I'm so glad someone is finally talking about the other APCs. The entire era between half-tracks and the m113 is a very forgotten transition.

@Cold_Warmaster

Ай бұрын

I have a soft spot for the M44. It's more a battle bus than a battle taxi.

@SoloRenegade

Ай бұрын

@@Cold_Warmaster This is the first I ever heard of these types, and I instantly liked the M44 the moment you put it on the screen.

@MFitz12

Ай бұрын

Probably because they were all a bit crap and got dumped on the Belgians in short order.

@josephmontanaro2350

Ай бұрын

This! I love the wacky ancestors of the AAV7

While in the US Marines, l took 4 plunges in LVTP7's, driving off perfectly seaworthy LSTs. The sensation of sinking, then a moment of leveling out, then slowly surfacing, is difficult to describe. In a word, eerie, but that doesn't nearly do justice. Amphibious applies to these APCs, but they did get careful maintenance .

@Cold_Warmaster

Ай бұрын

When hitting the water, what was the impact like? Where you harnessed in or holding on?

@vincentmueller3717

Ай бұрын

@@Cold_Warmaster Therewas no impact per se, the tracks were in a partially flooded well- deck, and the track accelerator was floored, so when you left the ship, the front of the track just tipped down a little, nothing like 45°, and then you settled. We weren't strapped in. If there was an "incident ", SOP was tolet pressure equalize, then the crew would pop the top hatches, and in theory egress. I never asked at what depth the pressure equalized. Being strapped in would complicate the process.

@gunner678

Ай бұрын

@@vincentmueller3717 fascinating

@petercabanillas244

Ай бұрын

YAT-YAS!! SEMPER FI!!!

@petercabanillas244

Ай бұрын

@@Cold_Warmasterwe didn’t use the seatbelts as they didn’t necessarily disconnect when they needed too. The sensation while driving off LST,LPD,LSD,LHA,LHD was more or less gentle for crew, cause we new what was going on. Embarked troops not so much, they can’t see can’t here, for them it can be a bite violent. Don’t help that the overhead hatch’s tend too leak. Not saying crew made gasket leak on purpose but “hey crunchy, get outa my MRE’s and water!” Nothing sucks more than yer coolant tower takes a dump and the grunts drank yer back up water. I enjoyed my time as an 1833 Assault Amphibian Vehicle Operator “Tracker”. We are currently raising funds for an Amtrac Memorial.

Nice presentation. I was a M113 crewman for about 10 years in the Australian Army (Cavalry / Recon), 1st as a Driver & later a Crew Commander. Loved my time in the Buckets (our nickname for the 113's).

@gunner678

Ай бұрын

Good vehicle, been in the command variant but only stationary. Ever been in the British FV432? Our version of the armoured battle box. Still in service like the M113.

@chopper7352

Ай бұрын

@@gunner678 hi. I've driven several variants of the 113, namely the Armoured Command Vehicle (M577) & Tracked Load Carrier (TLC... M548). Actually spent a lot of time in both on exercises. Driven both the Standard M113A1 & M548 in Amphibious operations. The M548 needed lots of silicon sealant & industrial tape to make it semi-waterproof... enough to give the bilge pumps a chance of keeping up. I've never been in or driven a FV432, but I know of them from my being a subscriber to several British AFV Restoration channels (Mr Hewes, Armourgeddon, etc). From what I've heard & seen, the 113 is a better all round vehicle in its design & operation. Was certainly operated by many more countries. I know the Aussie Army did a long series of tests comparing 2 M113's v's 2 FV432's in the early 60's, & the M113 came out the winner & that started the M113's long service in the RAAC that is still going to this day (now using heavily upgraded versions since about 2008). Cheers

@gunner678

Ай бұрын

@@chopper7352 the M113 is definitely more versatile, but the 432 is better protected, not that that makes much difference these days. The M113 clearly is more popular. I noticed that the Swedes are giving Ukraine their old armoured boxes, about 300 I think.

Lt. Sparky and his flying Gavin's!!! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤦‍♂🤦‍♂

One reason the US halftracks were so much cheaper than the fulltracks is that they were fundamentally 4x4 trucks with a stretched chassis and with the rear wheel replaced with a drive sprocket. This allowed the design team to leave out the complicated fulltrack transmission and steering/brake system. Also, the US halftracks did not actually have tracks but instead rolled on (effectively) an oversized rubber band. By contrast, the german halftracks were actually designed more or less as tracked vehicles and overcomplicated to boot.

@pyrrhus6264

Ай бұрын

There’s very few German vehicles that weren’t overcomplicated. I don’t think their half tracks had the problem of near spontaneously combusting transmissions, or tracks that were impossible to repair in the field

@echomande4395

Ай бұрын

@@pyrrhus6264 The halftracks' major problem in terms of overcomplication is that, except IIRC the Maultier and similar ad-hoc creations, they had a progressive steering that shifted from initially steering only the wheels to applying track brakes in sharper turns. US halftracks did not have this because they were mechanically 4x4 offroad trucks.

@Comm0ut

Ай бұрын

Band tracks certainly are "tracks" by technical definition and highly successful at it. Otherwise your post is techncially correct and the reason half-tracks (even complex ones) were built in the first place. Another is long narrow tracks are easy to throw so the wheels up front and the gap behind them averted having to build much more expensive "proportionally wide and robust" full tracks.

@s.marcus3669

Ай бұрын

Very well put, Echo.

There was a Dukes of Hazzard episode that featured a BM59 APC that everyone thought was the box, which of course it was, just a different box.

@rdallas81

Ай бұрын

That's what she said

AeroGavin mentioned, rejoice everyone!

@seanmurphy7011

Ай бұрын

lol

@uniformmike05

Ай бұрын

LOL! No such thing as a Gavin, buddy.

@marclaplante5679

Ай бұрын

@@uniformmike05tell that to Mike Sparks!

@blackwoodsecurity531

Ай бұрын

@@uniformmike05that’s the joke. Well the joke is mike sparks, but “the Gavin” is the setup lol

@uniformmike05

Ай бұрын

@@blackwoodsecurity531 LOL! I didn’t get that joke. Yeah, Sparky is a joke.

When I was a kid, we went to an outdoor military vehicle display that had an M113 with open doors. It was the first - and so far, only - armored vehicle I got to sit inside of.

Thanks for bringing this history to light. I had studied the various experiments and expedients. One thing left out of the road between M3 and M5 armored half-track personnel carriers and the M113 armored personnel carrier was atomic warfare. The transition vehicles and the M113 were designed to move across a nuclear battlefield. The M113 was also intended to be air transportable--that was one thing that killed the M75.

Good ol 113. I was a driver and later vehicle commander of one before they gave us FISTV's (M981). Loved the M113. Easy to work on, reasonably fast and could go anywhere. I got to swim one a few times and it worked fine. very mobile and dependable. Easy to maintain as well. The M981 was slow and underpowered. It was supposed to have the A3 engine but budget cuts forced it to get the A2 engine which struggled with the extra weight. I used the M981 during Desert Storm. It was a great vehicle in a defensive position like an OP but a turd on the move. When we first got them I asked if I could get my M113 A2 back.

Great video! Can't say I'll be sad to see the M113 go... Rolled around in an M113A2 at Ft. Riley, and then the National Training Center in an A3. Neither were good rides, couldn't keep up with the Abrams or Bradley's we were supposed to support, so we would roll up close to our OP's independently to dismount and walk the rest of the way hours before the supposed battles. Was glad that when I went to war, it was in a Stryker! However, there is a certain affection one must have for such a versatile and long lived machine.

@Comm0ut

Ай бұрын

While other countries greatly upgraded their M113s the US policy is strange. The size and format are outstanding but procurement alway neglected M113 upgrades. M113 can easily be armored to Bradley levels and any AFV can be vee-hulled to increase mine resistance. Modern suspensions don't require torsion bars making it vastly easier to armor vehicle floors. The alloy gearbox on many M113s is delicate though the drivetrain is basic old time truck parts (Detroit two stroke diesel, Hydramatic trans). Modern users replaced that 1950s stuff with far superior power packs. The US bought heaps of M113 yet never had the sense to make them better which is absurdly easy. Turkey for example guts old hulls and massively upgrades everything giving them a light fast agile track. The US takes so long to develop new vehicles they're almost never fielded while at the same time simple upgrades to M113 were ignored. At least Abrams and Bradley got some love. BTW one M113 got battery power decades ago as a BEV test bed. They packed it full of Optima batteries and it worked well but of course battery tech is barely sufficient for AFV today. They also got the bright idea to stick two 460 Ford big blocks in one which ran like the proverbial waped ape. Ancient times had very different R&D. tanks-encyclopedia.com/category/cold-war-us-m113-prototypes/

I'd love to see a video of a similar vein talking about how APC and IFVs evolved across NATO and the Soviet Union. Germany, France, the UK, Soviets, everyone had their own way of going about designing these vehicles with different functionalities in mind, and things changed. For example, the shift from APCs such as the M113 or British FV403 to the Bradley and Warrior, or the Soviets distinguished roles between the BTR and BMP/D series. Of course, APCs and IFVs don't necessarily go hand in hand doctrinally, but it still represents an interesting shift in personnel protection, transport and support.

Would love a video like this on the HMMWV. Arguably more iconic than the M113, the time between Jeep and HMMVW I know is the Cadillac Gage and that's it.

In fact the M75 APC was based on the M41 Walker Buldog tank chassis, and not on the M24 Chaffee chassis. Maybe not very important but that's the way it is.

Like the original commentator I enjoy obscure military systems

This is such a cool topic I had no idea I would be this interested in. Great video, all of the info was very easy to digest.

Great video man!

Interesting. Thank You. I've seen M-75s & M-59s in museums & always wondered about their history. My brother thought highly of the M-113. My only experience in that area is, I had a toy halftrack when I was a kid & have wanted one ever since. Thanks again

Bob Brody has both a halftrack and an M59 he bought that served with the Mexican Army, he also had a M114 and a V100 as he ran a fairly casual vehicle museum in Rochester NY back in the 80's. Halftrack would shake the fillings out of your teeth it vibrated so bad, it also had the same 300 cu in engine that was used in the M59. M59 had two 300 cu in engines that were used in the 2.5 ton truck with two 4 speed GM auto transmissions, they were mounted on on each side and each drove 1 track, it was a lot of fun to take through the parades. He paid $14,000 for the M59 and had to rebuild 1 transmission.

You missed a point, the M113 had a gasoline engine, but within a year of its introduction it was switched to an diseal engine and called the M113A1. All of the older APCs, had gasoline engines including the WWII Half tracks.

Always been interested in the ones just before the m113, still square and slightly larger and stranger.

Great video, interesting topic

Great work

The only reason I knew the M75 existed before this is because there is one on display in Hawaii at Schofield barracks.

So before the box, other boxes.

I think the lower profile of the M59 vs M75 comes down to the MG cupola, so the vehicle is shorter at the roof line, but taller because the MG turret sticks up.

@Cold_Warmaster

Ай бұрын

I suspect the same.

The LVT ( landing vehicle tracked) used in the Pacific campaigns looks like a likely ancestor

Good info man

I love how the, hmmmm, "air mobile" version had air to air missiles on it. 😅

Not hard to maintain. Was one hell of a Billy goat. Not just for moving troops but a good off road option for just getting stuff from a to b. Was never meant to be a front line combat vehicle.

There was an episode of “The Dukes of Hazard “ that featured a M59. I thought it was so cool as a kid.

If one would like to see a M39, the panzer museum in munster has one on display

A nice video, just subscribed because I like it very much. Coming from a country that used an alternative version to the M113 with the YPR-765's I've always been fascinated by the APC's that weren't straight M113's or M113 conversions. Can we expect a "LVTP's before the LVTP7" video? Because there's some really nice ones in that line too.

@Cold_Warmaster

Ай бұрын

Netherlands or Belgium? Seeing several comments about the LVTs, I may have to do a video on them.

@exharkhun5605

Ай бұрын

@@Cold_Warmaster Netherlands. Despite asking for the video myself I can see a video about the LVT's may turn out to be a bit more a task than a fun video about a small line of obscure, cute, not very successful nor very active little battle boxes. 😀 The LVT's were extremely active, and a lot more essential in some of the tasks they did.

There were also the 'Kangaroos' in WWII, where the Brits and Canadians pulled turrets off of Ram (Canadian 'Sherman-like' tanks) for use as open topped--but far more heavily armored--APCs.

My track in Germany was an M577, command track..S-2 4/35 Armor, Nov 72 - Jul 74

Ah, good old Mike Sparks shoutout at the end

Always wondered about this. When was the interchangeable powerpack introduced? Thanks!

I always thought it was so, so wrong that the M113 did not have a "proper nickname". Could have called it the Westmoreland? :) Great video, thanks for postin!

12:34 keep in mind the air to air missiles meaning it’s supposed to shoot down enemy aircraft

New video! Yippie!

> before the box > more boxes Also alluminium armour is more vulnerable to nuclear weapon (it intensifies its effects, makig soldiers within die rapidly due to gamma-rays exposure)

M113 Variants video please!

There were a couple of M59s sitting in a salvage yard we called Dirty Neck Pete's for decades here in North Pole, Alaska. Not sure what unit they used to belong to but I know there used to be a tank battalion stationed at Fort Wainwright many moons ago, maybe there was a mechanized unit there also?

The M113 was prototyped in steel and aluminum. The army went with aluminum, not because of weight. The construction with aluminum was stiffer than steel and required fewer stiffeners than steel, making it easier to mass produce. This book has a good history of the American APCs; "Bradley: A History of American Fighting and Support Vehicles " by R P Hunnicutt

The Soviets really appreciated the M15 when they got one hundred late in the war. Germans used the vehicle mounted 20mm instead of the .50cal. The .50cal had been developed by the Germans and used as an anti-tank round in the First World War. They found the 20mm to be better.

@cheekibreeki4638

Ай бұрын

15MM also saw some use.

The Algorithm blessed you! Subscribed 😂

@8:12 Notice the rifles that are being carried by the soldiers around the front of the machine.

Bless this video KZread

The M3 Scout Car was what the M2/M3 series of Half-Tracks were developed from, i.e. an M3 Scout Car was converted to Half-Track.

Beats Walking. It's amazing how many vehicles disappeared from the Army's Inventory in less 5yrs. Gamma Goats, Goers, Mules and of the odd ton vehicles like the 5 qtrs. The 113 could swim very well if properly prepped. The Bradley had to stay in the shallow end of the pool.

Ngl the M44 looks badass

I have never understood why, instead of sticking a 75mm cannon on an M-3, they just never produced an up armored (sides, driver compartment and engine) and stuck a roof and a rear door on it. Think it would have been better (and lower cost) than the M-113, but they never even tried. fter decades out of uniform, when I returned to a Uniform after 911 I was both shocked and horrified to see some 113s sitting in the motor pool. Somehow I had just assumed the old cooked meat in a can box had been replaced with something better. Then again, similar thoughts looking at Russian BMPs and T55/62s on the ground in Ukraine.

Chgo auto show 1967. Pants full of nickels we get to the show. First stop as a 10 yr old the US Army expo. Climbing on the M113 they let u do that then. Surprised it was so high off the ground and roomy on the inside. My main fear was finger smashing via that rear door and the hatches

What before the box? More boxs!

I thought M75 was a M41 derivative, not M24

We had a few ACAV variants in Iraq. But mostly there was not much armor on top.

According to Army Doctrine of the early 1970s the M113A1 was could be heavy dropped or LAPES. There was one Bde of 8th Infantry Mech consisting of 1 & 2nd Bns 509th Inf Airborne who had this capability. Maybe there's an Old-time Rigger who can chime in for better details.

Carrying to many Dismounts ensures maximum losses in case of a hit.

The Glorious Holy Box Simple, Efficient, Glorious - Supermutant, Fallout 1 Incredible History Good Work Great Man Alotta Misinformation Pacifically Small Arms and Armor Need’s more Confidence Less stopping to discuss Audience Fears and Political Funn Moments Amazing Lessons Wonderful Topic Thank You

Only the .50” cal. M2 HMG has served longer (in large numbers no doubt the M1911A1 is in specialist lockers) and perhaps some B52 airframes.

I like this thing, it mixes three things that cats like: an immeasurable amount of anger, Boxes, and Being good swimers but avoiding water whenever possible. And i like cats and M 113s, the first armored vehicle in wich I step as a Child was an old spanish M 113, and that also helps. BTW you would talk about other less known apcs? Such as the US marines weird LVTP 5? I like that Boeh because it looks straight from a weird scify thing such as warhammer or fallout.. Oh and u have a question: I understand that by role in ww2 the M3 halftracks where considered as a sort of Apc by today standards but my question is: The Germans converted or tried to convert the hetzer and panther to apcs same as some countries the M4 sherman hull to apcs.... ok its a bit exaggerated as apc.... but the question is: then the LVT used by the marines in ww2 its not an apc? ITS GIGANTIC I know... But it has amphibious capability, can transport angry guys inside, weight less than a tank... What's the reason that didn't make it here on the video? :O

@Cold_Warmaster

Ай бұрын

Different development path, so not related to the M113's development. I probably will talk about marine vehicles at some point, because they are cool and weird designs.

@bocktordaytona5656

Ай бұрын

​@@Cold_Warmaster Nice! And also some marine tanks are curious such as the T 32 it's curious to me the fact that the army wanted to develop more "curvy designs" taking as basis the M 24 chafee for example the Beautiful walker Bulldog was born.... but for some reason the marines wanted the T 32 as a sort of: Heavy tank, and well, that's curious for me.

Do LVTP-5 and it's variants.

No longer viable front line against major powers, but for all Army's it's still an extremely useful vehicle.

I'm actually really sad that the M44 wasn't selected. TBH I think it has even more utility potential.

could you make a video about tracks on vehicles like the soviet/russian T-series.

@Cold_Warmaster

Ай бұрын

Do you mean the development of tracks for military vehicles or different types like wet/dry or soft/hard tracks?

@amcyt3003

Ай бұрын

Yes that would be nice to see since I have seen in Ukraine a lot of variation of tracks And I haven’t seen somebody going in depth in Russian/soviet track development.

Mike Sparks' AeroGavin flying M113 is a beautiful thing and I'll hear nothing bad said about. Even if it is INSANE, totally impractical in every way and designed by a psychopath.

M44 looks quite modern

Your point about Theorical amphibipous is correct even to today, theres a video from 2022 I think of a Ukranian BMP-1 sinking, not sure what happened there, but one really need to be sure, as those vehicles have really low freebord you need to be very sure of what you doing

6:19 atomic warfare = disperse your assets.

Came from battle order. But I would like to say before rhe box, it was just more boxes tbh

The APC concept was a mistake and this is why. Like their predecessor "Purple Heart Box" M2 halftrack they have enough mobility to COERCE their use in IFV roles out of combat necessity. Combat necessity means you use what you have and if that entails casualties those losses are far less important than executing the mission. APCs were fine for wars which were never fought, the post-nuke battlefields of a then quite likely tac nuke war in Europe. (Atmospheric testing was the equivalent of a small nuclear war fought not far from Las Vegas, check "nuclear tourism" videos.) The US is always late to the party when it comes to defensive measures including armor upgrades despite having the richest armed forces in history so the bad idea of the APC was perpetuated costing lives where it need not have. High mobility is too important not to use and APC provide it with the tradeoff of feeble protection.

Μ2,Μ3,Μ16 Μ59 and M-113 in all variants exceprt the A3 served or still in service in Greek Army .

2:52 - they weren't supposed to fight from within those vehicles in any case.

How did the Australians stretch their m113s and make them bigger?

50mm steel frontal armour seems nice when soneone shots at you with 14.5mm.

The brave little toaster!

Will likely serve for 100 years, or more.

Clicked cuz the Box looked like a 40k land raider

@Cold_Warmaster

Ай бұрын

The imperium's vehicles are basically kitbashes of American APCs, Soviet BMPs, and British WWI tanks.

What about the M114?? What was that for??

@joeturner4666

Ай бұрын

It was an armored Recon/Scout Vehicle. Two or three man crew. 50cal or even 20mm cannon (???) GM/Chevy V8 Gasoline. I saw them in Germany around 1973. Next tour in 1978 they were gone. Poor Mobility and lack of battlefield survivability I was told.

*facepalm* for two decades I thought it was called half truck because of the open top and never bothered to look at the....half truck half wheels.

gj man

Anything is capable of being pushed out of an airplane if u put enough parachutes on it😂!!!!!

And then there is the 577.

12:40 The Gavin can still be a viable aircraft! ;~;

Hate to be a nittpicker . But you forgot the Marine Corps LTVP 5 and LTVP 7 series of vehicles that have been used up until recently as an AFV role.

@petesheppard1709

Ай бұрын

Different ancestry. Amtracs were a completely different concept and lineage, even though the US Army used them as well.

M59 is such a mood, Codename Panzers Cold War made me love the thing

I have seen an M113 that burned to the tracks because the 'armour' caught fire. In winter. Because an American Captain put his boots under the heater. Go with God, 49er. Thank you for your service.

They sure would make a good off road party vehicle ? Just saying ✌️

I drove a M113 in the US Army. We actually swam a M113. it was in a very calm pond. I would not trust it outside of glass smooth water. The freeboard was measured in inches.

2:21 1000 procent that the GMC picture is off a re enactment, no way is that pork belly historacly accurate

-talks about obscure vehicles -calls attention to the issue of amphibious capabilities -doesn't needlessly involve binary politics -correctly pronounces BMD -good sound quality but no overly fancy editing or effects Cool! One more youtuber to put in the scarce "must watch" category

@Cold_Warmaster

Ай бұрын

Where possible I try and pronounce things as their designers/users do, but I am not multilingual, so pronunciation may be inconsistent, and I don't always remember.

Fort Bliss PIVADS spotted 12:57

And don't forget that US airlift vehicles are all transported empty, the Russians drop their stuff out of a plane with the crew inside! Lol

@scarecrow559fresno

Ай бұрын

wow

do horses with armor count ...they had those right lol

8:54 thing i dont get right is ww2 is over right you have shermans and hellcats and lees and the like coming out your ears you would think the thing you would do it convert them hellcat will do what 70kph on road ? even if you weigh it down with armour you could probably get 50 kph out of it and its not like you need to buy new ..

I think these things look a little like old toasters so I always call them ‘Battle Toasters’

50,000 produced is a lot. But to give an idea of how far vehicle manufacturing would progress, consider the 1980 Chevrolet Citation. About 100,000 were produced per shift in one factory. GM produced about 900,000 x-body vehicles in 1980, in 3 plants, running 3 shifts each.

In my time of service in the Army back in the days of Ronaldus Maximus, I rode in some pretty crappy vehicles. But I can say with a sigh of relief that I never rode in an M113. That thing was a useless little Spam can.

Let's not forget the M113s service in the Arab Israeli wars.

The content of your video is very good but your tone of voice feels very condescending and sarcastic. It doesn’t come off as witty, it just feels like I’m being talked to by someone who is unenthusiastic. If you work on your tone of voice, your videos will probably do even better