±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: nbrich1
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6596

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 71
Total: 71
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Community Forums
03: Community Forums
04: Community Forums
05: Photo Gallery
06: Community Forums
07: Home
08: Community Forums
09: Home
10: Statistics
11: Photo Gallery
12: Community Forums
13: Community Forums
14: Community Forums
15: Photo Gallery
16: Community Forums
17: Community Forums
18: Community Forums
19: Community Forums
20: Photo Gallery
21: Community Forums
22: Community Forums
23: Community Forums
24: Community Forums
25: Photo Gallery
26: Home
27: Community Forums
28: Photo Gallery
29: Photo Gallery
30: Home
31: Community Forums
32: Community Forums
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Community Forums
36: Photo Gallery
37: Photo Gallery
38: Photo Gallery
39: Photo Gallery
40: Photo Gallery
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: Photo Gallery
44: Photo Gallery
45: Community Forums
46: Community Forums
47: Home
48: Community Forums
49: Community Forums
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Community Forums
53: Community Forums
54: Community Forums
55: Photo Gallery
56: Photo Gallery
57: Home
58: Photo Gallery
59: Community Forums
60: Community Forums
61: Community Forums
62: Community Forums
63: Photo Gallery
64: Photo Gallery
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: Photo Gallery
68: Community Forums
69: Community Forums
70: Community Forums
71: Community Forums

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
M113 #1?????
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Go to page Previous  1, 2
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
clausb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Mon Feb 04, 2008 11:12 pm
Post subject: Re: M113 #1?????

- bsmart
I'm gpoing to disagree with you here. "Quantity has a quality all it's own"

Within a class of weapons the ability to deploy enough items so that it is effective is important. The Sherman/T34 v Panther is a very good example of this. While neither one can match the Panther one on one they were able to compete because both could be produced in volume and deployed and supported so that they were always available in useful quantities while Panthers were never available in enough quantity to keep the units up to strength


The question is whether the qantity factor reflects qualities of the vehicle (ease of manufacture) or the production system building it. I'd guess that the US tank plants could build Panthers at about the same rate as they could build Shermans and vice-versa.

cbo
Back to top
View user's profile
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 22, 2006
Posts: 2516
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 5:51 am
Post subject: Re: M113 #1?????

- clausb

The question is whether the qantity factor reflects qualities of the vehicle (ease of manufacture) or the production system building it. I'd guess that the US tank plants could build Panthers at about the same rate as they could build Shermans and vice-versa.

cbo


I'm not sure about that. From what I've read there were many parts of the panther that were desiigned to be 'massaged' into place. Also much of it was assembed as piecework.

The Sherman during it's development was worked over by automotive production engineers to tweak it for high volume series production. Everything from parts standardization to having a well developed 'Change Order' system for introducing changes to the production line had been well developed by the high volume production system used by the American automobile industry.

The big difference between the American and the European tank production was that The Americans decided that 35 ton tanks could be built on a true assembly line like passenger cars instead of by heavy engineering firms that were used to building locomotives and other heavy equipment.

It would have been interesting to see what a 'production engineered Panther' would have looked like after the American assembly line specialists had gotten done with it. It would also be interesting to see what a Panther fitted with some of the advanced features of the Sherman would have been (Like the constant speed hydraulic turret drive) but it would have been a much different beast that the standard Panther

_________________
Bob Smart (bsmart@xecu.net)
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
clausb
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 146

PostPosted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 10:18 am
Post subject: Re: M113 #1?????

- bsmart
I'm not sure about that. From what I've read there were many parts of the panther that were desiigned to be 'massaged' into place. Also much of it was assembed as piecework.

The Sherman during it's development was worked over by automotive production engineers to tweak it for high volume series production. Everything from parts standardization to having a well developed 'Change Order' system for introducing changes to the production line had been well developed by the high volume production system used by the American automobile industry.

The big difference between the American and the European tank production was that The Americans decided that 35 ton tanks could be built on a true assembly line like passenger cars instead of by heavy engineering firms that were used to building locomotives and other heavy equipment.


You could be right about the design not being as fit for massproduction as the Sherman, but it seems that it was a good deal better than for earlier German tanks (which may not say much Smile )

I think the bottom line is that the number and types of parts that goes into a WWII tank of a given size are about the same. It needs an engine, transmission, armoured hull etc. What really governs output is access to rawmaterials, machinery, manpower etc. And here Germany was lagging behind the US. Add to that the fact that US plants, transport, etc. wasn'øt bombed every other day. In the bigger picture, improving the design for production may make some gain, but it cannot do much to change the basic production system and its flaws.

It would have been interesting to see what a 'production engineered Panther' would have looked like after the American assembly line specialists had gotten done with it. It would also be interesting to see what a Panther fitted with some of the advanced features of the Sherman would have been (Like the constant speed hydraulic turret drive) but it would have been a much different beast that the standard Panther


I think one problem would be that the Germans did not have the materials needed to make some of the features of the Sherman. The Sherman turret traverse, for example, used an electric motor for power and that togetherwith the required wiring might not have fitted well with Germanys precarious raw material situation. The mechanical-hydraulic system used in the Panther and Tiger used only steel.

cbo
Back to top
View user's profile
SHAWN
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 30, 2006
Posts: 484

PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 7:37 pm
Post subject: Re: M113 #1?????

hello roy,
it may not seem like much, but much respect to you and doug for serving on/in the track. thank you. my dads war photos dont paint a nice combat picture of the track. i think there must be alot of comparisons of the M4 in WW2 to the M113 in Nam.
when i called it a frig, i mean cause it was made by FMC (Food Machinery Corp., they made refrigators){M2/M3 also made by FMC}. i work in an aluminum fab shop and i wouldnt place AL between myself and bullets no how (unless it is moved by pratt & whitney).
it justed seems that good praise and all, that the, say "bad" qualities as told by my dad, by roy, by doug, others combat vets, hang heavy over that track thus hindering it being that close to the top of the list. you had to sandbag the interior, you woudnt ride inside (let alone fight from inside it-- ifv??), you wouldnt hang your limps inside or outside of the thing, you pretty much just rode on top... (please, please forgive me, but this doesnt make me feel confident in this thing). all of the pics dad has from nam that show damaged tracks, it isnt like they were lost in a european armored conflict. (they were lost to some of the best light infantry the world has seen).
we took AL plate out to the range, it dont stop .308, .223, unless you stack it up pretty thick... we spaced it (hell, that made it worse). it melts much more so than steel...

the M2/M3 is AL with steel plates hanging all over it...
arent the improved armor upgrades for the current M113 basically along the same lines?
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Sun Feb 10, 2008 3:37 pm
Post subject: Re: M113 #1?????

Hi Shawn! Hi Folks!

The following post is done in the spirt of showing those who may not know there is more to the story.
Before I started hanging out here, I have a VERY bad impression of the Sherman tank during it's use in NWE. Thanks to others who have pointed out facts I didn't think about before, I now feel that tank was the right vehicle, for the right time, and POSSIBLE the best that could be fielded at that time.

- SHAWN

my dads war photos dont paint a nice combat picture of the track.


How's this Shawn for a bad picture? All four of us survived hitting a large land mine. I think my right gunner died later of pneumonia in a hospital on Oklinawa. My right gunner/Platoon Leader was returned to the field after a check up and an overnight stay at the 93rd Evac Hospital, my driver returned to the field after a month of light duty. I returned to duty after three months of light duty.
There%20is%20more%20to%20the%20story%20than%20bad%20pictures.%20What%20counts%20(to%20me%20anyway)%20is%20the%20number%20of%20people%20who%20survived%20after%20their%20AFV%20has%20been%20hit%20by%20something.%20In%20the%20case%20of%20my%20first%20ACAV,%20most%20of%20that%20damage%20happiened%20AFTER%20we%20were%20able%20to%20get%20out%20of%20and%20off%20of%20it. Look%20at%20a%20picture%20of%20an%20Iraqi%20T72%20that%20has%20been%20burned%20out%20(like%20my%201st%20ACAV)%20with%20it's%20turret%20blown%20off.%20One%20has%20to%20ask,%20was%20the%20crew%20able%20to%20get%20out%20after%20the%20first%20hit%20and%20before%20the%20secondary%20fire%20set%20off%20the%20remaining%20main%20gun%20ammo?%20Both%20pictures%20show%20you%20a%20burn%20out%20and%20total%20destoryed%20AFV.%20However%20they%20do%20not%20tell%20the%20story%20of%20the%20crew.%20It's%20the%20crew%20that%20counts,%20not%20the%20vehicle%20and%20how%20well%20it%20does%20or%20does%20not%20survive%20a%20hit.
%20%20-%20SHAWN
%20%20
%20 when%20i%20called%20it%20a%20frig,%20i%20mean%20cause%20it%20was%20made%20by%20FMC%20(Food%20Machinery%20Corp.,%20they%20made%20refrigators){M2/M3%20also%20made%20by%20FMC}.%20%20i%20work%20in%20an%20aluminum%20fab%20shop%20and%20i%20wouldnt%20place%20AL%20between%20myself%20and%20bullets%20no%20how%20(unless%20it%20is%20moved%20by%20pratt%20&%20whitney).%20
Don't%20forget,%20FMC%20also%20made%20the%20LVTP7/AAV7.%20I%20have%20never%20heard%20the%20armored%20vehicle%20department%20of%20FMC%20call%20\"Frig\"%20before. Anyway,%20I%20am%20sure%20that%20the%20AFV%20plant%20was%20not%20the%20same%20one%20that%20made%20refrigators.
%20%20-%20SHAWN %20%20
it%20justed%20seems%20that%20good%20praise%20and%20all,%20that%20the,%20say%20\"bad\"%20qualities%20as%20told%20by%20my%20dad,%20by%20roy,%20by%20doug,%20others%20combat%20vets,%20hang%20heavy%20over%20that%20track%20thus%20hindering%20it%20being%20that%20close%20to%20the%20top%20of%20the%20list.
Name%20something,%20anything%20that%20is%20prefect.
%20%20-%20SHAWN %20%20
you%20had%20to%20sandbag%20the%20interior,
Not%20very%20crew%20did%20that.%20You%20could%20if%20you%20wanted%20to%20but%20there%20was%20no%20unit%20SOP%20requiring%20it.%20Nether%20one%20of%20my%20two%20ACAVs%20where%20sandbaged.%20In%20the%20case%20of%20the%20first%20one,%20sandbags%20would%20NOT%20have%20helped%20due%20to%20the%20size%20of%20the%20mine.%20That%20is%20just%20like%20the%20Sherman%20crews%20of%20WWII%20who%20put%20sandbags%20on%20the%20outside%20of%20their%20tanks%20just%20because%20they%20thought%20and%20hoped%20it%20MIGHT%20help.%20I%20for%20one%20didn't%20care%20for%20the%20idea%20of%20dirt%20being%20driven%20into%20my%20skin%20by%20an%20explosion.
%20%20-%20SHAWN %20%20
you%20woudnt%20ride%20inside%20(let%20alone%20fight%20from%20inside%20it--%20ifv??)
The%20driver%20rode%20inside.%20Sure%20some%20units%20modified%20the%20driving%20controls%20so%20the%20driver%20could%20set%20on%20top%20of%20his%20hatch%20and%20above%20the%20armor.%20During%20my%2018%20months%20with%20the%20Army,%20I%20never%20saw%20a%20M113%20modified%20like%20that. As%20for%20fighting%20inside,%20the%20M60%20gunner's%20had%20to%20get%20inside%20to%20fire%20their%20guns. The%20difference%20is%20what%20the%20vehicle%20is%20doing. If%20moving,%20the%20main%20threat%20was%20land%20mines%20under%20the%20vehicle.%20(Name%20a%20IFV/APC%20that%20IS%20prof%20against%20landmines)%20Therefore%20the%20best%20protection%20was%20riding%20on%20top%20the%20vehicle%20with%20both%20the%20bottom%20armor%20and%20the%20top%20armor%20between%20you%20and%20that%20landmine.%20It's%20a%20good%20thing%20the%20M113%20had%20a%20top%20that%20had%20room%20for%20the%20M60%20gunners%20to%20ride%20on%20top. When%20contact%20was%20made,%20the%20vehicles%20stopped,%20ending%20the%20threat%20of%20land%20mines.%20The%20M60%20gunner's%20then%20dropped%20inside%20the%20hull%20to%20take%20cover%20behind%20the%20side%20armor%20to%20operate%20their%20weapons.%20The%20driver%20of%20my%20second%20AFV%20came%20up%20with%20an%20SOP.%20When%20he%20saw%20a%2050%20cal%20ammo%20fly%20over%20the%20front%20of%20the%20hull,%20he%20came%20up%20out%20of%20his%20compartment%20and%20started%20firing%20his%20M16%20to%20the%20front%20of%20the%20vehcile.%20%20When%20he%20saw%20the%20lid%20of%20a%2050%20cal%20ammo%20can%20fly%20over%20the%20front%20of%20the%20vehicle,%20he%20dropped%20back%20down%20inside.%20%20What%20was%20that%20all%20about?%20I%20was%20reloading%20the%20M2.%20The%20crew%20firing%20weapons%20while%20inside%20the%20vehicle?%20Sounds%20like%20an%20IFV%20to%20me.
%20%20-%20SHAWN %20%20
%20 you%20wouldnt%20hang%20your%20limps%20inside%20or%20outside%20of%20the%20thing,%20you%20pretty%20much%20just%20rode%20on%20top...%20
When%20the%20main%20threat%20is%20landmine%20under%20a%20vehicle,%20you%20don't%20hang%20limps%20off%20the%20side%20of%20ANY,%20let%20me%20say%20that%20again%20ANY,%20AFV.%20That%20is%20not%20a%20problem%20with%20the%20vehicle%20or%20it's%20armor,%20it%20a%20problem%20with%20the%20blast%20wave%20moving%20up%20the%20side%20of%20the%20AFV%20that%20set%20it%20off.
%20%20-%20SHAWN %20%20
%20 (please,%20please%20forgive%20me,%20but%20this%20doesnt%20make%20me%20feel%20confident%20in%20this%20thing).
Having%20never%20been%20there,%20no%20problem.%20As%20one%20who%20has%20had%20an%20ACAV%20blown%20apart%20under%20me,%20I%20for%20one,%20think%20very%20highly%20of%20the%20M113%20and%20the%20FMC%20plant%20that%20build%20them.
%20%20-%20SHAWN %20%20
all%20of%20the%20pics%20dad%20has%20from%20nam%20that%20show%20damaged%20tracks,%20it%20isnt%20like%20they%20were%20lost%20in%20a%20european%20armored%20conflict.%20%20%20(they%20were%20lost%20to%20some%20of%20the%20best%20light%20infantry%20the%20world%20has%20seen).
It%20was%20a%20very%20good%20vehicle%20for%20the%20time%20and%20the%20threat%20is%20faced.%20It%20was%20used%20many%20times%20to%20do%20things%20it%20was%20never%20build%20to%20do.%20One%20example,%20used%20as%20a%20recovery%20vehicle%20to%20tow%20combat%20loaded%20Sheridans,%20estimated%20weight%2025%20tons,%20using%20a%20trailier%20hitch%20mounted%20in%20an%20aluminum%20ramp%20that%20was%20only%20rated%20at%207.5%20tons%20for%20towing.%20Towed%20a%20number%20of%20Sheridans,%20never%20broke%20the%20hitch%20or%20the%20ramp%20it%20was%20mounted%20in.
%20%20-%20SHAWN %20%20
%20 we%20took%20AL%20plate%20out%20to%20the%20range,%20it%20dont%20stop%20.308,%20.223,%20%20unless%20you%20stack%20it%20up%20pretty%20thick...%20%20we%20spaced%20it%20(hell,%20that%20made%20it%20worse).
Was%20that%20aluminum%20plate%20from%20refrigerators?%20Or%20was%20it%205083%20aluminum%20alloy%20rolled%20armored%20plate? Get%20yourself%20a%20M113%20and%20shoot%20at%20it%20with%20your%20.308%20and%20.223.%20I%20think%20you%20will%20find%20it%20will%20stop%20those%20rounds%20because%20the%20protection%20level%20it%20was%20designed%20for%20is%20a%20bit%20higher%20that%20those%20rounds.
%20%20-%20SHAWN %20%20
it%20melts%20much%20more%20so%20than%20steel...%20
True.%20So%20what? No%20body%20is%20going%20to%20stay%20inside%20a%20burning%20AFV%20if%20it%20is%20at%20all%20possble%20to%20get%20out.%20The%20melting%20happiens%20long%20after%20the%20crew%20is%20out%20or%20dead,%20so%20it's%20doesn't%20matter%20one%20way%20or%20the%20other.%20This%20is%20just%20another%20one%20of%20those%20'IT'S%20BAD'%20claims%20that%20has%20no%20merit%20in%20the%20real%20world%20of%20crew%20survival.
%20%20-%20SHAWN %20%20
the%20M2/M3%20is%20AL%20with%20steel%20plates%20hanging%20all%20over%20it...%20%20 arent%20the%20improved%20armor%20upgrades%20for%20the%20current%20M113%20basically%20along%20the%20same%20lines
Yes,%20the%20Bradleys%20and%20the%20M113s%20(the%20few%20that%20are%20being%20used)%20have%20been%20upgraded%20with%20steel%20armor. You%20are%20however%20forgetting%20the%20threats%20that%20the%20original%20designs%20were%20layed%20out%20for,%20the%20threats%20in%20Vietnam%20that%20most%20M113s%20faced,%20and%20the%20current%20threats%20the%20vehicles%20face%20today.%20They%20are%20not%20the%20same%20and%20upgrades%20that%20help%20protect%20the%20crews%20against%20the%20current%20types%20of%20threat%20have%20been%20added. Shawn,%20you%20feel%20the%20M113%20is%20not%20a%20good%20vehicle.%20OK%20what%20would%20you%20suggest%20the%20U.S.%20Army%20have%20used%20during%20Vietnam%20in%20place%20of%20the%20M113?%20Keep%20in%20mind%20that%20the%20Army%20had%20no%20plans%20to%20use%20the%20M113%20in%20Vietnam%20to%20start%20with. Maybe%20the%20Army%20could%20have%20used%20the%20USMC's%20LVTP5s.%20That%20was%20about%20the%20only%20other%20Infantry%20carrier%20in%20the%20inventory%20at%20that%20time%20and%20they%20were%20made%20out%20of%20steel%20and%20not%20aluminum%20armor.%20%20Asks%20Older%20Top,%20I%20am%20sure%20he%20can%20tell%20a%20bunch%20of%20good%20and%20possible%20even%20more%20bad%20stories%20about%20those%20steel%20boxes. Again,%20I%20say,%20I%20might%20not%20rate%20it%20as%20the%20best%20IFV/APC%20ever,%20but%20it%20would%20be%20very%20close.
Sgt, Scouts Out!
_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 2 of 2
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Go to page Previous  1, 2



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum