The Idiots Guide to Stryker MGS tactics

[J Ruddy]

Sorry if I got you here by false pretenses, but I have no frigging clue what I'm going to do with the MGS when CMSF comes out. (Or how Canada is planning on using the 66 we're buying)

Is there anyone here who is involved with modern US military doctrine who can tell me what the tactical role of a high profile lightly armoured wheeled vehicle with an autoloading 105mm gun stuck on it is? How exactly is it used as part of the Stryker Brigade in an Urban environment for example? If it isn't intended to be a tank, and I assume also not primarily intended to engage tanks what the hell is the purpose of this thing? I had a discussion with my brother in law (Major - CF - Military Doctrine Officer) over the weekend but I walked away even more convinced that this thing is a design of convenience not one of excellence.

I would be happy if someone here could give me some examples of how it'd be used, because I'm stuck at heavy recon a la 'SDKFZ-234-Puma' on it (Plus the whole "Scrap the Leo's, lets buy MGS's!" thing has been making me ill for quite a while now.)

Thanks!

[rune]

Easy...it is made to support the infantry. Specifically some rounds are made to punch through bunkers. The biggest drawback, in my opinion, is it only carrys a whopping 18 rounds.

Rune

[Abbott]

Originally posted by J Ruddy:

(Or how Canada is planning on using the 66 we're buying)

Thanks!

Just listen for them as usual. Ice cream trucks. It’s not like they will ever fire them for god's sake.

[J Ruddy]

Originally posted by rune:

Easy...it is made to support the infantry. Specifically some rounds are made to punch through bunkers. The biggest drawback, in my opinion, is it only carrys a whopping 18 rounds.

Yup - I am very familiar with that statement. I'm kind of hoping someone could answer the 'how is it used to support infantry' and as well as the 'what role does it fill' The infantry needs a heavy weapon to support it for engaging hard targets. This thing can engage hard targets.

It also has little armour, can not rotate on the spot like a tank, and can not go Hull Down because the turret is too far back on the chassis - so what do you do, drive it down the road until it has line of sight on the target and let 'er rip? I hope the area is secure or it's going to end up being a modern version of the Ronson.

The Stryker has a 25mm cannon on it, doesn't it? Or is that just the Canadian LAV? For engaging anything lighter than a tank or a heavy concrete bunker, the 25mm is a powerful weapon. So the stryker MGS is only used for taking out hardened targets that standard Stryker LAVs can't handle? Basically it's used as a SP direct fire gun? (Now I'm thinking SU-76)

[hellfish]

Yeah, it's an infantry support weapon. Just imagine how you'd use a StuH or a Sherman 105 or something similar.

[aka_tom_w]

This thread might help you if you are seriously looking for hints on tactics:

Advice for guys that don't know anything about modern combat tactics with Strykers.

There are some REAL gems of wisdom and insight in there.

-tom w

[J Ruddy]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

This thread might help you if you are seriously looking for hints on tactics:

Advice for guys that don't know anything about modern combat tactics with Strykers.

There are some REAL gems of wisdom and insight in there.

-tom w

Thanks. If I ever here the term C3I again it will be too soon.

[Dogface]

communication/command/control/intel

learn to love it

[RMC]

"The fundamental mission of the mobile gun system platoon is to provide mounted, precision direct fire support to the SBCT infantry company. Its ability to move, shoot, and communicate, and to do so with limited armored protection, is an important factor on the modern battlefield. The MGS platoon moves, attacks, defends, and performs other essential tasks to support the company's mission. In accomplishing its assigned missions, it employs firepower, maneuver, and shock effect, synchronizing its capabilities with those of other maneuver elements and with CS and CSS assets. When properly supported, the platoon is capable of conducting sustained operations against any sophisticated threat."

"The intended purpose of the MGS is primarily to close with and destroy enemy infantry."

-FM 3-21.11, App B

[J Ruddy]

Originally posted by Dogface:

communication/command/control/intel

learn to love it

{oops - I feel a rant coming on}

[RANT]

The concept of C3 / C3I is as old as mD's underpants and yet somehow everything old is new again and this C3I crap is the best thing since IMP's - and it must be embraced for the 'new' army to succeed!

It's all BS if you ask me, C3I is only a logical refinement of 60 year old concepts improved by leveraging updated technologies. Map & Compass are replaced by GPS. Old crappy radio's are replaced with new not-so crappy digital radio interfaces. War is getting faster - Communication, Command, Control & Intelligence are more important than ever, but they've always been very important. There's no new paradigm, no new breakthrough, just refinement...

You still need well trained men on the ground to do the work and pull the trigger.

[/RANT]

Now if the US raises an automated robot brigade, that will be something to talk about...

[RMC]

It's C4I now. Guess what the new C is for.

[J Ruddy]

Originally posted by RMC:

"The fundamental mission of the mobile gun system platoon is to provide mounted, precision direct fire support to the SBCT infantry company. Its ability to move, shoot, and communicate, and to do so with limited armored protection, is an important factor on the modern battlefield. The MGS platoon moves, attacks, defends, and performs other essential tasks to support the company's mission. In accomplishing its assigned missions, it employs firepower, maneuver, and shock effect, synchronizing its capabilities with those of other maneuver elements and with CS and CSS assets. When properly supported, the platoon is capable of conducting sustained operations against any sophisticated threat."

"The intended purpose of the MGS is primarily to close with and destroy enemy infantry."

-FM 3-21.11, App B

Sounds like something you would read at a booth at DSEi. (or hear on a OxiClean infomercial)

I guess it is the cheapest common denomenator? It can not do everything a tank or attack helicopter can, but it is fuel efficient and fast on road like surfaces. It also is part of the Stryker Brigade so there is no problem ordering it to support an action at a moments notice. I understand that from a strategic point of view, the MGS (or something like the MGS) makes sense. But tactically, in the field, where success or failure depends on the proper deployment and use of your assets, I guess the answer to "How do I use the MGS?" is "Very Carefully"

[General Bolt]

Originally posted by RMC:

"The fundamental mission of the mobile gun system platoon is to provide mounted, precision direct fire support to the SBCT infantry company. Its ability to move, shoot, and communicate, and to do so with limited armored protection, is an important factor on the modern battlefield. The MGS platoon moves, attacks, defends, and performs other essential tasks to support the company's mission. In accomplishing its assigned missions, it employs firepower, maneuver, and shock effect, synchronizing its capabilities with those of other maneuver elements and with CS and CSS assets. When properly supported, the platoon is capable of conducting sustained operations against any sophisticated threat."

"The intended purpose of the MGS is primarily to close with and destroy enemy infantry."

-FM 3-21.11, App B

Do you have a copy of this? Where can I get mine? LINK?

Originally posted by RMC:

It's C4I now. Guess what the new C is for.

Computers.

[RMC]

Originally posted by General Bolt:

Do you have a copy of this? Where can I get mine? LINK?

I accessed the Reimer Digital Library. You need an AKO account to get in. It is probably available elsewhere like globalsecurity or fas. I haven't googled it.

Computers.

Bingo.

[Abbott]

You will find a link here. Scroll down just a bit.

[hellfish]

I thought it was C5I now?

Command

Control

Communications

Computers

Civil Affairs

?

[mattwagner]

Just wanted to point out that the MGS is not in use in Stryker Brigades. Why? When they fired the gun with the turrent turned 90 degrees, the vehicle would roll on its side.

Nice huh?

If anybody knows of a Stryker unit that deployed to Iraq with MGS, let me know. I helped load the Strykers for 3rd BDE on the two ships that went to Iraq and I didn't see a single damn MGS.

[mattwagner]

Originally posted by J Ruddy:

Canadian and Marine Corps LAVs have the 25mm. Stryker LAV typically have .50 or mk-19.

The infantry didn't want the 25mm. They fought tough and nail against it. So we went with the .50/mk19

[Abbott]

Originally posted by mattwagner:

Just wanted to point out that the MGS is not in use in Stryker Brigades. Why? When they fired the gun with the turrent turned 90 degrees, the vehicle would roll on its side.

Nice huh?

If anybody knows of a Stryker unit that deployed to Iraq with MGS, let me know. I helped load the Strykers for 3rd BDE on the two ships that went to Iraq and I didn't see a single damn MGS.

The latest information is the gun and auto-loader is under going redesign. BFC expects them to ready for fielding by 2007 if not then they will likely not? be available in game.

The US Army better get them working, the entire concept is built around thier supporting fire.

[RMC]

Originally posted by fytinghellfish:

I thought it was C5I now?

Command

Control

Communications

Computers

Civil Affairs

AFAIK the C for Civil Affairs went to the METT-T acronym. Used to be:

Mission

Enemy

Time

Troops

Terrain

with the new C for Civil Considerations

METT-TC

Originally posted by mattwagner:

If anybody knows of a Stryker unit that deployed to Iraq with MGS, let me know. I helped load the Strykers for 3rd BDE on the two ships that went to Iraq and I didn't see a single damn MGS.

MGS isn't even in production yet.

[hellfish]

Ah yeah. METT-TC.

[David I]

I think Strykers are going to go the way of the B-1 bomber (a truely stealthy aircraft that cost a bundle and is rarely seen in combat). The Strykers were thought up prior to the 2nd Iraq War with the concept that speed and firepower, combined with overwelming air support would send the heavy tank the way of the dinosaur. The lessons of the 2nd Iraq War, however, were the exact opposite. More and heavier armor is the lesson learned on the ground during the "Invasion" Phase of the War. If Strykers had been used for the dash into Bagdahd instead of Abrams, there would have been a butt load of knocked out Strykers and dead GI's (Read "Thunder Run").

Perhaps the analogy of the battlecruiser might be appropriate: The battle cruiser concept came in just prior to WWI, it would be fast and heaviley armed at the cost of less armor. It would have enough firepower to sink anything but the most heavily armed Battleship, and able to run away from those. Unfortunately that theory gave way before the Navy's (all navies) desire to use their heavy guns in the line of battle. As a result the Battlecruiser was the Capital Ship that lost the most heavily in ship to ship combats (although fewer in number than battleships in the German, British, American, French, Italian and Japanese Navies more Battlecruisers were lost than Battleships). At Jutland the Brits lost primarily Battlecruisers, the German BC's were pounded to pieces, in WWII the Hood, Sharnhorst, Hiei, and Kirashima were all Battle Cruisers and all were sunk by naval fire.

Right now, to the best of my knowlege, the Strykers in Iraq are stationed in some of the more quiet regions. One of these days the temptation to use them in an inappropriate way, or to run into an unexpected situation will quite literally test their metal. A lesson you will be able to learn in CMX2.

My two bits.

DavidI

[mattwagner]

Originally posted by RMC:

MGS isn't even in production yet.

There were several on Fort Lewis. Back in 02/03. Right next to my motorpool. They dissappeared after a few months. Same reason I listed above. Anything beyond firing straight ahead left them on their sides.

Honestly, I don't think they'll ever be deployed per spec. Maybe if they make em 90mm and add about 8,000 lbs to the base! Profile is way too high. Its physics.

I forget the name of the vehicle(was told centurion, but isnt that a tracked tank?), but soon after there were several of these low profiled, wheeled, 105mm tanks sitting where the MGS used to be. Somebody told me they were the Abrams platform on wheels... pretty sure that was wrong. They were loans from Germany.

[mattwagner]

To me... the Stryker is pretty much a broken platform for these reasons:

a) MGS NBC c) Too heavy d) ****ty armor

Anyway, it was typical military crap. Write up a bunch of stuff on how things are supposed to work... when they dont work like that, its too late, drive on.

Still... it isn't complete junk. It's alright. My unit made do with it. They didn't lose too many people. They lost Strykers, but the people inside made it ok. And thats a big deal in my book.

---

Also, for the record, I did not go to Iraq with these, nor have I seen combat. My opinions are strictly from the standpoint of someone who used to drive one. I do have friends who are still serving however, and one is the VC of a Stryker and saw combat in Iraq.

[ October 11, 2005, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: mattwagner ]

[RMC]

Originally posted by mattwagner:

I forget the name of the vehicle(was told centurion, but isnt that a tracked tank?), but soon after there were several of these low profiled, wheeled, 105mm tanks sitting where the MGS used to be. Somebody told me they were the Abrams platform on wheels... pretty sure that was wrong. They were loans from Germany.

I was up there around that time. 3/2 was undergoing the conversion IIRC. I think the vehicles you saw were Italian Centauros. Other than the NIH factor it baffled me why we would dick around with the MGS instead of buying the the Centauros. They worked. They were in service.

There were also the Canadian LAV IIIs and German Foxes there too.