US Army Mechanized Infantry AT Companies

[pmulcahy11b]

A lot of National Guard units might still have the M113/M901 mix, or did not receive enough Bradleys to replace the Echo company.

[Abbott Shaull]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

A lot of National Guard units might still have the M113/M901 mix, or did not receive enough Bradleys to replace the Echo company.

Yeah seeing lot of National Guard units still having the M901 even if they had been given M2 for the other companies or even LAV-25 or something similar. One of the thing when the Battalion is holding a line, the M901 has it place. While the Battalion is in attack mode, it is invitation for set up of being ambushed, especially if the other Companies are in anything other than M113. If they are in the M113, think of the joy the Pact Tank Company Commander would feel when he found these slow movers in and catch them in their flank...Ugh makes my head spin to think about. Then again there enough Pact APC and lighter units would their commanders would have to worry about the same things.

After the war starts I can see the Mechanized Companies having their M113s replaced when possible. The Echo Company especially in battalions being converted to M2s would be low priority since each Bradley already had two TOW ready to fire. The M113 and all those various type of vehicle based off this chassis would be in support at best. Even at the rate the 3rd Mechanized moved in Iraq, they at time had to slow things down so support units and HQ could keep up with their displacement and set up.

[Panther Al]

You know with all this talk about the slowness of the 113 platform kinda boggles my mind. True, I accept the basic idea that the 113 can not keep up with the Abrams. OK, Got that. The last vehicle I was the TC of before I got sucked into recruiting was our 77 track (A M113). I can't count the number of times I was told over the radio to slow down so that the M1's can catch up (Especially when we was off road - in any terrain that wasn't smooth and flat, all our 113 platforms smoked our Abrams and Brads). So, while I accept the premise in general, I would tend to think that as the TW went on, the 113's that survived would be, on average, those that seem to be a might bit faster than the rest. Just something to think about...

[Legbreaker]

I'd have to agree. The M113's I've been riding in were capable of some damn fine speed over rough terrain.
I have no experience with M1s and M2s though so can't really compare.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

You know with all this talk about the slowness of the 113 platform kinda boggles my mind. True, I accept the basic idea that the 113 can not keep up with the Abrams. OK, Got that. The last vehicle I was the TC of before I got sucked into recruiting was our 77 track (A M113). I can't count the number of times I was told over the radio to slow down so that the M1's can catch up (Especially when we was off road - in any terrain that wasn't smooth and flat, all our 113 platforms smoked our Abrams and Brads). So, while I accept the premise in general, I would tend to think that as the TW went on, the 113's that survived would be, on average, those that seem to be a might bit faster than the rest. Just something to think about...

M-113s are surprisingly nimble little vehicles and they can outrun and outmaneuver a M-1/M-2 in tight terrain. But in the more open terrain, the only M-113 that ever out ran a M-1 was the Motor Pool Chief's personal ride, and that was only due to him having reset the timing on the governers. But then the first time we pulled a quarterly maintenance on our M-1, we went into the pack and reset our governer too.

Will say this, in my time on the "beasts" (8 years) I can count the times I've thrown a track on a Abrams or on a -113 on one hand. An M-60A1 on the other hand...look at it wrong in the motor pool and it will lock its brakes and throw a track.

[Abbott Shaull]

Never been in Heavy units, but everything that I have read up to this point has pointed to that the M113 was much slower than M1. Then again this could be attributed to people trying to sell their M2 to go along with the M1s in the first place, by claiming the M113 were too slow. How else could they sell an vehicle the cut the dismount portion of an Mechanized Platoon by a third. Other reason why the LAV-25 wasn't approved of, even though the Marine Corps thought they good idea.

Then hearing this, then it gives me some ideas. Take 2 M2s and 2 M113s for Mechanized Platoons of Mechanized Team. While Armor Teams would have 4 M2. Then their the Anti-Armor Company and Scout Platoons that offer so many combinations.

Like I said with the introduction of the M2 into Mechanized Battalions, I can see many of the Echo Companies being dispersed since the M2s in the 4 line companies already have two anti-tank missiles per unit. Yet, if they mix a Mechanized Battalion that had mixed of M2 with either M113 or LAV-25 or something similar to the Stryker, then having the Echo Company would still hang along.

[HorseSoldier]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

You know with all this talk about the slowness of the 113 platform kinda boggles my mind. True, I accept the basic idea that the 113 can not keep up with the Abrams. OK, Got that. The last vehicle I was the TC of before I got sucked into recruiting was our 77 track (A M113). I can't count the number of times I was told over the radio to slow down so that the M1's can catch up (Especially when we was off road - in any terrain that wasn't smooth and flat, all our 113 platforms smoked our Abrams and Brads). So, while I accept the premise in general, I would tend to think that as the TW went on, the 113's that survived would be, on average, those that seem to be a might bit faster than the rest. Just something to think about...

113A3s can hang pretty well.

M901s were underpowered and pokey things even compared to pre-A3 113s, though.

I still suspect that late in the Twilight War, a lot of them would have the 901 components just scrapped or cannibalized for used elsewhere and basically be converted back to M113s, or as close as DISCOM maintenance assets could manage by 1999-2000.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by HorseSoldier

113A3s can hang pretty well.

M901s were underpowered and pokey things even compared to pre-A3 113s, though.

I still suspect that late in the Twilight War, a lot of them would have the 901 components just scrapped or cannibalized for used elsewhere and basically be converted back to M113s, or as close as DISCOM maintenance assets could manage by 1999-2000.

The M-901 is certainly underpowered for its weight class, but then hang about 1,800kg of hammerhead turret and don't change out the engine....

The biggest drawbacks of the M-901 is that it is top-heavy, even with the hammerhead in the down position; under-powered due to the above mentioned failure to up-engine the thang when the funny-looking thang was added on top. Another major failure is that the hydralic system, well SUCKS!!! I've seen hammerheads fail to extend/retract, fail to spin, fail to stop spinning and flat out say to hell with it all and blow thier lines.

To its advantage...a M-901 in a down postion with the hammerhead just barely exposed is a nightmare to spot before it fires. It has a decent thermal sight and is a vast improvement over the old M-150...

Still, given the choice of crewing a Hammerhead or crewing a M-1A1....give me the Abrams, hands down!

[HorseSoldier]

When I first got in ('93) the Cav unit I was in was still running a sort of transitional MTOE with tankers in mid-NETT for M1A1s, 4.2" mortars, and 113 based scout platoons with 3 x M113A3s and 3 x M901s. The thermals were nice but otherwise they were a PITA. For the stuff we were actually doing circa 1993 I think we would have been better off with 6 x 113s or M2 Bradleys running four man dismount teams each, but then the army never asked me about my ideas for fixing MTOE. (Though my unit did eventually do a JRTC rotation as the heavy team element for a brigade where we did go with 6 x M2s instead of M3s per platoon and our 19Ds plussed up with 11Bs to fill all the seats in the back. Since we were running mixed platoons of 2 x M1A1s and 3 x Bradleys, it meant we could also put 18 dismounts on the ground on top of the firepower. Promised to be really solid, except that the OPFOR just avoided us like the plague until the mechanized attack at the end.)

[Abbott Shaull]

Yeah never understood why they would use the M3 as a scout vehicle, when the M2 offered more dismounts for the scouting. On the other hand M3 used to replacement in the AT Company would be just about right, if one was interested in keeping the Echo Company still active.