Am I opening a can of worms here? I think I am...M113...

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

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.

And therein is the rub! Too many congressmen (and way too many officers for that matter!) think that if the vehicle has tracks, armor and a weapon, then it must be a tank and is fully capable of going toe-to-toe with any other tank (of course there is that M-113 ACCV armed with a 106mm RCL....)!

[natehale1971]

Originally Posted by perardua

Yes, PAMs (the British equivalent of a field manual) exist. However, they are not generally available to the public, being as they are Restricted.

Darn... I just wanted to get a list of what an average soldier carries. You know something like the following...

Oh well.

US Army Kit carried by MSG Nathaniel Hale Spaight

Personal Gear: a pair of Uvex XC protective eye wear, sun/wind/dust goggles, pocket survival tool, glass cutter, zippo cigarette lighter, 1 set of dogtags w/silencers, a stainless steel cross, tan beret (w/flash or w/o flash), sand/black Shemagh headdress, Army Battle Dress Uniform (tunic and trousers), a BDU web belt w/buckle, light brown undershirt & underwear, a pair of cushion soled socks, a pair of combat boots, a quartz military watch, a skull bean pace cord, Nomex flight gloves, a small pocket bible (WW2 US Army issue originally carried by grandfather & father), St. Christopher’s medal, an extra-long Rosary necklace w/black hematite beans & a silver crucifix

Tactical Equipment: PASGT Ballistic Helmet, D.A.P./M-Tac 300 Level IIIA Ballistic Vest, Under Armor shirt & leggings, Knee/Elbow pads.

Field Equipment: AN/PVS70 nightvision goggles & hard box w/ batteries, Spare batteries for flashlight 2 sets in plastic bag, Motorola Saber-1R two-way radio w/handmic &earphone, maglight flashlight, 1 pocket knife/Leatherman/Gerber, Trifold entrenching tool (combo shovel/saw/axe), Strobe light, 50' nylon rope, repelling harness, spare batteries, spare com wire, Spare Battery for Platoon/Squad radio, M40 Gas Mask, 2 MOPP suits, LBE (pistol belt, H-type suspenders, 2 5.56mm magazine pouch w/3 clips each, first aid dressing pouch, compass pouch, pistol holster, 2 9mm magazine pouch w/2 clips each, radio pouch), 3 2-quart canteen w/canteen cover & canteen cup, canteen cup cook stove, Folding E-tool and carrier, M9 bayonet w/scabbard (works with scabbard to serve as wire cutters, the scabbard also serves as bottle opener, screw driver, & sharpening stone), first aid dressing, lensatic compass, crookneck flashlight, 3-day pack, 6 MREs, 10 Chemlight (2 red, 2 green, 2 yellow, 2 orange, 2 blue), 2 Infrared Chemlight, MOLLE system (includes a modular rucksack w/removable compartments & components, a fighting load vest, and an on-the-move hydration system), Soft Cover, Boonie Hat, wool watch cap, wool scarf, wool sweater, black leather gloves, wool glove liners, Poncho & poncho liner, field jacket & field jacket liner, Extended Cold Weather Clothing System (parka & trousers), Polypropolyne underwear, a spare pair of Uvex XC protective eye wear, 2 spare sets of ACUs, 2 sets of undershirts & underwear, 4 pairs of cushion soled socks, 1 pair of spare boots, 1 set spare boot laces, 20 magnesium flares, sunscreen, gun cleaning kit (contains: 1 Steel barrel rod with swivel handle, 3 Steel barrel rod extenders, 1 Double-ended nylon gun brush, 1 Shotgun adaptor, 1 Slatted patch holder, 1 Bottle of gun oil, 1 Package of cotton cleaning patches, 1 Silicon gun cloth), Shelter Half (canvas sheet, 4 metal tent pins, 3 section tent pole and 1 line), personal first aid kit (2 syringes of morphine, 1 roll of sterile gauze, 1 roll elastic tape, several field dressings, antiseptic, burn cream, band-aids), camouflage GORE-Tex bivouac shelter, Waterproof bag, extreme cold weather sleeping bag, Isomat (foam sleeping pad), 5-gallon solar shower, water filter, bottle of 20 water purification tablets, magnesium firestarter, Mess kit (can opener, pan, utensils), personal commode, field washstand, 4 bungee cords, 4 210rd bandoliers of 5.56mm ammo, 2 200rd SAW drums, 2 belts 7.62mm Linked ammo, camp stove, 6 sandbags, a Montague ‘Paratrooper’ tactical folding all-terrain mountain bike.

Normal Attire: MSG Nathaniel Hale Spaight wears his US Army Combat Uniform that consists of a tan beret (w/flash and rank insignia), a sand/black Shemagh headdress, an ACU jacket, an ACU combat shirt, a pair of ACU trousers, a light tan moisture wicking tee-shirt & boxers, a pair of brown cushioned soled socks, a pair of desert tan hot weather combat boots, a quartz military watch, a pair of sage Interceptor-X gloves, a set of dogtags w/black silencers, a pair of Uvex XC protective eye wear, a pair of sun/wind/dust goggles, a pair of tactical knee & elbow pads, a PASGT ballistic helmet w/an ACU 2005 Pattern Helmet Cover, MICH 2000 Helmet attachment w/NVG Mount (Die-cut Black EVA Inner Pad), a helmet band, ACU D.A.P./M-Tac 300 Level IIIA Ballistic Vest w/groin & bicep protectors, Coyote Brown Chest Rig w/pouches holding 4 M4 magazines, crookneck flashlight, a PRC 148 Radio w/a headset, an M4 5.56mm carbine w/an M4 Butt Stock magazine pouch holding 2 spare M4 magazines.

Weapons: Colt M4A1 5.56mm Carbine w/7 magazines, Beretta M9 9mm automatic pistol w/5 magazines, M9 Bayonet, 6 M67 Fragmentation Grenades, 1 M15 WP Grenade, 1roll Det Cord (Dmg: 2d6/+1d6 to +4d6, 5ft radius, Ref DC: 12), 1kg block C4/Semtex (Dmg: 4d6/+2d6, 10ft radius/+2ft radius, Ref DC: 18), 2 M18A1 Claymore landmine (6d6, Crit: 20, 60ft cone, Ref DC: 16), 6 blasting caps, 1 section of fuse a few meters, 2 M72A3 LAW rocket launchers, 1 M136 AT4 84mm rocket launcher.

[perardua]

Could give you a list of what I carried in Afghanistan in 2009, bearing in mind I did mostly vehicle mounted patrols, and that I can't be arsed going into quite such ridiculous detail.

Worn: Desert DPM combat trousers, Desert DPM Under Body Armour Combat Shirt (UBACS), Desert socks, Lowa desert boots (can't remember the specific model, but they were whatever the issue pair is), ID discs, ID card in holder round neck, wristwatch, antimicrobial underwear, Mk6A helmet with desert DPM cover (elastic scrim loops removed to prevent catching on interiors of vehicles, and because I was hardly going to somehow stick sand under them) and night vision mount, Mockingbird IR marker, ballistic eye protection (goggles on top cover, glasses on patrol), gloves, kneepad on right knee, Osprey body armour.

Carried in pockets: Left trouser map pocket containing 2x field dressing, 2x morphine combopen, 1x CAT tourniquet, 1x IR cyalume and 1x red cyalume; right trouser map pocket containing mine kit, notebook, Operation Herrick Aide Memoire, crib cards, range card, pen, pencils, lightweight compass. Rifle combitool, oil bottle and pull through in UBACS arm pocket

Carried on Osprey: Six 30-round magazines for L85A2, six 40mm HEDP rounds for UGL, smoke grenade, mine prod, bayonet, personal role radio (PRR), Gerber multi-tool and camelbak.

Carried in daysack: Softie jacket, waterproof jacket, foot powder, soft hat, spare socks, spare underwear, spare water bottles, 24-hour ration pack, spare batteries, head-mounted night vision system, common weapon sight (night sight for rifle), remainder of weapon cleaning kit for rifle and UGL, 16 40mm HEDP rounds for UGL, bandoleer of 150 additional 5.56mm ammo on 10-round stripper clips for refilling rifle magazines, magazine speed charger, plus sleeping system, additional 7.62mm link, etc when required by the task (we rarely did long foot patrols so we cached most of our kit with the vehicles).

Carried in bergen with desert DPM cover (almost always strapped to the side of the wagon): lots of spare socks, lots of spare underwear, 2 spare T-shirts (if and when the patrol harboured up for the night simply removing the UBACS I'd worn all day, having a quick wet wipe and putting on a clean T-shirt felt awesome. Change back into the UBACS in the morning, as it was only going to get soaked in sweat again), 1 spare UBACS, 1 spare pair of trousers, entrenching tool, flip-flops, spare pair of desert boots, huge pack of wet-wipes, washing/shaving kit (not that we shaved out on the ground), spare water (emergencies only, the main supply was in the wagons), lightweight sleeping bag, bivvy bag, desert DPM shelter sheet, softie trousers, more spare batteries, inflatable sleeping mat.

Weapons: L85A2 with 40mm underslung grenade launcher (UGL), LLLM (combination IR/visible laser and IR/visible torch) and SUSAT, assigned pistol (Sig Sauer P226) issued with one 15-round magazine generally left it in the armoury as an extra embuggerance of negligible use in most situations I was going to find myself in.

That was two years ago though, and British kit has been through several upgrades since then, so much of the details will have changed (new MTP uniforms, new helmets, new Osprey version, Elcan Spectre weapon sights, new flash hiders, new rifle magazines, etc).

Also worth a look would be this post on Arrsepedia: http://www.arrse.co.uk/wiki/The_Basics which is much probably better suited to T2K style warfare and is slightly outdated in terms of references to LSWs, etc.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by copeab

Yep, the Brits named our tanks -- and aircraft* -- early on the war. I think the only US tanks named by the Americans in WWII were the M-24 Chaffee and M-26 Pershing. Not sure about the M-22 Locust.

*Some aircraft were named (and trademarked!) by the companies that built them before the war, for marketing purposes

Yes, the Sherman name, IIRC, was actually a suggestion from the British. We did name the M-3, though -- the Grant for the American version and the Lee for the British version. (The Lee had a bigger turret because the British wanted to stuff more radios into some of their M-3s.)

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

And therein is the rub! Too many congressmen (and way too many officers for that matter!) think that if the vehicle has tracks, armor and a weapon, then it must be a tank

The press is WAY guilty of that one -- some reporters even refer to light wheeled armored cars with no mounted weapons as tanks!

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by natehale1971

I know this is going to be Off-Topic, but I've got a question about the Mobile Command Post armored vehicle... Just what are they? how are they used?

I've seen in movies where the Army has a tractor trailer truck turned into a mobile command vehicle, and I've seen Police departments use the same kind of setup for their field command posts during massive manhunts and the search and resuce operations. Are these the same thing as the specially built tracked command posts? I'm aving a problem seeing this because the commandpost looks so small.

I worked at G-3 at 2ID in Korea, and I've seen and worked in a lot of these setups. They are cramped inside, and I can't go into detail of what their crammed full of, but it varies depending on their job. Some are expandable -- one or both sides can be cranked out when their not moving, and the sides resting on retractable wheels, stands, or even jacks like on an 18-wheeler's trailer. This can potentially triple the working space inside, and it's easy enough to crank out the sides that it can be done by one person in short order. 8th Army HQ had a few 18-wheelers with expandable sides -- you just push a button, and small motors push out the sides, with jacks extending as they push out. (Unfortunately, I didn't have the clearance to even look inside one of those.)

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Try here to start with....
http://www.enlisted.info/field-manuals/

Jeez I get a lot of good links here!

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Yes, the Sherman name, IIRC, was actually a suggestion from the British. We did name the M-3, though -- the Grant for the American version and the Lee for the British version. (The Lee had a bigger turret because the British wanted to stuff more radios into some of their M-3s.)

LOL...the Brits named the Grant and Lee, as well as the Stuart, Sherman, Locust, Staghound and Greyhound. Pershing is the only one that was named by the Yanks.

The Lee is the US version and has a turret the same diameter as the turret ring, and is fitted with a coupla on top. It also mounts two .30-cal mgs fixed alongside the driver.

The Grant deletes the coupla and has turret fitted with a turret bustle holding a Brit radio set (moved up from alongside the driver); it also deletes the two fixed machine guns.

Both vehicles started out with the short-barreled M-2 75mm (this is the one with the large counterweight bolted to the muzzle end). This was replaced with the M-3 long-barreled 75mm (same one as fitted to the Sherman).

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by copeab

I see CivGov and MilGov as both evil, just in slightly different ways.

It could be funny if one side was primarily Democratic while the other side was primarily Republican...

[copeab]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

It could be funny if one side was primarily Democratic while the other side was primarily Republican...

And the PCs are Libertarians?

[copeab]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Yes, the Sherman name, IIRC, was actually a suggestion from the British. We did name the M-3, though -- the Grant for the American version and the Lee for the British version. (The Lee had a bigger turret because the British wanted to stuff more radios into some of their M-3s.)

Actually, I thought this was because the American practice was to put radios in the hulls and the British put them in the turret.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by copeab

And the PCs are Libertarians?

I call myself an Enlightened Democrat.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by dragoon500ly

LOL...the Brits named the Grant and Lee, as well as the Stuart, Sherman, Locust, Staghound and Greyhound. Pershing is the only one that was named by the Yanks.

The Russians referred to the M-3 Lee/Grants they received as "a coffin for six brothers".

Both vehicles started out with the short-barreled M-2 75mm (this is the one with the large counterweight bolted to the muzzle end). This was replaced with the M-3 long-barreled 75mm (same one as fitted to the Sherman).

Although the sponson mount of the 75mm gun gave it very limited traverse and it was low-velocity, at the time it was the only allied tank to mount a 75mm gun (some British tanks replaced their 2-pdrs with 3" howitzers for close support work, but these had an even lower velocity than the M-3's 75mm gun and were not very useful for AT work).

[natehale1971]

THank you! Thank you! Thank You! perardua i need you to get in touch with me so i can draw the T2k character of your Choice so i can thank you properly!

Originally Posted by perardua

Could give you a list of what I carried in Afghanistan in 2009, bearing in mind I did mostly vehicle mounted patrols, and that I can't be arsed going into quite such ridiculous detail.

Worn: Desert DPM combat trousers, Desert DPM Under Body Armour Combat Shirt (UBACS), Desert socks, Lowa desert boots (can't remember the specific model, but they were whatever the issue pair is), ID discs, ID card in holder round neck, wristwatch, antimicrobial underwear, Mk6A helmet with desert DPM cover (elastic scrim loops removed to prevent catching on interiors of vehicles, and because I was hardly going to somehow stick sand under them) and night vision mount, Mockingbird IR marker, ballistic eye protection (goggles on top cover, glasses on patrol), gloves, kneepad on right knee, Osprey body armour.

Carried in pockets: Left trouser map pocket containing 2x field dressing, 2x morphine combopen, 1x CAT tourniquet, 1x IR cyalume and 1x red cyalume; right trouser map pocket containing mine kit, notebook, Operation Herrick Aide Memoire, crib cards, range card, pen, pencils, lightweight compass. Rifle combitool, oil bottle and pull through in UBACS arm pocket

Carried on Osprey: Six 30-round magazines for L85A2, six 40mm HEDP rounds for UGL, smoke grenade, mine prod, bayonet, personal role radio (PRR), Gerber multi-tool and camelbak.

Carried in daysack: Softie jacket, waterproof jacket, foot powder, soft hat, spare socks, spare underwear, spare water bottles, 24-hour ration pack, spare batteries, head-mounted night vision system, common weapon sight (night sight for rifle), remainder of weapon cleaning kit for rifle and UGL, 16 40mm HEDP rounds for UGL, bandoleer of 150 additional 5.56mm ammo on 10-round stripper clips for refilling rifle magazines, magazine speed charger, plus sleeping system, additional 7.62mm link, etc when required by the task (we rarely did long foot patrols so we cached most of our kit with the vehicles).

Carried in bergen with desert DPM cover (almost always strapped to the side of the wagon): lots of spare socks, lots of spare underwear, 2 spare T-shirts (if and when the patrol harboured up for the night simply removing the UBACS I'd worn all day, having a quick wet wipe and putting on a clean T-shirt felt awesome. Change back into the UBACS in the morning, as it was only going to get soaked in sweat again), 1 spare UBACS, 1 spare pair of trousers, entrenching tool, flip-flops, spare pair of desert boots, huge pack of wet-wipes, washing/shaving kit (not that we shaved out on the ground), spare water (emergencies only, the main supply was in the wagons), lightweight sleeping bag, bivvy bag, desert DPM shelter sheet, softie trousers, more spare batteries, inflatable sleeping mat.

Weapons: L85A2 with 40mm underslung grenade launcher (UGL), LLLM (combination IR/visible laser and IR/visible torch) and SUSAT, assigned pistol (Sig Sauer P226) issued with one 15-round magazine generally left it in the armoury as an extra embuggerance of negligible use in most situations I was going to find myself in.

That was two years ago though, and British kit has been through several upgrades since then, so much of the details will have changed (new MTP uniforms, new helmets, new Osprey version, Elcan Spectre weapon sights, new flash hiders, new rifle magazines, etc).

Also worth a look would be this post on Arrsepedia: http://www.arrse.co.uk/wiki/The_Basics which is much probably better suited to T2K style warfare and is slightly outdated in terms of references to LSWs, etc.

[Schone23666]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

The press is WAY guilty of that one -- some reporters even refer to light wheeled armored cars with no mounted weapons as tanks!

Col. David Hackworth during Desert Shield/Desert Storm joked one time that he thought he should host a conference with all the reporters out there and teach them how to properly ID vehicles. "See this? It's big and heavy, it has tracks, it has a turret, and in the turret is a really big cannon...we call THIS vehicle a tank." ROFLMAO!!!


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.

[copeab]

Originally Posted by Schone23666

Col. David Hackworth during Desert Shield/Desert Storm joked one time that he thought he should host a conference with all the reporters out there and teach them how to properly ID vehicles. "See this? It's big and heavy, it has tracks, it has a turret, and in the turret is a really big cannon...we call THIS vehicle a tank." ROFLMAO!!!

Y'know, I'd make the argument that calling a Bradley or BMP a 'tank' is not completely wrong -- MICVs are oversized light tanks with undersized rifle squads crammed inside.

[B.T.]

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.

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by copeab

The Russians referred to the M-3 Lee/Grants they received as "a coffin for six brothers".



Although the sponson mount of the 75mm gun gave it very limited traverse and it was low-velocity, at the time it was the only allied tank to mount a 75mm gun (some British tanks replaced their 2-pdrs with 3" howitzers for close support work, but these had an even lower velocity than the M-3's 75mm gun and were not very useful for AT work).

Not to mention that there was a complete lack of 75mm AP ammo in the Western Desert. So 8th Army Ordnance took captured German 75mm APHE ammo, ground down one of the rifling bands so that it would work in the US gun, mixed the old propellent and remeasured it (for more even ballistic performance) and then reissued it to the Grants.

The Brits also pulled the fuzes from the US HE ammo and replaced it with old French fuzes, these were fitted with a drift element that allowed a 0.3 second delay, a feature that the US fuzes lacked. This allowed the Grants to fire HE rounds just short of German antitank guns and "ricochet" and explode over the crew's heads.

Hmmmm, German projectiles on US shells....US projectiles with French fuzes.....almost sounds like a T2K game?

[dragoon500ly]

Originally Posted by copeab

Y'know, I'd make the argument that calling a Bradley or BMP a 'tank' is not completely wrong -- MICVs are oversized light tanks with undersized rifle squads crammed inside.

Ouch! I can see your point, but even a light tank carries more armor than a MICV!

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

It could be funny if one side was primarily Democratic while the other side was primarily Republican...

Great thought, Paul. I'm really surprised that I've never thought about this before. It makes sense. MilGov, including most of the U.S.'s remaining military forces, would likely be more Republican because of that party's pro-military stance. CivGov, attempting to be more "democratic" and appealing to "the people", seems more like the Democrats.

I'm probably never come back to this again but it is an interesting idea. I think I prefer to think of MilGov and CivGov to be two new political entities, replacing the old two-party system. I'm sure each group spans the political spectrum on its own.

[Raellus]

I know that the M113 is lightly armored and lightly armed but I've always thought of it as one of the better tracked vehicle options for a group of T2K PCs.

Spare parts wouldn't be too hard to find as several NATO armies would have been using large numbers of them during the war.

It's got a relatively roomy interior (compared to a Bradley or Marder).

Side-mounted racks can carry a lot of gear and serve as stand-off armor against HMG and RPG rounds (same with the trim vane, as B.T. mentioned). There are also a few stand-off armor packages that users might have added by the Exchange.

The roof hatches over the troop compartment allow passengers decent all-around vision. Multiple MGs can be mounted there as well, giving it decent all-around firepower. With a Mk-19 or M2HB in the gunner's turret, it can tackle threats up to heavy IFVs and MBTs. Fuel tanks can be mounted on the back for extended range (although this increases its vulnerability somewhat).

The Israelis have been doing all of these things for years. They'll be the first to admit the vulnerabilities of the M113 on the modern battlefield, but they're still using them all these years later.

Also, I like calling it the Gavin, mostly because it irritates the piss out of Legbreaker.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

I used to be in a unit that used the M113 in the recce role. Having seen a door that was once part of the rear ramp used as a target, I would say that yes, given enough time anybody with a 7.62mm NATO machinegun will cut an M113 in half (excepting the drivetrain etc.) - because aluminium does not stop 7.62mmN, it'll stop small calibre projectiles and slow speed fragments but that's about all.

As for the Gavin name, it pisses me off as well - there's a whole bunch of dumbfuck media and civilians who are now calling it that and just adding to the confusion of identification. These same people are swallowing the crap that the M113 is the panacea to all the military's ills. The Gavin name has not been officially recognized, let alone adopted, by any military that operates the M113.

The person who gave it that name believes that the M113 should be called the Gavin because it is his notion of the perfect airborne combat vehicle (and as such should be named after a general deeply involved in airborne forces). Never mind the hard reality that all the modifications he wants to put on it will make it less and less capable as an airborne combat vehicle - try to make a single vehicle do everything and you end up with a vehicle that does none of them well.

[natehale1971]

I'm actually thinking of using the Gavin name in my campaign for the replacemet of the M113... the American lisence built version of the Weisel AWC.

I just can't figure out wht the 'M' number would be.

[pmulcahy11b]

Originally Posted by natehale1971

I'm actually thinking of using the Gavin name in my campaign for the replacemet of the M113... the American lisence built version of the Weisel AWC.

I just can't figure out wht the 'M' number would be.

Think of a random "M" number off the top of your head, and then run it through Google and see if it actually existed in the T2K timeline. Then you can decide whether to throw it out or use it.

[natehale1971]

Originally Posted by pmulcahy11b

Think of a random "M" number off the top of your head, and then run it through Google and see if it actually existed in the T2K timeline. Then you can decide whether to throw it out or use it.

That's what i've been thinking of doing.

I have to admit that i like the Strykers.... especially what some of the guys using them in Iraq said about them, namely that they were fro the most part quiet while running when compaired to the Bradley's.

[Schone23666]

Originally Posted by natehale1971

That's what i've been thinking of doing.

I have to admit that i like the Strykers.... especially what some of the guys using them in Iraq said about them, namely that they were fro the most part quiet while running when compaired to the Bradley's.

Well, how about "M-69"?

As far as vehicle numbers go, I don't see one anywhere...and I can see all the snickering going around with that number designation.
Just imagine if the vehicle complement was a 50/50 mix of say, female Project Athena members and male GI Joe members...okay, better drag my brain out of the gutter....

Would this be pretty much the Weisel "as is" or would there be any modifications done by the Americans? I was considering having Weisels appear in a few of my fics in use by my fictitious American military task force as well.

[Panther Al]

*twitch-twitch* ... must not get started on ... *twitch*



Ok, I will admit that the Stryker is a hell of lot quiter than any tracked vehicle - even the M1. which means I have found one good thing about it as a combat vehicle- kinda like a broken clock being right twice a day....

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

*twitch-twitch* ... must not get started on ... *twitch*



Ok, I will admit that the Stryker is a hell of lot quiter than any tracked vehicle - even the M1. which means I have found one good thing about it as a combat vehicle- kinda like a broken clock being right twice a day....

ROWS with 2 Axis stabilization is kind sweet. Blue Force Tracker. FBCB2.

8x8 morning commute goodness.

[cavtroop]

Originally Posted by Panther Al

*twitch-twitch* ... must not get started on ... *twitch*



Ok, I will admit that the Stryker is a hell of lot quiter than any tracked vehicle - even the M1. which means I have found one good thing about it as a combat vehicle- kinda like a broken clock being right twice a day....

Coming from a former Bradley crewman, I like the Stryker. I think it fits the counterinsurgency role much better than the Bradley does. However, in a shooting war, give me heavy armor over the Stryker any day

Right tool for the right job, and all that

[Graebarde]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

Try here to start with....
http://www.enlisted.info/field-manuals/

Thank you.. I FINALLY found the FM in there I've looked for a LONG time. FM 5-488 Forestry and Logging..