BAE MTVL
Notes: The MTVL (Mobile Tactical Vehicle Light) is a concept originally devised by United Defense, and later taken over by BAE. The MTVL, sometimes called the M-113A3+ or M-113A4, is a stretched version of the M-113A3. The MTVL can be distinguished by its extra set of roadwheels (six pairs instead of five) and the additional armor on the hull. United Defense marketed them to the US Army as replacements for existing M-113s, but found no takers; however several countries, most notably Canada, have taken the MTVL as an addition or improvement to their armored vehicle fleet which is less expensive than IFVs.
The MTVL has a more powerful engine to cope with the increased weight, a new high-mobility suspension, and a hull armored with stronger 5083 aluminum alloy armor. Appliqué armor is also available for the MTVL, and lugs for ERA can be added. The appliqué consists of titanium/steel alloy panels for the glacis and front sides of the hull, steel plates for the sides, and a spaced laminate/steel plate for the hull floor, giving a lightweight yet strong armor increase. The MTVL has six roadwheels on each side instead of five, and is nearly a meter longer. The driver’s station is similar to that of the M-113A3, being a conventional steering yoke with a brake pedal and gas pedal. The driver can remove his front vision block and replace it with an image intensifier or thermal imager. The engine is replaced with a 400-horsepower 6V-53TIA turbocharged diesel engine, and the transmission is replaced with an Alison X-200 transmission to match. The engine and transmission are electronically controlled for greater efficiency. MTVL can use the standard tracks of the M-113 (though a longer set) or wider tracks for soft terrain. The suspension itself is higher, as is roadwheel travel. The MTVL remains amphibious, though additional buoyant panels must be attached to the sides (they are composed of Styrofoam encased in aluminum – not enough to contribute to armor) and the trim vane is larger. The fuel tanks are larger than those of the M-113; they are normally at the rear of the vehicle, though Canadian MTVLs (generally called M-113A4s) have the fuel tanks in the floor of the vehicle, as experience in Afghanistan has shown that the rear-mounted fuel tanks are vulnerable to enemy fire due to their relatively light armor, and that diesel fuel is not as likely to ignite as other fuels when hit by a mine or IED. Overall layout is virtually identical to the M-113A3, except for the longer length of the MTVL. The commander’s station is in the same place (except on the IFV-L), and usually armed with the same weapons – though it is normally surrounded with AV2 gun shields. On each side of the front hull are a cluster of four smoke grenade launchers. Over the rear of the hull is the customary large, rear-opening hatch, but it is a bit larger than on the M-113 and to the rear of this hatch is a domed adjustable ventilator.
In addition to the APC-type variants shown below, there are several specialist variants, which will be covered elsewhere.
The APC Variants
The standard MTVL is essentially like a larger M-113, able to carry a larger infantry squad, specialized teams like dismount ATGM or SAM teams, or lots of cargo to forward areas. The commander’s station is as described above, and is normally armed with an M-2HB. A variant of this commander’s station is an Israeli-designed Rafael OHWS, also armed with an M-2HB; in this case the commander is also a gunner who sits in the hull under armor, and aims and fires his weapon though a downlinked monitor. Reloading the M-2HB in this case is from inside the vehicle, again under armor. The ammunition complement is generally the same as that of the M-113, though of course the MTVL could theoretically carry more extra ammunition. In practice, most countries using the MTVL use a normal size of infantry squad, but carry more ammunition and heavy weapons for their infantry squad.
Two other versions of the MTVL also exist, though neither has had any takers so far. The IFVL (Infantry Fighting Vehicle – Light) is a more heavily-armed APC version of the MTVL. The normal commander’s station is not fitted; in the center front of the vehicle is one-man turret mounting an M-242 Chaingun and M-240D machinegun in a fully-stabilized mount, with aiming assistance from a laser rangefinder and ballistic computer. The turret has a full-range of vision and night vision devices, including magnified sights and vision blocks, day/night TV, and thermal imaging. As with the MTVL hull, the IFVL turret can take appliqué armor plates. Existing MTVL’s can be converted to IFVLs by replacing the hull top. The size of the infantry squad carried is necessarily reduced by the space taken up by the turret and ammunition. The IFVL was considered for use by the US Army’s then-new IBCTs, but ultimately the Stryker was selected instead.
A heavier version of the IFVL is also built, though it is too called the IFVM (Medium). This version is topped by the complete turret of an M-2A3 Bradley (though in earlier iterations, the turret of earlier versions of the Bradley were used). This turret cannot take appliqué armor like the MTVL hull can. The turret retains the full capabilities of the Bradley turret. The result is similar to the Egyptian Infantry Fighting Vehicle, though the Egyptians arrived at their vehicle from a different process (they extended an M-113A2 hull, updated it to M-113A3 standards, and then installed an upgraded engine and transmission). The EIFV therefore does not have the ground clearance of the IFVM, most production versions of the EIFV do not have the horsepower of the IFVM, and the hulls do not have quite the armor protection of the IFVM. So far, there has been no interest in this version of the IFVM except by Egypt, who is considering replacing their EIFV in production with it. It is a heavy vehicle with corresponding performance, despite the more powerful engine.
The Mobile Tactical
Vehicle Light, Cargo Carrier (MTVC)
The MTVC is sort of a “stripped out” version of the MTVL, optimized for carrying bulk cargo instead of troops. It retains the commander’s station, though the commander’s station is not normally ringed by gun shields as they would interfere with the rotation of the cargo crane from some angles. The commander’s station itself has been moved somewhat more to the right and forward to further inhibit interference with the crane. Behind the commander’s station, the MTVC has only a flatbed section with only the sides retained (with reduced armor), equipped with numerous tie-down and lock-down points and with rollers in the bed to help off-load containerized and palletized cargo. The MTVC also carries sets of stabilization blocks as well as small ramps to help off-load cargo; in the rear, these fold up then the vehicle is in motion. On each side is a large double door to help quickly off-load smaller cargoes. Next to the commander’s section, behind the driver, is a space with lockers and slide-out drawers for crew gear and a maintenance tool set. Surprisingly, the MTVC can take appliqué armor on the front and even the sides, though the side appliqué will block the access doors. Finally, the MTVC has a winch/crane on the left side at the rear which folds along the left side; this crane has a capacity of 1.6 tons at a reach of 6.3 meters.
The MTVC can be quickly converted into an engineer variant, the MTVF (Mobile Tactical Vehicle Light, Fitter’s Vehicle). All that is required is a small refit inside the cargo bed and the installation of thicker floor plates. MTVCs typically use add-on flotation panels on the sides only when carrying 3.5 tons or greater; these also block the use of the side doors.
The MTVCP (Mobile
Tactical Vehicle Light, Command Post)
This is essentially the “M-577” version of the MTVL, and most of what applies to the M-577A3 also applies to the MTVCP. Some of the M-577A3 particulars will be reproduced here for convenience.
The most obvious difference from the MTVL is the raised roofline; behind the driver’s position, the roof has been raised by over 64 centimeters, allowing those inside to stand upright. There are work shelves on each side of the vehicle. Attached to these work shelves are folding wooden extensions (in two sections on each side). The vehicle commander’s position was also radically changed; the MTVCP has no commander’s cupola, though a pintle-mounted machinegun is optional (I have included one in the stats below). Instead, the MTVPC has a hatch in the roof that is about 25% larger than an MTVL’s commander’s hatch, making it large enough for large pieces of equipment (such as observation devices and designators) to be moved into and out of the vehicle from the top hatch. The commander’s seat has been removed, replaced with a simple folding metal stand. The commander’s hatch also has no vision blocks. The MTVPC, like a standard M-113 or MTVL, does have a bracket beside the driver for his M-16 or M-4, another bracket above the rear ramp (on the inside) that will hold an M-16/M-4, an M-60 machinegun, an M-240 machinegun, or an M-249 SAW. Below this is another bracket that will hold an M-16/M-4 or an M-249.
The passenger compartment has folding bench seats on either side of the passenger compartment. At the front of the raised roofline, to the right of the driver’s position and in the center of the front deck, is an enclosed metal box permanently attached to the MTVPC; this is designed for a 5 kW gasoline-powered generator to power the electrical equipment without having to run the engine for long periods of time. This generator is not designed to be removed from the vehicle, and the controls for the generator are inside the passenger compartment in front of the commander’s position. The generator can operate from its own fuel tanks or the vehicle’s fuel tanks.
Other items which may be found (depending on configuration and purpose) on the MTVPC include a 3x3 cabinet with several drawers and a fold-out table; 3-5 folding metal chairs; a 1.2x1.8-meter map board that attaches to the right inner wall of the vehicle; and a variety of shelves (and ways to mount them) for the equipment the MTVPC carries. An MTVPC generally carries several radios; including two short-range, two medium-range, and one long-range radio; the medium-range and short-range radios are typically data-capable. Inside the MTVPC are both white lights and blackout lights to light up the interior. Though they may not all be used at the same time, there are mounts for up to five antenna aerials; in addition, a very-long-range antenna may be mounted in a bracket at the front of the raised section to the left and rear of the driver. A 10-meter telescoping antenna at the left rear is an option on the MTVCP. A ruggedized laptop computer is carried. At the rear of the vehicle, on either side of ramp on the outside, are connections for four field telephones, two generators, and two pairs of conventional electrical outlets to allow other equipment to feed off of the MTVCP (generally done only if the MTVCP is itself feeding from a generator). Something that is standard equipment is a work area-extension tent and poles; these attach to the rear of the MTVCP, and add approximately 4x5 meters of enclosed workspace. When not in use, these stow in special brackets and lash-down points atop the ramp entrance. The MTVCP can take appliqué armor, though the side appliqué armor is necessarily of a different size than the side appliqué for the MTVL. The MTVCP retains its amphibious capability.
Twilight 2000 Notes: These vehicles were primarily used by US National Guard and reserve formations in the Twilight 2000 timeline.
Merc 2000 Notes: These vehicles were popular as they offered more power and protection than an M-113, but were less expensive.
Vehicle |
Price |
Fuel Type |
Load |
Veh Wt |
Crew |
Mnt |
Night Vision |
Radiological |
MTVL (Standard) |
$156,363 |
D, A |
2.1 tons |
18.1 tons |
2+13 |
10 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
MTVL (Standard) w/Appliqué |
$163,257 |
D, A |
1.9 tons |
18.9 tons |
2+13 |
11 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
MTVL w/OHWS |
$175,088 |
D, A |
2 tons |
18.2 tons |
2+12 |
11 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D), Image Intensification (C/G), Thermal Imaging (C/G) |
Shielded |
MTVL w/OHWS & Appliqué |
$181,982 |
D, A |
1.8 tons |
19 tons |
2+12 |
12 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D), Image Intensification (C/G), Thermal Imaging (C/G) |
Shielded |
IFVL |
$190,409 |
D, A |
1.9 tons |
18.4 tons |
2+10 |
10 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D), Image Intensification (C/G), Thermal Imaging (C/G) |
Shielded |
IFVL w/Appliqué |
$197,303 |
D, A |
1.6 tons |
19.2 tons |
2+10 |
11 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D), Image Intensification (C/G), Thermal Imaging (C/G) |
Shielded |
IFVM |
$312,097 |
D, A |
1.4 tons |
20.9 tons |
2+8 |
12 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (D, C), 2nd Gen FLIR (G) |
Shielded |
IFVM w/Appliqué |
$318,991 |
D, A |
1.1 tons |
21.7 tons |
2+8 |
13 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (D, C), 2nd Gen FLIR (G) |
Shielded |
MTVCP |
$229,862 |
D, A |
1 ton |
18.8 tons |
2+6 |
12 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
MTVCP w/Appliqué |
$237,101 |
D, A |
900 kg |
19.7 tons |
2+6 |
13 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
MTVC |
$107,891 |
D, A |
7 tons |
16.3 tons |
2 |
8 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
MTVC w/Appliqué |
$111,338 |
D, A |
6.9 tons |
16.9 tons |
2 |
9 |
Image Intensification or Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
Vehicle |
Tr Mov |
Com Mov |
Fuel Cap |
Fuel Cons |
Config |
Susp |
Armor |
MTVL (Standard) |
162/113 |
34/27/3 |
492 |
215 |
Stnd |
T3 |
HF9 HS7 HR4* |
MTVL (Standard) w/Appliqué |
156/104 |
33/26/3 |
492 |
224 |
Stnd |
T3 |
HF11Sp HS9Sp HR4** |
MTVL w/OHWS |
162/113 |
34/27/3 |
492 |
215 |
CiH |
T3 |
TF4 TS4 TR4 HF9 HS7 HR4* |
MTVL w/OHWS & Appliqué |
156/104 |
33/26/3 |
492 |
224 |
CiH |
T3 |
TF4 TS4 TR4 HF11Sp HS9Sp HR4** |
IFVL |
159/111 |
33/26/3 |
492 |
219 |
Trtd |
T3 |
TF6 TS6 TR4 HF9 HS7 HR4* |
IFVL w/Appliqué |
153/106 |
32/25/3 |
492 |
228 |
Trtd |
T3 |
TF7Sp TS6Sp TR4 HF11Sp HS9Sp HR4** |
IFVM |
141/98 |
30/23/3 |
492 |
247 |
Trtd |
T3 |
TF11 TS8 TR6Sp HF9 HS7 HS4* |
IFVM w/Appliqué |
134/94 |
28/22/3 |
492 |
258 |
Trtd |
T3 |
TF11 TS8 TR6Sp HF11Sp HS9Sp HR4** |
MTVPC |
155/108 |
33/26/3 |
492 |
224 |
Stnd |
T3 |
HF9 HS7 HR4* |
MTVPC w/Appliqué |
149/104 |
31/25/3 |
492 |
234 |
Stnd |
T3 |
HF11Sp HS9Sp HR4** |
MTVC |
180/124 |
37/30/4 |
492 |
194 |
Stnd |
T3 |
HF9 HS2 HR1*** |
MTVC w/Appliqué. |
173/121 |
36/27/4 |
492 |
200 |
Stnd |
T3 |
HF11Sp HS4 HR1**** |
Vehicle |
Fire Control |
Stabilization |
Armament |
Ammunition |
MTVL (Standard)/MTVC/MTVCP |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C) |
2000x.50 |
MTVL w/OHWS |
+2 |
Good |
M-2HB (C/G) |
2000x.50 |
IFVL |
+3 |
Good |
25mm M-242 ChainGun, M-240C |
600x25mm, 3300x7.62mm |
IFVM |
+3 |
Good |
M-242 25mm ChainGun, M-240C, 2xTOW II Launchers |
720x25mm, 2200x7.62mm, 5xTOW II |
*Hull floor for this version is 4.
**Hull floor for this version is 6Sp.
***The cab side AV is 5; the cab rear armor value is 3. The armor value shown for the sides and rear of the vehicle are for the rear cargo section only. The overhead part of the cab has standard AV value (2); the rear section is open. The “Shielded” radiological value applies only to the cab of the vehicle, the rest is “Open.” The floor AV of 4 applies to the entire vehicle.
****The above applies to the MTVC w/Appliqué, except that the appliqué gives the cab section a side AV of 9Sp.
FMC LVTP-5
Notes: Once the standard tracked amphibious carrier of the US Marines, the LVTP-5 is now used (in the LVTP-5A1 version) only by Chile, the Philippines, and Taiwan. It was designed shortly after World War 2 and was meant to provide invading Marines with protection during amphibious assaults. The LVTP-5 is a progressive evolution of the LVT-1 to 4 series, is considerably larger, able to carry a full-strength Marine platoon of the time. The LVTP-5 is long, wide and flat, and carries a large amount of troops and equipment. The LVTP-5 has a decent amount of armor for an APC of its period, but is slow in the water and vulnerable there. The inverted V-shaped bow, however, can shrug off most small arms and some autocannon fire; the hull front armor value also applies to this bow, even the underside. The LVTP-5 was never considered satisfactory by the US Marines, who cited its lack of speed, protection levels, and range, as well as operating restrictions; however, the Marines continued using it until 1974, primarily since there was no more satisfactory replacement until then. The LVTP-5A1 is largely similar, but the air intake and exhaust system were modified to further ease amphibious operations and the air intake and exhaust inlets and outlets on the roof are modified in form, being in a large housing. A number of variants of this vehicle were built; APC-type variants include the basic LVTP-5 personnel carrier and the LVTC-5 command post carrier.
The Marines access the vehicle through a large ramp in the rear, and the driver and commander have their own hatches on the front hull deck. (The assistant driver does not have a hatch of his own, though he does have vision blocks.) The commander has a manually-rotating cupola mounting a light machinegun mounted as part of the cupola. The troop compartment has two long hatches over that compartment. The troop compartment is actually large enough to carry a 105mm towed howitzer. 45 troops may be carried in an emergency, but all the troops must stand in this case. When water operations are carried out, however, the maximum troop compliment is reduced to 25 Marines, primarily due to weight balance requirements; the rear end would sink with more troops inside.
The command version carries a command crew, map boards, plotting and office supplies, and a number of radios (usually two short-range, two medium-range, and two long-range radios).
Vehicle |
Price |
Fuel Type |
Load |
Veh Wt |
Crew |
Mnt |
Night Vision |
Radiological |
LVTP-5 |
$31,132 |
G, A |
5.44 tons |
37.4 tons |
3+34 |
22 |
Headlights |
Shielded |
LCTC-5 |
$35,456 |
G, A |
2.72 tons |
37.6 tons |
3+9 |
25 |
Headlights |
Shielded |
Vehicle |
Tr Mov |
Com Mov |
Fuel Cap |
Fuel Cons |
Config |
Susp |
Armor |
LVTP-5/LVTC-5 |
146/102/33 |
31/24/7 |
1726 |
511 |
CiH |
T4 |
TF2 TS2 TR2 HF9 HS4 HR3 |
Vehicle |
Fire Control |
Stabilization |
Armament |
Ammunition |
LVTP-5/LVTC-5 |
None |
Basic |
M-1919A4 or M-60D |
2000x.30-06 or 2000x7.62mm |
FMC M-59
Notes: The M-59 entered service in 1953 as the replacement for the less-than-satisfactory M-75 APC; however, the M-59 proved troublesome and disappointing, and work began within a few years on what would become the M-113. Though the M-59 accomplished one goal of the program (it was less costly in real-life dollars), the use of twin engines and the associated complicated transmission led to a drive train that was difficult to service and was prone to breakdowns; it was also very difficult for the driver to operate. The armor protection was also less than that of the M-75; it in fact gave the troops inside more of a feeling of protection than any substantial protection. The pair of engines also had disappointing power production and the gasoline used to fuel it led to high fuel consumption and short range. The M-59 was, however, built until M-113 production began in 1960 and used until M-113 deployment was well underway in 1965; the National Guard also used some until the early 1970s. The only known variant to enter production was the M-84 4.2” mortar carrier, which will not be covered on this page; a version, not put into production, was used as an experimental ATGM carrier for SS-10 ATGMs. Small numbers of the M-59 are reportedly used by militia/home guard-type forces in Brazil, Greece and Turkey.
Though the M-59 bears a superficial resemblance to the M-113, this is appearance only and the two vehicles are not related. The M-59 has a blunt nose with a slightly-sloped glacis plate, a vertical plate below that, and another plate angled in below that to the hull floor. On the glacis plate is a trim vane; the M-59 is (supposedly – see below) amphibious with 2 minutes of preparation, including erecting that trim vane and turning on bilge pumps). The sides are straight and the entire vehicle basically a poorly-armored box. On the top front right is a commander’s cupola, manually-rotating, circled by vision blocks, and with an integral, hard mount for a machinegun (or a simple cupola with an external pintle-mounted machinegun on early versions). The machinegun can be aimed, fired, and loaded from under armor, though the interior sights are rather poor and have a notably narrow field of view. The front of the cupola has the weapon in it, and the rear of the cupola has a clamshell hatch. This standard cupola, the M-13 cupola, allowed for additional ammunition stowage; earlier versions carried less ammunition for the machinegun. The driver’s position is on the front left; he has three vision blocks to the front; an additional vision block on the top of the hatch could be removed and replaced by a night vision block. Access to the troop compartment is by a ramp with a door in the rear face; this door is surprisingly small. Atop the troop compartment are two long hatches on either side of the compartment. Down each side are bench seats. The interior is surprisingly spartan; though I have included a standard vehicle radio fit below, radios were not necessarily a design feature at the time. The compartment, however, is of surprising size; with the bench seats folded, a Jeep could be driven into the M-59, and just enough room is left to close the ramp.
The engines, being rather small, are in the walls of the troop compartment, one on each side of the hull. These engines, commercially-available truck engines, develop 146 horsepower each, and are linked by a common transmission in a rather complicated system. As stated above, the maintenance needs of servicing two engines which were not conveniently-placed, along with the complicated transmission which was underneath the vehicle, led to a vehicle that was unreliable and difficult to service. The use of gasoline-fueled engines seriously decreased the range of the M-59, even with the large fuel tanks, and the M-59’s high weight made those engines and transmission work hard. The suspension, using conventional torsion bars and two pairs of shock absorbers, also worked hard. The driver also worked hard, using tillers for steering and braking, a gas pedal, and a clutch pedal as well as fighting the balky transmission. Amphibious operations, while theoretically easy, were in fact only possible though careful balancing of the vehicle beforehand and by ensuring that the troops in the rear remain very still while the M-59 is afloat.
Price |
Fuel Type |
Load |
Veh Wt |
Crew |
Mnt |
Night Vision |
Radiological |
$53,631 |
G, A |
1.4 tons |
19.3 tons |
2+10 |
16 |
Passive IR (D) |
Enclosed |
Tr Mov |
Com Mov |
Fuel Cap |
Fuel Cons |
Config |
Susp |
Armor |
123/86 |
21/13/2 |
511 |
165 |
Stnd |
T3 |
HF4 HS2 HR2 |
Fire Control |
Stabilization |
Armament |
Ammunition |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C) |
2205x.50 or 1470x.50 w/early cupola |
Notes: Though development of what would become the AAVP-7 began in 1964, it was the first year of US involvement in Vietnam that really brought home to the Marines the shortcomings of the LVTP-5 series and the need for a better amphibious APC. The Marines quickly discovered that the LVTP-5 had a number of problems – it’s torsioelastic suspension, while it provided a comfortable ride over water and shore conditions such as rocks, sand, and reefs, was ill-suited for long trips and thus subject to frequent breakdowns. The LVTP-5 used the transmission and engine of the M-48 main battle tank – great for power, but not suited in the LVTP-5’s configuration; it could take a day of more to replace the power pack, and even routine service could require pulling out large amounts of the power pack just to get to the components to be serviced. Perhaps the greatest problem with the LVTP-5 as used in Vietnam lay with the fuel system; the tanks were under the floor, the engine ran on gasoline, and as the entire vehicle was lightly armored in the first place, even an antipersonnel mine explosion could sometimes turn the interior into a fiery slice of hell.
Because many of the LVTP’s problems were caused by improper employment of the vehicle, the Marines wanted something new that could take on roles Amtracs of the past could not. One of the first things to go was the torsioelastic suspension, replaced with a conventional torsion bar suspension on what was then called the LVTP-7 (later changed to AAVP-7). The armor protection was considerably upgrade, using the same 5083 aluminum armor that was used on the M-113 series. The engine chosen was a supercharged 400-horsepower 8V53T diesel truck engine with an HS-400 transmission; more importantly, the powerpack was a unified unit that could easily be lifted out of the vehicle in a matter of minutes with the proper equipment. The transmission was semiautomatic – it required no clutch, but still required gear selection on the part of the driver. The tracks were almost 54 centimeters wide for traction on soft sand as well as marshy conditions, and water propulsion was provided by two waterjets at the rear. Many other ideas were added, thrown out, or modified, and that, combined with political wrangling, meant that first deliveries of the LVTP-7 did not occur until 1972.
The LVTP-7 has a 3-man crew (driver, assistant driver, commander), and seated 25 Marines in the passenger compartment in the rear. The driver’s position is in the left front of the hull, behind the engine compartment, with the commander’s cupola behind and to the right of the driver. The assistant driver is on the opposite side of the hull from the driver, with a second set of driving controls. The officer or NCO in charge of the Marines in the rear has his own cupola to the rear of the driver’s hatch. The driver’s position as well as the OIC/NCOIC cupolas have seven periscopic vision block, and the commander’s cupola has nine; the front vision blocks at each position can be removed and replaced with an infrared night periscope. (There is no such provision at the assistant driver’s position.) In the rear ramp is a further vision block. In the passenger compartment, the remaining 24 Marines are seated in three rows of eight; all of the seats can be stowed away, clearing the compartment for cargo. The fuel tanks are in the walls of the vehicle. The commander’s cupola of the prototypes was armed with a 20mm M-139 autocannon and an M-73E1 7.62mm machinegun. The production versions, however, replaced these weapons with a single M-85 heavy machinegun with an 8x optical sight in a smaller cupola. An attempt was made on the prototypes to provide firing ports for the passengers, but these could not be squared with the need to maintain the watertight integrity of the hull. The rear deck has two large hatches, and the rear has a ramp with a door in it.
APC variants of the basic LVTP-7 include the LVTC-7 Command Vehicle. This version has provisions for up to seven radio antennas and a plethora of radios and communications equipment. The driver, assistant driver, and vehicle commander’s position are retained, but the cupola for the Marine troop commander is deleted and covered with an armored cap that is bolted on (though the vision blocks remain in place). As with the LVTP-7, the LVTC-7 vehicle commander’s cupola had a single M-85 machinegun, but in later production this cupola was unarmed so that other equipment could be stowed in the places that once held ammunition. In addition to the vehicle crew, the modified rear passenger area has a standard crew of one unit commander, four staff personnel, and five Marines to operate the communications equipment, assist the command staff, and perform other duties. There is a bench seat on the right side for these five crewmen; there is also a sliding mapboard and the communications equipment at this station. Various drawers, a folding table, and other ancillary equipment are also provided. Additional seats are found at the former troop commander’s position, at the front next to the unit commander’s seat, and at the rear of the vehicle.
Though the Marines expected to have the LVTP-7’s successor operational by the mid-1990s, delays, funding difficulties, and continuing research on the LVTP’s replacement considerably delayed its replacement (the ERV, which hasn’t yet been fielded). Therefore, in the early 1980s, a SLEP (Service Life Extension Program) was started, turning the LVTP-7 into the LVTP-7A1. This SLEP included replacement of the power pack and suspension, a new communications system based around the SINCGARS radio, upgraded protection, and a general overhaul of the vehicle. The engine was replaced by a 400-horsepower VT400 multi-fuel engine and a modified form of the old transmission called the HS400-3A1. The commander’s cupola was given an electric drive and the cupola enlarged slightly into a small turret with slightly-increased armor protection, along with eight smoke grenade dischargers. The shock absorbers were considerably upgraded, and shock absorbers were installed on the second set of roadwheels (where there had previously been none). Fuel tanks were replaced by flexible fuel bladders contained within the vehicle walls; these bladders are a bit further out from the passenger compartment walls and have self-sealing ability. The LVTP-7A1 was given the ability to lay a smoke screen by injecting diesel fuel into its exhaust. The assistant driver was given a night vision periscope. The bilge pumping system was given considerably more power. The LVTC-7 was given the same improvements and became the LVTC-7A1 (with the exception of the commander’s weapon station).
In 1984, during a vehicle and equipment designation change that affected many vehicles and equipment, the LVTP-7A1 was redesignated the AAVP-7A1. Any older LVTP-7s still in existence were redesignated AAVP-7. The LVTC-7 and LVTC-7A1 were redesignated AAVC-7 and AAVC-7A1 respectively. At this point, the commander’s weapon stations were replaced with small turrets equipped with both an M-2HB heavy machinegun and a 40mm Mk 19 automatic grenade launcher. Appliqué armor packages (designed by Rafael of Israel) were also devised for the AAVP-7 series, along with lugs for ERA; in addition, a steel mesh-type appliqué armor kit has been deployed on the AAVP-7A1. The bow plane was also modified to compensate for the weight and unbalancing effect of the appliqué armor when the AAVP-7A1 series is swimming.
Some interesting firepower upgrades were proposed for the AAVP-7A1. One of these was to replace the heavy machinegun with a 25mm M-242 Bushmaster autocannon, along with enlarging the turret. Another one (apparently seriously looked at) was to mount the turret of an M-2 Bradley on the AAVP-7A1. I have some stats for these below, but they never actually went past the conceptual phase.
The LVTP-7 and its descendants are typically called “Amtracs” or less commonly, “Gators” by their crews. Italy’s San Marcos Marines, Taiwan, Thailand, and Argentina are also known users of the LVTP-7 series.
Twilight 2000 Notes: In the Twilight 2000 timeline, virtually all of these vehicles are up to the AAVP/AAVC-7A1 standard in US use. Some other countries using them (such as Taiwan, Thailand, and Argentina) are using primarily LVTP/LVTC-7A1s and some LVTP/LVTC-7s. Some older LVTP-7s and LVTP-7A1s were refurbished early in the Twilight War and brought up to AAVP/AAVC-7A1 standards, but every so often (primarily in the Southern US) one may see an older LVTP/LVTC-7 in US hands. Italy’s San Marcos Marines are also known users of the AAVP-7A1. Perhaps 15% of the US Marines’ AAVP-7A1s are actually modified to the AAVP-7A1/25mm standard; these are called AAVP-7A2s.
Vehicle |
Price |
Fuel Type |
Load |
Veh Wt |
Crew |
Mnt |
Night Vision |
Radiological |
LVTP-7 |
$126,578 |
D, A |
4.05 tons |
22.48 tons |
3+25 |
5 |
Passive IR (D, C, UC) |
Shielded |
LVTC-7 (Early) |
$139,665 |
D, A |
5.55 tons |
21.32 tons |
3+10 |
8 |
Passive IR (D, C, UC) |
Shielded |
LVTC-7 (Late) |
$128,698 |
D, A |
5.61 tons |
21.25 tons |
3+10 |
8 |
Passive IR (D, C, UC) |
Shielded |
LVTP-7A1 |
$82,016 |
D, A |
4.05 tons |
23.35 tons |
3+25 |
6 |
Passive IR (D, AD, C, UC) |
Shielded |
LVTP-7A1 w/Appliqué |
$89,998 |
D, A |
3.05 tons |
25.25 tons |
3+25 |
7 |
Passive IR (D, AD, C, UC) |
Shielded |
LVTC-7A1/AAVC-7A1 |
$255,924 |
D, A |
5.55 tons |
22.66 tons |
3+10 |
9 |
Passive IR (D, AD, C, UC) |
Shielded |
LVTC-7A1/AAVC-7A1 w/Appliqué |
$263,906 |
D, A |
4.55 tons |
24.66 tons |
3+10 |
9 |
Passive IR (D, AD, C, UC) |
Shielded |
AAVP-7A1 |
$107,154 |
D, A |
4.05 tons |
25.25 tons |
3+25 |
6 |
Passive IR (D, AD, C, UC) |
Shielded |
AAVP-7A1 w/Appliqué |
$115,136 |
D, A |
3.05 tons |
27.25 tons |
3+25 |
7 |
Passive IR (D, AD, C, UC) |
Shielded |
AAVP-7A1/25mm |
$222,119 |
D, A |
4.05 tons |
25.43 tons |
4+20 |
6 |
Passive IR (D, AD, C, UC, G) |
Shielded |
AAVP-7A1/25mm w/Appliqué |
$230,101 |
D, A |
3.05 tons |
27.43 tons |
4+20 |
7 |
Passive IR (D, AD, C, UC, G) |
Shielded |
AAVP-7A1/Bradley Turret |
$384,899 |
D, A |
3.5 tons |
26.7 tons |
4+18 |
7 |
Passive IR (D, AD, UC), Thermal Imaging (C, G) |
Shielded |
AAVP-7A1/Bradley Turret w/Appliqué |
$392,881 |
D, A |
2.55 tons |
28.7 tons |
4+18 |
8 |
Passive IR (D, AD, UC), Thermal Imaging (C, G) |
Shielded |
Vehicle |
Tr Mov |
Com Mov |
Fuel Cap |
Fuel Cons |
Config |
Susp |
Armor |
LVTP-7 |
125/88/26 |
25/15/5 |
681 |
284 |
Stnd |
T4 |
HF8 HS6 HR4 |
LVTC-7 (Early) |
128/90/27 |
26/15/5 |
681 |
284 |
Stnd |
T4 |
HF8 HS6 HR4 |
LVTC-7 (Late) |
128/90/27 |
26/15/5 |
681 |
284 |
Stnd |
T4 |
HF8 HS6 HR4 |
LVTP-7A1 |
126/88/26 |
25/15/5 |
681 |
284 |
Stnd |
T4 |
HF10 HS7 HR5 |
LVTP-7A1 w/Appliqué |
115/81/24 |
23/14/5 |
681 |
297 |
Stnd |
T4 |
HF10 HS10Sp HR5 |
LVTC-7A1/AAPV-7A1 |
121/85/25 |
24/15/5 |
681 |
276 |
Stnd |
T4 |
HF10 HS7 HR5 |
LVTC-7A1/AAPV-7A1 w/Appliqué |
116/81/24 |
23/14/5 |
681 |
288 |
Stnd |
T4 |
HF10 HS10Sp HR5 |
AAVP-7A1 |
115/81/24 |
23/14/5 |
647 |
284 |
CiH |
T4 |
TF6 TS6 TR5 HF10 HS7 HR5 |
AAVP-7A1 w/Appliqué |
111/78/23 |
22/14/5 |
647 |
295 |
CiH |
T4 |
TF6 TS6 TR5 HF10 HS10Sp HR5 |
AAVP-7A1/25mm |
114/80/24 |
23/14/5 |
647 |
287 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF6 TS6 TR5 HF10 HS10Sp HR5 |
AAVP-7A1/25mm w/Appliqué |
110/77/23 |
22/13/5 |
647 |
298 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF6 TS6 TR5 HF10 HS10Sp HR5 |
AAVP-7A1/Bradley Turret |
113/79/24 |
23/13/5 |
647 |
289 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF 11 TS8 TR6Sp HF10 HS7 HR5 |
AAVP-7A1/Bradley Turret w/Appliqué |
109/76/23 |
22/13/5 |
647 |
300 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF 11 TS8 TR6Sp HF10 HS10Sp HR5 |
Vehicle |
Fire Control |
Stabilization |
Armament |
Ammunition |
LVTP-7 |
+1 |
None |
M-85 |
800x.50 |
LVTC-7 (Early) |
+1 |
None |
M-85 |
500x.50 |
LVTC-7 (Late)/LVTC-7A1/AAVC-7A1 |
None |
None |
None |
None |
LVTP-7A1 |
+1 |
None |
M-85 |
800x.50 |
AAVP-7A1 |
+2 |
Fair |
M-2HB, Mk 19 |
500x.50, 96x40mm |
AAVP-7A1/25mm |
+2 |
Fair |
25mm M-242 Chaingun, M-240C |
400x25mm, 1000x7.62mm |
AAVP-7A1/Bradley Turret |
+2 |
Fair |
25mm M-242 Chaingun, M-240C, 2xTOW II ATGM |
400x25mm, 1000x7.62mm, 5xTOW II ATGM |
Notes: When the Russian BMP-1 was first revealed to the West in 1967, it was a huge shock to NATO – they thought that the Soviets had a new class of armored personnel carrier that was easily better than anything they had, with armament that allowed the BMP-1 to defeat NATO’s APC and light armored vehicles and possibly even some tanks, as well as allowing their infantry to fight on an NBC battlefield. This was before some of the shortcomings of the BMP-1 were known; however, the essential point was clear – NATO’s “battlefield taxis” were no longer up to the task for most purposes. On top of that, it was clear that the M-113 series could not keep up with the speedy M-1 Abrams in the attack. Though most NATO countries were quick to follow up on the new concept of IFVs (Infantry Fighting Vehicles), the US took nearly 15 years of budget wrangling and infighting between the Infantry and Cavalry branches of the Army to field an IFV – the M-2 Bradley.
The M-2 and M-2A1
Bradley
The original version of the Bradley, the M-2 (sometimes referred to as the “A0” version), was first issued to US Army troops in 1981 (though they were not considered operational until December of 1983). The most marked difference between the Bradley and previous US personnel carriers was its turret with its heavy armament. The Bradley uses a two-man turret, with the gunner operating a 25mm M-242 ChainGun (called the Bushmaster) and a twin TOW missile launcher contained in an armored box on the left side of the turret. The commander (called a “BC” by Bradley-mounted infantry, for “Bradley Commander”) has no pintle-mounted armament on his hatch, as his weapon is considered to be the coaxial M-240C machinegun. The gunner also has controls for the coaxial machinegun, however, and the commander has auxiliary controls for the ChainGun (though not the TOW missiles). Both the gunner and commander have roof hatches with periscope-type vision blocks (the gunner has them to the left side, front, and about 30 degrees to the right side; the commander’s hatch is completely ringed with vision blocks), with no magnification. However, the gunner’s front periscopes are completely blocked by the head of his weapon sight in its armored box. The gunner has a 5x/12x image intensifier/thermal imager to use in conjunction with his gun/missile sight; the commander can also use this sight through an optical relay. The commander and gunner also have simple magnified reticle gunsights to take quick shots with the ChainGun or coaxial machinegun at close-range targets, and these simple sights can be used from an open hatch if necessary. Both also can share an auxiliary 5x telescopic sight. The commander’s and gunner’s hatches may be locked fully open (i.e. 90 degrees), or locked open to a little less than half that, letting them sort of peek outside with minimal exposure. The turret is capable of two rotation rates; 30 degrees per second is considered a standard rotation rate, but a high-speed 60 degree-per-second rate is also available. The turret can also be rotated manually, and the gun and coax elevated and depressed manually, in the case of electrical failure. Once a target is just about lined up, fine adjustments to the direction the turret is pointed can also be made if necessary.
The ChainGun and the coaxial machinegun can be elevated to +59 degrees (+57 on the M2A1 and later) and depressed to -9 degrees. They cannot be independently elevated or depressed. Both are stabilized for fire on the move, at a full clip. This was thought to be adequate when the Bradley was designed, though urban warfare in Iraq has shown that in the case of elevation, it’s not enough. Ideas were floated to try to increase the elevation, but the construction of the turret simply makes this impossible. (This has led to an experimental retrofit of an external M-249 SAW [see below], and BCs are sometimes seen with M-16s or SAWs in their hands, or even the excess M-231 port firing weapons that are have fallen into almost-complete disuse with the M-2A2 and later versions of the Bradley.) The M-242 is unusual for a vehicle-mounted autocannon in that it can be set for semiautomatic fire; two other fire rates are available for the M-242 – 100 rpm and 200 rpm. The M-242 is a dual-feed weapon, and the gunner may switch between belts with a simple flick of a switch (though for game purposes, and to simplify things, ammo from only one belt may be fired per semiautomatic shot or burst). The M-242 is electrically powered, but the M-240C coaxial is a variant of the standard M-240B infantry model, with spade grips and a sort of chute to vent the gasses of the fired rounds outside. The spent cases from the M-240C are caught in a bag attached to the machinegun; spent cases from the ChainGun are automatically dropped outside the turret through a slot forward of the “mantlet;” a rotating mechanism cycles during operation of the ChainGun and case “ejection” is part of this cycle. A pair of four-barreled, electrically-triggered smoke grenade launchers is found at the front of the turret, with one pair of launchers found on either side of the main gun and coaxial. Above these launchers are boxes which contain eight more grenades each. Originally, the Bradley could lay a thick, oily smoke screen by injecting diesel fuel into its exhaust, but with the change in the US military to a common fuel of JP-8 jet fuel, this capability has become superfluous, as injecting JP-8 into the exhaust won’t produce a smoke screen. Nonetheless, the Bradley still retains this capability (though today it is normally disabled).
The TOW launcher’s armored box is on the left side of the turret. It should be noted that while the box is armored, it is not as well-protected as the turret itself; it’s armor rating should be considered only 4 from the left side, and 2 from the front or rear. For firing, the box swings upwards to the side 90 degrees; about 10 seconds at a minimum are required by a good gunner to raise the launcher to firing position and take a shot. Though the TOW launcher box itself can be elevated to a significant degree and even depressed a little (+29 and -19 degrees), the TOW missiles cannot be controlled effectively in flight unless the launcher no more than +10 degrees and -0 degrees from being horizontal to the ground, due to the wire guidance of the TOW-series missiles for which the Bradley’s launcher is designed. (The M-2 Bradley TOW launcher is designed for TOW-1 series missiles.) Reloading of the launcher box is done by turning the turret to left a small amount (less then 5 degrees) and elevating the launcher box to its maximum elevation. Behind the turret on the rear deck is a narrow rectangular hatch that opens just enough for the crew or infantrymen in the rear to slide more missiles into the launcher box (i.e., one cannot stand up in that hatch and can just barely even peek out of it). If a TOW is in flight, the BC’s fire and turret rotation controls are locked in order to avoid a spoiled shot; the gunner also cannot rotate the turret if a TOW is in flight (though he can abort the TOW missile if necessary). After the TOW hits its target (or the gunner aborts), the guiding wires release from the launcher and fall off. It should be noted that the TOW launcher cannot be used on the move; the Bradley must be stationary in order to fire the TOW launcher.
The passenger compartment is for the most part in the rear of the Bradley, though two of the dismount infantrymen have seats on the left side of the turret. Though the entire passenger compartment is really cramped, those two seats are even more cramped. The rearmost passenger seat is in a particularly small space (one generally puts the smallest man back there), and that man is sitting with his back to the driver with only about a half a foot separating him from knocking heads with the driver. (When I was in mech infantry, this was often called the “die-in-place” seat…). In the M-2 Bradley, there are four more passenger seats; one on the left side facing forward, one on the left side facing to the rear, one on the left side facing to the rear, and one between those two facing to rear (generally used by the squad leader, who is also part of the dismount squad). The passengers in a “plain vanilla” M-2 have firing ports and periscopic vision blocks to allow them to observe outside the vehicle, with the exception of the center rear seat, which has only a vision block. While it is a bit awkward, the four troops on the sides of the M-2 version have to turn sideways in their seats (this is one reason the sliding wire stocks on the M-231 port firing weapons were quickly deleted). The passenger seats can also be folded up and stowed completely out of the way. In addition, effective fire is difficult from the firing ports unless the weapons are loaded with almost entirely tracer ammunition, as vision outside the vehicle is diminished, there are no night vision devices for the firing ports, weapon sights cannot be used, and there is a slight parallax error (the periscopes actually show a field of view about a foot above the weapon and are wide-angle lenses). The rear of the passenger compartment has an electrically-lowered ramp with a hydraulic backup, and an oval hatch is set inside the ramp on the right side. (This door has an interior lock as well as an exterior padlock; the padlock is primarily for use when the Bradley is parked in garrison to prevent unauthorized access.)
The driver is in the front right side of the vehicle, with the engine compartment to the left of him. Like all seats on the Bradley, the seats are (somewhat) padded to reduce crew fatigue, and the backrest can be folded down. The driver can enter his position from the passenger compartment, or through his overhead hatch. The driver’s hatch may be locked in a 90-degree open position or open about 30 degrees; when the Bradley is in combat, the hatch is normally closed or at the 30-degree position, as the 90-degree position blocks rotation of the turret. (The turret rotation system has an interlock which keeps the turret from rotating if the driver’s hatch is at the 90-degree position, in order to avoid bending the ChainGun’s barrel if it were to slam into the hatch while rotating.) As the driver’s hatch has as much armor as the rest of the top of the hull, it is too heavy to push open from a seated position (especially to a full 90-degree position). The hatch is therefore spring-loaded to a greater degree than the commander’s or gunner’s hatches.
The Bradley is protected by an aluminum alloy/steel laminate; for most of the vehicle, this armor also consists twin sections of armor spaced approximately 25mm apart to provide extra protection from HE-type projectiles. The floor of the Bradley has an additional centimeter of steel plate to increase mine protection. Track skirts with the same protection as the hull sides protect the sides; they hinge upwards for maintenance access. The M-2 version of the Bradley uses a Cummins VTA-903T diesel developing 500 horsepower; the suspension is exceptional for an APC, giving an unusually smooth ride. The M-2 version is also amphibious with preparation; about 15 minutes are required for an amphibious crossing, and requires the erection of a trim vane at the front and a flotation screen all around the vehicle.
Early experience with the M-2 revealed some shortcomings; this resulted in the M-2A1 being introduced in 1987 (though retrofitting of the central gas particulate NBC system for the driver, commander, and gunner began in May 1986). Improvements were made to the TOW missile system; these changes were primarily to allow use of the TOW-2 missile series as well as somewhat quicker target acquisition, and simplify construction and lower cost. (At first, replacement of the existing TOW launching box with a pair of non-moving launcher boxes, one on either side of the turret, was considered, but rejected as unnecessary). On the M-2 version, the turret bustle rack was angled inward; while this was ballistically more sound, it also seriously limited the storage space in the rack. The bustle rack on the M-2A1 was therefore given a square profile as well as enlarged. Ammunition storage in the bustle itself was also rearranged to allow more of the 25mm ammunition to be stored in the bustle instead of being distributed around the interior of the Bradley. Under-armor storage compartments were also added to the sides of the Bradley, though these were accessible only from the exterior of the Bradley and designed primarily for additional 25mm, 7.62mm, and 5.56mm ammunition storage. The storage for additional smoke grenades (for the grenade launchers) was removed from boxes just above the smoke grenade launchers on the turret to boxes at the rear of the vehicle on either side of the ramp; these boxes can hold a variety of mines, flares, grenades, or smoke grenades for the vehicle launchers. A thin layer of appliqué armor was added to the glacis and a small portion of the upper sides. In the interior of the M-2A1, the spall liner was improved, and a new fire suppression system was added inside the fuel tanks. The seating and stowage arrangement of the M-2A1 was rearranged, allowing for one more infantryman to be seated in the rear. The user of this seat does not have access to either a firing port or a vision block.
The M-2A2 Bradley
There had always been considerable controversy about the survivability of the Bradley. This controversy came to a head in 1984, when a series of live fire tests against M-2 versions of the Bradley were conducted. The tests were full of irregularities (for the most part in the proper combat loading of the Bradleys involved in the test), but eventually a live TOW shot against the side of a fully combat-loaded Bradley resulted in the vehicle being destroyed in a spectacular fireball. Development of the M-2A2 version of the Bradley (sometimes referred to as the Bradley II) dates to this point.
The changes from the M-2A1 to the M-2A2 were extensive, and centered around the fitting of heavier armor and lugs on the sides for reactive armor. In fact, the side armor was beefed up to the point that the sides of the Bradley were totally plated over. One immediate result of this extra armor was the loss of the side firing ports; their places on the hull were covered by the added side armor. (One vision block on either side was retained.) In addition, virtually the entire vehicle received increased armor protection – even the bustle rack was given an extra section at the rear – it can not only carry additional gear, but acts as a second layer of spaced armor. Internally, the interior of the M-2A2 was protected with an even thicker Kevlar spall liner of more modern design. The thickness of the armor on the front of the turret led to the deletion of the barrel jacket for the M-240C coaxial machinegun, and a slight redesign of the barrel extension for the M-242 ChainGun. Lugs for reactive armor blocks are found on the upper sides of the M-2A2 as well as on the glacis. These lugs can also mount bolt-on appliqué armor, bolt-on spaced armor, or the new slat armor if desired. The weight of the M-2A2 increased so much that it is no longer amphibious, and the trim vane and flotation screen have been removed. However, to cope with the increased weight, the VTA-903T was replaced with an upgraded version of the same engine, developing 600 horsepower.
Some smaller physical changes include retractable metal covers over the driver’s periscopes, along with a wire guard to protect the driver from wire and obstacles strewn across the Bradley’s path. Due to the changes in the frontal armor and the potential for the mounting of ERA, the design of the headlights was changed. Due to the loss of the side firing ports, the seating arrangement was again changed; on the sides of the passenger compartment, three troops sat on each side, and the “die-in-place” seat was retained. (Initially, this seat was to be removed and the dismount squad reduced back to six, but this decision was rethought.) The second seat on the left side of the turret was, however, deleted. Internal stowage, especially for the TOW missiles (and the infantry squad’s Dragons and M-136s) was again re-done (and again years later when the Javelin replaced the Dragon).
After operations in 1991’s Desert Storm campaign, several additions were made to the M-2A2 in response to crew wishes, new operational requirements and capabilities, and, unfortunately, the relatively high percentage of losses due to fratricide. This package of modifications was referred to as the ODS (Operation Desert Storm) upgrades, with such modified vehicles informally called M-2A2ODSs. Modifications included an improved, eye-safe laser rangefinder, the addition of a GPS system, an IFF system, thermal imaging for the driver, and a system to jam radio-guided and IR-guided missiles (regarded as only partially effective, but better than nothing). The missile jamming system consists of sensors to detect incoming missiles and automatically put out low-grade radio-jamming signals, launch flares and IR-defeating smoke grenades.
The M-2A3 Bradley
By 1995, operations during Desert Storm had been more fully evaluated. At the same time, the introduction of the M-1A2 Abrams III meant that the Abrams now had several important capabilities the Bradley lacked, and this led to the M-2A3 (sometime called the Bradley III). The largest change in the Bradley was internal; the Bradley was given computers and communications equipment to allow it to inter-operate with the Abrams III and the AH-64D Apache on the digital battlefield. The commander has a full flat-panel display/touchscreen and computer control; the gunner and driver have touchscreens of their own that display information appropriate to their roles. In the passenger compartment, mounted on a bracket that is against the turret basket but not actually attached to it (i.e., it does not rotate with the turret), is another large display to provide the dismount squad with information on the battlefield situation and allow them to plan, receive and provide updated information. Along with this capability, GPS and an INU (Inertial Navigation Unit) have been added. The M-2A3 has a computer (which has been steadily upgraded over time) to allow it to quickly receive, integrate, display, and send real-time battlefield information; commanders therefore (usually) know where their units are and their status; the Bradley is therefore a true counterpart to the Abrams on the digital battlefield. Rebuilding of existing Bradleys to the M-2A3 standard began in 1996, and by 2008 almost all Bradleys in the US Army inventory have been rebuilt to the M-2A3 standard.
Other improvements a CIS (Commander’s Independent Viewer), similar to the CITS of the M-1A2 Abrams III. The commander also retained the ability to see through the gunner’s sight. In addition, the thermal imagers were replaced with long-range FLIR systems more akin to those found on aircraft and helicopters. The M-2A3 has an automatic dual target tracking ability, and as the gunner’s sighted target is destroyed, the turret can be set to rotate automatically and the gun trained automatically on the commander’s sighted target. Fire control s also improved (the system called the IBAS – Improved Bradley Acquisition System), and boresighting is essentially automatic instead of requiring a stop and extensive adjustments. The gunner’s sight (the TAS – Target Acquisition System) has received particular attention in the fire control department. The main gun and coaxial machinegun is better stabilized and the ballistic computer improved (able to tap into, to a small amount, the primary computer of the Bradley). The TAS uses a 2nd-generation FLIR and a day TV/image intensification device, with a digital zoom from 4x to 48x, and twice the field of view of the zoom sights of earlier Bradleys. The day TV/image intensifier sees in near-infrared as well visible light, making it usable even in heavy smoke, IR-obscuring smoke, and conditions of low thermal contrast where FLIR imaging would be of little use.
The turret roof of the M-2A3 has a thin layer of added titanium alloy armor, as Desert Storm operations revealed the turret roof to be the weakest surface of the vehicle. As an adjunct to the electronic IFF system, the Bradley accommodates special panels on the sides of the vehicle made of the special aluminum alloy. These panels, when viewed through thermal imagers or FLIRs of the proper wavelength, gives off a heat signature that provides a further deterrent to fratricide. The M-2A3 includes a special cooling system for the vehicle’s electronics, but experience in Iraq has led to low-power air conditioning to be fitted to the M-2A3 (and some M-2A2s still in service) to relieve the stifling heat that builds up inside the Bradley.
The M-7 Bradley ACP
One of the newest members of the Bradley to be fielded is actually based on the FISTV version of the Bradley (the M-7, found in US Tracked Artillery Support Vehicles). This is the Bradley ACP (Assault Command Post), perhaps better known by its developmental name, the BCOTM Bradley (Battle Command On-the-Move). The ACP was first fielded in April of 2003, but at the time it was only an experiment – but a circumstance of the of combat during the Battle of Taji on 16 April 2003 dramatically demonstrated the ACP’s usefulness, as the pace of battle became to fast that 4th ID’s DTAC could not arrive in time to set up and control the battle, and one ACP and a handful of other vehicles became the ad hoc DTAC for almost 18 hours.
The ACP is still considered a developmental vehicle, but more and more are in use in Iraq. They are currently found primarily at the Brigade HQ level and above, but plans are to eventually use ACPs down to Battalion level, and in a few other applications such as leaders’ reconnaissance. As a part of TAC-type units, the interior of an ACP is crammed full of computers, displays, radios and other gear necessary to rapidly display and control operations of a unit. In addition, the ACP has the same level of armor protection as a standard M-2A2, though the ACP has much less ammunition for its ChainGun, TOW launcher and coaxial machinegun. As there is only so much one can stuff into a Bradley, the ACP is usually accompanied in its duties by an M-1068 CPV version of the M-113. An ACP has approximately six times the computing power of an M-2A3, and information is displayed on three large displays that are linked via a KVM and can simultaneously accept input from the three operators, the on-scene commander, the M-1068 that accompanies the ACP, and higher headquarters via radio, using a special version of a standard Cisco-made router. The three large monitors can be swung to the sides to allow personnel to get in and out of the ACP. The ACP also has a Toughbook laptop with a secure wireless connection to the ACP. The ACP can be equipped with up to ten radios, though five or six are more common. An external receptacle allows the entire ACP to be connected to an external generator to power the huge amount of electronics without rapidly draining the ACP’s batteries. In addition, the electronics have two large UPSs to power them in emergencies or when generator switch-overs or maintenance are necessary. Needless to say, the ACP is definitely a cramped vehicle inside, but a commander can pretty much use an ACP to go wherever he needs to during a battle.
The BUSK
As a result of experience in Iraq, the Bradley’s designers have come up with the Bradley Urban Survival Kit (BUSK) for the Bradley, similar in concept to the TUSK for the Abrams tank. This kit consists of a number of large and small modifications that can be applied at the unit level, and largely grew out of informal modifications that were already being used by Bradley crews. One of these is a handheld 3-million-candlepower spotlight, which may be powered by a rechargeable internal battery or by the vehicle’s electrical system through a cable. In order to protect the crew and passengers from accidental electrocution if the antennas contact low-lying electrical wires (something I’ve actually seen happen in Korea), BAE Systems came up with antenna mounts that allow the antenna to be retracted with an electric motor (and a manual backup). In addition, a dome like-structure, consisting of a pair of flexible poles of a non-conductive material, can be mounted on the turret. (Bradley crews usually refer to this as a “tent,” though it does not actually have any side panels.) These poles attach to the front, back, and sides of the top of the turret and meet at a 90-degree angle at the top, protecting against a lot of debris and wires that may hang across the road. Racks have been devised to give the crew and passengers extra external stowage for their gear on the sides and front of the Bradley; this not only cleans up the exterior stowage, but has the incidental effect of increasing the protection level of the Bradley (primarily by absorbing some small arms fire and pre-detonating shaped charge warheads.
One of the most interesting parts of the BUSK is CLAW. The CLAW (Commander’s Light Automatic Weapon) mount is still considered an experimental part of the BUSK (as of this writing in June 2008) and consists of a mount attached to the side of the CIV, so that the attached weapon (which may be an M-231 PFW, but is most commonly an M-249 SAW of any variety) is just above the CIV. The mount also allows for standard belt containers to be attached to the SAW. The weapon attached it a standard, unmodified version, so it may be easily unclipped from the CIV and used normally. The mount includes a mechanism to pull the trigger of the attached weapon, with a cable leading to the commander’s position that allows him to fire the weapon while buttoned up, and aim it using the CIV.
Twilight 2000 Notes: In Twilight 2000 pre-war active-duty US Army units, slightly over 60% of Bradleys are M-2A2s, with about a quarter of those M-2A2s being M-2A2ODSs. Most of the rest of the Bradleys in pre-war active-duty units are M-2A1s, but about 5% are “plain vanilla” M-2s and about 2% are M-2A3s. In pre-war Guard and Reserve units, Bradleys are almost half-and-half M-2s and M-2A1s, with about 10% being M-2A2s. The BUSK does not exist as such, though many of the BUSK features were added to Bradleys on an ad hoc basis. The M-7 ACP does not exist in the Twilight 2000 timeline.
Vehicle |
Price |
Fuel Type |
Load |
Veh Wt |
Crew |
Mnt |
Night Vision |
Radiological |
M-2 |
$275,216 |
D, A |
1.8 tons |
22.8 tons |
3+6 |
7 |
Passive IR (D), Thermal Imaging (G+C) |
Shielded |
M-2A1 |
$280,763 |
D, A |
1.8 tons |
22.8 tons |
3+7 |
7 |
Passive IR (D), Thermal Imaging (G+C) |
Shielded |
M-2A2 |
$313,166 |
D, A |
1.5 tons |
27 tons |
3+7 |
8 |
Passive IR (D), Thermal Imaging (G+C) |
Shielded |
M-2A2ODS |
$328,512 |
D, A |
1.5 tons |
27 tons |
3+7 |
8 |
Thermal Imaging (D, G+C) |
Shielded |
M-2A3 |
$686,517 |
D, A |
1.5 tons |
28 tons |
3+7 |
8 |
Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (C), 2nd Gen FLIR (G), Image Intensification (G) |
Shielded |
BUSK |
$2090 |
N/A |
N/A |
500 kg |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
BUSK w/CLAW |
$2530 |
N/A |
N/A |
600 kg |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
M-7 ACP |
$909,442 |
D, A |
400 kg |
26.9 tons |
3+3 |
10 |
Thermal Imaging (D, G+C) |
Shielded |
Vehicle |
Tr Mov |
Com Mov |
Fuel Cap |
Fuel Cons |
Config |
Susp |
Armor* |
M-2 |
132/99 |
28/22/3 |
746 |
131 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF6 TS6 TR4 HF8 HS4Sp HR4 |
M-2A1 |
132/99 |
28/22/3 |
746 |
131 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF6 TS6 TR4 HF9 HS4Sp HR4 |
M-2A2/M-2A2ODS |
122/92 |
26/20 |
662 |
142 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF11 TS8 TR6Sp HF13 HS8Sp HR6Sp |
M-2A3 |
120/91 |
26/20 |
662 |
147 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF11 TS8 TR6Sp HF13 HS8Sp HR6Sp |
M-7 ACP |
122/92 |
26/20 |
662 |
157 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF11 TS8 TR6Sp HF13 HS8Sp HR6Sp |
Vehicle |
Fire Control |
Stabilization |
Armament |
Ammunition |
M-2/M-2A1 |
+1 |
Fair |
M-242 25mm ChainGun, M-240C, 2xTOW II Launchers, 6xM-231 PFW |
900x25mm, 2200x7.62mm, 7xTOW II, 3070x5.56mm |
M-2A2 |
+2 |
Fair |
M-242 25mm ChainGun, M-240C, 2xTOW II Launchers, 2xM-231 PFW |
900x25mm, 2200x7.62mm, 7xTOW II, 1025x5.56mm |
M-2A2ODS |
+3 |
Fair |
M-242 25mm ChainGun, M-240C, 2xTOW II Launchers, 2xM-231 PFW |
900x25mm, 2200x7.62mm, 7xTOW II, 1025x5.56mm |
M-2A3 |
+3 |
Good |
M-242 25mm ChainGun, M-240C, 2xTOW II Launchers, 2xM-231 PFW |
900x25mm, 2200x7.62mm, 7xTOW II, 1025x5.56mm |
M-7 ACP |
+2 |
Good |
M-242 25mm ChainGun, M-240C, 2xTOW II Launchers |
250x25mm, 1100x7.62mm, 2xTOW II |
*Floor armor for the M-2 and M-2A1 is 5; for the M-2A2, M-2A3, and M-7 ACP, it is 7. The turret roof of the M-2A3 has an AV 7.
FMC/GDLS M-113
Armored Personnel Carrier
Notes: By the 1950s, the US Army already knew that their earlier APCs had essentially been failures; they were too big, too heavy, and too slow. The Army wanted APCs that could keep up with their main battle tanks of the time (the M-48 series and the then-projected M-60 series), and one that was amphibious, air-transportable, and if possible, air-droppable. Early prototypes of what would become the M-113, called the T-113, were ready for testing in late 1956, but revised requirements and new developments in aluminum alloy armor meant that the updated T-113E1 and T-113E2 prototypes did not begin their testing until October of 1958. Full production of the M-113, based on the T-113E2 prototype, began in January of 1960. The M-113 has since been upgraded and modified into scores of different forms; the M-113 series is regarded worldwide as one of the most adaptable platforms in existence. US crews typically refer to the M-113 series and most of its variants simply as “tracks.”
The first M-113s
The M-113 is basically a large armored box. There is a large overhead hatch designed for six of the passengers to stand with head, shoulders, and chest outside of it with their weapons (though I have seen as many as nine stuffed into that hatchway in actual use), and a hydraulic ramp at the rear with another hatch set into it on the left side. The ramp can be quickly opened by simply dropping it, or lowered more slowly by using engine power to help control the speed at which the ramp lowers. The handle to operate the ramp it to the rear of the driver, and it is the driver that is responsible for opening and closing the ramp under most circumstances. (The ramp is almost always opened in a controlled manner with the engine on, as without the engine on, the ramp will simply drop open once it is unlatched, which can damage the ramp’s mechanism. Without engine power, the ramp can be raised only with muscle power, taking 3-5 troops, and this can induce too much slack in the ramp cable.) The rear of the vehicle has no firing ports or vision blocks (though some very early examples of the M-113 had a vision block on the left and right sides of the passenger compartment), and is simply an open space with bench seats that can be folded and locked, a few storage compartments for ammunition and munitions like grenades, a shelf for a radio or two, and damn little other room for anything else other than the passengers. Perhaps distressingly, the fuel tanks of the M-113, M-113A1, and M-113A2 are inside the left wall of the passenger compartment, behind rather thin plates of metal. The M-113 also has a heater for the interior, fired by the vehicle’s fuel supply. At the center front of the M-113 is a small cupola for the commander; this is rotated by the commander simply unlocking the cupola and pulling him around in whichever direction desired. The cupola has periscopic vision blocks for all-around vision when buttoned up, and a platform with a seat that can be raised and lowered as necessary. The commander’s cupola also has a pintle mount for an NHT, NMT, or NLT-compatible weapon (most often the M-2HB); in addition, an adapter was made to mount a Dragon ATGM on the weapon mount, and there is also an adapter to mount a laser designator (these adapters are extremely rare). The driver’s position is in the left front of the hull; his hatch is above him, to the front and left of the commander’s cupola. The driver has vision blocks that cover everything except the rear and part of the right-side arcs, and the front one can be easily removed and replaced with a passive IR periscope. The seat for the driver can be raised and lowered so that the driver may drive with his head outside the hatch or buttoned up. The controls consist of a gearshift, a gas pedal, and a pair of tillers to steer and brake the vehicle using differential steering. (Driving an M-113 with the tiller system actually requires a surprising amount of upper body strength – if you don’t have it, you’ll develop it pretty fast.)
The engine of the original M-113 is a Chrysler 75M gasoline engine, coupled to an automatic transmission with four forward speeds and one reverse. A sore spot about the M-113’s power pack is the position of the exhaust – it is on the right front corner of the deck, and those standing in the troop hatch often get a bit queasy, if not outright sick to their stomachs, from the carbon monoxide in the exhaust. Many countries have taken the step of extending the exhaust pipe and running it downward to a position just above the tracks. The M-113 is amphibious with a minimum of preparation (the trim vane must be lowered to its swimming configuration, which takes no more than 15 seconds) – but the M-113 must already have rubber track skirts installed. These bolt onto the sides of the M-113 over the top part of the tracks; when the M-113 enters the water, an air bubble forms over the top of the tracks to give the M-113 the extra buoyancy needed for it to float. Propulsion is by the movement of its tracks. (These rubber skirts are easily torn up in normal field operations, and they are usually left in the motor pool.) The M-113 has a bilge pump that pumps water out of the engine compartment and from under the floor of the M-113. The M-113 used a flat torsion bar suspension, another thing that could lead to troops feeing beat-up and queasy by the time they reached the AO; I’m not the only one who has thrown up during a long off-road M-113 ride!
As stated above, the original M-113 used a gasoline engine, developing 215 horsepower. In the conceptual and prototype phases, there were to be two versions: a lighter version for use by airborne, cavalry, and scout troops, and a heavier one to be used as a general-purpose carrier in mechanized infantry units. After evaluation of both prototypes (the T-113E1 and E2 mentioned above), it was determined that the T-113E2 could meet both requirements, if FMC (the manufacturer of the M-113 at the time) could drop about 180 kilograms of weight. This was done by reducing the thickness of the rear armor and on the sponsons somewhat, but most of that weight was taken out of the floor of the vehicle. This short-sighted idea would have deadly repercussions in the future; the M-113 series is quite vulnerable to crew casualties from mine damage.
The M-113A1
Evaluations of the vehicle which would become the M-113A1 began in June of 1959, even before the original M-113 began production. The primary thrust of the modifications was the replacement of the gasoline engine of the M-113 with a diesel engine, and also making the engine, differential, final drives and transmission into an integrated power pack that could be removed as a unit for servicing, or serviced as individual components. The exterior would remain largely the same as that of the M-113. The M-113A1 entered service in 1964.
The engine chosen for the M-113A1 was the General Motors 6V53, which developed 212 horsepower and offered much better fuel economy; the better transmission of the M-113A1 ensured that the speed remained the same despite the lower horsepower rating of the engine and the greater weight. This engine and the integrated power pack concept required a new transmission. Originally, the M-113A1 was to have the differential steering system and its tillers replaced by a more conventional steering yoke and brake, but the transmission that was first chosen for the M-113A1 proved to be unreliable, and modifications to this transmission also did not work out. Objections to the original transmission were also raised by the soldiers involved in testing, since it was a manual transmission. The transmission was therefore replaced with an updated version of the M-113’s original transmission, which unfortunately required that differential steering be used. The fuel capacity of the M-113A1 was also increased over the M-113; it was felt that larger fuel tanks could be put into the walls, since the fire hazard of diesel fuel was much lower than that of gasoline. Minor changes were made to improve the safety of the crew compartment heater. On the M-113, the same mechanism that provided crew heat also included ducts to heat the engine and the batteries in cold weather; on the M-113A1, a separate, temperature-sensitive mechanism heated the coolant before it circulated through the engine and also supplied heat to an exchanger in the battery box as appropriate.
The M-113A2
The M-113A1 was considered extremely reliable mechanically and adequate as an APC. However, Vietnam revealed some deficiencies (other than the mine vulnerability). This resulted in the M-113A2, introduced in 1979.
The location of the radiator and fan on the M-113A1 tended to make the engine a bit hot, as dust and oil would build up on the radiator core. The positions of the fan and radiator were reversed to improve air flow, and the radiator itself replaced with a larger one with more coolant capacity.
The torsion bars of the suspension were replaced with stronger, yet more flexible ones; the increased travel capability of the roadwheels increased off-road performance. The idler wheel was replaced with a stronger one that was also raised about 50 millimeters to contribute to the increased off-road travel. The first, second, and rear roadwheels used improved shock absorbers that also helped increase off-road performance as well as smooth out the ride (a little…). The entire ground clearance of the M-113A2 was raised by 25 millimeters.
Perhaps the greatest change in the M-113A2 was in the power pack. The 6V53 engine was replaced by the turbocharged 6V53T, which develops 212 horsepower and has an improved cooling system. The transmission was also improved, with an additional forward speed. The M-113A2 also added neutral (pivot) steering capability, with the pivot steering handles being located at the front of the driver’s compartment above and in front of the tillers; however, most M-113A2s have them disconnected as it was found that the M-113A2 easily throws tracks under pivot steering, even when simply turning in place.
The M-113A2 also introduced a smoke grenade launcher kit; this consists of a pair of four-tube launchers mounted on either side of the front of the hull, above the fenders. Originally designed specifically for white or dark smoke vehicular grenades, these launchers were later modified to permit the use of colored smoke or IR screening smoke as well. The grenades are electrically fired, with a control box on the top of the wall of the engine compartment in front of the commander’s position.
The increased weight of the M-113A2 made swimming perilous; the tech manuals say that an M-113A2 has a freeboard of 14 inches when fully loaded, but in practice, the freeboard is typically 10 inches or less, and it is quite possible for M-113A2s to sink in even moderately choppy water. For this reason, normal practice is to leave all top hatches of a swimming M-113A2 open so that the occupants can quickly escape if the M-113A2 sinks. Several types of buoyancy cells were tried, ranging from the ones mentioned in the Mine Reduction Vulnerability Kit below to inflatable ones, but in the late 1980s, the amphibious requirement for the entire M-113 series was dropped, and the M-113A2 was to swim only in emergencies. Many units have not been even mounting the trim vanes on their M-113-series vehicles since the late 1980s.
The M-113A3
Development of the M-113A2 continued. The transmission of the M-113A2 was eventually upgraded three times; in a way, the use of these improved transmissions was sort of a test program, for they would allow the use of a new version of the 6V53T engine called the RISE package that had improvements to power and the drive train. In addition, many M-113A2s had Kevlar anti-spall panels added to the interior. The M-113A3 would include the new transmission, the RISE package, and many other improvements. The M-113A3 was introduced in 1987.
The M-113A3’s engine develops 275 horsepower; in addition, the M-113A3 has what drivers have been wanting for a long time: a conventional steering yoke and a brake pedal instead of the differential steering and braking system. This greatly reduced driver fatigue. The passive IR periscopic sight was replaced with a thermal imager. An improved neutral steering system was fitted, restoring the pivot steer capability. Kevlar anti-spalling liners were fitted to increase protection for the occupants. Finally, the external fuel cells were made standard equipment on the M-113A3, also greatly increasing crew survivability.
The M-113A3 is not “officially” amphibious; buoyancy cells of the type listed below can be added to the M-113A3’s sides and to the trim vane, but swimming an M-113A3 is even more dangerous than swimming an M-113A2. Many appliqué armor kits have also been devised for the M-113A3 (see below), and any of these make the M-113A3 too heavy to swim.
The M-577 Command
Post Carrier
Though the M-113 appeared in 1960, command, FDC, medical, and other specialist elements in mechanized or armored formations were still using M-59 APCs that used a plethora of ad hoc modifications. These ad hoc command vehicles had the same vulnerabilities and poor range of the M-59, and the electrical systems of the M-59 were often not up to the job they were given, particularly if the command vehicle carried a lot of communications equipment. The development of a CPC version of the M-113, designated the M-577, was given a high priority, and first issue began to US Army units in Europe in December of 1962.
The M-577’s most obvious difference from the M-113 is the raised roofline; behind the driver’s position, the roof has been raised by over 64 centimeters, allowing those inside to stand upright. The single fuel tank in the left side of passenger compartment was replaced by two fuel tanks, one in each side of the passenger compartment. These fuel tanks were mounted so that they extended down the sides of the compartment, and covered so that they formed a work shelf. Attached to these work shelves are folding wooden extensions (in two sections on each side; most M-577s I’ve seen have the front-most shelves removed, and some even have the left-side shelves removed entirely). The vehicle commander’s position was also radically changed; the M-577 has no commander’s cupola. Instead, the M-577 has a hatch in the roof that is about 25% larger than an M-113 commander’s hatch, making it large enough for large pieces of equipment (such as observation devices and designators) to be moved into and out of the vehicle from the top hatch. The commander’s seat has been removed; replaced with a simple folding metal stand. Contrary to the Twilight 2000 rule books, the M-577 does not have a mount for any weapon by the commander’s hatch or anywhere else on the vehicle. The commander’s hatch also has no vision blocks. The M-577 does have a bracket beside the driver for his M-16 or M-4, another bracket above the rear ramp (on the inside) that will hold an M-16/M-4, an M-60 machinegun, an M-240 machinegun, or an M-249 SAW. Below this is another bracket that will hold an M-16/M-4 or an M-249. (I discovered in Korea that either one will also hold an AKM or the South Korean K-1A1 or K-2 rifles.)
The passenger compartment has folding bench seats on either side of the passenger compartment (another feature normally removed by units; they get in the way). At the front of the raised roofline, to the right of the driver’s position and in the center of the front deck, is a metal box permanently attached to the M-577; this is designed for a 4.2kW gasoline-powered generator to power the electrical equipment without having to run the engine for long periods of time. To the rear of the driver’s position are brackets for a lifting davit to allow the generator to be put on the ground and dug in to cut down on the incredible noise the generator puts out. A 50-foot generator cable is provided to allow this, and a shorter one is also provided if the generator is to be run from its carrying position on the M-577.
Other items which may be found (depending on configuration and purpose) on the M-577 include a 3x3 cabinet with several drawers and a fold-out table; 3-5 folding metal chairs; a 1.2x1.8-meter map board that attaches to the right inner wall of the vehicle; and a variety of shelves (and ways to mount them) for the equipment the M-577 carries. An M-577 generally carries several radios; the one I worked out of in Korea had four SINGCARS radios, a medium-range AM radio, and a long-range AM radio. Inside the M-577 are both white lights and blackout lights to light up the interior. Though they may not all be used at the same time, there are mounts for up to five antenna aerials; in addition, a very-long-range antenna may be mounted on in the davit brackets. At the rear of the vehicle, on either side of ramp on the outside, are connections for four field telephones, two generators, and two pairs of conventional electrical outlets to allow other equipment to feed off of the M-577 (generally done only if the M-577 is itself feeding from a generator). An M-15 collective protection system, to which the troops inside the may hook their protective masks, can be mounted in the M-577, but is not standard equipment; this system is powered by the 4.2kW generator. An airlock system can also be attached to the rear of the M-577, but it is quite rare; it is also powered from the generator. Something that is standard equipment is a work area-extension tent and poles; these attach to the rear of the M-577, and add approximately 4x5 meters of enclosed workspace. When not in use, these stow in special brackets and lash-down points atop the ramp entrance. (Of course, the tent does make emergency moves a bit difficult…)
Other modifications paralleled to some extent those for the M-113. The M-577A1 brought the same power pack changes as the M-113A1, though fuel capacity remained the same as the M-577. The M-577A1 began issue in 1964. The M-577A2 likewise followed the same power pack and suspension improvements as the M-113A2, as well as adding the smoke grenade launchers. Issue of the M-577A2 began in 1979, with both new M-577A2s being built and earlier M-577s and M-577A1s being upgraded to the M-577A2 standard. The M-577A3 also included most of the improvements of the M-113A3; in addition, the 4.2kW gasoline-fueled generator was (gradually) replaced by a 5kW generator that could be powered by diesel or JP-8 jet fuel. M-577A3 issue began in 1994.
The M-1068 SICPS (Standard Integrated Command Post System) began as a modernized M-577A2, but with the advent of the M-577A3, the M-577A3 was made the base vehicle for modifications, and the resulting vehicle re-designated the M-1068A3. The interior of the M-1068A3 held two folding semi-bucket seats for the crewmembers, and the standard TC’s stand and the driver’s position. The M-1068A3 has a dramatically beefed-up electrical system to allow the use of the ATCSS (Army Tactical Command and Control System), with its multiple communications systems, computers, touchscreens, and ancillary equipment; the M-1068A3 also carries various other equipment in drawers and shelves similar to the other members of the M-577A3 series. The extension tent was re-designed (primarily to save weight) and also contains a lighting system for the tent.
The M-113 ACAV
Notes: In Vietnam, an attempt to increase the firepower and protection levels of M-113s, particularly those operated by scout units and those operated by the ARVN. This led to various ad hoc modifications (parts of which later became kits made by FMC), which were informally called ACAVs (Armored Cavalry Assault Vehicles). Though the ACAV appellation later became more-or-less standard, ACAV versions of the M-113 have never been official versions of the M-113, and do not have any special designation other than “ACAV” hung after the type of M-113 in question. ACAVs were typically used as scouts, convoy escorts, or to spearhead assaults.
The first ACAVs were vehicles of the 11th ACR, based on the M-113A1. The first of these modified vehicles entered combat in 1966. The increase in firepower and protection for the gunners was considered astounding, but more importantly, it increased the confidence of the crew. These first ACAVs had an armored shield for the commander’s cupola and the M-2HB (with a cutout for hatch in the rear), and M-60 machineguns on each front corner of the rear deck hatch on pintle mounts. A lug for a pintle was also mounted on the inside of the rear deck hatch. These gun shields have an AV of 2. Crews often armed one of their members with an M-79 grenade launcher and a large ammunition supply inside the ACAV. Some ACAV crews mounted other weapons on their ACAVs that were compatible (or jury-riggable), such as Miniguns, extra M-2HBs, or the XM-175 or Mk 19 automatic grenade launchers. With the gun shield removed, the rear weapons mounts could also mount 75mm, 90mm, or 106mm recoilless rifles. Experiments were also done with reduced-sized Claymore mines (often called “Minimores”) attached to the sides of the ACAVs (full-sized Claymores would damage the M-113’s hull). ACAVs were sometimes additionally protected by kits such as the Mine Vulnerability Reduction Kit (below) or bolt-on steel or aluminum plates; sometimes the crews took a cute from World War 2 vehicles and built frames for sandbags to protect vulnerable areas (sandbags on the floor of the ACAV were quite common). Telescopic, periscopic, or night-vision devices were sometimes added to the weapon mounts. The ACAVs would also be loaded with as much ammunition as possible, and typically carried only as many crew members as necessary to man their weapons.
After Vietnam, the ACAVs were converted back to their standard M-113 configuration, and largely seen only in museums. However, in Iraq, some M-113s have become ACAVs in all but name, and kits are available to convert the M-113s to “ACAVs,” sometimes further bolstered by the P-900 armor kit (see below) or other appliqué armor.
Other M-113 Mods
In the late 1960s, a waterjet propulsion system was developed for amphibious operations. This allowed the M-113A1 on which it was tested to roughly double its swimming speed and greatly increase waterborne mobility. The waterjets were steered by vanes. Air was sucked in from the top of the waterjet modules and pushed out under the water level to form the jets. Ballast was added in the front to ensure stability. The waterjet system was, however, decided against by the Army. In game terms, adding a waterjet propulsion system adds 300 kg to the weight of the vehicle (which is subtracted from the M-113s cargo capacity) and adds $4000 to the cost of the vehicle.
One of the interesting and creative uses for older M-113s (mostly M-113A3s and M-113A2s modified with the M-113A3’s power train) is being done at the US National Training Center (NTC) at Fort Irwin, California. Designated the M-113 OSV (OPFOR Surrogate Vehicle), this vehicle is a VISMOD (Visually-Modified) that is altered in appearance, and to some extent mechanically and operationally, to resemble the BMP-2. Most of this is done with fiberglass, sheet metal, and Kevlar add-ons to change the appearance of the M-113. Atop the M-113 OSV is a turret partially made with components of a Bradley turret, but designed to look like that of a BMP-2. The turret is largely non-functional, but can rotate and has useable vision blocks, hatches, and night vision equipment. The VISMOD is imperfect – the M-113 is too short and tall to really make it look like a BMP-2 – but it does have the advantage of actually being able to carry an infantry squad, something that the previous BMP VISMODs based on M-551 Sheridans cannot. In addition, the M-113 OSV uses about half the fuel of a Sheridan.
Non-APC-type M-113-based vehicles will generally be found in the other appropriate sections of the site (generally Light Combat Vehicles or Engineer Vehicles), according to which country developed them. A large number of experiments with the M-113 chassis were also postulated and tested (particularly in the 1980s) these will (eventually) be found in the various “Best Vehicles that Never Were” sections of this site.
Add-On Kits for the
M-113
With the advent of the M-113A1. FMC also devised a folding windshield kit for the driver for use in cold weather or when swimming. (Quite frankly, I’ve never actually laid eyes on one of these, though I’ve seen it in tech manuals and pictures…)
Experience in Vietnam resulted in various modifications and special kits for the M-113A1. M-113A1s used in Vietnam often got bogged down in mud, swamps, and rice paddies; this resulted in a special kit called a Marine Recovery Kit. The kit consisted of a pair of capstans which were bolted onto the drive sprockets, and a pair of high-strength nylon ropes with hooks on one end and large ground anchors on the other. The capstans, once attached to the drive sprockets and the recovery ropes attached, could allow the M-113A1 to pull itself out of bogged-down conditions as the ropes wound around the final drives. Once the M-113A1 was extricated, it would be driven in reverse to unwind the ropes, and the kit was removed. The capstan was stowed beside the commander’s hatch and the ropes and ground anchors were stowed on the left side of the vehicle.
The external armored fuel tanks were also available by themselves at an add-on kit for the M-113A1 and M-113A2. (For the M-113A3 and A4, they are standard equipment.) The tanks have a 95-liter fuel capacity (same as the internal tanks), and add 408 kilograms to the weight of the vehicle. The M-113A1 and M-113A2 cannot use both the internal and external tanks at the same time (unless either the internal or external tanks are simply used as giant fuel cans).
Appliqué Armor Kits
for the M-113
As stated above, the M-113 series is very vulnerable to mines and IEDs, due to the relatively thin belly armor. This problem hit home in Vietnam, where M-113A1s were knocked out by mines on a regular basis, killing, maiming, and injuring thousands of US and ARVN troops. In an attempt to reduce this problem, FMC devised the Mine Vulnerability Reduction Kit. This kit included plates of extra belly armor (adds 1 point of belly armor to most of the vehicle, but from the commander’s position forward, the armor increase is 2). A set of armored fuel tanks were devised to attach to the rear of the vehicle on either side of the ramp, along with a revised fuel line system that did not go through the floor. The driver’s seat was improved to take up more shock, including a shoulder harness. In the rear of the vehicle, the ramp had an emergency release to help the passengers to escape if the ramp control behind the driver was not quickly accessible. As this kit (especially the added armor) weighs about 1 ton and unbalances the M-113, buoyancy cells were added to the trim vane and sides to allow the M-113 to be able to swim; without these cells, swimming is dicey at best. (These buoyancy cells would also make an appearance later on certain special versions of the M-113 series).
Appliqué armor of various types have been proposed, tested, or used by various countries around the world. Most of these armor upgrades are simple bolt-on plates of additional composed of various materials (mostly metals), including aluminum and aluminum alloy, steel, and titanium. Ceramics, carbon fiber composites, and even a variant of Chobham have reportedly been tested. (The US Marines in particular have been experimenting with M-113A3s with ceramic appliqué armor.) Some of this appliqué armor is reportedly capable of defeating up to 30mm rounds without causing an undue weight increase or performance hit. Bar armor for the M-113 similar to that of the Stryker series is also being tested by the US in Iraq. Due to a lack of information, I will not go into further detail in this entry; I have included this paragraph for informational purposes only.
For the M-113A3, FMC devised a comprehensive appliqué armor kit called the P-900 kit. This kit consists of large sheets of extra aluminum plate (or steel plate for the belly) that bolt onto the vehicle. The P-900 kit pretty much adds protection to the entire vehicle, including spaced armor for the hull sides, added armor for the fuel tanks, and an armored shield kit that helps protect the entire commander’s cupola except for the rear. (This shield kit is almost identical to that of the ACAV kit’s cupola armor.) This extra armor adds a lot of weight and does affect performance, though the added horsepower of the M-113A3’s engine helps in this regard. This is the reason for the extra line below for an M-113A3 equipped with the P-900 kit.) I have not heard of any M-113A2s being augmented with the P-900 kit; I don’t see why it couldn’t be done, (though weight would definitely be an issue), since the Israelis have a similar kit for the M-113A2.
The Israelis have long been adding ERA to their M-113s; other countries that field the M-113 are also using them or testing the attachment of ERA to them. On the M-113, ERA is typically added only to the sides of the vehicle; it has been seen on the front on some Israeli and US vehicles, but due to the design of the M-113, there is a great danger of injuring the driver or even the commander due to an ERA tile detonation. In response to that danger, armored plexiglas windshields have been devised for the driver and commander. The rules for adding lugs and ERA to vehicles are well-covered in the Twilight 2000 v2.2 rulebook.
It should be noted that most appliqué armor kits will not kit on the M-577 series. However, with the M-577A3 and M-1068A3, bolt-on appliqué aluminum plates were devised that will fit the M-577A3 and M-1068A3, and lugs for ERA can also be applied.
Twilight 2000 Notes: Virtually all M-113-series vehicles in service worldwide in the Twilight 2000 timeline will be M-113A2s, though in third-world countries and even some allied countries M-113A1s and even M-113s will be quite common. There will also be a decent number of what are essentially M-113A1E1s (developmental M-113A1s with the power pack, drive train and most of the suspension improvements of the M-113A2) in service due to upgrade kits; these can be treated as M-113A2 for game purposes. In the US inventory, M-113A3s and M-577A3s will constitute about 20% of the fleet, while about 3% of the M-113-based CPCs will be M-1068A3s.
ACAV-type vehicles will comprise about 15% of the M-113-type APCs at the beginning of the Twilight War; these will be concentrated in brigade and battalion-level scout platoons. As the war goes on, more ACAV-type vehicles will appear, using either kits or ad hoc modifications. The P-900 kit is a rare but available modification; the MVRK kit is almost unknown.
As with Sheridan-based VISMODs, the M-113-based VISMODs have sometimes been used for infiltration-type raids and reconnaissance against Mexican and Soviet positions in the American Southwest – almost always with operational weapons installed.
Vehicle |
Price |
Fuel Type |
Load |
Veh Wt |
Crew |
Mnt |
Night Vision |
Radiological |
M-113 |
$148,222 |
G, A |
1.3 tons |
10.4 tons |
2+11 |
4 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A1 |
$148,838 |
D, A |
1.6 tons |
10.9 tons |
2+11 |
4 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A1 w/MVRK |
$150,262 |
D, A |
1 ton |
11.8 tons |
2+11 |
4 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A1 ACAV |
$200,172 |
D, A |
1.4 tons |
11.3 tons |
4+3 |
5 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A1 ACAV w/MVRK |
$201,844 |
D, A |
835 kg |
12.2 tons |
4+3 |
5 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A2 |
$147,324 |
D, A |
1.4 tons |
11.3 tons |
2+11 |
4 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A2 w/P-900 Kit |
$152,906 |
D, A |
970 kg |
12.2 tons |
2+11 |
4 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A2 ACAV |
$201,656 |
D, A |
1.2 tons |
11.7 tons |
4+3 |
5 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A2 ACAV w/P-900 Kit |
$207,238 |
D, A |
790 kg |
13.1 tons |
4+3 |
5 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A3 |
$146,972 |
D, A |
1.4 tons |
12.3 tons |
2+11 |
4 |
Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A3 w/P-900 Kit |
$152,554 |
D, A |
950 kg |
13.2 tons |
2+11 |
4 |
Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A3 ACAV |
$201,944 |
D, A |
1.2 tons |
12.7 tons |
4+3 |
5 |
Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
M-113A3 ACAV w/P-900 Kit |
$207,526 |
D, A |
770 kg |
13.6 tons |
4+3 |
5 |
Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
M-577 |
$233,279 |
D, A |
586 kg |
10.8 tons |
2+6 |
5 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-577A1 |
$244,017 |
D, A |
648 kg |
11.4 tons |
2+6 |
5 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-577A2 |
$214,230 |
D, A |
752 kg |
11.8 tons |
2+6 |
5 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-577A3 |
$220,471 |
D, A |
741 kg |
12.8 tons |
2+6 |
6 |
Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
M-1068A3 SICPS |
$414,456 |
D, A |
766 kg |
12.3 tons |
2+6 |
6 |
Thermal Imaging (D) |
Shielded |
Vehicle |
Tr Mov |
Com Mov |
Fuel Cap |
Fuel Cons |
Config |
Susp |
Armor |
M-113 |
176/123 |
30/18/3 |
303 |
148 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS4 HR4 |
M-113A1 |
150/105 |
30/18/3 |
360 |
124 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS4 HR4 |
M-113A1 w/MVRK |
130/91 |
28/17/2 |
360 |
139 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS4 HR4* |
M-113A1 ACAV |
135/95 |
29/17/3 |
360 |
138 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS4 HR4 |
M-113A1 ACAV w/MVRK |
127/88 |
27/16/2 |
360 |
144 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS4 HR4* |
M-113A2 |
136/96 |
30/20/3 |
360 |
124 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS4 HR4 |
M-113A2 w/P-900 Kit |
131/91 |
29/19/3 |
360 |
134 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF8 HS6Sp HR5** |
M-113A2 ACAV |
134/94 |
30/19/3 |
360 |
138 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS4 HR4 |
M-113A2 ACAV w/P-900 Kit |
126/88 |
28/18 |
360 |
149 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF8 HS6Sp HR5** |
M-113A3 |
146/103 |
33/22/3 |
360 |
136 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS5 HR4 |
M-113A3 w/P-900 Kit |
141/99 |
32/21 |
360 |
146 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF8 HS7Sp HR5** |
M-113A3 ACAV |
141/98 |
32/21/3 |
360 |
149 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS5 HR4 |
M-113A3 ACAV w/P-900 Kit |
136/95 |
31/20 |
360 |
160 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF8 HS7Sp HR5** |
M-577 |
133/93 |
29/17 |
454 |
154 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HS6 HS4 HR4 |
M-577A1 |
131/92 |
29/17 |
454 |
129 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HS6 HS4 HR4 |
M-577A2 |
134/93 |
29/17 |
454 |
129 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HS6 HS4 HR4 |
M-577A3 |
145/101 |
31/19 |
454 |
141 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS5 HR4 |
M-1068A3 SICPS |
146/103 |
33/22/3 |
360 |
136 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF6 HS5 HR4 |
Vehicle |
Fire Control |
Stabilization |
Armament |
Ammunition |
M-113 (Any) |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C) |
2000x.50 |
M-113 ACAV (Any) |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C); any combination of 3 - M-2HB, M-60, M-240, M-134, Mk 19 AGL, Dragon ATGM, or 75/90/106mm RCLR (Rt, Lt, R) |
4000x.50; 4xMinimore; up to 7200x.50, 12000x7.62mm, 2300x40mm HV, 15xDragon ATGM, 40x75mm, 34x90mm, or 29x106mm*** |
M-577 (Any) & M-1068A3 |
None |
None |
None |
None |
*The MVRK gives the M-113 equipped with a belly armor AV of 4 from the commander’s cupola forward. Behind that, the belly armor AV is 3.
**Belly and top deck armor AV for P-900 kit-equipped vehicles is 4.
***For ACAV ammo, the figures for all weapons except for the commander’s M-2HB and the Minimores is shown as if all three additional weapons are of the same type. The GM must “mix-and-match” the amount of ammunition in the basic load as necessary if different types of weapons are used.
GDLS
Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle (EFV)
Notes: Originally known as the AAAV (Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicle), the EFV is the last member of a program that was started in the late 1970s to provide the US Marines with a greater “over the horizon” landing reach for Marine assault units. The other members of this program, including the LCAC, the MV-22 Osprey, the UH-1Y Venom, the AH-1Z SuperCobra, and new amphibious assault ships have all yielded results, but the EFV is well behind of schedule – it is currently set to be first deployed in 2015, over 14 years behind schedule. It has been repeatedly delayed by budgetary shortfalls and overruns, repeated revisions in design, incorporation of new technology, reliability issues, alterations of perceived mission needs, and sheer political wrangling. It is noteworthy that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has recently described the EFV program as “exquisite” – a description he normally reserves for a program that he is about to cancel. The EFV retains the promise of being a revolutionary vehicle for Marine Assault Units – whether it can or ever will fulfill that promise is not known at this point. The US Army is even considering the EFV as a base chassis and hull for its new BCT Ground Combat Vehicle Program, though it is considered more likely that the Army will start anew from the ground up, considering the difficulties that the Marines are having with the troublesome EFV.
The EFV is physically a much larger vehicle than the current AAVP-7A1 that the US Marines use, though it does not carry as many troops as the AAVP-7A1. Armament is heavier, as are the protection levels. However, perhaps the most revolutionary part of the EFV’s design is its propulsion, particularly in water – the EFV has been described as a cross between jet ski and an IFV. When embarking from a ship offshore, the lower hull alters through a system of movable panels, hatches, louvers, and hydrojets to produce a vehicle which skims the surface of water and is capable of speeds in water over half as fast as its top speed on road on land. This means that an EFV can get troops onto shore faster, with a smoother ride that leaves Marines less seasick and leaves them less exposed to onshore enemy fire. The change from water mode to land mode (or back again) takes only 30 seconds. However, this new propulsion system is at the very heart of the EFV’s delays – it has proven to be non too reliable and very maintenance-intensive; some helicopters require less maintenance and as many as one-fourth of the vehicle trips in from ships during test have resulted in failure, with the vehicle being dead in the water. When it’s working, however, it’s quite a sight to see. The heart of this propulsion system is the MTU MT-883 Ka-524 multi-mode diesel engine, which produces 850 horsepower in land mode and an astounding 2702 horsepower in water mode. (Naturally, Fuel Consumption figures dramatically increase in water mode.) This engine is coupled with an automatic transmission that is also variable for land and water modes, an automatic system allowing the driver to quickly put the vehicle in and out of water mode, and the hydrojet system for water use. The hydrojets are fully steerable and allow the EFV to move forwards, backwards, and turn in place. Steering is done with a conventional driver station, and is reportedly quite easy when everything is going right. A water Travel Movement figure is provided below for water travel, as the EFV is envisioned to be able to make a long water crossing. Likewise, Fuel Consumption figures are provided for land travel/water travel.
The armor of the EFV consists of welded aluminum/copper alloy armor inner and outer plates, with ceramic and Kevlar sandwiched between them, along with a Kevlar anti-spalling liner; the EFV has a form of composite armor and has protection levels much better than those of the AAPV-7A1. This additional protection extends to the hull floor, though from the experience of recent years, there is currently a big push to incorporate some of the experience with MRAPs into the EFV’s hull floor, which could result in a giant redesign. Most experts at the DoD think, however, that protection levels are sufficient, and these changes are unlikely to be used. In addition to its standard armor, the EFV can mount additional appliqué armor on its hull sides, hull front, and turret. The EFV will also have lugs for ERA on the hull front, hull sides, turret front, and turret sides. The original turret was envisioned to be the same as used on the US Army’s M-2 Bradley; this was later changed to a similar turret with better protection levels but no TOW launcher, then to the current turret mounting an ATK M-230 30mm ChainGun variant (the Mk 44 Bushmaster II) which can used computer-fuzed airburst rounds as well as conventional rounds. The turret is a two-man turret; the crew also consists of a driver and assistant driver. The EFV is equipped with a laser warning system as well as a laser designator to allow the crew to assist in fire support; in addition, the EFV will most likely mount soft-kill and hard-kill active protection systems. The driver’s compartments, turret, troop area, engine compartment, and fuel tanks all have automatic fire detection and suppression systems; the fuel tanks are also self-sealing. On the sides of the hull, on each side of the turret, are clusters of sixteen smoke grenade launchers. The Marines deploy from large doors in the rear of the vehicle, and can also long hatches over each side of the passenger compartment. The crew and passengers have air conditioning and heating and are protected with an NBC overpressure system with a collective NBC backup. The EFV is equipped with a GPS system and is expected to be fitted with a full Battlefield Management System. Night vision is comprehensive, including a FLIR system and low-light TV system for the commander and gunner. The main gun is fully stabilized and can fire with great accuracy from both land and water; it is equipped with modern fire control elements as well as computer-controlled fuzing for airburst and delayed modes for its 30mm ammunition. The EFV is equipped with a 30-horsepower diesel APU for use in water, and a 10kW battery APU for use on land.
The EFV’s projected soft/hard-kill APS is a further extension of the P31
soft-kill system that is being tested on the M-1A2 and incorporate a
Raytheon-designed hard-kill system that will be similar to the Israeli Trophy
system (which is itself similar to the Russian Arena APS). The P31 soft-kill
system includes a standard sort of soft-kill system, which
consists of sensors and equipment
mounted atop the turret and control systems mounted inside the turret and hull;
the primary controls for the system are at the commander’s station.
The system includes an electro-optical jamming system to jam wire-guided
ATGMs (on a roll of 14+ on a d20, the difficulty to the ATGM gunner is increased
by one level; outstanding success indicates that the incoming missile
pre-detonates before it can hit the EFV).
A laser warning system is also included with the P31; when the EFV is
being lased by a laser designator, an alarm sounds inside the EFV, and a pair of
smoke grenades are automatically launched to help obscure the EFV to the laser
beam. The laser warning system can
also be triggered manually by the commander. The smoke grenades can also be
triggered by the gunner manually if he feels it is necessary; the EFV uses the
sixteen smoke grenade launchers on each side of the vehicle.
The P31 also includes a pair of IRCM lights (one on the turret on each
side of and above the main gun) that emit coded, pulsed IR beams to decoy
IR-guided munitions; their effectiveness is the same as listed for the
electro-optical jammer above, and both have a 360-degree range of protection, as
well as 180-degrees upwards. The
VIDS system in the P31 incorporates a laser dazzling system designed to damage
night vision devices and image intensifiers, as well as produce a level of
temporary partial blindness in enemy gunners.
The gunner-blinding part of the VIDS system, however is manual.
The blinding of an enemy gunner is a Difficult: INT task on the part of
the gunner or commander with a range of 2000 meters.
The temporary damage to night vision
and observation devices can also temporarily blind IR sights and image
intensifiers; this is successful on a roll of 8 on a d20 for IR sights and 5 for
image intensifiers. A computer is
provided to tie all of this information from the P31 and other sensors together.
The hard-kill component of the APS projected for the EFV uses a small, short-range radar system on the turret roof to detect incoming missiles and rockets (it doesn’t work fast enough to stop tank and autocannon rounds), and launches special rounds in the path of the missile that quickly break up into a cloud of tungsten pellets, destroying the missile before it can hit the tank. The system has 16 of these rounds available, and they are 75% likely to destroy the incoming missile about 10 meters from the EFV. The system protects the EFV in a 180-degree dome around the vehicle.
Stats are provided for the EFV with and without its APS, because like the EFV itself, development of the P31 and Raytheon APS systems are way behind the originally-projected timeline.
The standard form of the EFV listed above is the EFVP (Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle Personnel). A command version is also being developed, the EFVC, which has room for a command crew, a smaller, lightly-armed turret, two short-range, two medium-range, two long-range, and one SATCOM radio (with one long-range radio and the SATCOM radio being data-capable), an erectable mast antenna, two ruggedized laptop computers, LCD map screens, and the sort of map boards and plotting and office-type equipment one would expect in a command post carrier. The monitors can access information from the vehicle’s sensors and display them on the monitors or the laptop computers.
Special Note: The stats below assume a reliable, reasonably-perfected form of the EFV. For the EFV in its current form, multiply the Maintenance figure by five, assume that even new vehicles have a wear value of not less than three, and give the vehicle an additional 25% chance of a breakdown per period.
Twilight 2000 Notes: This vehicle is not available in the Twilight 2000 timeline.
Vehicle |
Price |
Fuel Type |
Load |
Veh Wt |
Crew |
Mnt |
Night Vision |
Radiological |
EFVP |
$652,146 |
D, G, AvG, A |
2.3 tons |
33.8 tons |
4+17 |
20 |
Passive IR (D, Asst D, G, C), Image Intensification (G, C), Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (G, C) |
Shielded |
EFVP w/Appliqué |
$660,142 |
D, G, AvG, A |
2 tons |
34.8 tons |
4+17 |
21 |
Passive IR (D, Asst D, G, C), Image Intensification (G, C), Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (G, C) |
Shielded |
EFVP w/APS |
$695,964 |
D, G, AvG, A |
2.2 tons |
34.1 tons |
4+17 |
22 |
Passive IR (D, Asst D, G, C), Image Intensification (G, C), Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (G, C) |
Shielded |
EFVP w/APS & Appliqué |
$701,593 |
D, G, AvG, A |
1.9 tons |
35.1 tons |
4+17 |
23 |
Passive IR (D, Asst D, G, C), Image Intensification (G, C), Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (G, C) |
Shielded |
EFVC |
$989,986 |
D, G, AvG, A |
1.2 tons |
35 tons |
3+7 |
22 |
Passive IR (D, Asst D, C), Image Intensification (C), Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (C) |
Shielded |
EFVC w/Appliqué |
$995,615 |
D, G, AvG, A |
1 ton |
36 tons |
3+7 |
23 |
Passive IR (D, Asst D, C), Image Intensification (C), Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (C) |
Shielded |
EFVC w/APS |
$1,033,804 |
D, G, AvG, A |
1.1 tons |
35.3 tons |
3+7 |
24 |
Passive IR (D, Asst D, C), Image Intensification (C), Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (C) |
Shielded |
EFVC w/APS & Appliqué |
$1,039,433 |
D, G, AvG, A |
950 kg |
36.3 tons |
3+7 |
25 |
Passive IR (D, Asst D, C), Image Intensification (C), Thermal Imaging (D), FLIR (C) |
Shielded |
Vehicle |
Tr Mov |
Com Mov |
Fuel Cap |
Fuel Cons |
Config |
Susp |
Armor |
EFVP |
135/94/86 |
29/22/19 |
1506 |
351/1389 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF19Cp TS14Sp TR11 HF24Cp HS12Cp HR9* |
EFVP w/Appliqué |
131/91/83 |
28/21/18 |
1506 |
362/1431 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF24Cp TS17Sp TR11 HF30Cp HS15Cp HR9*** |
EFVP w/APS |
134/93/85 |
29/22/19 |
1506 |
355/1403 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF19Cp TS14Sp TR11 HF24Cp HS12Cp HR9* |
EFVP w/APS & Appliqué |
130/90/83 |
28/21/18 |
1506 |
365/1445 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF24Cp TS17Sp TR11 HF30Cp HS15Cp HR9*** |
EFVC |
130/90/83 |
28/21/18 |
1506 |
365/1445 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF19Cp TS14Sp TR11 HF24Cp HS12Cp HR9* |
EFVC w/Appliqué |
127/88/81 |
27/21/18 |
1506 |
376/1487 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF24Cp TS17Sp TR11 HF30Cp HS15Cp HR9*** |
EVFC w/APS |
130/90/83 |
28/21/18 |
1506 |
365/1445 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF19Cp TS14Sp TR11 HF24Cp HS12Cp HR9* |
EFVC w/APS & Appliqué |
127/88/81 |
27/21/18 |
1506 |
376/1487 |
Trtd |
T4 |
TF24Cp TS17Sp TR11 HF30Cp HS15Cp HR9*** |
Vehicle |
Fire Control |
Stabilization |
Armament |
Ammunition |
EFVP |
+4 |
Good** |
30mm ATK Mk 44 ChainGun, M-240C |
600x30mm, 2400x7.62mm |
EFVC |
+4 |
Good** |
M-240C |
2400x7.62mm |
*Hull floor armor value is 6Sp. Hull roof and turret roof armor are 5Sp.
**Stabilization drops to Fair when firing from water.
***Hull floor armor value for this version is 9Sp. Hull roof and turret roof armor are 5Sp.
GDLS M-4 Command
and Control Vehicle (C2V)
Notes: The M-4 C2V (Command and Control Vehicle; sometimes it is called the M-4 C3I, for Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence Vehicle) is a derivation of the M-2 Bradley chassis, designed to replace the M-577 and M-1068 in some roles for the command and control role (primarily at higher echelons, battalion and above), and also with the capability to be fitted out for a variety of other roles including a division-level communications center, FDC, electronic warfare vehicle, SIGINT vehicle, or heavy medical vehicle. The M-4 uses a large, box-like enclosure fitted onto the back of the vehicle; the turret has been deleted, and the whole thing looks similar to the M-993 MLRS (which is also derived from the Bradley chassis). The M-4 C2V has been somewhat of an experiment by the US Army, following the BCOTM (Battle Command On The Move) concept. The concept has had a hard time selling in the US Army, partially because of early misuse of the vehicle as a relatively-static command post and specialist vehicle instead of being a highly mobile platform as envisioned; one observer criticized the misuse of the M-4 C2V as an “armored, moving tent.” In 1999, a total of 400 M-4 C2Vs were envisioned for procurement by the US Army, but as of 2010, only about 40 had been deployed; most of these are the command post variants, and only a very few are medical vehicles. The M-4 C2V is still being manufactured at a snail’s pace under an LRIP program, with only 1-2 being finished and delivered in a given year. The M-4 C2V may get a second lease on life under the IEWCS (Intelligence and Electronic Warfare Common Sensor) program, but it is still considered a sort of advanced, combat-deployed experiment whose future is highly in doubt. In addition to misuse, the M-4 C2V has problems with an inadequate APU and the resulting need to eat up fuel due to the running of the vehicle’s engine, and lower and higher echelons communicating primarily using text reports instead of the complex data the M-4 C2V is able to send and receive (this is a problem in general with the use of BMS systems in the Army and Marines, and is a problem with under-utilization of capability). The vehicles also have a unique appearance that can be a magnet for enemy fire, and are considered to suffer from overall under-armoring and vulnerability to IEDs. The M-4 C2V has also suffered from having no formal requirements for the program since it is still considered an experiment. The M-4 C2V is one of the last survivors (so far) of the Force XXI program vehicles, which originally included the Comanche, the MLRS MSTAR rocket, the Avenger Block II, the Grizzly, the Wolverine, and the ATACMS Block IIA.
All variants of the M-4 C2V are equipped with a basic version of a BMS and GPS.
The Command Variant
(CV)
Though this category includes primarily replacements for the M-577 at battalion, brigade, and division level, it also includes division-level FDC and FALO vehicles; the command-type vehicles themselves can also vary greatly in fit and equipment installed as well as the interior layout. A general sort of equipment fit will be discussed here. Externally, the primary distinguishing factor in the CV are the five whip antennas and the folding, extendible 10-meter mast antenna, which service as many as two short-range, two medium-range, and four long-range radios, with all of these radios being data-capable. In addition, many are also fitted with SATCOM radios which are data-capable and the associated folding antennas, and these are included in the stats below. The radio system is interoperable with ground units, aircraft, and ships, as well as fixed positions and being able to receive signals from all over the globe if equipped with SATCOM. The Command Variant is equipped with a full ATCCS (Army Tactical Command & Control System), sort of a BMS on steroids, plus large LCD screens for the display of maps, navigation information, and other information gathered and collated from intelligence reports and battle information. Three computers tie together this information, including lots of hard drive storage space. The usual sorts of ordinary map boards and plotting and office-type supplies are also present. This information is primarily concentrated in four ATCCS stations. The electronic equipment is contained in shock and vibration-resistant mounts. The entire vehicle is NBC sealed with an overpressure system and a collective NBC backup system. The vehicle includes a internally-mounted 25.6 kW APU (in the roof at the vehicle’s left rear side), which has surprisingly proved to be inadequate for the purposes of powering the vehicle’s equipment for an extended period while the vehicle’s 600-horsepower engine (the same as in the M-2A3 Bradley) is switched off. The vehicle is equipped with air conditioning and a heater, as well as amenities such as a water tank and cooler and a hot plate. The interior of the rear command section is also rather tight, with all the equipment and personnel that are to be accommodated, including four operators for the ATCCS stations and four staff officers (with more often jamming in). In the cab, above the commander’s position, is a mount for a heavy machinegun or grenade launcher; in the case of an M-240D or M-2HB, this weapon can be aimed and fired from under armor with the hatches closed. The cab has a large bullet-resistant windshield in front and bullet-resistant windows in the doors in the sides, over which armored louvers can be closed or opened in an adjustable manner. The louvered section can also be completely swung down or up, though this must be done manually from outside the vehicle. The body has small bullet-resistant windows at the rear, but no other windows or firing ports. No appliqué armor has yet been devised or envisioned for the M-4 C2V, though it may be in the works; future ERA lugs are also a possibility for the future, as is an APS. These are not reflected in the stats below.
Armored Medical
Treatment Vehicle (AMTV)
The AMTV goes beyond the typical armored medical vehicle – it is essentially a small surgical suite and advanced medical treatment facility for wounded soldiers on the battlefield. The typical AMTV carries a full range of medical supplies (including a full set of surgical tools, the equivalent of 5 Doctor Medical Bags, enough refills for the personal medical kits of an entire platoon, a full range of drugs, at least 10 units of each blood type, plasma, and IV fluids, and advanced first aid kits). A large refrigerator is carried, as well as a freezer, a 25.6 kW generator for running equipment with the engine off, a defibrillator, oxygen equipment for three casualties, medical monitors for five casualties, and radios to communicate with air as well as ground elements. The crew of the AMTV normally consists of a driver, commander, medic, and nurse plus a doctor or physician's assistant; the commander and the driver are normally medics. The AMTV has the capability to carry four stretcher cases and up to five seated casualties; alternately, two of the stretcher stations and room for two seated patients can be folded and moved out of the way to make room for surgical treatment of one patient. The AMTV can provide advanced and/or surgical treatment as complex as primary 3rd-degree-burn treatment, amputations, treatment for wounds as severe as disembowelment, and of course treatment for gunshot and fragment wound, including multiple life-threatening hits. The AMTV is essentially a mobile, self-contained, armored MASH-type unit. The AMTV can extend a tent at the rear of the vehicle to allow for the treatment of more casualties (though it of course becomes temporarily immobile in such a case. The AMTV is normally unarmed; the hatch above the commander’s position is a simple hatchway. The cab windows have the same armored windshield louvers as on the CV. The AMTV can be externally characterized by the virtual absence of antennas and aerials (it typically has only one whip antenna) and under most circumstances, by prominent medical insignia (i.e., a large red cross on the front, sides, rear, and top). The medical personnel have a small computer with decent hard drive storage capacity, which is used to consult a medical database. This computer can connect via a data-capable long-range radio to medical units in the rear, both to alert of incoming casualties and consult other medical personnel on treatment options and procedures.
Electronic Warfare
Variants
This category is comprised of two versions – an EW (Electronic Warfare) vehicle used for the jamming of radio and radar signals, which itself has several versions depending upon the mission, and a SIGINT (SIGnals INTelligence) version, which is used for MIJI (Meaconing, Intrusion, Jamming, and Interference) against enemy radio and intelligence broadcasts.
The mission of the EW version is essentially straightforward. Radio-jamming versions can jam VLF and LF radio frequencies and the lower half of HF frequencies; HF and VHF radio frequencies, or the upper half or HF and VHF radio frequencies as well as the typical frequencies used for communications with certain ships and aircraft. It is rumored that a radio-jamming EW version with these capabilities may also be able to jam GPS signals. The jamming of these signals by an M-4 EW vehicle is so effective that broadcasting or listening to frequencies within its 100-kilometer jamming range is two levels more difficult than normal. GPS jamming is handled differently; GPS units used by enemy troops within the jamming range will be degraded so that they completely fail to give a reading 25% of the time, and give the wrong reading 50% of the time. GPS jamming can be ameliorated on a roll of 10 or greater on a d20; if successful, the GPS operator can immediately attempt a second GPS reading, with the chances of GPSs failure being reduced to 12% and of a bad reading reduced to 25%.
Other EW vehicles are used to jam radar, including counterbattery radar. Jamming range for these vehicles in general is 100 kilometers. Again, there are several versions of this type of EW vehicle, which is called an ECM (Electronic CounterMeasures) vehicle. One is used to jam signals such as ground-surveillance radar and counterbattery radar; the ECM version can also jam radio signals used by ATGM, wire-guidance signals used by ATGMs, and IR guidance signals used by fire-and-forget ATGMs and TV guidance signals used by some air-to-ground missiles. It also has a small chance of jamming GPS signals used by some air-to-ground ordinance, with this being similar to GPS signal jamming as above but successful for a complete miss 10% of the time and tripling the scatter radius for a miss 25% of the time. This jamming protects all friendly units within a 100-meter radius of the vehicle. For use against counterbattery radar and GSR, this ECM vehicle degrades effectiveness by two levels. EW vehicles typically have a standard radio fit, plus a long-range radio with data capability.
Another type of ECM vehicle is optimized for use against the type of aircraft used by aircraft; degrading its effectiveness by two levels in the case of radar used to find and target ground targets and by one level for air-to-air targets. This version can also jam maritime radars, with effectiveness against ground targets being degraded by two levels and against other maritime targets within the radius and air targets by one level.
The SIGINT version is designed intercept and interfere with radio signals. At its simplest, the Intrusion mode, the SIGINT version is used to listen in on enemy radio broadcasts; in this mode, the computers of the SIGINT version use some of their power to dynamically find and keep up with enemy radio broadcasts. The SIGINT version has four such listening devices, which can be tuned to listen in on VLF and LF broadcasts, HF and VHF broadcasts, aircraft broadcasts, and ship broadcasts. Capacious hard drives, three computers, and conventional tape recorders record these broadcasts for analysis by intelligence soldiers, and assist in this analysis. The SIGINT vehicle can pass on its findings to higher headquarters via several radios with data capability. This equipment gives the operator a two-level boost in his chance of success at intercepting enemy signals. Meaconing allows the SIGINT vehicle to masquerade as a friendly radio source; the operator can then attempt to pretend to be a friendly unit (this would be a CHA or Disguise skill, as well as Language skills, more than anything else). Meaconing is involves the same procedure and has the same chances as the breaking into of an enemy radio unit as Intrusion above. Jamming and Interference are not generally a part of the SIGINT vehicle’s prevue, though the vehicle can attempt such; this jamming has a flat 10% base chance of success. These functions have a 100-kilometer radius.
These versions have the same cab as the other versions of the M-4 C2V. On this version, the cab is armed in the same manner as the CV above. Of course, these variants can be externally characterized by a plethora of specialized antennas. EW and ECM vehicles typically are equipped with powerful computers to help control the functions of their electronics suite. As with the other versions, the EW variant has a 25.6 kW APU. Crewmembers for these versions are normally four electronics specialists, two intelligence soldiers, and the driver and commander (who are normally themselves intelligence or electronics specialists). These vehicles typically have a standard radio fit, plus a long-range radio with data capability.
Twilight 2000 Notes: Only 12 of these vehicles were available for the Twilight War, all of the CV type; five were sent to the Middle East, four to Europe, one to Korea, one to Alaska, and one, for some strange reason, ended up in California with the forces defending against the Mexican invasion. The later vehicle was still known to be operational as late as 2003, though two of the BTCOM stations were known to be minimally-operative and one to be partially-inoperative (in addition to the loss of capability caused by the worldwide lack of communications).
Vehicle |
Price |
Fuel Type |
Load |
Veh Wt |
Crew |
Mnt |
Night Vision |
Radiological |
M-4 C2V CV |
$1,121,127 |
D, A |
7 tons |
30.6 tons |
2+8 |
24 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-4 AMTV |
$389,796 |
D, A |
5.5 tons |
29.3 tons |
* |
21 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-4 EW Radio Jammer |
$417,183 |
D, A |
2.3 tons |
29.1 tons |
2+7 |
20 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-4 ECM Vehicle |
$3,257,136 |
D, A |
2.3 tons |
30.1 tons |
2+6 |
20 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
M-4 SIGINT Vehicle |
$859,631 |
D, A |
2.3 tons |
28.1 tons |
2+6 |
20 |
Passive IR (D) |
Shielded |
Vehicle |
Tr Mov |
Com Mov |
Fuel Cap |
Fuel Cons |
Config |
Susp |
Armor |
M-4 C2V CV |
110/84 |
24/18 |
725 |
160 |
Stnd |
T3 |
HF8 HS4 HR4 |
M-4 AMTV |
114/87 |
25/19 |
725 |
154 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF8 HS4 HR4 |
M-4 EW Radio Jammer |
116/88 |
25/19 |
725 |
152 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF8 HS4 HR4 |
M-4 ECM Vehicle |
112/86 |
24/18 |
725 |
157 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF8 HS4 HR4 |
M-4 SIGINT Vehicle |
120/92 |
26/20 |
725 |
147 |
Stnd |
T2 |
HF8 HS4 HR4 |
Vehicle |
Fire Control |
Stabilization |
Armament |
Ammunition |
M-4 C2V (Except AMTV) |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C) |
900x.50 |
*See above for Crew and passenger capacity.
IHC M-3
(Half-Track)
Notes: By 2000, this famous veteran of World War 2 was long out of service in most countries, being actively used only by Yugoslavia, some South American countries, and in a reserve role in Israel and Lebanon. It was an attempt to provide an armored personnel carrier with the maneuverability and fuel efficiency of a medium truck and the cross-country capability of a tracked vehicle. The Half-Track was easy to make, but was a poor compromise between a truck and a tracked vehicle, not having the good attributes of either. In addition, it is open topped, providing no protections against air attack, airbursting munitions, or even a lucky grenade throw. They are easier to repair than a full-tracked vehicle, but not as mechanically simple as a full-wheeled vehicle. By 2000, most half-tracks that were still in use were being used as specialist vehicles such as weapon carriers, artillery tractors, ambulances, and logistics carriers, instead as APCs. There are doors on either side of the cab for the driver and commander, and a door on the rear of the hull for passengers; however, the primary method of egress in combat was meant for the troops to simply jump out over the sides. Over the commander’s position there is a ring mount for a heavy machinegun, and on each side of the passenger compartment there is a mount for a medium or light machinegun. In most versions, there are either a roller to assist in moving over high obstacles (to prevent the front bumper from digging into the obstacle and getting lodged) or a winch to assist in getting the stuck half-track (or other vehicle) unstuck. Though the stats below include a standard radio fit, radios did not become a standard feature on half-tracks in most cases until the late-1950s or early-1960s.
M-2 Half-Track Car
The story of the M-3 Half-Track actually started with the M-2 Half-Track Car, which was a version of the M-3 White wheeled scout car converted so that the rear wheels and suspension were replaced with a two-bogied, four roadwheeled tracked section. The M-2 entered service in 1940. The tracked section was itself taken from the Timken prototype of a half-track truck (the T-9), that truck, when armored, was woefully underpowered and in the M-2 Half-Track, it was replaced with a White 160AX gasoline 147-horsepower truck engine coupled to a manual transmission. The construction is primarily of bolted steel; the front end is primarily slightly-sloped, with an almost-horizontal armored hood. The front of the vehicle has armored shutters for the radiator which could be adjusted from the driver’s position and bullet-resistant glass over which could be lowered armored shutters with vision slits. Armor protection on the M-2A1 is slightly heavier. The driver’s controls were basically standard truck controls (a steering wheel, gearshifts, and a gas, brake, and clutch pedal). Though the M-2 had enough passenger capacity to serve to transport a small infantry squad (one that would be considered greatly-understrength at the time), it’s primary role was as a scout vehicle and as prime mover for light and medium field guns and howitzers. Unlike the M-3, the M-2 did not have the side machineguns, though an M-2A1 version has those side guns and also one in the rear on the right side of the rear door (there was no rear door on the M-2; it did not appear until the M-2A1). The M-2 had its commander’s machinegun in a semi-rectangular skate mount over his seat (a rectangle with rounded-off corners, giving him a 360-degree field of fire); the M-2A1 used a ring mount. The M-2 also had one rear machinegun, also on a skate mount, which extended across the rear end and slightly to the right and left, allowing fire to the left and right sides and somewhat to the front (about a 245-degree field of fire total). A version given to allies under the Lend-Lease program, the M-9, also did not have a rear door, though due to demand from those allies, an M-9A1 version was designed that did had a rear door. The M-9 and M-9A1 versions are identical for game purposes to the M-2 and M-2A1. Versions with field guns mounted and AAA guns mounted were also developed, though they will not be covered here. The protection levels on the M-9A1 are also upgraded, as on the M-2A1.
M-3 Half-Track
Entering service in 1941, the M-3 and its variants served over the years in the armies of 20 countries. Israel used them in large numbers as late as the 1990s; Bolivia, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Laos and Lebanon are believed to still be using small amounts of them. The M-3 is essentially a longer version of the M-2, able to carry a crew of 3 and 1o troops (about half an infantry squad in the US Army in World War 2). It entered service with the US Army in 1941. Some demilitarized versions are also still in use by civilian companies, particularly logging companies and construction companies in severe terrain.
The M-3 was not only designed to use as many components of the M-2 as possible, but as many commercially-available components as possible. Most M-3s used the same White 160AX 147-horsepower gasoline engine as the M-2. The M-3 used the same thickness of armor panels as the M-2 and had the same general design. As originally produced, the M-3 had racks down each side to hold antitank or antipersonnel mines to be emplaced by the troops inside; however, these were often removed and replaced with larger racks for crew and troop equipment. There were also spaces under the troop seats for ammunition and rations, and racks behind the seats for weapons to be placed in when they were not needed (something that didn’t often happen either in a combat zone or in training). The M-3 from the beginning had a door in the rear face. The M-3A1, as the M-2A1, used a ring mount for the commander’s machinegun instead of a skate mount. The M-3A1 added two machineguns on each side on a pintle mount on each side and another mount at the rear to the right of the rear door. Five troops sit down each side of the troop compartment; the cab has room for the driver on the left and commander on the right, as well as one person who could sit in the center (though in practice, this position was rarely occupied). Construction was primarily of bolted steel, with armored shutters for the radiator which could be adjusted from the driver’s position and bullet-resistant glass over which could be lowered armored shutters with vision slits; the M-3A1 had heavier side armor. Like the M-2, the M-3 had several versions with AAA, field guns, or field howitzers mounted on them, as well as mortar carriers. The M-2A1, M-5 and M-9A1 versions carry more ammunition for their machineguns, primarily due to rearrangement and the carriage of .30-06 ammunition replacing some of the .50-caliber ammunition.
The M-5 version was a large upgrade. The M-5 used a liquid cooled engine, rather than the air-cooled engine of the M-3, though the IHC RED 450B engine developed only 143 horsepower. The M-5 used primarily welded steel instead of bolted steel. The walls of the rear passenger section were of one-piece wrap-around steel rather than being bolted or welded. The M-5 used only the commander’s machinegun. The primary disadvantage, from a manufacturing standpoint, was that most parts of the M-5 were not interchangeable with the M-3; only about half of the drive train, the tracks, wheels and bogies, and machinegun mounts were interchangeable. The M-5 was primarily targeted at US Lend-Lease partners and was not used much by US troops in World War 2 or Korea. The M-5A1 was the equivalent of the M-2A1 in the M-5 line, with the skate mount for the commander’s machinegun being exchanged for a ring mount, three machineguns being added around the rear passenger compartment, and side and front armor being heavier.
Not to be confused with the M9 Half-Track Car, the M-9 Half-Track did away with the externally-mounted radios of the M-3 and M-5, bringing them inside the vehicle. The M-9 is otherwise like the M-5A1 for game purposes. Like the M-9 Half-Track Car, the M-9 Half-Track was primarily aimed at Lend-Lease customers. Note that the Israelis designated all of their half-tracks as “M-3,” even those based on M-2s, M-5s, or M-9s (of either type). In addition, in the 1970s, many Israeli half-tracks were retrofitted with the Detroit Diesel 6V53 212-horsepower diesel engine of the M-113 as well as its Allison TX-100N transmission. Suspension is also improved. Most Israeli half-tracks were based on the M-9 version; even M-2s were updated to an “M-9” standard (referring to the M-9 Half-Track and not the M-9 Half-Track Car), though they were based on the M-9A1 Half-Track Car version. The Israelis also used a command variant of the M-9 Half-Track, which differed primarily in having extra radios (one short-range, two medium-range, and one long-range), and including a hand-held image intensifier, as well as a map board and plotting and office-type supplies, and five pairs of binoculars.
Vehicle |
Price |
Fuel Type |
Load |
Veh Wt |
Crew |
Mnt |
Night Vision |
Radiological |
M-2 |
$39,348 |
G, A |
715 kg |
8.7 tons |
2+6 |
6 |
Headlights |
Open |
M-2A1 |
$41,008 |
G, A |
665 kg |
8.9 tons |
2+6 |
6 |
Headlights |
Open |
M-3 |
$29,511 |
G, A |
1 ton |
9.1 tons |
2+11 |
6 |
Headlights |
Open |
M-3A1 |
$50,965 |
G, A |
950 kg |
9.3 tons |
2+11 |
6 |
Headlights |
Open |
M-5 |
$29,501 |
G, A |
950 kg |
9.3 tons |
2+11 |
6 |
Headlights |
Open |
M-5A1 |
$51,328 |
G, A |
900 kg |
9.8 tons |
2+11 |
6 |
Headlights |
Open |
M-9 Half-Track Car (Israeli) |
$40,431 |
D, A |
715 kg |
8.7 tons |
2+6 |
6 |
Headlights |
Open |
M-9 Half-Track (Israeli) |
$51,743 |
D, A |
900 kg |
9.8 tons |
2+11 |
6 |
Headlights |
Open |
M-9 Half-Track Command (Israeli) |
$117,672 |
D, A |
450 kg |
10.3 tons |
2+5 |
9 |
Headlights |
Open |
Vehicle |
Tr Mov |
Com Mov |
Fuel Cap |
Fuel Cons |
Config |
Susp* |
Armor** |
M-2 |
128/89 |
21/13 |
230 |
78 |
Stnd |
T2/(W)1 |
HF3 HS2 HR2 |
M-2A1 |
125/87 |
21/13 |
230 |
80 |
Stnd |
T2/(W)1 |
HF3 HS3 HR2 |
M-3 |
124/87 |
20/13 |
230 |
82 |
Stnd |
T2/(W)1 |
HF3 HS2 HR2 |
M-3A1 |
122/85 |
20/12 |
230 |
83 |
Stnd |
T2/(W)1 |
HF3 HS3 HR2 |
M-5 |
120/84 |
20/12 |
230 |
83 |
Stnd |
T2/(W)1 |
HF3 HS2 HR2 |
M-5A1 |
116/81 |
19/12 |
230 |
88 |
Stnd |
T2/(W)1 |
HF4 HS3 HR2 |
M-9 Half-Track Car (Israeli) |
166/117 |
27/17 |
230 |
82 |
Stnd |
T2/(W)1 |
HF3 HS3 HR2 |
M-9 Half-Track (Israeli) |
155/109 |
25/16 |
230 |
99 |
Stnd |
T2/(W)1 |
HF4 HS3 HR2 |
M-9 Half-Track Command (Israeli) |
147/104 |
24/15 |
230 |
104 |
Stnd |
T2/(W)1 |
HF4 HS3 HR2 |
Vehicle |
Fire Control |
Stabilization |
Armament |
Ammunition |
M-2/M-2A1 |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C), M-1919A4 (R) |
700x.50, 7750x.30-06 |
M-3/M-5 |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C) |
4000x.50 |
M-3A1/M-5A1/M-9 |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C), 3xM-1919A4 (R, Rt, L) |
700x.50, 7750x.30-06 |
M-9 Half-Track Car (Israeli) |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C), MAG (R) |
700x.50, 7750x7.62mm |
M-9 Half-Track (Israeli) |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C), 3xMAG (R, Rt, L) |
700x.50, 7750x7.62mm |
M-9 Half-Track Command (Israeli) |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C) |
2675x.50 |
*If the tracks are hit, the Suspension value is T2. If the front wheels are hit, the Suspension value is (W)1. Suspension hits are a 50/50 proposition as to whether the tracks of wheels are hit.
**This vehicle has no overhead protection at all; hull roof AV is 0. Floor armor, however, is 2.
IHC/FMC M-75
Notes: This was the first successful US post-World War 2 APC design, and second full-tracked US APC design. The first US post-World War 2 design, the M-18 Hellcat-based M-44, was produced only in limited numbers for a very short time, as it proved to be too large, too heavy, and generally unsatisfactory as an APC. Development of the M-75 therefore began almost immediately on top of the introduction of the M-44 in 1946, and production began in 1952. Eventually, the breaking point of the M-75 was its cost – though it was better in almost every respect than the M-59 that replaced it, it’s real-world price was unacceptably high for the US Army at the time (though the Twilight 2000 price is lower than the M-59, it was in fact much more expensive than the M-59), despite continual changes to the design during and after development to reduce cost, and the use of many of the components of the M-41 light tank to further reduce costs. However, the high profile of the M-75 (2.8 meters) was also cited as a detriment, and the air cooling vents were considered vulnerable to small arms fire. The M-75 also has no amphibious capability. However, the single engine of the M-75 and relatively uncomplicated transmission made maintenance much easier and the vehicle on the whole more reliable, and armor protection was superior to that of the M-59. The M-75 saw service in Korea, arriving in-theater in 1952. Some 1780 were built; the last known users were Belgium, who used them into the 1980s in a reserve role; they were also given out liberally to other US allies and used into the late 1970s and early 1980s by them. Though several variants were evaluated, ultimately no variants were put into production; again, the Army felt the cost of the M-75 was too high.
The design of the M-75 was like most APCs of its time – a large armored box on tracks. As with the M-59, construction was mostly of welded steel, though some parts used bolts for fastening. The front of the vehicle has a modest slope, and has an unusual “double-slope” design with the upper part of the glacis having about twice the slope of the lower part of the glacis. The lower part of the glacis had the access hatch for the engine. The driver was in the front left hull, and center front of the hull, to the rear of the engine, had the commander’s position. The commander’s position was a simple manually-rotated cupola with a pintle-mounted machinegun. Late in production, the M-13 cupola, as used on the M-59, was fitted to the M-75. (During development, several other cupola and gun arrangements were tried, including a cupola with an M-1919A4 machinegun, twin remote-operated machineguns, and a pair of M-1919s on the cupola roof.) The driver had three vision blocks to his front; the commander had all-around vision blocks. In later production vehicles, an additional vision block on the top of the hatch could be removed and replaced by a night vision block. Access to the rear troop compartment was by a pair of hatches in the rear of the vehicle – these were wider at the top than the bottom. At the rear of the troop compartment, extending almost to the commander’s cupola, were a pair of center-folding hatches for the troops to stand in.
The M-75 used a Continental AO-895-4 gasoline engine which was air-cooled, necessitating large armored cooling louvers in the front of the vehicle in the upper part of the glacis. These cooling louvers in fact occupied most of that part of the glacis. The driver used a T-bar for steering, and had a gas pedal, brake pedal, and clutch pedal. The high silhouette was in part because of the placement of the transmission and large drive train, underneath the vehicle; the fuel tank was also in the floor. The suspension was virtually identical to that of the M-41 Walker Bulldog light tank. Early M-75s had very thin roof armor; this was almost doubled soon after production started; the M-75 was also noted for relatively-heavy floor armor. However, on early vehicles, the first two pairs and last pair of roadwheels had shock absorbers; later, as part of cost-cutting measures, the second pair of roadwheels lost its shocks. The M-75 had an early version of a semi-automatic fire suppression system, requiring only the pull of a fire-extinguisher handle located in the front and back of the vehicle (either one would do). Radios were not normally fitted to individual M-75s (except command vehicles), but I have included a standard radio fit below.
Vehicle |
Price |
Fuel Type |
Load |
Veh Wt |
Crew |
Mnt |
Night Vision |
Radiological |
M-75 (Early) |
$22,701 |
G, A |
1.1 tons |
18.8 tons |
2+10 |
14 |
Headlights |
Enclosed |
M-75 (Late) |
$24,417 |
G, A |
1.1 tons |
18.9 tons |
2+10 |
14 |
Passive IR (D) |
Enclosed |
Vehicle |
Tr Mov |
Com Mov |
Fuel Cap |
Fuel Cons |
Config |
Susp |
Armor |
M-75 (Early) |
126/88 |
21/13 |
568 |
166 |
Stnd |
T3 |
HF5 HS3 HR3* |
M-75 (Late) |
126/88 |
21/13 |
568 |
166 |
Stnd |
T3 |
HF5 HS3 HR3** |
Vehicle |
Fire Control |
Stabilization |
Armament |
Ammunition |
M-75 (Early) |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C) |
1800x.50 |
M-75 (Late) |
None |
None |
M-2HB (C) |
2205x.50 |
*Hull floor AV is 3; hull deck AV is 1.
** Hull floor AV is 3; hull deck AV is 2.