James Bailey

What happened to the Stryker discussion? how many REMFs does it take to sustain a deployed Stryker rifleman for a month? 10:1? 20:1? 30:1?

The SBCT's 155mm gun is a huge upgrade from the old infantry bde's 105mm. That advantage represents the most important firepower difference. Survivability is the biggest upgrade the Stryker offers over the normal infantry bde's humvee gun trucks. Overall, SBCT seems like a huge step forward for infantry forces. The key question that remains for me is deployability and logistical sustainability of these units. We have touched on both these topics briefly, but I don't think anyone has presented a conclusive answer. But then again, perhaps no one at the Pentagon even knowns!?!

STRYKER-PSG : Do you have any comments on how the logistics of a SBCT and its 300+ ICVs compare to other BCT types? I'm sure they go thru a lot of POL during a typical deployed day... Thanks - great thread all around; enjoying all the comments a lot.

Good post Chris and nice summary of the BCT TO&Es - I enjoyed reading these. I can see why the SBCTs in Iraq is in such demand. That is a lot of rolling thunder. Do you have any info on the logistical requirements of a deployed SBCT? How does it compare to a HBCT and IBCT?

Isn't this the exact role Stryker is built around - a meat-ier 'light force' on the escalation dominance chain? It allows our infantry to get there faster, with more punch than our previous capabilities, and survive longer against the light enemy without adding all the logistical burdens of a full heavy force.

JonS- what does TE OPE KAATUA O AOTEAROA mean? StrykerPSG- is there any serious discussion that you are aware of about adding a LAVIII/25 as a SBF platform?

If anyone wants to read one of the key AGAINST aarguments, it is here: O'Reilly Piece The irony in this piece is that his key argument AGAINST the Stryker - namely that it puts US servicemen's lives at risk - turned out to be one of the biggest arguement FOR the Stryker. Good illustration of how the theoretical analysis can fail to hold up in real world.

1992-94: 110th MI Bn, 10th Mtn Div, Fort Drum NY --Deployed 1993, OP Restore Hope, Somalia 1994-96: 312th MI Bn, 1st Cav Div, Fort Hood, TX 1996-98: US Army Intel & Security Command, Fort Meade, MD 1998-01 IRR Washington DC vic. 2001-2006: 3-116th Inf, 29th Inf Div, VA National Guard --Deployed 2005, OP Enduring Freedom, Afghanistan (TF Thunder, 25DIVARTY)

If I were a LAV salesman, I would be very very happy these days and my phone would be ringing off the hook. Wheeled heavies are clearly the direction Western military powers are headed. There are just way too many advantages against the light enemy compared to the tracked heavies. Sure if China suddenly invaded India or North Korea the South, this would change. But in the Dafurs, Iraqs, Afghanistans, Lebanons, etc wheels are the only way to go. Keep the HMMWVs inside the wire, the M-1 MBTs in reserve and ride in style on 8 wheels!

Thanks for the comments StrykerPSG. Good stuff. What turned me in favor of the Stryker was conversions with senior NCOs that have fought in the damn thing and *unanimously* they all agreed it is helping us win fights and keep guys alive and as such a huge step forward. Why was the 25mm SBF idea not pursued? That turret has wide range of fire options - 5.56mm pin, 7.62mm coax, and the 25mm ass-kicker. I get the 50cal as a good compromise but I don't understand why a compromise was necessary. I did talk to many Canadians in Afghanistan, and they loved that turret and thought us mad for dropping it. EAs are huge and Co-Lat damage restrictions less in Afghanistan compared to Iraq, so some caveats must be mentioned here. Finally, thanks for your service.

Try to spell his name right, and then worship the man whose idea you are keeping alive. http://www.cmmc2.org/forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=614 All the best Andreas </font>

Hey Jon, good to see you around again. Yeah, you might have hit the nail on the head with that question. Why didn't we just use the LAVIII design? LAV designs have clear advantages over the HMMWV, which, even with all the bells and whistle, is not really a combat platform. LAV designs also have a clear advantage over tracked heavier platforms by reducing the logistical footprint w/o losing lethality or survivability against a light enemy. So LAVIII vs Stryker: Can one of you experts fill us in on why USA choose to reinvent the wheel?

BigDuke- You oppose the war, that is fine. But that doesn't mean you should be throwing our soldiers away, which is what you do if we don't have the Stryker. The reality is that there are hundreds of soldiers breathing today thanks to the Stryker. There are thousands who still have their arms and legs all attached thanks to the Stryker. These are facts, not theories. It has moved the light force away from being light on survivability (the Humvee is not a combat platform - we learned that in Somalia and that hasn't changed after adding a few tons of steel). My only regret on the Stryker is that we (1) don't have more of them, and (2)didn't have them sooner. We could have cut the KIA rate in half and the WIA rate in 1/3d if we had. I personally know two KIAs in Afghanistan that would have been with us today if they had been in a Stryker. Also, it is not just the US Army that is benefitting. Talk to some Canadians. They do things with their LAV-III bn in Afghanistan that the US light bns can't dream of doing in our Humvee gun trucks. The Canadians are damn fine infantryman, and their LAV-III has been a huge combat multipler on their light-fighting skills. (BTW - great thread. Really enjoying reading all the different view points. Kudos!)

Question- Did anyone take the time to read all of JasonC's 35 points? Reminds me of Martin Luther. Being an old light fighter myself, I orginially thought the Stryker was an overpriced piece of sh*t. However after several years of talking to the guys that know - primarily NCOs on the front lines - I have taken a 180 degrees turn on the thing. The school-bus painted drab can take hits and keep its cargo "Charle Miking" it. Survivability is the key point here - forget all those other shortcomings. Chris - glad to hear of your retirement! Are you Ready Reserve? Thinking about the Guard?

Yep, the 210th MP has got a great rep. I'm 3-116th. Thanks for your service. Go ANG!

210th MP Bn? </font>

210th MP Bn?

Hev- Apologies if I offended you. You can be pissed, that is fine. Sorry to step on any toes there. Two points- (1) the end of those two monsters was the end of their horrible policy of dead and hopelessness. What impact their deaths had on the situation in Iraq is unclear (and unknowable), but what is clear is that their deaths were victories for the side that is trying to bring about a better day there. That victory, however brief and sparing, was what I was toasting. and (2) I'm in the National Guard and deployed to Afghanistan. As part of the intel section of a infantry battalion, I had the unfortunate job of having to see what thermobaric and MAC Hellfires do to humans in caves and other enclosed fighting positions. Trust me, there is no glory in this. Only small victories against evil. Again, sorry if I was too political or appear to glorify death.

Amen brother, amen! the TOW going in... and Uday's grave Kudos to the Screaming Eagles for that kill. and kudos to BFC for allowing us to model that in CMSF!

I was only commenting on the situation presented in that video clip from the good MAJ. That was, in my opinion, a realistic firefight. Pandur- I would tend to agree with your assessment of the situations you suggest, where enemy is hidden behind several meters of earth - although the 200 to 600 meters you cite is not a long ways for the optics on the Stryker. 1km is as close as 100 meters with its electro-optic site/screen. As such, identification of stationary enemy infantry is be possible out to ranges 1km, with detection (the in-game "question mark") out to maybe 2.5km. As far as 40mm Mk19 HEDPs, yes, they should tear apart walls, and pretty quickly. As I mentioned, I don't own CMSF and can't comment on its modeling of that ammunition. Curt- I have been swamped at work and therefore had ZERO time for wargaming. Hopefully I will get back into it once the weather turns cooler.

MAJ- I don't own CMSF so I can't comment on what is modeled in game. I can tell you that the Stryker has a VERY good thermal imager - most of its capabilities are classified - making it realistic for a Stryker commander to see that target before enemy engaged. Also, a .50 round has no problem penetrating the concrete blocks used in construction of most mid east buildings. As such, I think the firefight in your videa was realistic.

Hey all - first time I have logged on to this forum in years. Its good to see there are some folks out there who either remember playing or are still playing CMMC! It was interesting to read all the above comments, even the folks who didn't enjoy the campaign. I know CMMC2v2 has been an uphill struggle so its amazing to see the concept still has legs. If nothing more, CMMC is (was) a great way to meet a bunch of very nice people. My best regards to all CMMC'ers, past, present and future! -James Bailey CMMC1 Head GM (emeritus)

To: Anyone interested in serious ‘Ostfront’ campaigning, The folks over at CMMC are accepting applications for senior ‘staff’ positions (senior as in division, corps and army commanders). This is NOT a call for general ‘CM player’ positions (lower chain of command positions), as this call-up will take place only after a senior command staff is in place. CMMC2 scenario is historic-based Soviet offensive against Rzhev salient, Nov ’42 (infamously known as ‘Operation MARS’). If you are interested in experiencing command and control duties in the ‘Great Patriotic War’, I would encourage you to consider this unique opportunity. Only requirement is serious motivation and commitment to operational level wargaming utilizing CMBB – don’t worry if you were not involved in the CPX or CMMC1! General details can be found at: http://www.cmmc2.org/ Specific details on the call-up and CMMC2 scenario are found at: http://www.cmmc2.org/SeniorPlayerSignup.asp Best regards, James Bailey OIC, CMMC1 Player, CMMC2

Thanks to all the folks who offered advice and technical material, Based on all your info, I ponied up for a 18" Viewsonic (the VX800) - nice high response rate of 25ms, good contrast ratio and brightness, nice wide viewing angle, and both DVI and analog hook-ups. My best regards, James.

Swift and Jiggles, Thanks for the replies. Think I will go with the digital Flat Panel so no analog gets mixed up in there. I haven't looked at the high-end Samsung's -- looks like they have some nice stuff from their website. I'm primarily looking at the Viewsonic's and NEC's as I have seen both and they do a nice job. Best regards, James Bailey