Question regardong M113s...

[Baculus]

I was reading another thread regarding the funding to armor humvees. My question is, how come the older M113 APC isn't being use in greater number? We still have a decent number of these vehicles, but it seems the only time I have seen photos of these in Iraq is when they were being used as a communication vehicle or some such. To date, these vehicles have performed well for several decades, provide much better protection then a humvee, can move at a decent speed, and the Israelis have used them for years with success in urban environments.

Part of the reason, I figure, that they aren't used is the desire, pushed by Rumsfeld and others, to move to a more nimble, mobile, smaller armored force.

I remember reading this article by a general that was decrying the move to softer wheeled vehicles, in lieu of APCs such as the M113, especially in urban situatons. I read this article several years ago, and at that time, he saw the need for the M113 in the expected urban environment in Iraq.

Maybe someone in the military, such as Sarge or JPillian, can give me some insight into my question.

[chomerics]

I don't know the answer definitively, but the M113s are not that economical of a vehicle. Their track needs to be refirb'd something like every 3-4K miles at a cost of about 10K. This is from memory, but I thinkt the numbers are correct.

[Larry]

I also seem to remember that the armor in an M113 isn't really that great. I know it won't stop 50 cal or RPG (although, I doubt armored Humvees will, either).

And there's the image factor to consider. To many people, if it's got treads, it's a tank.