Finland (Suomi)

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by xav »

Finnish MoD confirms Pohjanmaa-class corvette program delay
Image
The Finnish Navy US$1.2 billion Pohjanmaa-class corvette program is being delayed due to protracted contract negotiations, Major General Lauri Puranen revealed on June 27 through the Finnish Armed Forces official blog.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... ram-delay/

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by xav »

aaaaaaand... back on track

Finnish Navy Pohjanmaa-Class Corvette Program back on track
Finnish Navy's Pohjanmaa-class corvette acquisition project is proceeding well after having been delayed by a change of government and longer than expected contract negotiations. The Finnish Ministerial Committee on Economic Policy gave its approval for the continuation of the process.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... -on-track/

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Interesting that all the complex weapon purchases have been made public, but the guns not. My 2 cents:
- a 57 (moved over from Haminas, which are being LEP'ped and receiving torps that will add weight)
- a Swiss (now German owned) 35 - as used on Danish frigates - to enhance close-in defences... or the newest Bofors 40 mm, but one would then expect the Haminas to receive the same. A navy is not meant to be a collection of artillery history - though we did send ships to the Falklands with WW2 20 mm's onboard.
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 »

Old news, but as the chg of gvmnt has slowed everything down on proc front, don't be surprised if Boeing will come through strong in the next news pieces, as and when they break. With the Block III radar update "simultaneous ground and air mode" capability for operating under radar and Growler to interfere with look-down radar assets (which inevitably will be less numerous than those on the ground), the combo may beat "stealth" as for survivability of a fleet that is likely numerically overmatched:

"Boeing and the Navy have offered the Growler and F/A-18 Super Hornet in a response to query issued by the Finnish Ministry of Defense as part of their HX fighter program procurement.
“All strike fighter aircraft rely on Growler escort to increase survivability during high-threat missions,” said Dan Gillian, Boeing vice president, F/A-18 and EA-18G programs. “The combination of the Super Hornet Block III and Growler..." ["]
https://armadainternational.com/2019/03 ... o-finland/
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
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by xav »

Sweden loans Torped 45 ASW torpedo parts to the Finnish Navy
Image
The Swedish Armed Forces (SwAF) recently delivered parts of Torped 45 anti-submarine torpedoes to Finland, the Swedish Defence Materiel Administration (FMV) stated on September 2, 2019.

According to the cooperation agreement between the two countries, Finland is loaning Torped 45 parts from the SwAF until the delivery of the new Torped 47 system from Saab Dynamics.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... nish-navy/

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Lord Jim »

Interesting piece of kit the T-45 ASW Torpedo. The only wire guided helicopter launchable weapon I know of, able to be controlled by the helicopter ad designed specifically for littoral operation as per the Baltic.

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

xav wrote:Finland is loaning Torped 45 parts from the SwAF until the delivery of the new Torped 47 system from Saab Dynamics.
Lord Jim wrote:Finland is loaning Torped 45 parts from the SwAF until the delivery of the new Torped 47 system from Saab Dynamics.
True, but in this case it is just a filler, for the training gap.
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)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Lord Jim »

Does anyone know if the new T-47 Torpedo retains the wire guidance ability or is it more conventional?

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Quite amazing that Crotale (with its roots as a S. African project, long ago) will be fully digitised and serve (from 1990, in Finland) out to 2040
- the press release let's understand that the digitisation/ IADS integration is done in Finland, supported by Thales
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)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Lord Jim »

Mind you, given the height of their Crotale NG SPAA vehicles you wouldn't want to go near any low bridges.

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Lord Jim wrote:Mind you, given the height of their Crotale NG SPAA vehicles you wouldn't want to go near any low bridges.
It does not look like that https://maavoimat.fi/documents/1950813/ ... 6388409000 when ' on the road' :D
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)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Lord Jim »

Any pics around of the vehicle in "Travel" mode?

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Lord Jim wrote:Any pics around of the vehicle in "Travel" mode?
https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/785807834964480098/

But they have built a true "bridge destroyer" onto the same chassis:
https://www.armyrecognition.com/xa_sisu ... ption.html
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)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Lord Jim »

Thanks for the pics. I now have images of a "You've been framed", segment of military vehicles destroying bridges by not retracting the equipment mounted on their vehicles.

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

These guys are clearly exaggerating "Finland understands the Russian challenge, having fought 33 wars with Russia over the centuries " as my count is only 28
https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/com ... operation/
but they also report on the sad fact that Finland, in some respects (err, might be a change of emphasis amongst capabilities), seems to be disarming " it has one modern artillery piece for every mile of its long border with Russia" when a decade ago the statistic was "for every kilometer"...OK, perhaps delete 'modern' from that latter statement.

The local press seems not only to have picked up the story, but have added some icing "on the cake" https://www.verkkouutiset.fi/wp-content ... 18x629.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)

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Let's see now: the allocation for the 4 corvettes is e1.232 bln and now 1.087 bln has been divvied up, contractually:
- Rauma Marine Constructions Oy 647.6 mln ja Aker Arctic Technology Oy for specialised under ice propulsion part-solution 27 min.
- Saab for CMC + integration (incl. purchase? as in UK 'Gvmnt Procured & Provided, some three letters that stand for that) 412 mln.

Total cost 1.32 bln, incl. a reserve for integration (and a v low quoted cost for the SAM part of the purchase, must be missiles only and all the rest in the Saab, integration, part?)

Ohh, no, the fiscally conservative Finns are already over their e1.2 bn estimate... can't anyone get this warship estimating & building right :eh:

EDIT: just looked up the tread and the 1.2 bn seems to be (?) $$
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
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by xav »

Aker Arctic to Deliver Propellers and Shaft Lines for Pohjanmaa-class Corvettes
Image
On 26th September 2019, the Finnish Defence Forces Logistics Command and Aker Arctic Technology Inc signed a contract for the design, delivery and integration of complete propulsion lines to four Pohjanmaa-class multi-role corvettes for the Finnish Navy. Construction of the vessels is scheduled to begin in 2022 and the four-strong squadron will achieve operational readiness in 2028.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... corvettes/

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

xav wrote: Aker Arctic to Deliver Propellers and Shaft Lines for Pohjanmaa-class Corvettes
Image
On 26th September 2019, the Finnish Defence Forces Logistics Command and Aker Arctic Technology Inc signed a contract for the design, delivery and integration of complete propulsion lines to four Pohjanmaa-class multi-role corvettes for the Finnish Navy. Construction of the vessels is scheduled to begin in 2022 and the four-strong squadron will achieve operational readiness in 2028.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... corvettes/
It has been noted that the CIWS is missing, but the smaller graphic, also included in the article, shows it
- if it in the end will be omitted, I would be inclined to conclude that these ships are meant to operate in pairs, as escort corvettes (that was the reasoning for the heavier/ more expensive SAM being chosen)
- from 4 it is not possible to generate the kind of pairs originally envisaged in the Visby prgrm (ASuW, ASW specialists... all with their point defence SAMs, which were later omitted altogether)
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
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by xav »

Finnish Navy Lifts Veil on its Future Anti-Ship Missile: The Gabriel V
Image
The Finnish Navy (Merivoimat) unveiled some details about its future anti-ship missile: The Gabriel 5. The information is limited but since details on Gabriel V were pretty much non-existent to date, it is a good start and worth a mention here.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... gabriel-v/

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Comments/ questions on the last two:

The unorthodox choice of of the SAM from S. Africa was not repeated (even though the nxt-gen is in dvlpmnt), and one can ask (aside from price considerations) why was that
- the previous choice was based on the ability to discriminate (with the seeker method) low-flying targets from the background archipelago clutter
- the mission changed, and so did the type of SAM: range (for escorting) became the primary factor... call it local area AW if you like
The Q then: could there be something about the Gabriel, like multi-method seeker head that gave the win over other contenders?

Second question, on the markings on the bow deck; what are they for? I've seen a mention about VerTrep, so as you have a 'pad' at the opposite end of the vessel, it would have to be about rearming (missiles/ gun rounds) to make sense
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)

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by SW1 »

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news ... ipen-offer

The HX requirement, which once specified 64 fighters, has been relaxed so that bidders have more freedom to offer what they see as the best solution, and the number of fighters has been removed. The principal figures of this design-to-cost approach, according to Keränen, is that “€10 billion is the maximum budget for everything,” including all infrastructure and initial set-up support, and that the operational costs are at “the same level as those for the Hornet.” There is also a 30 percent industrial offset requirement.

While Boeing is expected to offer the EA-18G Growler electronic warfare platform alongside the closely related F/A-18E/F Super Hornet

The Saab offer includes both single-seat Gripen Es and two-seat Gripen Fs, the latter being seen as ideal for complex long-range strike and electronic warfare missions, for which the recently flight-tested Electronic Attack Jammer Pod (EAJP) is being included in the proposal. The GlobalEyes for Finland would be based on the Bombardier Global 6500 platform rather than the 6000 used for the three aircraft soon to be handed over to the UAE Air Force.

The bit highlighted in bold is something to consider in relation to our future fighter mix.

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

xav, are you sure about this "as well as the 9LV combat system" for the Haminas?

Yes, the missiles and torps will be of common type, but ripping out the old CMS altogether in midlife ... sounds expensive?

And yes: the AShMs will go on corvettes, FACs and lorries on land. A nice way to curb the costs of the corvettes (for approval) as that "triad" is considered a system of systems - the Squadron 2020 being only a part of the jigsaw, and the AShMs' cost being a 'separate' procurement
- like we do: Complex weapons (look it up in the EP) is a separate category; and not a small one
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 »

SW1 wrote: Boeing is expected to offer the EA-18G Growler electronic warfare platform alongside the closely related F/A-18E/F Super Hornet

The Saab offer includes both single-seat Gripen Es and two-seat Gripen Fs, the latter being seen as ideal for complex long-range strike and electronic warfare missions, for which the recently flight-tested Electronic Attack Jammer Pod (EAJP) is being included in the proposal. The GlobalEyes for Finland would be based on the Bombardier Global 6500 platform rather than the 6000 used for the three aircraft soon to be handed over to the UAE Air Force.
The competition is mission (criteria) based and Saab is responding to this (superior?) capability:
" the Naval Air Systems Command’s (NAVAIR) F/A-18 and EA-18G Program Office (PMA-265) program manager[,] said that he could not talk about the specific types of platforms that the Navy practiced against during Fleet Exercise 2017. “Can’t talk about specific experiments and specific threats, but IRST is designed to be a long-range counter-stealth technology,” Kindley said.

Indeed, the Block I IRST was so effective during Fleet Exercise 2017 and other tests that the U.S. Air Force—which has traditionally been the Pentagon’s leading proponent of stealth technology—is planning on buying 130 of the pods for its Boeing F-15 Eagle fleet as a counter to emerging enemy stealth aircraft. Thus, ironically, the best counter to fifth-generation threats is a fourth-generation fighter equipped with new sensors and networking capability. "

Who wants Block I?
" the IRST Block II sensor, the resulting capability allows for a pair of Block III Super Hornets to engage enemy stealth aircraft from well beyond visual range — far beyond the range of the jets’ Raytheon AN/APG-79 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar. "

What else is Boeing throwing into this?
If you can keep the CAP patrols up in the air for longer, the capability can be produced from fewer a/c:
" new range-extending conformal fuel tanks (~120 nautical mile boost in mission radius)"

For Block III "the two most significant developments are the addition of the Distributed Targeting Processor-Networked (DTP-N) computer—which exponentially increases the Super Hornet’s processing power—and the high-speed, high-bandwidth, high-throughput anti-jam Internet Protocol-based Tactical Targeting Network Technology (TTNT) datalink. "
- that does not say anything about the radar, but in can now be in two modes simultaneously: terrain tracking and engaging A2A
- what do think? If you have 60 a/c, perhaps a third of them in the air at any time, against say 300, other than loitering with the extra tanks, will they engage high or low?
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 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:. With the Block III radar update "simultaneous ground and air mode" capability for operating under radar and Growler to interfere with look-down radar assets (which inevitably will be less numerous than those on the ground), the combo may beat "stealth" as for survivability of a fleet that is likely numerically overmatched
- forgot to put the Growler 'bit' into the above (though it was there, upthread, from half a year back)
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 little bit of trivia: The Hornets now in service are not the first instance of 'Fly Navy' in Finland. In 1941 Finnish Brewsters (which had only just missed the Winter War) achieved a kill ratio of 67.5 to 1 against the Soviet AF.
- they weren't Brewster Buffaloes, or Brewster 339's, or F2A-2, which failed everywhere, but were much closer to the original USN F2A-1, which were reported to be delightful to fly, but had been declared surplus in the US (Navy)
- the RAF assessed them (when fighters were at a premium), but the verdict was that they would make excellent trainer a/c :)
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)

Post Reply