Jump to content
Michael Ramsey

Slow M60,s ?

Recommended Posts

To be fair, that is an M60T.  It's got new tracks, new transmission, and an engine with 250 more horsepower than the M60A3 TTS modeled in ProPE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Michael Ramsey said:

After having played the M60A3 in the sim, I have to honest, its about right

 

Mostly, yes.  I've been complaining to @Ssnake for a while, however, that the loader should *NOT* be switching the stabilization off at any point while reloading on the move.  It may be something that's in the manual, but I previously got in touch with some M60 crewman and all of them basically said it was something never done in training or in combat.  One, IIRC, commented that if his loader hit that switch he'd smack him.  Curious to hear your input on that.

 

I also keep hoping some day we'll get the M60A3 Passive so we can have a pre-TIS/TTS tank for Blue.

Edited by Maj.Hans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the Magach 7 was accepted into service, in the winter of 1989/1990, there were many complaints about its mobility in the Lebanese mud with all that extra armor, especially when attached with a mine roller. The Merkava's 900 hp engine was then quickly adopted instead of the original 750 hp. It helped, but the Magach 7 was still less agile than the lighter armored (ERA) Magach 6 versions.

Looks like they did a much better job with the Sabra.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/17/2020 at 1:35 PM, Maj.Hans said:

Mostly, yes.  I've been complaining to @Ssnake for a while, however, that the loader should *NOT* be switching the stabilization off at any point while reloading on the move.  It may be something that's in the manual, but I previously got in touch with some M60 crewman and all of them basically said it was something never done in training or in combat.  One, IIRC, commented that if his loader hit that switch he'd smack him.  Curious to hear your input on that.

 

I also keep hoping some day we'll get the M60A3 Passive so we can have a pre-TIS/TTS tank for Blue.

Never ever did let my loader mess with the stab, no way no how.  That 10 hp turret motor always had a hard time maintaining hydraulic pressure.  I do not remember if it was in any manual to disengage stab.  I have noticed that the smoke generators are always on.  Smoke generators in real life suck.  They will give away positions and maneuver.  I had my platoon disconnect them.  Never really needed them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Michael Ramsey said:

Never ever did let my loader mess with the stab, no way no how.

@Ssnake I'll request again if we can get the loader to stop playing with the stab, pretty please!

 

Also while you're at it I would like a way to look look through the cupola and the .50 cal sights without causing the gunner to stop scanning.  Its almost impossible to see out when you're buttoned up without interrupting the gunner right now.

 

4 hours ago, Michael Ramsey said:

I have noticed that the smoke generators are always on. 

That shouldn't happen unless your units are on a route that has them assigned to be on, or if you press SHIFT+TAB to turn them on.

 

They might be turned on by default on "Retreat" routes.

 

It could also be that you were on a map set to have very dusty conditions which creates a trail in the sim that can resemble smoke.

Edited by Maj.Hans

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've heard veterans claim that the M48/M60 were actually faster (in desert terrain) with their old T97 tracks than the later M60 versions with T142 tracks. Does anyone have similar experience?

The M48A3 looks quite fast in the desert, see 1:00 for example:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To me, these claims are always to be taken with a grain of salt. Were they driving the same tank? There are turtles and racing horses sometimes between the same tank series. Fresh air filters vs clogged ones. Hot temperatures (slower) vs cool air. Different ground conditions (yes, it's sand, but WHAT sand). Not ruling out that the shape of track pads or the design of the track links themselves can have an effect on mobility (where maybe the US Army asked for a modification that offered a trade-off (e.g. better performance in mud, worse in sand or some such). But this is really impossible to say without knowing the other variables in play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not regarding a particular field test in specific conditions, but rather general impression following years of service. Some saw their own tank's tracks being replaced during their service. Others got a brand-new M60A1 RISE instead of a 15-year-old worn-out M60.

Of course the IDF did execute many mobility tests for the different types of tanks in service, in many different locations. Generally, the T-54/55/62 prevailed over the western designs. The M48 and M60 with rubber tracks were faster than the Centurion in the Sinai desert, but in rocky terrain the Centurion was far better. For this reason many M60s had their T97/142 tracks replaced with Merkava tracks, starting in the mid-80s.

My understanding is that the T142's major advantage over the T97 (which is considerably lighter, BTW) was endurance, not performance.

Share this post


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...