• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Infantry Vehicles

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
16,759
Points
1,160
Last edited:

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,381
Points
1,160

KevinB

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Reaction score
11,684
Points
1,260
What are the trade-offs between the two configurations?
Well the 6x6 does have another axle, so you have added something there, that is another drive axle, so a drive shaft U joint, differential etc. You get a shorter wheelbase and so generally better ground clearance and off-road ability. Plus for sandy, muddy etc terrain you can reduce the pressure on the tires to gain surface area and reduce your ground pressure.

But the dual wheels have inners and outers, the rims are different on civilian ‘personal vehicle’ dual - as generally for things like a Chevy dual the outer where slips over the inner - so you need to have different spares. It’s easier to change than Since they are close together you can’t reduce the pressure so your ground pressure is what it is, reducing pressure will cause sidewall rub and destroy both tires in short order.

Commercial trucks with duals (like Tractor trailers) generally don’t use the inner rim to support the outer wheel. One needs to remove the out tire, part of the differential and then the inner tire. It’s not an easy task.

GM has a decent run down on the pluses and minuses of their single versus dual wheel trucks bellow.


Generally my take is for Mil usage the single 4x4 Truck is going to be the best option for most role, and if one has a heavier need, then the 6x6 or 8x8 is a better setup than a dual wheel system, as with a dually one is set with either different inner and outer rims, or a very involved replacement system.
 

Dana381

Full Member
Reaction score
402
Points
730
Well the 6x6 does have another axle, so you have added something there, that is another drive axle, so a drive shaft U joint, differential etc. You get a shorter wheelbase and so generally better ground clearance and off-road ability. Plus for sandy, muddy etc terrain you can reduce the pressure on the tires to gain surface area and reduce your ground pressure.

But the dual wheels have inners and outers, the rims are different on civilian ‘personal vehicle’ dual - as generally for things like a Chevy dual the outer where slips over the inner - so you need to have different spares. It’s easier to change than Since they are close together you can’t reduce the pressure so your ground pressure is what it is, reducing pressure will cause sidewall rub and destroy both tires in short order.

Commercial trucks with duals (like Tractor trailers) generally don’t use the inner rim to support the outer wheel. One needs to remove the out tire, part of the differential and then the inner tire. It’s not an easy task.

GM has a decent run down on the pluses and minuses of their single versus dual wheel trucks bellow.


Generally my take is for Mil usage the single 4x4 Truck is going to be the best option for most role, and if one has a heavier need, then the 6x6 or 8x8 is a better setup than a dual wheel system, as with a dually one is set with either different inner and outer rims, or a very involved replacement system.

You are mostly right except the two areas I highlighted in yellow. Dual wheels on farm tractors are built the way you describe but trucks are not.

Truck Duals are built with all the same wheels and both wheels slide on the hub then are sandwiched by the wheel nuts. the "dish" of the wheel is large so the metal surfaces touch before the tires touch. On light/medium duty trucks manufacturers install spacers on the front axle so that the same wheels with the large dish is used on all positions. One can put any wheel on any position. Changing an inside tire is the same work as changing an outside tire if you follow procedure. A good tire guy will replace an outside tire without taking the wheel off but only if the inside does not need changing.

Tandem axles are much more complicated than duals but are far better off road. Duals are much lighter and simpler and are therefore the favorite for commercial trucks. Duals also let you limp home/to a safe place if one tire fails. Tires also encounter a weight penalty when mounted in dual arrangement. If you read the sidewall of any LT or truck tire it shows the max weight single and dual. The dual max weight is always less. I am not sure exactly why but my guess is heat buildup being greater with another tire so close.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Reaction score
11,684
Points
1,260
@Dana381 I had to help my buddy change a tire on his Dually, it had different rims, however reading your response led me to do a quick google search shows that practice is either going out of style or coming into style - I’ve seen Dodge and Ford trucks with both methods online and have been trying to figure out what the newest methods are for Chevy etc.
 

suffolkowner

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
956
Points
1,060
you are going to suffer a turning radius penalty running tandem axles as well and the greater the spread on those axles the greater the penalty. How important that is in a military context?
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
5,816
Points
1,160
You are mostly right except the two areas I highlighted in yellow. Dual wheels on farm tractors are built the way you describe but trucks are not.

Truck Duals are built with all the same wheels and both wheels slide on the hub then are sandwiched by the wheel nuts. the "dish" of the wheel is large so the metal surfaces touch before the tires touch. On light/medium duty trucks manufacturers install spacers on the front axle so that the same wheels with the large dish is used on all positions. One can put any wheel on any position. Changing an inside tire is the same work as changing an outside tire if you follow procedure. A good tire guy will replace an outside tire without taking the wheel off but only if the inside does not need changing.

Tandem axles are much more complicated than duals but are far better off road. Duals are much lighter and simpler and are therefore the favorite for commercial trucks. Duals also let you limp home/to a safe place if one tire fails. Tires also encounter a weight penalty when mounted in dual arrangement. If you read the sidewall of any LT or truck tire it shows the max weight single and dual. The dual max weight is always less. I am not sure exactly why but my guess is heat buildup being greater with another tire so close.
Yes the old deuces used the same tire and rim on all of it's wheels, including the dual wheel tandem version. these trucks had a simple and easy to use spare tire mount as well.

xm211-chris-philips-1206armytruck1.jpg


This was also based on the regular US army truck chassis of the day

M20.jpg
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,381
Points
1,160

Pick Up Trucks and Rockets in the 5 to 10 km band. This band would also be served by 70mm rockets and APKWS (and for that matter the 70mm Stinger)​

Inside the Ukrainian factory turning pick-up trucks into weapons of war​

At the secret location engineers work around the clock to produce the machinery needed to recapture Kherson from Russian forces

ByJoe Barnes and Heathcliff O'Malley IN KRYVYI RIH30 October 2022 • 6:14pm

Workshop in Kryvyi Rih

Engineers can convert at least one truck a week at the workshop in Kryvyi Rih, Pawel said CREDIT: Heathcliff O'Malley

Sneaking up on the enemy, it doesn’t take Pawel and his team of artillery men more than two attempts to destroy a Russian target.
Capable of striking from range, his three-man unit has rocked makeshift headquarters and ammunition dumps belonging to Moscow’s forces all across the Kherson front line.

But they are not equipped with super-accurate Himars rocket launchers or the like.

Instead, Pawel and his comrades unleash their deadly barrages from a pick-up truck fitted with a BM-21 Grad, a multi-launch rocket system – just one of the weapons helping Ukrainian forces secure parity in firepower against the Russians.

At the rear of the southern line is a secretive factory where engineers work around the clock to ensure their countrymen at the front have the kit they need to recapture Kherson.

The Telegraph was given exclusive access to the facility as Pawel visited to check up on the progress of the next improvised pick-up truck set to join the counter-offensive.
Inside the workshop sit two pristine Nissan and Mitsubishi trucks, already painted in Ukraine's signature olive green camouflage, with their cargo beds removed.

Vehicles are being turned into mobile rocket launchers

It is far from a high-tech production line but the engineers explain they are able to convert at least one truck a week.
As Pawel watches on the mechanics, who usually manufacture tools for the pharmaceutical industry, weld a bracket, to which the firing system will be attached, onto the chassis of the vehicle.

Across the room lies the firing tubes that will eventually unleash 122mm missiles.
Highly nimble, Ukraine's armed forces are able to take the pick-up to locations other rocket-launching systems cannot reach, fire on the enemy and escape before any counter-battery fire.

Pawel argues this makes them even more useful than Himars, which have changed the balance of the war since they started in Kyiv from the United States.

'With these trucks, you're in and out quickly with no need to lose the big launchers,' Pawel said

Ukrainian ingenuity is giving its army the edge in the war with Russia

"This piece of equipment is far more useful when you're located just a few kilometres from the enemy," he told the Telegraph.
"Bringing larger Grads, Himars or other rocket launchers is dangerous because you can be spotted quite quickly.

"With these trucks, you're in and out quickly with no need to lose the big launchers, because even before you've fired the enemy has often spotted you with binoculars and can take you out."

Capable of firing from a range of 6.2 miles, Pawel explains the most experienced artillery men can strike within a 16ft to 33ft radius of their target.

Each firing team consists of a driver, who also loads the rocket, a surveillance drone operator and a targeteer to position the launchers.
Pawel, a driver, said his team on one occasion had crept as close as 1.2 miles to enemy troops before unleashing an artillery barrage.
It is not just these highly mobile weapons being converted in the factory, which is funded by the government of Kryvyi Rih.

In an adjacent workshop sits a completed, much larger four-tube Grad system fitted onto the rear bed of a Mercedes Unimog ready to be dispatched to the front line.

It was sent back to the team for adjustments after initially being deployed in the summer, but now the engineers believe the huge transporter truck will be deadlier than ever.

The factory also produces truck mounts for MG42-style machine guns made in Yugoslavia, and still used by the Ukrainian military today.
At the beginning of the war Russia had a massive firepower advantage over Ukraine, with Moscow's artillery outnumbering Kyiv's forces by 10 to one.

But in recent months the tide has turned.

'Our offensive is unstoppable,' said Pawel

Ukrainian ingenuity and Western donations mean Volodymyr Zelensky's military in the southern Kherson region now has the edge in artillery, rockets and drones.

Unlike the Russians, who are using artillery more sparingly, Ukraine is able to use its aerial and long-range superiority to its advantage on the flat steppe in the south.

Falling rates of Russian fire, by up to three times in some areas, have led to suggestions that its forces are running low on ammunition.
Kyiv's forces are now closing in on the city of Kherson, the only regional capital to be captured by Moscow since the beginning of the war.
"Our offensive is unstoppable," said Pawel, as he stressed the need for more kit to get the job done.

But General Kyrylo Budanov, Ukraine's military intelligence chief, has said it could take at least another month to recapture Kherson.
Moscow has its most trained and combat-ready troops waiting for Ukrainian forces to enter the city, he said.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,381
Points
1,160
It's hunting season - and this is sitting outside my neighbours house. I'm jealous.

I also think that DND should be thinking about engaging these guys for advice on the fleet - LUV, LVM(L) and maybe even the TAPV.

 

Dana381

Full Member
Reaction score
402
Points
730
@Dana381 I had to help my buddy change a tire on his Dually, it had different rims, however reading your response led me to do a quick google search shows that practice is either going out of style or coming into style - I’ve seen Dodge and Ford trucks with both methods online and have been trying to figure out what the newest methods are for Chevy etc.

I am a heavy duty diesel mechanic, I don't normally work on 1 ton's but I do from time to time. All 1 ton's I have worked on have Unimount style wheels. I have not seen what you described in my career. By that I mean where the inner wheel is mounted behind the hub. It is common to need to remove the hub to remove the brake rotor/drum. The 1993 Chev 3500 service truck I used to operate was that way. It's possible maybe your friend had some custom wheel spacer set up or something. I also own a F-550 service truck and it has Unimount style wheels as well.

Here is a website that explains Budd wheels vs Unimount wheels also known as stud pilot vs hub pilot.

Sometimes trucks will have aluminum rims on the outside and steel on the inside. This is because steel wheels are cheaper and they can get the look of aluminum for less cost. These trucks the wheels are built the same except the aluminum ones are thicker and require longer wheel studs.

Budd style wheels (also called stud pilot) the outer wheel is held on by a nut and the inner wheel is held on by a sleeve. Tapers on the nut and the sleeve center or pilot the wheel on the hub. In this arrangement both wheels are the same. These wheels are easy to spot because they have tapers on the bolt holes like a car wheel. This style was popular in the 1970's and is all but obsolete. The only trucks that still come with it are Japanese built Hino's (the cabover ones) and Isuzu trucks. Budd wheels also use left hand thread on the left side of the vehicle. A big problem with these is the sleeve coming off with the nut, it is then trapped on the outer rim and has to be torched off.

Dayton style truck wheels were popular on heavy trucks and trailers up until about 1995. They were still available till around 2000 and now they can't be ordered on new trucks any more. They are the ones that mount on spoke hubs with retaining clips. This style also uses the same rim in all positions except a spacer ring (leaning on the milk crate in the pic) is required to space the duals apart on the hub. I have one customer that still has a fleet of these. They can be a pain in the ass as they can wobble if not mounted right. Many guys are converting these to Unimount style by replacing the wheel hubs.
post-6773-0-80109100-1373250277_thumb.jpg

I am well aware that I have not seen everything that is out there and that military often uses non standard systems, if there is another style of mounting wheels that I have not seen I would be interested in see it.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Reaction score
11,684
Points
1,260
@Dana381 appreciate the info. He’s in PA and it was bought out of Canada as a system from Overland. So I’m unsure of why or how it ended up that way. It’s a PITA enough that he’s swapping the system out for a Ram based custom job some locally to his design.
 

lenaitch

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,664
Points
1,040
It's hunting season - and this is sitting outside my neighbours house. I'm jealous.

I also think that DND should be thinking about engaging these guys for advice on the fleet - LUV, LVM(L) and maybe even the TAPV.

Wow - half a million USD for the starter model. Nice neighbourhood. Ya gotta really like venison. I thought a gutted school bus with a stove pipe sticking out of a window was fancy.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,381
Points
1,160
Wow - half a million USD for the starter model. Nice neighbourhood. Ya gotta really like venison. I thought a gutted school bus with a stove pipe sticking out of a window was fancy.
The RV costs about as much as the house it is parked in front of....priorities.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Relic
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,381
Points
1,160
I'm putting this here rather than in the Future Armour section because I am starting to think the UGV is likely to be, at least initially, a 4 MPH system well suited to supplying Infantry Support tasks - porting everything from back packs to 120mm guns.

I can also see them in the optionally manned role with the artillery with the vehicles only being manned in transit but being remotely managed in battery - whether that be Air Defence, Anti-Tank, Cannon or LRPF missiles.

I don't see them making much of an inroads into the Armoured or Cavalry elements for a while although I expect the technology will be used to enhance the capabilities and safety of the permanently mounted crew.

A key part of the Army’s development of new technologies involves testing them with soldiers in combat circumstances to see how they best operate.

“You're going to put a robotic combat vehicle in a formation, and we think we know how you're going to use it. But we're not right. Ultimately, the soldiers are going to help shape how it's used. That's really what AFC (Army Futures Command) is pushing for, to get technology in the dirt and allow soldiers to write those requirements, not come up with some exquisite end state threshold objective, and then 15 years from now we're going to achieve it. How do we iterate the requirements process as quickly as we can iterate software,” Mills told Warrior in an interview. “By giving us, you know, honest feedback, they (soldiers) definitely didn't hold back when things didn't work, or what they wanted to see improve. I think that's really the whole point of doing this is getting that feedback that allows me to go back to my engineers and say, okay, these are the things we have to fix.”

The developmental process, Mills explained, is intended to be incremental and progressive, involving ongoing collaboration between engineers and soldiers analyzing how new systems can best be leveraged in combat. There is a complex and extremely critical synergy between the emergence of new technologies and evolving concepts of Combined Arms Maneuver, and exercises such as the one at Fort Hood are designed to explore that intersection.

“It's really a chicken and egg thing because you're giving soldiers a new capability. And the worst thing you could probably do is say, hey, fight the exact same way with this new technology. What AFC (Army Futures Command) is really pushing for us to get technology in soldiers hands and let them innovate on the tactics and operations,” Mills said.

Accountants and Life Cycle Managers are going to hate this Continuous Improvement Model. They will never know when they get there. Every project will become an F35 project. Grandfather's axe will live forever.
 
Top