_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Modern - USA
Modern Armor, AFVs, and Support vehicles.
Hosted by Darren Baker
BAE wins contract for AMPV to replace M113
tanknick22
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 01:05 AM UTC
I dont know how old the article is but i just read that
BAE wins the contract for the AMPV to replace the M113
There are going to be 4 varients
Utility vehicle my guess to replace the M113A3
Command to replace M577A3
Mortar to replace M1064A3
and 2 medical vehicles
Looks like more kits to add to everyones wish lists
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 01:21 AM UTC
The contract was awarded in Dec '14. The first prototypes started testing late last year. The first vehicles are expected to go into full production in the next year or two. Fielding should be around 2020. The BAE AMPVs are all Bradley-based vehicles.

5 versions.


General Purpose Vehicle (APC)



Command Post Carrier


Mortar Carrier


Ambulances

AMEV (Armored Medical Evac Vehicle) 4-patient (ala M113)


AMTV (Armored Medical Treatment Vehicle) 6-patient (ala M577)
tanknick22
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 01:41 AM UTC

Quoted Text

The contract was awarded in Dec '14. The first prototypes started testing late last year. The first vehicles are expected to go into full production in the next year or two. Fielding should be around 2020. The BAE AMPVs are all Bradley-based vehicles.

5 versions.


The easiest one to kitbash from a bradley would be the utiity and mortar carrier

Utility Vehicle (APC)



Command Post Carrier


Mortar Carrier


Ambulances

4-patient (ala M113)


6-patient (ala M577)

18Bravo
Visit this Community
Colorado, United States
Joined: January 20, 2005
KitMaker: 7,219 posts
Armorama: 6,097 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 07:51 AM UTC
For our tenth anniversary (aluminum) my wife and I purchased Boeing stock for each other as gift. (As opposed to say, an aluminum framed GXR which I would probably have looked ridiculous on) The next year, steel, we purchased BAE. Two of the best decisions we've made. Of course when I was at Camp Shelby in 2013 they told me all of the old Bradley hulks there were going to be slated for this program once, not if, approved. Does that count as insider trading?
tanknick22
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 08:31 AM UTC

Quoted Text

For our tenth anniversary (aluminum) my wife and I purchased Boeing stock for each other as gift. (As opposed to say, an aluminum framed GXR which I would probably have looked ridiculous on) The next year, steel, we purchased BAE. Two of the best decisions we've made. Of course when I was at Camp Shelby in 2013 they told me all of the old Bradley hulks there were going to be slated for this program once, not if, approved. Does that count as insider trading?



no its not
Trisaw
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 08:40 AM UTC
In its heaviest configuration, it's 40 tons. If you add a turret to it, it's a Bradley.

I think this chassis has the potential for a lot of other variants, such as a small Self Propelled Howitzer, SAM or 30mm Anti-Air, ECM, laser turret, and with the FCS turret, perhaps a heavier and better protected 105mm to 120mm Mobile Protected Firepower medium tank that actually isn't the real MPF 20-30 ton light tank. The US Army really needs to see what other "egg variants" they could hatch out of the AMPV.
Epi
Visit this Community
Texas, United States
Joined: December 22, 2001
KitMaker: 3,586 posts
Armorama: 2,556 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 11:18 AM UTC
A kit like this guys? I got the inspiration from a friend on FB. He built the ambulance version. There are a couple of different prototypes on the web and this has things from those different prototypes. I've seen the Command Version also on FB scratched built.







Kenaicop
#384
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: August 23, 2005
KitMaker: 1,426 posts
Armorama: 1,316 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 11:28 AM UTC
Holy crap Pete, that’s gorgeous!
Frenchy
Visit this Community
Rhone, France
Joined: December 02, 2002
KitMaker: 12,719 posts
Armorama: 12,507 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 12:06 PM UTC

Quoted Text

BAE wins the contract for the AMPV to replace the M113



Bad day for Mike Sparks.... (private joke )

H.P.
tanknick22
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 03:39 PM UTC

Quoted Text

In its heaviest configuration, it's 40 tons. If you add a turret to it, it's a Bradley.

I think this chassis has the potential for a lot of other variants, such as a small Self Propelled Howitzer, SAM or 30mm Anti-Air, ECM, laser turret, and with the FCS turret, perhaps a heavier and better protected 105mm to 120mm Mobile Protected Firepower medium tank that actually isn't the real MPF 20-30 ton light tank. The US Army really needs to see what other "egg variants" they could hatch out of the AMPV.



there is a competition in the works to field a new light tank for the Army's light divisions General Dynamics Land systems and BAE
are in the competition
Bae will submit the M8 buford light tank and General Dynamics will submit thier Griffin technology demonstrator

the winning bidder will get the contact to build 54 light tanks for the Army with a service entry in 2025

the M8 Buford was a light tank that was going to replace the M551 Sheridans back in 1990 but the contract was canceled

HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Friday, January 19, 2018 - 06:09 PM UTC
Pete, the AMPV ambulance looks awesome. Very nice work. Can't wait to see it done.
thathaway3
Visit this Community
Michigan, United States
Joined: September 10, 2004
KitMaker: 1,610 posts
Armorama: 684 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 08, 2018 - 02:53 AM UTC

Quoted Text

The contract was awarded in Dec '14. The first prototypes started testing late last year. The first vehicles are expected to go into full production in the next year or two. Fielding should be around 2020. The BAE AMPVs are all Bradley-based vehicles.

5 versions.



While working as a contractor at the Army's PEO for ground combat systems, I sat in a teleconference with the Army's Vice Chief of Staff when the decision was made that the five variants of the M-113 vehicle which were still an integral part of the TOE for the Army's Heavy Brigades had to be replaced.

ONLY the Army could have made that process result in an outcome which saw the OBVIOUS choice, award the contract to BAE to modify existing Bradley vehicles into the desired configurations (just like we did SIXTY years ago with the ORIGINAL M113) take FIVE YEARS, and result in the fielding of the replacement to take over TEN YEARS!

Absolutely the right choice, but almost criminally negligent the path it took to get there.

And people always seem surprised at how much stuff costs. Yeah, I get things are more complicated and have a lot more capability, but DAMN! The Army went from ZERO to 100 between 1940 and 1945. We have built a process that guarantees sloth and waste.
Trisaw
Visit this Community
California, United States
Joined: December 24, 2002
KitMaker: 4,105 posts
Armorama: 2,492 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 08, 2018 - 06:20 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

The contract was awarded in Dec '14. The first prototypes started testing late last year. The first vehicles are expected to go into full production in the next year or two. Fielding should be around 2020. The BAE AMPVs are all Bradley-based vehicles.

5 versions.



While working as a contractor at the Army's PEO for ground combat systems, I sat in a teleconference with the Army's Vice Chief of Staff when the decision was made that the five variants of the M-113 vehicle which were still an integral part of the TOE for the Army's Heavy Brigades had to be replaced.

ONLY the Army could have made that process result in an outcome which saw the OBVIOUS choice, award the contract to BAE to modify existing Bradley vehicles into the desired configurations (just like we did SIXTY years ago with the ORIGINAL M113) take FIVE YEARS, and result in the fielding of the replacement to take over TEN YEARS!

Absolutely the right choice, but almost criminally negligent the path it took to get there.

And people always seem surprised at how much stuff costs. Yeah, I get things are more complicated and have a lot more capability, but DAMN! The Army went from ZERO to 100 between 1940 and 1945. We have built a process that guarantees sloth and waste.



Would the MLRS chassis, armored cab, and box body make for a suitable vehicle? I saw that there were proposals to make it a M4 C2V and ECM variant and possibly an ambulance. It uses the same Bradley chassis, no?

http://www.army-guide.com/image/m4_dlkfsdlk2.jpg

https://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/c2v.htm

Great job on your AMPV, Pete!
HeavyArty
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 08, 2018 - 07:22 AM UTC
The M4 C2V and the M992 (MLRS chassis) were found to be too expensive to operate and buy and gave no more room or other advantages over the AMPV Command Post Carrier. One of the major disadvantages is that the crew had to get out and go around the vehicle to enter/exit the cab. It used many of the same components as the Bradley, but the chassis is not the same.
LonCray
Visit this Community
Virginia, United States
Joined: August 24, 2005
KitMaker: 348 posts
Armorama: 256 posts
Posted: Thursday, February 08, 2018 - 09:00 PM UTC
Hopefully we'll see all these new Bradley variants in styrene soon. But I have to say, the M113 (being the only Army ground vehicle older'n me) has really lasted well, not unlike the UH-1 helo and the B-52 bomber. You have to respect something that has been serving continuously since 1960.
Tankrider
Visit this Community
Oklahoma, United States
Joined: October 07, 2002
KitMaker: 1,280 posts
Armorama: 1,208 posts
Posted: Friday, February 09, 2018 - 02:17 AM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

BAE wins the contract for the AMPV to replace the M113



Bad day for Mike Sparks.... (private joke )

H.P.



Good!!! I had to deal with him in 2001. What a loon.
He and his ranting are quite over the top. Maybe if he got all of those retired generals in his "stable" to pull some strings, the AMPV can be named the Gavin.

John
Epi
Visit this Community
Texas, United States
Joined: December 22, 2001
KitMaker: 3,586 posts
Armorama: 2,556 posts
Posted: Friday, February 09, 2018 - 05:31 AM UTC
JOHN, ROFFLMAO!!!!!!!

ATTENTION PENTEGON, FROM THIS DAY FORWARD, THE BRADLEY AMPV WILL BE NAMED THE GAVIN AMPV, DILLY DILLY!
 _GOTOTOP