Search results

I have a RMK Model 14 and Model 16 Special #1 Fighter and they are like night and day. The 14 has a lot of heft and "chopping" potential, which the 16 Spec Fight (really the Model 16 Diver's Knife but with a full tang handguard). It is much less suitable for a chopping action, but much...

A5's as far as I know are all upgunned to the 105mm. I think quite a few went to NG units. An upgunned M48 could hold it's own against it's presumptive enemy through most of the '70's.

These were still "gassers", but with the redesigned heatshields. The 90mm was a good, old-fashioned, percussion fired rifle that was a joy to shoot. I trained on the M48A2C, which was the same vehicle, but with the excellent M17 Coincidence Rangefinder that would find it's way onto the M60...

How about the specialty gun?

I served on all those except the Abrams and they were solid vehicles for the time. The MGM-51/M551/M60A2 chain of debacles paved the way to the Abrams by demonstrating that you can't build a multi-million dollar tank for a few hundred thousand dollars, you have to go all in & plan to keep it in...

I got one of those for the CC advantages. Like a Colt GO model or M1991, but lighter alloy.

Automotively it was a hoot! It stumbled in jungle environments due to cooling systems getting fouled with vegetation (the Australian field trials of the M551 found the same). I was on the Hughes LRF test project and liked it, found it reliable. I don't think it was necessarily superior to the...

TOF to 1500 meters was ~8-10 seconds, 2,000 meters, 10-12...3,000 meters, ~14 seconds. You don't have to have practiced in tank-to-tank combat to realize how stupid that is. Tank round regularly traverse the battlefield in 1-2 seconds. AND, you can begin reloading as soon as the recoil is over...

Yep, if the missile loses signal, it is "programmed" to ground itself. This is why you couldn't pull back among leafy trees or other concealment if there was any chance of the beam being interrupted by a waving leaf. Nor could you move, nor could you reload. Time of flight to 3,000 meters was...

Countermeasures against Shillelagh were only slightly worse than what might normally occur on the battlefield, but it was an issue. Fog and weather: Post-Vietnam I was at the Armor Board and one project was an upgraded VSS-1 Xenon searchlight. We did all the work, at night obviously, at...

What you also didn't know (and many people are loathe to hear) was the extent to which you were put at much higher than normal risk (for an armored vehicle) and you were never meant to know. There were calculations made for the probabilities of "catastrophic failures" of the main gun. Amazingly...

Well, you wouldn't have much, if any, VN-issued ammo. I was with 2/11th Cav when they finally stood down and by that time (71-72) main gun ammo was in short supply. Think about it, Vietnamization in full swing and we were trying to ship stuff the ARVN would be able to use. The M551 was not among...

Official Army figures that appear in reports until the late 1950's cited a first round hit probability at 2K of .27-.38. The practical range with the tech of the 50's-60's for a first round hit was 1,500 meters. Entirely practical for a European war in the projected theater, but not good enough...

Well, we didn't have HEAT in VN, it was all about HE and Can there. The 152 round comes with a neoprene "rubber" around the case to mitigate moisture being absorbed. This only comes off when loading the round. The issue of Project Management for Sheridan/Shillelagh (the two programs were...

"Fudging". Yep. Background: the XM409 HEAT round (the principle anti-armor round at sub-missile ranges) had a nasty reputation, both for premature detonations and of course like all conventional rounds, bad outcomes when smouldering bits of combustible case remained in the gun tube to detonate...

Glad to know there are those who appreciate it. Some years ago I came into possession of digital copies of many archival documents (that have long since been de-classified). Much of it never intended to see the light of day, it lays out the history of tank development here most especially since...

I can't speak to the anti-armor community, not being sure what that is but the two documents in the Armor community that drove the armament decisions of the '60's were ARCOVE & "Mobility, Firepower & Protection", 1958-59. F&F does not occur once in that or any documents that recently followed...

There really wasn't an issue with the "gun" specifically...it was that existing FCS could not cope well with ranges of 2K and above. Entirely reasonable ranges for European combat, but our hit rate with 105's was not great beyond 1,500 meters (The Army's own figures for first round hit...

Their legacy lives on. Thanks to British and German defense planners, they each designed the major weapon systems on our main battle tanks from the L7 105mm (M68 is U.S. service) and ultimately the Rheinmetall 120mm smoothbore. We have not designed a main gun adopted by our front-line Armor...

;)