A Canadian Cat Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 I recall the precise moment when the Pentagon decided it wanted Strykers. Entering Kosovo in 1999 the US struggled with its cumbersome heavy armor forces while watching the Canadians in their new LAV-IIIs zip to the head of the line and lead a quick advance into the country. It was plain to see the Pentagon was positively dripping with envy. And if they have to go against Russian T-99 now, they'd be kicking themselves for that decision. It is all about the right tool for the job at hand. Somtimes it is the Stryker sometimes its the Bradley sometimes the M1. Sometimes you are stuck making do with what you've got. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 The biggest problem with the Bradley is that it was designed in the 70s and the production line stopped 20 years ago. Yes, you can modernise and upgrade it, but eventually the Army needs to find a replacement. Ironically, the Stryker was originally designed as an interim vehicle until the Future Combat System vehicles were produced. However, now that the FCS has been killed by budget cuts, the Stryker's life keeps getting extended. New and improved models should be produced until 2018, at least. Time to roll out the Gavins again! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antaress73 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 I was in a M-113 and a VBL-III (canadian modernized LAV-25), similar to the stryker and I must say I much prefer the Stryker 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 I was about to mention that I vaguely recall Canada being offered at the time the choice of LAV-III or a stretched M113 with one extra roadwheel. So nobody was ever going to get an Israeli Namer Merkava-chassis APC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danzig5 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 (edited) Time to roll out the Gavins again! Oh god no! Not one of this mad-mans videos. This imbecile's lust for the M113 is a mental illness. Edited January 7, 2015 by danzig5 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzersaurkrautwerfer Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 I <3 Sparky. I have taken to using if someone calls the M113 a "Gavin" to be a litmus test if I'm talking to a moron or not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nik mond Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Lav's, Bisons, Strykers, these vehicles do not do as well with AT mines , or improvised, compared to other vehicles in a similar class. A large percentage of Canadian casualties in Afghanistan were infantry mounted in LAVs. Canada rapidly acquired a quantity RG31 Nyalas (50 more to come) to replace some of the LAvs for their patrols. Now the lesser armed, cheaper, faster alternative was the vehicle of choice because it was better designed to resist mines. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUCASWILLEN05 Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 (edited) In my CMSF experience Strykers did not do terribly well on the conventional battlefield against the Syrian army. In such situations the infantry are best dismounted with as many AT weapons (Javelin/LAW) as possible and move forward on foot to the best positions to engage enemy armour. The same will likely apply in Ukraine. Most of us will likely know this, already being Syria "veterans" The vehicle mounted AT weapons will be of some use however. But Bradleys are just as good with the upside being all Bradleys have vehicle mounted ATGMs as opposed to only the dedicated variant of the Stryker. I would therefre prefer to go into action in command of Bradleys, rather than Strykers in the high tech environment of CMBS Edited January 8, 2015 by LUCASWILLEN05 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Williams Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Strykers, BMPs, BTRs, etc., are basically like WW2 halftracks, they provide battlefield mobility and some cover to small arms fire, but they are not made to survive on the battlefield. Thanks. I'm going to be a complete noob to the modern stuff (had to look up what a Stryker was). Had to learn a couple of hard lessons with halftracks before I got it through my head that they shouldn't be used like tanks. I'll treat the Stryker the same way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I'll treat the Stryker the same way. Good call. Although that automatic grenade launcher is pretty cool... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted January 8, 2015 Author Share Posted January 8, 2015 Its the Marine AAV with with the AGL that really cool, its the same grenade launcher but it has like 4+ times the ammo. Just hose down EVERYTHING. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Its the Marine AAV with with the AGL that really cool, its the same grenade launcher but it has like 4+ times the ammo. Just hose down EVERYTHING. I like your attitude. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
domfluff Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Stryker battalions are in some ways suspiciously similar to Panzergrenadier units, including repurposing old tank guns as assault guns, embedded in the formation. They function in a very similar fashion on the whole, with the exception of the more sophisticated command and control. Thus sure, they're for getting your guys into battle, but you usually don't want them fighting anyone, at least not without being fairly certain that they're in a safe position. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frez13 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Strykers, BMPs, BTRs, etc., are basically like WW2 halftracks, they provide battlefield mobility and some cover to small arms fire, but they are not made to survive on the battlefield. Does this apply to all APC's in general, or just those you mentioned? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzersaurkrautwerfer Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 Think it's more to the BTR/Strykers. The sort of firepower a BMP or Bradley brings to the fight is something you don't want sitting idle and safe to the rear. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan/california Posted January 9, 2015 Author Share Posted January 9, 2015 (edited) Bradleys, and BMP-3s have real offensive punch, and are somewhat survivable if they have APS. Even they should smoke, duck, and run like He#% if they are at risk of a main gun round and should be treated with care generally. They are also vulnerable to the each others auto-cannon. Virtually everything else is a rolling bomb screaming " KILL ME, KILL ME". They can all generate large secondary explosions when hit, so get your pixeltruppen clear once unloaded. Edited January 9, 2015 by dan/california 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antaress73 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 The BMP-3 with ERA is fairly survivable against 20-30mm so the manual says. It has a yellow square level of protection (good) agaisnt both HEAT and 20-30mm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 The BMP-3 with ERA is fairly survivable against 20-30mm so the manual says. It has a yellow square level of protection (good) agaisnt both HEAT and 20-30mmHave Bil's BMP-3s in his writeup not got ERA? I thought they had all the bells and whistles, yet they're suffering through-and-throughs from Bushmasters. Actually, even if they have ERA, how effective is it going to be against the 10th through 20th rounds of a long burst? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antaress73 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 (edited) 25mm bushmaster is in a class of its own. From what i've se en so far, they dont have ERA in the AAR . some of them have ARENA Edited January 9, 2015 by antaress73 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 (edited) The thing about ERA-equipped BMP-3s in the game, they don't have smoke dischargers. So you're trading one capability for another. There's a LOT of different BMP-3 types to choose from in the game from plain Jane to Shtora to Arena to ERA blocks, but no combo vehicles. You only get one suite of protection. Edited January 9, 2015 by MikeyD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antaress73 Posted January 9, 2015 Share Posted January 9, 2015 that changes everythying. IR smoke is useful in dealing with javelins .. and ERA wont do crap against them. But increased survability against light cannons.hmmm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.