Finland (Suomi)

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
Post Reply

Wrekin762
Member
Posts: 76
Joined: 30 Aug 2015, 21:48
Cayman Islands

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Wrekin762 »

Yup, they're the vehicles that the Dutch got rid of.

Originally Finland wanted to buy ATACMS missiles for them as well, but last year they decided against it for budgetary reasons.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Yeah, then the manufacturer (after all the wriggles with export perrmissioning and so forth) thought that they had a customer on a hook... and put up the price five times! As the goodies are not in production any more, surely they must have gone up in value?
- now, who might be that manufacturer?
- by any chance the one that bribed Germany to take the Starfighter, and brought about the demise of making any such a/c by a single European nation, putting the industry through the motions of co-operating at multinational level... difficult, but can be done
- or is it the same company that has promised the earth to every one listening, so that they can be the only provider in the "West" for the next-gen fighter
- that only the US Congress could hold to account (too divided and incompetent for that!) and divides & conquers the whole industry by giving out " a wing" or "a final assembly line" or a "regional this & that service centre"?

You may have guessed already who was told "thank you, but no thank you"?

They got the biz anyway, as they make the JASSM... :roll:
- so, launch from the ground,or launch fro the air: same range, just that in the air you can get closer to the target

This part (2011) was to make the system ready for the longer ranged option (to be fired):
In May 2011, the Finnish Army placed a $45.3m order to upgrade its 22 M270 MLRS launchers. The upgrade enables the launchers to fire precision GPS-guided munitions
... never mind, GPS is good for 70 km out, does not need to be 300 km
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Which takes me to tube artillery, as opposed to rocketry:

Just wondering why the world-renowned maker of trucks (not so much their engines, but again... never mind) is mentioned here:
"
the 8x8 Tatra base opens up the variety of options that may be required by customers, like various autoloading levels as well as cabin protection to Level 2A or 2B. It could be adapted to carry 40 rounds. Broadening customer options, the T815 chassis itself already comes with a choice of engines besides the standard Tatra air-cooled 410 horsepower Diesel, including powerplants from MAN, Sizu and Renault/Volvo.
"

Is it may be the $100m that Finland has put aside for renewing the not-towed 155 mm pieces... all 18 of them (joking apart, they have more tubes than the Bundeswehr).

If you take the engine (& spares) out of the equation, $ 5m a piece might buy you this (x 18)

http://www.esdpa.org/category/news/page/2/
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by arfah »

...................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by arfah »

...................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by RetroSicotte »

Not surprised, and indeed somewhat pleased. Typhoon never felt like a genuine contender, but Gripen always has been the "second best option" for us if planes get picked, owing to our large portion of components we supply for the aircraft. (F-35 being the 'third' choice below it.)

It's a good place for British components in planes right now. Typhoon, Gripen and F-35 are all winners for us if any of them nails a contract.

~UNiOnJaCk~
Member
Posts: 780
Joined: 03 May 2015, 16:19
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ~UNiOnJaCk~ »

Strategically and operationally the Gripen makes absolute best sense for Finland. It might not have some of the raw performance offered by some of its international competitors but it is nonetheless a solid and capable plane in its own right and, more crucially, it is a platform that nations such as Finland are likely to be able to operate and support in a far more consistent and reliable manner - particularly given the types of threats they face.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

The Swedish and Finnish forces have started exercises using each others' navy and air force basis. You can understand the rationale if you locate the nearest Iskander artillery bdes and draw the circles representing their range.
- for clarity, there is no formal defence treaty, but both signed the NATO hosting of forces agreement at the same time (i.e. around the time of the NATO meeting in Wales)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

arfah wrote:Finland to purchase 240 rockets for its M270 MLRS.

http://www.janes.com/article/57776/finl ... e-purchase


The breakdown of the purchase (DID:)
"February 10/16: Finland has approved the purchase external link external link of missiles for its 22 recently upgraded Lockheed Martin M270 Multiple Launch Rocket Systems (MLRSs). 90 M31A1 Unitary Missiles and 150 M30A1 Alternative Warhead Missiles are expected to be delivered at a cost of $78.4 million. "
indicates more emphasis is put on neutralising a massing formation or its immediate logistics echelon (AW) than taking out pretargeted/ fixed location targets with Unitary warheads.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by arfah »

.......................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Let me see now: Estonia doing an amphibious assault across the Gulf of Finland (having declared it the Gulf of Estonia)? Norway brings their only bde up to strength and invades Lapland, to establish a monopoly in the trade of smoked reindeer meat?
Or Sweden quickly resurrects the 15 combat bdes they have abolished?
- must be one of those...
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

a hundred of these
https://static.ylilauta.org/files/6d/or ... /bmp2m.jpg
coming into service 2016-2019
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by arfah »

.................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

All optics, the visual and IR camo (Polish Miranda) and the internal arrangement in the back for dismounts... the common complaint was that after a couple of years of civvy life and coming back to refresh skills, the back had become too small for the whole squad - so who is going to be left behind?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

I was hoping to sow confusion, but the truth came out straight away.

Here's a much older project that went nowhere (the mounts were turned into arty observation posts instead):
http://www.defencetalk.com/pictures/dat ... inland.jpg
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

arfah
Senior Member
Posts: 2173
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 19:02
Niue

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by arfah »

.....................
Admin Note: This user is banned after turning most of their old posts into spam. This is why you may see their posts containing nothing more than dots or symbols. We have decided to keep these posts in place as it shows where they once were and why other users may be replying to things no longer visible in the topic. We apologise for any inconvenience.

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by dmereifield »

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... plans.html

Update on Finnish fighter procurement programme. So, in terms if UK plc, we have 3 dogs in this fight?

A few other questions, if anyone can help:

Does anyone know how many they are looking to order?

Since BAE are listed as the lead for the Typhoon, how would this affect the work share between the consortium partners if the Typhoon was selected (I don't understand how the workload is divided between the partners for any of the export deals)?

Which is currently the favourite?

Much obliged, as always

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

dmereifield wrote:Does anyone know how many they are looking to order?

Since BAE are listed as the lead for the Typhoon, how would this affect the work share between the consortium partners if the Typhoon was selected
There is no official line on the numbers, but a working assumption is 1:1 (60plus of the Hornets in use).

Work share will be interesting as even the Hornets (and many more types before them) were assembled in Finland, to make sure there is an independent deep maintenance and even refurbing capability, under any circumstances; spares you can always hord).

As for the favourites;;; difficult to make it out from all the different arguments being advanced, but I quote for Gripen what a Saab representative said in response to a question from press:
" How is this 'smart' concept being received in a market so dominated by U.S rhetoric centered around '5th gen' and 'stealth'?

A: Gripen is a highly versatile multirole platform and one of its missions is interdiction in a highly contested airspace. However, Gripen is more focused on using a smart approach in packs, advanced EW systems and the deployment of standoff weapons instead of being reliant on stealth, as some as its competitors, when it comes to taking out advanced enemy air defences"
Translation: any a/c that does not come with something equivalent to (long ranged and stealthy) JASSM, to be able to deal with AC/AD solutions of an OpFor is a non starter
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Just to add, the RFI round has concluded and I just read that three threat scenarios have been specified and the manufacturers will have to specify how, at what range and with what weapon package their "solution" can deal with them
- I guess this, in addition to technical information, is trying to avoid any costly "extras" from surfacing in late stages of the selection/ negotiation
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by dmereifield »

Thanks for the info

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Korean press have jumped the gun on K9s
"They are expected to sign an MOU afterwards for a deal costing 400 million dollars (USD I'm guessing), 200 million for 48 used guns and another 200 USD for maintenance including technology transfer so that most if not all maintenance should be able to take place in Finland (would be an oversight to have it required to be shipped back to Korea for maintenance).

The actually signing of the deal would take place in early 2017 in Helsinki."

Dont trust the numbers (the proc authorisation is for less), but the interesting aspects are
- technology tansfer ,raising the possibility of follow on deals (Finland sold 400 field pieces fitted on a T-xx chassis, for Egypt to utilise their older hulls when the M-1s started to flow into Egypt)
- the price quoted is probably for new, not for used (which are being bought)
- the quantity is probably right as that would swap all mech units (as for their supporting artillery) into protected and self-mobile artillery, in one go
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Some updates on the Hornet replacement (HX) process:
- 18, 48, 64 or 72 are the quantities for which indicative pricing has been requested
-- clearly 18 would presume a follow-on buy or purchase of a more specialised a/c later, the first deliveries and Hornet OSD being only 5 yrs apart

- each response would fill a big van in printed form; 10 % classified even from the technical evaluators

- for F35 and Rafale no industrial benefits have (yet?) been mentioned
- BAE is highlighting the AMV deal potential in Oz (manufacturing in Finland as opposed to some other AMV deals?), but also the cruise missile potential (?? which one; arent they all on the drawing board)
- Gripen and SH would bring industrial participation within the actual a/c industry

First hint of the budget in April when the Gvmnt is publishing spending & funding framework out to 2021 (the year when the deal will be sealed... and it is big enough to show as a bump in the road).
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by dmereifield »

Thanks for the info.

Although its early days, would I be correct in thinking that the SH seems best placed on a number of factors - cost, ease of transition from current aircraft, home industrial participation, commonality with some European allies and Nato allies (though they are non Nato, might still be a consideration?) etc., and that it might thus be considered the favorite?

How does it stack up in terms of performance against the other aircraft?

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2762
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by dmereifield »

Also, could you explain a bit (or point to some relevant literature) about your point on BAE/AMV/Australia?

Post Reply