and start playing laser tag on the enemies tanks and large artillery so they can then radio a M777 Howitzer and tell them to shell the canon that we used our targeting system to laser range? If they can see it, and range it... well then whatever they are ranging can also see them, its a laser, its shoots in a straight line and it can't go over hills and through trees, its just a laser. If they did something like that we would have one less Stryker in about 60 seconds and a bunch of dead soldiers. You stated "Artillery is a hard mistress to utilize when your in attack mode so these (Strykers) would be awesome." How is artillery hard to utilize when attacking?.... when artillery is literally what you use to attack. Artillery is defined as shell-firing guns, howitzers, mortars, cannon artillery, gun artillery (large), rocket artillery and so on. Basically when you attack a position you would shell it and launch missiles well before you send troops in the back of the Stryker. In Ukraine the land is rather featureless and mostly flat so it is an advantage to stay back and use artillery and also gain higher ground if at all possible. Russia is using upwards of 20,000 rounds of artillery a day! Artillery is rather accurate they are not just shooting artillery round without knowing where they are going. Today with GPS they know exactly where they are on the battlefield and with maps and intel they get targeting information so they know where to send the artillery. They generally send a round or two and move so they are not killed with a return round. The M777 and all Howitzer type guns shoot really far with standard rounds having an effective range about 12 miles and extended ranges over 20. Then you state "Especially with the new guided bombs being sent for ukrainian himars." HIMARS uses rockets and missiles. 'Rockets' its literally in the name. It is not a guided bomb as it is not dropped out of a plane. HIMARS is an acronym for High Mobility Artillery 'Rocket' System.

@@JosePerez-bi4ge 1. i never said it was going to go into combat at the tip of the spear so good job for for not accurately reading my comment. 2. Yes laser rangefinders are used to accurately fire their weapons, but laser range finders can also be used for getting target coordinates. It obviously depends on the range finder that is being issues, some are mostly for weapons systems while other can be used for tracking support and weapons systems, so it depends on the laser range finder that is being sent to them. 3. Seems like you completely miss interpreted my comment and i can see that which is hilarious. Maybe before making such a long winded comment you should read thoroughly becuase your making accusations of which i did not even write in my comment! good job my guy! 4. I stated artillery is hard when on the attack becuase you need to utilize it in an effective way that you arnt landing your shells into your attacking troops. This is something the russians have done in this war and they have literally killed their own people doing this becuase they dont have accuracy on their side, they point and fire and dont care what happens. Is it not logical not to fire shells into your own attacking troops no? 5. Thanks on giving me a lesson on artillery... not like my father served with the royal artillery in the british army... but thanks for that lesson! 6. HAHA yes himars does use bombs actually. I think you forgot or you didnt know about the GLSDB (ground launched small diameter bomb) THis is fired from a himars. Its a gliding bomb that uses himars rocket boosters to give it necessary altitude to glide over 100+ KM to its target. The rocket is used to boost it then the bomb is the ordance... maybe you should check your facts before you come into a comment section acting high and mighty.

@@ashleygoggs5679 Let me quote you... 100% guilty of 'ᴍɪsɪɴᴛᴇʀᴘʀᴇᴛɪɴɢ' you. Now remember I only read what you wrote so I misinterpreted YOU not your written words. semantics with missiles and bombs (HIMARS)... Saab and Boeing have together developed the Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB) - 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒓𝒐𝒄𝒌𝒆𝒕 𝒂𝒓𝒕𝒊𝒍𝒍𝒆𝒓𝒚 𝒎𝒖𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 designed to meet the evolving needs of the armed forces. You know damn well the general rule is bombs are dropped from planes and missiles are 'launched' from a system or platform. Then there are the exceptions like the Bunker Buster they used in the Middle East on Saddam when they needed more kinetic enrgy they strapped on an engine. Your words "not like my father served with the royal artillery in the british army... but thanks for that lesson!" I served, my whole family served... what does any of that have to do with inaacurate posting. I must admit this post is good, you spent time and did the research or articulated the information about 90x better. I will say congrats tou you... actually an excellent job. Not kidding this was a great rebuttle and post. You give credit where credit is due and you deserve it on this post not that last schite post. Now I understand 'you' but the post you made bade dude... seriously What is this about? You want to get technical or use semantics but imagine a person who knows nothing about anything and they read your post word for word like I did. They would come out of that with bad info. You know how people are these days, they read one thing they remember and that is their goto...good, bad or indifferent info. I didn't misinterpret your words you wrote the comment like @ss!.. But I did get to see You in all of this and I see someone 200x better than that post. Redeemed! I will delete my previous comment as coutesy but go back and edit that damn thing... U can do that!

The TOWs tore up Russian built tanks in Syria. It’s a very effective weapon

I think they met in Syria

Tow is an outdated system now though. Effective still but the wire guided element is its biggest draw back. if what i read is true tow cannot be used while firing over bodies of water.

@@ashleygoggs5679 where’s the bodies of water in ukraine lmao

No its not. Kiev is english name for the city.

@@TheBooban It's the Russian name for Kyiv, not English in the least.

@@cameronmcleod8419 it was the original spelling of the city and recognized by the entire world. Ukraine changed the spelling 2 years after becoming an independent state after the fall of the USSR. So yes it is a Russian spelling, but since Ukraine was never an independent country until 1991, it is still the original spelling.

Well since the US has spent $100 billion dollars of taxpayers money, that should have been spent on our own people, we can call it whatever the fu

@@mopar_dude9227 in which part of the comment you can see some dissatisfaction, on the contrary, I thank all those who help and understand the situation, since russia is a threat to the entire world order, which it began to destroy starting from 2014, spitting on all norms and international agreements. The last straw was the fact that after promises about not wanting war, Russian troops invaded the territory of Ukraine, unleashing a full-scale war.

I would imagine it's the same reason you always have a secondary weapon; in case the first one screws up. At least you can contribute something with your secondary weapon to support the ongoing operation before you have to retreat all the way back to get repaired. The odds of two weapons breaking-down at the same time are a lot lower than they are for one weapon going bust.

Awesome Vehicles

Super!

Kiev

Good idea :D

@@Military-TVctually it’s not that good of an idea. Placing a CIWS like phalanx would present a huge target. Moreover, the weight distribution would be terrible. But mostly because this idea is not only old, but been put into production. And none of them look like a CIWS placed on top of an armoured vehicle. Also change your title to use Kyiv correctly. It’s not spelt kiev.

Outside of ships they are used to protect bases in combat zones but not vehicle mounted

When will the world take care of the invading US forces all arround the world? Its about time we forma coalition and smash that bully. Time will come. US will go down soon. The World has had enough. Politicians are allrdy planning. Saudi Arabia going off Petro Dollar. Bye bye US. Ä

The SHORAD Stryker platform wouldn’t be as effective as other needed platforms. MANPADS are working just fine for the soldiers providing a portable, smaller target, and less expensive package to handle any air support they encounter. It would be very interesting to see what the SHORAD laser system could do in a combat application.

its not been confirmed. and i dont think they will show which varients are sent until videos crop up on social media.

He is. Until the jltv.

@@TheBooban The Abrams tank first saw service in 1980. The Humvee was introduced in 1989, The MRAP was introduced in 2007. I can think of more.

@@chuck571 The Stryker was before the MRAP. The Humvee wasn't designed as an armored vehicle.

Think the line was that the Stryker *was* the first new vehicle since the Abrams. As in, there've been more since.

Retired but not removed in stocks. So they can be technically given to the Ukrainians.

105 mm ammunition shouldnt be to hard to come by either

@@parsian5919 I doubt the Ukrainians would thank them for the MGS! 🤣🤣

What's the difference? Which is deadlier, Stryker or bradley?

@@larryc1616 The Bradley is heavily armed and armored. It carries a relatively small number of infantry to support it and the tanks it is supposed to be with. Because of this, it is slow (say 40 MPH). A Stryker is lightly armored (only rated to stop .50 cal). It carries a lot of infantry. A Stryker is fast, they 74 PMH, and that is because they have a governor, and are much after off road because of the suspension system off-road then a track assuming open area. . In a Bradley element, the Brad is the primary weapon, and the infantry support, in a stryker element, the Infantry is the primary weapon, and the Stryker Supports.

eight wheel drive

So are btr 80s but both sides still use them APC's do a lot of work just running the gauntlet back and forth from the mostly static front line

Nailed it. I am a styker infantryman with 2 tours in combat. I love the stryker, but it is only as useful as the infantry inside it. It is not intended to be a frontline fighter, it is designed to support the troops on foot.

@@tappytibbons735 get to see a Dargoon yet with the 30 mm autocannon?

Purchase a brain first

@@larryzigler6812 purchase an argument.

@@aacvieira Rubles on the way IVAN 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤡

@@larryzigler6812 I prefer information. If you know where they are delivered.

@@aacvieira Check inside your empty head 💘💘💘💘

60 mph

@@PAVEL-JAKL I was being facetious.

@@jarrodshipard 😀

62 MPH and a 300 mile range. I realize you're being facetious and after the sixth time of telling it became nauseous.

@@ronwilken5219 Actually, some infantry in Iraq stated they could push this vehicle to 80mph. I suggest that they will be an excellent ambulance, complete with serenes. . .

Kiev

noone knows atm.

It means that a group can attack with more force and firepower.

You don't need a drone to target mortars if you are properly functioning in a cohesive battalion. These vehicles are support for infantry troops, not individual combat brawling vehicles. Your comment seems like you are a bit out of your depth when it comes to military divisions operating in a combat environment.

Relax I think they'll still get there whether spelt either way

@@MainFrameGamerz yeah literally doesnt matter if they spell it the russian or ukrainian way right?

FCSB is the best

When you are receiving hundreds of billions of dollars in military aid, just be grateful and not correct other’s spelling.

Allah not God

These vehicles are weight limited. You can't just put a thousand guns on it and act like its going to not blow out the suspension. Even the mortar variant is so over loaded it can't run a single .50 cal machine gun. The suspension system is highly sensitive to added armor and weight. They are infantry carriers, not tanks.

depending on the language.

@@buravan1512 normal people language, not fascist zombie language

Stryker is the USA

@@chaosXP3RT same shirt

@@ismail-paine-de-circ Ur my shirt

Just because England experience during WW2 and America never tired and afraid of Hitler sending airplanes,tanks other war materials then manpower,men of war to England and Africa to Europe then Russia but some are ignorant that it could happen again now with the war in ukraine

🤣🤣