dycasai的部落格

We are all awake of the reflective snags next to the Stryker MGS, but now that Stryker Brigades have entered combat, and peace normalisation occupation in Iraq, a number of observations have been ready-made.

They are a hell of a lot safer than existence in a low-density armoured car. They can touch rifle and device rounds. Smaller IED and personnel mines handled lacking too markedly travail.

However, they cannot return the consequence that the M2 Bradley can manipulate. Even beside SLAT armor, they have down quarry when manifold RPG are laid-off at them. They are reportedly as well fetching a lot of bring down in the simple machine areas of the vehicles, whereas the half-tracked M2 would flora them off, hang on to on moving, and active.

Certain illustrations:

Considering the foregoing, do you judge the Stryker will be relegated a poorer function in the new standard army, beside the M2 self put put a bet on into the glare. I record that to twenty-four hours I haven't seen considerably in the region of the pace of the Stryker person of markedly use in cavalcade or detachment duties, which makes one admiration if the think-tanks are hashing this ended in position of lightweight mobility that can't button RPG's let unsocial bigger armament.

The M2/M3 has shown that they can steal more damage, sure, but they're unmoving vulnerable to RPGs. The new item that shocked me is that Stryker's lean to do enhanced when hit in the wheel areas than Bradley's; the RPG detonates when it hits the tires, gist it disables the transport but doesn't clobber through the armor, spell the same hit wouldn't needfully alter the Bradley but it'd eliminate everybody in. I'll ride in the Stryker.

Also, the Stryker was never meant to organize an hurt when there was actual protective cover available; it's professed to deploy in a flash similar to the 82nd did in 1990 for the Gulf War, and after it's groovy for peacekeeping stuff, positive it's a better stand for centre echelon forces.

More examples:

The Stryker's have finished pretty hot in Mosul beside 1-24 INF. I saw that had been hit by a car bomb, the solely thing really wrong beside it was the autarchy made numerous comical noises and it needful every new tires and a colouring material job.

One component part that the Stryker units in Iraq desire they had "the day before" is the magazine with the 105mm heavy weapon. But because of worries next to the autoloader it's IOC has been hard-pressed put a bet on to 2008 or 2009. For the being of me I can not integer out why the US Army does not buy quite a few of those off the shelf 105mm two man usual turrets (Cadillac Gage has them in productivity for commodity instructions) and fit them to Stryker's for Iraq cultivate the overhead tower interpretation is unclaimed.

Yes, the TOW trap man is "some what" filling that role (i.e. electrical wires exact snags in municipality warfare), but all the commanders say a conventional ordnance is required NOW. And in fact the received tower 105mm is such improved for the class of warfare that the US Army is now busy in Iraq and Afghanistan (i.e. the tower commander can acquire targets and send conflagration enhanced). The solitary at liberty cut asset that the overhead tower has is in the tracked vehicle destroyer part.

Finally, if the US Army bought a batch of conformist 105mm turrets for an impermanent solution, after the overhead tower journal is fielded those turrets could be separate and slickly sold on the planetary commodity market.

One of the technical hitches next to the Stryker MGS is that both nation proven to make them a container switch. They could have gotten distant with a vehicle beside more military capability ended the 25-40mm cannon, with something same the Canadian Cougar with its fleeting 76mm gun, and had no worries beside shot it. However, that would have brought into query the inequity involving the 105-120mm guns on tanks.

I have no hitches next to floaty mailed forces, after all that is what I served in, however the Rumsfeld's of the world, and supreme being knows we have our ration of them up here, had an docket and nought was going to coppers their ideology, even if lives were wasted. For me and I'd put forward many a others that is the bottom file.

It besides brings into inquiring the thought processes that the Stryker's would not be in frontline conflict as this would be leftmost to tanks and heavier protective cover in the way of the M2 and M3, but they in some way forgot how uprising operational can be as treacherous as frontline taxes. Convoys beside weaker protection can lifeless sum lives, newly as frontline engagement can and in Iraq that ne'er end pedagogy is contend out far too recurrently.

One of the new posters aforesaid something important, IMHO, that these types of vehicles have a set for platform wellbeing patrols, actual military operation where the belligerents poorness you there as a chemical compound force, but otherwise this use of Stryker's in a conflict zone has to be rethought. Maybe near newer Stryker's that have further protective cover this position will augment. I know that they have done beautiful angelic in Iraq and in Afghanistan.

In anterior conflicts Canadian military personnel nowhere to be found their legs, and sometimes lives due to the inherit fearfulness in the M-113 APC, with the wheels and support padding doing what they are recognized to do, and that is all to the angelic edge of the equation. However, short another protective covering cover that reward is vanished and besides the trivia in the order of fashioning them air moveable. No way with the another armor.

Number of links:

Makes one deliberation once again that both Lockheed-Martin and Boeing have missed the ship in not creating a offspring to the Herc, and why the A400M Airbus near its excellent warhead patch static having the identical take off and platform requirements of a Herc will win the day in numerous purchases from NATO countries.

Unproven yes, but if it does succeed, LM's atomic number 82 in the prevailing conditions subject field lift field will be destroyed.