How was/is the M113 doing in Iraq - Page 1

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - How was/is the M113 doing in Iraq (Page 1 of 4)

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:06:23 AM EDT

I had seen a while back that the military pulled a bunch of M113s out of storage in Kuwait, up-armored them, and sent them into Iraq. How is their track record? I figured they'd do pretty well against the insurgents.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:08:47 AM EDT

[#1]

Slow, fragile, crappy.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:11:27 AM EDT

[#2]

damn that would suck!

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:12:15 AM EDT

[#3]

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:13:16 AM EDT

[#4]

Grate armor.....

RPG's?

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:15:14 AM EDT

[#5]

From what I've seen most are sitting at ECP's.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:20:21 AM EDT

[#6]

Quoted:
Grate armor.....

RPG's?

I've always wondered this myself. I noticed the Brits use it on the Striker. Is it's purpose to detonate projectiles before they hit the vehicle?

Can't really think of any other reason for it.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:21:33 AM EDT

[#7]

Nothing about the M113 is good. I have driven many,many,many,many M113A2,A3 and M577s. I have fixed and broken the track on that piece of shit so many times that If I have to do it again I will gouge my fucking eyes out. I know that Satan has a special room in hell for me were I will do nothing but break and repair track at NTC for fucking ever.

It is damn hard to get to anything in the engine compartment without removing the fucking thing, the armor is poisonous when it burns and it is the slowest unarmored piece of shit in the ARMY.

If I had to drive one in Iraq I would make my piece with god before hand.

It is a rolling coffin.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:21:51 AM EDT

[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Grate armor.....

RPG's?

I've always wondered this myself. I noticed the Brits use it on the Striker. Is it's purpose to detonate projectiles before they hit the vehicle?
Can't really think of any other reason for it.

yes it is.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:22:40 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:
Nothing about the M113 is good. I have driven many,many,many,many M113A2,A3 and M577s. I have fixed and broken the track on that piece of shit so many times that If I have to do it again I will gouge my fucking eyes out. I know that Satan has a special room in hell for me were I will do nothing but break and repair track at NTC for fucking ever.

It is damn hard to get to anything in the engine compartment without removing the fucking thing, the armor is poisonous when it burns and it is the slowest unarmored piece of shit in the ARMY.

If I had to drive one in Iraq I would make my piece with god before hand.

It is a rolling coffin.

Wow.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:23:48 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Grate armor.....

RPG's?

I've always wondered this myself. I noticed the Brits use it on the Striker. Is it's purpose to detonate projectiles before they hit the vehicle?

Can't really think of any other reason for it.

The RPG uses a copper cone shaped charge that needs to flatten against the armor so that the copper plasma jet will burn into the armor.

If the charge hits the slant armor it burns way from the vehicle and lessens the plasma jets effect.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:25:54 AM EDT

[#11]

I just watched it on Weaponology, Grate armor is used to defeat shaped charge explosions. For what they saud the optimum distance for the expolsion is 5". anything farther lessens the effect.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:27:09 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
From what I've seen most are sitting at ECP's.

I had four on my TPE hand receipt when I go here last year. I asked the outgoing CDR what he used them for. His reply? PMCS practice.

Recently a unit indicated they wanted them for gate and ECP use. Got them off the MEEL and the hand recipet and voila. No more.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:28:16 AM EDT

[#13]

I've heard from military-type news media reports that the fine sand is really tough on the treads, and they are noisy.

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:36:48 AM EDT

[#14]

Unless they are in alot better shape than the crap ones my guard unit got just before I got out. Worn out, maintainence intensive, under powered, under armoured POS.

Posted: 6/24/2007 10:34:08 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
Nothing about the M113 is good. I have driven many,many,many,many M113A2,A3 and M577s. I have fixed and broken the track on that piece of shit so many times that If I have to do it again I will gouge my fucking eyes out. I know that Satan has a special room in hell for me were I will do nothing but break and repair track at NTC for fucking ever.

It is damn hard to get to anything in the engine compartment without removing the fucking thing, the armor is poisonous when it burns and it is the slowest unarmored piece of shit in the ARMY.

If I had to drive one in Iraq I would make my piece with god before hand.

It is a rolling coffin.

No need to sugar-coat it, tell us how you really feel

Erick Z

Posted: 6/24/2007 10:39:26 AM EDT

[#16]

We rode our hard and put it away wet back in 91. We had to keep gallons of oil on hand it leaked so bad. The steering was shot. When we rolled into to the drop off point we had to pivot steer left to make a hard right turn...

Posted: 6/24/2007 10:42:20 AM EDT

[#17]

Britian has sent a load of uparmoured FV432's… our take on the M113 to Iraq… the troops love them!

Bulldog arrives at the front line
4 Dec 06
Troops in Iraq are finding driving much easier following delivery of the first upgraded FV430 Mk3 Bulldog vehicles.

l
The delivery comes after successful trials in the UK and the Middle East confirmed that the Mk 3 vehicles are as reliable and robust as expected. The new engine and transmission give the vehicle improved performance and it is much easier to drive, resulting in less driver fatigue.

It is now fitted with additional armour and other improvements such as air conditioning. Bulldog can now also turn around within its own length which could be a life saver in a narrow street.

Over the next six months, more deliveries will be made to operations in Iraq as well as Afghanistan.

Lieutenant Colonel John Laidler from the DLO's Light Armoured Systems Support Integrated Project Team (LASS IPT) visited theatre to oversee the delivery of the vehicles to the 1st Battalion Royal Green Jackets. He said:

"I met the vehicle crews and their commanders and helped fit the additional armour. I was able to explain the strengths of the new vehicle and gain feedback, which proved positive and constructive. This has been an exceptionally demanding project, but we met the deadlines and the vehicles deployed to Basra on time. This was achieved through the combined efforts of BAE Systems and its sub-contractors, LASS IPT, DLO movements staff and particularly the users."

www.mod.uk

Posted: 6/24/2007 10:43:12 AM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Grate armor.....

RPG's?

I've always wondered this myself. I noticed the Brits use it on the Striker. Is it's purpose to detonate projectiles before they hit the vehicle?

Can't really think of any other reason for it.

Umm Americans? AFAIK we're the only ones using the slat armor on the stryker.

Posted: 6/24/2007 10:44:32 AM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Britian has sent a load of uparmoured FV432's… our take on the M113 to Iraq… the troops love them!

www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F9A031E2-F8F4-4073-92CC-FE26CAB39103/0/BulldogslineupafterthefirsttestdriveinIraqU.jpg

www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/4C5A0FF2-625F-413A-A880-E5029D9F9ADF/0/BulldogreturnsfrompatrolU.jpg

Bulldog arrives at the front line
4 Dec 06
Troops in Iraq are finding driving much easier following delivery of the first upgraded FV430 Mk3 Bulldog vehicles.

l
The delivery comes after successful trials in the UK and the Middle East confirmed that the Mk 3 vehicles are as reliable and robust as expected. The new engine and transmission give the vehicle improved performance and it is much easier to drive, resulting in less driver fatigue.

It is now fitted with additional armour and other improvements such as air conditioning. Bulldog can now also turn around within its own length which could be a life saver in a narrow street.

Over the next six months, more deliveries will be made to operations in Iraq as well as Afghanistan.

Lieutenant Colonel John Laidler from the DLO's Light Armoured Systems Support Integrated Project Team (LASS IPT) visited theatre to oversee the delivery of the vehicles to the 1st Battalion Royal Green Jackets. He said:

"I met the vehicle crews and their commanders and helped fit the additional armour. I was able to explain the strengths of the new vehicle and gain feedback, which proved positive and constructive. This has been an exceptionally demanding project, but we met the deadlines and the vehicles deployed to Basra on time. This was achieved through the combined efforts of BAE Systems and its sub-contractors, LASS IPT, DLO movements staff and particularly the users."

www.mod.uk

Vito,

Are those passive armour tiles? They do somewhat look like the type used on Marine Amtracs.

Posted: 6/24/2007 10:46:01 AM EDT

[#20]

even years ago it was a POS and everyone knew it,but still well used everywhere must be something there

Posted: 6/24/2007 10:46:31 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Grate armor.....

RPG's?

I've always wondered this myself. I noticed the Brits use it on the Striker. Is it's purpose to detonate projectiles before they hit the vehicle?

Can't really think of any other reason for it.

The RPG uses a copper cone shaped charge that needs to flatten against the armor so that the copper plasma jet will burn into the armor.

If the charge hits the slant armor it burns way from the vehicle and lessens the plasma jets effect.

No, an RPG is a HEAT round and the purpose of mesh disruptor armor is to break the projectile before detonation, making it into just an explosion at the most. Many times, the detonator circuit is broken, preventing all explosion.

The copper cone is squished into a jet of high velocity copper BEFORE it touches the armor. The nose cone provides this stand-off distance and contains the inpulse generating device, sending a pulse of current to the detonator in the base.

Posted: 6/24/2007 10:48:58 AM EDT

[#22]

The m113 is one of the most valued peices of armour on the civilian market and is the second most prolific peice of armour in the world, only behind the BMP-1 I beleive.

M113s are alluminum, right?

Posted: 6/24/2007 10:54:19 AM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Grate armor.....

RPG's?

I've always wondered this myself. I noticed the Brits use it on the Striker. Is it's purpose to detonate projectiles before they hit the vehicle?

Can't really think of any other reason for it.

The RPG uses a copper cone shaped charge that needs to flatten against the armor so that the copper plasma jet will burn into the armor.

If the charge hits the slant armor it burns way from the vehicle and lessens the plasma jets effect.

Shaped charge/self-forming fragment weapons don't work that way.

The explosives form the copper liner into a dense, carrot-shaped, extremely high speed projectile (>7000 fps) that punches through armor. But to form the carrot properly, it needs to detonate at a precise distance from the armor surface (distance = approx 3 to 3.5 times the warhead diameter). If the distance is too great or too close, the carrot doesn't form properly and armor will not be penetrated. The grate causes the RPG warhead to detonate too soon so the "carrot" deforms into a copper spray/blob before it impacts the armor.

Posted: 6/24/2007 10:56:38 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Grate armor.....

RPG's?

I've always wondered this myself. I noticed the Brits use it on the Striker. Is it's purpose to detonate projectiles before they hit the vehicle?

Can't really think of any other reason for it.

Umm Americans? AFAIK we're the only ones using the slat armor on the stryker.

UK - Striker

US - Stryker

Two completely different vehicles. US Stryker is wheeled, UK Striker is tracked, and so on.

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:11:44 AM EDT

[#25]

Apparently these guys have some good things to say about how the M113 should be used, particularly when contrasting it with the Stryker and HUMVEEs. I'm just relaying the link. You guys make up your own minds. Scroll about halfway down, past the WWII stuff about General Gavin:

Link: M113

Here's the link to the homepage. I thought there was some very interesting reading on the site:

Combat Reform

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:17:56 AM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:
Apparently these guys have some good things to say about how the M113 should be used, particularly when contrasting it with the Stryker and HUMVEEs. I'm just relaying the link. You guys make up your own minds. Scroll about halfway down, past the WWII stuff about General Gavin:

Link: M113

Here's the link to the homepage. I thought there was some very interesting reading on the site:

Combat Reform

The guy on CombatReform is a nutjob...

Ask ManicMoran about that one....

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:18:26 AM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Apparently these guys have some good things to say about how the M113 should be used, particularly when contrasting it with the Stryker and HUMVEEs. I'm just relaying the link. You guys make up your own minds. Scroll about halfway down, past the WWII stuff about General Gavin:

Link: M113

Here's the link to the homepage. I thought there was some very interesting reading on the site:

Combat Reform

Make the idiocy go away, mommy.

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:19:00 AM EDT

[#28]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Apparently these guys have some good things to say about how the M113 should be used, particularly when contrasting it with the Stryker and HUMVEEs. I'm just relaying the link. You guys make up your own minds. Scroll about halfway down, past the WWII stuff about General Gavin:

Link: M113

Here's the link to the homepage. I thought there was some very interesting reading on the site:

Combat Reform

Make the idiocy go away, mommy.

What's idiotic about the opinions those guys have?

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:20:16 AM EDT

[#29]

Vito, I like the 'Dr. Who' gunshields on those Bulldogs.

WRT the up-armored 113s, I hope they put some armor on the bottoms, too...

Bao Bang, '65. Yes, those are the torsion bars sticking up in the air on the lead track. The engine is sitting along side.

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:24:14 AM EDT

[#30]

Yes they're aluminum.

The only 113s I saw in Iraq were used as gates. Literally, the vehicle itself WAS the gate...

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:24:52 AM EDT

[#31]

During OIF I, my unit was making convoy runs through Fallujah in our un-armored M1025 Humvees. An enginner unit loaned us some M113s, with crews, to try to provide us with some armored protection. We gave the M113s back after one convoy run. The M113s were slow, not effective, and so loud that the insurgents could hear us coming from a long way off. We'd rather just go as fast as we could with the Humvees that stick to the slow speeds of the M113s....

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:29:57 AM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:

<Snip>

We'd rather just go as fast as we could with the Humvees that stick to the slow speeds of the M113s....

Interesting observation. I was in an airborne unit and have never been inside an armored vehicle in my life - let alone in combat - so I'm interested in how people with experience perceive the Stryker, etc.

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:31:10 AM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Apparently these guys have some good things to say about how the M113 should be used, particularly when contrasting it with the Stryker and HUMVEEs. I'm just relaying the link. You guys make up your own minds. Scroll about halfway down, past the WWII stuff about General Gavin:

Link: M113

Here's the link to the homepage. I thought there was some very interesting reading on the site:

Combat Reform

Make the idiocy go away, mommy.

What's idiotic about the opinions those guys have?

Plenty of folks have already answered that in this very thread. The picture above is most telling.

"these guys" is one guy and maybe a few straphangers.

It might come as a surprise to you, but "Defense Review" is one guy as well.

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:40:54 AM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:

Plenty of folks have already answered that in this very thread. The picture above is most telling.

"these guys" is one guy and maybe a few straphangers.

It might come as a surprise to you, but "Defense Review" is one guy as well.

I've never read Defense Review. However, regardless of whether it's written by 1 guy on Defense Review or 9 guys on ARfcom is immaterial to me. I'm looking at what was written. It appeared that his argument he was that refurbished M113s would be better in many cases than HUMVEEs. Plus, I think this was written back a couple of years ago when HUMVEEs were being lost more frequently.

That's the reason I posted the link: to see if people here thought there was any merit to the idea of using refurbished M113s.

We now know your opinion and I want to thank you for participating.

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:43:56 AM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Plenty of folks have already answered that in this very thread. The picture above is most telling.

"these guys" is one guy and maybe a few straphangers.

It might come as a surprise to you, but "Defense Review" is one guy as well.

I've never read Defense Review. ...

Smart man. I only wish I could say the same. It's kind of like watching "The Crying Game."

Posted: 6/24/2007 12:16:54 PM EDT

[#36]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Nothing about the M113 is good. I have driven many,many,many,many M113A2,A3 and M577s. I have fixed and broken the track on that piece of shit so many times that If I have to do it again I will gouge my fucking eyes out. I know that Satan has a special room in hell for me were I will do nothing but break and repair track at NTC for fucking ever.

It is damn hard to get to anything in the engine compartment without removing the fucking thing, the armor is poisonous when it burns and it is the slowest unarmored piece of shit in the ARMY.

If I had to drive one in Iraq I would make my piece with god before hand.

It is a rolling coffin.

Wow.

+1

Posted: 6/24/2007 12:16:56 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:

The picture is of a U.S. Army Stryker that was hit by a 500 pound roadside bomb in northern Iraq on October 8th. The Stryker was hit on the right side while travelling down the road at about 60 kilometers an hour. The bomb was in a car parked by the side of the road, and went off as the Stryker drove by. The Stryker flipped over one and a half times and skidded about 30 feet. This bomb was so powerful that it knocked out lights in the rooms of soldiers at a base 2400 meters away. There were four soldiers in the Stryker, and none were hurt (aside from a ringing in the ears...). When the Stryker was flipped back upright, it was still able to move under its own power.

www.strategypage.com/military_photos/2004101123.aspx

I'm going to say that certain things have been glossed over. Armor is great but the concussive effects of such a massive blast would be, well, massive. "Ringing in the ears" would be more like several grade 3 concussions at the very least.

Also you can see that it is rigged for tow, so obviously it could not move far under its own power (notice the 4 shredded tires).

Posted: 6/24/2007 12:20:55 PM EDT

[#38]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Grate armor.....

RPG's?

I've always wondered this myself. I noticed the Brits use it on the Striker. Is it's purpose to detonate projectiles before they hit the vehicle?

Can't really think of any other reason for it.

uhm, the Stryker is our vehicle, and yes, thats what it is used for.

ETA NM, I are wrong

Posted: 6/24/2007 12:37:34 PM EDT

[#39]

I dont know...

I have run 113's/577's for years, and I cant say I care for them anymore then they work for moving troops into the training ranges... But I think If I had the room to run them, and the badguys already know you are in the area anyways, I would rather have one that has been upgraded in armor than a wheeled veh that was ment to be a pickup truck...

YMMV.

Posted: 6/24/2007 12:51:46 PM EDT

[#40]

The black & white photo above clearly shows why US troops preferred to ride on TOP of the vehicle, as opposed to inside it, without their legs hanging over the sides, I might add.

Here are a couple more:

An improvement was made when they changed the earlier gasoline-powered M113s for the diesel M113A1. They also came out with a belly armor kit for added protection against mines. The troops had been lining the floors with sandbags and sand-filled ammo boxes, but this increased the weight to the point where they were ruining transmissions.

Posted: 6/24/2007 5:41:15 PM EDT

[#41]

What does the FV432 do/do better than the M113?

Posted: 6/24/2007 5:49:05 PM EDT

[#42]

Cool thread.

Posted: 6/24/2007 7:32:49 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:
How many posting on this thread actually used a M113 in Iraq?

Well, we used the hell out of ours and never had a problem.

If you actually do maintenance they are extremely reliable.

They are extremely maneuverable and offered much more protection than the up-armored M998 we usually had to use. M1114s were really hard to come by during OIF II.

I specifically liked the ability to pivot steer in tight quarters that would require at least a 3 point turn for any wheeled vehicle

The use of M113s in conjunction with the M998s and M2s added a lot of flexibility to our capabilities and really changed the "look" of our missions.

Those that never used them can bash them all you want but we loved ours.

Guess you missed my post that said we used them and gave them back, we prefered to roll with just regular M1025s.

I didn't miss it, I DISMISSED IT! I guess you weren't Infantry, Our M113s were MTO&E and we knew how to maintain and utilize them.

Sorry you didn't

ETA:

I guess you didn't read in my original post that up armored vehicles weren't readily available.

As a 1SG, I could use either a M998 or an M113 with either a M2 or Mk 19.

What would you choose?

Note to self...don't fuck with Top.

And THAT is how I survived the US Army. Keep on Top's good side and nothing to worry about.

Posted: 6/24/2007 7:46:49 PM EDT

[#44]

I am real interested in this as my brother is just completing training as a driver in the latest(?) variant of the M113 in CDN armed forces use. 400hp? Top speed well into the fast armor territory. He wasn't concerned about the armor either.

Anybody got any info on the latest upgrades/variants of the M113?

Posted: 6/24/2007 8:47:09 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
What does the FV432 do/do better than the M113?

Walks on water

Posted: 6/24/2007 9:14:04 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
How many posting on this thread actually used a M113 in Iraq?

Well, we used the hell out of ours and never had a problem.

If you actually do maintenance they are extremely reliable.

They are extremely maneuverable and offered much more protection than the up-armored M998 we usually had to use. M1114s were really hard to come by during OIF II.

I specifically liked the ability to pivot steer in tight quarters that would require at least a 3 point turn for any wheeled vehicle

The use of M113s in conjunction with the M998s and M2s added a lot of flexibility to our capabilities and really changed the "look" of our missions.

Those that never used them can bash them all you want but we loved ours.

Guess you missed my post that said we used them and gave them back, we prefered to roll with just regular M1025s.

I didn't miss it, I DISMISSED IT! I guess you weren't Infantry, Our M113s were MTO&E and we knew how to maintain and utilize them.

Sorry you didn't

ETA:

I guess you didn't read in my original post that up armored vehicles weren't readily available.

As a 1SG, I could use either a M998 or an M113 with either a M2 or Mk 19.

What would you choose?

I guess you missed my post about how they were loaned to us from the Engineers (who I think should be pretty good with keeping them running)

I guess you also missed my post that had nothing to do with maintaneances issues, and that they were useless because they were slow, didn't offer much armor protection, and were so loud that people could hear us from miles away.

I guess you missed it where I said we chose to use a M1025 Humvee armed with either a Mk-19 or a SAW.

Posted: 6/24/2007 9:25:48 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Nothing about the M113 is good. I have driven many,many,many,many M113A2,A3 and M577s. I have fixed and broken the track on that piece of shit so many times that If I have to do it again I will gouge my fucking eyes out. I know that Satan has a special room in hell for me were I will do nothing but break and repair track at NTC for fucking ever.

It is damn hard to get to anything in the engine compartment without removing the fucking thing, the armor is poisonous when it burns and it is the slowest unarmored piece of shit in the ARMY.

If I had to drive one in Iraq I would make my piece with god before hand.

It is a rolling coffin.

Wow.

The M548 was much, much worse than that, even. It would make one hell of a camper, though.

Posted: 6/24/2007 9:25:57 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
I guess you missed my post about how they were loaned to us from the Engineers (who I think should be pretty good with keeping them running)

I guess you also missed my post that had nothing to do with maintaneances issues, and that they were useless because they were slow, didn't offer much armor protection, and were so loud that people could hear us from miles away.

I guess you missed it where I said we chose to use a M1025 Humvee armed with either a Mk-19 or a SAW.

I guess you missed the post where I said the M113 could walk on water, can your M1025 walk on water? I didn't think so.

Next.

Posted: 6/24/2007 9:39:18 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Grate armor.....

RPG's?

I've always wondered this myself. I noticed the Brits use it on the Striker. Is it's purpose to detonate projectiles before they hit the vehicle?

Can't really think of any other reason for it.

The RPG uses a copper cone shaped charge that needs to flatten against the armor so that the copper plasma jet will burn into the armor.

If the charge hits the slant armor it burns way from the vehicle and lessens the plasma jets effect.

Shaped charge/self-forming fragment weapons don't work that way.

The explosives form the copper liner into a dense, carrot-shaped, extremely high speed projectile (>7000 fps) that punches through armor. But to form the carrot properly, it needs to detonate at a precise distance from the armor surface (distance = approx 3 to 3.5 times the warhead diameter). If the distance is too great or too close, the carrot doesn't form properly and armor will not be penetrated. The grate causes the RPG warhead to detonate too soon so the "carrot" deforms into a copper spray/blob before it impacts the armor.

If one looks at a RPG or LAW projectile, the widest diameter is usually the separation point of the HEAT warhead and the standoff cone (as mentioned above, HEAT needs a certain standoff distance to function properly). The tip of the of the standoff cone is usually a piezo crystal PD fuze but there are some specimens that use a true PD style fuze.

The warhead that mashes itself onto armor before detonating is called a HESH or squash head projectile. It uses a different shaped-charge effect of send a shock-wave from the outside of the armor to the inside, on the inside the shock wave causes the metal to splinter off or more accurately spall. The effect on those inside is utterly devastating unless they have special laminated armor, it is highly effective on buildings and such in an urban environment.

Posted: 6/24/2007 11:26:02 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:
What does the FV432 do/do better than the M113?

All steel construction…

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - How was/is the M113 doing in Iraq (Page 1 of 4)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us