Remote Mining System M128 GEMSS (USA)

23
Mine-explosive barriers are an essential element of defense, and their organization requires the use of special equipment. Placement of mines on the ground can be carried out by various samples using different methods of work. An interesting way to install mines was implemented in the American mining system project M128 GEMSS. This product could in the shortest time create large fields using several types of anti-tank or anti-personnel mines.

The new principle


By the beginning of the seventies of the last century, the US Army was equipped with several systems for quickly mining the area with several types of explosive devices. Used special artillery shells, cluster aviation bombs and ground devices. These products, in general, met current requirements, but did not always suit the troops. In this regard, in the early seventies began the development of a new land mining system with the required characteristics and capabilities.



Remote Mining System M128 GEMSS (USA)
M548 transporter with M128 installation. Photo Tankograd.com


The development of the new model was carried out with the participation of specialists of the engineering troops and was completed in the middle of the decade. In 1975, the new model was adopted under the designation M128 GEMSS (Ground Emplaced Mine Scattering System - "Ground Mine Scattering System"). Soon the army received the required number of new systems and deployed them in areas of alleged conflict. New technology first sent to Europe.

In developing a promising mining system, the unusual principle of scattering mines throughout the territory was used. Instead of pyrotechnic means, it was necessary to use a centrifugal mechanism with an electric drive. The principle of operation of such a facility was to disperse the mine with the help of a rotor and then send it to the field.

The GEMSS system was not particularly complex design. It was proposed to build a towed system on the basis of a wheeled trailer carrying several basic devices. Such a product could be towed by any available equipment and on the move to carry out mining areas. At the same time it was possible to change the main parameters of the barrier. In particular, the density of mining on the front directly depended on the speed of the tractor.

Design


The M128 product was built on the basis of the standard biaxial trailer M794, widely used in the US Army. This trailer was made in the form of a frame with a deck, to which a biaxial undercarriage joined from below. The latter was a cart with spring suspension. A towing device was attached to the trailer frame in front. To stabilize the platform in the parking lot or when performing some operations on the corners of the trailer there were jacks.


GEMSS system, right side view. Photo Tankograd.com


In front of the trailer placed launcher, providing the release of min. Her "nozzle" was sent back in the direction of travel: the mining system was throwing explosive devices behind her. Behind the launching device there was a large cylindrical housing with a pair of magazines for the transportation of mines and the means to feed them to the launcher. On the back of the trailer, there was a casing with its own power unit, which was responsible for the operation of all other devices. The main body of the installation was made of armor steel of small thickness and provided protection against bullets and fragments.

The launcher of the M128 system had a horseshoe casing with stiffeners, inside which was placed a rotor with its own electric drive. On the bottom, on the back of the casing, was provided a nozzle for feeding mines from the store, and above it, a nozzle for ejecting mines. The installation was placed on a special support with a certain inclination to the right (relative to the direction of movement). The support was equipped with its own drive, with which it had to constantly rotate the launcher around a vertical axis.

For the storage and transportation of mines used a pair of drum shops, placed in a transverse cylindrical body. Shops were placed on the sides of such a hull, in the center - their drives and the system for supplying mines to the launcher. Each store contained 400 min (total ammunition - 800 min). Mines were placed inside a rotating impeller feeder and successively entered the conveyor for feeding to the launcher.


The scheme of anti-tank mines family FASCAM. Figure Fas.org


All the basic mechanisms of the M128 GEMSS mining system were electrically driven. The energy for electric motors was generated by a low-power diesel generator located in the stern of the trailer. Also in the system there was a remote control with which the calculation could control its work.

In terms of overall dimensions, the M128 mining system matched the base trailer. The total height, taking into account all the special equipment, is slightly more than 2,5 m. Own weight of the product is 4773 kg. Gross weight with ammunition from 800 min - more than 6350 kg. The trailer was allowed to tow any available equipment with the required characteristics. There were no towing speed limits on the highway. Speed ​​on rough terrain depended on a number of factors.

Mines FASCAM


The M128 system was supposed to install several types of mines from the FASCAM line (Family Of Scatterable Mines). Depending on the task, the military engineers had to scatter M74 anti-personnel fragmentation mines, M75 cumulative anti-tank or practical M79 anti-tank mines on the ground. All these products had a unified cylindrical body with a diameter of 119 mm and a height of 66 mm.


M128 while running. At the top of the frame visible mines flying away. A shot from the newsreel


M74 anti-personnel mine weighed 1,4 kg and carried 410 g of explosive. The M75 anti-tank had a charge in 585 g. Practical ammunition weighed 1,6 kg and could simulate the ballistic parameters of combat. Instead of charge, he carried a weight simulator.

Operating principle


The principle of the GEMSS system was quite simple. Installation of remote mining with the help of a tractor should be carried along the front. The speed of movement was determined in accordance with the required density of mining. Slower speed provided a reduced distance between mines, while its growth contributed to a decrease in density. Using the control panel, the operator could change other parameters of the future minefield.

Suppliers of two drum shops had to constantly rotate and bring mines to a special conveyor. He handed ammunition to the launcher. Inside the latter there was a rotating rotor with its own drive. Under the action of the rotor mine was supposed to pass along the guide wall of the installation. High rotor speed created centrifugal force. Then the mine got to the top branch pipe and under the influence of this force flew out.

The energy of the rotor was enough to accelerate the ejection of a mine over a distance of 50-70 m, depending on its type and mass. The rate of fire of such a system could be set by the operator; Its maximum value is 4 mines per second.


View from a different angle. You can consider a flying mine. A shot from the newsreel


During operation, the launcher could be locked in one position or take turns in different directions. Due to this, mining of a strip of arbitrary width was ensured. In the first case, the mines were scattered in a strip with a width of no more than a few meters. With the maximum deviation of the launcher, the mine flew away to the 30-50 m from the line of motion.

Using two full-time magazines with 800 mines and observing the optimal speed, the M128 installation could organize a barrier with the dimensions 1000х60 m in one pass. By changing the rotor speed or trailer speed, the minefield parameters could be affected. In this case, excessive speed or reduced rate of fire could damage the installation density of min.

In service


The FASCAM family of mines was put into service in 1975. Soon, the M128 GEMSS remote mining installation was also adopted. Over the next few years, dozens of such products were manufactured in the interests of the US engineering forces. New equipment was distributed between sapper battalions tank and motorized rifle divisions. This unit was supposed to have 8 units.

The first new engineering systems received compounds deployed in Europe. According to known data, American connections at European bases received and deployed 69 installations GEMSS. A similar number of similar devices remained in the United States. Engineering equipment was regularly used as part of combat training. The M128 calculations went into the field of training battles and carried out conditional mining of the area using inert M79 mines. During service, the M128 systems never had to participate in a real operation and organize mine blast barriers in the enemy's way.


The use of the M128 system by the engineer unit. Outline of FM 20-32 field regulations


The active operation of GEMSS systems continued until the early nineties, when it was decided to replace them with other samples. The developed mining tools lost M128 in terms of ammunition size and main characteristics, but were lighter and more compact. From 1991, new remote mining equipment compatible with mines of the FASCAM family began to come into service with US engineering units. The emergence of these products has launched a gradual write-off of obsolete GEMSS.

The process of decommissioning and decommissioning of engineering systems lasted for several years and ended in 1995. According to different sources, part of the M128 GEMSS products was saved and sent to storage. Other mining systems were disposed of as unnecessary.

Advantages and disadvantages


The M128 Ground Emplaced Mine Scattering System, a towed remote mining system, was an interesting example of engineering technology capable of quickly and efficiently organizing mine-explosive obstacles. The installation was distinguished by a rather simple design, but at the same time it carried a large stock of mines, could use ammunition of various types and disperse them over a large area. All these factors led to the fact that at one time M128 was adopted and received a certain distribution.

However, the product GEMSS was not without flaws. Its main problem could be considered the size and weight, imposing certain restrictions on operation. Thus, the installation needed a tractor capable of towing a trailer weighing more than 6 tons, including over rough terrain. The presence of a large and heavy trailer to some extent worsened the mobility of the demining battalion or company. When mining on the way of the enemy, the trailer could attract attention and become an easy target.



Known about some of the difficulties associated with the use of centrifugal launchers and drum magazines. The composition of these devices was attended by a significant number of moving parts, which led to the risk of damage to mines at different stages of the mechanism. In addition, there were problems with the reliability of stores.

The mines used in the FASCAM range to some extent complicated the operation of the installation. Due to the characteristic working procedure, the M128 system could not be used in some locations. Mines could not be thrown on hard ground or other surfaces that could damage them when dropped. The presence of vegetation, snow cover or other interference interfered with the normal installation, and could also lead to premature self-destruction of ammunition.

The remote mining system M128 GEMSS was one of the most interesting examples of US engineering technology. It implemented unusual ways of working with ammunition, which provided high performance. However, obtaining the desired capabilities was associated with a number of difficulties and problems. In this regard, M128 has given way to newer mining systems that use other operating principles.
23 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -4
    20 May 2019 12: 54
    It seems to me that in the 40s an automatic mortar was developed by Filippov and one of the prototypes allowed throwing mines from a gasoline drive. Maybe I'm wrong?
    The principle was the same ...
    1. +1
      20 May 2019 16: 22
      Quote: Medvezhya lapa nad Ki
      and one of the prototypes allowed to throw mines from a gasoline drive.

      I'm not sure if there were mines to throw around then. The installation was "steered" by drill crew.
      There were, however, also "mine spreaders" based on onboard vehicles, but this is a slightly different topic.
  2. 0
    20 May 2019 13: 07
    Today there is an unambiguous transition from massive passive mines to high-tech active mines, which at times increases efficiency and reduces the cost in the quantities of mines exhibited .... The probable enemy has enough samples, it is necessary to familiarize himself with them ...
    1. +4
      20 May 2019 14: 16
      That's how it is, only you can't get enough of them. In addition, they are expensive, and sometimes have insufficient resistance to explosive demining, require more time for installation, etc. And with "simple" mines everything is easier (especially if you don't forget about installing booby traps in proportion to the usual ones) - he quickly mined (scattered) a dangerous direction or passages in an already installed minefield, or even a site suitable for the landing zone. And cheap and cheerful.
      1. -1
        20 May 2019 14: 24
        Blue Fox ... You are a little off topic. Just they need less than ORDER ... Such modern high-tech mines are scattered with a helicopter, MLRS and other things, and they themselves are put on alert. React to many fields. they work with the shooting of the warhead at the desired site, etc. ... Of course, their secrecy has been increased, but for what the SVR and GRU ... Your statements are more like diso, it’s clear where ...
        1. +4
          20 May 2019 14: 50
          Well, of course, I’m not in the topic, like Russian manufacturers of remote mining equipment that for some reason do not stop upgrading UZMy, VSMy and containers for MLRS. wassat Massiveness is sometimes more important than "high technology", as you call it. And above all, the means of remote mining are designed just for the installation of those "passive" mines according to your own formulation. When you need to quickly install a barrier and on the maximum area.
    2. +2
      20 May 2019 16: 08
      Quote: Vladimir 5
      Today an unambiguous transition from massive passive mines to high-tech active mines

      In most cases, this is pointless.
      Minefields are currently needed to limit the mobility of the enemy, nothing more. Moreover, time limits. Moreover, they are practically not used on their own.
      For example, a regiment / brigade’s mobile barrage squad usually places an MP that is hiding behind an anti-tank reserve or a tank / motorized rifle unit.
      Artillery makes remote mining in order to slow down enemy units in order to destroy them with high-explosive fragmentation or cluster munitions. Well and so on.
      Therefore, a lot, quickly and cheaply. Because no one will remove such minefields, they must self-destruct
      Well, all these "high-tech active" are purely a niche option
      1. -3
        20 May 2019 16: 30
        Lopatov ... Greetings from the SA 70 tykh ... You will set passive hundreds of mines, and later the enemy’s armored vehicles will immediately trawl them away from the aisle or blow it up. The remaining hundreds will rust. An active mine will not even come close with a trawl, as it will receive a side-shot with detonation and then a funeral march ... And it’s enough on the field a couple of dozen small and invisible containers with 3-6 shot mines .... You again what you don’t understand, frozen education does not allow ?!
        1. +2
          20 May 2019 16: 41
          Quote: Vladimir 5
          and later the enemy’s armored vehicles immediately trawls

          Will they put a trawl on each of their cars? Or try to get through a minefield in company columns under fire from ATGMs?

          Remember! There are no spherical horses in a vacuum. There are no fire weapons or weapon systems operating completely separately. So are mining systems and minefields.

          For example, a column of a motorized infantry battalion rides. He was spotted, with the help of MLRS, they placed a covering minefield from anti-personnel and anti-tank mines. While they cautiously kick them out from under the wheels, while the trawl is lowered in the first car (the speed is very slow with the trawl in the fighting position) .... During this time, the motorized infantry battalion, standing still, will be able to multiply ten times by zero.

          Quote: Vladimir 5
          And enough on the field a couple of dozen small and invisible containers with 3-6 mineshells being fired ...

          It remains to negotiate with the enemy so that he advances precisely to this place 8))))))
          1. -3
            20 May 2019 16: 58
            Shovels. What can I say, one with Napoleonic weapons and tactics crawls into battle with the troops at the PMV level ... (comparatively) ... Excuse me, your layouts are only perceived as a model for jokes ...
            1. +2
              20 May 2019 17: 17
              Quote: Vladimir 5
              one with Napoleonic weapons and tactics crawls into battle with the troops at the PMV level ... (comparatively) ... Excuse me, your layouts are only perceived as a model for jokes ...

              You have it from ignorance.
              In fact, the Americans have such an interesting concept as an "air-ground operation". CURRENT (I will clarify, this means that this is not "Napoleonic tactics" laughing )
              And now it provides for active mining at ranges of up to 250 km within the framework of the "fight against the second echelons". from the line of contact. And there are appropriate means for this. Starting from the aviation "Gator" (those same 250 km) and ending with the platoon-company level systems of the MOPMS type (remote mining in the immediate vicinity of the units)
              And it all works according to the principle I mentioned "many-quickly-cheap"

              These are the things, dear ... The materiel. For example, in 2003 the Americans used Vulcano very actively.
              And this is what they trained last fall:
        2. 0
          20 May 2019 18: 11
          Quote: Vladimir 5
          You will set passive mines in hundreds, and later the enemy’s armored vehicles will immediately trawl them away from the passage or undermine them, the remaining hundreds will rust.

          The trawl does not give one hundred percent guarantee even when making a passage in the barrage of "passive mines" (oh, you really like to use the terminology from the "translation" of zabugorschina - "passive" mines, "active" mines :) with a conventional fuse of variable magnitude (used still from the time of, if not Napoleon, then at least the 40-50s of the last century). And, having lost one or two units of equipment on mines, the enemy is unlikely to go further, given the potential danger and having reconnoitered the boundaries of a large-scale minefield (having lost a couple more sappers, for example, on POM-2 installed remotely, mixed with anti-tank vehicles from one vehicle from different cassettes in one pass, inconspicuous and, in principle, not particularly neutralized), even without other opposition. And if the passage here and now is categorically necessary, then the whole area will be plowed up with shells and bombs, demining installations and burned out with napalm. But .. in any case, the minefield will fulfill its main task and without the highly classified mines about which for some reason only the SVR and the GRU know - it will delay the enemy or force him to choose another route or direction of attack, which means he will make him lose the initiative. wink
          And greetings to you from the 21st century - ordinary mines and the same ones, but equipped with sophisticated sensors, targets and detonators are most effective when used together, from the first mass, from the second the difficulty of counteracting them, because the enemy does not know where is a simple mine with a pressure fuse, and where is a mine-trap or fuse with a multiplicity, and even more so with a seismic sensor configured to oscillate the soil under a certain type of target.
          1. -3
            20 May 2019 18: 38
            Blue Foch. Remark: You didn’t understand the essence - active mines that were self-propelled to the target, mainly through the air like ATGM with homing in different fields (thermal, magnetic, acoustic, vibration ...). Your stories, especially with different fuses, are also from the past 20th century. The level of awareness of the latest weapons on the VO is completely disastrous .......
            1. +2
              20 May 2019 18: 56
              Yes, let’s immediately blow the planets of death with the rays of the Death Star! :))
              Although, apparently in your universe, even about the means of electronic warfare with interference generators and others are not in the know. But the intergalactic government with your methods of warfare will definitely remain without spacesuits :)
              Before the heap, you’ve completely removed from the topic of the article about the installation of remote mining, into which the “PTURS” must be thrust (shh! GRU and SVR know how!).
              1. 0
                21 May 2019 11: 07
                Blue ... Why this foolishness, as an indicator, with whom is it dealing? Yes, the beads went in vain, in response to something unintelligible ...
                1. +1
                  21 May 2019 11: 22
                  Quote: Vladimir 5
                  Blue ... Why this foolishness, as an indicator, with whom is it dealing?

                  Exactly. In principle, you should even be grateful for this and for the educational program if you could realize it, given that in most cases you would just be sent with your pearls on a long walking trip without wasting time trying to explain, especially after your disrespect, move to the opinion of other opponents.
                  And so I, that colleague Lopatov, are very correct to you!
                  A soldier will not offend a child! (C) soldier
            2. +2
              20 May 2019 18: 58
              Quote: Vladimir 5
              also from the last 20 century.



              Will someone explain to them that the 21st century has already come?

  3. 0
    20 May 2019 17: 16
    Quote: Vladimir 5
    That active mine will not even come close with a trawl

    And the "Serpent Gorynych" UR-77 then for what?
    1. -3
      20 May 2019 17: 32
      Gurzuf ... UR-77 for passages, and active mines (10 meters from the axis will no longer be disabled) are further operational with all the consequences. Old stockpiles of mines and old tactics (20 centuries) - they are trying to get rid of them faster ... Everything is new secretly, especially the latest mine weapons with intellectual rudiments ...
      1. +2
        20 May 2019 18: 09
        Quote: Vladimir 5
        and active mines (10 meters from the axis will no longer be disabled) are further operational with all the consequences.

        Under the table....
        Dear, do you even understand what is happening 10 meters from the place of detonation of a semitone of RDX with aluminum powder?
        1. -2
          20 May 2019 18: 18
          Shovels. Firstly, a cord of 70 mm and a length of 90 meters, you don’t get confused ... and nothing special, the passage is made 6-7 meters wide, then the mines do not fire ... Especially with the increased explosion resistance of the newest ... You're back in your fantasies ...
          1. +3
            20 May 2019 18: 27
            Quote: Vladimir 5
            the passage is made 6-7 meters wide, then the mines do not fire ..

            8))))
            No, 6-7 meters is a strip of incapacitation of 100% of the mines in the ground.

            Your "active mines" will cover at a much greater distance
  4. 0
    20 May 2019 18: 41
    In my jacket-like opinion, barriers based on grandfather's mines are also needed. As well as the technique for setting and overcoming them. First, in the event of a large-scale conflict, stocks of modern engineering ammunition will quickly be zeroed out, and old-fashioned mines are easier to manufacture. Secondly, because the task of the obstacle is not to stop the enemy, but to slow down his pace, perhaps to force him to somehow tactically substitute himself. The Americans even have "guiding" minefields. And in this regard, you need not "effectively", but "a lot". Busurman engineers' technique is also not infinite, as well as personnel. Some combined arms divisions, you see, will not be enough.