If you look at the OP, our STEN APC only needs to protect infantry against rifle bullets and shrapnel from air-bursting artillery. Think of artillery shells detonating at tree-top level. So our STEN APC needs a better roof than most WW2-vintage APCs to protect passengers against rain and shrapnel.
If the German Army had more wheeled transports during the early stages of the Battle of France, tanks would not have needed to wait for infantry to catch up.
Those Bedford trucks converted by the German Army were what I originally had in mind when I started this thread.
Oxford and Cambridge carriers look like good ideas. What is the largest size APC you could built on Universal Carrier suspension?
Falk's Katzchen is clever, but probably cramped. In another forum, a "whatif" modeler built a pseudo version with a faceted troop compartment that resembled an SDKFZ 251 from a distance. His model had a door on the left side of the transom. However, troops had to clamber over a full-length drive shaft on their way to their seats. Hopefully his Mark 2 Katzchen would move the engine forward to sit beside the driver (ala. M113). Apparently many APCs (e.g. Canadian Bobcat) put the engine and drive axle at opposite ends to balance the vehicle. It is difficult to predict balance when you cannot predict infantry casualties.
That Skoda tank chassis had plenty of room for upgrades on its reliable chassis. The ultimate upgrade was the Swedish PBV 301 IFV with the engine moved forward and room for 6 infanteers plus a turret-mounted 20mm cannon.
Mind you the OP posits a rifle-caliber MG as standard armament with perhaps a few later upgraded to .50 caliber heavy MGs.
WW2 armies did not take APCs seriously until they suffered heavy infantry casualties: Germany on the Eastern Front and the Canadian Army during the summer of 1944.
If the German Army had more wheeled transports during the early stages of the Battle of France, tanks would not have needed to wait for infantry to catch up.
Those Bedford trucks converted by the German Army were what I originally had in mind when I started this thread.
Oxford and Cambridge carriers look like good ideas. What is the largest size APC you could built on Universal Carrier suspension?
Falk's Katzchen is clever, but probably cramped. In another forum, a "whatif" modeler built a pseudo version with a faceted troop compartment that resembled an SDKFZ 251 from a distance. His model had a door on the left side of the transom. However, troops had to clamber over a full-length drive shaft on their way to their seats. Hopefully his Mark 2 Katzchen would move the engine forward to sit beside the driver (ala. M113). Apparently many APCs (e.g. Canadian Bobcat) put the engine and drive axle at opposite ends to balance the vehicle. It is difficult to predict balance when you cannot predict infantry casualties.
That Skoda tank chassis had plenty of room for upgrades on its reliable chassis. The ultimate upgrade was the Swedish PBV 301 IFV with the engine moved forward and room for 6 infanteers plus a turret-mounted 20mm cannon.
Mind you the OP posits a rifle-caliber MG as standard armament with perhaps a few later upgraded to .50 caliber heavy MGs.
WW2 armies did not take APCs seriously until they suffered heavy infantry casualties: Germany on the Eastern Front and the Canadian Army during the summer of 1944.