±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: HighestAce
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6648

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 303
Total: 303
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Statistics
02: Community Forums
03: Home
04: Community Forums
05: Member Screenshots
06: Home
07: Home
08: Home
09: Home
10: Downloads
11: Home
12: Home
13: Home
14: Home
15: Home
16: Home
17: Statistics
18: Community Forums
19: Home
20: Home
21: Home
22: Home
23: Member Screenshots
24: Home
25: Home
26: Home
27: Photo Gallery
28: Home
29: Home
30: Home
31: Member Screenshots
32: Photo Gallery
33: Community Forums
34: Photo Gallery
35: Community Forums
36: Photo Gallery
37: Downloads
38: Community Forums
39: News Archive
40: Community Forums
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: Home
44: Home
45: Photo Gallery
46: Community Forums
47: Community Forums
48: Community Forums
49: Downloads
50: Downloads
51: Photo Gallery
52: Member Screenshots
53: Home
54: Community Forums
55: Photo Gallery
56: Community Forums
57: Community Forums
58: Community Forums
59: Community Forums
60: Home
61: Community Forums
62: Home
63: Community Forums
64: Downloads
65: Member Screenshots
66: Home
67: Community Forums
68: LinkToUs
69: Member Screenshots
70: Community Forums
71: Community Forums
72: Community Forums
73: Community Forums
74: Member Screenshots
75: Community Forums
76: Home
77: Home
78: Community Forums
79: News Archive
80: Home
81: Community Forums
82: Community Forums
83: Contact
84: Home
85: Home
86: Home
87: Community Forums
88: Home
89: Home
90: Home
91: Community Forums
92: Community Forums
93: Community Forums
94: Home
95: Community Forums
96: Community Forums
97: Member Screenshots
98: Photo Gallery
99: Community Forums
100: Home
101: Home
102: Photo Gallery
103: Home
104: Home
105: Home
106: Home
107: News
108: Community Forums
109: Photo Gallery
110: Community Forums
111: Community Forums
112: Photo Gallery
113: Home
114: Community Forums
115: LinkToUs
116: Home
117: Community Forums
118: Home
119: Community Forums
120: Home
121: Community Forums
122: Photo Gallery
123: Home
124: Home
125: Home
126: Member Screenshots
127: Community Forums
128: Photo Gallery
129: Home
130: Community Forums
131: Home
132: Home
133: Photo Gallery
134: Community Forums
135: Downloads
136: Community Forums
137: Community Forums
138: Home
139: Home
140: Downloads
141: Community Forums
142: Home
143: Home
144: Community Forums
145: Statistics
146: Community Forums
147: Member Screenshots
148: Home
149: Member Screenshots
150: Home
151: Photo Gallery
152: Community Forums
153: Community Forums
154: Community Forums
155: Home
156: Home
157: Community Forums
158: Member Screenshots
159: Home
160: Home
161: Home
162: Downloads
163: Home
164: Home
165: Home
166: Home
167: Community Forums
168: Home
169: Home
170: Home
171: Photo Gallery
172: Photo Gallery
173: Home
174: Community Forums
175: Home
176: News Archive
177: Community Forums
178: Home
179: Photo Gallery
180: Photo Gallery
181: Your Account
182: Downloads
183: Downloads
184: Photo Gallery
185: Community Forums
186: Home
187: Downloads
188: Home
189: Home
190: Community Forums
191: Statistics
192: Community Forums
193: Downloads
194: Community Forums
195: News
196: Home
197: Home
198: Home
199: Downloads
200: Home
201: Community Forums
202: Home
203: Photo Gallery
204: Home
205: Home
206: Home
207: Downloads
208: Community Forums
209: Community Forums
210: News Archive
211: News Archive
212: Home
213: Home
214: Community Forums
215: Community Forums
216: Home
217: Member Screenshots
218: Home
219: Photo Gallery
220: Home
221: Home
222: Photo Gallery
223: News
224: Home
225: Home
226: Community Forums
227: Home
228: Community Forums
229: Community Forums
230: Community Forums
231: Community Forums
232: Home
233: Photo Gallery
234: Community Forums
235: Community Forums
236: Home
237: Community Forums
238: Member Screenshots
239: Home
240: Home
241: Home
242: Home
243: Community Forums
244: Community Forums
245: Home
246: Community Forums
247: Downloads
248: Member Screenshots
249: Home
250: Home
251: Home
252: Home
253: Photo Gallery
254: Community Forums
255: Member Screenshots
256: Home
257: Home
258: Downloads
259: Community Forums
260: Photo Gallery
261: Community Forums
262: Home
263: Downloads
264: Downloads
265: Home
266: Downloads
267: Home
268: Home
269: Community Forums
270: Downloads
271: Home
272: Home
273: Community Forums
274: Home
275: Home
276: Home
277: Photo Gallery
278: Community Forums
279: Photo Gallery
280: Community Forums
281: Home
282: Home
283: Photo Gallery
284: Photo Gallery
285: Member Screenshots
286: Community Forums
287: Community Forums
288: Home
289: Photo Gallery
290: Member Screenshots
291: Home
292: Home
293: Community Forums
294: Photo Gallery
295: Community Forums
296: Member Screenshots
297: Community Forums
298: Your Account
299: Home
300: Home
301: Home
302: Home
303: News Archive

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information
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 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:22 am
Post subject: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

Found this data sheet while digging thru the Archives, some time ago. Just 'rediscovered' the entire data sheet.

(Let the debate begin.... Mr. Green )

[img][/img]


Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:37 am
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

What's to debate?....By the time it could have been fielded, it couldn't keep up with the forces it was expected to defend and couldn't hit anything even if it had.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
MarkHolloway
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Apr 08, 2006
Posts: 2054
Location: Beatty, Nevada
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:50 am
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

The glacis in the top photo is straight like an M60. Doesn't show the modified rear deck cover. I think Ford Aerospace had this contract. They disappeared after this failure. They would have done just as well, or better, to have upgraded the Duster.

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 7:53 am
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

- Doug_Kibbey
What's to debate?....By the time it could have been fielded, it couldn't keep up with the forces it was expected to defend and couldn't hit anything even if it had.


Agreed, but when I first posted just the hull diagrams, there seemed to be doubts in the information and I wasn't able to produce the entire data page.

Amazing that the M48 Hull system is used, instead of an Abrams or lighter AGS or even sheridan hull system.

The Division level Air Defense asset (hence the title DIVAD Gun) should have been developed with the future speed element foremost in the concept process.

JMHO
Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2069
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 10:11 am
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

Don Said:

Amazing that the M48 Hull system is used, instead of an Abrams or lighter AGS or even sheridan hull system.


I think it was a matter of necessity, Remember at this time M1 production was just ramping up (1985) and Detroit had to be used until Lima could get fully on line. Priority one was fielding the M1 Tank and no hulls could be diverted for other special projects at the time. As far as using the AGS or M551 hulls, I think again it was a matter of physics and cost. Both systems are very light and would be way underpowered to move/ power the electricity sucking turret of the DIVAD system. Also at this time the M60A3's being replaced by M1's were replacing the M48A5's in the Guard, creating a surplus of M48 hulls that logistically were easy to support verses the M551 or AGS whose parts were very limited.

If, and I say big if, the system performed as required, the hull could have been easily up graded with a more powerful engine and better suspension to keep up with the M1's. Both had already been developed for the M60 series but not implemented due to the M1 fielding. Applying them to an M48 hull would be very simple.

That DD 672-1 looks like part of a request for the DoD to provide M48A5 hulls with the necessary equipment. That might explain why the drawing is not of the actual M247 hull.

Thanks for sharing Don

Joe D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:01 pm
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

As I remember it (always dangerous) The Divad was a knee jerk reaction to the concerns with air defense in Europe based on observations in the Yom Kippur war ( The success of the zsu-23 and the smaller missles) and counting the number of aircraft the Soviets had to throw at the European front. I believe it was felt that they could save time (and money) by using an existing chassis. They didn't want to buy the Gepard but wanted a similar vehicle. It was thought that it was a low risk quick turnaround development effort. Then they started adding capabilities and it grew and stretched out in development time

I don't think an M551 chassis could have handled the recoil forces of twin automatic 35 or 40 mm weapons, especially when firing at low angle to the side

_________________
Bob Smart ([email protected])
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Jens_O_Mehner
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 511
Location: Giessen, Germany
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 12:30 pm
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

- MarkHolloway
The glacis in the top photo is straight like an M60.


Nope,

it certainly is not, as evidenced by the round sections on the lower hull- those would not be there on a straight glacis, which would show up as a rectangle on this type of drawing. Cool



Jens O.
Back to top
View user's profile
MarkHolloway
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Apr 08, 2006
Posts: 2054
Location: Beatty, Nevada
PostPosted: Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:10 pm
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

VIDEO www.youtube.com/watch?...re=related

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Feb 07, 2006
Posts: 39

PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 6:21 pm
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

I seem to recall it was supposed to be low risk: Known hull, known gun, known radar (from F-16 if I remember).
Back to top
View user's profile
MarkHolloway
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Apr 08, 2006
Posts: 2054
Location: Beatty, Nevada
PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 8:00 pm
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

- GaryKato
I seem to recall it was supposed to be low risk: Known hull, known gun, known radar (from F-16 if I remember).


That's what I remember, too. Also the twin 40mm guns from the Duster. Should have been reliable. Should have....

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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2069
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Mon Sep 29, 2008 9:04 pm
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

Gary said;

I seem to recall it was supposed to be low risk: Known hull, known gun, known radar (from F-16 if I remember).


All systems were proven, but in regards to the Radar, I don't think it was for ground use Rolling Eyes .

Therein lies the major problem. Something that is designed to work in the relatively clean environment of the sky does not automatically guarantee it'll work in a AFV. Not to mention the stress and shock it undergoes. Another problem from what I can remember was the inability to sort out all the clutter it experienced. IIRC the system was supposed to hone in on the tell tale signature of a helicopter rotor. Unfortunately it was easily confused and locked on such inordinate things like ventilator fans. It didn't help that during testing the targets were rigged to self destruct, a safety requirement, that ended up being a big controversy with the media when accusations were made that they were never effectively struck. The stink was that they supposedly faked the ability to hit by detonating the targets on cue.

Joe D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
tommyarizona
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Dec 05, 2008
Posts: 9
Location: Lake Havasu City Arizona
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 1:14 am
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

Fella’s
I just happened across this.
I was the design engineer for the gunfights on divad.
Prior to this I spent a month working on the rear deck you are questioning.
The Mod on the chassis was brought about with the addition of a 135 Hp turbine engine as an auxiliary power unit. Also the addition of better air filtration for both main and aux engines.
The M248 chassis would have not been my first pick either.
But they were plentiful.
The Guns
40s were chosen over 30s for many reasons, these are the ones I know of,
At the time the 40mm round came in a number of flavors mainly a Proximity round the 30 did not.
Ford Aeronutronic had just bid another project using a 30mm cannon and lost the bid.
Also lets not forget that Ford Aeronutronic was the maker of ammunition 20, 30, 40mm.
I believe using the 40 was also a business decision $$$$.
Lastly
Ford actually scored less direct hits in the initial shoot off with GD who was using twin 30's.
But because Ford was using a prox round there near misses were counted as hits.
One other thing to point out.
GD (General Dynamics) went light with its turret, it was all aluminum better suited for the 30s

I don’t know ware you are going with this topic.
So let me say this.
Nothing you read about this system, (on the Net or in the public news agencies) is the truth.
The cancellation of this system was purely political and had nothing to do with its performance.
I have been the senior Designer Engineer on many systems for the military.
To this day I am bitter about the cancellation of Divad.
One can not say, that if it worked as advertised(and it did)
We don’t badly need this system today.
Not to mention the if it was in our arsenal today it would be a matured system with all the advances in technology we have made since.
Had it not been canceled Katusha's would have never hit the ground in Israel.

Remember
The claim was that the system could not reach the stand off distance of the Russian Hind helicopter.
But the question as to weather it could shoot down the missiles fired by the Hind was never brought up or tested.
A BIG MISTAKE.

In the end...
The Missile loopiest won.
and there associates got all the gold $$$$$


Please
Feel free to visit my website for Ref www.tmaengineering.net
Click Defense tab

Peace
Tom

Peace
Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 2:05 am
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

Tom

WOW!! WELCOME!

I have contributed to a number of discussions on the Sgt York, but mainly from the aspect of an AFV historical aspect.

I remember DIVAD mainly due to a family members involvement in ADA during those days, and a possible after-service career at a 'proposed' DIVAD production facility in El Paso Tx. Your assertions to the testing is along the same lines as my family members.

Our big 'deal' is attempting to properly ID a vehicle based off of vehicle features. Sometimes it can be quite a 'dog-eat-dog' discussion. The primary goal is to exchange ideas and information in the hopes of historical accuracy.

Thanks for the information.
Regards
Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
tommyarizona
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Dec 05, 2008
Posts: 9
Location: Lake Havasu City Arizona
PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 10:56 am
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

Hello Don/All
Yep this one hits a nerve.
And good old Elpaso does too.
Fort Bliss
2 years 3rd Cav as an artillery surveyor.
Not complaining, I was young and dumb and wanted to go to Nam.
The God send was that the war ended wile I was in AIT, and I got stuck at Fort Bliss.
Didn’t seem fair at time, but I thank my lucky star’s today.
I grew a brain. Razz

If I can help with Divad let me know.
The only historical thing I can think of is that Divad was the first military system to go from concept to production in 5 years
(this included building the assembly ficility)
It was to be the model program for development of future military systems like it.
I use to have a top assy outline drawing but I have not seen it in a wile.I will look.
I have to mention,
When the government closes a program they make sure its gone for good.
I didn’t see them crush vheicales, but I saw them crush everything else.
All I can say is they make sure know one can change there mind.

Cheers
Tom
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website
MarkHolloway
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Apr 08, 2006
Posts: 2054
Location: Beatty, Nevada
PostPosted: Wed Dec 10, 2008 4:06 pm
Post subject: Re: Sgt York (DIVAD Gun) Information

Tommy,

When were you at Bliss and what squadron? I was in 'B' Troop 72-73 and 'I' Troop 76-79.

_________________
"TUMBLEWEED"
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Photo Gallery
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 4
All times are GMT - 6 Hours
Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next



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