Geoffrey Tillotson

........1Vehicles: 4

', ' , -'

, Geoffrey·TillotSdn~',,· ','s

". ' h

.\ .
\ .
~.:=-..: ~ : ::-..:..:.:-:- :-:-:-.: .:'". ~-.:. :' : ::::: c: =-:. ':'.:-:::­
=;;:-:i.:Om,: 0-: :T!c..:- :ram-: aJ . including photo­
:;te<:..-':i .

copying. recording or by any in format ion storage

and retrieval system. without permissi on from the
Publisher in writing.

Design by Robert C. Wi Icockson

© Geoffrey Tillotson 1981

Published by Ian Allan Ltd . Shepperton. Surrey,

and printed by Ian Allan Printing Ltd at their works
at Coombelands in Runnymede , England
 ontents

Preface 4

.-\bbreviations 5

From World War 1 to the Patton 6

- The M47 13

~ The M48 27

- \148 Variants 60

" :\148 in US Service 75

:\'148 in Foreign Service 88

- Parallel Developments 99

Appendices 110

Preface

When 1 was asked to write this book on the M48, I must example '2d Armored Division ' , ' Secretary for Defense ' .
admit that I had cel1ain reservations. 1 knew of others There have always been differences in usage on each side
working on the same subject, and over the years the M48 of the Atlantic, but these need not cause confusion . I have
has received considerable coverage in reference books used 'petrol' rather than 'gasoline', and for this I
and in magazines. Much of this material concentrates on apologise to my American friends.
the Vietnam War and on the two Middle East Wars. lowe a considerable debt to the many firms and
The M48 is now nearly 30 years old and cannot in all individuals who have helped in the preparation of this
fairness be regarded as a main battle tank of the current book. William Auerbach, George Balin , Gary Binder,
generation - that is, the T-62, Leopard, M60 and Paul Handel, Javier de Mazarrasa, Nathan Shiovitz and
Chieftain. The M48 belongs with the T-54 and Centurion. Russ Vaughan have all gone to great lengths on my behalf
I have therefore treated the M48 largely from a historical to provide photographs, and 1 am grateful to Thomas
point of view. Since the design of the M48 began before I Mayer for his reminiscences. Armor Magazine , The
was born, some might think that there are other good Military Engineer and Military Review have all kindly
grounds for taking this view. However my main reason allowed me to quote passages or to use photographs .
for taking the historical perspective is that it is the Colonel Robert leks and Richard P. Hunnicutt (whose
approach which 1 find the most interesting and for that I books on the Sherman and Pershing provided a detailed
make no apology. account of American tank development between 1930
Where possible I have used the official designations and 1950) have patiently answered my questions and
and nomenclature for tanks and other components. The generously provided photographs , and I am proud to
US Ordnance standardised nomenclature system largely acknowledge the assistance I have received from the two
avoids confusion, but it makes for repetitive reading and foremost experts on American AFV development.
lacks the appeal of. say, the variety of tank names in the Christopher Foss originally suggested the book and his
British Army. When describing measurements I have further suggestions , advice and the unlimited use of all his
kept to the units originally quoted and in most cases these material have been invaluable. I am glad to have this
are in 'imperial' units. There are two exceptions: the ton, chance to thank these individuals and to apologise to any
which in this book refers to the US (,short ' ) ton of friends I may have inadvertently overlooked.
2,000lb, and the gallon, which is the US gallon (0.83 Imp Finally I wish to acknowledge my family's tolerance
gal) . Metric units are also given and are in the Sl system , and support throughout the progress of the book. To Joan ,
conforming as closely as is reasonable. Brief notes on Clive and Anne: thank you for letting me get on with it.
nomenclature and units are given at the end of the book.
Spelling and terminology are other grey (or 'gray')
areas. The American spelling is used only in titles, for Geoffrey Tillotson

4
 Abbreviations

- - ~ :-,, ~ Defe nse '. AGl

Army Ground Forces GOCO Gove rnment Owned. Contractor
ac h side AP
Armour-pierci ng Operated
1 ha ve APC Armour-piercing , capped HE High Explosive
A.PDS Armour-piercing, discarding sa bot HEAT Hi gh Explosive. Anti-tank
APERS Anti-perso nnel (s pecifica ll y refers to shaped
and AP ? SDS Armour-pierci ng , fin stabilised , charges)
discardin g sabot HEP High Explosive , Pl asti c (US term
APG Aberdeen Proving Grou nd fo r HESH )
ARGADS Army Radar/Gun Air Defense HESH Hig h Explosive , Squash Head
System HVAP, HVTP, etc Hi gh Velocity AP , TP, etc
.-illV Armoured Recov ery Vehicle IR Infra- red
.-illVN Army of the Republi c of Vietnam MACOV Military Assistan ce Command .
(South Vietnamese Arm y) Vietnam
ATGW Anti -tank Guided Weapon MBT Main Battle Tank
AYLB Armoured Vehicle Launched MAP Mil itary Aid Program
Bridge NBC Nuclear, Bio logical and Chemi cal
B\lY Bowen -McLaughlin -York (US-CBR)
Company NVA North Vi etnamese Army
BLT Battalion Landing Team (USMC) PCF Pac ific Car & Foundry Com pany
C BR Chemica l, Bacteriological and PI Produ ct Improved
Radiol ogical (US) RISE Reli abi lit y Improved. Selected
C:\STR Canister Equipment
C ONARC Continental (US) Army Command ROKA Republic of Korea Arm y (South
- : ~ haye thi s DIVAD, DlVADS Division Air De fen se Gun System Korean Army)
E:\SURE Expedited , Non -S tanda rd , SAA Small Arms Ammunition
Urgently Required Equipment SHORADS Short Range Air Defen se System
res Fire Cont rol System SMK Smoke
f RG Federal Rep ubli c of Germany SP Self-propelled
(Wes t Germany) -T Tracer
F1' Fisca l Year TP, TPDS , etc Training Practi ce, etc
G L-\ADS Gun Low Altitude Air Defense VC Viet Cong
- - --~~ T ill otso n
- -1._ .. . System WP White phosphoru s

5
1. From World War 1
to the Patton

Today's Main Battle Tank (MBT) is a far cry from the M48s began in 1952 and ended in 1959, but there have
lumbering monsters which made their debut at Cambrai in been several models , most of which have also been
November 1917, The tank of the 1980s is a co mplicated supplied to foreign armies as well as the United States
machine, the design of which depend s on many factors all Army , Many of these armies have made various
of which in turn depend on each other. It is traditionally improvements to their M48s just as the US Army has, and
held that the tank combines the attributes of mobility , the latest M48A5 model is expected to remain in service
firepower and protection, and on this point practically until at least 1987. During its time in service the M48 has
everyone can agree, The US Army defines the MBT as a seen action throughout the world; in the Indo-Pakistan
tracked vehicle providing heavy armour protection and Wars of 1965 and 1971, the Middle East Wars of 1967
serving as the principal assault weapon of armoured and and 1973 , and in Vietnam .
infantry troops, The relative importance given to each Despite the publicity which greeted its announcement,
attribute is another question altogether and almost every there was little about the M48 which was revolutionary , It
expert has his own view, This is illustrated fairly well if evolved from an established line of design and its features
one compares two of NATO 's MBTs , the German were continued into its successor.
Leopard and the British Chieftain, Leopard is The M60 is the current US Army tank and was a logical
exceptionally agile but lacks protectio n while on the other development from the M48. A description of the M60 is
hand Chieftain has excellent protection, a gun which is outside the scope of this book but several other
second to none , and is less mobile, It was the difference experimental tank types are covered when they have
between the German and British users' perception of the featured in the story of the M48. For thi s reason the
way in which thei r tanks was to be used which resulted in history of American Medium Tanks has been traced back
two very different tanks . to the 1920s to show the succession of models and the
It might still be rel atively simple to agree on common changes , large and small, which resulted in the M48.
characteristics for a tank if it were only a case of choosing The practice of giving names to American tanks arose
the right balance of mobility, firepower and protection, during World War 2 when tanks were supplied to the
Howeve r, other factors have to be considered. The weight British Army, Un accustomed to referring to its steeds by
must be kept to such a value that the tank can still cross the impersonal alphanumerics such as M3 and M4 , the Royal
average bridge . The cost must be kept within a rigidly Armoured Corps preferred to have a name for each type of
defi ned budget or the user may not have the tank in tank , Out of courtesy to their American benefactors the
sufficient numbers. The chassis may have to perform models received were given the names of famous
other roles, such as recovery veh icles or self-propelled American generals , although 'General' was soon dropped
artillery. The tank must be easy to maintain ; th e training and the tanks were referred to as 'Grant', ' Sherman ',
of crew and maintenance personnel must be si mple. ' Chaffee ' and so on, The name ' Patton ' was first given to
Sometimes even the number of the crew must be the M46 Mediu m Tank which first appeared in 1949, but
considered, for in some armies manpower, rather than this time the name was given by the US Army. As the
fin ance, is the limiting factor. M46 was only intended to be an interim design it is
This book makes no attempt to compare the M48 with sometimes called the Patton I, indicating that there would
present day MBTs, This would not be a valid comparison be another tank with the same name. This later tank was
unless these other tanks were described in similar detail the M47, which followed in 1950. The M48 then assumed
and even then the comparison could not be entirely the name Patton III when it appeared in 1952. The name
objective. For this reason no comment was made on the has found little favour with troops although it is
rel ative effectiveness of Chieftain and Leopard when convenient to use it as a genera l name for any US medium
some of their differences were mentioned earlier. tank over the period from 1950 until the mid- l960s.
As a tank , the M48 is not new . The first production of The M48 is not a glamorous tank, It has none of the

6
 -: : ~ _: Ihere have
- - - ", :: al so been
- - -:- ,.-ru led States

• -. ~ ..:>uncement,
- - ::-::', 0: tionary. It
- . :- :.::.j :t5 features

sleek deadliness of the Chieftain, the cavalry background Above: The Soviet T-SS Medium Tank. An improved version of the
of the AMX-30 or the dash of the Leopard. Perhaps it is T-S4, the T-SS was in service throughout the Warsaw Pact during
not very dramatic, but it has been the Free World's most of the service life of the M48 series. C. F. Foss
equivalent of the T-S4, and of the tanks so far mentioned
onl y the Centurion, T-S4 series and M48 series have seen
Jction.
suspension known as the Vertical Volute Spring
Early developments Suspension (VVSS).
The bomber of the late 1920s was a flimsy contraption Directly or indirectly, the Infantry's control of tanks
'xhose appearance and performance clearly indicated its had led to them being regarded as mobile pillboxes, to
beginnings in World War 1. Similarly , most warship accompany infantry. This negative thinking meant that
designs of the time reflected the same concepts as those tanks were not appreciated as being able to take on other
which had prevailed a decade earlier. On land the picture tanks , or to fight in their own right. It was not until the
was very much the same. In the US Army, tanks were the closing months of World War 2 that this fact was fully
province of the Infantry and in 1930 all that existed was a assimilated into tactical doctrine. From the TS were
handful of Liberty Tanks and some Renault light tanks, developed in fairly rapid succession the Medium Tank
both of which types were of World War 1 vintage. M2 and then the Medium Tank M3, for by this time it was
Efforts to equip the Infantry with more modern tanks apparent that the coming war would require a new
during the 1920s and 1930s were hampered by financial generation of tank.
di fficulties and by opposition from some of the rival Thus by 1939 the American medium tank had taken on
fac tions within the US Army. It was not until 1940 that a completely new appearance. The 'mobile pillbox' form
. =:'::. The name the Infantry gave up its control of medium tanks, but four of hull gave way to the lower, more angled hull of the
. : _ ~ ",u g h it is years earlier a step had been taken in the right direction . In Medium Tank T6, later to become the M4 and known to
- . .:::..:. C S medium : 936 approval was given for the development of the TS all as the ' Sherman '. Today the result of such a
::.c =:2· 19605. \1 edium Tank. This tank combined for the first time a gun transformation would be described as a second generation
:: .::...:.s ~. 0 n e of the with all-round traverse, a rear engine and a new tank.

7
 The M3 was armed with a 75mm gun mounted in the armament, suspensions and transmissions. Eventually
hull, with limited traverse, and with a 37mm gun in a the new medium tank series was refined to a point where
turret. The Sherman dispensed with the 37mm gun and one or two models could be considered for standardisa­
mounted the 75mm gun in a turret with all-round traverse. tion and ordered into production. The T23E3 and T20E3
Later models introduced different hulls and engines for were therefore proposed for standardisation as the M27
convenience of mass production, but the American and M27B I Medium Tanks respectively. At the same
medium tank was still characterised by the same general time the Ordnance Department was asked to modify the
appearance and features. Even the introduction of a T23 to mount the new 90mm gun then under
modified suspension known as the Horizontal Volute development. Two versions of the modified T23 were to
Spring Suspension (HVSS) did little to alter the silhouette be built; the first with armour similar to the T23 and the
or characteristics of the Sherman, but by 1944 the second with heavier armour. These two tanks were
Ordnance Department and Army Ground Forces realised designated the Medium Tanks T25 and T26. Reports
that piecemeal improvements to the Sherman were not the from the European Theatre of Operations showed that the
answer. A completely new tank was needed. thin armour basis of the T25 would be inadequate and the
There was a school of thought which held that while the emphasis shifted to the T26E I, which was redesignated
Sherman may have lacked the hitting powerof its Gennan as a heavy tank in June 1944. This was a paper transaction
counterpalts, it was durable and reliable and, more which did not reflect any change in characteristics.
importantly , it was in mass production. However , a new After troop trials were complete the Ordnance
tank was on the way. As far back as 1942 battle Department was authorised to build 250 tanks, and by
experience with the Sherman in North Africa had shown February 1945 I 10 of these T26E3s had been produced.
the need for a better tank and the Ordnance Department The T26E3 went into action east of Aachen in late
had begun the design of the Medium Tank T20. A February, and in March 1945 was standardised as the
mockup was examined by senior officers from AGF and. Heavy Tank M26. From this point the evolution of the
was enthusiastically received. The Ordnance Committee M48 and indeed the M60 can be clearly traced. Fully
gave approval for the construction of two pilots of the T20 loaded, the M26 weighed 4lton and carried a 90mm gun.
and a few months later for two pilots each of the T22, with Its hull was assembled from sections of rolled plate and
a different transmission, and the T23, with a cast armour and the suspension consisted of six pairs of
' gas-electric' drive. Various additional models of the rubber-tyred roadwheels on each side supported on
T20, T22 and T23 were built with variations in torsion bars. In this form of suspension the springing

8
 : : ...es from the resistance of a high-tensile steel bar to a Ground Forces in the Army War College in Washington .
:-.. :5 ing force. The track was driven by a sprocket at the The Post War Equipment Review Board looked at every
:-~ .:r of the tank and the engine was mounted in a aspect of Army material and equipment , and recom­
: .:-:npartment at the rear of the hull , with very little mended the way ahead. The development of the M48
::~c) tru ding above the line of the top of the track. generally followed their recommendations , and from
The M26 was given the name 'General Pershing ' , after time to time in succeeding chapters further reference is
Gene ral John J. Pershing, who had been responsible for made to the report of this Board.
:'::e creation of the American Tank Corps in World War 1.
: was. however, more commonly known simply as the From the Pershing to the Patton
Pe rshing'. The Pershing arrived too late to make any In the years that followed the end of World War 2 ,
;reat contribution to World War 2, but production production of the Pershing continued and in all nearly
~ ominued after the war and when the Korean War broke 2,500 were built. Minor improvements were made and
o [ the Pershing was still the mainstay of the US Army. considerable experimental work was carried out. The
Towards the end of World War 2 a board of senior M26 was used as a testbed for various modifications to
oificers was assembled at the Headquarters of Army fire control equipment, armament (including rocket
launchers and machine gun cupolas) and to engines and
transmissions.
As various shortcomings became obvious in the M26,
development of a replacement tank was begun. This new
Left: A small number of M26 Pershings were supplied to the British tank was originally designated the M26E2 Medium Tank ,
Army , although nothing like the 1,610 reported by one authoritative but subsequently redesignated the T40 in 1948. Ten pilot
American journalist. This particular M26 has been renumbered models were authorised for the purpose of engineering
under the scheme introduced in the early 1950s. !WM test and in anticipation of these being found acceptable ,
Below: The bow machine gun opening of this M46 has been blanked the rework of 800 Pershings was scheduled to start at
off and the hull is practically the same as thaI oflhe M47 . The five Detroit Arsenal in July of 1949. By November, 16 tanks
track return rollers give the game away. US Army had been produced and the T40 had been standardised as

-',: .he same

ify the
:..': "n under

- - _~-.:.~s[i c s .
:J? Ordnance
- " - ;;.> . and by
: :>:";?- p~od uced.
- -; ;: :1 in late
as the

~ _" S!'\ pairs of

~ . - c;"O!1ed on
=--::- spri nging

9
the M46 Medium Tank. The name 'General Patton' was approach was that it was then possible to assemble a
bestowed on the new tank as was mentioned earlier. variety of vehicles relatively cheaply in the knowledge
It was mainly intended that the M46 should be more that each of the components was satisfactory in itself.
reliable and have better mobility than the M26, so the The CD-850-2 crossdrive transmission of the T40 was
armament and armour protection were largely un­ another product of the common component concept. The
changed. In the T40, the Ford GAF engine of the M26 Pe rshing had had a ' torqmatic' (sic) transmission,
was replaced by the Ordnance-Continental AV-1790-3 although the M26E2 had been used as a testbed for the
engine and a crossdrive transmission was incorporated. crossdrive unit. The new transmission gave control of
This new engine was one of the first of a range developed gear selection and steering by means of a single ' wobble
around the Common Component Concept, a scheme stick', while other refinements to the engine allowed the
forced upon the Army by postwar budget strictures as vehicle to operate with the engine submerged, or at
much as by common-sense . By settling on two basic temperatures down to -65°F (-54°C).
cylinder sizes it was possible to build up a range of A new design of track gave the vehicle more traction in
engines to suit almost any military purpose, from a heavy going, and a small track tension idler was added
one-cylinder engine for an auxiliary generator to a behind the rear roadwheel on each side to reduce the
16-cylinder tank engine. The M26E2 had in fact used the tendency to throw tracks when turning .
AV-1790-1, the first in the new series. This used the Tests of the M46 were conducted at Aberdeen Proving
larger 5 .75in cylinders. In a similar fashion to the range of Ground and at Fort Knox , Kentucky, from December
engine components many other components such as 1949 until April 1950, and revealed two serious failings.
roadwheels, track shoes, fire control instruments and The mechanical reliability was disappointing and
vision devices were standardised. The advantage of this certainly no improvement over the M26, and there was

10
: nadequate control over the steering of the vehicle. It is BadJy damaged or worn-out tanks were returned to the
ot c lear what action was taken to improve the reliabi lity, Tokyo Ordnance Depot of the US Army's Japan
. ut it was found that a simple modification to the routeing Logistical Command. Here the Japanese workforce could
of some hydraulic pipes in the transmission rectified the refurbish two Pattons each day at a reputed cost of only
steering defect. $700. Even if this figure is wrong by a factor of 100,
The Patton was popular with its crews in Korea. making the cost of rework $70,000, there is still a
..lJthough largely used in static defensive positions or as considerable saving over the cost of a new tank at
armoured artillery , it proved its superiority over the $245,000.
Russian T-34176 and T-34/85 used by the Communist The last 360 Pershings to be reworked were fitted with
forces. It also compared favourably with the Centurions the A V-1790-5B engine and CD-850-4 transmission and
in service with British Commonwealth forces. While the were known as the M46A 1, but the differences in engines
20pdr gun of the Centurion was superior to the 90mm gun and transmissions were minor. The M46 programme had
of the M46, American tank drivers were confident that been rushed through as an expedient to meet an urgent
they could put their tank anywhere a Centurion could go, operational requirement in 1948 and resulted in what was
and probably faster, although it compared less favourably essentially an updated Pershing. The same requirement
with the Sherman in difficult terrain . In generaJ, the was considered by a Panel on Armor whose work resulted
Patton was felt to be reliable by this time, particularly in in proposals for a family of three tanks which were
the transmission and oil cooling. designated Light Tank T41, Medium Tank T42 and
There were problems of course. The cooling fans often Heavy Tank T43.
failed in the hot, dusty summer conditions. A driver had At a conference at Detroit Arsenal on 2l September
to take care in his choice of gear ratios and soon learnt that 1948, the Military Characteristics of the T42 were
neutral turns on rocky or soft ground would break or established - although the earlier AGF Equipment
throw tracks. Anti-tank mines were a constant hazard and Review Board of 1945 had also given consideration to a
the escape hatches in the hull floor were too easily blown new medium tank to replace the M26. (' ... a medium
in. By welding old track sprockets on the outside of the tank, for light assault action, exploitation, and pursuit').
hatch the problem was overcome. The new tank was ' . . . to meet an urgent requirement
for a medium tank having a completely integrated fighting
compartment and incorporating modem components in
the hull. This new medium tank (is) to weigh
approximately 36ton , a l3ton saving of weight compared
Left: Tile Soviet T-34/85, tile main adversary of tile Perslling in
to the Medium Tank, M46.'
Korea. US Army By February 1949 the basic layouts were about 15%
complete. Layout drawings are intended to show the
Below: The first pilot model of tile T42 medium tank from which the relative positions of the major components and to ensure
turret of the M47 originated. US Army that the design does not appear to require undue emphasis

11

to be placed on anyone feature. From these drawings the performance before pilots were built a mobile test rig was
positions of the engine, transmission, radiators , exhausts assembled. This used the new AOS-895-1 engine and
and turret ring can be determined and designs for the hull General Motors CD-500 transmission in a turretless M46
and turret castings worked out. tank.
Development of the T42 was approved up to and The detailed mockup of the T42 was completed in
including the construction of wooden mockups and by about October 1950 , the drawings having been already
June 1949 a mockup was nearly complete. It showed the approved for production two months earlier. Six pilots
tank to be conventional in appearance , with a suspension were authorised and in December 1950 detailed
consisting of five pairs of roadwhee ls supported by characteristics were published.
torsion bars, and a long, narrow turret mounting a new The Korean War had broken out in June 1950, but the
90mm gun, and it looked as if the original weight estimate T42 had arrived too late to be of use as production could
of 36ton would be satisfied. not have been underway in significant quantities. Instead
One unusual feature of the T42 design was the large the US Army had to get by with the Pershing and the M46.
amount of secondary armament. The coaxial machine However, the T42 did play its part in developments
gun was the .50in Browning as opposed to the more usual leading up to the M48 tank, as the next chapter will show .
. 30in and there was in addition a .30in machine gun in a The six pilots were used to prove other components in the
remotely controlled blister on either side of the turret. continuing development of a medium tank- for example ,
These blister machine guns worked as a pair but were the T69 tank mounted a 90mm gun in an oscillating tutTet
elevated independently ofthe main armament and, with a on the hull of the T42 , and a T42 turret was used by the
maximum elevation of 45°, could be used against aircraft Chemical Corps at Edgewood Arsenal to develop a
as well as ground targets. The customary .50in Browning flamethrower version of the M47. In fact the T42
for the use of the commander was mounted on the turret programme was resutTected in April 1953 with the aim of
roof but the bow machine gun mounting was eliminated in producing a smaller, lighter and cheaper 90mm gun tank
the T42 . This reduced the crew from the five men of the under the designation Tank, 90mm Gun, T87 . Little more
M26 and M46 to four men and made more space available is known of thi s project but it may perhaps indicate that
for the stowage of ammunition. already the M48 was getting too big, too heavy and too
Another conference at Detroit in mid-1949 recom­ expensive.
mended that the turret blisters be eliminated from the
design until an effective control mechanism could be
demonstrated. At the same time an increase in weight to
38.25ton was allowed and it was specified that the turret
armour should be better sloped. The increase in weight
meant that the requirement for a speed of 35mph had to be Below: The 90mm Gun Tank T69, consisting of the hull of the T42
reduced to 30mph, and to get an idea of the new tank's with an oscillating turret. US Army
_- :c:st rig was
:: .~
-~ -
_ :'ng ine and
- _ = ::-:::kss M46

_ : ,'::lpleted in
2. TheM47
-; _ en already
=---:_::~ _ Six pilots
_':':: 0 detailed

- .:.::yc: lopments Development of the M47 The first trial modification to the M46 was known as the
- _- - ::: ~ \'. ill show. By 1950 the US Army found itself between the horns of a M46E1 , and thi s was later accepted for service as the
dilemma - whether to continue with the M26/M46 line M46A I, with the hull modifications but retaining the
with its reliability and familiarity, or to elect for the original hull casting. The new tank consisting of the T 42
- ' :: :':1 ingturret superior T42 then available for production. The eventual turret on the new hu]] was designated M47 and it is
-s u:;<': d by the decision was something of a surprise. The turret of the interesting to note that there is no record of a
: ) de\'elop a T42 was combined with the hull of the M46, and in one T-designation ever being assigned. Since the M47 never
- ::::: the T42 step a new tank appeared, combining the proven went through a prototype stage this is perhaps
_=--'1 he aim of components and mechanical sturdiness of the M46 with understandable .
:':1..' . gun tank the radically new turret of the T42. The new tank was The new gun and rangefinder of the T42 have been
- ! - Lirt le more ordered into production on 17 July 1950 although at that briefly mentioned previously. The 90mm Gun T119 was a
time no drawings existed. This was clearly a gamble, but completely new high velocity gun developed in parallel
it was hoped that any problems arising from the forced with the UK 20pdr tank gun. It had been intended that the
marriage of hull and turret could be overcome without 20pdr should be trialled in the M47, and it was hoped that
interrupting production. It should be pointed out, too , that the UK would test the T119 , known at the time as the
there was an historical precedent for this. In 1943 the TX-1, in the Centurion Mk 3. It does not appear that this
Ordnance Committee authorised the installation of the interchange ever took place. Although superficiall.y
turret of the experimental Medium Tank T23 on the hull similar to the 90mm Gun M3A 1 of the M46, the Tl19
of the Sherman to accommodate the new 76mm gun, and differed internally and ballistically, having a larger
~ -= -_ of! be T42 from this the new model went straight into production. chamber. It could thus fire any ammunition approved for
In fact the production of the new tank was not as simple the M3AJ gun, but the latter could not fire all the new
as it may have sounded . One of the requirements was for a ammunition developed for the T119 gun. There was
better engine cooling system and electrical harness, so another significant difference between the old and new
modifications had to be made to the M46 hull. The turrets and guns. While the 90mm guns in the M26 and
characteristic long shape of the T42 turret was in part due M46 had been developed from anti-aircraft guns and thus
to the fitting of the hull ventilating blower in the turret had recoil systems mounted externally around the breech
bustle, so the protruding rotoc1one housing between the of the gun, the T42 mounted the TI19 gun in a much
driver' s and co-driver' s hatches on the M46 was neater concentric recoil mechanism, reducing the
superfluous. The elimination of this housing and better intrusion into the gunner's working space in the turret.
sloping of the glacis improved the ballistic protection of Tank rangefinders were not new in 1950, but had only
the hull. just reached the point of sufficient refinement when they
The T42 tank had introduced other new features, could be considered for inclusion in an integrated fire
among them a turret rangefinder and a new 90mm gun. contro.! system. The T41 Stereoscopic Rangefinder of the
Production of range finders and guns was lagging behind T42 tank used a base of 60in and had a magnification of
tank production by several months, and the Office of the x7.5. The accuracy of a rangefinder is directly related to
Deputy Chief of Staff for Administration took note of this its optical base\ength but it was felt that the relatively
when work was authorised to proceed on the application short base of the T41 rangefinder would be adequate. It
of the T42 turret to the M46 hull on 13 July 1950. The also allowed the turret to be fairly narrow, which was
various changes to the M46 hull were specified and attractive ballistically .
directions issued that the new tank should supersede the Although the first M47s were issued without
M46 as soon as gun production would allow. Tanks from rangefinders, by March 1952 it was possible to conduct
initial production would be issued without rangefinders firing trials of 1\1475 fitted with rangefinders. These tests
but were to have provision for subsequent installation. and others were carried out at Camp Irwin and Aberdeen

13

--- -
;

Proving Ground and were in general quite successful, Production of the M47
although deficiencies were revealed in the hydraulic The invasion of South Korea on 25 June 1950 and the
traversing mechanism. On 16 April 1952 the Department subsequent involvement of the United Nations against the
of the Army announced its acceptance of the M47. The Chinese and North Korean armies had revealed the
gamble taken 20 months previously had paid off, and it alarming extent to which American tank production had
was estimated that a year had been taken off the normal declined. Tanks were not being produced; they were
development cycle. There had also been a saving in costs being rebuilt , and this did not justify the retention of large
and it was widely felt that the common component foundries and heavy industry solely for military use. A
concept had passed the crucial test. factory had been built in 1940 on a hundred acres of

14
 farm land outside Detroit and from these humble agreement with the Chrysler Corporation on the
beginnings arose the immense Detroit Tank Arsenal, reactivation of Detroit Arsenal.
ope rated by the Chrysler Corporation on behalf of the Other production facilities had suffered in a like
Government. During World War 2 this Govemment­ manner. The Cast Armor Plant at East Chicago, Indiana
wned , Contractor-operated (GOCO) plant grew to over had been a major producer of castings (mainly turrets) in
ihree million square feet of covered working area and World War 2 and had then been placed in suspended
orod uced over 22,000 new tanks. This valuable asset was animation. A new GOCO agreement was reached with
al lowed to decline at the end of the war as requirements American Steel Foundries of Chicago to operate the plant
diminished and although the need to reactivate the with an eventual workforce of some 6,000 men. The
..:vsenal was recognised at the outset of the Korean War, it rehabilitation of casting facilities at Pittsburgh, Califor­
·.\'as nearly two years before the Ordnance Corps reached nia, to be operated by the Columbia-Geneva Steel
Division of the US Steel Company cost $9.5 million. In
Left: The M47 under lesl al Aberdeen Proving Ground in Augusl New Orleans a Chrysler-operated Ordnance Plant was
19S1. US Anny via R. P. Hunnicutt built for the production of engines , and first deliveries
were due less than a year after work began on the factory.
Below lefl: This early M47 has the rangelinder openings blanked olT.
The muzzle of the coaxial .SOin machine gun is jusl visible above the
Detroit Arsenal was not the only producer of the M47.
9Qrnm gun barrel. US Anny On 22 November 1950 a contract was let to the American
Locomotive Company for the production of M47s in a
Below: M47 during durability testing at Aberdeen Proving Ground moderni sed plant at Schenectady, NY. It took five
in September 1952. US Anny via R. P. Hunnicutt months to convert this factory for the production of tanks,

'7 :' :'0 and the

~;-,s ~f ai nst
the
- ::-;;\';;aled the

- ::"D acres of

15

udldli I Ii
 ,. -'­ -­ -.--­ --­ --­

The :'\14­
Cn:": :­
\\'eig.bt : :
;.: . ~ ~ : ~-::- - :-
Lengtb: ~- -

.....
- -- -~ -
~ -­ - :;. ­ -

Above: A brand new M47 at the Alco plant at Schenectady, New short-sighted, for the Army stood to lose production of
York. A/co 3,000 tanks, resulting in a shortfall of almost 80% in
post-World War 2 tanks. Even during 1951, when the
North Koreans used armour very little, American tank
losses amounted to 400 tanks and although most of these
were Shermans the Army could ill afford to lose
but the plant eventually comprised a 300,000sq ft production while at the same time sustaining losses in
assembly facility with a 100,000sq ft secondary Korea. Of course, a di scussion of the strategic priorities
modification and test centre and a test track of 1.125 of the United States would be out of place in thi s account,
miles. but there may have been other, more pressing calls on
Despite the obvious need for new tank production, strategic materials. The availabi lity of production
there were al ways other demands on defence expenditure. materials was governed by the Controlled Materials Plan,
It is the normal practice in the USA for the Department of with the National Production Authority allocating those
Defense to submit requests for appropriations in the year resources in particularly short supply such as nickel.
or years ahead of the fiscal year in which the expenditure A total of 8,576 M47s was made of which Detroit
is planned. Production of the M47 was to be financed in Arsenal produced 3,440 and the American Locomotive
Fiscal Year CFY) 1951 and 1952 but as the fighting in Company another 5 , 136 before production was
Korea became more static , with a United Nations victory completed in November 1953. The M47 was too late for
seeming imminent , pressure grew for defence expendi­ Korea, so first deliveries to combat troops went to the US
ture to be cut in Fiscal Year 1963. This was somewhat 7th Army in Germany.

16
 Right: A top view of the M47 showing the elongated form of the
turret. The rangefinder ports are blanked ofT and there is also a
blanking plate over the bow machine gun port. US Army. via R. P.
HunnicuCl

The M47 described

Crew: S
Weight: 101 ,77Slb (4S2.7kN) combat loaded
92,8831b (413.2kN) less crew , ammo , fuel and
equipment
Length: 27ft 11.19in (S.S2m) overall, gun forward
23ft 3.7Sin (7 .09m) gun in travelling lock
20ft 10.31in (6.36m) hull only
Width: 11ft 6.2Sin (3.Slm) overall
11ft lin (3.38m) over tracks
Height: 11 ft (3.3Sm) to top of commander's MG
Ground contact length: 12ft lOin (3.91 m)
Track centre distance: 9ft 2in (2. 79m)
G/c1earance: 1ft 6.Sin (0.47m)
Turret ring diameter: Sft 9in (I. 7Sm)
Armament: Main - 90mm M36 (T 119) gun in M78
mount with 360° traverse and -So to + 19° elevation
Secondary-One .30in MI919A40r .SOin M2HB MG
(coaxial)
One .SOin M2H8 MG (commander's)
One.30inM1919A4EI MG(bow)
Ammunition carried: 90mm - 71 rounds
.SOin - 3,440 rounds
.30in-4, 12S rounds
Armour: Hull- From 4in (102mm) at 60° front to 2in
(SI mm) at 10° rear
x :...~ lose production of Turret- 4in (l02mm) at 40° front to 3in (76mm) at 3° rear
-"°1 of almost 80% in Engine: Continental A V -1790-S8 , -7 or -78, 810hp (at The cast turret of the M47, inherited from the T42, is
:~_-: ~ 1951, when the 2,SOOrev/min) air-cooled, four-stroke, 12-cylinder petrol perhaps its most characteristic feature. The long turret
~ ~ :: !e ..-\merican tank engine (bore and stroke S. 7Sin) compression ratio 6.S: I bustle, housing the radios, has a stowage box mounted on
Transmission:Allison CD-8S0-4, -4A or-48 the outside. Curiously, these boxes are perhaps the
Suspension: Torsion bar type (six pairs of road wheels feature of the M47 which has survived longest in the US
= ;;'J5 ai ning losses in and five dual return rollers per side) Army, for some units in Germany have salvaged these
:::K srrate gic priorities Power/weight ratio: IS. 9hp/ton (I . 33kW/kN) gross boxes and have mounted them on their M60Als. The
- :c -- ; :_:e in this account, Max tractive effort: 66,800lb (297 . 1kN) pointed gun shield, or mantlet, was 4.Sin thick and was
- ='~:: pressing calls on Tractive effort/weight ratio: 0.66 much narrower than that of earlier tanks. Inside the turret
- _Ey of production Max speed: 30mph (4SkmJh) the gun was mounted with a coaxial machine gun in the
: . . - ,,::= \-Iaterials Plan , Max gradient: 60% (31°) Combination Gun Mount M7S. Initially the .SOin
- -':":':1._' al locating those Trench crossing: Sft 6in (3 .S9m) Browning M2E I was used as the coaxial weapon but this
~:::. ;; u h as nickel. Vertical obstacle: 3ft (0.9 I m) was later replaced by the .30in machine gun
Fording depth: 4ft (I.22m) Ml9l9A4EI. The90mmGunTI 19, inan improved form
Turning radius: Pivot to infinity as the T 119El, was standardised as the M36 and had a
Fuel capacity: 233gal (882Iitre) vertically sliding, semi-automatic breech block . It was
Fuel consumption: 0.34mile/gal (0. 14Skmllitre) provided with a cylindrical blast deflector, although later
-= ::~Xl s went to the US Ground pressure: 14. 361b/sq in (99kPa) production guns were fitted with a T-head blast deflector.
Cruising range: 80 miles (12Skm) The commander's cupola had a single hatch and five

17
vision blocks, and another .SOin machine gun was corner of the e ngine compartment, drove a generator
pedestal-mounted on the turret roof as a dual-purpose which charged the vehicle's four 12V batteries, and was
weapon for the commander's use against air or ground popularly known as 'Little Joe ' .
targets. Also in the turret roof were an armoured cover Power was transmitted to the tracks by means of a
over the ventilating fan, and a small hatch through which crossdrive transmission with two forward and one reverse
the loader entered the tank. ranges . The driver used two main controls ; a foot throttle
The hull was constructed from welded flat armour plate and a hand range selector, or ' wobble-stick ' and could
and castings and was derived directly from the M46. The thus drive the vehicle with only one hand. Even though
hull of the T42 had been of welded plate construction but this type of transmission was not new there were initial
offered less ballistic protection. Belly escape hatches reliability problems due to the production changes made
were provided below the driver's and co-driver's to speed up the initial deployment of the M47. A doubling
positions and the design had been improved to overcome of the life of the transmission was later obtained by
the defects noted with the M46 in Korea. The engi ne tightening control of materials and tolerances in
compartment was separated from the crew compartment production. Access to the brakes and transmission for
by an amloured bulkhead and there were separate fire adjustment could be gained throu gh three circular hatches
extinguisher installations for each compartmen t. As well at the rear of the engine compartment, and these three
as the main engine , an auxiliary engine was provided for hatches are one of the characteristic features of the rear
charging the four 12V batteries. view of the M47.
The engine of the M47 was the Continental The suspension was of the torsion bar type typical of
A V -1790-SB , later production also using the - 7 or -78 American tanks since World War 2. On each side the re
models. As mentioned earlier, the Ordnance Corps had were six pairs of 26in rubber-tyred road wheels and there
achieved a commendable degree of standardisation was a characteristic gap between the first and second
among engine components , and of these components the roadwheels, due to the fact that the first pair on each side
A V -1790 series engines were V-12 air- cool ed engines were mounted on leading arms, the remainder being on
with the larger 149cu in (2 .4Slitre) cylinders giving a total trailing arms. The running gear also incorporated a small
displacement of I , 791.7cu in (29.36Iitre). The A V-1790­ idler wheel between the last roadwheel on each side and
S series produced 81 Obhp net (604kW) at 2, 800rev/mi n th e rear sprocket, and this idler was positioned to
but to avo id running the main engine merely to charge maintain track tension. Hydraulic shock absorbers were
batteries or to traverse the turret, a small auxiliary engine provided at the first, second, fifth and sixth wheel
was also fitted. The engine, located at the forward right stations.

" l Or!!
11"', .. : .II,r".
IlA PD . 'I '

18

 a generator
=-~ '. ' ;: • _ .. . _ control system, in those tanks which were Variants of the M47
: :,,-ccries. and was ~~d ti ned with the rangefinder, allowed targets to be M47EI
.- ;. ; :eJ at battle ranges of up to about 2,OOOyd, although The US agreed in 1951 to conduct troop trials of the
_-e -.!..~ :;~ti nder was actually calibrated to 5 ,OOOyd. The United Kingdom Fighting Vehicle Gun Control
- . ~ . nge fi nder had been standardised as the M 12 and Equipment (FVGCE) Mk 4, as fitted to the Centurion.
.~ _ -:ng produced by the Airtemp Division of the This system, made by Metropolitan Vickers, was not
::-~ " e~ Corporation in Dayton, Ohio. It was of the suitable for acceptance for US production and so could
-=::c-O-e o pic type , and required the operator to have a not be produced in the quantities required for a troop trial.
; - : cegree of stereoscopic vision. A ballistics drive Instead two M47s were fitted with the FVGCE Mk 4 and
_ - ·:=~:ed the integral computer in the rangefinder to the were made available to Army Field Forces for test, these
_-- _-:-.2..1de(s periscope, while a superelevation transmit­ tanks being designated M47El . The outcome of these
-:.. : :-nnec ted the rangefinder to the gun. Thus the tests is not known , but the significant difference from the
=- ~ ·e ~· 5 ac tion of reading the range automatically gun control system of the M47 was that the British sys tem
_;-.ec th e commander's periscope and the gun on the used electric traverse and a form of stabilisation. From
~ ; ;: : ociec ted. This was the first production integrated this point Minneapolis-Honeywell went on to develop a
-' .~ : l'. trol sys tem and as such had its problems. The similar system.
"-::>:- ~ " k " ati on transmitter required its own power supply,
. _: ~ I inverter had to be provided. More seriously, it M47E2
_....: :-:.-;x:typical of _, ':'::·icul t to train gunners to the required accuracy with When product improvement was being considered for the
- -:.,- e::.: side there :.- ~ -:ereoscopic type of rangefinder and troops quickly M48, similar improvements were also proposed for the
. ~ :-.rr.S and there : ,' ntidence in the instrument. Tank commanders M47. The de signation M47E2 was given to the proposed
::"-0: and second -:--~:'e :-:-e instead to use the time-honoured methods of vehicle which was to incorporate a modernised fire
---. ; ..:.:.~ o n each side -:; ~ es timation, with the commander 's periscope as the control system, a fuel injection engine and modified
-:-- - .1.1"\' sight. To allow the gun to be fired indirectly ­ transmission , an increase in protected fuel capacity and a
::::..-..: .' . as artillery outside the range of the rangefinder­ rear engine deck modified to reduce infra-red radiation.
: ':"':::ilut h indicator and range quadrants were provided. As far as can be determined, the M47E2 was not built.
- ~~ditio n to this fire control equipment, the driver was
:---, .i!e with a periscope to enable him to drive MJ02 Combat Engineer Vehicle
_ - :~ c - d ow n , and both the loader and the co-driver also A project for an armoured engineer vehicle based on the
_...: :'o:-ward-facing periscopes. M26 chassis was initiated in 1947 as the Tank, Pioneer,
~_ Th e .-\.\' -1790-5 series engine of the
- =d "1~8. The engine mounts were
- "-311,' locked , as opposed to the
-iOCking mounts of the diesel engine

_. ~ 1 -l8 .-\.3. The two oil bath air

, - ~ seen on top of the engine were

..,... >~ on the AV05-1790 engine by

--, .~ poe ai r cleaners, US Af71JY

- - :: The T39E2 combat engineer

~ , standardised as the M102, In
-=- ~ture the boom at the front is
erected. When not required it
...: ::i.sassembled and the components
- ~ on both sides of the hull on the
~ d5 provided. US Af71JY via Col R.

19
T39. Many concepts were proposed and rejected before Thus the T66 mounted the E25-30 flamethrower.) A
there was agreement that the vehicle should at least have a previous model, the E24-29, was fitted to the glacis of the
bulldozer blade , a winch. some mineclearing capability M46 tank which also towed a fuel trailer, but the E25-30
and the ability to launch assault bridges. There was less actually replaced the main armament of the M47 and its
agreement about the armament, and suggestions even fuel supply was contained within the hull. Like the M 102,
included the 8in rocket launcher T114. Eventually the the T66 never saw service, for by the time the T66 design
British 6.5in A VRE gun was selected and adopted as the was fully developed, its chassis, the M47 , was
T156. As the overall concept hardened, the requirement approaching obsolescence.
for mineclearing and bridgelaying was dropped and the
T39E I vehicle was built on the basis of the M46. Finally A.ssociated components
the M47 was used as the basis of the T39E2, which was Bulldozer, Earthmoving, Tank Mounting, M6
standardised as the M 102. It would seem that the efforts To assist in route clearance and digging-in, an add-on
to develop the M 102 were unrecognised, for although dozer kit was developed for the M47. It was only a slight
Tables of Entitlement were produced in which the M I 02 modification of the M3 dozer for the M46, and the
was available to engineer units in infantry and armoured operating mechanism was fitted in armoured pods below
divisions as well as to combat engineer battalions , by the the glacis plate. The controls were placed between the
time it could be produced the M47 chassis was becoming driver and co-driver. Nearly 500 kits were ordered but
obsolete and other vehicles such as the T I 18 were on the only 31 were delivered by the time the M47 was
way. designated Limited Standard in 1958. The bulldozer for
the M 102 combat engineer vehicle was designated the
T66 Flamethrower Vehicle M7.
In discussing the T42 medium tank earlier, mention was
made of a turret having been made available to the Flotation Device Tl5
Chemical Corps for flamethrower development. The T66 It was originally planned to adapt the M20E I swimming
used this turret which was fitted with the E30 flame gun device, developed for the M241ight tank, to the M47, but
and the E25 fuel system. (The 'E' designation is in 1953 the T 1.5 flotation device was tested. It consisted of
Chemical Corps practice, 'E' and 'R' being used in a four pontoon sections carried on large brackets bolted to
manner analogous to the Ordnance Corps use of ' T' and the glacis and engine decks, in addition to which long
'E'. It is normal to refer to flamethrowers by combining exhaust stacks were fitted. The pontoons were jettisoned
the flame gun and its fuel system in a single designation. on the tank's exit from the water obstacle, but the TI5

20
 -: -::.:: .\ \-+ ­ and its
=-_''' th ~ \1102,
--"' :~ T66 des ign
=--- ~ .. .17. \vas

-:- Gp left: The MI02. The hull of the M47 is obvious but the turret is consisted of nylon bladders which were inflated with a
e"cns;Yely modified. US Army quick-setting resin foam , mixed at the crossing site. The
bladders were supported in an aluminium platform on
-:- op: The TIS notation device takes to the water. US Army each side of the tank. At the same time as these attempts to
::z, : ~n a te d the float the M47 across water obstacles , a deep fording kit
,oo'-e: The TIS notation device on dry land. Immensely
c-..m bersome on land, and not much better in the water, the TIS was
was developed to enable the tank to drive through rivers
: a practical solution to the problem of crossing inland waterways and lakes.
~ takes. US Army
- , ':i mming Other modifications
- c :.'" :-'1·+7 . but M47M
J;:\ ice was clumsy and unwieldy. It marked the end of The firm of Bowen-McLaughlin- York announced a
-,::-empts by the US Army to float the M47, but the US complete rework of the M47 in 1969. This version, which
.-: ... h.ich long . IMine Corps developed the Device, MC-l, apparently they designated the M47M, has the A VDS-1790-2A
::::-0: : ~ !1 isoned :' 2 ~ the same purpose. This is the only record of any engine in an engine compartment similar to that of the
- ~_ :"~ : th e TlS .":-'IC involvement with the M47. The MC-l device M60, although the M47M's engine compartment actually

21

ul:l l l l l~1 1 ~
i I II
Above: The M47 modernised by Bowen-McLaughlin-York, known and T96 tanks were first tested on the M47, as was also the
as the M47M. Bowen-McLaughlin- York GEC Orion gas turbine engine. The UK 20pdr tank gun
was installed in an M47 in another test, and the Rheem
Manufacturing Company also carried out work on a rigid
mounting of the Tl19 gun in the M47 turret. In common
has about 20% more louvred grilles on the top deck, with most other combat vehicles a winterisation kit was
giv ing eve n better engine cooling. The track tension idler produced for the M47, and there was also a gunnery
is removed and the sixth wheel station moved nearly 4in training aid, the M 18 turret trainer.
to the rear to provide clearance between the engine oil pan
and the torsion bars. The opening for the hull machine The M47 in service
gun is sealed, and the exhaust for the hull personnel heater US Service
is led out through the now-defunct co-driver's hatch. The The M47 never saw action with the US Army and was
fuel capacity is greatly increased , and the performance of never given a familiar name or nickname. Man y
the M47M is very close to that of the M60. Commonality thousands were produced but the M47 was replaced fairly
with the M4RA3 and M60 is further enhanced by the quickl y in service by the M48. It also appeared when
installation of the Cadillac-Gage Constant Pressure tun'et several thousands of M46s were still around, and so the
control system, which is of the electro-hydraulic type. M47 found its way into the hands of reserve components
The 90mm gun is retained. BMY undertook conversion and allies fairly soon. First issues to the National Guard
of Iranian M47s to M47M standard and also organised the were announced in November 1953 and in the following
modification of Spanish M47s to the nearly-identical April the 40th (Grizzly) Southern California Armored
M47S. Division in Southern California received its first
battalion's-worth of M47s. Although the M47 and M48
The M47 was also used by the US Army as a testbed for served side by side for some time , the M47 was actually
various components of succeeding vehicles - not all of preferred for training, as the five-man crew allowed for
which were adopted. The flat track suspensions of the T95 20% more men to be trained per training cycle and it was

22
 Left: This photograph shows men of the
Jordanian Army mounting their M47
COl

Below: M47s of the Austrian Army on

exercise. The 90mm gun of the nearer
tank has the T-head blast deflector.
Ausrrian Army

.­ - :.s '... as also the easier to train drivers. Since there were plenty of M47s, obtained in late 1970s), Saudi Arabia, South Vietnam,
and the differences between the M47 and M48 (for Taiwan and Turkey. Belgium's M47s are now believed to
training purposes) were slight, the M47 remained in use be in reserve, and South Vietnam's tanks are assumed to
for training for a considerable period after its replacement have been absorbed into the Vietnamese Army after the
by the M48, Because of the appearance on the scene of the communist victory. There are unconfirmed reports that
M48, theM47 was classified Limited Standard in October South Africa has obtained a quantity of M47s . When
1955, just 5 '12 years after its acceptance into service - a Yugoslavia demonstrated her neutrality in the late 19505 ,
fairly short active life for a tanle several items of US equipment were supplied including
M47s. In 1978 50 of these M47s found their way to
Foreign service Ethiopia.
Belgium was the first foreign country to receive M47s and
nd was its first 10 tanks arrived in Antwerp docks on board the Foreign variants
- _~-:-:O' , :vtany vessel Steenstraete on 28 June 1952, in what must have Austria
, -~ : l':cd fairly been a most reassuring gesture under the Mutual Security In the early 1970s it was reported that Austria was
~xrcd when Agency programme , for by this time the US Army was considering re-engining its 120 M47s with a diesel
::. 3.od so the only about 25% re-equipped . 62 M47s remain in service. engine. Little more was heard of this suggestion, but in
Pakistan received 380 M47s under the Military Aid view of Austria's order for an additional 60 M60Als in
-=~' n2.1 Guard Program, and these tanks saw action in the 1965 November 1978 it may be assumed that plans to re-engine
- - ::-:: :'o!lowing Indo-Pakistan War. Since then the M47 has also been the M47 have been dropped.
:_ .: .:-:-_: ~ :\rrnored involved in operations by the Jordanian Army during the
=--= .. -:- .: ' :t5 first 1967 Middle East War and against Palestinian guerrillas , France
- _. _ .~ - J.nd M48 and it was also used by the Turkish Army in the 1974 Many M47s were received and these saw service for
.!. - " 2.S ac tually invasion of Cyprus . many years in the French Army, including active service
':':'Iowed for M47s were also supplied to Brazil , Greece (reported to during the 1956 Anglo-French operations at Suez. In
- : : :.e 2.n it was have c350 in service), Jordan, Pakistan, Portugal (c30 1967 the government armament agency DTAT reported

23
 the development of a 105mm gun for the M47 which about 60%. OTO-Melara estimated that the cost of
could fire the same ammunition as the AMX-30, and in regunning the M47 would be between If12th and Ifl,th of
particular the notorious 'Obus G' , a hollow charge the cost of a new tank fitted with the IOSmm gun. As
mounted on ball bearings inside the projectile casing. OTO-Melara had produced the M60AI under licence for
Little more was heard of this development of the M47. the Italian Army, the firm was familiar with the engine
and transmission, so it was not surprising that attention
Germany (Federal Republic of) was given to installing the diesel engine of the M60 in the
The Bundeswehr made little effort to improve the M47 for M47. The vehicle which was fitted with the
its own benefit. One chassis was used as a testbed for the A VDS-1790-2A engine was also fitted with the I05mm
engine for Leopard l, but apart from this, other gun and was probably a very potent tank, although it is not
modifications have been commercial proposals. Among thought that either of the OTO-Melara conversions was
these is Rheinmetall' s proposal to fit their 105mm adopted by the Italian Army.
smoothbore gun in place of the M47's 90mm gun, but this Another Italian firm, Astra SpA of Piacenza, made a
new gun has yet to attract any customers. study of the retrofit of the M47 and M48A I , and one M47
was actually re-engined. The engine used was the Detroit
Iran Diesel (General Motors) 12V71T, which is the engine
A tank manufacturing facility was constructed in Iran by used in the MI07 and MlO9 series of self-propelled
the American firm of Bowen-McLaughlin-York between artillery. The same firm also produced a bridgelayer
1970 and 1972. M47s were rebuilt to M47M standard in based on the M47, although it was claimed that the M48,
this plant and two were fitted with a Hughes laser M60 and Centurion chassis could also be employed. This
rangefinder for test purposes.

Italy
The firm of OTO Me lara of La Spezia undertook the Below: The M47 re-engined by Astra SpA. The turret and
installation of the UK 10Smm L7AI tank gun in the M47 suspension are unchanged but the engine deck has been modified to
after a study which bega n in 1964. Trials of the cope with the ditTerent air intake and exhaust arrangements of the
up-gunned M47 showed it to be more stable when firing General Motors 12V71 diesel and its associated cooling. Astra
via C. F. Foss
than with the 90mm gun. Since the 105mm gun actually
has a smaller outside diameter than the 90mm gun , it was RighI: The M47 AVLB developed by the Italian firm of Astra SpA.
a relatively simple matter to fit it into the 90mm mounting Astra via C. F. Foss
with a threaded adapter, and barrel changing in the field
was also simplified. At the same time inner sup­ Below right : OTO Melara upgunning of M48 with installation of a
plementary fuel tanks were added to increase the range by British IOSmm gun.

24

~~~~~.------------------ - ­
 cost of \ehicle, known as the ' Veicolo corazzato lancia-porte Spain
Ijlsth of ;:lasse 60 , Modello A26' was interesting in that the ends The Spanish Army received a total of 400 M47s under the
of the bridge could form adjustable piers to allow mUltiple MAP. In 1976 work began on the modernisation of some
bridging of gaps of up to 38m (124ft). It was reported in of these M47s. Bowen-McLaughlin-York Co, of York,
1979 that 600 M47s had been sold to the FRG from Pennsylvania , supervised the modification and assembly
surplus Italian Anny stocks. of the first M47S, which was similar to the M47M
modified for Iran. Production of the M47S , known in
'x it h the Korea Spain as the M47E , was supervised by Chrysler Espana at
An expedient armoured recovery vehicle (ARY) was their Villaverde plant. In the M47E the German MG42/59
produced by the removal of the annament from some of machine gun is fitted as the coaxial machine gun. Of the
its M47s. A winch was installed in the fighting 400 M47s in Spanish service, it is believed that Chrysler
compartment and the cable fed out through the gun modified between 100 and 200 tanks - sufficient to equip
opening in the mantlet. two to four battalions.
_.:.;-,jone M47
~ :h.: Detroit
- _- ...s :.he engine
-­ :~: :-- ~ro pelled
. :idgelayer
- : :...- ~ : the M48,
This

no n or a .... .;: ..... :

.. ..
- .' -. ~-

25

Above: The British Aerospace Corporation's installation of

Swingfire ATGWs on an M47, shown at Farnborough in 1967.
C. F. Foss

Right: A rear view of the Swingfire installation on the M47. The

tank still bears a Belgian Army number. BAe

UK
Although not a user of the M47, various British
component manufacturers put forward schemes for the
improvement of the M47. The British Aircraft
Corporation proposed mounting four of its Swingfire
anti-tank missiles on the M47 and a tank so fitted was less space for the cooling system but the Airscrew
shown at Famborough in 1967. A proposal to re-engine Howden design took less space and less engine power. A
the M47 with a GM diesel engine involved the Weybridge new gun control system was suggested by Marconi for
firm of Airscrew Howden, with their considerable those countries using the M47, but none of these three
experience of cooling tank engines. The diesel engine left improvements met with any commercial success.

26

--~--~
3. TheM48

Development of the M48 • the frontal armour should be a minimum of 4in

Deficiencies in the M47 were apparent even before angled at 60° and elsewhere a maximum within the
production began. The Ordnance Corps was confident weight limitation but not less than proof against
that its amalgamation of the hull of the 46ton M46 with SAA and a near airburst of light artillery
the turret of the 36ton T42 would not pose any • it was desirable that the crew be protected against
engineering problems , and its confidence was largely the disabling effects of a 20lb mine, and
justified as the previous chapter discussed . However, a • there should be provision in the design for
36-ton tank must inevitably be designed to a lower level protection against flame attack as long as th e normal
of protection than a tank IO ton heavier, and the earliest fighting efficiency remained unimpaired
assessments of the M47 all agreed that its turret protection It was accepted that certain of these characteristics could
was generally lower than that of the hull . The fuel carried not be incorporated into what was to become the M48 , but
by the M47 was poorly protected and was insufficient to in order to kee p abreast of technology and to incorporate
carry the tank through its battlefield day. For some time improvements when they were feasible, other models of
brand new M47s were stored in Ordnance depots until medium tank were considered. These are covered later.
Anny Field Forces were satisfied that the defects were at A significant change in nomenclature was made at this
least recognised. point. Before 1950, tanks were designated as light,
Work had begun on the new medium tank even while medium and heavy, but thereafter it was the tank gun
the M47 was being accepted as the US Almy' s standard which determined the role of the tank. Tanks were
medium tank. The AGF Equipment Review Board's referred to in general terms as, for example , ' medium gun
recommendations have been quoted earlier in the book , tanks', or ' heavy gun tanks ' . In specific terms , each
but in 1950 revised characteristics were stated in the model was now designated by the calibre of its gun . In
Army Equipment Development Guide (the Hodge November 1950 the nomenclature of the M47 was
Report) . These characteristics were agreed in 1951 by the changed from 'Tank, Medium, M47' to 'Tank , 90mm
United States, Great Britain and Canada at the Tripartite Gun , M47' and this form of nomenclature applied to the
Conference on Armour. The main features of these M48 series from the very beginning.
revised military characteristics were: The design study for the M48 began in October 1950
• the combat loaded weight should not exceed when Detroit Arsenal first began to study improvements
90,000lb to the M47 design. As well as improving the distribution
• the height over the highest fixed feature should not of armour protection, the study aimed to produce a tank
exceed 9ft 8in with lower ground pressure, greater range, a more
• the ground clearance should be a minimum of Ift 5in durable fire control system and improved ammunition for
• the gun should defeat 4in armour angled at 60° at the 90mm gun . It was highly desirable that the excellent
2 ,OOOyd with an 80% chance of a first round hit , manoeuvrability and overall mobility of the M47 be
using kinetic energy ammunition and a rangefinder retained .
• the speed should not be less than 28mph Detroit's design study was accepted by the Army and
• fuel consumption should be better than 0.72 on 8 December 1950 an order for the design and
miles/gal at 22mph. Army Field Forces later manufacture of the Tank , 90mm Gun, T48 was given to
concurred in these characteristics, adding that: the Chrysler Corporation. Chrysler began work on 22
• any tank considered for production before 1958 December 1950 and were to produce six vehicles as
should not weigh more than 50ton; engineering pilots - the first to be completed by the end of
• the tank must have built-in fuel (protected) to enable 1951. One of these prototypes was earmarked for the
the vehicle to drive for 120 miles, at a rate of 25 Marine Corps.
miles in each 2h . Jettison tanks would be acceptable An immense factory had ~een built in under 12 months

27
 Right: The second pilot T48 at
Aberdeen Proving Ground in April
1952. The 90mm gun is at its maximum
elevation of 20'. US Army

Below: The T48 is displayed to the press

at Aberdeen Proving Ground in
October 1952. The T1l9 gun and the
massive mantlet are clearly shown.
US Army

by the Chrysler Corporation outside the small town of Arsenal in 1940. The Hon Frank Pace Jr, Secretary for the
Newark, Delaware. Here the first T48 was completed on Army, performed the unveiling ceremony before 1,000
14 December 1951 - with just two weeks to spare. The guests and the T48 obligingly burst through paper screens
Delaware Tank Plant covered 240 acres and consisted of and snapped telegraph poles in similar fashion to the
five principal buildings, the largest of which itself unveiling of the M3 Medium in 1940. Later, Mrs Beatrice
covered 900 ,000sq ft (20.7 acres) , and there was also a Ayer Patton, widow of the flamboyant General George S.
one-mile test track within the Plant. Patton, named the tank the 'Patton 48' in honour of her
The T48 was first publicly shown on 1 July 1952 at the late husband. General Patton was kiJled in 1945 but his
Delaware Tank Plant, although service trials had begun a widow lived until 1953 having christened a tank her
month earlier. The Chrysler Corporation was represented husband would have been proud of.
by the chairman of the board, Mr K. T. Keller, and the The Chrysler Corporation rightly took most of the
President of the Chrysler Corporation , Mr L. L. Colbert. credits at the unveiling ceremony, but behind the scenes
Mr Keller had been the driving force behind the rapid other large automotive concerns were becoming involved
initial construction and rapid growth of Detroit Tank with the T48. On 2 March 1951 the Ford Motor Company

28

--- .. _- ­
 /

Right: As part of the festivities at the roll-out ceremony, this T48

went though the smashing of telegraph poles which was traditional
since the days of the M3 Medium. US Army

Below: An exuberant performance by one of the pilot T48s at the

unveiling ceremony at Newark on 1 July 1952. The gun at the
commander's hatch is a .30in machine gun. US Army

Bottom: Mrs Beatrice Ayer Patton and her daughter-in-law, Mrs

George S. Patton 111, sample the ride in a T48 after the naming
ceremony at Newark. US Army

- =-:-: :::-":;I ~ involved

-: - !~ : ' ~C ompany
 Left: The T48 under test at Army Field
Forces Board No 2 at Fort Knox. The
90mm gun is fully depressed (_9°). RAe
Tank Museum

Below: The requirement for the T48

called for the ability to cross an eight
foot trench. The test on the bridging
device at Aberdeen showed that it could
cross a trench of 8ft 6in, although the
towing pintle had to be removed to
negotiate any trench ormore than 7ft .
USAnny

was awarded a contract for production of 400 T48s, and Design Coordinating Committee met monthly to oversee
five days later the Fisher Body Division of General the project.
Motors received a similar letter contract. Chrysler's Now that the T48 had been revealed to the public it was
contract was for 548 tanks. Meanwhile , much of the a suitable time to assess the new tank against the M47 .
production capacity of the Detroit Arsenal was standing There were many improvements, such as the wider
idle, but in May of 1952 Chrysler and the Department of tracks , the 'quick-change' gun barrel, the longer-base
the Army reached agreement that Chrysler should once optical rangefinder and the armour protection. The T48
more take over Detroit Arsenal on a GOCO basis. A T48 was in fact the first American tank to have a one-piece cast

30
hull - even the Sherman and M47 had consisted of cast Above: A top view of the T48 with all hatches open. US Anny via
sections welded together. But there was a price to pay for R . P. Hunnicutt
some of these improvements. The combination of an
air-cooled petrol engine and the crossdrive transmission
of the M47 was known to result in a high consumption of Suspension: As M47

fuel and the M47's range of 85 miles was very poor. The Power/weight ratio: 18hp/ton (1.5 IkW/kN) gross

same combination in the T48, with more weight and less Max tractive effort: 78,OOOlb (347kN)

fuel, gave an unacceptably low range of 70 miles. The Tractive effort/weight ratio: 0.86

maximum speed was also slightly reduced. Max speed: 31 .8mph (SJkm/h)

Max gradient: 60% (31°)

Crew: 4 Trench crossing: 8ft 6in (2.S9m)

Weight: c90,000lb (400.3kN) combat loaded Vertical obstacle: 3ft (0 . 91m)

c83 ,4001b (371kN) less crew , ammo, fuel and equipment Fording depth: 4ft (1.22m) unprepared

Length: 28ft 2.25in (8.59m) overall , gun forward Turning radius: Pivot to infinity

24ft 1.5in (7. 35m) gun in travelling lock Fuel capacity: 21Sgal (813Iitre)

22ft 0.063in (6.71 m) hull only Fuel consumption: 0.3mile/gal (0.13km1litre)

Width: 12ft 2in (3.71 m) overall Ground pressure: 10.2lb/sq in (70.3kPa)

11ft 9in (3.63m) over tracks Cruising range: c I 00 miles (160km)

Height: 10ft7.62Sin (3.24m) to top of commander's MG

Ground contact length: 13ft 1.5in (4.00m) The significant details of the T48 lie largely in those
Track centre distance: 9ft 7in (2. 92m) areas in which it surpassed the M47, and these fall into
G/clearance: 1ft 6in (0.46m) three groups: armament and fire control, armour
Turret ring diameter: 7ft I in (2.16m) protection and suspension.
Armament: Main - 90mm T139 gun in T 148 mount with The 90mm Gun M36 (TI19EI) of the M47 was
360° traverse and _9° to + 20° elevation replaced by the TI39 Gun developed by Watervliet
Secondary - Either one .SOin M2El (left) and one .30in Arsenal. Both guns were identical ballistically and in
M 1919A4EI (right) or two TI53 MGs (coaxial) their ammunition and chamber dimensions . The
One .SOin M2HB MG (commander's) difference lay in the way in which the barrel was locked
Ammunition carried: 90mm - 60 rounds into the breech ring. The barrel of the T 139 gun could be
.SOin - 2,500 rounds . . unscrewed, after the removal of a locking key , and
' 2 500 d dependlfig on coaXIal weapons
. 301 0 - , roun s replaced within ISmin by a trained tank crew whereas it
Armour: Hull - From 4. 75in (120mm) at 60° front to was a task for a workshop to change the barrel of the M36
I. 37Sin (3Smm) at 30° rear gun of the M47.
Turret- 7in (l76mm) at 0° front (inc!uding4.Sin The T46 rangefinder of the T48 had a baselength of 6ft
(l14mm) ofTI48 mount) to 2in (5 I mm) at 0° rear 7in , compared to the Sft baselength of the MI2
Engine: A Y-1790-SB details as for M47 rangefinder in the M47. It also gave x 10 magnification as
Transmission: Allison CD-8S0-4 opposed to x7.S of the MI2 and thus offered greater

31

.,Iulllllllillilil
 -., ~ . .: - "'-"--­

Above: The Chrysler mount for the .500n MG is well shown on this Detroit until June 1955 in a $200million contract which
T48. US Army started in August 1952. Their bid for this contract was
reputedly 12% lower than the Chrysler bid, although in
earlier bidding Chrysler had secured a similar
$160million contract by a margin of $7.6million. 120
accuracy in ranging. In fact it was claimed to make M48s from early production had non-ballistic hulls ,
ranging 43% more accurate but this figure may be probably of mild steel, and were assigned for training
optimistic. only. The designation M48C was given, and the letter 'C'
The cast hull and turret of the T48 were better shaped was embossed at the front of the right hand side of the
than the M47. The one-piece hull was simpler to produce hull.
while the elliptical turret was better ballistically and also The production of the M48 presents a complex picture.
allowed the longer rangefinder to be operated by the tank There were at times three production lines, each working
commander. The new design also made possible an at different rates, and in 1953 production had to be slowed
increase in the turret ring diameter from the 69in of the in order to keep all the lines going, although construction
M47 which had been a feature of American medium tanks of a new Tank Modification Plant adjacent to the
since the Sherman. The turret ring of the T48 was 85in in Delaware Tank Plant was still under way. It was decided e re.... : .:
diameter. The effect of this was to allow for the that after April 1954 Chrysler would cease manufacture at We igh! : ~~
installation of a larger gun at a later date, the longer recoil the Delaware Tank Plant but would preserve the tooling ~ .3 _ 1:.:':: - ­
being accommodated inside the increased diameter. for future use. The Tank Modification Plant was to be
Changes to the suspension included the use of wider completed and used to store these machine tools. It was Lengt h: : - :­ ::
tracks and the elimination of the track te nsion idler of the planned to use the additional facility to process, outfit and
M47. A new type of shock absorber or 'snubber' was used modify tanks but these tasks could now be accomplished
in which energy was absorbed in concentric tubes lined by the Tank Plant, and the Modification Plant became Widt h : : : -'­ -
with the material used for brake linings. These friction known as the Delaware Tank Depot. Throughout the
type shock absorbers were estimated to last five to six production the Chrysler Corporation retained the design
times as long as the normal hydraulic type. parentage of the M48.
Several estimates of the unit cost of the M48 have been
Production of the M48 made, ranging from $110,000 to over $250,000. Of
In May 1953 the T48 was adopted as standard with the course, inflation later made these prices less meaningful,
nomenclature 'Tank, 90mm Gun, M48'. By this time for by 1978 it was estimated that the M48A5 represented
production was well under way at Ford and Fisher Body capital investment of almost $500,000. The inventory
as well as at Chrysler, and deliveries ofT48s had begun in price quoted in 1967 for an M48 was $130,80 I per copy,
April 1952. Chrysler produced a total of 2,538 T48s and and this seems a fairly reasonable figure . It represents the .-\.m.m
M48s up to July 1953, after which the Newark plant cost of some of the production resources which went into
turned to manufacture of the T43 Heavy Tank. Ford producing a tank: 90 ,000lb steel; 6,5121b bauxite, from
produced 900 M48s in their $50million factory in which aluminium is extracted (65% had to be imported);
Livonia, Detroit, while Fisher Body turned out M48s in 1,800lb rubber; 950lb manganese, of which 92% was

32
 imported ; 1,4841b copper , of which 29% was imported ; TUiTet- From 7in (176mm) at40° (including4.25in
5201b nickel, of which 92 % was imported; 60lb cotton; (110mm) ofM87 mount) front to 2.5in (54mm) at 30° rear
1 ,9151b chromium, of which 99% was imported ; 100lb Engine: Continental A V-1790-5 series details as for M47
tin, of which 78% was imported; and 75,000 man-hours Transmission: Allison CD-850-4
of labour. Suspension: As T48
The costs of production overheads such as energy and Power/weight ratio: 16 Ahp/ton (l . 37k WIkN) gross
transportation are not included , but the figures give an Max tractive effort: 78,OOOlb (347kN)
idea of the raw materials and labour involved . Tractive effort/weight ratio: 0.79
Although the manufacture of tanks would not normally Max speed: 26mph (42km1h)
be considered a commercially competitive business, there Max gradient, Trench crOSSing, Vertical obstacle,
are nonetheless other pressures on the tank designer, and Fording depth, Turning radius: As T48
these are stronger than market forces. He must seek Fuel capacity: 215gal (813Iitre)
constant improvements to his own design, and the Fuel consumption: 0.3mile/gal (0. 13km/litre)
simultaneous improvements to enemy tanks provide an Ground pressure: 11.2Ib/sq in (77 AkPa)
additional stimulus . While the standardised M48 was Cruising range: 70 miles (I 12km)
being manufactured, work on the T48 continued and in
the M48El the fuel-injection A VI-1790-8 engine and The hard lines of the M47 were somewhat softened in the
austere XT -1400 transmission were tested. The Report of M48 , and tank recognition caricatures soon reflected this.
the 1951 Tripartite Conference on Armour included a Both the M47 and the contemporary Centurion were of a
'-'-"'-~-~
- .:on tract which comparison of the T48 with the Centurion Mark 3, then distinctly angular appearance but the M48 was
~ co ntract was the UK's medium tank. The T48's armour was thicker, characterised by rather more graceful curves. The floor of
. :-:j . al though in but cast, and overall the M48 was some 8-1 Oton (short the hull was rounded to minimise the effect of mine blast .
a similar tons) lighter. The extra coaxial machine gun met with The upper hull was also rounded and the pointed edge of
~ : - . mill ion. 120 approval, and the ease of control and simplicity of driver the glacis had a distinctive boat-shaped rounding as a
• - . - ·:'31 listic hulls, training in the crossdrive transmission compared well result of the bevelling of two curved surfaces. Similarly
__ : :-~ for training with the Centurion's crash gearbox. Against these credits the turret was ellipsoidal in shape, rather like the 'frying
_ ~ ::.:. ' the letter 'C' the debit side was equally long. The power train was pan' turret of the Josef Stalin tank (although this
~ - : - . - "--."ld side of the complicated to maintain, expensive and time-consuming comparison was not drawn in .contemporary press
to manufacture and costly to operate. The T48 carried less stories').
ammunition for its (unproven) gun, and the fire control The hull was an armour casting with a floor of armour
system was also an unknown quantity. plate. Since any opening weakens the structure, an effort
was made to reduce the number of holes required in the
hull casting. "levertheless there were 13 different access
The M48 Described
holes, hatches and drain holes in the armour floor - and
Crew: 4 this figure does not include the holes for the torsion bar
Weight: 99,0001b (440AkN) combat loaded suspension housings. A bulkhead separated the hull space
93, 125lb (414.2kN) less crew, ammo, fuel and into two parts. In the fighting compartment the driver's
equipment controls were grouped in the centre of the bow of the tank.
Length: 27ft 8.5in (8A5m) overall, gun forward Behind the driver came the turret. The rear portion of the
24ft 5in (7 A4m) gun in travelling lock hull was the engine compartment, which housed the main
22ft (6.71m) hull only engine, auxiliary engine, transmission and fuel tanks. A
Width: 12ft4in (3.76m) overall patchwork of armoured grille covers allowed access to
12ft 3in (3 .74m) over tracks each component and to the fuel and oil filler spouts . The
Height, Ground contact length, Track centre engine covers were louvred to allow the forced circuJation
distance: as T48 of cooling air , and the engine exhaust silencer (muffler)
- -:::.= ~!-+ 8 have been G/c1earance: 1ft 3.5in (0.39m) was mounted centrally and forw ard of the louvres. The
~~ ) .50.000. Of Turret ring diameter: As T48 fuel tanks were mounted on each side of the engine, and
_ .-~ .7"" meaningful, Armament: Main - 90mm M41 gun in M87 mount with refuelling was therefore made hazardous by the proximity
. ~ -~.", 5 represented 360° traverse and from _9° to + 19° elevation of the hot exhaust and slow by the fact that the right tank
:: The inventory Secondary-One .30in Ml919A4El MG (coaxial) could only accept fuel (highly inflammable petrol) at the
_ :. -' : 0 I per copy, One .50in M2HB MG (commander's) rate of 25gal/min.
- ;-_.~ 1: :c presents the Ammunition carried: 90mm - 60 rounds The turret was more spacious than previous American
.~ .... hi ch went into .50in-180rounds tanks. There was more elbow room for the turret crew and
-.: . : .: ~aux. ite, from . 30in - 5 ,900 round s the longer rangefinder was accommodated in a position
- -:0 De imported); Armour: Hull- From 4.03in (ll Om) at 60° front to 2in convenient to the commander. At the front of the turret
~ ~.: "':-.,-h 92% was (51 mm) at 30° rear there was a Jarge rectangular ape11ure for the gun and this

33
Above: Side view of the 1\148. By contemporary standards, crew comfort was at least
acceptable. The commander's seat was adjustable and
could be folded to allow him to stand, or to sit with his
opening was covered by the 4.Sin armour mantlet of the head either inside or outside the cupola, Four plastic M17
T 148 mount. A cover of ballistic nylon material served to periscopes gave him all-round vision , and the inside of
seal the opening against the elements . The :'v1inneapolis­ the cupola ring was padded to prevent injury when the
Honeywell gun control system was used . vehicle pitched on rough ground. Having acquired a
Standardisation of the T139 gun as the M41 was target the commander then had to determine the range
approved at the same time as the T48 became the M48. using the T46EI rangefinder mounted in the turret roof in
The .30in Browning machine gun M1919A4EI was front of him, The gunner's seat was also adjustable. His
mounted in a cradle on the left side of the T 148 mount and primary vision device was the M20 periscope sight. The
the same cradle would also accommodate the T1S3 loader did not fare quite so well. His seat was smaller and
machine gun (later adopted as the M37), The Browning folded out of the way when he stood up to load the gun,
could only be fed from the left hand side while the T 153 and he had no means of seeing outside the tank when
could accept left or right hand feed, Both the coaxial and closed down, When not actually loading the gun, most
main armament could be fired electrically by the loaders preferred to sit or stand in the open loader's
commander and gunner; additionally the gunner could escape hatch,
fire both guns manually in the event of a power failure. The driver's seat had a 'dumping' feature, A lever on
A .SOin machine gun was mounted on the the floor released his escape hatch , after which by pulling
commander's cupola and could be loaded , aimed and a red-painted lever at his left he could swing his seat aside
fired from within the turret. The tank commander could and then drop through the hatch , This was very much an
also operate the gun while standing in the cupola. To load emergency exit to be used when his normal exit was
the gun from within the tank the gun was traversed to a blocked. The driver's normal entry to the vehicle was
position from which the loader could perform the loading through the hatch in front of the turret and in early models
from his hatch . Ammunition for the 90mm gun was of the M48 this had a rather small opening which caused a
stowed in tubular racks in the hull and around the turret certain amount of difficulty - particularly when a large
ring, Two racks occupied the space beside the driver and driver wanted to leave the tank in a hurry, For driving
another rack was fitted on the turret floor. Ready racks when closed down he was provided with three T2S
were provided on the left side of the turret. periscopes which gave him vision over a forward arc of
Radios, in the required combination, were mounted in 180°, and in tanks with the small hatch these dropped
the turret bulge, The appropriate power, intercom and down when the hatch was opened . Later production tanks
antenna connecting boxes were situated on the turret wall had a larger, heavier hatch which was raised before being
as part of the wiring harness, Two antenna bases were swung into the open position and in these tanks three T36
mounted on each side of the rear of the turret. periscopes were permanently installed, In these later

34
 ::1odels an infra-red periscope was mounted in the hatch was mounted in the left front corner of the engine
for night driving. The T41 periscope was a binocular compartment and drove a 28V , 240A DC generator. This
:n strument and incorporated a headrest to protect the served four purposes: battery charging, operation of
.:r, \er's brow when traversing rough terrain. Illumination electrical equipment when the main engine was not
.::une from the infra-red head lamps beside the normal running, supplementing the main engine generator output
, ~ [\ 'ice headlights. as required, and heating the engine compartment to assist
Controls for the driver were grouped around his driving in starting the main engine in cold weather. There was no
='O sition. An aircraft-type steering wheel controlled the direct mechanical connection between the two engines
steering which was conventional enough in the forward although the auxiliary engine could be started by using the
..jirection , but in reverse the steering wheel acted in the series winding of the generator as a starter, powered by
v pposite direction. The transmission W:>.S controlled by the vehicle batteries . The four 12V , 100Alhr batteries
me transmission shift level at the right hand side of the were located on the floor of the crew compartment. All
steering wheel, and this had five positions; park , neutral, the mechanically dri ven engine accessories and the starter
:ow . high and reverse. Selection of the range was simple motor were fitted around the forward end of the engine
al though novice drivers sometimes made a mistake in with the exception of the two cooling fans which were on
s"lifting from the low range into high, selecting reverse the top. An oil cooler and fan were mounted on each side
:ostead - once! It was a somewhat drastic way to learn not of the engine, serving to cool both engine and
to squeeze the grip which located the lever in reverse. transmission oil. These fans were driven from the
Piacing the transmission in neutral effected a neutral steer transmission. At the rear of the engine the transmission
al though care was needed to avoid throwing tracks. Just was coupled directly to the flywheel. Power was
as in a car, the accelerator pedal controlled the speed and transmitted to the final drives from the transmission by
:..ne brake pedal controlled braking. The brake pedal also two universal joints and underwent a reduction of 5: I,
acted as a parking brake when locked in position by terminating in the two sprockets. Four fuel tanks were
selecting the ' park' position of the transmission. On fitted , two on each side of the engine. The total capacity
instrument panels beside the driver were displayed fuel was 215gal , of which about 200gal could be used.
m d oil pressure gauges, the speedometer, and various The hull was supported on 12 pairs of rubber-tyred
'.::arning lights. The crossdrive transmission made a roadwheels suspended on torsion bars. Each wheel
tachometer unnecessary. Switch panels held light
sw itches and controls for the heaters and auxiliary engine.
The main engine was the standard Continental Below: The M48 on exhibit at the RAe Tank Museum, Bovington, is
.-\ \ '-1790-5B, designed on the modular concept of shown arriving on a Dyson SOtonne tank transporter trailer. The
Ordnance engines described earlier. The same engine was gun has the early cylindrical blast deflector, covered in preservative
also installed in the M47. A GM A41-1 auxiliary engine tape. RAe Tank Museum

:: C=.:=. ..-.. le ver on

_~ .:;., :'1 y pulling
- ~ \': 5 seat aside
 Left: The business end of a 90mm gun barrel during final inspection
at Watervliet Arsenal. US Army

links , although an older , worn track might require

shorte ning by one link at times. An alternative to the T97
was the T96 steel track. This was noisier but gave a better
performance in dry, rocky terrain. Very little use was
made of the T96 track in later mode ls of the M48. The top
run of the track was covered by trackguards and those on
the M48 were rounded at the front. Later models were
distinguished by angular trac kguards .
To complete the description of the M48, the various
hull fittings should be mentioned. Three large carbon
dioxide bottles were carried as a fixed fire extinguisher
system which was operated by the driver to smother any
fire which might start in the engine compartment. The
system could also be activated from outside the vehicle by
pulling the exterior control handle to the left of the
driver's hatch. A portable fire extinguisher was carried on
a bracket on the turret wall next to the gunner. Two
petrol-fired perso nnel heaters , controlled by the driver,
were fitt ed in the hull. A blower in the rear of the turret
station acted as the anchor for the torsion bar of the provided a degree of ventilation in the vehicle when
opposite wheel station, so there were six pairs of torsion closed dow n, at least removing any fumes which might
bars spaced along the floor of the hull where the high arise from battery charging or firin g the coaxial or main
tensile steel bars were later found to be rather vulnerable armament. No nuclear, bio logical or chemical (NBC)
to mine damage. Each pair of road wheels was mounted protection was fitted.
on trailing arms and those on the left hand side of the tank As part of the radio installation an intercom set was
were some 3-4in ahead of the other side, since the torsion fitted in order that the tank co mmander mi ght pass orders
bars were arranged side by side. Shock absorbe rs were to crew members. An ex tension kit to thi s intercom
installed on the firs t, second and si xth wheel stations terminated in a tel ephone in an arm oured bo x on the rear
(n umbered from the front) . As mentioned earlier, friction of the tank by which infantry could speak to the tank
'snubbers' were also fitted to some vehicles but their use commander. Also on the rear of the hull were fitted
was not yet universal. At the front of the tank the towi ng hooks for the attachment of towbars or cables and
compens ating idler had the functi on of regulating the a pintle for towing trailers, while a gun travelling lock
tension in the track . This idler was connected to the arms was fitted on top of the e ngine compartment.
of the first road wheel on eac h side. When the roadwheel Fire control equipment in the M48 vari ed and was
rode over a bump the compensating idler was pushed bas ically whichever items were available when the tank
forward , absorbing any slack in the track. The adjustable was issued. Earl y tanks appeared with a similar
link between the idler and road wheel was the means of arrangem ent to that of the M47 and were known as Phase
setting th e correct track tension. Five pairs of trac k III tanks. The Phase IV, or Ultimate , Fire Control System
support rollers guided the track on its return run to the (FCS) differed mainl y in the addition of a ballistic
sprocket and another roller of the same size, suspended on computer. Despite the advanced-sounding connotation of
a torsion bar between the sprocket and the sixth computerised fire control, the T30 ballistic computer was
roadwheel, served to take up the slack in that particular only a mech anical analogue device which removed from
section of trac k when the tank was turning or pivoting. the gunner the task of operating the T25 range drive. Th is
The track was th e T97 rubber-backed steel type. This device added elevation to the line of sight of the gunner's
was a 'live ' track ; that is, a track in which the individual M20 periscope to allow for the trajectory of the gun ,
links are held together by end connectors which give the while ballistic information on the ammunition selected
track an inherent tendency to roll up. Although thi s was added by means of the T24E2 ballistic drive . In the
feature reduces rolling resi sta nce it also leads to the Phase IV FCS the computer automaticall y indicated the
buildup of heat and results in a heavier track which is required elevation of the gun by combining the
complicated to maintain. The links of the T97 track were superelevation and ballistic information , and the T24E2
fac ed with rubber chev ron pads for quieter, smoother balli stic d,ive aligned both the commander's sight picture
running on roads. Each track of the M48 consisted of 78 in the rangefinder and also the gunner' s periscope.

36

I
 '" ~ a l inspection

require
. \c to the T97

=:: ..: :-:::: use was

. The top
. those on
els were

=_~ 2.S carried on

-,.:: ::- ~
the driver,
~ O"~ the turret
L) : '

' - - . :::'It.::le when Perhaps the one aspect of the M47 and M48 which Above: A vivid paint scheme on an M48 at Fort Ord, California in
:-t:'"> ·.,'lieh might aroused the most controversy and generated the most 1958. US A/my
:0 ~ . ':-.,,:<::31 or main discussion was the rangefinder. There are two types of
r _ - ·~": .::al ('\JBC) rangefinder: stereoscopic and coincidence. In optical
terms the stereoscopic type (,stereo') is superior but not The results of comparative trials showed that at least
everyone has stereoscopic vision, even those with 2,000 practice readings were required to produce a
otherwise perfect eyesight. Training soldiers to make use consistently accurate reading, and during basic training
of a phenomenon they cannot always perceive clearly this could be achieved if trainees took about 300 readings
presents problems , but both the M12 and T46 per day. Accuracy was improved at ranges between 800
rangefinders of the M47 and M48 respectively were of the and 2,200. As for the instrument itself, although it was
stereo type. Another problem arose over the division of complex, the crew were only required to perform minor
crew duties. Before the advent of rangefinders, it was the adjustments , such as boresighting, and to change bulbs.
tank commander who had traditionally estimated the In other cases the company turret mechanic would simply
range, but the configuration of the M 12 rangefinder had change the complete item. The argument for the
decreed that the gunner should perform this task. The centralisation of responsibility for fire control with the
longer rangefinder and better shaped turret of the M48 gunner lost the day, more for technical than tactical
allowed the task of reading the range to pass once more to reasons. The integration of the primary sight, rangefinder
-= -' . . . as Phase the tank commander, but some users advanced the view and laying of the gun into the one instrument operated by
~ -=- =C~ ~.rrol S~'s tem that with the gunner doing this , the commander could the gunner caused many engineering difficulties, was
...... r , :' J ballistic give more attention to operating his cupola, and acquiring unreliable and led to lack of confidence in the rangefinder.
other targets. There were also users who just objected to For this reason the sight and rangefinder were separated in
-: : ' :::c:>uter was the rangefinder, preferring instead the World War 2 the M48. As for the choice of instrument, the superior
- - - ~:'=-. w ed from methods of range estimation. The debate centred on five accuracy of the stereo rangefinder decided the issue, even
..: -=. ;= : rj'·e . This main issues: though operators would have to be hand-picked.
_._ -:' :..~= gunner's • was the instrument too complex for the average GJ? Laying the gun accurately is of little value if the fall of
:~ 0 ~~ the gun , • did the additional training involved lead to shot cannot be see n. This has always been a problem with
- - - ::~:1 selected improved accuracy? armour-piercing ammunition which has no effect if it
- :.:..., ·e . In the • did the rangefinder actually improve ranging does not hit so mething hard , such as a tank. With high
accuracy? explosive ammunition it is possible to see the shell land to
• if the rangefi nder was the answer, where should it be make corrections so that the next round hits the target.
mounted for the most effective results? However , the high velocity tank gun creates such a
• should a stereo or coincidence instrument be pressure at the mu zzle that even with smokeless powders
chosen? a doud of dust is thrown up, completely obscuring the

37
tank's vision in that direction. In an attempt to overcome a jacket of a lighter material such as aluminium alloy.
this problem the M48 was fitted with a so-called blast Overall the projectile weighs less than the AP shot and
deflector, or mu zzle brake. In theory, such a device can therefore be fired at a higher velocity and deliver its
should clear the smoke and dust away from the muzzle as energy over a smaller area of the target. This type of
well as reduce the recoil on the gun by reversing the projectile is known in British service as APCR, for
direction of some of the propell ant gases. The blast ' composite rigid'. Developments in kinetic energy attack
deflector of the M36 gun on the M47 was a simple are described later. Chemical energy antitank ammuni­
cylinder with two holes at right angles, a simple design tion likewise divides into two approaches. ' High
hav ing no effect on recoil. Early models of the M48 explosive anti-tank' (HEAT), is the term reserved for
retained this pattern on the M36 guns fitted but when the ammunition using the shaped charge principle to defeat a
M41 gun became available in quantity a single-baffle target. Unlike the kinetic energy attack, where muzzle
muzzle brake similar to that of the 90mm Gun M3Al of velocity is all-important, the effect of the shaped (or
the M46 was fitted . Both of these , and the later T-shaped hollow) charge is independent of the velocity with which
blast deflector, were described as ' . . uniformly it strikes the target. Indeed, its effect is degraded by spin ,
unsuccessful as anti-obscuration devices'. There has
always been doubt as to the value of such devices , and in
fact the successor to the M48 series, the M60, does not
use a muzzle brake .
Types of ammunition ava ilable to the M48 were
divided into two mai n types: armour-defeating and other
natures. Armour-defeating ammunition falls into two Below: The high explosive anti-tank (HEAT) round for the M48.
categories; those employing kinetic energy , and those This is the M348 which was the first to be fielded . US Army
using chemical energy. In simpler terms the two
Bottom: The later M431 HEAT round, showing the nose spike which
approaches may be resolved into blUte force and high
contains the impact fuze. The shaped charge is initiated at its base to
explosive . The term ' armour-piercing' (A P) is specifical­
produce the jet which penetrates the target. US AmlY
ly applied to the form of kinetic energy ammunition
which uses a solid shot of the same calibre as the gun. Right: Loading HE into a tank of Company D, 11th Armored
' Hyper- velocity armour-piercing' (HV AP) referred to a Cavalry Regiment at Hung Nghia in January 1971. Smoking during
core of a high density material such as tungsten carbide in replenishment was normally discouraged! US Anny

CARTRIDGE, gO-MILLIMETER: HEAT, M348Al (T108E46) AND M348 (T108E40)

1~·-------------33.74 MAX------------->

~ ~.~
. ... i --- ---
~~
i
i__·· . -­

-------------------------"- ----------.
.-JI--"'''--J.I'~.

CARTRIDGE, 90-MILLIMETER: HEAT-T, M431 (T300E59), M431Al A.~D M431 A2

ft--
· -~- - - - - - 3 6 . 0 1 2 M A X - - - - - - - - . 'l1
\
o
[I I :::VI
-lfT1<.O
I1
§ 0 G) »0
n

0 !S:-lG) I II III !
0 ~~
 ~ ':"=2 deliver its
_-;7­ This type of
:'~ "--' .-\PCR, for
--_ ~ ~ a ;: rgy attack

~. ;: re
muzzle
_: ~ shaped (or
= ~~. with which
by spin,

so most HEAT projectives fired from tank guns are material which is supported in the gun by a sabot in three
fin-stabilised. The other fonn of chemical energy or four sections. On leaving the muzzle the sabot
ammunition is the 'high explosive squash head' or HESH separates and falls away , leaving the core to travel to the
projectile. Originally developed by the UK during World target at a much higher velocity. For a long time the US
War 2 as a means of attacking concrete structures, and were quite satisfied with HV AP , and no effort was made
known as 'Wallbuster', HESH uses a projectile with a to produce APDS. Although some APDS rounds were
filling of plastic explosive to cause a scabbing effect developed in 90mm, none were standardised. The
inside the tank, hence its name in US nomenclature of 105mm gun of the M48A5, described later, fires APDS.
HEP, for 'high explosive, plastic'. HV AP and HEAT were the armour-defeating rounds
----, In tank ammunition, the conventional high explosive for the M48, although development HEP rounds existed
(HE) projectile is not considered to be chemical energy and some sight graticules were marked for HEP.
ammunition - that is, it has no primary armour-defeating
role. It is grouped with other natures as secondary The M48 enters service
ammunition, and is used for the destruction of In the first few years of the service life of a new weapon
non-annoured targets, where its fragmentation and blast system there may be literally thousands of modifications.
action are most effective. Other secondary natures The majority may appear to be of minor significance,
include smoke ammunition, both for obscuration and for such as the moving of an internal stowage bracket, or the
marking targets, and canister for anti-personnel use. addition of protective padding to sharp objects and fittings
Training ammunition is used to simulate primary natures which might otherwise cause injury to the crew . Only
of ammunition and consists of inert projectiles designed hard usage can reveal these slight failings, and this
to be ballistically similar to the service item but without 'burning-in' period is the heyday of the 'why ever didn't
the destructive effects. they ... ?' question.
A later fonn of armour-piercing ammunition is the While the M48 was being ' de-bugged' of these
annour-piercing discarding sabot (APDS) round. irritations, there remained some more serious shortcom­
Developed in Britain during World War 2, APDS ings. In the spring of 1955 Exercise 'Desert Rock VI' was
employs a subcalibre core, or penetrator, of dense held in the Nevada desert . Task Force Razor, consisting

39
Above: Father and son. Chief Thomas K. Yallup examines the M48 objective by 6am. As a related exercise, three unmanned
with the assistance of his son, Cpl Bill Yallup during training at M48s were exposed to the blast at 500yds and remained
Yakima Firing Center by armoured units of 44th Division in May basically sound. The tank at a three-quarter oblique angle
1954. US Army
to the bJast was rolJed over 1112 times, stripping both
tracks and one idler. The gunner's periscope was
Below: The Chrysler mount for the .50in machine gun is clearly
shown on this M48 of 32nd Infantry Division at Yakima Firing destroyed, the battery cracked and fueJ and oil lines
Center, Washington in May 1962. US Army fractured, but the engine was serviceable . The tank facing
the blast head-on was blown back 10ft but only
superficially damaged and was driven away. The third
tank was positioned with its right side facing ground zero.
The track on that side was tom off, and light metal (such
as mudguards and stowage boxes) was wrapped around
of 55 M48s and supporting vehicles, mounted a the gun. With the track replaced the tank drove away. Of
counter-attack after a nuclear strike. An atomic weapon the jeep and Y4 ton truck at 525yd there remained'. . . no
of 35-40 kiloton yield was detonated at the Atomic identifiable pieces'. The three M48s eventually survived
Energy Commissions's test site in the desert at 5. lOam on six nuclear strikes. Of course, the fact that two tanks out
Tuesday, 3 May. Task Force Razor was in hull down 6f three could be driven away does not mean that they
positions at 3,OOOyds from ground zero of the strike and were combat-worthy by any stretch of the imagination.
motored through the fallout zone in order to arrive on its External optics were scoured by sand; delicate fire control
equipment such as the rangefinders hopelessly jarred, and driver 'S hatch and the commander's difficulty in aiming
in a manned tank the crew would certainl y have been and loadi ng this machine gun. Another major deficiency
killed by immediate radiation . At this time the M48 had reported was the high level of infra-red (IR) radiation
no collective protection against contamination although emitted by the e ngine exhausts. With 1954 state of the art
the slight overpressure provided by the turret blower technology the M48 could be detected and identified at
would tend to keep out radioactive dust. Pe rhaps the 1,200yd.
major lesson from Exercise ' Desert Rock VI' was An earlier comparison with Centurion Mk 3 has
completely unconnected with the nuclear strike. Part of already been mentioned. Detailed comparisons with the
the build-up to the simulated counter-attack had been a T-34 and T-54 , as well as with the M47, were now
long approach march across some 200 miles of desert, available and showed that the M48 was basically evenly
and this operation highlighted the extremely high fuel matched with the T-34, but that the 100mm gun of the
consumption of the M48. As a result of this and other T-54 would probably be superior at ranges greater than
experiences, psychologists at the Army Human I,OOOyd. This disadvantage might have been redressed
Resources Research Office (HumRRO) were tasked to
instil the virtues of fuel conservation into tank drivers,
thus anticipating the energy crisis by 20 years. At the
same time efforts were begun toward s the conversion of
the Army from the use of petrol (gasoline) to diesel fuel. Below: A dead M48A I is loaded on to a tank transporter at Yakima
The nuclear survivability tests had also shown that petrol Firing Center during Exercise ' Lava Plains' in 1961 . US Anny
was especially vulnerable on the nuclear battlefield.
Complaints from other users both in Germany and in Bottom: The recovered M48AI aboard an MI23iM15A2 tank
the continental United States had concerned the size of the transporter of704th Ordnance Company. US Anny
 Above: This photograph shows the M I cupola. The vision block,
gM!riscope guard and the pivot for the hatch are well illustrated.
US Anny

Left: In this photograph of an M48A2 the hatch on the commander's

cupola can be seen to swing horizontally. The .50in machine gun is
at full elevation. US Anny

cause for concern. Design faults had led to costly

modification problems, but even so the overall
availability of the M48 and M48A 1 was unacceptably
low. A General Accounting Office report of 1960 was
by the higher first round hit probability afforded by the strongly critical and drew attention to the average of one
M48's Phase IV fire control system. The M48 could breakdown every 37 miles.
defeat the armour of the T-34 with ease at up to 2,OOOyd, Some production models of the T48 were fitted with a
but even the T-34 presented a serious threat to the frontal larger driver's hatch, and the Model 30 cupola developed
armour of the M48 at up to 500yd . Against the M47 the by Aircraft Armaments Inc , was installed on some of
M48 's range of75 miles was difficult to accept, and it was these. The Model 30 cupola , orT6 mount, was to become
not easy to persuade seasoned tankers that the new tank one of the hallmarks of the M48 series. Interest in
with about 10 rounds of 90mm ammunition and one remotely controlled secondary armament had remained
machine gun less was really an improvement. Pound for high since preliminary work on the Tl21 and T 122
pound, the M48 was baHisticaHy better than the M47, cupolas on light, medium and heavy tanks in World War2
particul arly in the turret, but the hull sides were still a and both the TI8 armoured infantry vehicle and the T37
weak point. While undoubtedly better than that of the
M47, the M48 's fire control system was still seen as
and T 41 Iight tanks had also featured remotely aimed and
fired .50in machine guns. Military Characteristics for a I--" ~~
-
...~
-
, ~
insufficiently rugged or ·soldierproof'. commander's dual purpose machine gun mount were II _ ­
The mechanical reliability of the M48 had also given published in 1950, but the design of such a mount was
1=
42

- - - - -- -
 insufficiently advanced in May 1953 to be included in the Width: 11ft llin (3.63m) overall
standardised tank and the awkward, fragile 'Chrysler Height: 10ft 3.375in (3 .13m) to top of cupola
mount' was adopted instead. The new mount replaced the Ground contact length, Track centre distance: As
entire vision ring and was in effect a small turret, adding M48
over a foot to the height of the tank. The commander was G/clearance: 1ft 3.25in (0.38m)
given a periscope sight to aim the machine gun, and Turret ring diameter: As M48
vision blocks for an all-round view. The T6 mount was Armament: As M48 except commander's .50in M2HB
adopted as the M I machine gun mount but was always is in cupola in M I mount
referred to as the cupola - and indeed this later became its Ammunition carried: As M48 except .50in 500 rounds
official nomenclature (,Cupola, Tank Commander's: Armour: As M48
.50in machine gun, M I '). It used a slightly modified form Engine: Continental A V-1790-7C details as M47
of the .50in used on the M48, adapted for electric firing Transmission: Allison CD-850-4B
and fitted with the :\IUO manual charger, but the Suspension: As M48
heavy-barrelled M2 was not the ideal choice as the Power/weight ratio: 15. 6hp/ton (131 k W/kN)
receiver and working parts protruded so far inside the Max tractive effort: 83 ,0OOlb (369kN)
cupola. It was not until the M85 machine gun was Tractive effort/weight ratio: 0.8
available that this problem was solved in the M60 tank. Max speed, Max gradient, Trench crossing, Vertical
The extremely short radius of action of the basic M48 obstacle, Fording depth, Turning radius: As M48
has been mentioned. In the T48E 1 Detroit Arsenal Fuel capacity: 200gal (757litre)
attempted to double the range by carrying more internal 410gal (1 ,550Iitre) with jettison tanks
fuel and this was shown to be feasible. However, it did Fuel consumption: 0.3mile/gal (0. 13km1litre)
require a rebuild of the rear of the tank hull, and since Ground pressure: 11.8Ib/sq in (81.3kPa)
major changes were underway in the concurrent T48E2 Cruising range: 70 mi les (112km)
project, the T48El was dropped. Another way to increase 135 miles (216km) with jettison tanks
range was to carry fuel externally. The Universal Jettison
Fuel Tank Kit was developed as a means of carrying four
extra 45gal drums on a crib at the rear of the tank. (These On standardisation of the T48 in May 1953 there were
drums actually held 55 US gallons!) These jettison tanks three different versions of the T48 : (1) with a small
were widely used in peacetime training but when used in driver's hatch and Chrysler cupola; (2) with a large
action by the Jordanian Army they proved to be extremely driver's hatch and Chrysler cupola; (3) with a large
hazardous and were abandoned with unseemly haste. driver's hatch and the Model 30 cupola. Version (I) was
adopted as standard as the M48 and the designation
Later models of the M48 M48Al given to version (3) and version (2) with the
M48Al Model 30 cupola substituted , although the M48AI was
Crew: 4 not yet formally adopted. 20 months later the M48A 1 was
Weight: 104,000lb (462.6kN) combat loaded
97 ,000lb (431.5kN) less crew, ammo, fuel and
equipment
Length: 28ft 7. 75in (8. 73m) overall gun forward Below: M48Als on the firing point on Range 4 at Grafenwohr in

24ft 2in (7 .36m) gun in travelling lock July 1959. These tanks from 4th Armoured Division have the cribs

22ft 5.5in (6.87m) hull only for the Universal Jettison Fuel Tank Kit. US Army

-- ~ :nount was
44

-­ - ,...
::=' ?"=

Above left: Side view of the M48A1.

Left: Driver training in the M48Al. The point of balance is just

behind the third wheel station. US Army

Above: Army Reservists of 103d Infantry Division refuelling their

M48A I from an M49 tank truck during summer camp at Camp
McCoy, Wisconsin in 1961. US Army

Right: Rebuilt M48A Is at Red River Army Depot, Texarkana,

Texas. The 90mm gun has no blast diffuser and the track tension
idler has been eliminated in the rebuild. These tanks, photographed
in 1978, are probably destined for a foreign country rather than US
Army reserves. US Army

Below right: Nightliring of the M48A l's .50in machine gun. The
tank's exhaust is torching as brightly as the tracer in this picture
taken at Fort Benning in January 1964. US Army

adopted as Standard and the M48 reclassified as

Substitute Standard. One point worthy of note is that like
the M47 , the M48A I never had a development
designation.
Production of the M48A 1 was undertaken by the
Chrysler Corporation in 1955 and 1956, a total of 1,800
being supplied to the US Army . The last in Regular Army
service were in the 4/69th Armor at Fort Benning,
Georgia in support of the Infantry School. They were
replaced in mid-1970 by M48A3s.

45

 Above right: M48Als firing at Hohne in

1956. The tank telephone is shown
connected 10 Range Safely. US Anny

Centre right: M/Sgt Charles E. Taylor

of Company D, 13th Cavalry adjusts the
fire of his M48Al during an exercise at
Grafenwohr in September 1960.
US Anny

Below: Maintenance, while not very

glamorous, is an essential part of the
tank's life and also ofits crew. The
powerpack is about to be lifted back
into the engine compartment of the M48
on the left. Capt Jerome E. Rolle and
CWO C. M. Osborn are examining the
CD-850 transmission . Behind it the oil
coolers and fans can be seen. US Anny

Above right: A top view of the M48Al.

US Anny via R. P. Hunnicutt

Right: An M48A I moves on to Ihe firing

JMlint on Range 4 at Grafenwohr during
a 4th Armored Division field training
exercise in July 1959. US Army

~!
j

46

 '. ¥.,
...... .
~ ".
~:-
/ .
Above: M48A Is and M59 APes of the 709th Tank Battalion on
training in Germany. US Anny

Right : The gunner's position in the M48A I. The rubber-covered .\/-+ .4..:'
forehead protectors of the periscope mount are obscuring the
Crew: -+
eyepieces of the M20 Periscope Sight. The gunner's left hand is on
the turret traverse control and the handle to the right is the gun
Weight: : : :
elevation control. US Anny 9S.000lb ..::­
Length: '::: 5:':: ­
24ft4.7" in --:
22ftS .75i
Width: I I f: : _~ _
Height: 10:': : : ~
Groundco n~-~~~
M4SAI
G/clearance: _-'- ­
Turret ring di­
Armament: ..;:,
MS7Al mouc =
Ammunition
.SOin -1,365: _ ­
.30in - 5,950:-c
Armour: Det'· ,
Engine: Conti- _
2,SOO rev/mi
petro) engine I L ~ ':
(l46mm)) com:-:­

48
Above: Side view of the M48A2 Transmission: Allison CD-850-5
Suspension: As for M48A I except three return rollers
each side
Power/weight ratio: 15 Ahp/ton (I, 29kWI kN) gross
Max tractive effort: 84,000Ib (373, 6kN)
Tractive effort/weight ratio: 0,8
Max speed: 30mph (48kmlh)
Max gradient, Trench crossing, Verticle obstacle,
Fording depth, Turning radius: As M48A 1
Fuel capacity: 325gal (I ,230Iitre)
535gaJ (2,025Iitre) with jettison tanks
M48A2
Fuel consumption: cO,5mile/gal (0,3kmllitre)
Crew: 4 Ground pressure: II ,9lb/sq in (82.0kPa)
Weight: 105 ,0001b (467kN) combat loaded Cruising range: 160 miles (256km)
98,0001b (434kN) less crew, ammo, fuel and equipment 250 miles (400km) with jettison tanks
Length: 28ft 6in (8.69m) overall, gun forward
24ft4.75in (7 A3m) gun in travelling lock One serious fault in the M48AI which was not rectified
22ft5. 75in (6.85m) hull only was the IR signature - the characteristic pattern of
Width: II ft II in (3 ,63m) Overall infra-red radiation by which the tank could be detected
Height: 10ft 1.625in (3.09m) on top ofcupola and even identified. The problem was addressed in the
Ground contact length, Track centre distance: As T48E2, also known as the Product Improved M48 , which
M48AI had a completely redesigned engine compartment. From
G/clearance: 1ft 4,5in (OA2m) the inside this allowed a 50% increase in the fuel carried
Turret ring diameter: As M48A I under armour, as well as the installation of the
Armament: As M48A I except M41 90mm gun could use A VI-1790-8 fuel injection engine, mated to the CD-850
M87AI mount and coaxial.30inofM37 (TI53) type series transmission, An experimental model. the M48EI,
Ammunition carried: 90mm - 64 rounds was fitted with the AUI-1790-8 engine and XT-1400
.50in- I ,365 rounds transmission,
. 30in - 5,950 rounds From the outside the engine compartment was more
Armour: Details as M48A I box-like and the exhaust in the centre of the M48 's engine
Engine: Continental A VI-1790-8, 825hp «615kW) at deck was replaced by a twin system beneath the armoured
2,800 rev/min) air-cooled, four-stroke, 12-cylinder, decking which vented through the two large doors at the
petrol engine (bore 5. 75in (I 46mm) stroke 5.75in back of the engine compartment. The exhaust heat was
(l46mm» compression ratio 6.35: 1 dissipated over a larger area and thus gave a much lower

49
Above: Refuelling an M48A2 of 7th
Infantry Division on exercise in Korea
in 1962. The crewman holding the fire
extinguisher is a reminder of the
.ver-present fire risk with petrol (or
gasoline). US Army

Right: A rear view of the M48A 1 at

Aberdeen Proving Ground in July 1955.
US Army via R. P. Hunnicutt

50
This page: Three views of the M48A2 I.
undergoing Engineering Test at
Aberdeen Proving Ground in January
1957. US Army via R. P Hunnicutt

signature . The tank telephone had to be relocated on the

right trackguard. The revised engine compartment
arrangement was in fact carried over into the M60 series
and also features in most other armies' rebuilds of the
M48 series and also in the Spanish Army's rebuilt M47s.
The improvements to the T48E2 were completed by an
up-dating of the fire control and gun control systems. The
M13 stereoscopic rangefinder was replaced by the
M13A 1, supposedly to allow engagements at greater
ranges, and the mountings of the sight and telescope were
modified to better withstand the shock of firing. Tests had
shown that the Cadillac Gage constant pressure gun
control system operated more smoothly and predictably
and was quieter, although the recharging cycle was still
alarmingly noisy. The Cadillac Gage system was
installed in the T48E2, and this tank became known as the
T48E3 although the designation was unofficial. After
tests at APG, Fort Knox and Yuma Proving Ground it was
this version of the T48E2 which was adopted as standard
as the M48A2 in September 1955, At the same time the
M48A 1 was reclassified substitute standard and the M48

51
i
,
I

/.
•j
!I Above: An M578 wrecker lifts the 13ton turret of an M48A2. The
lugs on the front of the tank hull may have been for an experimental
system was also introduced, allowing control by both
gunner and commander, but there was still no
mine exploder. US Army stabilisation. In the M48A2C the fire control equipment
was graduated in metres, and the Ml7 (MI3AIEI)
rangefinder was of the coincidence type.
Apart from the prominent cupola and distinctive engine
decks, the M48A2 could be recognised by its three return
declared limited standard. The designation M48E2 rollers , compared with the five of the M48 and M48A I.
appears to have been used for a time to describe the The two rollers were removed to save weight , and in the
M48A2. M48A2C of 1959 production the track tension idler was
The fuel injection in the AVI-1790-8 engine was also eliminated.
originally an English design. The firm of Simmonds A lOin 2kW tungsten searchlight could be installed and
Accessories in Tan)'town, New York had negotiated the used with an IR filter - however, viewing devices were
world rights (less the UK) for the SU Carburettors system limited to the driver' s periscope and the commander's
similar to that fitted to the Conqueror. Based in Coventry, binoculars.
SU Carburettors now forms part of the British Leyland Production of the M48A2 began in June 1956 at Aleo's
group. Simmonds approached the Continental Aviation plant in Schenectady. Some M48s were converted to
and Engineering Corporation (as it then was) and offered M48A2C standard by Chrysler at their Delaware Defense
the SU system. It was adapted to the Ordnance­ Plant, known by then as the Lenape Ordnance
Continental engine in the hope of improving its fuel Modification Center.
economy. An improvement of 27% was claimed , and Production of the M48A2 ended in 1959 to allow the
even without the larger fuel tanks the M48EI gave an M60 programme to begin. A total of 11,703 M48-series
increase in range of about 45 miles. tanks was produced, but to account for all of them now is
In the fire control system of the M48A2 the impossible. Many went to foreign armies and have since
superelevation actuating shaft was connected to the been sold , with or without the approval of the US
M20A3 primary sight , with the M 13A I rangefinder Government. Many have been captured from their former
somewhat optimistically graduated from 500 to 4,800yd. owners, and even today the Vietnamese Army has a
The constant pressure electro-hydraulic gun control considerable force of M48 series tanks.

52
 M48A3 By late 1958 plans for the M48 's successor were going
ahead. The T95 project was bogged down in its
Crew: 4 over-sophistication, so the next alternative was a
Weight: I04 ,0001b (462k.N) combat loaded complete revamping of the M48 series. This concept was
98 ,0001b (435.9k.N) less crew , ammo, fuel and provisionally known as the XM60, the prefix XM- having
equipment by now replaced the old T-numbers . Following the line
Length: 28ft 6in (8.69m) overall gun forward which began with the M26, the XM60 was an
24ft 5in (7 A4m) gun in travelling lock evolutionary design but was to be vastly improved in two
22ft 7in (6.88m) hull only major areas. Firstly, the 90mm gun was to be replaced by
Width: Ilftllin(3.63m)overall the British 105mm gun and secondly, the thirsty petrol
Height: lOft 3in (3. 12m) overall engine was to disappear in favour of a diesel. This latter
Ground contact length, Track centre distance: As decision had been taken once before in the US Army, in
M48A2 1941 - only to be reversed after a few months. This time
G/clearance: lft4in (OA1 m) minds were somewhat clearer and the diesel was here to
Turret ring diameter: As M48A2 stay .
Armament: Main - As M48A2 An early diesel engine, the A YDS-1790-P, had been
Secondary - One 7 .62mm M73 MG (coaxial) installed in an M48 in 1957, mainly to test the engine.
One .50inM2HB MG in MI cupola withMIOmanual Now , to investigate the installation, work began in
charger (com mander's) mid-1959 on the M48AIEI, which was the M48AI
Ammunition carried: 90mm - 62 rounds modified to accept the new A YDS-1790-2 diesel and also
.50in- 630 rounds the 105mm gun. Six pilots were built but in the M48AIEI
7 .62mm- 6,000 rounds the diesel engine was fitted in an ad hoc fashion into the
Armour: Details as M48 cramped engine compartment of the M48A I hull. One of
Engine: Continental A YDS-1790-2A, 750bhp «559kN) the requirements for the diesel engine had been that it
at 2,400rev/min) air-cooled , 12-cylinder, diesel engine should fit into exactly the same envelope as the fuel
(bore and stroke 5. 75in) compression ratio 16: I injected engine, so in the M48A I E2 the rear of the hull
Transmission: Allison CD-850-6 was altered to the configuration of the M48A2. This time
Suspension: As for M48A I the 90mm gun was retained but a 7.62mm coaxial
Power/weight ratio: 14Ahp/ton (1.2IkW/kN) gross machine gun was substituted for the .30in. The
Max speed, Max gradient, Trench crossing, Vertical M48AIE2 was a simple conversion and after production
obstacle, Fording depth and Turning radius: As
M48A2
Fuel capacity: 375gal (I ,420Iitre) early version
_ .:::\·e engine 385gal (I ,457Iitre) late version Below: A late model M48A3 in ' factory-fresh' condition after
- :- :.0 :'lr;Oe return
Fuel consumption: cO.7mile/gal (0. 42krnilitre) rebuild by Bowen-McLaughlin-York. BMY remanufactured and
_-~ .:..::': }'148A I.
Ground pressure: I 1.81b/sq in (81 AkPa) modified a total of 578 M48A Is to the M48A3 standard.
nd in the Cruising range: 290-310 miles (464-496km) Bowen-McLaughlin- York

- :>: .--: s.alled and

- : : '-:-',"ces were

- - _ ':' ~ 6 a t Aleo's
_ ~ ':(,l,'ened to
~e Defense
:->: Ordnance
 Left: The first task at the halt is to dig
defences, in this case on the edge of the
airstrip at Plei Djereng. The suitcase
carried on the engine deck of this
M48A3 of troop C, 1st Cavalry
(Mechanized) is not standard vehicle
equipment. US Anny

Below: M48A3 top view showing salient

details

U'..d..---------- Muzzle brake

(bore eva cuator)

1-----------9Clmm gun

j. ~~y,r~r-rm~;;:;;;~t--(;;~'~"; M27 periscope

arldle,,---Jmt~ti?~ '"
!i Fire extinguisher h.
(one of three)

>;:-~~~r--C!""",-I-+---.mr---Gunnet's M1 05C telescope

Searchlight ---1IT~ff"ff/7"'~~~~lJ ;:~~;;=!~f---Personnel heater exhaust
1I*~.r-I:-+--tt1+---.50in machine gun

r
Tool 80'< ----iftHo- LJIj-_"...,f-¥--HlI---Gu"n.' · s M31 sight

~tIt---Stowage box
Rangefinder 'ear'_--fH+--+H+
(one each side )
([t:::I;;i:~~t.1~UI!__ Commander'S
M28C periscope
Loader 'S hat,'h----+lI++-+-I-1!--++<~
--->,t>IL-+W+I!I---Cup(,la hatch
Antenna base (one of th",eJ.---+~w.,.,~~oij:Jl'\

I
Water can ---l+t--'t:...<
Turret ven ti ato"---+++-­
Searchlight stowage Ii':<1UI'o----+++_---I
stowage basket

Hinged .n~line 10'OV",.---.,Iii'F~

1I+---'++1r---Enoinedeck cover
Stowage bo,'---Htt-­

Gun travelling 10CI'---tt==~~~~~~k:J~~r:Jr--Tank telephone

of the M60 was under way the conversion of 2,000 on the M48A2, designated M48A2El, was absorbed into
M48Als to the new model began in July 1963. The the M48A3 programme. Both Army depots and
M48AIE2 was standardised as the M48A3 and replaced contractors worked on the conversions which continued
earlier M48 series tanks in units which were not for many years .
scheduled to receive the M60. A similar conversion based Contrary to popular belief, the diesel is not intrinsically

54
 Left: Fire control equipment in the M48A3
(A I) M28C periscope in cupola; (A2) M28C periscope in stowed
position ; (B) M44C infinity sight (for coaxial machine gun) ; (C)
MIOSC telescope; (0) M27 periscope; (EI) M24IR periscope,
installed; (E2) M241R periscope, in stowed position; (F) MilS
periscope mount; (G) M31 periscope; (H ) Filters for MIOSC
telescope; (I) Ball mounts for searchlight when stowed; (J) Loader's
hatch; (K) MI7B1C rangefinder; (L) MI3BI quadrant; (M) MIOBI
Ballistic Drive; (N) M28Al Azimuth Indicator; (0) Ml3BIC
ballistic computer; (P) Breech of I05mm gun; (Q) Turret ventilator.
US Army

Centre left: Layout of the armament in the M48A3

(A) M2 machine gun in commander's cupola; (B) M737.62mm
coaxial machine gun; (C) Radios in turret bustle; (0) Spent case
~-{) wing salient
container for coaxial machine gun; (E) Interphone and control
boxes; (F) Antennas; (G) M28C periscope in commander's cupola ;
(H) Turret portable fire extinguisher; (I) Elevating mechanism;
(J) Turret basket90mm ammunition stowage rack ; (K) Driver's
periscope (M2?) in front M24 IR periscope behind; (L) Fume
extractor; (M) Muzzle brake (blast deflector); (N) Gunner's
periscope sight M31; (0) Rangefinder MI7BIC. US Army

Bottom left : Marine LlCpl Gene Maire, of 1st Tank Battalion, 1st
Marine Division , cleans his .50in MG in a combat base south of Oa
Nang. The improvised machine gWl mount and vision riser blocks
for the cupola are clearly seen . USMC

-
better than the spark ignition engine. For a given power a
diesel will probably be heavier, bulkier, noisier, more
expensive and will produce more smoke. Its redeeming
feature is its fuel economy and in the M48A3 this was
combined with larger aluminium fuel tanks which gave a
range of over 300 miles. Diesel fuel is also less flammable
than petrol; it is in fact quite difficult to ignite under
ordinary conditions. Even under battle conditions it
makes the tank less prone to ' brewing up ' and of course
refuelling is made safer. Because more power is needed to
crank a diesel engine, the number of batteries was
increased to four. At the same time the auxiliary generator
was eliminated.
Although the 105mm gun was not included in the
package, experience with the M60's fire control
equipment was applied to the M48A3 , and lR equipment
was provided for the gunner. The two track return rollers
which had been removed from the M48A2 to save weight
reappeared on the M48A3.
The Chemical, Biological and Radiological (CBR)
protective system of the M60 had been tested first in an
M48A2. Now in the M48A3 a collective protection
system was installed. Two filters were fitted; one for the
--oS .0~orbed into driver and one for the turret crew. The driver's unit was
-::::pots and mounted at the rear of the ammunition rack to his right,
_ "_ continued and the turret unit was fixed on the turret wall beside the
fire extinguisher, providing clean, filtered air to a face
trins ically mask for each crew member.

55
 Above: The M48AIE3 combined the M48AI chassis, a diesel engine M48A4
and the M60 turret, This vehicle also has the T142 track of the M60 The M48AIEI had mounted the M60 's 105mm gun; the
and only the rounded nose of the glacis distinguishes this from the M48A3 had the M60's diesel engine installation. By
M60, US AmlY bringing these two features together in the M48A I E3 the
result was a pseudo-M60. In fact, since the M 19 cupola
was also fitted , the only ways to tell the M48AIE3 apart
After experience with battle damage in Vietnam, from the M60 were by the rounded edge to the glacis
M48A3s were further improved by the re-routeing of plate, the 5 return rollers and the plain steel roadwheels as
I
some of the driver ' s control linkage to minimise the distinct from the ribbed aluminium wheels of the M60.
I
effects of mine damage. The careful observer might also notice that the gap
I'i;
An adapter ring of eight vision blocks was added between the 5th and 6th wheel stations was still there .
!I
I
between the tunet and the cupola to increase the
commander's view when operating closed down. Since
Several M48AIE3s were built in 1964 and the
programme reached the stage of Engineering and Service
M48s were invariably operated with every possible hatch Tests. It was planned to install M60 tanks tunets which
open, this modification was rather a wasted effort. The were made surplus by the conversion of the M60 into the
Xenon searchlight was less of a waste of effort, although Shillelagh-armed M60A I E2, and in April 1964 it was
'pink ' searchlights, such as that of the Sheridan tank , proposed that the designation M48A4 be assigned to the
were generally prefened in V ietnam where the enemy two standardised M48A I E3s produced in this way.
only rarely took any action to counter lR illumination. However, the M48A4 did not enter production as a yet
Specially designed mountings (based on a caravan-type more ambitious programme was foreseen for the
ball hitch) were fitted to the gun mantlet, with an modernisation of M48-series tanks.
annoured power socket to the rear and left of the gun. A
similar mounting was provided at the left of the turret rear M48A5
stowage basket for stowing the searchlight, but it was if Crew: 4
anything even more vulnerable to damage from trees in Weight: As forM48A3, except 108,000lb(480.4kN)
this position, and the stowage bracket was rarely used. combat loaded
The first Army unit to deploy in the tank role in Length: 30ft 6in (9.47m) overall gun forward
Vietnam was the I st Battalion, 69th Armor (the ' Black 27ft lin (8.25m) gun in travelling lock
Panthers'). The 1169's supporting vehicles - its APCs, 22ft 7in (6.88m) hull only
recovery vehicles and A VLBs - were all shipped from Width: 11ft J I in (3.63m) overall
Hawaii, but its M48A2s were left behind and newly Height: 10ft lOin (3. 29m) with M 1 cupola overall
rebuilt M48A3s were drawn from depot storage in Ground contact length, Track centre distance,
Okinawa. G /clearance and Turret ring diameter: As for M48A3
The M48A3 was the workhorse of Armor units Armament: Main - J05mm M68 gun in M87 mount
throughout the war in Vietnam and a new fonn of details as M48
tank-APC combined anns tactics evolved, with the Secondary- Three 7.62 mm M60D (one coaxial; one
M 113A I APC itself becoming a small tank-like fighting commander's in reserve service, M2HB .50in used in
vehicle when the going could not support the M48A3. early conversions one loader' s)

56
 Left: The M48AS, seen under test at
Fort Knox. Both the commander's and
the loader's stations have the 7.62mm
M60D machine gun. US Army via G.
Binder

Below: One of the biggest parts of the

jI,'J48AS conversion programme was the
... J ~t.- t.A<
.. 0:: _ i, -"", :-':' . welding required. Additional steel was
. , .,. -~ added to the chassis to accommodate the
larger diesel engine; new fittings also
had to be attached. US Army

Ammunition: 1OSmm S4 rounds

- .. ~ : :::J.rn gun;the 7 .62mm- S,400 rounds
~:..Jl a tion. By .SO- 600 rounds
= ., ~ ':'~..l.,.lE3 the Armour: As for M48
.= ::c \ 11 9 cupola Engine: Teledyne Co'ntinental A VDS-1790-2A RISE
-== ~ - ~ A. I E3 apart (M48ASs converted from M48A3s)
~ ~-= ~o the glacis Teledyne Continental A VDS-1790-2D (M48ASs
~--:;. :,.:':!dwheels as converted from M48A Is)
=.0 " [ the M60. Transmission: Allison CD-8S0-6A
--= :j3t the gap Suspension: As M48A3
~ otil l there. Power/weight ratio: 13, 9hp/ton (1, 16kW/kN) gross
.':'5-1 and the Max speed, Max gradient, Trench crossing, Vertical
~...::. ; :md Service obstacle, Fording depth and Turning radius: As
- " l ITcts which M48A3
C::r. \ 160 into the Fuel capacity: 38Sgal (1 ,4S7Iitre)
-"";"'~ :964 it was Fuel consumption: 0.8mile/gal /0.34kmllitre)
-z- :>0 ::...;.' ip1ed to the Ground pressure: 12,2Slb/sq in (84.4kPa)
-:--= .L th is way, Cruising range: 3 10 miles (496km)
- -:-:: :....: _on as a yet
·T. : ~ n for the Around the time that the first M48A3s appeared,
Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and his West
German counterpart were putting the final touches to the Soviet product was steadily improving, so that it was no
Main Battle Tank loint Development Agreement. Signed longer possible to trade quality against quantity.
on 1 August 1963, the agreement provided for the joint Countering this threat took the form of three
development of the prestigious MBT-70, Construction of programmes. The first, and major part, was the fielding of
the US FRG tank first required the construction of loint the XMI in the largest possible quantities as quickly as
Project Management Structures as complicated as the possible. The second part was a major product
new tank, MBT-70 was to be the answer to everyone's improvement of the M60 series, linked with continued
prayer, but sadly did not happen that way, Failure to agree production, and the third part called for the M48 series to
on characteristics, and excessive costs caused the be brought up to the standard of the M60A I,
cancellation of the project in 1969, Attempts to salvage As mentioned previously, the diesel engine and
something of value from the project also failed, and it was lOSmm gun could be installed in the M48A2. Earlier
clear that the United States had to start from the beginning conversions such as these had taken second place to the
to develop a successor to the M60, The outcome was the M60, but the new rework programme used the latest
XM I, which is due to enter service in 1982, but moden components, identical to those going into the M60
-::: _~.J.! :o ne meanwhile there was an enormous disparity in Europe production line, and with equal priority. Clearly it would
- - ..:' :~·r ~d in between the numbers of tanks available to NATO and be simpler to convert M48A3s, since half the work had
those of the Warsaw Pact. Worse still, the quality of the already been done. Initially 360 M48A3s were converted

57
 Left: The finished product of the
M48AS conversions programme at
Annistion Army Depot has the same
engine main gun, firing and operating
controls as the current M60-series
tanks. The completed M48AS has a
lower profile than the M48A I because of
the new Israeli cupola. This M48AS,
with searchlight, machine guns and
communication equipment installed, is
ready for issue. US Army

Below: M48ASs of2/72d Armor, 2d

Infantry Division at Camp Casey in
Korea. These tanks have .SOin machine
gun mountings on the Israeli-style
cupolas and have no US Army
markings. R. P. Vaughan

at Anniston Army Depot, Alabama, at a cost of $130,000

each. These almost-new tanks were designated the
M48A5, and there are indications that the pilot
modification was designated M48A3EI.
In the hull, the top-loading air cleaner recently adopted
for the M60 was installed, and a solid state voltage
1, regulator was fitted. 90mm ammunition racks were
I: modified to accept the larger 105mm rounds; a turret
'1 basket was added, and the track was changed to the later
!I T142 type .
The 105mm gun was a straightforward fit in the
i original gun mount, and most of the M48A3' s fire control
equipment was easily modified. New cams in the ballistic aspects of that programme. To supervise the accelerated
computer and reticle changes in sights and telescopes conversion and production of the M48 and M60 a
were similarly straightforward. programme was set up within the office of the Army Chief
The advantage of the 105mm gun was in the wider of Staff in January 1975. Maj-Gen Chester M. McKeen Jr
range of ammunition available. The first APDS round was given the task of ensuring that the tota! of just over
was the British L28, manufactured in the United States. 5,000 combat-ready tanks (M48 and M60) was increased
Later rounds were developed by Picatinny Arsenal. More to the required 10,381 tanks within the shortest possible
recently the fin-stabilised APDS (APFSDS) round has time. By marshalling all the available stocks of M48A Is,
been developed. The so-called 'long rod penetrator' is M48A2Cs and M48A3s, including those of the Marine
much longer than a normal APDS core and requires fins Corps, and beginning conversions without delay,
for stability in Hight. Its penetration is claimed to be far M48A5s were in the hands of troops early in 1976. With
superior to that of conventional spin-stabilised APDS. one exception , the M48A5 was destined for Reserve
HEAT and HEP are also authorised for the 105mm gun, Army and National Guard units, and the first units to be
as is the usual range of secondary ammunition. re-equipped were the 2/263d Armor and Troop E, 196th
Converting the M48A I and M48A2C to the M48A5 Armored Cavalry of the South Carolina National Guard at
was a more involved operation. Nearly 30 hull Fort Jackson, South Carolina. The exception was the
modifications were called for, and almost 20 turret mid-1979 report that the M60Als of two battalions of the
modifications required. The opportunity was taken to US 8th Army in Korea were to be replaced by M48A5s.
install the A VDS-1790-2D RISE (Reliability Improved These would be the only M48A5s in Regular Army use,
Selected Equipment) engine. Conversion of an M48A I or and would differ slightly from those in National Guard
M48A2C to M48A5 standard took four months, a month use.
longer than the M48A3, and cost $240 ,000. This work
followed the M48A3 at Anniston. Apart from the M48A5 programme, there are also several
The XM I Project Office was established to oversee all commercial improvement programmes within the United

58
 St l e S. Hughes have advertised their Laser Tank Fire hemispherical-shaped turret could be improved, and the
Cont rol System , and Napco Ordnance offer a re-engining 90mm gun was inadequate. The disadvantages of using
se rvice in conjunction with Airscrew Howden in the UK petrol engines had become apparent, so a diesel engine
and Detroit Diesel Allison in the US. Bowen­ was called for. The M 1 cupola of the M48 was lacking in
:vlcLaughlin-York also offer a rebuild service . In 1977 some respects, and there were ways in which the hull
the CS Ariny made one M48Al available for a trial casting could be simplified. Nearly all these shortcomings
installation of the Avco Lycoming Six-Fifty gas turbine were examined in various experimental models in the
engine . The installation was carried out by Joanell M48 series, and in 1958 the XM60 105mm Gun Tank was
Laboratories. The low weight and reduced volume of the announced. Because the new turret was not yet available
turbine engine (claimed to be only 4901b and 29cu ft) the old hemispherical M48-style turret was used.
supposedly allow an extra 300gal of fuel to be carried , Production of the M60 began immediately and it soon
giving a range of 300 miles. Fuel consumption is became the US Army's standard MBT. However, the
improved by 40% . A diesel auxiliary power unit is also M60 has a story of its own.
accommodated within the engi ne compartment.
- r. 2ci

The M60
Because the T95 series was intended to produce the
successor to the M48 series the possibility of evolving a
new MBT from the M48 was not considered for a long
time. As the T95 programme foundered , so the Armor
Board looked to the growth poten tial of the M48. The

Above right: Napco's installation orthe Detroit Diesel12V71TA

engine in the M48A 1. Napeo Indusrries. Inc

Centre right: An early production model of the M60. Because of a

shortage of the M85 machine gun, an improvised mounting has been
_ ~ : .·ust over welded to the right side of the cupola for the M2 machine gun. The
:;.; :ncreased longer I05mm gun and the straight edge of the glacis are shown well
- : -:._:: possible in this photograph. US Army
, : :- :-'1 -i8Als,
_: :: e Ylarine Below: The M60Al, the last major descendant of the M48 series.
- -- ~ delay, Chrysler
- : -;6. With

.:7 3...50 several

~ :h e enited
 4. M48 Variants

M48 Bridgelayer

Crew: 2
Weight: I22,OOOlb (S42.6kN) complete with bridge
91,OOOlb (404.8kN) launcher only
Length: 36ft 3in (II .OSm) overall, with bridge
28ft4.Sin (8.6Sm) launcher only
Width: l3ft2in (4.0Im) bridge on launcher
12ft (3.66m) launcher only
Height: 13ft 3in (4.04m) bridge on launcher (folded)
IOft4 .Sin (3.16m) launcher only
II Ground contact length, Track centre distance,
G/cIearance: As for M48A2
!,
Ground pressure: 13 .8Ib/sq in (9S.4kPa)
I; Other details are similar to M48A2
'1
I[ BRIDGE
i Length: 63ft (19. 2m) emplaced
31ft 6in (9.6m) folded
Width: l3ft2in(4.0Im)
Treadway width: Sft 3in (I.6m) (each)
Height at centre: 3ft (0.91m)
Weight: 31 ,000lb (137. 9kN)
Construction: aluminium alloy in 3ft panels, tapering to
Sin at the ends
Military Load Classifications: 60 (equates to
approximately 60 US tons)
Time to lay: 2-3min (average)
Time to recover: Min I Omin on good ground
Max difference between banks: 20% gradient (II.SO),
or 12ft (3.66m) 12% (6.9°)

Above right: The pilot model M46 bridgelayer, built at Fort Belvoir
in 1952. The scissors bridge was made of aluminium and was
virtually identical to that used with the M48 bridgelayer. US Army

Right: The T2 assault bridge was pushed into position by the M47
but unlike hYdraulically-actuated bridges it could not be recovered
by the vehicle which had laid it . Here troops of 16th Armored
Engineer Battalion use a 20ton bridging crane to recover a T2 bridge
during Exercise 'Sage Brush' in Louisiana in 1955. US Army

60
 Below: An M48 AVi,B of 7th Engineer
:3attalion, 5th Infantry Division
(Mechanized) is demonstrated at Fort
Carson , Colorado in 1962. The bridge
operating cylinder can be seen in the
half of the bridge attached to the
launcher, and the quick-disconnect
couplings are visible on the end which is
about to touch down. US Anny.

Above: A folding assault bridge, believed to be either the T3 or ".'4,

at a demonstration at Fort Belvoir in 1955. The mechanical
'push-along' geared actuating mechanism is clearly in evidence.
Problems of the driver's vision, his ability to steer the bridge, and
the difficulty of deciding on the exact point at which to engage the
actuating gears probably led to the rejection of this type of bridge.
The M48 is marked with its inventory price - $135,597 - which
makes an interesting comparison with the quoted price of $130,801
in 1967. US Anny

Nearly all families of main battle tanks now include,

along with an armoured recovery vehicle, a bridgelayer.
The Armoured Vehicle Launched Bridge (AVLB), to use
the correct term, is an assault bridge. It is intended to span
short gaps under fire. These gaps may be unexpected,
such as shell craters or demolitions, or previously known
obstacles such as streams or ditches. Tank-mounted
assault bridges were used in World War 2 but were
cumbersome items, generally with complicated cable­
operated mechanisms and slow and conspicuous in use.
By the end of the war, assault bridging ('combat
bridging') in the US Army consisted of fixed length
bridges which were carried on or towed behind other
vehicles. The next development was a hydraulic scissors the development of tactical doctrine continued at Fort
bridge, the M I, which was built on and launched from a Belvoir. This refinement of the concept took long enough
semi-trailer. In 1950 the Engineer Research and for the M47 to be bypassed , and in September 1958 the
Development Laboratory (ERDL) at Fort Belvoir, Armored Vehicle Launched Bridge and Launcher were
Virginia, began work on a tank-mounted hydraulically standardised using the M48 chassis. Initial issues were
operated scissors bridge. Tested on the M46 chassis , the made on a scale of six launchers and nine bridges to the
concept worked. At the same time other concepts were divisional combat engineer battalion, forming a separate
also under consideration, including towed bridges both assault bridging platoon in the bridge company. After
rigid and folding. The designations Tl to T4 were standardisation minor corrections were later made to the
assigned to a series of rigid and folding bridges built by hydraulics and communications.
the LeTourneau Company , and the bridge illustrated is In the M48 hull the driver's hatch was now obscured by
believed to be the T2 . One of these pusher-type scissors the overhead hydraulic cylinder so for better visibility and
bridges was in fact tested with the M48 but was not communications the driver and commander were seated
proceeded with. Tests on the M46 bridgelayer were side by side in the space below the plated-over turret ring.
conducted at the Armor Board at Fort Knox and at Fort Each had a hatch, and unconfirmed reports suggested that
Belvoir. The vulnerability of the hydraulic system to some early models gave both the driver and the
small arms fire and to artillery shell splinters, and the commander a .50in machine gun in a small cupola, but no
vehicle's overall mobility were tested at Fort Knox while photographs of such mounts have been located.

61
 Bridges came in two lengths: 63ft (19 .2m) and 43ft planned in advance, rather than using it as an emergency
(13.1 m), the 63ft bridge being the more commonly used. measure when other form s of bridging may have been
Operational research had shown that the 63ft bridge could more suitable. The launcher itself has mobility equal to
satisfactorily span S8.S% of the gaps likely to be that of the tank, but the bridge adds 3ft (0.9m) to the width
encountered on a Western European battlefield, and this and 2ft (0.6m) to the height of the tank , and even the
40% chance of not being able to cross a gap was accepted. bridge alone is an outsize load . It was found that the 43ft
Nowadays a somewhat more favourable probability bridge, consisting of just the four end ramps joined by
might be expected! The bridge consisted of two braces and pins, could be carried disassembled on the
symmetrical halves hinged together. Wedge-shaped standard engineer stake truck, the Stan M328. The 63ft
ramps of low alloy steel and aluminium plate panels were bridge, in two halves , needed two M328s, although the
used to keep the weight low and the strength high , but 2Ston semi-trailer M 172 was suitable for the carriage of
even so the bridge weighted 14ton. A hydraulic cylinder assembled bridges. The folded bridge could also be
in one hal f controlled the opening of the bridge through a carried on a special 10ton tilt-bed trailer. Carrying the
quadrant linkage , and it was this opening which gave the 14ton bridge in one piece gave quite an advantage, for
familiar name of ' scissors bridge'. When carried on the assembly required seven men and a crane and took two
launcher, the bridge was supported in two places. At the hours. Even putting the shorter 43ft bridge together took
rear of the tank a heavy girder structure surmounted the the same team an hour.
engine deck . The bridge rested on this support and for Early production A YLBs used both M48 and M48A I
travelling was secured by a chain . A hydraulic cylinder hulis , usually without the track tension idler. Later the
released this chain prior to launching the bridge. M48A2 hull was used as this became the standard item.
At the front of the hull the launching mechanism held No attempt was made to fit the diesel engine of the
the bridge. A massive triangular structure, which M48A3 until 1976 when plans were laid for the
functioned essentially as a bell crank, could be rotated conversion of 142 M48 and M48A 1 bridgelayers to diesel
II forward through 90° thus tipping the folded bridge into operation. More recently funds were requested in the
II
I,
the vertical position. At the same time the substantial sole Fiscal Year 1979 appropriations for the conversion of 61
plate transferred the weight of the bridge to a point 6ft M48 chassis to the M48AS standard. This request was
I, (1.83m) in front of the vehicle. With the bridge vertical justified by the fact that the estimated cost of $8 .6million
Ii
t
another cylinder, the swing cylinder, lowered the bridge would be considerably less than the cost of procuring new
' forward over the gap. Simultaneously the bridge M60Al hulls.
actuating cylinder began to open the bridge, so that by the With the arrival of the M60 in 1960, this had become
time the swing cylinder had fully lowered the bridge it the preferred item for production of tank variants
was also completely extended. There was a smaller (although neither the bridgelayer nor the recovery vehicle
tongue cylinder below the swing cylinder and this was brought up to standard for IS years). The M60A 1
compensated for differences in height between the sale launcher chassis, using the same bridge as the M48 series,
plate and the launcher. was type-classified in 1963 with the intention at the time
When the bridge was laid an ejection cylinder in the that all M48 series A YLBs in the active army and reserves
launching arm pushed the bridge forward some 7-8in should be replaced.
(18-20cm) to disengage it from its cross-pin sockets, or Bridgelayers of the M48 series were also supplied to
keyways. At the same time two quick-disconnect many countries receiving M48 tanks . These include Israel
couplings (which took the hydraulic power to the bridge and West Germany. The Netherlands, while not a user of
opening cylinder) were released. Both ends of the bridge the M48, adapted the M48 scissors bridge to the
were identical , so the bridge could be recovered from Centurion hull. It will be recalled that the Centurion Mk S
either side, although the half containing the bridge bridgelayer laid its 40ft No 6 tank bridge in one piece ,
actuating cylinder was of course heavier. The complete presenting a much higher silhouette at the bridging site.
laying operation was stated to take two minutes , but to Judicious use of smoke could normally conceal this type
this very optimistic figure must be added the time to line of signature, although the rigid bridge may also be more
up the launcher accurately. cumbersome in close cover near to the obstacle. It is
To provide the launcher with hydraulic power , a pump perhaps worth noting that many Netherlands Centurions
was mechanically clutched to the main engine. The were in fact provided by the US under the Mutual Defense
hydraulic cylinders, to 1O-12in diameter (2S-30cm) were Aid Program.
operated at 3,SOOIb/sq in (24MPa), and the system,
including the reservoir, held a total of 13Sgal (Slllitre) of
fluid. Right: The M67 A2 flamethrower tank. The fatter gun tube,

Properly used, the A YLB is a tremendous aid to modified mantlet and flattened head lamp brush guards distinguish

battlefield mobility - but its use should be carefully the M67 A2 from the standard gun tank. US Anny

62
 'f

_ ~ --= - emergency
~ :::2: ha\-e been
::;)_ : :~: :y equal to
~-::: :0 the width
- • ::2.:1 eyen the
: :.:, t the 43ft
- --'- ;CO' joined by
:"::.) k d on the
_ ~: : ~ _ The 63ft
~ : ~;. ';; rhough the
: 7 ::-;:: : arriage of
~ - :~ :, _id also be
~ Carrying the
..:;. ~\-an tage, for
IT. took two Above: This M67 A2 namethrower of lst Tank Battalion, 1st Marine
M67 Flamethrower Tanl,
-r- ~;~ ~ ~ ge t her took Division is in action during a sweep against Viet Cong 10 miles south
Crew: 3 (commander, driver & gunner) ofDa Nang in mid-1967. USMC
! -~ 3J1
Y148Al Weight: lOS,790lb (470.74kN) combat loaded
- . .:~;:: : _ Later the IOO,79S1b (449. 16kN) less fuel, crew and equipment
- - - ;:.;ndard item. Length: 26ft 8.37Sin (8. 14m) overall , flame gun forward
iC :-:J ~ i n e of the 22ft 7 .12Sin (6.89m) flame gun to rear Power/weight ratio: 15. 7hp/ton (1.31 kWIkN)

~ : ~ ' d for the 22ft 6.Sin (6.87m) hull only Max tractive effort: 80,000lb (3S6kN)

~ -:7.3::ers to diesel Width: II ft II in (3 .63m) overall Tractive effort/weight ratio: 0.80

. =-~ : st e d in the Height: 10ft 1.62Sin (3 .09m) to highest fixture Maxspeed: 31.8mph (Slkm/h)

. - ::: - -. ersion of 61 Sft4.Sin (1.64m) hull only Max gradient, Trench crossing ability, Vertical

GroundcontactIength: 13ft l.Sin(4.00m) obstacle, fording depth, Turning radius: As M48A2

Track centre distance: 9ft 7in (2. 92m) Fuel capacity: 21Sgal (813Iitre)

_ -::' ~: uring new G/clearance: lft4.2Sin(0.4lm) Fuel consumption: O. 7Smile/gal (0. 32km!1 itre)

Turret ring diameter: 7ft I in (2. 16m) Ground pressure: 10.21b/sq in (70 .3kPa)

::::..:; 'lad become Armament: Main - Flamethrower, Mechanised, Main Cruising range: 160 miles (2S6km)

variants Armament: Turret Mounted, M7 A 1-6 consisting of 2S0 miles (400km) with jettison tanks

. .-=-~,~':e ry vehicle Flame Gun, M6 and Fuel and Pressure Assembly , M7 Al

The M60AI with traverse of 360° and elevation from-12° to +4So During the war in the Pacific from 1943 until VJ-Day on

_ ...:. ::-.c \ 1.+8 series, Secondary- .30in MG MI919A4 (coaxial) 14 August 1945, the US Army and US Marine Corps

::0:1 at the time .SOin MG M2HB in Mount M 1 (commander's) came to appreciate the value of the flame-thrower ­
__= :. :md reserves Ammunition carried: flamethrower fuel- 36Sgal particularly as a tank-mounted weapon. Various official

.SOin - 700 rounds and unofficial models were developed and saw service,

7 _ So..' supplied to . 30in - 3 ,500 rounds but by the end of the war there was no single standardised

-­ -:~ ::1'lude Israel Mobility: as for M48A2 type. In its Preliminary Report of April 1945 the Army

::...~ Jot a user of Armour, Engine, Transmission, Suspension: As Ground Forces Post War Equipment Review Board had

_ : ::dge to the M48A2 merely commented that ' . . . development of flame

~ -~7 :0 one piece,

::= j:i ging site.
: c- :=al this type
- -: ::..1 50 be more
-­ X> sracle. It is
- _ --=:. ::S Centurions
_. _! .::ual Defense
 throwers. .. for mounting on (tanks) should be Above: A platoon or M67 AI Hamethrowers was held at Fort Knox
continued. Use of the flamethrower both as a primary and for demonstration purposes. This M67 Al is part or a display ror
an auxiliary weapon should be considered.' Development cadets in June 1961. US Army
did continue at a fairly low priority until the Korean War Cn; w. ­ ­
\\' -' -~.
showed that there was a real requirement for
flamethrower tanks. Work was focused on specialist L' -~
vehicles using the M4 and M26 chassis but as these control, and a rudimentary form of fire control was
vehicles became obsolete, so the projects were dropped. provided by the gunner's M21 periscopic sight and by
The first thoughts of using the new tanks came in 1949 corrections from the commander's observations . The
I':I when the previous projects were cancelled and the T66 absence of90mm ammunition meant that the loader could
was conceived in 1951 as the flamethrower variant of the be dispensed with, leaving a crew of three men. G
II
"
M47. The development of the M48 overtook the T66, and The M67AI was equipped with the M7AI-6
I: a version of the M48 was initiated with the designation flamethrower and used the hull of the M48A2. These
Ii T67.
From the outset the T67 was designed to resemble the
were built by Chrysler at Newark between 1956 and 1959
and were the only M67 model to see service with the US
I"
M48 as closely as possible and this was simple to achieve. Army; both the M67 and the later M67 A2 were for US
The weapon was the E30R 1 flame gun, supplied with fuel Marine Corps use only. An improved fire control
by the E28 fuel system, only slightly modified from that capability was added in the M67 A I in the form of the
of the T66. On 28 July 1955 the T67 was standardised as XM30 periscopic sight, but this made no attempt to
the Tank, Combat, Full Tracked: Flame-Thrower, M67 correct for the effects of wind - still the greatest single
on the basis of the M48A I. source of inaccuracy, as the bulky, slow-moving jet of
To avoid being singled out as a target , the M67 was fuel was easily deflected.
indistinguishable from the M48A 1 from more than 50yd The M67 A2 , for USMC use, mounted the same
distance. In fact the flame gun was considerably shorter M7 A I -6 flamethrower on the hull of the M48A3.
than the 90mm gun, so a shield was provided to simulate Flamethrowers were issued to the Flame Platoon in the
the tank gun. Because this shield also served for access to Headquarter and Service Company of the USMC Tank Boom :
the igniter and as a combined air sleeve and drip guard , it Battalion and deployed in sections of two tanks. The
too was shorter and fatter than the 90mm gun. In addition, flamethrower has its advantages and disadvantages. It has
the end of the tube differed slightly from the T-shaped a good shock effect, yet is inaccurate and lacks the 19i (:' S=
blast deflector of the M48A I. The top arcs of the capability to sustain a good rate of flaming. Refuelling 2:, f ( - .~=

headlamp brush guards were also slightly flattened to takes time (as indeed does replenishment with 90mm Winc he-s:
aJIow greater depression of the flame gun. The E28-30R I ammunition!) and requires specialised vehicles - and .'.lain '."::::- . ­
flamethrower of the T67 was now designated the Flame flame fuel is obviously more dangerous than diesel fuel. It f3 cm Jc:.:c=- .
Thrower, Mechanised, Main Armament: Turret was stated that any gun tank could be converted to flame Capac:::.
Mounted, M7-6 and in the M7 fuel and pressure assembly operation in the field in six-eight hours , but this facility 27ft .. tir.
were held 378gal of fuel together with the necessary does not appear to have been used. It does after all
thickener and 10cu ft of compressed air at 3,000lb/sq in. suppose that crews trained in flamethrower operations are 42 ft m:n
This allowed the M67 to project flame to a range of about available in the same time. Mainly because the smaller (1 22 n J L • • : -

IS0-200yd with a total duration of 60sec. Under average M I 13-based M 132A 1 flamethrower had become avail­
conditions of weather and visibility a maximum range of able, the M67 A I was deleted from the Army inventory in (222.4'·,\­ ::..: .'
100yd would be more realistic. The range and duration of March 1970, but at the time of writing it remains in r iO . m ~:
the flame could be altered by nozzle settings and elevation service with the Marine Corps.

64
 M88 Recovery Vehicle

Crew: 4-6 (commander, driver, 2-4 riggers)

Weight: 117 ,0001b (S20kN) combat loaded
Length: 27ft 3.Sin (8.32m) overall
~ 0 :1tro l
was 33ft 7 .Sin (I 0.2Sm) boom at max forward extension
~ .... _ : , :~ h t
and by Width: 13ft 3in (4.04m) overall
~_ 21ions. The Height: 9ft 7in (2 .92m) to highest fixture
- -- : 0 3 er could 25ft 1.Sin (7 .66m) boom at max elevation
Ground contact length: 15ft (4.S7m)
Track centre distance: 8ft II in (2. nm)
. ~ !.~.~2. These G/clearance: 1ft 6in (O.4Sm)
~ :':':;6 and 1959 Armament: One .SOin M2HB MG in commander's M2
- : ~ ". ilh the US cupola
- - -.: ,:" ~ re for US Armour: No details available
-=-.: :'.re control Engine: Continental A VSI-1790-6A, 980hp «730 .8kW)
at 2,800rev/min) air-cooled four-stroke, mechanically Top: The T88 Armored Recovery Vehicle is shown to the Press at

- :':.7 form of the

supercharged 12-cylinder petrol engine (bore S. 7Sin Aberdeen in 1959. Just visible is the commander's cupola and the

- -7 :. ~ attempt to
protective guard of the periscope sight mount. US Army

:.:.e ~~ test single (146mm) stroke S.7Sin (146mm». Compression ratio

~:::o\' ing jet of 5.5: 1 Above: The M88 Recovery Vehicle. Detroit Arsenal
Transmission: Allison XT-141O-2
- - ...:.:ed the same Suspension: Torsion bar (six pairs of road wheels and
::- :.ne M4SA3. three du al return rollers on each side)
RECOVERY CAPACITY
Boom:
Capacity 4 part line - 12,000lb (S3AkN spade up (133.SkN) at 16ft/min (4.Sm/sec) or6Sft/ min

SO,OOOlb (2 22AkN) spade down (19.8m1sec)

19ft (5. 8m) at 8ft reach Towing:

25ft (7 .6m) at 4ft reach Max drawbar pull: 81 ,0001b (360.3kN)

Winches: . Max tractive effort: IS2,000lb (676 . I kN)

Main winch-Cable: 200ft (61m) 6 x 31 IWRC, 1. 2Sin Power/weight ratio: 16.7Shp/ton (IAKW/kN) gross
(3cm) diameter Tractive effort/weight ratio: \.357
Capacity: Line pull, bare drum: 90,0001b (400AkN) at Max speed: 30mph (4Skmlh)
27ft/min (8.23m/sec) or 108ft/min (32.9m /sec) Max gradient: 60% (31°)
Line pull full drum: 5 I ,400lb (228.6kN) at
Trench crossing: Sft 6in (2.6m)
42ft/min (l2.8m/sec) or 170ft/min (5 1.8m/sec) 400ft
Verticle obstacle: 3ft 6in (1 .07m)
(122m) 6 x 19 fibrecore, .62Sin diameter (l.6cm)
Fording depth: Sft 4in (l.62m) unprepared
Line pull, bare drum, 4 part line: SO ,OOOlb
Fuel capacity: 44Sgal (1 ,648 litre)
(222AkN) at 8.Sft/min (2.6m/sec) or 35ft/min
Fuel consumption: 0.5 mile/gal (0.3kmllitre)
:: re:nains in (10.7m/sec)
Ground pressure: I O.Slb/sq in (nAkPa)
Line pull, full drum, 4 part line: 30,0001b Cruising range: 220 miles (3S0km)

65
Compared with motorcars, tanks are indestructible. A car repaired and returned to service -leaving aside the danger
may have a calculated life of say 5-10 years (reduced even of their capture by the enemy.
more by built-in obsolescence) and a tank may be Tank recovery vehicles first appeared in the US Army
designed for an operational life of 15-20 years. The M48 in 1942 with the T2, a modified M3 medium tank.
will probably have an operational life of at least 30 years, Standardised as the M31 it saw wide service and for a long
to quote a now-familiar example. But the tank is not time served alongside its successor, the Sherman-based
destroyed by rust, or engine wear. Apart from being M32 . Around 1,600 of the eight variants of the M32 were
physically rent asunder by enemy action, tanks do not die; built and, although it was found to be unsatisfactory in
they become obsolete. Even then they are normally Korea when the M26 and M46 were beyond its
disposed of to another army, or relegated to other duties capabilities, its design was a strong influence on the M74
such as training , or converted for other purposes. which was based on the final model Sherman chassis.
Economic considerations may affect this, but another However, the M74 was only intended to be an interim
factor is the sheer size of the problem of disposing of a solution and it was proposed that recovery vehicles
tank. It is just not worthwhile spending time, money and should be developed in the light and heavy tank classes;
labour on cutting up armoured hulls and turrets. Because that is, based on the T41 and T43 respectively.
tank engines wear rapidly, and guns may require to be
changed, many maintenance operations are comparative­
ly simple and relatively economical.. It is cheaper to
change a power pack than to buy a new tank. For these
reasons there exist in most armies extensive base repair
facilities where tanks can be periodically rebuilt. For
most purposes the rebuilt tank is a new tank, and this is
certainly the case with the M48A5. Base overhaul
facilities can also repair most battle damage provided the
damaged tank can be transported to the workshop, and at
this point the value of an armoured recovery vehicle
becomes apparent. Tanks which are for any reason
immobilised on the battlefield must be quickly recovered
to the appropriate facility capable of repairing the
damage. In many cases this can be done within the unit­
such as the replacement of torsion bars and wheel
stations, or repairs to fire control equipment, or even
power pack changes. More severe damage, such as the
damage caused by an ammunition fire , may nevertheless
still leave the hull and turret structure intact as the basis
for a rebuild. Cannibalisation allows serviceable
components to be pooled. Since reserves of new tanks are
likely to be at a premium, it is vitally important that tanks
are not abandoned on the battlefield when they can be

Above: The M88 Recovery Vehicle with

A-frame in the raised position. Detroit
Arsenal via T. L. Mayer

Left: The M88 Recovery Vehicle with

A-frame raised and spade lowered and
complete stowage. US Army
 The heavy recovery vehicle, designated TS I, was but this feature fell into abeyance when the separate T 118
needed to handle battle casualties in the 60-70ton class began development.
and several projected vehicles fell within this category, The main role of the T88 was specified as: 'to provide a
but it was over-matched to casualties in the medium tank medium recovery vehicle to perform the functions of
class of up to SOton. For this reason a project for a battlefield rescue and recovery of disabled light and
medium recovery vehicle was initiated in April 1954. medium tanks and other comparable equipment.'
Proposals were received from Pacific Car & Foundry Recovery, with the use of the winch and possibly the
(PCF) and Bowen-McLaughlin (B-M). PCF's concept A-frame, requires mechanics and riggers to leave the
was for rear operation and was not favoured by armour protection of the vehicle and attach towbars or
Continental Army Command (CONARC) , the user, but cables to the disabled tank and is clearly a hazardous
B-M's proposal for front recovery wa, endorsed. The occupation on the battlefield. To perfonn the other
characteristics of what was now the Recovery Vehicle, function s of battlefield resc ue it was proposed that
Medium, T88 included maximum utilisation of automatic coupling devices be used remotely to attach the
components from the medium tank, then the M48 , but by dead tank in order that the recovery vehicle could drag it
1954 Ordnance were warming to the virtues of the T9S to a place of relative safety where the crew could do the
and saw this as the next medium tank. Ordnance therefore work with less hindrance and at less risk. Two devices
proposed that the new recovery vehicle be based on the were tested , both with two arms 7-IOft long; one
T95. CONARC insisted on the T88 concept as it stood, electrically actuated and the other hydraulically. These
based on the M48, to which Ordnance replied with a plan anns could be moved through 90° horizontally , 55°
to combine the functions of both recovery vehicle and vertically and rotated through a total of 110°. Along with
combat engineer vehicle in a single vehicle, the T 118 ­ thi s development went an attempt within the UK , US and
but still based on the T95 chassis. The user's view Canada to standardise on tank towing eyes, of obvious
prevailed, at least in the case of the recovery vehicle, and advantage when remote coupling was being considered.
B-M were authorised to produce pilots of the However, neither the electric nor the hydraulic system
T88. was accepted.
In their design, the hull was shaped for good angles of Provision was made for some of the 470ga l of fuel on
approach and departure, good visibility for all recovery board to be pumped to a stranded vehicle if the need
operations, and for adequate space for winches and other arose. The winches were hydraulically operated and
recovery equipment. Ballistic protection came lower power came from a pump driven by the main engine
down the list! The volume of the crew compartment was although in an emergency the auxiliary engine could also
in excess of 300cu ft (8.Scu m) and housed two winches provide limited hydraulic power.
under removable floor plates. The requirement specified The T88 proved acceptable and on 19 February 1959
that the main winch should have a capacity of 90,0001b was type classified as Standard A under the designation
(400kn) and the auxiliary winch, 12,500lb (55.6kn). The Recovery Vehicle, Full Tracked: Medium, M88. In
auxiliary winch was intended for use with a folding anticipation of this, three pre-production pilots had been
A-frame and in the pilot T88 a SO,OOOlb (22.4kn) winch ordered from the renamed firm of Bowen-McLaughlin­
was installed instead of the specified 12 ,SOOlb. York and quantity production began in their plant at Bair,
The T88 was specifically designed for good balance in Pennsylvania on 28th February 1961. On average, two
both axes to give a high degree of stability when using the vehicles per day were produced until the contract ended in
A-frame and for good traction when towing, dozing or February 1964 , and at this time the cost to the government
_- Yehicle with winching. To this end the ground contact length was was quoted at $169,410.
considerably greater than that of the M48, by some 23in The large hull of the M88, a single casting weighing
or 13% , but the width was in fact reduced, the track centre 17ton, provided space for the commander and driver to sit
distance of 107in comparing with the M48 's value of side by side at the front , and for roomy crew and engine
IISin. The quantity LlC, often referred to as the steering compartments at the rear. The turret-type cupola of the
ratio, is the ratio of ground contact length (L) to track T88 was replaced early in production by the
centre distance (C) and for good manoeuvrability LlC Commander's Cupola :\12, an open mount for the .SOin.
should lie between 1.2 and 1.4, while 1.8 is considered The boom , or A-frame, was operated by two internal
the upper limit. The M48 , at 1.35, had good control over hydraulic cylinders and controlled by a single lever. It
steering but the T88 's LlC ratio of nearly 1.7 meant that was normally stowed lying flat on the engine deck but
manoeuvrability on soft ground was somewhat impaired. fully rigged. A certain amount of fore-and-aft movement
The front-mounted dozer blade was provided primarily to was possible by adjusting the stayline crank arms.
stabilise the vehicle when lifting or winching, but it could In addition to the emergency operation of the boom , the
also be used to clear obstacles or even to help climb over spade and the hydraulic fuel pump, the auxiliary engine
them. It was originally planned that the dozer would be also provided power for a hydraulic impact wrench
detachable to allow the use of a fascine carrier or fork lift, required to handle the bolts of up to I. 25in diameter used

67
in some suspension components. The engine used was an Characteristics agreed by the various development
uprated version of the engine of the M48A2 designated agencies on 4 December 1946. Detroit Arsenal prepared a
the A VSI-1790-6A and developing 980hp gross at its design study and the Pacific Car & Foundry Company
maximum speed. A new crossdrive transmission was also was awarded a modest contract in April 1948 to design the
fitted to cope with the loads imposed by dragging dead l55mm Gun Motor Carriage T97, to be capable of
tanks and to provide the necessary power to steer the long accepting the 155mm gun and 8in howitzer interchange­
vehicle. ably, and to build a wooden mockup. Funds were short in
One criticism of the M88 was its lower level of ballistic the period between World War 2 and the Korean War, but
protection compared to the M48. This is only to be on 13 April 1950 the procurement of one prototype was
expected, and vehicles such as recovery vehicles should authorised. New ordnance was also to be developed for
not be exposed to direct fire if at all possible. The armour self-propelled artillery, and in February work had begun
was designed to give protection against small arms fire, on the 155mm gun T80 and the 8in howitzer T89. These
light automatic weapons and shell splinters , and that was were referred to as 'lightweight' because the weight of the
sufficient. vehicle to absorb recoil would allow the ordnance itself to
Over 1,000 M88s were made and many were supplied be lighter. The T97 was designed to use medium tank
to other armies where they remain in service , and in 1970 components and so began life with the A V -1790-3 engine
the production line at Bair was re-opened to overcome of the M46. The suspension also utilised M46
shortages in the US Army. In 1972 plans were announced components with a variation - a larger trailing idler was
to modernise the M88 by the use of M60 automotive used to increase the ground contact length and thus the
components and in March 1975 the new M88A I was type stability as a firing platform. This trailing idler was also
classified. Once again, Bowen-McLaughlin- York were needed to support the massive box-like turret of i/2in
awarded contracts both for new M88A 1 production and armour mounted at the rear of the hull. The driver sat on
also for conversion of existing M88s. the left hand side of the turret.
By the time the first pilot came to be built the T48 was
Self Propelled Artillery Variants of the M48 set to become the standard medium tank , so the
It was only towards the end of World War 2 that AV-1790-5B engine was installed. T48 running gear
self-propelled artillery was recognised as a consideration components were largely the same as the M46 , but the
in the planning of future vehicles. The first generation of narrow (23in) track was retained, and the larger trailing
equipments had used obsolete or obsolescent tank chassis idler was replaced by a standard 26in road-wheel. Pacific
and thus suffered from inferior mobility and reliability as Car and Foundry delivered the first T97 (now the Gun ,
well as logi stic problems with spare parts. The weapons Self Propelled, I55mm, T97) in April 1952. A contract
mounted on these chassis had been standard field pieces, had been let for the manufacture of the Howitzer, 8in,
complete in their top carriages , in limited traverse Self Propelled , TlO8 and the first pilot TlO8 was
pedestal-type mounted in whatever working space the delivered three months behind the T97. Although
tank hull could provide. Armour protection and modifications were needed, production of both vehicles
ammunition stowage received only secondary considera­ began at PCF's Renton plant in August 1952 and
tion and were far from ideal. continued until April 1955. Classification of the T97 as
With the Common Chassis Concept of 1944, some of the M53 came in February 1956 and the Tl 08 followed
this changed. No longer were obsolete chassis to be suit in May, becoming the M55, while the extensive
'wasted-out ' as self-propelled mounts, but each new class modification programme continued . If that were not
of tank chassis was to be capable of adaptation to various surprising enough , the Army decided in early 1956 that it
other roles - including self-propelled anti-aircraft, no longer had a role for the M53 with its 155mm gun, and
anti-tank and field artillery. The medium tank chassis was so all its M53s were converted to the M55 configuration.
expected to be capable of accepting the 155mm gun and The US Marine Corps had received the M53 and these
the 8in howitzer. This concept was altered somewhat by were retained in service.
General Cook's Post War Equipment Review Board, There are only four known variants of the \153-M55
which stated that 'The present policy of expediency of series. PCF built an experimental modification, the
adopting complete tank chassis fo r self-propelled mounts M55EI, in which the turret was lengthened and the
should be abandoned as this results in heavier carriages engine decking altered - presumably to accommodate
than are required. However, development should provide another engine . PCF also built three pilots of the 175mm
for interchangeability of components of gun motor self-propelled gun Tl62. Although externally similar to
carriages and tanks whenever practicable without the M53 this ambitious project was virtually a completely
sacrifice of the characteristics deemed essential in each new vehicle. The hull was wider and the suspension was
type .' It was expected that the 155mm gun and 8in changed to accept the wider 28in tracks of the M48 . The
howitzer motor carriages could be kept down to 40ton by supercharged engine and hydraulic torque converter of
this relaxation , and this was included in the Military the T88 recovery vehicle were used, and one of the major

68
 ::-2..._::1f idler was Above: A Marine Corps M55 self-propelled howitzer fires during an
L - ~-...::. -!fld rhus the exercise in Sardinia. USMC
-: _~: ~ was also
:= :'!ITer of 1f2in Right: The T97 155mm Gun Motor Carriage. The chassis used
~- :' Jri \'er sat on many components of the T48. US Army

- , -. SO the
_-~ :-~n nmg gear problems encountered during testing of the TI62 was
~ :: - \, 1-+6. but the ' torching ' of the exhausts due to their configuration and
position relative to the engine. The gun also had its
problems, but it was the difficulty in manoeuvring such a
bulky vehicle which led to its cancellation in the
mid-J950s.
_- ­ :: ~ '.':i rzer, 8in, Projects were also initiated in the late 1940s for Since the weapon had to accompany armour it had to be
n08 was self-propelled versions of the 240mm howitzer and the protected from at least th e secondary hazards of the
Although 8in gun , designated T146 and TI47 respec ti vely. These armoured battlefield , such as small arms fire and
h vehicles were to be similar in concept to the T97 but the weight overhead shell bursts, and some form of all-round
1952 and was to be kept below 60ton. The sheer impracticality of protection was therefore called for. The attributes of
(1-: rhe T97 as such a weight limit, and the limited usefulness of such mobility, firepower and protection are those of the tank ,
- - - -:­ 0 followed weapons (the 8in howitzer now had a nuclear capability) and early designs were attempts to produce anti- aircraft
-= :..~.: ex tensive meant that these two projects were abandoned even tanks. American efforts to develop armoured turrets,
: ::.3t were not before concept drawings were completed. although numerous , were unsuccessful, so their
- :-_-::. 1956 that it M53 series vehicles were also supplied to other self- propelled air defence at the end of World War 2
__ :' :" :mn gun, and countries and saw service in Vietnam with the USMC, but consisted of the M 19, a light tank chassis with twin 40mm
_~:" : onfi guration. most have been replaced in frontline service by the later guns in an open turret , and various halftracked vehicles­
-- ­ .' ~ :' 3 and these M107 series. The lighter weight of these vehicles is once again with open turrets.
largely made possi ble by a relaxation of the requirement The M 19 and the halftracks were very popular in Korea
--­ :..":.: \153 -M55 for an armoured cab around the gun. where a large vo lume of fire against ground targets was
- -_:'. : ation, the greatly appreciated. Similarly the successor to the M19 ,
and the DIVAD the M42 'Duster' found wide employment in Vietnam for
Organic air defence of armoured units is a subject which perimeter defence and similar functions. Nei ther in Korea
has for a long time received scant attention. Despite nor in Vietnam had there been a significant enemy air
,-~~. sim ilar to efforts by all the major combatants in World War 2, no threat, so the air defence capabilities of these two
: l 'ompletely satisfactory air defence weapon with the desired weapons were not really tested. Attempts to provide
characteristics of mobility , firepower and protection was better armour protection had continued , but nothing
fielded. Mobility was required to enable the weapon to materialised .
accompany armoured units, while firepower was required Other arm ies had adopted similar solutions to the
to be able to detect, track and destroy attacking aircraft. United States, although the British Army was notable in

69
Both the General Dynamics prototype (the XM246 seen above The US army designate the Ford D1VAD the 'Gun, Air Defense
during US Army trials) and the Ford contender (the XM247 seen Artillery, Self-propelled: 4Omm, XM247', but Ford have chosen to
below) used the XM988 chassis, an M48AS hull modified by the promote it simply as 'Gunfighter'. In tests, Gunfighter successfully
addition ofa primary power unit to suit the turret installed. The engaged 900 fixed-wing, helicopter and ground targets, including
vehicles were subjected to intensive contractor and service testing, engagements while the vehicle was manoeuvring at over 2Smph.
but the Army delayed making a final decision until May 1981 when it The US Army invested over S79million in two of each of the
announced that the Ford XM247 was to go into continued XM246 and XM247, and originally expected to spend up to $3billion
engineering development. on production and support of the required 618 weapon systems.
It was considered that both systems had met the specification; More recent estimates put the cost of these systems at $S.lbillion,
however, it is possi ble that the etTectiveness and growth potential of with an Initial Operational Capability of 1985. In times of rapid
the Bofors proximity-fuzed ammunition swayed the choice in favour inflation and increasing pressure on defence budgets, these figures
of the Ford system. are still subject to change. One thing is certain: this most costly
vehicle will ensure that the M48 will form part of a frontline weapon
system well into the 21st century. Ford Aerospace. General Dynamics.

f­

70
 - -----------------------------------------------

not adopting any solution at all. The Soviet ZSU-57-2 and Sperry Gyroscope
later ZSU-23-4 and the West German Gepard reawakened Gun: An adaptation of the 37mm Gun T250 developed for
US AmlY interest in armoured air defence. A series of the earlier Vigilante project. Maremont had redesigned
programmes under exotic acronyms such as GLAADS, the gun to 35mm calibre.
ARGADS and SHORADS examined the fe as ibility of Radar: A Sperry design incorporating low light level TV
many different gun and missile solutions, mounted on a (LLLTV) , a laser rangefinder and a Teledyne computer.
variety of chassis both tracked and wheeled, armoured
and unarmoured. Raytheon's proposal was based on the most satisfactory
The most recent and most definite programme is known performance of one of the 12 pre-production prototypes
as DIVAD (Division Air Defense Gun System) , and of the Leopard Flakpanzer, the Gepard, in firing trials at
evolved from the ARGADS programme. Under the Fort Bliss in 1974. The vehicle itself was too heavy, but
Defense Department's competitive development con­ Raytheon had been sufficiently impressed to take out the
cept, firms were invited to make proposals for the provisional US selling rights for the turret with Siemens
development of DIV AD. The US Army issued a radar, and to embark on studies to mate this turret to the
specification in April 1977 which called for , in essence, M48 or M60. As the DIVAD requirement evolved, the
the following characteristics: CA-l turret with the HSA digital fire control system was
• The weapon to be an automatic gun linked to a substituted. However, Raytheon's enthusiasm was in
search and fire control radar incorporating Identifica­ vain, for only Ford and General Dynamics were se lected
tion Friend or Foe (IFF) and an optical auxiliary fire to take their concepts forward to the prototype stage.
control system
• The weapon and its fire control to have a range of not T44 Flotation Device
less than 4,500m , and the requirements of standardisa­ Just as flotation equipment was developed for the M47, so
tion within NATO would be a major factor in selection the T44 device was designed for the M48. Initial tests
of the gun calibre and its ammunition were scheduled for October 1955 and it was hoped that
• The whole equipment to be turret-mounted on the the device would allow a water speed of about 4kts,
hull of the M48A3 possibly improving to 6kts. Little is known of what
The use of the M48 hull was expedient, but as plans for became of this device, but even by 1953 the user was no
the M48A5 were finalised it became clear that this would longer really interested in cumbersome, bulky and
be the better choice . Five fimls submitted proposals , and vulnerable flotation equipment and a deep fording kit was
these are briefly summarised here: under development in 1954. Later models of the M48,
from the M48A2 onwards, could be equipped for deep
fording , normally to a depth of 8ft (2.44m). In this mode
Ford the engine compartment was flooded and a single exhaust
Gun: Improved Bofors 40mm L-70 gun in twin mount,
extension was fitted. Engine air was drawn through this
firing proximity fused ammunition.
extension. This flooding of the engine compaItment not
Radar: Modified acquisition and fire control radar from
only avoided the tedious process of sealing the engine
the F -16 aircraft.
compartment but also reduced the buoyancy, giving the
tank a better exit performance in strong currents. Studies
General Dynamics of water crossing were carried out and these showed that
Gun: Originally the triple mounting of the Mauser F-30 bottom crawling was the best solution. An inflatable seal
30mm cannon was proposed. Later twin Oerlikon was permanently fitted around the turret ring and other
35mm cannon were substituted. seals and covers could be installed by the crew.
Radar: An adaptation of the US Navy's Phalanx Close-In
Weapon System (CIWS) radar. M8 Dozer Blade
Introduced as the Bulldozer, Tank Mounting, Tl8, the
M8 (T 18E I) was standardised in 1957. A hydraulic pump
General Electric Company driven by the main engine supplied hydraulic pressure to
Gun: The seven-barrelled 30mm gun GAU-8fA of the double-acting cylinders. Valves in the driver's compart­
A-IO aircraft. ment controlled the raising and lowering of the blade
Radar: Originally a Rockwell proposal but this was which was mounted on a parallelogram linkage . 'B lade
replaced by a Westinghouse design. tanks' were normally so equipped on a scale of one per
company, although dozer blades were much more widely
Raytheon used in Vietnam. The M8AI (M8El) bulldozer was
Gun: Twin Oerlikon 35mm GOA cannon. standardised in September 1959 and was an adaptation of
Radar: Hollandse Signaalapparat-Contraves in 5PZF-C the M8 to fit the M48A2 . The control valves and
turret of the CA-l weapon system in Dutch service. hydraulic reservoir of the M8AI are mounted on the right

71
 Left: The Tl8Et Bulldozer under test at
Aberdeen Proving Ground. US Army
via R. P. Hunnicutt

". Below: A view of the M8 Bulldozer on

an M48AI. RAe Tank Museum

trackguard of the tank whereas those of the M8 are device itself. 'High Hennan' and 'Larruping Lou'
mounted on the hull wall at the rear of the tank. Later the described the heavy and light tank-mounted rollers
M8A2 and M8A3 bulldozers were standardised. A snow respectively. The latter, 'Larruping Lou', consisted of
interceptor kit was also available for most M48 series two sets of heavy rollers weighing 21 ton and able to
tanks. survive a 20lb mine detonation. It was developed in the
mid-1950s but although it was never adopted, neither was
Mineclearing with the M48 it ever rejected. The pilot was stored until the mid-1960s
In the early 1950s much work was done on tank-mounted when it served as a model for the design of a mine roller
mineclearing devices and a series of vehicles was built. for the M60. 'Peter Pan' was a light mine excavator
Generally the name suggests the method of operation and pushed by a tank , while a rotary mine excavator was
in many cases the name was more impressive than the known as ' Fargo Express'. This used five M46 tanks as its

72
 Left: An early M48 minedearing device , ' Larruping Lou'. The large
cast iron rollers were intended to detonate single impulse fuzed
anti· tank mines. The announcement of this equipment states that the
attachment 'does not hinder the fighting capabilities of tank
weapons' but the mobility is obviously hampered. US Army

Below: Another view of the rollers, showing the way in which each
- = der test at roller is frce to move up and down and to castor. US Army
:... ~-5Army
Bottom: The rollers of this ' Larruping Lou' mine roller have swung
forward as the M48 propelling tank reversed. The exhausts for the
personnel compartment heaters are visible in front of the turret.
US Army

:1

-= :-::, ;ltor was

1_ -: :2JTh S as its
motive power and for obvious reasons was not pursued . A
jet-type mine clearing device was known as 'Dust Storm'.
An expendable roller was developed by the Corps of
Engineers but no nickname was given. This roller was
reactivated by the US Army Engineer Research and
5.
Development Laboratories for the ENSURE 202
equipment, its two rollers being replaced by two sets of
six M48 roadwheels. The ENSURE 202 project is
mentioned in Chapter 5.

The Shillelagh Missile System

The Shillelagh 152mm gun-launched missile system was
first tested in a heavily-modified M48. The system, as the
152mm Gun-Launcher M81 or M162 , was later fielded in
the M551 and M60A2 tanks, but the modified M48 tank
ended its days as a target.

One last, non-military, variation of the M48 deserves

mention. An enterprising contractor building power
pylons in remote areas along the Arizona-New Mexico
border modified a surplus M48 hull to carry a concrete
mixer. This vehicle had sufficient mobility to reach
isolated sites where it could pour concrete for footings.
The pylons were then positioned by helicopter.

Above left: 'Larruping Lou', seen here on an M48AI, detonates a

mine. The blast has lifted the cupola hatch and may well have
damaged the gun barrel. US Anny

Left: A more radical approach to the problem of mine clearance was

the mounting of a solid fuel rocket engine at the front of the tank.
Seen here on an M26, the device (nicknamed 'Dust Storm') was
intended to use a turbojet engine to clear the soil away from buried
mines so that other equipments could then dispose of them. US Army

Below: Smoke has always been useful both for blinding the enemy
and for covering one's own movements. This Marine Corps M48AI
has been fitled with an experimental smoke generator for close-in
screening. Although this device was being tested at the Marine
Corps Landing Force Development Center in 1959, it was 20 years
before this type of smoke generator entered service on the M60.
USMC
 s. M48 in US Service
': --':-3ued . A
__ Storm
~.-:;:,

::e C,-' rps of

The M48 first entered service in the US Army in the 2d Iraqi government, making this intervention necessary. At
Armored Division (,Hell on Wheels') in 1954. The 'Hell the same time British paratroops landed in Jordan at the
on Wheels' Division was stationed in Germany as part of request of King Hussein. Later , units of the 7th Armored
_ -~ ~ eserves
the US 7th Army, and when they had received theirs , the Division arrived in the Lebanon complete with their
next M48s went to the I st Armored Division (,Old M48A Is . These were employed mainly in the protection
Ironsides') in the Continental United States. of Beirut Airport and in peace-keeping in the surrounding
The first operational deployment involving the M48 area. By 4 October all US troops had withdrawn, and the
was ill 1958 when three Marine Battalion Landing Teams M48 was not used in action.
CBLTs) were sent to the Lebanon on 15 July at the request To the US Marine Corps must go the credit for
of President Chamoun. Sabre-rattling by Syria, and deploying the first armoured unit in the Vietnam war. On
encouragement by that country to revolutionary elements 8 July 1965 the 3d Marine Tank Battalion disembarked at
within the Lebanon, had followed the overthrow of the Da Nang, its task the support of Marine Infantry of the 3d

I ~~:£lD ates a
-!II "e

Left: The 1st Armored Division ('Old Ironsides') were the friendly
forces in Exercise 'Spearhead' at Ford Hood in May 1954. The
road wheels of this M48 show that the tank is almost factory-new.
Details of the Chrysler mount for the commander's machine gun can
be seen and the small driver's hatch is also shown. The 90mm gun
has the smaller T-head blast deflector. US Anny

Below: When the United States intervened in the Lebanon in

October 1958, tanks of the 3/35th Armor were among the force.
Here an M48A I with the M8 dozer blade clears the remains of a
rebel roadblock. The trunking on the glacis is the armour protecting
the hydraulic lines to the dozer blade cylinders. US Anny
 Above: M48A3s of the 3d Marine
Division in support of a BLT near Da
Nang in May 1965. USMC

Left: An M48A3 moving into action

during Operation 'Sitting Duck' near
Da Nang in April 1966. The shock
absorber is missing from the first wheel
station. USMC

Below: The Marine Corps caption to

this photograph is titled 'Looking for
Viet Cong'. The Marine on the left of
the tank is taking a less warlike
approach than his comrades. USMC

Marine Division . The Marines' original task was the

defence of the important airfield at Da Nang , but in
II drafting the request for Marine involvement the staff of
the US Military Assistance Command, Vietnam
(MACOV) had overlooked the fact that the establishment
of a Marine BLT included tanks . The Marines for their
part saw no reason to operate without tanks and so their
M48A3s also lumbered across the beach at Da Nang. This
embarrassed the US Ambassador to Vietnam, who took
the view that tanks were an over-reaction. Nevertheless,
tanks were now in-country and when the Army's 1st
Infantry Division was sent to Vietnam in the autumn of
1965 the divisional cavalry sq uadron kept its tanks
although the two tank battalions were left behind.
MACOV's justification for this was that the 1st
Squadron, 4th Cavalry would test the effectiveness of

76
 -"= "Iarine
_ E ~T r.earDa

-- ~

annour in Vietnamese operations. The l!4th's M48A3s Above: Mines were not the only problem in Vietnam. This M48A3
were soon withdrawn and held at the squadron's base at has become bogged-down in the edge of a rice paddy during a patrol
Phu Loi. So far, informed Army opinion had taken the with Ist Squadron, 1st Cavalry north-west of Tam Ky in December
1967. The M88 is just visible behind the bogged tank. US Army
view that there was no role for armour in Vietnam. Later
General Westmoreland changed this position and in late
1965 he asked for more troops, this time to include
armour. The 25th Infantry Division anived in March
1966 and the 1st Battalion, 69th Armor (,Black
Panthers') became the first Army tank battalion in blades to make them efficient at this. A fresh look at
Vietnam. Their area of operations was centred on Pleiku maintenance was called for in a climate and tenain where
in the Central Highlands. dust clogged oil coolers and air cleaners during the dry
New tactics had to be evolved to deal with an elusive season, and mud caused tracks to throw in the monsoon.
enemy in a new type of lenain, and it \-"as three years Sights developed condensation and mould, and lubricants
before tank engaged tank. M48A3s were used for quickly became contaminated by the all-pervading damp.
'jungle-busting' - clearing trails through primary jungle­ The Viet Cong's wide use of mines was perhaps the
and many were fitted with the cutting edges from dozer greatest obstacle to armoured operations in Vietnam and

77

-----------------­ ----~
 on a\'e:-::.;o
althou§:::, : ­
this '-'"2.::

was an ~-. __
to exp l cx ~ ­
into a h ~:o:- ­
large 2..> : _
remo te: :-: _
tank or -:-:­
mines 0 :':.('-­
and tho:- ::-~
the bb : -­
distortec,
Harki f : -'--­

plastic n : .
bars,
In an ~ :-::
Resear::-: .- - _

Above: Mine damage was a constant

threat to armoured operations in
Vietnam. This early model M48A3 was
involved in Operation 'Cedar Falls'
against the 'Iron Triangle' in the III
Corps Tactical Zone in January 1967.
Apart from damage to shock absorbers
the tank appears undamaged and would
soon have been back in action. US Army

Right: An M48A3 of Company C,

1177th Armor after hitting a mine about
eight miles north-east of Cam Lo on 9
July 1970. The 90mm gun has the
earlier blast deflector. US Army

78
on average 70% of all tank losses were due to mines , were asked to produce a mine roller. This equipment was
although only 20% of personnel casualties were caused known as ENSURE 202, being the 202nd item developed
this way. Conventional Chinese or even US anti-tank under the Expedited, Non-Standard, Urgent Requirement
mines were sometimes used but far more often the mine for Equipment, and the first was delivered to the II th
was an aircraft bomb or an artillery shell which had failed Cavalry in late 1969. Its 20ton (l78kN) weight made it
to explode - the biggest which could be conveniently dug unpopular , and it was found to be unsuitable for
into a hole in the road. Such improvised mines could be as jungle-busting (for which purpose it was never intended).
large as a 500lb (250kg) aircraft bomb, detonated The mine rollers then went into abeyance for a while until
remotely by command wire . There was little chance of the
tank or crew surviving an attack on this scale, but smaller
mines often left the M48A3 drivable , if not unscathed ,
and the crew were usuaJly unharmed. If the hull floor took
the blast then the torsion bars would probably be
distorted, making repair a difficult and lengthy task.
Harking back to the Korean War, Ordnance mechanics
used the field expedient of one or two ounces of C-4
plastic explosive to dislodge the fractured ends of torsion
bars .
In an attempt to reduce losses to mines, the Engineer
Research and Development Laboratories at Fort Belvoir

Right: One set of rollers of this ENSURE 202 mine roller has been
badly damaged and is secured in the raised position. The effect on
the tank's suspension is obvious. US Anny

Below: this ENSURE 202 mineclearing tank is preparing to go into

action along Highway 19 in Vietnam in August 1970. The tank is a
late model M48A3 and is comparatively uncluttered. US AmlY
1 Left: Yie\< . ' ­

painted on 'C"'o
Handel

Below left: T..-__ ......

, !.' combat W:..

Canister :'...~
perimete~ .:-:­
jungle. \\ -:-r.-­
HE fired ::-."
similar e;':':--:­
The · H ~ - . .-_
11 th Ca\'a::-:
in V ierna.::
pulled off l:::'
45° to the L--:,
of fire for :'...
One of ::-.:' _
that of rou:,: ~
mobile P L: ~
sandbags a:: :
M48 tuITe: :
ammunit i o ~. ~
protection -; _
Armoured C _ _
ofCenrurio:- =
been Britisl : .

the 4th Infantry Division had more success with the the II Corps Tactical Zone. His nine M48A3s blazed
equipment mounted on a combat engineer vehicle. 20km of trail in seven hours , proving that tanks could
Eventually 27 were in use, including one loaned for a operate in terrain without roads or tracks. In all, Task
while to 1st Field Squadron, Royal Australian Engineers. Force Spur completed 108km of jungle-busting during
Jungle-busting was an operation which taxed engines Operation ' Lincoln' . A facet of the jungle-busting
and transmissions to the limit. Extended slow speed capability of the M48A3 was that six tanks could crush
driving in heavy going made engine cooling vitally out a helicopter landing zone in about l5min.
important and oil coolers needed constant attention. The Tanks also excelled at bunker-busting. Firing HE, if
close country made short work of track guards and other necessary with concrete-piercing (CP) fuses, they quickly
less substantial external fittings , and if a track lasted for proved their worth. Viet Cong prisoners revealed that
more than about 750 miles it had done very well. With tanks were greatly feared because of the damage they
monthly track mileages of the order of700 miles thi s was could inflict on bunker systems and tunnel entrances, and
clearly a sizeable logistic problem , although old track because of the canister round. Gen Hay, in the Vietnam
could always be used to reinforce gun pits and bunkers. Study entitled 'Tactical and Material Innovations', said:
The first real jungle-busting took place at the end of "Captured documents and intelTogation reports disclose
March 1966 when Lt-Col Robert M. Shoemaker , the that the enemy is afraid of tanks . We feel what he really
squadron commander of }/9th Cavalry, led Task Force fears is the cannister (sic) round and its effect. This
SPUR into virgin jungle near the Chu Pong mountain in (feeling) has been justified, to a degree, by the absence of

80
 Left: View of the M48A3 mine roller 011 loan to 1st Field Squadron, cupola. Convoy escort was one aspect of route security;
Royal Australian Engineers in Vietnam. A kangaroo has been another was the task of actually keeping route s open and
painted on the turret and ' US' deleted from the vehicle number. Paul free from mines and ambushes. To prevent the Viet Cong
Handel from laying mines and ambushes at night the technique of
'Thunder Runs' or 'Roadrunning' was developed. Tanks
Below left: Tanks of 1st Squadron, 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment
in herringbone formation astride a road at Ben Dong, November
would move along roads at night firing canister and
1966. US Army machine gun fire into likely ambush sites, and while this
speculative fire may not have killed many Viet Cong, it
certainly discouraged many more from taking the risk.
There were very few occasions in the Vietnam War
combat when tank and infantry units move together." when M48 gunners actually saw enemy armour in their
Canister ammunition was also useful in ambushes, for sights. During the 1969 Tet offensive several tank
perimeter defence at night and on occasions, for clearing engagements took place and in each case the result was a
jungle. When supplies of canister ran out, impact-fused clear victory for the M48. The only clash between
HE fired into the ground in front of the enemy had a American and North Vietnamese armour took place at
similar effect. Ben Het in the Central Highlands , in March 1969. During
The 'Herringbone' formation was developed by the the night of 3/4 March two PT-76s were destroyed by
11 th Cavalry , whose tanks had been the first Army tanks tanks of the 1I69th Armor firing HEAT ammunition.
in Vietnam. When ambushed or just halted, vehicles When the tanks' complement of HEAT rounds had been
pulled off the road or axis in alternate directions, angled at fired, gunners fired HE with concrete-piercing fuses.
45° to the line of march. This fonnalion gave the best arcs In April 1972 the 20th Tank Regiment of the Republic
of fire for all weapons. of Vietnam fought a series of engagements with North
One of the less glamorous chores for armour units was Vietnamese T-54s and PT-76s. On several occasions,
that of route security. In this role , tanks were in effect enemy tanks were destroyed at ranges up to 3.200yd
mobile pillboxes , and were heavily festooned with (2,925m), and no M48A3s were lost to enemy tank fire.
sandbags and other added protection. Penetration of the Almost all the tanks in American service in Vietnam
M48 turret by a HEAT round was likely to start an were the M48A3 model. However, after the 1968 Tet
ammunition fire, with dire results, and any stand-off offensive it was necessary to issue M48Al s to unit s to
protection was worth having. (The Royal Australian make good their battle losses. The reduced range and
Armoured Corps had cause to be thankful for the design greater vulnerability to fire and HEAT attack made this an
of Centurion. Since the early days of World War 2, it had unpopular action , and rebuilt M48A3s replaced the
been British policy that no explosive be stored above the M48A I s as quickly as depots could carry out the
turret ring, and despite being petrol-engined, no necessary refurbishment.
Centurion is known to have been destroyed by a HEAT
round in Vietnam). M48A3 crew members rode outside Below: An M48A I of 1167th Armor on training with 3d Battalion,
the vehicle and it was nonnal to mount the cupola 4th Marines in Hawaii in January 1964. The searchlight is the
machine gun on a cut-down tripod mount on top of the earlier lkW white light. US Army

_ - "' lil al l, Task

_ -:: ~, : in g during
,-_::Jgle -busting
~ ( - :: uld crush
5 ;::in .
: ? :..--:ng HE, if
-_: ~, :.,o.' =Y quickly
--; :-c\'ea led that
; ' - _ 2l-nage they
::-;:::rances , and
- :he Vietnam
:::!ons' , said:
__ :xJ :1S disclose
~ -~ ~:u he really
- :s =ifect. This
:::::- a bsence of
 Above: One M48A3 tows another to an equipment collecting point at
t(eystone Robin in Vietnam in February 1971. Both tanks from the
11th Armored Cavalry Regiment show the signs of heavy
jungle-busting. US Ann)'

Left: Until the mid-1960s units from the US 7th Army, stationed in
the south of Germany, used the ranges at Hohne for annual weapon
qualification. Here troops load a round of HVAP into an M48AJ of
Company B, 67th Tank Battalion, 2d Armored Division (' Hell on
Wheels') . US Army

Perhaps the one feature of armoured warfare illustrated

by the American use of tanks in Vietnam was the value of
shock action against an enemy without tanks. General
Hay commented: 'The NV A and VC have shown a
reluctance to engage tanks where they ca n be avoided . '
This statement might appear to be self-evident , but
indicates that the enemy did not go in for tank-hunting in
the way that might be expected in a European conflict.

82
 Above: Tanks cannot be expected to drive for long distances without Below: An M48A3 of Company B, 1177th Armor moving into aellOh
showing signs of wear , and this is unacceptable in peacetime or when near Cam Lo in July 1970. The stowage is fairly typical. In front of
deploying over long distances when out of contact with the enemy_ the driver and below the 90mm gun the handles for the external
The MI23 tractor and MISA2 semi-trailer were the US Army's operation of the fire extinguishers can be seen . US Army
standard tank transporter for almost the entire life of the M48
series. This photograph taken in April 1960 shows an almost new
M48. US Anny

:.-rc illustrated

::.:: o.e avoided.'

xc <~''- id ent , but
.:­ :..::...t:, · hunting in
- =--c xln conflict.
 Left: This photograph of an M48A3 with dozer blade gives an idea of
the problems of visibility and maintenance which arise in close
country and jungle, such as this banana grove. The 900101 gun
would almost certainly have canister 'up the spout' although here
the gunner is riding outside the turret. US Anny

Below: Two M88 recovery vehicles lift a battle-damaged M48A3 on

to an M 15A2 trailer for evacuation for base repair. Despite its
forlorn state this tank is almost certainly repairable . The nearer
M88 has twin .50in machine guns at the commander's position and
another mounting on the rear deck. US AmlY

Right: Three M48A 1 'blade' tanks in the motor pool in

Hessen-Homburg Kaserne, Hanau, Germany in October 1959.
US Anny

Below right: An M48Al of the 3/35th Armor in a leaguer near Beirut

Airport during the United States intervention in the Lebanon in
August 1958. US Anny

84

~~::.5"'.~: ~ .\ 1~8A3 on

85

- ------- - - ~-
'I

86
 Left: An M48A3 of C Company, 3rd
Battalion, 3rd Marine Division is loaded
into a Navy LSD en route for the
battalion area at Quang Tri. USMC

Below left: A convoy of Marine Corps

M48A3s moves along a dirt road south
of the dcmilitarised zone in September
1967. USMC

Right : Hearts and minds. This blade

tank from 1st Tank Battalion, 1st
Marine Division is clearing a firebreak
to protect a V ietnamese village from the
fire hazard of dry trees. USMC

Below: A bulldozer from 11 th Engineer

Battalion is called on to assist a Marine
Corps M48A3 during Operation
'Pegasus' in the area of Khe Sanh and
Ca Lu in April 1968. USMC

~
·.
.-~;;. ~
~,,~.
-\
6. TheM48
in Foreign Service

Of the 11,703 M48 series tanks produced, approximately Austria

6,000 ended up in other armies. Some were provided Although not a user of the :\148 , the Austrian Army
under the Military Assistance Program; others were sold received some M88s as part of its fleet of M60A Is. There
as Foreign Military Sales, and some were sold by their are no current plans to modernise their M88s.
initial recipients. These latter transactions require the
approval of the US Government, but several deals in Belgium
recent years appear to have igno red this condition and of The M48A2 A VLB remains in Belgian service and for a
course there have been occasions when tanks have been long time the M55 SP howitzer was also used although
captured , or when a change of government result s in a th is has now been replaced by the MIlO.
change of political alignment.
Many countries have instituted their own improvement Bolivia

programmes. Fitting a diesel engine tends to be the 120 M48s were supplied .

highest priority , followed by upgunning (in variabl y with

the British JOSmm g un ) and at the same time there is
usually a case for improving the fire control system . In Below: Belgian M48A2 AVLBs of the 3rd Engineer Battalion
~ - - ­
-- -
this section user countries are listed with details of any
known improvement schemes.
crossing the Rhine on a causeway of UniOotes at Hersel, north of
Bonn, in spring 1979. Belgian Army
- -

Top: CC-'" "",_;t£!:

Bund "",,~ - ­
'.! ~ .-\ :: .~ ­
rep lare;_

.-\ Ix " t: _\ ­
0[1 (itt 0;-:
\ '= _-: = : C _ i:-':-~

Chlle

3il..."-0 c =-··· ­
5 andz..:

fran CE
Tn" :=- :-;;::.~ ­
· -. ..."::ian Army
- . . :O) ..l. Is. There

~•. :e and for a

- -.:~d although

Top: Conversion of the M48A2 into the M48A2GA2 for the Germany (Federal Republic of)
Bundeswehr. The mantlet is much more conspicuous than that of the Beginning in 1958, the Bundeswehr was supplied with a
'-. M48AS, and the new cupola is not much lower than the M I cupola it total of 1,400 M48-series vehicles including the M88
replaces. Wegmann recovery vehicle, the M55 SP howitzer and the M48
AVLB. In a major improvement programme costing
Abo"e: An M48A2 AVLB of the Bundeswehr about to touch down
DM180million, 650 of the Bundeswehr's remaining
on the opposite bank of the obstacle. Bundesministerium der 1,045 M48A2s have been converted to the M48A2GA2.
Veneidigung The conversion centres on improvements to firepower,
and the rifted I 05mm gun L7 A3 is being installed in a new
mantlet , with a much improved fire control system. The
Chile petrol engine is retained. Wegmann of Kassel are
The Chilean Army is reported to have 270 M48 series responsible for the conversion work, which began in
tanks of which it is planned to convert 40 to the Y148A5 February 1979. Rheinmetall have offered both their
standard. 105mm and 120mm smoothbore guns as retrofits for the
M48A2, but so far there have been no customers for
France either. A very sophisticated fire control system called
The French Army has not received the M48 or any of the LEMSTAR (Laser Entfernungsmesser und Stabilisiertes
variants. However, the strongly competitive French Richtschutzenzielgerat) was developed by AEG·
armament industry has offered two updated fire control Telefunken. It included a low light level TV camera with
systems for the M48 from the firms of Sopelem and a stabilised sight, as well as a laser rangefinder. A similar
GIAT. system, without the TV system, is used in the

89

- ----- - -
 Above: A proposed installation of
Rheinmetall's lOSmm smoothbore gun
in the M48A2. Despite the claimed
superiority of the smoothbore gun,
.1
NATO standardisation of ammunition
won the day and the British L 7 gun was
i selected for the up-armed M48A2GA2
~"I of the Bundeswehr. Rheinmetall GmbH

Left: An M48A2 of the Bundeswehr on

the firing point at the range at
Castlemartin in South Wales. These
I: tanks have no track tension idlers, but
German smoke dischargers and a
searchlight stowage box have been fitted
to the turret. Soldier Magazine

Below left: A troop returns to the

rangehead for a midday meal during
firing at Castlemartin. Soldier Magazine

90

 Above: Rheinmetall's study for

mounting their 120mm smoo~hbore
gun selected for Leopard 2, In the k
M48A2. This suggestion was not ta ~n
up by the Bundeswehr nor, as far as IS
known, by any other country.
Rheinmela/l GmbH

Left: An M48A2C of the Bundeswehr,

bl d
. d with the l\18A 1 dozer a e,
eqUlppe bridge which has been laid by
crosses
Biber abridgelayer. Bundesminisler;um
ader Verteldlgung , VI ae F Foss

B low left: A commercial up-armouring

of\he turret of the M48A 1 by the
'German consortium ofGLS. The gun
appears to be the 90mm, modified to
represent a IOSmm gun. GLS

91

--
M48A2GA2. The German firms of GLS and MTU are Israel
also active in M48 rebuild programmes in other countries The Israeli Armoured Corps (,Hel Shirion ' ) received its
such as Greece and Turkey . Finally, the Franco-German first M48A2s from Germany in 1965. In the Six-Day War
mineclearing project called LSM (Landmineschnell­
raiimmittels) is to use M48 hulls as motive power for a
flail equipment. The same device might also be mounted
on the AMX-30 hull.
of June 1967 these Pattons fought well and earned the
respect of their crews. The 7th Armoured Brigade, which
oven'an the 20th Palestinian Division during the advance
on EI Arish, included a battalion of M48s, and M48s were
also included in the composition of 'R' Force, which
.\
--
Greece occupied the Gaza Strip and Kantara. On the Jordanian
The Greek Army received 500 M48s and a number of front there was often confusion because both sides had
M88 Recovery Vehicles. It was reported that MTU, the M48s.
makers of the diesel engine of the Leopard tank, were Exploiting this type of confusion , a predominantly
examining the re-engining of the Greek Army's M48 Shelman-equipped brigade entered Nablus on 7 June
fleet. However, Greece later bought 600 kits to convert its without firing a shot. A strong counter-attack by the
M48A 1s to M48A3 standard and this package would Jordanian 40th Armoured Brigade (with 50 M48s) was
include the A VDS-1790 diesel engine. Discussions are in only beaten off with the aid of Israeli close air support.
progress with other firms on improvements to the fire After this, many Jordanian M48s were captured.
control system associated with the fitting of the rifled On the Syrian front a battalion of M48s took part in the
105mm gun. advance on Keneitra, while on the Jordanian side two
brigades equipped with M48s were deployed in the
Iran Jerusalem sector along the Jordan River.
The United States supplied Iran with 240 M48s in the When the first M48A2s were received from Germany,
early 19605. Re-engining of M48s in the plant built by plans were made to convert them to the diesel engine and
Bowen-McLaughlin-York (see the M47 entry) is reported 105mm gun , but by the time war broke out in June 1967
to have continued even after the revolution in early 1979. only enough for one company had been completed.
Several Iranian M47s and M48s have been captured by During the Six-Day War over 100 M48s and M48Als
Iraq in the fighting which began in 1980 . were captured from the Jordanian Army and soon

on the sear
Defence Fe.-,' "

f· Above: An ,, !.:.~

Right : A " tier;

M48 during i::o •

afterwards . __
purchased ::.i- :.. =
Conversioi: : :-­ ­
standard. "'_::
equipped Is:-.=­
was later f.::;:-:
priority an '; :-:'
around 800 . ~ -

The OC ((l~",,: ­
danger p0~": ::
(ATGW ). a;-- -=­
ATGWs on :.:c ­
tended to ne ;~-:-_­
' Saggers'
 -=-:= ...-ed its
- :_'\-:JJy \\-ar
- - e::"'-::'= the
.:. -=: - ;::--== _'.'. hich
- -; - r" 2iha nce

- - _!.!. ' s \'.-ere

-: :- ::: _ whi ch

_::':>:-:linantly
- --.: : ~_ - June

~ -:r:, Gennany,
_~ ==_gi ne and
- G Ju ne 1967
= : 0:npleted .
- ,: '- I-l8Als
l:1d soon
Left: An Israeli M48 modified by the substitution of lOSmm gun,
diesel engine and low profile cupola. This tank, of the 2nd Company
of the 1st Battalion of its Brigade, has a .SOin machine gun installed
on the searchlight mountings as a subcalibre training weapon. Israeli
Defence Forces

Above: An M48 ofthe Israeli Army in a revetment. Irvine Cohen

Right: A welder at work inside the engine compartment of an Israeli

M48 during its refurbishment. Irvine Cohen

afterwards 'large numbers' of M48s and M48A 1s were

purchased as US surplus, or in various roundabout ways.
Conversion of the varied selection of models to the same
standard, with the British lOSmm gun which then
equipped Israeli Centurions , and the diesel engine which
was later fitted to the Centurion as well, was given a high
priority and by the beginning of the Yom Kippur War infantry support with massive machine gun firepower
around 800 M48s were in service with the Israeli Army. became the nonnal tactical grouping. One of the lessons
The designation M48A4 was given to upgraded Israeli of the Six-Day War had been the vulnerability of the
M48s but is not a US designation. M48A2's controlled pressure hydraulic gun control
The October 1973 war brought home to the Israe lis the system. A leak could send hot, hi gh pressure , flamm able
danger posed by infantry anti-tank guided weapons hydraulic fluid all round the turret, and this point was well
(ATGW) , although two M48s had been lost to 'Snapper' taken by the US Army_ Non-flammable fluid was
ATGWs on the Suez Canal in 1967 _ Initial tank actions introduced, but the M48 series was still very vulnerable to
tended to neglect infantry support but after heavy losses to HEAT attack. It was this which caused the majority of
'Saggers ' (the Soviet 'suitcase' ATGW), intimate losses in the 1973 war.

93
 series ~.
suppl ie.: : .
Neve n:1...~. :­
tank U5~': :
s ign ific ~ ·
pro vide': :-­
first in

Italy
Like Fr.::< ~

Above: A squadron of M48s of the

Royal Norwegian Army lined up for
inspection . Royal Norwegian AmlY

Left: An M48 of the Royal Norwegian

Army 'somewhere in North Norway' .
Royal Norwegian Army

Above right: An M48 of the Royal

Norwegian Army reversing in the snow
during exercises in the north of Norway.
Soldier Magazine

Righi: An M48 oflhe Norwegian Army

outside a garage at Trandum. Royal
Norwegian AmlY

94
 After the Six-Day War, Israel took delivery of M60 Jordan
series tanks from the United States, and many more were Saudi Arabia has financed the construction of a tank
supplied by air from the US during the Yom Kippur War. conversion workshop in Jordan where 160 M48s will be
Nevertheless the M48 remains the principal American brought up to the \148A5 standard.
tank used by the Israeli Army, and has been not only a
significant factor in its effectiveness, but has also Morocco
provided much of the experience e mbodied into Israel 's There are plans to moderni se one battal ion of the 107
first indigenous tank, the Merkava . M48s supplied to the Moroccan Army. Detai Is of the
conversion are not known.
Italy
Like France, Italy is not a user of the M48 although a Norway
quantity of the M55 SP Howitzer was supplied. The firm The Royal Norwegian Army operates 38 M48s,
of Selenia has proposed another fire control system based organised in independent sq uadrons. Although the
on its VAQ-3 laser range finder. Leopard I is now in service, there do not seem to be any
plans to modernise the M48s .

Pakistan
Mention has been made of the use of the M47 by the
Pakistani Army. The M48 was also supplied to Pakistan ,
and in this extract from Military Review, Leo Heiman
analysed the differences between the Indian Centurions
and the Pakistani M48s , and their tactical handling in the
Kashmir in September 1965 .
'The tanks themselves were better handled by the
Indians than the Pakistanis , mainly because the Indian
tanks were older, simpler and less complicated than the
American-made Patton tanks used by the Pakistani
forces . This may sound like a paradox, but there is no
doubt that the sheer modernity of the Patton was its
undoing vis-a-vis the older, slower, weaker and simpler
Centurions and Shermans used by the Indians.

.--.c - 'As an armoured fighting vehicle, the Patton is so

vastly superior to Centurions and Shermans that under

~ _' me Royal

95

normal conditions no comparisons could be made. But shrapnel and mOl1ar bursts. If the armoured infantry had Soutb ~ :.
the US tanks proved too complicated for the soldiers who accompanied the Pakistani tanks into battle, they and 640 \1..: ' ,,_
operated them. The Patton weapon system relies on their vehicles would have cleared lanes of fire in the grass,
computers which control the main gun. For effective making ultimate victory certain. But lack of specially to ivl-k .'_: _
firing the crew must feed correct information into the trained infantry and carriers turned success into failure. been u :: ~:.2.._
computer which then does the rest. 'On the Indian side, orthodoxy and lack of imagination fitted v.::..- _
' During manoeuvres and field exercises, the Pakistani paid off.
tank brigades proved to be quite efficient, but real war is
vastly different from war games. In the zone of military There are one or two factual errors in the account - the This p~e: l<",,~~~
operations, computers went wrong, Pakistani tank crews ballistic computer is not an electronic computer, and the part in tbe
fed misleading information into the electronic brains, the 90mm gun has always relied on mechanical control, and a skirts and ......'
heavy guns had to be operated by hand, and the crews certain amount of imagination is required to regard the
Tank Maf ' - ·
were so occupied with modem gadgetry that they had M48's silhouette as low - and many would not agree that
little time left for fighting. To many armies, ultramodern the Patton is so vastly superior to the Centurion as Mr
hardware is not an asset. Heiman would suggest. However, the article does
'Apart from having trouble with the Patton's illustrate the extent to which sophisticated equipment can
automated fire control equipment, the Pakistanis were be made worthless by lack of attention to training. Indian
handicapped by their battle deployment. They applied losses in the Kashmir War were 114 tanks and 57
proper deployment procedure by sending an armoured armoured cars, while Pakistani losses amounted to 471
brigade of 70 Pattons streamrolling across the Indian tanks and armoured cars.
defences in the Kashmir sector without bothering about Again in 1971, Pakistan found herself at war with
the open flanks. But lack of armoured infantry precluded India. This time there was less scope for armoured
tactical exploitation of the initial gains. When fuel and warfare , and the composition and equipment of the
ammunition supplies were exhausted, the Pakistani Pakistani Army had changed. M48s were still in service,
brigade ground to a halt. Lacking infantry protection, the and still are today, but their particular contribution to the
Pakistani tanks became easy prey for Indian hunter-killer 197 1 war has not been recorded.
teams which stalked the Pattons with jeep-mounted In addition to the M48 MBTs , Pakistan has also
106mm recoilless rifles, bazookas and flamethrowers . received the M88 recovery vehicle. It was reported in
'In the Punjab sector, the Pakistanis also sent a 70-tank 1976 that a further 100 M48s had been received , and it
brigade steam-rolling forward, but failed to screen its was suggested that these tanks had been originally
advance with jeeps and motorised patrols. The heavier supplied to Turkey and later refurbished in Iran.
Pattons could not manoeuvre on the rain-soaked muddy
ground as easily as the Indian Centurions and Shermans, Portugal
and the few dry tracks across the battle zone were heavily In 1978 Portugal received 18 M48s under the NATO Aid
mined by the Indians. Combat engineers were not sent Programme. It was reported in late 1979 that a further 12
ahead to clear the mines and prepare attack lanes across M48s were shipped to Portugal from West Germany and
the muddy fields. that these tanks were fitted with 105mm guns.
'Moreover, at this time of the year, Punjab fields are
covered with sugar cane and grass 2-3m (6ft 6in-9ft lOin)
high. The low silhouette of the Patton is intended to
guarantee extra protection against enemy anti-tank fire
and provides better conditions for hull-down deployment
in major armoured battles. But in the grass and sugar cane
of the Punjab, the Pakistani tanks had to operate blindly.
To direct their fire, tank commanders would climb up on
to the turrets and scan the fields through binoculars,
shouting down orders to the crews who then fed them into
computers.
'The exposed tank commanders became easy prey for
Indian snipers and were mowed down by machine guns,

Right: Soldiers or the Indian Army beside a Pakistani M48

destroyed in the fighting in late 1965. Indian Anny

96
 South Korea
640 M48 series tanks were supplied to South Korea. In
early 1977 the South Korean Army ordered 416 M48A 1
to M48A3 conversion kits. Many M48A3s have now
been upgraded locally to M48A5 standards and are also
fitted with track skirts.

This page: Locally-modified M48·series tanks of the ROK A taking

part in the October 1978 parade in Seoul. The \oSmm gun, track
skirts and ANIVSS·3 searchlight can be clearly seen. The smoke
grenade dischargers on the turret sides are of the German pattern.
Tank Magazine

.' ..: war with

-, -. has also

- :y- \' .-\ TO Aid

- ~ "' iurther 12
=:;;: 2 :-:nany and

97

--- - --------- ---

 7.

Above: An M48A3 of the ROKA (Republic of Korea Army) Thailand

photographed at Munsan, Korea in the spring of 1979. The thin wire 50 M48A3s are in service. More recently a quantity of
bracket on the 90mm gun barrel may be an aid to the commander in
M48A5s has been supplied to the Thai Army.
aligning the gun, but would be vulnerable to damage by
undergrowth and other obstacles and even muzzle blast.
R. P. Vaughan
Turkey
160 M48s .were reponed to have been supplied to the
Below right: Oerlikon suggested the installation of the twin 35mm Turkish Army. The German firm of GLS, in association
gun turret of the Cepard on the hull of the M48A3, shown here in with MTU , is examining the re-engining of Turkey ' s
model form. Raytheon proposed the virtually identical CA-I turret M48s. As mentioned earlier, some Turkish M48s may
for the D1VAD requirement, and the Spanish Army set aside some have found their way to Pakistan .
M48 hulls for a similar project. Oerlikon·Contraves
UK
The UK has not used any of the M48 series, although one
M48Al was received on Standardization Loan and given
the British Army number 02B833. The M55 SP howitzer
was also tested. Vickers offer a re-engining service for the
Spain M48 and both Ferranti and Marconi have developed
Both the M48 and the M48A I were supplied to Spain, and upgraded fire control systems.
the M48A I was used in operations in the Spanish Sahara
against Polisario guerrillas. Many M48s have been Vietnam
converted to the M48E by Chrysler Espana SA by the The Vietnamese Army now possess one of the largest
installation of the A VDS-1790-2A engine, and some fteets of M48A3s, estimated at 940 tanks. This includes
M48E's have now been fitted with a 105mm gun of the 340 tanks abandoned during the closing stages of the
British L7 type. These guns are reported to have been Vietnam War.
obtained from Israel 'at an advantageous price ' . Some
surplus M48s were offered for sale in late 1979 and others
have been earmarked for use as anti-aircraft tanks by the
eventual installation of the Gepard turret.

Taiwan
350 M48A3s have been supplied. It is believed that there
are now plans to update some of these. In late 1977
Taiwan bought a further quantity of M48A I s.

98
 7. Parallel Developments

The Light and Heavy Tank Families l55mm Self-Propelled Howitzer, M44 - the same basic
The development and use of the M48 should not be chassis as the M52.
viewed in isolation, and this account would be incomplete Carrier, Personnel, Full Tracked, Armored, M75 ­
without a short mention of the two companion vehicle engine and chassis.
families. A requirement for both light and heavy tanks Carrier, Personnel , Full Tracked, Armored, M59 ­
was confirmed at the same time as that for the medium suspension.
tank , and the T41 light tank and the T43 heavy tank were Carrier, Mortar, l07mm , Full Tracked, Armored, M84­
developed alongside the T42. based on M59.
The T41 entered service as the 76mm gun tank'M41 Recovery Vehicle , Light, T50 - using the modified
and was widely deployed as a reconnaissance vehicle. Its chassis, but not proceeded with.
chassis was used in much the same way as the medium Tractor, Cargo, M85 - using the basic chassis but with
tank chassis, resulting in a family of lighter vehicles. This front sprocket. Standardised but not produced.
included the following: Bulldozer, Tl6 and Swimming Device, Tl4 were also
produced experimentally.
Twin 40mm Self-Propelled Gun, M42 - using the Tank, 90mm Gun , T49 - a different gun.
modified chassis.
105mm Self-Propelled Howitzer, M52 - using some The T43El heavy tank was standardised as the M 103
suspension components and engine. 120mm gun tank but saw little service with the US Army.

Left: The M41light tank, the parent

vehicle of the contemporary light
vehicle family.

0 -- [he largest
-:;U s includes
s - ~ g es of the

99
 I

Above left: The name 'Walker Bulldog' was given to the M41 light artillery formed another class of its own. So US armoured
tank in US Army service. This M41 of the 759th Tank Battalion is vehicles once more fell into three fairly distinct
preparing for a fire mission at Grafenwohr in July 1955. US Army categories , only one of which included tanks.

Left: The MI03 was the heavy tank developed alongside the M48. T54 l05mm Gun Tank
This T43EI pilot model is undergoing wading tests at Aberdeen
Not to be confused with the Soviet medium tank T-54 , the
Proving Ground in September 1953. The picture gives an idea of the
American T54 was an early attempt to upgun the M48.
size of the massive 120mm gun turret. US Army
The United States had agreed at the 1951 Tripartite
Above: The long gun and huge turret of the M 103 heavy tank are
Conference that the medium gun tank should be capable
well shown in this photograph. US Army of defeating 4in of armour angled at 600 at 2,000yd using
kinetic energy ammunition, and the 90mm gun M41
could not achieve this performance. The Ordnance
Committee initiated development of the T54 and its gun
in August 1951 and Army Field Forces endorsed this in
January 1952. The T54 used the hull of the T48
The US Marine Corps took 158 of the 225 produced into unchanged, but had a different turret mounting the new
service in heavy tank companies in Marine tank 105mm gun T 140. The turret was a conventional design ,
battalions. Only one variant, the M51 tank recovery with the gun in a hydromechanical recoil mechanism , and
vehicle, was standardised although other wrecker-type was 3.5ton heavier than the T48 turret. The 105mm gun
vehicles and cargo tractors were developed. fired fixed ammunition and about 45 rounds weighing
The Ordnance Committee's move to redesignate tanks 681b each were stowed in the tank. Two pilots of the T54
by gun calibre was an indication of the trend which was to were built.
replace the classical three-way split. The heavy class The United Shoe Machinery Corporation might appear
subsequently disappeared as the medium gun tank to be an odd choice for tank manufacture, but in fact their
became the main battle tank , and the M 113 APC formed experti se in this field went back to 1942 when they
the basis of the lighter vehicles, while self-propelled designed an automatic loader for the T22El medium

101

-- ~ -- -- -- -- ­
Top: This view of the T54El tank shows the hinge for the massive tank. Automatic loading was to be a feature of the T54E I, the fi re C 0 ~. __
hatch in the turret roof through which the automatic loader was made possible by the adoption of an oscillating turret subframc " :::
replenished. The problems of sealing an oscillating turret are design. The Tl40El gun was mounted in a conventional kinet ic t r.e:;:.
indicated by the canvas cover. Both the designation and the date on multi-cylinder hydrospring recoil mechanism and the tw o d iffe:=~ :-
the notice beside this tank at Aberdeen Proving Ground are 53.5to n ": - .
automatic loader was located behind the gun , its position
incorrect. C. F. Foss
remaining fixed relative to the gun , since the entire turret nearly
Above: The ' torpedo' turret orthe TS4EI is well shown in this moved in elevation. Problems with protecting the gap
photograph taken at Aberdeen. The long TI40 gun in its oscillating between the moving parts of the turret,and the fact that
turret makes the tank nose-heavy and the effect on the suspension of the turret weighed 20.8ton (185kN) , lead to the
the basic M48 hull can be seen. C. F. Foss abandoning of the T54E I.
Detroit Arsenal later designed the T54E2 which
returned to a conventional pattern of turret. In this model

102
 Q

'"' ,' ,

the fire control equipment was mounted on a shockproof Top and above: The lOSmm Gun Tank TS4E2. Although the turret
subframe within the turret to increase its survivability in a was quite a good ballistic shape, the long overhang of the gun and
kinetic energy attack. Four pilots were authorised, to test the excessive weight of the vehicle meant that it would not be a
two different turret power sys tems. At a combat weight of satisfactory replacement for the M48 series. US Army. via Col R. I
leks
53.5ton (476kN) the T54E2 was 100 heavy , and it was
:"'- c ::.J: je turret nearly 20 years before the M48 was effectively
-' -ll ~ the gap upgunned. hull was used without modi fica tion. The vehicle's weight
_' = fact that The Rheem Manufacturing Company of Philadelphia, of 56ton (498kN) exceeded the design target by Iton
~;:j to the PA had been responsible for the T54 . In the T77 120mm (8.9kN) and excessive weight probably killed the T77
gun tank , they had their chance to develop an oscillating project in the same way as the T54 had perished. A
- :'- ::=:~ whic h turret with an automatic loader when two pilots were II0mm gun was developed at about the same time and
- ::-ti s model ordered in April 1953. As with the T54 series, the M48 may have been considered for the T77.

103

- - '- ---- , - - - -­
 Crui.,-->-­ :c

Left: Tho T : -

hatch . .\', ::.~

T95 Series of Tanks Ammunition carried: 90mm - 50 rounds (17 ready

rOunds in turret basket)
Crew: 4 . 50in - 1 ,500 rounds
Weight: 83 ,600lb (371.8kN) combat loaded .30in -4,500 rounds
77 ,3001b (343. 8kN) less crew, ammunition, fuel and Armour: Glacis, noseplate, turret ring and sides of hull
equipment forward of turret centre Iine - cast, one piece
Length: 33ftO.625in (10.075m) overall , gun forward Hull-4Ain ( 112mm) at 60° front to Iin (25mm) at 20°
32ft 9in (9. 98m) gun in travelling lock rear
22ft 7. 75in (6.9m) hull only Turret - 7in (l78mm) at 60° front to 2in (3Smm) rear
Width: 10ft 4in (3. 15m) over tracks Engine: Continental AOI-1195-5
6ft 7i n (2.0m) hull only Transmission: XTG-41 0 series (Allison)
Height: 9ft 5in (2. S7m) to highest fixture Suspension: Torsion bar (hydropneumatic on some later
Ground contactlength: 13ft 9.5in (4.2m) models)
Track centre dista:1ce: Sft 7in (2. 62m) five pairs of dual roadwheels
G/c1earance: 1ft 5in (OA3m) but less under driver's seat Power/weight ratio: II hp/ton (0. 92kW/kN) gross
Turret ring diameter: 7ft 1in (2.16m) Max tractive effort: 92,300Ib (41OAkN)
Armament: Main - 90mm T208 gun in T 191 rigid mount Tractive effort/weight ratio: 1.10 (41O.5kN)
with traverse of 360° and elevation of _10° to + 20° Max speed: 37mph (59kmlh)
Secondary - one or two .30in MGs (coaxial) Max gradient: 60% (31 °)

104
 Trench crossing ability: 8ft 6i n (2. 39m I

Verticle obstacle ability: 3ft (0 .9: m I

Fuel capacity: 235gal (889Iitre)

the 15: ITln1 f U:1 - :.l~:--_ ': :-.;;:- \.."'l :- ::1;: S:-_: ~~t ~ :: {: ..~ =.:. ~~ ~.
Fuel consumption: O.64mile/gal (O.27km/ litre )
system \\ 3 5 also mounted o n the T95 -:ha, sis at 0 e ; ta ~ e .
Ground pressure: l2.02lb/sq in (82. 9kPa)
Rigid mounting of the 90mm smoothbore gun T208 was
Cruising range: 150 miles (240km) at 17mph (27kmih)
investigated , as was installation of the LK 120mm
bag-charge gun then under development for Centurion' s
A conference on future equipment policy at Fort Knox in
replacement.
April 1954 gave support to proposals to broaden the scope
Other innovations in firepower included the testing of
of tank development within the 'medium ' class - even
different methods of fire control and gun control. An
though this class no longer officially existed. It was
advanced type of rangefinder, the T53 , was fitted to the
accepted that the use of a conventional gun and power
first three pilots. This rangefinder, better known as
plant made a weight of about 40ton the lower limit, but
OPTAR (Optical Tracing Acquisition and Ranging) was
the use of a smoothbore gun and a power plant then in
the forerunner of today' s laser rangefinders, but instead of
development might allow a reduction in weight.
a laser it used a non-coherent pulsed beam of light which
The concept known as TLI was developed into the tended to scatter and thus gave too many false readings ,
90mm Gun Tank, T95. The tank was not conceived as an and was only accurate to 2,000yd. It looked like a small
immediate replacement for the M48 , but more as an searchlight on the right side of the turret. A more
exploration of technology and concepts. Models from the conventional rangefinder featured in later pilots . Other
T95 to the T95E8 are known, but they may have gone as T95 models used turrets from other tanks , such as the
far as the T95E 13. These models varied in the M48 , T54E2 and T96.
combinations of armament, fire control equipment and The developmental engine for the T95 was cryptically
known as the 'X-engine', possibly because the cylinders
were arranged in a cross. An engine designated AX-880
was under development at that time. Whatever the history
of the X-engine, early pilots of the T95 were built with the
AOI-1195 engine installed . Another model tested the
Top left: The T95E3 had the turret of the T54E2 I05mm gun tank.
By the time this photograph was taken, development of the l05mm 1,I00hp Solar Saturn gas turbine , and in the T95E8 a
gun T140EI shown here had ended, so the vehicle was used mainly commercial diesel engine was installed.
for automotive trials . US Army, via Co} R . 1. leks The T95 was also used as a testbed for different running
gear components. Five large (32in (81 cm) diameter)
Left: The T95. The armoured cover over the OPT Ax rangefinder is
wheels were fitted, suspended on torsion bars . The
in the closed position. The cupola has the horizontally swinging
suspension was referred to as . flat-track' , me aning that
hatch. Narhan N. Shio virz
return rollers were not fitted. !\'lany different de signs of
Below: This T95 has the T57 coincidence rangefinder and the design road wheels and trac k we re tried . includ ing a trac k
of roadwheel is slightly ditTerent. US Anny manufactured in titani um . Yet another farsighted
:- ~eady

(-T

- : ­ - ,:':<::5 o f hull

':: ~:n I at 20

) rear
0

H
if t
: ,' :1 so me later

gross
Above: A Solar Saturn gas turbine was
ins.lalled in a T9S tank and here is
shown on display at the Pentagon in
March 1961. US Army

Left and below left: These two

photographs show the T9S's
hydropneumatic suspension ' kneeling' .
The hull will not go any lower because
the driver's seat is in a bulge in the hull
noor in order to achieve a lower
silhouette when closed down, yet still
retaining the driver's seated position.
The semi-supine position of Chieftain
was tried and rejected. US Army

Above right: This T9S lank has been

heavily modified to accept a
sophisticated hydropneumatic
suspension system and relains the single
pin track of the T9S. The turret is a
developmenlal model from the M60A2
programme, but the tank shown here
does not have a model number. National
Warer Life Company
Right: Another view of the T9S, this
time with different roadwheels.
US AmlY

innovation
hydropneu nc ::....=
the tank ' 5 a:-.::­
The T96 [ 0 - ,
is , it would ~ _ _
within a \\ c:::-­
generated b~ ::-<7
T96 , and i
fabricated ...\ :.:
· the T95, this
'.. beels.

innovation was the experimental installation of a the mounting of the 120mm gun on the T95.In a way, the
hydropneumatic suspension, which allowed control of fate of the T96 had depended on the success of its I05mm
the tank's attitude. smoothbore gun and its 'arrow shot'. This round, which
The T96 tank was seen as an interim 'heavy' tank - that would today be known as a ' long rod penetrator' , was
is, it would be able to mount a larger gun than the T95 fired from the T210 gu n at a very high velocity , but in
within a weight limit of 45ton. The intense interest 1958 the required performance was beyond the state of
generated by the T95 programme somewhat eclipsed the the art.
T96, and it was abandoned before a pilot could be The T95 programme is widely regarded as a failure . It
fabricated. A few turrets were built and used to explore ran from 1954 until 1961 and consumed $26.6million in

107
 the process. However, gas turbine engines, hydrogas THO 120mm Gun T ank Armameo:
suspensions, smoothbore guns and laser rangefinders are with 15: : ~ :=­
now commonplace features of main battle tanks. The Crew: 5 elevation
T235 series of self propelled artillery which led to the Weight: c90,OOOlb (400kN) combat loaded Seconda:-:. - :'>
M107 and MilO was based on a chassis which drew Length: c32ft 6in (9. 9m) overall (commaL ':: ;"':
heavily on experience with the T95 , and the T95 was also c22ft 6in (6.86m) hull only Ammu ni ' -
used as the basis of the TI18 combat engineer vehicle, Width: II ft 3in (3 .43m) Armour : r:_
leading directly into the M728 based on the M60Al. So Height: estimates vary between 8ft 2 .5in (2.5m) and 9ft (2.5-4:' ~ ::-.
although no tank entered service as a result of the T95 7in(2.92m) Engine: C : -~

programme , nearly every aspect of current main battle G/clearance: 1ft 5in (O.43m) but 1ft 2 .5in (O.37 m) under Ordnanct .~.
= - -
tanks owes something to the T95 . driver's bulge (537k\\' ;:-:

Transrni.s.5 :

Right: T95 showing OPT AR Suspensio

rangefinder in open position. US Army side

Gross po "' .:-­

Below right and bottom right: Two Fuel capa :"

views ofthe T118 Combat Engineer

battlefiek -:--=-­

Vehicle, taken at Fort Benning in April

'1 1960. The Tll8 was hased on the T95
Ground pr~
tank but its equipment was derived
In an a ~ = ::­
from the MI02 combat engineer vehicle.
firepo \\"c~
: .:
US Army
120mm G_ ­ -=­
that the C_-:
Although ;-_

almost
missile wao _
for the kir:;"' :.:

--

108
 Armament: Main- 120mm TI23 gun in a rigid mount potent weapon available at the time was the 120mm gun
with ISo (left and right) Ira verse and -I 0' to -= 20 c of the MI03 heavy tank . This TI23 gun was to be
elevation mounted in a limited traverse and elevation mounting on a
Secondary- .50in M2HB in cupola similarto \148AI modified M48 hull. Nowadays the turretless tank concept
(commander's) makes much of a low silhouette, but the design for the
Ammunition carrled: 120mm - 30 rounds TllO shown in the drawing is only 7in (l7.8cm) lower
Armour: Hull- cSin (12. 7cm) at 70° front to I-I. 7Sin than the basic M48. The running gear was the same as the
~ - , - and 9ft (2.S-4.Scm) rear M48, but the volume of the hull was enormous because of
Engine: Continental A VI -1790-8, later amended to the five-man crew and the volume swept out by the gun
: :: - :-l un der Ordnance AOI-1490; Gross Power (AOI-1490) nOhp breech inside the hull. The TI23 gun used separated
(537kW) gross , S60hp (410kW) net ammunition, requiring two loaders - one for the projectile
Transmission: 'XTG-SOO (typically SOlb (22.7kg» and one for the propelling
Suspension: Torsion bar with six pairs of roadwheels per charge (typically 581b (26.3kg». The overall height was
side accentuated by the configuration of the power pack at the
Gross power/weigM ratio: 16hp/ton ( I. 34k WIkN) rear of the tank. The commander's position, and his
Fuel capacity: 3S0gal (1.324litres) allowing 22.S hours cupola over the engine added still more to the height.
battlefield running Because the weight was expected to be less than the M48,
Ground pressure: clO.37lb/sq in (71.SkPa) the 1790 series engine was considered larger than
necessary and so the AO 1-1490 engine, mated to the new
In an attempt to field a vehicle with greater anti-tank XTG-SOO transmission, became the intended power
firepower but weighing less than the \148 , the TllO pack.
120mm Gun Tank was designed in 19S5 . It was intended The TII0 was shrouded in secrecy as a project in 1955
that the Chrysler Corporation would be the design parent. and abandoned in October 1956 without a piLot being
Although guided missiles were at this time capable of built. Twenty-five years later it remains an enigma.
destroying tanks of any size (the 60lb HESH warhead of Perhaps the Armor Board realised just how inftexible
the UK Ma.lkara missile could inftict terrifying damage on such a vehicle would be, in time to forestall the prototype.
almost any target , and the HEAT warhead of the Dart
missile was a similar proposition), there was still a need
for the kinetic energy attack of enemy armour. The most Below: The TlIO with 120mm main gun.

:------------­ ----- OO~~u~-=-= ~-_.~"'--:.-

\~~u ...•

i
I
I
I
I
IL ___ _ _
 Appendices 2.
No
The sYS[C'=
a particu:.;.: ..
time the ::C'­
nomenc l2. ~~
nomen c i,,:--~
The pre ,::;:.· ..
II

I
1. Imperial and SI Units letter!\! fc :
Modi fi c2.:::::" _
approp ri 2:~ ­
first mo .: :' : ­
design a[:( ~
develop n::: -­
I: Modern technical usage requires that dimensions and
capacities be quoted in the SI (Systeme Internationale
originaJly quoted in the fps, or Imperial system, but
calibres of guns are now nearly all given in millimetres. indicate :.:::
I d ' Unites) system of units. However, in this book the The one exception to have continued in use is the cal.50
modific a:::-_
J
emphasis has been placed on the original units used, machine gun (0.5in, or l2.7mm). A comparison of
elevent h =.
which may also be more familiar. Most dimensions were Imperial and SI units is given below.

Quantity US unit Imperial unit SI unit Familiar unit

('Metric') obvious c: :. _
Weight ton ton kiloNewton (kJ'\!) tonne (T)
more tha c- ·
(in SI; Mass) (2,000lb) (2,240Ib) (224. 8Ibf) (I ,OOOkg)

(8.9kN) (9.96kN) (0. II US ton) (2 ,204Ib) intense de·, = _

(0 . I imp ton) standardis::-.::
develop m e ~.: -=­
Volume After the ". .;.: ­
(eg engine capacity) T num bc:--; . : ~
J
cu in m litre (1)
(O.OOOOI64cu m) (6I ,349in 3) (I,OOOcm 3 )
(0 .0164 litre) (1,000 I) (61.35in 3
(I,OOO,000cm 3) (O.OOlmJ)
Volume

(eg fuel capacity) gallon gallon m3 litre

(0.00378 m 3) (0.00455m 3) (220 imp gal) (0.22 imp gal)

(3.78 I) (4.55 I) (264 US gal) (0.264 US gal)

Power

horsepower (hp) kiloWatt (kW)

(0.745kW) (1.34hp)

Torque

ft Ib Newton-metre (Nm)

(1.36Nm) (0 74ft Ib)

Pressure

pound per square inch (psi) kiloPascal (kPa) kg/cm2

(6.89kPa) (0.145psi ) (3.217kPa)

(0.07kg/cm2) (0.3kg/cm2) (l4.2psi)

110
 2. The US Army Ordnance
Nomenclature System
The system is officially described thus: '. . To identify Finally in the late 1950s yet another change was made . T
a particular design, a model designation is assigned at the designations were replaced by XM, and on eventual
time the item is classified as an adopted type. This model standardisation of an item the X was simply dropped.
nomenclature becomes an essential part of the standard Thus the XM60 became the M60.
nomenclature and is included in the marking on the item. A different method existed for designating engines,
The present system of model designation consists of the since the adoption of standard components in 1946, A

s
letter M followed by an Arabic numeral , for example MI.
Modifications are indicated by adding the letter A and an
appropriate Arabic numeral. Thus, M I A I indicates the
first modification of an item for which the original model
series of letters and numerals were used , signifying the
type of engine and its capacity. These letters are:

A air cooled
designation was MI. Similarly, a system applied to D diesel
development items involves the use of a T designation to II possibly a cylinder configuration
indicate the basic design and an E to indicate I fuel injection
modifications thereof. Thus, T I 08E II would indicate the L liquid cooled
eleventh modification of a development item originally M multi-fuel
designated n08.' o opposed cylinder arrangement
This system evolved in about 1927 from an earlier S supercharged
convention under which equipment was designated by the V vee cylinder arrangement (but VCR refers to
letter M , followed by the year of its inception . There were Variable Compression Ratio )
obvious drawbacks , such as the problem of dealing with X possibly a cylinder co nfig uration
more than one design per year. The M and T system wa s
in use throughout World War 2. During this period of The nu merals indicate the tl al e n f in ~ ': 5=, !:: c ~::-. e .. : :.n
intense development activity it was common for the cubic inches. This \\ ill nO:o:·.:11: y:-e.'. :-:: ._ ::::o : ~ ~ :' :.:..: C ~
standardised M numbers to bear no resemblance to the 298. as thest aJl ard : y !j :1':e~5::O: ; ': ~ ~ c::: - .:..:' : .: ~ ~ _: . :

development T number, and this could cause co nfu sion. -=­

inches. The :1 f S[ e g : ~. o:: ~ ~: ': -: '.::: :-e ~ _-. :0': :.:_: ,:.•
After the war an attempt was made to relate .\1 numbers to was the .-\\'-:-9':1-: . ..::.: .:.. _._ .

T numbers, but there were stili many discrepan cies. .-\ \'DS - : -91: ·: ; ~~ : ' :-= ': .- ::-: \~ : .

: :7:1: ,

-:-'. gal)
: -- .. ~ gal)

-
:. : : -:J'a)
- =;si)

l ' .
 3. 90mm Ammunition

Ammunition for the earlier M3 gun of the M26 and M46 developed for the T 119 and Tl39 would not chamber in
used the M 19 and M27 series cartridge cases. The later the M3 gun. The standard rounds for the 90mm M41 gun
90mm guns had larger chambers and thus ammunition are shown in this table:

Nature Model Length Weight Muzzle Maximum Case

Ve!oci:y Range
in (em) Ib (kg) ft/sec (m/sec) yd (m)
AP-T M318AI 37.1 (94.2) 43.9 (19.9) 3,000 (912) 21,030 (23,000) MI08
(T33E7)
APC-T M82 38.2 (97.1) 42.75 (19.4) 2,600-2,800 21,400 (19 ,570) MI9
(790-850)
I:
HYAP-T M332AI 35.9 (91.2) 32 .3 (14.6) 3,875 (1 , 180) 15,700 (14 ,350) M19
(T67 series)
,I TP-T M353 36.9 (938) 43.9 (19.9) 2,730 (830) 23,000 (21 ,030) MI08
(T225EI)
:1 HE-T M71Al 37.5 (95.1) 39.5 (17.9) 2,400 (730) 16,800 (15,360) MI9
HEAT-T M431A2 36 (91.4) 33 (14.9) 3,950 (1 ,200) 8,900 (8,140) M1l4
I: (T300 series)
SMK,WP M313 37.4 (95) 42 (19.1) 2,700 (820) 18,170 (5 ,540) MI9
CNSTR M377 34 (86.5) 39 .5 (1 7.9) 2,800 (850) 402 (366) MI08
(T22EI5)
f
I APERS-T M580 38 (96 .7) 41 .2 (18.7) 3,000 (914) 4,400 (4 ,810) M200

Other rounds included: HYAP, M304 (T30EI6); HEP , TI42 series; HYAPDS, T65, Tl37 series ; HEAT, M348 series
(TI08 series); Canister, M336 (T22EI) Dummy, M12.

4. l05mm Ammunition

Nature Model Length Weight Muzzle Maximum Case

Velocity Range
in (em) Ib (kg) ftlsec (rn/sec) ft(m)
APDS-T M728 33 (83 .8) 42.2(19.1) M115BI
TPDS-T M737
APFSDS-T :Yl774
TPFSDS-T XM797
HEAT-T M456 39 (99) 48 (21.7) 3,850 (1170) 8,975 (8,200) M148AIBI
TP-T* M467 37 (94) 45 (20.4) 2,400 (730) 10,400 (9,500) MI50BI
TP-T** M490 39 (99) 45 (20.4) 3,850 (1170) 8,975 (8,200) MI48AIBI
HEP-T M393 45 (20.4) 2,400 (730) 10,400 (9 ,500) MI50
(T383)
APERS-T M494 39 .2(99.6) 47 .5 (21.5) 2,700(820) 4,810(4,400) M150
SMK, WP M416 37 (94) 45.5 (20 .6) 2,400(730) 10,400 (9,500) MI50BI
Dummy M457 37 (94) 44 (20) M148

Other rounds include: APDS, M392 series (T382), XM563 , M726; TPDS, M724; HEAT, XM604, XM815; APERS
(Beehive) , M380; APFSDS, M735 , XM814, XM833.
* TP-T M467 simulates the HEP round ** TP-T M490 simulates the HEAT round
112