How They Stole a Bank with a Helicopter and Escaped
On the morning of 23 September 2009, in the suburbs of Stockholm, a group of criminals executed one of the most audacious heists in modern Swedish history: they stole a helicopter, landed it on the roof of a high-security cash-depot building, used explosives and tools to break in, took off again loaded with sacks of money—and evaded capture for days. This remarkable event has since become a case-study in criminal planning, security failure, and police response. This article explores what happened, how it was planned and executed, how the criminals got away (at least initially), how they were caught, what mistakes were made—and what lessons we can draw from it.
Background & Context: Why This Target?
The heist took place at a cash-depot operated by G4S (a global security company) in Västberga, a southern suburb of Stockholm. The depot held large volumes of banknotes in transit for banks and retailers. The location was chosen because it combined valuable goods with access by air (flat roof) and apparently manageable security weaknesses.
Sweden is not normally associated with high-volume violent bank robberies of this scale, which contributed to the shock both locally and internationally. The fact that aerial assault was employed—via helicopter—made the robbery resemble a Hollywood thriller rather than an everyday crime.
The scale of the haul: The robbers reportedly escaped with 39 million Swedish krona (SEK) (roughly around 4 million euros at the time). The exact amount and the fate of the money remains unclear.
Timeline of the Heist: Minute by Minute
Here’s a reconstructed timeline of how the crime unfolded early that morning.
- 01:00–02:00: The helicopter (a Bell 206 Jet Ranger, registration SE-HON) is stolen from a hangar at Roslagens Helikopterflyg in Norrtälje (about 60 km north of Stockholm).
- Pre-dawn hours: The helicopter, now stolen, is flown to a secluded area near Stora Skuggan, where it is blacked out and prepared for the mission.
- 05:15 CET: The helicopter lands on the roof of the G4S depot in Västberga. Witnesses at the nearby railway office see it hovering and then landing.
- 05:19: Police receive first call about the robbery; meanwhile the robbers are already disembarking.
- 05:20-05:30: On the rooftop, three or four robbers descend ladders (or equipment) from the helicopter, break glass skylight structure, enter the building through a broken roof window, plant explosives inside to breach security doors, load bags of cash onto the helicopter.
- 05:25: Police patrol arrives, but is ordered not to intervene immediately due to suspected heavy arms and risk to hostages; also the police helicopter base is rendered unusable by bombs.
- 05:35 CET: The helicopter takes off from the roof, laden with money and robbers. Surveillance later locates the helicopter around 08:15 near Skavlöten in Arninge (north of Stockholm) abandoned.
- Afterwards: A man-hunt ensues; arrests are made within days though the majority of the stolen cash is never recovered.
This means the entire high-risk rooftop landing, break-in, loading of cash and take-off happened in roughly 20-30 minutes.
The Planning, Tools & Tactics Used
What makes this heist remarkable is how meticulously planned and executed it was. Let’s break down the key components.
Helicopter Theft and Deployment
Rather than infiltrate on foot or by car, the perpetrators stole a helicopter from a remote base. Using a harvested aircraft gave them aerial access, reduced reliance on major roads, and allowed them to land directly on the target roof.
The choice of a flat-roofed cash-depot building revealed they had scouted the structure, identified a landing zone, calculated timing and signage of police response.
Use of Caltrops, Decoy Bombs and Diversion
The robbers laid caltrops (spikes) across roads leading to the depot to delay police vehicles.
Simultaneously, they planted a decoy bomb (a suspicious package labelled “BOMB”) at the police helicopter base (Myttinge, Värmdö), which grounded police aerial response while the robbery was in progress.
These diversions show sophisticated awareness of police reaction times, response capabilities and the importance of controlling the environment.
Entry into the Depot, Tools and Techniques
Once on the roof, the robbers broke through a pyramid-shaped glass skylight (using a 10 kg sledgehammer as one witness later described) to reach the interior.
Inside, they used explosive charges to breach reinforced security doors and then used industrial cutting tools or saws to open cash-containers/cages inside the counting rooms.
They appeared selective: for example picking certain denominations (e.g., 500-krona bundles) and leaving less valuable material behind—showing prior knowledge of currency containers and risk-to-reward calculations.
The Escape Route and Abandonment of Helicopter
After loading cash, the helicopter took off and landed at several drop-off points to off-load loot and personnel, before being abandoned in a wooded field near Skavlöten in Arninge roughly 20 km north of Stockholm at around 08:15.
The fact that the helicopter was not destroyed immediately indicates a potential flaw: investigators later found it, collected forensic evidence and traced the aircraft’s use and the pilot.
Arrests, Sentences & Recovery (or Lack Thereof)
Although the heist was brilliantly executed, policing and investigation caught up quickly.
- Several suspects were arrested just days after the robbery (5 days after) in various countries: one suspect was captured in the Dominican Republic, others in Canary Islands and Sweden.
- In 2010, the pilot was sentenced to 7 years in prison for aggravated robbery; by 2011, on appeal, his sentence was increased to 8 years.
- Other accomplices received sentences of 2-8 years depending on involvement.
- Despite the arrests, the majority of the stolen 39 million SEK was never recovered.
Thus, while the plan succeeded in execution, the long-term gain for the robbers was limited by detection, arrests and inability to secure or spend the loot freely.
Why the Swedish Police Were Unable to Stop It
Several factors contributed to the fact that, although the police responded, they were unable to intervene in time to prevent the theft:
- The use of the helicopter allowed the robbers to bypass usual road-based police response.
- The planted decoy bomb at the helicopter base grounded aerial support, giving the robbers aerial superiority.
- The caltrops on roads hampered police vehicles.
- The early morning timing (05:15) meant fewer witnesses and delayed detection; the police arrival was at 05:25, by which time much of the loading was done.
- The depot may have lacked fail-safe procedures for rooftop intrusion and lacked real-time tracking of helicopter landings at its roof.
- Despite prior intelligence (a warning from Serbian police about a possible helicopter assault) the Swedish authorities did not act in time.
The result: though an ambitious plan, the robbers exploited weaknesses in security architecture, law-enforcement coordination and timing.
Security and Criminological Lessons
From a criminology / security-engineering standpoint, this event offers numerous lessons:
- High-value targets with aerial access must consider non-traditional ingress routes (e.g., rooftop landings).
- Diversion tactics (caltrops, decoy bombs) can significantly delay response and must be factored into security planning.
- Cross-domain coordination (ground, air, intelligence) is critical for rapid response to novel attack modes.
- Rooftop sensors, helicopter tracking and intrusion detection must be part of high-security cash-depots.
- Intelligence warnings (e.g., prior tip-offs) must be acted on and integrated into security threat assessments.
- Forensic evidence preservation (such as the abandoned helicopter) still enabled the police to crack the case, showing that even well-planned heists leave traces.
- Recovery of loot is difficult for criminals, even if the initial heist succeeds, because disposal, laundering and tracing remain major obstacles.
- Psychology of planning: The heist demonstrates how criminals will combine tools (aviation, explosives, diversions) not usually associated with bank robbery—indicating the importance of thinking outside typical scenario models.
For criminologists and security professionals, the event serves as a vivid case of how modern heists adapt aviation, technology and detailed pre-planning—and how law enforcement must adapt accordingly.
The Legacy of the Heist
The Västberga helicopter robbery has entered criminal-history lore for several reasons:
- It remains one of the most daring heists in Scandinavia and Europe: landing a helicopter on a depot roof, using explosives and leaving with millions.
- Several media productions, documentaries and dramatizations have since revisited the event, further embedding it into popular culture.
- It triggered security reviews, especially for cash-depots, helicopter access controls and police–air-force coordination in Sweden.
- From a public-confidence angle, the robbery exposed vulnerabilities even in nations with generally low violent crime—and thus stimulated debate on policing readiness and criminal opportunism.
- It remains partly unresolved in terms of missing loot: the fact that the stolen money was never fully recovered adds to its mystique and the continuing interest in the case.
Conclusion
The 23 September 2009 helicopter robbery in Västberga, Sweden was a heist of cinematic scope—but it was real. The combination of aviation theft, rooftop landing, explosives, caltrops and decoy bombs reveals how modern criminals can exploit multiple domains (air, land, intelligence) to carry out high-value thefts. Yet the success of the heist was ultimately limited: investigators caught many of the perpetrators; many of the necessary forensic footprints remained; and the inability to fully recover the loot means long-term benefit for the criminals was restricted.
For anyone studying criminology, security operations or law-enforcement readiness, the case serves as an important example of innovation in criminal behaviour, the importance of integrated security planning, and how even well-executed crimes tend to leave sufficient evidence for capture. The event also reminds us that the measure of a heist’s success is not just in the theft itself—but in the ability of authorities to respond, trace and capture.
So when you reflect on high-profile robberies—and especially those involving aviation—remember: the tower of planning may be tall, but the foundation of forensic and investigative work is strong.
