jsuo@niksula.hut.fi (Jyrki Juhani Suokas) (04/10/90)
From: jsuo@niksula.hut.fi (Jyrki Juhani Suokas) >From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) >>From: Erich J Smythe <"ANDREW::esmythe"@ATL.dnet.ge.com> >>I just read in AvLeak that Finland is negotiating to buy SU-27's or >>Mig-29's to replace the Mig-21's that they currently own. The also >>have sent out an RFP for the F-16, Mirage 2000, and Gripen JAS-39... >>Rather interesting inventory mix they have. >As neutrals, they've always preferred not to become dependent on >either >side for weaponry. (This might even be required by treaty, I'm not >sure.) > > Henry Spencer at U of Toronto > Zoology > uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry henry@zoo.toronto.edu About the planes :Yes, our Air Force is going to buy about 20 Mig-29:s in the near future and best guess about the other planes is the F-16 Fighting Falcon for following reasons : It's been in production for well over 10 years , it's been tested in cold weather conditions (Norwegian Air Force has them) and they seem to think it is best suited for our needs.Mirage 2000 is pretty new plane and for example it has not been tested in cold weather.They had a test series in Northern Lappland in Rovaniemi last month but the weather was pretty mild so a whole lot of info didn't come out of those tests.I think the JAS-39 Gripen is out of it because of the prototype planes crash and other reasons too. It is in our countrys foreign policy not in any treaties to byu military ordnance from both east and west.And we make a whole lot ourselves (the best mortars in the world come from Tampella). All opinions expressed above all totally my own not reflecting any official policies. -- +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ : JYRKI SUOKAS : : Keihastie 16 b Internet : jsuo@niksula.hut.fi : : 01280 Vantaa jsuo@otax.tky.hut.fi : : FINLAND jsu@sirius.hut.fi : : +358 (9)0 305993 t35104n@puukko.hut.fi : +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
pjt@niksula.hut.fi (Pekka J Taipale) (04/10/90)
From: pjt@niksula.hut.fi (Pekka J Taipale) In article <15266@cbnews.ATT.COM> henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes: >>I just read in AvLeak that Finland is negotiating to buy SU-27's or >>Mig-29's to replace the Mig-21's that they currently own. The also >>have sent out an RFP for the F-16, Mirage 2000, and Gripen JAS-39... >>Rather interesting inventory mix they have. >As neutrals, they've always preferred not to become dependent on either >side for weaponry. (This might even be required by treaty, I'm not sure.) It is not actually required by treaty, but has become a tradition in the Finnish Defence Forces. The Paris Peace Treaty of 1947 between Finland and the Allied (== USSR) says that Finland may not have any attack aircraft (bombers) or missiles (Finland has anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles, though), and no more than 60 'modern' fighter planes. Finland has had Mig-15's, DeHavilland Vampires, Folland Gnats (museum stuff) and has now one squadron (20) of Mib-21bis planes and two squadrons (40) of SAAB Drakens (which might also belong to museum, but are in active use, however). For pilot training, we have Finnish-made Vinka training planes and British-designed Hawks (jet planes), most of which have been manufactured under licence in Finland. Now the Air Force wants to buy a squadron of Mig-29's (this seems quite certain now) and two squadrons of Western planes. The JAS-39 has had so much difficulties that I think it's a sure looser. The Air Force people seem to want F-16's, the politicians seem to like Mirages. The tradition of buying arms both from East and West is also applied in other kinds of weapons, although we are more on our own with many weapon kinds. Infantry weapons like assault rifles are manufactured in Finland by Valmet - the model is Kalashnikov-compatible (this way we can use captured ammunition material - this principle was proved to be very effective 50 years ago). Tampella Oy makes field cannons. We have Apilas anti-tank rockets from France, and also the well-known Russian anti-tank rocket launcher (which is not 'use-and-throw-away', I think the 'international' name for it is something like SG-7). We have SAM-7 AA missiles and TOW anti-tank missiles. Quite a mix, isn't it? Disclaimer: I am not an expert in weapon systems, nor do I work for the Finnish Army or government. I've just done the mandatory 11 months in army (not air force) and some 're-training' (BTW, what should this really be called?) afterwards. -- Pekka Taipale -- pjt@niksula.hut.fi
SHUEE%IUCF.BITNET@UICVM.uic.edu (04/12/90)
From: <SHUEE%IUCF.BITNET@UICVM.uic.edu> Could our friends in Finnland please tell us about the reliablity and over- all impresions of the Soviet made weapons they use? I have heard lot's of stories, but not from anybody who has gotten to use or be around a wide cross section of both eastern and western equipment. Thank's SHUEE@IUCF
kp74615@nokikana.tut.fi (Karri Tapani Palovuori) (04/14/90)
From: kp74615@nokikana.tut.fi (Karri Tapani Palovuori) In article <15491@cbnews.ATT.COM> SHUEE%IUCF.BITNET@UICVM.uic.edu writes: > > Could our friends in Finnland please tell us about the reliablity and over- >all impresions of the Soviet made weapons they use? I have heard lot's of >stories, but not from anybody who has gotten to use or be around a wide cross >section of both eastern and western equipment. Thank's >SHUEE@IUCF The sole reason for buying Soviet weapons is politics. That should say it all. Soviet equipment are VERY robust. The idea: the guns fire every time, where the grenade hits isn't so important. Well actually they don't fire every time ;-) Typically Soviet arms, vehicles etc. are both designed and constructed poorly. One example I learned to know during my army time, was Soviet 'armoured' (what a joke) attack vehicle BTR-60. The armour stops rifle bullets - sometimes. The only exits are on the roof (and it was designed for fast commando transportations). The engine(s) deliver 180 horse powers. You can figure out how much that is when the vehicle weights 11 tons!!! Imagine your car (let's say 1000 kg) with 16 horse powers. Oh yes, and it consumes 200 liters of 92 oct gasoline per 100 km. When driving on road! And that was only one example. Very often Soviet equipment are modified HEAVILY by us to make them usable. After all, we didn't get them free. For defence purposes we have western (including Finnish) equipment. Karri P.S. Read the book 'Cold Will' by (some NATO general, can't remember the name) and find out what makes us strong. We have beated the Soviets two times now. We will beat them the third time, if necessary.
r31510k@kaira.hut.fi (04/14/90)
From: r31510k@kaira.hut.fi () In article <15491@cbnews.ATT.COM> SHUEE%IUCF.BITNET@UICVM.uic.edu writes: >From: <SHUEE%IUCF.BITNET@UICVM.uic.edu> > Could our friends in Finnland please tell us about the reliablity and over- >all impresions of the Soviet made weapons they use? >SHUEE@IUCF Generally: Soviet weapons are simple and reliable. My knowledge covers only infantry weapons, so I try to describe some of them. ANTI-TANK MISSILES We use both Soviet AT-4 Spigot (Finnish PST-ohjus 82) and US ITOW (PST-ohj 83). AT-4 is older model than ITOW. First time I saw AT-4 I thought it was of western manufacture. I understand it is a good weapon. RADIOS We use US PRC-25 and Soviet radio we call LV-301. My own impression are in favour of LV-301, many people would disagree with this. If PRC-25 ceases to function correctly, no repairs can be done in field. LV-301 however can be tuned and adjusted. We have also had difficulties with hand-pieces of PRC-25 in winter conditions. TANKS We use T-55 (modified) and T-72 tanks. I have understood that these function very well. TRUCKS AND ARMOURED PERSONNEL VEHICLES Russian trucks and armoured vehicles consume _very_ much of gasoline and technically leave a lot to hope for. PERSONAL AND OTHER WEAPONS Our VALMET M62 assault rifle is based on Kalasnikov AK-47 and is functionally equal with it. It is a very good, simple and reliable weapon even compared with AR 15 A2, HK G3, SIG 550. We manufacture our own light machine gun- 7.62 KK(=MG) 62. Somebody mentioned that we use Soviet Anti-tank rocket launcher. This is not true. Weapon that we use is very similar looking, but is of Finnish manufacture and technically a recoil-less rifle (All propellant burns in weapon). It is called "Sinko 55 S 55". First 55 for caliber 55 mm, second for vintage. Yours, Reima Raty r31510k@kaira.hut.fi "Qualitas potentia nostra "