±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: 327
Total: 327
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Member Screenshots
03: Community Forums
04: Community Forums
05: Home
06: Home
07: Photo Gallery
08: Community Forums
09: Community Forums
10: Photo Gallery
11: Community Forums
12: Home
13: News Archive
14: Photo Gallery
15: Community Forums
16: Community Forums
17: Community Forums
18: Photo Gallery
19: Home
20: Photo Gallery
21: Home
22: Community Forums
23: Community Forums
24: Community Forums
25: Community Forums
26: Member Screenshots
27: Community Forums
28: Photo Gallery
29: Community Forums
30: Member Screenshots
31: Community Forums
32: Home
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Community Forums
36: Community Forums
37: Home
38: Community Forums
39: Photo Gallery
40: Home
41: Home
42: Community Forums
43: Community Forums
44: Community Forums
45: Community Forums
46: Member Screenshots
47: Community Forums
48: Community Forums
49: Community Forums
50: Community Forums
51: Community Forums
52: Member Screenshots
53: Community Forums
54: Community Forums
55: Community Forums
56: Community Forums
57: Member Screenshots
58: Home
59: Member Screenshots
60: Community Forums
61: Community Forums
62: Community Forums
63: Community Forums
64: Community Forums
65: Community Forums
66: Community Forums
67: News
68: Downloads
69: Home
70: Community Forums
71: Tell a Friend
72: Your Account
73: Community Forums
74: Member Screenshots
75: Home
76: Member Screenshots
77: Community Forums
78: Community Forums
79: Home
80: Downloads
81: Photo Gallery
82: Home
83: Photo Gallery
84: Community Forums
85: Community Forums
86: Member Screenshots
87: Community Forums
88: Community Forums
89: News Archive
90: Community Forums
91: Community Forums
92: Community Forums
93: Member Screenshots
94: Member Screenshots
95: Community Forums
96: News
97: Home
98: Community Forums
99: Community Forums
100: Home
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: Community Forums
104: Your Account
105: Community Forums
106: Home
107: Community Forums
108: Member Screenshots
109: Member Screenshots
110: Home
111: Home
112: Community Forums
113: Photo Gallery
114: Statistics
115: Community Forums
116: Community Forums
117: Community Forums
118: Photo Gallery
119: Photo Gallery
120: Community Forums
121: Community Forums
122: Photo Gallery
123: Community Forums
124: Community Forums
125: Community Forums
126: Community Forums
127: Community Forums
128: Community Forums
129: Community Forums
130: Community Forums
131: Downloads
132: Community Forums
133: Member Screenshots
134: Community Forums
135: Community Forums
136: Community Forums
137: Member Screenshots
138: Home
139: Community Forums
140: Home
141: Home
142: Home
143: News Archive
144: Community Forums
145: Community Forums
146: Community Forums
147: Home
148: Home
149: Community Forums
150: Photo Gallery
151: Home
152: Community Forums
153: Member Screenshots
154: Statistics
155: Community Forums
156: Community Forums
157: Community Forums
158: Home
159: Community Forums
160: Home
161: Community Forums
162: Community Forums
163: Community Forums
164: Community Forums
165: Community Forums
166: Photo Gallery
167: Community Forums
168: Supporters
169: News Archive
170: Home
171: Home
172: Photo Gallery
173: Community Forums
174: Community Forums
175: Downloads
176: Statistics
177: News Archive
178: Community Forums
179: Home
180: Community Forums
181: Community Forums
182: Community Forums
183: News Archive
184: Community Forums
185: Community Forums
186: Home
187: Community Forums
188: Member Screenshots
189: Community Forums
190: Home
191: Photo Gallery
192: Home
193: Member Screenshots
194: Community Forums
195: Community Forums
196: Home
197: Home
198: Community Forums
199: Community Forums
200: Home
201: Community Forums
202: Photo Gallery
203: Member Screenshots
204: Member Screenshots
205: Member Screenshots
206: Community Forums
207: Community Forums
208: Community Forums
209: Community Forums
210: Community Forums
211: Community Forums
212: Community Forums
213: Community Forums
214: Community Forums
215: Community Forums
216: Community Forums
217: Home
218: Community Forums
219: Member Screenshots
220: Community Forums
221: Community Forums
222: Community Forums
223: Photo Gallery
224: Member Screenshots
225: Community Forums
226: News Archive
227: Community Forums
228: Home
229: Home
230: Home
231: Community Forums
232: Member Screenshots
233: Community Forums
234: Home
235: Community Forums
236: Downloads
237: Home
238: Downloads
239: Community Forums
240: Community Forums
241: Home
242: Home
243: Community Forums
244: Home
245: Member Screenshots
246: Community Forums
247: Member Screenshots
248: Community Forums
249: Community Forums
250: Member Screenshots
251: Home
252: Home
253: Photo Gallery
254: Community Forums
255: Member Screenshots
256: Member Screenshots
257: Community Forums
258: Community Forums
259: Member Screenshots
260: Statistics
261: Community Forums
262: News Archive
263: Community Forums
264: Community Forums
265: Community Forums
266: Home
267: Community Forums
268: Downloads
269: Community Forums
270: Photo Gallery
271: Member Screenshots
272: Community Forums
273: Community Forums
274: Member Screenshots
275: Community Forums
276: Member Screenshots
277: Home
278: Photo Gallery
279: Member Screenshots
280: News Archive
281: Community Forums
282: Community Forums
283: Community Forums
284: Home
285: Community Forums
286: Community Forums
287: Home
288: Home
289: News Archive
290: Community Forums
291: Member Screenshots
292: Home
293: Community Forums
294: Home
295: Community Forums
296: Community Forums
297: Community Forums
298: Community Forums
299: Photo Gallery
300: Community Forums
301: Community Forums
302: Community Forums
303: Community Forums
304: Community Forums
305: Community Forums
306: Home
307: Search
308: Community Forums
309: Community Forums
310: Community Forums
311: Community Forums
312: Community Forums
313: Community Forums
314: News Archive
315: Community Forums
316: Member Screenshots
317: Downloads
318: Community Forums
319: Community Forums
320: Member Screenshots
321: Community Forums
322: Community Forums
323: Community Forums
324: Community Forums
325: Member Screenshots
326: Downloads
327: 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