From: Darrell Ramsell (daram@comcast.net)
Date: Tue Nov 23 2004 - 00:55:52 PST
Ah yes, very true Steve. It did cross my mind that he might be bias toward
the Brady. In fact when the Bradley first came out I know a lot of people
were bitching and moaning about it.
Anyway, I just wanted to share with the list of what I was told from someone
who is on the front lines.
Darrell
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Grammont" <islander@midmaine.com>
To: "Military Vehicles Mailing List" <mil-veh@mil-veh.org>
Sent: Sunday, November 21, 2004 7:57 AM
Subject: Re: [MV] M113's in Iraq/Stryker
> Hi Darrell,
>
>>My friend who's driving a M-2 in Iraq doesn't like them.
>
> Not surprising, really. The whole problem within the Army before and
> currently is this "treads vs. wheels" mentality. The "treadheads"
> feared/loathed the possibility of losing their tracked vehicles so much
> they wanted the Stryker program killed before it even began. It is no
> different than the old "cavalry vs. tanks" or the navy's reluctance to
> give up battleships long after their need had passed. Change is always
> opposed by someone, usually the ones that will have to be doing the
> changing.
>
> Also, consider that soldiers often swear by and swear at the same weapons
> depending on their personal bias, experience, or comfortability. In
> researching the popularity of certain weapons during WWII it was easy to
> find one officer who said "this weapon is the best thing in the whole
> world" and another that said "we thought it was useless so we
> 'accidentally' misplaced it every time we were issued one". Same weapon,
> completely different reaction. It is possible that both are correct
> depending on the terrain, style of leadership, etc.
>
>> According to him,
>>the armor is not capable of stopping .50 cal. rounds.
>
> I'm not sure this is true anymore with the upgraded armor kit. I'll
> check on that. Anyway, not a big issue since the enemy doesn't have .50
> cal small arms available to them in any quantity (i.e. they would have to
> be swiped from us). Kinda like saying "this vehicle can be destroyed by
> a nuke" when the enemy isn't using nukes ;-)
>
>>The other issue he
>>had with them is that they can only mount one weapon system with no
>>secondary weapon such as a tow with a M-240. Most he said are armed with
>>a
>>.50 cal. on remote mount.
>
> Correct. The Bradley wins hands down in the firepower department.
> However, as with all weapons systems you can not simply pick and choose
> one or two things to compare. Every vehicle is a series of compromises
> designed to fit a particular design goal. For example, while the Bradley
> might have superior firepower it is also larger and heavier than the
> Stryker with its smaller weapon. Which is better? Depends on the
> scenario, but neither are perfect for all situations.
>
> Having said that, the Army is dissatisfied with the current remote .50
> system and is experimenting with a replacement. I'm not sure the
> proposed solution is common knowledge so I'm going to keep my yap shut :-)
>
>>Apparently the army was considering giving some
>>to his cavalry unit but they didn't want them.
>
> I don't buy this :-) Strykers are not being penny packeted out to units.
> They are kept in organic Brigades. It could be his unit was possibly
> selected to convert to Stryker, but that program has been nailed down for
> so many years I don't think that is the case either.
>
>> They rather have the Bradley's.
>
> Soldiers are always reluctant to change their weapons or mounts. Don't
> take any stock in that attitude. For one thing, your friend hasn't been
> trained in or fought in a Stryker, so in some respects his opinion is
> "uninformed" (at least when compared to someone who has). Kinda like
> asking someone if they like the taste of squid based on looking at it :-)
>
> The interesting thing is the Cav units that were converted to Stryker
> used to say the same things as your friend after they lost their Bradleys
> when they were Stateside. Now they seem to feel the exact opposite since
> going to Iraq. I have to wonder if your friend would change his tune if
> he switched as well.
>
> Lastly, the commanders apparently love the Stryker Brigades. They move
> quickly, quietly, and with minimal issues compared to tracked units.
> Readiness levels are often in the high 90% range from what I gather. A
> ground pounding grunt can't be expected to know about or care about this
> stuff. He is more concerned with himself and the soldiers around him.
> Therefore his focus is quite understandably narrowly focused.
>
> Just some thoughts to keep in mind :-)
>
> Steve
>
>
> ===Mil-Veh is a member-supported mailing list===
> To unsubscribe, send e-mail to: <mil-veh-off@mil-veh.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, send e-mail to <mil-veh-digest@mil-veh.org>
> To reach a human, contact <ack@mil-veh.org>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:37:43 PDT