How BAD are those M113's?

[rich4421972]

Dear Sirs,

I have a question about the illustrious M113 armored transport:

If all the troops have dismounted, how does the M113 still fire back at OPFOR units?

If anybody has an answer to this, I would be so grateful!

By the way, I think that the 4-man crew should be too busy driving the thing and not be able to shoot also. Did I misinterpret this or do I have a good idea?

Thank You!

Richard

[The Commissar]

Ive never played Tac Ops, but going by real life, the M113 should very well be able to fire and move at the same time. It is armed with a .50 machine gun which is quite effective against all soft targets, light vehicles and older Soviet BTR models included. The gun is also mounted in a little turret, I believe, which can rotate and has its own gunner. So why wouldn't it be able to fire?

[JonS]

This pic shows an Aussie M113 c/w turret, mounting an M2 .50", and a 7.62 GPMG. The turret is manned by the crew commander while the driver, well, drives. The infantry section have nothing to do with fighting the vehicle.

Regards

JonS

[rich4421972]

Thaks! That is exactly the question that I was hoping to be answered.

Rock On!

[gibsonm]

Gentlemen,

1) Yes the vehicle has an integral commander and driver. So it can function once the section dismounts.

2) The T-50 turret that we use here in Aust does not provide an effective gun platform, unless the vehicle is stopped.

The turret has manual traverse and elevation is achieved by bracing the 0.50 with your right shoulder. Add to this the fact that the commander is also directing the driver, checking his map, answering the radio, etc and you start to get a feeling for its effectiveness on the move. Troop Leaders are even better off having to command their other vehicles concurrently.

Even sub unit commanders have to master this beast.

Moving from the T-50 to a multi man turret (LAV or Leopard) is sheer joy!

[Mike Robel]

As an armored cavalry platoon leader (platoon had 3 M113, 2 M901, 4 M60A1, and 1 M106) I never rode in the commanders hatch of my M113. Rather, I stood in the cargo hatch with my map paying attention to where I was and where my platoon was. I told my vehicle commander where I wanted to go in general, and he took care of getting me there.

As a tank platoon leader and a tank company commander, I of course couldn't operate that way, so I had to pay attention to commanding the company, navigation, target acquisition, and a host of other things. Occasionally, I would take a sergeat as a loader and his job was to navigate the tank, much as the vehicle commander did for me in an M113.

[gibsonm]

Originally posted by Mike Robel:

Rather, I stood in the cargo hatch with my map paying attention to where I was and where my platoon was. I told my vehicle commander where I wanted to go in general, and he took care of getting me there.

You lucky bugger! Comd a Sqn (your Coy) advance to contact from our one man turret was a real bugger of a job. We don't get the luxury of "vehicle commanders" - its you.

[Michael**]

By the way... somebody told me that the M113 is able to swim, is that true??

Personaly i wouldn't like to take a chance on it!!

(we used to say:"Shooting at an M113 is a waste of ammo, just roll over them)

bye

michael

[Radar]

Ya, M113's can swim. They sit perty low on the water too, BTW.

[Mike Robel]

Mark,

As a Tank Company Commander, even though I had a gunner, driver, and loader, it was me from the turret. As I said, sometimes I would get a sergeant loader and he'd help me out.

And my M113 commander came out of my hide (a scout from another track).

Mike

[gibsonm]

Mike,

I appreciate that as a sub unit commander you need to fight your own vehicle as well as the Sqn / Coy.

All I'm saying is that the M113A1 with the T-50 turret makes this hard to do. You have your left hand on the travers hand wheel, your right on the trigger / elevation control, another to read the map, and another to use the radio / intercom.

At least in a larger turret your gunner can be briefed to cover an arc and there are less things for you personally to do. I haven't had much experience in the gun shield (single .50) variants but they seem easier to use than our .30 / .50 turret.

But the good news is that the track work is much easier than for an MBT! And since time spent in the compound makes up for a big % of total time that's a bonus.

And for others reading these posts, whilst the M113 can swim its meant for river crossings etc. The 2" or so of freeboard makes it a fun experience and its definitely not designed for amphib op or beach assaults.

[ April 09, 2002, 12:27 AM: Message edited by: gibsonm ]

[Mike Robel]

Yep, Us armor guys have it hard.

I was never comfortable swimming the M113. There are better things to do with life.

Kind regards

[gibsonm]

Mike,

If you are ever in Oz, look me up and I'll invite you to the Mess where we can tell each other lies over a couple of drinks!

[ April 09, 2002, 10:19 PM: Message edited by: gibsonm ]

[Jeff Gilbert]

Interresting ... 20 plus years in the US Army and I never saw a M113 swim ... saw a few being pulled out of the bottom of the river.

[Mike Robel]

Mark, Will Do, though it is a long way from Florida to Austrailia.

Jeff, it was always exciting. We used to swim them all the time across part of a resivour at FT Riley, KS. Much maintenance, "pre-swimming", checking the seals etc. Milford Lake was DEEP. Never sank one though. Did have some fall off bridges and run off bridges that were no longer there, ending with injuries and some deaths in other units, but not, thankfully, mine.

Mike

[BobDennis]

The Australians are blessed to have a turret on their M-113's. The American M-113, even the ACAV, had the M-2 .50s on a pintel mount. The Track Commander bracing himself and the gun and firing. There were requests that a traversing and Elevating mechanism be adapted but it was into the late '80s before that happened and then for the most part it was a unit modification.

The M-113 and its varients can swim. Ever seen an M-577 swim, it is best done from a distance. We always had empty bleach bottles tied to the vehicle so we could find it later and we wore life preservers and everyone, except the driver was on the top deck, no one inside.

War story alert: In 1979, around November, (that way if a vehicle sank no one would enjoy it) 1st Armored Divison was swimming the Main River near Bamberg. As I recall 1-46 Infantry had just gotten some rebuilt M-113s in. Everything went into the river and suddenly one of the drivers was hit in the face with a wad of fiberglass/tape and followed by a stream of water. The vehicle quickly filled with water and sank. M-113 swimming was stopped. The vehicle was recovered and inspected. By the driver's compartment was a nice round hole, there was one in the engine compartment and two (either side of the troop compartment). Everyone was scratching their head and one of the old Sergeants said they looked a lot like the holes they had in Viet Nam to hold the anti-RPG shields (sandbags and PSP). Sure enough these M-113s had been in Viet Nam, rebuilt and the Army Depot just filled the holes and painted over them. Most of the M-113s in Europe had always been in Europe and that conversion was never done.

It is still a mystery to me why we are going for a wheeled vehicle (and I like the concept) when it is bigger and weighs more than a M-113. But someone Beltway Bandit must be getting something.