DCS: AJS-37 Viggen Discussion

[Silver_Dragon]

I'll try to dig out old slides from my fathers archives that might give us some details regarding this. I kept some presentations he had, but I haven't got the time to go through it all yet.

He served at K3, then Milostab V and later UNDS, so there are some gold to be found among all the papers, slides and films :)

 

 

Not bad update the "invasion" force from the pic with a 80s-90s period vessels (typical 86-87 WW3 scenery on NATO-PacVar central front). I go to check "Harpoon" wargame to fit the forces of Soviet Baltic Fleet and update the fleet.

[Fredo_69]

I think that pic would be quite relevant into the 1980-ies if you only delete the Sverdlov and replaces the Mirkas with Grisja/Parchim and the Kotlins with Krivaks.

[Silver_Dragon]

Review "High Tyde" Harpoon Suplement, on a 87 scenery.

 

The composition have small changes.

Soviet Baltic Fleet:

- Project 68bis Sverdlov Class Cruiser Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya. (decom 16.09)

- Project 1134 Berkut [Kresta I] Class Guided Missile Cruiser Admiral Zozulya (decom 5.07)

- Project 56EM [Kildin] Class Destroyer, 2 units.

- Project 61 [Kashin] Class Large Anti-Submarine Ships, 2 units.

- Project 956 Sarych [sovremenny] Class Destroyer, 1 Unit

- Project 1159 [Koni I] Class Guard Ship, 4 Units

- Project 12417 [Tarantul] Class missile ship, 6 Units

- Project 266M Akvamarin [Natya] Class Minesweeper, 4 Units

 

1x Sovremenny added as rear antisubmarine guard ship

 

Landing Force:

- Project 773 [Polnocny-C] Class Medium landing ships, 2 Units

- Project 771 [Polnocny-B] Class Medium landing ships, 3 Units

- Project 775 [Ropucha] Class Large landing ships, 5 Units

- Project 1171 Tapir [Alligator] Class, 2 Units

 

The Landing force has been reduce for better transport capability (2x Polnocny vs 1xRopucha)

 

Not add submarines or other escort forces

Edited August 9, 2016 by Silver_Dragon

[Farks]

The invasion fleet in that picture consists of 36 ships total. E1 during this period consisted of 12 squadrons, if I'm not mistaken. Even if you take into account potential losses before they'd even left the ground (sabotage, assasinations, commando raids, etc) and aircrafts lost to enemy air defence before they could get their missiles off, you still have more than enough of the force left to completely devestate that fleet. And after that they'd still have the navy and coastal artillery to get through.

 

The soviets would most certainly have had their work cut out for them if they had decided to cross the Baltic Sea.

[renhanxue]

Review "High Tyde" Harpoon Suplement, on a 87 scenery.

 

The composition have small changes.

Soviet Baltic Fleet:

- Project 68bis Sverdlov Class Cruiser Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya. (decom 16.09)

- Project 1134 Berkut [Kresta I] Class Guided Missile Cruiser Admiral Zozulya (decom 5.07)

- Project 56EM [Kildin] Class Destroyer, 2 units.

- Project 61 [Kashin] Class Large Anti-Submarine Ships, 2 units.

- Project 956 Sarych [sovremenny] Class Destroyer, 1 Unit

- Project 1159 [Koni I] Class Guard Ship, 4 Units

- Project 12417 [Tarantul] Class missile ship, 6 Units

- Project 266M Akvamarin [Natya] Class Minesweeper, 4 Units

 

1x Sovremenny added as rear antisubmarine guard ship

 

Landing Force:

- Project 773 [Polnocny-C] Class Medium landing ships, 2 Units

- Project 771 [Polnocny-B] Class Medium landing ships, 3 Units

- Project 775 [Ropucha] Class Large landing ships, 5 Units

- Project 1171 Tapir [Alligator] Class, 2 Units

 

The Landing force has been reduce for better transport capability (2x Polnocny vs 1xRopucha)

 

Not add submarines or other escort forces

That looks really low, and furthermore you also have to consider the Polish and East German forces.

 

An excellent summary of Warsaw Pact forces available in the Baltic in the late 80's in Swedish is available here - it's too long to translate, but I'll sum up a few interesting tidbits:

 

Landing craft (lifts two reinforced naval infantry brigades, or equivalent)

 

Soviet Baltic fleet

2 ALLIGATOR - 1 naval infantry battalion (reduced)

7 POLNOCNY - 1 NI coy

9 ROPUCHA I/II - ½ NI bn

2 POMORNIK - 1 NI coy

14 AIST - 1 NI plt (reinforced)

2 PELIKAN - 1 NI plt (reinforced)

9 GUS - 1/2 NI plt (reinforced)

~30 smaller landing craft/boats, various types - ½ to 1 NI plt

 

Polish navy

23 POLNOCNY - 1 NI coy

~18 smaller boats/craft - 1 NI plt

 

East German navy

12 FROSCH - 2 NI coy

 

Civilian shipping

~20 Ro-Ro ships = 1 reduced motorized rifle division or equivalent (roughly 1-2 battalions per ship)

Other civilian/commercial shipping: 5-6 motorized rifle division or equivalent (roughly ½-2 battalions per ship)

 

 

Naval forces

Soviet Baltic fleet

 

Forward escorts:

 

Destroyers

1 SOVREMENNYY

1 KASHIN II

1 KILDIN MOD

 

Corvettes

10 TARANTUL I-III

10 NANUCHKA I & III

 

Missile boats

10 MATKA

20 OSA I & II

 

Torpedo boats

8 TURYA

 

Minesweepers

4 NATCHA

10 YURKA

20 SONYA

15 VANYA

 

 

 

Close-in escorts:

 

Cruisers (C&C, support)

1 KYNDA

 

Destroyers (AA, anti-submarine)

1 KASHIN I

3 KOTLIN SAM

 

Frigates (anti-submarine, AA)

8 KRIVAK I & II

9 MIRKA

 

Corvettes (anti-submarines)

6 GRISHA

12 PARCHIM II

7 PAUK

16 POTI

 

Minesweepers

20 YEVGENYA

 

 

 

Artillery support division:

 

Cruisers

1 SVERDLOV

 

Destroyers

2 SKORY

 

Frigates

2 RIGA

 

 

 

Polish navy

Forward escorts:

 

Destroyers

1 KASHIN II

 

Corvettes

4 TARANTUL

 

Missile boats

12 OSA I

 

Torpedo boats

11 PILICA

 

Minesweepers

6 T-43

25 KROGULEC

 

 

East German navy

Forward escorts

 

Corvettes

5 TARANTUL

 

Missile boats

12 OSA I

 

Torpedo boats

6 SHERSHEN

20 LIBELLE

 

 

Close-in escorts (anti-submarine):

 

Frigates

3 KONI

 

Corvettes

12 PARCHIM I

 

Minesweepers

21 KONDOR

Or, about 25-30 years earlier:

 

1961 total:

6 cruisers

2 missile destroyers

29 destroyers

8 frigates

86 submarines

80 sub hunters

170 torpedo boats/gun boats

60 larger minesweepers

80 smaller minesweepers

 

 

Of course, you can't exactly assume that all of these would be concentrated against Sweden...

Edited August 9, 2016 by renhanxue

[CoBlue]

The invasion fleet in that picture consists of 36 ships total. E1 during this period consisted of 12 squadrons, if I'm not mistaken. Even if you take into account potential losses before they'd even left the ground (sabotage, assasinations, commando raids, etc) and aircrafts lost to enemy air defence before they could get their missiles off, you still have more than enough of the force left to completely devestate that fleet. And after that they'd still have the navy and coastal artillery to get through.The soviets would most certainly have had their work cut out for them if they had decided to cross the Baltic Sea.

And 800 000 Swedes could be mobilized in 3 days to greet the remaining force of 5000 highly trained USSR marines.

No something is wrong with that picture, since Sweden counted on holding of an invasion for 3-4 days until defeated! No way USSR would do this kind of stupid suicide attack with only 5000 men.

[Farks]

And 800 000 Swedes could be mobilized in 3 days to greet the remaining force of 5000 highly trained USSR marines.

No something is wrong with that picture, since Sweden counted on holding of an invasion for 3-4 days until defeated! No way USSR would do this kind of stupid suicide attack with only 5000 men.

 

Those marines job would be to sieze a bridgehead so the main force (a few motorized regiments at least) could be shipped over safely, not face the entire swedish army on their own.

 

And 3-4 days doesn't sound realistic, even in a worst case scenario. I'm no expert on logistics and troop movement, but shipping over the necessary reinforcements to starting advancing inland from the bridgehead(s) would likely take a few days at a minimum. Looking at other seaborne invasions, it has typically taken the attacker weeks to start really pushing out of the bridgehead.

[Skjold]

AFAIK full mobilisation of cold war reserves and national guard of the Swedish Army was planned for 2-4 weeks. You would also have the army spread out all over the country. You'd probably look at a force in the tens of thousands to greet the Russian marines. Depending where they land, this may or may not include heavy equipment.

[BravoYankee4]

Don't forget about VDV. One of the main targets for the Swedish ranger battalions was to meet the airborne assaults. I have some figures somewhere about how many IL-76's that where available, the time to fly from Soviet to mid Sweden, how many troops that could be lifted per pass and so on.

 

As a AJ(S) Viggen pilot I wouldn't mind attacking an IL-76 or two ;)

[mattebubben]

And 800 000 Swedes could be mobilized in 3 days to greet the remaining force of 5000 highly trained USSR marines.

No something is wrong with that picture, since Sweden counted on holding of an invasion for 3-4 days until defeated! No way USSR would do this kind of stupid suicide attack with only 5000 men.

 

Sweden counted on holding for much more then 3-4 days during that time period.

(Weeks and Months not days)

 

3-4 days is a more modern estimate with the state our military has been in for the last few years.

 

Its not the estimate for the cold war when the Swedish armed forces was at its largest.

 

During the cold war Sweden would have been able to hold out for a much longer time (and perhaps even being able to repulse a possible naval invasion outright).

 

But in a modern scenario (today) Sweden would not have Hundreds of thousands of soldiers available to fight of a possible invasion.

 

Today we would most likely not have more then 50,000 or probably significantly less if the attack was a surprise.

(without a month or more to try to prepare the defenses)

 

Thats why todays scenario would be no more then 3-4 days since our military is alot smaller while and possible invasion would not be that much smaller then it would have been during the cold war.

(and our airforce is also smaller and less ready today then it was during the cold war as well as the coastal defenses being more or less completely gone).

 

But then again its pretty much the same with most of West European nations our Militaries almost vanished after the cold war.

Edited August 10, 2016 by mattebubben

[Silver_Dragon]

Normaly East German Forces and Polish Forces dont enter into doctrinal invasion vs Sweden. The main target for that naval forces has invade Denmark and control the Denmark straights to get a free passage vs Baltic / Polish / East German fleets and decimate the AFNORTH group of forces.

 

for example, typical naval invasion force on North Germany / Denmark by PacVar was a East German Motorized Schützenregiment + 7 Polish Naval Assault Division + 36 Soviet Guard Naval Infantry Brigade with support of the 6 Polish Airborne Brigade. A Speznad Battalion can raid Copenhagen to support of 7 Polish assault. 6 Polish can capture Borhorn Island.

 

Typical doctrinal plan maps

 

Document about cold war show Sweden fortress.

[ame]http://coldwarsites.net/wp-content/files_mf/travel_giude_www39.pdf[/ame]

 

Website about Scandinavian fortress

http://www.fortress-scandinavia.dk/

Edited August 10, 2016 by Silver_Dragon

[Farks]

Correct, but as those maps show occupying southern Sweden was a potential part of those plans.

[Volator]

Correct, but as those maps show occupying southern Sweden was a potential part of those plans.

 

I'm wondering why the Soviet Union / the Warsaw Pact would have been interested in attacking neutral Sweden in a major clash with NATO. Did they assume Sweden would give up neutrality and fight alongside NATO in a major conflict? Or were they afraid NATO might force Sweden to provide bases to interrupt Warsaw Pact fleet movements in the Baltic Sea? Or was it just a consideration of "Well, while we are at it, let's also conquer this little rest of free Europe"?

 

Surely the main thrust or main focus of a Warsaw Pact attack would always have been West Germany, BeNeLux and France/GB, and also Norway to win the contest for the North Sea/Atlantic/Arctic, so why deal with neutral Sweden and waste forces and resources if they (Sweden) remained quiet and possibly did not take sides?

 

Was it a - in my eyes totally understandable - common sense in Sweden to fight alongside NATO if the Soviets tried to take over NATO Europe?

[Farks]

I'm wondering why the Soviet Union / the Warsaw Pact would have been interested in attacking neutral Sweden in a major clash with NATO. Did they assume Sweden would give up neutrality and fight alongside NATO in a major conflict? Or were they afraid NATO might force Sweden to provide bases to interrupt Warsaw Pact fleet movements in the Baltic Sea? Or was it just a consideration of "Well, while we are at it, let's also conquer this little rest of free Europe"?

 

Surely the main thrust or main focus of a Warsaw Pact attack would always have been West Germany, BeNeLux and France/GB, and also Norway to win the contest for the North Sea/Atlantic/Arctic, so why deal with neutral Sweden and waste forces and resources if they (Sweden) remained quiet and possibly did not take sides?

 

Was it a - in my eyes totally understandable - common sense in Sweden to fight alongside NATO if the Soviets tried to take over NATO Europe?

 

The WP would have a few main reasons. One would be occupying southern Sweden (as seen above) as a part of securing the Öresund straits, another would be to open a second front towards Norway and the NATO forces in that region (either going through northern Finland and Sweden or cutting through central Sweden), and yet another would be to move forward their air defense. Denying NATO the use of swedish territory would problary be a reason as well, seeing how the soviets apperently didn't trust swedish neutrality.

 

 

There are people more knowledgeable about the WP's war plans and strategic thinking than me, but that's the gist of it as far as I know.

[renhanxue]

AFAIK full mobilisation of cold war reserves and national guard of the Swedish Army was planned for 2-4 weeks. You would also have the army spread out all over the country. You'd probably look at a force in the tens of thousands to greet the Russian marines. Depending where they land, this may or may not include heavy equipment.

Nah. Field army brigades had target mobilization times of 36-48 hours for most of the formation, with some of the more unwieldy parts (logistics and maintenance companies, field engineers and such things that needed to get a hold of a lot of civilian equipment like trucks, earth movers and the like) going up to 72 hours. Usually one battalion plus some support elements (AA, artillery) was earmarked for quick mobilization (within 24 hours). The formations that had longer mobilization times than 72 hours were mostly higher level (division or milo level) support and logistics ones - I think the longest mobilization time I've seen was 144 hours (6 days). Local defense formations that defended things like ports, airports, bridges and other infrastructure using the fixed fortifications in place had - on paper - 12 hour mobilization times, but since almost all of the personnel were locals, they usually mobilized within 6 hours or even faster on exercises. The national guard (hemvärnet) usually mobilized more or less instantly since they had their equipment at home.

 

For the air force, readiness was high even before the mobilization order was given. In the 60's, the lowest level above peacetime readiness, "lystring" meant that a quarter of the air force formations should be ready for takeoff within two hours, dispersion to wartime bases should be possible to start within 6 hours and the squadrons should be fully manned within 12 hours. The next step, "givakt" (probably familiar to you if you've read Operation Garbo) meant that most of the air force would disperse to wartime bases with a quarter of the aircraft at highest readiness (ready for takeoff within minutes) and the rest in one hour readiness. All of this was done without mobilization, using only the conscripts that were doing their service at the time. (See Med invasionen i sikte, p 32.)

 

It is, at least for me, difficult to grasp just how enormous the mobilization plans were. I've seen documents in the joint headquarters (försvarsstaben) archives that are just endless lists of mobilization bus routes for each county. In the event of mobilization, the civilian administration in each county (länsstyrelser) was responsible for stopping almost all regular bus traffic and rerouting it just in order to get the military personnel to where they were going. All of this was pre-planned with stops and timetables and everything. Similar plans existed for the national railroads.

 

See here for some more discussion about mobilization and readiness etc.

Edited August 10, 2016 by renhanxue

[El Hadji]

Speaking of doctrines, if we look at how the Soviets had started to organize "front group HQ's" in the late 1970's to lead and conduct operations within separated sectors - TVD's (Teatr Voennich Dejstvij or Theatre of Military Operations). Each HQ could carry out operations within their TVD's. Europe was divided into three TVD's: TVD South West, TVD West and TVD North West. What makes this doctrine interesting from a Swedish perspective is that Sweden is located in two of these TVD's (North West and West):

 

 

This meant that Sweden would be subject to attacks by units from two TVD's in the event of war. Eventhough the main assault would come against NATO countries, Sweden could not have avoided being dragged into a conflict in Europe based on this doctrine.

[QuiGon]

Speaking of doctrines, if we look at how the Soviets had started to organize "front group HQ's" in the late 1970's to lead and conduct operations within separated sectors - TVD's (Teatr Voennich Dejstvij or Theatre of Military Operations). Each HQ could carry out operations within their TVD's. Europe was divided into three TVD's: TVD South West, TVD West and TVD North West. What makes this doctrine interesting from a Swedish perspective is that Sweden is located in two of these TVD's (North West and West):

 

This meant that Sweden would be subject to attacks by units from two TVD's in the event of war. Eventhough the main assault would come against NATO countries, Sweden could not have avoided being dragged into a conflict in Europe based on this doctrine.

 

That's some odd logic. Just because Sweden is geographically located in two TVDs doesn't mean it would automatically be drawn into the war. That would then also apply to Austria and Switzerland.

[MBot]

On the subject of the Soviet Twice Red Banner Baltic Fleet, here is a little overview I put together some time ago. All data is from http://www.ww2.dk.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not included are ships under construction, refit, trials, exercise or visit in the Baltic (which were therfore not assigned to the Baltic Fleet). Also missing are minesweepers and auxillaries.

 

Baltiysk also was home to a large fleet of amphibious assault hovercraft, including several units of the potent Aist class.

 

In addition there were additional Soviet small coastal defense, ASW and missile craft in Leningrad, Swinoujscie (Poland) and Sassnitz (East Germany).

 

In wartime, the units of the East German and Polish navies would also come under control of the Soviet Baltic Fleet.

[QuiGon]

*snip*

 

Thanks man, that's really helpful (for CMANO)! :D

 

PS: And thanks Skjold for your Sweden/Viggen-scenarios :)

[Skjold]

That is really fascinating, renhanxue. Thanks for the insight.

 

PS: And thanks Skjold for your Sweden/Viggen-scenarios :)

 

Thanks, glad people enjoy them.

[Jaktaz]

Normaly East German Forces and Polish Forces dont enter into doctrinal invasion vs Sweden. The main target for that naval forces has invade Denmark and control the Denmark straights to get a free passage vs Baltic / Polish / East German fleets and decimate the AFNORTH group of forces.

 

for example, typical naval invasion force on North Germany / Denmark by PacVar was a East German Motorized Schützenregiment + 7 Polish Naval Assault Division + 36 Soviet Guard Naval Infantry Brigade with support of the 6 Polish Airborne Brigade. A Speznad Battalion can raid Copenhagen to support of 7 Polish assault. 6 Polish can capture Borhorn Island.

 

Typical doctrinal plan maps

 

Document about cold war show Sweden fortress.

http://coldwarsites.net/wp-content/files_mf/travel_giude_www39.pdf

 

Website about Scandinavian fortress

http://www.fortress-scandinavia.dk/

 

Where do you find this kind of documentation

[Silver_Dragon]

Where do you find this kind of documentation

 

Sorry by the OT, but check here:

http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/collection/89/warsaw-pact-military-planning

 

http://digitalarchive.wilsoncenter.org/collection/88/warsaw-pact

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Days_to_the_River_Rhine

Edited August 11, 2016 by Silver_Dragon

[renhanxue]

I'm back from vacation!

 

[microvax]

I'm back from vacation!

 

 

Nice that you are getting out all those formerly classified manuals, I really wished I was fluent in swedish. :D

 

Any luck yet finding infor about BK90 employment ? :D

[renhanxue]

Any luck yet finding infor about BK90 employment ? :D

Nope, this manual has a heading for it but it just says "information will be published later". I'm still hoping for a pack of errata pages to pop out of the declassification process though.