Stryker Armored Vehicle

[miles teg 1]

Deadmeat, is a mod team even allowed to release VBS1 addons for OFP after they've already released it for VBS1?  Is there some type of contract saying that they can't?   If not, I really hope whoever made the Stryker also releases it for OFP or at least Armed Assault.  

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[CanadianTerror 0]

nm

[b_ringer25 0]

we could petition cbt to do it. Force them to release it for ofp. It would only be the right thing to do. Also to comment on the if they release it for vbs1 and can't do it for ofp after it is done. I don't know about that but from just common sense I would believe that is not vbs1's model, it is CBT's. VBS1 can't tell CBT team what they can and cannot do and they are not making a profit off of the model.

[Cribban 1]

as far as I know, the stryker that CBT made is a part of the us army 1 module for vbs, meaning u pay for the module to be used in vbs only. If CBT whould release it to the public (we the ofp players) It whould all end up in a contract violation.

although I'm just guessing now

[dm 9]

Deadmeat, is a mod team even allowed to release VBS1 addons for OFP after they've already released it for VBS1? Is there some type of contract saying that they can't? If not, I really hope whoever made the Stryker also releases it for OFP or at least Armed Assault.

Any content made for VBS1 and then sold via the BIA online store automatically becomes the Property of BIA (IP etc). Basically that means if its out for sale in VBS1 it can not be released as a free addon.

Any content made for VBS1 by modders (such as SJB's weapon packs) can be released for OFP as long as it doesnt contain any material (models, textures, scripts etc) which are in VBS1.

So no chance of seeing the Combat! Strykers in OFP I'm afraid (unless they make them again from scratch)

[b_ringer25 0]

well just change the model a little bit, make it a little more or a little less detailed. I prefer more.

[dm 9]

well just change the model a little bit, make it a little more or a little less detailed. I prefer more.

Thats the point, you can't just change one bit here or there as the model is essentially still the same as the one "owned" by BIA.

It would have to be totally new, from scratch.

we could petition cbt to do it. Force them to release it for ofp. It would only be the right thing to do. Also to comment on the if they release it for vbs1 and can't do it for ofp after it is done. I don't know about that but from just common sense I would believe that is not vbs1's model, it is CBT's. VBS1 can't tell CBT team what they can and cannot do and they are not making a profit off of the model.

Its not quite that black and white. There are lots of contractual issues when working for a company, and the most common one is that any work you do for that company becomes property of said company. (I know of a few exceptions to this in VBS development, but I'm not at liberty to talk about them)

Common sense has nothing to do with contract law Just because Combat! may have made it, does not make it Combat!'s to do with what they please. And as for the "right thing to do" thats all down to your perspective. Its not right for Combat! to break the law just because you think you are owed an addon (but thats a whole different kettle of fish)

[tankieboy 0]

we could petition cbt to do it. Force them to release it for ofp. It would only be the right thing to do. Also to comment on the if they release it for vbs1 and can't do it for ofp after it is done. I don't know about that but from just common sense I would believe that is not vbs1's model, it is CBT's. VBS1 can't tell CBT team what they can and cannot do and they are not making a profit off of the model.

I have to wonder who are you to "force" others what to do?

They would be nice for OFP, however your tone is way off key.

Thank you for the pictures DeadMeatXM2, very nice.

[dm 9]

Thank you for the pictures DeadMeatXM2, very nice.

Pah, the thanks need to go to Combat! They did a fine job on the models, I just stuck them on a flat bit of land and took some quick pics of them.

[DKM Jaguar 0]

we could petition cbt to do it. Force them to release it for ofp. It would only be the right thing to do.

Yeah, anger them into releasing addons, good plan. I see it worked oh so well when people tried to insult the Invasion 1944 team into releasing their stuff...

Never mind the fact that a petition wouldn't "force" them to do anything and they could just not read it.

The Stryker was part of US Army 1, it is BIA's property irrespective of who made it, as that's what they agreed to when they made it, and they were paid for their efforts.

Edit: DM already posted what I meant.

As for "It's the right thing to do"... sounds like a line from Blackhawk Down or something.... *cringe*

[b_ringer25 0]

we could petition cbt to do it.  Force them to release it for ofp.  It would only be the right thing to do.

Yeah, anger them into releasing addons, good plan. I see it worked oh so well when people tried to insult the Invasion 1944 team into releasing their stuff...  

Never mind the fact that a petition wouldn't "force" them to do anything and they could just not read it.

The Stryker was part of US Army 1, it is BIA's property irrespective of who made it, as that's what they agreed to when they made it, and they were paid for their efforts.

Edit: DM already posted what I meant.

As for "It's the right thing to do"... sounds like a line from Blackhawk Down or something.... *cringe*

hmm, can you take a joke...  Always with the negative waves

[codarl 1]

we could petition cbt to do it. Force them to release it for ofp. It would only be the right thing to do.

Yeah, anger them into releasing addons, good plan. I see it worked oh so well when people tried to insult the Invasion 1944 team into releasing their stuff...

Never mind the fact that a petition wouldn't "force" them to do anything and they could just not read it.

The Stryker was part of US Army 1, it is BIA's property irrespective of who made it, as that's what they agreed to when they made it, and they were paid for their efforts.

Edit: DM already posted what I meant.

As for "It's the right thing to do"... sounds like a line from Blackhawk Down or something.... *cringe*

hmm, can you take a joke... Also it looks you have been a nice person, jsut look at your warning bars. You have a lot of room to talk.

it's his avatar you tit!

Most thing you could do imo is ask CBT to make one, or maybe IM:UC

...Unless a freelance addonmaker decides to pick up this thing, but I think it needs to gain some reputation before that .

One way or another, I hope to see this in OFP, was thinking about the stryker just a few days ago...

[chipper 0]

Many of the variants shown on that picture are still in experimental stage. The version with the 105mm cannon for example has tons of problems and may never become operational unless they replace the cannon with one that has lower recoil such as something like the 100mm low recoil cannon seen on the BMP3.

Hey look at least they got it to fire.

[miles teg 1]

Yeah they got it to fire...facing the front. Try to find a picture of it firing facing sideways. lol

If you did, most likely a second afterwards, it was flipped over on its side.

However its not impossible...I believe the Italians have a similar vehicle with a 105mm cannon. But I'm not sure if its a different cannon then the one they're testing on the Stryker platform. If they get it to work, it'll make for a nice assault gun for urban combat and a decent tank killer if mated to a high quality fire control system. But most likely it will not be able to fire on the move, at least not facing sideways as it could cause the drive to lose control. This is one reason why the top Pentagon brass and Donald Rumsfeld are out of their minds when they argue for a lighter faster armored force to replace heavy armor. Light armored, fast moving tank killers work well for certain enviornments and have worked well against old T-55 tanks for example such as South Africa's experiences with the Ratel and other 90mm equipped armored cars/wheeled IFV's. However South African crews were highly trained and performed daring tactics in order to score rear and side hits against Angolan T-55 tanks. However against a more modern enemy with decent fire control systems and well trained crews, the advantage of speed becomes less of an issue.

Nevertheless, with anti-RPG screens or ERA light wheeled armor aren't terrible and can do a good job in urban enviornments. They also can make excellent recon vehicles such as the LAV-25 has proven for the Marines. The Stryker in contrast loses its ability to move well on sand and loses easy air transport abilities making it not quite what the Army wanted but still leaving it with a useful system that hopefully they will keep in a limited role and not try to replace Bradley IFV's with.

Now... as for everyone complaining about Combat not releasing the Stryker, if you look back in this thread, there IS a free model out there that just needs someone to work on to sort out the LOD's and to do the interior on.

So basically all it requires is an addon maker/texturer individual or team to convert it into OFP and finish it up.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[eestikas88 0]

Are the beta versions of this vehicle also BIA property?I understand that only the final product is owned by BIA.

[Ironsight 1]

However its not impossible...I believe the Italians have a similar vehicle with a 105mm cannon. But I'm not sure if its a different cannon then the one they're testing on the Stryker platform. If they get it to work, it'll make for a nice assault gun for urban combat and a decent tank killer if mated to a high quality fire control system. But most likely it will not be able to fire on the move, at least not facing sideways as it could cause the drive to lose control. This is one reason why the top Pentagon brass and Donald Rumsfeld are out of their minds when they argue for a lighter faster armored force to replace heavy armor. Light armored, fast moving tank killers work well for certain enviornments and have worked well against old T-55 tanks for example such as South Africa's experiences with the Ratel and other 90mm equipped armored cars/wheeled IFV's. However South African crews were highly trained and performed daring tactics in order to score rear and side hits against Angolan T-55 tanks. However against a more modern enemy with decent fire control systems and well trained crews, the advantage of speed becomes less of an issue.

It's definately possible. The export version of the Rooikat has a 105mm gun and there have been no problems with that one at all. Same goes for the Centauro by the way...

[dm 9]

Are the beta versions of this vehicle also BIA property?I understand that only the final product is owned by BIA.

Anything made under contract for BI (with a few exeptions I know of) is automatically the property of BI.

Seriously - I'd forget about the Combat! Stryker, the version which is in VBS1 is NOT going to end up in OFP.

[Edit]I'd just like to clarify that I am NOT speaking on behalf of Combat! or BI. But that it is just my opinion, in that I really can not see BI granting licence for VBS1 content to be ported to OFP[/Edit]

[Bobcatt666 0]

I've seen the the Stryker with the 105mm fire off the sides, luckilly the tires soak up a lot of the recoil. Most of the problems keeping this vehicle from being released has been engine limitations and abusive end users. the eletronics suite is impossiable to emulate in the game. Remote firing turret and gun sighting system in a wheeled vehicle class. 80% of the inside of a Stryker is literly classified. The armor protection systems, are unable to be made in game as well, so it mostly be eye candy.

The vehicle is still being testsed for dev, just got its funding hacked with a number of other high dollar military projects,

Only one unit has them at this time, same goes for the M8 Buford.

Mostly the problem with the Stryker is its costs. It is currently one of the most expensive vehicles in the US Army invintory. The cost could buy several M1A2 Seps for the price the Stryker is alone. The addistion of the field added RPG gaes also makes the vehicle very top heavy and degrades the driving performance significantly. Now they roll over very easilly like most SUVs.

The sofisticated eletrocnics are another problem all th einformation the vehicle is capable of gathering, is not being filtered out to other units do the rest of the Army is not using the level of equipment the stryker was outfitted.

The infany that crew and ride in the strykers are also specially outfitted with gear and equipment solely attached to the stryker.

Intergrated helments uplinks to the and from the vehicle, as learned in the current combat situation the Stryker is unable to share intel with other units because the lack the systems used and it must be relayed by other sources to the front line units.

Mice vhiel but itss fallen prey to the being overly sofisticated for combat use. literly a rolling AWACs system for ground forces. Than an actual combat unit. At least they are smater than with the M2A2 and keep it back form main line use. Leave it to real Armor and Combained arms sections.

RPG cages offer zero protection to insergents on rooftops that attack from above which is the current focus of attack on Stykers. Hitting in the rear and front sections. and IED attacks . The old molitove cocktails are the most effective weapon against Strykers. Insudgents ambush the unit and snipers pick off the crews trying to put out the fires.

Army fears loosing one of new toys falling into enemy hands so they are not allowed to go too far without ample protection. And are offen destroyed by crews or air strikes when disabled in the field to keep the tech from being exsamined by hostiles.

US Army is still unable to equip the full force with the gear needed.

The Stryker combat system is _not_ in every unit.

Would require lots of lag causing code in order to work remotely close to its reallife counter part. Thus why most addons makers didn't bother wasting time making them at least in VBS1 they work better not having as many limitations.

Mainly people spouting for these addons forgetting nomatter how simple an addon even now takes months to make anything work correctly in ofp.

Already about six Strykers out in game already you got such a hardon should seak em out and obtain them rather than moan or snivel for new ones.

Already see even having the FLT model will cause problems cause everyone will cry about it not having a interior when also asked the person who made the model they said no to placing it in ofp.. It was for their aplication, and was in compitation with OFP and VBS. I just obtailed Sigmas LavIII and replaced the turret with thw m2hba2 mount.

[hellfish6 7]

However its not impossible...I believe the Italians have a similar vehicle with a 105mm cannon. But I'm not sure if its a different cannon then the one they're testing on the Stryker platform. If they get it to work, it'll make for a nice assault gun for urban combat and a decent tank killer if mated to a high quality fire control system. But most likely it will not be able to fire on the move, at least not facing sideways as it could cause the drive to lose control. This is one reason why the top Pentagon brass and Donald Rumsfeld are out of their minds when they argue for a lighter faster armored force to replace heavy armor. Light armored, fast moving tank killers work well for certain enviornments and have worked well against old T-55 tanks for example such as South Africa's experiences with the Ratel and other 90mm equipped armored cars/wheeled IFV's. However South African crews were highly trained and performed daring tactics in order to score rear and side hits against Angolan T-55 tanks. However against a more modern enemy with decent fire control systems and well trained crews, the advantage of speed becomes less of an issue.

It's definately possible. The export version of the Rooikat has a 105mm gun and there have been no problems with that one at all. Same goes for the Centauro by the way...

Neither of which are C-130 transportable either, which is a key requirement of the Stryker. The Stryker MGS IS able to fire with the turret at 90 degrees to the hull - that problem was fixed a long time ago.

Some of the other limitations of the MGS, however, are:

1. Autoloader needs to have the gun pointing directly forward to load a new round. That means that after every round fired, the gun essentially resets itself.

2. The MGS only holds 18 rounds of ammo. Yes, 18 rounds. Thats enough for about 5 minutes of combat, if that.

3. Everyone keeps saying the MGS isn't supposed to be a tank, but rather a direct fire support vehicle. Yet they give it a tank cannon instead of something more useful like a 90mm cannon (like the French or Belgian Cockerill guns) or a 105mm howitzer mounted for direct fire, each of which is vastly more useful than the 105mm M68A1 the MGS has now.

4. The 105mm M68 was picked because there are still extensive stocks of 105mm tank ammo laying around in warehouses. Well, someone finally decided to look and found out that most of that ammo is expired, much of it dates from the 1960s. Guess what? How they're making new 105mm ammo for the MGS.

The South Africans have extensive experience with armored cars - the Ratel 90 is basically the exact same concept of the Stryker MGS but far more useful - both are APCs turned into direct fire support vehicles. A 90mm gun is still effective against anything up to a T-55 frontally (a T-62 or T-72M from the side or rear). The difference is that with the Ratel's Panhard 90mm turret the Ratel 90 can carry 200 (yes, two hundred) 90mm rounds all because there is no autoloader.

If you've ever seen a pic of the MGS interior, you've seen a lot of wasted space. Almost the entire cabin is empty. With a manual 90mm gun, or even a 105mm howitzer mounted forward, you could pack a ton more ammo in an MGS.

A low profile 90mm turret would still enable the MGS to fit into a C-130 (which is also a stupid requirement, IMHO, has the C-17 is the aircraft that would do 90% of any vehicle airlifting anyways and the C-130 should be replaced anyways) and allow for far more ammo that is nearly as useful as 105mm ammo.

[hellfish6 7]

Quote[/b] ] 80% of the inside of a Stryker is literly classified.

Not true. Nothing inside the Stryker is specifically classified. I've got pics of everything inside of it somewhere.

Quote[/b] ]The vehicle is still being testsed for dev, just got its funding hacked with a number of other high dollar military projects, Only one unit has them at this time, same goes for the M8 Buford.

Nope, the Buford is officially dead. There are 7 prototypes in existence and all of them are sitting in United Defense depots. A damn shame - it's an excellent vehicle, especially the Thunderbolt variant.

Quote[/b] ]Mostly the problem with the Stryker is its costs. It is currently one of the most expensive vehicles in the US Army invintory. The cost could buy several M1A2 Seps for the price the Stryker is alone.

Wrong. The vehicle itself costs about $900,000. The electronics bring the total up to around $3,000,000 each. This isn't a factor since all US Army vehicles will be getting the exact same electronics in the very near future. The cost to upgrade an M1A1 to an M1A2 SEP is currently about $7,000,000. A new production M1A2 SEP is about $10,000,000.

Quote[/b] ]The infany that crew and ride in the strykers are also specially outfitted with gear and equipment solely attached to the stryker. Intergrated helments uplinks to the and from the vehicle, as learned in the current combat situation the Stryker is unable to share intel with other units because the lack the systems used and it must be relayed by other sources to the front line units.

The Strykers have all of that because they're test units. Eventually, all infantrymen will have the same gear, whether they're in Bradleys, Strykers or light infantry.

A lot of people seem to think that Strykers are infantry fighting vehicles. They are not. A Stryker brigade is a light infantry brigade with some armored trucks and a lot of electronics to make them communicate and fight more efficiently. They're not assault units like the new Heavy brigades with M1A2 and M2A3s.

The Stryker's job is to get light infantry to the battle. That's it. It's not designed to fight, which is why it only has a .50 cal or Mk19. If there weren't Strykers, the light infantry would have to walk there or move in totally unprotected trucks.

[astano 0]

Already about six Strykers out in game already you got such a hardon should seak em out and obtain them rather than moan or snivel for new ones.

Any ideas where we might be able to find one? I searched OFP.info and ran a Google search and nothing came up (except Sgt. Stryker's Nomex Deltas).

[miles teg 1]

I think Bobcatt means the LAV variants that Sigma created.

Bobcatt also didn't see the post beforehand about the FREE Stryker models.  However they need converting into oxygen using some program called "Deep Exploration" as they are in something called "openflight" format.  I am not familiar with the format but perhaps if someone has this program, they can convert the LOD's into p3d format so that addon makers can start working on them.

The site is here:

http://www.cscmodeling.com/homepage.htm

the direct download is here:

http://www.cscmodeling.com/free.models/M1126_stryker_us.zip

*** Update*** I tried the "Deep Exploration" program and I wasn't able to open the .attr files. Does anyone know what modelling program can open and covert these files to .p3d models?

Or do you have to buy the program and buy an extra plugin to get that? If anyone can convert these models to .p3d it would be a very important first step to getting someone to put a Stryker into OFP.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

[Imshi-Yallah 0]

At the risk of going offtopic

1. The Centauro and Rooikat are much heavier vehicles than an LAV, AFAIK with a wider footprint too.

2. The inability or limited ability to fire to the sides on the move is or has been common to all WAFVs equipped with Tank (this includes 90mm) calibre gun systems, even low pressure systems such as the panhard turret and the Lynx H90.

[shinRaiden 0]

Quote[/b] ] 80% of the inside of a Stryker is literly classified.

Not true. Nothing inside the Stryker is specifically classified. I've got pics of everything inside of it somewhere.

Yeah, I second that. I fixed a couple PC's at Ft. Lewis just as the first Stryker Brigade was loading up to go to Mosul. The computer was in the back of the garage where they were outfitting them, and while a lot of the specialty items - mg's and some radios - were not yet installed, they were all parked with all the hatches open and everything in plain view. I didn't ask if I could take pictures because I was just a contract tech, but there wasn't anything in the maintanence garage I was blocked from seeing.

[surpher 1]

*** Update*** I tried the "Deep Exploration" program and I wasn't able to open the .attr files. Does anyone know what modelling program can open and covert these files to .p3d models?

Or do you have to buy the program and buy an extra plugin to get that? If anyone can convert these models to .p3d it would be a very important first step to getting someone to put a Stryker into OFP.

Chris G.

aka-Miles Teg<GD>

I had the same problem so I used a program called Biturn to convert the model to Wavefront *.obj format, from there you can use Deep Exploration to convert it to 3DS format. Then you can import it into O2.

Here's a Stryker walkaround including pictures of the interior.