M113s For Ukraine After Bushmaster, Mastiffs: Can Armoured Carrier Shield Zelensky's Men From Putin?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 апр 2022
- An additional $800 million drawdown package of security assistance is on its way to Ukraine. One of the distinguished arms being supplied is 200 M113 armoured personnel carriers. As Russia turns its focus on eastern Ukraine, the M113 is expected to assist Kyiv’s efforts to relocate troops and regain ground. Australia recently sent the first of 20 Bushmaster armoured vehicles to Ukraine and Britain has also promised to send 120 “Mastiff” to Kyiv. Will armoured vehicles help Ukraine repel Russia in the east?
#RussiaUkraineWar. #USM113ArmouredVehicle. #Bushmaster. #Mastiff
CRUX is your daily video news guide to the big events that are shaping our world. We track news, geopolitics, diplomacy and defence strategies and explain how they shape national policies. Crux makes sense of global developments, and analyses their impact on daily lives.
Follow CRUX on Instagram (@crux.india): bit.ly/3qSFx1K
Follow CRUX on Facebook: bit.ly/2Lte7iF
#GetCloserToTheNews with latest headlines on politics, sports and entertainment on news18.com bit.ly/2Y4QccL
Also watch:
Crux Decode: bit.ly/3MjzIoG
Crux+ : bit.ly/35mm97B
Crux Most Watched: bit.ly/3KhJ8iX
Well done US, UK and Australia! These will definitely help the fighters get around to the various places fighting is taking place. Great work! Keep sending more!
The 113s had good cross country mobility when we used them as Scout vehicles in the Alaska Army National Guard. They were also effective in sub zero temps because they were analog and didn’t have electronics that don’t work in extreme cold. Inexpensive to: buy, operate, maintain and get trained on and extremely versatile.
ruclips.net/video/wzSVOcgKq04/видео.html&feature=emb_title
Excellent battle taxi and no more vulnerable that a BTR.
Your spot on buddy. 😉
Been on 1 when I was 12 at a birthday party, not very comfortable you get thrown about a lot in the back
@@patricktate4782 Yep. you 'knock-helmets' when in the back
M-113: Elegant simplicity. No computer tech to go wrong. Analog era vehicle. It's simple. It works. It's cheap. It's not an "armored vehicle." It's a tracked transport vehicle that can go where trucks and other wheeled vehicles can't and can help protect against minor shrapnel. It can carry some defensive weapons (machine guns, grenade launchers, and the like). It can carry troops, communications gear, and medical supplies and medical support. That's all. Worked well in Vietnam, where I served.
Ok, it's not a tank but is armored!!
in any case, it's better than buses and volunteers nissans. logistics is important part of the war
And the music played with the video makes the M113 more awesome!
The old "armor" was aluminum and fiberglass which was shit . The newer armor is Kevlar fabric and aluminum .
Yeah dudes bug geez. Its huge vs the BTRs low siluette
I drove M-113's. They are NOT fighting vehicles, they are transport vehicles that protect troops from light gunfire and light artillery. They can also protect you from biological and chemical weapons.
@Meme Memeson so what is your point?
Exactly, I drove them in the military over 20 years ago, no combat vehicle.
They can (and often do) have 50 cals mounted on them and they can be equipped with mortars and tow missiles.. and I suppose a lot of other weapons that have been fitted on them since my day. So they can fight.. but with drones and other aircraft, getting to the fight in them would be extremely hazardous.
But when a troop carrier gets converted into a weapon platform it is no longer a troop *_carrier_* but a combat or infantry support vehicle. If they put a heavy weapon on it and load it with the necessary ammo it can no longer carry troops.
our charlies shot mortars out of them, but your right at leas tin 1st armored div. our 113s were medical or mortar tracks
Having served in an M113, they are nicknamed the Battle Taxi. In todays, and yesterdays, environment they are the best cheapest easiest to drive and maintain support vehicles ever built. Command, Control, Logistics and last mile deliveries in the frontal areas are its best use today. FYI, all armored vehicles are coffins if they stay in one place too long or drive the same road a few times.
👍👍👍❤️
Putin will scrap those with crews
A vehicle is called a coffin more to do with whether or not it can survive a land mine or IED blast look at the snatch Land Rover used by the British and how much of a death trap the were called etc
I wonder what you're thinking about the following: many of the assistance given to Ukraine, in terms of hardware seems to be garage clearances. On one hand it is logical; eastern Europe has plenty of Soviet/Russian relics left and the Ukrainians don't need training to use those, they already know them. Giving away old tech also grants room in the donating countries to purchase more modern hardware. But even if it's old, things like the M113 greatly help with the logistics - which is where Russia failed dismally. How would you feel about Ukrainians driving around in M1 Abrams? How fast could the US relocate them and how much training would Ukrainians need? I can imagine the M1's would also need some changes to electrical and comm systems to integrate them. Eventually, in order to roll back the Russians I can imagine they would need more than infantry vehicles.
@@_____Z_____ putin is so big loser, that everything he can do is only to scrap his ass :D
We had M113s when I was in the Abrams Battalion in the early 90s. They we used by scouts if Humvees couldn't be used. Mortar platoon and engineers used it along with medical units. I had the taller M577 version as the signal officer. Wasn't used as a frontline fighting vehicle since we had Abrams and Bradley's. Way safer than Humvees if you are getting shot at, a lot of space inside, and M113 were able to maneuver once tank/bradleys jack up the ground. Adding just a little gas to the diesel fuel can supercharge the engine a little bit for more power.
The M113 is a troop transporter not something designed for the frontline. It's not armoured heavily enough for that unless you're facing off an opponent armed with just sticks and stones.
@@mikethespike7579 Would be GREAT in our next War when the Russians have nothing but those "sticks and stones"!
@@mikethespike7579 the US Army still uses the 113 in frontline service. Great at what it is used for.
@@mikethespike7579 What is a frontline vehicle depends on the topographic environment and what is on the other side. AT weapons have changed the definitions over the years and anything is a target these days, so frontline or not they are all metal coffins if hit.
@@RGC-gn2nm it’s a piece of 💩
I spent my first 10 years in the Army in a M113 (scout) they are great because they are easy to keep working and go everywhere. NO they do not have alot of armor protection, but with today's AT weapons nothing is safe if you are an idiot and just drive down the raod in column with no dismounted support to clear danger areas. It warms my heart to still see them in use.
They had good cross country mobility when we used them as Scout vehicles in the Alaska Army National Guard.
Yeah if the Ukrainians use them wisely they should be an asset. If anything I think the M113's being maybe less well armed than a BMP will encourage the Ukrainians to use all those nice Javilins we gave them to deal with enemy armor in stead of trying to use an APC like it was a tank.
You point out a very good thing: how the russians move. It's incredible, in column, with no protection, from one ambush to the next, i saw a video with a bridge exploded with Russian vehicles on top of it. It's probably the only army in the world that drives over bridges that are not checked .
@@wimclaes4411 they are brainless!
My father used them in Vietnam. I used them in 1990, jesus H they just won't die. This and a deuce will be around in 2050.
Anything is better than not having anything at all, there is no perfect all purpose vehicle, they all have their pros and cons.💪💪👋 Glory to Ukraine 🇺🇦
Slava 🇺🇦
If I was sitting in one of those I jump out fast I'd rather be climbing through the trees where they can't see me then sitting in a big box that any guided-missile can find
@@edwardroche2480 they aren't meant to fight from or ride around all day they are meant to move troops quickly with some protection, something is better than nothing.
To God be the glory, for helping Ukraine thru this war!!!
@@edwardroche2480 Those are designed to deflect shells and can absorb the blast of a 'missile' or RPG impact, depending on angle and explosive yeild.
NO vehicle is safe from a howitzer 143mm.
Id also like to point out in the battle of Bastone, the American forces had mass casualties from shelling that hit trees.
The explosion of the warhead makes EVERY tree a post of shrapnel. It literally makes it MORE, not less deadly.
The only true 'safety' (using that term relatively) is a foxhole. Literally, a hole in the ground.
One thing too about 113... they're very light.. they'll perform awesome in the Ukrainian mud. And they're Super reliable... and easy to work on.
When I first entered service with the U.S. Army in 1980 the most common "up gunned" version of the M113 mounted a "popup" TOW launcher. Later models mounted "Hammerhead" TOW launchers. The M113 was also fitted out with the 4.2in mortar and, for close air defense, with radar guided 20mm "Gatling guns", For all its age the M113 may be the best weapons capable platform around today simply because it's basically a box on tracks and just about any weapons system can be adapted to it up to and including SAMs along the lines of the Stinger and ATMs like the Hellfire and Javelin.
I saw one with a mortar tube mounted inside when I was near kaiserslautern in 1983.
And they are easily maintained, even on the battle field.
@@PhilLesh69 My first duty assignment following Basic and AIT was with Troop D, 10th Cavalry assigned to the 194th Armored Brigade (Separate) and attached to 5/33 Armored Battalion at Ft. Knox, KY. We had a four tube 4.2in mortar section which was mounted in modified M113s. ALL of our M113 Cav Scout M113s mounted "one shot" TOWs (reloadable of course) and M-2 HBMGs. We had our own vehicle maintenance/repair/recovery section, mess section, and fuel section. I think the first "Hammerhead" TOW M113 variant I saw was also at Ft. Knox and in 1983.
@@oveidasinclair982 I agree. If it's based on the M113 even a Dumb Ass Tanker like me could work on it!
Our platoon had gamma goats for 4.2" heavy mortars. POS applies to them. Horrendous reliability
These are perfect for the Ukrainian light infantry armed with mortars, ATGMs, Manpads and Switchblade Drones. It should be used for transport and support, not as a frontline IFV supporting tanks.
ruclips.net/video/wzSVOcgKq04/видео.html&feature=emb_title
Get some, get some, get somme hahahaha War ain't it crazy!!
@Juno tey Yep based on a plethora of current and growing reports at least 1/3rd of this will go on the black market
These things are marginal even for "low intensity" asymmetric conflict. Without multiple upgrade kits for protect which seriously inhibit their mobility not much bette5r than an "armoured" that is supposedly bullet proof Hummer
Agreed 👍
Nothing special about old M113, but it beats walking !!!
These are old M113 made in America. Sgt, Semper Fi
One more comment- These arent meant to go against tanks or as battle platforms. They are armored taxis. They stop small arms fire, grenades, shrapnel from mortars and artillery etc. They are very good at fording rivers and crossing bad terrain. They are not meant to sit there slugging it out on the front lines. They tranaport troops, materiaos, equipment and can be used to ferry the wounded or for command and control. They are RELIABLE. They can easily be modified to be mobile mortar wagons, carry anti-tank missiles and mount heavy machine guns for engaging enemy mechanized forces in a meeting engagement but that is so they can shoot and then withdraw, not get into firefights. Anyone claiming this is a bad gift is an idiot. Ukraine is having to use civilian trucks for lack of battle transports. They want these.
What about fuel, petrol.or.diesal ? Though all the refineries were blown up by RUSSIA
I think they can be used as an anti tank missile carrier hunting down enemy armor and other vehicles from a distance.
@@danl5592 The can run on diesel or JP8 which is diesel with additives.
No they do not stop small arms fire. Shrapnel - maybe, depending from what range and what was the force of the explosion. But virtually any rifle and several handguns bullets - would go just through the aluminum plates which is what the M113 "armour" is made from.
@@nyyotam4057 Yeah.....ok.
I also operated an M113 when I was in the military as a Panzergrenadier. The actual armor made of aluminum was at best a splinter protection, later they got a stronger outer armor. With today's anti-tank weapons, armor isn't as important anymore... Armed with a Hispano-Suiza HS.404 20mm caliber autocannon, it was one of the most widely used aircraft guns of the 20th century. This cannon with a high rate of fire and belts a 120 rounds - installed in a closed steel turret - could already cause real damage and it was pretty easy to shoot. It was always fun to race over hill and dale. The 550 armored personnel carriers were scrapped around 2006 - nobody wanted to buy them.
The M113 is still a good troop carrier, as an infantry fighting vehicle it is dated, but it can keep up with the heavy armor and can be equipped with anti tank missiles. The vehicle is highly reliable and easy to maintain which will suit the Ukrainian forces well.
It was never designed as an IFV, although some are modified to fit that role. It was intended to drop or pick up troops and leave before the enemy could bring AT weapons to bear. .50 cal and bigger will either put a big hole in this thing or turn it into Swiss cheese but it will work well against small arms and explosive fragments.
#are the nuts and bolts metric ?
Can not keep up with Any tank today
The m113 was designed to transport infantry to keep up with the armor columns- the troops always dismounted on enemy contact to assault or provide close in protection to the M48s & M-60s they were designed to support.
Great that you said it can be fitted with anti tank weapons. The javelins or anything they have at present in Ukraine ?
...ohh, YES it does.
The armoured vehicles will be quite enough to help Ukraine.
Better that way than walking.
Don't expect them to be mainly used like IFV's. Biggest selling point is the amount of troops and equipement they can carry while having some protection compared to normal technicals. May also free up better armored vehicles used in logisitcal duties etc. in the ukrainian military to be modified for performing combat roles. Furthermore the ukrainians so far used the light infantry very effectively. So giving them another vehicle to quickly deploy and redeploy is probably what they asked for as well. These lists are made in tandem with what Ukraine requests.
Exactly. APC stands for armored personnel *_carrier_*
They're like a landing craft that takes the troops to shore, where they get out and fight on the ground. Or a uh1, Blackhawk or chinook. They ferry troops, the troops don't from from inside.
The question is how important that is in theater where the fighting will mainly circle around smaller and bigger settlements, with heavy shelling as the main threat.
How will they get these vehicles to Ukrainian soldiers? All airports are destroyed.and RUSSIA will be looking out for shipments coming through Poland. If not careful they will end up in Russian hands or sold on black market, which has been happening a lot .
@@danl5592 maybe put up Russian flags on the transport train?
I declare victory for Ukraine! Keep fighting for freedom brave Ukranian soldiers!May God bless you always and the countries helping you...
Thanks for this presentation. It helps keep the hope and faith that Ukraine will be successful. So worried and tearful of all the suffering.😔🇨🇦
Exactly, it gives you hope 🍀
There are many configurations for this vehicle. This was my primary vehicle when stationed in Germany and when deployed. It's relatively slow compared to more combat-ready vehicles and they are made of aluminum which is easier to melt. RPGs make quick work of them. They are good vehicles for additional troop movement when ground-pounding becomes too much for the 11Bs and 11Ms. It's hella better than a car (obvs) and its thick armor can give soldiers time to dismount if hit, especially if surrounded by reactive armor.
Better than driving around in civilian soft bodied cars that offers 0 protection.
Ah yes the bushmasters, apparently going to be used by the Ukraine special forces. It's one hell of an off road ride!! Ukraines will have fun in those badboys!!
EXCELLENT and GREAT news! Thanks a lot #USA, #GreatBritain, #Australia, #Japan, #SouthKorea, #EU, #Canada, and the #WesternEuropeanCountries to help #Ukraine!!!
Got into an M113 tank wreck when the driver hit a four-foot wide stump that he couldn't see because of night driving with his periscope. The blast threw me forward thru the engine barrier and on top of the then-Chevy engine block. The driver was knocked out as his helmet crushed his nose when he smashed into a steel plate periscope mount. As a radio man, I had to pull him out of his seat, then learn hos to drive the dual auto tranny pedals to find a nearby road. Despite the engine having no coolant, the little beast drove like an armoured RV. I found the road. The driver found his nose and the engine was the only fatality.
M113s can move Switchblade 600s and their operators quickly into a dispersed position to fire coordinated attacks on tanks and artillery pieces.
Truthruclips.net/video/nnR4DPJ8crY/видео.html 😱
Yeh good but it's muddy there etc and.. abd have we got a new problem .. i hear they'll have 3 to 4 four times more soldiers for this eastern attack.. so isn't the top strategy to hit the supply lines .. can they ? And they are flooding tanks and heavy armoury a la the f ing cu.t Syrian general. I think the next 12 to 24 hours is going to be bad fir Ukraine.. they just won't get the weapons from the US in time et
Abd what you say is theory.. do you think in practice it can be done .. I think it's getting late .. the weaponry is late from the US ..
most of this junk is going to get blown up before it ever makes it to the front. Oh well as long as defense contractors profit.
Would this be able to save the civilian causalities due to barrage of missiles ...this would bring more destruction & suffering for Ukrainians. Need of the hour is to negotiate and give an end to war.
Why not? Those M113s can be used as infantry support and transport. Ukraine needs anything that can be of help in its fight for freedom.
Easy to drive!
This conflict reminds me of the "food drives" we had at school to collect non perishable food items for food banks. Everyone contributed their old stock of food 1st. And then could brag about having contributed.
After my time in the US Army with the 25th Infantry Light, I joined an Army National Guard unit. We had the M113A3. Now even Mechanized ground units use Bradley's. The A3s are better protected, stronger engine and the fuel tanks were on the outside lined with spall protection. All US M113s were upgraded to the A3 variant in the US Army. Can't say which version Ukraine is getting.
we still use the 113 on active. the bradley replacement hulls were only just announced
@@RGC-gn2nm yes they still use them but for rear units that don't have to keep up with M1A1 tanks. Lot of scout units still use them.
They are not meant to fight but I have seen some extreme modern modifications to the m113’s like the Philippine variant which has a bushmaster 25mm auto cannon
And we have new variants of m113s 120mm mortar carrier also
We did a version with the 76mm gun and turret from a Saladin scout car bolted on to it. Then a later upgrade with the turret and 76mm gun from the Scorpion light tank on it. The current ones are all lengthened with an extra road wheel, new engine, disc brakes and loads of additional armor plus an electronically controlled turret with an M2HB .50 cal. Many have been upgraded over and over up to the M113AS4 in service now. They are due to be scrapped or sold when new IFV's arrive in the next couple of years.
@@chrisbrent7487 yes, Due to the recent Chinese aggression Philippines also bought new IFV’s & APC’s that will be replacing the 113’s currently used, and upgrading the batches with the same elbit systems 25mm cannon. More power to Oceania and ASEAN = CCP fear
Ukraine can use any help right now, new or old. Ukrainians will find a good use of M113s. Especially with lack of air power of the Ukrainians its just too risky to send Abrams and M2 bradley right now on Ukraine without air cover.
They do come in handy. The Universal Carrier the Brits made is also up there. The Germans made so few of the rubber tracked Hanomags. Nothing beats a Donkey with attitude though.
Old or not, I'm sure Ukraine can use them. Even if old, anything from active inventory is almost assuredly running well and reliable. If freshly restored from reserve stocks, they'd still be certified in top working order before turning over to Ukraine.
I seem to remember these M113, they're a pretty basic troop carrier that can provide very light protection but are also very quick. AFAIK the US rarely uses them in quantity, most of the recent wars used the Bradley instead for the extra protection and firepower.
here in the philippines m113 was fitted with an 25mm cannon by elbit systems and some were even fitted with a mortar system. M113s are very versatile vehicle
At least M113s are better than Humvees in personnel protection, rough terrains, and river crossing.
200 like those armored vehicles fully tracked plus 100 armored wheeled vehicles, is a very good start for Ukraine now, including the T72 tanks send to them from Slovakia and Germany. Soldiers can't move by foot all the time and Ukraine isn't a small country.
It was heartbreaking when seeing the Ukrainian soldiers moving by foot from Mykolaiv toward Kherson.
that was probably a show, u know, there are several million cars in ukraine even now.
in a war truth dies first on both sides. and selensky is a professional in PR, he comes from entertainment.
we can only objectively say that putin was the agressor, and his claims are absurd.
@@certaindeath7776 it might have been a show I agree. However the area where these soldiers were moving wasn't some easy terrain for civil cars. In the war you need military vehicles especially at out roads. Soldiers don't move only on roads with asphalt.
@@sidritqafzezi3958 thats why m113 will come in handy for ukrainians, they offer good cross road manouvrability with their relative light weight on tracks. its a good choice, much better suitable for that job then way expensive ifv like the lynx
@@certaindeath7776 yes I found M113 vehicles very good for this war for Ukrainian tactics. I think this would do a better job than real tanks would do. M113's mainly weapon equipments is the heavy machine gun , but I think it may be equipped with the homemade Ukrainian anti tank system Stugna-P. Those armored vehicles equipped with Stugna-P would be better than tanks.
No it’s not as capable as a Bradley, but load it up with M2s, MK19s and it’s better than nothing and better than the M998 series. Might as well see if any ITVs are left in storage and send them too. They were the all around Infantry vehicle before the early 80s, plus the M113A3 series was a sports car compared to older versions.
Calling a 113 Armored is at best an overstatement. I drove them, them are archaic AF
113 is so versatile. And can be used more ways then said on this video. 😊
Bushmasters and M113 are perfect mobility vehicles for Ukraine. Armor in itself has shown to be incredibly vulnerable on the battlefield. High mobility vehicles that can carry troops, fire support and morters, medivac etc if used in accordance with vehicles strengths can be a huge force multiplier. No point trying to fight a numerically superior and more heavily armored opponent with the same tactics they are using. Im sure Ukranians can think outside the box and make good use of these vehicles.
Better than walking better than car, gives AT squads tactical teams set up drones,etc quicker access to positions of road.
Russian needs to start adding Backup lights to their Tanks.
You are sending M113s .
There isn't a tank in the world that can't defeat an M113.
I would hope the M113 we are giving to Ukraine would have up grades over the old Vietnam type,the M113 is a great transport vehicle not to be confused with a battle tank.
All US 113s were upgraded to the A3 model. However we have a bunch in storage, don't know what version Ukraine is getting.
@ SOMA DAY
Mercedes diesel?
The US M113 has a Detroit Diesel engine. The A3 version has the Silver up-power version, and the older versions were the same engine, just in lower power Configuration. The basic vehicle hasn’t changed much since the 60s, but the weapon and drivetrain upgrades have made it a usable platform, and light years ahead of the passenger cars Ukrainian troops are getting around in now.
@@somaday2595 German Diesel? The US M113A3 has a US (Detroit) diesel. As far as the logistics of it, it hasn't been said.
They're not a replacement for Bradleys, they're a replacement for HMMWVs. In a full-on ground war with a near-peer force, HMMWV's are no bueno.
With the enthusiasm Ukrainian soldiers are fighting these vehicles will be quite popular with these brave soldiers. They may not be tank proof but with the aid of drone scouts; it's the enemy tank occupants that should be worried.
200 M113s.... logistics wise, thats a big package.
With 10 troops inside each, that is a total of 2,000 soldiers.
@@thehumanityoflife6460 Effectively actually 8 with decent kit. I did territorial service and suffered in these.. These aren't safe to get within s3everal kilometers of action. Modern weight artillery with conventional round will sieve these things. These have been National Guard (US) for over 30 years. What was shown were straight M113's not even A1s let alone A3's which have been out of product for more than 20 years.
Was an operator of one, these won't survive a main cannon or artillery hit without significant refits and upgrades, and even then it might not. Good for small arms fire protection though, good way to transport supplies and people. I'd say the Bushmasters are better.
It's a ferry to bring troops into the battle. Just like a landing craft. It probably shouldn't stick around once it drops off the troops, unless it has a big gun to contribute to the fight. Otherwise it should probably go back and get some more troops to bring into the fight, or at least go lurk over a hill out of direct fire.
M113 was used by the Philippine Army in ISIS Marawi siege. It can survive the rpg used by the terrorist. The M113s are armed with 25mm bushmaster autocannon.
@Meme Memeson You russian troll bots seriously need to come up with some new content, you're boring the living snot out of us. Here's a suggestion, why don't you start claiming that the Ukrainians are all robot vampire ghosts, that would be refreshing, and slightly more believable than your tired old claims of them being Nazis... In a country where Nazi flags are prohibited... And which is headed by a president of Jewish heritage, do you see how thoroughly you fail?
Those Bushmasters are amazing. Saw one run over a I.E.D in Afghanistan and not one person hurt. It even drove itself back to base.
The IED could have been crap or didn't detonate properly. It was, after all, an IED.
So your anecdotal story is of little use in establishing the Bushmaster's credibility.
Yes it is a simple light armored tracked vehicle easy to maintain and operate. I drove one 50 years ago.
Great opportunity for the world to send all their soon-to-be-decommissioned equipment to Ukraine, plus the newest ones to be tested live on Russian armor.
I was Commo in 194th, TOC for our BN in a 113, we always had 2 air defense 113s with M 163s with us along with 2 M60s. Granted the 163 may be out dated but sure they can be replaced with upgraded air defense equipment.
The music played with the video makes the M113 more awesome! Fight on Ukraine! It's the only way to peace for now.
THANK YOU to ALL THE COUNTRIES that are sending any kind of aid to UKRAINE.
i served in vietnam on a M-113a2 APC m-2 50 cal. 2 m-60 mg 6V53 detroit diesel good for 45 mph.and never likes mud or pan cake mines. 4th inf. div. 1969.
Important vehicle for engineering support, moving mortar and missile squads etc. Excellent addition for the Ukraine. Cost effective and large numbers can be acquired for the unit price.
Yes but you have to send them some diesel too. Did you forget that part? How could you Americans be so naive
and believe everything your mass-media tells you. Don't you know that Russians bombed every single fuel
deposit in Ukraine and keep doing so non-stop day and night. Only yesterday they bombed targets over 800 times,
that's in just one night. Beside that, your vehicles won't reach the destination where needed, never ever. They'll be taken
out shortly after they pass the Ukrainian border. Do you remember the old S-300 systems sent from Slovakia to Ukraine? Those systems was take out the second day they arrived. You just waste your resources, your time and prolong the suffering of Ukrainians. Do you really think that Russians are stupid? Reading your comments here make me believe that you over there
know nothing about the events in Ukraine!!!
@@SpiderF27 Do you have issues ?
@@TennesseeHomesteadUSA Yes. Nazism and Fascism is a big issue for me.
Good too see the m113s back in the game helping ukraine
Correction: "The M113 is a fully tracked armored personnel carrier (APC) that was developed and produced by the Food Machinery and Chemical Corporation (FMC)."
"In 1994, FMC transferred the M113's production over to its newly formed defense subsidiary, United Defense. Then in 2005, United Defense was acquired by BAE Systems." FYI. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M113_armored_personnel_carrier
@@grss1982 Here we still run the originals after mods LOL but this is Canada.
Also if it's a little old, its hull is very flexible, as the old Praga T38s employed by the Panzerwaffe (Marders, Hetzers and so on), it could be adapted in various support roles, after all IAF employed them for yrs as support/rear echelon vehicles.
"Armored" is a relative term. The basis of the armor is hardened aluminum. It will defeat small arms fire but nothing larger. lots were lost to RPGs in Vietnam.
Very telling that the troops would rather expose themselves to snipers by riding on top of an APC than ride inside.
My point exactly.
Filled the cargo compartment with ammo, rations and gear. Rode on top due to mines and IED's (we didn't even call them that then) ability to rip the bottom of the hull wide open.
@M W I'm aware of that. A B40, RPG7 or even a .50 caliber anything will defeat the M113 sheet metal. Like I said it beats walking and will cross terrain most wheeled vehicles will not. The Ukrainians can use them as they please or ignore them. They seem perfectly capable of making those decisions.
I just hope they don't plan to put those M113's anywhere near the front! 12mm aluminum armor just doesn't cut it.
Actually, I saw that the M113 is actually good on Muddy terrain and since it's lighter and more versatile than most of heavy armored vehicles. It's very good for supply and transport. I think it will be an advantage for ukr troop because they don't have to only rely on roads so they can better escape strikes and ambushes to supply the eastern front, where Russians supplies must mainly take the roads
Not really- an armed HV is much faster, more mobile off road and easier to conceal
Scrap metal business may be very profitable after Ukraine war .
Sure, think of all the medals the Russians will get.
Ow wait, you did not mean that
RUSSIA SHOULD USE NUCLEAR TO FLAT UKRAINE
(Other refer to the topic about meaning of love in my video since 8th Feeling is a science theory in book of life and don't forget Alan Walker cos Dajjal did not come alone)
48thg
@@dannychong7842 russia is so desperade? :D
@@tomas6224 Using nukes to flatten a plain area
fkc f****kkk fff WHAT?
UKRAINE IS A PLAIN, DO U UNDERST@ND?
It was a RPG magnet in Vietnam. The cages will protect it against RPGs and light weapons fire, only.
The disturbing question that must be investigated is why the CDU leaders, Shroeder, Merkel, and Sholtz, have each been so friendly to Putain. While the current chancellor has made some movements away from that relationship, sending about $1,000,000,000.00 each day to Putain, when Germany could easily reduce its gas and oil consumption (which would be good also for the environment to avoid climate change), even if such reduction was not complete, shows that they desperately wish to maintain their ties to Putain and particularly to Gasprom, the carrot that Putain has apparently used to corrupt them. Apparently, their ally, the SPD, is equally corrupted: "German Social Democrats face more heat over Russian energy ties " in Politico.
Innocent German people may soon die as a result of that corruption, as Ukrainians have been dying for weeks. Germany has never been as UNPREPARED for a Russian invasion as it has been during the administration of Shroeder, Merkel, and Sholtz. (He CLAIMS to want to spend $100 billion rearming Germany, which is probably what prevented his coalition, which includes the far more anti-Putin, Green Party, from falling apart.) Poland’s own studies indicated that the Russians could have gone through Poland in a few weeks, if they had invaded, since Poland did not have a great army. Hence, due to the efforts of the administration of Shroeder, Merkel, and Sholtz, Germany might have been conquered far more easily than Ukraine, if Putain had turned his guns in the direction of Poland and Germany, instead of Ukraine.
The West must realize that Putain was a committed Soviet "man" who wishes to re-establish the Soviet empire, even if he must do it by killing every European who resists in Ukraine, Poland, the Baltic States, Western Europe, etc. Given his apparent past as a young, pretty, KGB-FSB agent living on "a diet of Western European sausage and cream" to get Kompromat, to put it delicately, you must understand why he was so upset when the Soviet empire for which he had degraded himself and in which he obviously hoped to rise collapsed. He was apparently not liking what he was doing, so that would have made it worse for him.
Hence, he made a deal with the Yeltsin family to enable them to avoid prosecution (when as an FSB agent he probably had access to the evidence of their corruption) in exchange for gaining their political support and power. Putain then proved that he was even more corrupt than the Yeltsin family, since as E. Musk acknowledged, reportedly, Putain is far wealthier than Musk-- but Putain surreptitiously stole all his money from Russia without building anything but a nest of crooks. Nevertheless, to maintain power, Putain will probably risk a nuclear war by using tactical nuclear weapons: the only answer we can give him is that if he risks that we will bomb him out of existence, along with his fellow kleptocrats, and including all their families. Showing him an iron fist will deter him.
As long as tanks or others run point, it would be a great rear end defensive system, troop transport, safe place for foot troops to stand by in street fire fights... Hop,in,and retreat for hit and move tactics, hell... Dig it a hole... Put an mk19 on it... Walla... City defense, can even use mk19 as an automatic mortar system
To those complaining about M113s being old & outdated: what help are YOU sending Ukraine? I'd choose old but serviceable equipment over 'good luck' cards & best wishes any day.
yellow ribbons. ya thats it.
I am helping them by insulting their incompetent president.
they have been good enough to be in service of a superpower for 70 years^^
Yeah, and words of "solidarity" 🤨
One of my jobs in the army was driving an M 113 with a mark 19. Nothing fancy just an armored box on tracks. It's been almost 20 years but I bet I could still raise some hell in one, pretty easy to drive.
RPGs in Vietnam went through those like a hot knife through butter. I hope they're sending the diesel models that don't brew up as fast.
@Ben Dover
No such thing as a gasoline 113, never was. All 113s are diesel powered, good old Detroit 2 stroke power. The M114 was gas powered, but that pre-dates the 113.
Anything big, powerful and expensive will be a target for Russian drones and missiles.
Don't forget that. Better 1000 Javelin missiles than one, sexy, high speed, jet fighter.
I thing a couple squadrons of A10s would be more useful!
@@dannychong7842 , ahm no woooooooomhao.
Don't play drone games with us, boy. You'll just die.
You need 1000 new tanks to replace the dead ones 🤣
Oh, you need a new Black Sea flagship too 🤣😄😆
@@dannychong7842 and than what? You think US British France China will all say that's fine?
No Russia will be nuclear wasteland 1 hour after first nuke hits Ukraine.
Stop talking dumb.
I think you are right and this is a portion of the success of the Ukranian personal it's hard on foot like guerrilla
СЛАВА УКРАИНЕ
It's a mistake to allow the M-113 anywhere near the front lines: True, it's nimble, it's light, it has a huge range - but it has absolutely no armour. Even small arms fire will go right through the aluminum plates that it has for "armour". I know, I've driven it in the IDF. The philosophy was: Drive like crazy and then some, to avoid getting hit, cause even an AK-47 bullet, will go right through you. So really, if you have to drive this thing anywhere close to the front lines - best that you can do, is drive like crazy. And then some.
ruclips.net/video/wzSVOcgKq04/видео.html&feature=emb_title
Can't armor plates be fitted to these, like the Russian tanks have?
@@thehumanityoflife6460 The IDF experimented in adding spaced armour mesh called "vaizata" to the M-113 but it weighed it down and made it less manueverable.
@@thehumanityoflife6460 However, IMI did come out with something better which costs a lot, so it wasn't used when I was still serving. Its called "L-VAS" and is a modular armour skirt coated with ERA blocks. It supposed to be light.
@@thehumanityoflife6460 But even if it is used, you still have no business being in the front line with the M-113. It is a tool best used strictly for transportation.
Bushmasters are specialised mine and IED resilient rapid infantry mobility vehicles.
The idea isn't to ride them into battle but to rapidly deliver troops and supplies to theatre's and evacuate wounded quickly.
Zelensky specifically requested the Bushmasters because they are fast, agile and resilient.
You don't have to sit on piles of sandbags in case you hit a mine.
M-113s have FLAT sides and not much armor. So they are basically troop buses that can protect them from SCHRAPNELL and small arms fire... BUT, an infantryman with a .50 cal and an AP round CAN go through that armor. And unless it's been upgraded, a 7.62mm AP round can also penetrate the aluminum armor. The US is NOT giving them the latest variants, but NOT the vietnam spec ones either. I suppose that they'll get different versions, some with decent Recce systems and others, with the M-901 TOW system, and the AA version with a Vulcan cannon or the Stinger mounts. ETC... They came in a multitude of flavors. The LAST one I EVER saw, was an M-901, in Wainwright Alberta, in the early 90s. It was owned by the recce platoon if I'm not mistaken. The optics on that thing were AMAZING.
Ukraine needs frontline armored fighting vehicles like Bradly's, strikers, and M-1s. things with modern thermal sights to out range/see the russians and get first shot capabilities. 113s are no better than using pick-ups to move men and supplies around in the rear area. they also need more than the 18 towed artillery guns we are giving them, they need 100s of them and a real nonstop supply of ammo for all these systems. the 40,000 artillery rounds we are sending them, is about a week or ten days worth. i hope Zelensky survives this war so afterwards he can write a book calling out all the western leaders for their lack of real help to end this war sooner rather than having it drag out for years and all the additional lives it will take.
Agree. Puck Futin.
Should add tow 2 launcher systems to the top before they send them out will make them very effective.
I swear we (the US) must have 100,000 sitting around in the desert somewhere! It is the MOST manufactured APC in HISTORY from any country!!! And you can adapt it to any purpose! I'm sure some Ukrainian cabbage farmer will even put a plow on the back!! I saw them even being used in mountains by private companies as equipment haulers and for forest fire supplies. Great machine....a set of tracks.....a good engine with a metal box to haul stuff......an all-terrain pick-up truck!!
From active to obsolete back to active again. They are more like battlefield taxis than fighting vehicles capable of neutralizing fortifications, but with that in mind, they are reliable, light, fast, inexpensive, low-maintenance for something tracked, and good range. They have a good-size crew compartment that is fast and easy to get in and out of with your equipment. It can protect from small arms and shrapnel. You could easily add TOW missile launchers etc. They aren't great swimmers but they can swim. Infantry fighting vehicles like the Bradley or BMP do far better with an RPG hit than the M113, but against anything more than that it won't make much difference which one you are in.
1:50 “The most common weapon is a .50 cal mg” shows a 20-25mm AA gun.
God bless u,fighters for Ukraine in Jesus' name
@Tw Time 😂😂😂🤡
I've been following what they've been doing in the Donbas for 8yrs. You should look into 'why' Russia is sticking its neck out. Don't expect mass media to serve it up to you.
Btw, did you know the Ukraine govt. have shot dead, over 57 war correspondents by the 5th week alone?
@@lorrainetaylor5894 🤡 ZOOKLENSKEY
@D E well they need to be praying harder he doesn’t seem to be listening thus far lmfao 🤣🤣🤣
@@alpha_4050 aww as zelensky hurt your little fee fees that’s he’s a world hero and your tyrant master is a world humiliation 😆😆😆
Some countries fitted these with artillery. Ukraine stand up! ✊🏽
We used the M113 extensively in Australia and are only now replacing them with more modern vehicles like the Boxer and the Puma.
It may be on the cards that we send them or the soon to be replaced AUSLAV's to aid Ukraine. God knows we will have hundreds of them.
most of the 113's are upgraded to either A2 or A3 with many sub classes such as medic, mortar and command also currently being "phased out"
as part of the Land 400 plan.
M113's are still, in my opinion a reasonably useful unit if employed using the correct doctrine and tactics. They are a tough little vehicle.
I bet the public only hear about 10% of the shipments. The Russians are in for so many surprises on the battlefield.
Oh yeah 🤣😂😂🤣..You believe that , isn't you?
With the current rains going on, you need tracked vehicles that can manage traveling in it. I have been in a M113 both in the Army and and as a contractor. Older guys from Vietnam era said most troops would ride on top, not inside. Great for hauling ammo, water, etc. But just an aluminum box on tracks.
We'll be send then deuce-and-a-halves, next. Plus welding gear and a lot of .five sheet metal. Gun trucks will rise again. Better dust off all the old M60's and M2's from storage.
My friend who is a retired Marine said when he was there in '67 they put sandbags over the roof and rode on them because if a track hit mines you were dead inside it but would often survive after being thrown off the roof.
I ever seen this transport vehicle is still in service in S.E.A ( south east Asia ) and east Asia.
this legend is still active on duty in outside of USA.
Almost as old as the B-52.
The Aussie Bushmaster armored vehicles are very good machines.
I hope the Ukrainians make good use of them.
20 aren't many though. We have around 1000 of them. We could have also sent some of out M113AS4's as they will be replaced in Land 400 phase 3 with Redbacks or Lynx IFV's.
@@chrisbrent7487 sounds like they listened to you mate ..!
@@amsuther Yes more Bushmasters and we have sent M113AS4's. They are far better than the others sent by other nations. They have an electrically controlled turret with an M2 .50 cal browning and new armor and an extended troop compartment with a bigger engine and extra road wheel. I believe BAE have got some other customers to do the upgrade on their M113's too.
Great and now attached a TOW or JAVELIN rocket system on top of it!!
M113... these are only a battlefield "taxis", they have no steel armour to speak of, a 7.62 AP will go straight through these. "The M113 is built of 5083 aircraft-quality *aluminium alloy. Aluminium alloy is fairly durable, but it still requires nearly three times the thickness of steel for an equivalent level of protection,[24] meaning it was only designed for all-around 7.62mm and shell splinter protection." It's a taxi, for god's sake don't drive this into an actual conflict area, drive to the area and get out (the US was going to scrap these anyway, why....) because they have no place on an actual front line area
Those things can drive over anything, and because they are relatively light, they won't sink in mud.
🇺🇦🙏 Glory to Ukraine 🙏🇺🇦
Love the 80s tune 👌
Did they improve the armor, or still 70's steel? How about twin 50 cal. to replace single barrel on top. Enclose the vehicle against chemical weapons. Create drone squadron for overhead protection. For starters!
Not steel Aluminum
In Greece we use this a lot but it's to get troops on the front line and then the viechle backs off and does support fire with the 50 cal
Battlefield taxi, great for mortars, shoot & scoot, plus they can cross rivers.
Get Japan to supply 1000 x 4WD light trucks (e.g.Toyota Hilux/Tacoma) and US/Nato can mount heavy machine gun and auto 40mm generade launcher plus portable anti-tank and anti-aircraft missles. It would be inexpensive and give much quicker movements than tanks......Support for 🇺🇦 🇺🇦 🇺🇦
Russia will flee right away if those are use.
Hopefully it will be the version with upgraded armor otherwise it does not protect against mortar and artillery fragments and also 7,62 mm and above penetrates. In the Bundeswehr it is called Mannschaftstransportwagen (Troup Carrier), so nothing about armor like Transportpanzer(Transport Tank) i.e. Fox or Boxer. Other than the US we did not upgrade the armor and will replace the M113 with Boxers.
..but Germany is still not helping.
@@johnkelly7187 I don‘t know in which universe you live with your fake news.
We had M113s in 1976 while I was in the 2nd armored division at Fort Hood Texas.Of course I was infantry 11B10. I could sleep on one wrapped around the TC hatch while we moved all night.lol
Gosh, thought these artifacts where museum items - it´s tech from the 60´s for god sake! Works? Yes, probably, an old tractor works too, but you´ll never win anything with second class equipment/abilities. The 113 is a fridge winter time and a sauna summertime, enjoy!
Vietnam war? That like so old equipment. Throwing rubbish to Ukraine?
They are well maintained.
@@laknidubandara
Well maintained? There’re 50 years old
Let Go Brandon !
They may be old but so is russians equipment
@@KingofDoubleBogey Bude there are reproduction if it works and if it is affordable no need to fix it.
@@whodaFru4551 No Russia's equipment is not from the 1960s. Most of this junk will be destroyed on route. US doesn't care. It's all to make defense contractors rich.
The M-113 is still a very piece of equipment. The 1st thing that you should have said is that the 113 is a multi platformed vehicle. Besides being a troop carrier, it is capable of mortars, anti-aircraft machine, radar platform, an engineer vehicle able to deploy the MCLIC,, a wrecker, and many other uses. Essayons!
The old Battle taxi is the perfect solution for for a country that broke and keeps demanding more help
What an innovative way to stock clear the inventory
M113s are little more than glorified humvees in this day and age as modern weapons (even machine guns with the right ammo) can go right through them.
But they are spacious and can be used in the CASEVAC or logistical role as well, or just bringing people around to drop em off. Still useful...as long not in the front.
Not at all, in fact the m113 is just as good as the most modern APC like the Lynx for many things. No rifle can go thought it Austraia upgraded theirs and compeletely rebuilt them and they are bulletproof from 14.5 mm rounds from the front and 50 cal from the sides which is very good. There is no point in having any higher protection then that in my opinion, 35mm sabot rounds will go through any APC and any modern missle will too. so a 4 million new APC can be destroyed just as easily as a 50,000 dollar second hand one thats in storage and worth nothing on the second hand market. These apcs give protection against snipers and arillery and ukraine greatly needs that, they have great mobility and can move troops around fast and there getting them free saving billions. Western countries should give ukraine everyting they have thats in storage and no longer state of the art at least it will get used and its usefull. A leapard 1 tank will still beat a T72 with good training and the right rounds, it also has an indirect arillery mode making it usefull. Judging by how russia is losing some t90s in just 1 day why would any country give brand new tanks to ukraine when there are huge numbers just in storage in so many wetern countries. America has 4000 i think m60s still that could be upgraded with a 120mm gun and still beat a t80 and its almost free for the US to get rid of them there just in storage no longer needed and cant be sold