Pioneering Army Unit to Debut in Iraq

AP | 8/02/03 | ROBERT BURNS

[Conservative84]

And the aluminum armor makes it burn nicely when hit with a hot enough round.

I've been looking, but haven't found an indentification of the metal used for the Stryker's armor. It probably shares the "advantage" of making a great illumination flare when really hot!

[R. Scott]

The Army’s newest ship is a Theater Support Vessel (TSV – before called a HSV) was bought with the new Stryker Brigades in mind. To learn more about this ship check out the Ft. Eustis web page
To learn more about the Army’s watercraft check this out

[FreedomPoster]

RPGs are more of a worry. Easier to carry/conceal, more numerous, and these things are far from RPG-proof.

[Conservative84]

The [Strykers] are not a replacement for the M1 Abrams tank or the M3 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle. The IAVs will be used in places, such as urban areas, where the heavy armored vehicles are not suitable for the mission.

True. But I object to the concept that heavy armored vehicles are not suitable for urban areas. In direct support of infantry units, tanks are very appropriate for urban areas. I don't think we've lost a single tanker to hostile fire since major combat operations ended, save perhaps that one tank where the crew failed to follow SOP and were driving across a bridge with the driver unbuttoned. Driver got shot, tank went into the water, rest of crew drowned. SOP says driver is never unbuttoned. Gee, I wonder why.

But imagine Mogadishu if we had dispatched a Mech Infantry task force with 2 Mech platoons and 1 tank platoon the moment that first Blackhawk went down. If I recall correctly, with the distances involved the heavy guys could have been there within 2 hours. Now imagine Somali reaction to an M-1 engaging them with direct, short range, main gun fire and Bradleys firing lots of HE 25mm instead of having nothing but our guys firing small arms at them. I don't think we would have lost 18 guys. And the Somalis would have lost either a lot more or a lot less than the 500-1000 they did - less if they reacted in the typical fashion when tanks show up spitting smoke and fire and death ("shock effect") and ran like hell, more if they obligingly hunkered down and tried to shoot at tanks with their small arms and RPGs.

And one other point - when I asked about the ultimate destination of the 6 Stryker brigades, Thunder 6 told us:

6 Brigades: Two currently at Ft. Lewis (one before too much longer), one in Alaska, one in Hawaii, one at Ft. Polk, and one in Pennsylvania. The ones in Alaska and Louisiana are separate BDE's. The other two belong to existing Divisions, one light, one mech.

Note that last division is a Mech division. I seriously doubt we're going to augment that division with a fourth brigade. So one brigade is going to turn in its M-1s and M-3s and transition to Strykers. That sounds like replacing M-1s and M-3s with Strykers. Iraq proved (again) that we need our heavy forces. I hope they're at least smart enough to choose the "light" brigade! Since we're deploying forces everywhere, my opinion is that we shouldn't replace any M-1s or M-3s with Strykers, but bring Fort Carson back up to full divisional strength and increase the number of maneuver battalions in the Army. And, again, I feel strongly the Stryker is a mistake when juxtaposed with the many other choices

For those who don't know, in a Mechanized Infantry division the "light" brigade is the one that has two Mech battalions and one Tank battalion. One brigade has two Tank and one Mech battalions, while the remaining brigade has four battalions, two of each. The only difference in an Armored division is it doesn't have a light brigade - both of the brigade with three battalions have two Tank battalions and one Mech.

Of course, my knowledge of division compositions could be out of date.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Nice boat. Now, can the Army trust the Navy to escort it and keep this high-value target from eating a shore-launched cruise missle or taking a 300-knot Russian torpedo launched from a 3rd-hand Dutch diesel sub?

I have my doubts. When you think about it, if the Navy trusted the Army there would be no Marine Corps, and if the Army trusted the Navy there would be no ships in the Army.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

USNS Shughart T-AKR 295 Large, Medium-speed, roll-on/roll-off ship [LMSR]

The LMSR ships are Large (950 feet long, 106 feet wide, 55,000 long ton displacement), Medium Speed (24 knots), Roll-on/Roll-off (RO/RO) vessels. LMSRs can carry an entire U.S. Army Task Force, including 58 tanks, 48 other track vehicles, plus more than 900 trucks and other wheeled vehicles.

[colorado tanker]

The wackiest ship in the Army??

[colorado tanker]

The IAVs will be used in places, such as urban areas, where the heavy armored vehicles are not suitable for the mission.

The problem is that some bad guys in "urban areas" have been known to have RPG's and ATGM's. Tanks were "suitable" in Baghdad. And has been pointed out in detail, we had our lunch eaten in Mog when we had no M-1's or Bradleys. So where is this "suitable" area for deployment? Liberia?

[colorado tanker]

Now that is a way cool ship.

[Thunder 6]

Con84:
One of the great things about this forum are the intelligent and committed folks who care enough to debate these issues.
The six locations are telling, for a number of reasons (I won't delve into the political side of it, but it is there):
The first two at Ft. Lewis: The force structure was already there (an armor and light BDE, both separated from their parent divisions by the Pacific Ocean) both supposedly able to deploy from Lewis anywhere in the world (which is true, the deployment facilities there are amazing...ports of Tacoma and Seattle, McChord AFB, and Boeing Field in Seattle), the environmental work was mostly done, etc...now one of them will likely not stay at Lewis (going to USAREUR, maybe Grafenwoer). One of these is headed to Iraq, followed by the second going somewhere as soon as it is certfied.
Alaska was/is a separate Light BDE, that has a PACOM mission (and Ted Stevens). Hawaii is a divisional light BDE (another BDE out of the 25th ID with a PACOM mission (and Daniel Inoye)and great deployment facilities...they are fixing to have huge problems there in Hi with the Environmental piece of fielding the SBCT (there are reasons why the forces in Hi have always been light!).
Ft. Polk's unit is the 2 ACR (L) which is the IVIII ABC Cav Regt, and is going to look different from the other SBCT's because there are different missions they will have to do for the Corps. However, they are currently in Iraq, and aren't due home for a year. This one makes sense, since it will pave the way for what the Cav Regt of the future will look/act like.
BDE number is going to the Pennsylvania National Guard, which also makes sense, because the ARNG has to covert to the future too, or it will end up marching in VFW parades and little else. The lion share of the soldiers who will make up that BDE are currently in Kosovo, or just got back from Bosnia, so the training part of the conversion should be easier.
All of these BDE's can operate independently, or as part of a Division, Corps, or Joint Force. SInce it appears the army is moving to BDE "like" structure as it's primary manuever forces, these BDE's will plug right into what is currently working in the field. Challenge is going to be lashing up a digital HQ (which all the SBCT's are) with analog Division or Corps HQ's. Only a couple of Divisions are digitized currently (4ID in Iraq, and 1st Cav at Hood), and only one Corps HQ (III Corps). There are workarounds being used (with V Corps in Iraq). There is much speculation that the later SBCT's may look significantly different that the first. Lessons learned, new equipment, technology advances, and even budget restraints will certainly affect the program.
regards,

[mark502inf]

When you think about it, if the Navy trusted the Army there would be no Marine Corps, and if the Army trusted the Navy there would be no ships in the Army.

You missed a service! Not only does the Army have more ships than the Navy, but it has more aircraft than the Air Force! Maybe for the same reason. :-)

[mark502inf]

Supposedly, the armor was fixed last year so it will stop a .50 cal round. Stopping an RPG takes application of additional armor from a kit.

Right. However, the testing showed that the RPG must hit "square" on the armor to get assured penetration. The Styker has lots of slope to its armor that can cause an RPG to either glance off completely or detonate at such an angle to the armor that the effect of the shape charge is at least partially deflected.

An M113 OTOH presents a nice square, flat surface for RPGs.

[colorado tanker]

However, the testing showed that the RPG must hit "square" on the armor to get assured penetration

Well, of course you have to line up "square" to get assured pene . . . . Oh, you're talking about tanks. :)

[R. Scott]

Cruise missiles and torpedoes? Nothing is perfect.

…if the Army trusted the Navy there would be no ships in the Army.

It’s not so much a case of trust as necessity. The Navy takes care of it’s own, and the needs of other services are secondary – the Navy’s funding is based on supporting the Marines, not the Army.
If an Army Battalion Commander needs amphibious support from the Navy, the request has to go through channels – at one time all the way to the Theater Commander. If the Navy has boats setting around uncommitted, the Army Commander might get them. If the request goes to the Army, it goes to the local Transportation Group Commander. It’s much quicker and more likely to be approved.

[mark502inf]

If the Stryker won't resist .50 cal AP, there's little to recommend it over a stretched version of the Hummer with a TOW launcher on top. At least we can transport lots of those by air, and they have good cross-country capabilities

The Stryker should have superior cross-country to HMMWVs--although as you say, the HMMWV is pretty good.

There's a lot more bad guys running around with 7.62 & 5.56, etc than with .50/.51 cal and the Stryker stops that stuff cold--as well as shell fragments--so on balance the Stryker is better deal than a HMMWV for the guys that have to ride in something.

[R. Scott]

Too bad the LMSR is a civilian crewed ship. I know a lot of Army types who would love to be on it.

[R. Scott]

Well, there was a time when Army Sailors had a reputation akin to that of pirates …
Then I retired.

[mark502inf]

For those who don't know, in a Mechanized Infantry division the "light" brigade is the one that has two Mech battalions and one Tank battalion. One brigade has two Tank and one Mech battalions, while the remaining brigade has four battalions, two of each. The only difference in an Armored division is it doesn't have a light brigade - both of the brigade with three battalions have two Tank battalions and one Mech. Of course, my knowledge of division compositions could be out of date.

A little out of date, but pretty good. Here's the latest: All divisions are going/have gone to 9 battalions. 1st Armor Division & 1st Cavalry are 5 tank battalions & 4 Bradley battalions (2 tank-heavy brigades & 1 Bradley-heavy brigade); the 1st Infantry Divison, 3ID, & 4ID are 4 tank Battalions & 5 Bradley battalions. The 2d Infantry Division is odd-ball: a heavy brigade in Korea, an air assault infantry brigade in Korea, and the Stryker Brigade at Fort Lewis.

The 25th Infantry Division has 6 light infantry battalions in 2 brigades in Hawaii & one Stryker Brigade getting organized and trained up at Fort Lewis.

[Cannoneer No. 4]

Reactive armor defeats shaped charges.

[Michael121]

M113 is slower. I like the new Buggies tube framed and can carry twin 50's even quads..... it can travel over 60 is 4 wheel drive.... engine in the rear it can lose a tire, not just flat but gone off the side and run fast on 3 wheels because it is balanced. It hits fast and so far the SF boys are playing with them. They can be stacked on top of each other to be loaded. they are very light.

As to the Strykers....they are deployed like Airborne. They move in fast hit hard and get out. They have waiting air support chops and fixed wings.... they have real time battle info and comm.... if they are utilized like they are supposed to instead of misused like the Airborne and Rangers in WWII, (Attrited as front line soldiers), they will be very efective. They have anti-tank weapons and can kill most tanks the enemy has. But they are made to hit and run. Overwhelming fire against infantry and too fast for arty.

I was M113 and M981 qualified. The M981 FIST, TOW could run 60 mph go up a grade of around 75% and kills tanks. Bad thing is only armed with TOWS one 60 and personal weapons. Trained OCS'ers on the Targeting System for a while at FT. SILL.... goes to 10 digit grid square, know where you are and hit target every time. M981 - 26 tons / M113 - 13 tons