STUGS! Part 1: Turretless Light Tanks are Born in Germany

[nokuhobune]

nice sync but dosent rly matter anyways ty for a good doc

[BusterXXXL]

I am not so sure about what you assume to be the main reasons for abandoning the assault gun concept. These seem to be a little to america-centric.

If you look at the russian army, they had lots and lots of experience with their SU-series, but still abandoned the concept after WW2.

The german armourers likewise abandonded their Kanonenjagdpanzer (the final STUG-sucessor) in 1983 for a TOW-armed variant. It weighed 25 tons and fielded only 90 mm cannon, so your ideas of 155mm under 20 tons?.



[TheJojo45678]

I think the concept of the assault gun is rather interesting, but also somewhat obsolete. The modern battlefield is much more mobile, and an assault gun would be easily out paced. The German army spent a lot of time on the defensive, so assault guns aren't much of an option to most nations who must deploy a rapid, mobile and agile force to a foreign land. I do wonder if it would be plausible to perhaps mount a tank gun on say, an M113 APC, and see what it could do.

[dynmicpara2]

@TheJojo45678 The "modern" battlefield is increasingly URBAN where we need SIEGE ENGINES like Assault Guns to prevail. Read General Tucker's "The Pattern of War".

[TheJojo45678]

@dynmicpara2 Ah, but what is to become of the vehicle, if it get's flanked on the sides not covered by the main gun? True you could have infantry to cover, but what of side amushes with handheld anti-tank weapons? And can a modern battle tank not fire the same rounds all the while using a turret? An assault gun has its uses, but urban warfare is not one of them my friend.

I would say reserve the role of an assault gun to open areas for anti-tank operations.

[dynmicpara2]

@TheJojo45678 The whole point of an ASSAULT gun is infantry fire support not tank killing. You have a 360 dgree swiveling remote weapon system (I advocate a 30mm autocannon) on top to help handle close-in attacks along with the STUG's crewmen firing out from open hatches cued by microcameras etc.

[TheJojo45678]

@dynmicpara2 Reasonable enough. What calibre weapon and what chassis would you use?

I personally would go with a 155mm weapon conversion for any tank chassis (sort of how the Markman system works). I'd perhaps mount it on a T-55 chassis to make use of out-dated, and perhaps underused resources.

What would you suggest?

[dynmicpara2]

@TheJojo45678 America does't have T-55s to convert but your idea is sound and would work for the IDF that does. The IDF needs such a turretles STUG offering no turret/hull junction weak spot and better armor protection to get LOS to blast urban structures with 155mm shells; their M109s are too vulnerable to use in DF mode; you have a war winner

[dynmicpara2]

@TheJojo45678 or America, we desperately need a LIGHT STUG under 20 tons for our Airborne/Air Assault/Light Infantry Brigade Combat Teams using plentiful M113 Gavins with a 105mm M119 howitzer or LRF tank gun. SOLTAM has a M113-based 155mm SPH but crew fires it exposed. LIGHT STUG must be C-130 and CH-47 trasportable and cross-country mobile in closed terrains (less than 8 PSI). FCS-NLOS prototype was 155mm crew covered so its possible...

[redreaper2020]

@dynmicpara2 I'd be inclined to agree very readily with you on this one. An M113 or (for other armies) a bmp or MT-LBu would be an excellent vehicle to convert to a light StuG, and an M113 would be the ideal vehicle to convert in this case. With a new engine, and the banded track they're trying out on them, they could reach hellcat-type speeds and deliver a heavy punch.

[ouano1]

@redreaper2020 i think all existing MBT(including old one) can be converted to stug, the trend today is a 120mm gun but if turretless then it can mount a powerful 155mm, i dont really know but i find stug to be a very sexy good looking tank or to be specific an SP... i wish they make new ones hehehe nice vid, cheers to all stug lovers!!!

[revolrz22]

dynmicpara, do you have a source for your statement that StuGs killed 30,000 Allied tanks in the west?

Because according to WO 291/1186 only 24.4% of Western Allied tanks were confirmed to have been from Self Propelled Guns. That would mean that all told, at least 120,000 Western Allied tanks were lost in total, and that's more than the total production all medium tank types in the United States combined.

[dynmicpara2]

@revolrz22 The Wiki web page and the Osprey book on STUGs. Obviously, the number of tanks killed by SP assault guns is wrong since a 75mm shell could come from them or a turreted Mark IV tank; tankers in western bureaucracies have a prejudice against turretless tanks and will always credit their pet.

[Zalzany]

@revolrz22 M4 Sherman alone had over 50,000 produced, and "Allied" means not just US, but Britain, and France and any one else who had a tank. There were several US models mass proceed into the tens of thousands during the war for other countries and for itself. We had to throw barrages of tanks at the Germans in order to win, that is kind of why the US came out on top, we were already streamlined for mass production, and one of the few countries with factories that weren't bombed into dust.

[julianraw]

is it my computer or is the vid out of sink with the narroators? but great vid

[dynmicpara2]

No, you are right. Our computer's motherboard was dying when I assembled this vid, sorry.

[popman638isthebest]

I'm a tank enthusiast, i enjoy your video's, i left comments on your other video's (i think they failed) so tell me is the swedish STUG "S" tank gas turbine or diesal. i to love stug tanks, flanks are the only problem, (turn to face one tank to fire then get hit by another in the back) anyway thank you for sharing. :D nice to know their are some smart people left in this world....

[dynmicpara2]

S-Tanks are BOTH diesel piston and turbine engine powered. Thanks for the compliments. YOUTUBE doesn't always inform us of remarks when posted for review...

[popman638isthebest]

cool, and no problem, i think in a stalemate war the S-tanks would be most effective, but they are still awesome at mobile wars, :D

[Kriegfreak]

Ty for uploading all these! I always enjoyed the look of STUG tanks. Very informative stuff, and I look forward to using some of these real-life bits to use in modeling and what not.

[Bereft008]

Hm. It is cheaper to produce one type of tank for offense and defense than to make two kind of them one for offensive war and the other for defensive war. I think that's the main reason why nobody produces turretless tanks nowadays. I mostly agree with what is said in the video though. In a defensive war the turretless tanks have the edge over any other type of tanks.

[dynmicpara2]

And the revelation here is that for OFFENSIVE 3D air-mech warfare to get maximum tank per pound, turretless is way to go.

[popman638isthebest]

lol drop a tank on the enemy cause it is so light, (joking), i saw your other comments on the other vid, and you summed it up very well, i would rather a turretless STUG tank, and a division of 12 counter tank and aircraft infantry, than a unit of soldiers which are less durable and are slower. "s" tanks are the way to go :D