Professional Documents
Culture Documents
A US Army M60A3 main battle tank moves along a street in Germany during Exercise REFORGER '85
The M26 Pershing, one of the US tanks designed near the end of
World War II and used during the Cold War.
2
in the 1950s, as it was realized that medium tanks could
carry guns (such as the US 90 mm, Soviet 100 mm, and
especially the British 105 mm) that could penetrate any
practical level of armor at long range. The World War
II concept of heavy tanks, armed with the most powerful
guns and heaviest armor, became obsolete since they were
just as vulnerable as other vehicles to the new medium
tanks. Likewise, World War II had shown that lightly
armed, lightly armored tanks were of little value in most
roles. Even reconnaissance vehicles shown a trend towards heavier weight and greater repower during World
War II; speed was not a substitute for armor and repower.
3 HEAVY TANKS
'Universal tank', lling almost all battleeld roles. Typical main battle tanks were as well armed as any other vehicle on the battleeld, highly mobile, and well armored.
Yet they were cheap enough to be built in large numbers. The classic main battle tanks of the 1950s were
the British Centurion, the Soviet T-55 series, and the US
M47 and M48 series. These three basic vehicles were upgraded signicantly over time. For example, the Centurion began life with the highly eective 17-pounder (76.2
mm) gun, but was upgraded to 20 pounder (84 mm) and
then 105 mm main armament by 1959, with improved
re control and new engines.
The Russian T-55 started with a 100 mm gun, but has
been upgraded with both 115 mm and 125 mm guns,
much improved re control systems, new engines, track,
etc. The M47 series evolved through to the M60 series.The rst Soviet main battle tank was the T-64[2] while
the rst American MBT was the M48 Patton.[3]
These vehicles and their derivatives formed the bulk
of the armored forces of NATO and the Warsaw Pact
throughout the Cold War. Some of them remain in use in
the 21st century.
2 Light tanks
M48 Patton
Light tanks continued to be built, but for very limited roles such as amphibious reconnaissance, support of
Airborne units, and in rapid intervention forces which
were not expected to face enemy tanks. The Soviet PT76 is a good example of a specialized light tank. It is
amphibious and has the repower to kill other reconnaissance vehicles, but it is very lightly armored. The US
M551 Sheridan had similar strengths and weaknesses, but
could also be airdropped, either by parachute or LAPES.
3 Heavy tanks
Heavy tanks such as the T-10 continued to be developed
and elded along with medium tanks until the 1960s and
1970s, when the development of anti-tank guided misAn increasing variety of anti-tank weapons and the per- siles and powerful tank guns rendered them ineective in
ceived threat of a nuclear war prioritized the need for ad- their role.
ditional armor. The additional armor prompted the de- The combination of large HEAT warheads, with a long
sign of even more powerful cannons.[1] The main battle eective range relative to a tank gun, and with high accutank thus took on the role the British had once called the racy meant that heavy tanks could no longer function in
T-72B with thick Dolly Parton composite armor on the turret
front
3
combined-arms tactics. This led to greater mechanization
of Infantry and advanced artillery tactics and warheads.
Tanks alone were vulnerable to Infantry, but a combined
team of tanks, mechanized Infantry, and mechanized artillery could still win in the new environment.
In 1974, the United States initiated an impressive programme to modernise its existing tank eet and start real
mass production of the M60A1, and later the M60A3; at
the same time the M1 was developed. Budgets for tank
design and production picked up during the administration of president Ronald Reagan, following tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union.
An American M103A2 heavy tank at Bovington tank museum in
the UK
6
6.1
USMC M46 Patton, 8 July 1952. Note the dierent rear plate
and twin fender-mounted exhausts.
The heavier but older M26 Pershing was deemed unsatisfactory due to its inferior mobility, which was unsuitable
for a medium tank role as it used the same engine that
powered the much lighter M4 Sherman, and in November, 1949, the upgraded M26 received a new power plant
and a main gun with bore evacuator, and the M46 Patton
designation. Less than a thousand were upgraded to M46
standard.
M24 Chaee
6.2
Interwar
6.2 Interwar
The M47 Patton was intended to replace the M46 Patton
and M4 Sherman tanks. It had a 90 mm gun and a crew
of 5. Despite it being the primary tank of the US it never
saw combat while in US service. In Early 1951, the U.S.
initiated the design of the M48 Patton, designated the
T-48 with a 90 mm cannon.[8] The T48 featured a new
turret, new redesigned hull and an improved suspension.
The hull machine gunner position was removed, reducing the crew to 4. On 2 April 1953, the Ordnance Technical Committee Minutes (OTCM), standardized the last
of the Patton series tanks as the M48 Patton.
Nearly 12,000 M48s were built from 1952 to 1959. The
early designs, up to the M48A2, were powered by a gasoMarines of 1st Marine Division at the Battle of Chosin Reservoir
line 12-cylinder engine which was coupled with an auxsupported by M46 Patton tank.
iliary 8-cylinder engine. The gas engines gave the tank
a short operating range and were prone to catching re
when hit. This version was considered unreliable.
by the new M41 tank in the United States Army which
was rushed to the battleeld. It was later designated the
M41 Walker Bulldog. The M41 was an agile and well
armed. On the other hand, it was noisy, fuel-hungry and
heavy enough to cause problems with air transport. The
Walker Bulldog saw limited combat with the U.S. Army
during the Korean War, but the conict served as a testing ground to work out the tanks deciencies, especially
with its rangender.
6.3
One of two PT-76s from the NVA 202nd Armored Regiment, destroyed by US M48 Pattons, from the 1/69th Armored battalion,
during the battle of Ben Het, March 3, 1969, Vietnam.[11]
6.3
tanks then in regular use. Most of the M48s were placed the last US main battle tank to utilize homogeneous steel
into service with reserve units by this time. By the mid- armor for protection. It was also the last to feature either
1990s, the M48s were phased out.
the M60 machine gun or an escape hatch under the hull.
The M48s performed admirably[15] in Vietnam in the
infantry-support role. However, there were few actual
tank versus tank battles. The M48s provided adequate
protection for its crew from small arms, mines, and
rocket-propelled grenades.
XM551 Sheridan
The plans were laid in the US in the late fties, for a tank
with a 105 mm main gun and a redesigned hull oering
better armor protection. The resulting M60 largely resembled the M48 it was based on, but has signicant differences. The M60 mounted a bore evacuated 105 mm
main gun, had a hull with a straight front slope whereas
the M48s hull was rounded, had three support rollers per
side to the M48s ve, and had road wheels constructed
from aluminum rather than steel.
The hull of the M60 was a single piece steel casting divided into three compartments, with the driver in
front, ghting compartment in the middle and engine at
the rear.[16] The driver looked through three M27 day
periscopes, one of which could be replaced by a night
vision periscope.[16] Initially, the M60 had essentially the
same turret shape as the M48, but this was subsequently
replaced with a distinctive needlenose design that minimized frontal cross-section to enemy re. The M60 was
ideal for both direct re support as well as short-distance served in combination with ACAVs (M113s) as armored
anti-tank engagements.
cavalry units consisted of both M113s and M551s as part
The only niche where the M551 Sheridan was not ideal of their TO&E. Armor units consisted solely of tanks
was the medium and long-range anti-tank engagement. (minus headquarters company) and Mechanized Infantry
The muzzle velocity was so low that a HEAT round red units consisted solely of M113s. In this role the real probat longer ranges would have to be lofted, making aim- lem with the Sheridan was its limited ammunition load of
ing dicult, and the ight time would be so long that a only 20 rounds and 8 missiles (though M551s in Vietnam
moving target would be very dicult to hit. However, it service were not equipped with missiles or their guidance equipment, increasing the basic load of conventional
appeared there was a solution to this problem by equipping the tank with gun-red anti-tank missiles. For longer rounds).
range engagements a missile would be red instead of a
HEAT round, and although its velocity would also be relatively slow, the guidance system would make a hit highly
likely anyway. The M551 Sheridan appeared to oer the
best of both worlds; for infantry support the large calibre gun allowed it to re full-sized artillery rounds and
canister shot, while also giving it reasonable short-range
anti-tank performance from the same gun.
6.4 Post-Vietnam
The US Army began to phase out the Sheridan in 1978,
although at the time there was no real replacement. Nevertheless, the 82nd Airborne were able to keep them on
until 1996. The Sheridan was the only air-deployable
tank in the inventory, and as an elite force they had considerably more pull than general infantry and armor
units who were forced to get rid of them. Their units
were later upgraded to the M551A1 model, including a
thermal sighting system for the commander and gunner.
6.4
Post-Vietnam
dans were destroyed upon landing.[18] The Sheridans performance received mixed reviews. They were lauded by
their operators and some commanders as providing repower in needed situations to destroy hard targets. However, the Sheridans employment of only HEAT rounds
limited their eectiveness against reinforced concrete
construction.
Fifty-one Sheridans were deployed in the Gulf War as
some of the rst tanks sent. They would not be very effective against the Russian-built T-72s. Their role was
limited by age and light armor to reconnaissance duties,
possibly 6 or less Shillelagh missiles were red[19] at Iraqi
bunkers, these fewer than a half-dozen missiles, were the
only time that the Shillelagh had been red in a combat
environment, from the inventory of the aforementioned
88,000 missiles produced.
9
as guided missiles.
The M60A2 proved a disappointment, though technical advancements would pave the way for future tanks.
The Shillelagh/M60A2 system was phased out from active units by 1981, and the turrets scrapped. Most of the
M60A2 tanks were rebuilt as M60A3.[20]
In 1978, work began on the M60A3 variant. It featured a
number of technological enhancements, including smoke
dischargers, a new rangender, and M21 ballistic computer, and a turret stabilization system. In addition it reverted to the 105 mm cannon. All active American M60s
eventually underwent the conversion to the A3 model.
The M60A3 was phased out of US service in 1997.[21]
10
The Gulf War saw the US Marines still deploying obsolete M60 Pattons while the rest of the tank forces had
Abrams. The Iraqi forces were initially regular army
units, equipped with tanks such as T-54/55 tanks and T62s. The Coalition main battle tanks, such as the U.S.
M1 Abrams, British Challenger 1, and Kuwaiti M-84AB
were vastly superior to the Chinese Type 69 and domestically built T-72 tanks used by the Iraqis, with crews better
trained and armoured doctrine better developed.
The majority of Iraqi armored forces still used old Chinese Type 59s and Type 69s, Soviet-made T-55s from
the 1950s and 1960s, and some poor quality Asad Babil
tanks (domestically assembled tank based on Polish T-72
hulls with other parts of mixed origin). These machines
were not equipped with up-to-date equipment, such as
thermal sights or laser rangenders, and their eectiveness in modern combat was very limited.
The Iraqis failed to nd an eective countermeasure to
the thermal sights and sabot rounds used by Coalition armour. This equipment enabled them to engage and destroy Iraqi tanks from more than three times the range
11
See also
History of the tank
Tanks in World War I
Comparison of World War I tanks
Tanks of the interwar period
Tanks in World War II
Comparison of early World War II tanks
Post-Cold War Tanks
References
[1] Front Cover Thomas W. Zarzecki (2002). Arms diusion: the spread of military innovations in the international
system. Psychology Press. p. 212. ISBN 0-415-93514-8.
Retrieved 5 April 2011.
[24] Scales, page 270: After the war they (TF 1-37th) returned to count the burned-out hulks of 76 T-72s, 84
BMPs, 3 air defense artillery pieces, 8 howitzers, 6 command vehicles, 2 engineer vehicles, and myriad of trucks.
[26] [Iraqi Army Tanks]. otvaga2004.narod.ru (in Russian). December 29, 2009.
12
9.1
Text
Tanks in the Cold War Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanks_in_the_Cold_War?oldid=736752639 Contributors: Geni, Mzajac, Martin Wisse, Alansohn, Catalan, GraemeLeggett, BD2412, MWAK, Ground Zero, MoRsE, Bgwhite, Noclador, Kirill Lokshin,
Joel7687, Duran, Nick-D, Yvwv, SmackBot, DMorpheus, Canthusus, Hmains, Chris the speller, Jprg1966, Vgy7ujm, CmdrObot, Monkeybait, Aldis90, Deathbunny, Matthew Proctor, Mr. Yooper, Dekimasu, CommonsDelinker, Hans Dunkelberg, Natg 19, Meters,
WereSpielChequers, PraetorianD, Lightmouse, Rocksanddirt, Ericwilliammarshall, One last pharaoh, Addbot, Kongr43gpen, Yobot,
Legobot II, AnomieBOT, Metalhead94, Midnite05, Mark Schierbecker, Bigrob10p, Phoenix and Winslow, Mztourist, John of Reading, Dewritech, Simbagraphix, Snotbot, Katangais, L'amateur d'aroplanes, Mogism, Head-it-behind, RotlinkBot, Jezzajomo, Monkbot,
SantiLak, T30 Tank Commander, Tikgeit and Anonymous: 34
9.2
Images
Source:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/
Public domain Contributors: http://www.dodmedia.osd.mil ID: HMSN9806736
9.3
Content license
13
9.3
Content license