Long wars and industrial mobilisation

[Targan]

This article touches on some of the issues we T2Kers have been discussing for as long as this forum has existed.

Long Wars and Industrial Mobilisation: It Won't Be World War II Again

[mpipes]

Interesting, but I disagree in some measure.

I don't think any arms producers (except for maybe shipyards) operate on 24/7 basis. There is thus a lot of "slack" built into the manufacturing base. Full mobilization will occur, but will take probably six months to a full year. A lot of government military contracts require maintaining manufacturing equipment from closed production lines in storage - mothballed. For example, when the B-1B production line was closed, Rockwell was required to mothball the production line equipment with the ability to reactivate production by a specified date (I think was either 6-months or one year).

At one time, the F-16 production line was supposed to be able to "surge" to over 600 fighters per year. I think the requirement for M-1A1s was to surge to well over 500, but I am not sure.

[RN7]

America now has only one tank factory at Lima Ohio. They haven't build a new tank from scratch at Lima since the mid-1990's as all tanks are reconditioned, but they are reconditioned to such a degree that they are practically new tanks.

M1 tank reconditioning at Lima averages half a tank per day (15 tanks a month). General Dynamics has stated that it can easily ramp that up to two and a half tanks a day (75 tanks a month). In wartime that figure could conceivably rise to over a 100 tanks a month. If we say that reconditioning takes the same amount of time as producing a new tank then that would be up to 1,200 tanks a year. Building another tank factory or re-commissioning the still existent Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant would not be that hard but it would probably take at least six months to either build from scratch or refit with the right machine tools and equipment. So with the right infrastructure it is possible that America could build up to 2,400 tanks a year after six months or so.


Some discussion on this here...http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=4627

[rcaf_777]

There are also a number of Ammunition Plants that are government-owned and government-operated or government-owned and contractor-operated

a few that I can think of are

Lake City Army Ammunition Plant
McAlester Army Ammunition Plant
Anniston Munitions Center
Crane Army Ammunition Activity
Scranton Army Ammunition Plant

[The Dark]

Originally Posted by mpipes

Interesting, but I disagree in some measure.

I don't think any arms producers (except for maybe shipyards) operate on 24/7 basis. There is thus a lot of "slack" built into the manufacturing base. Full mobilization will occur, but will take probably six months to a full year. A lot of government military contracts require maintaining manufacturing equipment from closed production lines in storage - mothballed. For example, when the B-1B production line was closed, Rockwell was required to mothball the production line equipment with the ability to reactivate production by a specified date (I think was either 6-months or one year).

At one time, the F-16 production line was supposed to be able to "surge" to over 600 fighters per year. I think the requirement for M-1A1s was to surge to well over 500, but I am not sure.

Speaking as someone who has worked on refurbishment programs, in my experience there are always hurdles when restarting a product line, because parts or materials will have gone obsolete, drawings won't be totally accurate (there will have been "tribal knowledge" that either wasn't recorded or wasn't kept), and the knowledge base will be shallow because of loss of experts to retirement or transfer to other programs. One of the items I worked on was an auxiliary sight, a pretty simple piece of optics (i.e. no special coatings and low magnification). It required six or seven engineering changes to become manufacturable again, with problems ranging from dimensions that were unreadable because part of the drawing was blurry to needing to find a substitute material because the metal that was specified hadn't been manufactured since the end of World War II (and this was for production circa 2010).

While there's slack capacity in that nobody runs 24/7 shifts, there's often a shortage of trained labor even at current production levels, so ramping up will actually slow production while new people are brought up to speed on things like CNC operations, material handling procedures, and clean room requirements. Given the number of reservists that work for DoD contractors who would be recalled to active duty, the lack of a reserve of trained labor, and production bottlenecks at sub-tier suppliers, it could easily take multiple years for some production lines to be able to expand, since all items would need to expand; it does no good to double the production of Hellfire missile bodies if you can't make any more of the seeker heads, or the engines, or the fuses for the warheads, etc, etc. As it currently exists, the industrial system supporting the military is capable, but brittle.

[RN7]

Originally Posted by The Dark

Speaking as someone who has worked on refurbishment programs, in my experience there are always hurdles when restarting a product line, because parts or materials will have gone obsolete, drawings won't be totally accurate (there will have been "tribal knowledge" that either wasn't recorded or wasn't kept), and the knowledge base will be shallow because of loss of experts to retirement or transfer to other programs. One of the items I worked on was an auxiliary sight, a pretty simple piece of optics (i.e. no special coatings and low magnification). It required six or seven engineering changes to become manufacturable again, with problems ranging from dimensions that were unreadable because part of the drawing was blurry to needing to find a substitute material because the metal that was specified hadn't been manufactured since the end of World War II (and this was for production circa 2010).

While there's slack capacity in that nobody runs 24/7 shifts, there's often a shortage of trained labor even at current production levels, so ramping up will actually slow production while new people are brought up to speed on things like CNC operations, material handling procedures, and clean room requirements. Given the number of reservists that work for DoD contractors who would be recalled to active duty, the lack of a reserve of trained labor, and production bottlenecks at sub-tier suppliers, it could easily take multiple years for some production lines to be able to expand, since all items would need to expand; it does no good to double the production of Hellfire missile bodies if you can't make any more of the seeker heads, or the engines, or the fuses for the warheads, etc, etc. As it currently exists, the industrial system supporting the military is capable, but brittle.

This might be true with older equipment not built for decades, but not if we are talking about equipment currently being made or reconditioned such as M1 tanks.

[Draq]

Originally Posted by The Dark

Speaking as someone who has worked on refurbishment programs, in my experience there are always hurdles when restarting a product line, because parts or materials will have gone obsolete, drawings won't be totally accurate (there will have been "tribal knowledge" that either wasn't recorded or wasn't kept), and the knowledge base will be shallow because of loss of experts to retirement or transfer to other programs. One of the items I worked on was an auxiliary sight, a pretty simple piece of optics (i.e. no special coatings and low magnification). It required six or seven engineering changes to become manufacturable again, with problems ranging from dimensions that were unreadable because part of the drawing was blurry to needing to find a substitute material because the metal that was specified hadn't been manufactured since the end of World War II (and this was for production circa 2010).

While there's slack capacity in that nobody runs 24/7 shifts, there's often a shortage of trained labor even at current production levels, so ramping up will actually slow production while new people are brought up to speed on things like CNC operations, material handling procedures, and clean room requirements. Given the number of reservists that work for DoD contractors who would be recalled to active duty, the lack of a reserve of trained labor, and production bottlenecks at sub-tier suppliers, it could easily take multiple years for some production lines to be able to expand, since all items would need to expand; it does no good to double the production of Hellfire missile bodies if you can't make any more of the seeker heads, or the engines, or the fuses for the warheads, etc, etc. As it currently exists, the industrial system supporting the military is capable, but brittle.

That's the same stuff hmg went through recreating the stg-44. https://youtu.be/iQxwVY7ziKs part 1

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by The Dark

Speaking as someone who has worked on refurbishment programs, in my experience there are always hurdles when restarting a product line, because parts or materials will have gone obsolete, drawings won't be totally accurate (there will have been "tribal knowledge" that either wasn't recorded or wasn't kept), and the knowledge base will be shallow because of loss of experts to retirement or transfer to other programs. One of the items I worked on was an auxiliary sight, a pretty simple piece of optics (i.e. no special coatings and low magnification). It required six or seven engineering changes to become manufacturable again, with problems ranging from dimensions that were unreadable because part of the drawing was blurry to needing to find a substitute material because the metal that was specified hadn't been manufactured since the end of World War II (and this was for production circa 2010).

While there's slack capacity in that nobody runs 24/7 shifts, there's often a shortage of trained labor even at current production levels, so ramping up will actually slow production while new people are brought up to speed on things like CNC operations, material handling procedures, and clean room requirements. Given the number of reservists that work for DoD contractors who would be recalled to active duty, the lack of a reserve of trained labor, and production bottlenecks at sub-tier suppliers, it could easily take multiple years for some production lines to be able to expand, since all items would need to expand; it does no good to double the production of Hellfire missile bodies if you can't make any more of the seeker heads, or the engines, or the fuses for the warheads, etc, etc. As it currently exists, the industrial system supporting the military is capable, but brittle.

Now I have no experience with any of this, but I do have a question, how much lead time would be needed to ramp up? I wounder as some things I think there would be enough surplus in the system to deal with some shortages for example on my last deployment before I got out in 2010-11 we got .50 BMG ammo with the date stamp of 44 so if they are still pulling ammo made for WWII and it is still good I would guess that they have some surplus that could take up some slack if they decided early enough, but like I said I have experience with this so just guessing.

[Adm.Lee]

"The words of Winston Churchill in the House of Commons, recalling the mobilization challenge of World War I, apply here:

'Here is the history of munitions production: first year, very little; second year, not much, but something; third year, almost all you want; fourth year, more than you need.'"

Probably the best summary from the article, IMO as a Churchil-phile.

[The Dark]

Originally Posted by RN7

This might be true with older equipment not built for decades, but not if we are talking about equipment currently being made or reconditioned such as M1 tanks.

The simple optical device was the Abrams' GAS (Gunner Auxiliary Sight). There were drawings that hadn't been updated since before the XM1 was tested.

Originally Posted by CDAT

Now I have no experience with any of this, but I do have a question, how much lead time would be needed to ramp up? I wounder as some things I think there would be enough surplus in the system to deal with some shortages for example on my last deployment before I got out in 2010-11 we got .50 BMG ammo with the date stamp of 44 so if they are still pulling ammo made for WWII and it is still good I would guess that they have some surplus that could take up some slack if they decided early enough, but like I said I have experience with this so just guessing.

I had trouble getting .50 BMG back in 2012 when I needed to supply it to the firing range I had leased to be able to shock-test weapon sights. I was required by my contract to use ammo from LCAAP (to make sure the profile matched what the sights would experience in service); 5.56mm and 7.62mm were no problem, but .50 was short. It was only a few weeks delay, but I was only ordering a few thousand rounds. Around that time, LCAAP was producing about 1.4 billion rounds per year total, which is 0.2 billion rounds below their theoretical maximum capacity. In 2005 (which was the peak of ammunition demand since 2001), total ammunition demand exceeded capacity for both 5.56mm and 7.62mm. The total demand for 5.56, 7.62, and .50 was about 1.703 billion rounds of ammunition, and LCAAP was only able to produce 1.269 billion rounds that year, so overall reserves shrank by almost 450 million rounds.

For small arms ammunition, the biggest supply chain risks are the powder and primer. Only one powder manufacturer is approved (St. Marks Powder of Crawfordville, FL) and they only have one nitrocellulose supplier (Radford Army Ammunition Plant in Virginia). The primer is produced only by ATK, although they have multiple plants capable of producing it. Of the 13 chemicals in the primer, 4 are sourced only from China, 2 only from Mexico, and 1 only from Brazil, which introduces risk in the case of hostilities with those countries or with a country capable of interdicting supply lines.

The ability to expand small arms ammunition availability would depend on how willing the military was to use ammunition manufactured outside their control, because any project to expand LCAAP would require years to produce any significant amount of material. Early on, not a snowball's chance in hell. When the supply starts running short? Even if it's not done officially, there will be back channels procuring any ammunition they can get.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by The Dark

I had trouble getting .50 BMG back in 2012 when I needed to supply it to the firing range I had leased to be able to shock-test weapon sights. I was required by my contract to use ammo from LCAAP (to make sure the profile matched what the sights would experience in service); 5.56mm and 7.62mm were no problem, but .50 was short. It was only a few weeks delay, but I was only ordering a few thousand rounds. Around that time, LCAAP was producing about 1.4 billion rounds per year total, which is 0.2 billion rounds below their theoretical maximum capacity. In 2005 (which was the peak of ammunition demand since 2001), total ammunition demand exceeded capacity for both 5.56mm and 7.62mm. The total demand for 5.56, 7.62, and .50 was about 1.703 billion rounds of ammunition, and LCAAP was only able to produce 1.269 billion rounds that year, so overall reserves shrank by almost 450 million rounds.

I can tell you of at least one reason for that, politics. Trying to stay as non-political as I can but here we go. First a little about my back ground I was EOD then and so a lot of the ammo rules did not entirely apply to us. But one rule that we found just stupid was that if the ammo turned in by a unit leaving was not in the same condition it was issued in they could not reissue it and it had to be turned over to EOD for destruction. What they mean by same condition was if you got a 100 round belt of ammo and when you went red you loaded a round, but never fired a round and at the end of your deployment you clear the weapon and put the 99 round belt and one lose round in the ammo can, all the ammo is "bad", but if the troops had relinked that one round it is good for issue. With the 5.56 if it did not come back in the cardboard boxes it was unserviceable. So when ever we wanted we would go and pick up as much "unserviceable" ammo as we wanted we would go to the range and shoot as much as we wanted, and still my unit burned (in fire pits) hundreds of millions of rounds. They also told us that it was cheaper to just destroy it than it was to send it back to the states to be inspected and repackaged for reissue. My first deployment every single member of my unit got to fire several AT-4's for this reason as they were going to be destroyed anyway. I was Army, but work OGA (Other Government Agency) a lot (got loaded out to the State Department) and we had a USMC FAST (not sure what this stands for) company come through and took them to the range, and let them shoot our Barret M82 .50 Cal's. We thought it was very fun when they asked how many rounds they each got to shoot, the look on there face when we said as many as you want and opened the back of the truck that was full of boxes of "unserviceable" .50 Cal ammo.

[RN7]

Originally Posted by The Dark

The simple optical device was the Abrams' GAS (Gunner Auxiliary Sight). There were drawings that hadn't been updated since before the XM1 was tested.

The XM1-FSED was developed in 1977-78, that's 40 years ago.

So as I stated "this might be true with older equipment not built for decades, but not if we are talking about equipment currently being made or reconditioned such as M1 tanks". The M1 has been reconditioned for the past 20 years, if there were major problems redeveloping parts, metals etc for the M1 then this would not be happening.

[Benjamin]

The Naval War College Global War Games touched on this in 1988. Over the course of 1985-87 they gamed out a World War Three scenario till D+64 or so, but the 1988 Game was different. In 1988 the refs moved the time period ahead till D+75 and then created three possible scenarios' Stalemate, Red Dominant and Blue Dominant. From there the participants examined various likely outcomes. One of these included what a prolonged, non-nuclear, War would be like. From what I remember the general consensus was that it would take at least until D+135 for Blue to shift vital industries to a war time footing, beyond an increase of 15% or so from slack.

Here's a link to the relevant PDF.

https://www.usnwc.edu/Publications/N...ts/20-pdf.aspx

Benjamin

[The Dark]

Originally Posted by CDAT

we had a USMC FAST (not sure what this stands for)

Fleet Anti-terrorism Security Team. They're intended for rapid reaction short term deployments to cover areas with temporarily heightened risk profiles.

Originally Posted by RN7

The XM1-FSED was developed in 1977-78, that's 40 years ago.

So as I stated "this might be true with older equipment not built for decades, but not if we are talking about equipment currently being made or reconditioned such as M1 tanks". The M1 has been reconditioned for the past 20 years, if there were major problems redeveloping parts, metals etc for the M1 then this would not be happening.

This was part of upgrading M1s to newer variants. The GAS is what's in the little hole below the coaxial machinegun on all Abrams tanks. The problem was likely because it hadn't needed manufacturing since the original production run (we weren't even updating that part, just replacing ones that had become irreparably damaged and left in place on M1s that were now scheduled for upgrade as they got cannibalized for spares for more modern Abrams). My suspicion is that there was a stockpile of the old metal left, and someone got lazy and specced it in as the only acceptable material, then the drawing was left untouched for 35 years or so, at which point we went to make more of these sights and the stockpile was gone. It was only a small problem (there was a readily available substitute), but it needed a little bit of engineering time for the original material's characteristics to be researched and an adequate substitute found among currently-produced metals. The problem's going to come when spares stockpiles start running short, since there may be other things where a "lifetime buy" ends up not actually being a lifetime supply at higher operational tempos, and parts for an active piece of equipment might have had production line shutdowns for years or decades after that lifetime buy.

It's possible we're talking past each other, so if you were stating that parts currently being manufactured should be scalable to a higher production rate, then yes, I agree to a large extent. However, the point I'm trying to clarify is that even on items currently in active service, there may be components that haven't been manufactured in a long time, and those components may be difficult to re-start and to get to a decent volume of production.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by The Dark

Speaking as someone who has worked on refurbishment programs, in my experience there are always hurdles when restarting a product line, because parts or materials will have gone obsolete, drawings won't be totally accurate (there will have been "tribal knowledge" that either wasn't recorded or wasn't kept), and the knowledge base will be shallow because of loss of experts to retirement or transfer to other programs. One of the items I worked on was an auxiliary sight, a pretty simple piece of optics (i.e. no special coatings and low magnification). It required six or seven engineering changes to become manufacturable again, with problems ranging from dimensions that were unreadable because part of the drawing was blurry to needing to find a substitute material because the metal that was specified hadn't been manufactured since the end of World War II (and this was for production circa 2010).

While there's slack capacity in that nobody runs 24/7 shifts, there's often a shortage of trained labor even at current production levels, so ramping up will actually slow production while new people are brought up to speed on things like CNC operations, material handling procedures, and clean room requirements. Given the number of reservists that work for DoD contractors who would be recalled to active duty, the lack of a reserve of trained labor, and production bottlenecks at sub-tier suppliers, it could easily take multiple years for some production lines to be able to expand, since all items would need to expand; it does no good to double the production of Hellfire missile bodies if you can't make any more of the seeker heads, or the engines, or the fuses for the warheads, etc, etc. As it currently exists, the industrial system supporting the military is capable, but brittle.

This is something I touched on in other Forum Threads (especially regarding steel production). Lean Manufacturing introduced in the Early 1990's really ate into excess manufacturing capacity. As a "for example," I'll discuss my best friend's employer Channel Lock Inc. Channel Lock is running 3 shifts a day 5 to 6 days a week. They could only squeeze out about 10% to 15% of additional production in the event of war. Building additional forges and adding CNC machines WON'T help because there isn't enough skilled labor now to run those machines. This is a product of the "outsourcing" of US manufacturing jobs since the mid-1980's. This also means that the powers who are at war will invariably need to take equipment out of mothballs to supplement what can be produced. This is a "real world" reason for older equipment showing up in the war zone. Just look at what showed up in Afghanistan and Iraq. I can imagine it would be FAR more pervasive in a major conflict.

[cawest]

Originally Posted by RN7

America now has only one tank factory at Lima Ohio. They haven't build a new tank from scratch at Lima since the mid-1990's as all tanks are reconditioned, but they are reconditioned to such a degree that they are practically new tanks.

M1 tank reconditioning at Lima averages half a tank per day (15 tanks a month). General Dynamics has stated that it can easily ramp that up to two and a half tanks a day (75 tanks a month). In wartime that figure could conceivably rise to over a 100 tanks a month. If we say that reconditioning takes the same amount of time as producing a new tank then that would be up to 1,200 tanks a year. Building another tank factory or re-commissioning the still existent Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant would not be that hard but it would probably take at least six months to either build from scratch or refit with the right machine tools and equipment. So with the right infrastructure it is possible that America could build up to 2,400 tanks a year after six months or so.


Some discussion on this here...http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=4627

I was in slidell, LA a few years back. that was were they were going mass produce the Stingray tank. production was to be up 25 per month. Now the hard part would be the 105mm cannons. Does anyone know about a tank planet that ran in the 80's in CA. Camdon AR also makes the M270 MLRS. this could be converted to M2/3 production. what about the Cat and John Deer production lines. the last two would not make "front line" weapons, but second line would be do able and spare parts would not be a problem they had shipped them all over the world. I think Henry rifles could change into production (a few hundred a month maybe more) of more modern designs. does anyone know how many armored car companies there are (the bank kind and the VIP SUVs types). how about 3/4 or 1 ton trucks production with M40 106mm. As older tanks take the field these will become usable, along with say Gatling (20mm? 12.7, 7.62, or 5.56) twin 50 cals with side good RHA would be a great gun truck.

[The Dark]

Originally Posted by cawest

I was in slidell, LA a few years back. that was were they were going mass produce the Stingray tank. production was to be up 25 per month. Now the hard part would be the 105mm cannons. Does anyone know about a tank planet that ran in the 80's in CA. Camdon AR also makes the M270 MLRS. this could be converted to M2/3 production.

The last M270 was built in 2003. Camden now produces the HIMARS vehicle, along with the ATACMS missile, the PAC-3 Patriot missile, the MLRS rockets, and portions of the THAAD system. It has ~650 employees. It would need tooling to do Bradleys, and wouldn't have the capacity without shutting down other lines. Bradleys produced there wouldn't have functional TOW launchers, since the optics for the TOW are at least partially manufactured in Florida.

what about the Cat

Caterpillar's agricultural vehicles are manufactured by AGCO, which licenses the name; some of them are manufactured by Carro Agritalia in Italy. The electronic systems are manufactured in Dayton, Ohio. Medium and large wheel loaders are made in Aurora, Illinois (as well as Japan, Belgium, Brazil, India, and PRC), and Caterpillar Defense is headquartered in Shrewsbury, UK.

and John Deer production lines.

Deere & Company (dba John Deere) has vehicle manufacturing in East Moline (IL), Davenport (IA), Dubuque (IA), Thibodeaux (LA), and Augusta (GA). Some engines come from Torreon (Mexico) and others from Waterloo (IA), while the cabs and drivetrains mostly come from Waterloo. Without good transportation infrastructure, their system breaks down.

the last two would not make "front line" weapons, but second line would be do able and spare parts would not be a problem they had shipped them all over the world. I think Henry rifles could change into production (a few hundred a month maybe more) of more modern designs.

Henry has a total of 410 employees. That's close to the size of Colt Defense (around 550 employees) but much smaller than Ruger (2000) or Remington (3500).

does anyone know how many armored car companies there are (the bank kind and the VIP SUVs types). how about 3/4 or 1 ton trucks production with M40 106mm. As older tanks take the field these will become usable, along with say Gatling (20mm? 12.7, 7.62, or 5.56) twin 50 cals with side good RHA would be a great gun truck.

Quite a few bank trucks are badly overloaded pickup frames, and the typical protection level is UL II/III, which will typically stop pistol rounds up to .44 Magnum, but isn't rated for protection against rifles. Police vehicles would probably be more useful, since they tend to be more heavily armored.

[cawest]

Originally Posted by The Dark

The last M270 was built in 2003. Camden now produces the HIMARS vehicle, along with the ATACMS missile, the PAC-3 Patriot missile, the MLRS rockets, and portions of the THAAD system. It has ~650 employees. It would need tooling to do Bradleys, and wouldn't have the capacity without shutting down other lines. Bradleys produced there wouldn't have functional TOW launchers, since the optics for the TOW are at least partially manufactured in Florida.

Caterpillar's agricultural vehicles are manufactured by AGCO, which licenses the name; some of them are manufactured by Carro Agritalia in Italy. The electronic systems are manufactured in Dayton, Ohio. Medium and large wheel loaders are made in Aurora, Illinois (as well as Japan, Belgium, Brazil, India, and PRC), and Caterpillar Defense is headquartered in Shrewsbury, UK.

Deere & Company (dba John Deere) has vehicle manufacturing in East Moline (IL), Davenport (IA), Dubuque (IA), Thibodeaux (LA), and Augusta (GA). Some engines come from Torreon (Mexico) and others from Waterloo (IA), while the cabs and drivetrains mostly come from Waterloo. Without good transportation infrastructure, their system breaks down.

Henry has a total of 410 employees. That's close to the size of Colt Defense (around 550 employees) but much smaller than Ruger (2000) or Remington (3500).

Quite a few bank trucks are badly overloaded pickup frames, and the typical protection level is UL II/III, which will typically stop pistol rounds up to .44 Magnum, but isn't rated for protection against rifles. Police vehicles would probably be more useful, since they tend to be more heavily armored.

thank you for the info, but i was thinking about getting away from the TOW and moving more to thinking of arming them with laser guided Hellfires. the GLID or other laser designatetor that might be usable.

the link from Tank Encyclopedia on the Mahmia tank gave me some.... ideas

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/mo...ia/t-72_mahmia

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by The Dark

Quite a few bank trucks are badly overloaded pickup frames, and the typical protection level is UL II/III, which will typically stop pistol rounds up to .44 Magnum, but isn't rated for protection against rifles. Police vehicles would probably be more useful, since they tend to be more heavily armored.

Also most of bank trucks are only an armored box, so the engine and all that are not armored, they would be very easy to disable.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by cawest

I was in slidell, LA a few years back. that was were they were going mass produce the Stingray tank. production was to be up 25 per month. Now the hard part would be the 105mm cannons. Does anyone know about a tank planet that ran in the 80's in CA. Camdon AR also makes the M270 MLRS. this could be converted to M2/3 production. what about the Cat and John Deer production lines. the last two would not make "front line" weapons, but second line would be do able and spare parts would not be a problem they had shipped them all over the world. I think Henry rifles could change into production (a few hundred a month maybe more) of more modern designs. does anyone know how many armored car companies there are (the bank kind and the VIP SUVs types). how about 3/4 or 1 ton trucks production with M40 106mm. As older tanks take the field these will become usable, along with say Gatling (20mm? 12.7, 7.62, or 5.56) twin 50 cals with side good RHA would be a great gun truck.

I'm not sure what types of privately armored vehicles you might encounter after the exchange, but there are a dozen private companies armoring "EXEC PROTECT" vehicles in the US (ordinary looking cars and SUVs). As for Commercial Armored Cars, there are three large companies that provide 80% of all the Armored Cars in use in the US. The vehicles they produce will range in size from E350 (Ford)/3500 (GM) vans to "Y" bodies (popularized by GARDA) to the ubiquitous "B" body (introduced by Brinks) seen in movies like Heat, Armed & Dangerous, and The Book of Eli.

The "big three" armored car builders are:
LENCO Armoring of Pittsfield MA
MCT of Memphis TN (primary builder of Brinks "B bodies")
Texas Armoring of San Antonio TX (primary builder of GARDA "Y bodies" and both GARDA and LOOMIS "B bodies")

The most common types of Commercial Armored Cars are:

Lights: Built on E350/3500 vans, these weigh between 9,000 and 12,000 pounds and are armored to NIJ Level 3A. They will have no more than 2000lbs of cargo capacity and are primarily used in cities. The Dodge Sprinter is also included in this class of vehicle. These vehicles are not very durable.

"Y" Bodies: These trucks are built on 11/2 ton to 2 1/2 ton frames. They run as high as 20,000lbs GVW. They will run NIJ Level 3A in protection, require a DOT medical card to drive and can carry up to 3000lbs. They are not as common as "B" bodies but are more common than Lights.

"B" Bodies: The most common armored car in the US. Unlike "Y" bodies, which may be called by other names/designations, EVERYONE calls these trucks "B" Bodies. They were created by Brinks DECADES ago and are the most common truck seen in movies as well as on the road. They are built on the same chassis that the Army's 5-Tons commercial and school buses are (yes, school bus chassis are REALLY tough). The majority are armored with Aluminum armor to NIJ Level3 (rifle). The Loomis truck that rescued the wounded in LA's 44 Minute Shootout shrugged off several 7.62mm X 39mm rounds during the incident. Windows are often downgraded to NIJ Level3A to save money. I'd say 6 in 10 "B" bodies have 3A windows. The truck maxes out at 26,000 lbs (to stay under CDL requirements) with a 5,000lb cargo capacity.

"Super B" Armored Cars: These "stretched B Bodies" are about 4ft longer than a "B" and exceed 30,000lbs (making them Class B CDL trucks). They are NIJ Level3 (rifle) and used as FED pickup trucks or in high threat environments (like LA and Detroit).

It is standard practice for these vehicles to be equipped (at least initially) with run-flat tires, and self-sealing coolant systems which allow the vehicle to escape a kill zone with the tires or radiator shot up. Many will be equipped with armored push bars over their grills and gun ports too.

Those are the most commonly encountered commercial armored cars I encountered during my 10-year stint with Great Lakes Armored (now Loomis) and Fidelity Armored (no longer in business...like 99% of small armored car companies after the 2008 Collapse). You can GOOGLE the armored car companies for more info. They often have a selection of used vehicles to choose from.

[Silent Hunter UK]

The USSR kept a load of their old stuff in store. Like war era stuff.

[ArmySGT.]

Originally Posted by Silent Hunter UK

The USSR kept a load of their old stuff in store. Like war era stuff.

The Soviets, and now the Russians, always have and still produce ammunition for them and clients around the world still using them. Things just get downgraded to the next lower mobilization tier... WW2 gear is something like partisan/police/ only in case of invasion/ depot tier... though with T-72s rotting in depots, I am skeptical of the "mobilization charts"

Soviets were producing new 85mm AP for Yugoslavia, North Korea, and maybe Eritrea right up to the collapse. For T-34s and ASU - 85s.

[cawest]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

I'm not sure what types of privately armored vehicles you might encounter after the exchange, but there are a dozen private companies armoring "EXEC PROTECT" vehicles in the US (ordinary looking cars and SUVs). As for Commercial Armored Cars, there are three large companies that provide 80% of all the Armored Cars in use in the US. The vehicles they produce will range in size from E350 (Ford)/3500 (GM) vans to "Y" bodies (popularized by GARDA) to the ubiquitous "B" body (introduced by Brinks) seen in movies like Heat, Armed & Dangerous, and The Book of Eli.

The "big three" armored car builders are:
LENCO Armoring of Pittsfield MA
MCT of Memphis TN (primary builder of Brinks "B bodies")
Texas Armoring of San Antonio TX (primary builder of GARDA "Y bodies" and both GARDA and LOOMIS "B bodies")

The most common types of Commercial Armored Cars are:

Lights: Built on E350/3500 vans, these weigh between 9,000 and 12,000 pounds and are armored to NIJ Level 3A. They will have no more than 2000lbs of cargo capacity and are primarily used in cities. The Dodge Sprinter is also included in this class of vehicle. These vehicles are not very durable.

"Y" Bodies: These trucks are built on 11/2 ton to 2 1/2 ton frames. They run as high as 20,000lbs GVW. They will run NIJ Level 3A in protection, require a DOT medical card to drive and can carry up to 3000lbs. They are not as common as "B" bodies but are more common than Lights.

"B" Bodies: The most common armored car in the US. Unlike "Y" bodies, which may be called by other names/designations, EVERYONE calls these trucks "B" Bodies. They were created by Brinks DECADES ago and are the most common truck seen in movies as well as on the road. They are built on the same chassis that the Army's 5-Tons commercial and school buses are (yes, school bus chassis are REALLY tough). The majority are armored with Aluminum armor to NIJ Level3 (rifle). The Loomis truck that rescued the wounded in LA's 44 Minute Shootout shrugged off several 7.62mm X 39mm rounds during the incident. Windows are often downgraded to NIJ Level3A to save money. I'd say 6 in 10 "B" bodies have 3A windows. The truck maxes out at 26,000 lbs (to stay under CDL requirements) with a 5,000lb cargo capacity.

"Super B" Armored Cars: These "stretched B Bodies" are about 4ft longer than a "B" and exceed 30,000lbs (making them Class B CDL trucks). They are NIJ Level3 (rifle) and used as FED pickup trucks or in high threat environments (like LA and Detroit).

It is standard practice for these vehicles to be equipped (at least initially) with run-flat tires, and self-sealing coolant systems which allow the vehicle to escape a kill zone with the tires or radiator shot up. Many will be equipped with armored push bars over their grills and gun ports too.

Those are the most commonly encountered commercial armored cars I encountered during my 10-year stint with Great Lakes Armored (now Loomis) and Fidelity Armored (no longer in business...like 99% of small armored car companies after the 2008 Collapse). You can GOOGLE the armored car companies for more info. They often have a selection of used vehicles to choose from.

would put a 7.62 or 12.7... on the top of this beast with a gun shield.

[The Dark]

One of the sites I've looked at is Alpine Armoring, since they have a chart of what their ratings translate to (in caliber and number of rounds it's designed to resist), an inventory of available vehicles, and a list of what vehicles they do with the range of armoring options. There are probably others with similar information, but they were the first I found.

[CDAT]

Originally Posted by cawest

would put a 7.62 or 12.7... on the top of this beast with a gun shield. Attachment 3973

Why? It barely has room for the one operator and no room to store any extra ammo and what not, also to use the MG the operator would have to stop and stand on the seat to use it.

[Olefin]

One of the weak links in getting up to speed as to production would be that you would need to get more welders certified to weld armor for tanks and heavy vehicles. We were always doing that at BAE as production ebbed and flowed during the time I was there - I asked someone there about what happened when they started building MRAP's and they said how they had had to go on a crash training program to meet production and had to bring a lot of guys out of retirement to meet the goals

you can train people up but it takes time - and that would figure into any quick ramp up on armored vehicles

as to running around the clock - BAE ran three shifts to get the MRAP's built that the military was screaming for in Iraq - with the third shift being a lot of maintenance and detail work but we added a complete production shift in a matter of weeks - with many of the guys doing it either being retired and brought back to train new guys or guys who had used to be on the line and then shifted back to get the second shift up and running

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by CDAT

Also most of bank trucks are only an armored box, so the engine and all that are not armored, they would be very easy to disable.

This is true of Lights and "Y Bodies" (we call them "squats" because they have very low roofs but are as wide as a "B Body" with a 450 truck front end. About 50% of "B Bodies" have Kevlar "liners" that are attached to the inside of the fiberglass hoods. These would become worn and begin to "detach" from the inside of the hood over time. They would then be removed. The "Super B's" were completely armored (these are also used as SWAT vehicles).

a Light would be AV 1 on every location BUT the engine compartment. The engine compartment is UNARMORED (unless an AV 2 bumper guard is installed at the front).

a Squat/Y Body would have AV 2 on the cargo box and AV 1 on the driver's compartment (NIJ Level 3A Kevlar panels in the doors and NIJ Level 3A Lexan windows). The engine compartment is UNARMORED (unless an AV 2 bumper guard is installed at the front).

a B Body would have AV 2 on the passenger and cargo compartments and NIJ Level 3 (rifle) Lexan windows (AV 2) on a 1-3 (1D10) or NIJ Level 3A (AV 1) on 4-10 (1D10). The engine compartment will have NIJ Level 3A side panels under the fiberglass hood on a 1-5 (1D10) and NIJ Level 2 armored mesh over the front of the radiator (AV 1/2). B Bodies seldom have pushbars/bumper guards because the hood opens forward to the front and they can interfere with the opening of the hood.

a Super B will have AV 2 armor everywhere but the hood. The hood will be MADE of Kevlar at NIJ Level 3A (AV 1) in order to save weight. They also have a large "mesh guard" over the radiator that ups the AV to 2 on frontal hits. Push guards are seldom fitted because the hood opens forward and a guard could interfere with opening the hood.

Run Flat Tires: Unlike military run-flats, these will only reduce the severity of a hit by one level (ie a Major hit becomes a Minor hit) for 100km. After that, the tire must roll OVER its Wear Value or fail.

Self Sealing Fluid/Fuel Systems: These will reduce an engine or fuel hit by one level just like run-flats above. The engine sealing system will allow the engine to run for 100km or 30 minutes on a Major hit and the engine will run for 10 minutes on a Destroyed hit IF a roll OVER its Wear Value succeeds.

[Olefin]

and we know that bank armored cars are being used as APC's by several groups - the Florida module has New America using them as APC's, the NJ article in Challenge has Milgov using them also as armored cars

[rcaf_777]

Originally Posted by Olefin

One of the weak links in getting up to speed as to production would be that you would need to get more welders certified to weld armor for tanks and heavy vehicles.

The Canadian army had the same issue when it deployed tanks to Afghanistan. What it did was bring Navy Hull Welders. So maybe you see welders brought in from some civilian ship yards, with the war on the demand for cruise ships and some other ships types would be down. The navy not going to need everybody

[RN7]

This list is I think a fairly complete list of US (and Canadian) vehicle production facilities. I also have had way to much time on my hands over the past two days!!

Tanks
The U.S. currently only builds the M1 Abrams, and has only active tank plant at Lima Ohio. The Lima plant is run by General Dynamics and hasn't built any new tanks since the mid-1990's. However General Dynamics rebuilds and refurbishes the M1 Abrams to such a degree that they are practically new tanks.

The Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant was closed in 1996. Some of the plant was sold to the city of Warren, but the U.S. Army still occupies part of the facility and uses it for a variety of armored warfare research and development purposes. Plant equipment needed to produce tank components were removed to the Anniston Army Depot in Alabama.
.
Anniston Army Depot is a U.S. Army facility. Its main function has been a munitions storage facility since the end of the Second World War, but it is also capable of rebuilding and repairing the M1 Tank and its principal components. General Dynamics has a large industrial presence within Anniston, as does Honeywell who builds/rebuilds/refurbishes the M1 gas turbine engine. The Stryker wheeled fighting vehicle are also sent to Anniston by General Dynamics for final assembly and overhaul. If the U.S. ever goes on a war footing expect Anniston to be building tanks alongside Lima.

Tank Assembly Plant
Anniston, Alabama (U.S. Army/General Dynamics)
Detroit, Michigan (U.S. Army) (* Closed)
Lima, Ohio (General Dynamics)

Armoured Vehicles
U.S. armoured vehicles are currently built/rebuilt by General Dynamics, Textron and British owned BAE. General Dynamics (LAV-25, M1120 Stryker), Textron (M117), BAE (AAV-P7, M2/M3 Bradley, M113, M109). Except for the Stryker few if any of these vehicles are currently being built, with other work concentrating on rebuilds and supplying components. Engines are supplied by Caterpillar, Cummins and Detroit Diesel.

Armoured Vehicle Assembly Plant
Anniston, Alabama (U.S. Army/General Dynamics)
Ladson, South Carolina (General Dynamics)
London, Ontario Canada (General Dynamics)
Slidell, Louisiana (Textron)
York, Pennsylvania (BAE)

MRAP's for U.S. forces are built by General Dynamics, BAE, Oshkosh and Navistar. General Dynamics (Buffalo, Cougar), BAE (Caiman, RG-33), Oshkosh (M-ATV) Navistar (MaxxPro). MRAP's are built at the armoured vehicle assembly plants or at commercial heavy vehicle assembly plants. Other companies also build MRAP's and police armoured vehicles such as Textron, Lenco, Texas Armoring, MCT and INKAS in Canada, but excluding Textron they are custom builders and not manufacturers. MRAP engines are supplied by Caterpillar, Cummins, Detroit Diesel, Mack and Navistar.

Heavy Support Vehicles
The major suppliers of large trucks and engineer vehicles to U.S. forces are Caterpillar (CAT D9, CAT 277), BAE (M9 ACE, M88), John Deere (John Deere 850J, TRAM 624K), Oshkosh (FMTV series, HEMTT series, HET) and Terex (TX51-19M). The M939 series was built by AM General in the 1980's, but AM now only make lighter vehicles. Large trucks and engineer vehicles are built at commercial plant/agricultural and heavy vehicle assembly plants across the U.S. and Canada. Many of the assembly plants listed below don't make any vehicles for the military, but most would be capable of making them. There are also a dozen or more custom builders of firetrucks, tankers, buses and other heavy vehicles across the U.S. and Canada, but they are a bit beyond the scope of this.

Farm & Plant Vehicle Assembly Plants
Augusta, Georgia (John Deere)
Davenport, Iowa (John Deere)
East Moline, Illinois (John Deere)
Fargo, North Dakota (Case IH) (* CNH)
Fort Wayne, Indiana (Terex)
Grand Island, Nebraska (Case IH) (* CNH)
Hesston, Kansas (AGCO-Massey Ferguson)
Hutchinson, Kansas (Kuhn-Krauss)
Jackson, Minnesota (AGCO-Massey Ferguson)
Peoria, Illinois (Caterpillar)
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma (Terex)
Ottawa, Kansas (Kalmar Ottawa)
Racine, Wisconsin (Case IH) (* CNH)
Waterloo, Iowa (John Deere)
Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada (Versatile) (* Rostselmarsh)

Heavy Vehicles Assembly Plants
Appleton, Wisconsin (Oshkosh)
Chillicothe, Ohio (Kenworth) (* Paccar)
Cleveland, North Carolina (Freightliner) (* Daimler-Benz)
Cleveland, North Carolina (MAN) (* Volkswagen)
Denton, Texas (Peterbilt) (* Paccar)
Dodge Centre, Minnesota (Oshkosh)
High Point, North Carolina (Thomas Built Buses) (* Daimler-Benz)
Ladson, South Carolina (Daimler-Benz)
Macungie, Pennsylvania (Mack) (* Volvo)
Mount Holy, North Carolina (Freightliner) (* Daimler-Benz)
Oshkosh, Wisconsin (Oshkosh)
Portland, Oregon (Western Star) (* Daimler-Benz)
Renton, Washington (Kenworth) (* Paccar)
Springfield, Ohio (Navistar)
St. Therese, Quebec Canada (Peterbilt) (* Paccar)
West Point, Mississippi (Navistar)
Williamstown, West Virginia (Hino) (* Toyota)

Engine Plants
Anniston, Alabama (U.S. Army/Honeywell)
Columbus, Indiana (Cummins)
Hagerstown, Maryland (Mack) (* Volvo)
Huntsville, Alabama (Navistar)
Melrose Park, Illinois (Navistar)
Mobile, Alabama (Continental) (* AVIC)
Mossville, Illinois (Caterpillar)
Peoria, Illinois (Caterpillar)
Redford, Michigan (Detroit Diesel) (* Daimler-Benz)
Rocky Mount, North Carolina (Cummins)
Seymour, Indiana (Cummins)
Waterloo, Iowa (John Deere)
Waukesha, Wisconsin (Navistar)

Light Support Vehicles
Light vehicles include pick-up trucks, commercial vans and vehicles specifically designed for military service. The major suppliers of military light vehicles to U.S. forces are AM General (HMMWV) and Oshkosh (L-ATV series, LVSR). The Mercedes G-Class fast attack vehicle is built by Daimler-Benz in Germany, and the RSOV is built by Land Rover in Britain. Oshkosh builds light military vehicles at their heavy vehicle assembly plants, but any number of commercial assembly plants could be relatively easily converted to build these type of vehicles.

Vehicle Assembly Plants
Alliston, Ontario Canada (Honda)
Arlington, Texas (GM)
Avon Lake, Ohio (Ford)
Belvidere, Illinois (Chrysler) (* Fiat)
Blue Springs, Mississippi (Toyota)
Bowling Green, Kentucky (GM)
Brampton, Ontario Canada (Chrysler) (* Fiat)
Cambridge, Ontario Canada (Toyota)
Carton, Mississippi (Nissan)
Charlotte, Michigan (Isuzu)
Chattanooga, Tennessee (Volkswagen)
Chicago, Illinois (Ford)
Dearborn, Michigan (Ford)
Detroit, Michigan (Chrysler) (* Fiat)
Detroit, Michigan (GM)
East Liberty, Ohio (Honda)
Fairfax, Kansas (GM)
Flat Rock, Michigan (Ford)
Flint, Michigan (GM)
Fort Wayne, Indiana (GM)
Freemont, California (Tesla)
Georgetown, Kentucky (Toyota)
Greensburg, Indiana (Honda)
Ingersoll, Ontario Canada (GM)
Kansas City, Missouri (Ford)
Lafayette, Indiana (Subaru)
Lansing, Michigan (GM)
Lincoln, Alabama (Honda)
Livonia, Michigan (AM General)
Lordstown, Ohio (GM)
Louisville, Kentucky (Ford)
Marysville, Ohio (Honda)
Mishawaka, Indiana (AM General)
Montgomery, Alabama (Hyundai)
Normal, Illinois (Mitsubishi)
Oakville, Ontario Canada (Ford)
Orion, Michigan (GM)
Oshawa, Ontario Canada (GM)
Princeton, Indiana (Toyota)
San Antonio, Texas (Toyota)
Smyrna, Tennessee (Nissan)
Spartanburg, South Carolina (BMW)
Spring Hill, Tennessee (GM)
Sterling Heights, Michigan (Chrysler) (* Fiat)
Timmonsville, South Carolina (Nissan)
Tuscaloosa, Alabama (Mercedes) (* Daimler-Benz)
Wakarusa, Indiana (Isuzu)
Wayne, Michigan (Ford)
Warren, Michigan (Chrysler) (* Fiat)
Wentzville, Missouri (GM)
West Point, Georgia (Kia) (* Hyundai)
Windsor, Ontario Canada (Chrysler) (* Fiat)
Woodstock, Ontario Canada (Toyota)

Engine Plants
Alliston, Ontario Canada (Honda)
Anna, Ohio (Honda)
Buffalo, New York (GM)
Buffalo, West Virginia (Toyota)
Cambridge, Ontario Canada (Toyota)
Cleveland, Ohio (Ford)
Dearborn, Michigan (Ford)
Deckard, Tennessee (Nissan)
Defiance, Ohio (GM)
Detroit, Michigan (Chrysler) (* Fiat)
Dundee, Michigan (Chrysler) (* Fiat)
Essex, Ontario Canada (Ford)
Flint, Michigan (GM)
Georgetown, Kentucky (Toyota)
Huntsville, Alabama (Toyota)
Lima, Ohio (Ford)
Lincoln, Alabama (Honda)
Romeo, Michigan (Ford)
Romulus, Michigan (GM)
Trenton, Michigan (Chrysler) (* Fiat)
Windsor, Ontario Canada (Ford)
Wixom, Michigan (GM)
Woodhaven, Michigan (Ford)