[Iris7]

I have been interested in the "S-tank" since the '70s. That hydraulic system is intriguing, in those days of no electronic elements, 100% hydraulic. I can hazily picture it's details. Too complicated, like the last piece points out.

Compact, pretty low, short (has to be to do the bogey trick of elevating and depressing the gun), 42 tons (that amazing hydraulic drive again) - more of a sturmgeshutz than a tank, of course.

Front engine is the way to go.

Turns out the armor stinks. A more normal drive train and a sturmgeshutz type traverse and elevation would have lowered the rig maybe 6 to 9 inches and would have left weight for armor. A modern Hetzer would have been more practical.

[SAMWolf]

more of a sturmgeshutz than a tank, of course.

Great minds....

It would have been interesting to see how it stood up in combat with it's contemporaries. I figured it'd do ok from an ambush position getting in the first shot, like the German Sturmgeschutz and TD's.

[snippy_about_it]

Turns out the armor stinks.

I would think armor would be the most important aspect in designing a tank, though speed and fire power are right up there with it.