|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
      
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 9/7/2005 7:22 PM
Posts: 6,666,
Visits: 289
|
|
Stryker Gun May Be Too Bulky For Airdrop: Report By Nathan Hodge An internal Army report casts doubt on whether the Stryker Mobile Gun System (MGS) can be air-dropped from Air Force cargo planes, possibly an important requirement. According to a draft report prepared by the Army's Transportation Engineering Agency of Newport News, Va., the MGS is too tall to be airdropped from a C-130 Hercules, a four-engined turboprop plane. What's more, the report said the gun system may be too heavy to be dropped from a larger, more powerful airlifter, the C-17 Globemaster III. "The C-17 low-velocity airdrop weight limits are the same as for the C-130 and are based upon the current 42,000-pound airdrop system" that enables heavy equipment to roll off the ramp of an airlifter and sail to the ground by parachute, the report says. "The maximum gross rigged weight of an item to be airdropped is 42,000 pounds. The maximum item weight, which depends on the rigging requirements, is about 36,000 pounds." In other words, the 44,000-pound gun system may be large and too heavy to be used on the existing airdrop system. If MGS is not certified as air-droppable, it means the gun system might not meet a key requirement for the 82nd Airborne Division, which wants a lightweight armored gun to provide fire support in airfield seizure and other operations. The Army recently awarded a contract to General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS), which makes the MGS, to experiment with the parachute airdrop of the vehicle, and has tentatively scheduled a static drop test for the end of this month. Another armored gun already is airdrop certified: the M8 Armored Gun System made by United Defense, L.P. Four M8s are currently in storage. However, the Army report does not rule out airdrop testing of the MGS. The report notes that prototype 60,000-pound airdrop hardware is available that could handle the heavier load. The Army developed and tested the 60,000-pound airdrop system, which can be dropped from a C-17 or a C-5 Galaxy, but it was never purchased. "The components that make up the 60,000-pound airdrop hardware may exist from the original testing, but not as a fielded set," the report says. "If these components exist, the MGS could possibly be airdrop tested." No immediate comment on the report was available from the Transportation Engineering agency; likewise, calls to a representative of the Natick Soldier Center, Natick, Mass., the agency responsible for evaluating the MGS for airdrop procedures, were not returned. Peter Keating, a GDLS spokesman, said the MGS airdrop was a very ambitious project. "They have the pallet to do it, but they just never had a vehicle that came in at this weight to need to try it," he said. "I don't know of any issues, but we'll know more after the static drop at the end of the month." On June 30, the Army is planning to do a static drop at Fort Polk, La., meaning they will rig up an entire MGS, haul it up on a crane and drop it from several feet up. In July, Keating said, the Army will airdrop a "surrogate vehicle": a tracked M113 Engineering Squad Vehicle with additional weight added to mimic the MGS. The MGS, a variant of the Stryker wheeled armored vehicle, carries a 105-mm cannon. It is slated for a production decision later this year.
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
      
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 9/7/2005 7:22 PM
Posts: 6,666,
Visits: 289
|
|
"In July, Keating said, the Army will airdrop a "surrogate vehicle": a tracked M113 Engineering Squad Vehicle with additional weight added to mimic the MGS." How about the Army doing the smart thing and air dropping M8 AGS's and M-113's and totally forget about trying to airdrop the Stryker whale. Afterall the M8 and the M-113 are both LVAD airdrop certified and have been for quite some time.
|
|
|
|
|
Hard Charger
      
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 5/3/2008 12:51 AM
Posts: 1,551,
Visits: 235
|
|
Sir, We could use it as a very effective weapon! We just roll it off the back of the 130 without a parachute over fallujah.
|
|
|
|
|
Air Force Liaison/P.Net Original Cast of Characters
Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Today @ 5:41 PM
Posts: 3,347,
Visits: 8,967
|
|
"The C-17 low-velocity airdrop weight limits are the same as for the C-130 and are based upon the current 42,000-pound airdrop system" that enables heavy equipment to roll off the ramp of an airlifter and sail to the ground by parachute, the report says. "The maximum gross rigged weight of an item to be airdropped is 42,000 pounds. The maximum item weight, which depends on the rigging requirements, is about 36,000 pounds." Ahhhhhhhhhhh BULLSH!T!!!!!! As the senior C-17 Airdrop Loadmaster in residence I call shenanigans on that bit of info. The maximum allowable payload for a SINGLE platform on my glorious, beautiful bird is 60,000 pounds, with 100,000 pounds for multiply platforms. Sooooooooo. I could drop the Stryker at 42,000 pounds and then three HMMMV weighing 6,000 pounds a piece. Not yet fielded?? Where did you get this pack of lies? I have dropped max payload at Bragg on several occasions. Liars!!! More than likely they don't want to ding up the electronics on their newest toy. Pah! I spit in their direction!!!

LOAD CLEAR! LOAD CLEAR! To avoid criticism do nothing, say nothing, be nothing. Elbert Hubbard
|
|
|
|
|
P.Net O.G.
Group: Community Supporter
Last Login: Today @ 9:08 AM
Posts: 377,
Visits: 1,448
|
|
At 44,000 lbs, I do not think the Stryker can currently be dropped even if the C-17 could handle it. Heavy drop platform releases can only hold a max of 8 G-11 parachutes, rated at 5000lbs a piece, which still leaves you 4000 lbs or almost one more necessary parachute away from a successful airdrop. Now I have heard the rumors that the Test Directorate is trying to come up with a way to do it, but I dont know how it is possible with the current limitations in place.
|
|
|
|
|
OIF Veteran
      
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 9/19/2008 7:35 AM
Posts: 3,600,
Visits: 24,581
|
|
tuffie, you are a rigger so you know the deal. That thing is a POS and it will never be as deployable as the army wants it to be. Like Delta said, the M113 and M8 AGS would have been a much better interim solution for our army.
|
|
|
|
|
Seasoned Vet
Group: Past PNET Supporter
Last Login: 9/17/2008 11:00 AM
Posts: 3,378,
Visits: 1,300
|
|
I just wish the Army would get a system in action to support my Brother Rios while he's killing Tangos!
Stand in the door!
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |