Modified Stryker Could Serve as Main Platform for FCS Vehicles

NetDefense | 26 August 2004

[SLB]

Dean Lockwood, a weapons systems analyst for Forecast International, says that a modified version of the U.S. Army's Stryker vehicle could end up serving as the primary platform for the service's manned ground vehicle portion of FCS. He says that Stryker's proven effectiveness in battle, combined with the Army's recent decision to push back portions of the FCS manned ground vehicle development, could cause Congress to divert money from FCS to Stryker. "The main point I have about it is that while the ground FCS vehicle is being pushed back, [the Army] has yet to be set on any concrete design," Lockwood said. "It hasn't decided if the [FCS vehicle] will be tracks or wheels. As soon as Stryker became combat proven, you see Congress giving more money to the Stryker program. To me, that is a sort of ominous sign for the 'mythical' FCS vehicle."

[SLB]

Am I surprised? No.

[SLB]

FYI

[.cnI redruM]

It could, but the MTBF would have to reach triple-digit mileage first.

[SLB]

Stryker ping.

[SLB]

It could, but the MTBF would have to reach triple-digit mileage first.

Picky, picky, picky! :-)

[PeoplesRepublicOfWashington]

FCS?

[Boundless]

> ... Stryker's proven effectiveness in battle ...

What do we actually know about this so far?

What are the grunts saying about it?

The Pravda Press often picks on the unarmored Hummers,
but so far they've been silent on Stryker. I presume
"no story" means "it works as designed".

[68skylark]

FCS stands for "future combat system." It's supposed to be a family of new light- or medium-weight armored vehicles. The Stryker vehicle has always been called an "interim" vehicle, to help the Army reach it's ultimate goal in gradual steps.

[68skylark]

I think it's safe to say the lib media would have daily headlines if they could find something bad to report about the Stryker.

[Jonah Hex]

Am I surprised? No.

Neither am I. I predicted over a year ago that the Army would probably push back the FCS vehicle until new automotive technologies (i.e. hybrids, fuel cells, etc.) matured, while accelerating new C4I and battlefield LAN integration into the existing Stryker chassis.

(I know that comes across as an "I told you so", but...)

:-)

[Darksheare]

Yeesh..

[martin_fierro]

At first blush, I thought this was about the "Morford Stryker."

Shudder.

[SLB]

During the IOT we could see the hand writing on the wall. Knew it was coming, just not the schedule.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

new C4I and battlefield LAN integration

What are we talking about with these acronyms?

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

During the IOT.....

What is that?

[Jonah Hex]

Sorry, occupational hazard. (smile)

"C4I" = command/control/communications/computers/intelligence

"LAN" = local area network

[noodler]

They need to get this together. The M1 Abrams is an excellent fighting vehicle but very heavy and costly.There needs to be a flexible design vehicle which can be light and swift and modified easily for heavy armor and tracks or if not,Two new vehicles.The history of the Sherman's in WWII is not a path to be repeated with air cooled aircraft engines stuffed into them or being nicknamed by the enemy, American cigarette lighters since they Lit Up every time they were hit.Catchup is as bad as Ketchup.

[GalaxieFiveHundred]

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Can a C17 haul one or two of these and land where it needs to land?

I am in the flight path of the Long Beach Airport and see one or two a day fly over on landing approach.

It is a big plane, looks like a serious machine.

[Sergio]

Hi 68skylark

Like the name, my dad had a 70 GS. 455ci engine, that thing would take off like a scalded cat.

On to the FCS, is it supposed to be a replacement for the Bradley or something else? Wish I was more up to date on the mech side of the DoD.

Thanks in advance for your reply and best regards.

Sergio