USMC ‘Secret’ Amtracs

[TomS]

There's a thread on What If Modelers where this image is described as an LVTP-7 with AMRAAM. Seems possible, with networked sensors.

 

[JFC Fuller]

Re MPC-TD picture posted above:

The program has built an MPC Technology Demonstrator test bed vehicle at the Nevada Automotive Test Center, Carson City, Nev., which is being used to evaluate all required performance attributes, including mobility (powerpack, drive train, and suspension system), survivability, electrical power generation and distribution, vehicle health monitoring, and the communication system.

From: http://www.marcorsyscom.usmc.mil/peolandsystems/mpc.aspx (as posted earlier in thread)

 

[xiaofan]

There is a rather good article about EFV program with some additional readings and sources.

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the-usmcs-expeditionary-fighting-vehicle-sdd-phase-updated-02302/

 

[Howedar]

I came across this image while cleaning out my desktop's HD last week. It looks like some sort of air defense variant of the LVTP-7, with vertically-launched SAMs. Any ideas as to what it is?

AIM-120 seems rather unlikely, it being 12 feet long (taller than LVTP-7, even if there were zero ground clearance under the VLS bay). Given the lack of mid-length wings/fins, I'd have to assume an early AIM-9X (or ASRAAM) is the intended missile. The thrust vectoring would presumably lend itself well to quick tip-over.

 

[TomS]

The picture shows a pivoting launcher that would lay horizontally in the cargo bay and erect through roof hatches.

 

[Jemiba]

The picture shows a pivoting launcher that would lay horizontally in the cargo bay and erect through roof hatches.

You're right, but isn't that a waste of volume and adding complexity ? Reloading may
be easier and the silhouette lower, but to me the disadvantages seem to be bigger.

 

[xiaofan]

There's a thread on What If Modelers where this image is described as an LVTP-7 with AMRAAM. Seems possible, with networked sensors.

I came across this image while cleaning out my desktop's HD last week. It looks like some sort of air defense variant of the LVTP-7, with vertically-launched SAMs. Any ideas as to what it is?

AIM-120 seems rather unlikely, it being 12 feet long (taller than LVTP-7, even if there were zero ground clearance under the VLS bay). Given the lack of mid-length wings/fins, I'd have to assume an early AIM-9X (or ASRAAM) is the intended missile. The thrust vectoring would presumably lend itself well to quick tip-over.

The picture shows a pivoting launcher that would lay horizontally in the cargo bay and erect through roof hatches.

You're right, but isn't that a waste of volume and adding complexity ? Reloading may
be easier and the silhouette lower, but to me the disadvantages seem to be bigger.

Is that possible the missile is a modified variant of Stinger? Sine the Stinger is small enough to be modified and fit in to a LVTP-7 hull.

 

[cluttonfred]

The image shown does not seem to show a turret which can track a target, rather a vertical launcher, so it is definitely not for Stingers.

 

[TomS]

You're right, but isn't that a waste of volume and adding complexity ? Reloading may
be easier and the silhouette lower, but to me the disadvantages seem to be bigger.

It's not unnecessary complexity if it's the only way to fit the desired missile in the desired chassis. It's not like this is a terribly rare solution--see ground-based ASTER, for example. The only unusual twist is putting it an armored chassis.

The USMC has been interested in AMRAAM for forward air defense for a long time, at least since the mid-1990s. It's not crazy that there would have been some thought given to marrying it to the service's only true amphibious vehicle.

 

[Nico]

Hi gents,
I try the search function with the word laser with no results, then I found this topic quoting also special weapon carrier version of the LVTP-7 and so I decided to post here one of my favourite pics: the FMC LVTP-7 amphibian modified with an high-energy laser (for anti-aircraft defence, I suppose). The picture came from 'Aviation Week' (from the 1970-1972 period), but I lost the article.
I beg your pardon if the photograph was already posted
Nico

 

[Sea Skimmer]

I've seen conflicting information on that laser; some stuff claims it was for destructive purposes, others that it was simply to blind defenders during landings. Given the state of laser technology at the time, only the latter role would have actually worked, but its entirely possible that the project was purely for demonstration purposes.

 

[Madurai]

I've seen conflicting information on that laser; some stuff claims it was for destructive purposes, others that it was simply to blind defenders during landings. Given the state of laser technology at the time, only the latter role would have actually worked, but its entirely possible that the project was purely for demonstration purposes.

I seem to recall that it wasn't a visible-wavelength laser, which would make use as a dazzler problematic.

 

[sferrin]

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,698.0.html

 

[Grey Havoc]

Not exactly secret, but an interesting account of the LVT-5 being used in Riverine warfare during the Vietnam War, among other things.

An Analysis of The Employment of the LVT-5 in Riverine Operations in Vietnam
and a Recommendation For the Employment of the AAAV Future Riverine Operations

CSC 2002

Subject Area Strategic Issues

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Title:
An Analysis of the Employment of the LVT in Riverine Operations in Vietnam
and a Recommendation for the Employment of the AAAV in Future Riverine Operations

Author: Major David L. Coggins USMC

Thesis:
The employment of the AAAV in future riverine operations, like the LVT in
riverine operations in Vietnam, will be based on the capabilities and limitations of the
platform, doctrine and creativity of the maneuver commander

Discussions:
The LVT used in Vietnam was the fifth variant developed for the Marine Corps
and they were many intended for classical amphibious assault operations to the shore
and not much further. In Vietnam there were no classic amphibious assaults across the
beach, but there were inland waterways, liquid highways, that carried the enemy and his
supplies. Tactics, techniques, and procedures were designed to allow for the maximum
employment of LVTs in riverine operations in Vietnam, but there were simply some
things the LVT could and could not do in riverine operations.
The AAAV is a quantum leap from the LVT employed in Vietnam. With multispectrum
signature reduction, increased land and water speed, digital communications,
and increased firepower the AAAV will provide the MAGTF with an ideal platform to
support riverine operations. There will be things the AAAV can and can not do in
riverine operations.

Recommendations:
Employment of the AAAV in future rivereine operations, like the LVT in
Vietnam, will be based on the capabilities and limitations of the platform. The AAAV
will not replace PBRs, rubber boats, LCACs, and LCUs, but the AAAV will provide the
commander with operational reach and leverage at the tactical and operational level never
before seen with assault amphibians. The AAAV may enable rivers, which previously
were regarded as obstacles, to serve as maneuver space. Future MAGTF maneuver
forces employing AAAVs will be able to seamlessly transition from the ship to the
objective through blue, green, and brown water instead of having to pause to conduct
specialized riverine operations.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Some info on the Landing Vehicle Assault (LVA) program:

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a024262.pdf

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a042778.pdf

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a072371.pdf [1979 FSHV (full scale hydrodynamic vehicle) rough water trials report]

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a143795.pdf [1984 report on the Improved Aluminum Track for the LVT7]

 

[Grey Havoc]

Volume I of a LVTPX11 concept study final report: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/420734.pdf

EDIT: Also came across a section in this old report called 'THE MARINE CORPS AND ACQUISITION: THE AMTRACS' (page 359 [pdf pg 376] onwards).

 

[Grey Havoc]

http://www.com-central.net/index.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=86008

 

[V8Interceptor]

Hi gents,
I try the search function with the word laser with no results, then I found this topic quoting also special weapon carrier version of the LVTP-7 and so I decided to post here one of my favourite pics: the FMC LVTP-7 amphibian modified with an high-energy laser (for anti-aircraft defence, I suppose). The picture came from 'Aviation Week' (from the 1970-1972 period), but I lost the article.
I beg your pardon if the photograph was already posted
Nico

IIRC, that vehicle was actually loaned by the USMC to the U.S Army who fitted it with the experimental laser system. I recall reading that this was because the Army had no AFV's in it's inventory with sufficient internal volume for the required equipment.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Via the SNAFU blog, a larger colour version of the LVTEX-3 photo that xiaofan posted over in the 'Info on FMC's XM765 AIFV, XM723 AIFV and LVT(X) designs?' thread.

 

[Mhmm]

For 'AGRA' r.e. his post "USMC ‘Secret’ Amtracs"on: February 11, 2008, 10:44:19 pm

Look here for news about LVTP-6's: http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.ca/2014/02/ed-gold-documentary-photographer.html

 

[Grey Havoc]

You beat me to it. Also via SNAFU:

http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.ie/2014/02/whats-story-behind-discovery-of.html
http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.ie/2014/02/more-ed-gold-pics-of-prototype-i-think.html

And:

http://snafu-solomon.blogspot.ie/2014/02/blast-from-past-fmcs-lvt00-concept.html

 

[eshelon]

FMC's Fighting Expeditionary Vehicle

source: Popular Mechanics January 1993

 

[jsport]

FMC's Fighting Expeditionary Vehicle

source: Popular Mechanics January 1993

WOW, thank you Dear Eshelon. ;D

 

[Pioneer]

So have we assertained how many troops the LVTP-6 was designed/able to carry?


Regards
Pioneer

 

[TomS]

So have we assertained how many troops the LVTP-6 was designed/able to carry?

I believe 20 troops. The link below mention the LVTP-5 carrying 34 ambulatory wounded and the LVTP-6 carrying 20.

https://books.google.com/books?id=ZXKQr3j04LoC&pg=PA161&lpg=PA161&dq=lvtp-6&source=bl&ots=s-gR__mmJ6&sig=-FgenyJFPtkXirZqmZN6_dmruIE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwif6M3hstPeAhUJi6wKHUcqCCU4ChDoATAFegQIBBAB#v=onepage&q=lvtp-6&f=false

 

[Pioneer]

Thank you again TomS!!
This info on the LVTP-6 is most difficult to find!
Although I did find this:

In 1956 eventually the FMC design was accepted for Marine service as the LVTP-6, but by that time, production of the LVTP-5 was almost complete and the awaited order never placed for mass production.

, which I thought was interesting.

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Silencer1]

FMC's Fighting Expeditionary Vehicle
source: Popular Mechanics January 1993

I wonder, how FMC experimental vehicle could swim just on two rearward-mounted hydrofoils?
In my humble opinion,without forward mounted hydrofoiles it's went nose-down.

However, on the photo vehicle moves with hull over the water surface and parallel, like it has enough lifting force to provide such attitude.
Any guesses?

 

[Foo Fighter]

It looks to have a side 'skirt' built into the hull. Forward motion would do the rest.

 

[Silencer1]

It looks to have a side 'skirt' built into the hull. Forward motion would do the rest.

Certain of the hydrofoil-equipped wheeled vehicles' prototypes have both forward and rearward "wings".
And it seem easier to balance vehicle that way, then on rear-mounted wings and possible "skirt".
For example, built and tested EFV has more obvious type of swimming: planning hall and waterjets.
Perhaps more information and other pictures of FMC' prototype could be found?

Pictures from Fred Crimson' book "US Military Wheeled Vehicles ".

 

[TomS]

Here is the patent for the FMC concept.

https://patents.google.com/patent/WO1990015752A1/ru

No mention of a forward skirt or foils. It appears that the intent was to use the foils to lift approximately half the weight of the vehicle. That means the hull would still be in the water, just less submerged so there would be less drag. There was also to be a series of plates under the tracks, creating an enlarged planing surface for the vehicle, so the hull would skim along the water surface but would not be elevated above the water completely.

One tricky bit is that the foils were asymmetrical so they could fold up over the hull and one would lie ahead of the other on the hull top.

 

[Silencer1]

Thanks a lot, TomS!

Here is the patent for the FMC concept.

It's very interesting to see, how comlicated the FMC' desighn has been, with a lot of features - from retactable asymmetric-mounted hydrofoils/hydrojets to special fairings to lower crawlers' resistance during high-velocity swimming mode.

It's great to obtain such detailed info so rapidly!

P.S. two pictures from patent, as a teaser

 

[jsport]

https://www.janes.com/article/81335/bae-systems-to-supply-assault-amphibious-vehicles-to-taiwan?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBB%206.27.18&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Military%20-%20Early%20Bird%20Brief

 

[Rickshaw]

All these ideas look like a lot of potential trouble. A air-cushion design would be easier and able to go over terrain as well as water, much more easily. They would also be mine-resistant. Surely there were ACV designs?

 

[TomS]

ACVs are terrible on land and have unacceptable fuel economy. There was a proposal for an air cushion assisted LVT in one thread or another here, however. The cushion skirts would fold up on land so that the vehicle could move on tracks.

Edit: beginning of this thread. https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3666.msg119545.html#msg119545

 

[Rickshaw]

ACVs are terrible on land and have unacceptable fuel economy. There was a proposal for an air cushion assisted LVT in one thread or another here, however. The cushion skirts would fold up on land so that the vehicle could move on tracks.

Edit: beginning of this thread. https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3666.msg119545.html#msg119545

And why wasn't it's development continued with, then?

 

[GWrecks]

ACVs are terrible on land and have unacceptable fuel economy. There was a proposal for an air cushion assisted LVT in one thread or another here, however. The cushion skirts would fold up on land so that the vehicle could move on tracks.

Edit: beginning of this thread. https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3666.msg119545.html#msg119545

Huh. I had no idea the skirt would have folded on land.

That actually makes a lot more sense now.

Now I'm kinda curious why they cancelled it too, since that seems like a sound idea.

 

[Elan Vital]

I have found most of the engineering reports on the LVTPX11 competition, sadly they are too large so I will only give the needed info to find them again on DTIC. Fascinating as always with these.

Borg Warner Corp Volume I through IV: Respectively AD422723, AD422721, AD422724 and AD422722
FMC Volume II and IV: Respectively AD420735 and 737
Chrysler Corp: AD420733
Pacific Car Foundry: AD420741

For example, here are pictures of the 105mm FSV and Mauler carrier versions of the Chrysler LVTPX11

 

[Firefinder]

Huh is that the Mauler missile pods for the AA one?

 

[Elan Vital]

Huh is that the Mauler missile pods for the AA one?

yes, that's Mauler.

 

[Elan Vital]

Adding Volume I of FMC study.

Interesting to see they tested composite armor with aluminium and titanium backplate to provide maximum protection, or "zig-zag" armor which was tested on M113 (corrugated steel).

Also, the variants included a command vehicle, engineering vehicle, fire support vehicle with the 105mm howitzer of the LVTPH6, XM70 rocket launcher, Mauler air defense system, and an ARV.