PDA

View Full Version : Foreign test off the S-Tank (picture and movie)



Luno
11-18-2004, 12:40 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 didnít 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 SkŲvde at the Swedish armor combat school. After that ten tanks were shipped to the 2. RTR barracks at MŁnster 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

Hullebullen
11-18-2004, 01:16 PM
Good post!

Edit: and a nice, little vid too...

tenda
11-18-2004, 01:46 PM
...i'm grow up reading book an military magazine and on commando magazine "s" tank was one of my favourite toyz....!!!!!!!! ;)

Luno
11-18-2004, 03:40 PM
Str103 tanks served for some thirty years in Sweden :-) and it where a great tank :D

here are two picture off the last S-tank the Strv103C
(notice the fence, the Fence made the tank almost immune to HEAT-rounds)
http://img64.exs.cx/img64/5608/gardfront.jpg
http://img72.exs.cx/img72/218/gardside.jpg

Heinzi
11-18-2004, 04:22 PM
Bah this here owns the Strv 103

http://www.bwb.org/C1256DC00048AA8F/vwWEBFilesByName/ORGANISATION_WTS_IMAGES/$File/vt1-2.jpg :lol:

Thor
11-18-2004, 05:15 PM
Heinzi:
In your dreams :D

soma
11-18-2004, 06:35 PM
God damn, I really want to meet some Swedish *** army mechanics :P

ogukuo72
11-18-2004, 11:44 PM
These are more like tank destroyers, rather than tanks, right?

Heinzi
11-19-2004, 04:27 AM
These are more like tank destroyers, rather than tanks, right?

Yes, I think the anti infantry capabilities are limited compared to tanks.

Luno
11-19-2004, 05:01 AM
These are more like tank destroyers, rather than tanks, right?

Yes, I think the anti infantry capabilities are limited compared to tanks.

And why is the anti infantry capabilities limited on the S-tank?

Heinzi
11-19-2004, 05:04 AM
These are more like tank destroyers, rather than tanks, right?

Yes, I think the anti infantry capabilities are limited compared to tanks.

And why is the anti infantry capabilities limited on the S-tank?

Not turret ;)

With a tank you can make drive by shooting :D

Luno
11-19-2004, 05:06 AM
These are more like tank destroyers, rather than tanks, right?

Yes, I think the anti infantry capabilities are limited compared to tanks.

And why is the anti infantry capabilities limited on the S-tank?

Not turret ;)

With a tank you can make drive by shooting :D

Ahh I see :D but you have a machine gun mounted on the commander cupola that can be used from the inside off the tank for that reason ;)
And donít forget that the tank also have twin coaxial machinegun in the front :D

Tributal
11-19-2004, 10:11 AM
But a definate shortcoming of the S-tank is that it cannot fire in any other direction than the one it is travelling in. But, luckily Sweden is short on deserts where such capability would be "nice". ;)

Werewolf01
11-19-2004, 10:34 AM
Don't knock the concept. Having no turret, the entire German series of Sturmgeschutzen performed yeoman's work during WWII and some of the leading aces of the war rode them (including Michael Wittmann). The S -Tank doesn't present much of a target either. The US has been tinkering with the idea of an S-Tank with an actuated gun or an unmanned turret for years.

Luno
11-19-2004, 11:09 AM
@Werewolf01

I agree with you a Strv 103 in a fire position is hard to spot. And when the threat consisted mainly of T-55 and the odd T-62 it would have been a real hard nut to crack while at the same tome being capable of damage to those foolish enough to positon themselves in front of the gun barrel.

OldRecon
11-19-2004, 11:53 AM
Nice creative concept the S-tank. No doubt about that. But better for defense in close country terrain with a good choice of hull down positions as is norm in Swedish terrain.
Hard to knock out from the front, but vulnerable like any "tank-hunter" to suspension damage.
Also the powerpack of the S-tank could have been better than the combined diesel/gas-turbine solution, though a pioneer tank with the latter type of propulsion.
There was also a 50-ton SPG in service with a less than satisfactory engine (way too underpowered) though it was one of the first SPG's with auto-loader in service anywhere.

OldRecon
11-19-2004, 11:57 AM
God damn, I really want to meet some Swedish *** army mechanics :P

:lol:
*** in Swedish have 2 meanings.
Either the one you think of :roll: or it can be the Sedish word for the number "six"/6.
Makes for som nice wordplay :lol:.

OldRecon
03-15-2005, 09:10 AM
Found this link to an analysis of the combat value of the Strv 103 (http://www.forsvarsframjandet.org/FMF-98-4/Strv-103.htm) Unfortunately it's in Swedish only, but if you can get someone to translate you will :lol:. Does not paint a particularly rosy view of the S-tank.

Thor
03-16-2005, 04:53 AM
..and here's an article that counters the first one. :)

http://www.forsvarsframjandet.org/fmf-03-3/Strv_103_-_ett_Ess_S_i_stridsvagnsleken.html

supercontra
03-16-2005, 06:59 AM
During those times the accuracy when firing on the move was not good enough to offset the STRV-103's inability since it had stabilized sights and range finding so the stand-still period was very short. Now the situation is totally different though which is why the S was discarded for the STRV-121/122