Jump to content


History of the Swedish "EMIL" tank project


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

DeadArashi #1 Posted 06 December 2016 - 07:09 PM

    Imperium Tech Priest

  • Member
  • 12805 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    05-31-2013

The Origins

     The EMIL project didn't start until 1951 but the designs before it started in 1945, but these weren't directly related to the project. This being the Strv Leo which was cancelled in 1947. Work by Landsverk continued and in 1948 a design for the Strv Lancen (which was essentially a smaller, less armoured Strv Leo with a 75mm gun) was offered. Another, even lighter version was also offered called the Strv Pilen. During this time a tank was proposed but never designed to have 150mm of frontal armor, 25mm at the side and 20mm at the rear while being armed with a 105mm L/50 Lvkan m/42 gun and was estimated to weigh 34tons. This remained an idea in 1950. 

 

     In 1951 the first design for what would become known as the EMIL Project was offered as a means to replacing the obsolete Strv m/42. The previous designs were considered too light for modern battlefield and thus ignored. The first design was based around the ideas previously mentioned, with the thinking that a modern tank would need to be heavier, better armed and protected then initially thought. The main role of the tank was to function as both an infantry support vehicle and a tank destroyer. To achieve this, the armament was to be a 12cm L/40 rifled gun fed by an autoloader with the main round of choice being HEAT and HE.

1951 EMIL armed with 10.5cm TK 105-9 in-game

 

     The requirements for the project made it clear that more armour would be required than any previous Swedish project, this was brought about by the concerned raised by the appearance of the Soviet IS-3 with its 122mm gun. Because the turret front was to be 200mm thick at the gun-mantlet and 150 to 125mm of sloped armor on the rest of the turret. The thick frontal armour on an oscillating turret was due to the turret been split into two parts with the front acting as "shield" allowing the gun to depress 14 degrees. The rest of the turret was 35mm on the side of the with 30mm towards the back of the side, with the rear of the turret being only 20mm thick. The hull was to be 20mm thick on the side and 30mm at the rear.

 

Armour layout of the EMIL


     The size was also very small standing at only 2.35m tall giving it a lower profile then the Soviet T-44 (2.45m) and the IS-3 (2.45m). This small size and thin side/ rear armour resulted in an initial estimated weight of 28 ton, though later calculations put it closer to 32 ton. Coupled with the SFA 8 cyl boxer engine producing 550hp, giving it an estimated power to weight of 17.18hp/t with a top speed of 55km/h. This meant the tank was considered more of a medium than a true heavy tank.

 

     The suspension was based on the Lvkv 44 SPAA developed by Bofors, meaning the tank would have hydraulic springs that would later be used on the Strv S. The hull was designed by Landsverk whil the turret was designed by Bofors . In 1952 the project advanced into a more heavy tank design as the fear for the IS-3 grew.

 

Emil 1 mounting the 1951 EMIL turret and the turret found on the Emil 2 and 3. The gun represented is again the 10.5cm TK 105-9

     

     In 1952, the project was reworked into a functional designs from a set of basic requirements. While the initial designs were based around the French and German tank designs; more specifically the AMX 13 oscillating turret and autoloader and the German Panther hulls, but the later designs chose to instead adopt the Soviet pike-nose design for the hull to further increase the effective thickness of the already well sloped armour. 

 

     Three variants were considered. The first was the E1 which was to correspond to the initial EMIL design but with the new pike-nose and an American engine. The weight range was estimated to be between 31 to 35 tons. The E2 was the mid range model. It was bigger in size and would allow for a 15cm gun to be mounted over the 12cm on the E1. The increased size meant that the weight range was increased to 34 to 39 ton. The E3 was the high-end model with a weight range of 36 to 42 ton and powered by an American engine.

 


Armour Configurations

There were also multiple proposed armor thickness combinations to choose from. This would also affect the vehicle weight and subsequently the power-to-weight. There were two frontal protection combinations which are listed as Alt 1 (JS III kprj) and Alt 2 (JS II ukprj) and three configurations of side and rear armour. Rear armor was 30mm for config A and B and 40mm for config C. 

 

 


Armament

     With the exception of the size of the Emil 1 in regards to the Emil 2 and 3, the only other differences were the engines and armament. The initial 1951 EMIL was proposed to receive a 12cm L/40 gun. Likewise, the only gun planned for the Emil 1 was this same 12cm L/40. The Emil 2 and 3 were planned to receive a new 15cm smoothbore autoloader based off the old 15cm Haub m/39 howitzer with a barrel length of L/40. The 15cm L/40 smoothbore was also later developed into a 14.5cm L/40 rifled gun. A back-up gun was also being developed for the Emil 2 and 3 in case the 15cm failed, this was to be an autoloader based off the 10.5cm Lvkan L/67 which would later be known as the 10.5cm TK 105-9 that we see on the tier 8.

 

    The primary ammo choice for the 12cm and 15cm guns were to be HEAT and HE, but APDS was also proposed. Sweden was also trying to make a new prototype ammo for these guns by combining HEAT and APDS. The goal was to have the power of HEAT with the shell velocity of APDS.

     

     All three guns were to autoloaders fed by two 7-round drums with a spare 28 rounds for a total ammo count of 42 rounds.

 

     There were also plans in 1958 to potentially mount either a British or French gun if the development of a suitable Swedish gun had failed.

 


Engine

     As mentioned above, the other area that the Emil tanks differed where the engines

  • 1951 EMIL - SFA 8 cyl (550hp)
  • Emil 1 - AOS-195 (500hp)
  • Emil 2 - AV-1195 (540hp) & AVS-1195 (665hp)
  • Emil 3 - SFA F12 (810hp)

     While the SFA F12 engine produced 810hp, only 723hp was recorded at the drive wheel giving Emil 3 Alt 2 C (Kranvagn) a power to weight of 17.21hp/t.

Emil 3 Alt 2 C "Kranvagn" mounting the 12cm L/40 in-game

 


Fate of the EMIL Project

     The idea was for the tank to replace the obsolete Strv m/42, but the gap before the production of the Emil would have left Sweden without a modern tank. Sweden then bought the British Centurion tank as stop-gap but with the development of the 105mm L7 there was no longer a need for the EMIL project, however two prototype chassis had already been produced for the Emil 3 Alt 2 C which was named "Kranvagn" (crane vehicle) to confuse any potential spies.

 

     One of the chassis, after testing in 1955-1956, was later converted to be a 15cm autoloading SPG known as the Artillerikanonvagn 151 (Akv 151) which was later developed into the Bandkanon 1 (Bkan 1). This used a similar twin 7-round drum autoloader that the EMIL tanks were planned to receive, plus a round already in the breach gave it a world record of being able to throw 15 rounds down range in 45 sec. Each shell weighed in at 47kg and had a tactical range of 28km. The downside was that it required an ammo truck as it couldn't carry its own rounds and took 2 min to reload using the built-in hoist.

 

     An idea was born for the second hull to be used to mount a Centurion Mk.10 turret along and fitted with Swedish components as a competitor to the Centurion Mk.10

Depiction of the Strv K mounting the 10.5cm Lvkan L/67

 

     In the end the Swedish army deemed it easier to just outright buy completed Centurion Mk.10's. There was a plan, however, to leave a vehicle in this configuration to serve as a prototype testbed for future turreted tank concepts but nothing come of this plan. Instead, the final chassis had 4 of its 8 road wheels removed, fitted with equipment for testing hydraulic suspension and had a 20pdr gun fixed to the hull to serve as a test rig for the Strv S.

 


Size Comparison of the EMIL Project

 


Sources

http://www.ointres.s...storia_bkan.pdf

http://www.ointres.se/strv_103.htm

http://tanks.mod16.o...paag-and-tanks/

http://tanks.mod16.o...emil-a-summary/

http://tanks.mod16.o...rrent-projects/

http://tanks.mod16.o...jects-may-1954/

http://tanks.mod16.o...s-project-6400/


Edited by DeadArashi, 04 November 2018 - 01:29 PM.


DeadArashi #2 Posted 06 December 2016 - 07:10 PM

    Imperium Tech Priest

  • Member
  • 12805 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    05-31-2013

~ moved to main post ~


Edited by DeadArashi, 04 November 2018 - 12:46 PM.


DeadArashi #3 Posted 06 December 2016 - 07:10 PM

    Imperium Tech Priest

  • Member
  • 12805 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    05-31-2013

~ moved to main post ~


Edited by DeadArashi, 04 November 2018 - 12:13 PM.


DeadArashi #4 Posted 06 December 2016 - 07:12 PM

    Imperium Tech Priest

  • Member
  • 12805 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    05-31-2013
~ moved to main post ~

Edited by DeadArashi, 04 November 2018 - 12:47 PM.


DeadArashi #5 Posted 07 December 2016 - 07:27 AM

    Imperium Tech Priest

  • Member
  • 12805 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    05-31-2013

~ moved to main post ~


Edited by DeadArashi, 03 November 2018 - 04:08 PM.


camdy #6 Posted 30 January 2017 - 03:06 PM

    First lieutenant

  • Beta-Tester
  • 25554 battles
  • 619
  • [CAMDY] CAMDY
  • Member since:
    08-09-2012
the centurion turret on the emil hull from the front it doesn't look right but the side view it sort of works

DeadArashi #7 Posted 04 November 2018 - 12:52 PM

    Imperium Tech Priest

  • Member
  • 12805 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    05-31-2013
Necro; fully revamped the old post with new images and reworded it

Still no idea why there's such a large empty space above it though :sceptic:

Edited by DeadArashi, 04 November 2018 - 12:55 PM.


DanLBob #8 Posted 04 November 2018 - 09:31 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 25174 battles
  • 3,201
  • Member since:
    09-16-2012

Would like to see the Strv K added.

 

Dan



mttspiii #9 Posted 04 November 2018 - 10:24 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 31075 battles
  • 16,931
  • [CALM] CALM
  • Member since:
    04-15-2012

View PostDanLBob, on 04 November 2018 - 09:31 PM, said:

Would like to see the Strv K added.

 

Dan

 

I reserved my Leo MT crew for the day WG introduces Swedish conventional MT's. WG can easily build a tree that goes VIII Strv T -> IX Strv A (choice of 105mm or 120mm) -> X Strv K "Kranturion"

I'm fierce and I'm feeling mighty,

I'm a golden girl, I'm an Aphrodite

 

 


DeadArashi #10 Posted 05 November 2018 - 04:42 AM

    Imperium Tech Priest

  • Member
  • 12805 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    05-31-2013

View Postmttspiii, on 05 November 2018 - 12:24 AM, said:

I reserved my Leo MT crew for the day WG introduces Swedish conventional MT's. WG can easily build a tree that goes VIII Strv T -> IX Strv A (choice of 105mm or 120mm) -> X Strv K "Kranturion"

 

Referring back to my Swedish tech-tree proposal

 

Well, the Strv A was to have a 105mm gun as you said, but it was an autoloader so going from a single shot to an autoloader then back to a single shot seems a bit odd. The idea of the tank was in response to the American M60 and British Chieftain. A later proposal for the Strv A was for a "heavy gun tank" version armed with a 12cm gun in response to the American T95E6.

 

So it would be possible to instead do Strv T -> Strv A -> Strv A (120mm).

 

If WG want to forego a turreted TD line they could use the turreted UDES designs as well; UDES 14A -> UDES 14E -> UDES 15/16 (though I think they would still perform better as TDs)

 

For a line built after the Leo though; Lansen M/51 -> LS-50 -> Strv K

 

 

Honestly, the Strv K can either be a tier 10 MT if it gets the British 105mm L/7 or a tier 8 HT if WG decide to give it the Swedish 105mm L/67


Edited by DeadArashi, 05 November 2018 - 04:44 AM.


mttspiii #11 Posted 05 November 2018 - 04:58 PM

    Major

  • Beta-Tester
  • 31075 battles
  • 16,931
  • [CALM] CALM
  • Member since:
    04-15-2012

UDES 14E looks real pretty as an LT too...pity it's a TD.

 

And none of them new tanks has hydropneumatic suspension?


I'm fierce and I'm feeling mighty,

I'm a golden girl, I'm an Aphrodite

 

 


DeadArashi #12 Posted 05 November 2018 - 05:19 PM

    Imperium Tech Priest

  • Member
  • 12805 battles
  • 1,723
  • Member since:
    05-31-2013

View Postmttspiii, on 05 November 2018 - 06:58 PM, said:

And none of them new tanks has hydropneumatic suspension?

 

The turreted UDES tanks had hydropneumatic suspension, but unlike the UDES 03 and the S-tanks it had some gun depression without needing the suspension (though only 3-5 deg, 10 deg with the suspension)

I really do love the designs of those tanks. The UDES 14E was to be the same height as the Strv 103 with the same gun... but with a turret, higher top speed of 70km/h and better power to weight of 22hp/t.

It could work really well  as a LT but I dont think WG would be too keen on giving a very small tank a 105mm gun that has 308mm of pen, it would be ludicrous. And we know how much WG love incorrectly classing tanks, there's a reason the S-tank is a TD and not a MT. 


 

Edit: though in saying that the Swedish were surprisingly energetic about trialling different nations guns in different tanks so it wouldn't be too far of a stretch to see the British 105mm L/7 on the turreted UDES. I don't think it needs to get the "Siege mode" the TDs get. Reasoning being that maintaining speed with the tank at 5 deg would be less damaging to the suspension then at the 10 deg of the S-tank. So it would be possible in theory to have these tanks as LTs.

 

They would very much fit as light tanks. Hell, i would be inclined to say that the whole line of "turreted TDs" I have suggested from tier 5 to 10 could be light tanks built off the TDs.

 

So you could end up with two light tank lines (UDES 15/16 & IKV 105), one HT line (Kranvagn), one TD line (Strv 103b) one or two MT lines... and a SPG line but WG have already said they're not going to add any more SPG unless they find a way to properly balance the class


Edited by DeadArashi, 06 November 2018 - 07:49 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users