Churchill's Funnies!
 

Who out there is clever enough to know what this is?
Cheers Andrew.

fuel bladders?

Possibly something akin to the Roto-trailer?

Just a guess, but with the tires emblazoned "flammable" in huge letters on the sidewalls, could it be some kind of fuel stowage for an armored flame thrower?

You guys are quick off the mark!, Evidently these are fuel bladders for the M113 believe it or not. I think made for towing a shore in combat zones. Cheers Andrew.

Something that's odd about this is that it evidently has a hookup for airbrakes, judging by the little bracket just back of the lunnette. No M113 I have ever seen had an air supply.

Is it for airbrakes, or a fuel line so you can run the vehicle from the fuel in the bladders and then discard them when empty? Did they have a remote disconnect option - I think some post-WW2 Russian kit had disposable drums on at the rear.

Chris.

I thought of that, but the hookup definitely looks like it is for the gladhand. I would expect any coupling for fuel would be of the quick disconnect type.....I doubt a gladhand would be suitable for fuel transfer. Mind you, the lunnette also looks like it forms some type of an impact brake.

Could we see photos of it without the blacked out portions?

I’m wondering why they needed tread on the tyres?

Actually these are nothing to do with Churchill but are 1960s American, developed I believe for both Vietnam and arctic conditions. The tread is to reduce the tendency to slip sideways on side slopes. There are photos of them being towed in groups, one behind the other.

David

Two-Wheeled Fuel Bladder
 

Canada trialled the US version in 1960. I have not checked to see if the configuration went into production of if it had either an XM or M number.

Attachment 100101

Attachment 100102

Yes David, we know they are nothing to do with Churchill, but you can sort of see the lineage? As Rob has pointed out and on closer inspection , it appears they were running an air coupling system, similar to that of the M800 series trucks, so yes the 1960's is the correct generation. Cheers Andrew.