7/23/2021

Tanks For The Memories

 The Marine Corps has decided to get rid of our regular and reserve tank units. The idea is that we will be fighting on islands in the Pacific and that we are light infantry. Tanks are too heavy.

I think that is a mistake.  We fought major land wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, and who knows where we will fight again?  Tanks may be needed.

I propose that the Marine Corps retain our two reserve tank battalions. Low cost insurance for a unknown future.

The article below illustrates how well Marine Reserve tanks did in the Iraq war. This is what a friend and I remember from a brief thirty years ago, and one should not trust an old memory, but the friend and I think we have written it accurately.

 

CWO-5 Bob Dart and I were discussing a brief given to MWCS-48 shortly after the Gulf War of 1991 by a Reserve Tank Company Commander. Major Bill Hammerstadt (Rest in Peace) had arranged to have the young Marine Captain and Gunnery Sergeant brief the Squadron on their experiences in the War. The Tank Company was from Fort Knox, KY, part of 8th Marine Reserve Tank Battalion.

One half of MWCS-48 was mobilized for the war, and some of us went to Norway or North Carolina, but only Bob Dart went to the Gulf. He needs to write his story down. Here is what Bob and I remember of the brief, written almost thirty years afterwards, so we don't want to be tested on these memories.

The young Marine Captain told us they were mobilized and arrived in the Gulf. They had the old M-60A1 Tanks, not the more modern M-60A3 Tanks. The Marine Corps received loaner M-1 tanks from the US Army. The M-1 was new and very much more powerful.

Before the war the British publication Janes Fighting Ships said that the Marine M-60's could not stand up to the more modern and lethal T-72 tanks used by Iraq. They said the Marine M-60 tanks would be badly defeated by the Iraqi tanks.

The Captain told us that the active duty command put them on the front line with their M-60's and told them to try to get through the first minefield. "You will probably get blown up", they were told, "and if you do, the active duty Tank Battalion with M-1's will come through and save the day."

But in the attack the Marine Reserve Tanks only lost the tread on one tank, so drove on to the second minefield, and took no losses in the second minefield. The Captain said the Iraqi minefield was ineptly constructed and that the wind had blown the sand away so they could avoid the mines. And the minefield was not covered by fire.

The Ground Commander told them to keep going. It would have been time consuming and complex for the active duty Marine M-1 tanks to pass past the M-60's. The Captain's story was that his Reserve Company led the fight all the way up to the road that led to Kuwait, then turned east towards Kuwait. He told us they met retreating tanks and vehicles and sometimes killed them with shots 100 yards away. I believe he claimed 35 tanks and 60 soft skinned vehicles. Something like that.



Photos are from the internet, not from the Captain's brief


I asked him now many of his troops had been tankers on active duty? Only four, he said, one of who was the Captain. 

I asked the old grizzled Gunny Sgt what he had done on active duty. "Do I have to tell you, Sir" he said. "Yes," I laughed, surprised that he was shy about what he did on active duty.

"I was a cook. In the Navy", he said.

Pretty impressive for the Marine Reserve to train an outstanding tank company from a bunch of different MOS Marines.

Excellent brief. This is the way I remember it, although my sea stories sometimes get exaggerated.

I can't believe that they have not written it up. Can't find it anywhere. It was a great story.

There is a great story written by a Reserve Tank outfit that fought very well with M-1 Tanks. They had very little time to transition from the M-60's to the M-1's but obviously did it very well.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1991-12-16-9104230141-story.html

_____________________________________

Sgt Major Tomaeno had a great story about tanks. He mobilized with 2/24, the Chicago Marine Infantry Battalion. His son was mobilized with him and they were soon in Iraq for the war.

Sgt Major Tomaeno saw a Marine on an Iraqi tank, and yelled "Get off of that tank. You don't know what you are doing. You will get hurt."

The Marine replied, "Son, I do know what I am doing. I am trying to get this running so we can use it." 

Sgt Major Tomaeno noted that there were few Marines in Iraq that could call him son. But the grizzled old Warrant Officer was one of them.

The Warrant Officer said, "The last time I was on one of these tanks was in Korea. But this is the last time. After this I am going to retire."

______________
Some good scoop on this link



______________

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Kuwait_International_Airport  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane%27s_Fighting_Ships

https://history.army.mil/books/www/www8.htm

https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/how-the-marines-ripped-through-the-iraqis-in-operation-desert-storm

During the 1970's, the 8th Tank Battalion was rounded out by the addition of Company A in Rome, GA (now in Fort Knox, KY); Company C in Tallahassee, FL; and Company D in Columbia, SC (now Eastover, SC). Additionally, AT(TOW) Company in Miami, FL, was activated October 1, 1978. Anti-Tank(TOW) Company has been recently reorganized to an Anti-Tank(TOW) and Scout Platoon.
The 1980's represented a period of company and battalion training exercises in preparation for the mobilization mission in support of the 4th Marine Division.
On November 26, 1990, the 8th Tank Battalion was mobilized in its entirety and deployed to Camp Lejeune, NC, for completion of its activation and for further deployment to Southwest Asia on December 21, 1990.
During Desert Shield/Storm, the Battalion participated as a maneuver element of the 2d Marine Division while providing company augmentation to the battalions' of the 6th and 8th Marine Regiments.
The 8th Tank Battalion returned to CONUS and was demobilized in March of 1991, The years l991 through mid-1996 found the Battalion retrog rating its M60A1 tanks, undergoing new equipment training and receiving a partial training allowance of interim M1A1 tanks. A trying period indeed, the Battalion continued to hone its war fighting skills, although training with a significantly decreased training allowance.
In August 1995, the Battalion retrograded its interim M1Al's, and in September and October 1995 received four improved M1A1 tanks at each site. In June and July of 1996, the formal shipment of MlAl Common tanks arrived at each site, bringing the Battalion to its current, full strength of 32 M1A1'S.
_______________________________________________

https://www.usmcu.edu/Research/Marine-Corps-History-Division/Research-Tools-Facts-and-Figures/Chronologies-of-the-Marine-Corps/Persian-Gulf-1990-1991/

https://www.wearethemighty.com/articles/how-the-marines-ripped-through-the-iraqis-in-operation-desert-storm


The following was excerpted from this link

These are comments made by a number of different individuals and there is some differing opinions.

How well did the US M 60 tanks perform in Desert Storm?

17 Mar 11
You always hear stories of how well the M1A1 Abrams did against Iraqi tanks and armed vehicles,
but we also had quite a few M 60 tanks being used in that war, but I have not heard any reviews of
how well they did. They might have never actually run into any enemy tanks as far as I know, and
maybe they were not used in the front lines of battle,
but I'd like to know how well they performed if in fact they did see some action........
________________

18 Mar 11, 09:44
I believe some USMC M-60A3s did encounter Iraqi armor near Kuwait City. I don't recall the details
but I believe I saw one Marine comment that their 105 mm DU ammo had no difficulty penetrating
Iraqi armor.

Perhaps someone else can recommend a reliable account of the engagement.


Someone here states the Marines did not use M60A3s but just late model M60A1s with add-on
reactive armor. The Army was equipped with M1s but allegedly a father of a Marine in the
4th Tank Battalion sued the Navy/Marines because the M60A1s were obsolete. Luckily the Army
had surplus M1A1 HA's and exchanged 54-58 M60s to the 4th Tank Battalion for no cost.
The USMC Reserve 4th Tank Battalion got the M1A1s and the 8th Tank Battalion used their
M60A1 RISE Passive tanks.

Although here they state that the 2nd Tank Battalion used 200 M60A3s in Kuwait City.

Desert Storm: The US Marines exclusively used the M-60A3 during the conflict. In early February
1991, two hundred USMC M-60A3s of the 2nd Battalion drove north from Khafji, Saudi Arabia into
occupied Kuwait where they met a larger Iraqi force of mixed (T-54/55, Type 69, and T-72) tanks
on the grounds of Kuwait City International Airport. This was the largest armored battle for the
Marines since WWII, and they won soundly destroying almost nine dozen Iraqi tanks with only one
M-60A3 lost. 


The defeat was humiliating not only to Iraq but also to the USSR’s arms export effort, as some of the
destroyed tanks were the newer T-72 which was supposed to be superior to the M-60. Despite the
commanding performance of the M-60A3, the USMC decided to phase it out shortly afterwards
anyways to achieve commonality with the US Army’s M-1 Abrams. Egypt also fielded M-60s during
Desert Storm, it is not known if they saw combat.
But here:


During Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force fielded 210 M60A1’s
with ERA to support the Saudi-Marine effort into Kuwait City. These were the first tanks to enter Kuwait
during ODS.

Caption: "M-60A1 Patton Main Battle Tanks of the 1st Tank Battalion, 1st Marine Division, advancing
toward Kuwait City during the third day of the ground offensive phase of Operation Desert Storm,
26 February 1991."


Someone mentions that the 

I heard the M60A1 and M60A3 had different fire control systems. Also heard the USMC was waiting
or the M1A1HC version to equip their armor battalions with instead of doing it piecemeal and then
having to upgrade older variants.



M60A1 ERA

Going into Desert Shield, the Marines' main battle tank was the M60A1 ERA (explosive reactive armor).
Outfitted with ERA applique armor, it was considered roughly equal to, if lesser-gunned than the best
tank in the Iraqi inventory, the much-vaunted Soviet T-72. During Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm
the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force fielded 210 M60A1’s with ERA to support the Saudi-Marine effort
into Kuwait City. These were the first tanks to enter Kuwait during ODS.

The Marine Corps fielded the M1A1 Tank to replace the aging M60A1 RISE/ PASSIVE Tank.

M60 Armored Vehicle Launched Mine Clearing Line Charge (MICLIC or AVLM) is an M60 Armored
Vehicle Launched Bridge (AVLB)

The MICLIC system suffered from several serious shortcomings during the Gulf War. Engineer
after-action reports from Desert Storm concluded that units placed an over-reliance on the MICLIC
as the answer to all their breaching problems. This was due to the ignorance of threat mine capabilities,
poor MICLIC training at home station, and the general lack of an effective training device or training
strategy. During test firings the system suffered a 50-percent failure rate.


M728 CEV

During Operation Desert Storm the CEV proved unable to manoeuvre with the heavy force due to
the inability of the M60 chassis and power train to keep pace with the M1A1. Many manoeuvre units
simply left the CEV behind rather than slow their manoeuvre. Such was the case with the Mine Rake
mounted on the CEV. Commanders planned for their use as a part of the deliberate breaching operation
but left them behind once they began the pursuit and exploitation phase of the operation. C
ommanders were unanimous in their opinion that the engineer force needs M1 chassis' for heavy
breaching and gap crossing equipment. The M728 still serves today in the National Guard and Reserve.


M60A1 RISE with ERA Photos in Operation Desert Shield: http://www.primeportal.net/tanks/gre...60a1_rise_era/

So we have the USMC using:

1st Battalion with M60A1s
2nd Battalion with M60A3s
4th Battalion with M1A1s
8th Battalion with M60A1s

So who knows, maybe the 2nd Battalion got the upgraded M60s while the other two kept using
the M60A1s and the 4th Battalion got the new M1A1s. Seemed that the crews in the M60A3s and the
M1A1s would have to be retrained on how to use the new tanks first.

Join Date: Aug 2004

19 Mar 11, 07:56
Originally posted by Frtigern View Post

So we have the USMC using:
1st Battalion with M60A1s
2nd Battalion with M60A3s
4th Battalion with M1A1s
8th Battalion with M60A1s

So who knows, maybe the 2nd Battalion got the upgraded M60s while the other two kept using the
M60A1s and the 4th Battalion got the new M1A1s. Seemed that the crews in the M60A3s and the
M1A1s would have to be retrained on how to use the new tanks first.

Hope this helps.


This in part had to do with the tank model stored on the prepositioned ships at Diego Garcia.
Those were amoung the first US tanks to arrive on Saudi territory. Which USMC battlaion picked them
up on the Saudi docks escapes me, but I did meet the battalion commander several times, LtCol 'Buster'
Diggs. His story about arriving and standing up the tank battalion was 'colorfull'.

There is an article in the 'Naval Institute Proceedings' from the early 1990s written by a company
commander in 4th Tanks. It describes the transition to the M1 after call up (4th was a reserve bn)
and their combat in Kuwait. They spent barely four weeks between initial call up and getting on the
flight to SWA. In practical terms the training on the M1 amounted to 2.5 weeks learning the controls
and time on the driving and shooting courses.


I am just guessing, with slight support from experience with USMC vehicals of the era, and a few rumors.
But, it is possible the 4th bn got M1 tanks because there were not enough dependably running M60 left
in the USMC inventory. I dont know if 3rd bn gave up any for Desert Shield, tho the desire to keep
3rd Div components intact was a factor.
Last edited by Carl Schwamberg; 19 Mar 11, 08:09.

___________________


08 Sep 11

M60A1

Advance party for 8th TKBN picked up M60A1's. Tanks were basically new and still painted for Europe.
We painted desert tan and bolted on our own armor.
Pruitt
____________


08 Sep 11

Did the Egyptians use some M-60 tanks in one Armor Division? I vaguely recall the Saudis had some
in the RSA. I don't think the Saudi National Guard had any.

Pruitt
________________


09 Sep 11


Advance party for 8th TKBN picked up M60A1's. Tanks were basically new and still painted for
Europe. We painted desert tan and bolted on our own armor.
Welcome to ACG mate, hope you stick around. 

I have read that the M60A3s had a superior thermal imaging system in comparison to the first
operational M1s at the time, do you have much info' in regards to this?
"In modern war... you will die like a dog for no good reason."
_____________________


09 Sep 11
M60A1


Thanks for the welcome. My experience was with the M60A1 and then about a year after we got back
8th TKBN transitioned to the M1A1. Can't tell you anything about the thermal sights on the M60A3.
Duncan


_________________

11 Sep 11
From what I remember, USMC M60s killed Iraqi armor with the same efficiency as the M1s.
I also recall, I think from Schwartzkoff's memoirs, that most Saudi M60s were unoperational when
he arrived in theater. Why? Clogged air filters.
_______________________


11 Sep 11, 18:01

How about M551 - Sheridans?
Did they see any action?
During Operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm, 51 Sheridans were deployed by the 82nd Airborne
Division, and were among the first tanks to be sent. Although photos that were published at the time
showed rows of Sheridans ready to defend against Iraqi tanks, they would not have been very effective
against the Russian-designed T-72s which comprised the bulk of the Iraqi Republican Guard. Their role
was limited to reconnaissance due to their age and light armor. It is likely that six or fewer Shillelagh
missiles were fired[16] at Iraqi bunkers; this appears to be the only occasion in which Shillelagh missiles
were fired in a combat environment, from the inventory of the aforementioned 88,000 missiles produced.
__________________


12 Sep 11


... I have read that thM60A3s had a superior thermal imaging system in comparison to the first
operational M1s at the time, do you have much info' in regards to this?
The TTS for the M60A3 was considered something of an emergency. IIRC Texas Instrument built
them on and pretty much exceeded everyone's expectations.


Sights on the initial production M1 were included in the contract. The government got what the specs
called for but not much more.


Consensus was that the TTS had a clearer image.
Any metaphor will tear if stretched over too much reality.


14 Sep 11

T-72s were present, but hardly the bulk of the Iraqi Armor. Most were T-54/55s that were heavily
modified and T-62s. Only the Republican Guard had 72s.
And by modified, I mean additional armor and larger guns in some cases.

Those things were not even what I was most worried about. I was in a Bradley, and I had seen
vids of the Iraqi Army using 57mm flak guns like Heavy MGs in Iran. Bad news for light armor,
and harder to hit with a TOW than a tank would have been.

Army used nine M60A3s but no one was sure with whom they were attached to or how they did.

Seems the M60A1, despite the manual sights had ERA armor and had better survivability than
the M60A3TTS despite the laser sights it had. Also the Marines were trained to use the M60A1.
There's probably other reasons why the Marines chose to still use the M60A1 despite there being
M1's available to use.

No comments:

Post a Comment