Why don't they use halftracks anymore?

[BeBMan]

So? During WWII they were used en masse on both sides. Sure, they had also only-wheeled (like trucks) as well as only-tracked vehicles (like tanks) at this time. But we have them both as well, only the halftracks disappeared.

So what happened to the halftracks?

I think it was a big conspiracy against them.

[Bereta_Eder]

was ist ein "halftrack"?

[chequita guevara]

Re: Why don't they use halftracks anymore?

Originally posted by BeBro
So what happened to the halftracks?

Helicopters.

[BeBMan]

A vehicle which has "normal" wheels (with tires and stuff) and tracks

Here are two examples:

http://showcase.netins.net/web/iamvpa/prod04.htm

[Nostromo]

My first guess: they were replaced by helicopters. Damn, Che beat me to it!

[BeBMan]

Hm, but APCs are still in use, they are just either wheeled or tracked.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by nostromo
My first guess: they were replaced by helicopters. Damn, Che beat me to it!

But we were wrong.

Half-tracks were used extensively in World War II by all sides, especially the Germans and Americans, but fell out of favor soon after, replaced with fully-tracked or fully-wheeled vehicles

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-track

[Nostromo]

But we were wrong.

But not completely wrong. Helicopters are used to transport troops, to transport the wounded, or to transport artillery. Granted they're not the cheapest way to go from point A to point B.

Wikipedia doesn't say why they fell out of favor. Maybe they just were a bad idea.

[Kontiki]

Probably just obsolete technology. They've made a few improvements to both tracked and wheeled vehicles since WWII, so there probably isn't any point in combining them anymore.

[Atahualpa]

What was the intention to invent them in the first place?

[Ecthy]

2nd Ata

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by nostromo


But not completely wrong. Helicopters are used to transport troops, to transport the wounded, or to transport artillery. Granted they're not the cheapest way to go from point A to point B.

Wikipedia doesn't say why they fell out of favor. Maybe they just were a bad idea.

They were too much of a middle of the road compromise to be really useful in the long run. As hard to maintain as a fully tracked vehicle, but easier to throw the tracks and less mobile off road and in soft or wet ground.

Way better off-road mobility than wheeled vehicles, but less reliable, much worse fuel consumption, slower on roads, and they'd beat the hell out of most roads far faster than equivalent weight of wheeled transport.

[SpencerH]

A better question is why were the stupid things designed and built that way in the first place? All the problems of both wheels and tracks with none of the benefits. Some 'bright boy' who never had to use one invented it no doubt.

[MichaeltheGreat]

The need to simplify supply chain and logistics. They didn't do anything real well, but they did provide armored and cavalry units with more mobility for their non-armor assets while reducing the number and types of total support vehicles.

Both the Germans and the US got a lot of mileage off their respective basic half-track chassis, for things like mortar carriers, ammo carriers, signals, AAA, recon, and other vehicles.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by SpencerH
A better question is why were the stupid things designed and built that way in the first place? All the problems of both wheels and tracks with none of the benefits. Some 'bright boy' who never had to use one invented it no doubt.

Yep go all tracked like the M111 or al wheeled like the BTR.