User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:11:03 AM EDT
http://breakingdefense.com/2016/10/army-rolls-out-upgunned-stryker-30m-autocannon-vs-russians/
Today, after 18 months of urgent work, the Army rolled out its first upgunned Stryker vehicle, nicknamed Dragoon. The armored eight-wheel-drive troop transport, built by General Dynamics and normally armed with no more than a 0.50 calibre (12.7 millimeter) machinegun in an unprotected mount, has been rebuilt with an armored turret containing a 30 mm quickfiring cannon.
That’s enough firepower, the Army computes, to dispose of other lightly armored vehicles like the Russian BMP troop carrier. If the Russians invade the Baltics, the Stryker Dragoon can’t stop their heavy tanks, but it can thin out their scout vehicles and transports, allowing American M1 tanks to focus their 120 mm firepower on the heaviest targets. As the US military reoriented anxiously to Europe and the heavily armored Russian army, however, 12.7 mm looked awfully small. With this prototype Dragoon and its 30 mm cannon, the Army’s well on its way to fixing that. With the right airbursting ammunition, the 30 mm weapon might even take out low-flying aircraft. In parallel, to defeat Russian drones, the Army is experimenting with a low-powered anti-aircraft laser, also mounted on a Stryker. Once derided by heavy-tank hardliners as an underarmored dead end, the Stryker now seems a versatile and vital part of the Army’s future. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:12:41 AM EDT
[#1]
Gay. I wonder how many soldiers had to lose their jobs so the army could have the budget for that.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:13:15 AM EDT
[#2]
Impressive 30mm goodness.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:15:18 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
http://breakingdefense.com/2016/10/army-rolls-out-upgunned-stryker-30m-autocannon-vs-russians/ Today, after 18 months of urgent work, the Army rolled out its first upgunned Stryker vehicle, nicknamed Dragoon. The armored eight-wheel-drive troop transport, built by General Dynamics and normally armed with no more than a 0.50 calibre (12.7 millimeter) machinegun in an unprotected mount, has been rebuilt with an armored turret containing a 30 mm quickfiring cannon.
That’s enough firepower, the Army computes, to dispose of other lightly armored vehicles like the Russian BMP troop carrier. If the Russians invade the Baltics, the Stryker Dragoon can’t stop their heavy tanks, but it can thin out their scout vehicles and transports, allowing American M1 tanks to focus their 120 mm firepower on the heaviest targets. As the US military reoriented anxiously to Europe and the heavily armored Russian army, however, 12.7 mm looked awfully small. With this prototype Dragoon and its 30 mm cannon, the Army’s well on its way to fixing that. With the right airbursting ammunition, the 30 mm weapon might even take out low-flying aircraft. In parallel, to defeat Russian drones, the Army is experimenting with a low-powered anti-aircraft laser, also mounted on a Stryker. Once derided by heavy-tank hardliners as an underarmored dead end, the Stryker now seems a versatile and vital part of the Army’s future. http://breakingdefense.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2016/10/IMG_6087-1-e1477593562519-1024x654.jpg Are we even going to put enough of both in the region to put up a fight or is this more posturing? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:17:42 AM EDT
[#4]
i wonder how much weight that added.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:18:24 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Gay. I wonder how many soldiers had to lose their jobs so the army could have the budget for that. The Stryker concept was flawed from birth. Lots of Soldiers died because of that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:19:25 AM EDT
[#6]
Excellent, so it's caught up with the BTR-80.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:21:34 AM EDT
[#7]
That does not look nimble
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:21:41 AM EDT
[#8]
How many do we get to order? 20? 30?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:22:46 AM EDT
[#9]
Now we need a turret with a 100mm gun/missile launcher, 30mm cannon, and MG:
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:23:32 AM EDT
[#10]
So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm...
Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:24:16 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Excellent, so it's caught up with the BTR-80. The difference is ours will be driven sober, with fuel and ammo, all at the same time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:25:02 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? GAU-8 isn't proof again NexGen Russian armor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:25:21 AM EDT
[#13]
why not just build more abrams?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:26:56 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:27:00 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? Im guessing lower muzzle velocity, different ammo, and that whole lack of hitting tanks from the top at 3000 rounds per min. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:27:17 AM EDT
[#16]
In before Dport.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:27:35 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? No expert but a A10 shoots at the top of a tank where he armor plate is thin |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:27:40 AM EDT
[#18]
Sort of want.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:30:07 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No expert but a A10 shoots at the top of a tank where he armor plate is thin Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? No expert but a A10 shoots at the top of a tank where he armor plate is thin And it still isnt effective against modern armor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:31:25 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: why not just build more abrams? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:31:39 AM EDT
[#21]
is it still C-130 transportable and can't stop a 23 mm?
When you polish a turd, you just smear shit everywhere. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:31:51 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? A-10 pilot's coloring book They get to shoot the weak spots. The 30mm isn't effective against many actual tanks now. However,it would work fine vs more numerous BMD/BMP/BTR/Typhoon/LMV. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:32:51 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
why not just build more abrams? See Bosnia Intervention. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:39:54 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
See Bosnia Intervention. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
why not just build more abrams? See Bosnia Intervention. I spent a year there with IFOR. I can count on my 12" dick the number of times I said, "gee, I wish I had a 30mm cannon" |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:42:57 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That does not look nimble Way to go Army. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:43:24 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The difference is ours will be driven sober, with fuel and ammo, all at the same time. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Excellent, so it's caught up with the BTR-80. The difference is ours will be driven sober, with fuel and ammo, all at the same time. And ours costs 4 million per Stryker for just the new turret, whereas a complete BTR-82A goes for about a million. American defense procurement is broken beyond all measure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:45:44 AM EDT
[#27]
So... the Pentagon wars are still raging, eh? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:47:54 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So... the Pentagon wars are still raging, eh? actually the primary problem with the stryker is that the AF had its dick beaters in on it from the beginning. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:56:12 AM EDT
[#29]
The Bradly at least had the old TOW (which worked rather well against monkey-model T72s in Iraq).
This new Striker's got nothing for MBTs? Nothing at all??!? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 9:56:48 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And ours costs 4 million per Stryker for just the new turret, whereas a complete BTR-82A goes for about a million. American defense procurement is broken beyond all measure. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Excellent, so it's caught up with the BTR-80. The difference is ours will be driven sober, with fuel and ammo, all at the same time. And ours costs 4 million per Stryker for just the new turret, whereas a complete BTR-82A goes for about a million. American defense procurement is broken beyond all measure. A Jeep Wrangler costs 4 times as much as a Lada Niva. American car production is broken beyond all measure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 10:01:35 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? A-10 pilot's coloring book That's pretty cool. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 10:13:56 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Bradly at least had the old TOW (which worked rather well against monkey-model T72s in Iraq). This new Striker's got nothing for MBTs? Nothing at all??!? A pile of Javelins in the back? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 10:22:15 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A Jeep Wrangler costs 4 times as much as a Lada Niva. American car production is broken beyond all measure. That's actually kinda true, but a separate matter entirely. Besides, the Lada Niva is dead, long live the Chevy Niva: 
The US Army decided it wants a 30mm gun for its bronetransporters. That's good! Everyone can applaud the decision, because if they are ever going to be used in anything other than COIN, a HMG ain't shit. So rather than picking up the phone and saying Oh hey Israel how about you license that Samson RCWS to us, we decide to pick an unproven new 30mm gun and run with that. It's not like everyone from Finland to Italy and on to Israel don't already have modern 30mm WITH ATGM RWS designs (the American design is 30mm gun OR Javelin) that we could have just licensed and started building TODAY, we need to extract maximum dollars to wind up with something not quite as good as what he rest of the world has. See Stryker MGS for a perfect example. Modern American defense procurement exists to transfer money. It certainly doesn't exist to make the best product at reasonable prices. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 10:54:33 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
And ours costs 4 million per Stryker for just the new turret, whereas a complete BTR-82A goes for about a million. American defense procurement is broken beyond all measure. Instead of bitching about it anonymously on an internet forum, I wrote the same under my real name in both the Army and Navy journals of record. So, I agree. The Army is lurching back to an MCO focus, because deterrence against land forces requires it. The reality is that U.S. military power operating completely unrestrained across all domains globally is a scary fucking thing. And the first dead Stryker driver risks that. But, its nice to give the guy a fighting chance. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 10:54:58 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So... the Pentagon wars are still raging, eh? Please stop. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 10:56:12 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A Jeep Wrangler costs 4 times as much as a Lada Niva. American car production is broken beyond all measure. Lulz. Well played. I'm going to rush out and get a Lada said no person with a choice, ever. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:00:58 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: is it still C-130 transportable and can't stop a 23 mm? When you polish a turd, you just smear shit everywhere. Look, the military needed something that wasn't a Bradley because wheels and airmobile and hightech. Then they needed something that wasn't a Bradley, but had a gun. So they designed this. Next step is to design a vehicle which is not a Bradley, but which has armor. Then they need to design something which is not a Bradley but which has a gun, armor, and tracks. It makes perfect sense. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:03:58 AM EDT
[#38]
Finally a bigger bore to replace the 50 cal. Funny by 2 c.m. was pretty standard on the German ACs of WW II. Talked to a classmate whose father was in an Armored Recce unit equipped with M-8 Greyhounds. They ran whenever they saw a Sdkfz 222 AC.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:04:11 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Look, the military needed something that wasn't a Bradley because wheels and airmobile and hightech. Then they needed something that wasn't a Bradley, but had a gun. So they designed this. Next step is to design a vehicle which is not a Bradley, but which has armor. Then they need to design something which is not a Bradley but which has a gun, armor, and tracks. It makes perfect sense. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
is it still C-130 transportable and can't stop a 23 mm? When you polish a turd, you just smear shit everywhere. Look, the military needed something that wasn't a Bradley because wheels and airmobile and hightech. Then they needed something that wasn't a Bradley, but had a gun. So they designed this. Next step is to design a vehicle which is not a Bradley, but which has armor. Then they need to design something which is not a Bradley but which has a gun, armor, and tracks. It makes perfect sense. yeah, I am waiting for the tracked stryker as the expeditionary non-Bradley to be permanently stationed in central Europe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:11:00 AM EDT
[#40]
Wasn't there Strykers equipped with the 25mm Bushmaster? Or is the M242 in 30mm? 
It makes sense as there are plenty of Bradley Gunners out there so transition training wouldn't much more than refresher training...and I can personally attest to the fact that APFSDS can tear some shit up, and that the HE will skull fuck a BMP. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:11:04 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That's actually kinda true, but a separate matter entirely. Besides, the Lada Niva is dead, long live the Chevy Niva: http://i63.tinypic.com/w9y8nc.jpg The US Army decided it wants a 30mm gun for its bronetransporters. That's good! Everyone can applaud the decision, because if they are ever going to be used in anything other than COIN, a HMG ain't shit. So rather than picking up the phone and saying Oh hey Israel how about you license that Samson RCWS to us, we decide to pick an unproven new 30mm gun and run with that. It's not like everyone from Finland to Italy and on to Israel don't already have modern 30mm WITH ATGM RWS designs (the American design is 30mm gun OR Javelin) that we could have just licensed and started building TODAY, we need to extract maximum dollars to wind up with something not quite as good as what he rest of the world has. See Stryker MGS for a perfect example. Modern American defense procurement exists to transfer money. It certainly doesn't exist to make the best product at reasonable prices. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: A Jeep Wrangler costs 4 times as much as a Lada Niva. American car production is broken beyond all measure. That's actually kinda true, but a separate matter entirely. Besides, the Lada Niva is dead, long live the Chevy Niva: http://i63.tinypic.com/w9y8nc.jpg The US Army decided it wants a 30mm gun for its bronetransporters. That's good! Everyone can applaud the decision, because if they are ever going to be used in anything other than COIN, a HMG ain't shit. So rather than picking up the phone and saying Oh hey Israel how about you license that Samson RCWS to us, we decide to pick an unproven new 30mm gun and run with that. It's not like everyone from Finland to Italy and on to Israel don't already have modern 30mm WITH ATGM RWS designs (the American design is 30mm gun OR Javelin) that we could have just licensed and started building TODAY, we need to extract maximum dollars to wind up with something not quite as good as what he rest of the world has. See Stryker MGS for a perfect example. Modern American defense procurement exists to transfer money. It certainly doesn't exist to make the best product at reasonable prices. the unmanned turret isn't an American design. It's made by Kongsberg from Norway |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:17:11 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wasn't there Strykers equipped with the 25mm Bushmaster? Or is the M242 in 30mm?
It makes sense as there are plenty of Bradley Gunners out there so transition training wouldn't much more than refresher training...and I can personally attest to the fact that APFSDS can tear some shit up, and that the HE will skull fuck a BMP. When the Stryker was in development there were variants out the wazoo. Mortars, TOW, Chapparals, drone launchers, 105mm, They even stuck a twin 40mm turret on the things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:17:58 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And it still isnt effective against modern armor. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? No expert but a A10 shoots at the top of a tank where he armor plate is thin And it still isnt effective against modern armor. The A-10 cannon would rip apart the thin, 1" plain steel, top armor of the Abrams |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:24:48 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
When the Stryker was in development there were variants out the wazoo. Mortars, TOW, Chapparals, drone launchers, 105mm, They even stuck a twin 40mm turret on the things. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't there Strykers equipped with the 25mm Bushmaster? Or is the M242 in 30mm?
It makes sense as there are plenty of Bradley Gunners out there so transition training wouldn't much more than refresher training...and I can personally attest to the fact that APFSDS can tear some shit up, and that the HE will skull fuck a BMP. When the Stryker was in development there were variants out the wazoo. Mortars, TOW, Chapparals, drone launchers, 105mm, They even stuck a twin 40mm turret on the things. That's what I thought I recalled. So were they invalidated for some reason, or is this, as referenced earlier, another "Pentagon Wars"? |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:28:54 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? The angle of attack is different when you're hitting the roof armor vs. the front or sides of a tank. Roof armor is usually the thinnest part of a track. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:29:38 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's what I thought I recalled. So were they invalidated for some reason, or is this, as referenced earlier, another "Pentagon Wars"? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Wasn't there Strykers equipped with the 25mm Bushmaster? Or is the M242 in 30mm?
It makes sense as there are plenty of Bradley Gunners out there so transition training wouldn't much more than refresher training...and I can personally attest to the fact that APFSDS can tear some shit up, and that the HE will skull fuck a BMP. When the Stryker was in development there were variants out the wazoo. Mortars, TOW, Chapparals, drone launchers, 105mm, They even stuck a twin 40mm turret on the things. That's what I thought I recalled. So were they invalidated for some reason, or is this, as referenced earlier, another "Pentagon Wars"? All procurement BS. Just going for the "Swiss Army knife" of a vehicle claim. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:31:50 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Why is the Stryker's 30mm considered useless? Too slow? An AR-15 and a Marlin model 60 are both .22 - vastly different effects on target. Bore diameter is not the only measure of weapon effectiveness. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:31:50 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Actually, GAU-8's effectiveness on modern tanks (not half-rusted T72s and older) is highly questionable. If said modern tanks are around, however... Stryker really shouldn't be... 30mm or not. Not without Abrams escort anyway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:34:39 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Look, the military needed something that wasn't a Bradley because wheels and airmobile and hightech. Then they needed something that wasn't a Bradley, but had a gun. So they designed this. Next step is to design a vehicle which is not a Bradley, but which has armor. Then they need to design something which is not a Bradley but which has a gun, armor, and tracks. It makes perfect sense. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
is it still C-130 transportable and can't stop a 23 mm? When you polish a turd, you just smear shit everywhere. Look, the military needed something that wasn't a Bradley because wheels and airmobile and hightech. Then they needed something that wasn't a Bradley, but had a gun. So they designed this. Next step is to design a vehicle which is not a Bradley, but which has armor. Then they need to design something which is not a Bradley but which has a gun, armor, and tracks. It makes perfect sense. Why stop at 30mm? Upgun that sunnuvabitch some more because I know there are some boys that need another star. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/28/2016 11:35:46 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually, GAU-8's effectiveness on modern tanks (not half-rusted T72s and older) is highly questionable. If said modern tanks are around, however... Stryker really shouldn't be... 30mm or not. Not without Abrams escort anyway. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So...a GAU-8 doesn't seem to have a problem fucking up a tank, and it's 30mm... Actually, GAU-8's effectiveness on modern tanks (not half-rusted T72s and older) is highly questionable. If said modern tanks are around, however... Stryker really shouldn't be... 30mm or not. Not without Abrams escort anyway. That's why they have all those hard points for stuff like Hellfires, bombs and such. Warthog will get them one way or another. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
