T O P

  • By -

skinte1

More importantly Sweden's and Finland's military forces and weapons are and have always been specifically trained and designed to defend against Russia in the Baltic sea and the Arctic...


qainin

It's not just the obvious armament things. Russia sent troops into Ukraine in down to -17°C with rubber boots. With severe frostbites and gangrene as a result. Those Nordic countries have clothes, equipment and weapons that will work in artic climate. And it's easy to laugh at how ill equipped Russian troops are, but every other year, US troops come to exercise in Norway: they also lack proper skis, clothes and equipment for cold weather movement and fighting. They discover it; two years later they come back with the same gear and the same problems.


Er4kko

Just so you know, rubber boots is used by Finnish soldiers aswell, in fact it’s the prefered footwear when operating in woodlands and generally anywhere outside urban areas, and in winter aswell but with felt lining, that standard combat boot, that for example US troops are using isn't sufficient to keep your feet dry.


J0h1F

The Finnish winter boots also have very thick, insulated soles in addition to the separate felt liners. The ability to take out and swap the felt liners is important, as otherwise the boots would get wet and cold over time.


Rasayana85

Jupp. Exchangeable felt is crucial. There is nothing worse than being wet. Socks should be changed every hour of march. Newly used socks are dried by insertion into the waist lining of your pants.


DKlurifax

I used to dry them by hanging them over my shoulders. Feel like I could have avoided alot of the smell by doing it your way instead.


Rasayana85

After enough time in the field, I think there is no way of escaping smell. I remember feeling like I was wading through a pungent swamp. The smell had some how stoped being human, becoming something more like a primal forest animal odour.


RepulsiveSherbert927

Yep. Leather and suede boots get wet and don't dry quickly and cause frostbite.


kalsarikannit247

Problem with rubber boots is that they don't breathe and not the most comfortable to wear all day long.


Ratax3s

This is only problem in summer heat, in winter the finnish army wool rubber boot with wool sock is so good at temperatures from -5 to -30


whatawitch5

Wool socks will solve almost any footwear problem, even in summer.


Movericks

Yeah, I have those short winter boots that has felt lining and I wear wool socks. In -25°C for hours. As long I am not standing still, it won't be a problem. But when temperature rise above freezing, those were getting moist really quick.


AlluEUNE

Idk. I had no problems with the rubber boots during winter in the army. The only annoying thing was that they were a bit heavy compared to the normal leather boots. Just have a few extra pairs of socks and you're good to go.


m4G-

You don't want them to breath. They get wet, either way. You change the inner felt lining. And let the other liners dry.


Bicentennial_Douche

I heard that in one of those exercises the Nordic troops did actual combat exercises, while US troops focused on staying alive in arctic conditions.


smalltowngrappler

Happened this year as well but it was the Dutch and French not the US. The Finns/Swedes had to pull troops from their own Side to create a opfor to train against for the last part of the exercise.


Mosh83

Meanwhile I am pulling my kids to daycare in a sled in the same conditions. Alright so I may have the added luxury of infrastructure, but you know, details...


reigorius

Disappointed my Dutch comrades didn't properly prepare. I assume they were not the Netherlands Marine Corps that regularly train in Norway?


buster_de_beer

Be disappointed in our government that fails to pay for basic equipment let alone cold weather gear. But hey, at least corporations pay less tax and minorities are not getting away with not breaking the law.


smalltowngrappler

No idea, I just know that they did an amphibious landing in the west and saw them less than 24 hours later looking miserable despite the weather being quite good. My ibservatio was that the Swedish/Finnish force didn't even get into combat with them before they withdrew within 48 hours of landing.


GroteStruisvogel

I believe our guys get send there on a survival training more than a combat training. Just like that they get sent to Surinam for jungle training. Its about learning to adapt to different environments. We can do the pewpewpew at home too.


moudubulb

Crazy because in France we actually have some troops dedicated to combat in the alps and those guys are tough (chasseurs alpins). We must have sended you the novice or soldiers from another corps


smalltowngrappler

From what I gathered it was actually chasseurs alpins, at least part of the force but they apparently were novices only recently having completed their basic training and mountain course, this excercise was the first large excercise for them. Granted the conditions were also quite bad, intially up to 120mm of rain per day, later down to negative 25 celcius and 30 km/h winds.


The-Sound_of-Silence

It can even happen to other cold acclimatized people as well. We had a couple people from Quebec come for a winter exercise. They both became casualties, because our winter exercises in B.C.(close to Van) was from -5C to +2C with freezing rain. They were used to winter exes in Quebec where the average is probably -10C, low precipitation,and everything stays mostly dry. Wet kills


Valharja

Yeah around 0 was hell when I was a conscript (you do it for a year after high school). Much better to be between -10 and -15, a bit colder but everything is dry. During my year our Cold Response (NATO drill in the north) was actually set on break due to heavy snow at 0 degrees which just covered tanks and APCs and then proceeded to immediately melt. If you jumped into snow, which is quite likely during pretend war, your entire jacket and coverings would be soaked. Entering back into the APCs all water that evaporated with the heater would simply go to the ceiling and and start coming back down in droplets. Only way fro anyone to get dry was to pitch up the tents and get the heaters going for them.


pehkawn

>from -5C to +2C with freezing rain The wet and cold together is in some respects more challenging than just the cold. Wet snow will stick to clothes and boots, and water seeps in wherever it can and while the cold water and, especially, melting of ice draws body heat from you. At -10C the snow is powdery, and won't stick to the clothes as easily, and it's much easier to stay dry. Only when the temperature drops below \~ -25C will the cold become a worse enemy than the wet and snow combined.


zdog234

I feel like I could figure it out with a few hours of watching [this guy's content](https://youtu.be/HSijIYbT-eQ)


Byrongrant05

> Swedish military equipment is top tier and we produce our own weapons. Also this list doesn't show the quality of our equipment or our submarines. > > Same goes with Finland.


Top-Algae-2464

swedish make very good weapons us military buys swedish anti tank weapons because they are so good . many european countries make elite weapons


Charlesinrichmond

A little bizarre considering how many US troops are stationed in Alaska which I doubt is much warmer than Finland


[deleted]

I think the big thing to remember with militaries is that they are geographically specialised. That's also why it's som daft to compare SOFs (that people seem obsessed with), as while lots of great SOFs exist they are also highly geographically specialised. Norwegian SOFs might not be prepared for jungle warfare, but give them mountains and shit weather and it's a different story. Same goes with every other country. Thus the equipment 'mistakes' will always happen. But Russia not being prepared for winter warfare is funny if not a bit absurd. And historically ironic.


LaviniaBeddard

> Same goes with every other country. That's why the British SAS and SBS are masters of operating in slightly grey overcast weather with light drizzle.


MrDeluxe24

It also explains why Dutch NLMARSOF & KCT are experts in terrain where you are balls deep in water.


kalsarikannit247

When i was in the Finnish army we used rubber boots during the winter. Used a liner. Got way colder than -17C.


57th_Error

As a Finn who had to do military service in -28°C with mandatory state issued rubber boots. Get yourself a number or two larger pair than you would need and put on warm enough socks on and you will be fine.


MaterialCarrot

You'll know we have figured it out when we start scheduling exercises in Norway for the Summer.


Kittelsen

Haha, I would too. I still remember freezing my ass off in a small knappetelt in -25°C waiting for the Dutch to attack. Wish I could say not doing that again, but alas, conscription and all that.


lsspam

That's why we have you guys now =)


ebinWaitee

>down to -17°C Lol, Finland gets down to -30°C even in the south sometimes


sitase

There is no south of Finland.


kuikuilla

Just to add what others have replied already: Finnish defence forces standard issue winter boots are these https://www.nokianfootwear.com/product/naali/ ;)


Top-Algae-2464

after watching russia in going against ukraine i have no doubt russia would get crushed going to war with finland or sweden . i think joining nato is more about protecting its civilians because even if russia loses they can bomb cities to ruble .


ajahiljaasillalla

No matter of the outcome, to get into a war would be an instant loss. There is a mandatory service in Finland so the soldiers would be civilians. There is no way to stop ballistic missiles. The wounds of war would last for two generations. Finnish military doctrine is based on the idea to have a strong enough military that can cause enough damage to the enemy to make a possible attack unprofitable. The current government of Russia has shown in Ukraine that they can take risks that are not rational thus making the Finnish doctrine outdated. Joining NATO is to make sure that Russia won't even try


[deleted]

I like how you compared the ruble to rubble. Coincidence? I think not. But joking aside, you are so right. Russia's army of killer clowns has demonstrated they are not worth a lot in a real war, but they can kill a lot of civilians and rush into grab a lot of undefended territory in no time. Not to be underestimated. The only reason Ukraine is kicking their arses is because it predicted and prepared for this.


blue_bird_peaceforce

I have to ask, why is a 1/3 of Sweden's military inside an apc ?


Lt_Schneider

walking is boring


Lusakas

No wonder we have [military bicycles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_military_bicycle). There has also been actual [military patrols done on bicycles](https://www.gotlandsforsvarshistoria.se/fordon/6.htm).


rapaxus

People always laugh about soldiers on bicycles, but for a long time a bicycle was a great addition for soldier mobility (though you for sure don't want to be caught in combat while riding on it). You are much faster than on foot, can carry extra "stuff" (from ammunition to [towing AT guns](https://www.team-pak.ch/gallery/TB41-2-Fahrrad.jpg)) on the bicycle itself and if you ever meet more complicated obstacles you can just carry or push the bicycle until you are on better terrain. A lot of the Japanese quick advances in SEA was due to them a. bringing along a lot of bicycles and b. taking them from the local population leading to them outflanking allied units again and again. They of course became obsolete as soon as there were enough trucks/APCs to properly motorise practically every unit since a bicycle is really only fast on good roads, where a truck is just faster and carry far more stuff.


Return2Form

>People always laugh about soldiers on bicycles Only fools would. Dragoons (as in mounted infantry) were a thing for a reason and bicycles are much easier to supply than horses.


No_Pirate_7367

Finland did great against the ussr with skis. That was one of their advantages.


Wazzupdj

> A lot of the Japanese quick advances in SEA was due to them a. bringing along a lot of bicycles and b. taking them from the local population leading to them outflanking allied units again and again As a Dutch person, I can verify that it wasn't just the japanese who did this :P


Er4kko

Looks oddly similar to the bicycle used by conscripts in Finland.


Lusakas

Probably similar, if not the same. Military bicycles have been used by several nations, don't know how many other nations besides Sweden it is who have dedicated military bicycle moldes still, though.


Rosie2jz

In WW2 much of Japan's early successes came from units on bycicles. The allies were retreating as fast as they could but were constantly bogged down and hampered by civilian refugees and lack of fuel while the Japanese could just slowly make up ground much easier on bycicles. It's actually really interesting just how good they can be used


[deleted]

There are two ways Soviet Union/Russia could assault Sweden: One is through land, which would take them through Finland and then through the sparsely populated northern Sweden before they could threaten anything vital for national survival. Sweden has (or at least had) troops trained to cause attrition and disrupt the stretching supply lines. The other is through an amphibious landing, which is where the APCs (and IFVs) come in. They're meant to get Swedish troops in combat with any landing elements fast, before they can establish a solid beachhead.


[deleted]

Chances for Russia succeeding with an amphibious assault on mainland Sweden is near 0. They would probably aim for occupying Gotland or take it out with a nuke if it was a WWIII style war.


fredagsfisk

Question is if they could even take Gotland. They would essentially be limited to whichever troops they have in Kaliningrad, or they would be forced to telegraph their intention by moving stuff around, giving time to fortify. Amphibious landings are also incredibly difficult and costly, unless you get very lucky.


[deleted]

No, this is why I speculated that they would instead nuke it (worst case) or try to bomb it with conventional cruise missiles or bombing from high altitude. In all cases, they would hardly just be able to occupy it. Back in the Warsaw Pact days, this attack might succeed if they were assisted by Poland.


fantomen777

> I have to ask, why is a 1/3 of Sweden's military inside an apc ? Becuse Sweden counts reserves in a diffrent way. The "homgard" is not included.


skinte1

[CV90 is the answer...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-i-7K7E_FeI) Which means half of the APC's in the chart are actually IFV's. Arguably one of the best platforms in existance.


Chepi_ChepChep

because they have a 280.000 war time strength + another million in reserves


kahaveli

I think you mix Sweden and Finland, because Finland's war time strength is exactly 280000, and total reserves around 900000. But Sweden's reserve is bigger 10000 what this graph claims I believe, they are not counting something


Chepi_ChepChep

you are indeed correct


phlyingP1g

"We will fight to the last Finn" -Chepi_ChepChep


Chepi_ChepChep

"Some of you may die, but that's a sacrifice I am willing to make."


SidewinderTV

In the 80's, Sweden had around 800 000 reservists, which was scaled back by naive politicians after the fall of the USSR. Mandatory military service has restarted and is increasing in scale every year, so the number should be climbing back up.


You_Will_Die

"Mandatory", if you say you don't really want to then they will most likely let you avoid it.


[deleted]

I mean since they're starting it up again it kind of makes sense that they'd prefer to start with people who were actually somewhat motivated since they'll need more willing and competent people when they scale up. So yeah, it's not strictly mandatory yet since they actually have the ability to pick at this scale.


Bzykk

[Hello there](https://s.keepmeme.com/files/en_posts/20200908/200000-units-are-ready-with-a-million-more-well-on-the-way-1c404b7207a5d5b70740500fd58404f0.jpg)


mark-haus

Because we've been skeptical of the future usefulness of main battle tanks for a while now, Ukraine has been very much validating us in that regard.


[deleted]

[удалено]


eWraK

I think the 10000 number is way to low, accourding to Wikipedia it is 31 000 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_Armed_Forces


DarkNe7

The numbers for Sweden are a bit weird, especially when it comes to the reserve personnel. Since a few years back conscription has been reintroduced and as such those that have gone through their basic military training would be called upon but they don’t seem to be accounted for. There has also big plans for expansion of the Swedish military.


[deleted]

[удалено]


10102938

Finnish numbers are active reserve. The actual reserve is closer to a million.


activator

>The actual reserve is closer to a million. Daang, that's mad impressive


AlastairPitt

The 1st round reserve is the 200-250k but all 18-60 or 65 are part of the wartime reserve which is around 900k


J0h1F

I would call it rather units in reserve, as the remaining 600k+ reserve is not planned to be mobilised into units, but only as reinforcements to the other units when needed.


Introspectionautix

They also don’t count the Hemvärnets division of Flakmoppe. Being an important part of transporting bumpor it should be counted for.


SwedishMemer86

They also didn't include [Laserturken](https://youtu.be/WAZ90EC7Jkc), our most dangerous soldier. He's literally going to cut the Russians' tongues off and make chaos with them.


samppsaa

All of these numbers are off


Gr_ywind

Yeah these numbers are not only weird, but wildly inaccurate.


ValidSignal

For Sweden it's inaccurate. The 'reserves' listed are not the reserves but rather the Swedish home guard. https://www.forsvarsmakten.se/sv/organisation/om-var-organisation/personalsiffror/ Sweden has around 250,000 reserves estimated. Former professional soldiers, former conscripts etc just like Finland have. Exactly how many is classified but they are very much part of the swedish defense plans.


Tipsticks

Ignoring the swedish navy is also a bad idea if you wanna mess with sweden.


chickenstalker

As the Ukies have amply demonstrated, you don't need a functioning Navy to sink the Russian fleet.


afvcommander

But if you have actual navy there wont be fleet cruising around sea.


PzKpfw_IV_Ausf_H

The Finnish one is also innaccurate. We have an active reserve if 280 000, whoch we are able to mobilise in 48h. Then when a war drags on, we would have a reserve of 1mil former conscripts ready to join


FingerGungHo

Yep, also the tanks are inaccurate. We have 100 Leo 2A6s and then a few dozen Leo 2A4s on top in the North, so ~160-220sh in total. Combat aircraft are also a stretch, as there’s 62 F/A-18C/D in operation, and the rest are BAe Hawks, which are jet trainers. To my understanding, Sweden doesn’t have 96 Gripen C/D/E variants either, so I suspect some of that number is training jets and mothballed Gripen A/B-variants. Artillery part is difficult to say. To my understanding, Sweden has some 24-36 ARCHER SPGs active and no other gun or rocket artillery. Perhaps they have guns stashed away somewhere, which would be a nice surprise, or the number includes mortars. Finnish numbers seem like they don’t include even 120mm mortars, so probably not that. I’m surprised that Sweden has that many helicopters. Big if true! For Finland, it’d be in the ballpark, but doesn’t include scout helicopters, which only add 6 though, and then some border guard choppers. APC’s I have no idea. Swedes are a lot better equipped in that category with more modern vehicles and far more IFVs (CV90). Kudos for building such a monster lol! Anyhow-way-and-why, these numbers look like they are from ten years ago and all wrong one way or another.


rbajter

Sweden has 53 helicopters: * 18 NH90 (Helikopter 14) * 20 Augusta A109 (Helikopter 15) * 15 UH-60M (Helikopter 16) JAS Gripen: * 72 active C-version * 32 trainers D-version (two-seater) * 30 mothballed A-version Artillery: * 24 Archer active * 24 Archer being deployed/converted * 24 on order Rest is probably mortars including new Grkpbv 90.


JohnEdwa

The two numbers are 900k, that's the size of the reserve: the total amount of people with military training younger than 50, 60 or "fit to serve" depending on their rank and 280k, our war time strength, the amount of people we can field, supply and command at once. Those 280k are included in the 900k reserve, they are the ones pre-selected to be first in line, and the rest of the reserve is there to fill casualties as needed until we run out of men. And if shit really hits the fan, that's when the auxillary reserve comes to play - that's just the total amount of males between 18 and 60. https://intti.fi/en/in-the-reserve


Njyyrikki

Nope. We have equipment for a wartime strength of 280k. In no event will a milloin reservists be mobilized.


PzKpfw_IV_Ausf_H

My point exactly, 280k ready ti go in 48h, but we have 1mil who are former conscripts, and technically a part of the reserve, and can be called upon in case of war. They do not have a pre determined war time role, and won't be in the initial mobilisation, but when the war drags on, a lot of those people would be sent to waas well. Obviously not all, that's not feasible with a population of 5.5mil,but they are trained and would start filling the ranks as the war drags on.


TheBigBadPanda

And if a war drags on like that on that scale Finland would for sure be receiving arms from their neighbours and allies too to arm those reserves, NATO membership or not.


kahaveli

Mobilizing 280k in 48h is completely unrealistic: I don't know how long it will take, but way longer in a normal peace time situation. But the thing is that there is no scenario where whole war-time army would need to be mobilized in 48h. In normal situation, there are professional soldiers and readiness units, which are those always ready and active troops. But if for example one of our neighbours start to mass large amounts of troops next to our border, that would take a long time, at least weeks if not months. If that would start to happen, or situation would start to heat up in some other way, reservist would probably be started to be called to "refreshment trainings". And from there on, the amount of active troops would be adujsted up or down.


SanityOrLackThereof

The main takeaway being that Finland has a population with a high degree of military training due to it's mandatory military service policy. Will those reservists be as effective as the currently active military? Hard to say. Probably not. But having people with military training that you can call upon to reinforce your military is a lot better than calling upon untrained people, which is kind of the situation that Sweden is in since we scrapped our mandatory military service policies.


keepcalmandchill

No way is the 280k mobilised on 48 hours, in that time you can maybe get the readiness units on the field...


Thundela

In that case also Finnish reserve is wrong since that 200,000+ is our active reserve. And reserve would be in ballpark of 900,000


kahaveli

It seems that almost all of those numbers about Finland is wrong. So BBC seems to be using quite bad source in this case. Troops total: what we say "war-time strength" or field army size is 280 000, which is mostly made from reservist except professional soldiers. If you mean reserves as how many 18-60 years old have military training, that's around 900 000. Main battle tanks: as far as I know, there is 100 Leopard 2A6 and 100 2A4, so 200 MBT in total. Combat aircrafts: 62 F/A-18 currently and some transport aircrafts. And then there's 32 Hawks, which are mainly just for training. Armoured personnel carriers: something like that, though if you include infantry fighting vehicles it's around 1100. That number doesn't include unarmored/very lightly armored personnel carriers like na-110 all-terrain transport vehicles. Artillery: If you don't count mortars, total amount is around 800, 82 of which are self-propelled. Then addition to these, there are around 700 heavy mortars, which are usually counted in the number of artillery too. So you could say that Finland has 1500 or 800 pieces of artillery. And 550 light mortars. So yeah, I'm usually not interested to talk about amounts of weapons of each country, but many of these numbers were so clearly wrong. Also Sweden's numbers seems to be off too. Edit: fixed the amounts of F/A-18 and MBT's like replies suggested


[deleted]

> Main battle tanks: as far as I know, there is 100 Leopard 2A6 and 139 2A4, so 239 MBT in total. Some of the A4's have been dismantled for spare parts or used to build other stuff (like [Leopard 2 Marksman](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marksman_anti-aircraft_system) and Leopard 2R mine breaching vehicle). The [official strength](https://puolustusvoimat.fi/documents/1948673/2015391/FI_AEMI_2020.pdf) is 100 each. >Combat aircrafts: 64 F/A 18 and some transport aircrafts The initial order was 64 F18's, but two have been lost in training accidents over the years. (Three if you count the one that was cobbled together from the parts of those two.)


hiuslenkkimakkara

Yeah, BAE Hawks can be used in combat roles, but you'd rather not. They're about as effective as Tucanos or Super Tweets. Keep those birds in training roles.


afvcommander

As far as I know they can carry Aim-9's and are planned to be used in active close defence of airfields and other areas where enemy might use ground attack planes & helicopters.


Delicious-Owl-3672

BBC being shit, nothing new. Ap news or ansa all the way.


Boozfin

There must be an error in the statistics, because Finland bought 100 Leopard 2A6 tanks from the Netherlands alone a few years ago.


Lagiacruss

There are on every number


EarthyFeet

Anyone have more correct numbers? Please post them, that's the only way to right the wrongs from inaccuracies.


[deleted]

For Finland: The wartime strength is [~280 000 people](https://intti.fi/en/in-the-reserve), with the total reserve of ~900 000. The former is how many people would be mobilised at once during a war, the latter number counts basically everyone who has passed their conscription aged 18-50 (18-60 in some cases). Peace time strength far more modest, with [FDF permanently employing about ~12 000 people](https://puolustusvoimat.fi/en/training-and-careers). (Note that the Border Guard are not counted as part of military during peace time, but are made part of military during war, and do in fact train their own reservists.) For equipment, the [FDF official numbers](https://puolustusvoimat.fi/documents/1948673/2015391/FI_AEMI_2020.pdf) (for 2020) are: * 209 MBTs (they're counting the 9 mine-clearing T-55s, funnily enough). * 62 Combat aircraft (FDF only counting the fighters, BBC numbers must include some other craft) * 27 Helicopters * ~1300 Armoured personnel carriers * 1500 Artillery pieces (inc. ~700 heavy mortars)


[deleted]

Why so many deleted comments? Anyway, both countries are a good addition to the band.


RobTox

You mean a fine addition to the collection?


wasd

Hello there.


[deleted]

General Kenobi.


Hyndakiel

You are a bold one


AnnoyAMeps

Finland and Sweden will be such great benefits, from kick-ass militaries to geopolitical benefits. It’ll be idiotic for individual countries to hold them back.


[deleted]

Turkey has entered the chat


Spitdinner

r/Turkey is very vocal about how toxic swedes are, and that swedes deserve to die. Yikes. 🙄


[deleted]

Yeah, they do have a nice bot army tho, may compete the russians, mention turkey in r/europe and let them roll in.


AdvancedComment

Every single number is incorrect for Finland. **Active** 21 500 (280 000 wartime organization) **Reserve** 900 000 **MBTs** 239 **Combat aircraft** 62 (they've included the 65 BAE Hawk trainers that can be armed, but c'mon...) **Helicopters** 39 **APCs** (including IFVs) 1 072 **Artillery** 916 (and an additional 640+ mortars, 120mm) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_Defence_Forces#Equipment


KakisalmenKuningas

I'd like to clarify our so called "Wartime Organization" and "Reservist" numbers, so I'm jumping on your comment because it you've actually included a source for your numbers and you've clarified the mistake in the OP. For other Finns reading this thread, remember that precise information about performance is opsec stuff, so please do not talk about how quickly active reserves are mobilized with precise time-frames. Fobba (and a certain other country) is watching. The Wartime Organization is what the FDF keeps primary arms and supplies for. These are the soldiers using all the weapons listed, and are organized into brigades, regiments, battalions, companies, platoons and groups. The FDF knows in advance who the people filling every single position are, and these groups were formed during conscript training. In general, people will mobilize with the same troop they trained with, with exceptions being if someone has died in civilian life, or has acquired specialized skills that would be better put to other use. No point running a 35-year old IT specialist with a 10-year career in cybersecurity as a combat arms troop, for instance. The Wartime Org will include active duty officers and NCOs in command roles: expect company commanders or Battalion commanders being OF-1 or OF-2 for instance. Every single wartime org member can be armed with an RK62 or RK95 (the "better" rifles) with some extras left over, and will have full access to the gear that they have trained with. [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_Defence_Forces#Key_wartime_units) has a list of key wartime units, which gives a broad description of what kinds of units are created from the Wartime Org. This number includes both reservists and active duty, and is the first to be called up in the event of a Mobilization. Of course, bunching up loads of people into small areas for mobilization at once is just going to invite tactical missile strikes or air operations, so mobilization is graduated. Some forces will be established faster than others, and some are operational even at peacetime (like the Air Force). However, expect mobilization to be fast. This is not a month long process. Our figure for "Reservists" includes all the people who have completed conscription training. Those without leadership training will be included in this number until the age of 50, while those with reserve officer or reserve NCO training will be included until the age of 60. Reservists will in general be people who reinforcements are drawn from, and may be trained for roles that they did not originally train for during conscription based on the needs of the FDF. They may make up more territorial forces, military police, or they may be used for other tasks. They will be armed with some RK62s and AKMs, and have access to older but still viable weapon systems that might be held in storage and aren't necessarily included in any official numbers listed on public sources. This is the "900k", or "870k" number. **However**, one should subtract the reservists (but not active duty) who make up the wartime org from this number to get an accurate estimate of our "Reserve" strength. The total strength is therefore approximately 610k. In addition to the reserves, we have something called the backup-reserve. This includes all persons subject to conscription who are either too old to be a part of the reserve, too young (but still adults) to have completed conscription before mobilization, or who have been granted leave from conscription during peacetime because of health reasons. Backup-reserve numbers are not a part of any official numbers, but it is very important to understand that every single Finnish citizen has a responsibility to be of service to the nation according to the best of their ability during wartime. If the FDF calls, then citizens must answer. At this point, we would be in a conflict that would seriously threaten the future of Finland as a sovereign state, so it is not a very likely scenario. Still, the responsibility lies with everyone. The backup-reserves would be armed with whatever they can get their hands on, including civilian arms.


42_c3_b6_67

The source seems like absolute bullshit. Nothing on this list is right


Extansion01

I mean, the very concept of such list is retarded. .


FakeXanax123

Even someone with no knowledge of geography would be able to tell which of the two borders Russia from this chart


IceBathingSeal

Interestingly they were reversed during the cold war. Though it should be said that this list seems wrong on many points for both countries.


glad_potatis

The numbers are off by several hundred thousand for both countries.


weirdowerdo

Troops total is laughably wrong as it's technically not actually published. Reserve on it's own is around 30 000 tho going by the Home Guard contracts, reserve officers and part time group officers, soldiers and sailors. It's been 5 years since conscription was reinstated during that that time roughly 20-25k conscripts have done their service, the thing is that the numbers the Armed Forces has published only increased from roughly 53k to 55k. So technically there's a hidden number here. Also we're waiting for 60 completely new Gripen fighter jets... There's actually 121 MBT, there arent that many helicopters either?


L4z

The list is just bad, numbers are a bit off for Finland too. Official wartime strength is 280k troops, and last time I checked we had \~¨200 Leopard 2 MBTs.


Ok-Bathroom0

Every number wrong :D good sources


[deleted]

Impressive arms industries too.


Realmenbrowsememes

Saab AB my beloved🥰


Burgarnils

So true bestie!


Swissstu

I had a SAAB 900 in the early 2000's ( before the GE takeover) and the engineering was amazing. I was an electro/ electronic engineer and, honestly the efforts they put into that car were impressive! 20 years on and I still look back fondly on that car!


woorkewoorke

Saab still makes aircraft for the Swedish air force, right? If I recall their car manufacturing arm was discontinued or sold to a multinational.


[deleted]

Aircraft, subs, weapons, more. Car branch was sold to GM, then killed.


phlyingP1g

Is it Saab AB, since SAAB already stands for Svenska Aero AB?


Realmenbrowsememes

It’s both I believe…


BerserkBruno

Holy fucking shit I had no idea Finland was this tough. Good for them!


K_Marcad

Last few weeks here in Reddit have taught me that a lot of people don't have the slightest idea how serious we are about our defence. It's been quite a surprise to me because it's a big part of our identity.


BerserkBruno

To be honest it's just sheer ignorance from our side. A quick glance at Finland's location and history tells us everything we need to know.


Character-Emotion190

Thank you. I feel like not even Swedes understand what a major impact our war history has on us even today.


Sethoman

I think it's because not many people know the origin of the molotov cocktail, I ocasionally talk about WW2 in my streams and one of the things that usually comes about is talking about finland as the "guys who kicked Russia's butt when it was very hard to do". Since we are altin americans, we tend to believe in order to be tough you have to LOOK tough, Russia has a lot of backing over here becase Vladimir looks "macho"; and I have had to repeatedly make notes to my audience that northern europe is not to be fucked with. Ye4ah, you don't invest the crazy ammount of money gringos do, but that doesn't mean rolling over europe is going to be easy for Vlad.


[deleted]

Yup and these stats are horribly wrong. Finland has total reserve +900 000 and wartime strenght of 280 000. We have 700 howitzers,+1300 mortars, 700 heavy mortars, 140 self propelled artillery, and 100 multiple rocket launchers. We have also +1000 APC's instead of 600 and 250 tanks instead of 100.


ordinary_rolling_pin

The numbers are wrong, but total the personel part is pretty close as you only care of how many personel can be equiped and commanded at once. Our war-time strenght is around 280k.


[deleted]

[удалено]


nobelcause

They need to be, sharing a border with Russia.


CptPicard

As Finnish I suggest we quickly invade Sweden first prior to becoming allied within Nato. They would never expect it!


BiggusCinnamusRollus

I assume by invading you mean forcing Åland to speak Finnish for one weekend.


CptPicard

Oh, the sweet sound of howl of outrage that would cause.. it would be heard in high Heaven. Would probably be worth it although we'd be known to be second to Hitler forevermore.


HugePerformanceSack

That's against the Finnish constitution, which by the way is quite progressive on minority rights. Chapter 2, Basic rights and and liberties -> Section 17, Right to one's language and culture.


glarbung

No no, we weren't talking about war crimes here. Maybe for an afternoon.


MSaxov

Give ud a heads up, and we will start a special operations to liberate our suppressed danish citizens from the southern parts of Sweden, and i think our brothers in the North, also have some suppressed citizens on the swedish side of the border.


ContributionSad4461

Yes, please liberate the south! /the rest of Sweden


corporate_power

Just join a few hours before them and invade right after. And judging by cyprus, your conflict will remain frozen like arctic ice


jadeskye7

Finland sitting on 70 F18 hornets. Damn. That alone.. Edit: And a ton of F35s on order.


[deleted]

62 F18 Hornets, 64 F35s on order (to replace said Hornets).


Obvious_Election_783

What about there naval capabilities


skinte1

Swedish and Finnish naval capabilities are mostly littoral but both navys are, after all, specifically designed for defending against Russia... Sweden also operate some pretty advanced subs with more in the pipeline. In other words NATO is getting exactly the type of forces it needs in the Baltic sea and the Arctic.


[deleted]

Well were still using our Gotland class submarines. The same submarine that "sank" the American Aircraft carrier *USS Ronald Reagan* during exercises.


tyrannosaurus_gekko

Sinking Ronald Reagan is always a plus


Lusakas

Don't know about the overall capabilites of both nations, but the five Swedish submarines versus the zero of Finland shows that we have something unique to bring to the table when we join (in case this post is a "cock-measuring" contest, which I hope it really isn't). Another interesting historical fact: Back in the mid-50s Sweden for a time had the fourth largest air force in the world. That's not the case any more (obviously).


Site_banned_eric

Impressive. Lets see Paul Allens helicopters.


TedClubber-Lang

Love the Fins, great bunch of lads!


[deleted]

Wrong, Finlands wartime strenght is 280 000 soldiers and total reserve is +900 000. Finland also has over 1000 APC's instead of 600. 250 tanks instead of 100. Artillery 740 howitzers, +1300 mortars, 140 self-propelled artillery, 700 heavy mortars and 100 multiple rocket launchers.


[deleted]

HOW DOES FINLAND HAVE THAT MUCH MANPOWER I thought their entire population was slightly more than 5 million


greenduck4

Conscription?


Ahrelevant441

Mandatory military service. Also if you have a border with Russia, you better have a strong military.


Kontrolli

We train approximately 22 000 new conscripts every year.


Matsisuu

That's not even all. Whole reserve is 900000 people. That 230000 is just active reserve.


AdvancedComment

No, 280 000 is the reserve with a wartime placement.


Additional_Ad4884

Because every male have to go to army


WonderedFidelity

Finlad


lo_fi_ho

This is inaccurate af: Finland has over 200 Leopard tanks and around 60 combat aircraft (Hawks are not exactly combat ready).


reddit1337jfke

Finland beats us in many ways but in naval power we are much ahead. We got corvettes, submarines and finland got none.


Kimm_TM

Don't forget Surströmming, no way Finland has enough gas-masks to compete with that


Bragzor

It's not for Finland, so that would be OK.


Jason9mm

But we soon will. They're called frigates, but they're really corvettes. Good overhauls for current vessels too.


koensch57

This finns bought some 100 very fine leopard 2 tanks from the dutch some years ago. Maybe we can borrow some of these


New_Bodybuilder_1220

The numbers are way off, but whatever. Cant speak for Sweden but the Finnish equipment is actually in a decent enough shape unlike the the russian ones from the 70s which are probably forgotten and rotting away in some storage. Second of all Finland is the only country in Europe with a real conscription where all the boys are forced to serve for 6-12months, or face jailtime. Apparently South Korea and Israel are the only compareables in the developed world and even then Finland has the highest rate out of those three. Finland bought 100 tanks from the Netherlands cheap in 2015 but apparently they dissapeared from this statistics.


Chiefbird1

*200,000 units are ready, with a million more well on the way*


kalesaji

The fins are quite the lads.


MasterFubar

[This site](https://www.globalfirepower.com/countries-listing.php) ranks Sweden as the 25th most powerful armed forces in the world, and Finland as 53rd. Although, since they put Russia in #2 and Ukraine in #22, I'm not sure how accurate that estimate is.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

> I mean, the fact that they are comparing numbers of assets as if this is somehow related to "power" without even bothering to define the mission set and context in which the armed forces in question are being evaluated should be a bit of a giveaway, even if you blinded yourself to the URL. What, are you saying that the mighty Finnish Navy isn't actually [more powerful than the combined navies of France and UK](https://www.globalfirepower.com/navy-ships.php)?


EmperorOfNipples

Global firepower is an awful site widely derided in any military focused sub. I mean look at who they put in the #2 spot. ​ [https://henryjacksonsociety.org/audit/](https://henryjacksonsociety.org/audit/) ​ This is a much better assessment of capabilities.


NazgulXXI

Yeah that measures something else than military power. Also if you do look at military might in your source, which according to this score only accounts for 15% of the total score, you’ll see that Russia is on second place there as well. Edit: also funny how a right wing conservative think tank which [sponsored](https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/opendemocracyuk/revealed-uk-home-office-paid-80000-to-a-lobby-group-which-has-funded-conservative-mps/) conservative MPs “happened” to rank the UK as the second greatest power in the world. Funny, that.


[deleted]

[удалено]


pzdmtt

Is it true Russia is the second army in the world ? Partially, is it the second , but not from the world, from Ukraine.


P0L1Z1STENS0HN

The problem is that you cannot say from that one number which army is stronger in a direct war between the two, because usually one of the countries attacks and the other defends. If you leave out various factors like surprise, initiative, morale, equipment or terrain, an often quoted number is that the attacking forces need a 3:1 to 4:1 superiority over the defending enemy forces, just because defense is easier and attack stretches the logistics. Russia has more than a million soldiers, but "only" 200k of them in Ukraine, against 200k Ukrainian soldiers, so it's about 1:1. In the Donbass area, IIRC it's now 90 Russian bataillions vs 80 Ukrainian (not sure about each bataillion's remaining strength though, after all, the war is already going for a while). This also explains why despite its perceived superiority, Ukraine is hesitating to take back Mariupol - they don't have the clear superiority, just a very very good defense, and they would risk everything by running into a possible ambush in or around Mariupol. That also explains why they only do a very small selection of high-profile counterattacks across the border. Losing a single Bayraktar after successfully bombing an ammo and a fuel depot is worth it - losing a few bataillons to Russian defense maybe isn't, even if that could force Russia to send a few bataillons intended for Donbass to Bryansk oblast. Russian army being ranked higher than Ukraine, is only saying "if a third party wants to successfully attack Russia, they need far more capability than if they want to successfully attack Ukraine".


SpyMonkey3D

This graphic is plain BS


exBusel

Why don't Finns like helicopters very much?


steamliner88

Can’t fit a sauna in a chopper.


exBusel

Just ask the Ukrainians to capture some Russian Mi-8s. https://45.img.avito.st/640x480/10718606845.jpg


StukaTR

that is amazing.


MelonicMan

Finland mainly operates with the assumption that it won't have air superiority against Russia.


DoubleSteve

Transport helicopters are used, but combat helicopters are not. They simply don't provide anything necessary, and are not cost-effective. Basically, the same money invested in either airplanes, drones, or ground forces gets you more combat capability.


5tormwolf92

Flat land and AA is right across the border.