PDA

View Full Version : Army recon targets Apache helicopter cannon for Humvee replacement



CS1983
09-09-2016, 13:53
As the U.S. Army readies to bring its current crop of Humvees into the 21st century with a new vehicle, reconnaissance officials are also looking to replace the Humvee's pre-World War II .50-caliber machine gun with a version of the Apache helicopter’s cannon in 2019.

The Army has embarked on a major project to replace the Humvee, officially known as the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (HMMWVS). Last year the Army signed a $6.7 billion deal with Oshkosh Defense for 17,000 Joint Light Tactical Vehicles (JLTVs). Touted as offering more protection and greater off-road mobility, JLTVs will replace a large chunk of the Army and Marine Corps’ legacy Humvee fleet. The military expects to see the new vehicles in 2018 and 2019.
Col. William T. Nuckols Jr., director of mounted requirements at the Army’s Maneuver Center of Excellence (MCOE) at Fort Benning, Ga., says the shift to new vehicles is a great opportunity for scout platoons to upgrade from the Humvees’ M2 .50-caliber gun.
“The design work for [the M2] was started in 1917 by General John Pershing,” he explained. “I don’t want to bash it; it’s the best heavy machine gun in the world, but technology has continued to move.”

Nuckols explained that, while scouts’ primary role is reconnaissance, they need heavy firepower when they run into enemy forces. “In a chance encounter scouts will be looking to engage the enemy, then disengage as quickly as possible,” he said.
A version of the M230-LF 30-mm. cannon used on Apache helicopters would significantly boost scout platoons’ weaponry, according to Nuckols, citing the cannon’s devastating explosive rounds.
“Having an exploding bullet is good when you’re facing enemy soldiers who are in a vehicle or behind a wall,” he said. “Anytime we can shoot bullets that explode, versus bullets that don’t explode, that’s a good thing.”
The M230’s 30-mm. rounds also cause much greater damage over long distances than the M2’s 12.7 mm bullets. Whereas the .50-caliber bullet can pierce just 7/8ths of an inch of armor at 100 meters, the 30-mm. round can penetrate 1.37 inches of armor at 500 meters, according to Nuckols. “At 1,500 meters, it actually goes up to [penetrating] 1.7 inches [of armor],” he added.


The Army is looking to field the modified M230 cannon to scout platoons in around 2019. “We have got to do some modifications to it, we’re working through that right now,” said Nuckols. “Along with the improved weapon, we’re also looking to add an improved sensor – it will give us the ability to see further using the sensor and also engage with the weapon.”
The cannon could be deployed on up to 800 vehicles.

Military.com reports (http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/08/25/jltv-needs-bigger-gun-more-seats-scout-mission-maneuver-leaders.html) that Army maneuver officials are also hoping to convince the service’s senior leadership, and Congress, that scout platoons need a light tactical vehicle that carries six soldiers. The JLTV carries four.
“We’re looking at several different options to present to Army senior leaders,” Nuckols told FoxNews.com.
The colonel explained that, with a 6-soldier vehicle, a 36-soldier scout platoon would only have to manage six, as opposed to nine vehicles. “It allows us to maximize our mounted [-in-vehicle] and dismounted [on foot] reconnaissance capability,” he said.
The Army and Marine Corps are looking to buy up to 55,000 JLTVs by 2040.

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2016/08/30/army-recon-targets-apache-helicopter-cannon-for-humvee-replacement.html?cmpid=prn_military&comp%3D1199467398560%26rank%3D2

A mockup pic is on the article itself.

I still say they need to bring back dirtbikes for the Scout platoons.

TFOGGER
09-09-2016, 14:50
http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2016/08/30/army-recon-targets-apache-helicopter-cannon-for-humvee-replacement.html?cmpid=prn_military&comp%3D1199467398560%26rank%3D2

A mockup pic is on the article itself.

I still say they need to bring back dirtbikes for the Scout platoons.

Diesel KLRs for the win!

www.m1030.com

Go to the History section.

M1030-M1 was designed to run on JP8 aviation kerosene.

HoneyBadger
09-09-2016, 15:59
“Having an exploding bullet is good when you’re facing enemy soldiers who are in a vehicle or behind a wall,” he said. “Anytime we can shoot bullets that explode, versus bullets that don’t explode, that’s a good thing.”

earplug
09-09-2016, 17:10
Weight and resupply issues with a 30MM automatic cannon. Helicopters fly home for more ammo.
warfare never changes. Weight, mobility and firepower. In the age of drones the Army is plannings on another half ass vehicle. Recall the M114 from 1962-1973? it had a 20MM.
Diesel Dirt Bikes have a lot of promise. 7th Infantry Light used dirt bikes.

Spdu4ia
09-09-2016, 17:13
All i read in my head is, " hummers about to be sold cheap in a few years..."

Aloha_Shooter
09-09-2016, 18:25
I can see arguments for and against. The first thought I had was that 30 mm rounds are considerably bigger and heavier than .50 cal. Exploding rounds but many many fewer. The shrapnel from the exploding round is great against a concentrated enemy but what about a dispersed one? Piercing 1.37 or 1.7 inches of armor is great if the enemy is bunkered up or inside armor but perhaps not as useful against an enemy relying on rapid dispersed maneuver instead of armor.

earplug
09-09-2016, 18:43
Check out the Panhard CRAB vehicle. I did a little research after reading this thread. Still to costly and another target on the battlefield.

Scanker19
09-09-2016, 23:07
The 3/5 Bradley Humvee platoon, imho is pretty good. Best of both worlds. The 25mm is an amazing weapon system, but again I'm a bit biased.

CS1983
09-10-2016, 08:44
The 3/5 Bradley Humvee platoon, imho is pretty good. Best of both worlds. The 25mm is an amazing weapon system, but again I'm a bit biased.

I personally never liked the Bradley. I feel like it inspired a baby tanker mentality; too big, loud, and a pain in the butt for reconnaissance work -- I think Clancy's "Armored Cav" does a good job of exposing that mentality regarding the Scouts going after the Iraqi tanks at 73 Easting. When I graduated 19D OSUT, my file had a sheet on the front that said something to the effect of "This soldier is D3 qualified and requests assignment to a unit with Bradley's". As soon as I saw that and was away from the Drills, I ripped that sheet off and threw it in the trash.

Some of the best work we did was either on foot or with the humvees. However, I know the guys on CFV's loved their giant hunks of stinky, loud metal. The way I looked at it, I could drive on a flat tire but I couldn't drive on a broken track.

I have no idea how a crew will support a 30mm system. It is an interesting concept, but I fear it combines the worst of both worlds. As I recall from the little training we did on the Bradley platform, one has to have a dedicated loader if it gets to re-loading time for the 25mm. While the .50 is technically "crew served", I never had to have any crew assistance aside from yelling for another box of ammo. For the most part it allowed my driver to drive, my TC to TC, and any dismounts to continue getting their precious sleep amidst the chaos.

The 3/5 concept, as I understand it, is essentially a "hunter/killer" concept. Dr. Cameron's observation (http://www.benning.army.mil/armor/eARMOR/content/issues/2012/SEP_OCT/Articles/Cameron_SO12.pdf) in the section "Scout Vehicles" is spot on: heavy armor and firepower is not the answer because it disallows the proper mission of reconnaissance.

Perhaps for a Cav squadron heavier vehicles make more sense for any sort of rapid blitzkrieg stuff. But, I also dislike the idea of a Cav squadron in general because Scouts should not be land owners and they should not be employed in the role of Infantry, both of which are far too easy to occur for a Squadron. Scouts should be Scouts, focusing on their primary roles of recon and security. In a BN Scout platoon, we never owned land, never stood guard, etc.; we did OP's, supported an SF team in an LNO capacity for training and going on raids with Iraqi MOI chuckleheads, supported the grunts w/ eyes on before any big raids, deployed and picked up our Snipers, etc. When I got sucked into a Cav squadron upon coming to Carson and subsequently back overseas, we owned land, stood guard, and basically were nothing more than grunts. I lucked out by getting pulled into the SCO's PSD team, so I didn't get stuck in the monotony of land owning activities for the most part. But in the end, a Scout should be snoopin' and poopin'. I cannot see how a Bradley remotely allows that.

My first platoon sgt was very old school. Had participated in DS/DS as a PFC and was trained in the role of a Scout by men who didn't care for the idea of doing anything else. He constantly drilled into our heads that we were a BN recon asset. We did NOT kick in doors. We did NOT stand guard (except for ourselves). We did NOT engage the enemy unless we HAD to. Unless something else demanded it, he preferred we only work at night and sleep during the day. The man instilled reconnaissance in us par excellence. As OIF progressed, I saw all that fall away in the other units I served in. i saw the role of a Scout turn into everything he told us we were not. Now the tide of the Army is seemingly recognizing that it, once again, went too far in pushing Scouts to do something they're not supposed to do: grunt work and baby tanker tasks.

Any commander who believes his Scouts are not force multiplying because they're not fighting is an idiot. We can do far more damage with a good OP and a radio, particularly with fire support or a FIST element attached and calling in the wrath. Nothing beats eyes on the enemy. While it is largely canned training, I'll never forget sitting on a mountainside at NTC as a young PFC, while my section and I watched our Charlie company grunts in their Bradleys move up a valley. They kept getting harassing fire from a "BMP" which was employing defilade tactics and they couldn't tell from where. Telling them where to direct their guns, talking directly to gunners and BC's on their company freq, the BMP and all its 11th ACR/Commie buddies soon got dead because we could see them initiate movement before they cleared their berm to fire. We'd never have made it up the mountainside in a Bradley. We humped our stinky asses up there at night and waited until the day broke and the companies exfilled the "FOB". We had range cards, fire support, etc. It was AWESOME. Nothing is cooler than a Scout doing a Scout's job. "Killing" with a radio between bites of MRE poundcake is way more fun than being a grunt. Being a grunt sucks. Bradley's suck too.

Skip
09-10-2016, 10:14
We had the KLR in my unit in the Corps. I tried to go to the school, but since I was a grunt and not a comm guy I didnt get to go. Our comm guys used them.

My KLR is wearing USMC pull offs/tank.

The vendor (don't remember their name) would pull the body panels/tank along with other parts and then wholesale them out. It was cheap.