Weird Tanks in History

War Thunder is a highly detailed vehicle combat game containing over 2000 playable tanks, aircraft and ships spanning over 100 years of development, immerse yourself completely in dynamic battles with an unparalleled combination of realism and approachability.

Copyright: DO NOT translate and re-upload our content on Youtube or other social media.

SIMPLE HISTORY MERCHANDISE

Get the Simple History books on Amazon:

T-Shirts

Simple history gives you the facts, simple!

See the book collection here:

Amazon USA

Amazon UK

Script: Luke Ursone

Credit:
Created by Daniel Turner (B.A. (Hons) in History, University College London)

Narrator:

Chris Kane

[agungkurniawan]

Sweden's tank design department never cease to amaze me

[trollman]

Few can comprehend the absolute power of the Bob Semple Tank. That's why Imperial Japan abandoned it's idea of invading Australia out of fear of the might of the Bob Semple Tank

[fandaeckert]

Fun fact: The US army managed to loose one of the T-28 "doom turtle" for 27 YEARS, they later found it in Fort Belvoir, it was there So long that there started growing grass INSIDE of the tank...

[One_Eyed_Cheshire]

The Bob Semple tank was actually an example of true engineering genius. The armor of the tank was so thin that the shaped charge of another incoming tank round wouldn't even detonate against it. The Semple would simply drive into the middle of a bunch of enemy tanks and they'd all shoot at it, and their shells would fly through the Semple's armor, out the other side, and hit their teammates by accident, Looney Toons style.

[LegendStormcrow]

The Bob Semple was so amazing that its successor, the Killdozer wasn't pit into production for decades.

[blazerocker]

The Bob Semple Tank was so revolutionary that it had no actual blueprints that could be stolen by enemy spies.

[believeinmatter]

It’s insane how far the innovations in tank design have gone in the last 50 years, always fascinating to learn about

[mardiffv.]

The Swedish Strv 103 was specific designed to defend Sweden in case of the feared, but never materialized Soviet invasion. If the Soviet Army gained ground in Sweden, the Strv 103 would deployed with Hit and Run tactics.

So suddenly appearing out of the forest (Sweden consist of 80 % forest), shoot 1, maybe 2 Soviet tanks and disappear back into the forest. Keeping the Soviets at their toes all the time. Wearing the Soviets out.

[zwojack]

Sidenote, the Strv 103 was the swedish MBT for quite a while and would have worked pretty well in a defensive position.

[arayzui]

The strv 103 was designed with a completely static gun as Swedish engineers realised that most tanks stopped before shooting so having a turret was deemed unnecessary for a tank intended fo defence. As the commies were likely only going to come from one direction so they wouldn't have to worry about flaking manovers as much. So a static gun was deemed better. It also ment that having every crew member having there own controls wouldn't be a problem as everyone can aim the gun if the gunner gets injured.

[jamesshields]

I feel like the strv74 was designed around swedens plan to counter an invasion, which as I understand it was pretty much firing hull down and being able to quickly retreat. Hence why the later Swedish Mbt the strv 103 had amazing hull down capabilities, as fast a backup speed as forward, and could operate with only one crew member although 3 is definitely better. The sweds don’t have the largest population so they dosing tanks to protect the crew as much as possible, tanks are replaceable, good crews aren’t.

Edit: as I understand it’s a modernization of the 42, I just mean to say with a powerful gun and a slim frontal turret profile I believe it may have been the start of the defensive tank strategy.

[bricklingtonlego]

"I don't see anyone coming up with any better ideas "

~Gigachad Semple

[MatthewSmith-tohz]

To be fair. New Zealand had very limited resources at the time, so Bob's Simple Tank was good for what it was and for what they had avaliable.

[randomexcessmemories]

One thing I always appreciated about Sweden is that when a tank became out of date, they would recycle the turrets into coastal guns. They have a long history of doing so, stretching all the way back to the Strv m/41 and other early WWII tanks. The Strv 74 would go on to become a central element of Swedish coastal defense, and those turrets remained in service into the 2000s, I believe. I don't know if they used their Centurion turrets for that purpose, and obviously the S-tank couldn't be used that way. Now with anti-ship missiles having taken over, there really isn't any need for coastal guns, which is sad. I've always been fascinated by them, especially converted from tank turrets.

[thedungeondelver]

Let's be completely clear about something. Bob Semple's tanks suffered 0 combat losses. _The Imperial Japanese Army surrendered prior to having to face the Semple in combat_ . That's right, you heard me. They gave up the honor of the Japanese Empire rather than face the Semple in combat. The Semple tank has a record of 0 crews lost in combat due to malfunction *or* enemy fire.

God created man, Bob Semple made men equal.

[AuroraWolf]

Bob Semple: I don’t see anyone else coming up with ideas
Schofield tank: am I a joke to u?!

[afif]

I like the Girls Und Panzer reference in the intro where a T95 rams through a gap.

[christopherg]

The Bob Semple could have actually worked in it's intended role - infantry support.
Japan was notoriously poor in the Armor department. And somehow _even worse_ in the Anti-Armor department. Poor Steel Production, a focus on the Navy and Airforce over the Army and a focus on Naval invasions over land warfare made for very light tank designs. Stuff you could easily destroy with AT guns. Leaving you as the only one that brought a tank.
And it was built from a tractor via a A-Team Montage.

[Chisszaru]

I'm a Swede, and the fact that two Swedish tanks was mentioned just amuses me a lot. We Swedes sure loves coming up with weird and crazy ideas

[nightshade]

the reason for the strv 103 became what it is, was that at the time, most MBTs and other vehicles that perform about the same role, still did not have a very capable gun stabilization system, meaning they still couldn't fire accurately on the move, so they still needed to stop to aim accurately and fire, thus the strv 103 was designed to work with that conundrum, fix the maingun to the chassis that has sufficiently capable armor scheme/design on the front arc, with mobility in mind that can allow the vehicle to relocate after firing.



also adding this in, for those who still think or believe that the super heavy tank T28 and the T95 GMC as two different designs/vehicles, i will just paste what i have already commented to other people

that is the WoT perspective as they split the two versions to flush out the tank destroyer line, even fabricating their own version of the T28, when in reality, it was still the T28 regardless if it had the external tracks, it simply was renamed the T95 GMC (Gun Motor Carriage) when Ordnance didn't think nor see that the vehicle fitted the classification it was being placed in, making the confusion that made people think (partly or rather mostly thanks to Wargaming) that the two vehicles are entirely different designs/vehicles. even Nicholas Moran had to talk about it in one of his Q&A videos.