You are on page 1of 49

UDES

Light
During the 1970s, were provided a rméstaben with input from eg the different UDE groups in the tank trials
conducted. iktigaste v The group was UDES (Sub team group Direct E ld Stridsfordon) at FMV.
The task of UDES was to collect, process, coordinate and present in uniform shape technical-economic basis in
the field of combat vehicle systems. F irst meeting was held on 7 January 1971. Standing agenda items during
the many meetings that took place during the 1970s were:
 Basis for playing cards
 Attempt
Examples of such illkommande points on the agendas were:
 Impressions (1971-10-27)
 Meeting (")
 Stridsledning (1972-03-29)
 Armored (1972-05-24)
 Stridsledning wagon (1972-08-21)
 Tank (1972-08-21)
 General included: Display, Protocol Adjustment, Orientations, Trials (1972-08-23)
 Ammunition Carriage (1973-03-22)
 Infantry Cannon Wagon (1973-12-14)
 Light tower tank (1973-12-14)
 Anti-tank wagons (1973-12-14) and anti-tank cars (1975-06-16)
 Of the threat of combat vehicles (1975-06-16)
 Study Situation and Continued study activities (1975-08-14)
 Anti-tank Robotic Vehicles (1975-09-15)
 Visiting the U.S. (1975-10-27)
 Try the German automotive (1975-10-27)
 Threat Tank III (1975-10-27)
 Dark warfare (1975-10-27)

UDES - Surface Group Direct Fire Combat
UDES led by chief engineer Sven Berge at Combat Vehicle Office at FMV. The group took on the work to
develop the concept and describe various options for new combat vehicles in the form of tanks, anti-tank
wagons or armored personnel carriers.
The studies were primarily based on finding a cheap solution for a tank, which in some important respects is
superior opponent. Three basic concepts for a new tank was produced - a tornlös tank, a conventional tank with
towers, and a tank with flush-mounted cannon. Both Swedish and foreign options were considered. A large
number of "playing cards" were developed - ie comprehensive system descriptions of the study concepts.
The matrix below is an attempt to correlate the various UDES concept that developed during 19 70s. In some
cases, the concept has changed over time, hence the contradictions that can be compared with other open
literature.
Tanks
UDES 01
Improved Strv 103, cannon 10.5-12 cm, half numb weapons storage, weight about 40 tons
UDES 02
Foreign tower wagon (type the Leopard 2, Chieftain or XM1), cannon 10.5-12 cm, weight
about 50 tons
UDES 03
Reduced UDES 01, canon 10.5-12 cm, half numb arms storage, weight about 20-25 tons
(later 25-30 tons)
UDES 04
Reduced UDES 01, canon 10.5-12 cm, half numb arms storage, weight about 25 tons
(later 25-30 tons)
UDES 11
Main Battle Tank with stiff weapon storage, gun 10.5-12 cm, weight about 25 tons
(later 25-30 tons), playing cards in 1971 accounted UDES 11:01 a.m. 20 tons of ammunition
wagon with weak armor in the family UDES 03
UDES 15
Main Battle Tank with turret from Bofors cannon 10.5-12 cm, weight 25 tons
(later 25-30 tons)
UDES 16
Main Battle Tank with turret from Hagglunds, cannon 10.5-12 cm, weight 25 tons
(later 25-30 tons)
UDES 15/16 Main Battle Tank with towers, balanced solution of Bofors and Hagglunds proposals,
cannon 10.5-12 cm, weight 25 tons (later 30 tons)
UDES 17
Main Battle Tank with height adjustable cannon 10.5-12 cm (pivot), weight about 25 tons
(later 25-30 tons)
UDES 18
Main battle tank with flush mounted cannon 10.5-12 cm, weight about 25 tons
(later 25-30 tons)
UDES 19
Main battle tank with flush mounted cannon 10.5-12 cm, weight about 25 tons
(later 25-30 tons)
OTHER combat vehicles
UDES 05
Armored with weak armor, turrets with 9 cm low pressure cannon, weight about 15-20 tons,
belonging to family UDES 03
UDES 06
Armored with strong armor, turret with 25 mm cannon, weight about 15-20 tons, belonging
to family UDES 04
UDES 07
Armored with weak armor without towers, weight about 15 tons, belonging to family
UDES 03
UDES 08
Armored with strong armor, weight about 15 tons, 25 mm cannon, belonging to family
UDES 04 (was also highlighted as rebuilt Pbv 302)
UDES 09
Stridsledning truck, weak armor, turret with 25 mm cannon, weight about 20 tons, family
UDES 03
UDES 10
Stridsledning truck, heavily armored, turret with 25 mm cannon, weight about 25 tons,
family UDES 04
UDES 12
Ammunition Wagon with strong armor, weight about 25 tons, family UDES 04
UDES 13
Infantry Cannon Carriage (Ikv 91) by 9 cm low pressure cannon, weight about 15 tons

UDES 14
UDES 25
UDES 26
UDES 27
UDES 28
UDES 29
UDES 30
UDES 31
UDES 32
UDES 33
UDES 34
UDES 35

Infantry Cannon trolley, tower by 10.5 cm strvkanon, weight about 20 tons
Anti-tank robot trolley, tower with Saab heavy pvrb, weight about 15 tons (later 12 tons modified Pbv 302)
Anti-tank robot trolley, tower with 9 cm pvpjäs, weight about 14 tons (later 12 tons modified Pbv 302)
Pansarvärnsrobotbil based on different options (armored Tgb 13, 20B, 40), pvrb TOW
tripod or Saab heavy pvrb in towers, weight 5-14 tons
Pansarvärnsbil based on armored Tgb 40 by 9 cm pvpjäs in towers, weight about 14 tons
Anti-tank Robot Trolley with pvrb TOW in the tower at a new low Pbv 302, weight about
13 tons
Anti-tank Robot trailer based on an armored Bv 206, armed with TOW pvrb on stands or
towers, weight about 5 tons
Pansarvärnsbil with 10.5-12 cm strvkanon at pivot, weight about 9 tons
Anti-tank truck with 10.5-12 cm strvkanon in tower alternatively pivot, weight about 13 tons
Anti-aircraft missile wagon based on Lvrbv 701
Transportation (Trailer) without an engine in two variants (A from IVC, B from Hagglunds)
Transportation (trailer) with engine available in two variants (A from IVC, B from Hagglunds)

HOTSTRIDSFORDON
UDES 51
Main Battle Tank with 11.5 to 13 cm strvkanon in towers, weight about 40 tons (of the
threat Strv II, version 3)
UDES 52
Armored with 7.3 cm low pressure cannon in the turret, weight 11-12 tons (of the threat
Pbv II)
UDES 53
Main battle tank with flush mounted from 11.5 to 13 cm strvkanon (equivalent UDES 19),
weight about 40 tons (of the threat Strv III) in variants A, B, F
UDES 54
Armored personnel of 25 tons (of the threat Pbv III)
By autumn 1976, full-scale models developed by UDES 05, 06, 11, 15/16, 19 and 32. Träattrapperna full scale
made it possible inter alia to make comparisons with existing vehicles, look at the areas / volumes and
component location, cannon rich opportunities, spotting opportunities, and more. On all UDES-concept was
also developed wooden models in scale 1/10.
To test the technical uncertainties in the UDES concepts presented in the playing cards, was taken a few simple
tests rigs up for some of the concepts. The rigs could be more or less complete vehicles.
Below is a brief presentation of the concepts.

UDES 01

Improved Strv 103, cannon 10.5-12 cm, half numb weapons storage, weight about 40 tons.
UDES 02

Foreign tower wagon (type the Leopard 2, Chieftain or XM1), cannon 10.5-12 cm, weight about 50 tons.
UDES 03

UDES 03 was a f örminskad UDES 01, canon 10.5-12 cm, half numb weapons storage, weight about 20-25 tons
(later 25-30 tons).
The tank studies commenced aimed primarily a successor to Strv 103. The first option studied was a very light
combat vehicles with a crew of two. To begin with, was carried simpler principle experiment as shown below to
get an idea of the services include vehicle profile. .

.

the following photographs were tank concept exceptional opportunities to target the chassis .. These were named UDES 03 körrigg respective UDES 03 shooting rig (10.5 cm L/45 cannon). for spring experimental rigs up to try out firing and driving characteristics of such tornlös tank in the 20 ton class. .To these simple principle experiment was also a träattrapp presented in full scale Thereafter.. Apparently.

.

conducted in PD. The most compact design solution proved UDES 19 . observing and keeping the context of other carts.In sliding rig could slide options in a tornlös wagon with a relative to the chassis eleverbar cannon verified. however.5-12 cm. The simple rig experiments. UDES 04 Reduced UDES 01. weight about 25 tons (later 25-30 tons) . showed that a combat vehicle with only two man crew would have insufficient capability of detecting. In late 1973 widened because the studies to include different kinds of tower wagons with three-man crew.a concept that was characterized by a top mounted cannon in a one-man mini-tower (see below). half numb arms storage. canon 10.

turrets with 9 cm low pressure cannon. weight about 15-20 tons. For detT concept was a träattrapp forward at full scale.UDES 0 5 The concept UDES 05 was a p tends tracked vehicle with weak armor. UDES 06 . belonging to family UDES 03.

UDES 07 Armored with weak armor without towers. belonging to family UDES 03. weight about 15-20 tons. weight about 15 tons. belonging spirit family UDES 04. turret with 25 mm cannon. belonging to family UDES 04. 25 mm cannon. .Armored with strong armor. UDES 08 Parallel to the tank studies were conducted including studies of a new armored. weight about 15 tons. Although this concept was a träattrapp forward at full scale. Concepts UDES 08 was a p tends tracked vehicle with heavily armored.

and the purpose of the tests was to "create practical experience as a basis for studies of various alternatives to new armored". . the H stands for the rear observation hood). for example related to the design and the technical operation of the equipment and battle tactics at armored group. The trailer was rebuilt by Hagglunds during the spring of 1975 and included a panoramic sight with rotatable outlook for the wagon boss. an assessment of the possibilities to improve or change the battle tactics in platoon and company made. In addition. rotatable observationshuv for shooting squad leader and ball-facing sides and left the back door for shooting group.A test rig for UDES 08 was developed and it was based on a converted Pbv 302 (Later referred to as Pbv 302 h. Experiments with UDES 08 started in March 1976.

STRF 90) be increased to such a level that the need for overlapping carrying wheels are significantly reduced. I am not so sure the result that accessibility is really improved in the experimental basket as well as model tests and experiences from WWIItrailers suggest otherwise. On me it does not seem as if the concept been sufficiently addressed. Those in the middle belongs to: Television PzKpfv V Panther 1943 Th PzKpfv VI Tiger 1943 (The gray turntables were removed with the use of narrow band). The experiments designed to evaluate vapenhuvarna from tactical and technical point of view. in extreme marförhållanden. to provide FMV basis for selection of vapenhuv and weapons. However. after modification of attempts cart. It was made in 1980-81 both model tests and full-scale trials. The far left is to my knowledge never realized. The problems tend to be associated with overlapping carrying wheels: band roll and build up of soil and the like inside the running wheels. the results were not as clear-cut. " On the rebuilt Pbv 302 was also tested alternative to ombeväpning because the trolley 20 mm automatic gun was considered too weak. could be avoided completely and that the jordan collection inside carrying wheels that actually. but was fitted later (in the early 80's before the development of STRF 90) with wrap-around pedestrian / overlapping carrying wheels. Use overlapping carrier wheel is a way to have a distance between the running wheels below bärhjulsdiametern. The results were that band heel. " . Different locations of the drive wheels in harness for overlapping rear wheels. The negative results were no increased accessibility in comparison with a standard pbv 302 was observed. On the other hand. did not lead to any problems. In full-scale tests (when d a modified e P bv 302 were used as guinea wagon). were analyzed. ground pressure and rolling resistance.The trailer had initially given a standard tape deck. From a report by Mårten Svantesson we find the following summary: "Overlapping carrying wheels were a construction Hagglunds have they suggested in several studies to reduce ground pressure. got one other positive results in the comfort of the cart was increased and that the rolling resistance on soft soil was reduced. At study r and try FMV 1982 -1984 looked at the following weapons:      Mauser MK25E Oerlikon KBA Oerlikon KBB Rheinmetall RH 20 Chaingun M242 This results in continued attempts at PS Skövde with Mauser MK25E and Oerlikon KBA during 1986-87. the belt tension on modern cars (ex. could occur. Purpose of these experiments was to "Obtaining data for ombeväpning of pbv 302 and armament of combat vehicles 90. sinkage. In the model tests had to be relatively unambiguous jakanda response to questions about the case more support wheels (overlapping) gave better properties in terms of traction. The variant th is the rate used in the above experiments.

.

UDES 08 is now saved for posterity and has been renovated. Take some of this work on the website .

UDES 09 The concept for UDES 09 was originally marketed a Stridsledning Cart with weak armor. in the context of family UDES 03. UDES 09 was also presented as an articulated concept according to the following sketch: . Over the years. turret with 25 mm cannon. refined Blueprint to become increasingly similar to the structure we now recognize as Combat 90. weight about 20 tons.

m. family UDES 04 UDES 11 Concept UDES 11 was a main battle tank with rigid weapon storage. turret with 25 mm cannon. . weight about 25 tons (later 25-30 tons). 20 tons of ammunition wagon with weak armor in the family UDES 03.UDES 10 Stridsledning truck. heavily armored. In playing cards in 1971 accounted UDES 11:01 a. UDES 11 were also highlighted as a träattrapp in full scale.5-12 cm. gun 10. weight about 25 tons.

weight about 15 tons. UDES 14 .UDES 12 Ammunition Wagon with strong armor. family UDES 04. UDES 13 Infantry Cannon Carriage (Ikv 91) by 9 cm low pressure cannon. weight about 25 tons.

Later developed the concept UDES 14 for a brand new vehicle with a brand new tower solution according to the following sketch: UDES 15 . This concept came to be developed as an experimental rig . weight about 20 tons.5cm str idsvagns cannon.UDES 14 was an Infantry Cannon Wagon that had a tower with a 10.a Ikv 91 with a new turret.

cannon 10. weight 25 tons (later 25-30 tons).5-12 cm. weight 25 tons (later 25-30 tons).5-12 cm.Main Battle Tank with turret from Bofors cannon 10. UDES 16 Main Battle Tank with turret from Hagglunds. UDES 15/16 .

This concept was also developed as a full-scale mockup of wood. weight 25 tons (later 30 tons).Main Battle Tank with towers. UDES 17 . balanced solution of Bofors and Hagglunds proposals. cannon 10.5-12 cm.

5-12 cm. UDES 18 Main battle tank with flush mounted cannon 10. weight about 25 tons (later 25-30 tons) UDES 19 .Main Battle Tank with height adjustable cannon 10.5-12 cm (pivot). weight about 25 tons (later 25-30 tons).

weight about 25 tons (later 25-30 tons). The studies and trials of new combat vehicles led to the realization that the governing principle which was most promising to steer tracked vehicles in the Swedish terrain was articulated. .5-12 cm.UDES 19 was a concept for the Main Battle Tank with flush-mounted cannon 10. The picture below shows UDES 19 träattrapp compared with Strv 103. This concept was developed as a träattrapp and the top of the stored canon law was tested later on a Marderchassi. During the second half of the 70th century was therefore studied a combat vehicle options with top mounted cannon into a mini tower.

.A sliding körrigg with this embodiment was developed (UDES 19). The rig to UDES 19 based's on a chassis of the German Marder armored one. This chassis was already in Sweden since the autumn of 1976 because we had hired it from West Germany with a tank Leopard 1 and a Mörserträger (also based on Marder) for a year's trial.

driving. It's made really two rigs for UDES 19. With this rig UDES 19 was carried out several attempts . On these g enomfördes run . In addition to driving and push rig a factory also produced a laddrigg. shooting. The design proved to work well and be so robust that neither snow nor the branches to testing (up to 5 cm) thick .and observation .shoot . and more.A 10. Laddriggen tested principle of letting a laddpendel rotating around the same axis as the gun bring shoots one by one from the magazine to the gun.and laddförsök.5 cm gun mounted on top Mardern in a one-man turret.

Were tested but not susceptibility to fire. Parallel also tested this principle with top mounted cannon on a chassis to Strv 103.this is because it has less mass than a regular tower. was seen to be a risk that debris came with the shots into the cannon. D also got the rig long hauling times due to bad fininriktningssystem. During the shooting trials confirmed that it was s nabbare to focus a cannon . UDES XX 5 The Swedish snowcats 206 stood out as unique in terrainability and thoughts aroused because this principle of articulated vehicles could also be used for a tank.posed no obstacle to function. however. It would provide an opportunity to travel over soft ground far superior to any other known tanks and would therefore provide a major advantage over an attacker's maneuverability in large parts of the Swedish terrain. .

AB Hagglunds & Sons produced a four tonnes of heavy articulated experimental vehicle built on a bv 206 chassis . None of the tested ditch types became prohibitive. either vehicle launched himself across the narrow and deep trenches or vehicle went into the ditch and "tilted" the front end toward the opposite ditch slope.A tank must be able to make the center pivot in order to avail a battle position maximally and to fight in buildings. The vehicle was found to have unique accessibility features. Using this could carriage parts compulsive angled towards each other in height. thereby gaining enough traction to pull himself up. The innovation that solved the problem was a hydraulic cylinder high located between the front and rear. Even if one were to try to turn an articulated vehicle by braking one side band.called UDES 5 XX (where XX stood for Extra Experiment). it would not work because the strap bearing no one gets too long. . Thus came only those parts of the bands that were closest to the waist to make contact with the ground and strap bearing no one was short enough for center pivot.

. It could also get up on a railway without loading dock.The vehicle climbed unimpeded across all types of stone walls and similar obstacles. The experiments with this vehicle is one of the most spectacular implemented.

FMV found in the tests and trials that a vehicle with articulated steering means a promising design solution  Armament should be strong so that defeating the tanks is possible  The vehicle weight is limited by the requirement of accessibility and therefore the vehicle's protection is limited. such as infantry units. This should be combined for the total weight of 20 tonnes. Studies on protection showed that vehicle at all times should withstand the effects of weapons from the most common threats. ie shrapnel and finkalibereld.The main conclusions from these experiments were as follows:  A new combat vehicles must have high mobility. at least as well as supporting units. .

Already in defense in 1977 had a further shift of new tank proclaimed.UDES XX 20 In order to decide on the acquisition of the next generation of combat vehicles needed CA additional evidence. Rather than prioritized acquisition need splinter primarily to Upper Norrland. The purpose of the experimental rig was to investigate:  If the theories and observations that have applied for the previously tested lightweight experimental rig UDES XX 5 also applies to an articulated fighting vehicles with higher combat weight (about 20 tons)  If a new design principle of the distribution of mass of the gun and shoot loads on both the front and rear can . and a full-scale experimental rig with a weight of about 20 tons would be produced. Therefore. it was decided in the early 80's that tank studies concentrated on a lightly articulated alternative with 12 cm high-pressure cannon as main armament.

be realized according imaginary theories. During the period from January 1982 to March 1984 was carried out trials with UDES XX 20 during FMV and PS management. as well as the slide technical characteristics obtained when a 12 cm high-pressure cannon mounted on a relatively light chassis  Observation Opportunities from a vehicle with top mounted cannon and articulated chassis The new combat vehicle rig came to be known UDES XX 20. The main supplier was HB Development AB. Delivery of the experimental rig was in early 1982. .

The experimental rig UDES XX 20 was an articulated tracked vehicle with the engine in the rear and cannon on the front end. .

which could invisas from carriage boss observationshuv. Gun was placed in a sidriktbar mounts at the front end. Shooter provided with a observationshuv.The crew consisted of three men .head coach. gunner and driver. This sample was not in the experimental rig but was only described in game card UDES XX 20 of the supposed serial execution. Ammunition Storage and charge automatic was meant to be placed in the rear. The cannon was addressed with a simple. which is in its highest position allowed observation around the horizon (the gun). electro-hydraulic straightening system and charged with one shot at a time. On the experimental rig loaded the smooth-bore 12 cm high pressure gun from Rheinmetall manually . .an operation that was supposed to be automated in a series of performance (loading from a magazine in the front). The crew was placed in the front carriage. The tripod was positioned so far back on the front end to lavettens sidriktaxel and sidriktaxel between the front and rear end will coincide. A special device to meet one of the most important basic requirements were wagon boss's placement in an instant height adjustable armor protected cabin.

The control system was of type double articulated. . and a hydraulic cylinder on each side of the trail was responsible for steering the side. This was based on the wagon portions were connected by a steering joint which allowed the front and rear suspension to move relative to each other. A hydraulic cylinder positioned above the wrist regulated governance in horizontal or vertical. Steering trail had been constructed in two versions .one with three degrees of freedom (orientation. tilt direction and rolling) and one with two degrees of freedom (orientation and tilt).

dummy) Crew Vehicle length (cannon in the direction at 12) Eldhöjd (max) Chassis Length Chassis width Chassis height (roof. . front suspension) Engine Speed Armament Rate of fire Protection UDES XX 20 (attempt rig) 26 tons 3 men 9630 mm 2150 (2600) mm 7400 mm 2900 mm 1500 mm Detroit Diesel 8VA-71TA 600 hp 55 km / h 12 cm L/44 Rheinmetall 7-10 shots / minute (practical) 15-20 mm RHA frontally. 6 +6 mm RHA page Shoot The experiments showed that it can provide an easy-combat with a powerful armament on muzzle brake use.Total weight (incl. and the precision was good. Stress on the crew in connection with the shooting was acceptable.

The goal was to try the rig would have as good traction as this vehicle. driving in easy and moderately difficult terrain and the snow was accessibility features of UDES XX 20 as well or better than the comparing vehicles.Traction experiments were primarily with Ikv 91 as compared vehicles. At obstacle climbing attempt. .

It proved possible to run with a reduced number of bands was possible provided that the front end had at least one band something that could reduce vulnerability to mines in comparison with strap-controlled combat vehicles. Salvage and excavation ability. . however.The assessment was that the corresponding results would be achievable even on soft ground and in difficult terrain modification of the experimental rig. was worse.

moving from the observation position to firing position was longer and took more time.Problems contrary position regarding the observation and transition to firing was significantly greater at UDES XX 20 than at Ikv 91 . The problems at unplugging the position was considerably larger. which meant that the movements became more disclosure. In firing showed UDES XX 20:01 higher silhouette. . even with specialized tools. There was a greater risk of losing the target while moving.

and a belt tensioning device between the first support wheel and pinion . UDES XX 20 B and C where the location of the crew was different.The experience gained in the experiments led to two new proposals. but also the following reconstructions were proposed:  Introduction of double-tilt direction  Introduction of high idler.

 Better protection p ga narrower vehicles. engineering and manufacturing.  Greater emphasis. . resulting in less front silhouette. articulated truck parts and forced control of the same.  Upptiltning of wagon parts for small turning radius is time-consuming. longer harness. ground pressure. better front armor at the same weight and lower risk when crossing the nation.  Less risk of exclusion at the mine detonation when the vehicle can move with tape destroyed. Disadvantages  Vulnerability we trail.  Larger target surface from the sides and from above. maintenance. but it was judged that it would go with modifications.  Increased complexity results in higher costs for operations. In the experiment carried out with UDES XX 20 [1] could not be all of the above expectations are met.What gave the trials with articulated vehicles experience? Here's a comparison with band-driven combat vehicle: Advantages  Greater mobility over soft ground. It was maneuverability in difficult terrain and soft ground which did not meet expectations. trenches and vertical barriers due to lower spec.

benefits did not offset the disadvantages in terms of increased maintenance costs.. What emerged with abundantly clear is that there is an upper weight limit for an articulated concept when mobility in soft soil (read marshland) will be limited. The reason that an articulated vehicle stuck in a bog can be explained that when a heavier front end crush the support layer in a bog.The reason that the concept articulated was not used is that the battle financially assessed tape drive vehicles to be superior articulated.UDES . And even worse if the terrain is so channeling that several vehicles to go the same route. E verliggande cannon studied in a number of different concepts during the 19 70's and early 19 80s .. so is nothing which stops when the rear suspension comes after the occupant in the same track. Sammantfattningsvis can be said from mobility experiments with xx20 that perhaps the most important conclusion drawn was linked to the vehicle's movement in soft ground. To then be on a total weight of 18-20 tons for an articulated vehicle proved to be simply too much .

18. The vehicle can be narrower p ga volume gain was achieved thanks to the smaller tower storage. 5. Better protection when the whole crew sitting in the chassis. The f earpieces that emerged can be summarized as follows: 1. 2.concepts 17 (04B). 32 and XX 20. The charging system is more exposed and additionally out of reach of the crew in case of malfunction. 3. The man tested was spotting opportunities and how stable the combination overhead cannon / articulated chassis was during shooting. No vulnerabilities in tower storage. because it has lower mass than a regular tower. weight about 15 tons (later 12 tons . On UDES XX 20 was tested. Faster alignment of the cannon. 5. And n ackdelar na: 1. 2. UDES 25 Anti-tank robot trolley. High total height of the cannon to be able pupil is enough. 19. Reduced visibility and observation opportunities due to lower position of crew and cannon gives blind spot. tower with Saab heavy pvrb. The above gives even weight gain as a result of the reduced amount of armor in the front due to the narrowness. 4.modified Pbv 302) UDES 26 . Characteristic profile gives short detection speed. not all aspects of the use of overhead projector. 4. Long charge times due to long laddrörelse. 3.

weight about 14 tons (later 12 tons . 40). tower with 9 cm pvpjäs. pvrb TOW tripod or Saab heavy pvrb in towers.Anti-tank robot trolley. weight 5-14 tons UDES 28 .modified Pbv 302) UDES 27 Pansarvärnsrobotbil based on different options (armored Tgb 13. 20B.

weight about 13 tons UDES 30 Anti-tank Robot trailer based on an armored Bv 206.Pansarvärnsbil based on armored Tgb 40 by 9 cm pvpjäs in towers. The concept went under the name UDES 30. armed with TOW pvrb on stands or towers. weight about 5 tons Within UDES studies also began efforts to obtain an armored variant of Bandvagn 206.either stati row or in a tor n . The idea was that a Bv 206 with armored body would carry anti-tank missile TOW . A träattrapp was developed. weight about 14 tons UDES 29 Anti-tank Robot Trolley with pvrb TOW in the tower at a new low Pbv 302.

.

weight about 9 tons UDES 32 .5-12 cm strvkanon at pivot.This laid the foundation for the "scariest" or Bv 206 S as the official name later became. UDES 31 Pansarvärnsbil with 10.

weight about 13 tons. UDES 33 Anti-aircraft missile wagon based on Lvrbv 701 UDES 34 Transportation (Trailer) without an engine in two versions.Anti-tank truck with 10.5-12 cm strvkanon in tower alternatively pivot. This koncet was also highlighted as a träattrapp in full scale. .

UDES 35 Transportation (trailer) with engine available in two variants (A from IVC. . Transportation (Trailer) without an engine in variant B from Hagglunds. This resulted in the development of UDES XX 20 was canceled. including to meet air land attached armored unit in Upper Norrland.which among other things was reflected in FB78. B from Hagglunds) The end of UDES studies Towards the end of the 1970s changed h otbilden 19-90s . F rom the studies have been primarily focused towards obtaining a new tank focused instead they continued studies na towards light within the framework of a combat vehicle family.Transportation (Trailer) without an engine in variant A from IVC.

which then kicked off. however. BIBLIOGRAPHY . that they might serve as a reference before the studies on a new tank for the 2000s. had given many valuable lessons that came in use in the development of what would later be referred to as Combat 90. The section below for ease-combat options that formed the basis for further studies were largely based on 1970s UDES studies. When projects Tank 2000 started up from 1984 to 1985 were also seen UDES concepts 11.The detailed system studies and the numerous attempts with various test rigs. 15/16 and 19 above.

* A: FH M52: 32/74 UDES 25 Statement of system study. * A: FH M52: 5/75 Report. LV arming of studied ease str f * A: FH A52: 107/78 Basic Supplies trials körrigg for articulated vehicles (Körrigg bv 206). 25-30 ton tank with turret-mounted cannon.lv function in combat units. phase 1 UDES 14. P vpbv with overhead gun based on Ikv 91. Photo. 40 ton tank with overhead cannon * A: FH M52: 3/78 Technical report. . * A: FH M52: 1/75 UDES 27 Statement of system study.15 / 16 and 19 * A: VH M52: 53/75 Anti-tank Robotic Vehicle Statement of serious study * A: FH M52: 3/76 Statement of studies of anti-tank missile vehicles * A: FH M52: 17/76 UDES 33. Armored wheeled vehicles based on tgb 40. * A: FA H M52: 1/80 UDES light combat vehicles Cost Estimates * A: FA H M52: 2/80 UDES light combat vehicles Pbv coaches Stage 2 * A: FA H M52: 26/80 System Study Phase 3 Armored tracked light combat vehicles * A: FA H M52: 30/80 UDES light combat vehicles Pbv coaches Stage 3 * VEHICLE H M52: 46/82 UDES 09 Study on armored with PV capacity * VEHICLE H M52: 1/83 UDES Study on tracked armored vehicle pioneer. Articulated combat and cannon carriage complementary realiserbarhetsstudie * A: FH M52: 44/78 Reports Additional studies of UDES 11. * A: FH M52: 42/75 System Study UDES 32. * A: FH M52: 40/76 UDES 53 A Statement of system study. stage 2 * A: FH M52: 25/74 UDES 05B. * VEHICLE H M52: 17/83 UDES Bandvagn 206 armored study report * A: FHM 52:31 / 74 UDES 05 Report of the study of compact tower KV 90 L/40 * A: VHM 52:31 / 75 UDES 05 Statement of study of compact tower KV 90 L/49 * A: PH A502: 33/81 Experience from studies / trials 1976-79 with combat vehicles in the weight class 20 tons and heavier * A: VH A502: 64/81 UDES . * A: FH A52: 3/79 Basic m trl try körrigg for articulated vehicles (Körrigg bv 206). Statement of study of anti-tank missile vehicles on Ikv 103 chassis. light tower tank of about 26 tons * A: FH M52: 56/73 UDES 14 Statement of system study. 20 T pbv (9 cm low pressure cannon / 25mm cannon). * A: FA H M52: 10/72 Project UDES 03 (Stage 2) * A: FA H M52: 49/73 UDES 14 Statement of system study. 19 o 32 See above for description. Final report. Complementary to the previous. P VRB-armed pbv. * A: FH M52: 49/75 Complementary systems studies UDES 11. construction study UDES 15/16. 06B Statement of system study. * A: FA H M52: 47/79 UDES light combat vehicles PV coaches Stage 2 * A: FA H M52: 52/79 UDES light combat vehicles Pv-carts.Here is a list of systems studies of vehicle concepts which may be of interest (each of these studies was previously H-stamped today avhemligade): * A: FA H M52: 10/72 Project UDES 03 (Stage 1) Tank with cannon stiff laterally swivel vertically.