>sweden has tanks without turrets because turrets are considered offensive to transgenders in the army
When will sweden stop embarrassing itself
wat
>>27935128
>ITS THE CURRENT YEAR TWENTY FIFTEEEEN I MEAN CAWM ON
can you imagine
Stridsvagn!
>>27935128
Please try to be a little bit funnit when obviuos baiting.
The brown parts are to bright.
![rooikat[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/PM9uQiP.jpg "rooikat[1].jpg")
>>27935128
Thats actually called a tank destroyer. They fire enormous rounds with huge cartridge loads and can penetrate any modern armor. The turrets don't move because the blast would knock the tank over if fired from a perpendicular angle.
>>27935128
>but the s-tank has been scrapped for 20 years...
>>27935128
It's funny because they got rid of these for German tanks
Seriously the last turretless design foiled by the Germans. These things were so good, kept up with the Abrams in live fire target acquisition tests and can easily function with a crew of only 2 if needed. Behind emplacements these things are unstoppable in terms of defensive capability with the insane armor slope
>>27935237
Defensive yes, but not offensive, If you can't fire and move at the same time then you would have to divide your armor budget between both types of armor. Tank Destroyers are not as versatile as MBTs, they're powerful and effective at their intended task but sometimes budgets are more important
>>27935272
Yes, but swedes aren't exactly going on wars of conquest for the past 100 years are they?
For it's purpose as a defensive implement it's fucking perfect
>>27935272
You fail to realise that the s-tank was concieved during the 1960s when you could fire and move anyway. Or rather, hoping to hit something. If you wanted to hit something, you stopped, aimed and fired, and the s-tank was faster at that than any other tank. Gun travel was also much greater than designs with turrets.
>>27935128
>sweden
>>27935324
>Yes, but swedes aren't exactly going on wars of conquest for the past 100 years are they?
Not yet.
>>27935478
That pic got outdated in the fall of 2014 though
>>27935501
it's probably even worse now. They probably added some diversity into cabinets.
But it doesn't really matter. The very fact that they would put these retards in charge of defending countries tells you everything about how insane these countries are.
>>27935478
>100% women
>Now we have diversity!
>>27935566
>it's 2015
>>27935673
Is the minister of defence still going to be that gurka?
>>27935816
Sihk. And he will cut off your balls and feed them to you like he did to Daesh in Afghanistan if you try to fuck with him.
>>27935543
Well, the defence minister in sweden is an old white guy. Socialist pig though, the true leader are knugen and the supreme commander.
![ShermansinCologne[1].jpg~original.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/KXJIuk7.jpg "ShermansinCologne[1].jpg~original.jpg")
>>27935324
Being able to seek and destroy in any environment with alot of cover is a mandatory role that must be covered in mainland defense. If you don't have MBTs to fill this role, then you're fucked.
I think a tank destroyer crew could be very effective in such environments but a well crewed armor with a rotating turret beats the tank destroyer.
Guns are a little but intimidating too with those long phallic barrels. They should be removed. Oh wait they're black? It's okay then, make them longer so we can trick young girls into thinking pavement chimps have bigger dicks. Gotta start programming them young.
Bullets have to go though, or be more diversified. We should hire refugees to paint each bullet a different color of the rainbow. $25/hr should be a good starting salary.
>>27935128
No turret means a cheaper tank and you don't need turrets if you plan to use your tank defensively since you can just point the tank at the most advantageous position your enemy will have to drive their tanks through.
>>27935167
Blerrie mooi rooikat daai broer
>>27935816
Sikh
He was a Lt Col in the reserve and did a tour in Bosnia and 3 tours in Afghanistan
If you've got professionals like doctors, soldiers, etc in your parliament might as well assign them to the portfolios they're familiar with
>>27935673
To be fair he did choose a sikh combat vet for minister of defense, which is basically the anti-kebab
>>27935959
>Strv. 103
>cheap and simple
![udes12[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/9R97BO6.jpg "udes12[1].jpg")
Turret eh?
>>27935543
The Russian MoD is a career bureaucrat and politician who never served in the military. Our current SecDef has a B.A. in Medieval History and still manages to have more applicable experience and history than Sergey Shoygu.
>>27935959
>No turret means a cheaper tank
In this case it meant they would need a top tier suspension system capable of aiming the whole fucking tank.
https://youtu.be/HUPfnAbFlfU?t=2m18s
someone said Strv 103 with ERA?
>>27936105
yes, Mr. I cant attach a fucking picture
>>27935128
>turrets are considered offensive to transgenders in the army
Lol how
>>27935128
1. Go fuck yourself, S-Tanks are neat
2. Sweden hasn't used them for years, they use pic related.
3. >>>/pol/
>>27935167
It was used as a main battle tank in the Swedish army.
>>27935478
>military experience of the Defence minister of Sweden in the picture:
>officer in the amphibious corps
>military experience of the Defence minister of Russia in the picture:
>none
>>27936410
Because my genderfluid transethnic otherkin headmate said so!
We don't need reasons or fact or logic, we have FEELINGS
>>27936802
Its mission was to dig in and remove as much of the soulless horde of soviet tanks it can until the nukes purge the earth
That's... not how this works
To be fair, S-Tanks were fucking cool.
![167A7A3F4D5491F10BB677[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/2loJfel.jpg "167A7A3F4D5491F10BB677[1].jpg")
Daily remainder that the strv 103 managed to defeat leopard 2 (strv 122 to be precise) formations in both defensives and offensive roles.
>>27935167
>tank destroyer
>Strv 103
>enormous rounds
>105mm L7
>penetrate any modern armor
>105mm from the sixties
>turrets can't rotate in tank destroyers
>posts an AFV
At least try to have one element right.
>>27936410
In the name of equality. Most vehicles were made without turrets so giving the tanks turret privilege would offend the rest of the motor pool. They have the right to identify as whatever vehicle they wish so some feel they are tanks with turrets built in a tank destroyer's chassis. Acceptance of trans-role operationsfluid combat vehicles is important to Sweden, from the Gotland submarine that identifies as a liferaftkin or the Gripen who had a conn tower, hangars and flight deck elevators installed to house it's headplanes.
>>27937740
That dark and beautiful post made me hard. Thank you, anon.
>>27936856
Sadly, no. As of 2014, our defence minister has served a whole 57 days of conscription, after which he demanded weapons-free duty. He's anti-NATO and pro-palestine.
Point and laugh at the dingus, /k/. Point and laugh.
>>27937823
I remember that exercise, though i was merely an engineer at the time. Our older officers gloated for months afterwards.
>>27937892
but thats sorta why it was built, it wasnt built for offensive purposes or spearheading advances on the enemy armor, it was made to hold a line
>>27937823
why would that be surprising? A tank destroyer defeats a tank. Isn't that exactly what they are specialized in.
>>27938040
A fairly common misconception imo, it was actually great at taking territory as well. I suppose its difficult to imagine if you havent seen combined arms and several experienced tank platoons working together, but tank warfare isnt just "full speed across the terrain guns blazing".
>>27938121
for the last damn time, it is not a tank destroyer
>>27937850
that was neither funny nor intelligent. stop posting.
>>27936802
We had Centurions for that.
>>27938200
KOM INGEN NU PRITT-MARIE, KÖR FÖR FA AN
>>27935156
Reaction image material right there.
wow, a stridsvagn 103 thread
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiWCpIJ5dBw
>http://imgur.com/a/1iSr0
>>27935673
turbo fuckboi
Just posting this in case anyone wants to see more swedish cold war stuff, this thread has tons
>>27936612
>>27938671
whoops
>>27932303 *
>>27938679
Tack mannen.
>>27938691
nemas problemas
>>27936802
MBT isn't really what you would call it. Assault gun is more accurate
STRV
T
R
V
>>27938738
käften.
>>27938738
>I am unable to comprehend that it is not physical features that define a vehicles classification but the doctrine and battlefield use
Yes, tanks can have a casemate instead of a turret. They use it as an MBT so its a fucking MBT.
>>27937850
>all tonks were created equal
>>27939821
But they didn't use it as an mbt.
>>27940851
Oh yeah ? In that case, why did they call it a Stridsvagn instead of Pansarvärnkanonvagn ?
>>27940851
>But they didn't use it as an mbt.
>We're calling this an MBT
>We're using it as our MAIN BATTLE TANK
>Some autist on fucking 4chan says its not
>Oh well, looks like it isn't
Stop being a fucking idiot anon.
>>27935128
That TD is actually loaded with a killer autoloader and designed to play heavy in the defense of Sweden as a reserve tank now that they use the STRV 122 which is basically a Leopard 2A4 with modern ammo.
>>27941070
How does combatwagon turn into main battle tank?
>>27941343
>used purely as a defensive tank destroyer
>this means it's a tank
>meanwhile the Centurions still in use were used as the exploitation force and offensive unit
>but they're not the MBTs
I can't even
>>27941365
>reserve tank
Almost all of them were sold as scrap i the late 90s-early 00s.
>>27935965
if hes qualified why are people upset?
>>27941418
My bad i don't know all the happenings of modern Swedish military news.
>>27941399
>used as a MAIN BATTLE TANK
>this means its a tank
>centurions are LITERALLY also MAIN BATTLE TANKS
Are you this fucking dense?
Are you REALLY this fucking dense?
>>27941469
>used as a main battle tank
>literally never used in offensive planning
>literally used as a tank destroyer platform
>B-B-B-B-BUT IT'S A MAIN BATTLE TANK CUZ I SAY SO
At this point it seems more like you're just trying to convince yourself.
>>27941374
Same way that "char de bataille", "carro de combate", "czołg podstawowy" or "carro da combattimento" (amongst others) translate into MBT, I guess. It's not like "tank" is very descriptive anyways.
STRVs are a goddamned adorable. So and low to the ground, they're like a StuG that's all grown up!
>>27941497
I want to fuck it and make tiny little StuGs with it.
>>27941490
>sweden
>offensive planning
>1945-1991
Its a fucking main battle tank because the fucking swedes called it a main battle tank, used it as THEIR MAIN BATTLE TANK. Why is this so difficult? Why can't you get over the vehicles characteristics? Why don't you see this literally doesn't matter?
I really am sorry that you are unable to comprehend that PHYSICAL FEATURES literally don't MATTER. I understand this is difficult with your medieval world war two knowledge of tanks which is not applicable at all.
I know this is going to trigger you but the Ikv 91 is a Tank destroyer for Sweden although classified as a light tank by other nations.
I know, its a mind blowing concept but different nations classify vehicles differently
![P5ikv[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/j4OcVco.jpg "P5ikv[1].jpg")
>>27941490
>literally never used in offensive planning
Yeah, because swedish planning during the cold war included a lot of offensives.
Also, I invite you to reread the with two lines of >>27937823.
>>27941530
Already done (Ikv 103). And it's the cutest ever.
>>27941551
>sweden
>offensive planning
>1945-1991
>there is no such thing as counter attacks or flanking attacks
We're done here.
>>27941493
>Being pedantic and getting caught up in literal translations instead of the military concept of the MBT
Yes yes, and Panzer doesn't technically always mean tank because blah blah who cares.
>>27941568
>We're done here.
We were done the moment you applied antiquated terminology and classifications to cold war vehicles.
We were done the moment you decided that the Swedes were in fact totally wrong with their own classification of military vehicles whereas you, autist on 4chan was correct instead. Sorry Sweden, looks like anon knows better.
But I guess the S-Tank wasn't there to replace the Centurion, you know, their previous MBT.
You're totally right anon. The S-Tank is going into the same category as the kanonenjagdpanzer 'cause it dunt have a turret or dem fancy MBT features.
>>27935128
I'd totally fund a HT-95-ish Levkov tank.
![m2cVQe2[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/6G3hwIQ.jpg "m2cVQe2[1].jpg")
>>27941573
Your point?
In the meantime, have some more turretless swedish designs.
>>27941646
What was yours, if you had one that is?
All I see is you being pedantic about language instead of what actually mattered - the doctrine employed.
Who cares what you call it when it conforms to essentially the same comparable doctrine?
>>27941619
>antiquated terminology
>the swedes quite literally never used them as MBTs but instead as tank destroyers
>B-B-BUT DEY DEFINITELLY CALLED DEM MBTS!
>Meanwhile in reality, they did not
>B-B-B-BUT DEY USED DEM DAT WAY
>Meanwhile in reality, they did not
>B-B-BUT MUH OTHER CULTURES
Nah brah, you lost a long time ago.
>>27941686
>the swedes quite literally never used them as MBTs but instead as tank destroyers
So what you're telling me is that the vehicles the called MBTs, employ as MBTs are infact tank destroyers?
Would you like to tell the swedes that they've got their terminology wrong and that they're using them incorrectly?
'cause right now you're arguing against a countries own classification.
>>27941686
he is right. we mostly didnt use them as TDs, even thogh they excelled in that role, we used them pretty much as any other MBT
![103dummy[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/2IRXE8X.jpg "103dummy[1].jpg")
>>27941674
Well, the initial question was
>How does combatwagon turn into main battle tank?
I assumed it was a litteral one.
After all, not everyone here has english as his native language.
Pic : prototype mock-up 103 (with 20mm autocannon)
>>27941686
>I know better than the country actually employing the vehicle
>who classified the vehicle
>who call it an MBT
>on an american tank porn sharing site
>in the year of our lord 2015
>I am seriously going to maintain this position with a straight face
>>27941734
>I know better than what retards on 4chan say about how the country actually employed the vehicle
Fix'd that for ya :3
![9032-1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/h1GPFB7.jpg "9032-1[1].jpg")
>>27941686
Nah man just look at a swedish armored battalion TOE, even there you can see that they were used as MBTs.
The Ikvs and the Recoilless Rifles/ATGMs on Terrängbils or Pbv 302s were the TDs.
>>27941374
This is Stridsvagn 122. Stridsvagn is the Swedish word for tank. Not tank destroyer or infantry support gun, just tank.
>>27941763
>The country calls this vehicle an MBT is wrong
>I say that its a tank destroyer instead despite having no authority to do so
And who are you that we are to bow so low?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiWCpIJ5dBw
>>27941763
Don't expect us to spoonfeed you ; we gave you enough elements for you to do your research and form an informed opinion. If you want to miss an occasion to educate yourself and continue sprouting nonsense, your loss. We already know the truth, some of us first hand because we were in the swedish army/worked with them, so we're not gonna leave this thread dumber than we entered, so...
>>27935324
The S tank was meant to be fast and mobile which is why it has a turbine
It was an offensive tank ironically
>>27941686
It's not a tank destroyer faggot.
>>27941809
>19.35
WHO DARED DISTURB MY SLUMBER!
>>27938018
Hultqvist stopped the budget cuts, commissioned an investigation and followed the advice of the commission and increased the budget of the military. He is, by far, the best defence minister for the Swedish military we've had in years. Enström was a sell-out that just did what the government told her to- lie about our capabilities, contradict the supreme commander and tone down the problems.
I know that it's difficult to grasp as the moderates have always been seen as "pro military" but this is simply because they've been in opposition. Their two stints as governing since the cold war resulted in the largest military cuts in Sweden since after world war 1. Please check your facts and stop spouting unconfirmed but sadly popular opinions.
So I guess this is not a tank because it has no turret.
>>27935482
kek
>>27942895
Looks like you forgot to put a turret on that Lemann Russ tank.
>>27938200
>mfw it throws a track
Jiddrar du så dör du.
>>27941530
STRV confirmed for cutest tank waifu.
>>27941809
I would trade my first born son for that. He is sitting next to me watching tv so it ain't no joke either.
>>27935673
I like how a non-answer like that is somehow considered an answer.
It's a badass tank, it could also swim.
Why drag /pol/ memes into tanks and firearms?
>>27942634
No, thats just not true. The supreme commander, Sverker Göransson FORCED the government to do something. If you are going to thank anyone, thank him.
>>27946199
The former supreme commander tried to force the former government to do something. His public statements about the readiness and capacity of the Swedish military was well within the mandate of the former government yet they didn't do anything. S built part of its' election strategy on this and, actually quite surprisingly, came through and made good on its' election promises.
>>27938271
Ja, Imam Sverige!
>>27935920
nice, i stood at this exact point just yesterday
>>27944253
>mfw strv
