Kenshin
05-04-2004, 12:05 PM
Chinks in Our Armor
The Army's chief weapons tester said Strykers were not safe against RPGs. Then the Army shipped them to Iraq
By Michael Hirsh
NewsweekMay 10 issue - Tom Christie was worried. It was the fall of 2003, and the Pentagon's chief weapons tester had noted problems with the Army's pride and joy, the new Stryker Armored Vehicle. The $4 billion program was seen as the vanguard of the lighter, high-speed Army of the future. But even with new add-on armor, the Stryker "did not meet Army requirements" against rocket-propelled grenades in tests, Christie wrote in his 2003 annual report. Now the Pentagon was about to deploy the first 300 Strykers to Iraq while an insurgency raged.
So Christie did something unusual: he sent a classified letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's office urging the military to be very cautious about where in Iraq it deployed the Stryker. The response? "I was slapped down," says the straight-talking Christie. "It was: 'What are we supposed to do with this [letter]? ... Are you trying to embarrass somebody?' "
There may be embarrassment to come. Six months after that exchange, the fighting in Iraq has called into question not only the Stryker's effectiveness but the Army's shift toward a lighter, faster infantry. With a record 138 U.S. soldiers dead in April, some inside the Pentagon are asking why the Army spent billions on new wheeled vehicles like the Stryker when commanders in the field are crying out for old-style treaded vehicles—tanks and personnel carriers—that are better protected and armed.
Many soldiers killed and wounded in Iraq were traveling in thin-skinned Humvees, which ride on rubber tires like the Stryker. Meanwhile, thousands of M113 armored personnel carriers, which are treaded and better armed, sit in mothballs around the world, even next door in Kuwait. That reflects an Army bias that has been prevalent since 1999, when the then Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki—who was frustrated by slow-moving U.S. armor in the Balkans—declared his preference for wheels. But treaded personnel carriers can better bear the weight of the big-caliber guns and armor needed to defeat insurgents and defend against IEDs (improvised explosive devices) and rocket-propelled grenades; Strykers are mounted with only machine guns or grenade launchers. (A new version with a 105mm cannon is months away, says General Dynamics, its manufacturer.) And now "tanks and armored personnel carriers are what commanders are looking for," Capt. Bruce Frame of CENTCOM told NEWSWEEK. Newsweek Interactive: Safety First
A shortage of armored Humvees has led some soldiers to secure vehicle walls and floors with sandbags or steel plates. Three widely used transport vehicles:
• THE HUMVEE
• THE STRYKER
• THE BRADLEY FIGHTER
Kevin Hand / Newsweek
THE HUMVEE
Safety: "Up-armored" models come with reinforced windshields and walls.
Cost: $50,000 each
Military owns: 35,000
Doug Pizac / AP
THE STRYKER
Safety: Has a thicker steel shell for landd - mine safety but is vulnerable to larger explosions.
Cost: $1.4 million each
Military owns: 2,100
Kevin Hand / Newsweek
THE BRADLEY FIGHTER
Safety: Welded aluminum walls; new model has steelРarmor tiles for blast protection.
Cost: $3.17 million each
Military owns: 6,719
The Army's chief weapons tester said Strykers were not safe against RPGs. Then the Army shipped them to Iraq
By Michael Hirsh
NewsweekMay 10 issue - Tom Christie was worried. It was the fall of 2003, and the Pentagon's chief weapons tester had noted problems with the Army's pride and joy, the new Stryker Armored Vehicle. The $4 billion program was seen as the vanguard of the lighter, high-speed Army of the future. But even with new add-on armor, the Stryker "did not meet Army requirements" against rocket-propelled grenades in tests, Christie wrote in his 2003 annual report. Now the Pentagon was about to deploy the first 300 Strykers to Iraq while an insurgency raged.
So Christie did something unusual: he sent a classified letter to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's office urging the military to be very cautious about where in Iraq it deployed the Stryker. The response? "I was slapped down," says the straight-talking Christie. "It was: 'What are we supposed to do with this [letter]? ... Are you trying to embarrass somebody?' "
There may be embarrassment to come. Six months after that exchange, the fighting in Iraq has called into question not only the Stryker's effectiveness but the Army's shift toward a lighter, faster infantry. With a record 138 U.S. soldiers dead in April, some inside the Pentagon are asking why the Army spent billions on new wheeled vehicles like the Stryker when commanders in the field are crying out for old-style treaded vehicles—tanks and personnel carriers—that are better protected and armed.
Many soldiers killed and wounded in Iraq were traveling in thin-skinned Humvees, which ride on rubber tires like the Stryker. Meanwhile, thousands of M113 armored personnel carriers, which are treaded and better armed, sit in mothballs around the world, even next door in Kuwait. That reflects an Army bias that has been prevalent since 1999, when the then Army Chief of Staff Gen. Eric Shinseki—who was frustrated by slow-moving U.S. armor in the Balkans—declared his preference for wheels. But treaded personnel carriers can better bear the weight of the big-caliber guns and armor needed to defeat insurgents and defend against IEDs (improvised explosive devices) and rocket-propelled grenades; Strykers are mounted with only machine guns or grenade launchers. (A new version with a 105mm cannon is months away, says General Dynamics, its manufacturer.) And now "tanks and armored personnel carriers are what commanders are looking for," Capt. Bruce Frame of CENTCOM told NEWSWEEK. Newsweek Interactive: Safety First
A shortage of armored Humvees has led some soldiers to secure vehicle walls and floors with sandbags or steel plates. Three widely used transport vehicles:
• THE HUMVEE
• THE STRYKER
• THE BRADLEY FIGHTER
Kevin Hand / Newsweek
THE HUMVEE
Safety: "Up-armored" models come with reinforced windshields and walls.
Cost: $50,000 each
Military owns: 35,000
Doug Pizac / AP
THE STRYKER
Safety: Has a thicker steel shell for landd - mine safety but is vulnerable to larger explosions.
Cost: $1.4 million each
Military owns: 2,100
Kevin Hand / Newsweek
THE BRADLEY FIGHTER
Safety: Welded aluminum walls; new model has steelРarmor tiles for blast protection.
Cost: $3.17 million each
Military owns: 6,719