Was the Swiss Pz 61 Main Battle Tank competitive with other MBTs of the 1970s and 1980s? You never see much about this tank.
How good was the Swiss Pz 61 Main Battle Tank?
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
 Admiral Beez |
How good was the Swiss Pz 61 Main Battle Tank? |
Lead | |
|
Posts: 4518 ( 3-May-2008 04:07:49) |
|
||
|
Dcnwilltex |
|||
|
Posts: 1256 ( 3-May-2008 06:46:06) |
The Pz-61 could be compared in specifications to a T-62 with a larger engine. The real problem was that the 650 Hp was a bit underpowered for a mountain
region, (but what tank isn't). The Semi-automatic SLM transmission made it relatively easy for the operator. The elevation/ depression at 21/10 degrees
is as good as anyone could ever ask for. The mechanics had an easy time removing an engine and carrying 56 105 rounds you packing a lot of ammo in a Middle
Weight tank. Since the tank began its production run in the 1961, one did not expect a stabilization system. You could compare it fairly to the AMX-32, Only
14 years older. The Swiss retired the tank from service 4 years ago, so it obviously held together for a bit of time.
B. |
||
|
Bunker Foesinger |
|||
|
Posts: 86 ( 4-May-2008 22:01:40) |
From "Tanks of the World" (7th edition), Berhard & Graefe, Koblenz 1990, Page 454:
"Assessment: From the beginning an ill-fated tank projekt with many deficiencies and malfunctions. Uncomparably high system costs. Below average mobility, high silhouette" Bset Regard Ralph |
||
|
Dcnwilltex |
|||
|
Posts: 1261 ( 5-May-2008 02:05:55) |
What tank does not have a high silhouette if it expects its main gun to have max elevation/depression? Kind of goes with the design. What tank has great
mobility in the mountains?
If the PZ-61 was so bad, then why did the notoriously cheap Swiss update the design to the PZ-68? and order a couple of hundred? It could have been better, but it was a first attempt by the Swiss who have special demands. B. |
||
|
Bunker Foesinger |
|||
|
Posts: 87 (10-May-2008 07:49:35) |
"What tank does not have a high silhouette if it expects its main gun to have max elevation/depression? Kind of goes with the design."
Concur, i was just citing a book. "What tank has great mobility in the mountains? " As I understand it, that was a general asssessment not refering to mountainous regions. "If the PZ-61 was so bad, then why did the notoriously cheap Swiss update the design to the PZ-68? and order a couple of hundred?" My guess: goal was to develop a key capability in terms of indeg. weapon industry and keep said industry in business. Many if not most purchasing decicions contain elements of industry support. Switzerland makes no exception. "It could have been better, but it was a first attempt by the Swiss who have special demands." Yes. The problems seem not to have been in the general design layout but with details. The book does not go into detail here. Best Regards Ralph |
||
- Battleship Vs Battleship
- Should Battleships Be Back In Service?
- The United States Navy
- The Royal Navy
- The European Navies
- The Commonwealth Navies
- The Asian Navies
- Aircraft Carriers
- Fighting Ships Of The World
- Submarines
- Designing A Navy/Ship
- The Land Forces
- The Air Forces
- The Naval Fiction Board
- The Politics Of War
- Naval Help
