The other morning, FOX NEWS ran a story about the first Stryker deployments to Iraq. The implication in the story, was that they are better suited to urban warfare than almost anything else (certainly far more useful than Humvees). Certainly the U.S. Army does seem to have a shortage of vehicles which are designed with this role in mind... However, I couldn't help wondering just how practical Strykers were compared to Bradleys in an urban environment....

The Stryker seems to be one hell of a system (8 different variants) and can be transported by C-130 without too many problems (although some variants have to be partially disassembled to fit on board).

What is the intention of the Stryker development? Is it to replace the LAV at some point in the future? Or will it eventually create its own niche within armored units? I understand from the official statements, that the intention is to create something like 8 Brigades within the U.S. Army, a figure which I find surprising....

Curiously enough, I discover the Stryker almost by accident whilst looking for photos on on DoD websites. And was certainly impressed by its looks and possibilities in model form. I would apreciate any comments or further information as I must admit to be somewhat puzzled, first by this recent deployment and secondly by the numbers that the U.S. Army is planning to acquire.

Here are a couple of links with some very good photos:

http://www.army.mil/features/stryker/default.htm

http://www.gdls-canada.com/products.asp?id=6

Jim

As a postcript, to my previous post, I have put up some Stryker photos in my gallery space, if anyomne wants some more, PN me....Jim

Nice looking vehicle. I am wondering who is going to bring out the first model !! :-)

BTW what does "PM me" mean ??

Marc

heard the IDF is intrested in the stryker to replace the m113.
The m113 is to slow to catch up with the merkava and is not suited for urban patrol operations.
so there is more intrest for this vehicle world wide, hope this will speed up any plans to bring it out.

I think Italeri will come out with the first model of a Stryker.It will be based on the early pre production prototype.
After 2 years of complaints from the modeling community,they will re issue the kit,still incorrect.
Aber will offer a 5 sheet PE set,1 year after that.
Fruilimodel is planning a variation of their metal track: ie. a replacement wheel and hub and individually applied lugnuts.
Tamiya will combine the latest molding techniques,and motorization.
Dragons version will be in 1/72nd as an RC version.
Academy will copy the Tamiya kit.
Trumpeteer will copy the Italeri kit.
Verlinden will produce a Resin Interior.
RooResins will produce a more detailed interior.
Tamiya will then produce a 1/16th scale full option R/C version
And figures.
Armorama will have 3 distinct Gruop builds and Campaigns about building each variant.
SS-74 will attach a salami to his.
Oberst will use PE and scratch built parts on one,and win Canehdian modeller of the year.


I think.

Actually, I found a test review somewhere indicating the LAV-3 Stryker being total crap in urban warfare environments. I think it is about 80 pages long and describes some problems with offroad capabilities, armour, airlift problems, and so on...

I'm currently at work (lunch break...) so I don't have the document here, but I'l try and post it later. If I forget send me a PM tomorrow to remind me

Here's another link with loads more pics:

http://www.bctide.army.mil/newspages/iavphotogaller3.shtml

My guess it'll come out in resin in 1/35 it'll be about $150 and someone will bring out a 1/35 C-130 which will cost about another $200...ad infinitum......Jim #:-)

Look down about an inch, you will see a link to "Private Message" me. The same happens on every post. We have a messaging system built in here at Armorama, and it is the best thing simce sliced bread. If you ever start up Armorama and you hear the "Mail Call" then you have a private message waiting.

Rob

Having sat through more briefings on our future Army organization than I care to remember, the Stryker Brigades are an intermediate step towards making our fighting forces more rapidly deployable. Currently the US Army comes in two basic flavors:
1. Rapidly deployable airborne/air assault light fighters who have little organic mobility once on the ground and lack massive amounts of decisive firepower.
2. Heavily armed juggernauts that take weeks to deploy and months to build up the necessary infrastructure to support.

The Stryker Brigade Combat Teams (SBCTs) are designed to get there quickly (can stick one in a C-130) and still have superior mobility and firepower once the fighters are on the ground. They are not the end all, be all for our Army, but will have more of a kick than the light fighters. They will have a better ability to hold onto the fight until the heavier forces arrive in theater. The Strykers will then hand off the battle to the heavy forces, not take the place of the heavy forces.

If you had to rapidly get a fighting force into urban environment, would you prefer an airborne brigade of infantrymen who may have a few up armored HMMWVs to go into the fight and hope that a substantial armored force gets there soon, or a Stryker Brigade with armored LAV-IIIs in several variants that include APCs, 120mm mortar carriers, 105mm AGS (mini-tanks), ambulances, etc.?

Eventually, they want our entire Army rapidly deployable in futuristic armored vehicles that are as versatile as the Stryker but as survivable as an Abrams. This is the Objective Force in a nutshell.

Rob, i'm glad to see your comments in this thread, more than anything to explain the concepts behind Stryker(which have been kicking around since before the inception of CentCom). My thesis was on precisely this concept i.e.force projection and the rapid deployment of light forces in-theater, sufficiently well-armed and supported to seize major objectives until the 'heavies' could arrive. Having gone through many of the (public-domain) sights on Stryker, my ideas are now a little clearer. So we should see Stryker in terms of a conceptual change in defense policy rather than simply a new system to replace an old one? In other words a system designed for a strategy/concept rather than as simply a system butting-in to the existing T of O.... Interesting,very interesting. This in time will cut down on the need for such high levels of pre-positioning and increase the need for more tactical transport aircraft. It follows a logic in that Stryker will fuction as a 'bridge' between the M3a3 and the M1s.... Jim . Sorry for the thinking out loud...if i start shouting it frightens the neighbours...

There are roughly 50 different variants of the basic Stryker vehicle. Everything from IFV, Field Ambulances, Engineers, Gunships with 105s or 120s, etc...etc. They are not intended to replace the Marines LAV but as stated above, they are the "Next Step' toward the FCS (Future Combat Systems) concept that the Army is changing to. Has all new Army toys, the Stryker has some teething problems but after spending three months at Ft Knox with the SBCT conducting tests and train-ups, it will eventually fulfill it's intended requirements. Unfortunatly I don't have any pictures (cameras were not authorized) but like everyone else I'm waiting for a model to be produced as well.

http://www.army.mil/features/strykerOE/stryker-(front-view).jpg


The ESV, Engineer Squad Vehicles , with its interchangeable mine roller (right) and mine plow (left), provide the Stryker brigade with one of several types of mobility support on the battlefield.
some thing to look at

kevin

The modelling world reply to the Stryker was quite a hoot! On a day like today, it was a winner!!

Well I guess I will chime in on this....

As the Canadian Forces have had the LAVIII for a couple of years now....they are the foremost expert on using them. As the LAVIII and the Stryker are one and the same vehicle....just the US Army for some reason have to give the vehicle a cool name....

Yes as have been said here the LAVIII has a multitude of abilities and addons.....anything from an ambulance to a troop carrier...to a mini tank(aka tank destroyer?), enginering vehicle, mortor vehicle....etc. etc.

It has been found my the CF that the LAV is better suited for on road adventures such as made up gravel roads and pavement....and less so suited to following a mainbattle tank off road through the bush. Which is one of the reasons why it was decided to update a number of our M113s....the hull was extended, a road wheel added and a new engine with like 400hp and transmission that allows it to keep up with a MBT...as well gone are the tiller bars...and a normal steering system similar to the LAV was installed....also some of the turrets used on the LAV are able to be fitted to it....its called a TLAV...or Tracked LAV.

The LAVIII is transportable by a C-130...however all the Kevlar and ceramic armour on the inside of the hull must be removed and transported separatly in order to not over weight the Herc.....well at least a Canadian Herc....maybe some of the newer US models have more power and lifting capability.

Apparently the CF are even thinking of installing an ADATS turret on a LAVIII chassis.....the chassis is already almost overweight.....the ADATS turret will only make it heavier....and top heavy.

just my 2 cents.

Hey All,

The LAV III, as Scott siad has been in production and use here in Canada for a few years now. We currently have it deployed in Afganistan as part of our comitment and was infact requested by the DoD as they had not feilded their Stryker program and thus had a void which was quickly filled by our Coyote, a recce version of the LAV III. As for Air transport... I don't think any of the Herc's would lift a Stryker (LAV III) fully kitted out as it's the A/C's superstructure not powerplants which have the problem. As far as an ADATS turret goes.... there where many proposed chassis for the system but I don't think the LAV III will do the job.... it's too bad the DoD didn't take so kindly to the ADATS as they have the LAV/LAV III.

The manuverability and rapid deployment of the Strykers would be a great asset to any force.... and possibly a great add in for the (once again) proposed multi national rapid response force!

Cheers!

The Stryker was intended by General Shinseki to be the "Interim Brigade Combat Team" or IBCT. The Army realised that there was a large gap between the Light and Heavy forces. Most of this was through lessons learned from the first Gulf War. The idea was to have a Medium force following light forces (82nd, 101st, 10th, and 75th...which could be anywhere in 72 hours...) Putting Brads and M1s on ships takes lots of time, and enormous logistics. So, the Stryker Brigade Combat Team (SBCT...changed from IBCT) was born. Strykers are also "supposed" to be able to deploy within 72 hours to crappy airfields, following the light guys. (which I used to be) That is the reason they wanted them able to fit in C-130s and C-17s.

The Stryker concept is also supposed to bridge the current army to the Objective force. Whatever that is, I am a little foggy about. Army Times has had some stuff about it, but it is still a VERY young concept. The amazing thing about the SBCT is...the Doctrine. No more Movement to daylight trying to find and fix the enemy....then....developing the situation. With SBCT, the point is to find the enemy (with a Squadron worth of recon assets...AMAZING...) then develop the situation at the Army's leisure...hit em when we want to...massed combat power on the objective. The Digital aspect of the SBCT is also incredible. Too much to get into here, but the FBCB2 is DA BOMB. I have had to teach that system several times now, and it is truly amazing what kind of situational awareness each vehicle in the TO can process.

Gentle people,

as mentioned earlier in this thread, I'm posting a link to a report apparently issued by the US Congress

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/congress/2003_rpt/stryker_reality_of_war.pdf

Gives me the impression its a new "Sheridan" case: First Buy, Then Test...

Well as it happens....this vehicle has been tested and is in operation with the Canadian Armed Forces...and since the LAVIII and Stryker are one and the same. And had been in service here for a few years and are currently deployed in Afghanistan....so I guess you could say that we are the guinie pigs for the Stryker program.

Here is a photo of the Canadian LAV III Engineer. Note that no variant is airtransportable in a herc because of the oversize and overweight. All our LAV III in Afghanistan got there by Antonov. Note also the Coyote is not a LAV III but based on the earlier LAV series II chassis simialr to that of a LAV 25.

I am not familiar with the Canadian LAVIII, but one of the requirements for the Stryker is the ability to transport in a C-130. The only problems that the test group was having for air transportablilty was the Stryker MGS (Main Gun System). It was too tall to get into a 130, but would fit in a C-17.

The other problem with that one was that the Main gun (a 105) cannot be fired over the sides of the vehicle. It was having problems with, yes it is true....rolling the freakin thing over and snapping axles. But, this is the best part...at the last Infantry conferrence, it was announced that the Army is buying them anyway. Imagine that.

One of Murphy's Laws of Combat: "Never forget that your weapon was made by the lowest bidder."

In fact the Stryker is "air transportable", technically speaking. It fits in a C-130 (barely), and the plane can get of the runway, but no decent distances can be reached.
Other mentioned problems are weight, lack of armour, off-road capacities (vehicle tends to get stuck when used on wet grounds), lack of stability (MGS version), limited obstacle crossing/breaching abilities (road blocks in urban environments)............

If you check out the link I posted earlier, you can a very nice pic in the document of a Stryker crewman crawling over the vehicle to get in the C-130...

We are lucky enough to live just a couple skips south of Ft. Lewis where one of the first Stryker brigades is and we get to see Strykers very often tooling up and down I-5. Up until maybe 6 months ago we almost never saw them on their own wheels - they were almost always on a transport flatbed, and we saw them almost every weekend. Recently, however, we have seen long convoys of them on their own wheels up and down I-5, including one that had broken down and was being worked on at the side of the road a couple days ago. And now we see them literally every day and at all hours. They are impressive critters and I really hope someone does come out with a model very soon.. and reasonably accurate.

As far as transportability, the entire brigade out here is shipping out to "The Persian Gulf Area" and over 300 of the Strykers were loaded on "giant transport ships" and the troops will join them by plane some weeks later. (All of this in the local newspapers, so apparently not secret in any way.) I was personally very surprised by this announcement since I had been under the impression that one of the MAIN demands on the vehicle was, indeed, for it to be carried by plane. C-130 preferred. With McChord AFB just next door, I was quite startled that the Strykers are all going for their first deployment by boat. Since it had been such a big hairy deal that they be air-transportable. I'm sure it is cheaper to go by boat, especially so many all at once... but still. It just surprised me.

There was also a local story, much played up hereabouts, that some of the ceramic armor plates were not within specs for protectability due to some manufacturing problem, but we were also told just recently that all of the Strykers being deployed have been re-fitted with proper ones. Of course I only personally know what I am told... and I am just a civilian with military and historical interests.

And here I just feel the need to tap that I truly and seriously hope that every single solider deployed returns home as soon as possible, all in one piece, and without difficulty. If any of you are reading this - thanks for you service. I truly appreciate it.

speaking as an old tanker M60A1 and A3 , M1 and M1A1 They can have those little beer cans on wheels. Myself I like the feeling of all that steel wrapping around me. I can remember in Graf Germany at a Gunnery when a Bradely was shot buy an M1A1 with a training sabot round . It went through that thing like a 22 through a beer can. The one thing that the wheeled vehicles have is they can get out of harms way faster. I rember the German luchs. That thing would flat out haul tail , in forward or reverse.

The Stryker should do really well in Iraq, we had really good success using the LAV25s during the war and in Operation Desert Scorpion (a joint operation with units from 1st MarDiv and the Army in Babil province), we operated in open and urban terrain. What is key to the success or failure of a weapon system such as the Stryker is still the good ol' Mk.1 Mod 0 human eyeball attached to the scouts and crewmen. Most of the threat we faced during Operation Desert Scorpion was small arms fire with some RPG attacks, our biggest worry was attack by IED's, although the hull on the 25's could withstand a 155mm detonating 10 meters from it. The Stryker's greatest asset, like our LAV's is its' mobility and sights which the bad guys lack. Semper Fi!