Beyond The Sprues
Modelling => Ideas & Inspiration => Land => Topic started by: Weaver on March 18, 2013, 11:29:27 PM
-
Ideas and Inspiration thread for anything to do with the British CVR (T) series of light armoured vehicles.
Real world vehicles are/were:
Scorpion light tank with 76mm gun
Scorpion 90 : Scorpion with 90mm Cockerill gun
Scimitar light tank with 30mm RARDEN cannon
Scimitar Mk.2 : Scimitar turret on Spartan chassis for enhanced mine protection in Afghanistan
Sabre light tank with 30mm RARDEN cannon (Scorpion hull with Fox armoured car turret)
Jordanian Scorpion : Scorpion refit with 30mm 2A72 cannon + 4 x ATGW (not sure if this is in production or prototype only)
Spartan APC : 3 crew plus 4 dismounts
Samson ARV : Spartan hull with winch and spades
Spartan Milan : Spartan hull with twin Milan turret
Striker ATGW vehicle : Spartan hull with 5-round Swingfire box plus reloads
Sultan command vehicle : Spartan with higher roof, radios map boards and a tent
Samaritan ambulance : Sultan hull with ambulance gear
Stormer APC : Spartan with extra road wheel and 8 x dismounts
Stormer load carrier : Stormer with flat-bed back.
Shielder : Stormer flat bed with Shielder automatic mine-laying system
Stormer HVM : Stormer with 8 x Starstreak SAMs
Stormer 30 : lowered hull with OTO-Melara Hitfist turret mounting 30mm Bushmaster cannon + 2 x TOW (prototype only)
Current or former users: Belgium, Botswana, Brunei, Chile, Honduras, Iran, Indonesia, Ireland, Jordan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Nigeria, Oman, Philippines, Spain, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, UAE.
-
Jordanian Scorpion:
(http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d165/hws5mp/JordanianScorpion.jpg)
Stormer 30:
(http://www.army-technology.com/projects/stormer30/images/stormer30_1.jpg)
Scimitar Mk.2 (Scimitar turret on Spartan chassis):
(http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d165/hws5mp/ScimitarMk2.jpg)
Spartan MCT with Milan turret:
(http://en.valka.cz/files/spartanmct_001.jpg)
-
So, whiff ideas....
US Scorpion : what if the US armed forces had bought the CVR(T) series?
Light tanks : it's hard to see the US Army going for either the 76mm or the RARDEN, though the USMC might see the value in the 76mm (light fire-support). The probable US option, assuming a 1970s/early 1980s buy, would be a 25mm Bushmaster I think. US requirements might also have lead to an early introduction of a stretched Stormer-style hull and that might have carried a Delco turret with a 25mm and 2 x TOW.
APC and derivatives : the US always seems to prefer 12.7mm over 7.62mm for APC weapons, so US version of the Spartan et al would probably have low-profile cupolas with manual .50 cal Brownings instead of the tall British Mk.16 cupola with it's remote GPMG.
ATGW : this is an interesting one: would the US have fitted TOWs on the 25mm Scorpion, or an infantry-style launcher in a roof hatch on the Spartan? It's hard to see how you could get a hammerhead unit onto a Spartan, given that it was capable of over-balancing an M113 given half a chance.
-
More Whiff ideas.....
The Scorpion turret seems to have been quite adaptable to other hulls: the Canadians used them on a MOWAG Piranha chassis as the Cougar and the Australians put them on M113s as a recce/fire-support vehicle (MRV). So what else could have been done?
Aussie equivalent of the Berlin Brigade FV432s, with a Scimitar turret on an M113 hull.
British equivalent of the MRV with a Scorpion turret on the FV432.
British fire-support vehicle with a Scorpion turret on an Warrior hull (76mm or 90mm).
M113 with the Striker's Swingfire system, i.e. a 5-round box on the rear hull with reloads inside.
Scimitar turret on a Saladin hull (i.e. a Fox that doesn't fall over on cross-slopes...)
Scorpion/Scimitar turrets on French hulls such as the Panhard AML and ERC series.
Canadian recce vehicle with Scimitar turret.
-
In the early-mid-1980s there were strong rumours that the Australian Army was about to buy MRVs with Scimitar turrets. It always seemed a logical progression from the Scorpion turreted FSV. However, nothing seemed to come of it. Instead they purchased ASLAVs instead (but only after the direct intervention of the then Minister of Defence Kim "Bomber" Beazely. )
-
The Canadian Forces had ongoing problems with cracks forming in those Alvis aluminium turrets. Was that an issue for British or Australian users?
-
Don't know about the UK and Aus ones, but I did read somewhere that Malaysia had trouble with turret cracking on their Scorpion 90s.
-
Jordanian Scorpion : Scorpion refit with 30mm 2A72 cannon + 4 x ATGW (not sure if this is in production or prototype only)
Hum...... I wonder if the same can be done on any what-if export Scimitar......
-
Don't know about the UK and Aus ones, but I did read somewhere that Malaysia had trouble with turret cracking on their Scorpion 90s.
Never heard of any problems with the Australian ones. Were the Canadian ones imported or locally manufactured? The Australian ones were imported IIRC. Might have been the sort of vehicle they were mounted on and how they were used...
-
So, whiff ideas....
US Scorpion : what if the US armed forces had bought the CVR(T) series?
Light tanks : it's hard to see the US Army going for either the 76mm or the RARDEN, though the USMC might see the value in the 76mm (light fire-support). The probable US option, assuming a 1970s/early 1980s buy, would be a 25mm Bushmaster I think. US requirements might also have lead to an early introduction of a stretched Stormer-style hull and that might have carried a Delco turret with a 25mm and 2 x TOW.
APC and derivatives : the US always seems to prefer 12.7mm over 7.62mm for APC weapons, so US version of the Spartan et al would probably have low-profile cupolas with manual .50 cal Brownings instead of the tall British Mk.16 cupola with it's remote GPMG.
ATGW : this is an interesting one: would the US have fitted TOWs on the 25mm Scorpion, or an infantry-style launcher in a roof hatch on the Spartan? It's hard to see how you could get a hammerhead unit onto a Spartan, given that it was capable of over-balancing an M113 given half a chance.
US Army Scimitars in a recon role. :-*
-
Easy, Australian RAAC 2nd Cavalry Regiment with the entire FOV Scimitar, Scorpion and Spartan in the Sabre Troops with Sultan and Striker at SHQ and RHQ, Samaritan at RAP and Sampson for the combat spanners. A Sabre Troop would have a scout section with two Scimitar, a fire support section with two Scorpion and a vegie section with Spartan. The purchase going ahead in the late 70s to free up M-113s for the Mechanisation of most of the RAR. 8)
-
Something from Greater Australia:
(http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e68/GTwiner/Greater%20Australia/Scorpion1.jpg)
-
Easy, Australian RAAC 2nd Cavalry Regiment with the entire FOV Scimitar, Scorpion and Spartan in the Sabre Troops with Sultan and Striker at SHQ and RHQ, Samaritan at RAP and Sampson for the combat spanners. A Sabre Troop would have a scout section with two Scimitar, a fire support section with two Scorpion and a vegie section with Spartan. The purchase going ahead in the late 70s to free up M-113s for the Mechanisation of most of the RAR. 8)
The Australian Army purchased over 800 M113s and most of those were available to it in it's war stocks. More than enough mechanise the entire Army.
-
Easy-ish 1/35th whiff:
Trumpeter do an AVGP Cougar and a Canadian LAV-25 in 1/35th scale. Since the former is based on a 6x6 MOWAG Piranha and the latter on an 8x8 Piranha, it should be relatively easy to do a turret-swap, i.e. put the Cougar's Scorpion turret on the 8x8 chassis. You could then claim that Canada did this for real in order to retain the 76mm fire-support capability on a common chassis as the 6x6s were phased out.
This would fool a lot a casual observers since it looks and feels "right". You could even back it up with the real-life tidbit that somebody (Uraguay?) bought a load of 2nd hand Cougars without the turrets: "so what happened to the turrets then huh? HUH?"
You also get a perfectly usable 6x6 Piranha hull with a largish turret ring and a spare LV-25 turret, both of which are eminently usable in other whiffs, so there's not much waste.
-
True there were a stack in war stocks and also in reserve units but that sort of ruins a good back story with facts. I believe there were actually many more than 800 in total as there were a significant number of written off US Army vehicles we repatriated from Vietnam. Many of those were the original petrol / gasoline powered vehicles, upgraded with the 6V53 and can be identified by the bolted panel around the fuel filler cap on the top left of the hull, we had a couple of these in my old unit.
-
Just a thought, a NEMO 120mm mortar turret on a Scorpion, to replace the 76mm gun, or on a Spartan as a fire support vehicle upgrade.
A surviellance varient with a mast mounted multi sensor head.
A SPAAG with a single 35mm to support the Stormer HMV, maybe a radar equiped Stormer as well.
An M777 armed SPG or Portee Stormer
A L118 Light Gun armed SPG or Portee Spartan
A Delco turreted CVR(T)
A 35 or 40mm armed CVR(T)
A 60mm HVMS gun armed CVR(T)
A 76mm Oto Melara armed CVR(T) (similar to the one in the Rooikat)
From memory the original 76mm in the Scorpion was retired as the gasses / residue from the guns propellant was found the be toxic / carcinogenic and dangerous to the crews.
-
True there were a stack in war stocks and also in reserve units but that sort of ruins a good back story with facts. I believe there were actually many more than 800 in total as there were a significant number of written off US Army vehicles we repatriated from Vietnam. Many of those were the original petrol / gasoline powered vehicles, upgraded with the 6V53 and can be identified by the bolted panel around the fuel filler cap on the top left of the hull, we had a couple of these in my old unit.
Interesting but doubtful. Why would they be repatriated to Australia when they were US military property? Our initial purchase were of the petrol engined version but all were converted very quickly to the a1 with the diesel as I understand it.
-
From memory the original 76mm in the Scorpion was retired as the gasses / residue from the guns propellant was found the be toxic / carcinogenic and dangerous to the crews.
As far as the UK is concerned, the reason why they were retired was because of the Convention Forces in Europe Treaty which ended the Cold War. Under the treaty, anything with a gun greater than 75mm in calibre was counted as a tank. If the choice was between an MBT and a CVR(T), you can guess which won...
Downunder they were retired because of a lack of ammunition, it being imported from the UK which had ceased to make it.
The gas story was a convenient excuse. It could have been handled in several ways. Addition of a fume extractor/an extractor fan or an increase in the NBC system's overpressure.
-
True there were a stack in war stocks and also in reserve units but that sort of ruins a good back story with facts. I believe there were actually many more than 800 in total as there were a significant number of written off US Army vehicles we repatriated from Vietnam. Many of those were the original petrol / gasoline powered vehicles, upgraded with the 6V53 and can be identified by the bolted panel around the fuel filler cap on the top left of the hull, we had a couple of these in my old unit.
Interesting but doubtful. Why would they be repatriated to Australia when they were US military property? Our initial purchase were of the petrol engined version but all were converted very quickly to the a1 with the diesel as I understand it.
They were written off as total losses, RAEME recovered and repaired them. We had one vehicle in my old unit that had aledgedly run over a mine killing the driver after blowing off the track front two road wheels and sprocket, it was still running in the late 90's and for all I know may have been upgraded since.
-
Glad to see this thread bumped. I've been thinking of a Canadian tracked recce vehicle, Scimitar but with LAV-25 turret, Diehl or Soucy tracks, and a mast. Alternatively, a Warrior IFV shortened hull, again with a LAV 25 turret (there was at least one of these mocked up, I think by BAE, I'll look for the pic), or as we'd discussed in the LAV-25 thread, the upper half of an AVGP, shortened and grafted to a M-113 lower hull. Though the latter one is getting close to the Lynx C&R, albeit with a front mounted engine.
-
Glad to see this thread bumped. I've been thinking of a Canadian tracked recce vehicle, Scimitar but with LAV-25 turret, Diehl or Soucy tracks, and a mast. Alternatively, a Warrior IFV shortened hull, again with a LAV 25 turret (there was at least one of these mocked up, I think by BAE, I'll look for the pic), or as we'd discussed in the LAV-25 thread, the upper half of an AVGP, shortened and grafted to a M-113 lower hull. Though the latter one is getting close to the Lynx C&R, albeit with a front mounted engine.
The Stormer recce vehicle would probably be ideal for that. Although it's nowadays called the Stormer 30 and has an OTO-Melara Hitfist turret, I think I'm right in saying that when it first came out, it had a Delco turret.
There's a British company called Repaircraft who do all sorts of mods for the Scorpion including diesel engines and improved track: it's repaircraft that keep the Scorpion the holder of the tank world speed record: http://www.scorpiontank.co.uk/html/ContentsPage.html (http://www.scorpiontank.co.uk/html/ContentsPage.html) (They also supply 76mm ammo, so it IS still available).
Model-wise, you could get what you want by doing my proposed turret swap but between an AFV Club Scorpion and a Trumpeter LAV-25.
-
Another possible Scorpion turret user...
MOWAG produced a long line of APC/MICV prototypes called the Pirate/Taifun/Tornado, none of which ever entered production. The mid-1970s version of these had a mid-mounted engine with the troop compartment behind it and the driver/commander/gunner in front of it. All the pictures I can find show it with a one-man 20mm turret in bewtween the driver and commander, but I've read that an alternative scheme had it armed with a Scorpion turret instead.
(http://jmcmtank.angelcities.com/images/mil/taifunmicv.jpg)
-
All the pictures I can find show it with a one-man 20mm turret in bewtween the driver and commander,
Not sure about the Scorpion turret but I have also seen these variations:
(http://www.dogswar.ru/images/stories/experement/Mowag-Tornado-1975-1.jpg)
(http://www.dogswar.ru/images/stories/experement/Mowag-Tornado-1975-2.jpg)
(http://pics.livejournal.com/seryj221221/pic/0004f028)
(http://pics.livejournal.com/seryj221221/pic/0004gq35)
(http://pics.livejournal.com/seryj221221/pic/0004hxs5)
-
Found the original reference now: Jane's AFVs 1976 edition (I love old reference books...)
It's a proposed Italian variant based on the MOWAG Taifun called the OTO-Melara O-F 24 Tifone. It had basically the same layout as the Taifun, but with a 2-man turret to the right of the driver, and it came in three flavours:
Mk.1 fitted with a Scorpion turret with limited traverse... ???
Mk.2 fitted with a Fiat 6616M armoured car turret with a 20mm Rh.202 cannon (I don't see why this quite bulky turret could manage 360 deg rotation while the Scorpion one couldn't)
MK.2 fitted with a turret with twin Rh.202 with 85 deg elevation.
All versions retained the twin remote 7.62mm MGs seen on the Taifuns rear corners.
Unfortunately, there are still no photos: even the photo for the article is that of the Taifun which I've already posted.
-
Mk.1 fitted with a Scorpion turret with limited traverse... ???
Are we talking about a Italian BMP-1 or just another light tank?
From the look of Taifun the rearward field of fire is probably very limited to begin with......
-
Helio turrets.
Helio are a British company that produce a range of 1-man turrets and cupolas, a couple of which have been fitted to CVR(T) family vehicles, either for trials or production:
FVT925 turret on Scorpion chassis. This turret has a 25mm Bushmaster and a 7.62mm co-ax:
(http://www.army-guide.com/images/fvt925_oweri.jpg)
FVT900 turret on a Stormer APC. This turret has a 20mm Oerlikon KAA ans a 7.62mm co-ax:
(http://www.army-guide.com/images/fvt900_wpeor.jpg)
-
It looks like the Phillipines have made some M113 FSVs of their own by adding Scorpion turrets to them:
http://www.timawa.net/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=94lkv5trrdlrs70kdmu8u0ksm1&topic=4025.0 (http://www.timawa.net/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=94lkv5trrdlrs70kdmu8u0ksm1&topic=4025.0)
(http://i53.photobucket.com/albums/g56/adroth92/armor1.jpg)
-
Mk.1 fitted with a Scorpion turret with limited traverse... ???
Are we talking about a Italian BMP-1 or just another light tank?
From the look of Taifun the rearward field of fire is probably very limited to begin with......
Italian BMP-1 in effect.... driver plus turret at the front, engine in the middle, 6 infantry with two remote MGs + firing ports in the back.
-
Mowag wasn't really really set up to carry out large scale production itself of it's designs. It relied more on licensing it's designs out, to other nations and was quite successful in mainly Latin and Southern America before it hit the big time with the Canadian LAVs. The Mowag Pirate was IIRC the basis for the Jagdpanzer Canone and Rakete series of SPAT vehicles. It also greatly influenced the Marder MICV. The Pirate, IIRC even had two SS11 ATGW missiles, one each side of the engine, in flip-up boxes which raised only at the front. Mowag hawked their MICV designs around for a couple of decades but apart from a technology sale to Germany, never really found a buyer.
-
Not exactly: MOWAG participated in the design of the Jpz Kanone and built some of the prototypes, but then produced their own version using essentially the same upper hull on the Torando running gear and engine. It didn't sell. MOWAG did indeed influence the Marder: they also built 1/3 of the (many) prototypes and were a major sub-contractor for the production vehicles, supplying the rear MG mount, the firing ports and the seating.
I havn't heard of SS-11s, but there was a version of the Pirate or Tornado which had two Bofors Bantam ATGWs in flip-up boxes.
MOWAG has a fair bit of production capacity in Switzerland, but you're right: they can't meet a major order without sub-contracting. The major subbies were Alvis in the UK (built the Saudi Piranhas), Cardoen in Chile who later lost the contract to FAMAE and, of course GM Canada.
-
MOWAG has a fair bit of production capacity in Switzerland, but you're right: they can't meet a major order without sub-contracting. The major subbies were Alvis in the UK (built the Saudi Piranhas), Cardoen in Chile who later lost the contract to FAMAE and, of course GM Canada.
MOWAG could produce high volume in Switzerland and did so for a range of contracts but the ‘sub-contractor’ deals were more about international marketing and access. Obviously Canada and Chile were deals for the local market which the Canadians were able to leverage into the USA. Alvis in the UK was all about selling to the Sauds and getting past Swiss export concerns and onto the established Anglo-Saud deal making. Switzerland has a highly engineered economy with lots of medium sized firms about to produce large quantities of stuff and relatively short notice. Even in the past few years of low demand MOWAG have built or rebuilt a few hundred ARVs per annum.
-
OT, I know, but very interesting about Alvis building LAVs for the Saudis. Most sources say it was GM Canada.
"During 2000 the Diesel Division of General Motors of Canada retained its position for the fourth successive year as the largest military contractor in Canada. The London, Ontario-based company, now the senior partner in the GM Defence subsidiary of General Motors, spent the year building light armoured vehicles (LAVs) for the armed forces of Canada, Australia, the United States, and Saudi Arabia."
For the Chilean Piraña, Cardoen built the 6x6s (four versions) while FAMAE did the 4x4 and 8x8 types. At one point, 20 or so 6x6s were fitted with new turrets for 90mm Cockerill MkIII guns. But the Ejército de Chile also has a dozen FV101s so picking up more Scorpion turrets for other Piraña 6x6s makes good sense.
Going way back (and apologies for the late reply), those Canadian Forces aluminium turrets originated with Alvis. It is puzzling that nobody else had that cracking problem. ???
-
OT, I know, but very interesting about Alvis building LAVs for the Saudis. Most sources say it was GM Canada.
The UN arms transfers database shows that all the Saudi LAVs came from Canada via US FMS contracts. It also shows that the only UK exports of Piranhas were to Oman (168) and Qatar (40) with production running from 1995 to 2003.
Going way back (and apologies for the late reply), those Canadian Forces aluminium turrets originated with Alvis. It is puzzling that nobody else had that cracking problem. ???
Most Scorpion turrets were mounted on aluminium hulled vehicles (Scorpion itself and M113 MRV). The Piranhas with Scorpion turrets combined a steel hull with aluminium turret. This could have lead to cathodic corrosion problems and therefore the cracking. The moral of the story being don’t try and cross your fish with arachnids.
-
Thanks for the Saudi LAV confirmation AGRA. And interesting point about bodging together piscids and arachnids!
-
My uncle used to be an engineer in the defence industry. He visited Alvis at one point, saw Piranha bodies being welded in big rotating jigs (so that all the welding was downhand, which is much easier) and was told at the time that they were for Saudi Arabia.
Canada wasn't the only user to experience cracking problems: the Malaysian Scorpion 90s have had similar problems. Can't recall where I read it now, but the explanation I saw for the Canadian problems was simply that they'd fired FAR more practice rounds than most users, leading to them hitting the fatigue limit of the turret's alloy before anyone else. It seems reasonable to suggest that the Scorpion 90's higher recoil results in more stress and so it reaches that point much earlier with fewer firings.
-
Very simple wiff, Cadillac Gage T-50 turret on a Spartan for the RAAC Cavalry regiments. In fact we could have Australia adopting the Spartan in a variety of versions, including 76mm MRVs, 30 or 25mm LRVs, twin 30 cal Assault Troop carriers and 30/50 cal scout vehicles.
Basically the Spartan replaces the M-113 in the cavalry and the M-113 mechanises the entire army, including the reserve. While I like the Scorpion and Scimitar the more spacious hull of the Spartan would make more sense in Australia. Oh yes local production of the thousand odd vehicles.
-
Well the British Army have responded to the failure/delay of replacements and the increased usage wearing out the Scimitars by transferring Scimitar turrets onto Spartan hulls, which has the added advantage of allowing them to mount mine-resistant suspended seats too. Not sure how a similar mod would cope with the recoil of firing a 76mm sideways though...
Don't forget for your Assault Troop Carriers that the Spartan is SMALL: 3 crew plus 4 dismounts, and that's only with a commander's MG cupola. There's a stretched version (one extra roadwheel) called the Stormer which claims 3+8 with a small turret, though again, I'd imagine it's pretty snug and 3+6+gear+elbow-room might be more realistic.
-
Basically the Spartan replaces the M-113 in the cavalry and the M-113 mechanises the entire army, including the reserve.
Very expensive way of doing it. Considering Army was having real difficulties throughout most of the late 1970s and early 1980s paying the costs of running the M113's it was using (which was only a small fraction of the total it did have. We purchased over 800 of the things) to the point that ARes units were bringing their own fuel to be used (and illegally disconnecting the odometers), I can't see it affording to mechanise the entire army. The M113 was a poor choice for that, for Australia. Wheels makes more sense. What we needed and ended up getting, the Bushmaster is perfect. Enough armour and enough mobility for most units.
As already mentioned by Weaver, Spartan is tiny. Stormer is larger but still too small for everyday use. You need to have basically room for 10 dismounts plus gear. Stretched M113 or 10x10 ASLAVPC is the right size for infantry. Normal M113 or ASLAVPC is the right size for Cav. Remember, the average sized Australian is about 5-10% bigger than the average sized European according to anthropomorphic measurements, then you need to put their gear in. The Spartan must be hell in NBC gear. In an Australian summer it would see diggers keeling over from heat exhaustion.
-
The Spartans arn't used for APC or even "Cav" work in the British Army, rather they're used for transporting specialised teams like MANPADS, ATGW, Engineer Recce and the like.
-
The Spartans arn't used for APC or even "Cav" work in the British Army, rather they're used for transporting specialised teams like MANPADS, ATGW, Engineer Recce and the like.
Downunder Cavalry units are primarily Recce units, despite their name.
-
The Spartan is not too small for Cav and I was not suggesting it as an APC for infantry, they already had the M-113 for that.
The Spartan would only need to carry a pair of Assault Troopers as scouts and if the manning was available for full assault troops then the M-113 is still available. As it was the RAAC moved away from separate assault troops over the years to the point that infantry had to be assigned to assist with the roles previously undertaken by them, so four to six scouts per troop would be more than they normally had anyway.
All of this aside, a Spartan with a T50 in Australian cam would look cool. Twin 30s and four assault troopers or 30/50 with extra ammo and two scouts.
-
There is the argument for sing smaller APCs - basically 2 with 4 troops per rather than 1 with 8. They always operate in pairs but the advantage is that if you take out one, you still have some troops rather than a complete loss.
-
There is the argument for sing smaller APCs - basically 2 with 4 troops per rather than 1 with 8. They always operate in pairs but the advantage is that if you take out one, you still have some troops rather than a complete loss.
The thought had crossed my mind. The Light Horse in WWI had one man in four holding the horses and a number of militaries have embraced the four man squad, brick or fire team for some time, most forming sections from two or more of these smaller elements. Even the traditional Australian infantry section used to consist of scout / command group, gun group and rifle group, each of three or sometimes four men. Any of these would fit a Spartan quite well.
-
here are some Belgian Versions of the Scorpion, next to Britian, we were the largest operator of the vehicle with 701 units delivered, here are a few pics i made when all preserved versions (Scorpion, Sultan, Scimitar, Striker, Spartan, Samson, Scholing,....) were on display in Ursel 3 years ago 8)
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/048.jpg)
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/050.jpg)
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/053.jpg)
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/056.jpg)
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/057.jpg)
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/059.jpg)
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/062.jpg)
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/064.jpg)
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/067.jpg)
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/070.jpg)
-
Do they have to use a mallet to get the Swingfire back in the box?
(http://i307.photobucket.com/albums/nn292/Nilssteyaert/Wings%20and%20wheels%202012/064.jpg)
Cheers,
Logan
-
There is the argument for sing smaller APCs - basically 2 with 4 troops per rather than 1 with 8. They always operate in pairs but the advantage is that if you take out one, you still have some troops rather than a complete loss.
I've thought of that before too, but the problem is that it means twice as much maintenance and twice as many crew. If two four-man APCs each have two crew, then that's four in total, or 1/3rd of your manpower driving or commanding. Of course that's not "doing nothing", but it does mean they're tied to the vehicle: if twelve men approach an objective in an M113 then ten of them can debus and take it, but if the same twelve men approach in two Spartans, only eight of them can debus. On the maintenance side, most tasks are per engine or per vehicle, not per litre or ton: one big engine has one oil filter to change, but two small engines have two to change.
-
Good pics Nils! :)
The MG fits caught my eye. The Spartan, Striker and Samaritan all have proper Mk.16 cupolas with remote-controlled MGs, but the Sultan and Samson have a low-profile cupola with a manual MG. I wonder what the thinking was?
-
Good pics Nils! :)
The MG fits caught my eye. The Spartan, Striker and Samaritan all have proper Mk.16 cupolas with remote-controlled MGs, but the Sultan and Samson have a low-profile cupola with a manual MG. I wonder what the thinking was?
Neither Sultan or Samson were intended to directly engage the enemy. Commanders command, not shoot MGs, Engineers dig holes/build bridges/etc.
You're right about the increased maintenance load of a multitude of smaller APCs would bring, as well as the manpower problem. Costs also appreciably increase, with increased requirements for POL and twice as many track pads, let alone paint, etc. Every expendable item is essentially doubled, that quickly appreciates.
Speaking of manpower problems of crew versus passengers, the BMP-3 has the worst IMO. It has a crew of five to six dismounts!
Nils, I wasn't aware that Belgium had adopted Swingfire. As Logan has pointed out, the practice round looks a little the worse for wear!
-
Neither Sultan or Samson were intended to directly engage the enemy. Commanders command, not shoot MGs, Engineers dig holes/build bridges/etc.
I was going to say "and medics save lives instead of take them, yet the Samaritan has the full No.16 cupola" but I've just looked at it again and I think I'm wrong: it has the same low-profile cupola plus manual MG as the Sultan and Samson. Having said that, most sources say the Samaritan is unarmed and it's hard to find a pic of one with a gun.
-
It depends on the role of the vehicles, are they cavalry or mounted infantry?
If cavalry then the dismounts are an adjunct to the vehicle that provide scouting, man OPs, listening posts, defend the lager, lay ambushes, checkpoints, roadblocks, etc. They can also assist in maintaining the vehicles, preparing positions, including defences and camouflage, possibly even providing spare crews for the vehicles. The troops in the back would be Armoured Corps troopers rather than infantry and an integral part of the crew, assisting in the effective and proficient operation and employment of the vehicles. Smaller capacity vehicles are ideal for this and the ideal complement to gun cars or even tanks, highly effective at screening and providing security to supported units.
Mounted, including armoured, mechanised and motorised infantry are different in that the vehicle, and its crew, are an integral part of the embarked section. Rather than the dismounts supporting the vehicle, the vehicle supports the dismounts with the vehicle being a part of the section. Its all about the vehicle supporting the rest of the section, getting them where they need to go and supporting them. With the dismounts being more important there are more of them, usually six, seven, or eight, in one or two fire teams or bricks. This is your AIFV, MICV, usually tracked but occasionally wheeled with the vehicles being an integral part of the infantry battalions and the infantrymen being specially trained to operate with the vehicles. These battalions are also trained to work with armoured (tank) battalions / regiments.
Next you have your APCs, IMVs, etc. that provide armoured, or protected, lift for other arms, predominantly infantry but also engineers etc. This is where you have your capacity for a nine man section or even more , i.e. the original eleven man capacity of the M-113 or the even greater capacity of the AAAV-7. These are specialised units that transport other units, under armour, to where they need to go. The RAAC used to do this pretty well with their APC regiments and squadrons (reserve) providing lift for the RAR in Vietnam and reserve battalions back in Australia. Post Vietnam we moved to specialised mechanised, motorised, light and airborne infantry but are now moving to the concept of infantry supported by armoured cavalry.
-
A couple of years ago, the Irish Army embarked on a Scorpion upgrade programme, with the plan to replace the Jaguar petrol engine with a Steyr diesel engine from the RG32M LTAV and replace the original track with Diehl tracks. Only one Scorpion was upgraded in this manner.
(http://i.imgur.com/EWLLLC6.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/Pz8yNeu.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/P5uBUeK.jpg)
-
Interesting upgrade but I would have thought they would go for band tracks and I thought there were issues with the fumes of the 76mm being carcinogenic, hence why most nations have retired it. The driver looks like he would have issues getting in and out of the hatch, with his shoulders pressed hard against the sides, means I probably shouldn't bother ever trying to get into one. :(
-
He's a just a normal Irish lad. He'd definitely have to wriggle a bit to get in and out of that hatch! I suspect it might be a bit cramped with the hatch closed...
I'm surprised they only upgraded one and I'm also surprised they didn't replace the 76mm gun as well. Not that there is much wrong with the 76mm gun, which a change to the propellants wouldn't hurt (if that was the reason why it was retired and the European Treaty on Conventional Weapons hadn't declared anything with a gun bigger than a 75mm a "tank" for counting purposes.).
-
He looks like a 1/35 guy in a 1/48 tank.
-
There isn't anything special about the 76mm's propellant as far as I know, the problem is just that it doesn't have a fume extractor to keep the fumes out of the turret. Like Rickshaw says, fumes were the given reason, but they might not have put much effort into solving it since the CFT gave an incentive to get rid of them anyway.
-
Australia did get rid of them at the same time and while I don't know the official reason that was the anecdotal one given.
-
I suspect we got rid of them because we didn't manufacture the ammunition ourselves...
-
Well, the Scorpions were always known as a "bit" of tight squeeze.
I know the main reason the 76mm was retained was due to the types of ammunition it fired (mainly HE, HESH and Cannister) and that the AML-90's were retired leaving the Scorpion as the only Cav asset with anything bigger than a 30mm. I know there has been a improved ventilation system was installed, but then again the crew still have to wear masks during a shoot (That could be health and safety gone mad).
-
Allow me to rephrase that, my old unit had previously been issued MRVs, with Scorpion turrets, and the story was that the fumes were carcinogenic and none of the options to fix the problem were viable (cost?) so they were withdrawn from service. It was before my time but it is what I was told.
In the 90s, once something like that was known, it would not have been acceptable to continue exposing personnel to an easily avoidable hazard, just look how quickly the Nomad was retired once it was realised that fatigue cracks, in an impossible to inspect section of the tail, caused catastrophic structural failure. Also once the ASLAV came on line the MRV was only used by reserve and School of Armour so it was no great loss and once it was a known risk its a no brainer that the government would have retired the capability rather than further expose troops. Easy fix, discard the MRV and re-role the Light Horse as Light Armoured Reconnaissance / APC instead of Cavalry.
What I do wonder however is, if not for he health risks, the Beasts (MRVs) would have been retained for DFS by 5/7 RAR in their Mech Inf role, as well as the reserve units and we may even have seen Scorpion turrets retrofitted to some ASLAVs to provide a heftier HE round as a cheaper, already in service option to the turreted 120mm mortars that were considered in the abortive major re-organisation of the army planned for the late 90s.
All of this aside I have wondered if Australia would have adopted the CVR(T) FOV as the natural successor to the Saladin and Saracen had the FV430 FOV been selected over the M-113.
-
The thought crosses my mind that it is conceivable that a complete FOV could have been developed from the Stormer to replace the CVR(T) in the late 80s early 90s. Maybe the driver could have been the Falklands and the realisation that there was a need for a medium weight force to support deployed light forces, not just in Falkland like scenarios but perhaps in Norway etc. where it was unlikely sufficient heavy armoured units could be deployed quickly.
To this end the Stormer was developed to replace, not just the CVR(T) FOV but also the F432 as well as forming the basis of a new light/medium tank/tank destroyer. The was possible because the base vehicle was not just larger than the Spartan but also very slightly larger than the M-113 (not sure on internal arrangements and space though).
End result a FOV consisting of:
- Scout vehicle with 25-35mm auto cannon in a two man turret, with two to four dismounts
- Light/medium tank with 60mm or greater HV gun
- Tank Destroyer with 77/84/90/105mm gun
- CS with 88/90/95/105mm CS gun
- 107 or 120mm turreted breach loading mortar
- AIFV with one man turret or RWS
- APC
- SPG
- Ambulance
- Command
- Recovery
- Fitters
- Engineers
- ATGW
- FO
- LAAD
When Australia was looking to upgrade the M-113 following the cancellation of Project Whaler Alvis could have proposed local production of the Stormer FOV instead, including marketing and production rights throughout SEA.
-
There was a Scorpion/Scimitar-style vehicle developed on the Stormer platform, called the Stormer 30. It had a low hull, a two-man turret, a 30mm chain gun and two TOWs. I don't think they sold any.
(http://www.army-technology.com/projects/stormer30/images/stormer30_1.jpg)
-
Yes you had that photo on page one ;)
I could also imaging a 105mm or definitely a 60mm HV gun.
As I see it the Stormer was a perfectly good enough FOV that came out at a time when NATO was going heavier, then caught out when they went light and predominately wheeled. It would have been perfect for tracked mech (as opposed to armoured) infantry brigades, the perfect substitute for all the "Gavin" fanboi concepts. Basis of a heavier armoured option for the Royal Marines, something cheaper (therefore more likely to get across the line) than the Cavalry's cancelled Tracer.
Ultimately (my parochialism showing through) something that a business case could have been made for local construction in Australia instead of wasting so much time and effort on the totally tactically useless AS3 and 4 upgrade to the M-113. Do the usual Aussie thing and order something smaller, lighter and less "warrie" than actually needed, so as not to offend the wishy washy baby boomers in the media, public service and politics who are afraid our neighbours may be offended if we procure anything too obviously effective, then spend years and billions of dollars trying to make it as capable and effective as what we should have bought in the fist place. End result, we try and evolve the Stormer into a Bradley/Warrior/CV90, which the M-113 was never be but the Stormer maybe could have done.
All that's needed is a stormer kit or kits.
A hindsight thing but Australian production of the Stormer to replace the M-113 and reequip most of the RAAC would likely have proven cheaper than the M-113 AS3/4 upgrade, provided higher capability, longer, lower cost service life, as well as permitting the separation of LAND400 project into two distinct projects. i.e. Australia could have gone from procuring LAVII (with locally produced turrets) to local manufacture of Stormer (instead the M-113 upgrade), Bushmaster, Hawkei to a LAV II replacement (probably locally produced) building an effective and sustainable (if not competitive) industry around the perfectly good enough Stormer.
-
All that's needed is a stormer kit or kits.
http://www.accurate-armour.com/showaaproducts.cfm?category=3&subcategory=65 (http://www.accurate-armour.com/showaaproducts.cfm?category=3&subcategory=65)
-
Cool, yep I forgot about them, will ring the bank about mortgaging the house Tuesday.
-
Cool, yep I forgot about them, will ring the bank about mortgaging the house Tuesday.
Ah, a man who understands his priorities...and is prepared to face the consequences from SWMBO. ;)
-
That's cool, she has just treated herself curtesy of a Catch of the Day make up sale.
-
Proposed Spartan with TOW:
(http://u0v052dm9wl3gxo0y3lx0u44wz.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Spartan-TOW-Missile.jpg)
-
Nice one - never seen that pic.
IIRC, there was a similar mounting developed for the Blowpipe/Javelin triple pedestal launcher.
-
Based on the very long tube on the TOW launcher that must have been from a very long time ago or Alvis did not have an up to date sales brochure on the TOW system. Still an interesting concept that might have been a real winner. Now how about the turret from the M901 ITV or the M981 FIST vehicle mounted on the Spartan? I suspect that might be asking for too much of the Spartan hull in real life but as a what-if it would be interesting.
-
IIRC, there was a similar mounting developed for the Blowpipe/Javelin triple pedestal launcher.
Your not thinking the Stormer are you?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Stormer_vehicle_fring_a_Starstreak_High_Velocity_Missile_%28HVM%29_on_Ex_Javelin._MOD_45158838.jpg/1599px-Stormer_vehicle_fring_a_Starstreak_High_Velocity_Missile_%28HVM%29_on_Ex_Javelin._MOD_45158838.jpg)
-
Based on the very long tube on the TOW launcher that must have been from a very long time ago or Alvis did not have an up to date sales brochure on the TOW system. Still an interesting concept that might have been a real winner. Now how about the turret from the M901 ITV or the M981 FIST vehicle mounted on the Spartan? I suspect that might be asking for too much of the Spartan hull in real life but as a what-if it would be interesting.
As I understand it the M901 turret could topple an M113 if deployed incautiously on a cross slope, so I'm imagine it's a none-starter for the narrower-but-just-as-tall Spartan.
The Stormer 30 pictured earlier in the thread has two TOWs, so you might imagine a Spartan/Stomer following it around with reloads. Still not as neat as a Striker though. I wish they'd kept developing Swingfire with competetive warheads: it had a lot of potential.
-
IIRC, there was a similar mounting developed for the Blowpipe/Javelin triple pedestal launcher.
Your not thinking the Stormer are you?
No I know about Stormer. The thing I'm thinking of was much less high-tech, basically a Blowpipe LML mounted in the troop compartment and sticking up though an open roof hatch with the gunner operating it manually in the usual way. I can find pictures of Spartans with single Blowpipe gunners standing up in the hatch and firing the normal single tube from their shoulder, but not the triple version.
-
basically a Blowpipe LML mounted in the troop compartment and sticking up though an open roof hatch with the gunner operating it manually in the usual way.
We used Javelin LML in M-113's in that exact set up. Wonder if it might have been a FV 432 you were thinking of?
-
I wonder about a fixed gun (ala Strv 103) tank destroyer variant. Basically remove the turret and put something such as a 105mm in a fixed mount (probably built up a bit to accommodate gun etc).
-
I wonder about a fixed gun (ala Strv 103) tank destroyer variant. Basically remove the turret and put something such as a 105mm in a fixed mount (probably built up a bit to accommodate gun etc).
I like it!! :P
M.A.D
-
Of course, one might need to do something about the recoil - maybe a lower muzzle velocity plus a spade at the rear.
-
Of course, one might need to do something about the recoil - maybe a lower muzzle velocity plus a spade at the rear.
Hmm... put the Scorpion's flatter powerpack in the Spartan's or Sultan's taller hull then mount the gun over it. The Samson's spaces would go right on the back.
-
Reposting: the son of Scorpion- Stormer hull, ROF 76mm L23A1 main gun, and a twin TOW missile launcher
-
:smiley:
-
Repaircraft came out with some aftermarket upgrade options a long time ago with some interesting upgrade options
http://www.scorpiontank.co.uk/html/UpgradeMenu.html (http://www.scorpiontank.co.uk/html/UpgradeMenu.html)
I'd be excited to see a variant incorporating these upgrades and potentially others, such as the possibility of Hybrid Electric drive -- seeing the internal volume improvements the hybrid electric Thunderbolt 120mm demonstrator had over the already small original M8 AGS was pretty eye opening, not to mention range and silent-approach benefits. With space already at a premium, something similar in the CVR(T) might allow for significant growth without having to switch to a larger platform like Stormer or FRES
Arm it with 40mm CTA, some compact turrets are coming out (See Panhard Sphinx) and with very little turret penetration of the breach, combined with possibly external ammunition feed from an armored box on the side of the turret to provide for some separation from ammunition and crew, and you might actually have more room inside. A couple of Spike-LR on the other side of the turret, and you'd have a pretty useful bit of kit IMO!
-
I wish they'd kept developing Swingfire with competetive warheads: it had a lot of potential.
Videogame artist impression of what a Sabre with addon Swingfire launchers might look like.
-
Another Scorpion tank re-armament proposal, this time for Malaysia with a 20mm cannon.
I don't know what that 20mm is supposed to be, but my guess is that it looks like an Oerlikon KAD.
-
Another Scorpion tank re-armament proposal, this time for Malaysia with a 20mm cannon.
I don't know what that 20mm is supposed to be, but my guess is that it looks like an Oerlikon KAD.
Oerlikon KAA in an FVT900 turret (both taken from a dozen of the Malaysian Stormers). Malaysian Scorpions are also getting new transmissions and tracks.
-
Oerlikon KAA in an FVT900 turret (both taken from a dozen of the Malaysian Stormers). Malaysian Scorpions are also getting new transmissions and tracks.
I see, but I actually think that the turret seems to still be the original Scorpion tank turret, just with the "new" autocannon going through the mantlet cutout for the original 90mm gun.
===================================================================
Atachment #3 & #4: a more-developed version of the Jordanian Scorpion tank modification- with new sight purported to include thermal imager and laser rangefinder above the gun, roof-mounted remote-controlled machinegun making up for the loss of co-axial weapon, 4 x Kornet ATGMs, new engine, and other automotive upgrades.
-
So, whiff ideas....
US Scorpion : what if the US armed forces had bought the CVR(T) series?
Light tanks : it's hard to see the US Army going for either the 76mm or the RARDEN, though the USMC might see the value in the 76mm (light fire-support). The probable US option, assuming a 1970s/early 1980s buy, would be a 25mm Bushmaster I think. US requirements might also have lead to an early introduction of a stretched Stormer-style hull and that might have carried a Delco turret with a 25mm and 2 x TOW.
US Army Scimitars in a recon role. :-*
-
here are some pictures i have from the (now retired) Belgian Army's Scorpion CVRT versions.
i took these pictures in 2013 during Wings & Wheels in nearby Ursel.
(https://i.imgur.com/ydjP10T.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/AvHSPXL.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/ATS9nIE.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/xEaZWMl.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/HoZ6C9x.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/r4DkrZm.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/FfIJXSi.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/VcJkemx.jpg)
-
I would love to buy a Spartan, a 1:1 scale one ;)
-
I would love to buy a Spartan, a 1:1 scale one ;)
You can ...and for only £18,500 - £23,500 plus vat: https://tanks-alot.co.uk/product/fv103-cvrt-spartan/
-
I would love to buy a Spartan, a 1:1 scale one ;)
I think this might be more useful for a man with a family... (https://tanks-alot.co.uk/product/cvrt-safari-gunbus/) ;)
-
I would love to buy a Spartan, a 1:1 scale one ;)
I think this might be more useful for a man with a family... (https://tanks-alot.co.uk/product/cvrt-safari-gunbus/) ;)
Hmm, we could even pack all the cats in for vacations. Be a bit of a pain to park a lot of places, though; probably have to store it where others store RV's when not in use. Wonder if they'd do an enclosed one for those who want an all-terrain RV?
-
I've always thought that the Scorpion turret and the Fox turret look interchangeable......
-
I would love to buy a Spartan, a 1:1 scale one ;)
I think this might be more useful for a man with a family... (https://tanks-alot.co.uk/product/cvrt-safari-gunbus/) ;)
Hmm, we could even pack all the cats in for vacations. Be a bit of a pain to park a lot of places, though; probably have to store it where others store RV's when not in use. Wonder if they'd do an enclosed one for those who want an all-terrain RV?
Well, that one was created from a enclosed version, the Sultan ACV. All they did was chop the top off and put in more seats. If you want an enclosed RV, I'd recommend either the Sultan or even better, the Stormer (which had an extra roadwheel on each side) which made it longer and roomier. It also featured a more powerful diesel engine and uprated gearbox.
-
What if an 8 wheels Scorpion?
(https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/j340/ysi_maniac/Alvis_Scorpion_8w.jpg?width=1920&height=1080&fit=bounds) (https://app.photobucket.com/u/ysi_maniac/a/e58f1c54-aee2-42c9-bc15-f72ec22af374/p/12ded9b7-2236-4a92-9a5d-a707f81f4d4b)
-
Neat idea, ysi! That inspires me to try my own crack at the concept.
I chose a smaller chassis, the YP-408, from closer to the time period of the CVR(T) family and scaled the turret to match, including a turret ring extension that considers the angled upper hull.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51470558756_2a38928917_b.jpg)
This would be a Dutch variant in place of the M113 C&V (also known as the Lynx or M113 ½). It would increase commonality with the Belgian and British armies and provide greater speed, strategic mobility, and firepower, albeit at the cost of greater size.
Also, I chose the Scimitar turret which I think is better fit and much better looking, but the Scorpion is still an option, too.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51471346969_f0aec8e100_b.jpg)
I'm calling it the YP-408 Pantserwiel Verkenning, abbreviated as YP-408 PWVK. I don't know about anybody else, but I like the looks of it more than the Bundeswehr's Spähpanzer Luchs of the same era.
Cheers,
Logan
-
I like your designs :smiley: :smiley:
-
(https://i.imgur.com/A64iSe2.jpg)
Joke explained - WAFFLE HOUSE is a US restaurant chain, primarily in our southern states. After dark, particularly on the weekends, it turns into a 21st Century version of the Mos Eisley Cantina - bad behavior, robbery and shootings galour.
For further information, search on "Waffle House Crime"
-
What about a version with a fixed casement style gun? Maybe somewhat akin to the ASU-85 though smaller?
-
Somewhere between an ASU-57 and ASU-85 in size?
-
What about a version with a fixed casement style gun? Maybe somewhat akin to the ASU-85 though smaller?
Sound like the skills of ysi_maniac needed here 🤔😉
MAD
-
Somewhere between an ASU-57 and ASU-85 in size?
Yep