Quote Originally Posted by Cavguy View Post
I just took over (2 months ago) as XO of a Stryker Reconnaissance unit. The Stryker is what it is - an eight wheeled personnel carrier. It's fast, carries a lot of troops, has good sights and sensors, and is reliable. It is also lightly armored by design, and does not possess stabilized gun systems. It is under-gunned in general, with only a .50 cal remote turret or a Mk19 mounted for firepower. We have 3x MGS Strykers per infantry company (9 PLTs in all) which mount a 105mm cannon. It's more of an infantry support gun than a tank killer, but that is what it is meant to be, although it can be effective in the anti-tank role. We have a Stryker TOW missile company as well. We have towed M777 howitzers in the Brigade and Stryker mounted 120mm mortars (with digital fire control) in our Squadron.

BLUF, it can transport lots of infantry to the battlefield and then provide overwatching fires against light/medium threats. It suffers all the mobility advantages (speed, efficiency) and disadvantages (off road performance) of wheeled APCs. It is also fully networked with FBCB2 and other systems, and the command variants are well equipped to conduct on the move C4I. Pound for pound, a Stryker unit has more dismounted infantry than any other formation in the Army. But it's not a mechanized force that can effectively oppose a heavy mechanized enemy without significant augmentation.

As far as soldier reviews, there are many vets in this unit with x2 tours in Iraq on Strykers. All praise the vehicle (with qualifications). They performed well in Iraq, but took significant hits in Afghanistan (as the CDN LAV3s did) due to increased canalization of terrain limiting mobility routes and options, and unfavorable cross-country terrain for wheeled vehicles. It wasn't designed like the MRAP for C-IED purposes, and suffers when large subsurface munitions detonate underneath it.

The Army is considering production of an upgraded double hulled version for Afghanistan.
Do you think this is something that should remain in the active force or be moved to the National Guard? What I mean is quite this, the Guard has two roles natural disasters, etc and war. We are a country with a well developed road system. Seems to be a vehicle that would be quite useful for something like Katrina, Tornados, etc. As far as war, the Guard played a huge part in Iraq, but a stablization role seems better suited and it seems that's when the Stryker is at it's best. Plus, the Stryker would come in handy for civil disturbance - I'm just saying

CavGuy thinks for the post that was the kind of stuff I am looking for.

Does the 1BCT 1st Armor still change to a SBCT as well as the 3rdACR?