Author: Mark Nash

Member since 2016. Specializes in weird. 113 articles & counting...

NM-116 Panserjager

Kingdom of Norway (1975-1993)
Light Tank/Tank Destroyer – 72 Converted

After the Second World War, as part of the United States-led Military Aid Program (MAP), Norway received around 130 M24 Chaffee light tanks to help rebuild its military. In the early years of the Cold War, the Norwegian Military (Forsvaret, Eng: “The Defence”) was happy with the M24 Chaffee, as it fitted its needs. Its small size made it perfect for operations in the harsh Scandinavian terrain.

By the 1960s, however, it was apparent that the 75 mm gun-armed Chaffee was in need of an upgrade if it was to combat the threat represented by the USSR. The 75 mm gun would be no match for the thick armor of Soviet tanks such as the T-54/55 or T-62. It was decided that the vehicle needed a new, more powerful gun, as well as many other new internal and external components.

An upgrade program began in the late-1960s, with the first prototype of what would be designated the ‘NM-116’ being unveiled in 1973. The vehicle would enter service under that designation in 1975. This new variant of the M24 would be used in an anti-tank role, leading it to be unofficially called the ‘Panserjager’ (armor hunter/armor chaser). It would serve the Norwegian Army well into the late 1990s.

The NM-116 ‘Panserjager’ was the result of an upgrade program to keep the M24 Chaffee relevant in the Cold War era. Photo: reddit

Foundation: The M24 Chaffee

The M24 Chaffee, named after Lieutenant General Adna R. Chaffee., entered service in 1944, largely replacing the M3 and M5 Stuarts. It was a small tank at 16 foot 4 inches (5.45 m) long, 9 foot 4 inches (2.84 m) wide, and 5 foot 3 inches (2.61 m) tall. It was also light at just 20.25 tons (18.37 tonnes). Armor on the vehicle was ¾ inch to 1 ½ inch (19 – 38 mm) thick. It was armed with the 75 mm Lightweight Tank Gun M6. It was operated by a 5 man crew, consisting of the commander, gunner, loader, driver and assistant driver/radio operator.

It was a very maneuverable vehicle, powered by a Twin Cadillac 44T24 8 cylinder petrol engine producing 220 hp. The transmission and drive wheels were located at the front of the vehicle. The Chaffee rolled on 5 roadwheels attached to a torsion bar suspension. The fifth road wheel was attached to the idler wheel at the rear of the running gear. This is because the idler was of the compensating type, meaning it was attached to the closest roadwheel by an actuating arm. When the roadwheel reacted to terrain, the idler was pushed out or pulled in, keeping constant track tension.

Norsk Chaffees

Norway received its first Chaffees from the US under the ‘MAP’ in 1946. The ‘Military Aid Program’ benefited the war-ravaged countries of the Second World War by providing them the means to rebuild their military and defenses. Norway was one of these countries that was rebuilding after a lengthy Nazi Occupation of the country. Other countries that benefited from the MAP included France, Portugal, and Belgium, but also former enemy nations such as West Germany and Japan. In April 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty was signed, and NATO was born with Norway a founding member. This resulted in the United States prolonging their Military Aid Programs.

The initial 1946 delivery consisted of just 9 vehicles. These were sent directly to Trandum leir, a Norwegian Army Camp (now closed) near Ullensaker. From 1946 until the early 1950s, Norway received a total of 125 M24s.

Norwegian Chaffees also have a royal connection. From 1955 to 1957, Prince Harald (now King Harald V) served in a Chaffee crew during his conscription years. The M24s gave the Norwegian Army (Hæren) excellent service for many years, but come the late-1960s, the M24 was obsolete, and the upgrade program began. Just 72 tanks would be upgraded to NM-116 standard. Some of the remaining vehicles were turned into NM-130 Bergepanser recovery vehicles, while 4 unmodified M24s were given to the Heimevernet (Eng: Home Guard) which operated them well into the late 1970s.

The majority of tanks that remained from this were scrapped, though it is believed at least one was taken by the Navy and turned into a static turret placed on a fort. (Further information on this escapes the Author at the time of writing.) The last use of the Chaffee came in 2002, when it featured in a rather risqué Norwegian commercial for mineral water.

An M24 Chaffee of the Heimevernet taking part in range exercises in 1977. Norwegian Chaffees retained the standard US Olive Drab until the mid-1980s when a new camouflage pattern was introduced. Photo: modellnorge.no

Upgrade Program

Due to the poor economic strength of Norway, funding was limited in the early parts of the Cold War, forcing the government to make incremental modernizations to its military equipment. As such, rather than invest millions of Kroner (the currency of Norway) in the development or purchase of a brand new tank, the Forsvaret began working with the far-cheaper idea of upgrading the Chaffee fleet. Thune-Eureka A/S, based in the country’s capital, Oslo, was chosen to develop an effective upgrade solution. At first, the company was given just one of the Hæren’s M24s to experiment with. Certain new features were prioritized in the program, including a new main armament, a new engine, and a new transmission.

Design schematics of the NM-116. Photo: NM-116 Handbook via modellnorge.no

Automotive Upgrades

The Chaffee’s Twin Cadillac 220 hp petrol engine was replaced by a Detroit Diesel 6V-53T two-stroke diesel engine that was liquid-cooled and equipped with a turbocharger. This was the same engine used in later models of the Swedish Strv 103 ‘S-Tank’. Diesel engines perform better in cold temperatures and are also somewhat safer as diesel is less volatile than petrol (gasoline). The engine gave the tank more power, as it produced 260 hp, but slowed the tank down to a top speed of 47 km/h (29 mph). This was not too big of an issue as the increased torque gave it the power to navigate Norway’s tough terrain. Two 208-liter (55 gallons) fuel tanks also gave it a greater range of 300 kilometers (186 miles) compared to the 160 kilometers (100 miles) of the original powerplant. Four heat exchangers were also installed to cool the engine’s oil.

The Detroit Diesel 6V-53T engine that replaced the M24’s original Twin Cadillac. Photo: NM-116 Handbook via modellnorge.no

The original ‘Hydramatic’ transmission was also replaced with an Allison MT 650/653 pre-selector 6-speed (5 forward, 1 reverse) gearbox. An additional gearbox was installed to control the speed transferred to the differential housed at the front of the tank.

The heat exchanger for the transmission and differential were installed in the engine compartment, while the exchanger for the additional gearbox was incorporated into an existing radiator. This presence of additional heat exchangers in the engine compartment resulted in the addition of larger ventilation intakes being installed on the engine deck, close to the turret ring.

Diagram showing the original M24 engine deck (left) compared with the upgraded NM-116 engine deck (right). Photo: Squadron/Signal Publications

Armament Upgrades

One of the most crucial aims of the upgrade program was to increase the Chaffee’s lethality – the old 75 mm gun was now obsolete. The Norwegian military wanted more punch but understood that the small chassis of the M24 probably wouldn’t stand up to the punishment of the recoil force produced by a large 90 mm (3.5 in) – or larger – gun. As such, the Norwegian Military turned to the French and decided upon their D/925 Low-Pressure 90 mm Gun. This 90 mm (3.5 in) gun was similar to that installed on France’s own Panhard AML 90, which was equipped with the D/921. To accommodate this new weapon, the gyrostabilizer had to be removed. The original concentric recoil system (this was a hollow tube around the barrel, a space-saving alternative to traditional recoil cylinders) from the 75 mm gun was retained. The muzzle of the barrel was equipped with a single baffle muzzle brake to further reduce the force of recoil. The gun could be elevated from +15 to -10 degrees.

The French D/925 Low-Pressure 90 mm Gun. Photo: NM-116 Handbook via modellnorge.no

The D/925 was capable of firing three ammunition types: High-Explosive Anti-Tank (HEAT, Nor: Hulladingsgranat M62), High-Explosive (HE, Nor: Sprenggranat MF1) and Smoke (Nor: Røykgranat MF1). All of these shells were fin-stabilized, so they would all have the ‘-FS’ suffix. The Hulladingsgranat round had a velocity of 750 m/s (2460 fps), and a maximum effective range of around 1,500 meters (1,640 yards). It could penetrate 320 mm (12.6 in) of vertical armor, or 120 mm (4.7 in) of armor sloped at 65-Degrees from vertical. In total, 41 rounds of 90 mm ammunition were carried.

The 3 shell types fired by the D/925 90 mm gun. Left to right: Hulladingsgranat M62 (HEAT-FS), Sprenggranat MF1 (HE-FS) and Røykgranat MF1 (Smoke-FS). Photo: NM-116 Handbook via modellnorge.no

A view inside the turret of the NM-116 showing one of the 90mm ammunition racks. Also note the .50 Cal (12.7 mm) ammunition run at the top right, and the rear of the .50 Cal AN/M3 gun at the top left. Photo: Thor Christfferson

Changes also came for the tank’s secondary armament. The coaxial Browning M1919 .30 Cal (7.62 mm) machine gun was replaced by a Browning AN/M3 .50 Cal (12.7 mm) machine gun. These were reportadly recycled from F-86 Saber Fighter Jets, around 180 of which were operated by the Royal Norwegian Air Force (No: Luftforsvaret) from 1957 to 1967.

Dag Rune Nilsen, a former NM-116 commander, recalled that they were…

“great fun to shoot with due to the extremely high rate of fire and [were very] precise since they were fixed in the turret.”

The roof-mounted Browning M2HB .50 Cal machine gun was retained for ‘air defense’, however, an additional position for it was installed in front of the Commander’s cupola. The bow .30 Caliber machine gun position was completely deleted, reducing the crew to four-men and making room for 90 mm ammunition stowage.

A driver operates his vehicle head-out as he disembarks his NM-116 from a landing ship, 1988. The blanked-off machine gun position is clearly visible on the front of the hull. Photo: Dag Rune Nilson

Other Changes

Numerous other upgrades were incorporated into the NM-116. Gunnery was further improved with the addition of an NM128 (otherwise known as Simrad LV3) laser rangefinder which was installed atop the barrel of the 90 mm, at the mantlet’s end. The NM-116 was the first tank in Norwegian service to incorporate such a device. Provision was also made for the installation of passive-night vision/infrared sights for the commander, gunner and driver positions.

Eight smoke-grenade launchers or Røykleggingsanlegg (Smoke Laying Device) were added to the left and right side of the turret in two banks of four tubes. These German-made devices were electrically fired, and were used to launch the 76 mm (3 in) Røykboks (smoke grenades) DM2 HC grenade. In total, 16 smoke grenades were carried and, if necessary, all loaded grenades could be fired at once.

On the left we see the Simrad LV3 laser rangefinder installed atop the 90 mm barrel (note also the additional .50 Cal. MG position in front of the commander’s cupola), and on the right, one of the 76 mm smoke launcher banks, installed on the right of the turret. Photo: Photo: Erik Torp, net-maquettes.com

Another improvement to the operation of the tank came with the introduction of new radios. NM-116’s assigned to platoon leaders were equipped with an AN/VRC44 unit, while other tanks were equipped with the AN/VRC64. A new intercom system for the crew was also installed.

The NM-116 was also given two types of new tracks, which could be switched between depending on terrain. The tanks were initially equipped with the original US T85E1 rubber chevron tracks. In the upgrade program, the tanks were equipped with new split rubber block tracks made by the German company, Diehl. With the T85E1 tracks, there were 75 links per-side, but with the Diehl tracks, there were 73 per-side.

The split-rubber block tracks produced by the German company, Diehl. Photo: Photo: Erik Torp, net-maquettes.com

Crew comfort was not ignored in the program, with a new internal heating system being installed to keep them warm in the cold Norwegian climate. Also, the original 4 shock absorbers per-side were replaced with 2 more effective shock absorbers per-side. These were made by the Swedish company Hagglunds.

Further Upgrades?

It would appear that throughout its service, the NM-116 went through a number of ‘incremental improvements’. Exact details are currently unavailable, but there are some features that can be discussed. At some point, the single-baffle square muzzle brake of the 90mm gun, installed on the prototypes, was exchanged for a tubular ‘T’ shaped muzzle brake, similar to those used on US tanks such as the M48 Patton. As Norway operated a fleet of 90 mm gun-armed M48s, it is not too outrageous to say that they could’ve been recycled from them. The 90 mm M48s were upgraded between 1982 and 1985 to 105 mm gun-armed M48A5 standard, so there would’ve been a surplus of 90 mm parts.

Another change saw the addition of a new sprocket wheel with smaller and fewer teeth. The original had 13 teeth while the newer one had 12. This was likely done to improve the compatibility with new track types.

Another addition was an infantry or ‘Grunt’ phone, installed on the right rear fender of the NM-116. A protective frame was also built around it. This phone would allow infantry outside of the tank to communicate with the vehicle commander and give him fire directions or other important messages. It is possible that this piece of equipment was also recycled when the M48 fleet was upgraded.

Further upgrades included the installation of equipment racks on the rear of the turret. A common field addition was the installation of stowage boxes to the tanks hull and fenders.

The three features discussed. Left to right, the ‘T’ muzzle brake, the sprocket wheel with smaller teeth, and what appears to be the ‘grunt’ phone. Photos: Left; reddit. Middle; primeportal. Right; Erik Torp, net-maquettes.com

Service

The single upgraded M24 prototype began trials in January 1973. After a lengthy trial period, the Hæren accepted the vehicle and a contract for the conversion of an additional 71 tanks was signed with Thune-Eureka A/S. The tank finally entered service in January 1975, with the last units delivered in October 1976.

An NM-116 is restocked with practice ammunition at a range shoot with a number of Norsk M48A5s. This vehicle features a few of the additional upgrades that appeared through its service (new sprocket, ‘T’ muzzle brake, possible ‘grunt phone’). This photo was reportedly taken in the late-1980s. Photo: Dag Rune Nilsen

With the new upgrade came a new role for the tank, now designated the NM-116. It was decided that the vehicle would operate as a tank destroyer with the capability to act as a light reconnaissance tank. This lead the vehicle to be unofficially designated the ‘Panserjager’. The NM-116’s small size made it perfect for both roles, as it could conceal itself in hidden positions to either engage an enemy or provide overwatch and intel for friendly forces.

The only full-time operator of the NM-116 was the Panserverneskadron, Brigade Nord (PvEsk/N, Eng: “Tank Squadron, Northern Brigade”). This squadron operated both the NM-116 and the M113 APC-based NM-142 (TOW) Rakettpanserjager, and was the only squadron that was permanently operational. All other NM-116 equipped units were kept in reserve for rapid mobilization or for use by reservist troops. Each Panserjagr Company (Eskadron) had 2 NM-116 platoons, 2 NM-142 (TOW) Rakettpanserjager platoons, a CSS platoon with several M113 and a single NM-130 Bergepanser. There was also a Command element with 2 M113s, as well as a Logistics element with some M621/Scania lorries and MB240 jeeps.

In 1983, a new 4-tone ‘Splinter’ camouflage was introduced that replaced the original olive-drab paint scheme on many of the tanks. Vehicles belonging to Brigade Nord used the same pattern as Norway’s Leopards as, at the time, there was no official pattern provided for the NM-116.

Dag Rune Nilson describes that…

“during wintertime, we applied a thick white cover of chalky paint over the light green and brown areas of the camouflage. The chalk was then washed off at springtime.”

NM-116 in winter camouflage, 1988. Photos: Thor Christoffersen

NM-116s were organized into Panserjager platoons with 4 vehicles per platoon. Only 3 vehicles were manned at all times.
The fourth vehicle of the platoon was left in reserve, and would only be mobilized (by reservist troops) in an emergency – eg, an enemy attack. These reserve vehicles were never painted in the ‘Splinter’ scheme, and were only painted in light olive green.

The NM116 was an ‘ambush predator’. And would use its small size and good maneuverability to outflank the enemy, engage, and then withdraw along pre-arranged lanes of engagement. Here, Dag Rune Nilsen describes how the vehicles were employed:

“The NM-116 wasn’t regarded as much of a tank and there were many jokes about it. However, none of us who actually used it were under any illusions and knew that we had to be smart when using it. Especially when considering fighting positions so that we could fire effectively and at not too long range, and then move quickly to the next planned fighting position. Most of the time our task was to delay an approaching enemy, fire a few rounds and then pull back to reposition. I do honestly believe that we could have caused some damage due to the tactics. The NM-116 was very easy to maneuver and we managed several times [on excercise] to trick Leopards battle tanks into short-range traps in wooded areas where their overconfident crews were unable to turn their turrets due to trees making them extremely vulnerable!”

To augment the ambush tactics used with the NM-116, the vehicles would be covered in ‘live’ camouflage. This consisted of layers of moss and peat, with shrubbery applied over the top. The moss and peat would last for at least 3 weeks, but the shrubbery would be replaced every other day. Thor Christoffersen, another ex-tanker, inherited command of Dag Rune Nilsen’s NM-116. Here he describes how effective the camouflage was:

“Our vehicles were almost invisible to the naked eye, and also to thermal sights [thanks to the peat and moss]. On one exercise, a Canadian Recon Patrol Unit stopped in front of my vehicle and made a brief sweep of the area. A couple of them took the chance to have a piss. Unknown to one of the Canadians, the whole time he was there, there was a very anxious gunner with a .50 caliber MG pointing at him. One of the Canadian Recon soldiers actually pissed on the vehicle’s tracks without noticing! What was more impressive, is that the Canadian Recon Patrol left our position without noticing the other 9 armored vehicles (6 NM-116 + 3 NM-142) sat alongside us! There was hell to pay the next day…“

An example of a well-camoflauged NM-116 on exercise. Photo: Thor Christofferson

The NM-116 was a successful conversion, but by the end of the Cold War in the early 1990s, the tank was becoming obsolete. Its gun simply did not have the penetrative power to combat modern armored fighting vehicles. This led to the NM-116 receiving the nickname ‘Pansernager’, literally meaning ‘Armor Nibbler’ due to the weapon’s lack of killing power. Nevertheless, the tank served the Norwegian Army well for 18 years, finally being retired in 1993.

The Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (also known as the CFE Treaty, signed in 1990, effective as of 1992) also played a big part in the retirement of the NM-116, as it mandated comprehensive limits of conventional military equipment in European states. This included the destruction of excess weaponry. It is likely that because of this, most NM-116s were scrapped after they were retired.

A surviving NM-116 at Rena Camp in Splinter Camoflauge. Photo: Erik Torp, net-maquettes.com

Foreign Interest

The US firm of NAPCO Industries Incorporated – a producer of military vehicles – were impressed with the Norwegian upgrade program. So much so, that they bought the rights to produce the vehicle for the international arms market.

NAPCO demonstrated the NM-116 to Greece and Taiwan. However, neither country invested in the vehicle, opting instead for less complicated upgrades for their respective M24 fleets.

Variants

NM-130 Bergepanser

To support the new NM-116, it was also decided by the military that a new Armored Recovery Vehicle (ARV) be developed. For this, four Chaffees were separated from the 116 projects.

The hulls of the tanks went through much of the same changes as the NM-116 (new engine, transmission, shock absorbers, etc.). The turret, however, was completely removed and replaced by a large folding crane. A small dozer blade was also installed on the lower glacis.

This ARV was designated the NM-130 ‘Bergepanser’ (Eng: Armored Recovery Vehicle). It entered service around the same time as the NM-116 and left service with its tank-killing brother. There is a possibility that it stayed on in service a little longer to serve Norway’s fleet of M48s and Leopard 1s, but concrete evidence of this cannot be found.

The NM-130 Bergingswagen, the ARV variant of the M24/NM-116. Photos: hestvik.no

Driver Trainer

Two NM-116s were converted into driver training vehicles. For this, the entire turret was replaced by a large, hexagonal protective cab. This cab featured four large windows, the front two fitted with wiper blades. There was room in this cab for two trainees and one instructor.

According to former Commander Nilsen…

“The removed turrets were used for the basic training of gunners and loaders. These two turrets could be easily mounted on the trainers in case of mobilization.”

Left, An NM-116 driver trainer is washed down by its crew after a training session. Right, the dismounted turrets are used for gunner and loader training. Photo: Dag Rune Nilsen

Conclusion

The NM-116 is a good example of an under-equipped and underfunded nation finding a solution to a critical dilemma: how do you equip a military with effective weapons while dealing with a tight budget? The Norwegians took what was – at the time – an almost 30-year-old piece of World War 2 technology and turned it into an effective tank killer for the late-20th century. This extended the service life of the M24 Chaffee to around 50 years. Having operated the Chaffee and NM-116 from 1946 to 1993, the Norwegian Army is one of the longest operators of the tank in the world, surpassed only by countries like Chile.

Unfortunately, these tanks are now something of a rarity, with not many surviving today. Some survivors can be found in Museums, however. One can be found in the Rogaland Krigshistorisk Museum, Norway. The tank in the Splinter camouflage pattern featured in this article remains on static display at the Rena Military Camp in eastern Norway. Another tank can be found in the Musée des Blindés, France.

The Rogaland Krigshistorisk Museum’s example of a surviving NM-116. Photo: Rogaland Krigshistorisk Museum

Personal Connection

Much of the detail in this article was provided by Dag Rune Nilsen and Thor Christofferson, former NM-116 Commanders of Panserverneskadron, Brigade Nord (PvEsk/N). Thor took over Dag’s tank when he was promoted. Below, Dag outlines some personal history with the tank…

Sergeant (at this time) Dag Rune Nilsen (extreme left) NM-116 Commander, stands with his crew alongside his tank, callsign 11, ‘Atilla’. Photo: Dag Rune Nilsen

“The NM-116 was the first tank I commanded in the cavalry. I served as a sergeant after completing the Norwegian cavalry academy at Trandum from 1986-1987. From 1987 to 1988, I served at a combat unit in the northern parts of Norway (Setermoen, Troms). From 1989 to 1990, I served as a 2nd lieutenant and instructor at the academy. Around this time, I was retrained to serve in the Leopard 1A5NO as a reservist. I also had some experience in the NM-142 (TOW) Rakettpanserjager.”

In the collection of pictures below, note that one of the tanks has the cartoon character ‘Snoopy’ painted on it. Dag explains why:

“That was actually my NM-116, callsign 11, named ‘Atilla’. The squadron commander did not like the Snoopy icon and wanted us to remove it. He changed his mind when a delegation of US Marine officers found it hilarious to see Snoopy being a mascot on a Norwegian tank!”

In this quote, Dag describes what equipment NM-116 crews would carry, and how it was stowed on their tanks:

“There were detailed plans [of] what each unit should have equipment-wise, and where the equipment was to be packed on the vehicles. However, during my years at (PVEsk/N), these plans were amended locally. The reason being that this unit could be described as a “field unit” and spent lots of time on exercise, far more than any other NM-116 unit previously. Some example of improvized equipment on the NM-116s at PvEsk/N was the turret racks added by our mechanics and the way we packed the vehicles with gear that was not included in the packing instructions made in the 70s. On the NM-116 driving off the landing ship,* one can see a large tent, rolled up and attached to the front. This type of tent was not included in the original plans and if you never served in my unit, one would not know of the use. The same goes for the additional storage boxes, tent oven, firewood, extra oils and other things that we brought with us. The point is that all tank crews will regularly amend the tanks for comfort and for practical purposes.”

*pictured above in ‘Armament Upgrades’

A collection of photos of the NM-116 provided by Dag Rune Nilsen. Clockwise: 1, An NM-116 heavily camouflaged with foliage. 2, an NM-116 fires its 90mm gun in a night shoot. 3, Dag’s gunner in the turret of their tank, ‘Atilla’ (note Snoopy). 4, an NM-116 on exercise in the Norwegian mountains. 5, an NM-116 parked beside a Norwegian Leopard 1A5. These photos were taken between 1986 and 1988. All Photos: Dag Rune Nilsen

An article by Mark Nash, assisted by Steffen Hjønnevåg, Dag Rune Nilsen, & Thor Christofferson

The initial NM-116 ‘Panserjager’ as it appeared in 1975 during the prototype phase. At this time, the vehicles remained in the same Olive Drab scheme used on the M24 Chaffees. The .50 Cal (12.7mm) Browning machine gun is placed in the added position infront of the commander’s cupola.

The NM-116 in the later years of its service during the mid-1980s. It is adorned with the ‘Splinter’ camouflage pattern introduced at that time. Note also, the other upgrades that appeared such as the ‘T’ muzzle brake and the new sprocket wheel.

These illustrations were produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon Campaign.

Specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)	5.45 (without gun) x 2.84 x 2.61 meters (16’4″(without gun)x 9’4″ x 5’3″)
Total weight, battle ready	18.3 tonnes (20 tons)
Crew	4 (driver, commander, gunner, loader)
Propulsion	Detroit Diesel 6V-53T, 260hp
Max Road Speed	47 km/h (29 mph)
Range	300 kilometers (186 miles)
Armament	D/925 low-pressure 90mm gun, 41 rounds Browning AN/M3 .50 Cal (12.7 mm) machine gun Browning M2HB .50 Cal machine gun
Front Armor	25 mm (1 in)
Front Side 2/3 Armor	25 mm (1 in)
Rear side 1/3 Armor	19 mm (3/4 in)
Rear Armor	19 mm (3/4 in)
Turret Armor	25 mm (1 in)
Gun Mantel Armor	38 mm (1 1/2 in)
Production	72

Sources

2nd Lieutenant Dag Rune Nilsen, Former NM-116 Commander, retired
Thor Christofferson, Former NM-116 Commander, retired.
Teknisk Håndbok, Panserjager NM-116: Beskrivelse, Behandling, og Brukerens Vedlikehold (Eng: Technical Manual, Panserjager NM-116: Description, Treatment, and User Maintenance). Available at modellnorge.no (Flash player required).
Clemens Niesner, Norge – Hærens Styrker, Vehicles of the Modern Norwegian Land Forces, Tankograd Publishing
Jim Mesko, M24 Chaffee in Action, Squadron/Signal Publications
www.net-maquettes.com
modellnorge.no
krigshistorisk-museum.no
hestvik.no
sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com

Cold War French Tanks

AMX-13 Avec Tourelle FL-11

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date December 10, 2019
No Comments on AMX-13 Avec Tourelle FL-11

France (1954)
Improvised Light Tank – 5 Built

By February 1952, the French had been fighting in the First Indochina War (1946 -1954) for six years. This war was fought between the French and Việt Minh (Việt Nam độc lập đồng Minh, Fr: Ligue pour l’indépendance du Viêt Nam, Eng: League for the Independence of Vietnam). The Việt Minh wanted to put an end to French rule and take control of Indochina. The French Minister of State for Relations with Associated States, Jean Letourneau, requested that the French Military’s latest tank, the AMX-13, be sent to Cavalry units battling the Việt Minh. The tanks equipping the Cavalry at the time – namely the M5A1 and M24 Chaffee light tanks – were too heavy and poorly armed to fight a guerilla war in a dense jungle environment.

However, the AMX-13 was also unsuitable for such warfare in its current configuration. Its large FL-10 turret and long, high-velocity 75 mm (2.9 in) gun was simply impractical for this Asian environment. There was also a requirement for air-transportability, but the AMX was just a bit too heavy to achieve this.

To meet the requirements, it was decided that modifications were needed for the AMX-13 to be suitable for constricted environments and light enough to be transported by air, thereby allowing it to be fielded in colonial policing operations, no matter the environment or enemy. This was achieved by mating the newly developed FL-11 turret – designed for the Panhard EBR (Engin Blindé de Reconnaissance, Eng: Armored Reconnaissance Vehicle) – with the existing AMX hull. This created the AMX-13 Avec Tourelle FL-11 (AMX-13 with FL-11 Turret). While it was a successful conversion that saved 1.5 tonnes (1.6 tons) of weight, the vehicle, for a number of reasons, would not go into large scale production.

The AMX-13 with FL-11 turret. This mated the hull of the AMX light tank with the turret of the Panhard EBR armored car. Photo: Pen & Sword Publishing

The AMX-13

Designed and built by Atelier d’Issy les Moulineaux or ‘AMX’, the officially titled Char de 13 tonnes 75 modèle 51 (Tank, 13 tonnes, 75mm gun, model of 1951) – often shortened to Mle 51, was more commonly known as the ‘AMX-13’. The tank was designed in the late 1940s and appeared in service in the early 1950s. It was designed to be a lightweight, highly mobile tank destroyer that could also perform the reconnaissance tasks of a light tank.

It was lightly armored, with the toughest plates being just 40 mm (1.57 in) thick. Its main armament consisted of the 75 mm Canon de 75 S.A. Mle 50, often known simply as the CN 75-50 or SA-50. The design of this gun was derived from the powerful Second World War German KwK 42 gun mounted on the Panther. The gun was mounted in an innovative oscillating turret and was also fed via an autoloading system.

The AMX weighed in at around 13 tonnes (14 tons) and was 6.36 m (20 ft 10 in, with gun) long, 2.51 m (8 ft 3 in) wide, and 2.35 m (7 ft 9 in) tall. It was operated by a 3-man crew consisting of the Commander, Driver, and Gunner. The tank went through many upgrades with many variations based on its highly adaptable chassis. The French Military only retired the AMX in the 1980s, but many other nations retain it in service.

The Standard AMX-13 Light Tank or, as it is officially known, the Char de 13 tonnes 75 modèle 51. Photo: weaponscollection.com

Fives-Lille (FL) Turrets

The engineering company Fives-Lille – shortened to FL – was responsible for the design of the turrets used on the AMX-13 series of light tanks. They were based in Fives, a suburb of Lille in Northern France.

The FL-10 turret. Note the long, high-velocity 75 mm SA 50 gun and the large turret bustle containing the autoloading system. Photo: Peter Lau, Rock Publishing

For the AMX-13 program, FL produced the 2-man FL-10 turret. This became the standard turret for the 75 mm armed Mle 51s. The high-velocity 75 mm Canon de 75 S.A. Mle 50 was fed via an auto-loading system which consisted of two revolving cylinders located in the turret bustle. It was an oscillating turret. These consist of two parts that move on a separate axis. The first is the top ‘roof’ section which holds the rigidly mounted main armament which moves up and down. In a conventional turret, the gun moves separately from the turret body, on its own trunnions. The second is the bottom ‘collar’ part attached to the ‘roof’ via trunnions and fixed directly to the turret ring, allowing conventional 360-degree traverse. The gap between the ‘collar’ and ‘roof’ could be covered with either a canvas or rubber covered material screen known as bellows. The FL-10 turret was the source of the problem for military heads that wanted the tank to operate in constricted environments, such as the dense jungle of Indochina, to provide close infantry support, not an ideal task for the SA 50. The high-velocity gun was long and, due to the autoloading mechanism, the turret bustle was large.

The FL-11 Turret

As the AMX-13 was in development, so too was the Panhard EBR armored car, which utilized a smaller oscillating turret produced by Fives-Lille – the FL-11. These turrets were manufactured alongside those destined for the EBR by Société des Ateliers de Construction du Nord de la France (SACNF, Eng: ‘Society of Construction Workshops in Northern France’) and the Société Alsacienne de Constructions Mécaniques (SACM, Eng: ‘Alsatian Society of Mechanical Constructions’).

It was decided that the FL-11 turret would replace the FL-10 on the AMX-13 hull. The FL-11 had the same level of armor protection as the FL-10 at 40mm (1.57 in) thick. The FL-11 turret was much smaller than the FL-10. This was because it lacked the bustle, due to the fact that the FL-11s gun was manually loaded.

Production diagram of the FL-11 turret. A: roof section, B: collar, C: turret basket. Note the lack of bustle and shorter 75mm SA 49 gun. Photo: Peter Lau, Rock Publications

The new gun was the 75 mm SA 49. It was shorter and had a lower velocity of 625 m/s (2050 fps) compared to the 1000 m/s (3280 fps) of the 75mm SA 50. This made the use of High Explosive (HE) shells far more effective, making the tank far more appropriate for close support tasks. The lower velocity, however, made it less effective against armored targets. Even so, firing Armor-Piercing Ballistic Capped (APBC), the gun could punch through 80 mm (3.14 in) of armor at 1000 meters (1093 yards). Secondary armament consisted of a coaxial 7.5 mm MAC31 Reibel machine gun located on the left of the main gun. Elevation range of the gun in this turret was +13 to -6 degrees. Four smoke-grenade launchers were also installed with two on each side of the ‘collar’.

The manually loaded 75 mm SA 49 gun. It was much shorter and had a lower shell velocity than the 75 mm SA 50 gun. Photo: Peter Lau, Rock Publishing

Like the FL-10, the FL-11 was a two-man turret with the crew consisting of the Commander and Gunner. However, with the lack of an auto-loader, the Commander also had the responsibility of loading the SA 49 gun. The Commander sat on the left of the turret with the gunner on the right. Both men had their own turret hatch. The Commander sat under a large cupola featuring 7 periscopes around its circumference. A mounting for an external machine gun could be installed on the cupola but, while it was used occasionally on the EBR, it is unknown if it was utilized on the AMX. The vehicle’s antennae were installed into the turret’s ‘collar’ with a base on the left and the right side.

Production diagram of the rear of FL-11 turret. Note a few details such as B: Commander’s cupola, H: Gunner’s hatch, P: smoke grenade launchers, K: ventilator, and J: stowage straps. Photo: Peter Lau, Rock Publishing

The AMX Hull

The AMX hull went through no alterations. It retained the same dimensions, as well as its forward-mounted engine and transmission. The tank was powered by a SOFAM Model 8Gxb 8-cylinder, water-cooled petrol engine developing 250 hp, propelling the tank to a top speed of around 60 km/h (37 mph). The vehicle ran on a torsion bar suspension with five road-wheels, two return rollers, a rear-mounted idler, and a forward-mounted drive-sprocket. The driver was positioned at the front left of the hull, behind the transmission and next to the engine.

Production

The conversion was approved by the French Military, with an order for 5 vehicles being placed in February 1954. One was to be built immediately for test purposes. Air transport tests then commenced in March of 1954. By May of that year, the remaining 4 vehicles had been built and troop testing was underway. At this time, an additional 15 vehicles were also ordered.

Left side view of the AMX-13 FL-11 test model. The FL-11 turret was placed on an unmodified AMX hull. Photo: chars-francais.net

Air Transportability

One of the key aspects of this conversion was to give the AMX-13 the ability to be air-transportable in the Armée de l’Air’s (French Air Force’s) cargo aircraft. The typical cargo aircraft of the Air Force’s fleet at this time was the Nord ‘Noratlas’. The original AMX-13, weighing in empty at 13.7 tonnes (15.1 tons), was too heavy. Replacing the FL-10 for the FL-11 resulted in the vehicle losing 1.5 tonnes (1.6 tons) of weight, making the new variant 12.2 tonnes (13.4 tons). This was still too heavy for the Nord, which had a load capacity of 6.7 tonnes (7.5 tons). Because of this, further tests were carried out using the larger English-built Bristol Type 170 Freighter, with a capacity of 7.9 tonnes (8.75 tons).

In the end, it was found that the vehicle was compatible with air transportation, but there was one small snag; the vehicle had to be completely stripped down and disassembled. The only way engineers could achieve the task of transporting the AMX was to take it apart and strap it down to three separate pallet loads of roughly 4 tonnes (4.4 tons) each. One pallet carried the entirety of the turret and rolled up tracks, the second carried the suspension and most of the automotive components, and the last pallet carried the entire hull unit with integral components. One aircraft could only carry one pallet, this meant that there would three aircraft to one tank, assuming three were available. If not, one craft could be making three round trips.

The AMX-13 FL-11 disassembled into three separate loads. Left to right we have the hull unit, suspension components, and the turret and track. Photo: Pen & Sword Publishing

Not only did this result in the logistical nightmare of transporting the loads, but also of reassembling the thing at the destination. This may not have been an easy task depending on the environment of said destination. The split also presented the risk of things going missing, not ideal when you need an operational tank on the front lines.

Service

Unfortunately, not much is known about the service history of this AMX-13 variant. By the time the initial batch was built in 1954, the First Indochina War had come to an end and the need for this tank had evaporated, resulting in the cancellation of the order for 15 more units.

An AMX-13 FL-11 is taken down a steep embankment. Both the driver and gunner are visible in this photo. Date and location unknown. Photo: chars-francais.net

The 5 vehicles that were built were dispatched to Morocco (still a French Protectorate in the early-mid-1950s) to be operated by the 2e Régiment Étranger de Cavalerie, (2e REC, Eng: 2nd Foreign Cavalry Regiment), a cavalry regiment of the French Foreign Legion, based in Oujda, Northeast Morocco. Their time here is not well documented, but it is known that in 1956 – when Morocco gained independence – the tanks were sold to the fledgling Moroccan Army. Details of their service here are also unknown. They were still present in the Moroccan arsenal in 1973.

There is a possibility that the Moroccan Army used the tanks in combat. In 1963, Morocco fought a border war with Algeria – the ‘Sand War’. Morocco fielded AMX tanks in that conflict, so the FL-11s may well have been among them.

In a typically French fashion, the crew (the three closest to the tank) of this AMX-13 FL-11 relax with what appears to be a bottle of wine next to their vehicle with an unknown guest. Date and location unknown. Photo: chars-francais.net

Conclusion

It is currently believed that no examples of the AMX-13 Avec Tourelle FL-11 survive today. How long they served and what happened to them in Morocco is currently a mystery.

This variant of the AMX-13 highlights what can happen when tanks that are designed for a specific purpose arrive too late to serve that purpose. They become destined to see out their service in obscurity, never having the chance to prove themselves in combat. The vehicle was also a bit of a failure when it came to the illogical air-transport element of its design. A feature that was one of its most important aspects. Despite this, however, the vehicle was a stepping stone to more French experiments with the concept of an air-transportable tank. These experiments would lead to the ELC EVEN and AMX-ELC programs.

As for the FL-11 turret, it would continue seeing service for a long period in the French army on its original mount, the EBR. Though the fleet of FL-11 equipped EBR were supplemented by some FL-10 equipped vehicles from the second half of the 1950s onward, the vehicles fitted with the original turret would be re-armed with a 90mm low-pressure gun with high-penetration HEAT-FS ammunition in the 1960s. Re-armed in this fashion, the FL-11 equipped EBRs would continue seeing service until the early 1980s, whereas the FL-10-equipped ones were phased out in the 1960s.

The AMX-13 Avec Tourelle FL-11. This was a mating of the AMX’s 13-tonne light tank and the Fives-Lille FL-11 turret, more often found on the Panhard EBR. Illustration by Tank Encyclopedia’s own David Bocquelet, modified by Andre ‘Octo10’ Kirushkin.

Specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)	6.36m (4.88m without gun) x 2.5m x 2.3m (20’9″ (16’0″) x 8’2″ x 7’5″ ft.in)
Total weight, battle ready	Aprx. 15 tons
Crew	3 (Commander, Gunner, Driver)
Propulsion	Renault gasoline, 8-cylinder water-cooled 250 hp
Suspension	Torsion arms
Maximum speed	60 km/h (40 mph)
Range (road)	400 km (250 mi)
Armament	75 mm SA 49 7.5 mm MAC31 Reibel machine gun
Armor	Hull & turret 40 mm (1.57 in)
Production	5

Sources

M. P. Robinson, Peter Lau, Guy Gibeau, Images of War: The AMX 13 Light Tank: A Complete History, Pen & Sword Publishing
Peter Lau, The AMX-13 Light Tank, Volume 2: Turret, Rock Publications
Olivier Carneau, Jan Horãk, František Kořãn, AMX-13 Family in Detail, Wings & Wheels Publications.
R. M. Ogorkiewicz, Profile Publications Ltd. AFV/Weapons #39: Panhard Armoured Cars
National Intelligence Survey #48, Morocco; Armed Forces, March 1973.

Cold War French Tanks Has Own Video

AMX-US (AMX-13 Avec Tourelle Chaffee)

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date November 30, 2019
20 Comments on AMX-US (AMX-13 Avec Tourelle Chaffee)

France (1957)
Improvised Light Tank – 150 Built

In 1956, the French Army and the Direction des Etudes et Fabrications d’Armements (Directorate of Studies and Manufacture of Armaments, DEFA, an institution within the French Military) were looking into affordable methods of modernizing their fleet of aging M24 Chaffee light tanks. One method was to somehow combine France’s new domestic light tank, the AMX-13, with the M24.

The officially designated AMX-US was a result of this. It would ‘mate’ the turret of the M24 with the hull of the AMX-13. The AMX-13 would become one of the world’s most popular light tanks to come out of the Cold War era, appearing in the early 1950s. While this particular variant goes by the official name of ‘AMX-US’, there are many other unofficial names, including ‘AMX-13 Chaffee’ – as it was known by troops – or ‘AMX-13 Avec Tourelle Chaffee (with Chaffee Turret)’.

Just a small number of these vehicles were produced. They initially found service in French Military Units tasked with policing colonies such as Algeria. They eventually found use as driver training vehicles once they were discharged from frontline service.

Two AMX-US’, ‘Lamarck’ and ‘Lagalissoniere’, sit side by side in Algeria in the early 1960s. The AMX-US was a convenient improvisation, ‘mating’ the new AMX-13 hull, with the older turret of the M24 Chaffee. Photo: chars-francais.net

French Chaffees

After the Second World War, France’s armored force consisted, almost entirely, of US-built vehicles, such as the M4 Sherman, M26 Pershing, and M24 Chaffee (among others). France received these vehicles as aid as part of the Marshall Plan and the Mutual Defense Assistance Act (MDAA). These aid pacts also financed the reconstruction of France’s economy and armed forces from 1948 until the late 1950s. In April 1949, the North Atlantic Treaty was signed, and NATO was born, resulting in the United States extending the MDAA. This resulted in France receiving newer vehicles, such as the M47 Patton II tank.

In total, France would operate around 1,250 M24s which were identical to their US counterparts. It was a small tank at 5.45 meters (16 ft 4 in) long, 2.84 meters (9ft 4in) wide, and 2.61 meters (9ft 3in) tall. It weighed 16.6 tonnes (18.37 tons), utilized a torsion bar suspension, and was armed with a 75 mm gun. The tank had a 5 man crew: Commander, Gunner, Loader, Driver, Bow Gunner. The ‘Chaffee’ was named after WWI US Army General, Adna R. Chaffee Jr.

The French Army deployed its M24 in both the 1954-1962 War in Algeria, and the 1946-1954 First Indochina War. It served with distinction in both theatres but would ultimately end up being fully replaced by the AMX-13.

M24 Chaffee of the French Army’s 3rd Company, 1st Light cavalry Regiment (3/1 RCC), in Dien Bien Phu, Vietnam. Photo: Osprey Publishing

The AMX-13

The Standard AMX-13 Light Tank or, as it is officially known, the Char de 13 tonnes 75 modèle 51. Photo: weaponscollection.com

Char Meets Chaffee

In 1956, DEFA and the French Military were investigating ways to efficiently upgrade the aging Light Tank M24. Initially, this led to the mating of the Mle 51’s FL-10 oscillating turret to the hull of the Chaffee. While cheap and feasible, this configuration never went further than trials. This was largely due to a perceived safety issue with the High-Explosive (HE) rounds fired by the CN 75-50 cannon. Inside the FL-10 turret, the CN 75-50 gun was fed via an automatic loading system, which was reloaded externally. If an alternate shell-type needed to be fired, HE, for example, it had to be loaded into the breach manually by the Commander. This was a tricky task in the tight confines of the turret on the standard AMX, made worse by the notoriously sensitive fuze of the HE rounds. This process would be even more dangerous on the smaller hull of the Chaffee. As a result, the inverse of this mounting was decided upon, mounting the Chaffee’s turret on the Mle 51’s hull.

M24 Chaffee hull fitted with the Mle 51’s (AMX-13’s) FL-10 Oscillating turret. This version of the mating of the two tanks was not pursued, largely due to the sensitivity of the fuses on the HE shells fired by the CN 75-50 gun. Photo: reddit

Avec Tourelle Chaffee

By 1957, work on the inverse of mounting the Chaffee turret to the AMX hull had begun. This was seen as a safer and easier alternative. It was also a convenient way of recycling useful Chaffee turrets by separating them from their worn hulls. It also created a vehicle lighter than the regular Chaffee, meaning it was easier to transport.

The M24 turrets went through very little modification for their installation, retaining all the same main features. The only modification necessary was the introduction of an adapter or ‘collar’ to the AMX hull’s turret ring. This was needed as the Chaffee turret had quite a deep basket. The collar granted the basket clearance from the hull floor for uninterrupted, full 360-degree rotation.

This photo shows what happened to these tanks once they were retired from active service. They were disarmed and became training vehicles. However, this photo also shows the adaptor ‘collar’ installed on the Mle 51s turret ring to allow the attachment of the Chaffee’s turret. Photo: chars-francais.net

Turret Details

The Chaffee turret was a standard design with a typical 3-man crew of the time: Gunner, Loader, and Commander. The Commander sat at the left rear of the turret under a vision-cupola, the gunner sat in front of him. The loader was located at the right-rear of the turret under his own hatch. Armor on the turret was 25 mm (.98 in) thick on all sides, with the gun mantlet being 38 mm (1.49 in) thick. Armament consisted of the 75 mm Lightweight Tank Gun M6 which had a concentric recoil system (this was a hollow tube around the barrel, a space-saving alternative to traditional recoil cylinders). Variants of this gun were also used on the B-25H Mitchell Bomber, and the T33 Flame Thrower Tank prototype. The shell velocity was 619 m/s (2,031 ft/s) and had a maximum penetration of 109 mm. The elevation range of the gun was around -10 to +13 degrees. Secondary weapons were also retained. This included the coaxial .30 Cal (7.62 mm) Browning M1919 Machine Gun, and the .50 Caliber (12.7 mm) M2 Browning Heavy Machine gun which was mounted on the rear of the turret roof.

A regular M24 Chaffee (left) sits alongside a Mle 51 ‘Avec Tourelle Chaffee’. The Mle 51 is noticeably lower. Photo: chars-francais.net

The AMX Hull

Apart from the adaptor or ‘collar’, the AMX hull went through no alterations. It retained the same dimensions, and forward-mounted engine and transmission. The tank was powered by a SOFAM Model 8Gxb 8-cylinder, water-cooled petrol engine developing 250 hp, propelling the tank to a top speed of around 60 km/h (37 mph). The vehicle ran on a torsion bar suspension with five road-wheels, two return rollers, a rear-mounted idler, and a forward-mounted drive-sprocket. The driver was positioned at the front left of the hull, behind the transmission and next to the engine.

Service

Trials with what would be designated the ‘AMX-US’ were undertaken between December 1959 and January 1960. The vehicle was well received, with an order for 150 conversions being placed by the French military in March 1960. Conversion work was carried out at a plant in Gien, North-Central France.

A French tank platoon consisting of 3 AMX-US’ and a single M8 HMC enter an urban area in Algeria during the conflict. Photo: Pen & Sword Publishing

The AMX-US was operated by a four-man crew, as opposed to the three-man crew of the standard Mle 51, due to the three-man turret of the Chaffee. The AMX-US saw brief service in the War in Algeria – otherwise known as the Algerian War of Independence or Algerian Revolution. They served well, but a few were lost in combat. One known operator was the 9e Régiment de Hussards (9th Hussar Regiment) based in Oran. There is no evidence to suggest they served in any other location with the French military, such as in France or West Germany based regiments.

After the conflict in Algeria, the vehicles were returned to France. They did not last long in active service after this, with many vehicles being repurposed into driver trainers. For this, the vehicles were disarmed, with the 75 mm gun and mantlet removed from the turret face. In its place, a large plexiglass windscreen was installed. In this capacity, the AMX-US stayed in service until the 1980s, when they were finally completely retired. After this, many were ‘sentenced to death’ as range targets or simply scrapped.

An AMX-US Driver Trainer with removed armament. Photo: chars-francais.net

Conclusion

The AMX-US is an example of an effective improvisation. It ‘mated’ old technology with new technology, creating a cheap yet effective light tank that did its job without issue. It also solved the problem of what to do with useful surplus and excess material. An interesting observation is that this is the only AMX-based upgrade or conversion that resulted in the hull being used and not the turret – apart from the AMX-13 (FL-11). The M4/FL-10 is a successful example of this.

Due to the AMX-US’ fate, the vehicles are now extremely rare, with almost none surviving. Some, however, do still sit rusting away on military ranges.

The crew of two AMX-US tanks take a break in Algeria. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

AMX-US ‘Lamarck’ during the Algerian Conflict of the early 1960s. The combination of the Mle 51’s hull with the M24 Chaffee’s turret was achieved with a simple adaptor ‘collar’ placed on the turret ring.

When they were retired from active service, many AMX-US’ were turned into driver trainers. They were completely disarmed, with a large window on the front of the turret replacing the gun and mantlet.

These illustrations were produced by Tank Encyclopedia’s own David Bocquelet.

Specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)	6.36m (4.88m without gun) x 2.5m x 2.3m (20’9″ (16’0″) x 8’2″ x 7’5″ ft.in)
Total weight, battle-ready	Aprx. 15 tons
Crew	4 (Commander, Loader, Gunner, Driver)
Propulsion	Renault gasoline, 8-cylinder water-cooled 250 hp
Suspension	Torsion arms
Maximum speed	60 km/h (40 mph)
Range (road)	400 km (250 mi)
Armament	75 mm Lightweight Tank Gun M6 .30 Cal. (7.62 mm) Browning M1919 Machine Gun .50 Caliber (12.7 mm) M2 Browning Heavy Machine gun
Armor	Hull 40 mm (1.57 in), turret 38 mm (1.49 in)
Production	150

Sources

M. P. Robinson, Peter Lau, Guy Gibeau, Images of War: The AMX 13 Light Tank: A Complete History, Pen & Sword Publishing, 2019.
Olivier Carneau, Jan Horãk, František Kořãn, AMX-13 Family in Detail, Wings & Wheels Publications.
Steven J. Zaloga, New Vanguard #77: M24 Chaffee Light Tank 1943-85, Osprey Publishing
Jim Mesko, M24 Chaffee in Action, Squadron/Signal Publications
www.chars-francais.net

Cold War British Engineering Vehicles

FV4003 Centurion AVRE

United Kingdom (1955)
Engineering Vehicle – Approximately 40 Built

In 1944, a new type of armored vehicle, designed specifically for use by the Royal Engineers (RE), entered service. This was the Churchill AVRE (Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers). It was based on the Mk.III and IV model of the Infantry Tank, and was famously armed with the devastating 230 mm Petard Mortar.

The Churchill AVRE served honorably throughout the Second World War as part of the 79th Armoured Division, famous for being the home of ‘Hobart’s Funnies’. In 1947, it underwent a limited upgrade program based on the Churchill Mk.VII. This vehicle was designated the FV3903 and was armed with a new 165 mm Demolition Gun. By the mid-1950s, however, the Churchill was obsolete and the Royal Engineers were in need of a new, modern vehicle.

In the late 1940s, the British Army’s new Universal Tank, the FV4007 Centurion, entered service. In 1953, the Engineers’ needs were answered in the form of this new vehicle. At the Fighting Vehicles Research and Development Establishment (FVRDE) in Chertsey, design work began on a new generation of AVRE (The nomenclature now being ‘Assault Vehicle Royal Engineers’), based on the Centurion. Once designs were approved, production began with the AVREs based on the Mk.5 Centurion.

The Centurion AVRE. This is a preserved example kept at the Norfolk Tank Museum. Photo: Norfolk Tank Museum.

The Mk.5 Centurion

At the time of the Centurion AVRE’s development, the Mk.5 gun tank was a brand new tank, only entering service in the summer of 1955. The biggest difference between this model and its predecessors was a change in coaxial machine guns. The BESA 7.92 mm machine gun had been used on British tanks since the Second World War, but in an effort to standardize ammunition types, it was replaced by the American Browning 7.62 mm (.30 Cal).

In all other major aspects, the Mk.5 was almost identical to the Mk.3. The standard main armament of the Mk.5 consisted of the Ordnance QF 20-Pounder (84mm) gun. It had armor from 51 mm up to 152 mm thick. The vehicle was powered by a Rolls-Royce Meteor engine producing 650 hp and giving the tank a top speed of 22 mph (35 km/h). The tank’s weight of 51 tons was supported on a Horstmann suspension with three two-wheel bogies per-side. The Centurion had a 4 man crew, consisting of commander, gunner, loader and driver. The fact that this variant was based on the Mk.5 tank led it to sometimes being called the ‘Centurion Mk.5 AVRE’.

Development

Obviously, the Centurion AVRE carried much the same equipment as its Churchill predecessor. This included a dozer blade, fascines (large bundles of branches or pipes to fill in a trench) and, of course, a powerful demolition gun. After designs were finalized at the Fighting Vehicles Research and Development Establishment (FVRDE), trials were undertaken in 1954. A standard Centurion was used to test the chassis with the additional weight of a load of fascines and other equipment. The design met the approval of the War Office in July of 1955, and the first prototype Centurion AVRE was delivered to the FVRDE in August 1957.

165mm L9A1 Demolition Gun

Though the 230 mm Petard Mortar of the Churchill AVRE was an extremely powerful demolition weapon, it had had a few flaws. Namely, a limited range of just 100 yards (91 meters) and the fact that the weapon was loaded externally.

Close up of the L9 gun on ‘Bombastic’, a surviving AVRE preserved at the Cobbaton Combat Collection, North Devon, UK. Photo: Authors own.

The Petard was replaced by the Ordnance BL 165mm (6.5 in) L9A1 Demolition Gun. This weapon was a vast improvement over the Petard in both respects. It was breech loaded and had a vastly improved range. The gun fired a 64 lb (29 kg) High Explosive Squash Head (HESH) shell up to 2,400 m (2,600 yds). The gun was reportedly accurate enough to blast a bridge girder at 600 yards (549 meters) or hit a pillbox or bunker at 1400 yards (1280 meters). At greater ranges, it was an effective Area-Of-Effect (AOE) weapon. The gun could elevate 20 degrees, and depress 10 degrees, though depression was limited over the engine deck.

The shell contained around 32 lbs (14.5 kgs) of PE4 explosives, equivalent to six 120mm HESH rounds. The round had no shell case in the traditional sense. Instead, the charge was placed inside a perforated base connected directly to the warhead and remained attached to the projectile as it flew. The gun and shell were never intended for use as an Anti-Armor weapon. This is not to say that a 165 mm HESH round from the L9 wouldn’t have been able to do so in an emergency, but it was never meant for that purpose.

Cross-section of a 165mm HESH shell. Photo: David Lister

Equipment

The role of the Centurion was much the same as the original Churchill. As well as its demolition gun, the AVRE carried a vast array of battlefield engineering equipment.

Fascines

Just like the Churchill before it, the Centurion could carry a large fascine over its front end in a cradle mounted on the upper glacis. Fascines had been carried by tanks since their earliest days on the devastated battlefields of the First World War, most notably at the Battle of Cambrai in 1917. Fascines are used to fill wide trenches or ditches to allow tanks to cross. They are usually fabricated from brushwood, bound tightly together into a cylinder. These wooden fascines were 8-10 feet (2.4 – 3 meters) in diameter, and up to 16 feet (4.8 meters) wide. They were heavy at six to seven tons, increasing by an extra ton when wet. They also had the effect of damming when placed in boggy ground or in a stream. This was not ideal as it caused the bundle to shift or even float away. The Royal Engineers soon developed a new type, fabricated from large sections of PVC piping. This new type only weighed around two tons, and fixed the damming issue as water passed straight through the pipes.

The new PVC pipe fascine. They were also known as ‘Maxi-pipes”. Photo: Haynes Publishing

The fascine was held in place by cables connected to explosive blow-off pins with the turret traversed to the rear. Carrying the fascine, the vehicle was limited to a speed of 10 mph. Usually, the commander would have to sit atop the turret to guide the driver. This precarious option was rarely used, however, as the driver had suitable vision under the bundle. The technique to deploy the fascine was to drive up to the ditch and brake sharply, simultaneously setting off the blast pins. The inertia of the braking would thereby propel the fascine off the front of the tank and into the ditch.

Dozer Blade

This hydraulically operated dozer blade was shared by the FV4019 Centurion Mk.5 Dozer, and was made by T.B. Pearsons Limited of Newcastle. It was a standard part of the AVRE’s loadout, being permanently fitted to almost every vehicle. However, they were sometimes removed to make way for mine clearing plows. The blade was fitted directly to the upper glacis at the front of the Centurion. In its raised position, the Dozer had the added bonus of acting as extra armor.

The large dozer blade of the AVRE was the same as the blade on the Centurion Mk.5 Dozer. Above it can be seen the fascine cradle. Photo: Haynes Publishing

The blade had an output capacity of 30 cu yds (23 cu m) per hour and was used for a number of tasks. These included carving out hull-down positions for gun tanks (this could be achieved within 7 minutes), digging gun emplacements, route denial (creating and filling anti-tank ditches), and improving bridge approaches. It could also be used aggressively to push barricades or debris from the path of attacking allies, and even clear inert and unexploded mines. The blade was also used to flatten ground for the application of Class 60 Trackway by ‘back-blading’, dragging the blade back over the ground to grade a uniform surface for the roadway to lie on.

12 BA 55, a preserved AVRE at the Wight Military and Heritage Museum, Isle of Wight, UK. Note the attachment points on the lower glacis for the Dozer blade at the front of the tank. Also, note the cradle for the fascine atop the upper glacis. Photo: Author’s own

Class 60 Trackway

An extremely versatile piece of kit, this portable metal matting could be used for a number of roles. These included forming a safe bridge approach, helicopter landing pad, stable road over boggy or soft ground, and a safe riverbank exit. The trackway was carried in the same cradle used by the fascine and was deployed in the same manner.

Towed Equipment

Trailer

The AVRE could haul a 7½-ton four-wheel trailer designed to carry a fascine roll, two rolls of Class 60 Trackway, demolition charges, No. 7 Anti-Tank mines, RDD (Radiological Dispersal Device) explosives, and other engineering equipment. The trailer could traverse any terrain the tank could, without hindering it. It could be jettisoned when required via an exploding pin in the jointed towing hook.

The 7½-ton four-wheel trailer carrying two rolls of Class 60 Trackway. Photo: Haynes Publishing

Barmine Mechanical Minelayer

Two of these devices could be towed by the AVRE. These were attached to the back of the trailer for mine laying operations. The trailer could carry and deploy 864 mines, compared to the 114 of the FV432 APC when it was fitted with the minelayer.

Giant Viper

Another trailer borne-device which was towed by the AVRE. A development of the World War Two ‘Conger’, the ‘Giant Viper’ was a mine clearing device used to clear large areas of explosive devices such as IED’s or landmines or clear a path through barbed wire. The Viper was mounted on a trailer that was towed by the tank. It consisted of a 750ft (229 m) long, 2 ⅝ inches (6.6 cm) diameter hose filled with plastic explosives. The Viper would be launched over the tank via a cluster of eight rocket motors, then landing in the area that had to be cleared and exploding. The blast would clear a pathway 24ft (7.3m) wide and 600 ft (183 m) long. The device was carried on the back of a unique two-wheel trailer.

The Giant Viper trailer. Photo: Haynes Publishing

Designations

There would be two variants of the Centurion AVRE. These were the standard 165 mm Demolition gun armed version, known as the Centurion 165 AVRE, and the 105 mm L7 armed Centurion 105 AVRE. Both vehicles shared common AVRE equipment.

The 105 AVREs appeared in the early 1980s and were based on Mk.12 Centurions, apart from a solitary Mk.13 used for tests. There were two versions, the standard AVRE Mk.12, and the AVRE Mk.12 H (H for Hydraulic). These versions were equipped with hydraulic systems that allowed them to use the Dozer Blade or Mine Plough. The standard Mk.12 AVREs could only carry the Mine Plough. They retained the standard 105 mm L7 tank gun, but they were limited to just firing HESH rounds. This gave the 105 AVREs the ability to carry out the same demolition jobs like the 165 AVREs at a greater range, but with slightly less explosive power.

The 105 AVRE could still carry a fascine with the turret traversed. The standard Mk.12s became specialized mine-clearing variants of the AVRE. Instead of the standard dozer blade, the tanks were fitted with track-width mine ploughs. The AVRE would use this in conjunction with the Giant Viper. The AVRE, with mine plow lowered, would drive the path cleared by the Viper’s detonation. The turret would be traversed so the gun was off to one side or positioned over the engine deck to protect it from any detonations. The plough would push any unexploded or pressure-insensitive mines to the side of the path, out of the way of following allied armor.

The Centurion 105 AVRE outfitted for anti-mine operations with Giant Viper trailer and mine plow. As this is a demonstratory photo, the turret remains pointed forwards. In actual operation, the turret would be turned away from any possible explosions. Photo: Haynes Publishing

Service

Trials with the Centurion AVRE began in February 1962. It finally entered service with the Royal Engineers in 1963 alongside the FV3903 Churchill AVRE, as it gradually took its place. It was assigned to the three Armoured Engineer Squadrons of the 32nd Assault Engineer Regiment. These consisted of the 26th, 31st, and 77th Armoured Engineer Squadrons. Originally, each squadron’s arsenal consisted of three AVREs (105s and 165s), two Centurion Bridge Layers and a troop of four FV4016 Centurion ARKs (Armoured Ramp Carriers). This would later become more flexible to suit the tactical situation at hand. The AVRE’s roots in the 79th Armoured Division and ‘Hobart’s Funnies’ were never forgotten. To this end, most of, if not all of the Centurions had the famous Bulls Head insignia of the 79th applied somewhere on their armor.

Only the British Army would ever use the Centurion AVRE. It took part in annual training exercises in the UK, Germany, and even BATUS (British Army Training Unit Suffield) in Canada. It famously saw action in ‘The Troubles’ in Northern Ireland in the early 1970s, and later in the First Gulf War in the 1990s. It is these situations that will be focussed on in this article.

AVRE of the 32nd Armoured Engineers, part of the BAOR (British Army of the Rhine). Photo: Tankograd Publishing

Operation Motorman

In response to the ‘Bloody Friday’ bombings of Belfast, the British Army initiated Operation Motorman. The aim of the operation was to take back the ‘no-go’ areas in Irish Nationalist (A group that wanted Ireland to be a unified country, free from the rule of the UK) communities and dismantle the barricades that surrounded them. Barricades had sprung up in many Northern Irish Communities in response to sectarian attacks. The Irish Nationalists built barricades in their communities to defend from attacks by Loyalists (A group that wanted Northern Ireland to remain British) and to deny access by the Police force in Northern Ireland, the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC). Although some Loyalist communities also erected barricades, the most famous ‘no-go’ area was in the Bogside neighborhood of Londonderry, known simply at the time as ‘Derry’ to the Nationalist community.

Preparation for the commencement of Operation Motorman started with the drafting in of an extra 4,000 troops. This brought the estimated total of troops in the area to 21,000, including 27 infantry and two armoured battalions. With the cover of darkness, HMS Fearless, an amphibious assault ship, unloaded a number of Centurion AVREs with Dozer Blades ready.

Centurion AVRE of the Royal Engineers traverses the debris left by the destruction of the Nationalist barricades in the Creggan Estate of Londonderry. The AVREs never fired a shot from their 165 mm guns, which remained fully traversed and under their protective canvas covers. Photo: Ed Francis

At 4 am on the morning of 31st July 1972, the Army moved into all ‘no-go’ areas. The AVREs would not fire a shot during the operation. Instead, they advanced with turrets fully traversed and used their heavy dozer blades to smash through the barricades. They then swept a path through the debris, pushing brickwork, bollards, concrete metal scrap, and even cars from the roads of the neighborhoods, clearing the way for the Army’s smaller wheeled armored vehicles.

The operation was intended to be a bloodless one as, knowing they were outgunned and outnumbered, the IRA (Irish Republican Army) had mostly fled the areas putting up little resistance. Unfortunately, two local teenagers were shot and killed which, regardless of the circumstances, simply further inflamed the community. However, the operation did substantially quell the levels of violence in the province.

An AVRE passes an FV604 Armoured Command Vehicle (ACV) – a variant of the FV603 Saracen – on an estate in Belfast. Photo: Belfast Telegraph

Gulf War

The AVRE remained in service long after its gun tank cousins had been retired by the British Army. The Centurion AVRE was still a key part of the Royal Engineer’s arsenal in the early 1990s. By this time, however, it was a struggle to keep them going due to lack of spare parts, and the age of the vehicles. Some were almost 40 years old at this point. Units operating them became known as the ‘Antiques Roadshow’. Even so, 12 Centurion AVRE’s were sent to the Gulf for Operation Granby, the codename given to British operations in the 1990-1991 Gulf War. It is known that one of the Centurions that went to the Gulf had also been part of Operation Motorman some 19 years prior.

With the expectation that the Armoured Engineers would lead the charge against the Iraqi Army’s formidable field fortifications and anti-tank defenses, the AVRE were drastically up-armored. This was one of the first tasks undertaken by the Engineers. Explosive-Reactive Armor (ERA) was applied all over the front half of the vehicle in an attempt to defend it against most of the enemy’s anti-tank weapons. In the event, the breaching would actually be achieved by the United States 1st Infantry Division.

AVRE with added ERA armor is worked on in a maintenance area. Photo: Haynes Publishing

The second task undertaken by the Engineers was training to operate the 165 mm gun. Because of safety regulations, the 165 mm on the AVREs had not been fired under-armor (from inside) since the late 1960s. Instead, the crew would load the gun while the tank was in a static position, and then fire via lanyard from outside. Due to an end of production of the 165 mm ammunition in the UK, stocks were low. To solve this, a number of AVREs were issued American 165 mm ammunition, usually issued to the M728 CEV (Combat Engineer Vehicle). The American ammunition was two inches longer than the British ammo, so storage became limited inside the tank.

The AVREs didn’t have the best of times in the Gulf. Three were lost in two separate training incidents, both involving vehicle fires and subsequent detonation of ammunition stored inside the tank. A single AVRE was destroyed in the first incident on 5th February 1991 and two were destroyed in the second incident on 6th February 1991. The incident on the 5th seems to have been caused by petrol fumes that ignited whilst cooking took place in the vehicle. The incident on the 6th was due to accidental ignition of the Giant Viper launch rockets while testing the firing circuits. There was a gigantic explosion, with debris flying hundreds of meters away. Fortunately, the crew only sustained minor injuries.

The catastrophic explosion that claimed two Centurion AVREs. Fortunately, no crew members were killed in the incident. It was claimed by some witnesses that road wheels were landing in artillery bases up to two miles away. Photo: SOURCE

In the event, the AVREs would never take part in a combat operation. After the cease-fire, however, they did take part in an important mission. The Multa Pass, North of Kuwait, was the Main Supply Route (MSR) to the Northern Border with Iraq and it was heavily blocked with wrecks of tanks, trucks, artillery pieces, civilian vehicles, rubble, and all kinds of unexploded ordnance thanks to numerous attacks by marauding US A-10 Warthog ground-attack aircraft. All other routes were compromised as there were minefields everywhere on the side of the Basra Road connecting Kuwait City to Iraq. Centurions were dispatched to the area as well as Chieftain AVREs. The Chieftains were used to haul vehicles that were still able to roll out of the area, while the AVREs were used to shunt armored vehicles around with crew under armor just in case they ‘cooked-off’ (ammunition blew). The US Graves service was supposed to have cleared the area of the dead, but numerous corpses littered the site. For example, when one of the Centurions tipped over a mangled bus, 30 bodies of people attempting to hide from the A-10 strikes were exposed.

The old engineering workhorses completed the grisly task, and the crews were commended for their work. It was the last military operation undertaken by the Centurion AVREs.

‘Easy Posse’ shunts a wreck of a T-54 off the highway. Photo: Haynes Publishing

Fate

Upon their return from the Gulf, the AVREs were gradually phased out. By 1992, both 165 and 105 AVREs had been retired. The AVREs had extended the service life of the Centurion to 45 years. Only the Centurion BARV (Beach Armoured Recovery Vehicle) exceeded this lifetime, remaining in service until 2003.

The Centurion AVRE would be replaced in service by the Chieftain AVRE, also known as the ‘CHAVRE’, which started life in 1989. The CHAVRE was however, unarmed, making the Centurion the last armed AVRE to serve in the British Army. It continued to carry fascines, trackway and also retained the ability to clear mines and tow heavy loads. The CHAVRE also served in the Gulf alongside the Centurion.

Fortunately, a number of AVREs do survive in a number of museums across the UK. One can be found in the desert colors of the 1990-1991 Gulf War at the Imperial War Museum in Duxford, Cambridgeshire. The Norfolk Tank Museum has an almost pristine running example that they run at the ‘Armourfest’ festival. It has the ID number 02 BA 58 and is known to be a veteran of the Gulf War. Another AVRE can be found at the Wight Military and Heritage Museum on the Isle of Wight. Its ID number is 12 BA 55. It is a Gulf War veteran and remains in Desert colors. One more AVRE can be found at the Cobbaton Combat Collection, North Devon. Their vehicle, named ‘Bombastic’ had survived action in the Gulf War, but while it was being craned onto a transport ship to head back the UK, a lifting lug broke and it plunged into the ocean. It was recovered, and some years later ended up in the Collection. Despite its salty bath, and its age, the vehicle is still running.

12 BA 55 at the Wight Military and Heritage Museum on the Isle of Wight. Note the attachment points for the Dozer blade. The vehicle does retain the blade but is not attached when the vehicle is usually displayed inside the museum. It is often placed in front of it to present the illusion though. This photo was taken in May 2019, when the museum was going through a reshuffle. That is why it is outside. Photo: Author’s own

‘Bombastic’, Cobbaton Combat Collection’s preserved AVRE. Photo: Author’s own

An article by Mark Nash, assisted by David Lister

The standard Centurion AVRE entered service with the Royal Engineers (RE) in 1963. It was armed with the 165mm L9A1 Demolition Gun and equipped with a bulldozer blade. Also, note the fascine cradle on the bow.

A Centurion AVRE of the Royal Engineers as seen during Operation Motorman, Creggan Estate, Londonderry, Northern Ireland 1972. The L9 guns never fired a shot and only the tank’s dozer blades were used.

A Centurion 105 AVRE with mine-plow and Giant-Viper trailer. The 105 AVREs started to appear in the early-1980s. These variants of the AVREs were based on Mk.12 Centurions and retained their 105mm L7 guns.

Centurion AVRE ‘Easy Posse’, Operation Granby, 1990-1991. The last operational use of the Centurion AVRE came during the 1990-1991 Gulf War. The tanks were so old that units operating them became known as the ‘Antiques Roadshow’. While here, the tanks were up-armored with panels of Explosive-Reactive Armor (ERA) over the front of their hulls and turrets.

These four illustrations were produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.

Specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)	7.82 m without gun x 3.39 m x 3 m (25’7″ x 11’1″ x 9’87” ft.in)
Total weight, battle ready	57.1 tons (114,200 lbs)
Crew	4 (commander, driver, gunner, loader).
Propulsion	Rolls-Royce Meteor; 5-speed Merrit-Brown Z51R Mk.F gearbox 650 hp (480 kW), later BL 60, 695 bhp
Speed	48/30 km/h road/cross-country (29.82/18.64 mph)
Range/consumption	190 km (118 mi)
Armament	165 AVRE: 165mm L9 Demolition Gun, 105 AVRE: 105mm L7 gun. One coaxial 7.62 mm L8A1 (0.3 in) machine-gun
Armor	Turret front 7.6 in, glacis 4.72 in, sides 1.37 in (195/120/35 mm)
Ammunition used	High explosive squash head (HESH), Armor-piercing discarding sabot (APDS)
Total production	Aprx. 40

Resources & Links

Account of ‘Operation Motorman’ (PDF)
www.militaryimages.net
norfolktankmuseum.co.uk
www.arrse.co.uk
Shortest Gap, Story of the Armoured Engineer Vehicles of the Royal Engineers, Micheal Osbourne
Pen & Sword Books Ltd., Images of War Special: The Centurion Tank, Pat Ware
Haynes Owners Workshop Manual, Centurion Main Battle Tank, 1946 to Present.
Osprey Publishing, New Vanguard #68: Centurion Universal Tank 1943-2003
Dorling Kindersley/The Tank Museum, The Tank Book: The Definitive Visual History of Armoured Vehicles
The Tank Museum, Bovington
The Cobbaton Combat Collection, North Devon
Imperial War Museum (IWM)

Cold War Irish Armor Cold War US Vehicles in Foreign Service

M113 APC in Irish Service (Congo Crisis, 1960-1965)

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date September 13, 2019
No Comments on M113 APC in Irish Service (Congo Crisis, 1960-1965)

Republic of Ireland (1960-1964)
Armored Personnel Carrier – 6 Operated

Militarily speaking, the Republic of Ireland is officially a ‘non-aligned state’. This means that the country is mostly neutral but it will engage an enemy if necessary, or if the country is threatened. The Republic of Ireland is, however, an extremely active member of the United Nations (UN), and has taken part in numerous UN peacekeeping missions.

In the early 1960s, Irish Troops, under the UN flag, fought with distinction during the Congo Crisis as part of UNOC (United Nations Operations in the Congo). It was during this time that the Irish would get a chance to utilize a small number of the ubiquitous American Armored Personnel Carrier (APC), the M113.

This poor quality photo is thought to be the only visual record of the M113’s in Irish use, in the Congo. The vehicle is parked next to three of Ireland’s own Ford Mk. VI Armoured Cars. The soldier crouching atop the nearest armored car is an Irish Serviceman. Photo: Sgt. John ‘chubby’ Griffin.

The M113

The M113 is one of the most famous armored personnel carriers ever built and continues to serve in not only the US Military but also in the inventory of many of the world’s militaries. The vehicle has been in service for 60 years, making it one of the longest-serving armored vehicles in history.

Developed and built by the Food Machinery Corporation (FMC), the M113 is a basic vehicle, little more than an armored box on tracks. It is 15 ft 11.5 in (4.8 m) long, 8 ft 9.7 in (2.6 m) wide, and 8 ft 2 in (2.5 m) tall. The vehicle’s structure is almost completely fabricated from aluminum, including the armor, which is between 0.4 and 1.4 inches (12 – 38 mm) thick. The vehicle started out with a Chrysler 75M petrol engine, although this would later be changed to a General Motors 6V53 diesel type. The power plant is located at the front of the vehicle, along with the transmission. The vehicle is supported by torsion bars connected to five road-wheels. The idler wheel is at the rear with the drive sprocket at the front.

The APC has a crew of two, a Driver and a Commander, who are located at the front of the vehicle, with a passenger compartment taking up the rear of the vehicle. Eleven passengers can be carried in the vehicle. The APC’s usual armament would be a single Browning M2 .50 Cal (12.7 mm) heavy machine gun, located at the commander’s position.

The American M113 Armored Personel Carrier (APC). Photo: Wikimedia

The Congo Crisis

The Congo Crisis (also known as the Congo Civil War) was a period of political unrest and violence which began in the Republic of Congo (the largest country in the center of the African Continent) in 1960. It began soon after the country gained its independence from Belgium.

In June 1960, Belgium negotiated mining rights with the future independent ‘Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC)’. Within days of this, Congolese troops mutinied, demanding increased pay and removal of white officers. Belgium launched a military retaliation, resulting in the rebellion of more Congolese troops. Then, with Belgian support, Katanga seceded from the DRC. Congolese President Joseph Kasavubu and Prime Minister Lumumba asked and received a peacekeeping force from the United Nations (UN).

Five years of conflict would follow this, eventually resulting in the rise of the Democratic Republic of Congo under the rule of a dictator, and 100,000 deaths. This was also a proxy war between the USA and USSR. Both super-powers were supporting opposite sides during the conflict; the Congo was sympathetic to the Soviets, while the US favored the Kantangese due to its mineral exports, one being Uranium.

Irish Involvement

Irish troops arrived in the Congo between 1960 and 1961. Their most famous engagement during the conflict was the Siege of Jadotville on September 13th, 1961, when “A” Company, 35th Battalion (UN service) of the Irish Army UNOC contingent was attacked by Katangese forces. Despite a valiant, four-day stand, the Irish troops were overwhelmed. Remarkably, no Irish troops were killed in the battle, although they were all taken prisoner for a month.

Irish Ford Mk. VI Armoured Cars in the Congo: militaryimages.net

There were other Irish engagements during the conflict, such as the Ambush at Niemba in November 1960, and the Battle of the Tunnel in December 1961. A total of 6,000 Irish troops served in the Congo from 1960 to 1964. Of this number, 24 men lost their lives.

Irish M113s

The story behind Ireland’s procurement of the M113’s is not very well documented. While in the Congo, the Irish Contingent obtained six M113s. Allegedly, these vehicles were US Army vehicles, donated to the UNs armored vehicle inventory sent to the Congo. It is from here that the vehicles were subsequently loaned to the Irish. It is unknown as to when the UN received these M113s but it would have to have been after 1961, as that is when the vehicles first entered service with the US Military. The Congo Crisis, therefore, may well prove to be one of the first combat deployments of the M113. When the Irish deployment came to an end in 1964, the vehicles were returned to the UN inventory. The Irish would never use the M113 again, although it would become a staple UN vehicle.

The M113 would have been a quantum leap compared to what the Irish Military was used to at this time. It was the only tracked APC to ever see use by the Irish. The only previous experience the Irish had with a tracked APC-like vehicle would have been the long-outdated Universal ‘Bren’ Carrier which was, remarkably, only just leaving service with the Irish at the time of the Congo Crisis. The M113 was a far cry from the only armored vehicles that Irish Military deployed in the Congo, the archaic Ford Mk. VI Armoured Cars which had been in service since 1941. These were little more than Ford commercial trucks up-armored by the Irish military, who also installed a machine gun turret.

Due to a lack of photographic and literary records, it is unknown what markings would have adorned the M113s or whether it was even painted white like most UN vehicles. It is known that the US markings were painted over. There is no evidence to suggest that the Browning M2 .50 Cal (12.7 mm) machine gun being installed, though a .30 Cal (7.62mm) may have been.

Conclusion

The six M113s utilized by the Irish Contingent would be the only time an American-built combat vehicle would be used by any element of the Irish Military. The Ford Armoured Cars, despite their archaic nature, served the Irish well in the Congo. They may just have been little more than up-armored trucks with a mounted machine gun, but they were more than capable of dealing with an enemy armed almost exclusively with small arms and no heavy, or anti-tank, weaponry.

The blend of mobility and armor protection granted by the M113 were unparalleled by anything in Ireland’s own arsenal, which was still full of outdated vehicles such as the Universal Carrier and Comet tank. It wasn’t until 1972 that the Irish Military would have a modern Armoured Personel Carrier. This came in the shape of the wheeled 4×4 Panhard M3 VTT (Véhicule de Transport de Troupes) armored personnel carrier, a wheeled vehicle built by the French.

The M113 became a staple UN vehicle after the Congo, as this Canadian Operated vehicle shows. Photo: captmondo.com

The American M113. It is unknown what markings adorned the vehicle while it was in Irish use. All that is known is that the US markings were painted over, and the vehicle was without its Browning .50 Cal (12.7mm) Machine Gun. Illustration by David Bocquelet, modified by Leander Jobse.

Specifications
Dimensions (L-w-H)	4.86 x 2.68 x 2.50 m (15.11 x 8.97 x 8.2 ft)
Total weight, battle ready	12.3 tonnes (24,600 lbs)
Crew	5 (Commander, Driver, 11 infantry)
Propulsion	Detroit 6V53T, 6-cyl. diesel 275 hp (205 kW) P/w 22.36 hp/tonne
Transmission	Allison TX-100-1 3-speed automatic
Maximum speed	42 mph (68 km/h) road/3.6 mph (5.8 kph) swimming
Suspensions	Torsion bars
Range	300 miles/480 km
Armor	Aluminum alloy 12–38 mm (0.47–1.50 in)
Used	6

Sources

Karl Martin, Irish Army Vehicles: Transport and Armour since 1922
Adrian J. English, Irish Army Orders of Battle 1923-2004, Tiger Lily Publications,
Ralph A. Riccio, AFVs in Irish Service Since 1922, Mushroom Model Publications]
www.theirishstory.com

Cold War British Other Vehicles

FV433 Abbot SPG

United Kingdom (1958)
Self-Propelled Gun – 234 Built

In the late 1950s, the United Kingdom was looking for a new Self-Propelled Gun (SPG). It was envisioned that this would replace the Ram-based Sexton, a Second World War-era 25-Pounder gun-armed SPG that was still in service with the Royal Artillery. It was also planned that it would somewhat replace the 25-Pounder gun in general, as the towed version was also still in service. Even so, there were some developments with 25-pounder armed SPGs, such as the Centurion-based FV3805. This was unsuccessful, however.

A 105 mm gun would be developed to replace the 25-Pounder. For ease of production, it was decided that this new SPG would be based on the FV432 ‘Trojan’ Armoured Personnel Carrier, then coming into service. The SPG would receive the designation ‘FV433’ and would be designed and constructed by Vickers. They would go on and build a total of 234 vehicles, the majority of which would see service with the British Army, though a few simpler, ‘Value Engineered’ versions would also be designed and sold to the Indian Army.

The FV433 would be the last Self-Propelled Gun to be named – in British tradition – after a religious title. In this case, ‘Abbot’. An Abbot is a man in charge of an abbey of monks. As well as the above mentioned Sexton, there were others named in this way, such as the Deacon, Bishop, and M7 ‘Priest’.

FV433 Abbot on the move in 1970. The wheeled vehicle in the background is an FV620 Stalwart. Photo: Profile Publications

Foundation, The FV432

The FV432 Armoured Personnel Carrier (APC) was a small vehicle at 17 feet 2 inches (5.25 m) long, 9 feet 2 inches (2.8 m) wide and 7 feet 5 inches (2.28 m) tall. It had a two-man crew (Commander & Driver) and had the ability to carry up to ten troops.
The FV432 weighed 15 tons (15.3 tonnes) and was powered by the 240 hp Rolls-Royce K60 multi-fuel engine. This gave it a top speed of 44 mph (70 km/h). A torsion-bar suspension gave the vehicle a smooth and comfortable ride. It had five road-wheels per-side, with the drive sprocket at the front and the idler at the rear.

The Abbot would utilize the exact same powertrain and suspension as the FV432 APC. This SPG was one of many variants that would be born from the FV432, or ‘Battle Taxi’, as it would come to be known throughout its service life.

The FV432 APC, the basis of the FV433 Abbot – one of which can be seen in the background. Photo: Wikimedia Common

Development

Development of the FV433 took place between 1958 and 1960 at the Fighting Vehicle Research and Development Establishment (FVRDE) located in Chertsey, Surrey. Basing a vehicle on an existing model has a number of benefits: It allows for a commonality of parts making maintenance easier, but also allows possible operators to familiarize themselves with the particulars of the vehicle when it comes to driving, for example. It also lowers costs and simplifies the logistical train required.

Vickers came up with a design for this new Self-Propelled Gun. The aim was to create a small, mobile SPG that was flexible and could be deployed quickly. It would be armed with a large caliber, quick-firing gun to enable saturation of a target in a short time.

They would utilize as many components from the FV432 APC as possible for the hull. For the gun, the new 105 mm L13A1 gun was chosen although at the time there were several contenders to be the new standard artillery caliber. This was placed in a turret towards the rear of the vehicle. As in the FV432, the engine and transmission were located at the front of the vehicle. A unique feature to the ‘Abbot’ compared to other SPG’s of the time was the fact that it was amphibious. This was possible via a flotation screen, like those used on the famous Sherman DD tanks of D-Day. The SPG would also have Nuclear, Biological & Chemical (NBC) protection.

By 1961, Vickers had produced 12 prototypes of the FV433. Six of these were fitted with the Rolls-Royce B81 petrol engine before the multi-fuel K60 of the FV432 was chosen as the production standard. This was a 6-cylinder horizontally opposed engine. These engines consist of two pistons per cylinder, working against each other in opposite directions. The idea behind multi-fuel engines was that in an emergency, the engine could run on either petrol (gasoline), diesel, or other fuel types. A similar, although less successful and more troublesome, engine was installed on the FV4201 Chieftain.
Vickers began full-scale production of the FV433 Abbot at their Elswick facility in Newcastle-upon-Tyne in 1964.

One of the prototype FV433s. The prototypes can be identified by having only two headlights, a straight flotation screen top, and the gun travel lock on the left front corner of the hull. Photo: Profile Publications

Design

Hull

Sharing the same hull as the FV432 APC, the Abbot gained similar dimensions at 19 feet 2 inches (5.8 m) long, 8 feet 8 inches (2.6 m) wide, and 8 feet 9 inches (2.7 m) high. The vehicle would weigh around 16 tons (16.2 tonnes). It utilized the same running gear and track.

The general shape of the hull was also similar, small and boxy, but sloped down towards the front. This sloping front housed the engine, gearbox, transmission, and fuel tanks. The driver was also located at the front, to the right. On the front of the hull, there were four large headlights mounted in two double-light units (the prototype only had two lights).

Head-on view of an FV433 Abbot found at the Wight Military & Heritage Museum, Isle of Wight, UK. Photo: Author’s own

On the rear of the hull, there was a large hatch that opened out to the right. This hatch was used while the gun was in operation. It allowed the crew easy access to the fighting compartment and provided ventilation. It would also provide an opening to discard spent cartridges, instead of letting them pile up in the confined space of the turret. Obviously, this door would not be used in hazardous situations. There was stowage above the door for some pioneer tools.

The exhaust was located on the left of the hull. On the prototypes, this was placed above the flotation screen. On the production model, this was moved to between the flotation screen and top of the fender.

A view of the rear and left side of the Abbot. Note the exhaust on the left and the large rear hatch. Photo: Author’s own

As mentioned above, the ‘Abbot’ was equipped with a flotation screen. This allowed the SPG to negotiate through calm waterways. Propulsion was provided by the revolution of the tracks, as was steering. When not in use, the screen collapsed onto the hull. On the prototypes, this sloped from the back to the front of the hull as one piece. On production models, this was adapted so it followed the shape of the hull. In later years of its use in service, however, this screen was removed.

The Abbot with flotation screen erected. Photo: Tankograd Publishing

Turret

The turret was capable of 360-degree horizontal rotation, allowing for great flexibility in fire-missions. It was rather small and took the shape of a non-equal octagon. It was also slightly frustoconical, narrow down towards the roof, meaning all panels sloped back a few degrees. The right turret cheek had a triangular bulge incorporated to make way for the gunnery equipment inside the turret. The turret face had a bolted-on reinforcing plate around the gun slot. At the top of this, there was a semi-circular cut-out that allowed the gun to reach maximum elevation. There were hatches at the left and right rear for the commander (right) and loader (left). There was also a small ‘ammunition supply’ hatch on the rear of the turret. When open, it revealed a tray with grooves for two 105 mm rounds.

An Abbot of the 27th Field Regiment, Royal Artillery, at the Sennelager Training Area in 1992. Note the two-shell loading tray in the rear of the turret. Photo: Tankograd Publishing

The outer circumference of the turret was covered in stowage. On the left and right turret sides, there were fastening points that would allow the attachment of large ‘soft’ bins. Smaller boxes were scattered around, with a shovel being stored on the right turret cheek. On the right rear corner, the large ventilation unit for the NBC system was installed. On the left rear corner, a wire reel was hung. This was a spool of telephone wire that was carried by most British tanks at the time. It would be used in bivouac areas when the tanks were in their defensive positions. The wire was hooked up to each tank and allowed them to discreetly communicate without broadcasting their positions via radio comms.

Crew

The driver was located at the front right corner of the hull. He was provided with a two-part hatch cover which opened to the left and right. For closed-down driving, he was provided with a single wide-angle periscope built into the hull roof just in front of the driver’s hatch. This periscope was even equipped with twin wipers.

Three Abbot crew members, circa-1960s. Photo: militaryimages.net

Three crew members were stationed in the turret. These were the Commander, Gunner – also known as the Gun Layer, and Loader. The Gunner was located at the right front of the turret and was without a hatch. The Commander was positioned directly behind him. He had override controls for the rotation of the turret. This allowed him to quickly lay the gun onto a target in an emergency. The commander sat under a rotating vision cupola with a hatch that opened up and rear and three vision periscopes. The Loader was positioned in the left rear corner of the turret, had a basic one-piece hatch over his head and also performed radio operator duties.

Although the vehicle technically had a six-man crew, only four were present on the tank at all times. There was not enough room for all six. The Driver, Commander, Gunner, and the Radio-Operator/Loader would travel with the SPG. The other two men were the Ammunition Handler and the Second in Command, who was responsible for correct ammunition preparation (setting charges and fuses correctly). These men would travel in an accompanying support vehicle and would join the rest of the crew upon reaching the designated firing position.

Armor

The ‘Abbot’ was only lightly armored, as it was not intended to combat enemies head-on. Armor on the hull consisted of 12 mm (0.47 inches) on the front and sides, 10 mm (0.39 inches) at the rear and 6 mm (0.23 inches) on the floor. Armor on the turret was 10 mm around the sides and 12 mm on the roof. This armor was simply intended to protect the vehicle’s occupants from shrapnel and small arms fire.

Armament

The 105 mm L13A1 was a brand new design built by the Royal Ordnance Factory (ROF). It was not only intended as the weapon of choice for Self-Propelled Guns but also as the main-stay towed piece of British artillery units. The 105 mm (4.1-inch) caliber was chosen after detailed examination showed it had an effective blend of weight, lethality and range.

The gun was 37 calibers (3.8 meters) long with a double-baffle muzzle break at the end and a fume extractor halfway down the length. The gun uses a semi-automatic, vertically sliding breech (a semi-automatic breach means the spent rounds are not ejected automatically after firing, but the breech closes automatically when loading) and is mounted in a ring-type cradle with twin hydraulic buffers. It was also equipped with a single hydro-pneumatic recuperator. The gun was mounted in the 360-degree-capable turret and had an elevation range of +70 to -5 degrees. Elevation was tended by hand wheels, although the rotation of the turret was powered. There was a travel lock located on the front of the hull, just off to the left of the centerline.

The 105 mm gun at full +70-Degree elevation. Note the exhaust system on the side of the hull, between the running gear and the flotation screen. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

For indirect-fire, the gun was laid via a periscope that protrudes from the turret roof and was protected by a small armored cupola. Thanks to its fully rotatable turret and wide elevation range, the ‘Abbot’ was also capable of direct-fire at enemy vehicles. This was an ability requested by Gunners themselves. For this, a telescopic sight was provided. It should be noted, however, that the ‘Abbot’s’ primary role was to provide fire-support. It was not designed to be in the front line or engage in combat with tanks. They were designed to fire shells over the heads of friendly troops from long range.

‘Guns to horizontal’. Four ‘Abbots’ in training using their guns in the direct-fire role. Photo: Profile Publications

Because of the amount of ammunition carried and the compact nature of the turret, the FV433 did not have calibrating sights. To overcome this, the gun mount had both Tangent Elevation (TE) and Angle of Sight (AOS) scales with a separate gun rule to convert the range into TE in mils, with corrections made for the ammunition type in use. The single eye-piece sight used internal, illuminated scales.

Secondary armament consisted of a light machine gun installed on the Commander’s cupola. In the early years of the ‘Abbot’s’ service, this would have been the L4 7.62 Light Machine Gun – an upgraded version of the faithful Bren Gun of WW2. In later years, this was replaced by the General-Purpose Machine Gun, or ‘GPMG’, also chambered in 7.62 mm (.30 Cal). The FV433 was also equipped with smoke grenade launchers, three-per turret cheek.

Abbots on the range. The location appears to be somewhere in Germany, judging by the German warning sign on the cab of the FV620 Stalwart. The Stalwart – also known as ‘Stolly’ is being used to resupply the Abbots with ammunition. Photo: Tankograd Publishing

Ammunition

A wide range of ammunition was available to the ‘Abbot’. For indirect-fire, this consisted of L31 High Explosive (HE), L37, L38 & L45 Smoke, and L43 Illumination. For direct fire, the Abbot was equipped with L42 High-Explosive Squash Head (HESH) shells and the L31 HE shell could also be used in the direct-fire role. The ammunition was two-part, meaning the projectile was separate from the propellant case, and that they were loaded separately. In this case, the projectile was loaded with the assistance of an electrically powered rammer, while the propellant was inserted by hand. The propellant for the 105mm gun was placed in brass cartridge cases. The primers were electrically triggered, rather than mechanically via a firing-pin. The propellant in the cases was contained in specific amounts in marked bags. A total of eight could be used in a cartridge; the more bags, the greater the range. There were, however, two cartridge types – supercharged and standard. The supercharged cartridge produced the greatest range and was filled with a much more potent charge. The standard cartridge contained 1-5 charge bags of equal size. There were also two lower-power charges known as ‘Sub zone A & B’. These were used in standard cartridge cases emptied of the standard charges. A maximum of 42 rounds were carried aboard the ‘Abbot’ (36 HE and 6 HESH). In normal operations, however, only 40 rounds were usually carried (32 HE and 6 HESH). The rounds were stored around the inside of the turret and the hull.

The various ammunition types used by the ‘Abbot’. Left to right: L42 HESH, L43 Illumination, L37 Marker-Red, L31 HE, L36 Smoke. Photo: Wikimedia

Gun Performance

The ‘Abbot’ had an extremely high rate of fire, so much so that three ‘Abbots’ could saturate a target with about half a tonne (453 kgs, 6-8 rounds) of shells per minute. This rate of fire was achieved thanks to the rotating turret and the semi-automatic breech with a powered rammer. At the time of its introduction, the ‘Abbot’ was unrivaled when it came to its blend of firepower, accuracy, and range covered. Its rotating turret gave it the ability to engage any target, in any direction without the need to reposition the hull. The high elevation angle of the gun also gave the ability to engage targets behind the steepest covers. It was able to engage targets accurately up to its maximum firing range of 19,000 yards (11 mi, 17.3 km). The 105 mm gun had a service life of 10,000 rounds.

A battery of ‘Abbot’s’ conducting firing trials at Munsterlager Ranges, Germany, 1990. Photo: MiltaryImages.net

Variants

The ‘Value Engineered’ ‘Abbot’ (VEA)

In 1965, Vickers presented the ‘Abbot’ to the Indian military. The Indians were impressed with everything about the SPG, apart from its price tag. This resulted in a full-scale investigation by the ‘Value Engineering’ Department of the Vickers Armament Division. Simply put, the Value Engineering process produces a cheaper vehicle, without impact to its tactical capability. The first ‘Value Engineered’ ‘Abbot’ was produced in 1967 and was taken to India for demonstration the same year.

The ‘Value Engineered’ Abbot at the Vickers plant in the late-1960s. Photo: Profile Publications

The VEA was different from the standard Abbot in the following ways:

The flotation screen was removed
The engine was exchanged for the Rolls-Royce K60 Mark G/1, a variant of the standard engine that only ran on diesel
No rubber pads on the tracks
No power traverse – turret traverse and gun elevation/depression were manual
No electric rammer
The armored cover of the roof-mounted gun sight was replaced by a canvas one, sights were replaced with a German model
The Commander’s cupola did not rotate and was only equipped with one periscope.
No smoke launchers or roof-mounted machine gun
Reduced external stowage

The Indian Army was happier with this cheaper ‘Abbot’, so much so that they accepted the vehicle for service. From 1967 onwards, a total of 88 VEAs were built. Twenty of these went to the British Army, specifically to the British Army Training Unit Suffield (BATUS) in Canada, as training vehicles. The remaining 68 SPG’s were sent to the Indian Army, where they were operated well into the late-1990’s.

A column of Indian Army Abbots. Photo: Chitresh Verma

The VEA was not the only vehicle that Vickers sold to the Indian Army. In the mid-1960’s, Vickers developed a main battle tank (MBT) which they called the ‘Vickers Main Battle Tank’. While it never entered service in the UK, the Indian Military were extremely happy with it, becoming India’s first MBT, and was named the ‘Vijayanta’.

The ‘Falcon’

Developed in the late-1960s, the ‘Falcon’ was a Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Gun (SPAAG) system based on the ‘Abbot. It utilized the VEA’s hull, but could easily be upgraded to standard ‘Abbot’ configuration (re-application of flotation screen, headlights, etcetera). A new turret was designed for the ‘Falcon’, which was armed with two Hispano Suiza HSS 831L 30 mm auto-cannons. These cannons utilized the same ammunition as the British-made 30 mm Rarden cannon, as used on the Scimitar and Fox light vehicles. The vehicle was operated by a crew of three, consisting of a Commander, Gunner, and Driver. Though designed to combat aircraft, it was also capable of combating lightly armored vehicles.

The ‘Falcon’ SPAAG prototype. Photo: Profile Publications

Despite extremely successful tests in the early-1970’s and favorable opinions from military officials, the ‘Falcon’ never entered service. This was largely due to a rather small ammunition capacity, caused by the small and cramped nature of the FV430-type hull.

Service

The ‘Abbot’ entered service in 1965, alongside around 140 M109 Howitzers purchased from the United States. The 3rd Battalion Royal Horse Artillery (3 RHA) became the first regiment to be equipped with it. The ‘Abbot’ spent almost all of its service life with British forces stationed in Germany. Its small size and good mobility allowed it to be deployed anywhere in a very short time, should the Cold War have turned hot. The ‘Abbots’ were placed in Field Regiments supporting Armoured Brigades, this would have been about 8 Regiments (142+) guns in the British Army of the Rhine (BAOR).

A British Army ‘Abbot’ of the Royal Artillery (RA) Hohne Range Road, Germany, 1985. Photo: Military Vehicle Photos

The ‘Abbot’ was an extremely reliable vehicle and was easy to maintain. As a result, the ‘Abbot’ became loved by its crews, despite it being very cramped internally. To describe how cramped it was inside, fellow amateur tank researcher and enthusiast, Rita Cardoso Sobral, has said “I am only 5′ 3” and it was nearly impossible for me to get in/out.”

A Convoy of Abbots from the 27th Field Regiment, Royal Artillery in Dortmund, Germany, mid-1990s. Photo: militaryimages.net

The ‘Abbot’ served the British Army for 28 years before it began to be replaced by the 155 mm gun-armed AS-90 in 1993.

Surviving Vehicles

Thanks to its reliability, many ‘Abbots’ still survive and are operated by private owners and/or companies. They are relatively easy to come by for private purchase at a relatively good price, and many can be found in museums across the world. These include the Wight Military and Heritage Museum, Isle of Wight (UK) and the Australian Armour and Artillery Museum (AAAM), Queensland, Australia, among many others. Many tank-driving attractions also feature ‘Abbots’ as part of their fleet. Such places include ‘Tanks-Alot’, based in Brackley, England, and ‘Drive A Tank’ based in Minnesota, USA.

A surviving Abbot located at the Wight Military & Heritage Museum, Isle of Wight, UK. Photo: Author’s own

One of the best examples of a private company using the ‘Abbot’ is the ‘Grenade’ sports nutrition company. In the UK, they use an ‘Abbot’ covered in their brand logo as an advertisement. As of 2019, they have also started selling authentic ‘Abbot’s’, done up in ‘Grenade’ colors on their website for the price of £75,000 ($94,000). See HERE.

An example of one of the ‘Grenade’ ‘Abbot’ is selling for £75,000 ($94,000). Photo: Grenade

Conclusion

The ‘Abbot’ was an attempt by the British Military to create an effective SPG on a common platform. In doing so, it became one of the most successful Self-Propelled Gun platforms used by the UK, largely due to its firepower, flexibility, and ease of maintenance. It was also one of the first British SPGs to adopt the post-war move to turreted self-propelled artillery pieces. In its almost 30-year service life with the British Army, it never fired a shot in anger.

The Abbot is one of the best examples in the world of a military vehicle that has been successful in both military and private sector service. It was loved by its military crews, and continues to be loved by civilian crews.

A prime example of privately owned Abbot’s is this example by the British Comedian, Ross Noble. Photo: @realrossnoble

Another example is the ‘Glitter-Balled’ abbot used at the premiere of the 2009 Sacha Baron Cohen movie, ‘Brüno’. Photo: justjared.com

The FV433 Abbot Self-Propelled Gun (SPG). Based on the FV432 APC, it had a 105mm gun in a fully rotating turret.

The ‘Value Engineered Abbot’ or ‘VEA’, a cheaper, simplified version of the Abbot developed for the Indian Army.

The ‘Falcon’ Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Gun (SPAAG), based on the Abbot chassis.

These illustrations were produced by Tank Encyclopedia’s own David Bocquelet.

Specifications
Dimensions	19ft 2in x 8ft 8in x 8ft 9in (5.8 x 2.6 x 2.7 meters)
Total weight, battle-ready	16 tons (16.2 tonnes)
Crew	6 (Commander, Loader/radio operator, Gunner/Layer, Driver/Ammunition Handler, Ammunition Handler, Second in Command/Ammunition Prepper)
Propulsion	240 hp Rolls-Royce K60 multi-fuel engine
Suspension	Torsion Bar
Speed (road)	29 mph (47 kph)
Armament	105mm L13A1 Gun L4 7.62mm Light Machine Gun/GPMG 7.62mm Machine Gun
Armor	12 – 10mm (0.39 – 0.47in)
Total Production	234 (176 FV433s, 88 VEAs)

Sources

Rob Griffin, FV432 Variants, Tankograd Publishing
Profile Publications Ltd. AFV/Weapons #51: Abbot FV433 Self-Propelled Gun, Christopher F. Foss
www.forecastinternational.com
www.driveatank.com
Wight Military and Heritage Museum
Australian Armour and Artillery Museum (AAAM)

Cold War British Engineering Vehicles

FV219 & FV222 – Conqueror ARV Mk.1 & 2

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date July 25, 2019
No Comments on FV219 & FV222 – Conqueror ARV Mk.1 & 2

United Kingdom (1959-1960)
Armored Recovery Vehicle – 28 Built (8 Mk.1, 20 Mk.2)

In the early years of the Cold War, the Western Powers began developing heavy tanks in response to the Soviet’s IS-3 heavy tank, unveiled at the end of the Second World War. The IS-3 sent a cold shiver down the spines of Western on-lookers. In response, the United States would produce the M103, while the French would experiment with the AMX-50. Great Britain – not to be outdone by these close allies – would develop the Conqueror, the last designated Heavy Tank operated by the British Army.

Weighing in at 63 tons (57 tonnes), the FV214 Conqueror – officially the ‘Tank, Heavy No. 1, 120mm Gun, Conqueror’ – was a monstrous tank. It was armed with a powerful 120 mm rifled gun and was protected by armor that was up to 10 inches (250 mm) thick. The weight of this tank presented a logistical issue, however – there were no recovery vehicles capable of moving it, other than heavy-duty tractors such as the FV1201A Heavy Artillery Tractor. The Americans faced a similar issue with the M103 and, as such, developed the M51, a heavy recovery vehicle built on the chassis of – and specifically designed to assist – the M103 tank.

The British would do the same and, in 1959, create the FV219 Conqueror Armoured Recovery Vehicle (ARV), built using the chassis, propulsion and suspensions systems of the tank on which it was based. This would be followed, in 1960, by the FV222 Mk.2 ARV.

The FV222 Conqueror Armoured Recovery Vehicle Mk.2. Photo: Wikimedia

The Conqueror

The Conqueror was born out of the 1944 FV200 project, a proposed ‘Universal Tank’ platform that could be modified to perform various roles (ranging from gun tank to engineering vehicle and Self-Propelled Guns) which would all share the same chassis. A 55-ton (49 tonne) tank armed with a 20-pounder (83 mm) gun designated FV201 was chosen for further development into a heavy tank. This later evolved in 1952 into the FV221 Caernarvon which utilized a Centurion Mk.III turret and gun. In 1955, the 120mm L1 rifled gun was introduced to the chassis in a brand new turret, thus, the FV214 Conqueror was born.

The Conqueror was worthy of its name. It was an impressive vehicle at 38 feet (12 m) long (with the gun forward, 25 feet 4 inches/7.72 m otherwise), 13 feet 1 inch wide (3.99 m) and 10 feet 5 inches (3.18 m) tall. The vehicle was propelled by an 810 horsepower Rolls-Royce Meteor M120 engine, which allowed the 63 long-ton (57 tonnes) tank to achieve a top speed of 22 mph (35 km/h). The tank’s weight was supported on a Horstmann suspension with four, two-wheel bogies per side. The drive sprocket was at the back while the idler was at the front. Armor on the tank was a maximum of 7 inches (177 mm) thick on both the front of the hull and the turret. The track was 31 inches (78.7 cm) wide and had 102 links per side.

The Conqueror had an extremely short service life – which was spent almost entirely in West Germany – before being retired in 1966. It was found, by this point in time, that the Centurion – now armed with the famous L7 105 mm gun – was just as an effective tank as the larger Conqueror. As such, the behemoth became the last of its kind.

The FV214 Conqueror Heavy Gun Tank. ‘William the Conqueror’ is a surviving example found at the Wight Military and Heritage Museum on the Isle of Wight, UK. Photo: Author’s own.

Development of the ARV

The Conqueror ARV was the only variant of the FV214 gun tank to reach production and service. Other engineering vehicles that were based on its chassis – which were carried over from the FV200 project – were planned, such as the FV215A Heavy Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers (AVRE), the FV216 Mine Flail, and the FV223 Armoured Ramp Carrier (ARK).

Another design to be recycled from the FV200 was the FV209, a design for an armored recovery vehicle. It was this design that the Conqueror ARV would be based on, using the chassis, suspension and automotive components of the FV214 gun tank. Production of three prototypes commenced in 1953. By this time, the vehicle had received the designation FV219 Conqueror ARV Mk.1. These three vehicles took part in successful trials in 1955, resulting in an order for 20 vehicles. Production of the Mk.1 would stop at just eight vehicles, as an improved design was soon unveiled. This became the FV222 Conqueror ARV Mk.2. Lengthy trials were avoided as it was simply an improved version of the Mk.1. The FV219 would enter service in 1959, four years after its gun tank relation. This would be followed in 1960 by the improved FV222.

FV219 ARV Mk.1

The FV219’s chassis was almost identical to the regular FV214 Conqueror tank. It weighed 61 tons (56 tonnes), a few tons lighter than the gun tank thanks to the lack of a turret. It was 29 feet (8.9 meters, with the anchoring spade) long, 13 feet 1 inch wide (3.99 m) and 9 feet (2.7 meters) tall. The bow area of the hull was especially similar to the gun tank. In place of the turret, a small armored superstructure constructed from welded plates was installed. There were three stowage boxes installed on the exterior of this cabin; two on the left wall, one on the right. Behind the bow on the right was a small round access port. This superstructure housed the ARV’s main winch and its accompanying crew. It is also known as the ‘winch compartment’.

The FV219 Conqueror ARV. Photo: Tankograd Publishing/RAC/Micheal Neumann

A four-man crew operated the vehicle. This team consisted of the vehicle commander (who also acted as the winch operator), radio operator, recovery mechanic and driver. Two men sat in the bow and the other two in the superstructure. The driver’s position was identical to the gun tank; front and right. He sat under a hatch that opened up and pivoted to the right. Like the gun tank, the driver had three vision periscopes to see through while driving ‘buttoned-up’. Another man sat to his left under a two-piece hatch similar to that of the driver’s hatch on a Centurion. The commander was located at the left-rear corner of the superstructure, under a fully rotating vision cupola with a built-in hatch. The man to his left and a simple one-piece hatch that opened up and backward. As with the gun tank, the bow compartment was separated from the main crew compartment.

The Mk.1 ARV, identifiable by the stepped front casued by the unchanged bow of the gun tank chassis. Photo: Tankograd Publishing/The Tank Museum

It was possible for a .30 Cal. (7.62mm) L3A1 machine gun – the British designation of the US Browning M1919A4 – to be mounted here. There was also provision for the mounting of smoke grenade launchers to the left and right cheek of the winch compartment, as well as the left and right corners of the hull rear. Each launcher consisted of five tubes, giving the vehicle a total of 20 smoke grenades. Both the machine gun and the grenades were purely a defensive measure.

Recovery Equipment

The ARV’s main recovery tool was a 49-ton (45 tonne) capacity winch. This main winch used a 450 foot (137-meter) long cable. This emerged from a small slit in the back of the superstructure. There was also a secondary, 4½ -ton (4 tonne) capacity winch. This used a 899 foot (274-meter) cable and was predominantly used to deploy and retrieve the heavier and stiffer cable of the main winch. This cable emerged from a void at the top of the upper front plate of the winch compartment. Both winches were mounted side-by-side in the superstructure. They were driven by a power-take-off from the vehicle’s engine. Numerous pulleys, guide wheels and fairleads (a device that guides a line, rope or cable) were dotted around the outside of the vehicle which allowed pulls to be made in any direction off of the front, right, left and rear of the ARV. The largest and strongest pulley and fairlead were located at the rear of the vehicle, as this was where the majority of tows would happen. To this end, a large spade was mounted beneath it. Operated hydraulically, this spade was used to anchor the vehicle into the ground when towing to stop the vehicle slipping.

Top-down view of the FV219 showing the various pulleys all over the vehicle. Photo: Tankograd Publishing/Archiv Pierre Touzin

Other recovery equipment included a jib on the rear of the hull, two tie-bars (metal bars with eyelets on each end, used together for towing), a wooden bumper/buffer bar (used when pushing) and two heavy-duty single-sheave snatch blocks for reeving a 3:1 tackle that would allow straight-pulls of up to 148 tons (135 tonnes). Secondary cabling and ropes were also carried, including a 98 foot (30-meter) tow rope, and two 15 foot (4.5 meter) towing cables. This equipment is stored around the exterior of the ARV. For instance, the 15-foot tow cables were stored on the armored skirts that protected the suspension bogies. These were carried over from the gun tank, but on the ARV they were removed more often than not. This led to the cables often being haphazardly being stored on the engine deck.

The rear of the FV222, note the large anchoring spade and pulley system. These parts of the vehicle were almost identical on the FV219 & FV222 Photo: Tankograd Publishing/Pierre Touzin

FV222 ARV Mk.2

The Mk.2 ARV featured a few upgrades over the Mk.1. The most noticeable of these was to the front of the vehicle. A large sloping plate of armor now formed the front of the vehicle, completely changing the forward profile of the bow. This upgrade greatly improved the crew’s protection but also presents the researcher with the most noticeable means of distinguishing a Mk.1 and Mk.2 ARV. The Mk.2 also carried four stowage boxes. Three were on the left of the winch compartment, one was on the right. The changes on the Mk.2 were not just external, as it meant a slight re-arrangement of the crew positions was necessary. The ARV retained a four-man crew, though. The driver’s position had been raised into the superstructure, and the commander was now seated to his left. These two crew members are separated from the two other crew by a bulkhead. The driver now sat beneath a shallow cupola with three vision periscopes at its front. The hatch opened up and back to the 4 o’clock position. To his right, there was a smaller round hatch set in the right wall of the superstructure.

Slightly back and left of the driver’s cupola was the larger commander’s cupola. This was also fitted with three vision-periscopes, with a mounting above them for the L3A1 machine gun. The built-in hatch opened up and back, and like on the Mk.1, was capable of 360-degree rotation. Behind these two positions were the other crew positions. There were three round hatches in the rear half of the roof which allowed crew access and access to the winch mechanisms for maintenance. This back half of the superstructure roof could also be removed as one to allow greater access to the area.

Top down view of a Mk.2 with all hatches open. Photo: Tankograd Publishing/The Tank Museum

Other than these alterations, the two vehicles were basically the same. Also, the Mk.2 did lack the multiple pulleys around the outside of the hull. They had the same crew, same suspension and tracks, and an identical complement of recovery equipment. The Conqueror ARV Mk.2 also seems to have received some automotive upgrades, however, at this time, it is unclear as to what exactly these upgrades consisted of.

Production and Service

Just 8 FV219 Conqueror ARV Mk.1s were made before the upgrade to the FV222 Mk.2. Entering service in 1959, the Conqueror ARV Mk.1 – followed by the Mk.2 in 1960 – would far surpass its gun tank cousin in terms of the length of its service life.

A Mk.1 ARV in operation. Visible are the Commander and another crew member. The Commander is giving orders to the driver via a microphone. Photo: Tankograd Publishing/Archiv Pierre Touzin

While the FV214 gun tank was retired in 1966, the ARV continued to serve after this. Although it was officially replaced in service by the FV4006 Centurion ARV (a similar vehicle, just built on the Centurion hull) which entered service in the early 1960s, a few were retained in operation in various locations. Records show that at least one Conqueror ARV was still in operation in Germany in the 1990s. One is also reported to have been in operation at the Amphibious Experimental Establishment (also known as ‘AXE’), at Instow in North Devon. It was used for beach tank recovery practice. Its current state, however, is unknown.

The Mk.2 ARV, identifiable by the large sloping glacis plate at the front of the vehicle. Photo: Tankograd Publishing/Photo: Tankograd Publishing/Archiv Pierre Touzin

Surviving Vehicles

With only 28 ARVs built in total, it is perhaps a miracle that a small number of these vehicles still survive, although only Mk.2s. Even more remarkable is that one of these vehicles is still in running condition. This vehicle can be found at the Royal Electrical Mechanical Engineers (REME) Museum, Lyneham, Chippenham. A couple, more unfortunate ARVs can be found at the Wight Military and Heritage Museum on the Isle of Wight. They are simply two rusting hulks that sit outside the museum, around its private track. One of the ARVs on the Isle of Wight (IOW) was rescued from Borden Camp in Hampshire in 1999 (see video below). It was hoped that the vehicle would be restored. Unfortunately, 20 years later, the vehicle remains in the state it was recovered. Another ARV can be found in storage at the Imperial War Museum, Duxford. The one there is not in as bad a condition as the IOW examples, but it is still in a rather poor state.

The Surviving, running Mk.2 found at the Royal Electrical Mechanical Engineers (REME) Museum, Lyneham, Chippenham. Photo: leicestermodellers

One of the surviving Mk.2 ARVs on the private track of the Wight Military and Heritage Museum, Isle of Wight. Photo: Author’s own

The FV219 Conqueror Armoured Recovery Vehicle Mk.1. Appearing in 1959, the Mk.1 was the first iteration of the Conqueror ARV. Only 8 of these were built. It is identifiable by its stepped front end.

The FV222 Conqueror Armoured Recovery Vehicle Mk.2. Appearing in 1960, the Mk.2 had improved protection over the Mk.1 thanks to a large sloping glacis plate at the front of the cab. 20 of these were built.

Both of these illustrations were produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.

Specifications
Dimensions	25.4 x 13.1 x 10.5 ft (12 x 3.99 x 3.19 m)
Total weight, battle ready	64 tons short (128,000 lbs)
Crew	4 (commander/winch operator, radio operator, recovery mechanic, driver)
Propulsion	Rolls-Royce Meteor M120 810 hp (604 kW) – pwr 12 hp/t
Suspension	Hortsmann suspensions
Speed (road)	22 mph (35 kph)
Equipment	Jib hull rear 2x tie-bars wooden bumper/buffer bar 2x heavy-duty single-sheave snatch blocks 3x two ropes, 1x 98 foot (30-meter), 2x 15 foot (4.5 meter)
Armament	L3A1 7.62mm (Browning M1919) Machine Gun
Armor	7 in (180 mm) front glacis
Total Production	28 (8 Mk.1, 20 Mk.2)

Sources

Profile Publications Ltd. AFV/Weapons #38: Conqueror Heavy Gun Tank, Maj. Michael Norman, RTR.
Tankograd Publishing, Conqueror Heavy Gun Tank, Britain’s Cold War Heavy Tank, Carl Schulze.
Surviving Mk.2
REME Museum
Wight Military & Heritage Museum, Isle of Wight (IOW), UK.

WW2 British Tankettes

Loyd Carrier

United Kingdom (1939)
Tankette – 26,000 Built

Carriers were a series of utility vehicles produced during the Second World War. They fulfilled a number of roles including troop transportation, reconnaissance, and towing guns. Though perhaps thought mundane compared to other armored vehicles, Carriers were the backbone of the British Army in the war. They even found use throughout the forces of the Commonwealth and the American Military. Captured examples were also used by the Germans. The Universal ‘Bren’ Carrier, perhaps the most famous of these light vehicles, still holds the record for the most produced armored vehicle of all time at around 113,000 built.

The Loyd Carrier, officially the ‘Carrier, Tracked, Personnel Carrying’, was designed by Captain Vivian G. Loyd (1894-1972) in the late 1930s. It was not his first foray into armored vehicle design. Loyd had previously worked with Sir John Carden on the famous Carden-Loyd series of Tankettes.

A Loyd Carrier in the Bocage, 1944. Photo: IWM

Design

The Carrier was part of a rapid-development program, so many of the carrier’s components were borrowed from other vehicles. The vehicle was designed around the drive systems of the 15cwt (0.84 US ton, 0.76 tonne) 4×2 Fordson 7V truck. This included the engine (an 85hp Ford V8 Side-valve), gearbox, transmission, and front axle. The track, drive sprockets, and suspension units were all taken from the Universal Carrier.
The chassis was also borrowed from the Fordson truck. Mild steel bodywork was added. A large, sloped, 0.27 inch (7 mm) thick armored plate (known as the ‘BP Plate’ in Loyd’s manuals) was placed at the front of the vehicle via bolts at the front and on the sides of the hull. This was enough to deflect small arms fire. Due to the sloping, it was also a little more effective than the flat structure of the Universal Carrier for example. A long stowage box was often placed in front of this sloped plate, above the exposed front axle. Pioneering tools were then stowed atop this box, with spare wheels stowed on the glacis.
The upper hull was enclosed at the sides and front but was open at the rear without a roof. This was not seen as an issue as the Carrier was not a fighting vehicle and, as such, did not need extensive protection or armament. A single Bren Light Machine Gun was sometimes carried for defensive purposes. There was an option to attach a canvas roof to protect the occupants from the elements. This was supported by a three-piece framework.

Mobility

The Ford V8 engine was located at the rear of the Carrier, with the radiator behind it. The engine was located centrally at the rear, in a box-like structure. Passage into the crew compartment could be gained on each side of the engine. The drive shaft took the power from the engine forward to the exposed front axle, to which the sprocket wheels that drove the track were attached. Steering was simple.
Both the drive wheels and idler wheels (which were also sprocketed) were fitted with brakes for steering. Steering was not as complicated as the track-bending method of the Universal Carrier and instead was actuated by means of the steering tillers in the driver’s position. Braking the left track would turn the vehicle left, and vice-versa.
The suspension was of the Horstmann type, consisting of two double-wheel bogies mounted at the center of the vehicle. Single rollers were mounted atop the bogies to support the return of the track.

Variants & Roles

There were three types of Loyd Carrier, all identified as ‘Numbers’. The only major difference between these was the engine type. The rest of the vehicle remained unchanged. There were also two ‘Marks’ with different braking systems. The vehicles were used in multiple roles during the War, all with their own designations.

Numbers

No. 1: 85hp British Ford V8 and gearbox
No. 2: 90hp US Ford V8 and gearbox
No. 3: 85hp Ford Canada V8 and gearbox

Marks

Mark I: Bendix brake system. A Brake system produced by the American Bendix Corporation.
Mark II: Girling brake system. A Brake system produced by the British company, Girling Ltd.

Roles

Tracked Personnel Carrier (TPC): Troop carrier variant. Able to transport 8 fully loaded troops or equal weight in cargo. Equipped with internal seating for troops, as well as seating on the track guards. Armor surrounded the entire compartment.
Tracked Towing (TT): The most produced variant of the vehicle. Predominantly used to tow heavy armament, such as the Ordnance ML 4.2 inch Mortar and the Ordnance QF 2 and 6 Pounder Anti-Tank Guns, as well as carrying their respective crews. It was equipped with four seats for the gun crew, and ammunition stowage on the track guards. Armor was only found on the front quarter of the variant. For a short time, this vehicle had its own unique title of ‘Tractor Anti-Tank, Mk.I’

Loyd Carrier used by the British Expeditionary Force in Belgium, 1940. Photo: RG Poulussen
Tracked Cable Layer Mechanical (TCLM): A variant used exclusively by the Royal Corps of Signals (RCS). It carried a large spool of telegraph wire. The vehicle was un-armored.
Tracked Starting and Charging (TS&C): A support vehicle to armored regiments. Used to charge flat batteries and help start tank engines. It was equipped with 30 and 12 volt DC dynamos driven from the gearbox. It also carried spare 30-volt, 300 amp/hr battery units. The vehicle was un-armored with the charging unit positioned against the hull plates on both sides. These vehicles were often nicknamed ‘Slaves’.

Illustration of the basic Loyd Carrier.

Illustration of the Loyd Carrier with canvas roof erected.

Both of these illustrations were produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.

Production

The prototype vehicle was tested by the Army in late 1939. An initial order of 200 vehicles soon followed. Production started at Loyd’s own company, Vivian Loyd & Co. In later years, production moved to larger firms, including the Ford Motor Company, Wolseley Motors, Dennis Brothers Ltd, Aveling & Barford, and the Sentinel Waggon Works. In total, 26,000 Loyd carriers were built from 1939 to 1944.

Service

World War Two

Early in the War, the TT and TPC variants were used extensively by the Royal Engineer Chemical Warfare Companies. However, most of Chemical Units were disbanded or re-purposed by 1943 to free up their 4.2-inch mortars for the regular infantry. The carriers were then assigned to units equipped with the Mortars.
The TT variant was the most common of the Loyd Carriers and was deployed in the largest numbers. From D-Day onwards, they were used to tow weapons like 6-Pounder AT guns from battlefield to battlefield. They saw action throughout the fighting in Normandy, and even in the famous Battle of Villers-Bocage.

A Loyd Carrier TT towing a 6-Pdr Anti-Tank gun passes a knocked out Panther. Photo: themodellingnews.com
In service with the Royal Electrical Mechanical Engineers (REME), the carriers were often paired with Caterpillar D8 tractors for tank recovery. The Carrier was used to carry spare parts and recovery apparatus.

Post War

Like most of the carrier vehicles, the Loyd continued to find use after the Second World War in other armies. The Belgian, Danish and Dutch armies purchased Loyd Carriers from the British. Sources suggest that the vehicle remained in service with the Belgian army as late as 1963.
The Belgian Army also created their own variant of the Loyd Carrier. This was the CATI 90 (canon antitank d’infanterie 90mm). The 90mm Gun was produced by MECAR and was designed to combat armored targets. It could also fire HE (High-Explosive) rounds in an infantry support role. The gun was mounted centrally in the vehicle, with the barrel protruding through the frontal plate. It was in operation between 1954 and 1962, and operated with another Loyd Carrier in an ammunition carrying role.

The Belgian CATI 90, preserved at the Royal Military Museum, Brussels. Photo: Alf van Beem

Experimental Variants

SPAAG
There was an attempt to develop an Anti-Aircraft vehicle on the Carrier. This consisted of mounting four-to-six Bren Light Machine Guns at the front of the vehicle on a gimbal that could elevate to point skywards. The vehicle was never mass produced.
SPG
A slightly more elaborate conversion was the attempt to introduce the 25-Pounder field gun to the chassis. The crew compartment was completely removed and the gun introduced directly onto the bare chassis. A second vehicle carrying just ammunition would have worked with it. The recoil of such a powerful gun on such a light chassis would no doubt have caused the vehicle to react violently. This variant was never mass produced.

A surviving Loyd Carrier TT at the Cobbaton Combat Collection, North Devon, England. Photo: Author’s own

Specifications
Dimensions	4.24 x 2.06 x 1.42 m
Total weight, battle ready	4.5 tons
Crew	1 Driver
Propulsion No.1	British Ford V8 petrol 85 bhp at 3500 rpm
Propulsion No.2	US Ford V8 petrol 90 bhp at 3500 rpm
Propulsion No.3	Canadian Ford V8 petrol 85 bhp at 3500 rpm
Speed	30 mph (48 km/h)
Armor	up 7 mm (0.28in)
Total production	26,000

Links & Resources

Concord Publishing, Armor at War Series: British Tanks of WWII: (1) France & Belgium 1944, David Fletcher
aviarmor.net
www.mapleleafup.net
www.wwiiequipment.com
Cobbaton Combat Collection, North Devon, England

Cold War US MBTs

Medium Tank M45 (T26E2)

United States of America (1945)
Medium Tank – 185 Built

In 1945, after a long and convoluted development process, the T26E1 – that lead to the M26 Pershing – entered service, and saw action in the closing months of the Second World War in Europe. The T26/M26 was armed with a powerful, high-velocity 90 mm gun that was perfect for engaging armored targets but was not practical in infantry support roles.

One of the most successful Sherman types to see service in the Second World War was the M4 (105). As the name suggests, these M4s were armed with the 105 mm Howitzer M4. These tanks provided infantry teams with a mean of knocking out enemy positions or obstructions with their powerful High-Explosive (HE) rounds. With a new tank coming into service, it was only logical to develop a similar vehicle based upon it. After all, vehicles based on the same base chassis helped ease production, crew training and ensured a plentiful supply of spare parts.

What would emerge can be described simply as a howitzer-armed version of the T26E1, with a few other, smaller modifications. This vehicle was initially known as the T26E2, but would later receive the designation Medium Tank M45. Only a small number of these vehicles were produced, and they would arrive too late to see action in World War II. They would, however, go on to see limited service during the Korean War.

Period artist’s rendition of the M45 (T26E2). Photo: Hunnicutt’s Pershing

The T26/M26

The M26 Pershing was the result of a request for a new tank for the United States Army. The development process was long and complicated with numerous changes of direction. The initial request was for the tank to be armed with a 76 mm (3 in) gun from the start, but this was later changed to a 90 mm. There were three separate experimental vehicles, the T23, T25, and T26. Of course, it was the T26E3 that became the serialized vehicle, and would later be designated as the M26 Pershing, after General John J. Pershing, the Commander of American Forces in the First World War. The T26 started out as a Medium Tank, was reclassified as a Heavy Tank in 1944, and was then returned to Medium Tank status in 1945.

Other than the replacement of the T26/M26’s 90mm Tank Gun M3 with the 105mm Howitzer M4, very little changed between the M26 and M45. The hull, powertrain and suspension remained identical.

The tank was 20 ft 9.5 in (6.34 m) long, 11 ft 6 in (3.51 m) wide and 9 ft 1.5 in (2.78 m) tall and weighed 46-tons (41.7 tonnes). It was operated by a five-man crew, consisting of the commander, loader, gunner, driver, and bow gunner. It was propelled by the 450-500 hp Ford GAF 8-cylinder, gasoline engine. This and the transmission were placed at the rear of the tank. With this engine, the tank could achieve a top speed of 30 mph (48 km/h). The suspension consisted of a torsion bar system, with six paired road-wheels and five return rollers per-side. The drive sprocket was at the rear with the idler at the front.

Development of the T26E2

In 1944, designers initially turned to the T23 prototype for this new howitzer-armed tank. Work on this went as far as the development and construction of a new combination gun mount (a mount that includes the primary sight and coaxial machine gun) for the 105 mm Howitzer, based on that of the T23’s 76 mm gun. However, with attention turning to the T26E1, work on a T23-based howitzer-armed tank ceased.

The 105mm Gun in the combination mount developed for the T23. Work on this ceased once attention turned to the T26. Photo: Hunnicutt’s Pershing

This new development of the T26 was initially designated as the Heavy Tank T26E2. The new design incorporated a heavier gun shield. As the 105 mm was so much lighter the 90 mm, extra metal on the mantlet was required to properly balance the turret. The mantlet was also re-worked to protect the trunnions and trunnion bearings from the force of a shell impact.

Drawings of the howitzer mount, turret, and fighting compartment were prepared and sent to the builders of the T26/M26, Fisher Tank Arsenal and Chrysler, based at the Detroit Tank Arsenal, in October 1944. Wooden mockups of the new internal layout of the turret were also provided. There were a number of new internal features such as a stabilizer for the gun and new ammunition stowage. Fisher then went on to produce a pilot turret that would be tested on a chassis provided by the Detroit Arsenal.

Production pilot of the T26E2 in 1945. Note the words ‘HVY TANK T 26E2 WITH 105 MM HOW M4’ stenciled on the fender. Photo: Hunnicutt’s Pershing

The M45 in Focus

The 105mm Howitzer M4

The howitzer chosen for the M45 was carried over from the 105 mm-armed Shermans. This was the 105 mm Howitzer M4. This was simply a rework of the M2A1 towed artillery piece. It underwent a rework to allow it to be mounted and operated inside the confines of the turret. The biggest modification to the artillery piece was the breech block which was rotated 90-degrees. The vertically sliding breech block was also replaced with a horizontal one. The breech was of the manual type. Placing a round into the chamber would trigger it to start closing, but the loader would have to finish the job with the breech operating handle. The single recuperator located atop the barrel of the field gun was also replaced by two smaller ones on each side of the barrel. The barrel had a length of 22.5 calibers (93.05 inches/2.3 meters) and was fully rifled. Depending on the shell type used, maximum muzzle-velocity of the gun was 1,550 feet-per-second (470 meters-per-second).

A new mount for the gun was developed for installation in the T26E2. This included the coaxial machine gun and M76G gun site. It was initially designated the Combination Mount T117, but was later serialized as the Combination Mount M71. In this mount, the gun had an elevation range of +35 to -10 degrees. Unlike, the regular 90mm-armed T26E1, the T26E2 was equipped with a vertical stabilizer.

Diagram of the 105mm Howitzer M4. Photo: Public Domain

The ammunition used with the howitzer was semi-fixed, meaning the projectile is only loosely attached to the propellant case. This allowed the projectile to be removed and the propellant charge to be adjusted as required. A number of shell types were available: M1 HE (High Explosive), M67 HEAT (High-Explosive Anti-Tank), and M60 WP (White Phosphorus ‘Willie Pete’). The M67 HEAT shell was capable of penetrating 4 inches (100 mm) of armor.

Secondary armament consisted of a coaxial Browning M1919A4 .30 Cal. (7.62mm) machine gun and a Browning M2 .50 Cal. (12.7mm) heavy machine gun placed on a pintle-mount towards the rear of the turret roof. This could also be placed in a similar mount in front of the commander’s cupola. There was also the bow machine gun which, again, consisted of a Browning M1919A4.

Turret

As mentioned above, the howitzer was lighter than the 90 mm gun. The M4 Howitzer weighed 1,140 pounds (520 kg) while the M3 Gun weighed 2,260 lb (1,030 kg). This unbalanced the turret. To remedy this and rebalance the turret, the mantlet was thickened from 4.5 inches (114 mm) to 8 inches (203 mm). The turret face was also thickened from 4 inches (101 mm) to 5 inches (127 mm), as was the armor on the side of the turret, which was increased from 3 inches (76 mm) to 5 inches (127 mm). This additional armor, of course, increased the tank’s overall weight by 645 pounds (292 kg).

This publicity photo of Major Harry Jost of Fort Benning, with his son, Stephen, sat on the barrel, is an excellent close up of the turret. It shows the gun as well as the thickened mantlet. Date unknown. Photo: Getty

The biggest internal change to the turret was the ammunition stowage. Room was found for 74 rounds of 105mm. These were stored in eight separate bins (4-per side) aligned perpendicular to the hull, versus the three longitudinal bin layout of the M26.

Limited Production and Service

It had been anticipated that the pilot T26E2 would be completed by April of 1945. However, interest in 105 mm Howitzer armed tanks had somewhat dropped at this point and it was not delivered to Aberdeen Proving Grounds (APG) until July, almost 2 months after the end of the War in Europe. Remarkably, the original plan was to produce more howitzer tanks than gun tanks. Battle experience in Europe soon highlighted the effectiveness of the high-velocity 90 mm gun, however, and as such, the trend was reversed.

The T26E2 at Aberdeen Proving Grounds (APG) in July 1945. Photo: war-book.ru

Both Chrysler and Fisher had been awarded contracts to produce the T26E2. With the end of the conflict in Europe – paired with the waning interest in howitzer tanks – Fisher’s contract was canceled and Chrysler’s was heavily reduced in number. Serial production started in July 1945 at the Detroit Tank Arsenal. During production, the order was cut back even further and by the end of production, and the year 1945, only 185 vehicles had been built.

Like its T26/M26 brother, the vehicle went through a period reclassification. During development, it was classified as a heavy tank (it received this classification in June 1944), and was designated ‘Heavy Tank T26E2’. After the war, it was reclassified as a medium tank. Following this, when the tank finally received its type-classification in May 1946, it was designated as the ‘Medium Tank M45’.

A photo of an M45 apparently taken on a test-range in Yakima, Washington. The flag flying from the turret does suggest that it is on a live-fire range. Other details are, unfortunately, unknown. Photo: Online Auction

The only combat service the M45 would ever see would be during the Korean War (1950-53), alongside its M26 brother and, later, its M46 nephew. Here, 105mm Howitzer tanks found a place as mobile light artillery and were used for indirect fire-missions. The M45’s compatriots, such as the M4A3 (105) and the M4A3 POA-CWS-H5 flame tank (this had a 105mm Howitzer with a coaxial flame gun) were often used in this role. They were dug into special positions in groups. Grooves were cut into the ground with a berm at the front that the tanks would sit on to increase their elevation angle. It is likely that the M45 was also used in this way. Unfortunately, information about their time in service on the Korean Peninsula is extremely scarce. It is known that the tanks were used solely by the US Army 6th Tank Battalion, 24th Division.

Colorization of the most well-known photo of an M45 in Korea. It shows two of the 6th Tank Battalion’s M45s crossing a river on September 11th, 1950, a day after the Inchon landings. Colorization by Jaycee ‘Amazing Ace’ Davis.

Thanks to a personal account, we do know that at least a few M45’s remained in Korea after the war:

“I saw two at Tongduchon in 1956, about a mile down the road from our unit (Tank Company 31st Inf. 7 Div). Supposedly, they were not on anyone’s property books and looked pretty ragged. They had belonged to the 6th Tank Battalion, who were supposed to turn them in for scrapping after the ceasefire. No one knew how they got to us and the crews had no information. According to a crew member of one of the tanks, the Ford V8 was ‘old and beat’ and used almost as much oil as gasoline. It was covered in jerry cans full of spare oil cans. I just wish they had considered converting a few M46s. With their better engine and transmission, they would’ve been an ideal infantry support tank.”

– Specialist William Campbel, 31st Infantry, 7th Division, US Army

An M45 in motion in Korea. Exact date and location are unknown. Photo: The Chieftain’s Hatch

Conclusion

The M45 was one of the last howitzer armed tanks to be produced by the United States. It may appear to some as a wasted effort. It was designed for the European theatre of the Second World War but arrived too late, then had to wait 5 years to see combat, by which time it was showing its age. Nonetheless, in its short, approximately 10-year career, it found a place although it never performed the role it was intended for.

Unfortunately, probably due to its extremely short production run, it is widely thought that no M45s survive today.

Pre-production pilot of the ‘Heavy Tank T26E2’ during testing in 1945, with the stenciling on the fenders. The Gun and mantlet are protected from the elements with the weather-proof canvas cover. The roof-mounted .50 Cal (12.7mm) machine gun is in the standard position for a T26/M26 type of tank.

A Medium Tank M45 as it served in the Korean War during the early-1950s. The .50 Cal machine gun has been moved to the position in front of the commander’s cupola and the fenders have been lost. This illustration is based on the description given by a Korean War veteran, William Campbell. All details are as he recalls, apart from the ’45’ number – this is speculation as he has forgotten the exact number of the tank he saw.

Both of these illustrations were produced by Tank Encyclopedia’s own David Bocquelet.

Specifications
Dimensions (L-w-H)	20 ft 9.5 in x 11 ft 6 in x 9 ft 1.5 in (6.34 x 3.51 x 2.78 m)
Total Weight	46 tons (46.7 tonnes)
Crew	5 (commander, driver, assistant driver, loader)
Propulsion	Ford GAF 8 cyl. gasoline, 450-500 hp (340-370 kW)
Maximum speed	22 mph (35 km/h)
Suspension	Torsion Bar
Range	160 km (100 mi)
Armament	105mm Howitzer M4 .50 Cal. (12.7 mm) Browning M2 Machine Gun 2x .30 Cal. (7.62 mm) Browning M1919A4 Machine Guns
Armor	Glacis front 100 mm (3.94 in), sides 75 mm (2.95 in), turret face 203 mm (8 in)
Production	185

Sources

The Author wishes to extend his thanks to William Campbel, US Army, Retired

R. P. Hunnicutt, Pershing: A History of the American T20 Tank Series, Presidio Press, 1971
Simon Dunstan, Armour of the Korean War 1950 – 53, Vanguard No. 27, Osprey Pusblishing, 1982
Jim Mesko, Don Greer, Armor in Korea, A Pictorial History, Squadron/Signal Publications, 1984
Steven J. Zaloga, M26/M46 Pershing Tank 1943-53, New Vanguard #35, Osprey Publishing, 2000
Anthony Tucker Jones, Armoured Warfare in the Korean War: Rare Photographs from Wartime Archives, Pen & Sword Books, 2013
The Chieftain’s Hatch
Armored Fighting Vehicle Database
www.theshermantank.com
www.historyofwar.org

Tanks Encyclopedia Magazine, #1 Republished

The first issue of the Tank Encyclopedia Magazine has been remastered and rereleased. It covers vehicles ranging from the French WWI Frot-Turmel-Laffly Armoured Road Roller up to the Salvadoran Cold War Marenco M114 converted vehicles. The star of this issue is a full article on the Improved Protection version of the famous M1 Abrams – the M1IP.

Our Archive section covers the history of the Mephisto A7V tank, the only one of its kind that still survives to this day in Queensland museum in Australia.

It also contains a modeling article on how to create Weathering and Mud Effects. And the last article from our colleagues and friends from Plane Encyclopedia covers the story of the Sikorsky S-70C-2 Black Hawk in Chinese service!

All the articles are well researched by our excellent team of writers and are accompanied by beautiful illustrations and photos. If you love tanks, this is the magazine for you!
Buy this magazine on Payhip!

WW2 US Other Vehicles

USMC Improvised M4A2 Flail Tank

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date May 9, 2019
2 Comments on USMC Improvised M4A2 Flail Tank

United States of America (1944-1945)
Flail Tank – 1 Built

In 1944, the United States Army began testing British-built flail tanks such as the Crab and Scorpion. Mine flails like these consist of a rotating drum connected to a series of chains suspended from the front of the vehicle. The drum rotates at a high speed, causing the chains to pummel the ground, detonating any mines that may be buried.

Meanwhile, down on Maui, one of the Hawaiian islands in the central Pacific, members of the 4th Marine Division, United States Marine Corps (USMC), were recuperating from their time battling the Japanese on Saipan and Tinian. While on Maui in late 1944, the 4th Marines began to undertake experiments with their tanks, one of which was copying the Crab and Scorpion equipment they had seen in an article in an issue of ‘Armored Force Journal’ (or possibly ‘Infantry Journal’) that the division had received.

The result of this particular experiment was an improvised mine flail built using an old M4 Dozer and the back axle of a truck. While it was just an improvised vehicle built from scrap, it did make it to the ash-covered island of Iwo Jima. Its deployment there, however, did not exactly go to plan.

The Marine Corps’ improvised flail tank, built on a salvaged M4A2 Dozer with an added truck axle and Jeep parts. Photo: Sherman Minutia

Guinea Pig, an M4A2 Dozer

The Marine Corps began to receive the M4A2 in 1943. The tank was of a welded construction and was 19 feet 5 inches (5.9 meters) long, 8 feet 7 inches (2.6 meters) wide and 9 feet (2.7 meters) high. It was armed with the typical 75mm Tank Gun M3 main armament. Secondary armament consisted of a coaxial and a bow-mounted Browning M1919 .30 Cal. (7.62mm) machine gun. Armor thickness was pretty standard for the M4s with a maximum of 3.54 inches (90 mm). The tank’s weight of around 35 tons (31.7 tonnes) was supported on a Vertical Volute Spring Suspension (VVSS), with three bogies on each side of the vehicle and two wheels per bogie. The idler wheel was at the rear. Average speed was around 22–30 mph (35–48 km/h). The big difference of the A2 with respect to other M4’s was the fact that it was diesel powered, unlike other models which were mostly petrol/gasoline driven. The A2’s powerplant consisted of a General Motors 6046, which was a twin inline diesel engine producing 375 hp.

Dozer tanks are used for route clearance. Dozer kits were installed on a number of different Sherman types in the Pacific, not just the A2. Others included the M4 Composites and M4A3’s. They were able to push debris off roads or clear routes through the dense jungles of the Pacific islands. The Dozer blade, known as the M1, was 10 feet 4 inches (3.1 meters) wide and was attached via long arms to the second bogie of the suspension. On the transmission housing on the bow of the host tank, a hydraulic ram was placed to allow the blade a small degree of vertical traverse.

M4A2 gun tanks and M4A2 with M1 dozer of the 3rd Marine Division on Guam, Summer 1944. It is a dozer tank like this that was chosen for the flail experiment. Photo: Ed Gilbert

The Modifications

After reading the article about the flail tanks the Army had tested, Robert Neiman, the Commander of C Company, 4th Tank Battalion decided that it would be a good idea for the Marines to develop their own version. Nieman discussed this with his Officers and NCOs who agreed with the concept. They knew that, in the coming battles, it was highly likely that they would run into dense Japanese minefields, and there were not always enough engineer personnel to clear them. The guinea pig for this experiment was a salvaged M4A2 dozer tank named “Joker” that had previously served with the 4th Tank Battalion on Saipan. It was available for this experiment as, at this time, the Marine Corps was starting to be re-equipped with the newer gasoline/petrol engined M4A3 model. The modifications were undertaken by Gunnery Sergeant Sam Johnston and Staff-Sergeant Ray Shaw who was also the chief maintenance NCO (Non-Commissioned Officer).

A new welded frame was constructed and attached to the joint on the second bogie. At the end of this frame, they placed a salvaged axle and differential from a truck. Drums were placed where the wheels once were and it was to this that the flail elements were attached. Approximately 15 elements were attached to each drum. The elements consisted of a length of twisted metal cable with towing eyes at the end, short lengths of chain, approximately 5 links in length, were then attached to this cable.

A view of the improvised flail, clearing showing its truck axle origins – the differential is clearly visible. Gy.Sgt S. Johnston is at the controls. Photo: Tanks on the Beaches: A Marine Tanker in the Pacific War

A drive shaft extended from the differential housing to the glacis of the tank and passed through the armor just to the left of the bow machine gun position. On the inside, this meshed with a salvaged transmission from a jeep which was, in turn, connected to the tank’s own drive shaft. This is what provided drive to the flail, allowing it to spin. The bow-gunner/assistant driver would be in charge of controlling the rotation and speed of the flail.

A frame was built atop the vestigial hydraulic ram left over from the tank’s time as a dozer. This frame supported the drive shaft, but also allowed the flail assembly to be lifted up and down. Additional support when lifting was provided by a metal shaft bolted to the glacis of the tank. It had a joint at the glacis end, with the other end connected to the frame near the axle – also jointed.

A view of the tank with the flail at full elevation. Photo: Getty

Testing

On completion of the vehicle, tests were authorized. Division commanders authorized the laying of a live minefield for the vehicle to carve a path through. In this initial test, the vehicle successfully beat a 30 to 40-yard (27 – 36 meter) path through the minefield. The tank emerged unscathed, the only real damage received was to the differential housing. Shrapnel from an exploding mine had penetrated the underside of the housing, but there was no internal damage. To stop this happening again, the engineers encased the housing in welded metal plating and during the following tests, no more damage was received.

A head-on view of the flail tank. Note the crudely welded armor on the differential housing. S.Sgt Ray Shaw is standing next to the turret. Photo: Tanks on the Beaches: A Marine Tanker in the Pacific War

Robert Nieman informed other Officers and his superiors of the success of the tests. Pretty soon, a display for high-ranking Officers of other units and branches stationed on Maui was arranged. However, come the morning of the display, the man with all the experience driving the thing, Gy.Sgt Johnston was, to quote Nieman; “drunk as a skunk”. Luckily, another driver was found for the display, which proved to be a great success. So much so, that it was planned to use this improvised vehicle with the 4th Tank Battalion in the coming assault on Iwo Jima.

Iwo Jima

Despite being the only one of its kind (and being a purely improvised vehicle), the flail tank was deployed during the February 1945 invasion of the volcanic island of Iwo Jima. It was assigned to the 4th Tank Battalion’s 2nd Platoon, under the command of a Sergeant Rick Haddix. It caused a small logistical issue, as it was the only Diesel engined tank the 4th Battalion took to Iwo.

Robert Nieman (left) with his executive officer, Bob Reed (right) stand in front of the flail assembly of the improvised de-mining tank on Maui before the Iwo Jima campaign. Photo: Tanks on the Beaches: A Marine Tanker in the Pacific War

Iwo Jima was both the first and last deployment of the vehicle. It is commonly thought that the tank simply bogged down in the soft ashen terrain of the island, as was the case with many tanks during the assault. In actuality, the fate of the vehicle was much more detailed than that. The Flail tank managed to advance to the island’s first airfield – simply identified as ‘Airfield No. 1’. Near the airfield was a series of flags, Sgt. Haddix believed these to be markers for a minefield and ordered the tank forward. These flags, however, were actually range markers for Japanese heavy-mortars in an elevated but hidden position nearby. The tank was pummeled by a barrage of mortar bombs, critically damaging the flail assembly and the tank itself. Following this, Sgt. Haddix and his men bailed out and abandoned the tank.

Conclusion

Thus ends the story of this improvised mine flail. Despite making it to one of the bloodiest battlegrounds of the Pacific Campaign, it never got a chance to prove itself. Robert Nieman was of the opinion that there needed to be more, which would likely have become a reality if American Forces had gone on to invade the Japanese mainland. Nonetheless, this improvised vehicle is a testament to Marine ingenuity. The Marines at this time were used to receiving the Army’s hand-me-downs, so the ‘make do and mend’ nature came naturally to these men. Although, by 1944, the Corps was getting what it requested from its own supply system. It is unclear what happened to the flail tank after it was abandoned. The most logical guess is that it would have been salvaged and scrapped during the post-battle cleanup.

Other US Flails

Neither the United States Army nor Marine Corps ever officially adopted a mine flail, although many were tested; some even in theatres such as Italy. The most produced flail was the Mine Exploder T3, a development of the British Scorpion, built on the hull of the M4A4 – a tank that otherwise went unused in American forces, other than in training units. Just like the Scorpion, the flail assembly was mounted at the front of the tank and was driven by a separate engine mounted externally on the right side of the hull, encased in a protective box. This engine drove the flail to 75 rpm. The Pressed Steel Car Company undertook the production of the T3 and would construct 41 vehicles in total. A number of these were rushed into theatre overseas in 1943. They went on to be used in the Italian Campaign, most notably in the Breakout from Anzio and the fight towards Rome. The flails were operated by men of the 6617th Mine Clearing Company, formed from the 16th Armored Engineers of the 1st Armored Division. The vehicles were eventually declared unfit for service as mine detonations frequently disabled the flail – the flail also limited the tank’s maneuverability.

The Mine Exploder T3 prototype. No chains are installed on the flail. Photo: Hunnicutt’s Sherman

An improved design for a flail was unveiled in June 1943, designated the T3E1. This vehicle was similar to the British Crab as the flail drum was propelled via a power-take-off from the tank’s engine. Although it was an overall improvement, it was still a failure and disliked by operators. This was mostly because the flail threw rocks and dust into the vision ports and because the flail unit was too rigid to follow the contours of the terrain.

When the Second World War ended, work on mine flails in the US ceased. With the eruption of the Korean War in June 1950, however, attention was again given to such vehicles. In preparation for deployment to the Korean Peninsula, engineers stationed in Japan began working on flails built on late-model M4s, namely the M4A3 (76) HVSS. The most common type to emerge featured wire cutters at each end of the drum, and 72 flail chains. Like the Scorpion flails, the drum was propelled by an external engine mounted in a protective box on the right side of the hull. Other flails were improvised in the field, but information on these is scarce.

Seen in this photo from 1952 is one of the M4A3 (76) HVSS tanks converted to a mine flail in Japan prior to deployment in Korea. This vehicle was operated by the 245th Heavy Tank Battalion of the 45th Infantry Division.

Illustration of the Marine Corps’ improvised Mine Flail, built on the hull of a salvaged M4A2 Dozer, using a truck axle and a salvaged transmission from a jeep. Illustration by Tank Encyclopedia’s own David Bocquelet.

Specifications
Dimensions (not including flail)	5.84 x 2.62 x 2.74 m 19’2” x 8’7” x 9′
Total weight (flail not included)	30.3 tons (66,800 lbs)
Crew	5 (commander, driver, co-driver, gunner, loader)
Propulsion	Twin General Motors 6046, 375hp
Maximum speed	48 km/h (30 mph) on road
Suspensions	Vertical Volute Spring (VVSS)
Armament	M3 L/40 75 mm (2.95 in) 2 x (7.62 mm) machine-guns
Armor	Maximum 76 mm (3 in)

Sources

Robert M. Neiman & Kenneth W. Estes, Tanks on the Beaches: A Marine Tanker in the Pacific War, Texas A&M University Press
R. P. Hunnicutt, Sherman – A History of the American Medium Tank, Presidio Press
The Sherman Minutia
Evolution of Marine Tanks

WW2 US Tech

7.2in Multiple Rocket Launcher M17 ‘Whiz Bang’

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date May 4, 2019
7 Comments on 7.2in Multiple Rocket Launcher M17 ‘Whiz Bang’

Though it did not have much of a chance to prove itself in action, the Rocket Launcher T34, famously known as the ‘Calliope’ after the steam organ, was a relatively successful weapon.
Mounted above the turret of the Medium Tank M4, the launcher was a great area-of-effect weapon. Despite this, work continued on upgrading the T34, specifically its firepower. This led to the development of a completely new weapon, which would be capable of launching 7.2-inch (183mm) demolition rockets. This weapon was the 7.2in Multiple Rocket Launcher M17.

M4A2 armed with the Launcher. Photo: Panzerserra

The Medium Tank M4

The tank started life in 1941 as the T6 and was later serialized as the Medium Tank M4. Entering service in 1942, the tank soon became a workhorse, not just to the US Army, but the Allies too.
The 7.2in Multiple Rocket Launcher was mounted on multiple iterations of M4, including M4A1s and A2s. All of the tanks the ‘Whiz Bang’ was fitted to were armed with the standard M4 weapon, the 75mm Tank Gun M3. This gun had a muzzle velocity of up to 619 m/s (2,031 ft/s) and could punch through 102 mm of armor, depending on the AP (Armor Piercing) shell used. It was a good anti-armor weapon, but it was also used to great effect firing HE (High-Explosive) for infantry support.
For secondary armament, the M4s carried a coaxial and a bow mounted .30 Cal (7.62 mm) Browning M1919 machine gun, as well as a .50 Cal (12.7 mm) Browning M2 heavy machine gun on a roof-mounted pintle.

Predecessor, the T34 ‘Calliope’

The Calliope was a bombardment weapon designed to clear paths for attacking infantry units. It was mounted above the turret of the M4 and was attached to the gun which would provide elevation and depression control. The launcher rack consisted of 60 launch tubes, each holding one high-explosive filled 4.5-inch (115mm) rocket.
The rockets had a range of 4200 yards (4 km). Though not accurate individually, when launched together, the rockets were a great area-of-effect weapon. The launcher was a demoralizing piece of equipment for an enemy on the receiving end. Just the shriek of the rockets slicing through the air was often enough to dissuade enemy troops from persisting in the fight.

More Firepower

The quest for increased firepower resulted in the development of the 7.2inch T37 demolition rocket. This 61-pound (27.6 kg) projectile was derived from a naval anti-submarine weapon known as ‘Mousetrap’. This was, in-turn, a development of the famous ship-mounted Hedgehog mortar – the difference being that the Mousetrap was rocket powered. This projectile carried 32-pounds (14.5 kgs) of plastic explosives. It had a low velocity of 160 feet-per-second (49 m/sec), resulting in a short range of just 230-yards (210 meters). A boost to the projectile range came with the T57. This was simply a T37 with the motor from the Calliope’s 4.5-inch rockets attached to the base. This increased the effective range to 1200 yards (1 km).
The 7.2 inch T37 rockets were designed to be used at a relatively close range as a demolition weapon that would breach enemy defenses or simply blow them away completely. To protect them during these close range engagements, the launchers would be armored. The T40 became the most popular of these armored launcher rigs, and it was soon serialized as the 7.2-inch Multiple Rocket Launcher M17.

The T37 Demolition Rocket. Photo: Presidio Press
Like the T34 Calliope, the launcher was mounted above the M4’s turret. Also like the Calliope, the tank’s 75mm gun controlled the launcher’s elevation and depression. In this case, the range was +25 to -5 degrees. When not in use, and for loading, the launcher would rest on the turret roof. For firing, the launcher would raise up and slightly forward, just under a meter clear of the turret roof. The launcher carried 20 of the 7.2in rockets on two rows of 10 rails that were 90-inch (2.2 m) long. Rockets could be fired individually or at ½-second intervals.
The launcher was completely encased in armor that was ½ inch (12.7 mm) thick. The front of the launcher was protected by two armored doors which open vertically to expose the launch rails. The doors were operated by hydraulics which was controlled from inside the turret of the tank. Empty, the M17 weighed 2.2 tons (2 tonnes) and could be jettisoned if required.

M4A1 ‘Whiz Bang’ in Italy being reloaded. Photo: US Archives

Illustration of an M17 ‘Whiz Bang’ equipped M4 Sherman, produced by Bernard ‘Escodrion’ Baker and funded by our Patreon Campaign.

Service

Little is reported about the M17s in service, but we do have a few points of note available to us.
The M17 did not see a great deal of action during the war. Like the Calliope, there was a plan to use tanks armed with the launcher during the D-Day landings. The plan was for them to clear beach obstacles for the attacking troops and armor. Delays in the development of the weapon, however, meant that the final model came too late to be incorporated in the invasion.

A ‘Whiz Bang’ armed M4A1 in Italy. Photo: US Archives
After the Normandy landings, the weapon did see the limited use in operations in North West Europe, as well as Italy. It soon received the nickname ‘Whiz Bang’ from troops. A small number of the launchers were put in reserve for use on the Ardennes Front, but the preemptive German assault meant the M17s went unused.
In 1944, the United States Marine Corps, fighting the Japanese in the Pacific, trialed both the Calliope and Whiz Bang. Despite positive tests, neither went on to serve with the Marines. This is, perhaps, a shame as the Whiz Bang may have proved to be an effective means of disabling the tough Japanese bunkers encountered later in the Pacific Campaign.

An M4 (left) and M4A1 (right) with M17s in Italy. Photo: Panzerserra

Further Development, T67 and T73

The T67 was a limited production upgrade of the M17, designed to be mounted on engineer vehicles. It also featured a new fire control system and the ability to fire the 7.2-inch rocket with either a 2.25 (57mm), 3.25 (83mm) or 4.5-inch motor.
The T73 was developed with the idea of protecting the launcher as much as possible. It differed in design quite drastically, as it only carried 10 rockets on 50-inch (1.2 m) rails. The armor thickness on this model was thicker than the M17s, with 1 inch (25 mm) of armor at the front and ½ inch (12.7 mm) of armor on the top and bottom. 1 inch of armor was enough to protect the rockets from .50 caliber (12.7mm) rounds. The mostly ½ inch armor of the M17 could only stop .30 Caliber (7.62mm). Like the T34 and M17, the launcher rotated with the turret, but this was the first launcher of the type to be independent in elevation and depression which was controlled by an electric drive. The launcher had an elevation range of +45 to -5 degrees. When no longer required, the launcher could be jettisoned by hydraulics controlled from inside the tank. This launcher could also take rockets with a 2.25 (57mm), 3.25 (83mm) or 4.5-inch motor.

Links, Resources & Further Reading

Presidio Press, Sherman: A History of the American Medium Tank, R. P. Hunnicutt.
Osprey Publishing, American Tanks & AFVs of World War II, Micheal Green
Histoire & Collections Publishing, Sherman In The Pacific War 1943-45, Raymound Giuliani
Panzerserra Bunker
Overlord’s Blog

WW2 British Other Vehicles

Morris-Commercial C9/B Self-Propelled 40mm Bofors

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date April 25, 2019
10 Comments on Morris-Commercial C9/B Self-Propelled 40mm Bofors

United Kingdom (1943-1945)
Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Gun – 1,680 Built

This rare Self-Propelled Anti-Aircraft Gun (SPAAG) began development in 1941 as a private venture by the Morris-Commercial company. Morris was one of Britain’s most famous motor companies, renowned for their cars. They also built a number of vehicles for the military, such as the Morris CS9 Armoured Car and the Morris Light Reconnaissance Car. One of their most famous military vehicles was the Morris C8 Field Artillery Tractor (FAT) also known as ‘Quad’. The Morris C9/B is based on this Tractor and was armed with the 40mm Bofors Anti-Aircraft Gun.
The British War Office liked the combination and placed an order. They were put into production in time for the D-Day operations of summer 1944.
The rarity of this SPAAG is somewhat frustrating to the researcher, as the contents of this article represent the majority of the available information out there, despite a relatively large number of produced vehicles.

A factory-fresh Morris C9/B. Photo: Historic Miltary Vehicle Forum

Development

A three-man team designed and developed the C9. They worked under the direction of Mr. Percy Rose at the Morris plant at Adderley Park in Birmingham. Construction of the first prototype was completed by late 1942, and subsequently took part in trials. The trials were successful and the SPAAG entered production. A total of 1680 vehicles were built in total.
The C9/B, officially designated the ‘Carrier, 30 cwt, SP, 4×4, 40 mm AA (Bofors)’ was intended to be a mobile gun platform for the defense of convoys and columns against air attack. Light anti-aircraft regiments were usually outfitted with a battery of six self-propelled guns.

British troops demonstrate the C9. Photo: Warlord Games

The Morris C8 FAT

The C8 Field Artillery Tractor (FAT), also known as the ‘Quad’, was a 4×4 utility vehicle used by British and Commonwealth forces during the Second World War, starting in 1939. It was used to tow weapons such as the 25-Pounder howitzer and 17-Pounder anti-tank gun.
A 70hp Morris EH, 4-cylinder 3.5 liter petrol engine propelled the vehicle to a top speed of 50 mph (80 km/h). It was an extremely reliable vehicle, seeing service in the European and South-Eastern theaters. Around 10,000 C8s were built in total.

The Morris C8 FAT or ‘Quad’ artillery tractor, towng a 25-pdr field gun. It is this vehicle that the C9/B was based on. Photo: IWM

Design

Gun, 40mm Bofors

The chosen armament for this self-propelled anti-aircraft gun was perhaps one of the most famous anti-aircraft (AA) guns in history. This 40mm autocannon, designed and built by the Swedish company Bofors, entered military use in 1934. It became one of the most reliable and deadly guns of the time, seeing use with multiple armies during and after the Second World War.
It had a number of uses, being placed on warships, towed into battle or mounted on various tank chassis. The gun fired a 40 mm (1.6 in) shell, weighing 0.2 kg (2 lbs), up to a maximum vertical range of 7,160 m (23,490 ft). The rate of fire was 120 rounds per minute. Elevation range was from −5 degrees to +90 degrees.

British troops operating the 40mm Bofors on the Morris. The exact location is not known, but judging by the uniforms it is a hot climate, suggesting the Far East. Photo: SOURCE:

Illustration of the Morris-Commercial C9/B Self-Propelled 40mm Bofors, produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.

Chassis

The C8’s chassis was lengthened slightly for this new variant. The engine and drive systems remained the same as the C8 base vehicle, retaining the 70 hp Morris EH, 4-cylinder 3.5 liter petrol engine mounted at the front. It also stayed a 4×4 vehicle.
A simplistic, almost skeletal body was installed on the frame, including a cab area at the front that was open to the elements, even lacking doors, with seats for four personnel. Two seats were placed on the right (one for the driver) and two on the left. A canvas cover could be placed over the cab area to provide some protection from the elements. Only the very earliest of vehicles had a windshield installed.
A fully enclosed cab was avoided as its addition would have prevented the gun from having a 360-degree arc of traverse. Even the steering wheel was hinged so it could be folded out of the way of the gun. The 40 mm gun, with a shield, was mounted centrally on the chassis. A flat platform was constructed behind the gun, with stowage for 40 mm ammunition boxes over each of the back wheels. Pioneering tools and crew stowage were located under this flat platform. Apart from the gun shield, the vehicle was completely unarmored.
To provide a stable gunnery platform, four jacks were added to the chassis. One was at the front under the bumper, one at the rear, and one on the left and on the right on arms that folded out. Four conical ‘shoes’ were also used under the jacks to spread the weight of the vehicle over a wider area, with the combination of the two lifting the C9 off its wheels. Only the engine compartment at the front of the vehicle bared any resemblance to the C8 base vehicle, yet even this was distorted thanks to the stowage of the conical ‘shoes’ in stacked pairs on the fenders over the front wheels.
The vehicle sometimes towed a small, wooden two-wheel trailer with a canvas cover. This was likely used to tow extra supplies for the vehicle such as ammunition and possibly fuel.

Service

The service life of this vehicle is not well recorded, unfortunately, despite a relatively large production total. The largest user of the C9/B was the Manx Regiment of the Isle of Mann. The Regiment was equipped with the Morris early in 1944, in preparation for operations in Europe. We do know that this SPAAG served in both theatres, fighting the Germans in Europe, and the Japanese in the East. At the point they were in Europe, their use as anti-aircraft vehicles would have continuously dwindled as the German Air Force gradually ran out of aircraft.
Such AA vehicles found alternate uses, however, as infantry support vehicles. The 40 mm Bofors would have been an extremely deadly weapon against enemy infantry, or light vehicles. It certainly would have been a devastating weapon against the thinly armored Japanese tanks in the Far East. Using it to engage both ground and air targets, the Manx Regiment became one of the highest scoring Anti-Air units of the Second World war.
At least one of the vehicles was sent to Australia. It took part in comparative testing alongside the locally produced self-propelled 40 mm SPAAG based on the Ford CMP chassis.

Surviving Vehicles

Thankfully, despite the rarity of the vehicle, a number do survive in the UK in various museums, but also in the hands of private restorers.
One such example can be found in the Cobbaton Combat Collection, near Barnstaple North Devon. Another can be found at the Douglas Aviation Museum on the Isle of Man.

The Cobbaton Combat Collection’s Morris C9/B. Photo: Author’s own.

An article by Mark Nash

Specifications
Weight	Around 3 tons
Crew	At least 4
Propulsion	70hp Morris EH, 4-cylinder 3.5 liter petrol engine
Speed (road)	50 mph (80 km/h
Armament	40mm Bofors AA Gun
Armor	N/A
Total production	1680

Links & Resources

Cobbaton Combat Collection, North Devon, England.
www.maps.org.im
www.flamesofwar.com

Modern German Other Vehicles

Minenräumer Minebreaker 2000/2

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date March 21, 2019
7 Comments on Minenräumer Minebreaker 2000/2

Federal Republic of Germany (1999)
Mine Clearing Vehicle – At Least 3 Built

In the late 1990s, the Flensburger Fahrzeugbau Gesellschaft (FFG, Eng: Flensburg Vehicle Manufacturing Company) unveiled a powerful new demining vehicle. It was designed to be capable of clearing large areas of ground quicker than existing vehicles.

This machine was called the Minenräumer (Eng: Mine Clearer) ‘Minebreaker 2000/2’ and was based on the heavily modified chassis of the old German Main Battle Tank (MBT), the Leopard 1. For the entirety of its existence, the mine clearer has been painted completely in bright red paint, with the exception of its bright blue control cab.

The big red Minebreaker is one of the largest and most powerful mine-clearing vehicles to have ever existed. Civilian demining organizations such as German Welt-Entminungs-Hilfe (Eng: German World Demining Aid) began using the vehicle in the late-1990s, but the machine also caught the eye of the world’s militaries. In September 2000, the South Korean Army became the first military to procure the vehicle, for the purpose of demining the inner-Korean border should the need arise. In 2002, the German Army purchased the machine seeing a need for a demining vehicle capable of clearing a larger area than the in-service Keiler Mine Flail. It had a very short service life with the German Army, being retired in 2014. It did, however, see minor service in Afghanistan around Kabul International Airport.

The Minebreaker 2000/2. Photo: Panzernet

The Big Red Beast

By the late-1990s, the Leopard 1 had long fallen out of service with the German Army. As such, it was the perfect candidate for the butchery that would take place converting it into the monstrous Minebreaker.

The Minebreaker was designed by Jorg Kamper, though unfortunately, not much is known about the man. The main feature of his Minenräumer is the large, combine harvester like plow at the front of the vehicle. The plow takes the form of a large tilling drum covered in long metal teeth. The plow is supported by giant arms that extend back to the center of the hull. In the middle of the arms is the command position, enclosed within a ballistically-protected, bright blue (or sometimes white) cabin. Behind the cab, protruding from the engine deck, are two, truck-like exhaust pipes or ‘smokestacks’. Finally, at the very rear of the hull, hanging over the back of the engine deck is a large box housing the vehicle’s giant air ventilation system.

Hull

The Leopard’s chassis is barely recognizable as the hull of this vehicle. The only recognizable features are the vestigial exhaust vents on the sides on the engine deck, just above the sprocket wheels, and the running gear. The running gear did see a small addition in the form of a protective disc attached to the sprocket wheel. Exactly what purpose this disc has, however, is unknown.

The engine is one of the few unchanged parts of the Leopard 1’s anatomy. It remains the same 10-cylinder, 37.4-litre multi-fuel MTU MB 838 CaM 500 engine. This engine produces 819 horsepower and propelled the 40-tonne Leopard 1 to 65 km/h (40 mph). The Minebreaker is 9 tonnes heavier than the Leopard, weighing in at 49 tonnes. The Minebreaker travels at a fraction of the speed of the Leopard 1, though, with a top speed of just 4 km/h. This is because the plow, and the vehicle itself, is driven hydraulically via a multi-pump transfer drive. In the case of mine clearing operations, this is not a bad thing. It allows every inch of ground to be cleared, forming as safe an area as possible. This hydrostatic drive allows the Minebreaker to travel as slow as 1 meter-per-minute.

Mine Clearing Equipment

The mine plow of the Minebreaker takes the form of a large tilling drum. The drum is covered in around 50, long chisel-like teeth. As the vehicle’s designer once explained: “The tilling drum is fitted with heavy-duty tungsten carbide teeth. If a mine blows up these teeth are the only piece damaged, but [they] are cheap and can be exchanged within minutes…”. Teeth included, the drum is 1.8 meters in diameter and 3.69 meters wide. The drum is covered in a large hood to stop debris and undetonated mines hitting the vehicle.

The gargantuan tilling assembly located at the front of the Minebreaker. Photo: Uwe Hellmann, Tankograd Publishing

The tilling drum is carried by a large frame consisting of two huge arms on the left and right of the drum, and a crossbar that spans the gap between the two. Attached to the bar are two hydraulic rams that raise and lower the tiller as required. The arms are attached to pivot joints roughly halfway along the length of the hull, just above the fourth road wheel. The drum was rotated via chains housed inside the supporting arms. On the inner side of the arm, near the ‘elbow’, was a small motor, powered by the hydraulic drive. This could rotate the drum in both a clockwise and anti-clockwise direction. Anticlockwise is often the preferred direction as it lifts mines out of the ground. Clockwise rotation can result in pushing the mine further into the ground. Unfortunately, the rotational speed of the drum is currently unknown.

The large frame that carriers the tilling drum is raised to allow the vehicle to move around slightly easier. Photo: topwar.ru

Thanks to the hydraulic drive, the vehicle can clear mines at various speeds and various soil types. In light soil, the vehicle clears at 12-20 m/min, 5-12 m/min in medium soil, and 2-5 m/min in heavy soil. This was estimated as being 20 to 40 times faster than a squad of 20 experienced deminers. The vehicle has an approximate clearing rate of 15,000 mᒾ – 20,000 mᒾ (1.5 – 2 Hectares) per day. Clearance depth of the tilling drum is 300 – 500 mm. Due to the size and limited flexibility of the tilling drum, the vehicle can only clear reliably on predominantly flat ground. Ground sloped over 35 degrees cannot be cleared by this vehicle.

The immense tilling drum of the Minebreaker. At the end of each blade, there is a tungsten-carbide tooth. Photo: 270862 of Flickr

Control Cab

The Minebreaker is driven and controlled by a single operator, located in a small bright blue cab placed in the middle of the vehicle. The cab was positioned on a large metal plate that covered the empty, 198 cm diameter turret ring. The cab is ballistically protected by 20 mm steel armor and 70 mm of layered bulletproof glass on the four windows. There is a window on the front of the cab (with a wiper blade), one on each side, and one at the rear built into the armored door used to gain entrance to the cab.

The bright blue one-man control cab of the Minebreaker. Note Flensburger Fahrzeugbau Gesellschaft’s ‘FFG’ logo on the front plate. Photo: Public Domain

The Minebreaker is incredibly easy to control. There are two joysticks attacked to control units on the left and right side of the driver’s seat. One stick is used to drive the vehicle, the other operates the tilling rig. The ease of control means anyone with basic knowledge and qualifications in operating foundry or construction equipment can easily, and quickly, be trained to operate the Minebreaker. The Operator’s seat is mounted above shock-absorbers. These shock-absorbers cushion the Operator from the force of an exploding mine. For example, the G-force produced by the detonation of a 7kg explosive is reduced to just 2 Gs in the cab. This is comparable to a car mounting a curb at walking speed. The seat also rotates to allow the Operator to egress the cab through the armored door.

A view of the Minebreaker from the engine deck. The armored door to the cab is open and the operating seat rotated. Note also, the motor that drives the chain to the milling drum on the inside of the support arm. Photo: GICHD

Other Features

One other large, eye-catching feature of the Minebreaker is the air filter assembly at the rear of the vehicle. The Minebreaker is a large and powerful mine clearing vehicle, and as such, produces a lot of dust and debris when its tilling drum is at full speed cutting into terrain. The powerful MTU (Motoren und Turbinen Union meaning, Eng: Motor and Turbine Union) engine is air-cooled, and of course, requires oxygen for the combustion process. To provide the cleanest possible air in a cloud of dust, the air filters were made truly large. The whole assembly is housed inside a large box overhanging the rear of the vehicle, supported by welded framework. Clean air is pumped into the engine bay directly through the engine deck. A large ‘hump’ of metal plating protects the connection between the front of the filter box and engine deck. The exact model of the filter, or how it operates, is unfortunately unknown at this time.

The huge air-filtration system at the rear of the Minebreaker. Note the extensive supporting framework underneath, and the ladder that allows maintenance access. Photo: 270862 of Flickr

To accommodate the filtration system, the exhaust gasses had to be diverted from the usual grills on the left and right of the hull, at the rear. For this, new exhaust pipes were installed just in front of these grills. The pipes culminated in large, semi-truck-like smokestacks just over a meter high, complete with perforated, heat sinking cowling.

Climbing aboard the Minebreaker is easy. Just in front of the left smokestack is a ladder. When the operator is aboard, it is then folded up and locked in place to stop it getting tangled up with the running gear. There is also a folding ladder attached to the left rear corner of the air filter.

The folding access ladder and left smoke stack of the Minebreaker. Photo: 270862 of Flickr

The Minebreaker is not intended for use in active combat areas and as such, it is mostly unarmored. Also, as a slow moving vehicle, it is an easy target for an aggressor tank or anti-tank weapon. The vehicle’s protective cab is only meant to protect the vehicle from small arms fire and the detonation of mines. Although the Leopard 1 was never a heavily armored vehicle, with a maximum armor thickness of 70 mm, it still grants a good level of protection for the Operator and the internal mechanics.

Another feature of the Minebreaker is that – according to both the designer, Jorg Kamper, and the manufacturer, FFG – the Minebreaker is a modular system. Kamper as been recorded as saying “…it is [currently] mounted on a Leopard 1 chassis, but [it] is a modular system and can fit almost [any other tracked chassis] such as the T-55, T-72, M48, M60…”. There is nothing to say that this is not true, but, for now at least, the only built and used Minebreakers have been Leopard 1 based.

Service

SFOR: Bosnia and Herzegovina

The first uses of the Minebreaker were at the hands of private, non-military demining organizations. As already stated, this included German Welt-Entminungs-Hilfe. In 1999, this organization aided NATO’s ‘Stabilisation Force in Bosnia and Herzegovina (SFOR)’ in the removal of mines from Vidovice, Kopanice and Jenjic. These were small towns on Bosnia and Herzegovina’s northeastern border with Croatia. These towns were in the Posavina Corridor, in the Sava River valley, some of the most hotly contested ground in the Bosnian War of 1992 – 1995. As such, the ground was heavily saturated with minefields.

The Minebreaker in Vidovice, Bosnia. Photo: Capt. Jesus Campuzano

For three years, the Minebreaker was used here in clearing operations. The Minebreaker was operated by personnel from Croatia’s 4th Guards Brigade ‘The Spiders’. The 4th Guards Bde. was under the supervision of the United States 1st Engineer Battalion, which was in the country as part of Task Force ‘Catamount’.

ISAF: Afghanistan

When it entered service with the German Army, the Teutonic Cross was added to the vehicle, on the tiller arms. The first use of the Minebreaker by the German Army came in September 2002, in Afghanistan. The Minebreaker was deployed with the German contingent of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force, also known as ‘ISAF’. While part of this force, the ‘ISAF’ logo was applied to the tiller arms. The Minebreaker proved to be somewhat of a logistical headache as no military aircraft was capable of carrying the vehicle to Afghanistan. The Ukrainian based Antonov Airlines were contracted to transport the Minebreaker, using the world’s largest cargo aircraft, the Antonov An-225 Mriya.

The Minebreaker is unloaded from the Antonov 225 at Kabul International Airport in September 2002. Photo: Pioneer News

The Minebreaker was tasked with clearing mines from the area around Kabul International Airport. Similar missions took place in this area, undertaken by various nation’s armies. The US Army, for instance, deployed the remote-controllable M1 Panther II for this task. The Minebreaker was in operation in Afghanistan for two years, after which it was sent back to Germany where it was used as a training vehicle.

Conclusion

The Minebreaker was retired from German military service in 2014. It is unknown whether South Korea’s machine is still operational. The Minebreaker is still listed as being available to purchase from Flensburger Fahrzeugbau Gesellschaft (FFG), however.

It is not known whether there are any other Minebreakers currently in service in the world, or whether they have been based on other vehicles. For now, at least, the only known Minebreakers remain Leopard 1 based. It also still one of the most powerful mine clearing vehicles to have ever existed.

The Flensburger Fahrzeugbau Gesellschaft (FFG) Minenräumer ‘Minebreaker 2000/2’. The hull of the Leopard 1 is barely recogniseable under all of the added components and large mineclearing tiller drum assembly. This illustration was produced by Andrei ‘Octo10’ Kirushkin, funded by our Patreon Campaign.

Specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)	10.94 x 4.51 x 3.31 meters
Total weight, battle ready	49 tonnes
Crew	1 (Operator)
Propulsion	MTU MB 838 CaM 500 engine, 819hp
Suspension	Independent torsion bars
Speed (road)	1 m/min – 4 km/h (2.4 mph)
Equipment	1.8 x 3.69 meter Mine Clearing Tilling Drum
Armor	Max 70 mm on the hull, 70mm bulletproof gl.
Production	At least 3

Sources

Ralph Zwilling, Minenräumfahrzeuge: Mine-clearing Vehicles from the Keiler to the German Route Clearance System, Tankograd Publishing
Pionier News, The German Corps of Engineers Magazine, Edition No. 5, December 2002. Page 28-29, an article by Lieutenant Colonel Thomas Sponfeldner. (PDF)
Mechanical Demining Equipment Catalogue 2008 (PDF)
Mechanical Demining Equipment Catalogue 2010 ( PDF)
www.gichd.org
www.nato.int/sfor
www.ffg-flensburg.de
texogatech.com/minebreaker001.cfm

Cold War British Engineering Vehicles

FV4203 Chieftain AVRE

United Kingdom (1963)
Engineering Vehicle – Approximately 70 Built

While it was still under development in 1960, the Royal Engineers (RE) requested specialist conversions of the UK’s new Main Battle Tank (MBT), the FV4201 Chieftain to replace the Centurion models then in service. One of the requested specialist vehicles was a new AVRE (Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers) to replace the FV4003 Centurion AVRE. At this time, these specialist vehicles were still called ‘Funnies’, after their famous ancestors in the 79th Armoured Division, ‘Hobart’s Funnies’. It made sense to design these specialist vehicles based on the MBT of the time to ease production, training, and have a plentiful supply of spare parts.
Following feasibility studies in 1963, designs were put forward in May 1965, and September 1966. These designs were designated Armoured Engineer Vehicles (AEV)s. There were two versions. These were the ‘W’ and ‘G’. The AEV (W) would be an unarmed variant with no turret or large caliber armament. It would be equipped with a 30-ton capacity winch, hence the identifier ‘W’. It would also carry the No. 7 twin-track bridge, a short bridge able to be placed across ditches or trenches. It was intended to replace fascines. The AEV (G) retained its turret and carried the same 165mm Demolition Gun (hence the identifier ‘G’) as the Centurion AVRE. It would also carry an ‘A-frame’ crane on the turret in a configuration similar to the American M728 CEV (Combat Engineer Vehicle). An Armoured Vehicle Launched Bridge (AVLB) variant was also designed.
All of these were intended to replace the Centurion-based models then in service. Fifteen AEV (G)s, which had acquired the designation FV4207, were requested as well as 53 AEV (W)s. However, come 1967, the AEV (G) was canceled in favor of the (W). The cancellation of the (G) variant meant that the Centurion AVRE would have to remain in service for another 20 years. With development focussed on the AEV (W), it received the designation of Chieftain AVRE.

Design drawings for the Chieftain AEV (w) above, and the AEV (G) below. Photo: Haynes Publishing

The Chieftain

The FV4201 Chieftain, entering service in 1966, was designed as a replacement for both the Centurion and FV214 Conqueror. It boasted a powerful 120mm gun and tough armor that was up to 230 mm (9 in) thick. It was armed with the L11A5 120mm rifled gun. The tank was manned by a crew of 4, consisting of a commander, gunner, loader, and driver. The Chieftain was one of the first tanks in which the driver sat in a reclining, or supine, position, meaning the tank had a much lower silhouette than previous vehicles.
The tank weighed 55 tons. This weight was supported on a Horstmann suspension inherited from the Centurion. There were six road-wheels per side, attached to three, two-wheel bogies. The idler was at the front while the drive sprocket was at the rear. The tank was powered by the notorious 750hp Leyland L60 multi-fuel engine. The engine was designed to run on different fuels (Petrol, Diesel, even cooking oil) but it was extremely unreliable causing a lot of breakdowns.
After a number of upgrade programs resulting in 12 separate marks of the vehicle, the Chieftain was eventually removed from service with the British Army in the early 1990s. It was replaced by the Challenger I.

Non-Starter

Come 1969, the design of the Chieftain AVRE had been completed and two prototypes with No. 7 bridges were ordered. The basic configuration of the AVRE was similar to that of the Chieftain ARV (Armoured Recovery Vehicle) which was under simultaneous development and was equipped with the 3-ton winch and a dozer blade/earth bucket. The No. 7 Bridge was carried driving surface-down on top of the hull.
Development on the AVRE ceased in April 1969. This was due to the development of the Combat Engineer Tractor (CET) by the Royal Ordnance Factory (ROF) in Leeds, which was a fraction of the cost of the Chieftain variant. It soon became clear that funds would not be available for both vehicles. By the end of the 1960s, the development of both the AVRE prototypes was canceled, leaving the Chieftain AVLB (Armoured Vehicle-Launched Bridge) to be the only variant of the MBT under development for the Royal Engineers. The small CET, which became the FV180, would enter service in 1976.

Resurrected

By the mid-1980s, the Royal Engineers were even more eager to replace their now almost 40-year old Centurion AVREs. Also at this time, the Chieftain’s replacement, the Challenger I had started to be put into service. Realizing that a number of surplus Chieftain tanks would become available, the Chieftain AVRE program was resurrected.
A design not too dissimilar from the old AEV (W) concept, almost a simplified version, was drawn up and 13, later 17, surplus Chieftains were made available for the conversion program. Following the acceptance of the design, a wooden mockup was constructed. This was followed by the construction of two prototypes built on Chieftain AVLB Mk.2 hulls. The conversions were done at Bovington Camp in 1984.

Design

This new AVRE would be operating alongside Challenger I. It was required that the vehicle maintain a high level of maneuverability and the best power-to-weight ratio possible. To achieve this, the turret was removed saving 12-tons. This, however, meant that the 165mm Demolition Gun was not added to the vehicle, making the Centurion the last armed AVRE used by the Royal Engineers.
It would have the ability to mount the standard-issue dozer blade or a modified version of the Centurion 105 AVRE’s mine plow. It could tow two four-wheel ‘AVRE Trailers’ or two Giant Viper (GV) mine clearing devices, doubling the capacity compared to the Centurion. On a UK road it was limited to 1 trailer however.
Atop the turretless hull, a three-piece superstructure was added. Known as the ‘roof-rack’ or ‘hamper’, it could carry three PVC ‘maxi’ pipe fascine rolls or six roles of Class 60 Trackway. Six welded legs secured the rack to the hull, the rearmost rack was fixed in place, but the back section of the middle and the front section of the forward rack could be raised or lowered hydraulically to drop fascines or Class 60 rolls off the front of the vehicle. It was also decided that the rack be capable of carrying a No. 9 Tank Bridge and other stores. Rollers were attached to the rack to facilitate the loading and unloading of the bridge. It must be stressed that the AVRE could not launch the bridge. It would only carry the No. 9 if it was operating in support of the Chieftain AVLB. A seventh roll of Class 60 could be carried on the rear of the hull. The vehicle could also stow its own dozer blade or mine plow in this location. A Rotzler hydraulic winch was also introduced. For close protection, a GPMG (General Purpose Machine Gun) light-machine gun was carried.
The vehicle had a crew of four. This consisted of the commander, driver and two engineers. The driver sat in the standard position at the front of the vehicle. The commander sat in the hull with the two engineers either side of him in very uncomfortable positions due to the low roof.

Production

To speed up the production of the vehicle and get it into service as quickly as possible, it was decided that all conversion work would be handled by the Army. Work started in February 1986 at the 21st Engineer base workshops in Willich, Germany. A total of 17 Chieftains were converted here. AVRE No. 1 was completed in August 1986, and was sent immediately for trials with the 32nd Armoured Engineer Regiment of the BAOR (British Army of the Rhine). This was to assess the design before full production started. This proved to be a wise endeavor, as a total of 40 modifications and additions were made to and for AVRE No. 2 & 3. The 4th converted vehicle became the finalized design. This was to avoid all 17 of the vehicles having different features and components. After No. 4, all of the AVREs were identical. The last Chieftain AVRE was completed by late 1987.
The completed AVREs were given the designations ‘AVRE Mk.6/2C’. They were also sometimes known as the ‘Willich AVREs’. Sixteen of the AVREs were based on Mk.2 Chieftains, with one solitary Mk.1. The conversions were completed at the relatively cheap price of GB£80,000 each. Two further AVREs were completed at the base workshops of the 23rd Engineer Regiment in Wetter to fulfill the requirement of AVREs in BATUS (British Army Training Unit Suffield), Canada. This brought the total to 19 Chieftain AVRE produced and in service from the mid-1980s to the early 1990s.

Equipment

The role of the ‘CHAVRE’ was much the same as its Centurion and Churchill predecessors, carrying a vast array of battlefield engineering equipment, but specifically not combat as it did not carry an obstacle destruction gun.

Fascines

Just like the AVREs before it, the Chieftain could carry a large fascine over its front end in a cradle mounted on the upper glacis. Fascines had been carried by tanks since their earliest days on the devastated battlefields of the First World War, most notably at the Battle of Cambrai in 1917. Fascines are used to fill wide trenches or ditches to allow tanks to cross. The original fascines were fabricated from brushwood, bound tightly together into a cylinder. In the late 1950s, the Royal Engineers developed a new type, fabricated from large sections of PVC or ‘maxi’ pipe. This was lighter than the original wooden ones, but also allowed water to flow through stopping it from shifting or floating away when dropped in a ditch.

‘CHAVRE’ at Salisbury Plain in 2000. The vehicle is carrying two rolls of ‘maxi’ pipe fascine. It is also equipped with a mine plow, and is towing a 7½-ton trailer. Photo: T.J. Neate

Class 60 Trackway

Dozer Blade

This hydraulically operated blade was fitted directly to the front of the Chieftain. The blade could be used for a number of tasks. These included carving out hull-down positions for gun tanks (this could be achieved within 7 minutes), digging gun emplacements, route denial (creating and filling anti-tank ditches), and improving bridge approaches. It could also be used aggressively to push barricades or debris from the path of attacking allies, and even clear inert unexploded mines. The blade was also used to flatten ground for the application of Class 60 Trackway by ‘back-blading’, dragging the blade backward over the ground to grade a uniform surface for the roadway to lie on.

A ‘CHAVRE’ of the 22nd Engineer Regiment, equipped with dozer, blade ploughs through a dirt pile. Perham Down, 1995. Photo: T.J. Neate

Towed Equipment

Trailer

The AVRE could haul one or two 7½-ton four wheel trailers that were designed to carry a fascine roll, two rolls of Class 60 Trackway, demolition charges, No. 7 Anti-Tank mines, RDD (Radiological Dispersal Device) explosives, and other engineering equipment. The trailer could traverse any terrain the tank could, without hindering it. It could be jettisoned when required via an exploding pin in the jointed towing hook.

An AVRE towing the 7½-ton trailer loaded with two trackway rolls. Photo: Haynes Publishing

Giant Viper

Another trailer borne-device which was towed by the AVRE. A further development of the World War Two ‘Conger’, the ‘Giant Viper’ was a mine clearing device use to clear large areas of explosive devices such as IED’s or landmines, or clear a path through barbed wire. The Viper was mounted on a trailer that was towed by the tank. It consisted of a 750ft (229 m) long, 2 ⅝ inch (6.6 cm) diameter hose filled with plastic explosives. The Viper would be launched over the tank via a cluster of eight rocket motors, then landing in the area that had to be cleared and exploding. The blast would clear a pathway 24 feet (7.3m) wide and 600 feet (183 m) long. The device was carried on the back of a unique two-wheel trailer.

Chieftain AVRE towing two ‘Giant Viper’ trailers, the rear of which is launching the Viper rocket. IT is also carrying 3 ‘maxi’ pipe fascines. Photo: Haynes Publishing

Service

Initially, nine of the AVREs went to the 23rd Engineer Regiment, five went to the 32nd Armoured Engineer Regiment, two went to BATUS (followed later by the two more built in Wetter) and a solitary AVRE went to Bovington Camp. Despite some initial teething problems with the general reliability of the Chieftain (the hulls converted were now around 30 years old), this new vehicle provided the Royal Engineers a flexible, hardworking vehicle able to support battle groups, armored divisions and even infantry with a range of engineering tools.

Gulf War

Fourteen Chieftain AVREs, accompanied by their older Centurion brothers, were part of the British contingent sent on Operation Granby, the codename given to British Operations in the 1990-1991 Gulf War. Here they received extra armor protection in the form of Explosive Reactive Armor or ‘ERA’, taken from Warrior MICVs. These were added to both sides of the crew compartment, adding a total of 1.2 tons to the vehicle. ‘Chain mail’ was added in the form of a net which was hung from the roof rack or ‘hamper’ as a defense against shaped-charge ammunition. This was not popular with the drivers as the chains reduced vision.

Sapper Matthew Newell, 39 Field Squadron, 23 Engineer Regiment, stands with a captured AK-47 assault rifle in front of his AVRE “Whoosh, Bang, Gone!”. Newell was the driver of this vehicle, its name came from the sound made when the Giant Viper mine clearing device was operated. Note the added chain net at the front of the vehicle, and stuffed toy decoration on the left. Photo: Matthew Newell Personal Collection
The AVREs proved very useful in operations in this theatre, serving admirably alongside the Centurion AVREs. Their only real mission, though, was clearing the Milta Pass, North of Kuwait. This was the Main Supply Route (MSR) to the Northern Border with Iraq and it was heavily blocked with wrecks of tanks, trucks, artillery pieces, civilian vehicles, rubble, and all kinds of unexploded ordnance thanks to numerous attacks by marauding US A-10 Warthog ground attack aircraft. All other routes were compromised as there were minefields everywhere on the side of the Basra Road connecting Kuwait City to Iraq. The Chieftains were used to tow and drag destroyed vehicles, while the Centurions shunted wrecked tanks off the road with their dozer blades in case any remaining ammunition cooked off (exploded).

Chieftain AVRE ‘Nice and Sleazy’, driven by Sapper Graham Aylward, 39th Field Sqn, 23rd Engr Rgt, in the Gulf. Photographed by Captain Neil Palmer RTR, Command Troop, 14/20th. Hussars, 4 Bde, RSO. Photo: Neil Palmer Personal Collection.

New Model

The AVRE’s success in the Gulf reinforced an idea from 1989, which called for the conversion of more surplus Chieftain hulls. These new AVRE would have a few improvements to the design. The rearmost hamper was fitted with hydraulics to allow the whole thing to tip backwards, allowing fascines or trackway rolls to simply roll off. A small, onboard hydraulic crane was also added. This would lift equipment onto the hull rear and was also used to load fascines and trackway rolls.

‘CHAVRE’ using the on-board hydraulic crane to steady roles of ‘maxi’ pipe fascines. The rear deck, carrying a roll of trackway, shows its abiliity to be tipped backwards. Photo: T.J. Neate
A total of 46 of these newer AVREs were constructed in two batches at ROF Leads, consisting of one batch of 30 and another of 16 constructed between 1991 and 1994. The vehicle received the official designation of ‘Chieftain Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers’, but this was often shortened to ‘CHAVRE’. Once these newer model AVREs entered service, most of the older ‘Willich AVREs’ were retired, though a few remained in service as training vehicles at various camps and bases.
The CHAVRE saw active service in the Kosovo War of 1998-1999. Here they served with the British Contingent of the NATO force dispatched. The ERA configuration used in the Gulf was also used on the vehicles in this theatre. They were mostly used for route clearance and were predominantly used to clear the way for Podujevo camp in the north of the country.

Chieftain AVRE ‘CHAVRE’ in Kosovo, 2000. Photo: Chieftain Tank Apreciation Society group on Facebook

Fate

The ‘CHAVREs’ were finally removed from service in the early 2000s. They were replaced by the British Army’s currently serving Armoured Engineer vehicle, the Trojan.
A few Chieftain AVREs do survive today. One of the earlier ‘Willich AVREs’ can be found outside the Tank Museum, Bovington. For a time, a later ‘CHAVRE’ was also kept here in a running condition. It was displayed in a few of the Tank Museum’s events. It is believed that it has now been moved to the Royal Engineers Museum, Kent. Another can be found on display at the Chatham Dockyards near London.

Specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)	25′ (Parx.) x 11’5″ x 9’5″ (7.5m x 3.5m x 2.89m)
Total weight, battle ready	Aprx. 43 tons (39 tonnes)
Crew	4 (commander, driver, two engineers).
Propulsion	British Leyland diesel BL 40, 450-650 bhp, later BL 60, 695 bhp
Speed	48/30 km/h road/cross-country (29.82/18.64 mph)
Range/consumption	500 km (310.68 mi)
Equipment	PVC Pipe Fascine Class 60 Trackway Dozer Blade Giant Viper
Armour	Glacis 4.72in, sides 1.37in (120/35 mm)

Links & Resources

Haynes Owners Workshop Manual, Chieftain Main Battle Tank, 1966 to Present.
Osprey Publishing, New Vanguard #80: Chieftain Main Battle Tank 1965–2003
www.armedforces.co.uk
www.army-guide.com
The Tank Museum, Bovington
Esteemed members of the the Chieftain Tank Apreciation Society Facebook Group
Photo walk-around: www.net-maquettes.com

FV4203 Chieftain Armoured Vehicle Royal Engineers (AVRE) in a two-tone camouflage pattern. The AVRE is equipped with a mine plow and is carrying two ‘maxi-pipe’ fascines. Illustration produced by Jarosław Janas, funded by our Patreon Campaign.

Cold War US Other Vehicles

Self-Propelled Flame Thrower M132 ‘Zippo’

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date March 12, 2019
2 Comments on Self-Propelled Flame Thrower M132 ‘Zippo’

United States of America (1959)
Armored Flamethrower – 351 Built

Since its appearance in the late 1950s, the Armored Personnel Carrier (APC) M113 has continued to be one of the most versatile and universal armored vehicles to have ever existed. It has spawned numerous variants in its long service life, from mobile command posts and Self-Propelled Anti-Air Guns (SPAAGs) to firefighting vehicles.

One of the less well-known variants was the Self Propelled Flame Thrower M132. Entering service in 1963, the M132 – along with the Flame Thrower Tank M67 ‘Zippo’ – would be one of the last armored or ‘mechanized’ flamethrowers to see service in the United States Military. Whereas the M67 would serve in the US Marine Corps (USMC), the M132 would serve with the US Army. The vehicle saw action during the long years of the Vietnam War (1955-75), but its time in service was, however, short-lived. This is mostly due to the fact that, after Vietnam, flame throwing vehicles began to fall out of favor.

One of the first things the article will address is its unofficial ‘Zippo’ nickname – named after the lighter brand – which it shares with the M67. Its origin is somewhat mysterious. Just like the M60A2 tank and its ‘Starship’ name, a concrete source cannot be stated as to when this name came into use. It was likely given by the crews or infantry that operated with the vehicle. There is a suggestion, however, that the name originated from this particular lighter being used to ignite the napalm fuel when the electrical igniters failed.

The M113-based Self-Propelled Flame Thrower M132 ‘Zippo’. Photo: Hunnicutt Bradley

The M113

The M113 is one of the most famous Armored Personnel Carriers ever built and continues to serve in not only the US Military but also in the inventory of many of the world’s militaries. The vehicle has been in service for 60 years, making it one of the longest-serving armored vehicles in history.

Developed and built by the Food Machinery Corporation (FMC), the M113 is a basic vehicle, little more than an armored box on tracks. It is 15 ft 11.5 in (4.8 m) long, 8 ft 9.7 in (2.6 m) wide, and 8 ft 2 in (2.5 m) tall. The vehicle’s structure is almost completely fabricated from aluminum, including the armor which is between 0.4 and 1.4 inches (12 – 38 mm) thick. The vehicle started out with a Chrysler 75M petrol engine, although this would later be changed to a General Motors 6V53 diesel type. The power plant is located at the front of the vehicle with the transmission. The vehicle is supported by a torsion bar suspension connected to five road-wheels. The idler wheel is at the rear with the drive sprocket at the front.

The APC has a crew of two, a Driver and a Commander, who are located at the front of the vehicle, with a passenger compartment taking up the rear of the vehicle. Eleven passengers can be carried by the vehicle. The APC’s usual armament would be a single Browning M2 .50 Cal (12.7mm) heavy machine gun, located at the commander’s position.

Development & Background, the CRDL

In June 1954, the Chemical Research and Development Laboratories (CRDL) began a study, conceptualized by the US Army Chemical Corps, looking into the conversion of serving tanks and armored vehicles into armored/mechanized flame throwers. As a result of this study, the E31-E36 flame thrower kit was developed. The nomenclature, which was unchanged from its debut in the Second World War, denotes that this is the combination of the E31 fuel and pressure unit and the E36 flame gun. The idea behind this kit was that it could be installed on serving vehicles with minimal effort.

One of the M59 prototypes during a demonstration for President Kennedy in 1961 at Fort Bragg. Photo: LIFE Magazine

Three E31-E36 kits were produced and tested on the M59 APC, the predecessor of the M113. In the M59, flame-fuel capacity was 400 gallons (1,818 liters) providing a total firing time of 70 seconds. Following the tests, improvements were made to the weapon and it received the new designation E31R1-E36R1. The modifications to this version of the weapon were intended to allow its installation not only on the M59, but also the brand new M113 APC.

Diagram showing the internal arrangement of the flame thrower system inside the M113. Photo: Hunnicut Bradley

Prototypes

In the summer of 1959, a contract was signed for the construction of three E31R1-E36R1 units and their installation aboard three M113s. The newer, and larger, M113 was found to be a far more suitable vehicle than the M59 and, as such, all work on an M59 based flame thrower ceased. This is despite the M59 having better flame fuel capacity, and as such, a longer firing time*. Logistically, however, it was only prudent to develop the vehicle on a new type which was then entering service. This would allow a degree of commonality, making it easier to manufacture and allowing spare parts to be shared between vehicles.

The three prototypes had the E36R1 installed inside an M1 Cupola – the machine gun armed cupolas found on the M48 and M60 tanks – with a coaxial machine gun. This cupola was then mounted over the commander’s position, with the fuel and pressure systems installed in the personnel compartment. Initially, the coaxial machine gun consisted of the .50 Cal (12.7mm) M85, this was later changed to the .30 Cal (7.62mm) M73.

Production artwork of the M132. The configuration of the flame projector in the cupola with the coaxial machine gun is clearly visible. Photo: Hunnicutt Bradley

Testing of the prototypes took place in 1961 at Fort Benning, Georgia, and Fort Greely, Alaska. In March 1962, the E31R1-E36R1 was standardized by the Chemical Corps Technical Committee (CCTC) as the M10-8. This nomenclature denoted the M10 fuel and pressure unit, and the M8 flame gun or ‘Cupola Group’. A year later, in 1963, the United States Army Materiel Command (AMC) officially type-classified the vehicle as the Self-Propelled Flame Thrower M132. In December of 1963, a new Diesel powered version of the M113 was nearing the end of its development, this would become the M113A1. The natural progression for the M132 was for it to be built on the hull of the new M113A1. The new version was classified by the AMC as the M132A1. The M132A1 was also known as the ‘Standard A’ with the earlier M132 version known as the ‘Standard B’.

Overview of The M132

In total, the Food Machinery Corporation (FMC) would produce 351 vehicles, consisting of 201 M132s, and 150 M132A1s. The M132 was operated by a two-man crew consisting of the driver, front and left, and the flame gunner/commander, located behind the driver in the center with the flame gun. Overall, the dimensions of the M113 chassis were unchanged. It remained 15 feet 11 ½ inches (4.8 meters) long and 8 feet 9 ¾ inches (2.6 meters) wide. Due to the flame cupola, it is 2 ¼ inches shorter than the standard M113 at 7 feet 11 ¾ inches (2.4 meters) in height. This is due to the lack of a mount for a machine gun. The M132 retained the M113’s top speed of 42 mph (68 km/h).

Flame Equipment

In the cupola, the M8 flame projector is mounted on the left with the coaxial M73 .30 Cal (7.62 mm) machine gun on the right. The barrel of the projector is flat with a sausage-like aperture. The cupola is traversed by hand and has a 360-degree arc of rotation. Both the machine gun and flame gun share a vertical traverse of +55 to -15 degrees. The cupola was equipped with 4 vision blocks and an M28D sight for the flame gunner/commander.

Front view of the M8 cupola group atop the M132. Note the M73 7.92mm machine gun on the left, and the flame gun on the right. The flame gun has a flat barrel, with a sausage-like muzzle. Photo: Public Domain

The flame gun is fed by the M10 fuel and pressure unit, located in the rear of the vehicle in what would be the personnel bay of the standard M113. The drop ramp was retained on the M132 to allow easy access and refueling to the weapon systems. The M10 unit took the form of four snowman-like structures, consisting of a large, spherical 50 gallon (227 liters) pressurized fuel tank with a smaller, spherical compressed air tank on top. The fuel tanks were pressurized to 325 pounds per square inch (23 kg/cm²), with the air tanks pressurized to 3,000 pounds per square inch (210 kg/cm²). The fuel tanks are connected in series, with the last one connected to the rotating joint of the cupola group. The air tanks are also connected together and provide pressure for the flame gun and fuel tanks. The tanks were placed in a removal rack system to allow easy maintenance for both the tank system and the internal components of the vehicle.

Diagram of the snowman-shaped fuel and air units located in the rear of the M132. The large balls on the bottom contain the flame fuel, the smaller balls on top contain pressurized air. These components were all mounted to a single rack system to allow easy removal. Photo: Hunnicutt’s Bradley

In total, the M132 could carry 200 gallons (909 liters, *the dropped M59 version could hold 400 gallons/1818 liters) of thickened, gasoline-based flame fuel. This fuel could be propelled to ranges of 12 to 218 yards (11 to 200 meters).

Service

Where its bigger brother, the M67, found service almost exclusively with the United States Marine Corps (USMC), the M132 would enter service with the US Army, specifically in Armored Cavalry units. Based on ensuing combat experiences, the Army Concept Team in Vietnam (ACTIV) advised that four M132s and two regular M113s be attached to each regiment. Headquarter companies of U.S. Armor and Cavalry units were all assigned at least one M132. Also, armored regiments of the Army of the Republic of Vietnam (ARVN, Viet: Lục quân Việt Nam Cộng hòa) were all assigned four M132s. The M132s were not limited to the US Army, however. Specific tactics were drawn up for operations with both the Army and Marine Corps, but also for the Navy.

Close up of the flame gun in action. This photo was taken with the Vietnam version of a ‘selfie-stick’. This being a camera attached to a metal pipe slotted over the coaxial M73 machine gun. Photo. LIFE magazine

Standard combat procedure for the M132 was thus: 1) the M132 would advance on a target, using the coaxial M73 machine gun to suppress the target. 2) continuing to fire, the vehicle will move into flamethrower range of the target. 3) the flame gun is fired. In some instances, this may first consist of a “wet burst” of unlit fuel, which would then be ignited by a second ignited burst. The “wet burst” method had been in use since the Second World War. Flame tanks, whether it be the Churchill Crocodile or POA-CWS H1 Sherman, would fire unlit fuel at defensive positions, allowing it to ‘soak’ into the structure. The second lit burst would then ignite the first burst, burning out the defenders. Due to the location of the flame gun behind the driver’s position, it was recommended that the driver keep his hatch closed in combat, for obvious reasons.

Due to the vehicle’s thin, aluminum armor, it was relegated to a strictly support role, operating only with the protection of infantry or armored support. Even so, the vehicle was a valuable asset to convoys. It served as protection against hidden attackers in the heavily vegetated roadsides of the Vietnamese jungle. There is also a recorded example of an M132 knocking out a Vietcong 57mm recoilless rifle team with a 3-second flame burst during the Battle of Ap Tau O in 1966.

M132 of 1/4th Cavalry “The Quarterhorse”, 1st Infantry Division “Big Red One” during Operation Cedar Falls. This M132 is burning a field in the “Iron Triangle” region of Ben Suc, January 1967. Photo: Jerzy Krzemiński

Unfortunately, not too much more is known about individual battles or skirmishes the M132 may have taken part in. The Vietnam War would be the only conflict that the M132 saw service in. The small paragraph below from the US Army report ‘Mechanized and Combat Operations in Vietnam’ published in March 1967, gives a little detail on the vehicle’s use in the conflict:

The M132 mechanized flame thrower has been successfully employed in offensive and defensive operations in Vietnam. In search and destroy operations, they are normally employed in pairs against bunkers and densely foliaged enemy-defended areas containing antipersonnel mines and booby traps. Flame directed at such areas may not destroy a protected enemy, but heat detonates mines and defoliates the area. In defensive positions, the flamethrower is employed to fill gaps not covered by direct fire weapons and to illuminate the area. During movements, the M132s can provide close-in flank protection to the column…

When being used in Naval operations, M132s would be backed onto Armored Troop Carriers (ATC, converted LCM-6 vehicle carriers) accompanied by a 2 ½ ton refueling truck. The M132s would fire over the sides of the vessel at targets on the river bank. There is at least one recorded example of this taking place on the Mekong River.

An Armored Troop Carrier (ATC) on a Vietnamese River, note the M132 in the cargo area at the front of the vessel. Photo: Photo: NHHC Photograph Collection, L-File, Vietnam

An M132 unleashes its firey breath at a river bank from the deck of an ATC. Photo: Quora.com

An Unquenchable Thirst

In operations, the M132 was accompanied by a specially adapted variant of the M548 Cargo Carrier. This was the Flame Thrower Service Vehicle XM45E1. As the M132 had such a small flame fuel capacity, it had a short burn time of just 32 seconds (*the dropped M59 version had a 70 second firing time). The XM45E1 was designed as a refueler for mechanized flamethrowers. The vehicle could mix and transfer thickened flame fuel. It also had an air-compressor to replenish air tanks and carried spare flame system parts. As well as the M132, the XM45E1 also supported the M67, but to a lesser extent.

The Flame Thrower Service Vehicle XM45E1. Photo: Hunnicutt’s Bradley

Fate

The M132 was a successful vehicle. Modified versions of its M10 flame turret even went on to be used on some smaller naval vessels. Despite its success, the M132 would share the same fate as the M67 Flame Tank, being one of the last mechanized flamethrowers to serve with the US Military. The M132 and M67 would be completely phased out by the early 1980s, by which point the controversial weapons had largely fallen out of favor in many of the world’s militaries due to humanitarian reasons. Flamethrowers were controversial with the operators as well as those on the receiving end. They were dangerous to use and the injuries caused by them were horrific. The United States officially stopped using all flamethrower types in 1978 and continued to phase them out after that date. The reason stated at the time was: “flamethrowers were not effective in modern combat scenarios”.

One of the later ATC that had turrets from the M132 installed. Photo: Michael Moore

A few M132s survive to this day. One can be found in Vietnam at the War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City (formerly Saigon). One of the only surviving examples in the US can be found at the United States Army Chemical Corps Museum at Fort Leonard Wood, Missouri.

Surviving M132 at the War Remnants Museum in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Illustration of the Self-Propelled Flame Thrower M132 ‘Zippo’, produced by Andrei ‘Octo10’ Kirushkin, funded by our Patreon campaign

M113 APC specifications
Dimensions (L-w-H)	4.86 x 2.68 x 2.50 m (15.11 x 8.97 x 8.2 ft)
Total weight, battle ready	12.3 tonnes (24,600 lbs)
Crew	2 (Commander/Gunner, Driver)
Propulsion	Detroit 6V53T, 6-cyl. diesel 275 hp (205 kW) P/w 22.36 hp/tonne
Transmission	Allison TX-100-1 3-speed automatic
Maximum speed	42 mph (68 km/h) road/3.6 mph (5.8 kph) swimming
Suspensions	Torsion bars
Range	300 miles/480 km
Armament	Main: M10-8 Flame thrower system. Sec: Coaxial M73 .30 Cal (7.62mm) Machine Gun
Armor	Aluminum alloy 12–38 mm (0.47–1.50 in)
Production	351

Sources

R. P. Hunnicutt, Bradley: A History of American Fighting and Support Vehicles, Presidio Press
Michael Green, Images of War: Armoured Warfare in the Vietnam War, Pen & Sword Publishing
Captain John Ringquist, U.S. Army Flamethrower Vehicles Part 3, Army Chemical Review
Fred W. Crimson, U.S. Military Tracked Vehicles, Motorbooks International
Armored Fighting Vehicle Data Base
www.globalsecurity.org
www.revolvy.com

Cold War US Engineering Vehicles

Medium Recovery Vehicle M88

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date March 5, 2019
10 Comments on Medium Recovery Vehicle M88

United States of America (1961)
Armored Recovery Vehicle – Approximately 3,000 Built

As a result of thicker armor, and the ever-increasing caliber of weaponry, tanks and armored vehicles in the aftermath of the Second World War became bigger and heavier. With the introduction of heavier vehicles throughout the Cold War, tanks would continue to gain weight and girth. Existing recovery vehicles based on the M4 Sherman, such as the M32 and M74, were reaching the end of their usefulness and proved inadequate to rescue a tank such as the 50 ton (44 tonne) M48 Patton III or the titanic 65 ton (58 tonne) M103 heavy tank.

In answer to the need for a new, more powerful recovery vehicle, the Chrysler Corporation, builders of the M103, produced a companion recovery vehicle for operation with the Heavy Tank. This was the Heavy Recovery Vehicle M51, itself based on the M103. This found use in the United States Marine Corps, the major users of the M103, but the US Army was still in need of a support vehicle for its medium tanks. Bowen-McLaughlin, Inc. came forward with a design for a ‘Medium Recovery Vehicle’ in 1954, based on the automotive components of the M48 Patton III medium tank.

After 7 years of development, the finalized vehicle was approved. It would be designated Medium Recovery Vehicle M88. It would enter service in 1961 and through various upgrade programs remains in service with the US Military to this day as the M88A2 ‘Heavy Equipment Recovery Combat Utility Lifting Extraction System’, otherwise known as ‘HERCULES’. The M88 also continues to serve in the armed forces of various other nations, from Australia to Egypt.

M88A1 in the Gulf War, 1990-91. Photo: Military Today

Development

In October 1954, the desired characteristics of a ‘medium recovery vehicle’ were outlined by the United States Ordnance Committee. The project received the designation T88, and three pilot vehicles were ordered. In December of that year, a conference was held at the Detroit Arsenal (DA) to review designs for the T88. DA themselves and Bowen-McLaughlin, Inc (BM) put forward designs, two from DA, and one from Bowen-McLaughlin, which was reviewed first.

Concept 1: Bowen-McLaughlin’s design was based on a drastic conversion of the USA’s latest medium tank, the M48 Patton III. The conversion would necessitate the complete removal of the turret and the curved ‘beak’ that formed the bow. This was to provide ample space for a fixed, armored cab to be built at the front end of the hull. Hull extension would also be required to provide enough room for a new, more powerful engine. It was also suggested that the vehicle’s overall width be reduced from the original 12 feet (3.6 meters) to 11 feet 6 inches (3.5 meters). It was hoped that the addition of the narrower 27 inch (68cm) wide tracks of the M47 Patton II would prove sufficient for this. An ‘A’ frame boom forged from tubular steel was placed atop the armored cab capable of supporting 25 tons (23 tonnes). It was also equipped with a 50 ton (45 tonne) capacity winch. It had a single spade stabiliser at the front and two spade stabilisers on the rear that were positioned via cables. The cab would be constructed of 1 inch (25 mm) armor, with a ¾-inch (19 mm) thick roof. The cab would contain the vehicle’s four-man crew.

Bowen-McLaughlin’s initial design for the T88. The similarities between this and what would become the M88 are clearly visible. Photo: Hunnicutt Patton

Concept 2 & 3: DA’s designs were similar to BM’s. They utilized the same basic chassis with a cab at the front and an ‘A’ frame boom mounted atop it. On Concept 2, the cab would have a much lower profile and thinner, ½-inch (12.7 mm) armor. The cab on Concept 3 would be taller and have ¾-inch (19 mm) thick armor. Both designs had a four-man crew, but contained two extra seats for additional personnel. Also, the suspension differed slightly, being a ‘flat-track’ type. This is a suspension without rollers where the track return is supported by the road wheels. Such suspension was used on tanks such as the Soviet T-54. Concepts 2 and 3 were also designed with jettisonable external fuel tanks to increase the ARV’s operational range.

Findings

After considering the three designs, the conference held at Detroit Arsenal concluded that Bowen-McLaughlin’s design had many admirable features. However, doubt was cast over the conversion of the M48 tank. It was thought, as the M48 was the USA’s front line tank at this time, that there would not be enough tanks available for conversion. It was also suggested that it would probably be easier to build a completely new vehicle instead of trying to modify an existing hull. Although an M48-based vehicle was rejected, it was recommended that the T88 be equipped with the features installed on the Bowen design and follow a base tank design to permit maximum interchangeability between them, and standardization of component parts.

The Pacific Car & Foundry Company and the Food Machinery & Chemical Corporation put a spanner in the works by suggesting that all winching and lifting operations be undertaken from the rear of the vehicle. On the BM design, it was done from the front of the vehicle. Mock-ups of the two rear-end focused designs, and Bowen’s front end design were prepared. The mock-ups were reviewed by Continental Army Command (CONARC) who wholeheartedly supported the front end focused vehicle to maximize operator visibility.

After all of these pre-development trials, Bowen-McLaughlin’s design came through on top. In October 1955, authorization was granted for the manufacture of three pilot vehicles. A Contract was signed with BM in April 1956 to start work on constructing the pilots.

A Doomed Project?

A number of delays that arose during the manufacture of the pilot vehicles cast a shadow over the future of the entire T88 project. A meeting held at the Ordnance Tank Automotive Command (OTAC) in January 1957 noted that just 90% of a single vehicle had been constructed. At this time, the biggest threat to the T88 was a new medium tank project that was taking shape to become the USA’s next front line medium tank, the T95. It was suggested that the current T88 design be dropped in favor of a new design utilizing parts from the T95. This would’ve received the designation T88E1.

However, since the M48 was the most numerous tank then in service in the US Military, it was suggested that an interim recovery vehicle be produced by simply making an add-on kit for the M48A2.

T88 at Aberdeen Proving Grounds, 6th February 1958. Photo: Public Domain

The eventual delivery of the T88 pilot vehicles and subsequent tests did not do much to save the future of the recovery vehicle. The vehicles were designed to be powered by the Continental AVI-1790-8 (AVI: Air-cooled, V-configured, Fuel Injected) engine. Producing 580 horsepower, it was thought that the 1790-8 engine would provide enough power to straight-pull the 52 ton (47 tonne) M48 Patton. In tests with the pilot vehicles, however, it was found that it had a relatively mediocre performance. As the weight of tanks was projected to increase over the following years, it was decided to replace this engine with the more powerful AVSI-1790-6 (AVSI: Air-cooled, V-configured, Supercharged, & Fuel Injected.) which produced 690 horsepower. This was coupled with the XT-1400 transmission which was already installed on the M51 Heavy Recovery Vehicle. This was the most powerful propulsion setup available to the Ordnance Department at the time of the tests and a meeting held in October 1958 concluded that it should be installed in the pilot T88s for the remainder of the trials.

Serialisation and Production

In February 1959, approval was granted for the production of three production pilots with the new powertrain. At the same time, the T88 received the official designation and serialization as the ‘Medium Recovery Vehicle M88’.

Photo of one of the early production vehicles taken at APG in 1961. Photo: Hunnicutt Patton

At this point in time, the T95 had been replaced by the XM60 as America’s future front-line tank. As such, the need for a recovery vehicle in the weight and power-class of the M88 was once more highlighted. The M88’s initial designers, Bowen-McLaughlin, Inc (now known as Bowen-McLaughlin York Company – BMY) were granted a contract in 1960 for the full-scale production of the M88. This contract lasted until 1964, and in that period 1,075 vehicles were produced.

Design of the M88 in Detail

The production model of the M88 is 27 feet 1½ inches (8.27 m) long, 11 feet 3 inches ft (3.43 m) wide, and 10 feet 6 inches ft (3.23 m) tall. A Continental AVSI-1790-6A engine, running through an Allison XT-1400-2 transmission powered the M88. This engine produced 980 horsepower, propelling the 51 ton (46 tonne) recovery vehicle to a top speed of 26 mph (42 km/h). The vehicle consists of an armored cab at the front supported on an elongated M48-like running gear. The vehicle rolls on six road-wheels attached to a torsion-bar suspension with the drive sprocket at the rear and idler at the front. The idler wheel was of the compensating type, meaning it was attached to the closest roadwheel by an actuating arm. When the roadwheel reacts to terrain the idler is pushed out or pulled in, keeping constant track tension. The return of the track was supported by three rollers.

M88 ‘Hell’s Half Acre of the US Army in Vietnam. The vehicle’s four-man crew sit atop their positions on the roof of the cab. You can see five of the vehicles road wheels in this photo as it has somehow lost the sixth. Photo: SOURCE

The cab extended back to roughly the center of the chassis, just over the fourth road-wheel. The cab was constructed of 1 inch (25mm) armor on the front and sides, with a ¾-inch (19mm) thick roof. The front plate is slightly sloped backward. There were headlights on the left and right cheeks of the cab. On later models, smoke dischargers were added above these. There are large hatches on the left and right side of the cab, positioned just over the third roadwheel. The A-frame crane arm is attached on pivoting joints at the forward edge of the roof and folds backwards into a travel-lock on the engine deck. At the front of the vehicle is a dozer blade, roughly the same width as the vehicle. Behind the cab is the engine, the fenders of which are part of the same casting as the sides of the cab. This rear section of the vehicle is primarily used for the stowage of spare parts and towing/recovery equipment, pioneer tools, spare road-wheel halves, drive wheel sprockets, rollers, track links and towing bars. As the exhaust pipes from the engine emerged in the center of the engine deck, a cowling system was constructed around them that takes the gasses and smoke, and vents them off the rear of the vehicle. There is a plate under the ventilation grills that deflect the gasses and smoke skywards.

The exhaust cowlings at the back of the M88. Photo: Jochen Vollert/Tankograd Publishing

Crew and Their Positions

A four-man crew operates the M88. This consists of the Commander (positioned in the center of the cab), Rigger (behind the Commander), Mechanic (front right) and the Driver (front left). Atop the Commander’s position was a vision cupola. It is here that the vehicle’s only armament can be found; a single Browning M2 .50 Cal (12.7mm) heavy machine gun for defensive purposes. There is a smaller hatch behind the Commander’s was for the Rigger. Both the Driver and Mechanic have vision blocks molded into the upper-front plate. They each have their own hatch, and three vision blocks per-position. The Driver has an extra rotating periscope built into his hatch.

A good deal of equipment is stored within the crew compartment. This included: At least 1 rifle (either M14 or M16), 3x M72 LAW rocket launchers, 2x jerry cans of water, 2x jerry cans of oil, 2x fire extinguishers, 1x bolt cutter, 2x vehicle jacks (one of 11 ton/10 tonne & one of 27 ton/25 tonne capacity), boxes of .50 Cal (12.7mm) ammunition, and 3x toolboxes.

Recovery Equipment

There are three major pieces of recovery equipment present aboard the M88. These are a Winch, an ‘A’ frame boom, and a spade. As a recovery vehicle, the winch – A Pacific Car & Foundry manufactured Type U90B – is the main piece of equipment. The winch drum is located in a compartment below the cab at the front of the vehicle. The cable is around 200 feet (61 meters) long and 1 ⅕ inches (32mm) in diameter. It exits the vehicle via a small port in the front plate of the cab and has a maximum capacity of 45 tons (41 tonnes). There is a roller under the port to reduce wear on the cable. The winch is wound/unwound via a hydraulic motor with a winding speed of 42 feet (12.8 meters) per minute.

The M88’s main winch. On the left, the empty void where it is placed, on the right, the winch itself. Photos: Marcus Bach/Tankograd Publishing

Second to this winch, is the ‘A’ frame boom and accompanying hoist winch. The boom consists of tubular steel frame with a hoist at the end. The boom is raised and lowered via hydraulics found on the left and right side of the hull. The boom arm has a forward-reach ranging between 4 feet (1.22 meters) and 8 feet (2.44 meters). At 4 feet of reach, maximum lifting height is 25 feet (7.66 meters), at 8 feet, this is reduced to 22 feet (6.87 meters). Lift is provided via winch and cable. The winch is located below the crew compartment with the cable traveling through a tunnel in the cab and emerges from a porthole the roof. The port is protected by a winch cable access door with integral rollers to reduce wear. The cable, which is 200 feet (61 meters) long and ⅝ of an inch (16mm) in diameter, then stretches up to the pulley at the top. The cable has a maximum capacity of 25 (23 tonnes). When raised, the boom is supported by stayline cables which are anchored on the left and right rear of the engine deck.

An M88 uses its boom-hoist to list an M113 on a flatbed trailer. Vietnam, January 1971. Photo: Olive-Drab.com

With its 45 ton (41 tonne) capacity, the main winch is responsible for the recovery of heavy vehicles such as medium tanks, like the M60 or M48. With roughly half the capacity of the winch, the boom is mostly used for the recovery of lighter wheeled vehicles or light armored vehicles like the M113 Armored Personnel Carrier (APC). It is predominantly used for the hoisting of heavy equipment, such as cannons or mine plows, and automotive components, such as engine and transmission units.

Located at the front of the vehicle, the hydraulically operated dozer blade, also known as the spade, has a number of roles. When the boom crane is deployed and lifting, the spade is utilized in a similar fashion to outriggers on a commercial crane. The blade is lowered underneath the front of the hull so far that the first set of road-wheels are almost touching the back of the blade. The blade is roughly the same width as the hull at 11.25 ft (3.43 m), and can, of course, also be used for light-bulldozer work, such as carving out hull-down positions for tanks, digging gun emplacements, route denial (creating and filling anti-tank ditches), improving bridge approaches, and leveling uneven ground. When not in use, the spade is stored in a horizontal position just above the idler wheels.

M88A1 ‘Grocery Getter’ of the 1st Battalion, 36th Infantry Regiment. This photo shows the dozer blade at the front of the M88 in stabilizing position. Photo: Oliver Kroh/Tankograd Publishing

The M88 also carries a number of pieces of towing equipment. These include spare pulleys, tow-bars, towing chains and towing cables. This equipment is stowed on the left and right flanks of the engine deck. The M88 has a towing capacity of 45 tons (41 tonnes), and can safely tow at speeds up to 13 mph (21 km/h).

An M88A1 of the 1st Battalion, 7th Field Artillery Regiment tows an M577A2 Mobile Command Post, Germany, 2000. Photo: Clemends Niesner/Tankograd Publishing

Upgrades and New Models

M88A1

Although the M88’s Continental AVSI-1790-6A engine was powerful, it had a high rate of fuel consumption. A full, 445 gallon (1,684 liters) tank gave the M88 a range of 201 miles (322 km). In the 1960s, the Military began to upgrade their vehicles to have more economical diesel engines. In 1972, BMY received a contract to produce a diesel-powered version of the M88. A prototype was ready by 1973, and it was designated the M88E1. The new engine was the same as the one installed on the M60 tank. This was the Continental AVDS-1790-2DR (AVDS: Air-cooled, V-configured, Diesel, Supercharged), a turbocharged 12-cylinder V engine. This new engine produced 750hp, this was less than the 980hp of the original engine but it granted increased torque and was thus extremely beneficial to straight-pulling and towing operations. It also granted an increased range of 300 miles (483 km). A new, Allison XT-1410-4 transmission was also installed with the engine. A new hydraulic pump was added that allowed the boom and winches to operate should the vehicle’s engine fail. In 1975, the M88E1 was officially serialized as the M88A1. Of the original production of 1,075 vehicles produced by BMY, 878 were built to A1 with production ending in 1982. In 1989, 2,167 new M88A1s were built. The M88A1 entered service with the US military in the late 1980s.

An M88A1 taking part in a training exercise to flip an overturned Marine Corps M60A3 tank. Gulf War, Operation Desert Shield, December 1990. Photo: inetres.com

New Tank = More Power

The original purpose of M88, and then M88A1, was to support the M48 and M60 tanks. When these tanks entered service, they had an approximate weight of 45 tons (41 tonnes) each. By the time these vehicles reached their final forms of M48A5 and M60A3, they weighed 49 tons (44 tonnes) and 52 tons (47 tonnes) respectively. This already exceeded the recommended maximum weight capacity of the M88. Then, the M1 Abrams arrived. The M1 Abrams main battle tank – named after the WWII General Creighton Abrams – had a base weight of 54 tons (49 tonnes) and, over its service life, this weight would only increase. It was clear that the M88 and M88A1 would only be grossly over-burdened by the M1. As such, in 1982, a requirement was drafted to produce an improved, more powerful version of the M88.

M88AX

Bowen-McLaughlin-York had foreseen the appearance of heavier tanks and the logistical issues they would cause the M88 and M88A1. In 1982, the company started work on improving the M88A1. The resulting vehicle was designated the M88AX. It received a new AVDS-1790-8DR air-cooled, turbocharged, 12-cylinder V diesel engine which produced 1,050 hp. This was coupled with an Allison XT-1410-5X transmission. Ballast was added to the vehicle to bring its weight up to 59 tons (53 tonnes). From 1985 onwards, the M88AX was put through a series of trials, during which the AX reached a top speed of 35 mph (56 km/h) and was able to tow an M1A1 Abrams at 25 mph (40 km/h). Although it did not enter service, lessons learned were passed on to the next program.

The M88AX in testing pulling an M1A1 up an incline. Note the weight blocks added to the front and sides of the vehicle. Photo: BMY/Tankograd Publishing

M88A1E1

In 1987, BMY was granted a contract to produce five improved M88A1s, following the outlines of the M88AX. These vehicles were given the designation of M88A1E1 Improved Recovery Vehicle (IRV). Improvements also included a new hoist boom constructed from hollow, square-profile steel beams, replacing the old tubular steel boom. It also included an improved main winch with greater pulling capacity. Running parallel to the A1E1s development was a new Armored Recovery Vehicle based on the M1 Abrams. In summer 1988, trials were held between the M88A1E1 and a prototype M1 ARV. The winner of the trials was the M88, and additional funding was granted to Bowen-McLaughlin-York to allow quick development to production. In 1989 however, the M88A1E1 project was canceled due to budgetary limitations.

The M88A1E1 Improved Recovery Vehicle (IRV) photographed in the late-1980s. The similarities with the later M88A2 are clearly visible. Photo: BMY/Tankograd Publishing

M88A2 & M88A2 HERCULES

In October 1991, the program to develop a new version of the ARV was reinstated. BMY was contracted to continue development up to 1993 when the existing prototypes from previous trials were reworked and put through extensive trials. In 1994 BMY was contracted to produce the new vehicle but due to further budget limits, it was decided to upgrade the M88A1 rather than build a whole new vehicle. In 1997, after tests, this new upgraded version of the M88 was designated the M88A2, it shared a few of the features tested on the M88A1E1. It is also known as the M88A2 ‘Heavy Equipment Recovery Combat Utility Lift & Evacuation System’, poetically acronymed as ‘HERCULES’ (this is also known as a ‘Backronym’). The conversion of M88A1 to M88A2 was a joint effort undertaken by United Defense LP (now part of BAE) and Anniston Army Depot.

The M88A2 ‘Heavy Equipment Recovery Combat Utility Lift & Evacuation System’, also known as ‘HERCULES’. Note the boom arm now constructed of square steel pipes, the added armor on the sides and front, the two-piece hatch, and the armored side-skirts. Photo: BAE Systems

The M88A2 was far improved over the M88A1 model. It can lift heavier loads with its reinforced 35 ton (31 tonne) capacity hoist boom and can pull heavier loads with its 70 ton (64 tonne) capacity main-winch. The main winch now had a 321 foot (98 meter) long, 1 ⅖ inch (35mm) diameter cable. A new auxiliary winch was added on the front of the vehicle, under the port where the main winch cable emerges. This auxiliary winch has a capacity of 3.3 tons (3 tonnes) with a 654 foot (199) meter cable. The M88A2 is powered by a Continental (now L-3 Propulsion Systems) AVDS-1790-8CR, air-cooled, turbocharged, 1,050 hp, 12-cylinder V diesel engine coupled with an Allison XT-1410-5A transmission. This gave the ARV more brute force power than the previous power pack, but only improved the top speed by 4 mph (6 km/h). As well as automotive and recovery equipment upgrades, the A2 also received armor upgrades. The entire superstructure was covered in an extra layer of armor plate. Huge, one-piece plates were added to the flanks of the vehicle that covered the whole of the cab and sides of the engine compartment. New two-piece hatches were built into these plates to replace the old one-piece hatches of the earlier M88 models. Another plate was added over the front of the cab, with extra small plates placed in front of the Driver and Mechanic’s positions. Finally, the M88A2 was given armored side skirts comprised of eight separate panels, all hinged to allow access to the running gear. The thickness of this armor is unknown, but it is said to be immune to 30mm Armor-Piercing rounds. In some cases, smoke dischargers were added to the front of the vehicle as well.

The M88A2 HERCULES is now the dedicated companion and support vehicle to the M1 Abrams. It entered service in the early 2000s and continues to serve today. Production of the HERCULES continues today. In September 2017, the production of 20 new vehicles was ordered. In December 2017 a total of 775 vehicles were produced and delivered. Another 60 are expected to be delivered between 2018 and 2019, bringing the Army inventory to 835 M88A2 vehicles. Armored Brigade Combat Teams of the National Guard (ABCTs) are also now being equipped with the M88A2 HERCULES. Upon the completion of M88A2 HERCULES production, 237 older M88A1s will remain in use by non-Abrams equipped units.

An M88A2 HERCULES performing its duty as the support vehicle to M1A2 Abrams. Photo: SOURCE

Future: The M88A3

The M1 Abrams is set to get even heavier in the future with the increased addition of new, heavier modular armor packages. In 2015-2016, BAE Systems began work on a new version of the ARV, designated the M88A3. The vehicle will feature a number of upgrades, including the addition of a seventh road-wheel to increase stability, and hydro-pneumatic suspension that can lock. (Locking the suspension will grant greater stability in lifting operations, a similar system is used on Self-Propelled Guns (SPGs) to help absorb recoil). Currently, on the A2, a member of the crew has to exit the vehicle and place a wooden block behind the rear wheels to achieve the same result. In October 2018, at the AUSA (Association of the United States Army) exhibition of 2018, one of the first prototypes of this vehicle, which was simply a modified A2 featuring the added road wheel, was unveiled. Further upgrades planned for the A3 include the replacement of the A2’s 1,050 hp AVDS-1790-8CR engine with a 1,300 hp Caterpillar liquid-cooled diesel engine, and the installation of a new transmission based on that of the M1 Abrams. This version of the M88 remains in development.

The M88A3 prototype unveiled at AUSA 2018. Note the extra roadwheel. Photos: Shephard Media

Experimental Off-Shoot: The Counter Obstacle Vehicle (COV)

The ‘Counter Obstacle Vehicle’ or ‘COV’ was an experimental Combat Engineering Vehicle (CEV) based on the hull of the M88. The control cab was completely removed to make way for two digging arms on the left and right side of the vehicle. A large dozer blade that could also be used as a mine plow was added to the front. The vehicle would never go past the prototype phase, with the program canceled in 1986. Developments made in the program were, however, passed on to the M1 Grizzly, a project to build a CEV based on the chassis of the M1 Abrams.

The prototype ‘Counter Obstacle Vehicle’ also known as ‘COV’. Photo: BMY/Tankograd Publishing

Service

The M88 entered service in 1961, at first just with the M48 Patton equipped units of the US Army. At this point, the US Marine Corps (USMC) was still happy with its M103 based M51 Heavy Recovery Vehicle, and would continue to use them until 1977.
To go into detail about every combat situation the M88 found itself in would be an exercise in futility. Simply put, the M88 has served wherever the US Army has been deployed since 1961. We shall explore a few of its more famous deployments in the following sections. Perhaps its longest deployment was in West Germany with US forces. They were issued to all US tank units stationed in the country.

Civillians look on as an American M88A1 pulls the power pack of an M60A1 tank during Operation Carbine Fortress in Niederstetten, Germany, 1982. Photo: Manfred Garstka/Tankograd Publishing

The Vietnam War

Vietnam was the M88’s first combat deployment with the US Army. It proved itself invaluable in the dense, marshy jungles of the war-torn country. Such terrain was a headache for the tanks that easily became stuck. The M88 proved to be a life-line when recovering tanks and vehicles from these sticky situations. They also proved to be extremely useful in field-repair tasks, and in the preparation of terrain with the use of its dozer blade. While the M48 Patton was the main object of the M88s’ attentions, as it was intended, the ARV was also used in the support of lighter vehicles such as the M41 Walker-Bulldog light tank, and the M113 Armored Personel Carrier (APC). In Vietnam, the M88 would serve alongside the M51, its older, heavier cousin – which was still in service with the US Marine Corps – and the Light Recovery Vehicle M578.

A rather comical photo of two M88s lifting a fellow M88 of the 178th Maintenance Company, Dong Ha, Vietnam. Photo: 2nd Bat. 94th Art.

The Gulf War

By the 1990s, the newer M88A1 had entered service. At this point, the M48 Patton and M60 tanks had been largely removed from service in the US Army, with the heavier M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank taking its place. The US Marine Corps, however, continued to use the M60. Also, by this point in time, the USMC was now fully equipped with the M88 and M88A1. One of the first combat deployments of the newer model of the M88 was in the Middle East, supporting American forces in Operation Desert Shield, and the following Desert Storm, during the Gulf War of 1990-1991. The Gulf War was the M88’s first deployment in support of the M1 Abrams, as well as the M2 & M3 Bradley Fighting Vehicles.

M88A1s in Iraq during the Gulf War 1990-91. Photo: Wikimedia

Bosnia & Kosovo

The next deployments of the M88 would be to southeastern Europe. Between 1992 and 1995, they were deployed with the US contingent taking part in the War in Bosnia. Later, between 1998 and 1999, the M88 supported the armored sections of the US forces deployed to Kosovo during the war. They were also present to support US tank units that remained deployed as part of NATO’s ‘Kosovo Force’ known as ‘KFOR’.

An M88A1 and M577A2 Mobile Command Post of the 1st Infantry Division ‘Big Red One’ in Kosovo, June 1999. Here, the M88A1 has just pulled the powerpack of the M577. Photo: Carl Schulze/Tankograd Publishing

Afghanistan & Iraq

At the beginning of the 21st Century, American forces would once more see deployment in the Middle East. In 2001, the United States invaded Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. In 2003, this was followed by the invasion of Iraq. Afghanistan and Iraq was the combat debut of the newly upgraded M88A2 HERCULES in both US Army and USMC service, as the Marine Corps was now fully equipped with the M1 Abrams. The M88A2 did not just support the Abrams in Iraq and Afghanistan; from 2008, it was also the support vehicle of the Abrams-based Assault Breacher Vehicle (ABV). While here, the M88A2s were equipped with the ‘DUKE’ Electronic Countermeasure (ECM) system. This is a jammer that blocks signals to remote explosives or other devices to stop them detonating. Vehicles equipped with this system are identified by thick white antennas attached to the outside of the hull.

An M88A2 HERCULES follows an Assault Breacher Vehicle (ABV) of the Mobile Assault Company, USMC 2nd Combat Engineer Battalion as it enters the staging area for Operation Dynamic Partnership. The ‘DUKE’ antennas can be seen in this photo. Photo: Corporal Alejandro Pena

Exports & Foreign Service

The M88 was a great export success, seeing service with around 23 countries around the globe. Next to the USA, Egypt is the second-largest user of the M88. The Egyptian Army currently operates 221 M88A1s and 60-70 M88A2s. The M88A1s were second hand, but the A2s however, were manufactured in the US, with final assembly taking place in Egypt.

Germany was the next largest user, operating 125 M88A1s from 1966 to 1992. Here, the M88 received the resignation ‘Bergepanzer 1’. The M88 was a necessary acquisition by Germany as it had a large fleet of M47 and M48 tanks. In 1985, the began upgrading there M88s to A1 standard. They also began upgrading the onboard radios. Vehicles fitted with new SEM25/35 radios were designated the M88A1 GE. Some vehicles were upgraded further with SEM 70/80/90 radios. Other upgrades included the addition of smoke dischargers on the sides of the cab. These were designated M88A1 GE A1s. In 1992, the vehicle was largely replaced by the Leopard 1-based Bergepanzer 2 and Leopard 2-based Bergepanzer 3 Büffel.

A Bergepanzer M88 being towed by a Bergepanzer 2A2 in a training exercise in the 1980s. Both vehicles served in the Bundeswehr for many years, at some points side-by-side. Photo: Yves Debay/Tankograd Publishing

The M88 and M88A1 saw long service in Israel, with a number of M88s upgraded to A1 standard. As is common, the Israelis heavily modified their vehicles to keep them up-to-date. In the case of the M88, this included the heavy application of bar and slat armor to protect against RPGs (Rocket-Propelled Grenades) and shaped-charge ordnance. In addition, a large turret constructed from armored panels and bullet-proof glass blocks was installed over the commander’s position. The M88s are set to be retired in the coming years, and will be replaced by the Merkava-based Nemmera ARV.

Israeli M88 at Israel’s 70th Independence Day celebrations. Photo: Wikimedia Commons

Other international operators of the M88/M88A1 include Greece (fleet of 95 M88A1s), Pakistan (fleet of 52 M88A1s), Taiwan (fleet of 37 M88A1s), Austria (fleet of 35 M88A1s), Lebanon (fleet of 35 M88A1s), Turkey (fleet of 33 M88A1s), Jordan (fleet of 30 M88A1s), Israel (fleet of 25 vehicles, a mixed fleet of M88A1s and M88s brought to A1 standard), Brazil (fleet of 12 M88A1s), Morocco (fleet of 12 M88A1s), Portugal (fleet of 6 M88A1s), Tunisia (fleet of 6 M88A1s), Bahrain (fleet of 4 M88A1s), Sudan (fleet of 2 M88As), and Spain (1 M88A1).

The only users of the M88A2 HERCULES outside of the United States are Australia (fleet of 13 M88A2s), Egypt (fleet of 221 M88A1s & 60-70 M88A2s), Kuwait (fleet of 14 M88A2s), Iraq (20-30 M88A2s), Saudi Arabia (fleet of 20 M88A2s) and Thailand (fleet of 22 M88A1s & 6 M88A2s).

As Australia operates a fleet of M1A1 AIM Abrams Main Battle Tanks, it was necessary that they procure its intended support vehicle. Between 2004 and 2005, Australia ordered 7 A2s, which began to be delivered in 2007. In 2017, six more vehicles were purchased. As of 2019, the country operates 13 of the ARVs. The majority of the A2s serve with the 1st Armoured Regiment of the 1st Brigade in Darwin, where the largest force of Abrams is based.

M88A2 ‘Out on Bail’ of the Australian 1st Armoured Regiment, 1st Armoured Brigade. Photo: Gordon Arthur/Tankograd Publishing

In 2010, the Iraqi army requested the purchase and construction of the M88A2 HERCULES for their own use. Starting that year, eight A2s would be delivered with a second batch of eight following in 2012. Starting in 2010, Iraq began to receive a number of M1A1M Abrams as part of military aid, and currently operates around 140 of the tanks. To support these Abrams, a further quantity of M88A2s were also gifted. The Iraqi army currently operates 24 M88A2s.

The latest purchase of the M88 was by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia who already had a large fleet of 50-60 M88A1s. In 2016, they procured 20 M88A1s and A2s with a plan for the Saudi Arabians to upgrade them to ‘HERCULES’ standard. It remains to be seen as to whether more countries will purchase the M88A2 in the coming years.

Conclusion

As a whole, the M88 is one of the longest-serving Armored Recovery Vehicles (ARVs) in the world and, quite possibly, one of the most successful in history.

During its 58 years of service, systematic upgrades have kept it in place as the backbone and lifeline of the United States military’s armored units. This ARV’s long service life shows no sign of coming to an end anytime soon, as the M88A2 HERCULES continues to provide support for the M1 Abrams until it is replaced by the M88A3. Likewise, the Abrams is projected to fight on for the foreseeable future, and as such will continue to be partnered with the M88A2.

The original Medium Recovery Vehicle M88 in a standard Olive Drab Livery. The standard M88 served with the US military from the late-1960s, to the late-1980s.

M88A1 with A-frame boom raised in lifting position and hoisting an engine unit. The dozer blade is also lowered to provide support. With a new diesel engine, the M88A1 entered service just before the Gulf War, and would serve during the War in the middle east. The camouflage pattern is based on images of M88s from that time.

Bergepanzer M88A1 GE. The German Army fielded the M88 and M88A1 for a number of years, up to 1992 when it started to be replaced by Leopard-based ARVs. Note the smoke dischargers towards the front of the cab.

The M88A2 ‘Heavy Equipment Recovery Combat Utility Lift & Evacuation System’, otherwise known as the ‘HERCULES’, entered service in the early-2000s. It continues to serve today supporting the M1 Abrams. Note the added armor plate to the cab of the vehicle and the armored side skirts. Note also, the two-part door which replaced the original one-piece, and the square bars of the A-frame boom.

M88A2 ‘Out on Bail’ of the Australian 1st Armoured Regiment, 1st Armoured Brigade. Note the red Kangaroo motif on the side of the cab. Australia operates a fleet of M1A1 AIM Abrams, and as such, starting in 2004, began purchasing M88A2s to support them.

These Illustrations were produced by Andrei ‘Octo10’ Kirushkin, funded by our Patreon Campaign.

Specifications (M88, M88A1 & M88A2 HERCULES)
Dimensions (L-W-H)	27 ft 1 0.5 in x 11 ft 3 in x 10 ft 3 in (8.27 x 3.43 x 3.12 meters)
Total weight, battle ready	M88 & M88A1: 50 tons (50.8 tonnes) M88A2: 62.5 tons (63.5 tonnes)
Crew	4 (Commander, Rigger, Mechanic, Driver)
Propulsion	M88: Continental AVSI-1790-6A, 980 hp M88A1: Continental AVDS-1790-2DR, 750 hp M88A2: L-3 Propulsion Systems AVDS-1790-8CR, 1,050 hp
Transmission	M88: Allison XT-1400-2 M88A1: Allison XT-1410-4 M88A2: Allison XT-1410-5A
Maximum speed	M88 & M88A1: 26 mph (42 km/h) M88A2: 30 mph (48 km/h )
Suspensions	Torsion bars
Range (Fuel)	M88 & M88A1: 280 miles (450 km) M88A2: 200 miles (322 km)
Armament	1 x Browning .50 Cal. (12.7mm) M2HB Heavy Machine Gun
Recovery Equipment	M88 & M88A1:45 ton (41 tonne) capacity main winch 25 (23 tonnes) capacity hoist winch 22.5 ton (20 tonnes) capacity A-frame boom Hydraulic Dozer Blade M88A2: 70 ton (64 tonne) capacity main winch 35 ton (31 tonne) capacity A-frame boom 3.3 ton (3 tonne) capacity auxiliary winch Hydraulic Dozer Blade
Armor	M88 & M88A1: ¾-inch (19mm) – 1 inch (25mm) around the cab. M88A2: As previous, with extra 30mm Ammunition-proof plating
Production (All)	Aprx. 3000

Sources

R. P. Hunicutt, Patton: A History of the American Main Battle Tank, Volume 1, Presidio Press
Carl Schulze, M88 Armored Recovery Vehicle, Tankograd Publishing
David Doyle, M88 Armored Recovery Vehicle Walk Around, Squadron/Signal Publications
Ralph Zwilling, In Detail/Fast Track #8: M88A2 HERCULES, Tankograd Publishing
www.army-technology.com
www.inetres.com
www.defesanet.com.br
www.defense-aerospace.com
www.upi.com (1) (2)
M88A2 2019 Selected Acquisition Report (PDF)
www.janes.com

Cold War US Engineering Vehicles

Heavy Recovery Vehicle M51

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date February 28, 2019
8 Comments on Heavy Recovery Vehicle M51

United States of America (1951)
Armored Recovery Vehicle – 187 Built

As a result of thicker armor, and the ever-increasing caliber of weaponry, tanks and armored vehicles in the aftermath of the Second World War became bigger and heavier. Logistically, heavy vehicles are a nightmare for recovery teams. With the introduction of heavier vehicles following the end of the Second World War, these nightmares would only get worse for such teams. Their World War Two era recovery vehicles based on the M4 Sherman, such as the M32 and M74, were inadequate to rescue a tank such as the 42 ton (38 tonne) M46 Patton or the titanic 65 ton (58 tonne) M103 heavy tank.

The answer to this problem was building a new Armored Recovery Vehicle (ARV) based on the M103 itself. This vehicle would be designated as the Heavy Recovery Vehicle M51. It featured a powerful 45 ton (40 tonnes) winch and a large, traversable crane arm capable of lifting 30 tons (27 tonnes).

This new vehicle would enter service from 1956-58 but would have a relatively short service life, after being largely replaced in the early 1960s by the M48-based Recovery Vehicle M88. The M51 still saw active service though. This was mostly in the Vietnam War with the United States Marine Corps (USMC), but also in smaller conflicts such as the US Occupation of the Dominican Republic in the mid-1960s.

The Heavy Recovery Vehicle M51. Photo: Public Domain

Development

The M51’s development began in February 1951 with a design study to produce a recovery vehicle capable of lifting and towing the new, heavier vehicles that were coming into service. A proposed concept meeting these requirements was shown to the Army Field Forces (AFF) in April of the same year. Construction of a full-scale mock-up and two pilot models began in the summer. By August, the design was approved and it received the designation ‘Heavy Recovery Vehicle T51’. The two pilot vehicles were dispatched to take part in tests. Pilot Number 2 was sent to Fort Knox, Kentucky, for service tests, arriving in February 1953, while Pilot Number 1 was sent for engineering and endurance trials at Aberdeen Proving Grounds (APG), Maryland, in April.

Heavy Recovery Vehicle T51, the finalized design from 1954 to 1956. Note the original crane arm. Photo: Hunnicutt’s Firepower

In October 1953, the vehicle was officially standardized as the Heavy Recovery Vehicle M51. The Chrysler Corporation of Detroit, Michigan, builder of the M103 heavy tank, was handed the contract to build the M51 to a cost of around $150,000 (around $1.4 million today) per vehicle, about half the price of an M103 tank. The first production pilot began construction that month and was then tested at Fort Knox in March 1954. The first production vehicle, following the finalized design, was completed and released in August 1954. A total of 187 M51s were built by Chrysler between 1954 and 1955.

Rear view of the 1954/56 design. Note the original crane arm and the two separate outriggers on the rear. These were later replaced with a spade like the one at the front of the vehicle. Photo: Hunnicutt’s Firepower

After further tests, it was found that the design still needed some adjustments and modifications as there were a number of defects in the engine, transmission, crane booms and winches. As such, Chrysler produced a pre-modification pilot incorporating no less than 52 alterations. The program to upgrade the vehicles started in June 1956, with the final vehicles being completed in July 1958. Each vehicle cost $26,000 (around $240,000 today) to upgrade. It would seem that only 177 of the vehicles received the modifications. It is unknown as to what exactly happened to the outstanding ten vehicles. It is possible they were kept for spare parts, but they may also have been completely scrapped.

Base: The 120mm Gun Tank M103

The M103 heavy tank was one of the largest and heaviest armored vehicles to ever serve with the United States Military during the Cold War. It was also the last heavy tank to serve, albeit almost solely, with the Marine Corps, as the US Army did not completely accept the tank.

The tank featured a 120mm main gun, and armor up to 5.1 inches (130 mm) thick. The vehicle was powered by an 810hp Continental AV-1790 12-cylinder air-cooled gasoline engine, which gave it a top speed of 21 mph (34 km/h). A slightly different, more powerful version of this engine was used for the M51, however. This was the AVSI-1790-6, accompanied by an XT-1400-2A cross-drive transmission. This was a supercharged, fuel injection version of the AV-1790, granting around 190 more horsepower, bringing the power up to 1000hp. The acronym ‘AVSI’ therefore stands for ‘Air-cooled, V-configured, Supercharged, Injected’. The Diesel engine upgrade that was installed on the M103A2 was not needed on the M51 with this supercharged engine installed.

The tank’s weight was supported on seven road wheels attached to torsion bar suspension. The drive sprocket was at the rear while the idler wheel was at the front. The idler wheel was of the compensating type, meaning it was attached to the closest roadwheel by an actuating arm. When the roadwheel reacts to terrain the idler is pushed out or pulled in, keeping constant track tension. The only difference between the running gear on the M103 and the M51 was the return rollers. The M103 had six while the M51 had four.

Schematic of the M51 ARV. Photo: Hunicutt’s Firepower

Design of the ARV

The M103 hull is almost unrecognizable as the foundation of the M51. The turret was completely removed and the upper hull extensively reworked. The engine location was the same as the M103, this being in the rear half of the vehicle. The engine deck, for the most part, remained unchanged, apart from the addition of smaller items of recovery equipment such as towing bars. These were stowed on the left-rear fender.

A USMC M51 in Dong Ha, Vietnam, 1968. Towing bars are installed at the front of the vehicle. Note also the extended winch cable. Photo: Unknown Source

The armored ‘beak’ of the M103 and the Driver’s position housed within were removed with the ARV’s main and most powerful winch taking their place. A large, armored superstructure was built over the front portion of the hull which extended back to around the center of the turret-ring on the M103, splitting to accommodate the crane. This structure was of a welded construction and was made out of rolled homogeneous steel. The armor on the superstructure was ¾ of an inch (19mm) thick, enough to stand against heavy machine guns, small caliber cannons, and shrapnel. There was stowage around the outside for various pieces of recovery equipment. These included jerry cans, fire extinguishers and oxy-acetylene bottles for cutting.

The superstructure is where the M51’s four crew members would operate the vehicle. The crew consisted of a Commander (front and center), Driver (front left), Rigger (center right) and Crane Operator (right rear). The Crane Operator, as his name clearly suggests, operated the 30-ton (27 tonnes) capacity crane, located directly at the rear and center of the superstructure. The Rigger was responsible for ‘rigging’ tow cables and the crane to whatever vehicle was in need of recovery. There were doors on the left and right side of the cabin, with ladders on the outside that extended down over the tracks. This allowed easy access for the crew. The Commander had a cupola above his position, to which was mounted the ARV’s only weapon, a single Browning M2HB .50 Caliber (12.7mm) Heavy Machine Gun. This was used specifically for self-defense.

The finalized M51 ARV. Note the .50 Cal (12.7mm) ‘Ma Deuce’ machine gun mounted atop the Commander’s cupola. Photo: AFVDB

At the front and rear of the ARV were deployable stabilizers. These were used when the crane was in operation to keep the vehicle secure and to stop it from shifting on its tracks by lifting slightly off the ground. They performed the same role as ‘outriggers’ on construction vehicles such as backhoes, excavators and cranes. The forward stabilizer spade was also a shallow dozer blade. This could be used for light excavation work such as smoothing terrain or building up gun/tank positions. The rear stabilizer went through a few changes over the vehicle’s development. Initially, on the T51, two individual, manually operated jacks were installed on the rear armor plate. At the end of the jacks was a large diameter metal disc, used to spread the weight of the vehicle over a larger area. For the M51, these were replaced with a single hydraulically operated spade like the one on the front.

US Marine Corps M51 A43 ‘Jolly Green Giant’. On the right, it can be seen rendering aid to a USMC M48A2 Patton. Vietnam, 1967/68. Photo: Vince Streech.

Crane

The crane arm went through a few changes between the T51 phase and the 1956/58 modification. Originally, the crane consisted of a single arm with exposed cables and lacked the ability to extend. For the finalized M51 model, the cables were almost completely housed internally in the boom. The boom was mostly straight, lowering into a curve at the connection to the hull, and it also had a hump halfway along. This hump was necessary as the improved crane arm could extend about 4 extra feet (1.2 meters). This, however, meant that only half of the lift capacity could be achieved at 15 tons (13 tonnes).

This photo of M51 ‘Nadine’ of the 1st Marine Tank Division in Vietnam shows the crane at full elevation. Photo: SOURCE

The Crane was almost completely cable operated, with not a single piece of hydraulic equipment inside the boom arm. Everything from the crane elevation, extension, and raising of the hook was controlled by cables and winches. The only part of the crane controlled by hydraulics was its horizontal traverse and the winch drums. The crane could swivel 30 degrees to the left and 30 degrees to the right. This was achieved with a horizontally aligned hydraulic ram placed underneath the crane in the hull, directly where the center of the turret ring would be on the M103. To turn the crane over the right fender, the ram would be extended. To turn it over the left fender, the ram would retract.

A USMC M51 in Dong Ha, Vietnam, 1968. It is using its crane to hoist the barrel of an M53 Self-Propelled Gun. Photo: Unknown Source

Winches

The most powerful piece of recovery equipment installed on the M51 was its 45 ton (40 tonnes) capacity main winch. This winch was located internally, in the bow of the M51, where the Driver would be located on the M103. An armored door on the lower glacis protected the winch drum, and this was opened to allow its use.

The front of the M51. In this photo, we can see the large door on the lower glacis, behind which could be found the main 45-ton winch. On the left of the face of the superstructure is a smaller door. This is where the 5-ton auxiliary winch was located. Photo: Hunnicutt’s Firepower

There was also a 5 ton (4.5 tonnes) capacity auxiliary winch found high and right of the main winch, on the right side of the upper superstructure. This is also protected by an armored door, albeit smaller, which opened to allow access.

Service

The M51 would share the same fate as the M103 it was built upon. The United States Marine Corps (USMC) was more than happy with the vehicle, fully accepting it into service. The US Army, however, did not. This may be due to the fact that US Army tankers had no experience with the M103 type, so did not want to accept a vehicle based on it. The USMC, of course, did have experience with the M103. The US Army would instead adopt the M48/M60 based Recovery Vehicle M88, which began development in 1959 and entered service in 1961.

An M51 being reversed onto a landing craft at Dong Ha, Vietnam, 1967. Photo: Hunnicutt’s Firepower

The USMC would deploy their M51s in a number of theaters, including Vietnam, unlike its M103 cousin. They even served during the United States occupation of the Dominican Republic in 1965, during the Dominican Civil War. Unfortunately, no more is known about its time serving in combat zones.

An M51 assigned to B Company, 2nd Tank Battalion, 2nd Marine Division towing a Dominican L-60 Light tank during the US intervention in the Dominican Civil War, 1965. Photo: Ampersand Publishing Company/Hobbylink Japan

The USMC would eventually retire their M51s and follow the Army into adopting the newer M88 in 1977, outlasting the M103 by two years. Even now, both branches retain the M88 in its latest incarnation, the M88A2 Heavy Equipment Recovery Combat Utility Lifting Extraction System, otherwise known as ‘HERCULES’.

Conclusion

Much like its M103 brother, the M51 was very much an ‘ugly duckling’ of the armored vehicle world. It was rejected by the US Army, but found service in the Marine Corps where it proved itself versatile, reliable and popular with the crews and troops. A Marine Corps tanker who got his vehicle stuck in a ditch would certainly have wanted no other vehicle to come to his rescue.

A number of these Armored Recovery Vehicles do still survive today. One can be found at the American Military Museum in Los Angeles, another can be found at the 45th Infantry Division Museum in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Once more can also be found at Fort Benning, Georgia. This example is currently going through preservation.

Surviving M51 at the Aberdeen Proving Grounds prior to the Museum’s closure. Photo: Richard S. Eshleman

Illustration of the Heavy Recovery Vehicle M51. Note the ladder for the crew, the oxy-acetylene bottle behind the cab, and the out-riggers on the front and rear of the hull. Produced by Andrei ‘Octo10’ Kirushkin, funded by our Patreon Campaign.

Specifications
Dimensions (L-w-H)	33 feet 3 inches x 11 feet 11 inches x 10 feet 9 inches (10.1 x 3.76 x 3.2 meters)
Total weight, battle ready	60 tons (54 tonnes)
Crew	4 (Commander, Driver, Rigger, Crane Operator)
Propulsion	980hp Continental AVSI-1790-6 V12, Supercharged, Fuel injected
Transmission	Cross-drive XT-1400-2A 3-Fw/1-Rv
Maximum speed	30 mph (48 km/h) on road
Suspensions	Torsion bars
Armament	1x Browning .50 Cal. (12.7mm) M2HB Heavy Machine Gun
Recovery Equipment	30 ton (27 tonne) capacity crane 45 ton (40 tonne) capacity main winch 5 ton (4.5 tonne) capacity auxiliary winch Dozer Blade
Armor	1 ½ inch – ¾ inch (38 – 19 mm)
Production	187
For information about abbreviations check the Lexical Index

Sources

Colonel Robert J. Icks, AFV/Weapons Profile #41: M103 Heavy Tank and M41 Light Tank (Walker-Bulldog)
David Doyle, M103 Heavy Tank, A Visual History of America’s Only Operational Heavy Tank 1950-1970, Ampersand Publishing Company/Hobbylink Japan
R. P. Hunnicutt, Firepower: A History of the American Heavy Tank, Presidio Press
Osprey Publishing, New Vanguard #197: M103 Heavy Tank 1950-74
www.historyofwar.org

Cold War West German Other Vehicles

Minenräumpanzer Keiler

Federal Republic of Germany (1977)
Mine Clearing Vehicle – 24 Built

The most effective and safe way of clearing a path through mine-laden ground has long been debated. Do you remove it from the ground, as with a mine plow? Or do you detonate it where it sits, as with a line charge or other means of sympathetic detonation? Mine Flails – which were first deployed by the British in the Second World War aboard tanks such as the Sherman Crab – are one of the less extreme methods of the latter technique. These flails consist of a rotating drum suspended from the front of the vehicle, to which are connected a series of chains. The drum rotates at a high speed, causing the chains to pummel the ground, detonating any mines that may be buried.
The German Minenräumpanzer Keiler is one of these tanks. It is known as a Mine Detection and Clearing Vehicle or ‘MDCV’. The Keiler was the Kaelble Company’s answer to a 1971 request from the West German Federal Ministry of Defence for a mine-clearing vehicle. The MOD asked a number of German arms companies to design such a vehicle, but it was Kaelble’s flail vehicle that received military approval in 1983.
After a period of further development, Rheinmetall was contracted for the construction of the vehicle which would be based on the American M48 Patton. Rheinmetall completed and unveiled the first prototypes in 1985. A full-scale production contract was awarded in 1993, with the vehicles finally entering service with the Bundeswehr between 1997 and 1998.

The Minenräumpanzer Keiler. This vehicle belongs to the Gebirspionier 8 and was photographed in 2014. Photo: Ralph Zwilling, Tankograd Publishing

Development

The 1971 request from the West German Federal Ministry of Defence was, in fact, a trilateral endeavor between West Germany, France and Italy, based on a mutually agreed tactical needs and requirements. Numerous companies were lobbied and a design contest was held. The companies that submitted designs were Rheinstahl, Industriewerke Karlsruhe, Krupp MaK Maschinenbau (now Rheinmetall Landsysteme), AEG/Telefunken, Dynamit Nobel and Carl Kaelble. In 1972, Italy pulled out of the project, followed in 1976 by France, leaving the project to become a solely West German endeavor.
Trials with functional prototypes of the clearing equipment from each company followed. Mine flail systems appeared to be the most successful, at it was Kaelble’s design that grabbed the MOD’s attention. It consisted of a complex flail rig, mounted atop a tank chassis. When not in use, the rig could be stored atop the vehicle, and then pivoted around and down for clearing operations. Several further contracts were signed with Kaelble to develop and produce further operational flail system prototypes based on this design. In 1982, Krupp MaK Maschinenbau was chosen as the overall contractor and was subsequently contracted to build two trial vehicles that Kaelble’s flail could be mounted on. These vehicles would be known simply as ‘01’ and ‘02’. They were constructed in close cooperation with MTU, Renk and of course, Carl Kaelble. MTU would handle propulsion, Renk the transmission and Kaelble the mine-clearing equipment.

Prototype of what would become the Keiler undergoing field trials. Photo: Bundeswher/Tankograd Publishing
By 1985, both ‘01’ and ‘02’ were ready for field, troop and technical trials. They took part in numerous tests at Bundeswehr (German Army, also known as ‘Heer’) field ranges and test centers in the first quarter of 1985. ‘01’ was sent for tests in Arctic conditions in Norway. After passing the trials, ‘01’ was given to Rheinmetall as a reference subject for series production. In Germany, where ‘02’ was under trial, the vehicle cleared a total of 54 live mines without any damage to the vehicle or mine clearing apparatus. In total, 25 kilometers (15 miles) of safe lanes were cleared in the tests without issue.

Prototype vehicle ‘01’ in operation in Mostar, Bosnia, 1996. Photo: military-today.com
On October 1st, 1991, authorization was given for the vehicle, now designated the Minenräumpanzer Keiler’ (MiRPz, Eng: Flail Tank, Wild Boar), to enter full-scale production and enter service.

Production Confusion

The latter part of the Cold War was an economically unstable period, which lead to some confusion and a number of re-evaluations of just how many MiRPz. Keiler vehicles should be produced. In 1975, around the time of the vehicle’s initial conception, it was expected that the Bundeswehr would purchase 245 vehicles. By 1982, the figure had been reduced to 157, with it dropping again in 1985 to 50. With the vehicle’s acceptance into service in 1991, the Bundeswehr pushed the order back up to 72 units. However, with the Cold War now coming to an end, the German Army went through a period of budget cuts and restructuring. This resulted in a single production run of a 24-vehicle batch, running from 1996 to 1998. These vehicles were delivered straight to Pionierkompanies, the engineer units of the Bundeswehr.

Base Vehicle, the M48

Kaelble’s mine clearing device needed a suitable carriage. The developers, not wanting to sacrifice the Bundeswehr’s serving tanks, opted for a recently retired tank. The tank they chose was the American origin M48A2GA2. The M48 Patton, designated the Kampfpanzer (KPz) M48 in Germany, was one of many American tanks supplied to the fledgling West German Army in the 1950s The GA2 was an indigenous German upgrade to the tank which, among other smaller things, replaced the original 90mm gun with the infamous 105mm L7 gun.

Body of the Beast

The M48 hull went through a complete metamorphosis to turn it into the Keiler. The only recognizable feature left over from the M48 is the bulbous nose, driver’s hatch and running gear. The running gear and suspension did not escape modification though. Although the torsion bar suspension was retained, vibration dampeners were installed into the suspension components to make the vehicle a little more pleasant to operate for the crew when the mine flail is in operation. Also, in a recent upgrade program that took place in 2015, the original American made rubber chevron T97E2 tracks were replaced by German-made flat rubber tile 570 FT tracks, as found on the Leopard 2 tank. These tracks allow the Keiler to operate without restriction in Arctic conditions and necessitated the addition of new teeth to the sprocket wheel.

Profile photo of the Keiler showing the distinctive M48 Patton running gear. This is, perhaps, the only recognizable feature of the M48 within. Photo: Ralph Zwilling
The engine compartment remained at the rear of the vehicle, and for the majority of its service life retained the same powerpack as the M48, this being the 750hp Continental engine and General Motors transmission. This propelled the vehicle to a top speed of around 45 km/h (28mph). Unfortunately, performance data of this engine while the flail was in operation is unavailable at the time of writing. As part of the 2015 upgrades, the old powerpack made way for an engine made by MTU (Motoren- und Turbinen-Union meaning, Eng: Motor and Turbine Union), and a 6-speed (4 forward, 2 reverse) transmission by Renk. The engine is the MB 871 Ka-501. It is liquid cooled, 8-cylinder, turbocharged diesel engine producing around 960 hp when in travel mode. When in mine-clearing mode, the engine produces 1112hp. This engine propels the 56-tonne vehicle to a top forward speed of 48 km/h (30 mph), and it can also reverse at a respectable 25 km/h (15 mph). Due to the fact that the engine was used to propel both the vehicle and the flail, the Keiler had a high fuel consumption. So much so that it has developed a bad reputation for being a ‘gas guzzler’.
The upper hull of the M48 saw the heaviest modification. The turret was removed and a new, shallow superstructure built up atop the vehicle. This structure had a completely flat roof on top to accommodate the flail equipment in the travel position. This roof extends forward into a protective overhang above the driver’s position. The commander’s position is located roughly halfway down the length of the vehicle, slightly off center to the right of the hull. There is a vision cupola above his station.

The Keiler in operational mode. Note the flat roof with Commander’s cupola, the smoke grenade launchers on the engine deck and the various air intakes. The large box hanging off the rear of the vehicle is the ‘CLAMS’ Clear Lane Marker System. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
A number of different vents were added to the engine deck to provide air to the various pieces of equipment on board, including the new, more powerful engine. The most prominent of these are the large cooling-air intakes that hang over the fenders of the vehicle, just above the sprocket wheel. Further, smaller intakes can be found on the left and right of the vehicle, above the fifth and sixth road wheels. These provide air into the engine for combustion. An intake that brings air to the engine’s cooling fan can also be found on the left side of the vehicle. The large overhanging intakes can be folded to reduce the width of the vehicle when traveling under its own power or via transport.

The large cooling air intakes on the rear of the vehicle. Note also the smaller air intakes on the side of the vehicle. Photo: Ralph Zwilling
The Keiler is completely devoid of any offensive armament. The only defense the vehicle has is a rack of 76mm smoke grenade launchers mounted on the left of the engine deck, in front of the left overhanging air intake. It consists of a bank of 16 launchers, divided into two rows of 8 side-by-side barrels. The grenades are fired 1 side at a time, launching all 8 at once. The grenades fly around 50 meters and cover a 45 Degree arc on each side of the vehicle. For safety reasons, the launchers are electrically blocked from firing if the crew hatches are open.

The Boar’s Tusks

In the wild, the boar uses its specially adapted head to dig through the soil in search of food. Similarly, the mechanical beast that bears this swine’s name uses its specially adapted ‘head’ to detonate buried explosives, or throw them clear of the vehicle. Designed by Carl Kaelble, the flail installed on the Keiler remains one of the most sophisticated in existence.

The clearing apparatus of the MiRPz Keiler in travel mode, aligned horizontally atop the hull. The flail arms are lifted to a 90 Degree angle for storage so a travel lock (note the rod stretching from the hull to the central arm) can be attached. Spare flail elements are stored on the left sponson. This is an older photo, showing the Keiler with the original American tracks and sprocket wheel. Photo: Jürgen Plate
An innovative and rather unique feature of the Keiler is its fold-away flail that can be placed in a ‘travel mode’. The whole flail unit is attached to a single pivoting arm, rooted at the front left of the upper hull. For travel mode, the entire unit is stored horizontally along the length of the vehicle. For operation, the arm swings the equipment around 110 Degrees to the front end of the hull. The flail equipment is then lowered into place, locking into two horn-like supporting hydraulic rams. These control the up and down movements of the unit. A large shield underneath the bow of the vehicle protects these hydraulic ‘horns’ from exploding mines. In travel mode, this shield is stored up against the lower glacis and held in place by a chain. When clearing, the shield is hydraulically lowered into touching distance to the ground. Pitch of the flail is controlled by hydraulics connected to a crescent-shaped bar on top of the frame.

The bow of the Keiler. Note the tusk-like hydraulic rams on the left, and the lowered blast shield. Photo: Public Domain.
The flail assembly is supported by a carrier frame, consisting of three arms, all connected to one long cylinder which contains the axial-piston hydraulic engines which power the rotation of the clearing shaft. The shaft is in two parts, connected from the far right arm to the central arm, and the far left arm to the central arm. The shafts are staggered with the right shaft further forward than the left. Each shaft is equipped with 24 chains, at the end of each chain is a 25kg solid metal weight, or ‘element’, shaped like an elongated bell with notches cut into the end. Due to this shape, the metal weights have become known as ‘Elephant’s feet’. It is recommended that these elements are replaced after every 3,000 meters of clearance. Six spare elements are carried on board the vehicle during clearing operations. When in travel position the chains are wrapped around the rotating shafts and ratchet-strapped down.

The Keiler’s flail assembly. Note the 24 flail chains, each equipped with 25kg ‘Elephant’s foot. The rods at each end of the assembly are for measuring ground level. Photo: Ralph Zwilling
In the operational position, the flail is set at a permanent 20 degree oblique angle from the direction of travel (simply put, the left side of the carrier frame sits closest to the hull than the right side). The shafts rotate anti-clockwise at 400 revolutions per minute, meaning the ‘Elephants feet’ pummel the ground at a speed of around 200 km/h. Any mine encountered is either detonated, smashed beyond use, or kicked out of the path of the vehicle. It is estimated that between 98 and 100-percent of explosives are cleared during operation. Clearance depth is electro-mechanically governed by the ground level measuring rods found at the ends of the carrier frame. (These are stored on the rear of the vehicle in travel mode). They are in permanent contact with the ground, and the measurements they record are set via hydraulics, keeping a constant clearing depth. The flail clears a path 4.7 meters wide with a typical clearance depth that can be set between +50 and -250mm. When surface clearing at +50mm, the speed of the vehicle is 4 km/h, for deeper clearing this is reduced to 2 km/h. For -250mm (on hard ground), clearance speed is 300 meters/hour, in soft ground like sand, the speed is between 500 and 600 m/h. It can clear a 120-meter lane in 10 minutes. With the flail system forward (but not lowered into operational position), the Keiler can travel at 21 km/h (13 mph).

Close up photo of the Keiler’s flail operating at full speed. In operation, the flail kicks up a tremendous amount of debris that often results in the top deck being covered in a thick layer of muck. Photo: Ralph Zwilling

An impressive photo of the Keiler detonating a buried mine during a joint German and Dutch training exercise in 2014. Photo: Alexander Koerner

Lane Marker System

Located centrally on the rear of the Keiler is a large box. The box is the vehicle’s lane marking system known as ‘CLAMS’ or ‘Clear Lane Marking System’. Designed and produced by Israeli Military Industries (IMI), this system can drop markers down the center of a cleared lane automatically or manually every 6, 12, 24, 36 or 48m. The markers consist of round metal discs painted white, with a sprung red square on top. There is a clip on the back of the square that can accommodate a glow stick if operating in low visibility or darkness.

The ‘CLAMS’ marker system at the rear of the Keiler. Note also, on the air intakes, the stowage positions for spare track links and rods for the ground level measuring system. This is a pre-track upgrade Keiler, denoted by the fact the original American tracks are installed. Photo: Ralph Zwilling

Crew Positions

Driver

The Keiler is operated by a small crew of just two personnel, consisting of the Driver and Commander. Up until 2004, the original Driver’s hatch from the M48 was retained. It was found that this hatch was not strong enough to stand up to overpressure caused by a mine exploding on top of it. As such, it was replaced by a purpose-built detonation proof hatch. The protective overhang that extends forward from the flat upper hull is in place to stop soil and debris kicked up by the flail accumulating on top of the hatch.

The driver’s position at the front of the vehicle. Note the retractable shield on the bow is in the raised position. The ladder on the right was part of the 2015 upgrade which saw the addition of a ‘safe climbing kit. Photo: Ralph Zwilling
In mine-clearing operations, the driver operates almost blind due to the amount of debris kicked up by the whirling flail. The three vision blocks around his head become useless, as such a gyroscope was installed on the right of the steering wheel. There is a marker that shows forward direction and indicates when the vehicle is veering off course. The driver corrects direction with corresponding movements of the steering wheel. One of the three periscopes can be replaced with a BiV night vision device.

Commander

The Commander’s position is located in the middle of the vehicle, slightly off center to the right of the hull. His position is topped off with a cupola with eight periscopes installed – like the driver, one can be replaced with a BiV night sight. On the right of his position are the controls for the 76mm smoke launchers. The Commander is in overall charge of the mine clearing equipment. The controls for the hydraulics are controlled by the Commander’s operator panel, found in his position.

The commander’s position atop the Keiler. The roof is covered in debris thrown up by the flailing process. Photo: Tankograd Publishing
Due to the direction the flail rotates in, the roof of the Keiler often becomes covered in a deep layer of whatever muck and mire the vehicle happens to be carving through. As such, both crew members will often exit the vehicle through the Driver’s hatch to stop dirt and debris falling into the Commander’s position.

Operation

Before the Keiler even approaches the area that needs to be swept, a good deal of preparation has to take place at a safe location. First, the flail is unbolted from the travel lock. Next, the Commander, using his control panel, rotates the flail equipment forward from the travel position so it is aligned in front of the vehicle. The ratchet straps are then removed from the flail chains which are then unfurled from the rotating shaft. The detachable ground level measuring rods are then installed on each end of the clearing shaft (If they haven’t been left on from a previous job). The headlights – all German tanks are required by law to have these, as well as tail lights and wing-mirrors for driving on public roads – are removed from the fenders over the idler wheels at the front of the Keiler to prevent them from being damaged.

A pre-2015 upgrade Keiler traveling at speed. The driver is operating head out. Photo: SOURCE
Once preparation is complete, the Keiler will drive to the area of clearing. Once there, the Commander will lower the flail into clearing position and order the Driver forwards at whichever clearing speed is required. In mine-clearing operations, it could be said that the Keiler gains a third crew member in the form of an outside observer. As the crew operates mostly blind due to the kick up from the flail, a Troop Commander, stationed at a safe distance from the clearing area, guides the vehicle by radio communication to the Commander, who then relays the commands to the Driver.

Troops of the Bundeswehr stand before a Marder 1A3 (I) and Keiler. Photo: MDR

Service

In its 22 years of service, the Keiler has been deployed to various countries with the German Army. In the late 1990s, the German Army took part in NATO’s Implementation Force (IFOR) Bosnia-Herzegovina during the Bosnian War, codenamed ‘Operation Joint Endeavor’. They remained here for Stabilisation Force (SFOR) operations as well.

Keiler in operation in Butmire, Bosnia-Herzegovina, in 1997. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
Unfortunately, further details about its deployments are scarce. Recently in 2015, the Keiler was part of the German contingent that took part in NATO’s Trident Juncture ‘15. The exercises took place in San Gregorio in Spain.

Keiler in operation in Trident Juncture ‘15 in San Gregorio, Spain. Photo: Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum
The Keiler is projected to remain in service with the German Army for the foreseeable future and remains one of the most technically advanced and reliable mine clearing vehicles in the world today. It is part of a vast arsenal of Mine Clearing vehicles in service, such as the Wiesel 1 based Detektorfahrzeug Route Clearance System (DetFzg RCSys) and Manipulatorfahrzeug Mine Wolf MW240 (MFzg RCSys). One of the Keilers that was deployed to, and operated in, Bosnia as part of IFOR can be found in the Deutsches Panzermuseum, Munster. It is in running condition and is often part of the Museum’s displays.

The IFOR veteran MiRPz Keiler preserved in the Deutsches Panzermuseum, Munster. Photo: Public Domain

Specifications (Post 2015 upgrade)
Dimensions (L-W-H)	6.4 x 3.63 x 3.08 meters
Total weight, battle ready	56 tonnes
Crew	2 (Commander, Driver)
Propulsion	MTU MB 871 Ka-501 liquid cooled, 8-cylinder, turbocharged diesel, 960 – 1112hp
Transmission	Renk 6 speed (4 forward + 2 reverse)
Speed	Travel Mode (forward): 48 km/h (30 mph) Travel Mode (reverse): 25 km/h (15 mph) Flail Deployed: 21 km/h (13 mph) Clearence Mode: 2 – 4 km/h (1.2 – 2.4 mph)
Suspensions	Torsion bars
Equipment	Mine Flial, 400 rpm, twenty-four 25kg elements impacting at 200 km/h, 98-100% clearence IMI CLAMS (Clear Lane Marking System) marker system 76mm Smoke grenade launchers
Armor	110 mm (hull front)
Total Production	24

Sources

Ralph Zwilling, Minenräumfahrzeuge: Mine-clearing Vehicles from the Keiler to the German Route Clearance System, Tankograd Publishing
Ralph Zwilling, Tankograd In Detail, Fast Track #15: Keiler, Tankograd Publishing
www.rheinmetall-defence.com
www.military-today.com
tag-der-bundeswehr.de

The Minenräumpaner Keiler in travel configuration. In this mode, the entire flail unit is stored horizontally along the length of the vehicle. The protective shield on the bow is also raised so it is clear of the ground while the vehicle is in motion.

TheMiRPz Keiler in mine clearing mode with flail assembly deployed. Note the flail chains, each equipped with 25kg ‘Elephant’s foot’. The rods at each end of the assembly are for measuring ground level. The bow shield is also deployed.

Both of these illustrations were produced by Ardhya Anargha, funded by our Patreon campaign.

WW2 British Vehicles in Foreign Service WW2 Irish Armor

Mk.IX Armoured Car (Standard Beaverette in Irish Service)

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date February 9, 2019
7 Comments on Mk.IX Armoured Car (Standard Beaverette in Irish Service)

Republic of Ireland (1943)
Scout Car – 30 Purchased

The Standard Beaverette was a small armored car designed and built in Great Britain during World War Two, in the early 1940s. In 1943, halfway through World War Two – or ‘The Emergency’, as it was known in Eire – the Military of the Republic of Ireland, the Irish Defence Force (IDF, Irish: Fórsaí Cosanta, officially: Óglaigh na hÉireann), purchased 30 of these light armored cars to supplement the Irish Military’s rather small inventory of armored vehicles.
Ten Mk.III and twenty Mk.IV Beaverettes were purchased by the Irish Army. The vehicles were designated as the ‘Mk.IX Armoured Car’ in the Irish Military, and were distributed amongst the Motor Squadrons of the Cavalry Corps (Irish: An Cór Marcra). The Cavalry Corps are the operators of the Irish Army’s armored vehicles.
In theory, the Beaverette’s small size made it perfect for operation in a small country such as the Republic of Ireland, which is dominated by small villages and narrow country roads. However, much like its service in the British Army, the vehicle became somewhat loathed for its poor reliability, cramped interior and sluggish handling.

Men of the 3rd Brigade HQ staff, June 1945, Collins Barracks, Dublin. The car on the left is a Ford Model 81A saloon car, the car in the center is a Chevrolet Model EM40 saloon car. On the right is a Mk.III Beaverette in its original configuration with machine gun turret on the roof. It is this very car that now sits in the Cobatton Combat Museum in England. Photo: Irish Army Vehicles, Karl Martin

Ireland in WW2

On 1st September 1939, Nazi Germany launched its invasion of Poland, kickstarting the Second World War. In Ireland, this became known as “The Emergency” after the state of emergency that was imposed by the Irish Government and which was to last for the duration of the conflict.
Officially, Ireland was a neutral party during the War but had slight leanings towards the Allies. Although Ireland as a state never joined the war, Irish individuals did fight in the war. The island of Ireland was also not untouched by the war, however, as both the Republic’s capital, Dublin, and Belfast, the capital of Northern Ireland, were bombed by the German Luftwaffe.
During this time, the Irish Army had few new armored vehicles to its name. Its inventory included, among other things, two Swedish L-60 light tanks produced by Landsverk, a small amount of British Rolls-Royce armored cars, and a large number of Universal Carriers, also from Britain.

Eager Beaver

The Standard Beaverette was something of an emergency measure. With the British retreat from Dunkirk in the Summer of 1940, the British Army lost most of its armored vehicles, which were simply abandoned in France. To compensate, a plan was hatched to produce a simple, easily made armored car. Lord Beaverbrook, Minister of Aircraft Production, went to the Standard Car company with the idea of producing these vehicles, based on their existing saloon car chassis. These cars were called the Standard Beaverette, named after Lord Beaverbrook. The ‘ette’ part of the name was a play on the word tankette, a small tracked armored vehicle armed with at most a machine gun. Almost 3,000 cars were built spread between Mk.Is to Mk.IVs. It was the Mk.III and IV Beaverette that was purchased by the Irish.
The Mk.III and IV were small, squat, boxy cars. They consisted of a projecting, jeep-like bonnet attached to a larger box section that formed the two-man crew compartment. Armor on the vehicle was just .4 of an inch (12mm) thick. This was enough to protect from small-arms fire and shrapnel, but not much more. They were light vehicles, weighing in at 2.9 tons (2.6 tonnes). They were 10 feet 2 inches (3 meters) long, 5 feet 8 inches (1.7 meters) wide, and 6 feet 10 inches (2.1 meters) high (including the small turret). This turret would carry the vehicle’s main armament of a .303 machine gun. This would usually consist of a Bren, Vickers or Lewis light machine gun. The car was powered by a 46hp Standard 4-cylinder petrol engine. The vehicle managed a top speed of just 20 mph (32 km/h) and had only front-wheel drive. A special reduction gear was added to the rear axle to try and compensate for this, but it had a detrimental effect on the vehicle’s overall speed. The vehicle rolled on heavy 9 inch (22 cm) wide tires. These were excellent for grip but made steering heavy for the driver.
The only real difference between the Mk.III and IV was the front of the cab. The Mk.III had a flat front with two vision ports for the driver and gunner. The cab of the Mk.IV was stepped and featured three vision ports, one for the driver, two for the gunner.
Across Britain, the Beaverette was parceled out to Home Defense units of the British Army, airfield security units of the Royal Air Force (RAF), and finally, the Home Guard. It was found to be obsolete by 1943, and as such sold on to other countries including Ireland.

This photo shows just how small and light the Beaverettes were. The photo was taken in 1974, the Beaverette is being prepared for decommissioning, and is being hoisted by an Army Berliet TBU 15CLD 6×6 recovery truck. Photo: Bob Cantwell, MMP Publications

Irish Service

For the majority of their service, the Beaverettes were painted in the standard, solid ‘Quaker Grey’ livery that adorned Irish Armoured Vehicles from the 1920s to the 1950s. The Irish Military considered them ‘Light Reconnaissance Vehicles’. Fourteen of the Beaverettes were placed in service with the 4th Armoured Squadron who, in 1943, replaced the Universal ‘Bren’ Carrier equipped Cavalry Corps Carrier Squadron. The remaining 13 vehicles were divided between the Cavalry Corps’ Motor squadrons. At the end of ‘The Emergency’, the 4th Armoured Squadron was disbanded, and its Beaverettes distributed between various units to be used in support, but mostly training roles.

An Artillery Corps 18-Pounder Field gun in operation during an exercise. In the background, you can see three Morris Quad tractors and, just in front, a Mk.III Beaverette in its original configuration with machine gun turret. Photo: Irish Army vehicles, Karl Martin
Between 1951 and 1953, all 30 Beaverettes went through a conversion program and were turned into ‘Scout Cars’. This was an easy modification which saw the roof and accompanying turret completely removed. As scout cars, they would have a completely open top providing excellent vision, but no protection from bad weather (a common feature in the Republic of Ireland), let alone bullets or shrapnel. The removal of the turret and roof cut the overall height of the car down to just 4 feet 10 inches (1.4 m). Under where the turret would have been, a simple map table was placed. This table could also carry a No. 19 wireless radio set.

Beaverette Mk.III scout car at Mckee Barracks, Dublin, in 1967. This vehicle is one of the only surviving today and is maintained by the Cavalry Corps. Photo: Peter Leslie, MMP Publications
The newly designated scout cars were spread around various Cavalry Corps units. Four were placed into service with the 1st Armoured Car Squadron and the 3rd, 5th and 11th Motor Squadrons. The remaining 14 were kept at Cavalry Corps vehicle depots.
The Beaverettes were finally retired in 1965. They remained in service for so long simply because the Irish Army had nothing better to replace them with.

A Mk.III Beaverette that has been converted into the scout car role with the turret removed. The vehicle is painted in the typical ‘Quaker Grey’ paint scheme of the period. This illustration was produced by Leander Jobse, based on work by David Bocquelet, sponsored by our Patreon Campaign.

Surviving Examples

Only a small number of the Irish Beaverettes survive today. The Cavalry Corps Museum, the Curragh in County Kildare, holds the only running example of an Irish Beaverette, a Mk.III that is often run in parades. They also have a preserved Mk.IV inside the museum with a preserved interior.

Surviving Mk.IV Beaverette scout car in the Cavalry Corps Museum, Curragh Camp, County Kildare. Photo: The Curragh
Interestingly, an Irish Beaverette can also be found in England. The Mk.III Standard Beaverette kept at the Cobbaton Combat Museum in North Devon was once used by the Irish Army. Like the rest of the Cars, this example had its roof and turret removed to turn it into a scout car. The museum manufactured a replacement roof and turret for the vehicle to restore it to its original configuration.

The once Irish Beaverette at the Cobatton Combat Museum. Photo: Author’s own

Conclusion

As it did in the British Army, the Beaverette simply filled a need in the Irish Military for a light armored car when little else was available. While it was a mostly loathed little car, it served its purpose in the Irish Military for over 20 years.

A surviving Mk.III on display in 2006. Photo: Bob Cantwell, MMP Publications

Specifications
Dimensions (Mk.II)	2.16 m x 1.76 m x 1.74 m (7ft 1in x 5ft 9.5in x 5ft 9in)
Dimensions (Mk.III)	2.16 m x 1.76 m x 2.13 m (7ft 1in x 5ft 9.5in x 7ft)
Total weight, battle ready	2 (2.6) tonnes
Crew	2 (driver, gunner/radio)
Propulsion	Standard 4-cyl petrol, 46 hp (34 kW), 17-23 hp/t
Suspension	4×2 leaf springs
Speed (Mark III)	38 km/h (24 mph)
Range (Mark III)	300 km (190 mi)
Armament	0.303 in (7.7 mm) Bren MG or 0.55 (13.97 mm) in Boys AT rifle
Armor	10 mm (Mk.III) – 12 mm (Mk.IV)
Total Purchased	30

Sources

Irish Army Vehicles: Transport and Armour since 1922 by Karl Martin
Tiger Lily Publications, Irish Army Orders of Battle 1923-2004, Adrian J. English
Mushroom Model Publications, AFVs in Irish Service Since 1922, Ralph A. Riccio
The Curragh Museum
Cobbaton Combat Collection, North Devon, UK

Cold War Chilean Armor Cold War Israeli Armor

M-60 Sherman (M-50 with 60mm HVMS Gun)

Post author By Mark Nash
Post date January 28, 2019
19 Comments on M-60 Sherman (M-50 with 60mm HVMS Gun)

State of Israel/Republic of Chile (1983)
Medium Tank – 65 Purchased & Modified

Simply put, the Chilean M-60 Sherman is a ‘modification of a modification’ of one of the most versatile tanks ever built, the American M4 Sherman. These Shermans had already been owned, upgraded and operated by the Israelis, who then sold them to Chile in the early 1980s. Chile bought 65 of these tanks, who in turn, requested that they be modified once more. This modification included the replacement of the main gun with a 60 mm (2.3 in) High-Velocity main gun, and a new Detroit Diesel engine.

By 1983, the M4 Sherman had been in active service with one country or another for 41 years. The Chilean Army (Spanish: Ejército de Chile) was about to extend this life further, only retiring their M-60 Shermans between 1999 and 2003. The 16 years of service the M-60 saw in Chile made it one of the last operational weaponized Sherman tanks to actively serve in any of the World’s militaries. The M-60s served alongside the far more modern French AMX-30, of which 21 were purchased in the early-1980s. The Shermans were replaced by the German Leopard 1V, in 1999.

Chile is a long, thin country located on the west coast of South America, with the Andes mountain range forming its eastern border. The country has seen a number of internal conflicts throughout its history. The last major conflict Chile fought was against Peru and Bolivia in what is known as the War of the Pacific (1879-1883). This resulted in a Chilean victory, but tensions between the three countries survive to this day. Chile has not taken part in any major international war in the 20th or 21st Centuries. In World War 2, Chile’s hesitation at declaring war on the Axis did not please the United States, who were pressuring the Latin American Countries to do just that. In 1943, Chile only broke diplomatic connections with Germany. It was not until 1945 that Chile would declare war on Japan as part of an agreement between the US and Chilean Governments. Diplomatic repercussions caused by the fact that Chile did not declare war on Germany resulted in reduced support from the US in the post-war years. Chile has maintained a very tense relationship with its neighbors, especially Argentina. However, it has taken – and does still take – part in a number of United Nations Peacekeeping missions across the globe. These included the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP, 1964-2013) and United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL, 1978-13). Throughout its history, the Chilean Army has been supplied by various countries, such as Israel, the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, France, and Spain.

An M4A4-based M-60 on maneuvers. Photo: Public Domain

Previous Experience

The M-60 variant was not the first type of Sherman to be employed by the Chilean Army. In 1947, following the signing of the Rio Treaty (Officially the ‘Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance) the United States supplied Chile with 30 M4A1 Shermans. This treaty, still in effect to this day, was signed in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, by multiple countries in the Americas. In a similar line to NATO, the principal article of the organization is that an attack against one is to be considered an attack against them all.

Two Chilean M4A1E9s on maneuvers in Antofagasta (north Chile) in 1975. The E9 was still in service with the Chilean Army in the mid-1970s. Photo: Familia Acorazada Del Ejército De Chile

Chile then acquired a further 46 from commercial sources. In 1948, this Sherman force was bolstered further by the arrival of 48 M4A1E9 Shermans, again supplied by the USA. The E9 was a modified M4A1 which saw an addition of a spacer set between the hull and bogies of the Vertical Volute Spring Suspension (VVSS). There was another spacer on the drive sprocket. The spacers allowed the addition extended end connectors to be fitted on both sides of the track, giving it a wider track. The E9 was supplied to many friendly countries of the USA after the Second World War.

Other upgrades included the addition of the newer vision cupola for the commander and a new hatch for the loader. The tank retained the standard 75mm M3 gun. They remained in service with the Chilean Army into the mid-1970s.

Third Hand Shermans

By the time the Chilean Army got hold of their M-60 Shermans, the tanks had already changed hands at least two times during their existence, making the South American buyers the third owners of these specific tanks. Originally, of course, the Sherman was an American tank which entered service with the Allies in 1941. During the Second World War, the M4 was used by the British, Soviet, French, Chinese and many other Allied nations. They also continued to serve with numerous countries after the war had ended. In the late 1940s, Israel found itself in need of tanks but was unable to purchase any directly, so instead, started scouring the scrapyards of Europe and acquired demilitarised Shermans which they brought back into service, ironically some of which had German guns. Over the next 20 or so years, this hodgepodge of all varieties of Sherman – from M4 to M4A4 – went through several upgrade programs.

In the early 1950s, with help from the French Military, a program began with the intent to upgrade their M4s. This included the addition of the 75mm SA 50 gun, as used on the AMX-13 light tank, which led to them being renamed the M-50 Sherman. In the 1960s, the tanks were upgraded once more to fit the 105 mm Modèle F1 gun. These upgrades received the M-51 designation and are often incorrectly called the ‘Super Sherman’ or ‘Isherman’. Along with this gun, all tanks were given a mobility improvement with the addition of the Horizontal Volute Spring Suspension (HVSS) system and the Cummins V-8 460 horsepower diesel engine.

Chilean M-51s of Combat team ‘Niklitschek’, Aguada Dolores, 1991. Photo: Familia Acorazada Del Ejército De Chile

By the early 1970s, the 75 mm armed M-50s were being phased out. The 105mm armed M-51 would stay in service until the early 1980s. Once retired, Israel chose to sell them. The Republic of Chile would purchase a mix of around 100 M-50 and M-51 Shermans from 1983 onwards. A few of the purchased M-50s had previously had their 75 mm guns removed when they were retired, however, Israel offered to install a 60 mm Gun developed by OTO-Melara of Italy and Israeli Military Industries (IMI) instead. Twenty-seven of these tanks were dispatched to Chile in 1988. The 27 tanks arrived and were disembarked at Iquique, a port city in Northern Chile. The first of these newly armed tanks were placed in service with the 9th Armored Cavalry Regiment ‘Vencedores’ (Triumphant). More of these modified Shermans would arrive in Chile throughout the following years. It is thought that as many as 65 Shermans were upgraded to this standard.

Close up photo looking at the engine deck, 60mm gun and turret face of one of the modified Shermans. Note the new gun travel lock and, on the right of the photo, the cowling for the modified exhaust. Photo: Public Domain

These 60 mm-armed Shermans were known by a few different names. The most popular of these is the ‘M-60’. The Chilean Army christened it ‘M-60’ after the 60 mm gun. However, it is also known as the ‘M-50/60mm’ or ‘M-50 (HVMS)’.

It is reasonable to suggest that one of the reasons the Chilean Army decided to purchase the Israeli Shermans was the fact that they had already gained experience in operating and maintaining Sherman tanks. This is the author’s own opinion, however. Also, in 1976, the United States had placed an arms embargo on Chile, which barred the sale and import of weapons which lasted until 1989. Furthermore, the French government had vetoed the sale of more weapons to Chile in 1981. This meant that the market for a new tank was restricted and Chile had to do with an obsolete tank.

This photo was taken moments after the gun had fired during a live-fire exercise, noted by the red flag flying from the turret. Photo: Familia Acorazada Del Ejército De Chile

Chilean Changes

The two identifying features of the Chilean M-60 Sherman are the 60mm gun and the modified engine deck. It is these modifications that will be focussed on in this section. There were other, smaller additions though, such as an Israeli-style stowage bin on the engine deck overhanging the rear of the vehicle or an air deflector which was also added below the overhang to deflect heat away from the stowage bin. A new folding travel lock compatible with the 60mm barrel was also added to the rear of the engine deck.

The 60 mm Gun

Officially, the weapon is known as the 60 mm High-Velocity Medium Support (HVMS) Gun. It was a joint development started in the late 1970s between Israeli Military Industries (IMI) and OTO-Melara of Italy. The 60 mm (2.3 in) gun was designed for infantry support, the idea being to give infantry units increased anti-armor firepower by giving them a powerful, but light gun that could be mounted on light vehicles. A joint project to develop a lightweight turret housing the gun, which could be mounted directly onto light vehicles, such as the M113 APC, was planned, but this did not come to fruition. The two companies split during the project, developing their own versions. Despite being a success, the weapons did not enter service with either the Italians or the Israelis.

The 60 mm High-Velocity Medium Support (HVMS) Gun in testing on an ex-British 6-Pounder gun carriage. Photo: Unknown Source

The gun had a barrel length of 70 Calibers (4.2 meters), with a fume-extractor placed halfway down its length. The barrel was constructed using the autofrettage method of metal fabrication. In short, this allowed the barrel wall to be thin, but extremely tough. The gun utilized a hydrospring recoil system, meaning the spring surrounds the breach-end of the barrel, protected by a shroud. It is further protected from the elements by a truncated rubber – or possibly canvas – sleeve. The hydrospring system allows quick barrel changes as the gun and recoil system can be removed/installed as one unit.

The gun has the feature of being both manually and automatically loaded. Manually consists of the traditional method of sliding the shells into the vertically-sliding breach by hand, though, in this case, there is hydraulic assistance. The automatic method consists of a vertical magazine with a three-round capacity loaded in a similar way to Bofors’ automatic guns. This system is recoil-operated with a shell-to-shell reload of three seconds. These could be fired one-by-one, although there was also the option of firing a three-round burst. Chile decided to modify their guns to be manually loaded, with a new rate of fire of 12 rounds per minute.

A Spanish-language promotional poster produced by the Italian Company OTO-Melara, featuring the statistics of the APFSDS-T round and the High-Explosive shell. Photo: Foro Militar General

The weapon was equipped with both High-Explosive (HE) and Armor-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding-Sabot, Tracer (APFSDS-T) rounds. Both rounds were produced by OTO-Melara. In Israeli tests, the gun proved to be precise at over 2,500 m. The APFSDS projectile flew at an initial speed of 1,600 meters-per-second and was able to penetrate the side armor (15 – 79 mm thick) of two T-62’s, side-by-side, at 2,000 m. At maximum, the dart could penetrate 120 mm of armor, angled at 60 Degrees, at a distance of 2,000 m.

The 60 mm guns were delivered separately from the tanks. Chilean Military Industries were given the task of installing the guns in the tanks, which involved modifying the existing mantlets to accept the new guns. The installation process and modifications were developed by the Israeli based NIMDA Co. Ltd. Apart from the installation of the appropriate gunnery and sighting systems, and new ammunition racks for the 60 mm rounds, very little modifications to the turret were needed. The Sherman was not the only tank upgraded with this weapon. The Chilean Army also had a number of their older M24 Chaffee tanks adapted to carry the gun.

New Engine

The other major upgrade to the M-50s came in the form of a new engine. The old Cummins V-8 460 hp diesel engines were worn out, and a replacement was required. The chosen replacement was the more powerful 535 hp V-8 Detroit Diesel 8V-71T engine.

Two M-60s on maneuvers. Note the exhaust emerging from the engine deck onto the sponson of the tank. Photo: Unknown Source

The introduction of this engine required some modification to the engine deck. On M4 tanks, the exhaust vents out of the rear of the tank, between the idler wheels. On the M-60 version, the exhaust vented out of the top of the deck. A hole had to be cut in the top of the engine deck, on the right side of the hull, near the air intakes. The exhaust pipe extended from the hole, down on to the upper portion of the sponsons. Additionally, a protective cowling was welded over it. The Israeli-added armor over the air intake was kept in place to protect the exhaust where it emerged from the deck.

Service

The tensions between Chile and Peru never subsided after the Pacific War of 1879-83. In the late 20th Century, when the M-60s entered service, tensions were at their highest between Chile and their northern neighbor. There was a fear that the two countries would once more fall into conflict. The Chilean Army had great faith that their M-60s, and indeed their M-51s of which they retained over 100, would be able to combat the Peruvian, Soviet-origin T-55s. Although both sides prepared for it, a war never materialized.

The M-60s would continue to serve past this point, complemented by the M-51s, 60mm-upgraded M24 Chaffees, and even a few French AMX-30s which were purchased in the early 1980s. In the late 1990s, Chile began to receive German Leopard 1Vs, supplied by the Netherlands between 1999 and 2000 and a few more AMX-30s. With this, the M-60s and M-51s became redundant. They were finally removed from service between 1999 and 2003. This made them some of the last operational weaponized Shermans in any military in the world, bringing the total service life of the M4 Sherman to approximately 60 years.

Although the tanks were retired, it appears that the guns continued to serve. Despite the fact there does not seem to be any currently available photos, some of the guns were reportedly mounted on Chilean license-built MOWAG Piranha I 8x8s. While most of the Shermans ended up as range targets, at least one survives as a museum piece. This tank can be found in the Museo de Tanques del Arma Caballeria Blindada in Iquique.

M-60 Sherman at the Tanques del Arma Caballeria Blindada in Iquique, 2012. Photo: Surviving Israeli Shermans

Illustration of an M-60 (HVMS), produced by Tanks Encyclopedia’s own David Bocquelet.

Specifications
Dimensions (L-W-H)	6.15m x 2.42m x 2.24m (20’1″ x 7’9″ x 7’3″ ft.in)
Total weight, battle ready:	35 Tons (32 tonnes)
Crew :	5 (Commander, gunner, loader, driver, bow-gunner)
Propulsion:	V-8 Detroit Diesel 8V-71T 535 hp V-8
Suspensions:	Horizontal Volute Springs Suspensions (HVSS)
Top Speed	Aprx. 40-45 kph (25-27 mph) M51/M50
Armament (see notes)	Main: OTO-Melara 60mm (2.3 in) High-Velocity Medium Support (HVMS) Gun Sec: Coaxial .30 Cal (7.62mm) machine gun
Armour	Hull nose and turret 70, sides 40, bottom 15, rooftop 15 mm
Total Converions	65

Sources

Familia Acorazada Del Ejército De Chile
Thomas Gannon, Israeli Sherman, Darlington Productions
Thomas Gannon, The Sherman in the Chilean Army, Trackpad Publishing
www.theshermantank.com
www.army-guide.com
www.mapleleafup.nl
The Sherman Minutia

“Tank-It” Shirt

Chill with this cool Sherman shirt. A portion of the proceeds from this purchase will support Tank Encyclopedia, a military history research project. Buy this T-Shirt on Gunji Graphics!

American M4 Sherman Tank – Tank Encyclopedia Support Shirt

Give ’em a pounding with your Sherman coming through! A portion of the proceeds from this purchase will support Tank Encyclopedia, a military history research project. Buy this T-Shirt on Gunji Graphics!

NM-116 Panserjager

AMX-13 Avec Tourelle FL-11

AMX-US (AMX-13 Avec Tourelle Chaffee)

FV4003 Centurion AVRE

M113 APC in Irish Service (Congo Crisis, 1960-1965)

FV433 Abbot SPG

FV219 & FV222 – Conqueror ARV Mk.1 & 2

Loyd Carrier

Medium Tank M45 (T26E2)

USMC Improvised M4A2 Flail Tank

7.2in Multiple Rocket Launcher M17 ‘Whiz Bang’

Morris-Commercial C9/B Self-Propelled 40mm Bofors

Minenräumer Minebreaker 2000/2

FV4203 Chieftain AVRE

Self-Propelled Flame Thrower M132 ‘Zippo’

Medium Recovery Vehicle M88

Heavy Recovery Vehicle M51

Minenräumpanzer Keiler

Mk.IX Armoured Car (Standard Beaverette in Irish Service)

M-60 Sherman (M-50 with 60mm HVMS Gun)

Kingdom of Norway (1975-1993) Light Tank/Tank Destroyer – 72 Converted

Foundation: The M24 Chaffee

Norsk Chaffees

Upgrade Program

Automotive Upgrades

Armament Upgrades

Other Changes

Further Upgrades?

Service

Foreign Interest

Variants

NM-130 Bergepanser

Driver Trainer

Conclusion

Personal Connection

Specifications

Sources

France (1954) Improvised Light Tank – 5 Built

The AMX-13

Fives-Lille (FL) Turrets

The FL-11 Turret

The AMX Hull

Production

Air Transportability

Service

Conclusion

Specifications

Sources

France (1957) Improvised Light Tank – 150 Built

French Chaffees

The AMX-13

Char Meets Chaffee

Avec Tourelle Chaffee

Turret Details

The AMX Hull

Service

Conclusion

Specifications

Sources

United Kingdom (1955) Engineering Vehicle – Approximately 40 Built

The Mk.5 Centurion

Development

165mm L9A1 Demolition Gun

Equipment

Fascines

Dozer Blade

Class 60 Trackway

Towed Equipment

Trailer

Barmine Mechanical Minelayer

Giant Viper

Designations

Service

Operation Motorman

Gulf War

Fate

Specifications

Resources & Links

Republic of Ireland (1960-1964) Armored Personnel Carrier – 6 Operated

The M113

Kingdom of Norway (1975-1993)
Light Tank/Tank Destroyer – 72 Converted

France (1954)
Improvised Light Tank – 5 Built

France (1957)
Improvised Light Tank – 150 Built

United Kingdom (1955)
Engineering Vehicle – Approximately 40 Built

Republic of Ireland (1960-1964)
Armored Personnel Carrier – 6 Operated

United Kingdom (1958)
Self-Propelled Gun – 234 Built

United Kingdom (1959-1960)
Armored Recovery Vehicle – 28 Built (8 Mk.1, 20 Mk.2)

United Kingdom (1939)
Tankette – 26,000 Built

United States of America (1945)
Medium Tank – 185 Built