Michael Yon’s ongoing dispatches have provided extensive coverage of ongoing Deuce Four Stryker operations. Here I would like to highlight the “overall consumer report” on the Stryker system from Col. Robert Brown’s briefing report:
Q Sir, this is Tony Capaccio with Bloomberg News. We met back in November when I was up there. I have an equipment question. Not only are you fighting the insurgents, but you’re the highlight unit for the Stryker, that’s gotten mixed publicity. We were told by The Washington Post earlier this year that it could be unsafe for soldiers to ride in. Give me the unvarnished assessment of how well the vehicle has performed and what are some of the weaknesses that need to be corrected.
COL. BROWN: Yeah, Tony, I’m glad you brought that up, because I’ll tell you, nothing makes our soldiers madder than criticism of the Stryker. That report, I think, was absolutely ridiculous. The Post — I’ll be honest with you. They had a reporter up here and he wanted to provide input. I said, “Go talk to any soldiers you want. Go ask any soldier which vehicle they would prefer to ride in; they would choose a Stryker, I guarantee it.” And they never asked them. They published the report based on a lessons learned report of how you could improve the vehicle. Well, of course, we try to improve every vehicle we have. No vehicle’s perfect.
The Stryker’s fantastic. It has incredible mobility, incredible speed. It has saved hundreds of my soldiers’ lives. I’m telling you hundreds of their lives. We’ve been hit by 84 suicide VBIEDs have hit Strykers, and I’ve had the greater majority of soldiers walk away without even a scratch. It’s absolutely amazing. If I were in any other type vehicle, I would’ve had huge problems.
The other thing is it carries, you know, the infantry men in the back that no other vehicle can do; nine infantry men that come out of that Stryker and are incredible in urban operations. You could ask any one of my soldiers, and they would choose the Stryker of any vehicle they could possibly ride in. By the way, our Strykers are in their second year of combat. We left our new ones back at our home station, and we fell in on Strykers that are in their second year of combat.
And I love the other vehicles in the Army inventory. I had a Bradley battalion, but there’s no way you could take a Bradley two years in a row in combat. You couldn’t do it maintenance wise. We maintained over 95 percent operational readiness rate. We went — with 5.2 million miles on the Strykers — 5.2 million miles, and I will tell you, interestingly enough, that same Washington Post reporter, after that report came out, he came to me and he said, please, Colonel Brown, do not make me ride in a Humvee. He said please, let me ride in a Stryker. And I was too nice a guy. I should have made him ride in a Humvee. I let him ride in a Stryker.
But our soldiers love the Stryker. Does it need improvements? I don’t know of any vehicle that doesn’t. I’d put a laser range-finder on it. I’d stabilize the gun, maybe put a larger gun on it. The Army’s working all that. Is it a fantastic vehicle? Yes. You know, I alone put thousands and thousands of miles on my Stryker, and I’m going to miss it when I go back home. I rode in it today for the last time, and I got to tell you it’s been very good to me. And I’m going to miss it a lot. And it’s a great vehicle, fantastic vehicle.
Q Colonel, do you have any specific tactical instances where in the city Mosul these vehicles accomplished more than a tank could of or a Bradley could have, given their construction and their mobility?
COL. BROWN: How much time do you have? Because I could give you an example every single night. I’ll give you one example of a company. In Deuce Four, 1-24 Infantry, a young company commander out being very agile and adaptive, he went out, and during the day some cars drove by and fired at the Strykers. They chased the cars in the Stryker. You wouldn’t have been able to keep up in a tank or a Bradley. They chased the cars. The guys got out of the car and being, again, the cowards that they are, they hid behind women and children, so the soldiers didn’t shoot them. But they went up to the cars. They found caches of weapons in the cars, and they found their wallets in the cars. They then went to some sources who said, yeah, we know where these guys live. So two hours later, they went and raided the home with one platoon, captured some more. Those guys talked. They went and raided more.
By the end of the night, one night, one Stryker company, about 120 soldiers, about, you know, 14 Strykers involved, went seven different locations, captured 15 out of 20 terrorist cell members, captured mortar systems, sniper rifles, a very large cache of weapons, et cetera, all that was mobile, all in cars. And they were able to get their quickly using their digital capability, using the speed of the Stryker, and oh, by the way, maintained perfect situational understanding at this time using a UAV up above and all the digital systems in what the Stryker affords. And the biggest thing the Stryker affords is nine infantrymen out in this urban setting — this was all in a city, population of 2 million — a very populated area, downtown city area that this happened. So that’s one example. It happens every night, and every single day the Stryker has performed like that. And it’s been a fantastic vehicle.
Another couple of quick examples are, you know, we needed some forces down in the Euphrates River Valley to stop foreign fighters from flowing in. Tanks and Bradleys would have to head down there. They couldn’t drive the 300 kilometers without a huge logistics tail and requiring more fuel. And I love tanks and Bradleys, again, but they all, you know, everything does something a little different.
With the Stryker — we sent a Cavalry Stryker unit down there, the 214 RSTA Cavalry Squadron, and they got down there in less then a day, no problem at all with 55 Strykers down there all over the battlefield, putting in — one of those Strykers put in 38,000 miles alone this year over here, didn’t require a heading. They drove down on their own.
Had another battalion in Fallujah; we needed them up in Mosul. Within 12 hours they drove from Fallujah 350 — 400 kilometers, maybe more, but all the way from Fallujah up to Mosul, got in the fight the same day in Mosul. Couldn’t do that with any other type vehicle because, again, they carry all those soldiers. They were ready to fight. In fact, on the move from Fallujah, we diverted a company to a mission enroute, and they did a great job on a mission enroute. Couldn’t do that with our type vehicles.
So I could on forever about what the Stryker has done, but the important thing about the Stryker is — are the soldiers, the great agile depth of soldiers that it carries inside and the digital connectivity and the speed, mobility and survive ability. We were hit by 115 RPGs hit Strykers over the year we had here, not one penetrated a Stryker, not one. Not any — no machine gun fire penetrated a Stryker inside. We did have a soldier that was killed in a hatch by an RPG — standing up in a hatch, and they fired from a building on top, but not one RPG penetrated a Stryker; 115 hits, it’s a fantastic vehicle.
And I think another — you know, you have a lot of other units and elements looking for it and wanting Strykers. It’s very popular. The biggest problem we have is keeping our brigade together because we’re more powerful then. Because everybody wants a little bit because they’re so useful and such a fantastic vehicle in concept.
MR. WHITMAN: I guess we’ll put you down as an undecided, Colonel, on the Stryker there.
0 Responses to “Stryker effectiveness?”