Tanks in the Cold War

Oppositely, the key NATO nations – the US, UK, France, and West Germany – all developed their own tank designs.

These were highly similar to early main battle tanks, with powerful guns, moderate armor, and decent mobility.

An increasing variety of anti-tank weapons and the perceived threat of a nuclear war prioritized the need for additional armor.

Typical main battle tanks were well armed and highly mobile, but cheap enough to be built in large numbers.

[3] These vehicles and their derivatives formed the bulk of the armoured forces of NATO and the Warsaw Pact throughout the Cold War; many remain in use in the 21st century.

The combination of large high-explosive anti-tank (HEAT) warheads, with a long effective range relative to a tank gun, and with high accuracy, meant that heavy tanks could no longer function in a stand-off, or overwatch role; much cheaper antitank guided missiles could fill this role as well.

Subsequent analysis showed that Israeli forces had underestimated their opponents during the first phases of the war; their all-tank tactics ignored the newfound ability of Infantry armed with cheap AT weapons to stop tanks.

In 1974, the United States initiated a program to modernise its existing tank fleet and start real mass production of the M60A1, and later the M60A3; at the same time the M1 was developed.

Budgets for tank design and production picked up during the administration of president Ronald Reagan, following tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union.

During WWII a few tanks designs such as the M4 Sherman were modified to carry unguided rockets on the turret in addition to their main gun.

The M551 and the M60A2 were widely considered disappointing due to problems of overall complexity, sensitive advanced electrical systems (some components of which involved the Shillelagh guidance system) and issues related to the conventional rounds with combustible cases, though the Sheridan would serve into the 1990s before finally being withdrawn.

Chaffees were more successful later in the war in their reconnaissance role, supported by heavier tanks such as the M4 Sherman, M26 Pershing, and M46 Patton.

The heavier but older Pershing was deemed unsatisfactory due to its inferior mobility, which was unsuitable for a medium tank role as it used the same engine that powered the much lighter M4 Sherman, and 1949, the upgraded M26 received a new power plant and a main gun with bore evacuator, and the M46 Patton designation.

[5] Subsequent shipments of M46 and M46A1 Pattons allowed all remaining M26 Pershings to be withdrawn during 1951, and most Sherman equipped units were also reequipped.

The UK tanks had to operate in much colder[citation needed] conditions than their usual deployments on the North German Plain.

The gas engines gave the tank a short operating range and were prone to catching fire when hit; this version was considered unreliable.

The turret of the M103 was larger than that of the M48 or the M60 to make room for the huge 120 mm gun and the two loaders assigned to it, in addition to the gunner and the commander.

Chieftain was heavily armoured and had a 120mm gun following a doctrine of long range fire and survivability that would be needed against the more numerous Warsaw Pact tanks in the event of an invasion of West Germany.

The plans were laid in the US in the late fifties, for a tank with a 105 mm main gun and a redesigned hull offering better armor protection.

Initially, the M60 had essentially the same turret shape as the M48, but this was subsequently replaced with a distinctive "needlenose" design that minimized frontal cross-section to enemy fire.

For longer range engagements a missile would be fired instead of a HEAT round, and although its velocity would also be relatively slow, the guidance system would make a hit highly likely anyway.

Firing the gun would often adversely affect the delicate electronics, so the missile and guidance system was omitted from vehicles deployed to Vietnam.

Despite vulnerability to rockets and mines, it was judged worth applying modifications and equip all cavalry squadrons with the Sheridan.

In 1976, prototypes of a new tank which became the M1 Abrams were delivered by Chrysler Defense and General Motors armed with a 105 mm rifled gun.

About 6,000 upgraded M1A1 Abrams were produced and used the German 120 mm smoothbore gun, improved armor, and a CBRN protection system.

The Iraqis failed to find an effective countermeasure to the thermal sights and sabot rounds used by Coalition armour.

In the war, the Iraqi T-72s were the preferred target for Apache helicopters and A-10s, in an attempt to diminish the combat power of Republican Guard divisions.

The only chance for the Asad Babil T-72s against American tanks was to lure them to close range combat, or trying to ambush them from dug-in positions.

[19] But even in those conditions, the M1s usually prevailed, as proven in circumstances like the Battle of Baghdad, and the drive to the capital, where dozens of Iraqi MBTs were obliterated,[20] or near Mahmoudiyah, south of Baghdad, April 3, 2003, (Iraqi Freedom) when US tanks engaged their counterparts from just 50 yards, shattering seven enemy T-72s without losses.

[21] The Lion of Babylon T-72 was utterly outclassed by the M1 Abrams, the Challenger and by any other contemporary Western main battle tank during the 2003 invasion of Iraq.