Are the Stryker Mobile Gun System's days numbered?

[Special-K]

https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2020/9/18/army-begins-fielding-upgraded-third-generation-strykers

 

I was reading the article at the above link and these paragraphs stood out:

"One element within the teams that could soon change involves the Mobile Gun System.

“That particular system is a story unto its own in terms of its development and fielding history,” Venable asserted. “And there is an upcoming decision in November to determine the future of that particular MGS on flat bottom vehicles.”

While one decision option could integrate the gun onto a DVHA1 chassis, Venable acknowledged that “the greater community of purpose is re-examining the requirement to try to better understand what we were trying to solve with that particular vehicle. … There’s quite a lot of conversation with various courses of action going around.”

He pointed to ongoing Stryker lethality upgrade activities as potentially providing “overlapping capabilities against the original set of requirements for” the Mobile Gun Systems, adding, “So it’s possible that in that re-examination, the Army could select another type of capability besides the direct fire 105mm cannon.”

 

I have always found this type of vehicle to be interesting, and there are several around - Centauro, Rooikat, etc. - and they don't seem to be going away. 

 

I am, as always, interested in the opinions of the those on this Grate Site. 

 

 

-K

[RETAC21]

I would say it depends on what the users do with them. Centauro and Rooikat are cavalry vehicles, used for reconnaissance. The AGS is a kind of a tank stand-in, but it's not a tank, nor an indirect fire platform, and it's big. Mebbe the new USMC will be interested in them.

[Ssnake]

The AGS is a wheeled assault gun against overmatched 3rd world opponents of the Derka Derka kind. Not sure if it has much potential in other roles, TBH. A lot of questionable design decisions went into this contraption that compromised what it was supposed to be, like the desire to recycle old high-pressure 105mm tank guns for cost savings, which made it (IMO) intolerably top-heavy. Cross-contry mobility is poor. I don't know enough about its sensors to pass judgement of its feasibility role as a cavalry vehicle, but somehow I'm skeptical.

If, as a vehicle commander, you have to tilt your head sideways when buttoning up, it's indicative of much bigger problems of the whole vehicle concept.

[shep854]

For an infantry support HE thrower, a 105mm how woukd be more practical.

More compact gun, more on-board ammo, and more boom per shot, as well a variety of shell.

[JasonJ]

Some people think that high velocity kinetic 105mm no longer really has much of a role. But on the mention of other wheeled vehicles as demonstrating some interest in them exists, then it might be that ATGMs are becoming easier to intercept with active defense. Video clips of the fighting in Syria have shown that vehicles do have a few seconds to move out of harms way from incoming ATGMs as well. High velocity 105 would hit harder and faster and probably mission kill any vehicle with just 1 hit except frontal MBT. So that's something that autocannons such as the 30mm on a recent Stryker variant couldn't really match either. For a quick-to-deploy mobile force, high velocity kinetic 105mm may still have a niche that can't really be covered by other means.

[Ssnake]

105 is still deadly for any MBT with flank shots, and frontal against museum pieces like unmodified museum pieces T-55 and -62. That much is out of the question. There are however 105mm gun designs with lower recoil and lighter assemblies. The cost saving measure for the Stryker and the profoundly stupid idea to cram it all into a Piranha III chassis to match Hercules air transportability however made this MGS an overall terrible design.

[Stuart Galbraith]

9 hours ago, Ssnake said:

The AGS is a wheeled assault gun against overmatched 3rd world opponents of the Derka Derka kind. Not sure if it has much potential in other roles, TBH. A lot of questionable design decisions went into this contraption that compromised what it was supposed to be, like the desire to recycle old high-pressure 105mm tank guns for cost savings, which made it (IMO) intolerably top-heavy. Cross-contry mobility is poor. I don't know enough about its sensors to pass judgement of its feasibility role as a cavalry vehicle, but somehow I'm skeptical.

If, as a vehicle commander, you have to tilt your head sideways when buttoning up, it's indicative of much bigger problems of the whole vehicle concept.

Its rather dispiriting when you reflect Engesa was making a more useful vehicle 45years ago.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EE-9_Cascavel

I think their 90mm had rounds that were still viable against T55s in flank shots. The only thing that held it back was lack of decent night vision (some did get II) and a decent fire control.

 

[Ssnake]

Well, the DF90 shows IMO the limits of 90mm guns in lightweight vehicles. It would be nice if they could get APFSDS to work, but they can't (recoil is too strong, wrecks the boresight with the first shot). They tried to fix it for years, and officially gave up last year.

So the DF90 shoots only HESH, nothing else. No Stuart, that's not a bonus feature.

[Stuart Galbraith]

It is, it so is! I play warthunder, I know how these things work!

 

I was searching through an old janes,and they certainly referenced a 90mm APFSDS round, but i couldnt figure out why nobody was using it.  So this never actually worked out then? There certainly was a HEAT round for it though.

[Ssnake]

I can only relay what the Belgians told me. Sure, the rounds exist, they just don't use them because they are fire and forget. : Fire them once, forget about your aim afterwards.

[bd1]

i think the american 90mm turrets in 80-90´s (Textron or was it AV) could fire  up to 40 degree angles, making them better fire support for urban scenarios and generally infantry work . maybe that would have been better fit for LAV chassis?  25mm. autocannon for cavalry-recon stuff, 90mm LV for fire spt., mortars remain for indirect fire.  or, like russians , 120mm gun-mortar for all DF and IDF fire spt . however , another munitions caliber in logistics in both cases

[CaptLuke]

6 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Its rather dispiriting when you reflect Engesa was making a more useful vehicle 45years ago.

Brazil seems to have a way with wheeled vehicles.  Their VBTP program seems, at least from afar, spectacularly better run than similar programs in the US and UK.

 

5 hours ago, Ssnake said:

Well, the DF90 shows IMO the limits of 90mm guns in lightweight vehicles. It would be nice if they could get APFSDS to work, but they can't (recoil is too strong, wrecks the boresight with the first shot). They tried to fix it for years, and officially gave up last year.

So the DF90 shoots only HESH, nothing else. No Stuart, that's not a bonus feature.

I'm not seeing that proves the limits of 90mm guns in general; GIAT's F4 would have been an alternative and I believe there are HEAT and regular old HE rounds for that in addition to APFSDS.  Panhard put it on an 8 tonne vehicle, so presumably an easy fit for the Stryker.

A more 'merican solution might have been a 76mm gun, there's already APFSDS for that which will, IIRC, defeat a T-62 frontally.  I think that would still be up for flank shots against anything and there would be space/weight available to add a couple TOW launchers for engaging more modern (or just up-armored) MBT frontally.

[bojan]

BMP-3 like weapon suite. Low velocity HE thrower, automatic cannon, just make ATGMs external.

[Stuart Galbraith]

38 minutes ago, CaptLuke said:

Brazil seems to have a way with wheeled vehicles.  Their VBTP program seems, at least from afar, spectacularly better run than similar programs in the US and UK.

 

I'm not seeing that proves the limits of 90mm guns in general; GIAT's F4 would have been an alternative and I believe there are HEAT and regular old HE rounds for that in addition to APFSDS.  Panhard put it on an 8 tonne vehicle, so presumably an easy fit for the Stryker.

A more 'merican solution might have been a 76mm gun, there's already APFSDS for that which will, IIRC, defeat a T-62 frontally.  I think that would still be up for flank shots against anything and there would be space/weight available to add a couple TOW launchers for engaging more modern (or just up-armored) MBT frontally.

I knew virtually nothing about the EE-9 before doing a recent mod to Armored Brigade, and I like what ive read of it. It was a cheap, simple vehicle, whose only failing was it didnt have thermal sights and a modern fire control. There is the other way of looking at it, that was its strength, its was dirt cheap.

And reliable too. The Iraqi Kurds are still using some of them in their battles with ISIS.

 

Speaking of Iraq, I thought this was creative.....

 

 

 

[Gavin-Phillips]

1 hour ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I knew virtually nothing about the EE-9 before doing a recent mod to Armored Brigade, and I like what ive read of it. It was a cheap, simple vehicle, whose only failing was it didnt have thermal sights and a modern fire control. There is the other way of looking at it, that was its strength, its was dirt cheap.

And reliable too. The Iraqi Kurds are still using some of them in their battles with ISIS.

 

Speaking of Iraq, I thought this was creative.....

 

 

 

BTR-50 with the turret from an EE-9 Cascavel?  The Iraqi's seemed to like the BTR-50, mounting ZU-23 and S-60 towed AA guns on them as well.  It'll be another modification added to War Thunder soon I'm sure.  🙃  Was this hydrid a one-of-a kind or were any number actually made?

[Stuart Galbraith]

Yeah, think so, though the Iraqis bought a   Czech built versions IIRC though. Interestinglythough it seems to have the remains of light green near the lower running gear, so this may be a captured Iranian BTR-50, one of those bought by the Shah from the USSR in the late 60's. Interesting vehicle anyway.

[CaptLuke]

8 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

I knew virtually nothing about the EE-9 before doing a recent mod to Armored Brigade, and I like what ive read of it. It was a cheap, simple vehicle, whose only failing was it didnt have thermal sights and a modern fire control.

EE-9 went into production (with the 90mm) in about '75-'76; not a lot of thermals around at that time.  Fire control was primitive, but I believe comparable to what you'd find on an Eland, AML-90, or, IIRC, the base version of the ERC-90 which were more or less its competitors on the open market.

I believe Brazil did some incremental upgrades ref night vision and laser rangefinders over time; don't know about any other users.

A company called Equitron developed an upgrade package in maybe 2015-16 that addresses all your concerns, plus adds a couple ATGM, plus re-capitalizes the drivetrain; supposedly Brazil was buying at least some of these upgrades, to EE-9U Cascavel, but I can't find anything about whether anybody actually got them and, if so, then how many.

[Stuart Galbraith]

Oh im not knocking it, I think if anything it was the reason for its success. There likely wasnt a cheaper AC out there with its firepower.

 

[lucklucky]

On 9/19/2020 at 6:16 PM, RETAC21 said:

I would say it depends on what the users do with them. Centauro and Rooikat are cavalry vehicles, used for reconnaissance. The AGS is a kind of a tank stand-in, but it's not a tank, nor an indirect fire platform, and it's big. Mebbe the new USMC will be interested in them.

Centauro was not only a cavalry vehicle, it was born as fast response to an invasion of Italy by Warsaw pact. It was expected Centauro due to its rapid mobility could be the first armored intervention. Another main requirement is that the main gun was to be at same level equivalent of 105mm Leopard 1. 

A new version with 120mm is being build in 136 numbers.