US Halftracks

[Wilhammer]

Check out Harry's Half Track Page.

He is currently restoring a M3A1.

http://www.eagle.ca/~harry/vehicles/halftrck/index.htm

This link agrees with the link I posted in the other Halftrack thread in that the M3a1/M5a1 replaces the M3/M5 in production, and all of them carried 13 passengers.

Another link describing the M3a1 HT. http://www.wargamer.com/cm/m3a1.htm

[This message has been edited by Wilhammer (edited 12-02-2000).]

[Formerly Babra]

Well, it's pretty much undisputed how many seats they had. BTS's position seems to be based on usage (command vehicle), and the assertion that a full squad just wouldn't fit due to the extra equipment and ammo on the M3A1. As you know, I disagree with the second assertion.

Regarding usage, the armor mag article we previously cited has raised doubts in my mind. It quite clearly states that armored infantry squads were different than foot squads in that one squad member was detailed as the driver. It also lists a TO&E for armored infantry platoons having a machine gun squad with one .50 cal and two Browning .30 cals. That's exactly the armament of the M3A1 (MMG), which coincidentally (?) was alloted at one per platoon.

I think these are some clues that perhaps these vehicles do not have any inherent crews at all and are merely platforms for the different squads which use them. More investigation is definitely needed here, but primary sources are required. I think I've exhausted the available net resources.

[Chief]

Wilhammer:

I can confirm that the M3A1 was apparently viewed as a replacement for the M3 in US TO&Es. I have an official TO&E for a recon troop that noted that the HTs will be M3s until M3A1s become available. I quote from TO&E 2-27 (15 July 1942), commenting on the M3A1s assigned to the troop:

"Modified half-track pers carr with ring mount for cal. .50 MG and panel mounts for cal. .30 MG. Pending availablilty,, carr pers, half-track, M3 w/o armament will be substituted."

All US TO&Es from this period list the halftracks as "w/o armament" and list the MG armament separately. For this TO&E, at least, the M3 and M3A1 were used interchangeably.

[Chief]

Oops, thats' 1943, not 1942. By the by, the armored infantry company in 1944 and 1945 had, as best I can derive from the official TO&Es, 20 halftracks. 10 had .50 cal. armament and were presumably either M3A1s or M2s (to tow the gun section). See my post last night on platoon organizations for more details.

[Wilhammer]

Based on American work practice, and as dangerous as War is, it was a job, then I would say that no crews were assigned to personnel HTs in the US Army in the field, except, maybe, a driver. Driving was a part of life for many of the GIs, life on the farm, etc.

I am also convinced that, for the most part, the MMG spindle mounts were used by weapons inherent to the unit, so if you want a heavily armed HT, put 2 MMG teams on it, and they mount their MMGs on the HT. Resonable for travelling, but I doubt they were used in direct combat long that way.

As ofr stowage, you can see that much was behind the passenger seats, and of course the plethora items mounted outside the damn things.

Concerning BTS questioning of how they were used, I can see the confusion.

If the A1 series was used to carry a squad, then I doubt it could support and feed more than one MG at the same time.

But BTS seems to feel that if it carries its squad, then no MG can be used.

Hogwash, I say. If I had to command a unit of a1 HTs, I would put a bunch of ammo on one HT (of course the other HTs would have some ammo), and use it to feed the other's MGs as needed so that I could carry my squads in unity.

[Chupacabra]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wilhammer:

If I had to command a unit of a1 HTs, I would put a bunch of ammo on one HT (of course the other HTs would have some ammo), and use it to feed the other's MGs as needed so that I could carry my squads in unity.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, fine, but I think BTS should probably stick to modelling what was done rather than what Willhammer would do. I'm assuming though that you are in fact asserting that this was done. Do you have sources to back this claim up?

Also, quoting from the second link you posted:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The American military used a variety of halftracks during WW2; these half-tanl, half-truck vehicles were used both as infantry carriers and weapons carriers because halftracks could traverse terrain that trucks could not, and they enabled infantry to be moved into combat with relative ease. The two most widely used were the M2 (later M5) and M3 (later M9). The M3 (M3A1) was powered by a White 147-hp engine. This model could carry 13 soldiers. Also used extensivly as weapons carriers, mounting both .30cal and .50cal machine guns.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Note that this description makes a distinction between M3A1s used as infantry carriers and those used as weapons carriers. This indicates to me that it was one or the other - either you carry a full squad, or you carry MGs plus a lesser amount of infantry.

------------------

Grand Poobah of the fresh fire of Heh.

[This message has been edited by Chupacabra (edited 12-02-2000).]

[Formerly Babra]

I took the reference to "weapons carriers" to refer to the 75mm variants and such things.

[Wilhammer]

Chupa, calm down.

BTS bases part of its claim on conjecture, and I offer some in return.

So, if you offer up a bunch of hard facts, but offer one dubious one....

Please, if you want to argue about this, don't attack me, attack my arguments.

Naming someone in your statement against the argument is close to a flame.

All the facts I offer are from a WW2 manual issued by the US Army that seems to be backed up by several other sources.

Please be calm, this is just a discussion board, not a brawl

[This message has been edited by Wilhammer (edited 12-02-2000).]