Jump to content

Can't win Tanks! with the M60A3.


Recommended Posts

I love the Tanks! scenario where you have to kill 9 enemy units.

When I play with the Centauro, I whoop ass.  If I am sloppy I get 5 or 6 kills, but if I play like I am supposed to I can get all 9.  Therefore I do have a history of not being a complete loser.

 

However, when I play with the M60A3 tank I get killed so easy.  The best I have done is to get 1 kill out of 10 plays, once.  My shortest game was about 60 seconds when a T-55 got me while I was still in the woods where I started.  Have not even moved yet.  Thought I'd be save for more than a minute at the spawn point.  My longest game was about 15 minutes.

 

And if I am even lucky enough to hit something it won't die.  I once hit a PC at 1500 meters twice and it just drove off like I was not even there.  The first hit was Heavy Damage, and the second was crew casualties, and then it drove into cover.  WTF.

 

Also, I seem to get swarmed by 2 or 3 different vehicles at the same time from difference directions every time.  They can see me, but I cannot see them.  Cannot see them daylight, binoculars, nor TIS, but they can see me well enough to get a kill.  Not just a hit or damage, but a kill.  I am seriously looking for them.

 

I am not just driving around at top speed out in the open either.  I am using every bit of cover I can.  Staying close to the edge of the battle area, and using hills and forest to block enemy view in multiple directions and limiting exposure as much as possible.  I have even tried to just stay in the woods the whole time and scout from there.

 

Is there a beacon or something that I am supposed to turn off so that they do not gang up on me with x-ray vision?  What is the strategy to not be a total luser in the M60 in this scenario? 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Having served on the M60/M60A1/M60A3 I can tell you that is not represented well in regards to speed.  So far as Fire Power,  an M68 Cannon and 105mm ammo should give you penetration capable of stopping and destroying a T72.  The A3's were a hold over until the Abrams was fielded. Fired many rounds down range at Tank Table 8,  stab platform speed 16 - 18 mph, fenders not vibrating sight stabilized "On the way!" Not sure if its modeled or not but the draw back of a 60 is that the gunners primary sight is slaved to the gun.  A 10hp motor would scream as it tried to maintain hydraulic pressure during a stab on the move run.  After every engagement I would six pack out the LRF clearing the range.  Ensure that the gunner was DUMPING LEAD.  Re-lase and engage.  ARM LAST RETURN. (Desert) 1st RETURN (Woodland)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the speed is basic mathematical calculation between mass and horsepower (power to weight ratio) and then combined with its known top speed, so its not like its rocket science. It should be an accurate representation, unless the transmission is something special that allowed it to reach 0-X kph in very short amount of time which would not be typical for its raw data. But it should be close. Also keep in mind that the tank is certainly going to be much faster in speed and acceleration on roads.

 

But in regards to the original post...

 

Without having seen the scenario in question, it could be that the enemy tank types might need to be downgraded. This is often true of scenarios which have the playable vehicle swapped out with a different one.

 

We have to remember that the M60 was originally designed to fight against the T-55 and T-62 (and early T-64), where it performed well in that role versus the ammunition the Soviets had at the time. Later on with the A3 advancements, it was an attempt to prolong its life to fight against modernized T-55s, T-62s and the T-72, the latter of which could probably considered a more even match although the M60A3 would still be considered superior. M60A3 with TIS disabled, versus the T-55AM or T-72A can be fun, but tough.

 

Then we have the TTS, a further attempt to prolong its lifespan, in which case by this time the M60 was becoming obsolete and at the limit of its capability.  Its big advantage at this point was that it would dominate the Soviets during night combat and low visibility with its thermal sight, but in day time it would lose much of that superiority. The M60A3(TTS) actually has a better thermal sight than the M1 (both in real life and in Steel Beasts).  Anyway, this is mostly why the M60 tank platoons had 5 tanks, and the M1 tank platoons had 4 tanks.

 

To make a long story short, the M60 is a good tank (so is the Leo 1 and T-72), but as with anything in the 1960s-1980s this depends on the match up.  If that scenario has many T-72s in it and its day time then is naturally going to be very difficult! 😮

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The M60A3 isn't a tank I use frequently but I've always felt like it's main limitation was the gun, not the tank itself.  The armor and the mobility might not be great, and the fire control system takes more attention than I would like...But...The LRF beats many of the soviet fire control systems, and this TTS sight is OUTSTANDING.

 

Going back to the bigger gun point, I wish we had perhaps looked more into the M60-2000 or M60-120S, even if only for the export market...  I don't like the idea of the Sabra/Magach series...Leaving unprotected combustible case main gun ammo lying around just doesn't seem wise...

 

On 1/23/2020 at 5:23 PM, Volcano said:

M60A3 with TIS disabled, versus the T-55AM or T-72A can be fun, but tough.

I will reiterate my request to have the earlier M60A3 Passive, featuring a passive IR night sight, modeled in Steel Beasts.  We already have 90% of it in game, I think it would be great to leverage off of what we have, where we can, to add more content.

 

Furthermore I will reiterate my request to have a passive IR night sight added to the Leopard AS1, or alternatively, to have a copy of the Leopard AS1 put into the game as "Leopard 2A4" featuring a passive IR night sight...

 

Sadly NATO tanks in this sim are stuck jumping from no night optics, to the TTS/TIS sights that basically turn them into invincible death knights on tracks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 1/23/2020 at 9:52 PM, Michael Ramsey said:

Having served on the M60/M60A1/M60A3 I can tell you that is not represented well in regards to speed.  So far as Fire Power,  an M68 Cannon and 105mm ammo should give you penetration capable of stopping and destroying a T72.  The A3's were a hold over until the Abrams was fielded. Fired many rounds down range at Tank Table 8,  stab platform speed 16 - 18 mph, fenders not vibrating sight stabilized "On the way!" Not sure if its modeled or not but the draw back of a 60 is that the gunners primary sight is slaved to the gun.  A 10hp motor would scream as it tried to maintain hydraulic pressure during a stab on the move run.  After every engagement I would six pack out the LRF clearing the range.  Ensure that the gunner was DUMPING LEAD.  Re-lase and engage.  ARM LAST RETURN. (Desert) 1st RETURN (Woodland)

the slow speed is an illusion. 
the tank appears to drive slow because the 2D screen gives you no depth perception, and you have a very limited FOV. 
you can see the same effect when you film while you drive, then watch the film of you driving afterwards. Real life will seem much faster than the film.

the one issue SB might have is that our tanks have somewhat slow acceleration. 

Edited by dejawolf
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/11/2020 at 5:00 PM, dejawolf said:

the slow speed is an illusion. 
the tank appears to drive slow because the 2D screen gives you no depth perception, and you have a very limited FOV. 
you can see the same effect when you film while you drive, then watch the film of you driving afterwards. Real life will seem much faster than the film.

the one issue SB might have is that our tanks have somewhat slow acceleration. 

Excuse me but is that a blue falcon?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

Frustrating. I am new to steel beasts, but an old tanker. I came in the Army on the M60A3 as it was starting to depart the field. I couldn't wait to try it in the game. I do not know where they got their speed data for the M60A3, but it is way off. Cross country a driver can get up to 30mph and on a highway sometimes up to 35 or 40mph depending on the condition of the engine. In the simulator the tank moves like a slug. I agree with Micheal Ramsey (Ironically enough who has my same last name). The M60A3 in the simulator is horrible when it comes to speed and he is right on about the whine of the hydraulics in keeping up in stabilization. Graphics, so so, but that is forgive able. The speed, no. It was already towering monster, but to give it no speed???  Disappointing, very disappointing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

As mentioned before, it's not really possible to say whether your observations are caused by poor offroad mobility settings (always a possibility) or if it is an optical illusion on your part (things often appear to move slow because we have to remove the camera position in the external observer's view to allow for an acceptable field of view without giving you the fisheye lens.

 

I suggest that you try out driving the M60 at max speed on a flat road and then to measure how much time it took you for a given distance (e.g. use the AAR for that). That should give you a very accurate estimation of the top speed that the vehicle can achieve in Steel Beasts. Then compare it with your notes, compare it with other tanks. If it's massively off we will certainly look into the matter.

But maybe in your test scenario you had very bumpy ground with less than optimal traction and possibly a lot of ground resistance/drag. That can slow down just any tank.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I did a test to determine the speed in game, compared to an M1A2. I used the basic map that opens with the editor, so a relatively flat route cross country. I had 1x M1A2 and 1x M60A3 drive 1 kilometer at top speed from a march tactic. The scenario is included below for your own testing. Here are the results that I got.

 

M1A2: 

Time to travel 1 KM: 1 minute, 18 seconds.

KPH: 50.8 in Steel Beasts, 48 according to technical specs for cross country.

 

 

M60A3:

Time to travel 1 KM: 2 minutes, 5 seconds.

KPH: 29.26 in Steel Beasts, 19 according to technical specs for cross country. 

 

 

Obviously, knowing the definition of "cross country" and the type of terrain that constituted it that was used in the test trials to publish the technical specs would be very useful in determining how accurate the Steel Beasts speed is to the real-life speed by being able to better replicate similar conditions. 

 

Also, for what it is worth, every technical spec that I found in a quick Google search states that the maximum speed for an M60A3 with a AVDS-1790-2C engine is 49 KPH, or about 30 MPH. I've never been on the platform, so I cannot comment one way or the other.

 

@TSe419E, does that speed sound accurate to you?

M60A3 Speed Test.sce

Edited by Mirzayev
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds a little slow compared to my experience driving an M60A1 at an absolute top speed.  How well maintained the individual vehicle is makes a big difference in it's ability to go fast.

 

Type of terrain is real important, too.  The soft, sandy stuff at Ft Stewart was miserable when wet but very firm when dry.  I never had the opportunity  to drive in any farm fields in Germany.  People told me they were terrible year round because the soil was constantly being turned.  Driving over the fields at Bergen Hohne and Hoenfels wasn't so bad as long as the tanks stayed away from really wet ground.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mirzayev said:

I did a test to determine the speed in game, compared to an M1A2. I used the basic map that opens with the editor, so a relatively flat route cross country. I had 1x M1A2 and 1x M60A3 drive 1 kilometer at top speed from a march tactic. The scenario is included below for your own testing. Here are the results that I got.

You can see the speed directly from the drivers positions

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
On 4/24/2020 at 9:10 PM, TSe419E said:

Sounds a little slow compared to my experience driving an M60A1 at an absolute top speed.  How well maintained the individual vehicle is makes a big difference in it's ability to go fast.

 

Type of terrain is real important, too.  The soft, sandy stuff at Ft Stewart was miserable when wet but very firm when dry.  I never had the opportunity  to drive in any farm fields in Germany.  People told me they were terrible year round because the soil was constantly being turned.  Driving over the fields at Bergen Hohne and Hoenfels wasn't so bad as long as the tanks stayed away from really wet ground.

Co.C 2-70th AR M60A1 Fort Stewart GA.  Red Cloud Range Tank Table VIII "Top Gun Baby!"  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gunner on B-25, B Trp. 2/9 Cavalry.  “First To Fight!”  The last qualification I remember shooting on table VIII I got the highest score in the Squadron.  I was one miss away from a perfect score.  I’m sure I hit it but they wouldn’t go inspect the target because they couldn’t see a hole.  I thought I nicked it, which would have counted, but oh well.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

Huge fan of the M60A1. Love reading posts by guys that crewed M60A1/M60A3s :) I was a sonar tech on subs, but one of my fellow shipmates was an M60A3 tanker before joining the Navy. The first plastic model I ever built was an MPC 1/72 B-17G, but the second was a Tamiya 1/35 M60A1 (both while I was in the first grade 1974-5). My  profile image is the box top from the model I built.

Edited by streakeagle
Link to post
Share on other sites

I first started out on the M60A1 at Fort Knox Kentucky (1977).  As a young private, I was totally blown away by it.  Spent many years living on them, the upgrade to the M60A3TTS in the mid eighties signaled her last run as a main battle tank.  Too this day I still say that old tank had superior thermals. The last M60A3TTS I served on now sits in front of my American Legion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 months later...

I have always seen the M60 series tanks as slow in US Army training and in YouTube videos, it's just how it is.  The firepower is fine with me as I normally kill most of what I shoot at.  Where I have a problem with this tank is that it can't take a hit from anything at all.  As an infantryman, I heard tankers talk about this being the best defensive tank that can take a lot of damage yet pales in comparison to speed and optics to the newer M1A1.  Well, in SB, that's not the case.  A damned BMP-1 cannon can take out an M60A3.  Ok, maybe not that, but any tank that hits the M60A3 pretty much kills it.  I like using this tank as part of older scenarios or for foreign armies.  But damn, it's flimsy against incoming fire.  So I don't know where it gets this reputation as a tough tank, but I wasn't a tanker, just an SB Treadhead...

Link to post
Share on other sites

The BMP-1's 73mm cannon is fairly potent - if it hits. Its main problem is the horrible accuracy under crosswind conditions (=practically always). The M60 still has homogeneous cast steel armor which offers the best conditions for hollow-charge projectiles such as 73mm PG-9 (or any other HEAT round of sizable caliber).

 

If I learned anything, it's that tank crews have supreme confidence in their armor protection, deservedly or not. It's better not to get hit in the first place, however.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/14/2021 at 3:23 AM, Ssnake said:

If I learned anything, it's that tank crews have supreme confidence in their armor protection, deservedly or not. It's better not to get hit in the first place, however.

So, the M60 series is more hype than anything?  In SB, the tank seems to have a glass jaw against incoming fire in every scenario I have used them in.  I shall believe that the models for the M60 protection is accurate despite seeing NUMEROUS videos and articles claiming (perhaps falsely) that the M60 is an excellent tank.  Granted, it's about 50+ years old...

Link to post
Share on other sites

60 + years old.  Proper employment counts even for the newest vehicles.  Properly employed even the M60 series of vehicle can be deadly to the newest tanks.  That doesn't mean you can slug it out face to face.

Link to post
Share on other sites

i wouldn't draw many conclusions from this scenario as benchmark to measure performance of any tank, by its very nature a single player vehicle is outnumbered and surrounded by minefields, infantry, and other tanks or vehicles capable of destroying tanks. the player generally has no preparation to consider the randomized disposition and placement of units, except through trial and error of repeatedly playing this scenario and dying enough times to get somewhat of a picture of what to expect next time. the lone exception to see what happens when enemy shots can come from practically any angle against a testbed like the armata based vehicles with automated smoke screens, active defense systems and the placement of sensors all over the vehicle, so it can theoretically fence off most attacks, at least for a while.

 

the theoretical height advantage of the m60 designed to pick off hordes of soviet tanks while making defensive movements probably doesn't work here so well- it's generally more of a liability. i do not think the m60's speed so much that would make it difficult for the m60 in this scenario is its tall height profile paired with relatively weak armor for such a large vehicle- particularly exposing the m60 to ATGMs from any direction if they are present, that is to say, in general enemy units are able to take relatively easy shots at a large target from all angles and there is little the m60 is going to do about it

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...