M60A3 (TTS) vs T-62

[Harlikwin]

Thx all for your feedback !

Very helpful.

Reason why I asked the initial question, was that I might make an "Iran-Iraq 1981" scenario.

Turns out the Iranians had M60A1, see below.

So I'll playtest your set-up, Harlikwin, thx.

And I'll assume that the Iraqi's had the T-62 that is in SB.

Not unlikely, I suppose.

Iraq will be the Blue side, as T-62 is playable

http://www.warandtactics.com/smf/war-conflicts-structures-toes-oobs/oob-iran-1980/

In September 1980 the Islamic Republic of Iran Army (IRIA) had following units garrisoned along the Iraqi border:

- 16th Armored Division, based in Ghazvin, with three ABs equipped with M-60A-1 MBTs and M-113 APCs, including 1st in Ghazvin, 2nd in Zanjan, and 3rd in Hamedan.

- 81st Armored "Kermanshah" Division, with three ABs equipped with Chieftain MBTs and M-113 APCs, including 1st in Kermanshah, 2nd in Islam-Abad-Gharb, and 3rd in Sar-e-Pol-e-Zahab.

(...)

****

http://www.warandtactics.com/smf/war-conflicts-structures-toes-oobs/oob-iraq-1980-war-against-iran/

Standard Iraqi armored division (AD) of the time had two armored (equipped with 300 T-62 MBTs) and one mechanized brigade (with BMP-1 ICVs), a single artillery brigade (with self-propelled artillery), and support elements.

A standard Iraqi mechanized division (MD) had one armored brigade (equipped with 200 T-54/55s), one mechanized brigade (equipped with Czech OT-64s APCs or BTR-50s), and one artillery brigade, as well as support elements.

According to Western sources, in September 1980 the IrA operated some 100 T-72 tanks, probably attached to the 10th Independent Armored Brigade, based at al-Rashid Barracks, in Baghdad.

Some Iraqi sources state that the first shot of the war was in fact fired by their T-72s. However, there is no firm confirmation yet that the Iraqi Army indeed operated T-72s at this stage of the war.

Their first confirmed appearance occurred only in 1982.

For this scenario design I'd also say to use the absolute worst main gun ammo for both the M60 and T62's.

[Harlikwin]

In the Valley of Tears, there were accounts of Syrian tanks closing to within just a few meters and even co-mingling with Israeli Centurions defending from their ramparts- the primitive night fighting equipment gave the T-62s and T-55s some advantage when the sun went down, nullifying the Israelis' long range, pre-sighted gunnery skills. Still, you read about how even then Syrian crews managed to fail to acquire or hit Israeli tanks when they would have targets that were right next to them.

The T-62 'FCS' actually includes a crew of 2- both the TC and gunner, the TC should actually be performing ranging duties and should be giving the gunner the information as well as the order to fire. In Steel Beasts, the player has more discretion and freedom when to shoot without the chain of command, so the player is potentially faster on the draw than a real life T-62 crew, but perhaps without the assistance from the TC- the gunner has to do all the work (the gunner has the tools to do it all himself, but procedurally, this isn't how it would normally work). Steel Beasts omits an AI TC handing off the estimated range, but it's a design feature that probably works better that it didn't, to give it that distinct, more primitive feel (a computer TC accurately feeding the player range data would for all practical purposes behave like a computerized FCS after all). To play it and get more of a feel of the life of a T-62 crew, there ought to be two at least two players- a human TC and human gunner. A third human player driving would be even better.

The ranging system clearly is more primitive and cumbersome. But it's fun for gameplay purposes, it is definitely a change from the contemporary SB vehicles because of the extra skill required to survive. The feeling of accomplishment when you can hit something and live to brag about it is more satisfying because it is more difficult.

Actually, I think an AI TC giving range would be neat feature. It could be "incorrect" however, put in some random +/- 10-20% range based on the TC skill or something like that. And have it take some time (few seconds) to compute.

[Marko]

Iranian, stillbrew? That's interesting, never heard that before.

The Brits sold stillbrew kits to a number of export customers cant say for sure.

But Iran was one of the biggest export customers for the chieftain

[Harlikwin]

The Brits sold stillbrew kits to a number of export customers cant say for sure.

But Iran was one of the biggest export customers for the chieftain

I thought that the stillbrew kits were developed after analysis of knocked out chieftains obtained from the Iraqis from the Iran Iraq war? Which would have been after the Islamic revolution, and the cancellation of western arms shipments.

[Marko]

I thought that the stillbrew kits were developed after analysis of knocked out chieftains obtained from the Iraqis from the Iran Iraq war? Which would have been after the Islamic revolution, and the cancellation of western arms shipments.

My bad

It was the Jordanians who upgraded there fleet, and the Iranians developed there own Upgrade Package Called the Mobarez not very much information about it though.

Its lucky they never got there hands on the CR-1.

[Harlikwin]

My bad

It was the Jordanians who upgraded there fleet, and the Iranians developed there own Upgrade Package Called the Mobarez not very much information about it though.

Its lucky they never got there hands on the CR-1.

Meh, Even with CR-1's and Iraninan tankies I think the outcome would have been the same.

[Kev2go]

i think it would be more fair to compare the m60A3 TTS to the T72M1, which is just an export T72A.

 

T62 realistically should only be compared to the earlier M60A1

[Maj.Hans]

I noticed the discussion about gunner and TC working together to range targets.

 

Ironically, I did that more in SB Gold than in Pro PE.

 

I had a few friends who liked to play as gunner in the Leo2.  LRF damage or other FCS damage instantly had me guesstimating ranges and calling them out.

They tended to burn out the LRF on the Abrams very quickly, so then I'd enter the range into the battlesight setting and hit the battlesight key to set them up with a rough guess and then let them walk sabots on target.

[Damian90]

I would only remind T-62 in SB is an oldest, initial model fielded with all it's flaws, the modernized ones were somewhat better in protection and fire control.

 

In later models they also eliminated problem with gunner sight moving with gun dring loading sequence.

[dejawolf]

well, to be Fair, M60A3 TTS should be paired with the T-62 obr. 1975, which was fitted with KTD-1/2 laser range finder. 

it would somewhat alleviate the T-62 biggest flaw, it's slow rate of fire, since you would

at least have a much higher likelyhood of a first round hit. 

[Kev2go]

2 hours ago, dejawolf said:

well, to be Fair, M60A3 TTS should be paired with the T-62 obr. 1975, which was fitted with KTD-1/2 laser range finder. 

it would somewhat alleviate the T-62 biggest flaw, it's slow rate of fire, since you would

at least have a much higher likelyhood of a first round hit. 

 

yes it had a laser rangfinder fitted,  but the FCS or Ballisitc computer didnt change.

 

so realistically  M60A3 is still easily superior  , because the digitized m21 ballistic computer is vastly more sophisticated.  plus its got the TTS which is usable in day time giving much better situational awareness. Hell the TTS was better than sights that were intially offered in the M1 & M1A1 Abrams.  The T62 1975 still needed IR searchlights for its nightsights, which were only usable in the dark.

 

Only thing the T62 ( even a obj 1975) would have a edge over the M60A3 would be mobility.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 27, 2016 by Kev2go

[billman]

I don't understand how this is even a fair match. the m60a3 tts has thermals,digital ballistic computer, faster reloading and a much better stabilizer. its a newer tank by almost 20 years. also any upgrade done to them were more of an attempt to keep them relevant rather then top of the line(t 64 job). now t62 vs m60a1 or  t62obr 1975 vs m60a3 is much more fair and honestly very Balanced.

[dejawolf]

even T-62 vs M60A1 is unbalanced if done 1 on 1 because of T-62 slow rate of fire. 

also because of no FCS, you have to walk your fire on target with T-62, or rangefind using brackets, which is slow. 

and if you miss, you're done. unless the guy in the M60A1 is a terrible shot, he will most likely have a first round hit 

at up to 1200-1300m or so. 

the 105mm rounds are all capable of penetrating the T-62, unless you hit the turret cheeks. 

T-62 advantage is in strategic mobility and cost. 

fewer roads and bridges will collapse under it's weight, and it requires less fuel to operate, which means fewer vulnerable fuel trucks in it's train. 

Edited June 27, 2016 by dejawolf

[billman]

well one thing the t62 has a stabilizer while the m60 dose not. another thing to remember that under ranges of 1200m, apfsd from t62 has little drop. meaning that t62 can preform battle sight engements with reasonable accuracy. so the fact it has no range find is not that big of a deal for apfsd at range less then 1200m. I dose matter for heat and he thought. anyway under let's say 1500m t62 and m60 are rather fair. while further out is denfelnty leaning to the m60. 

[Maj.Hans]

1 hour ago, billman said:

well one thing the t62 has a stabilizer while the m60 dose not. another thing to remember that under ranges of 1200m, apfsd from t62 has little drop. meaning that t62 can preform battle sight engements with reasonable accuracy. so the fact it has no range find is not that big of a deal for apfsd at range less then 1200m. I dose matter for heat and he thought. anyway under let's say 1500m t62 and m60 are rather fair. while further out is denfelnty leaning to the m60. 

Against a plain M60, or an M60A1 without stabilization, yhea.

 

But remember that the M60A1 AOS, RISE, RISE Passive, A3 and A3/TTS all have stab...

[billman]

well in this case I ment m60a1 with no stabilization

[Kev2go]

also thought id just post this here. Just love these vintage vidoes. gives a good overall rundown of the T62. IN the video this is a captured T62 Model 1972 that was passed down from the Israelis  to USA for evaluation a few years after the 1973 Yom Kippur war.

 

the T62 can be pretty effective firing at ranges of 1500m or closer, requiring little adjustment of the gun sight, due to very fast traveling High velocity APFSDS round. But I agree on a 1 on 1 basis M60A1 is the better tank, in particular at ranges beyond 1500m . I think the biggest Crippling factor of the T62 would have been its inaability to rotate turret or the gunner to track targets while reloading, bigger disadvantage than not having a dedicated rangefinder. However T62s were cheaper and available in larger numbers, that was its primary edge.

 

 

 

Edited June 29, 2016 by Kev2go

[enigma6584]

A while back I created a semi-historical (loosely at best) of an Iraqi-Iranian tank battle for SBPE.  I just wanted to test T-62 vs an M-60 set up as an M-60A1.  IIRC I had set in the mission editor all M-60A3 tanks to have permanent damaged primary gun-sights, no laser rangefinder, no thermal imaging thus forcing AI to use only the secondary sight.  I also believe I had both tanks use the crappiest ammo they could.  The scenario is designed to basically be a large cooperative mission but I play it as single player with a very thorough planning stage in order to set up routes for my AI platoons.  You might want to try it out for fun and see how the tanks stand up to one another.

 

I plan, when SBPE 4.0 comes out to do a more historically correct scenario focusing on these battles since I do have several books on those battles.  When I begin new mission, I will use a different map, one with marshes and fauna etc. like they really fought in during those wars.  Anyway, below are some of the stuff I've done and you may or may not be interested.  I can tell you the battles are fun as hell.  I personally would like to try them someday as a cooperative session.

 

Below is link to the mission I did.

 

SBPE Cooperative Scenario Road to Ghoramshir

 

Scenes from a tank battle video.  Best watched in full screen 1080HD.

 

 

 

Commanding from a T-62 tank against the Iranians.

 

 

[enigma6584]

My latest book on the Iran-Iraq war.  I got this about a month ago but have not read it yet.  Perusing through it I find it to be very detailed with maps, TO&Es, good prose on the battles.  Looking forward to using this to work on my newer Iran-Iraq war mission with SBPE 4.0.

 

The Iran-Iraq War

 

 

[Marko]

Looking forward to your finished work enigma6584.

[Bond_Villian]

Yep ive played the sh*t out of that mission 'road to goramshir' and consistently get whupped!

[Iarmor]

17 hours ago, enigma6584 said:

My latest book on the Iran-Iraq war.  I got this about a month ago but have not read it yet.  Perusing through it I find it to be very detailed with maps, TO&Es, good prose on the battles.  Looking forward to using this to work on my newer Iran-Iraq war mission with SBPE 4.0.

 

The Iran-Iraq War

 

 

 

If the subject interests you, I recommend to try and get the English version (if it's already available) of "The Wars of Modern Babylon: The Rise and Fall of the Iraqi Army" book by Pesach Malovany.

I believe that Malovany contributed some knowledge to the "The Iran-Iraq War" book as well.

 

[enigma6584]

@Iarmor  Thanks, I'll look this up.

 

@Bond_Villian  It is a tough mission in terms of how I have the Iranian defense set up.  Also, heavily randomized up to five different defensive plans and TO&E for the Iranian AI so you never know what you are going to get. 

[Damian90]

BTW that might be interesting for you guys in the context of T-62 development.

 

Initially it was not been designed as medium tank, but as tank destroyer (ИТ - Истребитель Танков), of course the research and development work then moved in to medium tank direction, however T-62 was kinda, not wanted child, and a stop gap solution and platform for new 115mm smoothbore gun, soviets really panicked because of the British L7 105mm rifled gun, and the US M68 105mm rifled gun, as well as L11 120mm rifled gun + M60A1 and Chieftain were seen as immune to the 100mm rifled gun and it's ammo used in T-54 and T-55. Here a side note, the US M68 105mm gun is not a license version of the British L7, it's a myth, these are two different guns, M68 is a further development of T254 gun, it's just due to agreements L7 and M68 shares the same ammunition and their barrels are interchangeable, other than that, two completely different guns.

 

However the development of new tank took time, the UVZ Object 140 was a complete failure, KMDB Object 430 needed further development in to Object 432/T-64, so as a staop gap T-62 was created as further evolution of T-54/55 and various prototypes like Object 140.

 

I know lots of people here do not know Russian, bu it's worth to watch this episode of Броня России documentary.

 

 

It starts around 32:00.

 

PS. T-62 shell ejections system at work.

 

Edited July 2, 2016 by Damian90

[Marko]

I have also read the T-62 cost considerable more to produce then the T--55

So much more some said the marginally better performance of the gun was not worth the expense.