Jump to content


Photo

M60A2 K Turret


  • Please log in to reply
20 replies to this topic

#1 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,924 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted 18 October 2017 - 2308 PM

Just reading about the H/V 152mm gun in the K turret, apparently 1 built but it died due to funding and better 105mm performance. Any further details? I did come across this, which appears to be the prototype D turret.

https://www.pinteres...92647647562096/



#2 Mr King

Mr King

    Major Washout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,249 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of corn syrup and fake breasts
  • Interests:Odds and Ends

Posted 19 October 2017 - 0151 AM

Hmmmm never thought I would see afv related stuff on Pinterest 



#3 Gavin-Phillips

Gavin-Phillips

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,336 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England, UK

Posted 19 October 2017 - 1139 AM

Hmmmm never thought I would see afv related stuff on Pinterest 

 

I echo your thoughts there exactly.  Seems quite different from the production version and yet I find it strange that it hasn't been mentioned on this site before (unless I missed it which is always possible) since when a question concerning the M60A2/M551/MBT70/Shilleagh missile system crops up; there is always a considerable level of interest.



#4 Dark_Falcon

Dark_Falcon

    The Stryker's Friend

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,590 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicagoland

Posted 19 October 2017 - 1445 PM

Sorry to go OT, but given the M60 focus of this thread this article fits decently:

 

 

Leonardo pitches M60 tank upgrade in Bahrain

 

p1711738.jpg

 

Leonardo unveiled a new M60 main battle tank (MBT) upgrade aimed at the Middle-East market during the BIDEC defence show in Bahrain from 16 to 18 October.

 

Leonardo Defence Systems and Leonardo Land & Naval Defence Electronics are proposing a modular upgrade solution covering all aspects of the tank, including its survivability, mobility, and lethality.

 

The upgrade involves replacing the M60’s 105 mm gun with the latest version of the company’s 120/45 mm ordnance, which is fitted to the Centauro II tank destroyer that has been developed for the Italian Army. The new gun is 500 kg lighter than the original, but has a comparable recoil thanks partly to its ‘pepper pot’ muzzle brake.

 

Further weight will be saved by replacing the M60’s cupola and its .50 calibre machine gun with a flat ballistic commander’s hatch that has periscopes providing 360° coverage and a Hitrole Light remotely operated weapon station armed with a 12.7 mm machine gun or 40 mm automatic grenade launcher.

 

The upgrade also includes the latest generation of the TURMS fire control system and a day/night vision sensor for the driver.

 

Leonardo is offering four different ballistic packages to counter kinetic threats and a slat armour solution against shaped charge warheads.

 

These include STANAG Level 6 protection across the frontal arc and along the tank’s sides up to the third road wheel. An all-round slat solution would provide protection against PG-7 anti-tank rockets with a 60% neutralisation probability. An automatic fire and explosion sensing and suppression system is also proposed.

 

Overall this seems a more through upgrade than that proposed by Raytheon.



#5 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,293 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 19 October 2017 - 1813 PM

 

Hmmmm never thought I would see afv related stuff on Pinterest 

 

I echo your thoughts there exactly.  Seems quite different from the production version and yet I find it strange that it hasn't been mentioned on this site before (unless I missed it which is always possible) since when a question concerning the M60A2/M551/MBT70/Shilleagh missile system crops up; there is always a considerable level of interest.

 

It's been mentioned in an off hand sort of way.  Hunnicut mentions them in his book and then others here have quoted him.  But since they were all pretty much dead end projects they didn't get a lot of play on this site.



#6 DogDodger

DogDodger

    Cornre durg dealing ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,376 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WV, USA
  • Interests:tanks, driving, hockey

Posted 19 October 2017 - 2015 PM

Hmmmm never thought I would see afv related stuff on Pinterest

I'm not a member, but you'd be surprised; my gf has a tank board she fills with pins for me to look at.

#7 Mr King

Mr King

    Major Washout

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,249 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Land of corn syrup and fake breasts
  • Interests:Odds and Ends

Posted 19 October 2017 - 2131 PM

 

Hmmmm never thought I would see afv related stuff on Pinterest

I'm not a member, but you'd be surprised; my gf has a tank board she fills with pins for me to look at.

 

 

That is pretty cool. 



#8 Walter_Sobchak

Walter_Sobchak

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 602 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Grand Rapids MI
  • Interests:Civilian tank and afv enthusiast. Collects 1/72 scale replicas although terrible at building them. Particular interest in post war US tank engines.

Posted 20 October 2017 - 1142 AM

Just reading about the H/V 152mm gun in the K turret, apparently 1 built but it died due to funding and better 105mm performance. Any further details? I did come across this, which appears to be the prototype D turret.

https://www.pinteres...92647647562096/

 

I took that photo two years ago in Armada MI.  Seems someone stole it for the pintrest page.  I guess I should start watermarking stuff.



#9 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,293 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 20 October 2017 - 1747 PM

 

Just reading about the H/V 152mm gun in the K turret, apparently 1 built but it died due to funding and better 105mm performance. Any further details? I did come across this, which appears to be the prototype D turret.

https://www.pinteres...92647647562096/

 

I took that photo two years ago in Armada MI.  Seems someone stole it for the pintrest page.  I guess I should start watermarking stuff.

 

I don't know if that would help.  You can find Scott Cunningham's pictures all over the internet and they're watermarked.



#10 Colin

Colin

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,924 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Vancouver, Canada
  • Interests:tanks, old and new AFV's, Landrovers, diving, hovercrafts

Posted 22 October 2017 - 1945 PM

So why with all the issues did the US persist with combustible cases? The 152mm case is quite short and not exactly a problem to deal with after the fact. I also wonder if by adding another inch or so of case, they could have used a slower powder to reduce the felt recoil?



#11 Harold Jones

Harold Jones

    Shaken but not deterred...

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 8,275 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Armor, History, Fishing and Beer

Posted 23 October 2017 - 1001 AM

Metal cases add a lot of weight, and for whatever reason separate loading rounds never really caught on for tank main guns in the US.


Edited by Harold Jones, 23 October 2017 - 1008 AM.


#12 Scott Cunningham

Scott Cunningham

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,341 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ft Leavenworth KS
  • Interests:Member, Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

Posted 19 November 2017 - 1007 AM

The 152 was never intended as a HV gun from what I remember. It was just too much gun for a HV option (which would have required 5x the propellant that the normal HEAT round took, and a gigantic breach that probably would not fit in that turret). Thats the main reason they incorporated the troublesome missile into the system, to create a long range tank killing capability, alongside the impressive HE/HEAT capability of a 6" gun.



#13 Ken Estes

Ken Estes

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 14,048 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle
  • Interests:USMC Tanker, Historian

Posted 19 November 2017 - 1246 PM

Didn't Jim Warford make a posting a year or two ago about a briefing on an APDS round for the 152mm intended for use in MBT70/M803?



#14 CaptLuke

CaptLuke

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,107 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco, CA, USA

Posted 19 November 2017 - 1504 PM

The 152 was never intended as a HV gun from what I remember. It was just too much gun for a HV option (which would have required 5x the propellant that the normal HEAT round took, and a gigantic breach that probably would not fit in that turret). Thats the main reason they incorporated the troublesome missile into the system, to create a long range tank killing capability, alongside the impressive HE/HEAT capability of a 6" gun.

 

The original design thinking never envisioned a kinetic energy round; they were actually trying to simplify down to one HEAT/FRAG round that would serve as an all purpose round.

 

Someone else found a fascinating design study that led to the 152mm solution, called A New Tank Main Armament System.  The original thinking was that a 140mm medium velocity gun (35lb/15.9kg projectile to 2400fps/731mps) would allow superior anti-armor performance to the 105mm high velocity solution with a much smaller gun.

 

The 140mm solution was expanded to 152mm both to allow for a dual purpose HEAT/FRAG round and to allow for future missile developments, which were planned for 152mm.  This changed the planned solution to 40lbs/18.1kg at 2260fps/689mps.

 

Part of the thinking was that a large caliber HEAT round was just a better armor defeating solution and some it appears to be the desire to reduce the size of the tanks by using a lighter, more compact gun.  Original plans for the light tank (that became the Sheridan) were for an 11.3 tonne vehicle which was to be backed up by a 22.7 tonne MBT.



#15 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,293 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 19 November 2017 - 1727 PM

Didn't Jim Warford make a posting a year or two ago about a briefing on an APDS round for the 152mm intended for use in MBT70/M803?

Whether or not he did, the penetrator for the 105mm M735 came directly from the APFSDS XM578 of the XM150E5 152mm gun launcher system, of the MBT70 system.  The Germans wanted a KE round so the Americans dusted off a mid 1950s design for a 120mm gun, tweaked it and scaled up the sabot portion to fit the 152mm.  When the MBT70 agreement fell through the now redesigned penetrator was incorporated into the 105mm M735.  What was old was new again.


Edited by DKTanker, 19 November 2017 - 1733 PM.


#16 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,095 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 19 November 2017 - 1823 PM

[OT]  Welcome back, Scott! :) [/OT]

----

Was HEP considered, or would HE have had that property?


Edited by shep854, 19 November 2017 - 1825 PM.


#17 DKTanker

DKTanker

    1strdhit

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 23,293 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Texas

Posted 19 November 2017 - 1910 PM

[OT]  Welcome back, Scott! :) [/OT]
----
Was HEP considered, or would HE have had that property?

There was no HE or HEP round for the M81 and XM150, the M409 HEAT-MP (HEAT multi-purpose) served dual roles.  The M81 could fire the following:  Shillelagh missile, M409 HEAT-MP, M625 Cannister, M617 Beehive (flechette) and of course a Target Practice round, M411.  The long barrel revision of the 152mm, the XM150 could fire all of those rounds and the aforementioned XM578 APFSDS-T.*

 

*R.P. Hunnicutt

Abrams

A History of the American Main Battle Tank

Vol II


Edited by DKTanker, 19 November 2017 - 1911 PM.


#18 Jim Warford

Jim Warford

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,881 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 November 2017 - 2252 PM

Didn't Jim Warford make a posting a year or two ago about a briefing on an APDS round for the 152mm intended for use in MBT70/M803?


Yes I did...in fact, the penetrator from that 152mm APFSDS round was handed around the room during a class I attended at Fort Knox. The 152mm gun/launcher of the MBT-70/KPZ-70 was intended from the beginning to fire an APFSDS round.

#19 shep854

shep854

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,095 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham AL, USA
  • Interests:Military History, Aviation

Posted 20 November 2017 - 0847 AM

 

[OT]  Welcome back, Scott! :) [/OT]
----
Was HEP considered, or would HE have had that property?

There was no HE or HEP round for the M81 and XM150, the M409 HEAT-MP (HEAT multi-purpose) served dual roles.  The M81 could fire the following:  Shillelagh missile, M409 HEAT-MP, M625 Cannister, M617 Beehive (flechette) and of course a Target Practice round, M411.  The long barrel revision of the 152mm, the XM150 could fire all of those rounds and the aforementioned XM578 APFSDS-T.*

 

*R.P. Hunnicutt

Abrams

A History of the American Main Battle Tank

Vol II

 

Thanks; I wondered if it had even been considered since a 152 HEP shell could produce an epic HE plate against at target, as well as a respectable general HE burst.



#20 Dark_Falcon

Dark_Falcon

    The Stryker's Friend

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,590 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Chicagoland

Posted 20 November 2017 - 1457 PM

 

Didn't Jim Warford make a posting a year or two ago about a briefing on an APDS round for the 152mm intended for use in MBT70/M803?


Yes I did...in fact, the penetrator from that 152mm APFSDS round was handed around the room during a class I attended at Fort Knox. The 152mm gun/launcher of the MBT-70/KPZ-70 was intended from the beginning to fire an APFSDS round.

 

 

Thank you.  I'm glad my memory worked correctly.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users