Hanomags, White, Autocar, What do you think of APCs in WWII? Do you have any favorites? Have you ridden in one? Which side had the best and used them to their advantage?

__________________
Coir a glaive

Nemo me impune lacessit

I think The Hanomags had the most 'military' look of all APCs, bar the Bren carrier. The American ones just look like trucks with tracks.

__________________

The SdKfz 251 series was probably used most widely, along with the M3. Probably the most effective idea was the 'Kangaroo'.

__________________
"Stand by to pull me out of the seat if I get hit" - Guy Gibson

Think "maintenance" on one and the other and come back to me.

__________________
No Rest for the Wicked!

Except for the Kangaroo (as Martin mentioned), the "A" of APC in WW 2 was a bad joke to those who rode in them. The 251 looks best (cool), the Hanomag was probably first, and the M-3 (etc.) perhaps got around the best (having driving front wheels).
Better than walking or tank riding for protection.
Under fire ? Bail out, you are a big target that draws a lot of attention, and can't take much punishment.

__________________
"Danger Will Robinson!"

I like the Sd.Kfz.251 for the looks,also.

So let's address the last part of the question, thanks for your early responses. Do you feel they were a novelty or an actual tactical advantage?
note: I am trying to promote dialog not trying to have those questions answered for myself, I will comment later.

__________________
Coir a glaive

Nemo me impune lacessit

My decision was based soley on looks, mate.

__________________

There are two groups of thought on APC design in WW 2, more or less lite today. The frist group of thinking is the 'battle taxi" idea. The French Laffy armored truck, the US M 2 / 3 series halftracks and similar epotimize this thinking.
This group designed vehicles that allowed transport of infnatry and supporting weapons onto the battlefiield but were not intended to actually engage in combat. That is, they were designed for mobility and for mobility under relatively random enemy artillery fire etc.
The second group saw the APC as an adjunct to battle. The Sdkfz 251 and Kangaroo are examples of this thinking. These were vehicles that were deigned to actually go into combat along with their passengers.
Personally, I see the best version as being something in between. Forcing lightly armored vehicles into combat is likely to result in nothing but casualties. The battle taxi idea on the other hand doesn't deliver the troops to the battlefild per se nor does it really give safe tactical mobility.
What was really needed was a compromise between the two. That is, a vehicle that coould maneuver on a tactical battlefiield with reasonable immunity to enemy weapons while delivering its crew and equipment to a point where they could be effective. It had little need to be able to fight on its own as many modern IFV do.

This was one area in which the Germans did not appear, to me, to be following an evolutionary dead end.

The 251 strikes me as the only vehicle that was intentionally designed to do the job that APCs are supposed to do. Despite the lack of a roof it at least protected the men inside quite well from small arms and blast and, importantly, due to the gradually improved rear doors could dump them out of the back in an efficient and protected manner.

M2/M3/M5 half-tracks, despite being able to carry a squad don't seem to offer as much protection to the occupants, and the rear door must have been a nightmare for all to bail out of, making the rather more exposed route of jumping over the sides more likely. Something about them in the troop role looks extemporised, but as a carrier for equipment or weapons it seems to make far more sense. An armoured lorry rather than an APC.
The Kangaroos were also heading in the right direction, but perhaps too much of a (necessary) compromise to really compete with the 251 as a finished and purpose built design. The armour may have been thicker by a large factor but entry, exit, and kit stowage looks like a nightmare. I'd rather be inside one under fire though so perhaps that's the primary criteria? Much better off-road than either of the other two as well.

The 251 has flaws of it's own, particularly I'm told by those that have driven them (confirming what an examination of the mechanicals implies) in the difficulty of steering, but it served well past the war (as, of course, did the US half-tracks, though not so much as troop carriers) in OT810 format and, in my opinion, feeds directly into the future development of IFVs and APCs (hmmm, maybe it's more of an IFV than an APC... or are they essentially the same thing blurring into one concept ).
The half or semi track may have died out in a military sense but there's wheeled vehicles that now carry a similar torch. The Kangaroos may most closely mirror M113s, FV432s etc. with full tracks and all round protection but during the war perhaps hadn't quite reached maturity?

Blah.
I'll have a time-travelling Merkava please.

Cheers,
Adam.

Edit: sorry, cross-posted with TA above... must stop popping off for a drink while posting.

__________________
"Wars cannot be fought with dream stuff" - Sir Percy Hobart.

also note that the different variants for the 251 compared to other Allied tracks............it had to be because of overwhelming Allied air cover, many 251 started having sand bags, concrete and then the redesign of the cabin in a slightly armored form with several different looks to them..........still did not help

By the by, in case anyone's not visited this is the 'official' page on the 251 & variants;
Hanomag Sd.Kfz. 251
Great stuff.

Cheers,
Adam.

__________________
"Wars cannot be fought with dream stuff" - Sir Percy Hobart.

Ask any soldier, woman, child, or dog if they'd rather walk or ride ?
especially through sand, mud, snow, or any distance further than to the mailbox.
Instant infantry support,
Rapid(er) deployment to necessary positions,
Heavy weapons carriers, ammunition, food, water, fuel.....essentially an armored truck.
towing capability (anti-tank/anti-aircraft),
Somewhat protection (thicker than your shirt),

Yes, use them, if you have the industrial base/fuel.........go for it.

__________________
"Danger Will Robinson!"

I don't think they were a novelty,especially on the Ostfront with the non-existant roads.

Your wish only came true with the BMP-1, some 30 years later than the end of our period

__________________
No Rest for the Wicked!

Well, I will now comment on my opinion of APCs. I feel that the German's had the edge with variants and specialist jobs for their vehicles. Although the Germans incorrectly tried to use them as a substitute for tanks. One vital task for these APCs was reconnaissance duty. They served well in the US inventory as anti aircraft platforms which doubled as infantry fire support. So besides lugging the boys around the front, they were an asset to all countries armored units.

__________________
Coir a glaive

Nemo me impune lacessit

The Americans used them as early "tank-killers" so I can't say the Germans were the only ones who used them incorrectly. The Germans needed them for their engineers/reconnaissance and maintantaince people especially in the swampy land of the Soviet Union.

Eg.:

Good page:
75mm GMC M3

Cheers,
Adam.

__________________
"Wars cannot be fought with dream stuff" - Sir Percy Hobart.

Wasn't the gun mounted on that vehicle the famous French '75 artillery piece from WW1?

__________________

I'm not much of an 'armor' guy (... I know, I know.... what can I say...it's a personality flaw!...)

Can someone direct me to a photo and/or description of the above mentioned 'Kangaroo'?


....bring me into the fold, so to speak!

-whatever

-Lou

__________________
5 out of 4 people have difficulty with fractions.

Here you go Lou:
Ram Kangaroo Preservation
It was also done with other vehicles, Shermans, experiments with Churchills etc.

And a thread here:
Kangaroo?

Cheers,
Adam

__________________
"Wars cannot be fought with dream stuff" - Sir Percy Hobart.