Jagdpanzer Kanone, AMX 13 (90 mm), AMX 13 (105 mm) in comparative trials in Switzerland, 1971. By the early 1970s, the aging Panzerjäger G-13 (also known as Hetzer or Jagdpanzer 38, purchased from Czechoslovakia post-war) was completely obsolete. Replacement options were considered, with candidates being the Jagdpanzer Kanone, AMX 13 (90 mm), and AMX 13 (105 mm). The Swedish Ikv 91 did not participate in the trials as it was not ready. Developing a new domestic tank destroyer was deemed too time-consuming, despite interesting proposals.This comparison is notable for pitting a casemate vehicle (Jagdpanzer) against turreted ones (AMX), which might seem challenging, but 22 decision-making criteria were developed and evaluated. The conclusions were as follows: 
Jagdpanzer Kanone (90 mm) outperformed the AMX 13 (105 mm) in most of the 22 criteria. It featured a modern design (11 years old compared to 20 for the AMX), fully completed development, high mobility, good armor protection (including against shrapnel), and an economical diesel engine with greater range. The Jagdpanzer offered superior ballistics (accuracy at 1200–1500 m), ease of operation, a comfortable fighting compartment, and straightforward maintenance, making it particularly suitable for the Swiss militia. Its communication systems were reliable, and integrating Swiss radio equipment posed no issues. The vehicle fully complied with military technical regulations and was well-adapted to winter conditions, crucial for Switzerland. AMX 13 (105 mm) lagged in many aspects: an outdated design, incomplete development (only the chassis), lower range due to a gasoline engine with higher fuel consumption, and limited accuracy (1000–1200 m) with reduced effectiveness against certain targets. Its cramped fighting compartment and less convenient maintenance access complicated operation. French communication equipment was prone to failures, and adaptation for Swiss use required significant costs. However, the AMX 13 offered a greater gun traverse angle and a partially established logistics base in Switzerland.Overall, the Jagdpanzer Kanone was the preferred choice for the Swiss army due to its versatility, compliance with requirements, and better adaptation to local conditions. The AMX 13, despite some advantages, required further refinements, reducing its appeal.
Jagdpanzer Kanone (90 mm) outperformed the AMX 13 (105 mm) in most of the 22 criteria. It featured a modern design (11 years old compared to 20 for the AMX), fully completed development, high mobility, good armor protection (including against shrapnel), and an economical diesel engine with greater range. The Jagdpanzer offered superior ballistics (accuracy at 1200–1500 m), ease of operation, a comfortable fighting compartment, and straightforward maintenance, making it particularly suitable for the Swiss militia. Its communication systems were reliable, and integrating Swiss radio equipment posed no issues. The vehicle fully complied with military technical regulations and was well-adapted to winter conditions, crucial for Switzerland. AMX 13 (105 mm) lagged in many aspects: an outdated design, incomplete development (only the chassis), lower range due to a gasoline engine with higher fuel consumption, and limited accuracy (1000–1200 m) with reduced effectiveness against certain targets. Its cramped fighting compartment and less convenient maintenance access complicated operation. French communication equipment was prone to failures, and adaptation for Swiss use required significant costs. However, the AMX 13 offered a greater gun traverse angle and a partially established logistics base in Switzerland.Overall, the Jagdpanzer Kanone was the preferred choice for the Swiss army due to its versatility, compliance with requirements, and better adaptation to local conditions. The AMX 13, despite some advantages, required further refinements, reducing its appeal.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий