akd Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 General Dynamics Armament and Technical Products (GD-ATP) will provide reactive armor tile sets for the U.S. Army Stryker family of vehicles. The $150 million contract is scheduled for delivery within 10 months, by March 2010... ...The recent contract represents one of the largest reactive armor-upgrades planned in recent years. As such it was fiercely competed between two of the leading armor providers - GD-ATP and BAE Systems. The original developer and designer of these reactive armor systems is Rafael Armament Development Authority from Israel. The Stryker add-on armor is the second reactive armor program GD-ATP is jointly conducting with Rafael. The two companies are also cooperating on the supply of reactive armor systems for the M-2 Bradley, for which the team has won repeated orders worth hundreds of million US$. http://www.defense-update.com/features/2009/may/stryker_reactive_270509.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP76er Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 I was wondering if they would ever do this. That means new kits for the 1/35 model world. Working on the photo etched slat armor is a nightmare. Thanks for the link. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silverstars Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 Hmmm. I wonder if the new ERA bricks precludes the Slat Armor, or if they will have both. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivodsi Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 Which Stryker is that in the photo? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdstrike Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 Since it's not burning, it's not one of mine. It looks like it has a .50 RWS, but that "canopy" is odd - some new kind of overhead protection, maybe? The driver als has a new cover - though I' missing ERA protection on the front of the vehicle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted May 30, 2009 Author Share Posted May 30, 2009 Hmmm. I wonder if the new ERA bricks precludes the Slat Armor, or if they will have both. I think no slat armor, but they have also produced a new slat armor add-on for vehicles that don't get reactive armor. This also shows better the crew protection add-ons: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevinger Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 I think that means I'm gonna get far less gunner casualties during RWS reloading 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 Can you imagine the weight increase! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted May 30, 2009 Author Share Posted May 30, 2009 Can you imagine the weight increase! The article doesn't address it, but one of the captions claims: Reactive tiles kits developed by Rafael for the General Dynamics Land Systems Stryker vehicle are providing improved protection to the hull, at weight levels comparable to the Slat kits. However, the use of reactive armor offers better protection, improved stability and maneuverability, compared to the much wider Slat. "Comparable" could mean lots of things. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stirling Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 It's starting to look like a DUKW. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted May 30, 2009 Share Posted May 30, 2009 The original Slat cage components weighed two tons, I believe. That was before addition of the upper hull armor package. They had a ERA package good-to-go for Stryker around 2004 but that weight twice(?) as much - I can't locate my references at the moment (messy apartment). Perhaps further design work has lightened the package. But the Army might find itself in a bind. The first-generation RPG rounds for which the Slat cage was designed have been pretty much depleted after 6 years. That means later-design rounds out of China, Iran, Russia with improved fusing are becoming more of a threat. The Strykers in the game face the same problem. Good against early-type RPG rounds, not so much against the later designs. It looks like Styker is following the lead of the Brits with their heavily-protected FV432 Bulldogs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clavicula_Nox Posted May 31, 2009 Share Posted May 31, 2009 I just see a big metal coffin in that picture. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted June 1, 2009 Share Posted June 1, 2009 I just located my references - slat cage without the roof armor 2.6 tons. If you were to include the added upper roof armor and (in the photo above) lower skirts I can imagine the full Slat package would start to approach the 4 tons claimed for the ERA package back in 2005. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrykerPSG Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 The photo is showing a manufactured anti-sniper support frame versus locally fabricated supports. You hang cammo netting over the frame, making it much more difficult for snipers to get a clear and unobstructed view of the occupants. The original slat armor did weigh 4000 pounds, however, the newest version weighs half of that. Also, the ERA would greatly reduce the effects of EFP's, much more common then RPG's in country. Matt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted June 2, 2009 Share Posted June 2, 2009 however, the newest version weighs half of that. Hey, you're right! In the slat caged Stryker pict up above the individual cage bars look considerably thinner than the original. In the original design a lot of the weight came from the overly-stout frame and the standoff plate that ran the full length of the vehicle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocalypse 31 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 As a Stryker guy here, I will tell you that this will not happen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP76er Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 As a Stryker guy here, I will tell you that this will not happen. Hi Mike, You don't think the ERA will come to fruition for the Stryker? Why do you think that? I was thinking they would be pretty much pushed into it because of the new RPG rounds that are evolving & arriving. Thanks for any input! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 deleted per user request 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apocalypse 31 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Sorry guys. Cant talk about it, but ill just say that itll never happen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP76er Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Sorry guys. Cant talk about it, but ill just say that itll never happen. Oh, he's torturing us! I hope whatever they do, it has you & the other Stryker troopers being the most up to date, safe & dangerous (to the enemy) units out there. Be Safe & Thanks for Serving! Jamie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StrykerPSG Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Question.... why is it such a big problem that the slat cage on the stryker makes it too heavy for mobile lift? Can't they fly 4 strykers in 4 hercs and 4 cages in a 5th? Adam, you'll have to go back to the initial contracting requirements stating the design must be airliftable tactically (C-130/C-17), but with a modular design towards protection. The initial design without slat, is very transportable via tactical means, however, less then practical with the C-130 in it's current guise because of the C-130's wing box limitation. So, yes, you could fly 4 Strykers in 4 C-130's and 5th bird used for the modular armor. Just note, that from a tactical perspective, it's not very practical to apply slat armor in the field, very time consuming and labor intensive. Stryker's can also be transported via C-17, with slat, but again, you can fit additional vehicles without the slat adding another 36 inches of circumference and a nightmare for the loadmaster. As for adding reactive to the current configurations, I would disagree with LT Mike's assessment that it won't happen. I believe it won't happen in our current state of fiscal plannings, but it has been a work in progress for quite some time, more so because of EFP's and unit's will be forced to utilize slat because it's readily available whereas the ERA is not, just yet. I never thought we would see the mounted mortar or MGS anytime soon back in 04, but they're here and working (mostly) as designed. Matt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Supposedly, we're done with patroling and out of the cities by June, concentrating on training Iraqis until 2011 then we're outa there! ERA Stryker package may be a case of closing the barn door after the horse has left. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Field Marshal Blücher Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Supposedly, we're done with patroling and out of the cities by June, concentrating on training Iraqis until 2011 then we're outa there! ERA Stryker package may be a case of closing the barn door after the horse has left. Maybe for this war. There's still Afghanistan and other wars that are, sadly, yet to be fought. There's nothing wrong with upgrading a weapons system even though we're leaving a war. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JP76er Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Adam, you'll have to go back to the initial contracting requirements stating the design must be airliftable tactically (C-130/C-17), but with a modular design towards protection. The initial design without slat, is very transportable via tactical means, however, less then practical with the C-130 in it's current guise because of the C-130's wing box limitation. So, yes, you could fly 4 Strykers in 4 C-130's and 5th bird used for the modular armor. Just note, that from a tactical perspective, it's not very practical to apply slat armor in the field, very time consuming and labor intensive. Stryker's can also be transported via C-17, with slat, but again, you can fit additional vehicles without the slat adding another 36 inches of circumference and a nightmare for the loadmaster. As for adding reactive to the current configurations, I would disagree with LT Mike's assessment that it won't happen. I believe it won't happen in our current state of fiscal plannings, but it has been a work in progress for quite some time, more so because of EFP's and unit's will be forced to utilize slat because it's readily available whereas the ERA is not, just yet. I never thought we would see the mounted mortar or MGS anytime soon back in 04, but they're here and working (mostly) as designed. Matt Non-military & I don't know; what's an EFP? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slug88 Posted June 3, 2009 Share Posted June 3, 2009 Non-military & I don't know; what's an EFP? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosively_formed_penetrator 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.