Why would adding it in the Swedish TT exclude it from a future Swiss TT? One does not exclude the other. And of all those vehicles that could fulfill “any SPAA desires”, this is one of them, which I want to suggest due to how interesting it is and that it fills a gap.
BTW, the turret is of Swedish design and was tested in Sweden. That makes a pretty good case for it being added to Sweden.
I’m not someone who likes to take chances, especially with how inconsistent Gaijin is with these things.
Generally speaking hulls are of greater value when deciding where a vehicle ends up as opposed to the turret, but this is also relatively inconsistent.
Did the Swedes ever contributing in developing the Bofors Trinity system or is it just developed by the Swiss but used Swedish components?
Bofors was a Swedish company during that time so it has a good connection (before being acquired by BAE Systems). The turret was even planned to be procured for the Swedish army by the company, however what happened after is a bit fuzzy.
Another detail I’m looking for is testing done in Sweden with the vehicle. Some photos and footage looks very much like Sweden but there are no notes to confirm it for certain.
Update
Thanks to @Teh0 i can add the BA-10, OT-133 and T-55M MEXAS onto the list since Finland operated the two former and prototyped the latter
Finnish anti-air trucks!
-Ford V 3000 S with 20 ITK 40 VKT
-Unimog with 30 ITK 62 (HS.831)
-at least two different Sisus with twin 23 ITK 61 (ZU-23-2) and/or 23 ITK 95
My suggestion about the first one is still pending. Bit of a problem how little is written about these. The last two are still there if someone wishes to make suggestions.
I Identified two possible variants of the Sisu ET13P that can be added
Sisu ET13P NEMO
Sisu ET13P NASAMS
Not an independently functioning vehicle, the truck is literally just to transport the NASAMS launcher, not even meant to fire on the truck’s back either.
I am going to work on a Finno-Swedish TT Rework and post it here. I may or may not add one other nation to it. I won’t tell what nation it is but you may figure it out since a couple of their vehicles are posted here
What’s the NEMO vehicle? I get nothing when searching it.
NEMO is not a vehicle, is a mortar, essentially a single barrel version of the AMOS
Also the name of the truck is written down on the comment
Preview of the Finno-Swedish Ground TT Rework with the Third Nation being revealed. I’m making it as a “Northern European Non-Aligned Movement (NENAM)” TT instead of a Nordic TT
Here is the rest of the preview of the Finno-Swedish Ground TT Rework
It is still subject to change hence why it won’t be featured just yet
agree, use Leopard 2 to replace T80U, H60 to replace mi28 and ASH
+1
I can agree with replacing the T80U and Mi28 but not so sure about the AHS
How come the ITO90 and Lvkv 90C TD is the same BR?
Lvkv would lack the range and firepower to manage shooting down any aircrafts in there
My idea is that it could get the more powerful APFSDS that the Strf 9040C uses (the regular Lvkv-9040’s uses the weaker APFSDS if i recall correctly) in other words better anti-tank abilities. Also It would not get any restrictions to said APFSDS assuming if a restriction on the amount of APFSDS rounds is added to the Lvkv-9040’s akin to the OTOMATIC.
This is ontop of the other improvements that it gets like an improved radar for example.
Like the post said, it is subject to change so it could get a lower BR though no lower than BR 10:3
The Lvkv 90 TD does not feature an improved radar. It’s an experimental upgrade package to the Lvkv 9040A which adds the same improved gun stabilization of the Strf 9040B, the same improved suspension of the Strf 9040B, a datalink enabling it to recieve and send target data to and from external radars, an improved GPS system, a rear-view camera for the driver, and IRST tracker, the same externally mounted Ksp 58 of the Strf 9040C / D1 / D2 whilst removing the internally mounted Ksp 39, and a V0 radar which reads the exit velocity of every single shell to use that data to improve the gun-laying.
If it were to be added, the only real gameplay difference from the Lvkv 9040C would be the datalink (if Gaijin adds datalink to ground-based SPAAs) so that any targets detected by friendly SPAAs and aircraft would also show up for you. It is in no way enough of an improvement gameplay-wise to make it on-par with the ItO-90M, let alone 11.0 worthy. And every single Strf 90 is able to use the Slpprj m/01 irl, so it’s just Gaijin logic that only the Strf 9040C recieved it.
10.3 would be a fair placement if it recieved the datalink and Sllprj m/01, but other than that it would just be a faster but less armoured Lvkv 9040C.
Artilleri-Tidskrift nr 4 2004 (Pages 21-25)
Lvkv 90
I really like the overall idea here and there’s some good background but I have a few notes. Afaik the T-55M with applique armour does not necessarily have MEXAS, nobody seems to actually know what it uses for sure. An alternative could be the single T-55M that had BDD turret cheek applique. AMOS can do direct fire but only has HE as direct fire anti-tank rounds so not sure whether it would really work in-game. What you call the “Ikv-91 AMOS” and the Mjölner both use the same loading system, with the ikv 91 version being a predecessor for AMOS. Problem in-game is that neither of these can do direct fire so they wouldn’t work in-game. Pansarterrängbil 202 is the command version of the Pasi, based on the XA-202, the one shown here is the Patgb 203 based on the XA-203. While some missiles systems are sometimes placed on top of it, these are not integrated systems but ground systems placed temporarily on the roof and they’d just fall off if the vehicle started driving. I’m also not sure there actually is a difference between the Pbv 501 and 501A, but it certainly didn’t get a new engine. The thing you call “Bv-206S (RB-56)” is a made up vehicle, somebody photoshopped a HOT ATGM turret onto a Bv 309
