Most kind! Once the undercoat has fully dried, I will post the resulting pics with a suitable backstory. 👍
Alternative History Armoured Fighting Vehicles Part 3
- Thread starter Claymore
- Start date
- Status
when you move back packing them and getting them back in one piece is going to be a chore
Last edited:
Has there even been a more crazy tank idea then the late war german nonsense like the Ratte and Monster (if that one is even real)?The Gavin looks good but we ofcourse all wait for you to get home so that you can build proper tanks like the Ratte!
Gavin Armoured Reconnaissance/Airborne Fire Support Vehicle Update:
The M551 Sheridan entered service with the United States Army in 1967. At the urging of General Creighton Abrams, the U.S. Commander, Military Assistance Command Vietnam, at the time, the M551 was rushed into combat service in South Vietnam in January 1969.
The Sheridan’s operational performance in Vietnam was problematic at best. It was armed with the technically advanced but troublesome M81/M81 Modified/M81E1 152mm gun/launcher, which fired both conventional ammunition and the MGM-51 Shillelagh guided anti-tank missile. In combat operations, firing the gun often adversely affected the delicate electronics, which were at the early stages of the transition to solid state devices, so the missile and its guidance system was omitted from vehicles deployed to South Vietnam.
The Sheridan had several advantages: it did not get stuck in the mud as often as the 52-ton M48 did, nor did it throw its track off as often. The light weight and high mobility proved their worth, and it was much appreciated by the infantry who were desperate for direct-fire support. The gun proved an effective anti-personnel weapon when used with either the M657 HE shell or the M625 canister round, which used thousands of flechettes as projectiles.
However, the M81E1 was not ideal in medium- and long-range tank engagements as its low velocity produced extended flight times, and made it difficult to lead moving targets. The gun also was criticized for having too much recoil for the vehicle weight, the second and even third road wheels coming clear off the ground when the main gun fired. Worse still was its paltry rate of fire. An average M48 crew could fire as many as seventeen 90mm shells during a "mad minute" (60 seconds with all guns firing-on command), the Sheridan was known to put out only two 152mm shells during the same time frame. To add insult to injury, only 20-25 rounds of 152mm ammunition could be carried.
In order to address these shortcomings, and to give its cavalry/reconnaissance units and their supported infantry more reach, a number of British FV433 105mm Abbot SPG turrets were procured in 1970 and rushed into theatre. Named after James M Gavin the Commanding General (CG) of the 82nd Airborne Division during World War II, this simple and expeditious conversion soon proved its worth. With a maximum range of 17.4 km the gun was able to elevate to 70 degrees and depress to -5 degrees, sufficient to engage enemy AFVs if necessary. Traverse and shell ramming were powered by electrical servo mechanisms, while elevation and cartridge ramming were by hand. Maximum rate of fire was 8-10 rounds per minute with 40 rounds carried in the vehicle.
The model comprises the hull of the excellent Tamiya M551 Sheridan kit and a scratch-built turret built mostly out of plastic (styrene) sheet, a knitting needle and some plastic tubing. Unfortunately, final painting and tactical markings will have to wait until I get back to Scotland next year.
The M551 Sheridan entered service with the United States Army in 1967. At the urging of General Creighton Abrams, the U.S. Commander, Military Assistance Command Vietnam, at the time, the M551 was rushed into combat service in South Vietnam in January 1969.
The Sheridan’s operational performance in Vietnam was problematic at best. It was armed with the technically advanced but troublesome M81/M81 Modified/M81E1 152mm gun/launcher, which fired both conventional ammunition and the MGM-51 Shillelagh guided anti-tank missile. In combat operations, firing the gun often adversely affected the delicate electronics, which were at the early stages of the transition to solid state devices, so the missile and its guidance system was omitted from vehicles deployed to South Vietnam.
The Sheridan had several advantages: it did not get stuck in the mud as often as the 52-ton M48 did, nor did it throw its track off as often. The light weight and high mobility proved their worth, and it was much appreciated by the infantry who were desperate for direct-fire support. The gun proved an effective anti-personnel weapon when used with either the M657 HE shell or the M625 canister round, which used thousands of flechettes as projectiles.
However, the M81E1 was not ideal in medium- and long-range tank engagements as its low velocity produced extended flight times, and made it difficult to lead moving targets. The gun also was criticized for having too much recoil for the vehicle weight, the second and even third road wheels coming clear off the ground when the main gun fired. Worse still was its paltry rate of fire. An average M48 crew could fire as many as seventeen 90mm shells during a "mad minute" (60 seconds with all guns firing-on command), the Sheridan was known to put out only two 152mm shells during the same time frame. To add insult to injury, only 20-25 rounds of 152mm ammunition could be carried.
In order to address these shortcomings, and to give its cavalry/reconnaissance units and their supported infantry more reach, a number of British FV433 105mm Abbot SPG turrets were procured in 1970 and rushed into theatre. Named after James M Gavin the Commanding General (CG) of the 82nd Airborne Division during World War II, this simple and expeditious conversion soon proved its worth. With a maximum range of 17.4 km the gun was able to elevate to 70 degrees and depress to -5 degrees, sufficient to engage enemy AFVs if necessary. Traverse and shell ramming were powered by electrical servo mechanisms, while elevation and cartridge ramming were by hand. Maximum rate of fire was 8-10 rounds per minute with 40 rounds carried in the vehicle.
The model comprises the hull of the excellent Tamiya M551 Sheridan kit and a scratch-built turret built mostly out of plastic (styrene) sheet, a knitting needle and some plastic tubing. Unfortunately, final painting and tactical markings will have to wait until I get back to Scotland next year.
Last edited:
A fair point and by performance I take you mean ammunition stowage.
As it happens the internal volume of the fighting compartments of the two vehicles is surprisingly similar. Looking at the diagram below: Front to rear (A) they are identical; the M551 hull (B) is slightly wider than the Abbot and the distance between the inside of the tracks (D) is slightly wider; the M551 hull is slightly taller (C) than the Abbot but the Abbot hull is slightly deeper.
The fact is that the differences are marginal and, therefore, (although difficult to be precise) the internal volumes are likely not to be that radically different. Also the Abbot's 105mm ammunition was loaded and stowed on two pieces (shell and cartridge) and was stowed in every nook and cranny of the fighting compartment. Although I have no idea what might have been stowed there, the M551, potentially, also has space either side of the driver's position.
Not sure if this helps...
Last edited:
Very 40KNot internal, but maybe an easier reload if the ammunition is in rotary magazines mountable to the sides of the turret, kind of like Mickey Mouse ears? Of course, that also implies theres a support vehicle with a built in crane for facilitating reloads
I love it
One question I have is with all of the what if bashing that goes on here, how much is initial work is done via line drawings to see if the idea conceptually works?
As I'm thinking about a carrier conversion and want to make sure that I have all my ducks in a row to start.
As I'm thinking about a carrier conversion and want to make sure that I have all my ducks in a row to start.
My baseline philosophy is and always had been that my designs and subsequent models have to be technically and physically possible. My back stories give the when, where and why but always the how must be physically possible. Therefore, I always have a plan and that plan always starts off with a scale line drawing to ensure that the basics are at least technically possible if not plausible.
Gavin - very nice. That would be a vehicle I'd wager would still be around today. Have noticed various recent sci-fi and superhero(?) movies using the Abbot itself in recent years trying to pass as US equipment. Can't think of titles though.
The Mist (2007), Evolution (2001), The Day the Earth Stood Still (2008), Super 8 (2011), The Dark Knight Rises (2012), Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016), and loads of TV programmes/series. 👍
How effective would a ATL IFV be if it had a turret with two .50 caliber machine guns and four UB-32 rocket pods (or the American equivalent, if there is one)?
Would there be any advantage to rapid firing over a hundred 57mm S-5/S-8 unguided rockets (or the American equivalent) compared to using a traditional 20-30mm autocannon?
The idea of a well camouflaged ATL Cold War era tank destroyers spamming rockets at unsuspecting enemy tank columns within effective range has always appealed to me as the perfect ambush weapon.
Would there be any advantage to rapid firing over a hundred 57mm S-5/S-8 unguided rockets (or the American equivalent) compared to using a traditional 20-30mm autocannon?
The idea of a well camouflaged ATL Cold War era tank destroyers spamming rockets at unsuspecting enemy tank columns within effective range has always appealed to me as the perfect ambush weapon.
Last edited:
- Status