Finland (Suomi)

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Fairly quiet on this front; I quess Covid is playing havoc with many countries' budgets.

But what is remarkable about Finland is that the 'local' experts were telling that there will only be box launchers on the new 'corvettes' - no silos :lol: .

Well that programme is proceeding well - with fairly deep silos designed in.

But the fighter prgrm is v quiet... the only noise you can hear is from the lobbyists paying baksheesh to the otherwise struggling local-language defence forums.
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: the fighter prgrm is v quiet... the only noise you can hear is from the lobbyists paying baksheesh to the otherwise struggling local-language defence forums.
Not any more, as the final offers have been tabled. The fixed sum buys
- 64 Gripens (+2 AEW planes in support)
- 64 from Boeing (50SH + 14 Growlers)
-X :shock: Typhoons
-Y :wtf: F-35s, or
-Z :eh: Rafales

Xyz will be the talk of the town (which one :D ) for a while; have these folks already decided that they will lose and will not give the trade press anything for x-analysing the offers to other countries (esp. if any are in the running)?
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: -X :shock: Typhoons

-Z :eh: Rafales

Xyz will be the talk of the town (which one :D ) for a while; have these folks already decided that they will lose
Now it is only the Typhoons and Rafales that are hiding behind the curtain (as for how many will fit into the fixed budget frame; the above comment applies for the 'why')
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)

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by inch »

Still would have thought f35 to win in my v humble opinion

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 870
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Defiance »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Xyz will be the talk of the town (which one :D ) for a while; have these folks already decided that they will lose and will not give the trade press anything for x-analysing the offers to other countries (esp. if any are in the running)?
You're reading too much into it. The trade press, or any public outlet, are nobodies when it comes to major equipment procurement. They don't make decisions like 'well the knuckle-draggers on the internet think this one is best' :lol:

If they decided they would lose then they wouldn't bid. Bidding is expensive.

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Defiance wrote:You're reading too much into it.
Ok, but what are you reading from the tea leaves, namely that 3 of the bidders have been open and two have not?
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)

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 870
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Defiance »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Defiance wrote:You're reading too much into it.
Ok, but what are you reading from the tea leaves, namely that 3 of the bidders have been open and two have not?
I'm not reading anything into it. I'm sure they're all putting forward comprehensive packages that the believe are competitive, to say otherwise is trying to create a story where there isn't one.

Companies aren't afraid to pull out of competitions they don't believe they can win. Look how Dassault and Airbus pulled out of the Canada bid.

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Defiance wrote: to say otherwise is trying to create a story where there isn't one.
Unlike in UK proc, where I am happy to throw virtual pints each and very way, here the timeframe is one year (left).
- we will see, will see (if @ Armchair does not pull the plug on the whole site... ohh, how many winnings I have to cash in from the @TD.... @Ron , are you listening :lol: ).
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: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by SW1 »

https://www.baesystems.com/en-fi/event/ ... -show-2021

Our exhibition stand, sat close to the flight line on the Helsinki waterfront alongside our partners Airbus and MBDA, tells the full story of our offer.

You will be able to hear more about the heritage of our European partners have in Finland, learn more about our partnership offer and see first hand the world-beating technologies we are developing on Eurofighter.

These include our next generation radar which will go in to service with the UK's Royal Air Force, Striker II, our fully digital pilot helmet offering Finland's pilots complete situational awareness, and the EJ200 engine which provides the unrivalled thrust before the aircraft.

For the first time, we will also be showcasing our Large Area Display Eurofighter cockpit showcasing the capability developed by our European partners and offered to Finland.

We are committed to keeping everyone attending the Air Show safe during the COVID-19 pandemic and all members of the Eurofighter team will be maintaining two metre social distancing and wearing face masks.

J. Tattersall

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by J. Tattersall »

What is interesting about Finland is how far it's moved in policy terms on defence. 15 to 20 years ago the Swedes used to joke about the Helsinki-Paris axis, with Finland dutifully aligning itself with France on European defence matters.

Whatever the outcome of their fighter competition (& Rafale does seem to be selling well), Finland has now moved to a far more atlanticist stance than I think Paris would like; perhaps driven by a renewed fear of Russia, disappointment at often ambiguous French attitude towards the bear, and less than inspiring EU defence achievements.

Of note, together with Sweden, Finland joined the JEF in 2017 after the EU referendum; seemingly being more comfortable working with the UK (& northern partner nations) than with Paris or the EU on defence.

Gtal
Member
Posts: 93
Joined: 31 Dec 2018, 19:55
Germany

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Gtal »

J. Tattersall wrote: Of note, together with Sweden, Finland joined the JEF in 2017 after the EU referendum; seemingly being more comfortable working with the UK (& northern partner nations) than with Paris or the EU on defence.
My man, finnland is as committed to EU as ever. Their one of the most active proponents of expanding and deepening EU defence.

J. Tattersall

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by J. Tattersall »

Gtal wrote:
J. Tattersall wrote: Of note, together with Sweden, Finland joined the JEF in 2017 after the EU referendum; seemingly being more comfortable working with the UK (& northern partner nations) than with Paris or the EU on defence.
My man, finnland is as committed to EU as ever. Their one of the most active proponents of expanding and deepening EU defence.
I'll have a drag from whatever you're smokin'.

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Lord Jim »

I think they are far more committed to co-operating militarily with NATO and Sweden that with the EU. the EU is still mainly a trade organisation.

J. Tattersall

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by J. Tattersall »

Lord Jim wrote:I think they are far more committed to co-operating militarily with NATO and Sweden that with the EU. the EU is still mainly a trade organisation.
To me the key question is why would Finland and Sweden join the JEF after the referendum when supposedly the UK was internationally isolated and fading away? While it doesn't obviously draw upon their equipment programmes, exercises are expensive and time consuming, making interoperability work takes real application, and the appropriately qualified and experienced the staff officers {at the SO2/SO1 and OF5 levels} needed are a valuable commodity; so why dedicate such scarce resources to the JEF, and not an EU alternative? Even accepting that most countries diversify their defence relations, the logical explanation for such a really significant commitment of time, energy and political capital is that it's getting from the UK and partners what it judges unlikely to get from the EU.

J. Tattersall

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by J. Tattersall »

Defence ministers from ten JEF countries to convene in Helsinki
On 30 June to 1 July 2021, Minister of Defence Antti Kaikkonen will host a defence minister meeting of the Joint Expeditionary Force (JEF) countries in Helsinki. The ministers will discuss topical security issues in the Baltic Sea region and the Arctic region. A political steering document guiding JEF military activities will be signed in the meeting. In addition, a scenario-based exercise will be organised during the meeting to explore the decision-making mechanisms and conditions for their cooperation.

“The JEF activities focus on the Baltic Sea and Arctic environments that are important for Finland and activities that involve Finland's key partner countries,” says Minister Antti Kaikkonen.

The UK-led JEF is a multilateral framework for defence cooperation formed by ten countries: Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom. Finland joined the JEF in summer 2017 at the same time as Sweden. The most recent expansion took place in April this year when Iceland joined.

Through their cooperation, the JEF partner countries aim to develop military capabilities, prevent various crises and, if necessary, act together in crisis situations. The main operating environment is Northern Europe.
https://www.defmin.fi/en/topical/press_ ... s#f8c59d68
Defence Ministers of JEF countries signed steering document guiding military activities
The defence ministers of the JEF partner countries met in Helsinki on 30 June to 1 July 2021. They signed a political steering document guiding military activities, complementing the JEF Memorandum of Understanding adopted in 2018. In addition, ministers held scenario-based discussions on the decision-making mechanisms and conditions for cooperation in the JEF countries.

The ministers met for the first time since 2019, as a joint meeting could not be held last year because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Finland regards ministerial meetings as very useful and is in favour of annually organised meetings.

According to Minister of Defence Antti Kaikkonen, organising the JEF meeting directly after Finland hosted a NORDEFCO meeting of Nordic defence ministers, Finland demonstrated how different defence cooperation arrangements support and complement each other.

One of the main forms of activities is joint exercises and operations in the partner countries. The cooperation framework for Joint Expeditionary Force activities can be used to support, for example, the operations of the UN, NATO or the EU. For each task and situation, an especially formed task force will be formed, and each partner country will decide independently on participation in line with its national legislation.
https://www.defmin.fi/en/topical/press_ ... s#f8c59d68

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

J. Tattersall wrote: the key question is why would Finland and Sweden join the JEF after the referendum when supposedly [1] the UK was internationally isolated and fading away? While it doesn't obviously [2] draw upon their equipment programmes, exercises are expensive and time consuming, making interoperability work takes real application, and the appropriately qualified and experienced the staff officers {at the SO2/SO1 and OF5 levels} needed are a valuable commodity; so why dedicate such scarce resources to the JEF, and not [3] an EU alternative? Even accepting that most countries diversify their defence relations, the logical explanation for such a really significant commitment of time, energy and political capital is that it's getting from the UK and partners what it judges unlikely to get from the EU.
J. Tattersall wrote: the JEF meeting directly after [2+] Finland hosted a NORDEFCO meeting of Nordic defence ministers, Finland demonstrated how different defence cooperation arrangements support and complement each other.
Didn't want to chop up the quote, hence:
on [1] the initiative came from the UK... there goes the 'supposedly'. Ie. the UK was assessing that there was a likelihood for isolation etc.
- not to forget that the need for an Arctic Strategy had been floated; but 'everyone' seemed to be at loss of what one of those could look like

[2] & [2+] ... as well as [3]
NORDEFCO is by far deeper than e.g. PESCO (by now, too early to judge at this point in time), so as for the eq. prgrms they run over decades and it has been assessed (@Ron, please jump in again with better :) numbers) that the Gripen prgrm has at times had a higher UK content (up to 40%) compared to the Typhoon (c. 27% , for those who know how to read export and import statistics... simultaneously, rather than just reading the debit side of a company's accounts, while ignoring the 'other' side). Defence industry lobby folks of course favour the one-eyed view ;) . Just saying that at this level of integration, the ties run deep and can't be quickly replaced
- just laugh :crazy: at Erdogan now, trying to buy F-16s to keep the AF flying in the future as well

Why do I talk about eq. prgrms? Err,
1. The Finnish H(X) has been in the running all this time; these things have to be started a decade or more 'before the fact'... BTW, does H(x) stand for Hornet (Next) :D
and 2. there is deep integration, at the industrial level, between Norway and Finland, as on their own bot could stand to lose their 'sovereign' capabilities and those capabilities are in quite different areas, ie. potential for being complementary
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 month to go in the fighter competition (which is not the same as when the outcome will be made public).

Some questions being asked as to how the yearly operating expense ceiling could possibly be met by F-35s as it has been derived from the e200 mln p.a. for the current Hornets (c. 60)
- NL for their 46 have estimated 570 mln
- Switzerland (with fewer flight hrs factored in, when the use of simulators is maximised) the same cost for their 36!

Our 48 have been the subject to DefSec Wallace saying the same as the HASC Chairman Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash:

“If you bring the sustainment cost down, we’ll buy more,” Smith said during a Aug. 31 event at the Brookings Institution. “If you don’t, we’re not going to, simply because of the cost that is involved in that.”
- simply due to the fact that " the total lifecycle cost of supporting that number of aircraft remains more than what the service projects it can afford".

"Specifically, https://www.defensenews.com/smr/defense ... nstraints/ the Defense Department will face a $6 billion gap in 2036 between the actual cost of sustaining the services’ F-35s and the cost the services can afford, the GAO said.

About $4.4 billion of that expense will be billed to the Air Force, which plans to buy 1,763 F-35A conventional takeoff and landing jets throughout the program of record."
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 irk the paid-for lobbyists in that country :problem: :o
the dual-mode (simultaneous) radar derived from the soo-o expensive B-1
might be a deal breaker - correction :wtf: deal maker - when Finland decides how to carry on with the offensive counter-air doctrine/ tactics:
"The F/A-18 Block III first flight in May 2020. Its configuration adds capability upgrades that include enhanced network capability, longer range, reduced radar signature, an advanced cockpit system and an enhanced communication system. Boeing started converting existing Block II Super Hornets to Block III this year. The fighter’s life will be extended from 6,000 hours to 10,000 hours.

The new 10-by-19 inch touchscreen display provides the pilot with the capability to see, track and target multiple long range targets generated by the common tactical picture.

The block II IRST will be able to detect threats at long range without having to depend on radar which may be jammed. The block II IRST will generate a multi-ship, common tactical picture at long range, allowing the Super Hornet to operate as a smart sensor node on the network.

The Block III Super Hornet was set to feature shoulder mounted conformal fuel tanks. They could carry 3,500 pounds of additional fuel and reduce drag, allowing the aircraft to operate longer, go faster and/or carry more weight. This option has been dropped however."
- heh-he... might be adopted as the Iskander can reach all air bases (except those in Sweden)
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: 5656
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by SW1 »


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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Lord Jim »

Something that would work well with the Royal Artillery planned CAMM Batteries, we only need around three anyway if we allocate one per battery.

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by Lord Jim »

Well, according to the attached article, the F-35A has won the HX Fighter Competition quite convincingly. It is said to have warned the top score or at least shared it in all mission areas exceeding the required value of 4.0 with a score of 4.47. Its nearest competitor only scored 3.81 It also appears the Finland is to get the capability to manufacture at least part of the aircraft including areas that are critical to the 5th Generation platform via technological transfer. IT will be interesting to see how much and to what level the Finns will be able to support their aircraft, though with the first deliveries due in 2025 I must assume the initial aircraft will be wholly built in the US or Italy. What other elements their could be in any package are not mentioned, but in the past Finland has always included a comprehensive package of munitions, which should now include air to ground ordinance.
https://breakingdefense.com/2021/12/fin ... er-battle/

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

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Well, the missing layer in AD (after the NASAMS selection; buying four Volvos instead of one RR... in the words of the general who was overseeing the project) suddenly got speeded up, for better vertical reach (some improvement came with the missile upgrade already):
Israel Aerospace Industries and Rafael Advanced Systems are the ones shortlisted from amongst just about all names in 'this' business
- interesting to see what else; March should bring more info about the deliberations of the gvmnt within the budget cycle (highly unusual)
- this one had been in the works for 2 yrs, so it was just the financial go-ahead that was missing
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 »

One afterthought: After the Swedish Patriot decision doing anything similar in Finland was deemed 'unaffordable'
- may be the 450 (as estimated by Pentagon) missiles raining down on Ukraine has changed the calculus?
- not sure if it is this aspect or the vertical reach that has driven the decision; of course the two need not be mutually exclusive, rather a matter of emphasis... call it 'requirements' that we will never get to see
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 saw someone draw up (from IISS) the stats for Russia, Ukraine and Finland, side by side.

Was impressed how Finland (5.5 mln) was a 10% match for just about everything (Russia, 140 mln), except
- helicopters. Well, what can you expect as they are expensive, Some for Spetznatzt hunting, some for the peace time SAR. Artillery observation/ targeting is a thing of the past (with helos)
- AD... still living in the (gun-based) past. Looks like this should be a big thing in the priorities?

Better get your skates on... giddy-uppa, there's still time (not necessarily so much)
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)

TheLoneRanger
Member
Posts: 331
Joined: 01 Jul 2020, 19:15
United Kingdom

Re: Finland (Suomi)

Post by TheLoneRanger »

Welcome to NATO - Finland !!!!!! Thankyou Russia for helping achieve the unimaginable...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... nberg.html
These users liked the author TheLoneRanger for the post (total 3):
Phil Sayerswargame_insomniacserge750

Post Reply