±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: cgsimpson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6645

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 219
Total: 219
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Home
02: Community Forums
03: Community Forums
04: News Archive
05: Photo Gallery
06: Photo Gallery
07: Community Forums
08: News Archive
09: Community Forums
10: Home
11: Photo Gallery
12: Photo Gallery
13: Community Forums
14: Home
15: Home
16: Community Forums
17: Downloads
18: News Archive
19: Community Forums
20: Community Forums
21: Photo Gallery
22: Photo Gallery
23: News Archive
24: Home
25: Photo Gallery
26: Community Forums
27: Member Screenshots
28: Photo Gallery
29: Photo Gallery
30: Photo Gallery
31: Home
32: Member Screenshots
33: Home
34: Community Forums
35: Community Forums
36: Photo Gallery
37: Photo Gallery
38: Community Forums
39: Home
40: Community Forums
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: Community Forums
44: News Archive
45: Community Forums
46: Photo Gallery
47: Community Forums
48: Home
49: Community Forums
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Community Forums
53: Community Forums
54: Photo Gallery
55: Home
56: Community Forums
57: Community Forums
58: Home
59: Community Forums
60: Community Forums
61: Community Forums
62: Member Screenshots
63: Home
64: Community Forums
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: Statistics
70: Community Forums
71: Community Forums
72: Community Forums
73: Community Forums
74: Photo Gallery
75: Your Account
76: Community Forums
77: Community Forums
78: Community Forums
79: News Archive
80: Photo Gallery
81: Community Forums
82: Photo Gallery
83: Community Forums
84: Community Forums
85: Community Forums
86: Community Forums
87: Community Forums
88: Community Forums
89: Community Forums
90: Home
91: Your Account
92: Home
93: Photo Gallery
94: Community Forums
95: Home
96: Photo Gallery
97: Photo Gallery
98: Photo Gallery
99: Community Forums
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Photo Gallery
104: Home
105: Photo Gallery
106: Home
107: Photo Gallery
108: Community Forums
109: Community Forums
110: Member Screenshots
111: Home
112: Community Forums
113: Community Forums
114: Statistics
115: Community Forums
116: Photo Gallery
117: Photo Gallery
118: Photo Gallery
119: Your Account
120: Photo Gallery
121: Community Forums
122: Photo Gallery
123: Downloads
124: Community Forums
125: Community Forums
126: Home
127: Community Forums
128: Downloads
129: Member Screenshots
130: Community Forums
131: Community Forums
132: Home
133: Photo Gallery
134: Photo Gallery
135: Community Forums
136: Community Forums
137: Community Forums
138: News Archive
139: Member Screenshots
140: CPGlang
141: Photo Gallery
142: Photo Gallery
143: Home
144: Community Forums
145: Photo Gallery
146: Community Forums
147: Photo Gallery
148: Photo Gallery
149: Photo Gallery
150: Community Forums
151: Photo Gallery
152: Community Forums
153: Downloads
154: Home
155: Community Forums
156: Photo Gallery
157: Community Forums
158: Community Forums
159: Community Forums
160: Community Forums
161: Community Forums
162: Statistics
163: Home
164: Community Forums
165: Community Forums
166: Home
167: Downloads
168: Home
169: Community Forums
170: Community Forums
171: Community Forums
172: Home
173: Community Forums
174: Home
175: Photo Gallery
176: Community Forums
177: Downloads
178: Member Screenshots
179: Photo Gallery
180: Community Forums
181: Community Forums
182: Community Forums
183: Community Forums
184: Community Forums
185: Community Forums
186: Community Forums
187: Photo Gallery
188: Photo Gallery
189: Community Forums
190: Community Forums
191: Community Forums
192: Community Forums
193: Community Forums
194: Community Forums
195: Community Forums
196: Downloads
197: Member Screenshots
198: Community Forums
199: Photo Gallery
200: Community Forums
201: Photo Gallery
202: Community Forums
203: Photo Gallery
204: Community Forums
205: Photo Gallery
206: Your Account
207: Community Forums
208: Photo Gallery
209: Home
210: Community Forums
211: Photo Gallery
212: Photo Gallery
213: Community Forums
214: Community Forums
215: Community Forums
216: Community Forums
217: Community Forums
218: Community Forums
219: Community Forums

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
XM-734 in Vietnam
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.
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Apr 08, 2006
Posts: 2054
Location: Beatty, Nevada
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 1:34 am
Post subject: XM-734 in Vietnam

XM734 ~ 1/5th Infantry "Bobcats" 25th Infantry Division "Tropic Lightning"
Track "C-35" , probably operation "Cedar Falls" , January 1967 /Robert C.Lafoon collection/.


_________________
"TUMBLEWEED"
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Photo Gallery
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 3:50 am
Post subject: Re: XM-734 in Vietnam

Never actually seen a pic of one of those there. Then again, I notice everybody is operating on or out the top and none of the ports are open, so it's being used just like any other ACAV there, but without the M60's. A lot of infantry unit M113's didn't have the full ACAV kit anyway (like the one just in front of it).

Looks like a case of "we have it and need to test it, so let's send it" regardless of actual utility in the theater to which it's been sent. (Recall that there was a proposal to send Sheridan's without main gun ammo in the beginning, but that idea was dropped)
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 12:07 pm
Post subject: Re: XM-734 in Vietnam

Hi Folks!

My first post Vietnam era unit at Hunter Ligget had ten of those vehicles. The word was they had been used over there and had been judged a failure. Like Doug noted the troops are up in the cargo hatch or on top. During my time, the major problem was land mines (now called IED's). The only troops who were inside were the drivers. The TC needed to kept all of his body above the turret ring. Those cupolas where known to pop off when a vehicle hit a mine.

Somehow the Army went from the gun port of the XM-734 which was made for the M-14 to poke out of, to the gun ports of the M2 Bradley IFV with it's Port Firing weapon.

In the end, it was all a waste of time after the Army up armored the Bradleys and covered over the firing ports.

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
MarkHolloway
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Apr 08, 2006
Posts: 2054
Location: Beatty, Nevada
PostPosted: Thu Jan 06, 2011 4:36 pm
Post subject: Re: XM-734 in Vietnam

There is a pretty good collection of Vietnam photos on Flickr at:

www.flickr.com/search/...3895%40N04

_________________
"TUMBLEWEED"
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Photo Gallery
C_Sherman
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 590

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2011 2:54 am
Post subject: Re: XM-734 in Vietnam

- Roy_A_Lingle
Hi Folks!

My first post Vietnam era unit at Hunter Ligget had ten of those vehicles. The word was they had been used over there and had been judged a failure. Like Doug noted the troops are up in the cargo hatch or on top. During my time, the major problem was land mines (now called IED's). The only troops who were inside were the drivers. The TC needed to kept all of his body above the turret ring. Those cupolas where known to pop off when a vehicle hit a mine.

Somehow the Army went from the gun port of the XM-734 which was made for the M-14 to poke out of, to the gun ports of the M2 Bradley IFV with it's Port Firing weapon.

In the end, it was all a waste of time after the Army up armored the Bradleys and covered over the firing ports.

Sgt, Scouts Out!


Hi,

It's all a case of PC-envy. In the early 60's, the Soviets rocked the military world by introducing the BMP, which had firing ports and was now considered an Infantry Fighting Vehicle. Partly fueled by the armaments companies and partly by Cold War me-too-ism, the military world was quickly infatuated with the idea of infantry being able to fight from under armor on a nuclear battlefield. Like so many of this sort of idea, no one ever actually conducted honest tests to determine if this was even practical. All the tests that were conducted, were biased to show how great the capability was. The voices that said it wasn't that great an idea were either ignored or silenced.

The Army went through a series of vehicles (XM-734 was one of them) trying to incorporate firing ports into existing APCs. Fortunately, budget constraints and obvious shortcomings prevented large-scale adoption of any of them. After all of the programs were stone-dead, the money became available to develop the Bradley IFV from scratch, while trying to incorporate the lessons from the earlier program. Sadly, one of those lessons didn't include the futility of infantry fighting from within the vehicle. That lesson wasn't learned until the Bradley was widely fielded and everyone finally had to face the fact that the firing ports were useless for anything but wasting ammunition. Oddly enough the Soviets had quietly learned that lesson years before, but continued to use the feature to sell BMPs around the world!

Nothing new, but still a disheartening look into how wacky the acquisition of military vehicles can be.

What is funny is that for years after the Bradley showed up, commanders had to sign and re-sign for hundreds of the special Firing Port Weapons. In most cases the weapons sat locked in racks for the entire time they were in the possession of unit. Most Commanders and Senior NCOs considered that maintaining positive control of a single M16 was only barely within the abilities of most Soldiers, and had no desire to issue them a second weapon. I also know one former Company Commander who was signed for several hundred weapons for his entire command tour, two years after the unit had turned in it's last Bradley that still had firing ports.

C

_________________
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it
will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
-Herm Albright

Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc!
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:31 am
Post subject: Re: XM-734 in Vietnam

- C_Sherman


Hi,

It's all a case of PC-envy. In the early 60's, the Soviets rocked the military world by introducing the BMP, which had firing ports and was now considered an Infantry Fighting Vehicle. Partly fueled by the armaments companies and partly by Cold War me-too-ism, the military world was quickly infatuated with the idea of infantry being able to fight from under armor on a nuclear battlefield. Like so many of this sort of idea, no one ever actually conducted honest tests to determine if this was even practical. All the tests that were conducted, were biased to show how great the capability was. The voices that said it wasn't that great an idea were either ignored or silenced.

The Army went through a series of vehicles (XM-734 was one of them) trying to incorporate firing ports into existing APCs.
C


Chuck,

The FMC proposed M765 and "Product Improved M113A1" also envisioned the inclusion of firing ports and an M139 20mm gun to make it even more BMP/IFV like (both had a reduced rear hull rather like the "M113 1/2 C&R" vehicle).

The "me too" think that imposed stuff like this (and the "swim ability") of the M551 Sheridan was not a proud era in U.S. AFV design.

Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
C_Sherman
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 590

PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2011 4:20 pm
Post subject: Re: XM-734 in Vietnam

Hi,

Doug, that Product Improved M113 lives on today! The AIFV, still in service (and maybe production, too!) in a number of nations outside of the US, is externally almost identical to the advertising you posted. I'm sure that it has been updated internally since 1970. I've seen it in Dutch and Turkish service, and I'm sure I've seen it other places too.

I had the privilege of touring the FMC-licensed production facility outside of Ankara, Turkey in 2003. I was startled by the depth of the commonality with the M113-series vehicles I was familiar with. Up to about 1 meter off of the ground, it's almost indistinguishable. The M113 lives on, much more than we realize here in the US.

However, I did notice that the whole firing-port infatuation has faded. Some (all?) of the AIFVs I've seen...didn't have the firing ports anymore!

C

_________________
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it
will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
-Herm Albright

Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc!
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Fri Jan 07, 2011 6:59 pm
Post subject: Re: XM-734 in Vietnam

- C_Sherman
Hi,

Doug, that Product Improved M113 lives on today! The AIFV, still in service (and maybe production, too!) in a number of nations outside of the US, is externally almost identical to the advertising you posted. I'm sure that it has been updated internally since 1970. I've seen it in Dutch and Turkish service, and I'm sure I've seen it other places too.

C


Chuck,
In Dutch service, it even lived on with the model number, but re-designated "YPR 765".

D.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 6 Hours



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