±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: cgsimpson
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6645

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 276
Total: 276
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Photo Gallery
02: Home
03: Community Forums
04: Photo Gallery
05: Community Forums
06: Home
07: Photo Gallery
08: Community Forums
09: CPGlang
10: Community Forums
11: Community Forums
12: Community Forums
13: Photo Gallery
14: Community Forums
15: Community Forums
16: Community Forums
17: Home
18: Community Forums
19: Photo Gallery
20: Community Forums
21: Home
22: Community Forums
23: Home
24: Photo Gallery
25: Community Forums
26: Community Forums
27: Community Forums
28: Photo Gallery
29: Downloads
30: Treasury
31: Photo Gallery
32: Member Screenshots
33: Home
34: Photo Gallery
35: Community Forums
36: Community Forums
37: Home
38: Community Forums
39: Community Forums
40: Home
41: Community Forums
42: Community Forums
43: CPGlang
44: Member Screenshots
45: Home
46: Photo Gallery
47: Community Forums
48: Photo Gallery
49: Photo Gallery
50: Community Forums
51: Home
52: Community Forums
53: Community Forums
54: CPGlang
55: Community Forums
56: Home
57: Community Forums
58: Community Forums
59: Photo Gallery
60: Community Forums
61: Community Forums
62: CPGlang
63: Photo Gallery
64: Community Forums
65: Home
66: Community Forums
67: Community Forums
68: Member Screenshots
69: Community Forums
70: Community Forums
71: Community Forums
72: Community Forums
73: News
74: Community Forums
75: Home
76: Community Forums
77: Home
78: Photo Gallery
79: Community Forums
80: Community Forums
81: Community Forums
82: Community Forums
83: Photo Gallery
84: Community Forums
85: Community Forums
86: Community Forums
87: Downloads
88: Community Forums
89: Community Forums
90: Home
91: Community Forums
92: Photo Gallery
93: Downloads
94: Photo Gallery
95: Community Forums
96: Home
97: Home
98: Community Forums
99: News Archive
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: News
103: Community Forums
104: Home
105: CPGlang
106: Community Forums
107: Photo Gallery
108: Community Forums
109: Home
110: Community Forums
111: Statistics
112: Photo Gallery
113: Community Forums
114: Photo Gallery
115: Photo Gallery
116: News Archive
117: Community Forums
118: Community Forums
119: CPGlang
120: Community Forums
121: Community Forums
122: Member Screenshots
123: Community Forums
124: Home
125: Community Forums
126: Community Forums
127: Downloads
128: Community Forums
129: Community Forums
130: Home
131: CPGlang
132: Community Forums
133: Home
134: Photo Gallery
135: Community Forums
136: News
137: Community Forums
138: Community Forums
139: News
140: Community Forums
141: CPGlang
142: News
143: Community Forums
144: Community Forums
145: Community Forums
146: CPGlang
147: Community Forums
148: Community Forums
149: Home
150: Home
151: Community Forums
152: CPGlang
153: Community Forums
154: Community Forums
155: Home
156: Home
157: Home
158: News
159: Home
160: Photo Gallery
161: CPGlang
162: Home
163: Community Forums
164: Photo Gallery
165: Community Forums
166: Home
167: Community Forums
168: Community Forums
169: Community Forums
170: CPGlang
171: Home
172: Community Forums
173: Community Forums
174: Photo Gallery
175: Downloads
176: Community Forums
177: News Archive
178: Community Forums
179: Community Forums
180: Community Forums
181: Community Forums
182: Photo Gallery
183: Community Forums
184: Community Forums
185: Downloads
186: Home
187: Home
188: Community Forums
189: Photo Gallery
190: Home
191: CPGlang
192: CPGlang
193: Statistics
194: Home
195: Community Forums
196: Community Forums
197: News
198: Home
199: Community Forums
200: CPGlang
201: Community Forums
202: Community Forums
203: Home
204: Community Forums
205: Photo Gallery
206: Community Forums
207: Home
208: Photo Gallery
209: Community Forums
210: Home
211: Member Screenshots
212: Photo Gallery
213: Photo Gallery
214: Community Forums
215: Community Forums
216: Home
217: Photo Gallery
218: Photo Gallery
219: Photo Gallery
220: Member Screenshots
221: Community Forums
222: Community Forums
223: Community Forums
224: Home
225: CPGlang
226: CPGlang
227: Home
228: Community Forums
229: Community Forums
230: Community Forums
231: Community Forums
232: Home
233: Community Forums
234: Community Forums
235: Member Screenshots
236: Community Forums
237: CPGlang
238: Community Forums
239: Downloads
240: Community Forums
241: Photo Gallery
242: Community Forums
243: Community Forums
244: Community Forums
245: Home
246: Home
247: Community Forums
248: Community Forums
249: Home
250: Community Forums
251: Home
252: Member Screenshots
253: CPGlang
254: Photo Gallery
255: Community Forums
256: Community Forums
257: Community Forums
258: Photo Gallery
259: Community Forums
260: Photo Gallery
261: CPGlang
262: Photo Gallery
263: Home
264: Community Forums
265: Member Screenshots
266: Home
267: Community Forums
268: Home
269: News
270: CPGlang
271: Community Forums
272: Treasury
273: Community Forums
274: Community Forums
275: Photo Gallery
276: Community Forums

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
XM 66 Tank Proposal
The AFV ASSOCIATION was formed in 1964 to support the thoughts and research of all those interested in Armored Fighting Vehicles and related topics, such as AFV drawings. The emphasis has always been on sharing information and communicating with other members of similar interests; e.g. German armor, Japanese AFVs, or whatever.
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page     Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board

View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 7:51 pm
Post subject: XM 66 Tank Proposal

This is a 'spin-off' Vehicle from the T95 Program.



Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
bsmart
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 2523
Location: Central Maryland
PostPosted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 8:11 pm
Post subject: Re: XM 66 Tank Proposal

Interesting - You say it was a spinoff of teh T95 program. Where does this fit in the M60A2 genisis? The picture looks like an M6A1E1 or M60A2. Could it be that the Army decided that it would be easier to get the program survive by either giving it a new designator (XM66) or developing it as a member of the M60 family

_________________
Bob Smart ([email protected])
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
tanker2010
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Aug 20, 2006
Posts: 264
Location: Kansas City, Mo.
PostPosted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 8:30 pm
Post subject: Re: XM 66 Tank Proposal

It does have a strange hull. While it has the shape and fenders of a M60, it has 5 return rollers.
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Dontos
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 3436
Location: Vine Grove, KY
PostPosted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 8:37 pm
Post subject: Re: XM 66 Tank Proposal

The turret is similiar to the T95 test bed at the LST buiding.
(NOTE: The 20mm gun is removed, but mount location is obvious)





This is around the time of the M60A2 development.

Don
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger Photo Gallery
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2067
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2009 2:12 am
Post subject: Re: XM 66 Tank Proposal

XM66 is the now known as M60A2 program.

That's a poor picture of M60 hull 9B4470 with the proposed "A" model turret. I think I posted a copy of it a while back.

In it's early stages the adaptation of the 152mm gun/launcher to the M60 was called the XM66. They reviewed 4 turret types, A, B, C, and D. "A" and "B" were similar compact types, with the "B" model being taller. The "C" model was very similar in appearance to an over grown M551 turret, and the "D" was a modified M60A1 turret with shorter rear. In early 1965 they changed the program name to M60A1E1. The "B" model ended up being selected and eventually became the M60A2.

_________________
Joe_D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Andrei
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Feb 05, 2006
Posts: 80

PostPosted: Thu Jan 27, 2022 3:19 pm
Post subject: Re: XM 66 Tank Proposal

Interesting if any alternative armament options were considered for XM 66 or M60A2 at the initial development (60s), later they considered 120 mm US and British guns, as well as M68.
Back to top
View user's profile
Harold_Biondo
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Sep 11, 2021
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Sat Dec 03, 2022 6:17 pm
Post subject: Re: XM 66 Tank Proposal

- Joe_D
XM66 is the now known as M60A2 program.

That's a poor picture of M60 hull 9B4470 with the proposed "A" model turret. I think I posted a copy of it a while back.

In it's early stages the adaptation of the 152mm gun/launcher to the M60 was called the XM66. They reviewed 4 turret types, A, B, C, and D. "A" and "B" were similar compact types, with the "B" model being taller. The "C" model was very similar in appearance to an over grown M551 turret, and the "D" was a modified M60A1 turret with shorter rear. In early 1965 they changed the program name to M60A1E1. The "B" model ended up being selected and eventually became the M60A2.


If this was referring to the tank that is in Armada Michigan, that is not in fact the XM66D (or A, in this case) turret, it is the T95S turret. S standing for Shillelagh. There was some cross-pollination going on between the M60A2 and T95 programs. The actual description of the XM66D does not match up with the T95 turret. The tank in Armada was built from the beginning on the M48 chassis, according to the original work order for it I found in the archives. The T95 and M60 hulls with T95S turrets were separate individuals entirely, since three T95S turrets were built, according to Hunnicut.
Back to top
View user's profile
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2067
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Wed Feb 01, 2023 4:08 pm
Post subject: Re: XM 66 Tank Proposal

Hi Harold and welcome.

The tank in Armada Michigan has the old Main Battle Tank - Medium Range (MBT-MR) turret installed. That’s why it has the driver in the turret position. This was the progenitor to the MBT70/XM803 program and envisioned as early as 1958. It was used as an ersatz "D" model turret demonstrator for what was to become the M60A2. The "D" model turret proposed in 1961 was supposed to be a basic M60A1 turret modified to accept the 152mm gun/launcher and associated equipment. None were produced. Instead, they realized a modified MBT-MR three-man turret without the driver could be made just as fast. At the same time, the Compact Turret designed by Clifford Bradley originally envisioned for the MBT-MR was considered for the M60/Shillelagh system. This unique type of turret is what the M60A2 eventually used, and the “A” and “B” models were alternate versions. The picture posted by Don "Dontos" Moriarty (RIP) is of M60 hull RN 9B4470 and has the “A” model Clifford Bradley designed turret, aka "Compact Turret". They eventually ended up on the T95 hulls that were used to test systems being developed for the MBT70/XM803. The T95 hulls being relegated to this duty when its program was cancelled in 1959. The three T95S turrets requested for the Shillelagh program were the T95/96 Turrets already produced for the T95 program and originally designed to have a fixed mount, no recoil, hypervelocity gun. They were modified to accept the M81 152mm Gun/Launcher and were installed on M48A1 gasser hulls to conduct test firing at White Sands Missile range by Aeronutronic Philco-Ford. Below are pictures of one conducting live fire tests. Once the M551 pilots were made these rigs were no longer needed.





About that M48 hull at Armada. I wrote a post years ago and ID'd it as having the "D" turret erroneously. The hull is one of the 6 M48A1’s converted to AVDS-1790 diesel and eventually became one of the two pilot M48A3’s. Here is a link to it: Pilot M48A3. The plaque installed in front of her is wrong. The only XM66 connection was the turret being used as a demonstrator for the D model turret. Here is a picture of 9B4470 with it:


_________________
Joe_D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Sun Feb 26, 2023 7:57 pm
Post subject: Re: XM 66 Tank Proposal

Hi Joe! Thanks for checking in. With regard to the test rig shown in Don's old post...do you know if MICOM was using that or a similar rig? Was any firing done at Redstone or if part of a MICOM operation, perfomed exclusively at White Sands? I've been trying to establish what platform was being used in the tests that were referred to by MICOM reps at a 1969 meeting at Ft. Knox. They assiduously avoided any use of or comment on Shillelagh launches involving an actual Sheridan. There are two tests in particular I'm interested in: First was a "shoot-off" between Shillelagh and M60A1. Second was a series of Missile Readiness firings they cited to anybody who would listen....503 missiles, 91% successful hit rate. It was a lie and 162 of those missiles were not even fired.
I'd love to know if this was the rig likely in use?
Best regards,
D.

- Joe_D
Hi Harold and welcome.

The tank in Armada Michigan has the old Main Battle Tank - Medium Range (MBT-MR) turret installed. That’s why it has the driver in the turret position. This was the progenitor to the MBT70/XM803 program and envisioned as early as 1958. It was used as an ersatz "D" model turret demonstrator for what was to become the M60A2. The "D" model turret proposed in 1961 was supposed to be a basic M60A1 turret modified to accept the 152mm gun/launcher and associated equipment. None were produced. Instead, they realized a modified MBT-MR three-man turret without the driver could be made just as fast. At the same time, the Compact Turret designed by Clifford Bradley originally envisioned for the MBT-MR was considered for the M60/Shillelagh system. This unique type of turret is what the M60A2 eventually used, and the “A” and “B” models were alternate versions. The picture posted by Don "Dontos" Moriarty (RIP) is of M60 hull RN 9B4470 and has the “A” model Clifford Bradley designed turret, aka "Compact Turret". They eventually ended up on the T95 hulls that were used to test systems being developed for the MBT70/XM803. The T95 hulls being relegated to this duty when its program was cancelled in 1959. The three T95S turrets requested for the Shillelagh program were the T95/96 Turrets already produced for the T95 program and originally designed to have a fixed mount, no recoil, hypervelocity gun. They were modified to accept the M81 152mm Gun/Launcher and were installed on M48A1 gasser hulls to conduct test firing at White Sands Missile range by Aeronutronic Philco-Ford. Below are pictures of one conducting live fire tests. Once the M551 pilots were made these rigs were no longer needed.





About that M48 hull at Armada. I wrote a post years ago and ID'd it as having the "D" turret erroneously. The hull is one of the 6 M48A1’s converted to AVDS-1790 diesel and eventually became one of the two pilot M48A3’s. Here is a link to it: Pilot M48A3. The plaque installed in front of her is wrong. The only XM66 connection was the turret being used as a demonstrator for the D model turret. Here is a picture of 9B4470 with it:

Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2067
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Fri Mar 31, 2023 5:01 pm
Post subject: Re: XM 66 Tank Proposal

Hi Doug,

I can say for certainty that the M48/T95 rig wasn't used for those tests. Anything else I'd have to unpack some boxes to find the info. Give me some time and eventually I'll be back on a normal routine. Right now I'm way to busy.

Nice to hear from you.

_________________
Joe_D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Joe_D
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2067
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Sat Jul 01, 2023 10:34 pm
Post subject: Re: XM 66 Tank Proposal

Doug,

Sorry for the long overdue reply. Checked my library and came up with this conclusion. In 1969 there were a very limited amount of M60A1E2's available. 300 were in storage until a satisfactory scavenge system was approved and implemented along with a plethora of other issues. The few available (approximately 14) were distributed between Knox, Aberdeen, Detroit, and Redstone, being used to develop/fix issues with the stabilization system, recoil mechanism, CBSS, FCS, and laser. The M551 was plentiful and capable of conducting these firings. It is highly unlikely they would have diverted any M60A1E2's for a test the M551 could just as satisfactorily conduct. If I find anything else to nail this down, I'll post it.

_________________
Joe_D
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    Reply to topic    Printer Friendly Page    Forum Index ›  AFV News Discussion Board
Page 1 of 1
All times are GMT - 6 Hours



Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum