Gyrostabilisering började användas redan efter VK2 men det var först framåt 70-talet stabiliseringen började bli effektiv nog att kunna skjuta med precision under gång.
GeekBoy03 ritastatusreport.live/2016/07/02/swedish-qa-with-sp15/ SP15 has been building the swedish tech tree with Wargaming. ritastatusreport.live/2016/06/20/swedish-inscriptions/ These are in game.
@patjo553 Långa bandplattor på en relativt kort vagn gör att det blir hoppigt. Det infördes med tiden, när vagnen uppgraderades till 103C, minns inte vilket år.
Amazing vehicule pioneered concepts many years ahead of its time like a turbine engine , no turret, great care to crew survival , it greatly influenced models like the M1 Abrams or the Israeli Merkava. Swedish technology light years ahead of its time.
+The Axis PoweR Actually, the Kanonenjagdpanzer was a further development of the Jagdpanzer IV while this concept is much closer to the Hetzer then the KanJPz!
Inte riktigt, en tungstens pil projektil slår rakt igenom den 40mm tjocka frontala pansaren. I ett bakhåll kanske den har en fördel, men dagens stridsvagnar är oftast "ambush protected". Idag är det en stor del i en stridsvagn att den ska kunna köra och skjuta samtidigt vilket Stridsvagn 103 inte kan. Man kan ju argumentera om att dom ska bygga om gamla vagnar med modern pansar (Kompositpansar) och en starkare kanon (Rheinmetall 120 mm) men det skulle kostat alldeles för mycket.
Samma datorer som styr kanonen i moderna tanks under körning kan anpassas till skjuta under körning med s-tank , fallet kanske inte var så under 90-talet med svagare datorer men möjlig nu , och antar att explosive armour skulle faktiskt göra s-tanken mer skyddad än en leopard 2 pga lutningen och med moderna sensorer på fronten kan man spränga en eller flera i förväg när en pilprojektil kommer och få den att bara stutsa - det är ju nu mer än 60 år sen den var designad och en ny eventuell s-tank kan inte vara en kopia på denna lika lite som Leopard 2 är en kopia av Centurion.
Sorry, but much of the video shows these old guys trying to reach maximum speed - and nearly succeeding in doing so. By modern standards it was never a very agile tank. Maybe they should have shown the clutch and brake maneuver, and how we could go from "full speed ahead" to fire a 100% hit on a target 1500m away, 120 degrees off course in less than 2 seconds - aiming with the whole tank. If missing, we would have shot two more times in less than 6 seconds. By the way, everyone says that the graphics in the sight is too complicated with too much information regarding ammo type, distances, speed etc. But "all" gunners were civilians with engineering degree, and for us it was as simple as reading the newspaper - every Swedish male did 7-15 months of military training, and the army could have their pick and select people for appropriate duties. And we also had the "combat square" in the sight, an U that when it was filled with an approaching T-62 it meant that you were ok to fire and would surely receive a kill in the front, at 1600m. The tank had its drawbacks, especially night-fighting capability and engine power, but the gun is maybe the best ever issued to a tank - and I do include the newest 120mm smoothbore ones, taking accuracy and time between shots into account. We had 2,9 seconds between shots, and I have actually seen a Leopard missing once - never saw that with a 103, never mind we didn´t have all the gyros and computers, and never bothered to use the laser range finder. We knew that the range didn´t matter when firing AP, the trajectory was almost completely flat, and to hit before the enemy fired was essential, even if we didn´t kill with the first round. The second one, three seconds later, would ensure that. // 103 Gunner/driver in 1990, UN officer 1991, tank nerd for ever.
in all honesty, the S tank looks really lulzy yet could probably slug other tanks like a boss when it had its run due to the L7 105 the Brits deemed hax.
Let's be clear, the S Tank came out long before the M1 Abrams was even a concept on the drawing boards. The Swedes designed it as a purely defensive tank and nothing more and it was an intentional political move so as not to portray them as agressors . It's a great design but to compare it to an M1 Abrams, British Challenger or any other similar tank in the world in it's intended use and design is rather misleading.
they are diesel fuel cans that works as spaced armor note diesel burns slow and is only lit on fire when it come outside of the fule cans so if the fule cans are hit no - low damage is taken :D
в заголовке написано: "Strv 103, танк S, разработанный шведами и в настоящее время списанный на металлолом, с неподвижной пушкой, поршневым и газотурбинным двигателями. Да, я тоже попал на тест-драйв!"
Looks like an E-15. Yes, the StuG, Jagdpanzer and such were so successfull that the Swiss actually used them well into the 60s, and the first post-war German tanks were of the same design (Jaguar, KaJaPa, RaJaPa). Some twisted NATO doctrine called for a full "Main Battle Tank" (MBT), mainly as a bargaining pawn on the ever present negotiating table. In a manly forrested environment such as Scandinavia, it makes a lot of sense to use an ambush vehicle like this.
+Thomas Bögel They are largely outdated now since most IFVs can undertake the tasks of a Jagdpanzer/StuG with their powerful cannons and guided-missiles while simultaneously transporting soldiers aswell. There´s no need for those type of specialized vehicles anymore and operating them would just overcomplicate logistics and resupply!
Like the Israelis combat proven doctrine, this machine fullfilled the swedish needs at the time, sure it is a defensive system, in the Cold War Sweden neutrality made clear that Sweden would not be the agressor, but make no mistake si vis pacem parabellum, the Bear was and is just around the corner.
Måste idiotförklara mig själv och fråga, är det ett lyse i mynningen på kanonen eller bara jävligt reflekterande färg på ett överdrag? Alldeles där i början (Och på några andra punkter) skulle jag kunna svära på att det lyser snarare än reflekterar.
The design is fine if you are defending. The fix gun ease the autoloading process and i bet this tank can reload faster than any turreted tank in Service. But it'll be unsuitable for a modern mobile warfare.
Om jag inte har helt för mig, så var det kostnaden som avgjorde, blev för dyrt att utveckla den mer, blev billigare i längden att köpa in Tyska Leopard 2 tanks istället, citera mig inte för jag kan ha fel.
Den blev skrotad eftersom det östtyska T-72:orna vi lånade sköt tvärs igenom hela vagnen framifrån, och armén hade provat vad en modern vagn (LeClerc, M1 Abrams och Leopard 2) klarade av. Panikköp av Leopard 2 (som var bäst i test), på köpet fick vi hyra en hel hög Leo2 A4 (strv 121) för småpengar.
Yes and no. Sven Berge was well aware of the StuG's performance during the war, but the shape was inspired by tanks drawn in Donald Duck, the hydraulic alignment or horizontal gun-laying is nicked from the Char 2B, autoloader was developed from the EMIL-project that in turn was influenced by the AMX-50.
i making new ones one for the home gard to have home most like the one sized like this and contol like the same -- But i need the nr of educted men on this gun
+Hugo Lundström Haha, what? Dude, check your infos! No swedish company was remotely involved in the making of the Jagdpanzer IV! It was build by several german companies like VOMAG, Alkett and so on. StuG on the other hand is just an acronym for the german word SturmGeschütz (assault gun) and the swedish tank company who build the S Tank was not a fictional company named StuG but the famous Bofors AB.
Varför kan det inte göras en bra krigsfilm ala "Fury" med Stridsvagn S i huvudrollen? Har ingen aning vad för story det skulle bli, men med en bra studio och budget, hur jävla kul vore inte den här saken på film?
Jovars, men det är svårt att göra en actionfilm om en stridsvagn som aldrig varit i krig, i ett land som inte varit i krig med sina stridsvagnar. Fast med tanke på hur få som finns kvar, skulle man kanske kunna göre en film om någon skurk som snor en av dem och blir väldigt svår att stoppa... Ja läste för många år sedan att George Lucas hade funderat på att spela in början på "Rymdimperiet slår tillbaka" i Sverige i stället för i Norge och använda maskerade Stridsvagn S i några scener. Vet ej om det stämmer.
When deciding on what style tank to purchase, the alternatives were T(ysk) - German, A(merikansk) - American or S(pecial)/S(vensk) - Special/Swedish (sources differ a bit on the last).
Odd design. The main gun was fixed so in order to aim and fire the whole vehicle had to pivot on the tracks. Impractical and possible fatal flaw. The only good thing was the very low profile
+RedThebigOneInfantry With its rapid firing 105mm autoloader and basically impenetrable upper glacis, the S 103 would no doubt be an extremely effective tank in a defensive position.
Då kan du börja med att lära dig lite hyffs och kanske se till att klara av ett G i svenska. Du skriver som en seriefigur. Är du seriös och skriver vänligt så bemöts du vänligt och får den information du vill ha. Du tror du kan snacka lite förortsslang och förolämpa dig fram till hjälp. Glöm det grabben. Byt attityd eller stanna på den låga nivå du nu så sorgligt befinner dig på.
