Aerogavin!

Truly Mike Sparks was ahead of us all

Can't wait to send M113s in space

A E R O G A V I N

Gaijins next Premium

Proper tools for a specific job

thank god for the Bradleys and other IFVs to exist

average youtube comment try not to lie challenge (impossible)

@@richardhill286 troll much? The M113 was a battlefield taxi, good enough for its time, The M577 command track variant was/is also good enough had I the money I wouldn't mind buying 1 or 3 ... guess I'll have to play the lottery ;)

@@ret7army no bro i just don’t really care enough to memorize every detail of vehicles

👆 Everything’s a death trap if you hit it hard enough.

how about sisu xa-apc

Had a Sgt that called AAV-7s "Floating coffins"

@@fireknightofficial1340 **laughs in Finnish conscript** Wanna guess again?

As it turns out, if you drive metal boxes into a warzone with rocket propelled grenades, ATGMs and copious amounts of gunfire, a good number of them tend to get blown up. I know its a significant event for those caught inside it, but like, *who'da fucking thunk*

Yup! it's original intent was to take troops and gear to the front lines and GTFO before geting shot. Sadly, for it's reputation, Vietnan war torn to pieces the concept of frontlines... Yet to this date, the M113 is a great logistical asset Also, you forgot that the AIM-9s should be mounted into the 360° arc turret with an autoloader to make better use of it's cargo hull.

😆 🤣 😂

@@eddiestray4870 LOL

Battle taxi? My man, I've seen an actual taxi driving through a street under fire from both sides and it had less losses than M113s in vietnam! (1 out of 1 surviving means 0% losses that's an achievement, no clue about the driver though, middle eastern taxi drivers are tough however! )

@@eddiestray4870 Mike Sparks is truly one of the soldiers to ever exist.

Warthunder is planes first and barebones&nothing for tanks. We still also got the incredibly poor modeled tracks that only give traction at the very front and back of it. None around the middle or in the parts of the track not touching ground.

@@PAcifisti poor modeling aside, the traction problems are also because the devs are too lazy to balance the maps properly. so they just made tanks slip down hills instead fixing map exploits

The traction used to be good but people kept mountain goating and climbing around gaijins broken maps and sniping people from impossible areas. Rather than fix their broken maps, they just added teflon to all the tank tracks and called it a day

@@Super_Tristan1005 They did a mobility nerf years back that fucked up just about every vehicle because they couldn't be bothered to work on their game. We have the same shitty map scope and incessant modes, but worse, that we had back when. We even lost the D point. Planes coming first is such a poster child common modern trash bin non-sequitur excuse for pussy player bases accepting dogshit as if a treat from bad people.

The BT-42 can go up basically a flat wall when you do it at an angle lol

Or the role of a support vehicle in general. I was in a unit that was still using these in 2019/2020 as a support vehicle or what some would call a “command” vehicle. For the most part, they were great. The only time you would ever really have an issue with them was with the onboard generator for the additional systems (or any time you let that new joe drive and they threw track, but that’s when we got to have a fun little party of teaching them how to put tracks back on), and that’s not an issue with the M113, that’s a generator issue cause we ran them like hell. People watch one shitty movie about an air force officer in the pentagon Who hated this thing because he had such an axe to grind because he didn’t get his way about his design for an aircraft, and they get all of their history from that one shitty movie. This isn’t to say that the movie isn’t necessarily bad, but I am so tired of everyone getting all of their information from that one movie. That man was absolutely pissed off And wasting taxpayer dollars. That’s it. Unfortunately, more recently, the same thing has been happening since the release of the movie “Tread” About the “Killdozer and Marvin Heemeyer. I’m not saying that what he did was right, but ever since that movie came out, people have been quoting it like we can’t get any of our information from anywhere anywhere else, and that the movie doesn’t conflict with anything at all. I’m not saying that the three people involved in the movie lied to you, But their story and Marvin’s tapes don’t match. You also see this with people who get all of their information about Erwin Rommel from his diary, trying to paint him out to be such an amazing man. He was not, and had he survived the war. He would’ve been dried as a war criminal. The man had an entire propaganda team with him in North Africa. I promise you everything in that man’s diary is catered to make him look better. All that to say, most people will not really do very much digging into the reality of a vehicle, or a topic, or a person even if it’s something that they’re really interested in. They will 99% of the time Take the first thing that they hear and run with it. And since the M113 Is an “armored” vehicle according to these people, it has to fit what their idea of an armored vehicle is. And since it doesn’t do the things that their favorite armored vehicle does very well it must be “bad”. In my opinion, I would have to agree with what was said in the video that there’s absolutely nothing wrong with this vehicle being what it is today a support vehicle. It does its job excellently, and when the vehicle came out, it was par for the course. Does it need an upgrade? Absolutely not. Not in the role that it’s currently being used in. Because a lot of people tend to forget US doctrine when it comes to these vehicles. Vehicle is rolling around, 99% of the time, it’s not alone. It probably is attached to a mechanized unit that definitely has heavier armor, or something to knock out heavier armor. I know a lot of people like to think that infantry are out there like they were in Vietnam with these things, but they are not. From what I can understand (again, not infantry, nor was attached to one, but had friends attached to them and who were) If you’re not walking somewhere, you’re not taking mechanized you’re probably taking a wheel vehicle. Now heavier, infantry, like mechanized infantry, those guys might have a couple of these things, and typically they aren’t just riding around in them everywhere. They still get to get treated like infantry anyway. These things are usually just a shorten the distance, or more for carrying the guys with the big weapons like the stuff to take out, heavier, armor, or so this way you can keep up with the tank that you’re probably trying to keep up with and Support.

Yeah I thought it was great while we had them. It’s basically the Toyota Camery of armored vehicles.

@@nelsoj11 Best comparison I have ever heard, I'm gonna adopt that :)

plus they weren't bad to sleep on

I was a Combat Engineer in the cool-azz 1980s…. Our squad vehicle was a overloaded M113 pulling and equally overloaded trailer in every freaking unit I served with… found sleep in every available cubic inch of that thing.😅

Cav scout 1970s, our m113 was a very good vehicle in Germany we didn't have a heater like the tankers but we survived.

Don't leak classified documents about it btw

DO leak classified documents about it

@@TheBananamonger lmfao

@@alehop333 I don't think there is much classified about what's basically a tracked fridge

its been a year since ive played this shit game, but are slopes still covered in oil and shit to climb in general? lol

My neighbor told me that he bought chain licked fences about 10 feet far from the APC and they would stop an RPG before it could hit the M113

Its only unauthorized if you get caught. 🤣🤣 Even then, its only unauthorized if a Fobbit or REMF sees it. I havent had a field grunt officer tell an enlisted guy something is unauthorized. Only thing I can recall is when the desert tan blackhawk boots 1st came out. Way more comfortable. Just about every enlisted started buying them. the only ones that had a problem were the non-combatants. They even got so anal about having to through every lace eyelet in the boots and started writing up soldiers for being out of uniform. With officers like that, who needs enemies? 🤣🤣.

That's because the back of the vehicle is essentially empty.

@@cheesytacos6498 I read a story from a tanker who said they put the same chick wire up in front of their M551’s for the same purpose

In the seventies one of my dad's employees was a vet that lost his lower leg when their 113 was hit an rpg. He was the only survivor as he was standing in the cupola. He was a great guy, but always struggled with 'survivor's guilt'.

The M1113 is more than 60 years old, and still in service with many armies around the world - currently in combat in the Middle East and Ukraine. That fact alone tells you something. This clever, reliable, low-maintenance, and easy to operate light AFV is the ‘Volkswagen’ of the AFV world. It’s a very capable battle-taxi, a platform for a wide variety of weapon systems, and offers much better protection than a Green shirt ! It is NOT a tank, but remains a valued ‘all-rounder’ in many armies decades after it was first conceived. Like the B52, it will be around for many years to come.

Soon enought, the Filipinos will have m113s for every combat role.

@@abnerdoon4902 mike sparks has now moved to the Philippines

@@koimeme well we have an IFV, APC and Fire Supporr Versions XD

Thr Dutch YPR765 had an open turret with a 25mm cannon

@@dwwolf4636 later on it had an fully enclosed one too (i don't know how many were actually upgraded) but they almost all got sold to egypt, and the few left over are now in the Ukraine

Ah yes, the FISTV, a vehicle that can destroy tanks without firing a single shot itself, but relying on its laser rangefinder-designator to guide the 155mm Howitzer gun-fired Copperhead anti-tank missile and Air-dropped JDAM to destroy whatever this thing is pointing its laser at lol

Glad we have the Bfist, I see the mortar tracks and 1068s always broke down. Not thst the brads are much better here

We had FISTERS with the Bradley. Cool dudes

Were you guys able to keep up with the M1s and Bradleys in the field? I was on a Vulcan and they would leave us in the dust.

GLLD, ground laser locator designator and the North Seeking Gyro. Old tech that predates and independent of GPS.

3rd one? Hot damn he was just built different and incredibly lucky.

Wow that's the kind of crazy injury one would call unrealistic if it happened in a movie xD

That's badass

I have heard this kind of "thankfully the helmet was unstrapped" stories but all I can find in the official and medical literature is not strapping helmets lead to more and worse injuries. My guess is that he was lucky it was a glancing blow and the strap had little to do with the thankfully good outcome.

Would be a fantastic premium/event vehicle for in-game.

Agreed

I damn near did flip my 577 track ... scary as ... but yeah

Me too. I was an Evac Medic [1st ID HHC 1-16 Infantry Medical Platoon Evac Section] circa 1992-1996. She was a b*&^% to maintain, but she was my baby.

But the tracks seem pretty narrow to me… i drove a MT-LB/v in the army for a year and that thing could drive on a swamp without sinking…. 0,28bar ground pressure….

@@jaakko222 like I said, the desert was pretty good for tracks. I've never had to dig it out of a bog, almost certainly because they've never seen a bog.

I was in an M113 at night in blackout drive that was going up the side of a ravine and broke traction and slid backwards. The driver was smart enough to keep it pointed uphill and it was quite the ride in the dark until eventually we slid to the bottom, the diesel drowned out our sighs of relief but dammed if he didn't just drive along the bottom a bit and picked another line and powered up it that time. That was greasy German dirt though.

You’d think at this point they’d give crews those liquid cooled vests to wear if they aren’t going to put A/C in

@@loganbaileysfunwithtrains606 it would be a lot easier just to put a/c in the thing lol

The commanding m113s have ac because they got to keep the computers cool.

@@victoria19853 ah yes, the 1068. The problem with those is they’re always full of senior NCOs and junior officers

@@JMAN-pg4tg I don’t see that as a problem 😎.

Yep. She's still getting it done all these years later. Excellent bit of kit. I seem to recall video of some enterprising Ukrainians having turned an M113 into a field kitchen to deliver hot meals right at the front. Incredibly resourceful people.

True, I think it got an unfair reputation in Vietnam where there wasn’t much artillery or mortars and mines would destroy them pretty easily.

@@SavageTactical I think Vietnam has done a lot of damage with lots of Myths that don't really stand up to scrutiny. But because many of these myths lineup with a lot of agendas, good luck getting people to view it objectively.

People keep forgetting this because the West has spent 50+ years fighting goat herders and rice farmers. The M113 is effectively immune to any artillery that isn't a direct hit. It's cheap to produce and easy to support logistically, so you can effectively hand them out to everyone. Rather than have a few super APCs and everyone else has to ride in the back of an unarmored truck.

out of curiosity do you feel the same about BMP-1s?

@@SavageTactical Part of that reputation is partially a misuse of what it was intended for, as commanders tended to use them more like IFVs than battlefield taxis.

Still doing CASEVAC in Ukraine to this day.

​@@hagamapamait is used in every role in Ukraine with varying success.... But they are mostly moving coffins

Makes sense, given each’s role.

If they just made a Bradley with no turret the US could phase out the 113 entirely. The Bradley is ridiculously large IRL and the turret is most of that space

@@jasonxd5738given what spook said I think they did

@@dogman9223 There is a few Bradley variants tried like the ADATS but I'm not aware of any that have actually entered service anywhere

@@jasonxd5738 It took the Army the better of a decade to start rolling them off the production line but that's what the new AMPVs are. If I'm lucky maybe I'll see it replace my M113 before I leave 😂

Yes that would be awesome.

I would love Spookston to play the Lynx I like the Huey because of the Vietnam memes, and I like the Apache and Mi-24 because they are beefy, but for some reason the Lynx for me is just brilliant

At a minimum you do services twice a year. It gets maintenance

@@cavtastic5691 You have to admit, even with "required" maintenance assumed, these things get treated like mullet Camaros. For the abuse and stretching, it's seen a lot for some child to come along decades later and neg it for rather plastic reasons, which may or may not be his fault.

@@lector-dogmatixsicarii1537 Right Mr. Dogmatix - some non - mech infantry gameboy ripping a vehicle he never rode in , drove , worked on ect . This vehicle is COMBAT PROVEN ! Maybe I am biased , I worked at FMC in San Jose and served in First Battalion , Twelfth Cavalry , ( Mech ) 1st Cav Division during the mid seventies .

I think you mean the Gavin, not the m113

@@TheJewishAzovMemberwhat?

@matthewjones39 It's an extremely niche joke about the m113.

It was really really good when it was new. Now it's like 70 years old it's impressive that it can still find a battlefield role for itself. It's not that the M113 is a wonderful machine. What's wonderful is that sooooooooo long after it first entered the battlefield, it's still making itself useful.

9.7*

Oh my bad thanks for the correction

@@philfree286 np

XC-8 is not the same as the TML

Never said it was the same tho

Heard stories in Ukraine of M113s being set up as mobile field kitchens to deliver hot meals to the trenches.

The main issue at this point is age and wear…. No matter how good something is when brand new, when its 35+ years old, run hard and stored outside every day of its existence, its going to give a trooper a totally different experience,and general opinion of the unit, than the first several crews that vehicle had over its life. Small arms are much the same… once you get issued a twice rebuild 30+ yr old gun with failing springs Of course your going to think its a lump of crap ( M9 is a good example, a Beretta M92 was/ a great gun if you purchased a new one, and took care of it, and didn’t use govt contract check mate magazines that had a rough interior that held onto talcum powder sand, and springs that were sub par) leading young soldiers to hate the M9…. While I carried them several years, 3 different ones… without a single malfunction and shot expert. The difference was I wasn’t saddled with worn out ones that was used by 150 people before me.

Clapped out isn't a fair comparison, I used them in the late 1970s and had none of that. There is a rebuild interval for all of that kit and I'm sure yours is well passed it.

Also Rhino shoutout

I started in the old 113…stick+detroit deisel….then when we got the A3s….Weeeeeeee it was like joyriding a stolen car! 2 years later the CFV replaced them. They were a true workhorse.

Way to go Dad ! Yeah , it is hard to compare the M - 113 to a Bradley , they are quite different vehicles . I crewed on one , and helped build the other at the FMC factory in San Jose .

I think the MTLB playtform could also be considered as a box that could be used for more ways than any other tank…

The M-901 is the TOW missile carrier version of the M-113, like in the video. I was in a scout platoon back in the late 80's. We had three M-113 and three M-901 in our platoon. Personally I loved them.

APC or track but not a tank.....

@@jewelltuber yes mr correct

British MkIX tank*

Noncredibledefence is leaking

Compare that with other industry grade equipment and itl put into perspective just how small that number really is. Like compare it with tractors, construction equipment, trains, and all sorts of shit. The "military industrial complex" should be renamed to "government contractual complex". Because in reality, the same companies that participate in military type shit, are the same companies that participate in other contracts aswell. Its just regular corporations doing corporation type shit. Mitsubishi wouldnt come across as a your average defence contractor, but they are since their an engineering firm. Same story with chrysler and boeing. Same story with even SpaceX

@@honkhonk8009 yeah but think of the huge demand for tractors, or really any other industrial machine. Now think of the demand for APCs. Is 6,000 really a low number? Let’s say you want to equip a mechanized division of the US army. Would it need over 600 APCs? And let’s say you keep 400 as spares and training vehicles per division. Thats six whole mechanized divisions. That seems like a pretty sizable amount. Compare that to some other WW2 vehicles, where sometimes the number was in the hundreds or even the dozens

Over 150 000 cars are produced *every day*. 6000 is small by industrial production standards, bit just military.

no, its a small number even in civilian world, toyota probably produced 6k of trucks every year.

@@matthiuskoenig3378 150,000 cars everyday for the 6.7 billion adults in the world. Again, I’m not saying it’s a technical feat to make 6,000 APCs, I’m saying that’s a pretty large number for something that has a relatively niche application. It’s not a jeep. It’s not a truck. It’s a purpose built APC.

Lol, no

Though quite a few have been destroyed already they keep asking for more. Also they operate the MT-LB as well and have made serveral modifications them from heli rocket pods to anti tank cannons for indirect fire role.

@@maksuthesunpraiser4821 Lol, beats walking.........

@@davidty2006 Fun fact: BMPs even now lack a hydraulic door mechanism. If you park one on a slope, it is nearly impossible to close the door from the inside.

anything more, including every single role (even IFV if you include some foreign upgrades) which a light armored vehicle can perform, most of which it has performed with good result.

*looks at M2 50. cal* timeless classics

Couldn't have said it better .I learned a lot about sockets and wrenches by my time as a M - 113 driver at Ft. Hood , Texas and in Germany .

Can you get more Murica than tooling around the battlefield in a Gavin drinking a Coke and blasting with Mama Deuce?

That is a hell of a lot of miles , but I believe you . I was in Germany as well , with a battalion from the First Cav , and we borrowed the ones they had at Wildfllecken . We went to the field a few times , and I drove our M - 113 .

In my company I we had the M-114s. I was a driver of a M-113 with a Tow Missile. The M-114 sometimes could not make it out of the motor pool but The M-113 could.

Very interesting hearing comments from a Bradley crewman about the M - 113 , they are so different but do almost the same job . I worked at FMC in San Jose and drove a M - 113 in the Army during the mid - 70's . Even back then there was talk about the " new " APC , but it didn't show up until 1983 . A case could be made for calling the Bradley the Army's favorite vehicle. 40 years and still going strong . When I got to the factory , vehicle # 14 was on the assembly line . Only 5,986 more to go .