M113 'The Bucket'

[ranger6]

Hi all, This is my first post, so I hope it works out well. A friend and I are working on modifying M-113s on the premise that in the near future (say within the next 10 years) many Third World countries will try to buy older (but less expensive) vehicles and upgrade them rather than buy top of the line APCs (Bradley or FCS/ICV).

So far, we've come up with two ideas -- an M-113 Support Gun mounting an external 90MM weapon on the roof and an M-113 Assault Gun (think Stug-III) with a 105MM gun mounted on the front hull. I'll post photos as soon as I have a chance, but in the meantime, I'm soliciting other whiffers to give further ideas for weaponry or other changes to the basic M-113.

Thanks,

Ranger6

[jcf]

BAE Systems/United Defense has a program devoted to future usage of the M113.
http://www.uniteddefense.com/www.m113.com/m113_vehicles.html

The Aussies built two series of fire support vehicles with 76mm guns, the first used Saladin armored car turrets the second used FV101 Scorpion turrets.

The export model of the FV101 was the Scorpion 90 with the 76mm gun replaced with one of 90mm bore, that would be something to look into for your first concept.

As to mounting a 105mm howitzer in the nose of an M113, would you be moving the powerpack (engine, transmission and final drive) to the rear of the box?

The Wiki entry is a pretty good intro to real-world M113 variations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M113_Armored_Personnel_Carrier_variants

Jon

[dragon]

BAE Systems/United Defense has a program devoted to future usage of the M113.
http://www.uniteddefense.com/www.m113.com/m113_vehicles.html

The Aussies built two series of fire support vehicles with 76mm guns, the first used Saladin armored car turrets the second used FV101 Scorpion turrets.

The export model of the FV101 was the Scorpion 90 with the 76mm gun replaced with one of 90mm bore, that would be something to look into for your first concept.

As to mounting a 105mm howitzer in the nose of an M113, would you be moving the powerpack (engine, transmission and final drive) to the rear of the box?

The Wiki entry is a pretty good intro to real-world M113 variations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M113_Armored_Personnel_Carrier_variants

Jon

One of the countries that purchased the Scorpion 90 was Venezuela.  Currently those Scorpion 90s are not doing as well as they should.  Lots of oil going through the engines and all...

[Jeffry Fontaine]

IMI (Israeli Military Industries) offered a 60mm Hyper-Velocity Cannon as an upgrade to the M113 several years ago.  The weapon itself was retrofitted to a number of M4 Sherman tanks that are currently in use by one of our South American Neighbors (don't remember which country at the moment but the upgrades were extensive and included the engine/drive train as well as the main gun).  The 60mm gun had some very remarkable penetration capabilities and was comparable to the 105mm M68/L7 when using the APDS and APFSDS rounds. 

Forgot to mention that Verlinden offered the 60mm gun and turret conversion for the M113 in 1/35th scale.  As for the details, it was nothing to get excited about but it looked like the pictures in the IMI advertisements. 

If you want something with a bit more firepower there was a 105mm howitzer armed M113 called the Fire Support Combat Vehicle. 

(from the Jed Site section on the FSCV: http://www.jedsite.info/fulltrack-mike/mike-number-us/m113_series/fscv/fscv-intro.html)
In 1977 the Gratzl concept was revived by a consortium consisting of Krauss Maffei, FMC and Rheinmetall and the vehicle was modified by replacing the original Abbott gun with the Rheinmetall developed version of the US M101 gun and moving it close to the centreline of the vehicle. The vehicle was fitted with a new aluminium armour enabling it to resist 14.5mm rounds at the front and 7.62mm/shell fragments at the sides and rear. The roles envisioned for the vehicle include Anti-tank, Artillery fire support, Mechanised infantry combat vehicle, Personnel carrier and Reconnaissance vehicle. It is capable of carrying seven crew and additional personnel could be carried by removing some of the ammunition racks.

The FSCV utilized the lower hull and suspension of the M113 including the wheels and tracks but it had a bloody great big 105mm howitzer barrel sticking out of the front slope right next to the driver.  The write up on the vehicle proclaimed all sorts of wonderful things but when you get down to where the rubber meets the road, it was nothing more than a SturmGeshutz with a very limited field of fire.  You had to traverse the whole vehicle to lay the gun on target and that is really not a good method for providing direct fire support unless you are set up in an ambush position with a known kill zone. 

If you need some reference images, you can visit the Jed Site main page at this link: http://www.jedsite.info/content/jed1.html
or use this link to go directly to the M113 section: http://www.jedsite.info/fulltrack-mike/mike-number-us/m113_series/m113-series.html 

[anthonyp]

Heh...  I wish the director of M113 were in the office this week.  He's got all sorts of proposals for 113 upgrades.  Not to mention he could probably give some insight to anything we dig up.

Completely OT:    Waitaminute... www.uniteddefense.com still exists?  No, wait, I see what it's doing now, they just put the BAE banner in place of the UDLP one on the UDLP site (instead of just redirecting to the BAE site...  we're talking my people (IT) here, so this doesn't surprise me...).  All UDLP stuff now has to say BAE Systems, like UDLP never existed...

[GTX]

What about a M113 with a 155mm Howitzer in the back - somewhat like a tracked equivalent to the vehicles like the Caesar (see pic)



To fire the vehicle has to stop and set up.

Regards,

Greg

[dy031101]

What about a M113 with a 155mm Howitzer in the back - somewhat like a tracked equivalent to the vehicles like the Caesar

There was a proposed LAV/Stryker-based 155mm LWSP howitzer with M777 in the configuration you mentioned, so the same idea is likely to be applicable to a M113.

I've always liked the Vietnam War era ACAV variant.  Give the vehicle applique armours, all-around protection for the 12.7mm gunner, and modified gun shields for the two 7.62mm positions at the back and Voila!

[Jeffry Fontaine]

I like the idea of adding some length to the M113 to allow more space for storage of equipment inside the vehicle where it has some protection from the elements (nothing worse than losing your kit to a tree branch as you are cruising through the forest).  The stretched M113 with six road wheel is a good start but I believe adding one more road wheel per side would be even better, the increased length with seven road wheels would certainly increase the level of comfort inside the vehicle for the troops that have to fight and exist in it for any length of time.  The increased length would also help in reducng the "gypsy carvan" appearance of these vehicle as they move about the battlefield. 

The merging of the M113 family with the M2 automotive components has created a lot of possibilities.  My own ideas are to consider adding an excavator to the M113 series FMTV tracked cargo vehicle to create a tracked combat engineer excavator vehicle to be used for digging fighting positions and obstacles or to help with the construction of bridgeheads and river crossings.  The image was created by blending the MLRS and a Caterpillar excavator together to give you an idea of what I was describing.  Nothing fancy but it is practical.

[dy031101]

I once saw someone imagining a M113 armed with the turret of M551 Sheridan light tank as a replacement of the Sheridan.  Is it feasible though?

I read long ago that the M113 MRV (the Australian variant with Scorpion turret) suffers from toxic fumes from the armament.  Could someone elaborate on that?

[Jeffry Fontaine]

I once saw someone imagining a M113 armed with the turret of M551 Sheridan light tank as a replacement of the Sheridan.  Is it feasible though?

The recoil stresses created by the 152mm gun/missile launcher on the M113 would be quite severe.  Better to look for something with less recoil such as the 76mm gun used on the Saladin and the Scorpion.  If you wanted something like the 152mm weapon on a lightweight vehicle, you could consider the M108 or M109 which would be more practical from the standpoint of usefull space and being able to handle the stresses associated with such a large weapon. 

I read long ago that the M113 MRV (the Australian variant with Scorpion turret) suffers from toxic fumes from the armament.  Could someone elaborate on that?

The 76mm gun fitted to the Scorpion and the Saladin was not equipped with a bore evacuator which would have assisted in venting the toxic fumes from the fighting compartent.  It would have been relatively simple to modify the barrel to incorporate this feature. 

[dy031101]

The recoil stresses created by the 152mm gun/missile launcher on the M113 would be quite severe.  Better to look for something with less recoil such as the 76mm gun used on the Saladin and the Scorpion.

Whoever came up with this idea probably figured that if M551 can handle it, so can M113.

Besides, it was meant as a M551 replacement, so it is probably supposed to be able to fit into a C-130......

The 76mm gun fitted to the Scorpion and the Saladin was not equipped with a bore evacuator which would have assisted in venting the toxic fumes from the fighting compartent.  It would have been relatively simple to modify the barrel to incorporate this feature. 

Also, if it's for vehicles of near future, the turrets might be refitted with modern 90mm guns, which should all have this feature.

[Archibald]

On a sidenote, I've recently discovered that NASA used a M-113. Not for warfare, just in case of Shuttle explosion on the pad. No turret, and painted yellow!

[Jeffry Fontaine]

On a sidenote, I've recently discovered that NASA used a M-113. Not for warfare, just in case of Shuttle explosion on the pad. No turret, and painted yellow!

Archibald,

NASA started using the M113 during the Apollo program, long before the Space Shuttle. 

I was wondering about a turreted morter carrier similar to some of the French AML's or the South African Eland-60's with a breach loaded morter. Not sure if it has enough benefit over a standard M106 to be worth the effort though?

Geoff,

The only real advantage to the breech loading mortar is the fact that you can adapt it to a turret and that allows the weapon to be used for direct fire support in addition to the traditional role of the mortar for indirect fire support.  The mortar is a low velocity weapon so all you are adding is a weapon with limited range and penetration for direct fire support.

[GTX]

Mind you a M113 with the AMOS twin barrel 120mm, breech loaded mortar setup would be cool.
Regards,

Greg

[The Rat]

I'm getting the quivers now, not only have I spent a fair bit of time in those noisy shaky cans, but you're reminded me that I have to start scratching out a 166th scale one for a project. 

And who's the incompetent dingbat who took that brand spanking new vehicle and put a dent in the side? Probably didn't clear one of the bollards at the coffee shop drive-thru.