Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Finland to buy NASAMS II SAM-system
Tanknet.org > Discussion Forums > General Naval and Air
Sardaukar
http://www.mil.fi/paaesikunta/tiedotteet/5061.dsp (in finnish)

Finland is buying Kongsberg-Raytheon NASAMS II missile system to replace Russian BUK M1 system. In addition, Finland is buying Thales-Raytheon Systems Company's mobile radar system and same company is also modernizing Finnish long-range radar network. Total cost is 642 million euros.

NASAMS II systems are going to cost 346 million euros, radar systems and upgrades 176 million euros. I think rest are going for purchasing the missiles.

About damn time. smile.gif

Josh
Isn't M1 Buk a rather modern system?
bd1
QUOTE(Sardaukar @ Wed 29 Apr 2009 0900) *
http://www.mil.fi/paaesikunta/tiedotteet/5061.dsp (in finnish)

Finland is buying Kongsberg-Raytheon NASAMS II missile system to replace Russian BUK M1 system. In addition, Finland is buying Thales-Raytheon Systems Company's mobile radar system and same company is also modernizing Finnish long-range radar network. Total cost is 642 million euros.

NASAMS II systems are going to cost 346 million euros, radar systems and upgrades 176 million euros. I think rest are going for purchasing the missiles.

About damn time. smile.gif


seems that Finns let us play with them too - local papers write that Finland buys 12 radars and Est. buys 2 Thales Ground Master 403.

My thanks to all Finns for their indispensable help to us. smile.gif
Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(jua @ Wed 29 Apr 2009 1741) *
Isn't M1 Buk a rather modern system?


M2 is already aviable and possibly even M3. So it may not be quite so new. Anyway, reason behind all this is that FDF found out that BUKs reliability can't be quaranteed in all circumstances. There is no precise info about this, but there are some theories: 1) Russians left somekind of backdoor or other kind of vulnerability to the system (possibly unintentional). 2) This has something to do with that raid to Syria by IDF. 3)Then there are theories about how Georgian BUK:s were upgraded in Ukraine and were supprize to Russians when their ECM didn't have any effect. 4) Finnish army wanted to get rid off any Russian equipment, so they just invented this whole thing. IIRC around 2000 there was complaints from the army about how high maintainance BUK was.

Edit: Deal includes 4 systems with 24 launchers total. Not sure about how many other components there is for those systems. Radar is MPQ-64F2 (also from Thales-Raytheon).
Yama
Meh. It was predictable - NASAMS is cheaper and there may be some other defence co-operation linked - but it is a poor choice. It does not have performance we need, and it uses same missile and seeker head as AMRAAM. Meaning, if there is a counter developed for AMRAAM seeker, 95% of Finnish air defence capability is neutralized.
CV9030FIN
QUOTE(Sami Jumppanen @ Wed 29 Apr 2009 2101) *
M2 is already aviable and possibly even M3. So it may not be quite so new. Anyway, reason behind all this is that FDF found out that BUKs reliability can't be quaranteed in all circumstances. There is no precise info about this, but there are some theories: 1) Russians left somekind of backdoor or other kind of vulnerability to the system (possibly unintentional). 2) This has something to do with that raid to Syria by IDF. 3)Then there are theories about how Georgian BUK:s were upgraded in Ukraine and were supprize to Russians when their ECM didn't have any effect. 4) Finnish army wanted to get rid off any Russian equipment, so they just invented this whole thing. IIRC around 2000 there was complaints from the army about how high maintainance BUK was.


This what is know in publicly: (Note! This standard Google translation from Finnish language news...)

QUOTE

Vanhanen and Heinäluoma received info from military about the Russian AA-missile problems

published today at 00:31, updated today at 13:15
Leaving the use of medium-haul aircraft missile battery 96 BUK M1.

Photo: The Defense Forces

Armed Forces Commander Juhani Kaskeala and Defense Minister Jyri Häkämies (IOC) have today, Wednesday, pre-care practiced a briefing, which describes one of the last decades, the largest single arms deals.

The army ordered a new air defense missile system, the new medium range of air surveillance radar system and update to long range of air surveillance radar system.
Total value of purchases for verges around 700 million euros, and the current economic crisis, the government must be prepared for the political laine would. The last major acquisition was the Air Force Hornets, who farms in the middle of the worst recession. The voters were tough, and sent the leaders of the opposition in elections.

Now the tasks of radar shops are part of the normal procurement cycle, when the technology is getting older and the equipment stops. Instead missile replacement is surprices outside experts.

Defense Forces' current-aircraft missile, a Russian Buk M-1 is still a relatively modern and, in principle, it should be the useful life remaining for many years. The missile was acquired at the mid-1990s that the payment arrangement in which Russia changed part of the Council during its debts to Finland. The gun is shown its abilities last in August 2008 in Georgia, the war, when it knocked down to the Russian aircraft.

Finnish magazine called Suomen Kuvalehti reported about a year ago that the Russian missile must be changed because it was the discovery of the enemy to go hole. Anonymous source from Defence staff confirmed information to the U.S. defense industry publication Defense News.

YLE news from various sources to the information available, at least according to their own policy-makers gave approval to the missile deal after obtaining military knowledge, that the Russian missile is vulnerable. Secrecy were married in a very small district the previous government.

Representatives of General Staff told verbally, and specifically Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen (Center Party) and Minister of Finance Eero Heinäluoma (SDP), the usefulness of Buk not be able to guarantee in all circumstances, the weapon is prone to outside influence. Due their position also Defense Minister Seppo Kääriäinen (Center) and President Tarja Halonen were adopted by resolution of the missile is replaced.

What is the external impact is, it is somewhat outside the impossibility to obtain more precise information. It is possible that today's briefing, even the defense minister does not permit to tell Buk problems, but the relevant issues must be forced to rotate. Outsiders do not want to give clues about where the "hole" lies, and the exchangeable missiles are still many years operational use.

A high-ranking source from Defence staff says without mention Buk that the problem may be, if the firearms to the range and extent of many users. International defense trade press has been some indication that Israel would be able to eliminate the Syrians used by the Russian air defense missiles, the two years ago in a military attack.

Finland took the missile deal pending, no later than three years ago. The acquisition of a public tender European arms agency, EDA's to maintain a register of attracting attention to midsummer, after June 26, 2006.

YLE Uutiset / Olli Ainola YLE News / Olli Ainola

Link
CV9030FIN
QUOTE(Yama @ Wed 29 Apr 2009 2204) *
Meh. It was predictable - NASAMS is cheaper and there may be some other defence co-operation linked - but it is a poor choice. It does not have performance we need, and it uses same missile and seeker head as AMRAAM. Meaning, if there is a counter developed for AMRAAM seeker, 95% of Finnish air defence capability is neutralized.


You should really stop reading what Suomen Sotilas writes...
Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(CV9030FIN @ Wed 29 Apr 2009 1923) *
You should really stop reading what Suomen Sotilas writes...


Suomen Sotilas was/is pro NASAMS. Anyway, NASAMS does lack range compared to SAMP/T, but aparently at the same prize they would have got only one SAMP/T system.
CV9030FIN
QUOTE(Sami Jumppanen @ Wed 29 Apr 2009 2244) *
Suomen Sotilas was/is pro NASAMS.


...the point is that they write what ever they are paid to write...and they are still sitting in trenches of WWII...
CV9030FIN
Photos of system integrated to its forthcoming platform

http://sisuauto.materialbank.net/NiboWEB/s...952&lang=fi

Deal includes 30 SISU 6x6 E13TP system platforms for missile BTY's, 12 SISU 8x8 E13TP system platforms for Thales-Raytheon Ground Master 403 Radar platforms and 40 SISU A2045 4x4 trucks for support roles of BTY's

http://www.sisuauto.com/portal/fi/uutinen/?id=127 (sorry only in Finnish)

Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(CV9030FIN @ Wed 29 Apr 2009 2043) *
Photos of system integrated to its forthcoming platform

http://sisuauto.materialbank.net/NiboWEB/s...952&lang=fi

Deal includes 30 SISU 6x6 E13TP system platforms for missile BTY's, 12 SISU 8x8 E13TP system platforms for Thales-Raytheon Ground Master 403 Radar platforms and 40 SISU A2045 4x4 trucks for support roles of BTY's

http://www.sisuauto.com/portal/fi/uutinen/?id=127 (sorry only in Finnish)


For some reason those numbers don't add up. There is suposed to be 24 launchers, not 30 (are they keeping some as spares?).
CV9030FIN
QUOTE(Sami Jumppanen @ Thu 30 Apr 2009 0046) *
For some reason those numbers don't add up. There is suposed to be 24 launchers, not 30 (are they keeping some as spares?).


6 for BMC4I system containers (FDC)...? Besides according to SISU press release all those 6x6 system platforms trucks are equipt with The MULTILIFT demountables so every truck can carry any piece of BTY as everything is packed to container platforms...
CV9030FIN
QUOTE(bd1 @ Wed 29 Apr 2009 2055) *
seems that Finns let us play with them too - local papers write that Finland buys 12 radars and Est. buys 2 Thales Ground Master 403.

My thanks to all Finns for their indispensable help to us. smile.gif


It seems that Estonians are also buying 2 similar 8x8 E13TP system platforms for their Thales-Raytheon Ground Master 403 Radars and 2 SISU A2045 4x4 trucks for support roles that FDF announced to buy too...
Yama
QUOTE(CV9030FIN @ Wed 29 Apr 2009 1923) *
You should really stop reading what Suomen Sotilas writes...


Didn't they write an "evaluation" of the systems which was hugely pro-NASAMS...?

Chief problem with NASAMS is that it simply lacks the altitude performance. It's ceiling of ~10km is not enough even against current threat of bombers armed with satellite-guided bombs. Also, it cannot intercept ballistic missiles.
Lampshade111
Isn't that a bit much to be expecting from such a smaller sized system? What about MEADS and it's PAC-3 MSE missiles, how close is that system to entering the market?
Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(Yama @ Thu 30 Apr 2009 0543) *
Didn't they write an "evaluation" of the systems which was hugely pro-NASAMS...?


They wrote an article about NASAMS and on the next issue they wrote another article about SAMP/T. Since they failed clearly enough to mention that next issue would have an article about the other system, many took that as a paid advertisement from makers of NASAMS.

IMHO NASAMS article was more positive than the one made about SAMP/T, but still they were quite balanced.

As for the range of NASAMS: it is a problem but it can be solved by bying longer ranged missile for the system and that is much easier done than trying to get funding for second SAMP/T battery.

BTW. I heard that it is not yet confirmed that Estonia will buy those radars, but if they do, then there will be 3% discount to the prize Finland would otherwise pay for those radars.
Yama
QUOTE(Sami Jumppanen @ Thu 30 Apr 2009 0624) *
They wrote an article about NASAMS and on the next issue they wrote another article about SAMP/T. Since they failed clearly enough to mention that next issue would have an article about the other system, many took that as a paid advertisement from makers of NASAMS.

IMHO NASAMS article was more positive than the one made about SAMP/T, but still they were quite balanced.

As for the range of NASAMS: it is a problem but it can be solved by bying longer ranged missile for the system and that is much easier done than trying to get funding for second SAMP/T battery.


Range is not a problem, in fact NASAMS ought to give pretty good coverage. Ceiling is the problem. I believe NASAMS is in fact fairly good system in its class, problem is that when it is supposed to act as top of the line ADS, it is simply outclassed...
m4a1
Does the SL-AMRAAM-ER have the same problem with ceiling?

Sami Juppannen, did you mean a few posts ago that Syria has got Buks?

Regards,
Jakub
Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(m4a1 @ Thu 30 Apr 2009 2130) *
Does the SL-AMRAAM-ER have the same problem with ceiling?

Sami Juppannen, did you mean a few posts ago that Syria has got Buks?

Regards,
Jakub


SL-AMRAAM-ER should have its range extended to 40-50 kilometers, so ceiling should have been increased also.

And nope, i have no idea if Syria has Buks, but radar AAM equipment comes from the same "source", so same faults may be in them.
Sami Jumppanen
http://www.suomensotilas.fi/nasams_english.php

I believe that this is that infamous article about NASAMS. (In english)

I also found that other article about SAMP/T in enlish: http://www.suomensotilas.fi/pdf/SAMPT_en-uk_web.pdf
m4a1
Frankly speaking, the best solution for Finland (if affordable) would be the purchase of both systems, let's say in 1:2 relationship. And importantly, some SL-AMRAAM-ER missiles should be neccesarily purchased to increase the engagement envelope, especially if NASAMS has to be the only AD system in Finland. Besides, if it is true that SAMP/T battery would cost only twice as much as NASAMS, that makes it strong competitor against Patriot system for those countries that have limited procurement budget (yes, I'm thinking of Poland, SA-3, SA-4, SA-5 need urgent replacement) though after economic collapse even those few batteries might not be afforded.
Regards,
Jakub
CV9030FIN
QUOTE(Sami Jumppanen @ Fri 1 May 2009 0148) *
SL-AMRAAM-ER should have its range extended to 40-50 kilometers, so ceiling should have been increased also.


I believe that the 100 M Euros that in current deal reserves to later date IOT buy missiles is due the fact that SL-AMRAAM-ER is not yet in production...and when ER -model is ready FDF will buy it.
CV9030FIN
QUOTE(m4a1 @ Fri 1 May 2009 1018) *
especially if NASAMS has to be the only AD system in Finland.


No there is also just modified Grotale NG systems for mid ranges and Bolides for short ranges. Besides main mission of FAF is fighter interception.
Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(m4a1 @ Fri 1 May 2009 0718) *
Frankly speaking, the best solution for Finland (if affordable) would be the purchase of both systems, let's say in 1:2 relationship. And importantly, some SL-AMRAAM-ER missiles should be neccesarily purchased to increase the engagement envelope, especially if NASAMS has to be the only AD system in Finland. Besides, if it is true that SAMP/T battery would cost only twice as much as NASAMS, that makes it strong competitor against Patriot system for those countries that have limited procurement budget (yes, I'm thinking of Poland, SA-3, SA-4, SA-5 need urgent replacement) though after economic collapse even those few batteries might not be afforded.
Regards,
Jakub


Well, as one of the Generals commented the deal "We didn't buy the Cadillac, we bought four Volvos", i suspect that that wouldn't be possible. I do agree howewer.
Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(CV9030FIN @ Fri 1 May 2009 0908) *
No there is also just modified Grotale NG systems for mid ranges and Bolides for short ranges. Besides main mission of FAF is fighter interception.


There was also a rumour that army would also obtain long range AD system, but that seems to have been scrapped.
lastdingo
Let's face it; the Finnish Defence Forces wouldn't be able to fend off the Russian air force anyway.

Camouflage, concealment, deception, fragmentation protection, dispersed Shorad and a couple of area air defence systems that force the attacker to be careful are all that the FDF can hope for against air attack.

It's already a success if the attacker can be forces to fly at 10+ km altitude and to devote 30% per cent of his combat aircraft force to CAP, SigInt and SEAD efforts.

Air defence systems are neither great killers nor impenetrable force fields - they are merely meant to reduce the effectiveness of enemy air attack and to assist friendly fighters tactically.


I would probably have suggested the use of Bolide (in part mounted on truck-based elevated platforms) and Mica VL (with both AR and IIR sensor head versions).
The driving factor should be a diversity of guidance principles to reduce the likeliness of effective countermeasures.
Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(lastdingo @ Fri 1 May 2009 1519) *
Let's face it; the Finnish Defence Forces wouldn't be able to fend off the Russian air force anyway.

Camouflage, concealment, deception, fragmentation protection, dispersed Shorad and a couple of area air defence systems that force the attacker to be careful are all that the FDF can hope for against air attack.

It's already a success if the attacker can be forces to fly at 10+ km altitude and to devote 30% per cent of his combat aircraft force to CAP, SigInt and SEAD efforts.

Air defence systems are neither great killers nor impenetrable force fields - they are merely meant to reduce the effectiveness of enemy air attack and to assist friendly fighters tactically.
I would probably have suggested the use of Bolide (in part mounted on truck-based elevated platforms) and Mica VL (with both AR and IIR sensor head versions).
The driving factor should be a diversity of guidance principles to reduce the likeliness of effective countermeasures.


That's the idea. There is only 4 batteries anyway.
Sardaukar
QUOTE(CV9030FIN @ Fri 1 May 2009 0908) *
No there is also just modified Grotale NG systems for mid ranges and Bolides for short ranges. Besides main mission of FAF is fighter interception.


There is also this really really persistent rumour that this time, FAF is really getting the JASSM too. biggrin.gif After that one interview coming out from the FAF major years ago, about what FAF actually wanted to do with them (or then also with Storm Shadow), I don't blame Yanks didn't want to sell them then. biggrin.gif

I think some posters on Russian forums were telling "FAF wants to take out all Russian northern command structure!" tongue.gif
CV9030FIN
QUOTE(Sardaukar @ Sat 2 May 2009 2307) *
There is also this really really persistent rumour that this time, FAF is really getting the JASSM too. biggrin.gif After that one interview coming out from the FAF major years ago, about what FAF actually wanted to do with them (or then also with Storm Shadow), I don't blame Yanks didn't want to sell them then. biggrin.gif


Well that is why I wrote main mission of FAF is fighter interception...

Besides you know as well as I why FAF wants air-to-ground ability...
Tuccy
QUOTE(CV9030FIN @ Sat 2 May 2009 2250) *
Besides you know as well as I why FAF wants air-to-ground ability...


...to hunt moose without having to do things that are too army-like such as wading through waist-high snow in forest with a rifle in their arms? wink.gif
CV9030FIN
QUOTE(CV9030FIN @ Fri 1 May 2009 1205) *
I believe that the 100 M Euros that in current deal reserves to later date IOT buy missiles is due the fact that SL-AMRAAM-ER is not yet in production...and when ER -model is ready FDF will buy it.


Intresting...http://www.defensenews.com/osd_story.php?sh=VSDF&i=3590322
Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(CV9030FIN @ Sat 2 May 2009 2050) *
Besides you know as well as I why FAF wants air-to-ground ability...


Well, it realy doesn't mater when you intercept them, right?
Yama
QUOTE(lastdingo @ Fri 1 May 2009 1519) *
Let's face it; the Finnish Defence Forces wouldn't be able to fend off the Russian air force anyway.

Camouflage, concealment, deception, fragmentation protection, dispersed Shorad and a couple of area air defence systems that force the attacker to be careful are all that the FDF can hope for against air attack.

It's already a success if the attacker can be forces to fly at 10+ km altitude and to devote 30% per cent of his combat aircraft force to CAP, SigInt and SEAD efforts.


Unfortunately that kind of thinking is increasingly obsolete. These days, it is less and less a hindrance for attacker to fly at high altitudes. Satellite guided bombs are cheap and accurate and it doesn't matter from what altitude you drop them - in fact higher is better because you gain more range. Recent air campaigns demonstrate this fact very clearly. Another threat are tactical ballistic missiles which have benefitted enormously from satellite guidance and they are becoming ever more prevalent. USA fired something like 400+ such missiles in OIF, Russia has also used them in recent campaigns.

The original plan was indeed for two missile systems - a medium ranged one and high-end one which would have been capable of intercepting ballistic missiles. Predictably, it was more expensive system which was scrapped but I think this was wrong way to go. Now we are left with a system which does give us good coverage for the money, but does not complement well our other AD component - F-18 - which is already at its best at NASAMS envelope. Meanwhile, we are left toothless against ballistic missiles and high-altitude targets, which we CAN intercept with our current missile system. Admittably, only in fairly limited fashion, but usually, when you replace one system with other, you expect new one to give improved performance...
m4a1
Does a SAMP/T battery costs only twice as much as NASAMS (that would mean about $200 m)?

Polish AD plans to purchase one or two batteries of long range (SAMP/T class) systems (after cuts - one) and up to six medium range (like NASAMS) for 20 Neva, 2 Wega and 9 Krug systems. Reduction of the altitude capabilities is not only the case with Finland, unfortunately.
Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(m4a1 @ Mon 4 May 2009 1012) *
Does a SAMP/T battery costs only twice as much as NASAMS (that would mean about $200 m)?

Polish AD plans to purchase one or two batteries of long range (SAMP/T class) systems (after cuts - one) and up to six medium range (like NASAMS) for 20 Neva, 2 Wega and 9 Krug systems. Reduction of the altitude capabilities is not only the case with Finland, unfortunately.


Well, one of out officers commenting this purchase told that "we did not buy one Cadillac, but four Volvos". So it would seem that SAMP/T system is much more expensive than NASAMS.
tanker_karl
ThalesRaytheon just posted the contract announcement for the radars on their website :

QUOTE
ThalesRaytheonSystems’ air defense radars selected by Finland and Estonia
Tuesday May 5, 2009

MASSY, France and FULLERTON, Calif., (May 5, 2009) – ThalesRaytheonSystems has been selected to deliver Medium Range Air Surveillance Systems including 14 Ground Master 403 radar systems, 12 for Finland and two for Estonia, and a Long Range Air Identification and Surveillance Radar System Mid Life Upgrade for five Teresa 22XX radars for Finland, which were previously supplied by Thales.

The order value for the Ground Master radars and the Teresa upgrade is expected to be approximately €200 million ($265 million). ThalesRaytheonSystems has also been selected to provide 12 Sentinel radars as part of the air defense system selected by the Finnish Ministry of Defense to fulfill Finland’s future Medium Range Air Defense Missile System (MRADMS) requirements.

(...)

ThalesRaytheonSystems also announces today that 12 Sentinel radars will be included in the Kongsberg/Raytheon Air Defense System – NASAMS – to fulfill Finland’s future Medium Range Air Defense Missile System (MRADMS) requirements. The AN/MPQ-64F1 Improved Sentinel is a state-of-the-art, three-dimensional, phased-array system that operates in the X-band frequency range. The Sentinel’s primary mission is protecting maneuver forces and critical assets from cruise missile, unmanned aerial vehicles and rotary and fixed wing threats.


http://www.thalesraytheon.com/press-and-me...nd-estonia.html
tanker_karl
Finland orders a couple more Ground Master 403 radars :

QUOTE
Finland increases Ground Master 403 order

14:12 GMT, June 8, 2009 defpro.com | Finland today announced to have increased its order of Ground Master 403 Medium Range Air Surveillance Systems from 12 to 14.

Early May, Thales Raytheon Systems has been selected to deliver this system to Finland as well as to Estonia (2 systems). The new order on the two systems is worth some €24 million a company spokesman told defpro.com.

ThalesRaytheonSystems was also awarded to provide 12 Sentinel radars as part of the air defense system selected by the Finnish MoD to fulfill Finland’s future Medium Range Air Defense Missile System (MRADMS) requirements.

Source
Chris Werb
QUOTE(m4a1 @ Mon 4 May 2009 1112) *
Does a SAMP/T battery costs only twice as much as NASAMS (that would mean about $200 m)?

Polish AD plans to purchase one or two batteries of long range (SAMP/T class) systems (after cuts - one) and up to six medium range (like NASAMS) for 20 Neva, 2 Wega and 9 Krug systems. Reduction of the altitude capabilities is not only the case with Finland, unfortunately.


We went from Bloodhound down to Rapier c. 1990, so you're not the first (and the army had done away with Thunderbird c. 1977)
Xavier
QUOTE(Chris Werb @ Mon 8 Jun 2009 2248) *
We went from Bloodhound down to Rapier c. 1990, so you're not the first (and the army had done away with Thunderbird c. 1977)

Belgium went from Nike Hercules & Hawk to Mistral.... sad.gif
Sami Jumppanen
QUOTE(tanker_karl @ Mon 8 Jun 2009 2156) *
Finland orders a couple more Ground Master 403 radars :


I think that Estonians just confirmed their order. Well, that means 3% discount...
Sardaukar
Edited (link was already posted).
m4a1
QUOTE(Xavier @ Tue 9 Jun 2009 1837) *
Belgium went from Nike Hercules & Hawk to Mistral.... sad.gif

Are there no Patriots, Rolands in Belgium?
Xavier
QUOTE(m4a1 @ Thu 11 Jun 2009 1103) *
Are there no Patriots, Rolands in Belgium?

nope, never had those
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2010 Invision Power Services, Inc.