Stridsvagn 103 aka s-tank?

[pide2020 0]

has anyone made one of these? i think they're retired now, but its a cool tank from the swedes- really low profile, it seems like a good defensive tank as compared to offensive like the abrams etc... any thoughts, i dont know enough aboot it, but i like its looks :-)

http://w1.500.telia.com/~u50015076/Strv103a.jpg

[pide2020 0]

well?..

[CrunchyFrog 0]

Probably not...

[pide2020 0]

well they should..

[dkraver 1]

There's a swedish army mod called Operation White Night, but its not at there unit list but htey have a forum where they have a area for what people think should be in it. Might be worth a try.

[cam0flage 0]

Damn, that's like really low profile ... the crew must be swedish midgets or something

[pide2020 0]

I was thinking that it sort of fits in with their philosophy, arent they meant to be neutral?. ie. keep to themselves unless attacked , this tank sort of suits them i think excellent defensive stuff, not so aggressive as t 72/80, abrams etc, this tank looks like it could sit on hill in the alps un-noticed, and then bite back if needed out of no where- who's going to notice just a barrel sticking out of the horizon, go swiss!! and they make good knives:-)

[cam0flage 0]

Uhm ... that tank is from Sweden, not Switzerland.

[pide2020 0]

i dont care :-)

[Bergmania 0]

Thank god we now have the worlds most advanced MBT (Strv.122) as the POS Strv.103 is utter crap.. Why build a tank that can't be used to attack (It looks like a tank killer but it is a MBT) it can't fire on the move and is a big target even when dug in.. and easy to spot as when you fire up the engines a huge plume of heat rises up.. even the Centurion is a better tank..

If you can read swedish here is what a swedish colonel have to say about the STANK

http://www.forsvarsframjandet.org/FMF-98-4/Strv-103.htm

[GeneralMortars 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why build a tank that can't be used to attack (It looks like a tank killer but it is a MBT) it can't fire on the move and is a big target even when dug in.. and easy to spot as when you fire up the engines a huge plume of heat rises up.. even the Centurion is a better tank..

<span id='postcolor'>

Yeah, probably... But the overall odd design of the tank makes it sumwhat interesting i think! Perhaps if i'll find the time sumwhen, i'll do one myself, coz i love odd tanks eventhough their battle performance may be shit

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

If you can read swedish here is what a swedish colonel have to say about the STANK

<span id='postcolor'>

Yes. Perhaps those swedish colonel want to warn me?? Hmm.. He failed, coz my swedish knowledge isn't that awesome

Regards

GM

[Eviscerator 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Thank god we now have the worlds most advanced MBT (Strv.122)<span id='postcolor'>

i think a lot of the world is going to argue that one...

are you sure its better than the latest Abrams/Challenger/Merkava/Leopard?

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Eviscerator @ Nov. 21 2002,23:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">are you sure its better than the latest Abrams/Challenger/Merkava/Leopard?<span id='postcolor'>

Stridsvagn 122 is an improved Leopard II

[Eviscerator 0]

and it has better armour than the challenger 2?(undoubtedly the best armour in nato) or a better gun than the M1A2/3?

(i have no idea, ive never heard anything about this tank)

[dkraver 1]

Well the STRV.122 is a Leopard 2A5 S with 3 tons of additional armour primarily applied to the front and top build under licence in sweden. It also features a new computerised command and information system like the one featured in the latest version of the abrams (friend/foe display and so on). Its also under consideration fitting a defensive aid suite to their tanks, along with engine emission signature management, laser detection, crew laser protection and an obscurant or smoke dispenser.

[pzvg 0]

Y'all bear in mind, That be a swedish OFFICER saying the tank is a POS, as in the same OFFICER who'd be telling his Government they need funding for a NEW, IMPROVED tank.

If they work anything like procurement in the US Military, they'll claim any number of faults, especially the well documented ones that were noticed in preacceptance tests but were dismissed because that was the NEW, IMPROVED tank

[Bergmania 0]

I think that most swedes that served on the 103 agrees that it isn't a very usefull mbt.. It became better at the last upgrade (103C) but the tank had some serious flaws..

The 103 was designed in the late 50's.. first delivered to the army 61.. so yes any officer would say that we needed a new tank anyways.. as the 103 is old,underarmed and underarmoured..

[granQ 293]

the s103 is like a peace tank.. it was madefor defending sweden and not making war with others. Too bad it sucked if the enemy took some ground of sweden.. then how should we attack it?

Sweden technology is often real cool.. too bad that sometimes in war gun power is better then some nice way of a firing system.. in other words.. the technology behind the strv103 rocks.. the preformence sucks

the low profile is not much lower the standard for the driver in modern MBT's.. Strv103 just removed the turnet.

some info in russian:

http://www.mainbattletanks.czweb.org/Tanky/Strv103.htm

and some in english:

http://w1.500.telia.com/~u50015076/strv_103.html

and last thing.. don't think you can do it.. well you can but it would not be a very good simulator of it.. like the loader was also the driver when reversing for aiming it can be done with some imagination...

[Bergmania 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">like the loader was also the driver when reversing <span id='postcolor'>

He is just the reverse driver.. the gun is autoloaded..

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">the low profile is not much lower the standard for the driver in modern MBT's<span id='postcolor'>

The problem with the 103 when used in a dug in position it shows more of it than a Centurion or T55 as the gun is fixed to the tank..

And if you want to read up on the Strv.122 (Swedish LeoII)

http://w1.500.telia.com/~u50015076/strv_122.html

[granQ 293]

ahh right.. he was the radio guy then too ? he had some other thing then just drive back..

and berg still waiting for a reply on the PM i sendt you..