But wasn't the the Stryker supposed to be the end-all, be-all of future American armored combat, to the point that BCTs and even new bases are now structured around them?
How does the Army plan on moving these things around anyway? And while they are supposed be IED proof (which I doubt), are they "enemy tank" and ATM proof?
Hitler was infatuated with gigantic armored vehicles, Krupp even made one, the Elefant, that weighted in at over eighty tons. During the Ardennes Offensive Royal Tiger tanks could not cross some of the bridges over the Meuse that the Germans managed to capture intact, German combat engineers had to reinforce the bridges while the offensive stalled.
This is not so much a “combat vehicle” as it is an uparmored colonial police wagon. It is not meant to counter the armed forces of a sovereign state, but to perform occupation and colonial administration duties.
No, the Stryker was always just an interim solution. They’ve been in service for a while, and the GCV was on-hold long enough that they had to do some fairly permanent things regarding training and infrastructure for the Stryker.
As to battlefield survivability, the GCV will be at least as durable as the Bradley is/was. Though, at this rate, they’re into overweight, undergunned-Merkava territory, and you’re right to wonder how they’ll transport these things. The M-1070 was necessary to move the Abrams, and the M-88 engineer vehicle struggles to handle it in recovery operations. At ten+ tons more, the M-88 will be unable to handle recoveries, and the 1070 cannot move something this heavy; they will need yet another even heavier transporter and a new engineer vehicle.
No.
The Stryker was an “Interim Combat Vehicle”, and it’s worked quite well.
The GCV came out of a cancelled program to unify combat platforms (tank, artillery and IFV).
This thing is HUGE, but we can’t build every platform around IEDs, because it significantly impacts performance against other threats.
At Ft. Knox in 1968, I recall seeing a monster US tank on display. It was taken out of service because it crushed road beds.
Remember the Crusader “Gun”?
Another money pit that was just too big.
How many gallons per mile does an 84 ton tracked vehicle require?
I tried and never finished a sci-fi story that had vehicles as large as naval ships, lol. I didn’t really think the US would head in that direction though
The Stryker was Shinseki’s plan to compete with the Marines for budget. We were going to fly Strykers into the combat zone in C-130s. They would roll off the aircraft anywhere in the world and bravely defeat our enemies. They encountered the same old problems. You have to make them light to transport them by air. That means RPGs and other anti-tank weapons can seriously harm them. They have to be big if you’re going to transport an Infantry squad in them. Big vehicles are easier to hit. The Air Force doesn’t want to use its money and equipment transporting the Army. The Navy doesn’t want to use its money and equipment transporting the Army. So, we have the Stryker......a vehicle crewed by the finest Soldiers in the world, that does none of the things that it’s supposed to do.
5.56mm