ground vehicles Super M60AX - The Final Patton Tank

[RefrigerRaider 563]

M60AX looks cool

[dotEXCEL 5,968]

12 hours ago, *AceArchangel said:

Right sorry my bad, and again thanks for those pics of the mantlet

it was my pleasure

[Querulous1 3,276]

Looks good. I would guess it would be good to have a target of 3 BR8.7 tanks in each tree.

[XDrake991 278]

Quote

http://www.military-today.com/tanks/super_m48.htm

 

:thinking:

 

I know. I actually made a post about the Super M48 on reddit a while ago where I didnt get the name right.

 

 

Edited September 29, 2017 by XDrake991

[kev2go 5,112]

406mm turret, and 368mm RHA eqivalent hull? 

 

Sure i guess. will feel kinda wierd without having an M60A3 ( but given no difference in fCS no that much point having that)

 

 

 

 Cant say no but i feel T64A  should at least get 3bm15 as additional ammo option against a 80s tank with such upgraded armor.  Not even far in timeline. given its a mod 71 and the 3bm15 came out in 72.

Edited September 30, 2017 by kev2go

[RefrigerRaider 563]

57 minutes ago, kev2go said:

406mm turret, and 368mm RHA eqivalent hull? 

 

Sure i guess. will feel kinda wierd without having an M60A3 ( but given no difference in fCS no that much point having that)

 

 

 

 Cant say no but i feel T64A  should at least get 3bm15 as additional ammo option against a 80s tank with such upgraded armor.  Not even far in timeline. given its a mod 71 and the 3bm15 came out in 72.

that level of protection is likely against heat, against ke prob much lower

[_PabloSniper_ 2,142]

Obviously I support!

+1

[*AceArchangel 908]

On 9/29/2017 at 7:45 PM, kev2go said:

406mm turret, and 368mm RHA eqivalent hull? 

Sure i guess. will feel kinda wierd without having an M60A3 ( but given no difference in fCS no that much point having that)

 Cant say no but i feel T64A  should at least get 3bm15 as additional ammo option against a 80s tank with such upgraded armor.  Not even far in timeline. given its a mod 71 and the 3bm15 came out in 72.

As RefrigerRaider said that armour value is against HEAT ammo, Kinetic would not be as hindered.

 

On 9/29/2017 at 11:52 PM, _PabloSniper_ said:

Obviously I support!

+1

Much appreciated mate!

[Battered_Walrus 995]

I don't see why not

[kev2go 5,112]

14 hours ago, *AceArchangel said:

As RefrigerRaider said that armour value is against HEAT ammo, Kinetic would not be as hindered.

 

Much appreciated mate!

 

then what are the levels of protetion against Kinetic?

[MH4UAstragon 9,581]

Wow, an M60 with a properly thick mantlet.

 

+1 support

[kev2go 5,112]

On 2017-10-04 at 11:41 AM, MH4UAstragon said:

Wow, an M60 with a properly thick mantlet.

 

+1 support

 

 

assuming gajin doesnt screw up its armor modeeling.

 

Remember that the m60 and M60a1 only have weak mantlents because incompetance ( or intentionally for balance) not because the RL mantlets had only 127mm of effective armor.

Edited October 7, 2017 by kev2go

[Capt_D_K_Marcus 169]

+1 

 

both this and the M60A3 Patton

 

 

Edited November 10, 2017 by Capt_D_K_Marcus

[Cryptocurrency 1,197]

Stop giving germans American tanks its just plain weird. Give super m60 and put at 9.0-9.3 

[*AceArchangel 908]

3 hours ago, Capt_D_K_Marcus said:

+1 

 

both this and the M60A3 Patton

Thanks a lot!

I assume you are specifically speaking about the late M60A3 with the deleted copula, as there wasn't many differences other than that.

Personally I can't wait for the addition of the M48A5, as a good alternative to the M60.

 

35 minutes ago, WOPPER said:

Stop giving germans American tanks its just plain weird. Give super m60 and put at 9.0-9.3 

There are not many options for them at tier V and VI however, I would like to see more East German additions however, T-54s and T-55s... maybe soon^tm

Anyhow, 9.0 would be perfect, 9.3 is a little high, I don't believe it should be higher than the MBT-70.

[EXTOR_9 711]

it looks kinda odd but futuristic at the same time

[RefrigerRaider 563]

more tier 6 tanks for usa would be nice

[kev2go 5,112]

On 11/10/2017 at 1:06 PM, *AceArchangel said:

Thanks a lot!

I assume you are specifically speaking about the late M60A3 with the deleted copula, as there wasn't many differences other than that.

 

 

But i like the Cupola. It has that 50 Cal heavy MG. IN any case The Cupola isnt thaat big a problem compared to the Unhistorical 127mm meme mantlet armor.

 

 

Quote

Personally I can't wait for the addition of the M48A5, as a good alternative to the M60. 

 

Why does one need an alternative that came much later anyhow? M60 was already Built with a M48 turret. Hull is differnt but still  slightly better due to more effective angling vs the M48 Chasis, though Its pretty similar tank in effectivness. Does US Aneed another 7.7 tank?

 

A5 came in 75 ( 15 years later)  to shore up a tank shortage . the M48s needed to be Upgraded with the 105mm gun becasue by that point the 90mm was obselete, and they wount have been very usefull. Even So  Majority of M48A5's were  Reservist  & National Guard unit Tanks ( with the exception of the 2nd Infantry Division Stationed in Korea)

 

Edited November 20, 2017 by kev2go

[Jarms 1,556]

Would be pretty cool. +1

[RefrigerRaider 563]

I want because i like.

[ThunderShocker 27]

Better Armour for the M60? count me in! +1

Unless they decide to mess this up as well.

Edited January 25, 2018 by ThunderShocker

[RefrigerRaider 563]

I hope not, better armor and 21 hp/ton will really set the bar for us tier 6 tanks.

[ThunderShocker 27]

2 hours ago, RefrigerRaider said:

I hope not, better armor and 21 hp/ton will really set the bar for us tier 6 tanks.

One can dream

[muzzleflash98 1,697]

1 hour ago, RefrigerRaider said:

I hope not, better armor and 21 hp/ton will really set the bar for us tier 6 tanks.

 

The MBT-70 has 26 gross hp/ton and the XM803 (were it ever to be added) has 22, but I would still love an M60 with that kind of hp/ton. And perhaps it would have some better ammunition to boot.

[Nope 10,634]

so what is in the composite module shown in hunnicutt's diagram anyway

 

i mean, its not only going to be an actual module in-game and thus have inconsistent degrees of reliability, but its on a patton

 

no one remembers auyer and buda anymore

 

49 minutes ago, muzzleflash98 said:

The MBT-70 has 26 gross hp/ton and the XM803 (were it ever to be added) has 22, but I would still love an M60 with that kind of hp/ton. And perhaps it would have some better ammunition to boot.

 

speaking of which a friendly reminder that the mbt-70 should have been on the same level as a t-80 and not a t-64a which i have repeated countless times in the past

 

goddamn its the wot is7 problem all over again

Edited January 25, 2018 by Nope