LAV-75; Stingray; M8 AGS

[Legbreaker]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

there is a rare, little-known mount replacement that allows a dragon to be mounted in place of a commander's machinegun on tanks that have a us-compatible commander's machinegun mount. I've never seen one in the flesh, but we were told about it during gunnery class and it's in the tms.

This of any assistance?
Attachment 774Attachment 775

Attachment 776

Attachment 777

Note that the M2HB is at right angles to the Dragon. It obviously does not require replacing the machinegun....

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

This of any assistance?
Attachment 774Attachment 775

Attachment 776

Attachment 777

Note that the M2HB is at right angles to the Dragon. It obviously does not require replacing the machinegun....

Right out of the manual!

[pmulcahy11b]

As for missile armament for the LAV-75A4 (or I guess A5) -- I've been doing some thinking. Canon does say that the US sent Tank Breakers to China; that makes Javelins a possibility. A less sensitive alternative would be the TOW II system. And since it is vehicle-mounted, a heavier missile like the Hellfire is (to me) the best choice.

Or we could go nuts and arm it with the Hypervelocity Missile.

[Raellus]

TOW or Hellfire would probably require some sort of box mounting but could be fired from the safety of inside the vehicle. This would add to the weight, bulk, and maybe profile of the LAV.

The other option is an external Dragon or Tank Breaker mount for the commander like the one posted by Leg. I like this a bit better. The gun/missile combo makes the M20 particularly versatile. Add a 7.62mm coax and an M2 for the commander and the Ridgway will be able to take on almost all comers.

I'm not sure but I think Targan may be thinking about a version armed only with ATGMs, kind of the like the M901/M113 ITV. If this is the case, bigger is better and I would go with Hellfire. The v1.0 U.S. Army Vehicle Guide presents a similar concept with Hellfires mounted on a Bradley chasis (the M920 Hellfire AT vehicle on p.33). The Hellfires are exposed, though, and I would guess that would eventually lead to system degredation due to exposure to the elements and such.

On the other hand, such a vehicle wished-for by Targan already exists in canon. On page 32, there's the M917 ADATS vehicle based on the LAV-75 chasis. To my understanding, the ADATS system was intended for both SAM and AT capabilities. IIRC the ADATS system was never adopted but I kind of like it in the T2K universe. I say go with that. Targan, what do you think?

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I'm not sure but I think Targan may be thinking about a version armed only with ATGMs, kind of the like the M901/M113 ITV. If this is the case, bigger is better and I would go with Hellfire. The v1.0 U.S. Army Vehicle Guide presents a similar concept with Hellfires mounted on a Bradley chasis (the M920 Hellfire AT vehicle on p.33). The Hellfires are exposed, though, and I would guess that would eventually lead to system degredation due to exposure to the elements and such.

On the other hand, such a vehicle wished-for by Targan already exists in canon. On page 32, there's the M917 ADATS vehicle based on the LAV-75 chasis. To my understanding, the ADATS system was intended for both SAM and AT capabilities. IIRC the ADATS system was never adopted but I kind of like it in the T2K universe. I say go with that. Targan, what do you think?

I'm aware of the ADATS vehicle (one turned up in my campaign, ex-Canadian vehicle somehow obtained by the 78th ID in New Jersey). That's not what I was suggesting. I had in mind original pattern LAV-75 variants with some sort of ATGM launcher added to it, either of the type that is bolted on and fired electronically from within the vehicle or of the type that is fired from a hatch.

We've already talked about how early in the Sino-Soviet War the experience of the Chinese original pattern LAV-75s in combat led to the US creating the M-20 Ridgway with a 105mm turret because the basic LAV-75 was found lacking when in combat with Soviet MBTs right? Well what I'm suggesting is that they might well have trialled a number of different variant options, not only the LAV-75A4/M20 Ridgway with the 105mm gun, but also basic LAV-75s with box-type ATGM launchers, LAV-75s with hatch fired ATGM launchers, heck maybe even a few US-only M20 Ridgway evaluation vehicles with ATGMs added too.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by Targan

I'm aware of the ADATS vehicle (one turned up in my campaign, ex-Canadian vehicle somehow obtained by the 78th ID in New Jersey). That's not what I was suggesting. I had in mind original pattern LAV-75 variants with some sort of ATGM launcher added to it, either of the type that is bolted on and fired electronically from within the vehicle or of the type that is fired from a hatch.

Sorry. I misunderstood. Not trying to read into what you wrote.

I think some sort of universal hatch mount along the lines of what Leg posted that could accept either the Dragon, the Tank-breaker/Javelin, or similar model ATGM (the Soviets made one- I can't recall its exact NATO designation right now- that was configured almost exactly like the Dragon) already used by the PRC would be the simplest option. Maybe the initial batches of LAV-75 were sent with Dragons, then later, when things started going really badly for the Chinese, the U.S. acquiesced and sent the newer Tank-breaker/Javelin either before or with (or both) the upgunned LAV-75A4. The ADATS-armed LAV-75 would fill the requirement for an exclusively missile armed version.

[ChalkLine]

Really, if you send LAV-75s with ATGMs you don't need to upgun the ARES turret.

(By the way, the ARES turret is really modular. There's lot of images of it mounted on Stingray, M551 and even M8 chassis)

Here's a site with many images, although it's a wacky group associated with the infamous 'M113 'Gavin' Sparks'

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Raellus

I think some sort of universal hatch mount along the lines of what Leg posted that could accept either the Dragon, the Tank-breaker/Javelin, or similar model ATGM (the Soviets made one- I can't recall its exact NATO designation right now- that was configured almost exactly like the Dragon) already used by the PRC would be the simplest option. Maybe the initial batches of LAV-75 were sent with Dragons, then later, when things started going really badly for the Chinese, the U.S. acquiesced and sent the newer Tank-breaker/Javelin either before or with (or both) the upgunned LAV-75A4. The ADATS-armed LAV-75 would fill the requirement for an exclusively missile armed version.

I agree with all that.

Originally Posted by ChalkLine

Really, if you send LAV-75s with ATGMs you don't need to upgun the ARES turret.

True. That is sort of what started me down this line of thinking. If the reason for creating variants of the original LAV-75 was that the 75mm gun wasn't killing Soviet MBTs it stands to reason that fitting an ATGM to the LAV-75 might be the simplest way to give it tank-killing capabilities. But when the missile drought kicks in the 105mm variant would become the better option. That still means that at some point there probably would have been a number of variants being trialled if not fielded, including both the 105mm variant and also one or even several LAV-75+ATGM launcher variants. See where I'm coming from? I'm not saying anything we've come up with so far is deficient.

Originally Posted by StainlessSteelCynic

Targan, did you mean the M113 based ADATS? Because I think Raellus was refering to the 1st edition US vehicle guide where it has the LAV75 based version. GDW made stats for two fictional versions, anti-tank and anti-aircraft gun.

Actually you are correct, the one that turned up in my campaign was the M-113 version (that was actually used by the Canadian Army IRL, although I've never checked to see if it is still in service with them). But I was aware of the fictional ADATS vehicle depicted in the US Vehicles Guide. In my campaign that LAV-75 chasis ADATS vehicle would only have been fielded by the US Army in very limited numbers, the M-113 version used by the Canadians would have been far more numerous.