WASHINGTON, Aug 13 (Reuters) - U.S. Air Force C-130 transport planes can carry the U.S. Army's new Stryker armored vehicles only short distances due to their massive weight, congressional investigators said on Friday.

The investigators recommended the Pentagon clarify how it planned to use C-130s to transport the Stryker within a theater of operations; the effect of limited range on missions; and potential alternatives for moving Stryker brigades.

The Army's first new combat vehicles in 20 years, Strykers can carry up to 11 soldiers and are part of an effort to make the Army faster and more agile in battle.

But the Government Accountability Office report said moving the hefty Stryker by the C-130 turboprop -- the workhorse of short-haul transportation for the military -- would be tough.

"In addition, if fitted with additional armor for increased protection against weapons such as rocket-propelled grenades, a Stryker would be unable to fit inside a C-130, and with added weight of the armor, the aircraft would be too heavy to take off," the GAO report said.

The Stryker, which weighs an average 38,000 pounds (17,100 kg), and is already deployed in Iraq, could be flown only about 860 miles (1384 km) by the C-130 under nearly ideal flight conditions, the GAO report said.

"Adding just 2,000 pounds (900 kg) onboard the aircraft for associated cargo such as mission equipment or ammunition reduces the C-130 aircraft's takeoff-to-landing range to only 500 miles (805 km)," said the GAO.

Limits on transporting associated equipment also curbs the ability of Strykers to engage in combat operations immediately upon arrival, the report added.

About a year ago the GAO said it could take much longer than hoped and vast airlift resources to deploy the new Stryker brigades of troops into action around the globe, mostly using bigger C-17 and C-5 transport planes with jet engines.

The cost of the Stryker vehicles has jumped from $3.34 million a piece to $4.13 million between November 2000 and December 2003 while the overall program costs have jumped to about $8.7 billion from $7.1 billion in that period, the latest GAO report said.

Come on, did anybody REALLY expect the Stryker to roll out of the transport with guns blazing?!? Please, the USAF wont even allow their transports to land in such a hot zone! As for range for the C-130 with the Stryker on board, somehow I really wonder how often are they really going to use such a capability (intra-theatre airlift).... I somehow see them using the C-17s instead for the more practical (and needed) mission of inter-theatre airlift.

What's interesting to know is that while the Stryker brigades were pretty successful as being a 'medium' brigade, Army brass found to their dismay that their logistical requirements were close to that of a heavy brigade. (which isn't too surprising, actually)

a few comments
-stryker, undergunned [40mm gl or 0.5 inch mg], under-armoured, actually a variant of the LAV first used by usmc decades ago
-scenario in iraq will perhaps change interim stryker systems, plus future combat systems thinking
-c130 replacement not in development, seems existing versions will soldier on, this will limit development of ground vehicles
-wheeled vs tracked, can a m113 take a RPG hit on its tracks better than a stryker wheel?
-israel has quite a few urban APC using old tanks, maybe something to consider?