LAV-75; Stingray; M8 AGS

[raketenjagdpanzer]

Thanks for merging the threads, Targan. For some reason, it doesn't look the two photos of the rusting prototype transferred over. I'd love to have them in here for posterity. It's really a cool little vehicle.

If someone could somehow (Photoshop) create images/schematics of the LAV-75 hull with a 105mm gun turret like the one the Stryker AGS uses, that would be awesome.

Hold on a second, there's actually pics of one out there. Let me see if I can find them.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

[ATTACH]2022[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2023[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2024[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2025[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2026[/ATTACH]

[raketenjagdpanzer]

[ATTACH]2027[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2028[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2029[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2030[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2031[/ATTACH]

[raketenjagdpanzer]

[ATTACH]2032[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2033[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2034[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2035[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2036[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2037[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2038[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2039[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2040[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]2041[/ATTACH]

[raketenjagdpanzer]

As you can see, in and amongst the LAV-75 or RDF/LT pics there are a few of the LAV-105.

(Somewhere out on the internet, a certain "Mr. Sparks" just had a shudder of extacy as he was updating his "101 reasons why the M113 is better than all vehicles, ever, including Apollo rockets and aircraft carriers and sending anyone out in anything but means you're deliberately murdering US soldiers" youtube page...)

[Tegyrius]

Now I don't know anything about TWv3, but I would hazard a guess the M8 could easily be pushed into service.

The Twilight War in 2013 was very much a "come as you are" affair due to the accelerated timeline. I doubt M8 production could have been ramped up in time for a substantial number of units to be deployed. It's more likely that Stryker MGS systems would have been rushed into that role.

- C.

[ArmySGT.]

the 105 looks great. Has to be used and supported as a tank destroyer and not as a main battle tank doctrinally.

[Raellus]

the 105 looks great. Has to be used and supported as a tank destroyer and not as a main battle tank doctrinally.

Absolutely, but late in the war, shortages of proper MBTs would likely lead to remaining LAV-AGS's being used as/in lieu of tanks. That's what the Germans ended up having to do with their STUG assault guns in the last year or so of WWII.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

By the by I have got a ton of Stingray pics, too, but as it is a lot more common than the never produced AGS/LAV-75/105/RDF-LT I figure we've all seen them all...

[ArmySGT.]

If you have them as deployed and not the promotional or prototype pictures.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

If you have them as deployed and not the promotional or prototype pictures.

Yes; they're all "action shots" if you will from Thai army deployments.

[Raellus]

Ideal PC Tank

I'm starting to think that the 105mm-armed LAV-"75" would be a pretty ideal PC vehicle.

First off, it's 105mm gun is powerful, but would need to be skillfully used against T-80 and later MBTs. Ammo for a 105mm would be scarce, but not impossible to find. Also, with an autoloader, no PCs crewman would get stuck with that thankless job (and/or you wouldn't need an NPC to do it).

Second, with the same basic drive-train components as the ubiquitous M113, there'd be enough spare parts out there in the game world to keep it running throughout the campaign.

Third, it doesn't have the same type/degree of high-performance composite armor that the M1/Leopard II/ Challenger have, meaning that the PCs will have to avoid risks that having "magic" armor might otherwise encourage them to make.

And lastly, with it's remote turret, a turret hit would not necessarily result in the death/incapacitation of the crew.

Of course, three PCs would be a pretty small group. The LAV-75/105 would work best with another vehicle or two. A companion M113 would be pretty ideal due to the commonality of automotive parts. It's lighter armament would be useful against soft targets, while the LAV-105's big gun could take on armor or harder bunker-type targets.

Thinking about it really makes me want to run/play in a campaign featuring a PC-crewed M-20 Ridgway AGS (i.e. 105mm-armed LAV-75).

[ArmySGT.]

They down side is the electronics.

The gunner is in the hull front. he can see forward with visor blocks but, any damage to the sighting system and I don't know if the TC can take over manually.

Upside M113 drive train, so the rubber track option is there. Speeds up production as any car manufacturer can do that. Doesn't divert material from M113 track production lines.

[Legbreaker]

I could swear I read somewhere that all three of the crew had the ability to lay and fire the main gun of the LAV-75...

[Raellus]

They down side is the electronics.

The gunner is in the hull front. he can see forward with visor blocks but, any damage to the sighting system and I don't know if the TC can take over manually.

Ooh. That's a really good point. Well, the upside could be that a PC with computers and/or electronics skill will actually have a task on which to apply it.

@Raketenjagdpanzer- thanks for posting all of those pics. I'd forgotten we actually had one of a 105mm-armed example.