Renault FT 'INFANTERIA Nº10' used by Spain during the Rif War. Illustrated by Andrei Kirushkin, based on the work of David Bocquelet, funded by our Patreon Campaign
Kingdom of Spain (1919-1931)
Light Tank – 18 bought
Debuting on the Western Front in 1918, the French Renault FT was a revolutionary weapon. Small and equipped with a fully rotating turret, it was deployed en masse in the later stages of the Great War, greatly impacting warfare and military thinking. In the post-war period of instability and economic crisis, the small, cheap, and simple FT would be acquired by the militaries of many nations, and in most cases, was the basis on which their own tank development was born. One of these nations was the Kingdom of Spain, which used the Renault FT during the Rif War.
Context – Spain and the Great War
Following centuries of imperial decline culminating in defeat during the Spanish-American War of 1898, Spain’s place as a lower secondary world power was cemented.
Since the mid-Nineteenth Century, Spain had greatly expanded its influence and territory in North Africa, and, as a result, been in conflict with the local Rifian tribesmen. The Algeciras Conference of 1906, convened to resolve Franco-German colonial competition during the First Moroccan Crisis, resulted in concessions to Spain in Morocco. Lead and other metal deposits were soon discovered further inland in Rifian territory and, almost immediately, contracts were given to companies to mine the deposits and build railway links to the coast, further infuriating the locals.
These growing tensions resulted in an armed uprising by the Rifians, whose attack on railway workers in July 1909 started the Melilla War, which Spain won, gaining some new territory south of Melilla.
However, peace was not long-lasting. In 1911, widespread rebellions against the Sultan and Morocco threatened the Spanish and French possessions. To make matters worse, in what is known as the Agadir Crisis or Second Moroccan Crisis, Germany attempted to use gunboat diplomacy by sending the SMS Panther to the port of Agadir, hoping to gain colonial concessions from France in the Congo by further destabilizing the situation in Morocco. In the end, France made concessions in the Congo and both Spain and France gained more territory in Morocco.
In 1913, the Spanish Protectorate in Morocco was established, integrating the new territories. Small armed uprisings began the following year, though they lacked cohesion and there was little activity during World War I. Spain took no part in the Great War but kept a close eye on developments and, by observing, learned valuable lessons.
Map of the Spanish Protectorate in Morocco. Most of the fighting against the tribes from the Rif in the following decade would take place in the Kert region – source: Research Gate
Spain’s First Tank
Designed to break the deadlock of trench warfare, the tank was one of the Great War’s major developments. Even before the guns fell silent, on October 18th 1918, the Spanish Government had made a formal petition to their French counterparts to begin negotiations for the acquisition of a Renault FT. However, the French authorities proved to be uncooperative in sharing their newest ‘toy’ with the rest of the world and did not respond to the Spanish request until January 15th 1919, once the Armistice was in place.
At this point, the Comisión de Experiencias, Proyectos y Comprobación del Material de Guerra [Eng. Commission for the Testing of War Materiel], a commission within the Spanish Ministry of War for the testing, trialing and acquisition of war materiel, fleshed out their request to the French Government by asking for a Renault FT equipped with the 37 mm Puteaux SA 18 cannon, followed a few days later by one for three more tanks equipped with the cannon and one with the Hotchkiss M1914 machine gun. This was authorized by Spanish authorities on March 5th 1919.
The petition was then amended to include two additional cannon-equipped tanks. This amended order for a total of seven tanks (six with a cannon and one with a machine gun) was rejected by the French Government on March 20th, leading to the negotiation of a new petition on April 12th. After tough talks, the French Government authorized the sale for F52,500 (Francs) of one machine gun armed FT in May 1919. The longed-for vehicle finally arrived in Madrid from the Centre d’Approvisionament de Materiel Automobile [Eng. Center of Automobile Provisioning] in Paris on June 23rd 1919. The vehicle’s serial number was ‘68352’ and it was equipped with an octagonal or ‘omnibus’ turret. It would be the only Renault FT with this type of turret which ever served in Spain.
The first Renault FT (‘68352’) to arrive in Spain – source: García, p. 4
After the vehicle’s arrival in Madrid, it was sent from the Estación del Norte train station (modern day Principe Pío) to either the Campamento military barracks or the Escuela Central de Tiro [Eng. Central Target Practice School] in Carabanchel. This journey was undertaken without the assistance of a truck or lorry. Two days later, the new tank was presented to the monarch, Alfonso XIII, and the Infantes with considerable attention from the press, which at the time, incorrectly claimed that the Renault FT had been a present to Alfonso XIII. Over the next few days, it was vigorously tested and was inspected by a military and political commission headed by Colonel Ramón Acha.
The new Renault FT being presented to a royal and military commission – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 10
More pictures from the presentation to the royal and military commission – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, pp. 17-20
During testing, by order of the commission, the machine gun was replaced by license-built Hotchkiss machine guns to allow the use of the Spanish Army’s standard 7 mm Mauser ammunition. These tests were so satisfactory that, on August 13th 1919, the Spanish Government ordered a further ten tanks, eight armed with a machine gun and two with cannon, priced at F533,400. The machine gun-armed Renault FTs were to be delivered with Spanish Hotchkiss machine guns and 500 rounds of ammunition per tank. Unfortunately for the Spanish Government, the French Government refused this request, claiming there were no surplus tanks to sell, and later refused any sales at all. It is possible that French feathers had been ruffled by Spain’s having replaced the machine gun on the vehicle which had arrived in 1919. As a result, Spain decided to look elsewhere in their search for more tanks, though nothing came of this.
During another presentation organized by the Ministry of War in April 1920, the vehicle was given an “ARTILLERIA” inscription, denoting that it belonged to the artillery, the section of the army that had carried out the purchase. On the vehicle’s redesignation to the infantry, this inscription was removed.
The only known picture of the Renault FT with the “ARTILLERIA” inscription – source: Molina Franco, p. 9
The Disaster at Annual
After September 1919, Spain made an effort to assert military control over its protectorate in Morocco and to quell the small scale rebellions which were taking place. This conflict is known as the Rif War. Across the dry, mountainous territory, the Spanish military built a series of forts supplied by long convoy routes subject to constant ambushes. With the objective of occupying Alhucemas Bay, the General Commander of the Melilla military region, General Manuel Fernández Silvestre, stretched his troops too far from the supply lines and, in May 1921, pitched camp in Annual. The reinforcement troops which were supposed to aid Silvestre’s troops for the final pacification of the Rif were ambushed and massacred by tribesmen under the command of their famed leader, Abd el-Krim. Krim’s triumph led many to join his forces, including part of the native contingent attached to the Spanish.
Driven by his success, Krim advanced, taking different forts en route to Annual. Silvestre, whose forces were reduced to four days of supplies and ammunition for one day of combat and with over 6,000 Rifians ever closer, ordered the retreat back to Melilla on July 22nd. Chaos and disorder broke out when some of the native contingent decided to fire upon their Spanish officers and the Rifian columns arrived. Four hours later, 2,500 Spanish troops lay dead on the field of battle, including Silvestre, who, it is rumored, committed suicide. For the next month and a half, Krim pressed his attacks, taking several other forts and massacring scores of Spanish troops in the process. Over the next month and a half, between 8,000 and 10,500 Spanish troops died at the hands of the Rifians or as a result of the harsh conditions.
The events had severe political consequences in mainland Spain and brought down the government, leading to the appointment of a national unity government headed by Antonio Maura, although it too would fall in March 1922. A report written by General Juan Picasso commissioned by the War Ministry found General Silvestre chiefly responsible for the disaster. The political instability was such that, in September 1923, General Miguel Primo de Rivera launched a coup and successfully took power with the King’s blessing.
On the military front, it was felt that more modern equipment was needed to defeat the Rifians. In August 1921, France agreed to sell 6 Schneider CA-1 tanks. Negotiations continued and, on September 14th, an agreement was reached between Spanish representatives and Renault for the acquisition of 10 Renault FTs, a Renault TSF (command and radio vehicle), spare parts for repairs and 11 Renault FU-25 lorries to transport troops. The tanks were equipped with the rounded ‘Berliet’ turret and were either unarmed but built to take a machine gun, or armed with the modified Spanish 7 mm Hotchkiss machine gun. The deal with Renault was worth 31 million pesetas (31,135,098.75).
The Renault TSF was used as a command vehicle – source: Caballero Fernández de Marcos, p. 42
The vehicles were transported from their factory to the border, arriving in Hendaye on December 17th, 1921, and the order to urgently transport them to the Escuela Central de Tiro in Madrid was given.
Once in Madrid, along with the Renault FT that had arrived in 1919, they were attached to the infantry section in the Escuela, where the infantry familiarized themselves with the new vehicles and tank-infantry operations. The tanks and infantry were amalgamated to form the Compañía de Carros de Asalto de Infantería [Eng. Infantry Tank Company] under the command of Captain Vicente Valero and this was divided into two sections with five tanks apiece and a command section with the Renault TSF.
A column of Renault FTs – source: source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 21
The Renault FT Lands in Africa
On March 5th, 1922, even before instruction in Madrid was complete, the order was given to transport the tanks, their personnel, and instructors to Melilla with the utmost urgency. Two days later, on the 7th, eleven tanks (one had been left in the Escuela Central de Tiro), fourteen support vehicles, and thirty-seven personnel (four captains, eight sergeants, and twenty-five soldiers) departed Madrid by train towards the southern city of Málaga.
On March 12th, the tanks embarked the steamship Guillém Sorolla to cross the Strait of Gibraltar, docking in Melilla the following morning. On arrival, the Commander in Chief of Melilla asked Captain Valero to compile a report on the preparedness of the company and to assess if it was ready to enter combat on March 14th. The report found that two of the tanks had been slightly damaged on the journey from Madrid, that the company had only half of their intended drivers (of the required 40 drivers, there were only 22; 9 for the tanks, 11 for the trucks, and 2 for the fuel trucks), and that the commander and machine gun operators had not been fully instructed. The training was so incomplete that three of the Escuela’s instructors were sent from Madrid to continue the instruction whilst on campaign. Captain Valero concluded that eight more days would be needed to carry out the necessary repairs, to await the arrival of more personnel, and to complete training. The instructors even volunteered to cover for the missing and less experienced tank drivers so that the unit could enter combat as soon as possible, but their offer was refused by the Melilla commander.
A number of Renault FTs forming a circle around the Renault TSF company command vehicle – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 21
The Compañía de Carros de Asalto de Infantería set up a base in Dar Drius (Driouch*) on March 14th 1922. One source, Carro de Combate Renault FT-17, states that the decision was made to leave one of the tanks in Melilla for training purposes, though this is not corroborated by other sources. Just 24 hours later, the order was given to join a column under the command of General Dámaso Berenguer in Itihuen (Ichtiuen).
*Please note that place names are spelled as by Spanish sources. Most place names have since changed. When possible, the current name is provided in parentheses.
Two Renault FTs (no. 3 in the background) and their crews and support staff before their baptism by fire – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 17
On March 18th, the Renault FTs of the Compañía saw their baptism by fire. At 6 a.m., the Tercio de Extranjeros [Eng. Spanish Foreign Legion], with 7 tanks leading the column, advanced on a Rifian position in Tuguntz (Tougount). The tanks moved into the Anvar (or Ambar) settlement under heavy fire. Soon, 800 m ahead of the infantry, they became surrounded by the Rifian forces, who, lacking the knowledge of how to destroy tanks, climbed onto them, began throwing rocks at them, and tried to stick their knives through vision slits.
Due to the hasty departure, some of the components had not been checked, including the machine guns, some of which jammed, leaving tanks and crews defenseless. Surrounded, and without the means to properly defend themselves, the order came to retreat. Three tanks, either immobilized or without fuel, were abandoned by their crews. Two crew members were killed and a tank driver was wounded.
Two of the tanks (nº 3 and nº4) had been abandoned on the battlefield and Rifian forces destroyed them with explosives on March 23rd. On March 29th, the remaining tanks and infantry managed to capture the positions of Anvar and Tuguntz and recover the damaged tanks. Repairs to tank nº3 by the Maestranza de Artillería took until April 1923, just over a year later.
The Renault FT ‘Infantería nº 3’. It is unclear if this picture is before or after its repair at the Maestranza de Artillería – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 5
Whilst their baptism by fire had been disastrous, the mission itself was successful in capturing the hamlets of Anvar and Yebel-Imelahen. The Army HQ set up a commission to investigate the tanks’ lackluster performance but concluded that this was due to the lack of cooperation between tanks and infantry, which could be explained by a lack of proper and lengthy training.
A typical operation in Morocco. Renault FT nº11 followed by troops of the Tercio de Extranjeros – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 17
Over the ensuing months, the Spanish FTs would be in the heat of battle on a regular basis, most often supporting columns to protect them from ambush, but also covering retreats. On March 29th, 1922, they protected a retreat at Chemorra (Chamorra). Between May 23rd and 26th, they protected Dar Drius from night attacks. They protected a column in Tamassin on May 29th and one in Tizzi-Azza (Tafersit) on October 18th and carried out small attacks near Cheik in August. From their debut in Morocco to the end of August 25th, at least 21 operations of this kind have been recorded, most, if not all, taking place in the modern-day Driouch province of Morocco.
Two Renault FTs behind a Tercio de Marruecos machine gun position. This rocky, hilly terrain was the usual environment in which the tanks operated – source: Bruña Royo, p. 28
The most notable engagement involving the Renault FTs in the early stages of the Rif War took place on June 5th, 1923. Colonel Ruiz del Portal’s column was tasked with relieving a besieged position in Tizzi-Azza (Tafersit). The lead tank, nº9, commanded by Sergeant Mariano García Esteban, who had taken command of the whole section when Lieutenant Francisco Sánchez Zamora became a casualty, broke the Rifian positions under intense fire. García Esteban lost his left eye and his right eye was also damaged, though that did not stop him from advancing across the enemy trenches, before turning around and continuing to fire his machine gun from the rear. Wounded, but refusing to be evacuated, the sergeant fought on for 20 hours. Tizzi-Azza was liberated for the time being and García Esteban was awarded the Cruz Laureada de San Fernando [Eng. Laureate Cross of Saint Ferdinand], Spain’s highest military decoration for gallantry.
Diorama of the rescue of Sergeant Mariano García Estaban after his heroics at Tizzi-Azza which can be found at the Museo de los Medios Acorazados – source: Caballero Fernández de Marcos, p. 41
To make up for losses, an additional six machine gun-armed tanks were purchased in 1925, along with their truck transports and 12,000 rounds of ammunition for a total cost of over one million Francs*. The tanks arrived in Madrid on August 20th and would soon be used to take the war to the enemy.
* 1,036,052.85 F
From Alhucemas to the End of the War
In April 1925, Krim had advanced his operation to the French Protectorate, inflicting a humiliating defeat on French forces at the Battle of Uarga. After this, the Spanish and French governments began to collaborate to defeat Krim and his Rifians. It was decided to strike behind Rifian enemy lines in Alhucemas and, as a result, a massive naval invasion with air support was planned to be led by Miguel Primo de Rivera. This would be the first time in history that air forces, naval forces, and army were deployed under a unified command.
A number of the surviving tanks from the operations in the vicinity of Melilla and the 6 new tanks were transported to Ceuta to prepare for the landings. Prior to their arrival in Ceuta, landing practice was undertaken at Medik. Part of General Leopoldo Saro y Marín’s column, the 11 or 12 tanks involved in the operation were commanded by Captain Juan de Urzaiz.
On the late morning of September 8th, 1925, the first of the 13,000 Spanish troops were landed on the beaches of Alhucemas Bay (Gulf of Hoceima) supported by covering fire from bombers, battleships, cruisers, and even a seaplane tender. 26 barges (named ‘barcazas K’ [Eng. K barges] in Spanish sources) bought from the British and used in the failed Gallipoli campaign in 1915, transported troops, and for the first time in combat, tanks. Each barge carried three tanks, though, due to the tides leaving the barges 50 m off the beach, it was impossible to disembark them until the early hours of the 9th with the assistance of some wooden structures. Once landed, the Renault FTs, with support from the 6th and 7thbanderas [Eng. Battalions] of the Tercio de Marruecos, were used to secure the right flank of the beach and the advances on Malmusi. The heights controlling the Bay were captured by the end of September. After Alhucemas, a Spanish victory was finally in sight.
Scenes from the landing at Alhucemas. In this photo it is possible to identify the distance between the barges and the shore, but also the wooden structures used to land the tanks – source: Molina Franco, p. 15Two Renault FTs getting ready for action after landing at Alhucemas. The vehicle in the foreground belongs to the circle section, though the number (possibly 4) is difficult to make out – source: Molina Franco, p. 16Eleven Renault FTs after landing at Alhucemas – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 28
In November 1925, the tank forces were reorganized into the newly created Grupo de Carros Ligeros de Combate [Eng. Light Tanks Group] and would prove their worth throughout 1926 in the sieges of Iberloken and Tafrás and the recapture of Xauen (Chefchaouen or Chaouen). The war would dwindle to pacifyin some stubborn Rifians still holding out in 1927. After a rocky start, the Renault FTs had proved themselves.
The Renault FT in Times of ‘Peace’
The order for the Grupo de Carros Ligeros de Combate to return to Spain was published on October 31st 1926. Sources indicate that between 15 and 17 tanks that had survived the constant fighting were sent back to the Escuela Central de Tiro in Carabanchel. Shortly afterward, the Grupo de Carros Ligeros de Combatewas disbanded. On November 22nd 1926, the Renault FTs were reorganized into Grupo de Carros de Asalto [Eng. Tank Groups] of the 3rd section of the Escuela Central de Tiro under the command of Captain Marcos Nieto Malo and were mainly used for training personnel. The Grupo de Carros de Asalto was supposed to be made up of a HQ Company, a Renault Company, and a Trubia Company. The Renault Company had a command tank, two sections with 5 tanks apiece, and a reserve section with 4 tanks for replacements, a total of 15 tanks. The Trubia Company was to have had the same structure except that it would have only had two tanks in the reserve section. However, the Trubias were never built in the anticipated numbers.
After a few years of being limited to training and maneuvers, the tanks would be used again at the end of 1930. By this point, Miguel Primo de Rivera had resigned his position as dictator and had been replaced by General Dámaso Berenguer. The military dictatorship, which was supported by the monarch Alfonso XIII, was very unpopular among the political establishment, the general population, and even elements within the armed forces.
On December 12th, 1930, two Army Captains in the northeastern town of Jaca revolted and proclaimed a republic. Following their early success, they marched on Huesca, where they were defeated. The coup attempt was not able to count on the support it had expected. On December 15th, by which time the two Army Captains had been executed for rebellion, General Gonzalo Queipo de Llano and Air Commander Ramón Franco (the brother of General Francisco Franco, future dictator of Spain), took control of the Cuatro Vientos airbase in Madrid and flew planes over Madrid to incite workers and the general population to go on strike against the monarchy and in support of the Republic. This is somewhat curious given Queipo de Llano’s role in the coup against the Republic less than six years later.
A column incorporating a number of Renault FTs under the command of General Luis Orgaz Yoldi was sent to recapture the base but before they arrived, Queipo de Llano and Ramón Franco fled to France, where they would remain in exile until the proclamation of the Republic a few months later in April 1931. The Renault FTs continued to serve under the Second Spanish Republic and were active on both sides during the Spanish Civil War.
Influence and Legacy
As with many of the other nations which bought the Renault FT, the tank would serve as the basis from which indigenous tank development was born.
In 1925, three men, Commander Victor Landesa Domenech, Captain Carlos Ruíz de Toledo and Rogelio Areces came up with the idea of working together to design and build an indigenous tank for the Spanish Army. Given the lack of tank technology information available, it should come as no surprise that they based their design on the Renault FT. The project was a private venture paid for out of their own pockets with no state supervision or finance.
The only known photo of the Trubia prototype. Note the overlapping turrets, frontal nose ‘ram’ and general resemblance to the Renault FT – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 42
The prototype vehicle resembled the Renault FT, with an almost identical tail and suspension. To surmount the firepower concerns which had led the Renault FT to be extremely vulnerable when its main and only machine gun jammed, two overlapping turrets with independent movement and each armed with a Hotchkiss 7 mm machine gun were adopted. There were plans to substantially improve the Renault FT’s armor and engine, but due to financial and technological constraints, these were only marginally improved.
The success of the prototype in tests inspired the team to create a new tank, the Modelo Trubia Serie A; Spain’s first indigenous tank. Only 4 were built and they saw limited action in the Asturias Uprising of 1934 and the early stages of the Spanish Civil War.
The first Trubia Serie A still inside the Trubia arms factory with its impressive array of armament – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 44
The legacy of the Renault FT in Spain lives on. When the Regimiento de Infantería Acorazada «Alcázar de Toledo» n.º 61 [Eng. Mechanized Infantry Regiment ‘Alcázar de Toledo’ No. 61] was formed in December 1943, it was decided that the regiment’s emblem should feature a Renault FT. Additionally, when the regiment was incorporated into the newly formed Brigada de Infantería Acorazada«Guadarrama» XII [Eng. ‘Guadarrama’ Mechanized Infantry Brigade No. 12] in 1966, the Brigade would also choose the Renault FT as its emblem. Fate would have it that the Brigade would be one of the last units to serve in Morocco when, as part of Spain’s last imperial foray on mainland Africa, it was deployed without seeing action during the Green March in 1975.
Badge of the Regimiento de Infantería Acorazada «Alcázar de Toledo» n.º 61 with a Renault FT in the center of it – source: WikipediaBadge of the Brigada de Infantería Acorazada «Guadarrama» XII with a Renault FT featuring prominently in the center – source: Wikipedia
Camouflage and Markings
The first Renault FT arriving in Spain in 1919 had a three-tone camouflage, the light base color being khaki and the other two colors dark green and brown, which may have been applied in the French factory. Apart from its period with the “ARTILLERIA” insignia, no other insignia or unit marking was present on this vehicle.
Because of the poor quality of some of the photos, it is difficult to tell what camouflage was painted onto the 1921 batch of Renault FTs. Whilst some photos would suggest just a two-tone camouflage, possibly khaki or sand and dark green, this was probably not the case and the contrast in the photographs is not the best. A grey-green and dark green camouflage combination has also been suggested by some artist’s interpretations, but this may not be the case. In some better contrast pictures, the two tones of camouflage appear to be separated by a thin dark line, maybe black.
A collection of Renault FTs and a Renault TSF. Note the camouflage – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 22
Based on photographic evidence, individual tank markings seem to be inconsistent. Without accurate dating of said photographs, it is almost impossible to tell when different aspects were introduced. However, vehicles are often seen with an “INFANTERIA Nº” [Eng. Infantry No.] inscription on the left side.
To distinguish between the two sections of the Compañía de Carros de Asalto de Infantería, a system of circles or triangles on the rear sides of the tank was developed. Some photos of the vehicles atop of trucks, presumably taken as the vehicles arrived in the Protectorate, show the circles and triangles empty. The tank numbers and the number in the circle or triangle were not necessarily the same, as the number in the circle or triangle denoted the number within each individual section. In other photos, it is possible to distinguish a number 1, number 2, and number 5 (tank no. 10) in a triangle and number 4 in a circle.
Photo of three tanks with a blank triangle symbol (left) and four with a circle (right) – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 22A closer view of the Renault FTs of the circle section before a number was applied. The picture also shows the variety of uniforms of early Spanish tank crews – source: Molina Franco, p. 11Tank no.10 (see suspension beam), and fifth vehicle of the triangle section. A two-tone with dark lines camouflage scheme appears to have been used on this particular vehicle – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 29
One photograph shows a confusing vehicle with a circle with a number crossed out and a number 4 written on the suspension beam. Other photos depict Spanish Renault FTs with a small white number inconsistently painted on the suspension beam.
Whilst this tank was nº 4 (see suspension beam), the number in the white circle in the rear has been crossed out. This perhaps may imply it is a section leader, though there is no evidence that confirms it – source: Molina Franco, p. 9
The FU-25 trucks purchased to transport the tanks had a similar camouflage pattern. Each truck was assigned to an individual tank and would have the relevant “INFANTERIA Nº” insignia on the side.
Renault FT ‘Infantería Nº12’ atop a FU-25 truck. Notice the camouflage duplicated on the two vehicles and the inscription on both – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 18
The vehicle which was left in Carabanchel had an “ESCUELA CENTRAL DE TIRO INFANTERIA” insignia instead of the infantry insignia. It also had an “ATM 1080” inscription on a white rectangle on the suspension beam. A similar numbered inscription on a white background was given to vehicles at some point between 1926 and 1931. By this later point, the Renaults’ three-tone camouflage had been replaced by single-tone camouflage.
Renault FT ‘ATM 1080’ with the “ESCUELA CENTRAL DE TIRO INFANTERIA” insignia on its slide – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 32
The Renault TSF
With the summer 1921 purchase from Renault came a Renault TSF (Télégraphie Sans Fil [Eng. Wireless Telegraphy]). This vehicle differed from regular Renault FTs in that it was turretless and unarmed. In place of the turret was a superstructure that housed an E 10 radio system with possibly other radios. The top of the superstructure had a tall pole used for flag communications with other vehicles. Instead of the Renault FT’s crew of two, the Renault TSF had three – driver, commander, and radio operator.
In Spain, the vehicle was known as Renault TSH (Telegrafía Sin Hilos) and was used as the command vehicle for theCompañía de Carros de Asalto de Infantería. This was indicated by the “CARRO DE MANDO” [Eng. Command Tank] inscription at the front of the superstructure. Additionally, the vehicle was designated as “INFANTERIANº1” [Eng. Infantry No 1] with the inscription being present on either side of the superstructure.
The different inscriptions on the Renault TSF are apparent in this picture – source: Molina Franco, p. 13Division General José Sanjurjo standing atop a Renault TSF in Imelhagen in March 1922 – source: Mortera Pérez, p. 29Division General José Sanjurjo (left) and General Dámaso Berenguer (center) discuss tactics. Sat atop the Renault TSF, Captain José de Alfaro, commander of the Compañía de Carros de Asalto de Infantería – source: Bruña Royo, p. 27
Once it was in North Africa, the vehicle was given a lamp fixed to the left side of the superstructure. In a number of photos in Morocco, the vehicle has a light circle with a dark triangle inside it painted on either rear side. As has been explained, the two sections of the Compañia either had a circle or a triangle in this position, so being a command vehicle for both sections, a combination of the two makes sense.
The lamp on the left side of the superstructure of the Renault TSF is plainly visible in this picture – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 35
The tank was painted in a two-tone camouflage with a light base (possibly light grey) and thick dark vertical lines (possibly dark grey or green). After its use during the Rif War, the fate of this particular vehicle is unknown.
The Renault TSF overcoming an obstacle – source: Marín Gutiérrez & Mata Duaso, p. 35
Conclusion
As occurred in many other nations worldwide, the Renault FT was the first step in the armored history of Spain. It was sent straight into battle without much preparation or training. After an underwhelming start, it proved its worth time and time again as Spanish forces fought for a hard-earned victory against well-organized and motivated resistance in the Spanish Protectorate in Morocco. Its continued legacy to this day is testament to the high esteem the small tank was held in. Whilst a number of Renault FTs remain in Spain, these are all Polish imports dating from the Spanish Civil War.
Renault FT ‘INFANTERIA Nº10’ used by Spain during the Rif War. Illustrated by Andrei Kirushkin, based on the work of David Bocquelet, funded by our Patreon Campaign
Bibliography
Artemio Mortera Pérez, Los Medios Blindados de la Guerra Civil Española Teatro de Operaciones de Andalucía y Centro 36/39 (Valladolid: Alcañiz Fresno’s editores, 2009)
Juan Carlos Caballero Fernández de Marcos, “La Automoción en el Ejército Español Hasta la Guerra Civil Española” Revista de Historia Militar No. 120 (2016), pp. 13-50
The Blindado Romeo. Illustrated by Yuvnashva Sharma.
Kingdom of Spain (1921-1922)
Armored Car – 1 or 2 built
In terms of armored vehicles resulting from both public and private ventures, the years following the Great War saw major developments. This was even true for those not embroiled in conflict, as was the case of the Kingdom of Spain. One of the vehicles to emerge from this period was the Blindado Romeo designed and funded by the Spanish journalist and parliamentarian Leopoldo Romeo in 1921. The vehicle was envisioned to be used in North Africa in the colonial war Spain was fighting and losing there.
Context – Disaster in the Rif
With the loss of its other overseas colonies in 1898, North Africa had become the focal point for Spanish military expeditions and it created the opportunity for career military officers to progress up the ranks. The initial expansion in the Rif area of Morocco, a mountainous region in the north along the coast of the Mediterranean Sea, was slow and peaceful. However, by 1909, Rif tribesmen had begun to ambush Spanish rail workers and settlers. To stop the Rifians who operated over the vastness of the mostly inhabited Rif, the Spanish turned to the new weapon of war, the armored car. Just before the beginning of the war in Europe, Spain had been one of the pioneering states in the use of armored vehicles in military conflicts, with the use of the French-built Schneider-Brillié.
In the summer of 1921, General Manuel Fernández Silvestre, without first securing his rear, led his troops far into enemy-controlled territory until they arrived at the village of Annual. Here, on July 22nd, they met a superior force of Rif fighters under Abd el-Krim. Facing these odds, Silvestre then ordered a month-long retreat to Melilla, 120 km away, during which Silvestre’s forces were constantly ambushed and 14,000 men, including Silvestre (he allegedly committed suicide), died. Furthermore, 14,000 rifles, 1,000 machine guns, and 115 cannons were lost. Shortly afterwards, the Republic of the Rif was created.
Arming the Troops
Despite having a large land army, the Spanish forces in Morocco were not equipped to fight a modern war. The main aim was to acquire a number of the relatively new weapons of war – tanks. In the end, 10 machine gun armed Renault FTs and 6 Schneider CA-1s were bought from France and deployed to the Rif.
Additionally, a number of armored cars were developed in Spain to be sent to North Africa. These included the Blindado Landa and the far more successful series of Camiones Protegidos Modelo 1921.
A lesser-known armored car of this period was the Blindado Romeo. This vehicle was financed, designed and produced by Leopoldo Romeo y Sanz and was presented for the first time on August 22nd 1921.
Leopoldo Romeo proudly stands next to his invention outside the Madrid royal palace – source: Mundo Gráfico via Biblioteca Nacional de España
Who Was Leopoldo Romeo?
The history of Leopoldo Romeo, also known as ‘Juán de Aragón’, is as interesting as that of the vehicle he created. Born on November 15th 1870 in Zaragoza, he did a degree in Law, Philosophy and Humanities in his local university. He dedicated most of his life to journalism, becoming an editor at Ranocés shortly after leaving university. He then moved to El Evangelio before becoming chief editor at the prestigious La Correspondencia de España in 1902. He also served as Spanish correspondent for the French newspaper Le Temps and the British Daily Telegraph. For the latter, he covered the Second Hague Conference of 1907 and the Spanish war in Melilla before the outbreak of the Great War. Based on these experiences, he developed a moralistic, anti-militaristic approach which landed him in prison in Madrid in 1909. It is somewhat ironic that, eleven years later, he would design a vehicle of war.
Leopoldo Romeo, as photographed by the famous Danish photographer Christian Franzen – source: Wikipedia
Leopoldo Romeo was also a politician, first being elected as a member for Santa Cruz de Tenerife in the Canary Islands in 1905. At the time, his profession was listed as lawyer. In 1907, he returned to his main role as a journalist before returning to politics as a member for his native Zaragoza in 1910. He returned as a member of the Spanish Parliament in the 1914, 1916, 1918, 1919, 1920, and 1923 elections representing Belchite, in the province of Zaragoza. Initially an Independent Liberal, by the 1914 election, he was a representative of the Partido Liberal [Eng. Liberal Party], one of Spain’s two largest parties, which alternated power in a system known as ‘turnismo‘ [Eng. taking turns]. He was considered to be part of the most liberal wing of the party and had a great friendship with Álvaro Figueroa y Torres, the Conde de Romanones, leader of the Partido Liberal between 1913 and 1918 and Prime Minister of Spain in 1912. Due to his friendship with Romanones, Romeo was appointed as Civil Governor of Madrid, the capital. During his time in the role, he had to deal with workers’ movements in Madrid during a period known as ‘el trienio Bolchevique’ [Eng. the three Bolshevik years].
Romeo died of pneumonia on March 26th 1925, four years after his military invention and with the war in the Rif still ongoing.
Section of the El Sol newspaper announcing the death of Leopoldo Romeo on March 27th 1925 – source: El Sol via Biblioteca Nacional de España
Design
As with many Spanish armored wheeled designs of the time, the Blindado Romeo was not an armored car in the conventional sense, but rather an armored transport vehicle, most of its offensive power being offered by the infantry it carried. In its essence, the ‘Blindado’ (Spanish for ‘armored’) was a car with an armored cover meant to withstand enemy rifle fire.
Chassis and Engine
There is some confusion over the chassis of the vehicle. Spanish military authors Francisco Marín Gutiérrez and José Mª Mata Duaso, the only ones to have covered the Blindado Romeo, point towards a Spanish Landa Landaulette 1920 automobile as the basis for the chassis of the vehicle. They claim the vehicle had a gasoline 4 cylinder 15 hp engine. They also state that the vehicle had right-hand drive.
There is not much information about the vehicles produced by the Spanish manufacturer Landa, but, based on the available information, some of Marín Gutiérrez and Mata Duaso’s claims seem questionable. Landaulette is an alternative spelling of Landaulet, which is a car body style where the rear passengers are covered by a convertible top, a popular design at the time. Landaulette may just be the style of the car rather than the type or model, and Landa are known to have produced landaulets at that time. Landa had a limited number of chassis designs, but advertised itself as producing any car body style upon request.
Photographic evidence demonstrates that the vehicle had left-hand drive though. Up until 1921, Landa had produced a number of cars with 2 cylinder engines manufactured by the same company and producing a maximum of 9 hp. Curiously, these had right-hand drive. Although today Spain drives on the right, until 1924, the city of Madrid drove on the left. In 1921, Landa moved to using the more powerful American 4 cylinder 15/35 hp Lycoming engines, which were positioned at the front.
Regardless, even with a meager maximum of 7 mm of all-round armor, which would have probably added around 2 tonnes, the weight would have proven too much for a chassis designed for an automobile. Similarly, the engine would have been underpowered.
The 1921 Landa chassis model using a 4 cylinder 15 hp Lycoming engine. This was most likely the base of the Blindado Romeo – source: Autopasión18Rear-side view of the Blindado Romeo with its creator, Leopoldo Romeo. This photo demonstrates that the vehicle had left hand drive. The photo also demonstrates how the foldable armored side plates worked – source: Mundo Gráfico via Biblioteca Nacional de España
Armor
One of the distinctive, though by no means unique, features of the vehicle was its armor. The armor itself was far from impressive, probably around 5 to 7 mm thick and made from chromium-nickel steel, more simply known as stainless steel, but considering the period and the opposition it would have faced, it was most likely sufficient. The entire vehicle was armored, including the wheels, with the tires being made from solid rubber. The sides of the vehicle though could be open like a parapet. At its maximum extension using both sides, this extended to 5 m in width.
The Blindado Romeo being demonstrated with both sets of foldable panels at their maximum extent of 5 m– source: Mundo Gráfico via Biblioteca Nacional de España
To remain in position, the armored parapets had to be fixed in position in several parts. On their furthest extents to the sides, they were fixed into the ground with a latch. There were four metallic bars (two on each side) that attached the folding doors to the body of the vehicle near the rear wheels.
The idea is that one of these vehicles could provide enough cover for a squad of infantry soldiers from their shins upwards. Using several, these could provide cover for bigger units of infantry or even artillery pieces. However, for several reasons, it was a flawed design for its intended purpose. To pick up the metal bars at the front of the vehicle, a crewmember or a soldier would have had to expose themselves to enemy fire. Whilst the armor protection was enough to withstand anything that would be found in the Rif, the sides and rear were vulnerable and the parapets could only be deployed statically. In spite of his awards and being an excellent journalist, Leopoldo Romeo had not understood what kind of war was being fought in the Rif. The Spanish had continuously lost to Abd el-Krim because his forces outmaneuvered them, thus a static vehicle would have been of very limited use in open warfare. Had the vehicle been intended for urban policing, which was something very common in Spain at the time, its design would have been of more use. Deploying the parapets, one vehicle could block a whole street. Even today’s riot control vehicles use a very similar system.
Side-view of the Blindado Romeo. The blue circles show the metal bars to hold open the parapet and the latch to fix it to the ground– source: Mundo Gráfico via Biblioteca Nacional de España with added modifications by author
Crew and Armament
The vehicle could have been operated by just one crew member, fulfilling the roles of driver and commander. Given the space at the front, it is likely that the vehicle would have had an actual commander in addition to the driver. The rear of the vehicle could have carried a maximum of four soldiers, who would have most likely sat on benches.
From the inside, the commander and driver had two slits in front of them and two each on the sides of the vehicle. These would have mainly been used to see their surroundings, but also probably to fire from, especially when the vehicle was static. The foldable parapet side armor had three slits for each panel, as did the rearmost side armor. The rear of the vehicle also had two slits. From the photographic evidence, it seems that these slits could have had a protective cover. This would suggest that the vehicle was also designed for the infantry complement to fire from the interior when in motion. Contemporary sources (Mundo Gráfico) suggest that inside the vehicle, two machine guns could have been carried. These would most likely have been Hotchkiss 7 mm light machine guns recalibrated to fire Spanish-made Mauser ammunition. Given the narrowness of the vehicle, operating two of these would have been difficult and uncomfortable.
At the front of the vehicle, between the wheels, was a single headlamp. It was fixed at a very low position, meaning it would not have illuminated a great distance forward, but also that it would have been prone to being damaged or falling off when not driving on good roads, which were not common at all in the Rif.
Frontal view of the Blindado Romeo showing the majority of the vision and firing slits and also the headlamp between the wheels – source: Mundo Gráfico via Biblioteca Nacional de España
Service and Possible Inspiration
Save for the photographs of the vehicle during its presentation on August 22nd 1921 at the Palacio Real, very little is known of the vehicle. At the time of its presentation, the weekly illustrated magazine Mundo Gráfico claimed that a hundred could be built in three or four weeks. This claim is rather ridiculous, as Landa was never able to build many vehicles in the first place and Spain did not have the industrial base to produce that amount of armor, even if only 5 mm thick. Marín Gutiérrez and Mata Duaso suggest that this was a mistake and they meant months, not weeks, but this is still a very non-realistic number. Reading the article by Mundo Gráfico, they stated that ‘they supposed the Minister for War was aware of the vehicle, but that if he was not, they offered to provide him the information which they considered to be of interest and importance at a time when its soldiers were fighting with limited weaponry’.* It is speculation, but it is likely that Leopoldo Romero used his contacts in the liberal media to promote his vehicle and tried to gain a contract to equip the troops in the Rif.
*Original Spanish text: “Suponemos que el Ministro de la Guerra tendrá conocimiento de tan importante obra; pero por si no lo tuviese, nos apresuramos a ofrecerle esta información, de interés y trascendencia en los momentos actuales en que nuestros soldados luchan con tan escasos elementos de guerra”.
The vehicle is only mentioned once again in an official telegram dating from November 27th, 1921, which stated that two Blindados Romeo had been received in Melilla on the boat A. Lázaro, which had departed from Málaga. This telegram raises the possibility of a second vehicle, indicating that the Blindado Romeo had some success or that Leopoldo Romeo commissioned a second vehicle. It could also well be the case that the telegram confused the vehicle with the very similar-looking Blindado Landa, which were also being shipped to Melilla in November 1921, though documents would suggest this predated the November 27th date.
On the topic of the Blindado Landa, Marín Gutiérrez and Mata Duaso have speculated that the Blindado Romeo was the source of inspiration for it. On inspection, this seems to be very probable, as the vehicle also used a Landa chassis, had a similar shape, including the shape of the cabin, and the presence of a metal bar behind the front wheel would suggest it also used a parapet.
The Blindado Landa, potentially inspired by the Blindado Romeo – source: Marín Gutiérrez and Mata Duaso, p. 17
Conclusion
The Blindado Romeo has had quite an unremarkable history, being ignored or forgotten even by Spanish armor military historians. Its design was flawed and would have been near useless in the Rif. In addition, the chassis, which was meant for an automobile, would not have been able to carry the weight of the armor on the rocky Rif roads and terrain and the engine was underpowered. In the end, the solution Spain would find would be Renault FT tanks and Camiones Protegidos Modelo 1921, armed with fully rotatable turrets. However, the Blindado Romeo also deserves some recognition as the first fully Spanish armored vehicle design, predating the Blindado Landa by a month or so. Its long-term legacy can perhaps be seen in the Blindados tipo ZIS and modelo B.C. of the Spanish Civil War and the Blindados Medio sobre Ruedas (BMR) and the Vehículos de Exploración de Caballería (VEC) which are part of the Ejército de Tierra to this day.
The Blindado Romeo. Illustrated by Yuvnashva Sharma.
Francisco Marín Gutiérrez & José Mª Mata Duaso, Los Medios Blindados de Ruedas en España: Un Siglo de Historia (Vol. I) (Valladolid: Quirón Ediciones, 2002)
Second Spanish Republic (1936)
Armored Car – ~160 built
Rightly or wrongly, the armored cars produced by both sides during the Spanish Civil War – the ‘tiznaos’ – have often been mocked and ridiculed. This may stem from their rudimentary and improvised appearance, which is a reflection of what they were. As the war progressed and foreign material became harder to come by, the Republican forces started to manufacture better thought out vehicles which could be produced in series. The most widespread of these vehicles is the often mistakenly designated UNL-35, correctly known as Blindado tipo ZIS, Blindado tipo 3HC, or Blindado Ford Modelo 85.
Context – Spain divided
Spain’s tumultus political situation eventually reached boiling point in July 1936, when a group of conservative minded generals would rise up against the democratically elected government of the Second Spanish Republic. Whilst the coup was mainly a failure, both sides, which were influenced by set ideological grounds, would fight out a bloody civil war which still has consequences to this day.
The view that the Spanish Civil War was a conflict between two cohesive camps, Communism versus Fascism, is totally misguided though. In Catalonia, the anarchists of the Confederación Nacional del Trabajo- Federación Anarquista Ibérica (CNT-FAI) [Eng. National Confederation of Labour-Iberian Anarchist Federation] had been instrumental in defeating the 1936 military coup and had since then been the powerbrokers in Catalonia. However, their methods did not match the centralized ambitions of the Republican Government, the Communist Party (PCE), and the Soviet military and its political advisors.
After the enormous losses suffered by the Republic during 1936, the first months of 1937 could, in contrast, be considered a relative success for them. At the turn of the year, the Republican forces defeated the last Nationalist attempts to fully surround Madrid from the north in the Battles of Corunna Road. Throughout February, Republican forces defeated the Nationalist and Italian Corpo Truppe Volontarie (C.T.V.) [Eng. Volunteer Corp Troops] at the Battle of the Jarama and then again a month later at the Battle of Guadalajara. However, Málaga was lost in February and in March, the Nationalists began the slow occupation of the North.
By this point, the Italian and German arms shipments to Franco’s Nationalist forces were tipping the balance in their favor. Of course, the Republic was also receiving armaments as well. Theirs were coming from the Soviet Union, and included T-26 and BT-5 tanks, and BA-6 and FAI armored cars. Whilst, in general, these proved to be superior to the Italian and German vehicles, not enough were available.
Politically, at this time, the situation in Republican Spain had changed. The initial revolutionary spirit had somewhat died out, and the makeshift and often disunited militias were being merged to form the Ejército Popular de la República (EPR) [Eng. People’s Army of the Republic]. Also, the factories which had independently been producing the makeshift ‘tiznaos’ – a name originating from the blackish color given by the iron and other metallic plating from the adjective tiznado (sooty) – were put under the centralized control of the Comisaría de Armamentos y Municiones [Eng: Commissariat of Arms and Ammunition] to help with the overall war effort on December 20th 1936. One of these was the Valencian shipyard of Unión Naval de Levante (UNL) [Eng. Naval Union of Levante], which was renamed Fábrica Nº22. UNL had already provided for the war effort with the construction and assembly of several ‘tiznaos’ for the Valencian columns which went to aid Madrid and its surroundings in the late summer and autumn of 1936. Among these were the two-turreted behemoths of the UNL-2.
A Soviet supplied BA-6 and the large UNL-2 assembled at Unión Naval de Levante during the defense of Madrid in 1936. This photo is testament to the disparities between the kinds of equipment available to the Republican forces – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 108
Development
At the beginning of 1937, under orders from the Comisaría de Armamentos y Municiones for the homologation of production, UNL had built 10 vehicles at its facilities in Valencia. Photographic evidence shows us that there were two different types of vehicle among them, a lighter armored car, which at a glance, looked similar to the Soviet FAI or BA-20, and a heavier vehicle, the ‘Goliat’. The lighter vehicles, sometimes known as UNL Prototipo II, had two cupolas very similar to the one on the FAI, which would later be substituted by a single less prominent one. Similar cupolas were on top of the driver and machine gunners positions, though these would later be removed. The fronts of the vehicle would also change to a wider less pronounced V-shape and the sponsons on each side would disappear altogether. These were the result of several months of experimentation with different designs until a satisfactory one was found. However, the serial production, overseen by Soviet Colonel Nicolai N. Alimov, would have a slightly different design taken from modified Soviet blueprints. As of February 12th 1937, four vehicles were ready to deliver to the front while the assembly of the other six was being completed. There was also a planned series of 150 vehicles for the lighter model. At this point, the project was christened ‘Trabajo nº 35’.
The four light armored cars produced by Unión Naval de Levante which were ready for delivery on February 12th 1937 pictured in front of the company’s factory – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), p. 95Close-up of one of the four light armored cars produced by Unión Naval de Levante which were ready for delivery on February 12th 1937. Note the FAI-like cupolas on the turret and top of the fighting compartment – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), p. 95The two Goliat heavy armored cars built by UNL. They were intended to carry a cannon in the turret, but here they are armed with a machine gun. Notice that the vehicle on the right is built on a British chassis, as the driver’s position is on the right hand side of the vehicle – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), p. 97
Not much is known about what happened to the pre-series vehicles. However, photographical evidence exists of two of them parked inside a maintenance garage in Madrid (according to Artemio Mortera Pérez) at some point during the war, meaning that at least some of the pre-series vehicles were sent to Madrid to fight in the late spring and summer of 1937. In addition, some sources claim that in the south of Spain, the Nationalist used a captured pre-series vehicle. However, on close examination, the vehicle could be unrelated and is equipped with a FAI armored car turret.
Two photos showing the preseries Blindados in a workshop in what is thought to be Madrid – Source: Mortera Pérez (2011), p. 99
Initially, General Motors Corporation (GMC) trucks were identified as being suitable for the chassis. In January 1937, UNL requested the Autonomous Catalan government, the Generalitat, to ‘send at least 100 of the GMC 1 ½ and 3 tons chassis’. The Generalitat had managed to get round the Non-Intervention Agreement and the USA’s resolution banning the export of arms to Spain by purchasing non-military vehicles, which they would then use as the chassis for military vehicles, after the acquisition of trucks from Chevrolet. It can be assumed that the GMC trucks were either the T-11 ½ ton powered by a Pontiac 200 60 hp engine or the 3 ton T-44 with the Buick 257 80.5 hp engine. Whatever was the case, these GMC trucks were never sent to Valencia. Instead, the first vehicles were built on the chassis of the venerable Soviet 4×2 ZIS-5 or other available vehicles, including some British vehicles which would have had right-hand drive. Later on, vehicles would be built on the elusive 1 ½ ton ‘Ford modelo 85’. This may not refer to a specific model of Ford, but to the 85 hp engine. Other vehicles are known to have used GAZ-AA chassis (the Soviet license build of the Ford Model AA) and Chevrolets. The 8 mm steel for the armor was provided by the Compañía Siderúrgica del Mediterráneo [Eng. Siderurgical Company of the Mediterranean], renamed Fábrica nº 15, under the command of A. Vorobiov, based in Sagunto, 30 km north of Valencia, and it is possible that final assembly for some vehicles took place there rather than at Fábrica nº 22.
The right-hand side drive Blindado indicates that this particular vehicle, pictured in Teruel during Christmas 1937, is based on a British-made truck. This vehicle has taken some damage on the mudguards and headlight. Notice the second vehicle in the rear also has right-hand side drive – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), pp. 145
Apart from the technical problems related to it being an unprecedented endeavor, the biggest problems UNL had were bureaucratic. Shortly before his return to the USSR, on March 10th 1937, Colonel Semyon Krivoshein, the commander of the Soviet tank forces in the early stages of the Battle of Madrid, sent a report to Moscow. In that report, he stated that, whilst some vehicles may have been ready since February, because authorization for the stock-up of fuel had not been approved by the Ministry of War, delivery had been delayed by one month. Later that month, on the 23rd, G. Dimitrov sent another report to Moscow highlighting the delay in deployment of this new vehicle and how this was causing unrest among the mainly anarchist workforce at Fábrica nº 22. If the delays were caused by political differences between the Socialists and Communists with regards to the Anarchists is impossible to tell, but seeing how the situation would combust in Barcelona in May later that year, it is definitely within the realms of possibility. Dimitrov also highlighted that the vehicles, from a technical point of view, were splendid and could be very useful in combat.
Name Controversies
The vehicle is often misnamed as the ‘UNL-35’, with ‘UNL’ standing for Unión Naval de Levante (which, at that point, was already renamed as Fábrica nº 22) and 35, which according to the military historian Artemio Mortera Perez, may result from the projects designation, ‘Trabajo nº 35’. However, according to the work of historians Josep María Mata Duaso and Francisco Marín Gutiérrez (Blindados Autóctonos en la Guerra Civil Española), this designation was never officially used during the war.
The vehicles had a variety of names and all related to the type of chassis used as the base. Thus, most vehicles were named ‘Blindado tipo ZIS’, in reference to the ZIS-5 truck chassis. An alternative was the Latin script for the Cyrillic name of the ZIS-5, ЗиС, thus becoming ‘Blindado tipo 3HC’. The ‘3HC’ designation was used in official documents of the Republican 3ª Compañía of the 2ª Brigada de Blindados dated July 24th 1938 during the fighting in Extremadura. Blindado simply means armored in English, whilst tipo is type. For those on Ford chassis, they were known as Blindado tipo Ford mod. 85 or a variation of that. Throughout the article, the vehicle will be referred to as Blindado tipo ZIS unless the exact chassis type is known. Some secondary sources use autoametralladora instead of blindado, or just autoametralladora. This term simply means machine gun vehicle.
Design
External Appearance
As has been said, the Blindado tipo ZIS was heavily based on already existing Soviet designs, most notably the FAI and BA-20. As the engine compartment was at the front, there was a plate angled at around 20º at the front of the vehicle serving as the engine cover. It had two small doors to access the engine. The front bumper had the hand crank to start the engine. Each side of the armor covering the engine compartment had a two-part hatch to access the engine for repairs and maintenance. The wheels had unpuncturable solid rubber tires.
Frontally, the slightly inclined top armor of the engine compartment turned upwards around 25º-30º to form a short plate with two openings: the one on the right was round and was for a machine gun, whilst the one on the left was a hinged plate to allow for better vision for the driver behind it. This hinged plate had a thin slit to allow vision through it at all times. Each side of the main structure had a prominent door which opened to the left. All four wheels were covered by straight flat armored mudguards, contrary to the curved ones on Soviet vehicles. The tires were Airsless. On top of the front two mudguards was a headlight or on the sides of the front, depending on the chassis used.. The rear of the vehicle had fittings for pioneer equipment.
At the rear top of the vehicle was the short, nine-sided turret. The frontal plate was flat and had a hole in the center for a machine gun. The sides, which were the larger of the turret’s plates, had a small slit, which by its size would probably not have been for vision, but rather a fume evacuator. The top had a small dome at the rear which allowed the commander to stand upright inside the vehicle, and a circular hatch which opened to the front. Unless the turret machine gun operator was making use of the hatch, they would have had a hard time firing, as the frontal plate had no slit to see through.
The riveted steel armor plate used was 8 mm thick all round and was produced by Compañía Siderúrgica del Mediterráneo, renamed as Fábrica nº 15.
The Blindado tipo ZIS was nearly 4 m long, over 2 m high and just under 1 m wide. Vehicle weight is often estimated at 2.3 tonnes, though considering the weight of the original chassis, this figure may be a very low estimation.
Whilst it is likely that the Blindado tipo ZIS’ weight would have allowed it to be carried on the back of a truck, its length means it had to be transported on a tank transporter. This Blindado tipo ZIS has just been captured by Nationalist forces north of the Ebro in March 1937 during the Aragón Offensive. Notice the ammunition trailer being towed – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 13
Armament
The Blindado tipo ZIS was armed with two Soviet machine guns. Initially, these were the gas-operated Degtyaryova Tankovy (DT) machine guns, the armored vehicle variant of the Degtyaryov machine gun. Due to shortages, the majority of models were armed with the older and heavier Maxim–Tokarev machine gun. Both fired the 7.62 mm rimmed (7.62 x 54R) cartridge.
One of the machine guns was housed in the turret, whilst the second was placed on the right hand side of the frontal plate. In Blindados en España, author Javier de Mazarrasa speculates that each vehicle carried 1,500 ammunition rounds. However, due to the chaotic state of weapons procurement and distribution of the Spanish Republic, it is unlikely that there was a standard load.
A Blindado tipo ZIS of the Escuadrón de Blindados [Eng. Armored Vehicles Squadron] of the Nationalist Ejército del Sur [Eng. Army of the South] (note the red-yellow Spanish flag on the front of the vehicle) with a third Maxim–Tokarev machine gun in an anti-aircraft mount on the turret. This is an odd arrangement, as, considering this photo was most likely taken in late 1938 or 1939 in the Andalucía theatre of operations, there would not have been much of a Republican aerial threat. Additionally, given the placement of the commander’s hatch on the turret, in this mount, the anti-aircraft machine gun would have been very difficult to operate – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 248
Interior
The frontal section of the vehicle housed the engine. Without evidence to the contrary, it should be presumed that the engine on board depended on the chassis used. When using the ZIS-5 truck as a basis, the engine would have been the 6 cylinder ZIS petrol engine capable of producing 73 hp at 2,300 rpm with a maximum torque of 279 Nm at 1,200 rpm. It can be estimated that the Blindado tipo ZIS would have had a speed of possibly as fast 60 km/h. The original ZIS-5 truck had a 60 l fuel tank. It is unknown what fuel capacity the Blindado tipo ZIS would have had, and an assumption would be that whatever its capacity, it would have been placed behind the engine. The transmission on the ZIS-5 built vehicles would have been mechanical and produced by ZIS, with four forward gears and one reverse.
The crew compartment occupied the rear half of the vehicle. The front left position was for the driver, whilst the front right position was for the hull machine gunner. Behind them was the position of the turret machine gunner, who, it can be assumed, also fulfilled the role of commander. It is unlikely that any radio equipment was carried.
The Blindado tipo ZIS and its competitors
In a way, the Blindado tipo ZIS was a step forward in regards to the Soviet light machine gun armored cars, such as the FAI and the BA-20. The Blindado tipo ZIS had sturdier armor, its wheels were more effectively protected, and it had superior firepower with the inclusion of two machine guns. Additionally, the Blindado tipo ZIS was built on a sturdier, more reliable and more advanced platform than the FAI, which used an older truck chassis, and the BA-20, which used a car chassis.
The Blindado tipo ZIS’ main shortcomings were the same for the rest of these relatively large, weakly armed and armored interwar armored cars, that is, that its armor was ineffective against anything which packed more of a punch than a machine gun and that its armament could only effectively deal with infantry, cannon and machine gun emplacements, and soft-skin vehicles.
However, when it was first introduced in May 1937, the Blindado tipo ZIS was superior to any light machine gun armored car in the Republic’s arsenal and also that of the Nationalist forces, with the elderly Great War era Italian 1ZM being its closest competitor, though the gap was significant, even if, on paper, the Italian vehicle had thicker armor and was more potently armed.
Production
As of September 1937, a total of 130 vehicles had been completed, with another 30 to be manufactured before the end of the year. By February 1938, production at Fábrica nº 22 switched to the heavier cannon-armed Blindado Modelo B.C.. It is not known with certainty how many vehicles were built between September 1937 and February 1938, but the number may be around 50 based on Fábrica nº 22’s estimates.
A selection of stills from Roman Karmen and Boris Makasséiev’s documentary for Studio Moscow showing the production of the Blindado inside the Unión Naval de Levante factory. The recording confirms that a selection of different chassis were used during the serial production – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), p. 99
In the spring of 1938, the Nationalist advance on Valencia and Castellón meant that Fábrica nº 22 was to be moved further south. By July-August, the factory began work in Elda and Petrel, in Alicante, though it is not clear if by this point they were still building Blindado tipo ZIS.
Another collection of stills from Karmen and Makasséiev’s documentary showing a number of Blindados leaving the Unión Naval de Levante factory. This event was marked with a political rally – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), p. 101
Service
Barcelona May 1937
Unsurprisingly for anyone who has studied the Spanish Civil War, the debut of the Blindado tipo ZIS would be an internal security matter. Tensions within the Republic intensified over the winter of 1936-37 and, in April, there would be altercations between government forces and anarchist militias for the control of road control posts and custom houses. On May 2nd, a telephone conversation between the President of the Republic, Manuel Azaña, and Lluis Compayns, President of the Generalitat, was cut by an anarchist phone operator. Anarchists had controlled the telephone exchange since the summer of 1936 and their handling was considered to be detrimental to the war effort.
On May 3rd, a force of police officers was sent to take over the telephone exchange in Barcelona. The anarchists resisted and soon, barricades would be raised all over the city – a civil war within a civil war. On the one side were the government and Catalan forces, and on the other the CNT-FAI, the Trotskyist Partido Obrero de Unificación Marxista (POUM) [Eng. Workers’ Party of Marxist Unification] and other revolutionary far-left forces. Whilst fighting on the streets of Barcelona continued, the central Republican government decided to send troops from Madrid and Valencia to end the violence and regain control of the crucial region of Catalonia. Lieutenant Colonel Emilio Torres was put in charge of the 4.ª División which arrived in Barcelona on May 7th and consisted of 5,000 assault guards and at least 6 Blindados tipo ZIS. By this point, the May Events were almost over, but some vehicles may have taken part in the clean-up operations the following day. Hundreds had died in less than a week and the political consequences were monumental. Shortly afterward, the POUM leadership would be arrested and disappear, the CNT-FAI was weakened, and the PCE, backed by Moscow, rose to prominence. The Blindados tipo ZIS sent to Barcelona would be taken over by the newly formed Ejército del Este [Eng. Army of the East].
At least six Blindados tipo ZIS on Avenida Marqués de l’Armentera in Barcelona, circa May 7th 1937. These were sent as part of a column to restore order in the Catalan capital during the May Events – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), p. 83A close-up photo of the lead vehicle in the above photo showing some of the Blindado tipo ZIS’ features in great detail – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), p. 83
Córdoba, Madrid, Segovia and Huesca Offensive
It is possible that some Blindados tipo ZIS were sent to the Ejército Sur and may have seen combat on the Frente de Córdoba [English: Cordoba Front]. Others may have been sent to Madrid to replenish the losses suffered during the battles of Jarama and Guadalajara and could have seen action in the combats around Casa de Campo in May, though how many were used or during which particular actions are unknown at this time. It is also possible that Blindados tipo ZIS were used during the Republican offensive around Segovia in late May and early June 1937.
A Blindado tipo ZIS somewhere in Madrid, Castilla La Mancha or Andalucía. Notice that the camouflage is meant to resemble the vast areas of olive groves in these regions and that even the tire sidewalls have been painted – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 176
At the beginning of the second week of June 1937, the Nationalist forces began their siege of the defensive perimeter surrounding Bilbao. As the northern Republican region had been cut-off from the onset of the war, the only way of aiding it would be by conducting attacks elsewhere with the aim of drawing out troops and resources. General Sebastián Pozas Perea was put in charge of the Ejército del Este, and on June 12th ordered his forces to attack the city of Huesca with the intention of capturing it. Pozas’ forces were divided into two groupings each split into two columns. Coordination and communication between the different columns proved troublesome.
The 4th column under the command of Major Enrique Oubiña Fernández-Cid was composed of the 123ª Brigada Mixta, an engineering company, and 5 armored cars. It is unclear what these may have been, though based on the fact that the Blindados tipo ZIS which had been sent to Catalonia in May were then aggregated to the Ejército del Este, they could well have been those and photographic evidence goes a long way to back this. Nevertheless, the testimony of Avelí Artís would suggest that the vehicles in question may be the ‘tiznao’ Torras. A mix of these two types of vehicles is also a possibility.
On June 10th, the southern grouping left Huerrios to attack Chimillas at 05:30, with the support of T-26s and Blindados tipo ZIS. The attack was repulsed and a second attack with more armor in the afternoon or evening also failed. The next three days saw lower intensity confrontations before a final major push on the 14th, which, having captured some of the objectives, ran out of momentum and soon lost all gained territory. The offensive had failed.
On June 15th, an abandoned Blindado tipo ZIS was pictured at Chimillas whilst it was being towed to the Nationalist lines. The vehicle seemed in good shape, so it must have had a mechanical failure. It is unknown if the vehicle was lost on the 15th or in the days prior and that only when the fighting calmed down did they bother to recover it. The Nationalists would end up capturing and making use of many Blindados tipo ZIS.
Three pictures of the Blindado tipo ZIS captured by the Nationalist at Chimillas. Notice that the machine guns have been removed to avoid capture and that the left-hand headlight has fallen off from its fitting – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), pp. 87-88
Battle of Brunete
In mid-May 1937, Francisco Largo Caballero’s government would fall and give way to the premiership of Juan Negrín López, who was much closer to the PCE and Moscow. In an effort to gain credibility on the world stage and to try to convince France that the Republic could win the war, along with the need to delay the Nationalist advance in the north on Santander, a major offensive was set in motion. After much discussion over where to launch the offensive, through Soviet pressure, the area around the town of Brunete, west of Madrid, was chosen. The Battle of Brunete would be one of the biggest of the war and saw a large deployment of armor.
Map showing the deployment and advances of Republican (red) and Nationalist (blue) armored vehicles at the Battle of Brunete. Whilst any exact actions of the Blindado tipo ZIS are unknown, the map gives some indications as to where they may have fought – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 198
Republican forces in the Ejército de Maniobra [Eng. Maneuver Army]had ‘150 tanks and 50 armored vehicles’ (Mortera Pérez, 2009, p. 193). It is almost impossible to identify exactly what vehicles these would be, but certainly, some Blindados tipo ZIS were used. The 50 armored vehicles were divided into five groups of ten and were part of the attack on the towns of Brunete and Quijorna that began on the night of July 5th. Over the next few days, Republican forces would advance but fail to properly break the Nationalist line. Armor, according to Enrique Líster, commander of the Republican 11.ª División, was used disastrously, with vehicles being used as mobile artillery pieces in support of infantry. Most vehicles did not even reach the enemy lines and were lost in the open. By July 11th, the Republican offensive was at a standstill and armor losses were major. With reinforcements from the north, the Nationalists launched a counteroffensive on July 18th, which also soon ran out of steam. A new offensive with much more limited objectives was able to recapture Brunete for the Nationalists between July 24th and 26th. The battle was inconclusive, as the Republicans had captured some territory and slowed down the Nationalist advance on Santander, but, overall, they had failed to achieve an overwhelming victory and had much higher casualties and losses, especially regarding aircraft, than the Nationalists. The limitations of the tactical usage of armored vehicles as mobile artillery and infantry support were especially highlighted in Brunete.
One of the many destroyed Republican vehicles at the Battle of Brunete, this knocked-out Blindado tipo ZIS is inspected by Nationalist forces. Note the red star painted on the left mudguard. Also note the KhPZ Komintern artillery tractor in the background of the first picture – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 202
Zaragoza Offensive and Battle of Teruel
It is likely that the Blindados tipo ZIS saw action during the August-September 1937 Zaragoza Offensive, but there are no known testimonies or photographs. However, their involvement in the Battle of Teruel, popularly known as ‘the Spanish Stalingrad’, is well documented.
After the loss of Asturias, the last Republican position in the north, and in the hope of preventing the planned Nationalist offensive on Guadalajara and Madrid, the Republican military authorities planned an attack on the city of Teruel. To do so, they amassed a significant force, the Ejército de Levante, which was expected to easily topple the weak Nationalist forces at the Frente de Aragón.
Blindado tipo ZIS at the Frente de Teruel in December 1937. Notice that the machine guns have been covered in a protective coat to shield them from the frigid temperatures – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), pp. 139Two Blindados tipo ZIS in one of the many villages near Teruel in December 1937 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), pp. 140
Republican forces were divided into 3 columns: north, center, and south. The central column, or the XX Cuerpo de Ejército [Eng. XX Army Corp], was under the command of Colonel Ledopoldo Menéndez López and was composed of the 40.ª and 68.ª infantry divisions, a regiment of ‘heavy’ tanks made up of a depleted force of Soviet BT-5s, two artillery groups, and an armored cavalry squadron with a dozen Blindado tipos ZIS. Starting from Mora de Rubielos, the offensive would begin on the night of December 15th with elements of the central column reaching the towns outside Teruel on the 17th and the outskirts of the city itself the following day. On the 19th, Republican forces would break through most of the Nationalist defensive perimeter in Teruel but the resistance was proving to be much tougher than expected. On that same day, Nationalist General Francisco Franco decided to send reinforcements to the besieged city.
On December 22nd, the 40.ª Division, supported by Blindados tipo ZIS, broke into the center of Teruel and would take part in bloody street-to-street combat for the whole evening.
Rear shot of a Blindado tipo ZIS inside Teruel on December 22nd 1937 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), pp. 142
Further shots of a Blindado in Teruel after it was captured by Republican forces on December 22nd, 1937. This particular vehicle was not on a ZIS chassis, as it has right-hand side drive, indicating it was based on a British-made truck – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), pp. 145
After the capture of Teruel by Republican forces and before the impending Nationalist counterattack, French photographer Henri Cartier-Bresson recorded a Blindado tipo ZIS for his pro-Republican film documentary Victoire de la vie, which provides many images of the vehicle. The Hungarian photographer Endre Ernő Friedmann, aka ‘Robert Capa’, was also present in Teruel at this time. This may be the reason why there are so many surviving pictures of the Blindado tipo ZIS in Republican service for the Battle of Teruel. Most other pictures of the Blindado tipo ZIS in other theatres of the conflict are in Nationalist service or showing them knocked-out or being towed to Nationalist lines.
Stills from Henri Cartier-Bresson’s pro-Republican film documentary Victoire de la vie show a Blindado tipo ZIS running through the streets of Teruel. Despite the sub-zero temperatures, the side doors and engine hatches are open, perhaps indicating that the Blindados tipo ZIS suffered from engine overheating. These stills also provide us some indication as to what color schemes and camouflage would have been used. A dark olive green color similar to the Soviet 3B would have been the base, with a lighter green being the secondary color and the shapes on the turret, rear of the vehicle, and behind the door, could have been a shade of brown – source: Mortera Pérez (2011), pp. 146
By December 29th, there were enough reinforcements for the Nationalists to carry out their counterattack. By the 31st, they advanced to the outskirts of Teruel themselves and the units originally assigned to the central column began to abandon the city they had fought so hard to occupy before the situation was controlled and they returned to their positions at the end of the day, with the Blindados tipo ZIS occupying the center of the city.
The front would stabilize for two and a half weeks until the Nationalists launched a major attack on January 17th, 1938, which was followed by Republican counterattacks the next two days and a major attack on the 25th. These would fail at a very high cost in tanks and personnel, and by the end of the month and beginning of February, the Nationalists had the initiative again. With the situation nearing criticality, Republican forces planned a major attack on the small town of Vivel del Río, north of Teruel, roughly halfway to Zaragoza. The attack of February 15th was able to count on three infantry divisions, three T-26 tank companies, and the Blindado tipo ZIS company, and was initially successful before receiving a Nationalist counterattack. However, this attack was poorly timed, as it took a considerable force away from Teruel, which the Nationalists were about to attack and try to re-occupy. Once the attack on Teruel proper began, some of the forces employed on the attack on Vivel del Río, alongside reinforcements, were dispatched south. These consisted of three infantry brigades, three T-26 tank companies, one BT-5 tank company and 2 Blindado tipo ZIS sections. The advance through the rocky and hilly countryside north of Teruel was met with fierce resistance from Nationalist anti-tank cannons, aircraft, and their own tanks, captured T-26s and Panzer Is. These actions on February 21st saw the loss of four T-26s and three BT-5s. Teruel would fall back into Nationalist hands between February 22nd and 23rd, bringing the battle to an end.
The Aragón Offensive and the Rush to the Sea
With momentum on their side and the majority of units already in the region, the Nationalists decided to abandon plans to strike Madrid and attack the tired and depleted forces in Aragón. The attack began on March 9th, with the Nationalists capturing town after town over the following few days and the Republican defenders, many young and inexperienced, retreating in disarray. Among the Republican reinforcements were a number of Blindados tipo ZIS. The Blindados tipo ZIS fought on the front north of the River Ebro.
Among the first reinforcements for the Republican forces were the Blindados tipo ZIS aggregated to the 16.ª División – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 13
The offensive cut through the Republican defense like a knife through butter and, by the end of March and beginning of April 1937, Nationalist forces began capturing towns in Catalonia. The advancing forces captured a multitude of Republican vehicles, which they quickly pressed into service, including a number of Blindados tipo ZIS. One of these may have been captured by the Corpo Truppe Volontarie (C.T.V.) in very early April in Gandesa, but the company’s reports are far from conclusive.
A knocked-out Blindado tipo ZIS (see the prominent hole in the rear of the hull, most likely caused by an anti-tank cannon) with Nationalist soldiers posing on it. Notice the soldier inside the vehicle posing through the hole – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 14
At this point, what seemed the logical step for the Nationalist forces was to press on with the attack on Barcelona, but Franco, fearful that this attack would encourage France to join the war on the Republican side, surprised his generals by ordering them to turn south and advance on Castellón and Valencia, the Republican capital. By mid-April, the Republican forces were offering no resistance and on the 15th, Nationalist troops reached the Mediterranean coast, cutting the Republican territory in two.
Two shots of abandoned Blindados tipo ZIS encountered by Nationalist forces during the Aragón Offensive. As per usual, the machine guns were removed to avoid their capture. The presence of many other vehicles could suggest that the Blindados tipo ZIS were moved from where they were found by Nationalist forces to a depot of captured vehicles – Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 24
Balaguer Offensive
Whilst the Nationalist troops advanced on Castellón and to counter the territorial losses over the previous months, Republican command planned an offensive on the Nationalist positions along the River Segre and Lleida. The initial main objective was to capture the bridges over the Segre at Tremp and Balaguer. Whilst the Republican offensive on the Segre has often been forgotten in historical accounts of the Spanish Civil War, the Republican forces for this attack were larger in number than those at Brunete or Teruel and included around 150 armored vehicles, including some Blindados tipo ZIS. The offensive began on May 22nd, but due to poor tactics, Republican forces were unable to fully defeat the stretched and vulnerable Nationalist forces. On the 24th, Republican forces captured Tremp, though Nationalist forces would try to retake it. On the 26th, the Republicans made one last attempt to capture Balaguer and lost some armor on the road between Bellcaire and La Rápita. Overall, short of capturing some territory, the offensive was a failure with a high cost in men and materiel.
A knocked out Blindado tipo ZIS on the Bellcaire-La Rápita road at the end of May 1938 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 54
Levante Offensive
As soon as the Aragón Offensive was over, Franco launched his offensive south on Castellón and Valencia, which would soon become known as the Levante Offensive. The defense presented by the newly reformed Republican Grupo de Ejércitos de la Región Central (G.E.R.C.) [English: Army Groups of the Central Region] proved to be superior to what was anticipated, and by April 25th, the second day of the offensive, Nationalist forces were halted. The Nationalists pushed on, but had to stop every couple of days, as the rocky and mountainous terrain favored the defenders, who had dug well-defended trenches along the route.
By the beginning of June, the Nationalist advance had overcome the rocky and mountainous terrain and had their eyes set on Castellón de la Plana. Defending Castellón was the Agrupación Toral, with 8 BT-5s, 14 T-26s, and 34 other armored vehicles, among which were a number of Blindados tipo ZIS. This grouping saw action towards the end of May and the beginning of June around the town of Ares del Maestre. During the first two weeks of June, they continued to see action as they fell back on Castellón, potentially engaging enemy forces on the 10th near La Pelechaneta and La Barona. On June 11th, a force of 17 Republican armored vehicles, most likely including some Blindados tipo ZIS, tried to attack Nationalist forces between Villafamés and La Pobla Tornesa, which had captured a number of Republican artillery pieces. Whilst the attack was unsuccessful and was repulsed with anti-tank cannon fire, the Nationalist forces were forced to destroy the captured equipment. By June 12th, Nationalist forces began to occupy parts of Castellón, which was defended by a contingent that included around 30 armored vehicles. Castellón would fall to Nationalist forces on June 14th, though Republican armor would try to recapture it with an offensive on Villarreal, a town just south of Castellón.
Knocked out Blindados tipo ZIS outside Castellón, June 1938 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 40
Once Castellón had fallen, Nationalist command set course on the offensive’s prime objective, the Republic’s capital, Valencia. The advance, which was launched from the south of Teruel through very rocky and mountainous terrain, was halted several times by repeated Republican counterattacks with armor. Towards mid-July, Nationalist forces reached the last major defensive position before Valencia, the XYZ Line. Between July 18th and 23rd, Nationalist forces failed in their repeated attempts to break the defensive line, suffering many casualties. However, by the 24th, with news of a major Republican offensive on the Ebro, troops were pulled out to counter this new major threat. Valencia had been saved.
Two Blindados captured by the Nationalists during their advance on Valencia. The lack of camouflage and the fitting behind the engine hatch may suggest that these were later models not on a ZIS chassis, which had been sent straight from the factories in Valencia or Alicante – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 46
Andalucía and Extremadura Summer 1938
The southern front in Andalucía had remained quiet after the first year of the war and the capture of Málaga by Nationalist forces in early 1937. Nevertheless, in the late spring-early summer of 1938, a Nationalist offensive was launched to close a defensive pocket in the province of Córdoba. Given the relative lack of importance of this front, the armor available for either side was second-rate, with the Nationalists mainly using captured equipment and the Republican forces relying on Blindados tipo ZIS aggregated to the 2.ª Brigada de Ingenios Blindados.
Two Republican Blindados tipo ZIS advance through a mountain road in Andalucía in 1938 – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 236
Throughout June 1938, the Nationalist forces broke the front and advanced, securing several objectives. At the end of June, Republican reinforcements were sent from other fronts to mount a counterattack. The fighting would extend for another few weeks, but without any major breakthroughs.
After some weeks with no major fighting, on July 20th, 1938, the Nationalists launched an offensive to capture the La Serena pocket near Badajoz. Between July 23rd and 24th, with the Nationalist capture of the towns of Castuera and Campanario, the Republican 37.ª División was almost completely enveloped. There was also the 3ª Compañía of the 2.ª Brigada de Ingenios Blindados equipped with at least 10 Blindados tipo ZIS in the same pocket. Fearing they would be totally surrounded, they requested permission to retreat to Puebla de Alcocer, but this was rejected by Major De Blas, who instead ordered them to attack, threatening to shoot the company’s commander for insubordination. The attack was an absolute disaster, with the 1st and 3rd sections of the 3ª Compañía losing nine Blindados tipo ZIS, which were either knocked out or abandoned, and 12 crew members. The one surviving Blindado tipo ZIS of the 3ª Compañía, No. 27, had been previously sent away for repairs and thus survived the bloodbath.
Battle of the Ebro and the Catalan Offensive
There is scant information regarding the deployment and usage of Blindados tipo ZIS during the Ebro Offensive of the summer of 1938. Even so, given the high number of these vehicles present in the subsequent Catalan Offensive, they were undoubtedly present, even if only used in reserve. The Ebro Offensive was meant to be a massive Republican assault across the River Ebro, an ‘all-or-nothing’ scenario with which Juan Negrín, the President of the Republican Government, hoped to convince France and Britain to intervene as a prelude to the imminent European conflict with Hitler’s Germany. Whilst initially successful, logistical issues and a ferocious Nationalist defense halted the offensive in early August. The Nationalists counterattacked throughout the following two months and pushed back to the original lines before the battle in mid-November 1937. The remaining Republican forces were tired, ill-equipped, and lacked experience. Furthermore, the results of the Munich Accords in late September sealed the fate of the Republic by putting an end to any hope of French or British intervention.
With the momentum from the Battle of the Ebro, Franco set his sights on Barcelona. On December 23rd, 1938, the Nationalist offensive on Catalonia began with the crossing of the Segre River. Initially, the weather and a courageous Republican defense held up the advance, but by the end of the first week of January 1939, the Republican line began to crumble. With the materiel losses in the Aragón and Ebro offensives, the 1.ª División de Ingenios Blindados of the Republican forces of the Grupo de Ejércitos de la Región Oriental (GERO) [Eng. Army Groups of the Eastern Region] consisted of a limited number of armored vehicles. According to Ramón Salas, author of Historia del Ejército Popular de la República, these consisted of 63 autoametralladoras (Blindados tipo ZIS and domestically produced machine gun-armed armored cars from Catalan factories, such as the Torras or Hispano-Suiza 3TS), 27 autoametralladoras-cañón (Blindados B.C. and possibly BA-6s) and 90 carros de combate (T-26s and BT-5s). A more conservative estimate from J. M. Martínez Bande (La Campaña de Cataluña) places the number at 40 tanques (T-26s and BT-5s) and 80 blindados (Blindados tipo ZIS, Blindados B.C. and other armored cars). Given the chaotic state the Republic was in, very little is known of the use of their forces in Catalonia at this time.
The Republican crew of a Blindado tipo ZIS – missing the frontal machine gun – surrendering during the early weeks of the Catalan Offensive – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 103
Following the breaking of the front in early to mid-January 1939, Republican forces, seriously lacking ammunition and equipment and very low on morale, were unable to offer any kind of resistance, and Nationalist forces spent the following month occupying the whole of Catalonia. On January 15th, a Nationalist dispatch stated that, up to that point of the campaign, 33 tanks and 11 armored cars had been captured, including without doubt a number of Blindados tipo ZIS. Over the following weeks, more vehicles would be captured.
Nationalist troops encounter an abandoned Blindado tipo ZIS on the side of a road somewhere in Catalonia January-February 1939 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 119
On January 14th, Tarragona fell, sending the whole of the region into chaos. As a result, civilians and military personnel headed north towards the French border to escape Franco’s forces. A week and a half later, on the 25th, the Nationalist forces began occupying the surrounding areas of Barcelona, marching into the semi-abandoned city the following day, encountering no resistance.
A sabotaged Blindado tipo ZIS abandoned during the flight from Barcelona to prevent it from falling into Nationalist hands. The remains of the vehicle are pictured outside the Gran Garage Universal on the corner of Albareda and Carreras streets. Notice the other sabotaged cars behind the Blindado – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 123
On the night of January 27th, 1939, France opened the border with Spain, allowing thousands of Republican refugees, civilians, and military personnel, to cross into France. Among these were the remaining armored vehicles in Catalonia, most numerous of which were the Blindados tipo ZIS and Blindados B.C.. All the vehicles that crossed the border were interned by French authorities. It is estimated that at least 22 Blindados tipo ZIS crossed into France in late January early February 1939. Due to the massive bottleneck to enter France, many vehicles were abandoned and captured by the pursuing Nationalists. On February 8th, Figueres, the last major town before the French border, fell, with Nationalist troops reaching the border two days later. On the 11th, Llivia, a Catalan town surrounded entirely by France, was taken by Franco’s forces, putting an end to the Catalonia Offensive.
The defeated. Two Republican soldiers, with a Blindado tipo ZIS in the background, head towards the French border. Note that the Blindado has its turret facing backward in the sign of surrender – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 125A column of 3 Blindados tipo ZIS and a Blindado Modelo B.C. (bringing up the rear) on La Junquera road, awaiting authorization to enter French territory – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 128A Blindado with its turret facing backward shortly after crossing the border into France. Notice that this vehicle had the right-hand drive and was thus built on a British truck chassis – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 128
Battle of Valsequillo/Peñarroya
On the morning of January 5th, 1939, whilst Catalonia was falling, the Republic launched its last offensive of the war in the Peñarroya sector in Córdoba. A large army of soldiers and armored vehicles (including Blindados tipo ZIS) was assembled for this operation, and after three days, 500 km2 of territory, the most extensive of the war, had been captured. After a few days, the Nationalist defense and the downpour of rain slowed the Republican offensive to a halt. On January 24th, after hurrying in numerous reinforcements, the Nationalists counterattacked, making use of a number of Blindados tipo ZIS of the Escuadrón de Blindados of the Ejército del Sur. The counterattack finished on February 4th, with the Nationalists pushing back to almost the original frontline at the beginning of the battle and destroying or capturing many Republican vehicles.
By the final stages of the war, the Nationalists had as much Republican armor as the Republic itself. Here, a T-26 tows a Blindado tipo ZIS which has fallen off the road. These vehicles were most likely reinforcements from the Escuadrón de Blindados of the Ejército del Sur to counter the Republican offensive in Córdoba in January 1939 – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 244
The Blindado tipo ZIS in Nationalist service
Throughout the war, the Nationalists made good use of captured Republican vehicles, with the Blindado tipo ZIS no exception. The first Blindados tipo ZIS captured were taken at Chimillas (Huesca) in June 1937, with potentially more falling at Brunete and Teruel later that year. Whilst some were used in the Aragón front, as with many of the second-rate captured equipment, they were sent south to Sevilla. Sevilla was the major repair and workshop facility for the Nationalists during the war. The armor used by the Nationalist Ejército del Sur in the Andalucía front was mainly captured equipment. These saw service at the Battle of Valsequillo/Peñarroya and during the final offensive.
Towards the end of the war, the Agrupación de Carros de Combate [Eng. Fighting Vehicles Grouping] of the Ejército Sur under the command of Miguel Cabanellas Torres was mainly composed of Blindados tipo ZIS. The grouping was composed of two groups with three squadrons each. Two squadrons were ‘light’, with 8 Blindados ZIS and 2 FAIs each. The other squadron of each group was ‘heavy’, with 8 BA-6s and 2 FAIs. This was a total of 32 Blindados tipo ZIS in the Agrupación. This unit took part in the military victory parades in Sevilla (April 17th 1939) and Valencia (May 5th 1939).
Whilst unconfirmed, it can be assumed that the Blindados tipo ZIS continued to be used to different degrees by Franco’s forces after victory in the civil war. The most likely destination would have been the Spanish protectorate in Morocco or even Spanish (Equatorial) Guinea for colonial duty. The ones that remained would have been scrapped when more modern American equipment started arriving in the mid-50s.
A Blindado tipo ZIS which has been captured by Nationalist forces and has been assigned to Escuadrón de Autoametralladoras-cañón de Caballería [Eng. Cavalry Squadron of gun-armed Armored cars] of the Ejército del Sur. Notice that the forward-facing DT machine gun has been removed and the position sealed, the red-yellow flag painted on the front of the turret, and what seems to be a black and white aerial identification marking, though it is impossible to tell if it is a Cross of Saint Andrew. The vehicle seems to be towing a trailer or cannon. Some sources have misidentified this as a second rear wheel and incorrectly state that the vehicle is a Blindado B.C. – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 219Three Blindados tipo ZIS of the Escuadrón de Blindados of the Nationalist Ejército del Sur. In the rear, still on its transport wheels, a T-26. The vehicle furthest to the left is an unidentified vehicle. Artemio Mortera Pérez has speculated that it is an early pre-standardization Blindado tipo ZIS, though it could also be a completely unrelated vehicle. The turret is almost certainly a FAI turret, and it is currently unknown if the vehicle was designed like that or if the chassis and the turret were mated by the Nationalists – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 240
A congregation of all the vehicles (minus the Panzer Is) of the Agrupación de Carros de Combate of the Ejército del Sur at the Estadio de la Exposición (modern day Estadio Benito Villamarín) before the victory parade in Seville on April 17th 1939. Pictured are 4 FAIs, 8 BA-6s, 15 (though most likely 16) Blindados tipo ZIS and a large number of T-26s. Additionally, the vehicles at the back of the second picture are most probably more Blindados tipo ZIS. All of these vehicles were of course captured, a testament to the Nationalists’ reliance on captured materiel, especially at the least important fronts – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 253A group of requetes (Carlist militias) pose alongside a captured Blidado tipo ZIS of the Ejército Sur. Note the black St. Andrew’s cross painted on a white background on top of the vehicle – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 257Blindados tipo ZIS and B.C. in what seems as a post-Civil War parade. Notice the darker colors of the vehicle’s camouflage and the white on the tires which are not present in Civil War eras photos. Additionally, the vehicles have number plates and unit or regimental markings on the side of the turret and behind the door – source: Defensa
Blindado tipo ZIS of the Corpo Truppe Volontarie (C.T.V.)
During their push through Aragón, Catalonia and Castellón throughout 1938 and the early parts of 1939, the C.T.V. came across plentiful abandoned or knocked out Republican armor. As the Nationalist forces they were fighting alongside, they did not waste any chance to incorporate these vehicles into the Raggruppamento Carristi [English. Tank Grouping]. This was done out of sheer necessity, too. The Lancia 1ZMs were not just a few in number but also unreliable. Designed during the Great War, by the mid-30s, they were showing their obsolescence and performed poorly. Their main shortcoming was their limited off-road driving, which, with the lackluster road network in Spain, was a major problem. For reconnaissance duties, the C.T.V. used captured BA-6s, Blindados tipo ZIS, and Blindados B.C.. These were put together in an armored car grouping attached to the Raggruppamento Carristi and saw service on the Aragón, Levante and Catalan offensives and possibly at the Battle of the Ebro. It is known that one BA-6 was transported to Italy for tests, but the most likely outcome for the rest of the C.T.V.’s captured armor, including the Blindados tipo ZIS, was that they were passed on to Franco’s forces.
A Blindado tipo ZIS of the C.T.V. during the Catalonia Offensive, circa January 1939 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 111A Blindado tipo ZIS – followed by a Blindado B.C. – belonging to a C.T.V. column in Catalonia in January or February 1939 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 116A C.T.V. column during a stop in a village in Catalonia during either the Aragón or Catalonia offensive. Pictured are two Blindados tipo ZIS, a Blindado B.C., a Lancia 1ZM and a Lancia 1Z with two turrets – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 116
From the frying pan into the fire – The Ford in French service
With the flight from Catalonia in early 1939, many vehicles crossed the border into France and were subsequently interned, among them, several Blindados tipo ZIS.
Twenty-two of these, which may have been all the vehicles seized, were given to the Ministère des Colonies [Eng: Ministry of Colonies] in April 1939, suggesting the blindado may have been considered for colonial service. In French sources, the vehicle is referred to as ‘Ford’, regardless of what chassis was used. There is photographic evidence that at least one of the vehicles that crossed the border into France in late January 1939 was built on a British chassis, as it had right-hand drive. What happened to the vehicles later is unclear, with reports of some having been used in the campaign of France and later captured and pressed into service with the Wehrmacht, though no photographic evidence appears to support such suggestions. These claims may be confusing the Blindado tipo ZIS with the Blindado B.C., which was used in combat by France and then used by Germany on the Eastern Front. All known photos of Blindados tipo ZIS in France show them in storage, suggesting they were never sent to the colonies.
At least five ‘Fords’ in French storage, 1939 – Source: Vauvillier, p. 116
Replicas
No Blindados tipo ZIS survived the conflict, but some replicas have been made since. One with a running engine sits at the Museo de los Medios Acorazados (MUMA) [Eng. Museum of Armored Vehicles] at the El Goloso military base, north of Madrid. Housed in the Spanish Civil War section, it sits between a T-26 in Nationalist colors and an Opel Blitz truck.
At least two (though possibly just the one) other replicas exist which are used for military reenactments, exhibitions and films. However, one, possibly yet another replica, is currently listed for sale on Milanuncios (a popular website for online classified advertisements in Spain).
A collection of pictures of the Blindado tipo ZIS replicas as posted on the Atrezzo website, a company specialised in providing historical vehicles and weapons for films, TV shows, adverts, etcetera – source: Soldier Satrazzo
Conclusion
All things considered, the Blindado tipo ZIS was a remarkable achievement for the inexperienced and often disjoint Republican workforce. Whilst the design and production of the vehicle would have been impossible without Soviet assistance, the armored car was a considerable improvement on what was available. Its widespread use on almost all fronts by Republican, Nationalists, and C.T.V. forces is testament to the vehicle. However, Spain’s most produced armored vehicle until the AMX-30E in the 1970s and the Pegaso 3560 Blindado Medio sobre Ruedas (BMR) in the 1980s is little known in the wider AFV community. Its role in the Spanish Civil War is often overshadowed by Soviet, Italian, and German vehicles and even the heavier Blindado modelo B.C. which went on to see service during the Second World War in French and German hands.
Pre-production Blindado, sometimes known as UNL II, as pictured outside the Unión Naval de Levante factory and in a Madrid workshopBlindado armed with Maxim machine guns as pictured outside Fábrica N22 where it was builtBlindado with camouflage pattern as seen in Barcelona, Chimillas and Castellón between May 1937 and 1938. This was the main camouflage scheme on Republican BlindadosBlindado as seen at the Battle of Brunete in July 1937Rare Republican camouflage pattern believed to have been used somewhere in Madrid, Castilla La Mancha or Andalucía. The camouflage was meant to resemble the vast areas of olive groves in these regionsBlindado of the Escuadrón de Blindados of the Nationalist Ejército del Sur during the victory parade in Sevilla on April 17th 1939A Nationalist Blindado based on the one in a picture with Carlist requetes. All illustrations by Pavel ‘Carpaticus’ Alexe
Blindado tipo ZIS specifications
Dimensions (L-w-h)
3.87 x 1.90 x 2.39 m
Total weight, battle ready
2.3 tonnes
Crew
3 (commander, gunner, driver)
Propulsion
6 cylinder ZIS engine 73 hp
Speed (road)
55 km/h
Range
230 km
Armament
2 x DT 7.62 mm machine gun (or Maxim–Tokarev machine guns)
Armor
8 mm
Total production
~160
Bibliography
Artemio Mortera Pérez, Los Medios Blindados de la Guerra Civil Española Teatro de Operaciones de Andalucía y Centro 36/39 (Valladolid: Alcañiz Fresno’s editores, 2009)
Francisco Marín Gutiérrez & José María Mata Duaso, Los Medios Blindados de Ruedas en España. Un Siglo de Historia (Vol. I) (Valladolid: Quirón Ediciones, 2002)
Blindado tipo ZIS destined for the Ejército de Andalucía of the Ejército Popular de la República on board a flat truck – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 183Blindado tipo ZIS with its crew somewhere in Andalucía – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 183Austrian International Brigadiers under the command of Sepp Mittermaier posing in front of their Blindados tipo ZIS – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 225 A column of at least six Blindados tipo ZIS in Andalucía in 1938 – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 236Blindados tipo ZIS knocked out outside of Castellón in June 1938 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 41Condor Legion personnel inspect a knocked out Blindado tipo ZIS as the approach Castellón, June 1938 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 42Several captured Blindados tipo ZIS now fighting for the nationalist cause mounted on flat trucks – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 247Captured Blindados tipo ZIS and BA-6s at Las Quemadas (Córdoba), the group’s headquarters – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 253Several Blindados tipo ZIS of the Escuadrón de Blindados of the Nationalist Ejército del Sur during the victory parade in Sevilla on April 17th 1939. Note that a red-yellow Spanish flag has been painted across the front – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 241A Blindado tipo ZIS captured by the Nationalist being prepared to be put on a flat truck to be transported elsewhere – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 247Blurry picture of a Blindado tipo ZIS being used by the C.T.V. in the Mediterranean town of Benicarló in mid-April 1937 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 28The rear of two Blindados tipo ZIS of the C.T.V. during a military parade celebrating the second year of the Nationalist uprising in the Plaza del Castillo in Pamplona (Navarra), October 31st 1938 – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 86C.T.V. servicing an abandoned Blindado tipo ZIS to join its ranks alongside the two Lancia 1ZMs – source: Mortera Pérez (2011a), p. 119A very rare camouflage on this C.T.V. Blindado. Note the white tires. Also note the text: “Flechas Negra! Agredir Para Vencer” [Eng. Black Arrows! Attack To Win”] – source: DogsWar
Argentina (1986-1990’s)
Self Propelled Multiple Launch Rocket System – 1 prototype
From as early as Medieval China, rocket artillery has been a recurring feature on the battlefield. Throughout WWII, rocket artillery was used with devastating effect, both in regards to the damage it did and its psychological effect. This conflict also saw rocket artillery mounted on mobile platforms, including armored ones, such as the M4 Sherman‘Calliope’ or ‘Tulip’. It was during the Cold War that these armored vehicles, or Self Propelled (SP) Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (MLRSs), would see their ‘golden age’. Not wanting to miss out, Argentina developed its own system based on the Tanque Argentino Mediano (TAM), which would become the Vehículo de Combate Lanza Cohetes (VCLC).
The Vehículo de Combate Lanza Cohetes (VCLC) – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 50
Context and Development
After the introduction of the TAM and the Vehículo de Combate de Transporte de Personal (VCTP) in the early ’80s, the Argentinian military authorities, Estado Mayor General del Ejército (EMGE), began to plan a family of vehicles based on the common chassis, among which were a command vehicle (VCPC), mortar carrying vehicle (VCTM), self-propelled artillery (VCA) and a tank recovery vehicle (VCRT). These vehicles were mostly converted by Tanque Argentino Mediano Sociedad Estatal (TAMSE), the state-owned company in charge of procurement, assembly, modifications, and exports of all TAM family vehicles. A later development would be the VCLC.
In 1986, EMGE set out requirements for an SP MLRS, something lacking in the Argentinian forces at that point. Israel Military Industries (IMI) offered to provide two different variants, one armed with the LAR-160, which had just been adopted by the Israeli Defense Forces, and one with the MAR-350, which had just been developed as a heavier alternative to the LAR-160. There were also discussions, not necessarily with IMI, to have the new MLRS vehicle armed with Argentinian produced systems, such as the 105 mm SLAM Pampero.
The VCLC being presented to the public – source: Sigal Fogliani, p. 115
Design
Chassis
At its core, the VCLC was a TAM that had had its turret removed. In its place was a rotating structure to place the rockets. The frontal plate was at a pronounced 75º angle and the sides and rear plates were positioned at 32º. At the front of the tank, on each side, were headlights. Behind these, also on each side, were wing mirrors. On each side of the front-middle section of the hull were a set of 4 Wegmann 76 mm smoke grenade launchers.
The VCLC’s armor was made of electrically welded nickel-chromium-molybdenum steel. The front plate was 50 mm thick and the sides and rear 35 mm. This provided protection from small arms fire and shell splinters.
As with all TAM family vehicles, the VCLC was equipped with an NBC protection system which would have allowed the crew to operate in a contaminated area for up to 8 hours. The NBC system fed the main and driver’s compartments with filtered air that could absorb solid or gaseous elements from poisonous or radioactive substances. The vehicle would have been able to operate in very harsh temperatures, from as low as -35ºC to as high as 42ºC, which would have been ideal for the varied terrain in Argentina. There was also an automatic fire extinguishing system which could also have been manually triggered from the interior or exterior.
Like the TAM, the VCLC retained the suspension and running gear of the West German Marder 1, a torsion bar-type suspension with six rubber-tired paired road wheels and three return rollers on each side. The first, second, fifth, and sixth road wheel stations had hydraulic shock dampers, a legacy of the Marder 1 design.
The tracks were of a Vickers system, each track consisting of 91 links with rubber tank treads. These could have been substituted by snow cleats if required.
Interior
The interior of the VCLC was divided into two main sections, with the frontal section being further subdivided into two sub-sections. The bigger of these sub-sections, occupying 2/3 of the frontal space, housed the engine, whilst the smaller one was for the driver and driving mechanisms. There was a hatch above the driver’s position and three episcopes. The whole section of the frontal hull covering the engine could be opened for engine maintenance.
The engine on the VCRT was the MTU MB 833 Ka 500 diesel engine, a six-cylinder rated at 537 kilowatts (720 hp) at 36.67 revolutions per second or 2,200-2,400 revolutions per minute. This gave the vehicle a power-to-weight ratio of 16.5 kilowatts per tonne or 22.5 hp per tonne.
The engine was kept cool by two fans at the rear powered by a 33 hp engine of their own.
The gearbox on the VCLC was the HSWL 204 automatic planetary gearbox with torque converter and four forward/four reverse gear ratios. The first three were epicyclic gear trains (also known as planetary gears) and the fourth was a clutch disc.
The maximum road speed was 75 km/h forwards and backward. Off-road or cross-country speed was limited to 40 km/h. The VCRT carried 680 liters of fuel for a maximum range of 520 km.
Among other performance indicators, the VCRT could overcome 60% gradients, 30% side slopes, 1 m tall obstacles, and 2.9 m trenches. It was capable of fording 1.5 m deep water without preparation, increased to 2 m with preparation.
The bigger rear section was where the rest of the crew, a commander and gunner, carried out their duties. Communications were by means of the VHF SEL SEM-180 and SEM-190 systems and the SEL SEM-170 radio-receptor, as on all TAM family vehicles.
Turret
One of the new features on the VCLC was the rotating structure, or turret, placed where the TAM’s turret would have been. The front of this structure had two hatches, for the commander and gunner, alongside a hatch on each side, and a circular hatch on the top. Inside the turret were the hydraulic system and firing mechanisms, including the ballistic computer. Unfortunately, there are no details as to what these would have been.
Rocket Systems
The only VCLC prototype was armed with a pair of the Israeli LAR-160 (Light Artillery Rocket) modified for 18 rocket Launch Pod Containers (LPCs) for medium armored vehicles, unlike the regular 13 rocket LPC on trucks. In Argentinian service, this was known as the CAL-160, or Cohete Argentino Ligero.
The VCLC’s LAR mainly fired the Mk. II rocket, which weighed 110 kg and had a 46 kg warhead which was either HE-COFRAM or a cluster warhead containing 104 CL-3022-S4 AP/AM submunitions. The range was around 30 km. It is unclear if there was also the option to use the Mk. I rockets, which Venezuela was adapting to use on their own MRLS based on the AMX-13 at the time.
Elevation and traverse of the launchers were performed by an electrohydraulic system, which was backed up by a manual system.
A VCLC having one of its sets of LPCs being loaded on with the help of a crane truck – source: Sigal & Fogliani, p. 115
Another option considered by the Argentinian-IMI partnership was the MAR-350 (Medium Artillery Rocket), or CAM-350 (Cohete Argentino Mediano), which had only just received its first firing test in 1988 and was essentially a heavier LAR-160.
This heavier piece of rocket artillery was a pair of two LPCs. Each rocket was 6.2 m long, 970 mm wide and weighed over 800 kg. Unfortunately, there are no reliable details on its range nor its munition type.
Drawing of the VCLC armed with the MAR-350. Note that, unlike the prototype, the drawing shows the VCLC armed with the FN MAG 60-40 – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 50
Another possibility that may have been considered was equipping the VCLC with an indigenous Argentinian rocket, such as the SLAM Pampero (Sistema de Lanzacohetes de Artillería Múltiple). The SLAM Pampeo had been developed in Argentina by Instituto de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas de las Fuerzas Armadas (CITEFA) in the early 1980’s and is still in service in very small numbers. This 105 mm rocket launcher system is composed of a pair of 8 LPCs. These are still in service on Unimog 416 trucks, though they are being replaced by the CP-30.
A proposed VCLC model armed with an unknown caliber rocket system – Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 50
Death of the Project
With IMI’s collaboration, one prototype armed with the LAR-160 was built on a TAM chassis and presented to journalists in June 1989. Tests were deemed a success, but, as is quite often the case with Argentinian military developments, budget cuts at the turn of the decade led to the project’s cancellation. What is more, the LAR-160 or MAR-350 were not the rockets in Argentina’s arsenal, so they would have all had to be imported, including the system and the ammunition.
The VCLC during firing tests – source Sigal Fogliani, p. 115
Since then, Argentina has continued to rely on truck-based systems, such as the Unimog 416 with the SLAM Pampero and, since 2012, the CP-30 mounted on the Fiat 697N or Iveco Trakker. However, these developments have also been limited by budgetary constraints.
The only VCLC was thoroughly tested, used for parades, and, finally, at some point in the ’90s or early 2000s, transported to the headquarters of Champion SA, at the former TAMSE factory.
The only VCLC at Champion SA – Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 51
Side Note – The Vehículo de Combate Lanza Misiles (VCLM)
Another contemporary development to the VCLC was the Vehículo de Combate Lanza Misiles (VCLM), a self-propelled Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) launcher. This TAM variant was meant to fire Roland missiles from presumably two tubes. Another option was to fire Halcón missiles to be developed in Argentina, but neither project properly materialized.
Conclusion
The VCLC is another fine example of the adaptability of the TAM platform which the Argentinians have sought to exploit. The VCLC’s biggest drawback was probably the lack of suitable Argentinian produced rocket systems and the over-reliance on Israeli technology. Regardless, the dire financial state of Argentina at the beginning of the 1990s doomed the project in spite of its merit.
The SLAM Pampero mounted on a Unimog 416 truck. Until 2012, these were the main SP MLRS in the Ejército Argentino – source: Weapons SystemsVehículo de Combate Lanza Cohetes (VCLC) illustration produced by Pablo Javier Gómez
In the study of military vehicles, logistic and engineering vehicles are often underrepresented in favor of ‘flashier’ vehicles armed with cannons. However, their role is fundamental. One of the challenges any army or force faces when introducing a new tank is how to properly assist it in logistic and engineering duties. One solution is to assist these vehicles with recovery vehicles based on the same chassis. For example, after the USA introduced the M103 heavy tank, it found that none of its recovery vehicles were able to deal with the over 60 tons of weight of the M103, thus the chassis was modified to create the Heavy Recovery Vehicle M51. A similar story took place with the British Conqueror and the Conqueror ARV.
After the introduction of the TAM in the early 80’s, Argentina was faced with the same conundrum, as it did not have vehicles capable of performing as recovery vehicles. At that point, Argentina had 4 M31 Tank Recovery Vehicles based on the M3 Lee chassis and 2 or 3 M578 light recovery vehicles. In 1981, Argentina received 2 Greif armored recovery vehicles based on the SK-105 Kürassier chassis, to complement the near 100 of these light tanks/tank destroyers the nation received between 1981 and 1982. However, all these were light recovery vehicles which were in too small numbers or unable to support the TAM’s 30 tonnes.
According to historian Sigal Fofliani, the VCRT’s origin comes from the different plans to build an armored recovery variant for the Leopard 1. One of the unsuccessful bids was that of MAG Germany Automotive GmbH. It found a second life when TAMSE (Tanque Argentino Mediano Sociedad Estatal), the company in charge of the procurement and development of TAM related vehicles, was looking for options for a TAM-based recovery vehicle and bought their plans to adapt to the TAM. The plans were given to ASTARSA (Astilleros Argentinos Río de La Plata S.A.), a company whose core business was building and repairing ships and locomotives. ASTARSA was presumably given the task on the basis of their know-how in cranes in shipyards. No exact dates are given in the literature, but sources from 1984 already mention the progress being made on what would become the VCRT.
With the lack of proper armored recovery vehicles in the Ejército Argentino, TAMs have often had to perform these duties themselves – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 17The VCRT prototype. Note the two external fuel tanks which were then removed – source: Sigal & Fofliani, p. 115
Design
Chassis
In its basic components, the VCRT was a turretless TAM, which in itself is basically a German Marder IFV. What made it different was the recovery equipment. The frontal plate was at a pronounced 75º angle and the sides and rear plates were positioned at 32º. At the front of the tank, on each side, were headlights. Behind these, also on each side, were wing mirrors. On each side of the front-middle section of the hull were a set of 4 Wegman 77 mm smoke grenade launchers.
The second half of the vehicle received some modifications. The left half had a raised superstructure in which the crew operated. On top of the structure was the commander’s cupola with seven episcopes. On the cupola was the VCRT’s only armament, a 7.62 mm FN MAG 60-40 machine gun. The 7.62 × 51 NATO-standard ammunition the machine gun fired had a muzzle velocity of 840 m/sec and a firing range of around 1,200 m. Additional weaponry consisted of the crew’s personal weapons and 9 hand grenades.
Although not designed for combat, the VCRT’s armor was made of electrically welded nickel-chromium-molybdenum steel. The front plate was 50 mm thick and the sides and rear 35 mm. This provided more than adequate protection from small arms fire including machine guns and shell splinters.
As with all TAM family vehicles, the VCRT was equipped with an NBC protection system which would have allowed the crew to transverse in a contaminated area for up to 8 hours. The NBC system fed the main and driver’s compartments with filtered air that could absorb solid or gaseous elements from poisonous or radioactive substances. The vehicle would have been able to operate in very harsh temperatures, from as low as -35ºC to as high as 42ºC, which would have been ideal for the varied terrain in Argentina. There was also an automatic fire extinguishing system which could also have been manually triggered from the interior or exterior.
Again, as the TAM, the VCRT retained the suspension and running gear of the West German Marder 1, a torsion bar-type suspension with six rubber-tired paired road wheels and three return rollers on each side. The first, second, fifth, and sixth road wheel stations had hydraulic shock dampers, a legacy of the Marder 1 design.
The tracks were of a Vickers system, each track consisting of 91 links with rubber tank treads. These could have been substituted by snow cleats if required.
Side view of the VCRT – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 54
Interior
The interior of the VCRT was divided into two main sections, with the frontal section being further sub-divided into two sub-sections. The bigger of these sub-sections, occupying 2/3 of the frontal space, housed the engine, whilst the smaller one was for the driver and driving mechanisms. There was a hatch above the driver’s position and three episcopes. The whole section of the frontal hull covering the engine could be opened for engine maintenance.
The engine on the VCRT was the MTU MB 833 Ka 500 diesel engine, a six-cylinder rated at 537 kilowatts (720 hp) at 36.67 revolutions per second or 2,200-2,400 revolutions per minute. This gave the vehicle a power-to-weight ratio of 16.5 kilowatts per tonne or 22.5 hp per tonne. This was the second-worst power-to-weight ratio in TAM family vehicles, only beaten by the heavier Vehículo de Combate de Artillería (VCA), as the VCRT weighed 32 tonnes, whilst the TAM weighed 30.5 tonnes.
The engine was kept cool by two fans at the rear powered by a 33 hp engine of their own.
Presumably, inside the VCRT was also an auxiliary engine for the crane and winches, though there is no information available on this.
The maximum road speed was 75 km/h forwards and backward. Off-road or cross-country speed was limited to 40 km/h. The VCRT carried 680 liters of fuel for a maximum range of 520 km. This was supplemented with a 200-liter fuel tank on the opposite side of the crane.
Among other performance indicators, the VCRT could overcome 60% gradients, 30% side slopes, 1 m tall obstacles, and 2.9 m trenches. It was capable of fording 1.5 m deep water without preparation, increased to 2 m with preparation.
The bigger rear section was where the rest of the crew, a commander and two engineers, carried out their duties. Given that the rear door for entry and exit of the TAM was taken out to equip the dozer blade, entry and exit happened through the hatch at the top of the vehicle. Communications were by means of the VHF SEL SEM-180 and SEM-190 systems and the SEL SEM-170 radio-receptor, as on all TAM family vehicles.
Recovery Equipment
Crane: The main feature of a recovery vehicle is the crane. In the VCRT, it was 5.5 m long and had a lifting capacity of 20-22.5 tonnes. It was positioned on the right-hand side of the vehicle in a 180º rotating platform and could elevate to an angle of 70º. The hook on the crane was kept in a lock at the front of the chassis during travel or in a static position.
Frontal view of a VCRT showing the crane in lock position. Note the main winch on the right on the superstructure – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 54
Dozer blade: Positioned at the rear of the vehicle was the dozer blade, which was 820 mm high and 3.12 m wide or 3.65 m with extensions. The main purpose of the dozer blade was to keep the VCRT in place and stable when it was using the crane or the winch, but it could also be used to clear paths and dig shallow entrenchments.
Rearview of the VCRT showing the dozer blade. Note the main winch to the left – Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 54
Winch and auxiliary winch: The winch, placed on the left of the superstructure, had 91 m long and 33 mm diameter cable with a 30.6-tonne towing capacity, the weight of a TAM, at a rate of 16 m per minute. The auxiliary winch, placed on the right of the hull, beneath the crane had a 200 m and 7 mm diameter cable, with 1.5 tonnes of towing capacity at a rate of 80 m per minute.
Trouble
ASTARSA finished a prototype at an undetermined point of time after 1984. Nevertheless, it was not successful. While the reasons seem to be clear, the time-frame is less so. It would appear that the Ejército Argentino was not too impressed with the VCRT’s performance, especially the lack of stability when using the crane, so did not adopt it. When this happened is unclear though. In Blindados Argentinos de Uruguay y Paraguay, published in 1997, Sigal Fogliani claims that following its untimely demise, the VCRT was left abandoned. However, Juan Carlos Cicalesi & Santiago Rivas, in TAM, published in 2012, claim that the VCRT made its first public appearance on May 25th, 1999 during a military parade in Buenos Aires. A combination of these stories may be true, and that after the VCRT’s failure it was abandoned, only to be put back into service for military parades or further trials. The last photos of the VCRT see it static in a park, presumably in Buenos Aires. The vehicle is covered in leaf-litter and has an information board and display lights on its side, indicating that it is probably out of service. These photos bare the inscriptions “CAP MARTIN DE TOURS”, the vehicle’s name, and “B ARS 602”, the unit it belonged to: Batallón de Arsenales 602 , a maintenance battalion based at Boulogne Sur Mer, the former headquarters of TAMSE.
Despite its shortcomings, the VCRT was even considered for export. In 1988, Ecuador was looking for a new tank and the TAM was considered. The deal was going to be for the purchase of 75 vehicles (TAM, VCTP and VCRT) for $108 million, but fell through, according to Sigal Fagliani, because of the threatened closure of TAMSE. In the end, Ecuador did not purchase any tanks.
According to Cicalesi and Rivas, the first public appearance of the VCRT on May 25th, 1999 in Buenos Aires – Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 53Side view of the current state of the VCRT, presumably in a park in Buenos Aires? – Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 53
Side Note – The Vehículo de Combate Lanza Puentes (VCLP)
Another TAM family variant is the VCLP, a bridge laying vehicle. Not much is known about this proposed variant, but it was presumably also thought about in the ’80s. Whatever was the case, no vehicle was ever built. Before then, the Ejército Argentino used pontoon bridges and a small number of the very light AMX-13 PDP (Poseur De Pont) Modèle 51. As with the VCRT and armored recovery vehicles, Argentina does not have a modern bridge laying vehicle.
Conclusion
In short, the VCRT was a failure. Several Argentinian prototypes and projects, including a number of TAM-based ones, have failed because of budgetary reasons rather than because they lacked merit. This was not the case with the VCRT, it simply did not fulfill the requirements. Since Argentina has continued to face the problem of a lack of a proper armored recovery vehicle. Instead, a variety of truck-based cranes have been used, such as the light-duty crane equipped Mercedes Benz 1114 or the heavier Fiat 697. Whilst in peacetime, this may not be seen as much of an issue, if Argentina was to become involved in a war with any of its neighbors, the lack of such specialized vehicles may have negative consequences.
Fiat 697 crane truck servicing two Vehículos de Combate Transporte de Personal (VCTP) during UN operations in Croatia – Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 32Vehículo de Combate Recuperador de Tanques (VCRT) EA 436196 illustration produced by Pablo Javier Gomez
Kingdom of Spain (1925-1926)
Light tank – 1 prototype
Spain has mainly depended on foreign technology for its tank forces but there have always been enthusiastic engineers, military commanders and policy-makers who have wanted to break the mould and create indigenous designs. The first of these initiatives would take place in 1925 in the northern town of Trubia, Asturias.
Note – given that the tank’s lack of official designation, it will be referred to as Trubia Prototype.
What Spain Learnt in Morocco
As a result of German, French, and British colonial competition, Spain was granted extensive control over North Morocco in addition to its already existing enclaves following the Algeciras Conference of 1906. In 1912, after signing a treaty with France, the Spanish protectorate in Morocco was formed, with an area of 20,948 km² around the Rif. This increased presence in Morocco and the loss of most other colonies gave wings to the group of military commanders known as ‘Africanistas’ (those with a vocation for Africa) and military and private operations were carried out in the area.
Map showing Spanish and French possessions in Morocco in 1912 – source: Rafael Moreno (2013), p. 35
Spain avoided the slaughter of the Great War (1914-1918) by remaining neutral, but following a series of incidents, the Riffian Abd el-Krim led an insurgency that would evolve into the Rif War (1911-27). In 1921, Spain suffered the ‘Disaster at Annual’, their most infamous military defeat ever, and at the hands of a numerically inferior force with less modern equipment, and as a result, the Rif Republic was created, factors which in part led to the successful coup in Spain led by Miguel Primo de Rivera and his dictatorship. Soon afterward, in 1924, France intervened on Spain’s behalf and after the amphibious landings at Alhucemas (North Morocco) in 1925 with Spain using its Renault FT’s in the first amphibious tank landing in combat, the war was all but won. In these campaigns, Spain used its Renault FTs and Schneider CA-1s bought from France in addition to Spanish-made armored cars.
Map of the front line as it was in 1921 – source: Rafael Moreno (2013), p. 36
Tank usage during the Rif War had a mixed result. Whilst some clear tactical advantages were gained with them, poor strategy and the lack of experience of the crews hindered their effectiveness.
In addition, it was felt that Spain should develop their own tank program, not only to improve tank capabilities with newer models but also to not have to rely on foreign imports for their armed forces.
The Three Amigos
At the end of the Eighteenth Century, in the northern town of Trubia (Asturias), a weapons factory was established. The factory grew to prominence during the mid-Nineteenth Century and provided ammunition and artillery pieces to the Spanish Army and exported around the world.
In 1925, three men would come to the factory to put in motion their ideas to build an indigenous tank design for the Spanish Army. These men would be Commander Victor Landesa Domenech (an artillery officer attached to the factory), Captain Carlos Ruíz de Toledo (a Commander in charge of the Batería de Carros de Asalto de Artillería [Eng. Artillery Tank Battery] during its first engagements during the Rif War) and the factory’s Chief Engineer, Rogelio Areces. Ruíz de Toledo would be appointed to the Trubia arms factory where he convinced the factory director, Victor Pérez Vidal, to authorize the construction of a tank. Pérez Vidal approved this venture and granted the three men an old workshop (Taller de Escarpa) probably in disuse, for them to build their tank.
The three men would work together to come up with a tank design. Given the lack of tank technology information available, they based their design on what they deemed the best tank in the Spanish Army’s arsenal, the Renault FT. The project, which was to be led by Landesa Domenech, was a private venture paid for out of their own pockets without state supervision or finance.
Design
The only known photo of the Trubia prototype, which, in this instance, is going over a brick wall. Date and location unknown. Note the overlapping turrets, frontal nose ‘ram’ and general resemblance to the Renault FT – source: Artemio Mortera Pérez (2007), p. 6
Given the circumstances, the vehicle strongly resembled the Renault FT, but there were some key differences.
The undercarriage was a direct copy of the FT, featuring a large front drive sprocket and smaller track idler at more or less the same height.
The Renault FT’s armor was slightly improved on and consisted of overall hull armor 18 mm thick. The sheets used were made from oil heated chromium-nickel steel. The construction and riveting of these proved problematic given the absolute lack of experience.
The turret was one of the most interesting and distinguishing features. Lessons learned in North Africa had shown that the Renault FT was extremely vulnerable when its main machine gun jammed, as there was no other weaponry to defend itself with. Therefore, Landesa Domenech and his team decided to equip the tank with a second machine gun in the turret. Their solution resulted in two overlapping turrets moving independently and each armed with a Hotchkiss 7 mm machine gun (either M1909, M1914 or M1922). As a consequence of the additional machine gun, it is possible that an additional crew-member was added to fill the gunner role, though as they would have been incredibly cramped inside this is unlikely, the commander probably having responsibility over the two guns.
The frontal plate had two distinguishing features. The first was a small semi-circular plate attached to an elongated nose of the tank which acted as a ram to cut through obstacles, such as walls and barbed wire. The second is a small box-like extension to the upper frontal hull which had a vision slit for the driver. In front of this box was a hinged two-part door for the driver to access and exit the tank. It is not known from photographic evidence if the iconic rear tail of the FT remained in the Trubia prototype, but given that it was used on the Trubia production series, it can be assumed that it was. A rear tail was used to improve trench crossing capabilities by facilitating balance.
One of the main improvements desired by Landesa Domenech’s teams was to enhance the FT’s poor speed, range, and performance by installing a better engine. As no significantly better engine was available, a 4 cylinder Hispano-Suiza 40/50 (40-50 hp) engine was used, one already fitted in the Army’s Hispano-Suiza trucks.
Testing and a Royal Visit
Once the vehicle was finished, at some point in 1925, it was transferred to the Escuela Central de Tiro in the southern Madrid neighborhood of Carabanchel. There, it was tested, and apparently, the results were satisfactory. Consequently, a budget was set for the creation of a tank producing workshop at the Trubia factory, and a commission led by Areces and Ruíz de Toledo was established to travel Europe and investigate tank technological innovations they could utilize for an improved serial version of the prototype.
The prototype was taken back to Asturias where it was displayed at the Feria de Muestras (a technology fair) in Gijón, where it would be viewed by the Principe de Asturias (title for the heir to the Spanish throne) Alfonso de Borbón y Battenberg. Shortly after the fair it was dismantled.
The first Trubia Serie A receiving finishing touches at the Trubia factory – source: Artemio Mortera Pérez (2007), p. 7
Conclusion
The Trubia prototype showed the way towards a domestically-built tank, though as would later be found out, it was not to be. However, this was a monumental step in the history of Spanish armor and its legacy should not be forgotten.
What the Prototipo Trubia may have looked like with a prototype grey coat of paint. Illustration produced by Andrei ‘Octo10’ Kirushkin, funded by our Patreon
Bibliography
Artemio Mortera Pérez, Los Carros de Combate “Trubia” (Valladolid: Quirón Ediciones, 1993)
Artemio Mortera Pérez, Los Medios Blindados de la Guerra Civil Española. Teatro de Operaciones del Norte 36/37 (Valladolid: AF Editores, 2007)
Chus Neira, “El primer tanque español salió de la Fábrica de Trubia hace 90 años” La Nueva España [Spain], 30 March 2017 (https://www.lne.es/oviedo/2017/03/30/primer-tanque-espanol-salio-fabrica/2081455.html#)
Rafael Moreno, Master of Military Studies Research Paper “Annual 1921: The Reasons for a Disaster” (2013)
Argentina (1982-present)
Armored Command Vehicle – 9 built
With the introduction of the Tanque Argentino Mediano (TAM) and the Vehículo de Combate Transporte de Personal (VCTP) in the early 80’s and the infrastructure to produce more vehicles using the same technology, Argentina was in a unique position to produce a family of vehicles based on the same chassis. After a mortar carrying vehicle and plans for a Self-Propelled Gun, the next step was a command vehicle to coordinate the units of the Ejército Argentino: the Vehículo de Combate Puesto de Comando (VCPC).
Context – The Vehículo de Combate de Transporte de Personal (VCTP)
Whilst working on the TAM for Argentina, Thyssen-Henschel delivered another vehicle, effectively just a modified Marder 1 IFV, known as the Vehículo de Combate Transporte de Personal (VCTP). The VCTP’s role was dual: Armored Personnel Carrier and Infantry Fighting Vehicle. Armed with a 20 mm autocannon in a fully rotatable turret and two machine guns, the VCTP had considerable firepower and carried a contingent of 10 infantry. Initially, these vehicles would have also been used as command vehicles by reducing the offensive capabilities. However, to be effectively used as a command vehicle, there had to be an increase in logistic and communication capabilities.
The VCTP ploughing through the Argentinian Pampa – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 65
The first plans to adapt the common TAM family chassis into a command vehicle were drawn in 1982, and production began in 1984. Only 9 would be built in addition to 2 VCCDF (Vehículo de Combate Centro Director de Fuego) and 4 VCCDT (Vehículo de Combate Centro Director de Tiro) artillery fire control variants.
Design
External Appearance and Armor
The VCPC is essentially a turretless VCTP with a command cupola. The frontal plate is at a pronounced 75º angle and the sides and rear plates are positioned at 32º. At the front of the tank, on each side, are headlights. Behind these, also on each side, are wing mirrors. On each side of the front-middle section of the hull are a set of 4 Wegmann 76 mm smoke launchers. On the left of the frontal section is an antenna for the radio equipment. The VCPC carries several pieces of pioneer equipment on the sides of the hull and on top of the frontal chassis.
When static, for added camouflage, the VCPC can deploy a camouflage net held by two poles placed on the top of the vehicle. There are several hatches on the vehicle: one on top of the driver’s position on the front left; one behind this position; a command cupola on the right towards the middle of the vehicle with 1 episcope; and a large hatch in the middle rear, which consists of two outwards opening doors. Armament consists of a single 7.62 mm FN MAG 60-40 machine gun placed in the commander’s cupola. The 7.62 × 51 NATO-standard ammunition for the machine gun fired has a muzzle velocity of 840 m/sec and a firing range of around 1,200 m. Additional weaponry consists of the crew’s personal weapons and 9 hand grenades.
A VCPC acting as a command post. Notice that only one of the poles for the camouflage net has been employed. Note the radio antenna at the forefront – Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 52
Although not meant for combat, the VCPC’s armor is made of electrically welded nickel-chromium-molybdenum steel. The front plate is 50 mm thick and the sides and rear 35 mm.
Additionally, the VCPC is equipped with an NBC protection system allowing the crew to operate in a contaminated area for up to 8 hours. The NBC system feeds the main and driver’s compartments with filtered air that can absorb solid or gaseous elements from poisonous or radioactive substances. The vehicle is able to operate in very harsh temperatures, from as low as -35ºC to as high as 42ºC, ideal for the varied terrain in Argentina. There is also an automatic fire extinguishing system which can also be manually triggered from the interior or exterior.
Suspension and Undercarriage
The VCPC retained the suspension and running gear of the Marder 1, a torsion bar-type suspension with six rubber-tired paired road wheels and three return rollers on each side. The first, second, fifth, and sixth road wheel stations have hydraulic shock dampers, a legacy of the Marder 1 design.
The tracks are of a Vickers system, each track consisting of 91 links with rubber tank treads. These can be substituted with snow cleats if required.
Interior
The interior of the VCPC is divided into two main sections, with the frontal section being further sub-divided into two sub-sections. The bigger of these sub-sections, occupying 2/3 of the frontal space, houses the engine, whilst the smaller one is for the driver and driving mechanisms. There is a hatch above the driver’s position and three episcopes, and another one behind for another of the crew members or one of the passengers with 1 episcope. The whole section of the frontal hull covering the engine can be opened for engine maintenance.
The bigger rear section occupies the central and rear part of the vehicle and is where command operations are carried out. It is divided in two compartments by a metal screen: a smaller one for the VCPC’s commander; and a larger one for the passengers. In the middle of this larger section is a map table with seats on both sides.
The interior of the VCPC. Notice the map table in the center – Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 52
In addition to the VHF SEL SEM-180 and SEM-190 systems and the SEL SEM-170 radio-receptor on all TAM family vehicles, for command duties, the VCPC has an SEL UHF and SEL unique multi-band radio systems provided by Fabricaciones Militares with Israeli aid. The UHF radio has a 4,000 km range and was allegedly used to communicate with an Argentinian base in the Antarctic from a VCPC based in Buenos Aires. The multi-band radio system is used to communicate with airborne units, such as planes and helicopters, allowing modern cross-branch cooperation and communication.
The crew is either 3 or 4: driver, commander, and up to two radio operators. Additionally, 6 regimental staff are carried. An improved air conditioning system not seen in other TAM family vehicles was incorporated on the VCPC.
Engine and Performance
The engine on the VCPC is the MTU MB 833 Ka 500 diesel engine, a six-cylinder rated at 537 kilowatts (720 hp) at 36.67 revolutions per second or 2,200-2,400 revolutions per minute. This, alongside a weight of under 25 tonnes compared to the VCTP’s 28.2 tonnes, gives the vehicle a power-to-weight ratio of 21.2 kilowatts per tonne or 28.8 hp per tonne.
The engine is kept cool by two ventilators at its rear powered by a 33 hp engine of their own.
The gearbox on the VCPC is the HSWL 204 automatic planetary gearbox with torque converter and four forward/four reverse gear ratios. The first three are epicyclic gear trains (also known as planetary gears) and the fourth is a clutch disc.
The maximum road speed is 75 km/h forwards and backward. Off-road or cross-country speed is limited to 40 km/h. The VCPC carries 650 liters of fuel for a maximum range of 590 km. This can be supplemented with 200-liter fuel tanks on each side of the hull for a total of 1,050 liters extending the maximum operating range to 840 km. However, these are not often added to the VCPC.
Among other performance indicators, the VCPC can overcome 60% gradients, 30% side slopes, 1 m tall obstacles, and 2.9 m trenches. It is capable of fording 1.5 m deep water without preparation, increased to 2 m with preparation.
Organization and Service
Each of the Regimentos de Infantería Mecanizados (RI Mec) [Eng. Mechanized Infantry Regiments] equipped with TAM family vehicles has a VCPC leading it. In the RI Mecs that are not equipped with TAM family vehicles, this role is carried out by M577A2. The regiments have two companies, each with three sections. Each section has four VCTPs plus an additional one for section command (total of five). The regiment’s headquarter section has the aforementioned VCPC, a VCTP for the second in command, and four Vehículos de Combate Transporte Mortero (VCTM) for fire support. The VCPC of each RI Mec has the role of coordinating the regiment’s infantry, VCTPs and VCTMs during operations with the regiment’s commander and headquarters staff being on board. The advanced radio and communications equipment on board allows for constant communication and coordination with other regiments and units.
There are almost no details for the VCPC’s service, but they may have seen action in 1989 during the attack on La Tablada barrack in Buenos Aires province. In this incident, the left-wing Movimiento Todos por la Patria (MTP) [Eng. All for the Fatherland Movement], which was heavily inspired by the Nicaraguan Sandinistas, took over the La Tablada barracks of the Regimiento de Infantería Mecanizado 3 on January 23rd. There is a lot of controversy surrounding the reasons behind this attack, but during the subsequent court hearings, MTP members claimed that they were attempting to prevent another carapintada military coup, of which there had already been three between April 1987 and December 1988. Others would claim that the attack on the barracks was a failed attempt to instigate a popular uprising. To quell the revolt, the VCTPs and infantry of the Regimiento de Infantería Mecanizado 7 «Coronel Conde» were sent to La Tablada, thus it is easy to assume that there would have been one VCPC among them. In the end, after several hours of fighting, MTP was defeated after losing 32 fighters.
A VCPC leading forces during Ejercicio Reconquista in July 2006 – Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 52
Variants – The VCCDF (Vehículo de Combate Centro Director de Fuego) and VCCDT (Vehículo de Combate Centro Director de Tiro)
Two almost identical vehicles derived from the VCPC were built for artillery fire control in the mid-90’s. The main difference between them and the VCPC comes down to their roles; whereas the VCCDF is used by artillery groups, the VCCDT is used at battery level. An easy way to identify them is by looking at the top of the vehicle. The VCPC has two antennas and the VCCDF and the VCCDT have four. They were built in small numbers: there are 2 VCCDFs and 4 VCCDTs.
Both vehicles are used in the armored artillery groups Grupo de Artillería Blindado 9 and Grupo de Artillería Blindado 11 «Coronel Juan Bautista Thorne», both of which are equipped with the TAM-based Vehículo de Combate Artillería (VCA). GA Bl 9 is based in Chubut province in the middle of the Patagonian plateau, whilst GA Bl 11 is based in the town of Comandante Luis Piedrabuena, Santa Cruz province, the southernmost point of Patagonia. Each GA consists of two batteries of 4 VCAs. Additionally, each battery has a VCCDT to command operations at battery level, whilst there is a single VCCDF per GA to command the operations of the whole group.
A battery of the Grupo de Artillería Blindado 11 «Coronel Juan Bautista Thorne», showing 4 VCAs, a VCCDT and a VCCDF – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 44A VCCDF unloading from a tank transporter. Notice the VCA in the background – Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 49A VCCDT followed by a VCCDF which a part of a battery of the Grupo de Artillería Blindado 11 «Coronel Juan Bautista Thorne» – Cicalsei & Rivas, p. 49
Conclusion
The VCPC is proof of the flexibility demonstrated by the Ejército Argentino in procuring new equipment. It is a simple yet effective conversion on tested and trusted technology to fulfill new roles without reducing the number of TAMs and VCTPs already in service. There is no reason the VCPC will go out of service soon, even if the TAM, VCTP or VCA are substituted for more modern equipment.
Vehículo de Combate Puesto de Comando (VCPC), EA 435196, ‘KELLER’ illustration produced by Pablo Javier Gomez
Argentina (2002-present)
Ammunition Supply Vehicle – 2 built
One of the biggest problems with Self Propelled Guns (SPGs) is that they can only carry a limited amount of their precious and delicate ammunition, so other vehicles have to be tasked with supplying it to the SPGs. Argentina did exactly that at the beginning of the current millennium when they converted the Tanque Argentino Mediano (TAM) chassis into the Vehículo de Combate Amunicionador (VCAmun) to supply the Vehículo de Combate de Artillería (VCA).
A TAM with side skirts on a trailer. The TAM was the basis for the VCAmun – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 10
Context – Never a Failure, Always a Lesson
The origins of the VCAmun lay in the failures of another project, the Vehículo de Combate Ambulancia (VCAmb). In 2001, Comando de Arsenales, which had taken over from TAMSE (Tanque Argentino Mediano Sociedad Estatal) as the company in charge of the tank assembly facilities in Boulogne sur Mer, built a mock-up for a chassis to go on a TAM running gear and fulfill the role of combat ambulance. Whilst this vehicle had some potential, it did not get past the mock-up stage and was rejected. However, the lessons learned were not lost. The following year, Comando de Arsenales presented a new vehicle that used the same chassis for the purpose of resupplying the VCAs which had entered service in 1997 with ammunition. The main difference is that instead of medical equipment, the VCAmun had a conveyor belt to feed the ammunition into the VCA’s turret. Two were built by Comando de Arsenales and the plan was to build at least 16 more to supply and assist every single VCA attached to an armored artillery group.
The VCAmb mock-up in the warehouse of Comando de Arsenales – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 10
Design
External Appearance and Armor
Given that the VCAmun is based on the TAM, it shares many of its characteristics and, by extension, also with the Marder 1 IFV the TAM is based on. The frontal plate is at a pronounced 75º angle and the front half of the sides are positioned at 32º. The second half of the vehicle has a tall superstructure instead of the turret, tall enough to house the 155 mm ammunition the VCAmun carries. At the front of the tank, on each side, are headlights. Behind these, also on each side, are wing mirrors. On each side of the front-middle section of the hull are a set of 4 Wegmann 76 mm smoke launchers. On the sides of the VCAmun’s superstructure, the crew’s backpacks are carried, along with towing equipment.
Given that the VCAmun is based on the TAM, the armor is made of electrically welded nickel-chromium-molybdenum steel. The front plate is 50 mm thick and the sides and rear 35 mm. There are no details for the superstructure’s armor, but an informed assumption would put it at 35 mm.
It can also be supposed that, additionally, the VCAmun is equipped with the same NBC protection system as the TAM, which allows the crew to stay or pass through a contaminated area for up to 8 hours, but not operate in it. The NBC system feeds the main and driver’s compartment with filtered air that can absorb solid or gaseous elements from poisonous or radioactive substances. The vehicle is able to operate in very harsh temperatures, from as low as -35ºC to as high as 42ºC. There is also an automatic fire extinguishing system that can be triggered from the interior or exterior.
On the top of the superstructure is the only armament the VCAmun carries, a 7.62 mm FN MAG 60-40 machine gun on the commander’s cupola. The 7.62×51 NATO-standard bullets the machine guns fire have a muzzle velocity of 840 m/sec and a firing range of around 1,200 m. The crew also carry their personal weapons and presumably between 8 or 9 hand grenades.
A VCAmun of the Grupo de Artillería Blindado 11 «Coronel Juan Bautista Thorne». Note that the crew’s backpacks are kept outside the vehicle – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 47
Suspension and Undercarriage
The VCAmun retained the suspension and running gear of the Marder 1, a torsion bar-type suspension with six rubber-tired paired roadwheels and three return rollers on each side. The tracks are of a Vickers system, each track consisting of 91 links with rubber tank treads. These can be substituted by snow cleats if required.
Interior
The interior of the VCAmun is divided into two main sections, with the frontal section being further sub-divided into two sub-sections. The bigger of these sub-sections, occupying 2/3 of the space, houses the engine, whilst the smaller one is for the driver and driving mechanisms to his left. There is a hatch above the driver’s position and three episcopes, and the whole section of the frontal hull covering the engine can be opened for engine maintenance.
The engine on the VCAmun is the MTU MB 833 Ka 500 diesel engine, a six-cylinder rated at 537 kilowatts (720 hp) at 36.67 revolutions per second or 2,200-2,400 revolutions per minute which is used on all TAM family vehicles. The engine is kept cool by two ventilators at its rear powered by a 33 hp engine of their own.
The gearbox on the VCAmun is the HSWL 204 automatic planetary gearbox with a torque converter and four forward/four reverse gear ratios. The first three are epicyclic gear trains (also known as planetary gears) and the fourth is a clutch disc. Again, this gearbox is used on all TAM family vehicles.
The rear section carries the ammunition, 80 rounds of 155 mm ammunition of the different types the VCA fires. These are supplied to the VCA by means of a 3 m-long conveyor belt which is powered by a 24 V electrical engine. The conveyor belt exits the VCAmun through the rear door, originally designed for entry/exit of the crew on the TAM, and enters the VCA through a rectangular hatch at the top rear of the turret. A total of 28 rounds, the VCA’s capacity, can be supplied in only two minutes. This process is carried out by two of the VCAmun’s crew and the two loaders on the VCA. The total crew consists of four: driver, commander, and two ammunition porters.
It can be assumed that communications are by means of VHF SEL SEM-180 and SEM-190 systems and an SEL SEM-170 radio-receptor, as this is used on most other TAM family vehicles.
Two photos of a VCAmun resupplying a VCA. Note the conveyor belt – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, pp. 44 and 48
Service
Despite its merits, the VCAmun is yet another lost opportunity in a long list of Argentinian military projects terminated too early because of budgetary constraints or lack of interest. Only two vehicles were built and serve the armored artillery groups equipped with VCAs stationed in the southern part of the country. These are the Grupo de Artillería Blindado 9 and the Grupo de Artillería Blindado 11 «Coronel Juan Bautista Thorne». GA Bl 9 is based in Chubut province in the middle of the Patagonian plateau, whilst GA Bl 11 is based in the town of Comandante Luis Piedrabuena, Santa Cruz province, the southernmost point of Patagonia. The VCAmuns carry out their tasks alongside modified M548A1s.
A VCAmun at full speed across the open vast Patagonian meseta – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 48
Conclusion
The VCAmun has fulfilled the role it was initially set out to do, supply the VCA with ammunition. Unfortunately, financial and administrative issues have meant only two have been built. It is unlikely any more will ever be constructed but the remaining two will probably serve in the Ejército Argentino for as long as the VCA does.
Vehículo de Combate Amunicionador (VCAmun) EA 437903 of the Ejército Argentino illustrated by Pablo Javier Gómez
Argentina (1976 – present)
Infantry Fighting Vehicle/Armored Personnel Carrier – around 124-216 built
Whilst the Tanque Argentino Mediano (TAM) has become the most celebrated armored vehicle of the Argentine Armed Forces, the Vehículo de Combate de Transporte de Personal (VCTP) has, perhaps unfairly, not achieved such fame. Despite the fact that the development of both vehicles took place at the same time, much information regarding the history of the VCTP is hard to come by. This is quite surprising given that the VCTP is the only vehicle of the TAM family to have seen service outside of Argentina.
Context – Plan Europa
Argentina had remained neutral during most of WWII. Although it declared war on Germany and Japan in March 1945, the country had previously held strong sympathies towards Germany. On June 4th, 1943, a coup took place which, in time, gave rise to Colonel Juan Domingo Perón, the most divisive character in Argentinian history, becoming the country’s president in 1946.
In military terms, Argentina had a large army for its region. Taking advantage of the end of WWII and the availability of a large stock of surplus and extremely cheap US and British armored vehicles, Argentina became a considerable military power in the zone. Between 1946 and 1949, Argentina purchased or acquired at least 250 Universal Carriers, around 360-400 Shermans (M4A4’s and Firefly tanks), 18 Crusader II, Gun Tractor Mk I, 6 M7 Priests and 320 M-series Half-tracks.
By the mid-1960s, these vehicles were becoming obsolete and a plan to replace them was put into action. Led by General Eduardo J. Uriburu, the intention of this project was to modernize and diversify Argentina’s armored vehicles with the purchase of European vehicles. The ultimate goal, however, was to avoid dependence on any foreign power to provide armored vehicles. As set out by the Estado Mayor General del Ejército (EMGE), the plan would be to not only acquire the vehicles but also the authorization to produce them under license in Argentina. Before the end of the decade, the purchase of 80 AMX-13’s armed with a 105 mm gun, 180 AMX VCI Armored Personnel Carriers, 14 AMX-155 F3 and 2 AMX-13 PDP (Poseur De Pont) Modèle 51’s from France and around 60 or 80 Mowag Grenadiers and possibly a number of Mowag Roland from Switzerland was agreed. Additionally, 60 Mowag Rolands and 40 AMX-13’s were assembled under license in Argentina.
The main purpose was to find a modern and adequate replacement for the Sherman Firefly as the main battle tank for the Argentinian armed forces. In 1973, EMGE set out the requirements for a medium tank to equip Argentinian forces from the 1980s onwards.
The Tanque Argentino Mediano, the VCTP’s tank cousin, which since 1979 has been Argentina’s main battle tank – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 27
Enter Thyssen-Henschel
The company which met EMGE’s requirements for a new tank was the West German Thyssen-Henschel. This would be an agreement for co-production and technology-sharing with Argentine engineers collaborating from the very beginning.
At some point, once Thyssen-Henschel had got involved, the West German company decided to also produce an Infantry Fighting Vehicle/Armored Personnel Carrier which would become the VCTP. It was built with the purpose of mechanizing the infantry whilst also being able to provide fire support.
It was agreed by both parties that, for ease of production, speed of development, and presumably cost, it was best to base the new vehicles on pre-existing and tested technology. To that end, the Marder Infantry Fighting Vehicle, which equipped the West German Army, was chosen as the basis for the new vehicles. In essence, the VCTP is an up-gunned and higher troop capacity Marder.
Thyssen-Henschel finished the first VCTP in 1977.
Trials
The VCTP was tested at the Thyssen-Henschel facilities along with two TAMs before being sent to Argentina for further testing and evaluation under the supervision of EMGE. The vehicle was shown to the public for the first time on May 25th 1977. Thyssen-Henschel built another prototype and improved it with more expensive equipment. This vehicle, the TH-302, was intended for the export market, but unfortunately for the West German company, it was unable to find any additional customers. It is very important to establish that, like the TH-301 and the TAM, the TH-302 was not a prototype for the VCTP, but rather a development of the prototype by Thyssen-Henschel.
Over the next 2 years, the VCTP and TAM drove almost 10,000 km over all the types of terrain and in all the climates found in Argentina. For context, Argentina has very varied geography: mountainous and very high peaks in the west, arid deserts across the middle of the country, wetlands in the northeast and polar tundra in the south.
The TAM and VCTP prototypes during trials – source: Mazarrasa, p. 14
The tests were deemed very satisfactory and, during the trials, EMGE ordered the construction (though this was most likely more of an assembly job) of 4 more prototypes (2 TAM and 2 VCTP) in the General San Martín and Río Tinto factories to carry out more tests and evaluate the factory’s capacities before producing the serial version. One of the main changes from the prototype to the serial production version was the reduction of the crew from 3 to 2, with the vehicle’s commander giving way to an extra infantry trooper. Additionally, the rear weapons station was changed.
The VCTP prototype. Note the different weapons platform at the rear to that of the serial production vehicle – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 62
Towards Serial Production
EMGE wanted to produce, or at least assemble, the new vehicles in Argentina. So, a whole new infrastructure had to be created, incorporating state-run enterprises and also private companies. Although the industrial development Argentina put into motion was mainly for the purpose of assembling and producing elements of the TAM, due to the nature of the VCTP, which used the same components and was based on the same chassis, these were also essential in the production of the VCTP. For example, the General San Martín factory built the hulls for the VCTP and TAM, and Río Tercero was put in charge of building the turrets and armament. The Argentinian Company Bator Cocchis SA produced the torsion bars and rubber pads. However, many components were still manufactured in West Germany or other countries, with several different companies working on different elements, including:
– Motoren- und Turbinen-Union (MTU) GmbH – engine
– Renk – transmission
– Diehl – tracks
– Standard Elektrik Lorenz – communications
– Carl Zeiss – optics
– Tensa
– Bertolina
– Pescarmone and Fiat – some elements of the undercarriage
In all, according to Mazarrasa and Sigal Fagliani, by 1983, 70% of all TAM components were being produced in Argentina, so it can be estimated that a similar percentage was also applicable to the VCTP.
In March 1980, with the objective of having one company that would coordinate the whole program, Tanque Argentino Mediano Sociedad del Estado (TAMSE) was created. TAMSE was established as the main contractor of the TAM and VCTP and given the task of overseeing the final assembly, delivery integration of the tanks into the army, trials, homogenization of the optics and armament and potential exports.
TAMSE was given a 9,600 km2 covered assembly plant in Boulogne sur Mer, just outside Buenos Aires. The installations at Boulogne sur Mer also housed two warehouses to stock vehicle components, offices, laboratories for quality control evaluation, engine test benches, a pit for trials and a shooting range.
Production had begun beforehand in April 1979, with most components coming from West Germany and assembly taking place in already existing factories. The initial order was for 200 TAM and 312 VCTP, though this would not initially be fulfilled.
Numbers Built?
One of the hardest facts to establish about the VCTP is the exact number built, as there are widely differing figures. In his book La Familia Acorazada TAM, Spanish author Javier de Mazarrasa states that, in 1995, as many as 216 VCTPs and Vehículos de Combate Puesto de Comando (VCPC) had been built. A much more conservative estimate is given by Juan Carlos Cicalesi and Santiago Rivas in TAM (published in 2012), who state that only 124 were built, in addition to 9 VCPCs.
A veteran of the wars in Yugoslavia. Note the remnants of UN whitewash paint on the wheels – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 62
Design
External Appearance and Armor
As stated previously, externally, in appearance and design, the VCTP is very similar to the Marder IFV. The frontal plate is at a pronounced 75º angle and the sides and rear plates are positioned at 32º. At the front of the tank, on each side, are headlights. Behind these, also on each side, are wing mirrors. On each side of the front-middle section of the hull are a set of 4 Wegman 77 mm smoke launchers.
In the center of the vehicle is the turret. On the front of the right-hand side of the turret is a small hatch to dispense used cartridges. On top of the turret are two hatches, one for an infantry commander and the vehicle’s gunner.
The VCTP’s armor is made out of electrically welded nickel-chromium-molybdenum steel. The front plate is 50 mm thick and the sides and rear 35 mm. Turret armor is 35 mm at the front.
Additionally, the VCTP is equipped with an NBC protection system allowing the crew to operate in a contaminated area for up to 8 hours. The NBC system feeds the main and driver’s compartments with filtered air that can absorb solid or gaseous elements from poisonous or radioactive substances. The vehicle is able to operate in very harsh temperatures, from as low as -35ºC to as much as 42ºC, ideal for the varied terrain in Argentina. There is also an automatic fire extinguishing system which can also be manually triggered from the interior or exterior.
Armament
The VCTP has a variety of armaments. Its main gun is located in the fully rotating turret and consists of a Rheinmetall Mk 20 Rh-202 20 mm autocannon, which has a total length of 2,612 mm (2,002 mm barrel length) and a weight of 75 kg. The gun’s depression is -11º, whilst its elevation is +60º. Effective firing range is deemed at 2,000 m, though maximum firing range far exceeds this. The Mk 20 Rh-202 fires 880 rounds a minute, which can be increased to 1,030 rounds a minute on quick-fire mode.
Some sources (Sigal Fagliani) suggest that Argentina encountered issues with Rheinmetall regarding a weapons embargo and turned to the Swiss Oerlikon KAD 20 mm autocannon, the new name of the Hispano-Suiza HS.820 following Oerlikon’s purchase of Hispano-Suiza, as the main weapon for the VCTP. Regardless, the Oerlikon KAD and the Rh-202 could fire the same projectiles.
A total of 1,000 cartridges of two types of ammunition for the main gun are carried in the VCTP: the High Explosive DM81 and the Armor-Piercing DM63. These are placed in ammunition clips with 325 DM81 cartridges and 75 DM63 cartridges.
Name
DM81
DM63
Muzzle Velocity (m/s)
1,045
1,150
Weight (g)
120
108
The fire control system for the main gun on the VCTP is hydraulic. The gunner has a Zeiss PERI-Z11A1 sight with ×4 magnification and an LRP-2100 panoramic periscope.
Secondary armament consists of two 7.62 mm FN MAG 60-40 machine guns, one placed on top of the turret and a second-placed in a TPA-1 remote-controlled weapon station at the rear of the vehicle. The 7.62 × 51 NATO-standard ammunition for the machine guns has a muzzle velocity of 840 m/sec and a firing range of around 1,200 m. A total of 5,000 rounds are carried inside. Additional weaponry for the crew includes their personal weapons and 9 hand grenades.
Suspension and Undercarriage
The VCTP retained the suspension and running gear of the Marder 1, a torsion bar-type suspension with six rubber-tired paired road wheels and three return rollers on each side. The first, second, fifth, and sixth road wheel stations have hydraulic shock dampers.
The tracks are of a Vickers system, each track consisting of 91 links with rubber tank treads. These can be substituted by snow cleats if required.
Interior
The interior of the VCTP is divided into two main sections, with the frontal section being further sub-divided into two subsections. The bigger of these subsections, occupying 2/3 of the frontal space, houses the engine, whilst the smaller one is for the driver and driving mechanisms. There is a hatch above the driver’s position and three episcopes, and another one behind for one of the passengers. The whole section of the frontal hull covering the engine can be opened for engine maintenance.
The bigger rear section occupies the central and rear part of the tank and is where the 10 infantry (1 commander and 9 troopers) the VCTP carries sit. Bizarrely, the infantry platoon commander also acts as the vehicle’s commander and usually sits in the turret, where there are seven episcopes and one periscope to observe the vehicle’s surroundings. The infantrymen are seated on a central bench back-to-back with five on each side. Furthermore, they can provide fire from inside the vehicle through the three hatches placed on each side of the hull. One of the infantry also has the task of operating the TPA-1 remote-controlled weapon station at the rear. This role is assisted by four periscopes and 3 episcopes, crucial to know where and what to fire at.
At the rear of the vehicle, there is a small door for the crew and infantry to enter and exit and to replenish ammunition and other things the VCTP may need.
Infantry exiting the rear of the VCTP prototype – source: Top GunThe VCTP prototype with its crew of 3 (changed to 2 in the serial production vehicle) and 9 infantry passengers (later increased to 10) – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 62
Communications are by means of VHF SEL SEM-180 and SEM-190 systems and a SEL SEM-170 radio-receptor.
Engine and Performance
The engine on the VCTP is the MTU MB 833 Ka 500 diesel engine, a six-cylinder rated at 537 kilowatts (720 hp) at 36.67 revolutions per second or 2,200-2,400 revolutions per minute. This gives the vehicle a power-to-weight ratio of 17.6 kilowatts per tonne or 24 hp per tonne.
The engine is kept cool by two fans at its rear powered by a 33 hp engine of their own.
The gearbox on the VCTP is the HSWL 204 automatic planetary gearbox with torque converter and four forward/four reverse gear ratios. The first three are epicyclic gear trains (also known as planetary gears) and the fourth is a clutch disc.
The maximum road speed is 75 km/h forwards and backward. Off-road or cross-country speed is limited to 40 km/h. The VCTP carries 650 liters of fuel for a maximum range of 590 km. This can be supplemented with two 200 liter tanks for a total of 1,050 liters which extends the maximum operating range to 840 km. However, these are not often added on the VCTP. Other capacity fuel tanks have also been used.
Among other performance indicators, the VCTP can overcome 60% gradients, 30% side slopes, 1 m tall obstacles and 2.9 m trenches. When it comes to fording, it is capable of fording 1.5 m deep waters without preparation, increased to 2 m with preparation.
Operational Service
When production began in April 1979, it was expected that 200 TAM and 312 VCTP would be completed by April 1985, when the project was expected to terminate. However, economic difficulties meant that production was stopped at 150 TAM and 100 VCTP in 1983. Additionally, 70 unfinished vehicles were left in the factory. The first serial production vehicles left the factory in 1980.
Having built the facilities and invested a considerable amount of money but with production terminated, it was decided to try to seek success in exporting both types of vehicles. However, several deals with Arab and Latin American countries fell through and, to date, no vehicle has been exported. In the meantime, the Ejército Argentino incorporated 20 TAMs and 26 VCTPs which had been built for export to Peru.
The VCTP would see its combat debut in January 1989 during the attack on La Tablada barrack in Buenos Aires province. In this incident, the left-wing Movimiento Todos por la Patria (MTP) [Eng. All for the Fatherland Movement], which was heavily inspired by the Nicaraguan Sandinistas, took over the La Tablada barracks of the Regimiento de Infantería Mecanizado 3 on January 23rd, 1989. There is a lot of controversy surrounding the reasons behind this attack, but during the subsequent court hearings, MTP members claimed that they were attempting to prevent another ‘carapintada’ military coup, of which there had already been three between April 1987 and December 1988. Others would claim that the attack on the barracks was a failed attempt to instigate a popular uprising. To quell the revolt, the VCTPs and infantry of the Regimiento de Infantería Mecanizado 7 «Coronel Conde» were sent to La Tablada. In the end, after several hours of fighting, MTP was defeated after losing 32 fighters.
Two VCTPs belonging to Regimiento de Infantería Mecanizado 7 «Coronel Conde» which intervened during the assault on La Tablada barracks in January 1989 – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 60
Extract of a video showing a VCTP and infantry advancing on La Tablada barracks in January 1989
The VCTP would also see some action during one of the ‘carapintada’ military coups which shook Argentina between 1987 and 1990. In the last of this series of coups (December 3rd, 1990), rebellious forces under Captain Gustavo Breide Obeid took over a series of military installations, among them TAMSE. The officer who took the factory, Colonel Jorge Alberto Romero Mundani, ordered 9 or 10 TAM in the factory to head to Buenos Aires. On route, the tanks ran over a group of civilians, killing 5 of them before heading off to Mercedes. Seeing that the attempted coup was heading for failure, Romero Mundani committed suicide, one of 8 military casualties of the failed coup.
In 1992, 15 VCTPs were sent to Yugoslavia as part of the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR). The vehicles were painted in UN white and departed Argentina on March 24th, 1992 on the ship ARA Cabo de Hornos, arriving in Bar, in modern-day Montenegro, in May. Within Yugoslavia, they were sent as part of the Batellón Argentino to Western Slavonia, on Croatia’s northern border with Bosnia. En route to Slavonia, when the contingent was outside Osijek, two VCTPs were shelled by enemy forces resulting in the deaths of some civilians. In October 1982, VCTPs were deployed to prevent Croat militias from attacking Serb civilians. Most of the actions in late 1992 involved controlling the large groups of refugees. No exact details are known of the exact role the VCTP’s played, but starting in January 1993, the Batellón Argentino and other UNPROFOR units in the sector were kept busy during the Croat Operation Maslenica to retake territory in northern Dalmatia and Lika from Krajina Serb forces.
Unfortunately, not much more is known about their actions in the crumbling former Yugoslavia, but they finished their service and returned to Argentina in 1995 when UNPROFOR was ended and replaced by three different missions.
The 15 VCTPs which were sent to Yugoslavia undergoing maintenance – source: Wikipedia CommonsOne of the VCTPs sent to Yugoslavia representing the Batellón Argentino of UNPROFOR – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 62
Since then (as of April 2020), the VCTP has served alongside the M113 as the main armored personnel carrier of the Ejército Argentino. In 2008, a small number of VCTPs were refurbished by Comando de Arsenales in the former TAMSE installations at Boulogne sur Mer.
As of 2019, there was a plan to modernize the VCTP by bringing some of its components up to date, including its hydraulic, electronic and optic systems, fire control system and ballistic computer. Exact details are unknown and neither is how many, if any, have been modernized.
A VCTP post-2008 refurbishment at Comando de Arsenales – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 61
Organization
The VCTP equips the Regimentos de Infantería Mecanizada of the Ejército Argentino, in other words, the mechanized infantry regiments. Those regiments equipped with VCTPs, such as the Regimiento de Infantería Mecanizado 7 «Coronel Conde», have two companies each divided into three sections, with 4 VCTPs per section and an additional one for the company commander. This is a total of 29 VCTPs per regiment. Additionally, each regiment is led by a VCPC and is accompanied by 4 Vehículos de Combate Transporte Mortero. Other mechanized infantry regiments use M113’s under the same organization.
A column of VCTPs led by a VCPC. Note the overhead hatches for the infantry inside to fire from – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 59
Export Failure
As with the TAM, once production of the VCTP was terminated two years early, EMGE unsuccessfully attempted to export the vehicles. Their intention was to try to make TAMSE financially viable to recoup the heavy investment in its set-up and infrastructure.
In mid-1983, Peru made an effort to purchase 100 TAMSE vehicles (TAM and VCTP). However, financial reasons meant that they canceled the order and stuck with vehicles already in service. The 20 TAM and 26 VCTP already built for this delivery were transferred to the Argentinian Army.
In 1984, Panama ordered 60 vehicles, again, divided between TAMs and VCTPs. However, this would not materialize. It is possible that the sources about this are incorrect, and that the tanks for Panama were actually for Iran.
The closest Argentina got to selling a TAMSE vehicle was to Ecuador in 1988-89. Ecuador was looking for a tank for its armed forces and had a competition between different tanks to inform and determine their decision. The TAM’s competitors were the Austrian SK-105, the American Stingray, and the French AMX-13. The TAM was the comfortable winner, scoring 950/1000 points. The deal was going to be for the purchase of 75 vehicles (TAMs, VCTPs and VCRTs) for US$108 million. It fell through, according to Sigal Fagliani, because of the threatened closure of TAMSE. In the end, Ecuador did not purchase any tanks.
Variants
Since its inception, the VCTP has played a variety of roles in the Argentinian Army. Mainly due to financial constraints, purpose-built or modified vehicles for those roles have been unavailable.
Ambulance
Originally, several VCTPs had their turrets removed, thus becoming Vehículo de Combate Ambulancia (VCA). In 2001, there was an effort to create a purpose-built ambulance vehicle, the VCAmb, but after only one wooden mock-up, the project was canceled. As a consequence, the VCTP continued to be used in this role, either without its turret or just without the main armament. It is possible only the driver is retained, as the gunner is no longer needed. In addition, in its ambulance configuration, the VCTP, or VCA, carries two medics and medical equipment. The vehicle carries 4 people on stretchers, two on stretchers and four sitting down, or eight sitting down.
A VCTP in ambulance configuration during Ejercicio Reconquista 2006. Note the main armament has been removed and a big red cross has been painted on the turret – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 61
Mine Clearing
All vehicles in the TAM family, more often than not, the VCTM, can carry an Israeli-built RKM mine-roller for mine-clearing duties.
Engineering
A small number of VCTPs have been repurposed as engineering vehicles by having their turrets and TPA-1 rear weapons platforms removed. The interior has been reconditioned so as to act as a small workshop. Additionally, a ladder has been added on the left-hand side of the hull.
Derivatives, the TAM family
One of the most distinguishing factors of the TAM family is how flexible a platform it is, having spawned several derivatives, including recovery vehicles, self-propelled guns and mortar carriers. Whilst this flexibility was not one of the initial requirements set by EMGE, it was very much appreciated and was in line with the initial wishes of the Argentinian military authorities, to reduce or limit the reliance on foreign vehicles. Several of the vehicles belonging to the TAM family seem to be direct derivatives or variants of the VCTP itself.
VCTM (Vehículo de Combate Transporte Mortero)
Produced from 1980’s onwards, it was the first TAM family vehicle to have been designed in Argentina. Eliminating the turret of a VCTP, it carries a 120 mm Brandt MO-120-RT mortar which fires through the hole where the turret once stood. 36 VCTMs have been built and are still in service.
A variant of the VCTP developed in 1982, the VCPC is a command vehicle that substitutes the turret of the VCTP for a hatch for the commander. It has additional radio and communications systems and a map table in the middle of the vehicle. Only 9 have been built.
Entering service in 1982, the VCPC has served as a command vehicle – source: Taringa
VCCDF (Vehículo de Combate Centro Director de Fuego) and TAM VCCDT (Vehículo de Combate Centro Director de Tiro)
Two identical vehicles derived from the VCTP were built for artillery fire control in the mid-’90s. The difference between them comes down to their roles; whereas the VCCDF is used by artillery groups, the VCCDT is used at the battery level. They were built in small numbers, there are 2 VCCDFs and 4 VCCDTs.
Conclusion
The VCTP has played an important role in the Ejército Argentino since it first entered service at the beginning of the 1980s. It has also been the only TAM family vehicle to have seen service outside of Argentina given its role as part of the Batellón Argentino in Yugoslavia. However, whilst not as urgently as the TAM, the VCTP should soon be replaced with more modern equipment, as it is heavily based on the 1960’s technology. The chances of this happening are slim, as there is no imminent threat to Argentina where the VCTPs age would show, and the limited budget will probably be used on finding an alternative to the TAM. As such, it is likely that the VCTP will continue to see service with Argentina for the foreseeable future.
A VCTP plowing through the Argentinian Pampa. Whilst mostly based on 1960’s technology, short of some minor modernizations, the VCTP is still going to provide support for the Argentinian infantry for the foreseeable future – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 65VCTP in two-tone green camouflage – illustrated by David BocqueletVCTP in a rare green-pink camouflage pattern – illustrated by David BocqueletVCTP call sign 313, serial number EA 434036, ‘MTE LONGDON’ in traditional sand-green camouflage with open rear entry door – illustrated by Pablo Javier GómezVCTP in UN livery as part of UNPROFOR in Slavonia, Croatia 1992-1995 – illustrated by David BocqueletAnother view of a UN VCTP, this time with external fuel tanks, a UN and Argentinian flag at the rear and one painted on the hull – illustrated by Pablo Javier Gomez
Bibliography
Anon., “Advierten que Panamá podría embargar la fragata Libertad,” Clarín, 09 September 1999
Anon., Military Vehicle Forecast, TH 300 (TAM – Tanque Argentino Mediano) and TH 301 [archived report]
Guillermo Axel Dapía, El Desarrollo de la industria de blindados en Argentina y Brasil: un estudio comparado de integración económico-militar, Thesis, Universidad de Buenos Aires, 2008
Javier de Mazarrasa, La Familia Acorazada TAM (Valladolid: Quirón Ediciones, 1996)
2 (driver and gunner) + 10 infantry (1 commander and 9 troopers)
Propulsion
MTU-MB 833 Ka-500 6-cylinder diesel, 720 hp
Range
590 km without external fuel tanks
Armament
Main – 20 mm Rheinmetall Mk 20 Rh-202 / Oerlikon KAD
Secondary – 2 x 7.62 mm NATO FN MAG 60-40 (one on top of turret, one in TPA-1 weapon platform in rear)
Armor
Front hull – 50 mm
Side hull – 35 mm
Rear hull – 35 mm
Turret – 35 mm
Argentina (1980-present)
Mortar Carrying Armored Vehicle – 36-50 built
As early as the Great War, the British Army experimented with mounting a mortar between the rear horns of a Mark IV Tadpole. Placing a mortar on an armored vehicle has the advantages of the extra protection offered by the armor and the mobility of the platform. These vehicles became more common in the Cold War era and continue to be used by modern militaries. Among the many nations around the world developing their own mortar-carrying armored vehicles is Argentina. Using the development of the Tanque Argentino Mediano (TAM) and Vehículo de Combate de Transporte de Personal (VCTP) carried out by Thyssen-Henschel, the Argentinians designed their own vehicle, the Vehículo de Combate Transporte Mortero (VCTM).
The VCTM during a military exercise – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 56
The Tanque Argentino Mediano (TAM) and Vehículo de Combate de Transporte de Personal (VCTP)
In the 1970s, Argentina set up an ambitious program to find an adequate replacement for its aging fleet of WWII vintage armored vehicles. After several previous programs, including the up-gunning of its Shermans to ‘Repotenciado’ standard and purchasing French AMX-13s, including the licensed production of a small number of them, Argentina reached an agreement with the West German company, Thyssen-Henschel. Thyssen-Henschel then proceeded to develop a tank, the TAM, and an Infantry Fighting Vehicle/Armored Personnel Carrier, the VCTP, based on tried and tested components on a Marder 1 IFV chassis. Whilst the technology and many of the components would be produced in West Germany, assembly would take place in Argentina, along with the construction of armament, turrets and hulls.
In March 1980, with the objective of having a single company that would coordinate the whole program, Tanque Argentino Mediano Sociedad del Estado (TAMSE) was created. TAMSE was established as the main contractor of the TAM and VCTP and was given the task of overseeing the final assembly, delivery and integration of the tanks into the army, trials, homogenization of the optics and armament and potential exports.
The TAM (left) and the VCTP (right) – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 21 and 61
TAMSE was given a 9,600 km2 covered assembly plant in Boulogne sur Mer, just outside Buenos Aires. This installation also housed two warehouses to stock vehicle components, offices, laboratories for quality control evaluation, engine test benches, a pit for trials and a shooting range.
Even at this early stage, it was decided to use these facilities and acquired technologies and know-how to develop a family of armored vehicles based on this common chassis and components, easing production and familiarity. The first of the Argentinian produced vehicles, soon to be known as the TAM family, was a mortar carrying vehicle, the VCTM. With the design dating from 1980, the VCTM is essentially a turretless VCTP which carries a large 120 mm mortar. It is not known exactly when the project began, however, it originated with an order from Jefatura III del Comando del Ejército [Eng. Army Headquarters]. 2,000 blueprints were produced by the engineering department, apparently without foreign assistance. Nevertheless, Michael Scheibert, author of SPz Marder und seine Varianten, states that the VCTM was also a Thyssen-Henschel design. Sigal Fagliani, who adamantly defends this as the first TAM Argentinian project, gives the figure of 30 months between the production of the first prototype and the serial production vehicles. Unfortunately, most of the relevant authors do not provide dates.
Design
External Appearance and Armor
Externally, in appearance and design, the VCTM is very similar to the VCTP, and thus, the Marder IFV. The frontal plate is at a pronounced 75º angle and the sides and rear plates are positioned at 32º. At the front of the tank, on each side, are headlights. Behind these, also on each side, are wing mirrors. On each side of the front-middle section of the hull is a set of 4 Wegman 77 mm smoke launchers. In the center of the vehicle is a large hatch for the mortar to fire. This hatch consists of three sections, one opening to the front and two opening to the sides.
The VCTM’s armor is made out of electrically welded nickel-chromium-molybdenum steel. The front plate is 50 mm thick and the sides and rear 35 mm.
Additionally, the VCTM is equipped with an NBC protection system allowing the crew to operate in a contaminated area for up to 8 hours, although they cannot fire without losing NBC protection. The NBC system feeds the main and driver’s compartment with filtered air that can absorb solid or gaseous elements from poisonous or radioactive substances. The vehicle is able to operate in very harsh temperatures, from as low as -35ºC to as much as 42ºC. There is also an automatic fire extinguishing system that can be triggered from the interior or exterior.
All vehicles in the TAM family, though more often than not, the VCTM, can carry an Israeli-built RKM mine-roller for mine-clearing duties on a fitting placed on the front of the hull. Mortar vehicles are not often used in these duties, but Argentina seems to have. However, if Argentina were to ever actually enter any real conflict, it may be unlikely that the VCTMs continue to carry out these duties.
A VCTM carrying an RKM mine-roller during a test on a minefield – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 57
Armament
The VCTM carries a French 120 mm Brandt AM-50 mortar as its main armament, which is 1,746 mm long and weighs 242 kg. It has a maximum elevation of 85º but is limited to 17º horizontal traverse, meaning that to fire at different angles, the VCTM has to move. The aiming optic is an AOP-1. These figures are those given by Mazarrasa, whilst Sigal Fagliani produces different data. To start with, Sigal Fogliani denominates the mortar as LR and claims ‘it is completely constructed by Dirección General de Fabricaciones Militares’. The dimensions and weight provided by Sigal Fogliani are a tube length of the mortar of 1.5 m weighing 44 kg, with an additional 22.5 kg from the mount, 35.6 kg from the base plate, and 1.3 kg from the aiming optics. Sigal Fogliani also assesses that the mortar is on top of a rotating base which allows it to fire at 360º with an elevation of between 45º and 80º. Sigal Fogliani’s claims are spurious as he designates the mortar wrongly and mentions that there are only two crew members operating the mortar. All photographic evidence points towards 5 mortar operators. Regardless, the AM-50 fires between 8 and 12 rounds a minute. A total of 49 rounds are carried inside the VCTM behind the mortar stored in 7×7 racks. There are four ammunition types:
PEPA-LP (Projectile Empané à Propulsion Aditionale-Longue Portée): a long-range rocket-assisted high explosive shell weighing 13.4 kg, with a range of 9,500 m and an initial firing velocity of 240 m/sec.
M44: a high explosive shell weighing 13 kg and limited to a 6,650 m range.
M62: a smoke round also weighing 13 kg.
M62ED: an illuminating shell weighing 13 kg.
Fire! By pulling a long lanyard, the mortar operator is firing the 120 mm Brandt AM-50 mortar inside the VCTM – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 58Photo showing the ammunition racks inside the VCTM. Also note the episcopes for the remote-controlled weapon station – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 58
Secondary armament consists of a 7.62 mm FN MAG 60-40 machine gun placed in a TPA-1 remote-controlled weapon station at the rear of the vehicle. The 7.62×51 NATO-standard bullets the machine guns fire have a muzzle velocity of 840 m/sec and a firing range of around 1,200 m. Additional weaponry for the crew includes their personal weapons, an 88.9 mm Instalaza M65 rocket launcher, and 9 hand grenades.
Suspension and Undercarriage
The VCTM retained the suspension and running gear of the Marder 1, a torsion bar-type suspension with six rubber-tired paired roadwheels and three return rollers on each side. The first, second, fifth, and sixth road wheel stations have hydraulic shock dampers to absorb a significant part of the stress created by firing the mortar.
The tracks are of a Vickers system, each track consisting of 91 links with rubber tank treads. These can be substituted with snow cleats if required.
Interior
The interior of the VCTM is divided into two main sections with the frontal section being further sub-divided into two subsections. The bigger of these subsections, occupying 2/3 of the space, houses the engine, whilst the smaller one is for the driver and driving mechanisms to his left. There is a hatch above the driver’s position and three episcopes, a hatch, and a periscope for the vehicle’s commander, and the whole section of the frontal hull covering the engine can be opened for engine maintenance.
The central area is open-topped and houses the large mortar. This area is also occupied by four of the five mortar operators, with the other one, the aimer, positioned behind them with a hatch of his own. Behind the mortar are the ammunition racks. One of the mortar’s operators is also in charge of operating the TPA-1 remote-controlled weapon station and has 2 episcopes to assist in those duties.
Communications are by means of VHF SEL SEM-180 and SEM-190 systems and an SEL SEM-170 radio-receptor.
The rear of a VCTM showing the ramp for entry and exit from the vehicle and two additional fuel tanks – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 58Six of the seven crew members aboard a VCTM. Note the numerous VCTPs in the background – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 55
Engine and Performance
The engine on the VCTM is the MTU MB 833 Ka 500 diesel engine, a six-cylinder rated at 537 kilowatts (720 hp) at 36.67 revolutions per second or 2,200-2,400 revolutions per minute and with a power-to-weight ratio of 17.6 kilowatts per tonne or 24 hp per tonne.
The engine is kept cool by two ventilators at its rear powered by a 33 hp engine of their own.
The gearbox on the VCTM is the HSWL 204 automatic planetary gearbox with torque converter and four forward/four reverse gear ratios. The first three are epicyclic gear trains (also known as planetary gears) and the fourth is a clutch disc.
The maximum road speed is 75 km/h forwards and backward. Off-road or cross-country speed is limited to 40 km/h. The maximum range is limited to 590 km, but it can be increased by 350 km to 840 km with the additional 200 l fuel tanks. The fuel capacity inside the tank is a meager 650 l, but with the addition of two 200 l fuel tanks on the back of the tank, this can be extended to over 1,000 l. However, these are not usually added to the VCTM. Fuel tanks with other capacities have also been used.
Among other performance indicators, the VCTM can overcome 60% gradients, 30% side slopes, 1 m tall obstacles, and 2.9 m trenches. When it comes to fording, it is capable of fording 1.5 m-deep waters without preparation, increased to 2 m with preparation.
Service
Not much is known about the service of the VCTMs, but it can be assumed that, as with the TAM and VCTP, they were used during several of the attempted coups that rocked Argentina in the late 1980s and early ’90s, the ‘carapintada’ military coups. In the last of this series of coups (December 3rd 1990), rebellious forces under Captain Gustavo Breide Obeid took over a series of military installations, among them TAMSE. The officer who took the factory, Colonel Jorge Alberto Romero Mundani, ordered 9 or 10 TAM in the factory to head to Buenos Aires. On route, the tanks ran over a group of civilians, killing 5 of them before heading off to Mercedes. Seeing that the attempted coup was heading for failure, Romero Mundani committed suicide, one of 8 military casualties of the failed coup. Some sources (Cicalesi & Rivas) claim that Romero Mundani was actually commanding a VCTM.
Video showing a number of TAMs, a VCTP, and a VCTM at the front of the TAMSE installations during the 1990 ‘carapintada’ coup. The officer commanding the VCTM which appears mid-way through the video may well be Romero Mundani – source: DiFilm on YouTube
There is a slight divergence in the sources over the numbers built, with Cicalesi & Rivas putting the number at 36 and Mazarrasa at 50. Notwithstanding, each of the mechanized infantry regiments equipped with VCTMs have them in groups of 4 to provide fire support to infantry units. In other mechanized infantry regiments without VCTMs, this duty is carried out by the M106 mortar carrier, which instead of the usual 107 mm mortar, has a 120 mm mortar.
A column of VCTMs during operations – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 55
Conclusion
Whilst experiencing a not too noteworthy career, the VCTM provided a valuable lesson to the Argentinian military authorities, and that was that they could apply their newly acquired technology to produce their own vehicles with a commonality of mechanisms and pieces for different roles. This not only supposed an easier retraining of crews and more common and faster production of replacement parts but eliminated reliance on foreign military hardware. However, as with other vehicles of the TAM family, the resources have not always been there to domestically sustain the production of these specialized vehicles, thus vehicles have to be imported to make up the numbers.
VCTM, call number 132, ‘CARAPANGUE’, with its ramp openVCTM with RMK mine-roller. Both illustrations produced by Pablo Javier Gomez
120 mm Brandt AM-50 mortar
7.62 mm NATO FN MAG 60-40 in TPA-1 weapon platform in rear
Armor
Front hull – 50 mm
Side hull – 35 mm
Rear hull – 35 mm
This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Cookie settingsACCEPT
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Privacy Overview
This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.
Kingdom of Spain (1919-1931)
A column of at least six Blindados tipo ZIS in Andalucía in 1938 – source: Mortera Pérez (2009), p. 236
Two VCTPs belonging to Regimiento de Infantería Mecanizado 7 «Coronel Conde» which intervened during the assault on La Tablada barracks in January 1989 – source: Cicalesi & Rivas, p. 60
