Talk:M48 Chaparral

MIM-72 vs M48 vs M730

Sorry, but I don't believe that this article is well written, as IMO it suggests that the MIM-72 surface-to-air missile, the M48 missile system and M730 carrier are all one and the same. Furthermore, it makes no mention of the fact that the M52 Launcher Station, was not only fitted to the M730 guided missile equipment carrier, but was also mounted to a trailer which was towed by other vehicles (including the M730) and set up as a ground-based battery.

I suggest that those responsible for writing/maintaining this article (re)read the following manuals to determine exactly what is what, and amend the article accordingly (especially so as the article is currently flagged as requiring further citation):

• TM-9-1410-585-24P: Organizational, Direct Support, and General Support Maintenance for Guided Missile System, Intercept-Aerial MIM-72
• TM-9-1425-1586-10-1: System Description of Improved Chaparral Air Defense Guided Missile System
• TM 9-1450-585-34P: Direct Support and General Support Maintenance for Carrier, Guided Missile Equipment M730
• TM 55-2350-224-14: Transport Guidance M113 Family of Vehicles

Basically, the article as it currently exists should NOT be titled "MIM-72 Chaparral" but instead should be "M48 Chaparral" or to use its full title, Air Defense Guided Missile System, which I admit would be overkill for the title).

Regards, Blammy1 (talk) 23:22, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

PS 'MIM' stands for "mobile interceptor missile", which should be a clue that from the title of this article it should not be describing the whole system nor a self-propelled launch vehicle; basically, this is two (or more) articles in one. Blammy1 (talk) 02:05, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

@Blammy1 you'll be happy to notice that the move/rename to M48 Chaparral was performed by @Toadspike at my request. Having done some research into the Chaparral I was very unenthused by the state of the wiki article. RulanIndustries (talk) 14:46, 7 July 2025 (UTC)

Technical move request

@RulanIndustries, I've performed the move you requested. Could you please do the post-move cleanup? I am not familiar enough with this topic to decide, for instance, what the first sentence of the lead should say and which parts should be bolded. Toadspike [Talk] 12:34, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

@Toadspike, thank you for the move. I've done a once-through on the article and will check in again later. RulanIndustries (talk) 20:07, 6 July 2025 (UTC)

M48 variants

While the article has been moved to M48 Chaparral, it does not include any discussion of different variants of the M48. Jane's Land-Based Air Defence gives the following versions: M48 Chaparral, M48A1 Chaparral, M48A2 Improved Chaparral and M48A3 Improved Chaparral. It states that M48A2 has the forward looking infra-red sensor added, giving a night and bad weather capability, while the M48A3 has the FLIR and the improved RISE power train (which makes the carrier vehicle a M730A2). It does not indicate the difference between the M48 and M48A1 (or say anything about the presumed M730 or M730A1 carrier vehicles). There is also the M85 towed system, with it being unclear whether they were fitted with the FLIR. Has anyone got access to reliable sources that can fill these gaps?Nigel Ish (talk) 15:54, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

@Nigel Ish Do you have any reason to doubt the reliability of Jane's Land-Based Air Defence? Seems like a reliable enough source to me, which should allow you to add this information yourself. Toadspike [Talk] 19:39, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Oh Jane's is perfectly reliable - its just that are gaps that Jane's doesn't cover which we need answers to if the article is going to be cohenrent.Nigel Ish (talk) 20:33, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

TM 9-1425-1585-10-1 for the M48A1 and TM 9-1450-585-10 for the M730 & M730A1 are the best public sources, everything from the M48A2 and M730A2 onwards remains either fully or partially restricted. RulanIndustries (talk) 20:09, 6 July 2025 (UTC)