Comment

Revealed: Senator Ted Cruz Follows Twitter Account w/Pres. Obama in Hangman's Noose Avi

188
William Lewis1/31/2014 6:49:44 am PST

re: #180 Dark_Falcon

‘Giraffe’? Never heard of that M1 idea.

The US >has had success in using its tank chassis as the foundation of other vehicles in the past (the M4 and M60 spring to mind quickly) though that happened less often form the 1960’s onward because the M113 came to be seen as the tracked vehicle from which to base specialized variants. This actually represented (and still represents) a good amount of practicality from the US Army, as the M113 is cheap to build and procure, is easy to maintain, is relatively easy to use, and is still effective in most specialized roles. To bring the discussion full-circle, the M113 was actually praised by Red Army evaluators who were able to examine captured M113s (captured in Vietnam) for those “Soviet” traits.

Heh. The 113 series was good, but I really preferred the 113A3 version - a steering wheel in place of the lateral levers and they moved the fuel tankage outside the armored envelope making it a far more survivable vehicle for the infantry on board. It remains the quintessential battle taxi and is arguably a better idea than the IFV concept of the BMP/Bradley type vehicles. Perhaps if we had a 14.5 mm version of the M2 ala the KPV that provided a bit more anti-armor performance, the Army might not have felt the need for the 25 mm of the Bradley.