previous post next post  

Stryker Mobile Gun System.

I admit I had (and still have) reservations about the Stryker being touted as the major armored punch of the Army. It has done very well in it's current service environment, and proven to be able to take an immense amount of damage with excellent crew survivability, while at the same time being economically repairable. And, as I assume they've gotten the lateral-shooting stability issues taken care of (i.e., being able to shoot to the side without flipping the vehicle if it's on any sort of slope) the MGS is a welcome addition to the fleet.

Now that we have some real operational experience with them, as well, we're getting in real improvements in a comparatively benign environment. Benign here meaning we aren't fighting a near-peer with our backs to the wall somewhere, a Bad Time to discover design flaws - nothing is benign when you're being shot at. Remember, to the individual soldier, *everything* is a frontal assault - only higher commanders and planning staff weenies like me talk of feints and envelopments.

But I still wouldn't want to find myself fighting a tank force in bad weather in cross-compartmented terrain - especially if I wasn't in a position to trade space for time. If I'm in that fight, vice a flat sandy pool table with good weather, I'd like some nice lumbering M1s.

But the truth is, the Stryker is a capability we need in this environment.

Stryker Mobile Gun System demonstrating max elevation.  Photo courtesy US Army

Pic of the Stryker Mobile Gun System demonstrating it's ability to engage targets well above itself. It's backed up on a ramp so that it can actually shoot level on a direct fire range. If it shot at max elevation, the round would travel many miles, and the probable error in range for high velocity guns fired indirect is really pretty massive. The PeR for the US 175mm gun was 1.5 to 2 km (call it a mile) at max range. This is lots safer, even if it looks silly.

For screensaver collectors - hi-res here.

Stryker ramps up to unveil Mobile Gun System By Annette Fournier May 9, 2006


FORT BENNING, Ga. (Army News Service, May 9, 2006) – The newest version of the Stryker vehicle, designed to provide fire power to Infantry units, will be unveiled May 15 at Fort Knox's Armor Warfighting Symposium.

The development of the Mobile Gun System is being managed by Fort Benning's Training and Doctrine Command System Manager-Stryker/Bradley.

The system was developed to meet the infantry’s need for a highly mobile support vehicle to supply rapid, direct fire, specifically during close assaults, said Dave Rogers, a TSM-Stryker senior analyst. The Mobile Gun System will eventually be integrated into Stryker Brigade Combat Teams.

"The Mobile Gun System brings a tremendous battlefield capability to the Stryker formation, providing direct fire support to infantrymen in close, complex terrain," said Col. Donald Sando, the director of the TSM Stryker/Bradley.

The Mobile Gun System's firepower includes a turret-mounted 105 mm cannon, a mounted M-240C machine gun and a pedestal-mounted M-2.50 caliber machine gun for the vehicle commander.

The cannon can blast holes through reinforced concrete walls creating a breach point for infantry, and destroy bunkers and machine-gun nests that typically pin down infantry squads and platoons.

The 105 mm cannon can also take out snipers, Rogers said, because with one shot, it can destroy the entire area where a sniper is firing from. The cannon also fires canister rounds, which are used when confronting large groups of combatants. The canister round sends out a spray of titanium balls, similar to the pellets from a shotgun, which can impact several targets at once.

It's the heavy fire power and versatility that will make the Mobile Gun System an asset in combat, Rogers said.

"People will assume it's a tank when they see it because it has a big gun," Rogers said, "but it's much lighter than a 70 ton tank, making it more mobile. Its primary role is to support the infantry, not to go head to head with tanks."

The Mobile Gun System also features the Ammunition Handling System, an ammo loading device for the 105 mm cannon. With the ammo system, several types of rounds can be loaded in advance, then the ammunition types are displayed on the cannon operator's central control panel monitor. Depending on the mission, the operator can select which ammunition to use and the Ammunition Handling System automatically loads the cannon.

This capability gives the Mobile Gun System an advantage over other Army vehicles, which must be manually loaded with specific ammunition by a fourth crew member, Rogers said. The Ammunition Handling System makes loading and firing on targets faster and more efficient, he said.

"When planning for the 10 variants of Strykers, the Army took into account everything a Soldier could need on the battlefield," Rogers said. "From that, they developed the other Stryker variants, like the Medical Evacuation Vehicle, the Antitank Guided Missile Vehicle and the Engineer Squad vehicles, which are all uniquely designed for their mission. The Mobile Gun System fills a hole, and gives the infantry another capability."

The Mobile Gun System will be the last Stryker variant to be fielded. The Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Reconnaissance Vehicle, the other new Stryker vehicle, was fielded to the 2nd Cavalry Regiment at Fort Lewis, Wash., in February. Soldiers with the 2nd Cav. Regt. will also be the first to receive the Mobile Gun System. They will receive 27 vehicles from July to August, which will be tested in an operational unit environment.

The Army designated 14 Mobile Gun System vehicles for extensive testing at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Md., Yuma Proving Grounds, Ariz., and White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico.

Testing the vehicle in extreme climates and terrain helps the Mobile Gun System's designers look for potential problems that may appear in a combat environment.

"People go to great pains to almost abuse the vehicle," Rogers said. "It's tested realistically in harsh settings so we can identify any shortcomings during the testing stage. We don't want to find out about a problem after it’s in combat, so we're not cutting corners. During the tests, these vehicles aren't treated with kid gloves. We want to make sure we don't equip our Soldiers with a weak vehicle."

It will still be a while before the Mobile Gun System will get to the battlefield. The Defense Acquisition Executive will decide if the vehicle should go into full rate production in July 2007.

(Editor's note: Annette Fournier writes for the Bayonet.)


17 Comments

Gotta love this quote: "The 105 mm cannon can also take out snipers, Rogers said, because with one shot, it can destroy the entire area where a sniper is firing from. The cannon also fires canister rounds, which are used when confronting large groups of combatants. The canister round sends out a spray of titanium balls, similar to the pellets from a shotgun, which can impact several targets at once." I'd say the 105mm would be a pretty effective anti-sniper round. ;) And as I recall from the earlier discussion the canister shot has what, 1,100 Ti balls, each of pretty good size? I'd say that would tend to 'impact several targets at once'. Sort of reminds me of the page I saw of the guy who set up a Mountain Cannon to hunt deer. He used 12ga slugs - lots of them. Also, the description with the picture is a bit confusing. My assumption is that they wanted to show the gun firing at a high elevation (relative to the vehicle) but keep the round on the range so they backed it on to the ramp. The description goes off into the PeR for indirect fire ('H&I'?) without giving any indication of either the range or the PeR for this particular gun.
 
I served with the 14th Armored Cav back in 66-69 up on the Fulda Gap. We were the M660A1 cav back then! I went up to Fort Lewis several years back for the re-activation of the 14th Cav and was surprised to see that they had no armor!! They had traded it all in for the Stryker. I must say I was not impressed with the Stryker and from what I read, they have had to up armor it and from this article on the Mobile gun system, do they have to up gun it too? your website is part of my daily routine! thx! Roy Patterson B Troop 1st Squadron 14th Armored Cavalry 1966-1969
 
And that was me making that description. The actual caption was much more bland. I was just telling people why they did it. I freely admit I have no farking idea what the PeR for that round is - and they may not either, not having done any work to determine it, not planning to shoot the things indirect. I may also be wrong.
 
I assume (and am probably wrong) that the driver wears earmuffs the size of Victorian fainting couches. Extrapolating from pintle placement and scribing an arc to quadrant zero, the muzzle's about a meter from his face. Heh. The lateral-stability issue was a tad more sucky than the PIO put out--the beast would roll even if it was fired on a level surface.
 
The whole Stryker AGS seems to be redundant after the years and dollars spent to devolp the M-8 Ridgeway which uses the same gun and ammo but is, gasp a real tank. I think the only reason the M-8 has not been ordered into production is because it has tracks which is not in keeping with what those at the top want to see at the moment.
 
Geez, People, the farking caption was MINE!
 
DOD just keeps ordering more junk. When do the troops get to decide what they need? I've only been watching for 40 years and reading about the past forever. Seems like the brass monkeys just can't get it right. Humve, m-16, etc. etc. Just maybe one of these day......oh well, just a dream.
 
Well, the obvious answer to that question Jim, is that the troops don't usually know what they want until they need it. The Stryker, as fielded now, incorporates a huge amount of soldier-derived input. But since we're still laboring under a peace-time driven major procurement process, cock-ups of large stature are *still* going to occur. What you aren't hearing is the bitching the jihadis may have about *their* gear. It's a common thread among soldiers that the other guy's stuff is better. Sometimes it is, sometimes it ain't, mostly it's just... different.
 
Ti spheres for the canister shot? Are they really using titanium? That's awefully expensive. There's denser, or almost as dense and cheaper, metals out there. Titanium? No wonder the cost of little league baseball bats has gone up.
 
Ry, has there *ever* been a decision made regarding weaponry you *approve* of? Just curious? I am just *so* used to dealing with the hand I'm dealt, and not bad-mouthing every tool down the chain, whatever I might be saying up the chain that I've been assimilated by the Borg.
 
The range of the 105mm on a Leopard, firing HESH, is 8000m. QE for that range is approximately 20deg. However, the danger template for the gun allows for a ricochet range of about 25km. Bill, the driver sits behind the front axle, and the gun in the photo is at full recoil. So there is a bit more than a metre of audio separation. Cheers JMH
 
It looks like there's at least 2.5 meters between the muzzle and the driver's compartment at the initial *bang*, but sound propagates strongly in the direction of the person who's most nervous about loud noises. Then there's the question of the driver's face mask--should he get Nomex™ or Kevlar™?
 
Another great invention. I ranks right up there with the Hover Tank
 
Heh. Nothing like being in Danger Area E as a *duty position*.
 
Heh. Jim B finally crawled out of that bottle of Scoresby the dame musta put him in. But the truth is, the Stryker is a capability we need in this environment. Pentagon Babblespeak 101 gents. The escape clause of the sentence is... capability.
 
Well, I seem to like the choice to start moving away from the 9mm sidearm back to a .45. ANd the rumblings about changing from NATO standard calibres, given the experiences of Afghanistan and Iraq, have my totally worthless seal of approval. Long live uninformed and idiotic civilian control of military purchasing! I, Gollum, will find a way to hose somebody somehow(and if it isn't me it'll be some anti-mil type from San Francisco)! And while much of my complaints may be utterly usesless and waste of electrons, I don't think complaints about use of titanium is of that sort. The stuff is really hard to refine, unlike aluminum, much less alloy for use as structural members for any type of vehicle. And there apparently isn't that large a terrestrial supply of it, John. Even Gollum gets one right every 3 years or so. pllllpppppt.
 
I wasn't commenting on your actual post in contention, Ry, merely the general trend them. And c'mon, everybody knows the gnomes make that stuff, in caverns deep inside the earth that only show up on Illuminati scans. Sheesh. As for the choice of the metal, too bad it's really tungsten, vice titanium. Does that make you feel any better?
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.