A crewable updated M60

[Stratos]

A crewable up to date M-60 MBT.

 

This one looks terribly old.

 

[ebabil]

my most favorite tank ever (along with t-55/72)

[Silver_Dragon]

The M-60 was on plans by ED some years ago (They show a pic of a update M-60), but yet has not news about them.

[Kev2go]

Yea would be nice to have a 3d model update.

 

 

If there is ever a dedicated m60 tank module. I hope it will indeed be the m60a3 tts.

 

Would fit in for late cold war to modern day period and still offer a taste of modernish fire control sytem

[Stratos]

Well with the updated 3d model they should make it CA compatible, at least, I hope so.

[Stratos]

Just a bump, I want to remember ED that Turkey will be a very important actor in the incoming Syria map, and they used the M-60 there!

 

[QuiGon]

Just a bump, I want to remember ED that Turkey will be a very important actor in the incoming Syria map, and they used the M-60 there!

Same with Israel. They are also an important actor in the new map and have used lots of M60 in the past.

[Home Fries]

The US Marine Corps also still used the M-60 in the 90s.

[Stratos]

The US Marine Corps also still used the M-60 in the 90s.

 

Of course, it even saw combat with Marines during Desert Storm!!

 

[Stratos]

Another bump, we will get a brand new T-72B3 tank, and that's cool, but when will we get and updated M-60? After all, Syria map should be released soon.

 

In regular or updated variants.

 

 

[Northstar98]

That M60A3 currently in DCS is shocking, it's probably one of the worst looking assets, even worse than most of the ships. It looks like it was ported from HL1.

 

Personally I'd go for an early M60A3 and then a newer version like an A3 TTS

Edited September 17, 2019 by Northstar98

[Kev2go]

That M60A3 currently in DCS is shocking, it's probably one of the worst looking assets, even worse than most of the ships. It looks like it was ported from HL1.

 

Personally I'd go for an early M60A3 and then a newer version like an A3 TTS

 

only difference with an initial "vanilla" M60A3 vs TTS is lack of additional thermal optics for gunner and commander, and instead sporting basic ( albeit passive) night vision optics.

 

 

M60A3 TTS where the most produced version of the A3, and following the next year in 1979 after initial non thermal A3 versions began in 1978. Older vanilla A3's were quickly retrofitted to those standards.

 

All in all if ED ever starts making tank modules they could ( and should) easily include both M60A3 and M60A3 TTS in one pack because of how similar they are. And most will prefer the TTS, because besides the obvious fact that you can spot heat singatures, the TIS can be used during daytime conditions as well.

 

 

EDit:

 

Also as a fun fact the M60A3 TTS system ended up being more advanced than the M1's TIS ;), offering a higher resolution quality that was not surpassed until the M1A2 SEP.

Edited September 18, 2019 by Kev2go

[Northstar98]

only difference with an initial "vanilla" M60A3 vs TTS is lack of additional thermal optics for gunner and commander, and instead sporting basic ( albeit passive) night vision optics.

 

 

M60A3 TTS where the most produced version of the A3, and following the next year in 1979 after initial non thermal A3 versions began in 1978. Older vanilla A3's were quickly retrofitted to those standards.

 

All in all if ED ever starts making tank modules they could ( and should) easily include both M60A3 and M60A3 TTS in one pack because of how similar they are. And most will prefer the TTS, because besides the obvious fact that you can spot heat singatures, the TIS can be used during daytime conditions as well.

 

 

EDit:

 

Also as a fun fact the M60A3 TTS system ended up being more advanced than the M1's TIS ;), offering a higher resolution quality that was not surpassed until the M1A2 SEP.

 

Oh okay, you seem to have much better knowledge on the subject that I do :thumbup:

 

I was also going to bring up the T72B3M they're adding, whereas what they should really be doing is replacing the old models with a model of the same variant, but with updated graphics something more resembling a vanilla -72B or -72BV

[Richard Dastardly]

And there's no Centurion at all...

[Northstar98]

And there's no Centurion at all...

 

Oh yeah the Centurion should definitely be in DCS - Mk10 and Mk13 are must haves - however I think it better to replace legacy models with updated ones before adding new ones.

 

For instance instead of making a direct replacement for the T-72B currently in DCS (I don't know what variant) they're adding a much improved, more recent version - the T-72B3M in what looks like to be a May-Day parade variant - not a standard version, at least according to Kev2Go.

 

ED are however adding replacement models and have been doing so for a while, which IMO is what they should be doing.

 

The current M60A3 however definitely, definitely needs a major update - it looks awful.

[Kev2go]

Oh okay, you seem to have much better knowledge on the subject that I do :thumbup:

 

I was also going to bring up the T72B3M they're adding, whereas what they should really be doing is replacing the old models with a model of the same variant, but with updated graphics something more resembling a vanilla -72B or -72BV

 

I would think they aught to have both.

 

a new T72B model to represent the cold war version , and the T72B3M for current day scenarios which would argue is very much relevant. AS of now Russia has more T72B3 or B3M's then they do T90/T90A's in service.

[Stratos]

With Turkey being a major player in the new Syria map, is really time to get an updated M60.

 

[Evoman]

In the last interview with ED it was mentioned that they do have plans to do a more advanced combined arms where not only would the models be updated bur the ground vehicles could be crewed. @1:08:56

 

 

 

 

[Stratos]

In the last interview with ED it was mentioned that they do have plans to do a more advanced combined arms where not only would the models be updated bur the ground vehicles could be crewed. @1:08:56

 

 

 

Thanks! Interesting!

[Stratos]

Ok, ED, now we have a very nice updated M-60 3d model. Can you please make it crewable for Combined Arms? Thanks a lot!

[Northstar98]

3 hours ago, Stratos said:

Ok, ED, now we have a very nice updated M-60 3d model. Can you please make it crewable for Combined Arms? Thanks a lot!

 

Well, the M60A3s model looks very much like the other legacy units - it's far away from being up to the same standard as many of the other new units.

 

But yes +1 on enabling it for CA (same with the Chieftain).

Edited May 22, 2021 by Northstar98

[Stratos]

6 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

 

Well, the M60A3s model looks very much like the other legacy units - it's far away from being up to the same standard as many of the other new units.

 

Check it again

[Northstar98]

On 5/22/2021 at 12:16 PM, Stratos said:

Check it again

 

Yeah I have, it's updated sure, and it looks a lot better than the HL1 looking model it had previously, but it hasn't been updated to the standard of many of the other new units (such as the T-72B3, BTR-80/82A). It looks more like the other legacy units we have (such as the Abrams and T-72B (not the T-72B3)), that have been around since BS1 (AFAIK). It looks more like it was an old model that wasn't implemented (which is what the PT-76 is, which has been sat in the files for years, probably since DCS 1.2, it was just never implemented until the 20/05/2021 update).

Edited May 24, 2021 by Northstar98

[IkarusC42B Pilot]

+1 but i hope its the m3 wich has atleast a decent fcs

Edited May 23, 2021 by IkarusC42B Pilot

[Silver_Dragon]

ED has not implement crewable interior cockpits on vehicles (not to be confused with the driver's camera or BTR-82 "low" detail interior). That require a internal detail clickable driver / commander / gunner / operator post with connectors, missing dlls and other lua entries (remember, Supercarrier module LSO clickable cockpit with connector can not be replicate on a MOD by LUAs as a aircraft or helo). The actual "cockpits" on Chinesse Assets Pack use Combined Arms funcionality, not SC funtionality.