I'm working on the vehicle data cards for my SGII scenario at Cold Wars. It is
an historical scenario set in Vietnam. I'm trying to work out the stats for
the M113 APC. I'm thinking that I could make the M113 a size 2 vehicle. The
M113 carried 9 passengers and had 1 360 mounted HMG. A size 2 vehicle could
carry up to 10 and gets the "free" support weapon. This would also give front
armor of class 2 and side and read armor of class 1. Does this sound right?
Thanks for any help.
-Mike
Sounds right. You can turret the APSW for 1 CS & still carry 9 passengers.
This means you can still fire the APSW while suppressed.
Neath Southern Skies - http://users.mcmedia.com.au/~denian/
[mkw] Admiral Peter Rollins; Task Force Zulu
[pirates] Prince Rupert Raspberry; Base Commander
> -----Original Message-----
support
> weapon. This would also give front armor of class 2 and side and read
In a message dated 1/26/00 9:17:15 PM Central Standard Time,
> Brendan.Robertson@dva.gov.au writes:
<< Sounds right. You can turret the APSW for 1 CS & still carry 9 passengers.
This means you can still fire the APSW while suppressed. >>
Yeah, but it's an historical scenario and even the ACCV version was not truly
turreted; therefore while the rules would allow it the period will not. One
thing to note with M 113 squads in Vietnam is that they rarely rode INSIDE the
vehicle. THeir main worry (rational or not) was mines and they felt the
vehicle was a death trap in a mine hit. The Vietcong and NVA often made their
own mines from unexploded bombs, so one of their mines might have a couple
hundred kilogarms of explosive in it - so sitting in it or on it was
rather moot.
Sounds about right; although I'd probably veer to Front Armour of Class1 as
well. The M113 whilst being a worthy work-horse only provides limited
protection against close ranged small arms fire.
On another note, one of the conveners at Cancon was talking about using
modified SGII rules to do a big WWII demo game for 2001 simply because of the
command and control and game flow! Good to see more support for the game from
the historical gamers.
Owen G
> -----Original Message-----
http://vietnam.isonfire.com
Check out the Charlie Company Discussion Group: Info, resources, and links for
RAFM's miniatures
skirmish wargame of infantry combat in Vietnam 1965-1972
"The world has no room for cowards. We must all be ready to toil, to suffer,
to die. And yours is no less noble because no drum beats before you when you
go out in your daily battlefields. And no crowds shout about your coming when
you return from your daily victory or defeat."
-Robert Louis Stevenson
Actually to provide an ACCV version you would probably rediuce the number of
grunts you carry and add two more d8 SAWs for teh wing guns....
As an aside teh Australian M113 is fitted with a Cadillac-Gage turret
mounting twin 30s or a 50/30. But when buttoned up firing from this is
almost as bad as suppressed; visibility is really poor! So, if you want to run
with this version for historical scenarios; say Somalia or Timor then I'd
suggest a 2 range banc modifier for firing whilst suppressed to represent poor
visibility and Fire Control system. The new turret being
introduced is fitted with a day/night elcro-optical sight but it isn't
widely deployed quite yet.
Owen G
> -----Original Message-----
> "Glover, Owen" wrote:
> Sounds about right; although I'd probably veer to Front Armour of
You're right. I was looking over my stats again and can see that
there is no difference between the front and side/rear armor on the
M113. I guess class 1 armor all around is the best answer. Thanks for pointing
that out to me.
> On another note, one of the conveners at Cancon was talking about
I've been using SGII at home for Vietnam for a few months now. SGII
is my favorite infantry combat system and I'm a Vietnam-era fanatic, so
the marriage had to occur sooner or later. <g> If this scenario, "Ambush at
Nhi Vinh," pans out, I'll submit it for Historicon, as well. BTW, at my GZG
scenario discussion group's site
(http://www.egroups.com/group/gzg/info.html) you can find the
description for the scenario in the "vault." I'll be upload some more info
there before the con. After the scenario is retired, which might
not be until after GZG-ECC IV, I'll upload all the scenario specifics,
including the squad and vehicle data cards. Thanks again for your help.
-Mike
> "Glover, Owen" wrote:
> Actually to provide an ACCV version you would probably rediuce the
Historically, the "ACAV" version carried about 6, both crew and infantry
support. This included a commander, a driver, and two gunners for crew, along
with two grunts for infantry support. So if one wanted to design the ACAV
variant for SGII, I figure you start with the basic M113 model. So you'd have
a size class 2 vehicle with class 1 armor all around. You'd still have the
commander, with HMG, and driver positions for "free." This leaves you with
enough space for 9 men. I know that according to the SGII rules, you'd still
have CS 10, but historically, the M113 carried 9 men. So you have 9 CS to add
on all the ACAV variant additions. This is a grand total of 2 CS, one CS for
each of the M60s. Which would leave you with 7 CS. But the ACAV really only
carried 4 more men, not 7 men. So here's how I'm thinking about handling this.
When fighting, the M60 gunners need some room. They pop the top hatch and
start firing, but they need room inside the crew compartment for footing and
movement to get the best shots. So while fighting, each gunner takes up 2.5
CS. This leaves room within the crew compartment for the 2 grunts to remain
mounted while the ACAV barrels through light resistance. However, if the ACAV
goes into transport mode, it can carry 7 men in the crew compartment. What do
you think, sirs?
-Mike