APC Development and related topics.

[sabresandy]

I'm sorry to nitpick, and I'll try to clarify, but: none of those articles address the problem with the Stryker vehicles. They cover future upgraded versions, yes, and I'll be looking forward to those, assuming they get fielded.

The issue is with the basic version of the Stryker, OBAT 12 UNIT 335, and its GL-equipped variant, UNIT 351, plus the cage armor versions thereof, UNIT 680 and 681.

The MG-equipped versions, 335 and 680, are armed with WEAPON 55, the .50cal AAMG, which is a Class 4 (FLAK/AA) weapon. The issue I had in mind was that this should not be correct, since they use remote weapons stations instead of a pintle mount. They should be using Class 5, CMG/BMG, or even Class 19, AUTOCANNON, to reflect that fact.

The same applies to the grenade launcher variants, 351 and 681. Their weapon mountings are Class 3, Team Weapons, which is affected by buttoning; they should be in Class 5 or Class 19 (5 makes a little more sense since the grenade launcher isn't an anti-helicopter weapon except at very short ranges), again, to reflect the fact that RWSes are immune to buttoning.

Regardless, though, I'll be pretty excited to see the new Stryker variants with better armor, stabilization, thermal sights, possible Javelin integration, all that. But I would like to see the existing old Strykers to be corrected as well.