Re: mystery tank

["Aahz." <ErickKilmer-at-comcast.net>]

And a bit more info taken from a tank discussion board.
----
The VT 1-1 and 1-2 were designed as tanks, not as tank-destroyers. 
Besides these two vehicles, a number of other twin-gun tanks were made, 
called Gefechtsfeld-Versuchsträger 01 to 05. The latter apparently had 
dummy guns with laser-simulation equipment and were used to test various 
concepts.

While VT 1-1 looks like this:
http://www.panzerbaer.de/types/leopard_vt_1.htm

VT 1-2 looks like this:
http://www.panzerbaer.de/types/leopard_vt_2.htm

While these are probably all GVTs:
http://www.panzerbaer.de/types/pix/leo_vt-2.jpg
http://www.mobilixnet.dk/~mob75281/pic/divs/GVT-04.jpg
http://www.bundeswehr-modellbau.info/images/pmmunster0058.jpg


There was a very good discussion about these vehicles on tanknet a while 
ago. Heres a couple of snippets from that discussion:

Stephan
GECONTANKNET posted 08 Feb 2002 04:29 Log:
----------------------------------------------------------------------Some 
technical details of the VT 1-2:
General description: Highly mobile twin gun "Kasemattpanzer" with 
automatic loader
Developement and construction: MAK Machinenbau GmbH
Crew: Three, on spring suspended platform
Overall length: 9.06m
Hull lenth: 6.69m
Width: 3.54m
Height to turret top: 2.04m
Combat weight: 43.5t
Power/weight ratio: 37kW/t
Ground clearance: 0.45m
Specific ground pressure: 9.86N/cm²
Capability of passing obstacles: 1m height/2m width
Max. Speed f/r: 70/40km/h
Engine: V12/90°, fourstroke multifuel engine with four turbochargers
Manufacturer/type: MTU MB803 Ra-500
Cubic capacity: 45'000cm³
Power output: 1600kW (2200HP)
Auxilliary engines: two 16kW/144V electric engines for silent driving 
and traversing without main engine
Mainguns: two 120mm smoothbore
Cadence: 10-12 rds/min per gun

Developement:
1972-1974: Construction of VT 1-1, twin 105mm rifled guns
1974: Trials with VT 1-1
1973-1975: Construction of VT 1-2
1975: Trials with VT 1-2 at KTS 2 (armor school)
1975: Decision to not pursue this concept for a future MBT because of 
tactical and technical (cost) problems

Short technical description:
The VT 1-2 is based on the hull of the MBT 70, the hull has been 
shortened by 750mm, reducing the number of roadwheels to five.
Behind the frontal armor is the compact crew compartment for the three 
men crew (TC, gunner, driver). The TC and gunner each have one 
independently stabilized panoramic sight (PERI-R 12), the driver is 
placed in the middle between TC and gunner. Behind the crew compartment 
is a seperate compartment for the electrical and hydraulical systems.
The engine is placed in the hull rear, the 120mm guns are each placed on 
the outer sides above the tracks in a semi-fixed mount, the guns are 
stabilized vertically. The guns are traversed by traversing the whole 
tank, the guns are fired computer controlled using the 
"target-passing-method". The left gun of the VT 1-2 has been equipped 
with a six round autoloader for demonstration purposes.
The engine is a high-power Diesel engine with four turbochargers with a 
modified transmission from the MBT 70 programme. The VT 1-2 uses a 
hydropneumatic suspension which is an improved version of the hydrop 
suspension of the MBT 70 programme.

Short assesment:
Compared to current [mid '70s] conventional turret tanks, it was hoped 
to achieve the following improvements:
a) Improved firepower:
- by shorter reaction times (redundant use of the guns, no shooting halt)
- by improving the hit probability (double shot or salvo fire)
- by improved kill probability (double shot, high cadence because of 
autoloader)
b) Improved mobility:
- by higher power to weight ratio and improved running gear
c) High survivability:
- by using a tactical combat driving method (Wedelfahrt) on enemy contact
- by minimizing the armored volume and improving the frontal protection

The trials of the VT 1-1 and VT 1-2 did show that it would be possible 
to realise this concept with a corresponding high degree of technical 
expenditures, but that there are certain practical and tactical problems.

My personal conclusion:
This concept would have been a hell of an offensive tank with its 
mobility and firepower, but wasn't what the Bundeswehr did need during 
the cold war.


Stephan
GECONTANKNET posted 09 Feb 2002 14:01 Log:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
<SNIP: This was a response to another poster>

One of the ideas behind this concept was to convert what you understand 
as a weakness into an advantage. Imagine this tank advancing at, oh, 
lets say 30km/h. Upon contact, the driver switches to "Wedelfahrt", 
while gunner and TC acquire targets, while advancing on this "waving" 
course, as soon a gun passes an acquired target, it fires. While driving 
like this, the tank is extremely difficult to hit - I don't really would 
want to be in a Leopard 2 or in any other conventional tank, if this 
beast was advancing on me. Even from a standing position, the concept 
would work reasonably well, the high engine power would make turning the 
tank really easy (Have you ever seen a Leopard 2 tank turning around its 
vertical axis? This already is quite fast, now imagine this concept 
vehicle would have had about 50% more power while weighting about 25% 
less!), remember, that unlike on the Strv 103 or any other tank with a 
(semi-)fixed gun, it would not have been necessary to really aim the 
whole tank at the target, rather the driver had just to turn the vehicle 
in such a way that the guns line of sight passes the target. Also, the 
high firepower (on average, it could fire one gun every three seconds, 
it could also fire both guns at once) and good protection would have 
still been a major advantage.

Aahz.