Like many weapons systems, PT-76 worked best when used for it's designed purpose. Too many times weapons systems are used for roles they were not designed, then the weapon system is blamed rather than the people using it improperly.
The US Army had that problem really bad with the M24 Chaffee in Korea. The US tankers confidently attacked T34/85s and the survivors had no compunction against declaring the M24 was a terrible tank because its gun was not making holes in the T34s while the T34s could, whenever they managed to actually land a hit, make holes in the M24. Somehow, between 1945 and 1950, everyone had collective amnesia and forgot that the Chaffee was a scout tank, so it was not supposed to be able to face down a purpose-made tank-killing tank in open battle. Looks like the phenomenon of measuring armored combat vehicles principally by how well they fight othered armored combat vehicles, rather than how well they did their intended jobs, is not a new one. :)
@@genericpersonx333 Seriously? M-24 against any model past the T-34/43? Did we swap tankers with an alternate timeline where the Super Pershing made it to mass production?
@@johnd2058 Must have been because it is hard to think what else could have been the case! Makes one really glad it is not the universe where the Red Army sent IS3s crewed by veterans of the Great Patriotic War to Korea in 1950. Now to be fair to the tankers themselves, they were were mostly the ill-trained and ill-disciplined products of the Occupation of Japan, with its horde of mostly post-war conscripts that spent more time in the bathhouses than the barracks. Virtually all the American veterans were in Europe. And to these second-rate tankers' credit, they knew they were often the only viable antitank weapon in an area, and they didn't leave the infantry to be slaughtered so long as they had shells to shoot. They also did hurt T34s plenty, as T34s were not immune to the short 75mm cannon, and despite their substandard training, the US tankers were better shots than the North Koreans on average, so every meeting cost both sides a lot of blood and oil. What really boggles the mind is that the tankers seem utterly convinced they should have been wiping the floor with the T34s, as opposed to just about breaking even as they did, and that the Army seem to agree with the tankers. I don't think it was racism either, because you don't see many references to the ethnicity of the enemy. Seems like the US Army and its tankers just took for granted they should win most tank versus tank actions, regardless of the tanks involved.
@@genericpersonx333 Yeah, that's got to be... what, like not getting terrorized enough in training to be sufficiently receptive to the parts about things to be afraid of? I did US Army infantry training, and they were REALLY good at that.
@genericpersonx333 funnily enough, the new M-10 Booker is believed to have been designated as a fire support platform and not a tank in order to discourage the crew from picking fights with enemy tanks despite the gun being capable enough to do so. This is a roumour/joke but having grown up around military personnel all my life...I can totally believe this is true.
Did you remember Lang Vay and Khe Sanh ? After resistance war of ours, PT76 tank have a fierce war in Cambodia, where ours being fighting Khmer Rouge of Pol Pot.
PT-76 both part 1 and 2 watched; very good stuff, never knew about the MRL version and the continuous comment about it's use and mis-use goes along way to explaining why this vehicle gained the reputation it did.
Love the works you guys had done so far. I want to add several information regarding Indonesian PT-76. - Indonesia never operates BRDM-2, instead receiving older BRDM-1. Interestingly Marine Corps TOE still listed BRDM-1 albeit not in active duty. - While it was first used in Indonesia-Malaysia Confrontation. PT-76 originally ordered as par of preparation for West New Guinea campaign (Operation Trikora). - Beside East Timor, Marines PT-76 were also used in Aceh against Free Aceh Movement in early 2000s. - Regarding the PT-76 with BM-14/17 rocket launcher. This project was started in 1995, internet suggest it was named TAPIR (Tank Amfibi Peluncur Incendiary Rocket) but I haven't found official document to confirm if. Therefore I will refer it as PT-76 MLRS. While the modification was judged successful and even passed amphibious test. It was never test fired or even operational due to lack of fund. The sole prototype is still in Marine base in Surabaya but has rusted. - PT-76 were supposed to be replaced by BMP-3F. But since Marines still lacking enough AFV, In 2020 a contrac was signed for PT-76 will be modernized in Indonesia by a joint Ukrainian company and local company. Among the modernization are new 90mm cannon that can fire Ukrainian Falarick missile, Zaslon active protection system, Synthesis FCS, Basalt communication system, new steering system and suspension, new Cummins VT400 engine with Allison transmission.
Im the guy who wrote the article, and I wanted to cover the Malaysian PTs lightly, but it would be very nice to have entire articles on Malaysian PT 76s. If you are interested give us a shout
@@ifanramadhana7833 you can join or TE discord server discord.gg/KxJmV2XE Or through my email Constantinalexe123@gmail.com Looking forwards to talking!
@@strakhovandrri Indonesia bought BVP-2 from Slovakia and BTR-50 from Ukraine back in the 90s. The plan is to replace all those PT-76 and BTR-50 with BMP-3F and BT-3F but I guess with Ukraine War and all those plan goes right out of the window. Currently Indonesian Marine also have some BMP-3F and BTR-4.
I would really like to see a video on the ASU-85 if possible, it's a very cool design not to mention it has the whole airborne thing going for it, I tried to do some research on it but wasn't able to find that much in-depth stuff about it.
Hello Chumbino, While such articles are within our sights and within our scope, they are not currently in the works. You can add them to our Public Suggestion List and you can help by adding more sources (or other suggested articles) docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p0Ll9TITGDiF9_fdS-tv1797JBs0_-pB70ReE_kIRkE/edit#gid=1911430820 Also, in order to help us with illustrating and publishing, please do consider donating through Patreon or Paypal. www.patreon.com/tankartfund Paypal.me/tankartfund
They were extremely useful for the Indian Army during 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War as Bangladesh's (then East Pakistan) geography is crisscrossed by multiple rivers big and small.
Most articles I read about Chechnya are more concerned with the massacre of T-72A/B and T-80BV tanks in Grozny, didn't know the PT-76 played a part too!
You can edit TH-cam videos after they have been published to clip out any parts where there is doubled dialog bits . Not that it matters or anything . I just noticed on a couple of videos that you have done the same thing i have done a few times and was wondering if you knew you can fix those bit in the youtube editor by very carefully cliping them out as you cant undo a mistake. Anyway great videos as usual 😊
3:56 shows a Sherman (maybe with the pt76 gun) but its definitely not a Pt 76. I've watched 2 vids on this channel and both had mistakes in them, maybe do a triple check before you post? Just a suggestion
The caption there was a slight mistake on the behalf of the video editor. The other comment of yours was not a mistake, as we pointed out. So maybe have the full conversation or look into it before accusing people?
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT So you admit a mistake was made, that could have been prevented by checking the videos better before uploading, (aka I am right) yet blame me of 'accusing'. I pointed out an error, you are welcome. Don't want to be corrected? Upload footage that does not have mistakes.
about the PT-76 tank in vietnam in 2018 We still have around 200+ pt76 all type 63 are now retirement the problem with pt-76 are lack of equipment because it very rare to find one for maintaining the tank since most of the equipment came from ukraine pt-76 role is fire support vehicles for infantry unit and the tank only use in south vietnam because of the swarm and amphibious is good at crossing river yes the pt-76 is very old but it still good
Writing under your pictures is interfering with YT captions. Both are of nearly identical font and both are white on black background. Can you have a look into it? I rely on captions and I'm sure so are others.
@@pavelalexe9254 You could try putting your video text on the top of the screen rather than at the bottom because YT captions will default to the bottom of the screen on most devices.
@@pavelalexe9254 Don't disagree with that the more I envision it myself. The important thing is that you are exploring options and I am sure you will find the happy medium where you are happy with your work and most viewers are happy with your work most of the time enough to keep watching. Have a good day and may your editing software not bug out on you!
0:51 ah yes the TAPIR modification of the indonesian marine TAPIR stands for Tank Amphibi Peluncur Incendiary Rocket Or in english Incendiary Rocket Launching Amphibious Tank PS : there are a few rumors that the PT-76M of the Indonesian Marines has been modified with the 90mm gun is able to launch ATGMs from the barrel, but sadly i couldnt find any such videos or photos
@@pavelalexe9254 unfortunately that is true, they proposed to replace the gun and turret with Cockerill LCTS 90MP, and it can launched Falarick 90 GLATGM
was it the 76mm gun a divisional field gun during WW2. those PT-76 equipped with "azimut setting" are awesome self propelled arttillery......... teamed up with BTR-50 variants and you will operate in a swap!!!!!
It is an Indian army, American made M4 Sherman medium tank with the original 75mm M3 gun replaced by the Soviet 76.2mm D56TM used in the PT-76. The American 75mm guns were worn out and ammunition was probably an issue.
USSR's occupation of Czechoslovakia lasted basically for the duration of communist governments in Czechoslovakia. It was Havel (and the new, democratic government) who sent them home in the early 90's.
It’s rare that I get an article about the NVA ( North Vietnamese Army) using tanks (PT-76) against US Army in Nam. In fact that the NVA have waited until the US Army withdrew main tactical land forces from Nam and they launched a mass attack (with tanks) against ARVN (Army Republic of Vietnam). 1972 the NVA indeed launched the mass attack against ARVN with tanks (mostly PT-76, Chinese type 63 (similar to PT-76 but with round half circle turret), T-54/55, Chinese type 59 (copy of T-54 with 88mm gun instead of 100mm gun).
@@nhacle BS. The Americans and ARVN destroyed the NVA tanks with Bell AH-1 Cobra helicopters and 66MM LAW anti tank weapons. Russia had to resupply them and never had any superiority until the American announced they were leaving.
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Well I learned from my father who fought against the PT in Nam. As well as my training in the Army. I've read more than my share of books on armor over the last 30 years. Keep up the good work 👍
@@jonhaskins617 You are right. PT-76 or NVA tanks seldom engaged US Army (land forces) after 1970. You are correct that all of NVA were destroyed by Cobra attack helicopters and on earth they were destroyed by M72 LAW hand held Panzerfaust 70’s era by ARVN. Because US Army (theoretically) withdrew all land forces after the TET’s offensive, thus the reason NVA dared to launch mass attacks with tanks. The most excited tanks vs tanks in Nam was near Saigon, where M-48 knocked down 3 type 59 Chinese tanks and ARVN used panzerfaust M72 LAW knocked down some type 63 Chinese APC operated by NVA. Those burning tanks blocked the bridge for days and no one dared come close because of explosion might happen. That was April 29-30,1975.
I would like to apologize for the mistake. The caption was supposed to point out that India converted a Sherman to use the PT-76's more potent gun. - Turn
Like many weapons systems, PT-76 worked best when used for it's designed purpose. Too many times weapons systems are used for roles they were not designed, then the weapon system is blamed rather than the people using it improperly.
The US Army had that problem really bad with the M24 Chaffee in Korea. The US tankers confidently attacked T34/85s and the survivors had no compunction against declaring the M24 was a terrible tank because its gun was not making holes in the T34s while the T34s could, whenever they managed to actually land a hit, make holes in the M24. Somehow, between 1945 and 1950, everyone had collective amnesia and forgot that the Chaffee was a scout tank, so it was not supposed to be able to face down a purpose-made tank-killing tank in open battle. Looks like the phenomenon of measuring armored combat vehicles principally by how well they fight othered armored combat vehicles, rather than how well they did their intended jobs, is not a new one. :)
@@genericpersonx333 Seriously? M-24 against any model past the T-34/43? Did we swap tankers with an alternate timeline where the Super Pershing made it to mass production?
@@johnd2058 Must have been because it is hard to think what else could have been the case! Makes one really glad it is not the universe where the Red Army sent IS3s crewed by veterans of the Great Patriotic War to Korea in 1950.
Now to be fair to the tankers themselves, they were were mostly the ill-trained and ill-disciplined products of the Occupation of Japan, with its horde of mostly post-war conscripts that spent more time in the bathhouses than the barracks. Virtually all the American veterans were in Europe. And to these second-rate tankers' credit, they knew they were often the only viable antitank weapon in an area, and they didn't leave the infantry to be slaughtered so long as they had shells to shoot. They also did hurt T34s plenty, as T34s were not immune to the short 75mm cannon, and despite their substandard training, the US tankers were better shots than the North Koreans on average, so every meeting cost both sides a lot of blood and oil.
What really boggles the mind is that the tankers seem utterly convinced they should have been wiping the floor with the T34s, as opposed to just about breaking even as they did, and that the Army seem to agree with the tankers. I don't think it was racism either, because you don't see many references to the ethnicity of the enemy. Seems like the US Army and its tankers just took for granted they should win most tank versus tank actions, regardless of the tanks involved.
@@genericpersonx333 Yeah, that's got to be... what, like not getting terrorized enough in training to be sufficiently receptive to the parts about things to be afraid of? I did US Army infantry training, and they were REALLY good at that.
@genericpersonx333 funnily enough, the new M-10 Booker is believed to have been designated as a fire support platform and not a tank in order to discourage the crew from picking fights with enemy tanks despite the gun being capable enough to do so. This is a roumour/joke but having grown up around military personnel all my life...I can totally believe this is true.
There were a couple or repeated lines but that was my only complaint about the new narrator.
You did well dude.
Did you remember Lang Vay and Khe Sanh ?
After resistance war of ours, PT76 tank have a fierce war in Cambodia, where ours being fighting Khmer Rouge of Pol Pot.
It was very good the Vietnam decided to intervene in Cambodia to save the people from that monster, that was dark time indeed
@jts0221 and the Vietnamese also have the Chinese a bloody nose. They might be communists but no one can deny the Vietnamese know how to fight.
Of course Pol Pot's Cambodia was battered because of Pol Pot's own disastrous policies plus Khmer Rouge at that time didn't possess any MBT
Am I the only one who noticed the deja vu in the audio? Part 1 had it too I believe
Part 1 had no deja vu
@@pavelalexe9254 I stand corrected. Either way, I'm glad I stumbled upon this channel. It's been eating up bandwidth for weeks.
@@pavelalexe9254 In part 1 the information on the engine was repeated later in the video, not right after it was first mentioned.
@@TimothySielbeck I think its just the article (its a 100 page article so things repeat)
@@BronxBastard730 that's rather harsh. Always is a bit of a stretch.
PT-76 both part 1 and 2 watched; very good stuff, never knew about the MRL version and the continuous comment about it's use and mis-use goes along way to explaining why this vehicle gained the reputation it did.
A big gun where you think there would be no big gun can mess up your day. I think this is what it was supposed to be used for.
Love the works you guys had done so far. I want to add several information regarding Indonesian PT-76.
- Indonesia never operates BRDM-2, instead receiving older BRDM-1. Interestingly Marine Corps TOE still listed BRDM-1 albeit not in active duty.
- While it was first used in Indonesia-Malaysia Confrontation. PT-76 originally ordered as par of preparation for West New Guinea campaign (Operation Trikora).
- Beside East Timor, Marines PT-76 were also used in Aceh against Free Aceh Movement in early 2000s.
- Regarding the PT-76 with BM-14/17 rocket launcher. This project was started in 1995, internet suggest it was named TAPIR (Tank Amfibi Peluncur Incendiary Rocket) but I haven't found official document to confirm if. Therefore I will refer it as PT-76 MLRS. While the modification was judged successful and even passed amphibious test. It was never test fired or even operational due to lack of fund. The sole prototype is still in Marine base in Surabaya but has rusted.
- PT-76 were supposed to be replaced by BMP-3F. But since Marines still lacking enough AFV, In 2020 a contrac was signed for PT-76 will be modernized in Indonesia by a joint Ukrainian company and local company. Among the modernization are new 90mm cannon that can fire Ukrainian Falarick missile, Zaslon active protection system, Synthesis FCS, Basalt communication system, new steering system and suspension, new Cummins VT400 engine with Allison transmission.
Im the guy who wrote the article, and I wanted to cover the Malaysian PTs lightly, but it would be very nice to have entire articles on Malaysian PT 76s. If you are interested give us a shout
@@pavelalexe9254 Hello mate, you mean Indonesian PT-76? Is there a way to contact you?
@@ifanramadhana7833 you can join or TE discord server discord.gg/KxJmV2XE
Or through my email Constantinalexe123@gmail.com
Looking forwards to talking!
Were Ukranian BMPs delivered or Indonesia opted for another IFV?
@@strakhovandrri Indonesia bought BVP-2 from Slovakia and BTR-50 from Ukraine back in the 90s. The plan is to replace all those PT-76 and BTR-50 with BMP-3F and BT-3F but I guess with Ukraine War and all those plan goes right out of the window. Currently Indonesian Marine also have some BMP-3F and BTR-4.
What's with all the repeat sentences, your video editor took the day off on this one? 😂
Yes 😂😂😂
Missed a gear shift...
I would really like to see a video on the ASU-85 if possible, it's a very cool design not to mention it has the whole airborne thing going for it, I tried to do some research on it but wasn't able to find that much in-depth stuff about it.
2:45 was it hunting M24 Chaffees or something?
M24 Chaffee was the main tank used by Pakistanis in 1971, atleast in Eastern theatre
great video, short and to the point, well done.
If you could do one on the Chinese copy tanks? Mainly Type 59,69,and 62
Hello Chumbino,
While such articles are within our sights and within our scope, they are not currently in the works. You can add them to our Public Suggestion List and you can help by adding more sources (or other suggested articles)
docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1p0Ll9TITGDiF9_fdS-tv1797JBs0_-pB70ReE_kIRkE/edit#gid=1911430820
Also, in order to help us with illustrating and publishing, please do consider donating through Patreon or Paypal.
www.patreon.com/tankartfund
Paypal.me/tankartfund
On the website you can find the full article where I have written about its service in the Arab Israeli wars, Pakistani-Idian war, and Vietnam war
Your work is highly appreciated. Thank you. 😀👌
They were extremely useful for the Indian Army during 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War as Bangladesh's (then East Pakistan) geography is crisscrossed by multiple rivers big and small.
@@fretted4life I know; I wrote an entire segment on the Indo-Pak war
- Sincerely, the Author
What website
Most articles I read about Chechnya are more concerned with the massacre of T-72A/B and T-80BV tanks in Grozny, didn't know the PT-76 played a part too!
A very, very small part, but they were there nonetheless
Around 7:31 there's a duplication of the narration. Original take got left in.
Just letting you know in case you want to trim that section out.
You can edit TH-cam videos after they have been published to clip out any parts where there is doubled dialog bits . Not that it matters or anything . I just noticed on a couple of videos that you have done the same thing i have done a few times and was wondering if you knew you can fix those bit in the youtube editor by very carefully cliping them out as you cant undo a mistake. Anyway great videos as usual 😊
3:56 shows a Sherman (maybe with the pt76 gun) but its definitely not a Pt 76. I've watched 2 vids on this channel and both had mistakes in them, maybe do a triple check before you post? Just a suggestion
The caption there was a slight mistake on the behalf of the video editor. The other comment of yours was not a mistake, as we pointed out. So maybe have the full conversation or look into it before accusing people?
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT So you admit a mistake was made, that could have been prevented by checking the videos better before uploading, (aka I am right) yet blame me of 'accusing'. I pointed out an error, you are welcome. Don't want to be corrected? Upload footage that does not have mistakes.
Is there any mixed with India and Indonesia part of the script there?
Great job 👍
about the PT-76 tank in vietnam in 2018
We still have around 200+ pt76
all type 63 are now retirement
the problem with pt-76 are lack of equipment because it very rare to find one for maintaining the tank since most of the equipment came from ukraine
pt-76 role is fire support vehicles for infantry unit and the tank only use in south vietnam because of the swarm and amphibious is good at crossing river
yes the pt-76 is very old but it still good
7:25 Repeat?
Yes audio editor was asleep
That PT-76 looks like a Sherman.
3:54 shows a Sherman tank.
With the gun from a PT-76.
Didn't the PT-76 fire HEATFS as well?
Now a PT-76 is a monument in Lang Vei...........to remenber the VPA victory in 1968.
The name of the village is Làng Vây which can be translate to village Vây
@@nhienleminhhue6605 In englishi books is writen "Lang Vei", but in vietnamese must be Lang Vay.....
Writing under your pictures is interfering with YT captions. Both are of nearly identical font and both are white on black background. Can you have a look into it? I rely on captions and I'm sure so are others.
Not much we can do about that. Yt captions are not that good to begin with
@@pavelalexe9254 They are better than silent movie.
@@pavelalexe9254 You could try putting your video text on the top of the screen rather than at the bottom because YT captions will default to the bottom of the screen on most devices.
@@genericpersonx333 we have discussed that, but it generally looks awful tbh
@@pavelalexe9254 Don't disagree with that the more I envision it myself. The important thing is that you are exploring options and I am sure you will find the happy medium where you are happy with your work and most viewers are happy with your work most of the time enough to keep watching. Have a good day and may your editing software not bug out on you!
0:51 ah yes the TAPIR modification of the indonesian marine
TAPIR stands for Tank Amphibi Peluncur Incendiary Rocket
Or in english Incendiary Rocket Launching Amphibious Tank
PS : there are a few rumors that the PT-76M of the Indonesian Marines has been modified with the 90mm gun is able to launch ATGMs from the barrel, but sadly i couldnt find any such videos or photos
That can't be true because it has a muzzle brake. Muzzle brakes prevent ATGMs from being fired iirc
@@pavelalexe9254 unfortunately that is true, they proposed to replace the gun and turret with Cockerill LCTS 90MP, and it can launched Falarick 90 GLATGM
@@СХП-п8ш well now we have an answer :)
The Indian BT76 Garipur monument look an awful lot like Sherman tank to me. The track pl;an and hull are very different.
The gun is a PT76, I think.
Wrong caption. Its a M4 with PT 76 gun
Although it had many shortcomings its cross country mobility gave it the upper hand in swampy conditions where no other tanks would dare to go.
It's a infantry support vehicle
was it the 76mm gun a divisional field gun during WW2. those PT-76 equipped with "azimut setting" are awesome self propelled arttillery......... teamed up with BTR-50 variants and you will operate in a swap!!!!!
Nope
This tank use D-56T 76mm Rifled Gun, and only this tank was ever known to mount such gun
3:38 strange pt 76 made from US right?
It is an Indian army, American made M4 Sherman medium tank with the original 75mm M3 gun replaced by the Soviet 76.2mm D56TM used in the PT-76. The American 75mm guns were worn out and ammunition was probably an issue.
MTLB next please!
USSR's occupation of Czechoslovakia lasted basically for the duration of communist governments in Czechoslovakia. It was Havel (and the new, democratic government) who sent them home in the early 90's.
The PT76 was used by the North Vietnamese to attack American forces in the Vietnam war.
It’s rare that I get an article about the NVA ( North Vietnamese Army) using tanks (PT-76) against US Army in Nam. In fact that the NVA have waited until the US Army withdrew main tactical land forces from Nam and they launched a mass attack (with tanks) against ARVN (Army Republic of Vietnam). 1972 the NVA indeed launched the mass attack against ARVN with tanks (mostly PT-76, Chinese type 63 (similar to PT-76 but with round half circle turret), T-54/55, Chinese type 59 (copy of T-54 with 88mm gun instead of 100mm gun).
@@nhacle BS. The Americans and ARVN destroyed the NVA tanks with Bell AH-1 Cobra helicopters and 66MM LAW anti tank weapons.
Russia had to resupply them and never had any superiority until the American announced they were leaving.
Our PT-76 article discusses in moderate detail the use of NVA PT-76 tanks against US forces
@@TanksEncyclopediaYT Well I learned from my father who fought against the PT in Nam.
As well as my training in the Army.
I've read more than my share of books on armor over the last 30 years.
Keep up the good work 👍
@@jonhaskins617 You are right. PT-76 or NVA tanks seldom engaged US Army (land forces) after 1970. You are correct that all of NVA were destroyed by Cobra attack helicopters and on earth they were destroyed by M72 LAW hand held Panzerfaust 70’s era by ARVN. Because US Army (theoretically) withdrew all land forces after the TET’s offensive, thus the reason NVA dared to launch mass attacks with tanks. The most excited tanks vs tanks in Nam was near Saigon, where M-48 knocked down 3 type 59 Chinese tanks and ARVN used panzerfaust M72 LAW knocked down some type 63 Chinese APC operated by NVA. Those burning tanks blocked the bridge for days and no one dared come close because of explosion might happen. That was April 29-30,1975.
Budapest is Hungary, not Czech.
Yes, the video editor was asleep
Meep
m50 ontos
Boop
picture shows a sherman some times. pls. take more care - you are not the historie channel, you are normaly better then them
I would like to apologize for the mistake. The caption was supposed to point out that India converted a Sherman to use the PT-76's more potent gun.
- Turn
Dreadful drowning of children.