Gotta Love it!

I just looked at the pic closely. I think I like the TC.

Interestingly, those bars on the bow were not seen in public until about 5-6 years ago (my guess) as they are intended to 'ward off' shaped-charge munitions. Some points about the S-Tank: 1. Technically it's a tank-destroyer vice a tank; 2. The powerpack is twin engined: originally a RR diesel (B-series) for general mobility, and a Boeing gas turbine cuts in for high power requirements/sprinting; 3. The gon is fixed in the hull and has an autoloader with dual 24 (?) round magazines; 4. Aiming is via two systems: a. elevation by suspension: hydropneumatic which the first and fourth suspension units are raised/lowered to change the fore-aft agle of the hull; b. traverse by turning the hull using the steering motor in the transmission; 5. Three-man crew: crew commander, driver and radio operator. The driver is also the gunner, and the CC has a back/over-ride gun-control. the rad-op face rear and can drive the S-Tank in reverse, ie the vehicle can reverse as fast as it can advance. 6. While the S-Tank has not been 'battle-tested', the hull configuration, based on WW2 data, is replicated by the Merkava. Its major defect is how well it can shot on the move, ie, its tank-likeness. Evidently, the Swedish Army intended the S-Tank as a high-mobility anti-tank weapon and its defects in the tank attack role were secondary. Despite the enthusiasm for shooting-on-the-move, at long range, accuracy is enhanced by being stationary (even for a short period: shooting from the halt); it is at reletively short range (c.