• Save
Lav3/Strykers: Don Loughlin Short Show
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Lav3/Strykers: Don Loughlin Short Show

on

  • 876 views

combatreform.org/lavdanger.htm

combatreform.org/lavdanger.htm

Statistics

Views

Total Views
876
Views on SlideShare
876
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Lav3/Strykers: Don Loughlin Short Show Lav3/Strykers: Don Loughlin Short Show Presentation Transcript

  • U.S. Army Chief of Staff,General Eric Shinseki inOctober 99 stated the Army’sURGENT, IMMEDIATE need forInterim Brigade Combat Teams(IBCTs) globally deployed byUSAF aircraft using:1. USAF C-130 transportablevehicles2. “Medium-weight” as per SSIAeromotorization report; 4-6per USAF C-173. Vehicles available NOW4. Army assumes it must buynew vehicles to meet theserequirements
  • “STRIKE 1!” No refuelling facilities here: C-130s must carry adequate fuel to return to base However, the LAV-III 8x8 wheeled armored car selected just before November Presidential election results is NOT C-130 tactically air-transportable* 32,000 pounds C-130 payload limit for forward landing strips- 37, 796 pounds combat loaded LAV-III_________________________________(+) LAV-III 5, 796 pounds too heavy for C-130s*U.S. Army/DOD LAV-III specifications: www.defenselink.mil/news/Nov2000/001117-D-0000C-001.jpgU.S. Army TRANSCOM C-130 air transport specifications :www.tea.army.mil/dpe/Aircraft.htm#C130
  • Its Still Fuzzy Math I Tell Ya!“STRIKE 2!” Even a M113-type tracked AFV with turret is a tight fit in a C-130!LAV-III’s 78.7392”+ height with 39” 105mm Low-Profile turret is 117”+ andthus too tall* to fit inside the C-130’s 102” high limit; (+) C4I, AT, FSvariant attachments heights must be added, too78.7392”+ high LAV-III chassis is larger than LAV-I39” LPT 105mm gun____________________________________ M113A4 LAV-III117.7392”+ LAV-III MGS102” C-130 roof limit LAV-III w/105mm_________________ LPT15.7392”+ too highLAV-III MGSs are too high to roll-on/off from C-130s; vehicle will need extensive and costly ($55million allocated so far) redesign to somehow fit under C-130 roofs *ASCOD w/105mm LPT: www.army-technology.com/projects/ascod/specs.html
  • “STRIKE 2” continued!LAV-III’s 78”+ height, makes it incapable of parachute airdropfrom C-130s due to tip-off curb requirements to not strike tailwhen rolling off rear ramp; more compact tracked vehiclesmeet this requirement as shown above; M551Sheridan retiredin ‘97 and not replaced as promised!- LAV-25s in Army service borrowed from USMC (1989-91)had to have all 8 tires deflated to be C-130 airdropped- 78”+ LAV-III chassis larger than LAV-I based LAV-25s________________________________LAV-IIIs are too high to parachute airdrop from C-130s in roll-off condition;vehicle type will not meet 82d Airborne Division’s requirements for a parachute-deliverable armored fighting vehicle to replace combat-proven M551 Sheridan
  • “STRIKE 2” continued!LAV-III’s combat loaded weight, 37, 796 pounds and 273 inchlength, limits only 3 being carried per C-17, not the 4-6 of a“Medium” weight vehicle3 x LAV-IIIs per C-172-3 Bradley Fighting Vehicles per C-17________________________________0 net gain in air transportabilityimprovement for U.S. Armyglobal responsibilities LAV-III is a LARGE, HEAVY vehicle requiring similar airliftdemands as existing BFVs; U.S. Army is still difficult to air-deploy!
  • “STRIKE 3!” First LAV-III not to be delivered until half-way through 2002; LAV-IIIs are NOT available NOW, “off-the- shelf”, MGS variant cannot fit under C-130 roof unless major redesign work/funds expended04/2002 First LAV-III delivered04/2003 First Brigade fully-equipped04/2004 First Brigade operationally ready_______________________________U.S. ARMY URGENT REQUIREMENTS FOR TODAY NOT MET! NO CAPABILITY FOR ANOTHER 2 YEARS!Production rate just 0.85 LAV-IIIs per day www.southam.com/windsorstar/wheels/000905/722279.html DESPITE $4 BILLION DOLLAR PRICE, U.S. ARMY NOT TRANSFORMED!
  • “STRIKE 1”: LAV-IIIs are NOTUSAF C-130 transportablevehicles“STRIKE 2”: LAV-IIIs are NOT“Medium-weight” as per SSIAeromotorization report; 4-6per USAF C-17“STRIKE 3”: LAV-IIIs are NOTavailable NOW“LAV-III is OUT!”QUESTION?Must the U.S. Army spend $4BILLION FOR NEW vehicles tomeet these requirements?????
  • The 21st Century Environment• Urbanization • Increased Access to• Ethnic & Religious Technology Conflict • Increased U.S. Reliance on• Asymmetric Conflict Force Projection• Simultaneous SASO • Reduced Warning Time Operations • Joint, Combined, Multi-• Weapons Agency Operations Proliferation/WMD • Force Protection an Imperative U.S. Army Forces Must Be… U.S. Army Forces Must Be… Responsive --Deployable --Mobile --Versatile --Combat Responsive Deployable Mobile Versatile Combat Effective Effective
  • “THIRD BASE”! M113A3/4s are available NOW forunits to be made combat-ready as U.S. ArmyEuropean Command has done with its ImmediateReady Force (IRF); BILLIONS SAVED can be used toupgrade M113A3/4-M8 AGS type vehicles to exceedIBCT requirements Remote weapon station and Rubber, single-piece “Band- squad Tracks” for low-vibration, leader low-noise, no maintenance, displays no HETs, light-on-third- world-roads, high road speeds Applique armors to defeat Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs), autocannon fire without cross-country mobility loss, gunshields
  • “BASES LOADED”! M113A3/4s can be heli- transported by CH-47Ds101st Airborne (Air Assault) Division Maximizing tracked vehicle weight/volume efficiency, Army CH-47D/F Chinook helicopters can air-transport M113A3/4s over mines, obstacles, avoiding road ambushes as the British Army did with its Scimitar light tanks to be the first NATO force into Kosovo in 1999. British Army Air-Mech into Kosovo FACILITATES 3D TACTICAL BATTLE MANEUVERS!
  • “SLUGGER AT BAT”: M113A3 /4 Infantry situational awareness, security and firepower by ability to fight mounted or dismounted if the situation dictates...M8 AGS can shoot-on-the-move (LAV-III MGSmust stop to fire) to kill enemy tanks as well as blast buildings, bunkers, dug-in positions
  • “HE IS A CLUTCH HITTER”: M113A3/4 M8 AGS Tracked Mobility to advance in the face of enemy fire Tracks overcome fire and obstacles... LAV-III’s Rubber-tired Wheels vulnerable!“Run-flats” at 5mph for 5miles no life insurance incombat
  • “HE HAS BEAT THE ODDS”: TRACKED VEHICLES ARE FARTracks pull MORE 2D CROSS-COUNTRYwheels out MOBILE THAN WHEELEDfrom the ARMORED CARS TO AVOIDmud…save ROAD-SIDE AMBUSHES, MINES,them from roadambush... OBSTACLES! Tracks swim, fight, move by land, sea or air!
  • “WHEN THE GAME IS ON THE LINE”: TRACKED VEHICLES ARE ACTUALLYLIGHTER AND 28% MORE WEIGHT/VOLUME EFFICIENT FOR AIR-TRANSPORT THAN WHEELED ARMORED CARS! (Official U.S. Army Fort Knox power point slide)
  • Conclusions• An Initial tracked Air-Mech-Strike IBCT composed of M113A3/4s, M8 AGSs and Wiesels have superior air-deployability characteristics to an all-LAV-III armored car IBCT. AMS IBCTs are significantly more deployable than AOE or Force XXI Divisional Brigades using all-heavy, 33- 70-ton M1/M2s.• The Tracked BCT provides more combat power per aircraft sortie due to greater vehicle cube efficiency than LAV-IIIs• Tracked Vehicles Have Greater Tactical Mobility and Agility; Wheeled LAV-IIIs have slightly higher range and highway speed if metal/rubber tracks governed, not if band-tracked• M113A3/4 Infantry dismount capability exceeds wheeled LAV-III armored cars• The M8 AGS is “Own the Night”, shoot-on-the-move, capable light tank with a significant advantage in ready rack ammunition over wheeled LAV-III MGS with LPTs• The M113A3/4, M8 AGS Modular Armor System provides greater crew protection than wheeled LAV-III bolt on armor w/o mobility loss• Production Costs of the M113A3/4, M8 AGS, Wiesel are less than wheeled LAV-IIIs...• O&S Cost comparisons between M113A3/4s M8 AGSs, Wiesels and wheeled LAV-IIIs show band-tracked vehicles are cheaper to operate
  • “THE TYING AND WINNING RUNS ARE ON BASE”: Tactics, Techniques and Procedures already in place to support M113A3/4 and M8 Armored Gun System (AGS) operations FM 17-18 8 March 1994 FM 7-7 March 1985www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi- www.adtdl.army.mil/cgi-bin/atdl.dll/fm/7-bin/atdl.dll/fm/17-18/f1718.htm 7/toc.htmRead them online at the U.S. Army Library web site!
  • Conclusions• An Initial tracked Air-Mech-Strike IBCT composed of M113A3/4s, M8 AGSs and Wiesels have superior air-deployability characteristics to an all-LAV-III armored car IBCT. AMS IBCTs are significantly more deployable than AOE or Force XXI Divisional Brigades using all-heavy, 33- 70-ton M1/M2s.• The Tracked BCT provides more combat power per aircraft sortie due to greater vehicle cube efficiency than LAV-IIIs• Tracked Vehicles Have Greater Tactical Mobility and Agility; Wheeled LAV-IIIs have slightly higher range and highway speed if metal/rubber tracks governed, not if band-tracked• M113A3/4 Infantry dismount capability exceeds wheeled LAV-III armored cars• The M8 AGS is “Own the Night”, shoot-on-the-move, capable light tank with a significant advantage in ready rack ammunition over wheeled LAV-III MGS with LPTs• The M113A3/4, M8 AGS Modular Armor System provides greater crew protection than wheeled LAV-III bolt on armor w/o mobility loss• Production Costs of the M113A3/4, M8 AGS, Wiesel are less than wheeled LAV-IIIs...• O&S Cost comparisons between M113A3/4s M8 AGSs, Wiesels and wheeled LAV-IIIs show band-tracked vehicles are cheaper to operate