Here's your basic issue vehicle. It's up to you to provide the Field Improvised Modifications.
Posted on 11/09/2004 5:14:37 PM PST by murdocj
Editor’s note: They rolled in on eight untracked wheels a year ago, one year after being introduced to the Army. Here’s a look at how the Army’s Stryker vehicle has fared.
MOSUL, Iraq — Ask nearly anyone in a Stryker unit and they’ll say they weren’t too crazy about the eight-wheeled vehicles at first.
Something about rubber tires seemed unlikely to withstand the same beating as a tracked vehicle. The Strykers looked slow and lumbering.
But the naysayers have been converted.
After the Strykers’ introduction to the Army two years ago, and after a year of combat experience in Iraq, the vehicles are almost too good to be true, say those who ride them, fix them or command them.
“I was kind of skeptical,” said Sgt. David Finney, noncommissioned officer in charge of the ground support equipment shop for the 73rd Engineer Company, part of the 1st Brigade, 25th Infantry Division.
“I was used to working on tanks. I saw the tires and thought, ‘what are you going to do with broken tires?’ But it’s surpassed everything I’ve expected,” he said. “It’s definitely saved lives. The Strykers can take a pretty big hit and get back on the road quickly.”
In October, a car bomb packed with 500 pounds of explosives hit a Stryker in Mosul. It killed a soldier and pummeled the vehicle.
The Stryker was back on the road in six days.
(Excerpt) Read more at estripes.com ...
There are unconfirmed reports that some Strykers are down around Fallujah, as well.
Beats the hell out of a Hummer
I want an "ARMOUR" vehicle... as in "ARMOUR Hot Dogs." I want it to have a Bacon launcher and a liquified pig fat cannon.
Is this an advertisement by the manufacturer.....or are these real military accolades representing the bulk of people using them???
Hmmm... A pork fat flamethrower. You may be on to someting there. Either that or I need my meds adjusted.
So you basically want to drop a MOAB.
MOAB - Metropolitan Overflow of Antimuslim Bacon
One of the Stryker soldiers had a blog called "My War: Fear and Loathing in Iraq". He had nothing but praise for them, and saw a bit of combat in them.
Well, if you're a believer in media slanting its stories
***and who isn't?***
I'm sure they culled glowing endorsement quotes from soldiers.
But the fact is that the Stryker is doing exactly what it was designed to do so far, and doing it well.
There are obviously issues with the air-deployability and the Mobile Gun System variant, but this thing is not the death trap Lonnie Shoultz and other M113 backers said it would be.
Type Stryker-problems in google and see what tests show.
This may well be another pork barrel gizmo that will help kill our people...maybe not....but alot of people in the know think so.
I write a lot about the Stryker on my site. I know what you get when you google.
I'm not talking test results here. I'm talking real world results.
Strykers have been taking tons of RPG hits. One lost in the spring due to a gas can (according to the Pentagon) and maybe one lost in the big fight on August 4th.
If it's not any good against RPGs, why haven't more been destroyed? Those people "in the know" predicted heavy losses in men and machines if the Styker ever saw combat.
Hasn't happened.
Here's your basic issue vehicle. It's up to you to provide the Field Improvised Modifications.
ROTFLMFAO!
I suggest adding slat armor. Sure, it might make the thing untransportable in a C-130, but one hit from an RPG and that thing will POP.
Also, don't ask where the components come from. You don't want to know...
The vehicle was not designed for front line combat but only for back up missions. That is a fact.
Go on the internet, stop puishing make beleive, and read what pros and cons for this vehicle are available bynthose well aware of the situation present for all to see.
The ceramic armor story is now over a year old. A work-around was adopted to deal with it.
The reason I "surmise" "everything on the protection side of the equation is fine" is from the reports out of Iraq.
Not tests. Not projections. Not theories.
Results.
I readily admit that the quotes included in the story I posted were hand-picked to support the thrust of the story, which is that the Stryker is performing very well.
That being said, a lot of soldiers quoted in Big Media stories, quoted in blogs, and emailed to me personally are all quite impressed with the vehicle.
Are they all lying? The guys in the field are all wrong and the suits (many of which have connections to the companies who would build the alternative to the Stryker) campaigning against it are all right?
And who said anything about front-line combat? The Stryker is a glorified armored truck. It seems to work very very well.
As for pros and cons, I'm quite aware of them. I've written about them quite a bit on my site. I've noted many problems with the Stryker. I've also come to the attention of someone claiming to be Lonnie Shoultz, though some of the basic ignorance the individual has shown tells me that it isn't really him.
And what is the actual combat experience of this vehicle in Iraq that you alude to and how well as it fared in defending it's occupants?
How about this:
MOAB - Massive Overpressure of Aerosolized Bacon.
"A pork fat flamethrower"
I had a gas grill that fit that description once.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.