Besides the 105mm MG, THE ANTI-ARMOR MISSLE, the mortar indide the vehicle, wat other protection [offensive] will it be able to provide the dismounts during an assault, firefight, beside that ma-deuce? how bout a 7.62 cal mini-gun mounted up top? come on ARMY, use ur brains that think every day about ways to kill the enemy. I LIKE THE MINI-GUN. shall i repeat?
I don't know who wrote this article about the stryker but it sounds like the mfr PR guy. The truth is that the Stryker may be transportable by C-130 but it does not arrive ready to fight as the vehicle must be partly disassembled for transport. Also 1/2" armor does not make for much protection. Small arms fire above 7.62mm will quickly do severe damage to the vehicle, to say nothing of what it does to the soldiers inside. Additionally, don't rubber tires add one more thing to burn? No. I think the greatest military in the world can do much better than this. Our service men and women deserve it.
when the soldiers are interviewed about STRYKER, they praise it. who knows wat they really say. if they don't mix up the model of STRYKER when goin' into indian country, i hate to rely on a bunch of machines with just .50's mounted on top. the SOUTH AFRICAN military has some good armored vehicles. go on strategy page or global security and take a look.
The Stryker is awesome. No round less than 12.7mm has ever penetrated the inner hull of the Stryker (in my experience and in my research). It is rated for up to 14.5mm, but I saw a 7.62mm make it through the outer hull once, so I don't believe that. I been through multiple IED attacks to include 5x 152mm ARTY shells tied together, and the vehicle still managed to roll in on 8 flat tires. It was back out the next morning. It is a great platform meant to transport many troops quicky while giving them some decent mounted support. The RWS and the FBCB2 are my favorite features. It is like playing a video game.
WELL I THINK THE STRYKER HAS A COUPLE OF POSITIVE FEATURES. ITS GOOD DURING NIGHT RAIDS WHEN U NEED TO GET INTO PLACES QUIET. BUT DURING THE DAY FOR NORMAL PRESENCE PATROLLS IT SUCKS. THEY GET BLOWN TO ****. THE ARMOR SUCKS. IT LEAVES LITTLE OR NO PROTECTION.
What the Stryker needs is updated Lighting! The old style Composite Lamps have a signature that no matter how comoflauged the vehicle gets, the lamps stick out like a sore thumb!
Also, there is barely enough light to see when driving in Tactical Mode with its existing Blackout Drive Lamps!
There is a newer LED version that is put out by Grote Industries that is field proven in Theater and is an added safety product for no additional cost - providing the Soldier / Marine the necessary light output to drive in Blackout Mode.
Samples can be obtained via email matthew.drake@grote.com.
Someone brought up a good point about the armament. Why just the remote 50cal. or 40mm? The initial concept testing in Fort Lewis was done on the original version, the Canadian Army Kodiak, with a 25mm chain gun. So why no turreton the Stryker? It sure could sure use a 25mm in Iraq and Afghanistan! And they are not the end all as far as armor goes. The Canadians in Afghanistan have their MBT, the Leopard to back up their LAV's there. The armor is good, but it is a LIGHT Assault Vehicle!
I dont know i drove a m551 this thing sounds just like the track i was on 30 years ago not to much survivability plus we had a BIG GUN 152mm mike ward B/37 1/2 acr 74/76
2nd DIV. SBCT 105 main gun system ready to go. i seen a pic, they were lined up, and more were being fitted. hope they get to iraq soon and hope they make a difference.
Do u guys know that the military is making more then one version of the Stryker. I think that the Stryker is a great armored vehicle thats my opinion though
there are a couple versions, and the most important one is the STRYKER w/the 105mm MG. great for troop support, and i bet it can knock out a larger SOVIET built MBT. its fast, it can maneuver. comes in a mortar armed version, a command version, a .50cal model, and they move troops quick and quiet. good cav scout vehicle.
never rode in a Stryker, but right now the Bradley is a better weapons platform, and can support troops with that cannon. that may at least even up when the Stryker, with that 105mm main gun shows up. there also is a variant with a mini-gun mounted on top for anti-air. you direct that mini at one of those houses, that house will crumble. protection? the Stryker guys say they wouldn't go back with anything but. i just wish the Stryker's with the weapons would get there. hey, a .50 is no joke, but its not a 105MG. or a 7.62mm mini-gun.
has anyone read or heard on the news somewhere that the Army was buying a number of Cadillac-Gage armored vehicles? its that 4 wheeled vehicle that the Saudi's used en masse during the 91 Gulf War. it will be an upgrade over the Humvees in the urban environment. i read that somewhere, i can't find the article.
Well.. .I believe it is no longer a Cadillac-Gage vehicle, but the Textron ASV now. I have seens several of them and there have been many new improvements. I'm not certain, but I think that Cadillac-Gage was purchased by Textron as the addresses are now the same...
thanx for the info. these apc's are being purchased and i think its a better urban vehicle than the Humvee. it has its place, but we went into Iraq with not enough up-armored Humvees. i guess this is the solution.
like to see the Stryker deployed to the ATO, armed with that 105mm MGS. if the Canadians are using Leopard MBT's near Kandahar, then the terrain must be favorable for armour. it would be to NATO's advantage to pour in as many troops, armour to clean the T-ban out of as many places as possible in A-stan. there will still be camps and fighters across the border, but 1 mission at a time. the Stryker comes in a couple variants. 120mm mortar, 105mm MGS, 1 W/ a mini-gun for AA, and the .50 and mk 19. thats a lotta firepower. we CANNOT lose A-stan. and still NATO "members" drag thier feet with thier caveats and ROE. Germany is by far the worst. France, and Belgium. where NATO H.Q. is located.
seems that v-shaped hull has alot to do with blast deflection. the Army, Marines, SPEC. OPS, Air Force have ordered an APC with a v shaped hull. problem is, there is not enough money. i cannot believe that. when it comes to our troops lives, there better be money. it was a TIME mag. article online. i don't know exactly the apc they are talking about. maybe its the one the Saudi's use? its got a v-shaped hull, and troops swear by it. no picture, just an article.
