Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: nevergore
But you have to find it absolutely amazing that all the time, money, development, requriements etc. that the US Government put in these Strykers and they didn't plan in advance to defend against on of the prolific weapons on the battlefield, the RPG.....Good Job Pentagon weenies..

Good point. But still, better late than never.

BTW, can anyone differentiate for me between Bradley Fighting Vehicules, Coyote, Stryker? Thanks.

20 posted on 11/19/2003 6:36:13 AM PST by americanSoul (Better to die on your feet, than live on your knees. Live Free or Die. I should be in New Hampshire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: americanSoul
BTW, can anyone differentiate for me between Bradley Fighting Vehicules, Coyote, Stryker? Thanks.

Sure. The M2 and M3 Bradley are full-tracked, seriously armored infantry fighting vehicles, armed with a 25mm [usually] automatic cannon and TOW missile antitank launcher. Loaded with troops, they're an Infantry tool; fitted with extra weapons and recon scout teams with Antitank launchers and radios, they're a scouting vehicle with a little less profile than a 60-ton tank. Still, the Bradley approaches the weight and bulk of a WWII Sherman tank. Bradleys:

Stryker was meant to be a much lighter wheeled vehicle, also capable of transporting an infantry unit, but not for them to fight from. At around half the weight of the Bradley, it would have been capable of being moveed around in-theater [in Iraq, for example] if not necessarily transported from the US to the theatre that way. But the add-ons have kicked Stryker's weight up to between 23 and 25 tons, far beyond it's design weight, and degrading performance, on road and off. The high center of gravity required by the design [both sets of front wheels steer] makes it very suceptable to rolling over, particularly if the wheels on one side go off-road into soft sand or mud. And mines are a major threat. Still,, the Russians have successfully used their BTR 8-wheeled vehicles for four generations of development...but took horrible levels of casualties among BTR crews in Afghanistan and Chechnya.

Stryker is more lightly armed than a Bradley, with only a .50 machinegun or a short-range 40mm grenade launcher, though a tank-killing gun version is under consideration. Stryker:

Coyote is a Canadian scout vehicle that performs pretty much the role of their old Lynx M113-type vehicle. It is a little like the LAV 25 wheeled light armored vehicle used by US Marines, with a 25mm cannon, except that it also has a very sophisticated suite of sensors. It has an extendable mast, a dismountable control console, digital commo links, ground surveillance radar, laser range finder, and a laser target designator for Copperhead 155 guided projectiles. It has the same size problem as other armored vehicles, but comes closer to being a practicle vehicle that does its job well than the *one size fits all* Strykers. The Canadians also use specialized wheeled fighting vehicles arranged for other specific battlefield tasks, though they share common automotive parts and armament packages: Cougar, the Grizzly, and the Husky make up the CVLAP program, along with the recon vehicle, the Coyote:


35 posted on 11/19/2003 7:31:46 AM PST by archy (Angiloj! Mia kusenveturilo estas plena da angiloj!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson