The XM1 was a scary fast tank even going cross country. I got the chance to pace one as it was fording creeks and rolling over small trees back around 1980. I was driving on a paved road and I found myself speeding well over the limit to keep up with the metal monster. I can't tell anyone how impressive these things are when your cruising next to one... Just their size and jet engine sound is beyond impressive... then watching small trees felled like a scythe cutting grass and the way the thing 'floated' across a small creek ravine with it's treads going down and the tank staying essentially level changed my entire comprehension of what a tank could do. I can't remember exactly how fast I was going, but I can say it was well above the rated specs on the current M1 Abrams. I suspect the XM1's were lighter and not fully fitted out when I saw them. Tanks are cool in static displays, but they are another thing entirely when your driving right next to one at highway speeds.
Maaaaan! This man can talk. As a German it's awesome to listen to him. He just speaks very clear and explains very good. It's just joy to listen to him.
The M-85 was a bitch. Terrible feed issues. The M-85 on the M-60A2 was even worse. It was mounted upside down in the commander's cupola. The M-2 was and still is the best MG ever produced.
Amen, here in israel we still use it,I served on IDF vehicles 1970s 1nto the 90s using it and 2 sons from 2000s to. Now still use the m2, and I suspect my 10 yr old grandson in 2030 to cock and fire it.
A bit of funny stuff, I was living at Scott AFB when the very first Abrams was tested in St. Louis. Not a full field test, they just rolled it out of the factory and were going to run it around a little, but the transmission was locked in reverse so it was a brief showing. This was actually on the local news that I saw this.
I always thought that it was pronounced shal-lay-lee however asking a few Irish friends it depends on where you are in Ireland. Maybe ask the Chieftain?
Back in the 70's there was an episode of 60 Minutes on TV where they did a story on the Abrahms tank being built by Chrysler for the army and basically it was all the problems with it from sand getting into the engine, cost overruns, etc. Now that we know that tank became the master of the battlefield in several wars and proved itself to be the best tank ever made I would like CBS to re-run their 60 minutes segment again!!!!
The evolution of tank designs throughout the cold war is very interesting indeed. A lot of the engineers and techs had WW2 and Korea experience and it showed in the various designs. It was always hit and miss, but fortunately was more hit than miss. One of the more atrocious misses was the M-551 which was supposed to support the airborne forces. Didn't work very well, particularly the missile system. The great thing is that the MBT-70 led to the great designs of the German Leopard and American M-1. Thanks for the educational upload, Sofi. Great way to spend some time today.
I think it's amazing that so many modern systems were first thought of back in the sixties but only now being brought to fruition. I'm thinking of the design of the Russian Armata and the Israeli LAHAT gun fire missile system to name a few.
@@roceye They had the vision, but not the technology to make it happen. Take for example, even though it was a fictional series, the communicator from star trek. Lo and behold, we use one every day. Who knows what's on drawing boards now.
Great info. I once interviewed for a position at the Chrysler Tank Arsenal. I really wanted to work there. I remember it as one of the best job interviews I ever had. I didn't get the job, which turned out to be good. It closed a few years later. I ended up working for Chrysler in auto manufacturing. A number of people from the Arsenal ended up transferring to where I was when the Arsenal closed. I still wanted to work there.
Chrysler lost the contract for production due to poor performance. The M-1 is welded and the UAW workers at the Lima Tank facility could not produce tanks on time because of the faulty welds that had to constantly be reworked. My AOAC class toured the Lima plant shortly after the contract change and General Dynamics was producing zero defect tanks on schedule. Side note. We had Allied officers in our class so the part of the factory where the turret armor was produced was off limits to us. I was pissed.
@@mruofacat Interesting "Facts", however, Chrysler did not lose the contract. Iacocca sold Chrysler Defense to General Dynamics in 1982 for $348.5M because Chrysler needed cash after posting a $500M loss in 1981. It was a cash up front buy that Chrysler needed. Those same UAW workers, that you said couldn't weld, built everyone of the M1 Tanks. Detroit Arsenal was only doing component production with full assembly at Lima. Chrysler Defense became General Dynamics Land Systems. Lima was rated to produce up to 4 M1s a day with the support of Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant. Production obviously never went to that level with end of the cold war. It was a great place to work and a lot of cool "toys" to see and "play" with for sure. Never, ever, park your car at the end of a parking lot row up at Sterling Heights HQ (used to be called Central Office Complex back in the day) when the prototype shop guys are going to be out testing vehicles on the grounds. :)
Sofilen, my father was a mechanic at fort Benning in the 70s and he's always told the story of a colonel having him both drive and pull the pack of an amazing new tank and give feedback. In his memory, he seems to remember this being called the 'Mech v'. Any way you can ask one of these museum people if that was a code name. We both can't wait for this museum opening and see these things. He's getting older and really wants to get his memory sorted of the vehicles he worked on at the time. Thanks for giving us a look!
The germans did continue work on casemat tanks with the VT series prototypes in the 1970s. Prototypes survive in museums en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/VT_tank
I restarted my hack, mediocre modeling career during COVID. I put the M-24, M-47, M48 and M-60A2 and A3 next to each other. It was easy to trace the lineage from one generation of tank evolution to another. Suspension, engine deck, stowage, etc, etc. all showed evolutionary advances. Then, I did a 1st generation M-1 Abrams-- wow-- Rob's right-- totally threw out the history up to that point and started with a clean sheet of paper! The Abrams looks nothing like it's older cousins. Sure, I could "see" it when I looked at photos, but actually assembling it (in 1/35) made a huge difference in understanding the change a bit better. Thanks for an awesome video! I'd love to see/hear more about the evolution of the T-29/30/34 into the M103 and even better, the different versions of tank recovery vehicles. There are also a lot of weird looking "battlefield taxis" from the 1950's that were ancestors to the M113 series.
The MBT70 as being a US-German collaboration can thus be found in Germany's tank museum in Munster. Interesting, that they ended up not having a common approach and so we see the M1 Abrams and the Leopard 2. Regarding the German engines, yes, this company belonged to Daimler (Mercedes Benz) in the past, but it is called MTU, a specialist for large scale and military diesel engines.
Actually MTU is the original spiritual successor of Maybach company , since they used to build these amazing engines during WWII and continued building these engines in the cold war under the brand name of MTU: Maybach Motoren und Turbinen Union, however what is funny is that Mercedes Daimler decided to sell MTU to Rolls Royce Holding, but keeping the Maybach brand under them for their ultra premium cars which is known as Mercedes-Maybach nowadays, also Rolls Royce sold their Motor company to BMW which that means both the original factories are now under the control of Rolls Royce Holding but the motor companies are under the German car manufactures
@@thewomble1509 wow didn't know that, I've just read about it now RR Diesel is now owned by Perkins therefore the original Maybach Diesel is under Caterpillar, it's so weird that Rolls Royce & Maybach Tanks/Heavy vehicles engines are Caterpillar Inc (USA), Rolls Royce & Maybach Aircraft, Ship engines are under Rolls Royce Holding (UK) and Maybach & Rolls Royce Motors are under German Auto Industry (Germany)
"King of the Killing Zone" was, to me, eye opening. I bought it and read it shortly after it came out (I think I still have my copy ... somewhere) and highly recommend it. In it, as I recall were some concerns about how the turbine engine and drive train would be able to handle what was considered unlikely at the time, use in a desert environment. M-1 was designed more for use in Northern Europe for a 'Fulda Gap' scenario with combined arms support from mobile artillery and another as yet untested system, the A-10 Thunderbolt II. My Dad was WWII Army and transitioned to the USAF in the 1950s. I was Navy and we used to kid around and pick on each other as you can imagine, but when Desert Shield / Storm took place he was proud of the fact that both Army and Air Force "had it all in one sock" and "made it look easy" (I know it wasn't.) During the ground campaign I was bobbing around 20 miles off Kuwait as a watch supervisor in the Intel Center of the Flagship of the Amphibious Group (30 ships and nearly a full Marine Division.) M-1 Abrams and A-10 and their crews performed much better than any of us could have dreamed.
to be fair, the a10 didnt do as much as stuff like the f111 and f117, which basically did all the work in that campaign. the a10 is just flashy and gets all the attention
Seeing the XM-1, MBT-70, and XM-803 mentioned outside of War Thunder... I'd say it's just pure coincidence considering how the game is filled with XM-1 only users because of the summer sale :3
Armor Warfare as well. I've always loved learning about tanks and my knowledge of them is far from complete, and thus I learned A LOT about these tanks and especially the MBT-70 while playing AW.
The Orr Kelly book is fascinating as it is a rare inside look at how weapons systems are developed. The Leopard 2 AV which was evaluated at Aberdeen was so austere that the special armor package was left out....
Love and Thanks from germany, and thank You arsenal folks for securing these treasures! Reminded me of the recently found Lewis & Clark girandoni airgun....Bob Beeman...
I was at Ft. Knox in Nov 1976 to March 1977. There was a MBT-70 behind an old building. I was able walk around it but not get inside. I remember the 120mm gun and the keyway for the missile. I got briefed on the XM-1 but never saw one ever. I got out July 1980 never ever seeing the M-1. Man, to have a digital camera back then.
3 ปีที่แล้ว +1
Very nice and intersting Video. Just filmed the MBT70 in the German Tank Museum Munster a few weeks ago.
The M-1 program was the replacement for the M-60 series. This was really just a R&D program that didn't go anywhere. They took the lessons learned from the MBT-70s, but the XM-1 program really was a "clean sheet", so much so that that the Army didn't want the Chrysler one, they wanted what was basically a "Super Patton".
@@jamestheotherone742 the M-60A2 was supposed to be the Super Patton but didn't upgrade the hull or drivetrain. Plus the gun, the 152mm never lived up to its expectations. Most crews NEVER got to fire a Shillelagh missile due to the cost per round. Thus the the M-1. The Army DID award the contract to Chrysler, but they lost it due to inability to deliver tanks. General Dynamics took over the contract
@@mruofacat Not quite. The M-60A2 wasn't a "Super Patton". It was designed to counter the Soviets fielding tanks and tank-destroyers equipped with ATGMs that could out-range tank guns. It was never meant to replace the M-60A1+. The M-1 program was a completely different project that was designed to replace the entire M-60 fleet. By that time the Army had completely gotten the gun/launcher idea out of its head. The GM entry in the XM-1 competition was the "super patton" I was referring to, with a direct lineage to the M-60 with a diesel powerepack, wedge front, and hull ammo.
Great video, thank you! Always have loved the development of the Abrams. The first time I seen her was at an airshow, at Bergstrom, AFB, Austin TX, later 80s, as a kid. Since then have always built models, both static and RC.
Funnily enough, my grandfather was one of the higher ranking officers during the XM1 prototyping phase and helped lead the development of the Abrams. One of these days I should ask him more about what his role was for it.
I'm glad he mentioned 'King of the Killing Fields'. I read it back when it first came out, and it is indeed a great book about the early 105mm Abrams. It ends with early deployment to Germany.
Great job Rob telling the history. It’s too easy to get too deep into the details, and loosing your audience. But then for those looking for trivia, give them someplace to go. Thanks to Sofilein for bringing this expert to us in a useful way. You make a great team n
A little bit off topic. But id kind of like to know more about the new building and the engineering and design plan that went into Constructing the new facility for the sole purpose of tank preservation.
Before I joined the army I played world of tanks extensively. When I went to basic training at Fort Benning I saw a lot of old tanks I recognized and a lot I didn’t recognize. I also remember getting yelled at by the drill sergeant for not paying attention because I was looking at was I thought was an IS-3. Good times!
So I work in the electronics industry, not military vehicle, but as an observer from the UK of both German Engineering and US Engineering a lot of what you described about the issues of “design by committee” rings true!
The Hunnicutt book on the Patton tank has been reprinted....the originals are now quite valuable. I have a book on the M-46 thru M-48 written by Micheal Green that is less comprehensive than the Hunnicutt book but much more up to date....
the development of cold war tanks might not have the same enthusiasm as ww2 but its super interesting how all the evolutionary branches developed and then converged into much more similar machines even to some extent Russian tanks
Entertaining and educational. I learned some things that I hadn't known before. As an aside, I have the MBT-70 unlocked in War Thunder but haven't used it yet. I enjoy using the XM-803 and with the current sale going on, I am pondering picking up the GM XM-1 (alas, the Chrysler version is for console players, not PC).
Saw my first XM1 as a PVT at the AEB on 1978, Later returned as a Tank Commander in Hco 2/6 Cav Ft Knox in 82. My M1 was serial# 0010. Would do volunteer work with the Patton Museum and workshop behind the old Todd Hall, LST building among others. Wish all that stuff was still here and not at the home of infantry.
Every Abrams I served on as a crewman OR had under my "command" as a Platoon Sergeant between early 1983 and late 1986 (While stationed in West Germany and later at Fort Hood, TX) had one glaring similarity....Data Plates identifying them as Chrysler products and as XM1s. By the way did you guys get BOTH of the MBT70s that were on static display at Ft. Knox when I was there between 1980 and late 1982? Since both "hulls" had had their various hatches and grates sealed at some point I, and many other Tankers of the era, and assigned to Dt. Knox, were very curious about the differences between the M60A1s and M60A3s we were assigned to and/or trained on. Thanks for a great video!
@@robertcogan7109 Thanks for the kind and timely rely! I'm sure it's the passage of time that caused me to confuse the two tanks as they were not side by side when I was stationed at Ft. Knox. One, if I recall correctly, was on display at the Patton Museum (outdoors) and the other, "The Pigg" I think, was near the 2/6 Cav AO. I suppose I should be ashamed of myself for confusing the two turret and hull designs but it has been roughly four decades since I saw them last. Take care and keep up the great work you are doing! Hopefully I will be able to visit your facility before too long and show The Lovely Bride some of the tanks and other vehicles armored or not so much if at all I dealt with back in my day as well as those one of my kinsmen served on in WWII.
Someone needs to read out Rob Cogan's mind and download all of the tank related information into a book! ;-) It's great to hear all of the little anecdotes and other details that tend to not end up in your standard description of military vehicles. Thank you for sharing!
The Leo 2 had issues with the hull being penetrated by mere I.E.D.'s in Syria. Imo the composite layout of the Leo's hull is less effective due to the angling (which is a liability in terms of composite design). The Abrams hull stacks the composite so that an in coming round hits the full thickness of composite on the face of the plate. The upper plate is so angled that it's basically flat but theres more than meets the eye. The upper plate is actually designed to snap penetrater rods upon impact. The gunner sight of the Abrams is also placed above the cheek armor removing a liability or weak spot for composite. The 2A6 is a good tank though.
@@news_internationale2035 It is a cold war design. It was basically designed for a defending war against the soviet. So it would mostly be in a hull down position. But even on a battlefield you would have a hard time to specially aim for that area of a tank from a long distance.
The Canadians loved the Leopard 2 in Afghanistan though. They even thanked the germans for giving them those tanks. When an Leopard 2 ran on an IED it managed to drive back on it's own and nobody died inside of it.
I actually have a discord friend who was in the US army as a 19 kilo. He went from using the M-60a1, M-60a2 that used a 152mm gun, M-60a3 and the sheridan. He then moved to the M1a1 abrams and finally the M1a2 during the gulf war and desert storm before retiring. He also told me he used the XM1 but didn't tell me much.
The M60A2s had a lot of first that was used in the M60A3s and the M1, the M60A2s was the first main battle tank to use the Laser Rangefinder, fire the sheleighly missile, combustible main gun rounds, fire on the move but not very fast, and some others first that I can't remember what we called them, been over 40 years that I crewed the M60A2. Lol...
I was happy to see someone actually learned much of the M1 story using Orr Kelly’s book. You forgot to discuss the Army’s use of The Main Battle Tank Task Force, which was that whole piece of “wiping the slate clean” to start over.
i always find it funny when Wehraboo's tell the story of how the Leopard 2 beat the XM1's prototypes but omit the part about it not having its armor and weighed almost 10 tons less.
@@jamestheotherone742 Well i am sure with todays technology you could avtuall make it work as it was supposed back then. But you would have to change the armor to modern composite and such.
FINALLY! I decent video on the MBT-70,XM-803. I would pay good money for a book that details the development history of the MBT/KPZ-70 tank. Also It was a 1,500hp Daimler Benz engine that was in the KPZ-70
Would be interesting to hear about the other side of the coin, the German development that lead to the Leopard. Really good and interesting video Sofilein! Is this the only MBT-70 around or are there several copies? Perhaps I missed that in the video.
The MBT-70 had so much potential. If they had equipped it with a 120mm normal gun and replaced the engine with the gas turbine the XM1 used it could have been a damn fine main battle tank.
I luv how you are covering the build up to the modern day tanks, , Sof keep doing what your doing, it fantastic content, I do see some interesting other tanks in the foreground, hope you close in on that 100 000 subs too, fingers crossed you get there soon, luv from down under. Hav a good one.
Huh. That anecdote about the Germans leaving the modular internal armor out of the Leopard 2AV in the U.S. trials is new to me. The way I've often heard it is that we blatantly chose the indigenous designs over the the German one, despite it performing better. Thanks for clearing that up!
Given that its a bit of controversial information, that's why I included the reference to "King of the Killing Zone" as it goes into detail on that incident.
I was on the Sheridan. The Missle was JUNK. We fired the 152mm Main Gun Rounds and only One Missle. So much was shaken around after firing the Main Gun Rounds we had Missle Electrical and Electronics issues.
I really want to see the inside of the MBT-70. Especially the drivers position and the autoloader mechanism.
Send the Chieftain in there!
@@ChenAnPin stick sofi and the chieftain in this turret together!
I back this proposal. Somebody must be able to make it happen.
@@ChenAnPin Or at least Dukakis.
There is video of it around, none of them are in very good condition internally.
“He knows a ton”
It’s closer 40 or 50 tons, per instance.
We know a tank or two, because we've seen a tank or two...dozen.
135,000 pounds to be exact give or take.
hahahahahahahaha
@@abitofapickle6255 Right, now divide by 14.
The XM1 was a scary fast tank even going cross country. I got the chance to pace one as it was fording creeks and rolling over small trees back around 1980. I was driving on a paved road and I found myself speeding well over the limit to keep up with the metal monster.
I can't tell anyone how impressive these things are when your cruising next to one... Just their size and jet engine sound is beyond impressive... then watching small trees felled like a scythe cutting grass and the way the thing 'floated' across a small creek ravine with it's treads going down and the tank staying essentially level changed my entire comprehension of what a tank could do.
I can't remember exactly how fast I was going, but I can say it was well above the rated specs on the current M1 Abrams. I suspect the XM1's were lighter and not fully fitted out when I saw them.
Tanks are cool in static displays, but they are another thing entirely when your driving right next to one at highway speeds.
Maaaaan! This man can talk. As a German it's awesome to listen to him. He just speaks very clear and explains very good. It's just joy to listen to him.
Yes he's a gem! Superb.
Interesting tank design that looks to be the earliest of the army's current main battle tank. Now I know and thanks for this video girl!!!!
Try T95
100 years from now, if we have anti-grav hover tanks, there will still be a "Ma Deuce" somewhere on the turret. 😁
The M-85 was a bitch. Terrible feed issues. The M-85 on the M-60A2 was even worse. It was mounted upside down in the commander's cupola. The M-2 was and still is the best MG ever produced.
plasma ma deuce
If the US keeps failing at the simple task of designing a tank machine gun and a remote control mount for it, your prophecy may well come true
Amen, here in israel we still use it,I served on IDF vehicles 1970s 1nto the 90s using it and 2 sons from 2000s to. Now still use the m2, and I suspect my 10 yr old grandson in 2030 to cock and fire it.
SGT Bilko vibes
A bit of funny stuff, I was living at Scott AFB when the very first Abrams was tested in St. Louis. Not a full field test, they just rolled it out of the factory and were going to run it around a little, but the transmission was locked in reverse so it was a brief showing. This was actually on the local news that I saw this.
Hard to believe that was in February of 1978 when I was a young PFC at FT Jackson. Now another retired old NCO...
Recruiter: "Hey, kid, ya like the Teacup ride at Disneyland? I have just the job for you."
thanks, now I know how to pronounce "shilleleleleleeighagh"
I always thought that it was pronounced shal-lay-lee however asking a few Irish friends it depends on where you are in Ireland. Maybe ask the Chieftain?
"And the chorus go: 'shi-le-le-le-le-le-eighagh'." :-)
I really like where this Channel is going. TBH, WW-2 armour is covered to wretched excess and the change of scenery is refreshing.
Back in the 70's there was an episode of 60 Minutes on TV where they did a story on the Abrahms tank being built by Chrysler for the army and basically it was all the problems with it from sand getting into the engine, cost overruns, etc. Now that we know that tank became the master of the battlefield in several wars and proved itself to be the best tank ever made I would like CBS to re-run their 60 minutes segment again!!!!
I remember that, they did nothing but slam it.
Maybe all the major components needed rework or replacement and the production M1 was different from the various development models.
These small educational videos are always great! Love the history of more modern stuff
The evolution of tank designs throughout the cold war is very interesting indeed. A lot of the engineers and techs had WW2 and Korea experience and it showed in the various designs. It was always hit and miss, but fortunately was more hit than miss. One of the more atrocious misses was the M-551 which was supposed to support the airborne forces. Didn't work very well, particularly the missile system. The great thing is that the MBT-70 led to the great designs of the German Leopard and American M-1.
Thanks for the educational upload, Sofi. Great way to spend some time today.
I think it's amazing that so many modern systems were first thought of back in the sixties but only now being brought to fruition. I'm thinking of the design of the Russian Armata and the Israeli LAHAT gun fire missile system to name a few.
@@roceye They had the vision, but not the technology to make it happen. Take for example, even though it was a fictional series, the communicator from star trek. Lo and behold, we use one every day. Who knows what's on drawing boards now.
Great info. I once interviewed for a position at the Chrysler Tank Arsenal. I really wanted to work there. I remember it as one of the best job interviews I ever had. I didn't get the job, which turned out to be good. It closed a few years later. I ended up working for Chrysler in auto manufacturing. A number of people from the Arsenal ended up transferring to where I was when the Arsenal closed. I still wanted to work there.
Chrysler lost the contract for production due to poor performance. The M-1 is welded and the UAW workers at the Lima Tank facility could not produce tanks on time because of the faulty welds that had to constantly be reworked. My AOAC class toured the Lima plant shortly after the contract change and General Dynamics was producing zero defect tanks on schedule.
Side note. We had Allied officers in our class so the part of the factory where the turret armor was produced was off limits to us. I was pissed.
@@mruofacat Interesting "Facts", however, Chrysler did not lose the contract. Iacocca sold Chrysler Defense to General Dynamics in 1982 for $348.5M because Chrysler needed cash after posting a $500M loss in 1981. It was a cash up front buy that Chrysler needed.
Those same UAW workers, that you said couldn't weld, built everyone of the M1 Tanks. Detroit Arsenal was only doing component production with full assembly at Lima. Chrysler Defense became General Dynamics Land Systems. Lima was rated to produce up to 4 M1s a day with the support of Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant. Production obviously never went to that level with end of the cold war.
It was a great place to work and a lot of cool "toys" to see and "play" with for sure. Never, ever, park your car at the end of a parking lot row up at Sterling Heights HQ (used to be called Central Office Complex back in the day) when the prototype shop guys are going to be out testing vehicles on the grounds. :)
Armoured engineer vehicles never get enough love on these programs like the German Dachs, British Trojan, or the American M728.
Sofilen, my father was a mechanic at fort Benning in the 70s and he's always told the story of a colonel having him both drive and pull the pack of an amazing new tank and give feedback.
In his memory, he seems to remember this being called the 'Mech v'. Any way you can ask one of these museum people if that was a code name.
We both can't wait for this museum opening and see these things. He's getting older and really wants to get his memory sorted of the vehicles he worked on at the time. Thanks for giving us a look!
Ah, that's the MICV! Mechanized Infantry Combat Vehicle, there were a few variants but that's the program that led to the Bradley Fighting Vehicle.
The germans did continue work on casemat tanks with the VT series prototypes in the 1970s. Prototypes survive in museums
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/VT_tank
I restarted my hack, mediocre modeling career during COVID. I put the M-24, M-47, M48 and M-60A2 and A3 next to each other. It was easy to trace the lineage from one generation of tank evolution to another. Suspension, engine deck, stowage, etc, etc. all showed evolutionary advances.
Then, I did a 1st generation M-1 Abrams-- wow-- Rob's right-- totally threw out the history up to that point and started with a clean sheet of paper! The Abrams looks nothing like it's older cousins.
Sure, I could "see" it when I looked at photos, but actually assembling it (in 1/35) made a huge difference in understanding the change a bit better.
Thanks for an awesome video! I'd love to see/hear more about the evolution of the T-29/30/34 into the M103 and even better, the different versions of tank recovery vehicles.
There are also a lot of weird looking "battlefield taxis" from the 1950's that were ancestors to the M113 series.
The MBT70 as being a US-German collaboration can thus be found in Germany's tank museum in Munster. Interesting, that they ended up not having a common approach and so we see the M1 Abrams and the Leopard 2.
Regarding the German engines, yes, this company belonged to Daimler (Mercedes Benz) in the past, but it is called MTU, a specialist for large scale and military diesel engines.
Actually MTU is the original spiritual successor of Maybach company , since they used to build these amazing engines during WWII and continued building these engines in the cold war under the brand name of MTU: Maybach Motoren und Turbinen Union, however what is funny is that Mercedes Daimler decided to sell MTU to Rolls Royce Holding, but keeping the Maybach brand under them for their ultra premium cars which is known as Mercedes-Maybach nowadays, also Rolls Royce sold their Motor company to BMW which that means both the original factories are now under the control of Rolls Royce Holding but the motor companies are under the German car manufactures
@@MetalGearArmA RR sold their Military engine division to Perkins , who are now owned by Caterpillar!
@@thewomble1509 wow didn't know that, I've just read about it now RR Diesel is now owned by Perkins therefore the original Maybach Diesel is under Caterpillar, it's so weird that Rolls Royce & Maybach Tanks/Heavy vehicles engines are Caterpillar Inc (USA), Rolls Royce & Maybach Aircraft, Ship engines are under Rolls Royce Holding (UK) and Maybach & Rolls Royce Motors are under German Auto Industry (Germany)
@@MetalGearArmA Yes, it gets harder and harder to keep up with!
"King of the Killing Zone" was, to me, eye opening. I bought it and read it shortly after it came out (I think I still have my copy ... somewhere) and highly recommend it. In it, as I recall were some concerns about how the turbine engine and drive train would be able to handle what was considered unlikely at the time, use in a desert environment. M-1 was designed more for use in Northern Europe for a 'Fulda Gap' scenario with combined arms support from mobile artillery and another as yet untested system, the A-10 Thunderbolt II.
My Dad was WWII Army and transitioned to the USAF in the 1950s. I was Navy and we used to kid around and pick on each other as you can imagine, but when Desert Shield / Storm took place he was proud of the fact that both Army and Air Force "had it all in one sock" and "made it look easy" (I know it wasn't.) During the ground campaign I was bobbing around 20 miles off Kuwait as a watch supervisor in the Intel Center of the Flagship of the Amphibious Group (30 ships and nearly a full Marine Division.) M-1 Abrams and A-10 and their crews performed much better than any of us could have dreamed.
I read "King of the Killing Zone" while sitting on my M-1A1 in the field and the irony was not lost on me.
@@jamestheotherone742 I can imagine.
to be fair, the a10 didnt do as much as stuff like the f111 and f117, which basically did all the work in that campaign. the a10 is just flashy and gets all the attention
I served on M1/M1IP/M1A1's while I was in the Army. They were my baby!! As far as I am concerned, the M1 series is the best in the world.
Seeing the XM-1, MBT-70, and XM-803 mentioned outside of War Thunder... I'd say it's just pure coincidence considering how the game is filled with XM-1 only users because of the summer sale :3
Armor Warfare as well. I've always loved learning about tanks and my knowledge of them is far from complete, and thus I learned A LOT about these tanks and especially the MBT-70 while playing AW.
Informative and entertaining. Thank you Rob and Sofi!
Having served on the M60, M60A1, M1, and M1A1 tanks, I can say US armor has come a long way. Very interesting video.
The Orr Kelly book is fascinating as it is a rare inside look at how weapons systems are developed.
The Leopard 2 AV which was evaluated at Aberdeen was so austere that the special armor package was left out....
omg i litterally wanted a video on the mbt/xm/abrams like this
Was just watching a video talking about the XM-1, the fort Benning collection is awesome
Love and Thanks from germany, and thank You arsenal folks for securing these treasures!
Reminded me of the recently found Lewis & Clark girandoni airgun....Bob Beeman...
Excuse me while I just get out of my flashback to going country running in Fulda. Love this!
Did not know the tank at all, so very interesting.
That is one sexy piece of machinery!
Thanks Rob and Sophie!
I was stationed at Knox in 1980 when the XM-1 was doing trials! I remember being on road marches and seeing these fly by us at 40. it was f-ing cool!
That's awesome!!
I was at Ft. Knox in Nov 1976 to March 1977. There was a MBT-70 behind an old building. I was able walk around it but not get inside. I remember the 120mm gun and the keyway for the missile. I got briefed on the XM-1 but never saw one ever. I got out July 1980 never ever seeing the M-1. Man, to have a digital camera back then.
Very nice and intersting Video. Just filmed the MBT70 in the German Tank Museum Munster a few weeks ago.
Glad I tuned in. I never heard of these tanks. I have always heard the Abrams tank was built to replace the M60 Patton. Thanks for sharing!
The M-1 program was the replacement for the M-60 series. This was really just a R&D program that didn't go anywhere. They took the lessons learned from the MBT-70s, but the XM-1 program really was a "clean sheet", so much so that that the Army didn't want the Chrysler one, they wanted what was basically a "Super Patton".
@@jamestheotherone742 I appreciate the info. I'm so far out of the loop on this stuff but I do enjoy it though. Thanks!
@@jamestheotherone742 the M-60A2 was supposed to be the Super Patton but didn't upgrade the hull or drivetrain. Plus the gun, the 152mm never lived up to its expectations. Most crews NEVER got to fire a Shillelagh missile due to the cost per round. Thus the the M-1. The Army DID award the contract to Chrysler, but they lost it due to inability to deliver tanks. General Dynamics took over the contract
@@mruofacat Not quite. The M-60A2 wasn't a "Super Patton". It was designed to counter the Soviets fielding tanks and tank-destroyers equipped with ATGMs that could out-range tank guns. It was never meant to replace the M-60A1+.
The M-1 program was a completely different project that was designed to replace the entire M-60 fleet. By that time the Army had completely gotten the gun/launcher idea out of its head.
The GM entry in the XM-1 competition was the "super patton" I was referring to, with a direct lineage to the M-60 with a diesel powerepack, wedge front, and hull ammo.
Thanks for the very clear and informative talk on tank development. Especially the further reading section.
Great video, thank you! Always have loved the development of the Abrams. The first time I seen her was at an airshow, at Bergstrom, AFB, Austin TX, later 80s, as a kid. Since then have always built models, both static and RC.
Funnily enough, my grandfather was one of the higher ranking officers during the XM1 prototyping phase and helped lead the development of the Abrams. One of these days I should ask him more about what his role was for it.
I'm glad he mentioned 'King of the Killing Fields'. I read it back when it first came out, and it is indeed a great book about the early 105mm Abrams. It ends with early deployment to Germany.
I was a gunner on the M60 A1 and A3, as well as the M48 A5. As a driver I was TDY to test the XM1 versions. Love my Armor!
So the Leopard ll test specimen was caught "doping"
Great job Rob telling the history. It’s too easy to get too deep into the details, and loosing your audience. But then for those looking for trivia, give them someplace to go.
Thanks to Sofilein for bringing this expert to us in a useful way. You make a great team n
Ft Knox traded one of its MBT 70s in order to obtain the Tiger II that was on display at the Patton Museum before its move to Ft Benning
A little bit off topic. But id kind of like to know more about the new building and the engineering and design plan that went into Constructing the new facility for the sole purpose of tank preservation.
Before I joined the army I played world of tanks extensively. When I went to basic training at Fort Benning I saw a lot of old tanks I recognized and a lot I didn’t recognize. I also remember getting yelled at by the drill sergeant for not paying attention because I was looking at was I thought was an IS-3. Good times!
If it was by the DFAC on the fence line, it was indeed our IS-3.
This is probably your coolest vid yet. A very interesting story of tank development!
Your channel is a great favorite of mine.
So I work in the electronics industry, not military vehicle, but as an observer from the UK of both German Engineering and US Engineering a lot of what you described about the issues of “design by committee” rings true!
Thanks for the interesting video. I like to know more about the development of the M48 and M60 tanks.
The Hunnicutt book on the Patton tank has been reprinted....the originals are now quite valuable. I have a book on the M-46 thru M-48 written by Micheal Green that is less comprehensive than the Hunnicutt book but much more up to date....
Thanks for another great video. The icing on the cake is the info on essential reference works. True scholarship.
You're welcome and thank you!
the development of cold war tanks might not have the same enthusiasm as ww2 but its super interesting how all the evolutionary branches developed and then converged into much more similar machines even to some extent Russian tanks
Russian tank, compared with glorious engineering outcomes of overocean partners, is able to launch missiles without need of mega-super-duper gun
Great Video Sofi! Rob's great and I found it VERY informative!
I loved this tank as a kid. I made the Revell model of it and was crestfallen when they dropped it.... Then came the Abrams!
Now we need the m60 tank tree
Yep that's next on my list when I can get back out there
The real GM XM-1 (not the video game versions) was one of the coolest tanks ever made in my opinion, I love it.
I'd love to transfer back out to Benning.
Awesome video Sofi and Rob! Thank you! 😎
it would be so awesome to see that mbt 70 running, and the hydraulic suspension in action
Entertaining and educational. I learned some things that I hadn't known before.
As an aside, I have the MBT-70 unlocked in War Thunder but haven't used it yet. I enjoy using the XM-803 and with the current sale going on, I am pondering picking up the GM XM-1 (alas, the Chrysler version is for console players, not PC).
Saw my first XM1 as a PVT at the AEB on 1978, Later returned as a Tank Commander in Hco 2/6 Cav Ft Knox in 82. My M1 was serial# 0010. Would do volunteer work with the Patton Museum and workshop behind the old Todd Hall, LST building among others. Wish all that stuff was still here and not at the home of infantry.
Every Abrams I served on as a crewman OR had under my "command" as a Platoon Sergeant between early 1983 and late 1986 (While stationed in West Germany and later at Fort Hood, TX) had one glaring similarity....Data Plates identifying them as Chrysler products and as XM1s. By the way did you guys get BOTH of the MBT70s that were on static display at Ft. Knox when I was there between 1980 and late 1982? Since both "hulls" had had their various hatches and grates sealed at some point I, and many other Tankers of the era, and assigned to Dt. Knox, were very curious about the differences between the M60A1s and M60A3s we were assigned to and/or trained on. Thanks for a great video!
We did get both MBT-70s, the second one is "The Pigg" i mentioned in the video.
@@robertcogan7109 Thanks for the kind and timely rely! I'm sure it's the passage of time that caused me to confuse the two tanks as they were not side by side when I was stationed at Ft. Knox. One, if I recall correctly, was on display at the Patton Museum (outdoors) and the other, "The Pigg" I think, was near the 2/6 Cav AO. I suppose I should be ashamed of myself for confusing the two turret and hull designs but it has been roughly four decades since I saw them last. Take care and keep up the great work you are doing! Hopefully I will be able to visit your facility before too long and show The Lovely Bride some of the tanks and other vehicles armored or not so much if at all I dealt with back in my day as well as those one of my kinsmen served on in WWII.
Someone needs to read out Rob Cogan's mind and download all of the tank related information into a book! ;-)
It's great to hear all of the little anecdotes and other details that tend to not end up in your standard description of military vehicles.
Thank you for sharing!
Great video. Nice to hear from Rob. I would like to hear the story continuing up the M1 line as it modernises. 😁👍🏻
Rob and Sofi; great video (as usual)! I'm really looking forward to my next visit to the collection. Keep up the good work!
Never knew about these early test tanks. Thanks.
Could listen to Rob for ages.
The Leo 2 had issues with the hull being penetrated by mere I.E.D.'s in Syria. Imo the composite layout of the Leo's hull is less effective due to the angling (which is a liability in terms of composite design). The Abrams hull stacks the composite so that an in coming round hits the full thickness of composite on the face of the plate. The upper plate is so angled that it's basically flat but theres more than meets the eye. The upper plate is actually designed to snap penetrater rods upon impact. The gunner sight of the Abrams is also placed above the cheek armor removing a liability or weak spot for composite. The 2A6 is a good tank though.
Also the Leopard 2 stores way more ammo in the hull not particularly well
protected.
@@news_internationale2035 It is a cold war design. It was basically designed for a defending war against the soviet. So it would mostly be in a hull down position. But even on a battlefield you would have a hard time to specially aim for that area of a tank from a long distance.
The Canadians loved the Leopard 2 in Afghanistan though. They even thanked the germans for giving them those tanks. When an Leopard 2 ran on an IED it managed to drive back on it's own and nobody died inside of it.
Excellent video! Following the overall design choices and how they happened is very interesting. Looking forward to more!
Thanks for the presentation, very interesting.
I actually have a discord friend who was in the US army as a 19 kilo. He went from using the M-60a1, M-60a2 that used a 152mm gun, M-60a3 and the sheridan. He then moved to the M1a1 abrams and finally the M1a2 during the gulf war and desert storm before retiring. He also told me he used the XM1 but didn't tell me much.
I would have liked to see this thing a mainstay mbt would have been Soo cool
awesome - I get tired of hearing about WW2 tanks. This really hit the spot.
The M60A2s had a lot of first that was used in the M60A3s and the M1, the M60A2s was the first main battle tank to use the Laser Rangefinder, fire the sheleighly missile, combustible main gun rounds, fire on the move but not very fast, and some others first that I can't remember what we called them, been over 40 years that I crewed the M60A2. Lol...
I was happy to see someone actually learned much of the M1 story using Orr Kelly’s book. You forgot to discuss the Army’s use of The Main Battle Tank Task Force, which was that whole piece of “wiping the slate clean” to start over.
i always find it funny when Wehraboo's tell the story of how the Leopard 2 beat the XM1's prototypes but omit the part about it not having its armor and weighed almost 10 tons less.
I have to admit, the MBT-70 looked very futuristic for it's time. That Sleek design and 20mm on top is just dope 👌
It was extremely "futuristic" for its time. It would be ambitious and exotic even today.
@@jamestheotherone742 Well i am sure with todays technology you could avtuall make it work as it was supposed back then. But you would have to change the armor to modern composite and such.
12:45 Hearing that gave me the same facial expression Frasier Crane had when he met the owner of Café Nervosa, Maureen Nervosa...
FINALLY!
I decent video on the MBT-70,XM-803.
I would pay good money for a book that details the development history of the MBT/KPZ-70 tank.
Also It was a 1,500hp Daimler Benz engine that was in the KPZ-70
Great vid. I want to know more about that desert camo tank destroyer next to the MBT70
That appears to be an Israeli Super Sherman with the HVSS, Cummins diesel engine, and the slightly detuned AMX-30 105mm main gun....
I was a gunner on a IP B34 “BARBARIAN” B 1/149 AR 40th ID loved it then I went back to being a TOW gunner/squad leader in the 41st brigade
Would be interesting to hear about the other side of the coin, the German development that lead to the Leopard. Really good and interesting video Sofilein! Is this the only MBT-70 around or are there several copies? Perhaps I missed that in the video.
I like these info vids. The young lady does a great job at producing them for us. THx!!!!
The MBT-70 had so much potential. If they had equipped it with a 120mm normal gun and replaced the engine with the gas turbine the XM1 used it could have been a damn fine main battle tank.
Sofi…….you guy’s do a wonderful job on these videos! Great quality and informative. A well done to you and your tank buddies!👍🤣👍
I wonder if that’s the same MBT-70 that used to sit near Disney Barracks at Knox, by the shoppette.
is it just me, or does the smiling Rob Cogan look like a relaxed version of Agent Phil Coulson... ?
I luv how you are covering the build up to the modern day tanks, , Sof keep doing what your doing, it fantastic content, I do see some interesting other tanks in the foreground, hope you close in on that 100 000 subs too, fingers crossed you get there soon, luv from down under. Hav a good one.
I like how during development of the vehicles, practicality wins out in terms of design, manufacturing, testing etc.
Modern tank videos are always interesting!
Thanks, Sofi!
Are refurbished tracks an episode in themselves..? Could be cool and fun.
Huh. That anecdote about the Germans leaving the modular internal armor out of the Leopard 2AV in the U.S. trials is new to me. The way I've often heard it is that we blatantly chose the indigenous designs over the the German one, despite it performing better. Thanks for clearing that up!
Given that its a bit of controversial information, that's why I included the reference to "King of the Killing Zone" as it goes into detail on that incident.
If that were always true though, the Stryker wouldn't exist.
thanks for the clear explanation
I was on the Sheridan. The Missle was JUNK. We fired the 152mm Main Gun Rounds and only One Missle. So much was shaken around after firing the Main Gun Rounds we had Missle Electrical and Electronics issues.
As always...awesome Sofi, thanks for your effort
MBT 70!!! The best!!! Also how is she so beautiful.
Horny 13 year olds hehehe.
You did it thanks
Yeah this is what I want to see
Funny how the us-germany experience with the mbt-70 project parallels the france-germany experience with the amx-30/leo 1
jeez those things are huge.
I want to see more information on GMs competitor for the M1 contract. Chrysler won basically to keep them in business.
Chrysler could not perform so they lost the contract to General Dynamics
I have a copy of King Of The Killiing Zone, very interesting read, well thought out.