More than likely just one of the "what if" variants. If you click the link below, and scroll to bottom of page, then click on "Vickers MICV w/ 105mm" you'll see a Bradley hull w/ a fullsize turret, similar to what you describe. You'll also find several other "what if" and production (limited and such) variants. Actually..you may have to copy and paste:
I'm not much of an armor guy so I need some experts to help. On the front page of today's paper there's a picture of what looks to be a Bradley personnel carrier with an M1 turret on top. Is this a real picture? What's up with the huge turret on such a small chasis? Jerry 47
Why mount it on a Bradley? It has its own chassis. In any event, the M109A6 turret ring is far too large for the modest Bradley chassis. Italeri makes a full kit of the M109A6 Paladin, as well as earlier variants. GPO
The embarassing thing is internally many Army units had the same problem. My unit at Fort Riley (an ASA Company) had more guys that would see an M114 or M113 and scream "IT'S A #$%!#$% TANK!"
Paladin suspension and Bradley suspension are totally different, as are the resto of the vehicles. Not even the tracks are the same. Both are made in the York, PA UDI factory though. Rob Gronovius Visit my motor pool in the
OK. Help me get this straight. The Palladin has nothing to do with a Bradley fighting vehicle? This thing that looks like a Bradley chasis to me really isn't? Jerry 47
At Rucker as an AIT student (august rank of E-2) at the aviation school I was playing with an armor and vehicle recognition aid at a learning center and maxed out the score at 100%. This came from my interest in Warsaw Pact vehicles which pre-dated my Army service. The person that ran the place had been watching over my shoulder and I became an instant "expert" and was immediately "volunteered" to run WOCs and rated aviators through an vehicle recognition program when I wasn't in my own classes. I found that many of these pilots couldn't recognize US armor from Soviet and other foreign armor, much less specific variants. And of course they called anything with a turret a "tank". They were poor at armor recognition, and even poorer at softskins. Asking them to distinguish between softskins was like pulling teeth. A US deuce-and-a-half was just as likely to be a prospective target as a ZIL-151 or 157.
Interestingly all the photos we used for recognition were stolen from various Janes publications, many of which I had in my own collection and many of which I knew were pretty old - we were evidently not allowed to use any photos from our own intel. Many of the recognition photos were blurry and the designations were suspicious if not obviously incorrect. The other part of my job was updating the material. I also did aircraft recognition and people did not do too good on those either.
A larger emphasis on recognition would obviously affect fratricide. I always wondered if I had any effect on those aviators.
Have to agree. When we had to teach threat recognition using a deck of cards (what a concept!) I found out when I switched to photos all my idiots did was memorize the number of the card (e.g. 30 -- good guy; 32 -- bad guy; 35 -- good guy; etc.)
All of them flunked the photo ID.
My all time favorite was an E-5 96D (photo interpreter or "Squint") in Berlin who identified a T-10M as a "T-62 command tank" because "it needed two extra wheels on each side for the extra radio sets." Sheesh.
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.