Rick Posted March 15, 2021 Share Posted March 15, 2021 General jeep questions. I think officially the jeep was rated to carry 1/4 ton (500 lbs) A cross-country towing limit was? There is a photo of a jeep towing a ten tons of rail cars on a railroad mounting railroad type wheels. Just my opinion but it looks like a publicity stunt? What is the heaviest stuff a Jeep could tow? A 105mm howitzer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim the Tank Nut Posted March 15, 2021 Share Posted March 15, 2021 a Jeep doesn't have much capacity. It can do more on level ground but that is true of anything. I can't imagine pulling a 57mm, much less a 105mm. You could pull a 57mm but downhill would be out of control. In a curve the gun would push the rear end out. The 37mm towed AT gun was about it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17thfabn Posted March 15, 2021 Share Posted March 15, 2021 I think the airborne units towed 57 mm anti tank guns and 75 mm pack howitzers with it. But they didn't have much choice. The standard 57 mm weighed around 2500 pounds. Not sure if the version the airborne used weighed less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ol Paint Posted March 15, 2021 Share Posted March 15, 2021 The M100 trailer often towed by the jeeps appears to have had a payload capacity of 500lb offroad & 750lb on-road with a gross weight of 1065lb/1315lb, respectively. The G-529 trailer of similar capacity had a gross weight of 1550lb. I expect the railroad useage of the Jeep was for yard switching type operations with brakemen manning the hand brakes on the rail cars. Getting the load moving is not the issue--stopping it would be. And pulling loaded railcars uphill is probably not going to work very well. Likewise, towing AT guns would probably be an issue of both the gun pushing the Jeep around, as well as overloading the suspension with too much tongue weight. As 17thfabn noted, the 57mm is around 2700lb, while the 37mm is just under 1000lb according to Wikipedia. I've dragged around a 7-ton high-speed tractor with a 4 cylinder Wrangler in low-range on level ground. The rated towed load on that vehicle was 2000lb. The tractor weighs around 13500lb. I wouldn't want to move it any distance that way, though, and certainly not more than walking speed. Anything more than easy application of throttle resulted in wheelslip and application of the steering brakes on the tractor did the same. And a WWII jeep is even smaller and lighter. Douglas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivanhoe Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 3 hours ago, Ol Paint said: I've dragged around a 7-ton high-speed tractor with a 4 cylinder Wrangler in low-range on level ground. The rated towed load on that vehicle was 2000lb. The tractor weighs around 13500lb. I wouldn't want to move it any distance that way, though, and certainly not more than walking speed. Anything more than easy application of throttle resulted in wheelslip and application of the steering brakes on the tractor did the same. And a WWII jeep is even smaller and lighter. I was thinking along the same lines. There's a huge difference between performing a task day in, day out, at speed, versus performing an exceptional task in extremis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichTO90 Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 7 hours ago, 17thfabn said: I think the airborne units towed 57 mm anti tank guns and 75 mm pack howitzers with it. But they didn't have much choice. The standard 57 mm weighed around 2500 pounds. Not sure if the version the airborne used weighed less. Only the British produced the Mark III Airborne carriage, although they did supply them to the 82d and 101st A/B and possibly later the 17th. It was narrower to make it easier to load in a glider, and was lighter, but I have not tracked down by how much. The Jeep was the prime mover for all the heavy airborne guns, including the 105mm M3, the 75mm M1, the 40mm M1, and the 57mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmgill Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 Asking over on facebook about the Mk3 6 pounder. David Gordon of the Tommy books probably knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmgill Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 oh, one thing about the british Airbone jeeps. They tended to make them lighter but then fitted extra bits to them. see http://visualcollector.com/OBLI/JeepSignals.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bojan Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 (edited) Locally Dodge 1.5t trucks (WC6X series) were used as a prime movers for 75mm M1 gun and 57mm M1 ATG with full ammo load (80/90 rounds). However it was noted that 3/4t truck can be substituted with 1/2 ammo load being carried and 1/4t light vehicle (Jeep), with ~1/4 f the ammo being carried. Edited March 16, 2021 by bojan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmgill Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 British practice was Bren carriers or Loyd Carriers... or possibly 15cwt trucks..airborne tended the light stuff so they made do with Jeeps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven P Allen Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 You can move a train of railcars with a washing machine motor and the proper transmission: that's the point of railroads. As noted above, the problems are grades and braking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiloMorai Posted March 16, 2021 Share Posted March 16, 2021 Demonstration of a Jeep pulling a railcar, 1943 While the Jeeps primary use was for the ground, it could be converted to rail use if necessary. Once converted to a train, Jeeps had the ability to pull up to ten tons by rail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim the Tank Nut Posted March 18, 2021 Share Posted March 18, 2021 I just can't fathom using a Jeep to pull a 105 downhill. Surely it was the prime mover only because no other option existed for the airborne during air ops? there has to be something I am missing. A jeep is a far better machine than a Kubel but that's asking a lot to pull the big 105mm like a CCKW 352 normally would Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R011 Posted March 18, 2021 Share Posted March 18, 2021 1 hour ago, Tim the Tank Nut said: I just can't fathom using a Jeep to pull a 105 downhill. Surely it was the prime mover only because no other option existed for the airborne during air ops? there has to be something I am missing. A jeep is a far better machine than a Kubel but that's asking a lot to pull the big 105mm like a CCKW 352 normally would It's the airborne 105 mm M3. It was half the weight (1.1 T) of the 105 mm M2/M101 (2.2 T) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17thfabn Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 4 hours ago, Tim the Tank Nut said: I just can't fathom using a Jeep to pull a 105 downhill. Surely it was the prime mover only because no other option existed for the airborne during air ops? there has to be something I am missing. A jeep is a far better machine than a Kubel but that's asking a lot to pull the big 105mm like a CCKW 352 normally would And the airborne were not expected to be that mobile . The infantry in the airborne had practically no transport other than their size 9 boots. Was there any other vehicle that the airborne could have used that would fit in a glider? Jeep seemed to be the only choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted March 19, 2021 Author Share Posted March 19, 2021 6 hours ago, 17thfabn said: And the airborne were not expected to be that mobile . The infantry in the airborne had practically no transport other than their size 9 boots. Was there any other vehicle that the airborne could have used that would fit in a glider? Jeep seemed to be the only choice. So from this ex-sailor's prospective, an airborne unit(s) were to parachute/ride a glider on an objective as closely as possible and hang on until the cavalry (old U.S. western film plots) arrive in the nick of time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Galbraith Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 12 hours ago, R011 said: It's the airborne 105 mm M3. It was half the weight (1.1 T) of the 105 mm M2/M101 (2.2 T) Did they use them as tractors for the 17 pounder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R011 Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Did they use them as tractors for the 17 pounder? Probably not. The 17 pounder is a big gun - three Tonnes, a Tonne more than an 105 mm M101. I got my info from Rich's post Monday stating they towed the M3 howitzer with jeeps and the weight data off Wikipedia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim the Tank Nut Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 they did have bolt together CCKW that shipped in 3 halves. Cool, but not practical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17thfabn Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 3 hours ago, R011 said: Probably not. The 17 pounder is a big gun - three Tonnes, a Tonne more than an 105 mm M101. I got my info from Rich's post Monday stating they towed the M3 howitzer with jeeps and the weight data off Wikipedia. What did they use? They had to move them some how? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17thfabn Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 Wiki says the Haimcar can carry two universal carrierers so the Brits may have used them to tow Airborne units 17 pounders. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R011 Posted March 19, 2021 Share Posted March 19, 2021 According to this: https://www.paradata.org.uk/article/morris-commercial-c8at-mark-3-artillery-tractor They used cut-down Morris tractors with gun and ractor carried by a Hamilcar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted March 20, 2021 Author Share Posted March 20, 2021 12 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said: Did they use them as tractors for the 17 pounder? Interesting photo. The 17 lber to my understanding it is not light, went over a curb, but I don't see a truck big enough to do that job. Maybe that vehicle is not in the photo. Second are the two machine guns in the foreground. The closes one looks like a Hotchkiss?, and I presume the one behind it is a BREN? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R011 Posted March 20, 2021 Share Posted March 20, 2021 I suspect the tractor is behind the gun, just out of picture. The MGs are indeed a Hotchkiss and a .303 Bren. The Bren is expected. The Hotchkiss less so. I wonder what the story is there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bojan Posted March 20, 2021 Share Posted March 20, 2021 (edited) Capture from Germans. They used a lot of of those, both ex-French in 8x50R Lebel and ex-Polish ones in 7.9x57mm Mauser in the various secondary and tertiary roles. Rear-area troops guarding a bridge would be quite expected place to find one. Edited March 20, 2021 by bojan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now