Hosted by Darren Baker
Viet Nam advice
![](../../images/avatar/R03.gif)
blaster76
![Visit this Community](../../images/flags/us.gif)
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,985 posts
Armorama: 3,034 posts
![General of the Army](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/levels/rank.generalarmy.gif)
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2005 - 06:09 AM UTC
I'm planning a diorama of a checkpoint for the campaign. I'm building a M151 and some figures (for the campaign)and then going to expand it for me by adding an already built M113 and a duece anda half. The question is, Would the gun jeep have a 60 or a Ma duece on it? Would it be more likely to have the jeep as the convoy lead vehicle with the 113 as checkpoint or the other way around?
![](../../../photos.kitmaker.net/data/19815/thumbs/1000w_q951.jpg)
HeavyArty
![Contributor's Award - This member has contributed content to Armorama in the past year.](../../images/contributor.gif)
![Visit this Community](../../images/flags/us.gif)
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
![General of the Army](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/levels/rank.generalarmy.gif)
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2005 - 07:34 AM UTC
M151A1(nor A2) was not able to carry a .50 cal. They were not strong enough and would shake apart if fired for a prolonged time. The standard mount for an M151 series vehicle was the M60 MG. Also, the M151 would be the most likely Convoy Lead. The M113s were positioned at key points along the route to provide security. M35 and M54 Guntrucks were usually part of the convoy and provided rolling security in route.
![](../../images/avatar/special/animal.gif)
animal
![Visit this Community](../../images/flags/.gif)
KitMaker: 4,503 posts
Armorama: 3,159 posts
![General](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/levels/rank.general.gif)
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2005 - 07:57 AM UTC
Quoted Text
M151A1(nor A2) was not able to carry a .50 cal. They were not strong enough and would shake apart if fired for a prolonged time. The standard mount for an M151 series vehicle was the M60 MG. Also, the M151 would be the most likely Convoy Lead. The M113s were positioned at key points along the route to provide security. M35 and M54 Guntrucks were usually part of the convoy and provided rolling security in route.
Gino is correct. We also had M-48 tanks stationed at the entry way to passes and at bridges. We also had ARVN Units that were stationed along some of the more congested areas. Along with the gun trucks we sometimes had a V100 from a Military Police unit assigned to our convoys. This was usually around the Saigon area though. The 100's were used a lot fro street patrol in the Cho Long district.
![](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/smilies/hello.gif)
![](../../../photos.kitmaker.net/data/12349/thumbs/aavatar.jpg)
Pedro
![Visit this Community](../../images/flags/pl.gif)
Joined: May 26, 2003
KitMaker: 1,208 posts
Armorama: 1,023 posts
![Pułkownik](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/levels/12_6.gif)
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2005 - 10:11 AM UTC
I have a picture of m151 with M2 browning mounted...
Dunno if I can post it beacause I've downloaded it from somwhere and even don't remember where it was...
Cheers
Pedro
Dunno if I can post it beacause I've downloaded it from somwhere and even don't remember where it was...
Cheers
Pedro
![](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/smilies/hello.gif)
![](../../../photos.kitmaker.net/data/12349/thumbs/aavatar.jpg)
Pedro
![Visit this Community](../../images/flags/pl.gif)
Joined: May 26, 2003
KitMaker: 1,208 posts
Armorama: 1,023 posts
![Pułkownik](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/levels/12_6.gif)
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2005 - 10:41 AM UTC
Well ok here it goes:
How about this bad boy ?
Pedro
![](../../../photos.kitmaker.net/data/500/paulonbackofjeep.jpg )
How about this bad boy ?
Pedro
![](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/smilies/hello.gif)
![](../../images/avatar/R03.gif)
blaster76
![Visit this Community](../../images/flags/us.gif)
Joined: September 15, 2002
KitMaker: 8,985 posts
Armorama: 3,034 posts
![General of the Army](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/levels/rank.generalarmy.gif)
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2005 - 11:08 AM UTC
OK well the key thing I needed and hoped for was using the 113 as the checkpoint. I'll go with the hog on the jeep. In WW 2 they used the ma duece on jeeps, was the M151 inferior in structure to it?
![](../../../photos.kitmaker.net/data/19815/thumbs/1000w_q951.jpg)
HeavyArty
![Contributor's Award - This member has contributed content to Armorama in the past year.](../../images/contributor.gif)
![Visit this Community](../../images/flags/us.gif)
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
![General of the Army](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/levels/rank.generalarmy.gif)
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2005 - 11:25 AM UTC
Quoted Text
I'll go with the hog on the jeep. In WW 2 they used the ma duece on jeeps, was the M151 inferior in structure to it?
Not necessarily inferior, but yes, the structure was not as strong because the M151 was a unibody construction, where there is no separate frame that would support the weight and stresses of the .50 cal., and they had stamped steel floor plates. The one pictured above is not a standard vehicle. Never said it wasn't done, it just was not the standard gun mount and did not come that way from the factory.
![](../../images/avatar/special/animal.gif)
animal
![Visit this Community](../../images/flags/.gif)
KitMaker: 4,503 posts
Armorama: 3,159 posts
![General](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/levels/rank.general.gif)
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2005 - 11:52 AM UTC
The floor boards of the 151 is stamped steel and they cracked around the mounting plate. Also because of their size(length) it was hard for the gunner to operate the gun effectively. You also have to remember that the authorization was for the M-60. The lead vehicle or convoy commanders vehicle(M 151) was a transportation vehicle and not an MP vehicle. The weapons we had on the gun trucks and Jeeps were for the most part scrounged from other units. WE were not technically a combat unit, but a support unit.
![](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/smilies/hello.gif)
![](../../images/avatar/017.png)
salt6
![Visit this Community](../../images/flags/us.gif)
Joined: February 17, 2002
KitMaker: 796 posts
Armorama: 574 posts
![Major](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/levels/rank.major.gif)
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2005 - 12:03 PM UTC
The MUTT was not made primarily out of aluminum. The M151 was a unibody construction produced with stamped sheet steel.
SB
SB
![](../../../photos.kitmaker.net/data/19815/thumbs/1000w_q951.jpg)
HeavyArty
![Contributor's Award - This member has contributed content to Armorama in the past year.](../../images/contributor.gif)
![Visit this Community](../../images/flags/us.gif)
Joined: May 16, 2002
KitMaker: 17,694 posts
Armorama: 13,742 posts
![General of the Army](../../modules/SquawkBox/images/levels/rank.generalarmy.gif)
Posted: Saturday, October 01, 2005 - 01:04 PM UTC
Quoted Text
The MUTT was not made primarily out of aluminum. The M151 was a unibody construction produced with stamped sheet steel.
SB
What was I typing? Guess I was thinking HMMWV, which is mainly an aluminum body. Post is corrected. Either way, the floorplates were not strong enough to take the abuse of the Ma Deuce and it was not a standard mount for the M151.
![]() |