Xoon

One thing I have been thinking about is how to help a suicidal person if they are actively been bought down by a close relatively like a parent or spouse, when you have no way to removing said individual. 
On the pure mental, how ever much one tries to help the suicidal person, it is undone by the significant other, since they are more important in life then yourself. 
 
For every plus you give to the person, they give them a bigger minus. And considering negatives are usually stronger than positives for the same action, you are working at a loss. 

In a ground-survey it was found huge amounts of pure copper in the Nussir-area, in Repparfjord. The Norwegian government gave the green light to start mining the vein. This was disliked by the local Sami who claim they lost land for their reindeer, and of course the usual backlash from environmentalists. 
 
Their issue is the mining waste. A dumping are will be constructed, as far as I am aware, they are filling in a portion so isolate it from the rest of the fjord. It takes up roughly 15% of the area. Everything in this area will die, but it is estimated that 10 years after the mining is done, the local fauna will returned to normal levels. 
It has also been taken special measures to not impact the local reindeer population.
 
So yes, they are dumping mining waste into the fjord, but no, it is not into the open sea, but a purpose built dumping area. Yes the local fauna will die, but it is estimated that it will return. It is unknown weather it will impact the reindeer population, but most point to not. 
 
Repparfjord is located in the most Northern part of Norway. Almost all fish produced in Norway is produced in fisheries, which are located in the middle/center parts of the country.  So it would not impact the fishing industry. The Sami only live as reindeer herders as a way to maintain traditions, and are granted special rights because of their status. They tend to be very overprotective of their rights, which is why they backlashed.  Of course, this was picked up by the biggest newspaper in Norway, and made into a rage-bait hit piece. A lot of lies and provocation to fire up the environmentalists in the capital. 

 
 
For now, I would hire some biologists to analyse the area and impact of mining to get a extended of the risk. It probably has already been done by the government, but it has not gone mainstream.  But to be honest, Northern Norway is very poor(the counties, not the populace), with a shrinking population, they want this badly. 
 

"
Forsvarets K9 Thunder are soon ready: Here is the Norwegian artillery vehicle
                                                   
                                                                                                    The two first vehicles should be built in march.
 
 
K9 Thunder is the name of the artillery that will replace Norway's 50 year old M109-artillery.
It is produced in South Korea, a country which other parts of Forsvaret and Norwegian petroleum industry has had mix experience with.
Therefor it is comforting to hear that the factory is en route with the Norwegian artillery delivery. 
 
It is Forsvarets Forum which has visited the factory of Hanwha Land Systems in Changwon, just west of Busan. I a airline this is just 40 kilometers north of DSME-shipyard which used two years and two months more than promised to complete the Logistics vessel, KNM "Maud"
Here the turret of the Norwegian artillery vehicle is welded.Foto: Ylva Seiff Berge/Forsvarets forum But with Hanwha there is obviously better control:
– The two first vehicles will be ready by the end of march. We are en route, we have been there the entire time, says quality director Kyeong Wook-Lim in Hanwha Land Systems to Forsvarets Forum.
Four days before christmas in 2017, forsvarsmateriell (FMA) made in public that Hanwha had won the norwegian artillery competition. 
A contract was signed for 24 K9-artillery with 6 K10 ammuntion carriers. In addition, there is a agreement for 24 more artillery systems at a later date. The project total cost is about 3,2 billion NOK.
There is one K9- and K10 ready in about a month to start factory testing, which is estimated to take half a year. Both will be delivered to Norway by Barbromesse 4. December (Sankta Barbara is the artillery corps shooting weekend).
K9 Thunder on a visit in region eastland field, 3 years ago. Bilde: Simen Rudi/ Forsvarsmateriell South Korea has license produced american artillery of the type M109 and the MBT of the type M1 from 1990 to 2000 century. They designed a new artillery and MBTs from a blank slate: K9 Thunder and K2 Black Panther which are built by Hanwha and Hyundai Rotem. 
- Even the barrel on the K9 is newly developed, and is built to NATO standard, like the Koreans usually do. The Korean army is anyways a very though customer with high life time requirements. The artillery system is 20% overbuilt to be sure tjat nothing goes wrong when it is operated by conscripts, has Mognes Rasmus Mogensen i Military Equipment Denmark (MED), which are both companies represented in Norway, earlier told Teknisk Ukeblad. 
New Ammuntion
The artillery will replace the M109 which came to Norway in 1969. K9 Thunder made a good figure at the training grounds by Rena, 3 years ago. Here, four candidates were invited to do tests in the Norwegian winter environment. FMA picked the artillery system which had the highest grade of off the shelf performance and thereby the lowest risk. It was therefor K9 from Hanwha Land Systems (former Hanwha Techwin/Samsung).
Finland was a observer during the testing and went straight after in between state negotiations with South Korea which ended with them buying 48 used K9 vehicles. Both the Finnish and Norwegian vehicles will have ICS (Integrated combat systems) from Kongsberg Defense & Aerospace. 
This is what the finished vehicle looks like. Foto: Hanwha Land Systems The ammunition carrier is named the K10 and is built on the same platform as the K9. Therefor it has the same mobility. It can carry 104 shells and automatically transfer 12 shells per minute to the artillery vehicle without the personnel having to expose themselves.
The K9 Thunder has a capacity to send 3 shot in 13 seconds which hit at the same time (MRSI, "Multiple Rounds Simultaneous Impact"), or 6 to 8 shots per minute. For continues fire over an hour, it can manage 2-3 rounds per minute. 
 Foto: Hanwha Land Systems A new thing for Forsvaret, is the canon with a two meter longer barrel(L/52 instead of L/39 on the current M109) and a bigger muzzle velocity. In parallel, NAMMO's new shells, which are named 155 mm IM HE-ER ("Insensitive Munition, High explosive, Extended Range") is bought. This ammunition has a range of over 40 kilometers with a very low spread. 
NAMMO is also working on a "Extreme range" ammunition which will be ready in four to five years. Here it is talked about a guided shell with the help of a ramjet engine which can hit a target at 150 kilometers away.
"
 
Source:
https://www.tu.no/artikler/forsvarets-k9-thunder-snart-klar-her-er-den-forste-norske-artillerivogna/458067

I took my car into the garage today, to do some general maintenance.  Was going to change the break liquid, but I bought the wrong type. So I tried changing oil, but the drain plug was so stuck and hard to get that I needed to lift the car, and since I lacked the stands to have it on, so waited with that too.  Then I began changing the drum break pads. I could not find the lift point, so in my half hypothermic, half feverish state I mistook the side channel for the lift point and did this:
 

 
 
After swearing a lot and getting a better jack, I found the correct point and starting dismounting the drum breaks. 
 

 
Of course, one of the nuts for the wheel got stuck in the wrench, which a had to knock lose with a hammer and screwdriver. 
 
 

 
After a lot of messing with the breaks to get the got damn pads of, I could not get the drum on.  Furious beyond belief, I went in to defrost and ease my back pain.  Now I feel very sick. 
 
All in all, a typical day, working on the car in -12 C. 

I don't know a lot about the US climate, so I just guessed, thanks for correcting me. 
And yes, I assumed they did, it is the norm her in Norway for washrooms and bathrooms to have tiles, sometimes the hall too. 
But if you speak about what is the most cost efficient, electric floor heating is not worth is at all. 
It's a "luxury" thing, people want it so that they can have fancy floors that tend to be very cold, and still have a warm feeling from beneath their feet. 
A rug is way more cost efficient. The only real upside is the very well distributed heating. 
 

I am not sure about the US, but most people know a carpenter or construction worker, or knows how to do flooring in Norway. We do all the prep work for the electrician, then he does the wiring and fuses, and we add the floor again. Sometimes we let the craftsmen do it do have it be extra nice. So it tends to be pretty reasonably priced. 
 
Not sure what would break in electric floor heating. It is all solid state, it would outlast your fuses, even the thermostat. 
 
 
Most houses in Norway lack ducting outside of simple air ducts that lets fresh air in, and the blower to getting the cooking fumes and steam out.  Most people do have a HVAC and wood stove though. 
The stove is mostly for the cosy feel, but it is also a back up in case of a power outage, in which it gets very cold in the winter. 
 
 
Electricity is "dirt cheap" here, so that is a big factor. Gas is not reasonably priced. 
 
 
Almost all houses in Norway lack water borne heating. Some do in special cases, like when a furniture factory is nearby and sells he excess heat.  Only modern houses have balanced heating with ducts, which means most heating comes from HVAC, heaters, wood stoves and floor heating. New houses tend to have floor heating in every room. Old houses only in the bathrooms and halls, places with tiles. 
 
So yes, we use almost purely electrical heating, either through HVAC or heating elements. 
 
 
Never heard of in Norway. 
 
 
Water borne heating is awesome, if you can pay for it. Much more efficient and allows a lot of power saving.  Thermal solar panels, wood/gas heating, electric heating, heat pump heating. 
 
Though it is simply not worth it to retrofit in most Norwegian houses, and most opt for electrical heating instead in modern houses to save cost. 

I don't know a lot about the US climate, so I just guessed, thanks for correcting me. 
And yes, I assumed they did, it is the norm her in Norway for washrooms and bathrooms to have tiles, sometimes the hall too. 
But if you speak about what is the most cost efficient, electric floor heating is not worth is at all. 
It's a "luxury" thing, people want it so that they can have fancy floors that tend to be very cold, and still have a warm feeling from beneath their feet. 
A rug is way more cost efficient. The only real upside is the very well distributed heating. 
 

I am not sure about the US, but most people know a carpenter or construction worker, or knows how to do flooring in Norway. We do all the prep work for the electrician, then he does the wiring and fuses, and we add the floor again. Sometimes we let the craftsmen do it do have it be extra nice. So it tends to be pretty reasonably priced. 
 
Not sure what would break in electric floor heating. It is all solid state, it would outlast your fuses, even the thermostat. 
 
 
Most houses in Norway lack ducting outside of simple air ducts that lets fresh air in, and the blower to getting the cooking fumes and steam out.  Most people do have a HVAC and wood stove though. 
The stove is mostly for the cosy feel, but it is also a back up in case of a power outage, in which it gets very cold in the winter. 
 
 
Electricity is "dirt cheap" here, so that is a big factor. Gas is not reasonably priced. 
 
 
Almost all houses in Norway lack water borne heating. Some do in special cases, like when a furniture factory is nearby and sells he excess heat.  Only modern houses have balanced heating with ducts, which means most heating comes from HVAC, heaters, wood stoves and floor heating. New houses tend to have floor heating in every room. Old houses only in the bathrooms and halls, places with tiles. 
 
So yes, we use almost purely electrical heating, either through HVAC or heating elements. 
 
 
Never heard of in Norway. 
 
 
Water borne heating is awesome, if you can pay for it. Much more efficient and allows a lot of power saving.  Thermal solar panels, wood/gas heating, electric heating, heat pump heating. 
 
Though it is simply not worth it to retrofit in most Norwegian houses, and most opt for electrical heating instead in modern houses to save cost. 

I think it is time to embrace the vile concepts of the missile gods:

 
Blast em with shittons of missiles:

 

I think it is time to embrace the vile concepts of the missile gods:

 
Blast em with shittons of missiles:

 

Simply fortify the Kiel canal and Baltic forests, and let time do it's job. 
 
Maybe ally the US and Russia. 
Scratch that, maybe ally visegrad group.

The answer is simple:
 

Yeah,  I am Norwegian.  This sounds legit, though badly translated.  
 
The reason the warship sank by the way, is because they anchored the ship to land to keep it steady. But it was a poor job,  a wire broke,  and when they tried to reinforce it, it became too dangerous and they had to abort half way.  Later other wires broke,  leading to a chain reaction causing the reinforced wire to rip out a chuck of rock and the ship sinking.  
 
Sjøforsvaret tells the media that it has no ship rescue capability "because they are not a ship rescue company" .  That competence has to be outsourced.  
 
The ship is unofficially declared lost and not Worth repairing.
 
 
 
A lot of memes about it:

(It says boat is given away, has to be picked up in Øygarden and the batteries for the GPS has to be replaced. A captain can come with for free.)
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah,  I am Norwegian.  This sounds legit, though badly translated.  
 
The reason the warship sank by the way, is because they anchored the ship to land to keep it steady. But it was a poor job,  a wire broke,  and when they tried to reinforce it, it became too dangerous and they had to abort half way.  Later other wires broke,  leading to a chain reaction causing the reinforced wire to rip out a chuck of rock and the ship sinking.  
 
Sjøforsvaret tells the media that it has no ship rescue capability "because they are not a ship rescue company" .  That competence has to be outsourced.  
 
The ship is unofficially declared lost and not Worth repairing.
 
 
 
A lot of memes about it:

(It says boat is given away, has to be picked up in Øygarden and the batteries for the GPS has to be replaced. A captain can come with for free.)
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah,  I am Norwegian.  This sounds legit, though badly translated.  
 
The reason the warship sank by the way, is because they anchored the ship to land to keep it steady. But it was a poor job,  a wire broke,  and when they tried to reinforce it, it became too dangerous and they had to abort half way.  Later other wires broke,  leading to a chain reaction causing the reinforced wire to rip out a chuck of rock and the ship sinking.  
 
Sjøforsvaret tells the media that it has no ship rescue capability "because they are not a ship rescue company" .  That competence has to be outsourced.  
 
The ship is unofficially declared lost and not Worth repairing.
 
 
 
A lot of memes about it:

(It says boat is given away, has to be picked up in Øygarden and the batteries for the GPS has to be replaced. A captain can come with for free.)
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah,  I am Norwegian.  This sounds legit, though badly translated.  
 
The reason the warship sank by the way, is because they anchored the ship to land to keep it steady. But it was a poor job,  a wire broke,  and when they tried to reinforce it, it became too dangerous and they had to abort half way.  Later other wires broke,  leading to a chain reaction causing the reinforced wire to rip out a chuck of rock and the ship sinking.  
 
Sjøforsvaret tells the media that it has no ship rescue capability "because they are not a ship rescue company" .  That competence has to be outsourced.  
 
The ship is unofficially declared lost and not Worth repairing.
 
 
 
A lot of memes about it:

(It says boat is given away, has to be picked up in Øygarden and the batteries for the GPS has to be replaced. A captain can come with for free.)
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah,  I am Norwegian.  This sounds legit, though badly translated.  
 
The reason the warship sank by the way, is because they anchored the ship to land to keep it steady. But it was a poor job,  a wire broke,  and when they tried to reinforce it, it became too dangerous and they had to abort half way.  Later other wires broke,  leading to a chain reaction causing the reinforced wire to rip out a chuck of rock and the ship sinking.  
 
Sjøforsvaret tells the media that it has no ship rescue capability "because they are not a ship rescue company" .  That competence has to be outsourced.  
 
The ship is unofficially declared lost and not Worth repairing.
 
 
 
A lot of memes about it:

(It says boat is given away, has to be picked up in Øygarden and the batteries for the GPS has to be replaced. A captain can come with for free.)
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Damn Americans can't stay away from our bacon hot dogs!
Just don't get massacred by cocky elementary school children with snowballs....

if disagree == True:
    person = "small penis"
*
 
Just had to. 

Damn Americans can't stay away from our bacon hot dogs!
Just don't get massacred by cocky elementary school children with snowballs....

You should look at it relative to its peers; that a newer tank reaches a higher level of protection than an older design is nothing special. IMO one could only say that side armor was prioritized, if more weight was invested into the side armor relative to the frontal armor (meaning the side armor is prioritized over the frontal armor) or greater coverage is demanded: prioritizing would mean to invest more weight into the side armor to either reach a higher protection level (larger frontal arc reaches same protection as the frontal armor) or armor coverage (which one can consider indepedent of timeframe). As we can see by looking at the requirements for the Abrams, it was designed with protection against tank rounds and ATGMs along a 50° arc. 50° is a bit smaller than 60°, which was common on other designs of the time (see German, French & British requirements for their third generation MBTs).
If we account for the technology differences,  the Stridsvagn 2000 wasn't designed to reach a high level of protection along a greater frontal arc than existing tanks, so side armor wasn't prioritized compared to other tanks.
 
The only reason why one could claim that the Strv 2000 prioritizes side armor compared to the M1 Abrams is the fact that the hull at areas covered by the ballistic skirts is capable to resist certain types of handheld anti-tank weapons (RPG-7, Carl Gustav?) at perpendicular impact angle, but IMO that is only a by-product of the higher protection level required for the frontal arc. It is similar to the Leopard 2A5, where the area covered by ballistic skirts is capable to resist the basic RPG-7 rounds, even though it wasn't nedessarily designed to do so.
 
If you consider that the Stridsvagn 2000 was an unfinished development project and originally meant to enter service around the year 2000, the it would make more sense to compare it to contemporary projects (i.e. the "lost generation" of Cold War prototypes and testbeds made for the 2000s), then the Stridsvagn 2000 doesn't seem to have particular thick side armor/good armor coverage at the hull.
 


 
The main reason why comparing the M1A2 Abrams' and Stridsvagn 2000's hull armor isn't a good idea, is the lack of upgrades for the (side) hull armor of the former MBT. Based on footage from the production of M1A1s for Egypt and factory footage from the United States, the basic hull armor and side skirts still have the same thickness/layout as used on the original production model of the Abrams in 1980.

" De tekniska studierna delades upp i kompetensuppbyggande studier och försök, konceptstudier samt projektstudier. Fysiskt skydd kom att prioriteras före beväpningssystem, ledningssystem och rörlighetssystem. Tre huvudkrav kom att bli konceptstyrande:
Skjutning under gång varvet runt (360º) med huvudvapnet Direktutblick för vagnchefen från vagnens högsta punkt Överlevnad för vagn och besättning vid en träff i ammunitionslagringen Vidare beaktades de typiskt svenska förhållandena som normalt resulterade i speciella krav på försvarsmaterielen – den korta värnpliktsutbildningen följd av korta repetitionsövningar (dvs materielen måste vara lätt att handha) och det faktum att materielen under större delen av sin livslängd skulle ligga i mobiliseringsförråd med ett minimum av underhåll.
 
 
 
Skydd
I projekt Strv 2000 tillmättes skyddet i vid bemärkelse stor betydelse – eller stridsvagnens överlevnadsförmåga vad avser skydd mot upptäckt-identifiering-träff, skydd mot verkan och skydd mot efterverkan. Kraven sattes mycket högt både vad gäller låga signaturer inom våglängdsområdena för IR och radar, men framförallt för det ballistiska skyddet. Dessa inkluderade mycket förutseende krav på skydd mot minor och takverkande stridsdelar.

Grundprincipen för vagnens uppbyggnad var ett minimiskrov i pansarstål som var tillräckligt tjockt för att kunna ta upp krafterna vid körning och skjutning. Det skulle också kunna ta upp de krafter som en yttre skyddsmodul kunde åstadkomma då den träffats.
 
I det fall den yttre skyddsmodulen använde sig av principen med ett spontaninitierat tungt explosivt reaktivt pansar (t ex i kompositionen 15/3/9) – effektivt inte bara mot riktad sprängverkan, utan även kinetisk energi – kunde dessa krafter på grundstrukturen bli relativt stora. De försök som gjordes mot frontalt monterade moduler med denna typ av skydd visade att det var möjligt att kraftigt störa en penetrerande pilprojektil.

Tanken var också att Strv 2000 skulle använda en stor andel keram i skyddskonstruktionen. Det faktum att den totala andelen keram skulle komma att uppgå till flera ton i respektive stridsvagn gjorde att ett det så kallade Skyddskeramprojektet startade upp 1988. Under ett par års tid gjordes försök med många olika typer av keram - Al2O3(aluminiumoxid), B4C (borkarbid) och TiB2 (titanborid) – men trots ett brett deltagande från svensk industri, FOA och FMV, blev det inte så mycket mer än en medioker referenskeram.

Inspirerade av den valda skyddslösningen i den amerikanska stridsvagnen M1A1 DU där Chobhampansaret uppgraderats med skikt av utarmat uran, gjordes provskjutningar i Sverige även mot denna typ av material. Resultaten visade på möjligheten att nå bättre skyddsprestanda om volymen och inte vikten var gränssättande.

Stor möda lades även på att åstadkomma en från besättningen separerad ammunitionslagring som skulle tåla såväl krutbrand som en detonation efter direktträff på en RSV-stridsdel med övertändning som följd. Den lösning som utarbetades fungerade och hade stora likheter med motsvarande utrymmen i Leopard 2 och M1A1 med så kallade ”blow off panels”, men hade en utvecklad princip för att förhindra total övertändning med total utslagning som följd. Skotten var placerade längst bak i chassiet. "
 
Translation:

" The technical studies are divided up into competence building studies and trials, concept studies and project studies. Physical armor is prioritzed over weapon systems, FCS and mobility systems. Three main requirements have steered the concept:
 
        - Firing while on the movie, 360 degrees with the main weapon.
        - Direct sight for the vehicle commander from the tanks highest point. 
        - Survival of the tank and crew in case of a hit to the ammunition storage. 
 
Furthermore, the typical Swedish environment is considered, which normally results in special requirements for defense materials - the short conscription followed by short repletion exercise (meaning that the material needs to be easy to handle) and the fact that the material in bigger parts of its lifetime will be located at mobilization storage with a minimum of maintenance. 
 
Armor:
In project Strv 2000 is armor of the highest importance - or the tanks survival chance against discovery - identification - hit, protection against impact, after armor protection. High requirements are sett for a low signature in the visual spectrum, for IR and for radar, men but most of all the armor. These include requirements for mine protection and roof armor. 
 

 
 
The principle of the tank construction is a minimal hull of armor steel, made strong enough to absorb the force when driving and firing. It should also be able to take up the force that a outer armor module would achieve when hit.

 
 
In the case of the outer armor module, the use of the principle with a spontaneously initiated heavy explosive reactive armor (composition 15/3/9) - effective not only against directed explosive force (I assume HEAT) but also kinetic energy - could these forces on the hull be reality large.

 
 
It was also thought that Strv 200 would use a large amount of ceramics in the armor construction. The fact that a big portion of ceramics would come to make up several tons in the tank in question, caused the so called ceramic armor project to be started in 1988. In a couple of years time a few tests were done with several different ceramics - Al2O3(aluminium oxide), B4C (boron carbide) and TiB2 (titan boride) - but even with a board cooperation between Swedish industry, FOA and FMW, the ceramics turned out the not be much more than a mediocre reference ceramics. 

 
Inspired by the armor solution chosen by the US tank M1A1, in which the Chobham armor was upgraded with a layer of depleted uranium, a firing trial was held in Sweden against this type of material. The results showed a possibility of better armor performance if volume and not the weight was the restricting factor.
 
 

 
A lot of effort was put into producing the ammunition storage, separated from the crew, which can take a direct hit and detonation from a ATGM. The solution developed was similar to the Leopard 2 or M1A1 with their so called "blow off panels", but was also developed to stop a chain reaction from detonating all the ammunition. The ammunition was placed in the hull rear. "
 
I translated the section covering the armor for you guys. Though I do not see anything indicating that the front engine required longer side armor. The requirements state the coverage, regardless of a front engine.  Though the coverage required is similar to the M1A2 and Leopard 2's turret. 
 
I can translate more if anyone is interested.

On hydrostatic driven wheel loader you have 2 methods of braking. First, is simply let your foot off from the accelerator pedal. The pressure in the system acts on the pump, slowing down the machine. Most of the time you use this method. But sometimes, this is not enough, for example emergency braking, or simply holding the machine when pushing up material to the pile. This is why you have a conventional brake too, on my machine it is located on the drive shaft that powers the front axle, it is a simple disc brake. It is also used as a parking brake.

" De tekniska studierna delades upp i kompetensuppbyggande studier och försök, konceptstudier samt projektstudier. Fysiskt skydd kom att prioriteras före beväpningssystem, ledningssystem och rörlighetssystem. Tre huvudkrav kom att bli konceptstyrande:
Skjutning under gång varvet runt (360º) med huvudvapnet Direktutblick för vagnchefen från vagnens högsta punkt Överlevnad för vagn och besättning vid en träff i ammunitionslagringen Vidare beaktades de typiskt svenska förhållandena som normalt resulterade i speciella krav på försvarsmaterielen – den korta värnpliktsutbildningen följd av korta repetitionsövningar (dvs materielen måste vara lätt att handha) och det faktum att materielen under större delen av sin livslängd skulle ligga i mobiliseringsförråd med ett minimum av underhåll.
 
 
 
Skydd
I projekt Strv 2000 tillmättes skyddet i vid bemärkelse stor betydelse – eller stridsvagnens överlevnadsförmåga vad avser skydd mot upptäckt-identifiering-träff, skydd mot verkan och skydd mot efterverkan. Kraven sattes mycket högt både vad gäller låga signaturer inom våglängdsområdena för IR och radar, men framförallt för det ballistiska skyddet. Dessa inkluderade mycket förutseende krav på skydd mot minor och takverkande stridsdelar.

Grundprincipen för vagnens uppbyggnad var ett minimiskrov i pansarstål som var tillräckligt tjockt för att kunna ta upp krafterna vid körning och skjutning. Det skulle också kunna ta upp de krafter som en yttre skyddsmodul kunde åstadkomma då den träffats.
 
I det fall den yttre skyddsmodulen använde sig av principen med ett spontaninitierat tungt explosivt reaktivt pansar (t ex i kompositionen 15/3/9) – effektivt inte bara mot riktad sprängverkan, utan även kinetisk energi – kunde dessa krafter på grundstrukturen bli relativt stora. De försök som gjordes mot frontalt monterade moduler med denna typ av skydd visade att det var möjligt att kraftigt störa en penetrerande pilprojektil.

Tanken var också att Strv 2000 skulle använda en stor andel keram i skyddskonstruktionen. Det faktum att den totala andelen keram skulle komma att uppgå till flera ton i respektive stridsvagn gjorde att ett det så kallade Skyddskeramprojektet startade upp 1988. Under ett par års tid gjordes försök med många olika typer av keram - Al2O3(aluminiumoxid), B4C (borkarbid) och TiB2 (titanborid) – men trots ett brett deltagande från svensk industri, FOA och FMV, blev det inte så mycket mer än en medioker referenskeram.

Inspirerade av den valda skyddslösningen i den amerikanska stridsvagnen M1A1 DU där Chobhampansaret uppgraderats med skikt av utarmat uran, gjordes provskjutningar i Sverige även mot denna typ av material. Resultaten visade på möjligheten att nå bättre skyddsprestanda om volymen och inte vikten var gränssättande.

Stor möda lades även på att åstadkomma en från besättningen separerad ammunitionslagring som skulle tåla såväl krutbrand som en detonation efter direktträff på en RSV-stridsdel med övertändning som följd. Den lösning som utarbetades fungerade och hade stora likheter med motsvarande utrymmen i Leopard 2 och M1A1 med så kallade ”blow off panels”, men hade en utvecklad princip för att förhindra total övertändning med total utslagning som följd. Skotten var placerade längst bak i chassiet. "
 
Translation:

" The technical studies are divided up into competence building studies and trials, concept studies and project studies. Physical armor is prioritzed over weapon systems, FCS and mobility systems. Three main requirements have steered the concept:
 
        - Firing while on the movie, 360 degrees with the main weapon.
        - Direct sight for the vehicle commander from the tanks highest point. 
        - Survival of the tank and crew in case of a hit to the ammunition storage. 
 
Furthermore, the typical Swedish environment is considered, which normally results in special requirements for defense materials - the short conscription followed by short repletion exercise (meaning that the material needs to be easy to handle) and the fact that the material in bigger parts of its lifetime will be located at mobilization storage with a minimum of maintenance. 
 
Armor:
In project Strv 2000 is armor of the highest importance - or the tanks survival chance against discovery - identification - hit, protection against impact, after armor protection. High requirements are sett for a low signature in the visual spectrum, for IR and for radar, men but most of all the armor. These include requirements for mine protection and roof armor. 
 

 
 
The principle of the tank construction is a minimal hull of armor steel, made strong enough to absorb the force when driving and firing. It should also be able to take up the force that a outer armor module would achieve when hit.

 
 
In the case of the outer armor module, the use of the principle with a spontaneously initiated heavy explosive reactive armor (composition 15/3/9) - effective not only against directed explosive force (I assume HEAT) but also kinetic energy - could these forces on the hull be reality large.

 
 
It was also thought that Strv 200 would use a large amount of ceramics in the armor construction. The fact that a big portion of ceramics would come to make up several tons in the tank in question, caused the so called ceramic armor project to be started in 1988. In a couple of years time a few tests were done with several different ceramics - Al2O3(aluminium oxide), B4C (boron carbide) and TiB2 (titan boride) - but even with a board cooperation between Swedish industry, FOA and FMW, the ceramics turned out the not be much more than a mediocre reference ceramics. 

 
Inspired by the armor solution chosen by the US tank M1A1, in which the Chobham armor was upgraded with a layer of depleted uranium, a firing trial was held in Sweden against this type of material. The results showed a possibility of better armor performance if volume and not the weight was the restricting factor.
 
 

 
A lot of effort was put into producing the ammunition storage, separated from the crew, which can take a direct hit and detonation from a ATGM. The solution developed was similar to the Leopard 2 or M1A1 with their so called "blow off panels", but was also developed to stop a chain reaction from detonating all the ammunition. The ammunition was placed in the hull rear. "
 
I translated the section covering the armor for you guys. Though I do not see anything indicating that the front engine required longer side armor. The requirements state the coverage, regardless of a front engine.  Though the coverage required is similar to the M1A2 and Leopard 2's turret. 
 
I can translate more if anyone is interested.

" En 10,5 cm kanon monterades ovanpå Mardern i ett enmanstorn. Med denna rigg UDES 19 genomfördes ett flertal olika försök – körning, skjutning, med mera.
Det gjordes egentligen två riggar för UDES 19. Utöver kör- och skjutriggen tillverkades även en laddrigg. På dessa genomfördes kör-, skjut-, observations-och laddförsök. Laddriggen testade principen att låta en laddpendel som roterar runt samma axel som kanonen föra skotten ett och ett från magasinet till kanonen.
Konstruktionen visade sig fungera bra och vara så robust att varken snö eller de grenar man testade med (upp till 5 cm) tjocka utgjorde något hinder för funktionen, däremot sågs det finnas risk att skräp följde med skotten in i kanonen. Man testade dock inte känsligheten för beskjutning.
Under skjutförsök bekräftades att det gick snabbare att inrikta kanonen - detta eftersom den har lägre massa än ett vanligt torn. Dock fick riggen långa skottider som berodde på dåligt fininriktningssystem.
Parallellt testades även denna princip med ovanpålagrad kanon på ett chassi till Strv 103. "
 
Translation:
" A 105mm canon was mounted on top of a Marder AFV in a one-man turret. With this rig, UDES 19 completed several different tests - driving, firing and more.
It is actually two rigs for UDES 19. For driving- and shooting-rig a loading rig is added. Driving, firing, observation and loading test are done on these rigs. The loading rig is to test the principle that a loading pendulum that rotates around the same axis as the canon can feed ammunition from the magazine to the cannon. 
This system appeared to work well and was so robust that neither snow or branches that was tested (up to 50mm) thick made a hindrance for the system, however, there is a risk of rubbish coming with the ammunition into the cannon. Therefor, the sensitivity to firing was not tested. 
In the firing trials in was found that the cannon was faster at aiming, because of the lighter tower. However, the rig high aiming time was thought to be because of bad FCS.
In parallel this principle was tested on a chassis of the Strv 103."
 
Source:
http://www.ointres.se/udes.htm

Translation:

 
 

 
 

 
 

" De tekniska studierna delades upp i kompetensuppbyggande studier och försök, konceptstudier samt projektstudier. Fysiskt skydd kom att prioriteras före beväpningssystem, ledningssystem och rörlighetssystem. Tre huvudkrav kom att bli konceptstyrande:
Skjutning under gång varvet runt (360º) med huvudvapnet Direktutblick för vagnchefen från vagnens högsta punkt Överlevnad för vagn och besättning vid en träff i ammunitionslagringen Vidare beaktades de typiskt svenska förhållandena som normalt resulterade i speciella krav på försvarsmaterielen – den korta värnpliktsutbildningen följd av korta repetitionsövningar (dvs materielen måste vara lätt att handha) och det faktum att materielen under större delen av sin livslängd skulle ligga i mobiliseringsförråd med ett minimum av underhåll.
 
 
 
Skydd
I projekt Strv 2000 tillmättes skyddet i vid bemärkelse stor betydelse – eller stridsvagnens överlevnadsförmåga vad avser skydd mot upptäckt-identifiering-träff, skydd mot verkan och skydd mot efterverkan. Kraven sattes mycket högt både vad gäller låga signaturer inom våglängdsområdena för IR och radar, men framförallt för det ballistiska skyddet. Dessa inkluderade mycket förutseende krav på skydd mot minor och takverkande stridsdelar.

Grundprincipen för vagnens uppbyggnad var ett minimiskrov i pansarstål som var tillräckligt tjockt för att kunna ta upp krafterna vid körning och skjutning. Det skulle också kunna ta upp de krafter som en yttre skyddsmodul kunde åstadkomma då den träffats.
 
I det fall den yttre skyddsmodulen använde sig av principen med ett spontaninitierat tungt explosivt reaktivt pansar (t ex i kompositionen 15/3/9) – effektivt inte bara mot riktad sprängverkan, utan även kinetisk energi – kunde dessa krafter på grundstrukturen bli relativt stora. De försök som gjordes mot frontalt monterade moduler med denna typ av skydd visade att det var möjligt att kraftigt störa en penetrerande pilprojektil.

Tanken var också att Strv 2000 skulle använda en stor andel keram i skyddskonstruktionen. Det faktum att den totala andelen keram skulle komma att uppgå till flera ton i respektive stridsvagn gjorde att ett det så kallade Skyddskeramprojektet startade upp 1988. Under ett par års tid gjordes försök med många olika typer av keram - Al2O3(aluminiumoxid), B4C (borkarbid) och TiB2 (titanborid) – men trots ett brett deltagande från svensk industri, FOA och FMV, blev det inte så mycket mer än en medioker referenskeram.

Inspirerade av den valda skyddslösningen i den amerikanska stridsvagnen M1A1 DU där Chobhampansaret uppgraderats med skikt av utarmat uran, gjordes provskjutningar i Sverige även mot denna typ av material. Resultaten visade på möjligheten att nå bättre skyddsprestanda om volymen och inte vikten var gränssättande.

Stor möda lades även på att åstadkomma en från besättningen separerad ammunitionslagring som skulle tåla såväl krutbrand som en detonation efter direktträff på en RSV-stridsdel med övertändning som följd. Den lösning som utarbetades fungerade och hade stora likheter med motsvarande utrymmen i Leopard 2 och M1A1 med så kallade ”blow off panels”, men hade en utvecklad princip för att förhindra total övertändning med total utslagning som följd. Skotten var placerade längst bak i chassiet. "
 
Translation:

" The technical studies are divided up into competence building studies and trials, concept studies and project studies. Physical armor is prioritzed over weapon systems, FCS and mobility systems. Three main requirements have steered the concept:
 
        - Firing while on the movie, 360 degrees with the main weapon.
        - Direct sight for the vehicle commander from the tanks highest point. 
        - Survival of the tank and crew in case of a hit to the ammunition storage. 
 
Furthermore, the typical Swedish environment is considered, which normally results in special requirements for defense materials - the short conscription followed by short repletion exercise (meaning that the material needs to be easy to handle) and the fact that the material in bigger parts of its lifetime will be located at mobilization storage with a minimum of maintenance. 
 
Armor:
In project Strv 2000 is armor of the highest importance - or the tanks survival chance against discovery - identification - hit, protection against impact, after armor protection. High requirements are sett for a low signature in the visual spectrum, for IR and for radar, men but most of all the armor. These include requirements for mine protection and roof armor. 
 

 
 
The principle of the tank construction is a minimal hull of armor steel, made strong enough to absorb the force when driving and firing. It should also be able to take up the force that a outer armor module would achieve when hit.

 
 
In the case of the outer armor module, the use of the principle with a spontaneously initiated heavy explosive reactive armor (composition 15/3/9) - effective not only against directed explosive force (I assume HEAT) but also kinetic energy - could these forces on the hull be reality large.

 
 
It was also thought that Strv 200 would use a large amount of ceramics in the armor construction. The fact that a big portion of ceramics would come to make up several tons in the tank in question, caused the so called ceramic armor project to be started in 1988. In a couple of years time a few tests were done with several different ceramics - Al2O3(aluminium oxide), B4C (boron carbide) and TiB2 (titan boride) - but even with a board cooperation between Swedish industry, FOA and FMW, the ceramics turned out the not be much more than a mediocre reference ceramics. 

 
Inspired by the armor solution chosen by the US tank M1A1, in which the Chobham armor was upgraded with a layer of depleted uranium, a firing trial was held in Sweden against this type of material. The results showed a possibility of better armor performance if volume and not the weight was the restricting factor.
 
 

 
A lot of effort was put into producing the ammunition storage, separated from the crew, which can take a direct hit and detonation from a ATGM. The solution developed was similar to the Leopard 2 or M1A1 with their so called "blow off panels", but was also developed to stop a chain reaction from detonating all the ammunition. The ammunition was placed in the hull rear. "
 
I translated the section covering the armor for you guys. Though I do not see anything indicating that the front engine required longer side armor. The requirements state the coverage, regardless of a front engine.  Though the coverage required is similar to the M1A2 and Leopard 2's turret. 
 
I can translate more if anyone is interested.