Out of interest Grey Havoc, can I ask what does it say about #12 (what looks like a 4x4 ‘Roland SAM’ system) on Page 929?

Regards
Pioneer
 

Attachments

  • 4x4 'wheeled' Roland SAM system.jpg
    4x4 'wheeled' Roland SAM system.jpg
    980.3 KB · Views: 302
From a clearer version of the image elsewhere:
12 - Artist's impression of 6 km-range Roland SAM system
mounted in self-contained module on a Caterpillar Goer vehicle.
Hughes and Boeing are Americanizing the Euromissile system for
US Army, and Norway has recently placed an order for this version.
Module has to be removed from Goer for airlift in a C-141.
 
Last edited:
The below artist's impression is from an old report (1977) over on DTIC. A bit more background on the Goer mounted version from same:
The U. S. version of the ROLAND II, however, would be mounted on the GOER vehicle . The plan was to deploy the ROLAND II SHORAD system with troops in central Europe to defend
rear-area, high-value targets, such as airfields, depots, ports, troop encampments, and other support and combat facilities. A DSARC decision on its assignment to Army divisions was yet to be made.

In the event, someone in late 1977 (after the linked report was published) thought it would be a good idea to change from the Goer to the M109 based XM975 as the carrier vehicle, at least for the Divisional role. Arguably not the best of decisions as things transpired.
 

Attachments

  • US Army ROLAND SHORAD.png
    US Army ROLAND SHORAD.png
    494.3 KB · Views: 611
Last edited:
larger pics
 

Attachments

  • IDR 1975-06 p.929_cr3.jpg
    IDR 1975-06 p.929_cr3.jpg
    919.7 KB · Views: 284
  • IDR 1977-01 p.107_cr.jpg
    IDR 1977-01 p.107_cr.jpg
    356.3 KB · Views: 256
  • IDR 1977-01 p.107_cr5.jpg
    IDR 1977-01 p.107_cr5.jpg
    1.9 MB · Views: 302
Last edited:
Back in the late 1960s, the West Germans commissioned a paper study and model work to see if the anti air weapons proposed for the Leopard 1 (Fla Pz Gepard) could be fitted to the KPZ 70, which was planned to replace the M48 in FRG service.
Because of the failure of the MBT/KPZ 70 nothing materialised. However, if the project had gone ahead, this would have been a great opportunity for the US and West Germans to standardize kit.
However, as the Gepard was never mated with the later Leopard 2 (KPZ 70s actual replacement) perhaps not.
But, I love paper studies, so maybe out there....
uk75, in all due respect, appreciating the practicality of the German's (well most of the time), I'd think the Bundeswehr fully appreciated the Leopard 1/Gepard combination better than anyone else in terms of operational capability. As much as I appreciate the notion of commonality/logistics of the Gepard turret being fitted to the Leopard 2 chassis, I'm thinking the cost of new Leopard 2 chassis and the engineering outweighed the notion of continuation of the legacy Leopard 1/Gepard being kept as it was - 'if it's not broken, don't fix it'

Regards
Pioneer
 
Pioneer
You are right about Leopard 2 and the Gepard turret, as I pointed out this was never an option.
The MBT70/KPZ70 was originally only intended to replace the M48 as Leo 1 had replaced the Heer M47s.
It never came close to entering service. But assuming the study was done as the German book on Deutsche Flakpanzer suggests, then a Gepard or Matador turreted KPZ70 was at least theoretically possible.
 
Pioneer
You are right about Leopard 2 and the Gepard turret, as I pointed out this was never an option.
The MBT70/KPZ70 was originally only intended to replace the M48 as Leo 1 had replaced the Heer M47s.
It never came close to entering service. But assuming the study was done as the German book on Deutsche Flakpanzer suggests, then a Gepard or Matador turreted KPZ70 was at least theoretically possible.

Hmm, I think I'll have to follow this book up my friend!

Regards
Pioneer
 
Here is the book. The ref is a brief one in the bit about Gepard development.. I should add it does not say if the propsed study happened
 

Attachments

  • 22536747269.jpg
    22536747269.jpg
    58 KB · Views: 233
I found these pictures on Reddit of a remote control scale replica of the General Dynamics XM246 DIVAD. The writing on the replica identifies it as belonging to the "GENERAL PATTON MILITARY MUSEUM", but the exact location where these pictures were taken is not known. Oddly, the museum display misidentifies the replica as the Ford Aerospace M247 Sergeant York.
General Dynamics XM246 DIVAD (A).png
General Dynamics XM246 DIVAD (B).png
General Dynamics XM246 DIVAD (C).png
General Dynamics XM246 DIVAD (D).png
Source: View: https://www.reddit.com/r/tanks/comments/qk28b7/apparently_this_little_guy_is_a_remote_control/
 
Oddly, the museum display misidentifies the replica as the Ford Aerospace M247 Sergeant York.
Did you politely bring this to the museum attention Christopher Wang ?

Regards
Pioneer
 
Oddly, the museum display misidentifies the replica as the Ford Aerospace M247 Sergeant York.
Did you politely bring this to the museum attention Christopher Wang ?

Regards
Pioneer

Given that Christopher notes in his post that he doesn't know where the museum is located, how could he do this? (And it's not trivial to figure out -- there are at least three "General Patton Museums" that I can find online, none of which call themselves the "General Patton Military Museum.")
 
Oddly, the museum display misidentifies the replica as the Ford Aerospace M247 Sergeant York.
Did you politely bring this to the museum attention Christopher Wang ?

Regards
Pioneer

Given that Christopher notes in his post that he doesn't know where the museum is located, how could he do this? (And it's not trivial to figure out -- there are at least three "General Patton Museums" that I can find online, none of which call themselves the "General Patton Military Museum.")
Yeah good point TomS :rolleyes:

Regards
Pioneer
 
The employment of the M109 chassis makes a lot of sense in my opinion, in terms of weight, complexity and it's SPH design configuration.

Regards
Pioneer
 
The Gepard turret with its twin KDA 35mm (35x228mm) 550 rpm guns weighed over 11 tonnes.
 
The employment of the M109 chassis makes a lot of sense in my opinion, in terms of weight, complexity and it's SPH design configuration.

Regards
Pioneer

More sense than the heavier tank hulls.
 
In 1992, the Italian firm Breda Meccanica Bresciana based in Milan offered an export upgrade package for the M42 Duster. The upgrades included a new enclosed turret armed with a single 40-mm L/70 Bofors and equipped with surveillance and tracking radars. The rear hull was also enlarged to provide room for an improved power plant. Ultimately, Breda's M42 Duster upgrade proposal was never accepted and was dropped.
Breda M42 Upgrade (1).png
Breda M42 Upgrade (2).png
Breda M42 Upgrade (3).PNG
SOURCE: Hills, Andrew. (2021, February 19). Breda M42 Upgrade. Tank Encyclopedia. Retrieved from https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/breda-m42-upgrade/

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P567j_V1p1k
 
2 volume report on human factors and lessons learned on the Sgt. York.
 

Attachments

  • DIVAD analysis V. I.pdf
    6.6 MB · Views: 19
  • DIVAD analysis V. II.pdf
    4.4 MB · Views: 12
A thesis paper comparing t he Sgt. York and Avenger systems.
 

Attachments

  • theavengerndsgty1094531561.pdf
    2.1 MB · Views: 20
Back
Top Bottom