There is some confusion here between Bren and Universal carriers, your example pictures all seem to be Universal carriers.
A Bren gun carrier is not a Universal carrier, this page shows the differences,
http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=303564
The Bren and Scout carriers have a rear compartment on one side only. Universal carriers have a rear crew compartment on both sides.
The Bren carrier rear compartment has a sloping rear. so 1 crew and 2 men is the maximum people that can fit IN it. The scout has the rear compartment squared off but the extra room is filled with a radio and its batteries so again 1 crew and two men. Wich is how they were actually crewed.
How many men can fit IN the carrier is different to how many men can fit ON the carrier. As these vehicles have all round armour of 1 only the amount of men that can fit IN are protected from small arms fire. Extra men ON the carrier are unprotected. Overall carry capacity of 4 for Universal carrier MkII means the rear two men can lie down on the internal mudguard to avoid being shot, with 6 men in the back it is impossible for them all to get behind the Armour. This is why these vehicles have a total crew of 4 not 8.
If the bren or scout carriers have any more than 3 men or the Universal carriers have any more than 4 men then the extra man should be vulnerable to small arms fire just the same as tank riders are because just like tank riders they are ON the carrier not IN it.
Pictures with more than 4 men in a universal carrier are showing the vehicle used as a transport, clearly they did not go into battle like this as it would be suicide.
I can see how 2 crew works to keep a soft vehicle alive a bit longer, but I can't see how this works for an armoured vehicle? Isnt it destroyed the same wether it has 2 crew or 1?
Looking at this comment from
http://www.diggerhistory.info/pages-...en_carrier.htm
An example of its limitations are best summed-up in the following account: On 23rd November 1942, General Clowes at Milne Bay, New Guinea ordered a small number of Bren Gun Carriers to Cape Endaiadere as direct support to American troops operating in this area. It was made clear to the Americans that the Carriers were too lightly armoured and the crews too exposed for them to be used as tanks. In addition, they lacked any overhead protection from sniper fire, shell splinters and were extremely vulnerable to flank attacks. Thus they were forced to work with infantry support.
A crew of 1 could be said to show how vulnerable the vehicle is. Especially with such low sides, if it is tilted towards the enemy at any point it is possible to shoot into the top very easily.
As General background the minatures website also says this
Bren carriers were used first to motorize a .303 Vickers machine gun and then as a general utility vehicle for infantry companies and above.
Scout Carriers were used by both infantry and armoured formations in a recce role.
Universal Carriers replaced Bren Carriers starting in 1940 and later replaced scout carriers too. Universal Carriers were used in both infantry and motor battalions of Armoured units.
Universal Carriers and Camden Loyd Carriers were used to tow 6 pdr AT guns. Universal carriers were later replaced by T-16 and Windsor carriers in the towing role c. 1944.
All universal carriers had three road wheels per side. Windsor and T-16 carriers which came into service in 1944 had four wheels per side.
The book I mentioned originally says this about PIAT carrier,
The PIAT had an effective range of just 100 yds, and the chances of an enemy tank permitting a carrier to get that close are too slim to be worth worrying about.
Clearly there is a much greater chance of success if the PIAT is used from outside the vehicle as a stealthy approach is then possible. Same thing would apply to the German Unit 612 PzJ Bren(e) Rkt
I noted and checked all the effected fighting formations. I can't see that reducing the bren/scout/universal units crew, carrying capacity or the number of men in the carried teams would cause problems, I am no expert in Mobhack though of course. As far as towing artillery Universal cariers can tow a 6 pdr in an emergency but probably should have any towing capability. Loyd carriers were specifically allocated to tow 6 pdrs. They are not big enough to tow any 17 pdrs or Howitzers, these and their ammunition are too heavy for a lloyd carrier. Loyds carriers should be removed as a towing option in formations containing Howitzers or 17 pdrs. This is discussed here.
http://www.network54.com/Forum/47208...+and+Wireless-
It appears I am not the one and only to take issue with carriers, Pibwl brought up this very issue of overloaded carriers in his last post on the last page of this thread
British OOB7 corrections/sugestions as for the British OOB:
thats back on page 3 0f 18 three pages back in the TOE section.
He posted on April 2011, thats 6 years ago not 20. Using the same reference he also mentions the Universal carrier should have a crew of 4, and comes to many other of the same conclusions as I do. His post is interesting reading not particularily funny unfortunately. I think I am in good company.
I think Pibwl and mys suggestions make a difference for example; your Carrier section with 3 Bren carriers has 18 men actually it had 9 men if it has Bren or Scout carriers, and 12 men if it had Universal carriers Mk II. With a carry capacity of 6 the Bren carrier section can have 24 men, that is 15 extra men per 3 carrier section. Bottom line to me is that with 2 crew and able to carry 6 men these units work as APCs, which they definitely were not.
Re: Carriers
Hybrid Mode
