1960's era US Army Articulated Armored Vehicles

M

Matt_Fisher

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
25 May 2009
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I'm looking for information on a program that the US Army was doing R&D work in for a family of articulated hull armoured vehicles. I remember seeing some photos of a proposed recce scout car version, and believe there were other variants proposed.

Cheers,

Matt
 
does this help?
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1844.0/highlight,lockheed+twister.html
The other load carrier programme was the Gama Goat
 
Thanks! That's exactly what I was looking for. It would be interesting to see if any of the current manufacturers would ever adapt the Twister concept into something more MRAP related with a V shaped armoured hull built to withstand pressure plate IEDs and AT mines.
 
Matt_Fisher said:
Thanks! That's exactly what I was looking for. It would be interesting to see if any of the current manufacturers would ever adapt the Twister concept into something more MRAP related with a V shaped armoured hull built to withstand pressure plate IEDs and AT mines.
Click to expand...

The Hagglunds BV-206 and ST Kinetics Bronco, not wheeled but tracked. Armoured but does not have 'V' hulls. Not sure of the later versions though.
 
What was the advantage of the articulate vehicles over a conventional one?
 
JohnR have a look at the Test Report links, in the link in the link I posted above, if you follow me.
speed over rough terrain was one aim. I think low silhouette another. I have seen a video of the Twister at speed over rough ground - very impressive.
 
smurf said:
does this help?
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1844.0/highlight,lockheed+twister.html
The other load carrier programme was the Gama Goat
Click to expand...

According to the U.S Army's official history of the TOW missile program, the Gama Goat (then the XM-561) was intended to be one of the primary vehicles (alongside the M113) to be equipped with the TOW system. However, they had trouble devising a firing platform for the XM-561 (I suspect that budgetary issues of the time [late 1960s] had something to do with that) so the M-561 ended up being a carrier for infantry TOW teams alongside it's other roles.

Images below via Wikimedia Commons.

XM561_Gama_Goat_in_difficult_terrain_c1965.jpg


XM561_driving_in_water_c1965.jpg
 
Most Gama Goats were operated by the United States Marine Corps.
Gama Goats had great mobility in rough and muddy terrain because they kept more rubber in contact than any other wheeled vehicle.
Land Rover also offered a powered trailer for a few years. The trailer's two wheels were driven off the rear powered shaft. That shaft was originally designed to power winches, etc.
The goal of all these articulated chassis was to keep the maximum number of wheels in contact with the ground when driving across rough ground. That is also why they had such wide tires and deep treads.
The goal was to achieve the same cross-country mobility as tracked vehicles, but quieter, lighter and as easy to maintain as wheeled vehicles.
 
JohnR said:
What was the advantage of the articulate vehicles over a conventional one?
Click to expand...
Speed of a wheeled vehicle, off-road capabilities of a tracked vehicle.

Here's the Chieftain's history of the XM808 "Twister":
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opKSpWjueG4


Note that a more modern version would be ideally suited for wheel hub electric (or hydraulic) motors rather than the horribly lossy walking beam suspension. Not to mention actually having space for things inside the hulls since you don't need engines in each section.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Speed of a wheeled vehicle, off-road capabilities of a tracked vehicle.

Here's the Chieftain's history of the XM808 "Twister":
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opKSpWjueG4


Note that a more modern version would be ideally suited for wheel hub electric (or hydraulic) motors rather than the horribly lossy walking beam suspension. Not to mention actually having space for things inside the hulls since you don't need engines in each section.
Click to expand...
Yes, modern electric motors allow you to lower each wheel individually, eliminating a whole bunch of transmissions, drive shafts, differentials, etc.

In IED prone regions, you could install the main power pack, hydraulics and maybe even spare ammo in the front section; then seat the crew in the rear section.
Hopefully, the front section would detonate any land mines. Even if the front section is destroyed, the crew could survive long enough to stumble out of the cloud of dust. Recovery crew sub-bolt the ruined front section and bolt on a new power pack. Both the crew and vehicle are back on duty the next day.
 
There also the M520 Goer.
en.m.wikipedia.org

M520 Goer - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org

Which was well like for its zero care ability to go anywhere.

But the lack of ANY suspension made going fast the 30 mph...

Fun.

But I image if you put in suspension, motor in hubs, and new engine you will get something truly fun.

The Gamma Goat was heavily used by that Army as well for radar Vehicles, the Q36 and the FAAR radar was heavily based on it. But, it had the issue of having the driver and passengers basically as the crumble zone. So if you hit anything, and the US did take these on interstates, you likely was going to die.

Also believe one of the MICV programs had an 6x6 version of the Twister as an option.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom