M551 Sheridan

[Weaver]

I thought the primary point of the Sheridan was that it was air-portable? Mind you, that's something else the Israelis don't need either: got enough trouble an hour's drive from Tel Aviv......

[GTX]

Actually, I must admit that the idea of an Israeli Sheridan has be intrigued at the moment.

Regards,

Greg

Why?  The primary point of the Sheridan's design was that it was amphibious.  The Israelis don't need amphibious ability in their AFVs.  Indeed, they went so far as to remove the trimboard from their M113s as soon as they received them, seeing them as unnecessary (and potentially dangerous, knowing how bad swimmers they actually are particularly when fully loaded).

Why???  Because I think it would look cool!!!

Greg

[JayBee]

[/quote]

Why???  Because I think it would look cool!!!

[/quote]

SECONDED!

JimB

[rickshaw]

I thought the primary point of the Sheridan was that it was air-portable? Mind you, that's something else the Israelis don't need either: got enough trouble an hour's drive from Tel Aviv......

Nope.  If you read Hunnicutt, the primary point of the Sheridan was that it was Amphibious. The US Army was on the verge of adopting the T92 light tank when they heard about the PT-76 and its amphibious ability and had a panic, adopting the Sheridan instead - because it was amphibious.

The T92 of course, wasn't.  However it had nifty things like a cleft turret, low silhouette and an autoloader:

[uk 75]

One of the reasons I love the 60s stuff is that it does look cool. I realise that in the real
world things have to work, but in the kit-fantasy-art world this is less important.

Having seen the drawings of the Sheridan versions kindly scanned above, they do give
some idea of what might have been.  Can you imagine the 82nd Airborne Division kitted
out with these things.  The Russians managed it with the BMD, but the Sheridans in 70s
US garish camo would have looked the bizz.

Israeli Sheridans with armoured gun shields and Ziva from NCIS in one of the hatches
(sorry at this point the mdeication kicked in again).  But seriously an Israeli Sheridan
would look great with all the extra stuff the IDF always puts on its vehicles. Oh dear
nurse is pulling me awy fom the computer.....

UK 75

[ysi_maniac]

What about shortening back part of Sheridan's hull, eliminating a roller each side?
Turret equipped with a 40mm (or so) chain gun?
I would say it will make a nice scout tank

[Logan Hartke]

Oh wow, I like that a lot.  Sort of a US-style Scimitar.

Nice, ysi.

Cheers,

Logan

[elmayerle]

I thought the primary point of the Sheridan was that it was air-portable? Mind you, that's something else the Israelis don't need either: got enough trouble an hour's drive from Tel Aviv......

Nope.  If you read Hunnicutt, the primary point of the Sheridan was that it was Amphibious. The US Army was on the verge of adopting the T92 light tank when they heard about the PT-76 and its amphibious ability and had a panic, adopting the Sheridan instead - because it was amphibious.

The T92 of course, wasn't.  However it had nifty things like a cleft turret, low silhouette and an autoloader:

Personally, I think that basic turret, upgraded to a suitable 105mm gun, would work superbly on a modified STRV-103 hull.  Back in Texas, I have one of the old ITC kits of the T92 and I'll admit to being tempted to clone the turret and scratch up the rest of this combination.  Thing is, it seems unlikely that I'll be returning to Texas for a long period for a fair while; I should be there over Christmas, but beyond that...

[ysi_maniac]

^^^^^
There is room for an engine

[roughneck06]

 I have grafted a 105mm gun onto a ROCO 1/87 M551 Sheridan- not bad looking at all. Back in the mid 1980s- there was a proposal to convert the M551s w/ 105 mm guns and equip 3 Battalions for the 9Th Infantry Division ( High Tech Light Division ). The Army then found out the number of transmissions left in the inventory could not support this- since none had been made since 1966. HTLD was a great idea- however- Army politics doomed it in the end. I'll take pics and try to post here ASAP.

9Th ID had some great concepts- alot off the shelf-

Ford Pickup trucks w/ Hellfire missile launchers in the bed

Dune buggys w/ TOW, M2 50 cal MG

Would have likely had what became the M8 AGS in lieu of M551 105mm in the light armor battalions.

It is really a shame that M8 got cancelled. I really hope it or an improved version is adopted. ( Once again- Army Politics)

[NARSES2]

Reading a reply in the My Stash Just Grew Again thread prompted my revival of this thread.

The reply was basically that the Shillelagh missile was named after the Irish club. Now back in the day from what I read the club may have been more effective then the missile was.

Now does anyone have any actual knowledge/experience of how effective or not the system was ? It always fascinated me and I've often wondered if what I read was pure "black" propaganda ?

[Dizzyfugu]

It was very effective. The missiles could not be fired while moving, and it took very long until the fired missiles actually went "hot" for a strike. Therefore, the missile only had a small effective range window, and IIRC the gun's range overlapped a lot with it, so that the two ammunition types were more or less redundant. The 152 mm gun/discharger itself also had a lot of flaws, e.g. through cartidges that were supposed to burn after a shot - but they didn't, so that the loader was frequently welcomed by burning or smoldering fragments after a shot.

[NARSES2]

So  it looks as though the comments I read back in the day were fairly accurate. Cheers gents

[rickshaw]

AIUI, the problem was that the vehicle was heavily "over-gunned".   It had stability problems when firing the gun athwartships.  It had stability problems when firing the gun fore and aft.   When the Australian Army trialed the Sheridan in the early 1960s they found firing the gun even with the handbrake firmly applied, the vehicle would "jump" up to 1.5-2 metres backwards when fired forwards.

The missile was often knocked out of alignment with it's sighting system when the gun fired conventional ammunition.  I've read accounts of the missile sights lasting only one or two shots.  Basically, the Shillelagh was an experimental system which was rushed into production before it was ready and the US Army never got it right.  The M60a2 was an even bigger disaster apparently.

Part of the problem was the fully combustible case used to hold the propellant for the normal gun rounds.  It didn't full combust in the initial versions and so they put an air scavenging system into the gun to blow all the embers out the muzzle before they opened the breech to reload.   The cases were also susceptible to moisture, being made of basically cardboard.  In Vietnam, the US Army introduced a large cellophane bag in which each cartridge resided in the turret, which were quickly nicknamed "condoms" by the troops.  It protected the cartridge from damage (which usually meant loose powder in the vehicle, on the floor) and moisture.   It didn't endear the round to the crews.

After the disaster the 152mm turned into, they developed a combustible cartridge for the 120mm round for the Rheinmetell tank gun which used a metal base so when the round fired, all that was left was the metal base to be ejected.  This cured some of the problems, along with thicker cardboard walls, so it was less likely to break in the turret.

[zenrat]

So the Australian Army were considering buying a tank which after firing it's gun snorted embers out of the end of the barrel?
Just the thing for a bushfire prone land...