Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 02/12/07 6:18 pm:
Elliot
Your concerns about the vehicle is noted . Since it had no operational experience before Iraq it is not suprising there are some flaws that needs ironing out .Frankly it's better to find these things out in Iraq than facing down the Chinese. As I recall in the 1980s the Bradlee came under simular critique. What we learn about how it operates in Iraq will be much more useful than what we'd learn driving them around the NTC for the next decade .
It's not like the Stryker is some brand new, never been done before vehicle. It's based on the LAV platform that's been used by the Marines Corps for close to twenty years. It is designed to bring the troops to the battle .It is not designed to be a tank in battle . When you contrast it's performance against the Humvee in Iraq it has performed superior. Army officials have taken lessons learned from Iraq and are making changes to be implemented in the near future including reduce the overall weight of the vehicle with the add-on slat armor to prevent it from getting stuck .
There have been plenty of incidences already of road side detonations that the vehicle and crew have survived ,and still maintained their mobility . Once a Bradlee loses it's track it's usefulness as a transport is over until it can be picked up and removed from the field .
The best information is coming from the field. Commenting on survivability which appears to be Saph's biggest concern MICHAEL E. KURILLA, Lieutenant Colonel
1st Battalion, 24th Infantry Regiment (Stryker Brigade Combat Team)made this observation about it's perfomance in Mosul on 'Strategy Page' :
I offer the readers the following facts based on six months of fighting a counter-insurgency with Strykers in Mosul, Iraq and ask them to make their own conclusion. These facts are purely as they apply to one Stryker Infantry Battalion -- 1st Battalion, 24th Infantry Regiment, which has operated in Mosul, Iraq since Oct 2004 with 75 Strykers.
The article specifically faulted the Stryker's substandard survivability and maintenance to the point of stating it places soldiers' lives at risk. I would argue that nothing could be further from the truth.
Since Oct 2004, our Battalion's Strykers have been engaged with 122 Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), 186 Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs), 33 car bombs, of which 10 where Suicide Car Bombs, and countless mortar and small arms engagements. In November and December we were fighting an enemy that massed up to 70 insurgents during attacks. As a result the battalion has had 7 soldiers killed in action and 102 wounded in action (81 of which were able to return to duty within 21 days). The majority of all casualties have come from doing what the nation expects us to do - dismounted infantry operations closing with and destroying the enemy.
The insurgents most dangerous and powerful weapon is the suicide car bomb. I have personally watched 4 of 10 suicide car bombs slam into Strykers creating an explosion that is equivalent to a 500lb bomb, one of which was a suicide truck carrying 52 x 155mm rounds (a net explosive weight 10% greater than a 2000lb JDAM) that detonated within 25m of a Stryker. In all 10 suicide car bomb attacks we did not lose a single soldiers' life, limb or eyesight for those soldiers riding on the Stryker.
One example -- Over the last six months, one Stryker, C21, has been hit by a suicide car bomb, 9 IEDs, 8 RPG direct hits, and countless small arms. The Infantry squad has had 6 wounded but every soldier is still in Iraq and still fighting on a daily basis. After each attack, the Stryker continued to stay in the fight or was repaired in less than 48 hours.
Not only is the Stryker survivable, it is incredibly reliable. Our 75 Strykers each have at least 20,000 miles on them. We average over 1,000 miles a month on each Stryker and amazingly we average greater than 96% Operational Readiness rate. That is 3-4 Strykers down at any given time. This is the highest operational readiness rate of any armored vehicle in the Army inventory. We average less than 24 hours to refit a vehicle after it has received battle damage. The electronic computers, monitors, mapping software, weapons cameras and radios that give us incredible situational awareness average greater than a 94% operational readiness rate.
Much like every other weapon system the Army has fielded it will continue to get modified and better with time. Remember, we are on the fifth major modification of the M1 tank. These are the irrefutable facts without emotion.
Now, let me share with you some emotion. I have watched this vehicle save my soldiers lives and enable them to kill our nation's enemies. In urban combat there is no better vehicle for delivering a squad of infantryman to close with and destroy the enemy. It is fast, quiet, incredibly survivable, reliable, lethal, and capable of providing amazing situational awareness. These qualities distinguish it from every other platform in the Army inventory but most importantly it delivers the most valuable weapon on the battlefield - a soldier.
Do not just take my word on the Stryker, ask one of the 700 soldiers in this Battalion which vehicle they want to go to combat in.
Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 02/13/07 1:45 pm:
Tom, I don't question the survivability of the Stryker. The damn thing is TOUGH. I question its maneuverability in wet or muddy terrain. I also question whether it is as good at its jobs as other vehicles already in wide use.
Your discussion of the weaknesses of the Bradley are noted as well. Any tracked vehicle can be stopped by taking out its track. But like the Stryker, the Bradley was never designed to be in combat... its a troop transport vehicle. Its armed and armored, but its not a tank, even if it is often used as one (mistakenly, in my opinion).
BTW, if you look at the history of the Bradley, you'll find that the vehicle that is currently in use has little resemblance to the vehicle's original design. I would have argued against the Bradley's original design too. And I think that the Stryker has many of the maneuverability weaknesses that the original design of the Bradley had.
The difference between the Stryker and the Bradley is that the Stryker gets stuck in mud because of its own weight, the Bradley does not. The Stryker with extra armor cannot pull itself out of the mud with its own winch, while the Bradley can winch itself out of trouble in an emergency. And the Bradley has more storage capacity for moving troops than the Stryker. All of these things make the Bradley a superior vehicle to the Stryker.
As for comparisons between the Stryker and the Hummer, I don't believe that it is a fair comparison. The Hummer is essentially a glorified jeep. It is an individual transport, not an armored troop carrier. Its role is to get individual officers or squads from one place to another. It is not there to act as an armored troop transport. If there are officers that are arguing that the Stryker should replace the Hummer, there's a huge problem with the Stryker. Because they are essentially saying that the Stryker is no more combat capable and has no more use than a lightly armored streetcar. That is NOT what the Stryker was designed for.
Anyway, I think we can leave it to the Army to sort this out. If the troops using them like them, then I'm not going to second-guess the guys on the ground, regardless of my own biases. If they want more Strykers, then give them more Strykers. In wartime, you give the troops what they think they need to get the job done, and you leave the post-battle analysis of equipment for after the war is over. If they asked for cans of silly string, I'd give it to them...
...oh, wait, they did ask for that, didn't they. American ingenuity at work... a 50-cent fix for a million-dollar problem.
Elliot
Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 02/13/07 3:08 pm:
I also think the performance of the Stryker is a critical test of the transformational Army that was envisioned . So far if I read the testimonials correctly it is exceeding expectations in the field . Michael Yon has one account in the link above where a Stryker parked on top of an IED and all occupants survived after the detonation (albiet with injuries of various degrees of severity...none life threatening ).
