Finnish Hamina : how to fit a FFG in a 50 metre ship !

[contedicavour]

I'm impressed by the Finnish fast attack crafts of the Hamina class.

While most of the world's navies are moving gradually away from FACs to light frigates (ex Germany replacing 20+ FACs with 5 corvettes, Sweden doing the same, etc), Finland has developed an amazing ship :

> 51metre 270ton platform
> 8 cell VLS for Umkhonto SAMs with a range of 12km and March 2.4, ie comparable to France's Crotale, Italy's Aspide, the older Sea Sparrow, and more than the UK's Sea Wolf.
> EADS TRE-3D air search radar (normally embarked on FFGs !)
> 4 to 8 Saab RBS15SF SSMs, 150km range (again, a FFG wouldn't do better)
> a sonar system including hull sonar and towed array low frequency !! with A/S mortars and depth charges...
> all of this operated by only 21 officers and seamen...

One could argue that other marginally larger ships carry SAMs and SSMs (Saar 4.5, the Greek Super Vita for example), but none carries such a complete ASUW, AAW, ASW weaponry.

I am normally sceptical of the residual utility of smaller ships that cannot be deployed on overseas missions, that are vulnerable to missiles launched in standoff position by aircrafts and helos, etc...
.... though in this case I must say that for the Baltic Sea such a ship is really impressive !

Any comments/opinions ?

cheers

 

[Sea Toby]

Yes, the Finnish Rauma class are loaded for bear, 50 meters long, displaces 268 tons full load, and with a range of 500 nautical miles at 30 knots. Since Finland doesn't reveal slower speed ranges lets compare this ship to a similar Italian ship, although with much less armament. The Esploratore class is 37 meters long, displaces 230 tons full load, with a range of 1200 nautical miles at 20 knots. The Cigala Fulgosi class is 88.4 meters long, displaces 1520 tons full load, with a range of 3500 nautical miles at 14 knots. The Artigliere class is 113.2 meters long, displaces 2525 tons full load, with a range of 900 nautical miles at 30 knots, 3450 nautical miles at 20 knots, and 5300 nautical miles at 16 knots. The Project Horizon destroyer is 150.6 meters long, displaces 6700 tons full load, with a range of 3500 nautical miles at 25 knots, 7000 nautical miles at 18 knots.

While the Rauma maybe armed as frigates, they don't have anywhere near the range of a frigate. While useful in the Baltic, the Rauma does not have much value in the Atlantic Ocean.

 

[contedicavour]

Yes, the Finnish Rauma class are loaded for bear, 50 meters long, displaces 268 tons full load, and with a range of 500 nautical miles at 30 knots. Since Finland doesn't reveal slower speed ranges lets compare this ship to a similar Italian ship, although with much less armament. The Esploratore class is 37 meters long, displaces 230 tons full load, with a range of 1200 nautical miles at 20 knots. The Cigala Fulgosi class is 88.4 meters long, displaces 1520 tons full load, with a range of 3500 nautical miles at 14 knots. The Artigliere class is 113.2 meters long, displaces 2525 tons full load, with a range of 900 nautical miles at 30 knots, 3450 nautical miles at 20 knots, and 5300 nautical miles at 16 knots. The Project Horizon destroyer is 150.6 meters long, displaces 6700 tons full load, with a range of 3500 nautical miles at 25 knots, 7000 nautical miles at 18 knots.

While the Rauma maybe armed as frigates, they don't have anywhere near the range of a frigate. While useful in the Baltic, the Rauma does not have much value in the Atlantic Ocean.

I see we've got the same 974-page sourcebook
The Raumas are only useful in small seas for small ranges, though they could sink Russian destroyers if it came to that. They could escape attack by Kilo SSKs in shallow waters, shoot down a few SU24s looking for them close to the heavily wooden/snowy coastline, then sink a couple of Sovremennys !!
They are just perfect for their Finnish role.

cheers

 

[aaaditya]

i believe that most countries nowadays are turning to vessels with ocean going capabilities and a high degree of endurance(i guess the naval doctrine of most countries are looking at these capabilities),this can be achieved by vessels of corvette class and above.

the disadvantage of the finnish vessels would be that they would not have the endurance or upgrdability of the corvette sized vessels,but then it must be a part of the finnish doctrine to give importance to such vessels .

however iam more impressed with the norweigian szeld class they have speed ,stealth and comparable weapons load for more or less a similiar displacement ,i would recommend these warships for navies intending to operate in shallow waters and near the coast.

 

[contedicavour]

i believe that most countries nowadays are turning to vessels with ocean going capabilities and a high degree of endurance(i guess the naval doctrine of most countries are looking at these capabilities),this can be achieved by vessels of corvette class and above.

the disadvantage of the finnish vessels would be that they would not have the endurance or upgrdability of the corvette sized vessels,but then it must be a part of the finnish doctrine to give importance to such vessels .

however iam more impressed with the norweigian szeld class they have speed ,stealth and comparable weapons load for more or less a similiar displacement ,i would recommend these warships for navies intending to operate in shallow waters and near the coast.

The Norwegian Skjold are stealth and very fast (50+ knots top speed), but they lack ASW and AAW is point defence only, not a 12km range 8cell VLS system as the Hamina.

cheers

 

[RA1911]

The Skjold class is custom made for the norwegian coast with loads of fjords and small islands. Speed (60knots), manouverability in extremely shallow waters (0.9meters) and surface-to-surface firepower (8 NSMs) is the name of the game. They are not made for anti-submarine and anti-air warfare. That's the job of the Nansen frigates and the F16s respectively.

 

[contedicavour]

The Skjold class is custom made for the norwegian coast with loads of fjords and small islands. Speed (60knots), manouverability in extremely shallow waters (0.9meters) and surface-to-surface firepower (8 NSMs) is the name of the game. They are not made for anti-submarine and anti-air warfare. That's the job of the Nansen frigates and the F16s respectively.

Fully agree, not to mention the 6 Ula SSKs that can chase Russian SSK/SSNs in Norwegian waters.
That's why I say the Skjold are a great design (should win the price for innovative naval design ) but are not comparable to the Haminas' capabilities.

cheers

 

[Gollevainen]

What's this, discussion about finnish navy and i wasen't invited??:flaming

Anyway few things to remember...Our navy has no intentions to atlantic deployemnt, it never had and I hope it never will. Thus smaller vessels are sufficient enough. Our coastline is very long and the archipegalo is filled with thousands of little islands and the navigable routes are narrow. This effiently leaves no room for big warships and hence there haven't been any in Finnish service. Biggest warships in our cathegory (aside the amoured ships) have been the two ex Soviet Riga class SRKs which were toughted as a escorts in our service. Other than that we have relyed to small FACs and most importantly mines. Minewarfare is the key to our naval doctrines and as unsexy it may sound, remeber that during WWII we managed to ensiege the entire Soviet Baltic fleet to it's port in Kronstad by simply mining almoust the entire Gulf of Finland.

But lets focus in todays world. Like I said our navy, possed by the limitations of the low budget and still plagued with the 50 years of restrictions by the Paris peace treaty has focused to the most relevant areas to defend our homewaters. Missile FACs are good solution to complement to minefields, by lurking in safe waters and just waiting the enemy warshisp coming to the spider's web. New sthealthfeatures makes the detection even smaller than earlier and the Haminas as well as the earlier Rauma and Helsinki class are going to be quite deadly to any foreing occupator...

But as the topic was about the Hamina class, lets look at it bit more carefully. I must agree (and this comes without any national pride) it's a formidable ship. It's only disavantage is the range, but then again it never was mented to operate in Atlantic. So knowing the doctrines of our navy, I say that Hamina may well be the best FAC in the whole world currently floating. It's biggest advantages are the multipurpose weapon and sensors fit, which allows it operating in both ASW and AsuW. Also modern FACs needs good airdefence, the first gulf war demostrated how effective can helicopters armed with ASMs can be. The Umokhoto is a good choise for ships of Haminas size.

Before i'm done, few toughts about the Finnish navy future. To complete our homewater defence, a submarines, ones like in our beloved neighbour Sweden has would be the cream atop the coffee. The paris peace treaty prevented us having ones and thus we have lost the knowlidge of using submarines, not only by running them but to include them in our naval doctrines and tacticks. Also the defence budget of ours is quite small and as the politicans just wants to make our armed forces more NATO acceptable, no spear money to things that actually would do some good...:frown Also I would have liked to see the Tuuli class missile howecrafts in service..

 

[contedicavour]

What's this, discussion about finnish navy and i wasen't invited??:flaming

Anyway few things to remember...Our navy has no intentions to atlantic deployemnt, it never had and I hope it never will. Thus smaller vessels are sufficient enough. Our coastline is very long and the archipegalo is filled with thousands of little islands and the navigable routes are narrow. This effiently leaves no room for big warships and hence there haven't been any in Finnish service. Biggest warships in our cathegory (aside the amoured ships) have been the two ex Soviet Riga class SRKs which were toughted as a escorts in our service. Other than that we have relyed to small FACs and most importantly mines. Minewarfare is the key to our naval doctrines and as unsexy it may sound, remeber that during WWII we managed to ensiege the entire Soviet Baltic fleet to it's port in Kronstad by simply mining almoust the entire Gulf of Finland.

But lets focus in todays world. Like I said our navy, possed by the limitations of the low budget and still plagued with the 50 years of restrictions by the Paris peace treaty has focused to the most relevant areas to defend our homewaters. Missile FACs are good solution to complement to minefields, by lurking in safe waters and just waiting the enemy warshisp coming to the spider's web. New sthealthfeatures makes the detection even smaller than earlier and the Haminas as well as the earlier Rauma and Helsinki class are going to be quite deadly to any foreing occupator...

But as the topic was about the Hamina class, lets look at it bit more carefully. I must agree (and this comes without any national pride) it's a formidable ship. It's only disavantage is the range, but then again it never was mented to operate in Atlantic. So knowing the doctrines of our navy, I say that Hamina may well be the best FAC in the whole world currently floating. It's biggest advantages are the multipurpose weapon and sensors fit, which allows it operating in both ASW and AsuW. Also modern FACs needs good airdefence, the first gulf war demostrated how effective can helicopters armed with ASMs can be. The Umokhoto is a good choise for ships of Haminas size.

Before i'm done, few toughts about the Finnish navy future. To complete our homewater defence, a submarines, ones like in our beloved neighbour Sweden has would be the cream atop the coffee. The paris peace treaty prevented us having ones and thus we have lost the knowlidge of using submarines, not only by running them but to include them in our naval doctrines and tacticks. Also the defence budget of ours is quite small and as the politicans just wants to make our armed forces more NATO acceptable, no spear money to things that actually would do some good...:frown Also I would have liked to see the Tuuli class missile howecrafts in service..

Ah-ha I was wondering when our Finnish friends would join the discussion
Since you mention the Finnish Navy's future, a couple of questions :
> why are the first 2 Helsinki FACs being deleted ? I've read the entire class could be deleted, thus leaving only the 8 Rauma and Hamina operational.
> What's the use of the big almost 100 meter long minelayers ? I've understood mine warfare is key to your national defence, but such big ships, even if equipped with Mistral SAMs, would be quite vulnerable and attract a lot of attention...

cheers

 

[Gollevainen]

Ah-ha I was wondering when our Finnish friends would join the discussion
Since you mention the Finnish Navy's future, a couple of questions :
> why are the first 2 Helsinki FACs being deleted ? I've read the entire class could be deleted, thus leaving only the 8 Rauma and Hamina operational.
> What's the use of the big almost 100 meter long minelayers ? I've understood mine warfare is key to your national defence, but such big ships, even if equipped with Mistral SAMs, would be quite vulnerable and attract a lot of attention...

cheers

To awnser the fist question is bit hard but I think it's mostly the same old, same old....Money...

THe seccond question is easier. Bigger the minelayer, the more mines you can lay at single sortie. We have three big minelayers, Pohjanmaa, Hämeenmaa ja Uusimaa. Pohjanmaa is also a trainingship and the minedeck can be modified to accomodate cadets in place of the mines. The other two are sisterships between and have secondary transport role, thus the bowramp.

 

[contedicavour]

To awnser the fist question is bit hard but I think it's mostly the same old, same old....Money...

THe seccond question is easier. Bigger the minelayer, the more mines you can lay at single sortie. We have three big minelayers, Pohjanmaa, Hämeenmaa ja Uusimaa. Pohjanmaa is also a trainingship and the minedeck can be modified to accomodate cadets in place of the mines. The other two are sisterships between and have secondary transport role, thus the bowramp.

Can we consider them (secondary role) mini-LSTs then ?

cheers

 

[Viper75]

Re: Finnish Navy

...
Anyway few things to remember...Our navy has no intentions to atlantic deployemnt, it never had and I hope it never will. Thus smaller vessels are sufficient enough. Our coastline is very long and the archipegalo is filled with thousands of little islands and the navigable routes are narrow. This effiently leaves no room for big warships and hence there haven't been any in Finnish service. Biggest warships in our cathegory (aside the amoured ships) have been the two ex Soviet Riga class SRKs which were toughted as a escorts in our service. Other than that we have relyed to small FACs and most importantly mines. Minewarfare is the key to our naval doctrines and as unsexy it may sound, remeber that during WWII we managed to ensiege the entire Soviet Baltic fleet to it's port in Kronstad by simply mining almoust the entire Gulf of Finland.

Don't forget the Turunmaa class corvettes (gun armed, referred to as gunboats by the finns)! They were of course smaller than the Riga class but still far larger than the FACs. The Finnish naval doctrine is slowly but clearly changing, with less emphasis on anti-invasion defense including minelaying, and added emphasis on protection of shipping - including MCM - and international ops, so I forecast a move towards (small) frigates or large corvettes capable of blue water escort operations in 10 years... not to belittle the mine warfare aspect of course. The size of ships up to corvette size is IMO not really limited by the archipelago (compare with the Swedish coastal corvettes of the Goteborg-class...).

But lets focus in todays world. Like I said our navy, possed by the limitations of the low budget and still plagued with the 50 years of restrictions by the Paris peace treaty has focused to the most relevant areas to defend our homewaters. Missile FACs are good solution to complement to minefields, by lurking in safe waters and just waiting the enemy warshisp coming to the spider's web. New sthealthfeatures makes the detection even smaller than earlier and the Haminas as well as the earlier Rauma and Helsinki class are going to be quite deadly to any foreing occupator...

Actually since 1991 the Finnish Navy is not limited by the Paris treaty anymore... other than that I fully agree with you here!

If anything, the demilitarization of the Aland islands as well as the finnish "peace dividend"-hungry parliament is the real plague...

But as the topic was about the Hamina class, lets look at it bit more carefully. I must agree (and this comes without any national pride) it's a formidable ship. It's only disavantage is the range, but then again it never was mented to operate in Atlantic. So knowing the doctrines of our navy, I say that Hamina may well be the best FAC in the whole world currently floating. It's biggest advantages are the multipurpose weapon and sensors fit, which allows it operating in both ASW and AsuW. Also modern FACs needs good airdefence, the first gulf war demostrated how effective can helicopters armed with ASMs can be. The Umokhoto is a good choise for ships of Haminas size.

Ehem... could someone please enlighten me with a description of the Hamina class ASW sensors and weapons...?? (ok, sorry loaded question here since there is no ASW capability except depth charges currently!)

Before i'm done, few toughts about the Finnish navy future. To complete our homewater defence, a submarines, ones like in our beloved neighbour Sweden has would be the cream atop the coffee. The paris peace treaty prevented us having ones and thus we have lost the knowlidge of using submarines, not only by running them but to include them in our naval doctrines and tacticks. Also the defence budget of ours is quite small and as the politicans just wants to make our armed forces more NATO acceptable, no spear money to things that actually would do some good...:frown ...

Wise words, my friend. Wise words indeed...

 

[Viper75]

Re: FACs

To awnser the fist question is bit hard but I think it's mostly the same old, same old....Money...

Quite so, and also the obvious lack of enough personnel to run that many FACs (theoretically 12 or actually 10 if you read Jane's). Of course this is also basically due to a lack of money as always...

As it is approximately half of the finnish FACs are manned at any one time, and most crews rotate between two ships to keep them all operational or in reasonable condition. Not the best solution, but better than mothballing or dismantling half the fleet.

The Helsinki class is being phased out with 2 non-operational hulls already (Helsinki and Turku). (source: Jane's)

 

[contedicavour]

Don't forget the Turunmaa class corvettes (gun armed, referred to as gunboats by the finns)! They were of course smaller than the Riga class but still far larger than the FACs. The Finnish naval doctrine is slowly but clearly changing, with less emphasis on anti-invasion defense including minelaying, and added emphasis on protection of shipping - including MCM - and international ops, so I forecast a move towards (small) frigates or large corvettes capable of blue water escort operations in 10 years... not to belittle the mine warfare aspect of course. The size of ships up to corvette size is IMO not really limited by the archipelago (compare with the Swedish coastal corvettes of the Goteborg-class...).



Actually since 1991 the Finnish Navy is not limited by the Paris treaty anymore... other than that I fully agree with you here!

If anything, the demilitarization of the Aland islands as well as the finnish "peace dividend"-hungry parliament is the real plague...



Ehem... could someone please enlighten me with a description of the Hamina class ASW sensors and weapons...?? (ok, sorry loaded question here since there is no ASW capability except depth charges currently!)



Wise words, my friend. Wise words indeed...

Hello ! The FACs have A/S mortar + depth charges. True, no torpedoes, but given very shallow waters, that's fine. What is impressive, is hull and VDS sonar active/passive.
Regarding the corvettes, the Swedish corvettes aren't much larger than the Haminas in size (a bit more in tonnage, though). The 2 classes of Swedish corvettes are respectively 50 and 58 metres long... Though the Visbies of course are much bigger.
If I were Finnish, I would recommand to be able to deploy to international missions of 2 types : coastal shallow waters requring powerful FACs, or operations in arctic waters with your icebreakers. No need for frigates really... Eventually I'd make sure your 3 big minelayers can act as LSTs to transport troops.

cheers

 

[contedicavour]

Quite so, and also the obvious lack of enough personnel to run that many FACs (theoretically 12 or actually 10 if you read Jane's). Of course this is also basically due to a lack of money as always...

As it is approximately half of the finnish FACs are manned at any one time, and most crews rotate between two ships to keep them all operational or in reasonable condition. Not the best solution, but better than mothballing or dismantling half the fleet.

The Helsinki class is being phased out with 2 non-operational hulls already (Helsinki and Turku). (source: Jane's)

Strange use of naval personnel... I'd rather put in reserve 1 of the 3 minelayers or one of the several auxiliary vessels and keep all 12 FACs operational. I'd eventually reduce coastal artillery personnel (those with the RBS missile batteries or with the artillery).

cheers

 

[rickusn]

FAC's are going out of syle for three reasons:

1. The need for larger, better seakeeping and endurance Offshore Patrol Vessels.

2. Experience has shown they have serious difficulty targeting both offensive and defensive weapons in all but the calmest sea states and clear weather.

3. The lions share of costs in a warship are for its combat systems. It makes little sense to incur such costs for a ship of limited utility especially if those systems performance is degraded by being placed on a platform that has trouble operating in all sea states and weather.

 

[Grand Danois]

FAC's are going out of syle for three reasons:

1. The need for larger, better seakeeping and endurance Offshore Patrol Vessels.

2. Experience has shown they have serious difficulty targeting both offensive and defensive weapons in all but the calmest sea states and clear weather.

3. The lions share of costs in a warship are for its combat systems. It makes little sense to incur such costs for a ship of limited utility especially if those systems performance is degraded by being placed on a platform that has trouble operating in all sea states and weather.

These are the exact same reasons the RDN stated for decommisioning four Flyvefisken (Flying Fish) class vessels.

One will get scrapped and three are to be sold to the Lithuanian Navy for 4.3 million USD a pop. The Lithuanians will use them a coast guard ships. They will probably have their GT and most of the advanced electronics removed. The 76mm OTO, some EO for targetting and new or refurbed diesel engines will probably remain and violá - you have a coast guard vessel for the Baltic Sea.

Sværdfisken (The Sword Fish) commisioned 1992 - to be scrapped
Flyvefisken (The Flying Fish) - 1989 - Lithuanian Navy
Hajen (The Shark) - 1990 - Lithuanian Navy
Lommen (a seabird, name in English unknown to me) - 1994 - Lithuanian Navy

 

[Gollevainen]

Actually since 1991 the Finnish Navy is not limited by the Paris treaty anymore... other than that I fully agree with you here!

Well what i ment was that the paris treaty has somewhat dictaded our naval aqustions for so long that when it no longer apllied, the overall conceptual and structual differences of our navy prevents new alien systems to be incorporated.

Can we consider them (secondary role) mini-LSTs then ?

Not actually LSTs as landingship tanks should be able to beach, but at least to my knowlidge the finnish minelayers cannot do that. So they are more of transportships as a seccondary roles, but also usefull for patrol duties.

 

[contedicavour]

These are the exact same reasons the RDN stated for decommisioning four Flyvefisken (Flying Fish) class vessels.

One will get scrapped and three are to be sold to the Lithuanian Navy for 4.3 million USD a pop. The Lithuanians will use them a coast guard ships. They will probably have their GT and most of the advanced electronics removed. The 76mm OTO, some EO for targetting and new or refurbed diesel engines will probably remain and violá - you have a coast guard vessel for the Baltic Sea.

Sværdfisken (The Sword Fish) commisioned 1992 - to be scrapped
Flyvefisken (The Flying Fish) - 1989 - Lithuanian Navy
Hajen (The Shark) - 1990 - Lithuanian Navy
Lommen (a seabird, name in English unknown to me) - 1994 - Lithuanian Navy

Couldn't the Danish Navy have used them as MCM ships ? Seeing them used as simple patrol boats when their modular conception was supposed to house VLS Sea Sparrows, Harpoons, ASW or MCM.... another huge waste of money

cheers

 

[contedicavour]

FAC's are going out of syle for three reasons:

1. The need for larger, better seakeeping and endurance Offshore Patrol Vessels.

2. Experience has shown they have serious difficulty targeting both offensive and defensive weapons in all but the calmest sea states and clear weather.

3. The lions share of costs in a warship are for its combat systems. It makes little sense to incur such costs for a ship of limited utility especially if those systems performance is degraded by being placed on a platform that has trouble operating in all sea states and weather.

I agree with all that you say... but here we're talking about the Baltic Sea, or, to be more accurate, coastal operations within the Baltic Sea. Hence the need for a small, fast, heavily armed platform.
My understanding of the crisis FACs are facing in most world's navies is that they lack decent AAW. The Haminas have solved the problem with a very serious air defence VLS system, the longest-ranged ever on a FAC...

cheers