M113 'The Bucket'

[dy031101]

Upon revisiting this thread, I have a question/request for advise......

Which one would you rather have- twin 106mm RR or 90mm gun?

[Maverick]

Unless there was an autoloader for the RCLs, I can't think of any advantage over the small calibre increase compared to a 90mm turret.  The 90mm would allow protected 360 traverse, more than likely a stabler firing platform and better optics.

[ysi_maniac]

Some ideas

[Maverick]

Whilst the StuG & M113A4 undoubtedly look cool, I have to wonder about the reasoning behind the A4 variant.  Having been intimately acquainted with the 'Bucket', I'd really hope that the A4 had significantly increased armour 'cause having .50cal rounds sail through the hull can really ruin a person's day.

Regards,

Mav

[dy031101]

Having been intimately acquainted with the 'Bucket', I'd really hope that the A4 had significantly increased armour 'cause having .50cal rounds sail through the hull can really ruin a person's day.

I like M113, too, but the way I got it figured after reading articles at places like combatreform.com, all the inflamable and/or explosive stuff hung throughout the hull would cook a M113 just a good as it would a Stryker......

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Wikipedia entry for the M113 Armored Personnel Carrier
South Vietnam

M113 w/ M8 turret - The Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN; South Vietnamese Army) fitted a small number of M113 armored personnel carriers with turrets taken from obsolete M8 Greyhound armored cars.

While I have never seen any images of this particular modification, it does make sense and provides even more fodder for WHIF applications such as arming the M113 with the 75mm howitzer turret from the LVT(A)4, LVT(A)5, or M8 HMC.  Another option would be to consider a kit bash using the M24 Chaffee turret on the M113 to come up with an American version of the Australian MRV.  Perfect for smaller conflicts where economy minded Juntas want to stretch their revolutionary dollars as far as they can. 

Here is the the first stretched 113

Steve,

You once asked for input on which turret to use on your short hull M113 project.  I gave this some consideration this morning and my recommendation is to use the Bradley turret on the short hull.  This would create an interesting little reconnaissance and scout vehicle.  There would be no need for passengers, just the driver, gunner, and vehicle commander and a little bit of space in the back for all of that TA-50 and other stuff that is always found strapped to the outside of the vehicle.  Maybe remove the ramp and use the smaller crew access door at the rear of the vehicle instead of the entire ramp. 


The reason for renewed interest in this subject came to me this morning while I was waiting for the Excedrin to take effect and could not get back to sleep.  I was reminiscing about the fun times I had while attached to the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment and the experiences I had on REFORGER.  I was attached to the Regimental S-2 and working out of the M577 command track assigned to the Regiment S-2.  The set up for the Tactical Command Post was always in a specific arrangement to allow all of the major decision makers and information providers to have access to each other while stationary.  Power generation was normally provided by the integral generator set mounted to the front of the M577 command tracks and required each vehicle to run their own generator set while set up in this configuration. 

What if the Army was to reconfigure a M577 or M113 to perform the power generation requirement for a tactical command post?  Call it an M577A2PGUA or M113A2PGUA (Power Generation Under Armor).  This would require mounting several generator sets in the troop compartment of the vehicle.  These generators would be mounted on the shelf created by the vehicle hull over the tracks and would require cutting out sections of the hull to mount the generators for easy access for replacement or maintenance.  The remainder of the troop compartment could then be utilized for a power distribution box, maintenance tools, and fuel storage for the generators.  All generators would run on diesel fuel to reduce the fire hazard.  There would be sufficient room for four generator sets which could be run for up to eight hours before switching over to another generator.  Power distribution would be through the vehicle slave cable connection to the power distribution box mounted to the rear of the vehicle. 

The generator sets could be adapted from the externally mounted APU that was used for a short period of time on the M1 Abrams.  Since this APU is now under armor and situated in the left rear corner of the Abrams hull this component that is common to many of the M1 Abrams models is surplus to the construction of the kit and usually ends up in the spares box.  Now you can take this unused component and use it for something besides a space filler. 

The attached image shows what I had in mind for the generators installed in the M113 (the M577 would be similar in arrangement).

[GTX]

Some Photos of the actual Stug M113:






Regards,

Greg

[ysi_maniac]

Hi Steven,
I love your M113s

[dy031101]

Some Photos of the actual Stug M113

Actually...... does anyone know the designation of the 105mm howitzer used for the conversion?

[Maverick]

Greg,

Two questions for that StuG. 

I see it's got what appears to be an MG3 as a secondary weapon so I'm assuming it's not US based.

Are those "firing ports" on the sides like the Bradley?  A boneheaded idea if they require a brand-new weapon to stick thru them like the M2/3.

Regards,

Mav

[GTX]

I understand it was a German mockup - hence the MG3 (good pick up) and the firing ports.

Regards,

Greg

[ChernayaAkula]

That StuG M113 reminds me of the Warhammer 40k "Vindicator". 


The Vindicator is based on the Rhino APC, which looks like one of its ancestors was also from the M113 family. 

<...> Regarding the Shielder, I think the Germans also field a similar unit. <...>

Yep. It's called the "Minenwerfer Skorpion" and is based on the M548, which in turn is based on the M113.

Pic below from the Bundeswehr site:

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Would the turret from the M24 Chaffee fit on the M113?  It is small and armed with a 75mm cannon.  It would certainly look different.

[Maverick]

Moritz, I have to agree that the StuG 113 looks remarkably like the Vindicator, which kinda is a good thing as it could me reasonably getting a WH40K vehicle in 35th scale.....   The StuG conversion also looks doable from a modelling point of view given the fairly simple lines of the vehicle.

I'd say an M24's turret wouldn't be too much of a stretch Jeffry.  We fielded the FSV M113 with either a Scorpion or Saladin turret, so the Chaffee's would seem to be more than suitable.  The Israelis also did a similar thing, although I think their turret was custom built.

Regards,

Mav

[dy031101]

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

After seeing pdf brochure for Cockerill Mk3 cannon, I don't know if I should retract this belief......

(It makes no mention of a bore evacuator, but company website says that the heavier Mk8 cannon has it......)

The company did say that M113 can use the Mk8-armed LCTS-90 turret......