Enter keywords or a search phrase below:
Interesting and sensible idea, commonality makes logistics in supply and training easier.
WIP:Trying to get my hobby stuff sorted - just moved and still unpacking.
"Gator, Green Catskill....Charlie On Time"
The current version of the M113, the M113A3 and subsequent mortar, command track, smoke, etc. variants, can keep pace with the M1/2/3 vehicles. The M113A3 can move like a scalded dog.
The main benefit to the M113 is its simplicity; it's basically a box on tracks. The Detroit Diesel engine and tranny are both relatively maintenance friendly.
Oh WOW!, just imagine the PE set for all that reactive armor!...it will be a nightmare to build...hehehe
Mustang8376While in Kuwait in 2003, I still saw the TOW versions of the 113 being driven around.
The M901 ITOW (Improved TOW) was retired long before OIF in '03. The Bradley, with its integrated TOW system, put them out of business by the late '80s to early '90s. What you probably saw was the M981 FISTV (Fires Integration Support Team Vehicle). Most of the old M901s were converted into them. They look basically the same except for a flat plate on the front of the targeting head with a couple small cut out for optics as opposed to two holes for the TOW missiles and a large opening for the TOW optics. The M981 also has the extended rear fuel tanks where the ITOW did not.
M901 ITOW
As a side note, the M981A3 FISTV has now been replaced by the M7A3 BFIST (Bradley Fires Integration Support Team).
Gino P. Quintiliani - Field Artillery - The KING of BATTLE!!!
Check out my Gallery: https://app.photobucket.com/u/HeavyArty
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -- George Orwell
While in Kuwait in 2003, I still saw the TOW versions of the 113 being driven around. If this new system uses can keep up with the M2/M3 systems yet offer better survivability than the 113, makes sense to at least look into.
Current build: 1/48 Monogram A-1H & AMT Jedi Starfighter.
Completed: 1/48 Monogram/Revell P-61B, 1/32 Hasegawa F6F-5, 1/48 Hasegawa F-16C, 1/48 Revell Mig-21PFM, 1/48 Revell/Monogram AH-64A, Revell/Monogram 1/48 F-14D, AMT 1/420 USS Defiant, AMT 1/650(?) USS Enterprise, 1/72 Bandai VF-1J, AMT 1/537 USS Reliant, Academy 1/35 M1-A1 Abrams, Academy 1/48 F-86F30, Linbergh's USS Gato
I think they are still needed. The M113 is still around in many units as support vehicles; maintenance tracks, 1SG tracks, supply tracks, ambulances, FDCs, TOC tracks (just about all units still use M577s or M1068s), mortar tracks, etc., etc., etc... They actually did not keep up well in '03 from my experiences. We had to slow down on a few occasions so the HQ M577s could keep pace. The biggest issue is the cost of maintenance though. As the M113 fleet gets older, it gets more and more expensive to support. A new(er) common platform would greately reduce this cost over the long term.
That's what I was wondering, was how extensively is the 113 still in service? I know that the M2/M3 replaced the M113 & M901 in Infantry and Cav units. And there were concerns about the remaining types of the 113 family being able to keep pace with the Abrams & Bradleys. But they seemed to do it well enough in 2003 in the drive to Baghdad. With the reappearance of a conventional threat from the Russians I understand the desire to re evaluate and re equip what few heavy forces we appear to have left. But again, the budget is a huge shadow over any attempt to modernize our vehicle's. It would be nice, but is it really needed?
F is for FIRE, That burns down the whole town!
U is for URANIUM... BOMBS!
N is for NO SURVIVORS...
- Plankton
LSM
Even the M113 isn't used to the extent it once was; today it mainly hauls around stuff as opposed to being a primary infantry or troop carrier. Why spend more money on a vehicle system that doesn't really improve the mission of the M113-based version?
Stik - Yes, it is intended to replace all M113 versions. There are the APC, Command Post Carriers w/extended roof like the M577/M1068, a 120mm mortar Carrier, and Medical Evac Vehicles, among a few other versions planned.
Mike - I think you are right. I doubt we will see these any time soon.
Hummmm...this seems to be kicking around for a while. With all the budget cuts coming I would not expect to see the 113 disappearing too soon. All the reasons make sense, just need $$$$.
The M113 is the army version of the B52, still serving after all the years
Rounds Complete!!
"The Moral High Ground....A Great Place to Emplace Artillery."
All those reasons make sense. It will save a lot of development coat & time using pre existing components. So I am guessing that this will replace whatever 113 family vehicles are still in service?
stikpusher Hmmmmm... Nothing radically new here...
Hmmmmm... Nothing radically new here...
No,its not intended to be. The Army isn't looking for a radical new design, just an up to date one. The goal is to come up with a cost effective new vehicle that has more commonality with other systems to make maintenance cheaper and streamline the supply chain. It is also needs to be more survivable and be able to keep up with the Bradley and the Abrams.
Thats what I read today that theres two companies here in Mi that are competing for a new contract and this is one of those vehicles. Looks like a very capable vehicle, I'd love to see the different interiors.
It is BAE's entry for the US Army's Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (APMV) competition which will replace the M113 family of vehicles with a new vehicle.
It's basically the Bradley AMEV (armored medical evacuation vehicle) set up as a troop carrier instead of ambulance.
Is that a Bradley chassis?
Greg H
"There is many a boy here today who looks on war as all glory, but, boys, it is all hell." Gen. Wm T. Sherman (11 April 1880, Columbus, Ohio)
Under consideration for the US Army. Some familiar features here.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.