Skip to content
Yearly Archives: 2013
Pictures from the archive
On November 23, 2013 0 Comments
- Blogging
Memo dated 1954-02-17 regarding options for upgunning strv m/42. Mentions both an oscillating turret and rebuilding as a tank destroyer.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0266/002/01:H/F I/1
Meeting notes from three different meetings between KATF and Bofors at various points during 1954, regarding “project 6400” (a heavy tank).
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0266/002/01:H/F I/1
A letter to the French military attaché in Stockholm, dated 1954-10-22, summarizing the conclusions from the Swedish evaluation of the AMX-13.
Summarizing the summary, the tank is found to have:
The evaluation further suggests that the small size would be even more advantageous if the gun depression was increased 3-4 degrees and that a zoom function for the tank commander’s optics would be desirable. It also criticizes the design choice to have the engine’s cooling air pass below the fighting compartment, on the grounds that this seems dangerous if the tank is exposed to napalm or radioactively contaminated dust.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0266/002/01:H/F I/1
Memo (dated 1964-02-22) from Bofors regarding various possibilities in increasing the engine output of the S-tank. Options mentioned are a supercharged 275 or 300 HP version of the Rolls-Royce K-60 piston engine (a 240 HP version powered the first incarnation of the S-tank), a 300 HP Volvo piston engine in development for use on the pbv 302 APC and a Boeing 553 turbine.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0266/005/01:H/F II/5
Watch this film clip to see an S-tank shot at, driven over minefields, exposed to simulated tactical nukes, strafed with aircraft guns and finally napalmed. Remember to enable English captions if you can’t understand spoken Swedish.
At the time when the first vague ideas about the S-tank started to take form (late 50’s), weapons technology was far more advanced than armor technology. It seemed prohibitively hard to design a tank that had sufficient protection against modern HEAT and APDS shells while also maintaining decent mobility and staying within reasonable weight limits. When the French and German governments cooperated on the Europa-Panzer project (what would become the AMX-30 and the Leopard 1), one of the stated design goals was to sacrifice armor strength in favor of mobility and weight savings. The British Chieftain was considerably better protected but especially in its early versions suffered from high weight and poor cross-country mobility.
Original title: Teknisk bestämmelse för stridsvagn S, typ A
Incomplete; I only photoed the 60 or so pages I found most interesting (out of a total of 144). Dated 1964-10-04. Note the wax seal on the first page.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0266/005/01:H/F II/5
Original title: Strv S. Kostnader för 0-serien
Memo describing an official decision regarding costs for the S-tank prototypes. Dated 1963-10-19.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0266/005/01:H/F II/4
