Tracked Strykers ?

Crusader74

Verified Military
Verified Military
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
2,766
It looks like the US Army are introducing a new model of the Stryker, tracked, heavier armour and twice the weight.

http://blog.thenewstribune.com/milit...-seen-at-jblm/

Tracked_Stryker-480x320.jpg



The manufacturer of the eight-wheeled Stryker vehicles that make up the backbone of the Army’s fleet at Joint Base Lewis-McChord is unveiling new models of at a conference this week, including ones that would have run counter to their initial purpose as a rapidly deployable medium weight infantry carrier.
General Dynamics is pitching the new models as a path for the Army to improve its vehicle fleet without spending billions of dollars designing new options.
One of the new models is a tracked Stryker that weighs some 42 tons – 22 tons more than an off-the-floor, basic Stryker infantry carrier.*
That’s a significant turn from the Army’s call to create a lighter, wheeled vehicle when it launched the Stryker program and sent the first models to then-Fort Lewis a decade ago. The tracked model is intended to help General Dynamics win a contract to create the next Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, replacing M113 personnel carriers.
“It’s going to be quite a good offering for us,” Mike Cannon, senior vice president for ground combat systems at General Dynamics, told Shepard Media.
“And even if it doesn’t go as the AMPV solution we still believe that we needed a medium weight tracked vehicle in our portfolio. And this will be our first one…And it’s pretty slick looking,” he told Shephard’s Scott Gourley.
Reports from the conference show that Cannon is pitching the new Strykers as more fuel efficient than armored personnel carriers it would replace. National Defense Magazine reports that Strykers cost $18 per mile to operate compared to $45 per mile for the M1113.
Lewis-McChord has about 900 Strykers for its three infantry brigades, the largest concentration of the vehicles in the Army. General Dynamics and the Army have redesigned the vehicle several times over the past decade of constant ground warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan, most recently by creating a slanted “double v hull” to deflect the impact of deadly buried bombs in Afghanistan.
In other Stryker news, the Army is considering placing more of the vehicles in Hawaii under the Pacific Command. The goal, reports the Honolulu Star-Advertiser, is to put them closer to where they might be needed for conflicts in the Pacific as the war in Afghanistan ends.
*An earlier version of this post misstated the weight of the tracked Stryker. It is estimated to be 84,000 pounds.
 
That's certainly a big "F*** You" to Donald Rumsfeld...which is usually the right answer for most problems involving Rummy.

I do have the impression the Army wants to retun to a big, heavy model and walk away from this nasty COIN "theory" it was "saddled" with for the last decade. I guess if you're incapable of, or unwilling to, learn something new...go with what you know.
 
I wonder what the ride quality is like. I.E. break you to bits like the Bradley did (or so I am told, never rode in one) or smooth like the wheeled stryker is supposed to be.
Reed
 
Brads ain't fun to ride in, and strykers are pretty much like being in a HMMWV that's loaded so it's actually in its suspention travel instead of topped out.


I don't know if I would buy into a tracked stryker, while it might work as a step down from a Bradley, I would honestly look more at the LAV25's or whatever the Canucks have. 25mm cannon on top = much more interesting utility as a fire support platform given a motorized infantry implementation of things.
 
We have the LAV 3 which is pretty much the same as the LAV-25. It has room for 8-11 dudes in the back fully loaded. I really like the LAV 3, very comfortable and lot's of room for gear and what ever other mission essential gear you need. Also tons of fire power for what ever you need.
 
42 tons? Pfffft...I can squat that heavy S.O.B....in my hulk mode. But anyways down to seriousness I bet this would be more expensive than the current models in use. At least in terms of production. The fuel efficiency looks like a pretty big improvement so that might outweigh the production cost in the long run. How long do they plan on keeping these in service?
 
It makes sense (a little), as some parts/techniques, etc would be the same as other striker variants. There are some areas where tracked is better, so having a Striker variant would (theoretically) keep the log trail/training pipeline smaller.

That said, is anyone surprised? Big Army is dominated by Mech/ Armor Guys who long for another Desert Storm/OIF.
SOF/Light Infantry are their number 1 enemy (ok, #2 after the AF)
 
How's the maintainence on those things? When I was at 4th tracks, I remember for every hour they splashed their AAV's, they told me they'd need 4 hours of maintenance. In the field, I'd wake up for reveille and still see maintenance platoon turning wrenches. Fuck all that noise. Made me appreciate mechanics more though.
 
Strykerland? Our mechanics never stayed late, they usually got off earlier than the line companies. I guess that's a telling tale, eh? The tracked versions probably would be a bit more intensive, but they're still pretty much built to be easily worked on. There's not a whole lot of "who the fuck thought to put this here" commentary when you're working with or on them.
 
Strykerland? Our mechanics never stayed late, they usually got off earlier than the line companies. I guess that's a telling tale, eh? The tracked versions probably would be a bit more intensive, but they're still pretty much built to be easily worked on. There's not a whole lot of "who the fuck thought to put this here" commentary when you're working with or on them.

Agreed.

For what it's worth, I enjoyed my time on a Stryker. I was either in the ICV or the MEV, and thought both were good, solid vehicles.
 
The first thing I thought when I hopped in one is that I wished I was back in Regiment with them. Both because of what modifications would be done to make its lethality go up about 100 times, as well as an institution that wouldn't be afraid of scratching the paint and would use them in an aggressive manner.
 
Bullshit. The Aussies picked up some M113's that had upgraded armor, rubber band tracks (don't laugh they work), with a lot of other upgrades that can still be carried on a C-130.

Sure that was us? I think we've been running with the same mob of tracks we purchased back in the 60's, periodically sending them off to the shop to get welded back up, new power packs, turrets, lengthen the hull, fresh coat of paint etc etc.
 
Dig, don't you remember the Beast, upgunned M113 you guys had that used to roll on their backs like a 16 year old girl after a wine cooler. I know the 5/7 guys were meant to get a stretched M113.

Lav 3 are Ok, I just don't see what you achieve putting tracks on a Stryker with that pissant gun as opposed to fixing the problems with the Bradleys.

Also that slogan on the front is stupid.
 
When 5/7 split the Army poached all the m113's from the reserve light horse and lancer units and sent them off to be turned into AS3's for the 2 mech battalions, stretched with a extra road wheel added, new turret, decreased fire power... all that good stuff, eventually they filtered back to 5RAR and 7RAR, just in time for the Government to park them all up in a cost saving measure. I didn't have a hell of a lot to do with them, never saw a FSV or MRV in the flesh.
 
Lav 3 are Ok, I just don't see what you achieve putting tracks on a Stryker with that pissant gun as opposed to fixing the problems with the Bradleys.

Brad's an IFV with a sorta-tangle-with-tanks gun and TOW's coupled with the afterthought of having a fire team comfortably and a squad hating each other in the back. There's no fixing what it is.

Think about that short little punk at the bar with a big fucking mouth towards the biggest guy at the bar (T-whatever tank). That's a Bradley. It's got enough balls to get into a fight (TOW, Bushmaster) and it'll probably be fine if it lands the first punch, but if that punch gets shrugged off and it takes a hit? it's going to get knocked the fuck out.

It's done well, but arguably who it's fought against in full-blown combat ain't been the best or brightest. Case in point, there's been more brad's killed in full-on maneuver warfare by friendly fire than by enemy fire... and that's not to say the enemy vehicles were incapable of getting a kill, operator headspace and timing plays a large part.

Tracked strykers fill the "tag along with mech as support/C&C/ETC" role currently filled by old-as-shit M113's in the arsenal... with a new, better armored and better survivability hull that has parts commonality with the wheeled strykers and also are designed from the ground up to interface with modern equipment.

Strykers are best thought of and fought from like they're a big f'ing hmmwv with a pile of SA/ISR capabilities onboard. Tracks or no tracks.
 
Back
Top