Re: Soviet tanks and missiles....

All true, plus firing a conventional round frequently KO'd the
Shillelagh
guidance system.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 12:51 AM
Subject: Re: Soviet tanks and missiles....

> Robert W. Eldridge wrote:
>
> >Well, the US used to have one, the M60A2 ,which fired a Shillaleagh
missile,
> >same one used on the Sheridan, from a short tube launcher, along with
HE
and
> >HEAT conventional rounds.
>
> Important difference here: the Shillelagh-firing gun/missile launcher
used
> on the M60A2 and the M551 was a huge-caliber (152mm) low-velocity gun
> unable to fire effective KE projectiles, whereas the Eastern tanks
fire
> ATGMs through more normal-sized guns (115mm and 125mm calibers) which
can
> also fire APFSDS. As for its impopularity, I bet the Shillelagh's low
hit
> probability at ranges less than 1 km had something to do with it
too...
and
> so did the tendency of the 152mm rounds to break and spill propellant
all
> over the fighting compartment :-/
>
> Conceptually the M60A2 and M551 both seem to have been closer to the
WW2
> "Infantry Support Tank" idea - ie. able to take on enemy tanks in a
crisis,
> but their main purpose was to provide massive direct-fire HE (and
APERS,
> and...) support for the infantry. I doubt that the US Army would admit
to
> this kind of thinking though, at least in the M60A2 case <g>
>
> Later,
>
> Oerjan
> oerjan.ohlson@telia.com
>
> "Life is like a sewer.
>   What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
> -Hen3ry
>