Com-Central.net

bsmart

- Joe_D

Question for Neil,
By any chance did you notice what the serial number was of the M60A2? Love the interior shots. Thanks for posting them.

Joe D

I noticed them. Problem is I forgot to right them down Sad

The number was very clear on the left front tow lug. I'll have to call up there and see if the staff has them handy or get them next time I'm up there.

Doug_Kibbey

- mike_Duplessis

Y'know, iIve got the Hunnicutt books, and i've seen all the pictures but I still can't for the life of me figure out what's going on with that M60A2 gun/missile breech. It looks more like an end pipe from some sewage treatment plant!

Mike, I know you're half kidding....

Complicated for sure, what with the "interrupted screw" mechanism, electric motor, and loading tray that rotates into postion when the whole thing "swings to the left". (not to mention the hose & manual handle)
I've got a pic of the breech without all this stuff installed side by side with one that is and it makes it somewhat easier to "put it all together"...lemme' see if I can find it here at work....if not, I'll put it up later.

Frankly, I detested the whole M81 gun mechanism and would have preferred a short-barrel 105mm....we might even still see some of both vehicles to mount the M81 in service today had that been done.

Joe_D

Doug,
That's what happens when you take a 6 inch Naval gun and adapt it for a tank. I worked with an NCO who served on M60A2's in Germany and Hood and told me of all the nightmares. If I wanted to get a rise out of him I would call an A2 a waste of money or pile of S---, then he'd jump all over me and tell me how HIS tank worked fine and it was the "Army's inability to recruit and train quality soldiers in the 70's" that really killed it. "How could you expect a dope smoking moron with no brains to fix something as complicated as an M60A2". You know, I believe the man had a point. I kinda regret I came in after they were retired. I would've loved to do a little time on them just to get my own perspective of what they were all about.

Joe D

Doug_Kibbey

- Joe_D

Doug,
That's what happens when you take a 6 inch Naval gun and adapt it for a tank. I worked with an NCO who served on M60A2's in Germany and Hood and told me of all the nightmares. If I wanted to get a rise out of him I would call an A2 a waste of money or pile of S---, then he'd jump all over me and tell me how HIS tank worked fine and it was the "Army's inability to recruit and train quality soldiers in the 70's" that really killed it. "How could you expect a dope smoking moron with no brains to fix something as complicated as an M60A2". You know, I believe the man had a point. I kinda regret I came in after they were retired. I would've loved to do a little time on them just to get my own perspective of what they were all about.

Joe D

Joe,
Your NCO is being more than a little sanguin about the vehicle, and cynical about the troops. When three crews and a similar number of civilian defense contractor reps & retired military as automotive and turret mechanics at the Armor Board can rarely get (and never keep) 3 of 3 producion vehicles on line at once, blame has to extend beyond a few bad apples. These weren't prototypes, either...this was the Initial Production Test (itself something of a joke, because virtually all the vehicles were already built) so the product was essentially "finished". The fix was in.
Furthermore, in two years at the Board, with time on some 8-10 different test projects, this was easily the highest profile, highest priority, most particular regarding crew selection, and highest level of "preparation" of any of them. (Project members all took a 3 week IPT training/operation course at the Armor School using their vehicle, which itself wasn't all that reliable).
I'm not one of those who consider it a POS...I'm pretty much on record as characterizing it as being underengineered (read: cheap) gap-bridging vehicle using less-than-mature technology and a weapon with an already checkered history to take over the role that the MBT70 would have occupied (with similar unsatisfactory results) until the gub'mint was ready to get serious about designing/building/paying for, a new state-of-the-art tank.

I don't think we'd have gotten the M1 Abrams we got, when we got it, without the collective experience (good and bad) of the M551, M60A2 and MBT70 programs.

Of those, we still use the basic laser rangefinder that was pioneered on two of those vehicles, and was one of the other Board projects I was privileged to serve on, so it wasn't a total loss.

Still wish they'd used another, more conventional gun though.... Wink

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