Talk:M48 Patton/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about M48 Patton. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Image copyright problem with Image:Pattonb.jpg
The image Image:Pattonb.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --05:49, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Home Defense Forces
- Kampfpanzer M48 A2C - replaced the Kampfpanzer M47 since the end of the fifties and saw service with the Home Defense Forces in reserve units until the early nineties
I guess this Home Defense Forces mean the Territorialheer. It is a quite sufficient description of the task of this Units, but it is no Translation an therefore no "term" as it seems to be in this Context.--WerWil (talk) 18:24, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
- it seems to be, that you haven't any other or any translation for Territorialheer, so what do you wanna say with your speech??? (Ah, not to forget - Home Dense Forces means HEIMATSCHUTZTRUPPE you know THAT term? --Sardines en huile (talk) 09:16, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
File:South Lebanon Army Patch.png Nominated for Deletion
|
An image used in this article, File:South Lebanon Army Patch.png, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 23:15, 9 February 2012 (UTC) |
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on M48 Patton. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150118070340/http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Articles/sultan-yakub.htm to http://www.waronline.org/IDF/Articles/sultan-yakub.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:14, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
m48 in other wars after vietnam war
did M48 Patton used during Sino-Vietnamese War and other wars in Third Indochina War? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scout MLG (talk • contribs) 00:12, 22 June 2018 (UTC)
M48A4 ?
I don't see any citation for the supposed explanation of the M48A4 that was never fielded. This notion of the Army intending to put "surplus M60 turrets" onto M48A3 hulls to make an "M48A4" seems highly suspect. Any "surplus M60 turrets" would have been on M60 hulls. There would have been no advantage in taking an M60 turret off an M60 hull to put it onto an M48A3 hull. N4aof (talk) 22:18, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
- What I understand is that there was an intention to refit M60 and M60A1 tanks with the new M60A2 turret (which was different), thus making those existing M60 and M60A1 turrets into a surplus. The potential variant of M48 hull with M60/M60A1 turret would be the M48A4. In the end the M60A2 was a bad design and was abandoned, so there were no M48A4s, except perhaps for some prototypes.--Xristar (talk) 22:33, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
What really happened was this.
1, The M60A1 came out in 1962. The M60A1 hull has more armor than the hull used on the original M60. So the Army wondered what to do with these now excess M60 hulls. Initially the Army wanted to put M60A2 turrets on them and use them to augment the M60A1 tank, but the gun/missile launcher system didn't live up to expectations. In conjunction to these visions, the Army explored the possibility of mating original variant of the M60's turret to the M48A3. This was thought to be a possible solution to upgrade existing M48A3 90mm gunned first generation MBTs already in widespread service.
2. M60A2 proved a failure and far fewer were produced than planned, so these turrets never became avaliable as originally envisioned.
3. Israel needed tanks after the Six Day War, and the USA was willing to sell the older M60 original variant to them, becoming the Magach 6.
A few test rig pilots were built but it never went into any scale of production or issued to any units. CIB2008 OEF (talk) 12:46, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
This lead to the next logical step in development, the M48A5. These conversions fitted the excess 105mm guns from withdrawn original M60 variant tanks and mounted them in the turret of the M48A3. CIB2008 OEF (talk) 12:58, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
M48 article is lacking in correct dates
I have recently been looking over the M48 Patton here on Wikipedia and find it grossly inaccurate in its timeline of production and US service.
The M48's timeline for US production (up to the M48A3) was between 1952 to 1959. Upgrades to the M48A5 ended in 1963. It was in Vietnam from 1964 to 1975. As US units rotated out, many M48A2C and M48A3s were left for the South Vietnamese Army. When American units re-equipped in the States, they got M60A1 tanks to replace them. M48A3s were withdrawn from combat (outside of Vietnam) by 1962 and the M48A5 served in some Guard units until 1982. It was used as a target for weapons and radar testing until the early 1990s.
I know that this can be proven and intend to correct these flaws as well as provide a clearer, well developed article. Please be patient CIB2008 OEF (talk) 22:53, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
Sources on the usage of the M36/T119 90 mm gun and other armament developments.
I have found zero primary sources stating that the M36/T119 90 mm gun was ever used on the M48. In fact, the technical manual for the T48 and M48 (TM 9-718B and TM 9-7012 respectively) both state the usage of the M41/T139 90 mm gun from the onset. Some pictures of the early T48 pilot vehicles indicate they may have been provisionally armed with the M36, however:
A new lightweight 90mm gun, identical in ballistic performance with the M47's T119, provided the main armament.
— Hunnicutt, Patton, page 85
as part of the characteristics of a new vehicle designated as the 90mm gun tank T48 as of February 27, 1951.
Externally, the M36 looks identical to the M41, so some confusion may have stemmed from there as both guns also used the Y-shaped and T-shaped muzzle brake at some point in their service history.
Also, the T137 HVAP-DS-T round for the M48 was developed with the T139 90 mm gun, not the T208 (a separate development) which fired APFS-DS "Arrow" projecties. One would find a summary of ammunition developed for the T139 in the Engineering Design Handbook, Ammunition Series Section 4, Design For Projection, Table 4-22.