Designing an amphibious flood response vehicle?

[kach22i]

Nice post monkeywrench.

I Googled some pictures of the Aris Gator M113, seems like a land vehicle first which can cross (not operate) in water. I mean It's not meant to replace a armed gunboat or riverboat in any conceivable situation, right? Has Aris Gator ever been used as a rescue or ambulance before?

http://www.combatreform2.com/m113gav...gbattlebox.jpg


It can be droped from the air, a big plus in my opinion.
http://www.combatreform2.com/itmaneuversabattalion.htm


The key word was modified, right?

Does anyone think that the desired 2-tonne capacity listed at the start of this thread is anywhere near realistic?

[RatliffFranklin]

Originally Posted by kach22i

Nice post monkeywrench.

I Googled some pictures of the Aris Gator M113, seems like a land vehicle first which can cross (not operate) water.

http://www.combatreform2.com/m113gav...gbattlebox.jpg


It can be droped from the air, a big plus in my opinion.
http://www.combatreform2.com/itmaneuversabattalion.htm


The key word was modified, right?

Does anyone think that the desired 2-tonne capacity listed at the start of this thread is anywhere near realistic?

Big airboats have that kind of payload capacity.

[kach22i]

I don't want to talk past you, I'll just stick to reading the posts of yours I like RatliffFranklin..........and the cool videos you post of course.

[Earl Boebert]

Originally Posted by kach22i

Nice post monkeywrench.

[snip]

Does anyone think that the desired 2-tonne capacity listed at the start of this thread is anywhere near realistic?

Well, googling on "ambulance specification" yields a 2002 US Govt. spec calling for minimum payload of a two-patient ambulance to be between 1500 and 1750 lbs. Assumed two patients and two crew at 175 lbs ea. I would think, based on helo videos from Katrina and elsewhere, that you'd want much more than that, as a very common flood scenario is groups of more than two people on rooftops, etc. Getting mobbed and swamped by a panicked crowd has to be a real consideration. Plus the need for emergency medical supplies and a *lot* of blankets.

Cheers,

Earl

[monckywrench]

"The key word was modified, right?"

Yes, as in ditching the thick hull armor (though the 5083 plate construction has worked well, I'd keep that) and building floatation into the sides of the vehicle. Standard non-Aris M113A2s (as pictured in the above posts) weigh about 21K lbs, but the sides and roof are targets for weight reduction.

Here's the Aris site:
http://www.arisspa.it/inglese/arisgator.htm
More pics:
http://www.army-technology.com/contr...ris/aris2.html

The Aris is suitable for marine assault as well as river crossings, but a civilian track could be built with more freeboard, and possibly siderails so more people would fit on deck. The VERY simple M113 construction is worth a look, especially the drivetrain layout. A hull based on those general concepts and dimensions would be easy to build. Custom short and long M113 hulls are common.

The stock M113 hull is all flat plate with only the hatches, ramp, etc being cast. A disaster-response version wouldn't need cast parts.

"Does anyone think that the desired 2-tonne capacity listed at the start of this thread is anywhere near realistic?"

Not for a serious vehicle. Disaster response is basically a military operation.
I don't have Aris-specific ambulance info, but M113 ambulance variants are in common use with many militaries worldwide.

http://www.olive-drab.com/idphoto/id..._ambulance.php

It is the most common APC, and the stock width is 90 inches which fits standard flatbed trailers. Parts are easily available, including many aftermarket upgrades.

One could do a custom hull and pick from a number of powerplants and other systems already in production. Hybrid prototypes have been built. The engine compartment has ample room and the hull has no heavy bulkheads, just sheet aluminum around the engine.

View of underside (plastic model) hull showing arms of simple torsion bar suspension:
http://www.missing-lynx.com/reviews/...eviewgp_1.html

Stock M113, note extended trim vane:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwuNuGhlPWg

Interior pics (model without roof installed). Note engine, hydramatic transmission, and differential (and room for different powerplants!):
http://www.blurmodeler.blog-city.com...ter_part_i.htm

Army tech manuals site with M113 manuals in pdf format. Free public download for most items and a great military vehicle and equipment resource. Has Army welding manuals and LOTS of useful info:

https://www.logsa.army.mil/etms/online.cfm

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by monckywrench

Interior pics (model without roof installed). Note engine, hydramatic transmission, and differential (and room for different powerplants!):
http://www.blurmodeler.blog-city.com...ter_part_i.htm

Wow, great links................for some reason I always like the models ones the best. No fat drivers/operators though, that cockpit looks less than 24 inches wide.

[monckywrench]

The cockpit isn't bad but the stock hatch opening is tight. I'm 6'2"/230lbs and my shoulders touch the sides while wearing a T-shirt. Once sitting down in front of the vision blocks there is decent room.

A larger-diameter hatch on top of a cupola with glass windows instead of AFV vision blocks would be good for civil use. The driver should sit higher so he can see more of the right front of the vehicle, or a clean-sheet design should have him centered. Unlike automobiles, a driver in an AFV who sits to the side has severely restricted visibility on the opposite side.

I'd offer a much wider hatch and a seat post that allowed a wide range height adjustment, plus a latched lock so it could swing like a "captains chair" to allow easier driver egress out the back. A clean-sheet design could use drive-by wire controls instead of the stock yokes, though they work well.

I'm working on an unrelated project I can't disclose here, but what you are interested in does not conflict at all so I'm happy to share info.

As these are surplused they could be a great pool of civilian vehicles.
The Swiss just crushed a bunch (550!) because the US vetoed a sale to Iraq (US companies selling new stuff = profit) but where they can be transferred to civil government use they can serve as a pool of supportable disaster response vehicles.

The US gives older M113A2 versions to requesting local fire departments and police. (Clearing the way for more MRAP sales even though those are roadbound urban police trucks...) Aberdeen proving Ground has made them into wildfire fighting engines (along with M60 tanks!).

[charmc]

This concept seems to lend itself to the amphibious rescue mission pretty well. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaGLNcIkSm0

http://www.fasttrackamphibian.com/

There are several vehicle types that would work, including hovercraft and airboats, which have the benefit of being thoroughly proven. Fast vehicles have the further advantage, like a helicopter, of high speed transit back to base once victims are on board. This means more missions per day, another important consideration, and might make a big difference in the case of seriously ill or badly injured victims.

Realistic rescue efforts must be made in cooperation with police, military, or other government authorities to coordinate logistics, such as secure storage of and access to fuel. Carrying and guarding an isolated fuel supply isn't efficient or a good use of manpower.

[alexlebrit]

Is this a general all purpose flood response vehicle used anywhere in the world, or is it tailored for one specific area? For sintance flood response in a place like Bangladesh would be very difference from flood response in Gloucestershire. The former would involve driving huge distances and then having to cope with large bodies of water, so you'd want a high water speed. Also there would be fewer bits and pieces to avoid. Then again flood response in an urban environment would surely require manoevrability over speed? You'd hardly want to be going down Tewkesbury High Street at 20 knots and bounce off a partially submerged Mondeo would you? Think of the wake lapping against Mrs "The Government's got to do more"'s double glazing.

So there's a few different parameters you might want to look at.

That said a tracked amphibian propelled on land and water by its tracks like a FastTrack meets a lot of these parameters. It's downfall and that of any tracked vehicle would be driver training and licencing. I have no idea about any other parts of the world but in Europe you'll need a special licence to drive one, and costly training to get it (unless with the military).

If you're aiming for a payload of 4 people might it not be better to have a smaller amphibious craft which can tow inflatable "liferaft" style craft behind it? Maybe even cruise round dropping them off so people have somewhere "dry" to get into who can then be picked up later?

If you haven't found it already, have a look at http://www.amphibiousvehicle.net/ There's hundreds of designs there. Particularly have a look at what the Russians are doing, there's plenty of scope. Few if any have a 20 knot speed, but is that imperative?

Also check out Mike Ryan's SeaRoader www.searoader.com as he's built loads of amphibs including the TopGear boys' amphibious vehicles.

Good luck though and keep us (well me) posted, I love amphibs.

[kach22i]

Originally Posted by alexlebrit

If you haven't found it already, have a look at http://www.amphibiousvehicle.net/ There's hundreds of designs there.

I'm having a difficult time understanding how that site is organized. Any tips for browsing it?

Here is another option, at least if getting there by sea in lieu of driving:
http://www.foils.org/miami.htm

[alexlebrit]

It's arranged alphabetically by manufacturer's name, when you get to the fron page, click on "Amphibians" and you'll see letters at the top of the page, click your way though them for the full show. Some of the amphibs on the list have dedicated pages, but you'll see the link beside their entry - the back button will become your friend.

Clicking on "Half Safe" takes you to the story of the first amphibious circumnavigation back in the 50's. "History" gives you the site's history and "Production" gives you a list of commercially available amphibs.

The site owner isn't a native English speaker so there may be the odd phrase or two, but the listing is excellent.

[kach22i]

UPDATE 12/03/2007

.............along the same thoughts (specs) as started by this thread.

Click link to see pictures of model:
http://www.defensereview.com/modules...ticle&sid=1001
Amphibious Combat Craft/Expeditionary (ACC/E), has four (4) wheels, is 20 feet long, and weighs 8,800 lbs. It will carry up to eight (8) personnel at 40 knots (approx. 45 mph) on water and 80 mph (land), respectively.

The second, the also high-speed Amphibious Combat Craft/Riverine (ACC/R), has six (6) wheels, is 35.4 feet long, and weighs 19,276 lbs. It will carry up to twenty (20) personnel at speeds of more than 35 knots (approx. 40 mph) on the water and over 65 mph on land. The ACC/R, just like the ACC/E, can transition from land to water, and vice versa, in approx. 5 seconds.