Alan,
2ID had M60A3s at Tongduchon-- I two battalions at least in 1987. I know, because we had to go out to the tank hardstand and clean up an M8 chemical agent alarm that had been crushed by one-- (they had an americium radioactive source as a component of the alarm). Fortunately, the source was not broken open, but the tank was decontaminated anyway to be sure. The interesting thing is the Korean army had the K1 which was a smaller version of our M1 Abrams. So yes, they were in Korea. VR, Russ

Russ, I believe I have found a picture on what you're talking about.



Link: http://research.archives.gov/description/6411291

"An M60A3 main battle tank of the 2nd Infantry Battalion, 72nd Armor, 2nd Infantry Division, guards a road in the countryside during the joint US and South Korean Exercise TEAM SPIRIT '86, 03/24/1986"

I noticed that the camouflage scheme is slightly different, is this a different MERDC camo for a different season? Also what are the tubes located on the main gun for? Finally, why does the cupola machine gun seem to have a different barrel?

The tubes on top of the main gun are a Hoffman device which is part of the MILES laser training system. It fires a small charge that produces a light and smoke signature to simulate the main gun firing. The TC's .50 cal has a blank firing adapter attached that allows it to fire blanks.

AFAIK, the M88 is a M48 based platform, check your refs...

I'll second the Esci/italeri M60 kits. IMHO, They build into a better representation of a M60 than the Academy or Tamiya kits. I personally like the AFC Club T-97 chevron or the T-142 octogon block tracks. assembly is not that hard but there is some filling that needs to done on the inner track pad surfaces.

John

Sort of, it was based on the chassis and automotive components of the M48 Patton and M60 Patton tanks. BMY was awarded a contract to build three prototype vehicles under the designation of T88, to use as many components as possible of the M60 tank.

I would prefer getting the Tamiya/Academy kit as I plan to try new techniques and attempt some mild scratching on the kit. I would hate to gut such a classic kit and prevent others from enjoying it (as I'm probably going to mess up somewhere)

Real tanks in service aren't pretty or neatly weathered. And remember to put your overshoes in the turret rail before entering the tank, don't track mud in the tank!

No M60 should be complete without a pair of boots stuck in the rail.



Don't forget the gear... four ALICE packs and four cold weather sleeping bags...

We kept our sleeping bags in wet weather bags or duffle bags to keep them dry.





The guy with the ALICE pack cover had his sleeping bag in a wet weather bag carried under the ALICE in an ancient M1956 sleeping bag carrier.

Notice the MILES sensors on the bustle rack. We carried tent poles for a lean-to tarp.

Thank you all for the information and references! Much of this has been interesting and insightful! Can anyone identify the camouflage scheme pictured below?

Looks like standard 3-tone NATO camo to me. It looks to have black on the front glacis and military brown on the end of the barrel.

I think may be MERDC - Forest Green and Field Drab and without the 5% sand highlights - wasn't uncommon to leave off the highlights/sand of the pattern.

NATO pattern is mostly green and black with smaller patches of brown - the pattern on the glasis plate isn't the same shape as NATO - also - accessories and removable items were usually just factory green - like the headlight assemblies - whereas the MERDC that was painted locally was usually sprayed over everything with minimal masking.

So the scheme would go basically like this without the sand?

Alan,
The photo of the M60A3 in Korea is definitely painted in the NATO scheme, not the earlier MERDC scheme, if it was taken in 1986. I was in 2 ID from 87-88, and almost every vehicle in the division was painted in the NATO scheme with CARC (chemical agent resistant paint in the new NATO scheme, either at the factory (if new) or at the Depot at Camp Carroll. CARC paint was difficult to apply, and was environmentally unfreindly, so it could only be done at the level III and IV maintenance level. Even touch ups were carefully done and spaying was out of the question for the most part. Before that, when we had the MERDC system, units used to paint at the unit level (we commonly used gasoline for thinner!). The CARC paints were much more durable thane the older enamel based paints, since CARC used an epoxy-polymer base (hence the painting hazard). They were easier to clean too, and although they were basically flat at a distance, microscopically they were more like a semi- gloss paint, giving them the ability tho "shed" chemical agents. Bottom line-- the photo is likely the NATO scheme if taken in 86'. The M60A3 was a significant improvement over the A1 by the way-- upgraded optics, fire control computer (hence the mast mounted wind gauge on the turret roof) upgraded bore evaluator, minor but better engine upgrade. One thing to be aware of when building your kit-- the A3 will have a longer bore evaluator, the already mentioned wind gauge mast, and the road wheels will be the later ribbed type. I think one of the three manufacturers of models has the earlier smooth wheels which would be appropriate only to the M60 and M60A1 series-- something else to watch out for. VR Russ

Alan, small correction to my previous post- I said longer bore evaluator-- I meant to say a longer thermal shield out from the bore evacuator for the A3. VR Russ

Alan, et. al.; one thing to keep in mind about paint schemes on US Army vehicles prior to the CARC paint system of the mid 80s is that paint could be applied at the unit level. That meant it could vary quite a lot from the standard and frequently did. As I mentioned before, we used gasoline for thinner, which could alter the shade of paint occasionally. We were aware of the published patterns, but a young private with an air gun in his hands could deviate from the pattern considerably. We used grease from a 5lb can as a masking agent for headlights and vision glass (especially on the road wheel hub inspection ports), antenna bases, etc. Vehicles were typically painted (before CARC) twice a year with ether a winter of summer pattern. Every vehicle in my squadron in the 11th ACR was painted with a different shade of green than the regulation called for because my squadron commander wanted to be able to differentiate "his" vehicles from other units (as Squadron S4 I had to go find the paint). Therefore when building a model, you wouldn't be wrong to deviate from the accepted regulations unless you had a specific photograph of the vehicle you're building to work from. That changed considerably with the factory applied CARC paints of the mid 1980s. even now, paint is applied at the Depot level, to specific standard-- not many (if any) units paint in the motor pool anymore). VR Russ

Actually, the M60A3 originally came with the ribbed aluminum road wheels, but it was discovered that they did not last as long as the solid steel ones. It was not uncommon to see a mix of aluminum and steel wheels on the same A3 or all steel wheels.

US Army M60A3 w/front road wheel steel


ROK M60A3 w/middle road wheel steel


Turkish M60A3 w/only one ribbed aluminum road wheel

Russ,
I have looked at Panzerbaer for some CARC schemes,



I noticed that the front plate varies slightly in that it does not have the middle strip of color. Compared to the MERDC scheme where the strip of color in the middle is present.

Perhaps the label is wrong. The pattern definitely follows the MERDC pattern and not he NATO pattern. Colors are more like Field Drab and Forest Green. Compare the standardized patterns for NATO and then MERDC and you'll what I mean.

Of course my wife tells me I'm wrong most of the time, so I wouldn't be surprised if I was way off base or something.

The general rule was that if a vehicle was already painted in MERDC it wouldn't warrant a repaint to NATO unless it went in for a total overhaul. Thus the mixture of factory fresh NATO vehicles and old MERDC for a while.

I'll go out on a limb and say unequivocally that it is MERDC. That is definitely Forest Green and Field Drab and I don't see any black. The green is too dark in tone and value to be the CARC color which has a far richer hue. It's bright sunlight, the green of the CARC paint should be loud and clear and it is not. That is Forest Green and Field Drab. In 1986 it would be far too early for the later CARC repaints in the older colors.

However I have seen CARC repaints and even then the colors used are not as dark as the older MERDC paints. Often the brown is close in shade to USAF Dark Tan and the green is the old DARK Green which is duller and lighter than Forest Green. Besides that's what the paint can said it was.

CARC repaints over many sand vehicles following the original DS degraded in less than a year resulting in M1's that looked like bizarre mixes of heavily flaked green and black over sand. Real messes.

In Baumholder we painted our own tanks. We usually worked in two shifts to get them done. Usually after gunnery and ftx. Our 60a3's were the nato camo. I was a tanker in Aco 2/68 From 85-88

In my ten years in the National Guard we never repainted a NATO scheme tank, only applied stencils. We weren't allowed to because the CARC paints were toxic. Even the maintenance guys were leery of it. However I did repaint a couple of trucks in MERDC, and some jerry cans with a forest green rattle can.



But the CARC stuff wasn't repainted until the mid-1990s in off colors.

Is there a final verdict on the paint scheme? There are several people saying it's a MERDC or a Nato scheme. Seems to me like a MERDC, but is there a definitive answer?

Folks,
I can only state what I experienced in Korea and Germany in the 70s and 80s (I went back and commanded a Support Group in ROK 2000-2002-- but by then everything had changed).

1) In May and June 1980, I was an Armor Officer coordinating the transition of the M551 Sheridan to the M60A3 for 2/11 ACR at Grafenwhor Germany. Those tanks were received brand new from CONUS in either the enamel MERDC scheme, or were just painted the standard enamel green to be repainted with enamels by the unit.
2) By 1984, I had switched branches, and was working as a Chemical Test officer at Dugway proving Ground Utah. one of my first projects there was testing the CARC paint on the new M1 Abrams, which by then was coming off the assembly line in standard CARC (NATO) green paint. I suppose they could have been over painted MERDC with enamels at some later point, but that would defeat the CARC qualities (and also explains the peeling and patched paint mentioned after DS-- since its like using acrylics over lacquers in the model world).
3) In March 1987 I arrived at the 2ID in Korea, and the M60A3s there were all painted in the NATO CARC Scheme. CARC was a big deal, since chemical weapons were perceived to be in the hands of all the bad guys. I was the Deputy Division Chemical Officer. CARC paint was one of our our jobs. The tank hardstand was 2 blocks away from my office, and as I said before, I have experience decontaminating CARC NATO painted M60A3 tanks. Because we were forward deployed, all vehicles were "supposed" to be painted in CARC, most armored combat vehicles had received the NATO/CARC treatment by 1986. We even had a 2ID BN Commander relieved in part because he had used olive oil on his vehicles (not tanks) to make them "shine"-- negating the effectiveness of the CARC. This cost upwards of a million $$ to repaint. So if that photo is of a 2 ID M60A3 tank in 86, -- it was painted in the NATO CARC scheme. There is the possibility it's a POMCUS stock tank (check the serial on the glacis) which were maintained at Camp Carroll, or a Marine Corps vehicle, which may not have received the NATO scheme. They too participated in Team Spirit exercises. But if it's indeed in the 2 ID, its almost sure to be wearing the CARC and NATO treatment due to the proximity of the DMZ and N. Korea. I think what's being taken as brown paint is mud, since it appears over the primary entry points of the tank, and the black rubber fenders seem to have the same shade of mud inboard. Not sure where the photo is from-- there is the possibility its mis-labeled too, it looks like winter in ROK, but Army photographers are not always 100% accurate in attribution.

These diagram paint schemes are good beginning guides, but are not an exact science-- they were not hard rules. Having three years in country in ROK, and six years in Germany, I can attest to the variances in the published schemes which depended on variables of time, color availability, and as I said, the differences in painter QC.
VR Russ

I agree with Russ above. Without knowing exactly when and where the tank was nor having any other pictures, a definitive answer can not be given.

I suggest just choosing which paint scheme you like (MERDC or NATO) and find a pic of a tank in those colors to copy. Neither is incorrect for an M60A3 so you won't be wrong.