Feasibility study: M113 in the 1930s.

What would be the technical obstacles for America to building something like the M113 in the mid to late 30s?

Aluminium hull, V8 diesel, able to float, carry a driver and 12 others. (Or a 25mm turret. Or a mortar. Maybe a M24/75mm turret. Or any number of other uses. Add armour as required.) Say some bright spark thinks it's a good idea, and they come up with the more creative variants later.

With the exception of armour :rolleyes:, it's a fairly good match up to the Panzer III, or Panzer IV if the M24 turret could work. Would probably do poorly against P.III-P.V, but given the extra speed might do slightly better against the P.VI than the sherman did.:p

That aside I can think of a few situations where it might be genuinely useful. Pacific island hopping springs to mind, amongst others. Any thoughts?
 

Tovarich

Banned
Damnit, I thought this said "MI13 in the 1930s", like from Excalibur.

Talk about disappointed......:(
 
Does anyone have figures for Aluminum prices and production at the time?

My search fu is weak and this would be the key factor

I know the USA had a hard time getting enough Aluminum OTL, so that would be the deal breaker here

An M75 or M59 equivalent would be better ideas
 
The closest match to what you're sugesting would be the M2 half track. If fully enclosed it would be a fair match for the M113 and would be able to cope with almost the same terrain. If you must fit a turret and make it into an infantry fighting vehicle the the turret from the M2 light tank would probably be best the combination of 37mm cannon and .30 machine gun would be adequate for most needs. It would however be vital to keep this vehicle away from enemy tanks as its armour would only be enough to keep out macinegun fire and shell splinters.
 
Metallurgy, engine technology, plus having the idea.

You are talking 30 years of advances in tech between when you are asking for it to be developed and when it was actually developed. With three wars driving armored vehicle design. Of course it will be near equivalent of the Tanks of the late 1930's it was designed with the knowledge of how to fight them built in!
 

NothingNow

Banned
Does anyone have figures for Aluminum prices and production at the time?

My search fu is weak and this would be the key factor

I know the USA had a hard time getting enough Aluminum OTL, so that would be the deal breaker here

It's not dirt cheap (in 1930 it was about 24 cents per pound, dropping to 20 cents in 1939,) and generally, it went for more higher end uses like in Aviation, which consumed pretty much all of the available supply.

Plus there's getting the skills to work an aluminum hull with armor up to an inch and a half thick, (that won't stop anything more than a Ma Deuce.) Oh, and using aluminum would make it far too expensive for peace time budgets.

You're better off trying to get the LVT-4 a few years early.
 
If it caught fire, it would burn like a flare. Ships made of that material early in the Cold War era were called "Bic Lighters" for a reason.
 
It's not dirt cheap (in 1930 it was about 24 cents per pound, dropping to 20 cents in 1939,) and generally, it went for more higher end uses like in Aviation, which consumed pretty much all of the available supply.

Plus there's getting the skills to work an aluminum hull with armor up to an inch and a half thick, (that won't stop anything more than a Ma Deuce.) Oh, and using aluminum would make it far too expensive for peace time budgets.

You're better off trying to get the LVT-4 a few years early.
Thank you for the info
 
If I remember rightly the British did experiment with the concept in WWI, trying to use Mark IV tanks. Problem was that the troops were practically gassed by the fumes and roasted by the heat from the engine. I suppose its possible someone could have carried the idea forward in the interwar years.
 
Peg Leg Pom:
Good sugestion! That was just what I was looking for.

NothingNow:
Aluminium isn't cheap, but the cost doesn't change between 1935 and 1960, when the M113 was built. Technically it should be equally affordable at both time periods. Besides I need something to suck up a large amount of aluminium for an ATL of mine.:D

Kalvan:
Plate aluminium doesn't really work that way. Also see 'Sherman Tank'. In this application, everything else will almost certainly catch fire and burn out (or scatter itself over a wide area) before the armour itself reaches ignition temperature.

Trekchu:
"It wouldn't work for, you know, reasons. Reasons that are vague and unspecific." Anything particular in mind? Wiki say aluminium welding was available in the 30s. And yes, Sparky was kinda the inspiration for this.:p
 

NothingNow

Banned
NothingNow:
Aluminium isn't cheap, but the cost doesn't change between 1935 and 1960, when the M113 was built. Technically it should be equally affordable at both time periods. Besides I need something to suck up a large amount of aluminium for an ATL of mine.:D

Defense budgets also increased massively at the same time, and the industry as a whole had a much better idea of how to work with inch and a half thick slabs of the shit than they did in the 30's especially when it came to not setting it on fire when you were welding, because Aluminum, like Magnesium burns like a motherfucker once you get it going. All that? Costs a fuck load of cash to develop.

The Petrol engine you'd have to use to get a decent power to weight ratio with 30's tech, while maintaining your cargo bay isn't going to help with that either.
 
Why bother with aluminum? If memory serves, the prototype M113 used braced steel. Otherwise total weight and protection were the same as the aluminum model. The only reason they chose aluminum was to dispense with the bracing and simplify manufacture. Since this is the 1930's, everyone is still stumbling forward towards best practice and might accept the additional steps.
 
Defense budgets also increased massively at the same time, and the industry as a whole had a much better idea of how to work with inch and a half thick slabs of the shit than they did in the 30's especially when it came to not setting it on fire when you were welding, because Aluminum, like Magnesium burns like a motherfucker once you get it going. All that? Costs a fuck load of cash to develop.

The Petrol engine you'd have to use to get a decent power to weight ratio with 30's tech, while maintaining your cargo bay isn't going to help with that either.

<nods> So Mr Sparky's late 30s army is due a few industrial accidents during R&D then. And I might have to ASB a version of GMAW ten years early. I can live with that.

For the engine I'd basically want a V8 verion of the M3's White 160AX. I can find no data on how much more this would weigh than the M113's origonal Crysler 75M. Probably well enough for government work.
 
with the Loyd Carrier you are almost there-it could seat 10 men, so just increase the engine, lenthen it a tad, pop on a proper roof rather than the canvas tilt and jobs a gudun.
 
The Lloyd Carrier could seat four.Ten on one is men hanging off here there and everywhere.To increase its size you would have to give a bigger engine,lengthen it,make it wider give it a new set of tracks,new suspension,new gearbox.......
Easier to start from scratch.
 
I think with late 1930's technology and design philosophy the best you could get would be something like an AMX VCI or M75.Aluminium armour? No.Diesel engine-Possibly but only in certain countrys.
 
Dable you are thinking of the Bren carrier-the Universal carrier. One version of that (an older variant) was the Scout Carrier and that had bench seating for a full section-although it was feet dangling. The UC is lightly armoured and has the driver and front gunner plus 2 bisected 'cabins' on either side of the engine housing-thats its main problem as an APC. Even so UC were often seen with as many folk as you could get hanging off them-a photo also exists showing one tooled up with a MMG, 2 Brens and a Boys plus its crew toting Tommy guns (very ACAV). The Loyd carrier however was pretty much an open platform with seating round the sides http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz2DnQLuojM
 
Top