Wednesday, February 21, 2024

U.S. Army Strykers left without modern active protection systems

The annual report issued by Pentagon’s Office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, or DOT&E, has revealed the Stryker combat vehicles’ Active Protection System (APS ) issues. It was initially suggested that Stryker combat vehicles will receive new active defense systems to increase platform survivability in the near future.

Army commanders intend to use Stryker vehicles equipped with APS to disrupt and destroy enemy military forces, to control land areas including populations and resources, and to conduct combat operations to protect U.S. national interests while increasing protection to the vehicle and its crew.

According to the report, the U.S. Army evaluated three different solutions for Stryker APS: Iron Curtain, Advanced Modular Armor Protection – Active Defense System, and the Trophy Medium Variant system. Each vendor had unique technical solutions with different countermeasures mechanisms.

- ADVERTISEMENT - CONTINUE READING BELOW -

These APS technologies intend to improve the survivability of ground combat vehicles against anti-tank guided missiles, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), and recoilless rifle threats by using a kinetic “hard kill” mechanism to intercept and disrupt/defeat the incoming threat.

In the fiscal year 2018, the Army completed Phase I Iron Curtain APS testing on the Stryker. And in FY19, the Army pursued and tested two additional Stryker APS solutions: Advanced Modular Armor Protection – Active Defense System by UBT/Rheinmetall and the Trophy Light system by DRS/Rafael.

The Army has not selected any of these solutions due to the demonstrated performance and systems maturity.

According to The Drive, the Army has been actively working to add active protection systems to all of its major armored vehicle platforms, such as the Bradley, the M1 Abrams tank, and the Stryker family of wheeled vehicles, in recent years. The ever-growing threat of anti-tank guided missiles, as well as advanced shoulder-fired infantry anti-tank weapons, is the primary driver behind these efforts. The service is particularly concerned about how vulnerable these vehicles might be to these types of weapons in major conflict as a “great power” competitor, such as Russia.

If you would like to show your support for what we are doing, here's where to do it.

If you wish to report grammatical or factual errors within our news articles, you can let us know by using the online feedback form.

Executive Editor

About author:

Dylan Malyasov
Dylan Malyasov
Dylan Malyasov is the editor-in-chief of Defence Blog. He is a journalist, an accredited defense advisor, and a consultant. His background as a defense advisor and consultant adds a unique perspective to his journalistic endeavors, ensuring that his reporting is well-informed and authoritative. read more

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

TRENDING NOW

US Army equips soldiers with next-gen combat helmet

The U.S. Army has commenced the fielding of the Next-Generation Integrated Head Protection System (NG-IHPS) to approximately 2,000 soldiers from the 1st Brigade Combat...