Luno
11-18-2004, 01:40 PM
I hope I not gone bore you to death by this thread. What I want to show by this thread is that a tank didn’t need to have a turret in the late seventies :D And it is interesting reading.
Foreign visitors expressed great interest in the Strv 103. They came from Belgium, Denmark, Switzerland, England, France, Holland, Yugoslavia, Norway, Poland, the Soviet union, West Germany, USA and Austria to see this new design. Apart from this the "S" was tested by three foreign armies. First out was Norway that in 1967 for two weeks conducted comparative observation tests with the Leopard 1. With closed hatches the "S" spotted more targets and fired faster than the Leopard. With open hatches the results were reversed. The main reason for the norwegians to buy the Leopard instead of the Strv 103 was not that because they thought it a better tank, but since the Leopard was manufactured in so large series for half of NATO it was much cheaper.
The american and british tests of the "S" were not to determine if they should buy it or not but to test the concept of a turretless tank. It was cheaper to borrow tanks from Sweden than to produce their own testriggs. In April - September 1968 two Strv 103 were tested at the british armored school in Bovington. Two Swedish officers trained three crews for six weeks and two mechanics from Bofors had the technical responsibility. The report after the tests contained phrases such as:
"- The "S"-tank must be considered to be a tank."
"- The turretless concept of the "S"-tank holds considerable advantage over turreted tanks
The next trial was with the BAOR 1973. Five officers trained ten british crews for six weeks in Skövde at the Swedish armor combat school. After that ten tanks were shipped to the 2. RTR barracks at Münster in Germany. Three Swedish officers came along as observers and *** Swedish army mechanics were responsible for maintainance and repairs. 19 well contolled tactical tests with platoons and company were conducted together with Chieftain units. After these tests 9 consecutive days of maneuvers began with the tanks rolling 900 km alltogether. Availability never fel under 90 % and on every morning ten battle ready "S"-tanks stood ready. The Chieftain never came close to this figures.Since the british simulator equipment was used a judgement can be made in different battle situations. The report afterwards states.
"- It has not been possible to prove any disadvantage in the "S" inability to fire on the move."
In 1975 two "S"-tanks were tested the american armor center at Fort Knox. One Swedish officer and two mechanichs from Bofors came along and trained seven crews in seven weeks. The tests were well planned and conducted in a positive atmosphere. The results showed that the Strv 103 was more accurate that the M60A1E3 but fired on an average 0,5 seconds slower. The report states that the Strv 103 was well suited both for offensive and defensive action. The Swedish method of training was well appreciated at Fort Knox and the "S" fullfilled the high expectations the americans had.
Short movie
http://w1.500.telia.com/~u50015560/mbt103klutchbrk.wmv
http://img55.exs.cx/img55/2403/11206.jpg
http://img55.exs.cx/img55/277/11207.jpg
http://img55.exs.cx/img55/1127/00116.jpg
Foreign visitors expressed great interest in the Strv 103. They came from Belgium, Denmark, Switzerland, England, France, Holland, Yugoslavia, Norway, Poland, the Soviet union, West Germany, USA and Austria to see this new design. Apart from this the "S" was tested by three foreign armies. First out was Norway that in 1967 for two weeks conducted comparative observation tests with the Leopard 1. With closed hatches the "S" spotted more targets and fired faster than the Leopard. With open hatches the results were reversed. The main reason for the norwegians to buy the Leopard instead of the Strv 103 was not that because they thought it a better tank, but since the Leopard was manufactured in so large series for half of NATO it was much cheaper.
The american and british tests of the "S" were not to determine if they should buy it or not but to test the concept of a turretless tank. It was cheaper to borrow tanks from Sweden than to produce their own testriggs. In April - September 1968 two Strv 103 were tested at the british armored school in Bovington. Two Swedish officers trained three crews for six weeks and two mechanics from Bofors had the technical responsibility. The report after the tests contained phrases such as:
"- The "S"-tank must be considered to be a tank."
"- The turretless concept of the "S"-tank holds considerable advantage over turreted tanks
The next trial was with the BAOR 1973. Five officers trained ten british crews for six weeks in Skövde at the Swedish armor combat school. After that ten tanks were shipped to the 2. RTR barracks at Münster in Germany. Three Swedish officers came along as observers and *** Swedish army mechanics were responsible for maintainance and repairs. 19 well contolled tactical tests with platoons and company were conducted together with Chieftain units. After these tests 9 consecutive days of maneuvers began with the tanks rolling 900 km alltogether. Availability never fel under 90 % and on every morning ten battle ready "S"-tanks stood ready. The Chieftain never came close to this figures.Since the british simulator equipment was used a judgement can be made in different battle situations. The report afterwards states.
"- It has not been possible to prove any disadvantage in the "S" inability to fire on the move."
In 1975 two "S"-tanks were tested the american armor center at Fort Knox. One Swedish officer and two mechanichs from Bofors came along and trained seven crews in seven weeks. The tests were well planned and conducted in a positive atmosphere. The results showed that the Strv 103 was more accurate that the M60A1E3 but fired on an average 0,5 seconds slower. The report states that the Strv 103 was well suited both for offensive and defensive action. The Swedish method of training was well appreciated at Fort Knox and the "S" fullfilled the high expectations the americans had.
Short movie
http://w1.500.telia.com/~u50015560/mbt103klutchbrk.wmv
http://img55.exs.cx/img55/2403/11206.jpg
http://img55.exs.cx/img55/277/11207.jpg
http://img55.exs.cx/img55/1127/00116.jpg