When I read about the trials in India, it sounds like the Ikv 91 was trialed first and then later the Ikv 105 was trialed.
You could give a Ikv 91 as a India event vehicle or premium and the Sweden can have this; the Ikv 105
Another amphibious light tank with thermals and a NATO-standard 105mm? I’m not going to pretend like there is an exact replacement I can think of.
However I also doubt there is any lack of potential 9.3 light tanks in general to give Sweden, especially when Finland and all its Patria variants are taken into consideration.
Well I don’t believe that, the NASAMS and its derivatives are joint developments after all, and should go to both Norway and America where applicable. I don’t necessarily agree with adding more Norwegian stuff to the Swedish TT though, but that’s a different conversation.
2 Likes
Just gotta wait like 3 more years before Gaijin remembers those exists
1 Like
Mind listing a specific 105 light tank from Finland that fills that role like the IKV? again my point was Sweden is already one of the most limited nation when it comes to areas like these and even with all their possible subtrees they can’t fill gaps here that easily
I wanna know which Patria he thinks is 9.3 worthy that isn’t just a CV90 clone
Why not add Norwegian content? They are part of the alliance with all Nordic nations, they have more ties to Sweden than any other nation. They are also one of the few nations that can go to Sweden and make sense.
large caliber? probably none
autocannon wise, maybe the AMV35 or other variants that has a 30mm but no ATGM
AMV 35 would be 9.7 and any with the 30mm are not viable replacements for a 105mm cannon so there are none that fill that gap loss for a vehicle that didn’t get bought by India.
Though with his logic AMV 35 wouldn’t go to Finland nor would any of the suggested models as they were made for other nations but didn’t make the cut so why mention adding a Patria if his own logic contradicts that?
It’s Oxymoronic to suggest Sweden could get a Finnish Patria but can’t get this IKV even though it falls in line with the Patria, so either the IKV will go to Sweden since it didn’t get adopted by India and they also receive all non adopted Patrias or they don’t get the IKV and don’t get any Patrias.
That what I need him to answer what in service of these supposed Numerous Patrias can Finland give that fill the role of the IKV
@BSpiel8-live so you’ll have to make a choice, either the IKV and all the Patrias that didn’t get accepted by other countries go to the manufacturer nation or they go to the nation that didn’t buy them which is it?
In my above comment you can see that I explicitly mentioned that there were no identical 105mm vehicles I could think of to fit the same BR. There are of course Leopard 1s from Norway and Denmark, but as I already mentioned, I’d rather not clutter the Swedish tree with more minor nations that lack subtree lines. What I was implying, however, was the existence of multiple capable Patria-based vehicles that could occupy the 9.3 space, albeit with autocannons, ATGMs, and perhaps direct fire mortars instead of large caliber cannons. If we’re looking solely for another 9.3 LT, this is my suggestion.
Because AMV35 was purpose-built for Australia (correct me if I’m wrong), meanwhile a large majority of the Patrias I reference are built for general export. This is an important distinction that I notice with these sorts of things.
Again, my opinion is based on a distinction between general export and purpose-built export. IKV 91-105 (or IKV-105 as MoleJ suggests above, both are likely correct), was built for India, first and foremost. I’m sure if there were photos from the Indian tests, people would be more willing to support this. Fact stands that Hagglunds designed a separate prototype before the vehicle was worth considering for Swedish interests, that which we already have in game.
Patrias were largely built for general export, no one specific customer (save for a few vehicles such as the AMV35), so they represent the Finnish export industry as a whole and thus I’m fine with adding them under the Finnish flag.
1 Like
Again the general majority of those 30mm Patrias do not make up for the 105. They are not equivalent replacements additionally many of the general exports can and will likely never be added, it’s been years since we got the first Patria and we have yet to see another. The simple point for my question to you was that unlike Britain which has access to nations with a wide array of vehicles why can’t Sweden get some like that? Yes nearly all of us use the same equipment but we’re also the only nations Sweden can get unless you wanna argue Sweden shouldn’t get any other additions because they are copy and paste.
General export also tends to lean to whatever nation gaijin wants rather than if the vehicle was made for a specific nation. Many of Finlands general export vehicles are also heavily wanted by other nations because of the turret like that of the Hitfact AMV by the Italians. Simply put just limiting Sweden to Finlands General export Patrias will not fix gaps on Finland and removing something like this IKV further hurts the tree for its diversity and list of obtainable equipment that’s actually effective in game. Especially given how vehicles like the CV9030 Fin perform.
1 Like
Which is a fair conclusion, but considering we already have a 9.3 in the LT line and a 105mm vehicle at just one BR lower, perhaps there is not a need for either at the moment. Ideally I would see the IKV 91-105 added to India (perhaps once a future Indian subtree line or tech tree comes to fruition), and then another Patria 105mm platform added at around 10.0 to help satisfy the gun-tank niche.
Doesn’t determine what I do and don’t support.
My opinions are unbiased IMO. There are similar vehicles for Britain I would argue for elsewhere such as the Vickers Mk 3(M) and RO2001. It just so happens that Britain has more domestically produced and intended equipment to add, which hardly means I have some sort of vendetta against Swedish vehicles. Even then I do think that Sweden and Finland combined produces more than enough to satisfy one tree even when excluding purpose designed export stuff.
I tend not to limit myself by Gaijin’s wants.
Wanted doesn’t equal nation-specific export. I don’t know about Patria AMV with Hitfact (I think it’s actually a Rosomak but besides the point), but Patria AMVXP with Hitfact was displayed at IDEX 2019 for general export, not necessarily built for the Czechs. This is why I am happy with it going to Finland.
There are many, and that’s not even talking about all the domestic non-Patria vehicles Finland has of its own to offer, which I’m sure you can attest to. I’m sure the subtree has plenty left to add.
Nation-specific exports make up a comparatively small amount of vehicles left to add, so I disagree.
Mostly due to the Bushmaster being gimped, I’m sure the vehicle would be quite satisfactory if the gun actually did damage.
1 Like
Again the 9.x bracket is very much empty and removing this IKV does hurt the already small tree far more than something like Britain which can get vehicles from AU, CAN, IND, and ZA
From those you have access to the LAV, Boxer, Patria ect and that’s for a lot of BRs.
My point was Sweden doesn’t have those levels of options and in general needs more stuff to keep up with other nations. I don’t mind nations getting stuff but I must say that removing options from a nation that’s already very limited is a silly choice and is just begging for stuff like the KV-1B which hurt the Finnish lineup greatly.
Again removing the only option to fill a gap on a nation imo is just a poor decision.
At the end this convo is going nowhere let’s agree to disagree
1 Like
Sure, I possess many opinions that happen to be pretty confusing and perhaps radical at times. I do promise I try to have the same standards between nations, and quite frankly I’ve been accused of being “biased” towards many of the countries in game based on what I’m defending at any given time. I appreciate your time though!
1 Like
Wasn’t really saying you were biased but that your claim that Finland with its Patrias are all Sweden needs which imo is a silly opinion because it’s literally just 30mm slop on top of other 30mm slop for the 9.x bracket those are not enough to fix Sweden and makes them one of the weakest nations given only one of their 30mm options is remote controlled.
Eh, that’s more of Gaijin’s fault if anything but I definitely see your point.
1 Like
I have named the suggestion as per the primary source from Hägglunds regarding this exact vehicle:
I do recall hearing that the name Ikv 105 was potentially considered for the upgunned 91s, but currently IKV 91-105 is the definitive correct name according to the documentation I have seen.
1 Like
Btw any evidence for this? So far there’s more contradictory stuff for this than for it. I see nothing to suggest india was related to this in any way
1 Like
I do not have any primary sources on hand unfortunately, but it is reported on by both amateur historian “SP15” (who at the very least has the qualifications to collaborate with Wargaming and Obsidian, apparently), and a Mr. Rickard O. Lindström, whom I believe is a more professionally certified researcher with published works to his name.
You can see both of the online blogs I reference under MoleJ’s above post.
They are both in Swedish so I will not use any direct quotes here as not to rely solely on Google translate, but I assure you both articles do mention that it was India who first requested the IKV 91-105 be built.
1 Like
As @BSpiel8-live mentioned, both SP15 and Lindström mentions in there respective blogs that the prototype was first thought of when India wanted a new light tank that was NATO ammunition compatible.
Mind you, Lindström worked for FMV and in 2002 he was made Stratigic Specialist for Combat Vehicles at FMV and he was very involved in Projekt: Strv Ny and the SEP Program. If anyone to believe it is Lindström.
So you discredit both my sources that clearly state that Ikv 105 was the name given to the vehicle in question? Ikv 91-105 is not wrong as it was the name given early on but later down the pipeline it was changed to Ikv 105 as mentioned by both Rickard O. Lindström and SP15.