±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: 629
Total: 629
Who Is Where:
 Visitors:
01: Community Forums
02: Community Forums
03: Home
04: Photo Gallery
05: Community Forums
06: Community Forums
07: Your Account
08: News Archive
09: Downloads
10: Photo Gallery
11: CPGlang
12: Statistics
13: Community Forums
14: News Archive
15: Community Forums
16: Community Forums
17: Community Forums
18: Community Forums
19: Search
20: Community Forums
21: Community Forums
22: Community Forums
23: Photo Gallery
24: Photo Gallery
25: Community Forums
26: Downloads
27: Community Forums
28: Community Forums
29: Community Forums
30: Home
31: Community Forums
32: Community Forums
33: Community Forums
34: Community Forums
35: Community Forums
36: Community Forums
37: Photo Gallery
38: Community Forums
39: Home
40: Community Forums
41: Photo Gallery
42: Community Forums
43: Community Forums
44: Community Forums
45: Community Forums
46: Home
47: Community Forums
48: Member Screenshots
49: Community Forums
50: CPGlang
51: Community Forums
52: Downloads
53: Community Forums
54: Photo Gallery
55: Photo Gallery
56: Photo Gallery
57: Community Forums
58: Community Forums
59: Community Forums
60: Community Forums
61: Home
62: Photo Gallery
63: Community Forums
64: Community Forums
65: Downloads
66: Photo Gallery
67: Community Forums
68: Community Forums
69: Downloads
70: Community Forums
71: Photo Gallery
72: Community Forums
73: Community Forums
74: Community Forums
75: Community Forums
76: Community Forums
77: Photo Gallery
78: Community Forums
79: Community Forums
80: Community Forums
81: Community Forums
82: Downloads
83: Community Forums
84: Community Forums
85: Community Forums
86: Community Forums
87: Community Forums
88: Community Forums
89: Community Forums
90: Community Forums
91: Community Forums
92: Community Forums
93: Photo Gallery
94: Community Forums
95: Community Forums
96: Member Screenshots
97: Photo Gallery
98: Community Forums
99: Community Forums
100: Community Forums
101: Photo Gallery
102: Downloads
103: Your Account
104: Statistics
105: Photo Gallery
106: Community Forums
107: Downloads
108: Community Forums
109: Community Forums
110: Community Forums
111: Community Forums
112: Community Forums
113: Community Forums
114: Photo Gallery
115: Community Forums
116: Home
117: Community Forums
118: Community Forums
119: Community Forums
120: Community Forums
121: Home
122: Community Forums
123: Home
124: Community Forums
125: Community Forums
126: Community Forums
127: Community Forums
128: Community Forums
129: Community Forums
130: Community Forums
131: Community Forums
132: Downloads
133: Community Forums
134: Community Forums
135: Downloads
136: Your Account
137: Community Forums
138: Community Forums
139: Member Screenshots
140: Photo Gallery
141: Community Forums
142: Home
143: Community Forums
144: Home
145: Photo Gallery
146: CPGlang
147: Community Forums
148: Community Forums
149: Home
150: Community Forums
151: Community Forums
152: Downloads
153: Photo Gallery
154: Community Forums
155: Downloads
156: Community Forums
157: Community Forums
158: Community Forums
159: Community Forums
160: Community Forums
161: Photo Gallery
162: Community Forums
163: Your Account
164: Community Forums
165: Photo Gallery
166: Community Forums
167: Member Screenshots
168: Community Forums
169: Photo Gallery
170: Home
171: Downloads
172: Community Forums
173: Community Forums
174: Community Forums
175: Community Forums
176: Photo Gallery
177: Community Forums
178: Photo Gallery
179: Home
180: Community Forums
181: News
182: Community Forums
183: Community Forums
184: Community Forums
185: Downloads
186: Statistics
187: Photo Gallery
188: Community Forums
189: Downloads
190: Community Forums
191: Downloads
192: Community Forums
193: Community Forums
194: Community Forums
195: Photo Gallery
196: Community Forums
197: Community Forums
198: Community Forums
199: Community Forums
200: Community Forums
201: Photo Gallery
202: Home
203: Downloads
204: Community Forums
205: Community Forums
206: Home
207: Photo Gallery
208: Photo Gallery
209: Community Forums
210: Statistics
211: Photo Gallery
212: Community Forums
213: Community Forums
214: Community Forums
215: Your Account
216: Community Forums
217: Photo Gallery
218: Photo Gallery
219: Community Forums
220: Community Forums
221: Community Forums
222: Community Forums
223: Home
224: Community Forums
225: Community Forums
226: Photo Gallery
227: Member Screenshots
228: Downloads
229: Community Forums
230: Community Forums
231: Community Forums
232: Community Forums
233: Community Forums
234: Community Forums
235: Community Forums
236: Your Account
237: Community Forums
238: CPGlang
239: Photo Gallery
240: Community Forums
241: Photo Gallery
242: Community Forums
243: Community Forums
244: Community Forums
245: Community Forums
246: Community Forums
247: Home
248: Community Forums
249: Downloads
250: Treasury
251: Community Forums
252: Member Screenshots
253: Photo Gallery
254: Photo Gallery
255: Community Forums
256: Community Forums
257: Community Forums
258: Community Forums
259: Community Forums
260: Statistics
261: Community Forums
262: Community Forums
263: Community Forums
264: Photo Gallery
265: Downloads
266: Statistics
267: Home
268: Community Forums
269: Community Forums
270: Photo Gallery
271: Community Forums
272: Home
273: Community Forums
274: CPGlang
275: Community Forums
276: Community Forums
277: Community Forums
278: CPGlang
279: Community Forums
280: Home
281: Downloads
282: Community Forums
283: News
284: Community Forums
285: Community Forums
286: Community Forums
287: Community Forums
288: Community Forums
289: Photo Gallery
290: Community Forums
291: Community Forums
292: Community Forums
293: Community Forums
294: Community Forums
295: Community Forums
296: Community Forums
297: Community Forums
298: Community Forums
299: Community Forums
300: Community Forums
301: Community Forums
302: Photo Gallery
303: Home
304: Community Forums
305: Community Forums
306: Downloads
307: Photo Gallery
308: Community Forums
309: Community Forums
310: Community Forums
311: CPGlang
312: Community Forums
313: Community Forums
314: Community Forums
315: Community Forums
316: Downloads
317: Photo Gallery
318: Statistics
319: Photo Gallery
320: Community Forums
321: CPGlang
322: Community Forums
323: Community Forums
324: Photo Gallery
325: Photo Gallery
326: Home
327: Community Forums
328: Community Forums
329: Community Forums
330: Downloads
331: Photo Gallery
332: Community Forums
333: Community Forums
334: Community Forums
335: Community Forums
336: Community Forums
337: Community Forums
338: Photo Gallery
339: Your Account
340: News
341: Community Forums
342: Photo Gallery
343: Community Forums
344: Home
345: Downloads
346: Home
347: LinkToUs
348: Community Forums
349: Community Forums
350: Community Forums
351: Community Forums
352: Community Forums
353: Community Forums
354: Statistics
355: Community Forums
356: Community Forums
357: Community Forums
358: Community Forums
359: Community Forums
360: Community Forums
361: Community Forums
362: Member Screenshots
363: Community Forums
364: Statistics
365: Community Forums
366: Home
367: Community Forums
368: Search
369: Community Forums
370: Community Forums
371: Photo Gallery
372: Community Forums
373: Photo Gallery
374: Photo Gallery
375: Community Forums
376: Community Forums
377: Community Forums
378: Community Forums
379: Community Forums
380: Community Forums
381: Community Forums
382: Community Forums
383: Photo Gallery
384: Downloads
385: Community Forums
386: Community Forums
387: Community Forums
388: Community Forums
389: Community Forums
390: CPGlang
391: Community Forums
392: Community Forums
393: Community Forums
394: Community Forums
395: Community Forums
396: Community Forums
397: News Archive
398: Member Screenshots
399: Community Forums
400: Community Forums
401: Downloads
402: Community Forums
403: Community Forums
404: Photo Gallery
405: Home
406: Community Forums
407: Community Forums
408: Community Forums
409: Community Forums
410: Community Forums
411: Community Forums
412: Community Forums
413: Photo Gallery
414: Community Forums
415: Community Forums
416: Community Forums
417: Community Forums
418: Home
419: Home
420: Community Forums
421: Member Screenshots
422: Community Forums
423: Community Forums
424: Community Forums
425: Community Forums
426: Community Forums
427: Community Forums
428: Community Forums
429: Photo Gallery
430: Community Forums
431: Community Forums
432: Community Forums
433: Community Forums
434: Community Forums
435: Community Forums
436: Photo Gallery
437: Downloads
438: Community Forums
439: Downloads
440: Photo Gallery
441: Community Forums
442: Home
443: Community Forums
444: Community Forums
445: Home
446: CPGlang
447: CPGlang
448: Photo Gallery
449: Community Forums
450: Photo Gallery
451: Member Screenshots
452: Photo Gallery
453: Photo Gallery
454: Your Account
455: News
456: Home
457: Community Forums
458: Community Forums
459: Community Forums
460: Downloads
461: Community Forums
462: Community Forums
463: Photo Gallery
464: Community Forums
465: Community Forums
466: Community Forums
467: CPGlang
468: Community Forums
469: Community Forums
470: Community Forums
471: Statistics
472: News
473: Community Forums
474: Community Forums
475: Community Forums
476: Community Forums
477: Community Forums
478: Photo Gallery
479: Community Forums
480: Community Forums
481: Your Account
482: Community Forums
483: Community Forums
484: Community Forums
485: Community Forums
486: Community Forums
487: Community Forums
488: Community Forums
489: Community Forums
490: Community Forums
491: Community Forums
492: Community Forums
493: Downloads
494: Community Forums
495: Photo Gallery
496: Community Forums
497: Photo Gallery
498: Photo Gallery
499: Community Forums
500: Community Forums
501: Photo Gallery
502: Community Forums
503: Downloads
504: Community Forums
505: Photo Gallery
506: Community Forums
507: Your Account
508: CPGlang
509: Community Forums
510: Community Forums
511: Community Forums
512: Community Forums
513: Community Forums
514: Community Forums
515: Statistics
516: Community Forums
517: Downloads
518: Community Forums
519: Community Forums
520: Community Forums
521: Home
522: Photo Gallery
523: Community Forums
524: Community Forums
525: Community Forums
526: Community Forums
527: Downloads
528: Photo Gallery
529: Community Forums
530: Community Forums
531: Community Forums
532: Photo Gallery
533: Community Forums
534: Member Screenshots
535: Community Forums
536: Community Forums
537: Photo Gallery
538: Community Forums
539: Community Forums
540: Photo Gallery
541: Community Forums
542: Photo Gallery
543: Downloads
544: Community Forums
545: Community Forums
546: Photo Gallery
547: Photo Gallery
548: Community Forums
549: Community Forums
550: Photo Gallery
551: Community Forums
552: Community Forums
553: Community Forums
554: Member Screenshots
555: Photo Gallery
556: Downloads
557: Community Forums
558: Community Forums
559: Community Forums
560: Home
561: Downloads
562: Community Forums
563: Community Forums
564: Photo Gallery
565: Community Forums
566: Community Forums
567: Your Account
568: Community Forums
569: Community Forums
570: Community Forums
571: Community Forums
572: Photo Gallery
573: Photo Gallery
574: Community Forums
575: Community Forums
576: Community Forums
577: Photo Gallery
578: Community Forums
579: Community Forums
580: Community Forums
581: Community Forums
582: Community Forums
583: Photo Gallery
584: Community Forums
585: Photo Gallery
586: Photo Gallery
587: Home
588: Photo Gallery
589: Community Forums
590: Community Forums
591: Community Forums
592: Member Screenshots
593: Community Forums
594: Community Forums
595: Photo Gallery
596: Photo Gallery
597: Community Forums
598: Community Forums
599: Community Forums
600: Community Forums
601: Community Forums
602: Community Forums
603: Community Forums
604: Photo Gallery
605: Member Screenshots
606: Community Forums
607: Community Forums
608: Community Forums
609: Community Forums
610: Community Forums
611: Community Forums
612: Community Forums
613: Community Forums
614: Community Forums
615: Community Forums
616: Community Forums
617: Home
618: Community Forums
619: Photo Gallery
620: Photo Gallery
621: Community Forums
622: Community Forums
623: Community Forums
624: Community Forums
625: Community Forums
626: Home
627: Community Forums
628: Photo Gallery
629: Community Forums

Staff Online:

No staff members are online!
"Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldtop
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
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 12:57 pm
Post subject: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldtop

Mainly for Oldtop, but Roy and some others may shed some light:

I'm trying to get a handle on what it was that made top-loading air filters less satisfactory than side loaders apart from convenience/access, if anything. That is, were they less efficient or just less likely to receive attention? I've crewed vehicles (M48A2, M60A1, M60A2) with both systems, but only at Ft. Knox which isn't as dusty as some other locations that come to mind.

Also, I notice that some of the top loaders on M60A1's have a smooth-sided armored box on the outward side while others have a single horizontal "ridge" there, like on this one:
image2.sina.com.cn/jc/...093650.jpg

...my pics of the M60A1 side-skirt test vehicle, "Hotpants", has this ridge too. I don't recall any function associated with it.

Thanks!
D.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
C_Sherman
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 590

PostPosted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 2:56 pm
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldtop

Hi Doug, all,

The top loading air cleaners were made of steel, rather than aluminum as the originals were. I recall that our maintenance guys didn't like the side loaders because the mechanisms were easily damaged, hard to repair, and the filter elements were often screwed up by crews trying to jam them back in. The doors were tricky and the seals often leaked, which is a problem when they are sucking air in that close to the tracks! The doors were a problem from the beginning, and the horizontal rib your pic shows is a reinforcment to stiffen the door and keep from flexing. (Yup, that's a side loader in your pic.)

I remember fighting with both, and hated the side loaders. The filter element was a very tight fit, and had to be held at just the right angle. However, you had to stand beside the tank and hold the heavy element at roughly shoulder-height to do this, which made it double hard. We usually used two folks to do it, one on the ground and one on the tank (leaning over the side) to guide it into the slots. The top loaders were a piece of cake, and the element just dropped into it's cradle.

Sometime after the A1s began to be produced, fairly early in the run, they changed to the top loading 'armored' type. I remember hearing that this was originally done by the Israelis, and adopted by us. But there are/were some A1s with the old-style side-loaders. The RISE modifications were supposed to replace these, when they were done.

This is all from deep memory, so I await corrections from better memories!

C

_________________
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it
will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
-Herm Albright

Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc!
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: Tue Aug 15, 2006 3:42 pm
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldt

Thanks, Chuck...

Only now, I'm really confused! I based my phrasing on "Oldtops" comment in the other thread:

One indecater that this is an first production is "side loader " air filter housing which is the same as on the M48A3 upgrade, M60A1s picker up the "top loader" armored box type...and with which the vehicle was damned for its operation life.


...which I understood (perhaps incorrectly) to mean that the toploaders were the troublesome types.

As I didn't personally experience problems with either, I'm just trying to clarify in my mind which system was preferred, and why. Sounds like you're more a fan of the toploaders.

Cheers!
D.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
oldtop
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Mar 17, 2006
Posts: 70

PostPosted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 10:34 pm
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldt

The first problem with top loaders was they stood out and everything fired at the tank hit them, 10 micorms (I could put that much dirt in your eye and you wouldn't notice it)of dust would kill the 1790 diesel engine.
The side loaders were postive sealing (when the cover was closed it was sealed) . The top loaders lid had two legs (one on each side) that engaed two studs on each side of air filter cage, when the lid close it was desiged for the leg to force the element (cage) seal into the front of the aircleaner housing so that no unfiltered air could be drawn into the engine intake..or all air had to go through the filter element first. The filter elements were a group of bag shaped cloth or paper envelopes held in a welded steel cage with a rubber gasget on the open end.
Problem #1 Each manufacter placed the metal studs a little bit off from what the specs called for, so when you closed the lid the leg may or may not engae the two studs and complete seal.
Problem#2 It was possible for the crewmen to put the element in backwards and by standing on the lid get the bolt holes to line up enough to get the bolts in...results were raw unfiltered air in the engine.
Problem #3 The soution was to weld shims to the lid legs to make sure they made contacted with the studs on the element cage. To do this the instuction for testing the seal was to coat the element seal with art white lead oil paint close and bolt down the lid then unbolt it and open the lid and check to see if there was a complet impression from the seal on the end of the housing...."However" because each manufacter place the studs differantly if you had welded shims the seal could end up too tight and the gasget seal was crushed and no airtight seal..raw unfiltered air (again).
My solution was to glue plastic shim or ring cut from PVC pipe on the studs, that way the ring would crush before the seal did and I knew we had a good seal no matter what...ya it worked fine!
As for the crewmen you simply put alining makes on the filter elements and the housing and hopefully the dummys would get it right..maybe.
...sub-problem err lets call it 3A problem, on thr front of each filter housing was a elbow that conducted the filtered air to the engine intake, the problem was the 3/8" capscrews holding it to the filter housing would work lose (even with lock washers) and you had (again) raw unfiltered air getting into the engine. the solution was to go to 1/2 capscrews and a spring washer...well it worked for me.
sub-problem 3B...the cloth elements were which designed to be cleaned and reinstalled, these elements developed holes in them and the only way to detected them was to build a "ligt box" over which you placed the elements (in a dark room), as you found each hole you placed a drop of "Elmer's glue on it. This problem alone killed over 50% of the dead lined engines, the solution was to use paper "one time" uses filter element which were in such a short supply that they'er production never caught up with the needs....so tank units clean and patched the paper elements and reused them...raw air problem again!!!
Back to top
View user's profile
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 11:41 pm
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldt

Hi Folks!

Thanks Top for explaining your post. I guess that one is a case of the repairer's point of veiw. Surprised

I was like Doug(SORRY DOUG). While I didn't work directly with the M60s very much, I never heard any of the tankers I was around saying the top loaders were a problem. For the most part, all of them loved the top loading design. But then maybe it was a major case of they didn't know their last engine failure was caused by raw air intake.

That's two things I have learned today!
Sgt, Scouts Out! Smile

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.


Last edited by Roy_A_Lingle on Wed Aug 16, 2006 9:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Tue Aug 15, 2006 11:46 pm
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldt

- Roy_A_Lingle

I was like Dong. Smile


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

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 29, 2006
Posts: 2066
Location: Razorback Country
PostPosted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:19 am
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldtop

Hi everyone,
My experience was with top loaders only, which came in armored and aluminum. Aluminum was on some of the A1's we had in 1-63 Fort Riley. The only side loaders I had any dealings with was when the Kansas National Gaurd had straight 60's and would be on the the range. The crews hated them. They wanted the simplicity of the top loader. Never had a problem getting filters either, got new ones every Q-service. I remember having to check the seals on ours too with that paint Ole Top talks about. They all sealed fine, this was in Germany, Riley and Irwin. The filters where made by Donaldson (?) from what I remember. If there was a sealing problem it would've been very evident at Irwin. I think the biggest improvement was the VDSS system, which IIRC stood for Vehicle Dust Scavenge System. It got rid of the blower motors and could self clean the filters. We had that system at Irwin. Even had a warning light in the drivers compartment. I absolutely loved that system. As far as placing a filter in wrong, yes, it could be done but you had to be a rock with lips to not notice it was when you closed the lid. To me the top loader was the way to go, and for what it's worth, blowing a pack was not a common thing, even with all the miles we drove in Germany. I guess my comparisons are also skewed by my very negative experiences with the M1 system and it's very high sensitivity to dust.
I am still trying to figure how the side loaders were less of a target than the top loaders on the 60, Both are loacated in the same place and took up the same amount of space. At least the later model top loader was armored and not aluminum.

My perspective

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: Wed Aug 16, 2006 1:39 am
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldt

I am still trying to figure how the side loaders were less of a target than the top loaders on the 60, Both are loacated in the same place and took up the same amount of space. At least the later model top loader was armored and not aluminum.


I might be wrong about this, but I think Oldtop was not referring to "hostile fire" when referring to what "might be fired at them", but dirt, debris, dust and the like. I'm sure he'll correct me if I'm wrong 'bout 'dat.

Well, what's emerging here is at least a good explanation of why I was confused...it seems there are at least two bodies of opinion out there regarding air filters, and maybe some of that follows the perspective of crews vs. mechanics or something. For sure there's a basis of experience to support both views.

My own one was that there was no significant difference between the two types...each having it's own virtues and vices. But I've heard strong negative opinions expressed about the toploader before and didn't fully understand the reason for it. I'm not sure I do now, but at least there's something to go on.

I'd sure like to hear any other opinions from those with time on either or both types.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
C_Sherman
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 590

PostPosted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 3:29 am
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldt

Hi Doug, Roy, Oletop, everyone!

I'm guessing that which one you hated more depended on which one gave you the most problems.

I remember our maintenance guys being very firm about putting the air filters in right, so Oletop's comments probably cover the same concerns. I remember the effort that was required to get the lids closed on the top-loaders, and how careful we had to be to get them right.

One needed and welcome improvement on the M60A3s were restriction indicators on the intake elbows...as long as no one knocked them off. They were vacuum indicators, similar to those used on many commercial diesels, that told you it was time to change/clean your filters.

I do know that the maintenance guys didn't have much nice to say about the side loaders, especially the doors. Apparently, they were subject to warpage under some conditions, which broke the seals on the filters. Fixing the doors was quite challenging, and being aluminum they were virtually impossible to weld under field conditions. The latch handle was held shut by a steel bolt, tapped into the aluminum housing. Inevitably, some young, strapping, not-so-bright crewman would overtighten the bolt and strip the hole. At some point, there were no practical bolts available large enough to retap the hole again, and the entire housing had to be replaced (or the hole had to be welded up...cheaper and simpler, but not likely). Being in a Reserve unit in the early 80's,parts were slow coming, and a simple stupid repair like that could deadline a tank for months or more.

C

_________________
A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it
will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
-Herm Albright

Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc!
Back to top
View user's profile Photo Gallery
oldtop
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Mar 17, 2006
Posts: 70

PostPosted: Wed Aug 16, 2006 12:34 pm
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldtop

What was the compounded problem was due to dust ingestion (both filters and lose elbows) there was a shortage of engines (RISE mod) at the same time a batch of "bad" pistions got into the system so maint units were caught between a rock and a hard place as were rebuild centers, you would see engines with mixed parts (RISE and non-RISE mixed). Once the new air filtering system was in place on the production line most of the problems were ironed out.....but from 1975 to 80 maints was pure hell in the support units. As for this thing between the side loaders vs top loaders, just look at the hight deference, the Israeli IDF pointed out time after time the damage done to the housing in combat...why in the world would you desgne a vehicle with its air filtering system sitting out in the open on the fenders?????
Back to top
View user's profile
oldtop
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Mar 17, 2006
Posts: 70

PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 4:56 pm
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldtop

This story begins with the M48s. Like most med to heavy tanks they are limited by their range of operation, if one reads the manuals you'll the range of U.S. diesel powered tanks is around 300 miles. However this was not the story with the gasoline fueled models, M48s and A1s were lucky if they got 90 miles per fuel load. (the german Tiger 1 had a ture combat range of 70 to 80 plus miles) The Army tried fuel injected engines for a few more miles, I know there are pictures foating around of M48s with barrels of gas strapped to a rack on their ass to push for more range (made the hairs stand up on the back of my neck just to think about it)...So heres the rule of thumb I use in calulating the fuel needed to support a tracked vehicle in the field. For every hour of cross-country operation you lose 5% of your total road range on top of you normal fuel consumtion...or a addistional 50% of your total road range milage every 10 hours...or if you burn half your fuel in 10 hours cross contry move you'er out of the go go stuff. This was the wall every army in the world was up against..and still is. So what has this to do with airfilters you ask. Well when the U.S. went to the dieselized M60 they remove the "lil joe" (APU) and installed form -fitting fuel tanks in the engine compartment, one other thing had been removed, the aircleaners which has sat in the left and right front of the engine compartment (fuel injected M48s had been the first with airfilters moved in this manner ). Now we had a med tank with a 300 mile road range and better than 150 mile cross country range (the diesel powered M103 heavy tank could now get better than 100 miles per fuel load with twice the fuel tankage)...However we now had the airfilter housings sitting rightt out in the open for everybody to shoot at, it was like the designers had said "oh were should we put these things")
Back to top
View user's profile
oldtop
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Mar 17, 2006
Posts: 70

PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 5:06 pm
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldt

"I do know that the maintenance guys didn't have much nice to say about the side loaders, especially the doors. Apparently, they were subject to warpage under some conditions, which broke the seals on the filters. Fixing the doors was quite challenging, and being aluminum they were virtually impossible to weld under field conditions. The latch handle was held shut by a steel bolt, tapped into the aluminum housing. Inevitably, some young, strapping, not-so-bright crewman would overtighten the bolt and strip the hole. At some point, there were no practical bolts available large enough to retap the hole again, and the entire housing had to be replaced (or the hole had to be welded up...cheaper and simpler, but not likely). Being in a Reserve unit in the early 80's,parts were slow coming, and a simple stupid repair like that could deadline a tank for months or more."
I was lucky enough to have a LM-62 welding unit with a "mig" system so I could rework the housings, once the word got out that I was repairing the housings I had Army reserve and NG units bring them to my shop for repair. With gobs of money for the Marine Reserves as well as pro welders I had a first class welding and machine shop, I mean my reserve troops built ships and powerplants for a living so they did great work.
Back to top
View user's profile
Roy_A_Lingle
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 24, 2006
Posts: 1997
Location: El Paso & Ft Bliss, Texas
PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 5:14 pm
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldt

Hi Folks!

I always though that putting the air filters out on the fender was a compromise for some reason. Never realized it was to make room for larger fuel tanks.

One thing I have learned from this, which surpised me, was the fact that the side loading boxes where made out of aluminum. Shocked

Now that is a weight compromise and I guess the IDF proved that it wasn't worth it. If I understand it right, they were the ones who came up with the armored version?

I think this is a major example of everything that goes into a tank is a compromise with something else. Only combat proves if each compromise is a good or bad idea.

Thanks Top!
Sgt, Scouts Out! Smile

_________________
"You can never have too much reconnaissance."
General G.S. Patton Jr.
Back to top
View user's profile Send e-mail
Doug_Kibbey
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Jan 23, 2006
Posts: 4678
Location: The Great Satan
PostPosted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 5:51 pm
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldtop

- oldtop
What was the compounded problem was due to dust ingestion (both filters and lose elbows) there was a shortage of engines (RISE mod) at the same time a batch of "bad" pistions got into the system so maint units were caught between a rock and a hard place as were rebuild centers, you would see engines with mixed parts (RISE and non-RISE mixed). Once the new air filtering system was in place on the production line most of the problems were ironed out.....but from 1975 to 80 maints was pure hell in the support units.


This at least partially explains my lack of familiarity with this problem in spite of the fact that I crewed side loader and top loader vehicles. All my experience was prior to 1974, so RISE parts availability was not an issue. Furthermore, I ETS'd about 60 days after the October (Yom Kippur) war, so any lessons learned by the Israelis during that one (apart from vulnerability to TOW missiles and the shortcomings of committing tanks without infantry support) were too late in coming to reach me. I'd moved on to other things.

I was also probably a bit spoiled by serving my last ~2 years at the Armor Board, one of the most support-rich units in all of tank-dom.
Back to top
View user's profile Visit poster's website Photo Gallery
oldtop
Power User

Offline Offline
Joined: Mar 17, 2006
Posts: 70

PostPosted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 6:22 am
Post subject: Re: "Patton" air filters: top loaders v. side loaders...Oldtop

The Israelis got a way with "cheating" for years (sending tanks in with out grunt support) till Yom Kippur..after all, the enemy had always ran away before! Any 2nd Lt in any other army knew you don't do that!!!
Know one ever want to fes up to how bad the M60 engine shortage was in the Marines, I had M60s sitting for over a year on my maint line/bone yard deadlined due to the lack of engines. And I couldn't get the parts to rebuild.
Back to top
View user's profile
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