Strv 103 BAR ARMOUR SIMULATION | T-62 vs S-Tank | 115mm 3BM3 APFSDS Armour Piercing Simulation

Рет қаралды 644,317

2 жыл бұрын

Some Swedish Strv 103's featured bar armour at the front of the hull to protect against shaped charge munitions as well as damaging or distorting kinetic projectiles. A potential threat to the Strv 103 was the Soviet T-62; the first tank to enter service with a smoothbore gun and fire Armour-Piercing Fin-Stabilised Discarding-Sabot (APFSDS) ammunition.
The 115mm smoothbore gun provided the APFSDS with an exceptional muzzle velocity of over 1600m/s, giving it more penetration than most NATO tanks of the time. It's initial APFSDS round (3BM3) featured a maraging steel body (~650BHN), a tungsten carbide slug, a soft steel cap, and a steel windshield and fins. The slug provided high penetration against vertical armour but could be easily deflected by sloped (or bar) armour.
The simulation shows the 3BM3 impacting the Strv 103 at 1km range, at a lower portion of the upper plate. This area of the upper plate doesnt have the ribbed armour, but instead has spare track links on it. (This area was chosen to save computational time as to hit the ribbed armour the round would have to fly substantially further)
Info on the bars: fromtheswedisharchives.wordpr...
Amazing thumbnail model from: Degitt22 sketchfab.com/3d-models/strv-...

Пікірлер: 439

@SYsimulations 2 жыл бұрын

I genuinely didnt expect this to go through, but I suspect a hit higher up wouldnt perforate the armour due to a larger air gap and the ribbed armour

@oim8254 2 жыл бұрын

Hi, a while ago I sent you an email offering OC armour design to test against APFSDS. Take a look at it if you're interested. 😊 Also dude, you definitely deserve Patreon page for your efforts on the channel.

@ericwilson5679 2 жыл бұрын

Could you do T-62 vs Is7 please?

@hotlanta35 2 жыл бұрын

Extreme sloped armor is great but you have to make it thicker if you expect to survive against a MBT

@I_dunno_man_but 2 жыл бұрын

@@hotlanta35 the thing is that this tank was designed in the 1950s while spicy needles were invented in the 60s. When this tank was designed, almost nothing could penetrate it from the front.

@_Astroh_ 2 жыл бұрын

Could you do one with the Centurion mk. 5 AVRE where you pen the bulldozer blade and then the tank

@TheAmazingCowpig 2 жыл бұрын

The dynamics of post-WWII sabot rounds and destabilizing them as a form of protection never stops being fascinating. While WWII was generally about "make armor thicker, and slope may make the impact less optimal", Cold War ammo vs armor is so interesting with "stopping a lot more while trying to do it with a lot less", and that's just wild.

@thehammurabichode7994 Жыл бұрын

I thought WW1 was more about "Make it thicker"?

@oerlikon20mm29 Жыл бұрын

@@thehammurabichode7994 lol WWI was just “make it move at a speed faster than I can walk”

@sol2544 Жыл бұрын

@@thehammurabichode7994 WW1 is just "Make it"

@tylersmith1468 Ай бұрын

Well, post ww2 rounds could go through like 300mm+ of RHA. So you'd start needing like a half metre thick metal box, which is kinda hard on the engine and transmission. So making the armor just thicker very quickly becomes impractical for anything that isn't a bunker.

@Prime_Sisyphus 15 күн бұрын

@@sol2544 interwar is just, slap as many guns as possible on it

@nicolasrouvreau8365 2 жыл бұрын

For a plate of only 40 mm, it still very impressive

@Shmuzznik 2 жыл бұрын

Slopege :D

@acog_is_good1650 2 жыл бұрын

they would still survive cuz it would hit the engine the crew compartment is more back

@ExcavationNation 2 жыл бұрын

It's because it's sloped DUH

@albinskold8792 2 жыл бұрын

@@acog_is_good1650 thing would probably just slip right trough everything if it managed to pierce, idk tho i'm not a engineer and i dont design armored engines or heard of

@ZETH_27 2 жыл бұрын

and it wouldn't even kill the crew. the shrapnel would be stopped by the engine block and/or the internal armour shield. And since the vehicle has 2 engines, even if one is taken out of commission, the vehicle can still counter-fire or retreat.

@thefunfactman6098 Жыл бұрын

And this is why my STRV 103 is still one of my favorite tanks. Such a unique design.

@henrik3291 Жыл бұрын

Uniques: yes, totally worthless: yes

@Tjalle Жыл бұрын

@@henrik3291 not wordless, for the porpoise it was build for

@anhaltboyzrule1704 Жыл бұрын

@@henrik3291 This tank is not used for head on combat, as it's a defensive tank. you probably wouldn't even notice the tank as it was very small as it was only 40 tons. Now for head on combat, yes it is worthless. Defensive? No, and the tactic with the tank was to ambush and retreat.

@henrik3291 Жыл бұрын

@@anhaltboyzrule1704 "Defensive tank" yeah that is the problem xD. Some Swedish officers thought it would better to redesignate as an assault gun or a tank destroyer.

@anhaltboyzrule1704 Жыл бұрын

@@henrik3291 really? Didn’t know that. Interesting

@Sean_but_Not_Heard 2 жыл бұрын

The additional explanations are what make your videos so awesome. I’m a complete nub when it comes to this stuff, but with the context you give I’m able to work out all the effects and figure out why you’re showing what you are.

@MrSuba47 2 жыл бұрын

It would be interesting to test full caliber 120mm M58 gun with AP shot, on different tanks like is3 and more modern tanks with composite armour designed to stop apfsds like leopard 2 turret.

@kajetus0688 2 жыл бұрын

or maybe battleship?

@MrSuba47 2 жыл бұрын

@@kajetus0688 "YAMATO" kudasai.

@moosiemoose1337 2 жыл бұрын

Awesome video

@PrinzAquatic 2 жыл бұрын

Unlike normal round that ricochet when meeting extreme angle Dart round shattered when hitting extreme angle, shown beautifully here.

@a.e.richardson218 2 жыл бұрын

Tungsten darts also ricochet but they tend to deform more when doing so

@cursedcliff7562 2 жыл бұрын

@@a.e.richardson218 how can brittle tungsten deform more than steel?

@datadavis 2 жыл бұрын

Ribbed armor - for added survivability feel

@henryextreme9210 2 жыл бұрын

War thunder seing this : looks like the shell completely penetrated so now it will go through the whole engine, kill the crew and explode the ammo Nice gaijin 👌

@orcashamudeluxeu567 2 жыл бұрын

thats not even that bad tbh, however I Draw the line at HULL AIMGING AHAHHAHHAHAHAHHHHHHHHH WHY GAIJIN

@JaM-R2TR4 2 жыл бұрын

while its quite easy to simulate this.. just compare achieved penetration vs effective armor.. and amount of overmatch should determine amount of shrapnels generated... so in this case, relatively small amount...

@romaboo6218 2 жыл бұрын

It wouldnt do jack shit in Warthunder only damage the engine or do nothing as the swedish angle god can only be killed whit flanking

@FlexyWrexy 2 жыл бұрын

@@JaM-R2TR4 The problem is War Thunder doesn't have any kind of over-matching process currently. This is why big calibres and HE don't work properly on angled surfaces in WT. I would love to see a proper over-match feature in War Thunder, it would be a game change for the big-boi guns. I'd also love to see deteriorating armour, shooting the same spot twice would send the round straight through the weakened armour.

@junibug6790 2 жыл бұрын

Balanced by War Thunder ALSO saying, "My gunner, driver and commander are all dead? No problem - I, the loader, shall drive, aim and reload the entire tank all by myself!"

@chelseagrey9166 Жыл бұрын

So impressive!!

@YuriKlbnv 2 жыл бұрын

That armor never stops surprising me

@Artemonim 2 жыл бұрын

Can you simulate a ricochet? It is interesting to see what condition the projectile is in after the ricochet.

@Artemonim 2 жыл бұрын

@Ēriks A. I meant a ricochet without completely destroying the projectile.

@dankuspanku4650 2 жыл бұрын

@@Artemonim Projectiles will always be deformed/destroyed after a deflection.

@xtron1234 2 жыл бұрын

@@Artemonim Considering the speeds and energy involved in these simulations, that’s not really possible unless it’s an extremely glancing hit.

@jimtrela7588 2 жыл бұрын

There IS a simulation video on KZfaq that illustrates how a ricochet becomes the dominate result. The angle of obliquity is stepped up in multiple simulations, from around 81° to 83° in 1/4 degree increments.

@BubupatianD 2 жыл бұрын

Amazing 👍👍

@fuahrahn Жыл бұрын

S-tank is amazing. Saw one in the museum few years ago and love it.

@MaxRavenclaw 2 жыл бұрын

That looks like cage armour made to mess up with shaped charge warheads. EDIT: Yes, didn't see the title well, that's bar/cage/slat armour. Interesting that it can also mess with APFSDS, though it was probably not installed to do that as much as to short RPGs that would probably fuse on the tracks or something. Just my educated guess, I haven't researched the official reasoning.

@ZETH_27 2 жыл бұрын

it was installed against shaped charge warheads, yes, however it functions to destabilize APFSDS projectiles as well, which drastically reduces their penetrative power.

@MaxRavenclaw 2 жыл бұрын

@@ZETH_27 Statistical armour through and through. Against APFSDS the projectile needs to hit the bars, and against RPGs it needs the warhead to go between them haha

@dposcuro 2 жыл бұрын

It isn't specifically designed to defeat APFSDS, there's a lot of empty space the penetrator could slip through without hitting it. But if it does hit the bar, especially just to the side, it imparts an angular force into the projectile, which then causes it to change it's orientation, in relation to the directions of its force. If the penetrator is hitting off axis, then it is not able to support the leading edge, making it much more susceptible to fracturing and having the energy redirected.

@MaxRavenclaw 2 жыл бұрын

@@dposcuro Yes, thought as much, and I'd guess it has a far higher chance to stop SC than KEP.

@hazardous458 Жыл бұрын

@@MaxRavenclaw it was designed for apds in mind not apfsds.

@basedjorts 2 жыл бұрын

Any chance of testing the 120mm M358 against the same target?

@petter5721 Жыл бұрын

I believe the rib armour on top of the main armour is missing in this simulation. Even if it penetrates the crew is protected behind the engines and another armour wall.

@MarcinP2 Жыл бұрын

You have the top of the bar cut short and constrained. I think the asymmetry caused by the bending would help.

@benij2431 Жыл бұрын

Even though it penetrated it the crew would be fine seen as this is a diagram from the very front of the S tank proving its design was really remarkable

@robertb6768 2 жыл бұрын

What software are you using to create these models/tests? FEA of some kind I assume?

@johan-erikjohannesson2796 Жыл бұрын

An engineer working for the Swedish defence material acquisition agency (FMV) wrote that Sweden testfired T-72s bought from former DDR in 1994 against Strv 103C. The apfsds of the T-72 went straight through with no problems.

@henrik3291 Жыл бұрын

One of the worst military projects that Sweden has invested in

@m1a1abramstank49 Жыл бұрын

@@henrik3291 The STRV 103 was designed during a time where there were no T-72s, and would be used when there wouldn’t be many in service during the time. It’s main opponents were AP and HEAT rounds which it can stop fine

@anhaltboyzrule1704 Жыл бұрын

The Strv was a defensive tank, so i wonder if the t-72 would have noticed it by the time the strv had fired and retreated.

@henrik3291 Жыл бұрын

@@anhaltboyzrule1704 Again, what you are describing is a tank destroyer

@mr.artist7247 Жыл бұрын

@@henrik3291 Strv 103 is great for Sweden. Now shut up

@viperfishlover8767 Жыл бұрын

hey sy what program do you use to make these simulations?

@gkhobby7722 2 жыл бұрын

can you do iphone 7 plus vs .22lr or 9mm ? at 90 degree and 60 degree will the battery fully charged act like ERA ? will the mainboard area contains with aluminium+ tin + textolite+ quartz core+ rubber+ air gap+steel + glass/rubber stops the .22 ?

@joeduv715 Жыл бұрын

I watch quite a few of your videos and am always curious what type of damage the crew might face. Even when there is no penetration, there seems to almost always be spalling and I’m interested to know how lethal it could be (depending on the place of the hit of course)

@Anon14_88 Жыл бұрын

~shotgun

@betterlatethannever9590 2 жыл бұрын

Стрв 103 произведение инженерного искусства и помимо этого симпатичная машина

@Frisher1 2 жыл бұрын

Can you do T62M1 vs T84? Not related to recent events definitely

@antonrudenham3259 2 жыл бұрын

Wouldn't the spare track links shear off and give way rather than redirect the slug down through the armour?

@flyingskyward2153 2 жыл бұрын

Is there any possibility of doing a test of plates at different angles including vertical with the same equivalent horizontal thickness against various rounds? I want to see how much benefit angled plates really are.

@SYsimulations 2 жыл бұрын

Will do at some point

@stijnVDA1994 Жыл бұрын

Would the shape of the bar armor help in protecting the tank any further?

@Tomartyr 2 жыл бұрын

0:32 The view down (up?) the barrel is probably the most interesting.

@adammckay852 2 жыл бұрын

Please add witness plate for future simulations

@05Hogsrule 2 жыл бұрын

how about a simulation that shows the round NOT hitting the rods first and going straight into the armor plate?

@igorbarbarossa 2 жыл бұрын

Can we see the same simulation but without the steel bars?

@fgm1197 Жыл бұрын

what kind of programm do you use?!?

@mbox314 2 жыл бұрын

How long does it take to run these simulations?

@Akatsuki_Krew Жыл бұрын

That one bounce!

@flyfish4fun 2 жыл бұрын

Thanks for finally showing with fence bars on the Swedish S-tank, however the bars are also horizontal, just saying 😉👏

@SYsimulations 2 жыл бұрын

Thanks, but this is showing an impact between the horizontal bars so they don't need to be modelled

@ovtiu97 Жыл бұрын

Ух ты! Снаряд резино-пластиковый?

@BPo75 Жыл бұрын

Вы когда-нибудь видели ствол Калашникова в замедленной съемке при стрельбе?

@the1Blind Жыл бұрын

Just as a thought, rerun this one without the track piece. It seems to me, like the track would create a backstop for the dart and add downward force, MAYBE helping in penetration. A kind of mini shot-trap.

@rohesilmnelohe Жыл бұрын

it is welded on in this simulation aswell.. so yes.

@johnnaill5028 2 жыл бұрын

Could you do one with heatfs against fence armor on m46

@Mamiya645 2 жыл бұрын

I'm a fan of engine-front design for this. Dream car is a civilian CV90 (with free fuel).

@petter5721 Жыл бұрын

Did you know that the Merkava tank was heavily influenced by the S-tank design. The Israeli even consulted some Swedish engineers during the development.

@shturm602 2 жыл бұрын

Can we have a test without the bar armor to have a baseline?

@gargean1671 2 жыл бұрын

Would like to see 3BM4/6 too

@Pro_yapper Жыл бұрын

what app is this?

@TheAdaoo7 4 ай бұрын

The strv is an absolute beast

@irirjhrhr4645 4 ай бұрын

far from a beast. mediocre, 3bm3 entered service 5 years before the strv 103 (for 103c its like 20 years) and it perforated, disabled the engine and could have gone into the crew compartment. also somehow despite having only 40mm of armor it weights more than a t72 and the same as a t80B

@IberianCraftsman 2 жыл бұрын

well, the best thing about that tank is the ability to dig itself into the ground so the ground itself is its armor as it has a bulldozer, but its a camper tank, on the move its just an easy target anyway

@TheFinanceHub_ Жыл бұрын

Imagine they added a little bit of composite onto it

@Blei1986 Жыл бұрын

OP AF

@jintsuubest9331 2 жыл бұрын

The bar does not appear to be doing anything interesting against the rod beyond standard erosion. Will we observe something complex if the rod scrap the bar sideways?

@BPo75 Жыл бұрын

The HEAT-grid was never intended to do anything against AP rounds, so if it had any effect at all it would be a lottery win.

@mehmettugrulakdeniz3840 2 жыл бұрын

What is this software or simulation could somebody tell me please

@feynthefallen Жыл бұрын

Funny how the actual penetrating is done by the projectile's fins

@tsuaririndoku Жыл бұрын

The screw still very safe and the engine is still in a working order. So I would call that the rounds fail to penetrate.

@johnojeda3900 Жыл бұрын

And the engine eat the shell. At least all 3 of them are still alive .

@snb333 2 жыл бұрын

what the programm?

@KREADOS2011 2 жыл бұрын

would it be possible to simulate how slat or cage armor deforms a shaped charge so the penetrating jet of copper fails to form properly or at all?

@SYsimulations 2 жыл бұрын

I hope i can simulate that one day; my current pc isn't powerful enough

@TheCopperGrasshopper 2 жыл бұрын

@@SYsimulations what software are you using for this? You may have the ability to outsource the "work" to cloud computing platform, like a "render farm". So you setup the sim and the processing part of it actually gets sent out and done on a server that's "rented" and you're returned the rendered product. Some programs have a link within them so you don't send the file over with instructions but it literally just processes on the communal server via net link rather than your PC's hardware. It's great for video editing and 3D model rendering, can still use your computer while waiting for the renders to complete because they don't use up any of your physical pc resources.

@DamplyDoo 2 жыл бұрын

So those bars actually do a nice job of messing with the integrity of the projectiles cap?

@TheLadderman 2 жыл бұрын

It's not a warhead, just a projectile, or rod, or whatever you wanna call it. Regardless, it doesn't have any explosives so it isn't a warhead.

@richardmillhousenixon 2 жыл бұрын

Not so much the cap, as it's a kinetic penetrator, but it definitely destabilized the round making it far harder for it to penetrate sloped armor

@Dramigbaklanges 2 жыл бұрын

I always wonder why Sweden didn’t put ERA modules on the upper plate? Perhaps that would be an interesting simulation?

@ThorSuzuki1 Жыл бұрын

They did test it on later models. :)

@BPo75 Жыл бұрын

Because of the HEAT-grid, it wasn't deemed necessary.

@penclaw 2 жыл бұрын

what if the driver had pool flippers on?

@Ownedyou 2 жыл бұрын

The top of the bar armor is a fixed constraint? Not the case in real life though... I wonder how much that would change the penetration picture.

@SYsimulations 2 жыл бұрын

Yes, just for simplicity. It wouldn't affect it as the bar has barely bent by the time the projectile has passed it, so the projectile wouldn't see the difference between fixed/realistic

@sergiokv5711 2 жыл бұрын

What happened to the little steps that the Strv has in his upper plate?

@SYsimulations 2 жыл бұрын

They're only present higher up, if you look at the image at the beginning of the video you can see where they start

@_uncas_7485 2 жыл бұрын

А фугасным снарядом?

@acog_is_good1650 2 жыл бұрын

yesssss lets gooo

@jotabe1984 Жыл бұрын

fun (and bad) thing about extremely sloped armor is that despite how cool it is at a given distance, the effect is on the opposite when strikes come from an angle... so the tactical usage is in fact very restrained

@dsheshin Жыл бұрын

A concept never tested in action in fact. The only planned purpose was ambushing other tanks being entrenched. Well a tank has zillions of others purposes besides that

@xendk Жыл бұрын

@@dsheshin Test made in Sweden showed that it could respond and turn to engage a target as fast as a turret tank could only disadvantage was it could not move and fire but in 1956 that was not a problem

@BPo75 Жыл бұрын

@@dsheshin "The only planned purpose was ambushing other tanks being entrenched" Completely wrong. It was intended to be used like any other tank, which in case of Sweden meant aggressive attacks against beachheads and air landings.

@jerryjerry5321 2 жыл бұрын

how damaging would this be to the engine? do you think this would put it out of commission or just damage it?

@imagifyer 2 жыл бұрын

I think it depends if it hits the drive train/transmission, the STRV has 2 engines so theoretically if one was knocked out they could rely on the other to stay mobile

@jerryjerry5321 2 жыл бұрын

@@imagifyer good to know.

@matspersson5382 2 жыл бұрын

"The simulation shows the 3BM3 impacting the Strv 103 at 1km range, at a lower portion of the upper plate." Difficult to say. This is where the front fuel tank and the brakes are located. A hit in this area wouldn't damage any of the two engines or the transmission but brakes or clutches.

@darrenbarry3628 2 жыл бұрын

my favoriate tank!

@Stripedbottom 6 ай бұрын

Bar armour was not something that was fitted to only "some" tanks or some later models. It was secret equipment that would have been fitted to ALL Strv 103's in wartime.

@blackroseta2 2 жыл бұрын

fragmention inside of that is a sertain death.

@Buugipopuu 2 жыл бұрын

For these non-homogenous armour add-ons, what I always want to see is if they do better than their mass in basic steel plate.

@SYsimulations 2 жыл бұрын

Do you mean the bars or things on the plate? For the bars, 500bhn would be better than RHA for its weight but can only be achieved on thin plates. As for the tracks and other things, no, it is weaker than rha

@warthunderworld9930 2 жыл бұрын

Funny from other scifi armor piercing simulations :D

@erushi5503 Жыл бұрын

That round will never reach the crew, since theres also the engine block and another 20-30mm plating before the nearest crew

@King.Leonidas Жыл бұрын

Dead Soviet t62 column right there ;)

@qc_ploum-zoum2 2 жыл бұрын

I don’t know if thd spall shield would be enough to stop the debri. Still amazing that a tiny fence changed a full penetration to a almost bounce

@spyran5839 2 жыл бұрын

@@axeavier And the entire engine compartment betwen the front and the crew.

@Mattebubben 2 жыл бұрын

As mentioned by others already between that penetration and the crew compartment you have the Gearbox, the Engines, and lastly a Spall shield separating the crew compartment from the engine compartment. So i don't think any of those fragments would penetrate the crew compartment.

@einar8019 2 жыл бұрын

@@Mattebubben the spall shield is 30mm(or 20 cant remember)

@1222dss 2 жыл бұрын

it doesn't matter tbh since the vehicle would be disabled anyway. Without engine it's just as useful as dead horse considering the fact this thing has no horizontal traverse whatsoever

@ZETH_27 2 жыл бұрын

@@einar8019 Yeah, WT (which few like to admit is their source), has the internal shield modelled wrong. IIRC it was 30mm yeah, but I'd have to look it up to be sure.

@nukkinfuts6550 Жыл бұрын

That front bar on Stridsvagn103 was classified as fuck back then and was originally intended to protect against HEAT ammunition not APFSDS etc

@BPo75 Жыл бұрын

Correct, it was original equipment (and not added later) but only revealed and mounted in case of national mobilisation.

@KaihanDTuna 2 жыл бұрын

Swedish lowrider is really worked out

@ksiaze997 2 жыл бұрын

Make the same symulation but with isu 152 HE

@bestamerica Жыл бұрын

' how come this missile dont have a high powerful TNT then boom inside the tank

@Harikuu 2 жыл бұрын

Those links in comments are kinda weird I have to say. Don't click them

@raz4371 15 күн бұрын

US should adopt the design and improve on it and resurrect the tank destroyer this tank had so much potential

@mwxxl318 Жыл бұрын

Интересено, что показал бы натурный эксперимент....

@mmmyes9353 2 жыл бұрын

Can i have the 3d model for both the apfsds and the armour?

@XavierAway Жыл бұрын

So basically if you’re the other side of that plate you’re dead in every case

@shannon1267 2 жыл бұрын

In warthunder, people in the 75mm Sherman when facing a tank they can’t pen, will aim for the turret hatch. The round hit the hatch and does a 90 degree turn downward and kills the crew. Can you simulate a 75mm AP round hitting a tiger turret hatch to simulate what would really happen

@dandas8726 2 жыл бұрын

AP and APHE are two very different rounds.

@pavelsokol_off393 Жыл бұрын

В картофельной игре это не пробил и рикошет от калибров ниже 120мм, но и выше порой тоже))

@user-en7qc9ef2s 2 жыл бұрын

Ну молодцы авторы, а хули не пушечными ядрами?)) Чё то вы нас переоцениваете.

@LyonPercival Жыл бұрын

MORE ANGLING due to the Strv cresting behind a hill 😉😉

@a2b3c Жыл бұрын

But if it doesnt hit one of the bars first (destabilizing), it will probably go right through..

@romaboo6218 2 жыл бұрын

You know the point is hitting the empty spots on the bars?

@SYsimulations 2 жыл бұрын

At 1000m its upto chance if it hits a bar or not

@Janek43961 2 жыл бұрын

Aby there are only soviet Shells hitting west tanks?

@Ramash440 2 жыл бұрын

The eternal cheese wedge reigns supreme.

@cristsan4171 2 жыл бұрын

*N O P E N E T R A T I O N*

@user-mk6eu9ky1x Жыл бұрын

Это решетки от кумулятивных снарядов )))

@VadimZ19 Жыл бұрын

Автор в мультики обыгрался. Эту картонку подкалибер насквозь прошьет. А у него на мульте фольфрамовый наконечник заменён на жевательную резинку.

@Igzilee Жыл бұрын

Imagine if this tank had just 10 more mm of armor at 50mm, it would probably stop almost every projectile it could face. It probably wouldn't be practical considering the added weight, but still...

@kirgan1000 Жыл бұрын

There was plane to make a next generaltion of the S-tank, Stv 2000, but it was to expensive so Sweden did buy Leopard 2 instead.

@BPo75 Жыл бұрын

@@kirgan1000 Strv 2000 was a conventional (well, by Swedish standards) turreted layout, as it was well recognized that fully stabilized guns had made the strv 103 concept obsolete.

@kirgan1000 Жыл бұрын

@@BPo75 Yes you are right, think it was a very early starge of Strv 2000 that was a bigger and meaner Strv 103, and the late from of Strv 2000 did have a turret.