S tank greatest ever

One of the greatest tanks ever, ranked sixth in the world by this clip.

[@gingewhiting1070]

I worked on this Tank, and it had a few short comings. If vehicle stalled for whatever reason, then you had to wait at least 3 minutes for the Gas Turbine exhaust to cool down before you could re-start. The rear driver had to get the front driver to lift the very square, low back ammunition magazine, to clear obstructions. So when you wanted the back up, the front driver would have to put the front down! There were lots of constant oils leaks, and they left them because in just about all cases the engines had to be lifted. If you traversed left and right to much, it dug itself in a hole that it couldn't always get out of. When we drove through close woods, the exhaust from the turbine was setting fire to the trees and branches. Apart from all that, it could also be great fun :-)

[@petegkSalonika]

good analisys , many thanks !

[@Joeltravels]

Other tank drivers should give one honest comment like this one on every tank they have driven on this list.

[@xbox7]

Ginge Whiting Must've been amazing to work with! As you can see in the comments not many people are fond of it, but I love it...because I actually watched the video.

[@SonnyKnutson]

To be fair, many other tanks have or would have similar problems. There are tonnes of problems with turreted tanks too that the S-Tank did not have :) I still think it's very good to hear about the drawbacks too. Apart from what everyone keep saying. "Oh no turret so it can't attack or aim well". They don't know shit about tanks :P

[@holytiamat777]

coolest tank ever

[@mikecimerian6913]

It is perfectly adapted to the forested mountainous terrain. So well adapted, it has no export market. On it's turf I can't see anything to challenge it.

[@xbox7]

Mike Cimerian People can't understand that tho lol. I love it tho.

[@rredhawk]

40 years ago I built a 1/48 scale model of this tank (by Aurora plastic models company) but have never seen footage of the real thing in action until now. Remarkable machine!

[@Joeltravels]

This isn't really a promotional video, so there are more things that stand out about this tank. It was the first series production tank EVER with a gasturbine as standard alongside with its Diesel engine. First series production tank to have a laser rangefinder. And let's not forget the automatically loaded gun. And the engines where put in the front of the tank, protecting the crew. The orientation around crew safety is much like today's Israeli tanks. The design shows thought. And as it has been tested and compared to its competition around the world. There are new design features all over this tank if one just cares to look. Too bad discovery didn't take the time to do so.. Had this tank seen action, this world would be a different place. It would have meant a soviet invasion of Sweden with things escalating from there. It was built for that, and had it been battle proven it would have produced enemy casualties well over expectation. It was hightech for its time.. And regarding the tactic. Let's not forget Tali-ihantala, Finland, where soviet meet tanks without turrets, and was beat back.

[@Melencir]

Heard somewhere that the S-tank had a "break" on its road speed, that can be removed and have a road speed of around 100 km/h, also read about a tank commander that overtoke a sports car and when pasing it found the young King in its drivers seat, saluting the King then ordering the rest of his tank commanders to bypass and salute. :) Presume the last one only a story, but still a fun little history.

[@cincin75ytb]

Swedish weapons are always so sexy, AK-5, S-tank, JA-37, JAS-39. They are all far beyond the front of their current time, impressively. After all they were always ready for fighting the monstrous Soviet Russian at any time in that period. Tough guys and blonde girls, long live Sweden.

[@theirondukew.8522]

+cincin75ytb Yeah, especially since the Ak5 was designed in Belgium as the FN FNC and manufactured on licence in Sweden. The JAS-39 has crashed numerous of times and no world power is interested in purchasing it. "Far beyond the front of their current time". DId you pass English class? "ready for fighting" That's *ready to fight* "Tough guys and blonde girls" Yeah, really tough since they haven't been in a war since 1809 (206 years) and when the hell did they allow girls in the army? Blonde girls? Far from the reality even in Scandinavia. Had it not been for the Finns guarding the border you wouldn't have done shit and you know it. Grow the hell up kid.

[@SWE-mf7og]

+cincin75ytb Don't forget Carl Gustav m/45 used by US Navy SEALs in Vietnam War.

[@cazcade77]

+TheIronDuke W. What's with the false information and aggression? The AK5 was based on the FN FNC sure, but it was and still is designed in Sweden. The JAS 39 Gripen actually has low crash statistics. It has been bought/leased by several nations. World Powers? No, they develop their own aircraft. Tough? If fighting wars is your idea of though then fine. We are a peace loving nation. Swedes are just regular folks like everyone else. Women have been in regular service in Sweden since 1994. The first volunteer was in 1962. Finns guarding the border... :) The soviets actually never saw Finland as a problem. They would have just run through Finland. The problem was gaining control over the baltic. They needed Gotland and mainland Sweden for that. The Swedish airforce was the deterrent for several decades. Not the miniscule finnish defense. PS I only have love for Finland!

[@ostbagen]

+TheIronDuke W. And Captian Butthurt strikes again.

[@swearm]

Thank you!

[@MrSpy3000]

our deer brothers sweden are genius! salute u, from Norway!! :D

[@Howie262]

This really aint that "Weird" of a tank... anyone who knows anything about WWII knows Tank Destroyers with super structure chassis are super effective! In wartime, raw materials matter and simplicity matters, so id say this would be an excellent war time tank/TD.

[@herremilkanter]

It made sense at the time because gun aiming and gun stabilization tech was pretty nonexistent in those days. Today when we have better optics, sensors and almost perfect stabilization, there really is no advantage to a fixed gun in a true combat situation. The area where fixed guns really lose out is when reacting to a threat. With a turret that can move about freely you can react fast and actually HIT the target, even while on the move. The S Tank would however work well in extreme defensive engagements or in direct assault on a single target. Also, I would'nt call hydraulic adjustment arms a much simpler/cheaper way than a turret ;) That being said the S Tank did come with a revolutionary laser aim assist system (yes, in the 60's!) which was supposed to help aim the gun. The system only worked while completely stationary however.

[@Howie262]

yeah in an all out war im sure for the same money and materials you could build 2 or 3 of these for every 1 abrams and leopard..... maybe this is my bias because I still love the stug :).

[@herremilkanter]

Don't get me wrong, I love the designs and they surely had their place in WW2, especially for the germans towards the end of the war when resources were scarce :)

[@MatteusNova]

My dad used to field test radios on these, in the 60s. :) He worked in Telecom, for the military. (FFV, FMV, etc)

[@logeassistentacacian-malmo6306]

PETEGK it had actually 3 machine guns , 2 fixed in the hull and 1 movable above the tank commander

[@dragonbutt]

And yet there's plentiful reccords of people missing it c: In the era before the gulf war, when tank on tank battles required more human effort, first-round-hits weren't as common as you think (It's why such great importance was placed on fixing that in the late 70's). Oh and the M60A2's turret could take a 125mm shell to the front and be just fine :P

[@Skalmans750]

@yairbe5 The S-tank was made for ambush, quick attacks, then pull back to a new position. With it's low profile the enemy wouldnt know what hit them until to late. Losing a few tanks from attacks coming from behind was calculated with when this tank was still at the blueprint stage. Tha advantage of its sneaking abilities were greater then the expected damage.

[@kmzmmz]

The s-Tank was designed to wait 50-60 km behind the shores of the southern Sweden. When the suprime comander know what beach was to be invaded the S-tank where to advance an take position and destroy the invading enemy. Just stdudy how the swedish Tank regemnts were lokated in the early 60´s, and you know i´m right. Tank Capten, for many years

[@kmzmmz]

In war time it gave about 11-1200bhp(so im been told by a high ranking tec), by adjusting the fuel regulator. There was an empty folder in the Logg book about what to change in case of war.The tank also chared big parts of the hydralic steering system, with JA37 Viggen

[@kmzmmz]

The resaults of the test with a swedish S-Tank Company in West Germany during the 70-is was classified Top Secret. That recuest came from the Britts!!! One of my training officer´s participated in that manouver. Funny how he always smiled when it was mentioned.Swedes learned a lot concerning tactic´s from Israel. They also studyed the S-tank (when they constructed the Merkava). We had one of there modified Centurions when we renovated our Centur.Fmr. Platoon and S-Tank comp Comander for 15 years

[@kmzmmz]

@thehateallguy The thank has tre mag. nr1 contains 25 rounds, nr2 20 rounds and nr3 5 rounds each mag have shafts, like mag 1 has five. on the bottom of the tank there ia a trolly moving,picking up ordered (by a button on the steering(its all controled there)) trolly moves the grenade to an elivator betweens mag 1 and two. Rise the grenade to the gun level, where it is hydralicly pressed in to the gun. and fire. if you press fire and load at the same time it will autoload. shoots 23/min

[@kmzmmz]

The hydropneumatic stearing and aiming system, is the same as the Swedish Ja/AJ/S/SH/AJS 37 VIGGEN. In our war Tank company we had flight mechanics that during peace, worked on VIGGEN

[@blidderbla]

hm are there diffrent versions of this program? never seen the s-tank in it b4 :/ I do like it tho :)

[@binka9066]

the StuG's cousin

[@GisterThomasGames]

i see you fuc*ing everywhere

[@kmzmmz]

@Skalmans750 We also used (sometimes) a platoon as "sleepers" during defense retreat. Carfully hidden and camuflage tank´s. We let the enemy past by us. When our batalion or brigade made an counter attack, the sleepers woke up. Attacking the enemy from behind.and making a hole in the enemys defense line. The Brigade or Batallion the could advance thru that breatch. Beleve me the enemy goes in to panic.

[@kmzmmz]

@yairbe5 S-tank was tested with IR-protection that worked quite well,don´t think M1 has a low IR profile. Coparing an OLD Gasturbine construction with a newer.

[@kmzmmz]

@TheHateAllGuy The Tank was using the German DIEHL tack, same as LEO and i think M1. I dont´understand the question,sorry.

[@jimmyn89SWE]

@UncleCthulhu This was mainly meant for defense anyway, we had other more conventional tanks that were more suited for offensive operations.

[@MrMugg]

Actually I don't remember if it was during the winter war or during the later conflict, I got the stats from a swedish book called " Finlands Krig" and since I'm not home at the moment I can't bring you the name of the author, but I can get back to you on that. If you have any other books to recomend I would gladly hear it.

[@jimmyn89SWE]

@lulle103 I believe the correct term for tank destroyer in Swedish is "pansarvärnskanonvagn" (pvkv), we built a tank destroyer in the 1940's and it was called pvkv m/43.

[@kmzmmz]

@yairbe5 Anti tank like AT4 or similar, has a security range of about 75-100m. That is because the missile shuld go clear of any vegetation and not explode to close to the soldier fireing. Our concern was robots fired from long range. We always had protection from our afv platoon or even from a afv company. But the back is a weak point, on all tanks. Maby weaker on the s-tank

[@043521068]

Körde denna under min militärtjänstgöring, jättekul! Dock var den längre än som det stod i textremsan 2 meter. Ska naturligtvis vara höjden och inte längden!

[@yomomasface]

Then why is that we watch this among many S Tank videos? Its' not as if we don't like it! This is one of my favorites! Top 5 actually. I just love how unique it is! If you don't know anything about Americans and Tank, it's best not to say anything about us.

[@MrHeico]

It looks awesome

[@ghanaboyz]

@yairbe5 I wont swear on this, but I belive the ammo compartment was pretty much separated to crew compartment. How much it helps? Have no idea, but the basic design that far make some sense. Btw, on a early T-62, I believe the hit rate on the first 2 shots in an engagment was pretty bad, much worse than most S tanks. Those T-62 had also to stop, move turret, to get a very good hit probability. Agreed that 2 shots of 3 in same time frame could be good anyway to give cover fire or whatever.

[@viking93ify]

what program is this and what episode ? :)

[@YDDES]

A big backdraw with the "S"-tank was that it had to stop to aim its gun and fire, since the gun was fixed in the hull. The "S"-tanks were scrapped before the last old "Centurions" in the Swedish arny.

[@TheHateAllGuy]

@kmzmmz during those 15 years was there any combat cause a track wont break if all it does is be used in exercises

[@wille1811]

0:32 i need that mustach!

[@ghanaboyz]

@yairbe5 Ok, not sure what guy you mean but still. Btw, in todays ongoing (mind you; ongoing) warfare, tanks doesnt seem to be met by other tanks or not even AT (advanced) missiles. Very expensive to deploy and maintain the high tech tanks... Heavy is harder to have at the right spot at the right moment compared to light (still wouldnt say no to a tracked vehicle with thick armor compared to the kind with weels...). A believed sniper, tank or not, can control a vast area to a small cost.

[@kmzmmz]

The Tank has three mags. Mag1 contains 20 rounds of "arrrow" anti Tank rounds, Mag.2 contains 25 exlosive shells and mag 3. contains 5 smoke. On the bottom there is a wagon(trolly) moving from side to side, picking up the munition,where they ly horisontaly. When you press load button (one button for exolosivse an one for arrow) the trolly moves to an elevator shaft. An elevator rises the grenade up to the gun. Then a hydralic "stick" push it in to the gun. When the gun travers....

[@kmzmmz]

The protective fence, was so secret, that not even platoon commander know about it. I was informed when i was promoted to Capt. and secend in command, for the tank-company. We used tnt to open the holes in the tank, where the fence was fastend in. Had at that time 8 years in service, never suspected anything. The fence´s were buerrid under each tank, in the war storage buildings.

[@Hellforsa]

älskar mitt land

[@ghanaboyz]

The ex-serviceman being the driver was pretty cool. Love the way is give a small smile when he says "if you are good enough". Seems ot be very good design thinking to put engine in front and ammo back. They got the better protection in front where they meet the enemy. Make sense. As I understand it, in an emergency, one single guy could operate this vehicle, both being driver, commander and gunner. 3 machine guns also, not too bad. Remeber, potential enemy at the time was T-62.

[@Skalmans750]

@kmzmmz You are correct, however we never had a oportunity to test this machine in real (thank god) but the logical reaction from an enemy having an battallion on their back of all a sudden, would surely result in panic.

[@kmzmmz]

@TheHateAllGuy Well only Good and maybe the man doing it know´s why he loaded that way. I think that it´s a Tank from a museum, and safty regulations stoped them from using the autoloader. Safty inspection of the autoloader was mandatory before shooting. A lot of safty switches, took about two houers to controll. The way he did it,he only had to pull aside one switch. And that won´t take a minute

[@danielgyllenbreider]

The perfect ambush/hit and run tank against an overwhelming enemy force in Swedish terrain conditions.

[@DaReaperZ]

"... making everyone miserable" "... gjorde alla nöjda" Either it's sarcasm in text form, or very bad translation.

[@fratercontenduntocculta8161]

It, like every weapon in Swedish service, is defensive in nature. Kinda funny that it appeared in this series, and even funnier is how even in the end of the episode, they closed saying no one really wants it.

[@TheHateAllGuy]

@Skalmans750 do you know how it is improved because i cant think of any thing then better tracks

[@DonMeaker]

@hogge87 it is just that the Gripen is being sold today, when the F-16 has been in service for 20 years.

[@kmzmmz]

@yairbe5 10-15 km/h depending on the surface. Speeds over that is much mor fun than a roller coaster, but you WILL get bruses all over your body. IR sensor will reveal you, but you can´t hit the tank with direct fire. IR sensor´s make me see a human hiding 30 m inside a forrest. That means modern tank´s and afv or what ever will be detected. And yes we had S-tank´s with TNS in our war-company´s

[@EloTheMan1]

@peepeevagi Have you ever been in Sweden? these tanks operates in Swedish terrain and this terrain does not allow for a lot of long range combat. We got a lot of small mountains and the forests here are very thick = excellent cover and camouflage. The movement of ground vehicles are very limited which means the use of roads is inevitable = perfect ambush situation. With the terrain on our side and all resources spent on this tank why would we surrender at the first sign of an invasion?

[@kmzmmz]

That´s for security reasons. You have to have a special training(all crew´s have it) if you want to use the autoloader. There asre some seven security sensors in the loader that have to be aligned in the right way. If they were not, the autoloader won´t work. This is for preventing for instance two granades arriving to the elivator at the same time. So if you don´t have clearence you are not allowed to use the autoloader.In emergency this switches culd be bypassed, with a button "Emergencyload"

[@Skalmans750]

@TheHateAllGuy I know what you mean, but the fact that this tanks was made to move this way, the drivesystem (tracks etc) was made to endure this higher level of preassure as a broken track would be a catastrophy leaving the S completely defenseless.

[@canucks0507]

pretty cool

[@DonMeaker]

@SgtDrDeath Americans are actually rather familiar with it. Very nice for its niche. The amphibious capability in particular is useful for its defensive role.

[@cannasnagler]

Stridsvagn 103 (SV) 72-0 Chieftain (UK), american test classified according to popular myth. 1970s ??? 105 mm L62 rifled Gun(strv103) - 105 mm L52 rifled cannon (M1) Can't be in reverse(wiki) Room was available for an extra crew member, the rear driver, who faced the rear of the tank equipped with a complete setup for driving. This allowed the tank to be driven backwards at the same speed as forwards, keeping its frontal armour pointed at the enemy.

[@unambitious]

I'm telling ya put smart missiles on it for on-the-move engagements and it would be an amazing, simple, sturdy, cheap tank. If I was in charge I would at least supplement my conventional tanks with a group like those aforementioned.

[@TheHateAllGuy]

@kmzmmz 1st in the video he loads it from the outside so how is it loaded on the inside since you operated s tanks and 2nd the tank has a large flaw and that's its gun having no movement what so ever and so it has to pivot and tear up the soil/frost therefore braking the tracks make making only to able to shot in what ever way it is stuck in

[@Razhael83]

The swimming curtain make me laugh, really. lol

[@TheHateAllGuy]

@kmzmmz i did not say anything about moving trees or rocks i said soil cause when that thing rotates the gun/tank soil builds up on the tracks causing more wear then normal thus making them break

[@christianoppelt6267]

Top tank!!

[@kmzmmz]

The reason it was scrapped was political. I was active when we tested M1A, Leo 2s and Le Clerc. The S-tank scored well against them. Using the S-Tank in ofensive was not a problem, you just have to use ANOTHER tactic then the turret tank does. Fmr. Platoon and S-Tank comp Comander for 15 years

[@johanmetreus1268]

Political? In a sense... when Germany was reunited, Sweden got to borrow some former East Germany T-72s for practical trials. One of those trials was shooting at a strv 103. The modern long rod penetrator went straight through the front and out the back. That is why the Leopard 2 was bought right away after the comparative trials were completed, as there was no time to waste on domestical development when the S-tank had to be instantly replaced.

[@RaccooNooB]

@UncleCthulhu it's the best thing for the a fight in sweden. a large turret in the middle of our forrest is not going to be so easy to maneuvre eather.You would have to move it around to be able to aim. So you would have to aim with the whole tank anyways

[@kalasnikoch]

@86celtics tanks dont need to prove themselves to be great, Stridsvagn S was quite groundbreaking and innovative, and if put to the test, i think it would perform very well.

[@redshade734]

look at the video at 3:18, he's loading the main gun apparently, since right after that he shoots.

[@kmzmmz]

The S-tank was the first tank with a joystic,stearing the commanders copula

[@mattias82sweden]

We will never know how well the S-tank would have performed in battle. The American and British tests during the 70's were probably mainly for propaganda purposes. The Americans didn't really bother if the world thought the Swedes had a better tank than the American M60 if it could deter a Soviet offensive through Scandinavia. The S-tank was lighter, cheaper and simpler to operate than conventional tanks which was its most important features.

[@Linush91]

@postal0service They say that there is no direct threat, not that we don't have to defend ourselves.

[@Grand-Wizard-Of-Cheese]

and the all mighty archer

[@vikitheviki]

Your figures must have been swedish soldiers in the finnish army. The voluntary swedish forces was named Battlegroup SFK I and II and fought in Märkäjärvi. It had a total of 8260 men, 727 was from Norway. Another battlegroup with 4000 voluntary swedes, Battlegroup III was also formed but the war ended before they was ever put into action. In Märkäjärvi was 33 dead and about 50 wounded.

[@GodNeedsNoReligion]

There is no crewman loader. It has an autoloader that reloads quickly. The clip they show is only the test round used in the show.

[@kmzmmz]

Part II When the gun traverse, the empty shell is thrown out, using the force of the traverse movment, and the next selected is on its war in the elevator. B.t.w. we moved forward or back, during loading. No big issue in swedish terrain Best regards kmzmmz

[@Oraserogue]

@comecra85 Because it is made for geurilla tactics does NOT mean that it cannot be used for other tasks. A SMG is not made for hunting deer, but can you do it? Yes. Is it THE best choise for doing it? No! This tank is made for geurilla tactics, is it good at it? Yes! Does it have armor and can it support troops at close range? Yes! Is it THE best tank for doing it? No!

[@Thulian]

Greatest Ever. Toplist show about different military systems on the Discovery channel.

[@ibbe1976]

it also a rumor, it was that the tank would be radiocontrolled to be controlled in radioactive areas. in early 1960 when the threat of nuclear weapons was great.

[@gingewhiting1070]

When I was at the Swedish Armour School in Skovde during around 1974, they demonstrated remote control!

[@benho278]

We got the L2 to a bargin price! New technologies for the same price as if we did another update of the old S-tank!

[@kmzmmz]

True, those who go to war using old tactic will loose.

[@Suomipanzerdiv13]

that tank could might fight in finnish terrain too! our terrain is basicly lots of woods too!

[@EmFer5]

I like how it takes a shit when it fires xD

[@white0devil0]

what show is this from?

[@Raafje84]

Well it is designed as an devensive Anti Tank weapon. It is not designed for a fast mobile war. It is really well designed for a war in sweden itself Its fire and retreat for this weapon. Although i believe this defensive role can be realised by Infantry anti tank teams wich we use. Dont forget that modern tanks like the Leopard 2a6 are outfitted with thermal scopes so a s tank can be spotted from miles away if the engine is still warm

[@tyskbulle]

Tank part, its a very good tank and I personaly think we need these more then the more offensive leopard 2 tanks. And as allways whit swedish military equiptment, we allways think they will sell but we never gave a thought that they are custom made for uss and nobody els, just look at JAS Gripen.

[@redreaper-xe6so]

2:50 "MULTI-TRACK DRIFTING!!!"

[@tedo1981]

Well the Maus was build as 2 prototypes then never saw battle, one of them didnt even have a gun. And the same goes for the IS-7, it never got massproduced. If your talking about prototypes you should mention the 1000 ton Ratte aswell :)

[@dragonbutt]

@EloTheMan1 It's amphibious? O.o Had no idea lol. And yeah i guess you got a point. The S tank is a design of a bygone era xD. And a superior defensive weapon, sure. But beyond that it's no more than a mobile pillbox. I'd take an M60A2 over an S-103C Any day. I wouldn't try to go up against S-103D's though. It's not fair with those upgrades lol.

[@EloTheMan1]

@peepeevagi "In 1975, two 103s were tested at the American armour center at Fort Knox. The trial demonstrated the 103 fired more accurately than the M60A1E3, but on an average 0.5 seconds slower." from wikipedia, also Britain has done several tests on the tank and came to the conclusion that the inability to not fire on the move is not a disadvantage. Both got different roles, M60A1 is far more suitable for raids and S103 is better at defending against tanks. Simple truth

[@blidderbla]

True. We have a simular saying here.

[@Suomipanzerdiv13]

its still small! and digging in is easy, so it could work as a low profile AT gun on tracks!

[@ThePenton400]

Why do so many people assume the main weapon HAS to be loaded from the exterior just because it's easier to pop one in the ejector door than running it through the auto-loader. I' building my trumpeter 1/35 S tank as I type.

[@Alex98714]

@Dinox242 How is it not a tank?

[@yairbe5]

@Douche082 well duh but the ammo dosnt have to be exopsed there are podes made to protect the shells from hit on the S tank the shells are poorlly protected and i highlly dought you can turn the tank 180 degrees in a second without moving in a vary high speed many modern taks are just 0.6 meters higher and besides in modern combat the enemy has hundreds of setelite photos of every inch of your'e country tanks have IR cemeras meaning that hiding behind somthing wont work

[@Joeltravels]

1:29 Well, back then, as now, Finland would be in between soviet and SWE. Geopolitics must always be considered. SWE was of course aware of the different ways of attack, and that is why our military was as versatile as it was, but keeping in mind both that the closest way was going straight across the baltic sea, either by plane or boat, and that the soviet baltic sea fleet had an unforgiving capacity, we put a lot of effort on stopping any invasion in its early stages. We Were ready.

[@TheHateAllGuy]

@kaptenmange if i know what a stug is i know how fricking self propelled guns works and that is what i mean they are saying thats its a new idea

[@Grand-Wizard-Of-Cheese]

it turn faster then a turret on a tank

[@wojtekimbier]

If I had enough money and had to select between this tank and lamborghini murcielago, I'd buy the tank.

[@solitajre222]

We are the ones ambushing, remember: we are neutral and have no need or intention of having any offensive action. We have no enemies but we are prepared.

[@spadehatesscrewtube]

ablative armor isnt a new thing, im well aware of it. a gas tank is just stupid to me, thats all. hell theres rockets for armor of all things suppsedly to intercept and explode harmlessly incoming heat/heap rounds. not sure how well the idea works in practice though, you dont really see a lot of this kind of armor anymore, im sure theres a reason.

[@Styvistan]

I don´t think there is a textbook definition of the difference between a MTB and a tank destroyer. It´s been suggested that a MTB has a rotating turret while a tank destroyer has a fixed turret or lacks a turret at all. My personal opinion is that it´s semantics but what the S-tank NOT is, is an assault gun. An assault gun is used to support an infantry assault, kind of a direct firing howitzer. The s-tank was never ment to have that role.

[@kmzmmz]

There is no emusement park in the world that can offer the sesation of doing a 180 at 50km/h. Man, your inner organs don´t quite catch up, it was not uncommon that crew member´s tooth fillings fell out. I would trade my 3 year old Audi A8 for an S-tank any day any time. Former S-Tank Comp. Capt.

[@kmzmmz]

Did you know that if you press a button in the tank it sinks dow an lay flat on the ground. That ment you culd drive far enugh forvard to expose the Gun,and then lower the entire tank 3-4dm. Raising the Tank to shoot took lless then a second.Pressong a button and only the commander could see,relese the button the tank could shoot.Whitout moving a mm forward.Capt. platoon ans S-Tank Comp. Comander(Ret)

[@redshade734]

not exactly, your right about the semantics thing but it can't be an MBT because that stands for Main Battle Tank, it's supposed to be versatile, useful in all sorts of situations, but this "tank" is only useful in forested areas where you can't turn the turret or tight spaces. an assault gun, originally, was an anti tank gun, mounted on a quick chassis, and made to fire rounds in quick succession. tank destroyer just had an armor piercing specific cannon design.

[@johanmetreus1268]

You got it backwards. The 103 was more than capable to operate in the southern flatlands, but the Centurions wasn't doing very well in dense forests.

[@K1ngRob1]

But a normal tank could turn it's turret while rotating its hull in the same direction, which surely would be faster. Though this tank has its unique, interesting advantages.