More Army vehicles with the USMC Module?

[Sequoia]

For kicks and in the spirit of the "WWII variety" thread I dug up the "planned" vehicles list, which you can still find up on this website and compared it to the U.S. vehicles that actually made the cut. I'm sure time constraints were the main reason these vehicles didn't appear in the initial release, though I read the Stryker mortar carrier was dropped as it would almost always remain off board.

So here is the list. My question is what are the chances we'll see some of these planned but not included vehicles in the USMC module?

US INCLUDED

M114 HMMWV

M1114 HMMVW (with M240 MG)

M1114 HMMVW (with M2 HMG)

M707 Knight

M1126 Stryker ICV (Infantry Carrier Vehicle) w/ M2 HMG

M1126 Stryker ICV (Infantry Carrier Vehicle) w/ Mk-19 GL

M1127 Stryker RV (Reconnaissance Vehicle) w/ M2 HMG

M1127 Stryker RV (Reconnaissance Vehicle) w/ Mk-19 GL

M1128 Stryker MGS (Mobile Gun System)

M1130 Stryker CV (Commander's Vehicle)

M1131 Stryker FSV (Fire Support Vehicle)

M1132 Stryker ESV (Engineer Support Vehicle)

M1134 Stryker ATGM (Anti Tank Guided Missile)

M2A3 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV)

M3A3 Bradley Cavalry Fighting Vehicle (CFV)

M7A3 Bradley BFIST

M1A1HC Abrams (Heavy Common)

M1A1SA Abrams (Situational Awareness upgrade)

M1A2 Abrams

M1A2 SEP Abrams (Systems Enhancement Package)

US Planned

M1114 HMMWV

M1046A2 HMMWV TOW Carrier

M1044A1 HMMWV Armament Carrier

M1123 Heavy HMMWV Cargo/Troop Carrier

M1126 Stryker ICV (Infantry Carrier Vehicle)

M1127 Stryker RV (Reconnaissance Vehicle)

M1128 Stryker MGS (Mobile Gun System)

M1130 Stryker CV (Commander's Vehicle)

M1131 Stryker FSV (Fire Support Vehicle)

M1132 Stryker ESV (Engineer Support Vehicle)

M1134 Stryker ATGM (Anti Tank Guided Missile)

M1129 Stryker MC (Mortar Carrier)

M2A3 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle (IFV)

M3A3 Bradley Cavalry Fighting Vehicle (CFV)

M7 Bradley FIST

M1A1HC Abrams (Heavy Common)

M1A1HC SA Abrams (w/ Situational Awareness upgrade)

M1A2 SEP Abrams (w/ Systems Enhancement Package)

M1A1 Abrams with various TUSK component upgrades

M1A2 Abrams with various TUSK component upgrades

M1078 Standard Cargo Truck

M1083 Standard Cargo Truck

M978 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck (HEMTT)

M985 Heavy Expanded Mobility Tactical Truck (HEMTT)

[Clavicula_Nox]

What I would like to see are humvees with armor plating around the gunners. At present, I can come up with no practical reason for using humvees. My intentions with this game were to re-create some of my personal experiences, but it's just plain impossible with the clumsy way humvees are handled in-game.

Oh well.

[M1A1TC]

The humvee models in CMSF were created before use of gunner shielding was widespread

[Clavicula_Nox]

That's fair enough, but even in 2004 we were using scrap metal welded onto the turret swivel. Apart from the armor, there is no way to use an infantry force in-game in conjunction with humvees. If using an empty vehicle, you can mount..say an HQ team, but cannot dismount them as they become the crew (if you can, I don't know how). Besides all that is the strict reliance on TO&E instead of the older method of customizing your force based on TO&E.

[Combatintman]

All for more kit I'd like to see in addition to the above:

M-113

M-577

I also think there's a place for modelling casevac in CMSF as well so would like to see ambulance variants of the M-113 and Stryker.

[YankeeDog]

I was about to pooh-pooh the addition of the M-113 until I looked it up, and discovered that more than a few are currently serving in Iraq.

According to various websites, some of the M-113s are serving with the "New Army of Iraq."

I think one really cool option would be to assume that a Iraq makes a small, but symbolically important contribution to the invasion of Syria, with a modest force from the Army of Iraq participates in the invasion. This would be a really cool way to bring in equipment like the M-113.

For the record, I'm really not expecting this at all. But I would be very pleasantly surprised if it happened in one of the modules.

Cheers,

YD

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

I was about to pooh-pooh the addition of the M-113 until I looked it up, and discovered that more than a few are currently serving in Iraq.

I was surprised to see the Canadians still use them in Afghanistan also, now called the "TLAV".

http://www.sfu.ca/casr/ft-leopard-tank.htm

[Clavicula_Nox]

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

I was about to pooh-pooh the addition of the M-113 until I looked it up, and discovered that more than a few are currently serving in Iraq.

According to various websites, some of the M-113s are serving with the "New Army of Iraq."

I think one really cool option would be to assume that a Iraq makes a small, but symbolically important contribution to the invasion of Syria, with a modest force from the Army of Iraq participates in the invasion. This would be a really cool way to bring in equipment like the M-113.

For the record, I'm really not expecting this at all. But I would be very pleasantly surprised if it happened in one of the modules.

Cheers,

YD

Not only that, but it would be great if the Army actually replaced the Gavins for us paratroopers.

[SgtMuhammed]

That would be easy considering the Gavin doesn't exist.

[M1A1TC]

I am sure he meant M113, though no one "in the buisness" calls it that

"Initially nick-named "The Green Dragon" by the enemy, the M113 served in all areas of Vietnam throughout the war and was to become one of the most successful armored vehicles of all time. Unlike many other Army vehicles, the M133 does not appear to have acquired an official name or even a widely used nickname. Some advocates have indicated that the M113 is also nicknamed the "Gavin", after an Army general who was influential in the development of the M113 in the 1950s. This is not however, an official designation, and there is some question about the extent to which actual users of the system use this name. A similar point arises with respect to the M8 AGS, which some unofficially call the Buford, despite this also being an unofficial naming. One observer wrote that "In more than 30 years working in the defense industry, I have never, never heard anybody use the name “Gavin” for the M-113. Not in the US nor in any of the many countries that use the vehicle. Not in the military forces, not in the companies that build and equip it, not in the groups that retrofit and repair it. This usage appears not only to be “unofficial”, it is entirely fictional and I believe that you may have been the victim of a hoax or deliberate disinformation."

Official BAE Systems site

According to the manufacturer

"The M113 is the largest family of armored tracked vehicles, with over 80,000 vehicles worldwide and more than 40 different variants. Today's M113 is fully equipped to meet the battlefield challenges for mobility, reliability, survivability, and transportability. Our M113 vehicles will represent the bulk of the combat vehicles included in the U.S. Army's Force XXI vision."

I was surprised that it wasnt included. As a tanker, Ive seen and even drove a lot of M-113s and M577s

[ March 11, 2008, 07:38 PM: Message edited by: M1A1TankCommander ]

[SgtMuhammed]

Drove them all the time. Never heard anyone refer to it by anything other than 113.

There should be a bunch of them in engineer units and TOCs. So for game representation they should be with the engineers since TOCs aren't really modeled. Of course they should also be with Medics and such. All of these will be with the HBCTs though the Stryker brigades will just all use Strykers.

As an interesting side note. During the Iraqi counter attack at Objective Peach, Marcone (CO 3-69 Armor) said that the Republican Guard troops were using captured Kuwaiti M113s.

[MikeyD]

"I was surprised to see the Canadians still use them in Afghanistan also, now called the "TLAV".

From what i heard they don't 'still' use them, but 'now' use them. Rumors have been floating about of unhappiness with some aspects of LAV-III in Afghanistan. Like inability to cross obstacles (just try driving your pickup truck over a log!). So they brought a reworked M113 back as a full-tracked compliment to LAV-III. i guess in Afghanistan having a 60 mph roadspeed is not of primary concern.

[Clavicula_Nox]

Originally posted by SgtMuhammed:

Drove them all the time. Never heard anyone refer to it by anything other than 113.

There should be a bunch of them in engineer units and TOCs. So for game representation they should be with the engineers since TOCs aren't really modeled. Of course they should also be with Medics and such. All of these will be with the HBCTs though the Stryker brigades will just all use Strykers.

As an interesting side note. During the Iraqi counter attack at Objective Peach, Marcone (CO 3-69 Armor) said that the Republican Guard troops were using captured Kuwaiti M113s.

They were called Gavins after General Gavin, who was a commander of the 82nd Airborne during WW2; he played a role in it's development and it was used as a heavy droppable APC/IFV for Airborne infantry. Since it was dropped, it hasn't been replaced. My post was just a random one begging the Army to give us something to fulfill that role.

[SgtMuhammed]

The M113 never had a nickname. The only place I have ever heard it called the Gavin was by that moron on the internet who thinks it is the perfect combat vehicle.

[Clavicula_Nox]

So because you never heard it from anyone other than some moron it didn't exist. Doesn't detract from what I was saying about having it replaced. I take it you've never been around an Airborne unit then.

[MikeyD]

This gets me wondering where that name 'Gavin' came frome. It's pretty much a certainty that 'naming' the thing Gavin after being know for 30(?) years as M113 was a corporate promotion stunt. It had to have come up sometime after Gulf War 1, right? About the time they were doing the testing face-off between Stryker and upgraded M113?

[MikeyD]

Hah! here's an excerpt from GlobalSecurity.org. Note the 'passion' of the writer:

One observer wrote that "In more than 30 years working in the defense industry, I have never, never heard anybody use the name “Gavin” for the M-113. Not in the US nor in any of the many countries that use the vehicle. Not in the military forces, not in the companies that build and equip it, not in the groups that retrofit and repair it. This usage appears not only to be “unofficial”, it is entirely fictional and I believe that you may have been the victim of a hoax or deliberate disinformation."

It should be noted on that very same webpage was a link entitled "M113 Gavin vs Stryker"

[Clavicula_Nox]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

This gets me wondering where that name 'Gavin' came frome. It's pretty much a certainty that 'naming' the thing Gavin after being know for 30(?) years as M113 was a corporate promotion stunt. It had to have come up sometime after Gulf War 1, right? About the time they were doing the testing face-off between Stryker and upgraded M113?

I'm not sure. I have only heard it being called "gavin" by an older 1SG while BSing with us on a field ex. One thing is for sure, whenever someone says Gavin, everybody knows they're talking about the M-113, and it has achieved that nickname informally. My question is, what does it matter if it's some official nickname or not?

The last part of your quote leads to the question of which is better, Stryker or M113? I have no first-hand experience with either.

[SgtMuhammed]

Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox:

So because you never heard it from anyone other than some moron it didn't exist. Doesn't detract from what I was saying about having it replaced. I take it you've never been around an Airborne unit then.

Light, mech, and motorized. I know what you are saying, I'm just saying that it isn't called the Gavin and never was.

I thought it was pretty stupid to take the Sheridans from the 82nd and not replace them with something, like the M8. I always thought that light infantry, no matter how deployed, was pretty useless on the modern battlefield because we just couldn't manuever. I was a big fan of the Army getting a simple, reliable, armored vehicle to give the light divisions but they never took my advice. Basically we agree that they need something to make the light/airborne units a little more useful.

[MikeyD]

This Gavin question reminds me of a similar - but much older- debate. Apparently, according to one source, No Brit tanker in WWII ever referred to his Sherman QF 17 pounder as an 'Achilles' and no 3 inch gunned M10 was ever a 'Wolverine'. These names creeped in in the early postwar period, then reinforced by Tamiya in the early 70s. Again, according to one source. It sounds like the poor old M113 had to be dragged kicking and screaming into being called a 'Gavin' but unfortunately the name's starting to stick.

[Clavicula_Nox]

Originally posted by SgtMuhammed:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox:

So because you never heard it from anyone other than some moron it didn't exist. Doesn't detract from what I was saying about having it replaced. I take it you've never been around an Airborne unit then.

Light, mech, and motorized. I know what you are saying, I'm just saying that it isn't called the Gavin and never was.

I thought it was pretty stupid to take the Sheridans from the 82nd and not replace them with something, like the M8. I always thought that light infantry, no matter how deployed, was pretty useless on the modern battlefield because we just couldn't manuever. I was a big fan of the Army getting a simple, reliable, armored vehicle to give the light divisions but they never took my advice. Basically we agree that they need something to make the light/airborne units a little more useful. </font>

[Melnibone]

From the font of all knowledge:

"the Swiss referred to it as the "Elefantenrollschuh" or elephants' roller-skate; the Germans called it the "Schweinewürfel" or pig cube"

[SgtMuhammed]

Originally posted by Melnibone:

From the font of all knowledge:

"the Swiss referred to it as the "Elefantenrollschuh" or elephants' roller-skate; the Germans called it the "Schweinewürfel" or pig cube"

Sweet.

[SgtMuhammed]

Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by SgtMuhammed:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox:

So because you never heard it from anyone other than some moron it didn't exist. Doesn't detract from what I was saying about having it replaced. I take it you've never been around an Airborne unit then.

Light, mech, and motorized. I know what you are saying, I'm just saying that it isn't called the Gavin and never was.

I thought it was pretty stupid to take the Sheridans from the 82nd and not replace them with something, like the M8. I always thought that light infantry, no matter how deployed, was pretty useless on the modern battlefield because we just couldn't manuever. I was a big fan of the Army getting a simple, reliable, armored vehicle to give the light divisions but they never took my advice. Basically we agree that they need something to make the light/airborne units a little more useful. </font>

[Clavicula_Nox]

Originally posted by SgtMuhammed:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by SgtMuhammed:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Clavicula_Nox:

So because you never heard it from anyone other than some moron it didn't exist. Doesn't detract from what I was saying about having it replaced. I take it you've never been around an Airborne unit then.

Light, mech, and motorized. I know what you are saying, I'm just saying that it isn't called the Gavin and never was.

I thought it was pretty stupid to take the Sheridans from the 82nd and not replace them with something, like the M8. I always thought that light infantry, no matter how deployed, was pretty useless on the modern battlefield because we just couldn't manuever. I was a big fan of the Army getting a simple, reliable, armored vehicle to give the light divisions but they never took my advice. Basically we agree that they need something to make the light/airborne units a little more useful. </font>