Quote:
Originally Posted by Webstral
There is a logic to both arguments regarding task organization. US mech units already are accustomed to maintaining large numbers of different vehicles. For example, in 1993 the 4th Combat Engineer Battalion (Mech) used M113, M577, HMMWV, 2.5 ton trucks, 5 ton trucks, at least two models of bulldozer, HMMIT fuelers and wreckers, and other vehicles. Granted, none of these vehicles used unique large caliber ammunition. Large caliber ammo is a supply consideration all its own. Still, the folks empowered to make such decisions will base their conclusions on the perceived need/usefulness of adding LAV fire support vehicles to existing LAV-75 battalions versus the additional logistical burden. Light divisions will need both the anti-armor capability and the fire support capability. This might be one of those moments when the maneuver commanders tell the support people to suck it up and do their [expletive deleted] jobs. Sometimes there will be ammunition mix-ups. If the LAV FSV is deemed sufficiently useful, some mix-ups might be judged a price to be paid.
|
Good point!
As far as the mounting of a 105mm on a LAV75; it probably would be more likely that a mounting for a TOW Under Armor system of some kind would be the vehicle of choice. The time frame of T2K would be as the M-901 was leaving service (Echo companies of the mech bns be deactivated). Now the M901 was top heavy for the M113 chassis, but yanking a turret, and replacing it with a TUA stripped from a M901...
I went digging through some old Armor magazines trying to find any of the articles that talked about alternative designs for the LAV, unfortunately the only mention that I could find for were two mentions in passing about a mortar version and a TUA version, neither of which went into any great detail. Still, it is intresting that they were already considering that the 75mm would have problems with the anti-armor role. The article itself was a more of "what-if" the RDF light tank would be deployed sort of thing.
The whole chain of RDFLT-LAV75 is a great "what might have been", but the final judgement for the 75mm was that it packed too little umph, was too complex, and would be too much of a logistical problem.
Still....it would have been fun to take one down range!