Other than GMPG ? Is the M113 armed with overhead weaon system called Ultra?

M113 Ultra OWS
Crew : 9 men
Length :5.32m
Width :2.8m
Height :2.8m
Ground clearance :0.41m
Weight :21.5 tonnes
Ground Pressure :0.54 kg/cm2 ?
Engine :DDE 6V92TA Diesel ( should be 475 HP at2.400rpm)
Transmission : General Dynamics HMPT 500-3EC
Suspension : Hydro-pneumatic
Armament :
1 x Rafael 25mm OWS weapon station(25mm cannon with a 7.62 co-axial)
6 x 76mm Smoke Grenade launcher
http://www.rafael.co.il/web/rafnew/product...ures/OWS_25.pdf

M113 Ultra 40/50
Crew : 11 men
Length :5.32m
Width :2.8m
Height :2.8m
Ground clearance :0.41m
Unloaded Weight :9420kg ?
Combat Weight :11700kg ?
Ground Pressure :0.54 kg/cm2 ?
Armament :
1 x CIS 40.50 twin weapon station
1 x 7.62 GPMG
6 x 76mm Smoke Grenade launcher

Road speed :64km/h
X-country speed :27km/h
Trench crossing :1.67m
Max slope :60%
Max side slope :30%
Range :320km
Engine :DDE 6V53T Diesel(should be 290hp at 2,800rpm) ?
Transmission : Automatic

The above data is provided from here but those in italics is from me:
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/army/armour.htm

But I am a bit skeptical of what is given by Mindef, the 40/50 version should be with add-on passive applique armour plus interior spall liner as reported by Janes but the weight does not seem to increase?

Especially when the range was reduced due to the upgrade from 480 to 320km, for example the M113A3 using the same engine (6V53T) with same fuel capacity with combat weight of 12,150kg still has a range of 480km.

This reduction of range I believe is due higher fuel comsumption due to the increase of weight or using the same engine of M113 Ultra OWS/Bionix which has higher fuel comsumption.

Another thing is that the two version is reported to be the same dimension, that could mean that they have the same upgrade of armour thus similar weight increase! B)
And I am not surprised if they both have the same upgraded engine.

Anyway, data from Mindef website must be taken with a pinch of salt, for example the ground pressure for Bionix 40/50 is 0.54kg/cm2 but many other reports stated it to be 0.69kg/cm2.

Since on the topic of IFV, I will repost the comparsion that I have made in another forum between Bionix 25 and FNSS ACV-300(AIFV):

Bionix 25 (ACV-300)
Length : 5.92m (5.26m)
Width : 2.7m (2.82m)
Height : 2.57m (2.6-2.7m depending on turret used)
C. weight :23,000kg (13,687Kg)
P/W ratio :20hp/tonne (21.91hp/tonne)
Engine HP :475hp (300hp)
Speed(road):70km/h (68km/h)
G. Pressure:0.76kgf/sq cm (0.67kgf/sq cm)

Bionix Armour:
All steel hull with bolt on applique armour(laminated armour with various mat'l including ceramics etc)

ACV-300 Armour:
All aluminium hull with bolt on space laminate steel.

Just by looking at the vehicle dimension, the ACV has larger width and height but shorter length, basically not great different in dimension but the weight wise, the Bionix is almost 10 tonnes more , this translate to more armour protection.

And the design of the frontal well sloped hull of the Bionix as compare to the ACV300 mean much better projectile deflection capability.

Afterall, the Bionix was designed with the technology of the 90s whereas the ACV-300 was designed in the late 70s with hull design of 1960.

And here a picture of MY ACV-300 with Baktar Shikan ATGW one of 10 variant that they have ordered:

Gary,

None your fault really and dun mean to nit-pick, but I suspect the weight for the Ultra seems quite a bit on the high side.

At 21 tonnes and a smaller size than the Bionix, it seems to suggest that the Ultra is much more well-armored?!!!

The US Gavins (M113A3 - upgraded M113 not dissimilar to the Ultras) are around 13 -15 tonnes.

I am also not sure if the M112 frame can "tahan" (withstand / take on) a 21 tonne weight though I cannot find evidence to suggest taht or otherwise....

Southpark
The Dude

Mindef 1998 Press Release on Ultras

According to the information provided there, the Ultras have a combat weight of 13 tonnes......

Southpark
The Dude

Another from the same Mindef website :

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/army/armour_equip_ultra.htm

Crew Capacity -

9 Men

Dimensions

Overall Length : 5.32 m
Overall Width : 2.8 m
Overall Height : 2.8 m
Ground Clearance : 0.41 m

Weight

Weight : 21.5 tonnes
Ground Pressure : 0.54 kg/cm2

Engine

Engine : Detroit Diesel Engine 6V92TA
Fuel : Diesel
Transmission : General Dynamics HMPT 500-3EC
Suspension : Hydro-pneumatic

&

http://www.mindef.gov.sg/army/armour_equip_m113.htm

Crew Capacity -

11 X Men

Dimensions

Overall Length : 5.32 m
Overall Width : 2.8 m
Overall Height : 2.8 m
Ground Clearance : 0.41 m

Weight

Unloaded Weight : 9420 kg
Combat Weight : 11700 kg
Ground Pressure : 0.54 kg/cm2


Here another that repeat the same weight and dimensions of both, so which one to believe? Any comfirmation here?

Well ,the actual M113A3 suppose to have bolt on applique armour but did not materlise in the production vehicles:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/sys...ound/m113a3.htm

That is why you only see slight increase of weight in M113A3 and you dun see a increase of width.

As for whether it could withstand the higher weight of close to 20 tonnes, it could if you change the torsion bar suspension to Bionix hydro-pneumatic suspension as stated in the spec.

Let look at the various spec:

M113A1/M113A3/M113 Ultra OWS/M113 Ultra 40/50

C weight : 11.07/ 12.15/ 21.5/ 11.7 tonnes
Length : 4.863/ 5.3/ 5.32/ 5.32 m
Width : 2.686/ 2.686/ 2.8 /2.8 m

The width has increase abt 11.4cm, this could be translate into a very heavy slab of armour with 5.7cm thick at each side.

Another thing, the picture I hv posted above, you could see a thick slab of something(armour?) between the trim vane and the hull on both OWS and 40/50.

And for the BionixICV (not ths same as our Bionix in dimension wise) that is stripped of bolt on armour weight abt 17 tonnes and with bolt armour weight abt 24 tons, which mean the bolt on armour is abt 7 tonnes.
So is not really far-fetched if the additional armour for M113 Ultra weight abt a few tonnes more. ( remember tha additional weight of the new OWS weapon station and ammo maybe abt 1.5 tonnes)

http://www.janes.com/defence/land_forces/s...av_bionix.shtml

Thanks Gary,

I did noticed the box-like add-on armor behind the box-like swimming / floatation device on the front (1st 2 Ultras from the left).

I also noticed the external fuel tanks (Ultra on the right - the box-thingie where the Jerry can is).

The one thing I do not see is an notable increase in the side armor as per the ACV-300 or the Gavins, i.e., add-on armor. An uparmored M113 on the side should something look like this...see the increase in side-armor....not flushed with the track / hull.





Also, if you scroll through the Mindef Armor site, you will note that the weight for Bionix 40/50 is also 21.5 tonnes.....a case of webmaster providing the wrong info?

I have seen the older M113 & the M113 Ultra in the field , it seem to me it is wider.

Anyway, it was reported by Janes that the upgrades include passive armour at the glacis plate and the side, interior spall liner etc.

And if the upgrade include in change of suspension as stated in Mindef website, then it could make to look to be flushed by widening the track width.

One thing to change a APC which is the M113A1 to a IFV, uparmoured is a must becos the original M113A1 armour is effective up to 7.62, therefore to have them having a 25mm gun & fight like any modern IFV , you need to upgrade the armour of the basic M113A1 APC (i.e. battle taxi) to increase their survivability in the IFV role.

As for how much uparmoured is neccessary?

Today standard is up to 14.5mm round, based on today armour technonlogy, a AFV weight should weight abt at least 19 tons for such protection.(practically all AFVs with protection up to 14.5mm are abt 20+ tons)

And according to Janes' A&A , the Ultra is suppose to protected up to that level.

Therefore , the Ultra uparmoured to the weight of 21.5 tonnes is not only feasible but the logical solution to have if you want them to be an IFV.

Gary,

This is wat I suspect.....the M113 Ultras might be capable of being uparmored to the level you are talking about.

That said, the Ultras in the pic you showed might be naked at the sides. The side armor are add-on's, i.e., hang them onto the chassis. There are some improvements still as you mentioned, some passive armor, spall liners, etc.

My suspicion is that the sides is actually welded on armour , thus it will look seamless. Reason becos it is wider than the old M113 and the side certainly dun look exactly the same as the older version, I think some modification must have been done.Anyway bolt on armour could be added when needed.
Take a look at it from here:

http://storm.webvis.net/album5.html

The front is bolt on armour which was clearly shown in the picture.

As for why some M113 have very bulky looking armour is becos they are space laminated armour, basically steel platings with spaces in between.



Look at the rear ramp, with two plate with space in between as well against the ramp, they have some effect against shaped charge weapons.

The Ultra supposed to have passive composite armour thus less bulky.

Another thing I want to add, since they have changed the suspension from torsion bar to hydro pneumatic, that means it will have more head room since the bar are removed, it could create a space for armour to be added to the base for better mine protection for the vehicle.