Military Review

M113 armored personnel carrier: tests in Kubinka and comparison with BMP-1

97
M113 in the Armored Museum in Kubinka. Photo by the author

Trophy from Vietnam



Visitors to the Armored Museum in Kubinka near Moscow, in all the variety of domestic and foreign equipment, will not pay attention to the three American M113 armored personnel carriers from the first time. Nevertheless, these tracked armored vehicles, installed in Pavilion No. 5 "Armored vehicles of the USA, Great Britain, Canada", are worthy of a separate stories.

The very first of them, the M113 armored personnel carrier with inventory number 4616, appeared in Kubinka in military unit 68054 in the early 70s. The car was donated by North Vietnamese comrades in gratitude for the extensive Soviet assistance. The rest of the M113s came to Kubinka later, after the defeat of the southerners. When the Americans left over 1300 tracked vehicles as trophies to the winners. A large part of them are now serving in the Vietnamese People's Army, armed with Soviet rifle weapons.

The baptism of fire of the M113 was adopted in Vietnam. Source: livejournal.com

For the early 70s, the American armored personnel carrier was a completely successful model, although it was not devoid of some shortcomings.

For its time, it was the most massive foreign tracked armored vehicle - by 1978, more than 40 thousand copies were produced. The Americans did not make any special secrets about the design of the M113. And they sold generously to allies - in at least 30 countries.

The armored car received its baptism of fire in Vietnam in 1962, when the American command transferred 32 vehicles to the South Vietnamese army. Then the Vietnamese gave the M113 the sonorous nickname "Green Dragon".

Indeed, at first, the enemy could not oppose anything to the tracked vehicle. The armored car had good maneuverability on rice checks, and also withstood small arms fire.

The partisans suffered losses. And this forced to look for new methods of dealing with the M113.

To do this, vehicles were lured into impassable areas and fired at from hand-held anti-tank grenade launchers.

Massive concentrated fire on the commander was also quite effective. tank... The Browning M2HB machine gun with a caliber of 12,7 mm was located on an open turret near the commander's cupola, which made the shooter very vulnerable.

In January 1963, the M113 company of the South Vietnamese army stormed a Viet Cong village. During the offensive, well-aimed North Vietnamese riflemen knocked out almost all the M113 commanders, who leaned out to the waist to fire from a machine gun.

It is likely that not all of those exhibited in the M113 museum were exhibited in the USSR. Source: livejournal.com

The response to the ever-increasing losses among the crews of armored personnel carriers was the superstructure on the commander's cupola and machine gun guards. Installed similar in the repair shops of the South Vietnamese army. And later, protection appeared on the vehicles of the American troops.

At least one of these vehicles was captured and in good condition ended up in the Soviet Union.

M113 vs BMP-1


The results of the study of the American M113 armored personnel carrier were partially published in the "Bulletin of armored vehicles" during the 70s. It can be assumed that a detailed study of all components of the machine and the registration of the results took the engineers a couple of years.

The greatest interest in Kubinka was aroused by the Allison TX-200-2 hydromechanical transmission with automatic gear shifting. It was a slightly redesigned civilian transmission of the XT series, which seriously reduced the cost of production of an armored personnel carrier.

At that time, the domestic industry could not offer anything of the kind, therefore, a considerable part of the publication was devoted to a detailed analysis of the device.

Engineers praised the transmission's small size and ease of use. Among the weaknesses of the armored personnel carrier, the insufficient power of the Chrysler Model 75M gasoline engine of 215 hp was noted. with. The kinematics of the transmission allowed it to accelerate to 72,5 km / h, but the traction capabilities of the motor were not enough.

Dozens (if not hundreds) of captured M113s still serve in the Vietnamese army. Source: pikabu.ru

To assess the dynamics of the M113, a concrete track in the vicinity of Kubinka was used. In the highest sixth gear, the armored personnel carrier was able to gain about 56 km / h.

When loaded (10,4 tons), the car accelerated to maximum speed for almost 45 seconds, and in light weight (8,4 tons) it fit into 39. As the testers noted, the acceleration dynamics of a tracked armored car in all speed intervals was at the level of domestic military equipment light weight category.

During the study, engineers compared the M113 with the world's first BMP-1 infantry fighting vehicle.

It is not entirely clear why they chose an armored vehicle of a completely different class for comparison. The BMP-1 was one and a half tons heavier and much more heavily armed. When comparing the efficiency, the diesel infantry fighting vehicle consumed 23-28% less fuel than the gasoline M113.

On a closed route, 10 km long, the BMP-1 kept an average speed of 36,8 km / h, and the "American" - only 25,7 km / h. This was largely determined by both the greater power of the engine of the domestic car and the high smoothness of the ride. According to the last parameter, the M113 was seriously inferior to the BMP-1.

In the domestic literature, you can find references to such disadvantages of the M113 as low permeability on difficult soils. Obviously, information about this was taken from the experience of foreign operation, since the test engineers of Kubinka did not mention a word about such a shortcoming. Probably, the overseas armored car was simply not driven through the mud.

Interestingly, since 1964, the Americans began to release the M113A1 modification, in which the 215-horsepower Chrysler 75M engine was replaced by the 212-horsepower General Motors 6V53 diesel. So to speak, they took into account the mistakes and experience of a potential adversary.

Much later, engineers managed to compare the M113 series machines with more advanced BMP-2s in absentia. The corresponding analytical report was published in the "Bulletin of armored vehicles" in 1989. The Americans carried out controlled operation of the M113 in their homeland in Forts Hood and Irvine, as well as in German Bramberg.

Despite the fact that the test conditions for the armored personnel carrier were simpler than that of the Soviet BMP-2, the engineers rated the reliability of the M113 as close to the domestic vehicle. As stated in the article, this indicates a high level of design development.

Aluminum armor


In addition to the hydromechanical transmission, the captured M113 armored personnel carrier was of particular interest to aluminum armor, the share of which in the total mass of the vehicle reached 40%. More precisely, it was not entirely aluminum.

Chemical analysis showed that the proportion of magnesium in the alloy was about 4,5-5%, manganese - 0,6-0,8%, chromium - up to 0,1%, and the "winged metal" was about 94%. Surprisingly, chemists found even scarce titanium in the armor - up to 0,1%. The rest of the elements - iron, zirconium, zinc and silicon - were present in the armor in trace amounts. The testers even named the steel grade 5083 and noted its good weldability.

An important advantage of American armor was the absence of a hardening and tempering procedure, which greatly simplified production. The only armor parts made of steel alloys were the mentioned protective superstructures of the commander's cupola and machine-gun shields. It was the standard high hardness bulletproof armor.

M113 armored personnel carrier: tests in Kubinka and comparison with BMP-1
Drawing from the "Bulletin of armored vehicles". Source: btvt.info

Testing the resistance of the M113 armor to shelling by large-caliber machine guns makes one think about the number of armored personnel carriers supplied by Vietnam to Kubinka.

The museum specimen in pavilion 5 contains an entire armored personnel carrier. At least there are no visible bullet marks on it. Meanwhile, the M113 evacuated from Vietnam was not at all good at the training ground in Kubinka. The vehicle was processed with armor-piercing calibers 14,5 mm, 12,7 mm and 7,62 mm. The shelling was carried out at different course angles at the frontal and side parts of the armored vehicle from distances of up to a kilometer.

In the report on tests of the armor of the American armored personnel carrier, the level of protection was designated as relatively high.

Later, publications appeared in which the M113 was accused of low resistance to anti-tank weapons.

This, of course, is absurd - the vehicle was not originally designed for frontline combat. And it performed its main task of protecting the crew from small arms very well.

This was confirmed by tests in Kubinka based on military unit 68054.
Author:
97 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The leader of the Redskins
    The leader of the Redskins April 1 2021 18: 10
    +17
    Thanks. I liked the article very much.
    1. Catfish
      Catfish April 1 2021 18: 41
      +8
      Hi, hi. smile
      Testing the resistance of the M113 armor to shelling by large-caliber machine guns makes one think about the number of armored personnel carriers supplied by Vietnam to Kubinka.

      Was it really so ?! wassat
  2. Vadim Ananyin
    Vadim Ananyin April 1 2021 18: 24
    +2
    There was such a car, I read about it back in 1982-83, but then there was no particular interest. Thanks to the Author!
    1. Flooding
      Flooding April 1 2021 19: 09
      +1
      I remember I was a kid
      textbooks and reference books that remained with my father and uncle after serving in the SA were some of my favorite books
      images of an American soldier in overalls, M113, recoilless weapon on a jeep
      still stand in the eyes
  3. Doliva63
    Doliva63 April 1 2021 19: 01
    0
    Studied it back in the 70s. The most interesting thing about it is the landing ramp, otherwise it sucks.
    1. YOUR
      YOUR April 2 2021 02: 23
      -10%
      What's so good about her? The doors will swing open faster than the ramp down. There is also some protection from the doors
      1. Doliva63
        Doliva63 April 2 2021 14: 57
        +2
        Quote: YOUR
        What's so good about her? The doors will swing open faster than the ramp down. There is also some protection from the doors

        Where did I say something good? It's just that the decision was extraordinary, you must agree. But I also think the doors were better.
    2. LastPS
      LastPS April 2 2021 08: 07
      +17
      It is tracked and protects the troops from small-caliber weapons and shrapnel, and there is also an automatic transmission, while it costs all relative pennies. What else do you need from a btra? In my opinion, it’s not the best example of the 60s in this class.
      1. Looking for
        Looking for April 2 2021 14: 51
        -16%
        American ass is also probably the best in its class ????
        1. LastPS
          LastPS April 2 2021 15: 56
          +9
          And in essence, there is something to say or are we only able to be drunk in delirium?
  4. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat April 1 2021 19: 17
    0
    There is not enough magnesium and manganese in the armor. We used to put more bombs in our children. laughing
    1. YOUR.
      YOUR. April 3 2021 10: 32
      +2
      As a child, I lived next to the Ryazan Airborne School. Therefore, for the bombs, they sawed BMD rollers on the obstacle course :) Chips of magnesium-aluminum armor worked worse :)
      1. Reserve buildbat
        Reserve buildbat April 3 2021 11: 30
        0
        We had a Su-7BM not far away, so there was something to profit from. And his engine lay next to it. So they sawed incessantly.
  5. Doctor
    Doctor April 1 2021 19: 22
    -20%
    M 113 is still the best. Slightly thicker armor, active armor and copy massively.
    1. bk0010
      bk0010 April 1 2021 19: 34
      +7
      Quote: Arzt
      M 113 is still the best.
      Really? I saw only one good review about him and then, with a non-standard application. If you have any other information, please share.
      1. Doctor
        Doctor April 1 2021 19: 45
        -6
        Really? I saw only one good review about him and then, with a non-standard application. If you have any other information, please share.

        This is a real APC.
        Simple, reliable, passable, convenient, cheap.
        One of the few where fighters ride in it, and not on it.

        What else is needed? A gun of 100 mm? This is already a light tank with passengers. A normal tank will finish it off just like any BTR-BMP-KAMAZ.
        1. bk0010
          bk0010 April 1 2021 19: 57
          +11
          Quote: Arzt
          This is a real APC.
          Simple, reliable, passable, convenient, cheap.
          Simple and cheap - no. A product made of aluminum armor on tracks is neither simple nor cheap. Passable - no, and the Vietnamese used it. Security appeared when additional. armor was hung (the mass increased from 10 to 14 tons with corresponding consequences for buoyancy and maneuverability). The Americans put extra on it. armament up to 106-mm recoillessness, so the gun would not be in the way.
          1. Nestor Vlakhovski
            Nestor Vlakhovski April 1 2021 20: 58
            -12%
            A product made of aluminum armor on tracks is neither simple nor cheap.
            for the equipment of the decaying bourgeoisie M113 is the most simple and abnormally cheap.
            Passable - no, and the Vietnamese used it.
            Already who, and the Vietnamese pretty much drank grief from the M113 with their excellent cross-country ability.
            Security appeared when add. the armor was hung
            the security of the basic M113 is at the level of the Soviet BMP-3. With add. by shielding in a circle, the armor protects up to 14,5 KPV bullets, and here the old man of the 80s can be compared only if he is with the ceremonial analogue "Kurgan".
            The Americans put extra on it. armament up to 106-mm recoillessness, so the gun would not be in the way.
            you will not believe, but they also installed all sorts of different cannons, including large-caliber ones. We agreed that the goat does not need this button accordion.
            1. EvilLion
              EvilLion April 5 2021 08: 30
              0
              Different armies of the world, putting full-fledged turrets with guns on the M113, look at you in amazement.
              1. Nestor Vlakhovski
                Nestor Vlakhovski April 5 2021 17: 59
                0
                How many machines from the total production of M113 received a turret? Less than 5%.
                So I did not deny the huge potential for converting this armored car into special vehicles (including cannon versions).
        2. Bad_gr
          Bad_gr April 1 2021 20: 37
          +25
          Quote: Arzt
          One of the few where fighters ride in it, and not on it.
          1. Doctor
            Doctor April 1 2021 20: 46
            -27%
            Yes, sometimes. But not because they are afraid inside, just reluctance to walk. wink
            1. bk0010
              bk0010 April 1 2021 21: 37
              +21
              Quote: Arzt
              Yes, sometimes. But not because they are afraid inside, just reluctance to walk.
              They also climb on our armor because it is cramped, stuffy, boring and swaying inside, and not because they are afraid.
              1. Doctor
                Doctor April 1 2021 21: 59
                -19%
                They also climb on our armor because it is cramped, stuffy, boring and swaying inside, and not because they are afraid.

                Look closely at these photos again. These are safe marches on the highway, except maybe the extreme one.

                When it smells like fried, they drive like this:



                And we are like this:



                Not a single normal fighter in danger, will not climb inside our coffins.
                Just because you can't get out of there. wink
                1. Usher
                  Usher April 1 2021 23: 43
                  +3
                  If you don’t know, don’t tell me. If a fighter dies or is wounded and at the same time he was not in the right place, that is, on the armor, and not inside. Then he will not be paid insurance.
                  1. EvilLion
                    EvilLion April 5 2021 08: 23
                    0
                    Actually, the commander orders how the vehicles move.
                2. Incvizitor
                  Incvizitor April 3 2021 15: 54
                  +2
                  Well, yes, they only have on the highway on the armor, but we have just like that on the armor in the battle there were bullets whistling and the soldiers on the armor. lol
                3. EvilLion
                  EvilLion April 5 2021 08: 26
                  +2
                  Once again, for stupid ones, the infantry must dismount at the beginning of the battle, it is not needed inside the boxes, to hit the infantry on a moving vehicle from the shooter, you must be a non-fig shooter, but the chances that the mass of people on the armor will notice the enemy before increases. Jumping out, when bullets are already knocking on the armor, is also not pleasant.
          2. Alf
            Alf April 1 2021 22: 19
            +13
            Interestingly, the first 113th is the Confederate flag. No matter how the Yankees jumped out of their pants, the spirit of the South did not disappear.
          3. YOUR.
            YOUR. April 3 2021 10: 35
            +6
            The Confederate flag in the first photo made me happy. BLM adepts nervously smoke on the sidelines :)
        3. YOUR
          YOUR April 2 2021 02: 31
          +8
          Quote: Arzt
          One of the few where fighters ride in it, and not on it.

          So I rode where mines were not placed. And then apparently not completely read the article. In one battle, they knocked out all the commanders.
          Look at add. materials. In the search engine "loss of M113"
          During the invasion of Laos in 1971, they lost 40 armored personnel carriers and (!) 80 were simply abandoned while running away. It turned out to be faster on foot
          1. Dmitriy170
            Dmitriy170 April 4 2021 21: 10
            +1
            Well, the South Vietnamese invaded Laos. So the losses of armored personnel carriers are mostly non-combat, even among those forty - most of them were stupidly abandoned.
        4. EvilLion
          EvilLion April 5 2021 08: 22
          +1
          In Vietnam, the fighters also drove it, because the review is needed. And so, the box is rectangular - this is its main plus.
    2. Reserve buildbat
      Reserve buildbat April 1 2021 19: 45
      +16
      That is, back in the 1970s he was so-so, but now he has become "still the best"? You have something with logic ...
      1. Doctor
        Doctor April 1 2021 19: 53
        -15%
        That is, back in the 1970s he was so-so, but now he has become "still the best"? You have something with logic ...

        So-so, because it was incomplete. The engine is weak, the armor is slightly weaker than necessary, the open machine gun, etc.
        But the concept itself is close to ideal.
        1. Reserve buildbat
          Reserve buildbat April 1 2021 19: 56
          +7
          Therefore, it remained a useless box. According to the concept
          1. Doctor
            Doctor April 1 2021 20: 12
            -15%
            ... Therefore, it remained a useless box. According to the concept

            The rest are even more useless. This is the whole point. wink
            1. Incvizitor
              Incvizitor April 3 2021 15: 57
              +2
              The rest, and with 30 mm, can support the infantry, but with 30 mm, in any case, better than with a machine gun.
            2. Serg koma
              Serg koma April 4 2021 16: 24
              0
              Write directly - "Best in the world because American!"
            3. Filxnumx
              Filxnumx April 5 2021 19: 55
              0
              just don't tell the Jews, טוב? And then they will be offended for their "carrot" and still will not let you into the promised land. hi
        2. tralflot1832
          tralflot1832 April 1 2021 22: 18
          +13
          The statutes are probably different, if the amers do not find the body inside the armored personnel carrier, you will not get any insurance. All because of the money they have. They are tied with insurance.
          1. Doctor
            Doctor April 1 2021 22: 27
            -7
            The statutes are probably different, if the amers do not find the body inside the armored personnel carrier, you will not get any insurance. All because of the money they have. They are tied with insurance.

            No, concept.
            They have it based on the work of Brigadier General Richard Simpkin, who served for over 30 years as an officer in the British Royal Tank Regiment.
            His books "Motorized Infantry" and "Tanks" are considered the best in the English-language analytical literature on this topic.

            Concisely here:

            http://btvt.info/5library/hifv2.htm

            Future Infantry Vehicle Development - Gregory A. Pickell - US Army Reserve Captain.
            1. tralflot1832
              tralflot1832 April 1 2021 23: 03
              +18
              In 71, the Vietnamese Congo decided to attack the Vietnamese troops in Laos, the basis of the Vietnamese defense was PT 76 and T 54. During a short battle, 30 M 113 and 80 M113 were thrown into a stampede. 72 g while trying to help the blockaded city of Lot Ninh in During the battle, a very short battle was destroyed 31 M 113. The experience of the Israelis is especially epic. The armed brigade M 113 was completely destroyed. A few hours before the end of the war, M 113 was destroyed by a burst of caliber 7,62. Guess what was fired from. This is only from wiki. Israelis will not let you lie, it is not for nothing that they began to practice heavy armored personnel carriers based on captured tanks. All from wiki. A lighter is a lighter.
              1. Doctor
                Doctor April 1 2021 23: 08
                -4
                In 71, the Vietnamese Congo decided to attack the Vietnamese troops in Laos, the basis of the Vietnamese defense was PT 76 and T 54. During a short battle, 30 M 113 and 80 M113 were thrown into a stampede. 72 g while trying to help the blockaded city of Lot Ninh in During the battle, a very short battle was destroyed 31 M 113. The experience of the Israelis is especially epic. The armed brigade M 113 was completely destroyed. A few hours before the end of the war, M 113 was destroyed by a burst of caliber 7,62. Guess what was fired from. This is only from wiki. Israelis will not let a lie, it is not for nothing that they began to practice heavy armored personnel carriers based on captured tanks. All from the wiki. A lighter is a lighter.

                Everything is correct. For it’s not fucking with a bare heel (M113) to rush to a checker (T-54). laughing
                They had to launch the M60 forward, and escort to the M113, so that the Vietnamese would not rush with a grenade.

                About 7,62 is possible. But these are the first cars.
                1. tralflot1832
                  tralflot1832 April 1 2021 23: 16
                  -3
                  Israel, but I don’t believe in life! belay
  6. Pavel57
    Pavel57 April 1 2021 19: 52
    +10
    I really had to compare with
    BTR-60.
    1. OgnennyiKotik
      OgnennyiKotik April 1 2021 19: 59
      +16
      Direct analogue of M113 is MT-LB. By tasks and parameters. Very strange comparisons with infantry fighting vehicles or wheeled armored personnel carriers.
      1. Doctor
        Doctor April 1 2021 20: 22
        -9
        Direct analogue of M113 is MT-LB. By tasks and parameters. Very strange comparisons with infantry fighting vehicles or wheeled armored personnel carriers.

        Yes, the idea is correct.
        But cramped, weak armor, no heavy machine gun or automatic grenade launcher.
        1. OgnennyiKotik
          OgnennyiKotik April 1 2021 20: 37
          0
          Both of these transports are outdated and should be found in the history section. In modern realities, service is maximum in artillery units and deep in the rear. Self-propelled coffins are not needed now.
          1. Doctor
            Doctor April 1 2021 20: 42
            -18%
            Both of these transports are outdated and should be found in the history section. In modern realities, service is maximum in artillery units and deep in the rear.

            The skate initially did not hold up, therefore it was used more as a tractor or for experiments in the form of a shock platform.

            And the M113, after reinforcing the armor to the level of holding a large-caliber machine gun, installing AGS, KAZ, will now be the best armored personnel carrier-BMP.
            1. OgnennyiKotik
              OgnennyiKotik April 1 2021 21: 02
              +3
              No, it will not. What you are talking about is called AIFV (Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle). Thousands of pieces made in metal. All the same, armor and mine protection falls short of modern standards. But in comparison with the BMP-1/2/3 and modifications of the BTR-80, it looks better. However, it is very far from AJAX, Lynx, Bradley. It is the modification of the Bradley BTR that replaces the M-113 in the US Army.
              1. Doctor
                Doctor April 1 2021 21: 12
                -12%
                It is the modification of the Bradley BTR that replaces the M-113 in the US Army.

                Yes, not bad, but there is an unacceptable drawback.

                The landing force is critically small, there is no full-fledged squad. One wounded person is enough to disrupt the BZ.
                Payback for strengthening in other aspects.

                They will fight a little and return to the analogue of M 113 laughing .
                1. OgnennyiKotik
                  OgnennyiKotik April 1 2021 21: 37
                  0
                  I don’t think so. In the heavy teams of Abrams and Bradley, in the Stryker teams it is clear that in the light MRAPs. M-113 and analogues have no place there. M-113 remains in the "non-advanced" parts, a tracked tractor / transport is always needed. The KMP has its own plans.
                  Here Bradley can replace the principle, but not in the next decade.
                2. OgnennyiKotik
                  OgnennyiKotik April 1 2021 21: 57
                  +11
                  By the way, there is an interesting option for upgrading the M113. Does the tower look like nothing?
                  1. Doctor
                    Doctor April 1 2021 22: 06
                    -7
                    By the way, there is an interesting option for upgrading the M113. Does the tower look like nothing?

                    This is yes. But the question is debatable.
                    Protection or Review? That is the question. wink

                    I read somewhere that the Germans were surprised at the habit of our tankers to drive with closed hatches.
            2. Angry Alt-Right
              Angry Alt-Right April 1 2021 23: 36
              -1
              Quote: Arzt
              Both of these transports are outdated and should be found in the history section. In modern realities, service is maximum in artillery units and deep in the rear.

              The skate initially did not hold up, therefore it was used more as a tractor or for experiments in the form of a shock platform.

              And the M113, after reinforcing the armor to the level of holding a large-caliber machine gun, installing AGS, KAZ, will now be the best armored personnel carrier-BMP.

              This you of course gave a blunder by writing that the M113 can be compared with the BMP! laughing
              But if we compare it with direct "competitors" in the class, such as the BTR-60 (and even the BTR-80), then there will be a better comparison. Especially in terms of various modifications.
            3. Dmitriy170
              Dmitriy170 April 4 2021 21: 15
              +1
              "Motolizhka" still as "held out" where the wheel "eights" did not pass. Our special forces in the Caucasus used them very actively.
              1. Doctor
                Doctor April 5 2021 00: 21
                0
                The motoryzhka "still held out" where the wheeled "eightyards" did not pass. Our special forces in the Caucasus used them very actively.

                So the special forces did not have the M113, therefore they used what they had. laughing

                MTLB is a successful car, the design is correct, but you need a higher one to sit normally, armor to hold 12,7, and 12,7 on the roof.

                In short, do it like an American. wink
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Incvizitor
            Incvizitor April 3 2021 16: 02
            0
            How mortars can and will go.
        2. Constanty
          Constanty April 1 2021 22: 26
          +1
          Then, perhaps, compare the M-113 with the OT-62 TOPAS 2AP?
          1. Doctor
            Doctor April 1 2021 22: 39
            -6
            Then, perhaps, compare the M-113 with the OT-62 TOPAS 2AP?

            You can compare. This is not the question.

            Why do you need an APC at all?
            Simplified - 2 tasks.

            1. Providing infantry with a protected vehicle;
            2. Providing fire support for infantry during battle.

            The BMP also adds a third - covering tanks in battle from enemy infantry.
            Whatever it is like here:




            Hence, we must dance.
      2. Bad_gr
        Bad_gr April 1 2021 20: 41
        +18
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        Direct analogue of M113 is MT-LB.

        I think that a comparison with the BTR-50 would be more appropriate: that the one that the other is a tracked armored personnel carrier and is almost the same age (BTR-50 -1954g, BTR M113 - 1960)
        1. tralflot1832
          tralflot1832 April 1 2021 22: 25
          +10
          Krasava, I served on such a large-caliber 14,5. I held each body before assembly. I changed the shooting marks to the left of the driver under three triplexes and the left side. Thank you.
        2. tralflot1832
          tralflot1832 April 2 2021 15: 34
          +2
          Here is a car for driving on German autobahns! GSVG eh youth, where are you? Only in memory !!!
      3. Hog
        Hog April 1 2021 22: 02
        +13
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        Direct analogue of M113 is MT-LB.

        With what fright? The M113 is an armored personnel carrier, and the MT-LB is a "light armored multipurpose transporter-tractor."
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        By tasks and parameters.

        The M113 was originally designed as an armored personnel carrier.
        MT-LB was originally designed as an all-terrain vehicle for transporting goods, a tractor for towing artillery guns, a chassis for mounting various devices, and also as an ambulance.
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        Very strange comparisons with infantry fighting vehicles or wheeled armored personnel carriers.

        How long has the M113 become an infantry fighting vehicle?
      4. Pavel57
        Pavel57 April 1 2021 22: 25
        +4
        Quote: OgnennyiKotik
        Very strange comparisons with infantry fighting vehicles or wheeled armored personnel carriers.

        Yet the BTR - 60 was the main BTR, not the MT-LB or the BTR-50.
        1. Dmitriy170
          Dmitriy170 April 5 2021 13: 24
          0
          At the beginning of the XNUMXs, I had to deal with such a phenomenon not described in textbooks as a motorized rifle battalion on the MT-LB. For all the "ABCs" he is either on an armored personnel carrier or an infantry fighting vehicle, but the realities of life have made their own adjustments.
      5. Potter
        Potter April 2 2021 13: 11
        +4
        Let me disagree. MT-LB does not have aluminum armor, it is thin steel. Anti-splinter. LB - lightly armored. The main purpose of the MT-LB is an artillery tractor, created to replace the AT-P. In the staff of the D-30 towed howitzers there were 27 of them. As an armored personnel carrier MT-LB in the SA, it was used in 3-4 divisions stationed in the north, Karelia, Murman and the Far North. Probably due to the good habitability and the low probability of conflict with the Finns at that time.
  7. John22
    John22 April 1 2021 19: 57
    +11
    Simple shape and low weight due to aluminum armor are the main features of the M113 armored personnel carrier. I remember it from Vietnam and the 1968 NATO Armed Forces Handbook. It turns out that the armor resistance of the M113 was at the same level. Although its results are not presented in the article, I have not seen it in print. And the permeability is sufficient, although the rubber pads on the tracks were surprising then. They are invisible on the tracks of the armored personnel carrier in Kubinka, but they are on all the photo guides. I was surprised by the lack of loopholes in the bots, compared to our armored personnel carriers. But the smoking-room is still alive.
    1. Andrey VOV
      Andrey VOV April 1 2021 20: 21
      -4
      RPG-7 so in theory it should have dealt with it at once ...?
      1. Nestor Vlakhovski
        Nestor Vlakhovski April 1 2021 20: 47
        +2
        RPG-7 is a situational weapon, it is not necessary to make a wunderwaffe out of it. An armored personnel carrier can be knocked out from any anti-tank grenade launcher, but the "consumption" of a grenade launcher will be considerable.
        1. Andrey VOV
          Andrey VOV April 1 2021 21: 16
          -3
          I just don’t make a wunderwaflu, but solely from experience ... just a wonderful goal in terms of its dimensions, apparently the Vietnamese saved the charges or there were few of them, or they were ineptly used ...
          1. LastPS
            LastPS April 2 2021 08: 23
            +4
            The Vietnamese have experienced some shortage of RPGs for quite some time. The main type, at best, was the RPG-2. It must be understood that no one designed such a technique so that it could counteract RPGs, and indeed something serious. This is a relatively cheap transport for the infantry and that's it. As for the size, they are not very different from the BTR-60, for example.
            1. Andrey VOV
              Andrey VOV April 2 2021 12: 39
              0
              American is more, let's say square or something)))
    2. Dmitriy170
      Dmitriy170 April 5 2021 13: 26
      +1
      A small series was released with loopholes in the sides. They refused after military trials. There is almost no sense from them anyway, but production is more expensive.
  8. Nestor Vlakhovski
    Nestor Vlakhovski April 1 2021 20: 44
    -6
    You can scold him, you can praise him, but it was the M113 that became the standard of the armored personnel carrier for many decades. It's amazing how the Soviet test commission did not learn positive experience from the operation of this armored car.
    1. Disant
      Disant April 1 2021 23: 05
      +4
      but it was the M113 that became the standard of the armored personnel carrier for many decades. Amazing

      Indeed - amazing.
      with what to compare - we do not know, but - the best.
      1. Nestor Vlakhovski
        Nestor Vlakhovski April 2 2021 15: 00
        +3
        with what to compare - we do not know
        how do we not know? We know and compare with other armored personnel carriers.
        but - the best.
        not the best. But very successful and popular.
        When someone is now building a new armored personnel carrier, his first question will be "What are the advantages in comparison with the M113." And very often it turns out that even modern technology does not have these advantages.
  9. dgonni
    dgonni April 1 2021 23: 58
    +8
    You can't compare soft to hard!
    Two different concepts. Two different uses!
    BMP-1? This is the front line transporter in a vigorous war! Or who has already forgotten the statutes? Forward through the funnel of a vigorous explosion and further we will crush the rear and everything else! ☺
    113th is just an infantry transporter!
    Therefore, deliver to the battlefield, cover yourself with frontal armor from a caliber no more than our 14.5 and disembark through a gentle ramp!
    And then the infantry can be covered with a machine gun. But this is as much as possible.
    Therefore, the volume is available. For the 113th is a transporter but not an infantry fighting vehicle.
    He did not count on a battle in the second line with tanks!
    Oddly enough, the BMP and the 113th are still in demand!
    Although each has its own advantages and disadvantages!
  10. Klingon
    Klingon April 2 2021 00: 06
    +3
    Quote: OgnennyiKotik
    Direct analogue of M113 is MT-LB. By tasks and parameters. Very strange comparisons with infantry fighting vehicles or wheeled armored personnel carriers.

    modern "Shell" is somewhat reminiscent of M113
  11. nonsense
    nonsense April 2 2021 10: 06
    +2
    and it is not clear whether the board of the M113 (the first models, without additional reservation) made its way from a 12.7 meter NSV machine gun from 500 to 60 degrees or not? And the forehead? And from KPVT 14.5mm?
  12. iouris
    iouris April 2 2021 18: 36
    0
    Clear business. For Russians, the most interesting is always the design of the engine, fuel equipment, transmission, shock absorbers ... But how did they do it?
  13. indy424
    indy424 April 3 2021 08: 58
    +2
    Quote: tralflot1832
    In 71, the Vietnamese Congo decided to attack the Vietnamese troops in Laos, the basis of the Vietnamese defense was PT 76 and T 54. During a short battle, 30 M 113 and 80 M113 were thrown into a stampede. 72 g while trying to help the blockaded city of Lot Ninh in During the battle, a very short battle was destroyed 31 M 113. The experience of the Israelis is especially epic. The armed brigade M 113 was completely destroyed. A few hours before the end of the war, M 113 was destroyed by a burst of caliber 7,62. Guess what was fired from. This is only from wiki. Israelis will not let you lie, it is not for nothing that they began to practice heavy armored personnel carriers based on captured tanks. All from wiki. A lighter is a lighter.

    can you please in more detail what specific Israeli "armed m113 brigade was completely humiliated"?
  14. Reiter
    Reiter April 3 2021 15: 30
    +2
    They forgot to mention that the chassis for mortars was built on the basis of the 113th, due to the large cubic internal volume. It is very convenient, by the way, you open the roof and throw it on, while the calculation is protected from shrapnel, if the response arrives, again promptly folded up and left to change position.
  15. alexey alexeyev_2
    alexey alexeyev_2 April 3 2021 23: 13
    -1
    Hmm, you have to be very gifted to miss a pturs in this shed. The dream of any anti-tank officer
  16. Vadim F
    Vadim F April 4 2021 16: 14
    +1
    I would like to compare m2 deliriously with the BTR-80 ... no, well, what about?
  17. Minikhan Eldoev
    Minikhan Eldoev April 4 2021 20: 46
    +2
    can we try to revive old Topvar, eh?
    some commentators, before talking about whether the fecal machine or not, will read the memoirs of the participants of the First World War (in those places where the losses from enemy artillery fire exceeded half of the people even before approaching the line of contact with the enemy).
    you can start with Jünger.
    and then to argue, did the car correspond to the terms of reference or not?
  18. mikael
    mikael April 4 2021 22: 07
    -3
    in all respects, except for the relatively low price for NATO whiskers and comfortable seats for the crew and transported complete crap, can be used only in the second echelons and rear units, both in terms of protection and overall characteristics
  19. alexey88
    alexey88 April 5 2021 10: 55
    +2
    I remember reading about him in a foreign military review. Then, as a child, it seemed like a straight tank. In fact, the armored personnel carrier as an armored personnel carrier is no worse and no better than analogues at that time, well, except that there is a machine gun.
  20. andrew42
    andrew42 April 5 2021 13: 09
    +1
    and "winged metal" accounted for about 94%. ....– iron, zirconium, ..... were present in the armor in trace amounts. The testers even named the steel grade 5083 ....

    How can this be? When did steels become aluminum-based alloys?
    I guess the author wanted to indicate "grade of aluminum alloy 5083" or something like that ..
  21. Dmitriy170
    Dmitriy170 April 5 2021 13: 20
    +1
    Quote: Arzt
    In short, do it like an American. wink

    That is, twice as high and made of aluminum? No, you shouldn't! As for the armament, they put it on it and so what you want, up to the ZU-23. The wide flat roof allows.
  22. Pavel57
    Pavel57 April 5 2021 15: 07
    +1
    Quote: Nestor Vlahovski
    It's amazing how the Soviet test commission did not learn positive experience from the operation of this armored car.

    Soviet means excellent. Training battles between MiGs and F-5Es, apart from irritating the leadership, caused nothing. And they could have changed the wing of the MiG-21.
  23. CastroRuiz
    CastroRuiz April 6 2021 13: 12
    +1
    Kakie "enteligenti" sravnivali BTR s BMP?
    BTR M113 priamiy analog BTR-50.
  24. tankman72
    tankman72 2 May 2021 23: 16
    0
    To begin with, in order not to mislead our readers, let us decide that the first photographs of the (deceased in the Bose) Armored Vehicle Museum in Kubinka show the M-125 (self-propelled 120-mm mortar), not the M-113. Someone will say - what's the difference? But if we are talking about cars that came to us (from Vietnam) during the war, and not during it, but from overhaul factories (Vietnamese). Either of all the "patriot" present in the park, none of them was tested for armor resistance in Kubinka due to the fact that we already had vehicles with aluminum armor, and work on aluminum armor plates was underway.
    For the specialists who served on the BRT-50 with the marks of 12,7 mm bullets that came from the factory, sorry - nonsense. In Soviet times, the principle was in place - accounting and control, therefore, from each batch of armored hulls (unfortunately I cannot say from how many issued (it is better to ask the specialists of GBTU, GABTU)) at least one corps got to Kubinka, where at 38 NII BTVT (v. 68054) specialists from 23, and then 26 departments, together with the OOI (officially the Test Support Department, and among the common people, the Department of Retirees and Disabled People) checked the compliance of the TTZ (Tactical and Technical Assignment) with the armor resistance according to the existing methods of both armored personnel carriers and tanks, BMP, aluminum BMD (ob. 915, 925, etc.) and other armored vehicles, including in the 90s armored vehicles of oligarchs and not only, collectors, etc. (D.A.Ratataev with NIIStali).
    I didn't want to offend anyone, just if someone is interested in practical tests (work), ask the specialists of the BTVT Institute.
    Thank you
  25. tankman72
    tankman72 2 May 2021 23: 29
    0
    If "Voennoye Obozreniye" really reviews "military FACTS", and not the writers from the blog "Alternative History", then let's talk about Facts, and not the reflections of "sofa experts".
  26. norg
    norg 10 May 2021 23: 57
    0
    What nonsense have I read? Where did the author get his amateurish reasoning that hydromechanical transmission was a novelty in the USSR at that time? In the 60s, the GMF was successfully used for both military and civilian equipment - for example, MAZ-537 and the Chaika automobile. About the bullet resistance of the M-113, no la-la - it is quite sewn from the RPK, and from 50 meters even with the AKM. To compare with the BMP-1 is to compare the incomparable, the BMP is superior to the M-113 in general in everything. In terms of power density, cross-country ability, armament, etc., etc. BMP is floating, M-113 is not. And in general, with a height almost 2 times higher than the BMP, the M-113 is just an excellent mobile target and a coffin on wheels. It’s just an ass-carriage designed to deliver infantry to the battlefield - as a combat unit, it is completely unusable. One beha will roll as many M-113s on firewood as there are shots in the ammunition load - while the eMka with the beha cannot do anything at all.
  27. militarist63
    militarist63 4 June 2021 01: 06
    0
    The museum specimen in pavilion 5 contains an entire armored personnel carrier. At least there are no visible bullet marks on it. Meanwhile, the M113 evacuated from Vietnam was not at all good at the training ground in Kubinka. The vehicle was processed with armor-piercing calibers 14,5 mm, 12,7 mm and 7,62 mm. The shelling was carried out at different course angles on the frontal and side parts of the armored vehicle from distances of up to a kilometer
    And who said that this particular APC was fired upon? There were several of them!