_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Vietnam
All things Vietnam
Hosted by Darren Baker
M163 Vulcan SPAAG Fielded during Nam?
retiredyank
Visit this Community
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2011 - 03:17 AM UTC
I have been slowly working on Academy's M163. I know it was developed during the Vietnam/Cold War. The kit comes with markings for Vietnamese service. I want create a base with a M151A2 Mutt and M113 weapons carrier travelling down a road in Vietnam, passing by the M163. My question is, was the SPAAG ever fielded in Vietnam? If so, would the M113 weapons carrier have ever been close enough to possibly see a M163 off base?
zapper
Visit this Community
Skåne, Sweden
Joined: October 18, 2005
KitMaker: 745 posts
Armorama: 734 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2011 - 03:42 AM UTC
Six vehicles were send to Vietnam for tests in late 1968. I think 2 had radars and 4 dummy radars and that they were used as convoy escort at least on some occasions. Here's a photos that show it outside a main base:



From:
https://picasaweb.google.com/100891020754889610478/M163VulcanVietnam

Cheers,
/E
Removed by original poster on 08/26/11 - 14:43:23 (GMT).
retiredyank
Visit this Community
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2011 - 04:29 AM UTC
Thanks Zapper. I'll be putting all three vehicles together as part of a convoy.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2011 - 05:35 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I have been slowly working on Academy's M163. I know it was developed during the Vietnam/Cold War. The kit comes with markings for Vietnamese service. I want create a base with a M151A2 Mutt and M113 weapons carrier travelling down a road in Vietnam, passing by the M163. My question is, was the SPAAG ever fielded in Vietnam? If so, would the M113 weapons carrier have ever been close enough to possibly see a M163 off base?



I never saw one, but heard about them. Were there only six? I can't say. I do know they did some conversions on the M42 that used the Vulcan cannon. Most were used down south, and maybe with the 1st Infantry division. I do remember seeing pictures of them in the Stars & Stripes (both).
gary
dobon68
Visit this Community
England - South East, United Kingdom
Joined: June 19, 2007
KitMaker: 392 posts
Armorama: 329 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2011 - 06:44 AM UTC
Matt,
You can use the M163 as others have pointed out but you can't use an M151A2 it would have been the M151A1 so if you have the Tamiya kit it would need back dating. Academy do an M151A1 kit in a few different variants that would be suitable.
Regards
David
retiredyank
Visit this Community
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2011 - 06:48 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Matt,
You can use the M163 as others have pointed out but you can't use an M151A2 it would have been the M151A1 so if you have the Tamiya kit it would need back dating. Academy do an M151A1 kit in a few different variants that would be suitable.
Regards
David


David: I plan on using Academy's M151A1 with the War Wagon stowage set.
retiredyank
Visit this Community
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2011 - 06:51 AM UTC
Another query, what was the typical cargo truck used in Nam? Was it the M35A2?
Miliminis
Visit this Community
Pennsylvania, United States
Joined: August 07, 2011
KitMaker: 125 posts
Armorama: 108 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2011 - 07:02 AM UTC
Yepper on the M-35A2, they're also a blast to go Boonie Hoppin in! You can also try an M-37, Kaiser Jeep M-715, M-815 (???) 5ton and sometimes civilian Tractor Trailer Rigs.
Thatguy
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: November 09, 2008
KitMaker: 487 posts
Armorama: 451 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2011 - 08:13 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Another query, what was the typical cargo truck used in Nam? Was it the M35A2?


The M44 2.5-ton truck series (including the M35 cargo truck) and the M39 5-ton truck series (including the M54 cargo truck) would have been the most common. Various types of semi-trailers (pulled by 5-ton tractors) were also common. Transportation and other units also had M37s and M151A1s, and there were tests of the GOER series of trucks and other vehicles as well. The M715 was also adopted by the US Army in the late 1960s, but I'm not sure how many made it to Southeast Asia with the US Army. I know they were used by the USAF for base defense though.
Frenchy
Visit this Community
Rhone, France
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Friday, August 26, 2011 - 08:43 AM UTC

Quoted Text

Another query, what was the typical cargo truck used in Nam? Was it the M35A2?



https://armorama.kitmaker.net/forums/153458&page=1

https://armorama.kitmaker.net/forums/161289&page=1

HTH

Frenchy
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 27, 2011 - 06:05 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Another query, what was the typical cargo truck used in Nam? Was it the M35A2?


The M44 2.5-ton truck series (including the M35 cargo truck) and the M39 5-ton truck series (including the M54 cargo truck) would have been the most common. Various types of semi-trailers (pulled by 5-ton tractors) were also common. Transportation and other units also had M37s and M151A1s, and there were tests of the GOER series of trucks and other vehicles as well. The M715 was also adopted by the US Army in the late 1960s, but I'm not sure how many made it to Southeast Asia with the US Army. I know they were used by the USAF for base defense though.



with a CAV unit the truck you might see on the road would be an M35 series with a winch. They for the most part also had the M2 machine gun and ring mount above the cab (but not always). You rarely saw a Jeep out in the field, as like the trucks were better suited for road use. Arty units used a lot of M54 five tons, and a small amount of M35's. The Cav's motor pool would have at least one M54, and their resupply squads would have them as well. The M54 was better suited for rough country as it had power steering and brakes, but it was still a rare sighting to see one far off the road. M37's were even worse than the trucks, and were prone to braking axels. Once you left the road you resupplied with a track or chopper 90% ofthe time. Actually an M549 might be better yet in a refueling diorama pulling a water tank trailer behind it.
gary
retiredyank
Visit this Community
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 28, 2011 - 12:02 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text

Another query, what was the typical cargo truck used in Nam? Was it the M35A2?


The M44 2.5-ton truck series (including the M35 cargo truck) and the M39 5-ton truck series (including the M54 cargo truck) would have been the most common. Various types of semi-trailers (pulled by 5-ton tractors) were also common. Transportation and other units also had M37s and M151A1s, and there were tests of the GOER series of trucks and other vehicles as well. The M715 was also adopted by the US Army in the late 1960s, but I'm not sure how many made it to Southeast Asia with the US Army. I know they were used by the USAF for base defense though.



with a CAV unit the truck you might see on the road would be an M35 series with a winch. They for the most part also had the M2 machine gun and ring mount above the cab (but not always). You rarely saw a Jeep out in the field, as like the trucks were better suited for road use. Arty units used a lot of M54 five tons, and a small amount of M35's. The Cav's motor pool would have at least one M54, and their resupply squads would have them as well. The M54 was better suited for rough country as it had power steering and brakes, but it was still a rare sighting to see one far off the road. M37's were even worse than the trucks, and were prone to braking axels. Once you left the road you resupplied with a track or chopper 90% ofthe time. Actually an M549 might be better yet in a refueling diorama pulling a water tank trailer behind it.
gary


Thanks for the history Gary, but I thin I will stick with the truck that there is a model of.
Frenchy
Visit this Community
Rhone, France
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Sunday, August 28, 2011 - 12:17 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I thin I will stick with the truck that there is a model of.



So AFV Club's M49A2C is another option. Resin M149 water trailer variants are available from PSM and MMK.

Frenchy

Cobrahistorian
Visit this Community
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: November 11, 2006
KitMaker: 710 posts
Armorama: 553 posts
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 - 10:45 AM UTC
I know this thread is somewhat outdated, but I figured I'd add a bit to it since I've got one on the workbench right now and I'm working on a Vulcan exhibit.

According to the ACTIV report on the Vulcan trials in Vietnam, there were five vehicles sent, four trials vehicles and a maintenance spare. Vehicles were always sent out in teams of two, but I know of at least one mission (resulting in the awarding of a Medal of Honor) where only one went. I have not confirmed yet which track was involved in the MoH incident, but should have that data soon. I do have the crew's names.

https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/100891020754889610478/albums/5713345694302283089
retiredyank
Visit this Community
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 - 10:49 AM UTC
I have since purchased a second M163, but will be using it for the Not Your Average M113 campaign.

Jon: Can't help you, there. I wanted a Nam version, but not a specific vehicle. I do look forward to seeing your build.
Cobrahistorian
Visit this Community
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: November 11, 2006
KitMaker: 710 posts
Armorama: 553 posts
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 - 10:59 AM UTC
Matt,

I've got all of the alpha numeric serials for the five vehicles. Each is photographed in the gallery I posted the link to. The Academy kit comes with decals for the 1st Vulcan Combat Team's "Duster Buster/Have Gun Will Travel", but from what I'm seeing, they're pretty inaccurate.

The 1st VCT operated in the III Corps area and was attached to 5/2nd Artillery (automatic weapons), one of three Duster battalions in-country. During their time in-country they supported the 1st ID, 11th ACR and 25th ID. The Medal of Honor incident I mentioned earlier was while operating with the 11th ACR, where CPT Harold Fritz earned his Medal. The Vulcan was the decisive factor in them successfully breaking the ambush.

I've got the Academy kit building now. If anyone's got a spare Italeri they're looking to part with, please let me know.

Thanks,

Jon
jphillips
Visit this Community
Arizona, United States
Joined: February 25, 2007
KitMaker: 1,066 posts
Armorama: 789 posts
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 - 11:14 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I have been slowly working on Academy's M163. I know it was developed during the Vietnam/Cold War. The kit comes with markings for Vietnamese service. I want create a base with a M151A2 Mutt and M113 weapons carrier travelling down a road in Vietnam, passing by the M163. My question is, was the SPAAG ever fielded in Vietnam? If so, would the M113 weapons carrier have ever been close enough to possibly see a M163 off base?



I've heard the South Vietnamese did have M-163s, but I'm not sure how many, and I've never seen any photos. Enemy aircraft seldom dared cross the DMZ, so they were probably used to escort ARVN convoys. The PAVN may have used captured Vulcans against the Chinese in 1979, though PLAAF air power played little part in that war. Good luck with your project. Vietnamese subjects are a special interest of mine and I look forward to seeing your finished kit.
Cobrahistorian
Visit this Community
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: November 11, 2006
KitMaker: 710 posts
Armorama: 553 posts
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 - 11:44 AM UTC
For some interesting reading here's the link to the ACTIV report on the 1st Vulcan Combat Team in Vietnam, October 68-April 69.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/857327.pdf
retiredyank
Visit this Community
Arkansas, United States
Joined: June 29, 2009
KitMaker: 11,610 posts
Armorama: 7,843 posts
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 - 12:28 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I have been slowly working on Academy's M163. I know it was developed during the Vietnam/Cold War. The kit comes with markings for Vietnamese service. I want create a base with a M151A2 Mutt and M113 weapons carrier travelling down a road in Vietnam, passing by the M163. My question is, was the SPAAG ever fielded in Vietnam? If so, would the M113 weapons carrier have ever been close enough to possibly see a M163 off base?



I've heard the South Vietnamese did have M-163s, but I'm not sure how many, and I've never seen any photos. Enemy aircraft seldom dared cross the DMZ, so they were probably used to escort ARVN convoys. The PAVN may have used captured Vulcans against the Chinese in 1979, though PLAAF air power played little part in that war. Good luck with your project. Vietnamese subjects are a special interest of mine and I look forward to seeing your finished kit.



They may have been used for infantry support.
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 - 02:06 PM UTC

Quoted Text

I have since purchased a second M163, but will be using it for the Not Your Average M113 campaign.

Jon: Can't help you, there. I wanted a Nam version, but not a specific vehicle. I do look forward to seeing your build.



I've been told by two guys that were in a unit that either used them, or operated with that unit that the M163 in Vietnam were nothing much more than modified late model M113's with the changes being ontop. Up north they did the same role with the Sheridan and a can round. A bee hive round out of a Sheridan was some serious business. There were also some M113's modified to use the minigun often found on helecopters. How many I don't know, but somebody used them.
gary
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 - 02:13 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text


Quoted Text

I have been slowly working on Academy's M163. I know it was developed during the Vietnam/Cold War. The kit comes with markings for Vietnamese service. I want create a base with a M151A2 Mutt and M113 weapons carrier travelling down a road in Vietnam, passing by the M163. My question is, was the SPAAG ever fielded in Vietnam? If so, would the M113 weapons carrier have ever been close enough to possibly see a M163 off base?



I've heard the South Vietnamese did have M-163s, but I'm not sure how many, and I've never seen any photos. Enemy aircraft seldom dared cross the DMZ, so they were probably used to escort ARVN convoys. The PAVN may have used captured Vulcans against the Chinese in 1979, though PLAAF air power played little part in that war. Good luck with your project. Vietnamese subjects are a special interest of mine and I look forward to seeing your finished kit.



They may have been used for infantry support.

Cobrahistorian
Visit this Community
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: November 11, 2006
KitMaker: 710 posts
Armorama: 553 posts
Posted: Friday, August 30, 2013 - 02:58 PM UTC
For photos of the minigun on 113s,check out these galleries. I know I've seen them in there, just not sure which one. https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/100891020754889610478/albums

As for the 163 in Vietnam, I'm working directly with the National Duster, Quad, Searchlight, Hawk and Vulcan Association's (Vietnam Air Defense) historian to better document the 1st VCT's time in-theater.

The XM163s were different from standard 113s in several aspects, so no, they were not just 113s with stuff stuck on top of them. The ammunition arrangement and turret basket on the inside and the hatch arrangement on the top deck are completely different from a standard 113.

Jon
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 31, 2013 - 05:51 AM UTC

Quoted Text

For some interesting reading here's the link to the ACTIV report on the 1st Vulcan Combat Team in Vietnam, October 68-April 69.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/857327.pdf



Brother inlaw was with the 1/4th CAV assigned to the 1st Infantry Div. during that time frame. They all were pretty much out of the country shortly after these trials were done.

reading the report, I can see that it was third or fourth hand written. A 20mm high explosive round won't cut with a re-enforced bunker complex. That takes a perfect hit from a 90mm HE round thru the slits (not easy). And even then it was only good for the top layer (often three and four layers deep). The Sheridan was a better bunker buster due to it's 152mm HE round. But the best you could hope for was two layers even then! Most of the heavier built bunkers were blown with shape charges placed on top of them (big ones). On the otherhand I'd suspect that the 25mm Bushmaster with AP ammo would get the top layer as well.

There really was no reason to deploy the M163 in I-Corps if one is thinking about anti aircraft. You already had the second largest airforce deployed up there already. But as an infantry support track maybe, yet once again doubtfull. Tracks were actually fairly limited to areas of travel up there, and over half that A.O. was untenable to tracks. Would taken an act of Congress to get a Skycrane to transport one out to a mountain top! Let alone resupply it!

The concept was right, but also at the wrong place at the wrong time. What was needed was a combo turret that had a minigun and an auto grenade launcher built into it. The old M42 was a dearly loved piece of equipment, and always made you feel good when you spent the night some where that had a couple of them dug in. Keeping in mind that just about every square foot of Vietnam as easily reached by arty also makes their point of use suspect. (there were a few areas up north that were unreachable via arty, and also some places in deep canyons and cliff sides as well). So the M163 was mobile, but also not mobile enough for the job needed. Something like a quad fifty but using the Vulcan would have been far better, and could have been placed all over the map.

The next issue is that it's frowned upon to shoot somebody with auto cannon fire, even though it's been done many times over. Now going back to that time period and being also politically correct for that era, I smell trouble! That was also from the same era when they started whining and crying about 20m height of burst arty as an anti personnel weapon. Let alone WP!

gary
trickymissfit
Joined: October 03, 2007
KitMaker: 1,388 posts
Armorama: 1,357 posts
Posted: Saturday, August 31, 2013 - 05:59 AM UTC

Quoted Text

For photos of the minigun on 113s,check out these galleries. I know I've seen them in there, just not sure which one. https://plus.google.com/u/0/photos/100891020754889610478/albums

As for the 163 in Vietnam, I'm working directly with the National Duster, Quad, Searchlight, Hawk and Vulcan Association's (Vietnam Air Defense) historian to better document the 1st VCT's time in-theater.

The XM163s were different from standard 113s in several aspects, so no, they were not just 113s with stuff stuck on top of them. The ammunition arrangement and turret basket on the inside and the hatch arrangement on the top deck are completely different from a standard 113.

Jon



The hull was a basic M113, but also slightly different in the suspension. More like an SPG. Yet the basic hull otherwise was identical, and that was my reference. Interior of course is going to be vastly different (there were many different interiors I might add). Power Pac is pretty much generic M113 (Detroit 6-53 diesel engine with an Allison TX1000 gearbox). I'd just about bet that these five or six tracks had the water steer gear box installed in them, even thought the regular M113's in Vietnam did not.
Now the top plate on the hull would have been vastly different, and probably similar to the fire support track the Australians used with much success. I would also think that the electrical supply for the weapon system would have been vastly different.
gary
 _GOTOTOP