![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Ironically, during my time in Iraq the MP Companies with these worked in Baghdad protecting convoys to and from BIAP to the Green Zone. While we escorted convoys from Talil AB to BIAP or the fuel depot (civilian) in Mahmudiyah. Using M114s and M1025s. http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...ground/asv.htm I am thinking that by this late in Twilight, the factory is nuked or running full tilt to supply U.S. Allies like Portugal and Spain with replacement parts and vehicles. So a civilian source making armored cars on civilian chassis would be available and provide what is adequate for the task. |
#3
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Used properly, the M113 is adequate on most battlefields. With a proper crew using the terrain, and NOT acting like a tank (ie rolling over the top of heavily armed opponents) the '13 performs quite well.
Basically, if an enemy is known to possess anything heavier than 7.62, the '13s should stay well back and let the infantry destroy the heavy weapons. Hull down and providing fire support once they've dropped the infantry off is the best way to use them in that situation. Should an enemy be armed with nothing more than rifles and medium machineguns, then the '13 can roll in and crush the enemy (litterally!) Just because a vehicle has light armour, doesn't make it useless on the battlefield. The tactics have to be adjusted of course, and the commanders need to be aware of the limitations of their vehicles.
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I'm looking for something that would be cost effective and that new construction wouldn't be necessary for the units being sent to Police, State Guard, Territorial Guard units.
It's the reason i was asking if the decommissioned M113s would be cost effective and useful for those kinds of units, or bring more return by just having them scrapped.
__________________
Fuck being a hero. Do you know what you get for being a hero? Nothing! You get shot at. You get a little pat on the back, blah blah blah, attaboy! You get divorced... Your wife can't remember your last name, your kids don't want to talk to you... You get to eat a lot of meals by yourself. Trust me kid, nobody wants to be that guy. I do this because there is nobody else to do it right now. Believe me if there was somebody else to do it, I would let them do it. There's not, so I'm doing it. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Thank you SGT...
That gives me some ideas... in a highened threat level world, older hulls (armored vehicles and naval vessels) being sold or given to allies would be a good idea. how hard is it to turn an already existing M113 hull into one of the variants? is the mod of say a stock M113 into a variant something that can be done quickly and economically?
__________________
Fuck being a hero. Do you know what you get for being a hero? Nothing! You get shot at. You get a little pat on the back, blah blah blah, attaboy! You get divorced... Your wife can't remember your last name, your kids don't want to talk to you... You get to eat a lot of meals by yourself. Trust me kid, nobody wants to be that guy. I do this because there is nobody else to do it right now. Believe me if there was somebody else to do it, I would let them do it. There's not, so I'm doing it. |
#7
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
M113 into an M113A3? Stripped to the hull and introduced into the assembly line. Whatever time it takes to assemble an M113A3, a week, two weeks, or just a few hours? I have no idea.
If it is not a fundamental change to the hull like a large turret, would not say much more. A lot of things are done, then the equipment is shipped to the Ally so the Ally completes the Mod to their specs. Like radio mounts, weapons mounts, fording gear, night vision, etc. The Ally fits it to meet their supply chain. The Leopard and the M113 are similar, NATO standard but, National specific models. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
i see... the bad thing is, the biggest allies i see getting the M113s that were not sold/given to the police, state guard and territorial guard during the years before the Euro-Soviet War would have been the PRC and Mexico in my altered timeline.
__________________
Fuck being a hero. Do you know what you get for being a hero? Nothing! You get shot at. You get a little pat on the back, blah blah blah, attaboy! You get divorced... Your wife can't remember your last name, your kids don't want to talk to you... You get to eat a lot of meals by yourself. Trust me kid, nobody wants to be that guy. I do this because there is nobody else to do it right now. Believe me if there was somebody else to do it, I would let them do it. There's not, so I'm doing it. |
#9
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Turning one into a mortar carrier or that level of alteration is possible, given the right tools and materials. Not sure how easy that would be in T2K when every last existing hull is likely to be refurbished rather than altered. Replacing old parts is much simpler than cutting and shutting...
__________________
If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives. Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect" Mors ante pudorem |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
__________________
The reason that the American Army does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices chaos on a daily basis. |
#11
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The press is WAY guilty of that one -- some reporters even refer to light wheeled armored cars with no mounted weapons as tanks!
__________________
I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com |
#12
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
Of course.....cough....that doesn't mean the men in uniform also isn't guilty of stupidity from time to time. I remember a Colonel at a previous base I was at was giving us young airmen a pep talk, and showed us a static display of what I think was an F105 (been a while) and pointed out the big cylindrical device under the hull. "See that? That's a good sized bomb it's got there!" Of course, as airmen we were all a little too embarrassed and intimidated at the time to mention it wasn't a bomb, it was a fuel tank. ![]()
__________________
"The use of force is always an answer to problems. Whether or not it's a satisfactory answer depends on a number of things, not least the personality of the person making the determination. Force isn't an attractive answer, though. I would not be true to myself or to the people I served with in 1970 if I did not make that realization clear." - David Drake |
#13
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
During my time in the Bundeswehr, we usually called the M113 "Panzer", like in phrases as: "No smoking in the Panzer!"
But "Panzer" is not clear as definition: The Tank (= Main Battle Tank) in German is: "Kampfpanzer". The IFV/CAV and even the APC are called "Schützenpanzer" in German. "Panzer" is used as a word for all kinds of tracked vecicles in German. Therefore it was not completely false, but on the other hand: Everybody knew, that the M113 was not a "Panzer" like the Marder (and the Marder is a true "Schützenpanzer"). It was used as a kind of mocking phrase. When we were introduced to our workhorse, the NCO explaining the M113 mentioned, that the trim vane would serve as a kind of additional armor. I've never read something like that afterwards, but in a way he was not for from reality. That special NCO even added that you could saw a M113 into pieces with MGs in 7,62 NATO, given time and a lot of ammo. Still don't know, if this is true.
__________________
I'm from Germany ... PM me, if I was not correct. I don't want to upset anyone! "IT'S A FREAKIN GAME, PEOPLE!"; Weswood, 5-12-2012 |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ouch! I can see your point, but even a light tank carries more armor than a MICV!
__________________
The reason that the American Army does so well in wartime, is that war is chaos, and the American Army practices chaos on a daily basis. |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|