Stryker

Stryker
Stryker ICV front q.jpg
M1126 Stryker ICV
Type Armored personnel carrier
Place of origin Flag of the United States.svg United States
Specifications
Weight ICV: 16.47 t (18.12 sh tn)
MGS: 18.77 t (20.65 sh tn)
Length 6.95 m (22.92 ft)
Width 2.72 m (8.97 ft)
Height 2.64 m (8.72 ft)
Crew 2+9

Armor 14.5 mm resistant[1]
Primary
armament
M68A1E4 105 mm gun (MGS)
M2 .50 caliber machine gun or MK19 40 mm grenade launcher mounted in a PROTECTOR M151 Remote Weapon Station (RWS) (ICV)
Secondary
armament
.50-cal M2 MG and M240 7.62mm MG (MGS)
Engine Caterpillar 3126 turbo diesel
260 kW (350 hp)
Power/weight ICV: 15.8 kW/t (19.3 hp/sh tn)
Suspension 8×8 wheeled
Operational
range
500 km (300 mi)
Speed 100 km/h (62 mph)[1] - limited to 72 km/h (45mph) by US Army rule due to rollover danger at high speeds

The Stryker is a family of eight-wheeled all-wheel-drive armored combat vehicles produced by General Dynamics Land Systems, in use by the United States Army. Based on the Canadian LAV III light-armored vehicle, which in turn is based on the Swiss Mowag Piranha, the Stryker is the U.S. Army's first new armored vehicle since the M2/M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle in the 1980s.

The Stryker was championed by General Eric Shinseki when he was U.S. Army Chief of Staff. The vehicle is employed in Stryker Brigade Combat Teams, light and mobile units based on the Brigade Combat Team Doctrine that relies on vehicles connected by military C4I networks.

Contents

Design

Pneumatic or hydraulic systems drive almost all of the vehicle's mechanical features; for example, a pneumatic system switches between 8X4 and 8X8 drive.

The vehicle comes in several variants with a common engine, transmission, hydraulics, wheels, tires, differentials and transfer case. Two exceptions are the M1130 Command Vehicle and M1133 Medical Evacuation Vehicle, which have an air conditioning unit mounted on the pack. The medical vehicle also has a higher-capacity generator. A recent upgrade program provided a field retrofit kit to add air conditioning units to all variants.

Power pack and mechanical features

For its power pack the Stryker uses a Caterpillar diesel engine common in U.S. Army medium-lift trucks, eliminating extensive retraining of maintenance crews and allowing the use of common parts.[2]

Designers strove to ease the maintainer's job, equipping most cables, hoses, and mechanical systems with quick-disconnecting mechanisms. The engine and transmission can be removed and reinstalled in less than one hour, allowing repairs to the turbocharger and many other components to be done outside the vehicle.

Because of obsolescence concerns, the Caterpillar 3126 engine was recently replaced by a Caterpillar C7 engine. The C7 shares a common engine block with the 3126.

Command, Control, and Targeting

Protective features

Mobility Features

Two Strykers move through rough terrain in Korea

Cost

The unit cost to purchase the initial Stryker ICVs (without add-ons, including the cage armor) was US$3 million in April 2002.[7] By May 2003, the regular production cost per vehicle was US$1.42 million.[8]

LAV-H Stryker Upgrade

The US Army plans to improve its fleet of Stryker vehicles with the introduction of improved semi-active suspension, modifications reshaping the hull into a shallow V-shaped structure, additional armor for the sides, redesigned hatches to minimize gaps in the armor, blast absorbing mine resistant seats (or BENCHES), non-flammable tires, an upgrade to the remote weapon station that allows it to fire on the go, increased 500 amp power generation, a new solid state power distribution system and data bus, and the automotive and power plant systems will be upgraded to support a 25% Gross Vehicle Weight increase. The upgrade incorporating lessons learned from Afghanistan is designated LAV-H and General Dynamics had a technology demonstrator displayed at the 2007 Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Exposition.[9]

History

The vehicle is named for two American servicemen who posthumously received the Medal of Honor: Pfc Stuart S. Stryker, who died in World War II and Spc Robert F. Stryker, who died in the Vietnam War.[10]

The Stryker MGS moved into low-rate initial production in 2005 for evaluation,[11] with plans for full production in 2007.

Currently the Stryker is in the research and development phase of being converted to a vehicle capable of Autonomous Navigation.[12] TARDEC has also tested an active Magneto Rheological suspension, developed by MillenWorks for the Stryker, at the Yuma Proving Ground, which resulted in greater vehicle stability.[13]

Deployments

Iraq War, 2003-present:

Variants

The Stryker chassis' modular design supports a wide range of variants. The main chassis is the Infantry Carrier Vehicle (ICV). Additionally, there is the Mobile Gun System (MGS), a heavier chassis to support a variant of the 105 mm M68A1 rifled cannon (M68A1E4), a lightweight version of the gun system used on the original M1 Abrams main battle tanks and the M60 Patton main battle tank. The M68A1E4 also features a muzzle brake to assist with recoil and an autoloader, a rare feature on US tank guns.

M1134 Anti-Tank Guided Missile (ATGM) Variant equipped with a TOW missile and M240B machine gun.

The Stryker has the following configurations with more planned:

Operators

M1126 APC variant equipped with the PROTECTOR M151 with MK19 automatic grenade launcher and anti-HEAT slat armor
M1134 Stryker ATGM carrier

U.S. brigades

Mission

The Stryker family of vehicles fill a role in the United States Army that is neither heavy nor light, but rather an attempt to create a force that can move infantry to the battlefield quickly and in relative security. Brigades that have been converted to Strykers have been light, or, in the case of the 2nd Cavalry Regiment, unarmored HMMWV-based cavalry scouts. For these units, the addition of Strykers has increased combat power by providing armor protection, a vehicle-borne weapon system to support each dismounted squad (a PROTECTOR M151 Remote Weapon Station with .50-cal or Mk-19), and the speed and range to conduct missions far from the operating base.

Stryker units seem to be especially effective in urban areas, where vehicles can establish initial security positions near a building and dismount squads on a doorstep.[19]

Similar to a UH-60 Black Hawk, the Stryker relies on its speed for the majority of its defense against heavy weapon systems. It is not capable of engaging heavily armored units and relies on other units to control threats outside of its classification.

However, at the National Training Center (Fort Irwin California) 3rd Brigade 2nd ID proved that through the use of unconventional tactics and small dismounted teams armed with anti-armor weaponry, a Stryker unit could hold its own against a conventional armored unit should the need arise. This situation is something that commanders would most likely avoid due to a higher casualty rate.

Brigades equipped with the Stryker are intended to be strategically mobile (i.e. capable of being rapidly deployed over long distances). As such the Stryker was intentionally designed with a lower level of protection compared to tracked vehicles like the M2 Bradley, but with much lower logistic requirements.

Criticisms

Main article: Stryker vehicle controversy
A Stryker vehicle with its wheels on fire in Iraq.
A Stryker vehicle stuck in the mud in a combat zone.

The Stryker had come under intense scrutiny from the civilian media since its introduction in the US Army. A report written by Victor O'reilly and submitted to New Jersey Republican Representative Jim Saxton initially blasted various points concerning the vehicle, only to have soldiers in the field seemingly exonerate its performance in a report by the US Army. Some criticism of the Stryker continues a decades-long ongoing debate issues concerning whether tracked or wheeled vehicles are more effective. Other criticism is specific to the Stryker, with complaints concerning various Stryker features.[20]

Much of the controversy centers around the Stryker's not being an Infantry fighting vehicle (IFV) in the mode of the M2 Bradley. The Stryker lacks heavy armor protection and its wheels provide less off-road mobility than tracks. The U.S. Army argues that the comparison with IFVs is inappropriate, since Strykers have been primarily deployed in foot infantry units which had previously relied on unarmored trucks and Humvees for mobility. Proponents of this view argue that Strykers are an enhancement to the protection of unarmored formations.

Other criticism arises from comparison to the proven, lighter and less expensive M113 Armored Personnel Carriers, and the M8 Armored Gun System. The Government Accountability Office reviewed the original purchase decision and found no reason to go against the US Army’s choice of the Stryker.[21] After the Stryker ICV was fielded, Congress ordered the GAO to perform tests to compare an M113A3 to a M1126 Stryker ICV. While they found both vehicles were adequate, the Stryker was found to be a superior infantry carrier.[8]

Documented testimony of the officers and men using the Stryker have been supportive of the vehicle and its protection. The level of protection provided is superior to up armored Humvees.[22]

Weight creep and heavy-lift transport also come up as issues. The ability of the Stryker to be air transportable by C-130 transport aircraft is one of the problems cited.

Rollover is a greater risk with the Stryker relative to other transport vehicles, due to the Stryker's higher center of gravity. The high center of gravity was a deliberate design choice as an anti-mine/IED measure. This issue is aggravated on the Canadian LAV III due to its turret. In the book My War, Colby Buzzell states that the first three fatalities of his Stryker brigade on its deployment to Iraq were from a rollover incident where a Stryker rolled over into a ditch of water. This was the only mention of a Stryker rollover in the book.[23] However, the book fails to mention the roll over was due to an eroded trail that gave way under the combined weight of two Strykers on the night of December 8, 2003 in Al Daluyia, Iraq. The pair of vehicles rolled into the adjacent body of water around 2200 hours. Inside the inverted Strykers, eighteen men struggled to survive in the frigid neck deep water before being rescued by their fellow soldiers. The vehicles were later refitted and soon patrolled the streets of Mosul, Iraq in early 2004.

Reports from military personnel and analysts indicate the Stryker is superior to other military vehicles (including Abrams tanks, Bradley IFV's and Humvees) regarding survivability against IEDs (improvised explosive devices).[24][25] One colonel said that the Strykers saved the lives of at least a hundred soldiers deployed in northern Iraq.[26]

Soldiers and officers who use Strykers defend them as very effective vehicles; an article in the Washington Post states:

"But in more than a dozen interviews, commanders, soldiers and mechanics who use the Stryker fleet daily in one of Iraq's most dangerous areas unanimously praised the vehicle. The defects outlined in the report were either wrong or relatively minor and did little to hamper the Stryker's effectiveness, they said." [26]

See also

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 "Army Fact File - Stryker". Retrieved on 2008-04-16.
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 Stryker Armored Vehicle, globalsecurity.org
  3. Stryker Armored Personnel Carrier
  4. Stryker gets new armor, decreases in weight, US Army
  5. Slat Armour for Stryker, defense-update.com
  6. "Stryker airdrop test". Retrieved on 2008-07-12.
  7. Jeffrey St. Clair: the General, GM and the Stryker
  8. 8.0 8.1 "GAO Compares Stryker to M113A3" p. 20. Retrieved on 2008-07-13.
  9. US Army Outlines Future Improvements for the Stryker, defense-update.com
  10. "Army Announces Name For Interim Armored Vehicle", U.S. Army. Accessed August 15, 2007.
  11. "General Dynamics Delivers First Production Stryker MGS Vehicles". Retrieved on 2008-07-13.
  12. Vetronics Technology Integration (VTI)
  13. Suspension test report, MillenWorks
  14. Stryker Self Propelled (SP) 105mm Indirect Fire, GlobalSecurity.org.
  15. Jane's International Defence Review, June 2006, p.64-5
  16. A Soldier's Guide to Army Transformation - Building a Direct Fire Unit -
  17. CBC News In Depth, Equipment: Mobile Gun System vs. Leopard tank, Oct 30 2003
  18. Army might buy surplus tanks from Germans, Swiss. CTV News, Oct 31 2006
  19. Army of Dude: Three Sixty Five
  20. The Wheel versus Track dilemma, fas.org
  21. "GAO Denies protest in choosing the Stryker over the M113 and M8". Retrieved on 2008-07-13.
  22. Canadian American Strategic Review. "Reviewing the LAV III – Rollovers and Suicide Bombers". LAV III. Retrieved on 2006-05-14.
  23. Buzzell, Colby. My War: Killing Time in Iraq, G.P. Putnam's Sons, 2005. ISBN 0399153276.
  24. Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) in Iraq and Afghanistan: Effects and Countermeasures, Congressional Research Service, Sept. 25 2006.
  25. Stryker increases troops’ survivability, U.S. Army 40th Public Affairs Detachment, Jan. 3 2007.
  26. 26.0 26.1 Soldiers Defend Faulted Strykers, Washington Post

External links

Official U.S. Army websites

Other websites