Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
LAVs vs. M113 Gavins: LTC Tooker v3.0
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

LAVs vs. M113 Gavins: LTC Tooker v3.0


Published on

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. LAV-III vs M113A3 D.E. Tooker LTC, ARMOR USAR
  • 2. PurposeCompare proposed LAV-III Stryker toexisting M113A3 Gavins to determine whichvehicle is the better Light Armored Vehiclefor Army Interim Brigade Combat Team(IBCT) and other contingency force unitmission accomplishment, troop protection andvalue for expenditure.
  • 3. Outline• Specifications JCS Standard• Characteristics LAV-III Stryker• Characteristics M113A3 Gavin• Additional Information• Summary• Conclusion
  • 4. Specifications Set By CJCS 1998• Must be C-130 deliverable in combat configuration to unimproved strips• Must carry infantry squad with equipment• Be able to cross-country, swim and ford• Modifiable to carry Armored Gun System, (AGS) or similar weaponry• Hull and running gear ballistic shielded against 12.7mm HMGs• Chassis/frame for multiple adaptations
  • 5. LAV-III Characteristicsartist’s conception (With 25mm AGS 21+ tons)• Added propulsion unit (x2) not on LAV-III Stryker vehicles because it reduces interior space via unsafe internal fuel tank. Vehicle cannot swim without it.
  • 6. LAV Characteristicsartist’s idealized conception swimming
  • 7. LAV Characteristicsactual LAV-III with AGS swimming attempt
  • 8. LAV Characteristicsactual LAV-III with AGS swimming attempt
  • 9. LAV-III Stryker Characteristics Actual vehicle w/o AGS (no prop devices) 19-21 tonsWeak .50 cal HMG on slowtraversing remotely aimedpedestal called a “RemoteWeapon System” (RWS) Fuel tanks occupy space where swim props/rudders would have been
  • 10. LAV-III Stryker Characteristics Actual vehicle to be C-130 air configured withsmall tires and no turret requires excess gear flown on another C-130: is it ready to fight like this? Consider the spare tire. UNSAFE: No side space for Soldiers to exit aircraft in crash-landing; will have to crawl over a pile of strapped-on junk like the spare tire, one-at- a-time
  • 11. LAV-III MGS 105mm gun CharacteristicsActual heavily burdened 21+ ton vehicle stuck (without spare tire); high ground pressures sink tires into mud
  • 12. M93 Fox 6x6 LAV CharacteristicsAll Wheeled armored cars fail standard slope tests
  • 13. LAV type vehicle Characteristics Actual vehicle tire change.Where is that spare? How many can we reasonably carry on an armored car?
  • 14. Wheeled LAVs in Combat
  • 15. Wheeled LAVs in MOUT environmentChannelized along easy-to-ambush roads/paths/streets
  • 16. Grenadan wheeled LAVBurning Tires = Mobility Kill
  • 17. Wheeled AGS Desert failure note tires not robust against bullets/shrapnel; too soft for rocky and sandy desert use
  • 18. BRDM note “soft” tires = Mobility kill
  • 19. Mine Damage Wheeled Vehicle type unknown; note hole from mine blast;easy to predict where wheeled vehicles will go and lay mines Shoulder patch is Russian
  • 20. Wheeled AGS~ one shot and it’s all over: top-heavy and prone to turn-overs;this vehicle caught on fire afterwards, killing everyone trapped inside
  • 21. LAV-III Stryker Characteristics Summary• Each situation in the acquisition test, used adifferently configured LAV-III. No singlevehicle meets all IBCT requirements.• Covering vehicle with applique’ or reactivearmor, makes it too large, too heavy to fit a C-130. Even without, vehicle weight reduces fuelload so C-130 can only fly it less than 200miles.• It cannot turn within its own length.• Current weak remote weapon system must be
  • 22. M113A3 Gavin CharacteristicsArtist conception and actual stretched vehicle (15 tons) with 25mm AGS
  • 23. M113A1/2 Gavin CharacteristicsArtist conception ~ Standard vehicle (11 tons)
  • 24. M113A3 Gavin mods
  • 25. M113A3 Band TrackPermits greater road speeds (up to 55 MPH; same aswheels), longer track life, less noise and less roaddamage. •Band track for 12 ton vehicle tested ‘97 - (2908 Mi) • Band track for 15 ton vehicle tested ‘98 • Acoustic, IR, Projectile & mine blast tested ‘98 - Camp Grayling, MI •Band track development for 25 ton vehicle ongoing
  • 26. M113A3 Band Track
  • 27. M113A3 Band Track alt-design
  • 28. M113A2 with Band Track
  • 29. Bradley Fighting Vehicle ~ 25-33 ton mod Band Track New Track Technologies
  • 30. M113A1 Gavin CharacteristicsChinook max out at 12.5 tons; can lift a Gavin Air Assault Capable
  • 31. M113A1 Gavin CharacteristicsCH-47D Chinook maxes out at 12.5 tons Air Assault Capable
  • 32. M113A2 ~ Aussies in East Timoroff loading in soft beach sand: no problems! Amphibious
  • 33. M113A3 Gavin CharacteristicsActual vehicle w/25mm AGS, swimming using tracks, doesn’t need spare tire! Actually Swims
  • 34. M113A3 ~ “Ultras”in Singapore Army service 25mm auto cannon system
  • 35. M113A2 ~ Aussies in East Timor fording, wading, swimming at will
  • 36. M113A2 AIFV~ 12+ t. vehicle25mm AGS turret = real firepower on real, mobile platform
  • 37. Aussie Army Upgraded M113A3s Gunshielded 40mm turret
  • 38. M113A3 ~ 13 t. vehicleRPG-proof explosive reactive armor (IDF)
  • 39. M113A3 (M1064A3) 120mm Mortar trackNote: external fuel cells: can fire 120mm mortar mounted or dismounted, LAV-III cannot
  • 40. M113A1 ~ Viet Nam U.S. Mech BN Central highlands 1968Note: skirts removed, no swim requirement Combat-Proven
  • 41. M113A1 Gavin ~ Viet NamRVN Mech company Mekong Delta 1969 Note: M40A1 106mm Recoilless Rifle mounted and skirts on Real Superior Firepower Options
  • 42. M113A2 Gavins ~ C-5B off-load note: 8+ vehicles, combat-readyonly 5 LAVs on a C-5B, not combat config’dReal Fixed-Wing Air Transportability
  • 43. M113A2 ~ with SpacedApplique’ armor = real protection
  • 44. M113A3 ~ LAV III Note: no turretsHeight is the biggest visual give away on the battlefield!
  • 45. Additional Information• Many nations use the M113 Gavin to replacewheeled vehicles (Australia and Denmark). Somenations continue to use a mix of tracked andwheeled vehicles, but none puts all its assaultvehicles in the wheeled category.• DA has postponed the Congress-mandated “side-by-side” comparison evaluation test with the M113repeatedly citing developmental problems at first,and then claiming it wasn’t necessary. After CEtests proved M113A3 Gavin superiority, writtenreports have been declared “top secret”
  • 46. M113 Gavin Characteristics Summary• There are literally thousands of M113s invarious configurations around the world today,and they represent a tried and true infantryassault vehicle. M113 Gavins are flexible,resilient and mobile, getting to the fight andbeing in the fight with positional, firepower,mobility and protection advantages.
  • 47. Alibi?About now you might be wondering why there are nopictures of LAV-III Strykers in difficult combat actioncoming from the Army—only PR stuff. The real picsof them stuck and burning have come from honest,non-Army sources…like the troops forced to usethem!This is because there are none that have been in actionyet. However, the M113 Gavin has been around awhile, is proven in combat, and has a fine history toback its real combat performances which continue aswe speak while the LAV-III Strykers play in mockwar games.
  • 48. Conclusion• Buying an expensive and impractical LAV-IIIStryker wheeled vehicle which is called an“Interim” Infantry Assault Vehicle when wealready have superior M113 Gavin trackedvehicles is a poor expenditure of Army funds.• Once we have it, the Army will be stuck withit until we have to try to fight from it, and then itwill be costing lives, rather than saving them.