Talk:Military ranks of the Swedish Armed Forces

Reordering the article

As the article is called Military Ranks of the Swedish Armed Forces, I propose that section 4 be placed first so as to give an overview, with the english translations afterwards. Dutygrade and the rest then follow on from that, and curios (historic ranks) can come at the end (or even better, be given an independent article).Hans Engstrom (talk) 08:57, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

In other words, 4, 3, 1, 2, 5, 6.Hans Engstrom (talk) 16:30, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

We should maintain the current order since looking at insignias without background info. is not very informative. Current translations are indeed very misleading as proven by the distribution of personnel vs ranks. Therefore the distribution should remain at the top. --Malin Lindquist (talk) 12:14, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Hans about the order and I also agree with him that we should move the pre 2009 ranks insignia to another article(I suggest the article Historical ranks of the SAF, which I created) I suggest that we at the very start of the article, before the insignias, add some introductory text about the three different categories; what kind of education they require and what their duties are. Malin, please try to understand that your personal opinion that the official translations are wrong have no place on wikipedia. Now, if someone notable like the Swedish Supreme Commander or the Chairman of the US JCS would say that the translations are wrong, then we might include that in the article.--Stulfsten (talk) 22:07, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

I also agree with Stulfsten and Hans Engstrom. Faffia (talk) 14:08, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

----

The Swedish rank system was complicated even before 1972, and subsequent reforms and counter-reforms have not made things easier. I think is difficult or impossible to explain its workings to non-Swedes, and many Swedes, unless we a) distinguinsh between the periods, and explain the situation in each period separately: before 1972, 1983, and after the return to, basically, the old system in 2009. b) explain some special features in Sweden, which are unusual in other countries - that the senior NCO or warrant officer (as you prefer) ranks are interspersed with officer ranks, so that a colour sergeant is ranking between second and first lieutenant etc. (The only other examples of this that I know of are "Offiziere des militärfachligen Dienstes" in Germany, and warrant officers in the Royal Navy before they introduced some sort of NBO in 1998.) - that we once followed the German or continental tradition to have also senior NCOs/WOs as platoon leaders, and not only commissioned officers. In the Bundeswehr about half of the platoon leaders typically still are NCO/WOs, and it is also common in France and other continental countries. This is unusual or unthinkable in Anglo-Saxon countries, possibly with the exception of the USMC. - that, until a few years ago when we still had a huge conscript army, regular platoon leader in the peace time establishment were typically posted as company commanders in the wartime establishment, and peace-time company commanders as batallion commanders. This was by no means only for a "theoretical" mobilization, they also occupied these post during the refresher courses when the wartime units were acitivated. From 1960 senior NCOs/WO who were also posted as company commanders (until their ranks changed in 1972).

The reform in 1972 had two major effects: - The regular senior NCOs (or WOs) got - well deserved - the same ranks as conscripts and reserves who held the same positions in the wartime establishment, and the same ranks as holders of similar positions in other armies, while the commissioned officers (including Major) were moved up one step. - But in the peace-time establishment the rank inflation went beyond that in other countries. Captain became the typical rank of a platoon leader, unlike other armies where they normally only have captains as platoon leaders in special or technical forces. This inflation remained when we went "back to the future" in 2009, while the good side of the NBO, equal opportunities for all, was abolished.

Two more things to remember: - We should not let ourselves be blinded by STANAG. It is not very consistent, but in fact rather arbitrary. A German Oberfeldwebel, OR-6, can very well be a platoon leader, while an American Sergeant first class, OR-7, is normally only platoon sergeant/deputy platoon leader. - We should be particularly cautious to press the comparison with top NCOs and WO in Anglo-Saxon countries. They often have a completely different role with responsibilities stretching horisontally over several companies, or more, across the otherwise vertical hierarchical command structure. Thus they often have the sole responsibility training of enlisted personnel, drill, discipline, dress and interior management, and even selection for NCOs, without interference of platoon leaders and company commanders. This is probably because Anglo-Saxon armed forces reflect more of an old class-society where officers and gentlemen were not expected to be bothered such low things. That is not the case in the more "democratic" continental Europe (or Scandinavia) where the French revolution and the Napoleonic wars ("each soldier carries the marshal's staff in his knapsack") have left their mark, and where the hierarchical structure is intact.

Minor remarks: - I think the easiest and best way to translate "tjänsteställning" is "rank". - Perhaps you could explain that the "fanjunkare" were given the same rank as underlöjtnant, and that the zig-zag system appeared when that rank was abolished in 1937 or 1938. (For some time regementskassör and some senior other underofficerare held the same rank as lieutenant.) - It is not correct to say that "In 1960 the tjänsteställning of the warrant officers were elevated further so that i. The lowest warrant officer, sergeant, had a tjänsteställning just below the lowest officer rank, fänrik". This was the case already from 1926. - It should also read "It was decided that some ranks in this category should, like the old underofficerare ranks in 1926-1972, have a .." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goofy201 (talk • contribs) 11:02, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

It’s a bit of a problem that the different tables differ in which direction they indicate seniority. This should probably be cleaned up. 21:07, 6 July 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.71.246.102 (talk)

Civilian ranks

I have added a few lines about the use of ranks among civilian employees. I am well aware that the article is "Military" ranks of the Swedish Armed Forces. The reason why I added it was a friend of mine asked yesterday why a "military" (as he saw it) wore a white rank, while the others around him wore the common yellow/brown/gold ranks. It's appropriate, IMHO, to explain the white ranks exist and to distinct those from the normal. However, it's not neccessary to enlarge this section any more than neccessary. Faffia (talk) 11:03, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Ranks vs roles in NBG11

platoon leader: Lojtnant-Kapten

platoon sergeant: Fanrik-Lojtnant

section leader(7 soldiers): First Sergeant

deputy section leader (7 soldiers): Sergeant

That would be 8 soldiers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.217.89.69 (talk) 13:34, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

REF: Graderna kan variera lite men enl personalchefen på skyttebataljonen generellt sätt enl nedan: Plutonchef: Kapten-Löjtnant Stf Plutonchef: Löjtnant-Fänrik Skyttegruppchef: 1. Sergeant (Specialistofficer) Stf skyttegruppchef: Sergeant

Med vänliga hälsningar

Jesper Tengroth Chief Public Affairs Officer Nordic Battlegroup, (F)HQ Swedish Armed Forces PL 920 SE 749 81 ENKÖPING, SWEDEN Telephone: +46 (0)171 15 88 78 Cell: +46 (0)70 388 11 80 Mail: jesper.tengroth@mil.se

Incorrect Ranks

Concerning two issues of incorrect information of the Swedish Armed Forces:

The comparison meaning of ranks between Sweden and NATO has a major fault, since the comparison of the Swedish ranks is only during peacetime. During mobilization (theoretically) the Swedish officers have similar commission as the NATO:

Fänrik (Second Lieutenant): deputy platoon leader or platoon leader.

Löjtnant (Lieutenant): platoon leader and deputy company commander (if company is commanded by a Captain).

Kapten (Captain): company commander or deputy company commander.

Major: company commander and deputy battalion commander or battalion commander.

Överstelöjtnant (Lt. Colonel): battalion commander and deputy brigade/regiment commander (if brigade is commanded by a Colonel).

Överste (Colonel): brigade/regiment commander, or deputy brigade/regiment commander (if brigade is commanded by a Brigadier General).

Brigadgeneral (Brigadier General): sometimes a brigade commander, but usually deputy division commander.

Generalmajor (Major General): division commander.

During mobilization there is no higher prepared unit than divisions (fördelning), but Generallöjtnants (General Lieutenants) could be appointed to command an army corps, if one is created.

Another fault is that the system previous to 1972 had another rank, Fältmarskalk (Field Marshal), which is not written on the page. The rank has not used in practice since 1824, but was a de jure rank until 1972, and should therefore be written on the page.

Thinitian (talk) 10:34, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

You must be unaware of lots of things. Sweden has some 18,700 officers and fully mobilized (90 days) Sweden may consist of some 3,000 men. How can you possibly mathematically explain your claims above? What you describe above was true during the 1970s when Sweden had 1,000 battalions that could operate after one weeks of mobilization. And even then, a division(fördelning) was led by a colonel 1 class (överste 1gr). Some very few officers today train troops, the rest are administrators. --Malin Lindquist (talk) 11:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree that it will never practically be possible to mobilize according to plan today, but I believe that it is important to note the theoretical difference between peacetime commissions and wartime, even though that I fully agree with your statement that it would be currently impossible, which should be noted.

Concerning the division (fördelning) commander, it is true that for administrative purposes, the division commander in peacetime was a Colonel 1st Class (Överste av 1:a Graden, equivalent to current Brigadgeneral). However, during (theoretical) mobilization, a flexible system to appoint Major Generals to command divisions, where the Colonel 1st Class would function as deputy and chief of the administrative, would apply. It is also important to note that not all divisions of the former mobilization-plan could be given command to a Major General, and I should have written this difference in the previous section.

I thank you for bringing this issue, which will give greater clarity to an addition for this purpose.

Concerning the former rank of Fältmarskalk, it could possibly be wise to write this as a small notice below the ranks before 1972-section, since the rank had not been used after 1824, and thus did not have a modern insignia as the others did, that is described in the section.

Thinitian (talk) 08:28, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I am not aware of the system of appointing Major Generals as division (fördeling) commanders. However, I have to admit that it does make sense to do so. For example, to promote överste 1st class to the rank in the event of war. The rank Överste 1st class, for most, appears too low for a division commander. It is probably a remnant from the time when ranks in Sweden were heavily deflated prior the rank inflationary reform 1972, which only affected ranks below Lieutenant Colonel and not ranks at and above that.

Anyway, I don’t know. Thus, I can only speak based on my own experience when participating in a division exercise in Norrbotten (1983) where the commander was a colonel 1st class. --Malin Lindquist (talk) 13:46, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I have noted the theoretical difference between peacetime and wartime ranks and commissions. I have also noted the previous rank of Fältmarskalk below the Ranks Before 1972-section.

Thinitian (talk) 06:51, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Spelling errors

There are a few places where kommendör is misspelled as komendör.

Rank structure

Rank structure is false. OR9-6 are specialist officers Senior NCO. OR 5-4 are gruppbefäl Junior NCO. OR1-3 are soldater Enlisted.

Vicekorpral is Enlisted. Korpral, furir, överfuri are JNCO. Sergeant to Regementsförvaltare are SNCO.

Weatherford (talk) 17:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)