UK Defence Forum

More surplus: Babcock sold over two dozen Grob trainers for 6.6 mln euro and now they are being used for outsourced training (Patria Aviation, on-going maintenance included) at a yearly cost of 4.5 mln
... no idea what the yearly output is (pilots onto jets), but sounds very economical

Finland has published its 2019 Vienna documents.

The interesting thing about those numbers are the ones for Mortars and Artillery. Compare them to what the British Army have.

That shows more of the attitude of our MoD towards Artillery than the Finns. Remember we weren't going to be fighting any nation to nations wars ever again. The Finns had a different outlook.

I wasn't suggesting the Finns had got it wrong.

You can deduce all kinds of things from those artillery numbers (valdemort can advice how many pieces are in each current "establishment strength", by type of formation, on mobilisation?):

122mm How => allocated at BG level
120mm Mor => allocated at Bn level
SP artillery => armoured & mech BGs (45 of the initial order for of 48 missing; for a little while the mech BGs will be over est. strength with the lighter ones... until the option for a further batch of 48 of the heavier type will be taken up, making for retirement of the 122 mm SP platform)

I wonder what the cut-off date for the report is?
- a fifth of the Leo2A6 delivery missing (simply because they have not been delivered yet)
- but the Leo1 engineering tanks are also not showing up, even though they have been delivered. Sure, it is possible that they have been sent to a Finnish factory (Patria?) for upgrades, and are not with any unit yet. The Leo2 & Leo1 specialised version numbers will still not be sufficient, which explains the "few odd" T-55s in a mine rolling role (still retained)

whitelancer wrote:I wasn't suggesting the Finns had got it wrong.

Sorry I came across the wrong way, I was saying the UK has got it wrong, big time and is only now starting to catch up and relearn the skills of conventional warfighting. The Finns never forgot.

Lord Jim wrote:

whitelancer wrote:I wasn't suggesting the Finns had got it wrong.

Sorry I came across the wrong way, I was saying the UK has got it wrong, big time and is only now starting to catch up and relearn the skills of conventional warfighting. The Finns never forgot.

Meh, who could think that you might need artillery for warfighting...

ArmChairCivvy wrote:You can deduce all kinds of things from those artillery numbers (valdemort can advice how many pieces are in each current "establishment strength", by type of formation, on mobilisation?):

122mm How => allocated at BG level
120mm Mor => allocated at Bn level
SP artillery => armoured & mech BGs (45 of the initial order for of 48 missing; for a little while the mech BGs will be over est. strength with the lighter ones... until the option for a further batch of 48 of the heavier type will be taken up, making for retirement of the 122 mm SP platform)

I wonder what the cut-off date for the report is?
- a fifth of the Leo2A6 delivery missing (simply because they have not been delivered yet)
- but the Leo1 engineering tanks are also not showing up, even though they have been delivered. Sure, it is possible that they have been sent to a Finnish factory (Patria?) for upgrades, and are not with any unit yet. The Leo2 & Leo1 specialised version numbers will still not be sufficient, which explains the "few odd" T-55s in a mine rolling role (still retained)

In each infantry battalion battlegroup there are 18 D-30s, 12 120mm mortars and three 81mm mortars per jäger coy. Mechanized and motorised battlegroups have 18 2S1s and 9 120mm mortars. Mechanised and motorised brigade have 155 K98 and AMOS. There are only speculations as to where K9s will go to, mech/mot BGs or what. Also MTLBV is getting long in the tooth so future of motorised battlegroups is uncertain. Mech BGs will probably exist till 2030s having received new Leo2A6s and updated BMP-2s.

As for tanks there are Uradan mine rollers which are used with Leo2A4s so for that purpose the special variants don't show in Vienna documents.

Motorised battlegroup has one tank coy with Leo2A4 nowadays. Abbreviation "PSV" stands for panssarivaunu which means armoured tracked vehicle, panzerwagen.

Translation:
TJPSV= FO
HINPSV= towing
LÄÄKPSV= medical
SILTAPSV=Bridge
RaivausPSV= Mine clearance
23 ITK = ZU-23-2
122 PSH = 2S1
120 KRH = 120 mortar
81 KRH = 81 mortar
NLAW = NLAW
PSTOHJ 2000 = Spike MR
Pyöräajoneuvo = wheeled vehicle

Voldemort wrote:In each infantry battalion battlegroup there are 18 D-30s

Thanks, now we can do some calculations

A bit lost on the terminology: When the mech BGs were set up, they were 1700+ and the motorised (note: still under armour) close to 1600
- as the grouping became the "going currency" also infantry battle groups came about, but the fighting power demands (them being endowed with fewer hi-end assets) made the manning close to 2500 (either side...). Old school would say " a regiment" but they are of course wrong because we are now talking 'combined arms'
- is it like in other countries that the inf.bn is still the core, around which the BG is built (and thereby, in a strict sense, the tube arty is a BG-level asset?)?

Woops; how they have grown (the numbers just appeared above!)

ArmChairCivvy wrote:

Voldemort wrote:In each infantry battalion battlegroup there are 18 D-30s

Thanks, now we can do some calculations

A bit lost on the terminology: When the mech BGs were set up, they were 1700+ and the motorised (note: still under armour) close to 1600
- as the grouping became the "going currency" also infantry battle groups came about, but the fighting power demands (them being endowed with fewer hi-end assets) made the manning close to 2500 (either side...). Old school would say " a regiment" but they are of course wrong because we are now talking 'combined arms'
- is it like in other countries that the inf.bn is still the core, around which the BG is built (and thereby, in a strict sense, the tube arty is a BG-level asset?)?

Woops; how they have grown (the numbers just appeared above!)

Do note that the artillery battalion there makes up a big portion of the total strenght.

Yes, artillery is battlegroup and above level asset. Jäger battalions don't have organic artillery. As for total number of infantry battlegroups I'm pretty sure it's not just 471:18. That number is not know and not to mention we have a number of other infantry units that aren't infantry battlegroups like marines or border jägers.

ArmChairCivvy wrote:countries

These battlegroups as made for purpose. They weren't infantry battalions where artillery battalion was added but made as they are to begin with.

Regiments are used rarely. Artillery and AA use regiment for their training units but that's about it.

Voldemort wrote:

ArmChairCivvy wrote:You can deduce all kinds of things from those artillery numbers (valdemort can advice how many pieces are in each current "establishment strength", by type of formation, on mobilisation?):

122mm How => allocated at BG level
120mm Mor => allocated at Bn level
SP artillery => armoured & mech BGs (45 of the initial order for of 48 missing; for a little while the mech BGs will be over est. strength with the lighter ones... until the option for a further batch of 48 of the heavier type will be taken up, making for retirement of the 122 mm SP platform)

I wonder what the cut-off date for the report is?
- a fifth of the Leo2A6 delivery missing (simply because they have not been delivered yet)
- but the Leo1 engineering tanks are also not showing up, even though they have been delivered. Sure, it is possible that they have been sent to a Finnish factory (Patria?) for upgrades, and are not with any unit yet. The Leo2 & Leo1 specialised version numbers will still not be sufficient, which explains the "few odd" T-55s in a mine rolling role (still retained)

In each infantry battalion battlegroup there are 18 D-30s, 12 120mm mortars and three 81mm mortars per jäger coy. Mechanized and motorised battlegroups have 18 2S1s and 9 120mm mortars. Mechanised and motorised brigade have 155 K98 and AMOS. There are only speculations as to where K9s will go to, mech/mot BGs or what. Also MTLBV is getting long in the tooth so future of motorised battlegroups is uncertain. Mech BGs will probably exist till 2030s having received new Leo2A6s and updated BMP-2s.

As for tanks there are Uradan mine rollers which are used with Leo2A4s so for that purpose the special variants don't show in Vienna documents.

Very interesting concept. How many such battlegroups will Finnish Army have?

abc123 wrote:

Voldemort wrote:

ArmChairCivvy wrote:You can deduce all kinds of things from those artillery numbers (valdemort can advice how many pieces are in each current "establishment strength", by type of formation, on mobilisation?):

122mm How => allocated at BG level
120mm Mor => allocated at Bn level
SP artillery => armoured & mech BGs (45 of the initial order for of 48 missing; for a little while the mech BGs will be over est. strength with the lighter ones... until the option for a further batch of 48 of the heavier type will be taken up, making for retirement of the 122 mm SP platform)

I wonder what the cut-off date for the report is?
- a fifth of the Leo2A6 delivery missing (simply because they have not been delivered yet)
- but the Leo1 engineering tanks are also not showing up, even though they have been delivered. Sure, it is possible that they have been sent to a Finnish factory (Patria?) for upgrades, and are not with any unit yet. The Leo2 & Leo1 specialised version numbers will still not be sufficient, which explains the "few odd" T-55s in a mine rolling role (still retained)

In each infantry battalion battlegroup there are 18 D-30s, 12 120mm mortars and three 81mm mortars per jäger coy. Mechanized and motorised battlegroups have 18 2S1s and 9 120mm mortars. Mechanised and motorised brigade have 155 K98 and AMOS. There are only speculations as to where K9s will go to, mech/mot BGs or what. Also MTLBV is getting long in the tooth so future of motorised battlegroups is uncertain. Mech BGs will probably exist till 2030s having received new Leo2A6s and updated BMP-2s.

As for tanks there are Uradan mine rollers which are used with Leo2A4s so for that purpose the special variants don't show in Vienna documents.

Very interesting concept. How many such battlegroups will Finnish Army have?

Two mechanized and two motorised, as for infantry battalion battlegroups that number is secret. There are three infantry brigades which are made of these battlegroups but are there battlegroups outside of these brigades is not know, nor do we know the composition of these brigades. Higher echelons above battalions and battlegeoups are brigade, army corps and military district. The linearity of these is not known either, so it can be BG-Army corps-Army HQ and/or any other variation.

The Finns did a bloody good job by constantly renaming their divisions in the last war - to confuse the assailant
- I can see the tradition is continued

ArmChairCivvy wrote:The Finns did a bloody good job by constantly renaming their divisions in the last war - to confuse the assailant
- I can see the tradition is continued

Not having a standing army allows this, it's pretty hard to conceal ORBAT of professional or standing army.

I've never heard of this constantly renaming divisions, care to elaborate.

Voldemort wrote:care to elaborate.

You can start with the history of the Continuation War. A good ploy (in the way of disinformation).
The story continued, in a different vain, as divisions were found to be too unwieldy (exc. in the fairly static scenes played out on the Isthmus) and brigadisation was decided - in fact the exercise was brought to a successful conclusion only in the late '50s, mainly due to the v stingy funding that pre-empted major reforms as the emphasis was on keeping the machine 'ticking over' mainly in the form of training (conscription, and a massive reserve, as you mentioned)
- you may note (relating to that funding squeeze) how few weapons there are with a 5x designation? As pretty much nothing new (exc. anti-tank) was developed/ procured until the 60's dawned.

Looks like ELTA Systems won the contract for counter-battery radars (they do more: e.g. the deconflicting of the airspace - for whatever their range might be; not disclosed).

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Looks like ELTA Systems won the contract for counter-battery radars (they do more: e.g. the deconflicting of the airspace - for whatever their range might be; not disclosed).

Very good news, long sought after capability.

New info about Finnish "Bouncing mine". Half a bucket sized, jumps up to 25m and shoot pellets down below. Ottawa compliant. Has sparked interest from Poland, China and Russia to mention a few. Will UK be interested?

DID, of today has this (anyone know of fighter* competitions in Europe closing in the next two years? Switzerland extended their Hornets - Canada is adding to the fleet, to keep some in the air, but is not quite in Europe. There must be F-16s somewhere that will soon need replacing):

"The Finnish Ministry of Defense received responses from five manufacturers as part of its its Boeing F/A-18C/D Hornet replacement program HX-FP. The program envisages an acquisition of 64 aircraft, with the information packages soliciting information on aircraft, training systems, maintenance tools, testing equipment, weapons, and sensors. HX-FP is valued at $8.03 billion. The Air Force wants to retire its fleet of F/A-18 C/D Hornet jets between 2025 and 2029. Sweden, USA, France and Britain made proposals. The aircraft types covered in the proposals are Boeing’s F/A-18 Super Hornet, Lockheed Martin’s F-35, France’s Dassault Rafale, the British-made Eurofighter and the Swedish Saab Gripen. The Saab proposal includes both the single-seat Gripen E and the dual-seat Gripen F versions."
- I wonder if they have new price information, as there is that point estimate
- so far (5 different types, or 6 if any Growlers are being looked into, are in the game) a range of e 7 to 10 bn has been the expression

====
* I left the Luftwaffe Eurofighter vs. f-18 aside, as the requirement has been framed in terms of strike, rather than multirole

Boeing Gets U.S. DoD Greenlight to Propose EA-18G Growler to Finland

Boeing and the U.S. Navy have received U.S. Department of Defense approval to offer the EA-18G Growler to Finland. Previously only Australia had been authorized to purchase the airborne electronic attack (AEA) aircraft.

https://www.navalnews.com/news/2019/02/ ... o-finland/

Today 21.02.2019 14:30 (heh-he, I don't have a crystal ball; that is Finnish time) it was announced that ESSM is the choice for the new corvettes
- as the thing is taking a while between the prgrm steps, can't remember now whether there was quadpacking for them, in silos on the centre line, planned
- these are after all fairly small vessels; has ESSM been put on anything smaller elsewhere?

Are they taking the latest version with the active seeker. If so it is a pretty powerful AAW for a platform so relatively small.