The beginnings of project EMIL
I’ve previously posted about project EMIL here; more specifically, a complete project summary with contents from various times during the project’s life. These 1951 documents however mark the very start of the project, suggesting that KAFT put six people to work for about a year in order to develop the project a loose idea to reasonably complete plans for a tank. There’s nothing new specs-wise here, just some project history.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/24
Minutes of meeting at Bofors 1951-05-30
Minutes of a meeting held at Bofors on May 30th and 31st 1951, regarding current projects. Most interestingly, a “new tank gun” is discussed, with some different alternatives presented.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/24
Report on current anti-tank weapons and development trends (1951)
This FOA report (dated 1951-01-23) summarizes the current state of anti-tank weaponry in the world, as well as current development trends. It contains some discussion on whether future anti-tank weapons should be based on kinetic projectiles or HEAT, and finds that in either case, the current Swedish anti-tank weapons are completely insufficient to fight current Russian tanks.
Contains penetration data for number of Swedish weapons (such as 37 mm pvkan m/37, 57 mm pvkan m/43, 7,5 cm strvkan m/41 and 7,5 cm pvkan m/43).
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/24
Suggestion for a tracked mortar carrier (1950)
In 1950, a lieutenant at I 15, B. Schmidt, suggested to KAFT that in light of recent developments in the field of artillery-hunting radar it might be a good idea to mount the ubiquitous 12 cm Tampella mortar on a tracked chassis, enabling it to “shoot-and-scoot”.
This post features the lieutenant’s letter as well as a KAFT memo suggesting to try the idea out on the “tankette” chassis. As far as I know the idea was tried in reality but the mortar recoil turned out to be too big for the small chassis and the idea was dropped.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/19
Discussions regarding AT super-weapons
In 1950 it was becoming alarmingly apparent that current Swedish AT weapons were completely inadequate for fighting foreign top-of-the-line tanks. A series of discussions were thus held at KAFT in order to figure out what kind of “anti-tank super-weapons” the army should be equipped with in the future. Since kinetic weapons were seen as impractically bulky and heavy, HEAT was considered the main alternative despite its downsides (such as difficulties with spaced armor).
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/19
Light tank development program 1949-1950
In March 1949 the army headquarters described the requirements for future AFV’s in a brief memo sent to KAFT. One of the vehicles called for was an unassuming 20-ton vehicle intended for infantry support, armed with a 75 or 105 mm gun. During 1949 and 1950 this vehicle was occasionally discussed, but left on the back burner in favor of the ongoing “tankette” development program. In August 1950 the army headquarters revisited the project and seems to have noticed certain alarming developments abroad; more specifically, tanks were rapidly becoming much bigger and heavier and with much greater protection.
As far as I know this project never led anywhere except to trials of the AMX-13, but it still gives some insight on what the army headquarters were thinking about tanks at the time. The sudden realization in late 1950 that foreign developments were just about immune to current Swedish tanks probably contributed to getting the EMIL project going the following year.
The documents are ordered chronologically.
Archive references: SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/16, SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/17 and SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/19
Further documents regarding tankette m/49
A few more documents from 1949 discussing tankett m/49, from a different archive volume than the previous post.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0062/D/01/025:H/F I/2
Development of tankett m/49
These documents from 1949 (I’ve attempted to order them chronologically) describe the early stages of development of tankett m/49, a very cheap and light construction (intended for about 6.5 metric tons) originally envisioned in three versions: one with only machine guns, one with a tank gun (initially 75 mm) and one “special” that could be armed with things like flamethrowers. The development work was contracted to Landsverk (chassis), Bofors (gun) and Volvo (engine and drive train).
Initially the “gun tankette” was armed with the short 75 mm gun used on the strv m/42, but as the project progressed both a 84 mm and a 105 mm gun option were investigated. Eventually the vehicle would enter service as ikv 72, where ikv stands for “infanterikanonvagn”, which translates to something like “infantry gun carriage”.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/17 and SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/18
Memo regarding ammunition and caliber for new TD’s
This memo (dated 1949-05-01) discusses pros and cons with sub-caliber APCR rounds, in particular with regards to the armament of new tank destroyers. The difference between squeeze-bore and sub-caliber sabot rounds are briefly discussed, with sub-caliber sabot rounds being considered superior. It is concluded that a 50 mm sub-caliber APCR round fired from a 75 mm gun has better penetration than a full-caliber 105 mm round, and with higher shell velocity to boot. The author recommends choosing a 75 mm gun.
Report on the activities of the 1946 armor committe
This memo is a report on the activities of the armor committee of 1946, up to October 1st 1948. The committee has consisted of various officers and engineers from the army headquarters, the army ordnance administration and the armor school, and it has taken the form of an open forum where various ideas regarding armor development could be discussed. The report gives pretty good summary of the thoughts behind the Swedish armored vehicle developments of the late 40’s.
Archive reference: SE/KrA/0062/D/01/016:H/F I/18