Interesting upgrade to Army HMMWVs in Iraq. It is called the Common Remotely Operated Weapons Station. I wonder which company will be the first to produce a resin update set?
The HMMWVs are starting to look like the old Tamiya kit of the M242 Bushmaster armed variant.
http://www4.army.mil/ocpa/read.php?story_id_key=7137
Hosted by Darren Baker
CROWS system for HMMWV
Sabot
Joined: December 18, 2001
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
KitMaker: 12,596 posts
Armorama: 9,071 posts
Posted: Monday, April 11, 2005 - 02:59 AM UTC
matt
Campaigns Administrator
New York, United States
Joined: February 28, 2002
KitMaker: 5,957 posts
Armorama: 2,956 posts
Joined: February 28, 2002
KitMaker: 5,957 posts
Armorama: 2,956 posts
Posted: Monday, April 11, 2005 - 03:05 AM UTC
I wonder how "fast" it moves..... I'd hope it can traverse pretty quick.... Looks very Usefull and should save Lives..... Don't the Israeli's Use something like this already?
allycat
England - North East, United Kingdom
Joined: October 03, 2004
KitMaker: 942 posts
Armorama: 571 posts
Joined: October 03, 2004
KitMaker: 942 posts
Armorama: 571 posts
Posted: Monday, April 11, 2005 - 08:56 AM UTC
Two questions for you Sabot:
1. Is the sand camo'd vehicle with a Marine unit (Deep wading air intake)?
2. What are the verticalboards on the tailgates for? the 3 tone has 2 boards, the sand coloured 1
Thanks
Tom
1. Is the sand camo'd vehicle with a Marine unit (Deep wading air intake)?
2. What are the verticalboards on the tailgates for? the 3 tone has 2 boards, the sand coloured 1
Thanks
Tom
USArmy2534
Indiana, United States
Joined: January 28, 2004
KitMaker: 2,716 posts
Armorama: 1,864 posts
Joined: January 28, 2004
KitMaker: 2,716 posts
Armorama: 1,864 posts
Posted: Monday, April 11, 2005 - 01:33 PM UTC
Quoted Text
Two questions for you Sabot:
1. Is the sand camo'd vehicle with a Marine unit (Deep wading air intake)?
2. What are the verticalboards on the tailgates for? the 3 tone has 2 boards, the sand coloured 1
Thanks
Tom
I can't directly answer 1, but I have seen Army vehicles with the deep wading air intake before. Also note that the foreground HMMWV has a semi-raised intake. By and large, the majority of HMMWVs I have seen have a near flush intake, that is, no stack to speak of.
As for 2, the boards would be for holding gear. Most crews will put gear on the rear hatch and tie it down. This just adds more support (especially if the tie down straps are cut or should snap).
Interesting find Sabot. Like Gino mentioned, I wonder how fast it turns. Probably as fast as the ones on the Stryker. Speaking of Stryker and CROWS, I will bet a resin version of CROWS comes out about the same time as a Stryker comes out in plastic (I know the story, I don't want to go into it...I'm bitter. Lets leave it at that:( ). Until then, scratchbuilding will have to suffice. Of course the system is only as good as the weapon not jamming and it having rounds to fire. The latter looks like it is fixed by a 500 (?) round box of ammo.
Something I noticed is the "graffiti" style camo on the door as well as the blackout (?) light on the front right of the first HMMWV.
Jeff
Whiskey
Texas, United States
Joined: May 30, 2002
KitMaker: 1,038 posts
Armorama: 377 posts
Joined: May 30, 2002
KitMaker: 1,038 posts
Armorama: 377 posts
Posted: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 11:12 AM UTC
Actually the "boards" are a sort of deflector to help protect the rear of the truck and also the gunner against IED's and RPG's. We dont put our gear outside the vehicle's because it is too easy for some Iraqi to steal it, which has happened. And its easier to read a sign when its not sloped on the back of a humvee, like one that says STOP AND DO NOT COME ANY CLOSER.
USArmy2534
Indiana, United States
Joined: January 28, 2004
KitMaker: 2,716 posts
Armorama: 1,864 posts
Joined: January 28, 2004
KitMaker: 2,716 posts
Armorama: 1,864 posts
Posted: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 11:46 AM UTC
Oh, okay. The sign idea makes sense. I would assume it was a carryover from the initial invasion, where one could see HMMWVs covered in equipment. But those boards don't look like they would aborb much shock impact, and in fact, would shatter into tiny wooden fragments, just adfing to the carnage. Now placing sandbags between the boards and hatch, much in the same fashion as equipment could be done, would make more sense.
Jeff
Jeff
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: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 11:54 AM UTC
The boards are a part of the CIPs for HMMWVs. It is the same principle as the CIPs on the front slopes of an M1 tank. The natural slope gives them their thermal properties, therefore they don't need the slats like you see on the flat CIPs. They are hinged in the middle and the upper portion folds down to turn them "off", where they do not show up in thermal viewers. The secondary benefit is that they act as a shelf to hold gear or, as mentioned, sand bags for extra protection. They have no ballistic capabilities and provide no protection from IEDs etc.
Whiskey
Texas, United States
Joined: May 30, 2002
KitMaker: 1,038 posts
Armorama: 377 posts
Joined: May 30, 2002
KitMaker: 1,038 posts
Armorama: 377 posts
Posted: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 - 09:17 PM UTC
Well that does make more sense. What I said earlier was what I was told by the tc of one of the trucks I rode in last month for a mission. Looks like he was wrong.