Difference between revisions of "XM803"
(Edits.) |
Inceptor57 (talk | contribs) m (→History) |
||
Line 195: | Line 195: | ||
Once it became apparent that the MBT-70 project was doomed to fail in the early ‘70s due to high costs and reliability issues, the U.S. Congress decided to cut their losses on the project by cancelling the MBT-70, and instead, diverted funding to the development of a new project called XM803. | Once it became apparent that the MBT-70 project was doomed to fail in the early ‘70s due to high costs and reliability issues, the U.S. Congress decided to cut their losses on the project by cancelling the MBT-70, and instead, diverted funding to the development of a new project called XM803. | ||
− | The XM803 was, in essence, envisioned to be a “budget version” of the MBT-70. Although the new vehicle would heavily be based on the MBT-70, inheriting many of its design solutions, it would also try to drastically reduce production costs by using more conventional and only American-made parts. Although this meant that the XM803 had to give up some of its high-tech equipment in | + | The XM803 was, in essence, envisioned to be a “budget version” of the MBT-70. Although the new vehicle would heavily be based on the MBT-70, inheriting many of its design solutions, it would also try to drastically reduce production costs by using more conventional and only American-made parts. Although this meant that the XM803 had to give up some of its high-tech equipment in favor of lower production costs, it was projected that the influence of these changes on the XM803’s combat performance would be minimal. |
− | Despite showing | + | Despite showing favorable performance and being seen as a promising design by the Army, the XM803 still remained a comparably expensive tank to produce even with the applied changes over the MBT-70. Moreover, neither the MBT-70 nor the XM803 seemed to offer any substantial increase in combat performance over the already in service M60 Patton to justify the high production cost. This ultimately led to the Congress cancelling work on the XM803 only a short while after the cancellation of the MBT-70. In the late 1970s, some funding of the two failed projects would later on find its way to support the development of an entirely new, but this time around, more conventional tank project. That tank of course being the legendary M1 Abrams itself. |
''- From [https://warthunder.com/en/news/5536-development-xm803-the-second-chance-en Devblog]'' | ''- From [https://warthunder.com/en/news/5536-development-xm803-the-second-chance-en Devblog]'' |
Revision as of 03:19, 2 April 2019
Contents
Description
The Tank, Combat, Full-Tracked, 152-mm Gun/Launcher XM803 is a Rank VI American light tank
with a battle rating of 8.7 (AB) and 9.0 (RB/SB). It was introduced in Update 1.79 "Project X".
General info
Survivability and armour
Describe armour protection. Note the most well protected and key weak areas. Appreciate the layout of modules as well as the number and location of crew members. Is the level of armour protection sufficient, is the placement of modules helpful for survival in combat?
If necessary use a visual template to indicate the most secure and weak zones of the armour.
Mobility
The mobility of the vehicle is worse than that of the MBT-70. In its stock configuration, it has a horsepower/ton ratio of 21.39, while with all upgrades this increases to 24.19 HP/T. The top speed (both forward and reverse) is 64 km/h (40 mph) with 8 gears for both directions. The tank can reach its top speed quickly on flat roads, while on more difficult terrain the top speed drops by around 20 km/h. The tank has neutral steering and good turning ability on all terrains.
Armaments
Main armament
152 mm XM150E5 | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Capacity | Vertical guidance |
Horizontal guidance |
Horizontal guidance | ||
53 | -10°/+20° | ±180° | Two-plane | ||
Turret rotation speed (°/s) | |||||
Mode | Stock | Upgraded | Prior + Full crew | Prior + Expert qualif. | Prior + Ace qualif. |
Arcade | 34.3 | __.__ | __.__ | __.__ | __.__ |
Realistic | 21.4 | __.__ | __.__ | __.__ | __.__ |
Reloading rate (seconds) | |||||
Stock | Prior + Full crew | Prior + Expert qualif. | Prior + Ace qualif. | ||
10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 | 10.00 |
Ammunition
Penetration statistics | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ammunition | Type of warhead |
Penetration in mm @ 90° | |||||
10m | 100m | 500m | 1000m | 1500m | 2000m | ||
XM578E1 | APFSDS | 380 | 370 | 360 | 345 | 330 | 315 |
M409A1 | HEAT | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 | 354 |
MGM-51C | ATGM | 431 | 431 | 431 | 431 | 431 | 431 |
Shell details | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ammunition | Velocity in m/s |
Projectile Mass in kg |
Fuse delay
in m: |
Fuse sensitivity
in mm: |
Explosive Mass in g (TNT equivalent): |
Normalization At 30° from horizontal: |
Ricochet: | ||
0% | 50% | 100% | |||||||
XM578E1 | 1,500 | 3.7 | N/A | N/A | N/A | +1.5° | 76° | 77° | 78° |
M409A1 | 754 | 19 | 0.0 | 0.1 | 3,730 | +0° | 62° | 69° | 73° |
MGM-51C | 323 | 28 | 0.0 | 0.01 | 3,600 | +0° | 80° | 82° | 90° |
Smoke characteristic | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ammunition | Velocity in m/s |
Projectile Mass in kg |
Screen radius in m |
Screen time in s |
Screen hold time in s: |
Explosive Mass in g (TNT equivalent): |
XM410E1 | 754 | 19 | 25 | 5 | 30 | 50 |
Ammo racks
Full ammo |
1st rack empty |
2nd rack empty |
3rd rack empty |
4th rack empty |
5th rack empty |
Visual discrepancy |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
53 | XX (+XX) | XX (+XX) | XX (+XX) | XX (+XX) | 1 (+52) | No |
Machine guns
12.7 mm M85 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Pintle mount | ||||||
Capacity (Belt capacity) | Fire rate (shots/minute) |
Vertical guidance |
Horizontal guidance | |||
1,000 (200) | 577 | -9°/+65° | ±180° |
7.62 mm M73 | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coaxial mount | ||||||
Capacity (Belt capacity) | Fire rate (shots/minute) |
Vertical guidance |
Horizontal guidance | |||
6,000 (250) | 500 | N/A | N/A |
Usage in battles
Describe the tactics of playing in the vehicle, the features of using vehicles in the team and advice on tactics. Refrain from creating a "guide" - do not impose a single point of view but give the reader food for thought. Describe the most dangerous enemies and give recommendations on fighting them. If necessary, note the specifics of the game in different modes (AB, RB, SB).
Pros and cons
Pros:
- Has spaced armour
- Stock ammunition consists of the good MGM 51C "Shillelagh" Guided Missile, means no ammo costs for using it, plus a decent but inferior HEAT Shell.
- Has access to APFSDS Shells with 380 mm of penetrating Power on a 90° angled armour plate @ 10m.
- Extremely fast in both forwards and reverse.
- Fast acceleration.
- Top mounted 50 cal can allow you to damage low-flying aircraft
Cons:
- Long reload on the gun (10 seconds) which cannot be improved since it is an autoloader
- The spaced armor is not composite armor and cannot provide adequate protection against most guns of its rank
- Weak sides and LFP
- Ammo racks are large and can be easily hit, and does not have blowout panels
- Vulnerable to the rear due to raised engine deck
- Cramped interior, loss of more than one crew member more likely when penetrated
- Does not have access to the roof-mounted 20 mm like the MBT-70 which could be very useful in certain situations
History
Once it became apparent that the MBT-70 project was doomed to fail in the early ‘70s due to high costs and reliability issues, the U.S. Congress decided to cut their losses on the project by cancelling the MBT-70, and instead, diverted funding to the development of a new project called XM803.
The XM803 was, in essence, envisioned to be a “budget version” of the MBT-70. Although the new vehicle would heavily be based on the MBT-70, inheriting many of its design solutions, it would also try to drastically reduce production costs by using more conventional and only American-made parts. Although this meant that the XM803 had to give up some of its high-tech equipment in favor of lower production costs, it was projected that the influence of these changes on the XM803’s combat performance would be minimal.
Despite showing favorable performance and being seen as a promising design by the Army, the XM803 still remained a comparably expensive tank to produce even with the applied changes over the MBT-70. Moreover, neither the MBT-70 nor the XM803 seemed to offer any substantial increase in combat performance over the already in service M60 Patton to justify the high production cost. This ultimately led to the Congress cancelling work on the XM803 only a short while after the cancellation of the MBT-70. In the late 1970s, some funding of the two failed projects would later on find its way to support the development of an entirely new, but this time around, more conventional tank project. That tank of course being the legendary M1 Abrams itself.
- From Devblog
Media
An excellent addition to the article will be video guides, as well as screenshots from the game and photos.
See also
Links to the articles on the War Thunder Wiki that you think will be useful for the reader, for example:
- reference to the series of the vehicles;
- links to approximate analogues of other nations and research trees.
External links
USA medium tanks | |
---|---|
M2 | M2 |
M3 | M3 Lee · ▃Grant I |
M4 | M4 · Calliope · M4A1 · M4A1 (76) W · M4A2 · M4A2 (76) W · M4A3 (105) · M4A3 (76) W · M4/T26 |
M26 Pershing | T20 · T25 · M26 · M26 T99 · M26E1 |
M46/47/48 Patton | M46 · M46 "Tiger" · M47 · M48A1 · T54E1 · T54E2 |
M60 | M60 · M60A1 (AOS) · M60A1 RISE (P) · M60A2 · M60A3 TTS · M728 CEV · 120S |
MBT-70 | MBT-70 · XM803 |
M1 Abrams | XM1 (Chrysler) · XM1 (GM) |
M1 Abrams · M1 KVT · IPM1 | |
M1A1 · M1A1 HC · M1A1 Click-Bait | |
M1A2 Abrams · M1A2 SEP · M1A2 SEP V2 | |
Other | T95E1 |
Australia | M1A1 AIM |
Canada | M4A5 |
Israel | ▃Magach 3 (ERA) · ▃Merkava Mk.1 · ▃Merkava Mk.2B · ▃Merkava Mk.3D |
Turkey | M60 AMBT |