Re: Soviet tanks and missiles

Nope, M60A2's also had the problem, although not quite as frequently.
The IR
guidance for the Shillelagh was just VERY finicky.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Siebold" <gamers@ameritech.net>
To: <gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 02, 2002 4:42 PM
Subject: Re: Soviet tanks and missiles

> >
> >
> >
> >>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 :-/
> >
> There was also a big problem with the Shillelagh system. The gun could
> fire acurately out to
> about 600 meters and the missle was inacurate out till about 1000
> meters. This left a dead zone
> of about 400 meters.
>
> I also was talking to a tanker who had been a crewman on the Sheriden
> tank who said that if they
> fired the gun the recoil messed up the optics and caused problems if
> they switched back to missles.
> I assume that this was not a problem on the Shillelagh system mounted
on
> the M60 tank (a heavier
> tank and why add it to the M60 if the problem was found in Sheriden).
>
> Scott Siebold
>
>
>
>