On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 09:09:18 -0400, "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:


"phil hunt" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 18:33:50 -0400, Kevin Brooks
wrote:

"noname" wrote in message
...
According to internal Pentagon e-mails obtained by Newsweek, the Humvee
situation is so bad that the head of the U.S. Army Forces Command, Gen.
Larry Ellis, has urged that more of the new Stryker combat vehicles be
put into the field. Sources say that the Army brass back in Washington
have not yet concurred with that. The problem: the rubber-tire Strykers
are thin-skinned and don't maneuver through dangerous streets as well
as
the fast-pivoting, treaded Bradley.

Duh. But the problem you posted was in reference to the HMMWV, not the
Bradley. Given a choice between a HMMWV (even uparmored) and a Stryker,
the
Stryker looks very good.

Indeed. I wonder how good Stryker's armour is against KE weapons,
however. Would it beat an anti-materiel rifle, or HMG? How about a
23 mm cannon?

It would likely be lousy against a KE weapon of any size, to include
anything of 12.7mm (with SLAP rounds, for example) and above at short enough
range. But IIRC the Bradley would be similarly vulnerable, though maybe not
as much so as the Stryker. Stryker is great compared to an uparmored HMMWV
or a home-reinforced deuce and a half or five ton; but it understandably is
going to come up short compared to the M2 series vehicles. Which is OK--the
missions of the two are a bit different. I have little doubt that we could
have put the better part or all of a Stryker BCT into northern Iraq during
the early phase of OIF had they been available at that time, whereas we were
pressed to get a heavy BN task force (minus) (and I don't know that we got
*any* M1A1's into that package) into the region as was. Stryker is not going
to replace the Bradley, but it sure does provide a better solution than the
HMMWV's with applique armor in terms of giving early entry and stability
support forces better protection.

The LAV series is almost entirely steel, so it does work fairly well
against small-calibre AP ammunition. I know the Canadian LAV III is
proofed for the front quarter against 14.5 mm AP. The Stryker may not
be due to the efforts to stuff them into C-130s. Since almost all 23
mm ammunition is HEI it should deflect that as well.

The real problem with the US Army's LAV is that they messed up on the
applique armour procurement, so they don't have their vehicles
equipped with it. I imagine they would have good protection against
older model RPGs if they were in theatre with their ceramic applique
packages.

Of course the LAV series has long been safe against land mines,
typically losing a wheel or two but suffering no casualties and able
to return to the depot under its own power.

--
Robb McLeod )
A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops.
On my desk I have a work station...