My favorite bugaboo

[panzergator]

Youtube: Why the Army Has Spent $21.6 Billion on Stryker Combat Vehicles

Interesting shots of Hohenfels and commentary on Stryker, but the damned thing can't navigate a gentle slope into a position because the ground is too wet! Maybe a tracked version?

I've seen the same problem with Boxers in other 'tubes. I think we're programming for disaster by relying too much on wheeled infantry carriers. S..t, I dunno. Invent a track that can just be wrapped around the wheels? You know, LIKE J. WALTER CHRISTIE DID IN THE 1930S! Add a sprocket at the front to help drive the track. Better than getting shot while spinning the tires to get in position. Speed does no good if you can't get traction, and the damned thing is clumsy as hell. I am CERTAIN there are grand features about the Stryker, but maneuverability cross-country is not one of them, and in combat, rolling down a paved road is NOT a good idea.

M113s could float, too. Maybe just rework those old boxes a bit for modern times. A basic Stryker weighs around 19 tons. An M113 weighs around 12.5 tons. Ya got some wiggle room on weight to use imagination with if the weight for transportability is a factor. It may not float when you're finished but Stryker isn't amphibious, either. Add mine resistance configuration, a little more armor. The M113 won't make 60 on a hard surface road, but it'll go 40, and the 20mph difference might be ignored if you can get up a hill into position when the ground is wet. I've spent time at Hohenfels. I've seen that ground wet. Glad I don't have to wrestle Strykers around in it. And that was a CAVALRY unit in the Youtube. What good is a Cav unit that can't cav?

End of rant.

[Hoth_902]

I wonder what will be said about the Stryker when all is said an done in Ukraine. I imagine it's a good proving ground for both old and new kit. I read an article, the other day, about the M113 in Ukraine. I need to read through it again to remember all the points.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/vikrammitt ... eld-needs/