By LTC Larry Altersitz USA (Retired) and Phil West

John Roos' excellent article on mortars in the December 2002 issue of Armed Forces Journal points out the vulnerability of open-topped vehicles firing mortars to airburst enemy fire but stops short of the solution. There are two 120mm mortar turret systems available now "off-the-shelf" that could be fitted to the U.S. Army's 11-ton M113 Gavin-based M1064A3 vehicles: the Royal Ordnance single and the Hagglunds Amos double tube system without losing C-130 air transportability because tracked vehicles are more compact and 28% more weight/space efficient than wheeled armored cars. The M113 Gavin only stands 72 inches high and a C-130 can only accept 104 inch high payloads and still parachute airdrop them---the 19-ton lav3stryker is 98 inches high leaving no room for turreted weaponry in a C-130: if you can't get it to the fight its just as bad as not having it.

Another flaw of the wheeled lav3stryker armored car is it cannot fire the M120 120mm mortar as-is like the M1064A3 Gavin can without cracking the hull as earlier marine LAV1s discovered with even less powerful 81mm mortars---if you think open-topped mortar firing is vulnerable; consider having to DISMOUNT and fire your 700+ pound 120mm mortar as the first lav3stryker mortar variants will require. The "band-aid" being planned is a recoil dampener on the lav3stryker but this only somewhat catches up the vehicle to what the tracked M1064 Gavin 120mm mortar carrier can already do: fire mounted for shoot 'n scoot tactics to evade enemy counterfires in the first place. I said "somewhat" because the high-ground pressure wheeled lav3stryker will never be as cross-country mobile as the low ground pressure tracked M113 Gavin family of vehicles. The point is the U.S. Army has a finite amount of money and it should be using these funds to GAIN NEW CAPABILITIES not playing "catch up" to prop up an inferior wheeled platform. The monies spent buying a recoil-dampened 120mm mortar could be better spent on a recoil-dampened 120mm mortar turret fitted to existing M1064A3 Gavins to get top-armor protection from enemy airbursts.

A turreted 120mm mortar also enables the "M1064A4" Gavin to direct-fire 120mm rounds and bunker-bust as the Russians do with their 2S9 Nona 8-ton BMD-based weapon system. Direct-fire 120mm mortar capabilities make the M1064A4 Gavin a defacto assault gun not unlike the marine LTVP-6 105mm howitzer amtrac was very effective in Vietnam, and since the Gavin swims--lav3strykers do not---with extra buoyancy floats can remain amphibious across lakes/rivers even with a 120mm turret system. ARIS SPA of Italy has a waterjet kit that will enable M113 Gavins to swim in the ocean--M1064A4s could splash ashore from high-speed sealift ships so they need not have to pull alongside a friendly pier to roll off as the non-swimming lav3strykers require. In the space where only 23 x lav3strykers can fit, it appears that 40 x M1064A4 Gavins could be carried onboard a fast catamaran like the Joint Venture.

EXCLUSIVE! AMOS 2 x 120mm Mortar Firing Video!

A 120mm mortar turret would have a fire control system to enable direct firing and faster indirect firing without the tedium of laying out aiming stakes and optically collimating to them. Guided 120mm mortar projectiles can steer to hit and kill signatures of enemy vehicles or to the GPS coordinates we pre-determine--it may simply be a White Phosphorous round marking the target for OA-10B Warthogs to see to make gun and missile strafing runs (see "The Close Air Support Imperative", December 2002 Armed Forces Journal)

What needs to be understood in land warfare is that there is no rules; its a winner-take-all brawl with all weaponry in play, at all times--to include "low-tech". The idea that a specialized anti-tank or anti-aircraft or anti-bunker platform is going to always be where it needs to be on the battlefield to thwart the enemy who is likely trying to exploit a weakness is the same WWII tank destroyer mentality that failed miserably in WWII. The current Interim Brigade Combat Teams (IBCTs) seek to attain combined-arms synergy by specialized weapons/missions variants in the "tank destroyer" mode, but this is fine only as long as all the variant types are fighting in close proximity and are available. As WWII painfully showed, if the enemy threat weapon system bumps into the wrong specialized platform--say a Tiger I heavy, defensive tank with 88mm gun versus a M4 Sherman medium offensive tank with 75mm gun intended to bunker-bust for infantry breakthroughs, the results can be disastrous. Peacetime MILES "laser tag" war game experiences prove this daily as BlueFor Bradleys often shoot down OPFOR helicopters with TOW anti-tank guided missiles and OPFOR will kill BlueFor helicopters with whatever they've got to include manpacked Dragon and Javelin ATGMs. What hurts is when the Bradley or a turretless vehicle faces a point/shoot/kill gun-equipped enemy tank and lacks a similar weapon. The TOW takes time to track to target; if the threat appear up close in a closed terrain fight, the Bradley doesn't have the time to raise its TOW launcher, stop and shoot to defend itself. The lesson learned should be to give ALL platforms at the bare minimum a weapons lethality that works instantly against ALL of the threats---bunkers, aircraft and tanks at least to a self-defense survival level. If you look like a tank, act like a tank because you are a VEHICLE, you darn well better be able to survive a confrontation with a tank.

So this brings us back to the direct fire point/shoot capability of a 120mm turreted mortar---there is no reason why that co-axially as the mortar barrel aims/aligns, that off to the side of the turret a pod system couldn't move in the same general direction. Realizing that a 120mm mortar tube will need to be super-elevated to arc its round into target, there is no reason why a switch couldn't select that the same cross-hairs that the gunner keeps on target for the 120mm mortar now sends aiming corrections to the side-mounted pod. A squeeze of the gunner's trigger would then shine a laser beam onto the target. Now, an accurate range to the target could be established for 120mm mortar engagement or radioing in a call for artillery fire or aircraft Close Air Support (CAS) missions. However, if the laser is kept on, a laser-guided Hydra 70mm rocket or a Starstreak Hyper Velocity Missile (HVM) could be shot from the pod into the target to destroy it in seconds. The beauty of the Starstreak HVM is that its a Mach 4 plus missile with 3 kinetic energy penetrator darts lethal against aircraft, bunkers and tanks out to 7 kilometers (twice the range of TOW) in a compact less than 50 pound man-portable missile. There is no reason why EVERY U.S. Army armored fighting vehicle with a turret couldn't have the co-axial laser pod system to fire Hydra 70mm and Starstreak HVMs to attain the triple-threat capability against aircraft, tanks and bunkers instead of over-relying on a specialized platform being there at the right time to save you. This applies of course, to the Infantry carriers of our Army--the Bradleys and Gavins could be enhanced by a 1-man 25-40mm autocannon turret with the co-axial laser pod system; the former by significantly reduced overall weight and more space for a full 9-man squad to be carried inside over the current bloated 2-man turret and the latter by increased firepower. Its clear that the Army needs a parachute forced-entry capable tracked IBCT using M113A4 Gavins--the 2nd ACR at Fort Polk, LA that is part of the XVIII Airborne Corps---to replace the armor-on-the-airhead capabilities lost when the M551 Sheridan light tanks were retired and not replaced as promised by the M8 Armored 105mm Gun System. A 1-man 25-40mm autocannon turret with the co-axial laser pod system could be fitted to the rear half of a BV-206S armored version of the SUSV to provide a CH-47D helicopter internal roll-on/roll-off capability for the 101st Airborne (Air Assault) Division.

The laser co-axial pod system enables tremendous triple-threat capabilies for a relatively simple 120mm turret; the laser rangefinds and can target designate for organic Hydra 70mm rockets, Starstreak HVMs (eventually the compact Kinetic Energy missile or "LOSAT Junior") and non-organic weaponry from artillery and aircraft CAS. To save weight/space the turret need only be 1 man operated by employing a helicopter gunship like helmet sighting system so the turret can be aimed head-out for natural peripheral vision to work. Combine the day optics to a forward looking infared or "thermal" sighting capability and all the firing capability previously described can work just as well at night in no star or moonlight.

By exploiting the M1064A4 Gavin's turret to provide additional pod weaponry, it then becomes possible to design the 120mm mortar tube to be detachable from the turret and ground mounted/fired away from the vehicle if the terrain and situation demand it without the vehicle becoming disarmed. If its a twin Amos 120mm mortar, one 120mm mortar tube could be dismounted and one retained. Right now, the mortar tubes of the Royal Ordnance and Hagglunds 120mm turreted systems do not dismount but it could be designed into future variants.

rgrlarry@aol.com