Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Army: GCV Needs to Be Big and Tracked (84 Tons!)
Defense Tech ^ | February 21, 2013 | Matt Cox

Posted on 02/26/2013 2:16:13 AM PST by Timber Rattler

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last
To: chrisser

Depends on the gearing.


21 posted on 02/26/2013 12:26:25 PM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Timber Rattler
Don't think you could get more than one on a C-17.

5.56mm

22 posted on 02/26/2013 12:29:57 PM PST by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: calex59
Or, the vehicle may have been the T28 super heavy tank (later T95 gun motor carriage). The vehicle was an attempt at a 95 ton tank to fight the super heavy tanks being developed by the Germans late in WW2. Two prototypes were built in 1944 by Pacific Car & Foundry. The vehicle used a 105mm high velocity gun. Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-28_Super_Heavy_Tank

The T28 SHT (aka T95 GMC) was very underpowered as well as difficult to transport. It used a dual set of tracks on each side and its suspension was modified from the M4A3E8 Sherman medium tank. The outer tracks were removable and designed to be bolted together and towed behind the tank. The end of the war, combined with other problems, effectively killed the project in 1947.

The British also designed a similar heavy assault tank called the A39 “Tortoise” in 1944. Heavily armored, it carried a 32 pounder QF gun and weighed 80 tons. Six prototypes were built, but it was difficult to transport. War’s end killed the program. Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortoise_heavy_assault_tank.

23 posted on 02/26/2013 3:13:13 PM PST by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: MasterGunner01

The vehicle you are talking about, was never put into production, the M103 was put into production and issued to troops, when I was in Germany(1959-1962)with the 13th Cav and later the 32nd armored, we had a company of them stationed at our Kaserne. A few years later all of them were withdrawn from service due to the reasons I previously stated. We had M41s, the M103 and M48A1 tanks all stationed at Ayers Kaserne. Later, in the summer of ‘61, as a Turret Mechanic, I helped take delivery of some of the first M60s to be issued to troops in Germany.


24 posted on 02/26/2013 3:25:12 PM PST by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: calex59
Quite right. The M103 was the Army (later Marines) 65-ton heavy gun tank from 1957 until the last ones were withdrawn in 1974. Here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M103_heavy_tank

What was amazing that the M103, M103A1 were gasoline powered and got 80 miles on 280 gallons. Replacing the gasoline engine with a twin, turbocharged diesel upped range to 280 miles using the same amount of fuel in the M103A2. The M103-series used a 120mm gun that could kill the heaviest Soviet-era armor.

Today's M1A1/M1A2 Abrams is very similar to the M103 series in size, weight, and armament; but is far superior in all the areas of armor, armament/fire control, and performance.

25 posted on 02/26/2013 3:45:34 PM PST by MasterGunner01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-25 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson