Quote:
Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b
What were the differences between our present Strikers, Striker II, and Striker III (in your timeline)?
|
I think I might have goofed by labeling it Stryker III: I know there is a program underway now to improve the protection level of the Stryker (V Hull for example) and other minor improvements. I thought there was a intermediate version, but it appears I was mistaken.
In general, to give an idea of my base level of assumptions for the timeline is that the Great Recession was as bad is it is. However, complications due to the troubles in Georgia meant that defense spending slightly increased in 2008 around the world. As 2012 arrived, outside of the US, the attitudes of those in positions of power was somewhat along the lines of "We don't think anything is gonna happen, but I don't feel good about it.." when it came to thinking of what to do about the defense budgets. After Georgia settled down (It was a little rougher that it was IRL) the UK MoD decided to place its CV program on a get it done now mentality - it didn't hurt that over in Germany an odd reaction to Afghanistan happened: A press headline of "Die Soldaten Waren Noch Nicht Fertig" turned into a mild scandal at first (And a massive embarrassment since the idea of the German Army being the new joke around the world did not sit all to well) , and turned into a surprisingly widespread support for the reformation of the German Army back to where it was during the Cold War: Well trained, and massively re-equiped, all so that the difficulties that the Army was facing overseas would not happen again. Of course, this couldn't be ignored by others, since many in europe (Especially when the German Economy recovered quite nicely faster than the rest of europe) saw a danger in that, and started the great buildups of 2008-2012. Over in the Pacific things was not so rosey as well: In this case the Spratly's was the centre of the troubles. With Chine taking a much harder line than it has in the Real World, a lot of emphasis was placed on contingency planning for operations in the Pacific. Not only in the US: This is the reason the RN wound up getting the lions share of the increased funding in the UK as well, in order to support commonwealth nations who did not have the ability or the resources to do so themselves (The Ark Royal, having reaching operational status in early 2012, for example was more or less home ported in Perth.). As far the UK's army was concerned, while the Gaurds units wound up going heavy in a big way, the bulk of the British Army could be best described as medium to light in nature: more of a reaction force than a warfighting army. Come 2014, the buildups renewed in a big way: the common thread was "I hope nothing happens, I don't think it will, but I am not going to bet anything on that." 2015 led to heightened tensions worldwide as China started flexing its rebuilt navy in a very very big way. It had managed to put 3 carriers at sea (All more or less along the lines of the old Invincible's) and was really pushing things hard over the resources present in the Spratly's. However, by this time they was not the only fleet in the area: Between a minor presence of India, a major Presence of the US and Royal Navies, you had Japan as well. Perhaps the most amazing thing about 2015, is that while there was a *lot* of sabre rattling going on, nothing happened more than a few warning shots here and there. But it was a distraction. One that Russia - also using Oil revenues to help itself out) took full advantage of. And than changed the winter of 2015-2016 from one of "Phew, we ducked that bullet" to one of, "Where did that MG come from?"