±Recent Visitors

Recent Visitors to Com-Central!

±User Info-big


Welcome Anonymous

Nickname
Password

Membership:
Latest: HighestAce
New Today: 0
New Yesterday: 0
Overall: 6648

People Online:
Members: 0
Visitors: 392
Total: 392
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: CPGlang
03: Home
04: Home
05: Community Forums
06: Community Forums
07: Community Forums
08: Photo Gallery
09: Downloads
10: Community Forums
11: CPGlang
12: Home
13: Downloads
14: Community Forums
15: Photo Gallery
16: Community Forums
17: Statistics
18: Downloads
19: Photo Gallery
20: Home
21: Home
22: Community Forums
23: Photo Gallery
24: Photo Gallery
25: Community Forums
26: Community Forums
27: Community Forums
28: Home
29: Community Forums
30: Community Forums
31: CPGlang
32: Community Forums
33: Community Forums
34: Home
35: Community Forums
36: Member Screenshots
37: Downloads
38: Community Forums
39: Photo Gallery
40: Community Forums
41: Community Forums
42: Photo Gallery
43: Community Forums
44: Photo Gallery
45: Home
46: Community Forums
47: Home
48: Community Forums
49: Community Forums
50: Home
51: Home
52: Community Forums
53: Photo Gallery
54: Photo Gallery
55: Member Screenshots
56: Member Screenshots
57: Community Forums
58: Home
59: Photo Gallery
60: Community Forums
61: Home
62: CPGlang
63: Community Forums
64: Community Forums
65: Community Forums
66: Home
67: Photo Gallery
68: Community Forums
69: Community Forums
70: Home
71: CPGlang
72: Photo Gallery
73: Home
74: Community Forums
75: Community Forums
76: Community Forums
77: Community Forums
78: Home
79: Community Forums
80: CPGlang
81: Photo Gallery
82: Community Forums
83: Downloads
84: Downloads
85: CPGlang
86: Photo Gallery
87: Community Forums
88: Downloads
89: Home
90: Community Forums
91: Home
92: Member Screenshots
93: Photo Gallery
94: CPGlang
95: Photo Gallery
96: Community Forums
97: Community Forums
98: Photo Gallery
99: Photo Gallery
100: Community Forums
101: Community Forums
102: Community Forums
103: CPGlang
104: Community Forums
105: Downloads
106: Home
107: Home
108: Community Forums
109: Community Forums
110: Downloads
111: Community Forums
112: Photo Gallery
113: CPGlang
114: Home
115: Photo Gallery
116: Home
117: Community Forums
118: Home
119: Home
120: Community Forums
121: Downloads
122: Photo Gallery
123: Community Forums
124: Home
125: Community Forums
126: Photo Gallery
127: Community Forums
128: Community Forums
129: Home
130: Member Screenshots
131: Community Forums
132: Community Forums
133: Community Forums
134: Home
135: CPGlang
136: CPGlang
137: Home
138: Community Forums
139: Photo Gallery
140: Community Forums
141: Photo Gallery
142: Community Forums
143: Community Forums
144: Photo Gallery
145: Community Forums
146: Community Forums
147: Home
148: Community Forums
149: Community Forums
150: News
151: Community Forums
152: Photo Gallery
153: Home
154: Downloads
155: Community Forums
156: Downloads
157: Statistics
158: CPGlang
159: Community Forums
160: Community Forums
161: Community Forums
162: Downloads
163: Community Forums
164: CPGlang
165: Community Forums
166: Member Screenshots
167: Downloads
168: CPGlang
169: Community Forums
170: Home
171: Community Forums
172: Photo Gallery
173: Home
174: Photo Gallery
175: Home
176: Photo Gallery
177: Community Forums
178: Community Forums
179: Community Forums
180: Home
181: Community Forums
182: Home
183: Home
184: CPGlang
185: Home
186: Downloads
187: Photo Gallery
188: CPGlang
189: Photo Gallery
190: Photo Gallery
191: Community Forums
192: Community Forums
193: Photo Gallery
194: Community Forums
195: Community Forums
196: Community Forums
197: Member Screenshots
198: Member Screenshots
199: Community Forums
200: CPGlang
201: Community Forums
202: Community Forums
203: Photo Gallery
204: Home
205: Home
206: Community Forums
207: Community Forums
208: Community Forums
209: Photo Gallery
210: Downloads
211: Community Forums
212: Member Screenshots
213: Community Forums
214: Community Forums
215: Home
216: Community Forums
217: Community Forums
218: Community Forums
219: Community Forums
220: CPGlang
221: CPGlang
222: Photo Gallery
223: Community Forums
224: Community Forums
225: Community Forums
226: Downloads
227: Community Forums
228: Community Forums
229: Downloads
230: Community Forums
231: Photo Gallery
232: Home
233: News Archive
234: Member Screenshots
235: Home
236: Photo Gallery
237: Community Forums
238: CPGlang
239: Photo Gallery
240: Photo Gallery
241: CPGlang
242: Member Screenshots
243: Photo Gallery
244: Downloads
245: Home
246: Community Forums
247: Downloads
248: Community Forums
249: Photo Gallery
250: Community Forums
251: Home
252: Photo Gallery
253: Community Forums
254: Home
255: Photo Gallery
256: CPGlang
257: Community Forums
258: Photo Gallery
259: Home
260: Community Forums
261: Home
262: Community Forums
263: Community Forums
264: Community Forums
265: Community Forums
266: Photo Gallery
267: Community Forums
268: Community Forums
269: Community Forums
270: Photo Gallery
271: CPGlang
272: CPGlang
273: Member Screenshots
274: Community Forums
275: Community Forums
276: Photo Gallery
277: Community Forums
278: Home
279: CPGlang
280: Photo Gallery
281: Community Forums
282: Photo Gallery
283: Community Forums
284: Photo Gallery
285: Home
286: Community Forums
287: Community Forums
288: Community Forums
289: Home
290: Home
291: Community Forums
292: CPGlang
293: Photo Gallery
294: Home
295: Home
296: Community Forums
297: Photo Gallery
298: Home
299: CPGlang
300: Community Forums
301: Community Forums
302: Community Forums
303: Community Forums
304: Community Forums
305: Downloads
306: Photo Gallery
307: Community Forums
308: Home
309: CPGlang
310: Community Forums
311: Community Forums
312: Photo Gallery
313: Community Forums
314: Photo Gallery
315: Community Forums
316: Community Forums
317: Community Forums
318: Home
319: CPGlang
320: Community Forums
321: Community Forums
322: Community Forums
323: Community Forums
324: Community Forums
325: Community Forums
326: Downloads
327: Home
328: Home
329: Community Forums
330: Photo Gallery
331: Community Forums
332: Community Forums
333: Photo Gallery
334: Home
335: Member Screenshots
336: Home
337: Community Forums
338: CPGlang
339: CPGlang
340: Community Forums
341: Community Forums
342: Home
343: Community Forums
344: Downloads
345: Community Forums
346: Community Forums
347: CPGlang
348: Home
349: Home
350: Community Forums
351: Photo Gallery
352: Member Screenshots
353: Community Forums
354: Community Forums
355: Downloads
356: Community Forums
357: Home
358: Community Forums
359: Downloads
360: Community Forums
361: Home
362: CPGlang
363: Photo Gallery
364: Community Forums
365: Community Forums
366: Downloads
367: Community Forums
368: Community Forums
369: Home
370: CPGlang
371: Community Forums
372: Community Forums
373: Home
374: Photo Gallery
375: Home
376: Home
377: Photo Gallery
378: CPGlang
379: Home
380: Community Forums
381: Community Forums
382: Community Forums
383: Member Screenshots
384: Member Screenshots
385: Community Forums
386: Community Forums
387: Photo Gallery
388: Community Forums
389: Home
390: Member Screenshots
391: Community Forums
392: Photo Gallery

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: 81

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