With the Swedish tech tree announced, we figured that people might be interested in knowing how closely it aligns with historical Swedish tank designs, so we can pre-emptively fend off accusations of paper tanks and clones, etc. Let’s have a look at each tank in the tree to see how it holds up to closer scrutiny.
Originally a German design called LK II, but it was never used in its country of origin. Ten tanks were delivered to the Swedish army in 1921-1922. They were in service until the late 30’s, mainly as tech demonstrators and for tank doctrine studies – they were not really intended for use in the field.
Designed at AB Landsverk in Landskrona, Sweden as a member of the rather successful L-60 family of light tanks. The Swedish army bought 16 tanks of this early variant, with deliveries starting in 1938. The in-game version also includes modules from an improved variant, strv m/39 – another 20 tanks of that variant were delivered 1939-1940. Both variants were in service until 1957.
A further upgrade of the strv m/38 and m/39. The in-game version also includes modules from the m/40K variant. A total of 180 tanks delivered to the Swedish army between 1941 and 1944. Strv m/40L remained in service until 1957, m/40K until 1960.
Designed at AB Landsverk in Landskrona, Sweden in the late 1930’s for the export market, more specifically Hungary. One prototype was manufactured and tested. The design was then adapted into the strv m/42.
Based on the Lago, this tank was developed in cooperation between AB Landsverk and the Royal Army Ordnance Administration for the Swedish army. A total of 282 were delivered to the Swedish army between 1943 and 1945 in various configurations. The tank in its original form remained in service until 1957-1960, at which point most were modernized and turned into strv 74’s.
A strv m/42 with a slightly modified chassis and a new turret, designed by the Royal Army Administration. 225 were built from existing strv m/42 hulls in 1957-1960, and most were in service with the Swedish army until the late 1970’s, with some examples surviving as late as 1984.
Designed at AB Landsverk in Landskrona, Sweden for the export market in the late 1940’s. The design was offered to Siam (today’s Thailand), Pakistan, Ireland and Switzerland, but there were no buyers and the design remained on paper.
These designs are from various stages of the Royal Army Ordnance Administration’s EMIL project, which aimed to develop a new modern tank for the Swedish army, starting in 1951. EMIL and EMIL II are based on paper designs from earlier stages in the project, while Kranvagn is based on the final design. Two prototype hulls of that design were built and tested (with one being convered to the artillerikanonvagn 151 SPG that was a prototype for the bandkanon 1), but the turret only got to the wooden mockup stage. The project was cancelled in 1958.
An experimental mini-SPG useful for both AA and TD duties, designed by the Royal Army Ordnance Administration and intended for company-level support for armored formations. One prototype built and tested as a feasibility study in 1942. The designation is fictional – it was never given a name.
Designed as a cooperation between AB Landsverk and AB Bofors in the late 1940’s and early 1950’s in response to a Swedish army request for a very light infantry support SPG. 36 delivered to the army starting in 1952. Was soon upgraded and upgunned and then renamed the ikv 102, and in that form it remained in service until the mid-1970’s.
An infantry support SPG (think StuG) based on the Czech TNH light tank chassis, designed at the Royal Army Ordnance Administration in cooperation with AB Scania-Vabis in Södertälje, Sweden between 1942 and 1944. A total of 36 were delivered to the Swedish army between 1944 and 1947. They remained in service until 1973.
An improved version of the ikv 72. 81 delivered to the Swedish army starting in 1956. Like the ikv 102’s, they remained in service until the mid-1970’s.
Ikv 65 alt II
Designed at AB Landsverk in Landskrona, Sweden in the late 1960’s as a response to a Swedish army request for proposals for a new infantry support light SPG. There were many alternative designs from several different companies – this was Landsverk’s most detailed one and the one they favored. A very detailed scale model was built, but since a competitor’s design was chosen instead, the design otherwise remained on paper.
Ikv 90 typ B
Designed at AB Bofors in Karlskoga, Sweden in the late 1960’s as another response to the request mentioned above. Just like in the Landsverk case, the design remained on paper since AB Hägglund & söner’s design was chosen instead.
Designed at the Defence Materiel Administration in cooperation with AB Hägglund & söner and AB Bofors in the early 1970’s as an experiment with a lighter, cheaper strv 103. Two prototypes were built and tested.
Designed at the Royal Army Administration in cooperation with AB Bofors in the late 1950’s and early 1960’s, initially as a feasibility study, but then as response to a Swedish army demand for a new tank. The 103-0 represents the “zero-series” of about a dozen prototypes built in the mid-60’s. Was not in any way a TD or a defensive tank.
The “real” production version of the strv 103-0. The original version, strv 103A, only lasted for three years and 70 tanks – all 70 were immediately upgraded to 103B standard almost as soon as they got off the production line. A total of 290 strv 103’s were delivered to the Swedish army between 1967 and 1971. They remained in service until the mid-1990’s.
So, to sum it up: out of ten lights/mediums/heavies, a total of five were in service in the Swedish army, two were prototypes and three remained on paper or as a mockup. Out of nine TD’s, four were in service, three were prototypes and two remained on paper. Other than the strv fm/21, which was a German design, and Sav m/43, which was based on a Czech chassis, all were designed and developed in Sweden.
RG: Thanks to Renhanxue and sp15. 🙂
37 thoughts on “How much paper is there in the Swedish tree?”
Very nice read there
Holy slooped armor batman! I know that tds going to be the new T95 and extremely Gold immune. HE will be needed for that one o.o GOOD we need more anti-gold tanks
If I remember correctly, the front of the S-Tank is only around 40-50mm, so even lower-caliber HE will work wonders against it
Bloody oath mate
is there any in game footage for Strv 103’s? i really wonder aiming mechanics.
I suppose there is basically no bloom when moving the hull
that seems like the only soution with a bigger aim circle to compansate zero aiming time.
is there an “in game” fotte in this video? if so, they made the graphics extremely realistic!
We have seen still images, but no movment yet.
Bleach just ended, but this makes up for it
Clorox never ends
Is there a possibility that we`re also getting the turreted td line at some point?
Well we never had any turreted TD’s that i know of. Paper designs or otherwise.. But i guess the UDES XX20 technically could be called a turreted tank destroyer even if it was meant to be an LT.. But i’d be very VERY surprised if that thing ever made it into the game. 🙂
Infanterikanonvagn 91 lies in the borderland between light tank and turreted TD.
I have to say it is better than I imagined. TD line is a bit too advance in the middle tiers but let’s say it is acceptable. Anyway far much better than fantasised heavy Japanese tanks.
O-I and O-I exp are same tank (O-I has later stage turrets and extra armour bolted on) and one was constructed, there are documents to suggest an O-Ho was built, there is photographic evidence of the Type 2406 (Type 4 Heavy) and the Tiers II-IV were all built. The only “fantasy tank” is actually the O-Ni. (Type 5 heavy was a design for a Type 4 with a smaller engine)
I do wonder if there are game advantages to making the Strv 103 a TD – do they get better camo, for instance? better use of a camo net or paint?
Well, people wouldn’t complain about “Wah! Why M3 Lee Top tier Med!” with it as a TD 😛
Anyways, considering that it was designed for stealthy Hit-And-Run tactics, it will probably have very nice camo (and if I recall, TDs loose less stealth when firing than other classes)
The reduced loss of camo rating after firing for TDs is long gone
Ah. Couldn’t remember if that was still a “feature” or not
rita, can u and jingles pls photobomb qb’s stream in cologne?
“Was not in any way a TD or a defensive tank.”
It was not considered a TD, but the design itself was considered to be used in a defensive role. If it came to going on the offensive, that would have been the role taken on by the Strv 81. (
I believe one of its designers said it best,
“If they get behind us, we have already lost.”
“If it came to going on the offensive, that would have been the role taken on by the Strv 81”
That is not true. And you can expect a article on why the Strv 103 isnt a defensive tank relatively soon.
It will pretty much be a cleaned up version of this.
Hmm, that info came from some old documentarys about it.
Everything I’ve read/seen about it suggests that the tank was specifically designed to be used against the Soviet Union in the outbreak of war and the invasion of Sweden.
But call me curious to see what you have to say about it.
Another problem with WOT. They use to say the game had tanks up to the 50s, but that was awhile ago. Now they have modern tanks fighting WW2 era and earlier tanks. This game has gone to such crap since it was introduced. Nerfing is a full time job over at WOT. Pay real money for a tank only to have it nerfed so they new line of modern grind tanks can rip you a new one. SO hate this game now. I started Armored Warfare and it is 10 times better. So see ya WOT. Hope to see this game crash and burn real soon.
By that standard this game hasent been about WW2 tanks sense the French line was introduced in 2012…
WOW then be happy with currupt AW
Better Corrupt AW than shot to shit, wasted, piece of Russian biased bullshit, utterly corrupt WoT with official numbers that doesn’t correlate to ingame reality. (Specs on tanks looking even but Russian tanks performing better than the specs say in traversing, acceleration, alpha damage etc, long list)
So yeah GG Fanboying….
@Wolf That’s the response you’ll give to anyone who thinks WoT is… well, ANYTHING better than a complete abomination. So pls, why are you even here?
im not fanboy..then play with russian tanks if theyre OP
The S-tank fstarted production in 1967, that puts it on-par with other pre-composite armour tanks like the Leopard 1 (1965), M60 (1960), AMX30 (1966) etc which are all in the game. The upgrades they all received later would make them OP in-game, but we’re only using the original models.
You, sir, are tragically misinformed. There has never been a strict age limit, rather, tanks could not be too modern. Smoothbores were and are largely out of the question. The T49 is just about the only exception to that rule in the game AFAIK. Feel absolutely free to play whatever you like, but do try to keep the BS to a minimum.
Please dont be OP WG
Wasn’t the Emil the tank thats like the 50B but with more IS-3 armor and a 15cm gun?
IKV 90 Typ B is bert’s long lost TD twin
Where did that info come from saying that Siam was offered the Strv Leo design?
I am very doubtful of the accuracy of this article.