Great video! Added clarifications and misc Stryker MGS facts ... - MGS-0001 spent its field life as a training vehicle at the Infantry Center / Maneuver Center. It had a reputation as the most reliable MGS in the fleet. - Fleet MGS actually came in three configurations -- reconfigured prototypes (like 0001) and two iterations of LRIP. Because the vehicle never went into full rate production they were never standardized, even after completing the "Dirty 66" operational test fixes and the 2016 reliability upgrade. As a result, the technical manuals had to account for all the fleet variations and were roughly 7,000 pages in total. - That door behind the pizza door is the external power port. - Most of the titanium on the vehicle is in the turret structure and hatches; your magnet doesn't stick to the side because that's MEXAS composite add on armor like the rest of the Stryker fleet. - CPV = Commander's Panoramic Viewer - The MGS met its operational requirements, even reliability (whether that requirement was *right* is an exercise for the reader), and gave excellent combat service with GDLS mechanics maintaining over 95% OR in combat. Organizational and personnel decisions, as well as not getting to the full complement due to the decision not to take it to full rate production, which kept it too small a density to be effectively sustained, had more to do with its middling reputation in garrison and training than capability or design. - That's not to say it wasn't a maintenance challenge -- it was; replenisher, autoloader, and turret electronics being most of the problems, and it was particularly hard to troubleshoot the electronics. Could have been fixed with more time and investment, but was not. - The decision to retire the vehicle was mostly due to projected future sustainment and upgrade costs. A large number of the electronic components were going obsolete and would have needed refresh, plus there was never aa DVH variant developed -- doing both would have been fairly expensive (thought not as expensive as developing the M10 as a like capability). Given other lethality additions to the Stryker fleet (CROW-Javelin, 30mm cannons, etc) it was deemed an acceptable risk to retire the MGS rather than either limp along or do the significant refresh that would be required to match the new DVHA1 variants. Looking forward to Part II!
Former MGS driver, the worst part of being assigned on an MGS section was the fact that infantry officers think they are cool to look at, but would hardly give you any money to make them work properly.
@@Seth9809 Apparently they didn't think so. The MGS has been retired since 2022 because they decided it sucked. They should have just bought the Centauro B1 or adapted the Centauro turret to the Stryker.
Basically the MGS is so hard to maintain even the maintenance guy don’t want to maintain it, for what is see in this episode the hull and gun turret even the autoloader in the gun are so well designed and easy maintenance, but I think inside or at episode two we will see how painful the finding the wiring to the two revolver cell and issue is the cell not designed properly or more Modular.
"We got this 'Chieftain' guy coming in today making one of his bloomin' videos. So I need you to go down to the Stryker and zip-tie all the hatches! *"And I mean **_all_** of them!!1"*
I served in the Swiss Army on the Mowag Piranha 2, which is sort of the grand uncle of the Stryker (Stryker was derived from the LAV 3 which was derived from the Piranha 3 which is the successor of the Piranha 2) and I find it very interesting how so many parts, hatches, levers and such are still completely the same as on the Piranha 2.
No need to change / fix what works.. I remember the Volkswagen group vehicles from the 80ties-ninties about every interior part in a audi was the same as in a golf....
The Swiss made a great APC/IFV and the Canadians didn't change much for their LAV-3, then the Yanks tryed to copy it - Conclusion: Big pile of crap :) So if I shoot that unarmored AC on the outside, I then just have to wait till they sweat to death inside? What I heard from Soldiers using that thing in Iraq and Afghanistan gives me the creeps!
@@WanderfalkeATThis is just one of many Stryker variants in US service. Most of which are still doing their jobs. The MGS definitely had issues, but they probably could have been worked out if not for the fact that they didn't provide much capability that the combination of the 30mm Bushmasters and CROWS-J armed Strykers didn't cover. The Stryker in general had issues in Iraq and Afghanistan from. It's flat hull was vulnerable to IEDs, but new versions resolved that with a double V hull. And the Stryker was far from the only vehicle with that issue.
@@88porpoise They simply should have bought LAV-3's, would have given them the time to design a great AC system instead of badly copying a allready good design and never finishing it. I understand that the Canadians and the Swiss never thought to operate their Mowag's and LAV's in 40°C heat but to work with them on a general upgrade to make them able to do so would have benefitted all of them. An AC Radiator unarmored on the outside where even a Kid can throw a stone on it and break it... Sounds like American Ingenuity 100%!
I remember back when they first had MGS1128 coming out and some ol' hand happily mentioned it was the GMC M3 reborn. More I look at it, the more I see what he meant. Take a proven auxiliary vehicle with minimal armor, stick an obsolescent gun on it, and you have a surprisingly useful piece of kit. It might be a glass cannon, but it is a potent cannon, and a hell of a lot easier to get to and around a warzone.
And when thinking in cost, then it is technically cheaper to loose a Stryker to an "AT" role then to lose a MBT. So, against a lower tech enemy, they can be quite the cost effcient kit too
@@Danspy501st For sure, if used as intended to be a first-on-the-scene vehicle to carry on a conventional battle while the heavier MBTs and MICVs were shipped in, the Stryker was a very cost-effective platform despite what was for the time a quite seriously high price tag. I remember the Stryker getting a bad reputation at the time because it was so expensive and squishy, with the turn-over in Iraq really shocking the bean-counters. That, of course, was a classic example of people using a good tool for the wrong job and wondering why the tool is not doing a good job instead of accepting they made the mistake of using the tool for the wrong job. To this day, I think we should have brought out the M113s out of reserve to carry on the policing work during the GWOT. They were in much better shape at the time, plenty resistant to common weaponry available to the various insurgents, and far more expendable. That would have saved a fortune in replacing and upgrading HUMVEEs, Strykers, Bradleys, and Abrams, while clearing out the reserves before they truly rotted.
@@genericpersonx333 Honesty,. I also dont know if some had been donated to Ukraine, but I also think they are able to use some of them too. Not for the direct fire, but more like sercurity for around like the border to Belarus
I volunteer here. I'm here every month... and I still learned a lot- in fairness my passion is the world war(s) and not so much the modern stuff, but that's why we have creators like Chieftain here to teach me about the eras I'm largely in the dark on. This collection is doing amazing work restoring and keeping (indoors and in display condition) pieces of critical and living history, and they host an open house several times a year. Next one is in December 13, 2024 from 0900 until- mid afternoon-ish (closing time is decided by how many people come through during the day). There is a following open house in April that will feature a live fire exercise. A Stryker might make an appearance there...
Saw this year's Armor Week live fire and saw the collection, it was truly phenomenal. Stykers, Bradleys, the mortar teams, and then the show-stopping M1 Abrams caught everybody off guard when it came up full speed and as soon as it hit the center of the stands shot without slowing down. I wasn't expecting the main gun to be so concussive, it was an incredible show to experience.
Do you know if I'd get kicked out for showing up in 80s tanker kit? Been a small dream of mine to take an impression pic infront of the XM1 Pilot Vehicle they got there. Regardless, with such a huge collection it must be very rewarding to do volunteer work in there.
@manofconstantgold I doubt you'd be kicked out especially if you explain what you were doing and clarify it's not stolen valor but an homage. We have re-enactors come through all the time. We also have active duty and retired every month. Last month we had someone dressed as Rosie the riveter and a guy in period correct ww2 Italian tanker gear (but he soon had to shed the heavy leather overcoat). Just kindly explain to any staff member or volunteer what you are doing. Most of us would take the picture for you.
@@TheFingerman77 it is something I highly recommend to anyone from avid historians, model makers, reenactors, down to video gamers and casual readers. There's something here for everyone.
The BCT system taught me that almost any idea can be made to sound good. I remember reading about the three types of brigade, thinking all that sounds like an excellent idea. Then, the new divisional system was announced. And the information on that made me me think that all that was a great idea. Turns out this military science thing is hard.
Both of them are good ideas, just designed to solve different problems. Just like how both a hammer and a screwdriver are good tools, just don't try and use them to do a job better done by the other.
@EvilTwinn My point was that evaluating anything that complex is difficult, especially since so many factors besides besides technical specs go into the evaluation. In the world of hypotheticals, with infinite money, anything can sound useful. The hard part is deciding what you can go without.
@@p_serdiuk I don't think it's that simple. The German Bundeswehr adopted a brigade centric structure during the Cold War to defend against a potential invasion by the Warsaw Pact. This was due to the belief that command and control would likely break down at higher levels from massed Warsaw Pact fires and local commanders would have to be able to act independently to continue the fight. The US Army basically copied the German system because of this and also because it was highly conducive to the expeditionary nature of the US military's 21st century force posture. I believe the decision to return to the division assumes that such redundancy is less important than the ability of higher command to coordinate large formations and concentrate fires in support of operational and strategic objectives over local tactical situations.
As far as i know, the autoloading system is still classified. For Chieftain to be able to post this (hopefully without any issues) the guys up in Washington must’ve gave him the go ahead to post it
That turret has such a convoluted history, being placed on one rejected prototype after another, and then it finally gets onto the MGS and was a maintenance nightmare because while they'd been trying to sell said turret for decades they hadn't been refining the design beyond prototype stage. Brilliant sales decision. This contrasted with the rock solid CAT C7 driving a garbage truck's indestructible transmission.
MGS were part of the older flatter bottom design batch. Newer Strykers have an improved bottom design that increases their protection against mines and other sources of explosions. Almost all of the older ones have been phased out of active use, except for a few specialized variants.
not surprising that it is retired so soon, its a complex/expensive piece and the design overall is lacking in modular freedom ... the upkeep and effort to adapt it to new requirments just wasnt worth keeping it around I guess.
@TheChieftainsHatch I know of an original AMC-10, but not the RC or RCR variant, that might be at a museum here in France. I'll look into it. The Foreign Legion still has some they haven't gotten rid of.
2 non connected tanks. 2 Switch just inside ramp under the floor, so you can pump from one tank to the other, and control which tank you pull from. Fuel gauge only reads one of the tanks tho.
Saw this one back during the Armor Week open day, and it really goes to prove why Ft Benning / Moore really needs better plaques for their armor collection. I know more about these vehicles than John Q. Citizen but there's a lot of very esoteric and rare samples in their collection that deserve a little more recognition and explaination; the detail of that being Stryker MGS **number 1** was completely lost on me. Thanks for the deep dive, and all you do.
Front hatch is a service hatch, with diagnostics hookups and service air lines. There is two horns one is a traffic horn and the outside one is a super loud air horn. Trailer use on the stryker is mostly engineer varients the miclic demineing equipment. I saw medics with the Role 1 one time towing a trailer with a m1133 ambulance probably to be dropped off for the role 1 setup and continue ambulance operations. the passenger side tail light has a reverse thermal camera "check 6". the first exhaust shown is the heater exhaust, itll burn a hole throuhg your camo nets
YYYEESSS, my favorite combat vehicle ever, and no chieftain is reviewing it? Couldn't be better, I've been waiting for you to do this for like 8 years now
17:22 -- Caterpillar was the first company to standardize on a color for all their construction equipment, picking "Highway Yellow" in 1931 for greater visibility; companies had produced equipment in all sorts of colors, such as red, dark green, and grey. Other companies, recognizing the increased visibility of bright yellow equipment, largely followed suit, then in 1979 Caterpillar switched to the similar, but legally protected "Caterpillar Yellow", which they use for all industrial hardware they produce. There are other companies that use different corporate standard colors, such as Hitachi orange, in order to establish a brand identity. If the engine in the MGS is a stock Caterpillar engine, it's likely yellow simply because all of their engines are painted yellow, and some of that particular model is diverted to the MGS production line.
Seeing some of the other vehicles in the background has me so excited for potential future videos. It would be incredible if you could get a look inside that AMX-30.
Midway through 19k osut in ‘04 we had the option of cross training to the Mgs. Our DS’s basically told us “you better fucking not, they wont be around long” …solid advice.
This vehicle, perhaps because of its bolted together appearance, makes it easy to see how complicated it must be to build an entire fleet of vehicles from a selection of plates and hardware. Quite a feat. I'm looking forward to part two.
11:11 former commo guy that reclassed as a Cav Scout....that thing's got an old Vietnam-era H189 handset in it! I liked it a lot better than the H250, heck I think I still have one in my old ruck in the garage! :D
This is a dream breakdown for me, M1128 has always been my favorite military vehicle for as long as I can remember, love the chassis design paired with that alien looking gun.
My friend's son was in the 1st unite deployed with the Gun Striker. The problem with gun Striker is the ground pressure would cause it to sink in soft soil. This restricted the gun Striker to improved roads
Strykers don’t have a forward looking IR system. It is a thermal system. The IR lens really domes that’s a use, it is just standard on all army platforms.
I never paid any of the Strykers much attention, as they were too new and had wheels instead of tracks... But this thing is really cool! Looking forward to more on this neat machine.
Auto parts sales guy here, aluminum is notoriously difficult to get paint to stick to. I can't speak to titanium, but I can't imagine it's any easier. Given the tooling marks visible on the exposed armor plate, it looks like neither scuffing nor self etching primer was used. For those at home, i recommend scuffing with an abrasive and using self etching primer.
After watching this series as long as I have, that seems eminently accessible for maintenance. It seems so simple to get to major points. I'd even consider a job as a mechanic working on one. Just with a proviso, as long as I didn't have to touch that turret. I don't think they ever fully worked that out. Got that fully standardised.
I was just thinking of the M1128 Today when watching your Q&As! Can't wait to get to the end of that should be another great video Edit: loved the end blooper, very relatable moment
Our company designed the early LAVs, whose value was that they had an Inertially Stabilized Turret, which could provide fire-on-the-move capability. These early turrets were hydraulically powered, and the noise of the pumps caused the crews to go half-deaf, even with earphones. Those turrets were emplaced onto many combat vehicles, including the GKN Desert Warrior, AMS-120 Mortar, and multiple off country combat vehicles. GPS based location and angulation corrections were also emplaced on some of these. The latest versions (Strykers) all have the Electric Drive turrets, of which I was one of the designer engineers. These are much more capable, and have a "silent mode" without needing engines to be on. There are at least 20+ variants of these, made for various purposes. Their combat shell delivery accuracy on-the-move is unparalled from any modern combat vehicle. However they are completely vulnerable to destruction from drones with a 4-Kilo warhead. How about some videos about how the turret and gun Inertial Guidance actually works.
A GREAT View(s) of M1128 MGS. A Strange favorite of this type of vehicle....due to that External gun ( kinda like my Battleship " I " Work on!! ) As a Former USN sailor...now model builder, I JUST Bought this kit......With the A-C unit on the side ( there are two [2] versions of the same vehicle from the same company ). Didn't know it had a titanium armor ( is that correct?? )🤨🤔 It Would be interesting to weather slightly. Look forward to your internal views.... Oh, 'The Chieftain'.... I 'Subscribed' your Channel!!👍👍👍
I always thought it was weird so much of the mechanism was inside the hull, the height requirement finally explains things! I'd like to place my vote for the AMX 30 I see in the background for the next Inside The Hatch, too 😊
That the US military in 2002 that didn't originally come with air conditioning is amazing. I guess the designers didn't expect it to operate in Africa, the Middle East, Asia or the Southern United States 🤣. As a Minnesotan, I feel like a vehicle that cannot operate well in -40 F to 95F+humid isn't really suitable for outdoor work.
@UmHmm328 Throughout history infantry has had some unnecessarily heavy packs and as an experienced hiker I want to shake someone. Ounces matter. Ounces are water, food and ammunition. The moment you understand the importance of logistics, weight is an enemy. A lighter thing is better than a heavier thing unless the heavier thing is better than food or ammunition.
youd be surprised. i was in a SBCT. we still only had one support company. my entire company was assigned a grand total of 3 mechanics for like 20 strykers and a handful of humvees and fmtv's. we did annual services in the winter. theyd pull the whole damn engine and tranny out of the thing every year. the only thing i really ever had issues with was the artic heaters. theyd add a coolant loop to the troop compartment so that you could get some of the lovely engine heat when it was -30F outside. the bypass valve liked to get stuck. also, the batteries werent the greatest in the winters.
This is.basicaly the adaptation of an adaptation of an adaptation on a 1960s vehicule. They had a lot of time finetune design elements and work out kinks.
My Platoon in Iraq was two 1129 MCVs, one 1127 ICV, and one MGS. I have a fond memory of Iraqi kids thinking the MGS was so cool they wanted to climb on it. The MGS crew started swishing the turret left and right to keep the kids off. The crew let me pull security in it a few times. Though the touch screen ammo selection was cool when compared to my mortar truck. I still had to turn wheels in that thing to lay the gun and ammo selection involved remembering where I stored the WP vs the HE.
i miss my mcv. i got sent to heavy land when i re-upped. i will take a mcv over a 1064 anyday of the week. they were more reliable, more comfortable, faster...i could take them places where i saw tracks breaking and slipping. strykers are far superior to the 113 family...but i guess that makes sense given the 40 years of development
I remember being stationed at Ft Lewis and LAV-3's were being trucked in from Canada around 1998-99 to train up the brigades before the Stryker entered production...
Under the first hatch yo can’t get open is the corrections for airlines for towing by another Stryker. Combat latch is in the driver’s compartment. Forward of the steeri wheel. Also the controls to lower it for transport on c-130
I knew someone who was deployed to Afghanistan with a Stryker brigade. He said he would much prefer being dismounted with his rifle than be riding in a big target.
the huge antenna on the infantry mic, does it allow for external calls? or can it receive wireless calls? i'm totally unfamiliar with modern combat vehicles!
@@jeromethiel4323 The Stryker MGS gun turret is not remote control. The commander and gunner still sit in a rotating turret basket, just like every other tank. They just sit lower in the hull. But I agree that true remote-control turrets are the way of the future.
@@jeromethiel4323 I had the same initial confusion as you, as I also didn't think there was room. My first clue was at 14:34, you can see the white turret basket in the top left of the frame. I went to google and found a schematic that shows the crew configuration and indeed, both gunner and driver are in a rotating basket. The last way to tell is that for it to be a rotating gun, the base of the mount would have to be above the commander and gunner hatches in order to rotate over them, and it's not. I just wanted to clarify those points so you wouldn't think I was a know-it-all. Haha. I struggled as much as you did to believe there would be room for a rotating basket. Their feet have got to be cramped. There are two other tanks I've seen where the turret crew sit super low like this, the T92 light tank, and a version of the M60 (can't recall the name).
by chance, do you guys have an amx-30 there and since this vehicle was mentioned in a caption, maybe an amx 10rc? edit: NVM, i see the AMX-30B behind next to the s-tank. It still has its optical range finder mounted in the turret which means it isnt an upgraded b2.
Question: Chieftain you stated that you’ve seen wheeled vehicles still functional. Even with wheels missing. I was wondering about the durability of wheeled vs tracks. Such as an explosion destroying a couple of wheels. As where a tracks would be unaffected. How much of a factor is the difference in durability?
The small hatch on the side should be a NATO power connection. Someone correct me if I'm wrong... It's been 5 years... I was on an ICV. The coolant / air cooler hatch has a small 90 degree silver handle. Turn that 90 degrees and you will be able to have access to the small square hatch behind it containing the trans oil.
As an engineer who worked for a Canadian military contractor, I can confirm that CARC paint doesn’t stick very well to anything. Also, can someone explain to me what is the point of a chemical agent coating when you have tires and cables?
Of all types of model kits i've experienced building, M1128 is the most fun i've had in trying to build one, partly because they used a full-metal gun barrel out of the kit. Using spare crew parts from Tamiya's Abrams kit, this wheeled STUG is one of my prized collection that i wouldn't want to part away with XD
Interestingly, he, Shinseki, made a decision that caused many of us to question his thought process. (Not stealing the Ranger’s beret) Why? He didn’t start off by making light units meatier, his initial unit was a heavy unit made lighter. Bad optics to those of us who didn’t know better.
. . . but does that MGS have a boiling vessel? A truly important upgrade, that. Maybe they should replace the 105mm with the heaviest 30mm to 50mm autocannon they can find and add a rack of Javelins or TOWs.
@@icantthinkofausername2605 25mm Bushmaster does not have the ability to take airburster/smart rounds, and the Army is generally moving to the bigger calibers.
Looking at that tracked Stryker concept... you just know after it fails to sell that there's some madlad GDLS engineer waiting to submit his concept where only the rear half is tracked with the front steering wheels retained
I suspect that was a GPS antenna to enhance a mobile mesh system giving the vehicle commander information on where the other Stryker vehicles were and so it’s troops can communicate with other squad and platoon members.
@@PalisadeFence Ahh yeah you're right. Man... The TTB video was from 3 years ago and I literally forgot they had it at the collection. God I love that collection.
27:53 if that CPV can only be manually lowered under the cover, then that seems like it would only be for transport. You're not going out during a barrage to lower it to protect it from artillery fragments.
Instead of getting the RDF/LT, the Burford or the Thunderbolt, we got this "Concurrency" mess of a platform that routinely overheated and damn near toppled itself after each shot.
Why were they taken out of service for the styker brigades? As to an ex Australian L/H (Cav) trooper it looks like the perfect back up for vehicles mostly armed with a 50. Cal. ?
The Autoloader was prone to failure and expensive to maintain and instead of a expensive armor upgrade it was deemed fitting other Striker vehicles with 30 mm cannons (M1296 Dragoon) and CROWS-J mounts would provide better distributed lethality capabilities that will not be lost from removing the MGS.
I've always liked this vehicle. I learned about it by playing Armored Warfare, and there's something about a six wheeled buggy with an enormous cannon strapped to the top that tickles me.
I believe the chassis for Stryker were also designed to carry soldiers. So I think it does make sense that it has a J-box and the back hatches can be open from the inside. I mean, why remove those two features when they arent in the way for it to be a "gun carrier"
![[Full] 4 ต่อ 4 Celebrity EP.922 | 10 พ.ย. 67 | one31](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zmV5HRIxIBI/mqdefault.jpg)
Great video! Added clarifications and misc Stryker MGS facts ...
- MGS-0001 spent its field life as a training vehicle at the Infantry Center / Maneuver Center. It had a reputation as the most reliable MGS in the fleet.
- Fleet MGS actually came in three configurations -- reconfigured prototypes (like 0001) and two iterations of LRIP. Because the vehicle never went into full rate production they were never standardized, even after completing the "Dirty 66" operational test fixes and the 2016 reliability upgrade. As a result, the technical manuals had to account for all the fleet variations and were roughly 7,000 pages in total.
- That door behind the pizza door is the external power port.
- Most of the titanium on the vehicle is in the turret structure and hatches; your magnet doesn't stick to the side because that's MEXAS composite add on armor like the rest of the Stryker fleet.
- CPV = Commander's Panoramic Viewer
- The MGS met its operational requirements, even reliability (whether that requirement was *right* is an exercise for the reader), and gave excellent combat service with GDLS mechanics maintaining over 95% OR in combat. Organizational and personnel decisions, as well as not getting to the full complement due to the decision not to take it to full rate production, which kept it too small a density to be effectively sustained, had more to do with its middling reputation in garrison and training than capability or design.
- That's not to say it wasn't a maintenance challenge -- it was; replenisher, autoloader, and turret electronics being most of the problems, and it was particularly hard to troubleshoot the electronics. Could have been fixed with more time and investment, but was not.
- The decision to retire the vehicle was mostly due to projected future sustainment and upgrade costs. A large number of the electronic components were going obsolete and would have needed refresh, plus there was never aa DVH variant developed -- doing both would have been fairly expensive (thought not as expensive as developing the M10 as a like capability). Given other lethality additions to the Stryker fleet (CROW-Javelin, 30mm cannons, etc) it was deemed an acceptable risk to retire the MGS rather than either limp along or do the significant refresh that would be required to match the new DVHA1 variants.
Looking forward to Part II!
+10
Amazing comment, thanks for the info dump.
Thank you for the info, The Chieftain is heavy Tanker guy BUT only one man and the Help for Info people is better
100Th Like, Oh Yeah.
Thanks for the info :)
Former MGS driver, the worst part of being assigned on an MGS section was the fact that infantry officers think they are cool to look at, but would hardly give you any money to make them work properly.
And sid they not need or want something that could put a large hole in a fortified building?
@@Seth9809 Apparently they didn't think so. The MGS has been retired since 2022 because they decided it sucked. They should have just bought the Centauro B1 or adapted the Centauro turret to the Stryker.
@@larrythorn4715Isn't the Centauro huge with a high weight limit...? I don't think that would have fit on the Stryker.
Basically the MGS is so hard to maintain even the maintenance guy don’t want to maintain it, for what is see in this episode the hull and gun turret even the autoloader in the gun are so well designed and easy maintenance, but I think inside or at episode two we will see how painful the finding the wiring to the two revolver cell and issue is the cell not designed properly or more Modular.
@@larrythorn4715 Oh yeah absolutely. But generally the 105mm shells still work and are fired correctly right?
"We got this 'Chieftain' guy coming in today making one of his bloomin' videos. So I need you to go down to the Stryker and zip-tie all the hatches!
*"And I mean **_all_** of them!!1"*
An Army vehicle missing supplemental equipment? Kudos to the staff for going the extra mile for authenticity.
I was going to say, who walks up to an Army vehicle and expects it to be 10/20 complete?
Can’t keep it on current vehicles
Most likely they just took it for an operational variant.
The Stryker's aesthetic is off the damn charts...
Chieftain is opening hatches. Caption reads: "Officer effort noises."
I served in the Swiss Army on the Mowag Piranha 2, which is sort of the grand uncle of the Stryker (Stryker was derived from the LAV 3 which was derived from the Piranha 3 which is the successor of the Piranha 2) and I find it very interesting how so many parts, hatches, levers and such are still completely the same as on the Piranha 2.
No need to change / fix what works.. I remember the Volkswagen group vehicles from the 80ties-ninties about every interior part in a audi was the same as in a golf....
I think the danish army had Piranha 3s, but are now changing them to Piranha 5s. I do say that they do look amazing :D
The Swiss made a great APC/IFV and the Canadians didn't change much for their LAV-3, then the Yanks tryed to copy it - Conclusion: Big pile of crap :) So if I shoot that unarmored AC on the outside, I then just have to wait till they sweat to death inside? What I heard from Soldiers using that thing in Iraq and Afghanistan gives me the creeps!
@@WanderfalkeATThis is just one of many Stryker variants in US service. Most of which are still doing their jobs.
The MGS definitely had issues, but they probably could have been worked out if not for the fact that they didn't provide much capability that the combination of the 30mm Bushmasters and CROWS-J armed Strykers didn't cover.
The Stryker in general had issues in Iraq and Afghanistan from. It's flat hull was vulnerable to IEDs, but new versions resolved that with a double V hull. And the Stryker was far from the only vehicle with that issue.
@@88porpoise They simply should have bought LAV-3's, would have given them the time to design a great AC system instead of badly copying a allready good design and never finishing it. I understand that the Canadians and the Swiss never thought to operate their Mowag's and LAV's in 40°C heat but to work with them on a general upgrade to make them able to do so would have benefitted all of them. An AC Radiator unarmored on the outside where even a Kid can throw a stone on it and break it... Sounds like American Ingenuity 100%!
I remember back when they first had MGS1128 coming out and some ol' hand happily mentioned it was the GMC M3 reborn. More I look at it, the more I see what he meant. Take a proven auxiliary vehicle with minimal armor, stick an obsolescent gun on it, and you have a surprisingly useful piece of kit. It might be a glass cannon, but it is a potent cannon, and a hell of a lot easier to get to and around a warzone.
And when thinking in cost, then it is technically cheaper to loose a Stryker to an "AT" role then to lose a MBT. So, against a lower tech enemy, they can be quite the cost effcient kit too
@@Danspy501st Against a lower tech enemy, the 105mm M68 is shockingly lethal.
@@Danspy501st For sure, if used as intended to be a first-on-the-scene vehicle to carry on a conventional battle while the heavier MBTs and MICVs were shipped in, the Stryker was a very cost-effective platform despite what was for the time a quite seriously high price tag.
I remember the Stryker getting a bad reputation at the time because it was so expensive and squishy, with the turn-over in Iraq really shocking the bean-counters. That, of course, was a classic example of people using a good tool for the wrong job and wondering why the tool is not doing a good job instead of accepting they made the mistake of using the tool for the wrong job.
To this day, I think we should have brought out the M113s out of reserve to carry on the policing work during the GWOT. They were in much better shape at the time, plenty resistant to common weaponry available to the various insurgents, and far more expendable. That would have saved a fortune in replacing and upgrading HUMVEEs, Strykers, Bradleys, and Abrams, while clearing out the reserves before they truly rotted.
@@genericpersonx333M113 was less armored than Stryker and had horrible mine resistance. It would have been a scandal
@@genericpersonx333 Honesty,. I also dont know if some had been donated to Ukraine, but I also think they are able to use some of them too. Not for the direct fire, but more like sercurity for around like the border to Belarus
When will the Chieftain do an inside the Chieftain video
Perhaps when he's due for a colonoscopy?
That is for the onlyfans.
That would be done by the medical section, only after grievous harm had ended his tour. Nobody wants that. He has too much left to teach.
An interview with his Urologist?
@@mickleblade Gastroenterologist.
I volunteer here. I'm here every month... and I still learned a lot- in fairness my passion is the world war(s) and not so much the modern stuff, but that's why we have creators like Chieftain here to teach me about the eras I'm largely in the dark on. This collection is doing amazing work restoring and keeping (indoors and in display condition) pieces of critical and living history, and they host an open house several times a year. Next one is in December 13, 2024 from 0900 until- mid afternoon-ish (closing time is decided by how many people come through during the day). There is a following open house in April that will feature a live fire exercise. A Stryker might make an appearance there...
Saw this year's Armor Week live fire and saw the collection, it was truly phenomenal. Stykers, Bradleys, the mortar teams, and then the show-stopping M1 Abrams caught everybody off guard when it came up full speed and as soon as it hit the center of the stands shot without slowing down. I wasn't expecting the main gun to be so concussive, it was an incredible show to experience.
Do you know if I'd get kicked out for showing up in 80s tanker kit? Been a small dream of mine to take an impression pic infront of the XM1 Pilot Vehicle they got there. Regardless, with such a huge collection it must be very rewarding to do volunteer work in there.
@manofconstantgold I doubt you'd be kicked out especially if you explain what you were doing and clarify it's not stolen valor but an homage. We have re-enactors come through all the time. We also have active duty and retired every month. Last month we had someone dressed as Rosie the riveter and a guy in period correct ww2 Italian tanker gear (but he soon had to shed the heavy leather overcoat).
Just kindly explain to any staff member or volunteer what you are doing. Most of us would take the picture for you.
@@TheFingerman77 it is something I highly recommend to anyone from avid historians, model makers, reenactors, down to video gamers and casual readers. There's something here for everyone.
The BCT system taught me that almost any idea can be made to sound good. I remember reading about the three types of brigade, thinking all that sounds like an excellent idea.
Then, the new divisional system was announced. And the information on that made me me think that all that was a great idea.
Turns out this military science thing is hard.
Both of them are good ideas, just designed to solve different problems. Just like how both a hammer and a screwdriver are good tools, just don't try and use them to do a job better done by the other.
@EvilTwinn My point was that evaluating anything that complex is difficult, especially since so many factors besides besides technical specs go into the evaluation.
In the world of hypotheticals, with infinite money, anything can sound useful. The hard part is deciding what you can go without.
The new division system is pretty much rebooted J series and division 86
In modern war divisions have to exist for major wars, BCTs do better in smaller engagements
@@p_serdiuk I don't think it's that simple. The German Bundeswehr adopted a brigade centric structure during the Cold War to defend against a potential invasion by the Warsaw Pact. This was due to the belief that command and control would likely break down at higher levels from massed Warsaw Pact fires and local commanders would have to be able to act independently to continue the fight. The US Army basically copied the German system because of this and also because it was highly conducive to the expeditionary nature of the US military's 21st century force posture. I believe the decision to return to the division assumes that such redundancy is less important than the ability of higher command to coordinate large formations and concentrate fires in support of operational and strategic objectives over local tactical situations.
Sir, the J-box in the back is meant for the person to communicate with the crew as they load rounds in the replenisher
I guess that makes some sense
Saw Sofilein's video about Stryker before it disappeared from YT !
I'm very happy to see another "inside tour" of this vehicle !
Ye peobably it """disappeared""" because stryker was still in service at the time.
what happened to the video?..
@@DanySdowowhich means she got inside cause someone got inside before😂
As far as i know, the autoloading system is still classified. For Chieftain to be able to post this (hopefully without any issues) the guys up in Washington must’ve gave him the go ahead to post it
@@keolath1343 If it was classified it would have been removed from the vehicle.
That turret has such a convoluted history, being placed on one rejected prototype after another, and then it finally gets onto the MGS and was a maintenance nightmare because while they'd been trying to sell said turret for decades they hadn't been refining the design beyond prototype stage. Brilliant sales decision.
This contrasted with the rock solid CAT C7 driving a garbage truck's indestructible transmission.
I could watch Chieftain fumble, fiddle, flick and look inside of armored vehicles and all their compartments all day
Stryker already in a museum, wow that was fast
They have a lot of current vehicles at the museum at fort Moore. They also had an Abrams there you could climb inside
To be fair, it is literally the first one, they might have reserved it for this purpose?
Back in the mid 90s when I was a kid at an air show, they would let kids in the Abrams, but not adults. @@Whaley96
MGS were part of the older flatter bottom design batch. Newer Strykers have an improved bottom design that increases their protection against mines and other sources of explosions. Almost all of the older ones have been phased out of active use, except for a few specialized variants.
not surprising that it is retired so soon, its a complex/expensive piece and the design overall is lacking in modular freedom ... the upkeep and effort to adapt it to new requirments just wasnt worth keeping it around I guess.
The tracked stryker is just nightmare fuel
Well, at some point wheeled bradley is a very real possibility.
"A big feckoff cannon !!" 😂😂😂
He maybe from the ROI. but the Ireland is still in the "British Isles" and "Big Feckoff Cannon" can't get anymore from the British Isles.
You can take the man out of Ireland, but you can't take Ireland out of the man.
A traumatic life event cannon
Feckoff's gun: if there's a gun mounted on the vehicle in act one, exit stage left.
You can take the Dub out of Dublin, but you can't take Dublin out of the Dub! 😁
It might be a good thing to take a look at my old AMC-10 RC. Spent a lot of good times in that.
If you know of one which I'll be allowed to climb in/on/over with a camera, let me know.
@TheChieftainsHatch I know of an original AMC-10, but not the RC or RCR variant, that might be at a museum here in France. I'll look into it. The Foreign Legion still has some they haven't gotten rid of.
2 non connected tanks.
2 Switch just inside ramp under the floor, so you can pump from one tank to the other, and control which tank you pull from.
Fuel gauge only reads one of the tanks tho.
Saw this one back during the Armor Week open day, and it really goes to prove why Ft Benning / Moore really needs better plaques for their armor collection. I know more about these vehicles than John Q. Citizen but there's a lot of very esoteric and rare samples in their collection that deserve a little more recognition and explaination; the detail of that being Stryker MGS **number 1** was completely lost on me. Thanks for the deep dive, and all you do.
Front hatch is a service hatch, with diagnostics hookups and service air lines. There is two horns one is a traffic horn and the outside one is a super loud air horn. Trailer use on the stryker is mostly engineer varients the miclic demineing equipment. I saw medics with the Role 1 one time towing a trailer with a m1133 ambulance probably to be dropped off for the role 1 setup and continue ambulance operations. the passenger side tail light has a reverse thermal camera "check 6". the first exhaust shown is the heater exhaust, itll burn a hole throuhg your camo nets
YYYEESSS, my favorite combat vehicle ever, and no chieftain is reviewing it? Couldn't be better, I've been waiting for you to do this for like 8 years now
These were assembled in my home town, I still remember looking in the rear view mirror and looking down the barrel of this vehicle
17:22 -- Caterpillar was the first company to standardize on a color for all their construction equipment, picking "Highway Yellow" in 1931 for greater visibility; companies had produced equipment in all sorts of colors, such as red, dark green, and grey. Other companies, recognizing the increased visibility of bright yellow equipment, largely followed suit, then in 1979 Caterpillar switched to the similar, but legally protected "Caterpillar Yellow", which they use for all industrial hardware they produce. There are other companies that use different corporate standard colors, such as Hitachi orange, in order to establish a brand identity. If the engine in the MGS is a stock Caterpillar engine, it's likely yellow simply because all of their engines are painted yellow, and some of that particular model is diverted to the MGS production line.
Seeing some of the other vehicles in the background has me so excited for potential future videos. It would be incredible if you could get a look inside that AMX-30.
What about a prototype Abrams with an unmanned turret, on the left?
@@ArthurIdrisov You mean the M1 TTB? The Chieftain already did a video on that. Check it out if you haven't!
@@emilchan5379 the video is short, but there isn't much to show anyway 😀
@@ArthurIdrisov Yeah unfortunately
Oh goody goody goody... Nick saves Flashy from an evening of BBC Saturday night telly with the Missus! Greatly appreciated!
Glad to be of service.
The intercom and J-box is for when the autoloader fails. More than once, our MGS guys were having to load the gun by standing out of that hatch.
I equally enjoy the well structured and researched videos we're used to from The Chieftain just as much as these more ad-hoc explorations.
I believe the green device on the left side headlight is an active RFID tag. Most likely for inventory/ logistical tracking.
Nick, I am glad that you and Rob get along well - there is so much material to cover at the NACC.
Hi all from blighty. Looking forward to it.
It was worth looking forward to as usual. Can't wait for the next installment. Thanks Chief
How's it like living in england?
Have a wonderful Remembrance Sunday
@@woocashP Currently it's grey and wet, so fairly normal for November.
Midway through 19k osut in ‘04 we had the option of cross training to the Mgs. Our DS’s basically told us “you better fucking not, they wont be around long” …solid advice.
This vehicle, perhaps because of its bolted together appearance, makes it easy to see how complicated it must be to build an entire fleet of vehicles from a selection of plates and hardware. Quite a feat.
I'm looking forward to part two.
11:11 former commo guy that reclassed as a Cav Scout....that thing's got an old Vietnam-era H189 handset in it! I liked it a lot better than the H250, heck I think I still have one in my old ruck in the garage! :D
So happy Chieftain got to evaluate the M1128 honestly. Thanx Sir! 😰👍 {PS:looking forward to PT: 2!}
13:19 this is the exact moment I hit the "like" button
Now finally congratulations on 300k subscribers.
Great. Now that I have finished the 1:35 scale kit we get a video on it. So next videos are
ARL-44
AMX-50
VT 1-2
because I finished those recently ;)
This is a dream breakdown for me, M1128 has always been my favorite military vehicle for as long as I can remember, love the chassis design paired with that alien looking gun.
Been looking forward to this one for a long time
An interesting vehicle. Thanks Chieftain!
My friend's son was in the 1st unite deployed with the Gun Striker. The problem with gun Striker is the ground pressure would cause it to sink in soft soil. This restricted the gun Striker to improved roads
This is the reason the M113 never had a heavy turret
What an amazing vehicle. Thanks for the video.
Can't wait. It's a great day. Chieftain posted
AMX 30 in the background, my beloved
Strykers don’t have a forward looking IR system.
It is a thermal system.
The IR lens really domes that’s a use, it is just standard on all army platforms.
I haven't heard or thought about CARC paint since 1993...
I never paid any of the Strykers much attention, as they were too new and had wheels instead of tracks... But this thing is really cool! Looking forward to more on this neat machine.
Me staring at the TTB right next to the MGS salivating.
Auto parts sales guy here, aluminum is notoriously difficult to get paint to stick to. I can't speak to titanium, but I can't imagine it's any easier.
Given the tooling marks visible on the exposed armor plate, it looks like neither scuffing nor self etching primer was used. For those at home, i recommend scuffing with an abrasive and using self etching primer.
After watching this series as long as I have, that seems eminently accessible for maintenance.
It seems so simple to get to major points.
I'd even consider a job as a mechanic working on one.
Just with a proviso, as long as I didn't have to touch that turret. I don't think they ever fully worked that out. Got that fully standardised.
I would never have thought that you could put a modern wheeled tank out of action with a few cable ties. Crazy!
I was just thinking of the M1128 Today when watching your Q&As! Can't wait to get to the end of that should be another great video
Edit: loved the end blooper, very relatable moment
Our company designed the early LAVs, whose value was that they had an Inertially Stabilized Turret, which could provide fire-on-the-move capability. These early turrets were hydraulically powered, and the noise of the pumps caused the crews to go half-deaf, even with earphones. Those turrets were emplaced onto many combat vehicles, including the GKN Desert Warrior, AMS-120 Mortar, and multiple off country combat vehicles. GPS based location and angulation corrections were also emplaced on some of these. The latest versions (Strykers) all have the Electric Drive turrets, of which I was one of the designer engineers. These are much more capable, and have a "silent mode" without needing engines to be on. There are at least 20+ variants of these, made for various purposes. Their combat shell delivery accuracy on-the-move is unparalled from any modern combat vehicle. However they are completely vulnerable to destruction from drones with a 4-Kilo warhead. How about some videos about how the turret and gun Inertial Guidance actually works.
A GREAT View(s) of M1128 MGS. A Strange favorite of this type of vehicle....due to that External gun ( kinda like my Battleship " I " Work on!! )
As a Former USN sailor...now model builder, I JUST Bought this kit......With the A-C unit on the side ( there are two [2] versions of the same vehicle from the same company ).
Didn't know it had a titanium armor ( is that correct?? )🤨🤔 It Would be interesting to weather slightly. Look forward to your internal views....
Oh, 'The Chieftain'.... I 'Subscribed' your Channel!!👍👍👍
I always thought it was weird so much of the mechanism was inside the hull, the height requirement finally explains things! I'd like to place my vote for the AMX 30 I see in the background for the next Inside The Hatch, too 😊
That the US military in 2002 that didn't originally come with air conditioning is amazing. I guess the designers didn't expect it to operate in Africa, the Middle East, Asia or the Southern United States 🤣. As a Minnesotan, I feel like a vehicle that cannot operate well in -40 F to 95F+humid isn't really suitable for outdoor work.
Archaic mindset that uncomfortable soldiers are good soldiers.
@UmHmm328 Throughout history infantry has had some unnecessarily heavy packs and as an experienced hiker I want to shake someone. Ounces matter. Ounces are water, food and ammunition. The moment you understand the importance of logistics, weight is an enemy. A lighter thing is better than a heavier thing unless the heavier thing is better than food or ammunition.
they did however come with artic heaters (a bypass to add a cooling loop thru the troop compartment...they get hot dummy fast)
Barely get a heater
Ooh is that a Mk VIII Liberty in the background
MGS: Combat crew of 3: Maintenance crew of 33! These modern vehicles are simply sooooo complex, which I suppose is only to be expected.
youd be surprised. i was in a SBCT. we still only had one support company. my entire company was assigned a grand total of 3 mechanics for like 20 strykers and a handful of humvees and fmtv's. we did annual services in the winter. theyd pull the whole damn engine and tranny out of the thing every year. the only thing i really ever had issues with was the artic heaters. theyd add a coolant loop to the troop compartment so that you could get some of the lovely engine heat when it was -30F outside. the bypass valve liked to get stuck. also, the batteries werent the greatest in the winters.
It does look well thought out.
This is.basicaly the adaptation of an adaptation of an adaptation on a 1960s vehicule. They had a lot of time finetune design elements and work out kinks.
At background was Abrams block 3 , that would be interesting have a look to that tank.
One of the best parts of the OG MW2 campaign
My Platoon in Iraq was two 1129 MCVs, one 1127 ICV, and one MGS. I have a fond memory of Iraqi kids thinking the MGS was so cool they wanted to climb on it. The MGS crew started swishing the turret left and right to keep the kids off. The crew let me pull security in it a few times. Though the touch screen ammo selection was cool when compared to my mortar truck. I still had to turn wheels in that thing to lay the gun and ammo selection involved remembering where I stored the WP vs the HE.
i miss my mcv. i got sent to heavy land when i re-upped. i will take a mcv over a 1064 anyday of the week. they were more reliable, more comfortable, faster...i could take them places where i saw tracks breaking and slipping. strykers are far superior to the 113 family...but i guess that makes sense given the 40 years of development
I remember being stationed at Ft Lewis and LAV-3's were being trucked in from Canada around 1998-99 to train up the brigades before the Stryker entered production...
as always , thank you for another interesting video , any chance of doing one on the Mk V *, that is in the back ground ? as it is the only one left
Under the first hatch yo can’t get open is the corrections for airlines for towing by another Stryker. Combat latch is in the driver’s compartment. Forward of the steeri wheel.
Also the controls to lower it for transport on c-130
I can feel the annoyance at the zipties. Love how these look vs other wheeled vehicles.
I knew someone who was deployed to Afghanistan with a Stryker brigade. He said he would much prefer being dismounted with his rifle than be riding in a big target.
the huge antenna on the infantry mic, does it allow for external calls? or can it receive wireless calls? i'm totally unfamiliar with modern combat vehicles!
Nice design. Well thought out.
Interesting vehicle as in it's maintenance aspect. The engineers thought that part out pretty good.
I can't wrap my head around that turret. It's all gun!
The BEST kind of turret. If it gets shot off, a whole lot less chance of crew dying. Remote control turrets are the future.
What else does it need to be? Toaster over and deli slicer?
@@jeromethiel4323 The Stryker MGS gun turret is not remote control. The commander and gunner still sit in a rotating turret basket, just like every other tank. They just sit lower in the hull. But I agree that true remote-control turrets are the way of the future.
@@MrJedi5150 Huh. Doesn't look like there'd be room. But i'll take your word for it. Still think remote operated turrets make a lot of sense.
@@jeromethiel4323 I had the same initial confusion as you, as I also didn't think there was room. My first clue was at 14:34, you can see the white turret basket in the top left of the frame. I went to google and found a schematic that shows the crew configuration and indeed, both gunner and driver are in a rotating basket. The last way to tell is that for it to be a rotating gun, the base of the mount would have to be above the commander and gunner hatches in order to rotate over them, and it's not. I just wanted to clarify those points so you wouldn't think I was a know-it-all. Haha. I struggled as much as you did to believe there would be room for a rotating basket. Their feet have got to be cramped. There are two other tanks I've seen where the turret crew sit super low like this, the T92 light tank, and a version of the M60 (can't recall the name).
Haven't touched one since OSUT but I'm pretty sure you have to pull a lever near the driver's seat to unlock and open that forward access hatch
tank you
Heh, Chief seems to know as much about this one as we do 😊
by chance, do you guys have an amx-30 there and since this vehicle was mentioned in a caption, maybe an amx 10rc?
edit: NVM, i see the AMX-30B behind next to the s-tank. It still has its optical range finder mounted in the turret which means it isnt an upgraded b2.
That Ferris Bueller smile AT 13:35 made me spit out my drink. 😆
Question: Chieftain you stated that you’ve seen wheeled vehicles still functional. Even with wheels missing. I was wondering about the durability of wheeled vs tracks. Such as an explosion destroying a couple of wheels. As where a tracks would be unaffected. How much of a factor is the difference in durability?
It depends on the size of the explosion. A move which can blow off a wheel will probably break a track and immobile a tracked vehicle
The small hatch on the side should be a NATO power connection. Someone correct me if I'm wrong... It's been 5 years... I was on an ICV.
The coolant / air cooler hatch has a small 90 degree silver handle. Turn that 90 degrees and you will be able to have access to the small square hatch behind it containing the trans oil.
As an engineer who worked for a Canadian military contractor, I can confirm that CARC paint doesn’t stick very well to anything. Also, can someone explain to me what is the point of a chemical agent coating when you have tires and cables?
TTB next? Sitting right there
I do have a short video on it
Of all types of model kits i've experienced building, M1128 is the most fun i've had in trying to build one, partly because they used a full-metal gun barrel out of the kit. Using spare crew parts from Tamiya's Abrams kit, this wheeled STUG is one of my prized collection that i wouldn't want to part away with XD
Interestingly, he, Shinseki, made a decision that caused many of us to question his thought process. (Not stealing the Ranger’s beret) Why? He didn’t start off by making light units meatier, his initial unit was a heavy unit made lighter. Bad optics to those of us who didn’t know better.
. . . but does that MGS have a boiling vessel? A truly important upgrade, that.
Maybe they should replace the 105mm with the heaviest 30mm to 50mm autocannon they can find and add a rack of Javelins or TOWs.
You've juste described the stryker Dragoon right there
Why would they make a second autocannon Stryker
@@Zakfiel_the_Mushroomand the Bradley replacement
@@icantthinkofausername2605 25mm Bushmaster does not have the ability to take airburster/smart rounds, and the Army is generally moving to the bigger calibers.
@@MM22966 Stryker Dragoon is distinctly not Bradley. It doesn't use 25mm bushmaster so I'm not sure what your point is
Cool, I've always heard this was a very bad platform but you didn't mention any huge problems.
Looking at that tracked Stryker concept... you just know after it fails to sell that there's some madlad GDLS engineer waiting to submit his concept where only the rear half is tracked with the front steering wheels retained
"I hate slamming museum pieces" got me good 🤣
I want a t-Shirt of Chieftain vs Tiewrap 'lock' complete with smile!!!! Greatly amused.
I suspect that was a GPS antenna to enhance a mobile mesh system giving the vehicle commander information on where the other Stryker vehicles were and so it’s troops can communicate with other squad and platoon members.
@The_Chieftain What in gods name is that on your right @ 3:00 ?
Deduced from another comment here, it's an M1 TTB (Tank Test Bed).
@@PalisadeFence Ahh yeah you're right. Man... The TTB video was from 3 years ago and I literally forgot they had it at the collection. God I love that collection.
27:53 if that CPV can only be manually lowered under the cover, then that seems like it would only be for transport. You're not going out during a barrage to lower it to protect it from artillery fragments.
Instead of getting the RDF/LT, the Burford or the Thunderbolt, we got this "Concurrency" mess of a platform that routinely overheated and damn near toppled itself after each shot.
Was that general you mentioned the guy who brought in the beret? Where have I heard of him before?
Question on Notice, the M10 Brooker is the Replacement for MGS?.
Very similar role, but suited for light infantry units
Why were they taken out of service for the styker brigades? As to an ex Australian L/H (Cav) trooper it looks like the perfect back up for vehicles mostly armed with a 50. Cal. ?
The Autoloader was prone to failure and expensive to maintain and instead of a expensive armor upgrade it was deemed fitting other Striker vehicles with 30 mm cannons (M1296 Dragoon) and CROWS-J mounts would provide better distributed lethality capabilities that will not be lost from removing the MGS.
The Teledyne MGS looks a lot like it could have been a big inspiration for the front half of the Strv2000 prototype monstrosity 😅
I've always liked this vehicle. I learned about it by playing Armored Warfare, and there's something about a six wheeled buggy with an enormous cannon strapped to the top that tickles me.
Holy cow Nathan, be careful 19:45 you’re getting pretty red.
I believe the chassis for Stryker were also designed to carry soldiers. So I think it does make sense that it has a J-box and the back hatches can be open from the inside. I mean, why remove those two features when they arent in the way for it to be a "gun carrier"