If you'd like to join the folks who keep this channel sustainable & the info free, Lance Sergeants (YT), Sergeants & Sergeants Major (Patrons) now get featured in the middle of videos. Patrons also get exclusive merch. UA-cam Members: youtube.com/@BattleOrder/membership Patrons: www.patreon.com/battleorder Tiers at Lance Corporal and above get access to my annual financial report which declares all of Battle Order's revenue and business expenses.
@dominuslogik484 It wasn't experimental. In the late 1950s, the Army wanted to replace the M42 Duster with a radar directed SPAA, and the T249 was chosen in 1956 to be the replacement. Unfortunately, the Army discovered that its performance against jet aircraft was marginal and canceled the project. The 37 mm Gatling gun was resurrected by Sperry in the 1970s, rebored for 35 mm Oerlikon, and mounted on an M48 Patton, but it lost out to M247 Sergeant York.
@@petergray2712 it never entered service and only prototypes were built though. Just look at the M10 production versus prototype and preproduction models and they all look pretty different
The fact that this kind of thing is still around and being used (hello Ukranian used German Gepard) says something for the utility of a big piece or machinery with putting a ton of lead in the air.
Outstanding video. I went to Officer ADA basic school in FEB 1987 and was shocked to find out one of the other Lieutenants in my class was in the Ohio National Guard and they were still using the M42 Dusters. I had no idea the Dusters were still being used at that time. However then again I never expected I would be carrying an M3 Grease Gun as a Vulcan Platoon Leader in Desert Storm.
Attending an NCO academy in 1985?, a classmate from the Arizona National Guard. He said that they still used the M42. He commented that the electronics were still using “tube’s” and were resistant to EMP.
64 armored AA vehicles in the 1954 infantry division is a huge investment in logistics and personnel. That represented a big slice of firepower and I can only imagine that the dusters would have been put to use supporting the infantry with direct fire in any European war too.
Still you have to account for rearming and resupply too this does cause some down time. They where for sure limited to only Search a narrow sector. If you have a section (2 Duster /2 Quads) covering about 2 - 4 miles of width behind the front line. Then your devision can only cover about 60 miles.
@@carlalm6100 So, in the most dispersed scenario for an American division (that being a Pentomic in 1960). A division could operate in an area of 900km^2 with up to 9km between battlegroups. Frontage will vary, but even if we asume all five battlegroups placed at the front of the division (with no reserves) at a maximum distance of 9km between battle groups that gives a frontage of at most 45km (28 miles) with an incredibly stretched division with absolutely no depth. 15km (9 miles) of front would be much more common with the dispersion being achieved through constant movement and great depth in the area of operations. Source: Pentomic Doctrine: A Model for Future War \ A Monograph by Major Jack F. Smith Engineer III PENTOMIC DIVISION DOCTRINE C. Pentomic Doctrine. Pentomic doctrine addressed the fundamental characteristics of conventional forces on a nuclear battlefield with dispersion becoming a primary tenet of military operations. Command and General Staff College (CGSC) instruction during the 1940’s through the 1960's provide a good example of how dispersion effected the military. A World War II division could occupy seven kilometers of front. By the 1950's the division in a CGSC exercise would occupy fifteen kilometer frontages with a depth of fifteen kilometers in sector. By 1960 a similar division operated within a 900 square kilometer sector. One can identify three primary reasons for this enormous growth in a division's sector. The first cause was an increase, albeit small, in a division's size from a 14,000 man Pentomic division to a 16,000-20,000 man Reorganization Objectives Army Division (ROAD) Dispersion of relatively small combat teams led to new defensive concepts such as perimeter type mobile defense" and "island perimeter defense." These defenses relied on isolated battalions or battle groups dispersed throughout the width and depth of the battle area. These isolated formations were not mutually supporting and doctrine permitted gaps of up to 6000-9000 meters between units
@@carlalm6100 An American division at its most dispersed (1960 Pentomic) consisted of 5 battlegroups and could operate in an area of 900km^2. Doctrinally gaps within battlegroups could reach up to 9km. Each battle group could defend a perimeter of 9km (a circle of diameter less than 3km). As such if you put all battlegroups on the frontline with no units in the reserve that gives you a maximum frontage of 60km (37 miles). That is an incredibly stretched division with no reserves, no depth and no flexibility (the antithesis of a pentomic division). Frontage of a division would much more commonly be around 15km (9 miles) with dispersion being achieved mostly through great mobility and operational depth. Around 6 times the density. But the thing is that point air defence is not supposed to cover the entire frontline but rather protect assets. That would mean that most Dusters would be heavily concentrated around the battle groups and support units. Making them far more available for ground support when needed. Source: Pentomic Doctrine: A Model for Future War \ A Monograph by Major Jack F. Smith Engineer III PENTOMIC DIVISION DOCTRINE C. Pentomic Doctrine. Pentomic doctrine addressed the fundamental characteristics of conventional forces on a nuclear battlefield with dispersion becoming a primary tenet of military operations. Command and General Staff College (CGSC) instruction during the 1940’s through the 1960's provide a good example of how dispersion effected the military. A World War II division could occupy seven kilometers of front. By the 1950's the division in a CGSC exercise would occupy fifteen kilometer frontages with a depth of fifteen kilometers in sector. By 1960 a similar division operated within a 900 square kilometer sector. One can identify three primary reasons for this enormous growth in a division's sector. The first cause was an increase, albeit small, in a division's size from a 14,000 man Pentomic division to a 16,000-20,000 man Reorganization Objectives Army Division (ROAD). ... Dispersion of relatively small combat teams led to new defensive concepts such as perimeter type mobile defense" and "island perimeter defense." These defenses relied on isolated battalions or battle groups dispersed throughout the width and depth ofthe battle area. These isolated formations were not mutually supporting and doctrine permitted gaps of up to 6000-9000 meters between units. Placing units closer together created a lucrative target for nuclear strikes.
Later in the Cold War the M42 was very vulnerable as a SHORAD asset. It was lightly armored, no armor protection for the gun crew and as Soviet Air got faster and more accurate. But we had nothing to replace it in the short-range mission. The M48 Chaparral system suffered from the same problem as the Airforce was having with AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles (They are called "missiles" for a reason, they miss) and reloading was not fast. For the short-range defense, we needed accurate, quick reload, high mobility, survivability and light. When I got to my first ADA unit they were giving up their M-167, towed 20MM Vulcan. That system was okay systems but no armor protection at all. Another battery in division had M163s (they were M113 with a Vulcan mounted on top, this gave some survivability and a little more mobility to keep up with armor and infantry. They soldiered on a while longer than the towed system. We became a FIM92 (Stinger) MANPADS battery. They completely through survivability out the window as we were issued cargo HUMVEE's but of course they were highly mobile and could keep up with the front-line assets. I spent 2 years in that unit (great group of soldier's top to bottom) and transferred out when I was promoted. We learned firsthand one time how vulnerable we were. Our Battery Commander met these 2 F/A18 pilots the night before (at the O club of course) a training and convinced them to spend an hour with us. We would track them as the flew different attack patterns. We were on the middle crest of a hill about halfway up. One of the Hornets was flying just outside our 3-mile range, and we got "targe fixated" on him, while his wingman snuck up the valley behind us, popped out right on top of us, stood it on its tail and lit the cans. It was defining, rocked the fillings in my teeth. He made his point, never said anything over the coms, we all knew we were dead! Sorry for the length of this but you brought back a lot of memories.
i always kinda wondered how AA units would've done exercises with other air assets. super cool and don't feel bad about it being too long! i personally like the details
Of course they knew exactly where you were and had no other mission or anyone else to shoot at. Stinger team's survivability comes from being easy to hide and totally passive. CAS coming in to attack targets would never see you until missiles were in the air and then they would be too busy to do anything to you. MANPADS took a huge chunk out of the IDFAF in '73 and Ukrainians are downing a lot of Russians with them.
True but if you think about the scenario we painted the lead hornets, so he knows he was being tracked and the general direction of the target. These where Marine Hornets so they had several techniques they would use to flush out SHORAD. We were a better unit for it, because we never target fixated on anything ever again. @@obsidianjane4413
It's less troubled and more like under funded and questioned in doctrinal use every 5 seconds. The war on terror did not do that section of the Air Defense branch any favors. There were ideas ahead of there time like Mauler (which failed being too head of it's time) and then there were stop gaps that failed horribly (like York). Now world has drones. Lots of drones. It's good to feel very relevant and vindicated.
@@amirraziq1078 Gun overheats and serious Jams with ammo cookoffs and a bitch to reload. I spent 15 minutes looking at the survivor at Aberdeen proving grounds.
The weird part about M42 Duster and similar vehicles like it's steroid sibling ZSU-57-2 is that VT fuzes were available for both 40mm and 57mm gun. At least from Bofors. So these SPAAGs could be modernized with those and radars similar the one included onto M163(and in case of Duster, there was even separate radar vehicle intended per battery, but none built) and would still be effective even today against drones or helicopters and definitely against infantry on top floors of apartment buildings😅 But nobody modernized them.
@@tanksalot1180 not really. VT shell doesn't need any modifications to the gun, it's just loaded normally. Type 80 aka WZ305 doesn't have neither radar, nor optical rangefinder. Unlike soviet Object 520 prototype and finnish ZSU-57-2M prototype.
It all comes down logistics and costs. Gotta get the most bang for your buck and when other systems like IFVs or Stinger missiles can do the same job, things get cut to improve production related concerns and save money in the bigger picture. A lot of the cash saved goes into R&D.
@@aymonfoxc1442 If anything a proper SHORAD would be a combination of missiles and guns to cover eachother's weakness, so modernizing the 40mm with radar assisted VT shells and Stingers are a good idea, likely only need a new turret too
@@AHappyCub I agree. I like guns in the SHORAD mix, alongside EW, particularly given the emerging prevalence of drones of all types. I was just explaining the rationale that is often behind a platform's retirement and sometimes, the retirement of an entire type of weapon.
Been there I captured a duster track section to take home along with TP projectile cores and other interesting bits reserve side live fire after 2 weeks teaching recruits how to use the TOW system on the Improved TOW Vehicle M901. Part of Division level Mobilization test running all summer.
@7:50 The M42 was replaced by the M-163 Vulcan and M-48 Chaparral NOT the Hawk. The Hawk was a medium to long range SAM that replaced the Nike/Nike-Hercules. There were still ADA battalions in the '60s and '70s, but they were deployed in Europe. Just like with M-60 armor units drawing M-48s instead, units that deployed to Vietnam drew M-42s and did the base defense and convoy security job.
Back when my dad was in the Texas National Guard, the 1st Bn./200th Air Defense Artillery, New Mexico National Guard was part of the 49th Armored Division's artillery train. During annual training he witnessed those M42 Duster crews outshoot the M163 Vulcan crews, putting more shots on target every time. The crews had been together so long they instinctively knew what each other were going to do. Also, I recognized the Virginia National Guard JFHQ patch on the sleeves of some of those crewmen.
I read about Dusters with the US Army, specifically Task Force Faith, during the Battle of Chosin Reservoir. Let's just say they didn't use them for anti air... The Duster's and M16's helped helped to repeatedly repel Chinese wave attacks until they ran out of ammunition, just let that sink in. The book is called East Of Chosin by Roy Appleman if you're interested.
My father was in Vietnam 65-66 assigned to the B-Bty 29th Artillery searchlights mentioned at 9:45. Really cool seeing it here. Makes sense that they were at least logically linked to the Dusters.
Nice video! One bit of context (NOT a complaint): During the Vietnam War, I Corps was pronounced 'Eye' Corps (like the letter) and the others were simply called TWO, THREE or FOUR Corps.
My first MOS 16F, 200th ADA New Mexico National Guard 87/88. Soon replaced by the Hawk Missile System. I went to Ft Bliss to train as a 16D. Great video!
The U.S. Army still cannot quite decide to make up its collective mind about the utility and usefulness of cannon for close-in anti-aircraft use. The Army is sold on guided missiles like the Stinger and Hellfire yet continuing studies seem to point out such guided anti-aircraft missile systems would be well-served with cannon back-up for closer-range anti-aircraft support. The Army was a hair's breadth away from deploying the new Sergeant York, twin 40mm cannon anti-aircraft system mounted in a large closed turret atop a M60 tank chassis, before cancelling it for last minute technological problems. During the early 2000s, the Army fielded a few M2/3 Bradleys converted into the M6 anti-aircraft platform that mounted the 25mm Bushmaster cannon and Hellfire missiles. The Army soon withdrew all from service. There is a new proposed multi-wheeled armored vehicle system mounting a 30mm cannon, two Hellfire missiles in a side box attached to the small, largely automated turret, and a built-in 7.62 machine gun in the middle of the turret for anti-personnel self-protection.
Good question. The U.S. Army developed the Hellfire to be effective against ground targets and air targets. Now that is great versatility in a fire-and-forget missile.@@henrylicious
At 9:44 there's a picture of a AA searchlight in the back of a mutt. The vehicle has the front drive side wheel off and is sitting on a jack stand as well as the rear wheel looking completely out of camber. I'm wondering is the searchlight being directly powered off the mutts motor via extra alternators, or through a PTO of some sort? I know there are air raid sirens that run off a crank, makes me wonder if that's how this possibly works as well. Long comment I know lol thanks for any info on this!
In 1992, the Italian firm Breda Meccanica Bresciana based in Milan offered an export upgrade package for the M42 Duster. The upgrades included a new enclosed turret armed with a single 40-mm L/70 Bofors and equipped with surveillance and tracking radars. The crew was reduced to three men consisting of the commander, gunner, and driver. The rear hull was also enlarged to provide room for an improved power plant. Ultimately, Breda's M42 Duster upgrade proposal was never accepted and was dropped.
InDong Ha, Viet Nam,1968 1 ,we had a Duster with a Starlight scope behind our hut and they would start firing at something on the ground very often.We had Mig fly overs,but O don't remember anybody firing at the Migs that we were told were doing photo reconnaissance.
Bofors 40 mm is still used in sweden CV 90 LvKv 90C Anti-Air Vehicle and also in the IFV CV9040 the anti air version bofors uses the L70 The CV 9040 TriAD self-propelled Luftvärnskanonvagn 90 based on the CV 9040 mechanized infantry combat vehicle, and 40mm Bofors L/70 autocannon uses programmable ammunition.
Given what's going on in Ukraine, it seems like this would be a good time to take another look at SPAAGs. It's a shame the US seems to have dropped the idea after the fiasco with the M247 Sergeant York.
At least sweden Did send 50 of the regualr IFV cv9040 C i wish they could send CV 9040 TriAD also i agree i think they shuld Do that and look at SPAAGs the IFV cv9040 C has from reports done good against at least ground targets from what i heard! But there are not alot of videos of the cv90 in Ukraine due to Sweden asking Ukraine not to publish cv90 videos the cv 90s uses programmable 3P ammo and also all IFV cv9040 have the SAAB s Universal Tank and Anti-Aircraft System (UTAAS) sight and fire control system for tanks and combat vehicles. so could be good idea @@carlinglin7289
My friend was in Dong Ha, Vietnam, on a Duster crew. They were all attached ADA units and used for perimeter defense. There was zero cover for the guys operating the cannons. There were some awesome custom gun trucks in Nam for convoy support. I saw pictures of the Army doing the same custom stuff in Iraq.
I love the Duster! Out at the range in Whites Sands, early 1980s. I got to watch two of these. And one each BMP and BTR(?) 8 wheels/20(!)mm auto cannon. Engaging targets with two new R&D Bradley's. It was awesome
Made in Berwick PA. In the 80’s we used their test track for official USCF races. Some good memories.
11 місяців тому+1
Very nice Video. At some point I want to make a video about the Duster in West German service. The German Tank museum has one that looks pretty good. I think they also at least tested upgrading it with a small radar. But I need to look more into that
When I was stationed at what was then Fort Hood, TX and assigned to the 2ns AD the Oklahoma NG provided, as part of our "Round Out Brigade", a battalion of Dusters. This was in the mid through late 1980s.
Considering the growing use of weaponized commercial drones, a modernized version of the Duster maybe the most cost effective solution. A JLTV mounted with a single or duel 30 mm auto cannon, using programmable ammunition would be highly effective. Using modern sensors and radars, it could be all weather as well. Supplementing the 30mm vehicle, another vehicle mounting dual mount 7.62 chain guns, could provide extreme close in protection.
Minor nitpick. When I served as commo chief for D battery, 4/60 artillery in 1970 each of our platoons had four sections of 2 dusters each for a total of 16 dusters in the battery rather than 8 dusters as described. Each of the 8 sections, 2 dusters each was typically assigned to a separate fire base or LZ as perimeter defense. Each section was typically commanded by a staff sergeant. Platoon leaders and platoon sergeants led a nomadic life as they circulated between sections and were seldom actually present when the dusters were fired. I felt rather sorry for them as, despite their rank, they were largely irrelevant to the combat mission as they mostly dealt with logistical support issues.
Loved the video @BattleOrder! Can't wait for the next video man! I was wondering about how the M42A1 Duster's were Organized in Vietnam, now I can Probably use them for a Few Scenarios that I've got planned for the Tabletop. The only other thing that I'm wondering about is how was Soviet Anti-Aircraft Organized as far as the ZSU-57-2's, the ZSU-23-4 "Shilka's" and the 2S9/2K22 Tunguska's are Concerned. Let me know what you think about this and I'll catch you in your next video man!
This reminds me of the German 'Gepard' , in use by Ukrainians to down drones, like Iran's 'Shahed'. The main difference is that the Gerard has modern, automated, radar guided tracking and faster slew rates in azimuth and declination. Creating a Stryker or Bradley variant, so it carries a multi-gun anti-air system resembling the Gepard/M42 seems like a smart move for addressing subsonic drones.
Excellent video once again! i have a little question, at 5:51 you talk about an AA MG gunner, what's his purpose? Seems a bit weird in a full AA platoon.
Awesome video, thank you for sharing this information. If anyone is a book reader interested in the Korean War. The book, "East of Chosin," by Roy E. Appleman is an excellent book and mentions the M19 bofors vehicle. During the 31st Regimental Combat Teams, 7th Divisions fight to get back south out of the Northeast area of the reservoir, the M19 is mentioned several times in the book. It was a devastating anti personal weapon. Mentioned as a "massive grenade thrower," it devastated Chinese mass attacks at the beginning of the battle. Unfortunately, the flying box cars did not continue to drop reserve ammunition for the vehicle as the MSR was chocked with communist roadblocks and most of the ammo that was dropped fell into communist hands. The M-19's were just set on fire to keep them inoperable.
Gun AA nearly phased out because jets are too fast and to far to be effective. Some gun AA kept for anti helo. But with large drone use will gun AAs make a return?
Had a chat recently if they should bring the static Bofors with the Flycatcher RADAR back from the dead for counter-UAS. Doubt it will actually happen as the tech is old and nobody knows how it works anymore, atleast nobody who's not a retired contractor. But perhaps more cost-effective than using missiles.
Any chance you could do some videos on WW1 orders of battle or focusing on how the various imperial armies were organized and their doctrines and strategies?
A modernized version of the m16 or m42 would be a decent match for the modern drone war. Mobile anti drone defense that could stay close to the front as an attack is pushed forward
Could use a bit of modern targeting computers and trackers but it seems like a good platform. What with all the drones and all. But I'm wondering if a CIWS could do its job better.
@@mill2712 C-RAMs did pretty well in Iraq against mortar and other indirect fire countering, biggest problem is that they basically are a full on tractor trailers so mobility wise is a problem, I'm not too keen on it's details so idk if it can work on the move but I doubt having an 18 wheeler in a convoy would allow for much flexibility plus the huge threat with friendly fire that CWIS normally doesn't have at sea
Why have a armored body but very open top? I assume its ease of production and mantaince than any savings from a whole new chassey less armored one? I also assume machine gun aa is set to return in the anti-drone role. I assume guns like this, or tge 50cal, with aim bot, would wipe out the light drone threat.
The Gepard has a tracking radar, which the Duster apparently didn't. Nevertheless I was indeed waiting until the end of the video to see it dusted off in Ukraine.
Realize there is a slow fire mode and a fast fire mode. Soldiers use this weapons would fast fire mode. 40mm bofurs mobile gun. Very effective during small actions or against civilian uprisings. Looks basically like a bushmaster 40mm autoloader single barrel.
I knew an Guardsman (may he RIP)who used Dusters in Vietnam before getting them later in his Guard unit. He liked them a lot more then the Vulcan cannon. He thought his Dusters were a match for any Soviet tank Battalion. He was looking forward to the Sgt York. In any event, I bet Ukraine could use a few today for the drone war . . r
So what are the anti air batteries using now, as the air threat has increased with small cheap drones. The supposedly obsolescent Gepard has proven deadly to drones and cruise missiles.
This class of ADA battalion which would support maneuver units mainly has Avengers, and soon M-SHORAD on a Stryker. Both are Stinger and cannon based, although M-SHORAD is going to get a laser variant that will probably be better suited to the counter UAS role.
There's something a bit off in thd commentary when you say "the duster was transferrd from the National Guard as the active duty battalions were inactivated around 1960..." surely this should be "to" the National Guard and you need to then state when some (but not the majority) were transferred back to.the Regulars (presumably 1966). I'm a bit dubious about the claim that Duster served into the 80s with the ARNG. Mid 70s seems more likely.
The last unit with M42 Dusters was 2-263 ADA (South Carolina National Guard) which transitioned from the Duster to the Stinger in 1988. This old battery history page has a bunch of pictures of Dusters they used in the 80s web.archive.org/web/20150210083122/charliebatteryoletimers.com/Unit_History.html
The local national guard unit had M42 Dusters when I was in high school, mid 1980s. One would be on display during the home coming festival. IIRC they were being serviced out during that time.
Old A.D.A. guardsman here. Hawk was sent to the guard when the Duster was finally retired in the 80's. The Avenger A.D.A. system was sent to the guard about a year before I retired. Let's say I was not impressed by the loss of range when the Hawk was retired.
Battalion Commander Executive Officer S3 (Operations/Training Officer) Assistant S3 S1 (Adjutant/Personnel) Chaplain Communications Officer S2 (Intel Officer) Liaison Transport S4 (Supply) Western militaries generally have a lot of staff officers starting at the battalion-level
The Duster was the first AA mobile Plattform used by the German Bundeswehr. They hurried to replace it with the Gepard Tells you how capable the Duster was 😟
Fun fact : Thai army plan to retire their M42 duster in 2020 but in the end they decide to kept them in service to use it as a drone hunter and plan to upgrade them with modern FCS
If you'd like to join the folks who keep this channel sustainable & the info free, Lance Sergeants (YT), Sergeants & Sergeants Major (Patrons) now get featured in the middle of videos. Patrons also get exclusive merch.
UA-cam Members: youtube.com/@BattleOrder/membership
Patrons: www.patreon.com/battleorder
Tiers at Lance Corporal and above get access to my annual financial report which declares all of Battle Order's revenue and business expenses.
Ok 👌
Say, what was that soothing Company of Heroes-esque background music?
@@chungusbooper It's from the Call of Duty 3 soundtrack
No one will defeat the United States.
we need something new like these to deal with drones, maybe a current gen Flakpanzer Gepard equivalent. do you know if something is being worked on?
There is just something about self propelled anti air guns that makes them aesthetically unmatched. Thanks for including metric by the way.
Go look at a T249 Vigilante, and then come back here and say that with a straight face.
@@petergray2712 experimental vehicles are always ugly for the most part.
@dominuslogik484 It wasn't experimental. In the late 1950s, the Army wanted to replace the M42 Duster with a radar directed SPAA, and the T249 was chosen in 1956 to be the replacement. Unfortunately, the Army discovered that its performance against jet aircraft was marginal and canceled the project. The 37 mm Gatling gun was resurrected by Sperry in the 1970s, rebored for 35 mm Oerlikon, and mounted on an M48 Patton, but it lost out to M247 Sergeant York.
@@petergray2712 it never entered service and only prototypes were built though. Just look at the M10 production versus prototype and preproduction models and they all look pretty different
The fact that this kind of thing is still around and being used (hello Ukranian used German Gepard) says something for the utility of a big piece or machinery with putting a ton of lead in the air.
Outstanding video. I went to Officer ADA basic school in FEB 1987 and was shocked to find out one of the other Lieutenants in my class was in the Ohio National Guard and they were still using the M42 Dusters. I had no idea the Dusters were still being used at that time. However then again I never expected I would be carrying an M3 Grease Gun as a Vulcan Platoon Leader in Desert Storm.
Same story today, the ArNG's ADA is still rocking Avengers, and just like the Duster in Nam, they're suddenly relevant again.
FLARNG had them too in the late 80s
Would being handed a grease gun mean you were not expected to encounter an enemy up close?
I was in the Army National Guard in 2000, and trained with an M3 then.
Attending an NCO academy in 1985?, a classmate from the Arizona National Guard. He said that they still used the M42. He commented that the electronics were still using “tube’s” and were resistant to EMP.
64 armored AA vehicles in the 1954 infantry division is a huge investment in logistics and personnel. That represented a big slice of firepower and I can only imagine that the dusters would have been put to use supporting the infantry with direct fire in any European war too.
Still you have to account for rearming and resupply too this does cause some down time.
They where for sure limited to only Search a narrow sector.
If you have a section (2 Duster /2 Quads) covering about 2 - 4 miles of width behind the front line. Then your devision can only cover about 60 miles.
@paxundpeace9970 60 miles of frontage is massive, divisions would be packed much more closely in a conventional war
@@andresmartinezramos7513not a nuclear one, for which the Americans were planning their forces during those times.
@@carlalm6100
So, in the most dispersed scenario for an American division (that being a Pentomic in 1960). A division could operate in an area of 900km^2 with up to 9km between battlegroups. Frontage will vary, but even if we asume all five battlegroups placed at the front of the division (with no reserves) at a maximum distance of 9km between battle groups that gives a frontage of at most 45km (28 miles) with an incredibly stretched division with absolutely no depth. 15km (9 miles) of front would be much more common with the dispersion being achieved through constant movement and great depth in the area of operations.
Source:
Pentomic Doctrine:
A Model for Future War
\
A Monograph
by
Major Jack F. Smith
Engineer
III PENTOMIC DIVISION DOCTRINE
C. Pentomic Doctrine.
Pentomic doctrine addressed the fundamental characteristics of conventional forces on a nuclear battlefield with dispersion becoming a primary tenet of military operations. Command and General Staff College (CGSC) instruction during the 1940’s through the 1960's provide a good example of how dispersion effected the military. A World War II division could occupy seven kilometers of front. By the 1950's the division in a CGSC exercise would occupy fifteen kilometer frontages with a depth of fifteen kilometers in sector. By 1960 a similar division operated within a 900 square kilometer sector. One can identify three primary reasons for this enormous growth in a division's sector. The first cause was an increase, albeit small, in a division's size from a 14,000 man Pentomic division to a 16,000-20,000 man Reorganization Objectives Army Division (ROAD)
Dispersion of relatively small combat teams led to new defensive concepts such as perimeter type mobile defense" and "island perimeter defense." These defenses relied on isolated battalions or battle groups dispersed throughout the width and depth of the battle area. These isolated formations were not mutually supporting and doctrine permitted gaps of up to 6000-9000 meters between units
@@carlalm6100
An American division at its most dispersed (1960 Pentomic) consisted of 5 battlegroups and could operate in an area of 900km^2. Doctrinally gaps within battlegroups could reach up to 9km. Each battle group could defend a perimeter of 9km (a circle of diameter less than 3km). As such if you put all battlegroups on the frontline with no units in the reserve that gives you a maximum frontage of 60km (37 miles). That is an incredibly stretched division with no reserves, no depth and no flexibility (the antithesis of a pentomic division). Frontage of a division would much more commonly be around 15km (9 miles) with dispersion being achieved mostly through great mobility and operational depth. Around 6 times the density.
But the thing is that point air defence is not supposed to cover the entire frontline but rather protect assets. That would mean that most Dusters would be heavily concentrated around the battle groups and support units. Making them far more available for ground support when needed.
Source:
Pentomic Doctrine:
A Model for Future War
\
A Monograph
by
Major Jack F. Smith
Engineer
III PENTOMIC DIVISION DOCTRINE
C. Pentomic Doctrine.
Pentomic doctrine addressed the fundamental characteristics of
conventional forces on a nuclear battlefield with dispersion becoming a primary
tenet of military operations. Command and General Staff College (CGSC)
instruction during the 1940’s through the 1960's provide a good example of how
dispersion effected the military. A World War II division could occupy seven
kilometers of front. By the 1950's the division in a CGSC exercise would occupy
fifteen kilometer frontages with a depth of fifteen kilometers in sector. By 1960 a
similar division operated within a 900 square kilometer sector. One can identify
three primary reasons for this enormous growth in a division's sector. The first
cause was an increase, albeit small, in a division's size from a 14,000 man Pentomic
division to a 16,000-20,000 man Reorganization Objectives Army Division
(ROAD).
...
Dispersion of relatively small combat teams led to new defensive concepts
such as perimeter type mobile defense" and "island perimeter defense." These
defenses relied on isolated battalions or battle groups dispersed throughout the
width and depth ofthe battle area. These isolated formations were not mutually
supporting and doctrine permitted gaps of up to 6000-9000 meters between
units. Placing units closer together created a lucrative target for nuclear strikes.
Later in the Cold War the M42 was very vulnerable as a SHORAD asset. It was lightly armored, no armor protection for the gun crew and as Soviet Air got faster and more accurate. But we had nothing to replace it in the short-range mission. The M48 Chaparral system suffered from the same problem as the Airforce was having with AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles (They are called "missiles" for a reason, they miss) and reloading was not fast. For the short-range defense, we needed accurate, quick reload, high mobility, survivability and light. When I got to my first ADA unit they were giving up their M-167, towed 20MM Vulcan. That system was okay systems but no armor protection at all. Another battery in division had M163s (they were M113 with a Vulcan mounted on top, this gave some survivability and a little more mobility to keep up with armor and infantry. They soldiered on a while longer than the towed system. We became a FIM92 (Stinger) MANPADS battery. They completely through survivability out the window as we were issued cargo HUMVEE's but of course they were highly mobile and could keep up with the front-line assets. I spent 2 years in that unit (great group of soldier's top to bottom) and transferred out when I was promoted. We learned firsthand one time how vulnerable we were. Our Battery Commander met these 2 F/A18 pilots the night before (at the O club of course) a training and convinced them to spend an hour with us. We would track them as the flew different attack patterns. We were on the middle crest of a hill about halfway up. One of the Hornets was flying just outside our 3-mile range, and we got "targe fixated" on him, while his wingman snuck up the valley behind us, popped out right on top of us, stood it on its tail and lit the cans. It was defining, rocked the fillings in my teeth. He made his point, never said anything over the coms, we all knew we were dead! Sorry for the length of this but you brought back a lot of memories.
Impromptu combined arms force on force training? Good times.
A very cool story
i always kinda wondered how AA units would've done exercises with other air assets. super cool and don't feel bad about it being too long! i personally like the details
Of course they knew exactly where you were and had no other mission or anyone else to shoot at.
Stinger team's survivability comes from being easy to hide and totally passive. CAS coming in to attack targets would never see you until missiles were in the air and then they would be too busy to do anything to you. MANPADS took a huge chunk out of the IDFAF in '73 and Ukrainians are downing a lot of Russians with them.
True but if you think about the scenario we painted the lead hornets, so he knows he was being tracked and the general direction of the target. These where Marine Hornets so they had several techniques they would use to flush out SHORAD. We were a better unit for it, because we never target fixated on anything ever again. @@obsidianjane4413
Now this makes me want a video on the troubled history of short ranged air defences in the US army (Mauler, SGT York, VADS/ Chapparel, ADATS)
how about the the T249 Vigilante ?
It's less troubled and more like under funded and questioned in doctrinal use every 5 seconds. The war on terror did not do that section of the Air Defense branch any favors.
There were ideas ahead of there time like Mauler (which failed being too head of it's time) and then there were stop gaps that failed horribly (like York).
Now world has drones. Lots of drones. It's good to feel very relevant and vindicated.
@@amirraziq1078 Gun overheats and serious Jams with ammo cookoffs and a bitch to reload. I spent 15 minutes looking at the survivor at Aberdeen proving grounds.
My dad kicked ass,driving this bad boy in Nam 1966. His stories growing up was crazy 😂 1st/44th
The weird part about M42 Duster and similar vehicles like it's steroid sibling ZSU-57-2 is that VT fuzes were available for both 40mm and 57mm gun. At least from Bofors. So these SPAAGs could be modernized with those and radars similar the one included onto M163(and in case of Duster, there was even separate radar vehicle intended per battery, but none built) and would still be effective even today against drones or helicopters and definitely against infantry on top floors of apartment buildings😅
But nobody modernized them.
The Chinese made a modernized ZSU-57, with VT shells
@@tanksalot1180 not really. VT shell doesn't need any modifications to the gun, it's just loaded normally. Type 80 aka WZ305 doesn't have neither radar, nor optical rangefinder. Unlike soviet Object 520 prototype and finnish ZSU-57-2M prototype.
It all comes down logistics and costs. Gotta get the most bang for your buck and when other systems like IFVs or Stinger missiles can do the same job, things get cut to improve production related concerns and save money in the bigger picture. A lot of the cash saved goes into R&D.
@@aymonfoxc1442 If anything a proper SHORAD would be a combination of missiles and guns to cover eachother's weakness, so modernizing the 40mm with radar assisted VT shells and Stingers are a good idea, likely only need a new turret too
@@AHappyCub I agree. I like guns in the SHORAD mix, alongside EW, particularly given the emerging prevalence of drones of all types. I was just explaining the rationale that is often behind a platform's retirement and sometimes, the retirement of an entire type of weapon.
No GI in Vietnam EVER complained about a Duster on their FOB or in their Convoy.
Yep a couple of Bofors on your side is definitely some stern 'go away'
In the early 80's I was in a Duster Nat'l Guard unit in Anderson SC. We spent some fun times at Ft Blizz TX/Donna Anna Range Camp!!!
Been there I captured a duster track section to take home along with TP projectile cores and other interesting bits reserve side live fire after 2 weeks teaching recruits how to use the TOW system on the Improved TOW Vehicle M901. Part of Division level Mobilization test running all summer.
I was literally talking IRL about the M42 yesterday! There’s a couple that are gate guards to a military base not far from here.
Camp Garfield?
@7:50 The M42 was replaced by the M-163 Vulcan and M-48 Chaparral NOT the Hawk. The Hawk was a medium to long range SAM that replaced the Nike/Nike-Hercules.
There were still ADA battalions in the '60s and '70s, but they were deployed in Europe. Just like with M-60 armor units drawing M-48s instead, units that deployed to Vietnam drew M-42s and did the base defense and convoy security job.
Yes, but also no. The Hawk augmented the Nike until they both got replaced by Patriot.
Back when my dad was in the Texas National Guard, the 1st Bn./200th Air Defense Artillery, New Mexico National Guard was part of the 49th Armored Division's artillery train. During annual training he witnessed those M42 Duster crews outshoot the M163 Vulcan crews, putting more shots on target every time. The crews had been together so long they instinctively knew what each other were going to do.
Also, I recognized the Virginia National Guard JFHQ patch on the sleeves of some of those crewmen.
I am in 1/200th, we got reflagged to infantry in the 90s.
@@personalaccount8914 Whoa! Now, that's a far cry from getting to shoot down planes.
It’s not exactly a hot take but 50’s era equipment goes so hard.
It’s just the angriest willie coyote type stuff and I love it.
I read about Dusters with the US Army, specifically Task Force Faith, during the Battle of Chosin Reservoir. Let's just say they didn't use them for anti air... The Duster's and M16's helped helped to repeatedly repel Chinese wave attacks until they ran out of ammunition, just let that sink in. The book is called East Of Chosin by Roy Appleman if you're interested.
In Korea, those quad .50s were known as 'Meat Choppers'.
I’m digging these new videos that combine equipment breakdowns with TO&Es. 👍
My father was in Vietnam 65-66 assigned to the B-Bty 29th Artillery searchlights mentioned at 9:45. Really cool seeing it here. Makes sense that they were at least logically linked to the Dusters.
Nice video!
One bit of context (NOT a complaint): During the Vietnam War, I Corps was pronounced 'Eye' Corps (like the letter) and the others were simply called TWO, THREE or FOUR Corps.
Seen one in person at the Russell Military Museum. Loved it.
My first MOS 16F, 200th ADA New Mexico National Guard 87/88. Soon replaced by the Hawk Missile System. I went to Ft Bliss to train as a 16D. Great video!
My country (Vietnam) plans to use our collected M42 for future use according to some documents.
I mean if you guys put a radar system on it, it would be scary for any helicopter to face off against
@cornballshark4413 That would be quite heavy I think, maybe an Anti drone platform is good enough
The U.S. Army still cannot quite decide to make up its collective mind about the utility and usefulness of cannon for close-in anti-aircraft use. The Army is sold on guided missiles like the Stinger and Hellfire yet continuing studies seem to point out such guided anti-aircraft missile systems would be well-served with cannon back-up for closer-range anti-aircraft support.
The Army was a hair's breadth away from deploying the new Sergeant York, twin 40mm cannon anti-aircraft system mounted in a large closed turret atop a M60 tank chassis, before cancelling it for last minute technological problems. During the early 2000s, the Army fielded a few M2/3 Bradleys converted into the M6 anti-aircraft platform that mounted the 25mm Bushmaster cannon and Hellfire missiles. The Army soon withdrew all from service. There is a new proposed multi-wheeled armored vehicle system mounting a 30mm cannon, two Hellfire missiles in a side box attached to the small, largely automated turret, and a built-in 7.62 machine gun in the middle of the turret for anti-personnel self-protection.
The Sgt. York was on a M48A5 chassis, had FCS problems, and got hit with a Reformer hit piece.
Thought hellfires were atgms?
Good question. The U.S. Army developed the Hellfire to be effective against ground targets and air targets. Now that is great versatility in a fire-and-forget missile.@@henrylicious
Great series about the more esoteric military vehicles! Keep it coming…
At 9:44 there's a picture of a AA searchlight in the back of a mutt. The vehicle has the front drive side wheel off and is sitting on a jack stand as well as the rear wheel looking completely out of camber. I'm wondering is the searchlight being directly powered off the mutts motor via extra alternators, or through a PTO of some sort? I know there are air raid sirens that run off a crank, makes me wonder if that's how this possibly works as well. Long comment I know lol thanks for any info on this!
Imagine someone firing redbull cans of explosives at you. The psychological effect of that would be insane.
Except this time they're taking away the wings
In 1992, the Italian firm Breda Meccanica Bresciana based in Milan offered an export upgrade package for the M42 Duster. The upgrades included a new enclosed turret armed with a single 40-mm L/70 Bofors and equipped with surveillance and tracking radars. The crew was reduced to three men consisting of the commander, gunner, and driver. The rear hull was also enlarged to provide room for an improved power plant. Ultimately, Breda's M42 Duster upgrade proposal was never accepted and was dropped.
A new turret you could put on any vehicle.
There's a place near my Grandma's that has one of these and an M4 Sherman in front of it. They're so cool and aesthetically pleasing.
Love seeing the ammo load stuff on Oxide, would love to see more
InDong Ha, Viet Nam,1968 1 ,we had a Duster with a Starlight scope behind our hut and they would start firing at something on the ground very often.We had Mig fly overs,but O don't remember anybody firing at the Migs that we were told were doing photo reconnaissance.
Bofors 40 mm is still used in sweden CV 90 LvKv 90C Anti-Air Vehicle and also in the IFV CV9040 the anti air version bofors uses the L70 The CV 9040 TriAD self-propelled Luftvärnskanonvagn 90 based on the CV 9040 mechanized infantry combat vehicle, and 40mm Bofors L/70 autocannon uses programmable ammunition.
Given what's going on in Ukraine, it seems like this would be a good time to take another look at SPAAGs. It's a shame the US seems to have dropped the idea after the fiasco with the M247 Sergeant York.
At least sweden Did send 50 of the regualr IFV cv9040 C i wish they could send CV 9040 TriAD also i agree i think they shuld Do that and look at SPAAGs the IFV cv9040 C has from reports done good against at least ground targets from what i heard! But there are not alot of videos of the cv90 in Ukraine due to Sweden asking Ukraine not to publish cv90 videos the cv 90s uses programmable 3P ammo and also all IFV cv9040 have the SAAB s Universal Tank and Anti-Aircraft System (UTAAS) sight and fire control system for tanks and combat vehicles. so could be good idea @@carlinglin7289
They have been looking into it, the Stryker M-Shorad is the interim solution. @@carlinglin7289
That's a really weird table sweeper
But quite efficient if you have VC stuck to the table
its called a duster not because it can sweep things from the table
*it turns things INTO dust*
god i love the US
My friend was in Dong Ha, Vietnam, on a Duster crew. They were all attached ADA units and used for perimeter defense. There was zero cover for the guys operating the cannons. There were some awesome custom gun trucks in Nam for convoy support. I saw pictures of the Army doing the same custom stuff in Iraq.
I love the Duster! Out at the range in Whites Sands, early 1980s. I got to watch two of these. And one each BMP and BTR(?) 8 wheels/20(!)mm auto cannon. Engaging targets with two new R&D Bradley's. It was awesome
The quad mounted .50 had the most savage nickname of all time - The Krautmower or Meat Chopper
Made in Berwick PA. In the 80’s we used their test track for official USCF races. Some good memories.
Very nice Video. At some point I want to make a video about the Duster in West German service. The German Tank museum has one that looks pretty good. I think they also at least tested upgrading it with a small radar. But I need to look more into that
As a Field Artillery office I love what your doing with the channel. Thanks.
When I was stationed at what was then Fort Hood, TX and assigned to the 2ns AD the Oklahoma NG provided, as part of our "Round Out Brigade", a battalion of Dusters. This was in the mid through late 1980s.
We had one in our Ammo dump in Phu Tia 184th Ordnance bn. One of 4 in the Quin Hon area support units. 68-69. Bad guns
Considering the growing use of weaponized commercial drones, a modernized version of the Duster maybe the most cost effective solution. A JLTV mounted with a single or duel 30 mm auto cannon, using programmable ammunition would be highly effective. Using modern sensors and radars, it could be all weather as well. Supplementing the 30mm vehicle, another vehicle mounting dual mount 7.62 chain guns, could provide extreme close in protection.
In 1980 I went to FT.Bliss, Texas and trained on the M42 duster and was with the 200th ADA in Clovis,New Mexico National Guard until 1984.
Realistically something like this (with more modern guidance) is the only economically viable solution against suicide drones.
I was a crewman on the M42 and later the platoon jeep driver. The Duster was reliable but I didn't feel confident in engaging jet aircraft.
Minor nitpick. When I served as commo chief for D battery, 4/60 artillery in 1970 each of our platoons had four sections of 2 dusters each for a total of 16 dusters in the battery rather than 8 dusters as described. Each of the 8 sections, 2 dusters each was typically assigned to a separate fire base or LZ as perimeter defense.
Each section was typically commanded by a staff sergeant. Platoon leaders and platoon sergeants led a nomadic life as they circulated between sections and were seldom actually present when the dusters were fired. I felt rather sorry for them as, despite their rank, they were largely irrelevant to the combat mission as they mostly dealt with logistical support issues.
An impressive weapon given the era it was developed in.
Perun and Battle Order on the same day? Y'all sure know how to spoil me.
Had one of these outside the local National Guard Armory for years. Would have loved to watch that thing work.
Loved the video @BattleOrder! Can't wait for the next video man! I was wondering about how the M42A1 Duster's were Organized in Vietnam, now I can Probably use them for a Few Scenarios that I've got planned for the Tabletop.
The only other thing that I'm wondering about is how was Soviet Anti-Aircraft Organized as far as the ZSU-57-2's, the ZSU-23-4 "Shilka's" and the 2S9/2K22 Tunguska's are Concerned.
Let me know what you think about this and I'll catch you in your next video man!
This reminds me of the German 'Gepard' , in use by Ukrainians to down drones, like Iran's 'Shahed'. The main difference is that the Gerard has modern, automated, radar guided tracking and faster slew rates in azimuth and declination. Creating a Stryker or Bradley variant, so it carries a multi-gun anti-air system resembling the Gepard/M42 seems like a smart move for addressing subsonic drones.
There's one of these vehicles here near me in FL. Awesome looking up close plus a m7 arty
Excellent video once again! i have a little question, at 5:51 you talk about an AA MG gunner, what's his purpose? Seems a bit weird in a full AA platoon.
Awesome video, thank you for sharing this information.
If anyone is a book reader interested in the Korean War. The book, "East of Chosin," by Roy E. Appleman is an excellent book and mentions the M19 bofors vehicle. During the 31st Regimental Combat Teams, 7th Divisions fight to get back south out of the Northeast area of the reservoir, the M19 is mentioned several times in the book. It was a devastating anti personal weapon. Mentioned as a "massive grenade thrower," it devastated Chinese mass attacks at the beginning of the battle. Unfortunately, the flying box cars did not continue to drop reserve ammunition for the vehicle as the MSR was chocked with communist roadblocks and most of the ammo that was dropped fell into communist hands. The M-19's were just set on fire to keep them inoperable.
Gun AA nearly phased out because jets are too fast and to far to be effective. Some gun AA kept for anti helo. But with large drone use will gun AAs make a return?
Had a chat recently if they should bring the static Bofors with the Flycatcher RADAR back from the dead for counter-UAS. Doubt it will actually happen as the tech is old and nobody knows how it works anymore, atleast nobody who's not a retired contractor. But perhaps more cost-effective than using missiles.
Damn they made the BMP shredder from War Thunder a real thing
Quick question: what was the role of the platoon HQ's AA machine gunner? It's not apparent in the graphic
The basis for further anti-drone defence?
I had a friend who fought in Vietnam. They had M-42 in their camp and loved it.
Any chance you could do some videos on WW1 orders of battle or focusing on how the various imperial armies were organized and their doctrines and strategies?
We saw one of these with the national guard unit in red dawn..
A modernized version of the m16 or m42 would be a decent match for the modern drone war. Mobile anti drone defense that could stay close to the front as an attack is pushed forward
2:59
now imagine an ammo cook-off riding in this thing
God there is something so interesting about vietnam era us armor and how it got forced into counter insurgency roles.
In a world of drones and the effectiveness of things like CRAM, I see gun based AA making a strong comeback.
Call of Duty 3 soundtrack, good taste
I guess it's time to revive this as an anti-drone vehicle (y)
Could use a bit of modern targeting computers and trackers but it seems like a good platform. What with all the drones and all. But I'm wondering if a CIWS could do its job better.
@@mill2712 C-RAMs did pretty well in Iraq against mortar and other indirect fire countering, biggest problem is that they basically are a full on tractor trailers so mobility wise is a problem, I'm not too keen on it's details so idk if it can work on the move but I doubt having an 18 wheeler in a convoy would allow for much flexibility plus the huge threat with friendly fire that CWIS normally doesn't have at sea
Why have a armored body but very open top? I assume its ease of production and mantaince than any savings from a whole new chassey less armored one?
I also assume machine gun aa is set to return in the anti-drone role. I assume guns like this, or tge 50cal, with aim bot, would wipe out the light drone threat.
Sounds a lot like what anti-drone air defense requires. Since Flakpanzer Gepard has proven so useful once more.
The Gepard has a tracking radar, which the Duster apparently didn't. Nevertheless I was indeed waiting until the end of the video to see it dusted off in Ukraine.
Seems something the US may want to bring back into service to fight drone swarms, at least as a stopgap until something more advanced is developed.
I thought the hull was specially made for the Duster?
It’s based on the m41 bulldog chassis. It’s a modified m41 hull
Realize there is a slow fire mode and a fast fire mode.
Soldiers use this weapons would fast fire mode.
40mm bofurs mobile gun.
Very effective during small actions or against civilian uprisings.
Looks basically like a bushmaster 40mm autoloader single barrel.
Is that music from cod 3???
Ultimate fate of any AA gun: Infantry fire support.
Just remember, the Taiwanese put M41 Bulldog turrets on the M42 Duster's chassis to make a new light tank
Wasn't it M18 Hellcat turrets on Duster chassis? Type 64 IIRC.
M18 Hellcat turret, not M41 turret.
@@Pilotmario mb
Now with the arrival of the cheep Ali express drone, make duster great again
I knew an Guardsman (may he RIP)who used Dusters in Vietnam before getting them later in his Guard unit. He liked them a lot more then the Vulcan cannon. He thought his Dusters were a match for any Soviet tank Battalion. He was looking forward to the Sgt York.
In any event, I bet Ukraine could use a few today for the drone war . .
r
Did not The U.S. during the Regean Administration under the Sgt. York program attempt to develop a similar weapons platform on a M-60 chassic?
Could easily fit a water jacket to those guns..
We need these guns on a M1 Abrams chassis with programmable munitions for trench clearing.
'Let's dust!' .. sir there are so mamy enemy.. 'bring up the ontos!'
So what are the anti air batteries using now, as the air threat has increased with small cheap drones. The supposedly obsolescent Gepard has proven deadly to drones and cruise missiles.
This class of ADA battalion which would support maneuver units mainly has Avengers, and soon M-SHORAD on a Stryker. Both are Stinger and cannon based, although M-SHORAD is going to get a laser variant that will probably be better suited to the counter UAS role.
So is everyone near the 40mm cannons have hearing problems later on
The German Gepard has proven very useful in Ukraine.
There's something a bit off in thd commentary when you say "the duster was transferrd from the National Guard as the active duty battalions were inactivated around 1960..." surely this should be "to" the National Guard and you need to then state when some (but not the majority) were transferred back to.the Regulars (presumably 1966). I'm a bit dubious about the claim that Duster served into the 80s with the ARNG. Mid 70s seems more likely.
The last unit with M42 Dusters was 2-263 ADA (South Carolina National Guard) which transitioned from the Duster to the Stinger in 1988.
This old battery history page has a bunch of pictures of Dusters they used in the 80s web.archive.org/web/20150210083122/charliebatteryoletimers.com/Unit_History.html
The local national guard unit had M42 Dusters when I was in high school, mid 1980s. One would be on display during the home coming festival. IIRC they were being serviced out during that time.
Old A.D.A. guardsman here. Hawk was sent to the guard when the Duster was finally retired in the 80's. The Avenger A.D.A. system was sent to the guard about a year before I retired. Let's say I was not impressed by the loss of range when the Hawk was retired.
4 man turret?! Thank God it's open-top.
Also the smoke coming out of that thing. How do you even aim?
Woooow, did they saved one?!
What did they need 11 officers for in the battalion HQ?
Battalion Commander
Executive Officer
S3 (Operations/Training Officer)
Assistant S3
S1 (Adjutant/Personnel)
Chaplain
Communications Officer
S2 (Intel Officer)
Liaison
Transport
S4 (Supply)
Western militaries generally have a lot of staff officers starting at the battalion-level
Have you considered doing a AAA BATTERY through history for the US army
Yeah I have. It would probably be more like the evolution of divisional ADA though
@@BattleOrder would love to also see a video similar to your m8 vid but for the m247 AA
what different us army way poi nt 2030's division air defence battalion?
A lot more missiles that's for sure lol
Can you make more squad load out but for 6 mans squad ?
so this is the American version of the gepard AA ? sounds good if you ask me
The Duster was the first AA mobile Plattform used by the German Bundeswehr.
They hurried to replace it with the Gepard
Tells you how capable the Duster was 😟
Always liked multi barreled turrets.
Ah Americans, if they could, they would bring AAVs with bunch of .50cals to fight off TIEs at Battle of Hoth.
tfw Anti air can be used as anti-literally anything that's in front of it
You really need to talk about the zsu 57 2
FUN FACT: Snoop dogs dad was part of a m42 crew in vietnam
Fun fact : Thai army plan to retire their M42 duster in 2020 but in the end they decide to kept them in service to use it as a drone hunter and plan to upgrade them with modern FCS
W/ the increased use of drones these things should start making a comeback.