Com-Central.net

68Barracuda · Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:51 am Post subject: Quad 50 M113?

Stumbled upon this link/website on the Dodge Powerwagon web board of all places...

www.ichiban1.org/html/...ory_47.htm

Anybody seen or heard of this beast?

Roy_A_Lingle · Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:08 pm Post subject: Re: Quad 50 M113?

Hi Rob! Hi Folks!

- 68Barracuda

Anybody seen or heard of this beast?

Say what? A M45 Maxon turret mounted on top a M113 APC! I don't think so.... No way! The loaders would get thrown off when the vehicle tips sideways while moving cross country or on dirt roads. How would they pass ammo up to the top of the vehicle?

I think that web site master doesn't know much about M113s and has his facts mixed up.

He has a line where he talks about the M113 FOVs having M109 and M132 mortar tracks. The mortar carriers are the M125 (81mm) and the M106 (4.2"). The M109 is a SP 155mm Howitzer. The M132 is a member of the 113 FOVs, but it's a flame thrower, not a mortar carrier.

This is what I think the 1/50 Infantry was using. Photo croped from Hunnicutt's Bradley book. Caption with the photo does not ID the unit.

When I have a little more time, will see if I can find the main web site and e-mail that web site master.

Spot Report and My 2 cents,
Sgt, Scouts Out!

68Barracuda · Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 2:21 pm Post subject: Re: Quad 50 M113?

Interesting! I figured one 'O youse guys would know something Mr. Green

MarkHolloway · Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 6:20 pm Post subject: Re: Quad 50 M113?

Roy, I e-mail them about the mis ID's and the message bounced back.

Joe_D · Posted: Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:52 pm Post subject: Re: Quad 50 M113?

Roy,

Makes more sense on an M548 than an M113, lot lower center of gravity and the thing was designed to carry heavy loads being un armored. Though the Aussies did put Salidin and FOX (IIRC) turrets on them but was told by an RAAC officer they were beasts to operate.

Joe D

Coldsteel · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 61

- Joe_D

Roy,

Makes more sense on an M548 than an M113, lot lower center of gravity and the thing was designed to carry heavy loads being un armored. Though the Aussies did put Salidin and FOX (IIRC) turrets on them but was told by an RAAC officer they were beasts to operate.

Joe D

Close, Saladin and later Scorpion turrets.

Roy_A_Lingle · Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 7:06 pm Post subject: Re: Quad 50 M113?

Hi Mark! Hi Folks!

- MarkHolloway

Roy, I e-mail them about the mis ID's and the message bounced back.

I went looking for the main web site last night while at work. Found it along with a button for "Comments" Send along two e-mails with referance links to help them learn the correct AFV names.

The biggest problem I have with accepting this set up is that I feel it was something done within the Infantry Battalion without any depot support. Taking a Maxon turret off a gun truck and setting into a M-548 would not be a problem. The turret would have been blocked into the cargo bed just like on the truck. No modifications required to the turret or the vehicle.

I have been reminded by Costas Tasganas Thessaloniki of Greece (via e-mail) that Turkey had this set up which they called the M113A2T2ZPT. That vehicle had the standard TC's cupola removed. The base of the Maxon turret was removed and the bottom of the pedestal was mounted over the opening. Doing something like that to a US Army vehicle would have required a very high level permission to modify the vehicle. I am sure it would have required the support of a depot to drill holes into the M-113 APC to match up with the Maxon's pedestal.

As members of this DG know, folks who are not AFV nuts like us, get AFVs mixed up all the time. Remember that page says the M109 is a member of the M113 FOVs and the M-132 was a mortar track. So until I see more documention, this old Vietnam Vet is thinking this one is an "old war story" that got a little mixed up over the years. Don't forget there is that Hunnicutt picture from Vietnam of a M-548. Want unit had that vehicle?

Sgt, Scouts Out!

Dontos · Posted: Tue Apr 22, 2008 8:38 pm Post subject: Re: Quad 50 M113?

- Roy_A_Lingle

Hi Mark! Hi Folks!

- MarkHolloway

Roy, I e-mail them about the mis ID's and the message bounced back.

I went looking for the main web site last night while at work. Found it along with a button for "Comments" Send along two e-mails with referance links to help them learn the correct AFV names.

The biggest problem I have with accepting this set up is that I feel it was something done within the Infantry Battalion without any depot support. Taking a Maxon turret off a gun truck and setting into a M-548 would not be a problem. The turret would have been blocked into the cargo bed just like on the truck. No modifications required to the turret or the vehicle.

I have been reminded by Costas Tasganas Thessaloniki of Greece (via e-mail) that Turkey had this set up which they called the M113A2T2ZPT. That vehicle had the standard TC's cupola removed. The base of the Maxon turret was removed and the bottom of the pedestal was mounted over the opening. Doing something like that to a US Army vehicle would have required a very high level permission to modify the vehicle. I am sure it would have required the support of a depot to drill holes into the M-113 APC to match up with the Maxon's pedestal.

As members of this DG know, folks who are not AFV nuts like us, get AFVs mixed up all the time. Remember that page says the M109 is a member of the M113 FOVs and the M-132 was a mortar track. So until I see more documention, this old Vietnam Vet is thinking this one is an "old war story" that got a little mixed up over the years. Don't forget there is that Hunnicutt picture from Vietnam of a M-548. Want unit had that vehicle?

Sgt, Scouts Out!

Roy,....I am horrified that you forgot the 'nets' resident expert on the M113 "G"..... I'm sure if you contact him, he'll extort how this was in fact hand built by Gen Gavin AND was not truely made because of a personal & professional vendeta lead by the Air Force. Rolling Eyes

Mean while all your personal photos will mysteriously dissappear and materialize on one of the Combat Reform websites, Along with 'ACTUAL' video clips of you praising 'Sparkie' as the man who saved the western world by naming the M113 the 'G'.... Shocked

HA HA HA HA Laughing

Sorry 'bout that
Don

Roy_A_Lingle · Posted: Sat May 03, 2008 3:39 pm Post subject: Re: Quad 50 M113?

Hi Don! Hi Folks!

- Dontos

.....extort how this was in fact hand built by Gen Gavin AND was not truely made because of a personal & professional vendeta lead by the Air Force.

Interesting that you would say that Don!

Something that I have learned about General G is that doing his time when HE hand built the vehicle in question, he had a "personal & professional vendeta" against the Air Force. He was pushing missile and rocket programs with the end goal of making the Air Force un-necessary during the time when he was in charge of new equipment programs!

Looks like the Navy was not the only ones who had a problem with the post 1947 Air Force getting most of the defense funding. A little meeting that became known as the "Revolt of the Carrier Admirals". There were generals in the Army that were also looking for ways to cut a larger chuck out of the funding pie.

Something else I have noticed about photos of General G. during the time he hand built the vehicle in question, there are all types of Army rocket and missle models in those photos of him. How odd that none of those photos have a model of the AFV he hand built doing that stage of his career.

Sgt, Scouts Out!

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

±Recent Visitors

±User Info-big

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big