The sole reason for sweden having a military is Russia. Seeing how everything was developed to fight them it seems only fitting they are going to be used for that very purpose.
[Check out this unedited video of the Archer in operation.](https://youtu.be/d8x8ITwd4Vg) It's absolutely perfect for this war (with all the crazy artillery duels that have been going on) because it can deploy, fire a 3 round fire mission, pack up, and leave before the first round impacts, all with only one or two crew in the cab.
That's what I find so fascinating and horrifying about modern artillery. Such quick calculations and adjustments. I wonder if this is auto loaded shells, or manual?
The whole system is automated, and it can fire it's full magazine of 20 shells before needing to be reloaded. They have a separate vehicle as ammo haulers for them.
It’s the “Protector” weapons station from Kongsberg (Norway).
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protector_RWS
I didn’t recall the name so I googled “Archer Kongsberg” - which resulted in something completely different :|
That's really impressive.
Now I wonder where in the time of flight can counter artillery radar pick up the incoming rounds? Obviously some time before they impact, but anyone know how long?
It won't matter too much because they'll probably still be long gone by the time any counter fire rounds impact, but that aside.
It's possible since western systems can do just that with enemy artilery and mortars. Counter battery radar systems like Saab ARTHUR (most common system among NATO countries) can detect and track up to 100 projectiles at once, calculate origin, and convert to target data for an ARCHER system to fire at. So it's all about deployment speed and rate of fire which ARCHER is very good at.
Obviously that depends greatly on the geography and location of the radars. But an artillery shell tops out at around 10-15km over the surface. So in a flat country like Ukraine, an active radar should probably be able to pick it out only a few seconds after firing. But in order to use a counter-battery radar, to pick up shells, it needs to be turned on first, and passive radiation homing missiles are a lot cheaper than counter battery radars.
Of course, as we continue to connect different systems, shooting at a more advanced army with howitzers will end up being nothing more than a suicide.
There are also smart munitions that deploy parachute slowed explosively formed penetrators that scan the area and shot a glob of metal at the target. They are kinda like typical shaped heads you see in anti-tank weapons, but with longer range and less penetration. So the Archer's large magazine may not see much use in such a war.
Source: I pretend to know things.
Plus, that equipment ages. If it doesn't get used then it eventually gets scrapped - and it's far better used in defense of Ukraine today than decommissioned tomorrow or five years from now.
True, but at least Archer are new and Sweden have to few of them as is. But every Russian killed in Ukraine means a Russian that can't come fighting in Sweden.
The Russians removed the Swedes from the great power list, they've been on the defensive against Russia since Finland was taken from the Swedes 350 years ago
My grandfather was always neurotic about the USSR invading Sweden. One morning in the 60s or 70s he woke up a bit groggy, looked out through the windows and saw a line of combine harvesters driving across the field outside their house. He ran out to my grandmother in the kitchen shouting that exact phrase, thinking that they were tanks.
This perspective is one reason lots of Swedes empathize with Ukraine a little bit more than usual. We've been expecting this scenario to happen to us for our entire lifetimes.
On the plus side (egoistically), up until this war most people expected that the first sign of a war would be Spetsnaz troops and cyber attacks completely disabling the entire infrastructure, followed by us quickly being overpowered by a massive blitzkrieg. Hence the investment into systems like Archer, Gripen, etc. From a safe external position, Russias performance in this war has been reassuring if anything.
Sweden is actually a [huge exporter](https://theworld.org/stories/2014-05-23/peace-loving-sweden-and-switzerland-are-among-top-arms-exporters-capita-world) of military hardware. Since they've maintained their neutrality, they've built up a large military industrial complex. The US even buys Swedish made weaponry like the [Karl Gustaf](https://www.army-technology.com/projects/carl-gustaf-m4-multi-role-weapon-system/) because the Swedes are pretty damn good at making weapons.
Actually it's the other way around. Saab fighter jets have US designed engines in them .The Gripen C/D has a RM12 which is a Volvo Aero built version of a General Electric F404 and Gripen E has a General Electric F414.
TIL. Good to know. For some reason I thought Saab built jet engines too. I always worked on the radar/datalink side of things (and mostly smaller drones) when I was still in the defense industry, so I'm less than a pro when it comes to powerplant and engines haha.
Sweden has a population of 10 million.
Just the amount of CV90s is equivalent to Germany sending 500 Marders or the U.S. sending 1500 Bradleys (per population, their economies are even bigger proportionally).
Yeah. It might seem like a great deal for exterminating rashist vermin but you have to remember that Ukrainians are paying actual price with their lives.
We should def send more tbh.
If the Russian regime survives losing the war and is kicked out of Ukraine, which is quite a strong possibility, the only real thing that will stop Russia just doing Hamas-style cross-border shelling is joining NATO. It's their victory condition.
Even if Putin falls, or Russia breaks up, whatever replaces him may still be pro-war. Not joining NATO after the war isn't really a practical option for Ukraine.
It will definitely be “Putin didn’t do enough to secure a victory, I will make it happen” rather than “this was a lost cause all along” if he’s ever succeeded
Used to command one of these when I was a conscript, many many years ago. I hope mine is one of the bunch we send over so that she can finally fulfil her intended purpose of spreading bad vibes among Russian invaders instead of decaying in storage somewhere
Question from a Swede who didn't do military service: how difficult are they to service? Will the Ukrainians be able to do it themselves or will they have to be sent to Poland? What about spare parts, do we have enough laying around?
I imagine Ukrainian mechanics were being trained before this deal was announced. And "fixing" a piece of military equipment often means first finding which system is broken, then replacing that system. Easier to train a parts-switcher than a true mechanic. So having spares is essential.
Sweden has a large defense industry. I'm sure they will be very happy to make sure there is enough ammo and spare parts for these suckers to run
The swedish defence industry is interesting in that regard. Most of their exports were developed initially for domestic defence, and the swedish armed forces used to be a very large conscript army. (Not many are aware but at one point during the cold war the swedish air force was the worlds 4th largest airforce. In 1957 they could field an impressive 1000 fighter planes, of at that time modern planes). They brought that conscript philosophy along with them into the modern era in weapons development. Everything is designed to be able to be serviced relatively easily and quickly by conscripts, with just a few trained technicians supervising if at all, and operated to a large degree by conscripts with short training time. It even trails into their Saab fighter jets where they can land on highway sections expanded to function as runways in wartime, and where refueling and rearming can be done on site by a crew of just 8 conscripts and 2 technicians in very short order.
Their equipment usually is very rugged, very well constructed, very functional and can be assembled with just an allen wrench you will find enclosed in the package....
If a conscript raggarjävel manages to service them, Ukraine solves it. As noted CV90 is a modern, modular veichle. An unexperienced mechanic change the engine/transmission in like half an hour, for soviet era BMP-crap it takes like a day or two.
40mm would easily penetrate T-72 on side......it has something like 100mm of penetration with its AP shells, thats more than enough to penetrate almost anything other than the front armor of a MBT.
I was responding to the guy talking about penetrating from the front. It can easily penetrate the sides of any tank currently in use worldwide.
Also just something to note, AP, when it comes to armored vehicle ammunition, means specifically a solid, monolithic round without any explosive charge. No one has used straight AP in a very long time, these use APFSDS rounds.
APFSDS stands for Armour piercing, fin stabilized, discarding sabot. Shouldn't there be a "explosive" somewhere in the acronym if the shell uses explosives? Like High-explosive incendiary/armor-piercing ammunition (HEIAP).
No, there aren't any explosives in APFSDS, but it's also not a monolithic round. AP rounds are basically just steel slugs, with the same (rough) diameter as the bore of the gun. APFSDS are what's called "sub-caliber ammunition", that is the penetrator is a lot smaller then the bore ("caliber, although that's not even totally accurate since caliber in artillery guns generally actually refers to the length of the barrel, which is measured in "times the length of the bore". A 16"/50 naval gun, is 50 times the bore diamater in length, which would be a "50 caliber long gun". Confusing as shit), for added penetration.
AP is just a pointy slug of metal. After that came APC, Armor-piercing-capped, with a cap of softer metal to reduce the chance of a "bounce". Following that was APCBC, Armour-piercing, capped, ballistic capped", where they add a SECOND cap to improve ballistics.
It's a whole jungle of acronyms, sorry if i went a bit too in-depth, but the point is that if you call it AP rounds, you're reffering to a specific type of ammunition, unlike in say rifles where AP just means you've got a hardened penetrating core.
Generally speaking, few armies use any kind of explosives in their anti-armor ammunition, since you have to have a large shell that would be inherently poor at penetrating armor. If you've got explosives in your shells today, it will generally be either HEAT rounds, like what a Javelin or RPG uses, or you will have HESH rounds, which is basically shooting a patty of plastic explosives that stick on a target, blows up and sends a shockwave through the armor with the intention of causing metal splinters to break from the inside of the vehicle and killing the crew. We're likely to see quite a bit of those in Ukraine with the Challenger 2, since those are afaik the only modern tanks that still use them. They're the primary reason for why the Brits stuck to a rifled gun for so long, the rotation helps the explosives spread out more, and be more effective.
Sorry for the wall of text, you might notice I'm a bit of a nerd lol.
If this is how you show you're a nerd, I appreciate it :) Thanks for the explanation, it's super cool to read all the details! (Lol @ the "50 caliber long gun")
No worries mate, anytime! It's a whole jungle of acronyms and odd phrases, pretty much impossible to understand if you don't dig in :P Hope i brought some clarity!
Yes. But those aren't anti armor rounds.
Vehicles like this will have two ammo feeds, and the gunner just flicks a switch, and it'll go from air bursting HE to APFSDS.
Anything that penetrates thick armor will make a decent mess of the inside due to friction heat and spalling etc. Not definitely a kill,but definitely a problem. Not to mention there's several shells incoming per second. I've a hard time seeing any target getting away safely at that point.
And a penetration is bound to cause, as the Chieftain so aptly calls it, *a significant emotional event*. A crew might bail even if the tank or crew wasn't actually affected by the penetration (it might miss all critical components/crew)
The new turret is said to get over 140 mm of RHA (Rolled Homogeneous Armour) at 1500 m. That's basically enough to kill anything less than a tank and at the very least mission kill a tank.
Russians are using big-caliber auto-cannons against tanks. It does not penetrate armor, but without optics, thermals, and all that fragile electronics tank has no fighting capability left.
The Bofors logo at the start of the video doesn't have "Defence" or "BAE" in it. It's quite likely the video is from before Bofors were bought by United Defence in 2000 and Bofors added Defence to their name and logo.
Sweden is also sending their Archer artillery system. These things are pretty great, Ukraine specifically wanted this system. They can fire multiple rounds in quick succession and be on the move within 1 minute.
[Video demonstration by BAE Systems - Archer Shoot and Scoot](https://youtu.be/d8x8ITwd4Vg)
Honestly we haven't even seen some of the stuff they've cooked up in the last few years. Most military tech you see in action is like 15+ years old. Often way older.
Better than the Bradley, though they're fairly comparable.
The CV90 has better mobility in mud or snow, I think snowmobiles are the only ground vehicles capable of outrunning a CV90 in winter conditions off road. It can drive circles around just about any other armoured vehicle off road and in snow. The first time I saw one on a NATO exercise, a CV90 equipped unit went up a damned mountain and then held high ground where no other armoured combat vehicles managed to go. These are top tier IFVs.
It's quieter than a Bradley, more capable of sneaking up on enemies. That may not seem important, but most armoured vehicles are insanely noisy. Main battle tanks can typically be heard a long time before they get into range, so infantry have all the time in the world to prepare an ambush. IFVs are lighter and have smaller engines than MBTs, but even so most of them can be heard coming for miles. Not so the CV90, a defending infantry force has less time to react from "I think I hear something, is that an engine?" to "Incoming fire!"
Depending on which variant, the CV90 comes with different guns. The standard Swedish ones have a 40mm main gun, more powerful than the Bradley's (with the downside of not being able to carry as many rounds of the much bigger ammo). These can kill a T-72 from the sides or rear, but probably not from the front.
They also have insanely effective programmable airburst fuse explosive fragmentation rounds, these can be set to explode above a trench to send fragments down and kill people covering in the trench. It's like a magic ability to shoot around corners. Can also be set for delayed impact detonation, very useful if the enemy is firing from a building. The shell punches through a concrete wall, then detonates inside the room behind the wall to kill everyone inside. Oh, and it has a proximity fuse anti aircraft setting for use against helicopters or drones. The shell senses when it is close enough to the target and then explodes, turning a near miss on an aerial target into a hit with the fragments.
Basically, the CV90 is the best of the best but the advantage over a Bradley isn't that great. They're both very capable vehicles, much better than the ruzzian BMP variants.
> mobility in mud or snow
High priority for any Swedish military ground vehicles, really. Snow, bogs and other wetlands, and forests... preferably with decent speed.
I've driven a ton in the 308's, haven't gotten the chance to drive any 206 chassi, but man compared to the 308's the 410 sure is like comparing a gokart to a bus.
> I think snowmobiles are the only ground vehicles capable of outrunning a CV90 in winter conditions off road.
I'd say the BvS10/BV410 (developed by Hägglunds just as the CV90) can outrun it in deep snow and mud. But no other IFVs come close.
In a nutshell CV90 is
\- newer
\- more versatile (can be equipped with different weapon systems and ammo types)
\- Better mobility (faster, and *much* more agile in snowy terrain)
Bradley is heavier with probably better protection than CV90, but I have read it might have difficulties in snow terrain.
Also Bradley has seen more action in general so it's more firetested IFV.
In the end both IFV's are on the top of the food chain, and I wouldn't want to go against either of them.
A derivative of the CV90 seems to have been the original contender from BAE for the US program that aims to replace the Bradley, but based on recent information from BAE, they will present an all new design.
The program itself is still in an early stage and there are various companies participating with their proposals, years will pass before there is a winner
Isn’t it just the MkIV of the CV90 that is a contender for Bradley replacement? I doubt they would develop a whole new platform when the CV90 is still a good base to build and improve upon.
CV90 is a newer vehicle, has better mobility and probably thicker armour. Its base gun is also bigger and packs more of a punch (40mm vs 25mm on Bradley). It has more damage potential on light vehicles and event infantry on the open with that thing
There are CV90 models with 35mm, 30mm and 40mm cannons. Sweden uses 40mm, export models are 30 or 35mm.
Which version UA get I guess is depending on the stocks they pull from?
They build every demonstrator they can ever think of. There must be 10 variants for every variant actually sold.
There’s likely a CV90 ice cream truck if you search the BAE basements.
An unspecified number of Archer systems are being sent as well. I do wonder how quickly they will start seeing use in combat though, since they require experience to be used effectively.
During the conference our defense minister said we are sending up to 50 CV90 and an undetermined number of Archer, pending a recommendation from the military.
There are 20 "Available" from the 24 originally made for Norway (out of 48 in existence). Norway canceled the order.
He also mentioned a artillery batallion would normally have 12 pieces. This is where that number comes from.
Hypothetically they could have already started training when the leadership changed after the election, no? Ebba Busch talked about the lobbying for sending Archer started that early during the press conference.
(just wildly speculating here ofc lol)
To be fair we have a pretty big defensive wall against Russia called Finland so I think we can all agree that it's better if you guys save a bit of extra weaponry for yourselves (and all the Swedes who would join you) whereas we can spare some death machines
The Viking chariots of war are on the way.. They can join the Norwegian Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System to fight side by side against the invaders.
The Scandinavians are ready and willing to help Ukraine!
Im so glad to see it, and proud for our little part in this saga
It's like putting a frog in water and slowly raising the temperature so it doesn't notice.
Of course it wouldn't work on an actual frog but I assume that's what the West is going for
This is huge.
90s are a top notch IFVs. These are heavy fighting vehicles on par with Bradleys. Sweden makes very high quality weapons and they're perfect for Ukrainian terrain. The artillery too.
Also, there are a lot of specialized variants of this vehicle. Mortar tank, anti-aircraft... If Ukraine got to choose any platform for their army, it's probably this one.
Between this, Bradleys, will-they-won't-they german tanks... Ukraine is going to have some legit heavy mech units in the field soon. Fielded against Russia soviet gear in the right kind of fight, there's potential for 5X differences in performance. These are very good vehicles.
The question is quantity. What’s 10-30 top-notch IFV’s against thousands of Russian tanks? Anyone who’s played an RTS can tell you quantity can have a quality all it’s own.
To be fair, while we *did* give concessions to Germany under duress during WW2 to avoid being invaded (and to afford food and coal to survive), we repeatedly *willingly* violated neutrality to aid the Allied forces, and our neutrality allowed us to take in tens of thousands of refugees, and use our diplomats to affect things (and save thousands more) across Europe.
Allowing the Germans to use our telegraph cables and intercepting every message so Arne Beurling could decypher them and we could pass on intel to the Allied forces, for example, or leasing 8000 seamen to Britain after the Swedish merchant fleet was stuck outside the Baltic.
>Raoul Gustaf Wallenberg (4 August 1912 – disappeared 17 January 1945)[note 1][1] was a Swedish architect, businessman, diplomat, and humanitarian. He saved thousands of Jews in German-occupied Hungary during the Holocaust from German Nazis and Hungarian fascists during the later stages of World War II. While serving as Sweden's special envoy in Budapest between July and December 1944, Wallenberg issued protective passports and sheltered Jews in buildings he declared as Swedish territory.
>Two days before the Soviet Army occupied Budapest, Wallenberg negotiated with Eichmann and with Major-General Gerhard Schmidthuber, the supreme commander of German forces in Hungary. Wallenberg bribed Arrow Cross Party member Pál Szalai to deliver a note in which Wallenberg persuaded the occupying Germans to prevent a Fascist plan to blow up the Budapest ghetto and murder an estimated 70,000 Jews.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raoul_Wallenberg
I just want to note, because it's pretty badass, Arne Beurling didn't have those fancy computing machines that the British had. He sat down with pencil and paper and managed to figure out how the cipher machines used actually worked.
Yeah, from Wiki;
> He is perhaps most famous for single-handedly decrypting an early version of the German cipher machine Siemens and Halske T52 in a matter of two weeks during 1940, using only pen and paper. This machine's cipher is generally considered to be more complicated than that of the more famous Enigma machine.
i know we werent prepared at all and would have lost so fast against germany,but this time we actually can help so im proud that we are and not saying we are neutral out of fear of russia.
Wow that’s an incredible package! Meanwhile Germany with a military gdp and population that eclipses their own many times over sends 40 marders and blocks other countries from sending leo2’s unless America, who is already sending hundreds of armored systems monthly, sends abrams. All eyes still on German leadership 🧐
Everyone is getting a huge amount of info out of this
Sadly it’s costing a lot of young men their lives
And civilians of course
Hopefully it costs a dictator his too
IFVs, people never seem to understand how important these vehicles are. These are the things that save lives, like, every day. Take every tank and rocket systems donated whenever. IFVs keep people alive.
> But germany (And US) already agreed to send IFVs to ukraine though?
yes but Germany only agreed to send much older and much worse Marder IFV (about 20 years older vehicle than CV90 and far less capable)......CV90 is equivalent of the new German Puma IFV, and Scholtz would get a heart attack from just thinking about such proposal to send those to Ukraine. So no they are not the same thing
> I don't think the CV90 has a soft kill system like the Puma for example.
https://euro-sd.com/2019/05/articles/13297/active-and-reactive-vehicle-protection-systems/attachment/saabs-land-electronic-defence-system-50-soft-kill-electronic-countermeasure-system-is-deployed-on-the-swedish-armys-cv90-combat-vehicles/
It does
>Not sure if the CV90 has reactive armor either.
https://defense-update.com/20050823_cv90.html
it does
they gonna send whatever Swedish army has in its arsenal......and far as can be seen, all Swedish CV90's have been upgraded to somewhat high level. So they are going to be definitely among the most modern IFV's around and light years ahead of those old Marder 1A3 that Germany pledged (a 80's modification to a 60's vehicle)
We're not sending old stuff. We are in it to win it. Then you must send the best you have if want Ukraine to win. I am hoping we will train Ukrainians on Jas gripen too, if there would be a need for it later on, and i think it would be a optimal fighter jet for Ukrainie going forward. It would for sure escalatethings with Russia, but i think we passed that line already so might as well go all the way.
You realize that marders received upgrades as well don't you ? The Marder can be equipped with the same reactive armor that the Puma has for example.
And yes whatever sweden has in their arsenal. That link you send shows that such a system exists. Not that it was rolled out to all of them.
On modern battlefield lines are kind of blurred.
In general IFVs are used to support infantry, while tanks are supported by infantry. Tanks are also much more survivable.
Western MBT tanks are much heavier than Soviet designs, based on what we see employed on battlefield they might be actually immune to what Russians have. However until it is proven, it might be just wishful thinking.
Sweden has received security assurances from various NATO countries, USA included.
Being an EU member, they are also covered by said's organization collective self defence agreement
I still feel the US should immediately declare Sweden and Finland as Major non-NATO allies, while their Nato applications are still being processed. The President can designate a nation as an MNNA thirty days after notifying Congress, and while it does not automatically include a mutual defense pact with the United States, it does confers a variety of military and financial advantages that otherwise are not obtainable by non-NATO countries (for example, exemptions from the Arms Export Control Act that are enjoyed by NATO members).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_non-NATO_ally
reminder that upon announcing their plans to join both Britain and the US signed defensive treaties with Sweden and Finland both having a functional mini article 5. Both are now functionally already in the NATO protection umbrella with the Royal and US navy/ air force ready to come in like the cavalry if the Russians start anything. as in all likelihood would the rest of NATO even if Turkey are being bellends about it
Well it could be used as blackmail against Nato but we are not Turkey, we support friends in need and dont use it as an oppertunity to win advantages for ourself.
> The package is worth 4.3 billion Swedish crowns ($419 million) Thats quite impressive for a country the size of sweden
The sole reason for sweden having a military is Russia. Seeing how everything was developed to fight them it seems only fitting they are going to be used for that very purpose.
There is no better way to test their designs
[Check out this unedited video of the Archer in operation.](https://youtu.be/d8x8ITwd4Vg) It's absolutely perfect for this war (with all the crazy artillery duels that have been going on) because it can deploy, fire a 3 round fire mission, pack up, and leave before the first round impacts, all with only one or two crew in the cab.
That is sick. Damn. What a system.
It can also fire those 3 rounds (up to 6) and have them sync up on impact for simultaneous detonation.
That's what I find so fascinating and horrifying about modern artillery. Such quick calculations and adjustments. I wonder if this is auto loaded shells, or manual?
The whole system is automated, and it can fire it's full magazine of 20 shells before needing to be reloaded. They have a separate vehicle as ammo haulers for them.
That's amazing. Kick ass, Sweden!
gets better when there's apparently a ramjet version of the shell being developed for the gun it uses to give them even greater range.
Wow. That is bad ass.
Damn, it's even got a little CROWS style system up top
It’s the “Protector” weapons station from Kongsberg (Norway). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protector_RWS I didn’t recall the name so I googled “Archer Kongsberg” - which resulted in something completely different :|
Damn among many other weapons you can mount a javelin up top.
That's really impressive. Now I wonder where in the time of flight can counter artillery radar pick up the incoming rounds? Obviously some time before they impact, but anyone know how long? It won't matter too much because they'll probably still be long gone by the time any counter fire rounds impact, but that aside.
It's possible since western systems can do just that with enemy artilery and mortars. Counter battery radar systems like Saab ARTHUR (most common system among NATO countries) can detect and track up to 100 projectiles at once, calculate origin, and convert to target data for an ARCHER system to fire at. So it's all about deployment speed and rate of fire which ARCHER is very good at.
Obviously that depends greatly on the geography and location of the radars. But an artillery shell tops out at around 10-15km over the surface. So in a flat country like Ukraine, an active radar should probably be able to pick it out only a few seconds after firing. But in order to use a counter-battery radar, to pick up shells, it needs to be turned on first, and passive radiation homing missiles are a lot cheaper than counter battery radars. Of course, as we continue to connect different systems, shooting at a more advanced army with howitzers will end up being nothing more than a suicide. There are also smart munitions that deploy parachute slowed explosively formed penetrators that scan the area and shot a glob of metal at the target. They are kinda like typical shaped heads you see in anti-tank weapons, but with longer range and less penetration. So the Archer's large magazine may not see much use in such a war. Source: I pretend to know things.
[удалено]
Roughly 50km with Excalibur ammo
30 - 50 km depending on ammunition
Wow that’s awesome!
Holy shit. The enemies dead and vehicle's outa there in less than a minute and a half! Russia's fucked.
It really rhymes a lot with WW1, doesn't it?
And the spanish civil war for ww2...
That's pretty much all of Europe that is anywhere close to Russia.
Plus, that equipment ages. If it doesn't get used then it eventually gets scrapped - and it's far better used in defense of Ukraine today than decommissioned tomorrow or five years from now.
True, but at least Archer are new and Sweden have to few of them as is. But every Russian killed in Ukraine means a Russian that can't come fighting in Sweden.
Arnt these from the cancelled Norway order?
Probably. But Sweden could use a lot more than what we have, in my opinion.
The Russians removed the Swedes from the great power list, they've been on the defensive against Russia since Finland was taken from the Swedes 350 years ago
The russian is coming. Ryssen kommer.
Smaka på svenskt stål ryssjävel! Taste swedish steel russian devils!
As a Norwegian; I kinda like this new angry Swede thing. Its got a certain pizzazz to it!
Its the old Carolean battel cry, variant "Swedish steel bites"
Fall in line, battle formations Show no fear, riding them down Break their will, show them no mercy Caroleans attack!
[https://www.youtube.com/shorts/NJh2ANn-4GI](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/NJh2ANn-4GI) :P
I like this one even better!
My grandfather was always neurotic about the USSR invading Sweden. One morning in the 60s or 70s he woke up a bit groggy, looked out through the windows and saw a line of combine harvesters driving across the field outside their house. He ran out to my grandmother in the kitchen shouting that exact phrase, thinking that they were tanks. This perspective is one reason lots of Swedes empathize with Ukraine a little bit more than usual. We've been expecting this scenario to happen to us for our entire lifetimes. On the plus side (egoistically), up until this war most people expected that the first sign of a war would be Spetsnaz troops and cyber attacks completely disabling the entire infrastructure, followed by us quickly being overpowered by a massive blitzkrieg. Hence the investment into systems like Archer, Gripen, etc. From a safe external position, Russias performance in this war has been reassuring if anything.
>The sole reason for sweden having a military is Russia. Hey now, those sneaky Danes still exist down there too.
This is on top of earlier support packages that themselves total about 900 million Euro.
Sweden is actually a [huge exporter](https://theworld.org/stories/2014-05-23/peace-loving-sweden-and-switzerland-are-among-top-arms-exporters-capita-world) of military hardware. Since they've maintained their neutrality, they've built up a large military industrial complex. The US even buys Swedish made weaponry like the [Karl Gustaf](https://www.army-technology.com/projects/carl-gustaf-m4-multi-role-weapon-system/) because the Swedes are pretty damn good at making weapons.
Ad Swedish naval guns (Bofors) used by several navies in the world including the US and the UK.
And Saab engines in a lot of military jets too!
Actually it's the other way around. Saab fighter jets have US designed engines in them .The Gripen C/D has a RM12 which is a Volvo Aero built version of a General Electric F404 and Gripen E has a General Electric F414.
TIL. Good to know. For some reason I thought Saab built jet engines too. I always worked on the radar/datalink side of things (and mostly smaller drones) when I was still in the defense industry, so I'm less than a pro when it comes to powerplant and engines haha.
Jet engines are basically a UK/US duopoly
Sweden has a population of 10 million. Just the amount of CV90s is equivalent to Germany sending 500 Marders or the U.S. sending 1500 Bradleys (per population, their economies are even bigger proportionally).
I expect U.S. to keep drip feeding Bradleys til like 300 - 500.
Sweden is like Poland — it has more skin in the game…
Yup, contributing US$ 60-ish of my taxes here just for this package.
Yeah. It might seem like a great deal for exterminating rashist vermin but you have to remember that Ukrainians are paying actual price with their lives. We should def send more tbh.
I hope at the end of this Ukraine see the importance of NATO and/or the EU and decides to fully commit to the alliance
If the Russian regime survives losing the war and is kicked out of Ukraine, which is quite a strong possibility, the only real thing that will stop Russia just doing Hamas-style cross-border shelling is joining NATO. It's their victory condition. Even if Putin falls, or Russia breaks up, whatever replaces him may still be pro-war. Not joining NATO after the war isn't really a practical option for Ukraine.
It will definitely be “Putin didn’t do enough to secure a victory, I will make it happen” rather than “this was a lost cause all along” if he’s ever succeeded
"It's the Ukrainians' fault we lost!"
Ukraine will join NATO if NATO lets them join (see: the nonsense with Finland and Sweden). Otherwise, they may sign bilateral security guarantees.
[удалено]
Used to command one of these when I was a conscript, many many years ago. I hope mine is one of the bunch we send over so that she can finally fulfil her intended purpose of spreading bad vibes among Russian invaders instead of decaying in storage somewhere
I love the CV90 and working with them is incredibly exhilarating. The motor and cannon have the best sounds in the business.
I remember entrenched cv90 stonewalled the attacking leo2 during cold response when I was a conscript.
Question from a Swede who didn't do military service: how difficult are they to service? Will the Ukrainians be able to do it themselves or will they have to be sent to Poland? What about spare parts, do we have enough laying around?
I imagine Ukrainian mechanics were being trained before this deal was announced. And "fixing" a piece of military equipment often means first finding which system is broken, then replacing that system. Easier to train a parts-switcher than a true mechanic. So having spares is essential. Sweden has a large defense industry. I'm sure they will be very happy to make sure there is enough ammo and spare parts for these suckers to run
The swedish defence industry is interesting in that regard. Most of their exports were developed initially for domestic defence, and the swedish armed forces used to be a very large conscript army. (Not many are aware but at one point during the cold war the swedish air force was the worlds 4th largest airforce. In 1957 they could field an impressive 1000 fighter planes, of at that time modern planes). They brought that conscript philosophy along with them into the modern era in weapons development. Everything is designed to be able to be serviced relatively easily and quickly by conscripts, with just a few trained technicians supervising if at all, and operated to a large degree by conscripts with short training time. It even trails into their Saab fighter jets where they can land on highway sections expanded to function as runways in wartime, and where refueling and rearming can be done on site by a crew of just 8 conscripts and 2 technicians in very short order. Their equipment usually is very rugged, very well constructed, very functional and can be assembled with just an allen wrench you will find enclosed in the package....
Lol the enclosed Allen wrench, just like IKEA.
If a conscript raggarjävel manages to service them, Ukraine solves it. As noted CV90 is a modern, modular veichle. An unexperienced mechanic change the engine/transmission in like half an hour, for soviet era BMP-crap it takes like a day or two.
[удалено]
Dope! Demonstrational video about the CV90 here: https://youtu.be/gGj_ioyZaIk
holy fuck. Thats an auto cannon from hell. I dont think it can penetrate tanks from the front, but it sure wake up the crew.
Not the T72s and later models, but quite possibly the older ones they're pulling out of storage.
40mm would easily penetrate T-72 on side......it has something like 100mm of penetration with its AP shells, thats more than enough to penetrate almost anything other than the front armor of a MBT.
I was responding to the guy talking about penetrating from the front. It can easily penetrate the sides of any tank currently in use worldwide. Also just something to note, AP, when it comes to armored vehicle ammunition, means specifically a solid, monolithic round without any explosive charge. No one has used straight AP in a very long time, these use APFSDS rounds.
APFSDS stands for Armour piercing, fin stabilized, discarding sabot. Shouldn't there be a "explosive" somewhere in the acronym if the shell uses explosives? Like High-explosive incendiary/armor-piercing ammunition (HEIAP).
No, there aren't any explosives in APFSDS, but it's also not a monolithic round. AP rounds are basically just steel slugs, with the same (rough) diameter as the bore of the gun. APFSDS are what's called "sub-caliber ammunition", that is the penetrator is a lot smaller then the bore ("caliber, although that's not even totally accurate since caliber in artillery guns generally actually refers to the length of the barrel, which is measured in "times the length of the bore". A 16"/50 naval gun, is 50 times the bore diamater in length, which would be a "50 caliber long gun". Confusing as shit), for added penetration. AP is just a pointy slug of metal. After that came APC, Armor-piercing-capped, with a cap of softer metal to reduce the chance of a "bounce". Following that was APCBC, Armour-piercing, capped, ballistic capped", where they add a SECOND cap to improve ballistics. It's a whole jungle of acronyms, sorry if i went a bit too in-depth, but the point is that if you call it AP rounds, you're reffering to a specific type of ammunition, unlike in say rifles where AP just means you've got a hardened penetrating core. Generally speaking, few armies use any kind of explosives in their anti-armor ammunition, since you have to have a large shell that would be inherently poor at penetrating armor. If you've got explosives in your shells today, it will generally be either HEAT rounds, like what a Javelin or RPG uses, or you will have HESH rounds, which is basically shooting a patty of plastic explosives that stick on a target, blows up and sends a shockwave through the armor with the intention of causing metal splinters to break from the inside of the vehicle and killing the crew. We're likely to see quite a bit of those in Ukraine with the Challenger 2, since those are afaik the only modern tanks that still use them. They're the primary reason for why the Brits stuck to a rifled gun for so long, the rotation helps the explosives spread out more, and be more effective. Sorry for the wall of text, you might notice I'm a bit of a nerd lol.
If this is how you show you're a nerd, I appreciate it :) Thanks for the explanation, it's super cool to read all the details! (Lol @ the "50 caliber long gun")
No worries mate, anytime! It's a whole jungle of acronyms and odd phrases, pretty much impossible to understand if you don't dig in :P Hope i brought some clarity!
Maybe I am remembering incorrectly, but I thought a lot of air burst rounds contain an explosive charge?
Yes. But those aren't anti armor rounds. Vehicles like this will have two ammo feeds, and the gunner just flicks a switch, and it'll go from air bursting HE to APFSDS.
I guess penetrate doesn't automatically mean a kill. But yeah, should certainly make Russian tankies nervous.
Anything that penetrates thick armor will make a decent mess of the inside due to friction heat and spalling etc. Not definitely a kill,but definitely a problem. Not to mention there's several shells incoming per second. I've a hard time seeing any target getting away safely at that point.
And a penetration is bound to cause, as the Chieftain so aptly calls it, *a significant emotional event*. A crew might bail even if the tank or crew wasn't actually affected by the penetration (it might miss all critical components/crew)
Wouldnt the ammunition inside explode?
Not if it didn't get hit.
The new turret is said to get over 140 mm of RHA (Rolled Homogeneous Armour) at 1500 m. That's basically enough to kill anything less than a tank and at the very least mission kill a tank.
Russians are using big-caliber auto-cannons against tanks. It does not penetrate armor, but without optics, thermals, and all that fragile electronics tank has no fighting capability left.
Airburst them, would take out the sights instantly.
Munitions in 2023 are something else. That's crazy.
To note: vid is ~~from~~ uploaded 13 years ago.
The Bofors logo at the start of the video doesn't have "Defence" or "BAE" in it. It's quite likely the video is from before Bofors were bought by United Defence in 2000 and Bofors added Defence to their name and logo.
At the end of the video, it says "copyright 2000". So actually 23 years ago.
Video uploaded 13 years ago but imagine the video was almost 15 years old by then.
More like 20 years. That video gives me late nineties, early 2000s vibes.
Should put a voice over the video with a salesman going "see the latest gopnik killing technology. Guaranteed anti-Vladimir effect on target!"
Sweden is also sending their Archer artillery system. These things are pretty great, Ukraine specifically wanted this system. They can fire multiple rounds in quick succession and be on the move within 1 minute. [Video demonstration by BAE Systems - Archer Shoot and Scoot](https://youtu.be/d8x8ITwd4Vg)
Honestly we haven't even seen some of the stuff they've cooked up in the last few years. Most military tech you see in action is like 15+ years old. Often way older.
Im a military noob, how does it fare when compared to the bradley?
Better than the Bradley, though they're fairly comparable. The CV90 has better mobility in mud or snow, I think snowmobiles are the only ground vehicles capable of outrunning a CV90 in winter conditions off road. It can drive circles around just about any other armoured vehicle off road and in snow. The first time I saw one on a NATO exercise, a CV90 equipped unit went up a damned mountain and then held high ground where no other armoured combat vehicles managed to go. These are top tier IFVs. It's quieter than a Bradley, more capable of sneaking up on enemies. That may not seem important, but most armoured vehicles are insanely noisy. Main battle tanks can typically be heard a long time before they get into range, so infantry have all the time in the world to prepare an ambush. IFVs are lighter and have smaller engines than MBTs, but even so most of them can be heard coming for miles. Not so the CV90, a defending infantry force has less time to react from "I think I hear something, is that an engine?" to "Incoming fire!" Depending on which variant, the CV90 comes with different guns. The standard Swedish ones have a 40mm main gun, more powerful than the Bradley's (with the downside of not being able to carry as many rounds of the much bigger ammo). These can kill a T-72 from the sides or rear, but probably not from the front. They also have insanely effective programmable airburst fuse explosive fragmentation rounds, these can be set to explode above a trench to send fragments down and kill people covering in the trench. It's like a magic ability to shoot around corners. Can also be set for delayed impact detonation, very useful if the enemy is firing from a building. The shell punches through a concrete wall, then detonates inside the room behind the wall to kill everyone inside. Oh, and it has a proximity fuse anti aircraft setting for use against helicopters or drones. The shell senses when it is close enough to the target and then explodes, turning a near miss on an aerial target into a hit with the fragments. Basically, the CV90 is the best of the best but the advantage over a Bradley isn't that great. They're both very capable vehicles, much better than the ruzzian BMP variants.
> mobility in mud or snow High priority for any Swedish military ground vehicles, really. Snow, bogs and other wetlands, and forests... preferably with decent speed.
As a BV410 driver I'd say we're faster than the cv90's but it's not by much, and we don't have a gun(medical transport in Sweden....) ..
The BVs are great vehicles! Miss driving them (the 206s, anyway)!
I've driven a ton in the 308's, haven't gotten the chance to drive any 206 chassi, but man compared to the 308's the 410 sure is like comparing a gokart to a bus.
> I think snowmobiles are the only ground vehicles capable of outrunning a CV90 in winter conditions off road. I'd say the BvS10/BV410 (developed by Hägglunds just as the CV90) can outrun it in deep snow and mud. But no other IFVs come close.
In a nutshell CV90 is \- newer \- more versatile (can be equipped with different weapon systems and ammo types) \- Better mobility (faster, and *much* more agile in snowy terrain) Bradley is heavier with probably better protection than CV90, but I have read it might have difficulties in snow terrain. Also Bradley has seen more action in general so it's more firetested IFV. In the end both IFV's are on the top of the food chain, and I wouldn't want to go against either of them.
I would not want to get gunned down in the snow by a CV90. Impressive bit of engineering.
I read that the US is contemplating replacing some of its bradleys with them
A derivative of the CV90 seems to have been the original contender from BAE for the US program that aims to replace the Bradley, but based on recent information from BAE, they will present an all new design. The program itself is still in an early stage and there are various companies participating with their proposals, years will pass before there is a winner
Isn’t it just the MkIV of the CV90 that is a contender for Bradley replacement? I doubt they would develop a whole new platform when the CV90 is still a good base to build and improve upon.
BAE claimed a few months ago that they would be presenting a completely new platform: hybrid electric drive, an unmanned 50mm gun turret etc.
So... MkV then :) Unmanned turret is an option for MkIV: https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/cv90-mkiv
CV90 is a newer vehicle, has better mobility and probably thicker armour. Its base gun is also bigger and packs more of a punch (40mm vs 25mm on Bradley). It has more damage potential on light vehicles and event infantry on the open with that thing
There are CV90 models with 35mm, 30mm and 40mm cannons. Sweden uses 40mm, export models are 30 or 35mm. Which version UA get I guess is depending on the stocks they pull from?
if they come from Sweden directly then its Swedish army 40mm model
Bofors 40mm, tried and tested for almost a century. Bofors goes chunka-chunka-chunk
https://www.baesystems.com/en/product/cv90120--strong-agile-lethal No one bought these yet though.
They build every demonstrator they can ever think of. There must be 10 variants for every variant actually sold. There’s likely a CV90 ice cream truck if you search the BAE basements.
CV90 food truck would be perfect!
Can deliver your ice cream through a 150mm reinforced concrete wall directly to your mouth with a proximity timed fuse.
Fake, there was no Sweden in Red Alert 2 for alliance faction.
An unspecified number of Archer systems are being sent as well. I do wonder how quickly they will start seeing use in combat though, since they require experience to be used effectively.
Probably a battalion worth of Archers (12).
Unspecified? I thought the number was 12?
During the conference our defense minister said we are sending up to 50 CV90 and an undetermined number of Archer, pending a recommendation from the military. There are 20 "Available" from the 24 originally made for Norway (out of 48 in existence). Norway canceled the order. He also mentioned a artillery batallion would normally have 12 pieces. This is where that number comes from.
Yup, 12 is just speculation. It is a good guess but there is not official number.
Hypothetically they could have already started training when the leadership changed after the election, no? Ebba Busch talked about the lobbying for sending Archer started that early during the press conference. (just wildly speculating here ofc lol)
If we’re bringing back bow and arrows, where’s the trebuchets at?
Super thicc volvos smashing through enemy lines!
Suggas? Those would be very cool. Extremely rare, though.
For anyone wondering we are sending the combat vehicle 90 aka CV90 and our artillery platform Archer.
Volvo s90 will do just fine
Now that's just overkill.
No, overkill would be a Volvo 240
245 turned into pickup (epa style). Mount a heavy machine gun on the back.
And for anyone wondering CV90 is one of the best IFVs out there.
Heja Sverige! I wish Finnish support for the war effort would be as strong. More we give the sooner this war will be over and with less casualties.
To be fair we have a pretty big defensive wall against Russia called Finland so I think we can all agree that it's better if you guys save a bit of extra weaponry for yourselves (and all the Swedes who would join you) whereas we can spare some death machines
You just announced a huge package now. So, yes, it is.
[удалено]
yes
CV90's? Thats fucking sick! By far the coolest IFV out there :D
The Viking chariots of war are on the way.. They can join the Norwegian Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System to fight side by side against the invaders. The Scandinavians are ready and willing to help Ukraine! Im so glad to see it, and proud for our little part in this saga
Til Valhall
Name checks out. May all brave warriors be granted access to the halls of the slain. Until Valhalla!
I do wonder if flooding Ukraine with western IFV’s that are generations newer than Russia’s tanks makes the Leopard 2 drama less relevant.
The fragmentation rounds will fuck up thos trenshes lol
Those CV 90s are going to tear up those trenches like there’s no tomorrow. They will regret using those tactics real quick once these arrive.
I can't imagine what it's like being in charge of Ukrainian logistics.
"And what the hell is THIS thing?" must be a regular occurence
I’m curious if we will have Ukrainian personnel being trained on these vehicles in Sweden. Maybe it’s already happening.
Why do we keep trickling in help? We need to give them an overwhelming force so they can end this.
It's like putting a frog in water and slowly raising the temperature so it doesn't notice. Of course it wouldn't work on an actual frog but I assume that's what the West is going for
Because Ukraine has to be able to absorb that equipment. Giving too much too fast will result in assets sitting idle.
This is huge. 90s are a top notch IFVs. These are heavy fighting vehicles on par with Bradleys. Sweden makes very high quality weapons and they're perfect for Ukrainian terrain. The artillery too. Also, there are a lot of specialized variants of this vehicle. Mortar tank, anti-aircraft... If Ukraine got to choose any platform for their army, it's probably this one. Between this, Bradleys, will-they-won't-they german tanks... Ukraine is going to have some legit heavy mech units in the field soon. Fielded against Russia soviet gear in the right kind of fight, there's potential for 5X differences in performance. These are very good vehicles.
The question is quantity. What’s 10-30 top-notch IFV’s against thousands of Russian tanks? Anyone who’s played an RTS can tell you quantity can have a quality all it’s own.
[удалено]
Believe me, a Lot of people here would Love to send them what we have (and is functional). But we seem to be unable to elect someone with a spine
He gets it.. they (Ukraine) are fighting for the whole of europe
Great thanks Sweden! You’ve saved many lives today.
Cant wait to see them in action we are repenting for staying neutral in ww2.
To be fair, while we *did* give concessions to Germany under duress during WW2 to avoid being invaded (and to afford food and coal to survive), we repeatedly *willingly* violated neutrality to aid the Allied forces, and our neutrality allowed us to take in tens of thousands of refugees, and use our diplomats to affect things (and save thousands more) across Europe. Allowing the Germans to use our telegraph cables and intercepting every message so Arne Beurling could decypher them and we could pass on intel to the Allied forces, for example, or leasing 8000 seamen to Britain after the Swedish merchant fleet was stuck outside the Baltic.
Also Sweden saved a lot of Jewish people.
>Raoul Gustaf Wallenberg (4 August 1912 – disappeared 17 January 1945)[note 1][1] was a Swedish architect, businessman, diplomat, and humanitarian. He saved thousands of Jews in German-occupied Hungary during the Holocaust from German Nazis and Hungarian fascists during the later stages of World War II. While serving as Sweden's special envoy in Budapest between July and December 1944, Wallenberg issued protective passports and sheltered Jews in buildings he declared as Swedish territory. >Two days before the Soviet Army occupied Budapest, Wallenberg negotiated with Eichmann and with Major-General Gerhard Schmidthuber, the supreme commander of German forces in Hungary. Wallenberg bribed Arrow Cross Party member Pál Szalai to deliver a note in which Wallenberg persuaded the occupying Germans to prevent a Fascist plan to blow up the Budapest ghetto and murder an estimated 70,000 Jews. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raoul_Wallenberg
I just want to note, because it's pretty badass, Arne Beurling didn't have those fancy computing machines that the British had. He sat down with pencil and paper and managed to figure out how the cipher machines used actually worked.
Yeah, from Wiki; > He is perhaps most famous for single-handedly decrypting an early version of the German cipher machine Siemens and Halske T52 in a matter of two weeks during 1940, using only pen and paper. This machine's cipher is generally considered to be more complicated than that of the more famous Enigma machine.
i know we werent prepared at all and would have lost so fast against germany,but this time we actually can help so im proud that we are and not saying we are neutral out of fear of russia.
Wow that’s an incredible package! Meanwhile Germany with a military gdp and population that eclipses their own many times over sends 40 marders and blocks other countries from sending leo2’s unless America, who is already sending hundreds of armored systems monthly, sends abrams. All eyes still on German leadership 🧐
Everyone is getting a huge amount of info out of this Sadly it’s costing a lot of young men their lives And civilians of course Hopefully it costs a dictator his too
IFVs, people never seem to understand how important these vehicles are. These are the things that save lives, like, every day. Take every tank and rocket systems donated whenever. IFVs keep people alive.
Everybody flexes on Germany
But germany (And US) already agreed to send IFVs to ukraine though? Its tanks thats the problem here
> But germany (And US) already agreed to send IFVs to ukraine though? yes but Germany only agreed to send much older and much worse Marder IFV (about 20 years older vehicle than CV90 and far less capable)......CV90 is equivalent of the new German Puma IFV, and Scholtz would get a heart attack from just thinking about such proposal to send those to Ukraine. So no they are not the same thing
The CV90 is not comparable to a Puma at all.
yes it is, modern CV90's in Swedish service were upgraded not even 10 years ago. Tell me a single thing that Puma has that CV90 doesnt
I don't think the CV90 has a soft kill system like the Puma for example. Not sure if the CV90 has reactive armor either.
> I don't think the CV90 has a soft kill system like the Puma for example. https://euro-sd.com/2019/05/articles/13297/active-and-reactive-vehicle-protection-systems/attachment/saabs-land-electronic-defence-system-50-soft-kill-electronic-countermeasure-system-is-deployed-on-the-swedish-armys-cv90-combat-vehicles/ It does >Not sure if the CV90 has reactive armor either. https://defense-update.com/20050823_cv90.html it does
And are they sending them the vehicles with all the latest upgrades ? Most likely no.
they gonna send whatever Swedish army has in its arsenal......and far as can be seen, all Swedish CV90's have been upgraded to somewhat high level. So they are going to be definitely among the most modern IFV's around and light years ahead of those old Marder 1A3 that Germany pledged (a 80's modification to a 60's vehicle)
We're not sending old stuff. We are in it to win it. Then you must send the best you have if want Ukraine to win. I am hoping we will train Ukrainians on Jas gripen too, if there would be a need for it later on, and i think it would be a optimal fighter jet for Ukrainie going forward. It would for sure escalatethings with Russia, but i think we passed that line already so might as well go all the way.
You realize that marders received upgrades as well don't you ? The Marder can be equipped with the same reactive armor that the Puma has for example. And yes whatever sweden has in their arsenal. That link you send shows that such a system exists. Not that it was rolled out to all of them.
Yes. So if there's IFVs there already then what's the difference between sending them and tanks?
On modern battlefield lines are kind of blurred. In general IFVs are used to support infantry, while tanks are supported by infantry. Tanks are also much more survivable. Western MBT tanks are much heavier than Soviet designs, based on what we see employed on battlefield they might be actually immune to what Russians have. However until it is proven, it might be just wishful thinking.
How?
[удалено]
In that case 1 cv90 for 10 BMP-2s or no deal.
Good, form a stomp circle around the bastards
You listening Germany?
Also No assembly required
> Sweden to send infantry AAAAAAAAAA > fighting vehicles to Ukraine Oh okay
Sending IFVs instead of tanks is like serving desert instead of the main course when someone is hungry!
Wouldn't it be smart to join NATO first?
Can't let Erdocuck get in the way of helping Ukraine.
Why? Their only reason for existing is in defense from russia. Why wait until the war is at swedens door to use them for that purpose?
Exactly. I hope that Finns would understand this and send all 100 Leo 2A4s to Ukraine.
Sweden has received security assurances from various NATO countries, USA included. Being an EU member, they are also covered by said's organization collective self defence agreement
I still feel the US should immediately declare Sweden and Finland as Major non-NATO allies, while their Nato applications are still being processed. The President can designate a nation as an MNNA thirty days after notifying Congress, and while it does not automatically include a mutual defense pact with the United States, it does confers a variety of military and financial advantages that otherwise are not obtainable by non-NATO countries (for example, exemptions from the Arms Export Control Act that are enjoyed by NATO members). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_non-NATO_ally
Amd there is finland working as a wall between them so sweden if fine anyways...
To a degree, it's mostly the Baltic Sea that is our moat, as it were.
We are trying, but someone in nato dont want us there. So we just help ukraine instead.
I believe we are ordering new ones, in the time it takes to produce and deliver, ruSSians are busy failing in Ukraine
reminder that upon announcing their plans to join both Britain and the US signed defensive treaties with Sweden and Finland both having a functional mini article 5. Both are now functionally already in the NATO protection umbrella with the Royal and US navy/ air force ready to come in like the cavalry if the Russians start anything. as in all likelihood would the rest of NATO even if Turkey are being bellends about it
Well it could be used as blackmail against Nato but we are not Turkey, we support friends in need and dont use it as an oppertunity to win advantages for ourself.