• Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!

  • Microsoft MSN, Live, Hotmail, Outlook email users may not be receiving emails. We are working to resolve this issue. Please add support@steelsoldiers.com to your trusted contacts.

Did they ever make an Armored Cab upgrade package for M939 series cabs? (I.E. M923A2)

kennys@wi.rr.com

Active member
1,474
23
38
Location
Waukesha, WI
Thank you for the help CSM. I have added pictures of the floor parts I have and all the steel parts I have. There is also a picture of one piece of plate that I have no idea what it's for. So far I know I'm missing the wheel wells, the back plates, the inside window frames and of course the doors. I also found one picture of some parts that were under the hood but I don't know if those were a part of the kit or if that was something the unit did.

Thank you again.
 

Attachments

73m819

Rock = older than dirt , GA. MAFIA , Dirty
Steel Soldiers Supporter
In Memorial
12,195
325
0
Location
gainesville, ga.
As far as armored cabs go, the way I see it is if I need a armored cab, I am someplace I should not be, like inter city Detroit, second, a armored cab says to the bad guys "get a bigger banger" and I for one never liked small bangers discharged in my direction let alone BIG ones, a armored cab says in big letters "TARGET"
 

kennys@wi.rr.com

Active member
1,474
23
38
Location
Waukesha, WI
As always everyone is entitled to an opinion. I'm not putting it on my truck to be protected from good or bad guys, I'm doing it because it will make my truck unique in a see of trucks that it now seems "everyone" has. As far as I'm concerned the parts I'm missing can be made of paper as long as they hold the paint and look accurate, it has nothing to do with stopping a "banger" of any size.

I really hope that helps clear that up for you.
 

Csm Davis

Well-known member
4,166
393
83
Location
Hattiesburg, Mississippi
If you look at some of the other post there are some pictures of under the hood and I believe that the piece under the fender is the same on the Bosnian armored trucks as the P1 trucks.
 

Trailboss

Well-known member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
1,577
138
63
Location
Norwood LA
You don't often think of such support vehicles in a conflict, but I've also seen uparmored bulldozers and road graders at Ft Polk.
 

Csm Davis

Well-known member
4,166
393
83
Location
Hattiesburg, Mississippi
I found this over at global security, if this is a violation please delete it.

M939 / M35 Crew Protection Kit
Responding to information that Central Command truck drivers needed better protection against small arms fire and explosive devise fragments, in March 2004 Col. Robert Groller, program manager-tactical vehicles (PM-TV) contacted the US Army Tank-Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center (TARDEC) to find a survivability solution. Soon prototype armor kits for the M939 and M35 series vehicles were under development. Noting TARDEC's work to quickly and successfully field the HMMWV Armor Survivability Kit, Col. Groller requested that TARDEC develop prototype kits for testing and evaluation in 90 days.

TARDEC was up to the challenge, and within a day of the request a matrix team was organized for the project. It included members from TARDEC's Research Business Group, Emerging Technologies Team, Development Business Group Digital Design and Physical Prototyping Teams, as well as individual members representing Quality Assurance, Safety, and representatives from PM-TV to ensure the customerËs needs were met. Representatives from PM-TV defined protection performance parameters to be that of the successful HMMWV Armor Survivability Kit. Taking that parameter, an armor solution now had to be found for these larger trucks.

TARDEC engineers first looked at an existing solution. Although not great in numbers, 165 armor kits were developed for the M939 during operations in war-torn Bosnia and still existed in Army warehouses. Developed in the early 1990s, this crew-protection kit would first need to be upgraded to provide enhanced side protection.

One full kit and enough parts remained at TARDEC to complete an increased protection upgrade for the Bosnia kit. By 21 May 2004, the TARDEC team had completed necessary changes, fabricated, assembled and shipped two prototype kits to be tested at Aberdeen Test Center (ATC). ATC would determine the performance of these kits against the Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) threats. While providing an interim solution, the Bosnia kits did not meet the full OIF requirements. Testing was delayed while a new kit design and prototype were completed.

Upon completion of this effort, attention turned to the production of new kits for the M939 vehicle system; a firm requirement for 2,229 M939 series kits was established in mid April. No firm number of kits was established for the M35 system, hence the priority on the M939 prototype kit development.

The ballistic threats that the OIF M939 kit would need to defeat greatly exceeded the Bosnia kit's capabilities. In addition to meeting threats, Central Command identified requirements to have movable side windows for ventilation and firing of all infantry weapon types, a gun ring that would permit mounting and firing of the M2 and M60 machine guns, M249, Mk19, a weapons platform, digital rack, and cab air conditioning unit. These requirements would prove to be a significant challenge.

There was great concern that the weight of the original Bosnia crew protection kit was at the ragged edge of what the vehicle's axle could withstand. To meet these additional requirements and not decrease the level of threat protection, the increased weight would need to be partially borne by the non-cab vehicle structure. Additionally, movable windows would be a design challenge since the estimated weight of the applied armored window transparency would be more than 100 pounds. Air conditioning space claim and cooling rate likewise posed a great challenge.

A start of work meeting occurred on 20 April 2004 during which it was indicated that M939 A1 and A2 vehicles would need to be supported by this new protection kit. M939 base vehicles would require upgrade to the A1 as part of the process, with front winches removed to accommodate the anticipated weight of the protection kit. Information provided by the PM-TV indicated that there existed 9 versions of the A1, A2 and M939 base vehicle with a total of 27 possible variations. The kit would need to fit 18 of these further complicated by realizing that approximately 40 percent of the vehicles in use in southwest Asia were the M939 base variants needing their winches removed.

Although funding was authorized for the project on 18 April 2004 by PM-TV, TARDECËs Emerging Technologies Team had already commenced armor design efforts on 25 March 2004. This was and continued to be an all-out effort that has no margin for error. Every delay or mistake results in potential casualties to troops. There is no greater motivation than to have the ability to provide life-saving equipment.

In an effort to optimize the material and reduce unnecessary weight, numerous armor material combinations were considered for the various areas of the cab. Readily available armor materials and windshield transparency materials were given highest priority, as this approach would lead to lowest schedule and cost risk. Several other novel armor technologies were investigated and considered, but the combination of schedule, availability, fabrication ease, multi-hit performance and cost ruled out their application.

Design and digital modeling continued throughout April and May 2004, with 02 June 2004 established as the date to complete designs for the M939 kit. Fabrication of parts commenced prior to Memorial Day with fabrication revisions completed two weeks later. The final product consists of an armored cab, fire-wall protection, floor/fender mine protection and air conditioning.

To meet the most important requirement, crew protection, TARDEC engineers developed and manufactured an entire new cab from roof to floor and from door to door. Upon removal of an existing M939A2 cab, the new armored cab was installed consisting of armored cab walls and doors, which include the applied armored glass. Powered actuators to assist in moving the heavy doors and a powered protected door assembly that can move the side transparencies up and down for ventilation and firing purposes were included. To be able to mount the required weapon platforms, engineers fitted the armored cab's roof with the gun port ring used on the HMMWV lightweight gun ring. To add a bit of creature comfort and to make room for the vehicle's air conditioning and gunner platform, two new air ride seats were installed. Once complete the kit fits both the M939 basic, A1 and A2 series vehicles.

Adding even more protection, TARDEC technicians using a variety of water jet cutters and computer aided design, added contoured armor plate under the M939 hood and inside the dash board to reduce the threat of small arms fire through the hood region. Armor plate was also mounted inside the floor of the cab as well as under the front wheel wells to reduce the threat of fragments from land explosives.

Lastly, the problem of air conditioning was tackled. Collaborating with the Red Dot Corporation of Seattle, Wash., TARDEC modified an existing HMMWV air conditioning kit to fit in the M939. The thought was to adopt commonality between vehicle systemsßin order toßsimplify the number of parts and repair procedures required. Once the system was selected, additional room had to be made in the vehicle to mount it.

To make room for the evaporator cooler fan console, the bench seat along with the battery box were removed and relocated. The console was then mounted between the two new bucket seats; a new gunnerËs platform was mounted on top of the console. Within two weeks of inception, a functional air conditioning system was installed.ß Upon successfulßcompletion ofßtesting, a robust easy-to-install kit will be packaged, with an estimated cost per air conditioning kit per vehicle at $3,000.

The prototype design of the M939 armor kit required more than 300 drawings (to date) and consists of 260 individual components and it is estimated that the kit adds from between 1100 to 1500 pounds to the front wheels of the various M939 series vehicles. TARDEC's Physical Prototyping Team completed assembly and installation of the armor and air conditioning kits by 21 June 2004. The next day, the first two kits departed for ATC to under go automotive and safety testing, with one kit to become the Yballistic turret & hull÷ for live-fire testing against the standardized OIF threats.

Concurrent to design, TARDEC is actively working with the ArmyËs Ground Service Industrial Enterprise (a relationship that was cemented during the design and production of the Armor HMMWV kits) to identify and begin production of low-risk, long-lead items. This pre-production greatly helped to expedite fabrication of complete kits upon favorable automotive and ballistic evaluation by ATC.

Copyright © 2000-2016 GlobalSecurity.org All rights reserved.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 

saddamsnightmare

Well-known member
3,618
80
48
Location
Abilene, Texas
November 11th, 2016.


Interesting from an historical point of view, reinventing armor to convoy vehicles seems to happen again and again. Why any civilian would need one is beyond my comprehension (even in Detroit or Hoboken), but your mileage would be about 1 MPG, and the trucks springs probably should have been upgraded.:!: Reactive armor probably would have worked better at less weight.
 

simp5782

Feo, Fuerte y Formal
Supporting Vendor
12,125
9,384
113
Location
Mason, TN
November 11th, 2016.


Interesting from an historical point of view, reinventing armor to convoy vehicles seems to happen again and again. Why any civilian would need one is beyond my comprehension (even in Detroit or Hoboken), but your mileage would be about 1 MPG, and the trucks springs probably should have been upgraded.:!: Reactive armor probably would have worked better at less weight.
It is all about the cool factor with some things. Like the armor and turret on a Hmmwv. Or this //cloud.tapatalk.com/s/58267f058e6df/Screenshot_2016-04-01-07-44-28.png?


Sent from my SM-G860P using Tapatalk
 

jmb6741

Member
Steel Soldiers Supporter
110
3
16
Location
NC
They dismantled some up armored M923A1's and M925A1's at a local scrapyard. Hard to see those unique trucks trucks with A/C cut up and destroyed!!
 

Tinstar

Super Moderator
Super Moderator
Steel Soldiers Supporter
4,290
1,776
113
Location
Edmond, Oklahoma
November 11th, 2016.


Interesting from an historical point of view, reinventing armor to convoy vehicles seems to happen again and again. Why any civilian would need one is beyond my comprehension (even in Detroit or Hoboken), but your mileage would be about 1 MPG, and the trucks springs probably should have been upgraded.:!: Reactive armor probably would have worked better at less weight.
It has nothing to do with need.
"Any Civilian" can make his/her truck look as battle authentic as he/she wants.
It's not a prohibitive item or illegal item to own.
If you are lucky enough to find a truck or the armor parts, so be it.

The Govt doesn't like it since it doesn't trust its citizens.
Hence the demilitarized codes, aka scrap pile now.
There were some fully armored ones that were sold. Now they scrap it all.

I personally wouldn't want one but they are very cool.



"Why any civilian would need one is beyond my comprehension"
Antigunners use that same phrase.
 

Csm Davis

Well-known member
4,166
393
83
Location
Hattiesburg, Mississippi
November 11th, 2016.


Interesting from an historical point of view, reinventing armor to convoy vehicles seems to happen again and again. Why any civilian would need one is beyond my comprehension (even in Detroit or Hoboken), but your mileage would be about 1 MPG, and the trucks springs probably should have been upgraded.:!: Reactive armor probably would have worked better at less weight.
Why do YOU need a military truck? Why would it get 1 MPG? Why upgrade the springs, these are only 1500 lbs or so heavier. And unless I am wrong reactive armor has to be on the outside of a armored vehicle and is only for explosive missiles and IED'S not small arms fire. So am I missing something?
So why the lack of comprehension? What is dangerous about a armored vehicle? It is not a offensive weapon, it is by its very makeup a defensive thing made to protect the humans inside. So only the military and government officials need to be protected?



Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
Top