Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Rnd 1 Grp 3 - T-62 (Soviet Union/Russia) vs Strv 103 'S' Tank (Sweden)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Rnd 1 Grp 3 - T-62 (Soviet Union/Russia) vs Strv 103 'S' Tank (Sweden)

    Round 1, Group 3: T-62 (Soviet Union/Russia) vs Strv 103 'S' Tank (Sweden)


    This is another quite ‘different’ pairing; T-62 vs S-103.

    Whatever the original intent of its design, the T-62 can be said to have effectively become a supplement to, rather than a replacement for, the T-55. Indeed, T-55 production continued after that for T-62. That said, the T-62 was nevertheless produced in large numbers. Also, it has seen considerable service with at least 20 countries and participated in numerous conflicts. Its 115mm main gun – the first smoothbore tank gun to see action – represented a significant upward step from the 100mm armament of T-55; and T-62 could be very effective in battle.

    The Strv 103 (or, S-103; commonly known as the “S Tank”) is fascinating, unique and – to some at least – controversial. It has no turret as such and the main armament – a 105mm gun – is fixed in the superstructure. Traverse is achieved by fine adjustment of the sensitive and precise steering; while elevation is by graduated tilting of the suspension, which can raise or lower the front and rear of the vehicle up or down. Dispensing with a turret allows the S-103 to have a very low profile, which is especially useful in an AFV intended for primarily defensive employment.

    Your choice again: The T-62, which appears almost like “a T-55 on steroids” and has seen quite a lot of action; or the unusual and intriguing Strv 103 which has seen no action but has certainly added some excitement and interest to tank development.


    Only one of these two candidates will make it to the next round!

    Which of them is the most significant and/or influential?



    Candidate #40 - T-62 (Soviet Union/Russia)

    Service Entry – around 1963
    Weight – 40 metric tons
    Top Speed – 50 km/h (31 mph)
    Main Armament – 115mm smoothbore gun
    No. Produced – 23,000 (approx.)

    For further info, check this on wiki:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-62












    Candidate #44 - Strv 103 'S' Tank (Sweden)

    Service Entry – 1964/65
    Weight – 40-43 metric tons
    Top Speed – 50 km/h (31 mph)
    Main Armament – 105mm gun
    No. Produced – about 300

    For further info, check wiki here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_103












    Consider the criteria with care! You decide!

    88
    T-62 (Soviet Union/Russia)
    80.68%
    71
    Strv 103 'S' Tank (Sweden)
    19.32%
    17

    The poll is expired.

    Last edited by Skoblin; 27 Jun 14, 00:31.
    "Chatfield, there seems to be something wrong with our bloody ships today!"
    Vice Admiral Beatty to Flag Captain Chatfield; Battle of Jutland, 31 May - 1 June, 1916.

  • #2
    The T-62 had some problems. I recall stories about the combustible ammunition rounds not always going through the shell ejector. It did have a turret though and I think a tank with a turret should be better than a tank destroyer.

    Pruitt
    Pruitt, you are truly an expert! Kelt06

    Have you been struck by the jawbone of an ASS lately?

    by Khepesh "This is the logic of Pruitt"

    Comment


    • #3
      Well the Stidsvagn 103 was novel and technically sophisticated, bit of a head turner, but the T 62 was a bread and butter tank or in marketing speech a cash cow. One cannot disregard cash cows. Hence my vote: T 62.

      Ed.
      The repetition of affirmations leads to belief. Once that belief becomes a deep conviction, you better wake up and look at the facts.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by dutched View Post
        Well the Stidsvagn 103 was novel and technically sophisticated, bit of a head turner, but the T 62 was a bread and butter tank or in marketing speech a cash cow. One cannot disregard cash cows. Hence my vote: T 62.

        Ed.
        Seconded.
        Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by dutched View Post
          Well the Stidsvagn 103 was novel and technically sophisticated, bit of a head turner, but the T 62 was a bread and butter tank or in marketing speech a cash cow. One cannot disregard cash cows. Hence my vote: T 62.

          Ed.
          Seconded. Plus the 103 does not appear to have spawned follow-on designs.
          Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

          Comment


          • #6
            The S-Tank was a wonderfully different design, Well done Swedes!. but it's too limited in it's application I would hate to see it in a Urban combat environment... poor little S-tank.

            So I must vote for the T-62.
            BoRG
            "... and that was the last time they called me Freakboy Moses"

            Comment


            • #7
              T-62 also played a role in the development of T-72. Strv 103 was, while technically interesting, a one-off that appeared just before stabilization technology would render many of its features unnecessary.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by DogDodger View Post
                T-62 also played a role in the development of T-72. Strv 103 was, while technically interesting, a one-off that appeared just before stabilization technology would render many of its features unnecessary.
                Agreed, the Strv-103 was a most interesting concept, but turned-out to be a dead-end as far as further development was concerned.
                "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
                Samuel Johnson.

                Comment


                • #9
                  The Strv looks like a development of the German Jajd tank destroyers of Ww2.
                  "To be free is better than to be unfree - always."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    T-62 gets my vote.
                    “When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun'.”
                    ― Groucho Marx

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      While the T62 did serve as a test bed for T72,other than avoiding the mistakes it had little to do with the development of future Sov tanks.
                      I love the S tank,it is a genius design aimed solely at one countries defensive problems and would have given any invading armour a real headache.
                      It has proved not to be influential but only because no other country had the same problem as Sweden,the tank is miniscule and would be very hard to see,let alone hit onjce it has dug itself in with its own inbuilt dozer blade.

                      In my opinion the jury is hung regarding influence between the two.
                      Neither influenced any successor or potential enemy development.

                      I don't rate this tank very highly at all but have to go T62 only for its actual use.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by flash View Post
                        While the T62 did serve as a test bed for T72,other than avoiding the mistakes it had little to do with the development of future Sov tanks.

                        In my opinion the jury is hung regarding influence between the two.
                        Neither influenced any successor or potential enemy development.

                        I don't rate this tank very highly at all but have to go T62 only for its actual use.
                        The gun of the T-62 was very significant, it shaped NATO tank design and doctrine.
                        Кто там?
                        Это я - Почтальон Печкин!
                        Tunis is a Carthigenian city!

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Although the S Tank is a very innovative design, it isn't a "tank - it's a self-propelled anti-tank gun. It's not in the same class as the T-62 or any other MBT.
                          Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I agree with Mountain Man.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The only significance the S Tank has is it's chassis. It's an interesting design, but that's it.
                              ALL LIVES SPLATTER!

                              BLACK JEEPS MATTER!

                              BLACK MOTORCYCLES MATTER!

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              • asterix
                                New York AG to sue the NRA
                                by asterix
                                New York Attorney General Letitia James launches lawsuit against the National Rifle Association alleging financial discrepancies:

                                https...
                                Today, 05:46
                              • casanova
                                Emanuel Macron
                                by casanova
                                The French president Emmanuel Macron visited Beirut, Libanon. He watched the devastation in the city, caused by the Amoniumnitrat explosion....
                                Today, 01:27
                              • casanova
                                Beirut
                                by casanova
                                A awful, dedoerate situation for the population in Beirut, Libanon. A Amoniumnitrat-explosion was the cause of the catastrophe....
                                Yesterday, 23:35
                              Working...
                              X