Re: Phalanx Cwis
Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2008 5:37 pm
Sorry, I mean the howitzer/Shillelagh version.The M-60 was at worst on a par with all other MBTs of it's generation what's your problem with it?
Warships, naval battles, technology, weapons, navies of all eras, modeling, etc.
http://kbismarck.org/forum/
Sorry, I mean the howitzer/Shillelagh version.The M-60 was at worst on a par with all other MBTs of it's generation what's your problem with it?
My sensitivity has something to do with the fact that I was a tank commander in an M60. Over several years I served in the M60, M60A1, and M60A3. We didn't have the M60A2, which is the 152mm/Shillelagh version but I understand it was successful. The 152mm didn't work very well in the M551 Sheridan light airborne vehicle because it was too light for the gun's recoil. That problem didn't exist in the tank version. The missile was very sensitive to burning when subjected to turret penetration though, so was eventually given up. Any missile system has the problem that it's slower than a sabot, so you might be destroyed by an enemy even though you fire first. The howitzer made a really good weapon in an urban environment, and was used on the engineer version.marcelo_malara wrote:Sorry, I mean the howitzer/Shillelagh version.The M-60 was at worst on a par with all other MBTs of it's generation what's your problem with it?
There is a book out called When Odds Were Even or something to that effect that suggest otherwise. The Sherman was a very well designed tank that fit into the US concept of operations. While it didn't have the most powerful gun or the thickest armor it was light enough to move in numbers across the world. It worked with US bridging equipment. It was reliable. Etc.Karl Heidenreich wrote:...I agree with Marcelo, as the M60 is just another "inferior" tanks as was the Sherman in WWII. The US won over the Germans because there were more Shermans than Tigers or Panthers. Being even in numbers the Shermans would have been good for German scrap metal companies.....
That's the "Meroka".jackbrown wrote:Spain has an interesting system which uses two groups of six 20mm barrels, one above the other (I forgot the name, though).
Because it takes up much more room, is much heavier, and provides a marginal increase in effectiveness.jackbrown wrote:Why are we still using GDs 20mm Phalanx? Why not use the "Goalkeeper" that the Dutch Navy uses? The gun itself is the same as that used on the A-10 Warthog (GAU-8). Spain has an interesting system which uses two groups of six 20mm barrels, one above the other (I forgot the name, though).