Budget cuts in European Navies

[Viper75]

Another view from Finland

... And what comes to the helicopter thread, many modern FACs are fielding CIWSs or short range fire and forget SAMs in addition. ...

A good example of the attention given to the (combat proved) high air threat against FAC is the new Finnish Navy Hamina-class FAC with both a Bofors 57mm mk3 Dp gun suitable for Bofors 3P ammunition and 8 Umkhonto-IR -missiles. From the Finnish Navy perspective the latter are not exactly close-in weapons, rather than point air defence (ranges up to 12 km) when compared to previous systems (57mm mk1 and 40mm guns, Mistral IR missiles, all with ranges well under 10 km)

some sources for the Umkhonto SAM:
-http://www.denel.co.za/Resources/AS_Umkhonto.pdf
-http://www.defense-update.com/products/u/Umkhonto.htm

... Intresting path that have left quite uncharted is to use high speed hovercrafts as missile FACs. Russian Dergah was (propaply, not sure but sure appears that way) too overloaded and our Tuuli class was trampled by the NATO jackboot so we havent got any good experience about their purposefullnes. ...

I wonder how ACV Tuuli was in any way "trampled by the NATO jackboot"?? From what I gather, the reasons for abandoning the Tuuli project had to do with high maintenance costs, low mission availability due to maintenance demands and primarily the fact that traditional defence of the coast against an invasion fleet is today quite a "backburner" mission for the Finnish Navy while the escort and protection of shipping have risen in priorities.

IMO the Tuuli is (was) probably very good for missions which were probable during the 1970s and 80s and quite useless for the missions that are probable today, and this was realized too late to stop the project before Tuuli had been built (or until certain high-ranking officers who supported the project were retired?).

PS Gollevainen: sorry to "barge in" on you like this, but IMO your post had "between the lines" a familiar, quite unnecessary tone of blaming NATO for whatever problems our politicians/military/defence budget have...

 

[Gollevainen]

first of all well nice to see some other fins in these waters...:finland

But actually there was some sort of semi-offical report that the Tuuli was abbanon due its insuitability to modern crisis invention operations and your mentioned 'escort' dutyes, and that traditional displacement hulled vessels suits much better to it....So atleast it seems to fit my NATO conspiracy theories...:alian2

 

[Viper75]

first of all well nice to see some other fins in these waters...:finland

But actually there was some sort of semi-offical report that the Tuuli was abbanon due its insuitability to modern crisis invention operations and your mentioned 'escort' dutyes, and that traditional displacement hulled vessels suits much better to it....So atleast it seems to fit my NATO conspiracy theories...:alian2

Thanks for the welcome! :finland

While I agree with the substance of what you wrote above (re: modern crisis intervention and escort which both _need_ displacement hulls), I still quite disagree with either having much to do with NATO. As for cospiracies, well I suppose they are easy to subscribe to, but usually have no substance or purpose other than to further the political scaremongering goals of dissatisfied extermists. In Finnish politics this is correct for some "right" as well as some "left" wing elements IMO, and the sinister plotter in the backgroud is either Russia or NATO/the USA depending on whose conspiracy theory one subscribes to...

IMO the "escort mission" has more to do with the fact that approximately 90% of Finnish trade is conducted by sea... and until now the Finnish Defence Forces have conveniently ignored the repercussions of that fact (due to former towering soviet supremacy in the Baltic?) - namely that we _need_ a navy that can escort at least the most necessary transports from the southern Baltic safely into Finnish ports! It is of course also a question of budgeting... and that doesn't seem to be getting any better...

The crisis intervention/peace support/etc mission is in my opinion something that all western navies (not only NATO) _have to_ deal with, as we are no longer living in a clear-cut east-west cold-war world ("we'll just defend our territory and screw everything else" doesn't work - at least if we want to make the world a safer place, and this is IMO evident in the foreign policies of most western democracies). Also, and if for no other reason, then "crisis intervention" is a mission that all western navies _need_ to promote and train for in order to get parliaments to approve their funding in the "post-cold war, peace dividend era".

Defending the Finnish coast against a hypothetical invasion can be done from the air (FAF is now looking into air-to-surface weaponry for the F18s) and from land-based units (Navy coastal rangers, especially the new light coastal missiles coming into service, as well as the truck-mounted RBS-15K heavy SSM batteries along with what is left of the coastal artillery which is slowly being dismantled).

In essence (and trust me, it hurts to say this): if the Finnish Navy cannot participate effectively in multinational crisis intervention/peace support/etc ops, and cannot effectively protect our vital seaborne trade, then it serves no useful purpose today. Thankfully there are several signs that these "shortcomings" are being rectified, as they IMO should be - be it with a future membership in NATO or without it

Regards, Viper75

"...In the DPRK all the people are armed and the whole country has been turned into a fortress. Its frontline area, rear and depth are an impregnable fortress. The Koreans have high pluck as they are led by Kim Jong Il, an invincible and illustrious commander. He is the best in military wisdom and insight, pluck and gut, strategy and tactics, military stratagem and commanding art. He is the most brilliant commander who has the world under his control and his decisions and orders lead the Koreans to victory..."
- Quoted on April 8th 2006 from -http://www.kcna.co.jp - the Korean Central News Agency of the DPRK (North Korea)

 

[contedicavour]

For Finland fast missile-carrying patrol boats with some AAW capability are clearly an indispensable asset. The Baltic in itself, and some of your neighbors' past attitudes (I mean to the East ) mean that FAC(M)s are the most cost-efficient ships.
However the Baltic Sea is quite an exceptional area, hardly comparable to navies operating on Oceans or even in the Mediterranean Sea.
In more open seas FAC(M)s are vulnerable to air and submarine attacks...
The Umkhonto/57-mm AAW is good, still most helicopters carry missiles with 30-km range. While FAC(M)s may hide well in your coastline, once in the open sea they would be hopeless.

 

[Gollevainen]

well if put that political aspect aside, wheter its rigth or wrong to invest in crisis invention or peace keeping mission(I know the webby of this forum and he propaply wont like if we start flaming over finnish politics ), I do agree whit you, the sea has always been ignored in our defensive orientations and the navy has usually been ill-equiped to its assigned role. The mentioned escort duty ecpesially have been left quite dangerously ignored state as we have discarded all ASW units that we have and relyed solely on modest ASW fits on our missile boats. A escort mission needs good ASW and AAW armament, range and endurance and even whit Umkhoto onboard, the missile boats aren't the ideal platform to execute it.

A healthy sign would be some sort of combined escort/transport gunboat type of ship than Dannes are having (absalon class), thougth maybe smaller, or more numerous class like tha Flykvisken's whit little bit bigger hull than average FACs and obtions to be fitted mine laying, mine sweeping, attack, anti-submarine and patrol dutyes...sort of mini-SRK if following the old russian ship definitions

 

[contedicavour]

well if put that political aspect aside, wheter its rigth or wrong to invest in crisis invention or peace keeping mission(I know the webby of this forum and he propaply wont like if we start flaming over finnish politics ), I do agree whit you, the sea has always been ignored in our defensive orientations and the navy has usually been ill-equiped to its assigned role. The mentioned escort duty ecpesially have been left quite dangerously ignored state as we have discarded all ASW units that we have and relyed solely on modest ASW fits on our missile boats. A escort mission needs good ASW and AAW armament, range and endurance and even whit Umkhoto onboard, the missile boats aren't the ideal platform to execute it.

A healthy sign would be some sort of combined escort/transport gunboat type of ship than Dannes are having (absalon class), thougth maybe smaller, or more numerous class like tha Flykvisken's whit little bit bigger hull than average FACs and obtions to be fitted mine laying, mine sweeping, attack, anti-submarine and patrol dutyes...sort of mini-SRK if following the old russian ship definitions

Agree with what you say. I would buy a couple of absalon class, and even take a couple of second-hand Type 209s from Germany. I know peace treaties didn't allow Finland to take up submarines, but the USSR is dead and the Russians can't really complain if Finland takes up T209s while Russians still use Kilos in the Baltic. This would strengthen your ASW a lot. Last but not least, a few Agusta ASW helos like the NH-90s Sweden and Norway are buying would help patrol and support your FACs.

cheers

 

[Gollevainen]

well submarine is big investment after 60 years of absence of the type and currently its well beyond anybodys imagination...its just too huge prize when you need to set up proper infrastructure and train sufficent force to operate one...But indeed it would be the ultimate weapon for navy of our size and our hydrodynamical conditions. Tracking subs in baltic have always been difficoult task and thus providing ideal arena for small subs to manouvre. But if we ever decide to have one, perhaps it would first be a rented boat from sweeden whit swedish instructors and then the intial operational boats from same source.

Actually, we have now combinated our naval warning system whit sweden and some one has foresighted a nucleus of some sort of co-operational arragment or defence pact between our nations. Who knows, To me it sounds like sweds want to again give the burden of defending them to us while they can strip down their cold war heavy armed forces. But our defence needs are rather mutual and one cannot think that any future attack against Finland wouldn't affect sweden as well so i wont see that anyway bad solution. Some sort of combined swedish/finnish defence forces...a nice change to see some of those nice looking swedish blondes :whipimp in refreshment training in somewhere Swedish lappland ....

 

[nornavy]

As to Norwegian LPDs there are no plans. The focus is on cooperation with the Dutch. There are plans for a logistical support ship like the German Berlin class but nothing has been funded as yet.

To continue on the FAC discussion. There is a need to protect the LPDs and in condfined waters frigates are too big and clumsy. What I see as a good solution is a ship, similar to the Norwegian Hauk but better fuel capacityand with different armament to supplement existing SSM carriers
More emphasis on guns. Say a 40/57mm Bofors on the bow. A 25 - 35mm twin barreled, remotly controlled chaingun at the stern. A couple of .50cal machineguns and prehaps a pair of LMGs.
Hellfire for anti ship and Stinger for anti air. Would be perfect to give fire support to the CB 90s.

 

[Viper75]

Ok, so we'll drop the politics

IMO what the Finnish Navy should be going for in terms of platform mix (capable of escort, peace support as well as traditional invasion defence) is:

- the 4 new Hamina class FACs, but with the hull partially rebuilt (a new section cut in, lenghtening the ships to approximately 70 meters - allowing both a full ASW suite (VDS+torpedoes) and longer endurance, and maybe also a second, gun-based CIWS aft in addition to the bow 57mm) as well as upgrading the new Umkhonto-IR SAMs to the extended range version (Umkhonto-NG, radar guided) as soon as Denel gets them developed, in effect making them fully escort capable corvettes without making them too large for littoral ops.
- the 4 already operational, ASW capable FACs (the Rauma class) but with an upgrade (MLU), with new ASW armament (torpedoes) as the highest priority. If possible, also change the 40mm Bofors to new 57mm mk3 for more AAW range and firepower.
- the 2 "being upgraded during the next few years" Hameenmaa class minelayers (If for some reason money and political will was available I would actually stop the upgrade, and take all the systems that they will get and buy 2 new hulls for them, maybe something closer to a real "escort frigate" including a helo hangar and facilities for boarding teams and several RIBs, and leave the minelayers pretty much as they are, but oh well..)
- changing 4-6 of the new NH90 helos to "maritime" versions (maybe with both an ASW (sonobuoys,VDS+torpedo) and ASuW (Hellfire etc) capability

The sub option would be optimal in terms of some capabilities, it has been studied and discussed, but the fact remains that the money to start the "silent service" up from scratch (training, logistics, rescue facilities...) after 60 years is not and probably will not be available.

Well, that's my "two cents". Now I'm off for a vacation, so see you later!

Regards, Viper 75

 

[Sea Toby]

Ireland appears to be buying a MEKO 200 MRV, about half the size of Denmark's Absalon class. Its more of an OPV rather than a frigate. I wonder if these would fit with Finland's plans in the future.

Main dimensions:
Length over everything 121.00 m
KWL lengthens 109.00 m
Width 17.00 m
Depth 4.40 m
Displacement 3,900 t
Range 8,000 Nm
Sea endurance 30 days

Drive system:
2 high-speed diesel engines ever 5,200 KW
2 drive shafts with variable-pitch propellers
Maximum speed > 22 kn

Crew:
Altogether 150 + 10

Helicopter:
optionally

The MEKO® 200 MRV is conceived according to the same guidelines and principles as for the MEKO® 100 the OPV. It is a multi-role ship with a large range, a long sea endurance and a high flexibility, which is suitable for a whole set of employments. Compared to the MEKO® 100 OPV the MEKO® 200 MRV is clearly larger and has therefore more area for equipment and personnel.

Additionally to it the MEKO® has 200 MRV the following characteristics:

* Better seakeeping
* Larger range and sea endurance of over 8000 Seemeilen/30 days
* Higher availability with longer enterprise on high lake
* Larger on-board command possibilities due to:
o Two 30-Knoten/8-Personen-Boote
o An additional 9-m/25-kn-Boot with communication systems for an employment with larger range, larger commands and evacuation
* Reservoir at deck for oceanographic, hydrographic and environmental protection containers
* Reservoir at deck for wheeled vehicles (in accordance with manufacturer data corrosion damages do not need to be feared in the case of short time transportation from up to 30 days, if routine maintenance work is accomplished) with the following advantages:
o All devices can remain equipped with ammunition filled up and, so that they can be taken after arrival immediately in enterprise
o No fire and danger of explosion under deck
o No necessity for explosion-proof ventilation in taken off charge deck
o Vehicle weapons can be used as additional defensive weapons
* Congestion and enterprise at deck of:
o Operated by remote control mine clearing/minelaying equipment
o Drones and unmanned underwater crafts
* Exact, dynamic positioning without “heading” (two variable-pitch propellers, bow thruster, two from each other independent rudders)
* Schwerlastkran (20 t/18 m range), option on 50t/18m
* Larger training possibilities for up to 150 cadets with large Briefing and training areas, practical demonstration of ship devices for training purposes
* Medical training in the ship military hospital:
o Large military hospital with full operating room and at least 4 intensive beds.
o Overall capacity 15 beds
o Additional containerized Feldlazerett in congestion on the charge deck
o Congestion possibility for 1 LCVP or 2 LCU under abolishment 9 m of the boat

Those multi-role-in-corrodes the MEKO® 200 MRV can be classified as follows, whereby the individual forms of application can overlap themselves: Peacekeaping measures, transportation by sea, disaster control operation and evacuation.

Link

Images are attached

 

[Gollevainen]

Well I pretty much agree with you Viper, but I think some sort of single hull solution would be more easily approved by the eduskunta. So basicly a bit smaller than the Absalom to fullfill the roles of escort, fast transport, training and minelaying. Berhaps a 4-5 hulls with each having dedicated role (selected from the above) in peacetime but the option for formability in wartime. To complete them a smaller common hull (bit larger than standart flex, but smaller than Visby) to fullfill the roles of missilefac, minesweeper and offshore patrol boat for coastguard...

The helicopter is essential, I whis our armed forces would really start realizing the benefits of helicopters in our situation and adopt the flexipility. Our navy should have it's own helicopter fleet accompanied by modern martimate survellance aircrafts.

Mutta nauti lomasta viper, ja hyvaa kesaa muutenkin

 

[contedicavour]

Ok, so we'll drop the politics

IMO what the Finnish Navy should be going for in terms of platform mix (capable of escort, peace support as well as traditional invasion defence) is:

- the 4 new Hamina class FACs, but with the hull partially rebuilt (a new section cut in, lenghtening the ships to approximately 70 meters - allowing both a full ASW suite (VDS+torpedoes) and longer endurance, and maybe also a second, gun-based CIWS aft in addition to the bow 57mm) as well as upgrading the new Umkhonto-IR SAMs to the extended range version (Umkhonto-NG, radar guided) as soon as Denel gets them developed, in effect making them fully escort capable corvettes without making them too large for littoral ops.
- the 4 already operational, ASW capable FACs (the Rauma class) but with an upgrade (MLU), with new ASW armament (torpedoes) as the highest priority. If possible, also change the 40mm Bofors to new 57mm mk3 for more AAW range and firepower.
- the 2 "being upgraded during the next few years" Hameenmaa class minelayers (If for some reason money and political will was available I would actually stop the upgrade, and take all the systems that they will get and buy 2 new hulls for them, maybe something closer to a real "escort frigate" including a helo hangar and facilities for boarding teams and several RIBs, and leave the minelayers pretty much as they are, but oh well..)
- changing 4-6 of the new NH90 helos to "maritime" versions (maybe with both an ASW (sonobuoys,VDS+torpedo) and ASuW (Hellfire etc) capability

The sub option would be optimal in terms of some capabilities, it has been studied and discussed, but the fact remains that the money to start the "silent service" up from scratch (training, logistics, rescue facilities...) after 60 years is not and probably will not be available.

Well, that's my "two cents". Now I'm off for a vacation, so see you later!

Regards, Viper 75

How about buying some Swedish Visby stealth corvettes ? would be better than spending on enlarging the Hamina...
Operating jointly with Sweden 1 or 2 SSKs (before Singapore takes all the Vastergotland being deleted) and a couple of Visby would be a very cost efficient buy. A bit like the cooperation between Belgium and Holland.

cheers

 

[Grand Danois]

Thought it was worth flagging that the Danish Parliaments Committee of Finances confirmed and signed the use of the last 4.3 billion DKK for a total sum of 4.7 billion DKK for three 6,200 t FFG's this very day.

1 USD = 6.1 DKK, which makes for 783 million USD.

Cheers!

EDIT: And first now I find an article in English with regards to the new ships. Saves me the trouble of explaining them .

http://www.navalhistory.dk/English/NavyNews/2006/0622_PatrolShips.htm

 

[Sea Toby]

The new Danish frigates look impressive. They should complement with the Absaloms well. It appears Denmark is increasing their capabilities for out of theater operations. Good for them.

 

[contedicavour]

Thought it was worth flagging that the Danish Parliaments Committee of Finances confirmed and signed the use of the last 4.3 billion DKK for a total sum of 4.7 billion DKK for three 6,200 t FFG's this very day.

1 USD = 6.1 DKK, which makes for 783 million USD.

Cheers!

EDIT: And first now I find an article in English with regards to the new ships. Saves me the trouble of explaining them .

http://www.navalhistory.dk/English/NavyNews/2006/0622_PatrolShips.htm

Wow what is most amazing is that if SM-2 bl-III are bought, Denmark will have fleet air defense for the first time ever. The number of Harpoons is also amazing, normally 8 are enough.
Abandoning SSK capability in exchange for these mini-destroyers is definitively a good choice

cheers

 

[Grand Danois]

Wow what is most amazing is that if SM-2 bl-III are bought, Denmark will have fleet air defense for the first time ever. The number of Harpoons is also amazing, normally 8 are enough.
Abandoning SSK capability in exchange for these mini-destroyers is definitively a good choice

cheers

Well, the rationale for 16 Harpoon blk II's is that they have a limited land-attack capability, so they are not meant for anti-shipping only.

The final decision on VLS launchers and radars should be revealed over this summer. Exciting! The Sylver is AFAIK still in the competition*. Decision on actual missiles as Standard 2 or Aster 30 and TLAM or Scalp Naval will be made post 2009. But is of course dependant on choice of VLS.

These frigates and the Absalons are the replacement for 3 corvettes, a FAC sqn and a submarine sqn. I we had not gotten these surface ships, i suppose we would have gone for a sqn of A-26's from the thread started by ratmuff.

* I haven't seen any official announcements wrt the choice of VLS, but word around the campfire is that the Mk41 has actually been chosen...

 

[Sea Toby]

It appears the Danish navy, along with the Belgium navy, has learned its lessons about naval aviation, the usage of helicopters with its warships and patrol ships. The Nils Juels class of corvettes didn't have space for helicopter capability, something I'm sure the Danish navy missed when operating in peacekeeping missions far from home.

I'm still interested in what a Norwegian logistic support ship will resemble. If not a multi-role ship, and not an amphibious ship, I presume this ship will be more of a ro-ro freighter. I'm of the opinion Norway would do well following New Zealand's example of converting a ro-ro passenger ferry for around the price of $100 million American.

 

[Grand Danois]

The Danish Navy still has a dozen Flykevisten (sorry for the spelling if it is wrong ) FACs right ? I am aware the ships can be turned into MCMVs and other support roles, but they are still basically modern modular FACs.

cheers

I totally missed out on the FAC discussion. So to clear up.

The Flyvefisken ("The Flying Fish") class is different from our decommisioned Willemoes FAC's in that they have longer endurance and are modular, so they're not classic FAC's. They can do MCM, patrol and environmental tasks.

The endurance (and size) allows for them to participate in international units like SNMCMG 1 as MCM's like in STEADFAST JAGUAR, clear up jettisoned air-ground munitions like ALLIED HARVEST or patrol the Gibraltar as part of ACTIVE ENDEAVOUR.

I think only a few is used in the FAC role and some doubles up in the environmental role and they are used mainly close to Denmark.

 

[contedicavour]

Well, the rationale for 16 Harpoon blk II's is that they have a limited land-attack capability, so they are not meant for anti-shipping only.

The final decision on VLS launchers and radars should be revealed over this summer. Exciting! The Sylver is AFAIK still in the competition*. Decision on actual missiles as Standard 2 or Aster 30 and TLAM or Scalp Naval will be made post 2009. But is of course dependant on choice of VLS.

These frigates and the Absalons are the replacement for 3 corvettes, a FAC sqn and a submarine sqn. I we had not gotten these surface ships, i suppose we would have gone for a sqn of A-26's from the thread started by ratmuff.

* I haven't seen any official announcements wrt the choice of VLS, but word around the campfire is that the Mk41 has actually been chosen...

Ok thanks for the information. I'll be following this closely, it is one of those rare commercial battles between Mk41/ESSM/SM-2 and Sylver/Aster ... even though I agree with you Mk41 starts with a huge advantage (isn't it used on Absalons and Flyvefisken on special modules ?)
Anyway excellent choice and way more useful than a SSK squadron, even if it had been these impressive A26.

cheers

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

I was just wondering. Can the cuts in the navies also be seen as a positive sign of the strength and security of the region?

In the Far East, countries are increasing spending because they're unsure of each other. Whereas in Europe, the threats have gone so there's no need to have such a large capability any more. Really only the UK and France can afford to run large navies (Germany isn't interested) - it's ridiculous for every country on the coast to need a blue-water capability.