Jenka

Dan Larson and Jeff Hady are planing on being there.

Hurm, I’ve been thinking. If a striker Bn is roughly the same as a Panzer grenadier Bn. They have Infantry and light armored vehicles in support, they have Integral anti-tank (ATGM in the Stryker, ATG in the PZG). They have integral fire support (MGS in Striker, Sd kfz 251/9 in PZG, mortar carriers in both) they seem very similar indeed. No one would argue that a PZG BN would be unable to either attack or defend on its own. Much of the offensive work of a ww2 armored division would be handled by the PZG or equivalent supported by elements of the PZ/tank regiment. HBCT’s seem more like Armored Regiments than Mech inf. They have 2 BN of heavy tanks and a BN of light tanks (BFV) with tank riders under armor. Bradleys have been described elsewhere as proof against anything but ATGM or main gun fire, while in return capable of killing anything that moves on the battlefield. This sounds more like a light tank than a infantry carrier. With a 6 man squad inside that sounds more like tank riders instead of a serious force of infantry. Am I completely off my rocker for drawing these comparisons? [ August 05, 2007, 10:22 PM: Message edited by: Jenka ]

Sirs, I am at best a dilatant in military tactics (for some reason the armed forces didn’t want to take a asthmatic in the 80s ). I’m trying to see if I have drawn the correct lessons from this thread. JasonC seems to be arguing that the Stryker is the poster childe for what he sees as a failed Strategic doctrine. That the proper conduct of a war would have been fought to the destruction of not just the ability of the enemy to fight but their will as well, because he finds the strategic thinking to be flawed he does not see any use to the vehicle either operationally or tactically. Blackhorse and others are arguing that the SBCT provides a good rapid reaction force that a commander can use operationally and tactically to move between widely separated battles and to bring a large number of dismounted infantry to the fight where a HBCT would have problems because the road march is too long for the tracked vehicles to reliably transverse. They point out that the vehicle is popular with the actual users because of its user friendly capabilities and it’s ability to take the occasional hit. I think that’s where the disconnect is. Jason C is arguing Strategy while Blackhorse and others (who have actual experience with the operational and tactical use of strikers) are arguing that there is a valid Operational and Tactical role for the units. The striker seems to me to be a lot like half tracks in WW2. In fact a Striker Battalion sounds to me to be a lot like a Panzer grenadier Battalion. There are Machinegun armed armored vehicles designed to deliver a full squad of infantry to the battle field. There are specialty variations to provide organic fire support, communications, and other support roles. Strikers seem to fill the role of WW2 halftracks in a formation that largely relies of the power of the infantry to fight not its vehicles. I only use the WW2 reference because that is the period of history that I have spent the most time studying.

All three lost to APFSDS from T55's. Turret side shots, Hull side shots (even at some fairly wide angles). When your engaging 7 T55's with a single M1, to service all the targets one must turn the turret. Cagey T55 crews will let some vehicles draw fire and then wait till the M1 has turned to engage and THEN unmask. The side armor on a M1 is plenty vulnerable. I did mention the bad play on my part right? 4 M1s Destroyed 19 T55s. One of the M1s was used correctly with carefully masked positions exposing itself to the minimum number of targets on a narrow ark. The other three in one way or another were used poorly. I lost one as I was repositioning it. "I've killed all the T55's" says I "That you can see" says Rune. Boom Turret side penetration, Hull side Penetration, Crew bailing. Now to be fair all the M1 crews survived. None of the M1's were catastrophic kills (burning) while all of the T55's burned. So to a extent it's relative. Still 20 t55s is insuficent reason to loose so many M1s

At the Chicago Preview I played a Striker Company + M1 Platoon Vs T55's that to a large extent started the game Immobile. I Managed to lose 3 M1s and 2 strikers to T55s. Just because I was using one of the best tanks in the world did not excuse my poor play. If i can lose m1s to T55's then you can darn sure lose them to T72s

Well Jenka has been to Syria and survived sorta. The company of Strikers and Abrams he commanded are MUCH the worse for wear. I was on track to win my scenario when the gaming ended but *cough* there is very likely a court-martial in my future As for Oh wows: A heroic/foolish T55 charging towards the seemingly broken remnants of the Striker Coy. It pulls past the edge of a compound and its flank is lit by fire as a MK19 AGL on a Striker turns it into a burning wreck. Watching a Round of 155mm HE hit a guard tower on the roof and blow two floors down while leaving the walls standing. There is one less HMG team to worry about. The beauty that is 81mm and 155mm VT raining down across a trench line full of defending troops. Being able to dedicate 2 gun sections of 155mm to easily and creatively help turn a horribly botched operation into near if pyrrhic victory. Watching a company of Syrian T72’s charging into a town and leaving a pile of burning Strikers in their wake. Me thinking to myself “God I’m having a great time Thank’s for having me over Rune, and thanks to Mrs Rune for snacks and most excellent Sloppy joes . Some Oh nos: Rune telling me “But Jenka this scenario is supposed to be stupidly easy and the other people who played this blew through it with hardly a loss.” ( I lost 3 M1, 6 strikers and had 18 dead and 31 wounded) A HQ striker who decided on it’s own to drive in front of two bunkers stuffed with crack Syrian concrips who blew it to pieces at 40 meters range  “Well I’ve knocked out all the T55’s “ Says Jenka “That you can see” says Rune as a T55 that moved up put a 100mm APFSDS through the turret side of my 3rd M1 Loss Pathing issues where a striker decided to drive on top of a berm in full sight of 5 T55’s…. There were no survivors. In the striker that is. Some very interesting discussions and conversation that layed my ignorance bare. A good thing :eek: 