Dismiss Notice
Thanks for being a member of our community. Please donate toward site expenses if you can.

Question About an M1A2 as opposed to an M60A3

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by Dayton3, Aug 27, 2017.

Page 2 of 2
  1. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes. Operation Iron Forge, iirc, was supposed to be a major counter-attack that drove them back East. The problem was both Great Britain and especially France made it clear they would go nuclear, the Brits if their allies were seen to be losing, and of course France's policy was to go nuclear right off the bat, which of course made the U.S.'s rather weird nuclear policy irrelevant, and its operational plans as well.
     
    Last edited: Aug 30, 2017
    Strasser, Aug 30, 2017
    #26
  2. Questerr

    Questerr Banned

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    63,174
    Likes Received:
    4,995
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Where have you heard France was to go nuclear right from the start? My understanding is that their position was they would go nuclear if the Soviet's crossed the Rhine.
     
    Questerr, Aug 31, 2017
    #27
    Dayton3 likes this.
  3. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,439
    Likes Received:
    6,728
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Same here. Which many thought seemed to present the Soviets with a natural "stop line" in any invasion.

    After all, the Soviet led attack only into Germany, the low countries, Norway, Greece, and Turkey would mean the Soviets were only taking the territory of nonnuclear powers.
     
    Dayton3, Aug 31, 2017
    #28
  4. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I was around then, late 1960's and early 1970's. France wasn't a part of NATO, and took pains to make sure everybody knew they were independent and pursued their own interests re the Soviet threat. It was in all the papers, and no big secret of any kind. You may mean the Brits re the Rhine.
     
    Strasser, Aug 31, 2017
    #29
  5. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That is what they said publicly, but nobody was fooled by it, at least re France and Britain. The were always expansionist, and leopards don't change their spots just because their ideological spins and rhetoric changes. France knows their history, bombastic attitudes aside.
     
    Strasser, Aug 31, 2017
    #30
  6. Dayton3

    Dayton3 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Messages:
    25,439
    Likes Received:
    6,728
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The French "withdrawal" from NATO was largely in name only and from what I've read largely a ploy by Charles de Gaulle to gin up support for French funding of an independent French nuclear arsenal and to rally support for the French govt. in general.

    But everything I've read is that the French military still cooperated closely in NATO military planning and most NATO plans for operations in West Germany and at sea took French support in a war for granted.
     
    Dayton3, Aug 31, 2017
    #31
  7. Nightmare515

    Nightmare515 Ragin' Cajun Staff Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    11,135
    Likes Received:
    4,904
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I haven't read the book but when it comes to tank battles much of it depends on the crew experience and some luck rather than what type of tank you have. I was an Abrams commander years ago and I can tell you that in training there have been times when my tank went "Rambo" and killed 10 enemy T-72s and other times when a BMP hit me and disabled me right out of the gate. A full on tank battle comes down to maneuvering, having good battle positions, being in the deflade at the right time, communication, and overall just hoping that nobody shoots you in the wrong spot. As to whether or not an M60 could survive what the Abrams went through in the book is concerned it really just depends.

    An experienced Sherman tank crew could destroy an Abrams at any given time. Hell during force on force training I was killed more often by enemy tanks that I didn't even see. Or had artillery dropped on me...In books and movies and video games you often see tank brigades rolling around fighting enemy tanks head on in huge battles. In cases like that I mean there really isn't much you can do except pick your targets and shoot and hope none of the enemy tanks picks you out of the line up. As far as survivability goes the Abrams is a great tank but if you get popped with a Sabot round in a weak spot then it doesn't really matter how good your tank or your crew is at that point.

    And if you throw track (which happens way more often than people think) then you are a sitting duck. Thats the Achilles heel of pretty much every tank. Unlike the movies where tanks can run over buildings and stuff, in real life the damn track falls on by just driving straight sometimes. Sometimes you can pivot around and pop the track back on the sprocket but more often than not once that track jumps off then you have to get out and put it back on. Not something you can do in the middle of a battle.
     
    Nightmare515, Sep 22, 2017
    #32
    ArmySoldier likes this.
Page 2 of 2

Share This Page