We're the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost. All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT, and KA 2003-2010 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html Sat, 24 Mar 2012 15:53:18 Z Movable Type 4.12 en Copyright 2012 http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification 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... http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html Thu, 11 May 2006 07:47:30 -0600 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? http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45188 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45188 Sat, 13 May 2006 09:16:52 -0600 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. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45186 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45186 Sat, 13 May 2006 06:02:45 -0600 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.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45170 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45170 Fri, 12 May 2006 11:27:55 -0600 Heh. Nothing like being in Danger Area E as a *duty position*. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45169 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45169 Fri, 12 May 2006 10:53:05 -0600 Another great invention. I ranks right up there with the Hover Tank http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45168 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45168 Fri, 12 May 2006 10:52:43 -0600 Nomex™ or Kevlar™? ]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45166 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45166 Thu, 11 May 2006 23:41:47 -0600 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 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45164 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45164 Thu, 11 May 2006 21:55:08 -0600 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. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45163 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45163 Thu, 11 May 2006 21:51:25 -0600 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. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45162 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45162 Thu, 11 May 2006 21:24:53 -0600 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. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45161 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45161 Thu, 11 May 2006 19:29:11 -0600 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. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45160 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45160 Thu, 11 May 2006 19:12:34 -0600 Geez, People, the farking caption was MINE! http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45158 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45158 Thu, 11 May 2006 18:37:21 -0600 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. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45156 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45156 Thu, 11 May 2006 18:12:58 -0600 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. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45153 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45153 Thu, 11 May 2006 17:10:47 -0600 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. http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45148 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45148 Thu, 11 May 2006 13:55:21 -0600 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 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45147 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45147 Thu, 11 May 2006 13:33:09 -0600 "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.]]> http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45146 http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2006/05/stryker_mobile_gun_system.html#comment-45146 Thu, 11 May 2006 13:30:06 -0600