_GOTOBOTTOM
Armor/AFV: Modern - USA
Modern Armor, AFVs, and Support vehicles.
Hosted by Darren Baker
M-60's in Desert Storm
melonhead
Visit this Community
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: July 29, 2010
KitMaker: 662 posts
Armorama: 457 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 10, 2011 - 02:45 PM UTC

Quoted Text


Quoted Text

The major difference between the M60A1 & M60A3 is the fire control system. The A1-version has a coincidence (manual) range finder, analog/mechanical ballistic computer and IR or passive (starlight) sighting system along with normal daylight sights. The A3 has a laser rangefinder, an electronic ballistic computer and thermal sight along with normal daylight sights. Items like engine exhaust smoke generating system, smoke grenade launchers and thermal shield for guntube could, and often were retrofitted to M60A1s.


O.K., back to this one. Does this bother anyone else? We Didn't even give the Marines the good version of the old tank, we gave them the old version of the old tank. They realy used manual sights? Thats just plain crazy IMO. I have heard we did have some 105mm versions of the abrams in the theater but only put the 120mm into the offensive (my point isn't whether any 105mm's went into battle or not, but that we did have some in reserve that nobody used in the offensive). So we have these M1's with the 105 barrels sitting back and we send the marines into an offensive against Kuwait with M60A1's????? I am by no means saying that the Marines can't handle themselves, they did. Just that they should have had some better tanks if they where available at all. Even if they where going to use the M60's we could have at least gave them the A3 version with a lazer range finder for goodness sakes. I hope there is something here I am wrong about because it just doesn't make sense to me. Please let me know if I am so I won't be upset about this.

God Bless every one of you that served over there.

the marines are used to getting the common equipment well after everyone else. its just the way it happens for us. When i was in the marines, there was comm equipment that we had still in use from ww2/korea. hell, as far as i remember, we were still using willys jeeps for the most part in the first iraq war while most of the army had transitioned to the HMMMV.
also, to David, you are right. there are equipment ships that are basically just floating the ocean with a sole purpose of tactical readiness. If needed, the closes ship will unload equipment quickly and have it be ready to use. All that would have to be done is get the marines over there to use it.
i was in 1st BN 2nd Mar in the late 90s and we got the joy of unloading HMMMV's from one of those ships to use. BRAND NEW vehiicles. the HMMMV i drove had 18 miles on it when i drove it off the dock.
MikeMummey
Visit this Community
New Mexico, United States
Joined: February 09, 2005
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 653 posts
Posted: Saturday, September 10, 2011 - 08:44 PM UTC
Melonhead, I believe it is time for you to see the SACO and get a urinalysis. And Marines is spelled with a big 'M".
Outta here, Mike sends . . .
skyhawk
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: June 03, 2003
KitMaker: 1,095 posts
Armorama: 743 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 11, 2011 - 04:58 AM UTC
I'd love to see some pics of USMC "Willys jeeps" in use during ODS...but they may have been Ford GPW...
melonhead
Visit this Community
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: July 29, 2010
KitMaker: 662 posts
Armorama: 457 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 11, 2011 - 07:34 AM UTC

Quoted Text

I'd love to see some pics of USMC "Willys jeeps" in use during ODS...but they may have been Ford GPW...

i suppose i should not have been so specific to call it a "willys" jeep. instead just say jeep. i tend to say willys jeep for all jeeps becuase of the look and it being the more popular name.
so, to appease everyone, i did research. it may have been a GPW, but it more than likely would have been the m151a2 "mutts"
MikeMummey
Visit this Community
New Mexico, United States
Joined: February 09, 2005
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 653 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 11, 2011 - 10:58 AM UTC
Melonhead my brother, you were in the Marines in the late 1990s and were still using WWII/Korean era radios? Maybe you exist in a parallel universe. Did you wear herring bone utilites too?
Outta here, Mike sends . . .
AgentG
Visit this Community
Nevada, United States
Joined: December 21, 2008
KitMaker: 1,109 posts
Armorama: 1,095 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 11, 2011 - 11:26 AM UTC
I went in spring of '74. We had the green cotton utilities that were heavily starched, but not herringbone. We also wore the green cotton utility cover which we blocked, and put a salty "sea dip" in it. The belt was khaki canvas with an open face brass buckle. Boots were black leather with rubber soles.

Around '75 or so the first of the slant pocket "jungle camo" utilities made an appearence. They were issued on a limited basis at MCRD in '76. At that time recruits received two sets of green utilities and one set of he jungles.

Our Company Gunny forbade the wearing of anything but heavy starched green utilities. His comment was " I don't want to see no m%^&*()^%*^ng bushes standing in my formations".

The jeeps were Fords back then, however not being MT, I couldn't give the official nomenclature though.

I recall M60's at 29 Palms around '77, but again as a grunt I couldn't tell what model. I did see M48's earlier at Pendleton though.

G

melonhead
Visit this Community
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: July 29, 2010
KitMaker: 662 posts
Armorama: 457 posts
Posted: Sunday, September 11, 2011 - 02:56 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Melonhead my brother, you were in the Marines in the late 1990s and were still using WWII/Korean era radios? Maybe you exist in a parallel universe. Did you wear herring bone utilites too?
Outta here, Mike sends . . .

i dealth with wire and and field phone equipment.we did have some very old equipment. the wire spools you would recognize as being VERY old. ive seen them being referenced from ww2 throughout the web. i dont know for certain that our spools were that old but the types of spools we used were identical to the spool used in saving private ryan. when the airborne soldier is wiring the claymores on each side of the road. obviously, dont use this as a legitimate reference, but if you search online for ww2 wire spool ce-11 or ww2 wire spool dr-8, we had these in our wire shop.
we also used an SB-22 switchboard with TA-312 field phones which are korean war era equipment.
p.s. i dont appreciate the condecending tone to your replies. thank you
TankSGT
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: July 25, 2006
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 946 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 05:49 AM UTC
Old equipment was out there. Before my National Guard unit got M9s we had several 1911 45s, pre WW2 issue. We also had Model 1917 Trench shotguns with the 2 foot bayonets for riot control. In the late 1980s I drove a 1954 Studibaker 2 1/2 ton truck to Fort Drum NY.

They should have gotten at least M60A3s before Desert Storm. The A3 was a good tank, My National Guard unit transitioned in 1989. Ironic, the Jersey Guard had better tanks 2 years before the Marines. If the Marine tankers had been given 2 weeks of hard training I'm sure they would have been combat ready with the A3, it wasn't that different from the A1.

Tom
MikeMummey
Visit this Community
New Mexico, United States
Joined: February 09, 2005
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 653 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 01:37 PM UTC
Howdy Melonhead, I am not being condescending(proper spelling) in any way. I am flat out pulling your your chain, with vigor!. And now that I know you were an abused "Wire Splicer" I shall pull harder Devil Dog! You are the one telling sea stories about using the Willy Jeep and such. You say it on here and if it is not true it becomes gospel to the masses. Next thing you know we have Willys Jeeps in out Desert Storm dioramas, "Cuz melonhead sed it wuz sew". And the TA-312 that we used in the late 90's was still there because it freaking worked! The Army was dragging the same gear around. That old "Marines get the hand me down" line is weak at best. So tell you what, go perform around 60 good hard bend-n-thrusts to atone for your sins and we can call it even. Have a NAVMC Day!
Outta herre, Mike sends . . .
didgeboy
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: September 21, 2010
KitMaker: 1,846 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 01:45 PM UTC
I love it when you sea doggies get all worked up, makes me laugh. When I was in basic at Knox in early half of 1990 the USMC were riding "dinos" as we called 'em, m60a3 and they were clanky as hell and we laughed good and hard at them, till they marched by on foot and then we stood in awe as their gunny called cadence, man that was a sight. . .
When I got to germany, I was issued a .45 pistol even though I trained on the M9 baretta in basic. The 1911's were the biggest piece of junk the army used. We had the newest tanks in all of Europe, and the oldest hand guns. . .go figure.

Cheers to all you doggies and thank you all for your service. Cheers.
MikeMummey
Visit this Community
New Mexico, United States
Joined: February 09, 2005
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 653 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 01:46 PM UTC
Thomas, the M60A3 is not "better" than the A1, it just has a couple of different fire control enhancements. As it turns out we murdered them guys just fine with what we had. DS/DS caught the USMC when eqipment was changin, same in OIF. No Marine was "wronged' for not getting an upgraded tank. It is what we had at the time and that is the way the deal went down. As has been said before, it is the man, not the machine that determines the battles outcome.
Outta here, Mike sends . . .
MikeMummey
Visit this Community
New Mexico, United States
Joined: February 09, 2005
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 653 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 01:48 PM UTC
Damon you dog squat of a soldier you. You fail AFVID, those Jarheads were crewing M60A1 (RISE) Passive tanks. Be all you can be mike foxtrot.
Outta here, Mike sends . . .
didgeboy
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: September 21, 2010
KitMaker: 1,846 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 01:53 PM UTC
Mike; I think I am going to have to disagree with you here, homeboy. Pretty sure those were the A3's as we had just started to get the A1's (120mm) in the training units. Now please correct me here (I am not expert on USMC hardware), but isn't the RISE the reactive armour? The mantlet on the A1 and A3, from what I have seen, are different too, yes? Cheers.
skyhawk
Visit this Community
Florida, United States
Joined: June 03, 2003
KitMaker: 1,095 posts
Armorama: 743 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 02:25 PM UTC

Quoted Text

....Pretty sure those were the A3's as we had just started to get the A1's (120mm) in the training units.....


I'm pretty sure both the A1 and A3 are 105mm.... Mike has already pointed out the main differences between the A1 and A3. RISE has to do with upgrades and nothing to do with the ERA.
tanknick22
Visit this Community
United States
Joined: February 19, 2009
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 1,100 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 02:49 PM UTC
the last M-60 the marines used was the M-60A1 and thats what they used in the gulf war then they converted to M1A1 abrams academy make a M60A1 with reactive armor with USMC markings
didgeboy
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: September 21, 2010
KitMaker: 1,846 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 02:49 PM UTC
120 mm was in reference to the M1A1 not the 60's. Why would the armor school not have A3's at that time?
didgeboy
Visit this Community
Washington, United States
Joined: September 21, 2010
KitMaker: 1,846 posts
Armorama: 1,509 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 02:54 PM UTC
Well there you go. Which was why I was never a Dino rider. So what does any of this have to do with building plastic models? Not sure but it still is fun. Cheers
melonhead
Visit this Community
Wisconsin, United States
Joined: July 29, 2010
KitMaker: 662 posts
Armorama: 457 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 03:46 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Howdy Melonhead, I am not being condescending(proper spelling) in any way. I am flat out pulling your your chain, with vigor!. And now that I know you were an abused "Wire Splicer" I shall pull harder Devil Dog! You are the one telling sea stories about using the Willy Jeep and such. You say it on here and if it is not true it becomes gospel to the masses. Next thing you know we have Willys Jeeps in out Desert Storm dioramas, "Cuz melonhead sed it wuz sew". And the TA-312 that we used in the late 90's was still there because it freaking worked! The Army was dragging the same gear around. That old "Marines get the hand me down" line is weak at best. So tell you what, go perform around 60 good hard bend-n-thrusts to atone for your sins and we can call it even. Have a NAVMC Day!
Outta herre, Mike sends . . .

never said we get the "hand me downs" but the marine corp, for the most part, are the last to get the upgrades and it can be seen in many cases. the m1a1, the hmmmv, digital radios. they arent decades behind, but they typically wont get the latest and greatest before the army does and if you were ever in the marines, you would know this. the marines arent deprived. they make do with what they have. the equipment still works, may as well use it. but, having upgrades does make it easier.
as for the willy jeep comment i made, i also corrected myself.
TankSGT
Visit this Community
New Jersey, United States
Joined: July 25, 2006
KitMaker: 1,139 posts
Armorama: 946 posts
Posted: Monday, September 12, 2011 - 05:56 PM UTC

Quoted Text

Thomas, the M60A3 is not "better" than the A1, it just has a couple of different fire control enhancements. As it turns out we murdered them guys just fine with what we had. DS/DS caught the USMC when eqipment was changin, same in OIF. No Marine was "wronged' for not getting an upgraded tank. It is what we had at the time and that is the way the deal went down. As has been said before, it is the man, not the machine that determines the battles outcome.
Outta here, Mike sends . . .


Mike gunnery wise the A3 was way better then the A1, it wasn't enhanced it was a whole new system. They were pretty much the same automotively. But the Thermals and laser beat the pants off of the A1. No crazy Ls. Just changing the ammo in the computer was light years ahead. I gunned and drove A1s TCed 48A5s and 60A3s and M1s.

The fact that the Marine Tankers kicked ass in spite of their equipment is a tribute to the American fighting man. Not the system that sent them into battle in 1991 in the same tank I crewed in 1978.

Tom
MikeMummey
Visit this Community
New Mexico, United States
Joined: February 09, 2005
KitMaker: 672 posts
Armorama: 653 posts
Posted: Tuesday, September 13, 2011 - 07:22 AM UTC
Howdy Melonhead, I know a little about the Marines as I hit the yellow footprints in 1975 and did the Seabag drag home in 2004. I guess I should update my profile. Thank you for your service and input regarding the Comm gear. And yes you did correct your Jeep statement and I thank you. As we have been going back and forth you cannot see the smile on my face as I type. I miss the squad bay banter and wish we could be doing this face to face over a cold one.
Damon, the reason that the Marines at Ft Knox were using the M60A1 is because that is what they would be operating when they hit the FMF(Fleet Marine Force) upon graduation from the Crewman Course. The USMC did not field the M1A1 until FY 91(October 1990). And as a result of the timing they went to war with both the M60A1 and M1A1. And there were the 11 M60A3s recieved from the US Army just a month before we crossed LD. The RISE stands for Realibility Improved Selected Equipment and deals mainly with automotive and electrical issues as well as the stabilization system.
Thomas, yes I understand that the TTS and Laser RF were all the rage and a jump from the A1s rangefinder and optics. Unfortunately the 11 M60A3s that I dealt with in 1991 were all pretty much down to using the M105D telescope when we signed for them. So yes a "full up" M60A3 would be quite the upgrade. Most Gunners on the A1s that I was familiar with could change the ammo without taking their eye out of the sight. So as you have pointed out it is how you train with what you have.
Outta here, Mike sends . . .
 _GOTOTOP