Com-Central.net

....For all you 'OLD' guys



More to follow...

Don

Awesome!

Here are some more









No clue on the last two, anyone care to enlighten a 'modern tanker' as to what these are?

Don

Don:

All 4 pictures in your last set are M60A1 Dozer tanks . . . the third one is a dozer tank with the blade removed. Picture 4 is (most likely) the rear-end of a dozer tank, with the hydraulic lines coming out. Honestly, I don't remember them coming out of the left access plate, but there they appear to be.

I like your picture in the original post: "Here's our latest and greatest, being off-loaded into a mud-hole!"

Is that a main gun shoot-through hole in the range tower???






Mark

The question on this photo is based on who you ask.....

Is the M88 pulling the tank down the hill??

Or as the tank crew insists,..... The tank is pulling the M88 up the hill...



The true answer is in 'the track'.

Don

Here is a different view of the Plow tank rear.



Thanks 'Bug'!

Don

Yeah,

And four years later in '79 that same Division had a catastrophic failure when a valve block assembly blew against the breech housing, causing it to fall and bust the TC's leg. This among other problems in 3AD helped speed the retirement of the M60A2 with all being turned in by mid 1980.

That third picture of the Dozer tank sans blade is how most looked when I was in Germany. That last one they didn't install the split armored cover for the hydraulic lines coming from the pump attached to the transmission PTO.

Oh BTW,

From what I can see some driver managed to throw track to the inside and the 88 crew are dragging her to level ground so it can be put back on. 2nd ACR crew with their Berets. At least it ain't raining and muddy.

Nice collection Don,
Thanks for sharing

That's the standard rear fittings for a blade tank.

"Is the M88 pulling the tank down the hill??"

Well, the right track of the M60 has started to come off and the those on foot are heading down hill so the M88 is most likely pulling the M60.

- Dontos

....For all you 'OLD' guys



More to follow...

Don

Interesting, that is not the way the conventional rounds were packaged in the early '70's, somebody must have learned something from bad experiences.

Caption should read "Shillelagh", BTW. And they're splitting hairs with that "first MBT to fire both...", etc., etc. The not-a-tank M551 certainly did it, and the MBT-70 protos did as well, among some other test vehicles.

Not splitting hairs, but the 'truth' is in the vehicle classification....

"...The first MAIN BATTLE TANK..." The M551 was classified a light Airborne tank (or something like that,...and not an MBT.

I assume the Prototypes or Experimental tanks were excluded since they were not fielded, production MBT's.

Thats a typical caption from some sorts of Public Information Office.

"Cut the 'REMF' a break"

Geeez
Don

Ergo, the "not-a-tank"nomenclature...I''d never call an M551 an MBT. In fact, this weapon on a 17 ton vehicle is considerably more of an experience that it is on an ""MBT". Been there, done both.

M60A2 = "Yawn"
M551 = "Jaysus!"

What is the correct terminology called for the "light" mounted on the mantlet? Did it have a number assigned to it and why was it only on certain tanks?

- JeffStringer

What is the correct terminology called for the "light" mounted on the mantlet? Did it have a number assigned to it and why was it only on certain tanks?

The first one pictured is an AN-VSS-1 2.2kW searchlight (white and "pink" light capability). This would be mounted on the left (loader's) side on an M60A2 when so equipped, rather than on top (where it would interfere with the missile receiver/transmitter box).



The second one looks to be (under the all-enclosing cover) an AN-VSS-3, which would be the same as that mounted on the later Sheridans. Different geneations. Sometime after I ETS'd, night vision was on pretty much on everything and tanks dispensed with searchlights altogether. Joe can probably tell us when, exactly.



Some excellent pictures of components for the AN-VSS-1 can be viewed on this forum:

www.candlepowerforums....p?t=110558


Curiously, a couple of the pics show rear stowage racks for the searchlights, but I have my doubts that the light would clear the bustle rack without the "removable" modification I am familiar with (this one seems to have the "bolt-on" section for the bustle rack modification, but it's in place...maybe these guys didn't stow their searchlights). The AN-VSS-3 is smaller, so maybe it fits. Joe can probably advise about that as well.

Jeff,

AN/VSS-1, 1A,1B,1C,1D,and 1E along with AN/VSS-2 and 2A are all those big screen TV looking ones with handles on the side. All the differences are internal, mostly consisting of sub component changes that didn't effect performance.

Major difference between the 1's and 2's was the IR setting. VSS-1 used a true IR filter which was used in conjunction with the IR sights fitted, hence the systems were called "Active IR" and "Painted" the target in order for the sight to see it.

AN/VSS-2's used a "Pink" filter which allowed some visible light through. This was needed for the newer "Passive" sights which used light intensification instead IR. Search light increased performance of these passive sights, especially during nights with no ambient light (overcast, no moon).

AN/VSS-3 was on the M551, and was also of the "Pink" type. Much smaller and had the top angled.

AN/VSS-3A was first used on the M60A1/A3 passives. It was same in size to the 3 but was square on top.

You could actually see the pink in a searchlight when set to IR mode (2's and 3's). Common radio transmission at night was "Two-Three, you lights still on" when a TC didn't flip the switch all the way down after using white light .

Hope this long winded answer didn't bore you