New Zealand Gets Super Stryker

StrategyPage.com ^ | August 31, 2001 | Bay & Dunnigan

[Cannoneer No. 4]

New Zealand Gets Super Stryker

August 31, 2003: The New Zealand army is buying 105 LAVs (Light Armored Vehicles) from General Dynamics Land Systems. This wheeled armored vehicle is based on the Piranha III LAV long used by the U.S. Marines, and later adopted by the US Army as the Stryker. This vehicle was designed Mowag of Switzerland, a company now owned by General Dynamics. In some ways the New Zealand LAV is an improvement on the Stryker LAV, with many small, but important, improvements. All 105 of the New Zealand vehicles will have a turret with a 25mm automatic cannon and have room in the back for ten troops. Seven LAVs will be equipped for engineer work and three used as recovery vehicles. The 14 ton, 8x8 vehicle has a maximum road speed of 100 kilometers an hour.

[KiaKaha]

I will fully admit that my initial “calculation” was done as an example, In NZ their has been a huge fuss made about the transportability issue, the point I was making is I cannot foresee a situation where we (NZ) would need to urgently transport the LAV’s in that manner.

The other point is the deployment of the LAV’s by air cannot be purely indicated in distance/hours, you must factor in maintenance and crew hours.

As to the C130/LAV – C17/Bradley argument I know what I would chose, unfortunately it’s a choice of what we (NZ) have. What we DO need is a ship in the RNZN capable of doing the deployment job.

[KiaKaha]

The NZ Navy is currently tendering for a new transport/logistics ship to be available 2005

[Timesink]

They are still working the bugs out of Stryker and there is already a SuperStryker, and the New Zealanders are buying it?

Well, better they be the beta testers than us.

[New Zealander]

The best I can figure out and basically guess at, is that the improvements to the Stryker, are the improved generation turret, which has delayed the order being filled, and (I'm speculating wildly here) the height adjustment system that allows the LAV to fit into a C-130 without having to be decapitated first. Even if the NZLAV is a 'SuperStryker ', it won't be long before upgrade programs improve the Stryker beyond its current capabilities, and those of the NZLAV.

[exnavy]

Good find, this is the first I've heard of this. I'll keep my eye on the company newsletter for any other details.

[exnavy]

A C-130 will carry the Stryker, thats why it was pressed into production.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

The New Zealanders placed their order with General Motors Canada back in the spring of 2001, according to Jane's Defence Weekly.

I'm finding it difficult to keep all the licensees, variants, and names straight. It would appear that Pirahna III, LAV III, NZLAV, Stryker and Kodiak are essentially the same vehicle with minor variations.

Piranha III is a family of armoured wheeled vehicles developed by Mowag Motorwagenfabriken of Switzerland, now owned by General Motors Defense of Canada, which is now owned by General Dynamics Land Systems . General Motors also produce a version of the Piranha III known as the LAV III under license. Alvis Vickers Ltd of UK is also licensed for production and marketing of Piranha 8x8 and 10x10 Light Armoured Vehicles. The vehicles are available as Armoured Personnel Carrier, Command Vehicle, Reconnaissance, Fire Support, Repair and Recovery Vehicle, Ambulance, Mortar Carrier, Observation, Load Carrier and Mortar Fire Control variants.

Piranha III has been ordered by Sweden, Denmark, Ireland, Spain and Switzerland.

The General Motors Defense LAV III 8 x 8 has been ordered by Canada (650), Australia (150), and New Zealand (105). First deployment of the LAV III was with Canadian Forces with UN operations in Eritrea in early 2001. The LAV III has been selected as the base vehicle for the US Army’s Interim Armoured Vehicle (IAV) program and has been named the Stryker. The US Army plans to procure over 2000 Stryker IAVs. First deliveries were in July 2002 and the vehicle is planned to enter service beginning November 2003.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

25mm beats .50 cal, and turrets beat Remote Weapons Stations, especially when they don't work and you have to crawl outside to reload. Seems to me NZLAV is better than Stryker.

[New Zealander]

You mean the Stryker doesn’t have a 25mm equipped turret, based upon the LAV-25s?!

My understanding was that there were to be a range of versions, including some packing 105mm, others with some sort of anti-tank missile, and some with limited weapons, used for stores vehicles - all to be used together in a unit.

[Rebelbase]

The Kiwis are serious about protecting their sheep from Jihadist types.

[New Zealander]

Far - checkout that pop-gun!

[LibKill]

Look, I'm not an expert, just a sometimes Marine Rifleman.

I don't trust this thing. And it is no replacement for the M1A1 or the Bradley.

The Army has a good thing going with the Abrams and the Bradley. Instead of buying these hotwheels, they should try to improve transport to where they can get the armor where it needs to go on time.

Even though I do make fun of the Army from time to time, they're on OUR side!

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Nope.

The Kongsberg Remote Weapons Station mounts either a .50-caliber machine gun or MK19 40 mm grenade launcher. Both are operated by remote control from inside of the vehicle. The RWS has a camera with a zoom lens that can spot distant enemy forces.

The RWS has to be removed to load on a C-130, then reassembled after debarkation. I do not believe mounting the RWS is operator-level maintenance.

[Tailback]

What Travis McGee meant was that to load the Stryker in a C-130 all the fuel has to be drained, all the crews field gear removed, all the ammo removed, and all externally mounted stuff removed so that it makes weight and will fit. Sure a Stryker will fit, it just can't fight once it gets there until a second C-130 delivers its basic load. Oh, it also limits the range of the C-130 drastically. There are lots of upgrade packages available for the M-113 to add armor, turrets, band tracks, hybrid drive, etc. All of those would cost a fraction of the amount for Stryker and you'd get a vehicle that can be air dropped and actually drive through a little mud. Remember, Stryker is only supposed to be an interim vehicle until FCS is online. Why not use a cheaper interim vehicle with more capability?

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Why not use a cheaper interim vehicle with more capability?

That is the $64,000 question. The advocates of the tracked M-113A3 and M-8 Armored Gun System lost the argument. They had a pretty good argument, lots of facts on their side, more bang for the buck, but the wheels won.

Why did the wheels win?

Several reasons come to mind.

1. United Defense couldn't compete in the stock options and employment opportunities for retired generals arena.

2. The Airborne did not scream loud enough and long enough when the Sheridans were taken away from them and the M-8 was cancelled. The rationale for the Stryker Brigade Combat Teams was to provide combat power to the 82nd and 173rd so they don't have to be just speed bumps. What they needed was a parachute-delivered BMD-type vehicle for paratroopers to ride in. That ain't what they got.

3. The army's decision-makers come from two seperate camps -- Peacekeeper vs Blitzkrieger. The Blitzkriegers commanded cav troops in Germany in the 70's and armor brigades in Desert Storm. The highlight of the Peacekeeper's careers was Haiti, Somalia, Bosnia, and Kosovo. I think we lost a lot of Blitzkriegers from 1993 to 2001. I think the Peacekeepers are in charge.

Stryker is a great vehicle for delivering the pizza in various Third-World sh*tholes. If you think peacekeeping and military operations other than war and low intensity conflict is all we are ever going to be faced with, you like wheels. If you look at Chinese, Russian, Ukrainian and other developments in Main Battle Tanks, and then you look at how many ragtag and bobtailed outfits have old Soviet tanks, the oldest and sorriest of which can eat a Stryker's lunch, you like tracks.

[Tailback]

Actually, I know all the reasons you listed. I just can't say them out loud because FR has ears attached to peoples' rear-ends and I've been threatened because I'm still in the military. BTW, if you aint Cav, you aint $hi&. Former 19-D light cav scout.

Scouts Out!

[shaggy eel]

,,, has the NZ Navy flogged off the Charles Upham? What a disaster that is/was.

[shaggy eel]

FYI

[Brian Allen]

<< The Kiwis only need one [Clerk] and one telephone, to accept the surrender terms. >>

The Kiwis need a recorded message that says "We are a little speck of a place and, apart from our SAS and heavily-armed Citizen Militia, whose ancesters suffered more battle casualties per capita during the 20th century than did the men of any Western military force, don't have much to offer in the way of a defense.

But we do have a dozen fully-nuclear-armed Trident submarines and only two of them are ever in port at any given time.

So, if you reckon you know where our Tridents are and are confident you can get them -- and our Aussie and American Allies' Tridents and Nimitzes -- before they get you -- and your granny and your wife and kids and grandkids and cousins and your girl friends[Aand their's] -- give it your best shot, Bucko.

Otherwise piss off.

We're busy here.

Having a Good Time.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

There is a price to be paid for speaking the truth. The nail that sticks out gets hammered.