Top Ten Infantry Fighting Vehicles Nr. 9

[melgibsonsballs]

Yes the company that made the alligator is called Food Machinery Corporation (FMC) they also produce as far as I have known Bradley Fighting Vehicles, M113s, and XR311s

[beallman64]

what is petrol?

[Dustbin2008]

@beallman64 Fuel

[redxenos]

@beallman64 It's the British name for 'gasoline'

[HappiKarafuru]

Did you all see Sargent Reobuck,Palonsky and Miller over..there..LOL

[e0o9kii]

2:19 You can see a BLUE GUY.

[antimorons1945]

food machinery coporation? was this supposed to be a fridge?

[kieferkippy]

it's almost like a free toy from a kiddy meal

[stickpge]

im getting hugry for this number are aligators?? eatable becouse i am living almost next to a ww2 museam

[mrutubeisms]

wtf? food machinery?

[lolitstinks1]

So it earned top innovation marks when they copied it from the japanese.....lolwut

[TheHunter222]

@lolitstinks1 Because it is a general international list altough there is a lot of US stuff in it. It is more about the type of vehicle. And this was an innovation, no matter which country had the idea first.

[916ppl]

@lolitstinks1 Copied it from the Japanese? The LVT 4 Alligator was design by a American before the war. Also, the Japanese use forward landing boats which is not very great. Example is Saving Private Ryan on Omaha Beach.

[916ppl]

@lolitstinks1 The USMC and USN use the idea of landing troops with small land crafts instead of the normal large ships or row boats of WW1 and older.

[n213978745]

why this vehicle has high innovation score, if they copied the idea from japanese :/

[jackydefo]

This guy has a great voice

[redxenos]

"Manufacturer - Food Machinery Corporation" LOL

[vk45de]

@redxenos That's what I was thinking. Funny as hell.

[0TGhunter0]

@redxenos LOL! Epic Win!

[22250rmntn]

@redxenos

Yeah, and during combat the solders carried by the LVT 4 are the meat.

[greatsharkman]

@redxenos I think he meant Ford Machinery Corporation, but who cares right?

[redxenos]

@greatsharkman No, Food Machinery Corporation is correct. The company still exists and is now known as FMC Corporation.

[redreaper2020]

@redxenos FMC actually was a large manufacturer of armor and military vehicles for 60 years. It's been absorbed into other companies now, but i you think about it, early tanks were essentially large, armored agricultural tractors.

[hedus42]

i just dont understand why all ww2 personal carriers had no roof, i mean they werent smart enough to know that bullets come from above too????

[hedus42]

@hedus42 not all of them but most

[jotabe1984]

@hedus42 i think in theory the concept was that if the vehicle get sunk, soldiers could jump out

[hedus42]

@jotabe1984 but if you made an compartment in witch water cant poor in and would keep the air inside while sinking the vehicle would float right??? like a water bottle thrown in the water filled up with air............ you had your point too because war is unpredictable...

[John4566442]

@hedus42 They were meant as transports not as a fighting vehicle. The idea was to ride in the half-track or whatever until you made enemy contact, then dimount and fight on foot. Think of the WWII era cariers as armored trucks. Of course that theory sucks it you get caught in the back of one while someone opens up with an MG-42 from above... but that the concept. At that time infantry would ride on top of tanks in the same manner, yet way more exposed. Again, they would dismount when in contact.

[916ppl]

@John4566442 MG-42 from above. Pfff. I more scare of the M2. It even kill soldiers despite the armor door is still up.

[SargeBullRandleman]

LVT with Low mobility. LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLOOOOOOOOOOOOOO­OOOOOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

[phil5775]

There were 300 of these available in England at the time of the Normandy Invasion. Think of what an asset they would have been at Omaha Beach. Instead of American soldiers getting mowed down by machine gun fire exiting the Higgins boats, the LVT's good have taken them right up to the safety of the seawall, at the bottom of the bluffs. Unfortunately, the Overlord planners all but ignored the amphibious techniques that had been developed in the Pacific.

[BrenTank1996]

The LVT is good, but it is lightly armoured. It suffered heavily by Japanese mortars.

[ahgimpgimp]

does anyone know why most of the marines in the footage have painted blue faces?

[matt99is]

They were smurfs

[Taisykis]

BlikjeBier:

um... as far as i see it it's the smallest APC. The humvee is a general purpose vechicle. Since it's top ten IFVs it get's on the list since it can carry a drvier and 3 people.

[Kriegerdammerung]

The Humvee M1114 and M1025 are just:

"Troop Transport"

Example the D90, UAZ 469, Vodnik, Jeep

[OlderG0ds]

The show is not actually called "top 10 IFV" it's "top 10 fighting vehicles"

[mikkoass222]

its top ten AFV (armoured fighting vehicle)

[XxMusashiYamatoxX]

why don't they put hard covers over these things for extra protection. The troops are very vulnerable to artillery and small-arms fire, especially if enemy forces are on elevated terrain.

[Taisykis]

Guess that would add weight issues... It's not really a powerfull engine... I guess overhead protection wasn't really that needed...

[BlikjeBier]

smallest vehicle on the list? what a dumbasses, the humvee is much smaller and way lighter than this one

[Mouiki]

He was talking about the bren carrier not this

[Eboreg2]

I think they're really talking about the Universal Carrier that's number 7

[historian246]

This is a war-winning machine. Love it!

[housekeeper25]

These AmTraks as they were called were a quantum leap in amphibous landings because of its rear door and adequate armor protection they saved countless soldiers and marines, Unfortunately they were too late to be used in the Normandy landings as well as the fact that the US was also conducting an Island Hopping campaign against the Japanese at the pacific

[jhonixs1974]

Yeah why didn't they use this on D-Day the casualties would have been much lower.

[AlphaWhiskey22]

Pshh, if they even use these vehicles, powerful anti tank weapons and tank traps u have seen in the D-day footage blocks the usage of tanks or any kind of vehicle.

[Dogmeat7]

they were made for Fighting in the Pacific.

[Lachausis]

Germans were not dumb or slow. This vehicle was too slow. It would have been destroyed pretty fast.

[xiaodog1234]

pretty sure these things can't go up cliffs

[yootubematt]

I think the guy's point was mostly about the rear-opening doors and two machine guns up front. The landing boats opened up directly into opposing gunfire and didn't have any support fire. They didn't have to go up the cliffs, the armor and firepower alone would have meant a lot less deaths.

[inovillacastin]

why didn't they use this on D-Day?

[KaarJaren]

They were all needed for the Pacific campaign. When the only amphibious operation in the whole European Theatre was the initial invasion, they couldn't justify pulling LVT's away from the Marines hopping island-to-island against the Japanese.

[Isolder74]

Another reason was that D-day included a large number of DUKW's already and LVT's just could not be spared in the Pacific. While LTV's were used for river crossings in Europe the DD Tanks already had major problems getting inland. LVT's while looking good on paper may not have fared well trying to get to the beaches of Normandy with the channel's swift currents and fast tides.

[theGoldenAgeOfBoredo]

cos they are too slow and would have easely blown to hell by the germans..or something like that.

go to the national war museum in london,and read for yourself:-)

[iceteaguy]

First!

Thanks for posting it. I love these series things.