B-17s had up to THIRTEEN .50 cals.
B-17s had up to THIRTEEN .50 cals.Pretty cool! But why not get a P-47 and have 8 of them! Or, better yet, a B-17 and have 10!
Just kidding. A F4U (in fact it was from the Black Sheep Squadron) landed at the local strip 1.5 miles from the house about 15 years ago - man it was impressive - shook the ground when it took off!
Riposte
Up until recently, the Marines were always last to get every new thing. That is except for the Army Reserve / National Guard who were dead last in getting anything. We actually got Vietnam era flak vests for body armor in 2003 prior to our deployment to the desert..I am not going to disagree with the information in the article that there were M60 tanks in Vietnam but I feel confident in saying the USMC didn't have any M60 tanks there!!!!!!!!!
Yes 2nd photo is a straight M60, on the ammo pad on Range 42, Grafenwöhr, Germany January 1974. The M48A3 is RVN in 1969. The only M60 chassis based vehicles used in Vietnam were the M728 CEV and the AVLB. Some 20 miles across the Cambodian border (May 1970) you can see the AVLB minus the bridge. My loader took the picture.Silver tip API - Nice... And the M60 tank...
I knew a guy that was on an M60 in Vietnam (actually I suspect they were operating across the border a little) but he was Army, Come to think on it, perhaps I assumed it was an M-60, it might have actually been an M-48. He said he didn't like the M-551 Sheridan (a sentiment that I've heard from many tankers).I am not going to disagree with the information in the article that there were M60 tanks in Vietnam but I feel confident in saying the USMC didn't have any M60 tanks there!!!!!!!!!
Wanna know why most tankers didn't think much of the Sheridan? Here's an outside picture of one the 11th ACR lost in Cambodia. It did not tolerate an RPG very well.551’s were good for racing as one could adjust the governor on the 6V-53 and get +-45 MPH provided the tracks were right.
551’s did provide some fire support with the 152 mm gun but no good against RPGs or large mines. The missile was never used in RVN, if and when it did work,lol
Had one come in that was minus the turret, all road wheels and maybe 3 1/2’ high. Ran over a “ mine” made from UXO bomb the vc put in a road. Have alway wondered if there were any tank battles between ARVNs and nva? Never looked it up…
Inside of 551 turret pics..
I pretty much agree with most of your comments. All of my 1911's are 10mm because it's just a superior cartridge. I also agree on the Walther P38. It's a beautiful, historical firearm. Back in the 1989's I bought a Walther PPK/s for the same reason. But, I later sold it because the D/A trigger pull was ridiculously long and super heavy. But, the accuracy was great for a small pistol because of the fixed barrel.Similar experience here - bought one in (Jan 04? I forget) - a Barrett model 95, 3-digit SN - added a complete spares kit, four extra mags (at $135 each!), and - get this - a QD suppressor and brake. Yes, a suppressor for the Barret - as long as my forearm and as big aroung almost - it was, IIRC, $3,700! And a 50 BMG reloading setup - O-frame press, dies. Then powder, and bullets. Had 100+ rounds of ammo, too.
Sold the whole kit a few years ago. About three months after the last time I shot it. Just wasn't as fun, or as 'cool', as it used to be.
I list some of the (high) prices because it is an EXPENSIVE toy, and folks need to know that before geting one. All in, I had spend $8,000-$10,000....got somewhat less than that out of it (Took a HUGE beating on the suppressor and brake....)
As I've gotten older, especially the last 6 years, I have focused on less diversity. Fewer operating systems, fewer calibers. Getting out of 50 was an easy call. Also got out of 338 Win Mag. And 7mm Mag. And 22-250. And 257 Roberts. And 30-06. I am pretty confident ALL my rifle needs can be met with a 22LR, 5.56 (.223), and 7.62 (.308).
Similarly, in handguns (since this is a 1911 forum), I am almost exclusively a 1911-platform guy for semi-auto's (my wife's S&W EZ's are because she's not an enthusiast, the P38 is just historical, and the Walther PPKs are - well, just fun). Here's heresy - my 1911's are in .22, 9mm, and 10mm - not a .45 among them. The 10 will do everything a .45 will, and then some.
Sorry to ramble - it's early, I need coffee.
Nice P38 - much nicer than mine. I bought mine - a German police trade-in - because it was made in 1961, and I was born in 1961. Similarly, I found a (worn, but complete and original) S&W .22 black powder (1st gen 2nd issue? I have a factory letter somewhere) that was made in 1861...so 100 years older than me. Completely impractical. but cool.I pretty much agree with most of your comments. All of my 1911's are 10mm because it's just a superior cartridge. I also agree on the Walther P38. It's a beautiful, historical firearm. Back in the 1989's I bought a Walther PPK/s for the same reason. But, I later sold it because the D/A trigger pull was ridiculously long and super heavy. But, the accuracy was great for a small pistol because of the fixed barrel.
Here's my Walther P38. I paid $1,400 for it. I'd also like to get a nice condition Luger P08 for the same reasons, but, a good one will run $3,000 and up.
View attachment 681960
Wow! I bought my P38 because it was a post war polished blue commercial model. And, it turned out to be made in 1958, the same year that I was born. Some coincidence.Nice P38 - much nicer than mine. I bought mine - a German police trade-in - because it was made in 1961, and I was born in 1961. Similarly, I found a (worn, but complete and original) S&W .22 black powder (1st gen 2nd issue? I have a factory letter somewhere) that was made in 1861...so 100 years older than me. Completely impractical. but cool.
Thanks for sharing.
When I read the thread title I thought of the M2, not the Barrett. I wouldn't mind shooting an M2 because it would be mounted on a tripod or other mounting system without any recoil impacted on my shoulder.M-2 is a real blast to shoot, thank you uncle sam…
Nice, Is that a wartime P.38 or a post war. It has the Walther banner, and that was only on Very Early production P.38s, but it was on all post war pistols.I pretty much agree with most of your comments. All of my 1911's are 10mm because it's just a superior cartridge. I also agree on the Walther P38. It's a beautiful, historical firearm. Back in the 1989's I bought a Walther PPK/s for the same reason. But, I later sold it because the D/A trigger pull was ridiculously long and super heavy. But, the accuracy was great for a small pistol because of the fixed barrel.
Here's my Walther P38. I paid $1,400 for it. I'd also like to get a nice condition Luger P08 for the same reasons, but, a good one will run $3,000 and up.
View attachment 681960
But Both of the tanks in the original posting look like they have 105mm canons on them and that canon was not fitted to M48s until the M48A5 variant which was not even started until 1975-76. It has the distinctive offset bore evacuater about 2/3 of the way back down the barrel towards the turret. That's a 105mm cannon, Not a 90mm Cannon.Yes 2nd photo is a straight M60, on the ammo pad on Range 42, Grafenwöhr, Germany January 1974. The M48A3 is RVN in 1969. The only M60 chassis based vehicles used in Vietnam were the M728 CEV and the AVLB. Some 20 miles across the Cambodian border (May 1970) you can see the AVLB minus the bridge. My loader took the picture.
![]()
![]()
Yea, sad sight. 113’s were no better, in fact worse with the large flat sides. IIRC about 99% were junk after a RPG hit. We had a 557 we used for “ alerts” during the spring offensive, as it would have helped against a T-54.Wanna know why most tankers didn't think much of the Sheridan? Here's an outside picture of one the 11th ACR lost in Cambodia. It did not tolerate an RPG very well.
View attachment 681954
1958 post war commercial P38.Nice, Is that a wartime P.38 or a post war. It has the Walther banner, and that was only on Very Early production P.38s, but it was on all post war pistols.
So if the one with the shirtless tanker is in Vietnam, it is an M60 tank in Vietnam.