Original Source: https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000.htm
Project "Stridsvagn-2000"
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-1.jpg
Background
Although the tank studies in the late 1970s, in line with the defence decisions, changed direction to produce a light tank family (what later came to be known as the Combat Vehicle 90), the need for a new Swedish main battle tank remained. Refurbishment and modification of the tank heritage - Strv 101/102/104 and Strv 103 - could in itself temporarily extend the service life to match the perceived threats, but for the 21st century a weapon system was probably required that could better meet the future (standard*).
At the Army Staff quarters, the Armour Inspector, Colonel 1 Björn Zickerman, had been the driving force in providing a clear objective and role for a new light combat vehicle (Combat Vehicle 90), but he also urged the need for a new tank. In all the statements of the Armour Inspector and the Armour Division of the Army Staff, it was repeated as a ceterum censeo "...but first the army must have a new tank".
In 1984, the FMV therefore ordered the resumption of studies on a new tank system. The game map produced within the framework of the UDES studies had to form the basis for a Swedish-developed alternative. In parallel, the door was also kept open for direct procurement or licensed production of a foreign alternative. The studies were to lead to a decision-making basis for the 1991 defence decision (what was later to become FB 92).
It was the head of the FMV's combat vehicle bureau - Colonel Sture Ärlebäck - who led the resumed tank studies. Starting values and requirements were gradually anchored in a broadly composed reference group with representatives from the army, FMV and FOA - including the mythical "Häringeinternaten". In 1990, Sture Ärlebäck became head of the FMV Vehicle Department and Colonel 1.
The studies were conducted within the framework of a project that came to be known as "Stridsvagn 2000" (Combat Vehicle 2000). Although this term stood for all conceivable solutions, it gradually became synonymous with a Swedish-developed alternative. HB Utveckling AB - the joint venture between AB Bofors and AB Hägglunds & Söner - was the main contractor for the studies on the Swedish concepts.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/udes-grupp.jpg
Their first task was to review three of the previous UDES concepts (11, 15/16 and 19) in terms of price and technology, using 1970s technology, the level of protection to be equivalent to a maximum 45 tonne tank, with IRV to be an option, a satisfactory solution to be developed on the observation of a superimposed "gun wagon", and a "cheap" end product (i.e. not expensive and exclusive), among others. The revised and updated concepts would then be used as reference vehicles in the further studies until the early 1990s. In parallel, the industry was also given the task of investigating the possibilities, forms and costs of licensed production of a foreign tank.
The technical studies were divided into competence-building studies and trials, concept studies and project studies. Physical protection was given priority over armament systems, command systems and mobility systems. Three main requirements became conceptual guidelines:
Shooting while moving (360º) with the main weapon
Direct view for the vehicle commander from the highest point of the vehicle
Furthermore, the typically Swedish conditions were taken into account, which normally resulted in special requirements for the defence equipment - the short conscription training followed by short rehearsal exercises (i.e. the equipment had to be easy to handle) and the fact that the equipment would be in mobilization storage for most of its life with a minimum amount of maintenance.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_hotbild-web.jpg
(Translated terms in image):
After the industry presented the updated UDES concepts in September 1985, the technical studies on a Swedish developed tank alternative were deepened in three different conceptual solutions:
A traditionally built tank with a four-man crew A tank with a compact turret and a three-man crew A tank with a superimposed turret and three-man crew
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-modeller.jpg
Threat Tanks
In the 1980s, the technical threat was represented by so-called "threat tanks". The technical work was oriented towards the requirements of the UTTEM (i.e. the draft Technical-Tactical-Economic Objective included in System Plan 1). The ÖB had determined a threat tank VI (most closely equivalent to the Soviet T-80 tank) as the dimensional threat.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/t80bv.jpg
Sensitivity analysis was also carried out against a "higher" alternative - the Threat Tank VII (closest resembling an intended successor, a further developed T-80). These Russian tanks became representatives of all types of tanks that could be encountered in a possible conflict, regardless of where they came from.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/hotstrv4.jpg
Ever since the T-64/T-72 it was a known fact that Russian tanks had some form of composite armour integrated into the basic structure. However, the protection technologies used were not very impressive (e.g. fibreglass was used between thicker armour plates of different quality or injected quartz sand) and did not save much weight (10-20%). On the other hand, the explosively reactive armour used as additional protection from the mid-1980s was very effective.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/libanon_1982_isaelisk_m60_erp3.jpg
Unlike the Israeli "Blazer" where the combination 3/3/3 (plate/explosive/plate) was used for the explosive panel inside the protection module placed at 30º, Russian tanks were equipped with explosively reactive modules containing two panels, each with the composition 2/7/2. The modules were normally placed at 22º and the effect was extremely good against directed explosive ordinance (>90% reduction).
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/era-kontakt5.jpg
The Swedish hard-nosed ammunition was developed against the "Blazer" and had good effect, but against Russian NAP modules ("new active armour" later called Kontakt-5) the armour "won". The solution lay instead in tandem charges.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/t80u_1989-1.jpg
The further developed T-80 was officially presented for the first time at the May Day Parade in Moscow in 1989; it was designated T-80U. The main feature of the carriage was a completely new type of additional protection, but also a completely new construction of the integrated tower protection. Analysis of and test firings against these new protection technologies showed significantly improved ballistic protection in comparison to the T-72 and older T-80. The use of heavier "flying plates" and specially designed explosive layers, which could also be initiated by APFSDS projectiles, made the additional protection also effective against kinetic energy.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/t80u_1989-2.jpg
In combination with the replaceable composite armour (a type of hollow armour filled with polyurethane that could also be upgraded with e.g. ceramic rods) in the turret, levels of protection were obtained far above what the Western ammunition could penetrate. However, there were large ballistic holes (i.e. areas unprotected by special armour) and, in addition, explosively reactive solutions were only effective at 50% of the projected target area.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/bm22-23.jpg
It became clear much later in the West, but already in 1979 the Soviets had an arrow projectile (BM 22/23) for their 125 mm armament with penetration of up to 500 mm (380 mm at a range of 2000 m) in a semi-infinite target of armoured steel (RHA). This APFSDS projectile has since been replaced by further improved versions, but in the 1980s NATO tanks demonstrably did not have the level of protection required to withstand attacks from Warsaw Pact tanks.
Taken together, these insights about threat tanks drove the requirements for effectiveness and protection for the Battle Tank 2000 to high, but supremely relevant levels.
The requirements of Strv 2000 are shaped
Firepower
The armament of the Strv 2000 initially consisted of a 12 cm high-pressure gun equivalent to that on the M1A1 and Leopard 2 tanks. However, the common perception in the second half of the 1980s was that the penetration capability of this calibre was not sufficient for the next generation of tanks. Studies were therefore carried out in many places and on various tracks to increase penetration. The NATO priority solution was to increase the calibre of the gun to 14 cm. Compared to the 12 cm gun, this calibre provided twice the muzzle energy and 25-50% more penetration. The alternative to increased calibre was to find propulsion principles other than traditional powder charges. It was possible to show theoretically and in laboratories that electromagnetism and electrothermal-chemical energy gave very high exit velocities. However, the assessment was that these new weapon principles required more time to mature.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_1987-1web.jpg
The 14 cm calibre became the solution for Strv 2000. The requirement for a penetration capability equivalent to 800 mm RHA with a continued capability for after-action meant in practice that the 12 cm gun calibre did not provide sufficient effectiveness. One problem, however, was that the 14 cm ammunition was significantly larger and heavier than its predecessor; to keep within reasonable weights and volumes, far fewer rounds could be carried. This gave rise to the idea of mounting a 40 mm automatic cannon in parallel, which could be used in situations where the main weapon was not considered necessary; that is, in situations where it was sufficient to fight targets with the additional armament.
Protection
In the Strv 2000 project, protection in the broad sense was considered important - or the survivability of the tank in terms of protection against detection-identification-hit, protection against impact and protection against aftermath. The requirements were set very high both for low signatures in the IR and radar wavelength ranges, but above all for ballistic protection. These included very forward-looking requirements for protection against mines and rooftop ordnance.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_kompositpansar-web.jpg
(Translated terms in image):
The basic principle of the wagon's construction was a minimum hull of armoured steel, thick enough to absorb the forces of driving and firing. It would also be able to absorb the forces that an external protection module could produce when hit.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_framre_skydd_sida-web.jpg
(Translated terms in image):
(image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_amlagring-web.jpg
In case the outer protection module used the principle of a spontaneously initiated heavy explosive reactive armour (e.g. in the composition 15/3/9) - effective not only against directed blast impact, but also kinetic energy - these forces on the base structure could be relatively high. The tests carried out against frontally mounted modules with this type of protection showed that it was possible to significantly disrupt a penetrating APFSDS projectile.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_tap-web.jpg
(Translated Terms in Image):
It was also envisaged that Strv 2000 would use a high proportion of ceramics in the protective structure. The fact that the total proportion of ceramics in each tank would amount to several tonnes led to the launch of the so-called Skyddskeram (Ceramic Protection) project in 1988. For a couple of years, trials were conducted with many different types of ceramics - Al2O3 (aluminium oxide), B4C (boron carbide) and TiB2 (titanium boride) - but despite broad participation from Swedish industry, FOA and FMV, the result was little more than a mediocre reference ceramics.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/keramprov.jpg
Inspired by the chosen protection solution in the American M1A1 DU tank, where the Chobham armour was upgraded with layers of depleted uranium, test firings were also made in Sweden against this type of material. The results showed the possibility of achieving better protection performance if volume rather than weight was the limiting factor.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/amlagringsprov.jpg
A great deal of effort was also put into providing a separate ammunition storage area from the crew that would withstand both gunpowder fire and a detonation after a direct hit on an RSV combat component, resulting in ammunition detonation. The solution devised worked and was very similar to the corresponding Leopard 2 and M1A1 "blow out panel" compartments, but had a developed principle to prevent total ignition resulting in total elimination. The bulkheads were located at the rear of the chassis.
Manouverability
Unlike the previous situation for tanks operating in upper Norrland, the Strv 2000 was not required to be able to float or deep-wade. Even the old truth that terrain accessibility for really heavy tanks was not sufficient in the northern parts of our country was challenged. In 1989-1990, two borrowed foreign tanks - Leopard 2 and M1A1 - were tested in the Milo ÖN. These tanks had a total weight between 55 and 60 tons.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/m1a1_leo2_1990.jpg
These modern tanks - with powerful engines, automatic transmissions and efficient tracks - proved far more capable of negotiating this terrain than the army command had previously thought. This new-found insight exposed an operational weakness - the existing "tank heritage" did not meet the demands of the 1990s and the question arose whether it was at all possible to wait until after the turn of the millennium for a new tank.
Thus, it was clear that total weight - compensated by high engine power - did not appear to limit mobility on the battlefield, it only had an impact on field ordnance and the design of combat vehicle transport vehicles.
Fire Control
Another area studied in depth in the Strv 2000 project was "Fire Control". The command capability had been a low priority in Swedish combat vehicle development and was given very little importance in the Strf 90 project during the first 10 years. It was only with the tanks of the 1990s that it was possible to talk about a more qualified command system - a modern command system with tools for ordering, positioning, etc. Project Strv 2000 laid the foundation for this.
The Concept
A large number of different concepts for a new Swedish tank were developed at HB Utveckling. Below are those that were deemed most interesting.
T 140 and T 140/40:
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv2000_data.jpg
A turreted tank with a three-man crew and with the vehicle commander and gunner on the same side of the turret. It was equipped with a 140 mm armament that had twice the muzzle energy of the Rh 120 mm - this concept had room for a total of 40 rounds. The T 140/40 concept also had a coaxially-mounted 40 mm autocannon for engaging, among other things, air targets - the ammunition quantity carried is then 29 and 148 rounds respectively. Automatic loading. Modular construction. Chassis and turret had a supporting basic structure - minimal hull - on which protective modules are attached. The vehicle was essentially built from already developed components such as MTU 883 diesel engine and steering transmission from Renk, hydropneumatic suspension from Air Log, etc.
T 120B
A turreted tank with a crew of four. The development time could be short (until the mid 90's) as only existing technology was used and already developed components such as diesel engine MTU 883 and steering transmission from Renk, hydropneumatic suspension from Air Log etc. The main weapon was a 120 mm NATO-compatible, hand-loaded high-pressure gun, with a total of 48 rounds. The chassis and turret had a basic load-bearing structure - a minimal hull - to which protective modules were attached. Reference level requirements were met.
L 140
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_koncept_t3-web.jpg
A turreted tank with a crew of three. The concept was based on a reinforced chassis from Strf 90. The tower was mechanically built in the same way as the heavier concepts. Ammunition was stored at the rear of the chassis and ammunition handling was fully automatic. A total of 40 rounds were carried for the main armament, which consisted of a 140 mm cannon and would be compatible with future NATO systems. The ballistic protection was limited to the protection that a minimum hull could provide; i.e. did not meet the protection requirements. The carriage had a modular design. The L 140 was to be seen as an anti-tank gun carriage.
O 140/40
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_koncept_o3-40-web.jpg
A tank that had a gun mounted on top and a two-man crew deep in the chassis. The concept was modular; the basic load-bearing structure consisted of a minimal hull on which protective modules were mounted. The main armament was a 140 mm gun and a parallel mounted 40 mm automatic cannon as additional armament. The carriage carried 34 and 140 rounds respectively. The major advantage of the concept was its low weight. In one unit, the wagon was supplemented by a special 46-ton lead vehicle with a crew of 5-6 men and equipped only with a 40 mm auto-cannon.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_koncept_t3-sida-web.jpg
(Translated terms in Image):
Other Swedish concepts that were also considered:
T120 - Not considered to meet the requirements for effectiveness
T120/40 - Assessed as not satisfying the performance requirements
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_silhuettjmf-web.jpg
System Plan 1
The first phase was completed in 1987 when System Plan 1 for Strv 2000 was finished - it was handed over by CA to ÖB 1988-05-30. ÖB position paper with directives for further work was sent to the government 1988-11-25:
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_1988-1-web.jpg
The option of upgrading the old existing tanks had been analysed and it was concluded that it was technically difficult to realise and economically unattractive to achieve the necessary power level. Further studies resulted in the construction of a full-scale wooden mock-up of the Swedish T140/40 tank concept.
(image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_utl-strv.jpg
In parallel, information was gathered on the most modern Western tanks - trips were made in 1988-89 to France, the USA and West Germany to increase knowledge of the Leclerc, M1A2 and Leopard 2 "Improved". A Swedish delegation also undertook a trip to the Balkans to gain knowledge of the M84 tank - the Yugoslav variant of the T-72 - in order to determine whether a "cheap" vehicle from the East could be the solution to the Swedish tank problem. The trip resulted in an offer from the Yugoslavs for the M84 - at a very low price. Given the conflict that erupted in the region a few years later, it was perhaps fortunate that Sweden did not pursue its interest in this offer...
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/m1a1_leo2a4_fmv.jpg
After Swedish personnel had been trained abroad on two of the vehicles, an M1A1 and a Leopard 2 A4 were loaned to Sweden for trials. The purpose of the operation was primarily to provide Swedish defence personnel with a good knowledge of the performance of the then state-of-the-art operational tanks, and to make comparisons with the Swedish Strv 103 and Strv 104 tanks. Great importance was also attached to demonstrations for senior decision-makers for further information dissemination. The results of the testing of the tanks carried out in the winter of 1989-90 had a major impact on the decision that was later taken.
Technical-Economic Basis for FB 91
In the spring of 1990, FMV submitted a technical and economic basis for the defence decision to be taken the following year. This included more than five years of study work on a new Swedish tank, as well as a study on the procurement of a foreign tank. The report stressed that the conclusions drawn were based on the state of knowledge in December 1989, but that these had to be regarded as uncertain in view of the major changes in the world situation which were then under way (the Berlin Wall had just fallen) and which were expected to continue.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv2000_attrapp-web.jpg
Two scenarios had been considered:
Option 1: An early purchase of a new tank with an early supply
Option 2: Acquisition of a new tank more in line with current economic planning (i.e. with delivery from 2000 at the earliest)
New tank in the near future
The report made it clear that new tanks could only be procured in the short term through direct purchase of foreign tanks - with the US M1A2 and German Leopard 2R deemed to be the ones available with acceptable performance (although the Challenger 2 and Leclerc were also priced in the report). FMV proposed that the choice should be decided by a competitive tender. Cheaper solutions were said to be available, such as the Yugoslav M 84. The recommendation was that the procurement process should start immediately.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/leo2a4_vallhalla-web.jpg
FMV pointed out that unless the financial framework was significantly increased, a direct procurement of a foreign tank would have a number of consequences. Option 1 - also referred to as the reference level - would mean that all actions on the legacy and parts of the FV90 programme would have to be postponed. Also, the numbers of the legacy would have to be reduced (some types would have to be phased out earlier than then planned) and it was "warned" that it might be necessary to replace the Fighting Vehicles 90 for the armoured brigades with upgraded Pbv 302s. Future needs for study and development capability in the combat vehicle area were in danger of being virtually eliminated by 1995. Similarly, it was said that the ability to maintain a balanced capacity at the defence workshops would also be affected.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/m1a1_vartavagen-web.jpg
New Combat Vehicle by the Turn of the Century
In the event that the economic situation did not allow for an early turnover of existing tanks, it was made clear that there were various options for action:
Either direct purchase of a new tank with delivery from the turn of the century (as a replacement for Strv 103) where a procurement decision had to be taken by 97/98 (however, procurement preparations had to start earlier)
The need to maintain, or regain, confidence in the heritage of the equipment that would remain operational was stressed. Most importantly, a REMO of the Centurion tank had to be initiated immediately and a level to the current Strv 104 had to be accepted. REMO Ikv 91 was also perceived as urgent to start (option to phase out the system to free up funds for renewal in the future).
This option 2 - also referred to as "requirement level" - highlighted the T140/40, M1A3, Kampfpanzer 2000, Leclerc 2 tanks as the identified options after the turn of the century. The report pointed out that option 2 would also imply a reduction of the legacy in terms of overall economics and that the FV90 delivery rate would have to be reduced and deliveries postponed.
The Recommendation
Before deciding on new tanks, the FMV highlighted the following key issues to consider:
In the light of recent experience with the foreign tanks that had been tested in Sweden, both the ÖB and the CA had proposed a rapid replacement of the old tanks (decommissioned Centurions) with more modern equipment. FMV supported this proposal from the point of view of both credibility and effectiveness, but at the same time pointed out that the alternative required a reprioritisation within the current programme plan. FMV considered that it was not economically realistic to propose the development of a Swedish tank in the near future, despite the advantages that such an option would have brought in terms of future competence requirements and the greater freedom of action in planning terms that it would have entailed.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv_2000_skiss-web.jpg
(Translated Terms in Image):
On the other hand, it was pointed out that the evidence provided regarding the need for competence in the defence industry in areas such as combat vehicles and guns must be taken into account - otherwise the defence industry concerned would be reduced so considerably that Sweden would in reality have no defence industrial capacity of its own in this area after the turn of the century. However, through various investments in technical work (as proposed), the development capacity of the industries concerned would at least be brought to an acceptable minimum level.
The Decision and its Consequences
The consensus that the Swedish army's next tank would be foreign meant the end of the Stridsvagn 2000 project. This decision was formally taken in 1991 and made clear in the defence decision the following year.
However, Project Stridsvagn 2000 laid a very valuable foundation for the requirements of "Stridsvagn ny" (Combat Vehicle New) - not least in the areas of survivability and command and control where the direct procurement options subsequently evaluated were not deemed to meet the requirements deemed necessary to meet for the 21st century.
For the combat vehicle industry in Sweden, continued development of the Strf 90, licensed production of the new tank, development of armoured tracked variants, and study and development of the SEP, proved to be fully sufficient efforts not only to keep the competence alive but also to develop it into a world leader.
(Image) https://www.ointres.se/strv2000_1988-web2.jpg
Below is a collection of photographs of the full-scale wooden mockup that was made for Strv 2000...
(Images)
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-1.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-2.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-3.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-4.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-5.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-6.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-7.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-8.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-9.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-10.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-11.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-12.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-13.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-14.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-15.jpg
https://www.ointres.se/strv2000-attrapp-16.jpg
