Matsimus nice to see the vid back up, find myself forgetting little facts about the TAPV here and there so atleast now I can watch ur vid to remind myself
It looks like the TAPV was designed to take a LOT more weight. A variant would pair very well with the Patria Nemo 120mm auto-mortar. Textron probably offers a bolt on hydro-shock upgrade package for the terrain glide performance.
First unlike many of the people who commented on this I am still serving and I work at the Armd School which is the Centre of Excellence for the TAPV. Matsimus has relied too much on the Textron talking points. Although Textron makes Commando Armored Vehicles that have seating capacity for 7 dismounts over and above the crew the Commando variant that Canada calls the TAPV only has seating capacity for 6 total in the general propose vehicle, 3 crew and 3 dismounts. The Recce variant has seating for 5 as extra batteries required it to lose a seat. Not a big loss since the crew complement in the Recce Orbat is 4. Again although Textron makes a Recce variant of the Commando the CAF did not buy the items like the surveillance tower and an independent crew commander's sight that would have made our Recce vehicle better suited to do Recce with. As I said Textron makes variations to the vehicle that would have made it more conducive to Recce and wanted to sell those variations to us but the CAF chose not to buy them. Now in reality there ended up being 3 projects that were thrown into the one project that they bought the TAPV to fill. The Armd Corps has been looking to buy a "Light Recce Vehicle" since the mid 90s to compliment the Coyote (not replace it). Later on the Infantry Corps wanted a "Patrol Carrier" for 1 coy of their Light Battalions and then after our Afghanistan experience the CAF wanted to replace the G-Wagon in conflict zones as the run about vehicle. Somehow all three projects got moulded into one. The Textron Commando that we now know as TAPV was bought to answer all three needs. The 100 or so that were going to the Infantry were rejected because the Infantry decided that with only 3 dismounts the vehicle did not meet their needs. Although the Armd Corps took delivery of the vehicles it was much larger than the Light Recce Vehicle we were looking for. Also as has been pointed out by others, the weapon system is not configured for what the Armd Corps does ( Recce or anything else). This leaves the Run About vehicle in a conflict zone. It actually works very well for that as the original vehicle was designed for the US Army Military Police to drive around the Vietnam countryside without getting their butts shot off. So some of the strengths of the vehicle. First one is crew protection. Textron claims that it has THE BEST crew protection of any 4 wheeled light armed vehicle in service with any military today. I believe it. This ended up being the single most important requirement from the CAF point of view and Textron had to redesign the vehicle several times to answer that requirement. The second strength, much to everyone's surprise, is the cross country mobility. Some of the crew who have used it cross country say it's as good as the Coyote, some say it is better. This consistent review from just about everyone initially surprised me but then I realized that the vehicle looks like a Damned Tree Farmer, so I guess it makes sense that it's good cross country. As for the distribution throughout the Armd Corps, 17 of the approximately 27 F-Echelon vehicles in the Reg F Recce Sqn is now the TAPV. So approx 60%. The Armd Reserves have been included in the TAPV distribution so that the Reg F and Reserve side of the Corps now share a deployment vehicle. The TAPV is now the default PCF vehicle for the basic Crewman course for both sides of the Corps.
We dont want it back. Im a regf tapv driver and regiment wide the tapv is hated. Its not a good vehicle for many reasons and the cons outweigh the single pro: survivability. Also the only feasible crew config is 4 pers. Only one dismount. You can fit 5 but there is simply not enough room for rations, water, ammo, kit etc. Unless you get super creative strapping stuff outside.
@@GSKboarder yeah the vehicle started it’s existence as the Cadillac Gage Commando a patrol vehicle for the USArmy Military Police in Vietnam. The company that makes it changed from Cadillac Gage to Textron and the vehicle design has been modernized but it’s still essentially that same protected police patrol vehicle it started out as 60+ years ago. The first time I looked at it I said to myself “it will be the Cougar al over again, the Reg F is going to hate it because it’s not a tank and the P Res is going to love it because it’s a big steel thing with a gun system”. And that’s pretty much how it’s worked out. There were so many vehicles more appropriate for the Armd Corps to do Recce with than this one they should not have tried to fulfill 3 requirements with one vehicle. Sometimes I wonder what the people at DLR are thinking..
Sorry to say that when CAF first went to TFA we did not have the G wagon but we drove iltis jeeps for several years and even lost troops in them. The G wagon arrived just before my second tour in 5 March 2004 in Kabul, Afghanistan.
Drove the prototypeM1117 guardian(U.s. Version) used as scout vehicles and gun trucks. Convoy security in Iraq from 06-07. Some reason concerns of roll overs came up. Fully inclosed turrets where held in mainly by gravity, so if it goes upside down, the turret came out. Mk19 auto-grenade launcher as a primary was restricted from use in urban environments. So secondary weapon(Browning m2) became the primary. Can personally attest to it's survival rating against I.e.d.s. I'd be goo in a bag mailed home, if not for textron's vehicle. If I had the money i'd buy a stripped down version for use.
Well I'm not in the Canadian military anymore and I have an opinion. Firstly, the versatility of the vehicle with regards to evolving requirements by the Canadian Forces is VERY limited by the fact that the engine is located in the rear. That is a very 1950's design innovation and one that has been more or less dropped by most nations in the world in favor of placing a loading ramp or swinging crew doors at the back of the vehicle. Secondly - mobility issues and limitations with only four wheels. Look I could go on and on, but one thing is clear. This vehicle is all wrong for the Canadian Forces. It seems like something that a committee of untrained civilians would have decided upon. WELL OF COURSE THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
It seems like it would be more suited to Afghanistan, but we are never going back there. Why not design a transport more suited for modern warfare. The war on terror is pretty much over, so any enemy of Canada is going to be a nation.
they look bad ass , But I miss the smell of diesel, oil , other smells anyone who drove knows what im saying , And of course the Gatorade bottles of Lemonade rolling around . GREAT DAY TO BE A DRAGOON!!!
That's Canada for you... a desert landscape with SNOW patches! Before any of you flip out... I am Canadian and I have had the rather peculiar distinction of throwing a snowball.... in August (and I was NOT in the mountains!). Ya gotta love it!
As soon as I saw this vehicle I said to self "Self, that looks like the M1117 armored car which itself is a modern version of the Vietnam era LAV-150".
I'm gonna do a vid-request: The "Holland-Class" Ocean Patrol Vessels Or the "Zeven Proviencien Class" Frigates in use and developed by the Netherlands. Both look pretty fancy and 'not very intimidating' but pack a astonishing punch PS. Specially do some research into the sensory and detection&interception capabilities. It's really something else! Another cool thing, In NATO ASD Training (a mock battle) The Zeven Proviencien coupled with a dutch submarine took out 8 US navy vessels! including the CNV-71
It almost looks like a combat version of the german Panzerspähwagen Fennek, but it doesn't have that slit in the side to launch small reconnaissance drones.
I'm sorry about those people that make creating your content more difficult, instead of just appreciating it for what it is. Yeah, people are the worst. 😏 Anywho, I enjoy your channel, and please keep it up!
Several of the clips in the video show the TAPV sporting what im 99% sure is a Javelin ATGM mounted beside the light machine gun. Didn't hear it mentioned in the audio so thought I'd just mention that. A pretty significant capability for such a vehicle if it can engage light / medium armor targets too
I cant even stress how much we didnt need these....... the c16 on the roof still has no chute so it only has 32 rounds then you have to get back on the roof and reload it... we have litterally kept the coyote in service longer because of the thing sucking so much.
Ryan Lincoln standard box is 32. And having 96 followed by having to get out in a fire fight on to the roof to reload still is shit.... lavs have chutes for a reason. No one payed millions for a shit version of a afv with a c6.....
hey man, great video as always. i understand that you can't talk certain things, because you might get in trouble. it's sad that we live in a world like that, where people want you to get in trouble for just saying what you think, even though you are never mean or arrogant when you voice your opinion. never the less i enjoy watching your videos, they are educational and it's nice to have someone who served in the army talking about army stuff, unlike to some keyboard warriors talking shit. take care man.
don't forget that "freedom of specch" doesn't apply while being in the armed forces in some countries. anyhow, I am sure we all have had a nice, informative time with all of your videos. best from Greenland.
The sole reason I subscribed to you was becouse of both review and opinions (even thou we both disagree on wheel tanks vs track tanks, I love wheel tanks)
My gripe with the TAPV and Guardian series in general is they should all be the extended ICV chassis. So much possibility with the platform, especially the 90mm cockerill. Run them with some CV90s and call it a day.
Thanks for the vid! As a person that is aspiring to enter the Canadian armed forces, it's very cool to see what is being developed. I have no issues with opinions, for I love talking military. So if you are still wondering if you should through your opinion in, I say do it. For then we can look up the equipment you are pairing it too, look up the stats, and make our own conclusions.
Your channel, your choice, I like to hear your opinion about these things, especially since you did serve, and ITS YOUR CHANNEL !! give your opinion if you want to bro (Keep up the great content)
Very interesting Matt, I'm a retired recce soldier and served with the Strathcona's operating a Lynx recce vehicle, Leo C1 In Gagetown ("B" 8 CH / "C" RCD) and back the the reserves as a member of the Sherbrooke Hussars (Jeeps as recce vehicles). It's nice to see My old regiment on a video.. However, I'm old school recce and let me say this, a five car or a seven car recce troop operating this vehicle is a disaster waiting to happen. As you pointed out a height of three meters? Recce vehicles NEED to be small and easily concealable. "C" sqn, LdSH back in my day used the Ferret scout car, a very capable recce vehicle and it was much better than the Lynx that was operated by "B" sqn, LdSH, a very capable recce vehicle as well. At any rate, a weight that this vehicle is.. Laughable to say the least.. It sounds like the appropriations folks are doing back room deals to get contracts approved.. NUTS! You may be constrained to say things like it is Matt, however I am not. I think most veterans would most likely agree with my appreciation of this abortion of a vehicle.. Tactically, it sucks. Case in point, we had the Cougar, Grizzly and Husky AVGP family, six wheeled vehicles that were horrible at cross country, (I personally witnessed a whole cougar troop get stuck on wet grass in the bowling alley in the gagetown trg area back in 1979-80) the suspension was horrible and I'm going to guess that this vehicle with four wheels is much worse. Imagine your a combat team commander and your recce elements are bogged down because of the four wheel configuration? We went from a six wheeled abortion to an eight wheeled abortion and now back to four? Why do you think they went from six wheels to the eight wheeled LAV series in the first place? And this is based on a Military police vehicle? Designed for security and not recce? See an issue here? Sorry Matt, I'm not sold or happy with the way the REMFS in ottawa are spending MY tax dollars.
@@TheCoolCucumber back in the day, I was B sqn LdSH they were lynx. C Sqn was ferret. I was in an OP overlooking a ford on the battle R out in the wainwright trg area. C sqn was playing en force. I had a ferret sneak right up to my OP, to within 20 meters. I only discovered that the ferret was behind us when their Crew commander cocked his GPMG.
Kirk Jones, you are right the height is good against ieds but it creates a larger target. And when it comes “stealth” or scouting the height may make it easier to spot.
Jack O'Dell yep I see your point but also consider big size also very useful. I've seen videos of the M1117 being used to breach walls and buildings while being shot at in Iraq not so sure I'd use a G wagon or RG13 for that. Having the engine at the back and more thick armour on the front makes it a mini tank in certain situations. Short of multi RPG hits or shell or missile attack should hold up good. I really would love know mattimus opinion and why he was censored though he's usually on point.
That moment when you're really proud of your awesome new vehicle and show it off to everyone. Only to wake up the next morning and realise you've basically re-invented the BRDM-2..
Could of found something better honestly... what about our sub-marines that have only one way, down.!? (I've been in the Canadian army I know all the jokes, we invent most of em our selves. lol )
Thank god when we first deployed the American Commander was like "You fucking Canadians are ballsy" Didn't allow us to deploy with the G-Wagon on patrols. So I can only assume that after this G-Wagon use went down and LAV-3 deployment went up.
I read through some of the comments and would love to her from some armoured drivers. I'm a former AVGP driver and know the driver is the one that had to deal with all the fun trying to take these vehicles off road. From a former boat driver (8CH)
I've got a battle buddy that crewed the m1117 in Iraq. He said the mission scope of the vehicle (in the US Army) was very redundant in theater when considering all the other varieties of MRAPs.
"Allo me ol' mucker"...lol....Hey Matsimus......Found it interesting that you had mentioned that the CF was considering replacing the Coyote with the TAPV...I had heard this too...however...last weekend while at CFB Borden and having a LONG chat with members of the CF's REME there......it appears that things HAVE changed ( you also mentioned that)....The TAPV is NOT going to be utilized as a "replacement" for the Coyote ( Thank GOD...To Tall, to lightly armed)....actually the CF is in the middle of gearing up the brand new Optronics masts to be fitted to the new LAV 6.0's for the "new" Coyote replacements.....apparently the kit is far far superior to the already good Coyote Optronics and with the larger LAV 6 hull, the mast will be deployable without having to fit Optronics onto it first....It was mentioned in that conversation that many of the TAPV's are going to the reserve units...more than initially thought.......to bring the reserve Armoured Units ( ALL Armoured Recce by the way) up to a "usable" level.....I also noticed that there are a hefty number of MRAPS ( the Afghanistan used RG-31's and a number of the EROC Cougars) just sitting and rusting in yards at the base........Glad that you stuck by the CF "recruiting phase" mate...you seem more in tune with it all now?.......
Your opinions are a crucial part of your content. Hell, hearing your opinions on military gear was pretty much the whole reason I subscribed. Hope those censoring your comments decide to fuck off.
hello mastimus! have you ever heard about "Horseshoe trap" in tank battle? it's a great tactics used by indian army against Pakistan in 1965. where they defeated pak's superior patton tanks using their centurion tanks. I believe that tactic could used by allies to take out TIGERs using shermans. Horse shoe trap could be good topic for you next videos
jaikumar848 I am familiar with NATO tactics. A proper NATO Armor corp will not operate without Recon. The enemy using a "Horseshoe Trap" exposes the flank of the artillery. Iraq tried a form of Horseshoe Trap on us at the battle of "73-Easting". And also on the French lead advance to the west of the formation. Iraq used Tanks, Artillery and ATGM's in Horseshoe shaped formations. Hoping to lure armor into Crossfire and Coverfire. U.S. lead and also French lead formations "sidestepped" the Horseshoes and exposed their weakened flanks. Russian armor practices are to drive a distance, stop, rotate 30 degrees, drive a difference, stop, rotate the opposite rotation by 30 degrees and so on. U.S. practice is to make wide, long turns, only stopping if you have to. When you stop, you become a target. A fatal flaw with India vs Pakistan was Indias class based system. Their troops would not fight side-by-side. The Hindus would not fight next to the Sikhs. The Bengali's would not fight beside the Hindu's. Neither would take orders. When requesting Reinforcements, they would refuse to help each other. The Indian military at that time suffered from a lack of cohesion. A military that lacks cohesion is doomed to fail. So they did.
Some of those shots are from the sherbrooke hussars An armored division that in ww2, Sydney Radley Walters commanded. Walters is a national hero and an ace tanker. He killed many, many Nazis.
Should work well with allies and growing fleet of wheeled systems. Boxer and that Denel you posted, Centauro. Lot of range and quick deployed with small logistics
i love armoured cars, tankettes & light tanks, the ww2 German 8-rad with the 20mm autcannon, and the beastly puma with the 50mm ant tank gun, love the soviet btr & bmp series, british ferret & crvt, german wiesel, sdkfz 222, yank m8 greyhound, polish tks 20mm, panzer 2, the italian ww2 tankettes w/flamethrowers, dailmer dingo, fv432, the newer chinese armoured cars & ifv's & the classic ft-17, which looks so good sporting the iron cross, so does the souma s-35. the ft-17 was used to protect airfields from the french resistance, and im pretty sure they sold/gave some to the romanians & croats, which were german allies. i know polish tks tankettes were sent by the germans to croatia, who used them to support partisan hunting squads, their small size made them useful in the forest & the commie partisans lacked anti armour weapons & veichles of their own, many people laugh at the tks, but if your armed with a bolt action rifle, shotgun or smg, your not going though the armour, a grenade may do it, but its not gonna be used without infantry support. plus if the tks has a 20mm autocannon, it'll shred your cover, can fire high explosive, and its ap rouns will shred a armoured car, half-track or light tank, i even read a report where a polish tks 20mm knocked out 3 panzer 38(t)'s 2 hanomags, a kubelwagen & a panzer 4, albeit, with multiple shots to the rear armour, but still.
Given how strongly at least *some* modern armoured recon vehicles resemble either the humvee or its successor, the question suggests itself whether the two of them - standard vehicle and armoured recon vehicle - couldn`t be based on a common platform.
Id like to see them show case this vehicle traversing boreal Canadian forest and not the moon rock Alberta is .. how dose it perform in soft muddy ground full of huge trees
One good-sized patch of muskeg would probably quickly disable a TAPV. The TAPV looks like it is best suited for paved and dirt roads where thick mud and other impediments will not likely occur.
Actually even before the Mercedes G-wagon Canada had nearly 100 “Iltis” light vehicles in Afghanistan in 2002, (and even earlier in Yugoslavia) against the strong warnings of the US. 2 members of the PPCLI were killed by an explosion while on patrol in one. They were light, underpowered and provided about as much protection in combat as a VW Beetle. Actually less, because a Beetle at least had a hard roof. They were completely unsuitable for use in combat operations.
The MCRAPS are just hulls. The TAPV and ASV protect not only the soldier but the drive train and the motor. The mcraps are no competition and shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as TAPV.
IED's will always be able to disable wheeled vehicles. If it can take the hit from the IED and protect the crew inside then the vehicle has done well. If it enables the crew inside to fight off a following attack and/or hold out until help can arrive I would consider that a successful design.
I will agree they did a pretty good job when I comes to armor but like everything in the world I'm sure they could do some thing to make it a little better
We did, all of Canadians requirements we're met or exceeded. The big ass were blow away compartments to allow the vehicle to be mire survivable. Years went into fine tuning this machine to be the best versatile machine money could buy
Hey all! Sorry for the re-upload. Its just the situation I am in and the way things are. Hope you enjoy anyway! Thanks all!
You’re more Canadian than British now. Sorry.
Matsimus nice to see the vid back up, find myself forgetting little facts about the TAPV here and there so atleast now I can watch ur vid to remind myself
This video is new to me
Matsimus Hope all is good Brother ✌
It looks like the TAPV was designed to take a LOT more weight. A variant would pair very well with the Patria Nemo 120mm auto-mortar. Textron probably offers a bolt on hydro-shock upgrade package for the terrain glide performance.
Personally yes, I watch your content to get specs and such on the various equipment you cover, but I also like to hear your opinion of them.
First unlike many of the people who commented on this I am still serving and I work at the Armd School which is the Centre of Excellence for the TAPV. Matsimus has relied too much on the Textron talking points. Although Textron makes Commando Armored Vehicles that have seating capacity for 7 dismounts over and above the crew the Commando variant that Canada calls the TAPV only has seating capacity for 6 total in the general propose vehicle, 3 crew and 3 dismounts. The Recce variant has seating for 5 as extra batteries required it to lose a seat. Not a big loss since the crew complement in the Recce Orbat is 4. Again although Textron makes a Recce variant of the Commando the CAF did not buy the items like the surveillance tower and an independent crew commander's sight that would have made our Recce vehicle better suited to do Recce with. As I said Textron makes variations to the vehicle that would have made it more conducive to Recce and wanted to sell those variations to us but the CAF chose not to buy them.
Now in reality there ended up being 3 projects that were thrown into the one project that they bought the TAPV to fill. The Armd Corps has been looking to buy a "Light Recce Vehicle" since the mid 90s to compliment the Coyote (not replace it). Later on the Infantry Corps wanted a "Patrol Carrier" for 1 coy of their Light Battalions and then after our Afghanistan experience the CAF wanted to replace the G-Wagon in conflict zones as the run about vehicle. Somehow all three projects got moulded into one. The Textron Commando that we now know as TAPV was bought to answer all three needs. The 100 or so that were going to the Infantry were rejected because the Infantry decided that with only 3 dismounts the vehicle did not meet their needs. Although the Armd Corps took delivery of the vehicles it was much larger than the Light Recce Vehicle we were looking for. Also as has been pointed out by others, the weapon system is not configured for what the Armd Corps does ( Recce or anything else). This leaves the Run About vehicle in a conflict zone. It actually works very well for that as the original vehicle was designed for the US Army Military Police to drive around the Vietnam countryside without getting their butts shot off.
So some of the strengths of the vehicle. First one is crew protection. Textron claims that it has THE BEST crew protection of any 4 wheeled light armed vehicle in service with any military today. I believe it. This ended up being the single most important requirement from the CAF point of view and Textron had to redesign the vehicle several times to answer that requirement. The second strength, much to everyone's surprise, is the cross country mobility. Some of the crew who have used it cross country say it's as good as the Coyote, some say it is better. This consistent review from just about everyone initially surprised me but then I realized that the vehicle looks like a Damned Tree Farmer, so I guess it makes sense that it's good cross country.
As for the distribution throughout the Armd Corps, 17 of the approximately 27 F-Echelon vehicles in the Reg F Recce Sqn is now the TAPV. So approx 60%. The Armd Reserves have been included in the TAPV distribution so that the Reg F and Reserve side of the Corps now share a deployment vehicle. The TAPV is now the default PCF vehicle for the basic Crewman course for both sides of the Corps.
To bad it gets stuck in 6 inches of mud. 🤣 2RCR would love to give you your trash back! 💕
We dont want it back. Im a regf tapv driver and regiment wide the tapv is hated. Its not a good vehicle for many reasons and the cons outweigh the single pro: survivability.
Also the only feasible crew config is 4 pers. Only one dismount. You can fit 5 but there is simply not enough room for rations, water, ammo, kit etc. Unless you get super creative strapping stuff outside.
@@GSKboarder yeah the vehicle started it’s existence as the Cadillac Gage Commando a patrol vehicle for the USArmy Military Police in Vietnam. The company that makes it changed from Cadillac Gage to Textron and the vehicle design has been modernized but it’s still essentially that same protected police patrol vehicle it started out as 60+ years ago. The first time I looked at it I said to myself “it will be the Cougar al over again, the Reg F is going to hate it because it’s not a tank and the P Res is going to love it because it’s a big steel thing with a gun system”. And that’s pretty much how it’s worked out.
There were so many vehicles more appropriate for the Armd Corps to do Recce with than this one they should not have tried to fulfill 3 requirements with one vehicle. Sometimes I wonder what the people at DLR are thinking..
People are annoyed by opinions, who would have thought. lol
Indeed.
Sorry to say that when CAF first went to TFA we did not have the G wagon but we drove iltis jeeps for several years and even lost troops in them. The G wagon arrived just before my second tour in 5 March 2004
in Kabul, Afghanistan.
Drove the prototypeM1117 guardian(U.s. Version) used as scout vehicles and gun trucks. Convoy security in Iraq from 06-07. Some reason concerns of roll overs came up. Fully inclosed turrets where held in mainly by gravity, so if it goes upside down, the turret came out.
Mk19 auto-grenade launcher as a primary was restricted from use in urban environments.
So secondary weapon(Browning m2) became the primary.
Can personally attest to it's survival rating against I.e.d.s. I'd be goo in a bag mailed home, if not for textron's vehicle. If I had the money i'd buy a stripped down version for use.
The U.S Army calls these M1117 Armored Security Vehicle. I was an MP and used these, made by Textron in Mississippi.
Well I'm not in the Canadian military anymore and I have an opinion.
Firstly, the versatility of the vehicle with regards to evolving requirements by the Canadian Forces is VERY limited by the fact that the engine is located in the rear. That is a very 1950's design innovation and one that has been more or less dropped by most nations in the world in favor of placing a loading ramp or swinging crew doors at the back of the vehicle.
Secondly - mobility issues and limitations with only four wheels.
Look I could go on and on, but one thing is clear. This vehicle is all wrong for the Canadian Forces.
It seems like something that a committee of untrained civilians would have decided upon.
WELL OF COURSE THAT'S WHAT HAPPENED.
It seems like it would be more suited to Afghanistan, but we are never going back there. Why not design a transport more suited for modern warfare. The war on terror is pretty much over, so any enemy of Canada is going to be a nation.
The engine is not at the rear. What you see is a crew cab
Karl P - yes the engine is in the rear. Rear enough not be able to install a rear ramp or door.
SuperSix delta. I stand corrected, you're right. Thank you
Chadwicked B - I served in the 90's too. Our C7A1's never gave us any issues. After lugging that C1A1 around all day, the C7 was a welcome change.
The tapv looks like its straight out of mad max, is it just me?
I drove around in a M1117 in Iraq in 07-08, and would be interested to see the differences up close.
Great video man, I love all the info an these awesome military vehicles (most of which I didn't even know existed) keep up the great work!!
Wehh good timing on this video, saw 3 or 4 of these roaming the streets of Pembroke Ontario.
they look bad ass , But I miss the smell of diesel, oil , other smells anyone who drove knows what im saying , And of course the Gatorade bottles of Lemonade rolling around . GREAT DAY TO BE A DRAGOON!!!
@@griff9647 gross
Pembroke, lol...go light a match.
@@griff9647 Yeah, not!
Royal
Canadian
Disappointments
It’s like a Cadillac gage, I loved these 20 years ago. Fast, 50 mph on pavement/hard pack .
That's Canada for you... a desert landscape with SNOW patches! Before any of you flip out... I am Canadian and I have had the rather peculiar distinction of throwing a snowball.... in August (and I was NOT in the mountains!). Ya gotta love it!
I like hearing your opinions on military equipment. Sorry to hear...
Mariano Mazza it’s just for Canadian stuff
Matsimus Oh cool!
LOL is it because the equipment they purchase is shit? Liberals buy from bargain bin in Canada.
Baseshocks Pretty sure the TAPV was a Tory purchase...
He's not allowed to give his opinion on current Canadian equipment, means someone talked to him.
Great video, thanks for uploading, I'm always trying to learn more about the TAPV.
Yay a Canadian military vehicle! :D
Not made in Canada
@@kristofballing2733 but used by Canada...I think that was the point
this vehicle is a piece of shit
@@echosloud your mom is a piece of shit shut the fuck up.
@@diligentone-six2688 holy shit lol, wtf you coming with so much heat 😂
THICC BOOTY? That's offensive! No revenue for you! XD
As soon as I saw this vehicle I said to self "Self, that looks like the M1117 armored car which itself is a modern version of the Vietnam era LAV-150".
I'm gonna do a vid-request:
The "Holland-Class" Ocean Patrol Vessels Or the "Zeven Proviencien Class" Frigates in use and developed by the Netherlands.
Both look pretty fancy and 'not very intimidating' but pack a astonishing punch
PS. Specially do some research into the sensory and detection&interception capabilities. It's really something else!
Another cool thing, In NATO ASD Training (a mock battle) The Zeven Proviencien coupled with a dutch submarine took out 8 US navy vessels! including the CNV-71
Love the "Student Driver" sign on the back of the one. 😂
I love the footage in Sherbrooke, QC... I love your work too!
You have some of the best analysis I’ve found.
10:35 "Damn, Boy, that armoured vehicle is THICC"
...as it twerks it's way across rough ground. 😏
🇨🇦 proud. Wonder how well it will preform in winter
Like shit.
Hey Matsimus, if you wanna do more about APC's. I suggest you review the V-100 Cadillac Cage next after this, it was a reliable apc though. 😃
Better the V-150, which is the base for this vehicle.
It almost looks like a combat version of the german Panzerspähwagen Fennek, but it doesn't have that slit in the side to launch small reconnaissance drones.
Funny, I immediately recognized the place, when the atpv first gets out of the garage at the beginning of the the video. Sherbrooke is my home town.
Australian bushmaster or thales Hawkeye????
I'm sorry about those people that make creating your content more difficult, instead of just appreciating it for what it is. Yeah, people are the worst. 😏 Anywho, I enjoy your channel, and please keep it up!
@@TheCoolCucumber Fair enough.
Several of the clips in the video show the TAPV sporting what im 99% sure is a Javelin ATGM mounted beside the light machine gun.
Didn't hear it mentioned in the audio so thought I'd just mention that. A pretty significant capability for such a vehicle if it can engage light / medium armor targets too
Canada needs more of these 100,000
SherH! I used to be at that regiment. . I was actually on one of the first official TapV courses a few years ago
4:24 LOL that was awesome. This thing is like the perfect SHTF/prepper survival vehicle. The US should've used the M1117 more.
I cant even stress how much we didnt need these....... the c16 on the roof still has no chute so it only has 32 rounds then you have to get back on the roof and reload it... we have litterally kept the coyote in service longer because of the thing sucking so much.
you get 96 rounds in the GMG and 500 in the coax.
Ryan Lincoln standard box is 32. And having 96 followed by having to get out in a fire fight on to the roof to reload still is shit.... lavs have chutes for a reason. No one payed millions for a shit version of a afv with a c6.....
46336 34 ain't disagreeing
2:20. That would be the “Royal Canadian Armour Corp.” Thank you.
hey man, great video as always. i understand that you can't talk certain things, because you might get in trouble. it's sad that we live in a world like that, where people want you to get in trouble for just saying what you think, even though you are never mean or arrogant when you voice your opinion. never the less i enjoy watching your videos, they are educational and it's nice to have someone who served in the army talking about army stuff, unlike to some keyboard warriors talking shit. take care man.
Marcus Fenix thanks Marcus!! I appreciate that buddy! Have a great weekend
Marcus Fenix seven vehicles seven corners no progress since 1950
I want mine in white with chrome all over the place led lighting great video pal
One of them already caught fire during training.
What does it taste like?
Washer fluid
Poutine and a shot of maple syrup.
Personally, I feel it has a rather metallic taste.
don't forget that "freedom of specch" doesn't apply while being in the armed forces in some countries. anyhow, I am sure we all have had a nice, informative time with all of your videos. best from Greenland.
Can you do a video on the longest confirmed sniper kill shots??
The sole reason I subscribed to you was becouse of both review and opinions (even thou we both disagree on wheel tanks vs track tanks, I love wheel tanks)
15 t ?! Coudn't you get for that weight a 6x6 with a lower profile?
I think the height is to improve ground clearance and bottom armour for mines
This vehicle reminds me of the Bradley development story from Pentagon Wars
Jack of all trades
Master of none
Garomcfbgdd Pentagon wars was a good video/documentary.
@@Gegengrupenfuhrur its a hollywood movie, it isn't a documentary.
@@TheCoolCucumber Not really a fair comparison. Iraqi tanks in either of the Gulf Wars aren't credible threats for modern armor.
Looks like a capable beast to me. Great drive train Cummins and Allison trans.
My gripe with the TAPV and Guardian series in general is they should all be the extended ICV chassis. So much possibility with the platform, especially the 90mm cockerill. Run them with some CV90s and call it a day.
The arms industry must fucking love you.
Thanks for the vid! As a person that is aspiring to enter the Canadian armed forces, it's very cool to see what is being developed. I have no issues with opinions, for I love talking military. So if you are still wondering if you should through your opinion in, I say do it. For then we can look up the equipment you are pairing it too, look up the stats, and make our own conclusions.
I’ll be driving that soon hope it’s as fun as they say
If its anything like the M1117 ASV that predated it. You will hate every second being near it. Except the AC that was on point
...and 3 years later?
Interesting how low intensity warfare rejuvenated advancements in armoured vehicle design.
It’s literally a vehicle design from the 90s just modernized.
Another great video, I wonder what are your thoughts on Britain buying the American jltv
can you make video on the tow missile system and how it works
Your channel, your choice, I like to hear your opinion about these things, especially since you did serve, and ITS YOUR CHANNEL !! give your opinion if you want to bro (Keep up the great content)
Oh oh, please do the Australian Bushmaster next
Very interesting Matt, I'm a retired recce soldier and served with the Strathcona's operating a Lynx recce vehicle, Leo C1 In Gagetown ("B" 8 CH / "C" RCD) and back the the reserves as a member of the Sherbrooke Hussars (Jeeps as recce vehicles). It's nice to see My old regiment on a video.. However, I'm old school recce and let me say this, a five car or a seven car recce troop operating this vehicle is a disaster waiting to happen. As you pointed out a height of three meters? Recce vehicles NEED to be small and easily concealable. "C" sqn, LdSH back in my day used the Ferret scout car, a very capable recce vehicle and it was much better than the Lynx that was operated by "B" sqn, LdSH, a very capable recce vehicle as well. At any rate, a weight that this vehicle is.. Laughable to say the least.. It sounds like the appropriations folks are doing back room deals to get contracts approved.. NUTS! You may be constrained to say things like it is Matt, however I am not. I think most veterans would most likely agree with my appreciation of this abortion of a vehicle.. Tactically, it sucks. Case in point, we had the Cougar, Grizzly and Husky AVGP family, six wheeled vehicles that were horrible at cross country, (I personally witnessed a whole cougar troop get stuck on wet grass in the bowling alley in the gagetown trg area back in 1979-80) the suspension was horrible and I'm going to guess that this vehicle with four wheels is much worse. Imagine your a combat team commander and your recce elements are bogged down because of the four wheel configuration? We went from a six wheeled abortion to an eight wheeled abortion and now back to four? Why do you think they went from six wheels to the eight wheeled LAV series in the first place? And this is based on a Military police vehicle? Designed for security and not recce? See an issue here? Sorry Matt, I'm not sold or happy with the way the REMFS in ottawa are spending MY tax dollars.
@@TheCoolCucumber back in the day, I was B sqn LdSH they were lynx. C Sqn was ferret. I was in an OP overlooking a ford on the battle R out in the wainwright trg area. C sqn was playing en force. I had a ferret sneak right up to my OP, to within 20 meters. I only discovered that the ferret was behind us when their Crew commander cocked his GPMG.
It seems like an okay vehicle, but the height is an issue. I do love the grenade launcher and v shaped hull though.
Jack O'Dell I thought height was a good thing when dealing with ied
Kirk Jones, you are right the height is good against ieds but it creates a larger target. And when it comes “stealth” or scouting the height may make it easier to spot.
Jack O'Dell yep I see your point but also consider big size also very useful. I've seen videos of the M1117 being used to breach walls and buildings while being shot at in Iraq not so sure I'd use a G wagon or RG13 for that. Having the engine at the back and more thick armour on the front makes it a mini tank in certain situations. Short of multi RPG hits or shell or missile attack should hold up good. I really would love know mattimus opinion and why he was censored though he's usually on point.
If you don't want opinion go to wikipedia, right?
could you do one on the hawkie or bushmaster pmv's?
HAVE YOU HEARD ANYONE SAY SORRY?
Derptank Sorry, I have not. 😀
Sorry, but I don't what are you talking aboot.
Eh? Sorry, I wasn't sure I heard that right. Sorry about that.
I dont prononce the word about like "aboot" ,well not me loll and im an hybrid : half quebecer, half "english,scotish" 😎😂🤣
I love all the joke "aboot" canadians made by the u.s. 😁😂🤣😁
Nice remainder me the bradley.... hey what about the tires? No worries Mat...keep up cheers!
Perfect for rush hour in Montreal.
I love hearing your options :(
I don’t mind to listen this is cool guy and have lots of knowledge
So either Textron via youtube or someone in the canadia army did not like your opinion?
If it was just your opinion, what was their point??
Victor García it was someone in the army. They reported me. It’s sad really
Give them a Comment Action Ribbon
That moment when you're really proud of your awesome new vehicle and show it off to everyone. Only to wake up the next morning and realise you've basically re-invented the BRDM-2..
You should do a video on the british foxhound LPPV
FOR CANADA! WHERE TANKS HAVE WHEELS!
Sorry that's all I can think of.
Could of found something better honestly... what about our sub-marines that have only one way, down.!?
(I've been in the Canadian army I know all the jokes, we invent most of em our selves. lol )
Tanks have wheels...
the tapv is amazing
Could you please do an episode for either the EMB 314, LAV III, or EE-9 Cascavel?
He did do lav 3, but I think he took it down like this one. Hopefully he will re-upload it. I wouldn't mind see EMB 314 or texan 2.
Informative piece, thanks
Thank god when we first deployed the American Commander was like
"You fucking Canadians are ballsy"
Didn't allow us to deploy with the G-Wagon on patrols. So I can only assume that after this G-Wagon use went down and LAV-3 deployment went up.
Wink, wink, Nudge, nudge .. say no more. ;-)
ForbiddenOpinion hmmmmm
Yep, the Queen's Regulations and Orders. The "do not disclose military information or express your opinion on any military subject".
Awesome video. please more Canadian equipment videos
I can't imagine 10 crew in a the utility version. The CF website states 3 crew+ 3 fully armed soldiers.
I read through some of the comments and would love to her from some armoured drivers. I'm a former AVGP driver and know the driver is the one that had to deal with all the fun trying to take these vehicles off road. From a former boat driver (8CH)
I've got a battle buddy that crewed the m1117 in Iraq. He said the mission scope of the vehicle (in the US Army) was very redundant in theater when considering all the other varieties of MRAPs.
Thank you for your time served.
WollongongWacko The privilege to serve in history's most powerful military was my pleasure, honor and life defining experience.
"Allo me ol' mucker"...lol....Hey Matsimus......Found it interesting that you had mentioned that the CF was considering replacing the Coyote with the TAPV...I had heard this too...however...last weekend while at CFB Borden and having a LONG chat with members of the CF's REME there......it appears that things HAVE changed ( you also mentioned that)....The TAPV is NOT going to be utilized as a "replacement" for the Coyote ( Thank GOD...To Tall, to lightly armed)....actually the CF is in the middle of gearing up the brand new Optronics masts to be fitted to the new LAV 6.0's for the "new" Coyote replacements.....apparently the kit is far far superior to the already good Coyote Optronics and with the larger LAV 6 hull, the mast will be deployable without having to fit Optronics onto it first....It was mentioned in that conversation that many of the TAPV's are going to the reserve units...more than initially thought.......to bring the reserve Armoured Units ( ALL Armoured Recce by the way) up to a "usable" level.....I also noticed that there are a hefty number of MRAPS ( the Afghanistan used RG-31's and a number of the EROC Cougars) just sitting and rusting in yards at the base........Glad that you stuck by the CF "recruiting phase" mate...you seem more in tune with it all now?.......
Your opinions are a crucial part of your content. Hell, hearing your opinions on military gear was pretty much the whole reason I subscribed. Hope those censoring your comments decide to fuck off.
hello mastimus! have you ever heard about "Horseshoe trap" in tank battle? it's a great tactics used by indian army against Pakistan in 1965. where they defeated pak's superior patton tanks using their centurion tanks. I believe that tactic could used by allies to take out TIGERs using shermans. Horse shoe trap could be good topic for you next videos
jaikumar848 They do not quite work on current MBT's.
india vs pakistan hate incoming in 3.... 2..... 1.....
Aaron A. Foster MBT surrounded by M-777s
jaikumar848 I am familiar with NATO tactics. A proper NATO Armor corp will not operate without Recon. The enemy using a "Horseshoe Trap" exposes the flank of the artillery. Iraq tried a form of Horseshoe Trap on us at the battle of "73-Easting". And also on the French lead advance to the west of the formation. Iraq used Tanks, Artillery and ATGM's in Horseshoe shaped formations. Hoping to lure armor into Crossfire and Coverfire. U.S. lead and also French lead formations "sidestepped" the Horseshoes and exposed their weakened flanks. Russian armor practices are to drive a distance, stop, rotate 30 degrees, drive a difference, stop, rotate the opposite rotation by 30 degrees and so on. U.S. practice is to make wide, long turns, only stopping if you have to. When you stop, you become a target.
A fatal flaw with India vs Pakistan was Indias class based system. Their troops would not fight side-by-side. The Hindus would not fight next to the Sikhs. The Bengali's would not fight beside the Hindu's. Neither would take orders. When requesting Reinforcements, they would refuse to help each other.
The Indian military at that time suffered from a lack of cohesion. A military that lacks cohesion is doomed to fail. So they did.
jaikumar848 the Centurion was superior to the Patton, not the other way round!
Some of those shots are from the sherbrooke hussars
An armored division that in ww2, Sydney Radley Walters commanded. Walters is a national hero and an ace tanker.
He killed many, many Nazis.
Should work well with allies and growing fleet of wheeled systems. Boxer and that Denel you posted, Centauro. Lot of range and quick deployed with small logistics
I have been out for a while. Good to see what new equipment they have.
i love armoured cars, tankettes & light tanks, the ww2 German 8-rad with the 20mm autcannon, and the beastly puma with the 50mm ant tank gun, love the soviet btr & bmp series, british ferret & crvt, german wiesel, sdkfz 222, yank m8 greyhound, polish tks 20mm, panzer 2, the italian ww2 tankettes w/flamethrowers, dailmer dingo, fv432, the newer chinese armoured cars & ifv's & the classic ft-17, which looks so good sporting the iron cross, so does the souma s-35. the ft-17 was used to protect airfields from the french resistance, and im pretty sure they sold/gave some to the romanians & croats, which were german allies. i know polish tks tankettes were sent by the germans to croatia, who used them to support partisan hunting squads, their small size made them useful in the forest & the commie partisans lacked anti armour weapons & veichles of their own, many people laugh at the tks, but if your armed with a bolt action rifle, shotgun or smg, your not going though the armour, a grenade may do it, but its not gonna be used without infantry support. plus if the tks has a 20mm autocannon, it'll shred your cover, can fire high explosive, and its ap rouns will shred a armoured car, half-track or light tank, i even read a report where a polish tks 20mm knocked out 3 panzer 38(t)'s 2 hanomags, a kubelwagen & a panzer 4, albeit, with multiple shots to the rear armour, but still.
Given how strongly at least *some* modern armoured recon vehicles resemble either the humvee or its successor, the question suggests itself whether the two of them - standard vehicle and armoured recon vehicle - couldn`t be based on a common platform.
My local reserve unit still uses g-wagons but has a few tapvs
Id like to see them show case this vehicle traversing boreal Canadian forest and not the moon rock Alberta is .. how dose it perform in soft muddy ground full of huge trees
One good-sized patch of muskeg would probably quickly disable a TAPV. The TAPV looks like it is best suited for paved and dirt roads where thick mud and other impediments will not likely occur.
I mast say it looks so cold war USSR
I had BRDM-2 flashbacks.
Think more cold war US Vietnam - V100/150 Caddilac Gage Commando
@@CreepySugar Kinda cuz Its 2,5x the weight of the BRDM
Cool looking Vehicle for sure!
Actually even before the Mercedes G-wagon Canada had nearly 100 “Iltis” light vehicles in Afghanistan in 2002, (and even earlier in Yugoslavia) against the strong warnings of the US. 2 members of the PPCLI were killed by an explosion while on patrol in one. They were light, underpowered and provided about as much protection in combat as a VW Beetle. Actually less, because a Beetle at least had a hard roof. They were completely unsuitable for use in combat operations.
Your A Best Military Tutorial!
NOOOO I love your opinions!!
Looks like the Military have done what they are so good at. Designed a very good vehicle for the last war not a good one for the next.
I like the front sloped Armor of it. Looks aggressiv
I'm still in disbelief the Canadian Government didn't place a 500 million order for the successor to the ILTS, circa 1997s technologies.
Thanks for the overview, for a 4 wheel drive looks ok. Bit more gun would be good! 👀🧐
Looks interesting but I wonder what the mechanised military will do when the fuel runs out?
Range is over 400miles
So the TAPV is basically a Canadian version of the MRAP? Pretty cool!
Wow that looks nice! Personally I’m more of a fan of the MRAPs but the TAPV appears to have more protection
That would make sense since the MRAP has a V shaped hull
That would make sense since the MRAP has a V shaped hull
That would make sense since the MRAP has a V shaped hull
The MCRAPS are just hulls. The TAPV and ASV protect not only the soldier but the drive train and the motor. The mcraps are no competition and shouldn't be mentioned in the same breath as TAPV.
They have gave some to the infantry and we have no idea what to do with them. Taller than a lav 6 on its ass end and less fire power.
IED's will always be able to disable wheeled vehicles. If it can take the hit from the IED and protect the crew inside then the vehicle has done well. If it enables the crew inside to fight off a following attack and/or hold out until help can arrive I would consider that a successful design.
I will agree they did a pretty good job when I comes to armor but like everything in the world I'm sure they could do some thing to make it a little better
We did, all of Canadians requirements we're met or exceeded. The big ass were blow away compartments to allow the vehicle to be mire survivable. Years went into fine tuning this machine to be the best versatile machine money could buy