All of our equipment here in Sweden is highly specific for their intended task in the Swedish/Nordic region. Thus, it is quite clear that a lot of the equipment may not be suitable for other countries - with the exception of more general equipment like the CV90 or "Bandvagn 410" for example. The navy is a great example of the suitedness in action. We don't have any large vessels. They are made for navigating the difficult waters and going out for shorter intelligence/fighting runs to then quickly return to their home base, to be refueled, new ammo, and so on - to then go out for another short run. We also have the amphibious corps who use smaller vessels and are very mobile/agile in the archipelagos - all to make it as difficult as possible for a potential invader to get in.
There also was some bullshittery between Thysen-Krupp and the Swedish government that might have impacted sales. If I remember correctly, Thysen-Krupp believed they were competing with their own, German, designs and therefore didn't want to sell Swedish subs. It ended with the Swedish military raiding their facilities at Kockums and forcing a sale to SAAB.
@@rayceofhistory Basically Thysen-Krupp bought Kockums (the company designing and making the swedish subs) to get rid of a competitor. Due to politics they couldn't just kill the company off, so they tried to starve it to death so it would die a "natural" death. Sweden was surprisingly aggressive when they realized what was going on. The DoD sent in military police without prior notice to take possession of blueprints and machinery that was the property of the Swedish government. When Thysen-Krupp didn't want to sell Kockums the government tasked defense company Saab with starting making submarines, something completely new for them. Saab quickly started headhunting Kockums engineers in droves. Thysen-Krupp then relented and sold the company to Saab while it still was worth something.
@@rayceofhistoryYep, it quite a story. The raid by military is totally unprecedented in Swedish modern history basically confiscating everything connected to the technology (that formally dont belong to the manufacturer but to the Swedis defence material bureau (FMV). The swedes got their submarine industry back. But HDW basically bought over the Singapore contract and kept Sweden off the export market for the years when Gotland-class was most unique.
True HDW actively opposed any export deals of the Swedish built subs, this is also one of the reasons the Swedish government (through FMV, not the military) took control of the shipyard later to hand it over to Saab for a symbolic sum to protect strategic assets back in 2014.
@@rayceofhistory It sure was a shit show. The Germans only let former Kockums make competetive offers to the Swedish navy. The marrige ended with a stand off over a army truck held 'hostage' over a weekend. Monday morning it was annonced that Saab was buying former Kokums.
We have a large millitarydrill in Sweden now with several countrys is participating in ( including the US). Its named Aurora 23 and its 26000 soldiers from different countrys in it.
Also I think one reason why a lot of our weapons didn't become export successes is because we have pretty strict weapons export laws. And of course it's also hard to sell weapons as the little guy. Everyone wants protection from the big guys. So it's a lot of politics in it as well.
Yeah I’m sure that’s the case. I know from the Us perspective at least this is part of what goes into some treaties and deals, like what was done with the Saudi’s. There is an agreement made for protection or US capital or something like that, and then tacked onto it is the sale of arms specifically from the US.
@@rayceofhistory Yep, that is how it is. But I'm pretty happy because if we create awesome weapons we can share that with our allies like in the case of HMS Gotland and the USA. I'm happy that we help the united states with our tech. And it's actually more than you think. The last year I have dug more and more into our swedish weapons and been surprised of how many joint collaborations we actually been part of. You can almost say that Sweden is a small weapons factory of the United States. For example the Excalibur artillery round is manufactured in Karlskoga, Sweden. The munition was co-developed by United States-based Raytheon Missiles & Defense (guidance system) and the Swedish BAE Systems Bofors (body, base, ballistics, and payload). I know that it's a very advanced artillery shell when it comes to it's fly path. The shell has "wings or fins" and is launched with a very high angle when it's launched. That in itself was an engineering feat to accomplish. Then Raytheon did the GPS guidance. So this was a great collab. And it has taken out countless of tanks, artillery and other stuff in Ukraine which makes me happy. Give the russians what they deserve! Another great project was between Boeing and SAAB, developing the GLSDB (Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb) with a range of 150 km. It's the cheapest long range weapon. Much cheaper than HIMARS and almost as effective. I have seen many videos where we tested it here in Sweden during winter conditions and engineers from Boeing also took part. I think this also has been sent to Ukraine. Then you have the "Bonus" cluster artillery round which is insane. That there exists such an advanced artillery shell is beyond me. That was a joint project with the french. Think Ukraine got this one as well. Then you have the Carl Gustaf and AT4 that the united states uses. And in the future the Carl Gustaf will get even more useful with it's new laser guided ammunition. Seems like we have a lot of future orders of these because of the war. And you guys have shown interest in our Archer. It was sent to the states 1-2 years ago and you guys tested it. Your artillery forces liked it a lot and wanted it. However it didn't make it because of budget constraints, but maybe later, who knows? The UK bought 14 Archers recently, just a couple of weeks ago. This is huge for us, since no other country got it yet, except the 8 that were donated to Ukraine. Then you have the CV90 which I hope a lot more countries will buy, but it's very popular. It's the most used IFV in NATO if you look at how many countries that uses it. I think it's 10 countries by now. Recently the italians wanted it as well, they have shown interest. And not to long ago the slovaks and Czech Republic bought 400 of them. And maybe the US can by some NLAWS from us. You know as well as I know that it fills the in between role, it's not the same as the Javelin. First you got your Carl Gustaf and AT4's, for trucks and lighter armored stuff. Then you got the NLAW for ambushes and urban warfare with shorter distances. And then you got the Javelin for longer ranges, open fields and stuff. All these weapons complement each other. I would also like Sweden to buy some Javelins so we got longer range. We would need that capability as well. If we could trade weapons between our countries, so we got all the capabilites with all the pros and cons I think that would be a smart move. I would also like to have the Stugna-P from Ukraine because that one has proven to be an awesome weapon in this war as well. We have a similar weapon to Stugna-P, the Bill 2, but it's starting to get old. I think the Stugna-P is better with longer range. Either we buy the Stugna-P or update our Bill 2 for the future. Anyways, my dream is that the US buys our CV90, a couple of them and then some Archers. That would be nice! But I guess it won't happen. You want to produce your own weapons, but maybe it can happen. There is small chance for it to happen at least. But right now it looks really good for our defence industry, we are fully booked for years to come because of the invasion of Ukraine. Also the swiss and austrians have shown their true colors during this war and a lot of NATO countries have realized that they can't be trusted since they block usage of their weapons in Ukraine. This is really good for swedish defence industry! So I'm very happy that we have shown that we can be a trusted and reliable supplier of weapons to NATO! That warms my heart.. ;)
Great video...anything to do with submarines is instantly fascinating to me. I did have a couple of answers/confirmations in regard to things you wondered about... Only the Swedish know exactly how close to the bottom they really operate on a normal basis, but my understanding is that the Gottland class can sit on the bottom...which means the Swedes must surely practice that maneuver. My guess would be that they have a somewhat "safe" place to do it, like a relatively shallow spot with a nice, soft sand bottom. The Gottland class has an excellent high frequency navigation sonar for mine avoidance, under ice work, and avoiding obstacles near the bottom. On that matter of nuclear boats needing to use their reactor pumps, I am almost positive that the reactors on the Virginia class can operate their reactors in a mode that has their pumps turned off, where the water is circulated by convection currents...which could make them as quiet as a Gottland class in creep mode. I know for a fact that the Ohio class SSBNs of the US Navy can run their reactors without running the circulation pumps...so it would be surprising if the Virginias cannot do the same thing. In answer to your question...yes...the torpedoes share data back to the sub through a fiber optic "wire"...so as you said, the sub can "see" whatever the torpedo can "see" with its own sophisticated sensors. In essence, as long as the wire is intact and the torpedo's batteries are providing power, the torpedo is in constant 2 way communications with the sub that launched it...and is effectively a wire guided drone. Yes...the new Blekinge class boats are meant to be upgrades of the Gottland class, which are undergoing the same major upgrade themselves between 2018 and 2024...at least I think that is when the 3rd boat is scheduled to finish its overhaul. So a significant number of the systems in the new class of boats have already been to sea in the Gottland class, and a lot of the ones that are going to be new are basically just upgrades of older systems that are already proven.
With the Ohio and Virginia subs, what are the limitations of running in that mode with the pumps turned off? I’m really trying to see in what way and by how much they’re limited in use when they’re turned off. And a submarine sitting on the bottom of the sea like a camouflaged ocean predator..what a wild world we live in.
@@rayceofhistory The Ohios are reported to be able to run at up to 10 knots without their circulating pumps turned on...I think there is a limit to how long they can run that fast, and they normally troll along at 5 or 6 knots for weeks at a time. The Virginias seem likely to have at least the same abilities, if not better...perhaps they can run at 10 knots for extended periods. The Seawolf class boats were reported to be able to "run silent" at up to 20 knots...but that is a big part of why they were SO expensive. Sitting on the bottom was a common tactic in almost every submarine force during World War 2 and after. But bottoming is definitely one thing that nuclear boats cannot do, so the US no longer does it. I believe some small number of Soviet nuclear boats could bottom, since their cooling water intakes were not located on the bottom of the boat, but every other nuclear powered sub that I know of is incapable of sitting on the bottom. Even if they are not using pumps, fresh sea water does need to enter the cooling system, and those intakes on the bottom are always a limitation.
I just think the reason why we create so many own weapons is because we have the know how. We have a pretty solid manufacturing base compared to many other countries. We have good engineers, etc. A good comparison is between Norway and Sweden. We didn't have a lot of oil, so we couldn't become rich that way. We had to be innovative and create products to export. Therefore we built a strong industrial sector, and that's how we became rich, through hard and honest work. Another reason is that we are one of the strongest democracy's in the world, and in my world that means beeing efficent. Look at all democracy's compared to all dictatorships. Which countries are rich? Well, the western world is far richer than the rest of the world and the reason beeing that we are 99% democracy's while they are dictatorships. They have problems with corruption, leaders that steel money which should have gone towards innovation and stuff. Strong democracy's are the least corrupt and therefore most of the money actually goes towards science, industrial projects, etc.
Using the mid life upgrade for testing out new systems sure sound familiar. The AJS upgrade for the attack Viggen served the same role in relation to the development of JAS-39. Since both navy and air are very tech dependant, a hull is always going to age less bad then your systems. This was also the reason why the fighter version of the Viggen enterd service almost a decade after the attacker. The draken was still good as an interceptor so Sweden could afford to wait for radar and computer tech to make the next leap.
I'm not sure the data on how close Swedish subs go in relation to seabeds is non-classified information so it might not be the best thing for commenters to share here. But the weapons detective does thorough research. :). And you are on the money - all swedish-made wpn platforms are designed for domestic use primarily, tailored for our terrain and needs (which usually means that long-range is not a very high priority for Navy or Air force)
I am too, and that’s part of why I don’t think I could do it. Being in small cars bother me, knowing I wouldn’t be able to get out of a cramped space would drive me nuts.
All of our equipment here in Sweden is highly specific for their intended task in the Swedish/Nordic region. Thus, it is quite clear that a lot of the equipment may not be suitable for other countries - with the exception of more general equipment like the CV90 or "Bandvagn 410" for example. The navy is a great example of the suitedness in action. We don't have any large vessels. They are made for navigating the difficult waters and going out for shorter intelligence/fighting runs to then quickly return to their home base, to be refueled, new ammo, and so on - to then go out for another short run. We also have the amphibious corps who use smaller vessels and are very mobile/agile in the archipelagos - all to make it as difficult as possible for a potential invader to get in.
Sweden is not a NATO member
There also was some bullshittery between Thysen-Krupp and the Swedish government that might have impacted sales. If I remember correctly, Thysen-Krupp believed they were competing with their own, German, designs and therefore didn't want to sell Swedish subs. It ended with the Swedish military raiding their facilities at Kockums and forcing a sale to SAAB.
Whoa I’ve gotta look this up. Sounds intense.
@@rayceofhistory Basically Thysen-Krupp bought Kockums (the company designing and making the swedish subs) to get rid of a competitor. Due to politics they couldn't just kill the company off, so they tried to starve it to death so it would die a "natural" death.
Sweden was surprisingly aggressive when they realized what was going on. The DoD sent in military police without prior notice to take possession of blueprints and machinery that was the property of the Swedish government.
When Thysen-Krupp didn't want to sell Kockums the government tasked defense company Saab with starting making submarines, something completely new for them. Saab quickly started headhunting Kockums engineers in droves. Thysen-Krupp then relented and sold the company to Saab while it still was worth something.
@@rayceofhistoryYep, it quite a story. The raid by military is totally unprecedented in Swedish modern history basically confiscating everything connected to the technology (that formally dont belong to the manufacturer but to the Swedis defence material bureau (FMV). The swedes got their submarine industry back. But HDW basically bought over the Singapore contract and kept Sweden off the export market for the years when Gotland-class was most unique.
True HDW actively opposed any export deals of the Swedish built subs, this is also one of the reasons the Swedish government (through FMV, not the military) took control of the shipyard later to hand it over to Saab for a symbolic sum to protect strategic assets back in 2014.
@@rayceofhistory It sure was a shit show. The Germans only let former Kockums make competetive offers to the Swedish navy. The marrige ended with a stand off over a army truck held 'hostage' over a weekend. Monday morning it was annonced that Saab was buying former Kokums.
We have a large millitarydrill in Sweden now with several countrys is participating in ( including the US). Its named Aurora 23 and its 26000 soldiers from different countrys in it.
Also I think one reason why a lot of our weapons didn't become export successes is because we have pretty strict weapons export laws. And of course it's also hard to sell weapons as the little guy. Everyone wants protection from the big guys. So it's a lot of politics in it as well.
Yeah I’m sure that’s the case. I know from the Us perspective at least this is part of what goes into some treaties and deals, like what was done with the Saudi’s. There is an agreement made for protection or US capital or something like that, and then tacked onto it is the sale of arms specifically from the US.
@@rayceofhistory Yep, that is how it is. But I'm pretty happy because if we create awesome weapons we can share that with our allies like in the case of HMS Gotland and the USA.
I'm happy that we help the united states with our tech. And it's actually more than you think. The last year I have dug more and more into our swedish weapons and been surprised of how many joint collaborations we actually been part of.
You can almost say that Sweden is a small weapons factory of the United States. For example the Excalibur artillery round is manufactured in Karlskoga, Sweden. The munition was co-developed by United States-based Raytheon Missiles & Defense (guidance system) and the Swedish BAE Systems Bofors (body, base, ballistics, and payload).
I know that it's a very advanced artillery shell when it comes to it's fly path. The shell has "wings or fins" and is launched with a very high angle when it's launched. That in itself was an engineering feat to accomplish. Then Raytheon did the GPS guidance. So this was a great collab. And it has taken out countless of tanks, artillery and other stuff in Ukraine which makes me happy. Give the russians what they deserve!
Another great project was between Boeing and SAAB, developing the GLSDB (Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb) with a range of 150 km. It's the cheapest long range weapon. Much cheaper than HIMARS and almost as effective. I have seen many videos where we tested it here in Sweden during winter conditions and engineers from Boeing also took part. I think this also has been sent to Ukraine.
Then you have the "Bonus" cluster artillery round which is insane. That there exists such an advanced artillery shell is beyond me. That was a joint project with the french. Think Ukraine got this one as well.
Then you have the Carl Gustaf and AT4 that the united states uses. And in the future the Carl Gustaf will get even more useful with it's new laser guided ammunition. Seems like we have a lot of future orders of these because of the war.
And you guys have shown interest in our Archer. It was sent to the states 1-2 years ago and you guys tested it. Your artillery forces liked it a lot and wanted it. However it didn't make it because of budget constraints, but maybe later, who knows?
The UK bought 14 Archers recently, just a couple of weeks ago. This is huge for us, since no other country got it yet, except the 8 that were donated to Ukraine.
Then you have the CV90 which I hope a lot more countries will buy, but it's very popular. It's the most used IFV in NATO if you look at how many countries that uses it. I think it's 10 countries by now. Recently the italians wanted it as well, they have shown interest. And not to long ago the slovaks and Czech Republic bought 400 of them.
And maybe the US can by some NLAWS from us. You know as well as I know that it fills the in between role, it's not the same as the Javelin. First you got your Carl Gustaf and AT4's, for trucks and lighter armored stuff. Then you got the NLAW for ambushes and urban warfare with shorter distances. And then you got the Javelin for longer ranges, open fields and stuff. All these weapons complement each other. I would also like Sweden to buy some Javelins so we got longer range. We would need that capability as well. If we could trade weapons between our countries, so we got all the capabilites with all the pros and cons I think that would be a smart move. I would also like to have the Stugna-P from Ukraine because that one has proven to be an awesome weapon in this war as well.
We have a similar weapon to Stugna-P, the Bill 2, but it's starting to get old. I think the Stugna-P is better with longer range. Either we buy the Stugna-P or update our Bill 2 for the future.
Anyways, my dream is that the US buys our CV90, a couple of them and then some Archers. That would be nice! But I guess it won't happen. You want to produce your own weapons, but maybe it can happen. There is small chance for it to happen at least.
But right now it looks really good for our defence industry, we are fully booked for years to come because of the invasion of Ukraine. Also the swiss and austrians have shown their true colors during this war and a lot of NATO countries have realized that they can't be trusted since they block usage of their weapons in Ukraine. This is really good for swedish defence industry!
So I'm very happy that we have shown that we can be a trusted and reliable supplier of weapons to NATO! That warms my heart.. ;)
Great video...anything to do with submarines is instantly fascinating to me. I did have a couple of answers/confirmations in regard to things you wondered about...
Only the Swedish know exactly how close to the bottom they really operate on a normal basis, but my understanding is that the Gottland class can sit on the bottom...which means the Swedes must surely practice that maneuver. My guess would be that they have a somewhat "safe" place to do it, like a relatively shallow spot with a nice, soft sand bottom. The Gottland class has an excellent high frequency navigation sonar for mine avoidance, under ice work, and avoiding obstacles near the bottom.
On that matter of nuclear boats needing to use their reactor pumps, I am almost positive that the reactors on the Virginia class can operate their reactors in a mode that has their pumps turned off, where the water is circulated by convection currents...which could make them as quiet as a Gottland class in creep mode. I know for a fact that the Ohio class SSBNs of the US Navy can run their reactors without running the circulation pumps...so it would be surprising if the Virginias cannot do the same thing.
In answer to your question...yes...the torpedoes share data back to the sub through a fiber optic "wire"...so as you said, the sub can "see" whatever the torpedo can "see" with its own sophisticated sensors. In essence, as long as the wire is intact and the torpedo's batteries are providing power, the torpedo is in constant 2 way communications with the sub that launched it...and is effectively a wire guided drone.
Yes...the new Blekinge class boats are meant to be upgrades of the Gottland class, which are undergoing the same major upgrade themselves between 2018 and 2024...at least I think that is when the 3rd boat is scheduled to finish its overhaul. So a significant number of the systems in the new class of boats have already been to sea in the Gottland class, and a lot of the ones that are going to be new are basically just upgrades of older systems that are already proven.
With the Ohio and Virginia subs, what are the limitations of running in that mode with the pumps turned off? I’m really trying to see in what way and by how much they’re limited in use when they’re turned off.
And a submarine sitting on the bottom of the sea like a camouflaged ocean predator..what a wild world we live in.
@@rayceofhistory The Ohios are reported to be able to run at up to 10 knots without their circulating pumps turned on...I think there is a limit to how long they can run that fast, and they normally troll along at 5 or 6 knots for weeks at a time. The Virginias seem likely to have at least the same abilities, if not better...perhaps they can run at 10 knots for extended periods. The Seawolf class boats were reported to be able to "run silent" at up to 20 knots...but that is a big part of why they were SO expensive.
Sitting on the bottom was a common tactic in almost every submarine force during World War 2 and after. But bottoming is definitely one thing that nuclear boats cannot do, so the US no longer does it. I believe some small number of Soviet nuclear boats could bottom, since their cooling water intakes were not located on the bottom of the boat, but every other nuclear powered sub that I know of is incapable of sitting on the bottom. Even if they are not using pumps, fresh sea water does need to enter the cooling system, and those intakes on the bottom are always a limitation.
I just think the reason why we create so many own weapons is because we have the know how. We have a pretty solid manufacturing base compared to many other countries. We have good engineers, etc.
A good comparison is between Norway and Sweden. We didn't have a lot of oil, so we couldn't become rich that way. We had to be innovative and create products to export. Therefore we built a strong industrial sector, and that's how we became rich, through hard and honest work.
Another reason is that we are one of the strongest democracy's in the world, and in my world that means beeing efficent. Look at all democracy's compared to all dictatorships. Which countries are rich? Well, the western world is far richer than the rest of the world and the reason beeing that we are 99% democracy's while they are dictatorships.
They have problems with corruption, leaders that steel money which should have gone towards innovation and stuff. Strong democracy's are the least corrupt and therefore most of the money actually goes towards science, industrial projects, etc.
Sweden is a muslim hell hole
Using the mid life upgrade for testing out new systems sure sound familiar. The AJS upgrade for the attack Viggen served the same role in relation to the development of JAS-39.
Since both navy and air are very tech dependant, a hull is always going to age less bad then your systems. This was also the reason why the fighter version of the Viggen enterd service almost a decade after the attacker. The draken was still good as an interceptor so Sweden could afford to wait for radar and computer tech to make the next leap.
Rely like al your videos! Started with passion for Sabaton and ended with following your reactions!
I appreciate it!
I could easily imagine that the Taiwanese would like to be able to get a shot off on the Chinese Aircraft Carrier, etc.
I'm not sure the data on how close Swedish subs go in relation to seabeds is non-classified information so it might not be the best thing for commenters to share here. But the weapons detective does thorough research. :).
And you are on the money - all swedish-made wpn platforms are designed for domestic use primarily, tailored for our terrain and needs (which usually means that long-range is not a very high priority for Navy or Air force)
remember sub crew are silent for a lifetime
Collins is not Sterling engine
More tips on same theme ruclips.net/video/ePdm5CsELn8/видео.html
ithe New A26 can sit on the sea bed
I think i could do that but then i am also a tall guy so not sure how well i fit in these things.
I am too, and that’s part of why I don’t think I could do it. Being in small cars bother me, knowing I wouldn’t be able to get out of a cramped space would drive me nuts.
6:42 nopp