Inside the Chieftain's Hatch: Stridsvagn m/42 part 2

[@TheMalevolentSpoon]

Imagine being a kid, dragged along by your nerdy dad on a family trip to one of these tank museums, and while the tour guide has your dad enthralled about the vehicle directly in front of you, you glance off to the corner of the room and suddenly spot the turret of the tank squatted down there traversing back and forth with no view of anyone nearby, not remotely knowing there's a giant of a man inside manipulating the controls.

[@TheAquarius1978]

So one has to assume that the Swedish army had a very high demand for midgets with very good eye sight during WW2...

[@GreenAppelPie]

TheAquarius1978 1.75 Magnification, what's the point?

[@ensteffo]

Not really as they sat on their ass for the most part.

[@Handle423]

TheAquarius1978 Or maybe Dwarfs D:

[@lavrentivs9891]

When I was in the swedish army (armoured battalion), you could easily spot the tank company by being a head shorter than everyone else. I think their medium height was about 160-165 cm ^^

[@brucelee3388]

Height restrictions on tank crews is pretty common even today - IIRC France sends the shortest 10% or recruits straight to armoured vehicles. Russian ditto.

[@MilitantOldLady]

Sometimes when i need cheering up and im driving around in my Audi, i go "Oh my God, the tank is on fire!" and giggle as i get out of the car.

[@TrueCanad1an]

that needs to be a voice mod

[@MrMakinCupcakes]

Teutone I would love to see that.

[@russwoodward8251]

Me too, only in my case it's a Volvo. heh

[@inisipisTV]

It's nice they added that toilet for shell casings. All they have to do is just pull the lever and the tank is relieved.

[@marc0523]

And in a pinch for the crew as well!

[@scottjohnson9096]

That's a relief

[@Hopolit1]

There was a height requirements back then and still is for Swedish tankers. Being as tall as the chieftain is a bit of a bother in tanks, but boy is it fun to drive/shoot them

[@jeremeymcdude]

"welcome to the gunners seat!" uhh nick. you seem a bit squished there...

[@RealLuckless]

Handle for fire suppressant on the outside of the tank... Man I can see that one going so terribly with regards to bored soldiers and pranks...

[@jagervonweebs610]

RealLuckless or sneaky enemy soldoers

[@RealLuckless]

Eh, if they're close enough to pull the lever, then they're probably close enough to drop a grenade somewhere that's uncomfortable. Of the two options I think I would prefer them wasting their time fiddling with the fire suppressant system if I were in the tank.

[@jagervonweebs610]

RealLuckless why not both? confuse the crew then in the mess drop a grenade in

[@epion660]

*fire suppression system goes off* "Damn it larry, we told you to sto- HOLY SHIT, GRENADE!"

[@Mattle_lutra]

If the tank is overrun the handle poses less of a risk than a bundle of grenades, why waste time pulling the fire extinguisher when you can actually damage the tank?

[@Mattebubben]

I hope they do the Strv 74 next! (Feel like that is the Natural next step)

[@AdurianJ]

No we want the Leatherneck AJS-37 Viggen next !

[@niklaseriksson3343]

They have a 74 at Arsenalen so that is possible!

[@Mattebubben]

thats why i suggested it =).

[@jjab99]

That was very interesting Nicholas and quite educational too. I don't fancy being the gunner on that tank. Many thanks for the videos from 2016 and I am looking forward to lots more in 2017. Have lots of fun in 2017 and have a Happy New Year! Joe

[@Danspy501st]

Well it is like me :D I like the Hetzer, but I dont like to be a crew in one

[@MrMenefrego1]

Other than the need for a malnourished midget to fit into the Gunner's position the Stridsvagn m/42 was indeed a worthy vehicle. I do wonder about the power behind those rather smallish 75-mm rounds though. Great stuff, Chieftain!

[@lanefamily0508]

I look forward to these...great work... keep 'em coming!

[@am17frans]

Looks very convinient to have, in effect, an indoor toilet as well.

[@JonManProductions]

And it was here that Torbjörn's ancestor was actually a gunner inside this tank.

[@kentnilsson465]

Lots of tanks have height limitations for crew, especially sovjet ones. What I would have liked is an opinion of the tank, ie was it any good for its time?

[@Vnx]

11:35 You'd still be trying to get out if you were in a Panther and going to use the commander's hatch.

[@DanielWW2]

4:23, it's a casings toilet. :P

[@Skozerny]

I dont doubt for a second that it wasnt use asa real toilet as well by some.

[@Sphere723]

You should start using the term par-axial instead of coaxial just to blow peoples minds.

[@pernormann4869]

4:20 - 10 Euros says, crews pissed in it.

[@remcodenouden5019]

I dare say they even took a shit in it

[@zethao4388]

could you guys get the chieftain to look around and inside the Ferdinand would be interesting

[@BikeFitterErik]

It's very interesting to see how one could get into and out of these crew positions. Could we see some more of the egress and ingress of the positions of the vehicles?

[@MrSebfrench76]

My daily is a 87' Volvo 760 , not very different from this tank. Sweden rocks!

[@remcodenouden5019]

I actually drive a '96 960, the next evolution of that car. Great cars, very reliable and I was pretty surprised to hear in part 1 that the Volvo engines weren't very reliable

[@Jesses001]

The turret has a lot more room then I would expect looking at it from the outside. Well, all except the gunner, ha. I love that shell collection system. Would be great for reloading shells. Shame that I could never get my hands on one of these here in the states. I do not think we got a lot of surplus of these.

[@psi-phen]

No heavy lifting this time, Just contorting! Awesome vid as always. Thanks!

[@budmeister]

I like the design of that driver's hatch.

[@acidobasico]

"oh my god the tank is on fire" - good old meme :D

[@callejansson682]

If I remember right, the machine guns were caliber 8 millimeter, (or 7.92 but it was named 8 mm to not being mixed with 7.62 mm). That 8 mm projectile needs to be talked about, as it was a great projectile. Hard targets or aircraft or boats, just use the right type of proj. Thats one of the reasons that we kept them for protecting harbors and beaches. The 75 mm gun was fun to shoot, but no range, no speed, no big damage, and you will see the tracer going in a spiral against your target. 2Lt Jansson (Ret.)

[@boredsights3923]

The design is so clean and simple. I love it (except for the cramped gunners position).

[@Dennan]

they should add an motor to that turret rotation device so it goes back and forward randomly, that would look so good when you visit the museum.

[@russwoodward8251]

The Chieftain reviews my Volvo wagon's early ancestor. This is a well designed little tank for the early war. Thanks Chieftain.

[@KozmykJ]

07:58 What is the purpose of that circular bracket with the threee leather straps in the foreground next to the Chieftain's right elbow ?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Good question. Fire extinghuisher mount? Honestly, no idea offhand.

[@KozmykJ]

@@TheChieftainsHatch Surströmming retaining bracket ? aka Biological warfare ...

[@rodtopp]

super interesting as always

[@TNX255]

The tank looks very neat and serviceable even now, even if you can clearly see that it bears the marks of use on its armor. Also cool to see that many shells in it, even if they were only dummies.

[@TheRandCrews]

This tank looks so simple and easy to use, if you are just the right tank

[@mooneyes2k478]

I am vaguely disappointed. No outtakes where Chieftain said silly things.

[@lavrentivs9891]

It can be added that the turrets from the Strv 74 were used in fortifications as that tank was taken out of service.

[@ilzak]

You should probably watch the end again...

[@lavrentivs9891]

ilzak2812 When the Strv 74 were decommissioned and the m/42 turrets returned to some of the old chassis, the Strv 74 turrets were used in fortifications along the swedish coast and certain inland roads. This is not a counter to what the Chieftain said, this is an addendum.

[@AdurianJ]

That is so Swedish to design a tank which armor and gun wise isn't up to the competition but it has a very well thought out design with numerous advanced features. This is why Swedes should modify things they have bought and not build to many weapons systems themselves :D

[@Terminus_4]

Not sure I would totally agree. The Sherman went into production October 1941, the Strv/M42 started Novemeber 1941, only a month later? These two tanks are very similar, when it comes to statistics like armament, weight and speed. If i were to compare the two, the Sherman has the advantage of being slightly more armored. With the Strv has the advantage of having a better Anti-tank gun. So unless your talking about fighting Panthers, Tiger II's and IS-1's (which were not available till at least 1943) Id say the M/42 was fairly modern for its time. Of-course it would still have quickly become under-gunned by the arrival of newer tanks on the battlefield. However I do recall reading somewhere, That in 1944 there were proposals to upfit a long barreled 75 (or even a long barreled 57mm anti-tank gun) into the Strv (Much like the Sherman 76mm variants, Firefly and T34-85) who also all arrived in late 1943 or 1944. I can agree the armor of the tank was rather crap, but it really had to be. Sweden needed a tank that could use the country's pre-existing infrastructure, so having a big heavy tank was just not viable.

[@peterson7082]

Terminus Much more armored. The Swedish 75mm is more or less the comparable to the 75mm gun M2 on early M4s. The 75mm gun M3 on most M4s was outright superior in penetration to the Swedish gun and even the German tank guns of the time.

[@Red0100]

Terminus Swedish steel was of significantly better quality compared to foreign steel so I'm not so sure about m42 actually having worse armour. Besides, it generally has better angles too to increase chances of ricochets. You will actually notice this difference when you drive the two tanks in game.

[@peterson7082]

Red0100 I'm not referring solely to armor quality, just relative armor.

[@ScreamingSturmovik]

does the shell dispensing shoot in the floor make for any hull integrity questions when it comes to mines? (i remember that being mentioned for escape hatches in another tank vid) or it it kind of a take it or leave it type thing.

[@tyler_bt3326]

ScreamingSturmovik tbh if something is gunna go through the hull floor having a chute or not having one won't make much difference

[@CthulhuInc]

what's with the xmas bulb in the top left corner?

[@skittycat213]

Thanks Chieftain for doing all these! Really appreciate it and learn a hell of a lot about tanks!

[@TheBeardMachine]

Welcome to the gunners seat :D imgur.com/a/woSjP You're welcome.

[@Bhatakti_Hawas]

1) What's the commander's override button?? What does it do?? 2) What's the short cylinder like thing below the 75mm canon on the outside of the tank??

[@Danspy501st]

Yes, it is part of the recoil reducing system. It might some kind of spring or hydraulic system

[@Ellis307]

4:56 is a brilliant moment, especially with the fish eye lens

[@user-74652]

Thank you once again for making yourself suffer for our amusement.

[@Quokka666]

ene more blopers ??

[@woooster17]

I get the impression (sometimes) that you get fed up doing this.. like, "if I have to get into one more damn Tank" I might be wrong though.. just an impression ;-)

[@tonydeleo3642]

I get the feeling this tank was designed by a tank driver.

[@spikeguy33]

Nice to have a trash can in the tank. Even better than throwing things out the window of a moving car. :)

[@Reckec]

UrbanTarzan Duh It can double as a flush toilet. XD ugh... But you know someone has done it.

[@petertimowreef9085]

I believe the law of diminishing returns definitely applies to a second co-axial MG in the turret.

[@johanmetreus1268]

Main reason is to reduce barrel heating. 500 rounds per MG causes lot less heating than 1 000 rounds through a single MG.

[@Ammageddon89]

10:30 - the upper storage holder is so happy xD

[@dylanclark9488]

Dear Chieftain, why don't the countries that use the T-54/55 use ERA to improve the armor effectiveness? It may be a silly question but I want to see if you know.

[@mcsquizzy440]

Chieftain and others, what are your thoughts on the competitiveness of this tank compared to others of its time? Thank you!

[@ineednochannelyoutube5384]

The armour is slightly better than a mid generation panzer 4, and is certainly better sloped, power to weight is about avrage, ergonomics are on the better side. Question is whats the muzzle velocity on the gun. I suspect its closer to an M1A2 tank cannon than an M1A3 on the shermans, which would make it slightly lacking in penetrative power, needi g to get within 500 meters to effectively engage shermans T34s, or late generation panzer 4s. It is probably effective against itself, and other early medium ganks past a kilometer. In short, its about an avrage vehicle for its time, and with a longer gun, and some additional front armour would remain comeptitive until the very end of WWII.

[@satanihelvetet]

@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 Yes, it definitly lack of gun power with the short barrel and pretty small shells when it comes to meet the better armoured tanks at the mid and late part of WW2.

[@MothaLuva]

What did they make this for? In case, Nigeria decides to attack Sweden?

[@johanmetreus1268]

Well, there were the Soviets to the East and North, the GB and French threatening to invade through Norway, and German surrounding the rest of Sweden in overlap with the previously mentioned.

[@StalkingRainbow]

Maybe the gunner was supposed to sit in the hull machine gunners spot while traveling? And maybe they figured he could play with the bow mg on the move lol

[@Jacky-DavidWBelt]

This tank has become my favorite in Blitz. With the upgraded gun, I am able to take some sniper shots with a good chance of a hit.

[@wikikomoto]

was the commanders override part of the original design?

[@planescaped]

Plus, he could get out of that drivers seat twice as fast if he wasn't worried about damaging a museum tank.

[@stephenbritton9297]

I think I had a GI JOE vehicle as a kid that looked like that armored truck to the left of the M/42!

[@mariebcfhs9491]

lel Oh my god the tank is on fire I love that part the most

[@aiden3503]

the short montage of the tank at the end was cool ^^ looking forward to the next one!

[@Colinpark]

There was a control handle on the right side of the tank by the ammo rack when you were in the driver position what did that do?

[@05Hogsrule]

Happy New Year Nick!!! HOOYAH.

[@Handle423]

9:00 There's ammo next to you and there's a Lever right there, dafuq is its for?

[@littlealbioner9538]

Welcome to Ingsoc - Airstrip 1 - Oceania

[@WalkaCrookedLine]

The shell casing drain looks like a great way to break an ankle for anyone trying to stand on the hull floor.

[@darinmoore265]

Please re-release these videos w/o the repetitive music that we have to constantly sit through to get to the next one.

[@andrealves2630]

I didnt quite like the new intro... the original one was better

[@crossfirerambo]

please bring back the old transitions.

[@GeneralJackRipper]

That was a pretty neat little tank.

[@JorgitsAUG]

When will you make a video on the Chieftain? :D

[@G.O._MEDIA]

5:15 best frame of the whole video

[@bigjuliedive]

Put a round thru the Music man will ya?

[@theblitz6794]

It's weird because on the one hand its wonky and awkward and probably suboptimal in a lot of ways as though the designers never worked on a vehicle that saw combat service. Ex: the 2nd machine gun in turret or the manual firing of the mgs. But it clearly hits all the bases it needs to and appears to get the job done. It seems ergonomic enough and its tailored to Swedish terrain. Proof that good designers can design good things even when they haven't seen combat

[@pouncepounce7417]

I think the many machine guns make sense if one considers this tanks where slooooow. Todays tanks are friggin big and accelerate and turn hard, you can not run up and onto them and annoy the crew with grenades that easy anymore, mg's are not that usefull. If your tank is slow you probably do not mind it looks like an porcupine as long you have more options to keep the opposition at distance.

[@RonI-qz2tz]

Nice job plz keep them coming.

[@witcheddoctor2720]

I wish world of tanks had drifting

[@leighrate]

And you get machine gunned on the way out.

[@einar8019]

strv 103? plz

[@niklaseriksson3343]

The_Challenger has done one on the S-tank.

[@Neuttah]

I think there's already videos of him climbing around one, so you probably just have to wait for them vids to "Climb up the tree."

[@michealmolina987]

poor Nick to talk for his own good

[@Bob_Lennart]

What is an ikv 73? i'm googling images for ikv 73 and all i get is ikv 72 or 103, sav m43 and strv m42's... An ikv 73 does not appear to exist.

[@lavrentivs9891]

It's the third type of IKV with a 7X mm gun ;)

[@Neuttah]

For emphasis: an Ikv 73 is basically a fire-support variant of the tank. It retains the turret, and, I doubt I could tell a difference between it and a standard m/42 without the two standing side by side with a pair of plaques in front. So I'm not sure if it was really an actual modification, or just a refurbishing and rebranding. Photo: www.ointres.se/ikv_73-3.jpg Photo source article, but I don't do Swedish, so all I got was the photos, the table, and some name-age; www.ointres.se/ikv_72_102_103_73.htm

[@Catrik]

8:13 aww that shell on top of the transmission tunnel is so lonely

[@venator5]

Poor shell :(((

[@Reckec]

Release the fire suppression system from outside, hmmm... Depending on the way it works, that could be bad for anyone buttoned up inside.

[@TNX255]

... So they either choked to death or got a refreshing shower.

[@stevepirie8130]

It was likely a powder extinguisher thus choking the fire of air, mine was on my vehicles.

[@sumonesumwhere6351]

King tiger now :D?

[@FFSK734]

I really like the content and the chieftain, but the editing is just stupid. These horrible animations between two scenes are pointless and for god sake get some new music. I still like watching the videos +1

[@butterflyspinart]

If I may ask, is there a Russian version to this show?

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Well, this gets dubbed into Russian on the Russian WoT channel, if that counts.

[@michaelcoker3197]

What is the tumor under the tube?

[@ineednochannelyoutube5384]

Recoil absorber hydraulics tube.

[@Pfsif]

How tall are you? Has Sweden ever fired a tank shot in anger?

[@BigSwede7403]

To my knowledge the official answer is "no". Sweden has not been activly involved in a war since 1814. (Sorry Norway, my appologies) We have been part of Peacekeeping operations, but i do not think anything heavier than armored cars/APC/IFV´s were ever involved there.

[@silenthunteruk]

The Swedes are a major practitioner of 'armed neutrality' in fact.

[@maciek19882]

The Ikea tank

[@witcheddoctor2720]

Sromotny Kobziarz lol

[@daveybernard1056]

I want you to do a hands on review of a 1960's VW Bug.

[@keithtan4291]

make a inside hatch about stridsvagn 74,inside and out.

[@olivierr.5752]

I think it would be a good idea to do an Inside the Chieftain's Hatch episode on the L-60 tank, especially since special missions are coming for it in January. Plus, everybody that logge to WoT for the 2 previous weeks got one, so it would be more relevant. I also would like to see an episode about the Lago, since it's the family name of one of my friends (and he's not even Swedish!).

[@NitrogenoxTheQuick]

Could you do an inside the hatch on the IKV 91 a tank my own dear father was a commander in one of those. first prototype was built in 69 so it's a bit later than WW2 but still.

[@IFear_Naught]

goddamn, this is a cute looking tank. Nicholas, if the gunner's position was modified to accommodate people over 5ft5, how highly would this rate for you as an ex-tankie in terms of livability?

[@sirjohndough8575]

The proper designation of swedish tanks (in Swedish) is "stridsvagn", literally fighting vehicle. The latter part of the word is pronounced as you would do the word wagon, but deleting the "o" in the pronounciation. As for all you complaining about the the thickness of the armour and armament, think again. The weight, width and length of the tank was based upon what standard bridges and flat cars could load at the time. No more than 25 tons. As for the main gun, it is basically of the same generation as the regular Sherman tank. A short and rather ineffective 75 mm gun. And it proved itself rather useless against the heavier German tanks. It took 3-4 lost Shermans to kill one German. Be aware of the fact that this was the first tank to carry a gun of that calibre. All other tanks in the armoury at the time were carrying 37 mms. Swedens first heavy tank were the British Centurion Mk III with a 81 mm gun, which were bought during the fifties.

[@josephinebarles6077]

jeez good thing this did not go to war cause this would be catastrophic chaos specially for the crew in the turret