Tank Chats
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- Curator David Willey discusses the Cold War era Swedish Ikv 91. Short for Infanterikanonvagn 91, this tank destroyer was developed to meet the operational requirements of the Swedish Army post WW2.
SUBSCRIBE to The Tank Museum TH-cam channel: ► / @thetankmuseum
Support the work of The Tank Museum on Patreon: ► / tankmuseum
Visit The Tank Museum SHOP & become a Friend: ►tankmuseumshop...
Press the little bell above to enable NOTIFICATIONS so you don’t miss the latest Tank Museum videos.
Follow The Tank Museum on FACEBOOK: ► / tankmuseum
Twitter: ► / tankmuseum
Instagram: ► / tankmuseum
Stay up-to-date with the latest Museum news, videos, and special offers: mailchi.mp/e6f...
#tankmuseum #tanks
I served a couple of years in the 80’s on IKV 91 as a platoon commander. The main uses for IKV was 1/ to be a rapid force cleaning up a field from BMD:s after a Soviet airdrop and 2/ do delaying warfare against a Soviet tank battalion that was advancing along a long road in canalizing terrain (for example between lakes, swamps, thick forests or steep hills). That meant waiting almost invisible in the flank, then hitting the first tanks in the side (the IKV could hit a target at 1 600 m range, but the preferred distance to the target was 1 000 m maximum. That would mean good chance of hitting with the first round and a guaranteed hit with the second round after slightly adjustment. However, canalizing terrain often meant doing battle on a 200-500 m range). Continue firing until the enemy began with serious response. Then fast regrouping to a similar position further down the road, then do the procedure again 2 or 3 times to weaken the enemy even more until the IKV company reached the decided bottom line where each tank received a new load of grenades (full load + one in the cannon + one in the hands of the loader). Then fight until death or victory together with the infantry brigade and perhaps heavy artillery support. T-55:s and T-62:s were considered easy targets for the IKV. T-64:s and T-72:s were worthy opponents. The only thing that would be a real nightmare for IKV was a battalion of T-80:s.
Later T-72s like the T-72B also had pretty good resistance against HEAT, didn't they?
Or are you assuming that you successfully get to the opponent's hull flanks here?
Someone will belive you there TG.
@@patrickchase5614 It was just a little run around to keep the guys trained up.
@@patrickchase5614 um... yes, the purpose of ambushing is to attack an enemy flank or rear...
If the Ikvs couldn't find a flanking ambush position, they would not engage but fall back further until they could find a good flanking ambush position. AND/OR, call on artillery or air support if availiable.
It's my favorite tank in war thunder, It's low profile and the range finder is a great advantage against T-55's and other more primitive tanks. Funny how I use those tactics you mentioned unknowingly, but in my case the serious response is artillery or planes, because of how vulnerable it is due to the thin armor.
As a swede I'm always fascinated with the designs and history of Swedish armoured vehicles. I also love all the warning label we put in our tanks, one of the labels in the turret of the IKV 91 said "använd hörselskydd" (use ear protection) next to a the cannon
As the sign on the gyro for the J-29 Tunnan fighter jet: "Ömtåligt- Hanteras som ägg" translated to: "Delicate- handled like egg"
Not kidding.
can't be more than how the JASDF plasters their F-4s with so many stickers at every rivet point, can it?
lucky ☺️👍
@@wiryantirta difference is we do it with care of the operators in mind, u.s fighter planes its to avoid liability 🤷🏿♂️
That is because soldiers are complete idiots
Another fascinating chat on a not-so-well-known armoured vehicle. Well done Mr. Wiley. Keep on keeping us interested!
31866
31866
@@newspaperbin6763 What?!?!?!?!?!?
play war thunder noob... you will learn stuff... you food
I served as a gunner on these back in 1979/1980. Fantastic machine, quick and stealthy. Excellent gun and ballistics computer for the time. I never missed a shot, not even on moving targets.
@svenohnander6267 I don't know about stealth but if you compared it with a Centurion witch you could hear 10 km away when it started up so sure. 😁
I've seen it in the field a couple of times. One time was during a refresher manoeuver in 1989, when an IKV 91 platoon supported our motorized rifle company in our attack on "enemy" forces in the port town of Oskarshamn. The other time was in the early 1990s, when I attended an anti-tank course, and we got to fire simfire LAWs at a IKV 91 with sensors. Later, it was driven across swampy ground in order to demonstrate the capabilities of Warsaw Pact vehicles with similar ground pressure. It got bogged down to the engine deck, and had to be towed out of the muck by another IKV 91...
70 km/h easily and we fired it up in much colder weather than that, sir.
It's a fantastic vehicle to command and as you stated speed and portability is key to the tactics.
4 wagons in a platoon and one shot and then regroup whether that is fot infantry support or ambush.
One of my Uncles fought a Sherman tank for the CANADIAN army through Italy and then Holland into Germany.
He would agree with you, he maintained that speed and finding hull down opportunities was better than armour.
He went through 7 tanks, 2 to AT guns but 5 to mines.
He was very grateful to get wet stowage for the 75 mm rounds.
He'd give away the pintle mounted 50 Browning to Bren gun carriers so they had more firepower 🔥
That way he could carry more 30 caliber coax ammo.
The 50 cal also made the already tall Sherman profile too high.
The 50 and its boxed ammo could block the escape hatch - Shermans brewed up pretty fast, so getting out was something they practiced.
It was supposed to be for anti air and they never once had to deal with German aircraft-but they did get strafed by American fighters
@Fredrik Nilsoon you were comander of IKV 91?
@@diprosla592 Yes, and also commander of a platoon of 4
@@fredriknilsson7878 nice and can i ask about how LONG you needed to prepare IKV 91 for crossing river or lake? And did you needed to raise back cover of eng air intake and exshaust so that the engine wouldn t take water in or you could float just with front screen raised up? And could you shoot while being in water from gun?
@@diprosla592 cannot remember but preparation for floating is raising the splash shield in the front 30 sec, raising the bellows to protect the air intake 30 sec, testing the drain pumps 30 sec. Checking the band shields about the same time. In less than a minute you would be able to cross.
The vehicle have all the things fitted all the time and the time needed to prepare is to make sure all parts work.
The investigation of where a suitable place would be to cross would take longer, you need to be able to drive down and also have sloaps on the other side that you can drive up from and also protected terrain during the crossing.
Technology you can firethe gun but you wouldn't hit anything. The machine guns would be a better option. One vehicle crosses perhaps two while the other two protect the crossing.
War Thunder players: I fear no man…. but that thing….. it scares me
lol so true
It’s a demon
Laser rangefinder and 400mm of pen in 6.7, perfectly balance ~Gaijin
Yeah, it's verry mobile, the gun is most decent, and with that magic rangefinder, it requires next to no skill when aiming
@@friedyzostas9998 Gaijin : But it can be killed with .50 , so 7.0 then
Served as a IKV-91 platoon commander. The vehicle was tactically deployed as an ambush tank ONLY. You basically used the exceptional terrain capabilities to hide hull down along along a wooded road, waiting.
With lap-loading you shot 2 shots within 4 seconds against the first and last vehicle in a column 2 IKV's on each target, deployed smoke and moved back before the enemy could react.
Platoon commanders loader was also a artillery guy, that could with the IKV high powered radio (we had 2 radios) call down pre-plotted artillery on the now struck column of vehicles.
The best feature of the tank was that we had cocking abilities inside the tank. A direct hit on it would be like hitting a grocery store.
We did not worry too much about other tanks but helicopter gunships that flew along the enemy tank columns would have been a menace.
We had summer and winter net camouflage on until we sprung the ambush.
Even against air landings? Wouldn’t you train to be more offensive in that case?
But fungerade lasern? Kunde man möts både utåt och inåt som på leoparden och andra moderna vagnar(första och sista ekot) och var kunde man avläsa avståndet?(visst tog den automatiskt uppsättning?) har varit nere i en ikv och skyttplats känns mycket rymligare än på 122an faktiskt. Nu var det ju inga saker i den men alla paneler och sånt kändes välplacerade.
During my military service (infantry mid 80th) on a number of occasion we got IKV 91 assigned to our company and our squad rode on the rear deck holding on to rubber straps. Quite scary at times and I wondered if the driver had forgot that he had passenger on the back. (A hell of alot faster than the Centurions )
ye it was a bumby ride, but rather then skiing long distances it was nice with some mobile transport.
@@mikael5938 we used to say the same thing about the M113 in Australian service - not ideal but better than walking.
@@brucelamberton8819 yeah, buut you rode on the *inside* of your M113s, the infantry rode *outside* behind the turret on the Ikv91... ;)
Another superb piece. During lockdown I looked forward every week to your garden chats, they were such fun, a great distraction from the misery all around and were a weekly dose of "a chat down the pub" - it kept me sane so thank you so much
That was nice of Sweden to donate it. Racing it around the hills and valleys of Sweden must have been an adventure.
I'd love to see a collaboration between Arsenalen and The Tank Museum. Stefan, David, and Mr. Fletcher all together would be amazing.
I used to eat doughnuts on the one exhibited at the Brigade Museum in Karlstad.
Honestly, the Centurion engine deck is more suitable for doughnut consumption.
You climb better than most doughnut eaters.
Please don't give an old infantryman straight lines like that with regards to armored crewmen;).
@@silverjohn6037 Yeah, you could do yourself an injury holding those responses in.
@@colinmcdonald2499 A distinction I shall wear with pride!
@@Handles-Suck-TH-cam cheers!
Please correct me if I’m wrong here, but “PERISCOPES” and “EPISCOPES” are different beasts. PERISCOPES can SWIVEL, and EPISCOPES cannot. The driver, for example, has EPISCOPES. He looks through 3 or 4 EPISCOPES that have a fixed field of view.
This type of tanks are my favorite: the one developed and built to defend a country and its specific environment.
The IKV-91; a product of the fiercest neutral country ever to build armaments.
Calling the ikv 91 just a tank destroyer doesn't really give the whole picture. In actuality, the ikv (infanterikanonvagn) concept comes about in the 1950s and when it's first implemented, the vehicles with this designation (ikv 72, 102, 103) don't even have real anti-tank capability when they're first introduced. That's because an ikv is first and foremost an assault gun, it's a means of providing mobile firepower to infantry, just like the German StuG concept. The ikv 91 is again, primarily an infantry support vehicle, not purely a tank destroyer, even if the anti-tank role is very important to both its design and operation. Those bars at the edge of the engine deck for example are actually foot rests for infantry who were intended to ride on the rear of the vehicle. For that reason, I personally prefer to refer to it as an assault gun. As for calling it a light tank, it was actually offered under this designation to India as the Ikv 91-105, although I'd reckon their intended tactical use differed from Swedish doctrine. While this vehicle is no longer in military service, four vehicles are being run by volunteers as OPFOR vehicles during exercises, having been equipped with modern digital training systems and generally used to represent T-72s from what I've heard
Also, as for the pbv 301 and 302, they are both very much IFVs, not APCs. If one studies their design and use, this is very clear
If I recall, what India was looking for when they looked at the Ikv 91 was a replacement for the PT-76.
Btw, the swedish army saw the Pbv 301 and 302 as APCs, not IFVs, hence "Pbv" and not "Strf". That Sweden used them differently than most countries used their APCs doesn't really prove that they're IFVs. As you point out yourself when it comes to Ikvs, they're not easily translated into either tank destroyer or assault gun and likewise with the Pbvs.
The Ikv 91 was part of "Infanteribrigad 77" (Infantry Brigade 77) organized under the "Bandpansarvärnskompani" (apprx. Tracked Anti-Tank Company) in a quantity of 12 split into 3 platoons with 4 squads. The same identical organization was also present in "Norrlandsbrigad" (Norrland Brigade) from at least 1978.
It is worth mentioning that in 1977 the Norrland brigades were not equipped with Ikv 91 but rather Ikv 103, although the Ikv 103 was organized under a "Stormkanonkompani" (apprx. Assault Gun Company) in a quantity of 11. The change from "Stormkanonkompani" to "Bandpansarvärnskompani" seems to imply that, in spite of having the same Ikv designation, the vehicles did not have the same purpose.
Sources:
Arméhandbok del 1 Organisation Norrlandsbrigadens förband (1977)
Arméhandbok del 1 Organisation Infanteribrigadens förband Organisation 77 (1980)
Pansarreglemente Bandpansarvärnskompani (1978)
Svensk armé (1983)
@@lynx6023 Aye, the role of the ikv did change with the ikv 91 as it sported capabilities which previous vehicles lacked. The anti-tank mission was central to its use, but from what I understand direct infantry support was still a significant part of its role to a degree far greater than the dedicated tank destroyers of the time (ex pvpjtgb 1111) had.
@@lavrentivs9891 "Btw, the swedish army saw the Pbv 301 and 302 as APCs, not IFVs, hence "Pbv" and not "Strf"."
No. They did not. The 301 and 302 are IFVs. The 401 is an APC. Pbv, or Pansarbandvagn, is an overarching term for both "pansarskyttefordon", IFV, and "splitterskyddat trupptransportfordon", APC.
Pbv merely means "armored, tracked vehicle" and puts no value into what it's used for, and is a lot easier to say that "SSTTF"
@@mcpuff2318 The Pvpjtgb vehicles were used in the regular "Pansarvärnskompani" (Anti-Tank Company), not the "Bandpansarvärnskompani" (Tracked Anti-Tank Company), at least in "Infanteribrigad 77". I do not have any solid data for "Norrlandpansarvärnskompani" (Norrland Anti-Tank Company) but I would infer from illustrations in "Svensk armé" (1983) that vehicles such as the Pvbv and Pvrbv were in the Norrland Anti-Tank Company and not in the "Norrlandsbandpansarvärnskompani" (Norrland Tracked Anti-Tank Company).
The IKV 91 stills servs to this day. A few of them is used at the infantry combat school at Kvarn training grounds, Östergötland. They are a part of an OPFOR unit, and the IKV is used at a model for the Russian Sprut-SD Airborne Tank Destroyer.
The most interesting and well made light tank of the 60s up to 2000s. I love it so much. Something like this one, would be great for romanian naval infantry.
Another great chat with David! I do miss when he was in his backyard a bit though, I wonder if you could drive some tanks to his house to do the chats.. and let Finn clamber about on them.
Odd, it has been about a year since his first Curator at home, the first episode was about the Jerrycan.
I think he still does them but for Patreon supporters only.
So basically, in terms of other nations "needs" an Airborne or Armored Cavalry tank. What the Sheridan SHOULD have been.
Yeah, 16 and a half tons, Bradley 27 tons, Warrior 25 tons. Puts this item into perspective.
The biggest microwave oven in Vietnam, although a bit ahead of its time...
The sheradin sucked because the Americans were determined to get a shalele missile launcher on a tank
Don't need airborne tanks when ya got the largest navy in the world 😂
@@Ver-wn6el didn’t the gun alignment fail upon firing ?
I feel like the tank vs tank destroyer debate is more a question of implementation and use of a vehicle, rather than physical traits. Just want to start a conversation :)
Love the tank chats cant wait to visit someday soon
Have to agree with you, look at the likes of the t34 85, m4 76, firefly etc, very much a tank but most were employed in very much td role
Early WW2 tanks I feel could easily be classed as a tank or td by simply whether or not it had a turret or a fixed gun, but of course that doesn’t work for the American tank destroyers.
I've toyed with the idea that most western post war mbts are infact tank destroyers as their primary intended role was to defeat the hoards of red tanks.
@Ashley Sandford @@zopEnglandzip While many tanks have had anti-tank capability as a very important requirement, the infantry support role is still in their blood and their primary role. It's just that in order to support infantry, you have to be able to defeat everything that threatens infantry, and that very much includes other tanks
Yeah The Chieftain argues along the same lines: it's a matter of intended use and doctrine rather than any specific design characteristic. Because all sides used or at least looked at light vehicles, heavy vehicles, turreted and non turreted, open top vs enclosed, tracked or wheeled so called TD's. And there was a lot of cross over: assault guns, SPG, "breakthrough tanks", recon (that late war german half-track that got a 75 mm gun for example), vehicles never intended as tank destroyers went and became famous as tank destroyers because they were suited for the role. Hell an infantry man with a bazooka in a jeep could be called a "tank destroyer" if you stretch the definition a bit and if he proved succesfull enough :)).
Saw one of these in a barracks in Boden, in the north of Sweden, when I was on exercise ten years ago. Couldn't believe my eyes. It was just sitting there. I spent some time walking around it, having a good look. Oh and Hägglund is pronounced "HEGGlund" This: Ä, is not an A 🙂
One of my Uncles fought a Sherman tank for the CANADIAN army through Italy and then Holland into Germany.
He maintained that speed and finding hull down opportunities was better than armour.
He went through 7 tanks, 2 to AT guns but 5 to mines.
He was very grateful to get wet stowage for the 75 mm rounds.
He'd give away the pintle mounted 50 Browning to Bren gun carriers so they had more firepower 🔥
That way he could carry more 30 caliber coax ammo.
The 50 cal also made the already tall Sherman profile too high.
The 50 and its boxed ammo could block the escape hatch - Shermans brewed up pretty fast, so getting out was something they practiced.
It was supposed to be for anti air and they never once had to deal with German aircraft-but they did get strafed by American fighters
Sherman's were a good all around tank overall. But never meant to take on a tank. Americans strategies at the time were tank destroyers companies at the time. Pershing was a dedicated tank killer 90m gun. Came late in the war but a marvelous tank. I wish you Canadians had them. Came out late you went thru hell in the Rhine area. Very very tough fighting tank on tank. You Canadians kick azz. You were out gunned ambushed ever town. Never got the recognition you deserve in my yank opinion. The British gave you a tough task you came thru in ♠️ good job well done tell you grandpa if still around. If not be proud of his bravery he had it bad. Thank you from USA 🇺🇸 well done
This presenter is great.
Yes. Yes, he is.
Watched this a lot during lockdown in New Zealand last year. Great presenter and very informative. How is Finn doing?
the internet has lots of people whoms brains melt when this is the "td" and the "strv103" is the tank.
also i damn well adore you for putting this out there so well.
One thing though. it was tested in the early 2ks and the armor withstood 30mms.
A cracking and versatile light tank. I like the thought and weapons capability. Attuned the the geography and challenges it would face. If you were a Swede you would be happy having these at your side. If you were an invading force with main battle tanks, getting bogged down, facing lakes and sticking out like a sore thumb - these IKV 91'S would be a serious threat. It looks the business too!
Seems really well thought out and designed.
The IKV91 is still used by the army ground combat school as Opfor
Correct. 4pcs are keept in running order as the opponent force.
@@martinsvensson781 There are a few gate guards and two(?) at the Tank Museum in Strängnäs (as I am sure you already know), the rest were scrapped and recycled by Stena Recycling. The body of the vehicle, more or less just a big box, was too weak for the abuse it had to take over the years. The body tended to loose its shape and become twisted, putting an immense stress on the torsion bar suspension and also leading to metal fatigue. Combined with a lack of night time fighting ability and ability to fire while moving (unless in a fire-or-die situation) it was a sad but expected ending for it.
Awesome 👍🏻
On of the first vehicle in the world to use a laser rangefinder!
Swedish tanks mostly look pretty cool for some reason.
Swedish BMP-1's grew much larger than their eastern cousins due to their Viking lineage.
Swedish WW2 and immediate post-WW2 era tank turrets would like to have a word with you.
@@ygma1460 They were merely adapting to have a lower profile while soviet heavies were still the apex predators of their environment. These creatures are passive hunters after all.
@@gelatinousturncoat Are you aware Sweden literally had BMP's in service for a short while in the 90's? Before they downsized the army.
Swedish tank design provides a solid measure of how hot the cold war actually was. And excellent video.
Amazing how big a tank can get when it is designed for people and not weird contorted gremlins
Ahem. Not every race of people are 6 footer & above.
The turret is actually fairly cramped in it. Part of the reason for the lower pressure gun. It's also partly the size it is to make it float when it swims. That and the significant amount of spaced armour on the sides.
@@peekaboopeekaboo1165 Tank crew at this time were disqualified from serving if they were much taller than 170cm for the most part. They were anything but tall. Also, what is this, the middle ages!? Who uses feet!?
@Ragedaonenlonely I don't recall tanks crewes being that short. They were about the same hight as me and I'm 177 cm. I was a gunner on the PBV302.
I have ridden on the rear of an IKV91 in heavy snow when I did service as a Ranger in north sweden. Great fun and didnt feel very safe =)
I served in I19/P5 in Boden as infantery in the 80s. So they where a common sight.
Only Swedish can call Tank a turretless vehicle and Tank destroyer a 360 degree turret vehicle
US M18 Hellcat?
swedens ingenuity and for their ability to force multiply, well their capabilities are simply awe inspiring
Well to be fair, in order for our neutrality to be respected, a concept which it definitely wasn't during WW2 (which was a huge lesson to the Swedes) we had to make sure that the enemy knows that we both could and would willingly fight a total war if necessary and we do have a largely self sufficient arms industry. It would have to cost alot to invade Sweden during the cold war and sure as hell we did have an extremely powerful defensive military. Our air force back in the cold war days was truly beyond massive for our population, having thousands of warplanes and being among the top 5 largest air forces in the entire world. That capability has largely gone away in present day but that is also to be somewhat expected as the USSR is no more and military conflicts are becoming less and less prevalent as a whole. It's simply more efficient to trade and cooperate. But yeah, we still have companies like SAAB, BAE Systems (bofors), Volvo etc that are absolutely extremely competent to this day.
BAE owns Hägglunds as well. And im glad submarine productions is back in swedish hands again.
@AtroFear The Swedish airforce was the largest in the world compared to the population.
@@dennistofvesson6351 as i said ingenuity, the swedish are simply adept when at their best
This thing has no place at 6.7
It dies to 50 cals and its wobbly as hell. It didn't deserve 7.3
It doesn't even reach its top speed in most terrain, even though it has low ground pressure and high hp/t. The mobility is nowhere near where it should be.
It has high HEAT pen and a rangefinder. It also has no armour, mobility way worse than it should be, low shell velocity and all the drawbacks of HEAT. Just looking at the penetration is daft. You just want to invulnerable in your heavy that still kills this with ease. It goes both ways, but apparently people who use this argument just want the penetration to go 1 way.
The IKV 91 was simply a much better PT-76 built for Swedish use in country... ^~^
Some organizational data for the Ikv 91 in Swedish service:
The Ikv 91 was used in the Tracked Anti-Tank Companies (Bandpansarvärnskompani, from now on "TATC") in the Infantry Brigades using the 1977 organization (Infanteribrigad 77, IB77). The TATC was a shared asset of the brigade as opposed to being part of a battalion. TATC had three platoons each with four squads, each squad operating a single Ikv 91.
The Ikv 91 was also used in the Norrland Tracked Anti-Tank Companies (Norrlandsbandpansarvärnskompani, from now on "NTATC") in the Norrland Brigades (Norrlandsbrigad). The NTATC is organized exactly as the regular TATC, i.e. a shared brigade asset. It is worth noting that according to the 1977 TO&E for the Norrland Brigade, there is no NTATC, but there is an Assault Gun Company (Stormkanonkompani) equipped with eleven Ikv 103. However, in the 1978 Armor Regulation for TATC it specifically states that it is applicable to the Norrland Brigades as well, so it appears as though in 1978 the Assault Gun Company was replaced with the NTATC.
Sources:
Arméhandbok del 1 Organisation Infanteribrigadens förband Organisation 77 (1980)
Arméhandbok del 1 Organisation Norrlandsbrigadens förband (1977)
Pansarreglemente Bandpansarvärnskompani Utkast (1978)
Svensk armé (1983)
The TATC in IB77 actually had four platoons where the fourth was an bandpansarvärnsinfanteripluton, a light infantry platoon specialised in dismounted anti tank warfare, bringing one GRG and a lot of mines per squad. They had either unarmoured all-terrain vehicles (TGB20) or tracked unarmoured vehicles (BV201), but most of the time they came along, one squad per IKV, sitting behind the turret, back to back with their feet resting on the rails. The engine kept them warm in the winter and hot in the summer, it was noisy, bumpy and no protection against rain of course. All the guys from a David (fourth) platoon I have ever met were tough as nails.
The IKV platoons were almost always separated and sent to one infantry battalion each, but the platoons were kept intact. To become a infantry company commander you had to take part in BPV familiarization training at the Infantry Battle Training School, INFSS, and without exception they all treated the IKV 91 like a main battle tank, charging over open terrain facing dug down ant-tank troops. The always lost that fight...
@@perandersson1244 I stand corrected! Looking at the TO&E for IB77 from 1980, there is indeed a Bandpansarvärnsinfanteripluton (Tracked Anti-Tank Infantry Platoon). Equipped with 2 GRG and 36 AT mines for the entire platoon as well as 3 TGB 30.
So it's a turreted stug basically. Can give the infantry something mobile that can fling a decent HE shell, provide smoke in the day and illumination at night, plus machinegun fire and can tackle enemy vehicles. Pretty good.
@cleanerben9636 Infantry don' need them to get smoke. They can do that themselfes with the CarlGustav.
It’s hilarious reading some of the comments from these armchair World of Tanks fans and so called self styled experts. I’m willing to bet that most of the comments are based on written works and that nobody has raised enough wit to actually ask any member of the Swedish Army who served in these tanks, the intended use on the battlefield and the principles behind the Swedish High Command’s decisions to implement this design over any other designs. Laughable really!😂😂😂
Thank you, David, for a fascinating chat on an interesting vehicle.
IKV91 was brigade resource on swedish INF brigades in 79/80/90s. Each brigade had about 1 company of about 10 IKV 91 as a brigade resource. The swedish INF brigade didnt had any armour protection almost and everyone used/was transported by bandwagons/open vehicles/trucks. Brigade commanders useally used these as fast recon or spearhead units during exercisis. The brigade also had additional anti tank batalions with more cannons/missle vehicles but the IKV was the best/most mobile anti tank rescouce brigade commanders had. Sweden during this time had about 20 infantery brigades thus the production number about 200 or 10 each.
During winter we used these up in the north with alot of white camouflage as mobile anti tank unit. It was probobly pretty bad againt enemy tanks but as ambush/support inf/flanking unit it gave the inf brigade a very good resource. Also it had pretty good space in the back for a full INF squad.
12 ikv 91 in each company, 4 in each platoon, at least in the north close to Finland border where I served.
This video bring back some nice memorys from1983-1984 when I was serving as gunner on a PBV302 in MecBat10, a type of mechanised battalion used primarily in the middle and northern part of Sweden. One of the tasks we had was to counter air landing operations and the key was to get there fast. That was done by a type of alternate advance usualy done by an infantry platoon when advancing but this was down with one platoon of IFV91 and one platoon of PBV302. Quite fun to do this in speeds of up to 70 kmh on dirtroads.
S-tank looks like a TD. Swedes think it's a tank.
Ikv 91 looks like a tank. Swedes think it's a TD.
Nah, in the Swedish defence force it's called Infanterikanonvagn, which literally means Infantry Gun Carriage. It's basically a StuG-style assault gun, only with a turret. The comparison is a little funny as the StuG also gets called a tank destroyer on occasion...
@@Paveway-chan To be fair the StuG did change its role to that of a tank destroyer as WW2 dragged on. Early versions and deployments were very much as an assault gun, but in 44-45 it was used almost exclusively as a TD even if its name didn't reflect that.
@@jonsi3559 And since 1943 StuGs were also used to equip Panzerabteilungen (of Panzergrenadier-Divisions).
It's silly to classify a vehicle by its appearance rather than by its tactical and operational role. Ikv 91 was issued to Infantry Brigades and provided fire support. It filled the same role as the American Stryker MGS and even in the same numbers per brigade.
The Strv 103 was issued to armored units and tasked with mobile defense, counterattack, attack and breakthrough missions just like Sweden's Centurion tanks and the MBTs of other nations.
@@Paveway-chan The Stug was designed as an infantry-support gun to support infantry against other infantry. The Ikv was designed to support infantry, but against armour and not other infantry. The designation is irrelevant if you look at what it's actually supposed to do. Supporting infantry isn't exclusive to just acting against other infantry. This did the same thing as pvpj 1110, but self propelled and shrapnel protected. The existing AT guns were simply either not mobile enough or didn't give the protection necessary to perform its role under fire.
I was a platoon commander in the MBT’s, trained on both Strv 102 & 103, but I absolutely love these ”sports-tanks”! So agile, so cool! I saw them all the time during basic training and have several friends who trained on them. Great little vehicles!
I understand that you must have a lot of different ideas for videos (I also understand that you get so many comments that you cannot possibly comment them all), but I wish you'd make a video on the Vickers MBT series of tanks at some point: it is a fascinating if somewhat overlooked tank - still in service with a few countries.
In the game Warthunder this thing fights WW2 tanks, its got HEATFS and a laser range finder. Now tell me is that even fair?
All the HEAT firing light tanks in WarThunder are placed about 10-20 years before they were operational and 1.0 to 2.0 BR's too low.
Sweden is always gonna be a bit star wars compared to others🤷🏿♂️
Explain to me how it isn't outperformed by any other tanks APHE or APDS or any shell really in every metric. Penetration? It dies to it. Velocity? It's lower than AP for sniping. In which way is HEAT a big advantage if you actually stop and think for a second. Penetration? Sure, that's great when your armour is made of paper and you still have to hit a target with it.
This is just a poor excuse for wanting to be invulnerable in heavy armour regardless of the context or actual performance of things. The bloody thing doesn't even reach its top speed somehow, even though it is light as all hell and has over 20 hp/t. Its acceleration and gear shifting is broken.
@@Ragedaonenlonely Laser Range finder. Also a meme on said tank. th-cam.com/video/VjfrIQTnIYo/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=DOLLARplays
I did point out the rangefinder didn't I?Eyeballing ranges isn't hard. Especially not with high velocity guns. At this BR even AP should have a velocity of up to 1000m/s if not more. If you have to stop and rangefind to hit a target, you're already delaying the shot by a massive amount. At this BR you should just have a feel for the dropoff of the gun and be able to adjust it accordingly without having to find out the range beforehand.
If you need to rangefind to make a 700m shot in a cannon with 1000m/s, let alone 800m/s, then you're not exactly a great player to begin with. You can make that shot easily with a Sherman without even needing a rangefinder.
I bet there is a hidden storage compartment for Absolut Vodka .
Yes, the barrel
Infantry can order them online and they can be mailed flat pack , tools included , only complaint was the ambiguous assembly instructions
Does it come with Allen keys for easy assembly?
Yes, as well as a shovel, an axe, a tanker bar, and a squad's worth of pine wood skis with bindings designed to fit directly onto Swedish army winter marching boots and rubber boots.
@@SonsOfLorgar What no meatballs?
And a huge tool for tightening the wheel nuts. Well, make that two huge tools, you had the commander as well :-)
Search for "Tänkbüster" on the IKEA homepage for details.
I hope Finn is OK and you can still manage a good cup of tea or a pint when you are off duty.
The turret on the 105mm prototype had a bit of a Pzkpfw Tiger look to it
If you drag the red pin out of the turret it will explode! 2000kg TNT. Swedens biggest combined Light tank/handgrenade
Stop calling Swedish tanks for Wagen. We are not Germany, Vagn without the E would be an improvement.
But how does that tank cope with the Swedish army's greatest enemy...Mosquitos
Just close the hatches and your fine. 😁
Love the IKV 91. It's a bit of an ugly duck, but I would love to see one running one day regardless! You have to think that the main reason this wasn't adopted outside Sweden is, like with Strv 103, that it was just tailored to Swedish requirements and unpalatable for foreign powers
i wouldn't call it ugly, it has a charm of it's own.
the Marder DF 105, now that's an ugly duckling
@@quentintin1 Why would you allow someone to google that!?
@@ZETH_27 so we can all suffer :)
Americans: "can we get it with a bigger gun?"
Swedes: "105 take it or leave it."
@@ZETH_27 yes, which they made for sale to the Americans.
Americans that's to cheap we can build the same thing at four times the price.
It's not surprising. The 90mm gun on Ikv 91 fires the warheads designed for the pvpj 1110 90mm recoilless ATG then in use by the Swedish army.
The US equivalent would be the M40 105mm recoilless ATG.
@@ollep9142 Isn't it M40 106mm?
Still used as a opposing tank during training where they bring in former IKV crews to man them
So, basically, it's a Swedish version of the PT-76.
With a slightly better gun but even thinner armor.
Nice vehicle. Very interesting, really good video as all Tank Museum videos are.
I had actually just read the Wikipedia page on the IKV 91 when I saw this video was posted.
It looks like a baby IS-3!
You cant go wrong with a shape like that.
They may call it what they want but technically it is a boat.
Somewhere between a strawberry and a horse really
So... the S tank witch looks like destroyer is a tank, and tank is a destroyer...
I admire the ethos of this vehicle.
It's closer to Sturmgeschutz than tank destroyer.
StuG with a turret
@@secularnevrosis Talking about original idea.
It's really not. The Stug was designed for infantry support against other infantry. This was designed for infantry support by defeating armour. It's kind of the opposite of the stugs design focus.
@@Ragedaonenlonely Are sure that Ikv 91 is tank destroyer?
@@jaroslawwalczak2855 Absolutely. It was attached to help the infantry take out tanks. That makes it a tank destroyer. Look up pvpj 1110. This is supposed to do the same thing, but with more mobility and crew protection.
In future videos could you include more statistics like vertical guidance of the main gun, performance of the various ammunition types, and turret traverse speed? I think vertical guidance and the ammo performance should be pretty necessary for these videos if you have the information available
Wargamming: Ah yes, this is perfect for the whales.
when i was in the Artillery in 2001/2, the cavalry had CV90's for a 6? man assault team deployments, fast in, fast out with 5 shots autoloader cover fire if i remember somewhat correctly. since i was in the arty, it's pretty much as indepth our knowledge was.
it sounded like a great apc / tank at the time.
theya re kidna similar, and at the same time not
Edit: a year off
The CV9040 IFV is quite similar in many ways yeah, makes sense being designed by the same company for a similar role. Its mobility requirement was actually based on the capability of the ikv 91. The CV90's gun is a Bofors 40 mm autocannon fed from three eight round magazines which had to be replenished after a maximum of 24 shots
@@mcpuff2318 CV90 was built upon the experiences of the Ikv91 after all =)
@lavrentivs9891 Don't forget the input from the PBV302. I think the CV90 is a kind of merge of the two.
Ahh, the most under tiered vehicle in War Thunder. Thanks Gaijin.
Can't be as bad as it was when the T-10M came out, lol what a shitshow that was.
@@Handles-Suck-TH-cam or IS-7...
Power creep everywhere. And then Gaijin proceeds to balans things with statistics. Ouch.
wow this might be the only armoured vehicle in history with the engine fitted at an angle!!
This is one of the vehicles I wished World Of Tanks had put in game.
Then play war thunder lol
Premium tier 9 tds
I think thy are adding it to the cold war mode on console
Also think it would fit as a tier 9, have the 105mm cannon as a researcheble module, then UDES-19 at tier 10 with hydropnumatic suspension
@@thatguysky123 Every War Thunder player hates this tank, myself included, so no, don't play WT xD
Iv'e seen the IKV 91 outside Arsenalen and really its just looked flimsy -I guess they made it basicilly immune to Ak-47 bullets and nothing more - 4 mm shirts and 4mm x2 plates are not much . Maybe if it was agile and fast and could fire fast othewise it would a dead duck -preferble fighting at 1000m distance (yards) even then ..40 years ago
This tank is an absolut beast in WarThunder.
Ikv 91 Will be nice add-on for Ukrainian Infantry, in curent War to serve alongside bmp-1.
To bad none is left being fit for real war. None of these are going to Ukraine. That is the CV90.
Im realy liking the design of of swedish armour, also from an esthetic point of view. Probably the reason why my first car was a Volvo S60 xD.
It looks like the Marder, by this I mean there's a resemblance.
This should replace the Ikv 90 B in WoT
-35 degrees centigrade. Pffuu.. didn't hear "centigrade" instead of "Celsius" for a long time :)
I pre-ordered the tiger tank book you guys are re releasing! Thank you guys for doing that, can't wait to get my 1/35 armor modeling hands on it! I'm going to be buying those Haynes manual's as well! Thank you
Nice pike nose. Seems rare on modern vehicles sadly due to modern tech.
It isn't actually a pike nose. It's just sloped regularly. It would need to be sloped horizontally and vertically to be a pike nose.
@@Ragedaonenlonely I mean, it does look slightly angled horizontally like a pike nose.
Tank destroyers, by definition are meant to be capable of being bought onto the battlefield at a moments notice and disabling whatever foe is required, but by definition, they should not be relied upon to do 100s of kilometres of overlanding, and they should be withdrawn from the battlefiend whence that foe is removed from the equation.
An additional point to make is that Hägglunds also makes the Bv202, Bv 206, Bv 208 and Bvs 10, but its the experience from the Ikv91 that helps them build the CV90 in collaboration with the Swedish military which uses many of them same features when it comes to mobility
These videos are just great, nice job fellas.
Everything can be this vehicle but not a "Tank Destroyer". To me more look like a light tank...
The way how is build, this vehicle only can face APC's like MP1, BMP2, BMP3, BRDM, BTR, and similar. For such purpose, still today the Ikv91 is useful, but ONLY if Ikv91 will shot first, otherwise any of them which i mentioned, can damage it or destroy completely.
Tank Destroyer is an HEAVY armored vehicle, which on sides where cannon can rotate, the tank is IMMUNE and can withstand ALL types of shells which enemy tank can fire. Also, the cannon of "Tank Destroyer" can fire shells which will blow up enemy tanks in the way One-Shot-Kill.
Today, not any type vehicle can be named like "Tank destroyer" except if uses 150mm cannon, and which can withstand at least all shell types fired multiple times from an 130mm cannon (like 120mm, or 122mm or 125mm, last time we see cannons like 130mm).
If somebody does not accept this what i said, then: Do and soldier carrying an AT launcher can be called "Tank destroyer"?
Or, an HUMVEE mounted in an AT launcher like TOW? NO, because except that such light vehicles can destroy enemy tanks, but can not withstand enemy fire from tanks.
Last, manufacturers of such vehicles can say what ever they like, or if peoples speak based on feelings but not on facts, but the reality can be seen n battlefield only.
Boy, did that comment age fast...
Great chat as always and such an elegant looking tank
Shortly after this video Sabaton decided to use this tank for their new video. Coincidence?
fume extractor installed for the health of the crew. Hand removal device still installed because loaders don't count as human
I pre-ordered the tiger tank book I hope I'm within the first few so I can have it autographed if not I'll have to find a way across the pond and have everyone sign it that'll make my day
Huh... It would have been an ideal vehicle in Alaska and useful in the frozen Northern Central USA, like Idaho and the Dakotas.
In case Canada invades?
No Fulda gap and lots of forest really bring about some interesting designs
So when will this be in the WoT tech tree? I sense a premium Tier 8 Light tank is coming. :D
Hagglund makes a terrific little vehicle called the SUSV used quite a bit up here in AK
Can this guy be my grandpa?
Primary shields.is.xomprimised.
To thqt is no.issue use this to.reduxe.consumption. look at.now elements to.those whom.meed and awqy from those whom.hqve ..then rationing
I sorta thought this was an uninteresting vehicle. Turns out it's both very capable and interesting.
Swedish take on thecsmall, light tank hunter. Interesting if you compare it to the german solution of the same time frame (Jagdpanzer 4-5)