I have two questions that I’ve been wondering about the first question is what kind of halftracks did the British use during Market Garden. The second question I have is if the British did use Halftracks would they have left the 50. calibre machine gun on it or would they have replaced it with a bren gun?
…the British produced no halftrack of their own; they used American halftracks, and yes, they would have left the 50 cals in place, just as they did with the Sherms they used…
The British were supplied with the M5 and M9 half tracks. None of which are produced except some obscure (and not so great) conversion kits.
The DML M2 & M4, the Tamiya M3A2 – are not the same vehicle despite the resemblances.
…the M5 may not be the exact vehicle, but other than the fact that it had homogenous armor vs face-hardened steel on the US versions I think they would pass in a dio to the casual eye…if I am wrong I would like to know some of the major visible differences…
One of the half track variants had rounded corners on the rear of the troop compartment vs squared corners on the M2/M3 series. The Brits had a habit of removing the .50’s off their lend lease tanks, occasionally replacing them with a “bomb thrower”. I will check my references when I get home for photos.
MR:
Three pretty obvious differences are the British ones had rounded rear corners of the troops’ compartment, the fenders were differently shaped and the armored shutters on the windshield and side windows were inside of the armor rather than on the outside.
Mechanically, there were very few duplicate parts.
…those can be easily worked out with the DML kit (eyeballing the actual Villers-Bocage pics of burnt-out M-5’s it is extremely difficult to visually see the differences)…I plan on doing another Villers dio and will use it (DML) for a commonwealth vehicle…
I’m starting to like halftrack even thought I never made one and probaly won’t for a while now, but hey, who hates a half tank, half truck, they should be use more for swat team.
I notice that americain halftrack and german halftrack are very diffrent even thought they’re the same type of vehicle, for instead, german hanomag (which is what they called there half track) road wheels look the same as the kettenkrad road wheels, while the M1 halftrack (americain) had road wheels more like a sherman road wheels.
THe Germans liked their interleaved road wheel design whereas the US halftracks link back from tractor suspensions.
By the way, “Hanomag” is incorrect. Hanomag was one of seven factories that helped produce the SdKfz 251. The fact that it’s so frequently used is because of Tamiya mid-70s marketing more than actaul wartime references. They packaged the SdKfz 251 ausf C model kit as the “Hanomag 251” (didn’t we all buy and build one of these???). The real German term was Schwere Panzerwagen (SPW) or Heavy armrored vehicle. Sometimes Halbeketten could be used (half-track) but most wartime references and veterans recall SPW or Ess-pay-vay. They wouldn’t have called it a Hanomag as we wouldn’t have called ours an International Harvester or a White.
…true, calling it a Hanamog would be about as rare as seeing a German applying zimmerit to a John Deere riding lawnmower, in the field…
Ok, I just finished a quick check of photo references. Out of seven photos showing Brit half tracks, all appear to be M9/M9A1 variants. On the M9’s (no armored machine gun position), in five photos, NONE have a .50 mounted. On the M9A1’s (armored machine gun position over the front passenger position) in the two photos, one (ID’d in caption as assigned to 4th Armored Brigade) has the .50 mounted. The other M9A1 (ID’d in caption as assigned to Motor Batallion, Grenadier Guards) has no .50 and instead has a Bren laying across the front of the armored mount position. The Bren is NOT mounted in a pintle. All these photos were supposedly taken between the break out from Normandy and the capture of Brussels/Antwerp in late summer of 1944. Not the last word on this area, but at least it gives you leeway.
One other APC option you have for Market Garden in the Kangaroo Priest. I have seen a photo of a column of these from the Guards Armored Division crossing Nijmegen Bridge the day after it’s capture by the 504th PIR/Grenadier Guards.
…good info…of approx three pics taken after the Villers-Bocage disaster by the Germans, the burnt-out halftracks all seem to have the MG “pulpit” in place over the passenger side (no MG’s to be seen)…too difficult to discern whether or not they have the rounded rear corners or not…
The halftracks are pictured in “Through the Lens: Villers Bocage”
Easier ways to distinguish an M5/M9 is through the appearance of the armored shutters on the windscreen armor and side window armor and the open space beneath the fenders, behind the front wheels. Admittedly, angles often don’t clearly show the rear corners of the fighting compartment.
Like I said, if you see the shutters on the “inside” of the armor, it’s a clear mark of an M5/M9.
As a matter of fact, I don’t recall ever seeing a single M2/M3 in NWE under UK/Commonwealth control.
The rounded corners are extremely difficult to pick out in most photos. But the fenders for the front wheels and the armored sliding ports are easy key indicators of the difference between the M3 and M9 series. On the M3 the fenders also curve/flare down and outward like on a car in addition to curving forward over the wheel, and the sliding vision shutters are mounted on the outer face of the armor. On the M9’s the fenders are flat without any downward wheelwell flaring and simply curve over the front wheel, while the vision shutters are mounted on the inner face of the armor.
After seeing these diffs, I just may have to give a go at converting an old Tamiya M3 into an M9. Since their rear compartment needs so much work to correct anyways into a proper M3… The rounded rear corners are probably the greatest challenge.
…I might just round mine (rear corners) off with a sanding stick, or better yet, a sanding block…
It’s not that simple MR. The curvature is quite extreme verus the right angle of the M2/M3. You’d need to rebuild the fighting compartment armor. It’s not just an issue of sanding off the corner but the curved section needs to be rebuilt – about 5mm on each side. Hunnicutt’s Halftrack book is commonly available. I know that the new Boresight magazine is a Half-track special and is about to be mailed. I think there’s M5/M9 coverage in there too.
While your “sanding” the corners, make sure to lengthen the fighting compartment of the M2 as it is noticeably shorter than that of the M5 & M9.
Another difference between the M3 and M9 series is the stowage lockers. It will be something of a challenge to make a new troop compartment, but manageable. Almost everything is angled or squared with the exception of the rear corners. As long as I can get some good scale drawings it should work.
ALCON: The M5 and M9 series Halftracks were manufactured by International Harvester Company (IH). With few exceptions almost the entire run of these HT became “Lend Lease” vehicles and were as a matter of course used by our allies. On many of these HT the French installed their own speedometer to reflect KM vs. Miles. The distinct rounded rear corners on the rear armor and the flat fenders were distinct differences noted in these halftrack. The IH HT armor was not manufactured by Diebold Safe Company and it had different ballistic penetration characteristics. In addition the IH halftrack had a distinct instrument panel in the driver’s compartment and did not utilize the “White” truck company “Hercules Series” Engine but used an IH engine instead.
Cheers,
Mark
Mark,
with all due respect, digging up these three and five year old threads to show your prowess in the area of the half track looks a bit odd (and almost like a spammer) and I’m not quite sure what ALCON: means.
…and for the record, the 12th armored division used tons of IH half tracks both stateside for trainging as well as in the European theater. If you’d like to start a current thread on the subject, I’d be happy to post pictures.
Regards,
Ken Abrams