M113 'The Bucket'

[Jeffry Fontaine]

One of my long term projects has recently run into a snag.  If any of you recall the image of the M113 AVLB that was tested in Vietnam, there was a one image provided in the Squadron M113 In Action book showing the vehicle in the bush.  I was always impressed with this concept and wanted to try and build one in 1/35th scale.  The original idea was to use the 1/40th scale M48 AVLB bridge components from the Revell kit which was last issued under the "History Makers" theme.  I realized that this was a bit odd looking and put the project on hold for a few more years.  I was inspired once again with the M113 AVLB concept when Revell of Germany released the 1/72nd scale Leopard 'Biber' AVLB kit which had a bridge that looked a lot like the equipment mounted on the original M113 AVLB.  It took time but I eventually acquired one kit and started doing the check fit process to see how it would look.  The first obstacle I encountered was the width of the treadway.  As it comes in the kit this is just wide enough for the Leopard in 1/72nd scale but barely so for the M113 in 1/35th scale.  A minor setback but easily overcome if you double up the bridge sections to increase the width of the treadway that is more in line with what you would expect for a bridge of that size in 1/35th scale.  This was looking pretty good and I started doing some additional test fitting to determine whether I should keep the sections as separate parts or cut out the parts that were in between that would have been the sides of each bridge section if assembled normally.  I decided that I should cut out these parts and made my cuts to remove the material that was associated with these parts.  It was looking good until I actually assembled the parts and cemented the pieces together.  That is when I discovered several gaps that escaped the sanding process that I had performed prior to assembly.  So, the pieces were pulled apart once again to try and get them sanded flat and true.  It looked good to the naked eye but after assembly the second time it once again displayed glaring imperfections through which light was observed that indicated I had once again screwed the pooch.

So one Leopard AVLB kit was ruined and I had to go out and purchase another one to get the required double quantities of parts for the treadways.  At this point, I felt it was best to put it all back in the box and let it set for a while longer before I fail this miserably. 

Is there a support group that can share my grief? 

[GTX]

Some photos I just came across - perfect whiffing fuel:



Yes, those are Hydra 70mm rocket pods!

Regards,

Greg

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Some photos I just came across - perfect whiffing fuel:

Great concept and a B1TCH to reload after you fire all 38 rockets and I am sure it would impress the opposition with some extreme "shock and awe" :^)
In addition to the potential for putting thirty-eight 70mm high explosive rockets on target it would be a great way to provide smoke on the objective prior to the assault or produce a smoke screen on your flanks to conceal movement.  There is still the danger of back blast from the tubes but it is still a grand idea.  If you wanted to go one further, you could use the old 24 tube rocket launcher system that was mounted on the UH-1B an UH-1C helicopters for aerial fire support during the assault.  This consisted of a large box framework with twenty-four 70mm FFAR in separate tubes that mounted to the weapons pylon on the side of the helicopter.  That would increase your ready to fire weapons by ten if you switched from circles (pods) to rectangles :^)

I had a similar idea but it would involve a heavy machine gun mounted in the M981 FISTV or M901 ITV "Hammer Head" so that you could have an elevated gun system slaved to your electro-optical sensors.  Elevated such as it is that turret would allow firing over objects or as in the M981 and M901 complete concealment with only the turret elevated above the position to observe and engage targets. 

The M901 ITV would have to lose one missile launch tube in order for the concept to work but the M981 FISTV has no such issue so it could be modified to mount a weapon along side the sensor suite.  Ammunition supply would be a couple of hundred rounds in a ready use box and resupply of this would necessitate lowering the weapon and loading more ammunition when required.  I had considered one of those flexible ammunition feed chutes from the vehicle up through the turret following the electronics conduits that are already in that position but there is not much room as it is inside of that turret so adding a luxury such as that would be rather pointless.  Better to have a separate resupply of ammunition instead of a giant reservoir of ammunition that could jam at the worst possible moment.  Besides that there is also a 7.62mm GPMG (originally the M60 GPMG) mounted on that cupola for local defense of the vehicle.  Additional equipment for ground mounting the weapon would be carried so the heavy machine gun would be dismounted and placed on a tripod with traverse and elevation equipment when the situation deemed it necessary to do so.  Perhaps an improved version of the M981 FISTV could be modified to mount a .50" heavy machine gun and a 40mm grenade launcher such as the Mk19. 

[dy031101]

Here is an effort with purpose-built artillery rocket launchers (Kung Feng IV).

[Maverick]

I've definitely got some big love for Bucket whiffs. 

The FFAR setup is pretty nice, kinda reminds me of the Serbs when they put UB-57 pods on trucks and the like during the Balkans unpleasantness.  Greg, any idea on the nationality?  Kinda looks Canadian to me...

Jeffry's idea of the elevated gun posit in the FIST is certainly interesting although the elevation isn't quite as high as all that.  Add the FIST setup to a Bradley... then you've added another foot or two to the overall height.  I guess that's another whiff concept of a different breed.

Regards,

Mav

[dy031101]

For some quick and dirty (am I using an appropriate description?) conversion, can a 105mm or 122mm howitzer (L118/M119, LG1, D-30, or even older types such as M101 and M102) be installed in the manner depicted below?

[jcf]

Proposal to mount XM103 105mm howitzer on M113 and partial internal arrangement of German FSV concept.

Jon

[MAD]

The closest German analog to the M113 as a prototype that got build would have been the Katchen.  Based on the Hetzer 38(t) hull, it was a full tracked APC with an armoured superstructure.

Probably a substantial improvement over the myriad of halftracks throughout the German Army in both mobility and ease of production.
But I still do not understand after their costly experiences at the hands of the Russian's God of War – 'Artillery', that the Germans did not employed a completely enclosed troop compartment (including a roof) on its Katchen, to protect its troops against both the weather, artillery, rocket and mortar splinters.

Saying this I think that as an effective APC, and due to the Katchen being based on the chassis of the small Hetzer, would it have been large enough to take a fully equipped infantry section, (with their personal weapons, webbing, MG-42 section weapon a Panzershrek and rounds.)

M.A.D 

[Maverick]

I guess the German's lack of use of overhead armour was the same as everyone else at the time (with the exception of the tank conversions like the Ram). 

I'd hazard a further guess that the arty was primarily groundburst and therefore the overhead protection issue wouldn't have been quite as drastic and any overhead protection would have been next to useless against a Typhoon or Il-2 anyway. 

"Battle taxis" are there for a purpose - to protect infantry from shell-splinters and small arms, whether it be enclosed or otherwise. 

Protection from the weather would have been a poor second methinks to the Wehrmacht in the overall scheme of things, although I've seen a canvas top worn by the Hanomags, so one for the Katchen isn't too much of a stretch.

Regards,

Mav

[Jeffry Fontaine]

The closest German analog to the M113 as a prototype that got build would have been the Katchen.  Based on the Hetzer 38(t) hull, it was a full tracked APC with an armoured superstructure.

Probably a substantial improvement over the myriad of halftracks throughout the German Army in both mobility and ease of production.
But I still do not understand after their costly experiences at the hands of the Russian's God of War – 'Artillery', that the Germans did not employed a completely enclosed troop compartment (including a roof) on its Katchen, to protect its troops against both the weather, artillery, rocket and mortar splinters.

Saying this I think that as an effective APC, and due to the Katchen being based on the chassis of the small Hetzer, would it have been large enough to take a fully equipped infantry section, (with their personal weapons, webbing, MG-42 section weapon a Panzershrek and rounds.)

I guess the German's lack of use of overhead armour was the same as everyone else at the time (with the exception of the tank conversions like the Ram). 

I'd hazard a further guess that the arty was primarily groundburst and therefore the overhead protection issue wouldn't have been quite as drastic and any overhead protection would have been next to useless against a Typhoon or Il-2 anyway. 

"Battle taxis" are there for a purpose - to protect infantry from shell-splinters and small arms, whether it be enclosed or otherwise. 

Protection from the weather would have been a poor second methinks to the Wehrmacht in the overall scheme of things, although I've seen a canvas top worn by the Hanomags, so one for the Katchen isn't too much of a stretch.

VT fusing was made available to field artillery quite late in the war.  This advance in technology made open topped anything hazardous to air bursts.  This development pretty much dictated the need for overhead cover being provided on all future armored personnel carriers.  Prior to the introduction of VT fusing technology there was no real need for the overhead cover on armored personnel carriers. 

Now back to our regular scheduled discussion on the M113.

[GTX]

A M113 variant I wasn't aware of until now - the Italian M113 SIDAM with four 25mm cannon:




Regards,

Greg

[Jeffry Fontaine]

A M113 variant I wasn't aware of until now - the Italian M113 SIDAM with four 25mm cannon

I have fondled the box that contained the 1/35th scale resin conversion for that vehicle on two separate occasions and both times had to put it back on the vendor table since I had already shot my allowance on other things.  It was quite expensive but still enticing. 

[rallymodeller]

You can also mix and match western and Soviet and be realistic when it comes to the Bucket:


-Taken from Tank Battles of the Middle East v.2

And also, don't forget that all M578-based vehicles are for all intents and purposes based on the M113 as well. Like the Chaparral, Tracked Hawk, the German rocket, missile and mine launchers, Tracked Rapier...

[rallymodeller]

Oh yeah -- our ADATS launchers are pretty badass too:

Something I didn't know until recently about the ADATS system: the sighting system is directly related to the TADS/PNVS system on the nose of the Apache. How about that.

***Fixed your image link-jjf***

[dy031101]

You can also mix and match western and Soviet and be realistic when it comes to the Bucket...

If attempts to fit the turret of the BMP-1 onto the M113 hull are to be made, where would the vehicle commander sit and how many dismounts can the vehicle carry?