Swedish Neutrality
- Thread starter Merkava
- Start date
For JERU
I just thought some further explanation might be in order....
In my AH I would like to be able to envisage that Country X buys stakeholdings in SAAB and other Swedish companies in the 1920's and 1930's. Part of this would be associated with support for German companies since country X disagrees with the harsh terms of the Versaillies Treaty. (The US didn't sign the treaty either) Instead of American technicians helping Saab produce the B17 it would be those from X. Instead of US techs leaving when war broke out those of X would stay and increase help.
Here I have to digress a bit...
Since Country X is at least as advanced as US / Britain / Germany etc, I have postilated an number of technological advancements earlier than the historic dates. For example having a Type XXI submarine (the electric boat) in service as early as 1939. NB Britain built a small number of R Class hunter / killer submarines in 1917 / 18 which were faster underwater than on the surface - decades ahead of their time. Also having an equivalent to the A4 (V2) rocket operational as early as 1939. Similarly jet aircraft about 3 years early. Whittle was actually looking for people to help develop the jet engine as early as 1930 / 31 but didn't get any help until about 1935. So I have thought it possible that the Whittle jet prototype could have flown in 1938 and an axial jet powered aircraft the same year. This would bring forward the Vampire (De Havilland is not British in this AH, along with a number of other historically British / US and German aircraft companies) to first flight 1940 and operational 1942 / 43. On this basis Country X would design the J29 with first operational use 1946 and through at least 50% ownership of Saab give the design to Sweden. The later Saab aircraft designs would therefore be joint designs in the sense Saab would be jointly owned.
Does this clarify the reasons for my questions Jeru?
I just thought some further explanation might be in order....
In my AH I would like to be able to envisage that Country X buys stakeholdings in SAAB and other Swedish companies in the 1920's and 1930's. Part of this would be associated with support for German companies since country X disagrees with the harsh terms of the Versaillies Treaty. (The US didn't sign the treaty either) Instead of American technicians helping Saab produce the B17 it would be those from X. Instead of US techs leaving when war broke out those of X would stay and increase help.
Here I have to digress a bit...
Since Country X is at least as advanced as US / Britain / Germany etc, I have postilated an number of technological advancements earlier than the historic dates. For example having a Type XXI submarine (the electric boat) in service as early as 1939. NB Britain built a small number of R Class hunter / killer submarines in 1917 / 18 which were faster underwater than on the surface - decades ahead of their time. Also having an equivalent to the A4 (V2) rocket operational as early as 1939. Similarly jet aircraft about 3 years early. Whittle was actually looking for people to help develop the jet engine as early as 1930 / 31 but didn't get any help until about 1935. So I have thought it possible that the Whittle jet prototype could have flown in 1938 and an axial jet powered aircraft the same year. This would bring forward the Vampire (De Havilland is not British in this AH, along with a number of other historically British / US and German aircraft companies) to first flight 1940 and operational 1942 / 43. On this basis Country X would design the J29 with first operational use 1946 and through at least 50% ownership of Saab give the design to Sweden. The later Saab aircraft designs would therefore be joint designs in the sense Saab would be jointly owned.
Does this clarify the reasons for my questions Jeru?
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]I talked breifley to my father-in-law today. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]1) No. There where no sales of Viggen to other countries and Sweden hasn't been at war for nearly 200 years. Rumors of neutrality-watch-missions outflying MIG 21's and 23's and other russian aircraft are legio, but no official reports hereof are available. His lips are sealed.
Just second hand stories and fairytales online. [/FONT] [FONT=Arial, sans-serif]2) Only if You remove the pilot. The trainer version, SK 37, had a dual-cockpit, hence requiring more space for the pilots. That prompted an dropable external fuel tank below the fuselage. This tank was used on the other versions as well.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]3) Se above.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]4) Same as today. That is sales only to 'nice' counties who don't do war.
Actually there where a euroversion fighter offered to several NATO countries. The yanks never allowed any sales though. Some key components in engine and armament where on american licenses, and this was used in the negotioations. The americans, who wanted to sell F16's, stated in no uncertain terms that they would not allow Belgum, Netherlands, Norway and Denmark to buy the J37. Other sales where omitted since american laws prohibited 'advanced' technological components of US origin being transfered to them. The advanced technology where in the India sale case the engine. Though it was ok for India to buy american built DC9's with the same engine...[/FONT][FONT=Arial, sans-serif]5) The americans didn't allow SAAB to sell the J37 to any other countries so...[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]6) He has no idea! And I can't find any measurements of the PS-46/A radar. Some photos a bit down on: http://web.telia.com/~u04201618/SAAB37_Viggen.htm But it's the radar disc who has the largest diameter so he suspects it would be quite easy to engeneer.[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Something nobody has commented on in this thread is the fact why the J37 Viggen was built so large. It is a bit bigger then it had to be. A bit to much engine and so on. The reason for that was partly the nukes. In the original planing for the Viggen project it was envisioned that it would carry small tactical warheads. These was envisioned to be rather heavy, hence a powerful engine and large airframe. This turned out to be unnecessary when Sweden decided to terminate the nuclear program. Thereby being one of few countries who has the technical knowhow and the practical means to build nuclear weapons - and not doing it. Since then Sweden has scraped its weapon plutonium reactor and therby loosing the means. The reasons for this decision where several, but the high cost of the Viggen program was one of them!
[/FONT] [FONT=Arial, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]SAAB AB (limited) was founded 1937. The expressed purpose was to build combat aeroplanes for the Swedish armed forces. Quite soon, 1939, SAAB bought the only real competetor ASJA (they started to build planes in the early 30'ies) thereby concentrating all resourses in one company. In this early stages it is possible that a foreign company with knowhow to share would have been warmly welcomed as shareholders. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Sweden has allways had a lot of connections with Germany. Buisness wise and other. As to why, You just have to cast a quick glance at a map. Quite a few german technicians left Germany for work elsewere after Versiles. The swedish artillery manufacturer Bofors and swedish shipping industries are mentioned as employers and partners with German firms. The did however went back to Germany in the early 30'ies. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]In the cold war era this gets more problematical. In real life SAAB bought and sold back a lot of technology to the US. But the Swedish neutrality policy required a swedish owneded armament industry. Major foreign shareholders might have been difficult. The american involvement in Vietnam was rather impopular in Sweden. On the other hand Sweden cooperated with NATO on several levels, building runways fitted for NATO fighters and so on. Massive exchange of information with NATO intellegence, all known by the Sovjet Union. So on the other hand a long established foreign part ownership in SAAB could just as well have been accepted. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]And finaly my father in law claims that J39 Gripen would be a rather better carrier airplane!
[/FONT]
Yes to 'sorta neutral', no to the war games comment.
Most is not all.
There were a few much less well developed war games with NATO on the opposite side.
And one or two without aid and support of NATO divisions (delaying actions and all that).
But both NATO and the WP knew which side Sweden leaned to.
Oddball
Monthly Donor
Indeed.
Its enough to look at the Swedes deployment of assets. Not particularly many towards the potential hostile Norwegian border...
maybe because WarPaC was expected to start offensive while NATO would be on defense. Doesn't make much sense to make plans to defend yourself agaisnt somebody who plans to stay put.
Yugoslavia was similar, though not same.
Thats interesting! From what I have read the J39 has much hidden talent and great capabilities. I wonder how it would do against MiG29, Su37, F15, F22???? Don't suppose I shall even find out.[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]1) Rumors of neutrality-watch-missions outflying MIG 21's and 23's and other russian aircraft are legio, but no official reports hereof are available. His lips are sealed.
Just thought I'd ask, in hope!
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]2) Only if You remove the pilot. The trainer version, SK 37, had a dual-cockpit, hence requiring more space for the pilots. That prompted an dropable external fuel tank below the fuselage. This tank was used on the other versions as well.[/FONT]
I was looking for F15 range.
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]4) That is sales only to 'nice' counties who don't do war.
US have Sweden 'over a barrel' (as the saying goes)!
I was looking to see whether the Viggen had potential to be an F15 (c3700km range and highly maneuvrable). Other clannard fighters have proven very maneouvrable.
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]This turned out to be unnecessary when Sweden decided to terminate the nuclear program. Thereby being one of few countries who has the technical knowhow and the practical means to build nuclear weapons - and not doing it. Since then Sweden has scraped its weapon plutonium reactor and therby loosing the means. The reasons for this decision where several, but the high cost of the Viggen program was one of them!
Never new Sweden had a nuclear weapons program. Interesting!
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]SAAB AB (limited) was founded 1937. The expressed purpose was to build combat aeroplanes for the Swedish armed forces. Quite soon, 1939, SAAB bought the only real competetor ASJA (they started to build planes in the early 30'ies) thereby concentrating all resourses in one company. In this early stages it is possible that a foreign company with knowhow to share would have been warmly welcomed as shareholders. [/FONT]
Just the timeframe I was thinking of for ownership.
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Quite a few german technicians left Germany for work elsewere after Versiles. [/FONT]
I new about this. I have a small book of the history of Saab company.
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]In the cold war era this gets more problematical. In real life SAAB bought and sold back a lot of technology to the US. But the Swedish neutrality policy required a swedish owneded armament industry. Major foreign shareholders might have been difficult. The american involvement in Vietnam was rather impopular in Sweden. On the other hand Sweden cooperated with NATO on several levels, building runways fitted for NATO fighters and so on. Massive exchange of information with NATO intellegence, all known by the Sovjet Union. So on the other hand a long established foreign part ownership in SAAB could just as well have been accepted. [/FONT]
I was thinking substitute Country X for US as supplier of components, etc. Also 50-50 ownership and deals over technology transfer.
Other questions arise...
How easy would it be to fit thrust reversers to other aircraft (eg F4, F14, F15, F16, F18, etc).
F15 has TO run as intercepter of 275m!
Would F14 with thrust reversers land / TO in similar distances to Viggen?
War issues...
Country X will probably invade southern France in 1944 instead of the Allies. X is not part of the Allied coalition but independent. One possible consequence is fast armoured thrust (best armoured forces in the World) through France and Germany to the Elble before the Russians can attack Berlin. Country X takes the historical Russian sectors in Germany and Austria, also what is now Czech Republic. Perhaps withdrawal c.1957 after Germany rearms.
Affect of this on Swedish policy / friendliness???
[FONT=Arial, sans-serif]And finaly my father in law claims that J39 Gripen would be a rather better carrier airplane!
PC Just realised most comments are in the quote. I have highlighted in bold.
Can you clarify your statement please?
What do you mean by 'lock'? Did you mean that the Viggen radar could lock-on to an SR-71? Even if it could, would the air-to-air weapons available for the Viggen be able to intercept the SR71?
Just like that and I have no idea if the robots could hit. It was never tested in real life for obvious reasons. Or so the rumors say.
I think a POD that big and that early would change the Swedish arms industry. Not only due to butterflies but also due to the fact that the world wars has a lot of influence on the Swedish arms industry.
Can you expand upon your comments? Any thoughts on the extent of the changes you think might occur would be welcome.
I'm jumpimg ahead in my thoughts here, to include Finland and Norway...
I'll explain later, but in the meanwhile...
Does anyone have maps of the alignment of the rest of the Nordlandsbanen to Kirkenes that the Germans eventually hoped to build? I know it goes as far as Bodo now.
Also any map of the Kirkenes-Bjørnevatn Line?
Also any map of the proposed Kirkenes-Rovaniemi railway?
I'm thinking that Country X would join all the other countries condemning Russian invasion of Finland (Winter War) and gathers a large naval and amphibious force on Iceland (part of it's territory) for possible intervention. Norway and Sweden said no to Allied requests to transit their countries. No intervention, but forces remain in Iceland. When Germany invades Norway, Country X could land forces in place of / or just after Narvik recaptured then abandoned by Allies. Country X would then occupy northern Norway for the rest of WWII and start building the northern section of railway to Kirkenes.
I'm assuming Germany would baulk at declaring war on Country X. There's so much more to explain.... Go to pre-1900 for disease in Africa for more of early Country X history outline. Nazi Germany views Country X as fellow Aryans and the origin of their race so very reluctant to antagonise X. X uses this to their anvantage.
This is just an outline thought at present.
I'll explain later, but in the meanwhile...
Does anyone have maps of the alignment of the rest of the Nordlandsbanen to Kirkenes that the Germans eventually hoped to build? I know it goes as far as Bodo now.
Also any map of the Kirkenes-Bjørnevatn Line?
Also any map of the proposed Kirkenes-Rovaniemi railway?
I'm thinking that Country X would join all the other countries condemning Russian invasion of Finland (Winter War) and gathers a large naval and amphibious force on Iceland (part of it's territory) for possible intervention. Norway and Sweden said no to Allied requests to transit their countries. No intervention, but forces remain in Iceland. When Germany invades Norway, Country X could land forces in place of / or just after Narvik recaptured then abandoned by Allies. Country X would then occupy northern Norway for the rest of WWII and start building the northern section of railway to Kirkenes.
I'm assuming Germany would baulk at declaring war on Country X. There's so much more to explain.... Go to pre-1900 for disease in Africa for more of early Country X history outline. Nazi Germany views Country X as fellow Aryans and the origin of their race so very reluctant to antagonise X. X uses this to their anvantage.
This is just an outline thought at present.
Sweden was unprepared for WWII and started rearming to late. They had a lot of problems. Not only did the other countries prioritise their own militaries making Sweden buy from Italy, the Brittish acctually intercepted four destroyers that lead to something of a crisis (interesting POD).
That made politicians and militaries realise the need for a domestic arms industry to avoid standing without arms again.
Then came the plans for a Swedish nucklear weapon. It caused a lot of debate but both a anti-nuklear opinion (mostly social democratic women) and worries about the costs lead to a scrapping of that plan and a desition to prioritise the airforce for the money.
That made politicians and militaries realise the need for a domestic arms industry to avoid standing without arms again.
Then came the plans for a Swedish nucklear weapon. It caused a lot of debate but both a anti-nuklear opinion (mostly social democratic women) and worries about the costs lead to a scrapping of that plan and a desition to prioritise the airforce for the money.
Just found interesting references on the web relevant to the thread...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_neutrality
see section on Cold War and secret US / Swedish co-operation.
Could substitute Country X here and for help with Viggen.
http://www.histdoc.net/history/nordic1938_en.html
League of Nations concerning neutrality.
Thinking about whether X would just support or sign. Latter unlikely because no intention of foreclosing options of armed activity / intervention.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_neutrality
see section on Cold War and secret US / Swedish co-operation.
Could substitute Country X here and for help with Viggen.
http://www.histdoc.net/history/nordic1938_en.html
League of Nations concerning neutrality.
Thinking about whether X would just support or sign. Latter unlikely because no intention of foreclosing options of armed activity / intervention.
Nuclear - see Jeru post 24.
I planned Country X substitute for Italy for not only supplying bought arms but also donation of free arms.