Whiskey on the Rocks, The Soviet-Swedish War of 1981

Interesting update but a minor error again HMS Halland belonged to the Halland class (with no SAM)
HMS Halland was able to return port, but thats about it. One of the two AS-6 kingfidher missiles, failed to go off. Only the Ostergotland had SAMs, and they were fired at the AS-6.
 
HMS Halland was able to return port, but thats about it. One of the two AS-6 kingfidher missiles, failed to go off. Only the Ostergotland had SAMs, and they were fired at the AS-6.

You wrote that 4 Östergötland class DD were part of the battle and that only HMS Halland survived its not mentioned before so you should have mentioned it separately or choose another survivor.
 
I could see it being restarted after this. Swedish neutrality is effectively tossed out the airlock after this.

Also, hoping to see the J35 (my favorite plane) get a few kills.
 
If Sweden still wishes to be neutral, then they develop their own nukes. Even if they join NATO, the swedes will probably not be content to just have other people's nukes on their territory, the would want their own non-dual key nuclear weapons.
 
If Sweden still wishes to be neutral, then they develop their own nukes. Even if they join NATO, the swedes will probably not be content to just have other people's nukes on their territory, the would want their own non-dual key nuclear weapons.

Do you think the Americans and especialy the Reagan administration would try to use a much more polite version of super-power dick-waving to 'persuade' the Swedish from the folly idea of having national nukes after this 'little' crisis is over? Which will backfire horribly on the West if they do so.

The one thing that both the US and USSR do not want, period, is more countries -ones who were not part of the WW2 Allies- with nukes and the systems to deliver them..nukes that can make a country with a miniscule population into a super-power over night.
 
sounds like you've been playing Harpoon. I have 1 or 2 issues with Harpoon it seems to credit the Soviets far far too strongly-their electronic systems were -to put it mildly- rather poor, so maybe hammer them a bit more than you have-not saying it'd be a turkey shoot.
 
sounds like you've been playing Harpoon. I have 1 or 2 issues with Harpoon it seems to credit the Soviets far far too strongly-their electronic systems were -to put it mildly- rather poor, so maybe hammer them a bit more than you have-not saying it'd be a turkey shoot.
The Swedish have a problem that NATO wouldn't, they lack ocean going vessals that have modern SAMs. And lack of Electronic counters, also hurt the Swedish chances.
 
The Falklands experience was that 1 or 2 hits were quite capable of utterly crippling frigates, not due to weight of explosives or structural damages, but rather fires. This was mostly due to poor choice of materials (plastics) and running far too many wires through the few natural conduits available, causing single points of failures for all kinds of stuff.

If the swedes have similar problems and given their extensive (but quite off the record) contacts to various NATO militaries, will the brits have time to do sometihng about it before Falklands - assuming that's not butterflied away.
 
After the raid by Tu-16s, the Swedish changed their ROE once again. Every Soviet ship and airplane in the Baltic was now a target for the Swedish air force and the submarines of the navy. They were pissed off, is the only word that comes to mind. The Swedish booted the whole Soviet diplomatic mission to Sweden out of their nation. They declared the Soviet ambassador a persona non grata. Then they recall their staff and ambassador from the Soviet Union. The Soviets soon after declared the Swedish ambassador a persona non grata.

For the rest of the night and in to the next morning there was only a few small dog fights between the Swedish and Soviet Air Force. For the first time since the end of the World War 2, all passenger traffic on and over the Baltic sea came to a stop.

That chance at 0437, when the Swedish submarine HMS Nacken started its famous war patrol, when it sunk the B-103. This was the first victory for the Nacken, but by no means the last.

Mean time at the UN headquarters in New York City, the Soviet Ambassador there delivered a message to the Swedish Ambassador. To this day, we do not know what this message said, but the Swedish Ambassador, has been reported by more than one person to tell the Soviet Ambassador to go to hell with that message. But the general believe is the Soviet message, said the Swedish government would pay for all the damage cause so far to the Soviet military as well of given other measures that would help the Soviets.

At the same time this was going on, President Reagan order the air force to get ready to perform an Operation Nickel Grass operation to resupply the Swedish incase this when on for any length of time. Reagan didn't want to see the Swedish fold to Soviet pressure. Reagan also ordered the CIA to help out any way possible, short of getting the US in the middle of this pissing match.

The 28 for most part was a low in the action. Mostly it was dog fighting between the Swedish and Soviet Air Force. There was also the naval side, HMS Nacken sank a Whiskey class submarine in the early afternoon. But this low, would only last the day, on the 29 the war would chance.
 
Last edited:
Any ground engagements?

I wonder how the Strv 103 would far against T-72 and T-81s? Would the insistence to sacrifice a moveable turret for an incredibly low profile and possibly increased crew protection be worth it?
 
Awesome stuff! Reminds me of an idea MacCaulay mentioned to me months ago involving a Soviet invasion of Finland around the same time period.
 
Do you think the Americans and especialy the Reagan administration would try to use a much more polite version of super-power dick-waving to 'persuade' the Swedish from the folly idea of having national nukes after this 'little' crisis is over? Which will backfire horribly on the West if they do so.

The one thing that both the US and USSR do not want, period, is more countries -ones who were not part of the WW2 Allies- with nukes and the systems to deliver them..nukes that can make a country with a miniscule population into a super-power over night.

The US let the Israelis develop their own nukes. The Soviets HELPED the PRC get nukes. (Well for a time, until the Sino Soviet split) Neither power did anything when India developed nukes. IF the Swedes develop their own nukes after this crisis, and the US starts dick waving (especially if the dick waving is very public) it would be a PR disaster, and would make it even more likely they develop nukes, which is in a way another PR disaster for the west. The Swedish government has every right to develop their own nukes, especially after this. And it makes no sense from a strategic standpoint. IF the Swedes have nukes then more warheads can be thrown at the soviet union, from an even closer point to the soviet union. Nato would literally have a nuclear wall from the baltic to Turkey.
 
Nuclear fires over the Baltic will be a bad thing, no matter who starts it.

Hope the US has the good sense not to get involved beyond supporting Sweden.
 
Nuclear fires over the Baltic will be a bad thing, no matter who starts it.

Hope the US has the good sense not to get involved beyond supporting Sweden.
The title said Whiskey on the Rocks, the Soviet-Swedish War of 1981. No other nations will be fighting in this war.
 
Top