Swedish nuclear powered submarines

Interesting

Length: 48,5m
beam: 6,4m
Depth: about 5m
Crew 20 men
Displacement 965 tons
Speed ​​25+ knots
Armament: 6x 533mm TT (6 torpedoes) and 2x ejection modes 40cm torpedoes (20st torpedoes)


Apparently there's an illustration in Från Hajen till Södermanland - Svenska Ubåtar under 100 år av Fredrik Granholm
 
Not too far off the size of USN's mid-1950s SSKN concept, but faster and better armed. The SSKN fell through because the reactor got much larger than expected -- the end result was Tulibee at nearly 2500 tons. I suspect the Swedes might have had the same problem.
 
Last edited:
Heads up

I have been given high quality plans and illustrations of several design phases of Neptune by a very generous and well informed Swede.

Also of A11 alternatives.

These are incredibly forward thinking designs with many novel features.

Expect an article in a few weeks when I've been able to pull it together.
 
Expect an article in a few weeks when I've been able to pull it together.
Click to expand...

My colleagues and I urge you to type faster ;D

Seriously, very interested in this. I vaguely recall mention of Swedish "nuclear-AIP" programmes, but little in the way of detail.

- RP1
 
Not a lot of point, really.

All Swedish subs would have been deployed in the Baltic, which is quite shallow [usually less than 100m]. Distances are relatively short, unlike the Atlantic and the Pacific.

And - what threat were they facing? A Russian seaborne invasion is much better tackled by the Air Force than by a sub with half a dozen torpedoes.
 
Though submarines (and aircraft carriers) aren't my favourite kind of warships, I eagerly wait what will you able to tell us about these proposed projects!
While Sweden is considered a coastal navy country, it did developed and built ocean going cruisers and destroyers next to the coastal battleships and designed even a smaller sized aicraft carrier (escort carrier) after WW2. I wouldn't be surprised if one time in the future someone would dug up a proposal about a full grown ocean going battleship as well!

As for mission for the Nuclear submarine, I think it would be best used for convoy and merchant shipping hunting and interdiction of the Red Fleet away from the ports
 
Sweden was looking at nuclear subs in late 1950s-early 1960s for the A11 class. Sweden had good access to USN technology and ideas (especially Albacore) and also British, but needed to design their own nuclear power plant.

The concept seems to have been for a high speed sub. Faster to attack, faster to evade, no need to snort. Possibly also under-ice in winter although that's just my thought - haven't verified.

At the time (and now) the Russians had many more submarines and they probably thought it was only a matter of time before the Baltic was full of Soviet nuclear powered subs.

The smallest nuclear powered A11 concept I have plans for displaces less than 700 tons - think about that!

They did have the tech but I think ultimately a submarine was considered too ambitious. And would take too long to develop. They also looked at AIP for A11.

As built the A11s (which are still in service with Singspore) were extremely advanced for their time, futuristic even. But they used conventional diesel electric propulsion.
 
Forgot to say, these nuclear sub designs have 'wings', massive screws and rotary torpedo launchers wrapped around the hull. Not kidding. Fascinating designs.

If they'd have built them I think it'd have changed submarine history. I think many more countries would now have nuclear powered submarines.
 
CNH said:
Not a lot of point, really. ...
And - what threat were they facing? A Russian seaborne invasion is much better tackled by the Air Force than by a sub with half a dozen torpedoes.
Click to expand...

The Swedish sub force has to be looked at in the context of an integrated response to amphibious forces across multiple axes of threat/capability. So you have air-launched RBS-15s, FAC launched RBS-15s, conventional surface/stealth warship launched RBS-15s, coastal RBS-15 batteries, coastal naval gun batteries, mine belts, and submarines, and all the way down to squads of Kustjägarna with manpacked Hellfire. Each new axis of threat dilutes the response against all other axes of threat both by dividing defensive weapons fire and by dividing the attention of the Russian commanders and CICs across multiple sectors and sensors.

The Swedes assumed they would lose their fixed airfields, and the attrition against aircraft operating out of highway bases would be very high, so the assumption that the air force would be there when the amphibious assault forces came rolling out of Leningrad, Kaliningrad or Gydnia isn't necessarily a safe one. Where a nuke (or AIP) boat might have been useful is lurking forward of the main defences, potentially as far across the Baltic as the mouth of the Gulf of Finland, either as a tripwire, or to lay offensive minefields.
 
Outstanding job and most interesting reading. My respect.
 
Brickmuppet said:
Well, his article is up.

http://www.hisutton.com/Swedish_SSN.html

It does not disappoint .
Click to expand...
Thanks!!!!


Teasers:
gTOmV15.jpg

DKysOIW.jpg

5BUdsPm.jpg


Questions welcome!
 
Utterly fascinating - thanks for that write-up!

Can't help but admire the very unorthodox but at the same time pragmatic Swedish approach to such things.
 
Trident said:
Utterly fascinating - thanks for that write-up!

Can't help but admire the very unorthodox but at the same time pragmatic Swedish approach to such things.
Click to expand...
i think you've nailed it! Swedish submarine sevelopment is so interesting because they are bold, yet sensible. A very rare combination. There's more to come on Swedish sub development but it takes a long time to reach the website. :(
 
I adjoin the praises for the article, good reading. And Hope to read more about swedish submarine ideas in the future
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom