European NATO Army alternatives: 1950 - 1990

[Capt Thunderbolt]

the original design of the M60 called for a composite armour which would have made a difference, but they could not make it in sufficient quantities or reliably so in 73

Yes, the original design, of which the tests of were published in 1958, could have been adopted. So, from early 60's could have been standard, and in 1973, normal.

In Israeli popular consciousness the M60 was regarded as highly vulnerable to fire in the ?hydraulic systems.

Without penetrations, the flammable high pressure hydraulics would be much less a problem.

 

[Jotun]

@Simon The F-104G should never have been bought. It was a pure interceptor, and unsuited for pretty much everything else it wa supposed to do in the Luftwaffe (naval strike fighter, fighter bomber, nuke delivery platform). It was also extremely unforgiving to pilot error. While General Steinhoff‘s reforms significantly lowered the lawn darting, the fucking things still plonked out of the skies a lot more than those in air forces using the F-104 in its proper role.

The Mirage III was a lot more user friendly and versatile. No contest.

I am still of the opinion that Korruptus Strauß' mortal remains should be exhumed annually and beaten with towels soaked in diarrhea, just for his role in acquiring the Widow Maker. He should have been jailed. Nothing good has ever come out of Bavaria when it comes to politicians.

 

[cjc]

@Simon The F-104G should never have been bought. It was a pure interceptor, and unsuited for pretty much everything else it wa supposed to do in the Luftwaffe (naval strike fighter, fighter bomber, nuke delivery platform). It was also extremely unforgiving to pilot error. While General Steinhoff‘s reforms significantly lowered the lawn darting, the fucking things still plonked out of the skies a lot more than those in air forces using the F-104 in its proper role.

The Mirage III was a lot more user friendly and versatile. No contest.

I am still of the opinion that Korruptus Strauß' mortal remains should be exhumed annually and beaten with towels soaked in diarrhea, just for his role in acquiring the Widow Maker. He should have been jailed. Nothing good has ever come out of Bavaria when it comes to politicians.

Dussalt would probably prefer to bomb his own factory then sell a singal plane to Germany, the actual second place option was the much more user-friendly f11-1f (the one actually recmened by german test pilots).

 

[Capt Thunderbolt]

Any work by the IDF will be post 73, well by the late 60s the British will want to have fielded the 120L11 so no need to downgrade to a 110 bodge up and APFSDS is becoming viable so the 120 L44 from Rheinmetall is out of development in 74 and just needs the tank to build around it.

Both 105 and 120mm were designed for tungsten carbide APDS. With the introduction of double and triple arrays, WC fractured on first layer, and couldn't penetrate further. UK didn't get APDSFS until 1985, and mk5 with modified storsge.

NATO tank gun competition compared 105 rifle, 110 rifle and 120 SB. (120mm was not considered) New ammo needed tungsten alloy, and ideally APDSFS. Germans had worked on both 105 and 120SB, but were immature at time of competition.

IDF were actually wanting 110mm as a 1:1 replacement of 105mm. Both rounds could adopt APDSFS with fixed rounds and not disrupt storage.

Smoothbore take about 20% less propellant than rifle for same MV. Don't underestimate 110mm in SB.

 

[Nell_Lucifer]

Dussalt would probably prefer to bomb his own factory then sell a singal plane to Germany, the actual second place option was the much more user-friendly f11-1f (the one actually recmened by german test pilots).

They were also looking at the Heinkel 031, though I forgot how much support the program had.

 

[tomo pauk]

Difficult as very few countries would be willing to see defence spending being sent abroad negatively affecting the balance of payments, plus running down domestic manufacturing capacity with memories of WWII still fresh and the Korean conflict ongoing. Best I can think of is picking a model and then domestic production by member states. Even then you'd still have issues over differing design decisions e.g. protection versus mobility for tanks.

Very true.

Comparing operational losses I've seen convincing arguments made that the problems with the F-104G had more to do with deficient training and operation on the part of the Luftwaffe than any major problem with the aircraft.

There was a lot of engine-related problems, too, the J79 not liking some maneuvers that were messing with the airflow towards the engine.

 

[Gannt the chartist]

I said.....
.257 much lighter than .270, and flatter shooting

Miss typing on my part. I dont know what you mean by .257.

That sharing only started in 1960s, when the US released weapons to NATO air assets.

Without F104, the air weapon sharing could not happen. Catch 22.

Sure it would. The US actually wants lots of nukes and the alternative to the US providing the nuclear weapons is either the Europeans build their own or France or Britain provides them or the US puts more Squadrons into Europe while fighting Vietnam and still has the political problem. Now there is a serious political issue that the US will not want nukes deployed without its consent or knowledge if it possibly can but that's a technical issue of how you operate the PAL.

Now using US aircraft the whole thing easier but if you use Mirage no reason not to use French nukes. with French PAL which forever excludes the US from the Euronuke decision process.

Without penetrations, the flammable high pressure hydraulics would be much less a problem.

But the US cannot make the armour. It does not exist outside lab scale experiments. Everyone with a decent scientific base and interest in defeating HEAT rounds knows the issue and the solution a basic composite form has been known since WW1 to offer much better protection. Soviet Composition K vs kinetic rounds is used on the T64 but then 120mm guns. The problem all along is how do you make something that works at the size and scale needed to equip a tank fleet. If the US cannot do it in 1960 then it probably cannot be done then, late 60s it probably could have been that means the US does not deploy its next gen MBT until then or more probably early 70s as you have to run up design and for a tank using it and production of the armour.

IDF were actually wanting 110mm as a 1:1 replacement of 105mm. Both rounds could adopt APDSFS with fixed rounds and not disrupt storage.

Yes they were the problem is not that it could not have been developed, the Israeli offer was actually to develop the HEAT round for a then experimental 110 ROF gun the British were developing. The underlying problem is in 1974 the Germans produced the 120mm smoothbore. And they are going to use it.

Just about the only way it comes into service is if the FMBT programme of the early 70s is shifted back in time. Basically no MBT 70 and its nonsense of a gun missile launcher which is technically not viable in the 60s or early 70s and you end up with a Burlington armoured AFV available around 1970 and the 110 is offered as a replacement for the existing 105, but not 105 ammo stocks. But the 105 L7 is perfectly good at taking on soviet tanks into the 80s and the 120 L44 is intended to deal with the net gen soviet tanks.

The big drivers are the US and German requirements, If you have an Anglo German collaboration there is probably a better cultural fit in the development than with the americans and you get something earlier that is better than what was around in the early 70s. But its difficult to see why either party would ditch their 120mm in favour of a less developed 110 gun and ammunition as it will likely be available with a 105 version to make use of existing ammo stocks and designed to be upgraded to either 120mm.



The F11-1f never goes beyond prototype and would have the same issues, you are changing a single seat fighter into a nuclear bomber/FGA and there will be issues. Maybe not as many as with the 104 but still you have a growing air force attempting to maintain an advanced aircraft there will be a lot of problems.

 

[Jotun]

Dussalt would probably prefer to bomb his own factory then sell a singal plane to Germany, the actual second place option was the much more user-friendly f11-1f (the one actually recmened by german test pilots).

The French not wanting to sell to Germany, including Monsieur Dassault, is a myth.
The West germans even sent a test pilot, Walter Krupinski, to fly the pre-series Mirage III, but since it was underpowered and not yet close to what the Luftwaffe wanted, they backed away.

 

[Capt Thunderbolt]

Miss typing on my part. I dont know what you mean by .257.

In 1958 Powell board recommend a rifle .258"/6.55mm round, in place .223"/ 5.56mm Other studies suggested 6.5mm to 7.0mm. However, US quotes bullet diameter, not rifle lands as calibre. So should be 6.35mm to 6.8mm. Early "Pig" board found 6.5mm (.257" land) effective.

Since this is a "hypothetical", I take the sliding door approah. The suggestion is a Robert's .257 calibre, popular at this this, in a slim Line cartridge. It fits in the "range", and later UK 6.25mm concept.

The standard .30-06" with huge stockpile, is retained as the medium round. M1 round outdoors old M2 and .303" mk VIII.

This US and UK, had LMG/SAW and separate MMG, so fits with Both nation tactics and doctrine. Hence rifle and LMG. Maybe FAL and Mini, or M10/M60 in new calibre..??

Besides Vickers, both use M1919/ Browning as standard MMG, so no change here. No GPMG needed.

 

[Capt Thunderbolt]

But the US cannot make the armour. It does not exist outside lab scale experiments. Everyone with a decent scientific base and interest in defeating HEAT rounds knows the issue and the solution a basic composite form has been known since WW1 to offer much better protection. Soviet Composition K vs kinetic rounds is used on the T64 but then 120mm guns. The problem all along is how do you make something that works at the size and scale needed to equip a tank fleet. If the US cannot do it in 1960 then it probably cannot be done then, late 60s it probably could have been that means the US does not deploy its next gen MBT until then or more probably early 70s as you have to run up design and for a tank using it and production of the armour.

It was shown they could, the concern was only one supplier of silicon glass cores. Funding for new plants were required. Later studies suggested steel front and aluminium rear to use the density rule to defeat HEAT.

CONFIDENTIAL armor for the XM60 production. Since the placing of the silica cores in the mold cavity does not represent a novel technique to founJries, it is not expected that the incorporation of siliceous cored armor will require any new facility or any particular signi- ficant time delay in production capability in the foundries.

CONFIORIIAL PRODUCTION CAPA ILITY FUSM SILICA COPE The major problem that must be overcome in providing siliceous cored armor for the IM60 is the establishment of an adequate pro- duction facility for the manufacture of fused silica cores. since the fused silica utilized in the armor is considerably larger both in area and weight than.an..other application of fused silica- in this country, it was necessary to establish a facility capable of manufacturing these larger cores. Sch a facility has been developed and is in operation at the Amersil Company in Hillside, New Jersey. However, the capability of this facility is only sufficient for pilot production and will not be adequate for production runs required for the XM60. It has been estimated that one year will be required to construct additional facilities to meet production requirements of the XM60. Consequently, funds must be made available at the earliest possible date in order to meet production requirements. The current prototype facility was designed to manAifacture sufficient silica to build 6 tanks a month. With minor changes to equipment, this pro- duction can be increased to supply silica for 12 tanks per month. However, the utilization of siliceous cored armor in full scale a production will require the construction of additional facilities at the earliest possible time. It will be possible during this interim priod to stock pile some silica from the current facility in case a slight delay is experienced in the allocation of fundsi however, the funds must bo made available in early 1959, if production schedules for the IM60 are to be met.

 

[L'amateur d'aéroplanes]

@Capt Thunderbolt Lien : https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/AD0524050.pdf

 

[Questerr]

Imagine all NATO armies adapting the M16 or if the U.S. joined the FAL club.

The US adopting the FAL could happen if the shenanigans that Springfield Arsenal were doing come out early on.

 

[sonofpegasus]

I always liked the Idea of the UK adapting an EM2 to use a 7.62 version of the Voss Bullet with a case length to match the overall dimensions of what became the 7,62 NATO round. The Belgium's do the same with the FAL which the Canadians pick it. The Spanish also change to what is now the standard European round for their roller delayed SETME rifle.

 

[prester.john208]

the shenanigans that Springfield Arsenal were doing come out early on.

???

 

[cjc]

The F11-1f never goes beyond prototype and would have the same issues, you are changing a single seat fighter into a nuclear bomber/FGA and there will be issues. Maybe not as many as with the 104 but still you have a growing air force attempting to maintain an advanced aircraft there will be a lot of problems.

The f11-1f is a development of a plane that can already drop nukes, that alone deals with the issues.

The French not wanting to sell to Germany, including Monsieur Dassault, is a myth.
The West germans even sent a test pilot, Walter Krupinski, to fly the pre-series Mirage III, but since it was underpowered and not yet close to what the Luftwaffe wanted, they backed away.

Dassault definitely did not want to sell to Germany, that definitely is not a myth. now the French government did own dassault aviation at the time so can probably push though a deal anyway, but that deal was still never going to happen due to the f-104 being mostly payed for with us military aid. that test pilot review was probably more a sop to french (and german) pride, it's not like they didn't know it had a test engine.

 

[Gannt the chartist]

The f11-1f is a development of a plane that can already drop nukes, that alone deals with the issues.


Dassault definitely did not want to sell to Germany, that definitely is not a myth. now the French government did own dassault aviation at the time so can probably push though a deal anyway, but that deal was still never going to happen due to the f-104 being mostly payed for with us military aid. that test pilot review was probably more a sop to french (and german) pride, it's not like they didn't know it had a test engine.

The F11-1f is the development of the F11 it carries at most 4 sidewinders. This is not the F111 which would be a great choice btw except it means the US has to devolve production to the European nations and they have to wait until the late 60s at the earliest.

What it is the 'losing' competitor to the F8. which is interesting as when they turn that into the A7 which is a nuclear capable subsonic aircraft that first flies in 67.

The general problem is the German requirement is for an all weather multi role aircraft and probably supersonic. Most of which is built in Germany and when the other Euro states get involved a lot of construction in their country. In 1959. Of the aircraft around at the time just about the only one that starts able to do all of this is the F4. And you are not going to get production of that devolved to Messerschmidt.

Dassault of the Mirage bit is a limited company with Marcel Dassault nee Bloch at its head. The Earlier Bloch company was nationalised and ends up as Sud Aviation but this is a separate structure. The Mirage was in competition for the eventual F104 order and would have had at least as many problems. The eventual success of the Mirage III is mid - late 60s with the C and CJ models. Would the French have let Messerschmidt build it. No, with or without Dassault, its a French thing.

However, the utilization of siliceous cored armor in full scale a production will require the construction of additional facilities at the earliest possible time

i,e did not have the capacity to build it. And this is the McNamara era, where there is a 90% + chance that everything he touches turns to shit (I include Ford in that).

The US problem in the late 50s is they know that right now their entire tank fleet with 90mm guns is not effective vs T54/55 tanks much less the next soviet model and their armour also ineffective agains tthe latest Soviet guns. So they need a better armed and armoured tank, right now not a few years down the line. Also more nuclear bombers and and SLBM and Minutemen and Vietnam is becoming an issue and all the other stuff. This is the period of the Cuban Missile Crisis, Berlin Crisis, Straights of Taiwan Crisis there may be lots of things that are really good ideas but do they add to capability on the timescale needed and once you have bought the one thing you have it. Is it good enough well basically yes. Is anyone else going to buy it, no. The Germans actually want a German designed and made or largely German designed and made tank and they are happy to take a very lightly armoured MBT.

 

[Sasza]

I think I need to find an article about granite armor tested by Sweden in the 1950s.

 

[yulzari1]

I think I need to find an article about granite armor tested by Sweden in the 1950s.

https://fromtheswedisharchives.word...-trials-against-granite-composite-armor-1958/

It vaguely reminds me of the asphalt/gravel armour used on some British ships in WW2 to protect against machine gun fire etc. The coarse gravel was the major part and a bullet would have to shoulder the gravel aside to penetrate but the energy to force them to move in the asphalt matrix and move the neighbouring chips was enough to stop them. Also a bit like colander armour with the steel plate covered in holes. A bullet would deform the steel and divert the bullet into the hole. The hole being smaller in diameter than the bullet the friction was enough to stop the bullet. Weight for weight it was lighter for the same protection but would have to be thin enough to deform suitably. Many and various are the cunning plans…………

 

[Nell_Lucifer]

The F11-1f is the development of the F11 it carries at most 4 sidewinders. This is not the F111 which would be a great choice btw except it means the US has to devolve production to the European nations and they have to wait until the late 60s at the earliest.

What it is the 'losing' competitor to the F8. which is interesting as when they turn that into the A7 which is a nuclear capable subsonic aircraft that first flies in 67.

The general problem is the German requirement is for an all weather multi role aircraft and probably supersonic. Most of which is built in Germany and when the other Euro states get involved a lot of construction in their country. In 1959. Of the aircraft around at the time just about the only one that starts able to do all of this is the F4. And you are not going to get production of that devolved to Messerschmidt.

Dassault of the Mirage bit is a limited company with Marcel Dassault nee Bloch at its head. The Earlier Bloch company was nationalised and ends up as Sud Aviation but this is a separate structure. The Mirage was in competition for the eventual F104 order and would have had at least as many problems. The eventual success of the Mirage III is mid - late 60s with the C and CJ models. Would the French have let Messerschmidt build it. No, with or without Dassault, its a French thing.

From what I've been able to find, the 1956-57 requirements were for an interceptor than a multi-role aircraft.

Among the requirements for the flight characteristics of the fighter being created were a maximum speed of M = 2.0 and a practical flight ceiling of 25,000 meters and a time to climb to this altitude, which should not exceed three minutes. The distance from the start of the take-off run to the climb of 15 meters should not exceed 1000 meters. The interceptor fighter's armament was to consist of two air-to-air guided missiles or units of unguided missiles. The navigation equipment and communications equipment should have included a radar with a detection range in the range from 30 to 50 kilometers, a radar system for identifying nationality (“friend or foe”) and a short-range angular-range air radio navigation system (TACAN - Tactical Air Navigation ).

Which fits with the aircrafts considered by the air ministry (F-100, F-104, SR.177 and He 031) in 1956 and 1957. I assume the choice would be between the SR.177 and He 031.

The US problem in the late 50s is they know that right now their entire tank fleet with 90mm guns is not effective vs T54/55 tanks much less the next soviet model and their armour also ineffective agains tthe latest Soviet guns. So they need a better armed and armoured tank, right now not a few years down the line. Also more nuclear bombers and and SLBM and Minutemen and Vietnam is becoming an issue and all the other stuff. This is the period of the Cuban Missile Crisis, Berlin Crisis, Straights of Taiwan Crisis there may be lots of things that are really good ideas but do they add to capability on the timescale needed and once you have bought the one thing you have it. Is it good enough well basically yes. Is anyone else going to buy it, no. The Germans actually want a German designed and made or largely German designed and made tank and they are happy to take a very lightly armoured MBT.

They expected that since the early 1950s, hence they looked into the T54 program with its 105 mm cannon and later into the T95 (90 mm APFSDS to 120 mm Chieftain cannon) and T96 (105 mm) programs. Though it is not really right to say the US's 90 mm cannon (in early 1950s) was not effective against the T-54/55, its HEAT-FS and APDS ammunition was more than enough for the Soviet medium tanks.

 

[Giant Man Eating Rabbits]

This is not the F111 which would be a great choice btw except it means the US has to devolve production to the European nations and they have to wait until the late 60s at the earliest.

Excellent!m the RAF gets it's F-111K and saves £££'s on the development of the Tonka! The £'s saved goes onto giving the RAF the F-15K!