T___A

Yeah, that should do it.

I know the Jagdpanther had an improved final drive but is there good evidence that it was completely "fixed?"  I think there is a british report on a captured Jagdpanther that showed that they had issues with the final drive.  But I may have remembered that incorrectly.  Anyone remember that?

I've read that since the Jagdpanther used the final drive from the Panther II the problems with them were fixed. I may be misremembering so feel free to correct me.

I'm using Windows 8.1 with Start is Back and I've been enjoying it a lot. Though you can't go wrong with either one.

Oh man. Dat parallel staging.

At least it isn't using solid rocket boosters.

Since the Jagdpanther fixed the final drive issues of the Panther is it still a bad tank?

I think that a turretless tank would be highly unsuitable for the types of operations the Soviets would have undertaken during the Cold War. However, given Sweden's unique set of requirements, and that the Strv 103 would fight in a purely defensive war, I can see how it would be a logical design.

The Soviets thought turretless tanks weren't even good for that as in their opinion turning the tank to move the gun would reveal the tank's postion.

It's interesting to note what the Soviets and what the Swedish thought were viable designs. The Soviets desgined a tank similar to the Strv 103 but it was rejected due to their concerns on aiming the gun of a turretless tank.

This shall be the general thread for all things soviet tanks. I shall start by posting an article I just wrote for my blog. I would recommend Archive Awarness which is an excellent blog about Soviet tanks and their experiences with other nation's tanks.

In the 2nd half of 1957 at the suggestion of Chief the Armored troops of the Soviet Army Colonel General P.P. Poluboyarova suggested that a new tank be developed on the basis of the Object 140 but uses the chassis of the T-54B to ensure maximum part compatibly. The tank was designed at factory №183 under the leadership of Leonid Karcev. One prototype was built and underwent testing in the fall of 1958.

The Object 142 was armed with the 100mm D-54TS. The tank contained 50 rounds of ammunition for the main gun. The D-54TS was two plane stabilized with the “Blizzard” stabilizer. The gun was aimed with a TSH2A telescopic sight while night sighting was used with the TPN-1. Gun traverse of the main gun was -5 to 16 degrees. Unlike the Object 140 the Object 142 lacked a mechanism for spent shell ejection. Due to removing the AA gun that was on the Object 140 spaced was freed up for more ammunition (3,500 rounds) for the 7.62mm SGMT machine gun. The armor layout was mostly the same as the Object 140.

The Object 142 was powered by the 580hp B-55. Top speed was 50km/h. The transmission was essentially that of the T-54B. Most of the parts from the Object 142 power system were taken from the Object 140 except for the heater and fuel tanks. The Object 142 carried 715 liters of fuel plus 285 on external tanks. This gave the Object 142 a range of 500km.

Armor layout of the Object 142

The Object 142 was canceled with the start the start of production of the T-55 at Factory №183 and research being undertaken to improve the fighting capability of the T-55.While the Object 142 was short lived it did form the basis for the T-62A and thus the T-62. The Object 142 would mark the start of Nizhny Tagil's move to improve tank capability of it's future tanks with older ones. It should be noted that the Object 142 is commonly misidentified as the T-62A, you can tell the difference by seeing if it has a Object 142 turret and hull.