Com-Central.net

JeffStringer · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 637

Forgive me if this has already discussed before, but why were these referred to as a "Starship"?

It's always been a favorite American tank of mine and I just thought this would be the right place to ask! Mr. Green

Doug_Kibbey · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 3:12 pm Post subject: Re: M60A1E1 - M60A2

A favorite topic of mine, Jeff.

I served on the M60A2 Initial Production Test at the Armor Board in '73 and the "Starship" term hadn't been invented or applied yet, but I'm sure I know how it came to be so applied....

Because the vehicle was extremely ambitious for the budget available to it, the level of maturity (or immaturity, I should say) of the technology being utilized, and because in the context of the then-current tanking, it was so stupifyingly complex and unreliable that it rivaled early spacecraft.

For all it's shortcomings, as I've previously stated about both the M551 Sheridan AND the M60A2, we likely wouldn't have the M1 Abrams we have today without the pioneering ground broken and backdrop of experience provided by both of those vehicles. They were interim steps, done on the cheap, and too soon, to deliver what was promised, but that was made good when the M1 was designed.

FWIW, both the M60A2 and the Sheridan looked positively BADA$$ in their day....gotta' count for something, right? Wink

That's my $.02

JeffStringer · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 637

Yep ... just reading about how dangerous it was to fire both tanks earned a seperate level of respect!

And they DO look assume too.

Thanks for the info Doug!

JimWeb · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:10 pm Post subject: Re: M60A1E1 - M60A2

The only place I have seen the term 'Starship' used in documents is in relation to the M60E2 which had the driver in the turret as well....

Doug_Kibbey · Posted: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:46 pm Post subject: Re: M60A1E1 - M60A2

- JimWeb

The only place I have seen the term 'Starship' used in documents is in relation to the M60E2 which had the driver in the turret as well....

The only place I have seen the term "M60E2" is on page 179 of Hunnicutt's "Patton" to describe the interim nomenclature of an M60A1 that has been modified to accept the M81 gun and Shillelagh system. There was no provision for relocating the driver in this vehicle of which I'm aware.

Is it possible you are referring to the MBT70?

If you review guestbooks and such areas of the 1st or 3AD website as you can access, you will find references to the M60A2 as the "Starship". Unfortunately, they seem to have password protected access to many of their features recently. I've heard many a discussion on the forum making this reference, though it was all after my service. (Did the use of this term coincide with the Battlestar Galactica TV series, maybe?)

I may have a look at the USAREUR website again....

JimWeb · Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 7:16 pm Post subject: Re: M60A1E1 - M60A2

The only place I have seen the term "M60E2" is on page 179 of Hunnicutt's "Patton" to describe the interim nomenclature of an M60A1 that has been modified to accept the M81 gun and Shillelagh system. There was no provision for relocating the driver in this vehicle of which I'm aware.

Is it possible you are referring to the MBT70?

No! The M60E2 is the M60 fitted with the ICFC turret.

Even Hunnicutt missed things (dare I say that here???) Smile

Doug_Kibbey · Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 7:25 pm Post subject: Re: M60A1E1 - M60A2

- JimWeb

The only place I have seen the term "M60E2" is on page 179 of Hunnicutt's "Patton" to describe the interim nomenclature of an M60A1 that has been modified to accept the M81 gun and Shillelagh system. There was no provision for relocating the driver in this vehicle of which I'm aware.

Is it possible you are referring to the MBT70?

No! The M60E2 is the M60 fitted with the ICFC turret.

Even Hunnicutt missed things (dare I say that here???)

Whoa! Looks like a giant Sheridan turret with a position for another crewmen. Did this work the same as the MBT70 turret with the same attendant "motion sickness" problems? You'd think something would have been gained from that experience that would have ruled it out on the MBT70....was this operated enough, with driver in that position, to reveal this problem? I can't understand how those issues would only have been manifested on one vehicle and not the other...

It would also seem, from that picture, that the driver would be blind in certain angles with the loaders' hatch open, and under any circumstances with cupola in the same plane with turret in some positons.

Neil_Baumgardner · Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:08 pm Post subject: Re: M60A1E1 - M60A2

- Doug_Kibbey

- JimWeb

The only place I have seen the term "M60E2" is on page 179 of Hunnicutt's "Patton" to describe the interim nomenclature of an M60A1 that has been modified to accept the M81 gun and Shillelagh system. There was no provision for relocating the driver in this vehicle of which I'm aware.

Is it possible you are referring to the MBT70?

No! The M60E2 is the M60 fitted with the ICFC turret.

Even Hunnicutt missed things (dare I say that here???)

Whoa! Looks like a giant Sheridan turret with a position for another crewmen. Did this work the same as the MBT70 turret with the same attendant "motion sickness" problems? You'd think something would have been gained from that experience that would have ruled it out on the MBT70....was this operated enough, with driver in that position, to reveal this problem? I can't understand how those issues would only have been manifested on one vehicle and not the other...

It would also seem, from that picture, that the driver would be blind in certain angles with the loaders' hatch open, and under any circumstances with cupola in the same plane with turret in some positons.

The turret was first tested on the T95 family.

Notice the 20mm cannon, just like on the MBT-70...

Neil

Doug_Kibbey · Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:30 pm Post subject: Re: M60A1E1 - M60A2

Neil,
Timeline-wise, when was the turret based driving station first actually used, and were there reports of the "disorientation" problems by driver's prior to the MBT-70?

Doug

mike_Duplessis · ***Power User*** Offline Joined: Jan 24, 2006 Posts: 236

As a pre-Chobham armor design the in-line turret probably wasn't half bad. What did the thing in was the awful gun/launcher and all that immature high technology. Basically their reach exceeded their grasp design-wise (a common complain about U.S. designs from back then). If only they had instead installed a 105mm (120?) gun and low profile cupola the design would probably still be in use today among 2nd eschelon units in Turkey & Israel.

Neil_Baumgardner · Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:57 pm Post subject: Re: M60A1E1 - M60A2

- Doug_Kibbey

Neil,
Timeline-wise, when was the turret based driving station first actually used, and were there reports of the "disorientation" problems by driver's prior to the MBT-70?

Doug

I'll have to check my copy of Hunnicutt's Abrams (just got it off Ebay!) when I get back from travel... I suspect even if it was encountered, they probably thought it could be overcome somehow...

Neil

JimWeb · Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:29 pm Post subject: Re: M60A1E1 - M60A2

The turret was first tested on the T95 family.

Notice the 20mm cannon, just like on the MBT-70.

Same concept - different turret

Doug_Kibbey · Posted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:39 pm Post subject: Re: M60A1E1 - M60A2

So, the M60A2 was inadequate and unreliable, but that was just insane from the get-go!
What in the name of all that is holy were they thinking?! Rolling Eyes

OK...the ladders were a nice touch...

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big

Com-Central.net

Select Language

Login

±Recent Visitors

±User Info-big

`±`Recent Visitors

`±`User Info-big