Defending Scandanavia (catch all)

[jmm99]

Over the past decade, Finland has developed closer ties to the EU, NATO and the US in things military. It has always been close to the US in other ways - e.g., the largest population group of Finnish ancestry outside of Finland are US nationals (including JMM from his mother's side).

This is a longer backgrounder, followed by a short question.

The largest single military purchase in Finland's history was that of 64 F-18s, which are about to be updated (the second largest Finnish defense expenduture). While there are disputes about the exact cost of the update, no question that it will be done.

HELSINGIN SANOMAT
INTERNATIONAL EDITION - HOME
3.10.2008
....
Ministry denies Air Force’s price estimate for upgrading its Hornet fighter jets.
Price of conversion of interceptors into assault fighters clarified to MPs.

The Ministry of Defence has declared incorrect the information, carried by Helsingin Sanomat and others on Thursday, according to which the modernisation programme of the Air Force F/A-18 Hornets and turning them into assault fighters would come with a price tag of EUR 1.6 billion. ...

http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Min.../1135239940183

and, the article prior

HELSINGIN SANOMAT
INTERNATIONAL EDITION - HOME
2.10.2008
.....
Mid-Life update of Hornets is second-largest weapons deal in Finnish military history.
Planes that cost EUR 3 billion to buy will be upgraded for EUR 1.6 billion.

The Finnish Air Force is starting the second phase of the renewal programme of its F/A-18 Hornet fighter jets. The aim is to secure the usability of the aircraft introduced in Finland in 1995 past the year 2020 and to equip the planes for their original purpose.

“The Hornet was designed to be a strike fighter jet that would fight its way to the target, deliver the payload, and fight its way back”, explains Air Force commander Major-General Jarmo Lindberg.

So far the aircraft have only been used as interceptors against aerial targets, which is the sole role the Finnish Air Force planes have been deployed in since the Second World War. Now the Hornets are to be converted into assault fighters as well, by equipping them with bombs, glide bombs, and air-to-ground missiles. ...

http://www.hs.fi/english/article/Mid.../1135239907228

Both articles provide more information about the Finnish Hornet program.

Presently, an issue exists as to sourcing of the air-to-ground missiles.

HELSINGIN SANOMAT
INTERNATIONAL EDITION - FOREIGN
5.2.2007
....
US refuses to sell air-to-ground missiles for Finland’s Hornet jets

Officials in the Untied States have rejected a preliminary request by Finland to buy JASSM air-to-ground missiles for the US-made Hornet F-18 jet fighters used by the Finnish Air Force. Finland inquired about the purchase last autumn as part of an extensive package aimed at implementing MLU2 - the second phase of the modernisation of the Air Force’s fleet of 62 jets. The Americans had no objections to Finnish requests in other respects. Finland will thus be allowed to buy missiles to attack radar stations, as well as NATO-standard Link 16 data exchange devices.

http://www.hs.fi/english/article/1135224850681

General background on the Finnish Hornet program over the last decade is here (all English).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish...ce#F-18_Hornet

http://www.ilmavoimat.fi/index_en.php?id=651

http://www.ilmavoimat.fi/index_en.php?id=742

There are also various MoD and Defense Forces papers which deal with the program, but which are not material to my question.

---------------------------------
Finland's Main Adversary is Russia, Russia, Russia. There is no other.

The Finnish assumption (worse case scenario) is that a Russian attack will have to be defensed by Finland alone. The defense strategy seems to have two components (not clearly stated as such in formal documents).

A conventional first stage would require Russia to deploy large conventional forces and sustain heavy casualties in order to win the first stage.

The second stage would be a total nation war which probably would result in the destruction of the Finnish people in Finland (the "Paasikivi doctrine"). About 70-80% of Finns agree with that strategy even though Finnish military success would be doubtful.

My question is simply how long could the 62 Finnish Hornets stand up to Russian air power ? In short, is the expendure worth it, or could the Euros be better spent on other anti-Russian weapons ?

If there are any Hornet types (or anyone else knowledgeable) out there who would tackle this, your help would be appreciated.

[Entropy]

My question is simply how long could the 62 Finnish Hornets stand up to Russian air power ? In short, is the expendure worth it, or could the Euros be better spent on other anti-Russian weapons ?

I supported Hornets for two deployments to Southern Watch in the 1990's when I was in the Navy. Overall, the hornet is a very capable multimission aircraft.

On your first question, without additional context, the answer has to be "it depends." If Finnish training and tactics are comparable with the US, I think they could do quite well against the Russians, assuming they have a robust air surveillance and C3 network to support the aircraft.

On your second question, any answer is going to be subjective. It seems Finland's primary goal is deterrence and for that purpose I think a multirole aircraft like the hornet is a decent choice. If deterrence fails, and when the aircraft are fully air-to-ground capable, the Finnish hornets will provide a flexible force able to respond to a variety of threat scenarios.

[J Wolfsberger]

My question is simply how long could the 62 Finnish Hornets stand up to Russian air power ? In short, is the expendure worth it, or could the Euros be better spent on other anti-Russian weapons ?

If you phrase the issue from the standpoint of systems analysis, I think you'll get a better focus. Let me suggest: How much would it cost the Russians to overwhelm the Finnish Hornets? Is there any other weapon system that could force a higher cost to the Russians for the same expenditure? Would the Russians be willing to make that expenditure of men and material (aircraft)?

During the Winter War, the Finns under Mannerheim were outnumbered 30 to 1 in aircraft and fought the Soviets to a stand still. Could they enforce the same ratio today? Given the differences in aerial combat between then and now, I don't think it reasonable to think the Russians would need over 1800 aircraft to achieve air superiority. On the other hand, even forcing a 10 to one ratio is pretty high.

At any rate, I suggest you address the issue along the lines I suggested, and decide accordingly.

[jmm99]

I realize that, however phrased, the question and answer is an "it depends". And, both of your responses address the concepts I was looking at - and better suggest the questions that should be asked.

I guess another related question is whether there has been any open-source "war gaming" re: "Russia attacks Finland". I haven't seen any, but probably do not know where to look.

The Winter-Continuation Wars were so long ago that they are not especially good precedents for the present. And, the Finns that would fight a present war are two or three generations removed from the warriors of that struggle - and have lived in a very peaceful environment.

BTW: While the Winter War ended in more or less of a stalemate, its end presaged the end of the Continuation War where Finland was within a few months of military collapse. See here (starting at post #7, with discussion in #8 - the rest is post-war politics),

http://finlander.eget.net/showthread...3900#post23900

[Old Eagle]

Positing an all-out war between Finland and Russia as the primary Hornet scenario is obviously not the driving factor behind the various hornet procurements. Truth in lending -- I was an SAO in Helsinki administering the original deal, so I have a slight bias. The Finns take their sovereignty very seriously and want to be able to deal with multiple contingencies. Adding an air-to-mud capability is an interesting development.

[Stan]

Positing an all-out war between Finland and Russia as the primary Hornet scenario is obviously not the driving factor behind the various hornet procurements. Truth in lending -- I was an SAO in Helsinki administering the original deal, so I have a slight bias. The Finns take their sovereignty very seriously and want to be able to deal with multiple contingencies. Adding an air-to-mud capability is an interesting development.

I was wondering when you would add your 2 cents to this . Not to be cynical herein (God forbid), but I think the majority of the Finnish population is more concerned about the rising cost of alcohol in Estonia than Russian air superiority

[1st Lieutenant]

its not the issue of number Russian Sukhois or Migs contra to Finnish Hornets and the number of the planes itself...it will do with the capability of the pilots the planes will last 2 weeks will the pilots last that far..

Will Finland again be the only country in n<orthern Europe to fight against russians, I doubt. What would be interest of Russia just to attack Finland, it will not give them any geopolitical ormilitary advantage.

Shall it 1 day happen anyhow we are happy to face them, again. Like highly respected ex WWII General Ehnrooth said..'Finnish defence is based on a methodof 1 man with a rifle under each tree..and we have loads of trees'

Gallup Intrenational study do show which country is most anti-Soviet...sorry anti-Russian...so no point of any US 'socialist' coming here with no better knowledge to comment we are leftisist..anti-Russïan is here deeper than in UK, Germany and in Uncle Sam...Kill!

[jmm99]

Please introduce yourself - either in this thread in your next post, or here - or both.

After doing that, you can ....

from 1LT
... anti-Russïan is here deeper than in UK, Germany and in Uncle Sam...Kill!

tell us what you really think about Novgorodians.[*]

Seriously, perhaps, more comment, with reasons, on:

... it will do with the capability of the pilots the planes will last 2 weeks will the pilots last that far...

-------------------------
Besides Adolf Ehrnrooth,

We also could heed this advice in spring 1944 from Juho Paasikivi: "We will shoot from behind every stone and tree, we will go on shooting for 50 years. We are not Czechs. We are not Dutchmen. We will fight tooth and nail behind every rock and over the ice of every lake. I will not fight long. I am old, but others will fight."

When you are my age, you realize the truth in "not fight long".

Final thought (before the footnote), I noticed this ...

... so no point of any US 'socialist' coming here with no better knowledge to comment we are leftisist ...

and suggest you go very light on political commentary (this is a military, not a political, forum).

Kiitos paljon.

Mikko

--------------------
[*] Matti Kurki - sankari Vesilahden Sakoisista. OK - here is a brief English Wiki on Matti Kurki, for the benefit of non-Finns.

Matti Kurki jo Pohto !
Kuolema !

The more serious logistics question is where will all those dead Russians be buried ?

[kaur]

Sweden deploys troops over underwater threat
Published: 17 Oct 2014 17:44 GMT+02:00
Updated: 18 Oct 2014 09:30 GMT+02:00

UPDATED: Sweden's military has deployed planes and ships in the Stockholm Archipelago against what it says is a foreign threat in the waters, with the size of the operation unchanged overnight.

Ring was however also keen to avoid connecting the incident to Russia, saying

too little was known for now to allow an in-depth analysis. In recent months, Sweden has seen an uptick in Baltic Sea manoeuvres by the Russian air force -- including an incident in September when two SU24 fighter-bombers allegedly entered Swedish airspace in what then Foreign Minister Carl Bildt called "the most serious aerial incursion by the Russians" in almost a decade.

Sweden lodged a formal protest after the alleged incursion.

"As the government has said, the situation has deteriorated in the Baltic Sea," Wikstrm said on Friday.

Russian submarine activity around Sweden became a major cause of concern during the Cold War. The most famous of these was the submarine U137 which ran aground in a secret Swedish submarine lane in Blekinge, southern Sweden, in 1981, causing a major diplomatic crisis.

http://www.thelocal.se/20141017/swed...-off-stockholm

It seems that Gordon McCormick, author of famous COIN formula "Magic diamond", has studied Swedish problem in 1990.

"Stranger Than Fiction. Soviet Submarine Operations in Swedish Waters"

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand...2007/R3776.pdf

[kaur]

Sweden hunts damaged Russian sub. Report says.

http://www.thelocal.se/20141018/swed...ian-sub-report

Russian blogosphere makes already jokes about Russian tanker, which trajectory is in the graphic in the article. It is just wondering around.

TASS has their version. No emergecies, just routine work on world oceans.

[kaur]

TASS link http://en.itar-tass.com/russia/755202

[AdamG]

Russia prepares for ice-cold war with show of military force in the Arctic
Vladimir Putin sends troops and jets to oil- and gas-rich region also coveted by Canada, United States, Norway and Denmark

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-oil-gas-putin

[AdamG]

According to the Latvian military, on Oct. 28, the German Air Force Eurofighter jets on QRA (Quick Reaction Alert) at Amari, Estonia, to provide NATO Baltic Air Policing were scrambled to intercept seven Russian Air Force planes flying in international airspace over the Baltic Sea.

The German interceptors identified the Russian planes as a large package, made of attack planes and escort, which included 2x MiG-31 Foxhound, 2x Su-34 Fullback, 1x Su-27 Flanker and 2x Su-24 Fencer jets.

Regardless to whether the Russian aircraft were involved in one of the frequent training missions in the Baltics or were commuting to/from the Russian airfield in Kaliningrad oblast, the package on Oct 28 represents one of the largest “formations” intercepted by NATO fighter planes during the last couple of years.

Usually, close encounters involve Russian, Swedish or U.S. spyplanes intercepted before (or after) violating sovereign airspaces. Sometimes, scrambles are required to greet Moscow’s Tu-22 or Tu-95 bombers on long-range training patrols or strike packages involved in (alleged) simulated air strikes on one of North Europe’s states (usually, Sweden).

http://theaviationist.com/2014/10/28...7-ruaf-planes/