Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan
It has always seemed strange to me that the Strykers lost the LAV-25's amphibious capabilities. Can anyone provide any specific info on what caused the loss of that capability, or perhaps more relevant to Nate's post, what it would take to return amphibious capabilities to the Stryker?
I guess what I'm saying is, in your universe Nate would such a vehicle still really be a Stryker? Would it perhaps make more sense to say the vehicles being used in your universe are US-produced LAV-25s with some or all of the Stryker's features?
|
Well... the family of Stryker vehicles were deveoped for peacekeeping missions... the 1990s in my campiagn were full of oppurutnities for peacekeeping missions in Africa (the grouth of the Congo Pact caused alot of strife like Darfur, Rowandan genocie and the like), South America (Columiba's problems with FARC spread throughout the region) and Middle East (yeah... it was bad, think arab spring... just with alot more combat - like in Libyan Civil War).
the fact that the Strykers are nice and quiet when compared to tracks, they allowed peacekeepers to sneakup on badies... and the remotecontoled turret allowed the strkyers to find nasty surprises before it was too late.
The Stryker MGS might not replace the M1 as a mainbattle tank.. it did give light units what they needed. 
__________________
Fuck being a hero. Do you know what you get for being a hero? Nothing! You get shot at. You get a little pat on the back, blah blah blah, attaboy! You get divorced... Your wife can't remember your last name, your kids don't want to talk to you... You get to eat a lot of meals by yourself. Trust me kid, nobody wants to be that guy. I do this because there is nobody else to do it right now. Believe me if there was somebody else to do it, I would let them do it. There's not, so I'm doing it.
|