Are wheels really better than tracks for the Stryker’s tactical mobility?
• Does the Stryker provide enough protection? • What’s wrong with the 105mm gun-armed Mobile Gun System variant? • Why weren’t competitive head-to-head tests with alternative vehicles held? • Why does so much of the decision-making and procurement process of the Stryker program seem to stink so badly? Here is what I’ve found and some thoughts on each subject: Is the Stryker’s really more strategically mobile than other units? Mechanized infantry and armored divisions take too long to get to the war. Light infantry, including airborne forces, can be there quickly but cannot stand against a mechanized foe. Enter the Stryker brigade. Designed to be air-deployable via C-5, C-17, and C-130, one of the requirements for the Interim Brigade Combat Teams was to be deliverable in fighting condition to anywhere in the world within 96 hours. The idea behind deploying the Stryker is that C-5s and C-17s, each able to carry four and seven Strykers respectively, would bring the brigade to a major airf
