| Hey, the Stryker has some flaws. So what? The USA has not done much with wheeled APC's before it, so the US military is having to learn how the only way that it is possible: Trial, error and fixing the flaws as they arise.
How many of us would rather be out in the open, rather than inside a Stryker if an artillery shell explodes right next to you? A car bomb? A RPG being fired at you? Your odds of survival are seldom going to be diminished by being inside a Stryker. So people can die in a Stryker going into a warzone. You're a lot more sure of death in an unarmored Humvee. If circumstances merit a more heavily armored, slower APC, bring a Bradley for crapsakes!
A lot more could have been learned from other countries with regard to design. South Africa could have made some excellent suggestions for the design, and they have often done on this forum. So too could many other nations. But the Stryker fits the bill and fills a role that Bradleys and Humvees are not truly capable of filling. A Bradley just can't get where its going faster than the Stryker. [Top speed 45 miles per hour vs top speed of 60 miles per hour.] A Humvee can get there even faster, but it is a helluva lot easier to take out than a Stryker. The Stryker remains as the fastest most rapidly deployable fully armored vehicle we have, (at least that I am aware of.) It also fits inside a C130, which is a tremendous benefit in terms of deployment.
__________________
"It is well that war is so terrible, else we should grow too fond of it."
- General Robert E. Lee
Warning, critical pebkac error in the iD10t!! pebkac\wtflolurpwnzd\snafuroflmao.exe called iD10t, iD10t failed to respond!! System in danger!!
"It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong. I am NOT a big man." -Chevy Chase
|