MGS-specific criticisms
The C-130 cannot carry the heavier Mobile Gun System at all, thus totally failing the "Key Performance Factor" above.
Instead of using a low pressure gun like the M8 (or the Russian 2S25), the Stryker MGS uses the M60's 105mm M68A1 cannon. This gun has far too much recoil for the Stryker's weight class.
Thus, they added a muzzle brake. Muzzle brakes reduce recoil at the cost of extra blast and noise. The noise level in tests approached 200dB. It is estimated that means a soldier cannot safely approach within
450m of a firing Stryker MGS. The blast debris was also extensive, forcing the crew to fight in the buttoned-up position.
Even with the muzzle brake, the recoil still damages the MGS' more delicate internals, such as night vision electronics, the lights, instrumentation and helmets worn by test dummies. Without the muzzle brake, the recoil mechanism is destroyed.
Unlike the M8 autoloader, the MGS autoloader apparently cannot reliably select the right type of round. It also has a carousel with half the capacity, reducing its battle endurance.
Only 2-axles on a Stryker are equipped with run-flat tires. The MGS is too heavy to be supported on 2 axles.
No winch means no self-recovery
Various other ergonomic and survivability flaws.
[edit]
Updates
According to a Washington Post article, the Stryker vehicle has some serious faults; e.g. the insufficient ability to carry additional armor for protection against rocket-propelled grenades. The 5,000 pounds armor that was added caused problems with the automatic tire pressure system, causing crews to check tire pressure three times a day. Other problems include:
As designed, the
weapon system does not shoot accurately when the Stryker is moving.
Troops cannot fasten their seat belts when they are wearing bulky body armor. This contributed to the death of one soldier when his Stryker vehicle rolled over. This problem was fixed by the time the CALL report was published and six months prior to the Washington Post article.
Computer systems for communications, intelligence and other systems have malfunctioned in the desert heat due to air conditioning problems.
Washington Post Article
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14284-2005Mar30.html
POGO article
http://www.pogo.org/p/defense/da-050304-stryker.html
I found this in a five minute serach on google.
I can't source the origional statement, but I remember footage of an MGS firing with the turret 90 degrees to the hull, and rolling over. I assume that this was without the muzzle brake.
Many of the complaints in the articles are stryker and not MGS specific, but I question the use of such a vehicle especially one that a soldier cannot stand within 450m of when the main gun is being fired.
As for your dismissal of the small ammunition capacity of the MGS, I would consider this to be a serious flaw. The vehicles high speed, yet only having 400 rounds of .50 cal and
18 rounds of 105mm is hardly compensated for with 3400 rounds of 7.62. That tells me that you have a vehicle that can outrun it's supply, quickly run out of ammunition, have it's tires flattened by small arms fire and be finished off with an RPG 6 or 7 while trying to defend itself with a co-ax c6. Why are we better off without the Leo again?
(Edited for clarity and spelling)