Hi guys,
I might be able to buy myself an old model kit Italeri M-108.
But before i do so i have a question:
On the intersite from Texas Forces Military Museum i found some info in the Lineage and Honors section of the 133rd FA.
It says that uptill 1985 all batallions ot this regiment used 105mm SP guns.
Am i correct that this were M-108 ?
Thanks for your answers !!
Gé
Hosted by Darren Baker
Italeri M-108
bankmannl
Zuid-Holland, Netherlands
Joined: October 31, 2006
KitMaker: 649 posts
Armorama: 609 posts
Joined: October 31, 2006
KitMaker: 649 posts
Armorama: 609 posts
Posted: Thursday, January 20, 2011 - 08:35 PM UTC
HeavyArty
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Friday, January 21, 2011 - 12:06 AM UTC
It is possible, but very unlikely. My bet is that the write-up is incorrect. The M108 was pretty short-lived and was phased out in the late '60s from front line service. They probably either had M109 155 SP howitzers. The 133rd FA supported the 49th Armored Div (Tx National Guard), who was a pretty well supplied unit since they were one of the first NG units to be activated if needed and they are headquartered close to Ft Hood and the 1st Cavalry Div for training. They were a pretty good unit.
bankmannl
Zuid-Holland, Netherlands
Joined: October 31, 2006
KitMaker: 649 posts
Armorama: 609 posts
Joined: October 31, 2006
KitMaker: 649 posts
Armorama: 609 posts
Posted: Friday, January 21, 2011 - 02:01 AM UTC
Hi Gino,
Thanks for your fast reply!
That's what I thought, since it would be unlikely that the M-108 was still around late 70's-early 80's.
By the way, the markings in that Italeri kit say 112F28.
Do you know what unit that was ?
Gé
Thanks for your fast reply!
That's what I thought, since it would be unlikely that the M-108 was still around late 70's-early 80's.
By the way, the markings in that Italeri kit say 112F28.
Do you know what unit that was ?
Gé
HeavyArty
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Friday, January 21, 2011 - 02:16 AM UTC
Sorry, that unit marking doesn't ring a bell.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Friday, January 21, 2011 - 05:36 AM UTC
Quoted Text
It is possible, but very unlikely. My bet is that the write-up is incorrect. The M108 was pretty short-lived and was phased out in the late '60s from front line service. They probably either had M109 155 SP howitzers. The 133rd FA supported the 49th Armored Div (Tx National Guard), who was a pretty well supplied unit since they were one of the first NG units to be activated if needed and they are headquartered close to Ft Hood and the 1st Cavalry Div for training. They were a pretty good unit.
in the late fall of 1967 I took my first driving lesson in an M108. We were told then that the Army was phasing them out, but that didn't mean we could destroy them! Of course I managed to drive strait into the only standing tree is a field the size of four Cotten Bowls! There were a few units in Vietnam that used them (really just a few), and it seems like I've seen photos of them in Germany and Korea.
gary
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Friday, January 21, 2011 - 08:47 AM UTC
Quoted Text
It is possible, but very unlikely. My bet is that the write-up is incorrect. The M108 was pretty short-lived and was phased out in the late '60s from front line service. They probably either had M109 155 SP howitzers. The 133rd FA supported the 49th Armored Div (Tx National Guard), who was a pretty well supplied unit since they were one of the first NG units to be activated if needed and they are headquartered close to Ft Hood and the 1st Cavalry Div for training. They were a pretty good unit.
The 49th as a round out unit to the 1st Cav wasn't in effect until the 1980s. After Vietnam, 1st Cav became a TRICAP division (two armored brigades, one air cavalry brigade).
It is entirely possible that the Texas National Guard used obsolete (to the Regular Army) self propelled howitzers throughout the 1970s and into the 1980s. I know the 50th Armored Division used M48A5 tanks and M42 Dusters into the late 1980s, at a time the Regular Army had units equipped with M1A1s and M163 Vulcans.
Paulinsibculo
Overijssel, Netherlands
Joined: July 01, 2010
KitMaker: 1,322 posts
Armorama: 1,239 posts
Joined: July 01, 2010
KitMaker: 1,322 posts
Armorama: 1,239 posts
Posted: Friday, January 21, 2011 - 09:07 AM UTC
The Belgian Army used the M108 from 1964 as a replacement for the M7. They were used until 1985.
Some were converted to M109A2B's Some were used in the artillery schools with M109 turrets.
Others, about 50, were converted to so called Vehicules Blindes de Commandement et Liaison. They look like the US FAASV M992. A full Belgian production.
Some were converted to M109A2B's Some were used in the artillery schools with M109 turrets.
Others, about 50, were converted to so called Vehicules Blindes de Commandement et Liaison. They look like the US FAASV M992. A full Belgian production.
redleg12
New Jersey, United States
Joined: March 11, 2007
KitMaker: 872 posts
Armorama: 831 posts
Joined: March 11, 2007
KitMaker: 872 posts
Armorama: 831 posts
Posted: Friday, January 21, 2011 - 10:07 AM UTC
Anything is possible....the M108 was taken off active service in the early 70s. The reserve and NG contuniued using older equipment until the early 80s when the Regan years pumped money into the reserve and NG to upgrade equipment.
Yes....I even remember the 42nd Div used M115 towed 8 inch into the early 80s.
Rounds Complete!!
Yes....I even remember the 42nd Div used M115 towed 8 inch into the early 80s.
Rounds Complete!!
thathaway3
Michigan, United States
Joined: September 10, 2004
KitMaker: 1,610 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Joined: September 10, 2004
KitMaker: 1,610 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Posted: Friday, January 21, 2011 - 01:23 PM UTC
I found the same info from the site you did which says,
"In 1985, the following units remained as assigned to the 49th Armored Division: 1/133; 3/133; 4/133. All were 105mm SP units."
There is no question that at one point the 49th had M108s as I found the following in a unit history of the 49th which deals with the period surrounding the Berlin Wall crisis:
"Armored Field Artillery units were being supplied with modern weapons including the M-108 self propelled gun (sic), replacing World War II era M-7 self-propelled 105 mm. guns."
(Sorry boys, it's a HOWITZER not a gun!)
But this was in 1961.
Anything is POSSIBLE especially when dealing with the National Guard, but while it's certainly true that the Guard often had much older equipment, it's difficult to imagine that even the Guard still had M108s in 1985.
I'm thinking the 1985 may be a typo, but it's certainly correct for the early 60's.
As far as the unit markings go, that's a mystery. The "2F28" portion would tend to indicate 2nd Bn, 28th Field Artillery. The "11" in front is the problem. (There is no 12th Bn or 112th Bn of the 28th FA).
Another problem is that 2/28 FA went from M107 (175mm Gun) to M109A2s sometime between 1969 and 1983. And they were part of 210th FA Group, which supported VII Corps. I found a picture of a vehicle from another BN in the group which indicates that the unit ID should read "7A2F28".
Perhaps Italeri didn't do such a good job of research.
I'm thinking an all OD M108 with "49 ^ 1F133" might be correct for that time frame.
"In 1985, the following units remained as assigned to the 49th Armored Division: 1/133; 3/133; 4/133. All were 105mm SP units."
There is no question that at one point the 49th had M108s as I found the following in a unit history of the 49th which deals with the period surrounding the Berlin Wall crisis:
"Armored Field Artillery units were being supplied with modern weapons including the M-108 self propelled gun (sic), replacing World War II era M-7 self-propelled 105 mm. guns."
(Sorry boys, it's a HOWITZER not a gun!)
But this was in 1961.
Anything is POSSIBLE especially when dealing with the National Guard, but while it's certainly true that the Guard often had much older equipment, it's difficult to imagine that even the Guard still had M108s in 1985.
I'm thinking the 1985 may be a typo, but it's certainly correct for the early 60's.
As far as the unit markings go, that's a mystery. The "2F28" portion would tend to indicate 2nd Bn, 28th Field Artillery. The "11" in front is the problem. (There is no 12th Bn or 112th Bn of the 28th FA).
Another problem is that 2/28 FA went from M107 (175mm Gun) to M109A2s sometime between 1969 and 1983. And they were part of 210th FA Group, which supported VII Corps. I found a picture of a vehicle from another BN in the group which indicates that the unit ID should read "7A2F28".
Perhaps Italeri didn't do such a good job of research.
I'm thinking an all OD M108 with "49 ^ 1F133" might be correct for that time frame.
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 22, 2011 - 02:19 AM UTC
112th is/was an Armored Cavalry Regiment in the Texas National Guard (I was a constant TAM evaluator for their AT visits in the summer). While I think they are now a regular cavalry squadron, once upon a time they were an ACR so the 112F28 bumper number would mean that it was the #28 gun in the organic field artillery battery belonging to the 112th ACR.
From my Cav Leader's Course days (20 yrs ago this year), ACRs had an organic tank company and organic field artillery battery in addition to the cavalry troops.
From my Cav Leader's Course days (20 yrs ago this year), ACRs had an organic tank company and organic field artillery battery in addition to the cavalry troops.
thathaway3
Michigan, United States
Joined: September 10, 2004
KitMaker: 1,610 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Joined: September 10, 2004
KitMaker: 1,610 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 22, 2011 - 04:31 AM UTC
That makes sense.
Since the 112th was part of the 49th Armored Division, I'm guessing if the decal is correct, it would go on the right side (as you face the vehicle) and the designation for 49th Armored Division would be on the left.
Shows the inconsistency of applying bumper numbers.
The two ACRs in Germany (2nd ACR with VII Corps and 11th ACR with V Corps), each had 3 Squadrons, each with three Cav Troops, a Tank Company, and a Howitzer Battery.
But while the Cav Troops and Tank Companies were designated with letters (A-C and D) in 1st Squadron, E-G and H in 2nd Squadron and I, K, L (no "J") and M in 3rd Squadron, the Howitzer Batteries were shown as either 1HOWxx, 2HOWxx or 3HOWxx depending on the Squadron.
On the left side (again ignoring the Corps or Group level) was either 7A 2 CAV or 7A 11CAV.
That's why pictures are always the best resource in colors and markings, because trying to figure it out from written references such as regs and histories is confusing because either what you're looking for isn't covered or isn't followed.
Since the 112th was part of the 49th Armored Division, I'm guessing if the decal is correct, it would go on the right side (as you face the vehicle) and the designation for 49th Armored Division would be on the left.
Shows the inconsistency of applying bumper numbers.
The two ACRs in Germany (2nd ACR with VII Corps and 11th ACR with V Corps), each had 3 Squadrons, each with three Cav Troops, a Tank Company, and a Howitzer Battery.
But while the Cav Troops and Tank Companies were designated with letters (A-C and D) in 1st Squadron, E-G and H in 2nd Squadron and I, K, L (no "J") and M in 3rd Squadron, the Howitzer Batteries were shown as either 1HOWxx, 2HOWxx or 3HOWxx depending on the Squadron.
On the left side (again ignoring the Corps or Group level) was either 7A 2 CAV or 7A 11CAV.
That's why pictures are always the best resource in colors and markings, because trying to figure it out from written references such as regs and histories is confusing because either what you're looking for isn't covered or isn't followed.
Frenchy
Rhone, France
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 22, 2011 - 07:58 AM UTC
Quoted Text
Others, about 50, were converted to so called Vehicules Blindes de Commandement et Liaison. They look like the US FAASV M992. A full Belgian production.
Frenchy
C_JACQUEMONT
Loire-Atlantique, France
Joined: October 09, 2004
KitMaker: 2,433 posts
Armorama: 2,325 posts
Joined: October 09, 2004
KitMaker: 2,433 posts
Armorama: 2,325 posts
Posted: Saturday, January 22, 2011 - 08:53 PM UTC
And what about the M108s now in Brazilian Army service, where did they come from, are they ex Belgian?
Cheers,
Christophe
Cheers,
Christophe
bankmannl
Zuid-Holland, Netherlands
Joined: October 31, 2006
KitMaker: 649 posts
Armorama: 609 posts
Joined: October 31, 2006
KitMaker: 649 posts
Armorama: 609 posts
Posted: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 - 07:13 PM UTC
Hi guys,
Sorry for not responding to your posts in the last days.
Anyway, I went along and bought that Italeri M-108.
I will built it either a version of the 49th armored division or 2/15 FA ( stationed in Alaska in winter camouflage )
Thanks for all your input !!
Gé
Sorry for not responding to your posts in the last days.
Anyway, I went along and bought that Italeri M-108.
I will built it either a version of the 49th armored division or 2/15 FA ( stationed in Alaska in winter camouflage )
Thanks for all your input !!
Gé