This documentary deserves more views. I was surprised to learn that Sweden even had a nuclear bomb.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Thank you, it was a long and hard effort to research the information and verify each point made. To date, I believe that this is the most detailed assessment available online -- I believe that a better accounting of this history would be good for the country as well as the rest of the world. There are a lot of lessons to be learned from this.

@MATTETRUEFACT

Жыл бұрын

@@HistoricWings Yes..A Swedish Tiger is always best:) And Swedes are good at keeping secrets:)

@skunkjobb

9 ай бұрын

We didn't. That's because we didn't. We had plutonium for one, maybe two weapon cores, did research on explosive compression and was pretty close to completion but no bomb was ever completed.

@somefuckstolemynick

7 ай бұрын

@@skunkjobballegedly. You really think they been completely open to the public?

As a swede, this is mindblowing. As far as I can see, you got the details right. Been doing some resarch on this, and with this additional new information, it all fits. Thank you!

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Glad it was helpful! A lot of research went into these two videos.

Thank you for making this miniseries, the research you have made impressed me! I knew we had a nuclear program which had been canceled, but had no idea about these details. I wonder if our government pursued other types of WMDs back then also.

@HistoricWings

10 ай бұрын

I have not researched anything about Sweden's other programs and don't know if they had chemical or biological research or programs ongoing.

Very interesting and well presented.

@HistoricWings

3 жыл бұрын

Many thanks! Glad you enjoyed it!

You did forget about Marviken. A "special" natural uranium reactor that is basically intended for making Pu, and lots of it. It was never loaded and is dismantled today.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for pointing this out -- there are many aspects of this story that are yet to come to light. Running a nuclear weapons program is a very big challenge and the resources required were extensive.

@matsv201

Жыл бұрын

As far as i know it was never loaded. And it was really only dismantled a few years a go. Its strange how R3 and R4 was dissmantled so sudenly just a few years ago.. almost like there is something they trying to hide

@kjelllindberg6987

Жыл бұрын

@@matsv201 Your first two sentences were proof of your lacking reading skills...

@matsv201

Жыл бұрын

@@kjelllindberg6987 it's really not

The large-scale plutonium reprocessing plant planned was never built, so even though Ågesta could deliver reasonable amounts of plutonium to the small FOA reprocessing plant from 1964 on, there never was enough plutonium to make more than a few bombs. Marviken was the plant that really could deliver - but it was closed before becoming operational. These videos are interesting but they make it look like Sweden had tons of plutonium and lots of bombs built already in the ‘50s. The final tests of plutonium compression weren’t nuclear detonations, as it’s made out to sound like here.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for these comments. I will stand by the research on the published amounts of plutonium produced based on Sweden's IAEA reports and the Government of the UK. There is no doubt that Sweden was working toward producing large numbers of nuclear warheads -- ultimately it did not for the reasons outlined in the video.

Cool documentary, but there seems to be a fair few inaccuracies. First off, the Lansen was designed to carry nuclear weapons and you don't seem to mention the A36, a supersonic bomber that was in development for the bespoke purpose of dropping nuclear weapons. Also, ordering 300 Viggens wasn't an "expansion" of the airforce triggered by the six day war. The Viggen was going to be ordered in a fighter configuration from the start as it was, like the Gripen, intended to be an aircraft that would equip the whole airforce. Sweden was at this time SHRINGKING its airforce, from the fourth biggest in the world (some 1'600 in the 50's) to just a few hundred planes.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for your well-considered note. Please review more closely and you will find the discussion about the A36 is included in the first of the two videos in this series. It belongs there as it was an earlier development in the timeline. I concur that Sweden's air force was shrinking at the time, but actually increasing in capabilities given the advances made with the Viggen -- and my records show that the decision to buy more, rather than less Viggens at the time was influenced by the Six Day War. I will double check other sources and evaluate that. Thank you for pointing it out. As a final note, the numbers of aircraft in service were less important than their individual capabilities. Older Swedish aircraft like the Tunnan and Lansen were no match for the threat "from the East" being faced at the time.

@jakobholgersson4400

Жыл бұрын

@@HistoricWings From what I've read, Viggen was developed for the same reason the Gripen later was: it was unfeasible for Sweden to have multiple types of aircraft. I've read that when Viggen went into development, plans were to make as many as 800.

@matsv201

Жыл бұрын

​@@jakobholgersson4400ironically viggen, draken and gripen all flew for the airforce simulatanius... granted, that was for a very short while. With that. Allt the Lansen , tunnan and F21R was retired. Granted, that might also partially by for saftey reason.

@jakobholgersson4400

Жыл бұрын

@@matsv201 Yes, Sweden constantly cheaped out. The Viggen was supposed to replace all aircraft in equal numbers. I believe the plan was to order close to 700 Viggens. Then 400+ Gripens.

Double speak was the first language of Palme for sure...

Regarding Sweden using tactical nukes: kzread.info/dash/bejne/a2SrxbKsqNWaeJc.html In service since 1967 the self propelled howitzer Bandkanon1 could "in theory" fire nuclear shells. They were stationed in the far north at the Boden Garrison, where the bulk of the Soviet invasion forces would have to pass through in an invasion coming through Finland. Perhaps this was the reason why the Soviets built up such a big capacity of airdrops and naval landings, to avoid the Boden Garrison all together...

@HistoricWings

3 жыл бұрын

Very good point -- the original design of the Swedish Bomb was based on US drawings and plans for the American nuclear artillery shell.

@matsv201

Жыл бұрын

@@HistoricWings Its suspiciously many instances where Sweden develop something right into the finish line and stop develop just weeks before its finished.. almost... like it was a lie.

@johanmetreus1268

Жыл бұрын

"Bandkanon1 could "in theory" fire nuclear shells." So could any of the 15.5 cm pieces in the Swedish army. Bkan 1 would be a very strange choice though, with a rate of fire of 14 rounds (15 if chamber preloaded) in under 45 seconds.

@johanmetreus1268

Жыл бұрын

@@matsv201 "Its suspiciously many instances where Sweden develop something right into the finish line " Like?

@oddjonsson2815

Жыл бұрын

​@@johanmetreus1268as I understand in Bkan1C was the model that was genuinely purposed to fire tactical nukes, unclear if it would have been very efficient at that role. The point of the high rate of fire was in order to avoid counter-battery fire, not necessarily a requisite for a nuclear role. You can see it's legacy in the Archer artillery system. Fire fast and get the hell out is the best way to stay alive as an artillery crew.

You missed one possible reason for the small nuclear tests that Sweden did. And that where for the S program to find out how to handle a nuclear attack.

@HistoricWings

2 жыл бұрын

That's a valid point, though the amount of plutonium the country was stockpiling points to a very clear focus on offensive use, rather than for civil defense. As noted, the S Program was supposed to have been defensive in nature, but it ended up actually being focused on both offensive and defensive nuclear preparedness.

@nubbetudde8922

2 жыл бұрын

@@HistoricWings I believe the answer is A+B+Cf where C stands for curiosity.

Thanks!!

@HistoricWings

2 жыл бұрын

No problem! I'm glad you liked the video!

@sibbebladh8661

2 жыл бұрын

@@HistoricWings very informativa,, i didnt know this! Excellent video!!

Its interesting that everybody talks about plutonium. It is much easier to produce an uranium bomb. USAs first bomb, the one that hit Hiroshima, was a uranium bomb. The second one, however, was a plutonium bomb. Both worked.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Yes, however, plutonium has greater blast potential.

part II, To call it a "basement" is to belittle it, if that's your intention you've succeeded. It's called Reaktorhallen = Reactor-Hall, and it is 25 meter below ground at the "KTH" Royal Technical Highschool (correctly translated) side note/, they themselves have translated it to, "Royal Institute of Technology" which is a little weird, since the acronym would be RIT or RIOT (the latter would be funny)

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Not really an insult to call it a "basement" -- that is a slang term for something hidden below ground. The KTH reactor was a very sophisticated system and quite revolutionary in that era.

@thelastswedishviking

Жыл бұрын

@@HistoricWings ok pleb, now go back to your basement and post a video!

But no one knows for sure if we really shut down our nuclear weapons program?? One can wonder what they are doing up in Kiruna on Esrange today?? Snow most of the year and permafrost under the ground close to a river !!! I'm from Sweden btw.. 💥💥💥🤐🤐🤐

@HistoricWings

3 ай бұрын

Exactly correct. The last round of IAEA reports corrected the previously undisclosed fact that secretly Sweden had kept enough plutonium to build at least one or two tactical nuclear warheads. That material has now been shipped to the UK. Does Sweden have yet more hidden? It is hard to say. After Russia's Ukraine invasion, Sweden announced a surprising reversal of its nuclear power generation policy, though it was cloaked in environmentalism and climate change language. That reversal enables Sweden to create more plutonium -- however, is that happening? Again, it is hard to say I expect that Sweden's national security team realized that it was a choice of building a new nuclear weapons arsenal or joining NATO. Since the nation elected to join NATO, I would imagine that the pressure to develop nuclear weapons has been reduced considerably. Again, who knows? The country the means, budget, knowledge, sophistication, organization, and driving security requirements to do so. It would not be surprising if the program was relaunched. If it was, it will take some years to scale it up.

Interesting.

@HistoricWings

2 жыл бұрын

Glad you think so!

The total number of reactor is almost always lied about in Sweden. Not because the civilian reactors are the problem, but that Ågesta is the problem. The statmetn is always that there just have ever been 12 nuclear power reactor. That might make you belive that its Ågesta + 11 other reactors. That would not be right. Its 12 civilian reactors + ågesta. The real number is actually 13. But that number is never printed or told any where what so ever. (B1,B2, O1, O2, O3, F1, F2 F3, R1, R2, R3 (not to be confused with Ågesta that is also named R3) and R4. So to be absolutly clear. There have beent two nuclear power reactors with the exact same name. R3 and R3. The first is Ågesta Reactor typ 3. And the other is Ringhals powerplant 3. There was also a Marviken R4 not to be confuzed with Ringhals 4. The R3 in Ågesta is the reactor type. The R3 in Ringhals is the reactor unit name. Also the rocket facility outside of Kiruna is in Use to this date and have actually launched orbital rockets.

@kjelllindberg6987

Жыл бұрын

Some more existed... R1 (reaktor) - Reaktor vid Kungliga Tekniska högskolan i Stockholm 1954-1970 R0 (reaktor) - Forskningsreaktor i Studsvik 1959-1972 FR-0 R2 (reaktor) - Forskningsreaktor i Studsvik 1960-2005 R2-0 (reaktor) Zebra (Zero Energy Bare Reactor Assembly) var en underkritisk reaktor uppförd intill R 1 men flyttad till Studsvik 1959. Användningen var att studera härdarna med olika typer av bränsle och moderatorförhållanden. TZ (Tryckzebra) Efter att ZEBRA flyttades till Studsvik byggdes den 1963 om till en underkritisk reaktor som klarade mätningar upp till 250° C. KRITZ var en ombyggd version av TZ vilken även den låg i Studsvik och togs i drift 1969. KRITZ var en nolleffektsreaktor modererad med lättvatten. Dessa tre experiment fanns i samma lokal som R0. Alla avvecklades och revs i början på 1980-talet.

@matsv201

Жыл бұрын

@@kjelllindberg6987 none of those was power plants. The total number of nuclear power reactor is 13. The other are zero energy reactors.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Excellent and well-informed commentary. Thank you for posting this.

WOW ...shows a strong new Light in Case of Olof Palme. He did know to much.....

@HistoricWings

2 жыл бұрын

Indeed, though it seems a leap too far in logic to state this was the motive for his killing; it does point to a far more complex legacy and to a lack of full disclosure. .

What I am more curious about is how many nuked Sweden actual had/have.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

The question of how many nuclear weapons Sweden had is not one that we can answer based on publicly released data and the IAEA reports that Sweden submitted. One can surmise that they had at least 6. They had the capacity to rapidly ramp up production -- again, what mattered was that they did not have a capable delivery system early on, so they did not apparently do so.

@williamolin6230

Жыл бұрын

I would first like to thank you for your quick response even though the video is 2 years old. That does make a lot of sense, it is rather interesting how a small country like Sweden could be so secretive about something so big as nuclear weapons. It is rather unfortunate (or fortunate depending on how you look at it) Sweden didn't develop the technology to use them in time and it's definitely fortunate that they didn't get any reason to use them. Again, I just find it so interesting that a small country like Sweden had nukes. Makes me wonder what else they had. And again, thanks for the quick response, will definitely subscribe!

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

William, thank you for your kind message. A quick comment -- Sweden did develop and have the technology to manufacture nuclear weapons; in fact, it tested new nuclear weapons ignition systems that were more advanced than those in use among NATO countries at the time. Sweden's policy apparently was to develop sufficient nuclear weapons to successfully penetrate Soviet air defenses and destroy Moscow in a decapitation strike as well as other major cities, as well as to have air-launched rockets that could deliver tactical nuclear weapons from a range of just over 30 km (this rocket delivery capability was achieved in the Rb 04 in the 1960s, but never formally tested with live or dummy nuclear warheads on board to my knowledge based on research). As for it being a small country, Israel also developed nuclear weapons -- at a time when its population (including Arabs) was less than 2.5 million -- and currently, it maintains a stockpile of what is reputed to be at least 110 weapons, which is a sufficient "insurance policy" against any threat of destruction from any surrounding Arab states. Even if Iran develops a weapon of its own and manages to penetrate air defenses and strike Tel Aviv, it cannot win -- Israel has the capacity to destroy Iran completely.

@williamolin6230

Жыл бұрын

@@HistoricWings Thank you for your reply.

@mohaosman1473

4 ай бұрын

If Israel so small with 110 nukes can destroy Iran with so big landscape and over 90 million what do you think Iran can do with 10 million Israel’s ? Or maybe you trying to ignore the reality

The Scandinavian countries punch above their weight. Look what happened to the Soviet Union, when it staged a winter assault on Finland, early in WW2. The Finns, with their excellent winter-trained troops, handed the Soviets a humiliating defeat. Eventually the Soviets prevailed through sheer weight of numbers, but at a painful cost.

@HistoricWings

11 ай бұрын

This was the case in earlier years -- Sweden is now rebuilding its military.

My dad used to talk about his friends at KTH, who would routinely enter and leave this basement, where the reactor was situated. On another note, considering how close the nordic nations diplomatic relations are, it shouldn't come as much of a surprise sweden was an early player in the nuclear business, as the world's only heavy water production plant was located in norway during ww2. However, considering how little maintenance is involved in running a nuclear program, you can kinda expect that many more countries secretly have a basement they feel very protective over. It's not that far of a stretch to assume that most the developed countries in the world at least have a nuclear weapons program, and as for the nordic nations, they might as well all have one if sweden does. They're practically the same country, save for maybe denmark, in terms of strategic interests.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Yes, for sure. Would love to hear more about what your father talked about regarding KTH. As for Sweden, Norway, and Denmark -- and Finland too -- yes, closely aligned for sure. Sweden and Finland were the odd countries out of the NATO club until recently.

Nice

@HistoricWings

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks!

I thought we where just at the brink of creating nuclear bombs. I mean technically that makes Sweden the 4th country/power to build a nuclear weapon doesn't it?

@HistoricWings

10 ай бұрын

Yes, it does. Sweden wasn't "on the brink"; it proved the concept, built the components, and then kept them separated in adjacent rooms "in the bunker". For exercises and training, the crews would assemble Part A to Part B, then take it apart. Then they would assemble Part B to Part C, then take it apart. That way, Sweden could say that it never fully built the Bomb.

@MegaBanne

10 ай бұрын

@@HistoricWings Wow, that's devious.

olof palme was also a celebrated pancake artist , he worked parttime on markets and shopping malls baking amazing pancakes

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Ummm, not really sure about that.... ;-)

So we just had all the parts for bombs in one room? Sounds weird i mean probably they must have made at least one whole in secret right?

@HistoricWings

11 ай бұрын

There is no evidence that they ever fully assembled one of the "combat-ready" bombs. They did do testing, which required fully-assembled devices, but without the material to yield the full potential blast.

Mycket intressant

@HistoricWings

3 жыл бұрын

Tack! This is a careful assessment of a program that is frequently denied, but, if one assembles the data from the government's own reports, then places it into context, a reasoned set of conclusions is possible -- yes, Sweden played a fascinating game.

@virginiajim

3 жыл бұрын

And perhaps still plays an interesting game

The cuts on this video are very frustrating. Just abruptly cutting off words. So annoying. Great info though.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

Sorry about that. I just watched it again and did not hear the same problem. Obviously, I cannot redo the audio on the video -- however, it would help you perhaps to turn on the captions as they are carefully edited and published to provide a complete transcript of everything said in case there are any sound problems.

The history taught in Sweden to this day is that PM Erlander couldn't even consider nuclear bombing the ports in Soviet Baltic ports. That's why he cancelled the program. I very much doubt it. More probably it was a very expensive program to go nuclear. When the other branches of the military realized this they all voted for the US shield option...And now we have the Trump - Putin mess...

Why did Reinfeldt give away the plutonium?

@HistoricWings

2 жыл бұрын

The decision making process and justification documentation has not been released, so we cannot know with confidence. However, one can surmise that maintaining a small amount of plutonium and the costs associated with that were not cost-effective and carried risks. We should also know that the perception of the threat from the Russians -- always the justification for maintaining a nuclear deterrence capability -- was that the threat was not high at the time.

@benghazi4216

Жыл бұрын

Many see him as a traitor to be honest. The only politician in the world that has called their country's "Defense force", ie Swedish Armed forces, a special interest. In English it sound a little bad, but in the Swedish language that term drips of corruption and bad intentions. Truly mindboggling view and statement by a country's leader.

8:55 I would be interested in knowing what your sources is

@HistoricWings

2 жыл бұрын

The ten nuclear blast tests are documented by the Swedish Government and submitted to the IAEA in formal reports.

@bjornerikroth

Жыл бұрын

@@HistoricWings That would have been a blatant breach of the non-proliferation treaty, right?

Sweden never had a completed nuclear bomb, made no nuclear test and the mentioned reactors were not breeder reactors even if they did produce usable plutonium.

@HistoricWings

8 ай бұрын

Documentary evidence exists and proves the point otherwise, however. Of particular interest for you would be to read the IAEA reports that Sweden formally submitted.

Sweden never had a bomb it was just in two parts taking just minutes to be assembled and the one way mission to drop it was practiced by the AF even the Gripen can do it..

@HistoricWings

2 жыл бұрын

Correct, though the capabilities of the Gripen in this regard have never been confirmed by the Swedish Government.

@pernykvist3442

Жыл бұрын

We do have ballistic missiles. Mostly for satelite launch

@matsv201

Жыл бұрын

​@@HistoricWingswell. Gripen can carry a taurus cruise missile. Its the same size and actually a bit heavier than some nuclear crusie missiles. So it is quite clear that it can. So the question is rather if it would.

Palme was one of the most two faced hypocritical politician ever. A lot of the brainwashed Swedish population still regard him a some kind of saint. Sweden was and still is extreme in so many ways.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

An incredibly beautiful country with wonderful people. The politics of Sweden have always been interesting, however -- a lot more contentious than most of the rest of the world realizes.

@carlkolthoff5402

Жыл бұрын

​@@HistoricWingsI think Swedish foreign and defence policy since WW2 and onwards have been the embodiment of Roosevelts "Speak softly and carry a big stick". We don't want any trouble, we're happy to join peace talks and international diplomacy to help sort things out. But if anyone tries to invade us, it's gonna hurt and get expensive. We don't invest billions in our arms industry because we love weapons, we do it because we love peace and independence. This could be said about Olof Palme aswell. His big stick was the Swedish nuclear program, and his "soft voice" got him a role as special mediator for the United Nations. I think the reason many Swedes still today holds him in high regard, was that he was completely fearless in his criticism of other countries leaders in official speeches, while at the same time expanding social welfare programmes and workers rights in his domestic policies.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

@@carlkolthoff5402 Excellent observations, though Sweden was also quite monolithic in its support at that time for the Social Democrats, which authored Sweden's "social safety net", perhaps the political party's greatest achievement in government. It is a very interesting history.

@matsv201

Жыл бұрын

Half the population consider him a Saint the other half consider him being satan incarnated....... One thing is clear. He did lie more than is common in politics.

A very good video, but SAAB Vegan?? It's Vigg-en.

@HistoricWings

Жыл бұрын

As the plane is of Swedish design and manufacture, I have used the correct Swedish pronunciation.

@andersgrassman6583

4 ай бұрын

@@HistoricWings Funny thing about the name "Viggen" is that in Swedish it's both a name of a birdspecies, and can also mean "thunderbolt". Draken is just Dragon. And Gripen is Gryphon.