@Redfox161616 but nested we got a goverment that cares about are military and they bout 120 brand new tanks one thing I wish they didn't cancel on that project was TUA they phased it put on the M113 and were going to put them on the LAV but when they canceled the MGS they canceled all of that so now we have no TUA
@Redfox161616 well your right but they were going to replace the ADATS because it's one of the best sytems out there they were just going to move it ok to a LAV platform another thing at that time is they were also going to shrink the numbers (liberals at the time) we have 34 units of ADATS in service they were going to shrink that to 16 just like MGS they were only going to buy 66 to replace at the time are 66 C2 tanks
Thank god that shit was canceled you can not replace a tank with a lightly armored vehicle we canceled that and got new tanks 80 leaped 2A4 and 40 2A6 M CAN now 20 of those are being ingraded to 2A4 M CAN and another 40 will also be upgraded to that and the other 20 will be converted to new engineer vechles so that will leave us with 100 battle ready tanks and we bought am extra 15 for parts for quick repairs in the field that's more then were gonna get with that only 66 they wanted
@TheCFarmy yes and no I think it is good it was canceled because tanks are the bully of the battlefield and the Leo 2 is a great tank, but I am sad because we will not have a strong fast new Sam system to replace the ADATS of course this would have only been a partial replacement for ADATS but I think this vehicle should have focused more on the SKY than the ground.
Stryker (APC), LAV-25 (IFV), Bison (APC) CQ-10 Snowgoose (UAV) and many more are used by the U.S marine corps, U.S army and National Guard. They're all canadian equipments and they're are all combat proven. Seriously what is your point ?...United States use alot of foreigns equipments and weapons.
The C7 is a lightweight assault rifle and ultra modified variant of the M16 rifle built entirely in Canada. The C7 use different STANAG 2324 rail and the gun barrel is able to shoot 10 000 times, unlike M16 which is only 8 000. The shoulder stock is empty which reduce the weight ratio. The mid-life program of the C7 (C7A2 and in near future C7A3) are fully retractable. Both mid-life C7A2 and C7A3 use parts of C8PDW which make the C7 a unique rifle.
@Jimderkaisser OK thats cool, US still designed the it and in the 1960's, I would hope canada made a better version of it. US designed a lot of UAV's and the first one to be made was created by US, The US also designed the Stryker and built the inside to work with the land warrior system Canada did help Create, Its named after two US soldiers with the last names of Stryker, 1 from WW2 and 1 from Vietnam. And Switzerland created the LAV-25 with Canadas help.
The stryker is a light armed variant of the canadian LAV-III. The only difference between the stryker and the LAV-III is the role and the weapons systems. The Stryker use a 12.7mm machine gun for rapid deployement which is able to go directly into the battlefield while the LAV-III need to remove the 25mm gun. The Stryker is a APC while the LAV-III perfom as a infantry fighting vehicle. DEW currently works to improve the ballistic protection of the LAV-H.
We're not in stone age...Canada is a modern country. Our research and development (R&D) represent nearly 2% of our GDP. I mean what is your point ?....United States is the not the only country in the world which make weapons nearly every countries in the world have military industries including in Canada.
@Jimderkaisser Why do you you say your from UK on your channel?!?!?! Anyways I know Canada is not in stone age I live in Washington state, I go to Canada all the time. Im not saying anything bad about Canada. All I am saying is that since US and Canada are Allies they use a lot of US designed stuff, not US made. Same goes for US, we use Guns and weapons from all over the world. Germany, Italy, Israel, more and more
@xGotGutsx We desinged it in the 1957, CAnada in 1982. I would definaty hope it would be more reliable. Who cares who desinged it anyways, The US is replacing it by a gun that is by far more reliable and is a part of the FFW ( future force worrior )
and will be used with the land warrior system. I guarante you that the FFW will be used by Canadians.
Ok.. then Czech Army, China Army, Brazilian Amazon Police, USMC already played these video games.. What you have now, the Czechs had in 1999, today is a wonderfull simulator that you can see (VBS).. You can also include custom addons. VBS have a complete language program(variables, loops, arrays,FMS, etc..) just for you create custom missions. You can integrate the VBS with any extern simulators eletronic systems using a simple mid controlator.. eheh.. They are just 10 years ahead you...
It is a demonstrator for a weapon system which was cancelled in 2006, what are you talking about with VBS. I know what is VBS i use it during my training with the U.S army in Orlondo ,Florida with the I/ITSEC.
Au départ le MMEV a été un très bon véhicule sur papier tout en respectant les normes minimale des forces canadiennes et rentrer ainsi dans les doctrines de guerre asymétrique et linéaire. Le problème avec le MMEV n'est pas la capacité combattante ou sont rôle, mais bien que le projet a changé plus d'une fois. Au départ le MMEV c'était tout simplement un ADATS sur un LAV III avec des améliorations sur sont système d'armement et optique qui date des années 80.
Le MMEV au départ a été un véhicule ADATS sur un LAV-III avec un système de liaison basé sur le LINK 16 TDL de l'aviation ,mais ici un système pour communiquer et envoyer des informations avec l'armée et l'aviation simultanément. Plus les années ont passé plus le véhicule a eu des modifications stupides sur les armement qui a changé tout sont rôle de base. Passé de véhicules de protection contre les menaces aériennes à base altitude à un véhicule contre toute menaces.
Canada gave 100 Million Dollar in 2006 for phase one, right now Canada have only 6x MMEV ( only for test and presentation ). Canada plaining aquired more 40x MMEV in 2010 for $750M Dollar. Another version of MMEV is the tank like the STRYKER MGS (Mobile Gun System) but more moderns. Is only a prototype you can see it on the video, but the real MMEV is the Air Defence and Anti-tank systems for direct and indirect fire power.
The MMEV is only for protected convoy and soldiers, so isn't a real "Air Defence" is only for helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. The MMEV is the most advanced and the only multi-mission system in the world. Maybe a waste of money? not really canada need this type of vehcile who can required the most faster colaboration with tank/soldiers and aircraft. Aircraft are too slow for destroyer the enemy position and tank are alone, so they need missiles Ground to Ground/Ground-to-Air.
Hey Jim, I only wiki that other stuff on the stryker because all of the other info was spread out all over the place. but eveything I put down was correct to the best of my knowledge. But enough about the strykers/Lavs lol. This mmve looks like one hell of an idea though eh.
The MMEV are not a front to front vehicle like Leopard 1/2 , the MMEV is a escorter vehicle. The Air Defense Anti-Tank System (ADATS) are "Old" and canada want a new type of vehicul a multi-mission MMEV. Who can protect convoy and soldiers in combat action ( in medium range at 8-20km )
Weren't going to replace it
TheCFarmy 7 months ago
@Redfox161616 but nested we got a goverment that cares about are military and they bout 120 brand new tanks one thing I wish they didn't cancel on that project was TUA they phased it put on the M113 and were going to put them on the LAV but when they canceled the MGS they canceled all of that so now we have no TUA
TheCFarmy 7 months ago
@Redfox161616 well your right but they were going to replace the ADATS because it's one of the best sytems out there they were just going to move it ok to a LAV platform another thing at that time is they were also going to shrink the numbers (liberals at the time) we have 34 units of ADATS in service they were going to shrink that to 16 just like MGS they were only going to buy 66 to replace at the time are 66 C2 tanks
TheCFarmy 7 months ago
Thank god that shit was canceled you can not replace a tank with a lightly armored vehicle we canceled that and got new tanks 80 leaped 2A4 and 40 2A6 M CAN now 20 of those are being ingraded to 2A4 M CAN and another 40 will also be upgraded to that and the other 20 will be converted to new engineer vechles so that will leave us with 100 battle ready tanks and we bought am extra 15 for parts for quick repairs in the field that's more then were gonna get with that only 66 they wanted
TheCFarmy 1 year ago
@TheCFarmy yes and no I think it is good it was canceled because tanks are the bully of the battlefield and the Leo 2 is a great tank, but I am sad because we will not have a strong fast new Sam system to replace the ADATS of course this would have only been a partial replacement for ADATS but I think this vehicle should have focused more on the SKY than the ground.
Redfox161616 7 months ago
put some cadpat on that =)
striker2387045 1 year ago
they love they're abbreviations lol
tipex12 1 year ago
Canada uses a lot of Military stuff the US desinged
TheColt451911 1 year ago
@TheColt451911
Stryker (APC), LAV-25 (IFV), Bison (APC) CQ-10 Snowgoose (UAV) and many more are used by the U.S marine corps, U.S army and National Guard. They're all canadian equipments and they're are all combat proven. Seriously what is your point ?...United States use alot of foreigns equipments and weapons.
Jimderkaisser 1 year ago
@Jimderkaisser That is why i didnt say they use everything designed by US
TheColt451911 1 year ago
@Jimderkaisserr And I said designed by the US not built by the US, Take the C8 or C7 for instance
TheColt451911 1 year ago
@TheColt451911
The C7 is a lightweight assault rifle and ultra modified variant of the M16 rifle built entirely in Canada. The C7 use different STANAG 2324 rail and the gun barrel is able to shoot 10 000 times, unlike M16 which is only 8 000. The shoulder stock is empty which reduce the weight ratio. The mid-life program of the C7 (C7A2 and in near future C7A3) are fully retractable. Both mid-life C7A2 and C7A3 use parts of C8PDW which make the C7 a unique rifle.
Jimderkaisser 1 year ago
@Jimderkaisser OK thats cool, US still designed the it and in the 1960's, I would hope canada made a better version of it. US designed a lot of UAV's and the first one to be made was created by US, The US also designed the Stryker and built the inside to work with the land warrior system Canada did help Create, Its named after two US soldiers with the last names of Stryker, 1 from WW2 and 1 from Vietnam. And Switzerland created the LAV-25 with Canadas help.
TheColt451911 1 year ago
@TheColt451911
The stryker is a light armed variant of the canadian LAV-III. The only difference between the stryker and the LAV-III is the role and the weapons systems. The Stryker use a 12.7mm machine gun for rapid deployement which is able to go directly into the battlefield while the LAV-III need to remove the 25mm gun. The Stryker is a APC while the LAV-III perfom as a infantry fighting vehicle. DEW currently works to improve the ballistic protection of the LAV-H.
Jimderkaisser 1 year ago
@TheColt451911
We're not in stone age...Canada is a modern country. Our research and development (R&D) represent nearly 2% of our GDP. I mean what is your point ?....United States is the not the only country in the world which make weapons nearly every countries in the world have military industries including in Canada.
Jimderkaisser 1 year ago
@Jimderkaisser Why do you you say your from UK on your channel?!?!?! Anyways I know Canada is not in stone age I live in Washington state, I go to Canada all the time. Im not saying anything bad about Canada. All I am saying is that since US and Canada are Allies they use a lot of US designed stuff, not US made. Same goes for US, we use Guns and weapons from all over the world. Germany, Italy, Israel, more and more
TheColt451911 1 year ago
@TheColt451911
My English is seriously poor so how i can from United Kingdom ..i'm from Québec (Canada).
Jimderkaisser 1 year ago
@TheColt451911 your right, most of the equipment canada uses is modified versions of american weapons built by mostly european countrys
101andrewj 1 year ago
@101andrewj
wtf are you talking about..
Jimderkaisser 1 year ago
@TheColt451911 The UK uses the C8 and C7 because its more reliable :)
xGotGutsx 1 year ago
@xGotGutsx We desinged it in the 1957, CAnada in 1982. I would definaty hope it would be more reliable. Who cares who desinged it anyways, The US is replacing it by a gun that is by far more reliable and is a part of the FFW ( future force worrior )
and will be used with the land warrior system. I guarante you that the FFW will be used by Canadians.
TheColt451911 1 year ago
Is that mounted on a STRYKER?!?!
FAIL
adrastea99 2 years ago
no LAV-III ...
Jimderkaisser 2 years ago
@adrastea99
The Stryker is based offof the Lav-3 dumbass
sniper77shot 1 year ago
Thank you for proving my point dumbass
adrastea99 1 year ago
poor simulation... Go play Armed Assault... or buy VBS system from Bohemia Interactive Software... These simulators is avaliable since 2001
cassiobj 2 years ago
It is a demonstrator not a video game.
Jimderkaisser 2 years ago
Ok.. then Czech Army, China Army, Brazilian Amazon Police, USMC already played these video games.. What you have now, the Czechs had in 1999, today is a wonderfull simulator that you can see (VBS).. You can also include custom addons. VBS have a complete language program(variables, loops, arrays,FMS, etc..) just for you create custom missions. You can integrate the VBS with any extern simulators eletronic systems using a simple mid controlator.. eheh.. They are just 10 years ahead you...
cassiobj 2 years ago
It is a demonstrator for a weapon system which was cancelled in 2006, what are you talking about with VBS. I know what is VBS i use it during my training with the U.S army in Orlondo ,Florida with the I/ITSEC.
Jimderkaisser 2 years ago
Me semblait que cette merde libérale avait été scrapée par les conservateurs ?
Vive le Léopard 2A6.
Durandal1492 2 years ago
Le MMEV a été annulé mais pas la modernisation du system A.D.A.T.S (SHORAD).
Jimderkaisser 2 years ago
Ah parfait. Le ADATS est bon mais le MMEV est vraiment une mauvaise idée.
Durandal1492 2 years ago
Au départ le MMEV a été un très bon véhicule sur papier tout en respectant les normes minimale des forces canadiennes et rentrer ainsi dans les doctrines de guerre asymétrique et linéaire. Le problème avec le MMEV n'est pas la capacité combattante ou sont rôle, mais bien que le projet a changé plus d'une fois. Au départ le MMEV c'était tout simplement un ADATS sur un LAV III avec des améliorations sur sont système d'armement et optique qui date des années 80.
Jimderkaisser 2 years ago
Le MMEV au départ a été un véhicule ADATS sur un LAV-III avec un système de liaison basé sur le LINK 16 TDL de l'aviation ,mais ici un système pour communiquer et envoyer des informations avec l'armée et l'aviation simultanément. Plus les années ont passé plus le véhicule a eu des modifications stupides sur les armement qui a changé tout sont rôle de base. Passé de véhicules de protection contre les menaces aériennes à base altitude à un véhicule contre toute menaces.
Jimderkaisser 2 years ago
Jimderkaisser 3 years ago
Canada gave 100 Million Dollar in 2006 for phase one, right now Canada have only 6x MMEV ( only for test and presentation ). Canada plaining aquired more 40x MMEV in 2010 for $750M Dollar. Another version of MMEV is the tank like the STRYKER MGS (Mobile Gun System) but more moderns. Is only a prototype you can see it on the video, but the real MMEV is the Air Defence and Anti-tank systems for direct and indirect fire power.
Jimderkaisser 3 years ago
The MMEV is only for protected convoy and soldiers, so isn't a real "Air Defence" is only for helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. The MMEV is the most advanced and the only multi-mission system in the world. Maybe a waste of money? not really canada need this type of vehcile who can required the most faster colaboration with tank/soldiers and aircraft. Aircraft are too slow for destroyer the enemy position and tank are alone, so they need missiles Ground to Ground/Ground-to-Air.
Jimderkaisser 3 years ago
Hey Jim, I only wiki that other stuff on the stryker because all of the other info was spread out all over the place. but eveything I put down was correct to the best of my knowledge. But enough about the strykers/Lavs lol. This mmve looks like one hell of an idea though eh.
Thanks for the vids Jim Justin-Blue
JustinBlue82 3 years ago
No problem , if you're a member of Wikipedia feel free to update the MMEV page ( i start it but i'm not very good in english...)
Jimderkaisser 3 years ago
Don't these things get stuck in the mud and blow up easily?
bighairyfrog 3 years ago
The MMEV are not a front to front vehicle like Leopard 1/2 , the MMEV is a escorter vehicle. The Air Defense Anti-Tank System (ADATS) are "Old" and canada want a new type of vehicul a multi-mission MMEV. Who can protect convoy and soldiers in combat action ( in medium range at 8-20km )
Jimderkaisser 3 years ago