Name This Photo!!! - The AFV Recognition Thread

[exspy]

Gentlemen,

Excuse my ignorance but how would China have gotten a hold of enough M-40's to have made constructing a type anti-tank vehicle worthwhile?  In all of my reading of this weapon system (including Jane's) I have never come across anything that indicated that China produced their own versions of it either with or without a license.  I'm eager to learn more if it's available.  Does anyone have any more details on these?

Dan.

PS:  For ironduke57, I rechecked my sources and it seems the JSDF had two armoured vehicles designated the Type 60.  One was a fully tracked armoured personnel carrier similar to the M-113 and the other was the anti-tank vehicle I mentioned earlier.  Perhaps it was the Type 60 APC that was still in service in 2001?

 

[Danjanou]

Gentlemen,

Excuse my ignorance but how would China have gotten a hold of enough M-40's to have made constructing a type anti-tank vehicle worthwhile?  In all of my reading of this weapon system (including Jane's) I have never come across anything that indicated that China produced their own versions of it either with or without a license.  I'm eager to learn more if it's available.  Does anyone have any more details on these?

Dan.

Dan this may be a clue

It is chinese, but AFAIK it was build around 75-78.

The Vietnam War ended in 1975 and I'm sure there were plenty of M-40s either US or ARVN laying around for the NVA to acquire. If my addled memory serves me well there were a couple of years there before Sino-Viet relations soured and the border clashes ocurred. Perhaps some were traded north in exchange for other materials and a few were mounted on a trial vehicle?

 

[ironduke57]

Gentlemen,

Excuse my ignorance but how would China have gotten a hold of enough M-40's to have made constructing a type anti-tank vehicle worthwhile?  In all of my reading of this weapon system (including Jane's) I have never come across anything that indicated that China produced their own versions of it either with or without a license.  I'm eager to learn more if it's available.  Does anyone have any more details on these?

Dan.

PS:  For ironduke57, I rechecked my sources and it seems the JSDF had two armoured vehicles designated the Type 60.  One was a fully tracked armoured personnel carrier similar to the M-113 and the other was the anti-tank vehicle I mentioned earlier.  Perhaps it was the Type 60 APC that was still in service in 2001?

Regarding its weapons. I have no information which weapon it used, but IMHO it is much likely that it used an copy of the US M-20 called Type 53.
----------------------------------------
Regarding Japanese AFV. There is the Type 60 tank hunter and the Type SU 60 an APC. (Which is the base for the Type SV 60 81mm mortar carrier, the Type SX 60 107mm mortar carrier and the Type SU 60 NBC NBC detection vehicle.)

Regards,
ironduke57

 

[exspy]

Gentlemen,

Thanks.  All very good answers.

Now, who has the next photo to identify?

Dan.

 

[ironduke57]

I think you misunderstood me. My pic isn´t finished yet. You still have to find it´s designation.

Regards,
ironduke57

 

[exspy]

ironduke57,

All I can find so far is that the recoilless rifles were designated 105mm rather than 106mm.  They weapons themselves were known as the Type 75.  The only reference I've seen to mounting two of them on a tracked chassis lists it as the Twin 105mm Type 75 (SP) which is not, what I think, you are looking for.

Am I getting warm?

Dan.

 

[ironduke57]

Twin 105mm Type 75 (SP)? No.

As said I don´t know how it was armed. Self with it´s designation it is hard to get information about it.

One more piece of information: One or more prototype´s where build but not adopted for production.

Now I am off to bed, damn late here.

Regards,
ironduke57

 

[ironduke57]

Hint: It was a prototype for an airborne light tank. (I don´t know if it was able to be airdropped or if it was only air transportable.)

Regards,
ironduke57

 

[Emenince Grise]

Hint: It was a prototype for an airborne light tank. (I don´t know if it was able to be airdropped or if it was only air transportable.)

Regards,
ironduke57

WZ141 Airborne Light Tank

http://china-defense.blogspot.com/2007/02/wz141-airborne-light-tank.html

 

[ironduke57]

Right.

Your turn.

Regards,
ironduke57

 

[Emenince Grise]

Name the vehicle. Bonus points for the nationality.

 

[exspy]

Always a 1/2 hour behind the rest of the crowd.

I just found the Chinese vehicle on the same site.  The new clue ironduke57 gave was the giveaway for the search.

Waiting for the next question.

Dan.

 

[exspy]

Your Emenince,

A Centurion ARV Mk 2, possibly Australian?

Dan.

 

[Petard]

I would agree with the Centurion ARV Mk 2, Jordanian?

 

[Emenince Grise]

Your Emenince,

A Centurion ARV Mk 2, possibly Australian?

Dan.

Correct. Centurion ARV, Australian service.


Your turn.

 

[exspy]

Alright,

I've selected the following 'B' vehicle and am asking the following questions; vehicle name, country of use, carrying capacity and manufacturer.

Dan.

 

[ironduke57]

Shoot in the blue: EE-50?

Regards,
ironduke57

 

[exspy]

I know it's not a very good photo but I don't think there are very many good photos of this truck around.

It's a Canadian 5/4 ton vehicle built by Chrysler in the late 1960's for purchase by the CF.  It was called the RAM truck.  It was never accepted due to it's cost, or so I've heard.  However Mobile Command was so sure that it would be purchased that all of its land unit war establishments published in 1968 have it included in the vehicle's sections.

Ironduke57, you're much better at this than I am.  The next question I offer to you.

Dan.

 

[ironduke57]

Okay, then. What have we here?

Regards,
ironduke57

 

[Emenince Grise]

Okay, then. What have we here?

Regards,
ironduke57

The running gear is unmistakably from the Russian T-26. But the gun looks like a howitzer, which makes it an SU-5-3, based on the gun braces. 

Full details here: http://rkkaww2.armchairgeneral.com/galleries/T-26/SU-5.htm