Why Halftracks? Why limited to WW2 only? (Featuring Tank Fest 2018)
Vložit
- čas přidán 5. 07. 2018
- Disclaimer: I was invited to Tank Fest by the Tank Museum.
Why were Half-Tracks used in the first place? Why not trucks, fully-tracked vehicles or something else? Also, why after the Second World War did the Half-Track disappear? Why were there no new types produced by major powers?
Want to learn more about Panzergrenadiers and how they used Half-Tracks see this video: • Panzergrenadiere 1944:...
Tank Museum's CZcams Channel: / thetankmuseum
Big thank you to green_goblin_z for sending me 2 books from my amazon wishlist!
»» GET OUR BOOK ««
» Army Regulation Medium Panzer Company 1941 - www.hdv470-7.com/
»» SUPPORT MHV ««
» patreon - / mhv
» paypal donation - www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
» Book Wishlist www.amazon.de/gp/registry/wis...
»» MERCHANDISE - SPOILS OF WAR ««
» shop - www.redbubble.com/people/mhvi...
»» SOCIAL MEDIA ««
» minds.com - www.minds.com/militaryhistory...
» facebook - / milhistoryvisualized
» twitter - / milhivisualized
» twitch - / militaryhistoryvisualized
» RallyPoint - www.rallypoint.com/organizati...
» tumblr - / militaryhistoryvisualized
Military History for Adults is a support channel to Military History Visualized with a focus personal accounts, answering questions that arose on the main channel and showcasing events like visiting museums, using equipment or military hardware.
» SOURCES «
Spielberger, Walter; Doyle, Hilary Lous, Jentz, Thomas L.: Halbkettenfahrzeuge des deutschen Heeres
Spielberger: Halftracked Vehicles of the German Army 1909-1945 (Spielberger German Armor and Military Vehicle)
Zaloga, Steven J.: M3 Infantry Half-Track. 1940-73. Osprey Publishing: Oxford, UK (1992 / 2002).
Citino, Robert M.: The German Way of War. From the Thirty Years’ War to the Third Reich. University Press of Kansas: USA, 2005.
Krapke, Paul-Werner: Armor, in: Margiotta, Franklin D. (Executive Editor): Brassey’s Encyclopedia of Land Forces and Warfare. Brassey’s: Washington, USA (1996), p. 42-53
Pöhlmann, Markus: Der Panzer und die Mechanisierung des Krieges: Eine deutsche Geschichte 1890 bis 1945 (Zeitalter der Weltkriege)
Munzel, Oskar: Die deutschen gepanzerten Truppen bis 1945
Fleischer, Wolfgang: Die motorisierten Schützen und Panzergrenadiere des deutschen Heeres: 1935-1945 - Waffen, Fahrzeuge, Gliederung, Einsätze
Felberbauer, Franz: Waffentechnik I - Band 2: Geschütze, Waffen in Entwicklung, Nichttödliche Waffensysteme, Ballistik, Physikalische Grundlagen (Truppendienst)
www.truppendienst.com/td-buec...
![[Barbarossa] The Major Errors and Blunders - Or why Barbarossa Failed](/img/n.gif)
Like the content? Consider support me on Patreon - patreon.com/mhv every single dollar helps!
Military History not Visualized Are you going to do a vid about the Serbian General Staff? Encountered it in Hearts of Iron, but can’t seem to get proper info of it in the web.
unlikely, 1) Balkans, 2) no sources in my library, 3) no area of interest in generally and also personally.
Military History not Visualized I like the fact that "Balkans" is the number one reason
So Half-track today would be viable choice to countries which have weaker economy and are in dire need of transport vehicles(for example, because of a war)? Because if I understood correctly, one(or two) advantages are still present, but are not relevant to current situation of most countries. You can convert trucks into basically an armored vehicle, and drivers for it would be easy to find, so ideal situation for using a half-track should be late stages of war in which one side is running out of supplies and human resources.
Military History not Visualized - Israel still uses the M3 half track. This is proof that you dont know what the ffkk you are talking about
“The problem with a mermaid is if you want a fish you get a woman, and if you want a woman you get a fish.” - Military History Visualized 2018
That I believe is his best line yet. Not only funny but summing up the issue so well.
But if you want a fish-woman you're good.
That was one of the best line in history, I am thinking MHV wins Internet.
@Mike'e Stark he didn't say "headjob". He said they "give great head".
New Hoi4 Opening Quote
Why half-tracks? Because they're cool, that's why.
Nebelwerfer looks so freaking badass.
Cool-factor goes up 1000% with the addition of a quad fiddy...
VZ_ 342 - They are even cooler looking with .50 caliber holes in them. They were protective against .30 cal. rifle fire and from splinters from explosives.
Queue Simon Miller.
This is true. Saw one at Pismo beach, they are a sight to see.
I don't think you ever addressed the basic question of "Why aren't half-tracked vehicles made anymore?" You addressed why the _specific configurations used in WW2_ aren't made anymore, but not why half-tracks were abandoned altogether. The reason for that is: Half-track vehicles were all essentially rear-wheel-drive, except the rear wheels were replaced with tracks for better traction and towing capacity. After WW2, four-wheel-drive eventually improved to the point that a 4WD wheeled truck could have the same off-road capability and towing capacity as a half-track truck, while also having a tighter turning radius and without any requirement for special parts. Modern 4WD is simpler, more reliable, and better-performing than half-tracks, so there was no longer any use for half-tracks.
That's not correct. The American M3 half track was based on the 4WD M3 scout car. The front wheels and the tracks were both powered. The M3 scout car had much higher ground pressure than a tracked vehicle, so it would sink in the mud and other soft ground. Tracked vehicles perform better off road than modern 8x8 vehicles due to their lower ground pressure.
@Jim Man
I'm with you...
A modern quad-fifty half track with a cutting edge armor system would be sweet.
And frankly, a pretty utilitarian choice to resurrect. I'm sure there are still some genuine uses for such a platform still.
@Jim Man
No doubt. I agree with you, especially about decisions made that put relatively unproven weapons into an active shooting war to the detriment of tried and true battle rifles with years of development behind them...
That's just short sighted leadership choices, putting cost effectiveness over solid state proven capabilities.
As far as the quad fifty half track. I understand they were useful in ground combat in Korea during massed infantry attack. So much so that barrel overheating was an issue. And like the gun trucks of Vietnam, a light vehicle that is essentially nothing more than a multi gun platform still seems useful to this day.
Fill the gap between APC/IFV and Hummer with a ring mount. Those guntrucks, in Iraq, were pretty necessary during logistics (fuel/food/material) convoy runs.
In fact, as a principle, when is a high mobility, high firepower output vehicle not a good idea? It should be a permanent fixture in mechanized warfare.
Okay, so maybe a half track isn't the perfect host vehicle... but a quad mount certainly has significant impact on the battlefield if employed to full effect.
My two pennies.
def not a 4wd truck, a 6x maybe but not in tough conditions and they would cut up the roads if they're dirt. Up hill in sand a 6x truck is challenged, 20 of them will take an hour to climb 500ft. So they wont be towing guns and they wont be loaded with a section of men and their gear.
The simple answer is the APC, because if you think about it half tracks were the first APC's the world ever saw. Look at the tract back end of a German half track, then visually increase the size of the back end by about 50 %. If you were to then put a roof and a back gate on this vehicle, you would come up with something looking like a modern APC. The half track is the genesis concept of the APC. Like you said we have better 4WD vehicles for hauling, but the half tracks' most vital role was mechanizing infantry, so with better technology available or in development towards that end, there would be no need to produce the half track anymore. Makes sense.
They realised horses are better because you can eat them?
delicious
One can totally eat steal, just ad a little KC Masterpiece BBQ sauce!
Joe Stillwell hated horses and the cavalry. After one of his toiurs in China he came back and gave a talk on warfare in China. A young cavalry officers asked him about the role of the horse in combat. He thought for a second, and replied, "Good eatin' if you're hungry."
Jay Felsberg - A few horses can get your stuck-in-the-mud halftrack loose, too.
Idk i did eat a tire once or it mite have been a dehydrated pork patty its hard to tell.
Mermaid analogy = best analogy ever xD
The mermaid - a sailor's dilemma, which variety to wish for?
It is interesting how people speak so highly of halftracks, while they actually got all the disadvantages of both wheels and tracks in one package. But they did the job they were supposed to do. And that is enough reason to call something effective.
I am reminded of the old saw regarding motorcycles with side cars. "They have all the disadvantages of an automobile and a motorcycle and none of the advantages."
To be fair they do have their charms, and they are cheaper then an automobile.
@@gonova8412 Good point there.
one more reason to use closed APC - Cold War era APC meant to be used in nuclear war. So they should have had some level of protection against radiation. As well as biological and chemical weapons. No real way you can get there with open top APC
very good point! I missed that one, although I shouldn't have, considering the T-54 to T-55 upgrade for NBC stuff.
Why not do this - add an armored roof - with a Half track?
I'd wager a half track with a roof worth something would just be too heavy for the chassis and engine to bear.
Plus, all the cons of a halftrack.
In Vietnam the soldiers were riding on top of the M113s, putting a lot of sandbags there to protect themselves a bit at least. They would have been glad about an open vehicle, as it is way easier to fight from there and not get blown into the roof when running over a mine. This made the M113s very top heavy too, with all the extra weight on top.
Putting a roof was usually considered to heavy in the first place, but where to store a roof, when the infantry want's to fight from the vehicle? That was another reason why they were kept open.
roof wouldn't be enough, additionally, the whole design was made under certain restrictions and assumptions, then just adding a major design change would be at best detrimental at worst a huge issue.
The half measure argument makes a lot of sense. One only needs to look at the Soviet Union's developments. Either fully tracked IFVs and specialised APCs, or fully wheeled APC.
But a point that was perhaps less stressed was the improvements in engines and production. The 30s engines were... less than optimal. Just look at how even the tanks were largely underpowered. The tanks that weren't had enormous engines with little room for other things, especially not a squad of fully kitted soldiers. But enter the 50s and the engines were becoming a lot better. I guess the massive output difference in fighter engines in WWII itself in indicative of the improvements.
With considerably better engines, transmissions and controls, getting a fully tracked vehicle going would have been a lot easier than in 1935.
Great point
I guess that what halftracks offered in light of an underpowered engine is offroad ability in the weight class and speed of a truck. When the engines get good enough like today, a wheeled vehicle can offroad just fine, so all adding half a track system is doing is limiting the speed and increasing maintenance costs.
I would also wager improvement in suspension systems and tire technology also helped wheeled APCs/IFVs, improving their all terrain capabilities, obviating the need for heavy track systems to keep up with their bigger brethren.
yes I would have to agree. better engines better drive systems, better suspensions all meant they could put on armor and guns and the next thing anybody knew they had designed an apc. and the poor half track was an antique joke. it became obsolete rather rapidly.
Plane engines of the time and still alot made today have nothing in common with tank/apc engines. Tanks arnt known for needing altitude mixtures or runnin on a radial engine. And old engines from the 30s were mainly big block pieces of 3 or 4 parts. Todays engines are alot of small parts. In some ways the old engines were more easily fixed or replaced than today's set up.
Steering of tracked vehicles, at least throught the M113, was with laterals, two levers, one for each track; this goes back to my one experience in basic training in 1980. To go ahead straight, you had the laterals in the same position relative to each other; to accelerate, push them forward the same amount, to slow down, bring them back the same amount. To turn right, you pushed the left one forward, but kept the right one more to the rear so that the left track was going faster than the right. To turn left, do the opposite. Sounds simple, but it takes a while to get the hang of it going faster than a crawl.
Current tracked vehicles, however, use a steering wheel which coordinates the proportion of power going to each track and an accelerator to control the speed. It is very similar to normal vehicles, except that there is definite sense of the mass you are trying to control when you accelerate.
One other factor to remember. If you loose the tracks on a hill, you cannot stop. The brakes work on the drive sprocket, not the road wheels. If you loose one track, you can stop the other, but the freewheeling track will swing the vehicle sidewaysand creates a good chance of ripping the remaining track off.
BTW, the M60 tank, I believe, weighed about 60 tons, but exerted only about 11 pounds per sq inch, whereas a woman wearing spike heels may weigh 110 pounds, but exert hundreds of pounds per sq inch if she has most of her weight shifted to the rear. On soft ground, you would rather have an M60 run over your toes than your girl friend in spike heels.
That last part is nuts
There was also the pivot sticks situated above the laterals, to quickly spin the M113 180 degrees.
They were built this way cuz of farm boys both in Germany the world for that matter. Tank, half tracks etc were set up like farmin machinery. Most soldiers had a lot of experience running that style of equipment. Wasnt a great set up for being in actual combat tho.
Nah, spike heels everytime.
@@jonathanmimnagh8956 Sympathy sex.
The Bren or Universal Carrier used a track warping system to aid steering. It did not behave like most fully tracked vehicles. Another fine video.
They should've turned the half-tracks into armored convertibles. :D
Open topped for those breezy summer days. Armored top for when it's raining bullets and artillery.
Hilarious!
Very nice video. Just to add something, the French engineer Adolphe Kégresse was one of the pioneers of halftrack development, going all the way back prior to the first world war. During WWII, the French had a number of halftracks in service. some of which ended up in German service. The Kegresse halftrack system was tested in the US prior to the war and influenced US halftrack development.
tank you! Yeah, I came across the name. I think one major issue for a time was that the speed was rather limited.
Oddly enough, I recorded a video of "M2 Halftrack vs Hannomag" a couple months ago and never finished it. I might have to revisit it.
Tank and AFV News please do. I have been subscribed to your channel for a while now and would love to see that one.
Its up now, I had a little extra studio time so I did an off the cuff talk on the topic. czcams.com/video/GkKUo1WkQ1U/video.html
Yes and designed one for British but met stiff resistance in favor of horse mounted calvary and transportation, although his original design couldn’t be called a half track but a quad track it worked and was among many designed half tracks of the Great War. He should be celebrated VIVA LE FRANCE !!!
Great video! Big fan of your channel
tank you!
I like both you mongs
He he tank you
you guys rock fan of you both Hey Matsimus can you review the IFVs and the APCs used in
the Marawi Siege
+matsimus we meet again 🤔
Mermaids: "If you want a fish, you get a woman. If you want a woman, you get a fish."
Love it!
Want to learn more about Panzergrenadiers & how the used half-tracks, see this video: czcams.com/video/vsTudthlCik/video.html
Some important points that I missed:
1) The "openness" of Half-Tracks was an issue during the war, but became even more important in the "Cold War", due to the necessity for NBC (Nuclear Biological & Chemical) Protection. Should have known that, since the T-55 was a T-54 with NBC upgrade.
2) There were also advancements in the overall capabilities of wheeled vehicles that allowed fully-wheeled vehicles to perform better off-road/cross-country.
Besides that some note that I missed the French half-track developments, this was intentional since this is not a general history of half-tracks and mainly focused on the German SdKfz 251 and US M3.
Another thing people seem to forget about the World Wars when they ask these FAQs (Another one is Y no more Bombers?) is the World Wars, and the Cold War changed wars, significantly. Modern strategies can be divided into Pre-World War, then in the Interwar all of the powers looked at Trench Warfare and collectively said "There has to be a better way to do this." World War II debuted with Blitzkreig, which caused the need for one of your points: The Infantry needs to keep up with sie Panzers. So, Halftracks were a way to do this, as well as Supply sei Panzers with Fuel, Ammunition, and Parts/mechanics. Another thing Modern Warfare gamer soldiers don't seem to realize is that tanks break down, because they don't have infinite Fuel, and operate at full capacity until you shoot one 3 times, then they are disabled. They just have to worry about shooting it 3 times with the weapon that does that.
Well, the open-top is not inherent to the design. I mean there someone could have developed a model with roof, in fact, I think czechoslovaks updated their own ones with such at some point. I mean even the BTR-60 started as open-topped, and I think there would have been nothing stopping someone from designing fully enclosed one. It's just that people weren't that interested with half-tracks at that point. Another reason for disuse for half-track design might have been the whole thing About APCs moving away from "armored truck" design, and becoming a more of a thing in their own.
But we still use half tracts for farming
Military History not Visualized sorry to bug, but can you do a video on the evolution of the PanzerGreindiers from there establishment to the end of ww2
Half-Tracks were still extensively used in the Korean War (1950-1953).
In the Vietnam war neither tanks nor half-tracks were used very much because they would sink into the swampy ground. The military put all their infantry in Helicopters or just simply had them walk into combat.
When the gulf war began in 1990-91 the half-tracks were obsolete and were replaced with Bradley fighting vehicles. The second Iraq war introduced the "Striker" combat vehicle.
Lol "not visualized" nice. I listen to these like podcasts at work
I reckon he should change this channel name again, to "Military History Vocalised".
The half track concept was popular for early tracked vehicles (including civilian ones) because early tracked drives used crude clutch/brake systems to steer which required a great deal of skill and effort from the driver. A lot of work was done during WWII on improving steering for fully tracked vehicles to make it smoother.
This comment section is lit. We got people relating family stories, people talking about video games, people referencing historical documents. Good stuff.
U.S. Army still had and used half track trucks up until 1957 or later. I remember seeing them being driven in field maneuvers miles outside of Fort Polk Louisiana in Hornbeck. Army soldiers drove them up and down the streets as they participated in mock battle.
By war's end there were gearbox and steering systems that made driving a tracked vehicle easier AND more accurate (the M24 even already had an automatic transmission). So not only did you have more drivers, they got easier to train).
Also, I suspect that seeing LVTs in action woke people up to the advantages of stern ramp doors (even if they were more expensive). Which was a feature of most postwar APCs. (this was the big problem with the "Kangaroos", the troops had to climb out).
And P.S. The French also started with Half-tracks for their Mechanized Infantry, and did a lot of between wars work with them, lots of driving all over Africa.
The original LVTs didn't have the rear ramp, but experience soom showed that it was a good idea, not only for the troops, but for loading/unloading cargo in places without handling gear. The ramps showed up on the LVT-3 and LVT-4s went into service in late 1943.
Halftracks are more difficult in steering the heavier the vehicle gets. At some point the wheels will not be able to bring enough traction to turn the vehicle at all. So you need to operate the tracks at different speeds to turn the vehicle, which basicaly means to operate two different systems to turn the vehicle at the same time. The handling of tracks also has improved. On the other hand all-wheel-drives have been developed to increase performance of road. Trucks can go off road much more easily today than during WWII. So you now have all wheel armored trucks like Fuchs, which is very fast and can go off road
Great video. I loved seeing the footage from Tank Fest. I always wondered about half-tracks. Now I know.
Great explanation on the pros and cons of Halftracks! I appreciate the comment on the operational requirement of having infantry and artillery keeping the pace of tanks in order to achieve the movement war objectives. Good work. Cheers!
Yeah, I've always liked half-tracks since watching COMBAT & RAT PATROL in TV in my youth. 😄😄😄
Sam Iam To have a jeep with a 50 Cal in the back....
Cool video idea. I think halftracks are some of the most interesting vehicles of the war
lol is that really what you think?
Sir Whitemeat Everybody has their opinions
Great video & explanation. I have often wondered this also. Thanks for uploading this, & keep up the great work..
Loved your podcast which i recently discovered. Really enjoy your videos now too.
My dad drove a M3 Halftrack when he was in the Argentine Army in 1978.
Huh, cool. BTW Falklands are ours!
Xenon don't be mean.
I think the argies do mate, they invaded the damn islands
Xenon Triggered because you saw an Argie?, Dont worry, I don't care about the Islands.
No fun mate, Normally they get pissed and start screaming, good to see you have at least half a brain. Carry on good sir
My understanding is that halftracks, at least in Germany, is a result of the level of differential technology in the 1930’s and a requirement for high speeds. Halftracks allowed gradual turns without sacrificing speed, as would be required with a standard clutch-break differential. During the war more advanced differentials were developed making the halftrack concept obsolete.
I've had a but of experience with working on and running both American and German halftracks. In some ways, they're more different than similar.
The German Halftracks - Which are actually 3/4 tracks - almost all the weight is borne by the tracks, still have a tank-type clutch-brake system for anything but a very shallow turn. They also have a sophisticated (complicated) suspension system, multi-link tracks, and a dead (unpowered) front axle. This gives fairly good cross-country mobility, albeit with problems crossing ditches, (No help from the front wheels) and adequate on-road performance, but it comes at a number of costs. Basically, your Armored Personnel Carrier is now as complicated to build as a Light Tank, it requires the same level of day-to-day maintenance, and special training for your drivers and mechanics.
The U.S. Halftracks are , have more or the weight borne by the fron wheels - it's basically a White M3 Scout Car with the rear wheels removed, and a relatively simple suspension and one-piece flexible "rubber band" tracks. The front wheels are driven. There's no clutch/brake steering required. They're are easy to build, drive, and maintain as any other equivalent truck (Other than getting into the armored engine compartment itself, that's always a pain) Road performance is better than a German Track, and cross country performance is slightly less. So, a lot less complication for pretty much the same capability.
Since the U.S. already had a large pool of experienced drivers and mechanics, training wasn't an issue. The ease of manufacture meant that we built a lot of them, not only fully equipping our Armored Infantry, Cav Recon and Self-Propelled Antiaircraft Artillery units, but also supplying the U.K., the Soviet Union, and French armies during the war.
(So everybody had a lot left over when the war ended.)
Peter. Thanks for your reply. I was never quite sure if the American, and I assume the French, halftracks had track differential. I didn't think they did but thanks for confirming it. Turning diameter of the American half track is about 18 meters the German Sd.Kfz. 251 11 meters so track differential does make a difference there.
Follow up question: do you happen to know what the trench crossing capability of an American halftrack? I've never seen it documented.
Bernard, a thought, German and American halftracks were built for different missions. Most German half tracks were prime movers for artillery or recovery vehicles. Artillery needed high speed and off road performance to leap frog forward to support the advancing combat units. German APC halftracks were adaptions of existing prime movers. US halftracks were prime movers for AT guns and APC's so didn't have to leap frog forward as much. And yes there were a multitude of subtypes but the chassis didn't change.
dnillik, The M3 halftrack's turning radius is more like 30' (10m). Don't forget that although there isn't a controlled differential like a full-tracked vehicle, it still has a standard truck rear differential. Since the track length on the ground is shorter than that of the German tracks, there's less resistance to turning.
Trench Crossing - Not something I've done, so I ook a look at the Manual. It doesn't give a trench width, but it does give approach and departure angles (The angle between the roller or winch and the front wheels, for approach, and between the back of thrack on eh ground and the hull for departure - these are between 25 and 50 degrees.
Given the size of the vehicle and the geometry, I'm estimating it to be about the same as a M5 Light Tank - about 2-2.5m (6-7 ft)
It may also be worth noting that The speeds of the halftracks on roads - 50 km/hr (32 miles/.hr) for the SdKfz 251, and 40-45 mph (65-70 km/hr) for the American tracks is actually about the same as a standard truck on roads. You can expect a late 1930s - 1940s truck to cruise at about 35 mph (a bi over 50 km/hr) on road, and much less off.
The US and German HT (roughly 14mm armor) was quite different as said. Especially in armor. The US HT (roughly 8mm armor) could consistently be penetrated by the German 7.92mm cartridge of the mg34 and mg42, while the German HT was quite resistant to the majority of allied cartridges. Even the .30 cal machine gun was not able to penetrate it with regular ammunition. You needed a .50 M2, AT-rifle or the like.
Which made a huge difference in usage. There are official German training videos of HTs used directly in front line attacks. The US HT was more to protect and carry infantry up to 1-2km behind the front line.
Both served their purpose quite well though. Different designs for different combat doctrines.
I cannot tell you how much I’ve been wanting to know what you’ve collectively posted here. THANK YOU!!!
This man is perfectionist, at the same time he explain it as an easy video to watch, actually enjoyable...
Nice video. My grandfather drove a half track in Paton's infantry and I've always wondered about it's purpose.
HalfTracks = mermaids
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. ok this makes a lot of sense somehow
yeah that made me chuckle :)
The French also had some interesting Citroën half-tracks in the beginning of the war
Thank You, MHnV, for tackling this subject. I feel that this question (Why halftracks?") has been at the back of my mind for decades (no joke!) and I may never have tracked down the answer on my own. I will like and subscribe purely on the basis of your choice of this subject.
Tally Ho!
Another potential reason is that the transmission technology for tracked vehicles has improved to the point where many tracked vehicles have as good or better handling than a half track meaning that the benefit of being more road maneuverable was effectively erased over time.
That was interesting. Remember before WWII, tanks tended to be fairly small and unreliable. Even larger tanks had very little interior space, so they did not look at all suited to converting to troop-carriers. Trucks and motorised infantry were a much better option, but lacked cross country ability. So it was logical to adapt trucks to half tracks, rather than modify tanks into APCs. During WWII larger and more reliable tanks were developed, and the idea of having a fully tracked infantry-carrying vehicle was much more practical. However, during the war itself, tank production took priority, so vehicles such as the Kangaroo APC were still quite rare during WWII - even though they were quite successful vehicles.
*Laughs in T-20 Komsomolets with ZiS 3 slapped on top
I love your content and accent when explaining all this material it gives it a very authentic feel. Additionally, for some reason if you wore a surplus German military Tunic it would make for an even greater presentation.
Excellent vid. Learned something new today.
Great u renamed this channel without using "for adult" on it
In the Cold war USSR, Ifvs and Apcs were distinguished on the basis of function. Apcs were to transport troops to the frontline, fire support was secondary. They were to follow behind the line of infantry in zigzags, from hill to hill. The Ifvs, on the other hand, were to shoot at the enemy over the heads of friendly infantry during offensive. The Ifv based squad had a dedicated turret weapons operator, while the Apc based squad did not have one
So cold war USSR tactics basically said to send your infantry up front with all the armoured stuff staying behind the meatshields shooting over their heads.
MarcAFK Not exactly. Infantry was to follow tanks, and tank by a general rule were followed by infantry, at the distance of 100-300 meters. On the other hand, Ifvs and Apcs are much less armoured than tanks. It is nonsensical to put them in front, as they are too easy a target, and will be destroyed instantly. Basically, tanks break through, infantry takes control, transport vehicles support the infantry
That makes perfect sense.
jurisprudens usa still us them up to the 70s they was in ww2 keran war and nam as a gun truck
You're talking about half-tracks?
Thank you. I appreciate the quotes with situations at the bottom of the screen.
Extremely interesting - thank you!
Snowmobiles all across Canada, May not be military but same principle of the half-track. Its alive & well.
didnt canada invent the snowmobile?
@@migmadmarine no the first snowmobile was invented in New Hampshire by a man named Vergil White. He created a kit that turned a Ford Model T into a half track with skis. He received a patent for the kit in 1917.
It’s pronounced snow machine 😂the natives say sno-go 😂
@@gavinc2827 we call them oversnows here in australia, mostly bombardier made vw beetle looking things as well as modern snowcat's. Yeah it snows here and our ski resorts don't often have large villages, just a collection of chalets in the hills with no roads in winter.
Dave M probably the best known representation of Virgil White’s Ford Model T Conversion kit is seen in the Classic Rankin Bass Christmas Special Santa Claus is Comin to Town. The Half Track Snowmobile Mail Truck that Fred Astaire’s Mailman narrator drives is a fairly accurate model of the real thing. The US postal service adopted the Model T conversion for some of the more remote wintery mail routes.
The M3 became standard equipemt for many post WWII armies. The Israeli Army used it thoroughly from the 1948 War to the Yom Kippur War in 1973. It was seen in the Latin American and African armies up to the 80's. A very ubiquitous vehicle.
I would prefer the M24.
Awesome video! Always wondered this
Thank you for the video. I would add that I think another great role that the Half Track played
was in replacing the many draft animals like horses and mules that were used in so many great
numbers in WW I to pull artillery pieces and to transport supplies up to the front.
Like the horse a half tracked vehicle had a lot more mobility pulling a large artillery piece than
a truck did on muddy roads and where there were no roads.
Last time I was this early the Italian's hadn't even switched sides yet.
Comrade General Vladimir Pootis - Had to hang Musso & mistress from lampposts first.
Traditori!
You can have extra armour and close the halftrack top. Im not sure why you listed that two particular reasons against the halftrack, as that applies to any modern APC too. Actually the M113 is papper thin despite being fully tracked. Open tops and weak armor are not really mandatories features for a halftrack.
Cross-country mobility was the main reason for the halftrack demise.
I always loved that M3 Halftrack design.
There is something beautiful about those machines.
Thank You for clarification. Dig the Background you have.
Kettenrad btw was a half-tracked motorcycle.
Coming soon to a special forces group near you: the half-tracked bicycle!
sorry those were supplanted by -- fat bikes. xD
How about a half-tracked helicopter?
This is a better name. You finally give up your adult channel.
Mr. Derhoro I miss the escort fighters...
What do you mean?
Lord Gronor he talked once that bombers were escorted by fighter planes and used as an icon pin-up girls...
so what!? Whats the big deal about that? He was talking history not erotic novel ...
It was a joke...
Very informative thanks dude!
So much more easy to understand without symbols distracting from the content!
The mermaid analogy made my day!
🙂
Road conditions, have changed by light years in 80 years. After driving for 40 years and driving commercial for the last 10 years.
This almost as big as logistics.
Maintenance is much higher for track vehicles, but do not forget gas engine VS diesel engine. As much as torque VS horse power.
Kurt Seaberg I bet that is a much bigger factor that this channel is giving it credit for.
Kurt Seaberg
It's the time when you're having to be off road that really defines what your need is in an infantry vehicle. The logistics point is well made. By contrasting the German success in France verses Russia it would be interesting to see the correlation of their successful advancement verses the ability of being able to properly maintain and supply their forces.
@Lord Byron
When we think about the Soviet Union, we have to take into account the vast distances as well as the poor quality of the roads.
Lavrentivs - Yeah, roads that turn out to be paved with chocolate pudding during the rainy season, which runs from spring thaw to late autumn frozen solid, slow vehicles down.
Knut Der Große. Gasoline blows up easier than diesel.
I seem to remember seeing a half track mounting quad 50s in Korea. Long time ago and an old mans memory may be defective. But I wouldn't be surprised if it were the last halftrack in captivity since we were Marines and the Marines at that time were usually equipped with surplus, outdated and castoff equipment. I operated radios from WWII (ever see a TBX 8?) and some of them had "U.S. Army Signal Corps" labels on them. But in our Corps, in our time, it may have been st-liberated from any nation involved in the war. I know that the U.S. Army generously supplied us with fresh eggs, telephone wire and heating oil through informal midnight requisitions.
The short answer is to the question, why no more 1/2 tracks. After WW2, there were tremendous technical advances in drive train and suspension designs. This narrow the difference between wheels and tracks off road. The result is military vehicles are either wheels or tracks. Wheels only are more common, because wheels are more resistance to mines and other battle damages, cheaper to run and maintain, faster, quieter and easier on the roads and poise a less aggressive image. The proliferation of auto transmission also make driver training easier. Towing is not done as much as it used to be, for there are many more mobile artillery like the M109 and MLRS on Bradley chassis. We also have many tactical trucks like those made by Oshkosh, Tatra etc.
Japan used a fully-tracked apc/ artillery tractor during WWII.
"Why limited to WWII only?"
Well, you probably know what happened to the country that produced them.
America produced them.
Good video as always - I'd suggest a couple of other reasons as well, high speed tracked vehicles - such as cromwell, hellcat and M24 were already in by the end of WW2 - and further progress was coming. Then the oversize pneumatic tyres used on modern wheeled vehicles made up a lot of gap from the other end. In the end both armoured cars and tracked vehicles got better than half-tracks which - as you wisely point out came with the complexity of both.
My Grandfather served in 5th AD, 387th AAA(SP), he operated a Quad .50 on an M16 ( Half Track with a Quad .50 mounted in back).
"Hey sexy, aww damn you're a fish!"
I'd tap it anyway. Still better than a feminist. XD
@Devin Davis Use your imagination...
In Company of Heroes, I always use Halftracks as troop transports and road checkpoints...
Wonderful discussion!
Another great video
8:53, that sounds like something my dad would say.
In HOI4 I recently tried to make a mechanized focus German army rushing the tech before the start of war, seemed like a good idea at the time until I was against USSR and lacked 5k mech reinforcements even with 60 factories building them I couldnt keep up. I had 23 divisions with 20 combat width all mech and I did have maintenance support on them as well.
They cost to much to make, are too slow, not reliable, and break through is not much better then a standard truck. Better to focus on leopard 2 since they take about the same time to make.
in one of my germany games i was able to field about 100 divisions of mechanized infantry, idr if 40 or 20 width, by around 1945 or 46 with insane amounts of stockpiled vehicles and performed wonderfully, but overall it's more of a late game thing. at best it's probably best to have them flesh out your tank divisions in the mid game but i agree that rushing modern tanks is better than mechs. the real issue i have with mechanized is that you require way too much industry to be able to devote to actually outfit your main forces and often when you get to that point you've basically won the game already anyway so you're just doing it for shits and giggles.
I was trying to go for mech as my breakthrough division instead of tanks as Sweden. Swe going to war with Soviets really shows how effective something is (because if it isnt it gets screwed), and mech just didnt perform well at all. Also in most cases where I could use their speed in a gap or whatever - truck divisions would have worked just as well, but cost way less.
Fenno-scandinavian terrain is just not that good for vehicles^^
trucks are soft targets they're vulnerable. but with more of them you can fulfill more types of missions. mechanized infantry is specific to supporting certain types of tank movements, when tanks can get chewed up by tank busting units or lack the volume to push through and hold new territory. eh it's been a long time since HOI3 that's what I remember from that game.
If you just set the cost or the reliability of the unit in the game a bit differently, it would be very different. Because that's not real life.
Thanks dude. I always wanted to know that.
Excellent Video.
Someone needs to write the captions for this channel I'm pretty sure halftracks don't fight rape, unless thats what was actually said
The German Army defined the organization of combined arms thanks to Gen. Guderian. The Americans learned and used it during WWII. The Soviets totally revolutionized it by introducing the BMP with total protection for their infantry with firepower in the late 1960s. Of course other nations in the world had APCs before the Russians did after Korea like the US, Germany, and the UK. Only the Germans took it further in NATO with the Marder which is excellent in design. The American M113 and British FV432 are just "Battlefield Taxis". The British and Americans had to catch up with designs like The Warrior and Bradley in the 1980s.
The Germans had "BMPs" during WW2 later stages. Aka IFVs.
The SdKfz was produced in many IFV variants to enable firepower and support for the infantry.
Howitzers, At-guns, Flamethrowers, grenade launchers. You name it. They build it.
The Russian BMP is just a natural evolution from the German idea. Which might not even be an original German idea. I recall Italians, French and British armies had similar ideas, but to a lesser extend. Someone who knows more than me, prolly knows who started the IFV idea.
The other thing that should be mentioned with regard to the popularity of half-tracks during WW2 was that they were easier to produce in large numbers in comparison to say fully tracked vehicles.
That being said, even the Germans realized midway into the war that half-tracks were too restricted in terms of off-road mobility: The un-powered front axle of most half-track designs proved to be a liability in deep snow and thick mud and the Sd.Kfz. 250 and 251 series were notorious for losing steering control in muddy conditions. Just before the end of the war, a couple of prototypes for two designs for an order for a fully tracked sPW had been produced and were undergoing trials.
Thanks again for yet another insightful video :)
My father's engineer company in the Pacific had a half-track with quad 50 cal machine-guns.
Czechoslovaks used OT halftracks all the way during the Cold War.
yeah, but I don't consider them a major power.
Military History not Visualized damn burn/roasted
vejas butkus Not a major? Czechs where a powerhouse in the Warsaw Pact as one of the richest countries in the pact it had a very big army with alot of good gear
Raymond Saint those were 2nd world war leftovers. We had OT-64 8x8 with Tatra base later. And fully tracked APC also (OT-62, BMP1, BMP2 etc.)
xmeda actually they where home made copies of the German Sdkf series of halftracks for the armed czechslovak peoples militia. And as you mention the regular forces used BMPs and OT64 "Battlebuss's" and OT62s amongst others. Most of the regular army was mechanized or motorised one of the biggest save the soviets numerally and qualitywise
total miss the fact the IDF was still using them clear into the 1970s. Desert warfair they work great.
My grandmother's brother served in WW2 and drove a half track while stationed in Germany. I have a couple pics of him and it's similar to the one shown at about 2:30 in this vid. He survived it all just to die in Los Angeles in 1947 after he crashed his car while driving drunk. Melvy (Melvin) Glenn Gamel
LOVE THIS CHANNEL!!!!
Israel used half-tracks in all their wars up to and including the Yom Kippur war. The South Lebanon Army continued to use them up to the end.
Old american half tracks though, not new ones.
Regardless of ORIGIN, the vehicles where still in active military service...in fact Israeli mech. infantry where still in half tracks on the road into Lebanon in 1982!...there are plenty of photo and video evidence of this.........I don;t think that the comment stated in anyway, shape or form that Israel BUILT the Half Tracks....just that they where in use...which is absolutely factual and documented information...so, in all regards Half Tracks of American design from the 1940's where STILL in combat more than 40 years after the where introduced. pretty impressive actually....
True, the Israelis and SLA used WW2 era US Half-tracks
But why post it. It has nothing to do with the statement in the video. No major power produced HTs after ww2.
How can you write a reply, when you are dumb and blind?
The United States used Half Tracks in the Korean War!!
Yeah but the korean war was practically an epilogue of ww2.
So? no one claims differently.
Really great well researched video. You did your homework!🤔😉
Around 1973, here in San Diego County, in Escondido, an American Halftrack was going through town, coming back from the desert. It was full of Hippies, and I must say, the one up in the conning tower sure looked majestic, arms folded and staring straight ahead. The way the gears ground, it sounded like it could use a clutch! But, it was a real sight to see! It possessed rubber feet so as to not damage the road. It was a real Wow moment for an 18 year old punk kid
in an MG Midgit.
Girls' last tour sup
Ayyyyyyyy
I spose the Russians just put handle bars on their tanks
Amazing info👍 thanks👏
I don't know any APC that can carry as many soldiers as the good old halftracks.
edi Very very tightly.
XA-180 for example
edi The M3 Halftrack and German Halftrack both carried 10 people. The M113 carries 11. The earliest BTR-60 models carried between 12 and 16 people. The FV432 carries 10 people.
edi but current wars don't require as many infantry units as was needed in ww2. So the apc now don't need to carry as many anyway
Jacob Babb Plus by sacrificing 2 or 3 men, you get vehicles like the Bradley and BMP which can be real powerhouses with the ability to suppress or destroy entire enemy squads and even knock out tanks.
I thought this channel was for adult German content, has that changed?
Thanks for the tip... I'm uh, going to do some research on this
An Austrian is a German
(Am I gonna get yelled at for that?)
For a friend.
Please, uh, share your research when you have the time... for cross -examination!
I guess it didn't really make sense since the general audience was essentially the same. Its not like more adults watched this channel over the other. Anyone interested in history and the military regardless of age are subscribed to both. The difference is one channel is utilizing visual images while the other don't so, in addition to not being scripted as much. I guess that's the reason for the change.
This is an example of why I love learning about WWII. The tech existed, but nothing was refined. It was a war of innovation, countries invested and developed tools and vehicles that needed to serve a purpose, but where the concept of how best to serve that purpose hadn’t yet been figured out. So they just made things work. That’s why there’s so many wildly different vehicles that came out of the war, there were so many needs to be filled and the number of ways they tried to fill them were just as varied.
The benefit of the halftrack being able to off road and on road travel also meant it was versatile. Hence why they got used for everything. From troop transport, anti-tank, support weapon towing, infantry support MGs, mobile mortar platforms, mobile anti-air platforms, even ambulances. They could do just about anything, anywhere and had a mounting system for it all. It’s what made the Sherman so great too. If you needed something done, there was a Sherman for that. Versatility helps logistics greatly and logistics is a huge reason the allies won that war. If we needed something somewhere, you’d have twice that much on hand sooner than you expected.
I love that you footnote your sources, more history videos should do this, especially when using stock footage, or in your case, video of the larger German half-track with field gun, that wasn't exactly the original model. Prost!
Didn't the US used their M3 in the Korean War and also later in Vietnam?
Yes. so?
Most of them were the M-16 Quad-.50 AA vehicle used mainly for ground support.
´coz the title asks "why limited to WW2 only" and it is clearly not the case that halftracks died out after WW2, you and I seem to agree that they have been in use after that as well
Yes :-)
Karakoth But only in limited numbers & no new mass production worldwide.
The introduction of model guns and the likes of the Canadian kangaroo personnel carriers made half tracks obsolete. The Commonwealth 21 Army used all track, the Bren and Kangaroo, what did the Russian army use in the war, personnel carriers? How often did the Tanks go into action because the infantry was not there, with fatal results. For example, Villers-Bocage in Normandy, not normally discussed, is the afternoon battle when 5 Tigers and 4 Panzer Lehr Mark IV were lost because no Panzer grenadiers were available when 7th Armoured Division rallied after the morning ambush. Several other Tigers were damaged in the battle but subsequently were recovered and repaired. A smart commander does not take open field tanks into a town without infantry support. What did 21st army group use in the Great Swan, going from Normandy to the Belgian boarder in days, the Cromwell is very fast, half tracks too slow, kangaroos are the same speed as Sherman’s.
The Bren Carrier / Universal Carrier is a tiny little thing - more a full-tracked jeep than a cargo carrier. The Kangaroos seem like a good use of redundant tank hulls, until you try to dismount your infantry over the hull top under fire. There's a reason why the idea didn't catch on.
Peter Stickney please see video czcams.com/video/-DjcNZWVa0w/video.html from tank museum. The ram kangaroos were used extensively by 21st army. They could keep up with the Sherman’s but had difficulty with the Churchill’s because of there climbing abilities in infantry support roles. It may explain all the photos with troops tank riding Churchills. They were used extensively in the battles after Normandy to the end of the war. You are correct, they had issue like all tanks in getting off sensibly.
The Russian used some lend lease half tracks but mainly used tankodesantniki troops that rode on the backs of tanks and would jump off to provide support
The soviet army prefered to mount their infantry on the tanks themselves, hence the large amount of handles on soviet WWII tanks.
DC - The Russian army used Studebaker trucks.
Thanks for video
I've learned a lot of cool stuff about vihiklis from this video!
Damn, I am a Nerd. 😂
This topic actually interests me.
A lot of what said here is VERY academic, but VERY inaccurate, as well. My father served in WWII infantry, and as a kid, I saw a lot of the old pictures that he brought back to the states. The half-track REALLY caught my young eye at the time, and I actually wanted one...bugged him all the time to tell me about the 'machines' he saw (I'm a retired engineer now, as you can imagine).
Anyway, he told me a LOT about one of my favorite 'machines'...the half-tracks. He said that the half track was supplied to mostly supply and infantry units to negotiate VERY WET-MUDDY SOILS and across open lands that 'weren't mined'...or they had a tank 'forward' them, otherwise, to prevent mine damage. The half-tracks were 'potentially faster', and more agile than, say, a Sherman tank, but at the same time, they were more fragile too. The half-track was considered 'an improvement over a truck', but more vulnerable than a tank, while being heavier, capable of greater payloads, and more 'sure footed'...that said, he claimed 'they broke down a LOT MORE' than a truck. They were also 'cheaper' to repair than a fully tracked vehicle, but far more expensive than a multi-wheeled vehicle...and they did less damage to 'improved roadways' than a full-track, but far more damage than a wheeled-vehicle.
He said back then, 'I don't expect them to ever be popular beyond maybe farm use...they tear up roads, cost to much to keep maintained, and aren't good for much of anything beyond travel in unimproved lands...they might use them in the prairies...but those things sure don't like sand at ALL...we couldn't keep them running in Africa for long.'
So, in fact, they are a pain to try and use in our 'modern world' with bituminous asphalt, they don't do well in deserts (due to sand), they are expensive (over a wheeled vehicle) to maintain, they are heavy (bridge-prohibitive possibly in rural areas), and consume far more resources than a comparable truck. Unlike full-tracks, they also do NOT have much advantage for traction over wheeled comparisons, because the front-axle tends to 'dig into trenches' (why that M3 half-tracks have that big roller on the front - to keep from 'pile-driving the trench' when you try to ford a steep-banked creek or deep trench...they help keep your vehicle front out of the ditch).
This doesn't contradict much of what he said in the video though.
Skeeter Saurus - Last halftrack I saw off of an army surplus lot was pulling a house westward on Lebanon Rd. in Nashville, Tn. in the '70s. Rubber block tracks.
Ironic that ISRAEL used the M3 series Half Tracks up until the Israeli run into Lebanon in 1982.......As you may guess Israel tends to have some rather "sandy", Dusty terrain....yet there is HUGE volumes of video and photo evidence of the Israeli Tracks running like a bat out of hell across the Sinai throwing HUGE clouds of dust
Israel was using a lot of the old 'Rommel era' trucks...we did not make very many more after Korea...so to keep them running, they would have had to machine parts for them, eventually. That said, they do NOT use them (much) anymore...as they are museum pieces, even for them now...ask yourself why?
'Road Pads' are really nothing more than the equivalent of a car-tire, cut up so that the 'tread side' (aka belted-side) can be bolted to the track. HOWEVER...road pads do NOT survive anywhere NEAR as long as steel pads or car tires...again, if you get 750-2000 miles out of a road-pad, you can claim you've done something...they came about LONG after tracked vehicles did, and presumably after our adventures in WWII France (as my father said, 'when we rolled into France (to counter Nazis) the French could just eat us up....2-months later, they hated us so badly, they wish they had!)
Saying this...turning a full-track vehicle shears the road pad QUICKLY...and a half-track with a long track section (such as an M-3) does almost as much damage to that road pad.
No one is going to stop in combat to put 'new shoes' on a tracked vehicle...they will keep driving it...bolt-heads (that hold the road pad in place) acting like golf cleats on that 'nice, smooth bituminous asphalt' is a tragedy for whoever has to pay for resurfacing later.
If you look at the modern history of tracked vehicles (like Fort Hood, Texas), you see there is a 'minimal driving on paved roads' ideology in place...because ARMOR ABHORS PAVED ROADS!
good episode
Interesting stuff. Many in the US Army during the war were aware of the shortcomings of the M3 and other US halftracks. In his after-action report on his 1st Armored Division in Tunisia, Maj. Gen. E.N. Harmon stated that halftracks "have been continually subject to the throwing of tracks" and went on to state they were more trouble than they were worth and should be replaced by trucks. Also, according to Steuard and Fines, American Combat Vehicles: Halftracks, vol. 1, the production of all US halftracks was halted in early 1944.
That’s my favorite Austrian.
Well, second favorite...
Oh shoot