Replies

From what I understand, the Stryker has like all weapon systems fielded, had to have some small kinks worked out. The Soldiers had to get used to employing it properly and get a feel for what it can and cannot do.

This was to be expected.

Other than the fencing added in order to defeat RPG rounds I have heard no qualms from the people who know [The actual troops employing the system]. As a matter of fact I have heard nothing but good things about it's capabilities on the field in Iraq. Especially the quiet engine and tires and the advantage gained when sneeking up on the enemy [and the fear terrorists have at knowing it is so quiet].
I completely discount this article as it is not discussing an American weapon system or Americans period. I find it quite sad that any anti-Stryker whiner would want to use the criticism coming from such a limp wristed natio...err...source.

We'll always have the contrarians and the naysayers...

From what I understand, the Stryker has like all weapon systems fielded, had to have some small kinks worked out. The Soldiers had to get used to employing it properly and get a feel for what it can and cannot do. That's funny, I don't recall ever reading about soldiers trying to work the "kinks" out of the M1 Abrams.

VaBthang4 wrote I find it quite sad that any anti-Stryker whiner would want to use the criticism coming from such a limp wristed natio...err...source.

Steady.

Seems there's still a lot of debate amongst intelligent people re the Stykers abilities in the field, from every angle. I put a lot of weight on the post/s here from folk who have ridden them, worked in theatre with them. Me, I'm not an expert on LAV's but find the debate interesting at least.

centurion316 wrote ....propagandish screed from some commie-leftist newspaper in New Zealand that propagated complete nonsense about the Stryker Combat Vehicle. Of course, this leftist agenda merchant journalist....

The National Business Review is New Zealand's equivalent of "The Wall St Journal". Its interest in the NZLAV would have been prompted by the cost of purchase, and value for money. Note, (your post #64) that the National Business Review was not quoting a New Zealand newspaper.

Many here thought the NZ army should have retained a tracked upgrade path. These views would have been strengthened by the New Zealand Army's M113's going places in East Timor that Australian LAV's could not.