Com-Central.net

Roy_A_Lingle

Hi Folks!

A fellow model club member was showing me an old Squadron/Signal book, "Ground War-Vietanm Vol. 1 1945-1965", number 6053.

He had ran acrossed this photo of an ARVN M113 mounting a turret I had never noticed until today. Surprised

The back cover of the book has a drawing/painting of two such vehicles. After getting home, I pulled out my Hunnicutt Bradley book and starting looking though the M113 section. No such turret listed. There are two photos in the In-Service section of an ARVN M113 with this turret. I did find something like this turret in the M113 and 1/2 section called a FMC M74 with twin machine guns and Model 100-E for a single machine gun mount.

Does anyone know anything about these turrets? In all my time around M113s and 18 months in Vietnam seeing ARVN M113s, I have never noticed this set up before.

I am seeing a conversion project in the works that will blow a model contest judge's mine! Twisted Evil

Spot Report!
Sgt, Scouts Out!

Doug_Kibbey

- Roy_A_Lingle

I am seeing a conversion project in the works that will blow a model contest judge's mine!

Sgt, Scouts Out!

...and there was much rejoicing! Laughing

Seriously, I've never seen one either...nor on the Product Improved M113 A1 models in my brochure. I saw the one in Hunnicutt, and wondered if it might be a naval mount adapted from a patrol boat or something.

Dontos

The turret looks to be the same off of the V-100, of which the RSVN was equipt.

I think I have seen this version before, but it never really made an impression on me to think it was unique.

Don

Doug_Kibbey

Looks rounder and dome-ier than the ones I find on V100 Commando's. Fer example:

www.intlrepo-depo.com/...ndo%20.jpg

Dontos

- Doug_Kibbey

Looks rounder and dome-ier than the ones I find on V100 Commando's. Fer example:

www.intlrepo-depo.com/...ndo%20.jpg

Doug

... Funny you should use that particular vehicle. I toyed with the idea of owning a V100. Of the few available on the market (at that time)...I made inquiries. Shocked

A bit too 'steep' for me....

I gave up the V100 idea,.... stuck with aquiring another type,.... Rolling Eyes

Anyway, thought the turret looked similiar....without any references.

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

Aircraft Armaments Incorporated Model 74C Cupola/Command Station
US designation XM30
Used on M113 by the ARVN and about 20 were acquired by Australia for use on M113s before being replaced by the Cadillac Gage T50 turret as used on the V-100 Commando.

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

here you go, a few more pictures and information on Australian use.
www.mheaust.com.au/Aus...74/M74.htm

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

posted by buglerbilly here earlier from Defense Industry Daily

Everything old is new again Smile

Note the turret, now that would make an interesting model!
from sitrep1.tripod.com/mem...oto_album/

Sabot

Looks like the turret Academy includes with their Vietnam era M113A1 kit. Along with the standard cupola and ACAV armor, they also include the twin .30 cal Aussie turret and M132 flame thrower turret.

Al_Bowie · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 25, 2006 Posts: 34

Roy, the Aussies and RSVN troops used the CG 74 turret on the 113s during the VN period. The Aussies abandon the T74 and went for the larger (although still small) CG T50 turret which is still in service today albeit with 50/30 combo as opposed to the twin 30's.
The Academy VN era 113 kit has the t50 and the US flame turret which was based on the 74. Verlinden also did a set of 113 turrets which included both the t50 and the T74 from memory. I'll see If I can find some pics of Aussie ones with the T74.

Al Bowie

Maple_Leaf_Eh · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 517

- Coldsteel

here you go, a few more pictures and information on Australian use.
www.mheaust.com.au/Aus...74/M74.htm

Clipped from the linked page, "Firepower was provided by two L3A3 .30 calibre electrically fired machine guns. Turret traverse and weapon elevation was manual"

What is an L3A3? A Browning M1919A4 in 30-06, in 7.62NATO, or the M73 with the very short receiver? My 12th Ed Small Arms of the World is mute on Oz AFV weapons.

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

- Maple_Leaf_Eh

What is an L3A3? A Browning M1919A4 in 30-06, in 7.62NATO, or the M73 with the very short receiver? My 12th Ed Small Arms of the World is mute on Oz AFV weapons.

I'm not completely sure, Australia was unable to obtain either the M73, or the M37 (for which the turret was designed) and so the 74C turrets were ordered from AAI with one gun port blanked off and ready to mount the standard MG in use with the RAAC, "the Browning .30-inch M1919A4"*, so presumably that is the L3A3 or it's a typo.

*AMEP Vol 4, the M113 and M113A1 APC in Australian Service 1962 to 1972.

Joe_D

Did a little "Google"ing,
Seems like the L3A3/4 is the Browning M1919 modified with an open sear. Not sure what it was chambered at but it kinda alluded to 7.62 NATO. Makes sense, in a confined cupola it's quicker to reload when all you have to do is put the ammo in and not retract the bolt back to fire. The M2 TT .50 cal bolt doesn't lock to the rear either (Another Browning Design) when rounds are expended. So you have to charge the bolt before firing again. Didn't have that problem with the M85. About not getting the M-73/219 system. Smart move, both were absolute junk as a Co-axial MG.

Joe D

Doug_Kibbey

- Joe_D

So you have to charge the bolt before firing again. Didn't have that problem with the M85. About not getting the M-73/219 system. Smart move, both were absolute junk as a Co-axial MG.

Joe D

Tell it, Brother. I can testify as well. Even tested some of the unheralded variants of that system and even the M219 (somewhat "improved" M73)" was absolute junk. You can't put three pounds of crap into a two pound bag and that's basically what they tried to do (with M85 to an extent also, of which I'm also not a fan, though the high ROF mode was fun when it worked). M73 family used an overcammed, underleveraged receiver and a really poorly thought out feed mechanism. Then it all fit ever so snugly against the forward turret such that service-in-a-hurry (likely to be needed) in the field was out of the question. A quick-detach device was developed to try to save the bacon of the poor crew who needed to get it out in a hurry.

Joe_D

Doug,
When I was a young SGT I worked with a veteran TC who told me the reason why they called the improved CO-AX M219 was because it was 3 times worse than the M73. Then God gave us the M240 and all our problems ceased. I always wondered why the rest of the Army took so long to adopt it. It is a just fantastic piece of equipment. About the M85, I know I am in the minority but I guess by the time I came in the bugs had been worked out. I always loved it.

Joe D

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