Stryker & Slat Armor: Innovative, yet ridiculed..

[1stFreedom]

Stryker vehicles being prepared for deployment in Iraq are being retrofitted with "slat" armor. The fact that they are being upgraded with this armor has given Stryker critics fuel for the fire.

The critics of the Stryker vehicle claim that it is a high tech death trap for the troops who ride inside.

Yet the problem really isn't the Stryker vehicle, it's the proliferation of high powered yet cheap munitions.

Critics should take into consideration that RPG's are a serious threat to ANY vehicle, including the M1A2 tanks (depending on where the tank is hit). The energy utilized by RPG's is so overwhelming it easily penetrates through many inches of armor.

The real issue is not the capabilty of the Stryker, but rather, the fact that RPG's have basically been ignored when it comes to lighter vehicles.

Reactive armor was designed to defeat RPG and HEAT tank rounds but it was an afterthought and is not appropriate for light vehicles such as a Humvee.

Slat armor should have been fitted on light vehicles years ago. It need not have been as heavy as the slat armor on the Stryker. In Vietnam simple chain link fence was used to help defeat RPG's. However, when utilized improperly, fencing can improve RPG performance.

A properly designed fencing for light vehicles should have been an option for all light vehicles in use today. There isn't an excuse for not having such a package since we have known since vietnam that this type of armor can help defeat RPG's.

The concept of slat armor seems to be unorthodox to those who take an interest in armored vehicles. It's different and a new concept for most of us who didn't know fencing was used in Vietnam against RPGs. Look at the picture of the Stryker with the slat armor. It simply looks ridiculous since we aren't used to this type of armor technology.

Instead of critizing the Stryker, it's time to applaud a "new" technology which can help defend against RPGs. It's time to get used to armor which isn't of the typical plate/body frame configuration.

Slat, chain link fences, and whatever other anti-RPG armor that is available should be fitted on every vehicle that faces RPG threats.

[1stFreedom]

ping!

[Hodar]

Cool idea! RPG hits the chain link fence and detonates well away from the armor. Kind of rough on the fence, but the armor should only see some heat scorching, and is less likely to be penetrated. I hope someone got a nice promotion or bonus for original thinking.

[VaBthang4]

I dont have a problem with the attachments. After the M1A2 was disabled, wisdom dictates you upgrade the Stryker.

Cheap and probably fairly effective. Haters are always gonna hate. We could retrofit the Stryker with a Vulcan Death Ray and the Contrarians would find some angle to complain.

It's what they do. It's all they do.

"Jesus walked on Water...how come he couldnt run on it"

Crap like that.

[tet68]

re;vulcan death ray

If they wanted it to have a death ray, why didn't they design one for it. It's always the little guy, out in the field up to his neck in terrorists that has to come up with a solution, well, I'm tired of it, damned tired of it.

So there.

[U S Army EOD]

Well that is all and good, the Russians were using bed springs to defeat Panzerfaust in WWII and the Germans were using side armor to defeat shaped charged weapons.

Another new threat to lightly armored vehicles are the 30mm and below with super kinetic penetrators. The Stryker will have a rough time with those.

[bvw]

"Yet the problem really isn't the Stryker vehicle, it's the proliferation of high powered yet cheap munitions."

That is what as known as an "EXCUSE".

They forgot to mention the proliferation of people with bad attitudes, killers, terrorists. That would be easier to cure than cheap munitions. And both impossible, for practical purposes. That is if we ever cured the easier -- removing the killers -- we wouldn't need a dang armored carrier in the first place.

[PeaRidge]

Has the munition that took out that M1A1 been determined?

[U S Army EOD]

Even at that stand off distance, the jet on a shapped charge can penetrate the armor if it is still directed in the right direction.

[tet68]

"Yet the problem really isn't the Stryker vehicle, it's the proliferation of high powered yet cheap munitions."

When RPGs are outlawed, you won't be in Kansas anymore.

[1stFreedom]

Not publicly.

However, one has to consider that the DU/Chobham armor is on the front face of the turret. I presume that the rest of the tank is not so well armored.

The only weapons that could possibly penetrate the frontal armor of an M1A2 IMO, is the LOSAT anti-tank round and possibly the Hellfire missile. That being said, there are plenty of other weapons which can penetrate the flanks.

[U S Army EOD]

It was probably something simular to the RPG 7. There have been many improvements on that since it was introduced in the mid 1960's.

[VaBthang4]

Truth be told....it was probably nothing more than a .50 cal round from about 50-100 feet away that struck a seem in the chassis construction. It's what's called in any business...


...a lucky shot.

Otherwise they towel heads would've been dropping tanks every day.

[Hodar]

Even at that stand off distance, the jet on a shapped charge can penetrate the armor if it is still directed in the right direction.

As I have no experience in this, and frankly the only tool I have to evaluate is my (overly) vivid imagination; I will accept your statement as fact. But, my thoughts are that if the shaped charge would still penetrate; the occupants would be dead with or without the slats. But, for the blasts that do not penetrate due to the lightweight and inexpensive armor, it's worth it's weight in gold. Armor is for protection, but it does not garrantee invulnerability. From the looks of things, one could 'guess' that a crew could construct a slat armor system pretty quickly.

[PeaRidge]

That is what an article last week said. The '7' is credited with 12" penetration potential. In this article, the hole inside the turret was about the diameter of a pencil with very little molten metal residue. The author made that out to be important in terms of munition recognition.

[Axenolith]

When the Soviets started running into lots of Panzerfausts on their drive west some of the more enterprising tankers found that plastering looted bedspring sets over the tank detonated the round away from the armor or bounced it off without ignition.

I've often wondered if putting a thin water or jell filled void in an armor plate would attenute the jet of a HEAT or other shaped charge. I just got a sample of this powder that absorbs 500-600X its volume in water to form a stable wet jell, and it seems that you could manufacture an ~1.5-3 inch applique plate with the interior filled with the powder. For weight savings you'd ship around dry, and add water and install on vehicles prior to entering a combat theater. Any thoughts?

[Cobra Scott]

Yet the problem really isn't the Stryker vehicle, it's the proliferation of high powered yet cheap munitions.

Well then why don't we just outlaw those weapons? I mean, they are outlawed in New Jersey, and I have yet to hear of Strykers being taken out with RPGs in Atlantic City. Statistically, that law is 100% effective...

[VaBthang4]

Sounds logical.

[Tallguy]

My understanding is that the fencing is not really intended to prematurely detonate the warhead. If that were to happen the molten stream of metal would probably still penetrate the stykers armor. Rather the fencing is intended to prevent it from exploding at all. The slat armor or chainlink fencing distorts the slender casing of the warhead and prevents the fusing from operating about 70 percent of the time according to tests. Can't vouch for it, but that's what I've read from some reliable sources.

[Lazamataz]

"Yet the problem really isn't the Stryker vehicle, it's the proliferation of high powered yet cheap munitions."

....showing, once again, the need for safe and sensible gun control.