|
Outside Dawg posted:A bit more looking into it provided more information than I had read on this before. You are correct that 2D upgraded to Abrams upon deployment, and I was mistaken on that point. However for you to label the entire post as "entirely incorrect" is mistaken, as the Gulf War was indeed the last hurrah for the M60A1 tank in the US military. I did come across this; http://www.gulflink.osd.mil/histories/db/marines/usmcpersiangulfdoc3_016.html If you'll notice a few posts prior to yours I mentioned that the 1st, 3d, and 4th had M60A1 RISE Passive tanks (shamefully forgetting the reservists of 8th which Veins brought up) and indeed posted pictures of Gulf War M60s. I've never argued against the "last hurrah" point, though I should have edited that out of my post for clarity. quote:This seems to suggest that 4th BN, was also equipped with M-1's at the time. Marine Battalions, both Armored and Amphibious, are comprised of 3 "combat" Companies and 1 H&S Company. The M60A1 that I posted is likely part of 2D's Combat Engineer Battalion. Where are you getting your information from? Marine Tank Battalions had 4 companies equipped with main battle tanks, plus the H&S and a TOW company. By the time Desert Storm actually started, 2d was operating 5 companies (another from 4th), all with M1A1s according to the 2 Mar Div command chronology, a total of 76 Abrams. That seems like too many tanks, but the command chronology is almost certainly correct.
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 04:20 |
|
|
I kinda love the T-72, because it's the tank Wal-mart would have built if Wal-Mart wanted a MBT. quote:In the mid-sixties, the Soviets made a revolutionary new tank called the T-64. At the time the world's best tank, it had a slew of new technologies that would eventually become universal, including the first use of composite armor, and a smooth-bore gun. It replaced heavy tanks on the battlefield, and was given to elite Red Guards divisions. But it was too expensive to be produced in the numbers the Soviets wanted. This was a serious drawback: communist war plans against NATO called for overwhelming numbers of tanks. There was also the problem that the T-64 couldn't given to allies, or sold to other nations, as the western powers were sure to get ahold of one. So, the USSR ordered it's engineers to design a new tank: it was to have the same gun and rough capabilities as the T-64, but be 'decontented' - essentially, built to a price. It was also had to be easy to mass produce, and easy to maintain - the new tank was to replace the obsolete T-54/55 series. If the T-64 was the latest Mac device, this new tank was to be the stripped down version, sold at Wal-Mart at a third of the price. Dumb question regarding commie tanks: did China ever copy the T-72? Reading the Wikipedia article, I suspect some patriotic Chinese editor has carefully scrubbed any mention of copying from the articles about Chinese tanks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I kinda love the T-72, because it's the tank Wal-mart would have built if Wal-Mart wanted a MBT. I don't think the Chinese did much direct copying of any Soviet tanks after the split. They tried to build counters/competitors but I don't think they ripped off any designs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:Wait, global aviation is still Imperial and not Metric? Most aircraft are built with imperial fasteners and dimensions, as well. Some airlines mix units occasionally for local convinience. Sometimes, that doesn't work so well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
Rodrigo Diaz posted:If you'll notice a few posts prior to yours I mentioned that the 1st, 3d, and 4th had M60A1 RISE Passive tanks (shamefully forgetting the reservists of 8th which Veins brought up) and indeed posted pictures of Gulf War M60s. I've never argued against the "last hurrah" point, though I should have edited that out of my post for clarity. The Battalion structure was from the 70's - 80's while serving in 3rdAABn, of course this was at a time when we were seriously undermanned (Carter-Reagan years), First Tank Bn was right up the road from us and they were set up identically. I just overlooked factoring in the force build up that occurred during the intervening years, that would have increased the units back to full manpower.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
bewbies posted:I don't think the Chinese did much direct copying of any Soviet tanks after the split. They tried to build counters/competitors but I don't think they ripped off any designs. They're probably content enough at that point having copied everything else the Russians came up with then and there after.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
I believe the Chinese only managed to get their hands on a Soviet T-62 during a border clash (?) around the time of the split, from which a bunch of tanks sprung (Same for North Korea, but different reasons). By now they've probably gotten their hands on whatever T-72 versions they want, but they got more modern designs now anyways.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
Walmart would have saved space for a 300lb person. I couldn't even fit in the driver position at 5'11" 200lbs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
I like the arrows. This is UP, this is FORWARD.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
Caconym posted:I like the arrows. This is UP, this is FORWARD.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 00:01
|
|
Caconym posted:I like the arrows. This is UP, this is FORWARD. You're probably joking but those are identification marks. The forward facing arrow indicates the company(others within the battalion would be pointing a different direction), the dots indicate the platoon. The upward facing arrow probably identifies which tank BN(and thus, which division). Mortabis posted:Since 14 tanks is a company where are the extra pair of tanks going? Battalion headquarters I guess? BN CO and his wingman.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 05:51
|
|
|
poo poo, all this M60 chat made me think of the original question, so maybe if the M1's were ahead of Iraqi T72's, and they had no T80's, would the M60 step in and be an even match with the T72's? I know the M60 is older, but would the cream of the crop T72's with upgraded sensors and armor be comparable to the similarly modified M60? I'm no tank expert as I illustrated earlier, and I'm doubly unfamiliar with the M60. Also a secondary question, how did the M60 fare in Desert Storm? How many did we lose and how many kills were scored with it? I remember at the time I thought the combat engineer versions were badass to my 10 year old self, but for whatever reason in all the years I've been into military history I really neglected on studying tanks in any kind of depth.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 08:27
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:poo poo, all this M60 chat made me think of the original question, so maybe if the M1's were ahead of Iraqi T72's, and they had no T80's, would the M60 step in and be an even match with the T72's? I know the M60 is older, but would the cream of the crop T-72's with upgraded sensors and armor be comparable to the similarly modified M60? I'm no tank expert as I illustrated earlier, and I'm doubly unfamiliar with the M60. Broadly speaking, the T-72 and T-80 platforms aren't very different; they share the same basic design philosophy that came out of Soviet efforts of the 1950s and 60s to develop a 'true' Main Battle Tank (rather than a specialized light, medium, or heavy one), and have a number of important systems in common. For the US the switch from the M60 to the M1 was a big step forward, but it's not like there was this definitive sea-change where all of a sudden those tanks were a cut above everything else. The M60A3 and baseline M1 had the same gun and (parts of?) the fire control system, so acquiring and defeating a target happened the same way in both vehicles. It was the protection level and added mobility that set the initial M1 apart, and of course a decade of upgrades only broadened the gap. But in many ways a tank is a tank is a tank, and the importance of whether or not one and the other 'matched' pales in comparison to other factors in Desert Storm IMO. Some people have even argued in jest that had you switched ground vehicle types between the two belligerents, the outcome would have been roughly the same. I wouldn't necessarily go that far, but the giant disparity in training, equipment maintenance standards, and logistical support had already set the Iraqis and the Coalistion far apart at the outset. Weeks of unprecedented aerial bombardment, some deft operational maneuvering by VII and XVIII Corps, and plummeting morale on the Iraqi's side only widened this gap. A cream of the crop 1991 T-72B would have been a dangerous opponent to contemporary M60s, but local overmatch by tank and mechanized forces was very much a result of far broader factors than equipment alone. If you really want to get into pie in the sky scenarios those T-72s would have needed to be operated by crack USSR or East German units as well, and supported by the whole gamut of combined arms firepower too. quote:Also a secondary question, how did the M60 fare in Desert Storm? How many did we lose and how many kills were scored with it? I remember at the time I thought the combat engineer versions were badass to my 10 year old self, but for whatever reason in all the years I've been into military history I really neglected on studying tanks in any kind of depth. Here's a thread on Tank-Net about USMC M60s in ODS: http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=26158 Can't be arsed to look it myself right now!
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 11:47
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Also a secondary question, how did the M60 fare in Desert Storm? How many did we lose and how many kills were scored with it? Koesj posted:Here's a thread on Tank-Net about USMC M60s in ODS: http://www.tank-net.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=26158
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 13:13
|
|
|
As an Australian I would like to see an F-15, F-16, and F-22 (et al) in person at least once before I die. I am willing to travel internationally and spend many thousands of dollars to do it! Question for the thread: Are there any recommendations for the 'best' airshow, tour, or other event to attend? It can be this year or in 2020 for all I care, I just want a good experience. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
Paris or Farnborough would be 'best' for seeing neat stuff, any number of Doha or Dubai expos or major US market airshows would work too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
You can't get into the Dubai Airshow if you're just Joe Public and I can imagine it's the same with Doha. Start a blog and get accredited or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:Walmart would have saved space for a 300lb person. I couldn't even fit in the driver position at 5'11" 200lbs. Good point. Maybe they would have sold a XXL size.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 18:11
|
|
|
Crescendo posted:As an Australian I would like to see an F-15, F-16, and F-22 (et al) in person at least once before I die. I am willing to travel internationally and spend many thousands of dollars to do it! Instead of the big trade shows, I'd probably just come to the states and see one of the big domestic shows. Andrews AFB had one for 50 years, but they cancelled 2013 and 2014. Thunder Over Michigan is reliably excellent, but not cheap and tends more toward warbirds than current stuff (though the Thunderbirds are flying there this year). Take a look at your vacation schedule, and then take a look at an airshow schedule. http://www.milavia.net/airshows/calendar/showdates-2014-north_america.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 18:22
|
|
|
Helter Skelter posted:Second page has some info, looks like 2 battalions participated (1st and 3rd, don't know exact number of tanks). No losses to enemy fire (further reading in the thread indicates the Iraqis were terrible shots), though 10 mobility kills were sustained from mines. Between the two, total of 112 tank kills (nearly all being T-55s/T-62s), 32 APCs (BTR/BMP), and 10 trucks. Majority of engagement ranges were under 1000m. It makes no mention of 8th Tank Battalion, which was attached to 6th Marines and definitely saw combat. Apparently elements of 4th Tank Bn provided tanks for Task Force Breach Alpha, which used M60s, so there were still some Pattons in 4th as well. That thread mentions 277 M60A1s. Assuming that number is correct that would mean almost 5 full battalions. However, with 1st, 3d, 4th (minus a company equipped with M1A1s), and 8th accounted for, I cannot think of where the remaining battalion would come from. Marines afloat?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 18:26
|
|
|
That's based on Ken Estes' comments right? I'd like to say he got it right since he's highly knowledgeable about USMC tank stuff, but by now that thread is probably old info and somewhat incomplete.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 18:32
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Instead of the big trade shows, I'd probably just come to the states and see one of the big domestic shows. Andrews AFB had one for 50 years, but they cancelled 2013 and 2014. Thunder Over Michigan is reliably excellent, but not cheap and tends more toward warbirds than current stuff (though the Thunderbirds are flying there this year). Yeah, the Andrews show was incredible for that kind of thing. I went a few times when I lived near DC and they always put on an excellent show. Hopefully it'll get back on track in 2015 ... okay 2016 ... 2020...
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
Propagandalf posted:Paris or Farnborough would be 'best' for seeing neat stuff, any number of Doha or Dubai expos or major US market airshows would work too. Slo-Tek posted:Instead of the big trade shows, I'd probably just come to the states and see one of the big domestic shows. Andrews AFB had one for 50 years, but they cancelled 2013 and 2014. Thunder Over Michigan is reliably excellent, but not cheap and tends more toward warbirds than current stuff (though the Thunderbirds are flying there this year). Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Instead of the big trade shows, I'd probably just come to the states and see one of the big domestic shows. Andrews AFB had one for 50 years, but they cancelled 2013 and 2014. Thunder Over Michigan is reliably excellent, but not cheap and tends more toward warbirds than current stuff (though the Thunderbirds are flying there this year). Like this one at Langley Air Force Base in Hampton, Virginia, about 3 hours drive south-east of DC (and the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum and Udvar-Hazy center which has an SR-71 & Space Shuttle). If you're really getting your war-nerd on, Norfolk Naval Station is about 20 minutes from Langley, and usually has one or more aircraft carriers in port (and Newport News is right there, too, so you might be able to see the one being built). They mostly fly E-2C/D Hawkeyes there, though; you'd have to drive another 20 minutes to naval air station Oceana to see F-18s doing touch 'n goes. e: oh, and the battleship Wisconsin, which doesn't have much to do with airplanes, but you still may enjoy it
grover fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Feb 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 04:50
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I kinda love the T-72, because it's the tank Wal-mart would have built if Wal-Mart wanted a MBT. Strangely enough the Soviets never really put out a request to design the T-72. It actually came about due to internal politicking in the military industry complex. Uralvagonzavod wanted to build a new tank and was working on a couple prototypes to be competitors for the T-64. The government told them that no, that was silly, they were going to build the drat T-64 like everybody else. In response Uralvagonzavod grudgingly agreed, but instead worked up a slew of changes to the T-64 to make a cheaper and more reliable variant which just so happened to have a bunch of stuff from their now-canned designs. They passed it off as a cheaper T-64 design for a while until somebody latched onto the idea of procuring it to cheaply outfit reserve units with and they could safely call it a new design. As a result the design is very similar to the T-64, but generally stayed a good 1-2 generations behind it in technology. As an example, the T-64 had composite armor on both the hull and turret since the 60s. The T-72 Ural, while having a similar looking design, didn't have any composite armor of any kind because it'd have been expensive. In 1978 the T-72A finally got what passed for composite armor - but only in the front of the turret in the form of a hollow cavity filled with a cheap ceramic (the hilariously nicknamed "Dolly Parton Armor"). It wasn't until the late 80s that the T-72B finally got composite armor for the front hull. A similar progression took place with explosive reactive armor - with the T-72B getting Kontakt-4 (similar to what had been fitting on the T-80B since the early 80s) a few years after the T-80U came out with Kontakt-5. Then in the 90s you saw the T-72BU (T-90) prototypes getting K-5 similar to the T-80U. In some ways the T-64 family is still in the lead even after being dropped entirely. In 1999 the Black Eagle prototype had already addressed the catastrophic explosion issue with western-style ammunition magazines, had the new Kaktus ERA, the capacity to fit a 152mm gun, and an improved autoloader. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 09:51 on Feb 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 08:53
|
|
|
I was really hoping they get a little goofy and give us the Black Eagle or T-95 in Wargame RD, but oh well. Chinese armor was a bit strange, there first few tanks are based heavily around the T-54/55 design, with the follow ups being much the same but swapping out new guns (the NATO standard 105mm L7) and engines. In the mid/late 80's they actually received some 72s from the middle east and found their tanks surprisingly vulnerable to the 125, hence the big modernization of the 90s with the Type 90 and 98/99, which were technically indigenous designs but with very obvious connections to the Soviet design philsophies. The very latest Chinese tanks are supposedly pretty capable, but like anything else from the Chinese, it's hard to find great sources. They were heavily influenced by the 72s though, even if not directly related in design. Also, in the modern Chinese tank fleet, the Type 96 is the 72 and the 98/99 the 80s if making a cold war era Russian comparison. Mazz fucked around with this message at 10:49 on Feb 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 10:35
|
|
|
The old grand daddy of the M60, the M48 Patton did see some action, read up on Khemkaran for what can happen when two rather equal forces bump into each other. The Indian Army managed to capture 97 Pakistani tanks as a result of the botched assault by the 1 Armoured Division of the Pakistan Army at the Battle of Assal Uttar on 10 September 1965.[2] Six Pakistani Armoured Regiments took part in the battle, namely the 19th Lancers (Patton), 12th Cavalry (Chaffee), 24th Cavalry (Patton) 4th Cavalry (Patton), 5th Horse (Patton) and 6th Lancers (Patton). The Indian forces in the field that day consisted of three Armoured regiments with tanks of varying quality, the Deccan Horse (Shermans), 3rd Cavalry (Centurion) and the 8th Cavalry (AMX-13). The battle was so fierce and intense that at the end of the war, the Pakistani 1st Armored division had lost about 97 tanks in destroyed/damaged or intact condition. This included 72 Patton tanks and 25 Chaffees and Shermans. 32 of the 97 tanks, including 28 Pattons, were in running condition. The Indian 4th division lost 32 tanks, mostly Sherman tanks, fifteen of which were captured by the Pakistan Army.  Egypt, Turkey and Israel got a shitton of upgraded M60s still around.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 12:50
|
|
|
Helter Skelter posted:Second page has some info, looks like 2 battalions participated (1st and 3rd, don't know exact number of tanks). No losses to enemy fire (further reading in the thread indicates the Iraqis were terrible shots), though 10 mobility kills were sustained from mines. Between the two, total of 112 tank kills (nearly all being T-55s/T-62s), 32 APCs (BTR/BMP), and 10 trucks. Majority of engagement ranges were under 1000m. To be fair to the Iraqi tankers the T-72 FCS was pretty rudimentary and modern features Western tankers take for granted like Fire Control Computers, IR optics, and assisted aim mechanisms simply did not exist. Those dudes had to pick out the target with an 8x fixed magnification scope and manual windage and elevation adjustments, with the lucky few getting an accurate range value from an LRF and/or a commander with an IR scope to spot things. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 14:40 on Feb 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 13:50
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Dumb question regarding commie tanks: did China ever copy the T-72? Reading the Wikipedia article, I suspect some patriotic Chinese editor has carefully scrubbed any mention of copying from the articles about Chinese tanks. Not really. The Chinese post the Sino-Soviet split basically at first did things to the T-55 that its original designer would have never thought about (like upgunning it with a western 105mm for example) and then began designing their own tanks initially based on the T-55 and then modified further and further to keep pace with foreign deelopments. As a good example, the Type 96/ZTZ-96 has a suprisingly roomy and comfortable turret. That's because it's a 2-man turret that is still rooted in the layout of the turret of the T-55, just now using an autoloader instead of a human one and taking advantage of the extra space.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
They also stuck a 125 mm gun to a glorified T-62 (Type 88) and a 1000 hp engine to go with it. I think North Korea has done something similar (and ERA plates up to the ears).
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
Last batch of aircraft wallpapers! Click for 1920x1080 resolution                                       
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 15:34
|
|
|
So BAE Systems / the MOD finally confirmed that the Taranis UCAV had its maiden set of flights at the end of last year. http://www.baesystems.com/article/BAES_165051/first-flights-of-uk-built-taranis-unmanned-aircraft-surpass-all-expectations?from=homepage-rzz  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nG-TMhvZ1pU Total official spend to get a prototype this far is £185m. So 50% higher than the unit cost of the F35B's we're going to buy. The program was started around 2005. The last time we got a military jet program this far alone was the Harrier. Pablo Bluth fucked around with this message at 23:28 on Feb 11, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
Crescendo posted:As an Australian I would like to see an F-15, F-16, and F-22 (et al) in person at least once before I die. I am willing to travel internationally and spend many thousands of dollars to do it! Closer to home there is the Avalon airshow. I don't know what they will have in 2015 but here is the 2013 list http://www.airshow.com.au/airshow2013/public-airshow/aircraft-display/aircraft-scheduled-2013.html
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Pablo Bluth posted:Total official spend to get a prototype this far is £185m. So 50% higher than the unit cost of the F35B's we're going to buy. The program was started around 2005. The last time we got a military jet program this far alone was the Harrier. Only ~$305m over 9 years, you guys aren't even trying. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 07:15
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:Closer to home there is the Avalon airshow. I don't know what they will have in 2015 but here is the 2013 list http://www.airshow.com.au/airshow2013/public-airshow/aircraft-display/aircraft-scheduled-2013.html I grew up directly across the bay from Avalon, it was always awesome around air show time because we would get a lot of traffic passing overhead of all kinds of fighters etc. Never been to the actual show but my brother worked at it one year, he's got a bunch of photos with American pilots and even a few he took of the insides of cockpits when no one was around.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 09:22
|
|
|
drat phone.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 09:23
|
|
|
The airshow before last, I was a 1st year apprentice sparky. And we were at Laverton near that big golf ball thing, rewiring the lighting for sunking lovely building that was there for eons. And we got our own private airshow with the 'Tigers' and Blackhawks with cool dudes with guns dangling their feet doing circles around us. Best $7/hr I ever made.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 10:02
|
|
|
Plinkey posted:Only ~$305m over 9 years, you guys aren't even trying. grover fucked around with this message at 11:48 on Feb 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 11:44
|
|
|
Just saw the "one simple trick" radar banner for this thread. Still made me laugh.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2014 19:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 04:20 |
|
|
It was the best thing until I saw the "Grovergrad" thread title in GBS.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2014 02:45
|
|
