login   |    register
Armor/AFV: What If?
For those who like to build hypothetical or alternate history versions of armor/AFVs.
Hosted by Darren Baker
what if lav-25
dvarettoni
_VISITCOMMUNITY
South Carolina, United States
Joined: September 28, 2005
KitMaker: 778 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 03:53 AM UTC
Hay all I'm starteing is new build so i thought that I would get some feed back
I have a very old Lav-25 at i have started to rebuild my idea is to make a convoy support vehicle i'm going to add a lot of firepower on the back a GAU-19 in a remote turret and i'm going to add a turret up frunt with a m-134 and a ms 50cal all with a lot of exterarmor as well all input is welcome thanks
dave
PS hope to have some pic up soon
dvarettoni
_VISITCOMMUNITY
South Carolina, United States
Joined: September 28, 2005
KitMaker: 778 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 09:43 AM UTC
ok got smoe pic for you all hope you like
dave


Photobucket


Photobucket


Photobucket


Photobucket


Photobucket


Photobucket
LopEaredGaloot
_VISITCOMMUNITY
United States
Joined: November 18, 2009
KitMaker: 19 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 11:36 AM UTC
The GAU-19 is a suppression weapon designed to an original helicopter doorgun spec when a couple of our troopships got out calibered (you'da thunk 5,000 Hueys in SEA would teach someone not to use helos as 'assault' platforms but no lesson gets learned longer than it takes an ignorant general to think physics doesn't apply to him, see Marine UH-1Ns over a certain graveyard in Najaf...) in the Grenada fling. It weighs around 500lbs, needs monument ammo can of some 2,000rds to feed it properly and as I recall, a delinker that is also rather bulky.

Dunno whether CROWS could handle that or not.

The weapon itself is fine if the enemy decides to stage a napoleonic charge but suffers a bit in the accuracy department for extended ranges especially, despite a promised 5mil/80 dispersion pattern. See, the gun was originally meant to be a six barrel weapon, just like the M134, but the ROF was so monumentally high (8Kspm) that feed problems and magazine weights became an issue and so that version never came to be. Unfortunately, the spindle whip in the tribarrel configuration is quite considerable because there is only the one locking collar and it is too far forwards on those long barrels-

http://www.anupkumarchaturvedi.com/00001_212.jpg

The result is a lot of wasted round-scatter-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S21EG5cACQA&feature=related

Given there are few targets in an OOTW/LIC environment that need more than 1-2 _placed_ .50BMG rounds to an engine compartment or roofline defilade to end any argument, the question rapidly becomes one of just how much noise you're lookin' to make vs. how LONG you expect the enemy to play whackamole games with popup or even indirect fired RPGs and the like available to them in numbers.

They are not beyond salvo launching the things to break through slats/reactives and simply deplete APS' magazines.

Similarly, the M134 is a fine weapon but if you need 2,000spm firepower (which is all it's rated to in surface mounts nowadays), there are a lot of single barrel weapons which do the trick just as nicely and are a lot more controllabe for fine shooting via CROWS.

If I'm lookin' for psyops value of a big freakin' cannon and a loud muzzle report, the existing 25mm chain gun on most LAVs is just the trick.

Indeed, the problem with the LRDG/SAS 'gun truck' approach to warfare is that inevitably there aren't enough of them and the more they play dragon, the more they tend to soak the sole attention of whatever suppression capabilities the enemy has brought to the fight. Unless lucky (and aggressively, independently, maneuvered) they don't tend to last long.

The more you up the ante with max-ROF weapons and different calibers, the faster each individual mount runs out of bark.

Few visible targets, well spaced, and lots of adversary explosive firepower thus tends to get your remote mounts shot up and/or offline in a real hurry, after which you are in a mobile range target, poking your head up with your personal weapon because the XM153 is useless.

Vs. Your standard Hill Billy threat, nothing beats a trained squad taking aimed shots with decent optics as a base of fire, just so long as you realize the threat can come from both sides of whatever you're hunkered behind.

With this in mind, let me recommend indirect and explosive fires and a common caliber on a lot lower ROF weapons spread. A Mk.19 is good. So is a mortar. I have seen over/under combinations of both on boats, in combination with a simple M2.

The goal here is to make it impossible for an ambush threat to cohabitate within the same 500m terrain space by dosing them liberally with indirect and explosive fires of your own that you can dole out 3-4 at a time to reach behind the cover they inevitably (prepared position) have set themselves up with. If the fight goes beyond that distance, which is possible in some of the desert and mountain areas, you're next bet is an M107 DUM or Javelin operator and a good radio operator with fires coordination experience.

While on the subject of smart munitions, air of any kind but particularly a UAV overhead can be a super asset, especially if you have OSRVT linkup for moving picture relay. Only the most disciplined of insurgent forces have the discipline to stay heads down until the last second and if you can SEE the ambush coming then it's the USAF that pays the 500lb GBU-12 penalty to kill a few and set the rest to rout.

Indeed, even some of the drone guys have a new munition which 2fer1s the Viperstrike and Hellfire on the same pylon.

Here too, a big problem is getting an antenna suite that is sufficiently 'redundant' (read fake) that they shoot all the high dipoles and leave the surface stripline alone. Running low profile antennas along the roofline behind a shield that looks like a raingutter tends to buy up contested realestate, fast.

Protective Measures. Birdcage is okay. There are places where the desultory fires are so intense, that there is simply no choice. But the topweight issue has become critical what with the cracked hub spindles and the tendency of even the beefed up Strykers to roll over at speed that it also brings a lot of 'not an all terrain battle taxi no more' issues with it. The resulting operational restrictions have not been cool.

Obviously, if you are weaving your way down some backstreet or mountain trail, you don't need a 3ft wide chastity fence around you. A front grille (head on to the threat) is another story and might look unique. As do some of the more homegrown solutions like sectioned sewer pipe mounted like tile shingles.

MCS is well appreciated by those units that have it. It drops ambients inside the crew compartment quite a bit and the dense, '3D' effect of the looped-jute camo is actually quite effective if they get the colors right.

A couple companies make resin Trophy APS systems designed for the Stryker that should fit onto the LAV and standoff intercept beats letting the badguys knock holes in your slats until they get the golden shot.

And of course, if things are really dicey (threats inside 100m), it's not unheard of to rig M18s to whatever hardened structural frame will take the backblast. Ain't nothin' like a little high explosive shotgunning to make the enemy avoid a lot of 'small unit' shennanigans, particularly where there are already enough rounds spanging off the hull that you are keeping your squad aboard and just doing thunder runs as linear objective dashes (which invites mine attacks which is another problem...).

Myself, one of the best options a guntruck can have is a UGV. Because not only can it go look inside that horse carcass or pile of trash for wires and cylinders but it can do things like leap ahead into into the center of a vill and look at the condition of the people moving about the market place. Or take up position one side street over and let you know when someone starts moving up or away as you arrive on main street.

A lot depends on the kind of high-hard or low-key patrol emphasis you are doing. You want enough firepower (and friends) to stay in the fight. But as a recce asset particularly, you also want to be able to go about your business without making your presence itself the center of attention.

Tactics count a _lot_ here. Our UAVs don't like cold weather, high winds or lightning. The enemy knows that. Which means that they tend to engage in a lot of acts we'd like to catch them at when we have no overhead asset to do so. Out rolls the 'community relations' teams. And on comes the ambushes.
gcdavidson
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Ontario, Canada
Joined: August 05, 2003
KitMaker: 1,697 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 01:10 PM UTC
There's a man who takes what-iffery pretty seriously.
bossman
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Maine, United States
Joined: May 05, 2002
KitMaker: 30 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 03:21 PM UTC

Quoted Text

There's a man who takes what-iffery pretty seriously.



Indeed. We kid because we care.
dvarettoni
_VISITCOMMUNITY
South Carolina, United States
Joined: September 28, 2005
KitMaker: 778 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 06:36 PM UTC
Thank for you input Loperaedgaloot what you said is great but it is just a what if and for me to build the gau-19 from scratch is the real challenge
thanks dave
RotorHead67
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Virginia, United States
Joined: May 07, 2003
KitMaker: 1,174 posts
AeroScale: 226 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 16, 2010 - 09:55 PM UTC

Quoted Text

There's a man who takes what-iffery pretty seriously.



Sometimes I think the "What If" ery, in us makes better sense, than that - what THE BEAN counters IN the PENTAGON, who approve DOD New equipment allocations. We never get what, we need to do the right job, and what we do get is worthless in 2 yrs cause they come up with a Brainstorm idea......
"Oh wait This would be much bettter-----Quick build me 200 of these" @ the cost of 35 million"
dvarettoni
_VISITCOMMUNITY
South Carolina, United States
Joined: September 28, 2005
KitMaker: 778 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 23, 2010 - 06:21 AM UTC
hey all small up date for you

Photobucket


Photobucket


Photobucket


Photobucket

dave
gogs007
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Scotland, United Kingdom
Joined: February 03, 2007
KitMaker: 300 posts
AeroScale: 5 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 30, 2010 - 06:40 AM UTC
would it not have been better to have the 40mm and the gattling gun, that way you have both direct and indirect fire ability.
zoomie50
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Texas, United States
Joined: March 20, 2005
KitMaker: 358 posts
AeroScale: 43 posts
Posted: Thursday, December 30, 2010 - 01:35 PM UTC
David
I think it's a cool idea. I'm taking a stryker with the 105 gun mount, pulling off the gun adding the centauro turret to it then putting the US built 105 in the turret. Adding extra armor to the turret, the hull and then adding sideskirts.Place a 50 cal on the 105 cannon Israeli style,with a 50 cal and a mini-gun on the hatches.Paint and mark it in US markings then load it up with gear.And put it in an urban setting with some US troops.
So of course I think your idea makes perfect sense,lol.
Jerry
dvarettoni
_VISITCOMMUNITY
South Carolina, United States
Joined: September 28, 2005
KitMaker: 778 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 - 04:17 AM UTC
thank Jerry hope to have some more pic up this week off from work. what colers were you going to paint ? and can't wait to see some pic
dave
zoomie50
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Texas, United States
Joined: March 20, 2005
KitMaker: 358 posts
AeroScale: 43 posts
Posted: Monday, January 10, 2011 - 03:46 PM UTC

Quoted Text

thank Jerry hope to have some more pic up this week off from work. what colers were you going to paint ? and can't wait to see some pic
dave


Dave
I'm not sure about the paint scheme just yet. I built Bandai's twin barreled tank.The M-61A5 and painted in a dark yellow brown and dark grey camo scheme. I really like the way it turned out. So I will either paint this one the same way or in an urban camo scheme. I am open to suggestions.I am putting it with a burned out building and some grunts. So I am leaning towards an urban scheme.And I'm looking forwad to seeing your finished product also.
Jerry
SGTJKJ
#041
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Kobenhavn, Denmark
Joined: July 20, 2006
KitMaker: 9,816 posts
AeroScale: 3,691 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 - 01:13 AM UTC
Looks cool so far, Dave. A really cool idea.

I would definitely go with the urban camouflage idea. If you are up for it, you could go for a Slovak MiG-29 camouflage. That would look cool, but would be a lot of masking work.
Alternatively buy the Academy kit of the Slovak MiG-29 as it has the camouflage scheme as decals and the cut those into shape and use them.

Looking forward to see more.

ModelBuildingTanks
_VISITCOMMUNITY
Washington, United States
Joined: August 05, 2010
KitMaker: 146 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Sunday, April 10, 2011 - 07:01 PM UTC
Looking good so far Dave. Might as well design a vehicle for the US army!
dvarettoni
_VISITCOMMUNITY
South Carolina, United States
Joined: September 28, 2005
KitMaker: 778 posts
AeroScale: 0 posts
Posted: Monday, April 18, 2011 - 02:11 AM UTC
thanks alex i have put it aside for right now and i'm saveing it for the what if campaign wich starts next mouth so you can look for it there thanks
dave