STRYKER driver view

[desertfox 2]

It's close to impossible to navigate as driver in the STRYKER IFV.

I love the look of the cockpit, but the screen showing you the outside view is way too small. ( Nope I'm not going to use 3rd person perspective to navigate vehicles. That's knob stuff. )

Couldn't it be switched to a full-screen view of the outside camera by simply right clicking like in most of the other vehicles ?

Or am I just missing something lol.

[CANavar 0]

Remember that there is a "turn out" option Desert. Check you key assignments. It will give you a much better view when bullets are not flying around.

[desertfox 2]

Okay okay .. I will open the hatch and enjoy the landscape when in friendly territory.

But what do I do in a combat situation ?

Nah seriously .. I think the driver should be able to navigate even with closed hatches.

I could only find this very tiny cockpit picture.

Guess you sit pretty close to the monitor, so you should have quite a nice overview.

[pong2cs 0]

You should be able to use the hatch viewports at least by pressing your iron sight key...

[desertfox 2]

You should be able to use the hatch viewports at least by pressing your iron sight key...

I figure you do not have ArmA yet ? Because there is no such thing as hatch viewports.

You see the outside world on a tiny screen infront of you.

And no, clicking the ironsight ( right mouse ) key does nothing. Basically it is not possible to navigate with closed hatches while 3rd person perspective is disabled. That's why I made this post.

I can hold the + key to zoom in on the cockpit to see it a little bit bigger, but I get a cramp in my hand when doing that for more than 5 minutes lol

[pong2cs 0]

You should be able to use the hatch viewports at least by pressing your iron sight key...

I figure you do not have ArmA yet ? Because there is no such thing as hatch viewports.

You see the outside world on a tiny screen infront of you.

And no, clicking the ironsight ( right mouse ) key does nothing. Basically it is not possible to navigate with closed hatches while 3rd person perspective is disabled. That's why I made this post.

I can hold the + key to zoom in on the cockpit to see it a little bit bigger, but I get a cramp in my hand when doing that for more than 5 minutes lol

I beg to differ.

http://the-bobcat.dk/pics/stryker_view.jpg

http://the-bobcat.dk/pics/stryker_view2.jpg

[desertfox 2]

Did not see them when sitting in the cockpit. My focus was immideately drawn towards the monitor. My bad.

However, as you might have tried out yourself - they do not function. I assume BIS is going to implement a driver view sooner or later then. Hopefully.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

You should be able to use the hatch viewports at least by pressing your iron sight key...

And no, clicking the ironsight ( right mouse ) key does nothing. Basically it is not possible to navigate with closed hatches while 3rd person perspective is disabled. That's why I made this post.

This worked in OFP in tracked vehicles, seems odd that they wouldn't give the Stryker such an option. And the way it worked was by letting you see through the viewport in full screen (just like the tank drivers in ArmA now apparently).

[Jezza_NL 0]

It's true. The Stryker is pretty much a useless bit of kit in ArAs, just as it is in real life. Not only because of the issue with the driver cockpit. It's also a huge target with too little armour protection or firepower to make up for that.

If you were to select addons or just vehicles in-game on functionality and operation requirements then your would probably get rid of the Stryker quite quickly.

[Jimboob 0]

Press your optics keys. You'll see much better.

[Sentralia 0]

The Stryker is just an APC. It's not a battle tank or anything, so it needs as little armor as possible to stay mobile. It transports the troops to the location, and gets out of there! It could be used to clear streets after the initial fight is over.

[olemissrebel 0]

aren't we a genius, the ST does not just transport troops somewhere and leave them, it is a means of support, and three members of the squad are assigned the positions in the vehicle...

[Capt.Marion 0]

I don't know, that screen looks pretty lavish to me for an armored vehicle. But that's just my opinion...

[NeZz_DK 1]

If your commander hasn't set your combat mode to safe you cant open the hatch, if it is you can, I just tested it with an empty Stryker, one where I had an AI commander and one where I had an AI team that where set to combatmode safe

Empty: You could do anything.

AI Commander: you couldn't open the hatch.

AI Commander combatmode SAFE: you could open the hatch

full AI team: on SAFE they them self opened the hatch.

but the look from the hatch takes some getting used to

[scubaman3D 0]

It's true. The Stryker is pretty much a useless bit of kit in ArAs, just as it is in real life.

This is simply not true. The Stryker was meant to fill the troop transport void between the M113 and the M2 Bradley, with emphasis on functionality in urban environments. Last I heard, indications from Iraq are that the Army is completely happy with the vehicle.

Also, several Stryker-based variants are in the works for a 105mm cannon and a self-propelled Howitzer versions in the near future.

My complaint about it in ArmA other than the tiny TV screen is that the gun camera doesn't zoom.

[max power 21]

With the m2 on the top you can outrange pretty much anything but a cannon, if ofp is any indication. This includes the maximum effective range of rpgs and stuff. Provided you can see the target, or you have someone telling you where they are, you should be able to stand off, shoot and scoot when breaking into a township. I'm not sure about the stryker itself, but those things should have a lot of ammo too. That with its little gun tower should allow you to use defilade quite effectively.

In reality, being behind defilade should introduce some ranging error in addition to providing hard cover... this, I doubt, is a factor for the AI though.

[Soldat32 0]

It's true. The Stryker is pretty much a useless bit of kit in ArAs, just as it is in real life. Not only because of the issue with the driver cockpit. It's also a huge target with too little armour protection or firepower to make up for that.

If you were to select addons or just vehicles in-game on functionality and operation requirements then your would probably get rid of the Stryker quite quickly.

This just goes to show you know nothing of the vehicle in the real world or its service record.The stryker has proven itself time and time again on the battlefield and even large IEDs have not killed those inside it.Many of these vehicles are later patched up even and returned to service.How is that useless for you?

By the way Afghan and Iraq....Been there done that.

[desertfox 2]

I've been trying to get a decent foto from a Stryker interior. Could not find anything useful though.

I think ( to stay on topic ) the best bet would be to simply give the Stryker driver a view similar to the one in the other vehicles. You should be able to press the right mouse key and have the 'standard' view that a tank driver has as well.

Should not be that hard to implement either, because basically it's just a fixed camera on the front of the vehicle.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]This just goes to show you know nothing of the vehicle in the real world or its service record.The stryker has proven itself time and time again on the battlefield and even large IEDs have not killed those inside it.Many of these vehicles are later patched up even and returned to service.How is that useless for you?

A failure rate of 50 percent on the slat armor, ground plates not thick enough, reinforced plates that put too much pressure on tires (check pressure 3 times a day as a result) and tire wear that is unacceptable for a combat vehicle.

There is a huge list of issues with the stryker, basically it was tested in Iraq and was not fit for combat at the time.

Quote[/b] ]By the way Afghan and Iraq....Been there done that.

[xnodunitx 0]

http://tanxheaven.com/stryker/Stryker-102.JPG

http://tanxheaven.com/stryker/Stryker-112.JPG

http://tanxheaven.com/stryker/stryker.htm

[desertfox 2]

Thanks a bunch xnodunitx. That's really nice pictures, and they give us an impression how it should look.

Off topic: Here are some background infos on the Stryker:

Quote[/b] ]Design

They have a maximum speed of 60 miles per hour and a range of 300 miles on a tank of fuel. The vehicle are swift, easily maintainable and include features designed for the safety of soldiers. The LAV's tires can be inflated or deflated from inside the vehicle to adapt to surfaces ranging from deep mud to hardtop, and it has run-flat tires, a built-in fire-suppression system and self-recovery winch. The vehicles run quieter than the current armored personnel carriers, increasing their "stealth." They will also give the new brigades a reduced logistics footprint, and make the units cheaper to operate than today's heavy brigades. The Interim Brigade Combat Team should be about 25 percent cheaper to operate than today's heavy brigades.

The LAV engine is a Caterpillar engine, which is common to the Army's family of medium tactical vehicles. That means some of the same repair parts can be used. Commonality of equipment reduces the brigade's logistical footprint and support costs and makes the entire vehicle fleet easier to maintain. This will allow the use of the same support structure for all of a unit's vehicles, including mechanics and parts.

Reducing its weight is a modification the Stryker underwent before the vehicles arrive in May at 3rd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division and 1st Brigade, 25th Infantry Division, both located at Fort Lewis, Wash. The Stryker was reported to be 4,000 pounds more than the 38,000-pound requirement. However, officials expect that the vehicles will meet weight limits, which will allow them to be loaded and transported on a C-130 cargo plane.

For vehicles weighing 10-20 tons, tracked vehicles have better cross-country mobility in sand, mud and snow than wheeled vehicles, while wheeled vehicles have much better speed and ride quality over primary and secondary roads than tracked vehicles

Quote[/b] ]Survivability

Three block improvements are planned for the Stryker. A crew-installable add-on armor kit that provides 360-degree RPG-7 protection, an internal recoil-mounted 120mm mortar system, and embedded training that will be provided beginning with the third SBCT. Block improvements will be retrofitted to SBCTs 1 and 2 in subsequent years.

The Army says the Stryker family of vehicles are considered less vulnerable to small arms and weapons fire than the M113 family of vehicles. The crew and engine compartments of the Strykers are fully protected up to 14.5mm armor piercing (AP) rounds while the crew and engine compartments of the M113s are protected only up to 7.62mm AP rounds. Although a 14.5mm armor design was developed for the M113s, the armor was never produced and fielded.

The LAV's armor protection will stop 50-caliber bullets and protect against 152 mm airburst shells. The basic package on every vehicle is the basic steel hull, which protects against 7.62 mm bullets, and then a ceramic applique, which is added on give protection against 14.5mm machine guns. This is similar to the Bradley add-on armor that is appliqued on top. And just like Bradley armor, the Bradley's don't drive around with that. If there is a situation that requires it, the unit deploys with it, and applies it. The Strykers are protected by armor sufficient to withstand 14.5mm heavy machine gun fire and 152mm overhead artillery fire. A strengthened undercarriage protects the personnel inside from mines.

Beginning in October 2001 the Stryker underwent coupon testing, which is taking small squares of armor and firing at it with various caliber weapons and munitions at varying distances. After the tests, officials discovered that the initial armor proposed by the contractor was not suitable and changes in the armor were ordered in early 2002. When modifications are made to the armor, the vehicle will be able to stop 7.62mm and 14.5mm armor piercing ammunitions.

GM Defense delivered a new, denser ceramic-skin armor for Stryker in May 2002. In the summer of 2003 the first Stryker vehicles had problems with the armor not adequately protecting the crew from 14.5mm fire. This was fixed by backing the ceramic armor on the Strykers with a 3mm steel plate. Depending on the model, up to 126 tiles could be installed. When the LAV-III add-on armor is mounted, the LAV-III weighs 43,000 pounds, which precludes C-130 transport altogether.

The Army was concerned about the Rocket Propelled Grenade threat, the enemy's weapon of choice. So two new types of armor have been installed on the vehicles. The most obvious add-on to the discerning eye is called slat armor. It resembles a "bird cage" that will add three feet to the Stryker's width. The slat armor installed on the Strykers resembles a big catcher's mask that wraps around the vehicle. The armor is basically a grill of wire mesh that will cause the RPG to detonate away from the vehicle. Plans are in the works to add another type of armor package to the inventory. That add-on armor is called "reactive armor." Essentially that armor explodes when an RPG or other anti-tank round hits it. It's already on M-2 Bradley fighting vehicles.

United Defense Industries, Arlington, Va., received a $7.9 million contract from GM Defense 04 November 2002 to develop and test add-on applique armor that will stop RPG-7 rounds. The contract requires United Defense to develop and test the applique armor by February 2004. If it passes, the company could build 1,600 add-on armor kits by 2006.

Production Qualification Testing of the rocket-propelled grenade-level add-on armor began in May 2003 and found that the armor performance did not meet Army requirements. As a result, the Stryker program experienced delays in all add-on armor related testing to allow the contractor to refine its armor solution to meet Army requirements. Re-qualification of the new add-on armor solution resumed in September 2003 and will continue through February 2004.

Add-on armor for the Stryker adds approximately 7,000 lbs to the vehicle weight and approximately 12-14 inches to each side. To accommodate the increased weight, the tires were inflated to 90 psi and the Central Tire Inflation System (CTIS) was disengaged. As the vehicles moved from a hard surface to a softer one (in a grove of trees) the vehicle's tires sank into the soft ground. The winch on the Stryker is not sufficient to recover a Stryker with add-on armor mounted; therefore, some other vehicle recovery asset must be used.

Another challenge was the problem moving the vehicles down narrow two-lane roads while they had the add-on armor on the Strykers. The vehicles were unable to pass side by side. One driver had to pull off the road to make room for the other vehicle to pass. When he did this, the vehicle would sink into the dirt and require another vehicle to recover it. This made it important for the battalion staff and company-level leaders to ensure that they did detailed mission planning and route selection to reduce the possibility of two vehicles passing. While this does not appear to limit maneuver, it could cause temporary loss of momentum.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/militar....omp.gif

[Soldat32 0]

Quote[/b] ]This just goes to show you know nothing of the vehicle in the real world or its service record.The stryker has proven itself time and time again on the battlefield and even large IEDs have not killed those inside it.Many of these vehicles are later patched up even and returned to service.How is that useless for you?

A failure rate of 50 percent on the slat armor, ground plates not thick enough, reinforced plates that put too much pressure on tires (check pressure 3 times a day as a result) and tire wear that is unacceptable for a combat vehicle.

There is a huge list of issues with the stryker, basically it was tested in Iraq and was not fit for combat at the time.

Quote[/b] ]By the way Afghan and Iraq....Been there done that.

Thats the price of a new platform..The Bradley had its quirks as well.Your always going to find new problems when you throw somthing into a combat situation.As far as armor protection failure well screens externally on the vehicle have solved a lot of incoming RPGs.Somthing that was learned in vietnam long ago with the M113's.My how we forget lessons learned long ago.

As far as your whistling smiley at my service well keep on blowing. This will be my 12th year in the Army.Ahhh just 8 more years to go.

[RHK 0]

I have any screen from STRYKER Gunner in AmericasArmy game:

Stryker Gunner position "Zoom Off"

Stryker Gunner position "with Zoom"

Stryker Gunner position "Fully Zoom"

I think BIS need change Gunner position for more realistic. I suppose Strykers have IR Vision etc.

Salu2

[desertfox 2]

Hey BIS .. those interiours of the STRYKER look really awesome.

Couldn't you nick... ERM .. let yourself be inspired by them ?

[Favonious 0]

I don't know why BIS designed the "turn out" option to have a fully open hatch. We NEVER NEVER drive with the hatch completely open. When we are driving the hatch is usually only open to about 15%. There is actually a locking bar to lock the hatch to that position. We even call that the "travel position". As for driving DVE, we usually only use soley the DVE when we are driving with the hatches closed at night, during the day it is easier and much more practical to use the periscopes. C Trp 1-2 Stryker Cavalry Regiment.