Author Topic: M113 Family of Vehicles  (Read 94192 times)

Offline Twiddle

  • No, it's pronounced Frankensteen
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #315 on: September 30, 2018, 02:33:41 PM »
M113 camper-van

With a 50 Cal for the odd Zombie  >:D
Kit instructions are not acceptable - let the imagination howl forth !

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #316 on: October 22, 2018, 01:40:01 PM »
The M59, the predecessor to the M113, is said to be unreliable due to its power system of two truck engines mounted on each side of the hull and directly connected to the transmission.

Does anyone know if this lack of reliability comes directly from the engines, or other components of the drive train?
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline kerick

  • Responsible for all surrendered booty....Arrrr!!!!
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #317 on: October 22, 2018, 02:24:43 PM »
I saw one of those once, a very long time ago at Ft. Hunter-Ligget in California. Very odd set up with the engines. One on each side of the crew compartment, Up in the sponson. Mechanics must have a real good time servicing the side of the engine facing the armor wall in f the vehicle.
« Last Edit: October 24, 2018, 06:26:29 AM by kerick »

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #318 on: October 22, 2018, 10:07:04 PM »
In fairness, the LVT-3 had the same sort of setup with Cadillac V-8s and the USMC seemed to prefer it over the LVT-4. That drivetrain came from the M5 Stuart, though, so you know it worked in principle.

Cheers,

Logan

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #319 on: October 23, 2018, 02:31:41 PM »
The M59, the predecessor to the M113, is said to be unreliable due to its power system of two truck engines mounted on each side of the hull and directly connected to the transmission.

An interesting claim.  Hunnicutt doesn't back it.  He notes that the US Army were quite happy with the M59, until its use revealed that it was a tad underpowered.  No problems with the drive train apart from the lack of power it seems.   They abandoned it's development because a better, smaller vehicle had come along in the meantime - the M113, not because there wasn't any problem that couldn't be fixed with a little bit of effort and attention.,.


Offline Frank3k

  • Excession
  • Formerly Frank2056. New upgrade!
    • My webpage
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #320 on: October 24, 2018, 03:51:57 AM »
This is a good video of the M59:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vOVn61qnBHI

Offline kerick

  • Responsible for all surrendered booty....Arrrr!!!!
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #321 on: October 24, 2018, 06:34:30 AM »
I looked up a couple of articles and one mentioned it being unreliable. The others didn’t. Must be one of these fables that get passed around.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2018, 01:37:02 PM by kerick »

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #322 on: November 03, 2018, 12:24:30 PM »
No problems with the drive train apart from the lack of power it seems.
I looked up a couple of articles and one mentioned it being unreliable. The others didn’t. Must be one of these tables that get passed around.

I see.  Thank you.

=======================================================================

I have a soft spot for big guns:
« Last Edit: November 04, 2018, 08:36:01 AM by dy031101 »
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #323 on: November 04, 2018, 01:27:11 PM »
Hellfire Manned Turret System
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline dy031101

  • Yuri Fanboy and making cute stuff practical- at least that's the plan anyway
  • Prefers Guns And Tanks Over Swords And Magic
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #324 on: January 14, 2019, 08:14:47 AM »
Now that I get to see how its top side looks like, the M59 really reminds me of the Rhino in Warhammer 40K  ;)

Minus the side hatches.

« Last Edit: January 14, 2019, 08:17:29 AM by dy031101 »
Forget about his bow and arrows- why wait until that sparrow has done his deed when I can just bury him right now 'cause I'm sick and tired of hearing why he wants to have his way with the cock robin!?

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #325 on: April 26, 2019, 03:33:03 AM »
New twist on the M113 family thanks to here

Seeing the German companies develop the German army and producers to develop their tank destroyers and APC’s, the Americans wanted a share of that pie as well. Specifically, the Food Machine Company Inc. (FMC), the creator of the US M113 APC (developed a few years earlier), wanted to sell something to the Germans. Therefore, in April 1963, an offer was made by FMC to the Germans for two types of armored personell carriers, called APC Type A and Type B (Schützenpanzer Typ A and Typ B).

Schützenpanzer Typ A isn’t that interesting, although it looks very pretty.







Schützenpanzer Typ B is much more interesting, because included in the proposal, something else was hidden. This is how Type B was proposed to look:



As a part of the proposal, three more vehicle variants (well, four technically) were proposed. Two aren’t interesting for us (one was a 120mm mortar carrier, the other was a dedicated ATGM launcher). Third variant however was a 90mm Kanonenjagdpanzer proposal on Type B chassis. This is how it was supposed to look:



Basically, what we have here is a 90mm tank destroyer on modified M113 suspension. Technical characteristics:





And here is the fourth variant, 90mm Kanonenjagdpanzer with (unspecified) ATGM system (Shillelagh missiles are mentioned)



Might make for an interesting scratch build.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline Frank3k

  • Excession
  • Formerly Frank2056. New upgrade!
    • My webpage
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #326 on: April 26, 2019, 05:24:51 AM »
The Schützenpanzer Typ A might be the focus of friendly fire on the battlefield - it looks a lot like a BMD-1.

The tank hunter looks interesting, but the complete hull would have to be scratchbuilt - it only has 4 wheels per side.

I'm not sure that I'd want to put the fuel tanks at the front, right next to the driver and the TC

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #327 on: April 26, 2019, 01:01:16 PM »
The Schützenpanzer Typ A might be the focus of friendly fire on the battlefield - it looks a lot like a BMD-1.

Except this proposal predates the BMD-1 by about a decade and a half...

Quote
The tank hunter looks interesting, but the complete hull would have to be scratchbuilt - it only has 4 wheels per side.

I'm not sure that I'd want to put the fuel tanks at the front, right next to the driver and the TC

Depends if it is petrol of diesel powered.  If it is the former, I agree.  If it is the latter, I disagree. 

Offline jcf

  • Global Moderator
  • Turn that Gila-copter down!
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #328 on: May 04, 2019, 10:55:21 PM »
" ... a decade and a half ... "
Scutzenpanzer A proposal 1963.
BMD-1 development begins 1965, enters service 1969.

Frank is correct as it's doubtful, based on the history of weapons development/procurement
in NATO, that the FMC machine would have been in service any sooner than the BMD-1.
Which means you would indeed have potential ID problems in the heat of the moment.
 :icon_fsm:
"Evil our grandsires were, our fathers worse;
And we, till now unmatched in ill,
Must leave successors more corrupted still."
Horace, 65BC - 8BC. Marsh translation.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: M113 Family of Vehicles
« Reply #329 on: May 27, 2019, 02:21:51 AM »
A different sort of 120mm mortar version:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!