ShopDreamUp AI ArtDreamUp
Deviation Actions
Description
The M114 ACRC (Armored Cavalry Reconnaissance Vehicle) seemed like a sure thing when it was put into service, back in the 1960s.
It was small and light, fully-armored, fully-tracked, and able to fight on an active NBC battlefield. It was built from immediately available "Off-The-Shelf" components, and armed with a powerful 20mm Autocannon.
Yet, it ended-up being one of the biggest disasters in the history of Armored Fighting Vehicles. How could such a simple approach to designing and building an AFV have gone so terribly wrong?
Here, in Chapter 3 of Failed Tanks, you'll see how the M114 Scout Vehicle rose and fell --- and WHY.
To play this Animated GIF slide-show, click "Download".
It was small and light, fully-armored, fully-tracked, and able to fight on an active NBC battlefield. It was built from immediately available "Off-The-Shelf" components, and armed with a powerful 20mm Autocannon.
Yet, it ended-up being one of the biggest disasters in the history of Armored Fighting Vehicles. How could such a simple approach to designing and building an AFV have gone so terribly wrong?
Here, in Chapter 3 of Failed Tanks, you'll see how the M114 Scout Vehicle rose and fell --- and WHY.
To play this Animated GIF slide-show, click "Download".
Image size
720x576px 5.35 MB
© 2010 - 2024 BlacktailFA
Comments20
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
1. The M114 had a externally fired M2HB not a 20 mm (just like the M113). The M114A1 introducted a new copola that allowed the firing of the M2 from inside the vehicle. The M114A2 was the variant that mounted the hydraulically powered 20 mm turret, which could be fired from inside the vehicle. The proto-types had 20mm turret, but it had not completed developed by the time production started, so it was eliminated in favor of a simple M2HB on a pintle.
2. The armor of the M114 was, at least from the front, comparable to the M113. The M114 had 1.25 inches at 70 degrees on top and 1.75 inches at 30 degrees on the bottom, compared to the M113 which had 1.5 inches at 45 degrees on top and 1.5 inches at 30 degrees on bottom. Both of these are proof against a .30 cal M2 AP at ranges beyond 100 meters. The side armor for the M114 was 1.25 inches and .75 inches (behind road wheels), compared the M113 which had 1.75 inches and 1.25 inches, which means from 90 degrees to the side the M114 was proof against .30 cal AP at 300 meters and beyond, whereas (from the side, 90 degrees) the M113 was proof against .30 cal M2 AP at ranges beyond 100 meters. The floor armor of the two vehicles was the same 1 inch of aluminum, the reason the M114 showed a weakness to mines was simply because it was 2 inches closer to the ground and gasoline fueled.
3. The reason the Army never courted the upgrading the M114 to a diesel engine was the weight. The M113 gained a bit of weight went it went to a diesel engine of the same horsepower (625 pounds dry weight producing 209HP for the Chrysler 361i Big Block (75M) gasoline engine versus over 1000 pounds for the Detroit 6V53 212 HP for the V6 diesel). The M114 could not stand the weight increase, as it was somewhat under powered in the first place.
4. Creighton Abrams was the Chief of Staff of the US Army, not the Secretary of the Army.
2. The armor of the M114 was, at least from the front, comparable to the M113. The M114 had 1.25 inches at 70 degrees on top and 1.75 inches at 30 degrees on the bottom, compared to the M113 which had 1.5 inches at 45 degrees on top and 1.5 inches at 30 degrees on bottom. Both of these are proof against a .30 cal M2 AP at ranges beyond 100 meters. The side armor for the M114 was 1.25 inches and .75 inches (behind road wheels), compared the M113 which had 1.75 inches and 1.25 inches, which means from 90 degrees to the side the M114 was proof against .30 cal AP at 300 meters and beyond, whereas (from the side, 90 degrees) the M113 was proof against .30 cal M2 AP at ranges beyond 100 meters. The floor armor of the two vehicles was the same 1 inch of aluminum, the reason the M114 showed a weakness to mines was simply because it was 2 inches closer to the ground and gasoline fueled.
3. The reason the Army never courted the upgrading the M114 to a diesel engine was the weight. The M113 gained a bit of weight went it went to a diesel engine of the same horsepower (625 pounds dry weight producing 209HP for the Chrysler 361i Big Block (75M) gasoline engine versus over 1000 pounds for the Detroit 6V53 212 HP for the V6 diesel). The M114 could not stand the weight increase, as it was somewhat under powered in the first place.
4. Creighton Abrams was the Chief of Staff of the US Army, not the Secretary of the Army.