"Armored Ammunition Carrier" Topic

Just finished reading Thunder Run. In the book a resupply column is sent through contested territory to meet up with units engaged in combat. Soft skins are lost. Some supplies have to be carried in the bustle rack of Abrams to get distributed.

Why no armored supply vehicles for front line units? The Germans, most notably, during WW2 used armored half tracks and converted tanks for supply vehicles at the front. Lesson lost?

Do any modern armies have armored supply vehicles (I see a few have armored supply vehicles for artillery)?

I suspect they don't consider the added expense to be worth it, and some bean-counters probably assume our logistics links will remain untouched.

Yes, many lessons have to be learned and re-learned, over and over, and over again, sadly.

I think you will find that 155mm SPG units have armored ammunition carriers, but they are pretty specialized, being designed to drive up to the the back of the SPG and directly transfer ammunition to the ready racks of the SPG. They also use the same running gear, just the superstructure is different. I think some of the other SP Artillery units also have dedicated ammunition carriers armored like the firing unit (I'm pretty sure the MLRS has them).

Yes, the M109 SP 155mm has an armored resupply vehicle. The M992 FAASV – link

I ran resupply ops in the ROK, '84-'85 for a Mech Bn as the Bn Log Ofc. The US ARMY has a resupply system that generally works.

Bn Field Trains 10-12+ Km behind the FEBA.

The forward deployed Combat Trains, 3-5 Kms behind the FEBA. And at times "Push Packages" of a smaller resupply convoys. You set up a Logistics Resupply Point(s)(LRP) and the unit's Supply/POL Trucks would link with you up there.

You run supply convoys all day going back and forth to the CBT SPT Bn, then back to the Field Trains. Then a smaller convoy to the Combat Trains. Set up LRPs once or twice a day. And advance the whole system as the Bn advanced.

But yes all we had was 2&1/2 and 5 ton Cgo Trks. Later, '86-'90, when I was with a Mech Bde at Benning, we got the 10 ton HEMTT also. ghqmodels.com/store/n95.html

I suspect they don't consider the added expense to be worth it, and some bean-counters probably assume our logistics links will remain untouched.
Yes, many lessons have to be learned and re-learned, over and over, and over again, sadly.

I'm not sure if that is totally the case. The US military understands the importance of Logistics in the modern mobile combined arms battlefield. There is more to it than just cost/$$$. Both Armored and Unarmored Vehicles each have their pros & cons. But that's a topic for a another whole discussion.

But yes, we knew how to run resupply in the Jungles, the ROK and Europe. But in the Desert with insurgents presented a new paradigm. Of course AFAIK they did similar to what was done in Vietnam. By turning, in this case some of the HEMTTs into a lightly armored Gun Trucks for convoy protection. And MPs in armored HMMWVs also ran convoy protection/route security too. Some NG and RES units were even converted to MPs. I know of a case of a local RES FA unit was trained and converted to MPs. Just for this reason and others.

As we know with an insurgency they are "everywhere". And you can't tell the difference between the "Bad Guys" and the locals, as well as who is supporting them. Until they open fire on you, etc. You have to constantly be aware of collateral damage. And that whole situation works in the insurgents' favor. Along with they have the "home court"/"it's their backyard" advantage. E.g. Remember what happened to the "Jessica Lynch" convoy/incident.

Just finished reading Thunder Run. In the book a resupply column is sent through contested territory to meet up with units engaged in combat. Soft skins are lost. Some supplies have to be carried in the bustle rack of Abrams to get distributed.

Why no armored supply vehicles for front line units?

Because when the Humvees (and other trucks) were designed, there weren't supposed to be any bad guys between the front line combat units and their supply dumps.

Furthermore, no vehicle in the US inventory short of an Abrams is RPG-proof. Bradleys aren't, M109/M992s really aren't, Strykers aren't, M113s aren't even .50cal-proof, and Humvees/other trucks were completely unarmored (at the time).

We've shifted a bit, so that all our 'softskins' are IED-proof *now*, but that makes them a lot heavier, more expensive, and carry less stuff while burning more fuel.

Okay. So as a professional Army logistician…

Any transport vehicle which adds armor reduces transport capability.

And in Thunder Run, did they mention the decision making process of guns vs butter for moving bullets instead of water.

Eric

Agree Lion and Eric +1

As a Mech Bn S4 then Mech Bn BMO. The Bde Cdr kicked me upstairs to the Bde BMO then Bde Asst S4. Waaaay back in '84-'90 …