Stryker w/25mm ChainGun?

[tankgeezer]

Are the U.S.Marines Stryker’s the only ones with the 25mm Bushmaster chaingun turret (or the Bushmaster II for that matter)?  I just noticed this when setting up a quick battle.  I seem to remember them from Shock Force.
 

[db_zero]

If I'm not mistaken the Marines don't have Strikers. They use something called the LAV which is a completely different. I think its a Canadian design.

[TeaReks]

For what its worth, the styker is a derivative of the LAV III which in turn is based on a Swiss 8x8.

[c3k]

LAV is much smaller than the Stryker.

[RCE_Spr]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/images/lav-comp.jpg

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

As pointed out already:

 

1. The Stryker and LAV share a common ancestor in the form of the Mowag Piranha.  Both vehicles are built off of versions of that vehicles as license built by General Dynamics Land Division (Canada).

 

2. They are different generations however.  The USMC vehicles belong to the LAV-I generation of platforms, which is smaller and more lightly armored, while the Stryker is based on the LAV III which is better protected, but also much larger and loses the amphibious capabilities of earlier generations.

 

3. There are LAV III variants that mount the 25 MM, however when the Army was designing the Stryker units it was seeking firstly a vehicle that could mount an entire rifle squad in each vehicle without crossloading.  This would not be possible in the 25 MM armed Stryker models.  Further for fire support, the 105 MM equipped Mobile Gun System Stryker was to be allocated at a rate of three per rifle company.  In summery, by the Army's first go, the LAV III with autocannon wasn't enough transport, or gun to fill either of the potential roles.

 

4.  The postscript however is that the Mobile Gun System has proven deeply unpopular and has not lived up to advertising.  It's either too much gun for COIN, or not enough firepower and armor for full spectrum operations.  The number of MGSes has been reduced to just three per Battalion, and there's talk of procuring autocannon armed Strykers to replace the MGS at the Company level (either the cheap fix of 25 MM, or a larger turret mounting a 40 MM gun).

[Skwabie]

4.  The postscript however is that the Mobile Gun System has proven deeply unpopular and has not lived up to advertising.  It's either too much gun for COIN, or not enough firepower and armor for full spectrum operations.  The number of MGSes has been reduced to just three per Battalion, and there's talk of procuring autocannon armed Strykers to replace the MGS at the Company level (either the cheap fix of 25 MM, or a larger turret mounting a 40 MM gun).

Nice to know. CM experience is the same, excluding rare occurrences the MGS is usually left at the back. In situations where you really need it the armor becomes insufficient.

[tankgeezer]

Thanks Peeps; I'm now up to date.  It would be nice in future modules (NATO?, hint,hint ).  For now, I'll just patiently await for CMSF to be brought up to engine 3.0.

[c3k]

The Army needs to put 120mm smoothbore direct-fire mortar Strykers in as support for each company. That's a lotta HE support. They won't get used as ersatz tanks. Pure bunker busters/HE tossers. That and mini-gun mounts.

[vyrago]

Canada was angling towards the MGS in the mid 2000s but given even the LAV/Stryker's weakness against RPGs they opted for new MBTs ala Leopard 2A4M and 2A6M.  

 

On the flip side, Canada will be converting 33 older LAVs into LAV ISC (infantry section carrier) armed with a remote weapons station, effectively making them slightly smaller Strykers.  

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

The Army needs to put 120mm smoothbore direct-fire mortar Strykers in as support for each company

 

Already have two of them per rifle company.

 

 

 

mini-gun mounts

 

Nah.  ,50 cal and MK-19 are better in terms of damage potential.  Also given the external mount of the weapons system and limitations on how much you can strap onto a CROWS, your crew would be at risk pretty often to reload.

 

 

 

 It would be nice in future modules (NATO?, hint,hint   )

 

You'll see all the US LAV models if there's a USMC module, Canadians also use the 25 MM equipped LAVs.

Edited February 19, 2015 by panzersaurkrautwerfer

[Stagler]

I do believe they trialed a 40mm Kongsberg RCWS on a Stryker recently. There was pictures somewhere.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

I do believe they trialed a 40mm Kongsberg RCWS on a Stryker recently. There was pictures somewhere.

 

That's the MGS replacement I alluded to earlier.  Something better scaled to what the platform is capable of.

[Pablius]

In the only mission I got a MGS in CMBS it got blown up by a T-90 before doing anything...I didn´t even reload the turn to give it a second chance...never understood how to use them properly, even in CMSF

 

The thing is, at least in CM, if you go against armor the MGS is going to die rather quickly an not do anything of note...if you go against entrenched inf. in an urban setting you first need to detect it (because the MGS is not likely to do it by itself an will be blown up first) and then move an MGS into position to bust them, but often that expose the damn thing too much an it gets blown up or damage anyway

[vyrago]

to be honest, I think the best way to use the MGS is to think of it as a 105mm direct fire 'mortar'.  Keep it back while your infantry and strykers push forward.  The ideal scenario is you find a stubborn enemy infantry group in a building off your axis of advance.  bring up MGS, boom.  threat removed, carry on.  

 

theyre also great against technicals.  

[Pablius]

Maybe they are a kind of psychological reinforcement..."Hey!, we have this big gun right here...we can do anything!"

 

In CM I think the best use for it is to just shot at every house/building preventively until it´s rubble, and ask questions later

Edited February 19, 2015 by Pablius

[c3k]

No, not the mortar variant. The dirct fire 120mm type. Think stubby tank gun. Fires 120mmm mortar rounds. Thumb typing sucks.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

Even less capable than the MGS then I suppose.

[MikeyD]

For 30 years the Pentagon has been dancing around the notion of providing the army with a simple direct fire low pressure gun like the 90mm Mecar for infantry support. But every time they approach the topic 'committee think' sets in and they go off on some weird 'high technology' tangent from hyper-velocity 75mm guns to overhead-mount 105 NATO tank guns to exotic vertical launch missile systems. When all the infantry wanted was something that could put HE rounds into a building while in close proximity to friendly units.

[panzersaurkrautwerfer]

 

 

For 30 years the Pentagon has been dancing around the notion of providing the army with a simple direct fire low pressure gun like the 90mm Mecar for infantry support. But every time they approach the topic 'committee think' sets in and they go off on some weird 'high technology' tangent from hyper-velocity 75mm guns to overhead-mount 105 NATO tank guns to exotic vertical launch missile systems. When all the infantry wanted was something that could put HE rounds into a building while in close proximity to friendly units.

 

Which is cool and all, but again anything on a Stryker should not have "direct fire" as part of its job description.  If you want an assault gun, you really need something that'll take being shot a lot better.

 

Conversely by god canceling the XM8 AGS was a stupid choice.  There'a light tank shaped hole in our IBCTs, and with the add-on armor it'd be great choice for the assault gun type role elsewhere.

[coffeeis4closers]

Do people really use Strykers? I had them figured for T-90 lunch. 

[vyrago]

Obviously any tank or modern IFV is a threat to a Stryker but they *can* used....very carefully.  If you're going to move, smoke your advance and race up to your intended position.  Disembark then find a good hiding spot for your strykers.  Treat them like an M113, just a battle taxi.

[tankgeezer]

Here's the units I had in mind.

http://www.military.com/video/forces/marine-corps/marines-send-rounds-down-range-in-lavs/4036247294001/

[akd]

30mm is better.

 

[sburke]

Do people really use Strykers? I had them figured for T-90 lunch.

Playing Poking the Bear with my TOW mounted Strykers I was able to take out multiple T 90s. Dicey though as if given half an opportunity the T90s would toast them. Narrow firing lanes, rear arc, T90 on the move, I had the odds decked in my favor, but still risky.

Had another incident where a T90 barreled over ha hill face on to a Stryker which proceeded to douse it with 40mm. I figured the Stryker was dead, instead the T90 popped smoke and backed up with its's optics etc shot up. In it's weakened state I was able to use the Stryker's infantry to take it out.