Maybe for urban warfare, we do need something like that.
In fact, I hope that SAF will replace the old V-200 with the
Terrex, it certainly offer better protection and mobility than the
old 4x4 V-200.
The advantages of having a wheeled vehicle for urban warfare is
that they are quiet and faster speed as compare to a tracked
vehicle.
But for conventional warfare, tracked still rule.
Well here are a few reports on the dangers and weaknesses of LAV
& Stryker and comments on how air deployable the Stryker
is.
According to one report, before a stryker was loaded into a C-130
it has to be stripped down. I think they may as well have gotten
the bionix they be better off today.
This reports shows the danger and weakness of LAV, vehicles
overturn, stuck in mud needs to be pulled out by M113 tracked
vehicles, tyre punctures, tyre sabotage etc etc etc ...
... "Some senior airlift officers had some interesting comments
about Stryker. There's 3/4 of an INCH on either side of the Stryker
when it gets loaded into a C-130. You cannot carry anything else
onboard when it's loaded in its stripped configuration, which means
the crew, extra armor, ammo, etc. have to go in another
plane.
Here's the real kicker--they couldn't fly the Stryker up to Andrews
AFB (the big 'demo' that was supposed to convince the doubters)
from Pope AFB in North Carolina because when you put one
Stryker into a C-130 it limits the range to under 200
miles! You have to offload so much fuel to get the plane
into a safe flying configuration that it can't fly very far at
all--certainly not operationally significant distances. But never
mind the details--we have some transformation to do!
http://www.combatreform.com/lavdanger.htm
http://www.combatreform.com/gg021006a.htm
