Military Review

American tank 50-s got a chance for a new life

In the arsenal of the Iranian army for a long time were Tanks M-47, the production of which was completed more than 60 years ago. As part of military assistance to the allies, the Americans delivered these military vehicles to various countries. Including to Iran.

American tank 50-s got a chance for a new life

In 70, the Iranian military unified the M-47 with the more modern M-60А1. True, the standard weapons - 90-mm gun - remained. This tank was actively used during the war with Iraq. And if he somehow could resist the T-54 and T-55, then during the collisions with the T-62 and T-72 suffered losses. A large number of M-47 was captured by Iraq as trophies.

In recent years, these tanks were withdrawn from combat units, but since Iran’s resources were thrown on the development of missile technology and the purchase of modern armored vehicles, in fact, was reduced to a minimum, it was decided to upgrade the diversified tank fleet.

Used backlog, obtained in collaboration with the Slovenian company "Fotona", which since the time of the SFRY, made sights for Yugoslav armored vehicles, in particular, for M-84 tanks.

The Iranians were able to establish the production of a fire control system (FCS) EFCS3-55, which, judging by the name, was intended for the modernization of T-55 and T-62 tanks.

Initially, this MSA was installed on the part of the upgraded captured T-55 and purchased in China Type 59. Then it was mounted on tanks M-60, T-72 and Zulfikar produced in Iran.

The EFCS3-55 includes a laser range finder (range to 10 000 m, distance determination accuracy +/- 5 m) and an electronic ballistic computer that provides various types of projectiles. The probability of hitting the target in this case reaches 80%. The tank is equipped with a day sight (10 multiple magnification) with a 6 ° field of view and a night sight (7 multiple), whose field of view is also 6 °.

The Slovenian system is stabilized in two planes, the night channel has better target detection and aiming. It is more protected from various interferences.

Judging by the photos, EFCS3-55 is installed on the upgraded M-47. Show of the updated cars took place the other day. In addition to the new LMS, the tank received an 105-mm gun, side screens. The design of the tower has been significantly improved, apparently, there is currently multi-layered booking. Also replaced the means of communication.

Even in an updated form, the M-47 is significantly inferior to the armored vehicles of its neighbors, and its use is possible only in secondary directions.
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. JoylyRoger
    JoylyRoger April 22 2014 10: 10
    There will still be less design potential than the T-54
    1. olegff68
      olegff68 April 22 2014 10: 21
      What kind of T54 is there ....... With the 34th one can still be compared, which is still being modernized in some countries.
      MECH.WATER. He smiled .... they had no accidents with chopping off the head by turning the tower ???
      1. SS68SS
        SS68SS April 22 2014 10: 53
        Quote: olegff68
        What is the T54 ....... With the 34th you can still compare

        And how similar to the 34th, straight twins, only dads are different .... lol
        1. bistrov.
          bistrov. April 22 2014 11: 23
          Quote: SS68SS
          And how similar to the 34th, straight twins, only dads are different ...

          In fact, after the Second World War, almost the whole world switched to the Soviet principles of the layout of the tank, the engine and transmission in the rear, weapons and crew in the front. (The Germans and Americans, until the end of World War II, used the scheme engine in the rear, transmission in front). are Israel and Sweden, which created their own designs. However, the Swedes abandoned their tank "S", a feature of which was the absence of a turret, and switched to the British "centurions". Israel continues to use its "Merkava" (Chariot of Fire) of a rather original design. the opinion that this is one of the most protected tanks, so it is not surprising that the M-47 resembles the T-34.
          1. Andrey77
            Andrey77 April 22 2014 12: 07
            And it is not known whose layout is better in modern warfare when each soldier has a one-time RPG. I like Merkava.
            1. inkass_98
              inkass_98 April 22 2014 12: 28
              Quote: Andrey77
              I like Merkava.

              A good tank, but only for its own DB theater. For some reason, you will not meet them in the arms market, unlike small arms and drones. Too specific car. It would be interesting to look at her somewhere on the black soil.
              1. Andrey77
                Andrey77 April 22 2014 13: 30
                Even as you meet. You have not monitored the market. As well as PP ultrasound. He is in demand. I didn’t look for Merkava’s video in the internet, but I think everything is in order with the maneuverability - who can rake out of sand and from black earth. The converse, alas, does not work.
                1. Fedya
                  Fedya April 22 2014 20: 03
                  And from the swamp? Or quicksand, but there’s any amen to any tank.
            2. Predator
              Predator April 22 2014 12: 51
              This is how you will use it, in an open field I will take out a company of T-34 companies with all the RPGs!
          2. shuhartred
            shuhartred April 22 2014 13: 33
            Quote: bistrov.
            .After the Second World War, almost the whole world switched to the Soviet principles of layout of the tank, the engine and transmission at the rear, weapons and crew in front

            Wait, wasn’t the French FT-17 the first tank with this configuration?
          3. Pimply
            Pimply April 22 2014 14: 42
            Quote: bistrov.
            "Merkava" (Fire chariot

            Merkava is just a chariot. Not fiery
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. domokl
      domokl April 22 2014 10: 25
      It seems to me that it’s not even the potential ... Everything is practically outdated ... Replacing an aggregate or even a system almost does not increase the real capabilities of the machine ... They are modernizing more for complacency ...
      1. sergey72
        sergey72 April 22 2014 11: 02
        Quote: domokl
        More for complacency upgrade ...

        But the upgraded machine has no combat value ...
        1. The comment was deleted.
  2. svp67
    svp67 April 22 2014 10: 11
    Well, how many do not upgrade it in such a way until the cannon’s power is increased, this tank can’t be recognized as a full-fledged combat unit, only if in a police operation
    1. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith April 22 2014 12: 33
      Quote: svp67
      Well, how many do not upgrade it in such a way until the cannon’s power is increased, this tank can’t be recognized as a full-fledged combat unit, only if in a police operation

      M47 had a gun 90mm, this modernized model has become 105mm.
  3. Giant thought
    Giant thought April 22 2014 10: 12
    Not from a good life did the Iranians go to these events. All these modifications will not be able to satisfy modern requirements for a long time, although even now they only partially satisfy them. And there, you look, they will come to an agreement with ours, but they will buy military equipment from us.
  4. Duke
    Duke April 22 2014 10: 13
    Use what's under your arm.
  5. kopar
    kopar April 22 2014 10: 17
    Guys, looking at this tank head-on, it reminded me very much of the T-34!
  6. Russ69
    Russ69 April 22 2014 10: 18
    And what should Iranians do if they are sanctioned on all sides, especially in the military sphere.
  7. avt
    avt April 22 2014 10: 22
    Quote: Duke
    Use what's under your arm

    Yeah. In addition to missiles, you can also make catapults. From hopelessness and great show-offs this is. Instead of buying, at least more expensive and roundabout ways, at least 72 second-hand , are engaged in this sadomasochism with old, American rubbish. She pays twice.
    1. kotvov
      kotvov April 22 2014 10: 57
      Yes, they divorced them into grandmothers. Yes, how do you modernize the ancient junk. It is clear that the Iranians are trying to strengthen the army, but that it fell, it disappeared, I will repeat the divorce again.
  8. ZU-23
    ZU-23 April 22 2014 10: 26
    Will go in order to terrify on armored personnel carriers smile .
  9. vsoltan
    vsoltan April 22 2014 10: 32
    The armor is strong and our tanks are fast .... 34-ki fought pretty well in Yugoslavia
    1. Terrible ensign
      Terrible ensign April 22 2014 10: 37
      When did you fight? ..
      1. s.cot
        s.cot April 22 2014 11: 13
        In the 90s noted. Chronicle somewhere seen.
  10. Terrible ensign
    Terrible ensign April 22 2014 10: 42
    Smiled ...
    That's for sure, absolutely not our way. It remains only to sympathize with the Iranian tankers who have to serve on this iron. Even the Turks removed these tanks from service as far back as, in my opinion, in the 80s. And here the question is not in stinginess, but rather in poverty.
    1. kotvov
      kotvov April 22 2014 10: 58
  11. sub307
    sub307 April 22 2014 10: 43
    Well, nothing like that. "Two birds with one stone are killed":
    - "thrift to thrifty" is performed;
    - the notorious "secondary" directions are covered (taking into account that the priority of directions tends to change qualitatively over time).
  12. Kovrovsky
    Kovrovsky April 22 2014 10: 52
    "Abrams for the Poor" wassat
  13. 0255
    0255 April 22 2014 11: 43
    Let the Chinese put their tanks for them - they were selling weapons to the Iranian despite sanctions
  14. kocclissi
    kocclissi April 22 2014 11: 46
    Shushpanzer, the invention fiction is cunning! When to a new one, there is no dough and you are not so blind!
  15. propolsky
    propolsky April 22 2014 11: 49
    Hunger is not an aunt! What else to say...
    1. Andrey77
      Andrey77 April 22 2014 12: 10
      Maybe it's better not to create at all than to spend the loot on such a freak?
  16. Robert Nevsky
    Robert Nevsky April 22 2014 12: 12
    Once built great!
  17. Blad_21617
    Blad_21617 April 22 2014 12: 36
    After reading the title of the article, the first thought was about Ukraine, I decided that they would be sold at a discount ...
  18. Roman 1977
    Roman 1977 April 22 2014 12: 38
    During the Iran-Iraq war, several fairly large tank battles took place:
    For example, a battle in the Kharhi Valley (January 1981 year) near the town of Susengherd. On both sides there were 300 tanks. In January 1981, Iran’s reinforced 16 Panzer Division (300 English Chieftain and American M60 tanks), with the support of the 55 Parachute Brigade, prepared a counterattack near Susengherd (Iran) to clear the road to Ahwaz and remove the Iraqi siege from the city of Abadan. Due to the rainy season that began, the extension of the Iranian troops was a sea of ​​mud, which impeded the implementation of maneuvers and the supply of troops. The Iraqi command foresaw the enemy’s intentions and advanced a tank division (300 T-62 tanks) towards it.
    On January 5, Iraqi reconnaissance helicopters detected the movement of three tank columns and a parachute brigade that followed. The commander of the Iraqi division quickly concentrated all his forces at the village of Akhmet-Abad in the Kharkhe plain. In the first phase of the battle, combat helicopters took part from both sides, but then the opponents got close enough that the use of aviation became impossible. The site for the offensive was unsuccessfully chosen by the Iranians. The heavy Chiefs were bogged down in soft soil, even more soggy from the torrential rains. On January 6, an advanced Iranian tank brigade reached the Iraqi positions. Considering that there was only a small cover in front of them, the Iranian tanks attacked on the move, the Iraqi units immediately withdrew, as a result of which the first Iranian brigade was in a prepared fire bag and was attacked from the flanks. Iranian losses totaled more than a hundred tanks. The second and third brigades, acting in isolation and without infantry support, fell into a trap later, on January 7-8. By this time, the battlefield had turned into a continuous quagmire, and the opponents were so close that the aviation could not provide them with support. The Iranian troops, realizing the riskiness of their position, were forced to retreat. Iraq announced that it destroyed or captured 214 Iranian tanks, while Iran admitted the loss of only 88 vehicles. In the course of the battle it was finally clear that the 115-mm armor-piercing sub-caliber projectile of the T-62 tank can reliably penetrate the frontal armor of the Chieftain tanks, and further Iranian tankers avoided a head-on collision with modern Soviet-made tanks.
    In February 1986, a powerful Iranian tank offensive near Dizful was stopped by strikes by Iraqi fighter-bombers. Iranian armored forces suffered heavy losses in the battles for Ahfaz in March. Iraqi intelligence revealed a large concentration of Iranian armored vehicles, and 56 aircraft were raised for the strike, mostly MiG-23BN. On the battlefield, according to Iraqi data, up to 500 Chieftain, M60 and M113 armored personnel carriers remained, some of which went to the Iraqis intact in the form of trophies.
    1. Andrey77
      Andrey77 April 22 2014 13: 18
      And why should Iraq be praised? You do not give reverse examples. Why? Turntables used to be able to shoot tanks, but now the situation has changed radically - MANPADS, although Strela-3, about the Needles are silently available to any state.
      1. andj61
        andj61 April 22 2014 13: 28
        It is not Iraq that is praised, but domestic weapons!
        1. Andrey77
          Andrey77 April 22 2014 13: 35
          Give reverse examples. For objectivity.
          1. Roman 1977
            Roman 1977 April 22 2014 14: 09
            Quote: Andrey77
            Give reverse examples. For objectivity.

            I can’t bring you the opposite examples, unfortunately, there are many photos of wrecked and captured Iraqi tanks: T-72, T-62, T-54 / 55, and their Chinese clones T-59 and T-69.

            padded Iraqi T-72

            padded Iraqi T-62

            Damaged Iraqi T-55A tank (late years of production, with mounted anti-aircraft machine gun)
            In addition, do not forget that at the beginning of the war, the bulk of Iranian armored vehicles were Western-made tanks, which Great Britain and the USA supplied to their ally the Iranian Shah: American M-47, M-48 (about 400 tanks of both types), M-60A1 ( 460 cars); British "Chieftain" (700 tanks of variants Mk.3 and Mk.5R.) and light "Scorpion" (delivered 130 vehicles, currently in service 80). Lack of spare parts, as well as losses forced the Iranians to look for replenishment of their tank fleet, even in such exotic places as the DPRK, for example, in 1982-1985. Iran was supplied with 150 units of the licensed North Korean version of the T-62 "Cheonmaho".
            All this led to the fact that there were no tank battles similar to the battles of the Arab-Israeli wars during the Iran-Iraq war, the only 2 attempts by the Iranians to use tanks in large numbers ended in failure for them.
            The nature of the battles can be judged by the fact that by the end of the 1980 of the year Iraq had captured Iranian M25 tanks as 60 trophies, and for the 1984 year Iraq had 200 M47 / M48 captured tanks.
            Tucker, AR (1988). Armored warfare in the Gulf. Armed Forces, May p. 226

            In 1989, Iraq transferred to Jordan approximately 120 of the captured Chieftain tanks. Most of them were in combat damage and needed serious repairs, but about 30 vehicles were in combat-ready condition. Iraq decided to sell the captured vehicles due to difficulties with the maintenance of tanks of British design, since the entire tank fleet of this Arab state consisted of Soviet or Chinese vehicles. Also, Jordan was donated 19 scorpion trophy light tanks
  19. kelevra
    kelevra April 22 2014 14: 54
    I don’t understand, there’s enough money to buy our S-300 and much more property, and there’s not enough money for tanks. Of course, you shouldn’t refuse these, you can just create a tank part of a limited action, for example, so that these tanks operate in one or another special operation. And when serious battles begin. for this you can buy more modern T-80.
    1. zennon
      zennon April 22 2014 16: 58
      I don’t understand, there is enough money to buy our S-300

      AND WHAT, PURCHASED? request
  20. twviewer
    twviewer April 22 2014 15: 19
    Quote: svp67
    Well, how many do not upgrade it in such a way until the cannon’s power is increased, this tank can’t be recognized as a full-fledged combat unit, only if in a police operation

    it’s better to hide behind armor, to be able to suppress firing points (compare the assault on Pervomaisky and Aleppo). what is wrong that the Iranians know for sure against WHO they need tanks ?!

    PS. and successful tank battles, I’m not remembering something over the past 30 years :) share it if that.
  21. Sigizbarn
    Sigizbarn April 23 2014 20: 29
    A triplex I win not provided