10-23-2020, 09:17 AM | #21 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
|
Re: Major advantage of a half track?
Note that while the British did use them in WWII (all US made as far as I know), they mostly used small tracked vehicles such as the Universal Carrier (the most produced armoured vehicle ever, at about ~113,000 made) and the Loyd Carrier (~26,000 made), or wheeled trucks where they didn't need the off-road capability of tracked vehicles, or where long range was needed (such as for the Long Range Desert Group's vehicles).
The major attraction of half-tracks for the US seems to have been that civilian truck manufacturers could make them with little retooling and retraining required, and they gave a useful improvement in cross-country performance over the trucks that they were a modification of. As the US didn't enter WWII with an over-abundance of hardware, this was a really important consideration for them.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn "A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history." |
10-23-2020, 10:07 AM | #22 |
Hero of Democracy
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: far from the ocean
|
Re: Major advantage of a half track?
mechanically speaking, I think the key to understanding a half-track is that its steering with the wheels but putting the motive power through the tracks.
My experience with light off-roading and driving in snow is that if you run into trouble its most likely because the wheels providing the power have lost traction. So a half-track uses tracks to make your traction more reliable. Tanks need to run their tracks in opposite directions to turn. That's complicated, and not something that was typically asked of existing vehicles. Half tracks use wheels to turn, so they can have a simple (civilian) transmission. Half-tracks also don't lay tracks out the full half-length of the vehicle, so they get some cost savings there. So in the end you have a vehicle easier for civilians to drive, produce, and maintain than a tank, and that has decent off-road capability. A half-track can follow tanks off-road, but it can't get to all of the silly places a fully tracked vehicle can go. So it can't cross a 5 foot trench like a tank, but but it can cross 6 miles of farmer's fields that trucks would get bogged down in, and the occupants can work out a solution for other obstacles as they appear.
__________________
Be helpful, not pedantic Worlds Beyond Earth -- my blog Check out the PbP forum! If you don't see a game you'd like, ask me about making one! |
10-23-2020, 10:14 AM | #23 |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
|
Re: Major advantage of a half track?
That's only true if you intend for the vehicle to be able to turn in place. Generally in WWII a tracked vehicle turned by braking one track and/or by reducing power to one and increasing it to the other. Braking was simpler, power transference more efficient.
__________________
Rupert Boleyn "A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history." |
10-23-2020, 10:52 AM | #24 |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: Major advantage of a half track?
They were a utility transport vehicle. I think they were used mainly for carrying armored infantry but they could also toe artillery pieces, serve as command vehicles, whatever.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison |
10-23-2020, 11:06 AM | #25 | |
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Re: Major advantage of a half track?
Quote:
I have at least twice commented that the Germans were prepared for the Franco-prussian war. It is a silly sounding comment but what it really meant was that for a long time Germany's strategy was the same as it's tactics. This was more sensible than it sounds at first hearing: they were built for geographically limited conflicts in comparatively docile terrain rather than for global war and concentrated on winning one or two battles and bringing that to the peace table. It was predicated on the fact that natural defenses were scarce and playing for time wasn't an option. This system worked in the Wars of Unification because Kaiser Bill the First was a fairly sensible warleader and knew how to get out when the getting was good. He also had Bismark and Moltke handling his wars and subsequent peace and took their advice which was also sensible. Hitler let his enemies have the kind of war they wanted which was exactly the opposite: it was all about playing for time until resources kicked in. WW2 was a fight between Apollo Creed and Rocky Balboa. Now Hitler could of course not have forced peace on an unwilling enemy without conquering them. But it was his own fault for making himself so odious that people would rather have anything than him.
__________________
"The navy could probably win a war without coffee but would prefer not to try"-Samuel Eliot Morrison Last edited by jason taylor; 10-23-2020 at 09:09 PM. |
|
10-23-2020, 01:18 PM | #26 | |
Join Date: Sep 2007
|
Re: Major advantage of a half track?
Quote:
The initial version of the 251 had sprocket wheels with lubricated roller bearings that would engage with the pads on the inside of the track. Apparently good track life and traction, but it was expensive to make, so later versions dropped that design in favor of sprockets with the dry teeth you probably imagine when you think of a tank tread. |
|
10-23-2020, 07:15 PM | #27 | |
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Wellington, NZ
|
Re: Major advantage of a half track?
Quote:
__________________
Rupert Boleyn "A pessimist is an optimist with a sense of history." |
|
10-23-2020, 11:37 PM | #28 |
Join Date: Sep 2004
|
Re: Major advantage of a half track?
Only if you want to lose it immediately. They were used for cross-country, off-road movement. (Trucks don't really go off-road.)
__________________
My blog: All my hobbies, all the time |
10-24-2020, 08:44 AM | #29 |
Icelandic - Approach With Caution
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland
|
Re: Major advantage of a half track?
They were effectively an early version of the M113 APC.
|
10-24-2020, 12:29 PM | #30 |
Join Date: Apr 2019
|
Re: Major advantage of a half track?
They were best considered in tandem with the rest of the equipment available at the time and the doctrine that spawned them to fill a needed niche.
Much like amphibious assault vehicles of WWII would be pretty pointless today (except in specific edge cases) because we have many other (better) options to move troops from water to land. No doubt in 50-100 years historians will giggle about Jets that can hover, rocket assist take off, Chinooks, etc... At the time the allies needed to be able to move troops and "equipment" overland avoiding the roads or easy terrain (roads were mined and small bridges were easy to collapse). They didnt have anything in the inventory that filled the transport roll, was at least lightly armored, and could traverse the bulk of the European landscape (mostly muddy fields, dirt trails through the woods and void space between villages). They only had to plan to encounter small arms on accident (maybe the occasional lightly fortified village), if they ran into big guns they were either in the wrong place or had bad intel and the doctrine was not to "Stand and Fight". Its not that a half track would be considered a fantastic piece of equipment, or even a great transport platform. They were light enough to transport en masse to the front lines, The key was it was available and functional using much of the same parts that were already in the supply chain, and the rest was simple (metal panels) or a one off like the track. It wasn't the best piece of equipment, it WAS the best they had that did the job enough to move on to doing the job. |
Tags |
halftrack, wwii |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|