Why does Finland still use costal artillery? Won't it just be taken out by a missile / drone the second a war starts?
Because they don't have the best navy in the world protecting them. Fuck europe, go USA!!!!!!
>>65089738Finns are backwards forest people.
>>65089743>>65089745Trying too hard, Ivan.
>>65089738>you have a hardened target controlling a vital point>opfor now has to spend x munitions to make sure it's no longer functional>those munitions aren't hitting other targetsit's a matter of effective resource allocationsince the fins have already build the things and don't use them much they don't cost much in maintenancebut the russians would still have to hit them with stuff they'd rather send somewhere elsethe Fins also did a number on the soviets with some of their coastal batteries during the winter war
>>65089745>He doesn't know that finns are the most advanced race, and have been for millennia
>coastal batteries It would be a land war, not a coastal war...
>>65089738>costalFinland doesn't need it. Russia doesn't have a navy anymore
Defending ports and bays from which reinforcements and supplies arrive would still be effective today.Finland had the painful experience of narrowly missing the arrival of the Allied forces during the Winter War.
They realistically only have to deal with Russian CEP, which is still measured in the tens of meters.
>>65089738A missile spent blowing up this ancient artillery that costs the Finns nothing to operate is a missile spent not blowing up their more advanced systems.
>>65089738No clue. T.fin
>>65089774WERE, retard. Not are.Besides, the koreans won.
>>65089738If the recent situation in the strait is any indication, missiles actually kind of suck at permanently disabling coastal defenses, and a shell will punch through their most likely adversaries' non-existent damage control like butter.
>>65089738>Why does Finland still use costal artillery?It's quite useful against fast attack boats
>>65089925Surely you mean CEP measured in tens of kilometres
because big guns in hardened fortifications are rad as hell
>>65091018Not in the age of drones.Drones hidden in deep tunnels are rad.Guns not.
>>65090990These turrets can't stop even basic RPG-7 round warhead.Iran operates their drones and ballistic missiles from deep underground tunnels impervious to US military bunker buster bombs.
>>65091153Good thing we're not fighting IranBesides, there aren't that many fixed guns anymore, the main coastal defence has been missile-based for a decade or two already
>>65089774trying to plot anything related to the Finno-Korean hyper war on a linear time axis is a fool's errand. At least half of it retroactively never had happened and another third happened a thousand times over due to the use of temporal ordnance. Some temporal UXO was still causing localized time loops as late at 2022 over the Kherson airport.
>>65091176as late as*
>>65089738They've told the Russians they keep them in case torpedo boats appear.
>>65089738with the Russian precision missiles that disabled the Ukrainian military in 3 hours?
>>65090978>WERE, retard. Not are.>he really believes (((their))) liesyou don't know what lies beneath the forests and lakes of lappland
>>65089738Because static, ancient coastal defences are perfectly adequate to deal with the russian navy.
>>65089918>missing the arrival of the Allied forces during the Winter WarImagine had Hitler not chimped out over Poland he could have allied with the Bongs and Frogs and said 'Hey lets go save Finland' and he could have gotten everything he wanted. Land, resources, defeating Gommunism :DD. Hell, Japan might have gotten involved too, or at least would have looked there for oil instead of invading the colonies of Europe (and thus would have been able to concentrate on China) while the USA, if they wanted, could have crossed over from Alaska to secure stuff there. Russia ends up being defeated, no Gommunism spread, colonies not raped, Empires not financially ruined (granted USA did this on purpose in reality) and Hitler dies a hero, rather than the STI riddled schizo drug addict he was.>>65089738Any potential weapon is something that war planners would have to account for and plan for. Which means a simple coastal cannon could prevent a naval operation in the firing range and require the use of other forces to disable or destroy before your naval assets can get involved. Which means time. Which means you can put AA around the coastal gun to deal with air threats, which means you're risking losing aircraft. If you use long range missiles, you have to hope they hit and destroy it in one go, requiring perhaps double-taps. All time and munitions.Point is, things do things and require things to deal with. Not insurmountable but it's still a thing somebody invading would have to think about and plan for.
>Won't it just be taken out by a missile / drone the second a war starts?Ukraine had anti-ship missiles in 2022, that didn't stop russians from sending ships to the coast and getting their flagship promoted to submarine. So, if anything, ruslims would retardingly send their boats in range of that coastal artillery and get fucked.
>>65091470>getting their flagship promoted to submarine
Coastal artillery has always been this use and lose branch. It has always gotten the leftovers and useless stuff, because it is expected to get nuked by the Baltic Fleet. But that is why it has always been so important. You have to nuke it to get through it. And all along while you try to get through the bunkers and other fortifications, there's coastal jaegers (Finn marines) fucking with your rear.
>>65091688They look like they're having a good time
Ok. Historian here.While coastal gun batteries can be considered somewhat obsolete in the age of smart missiles and drones, they do still provide another layer of defense to coastline. Of course Finland has all those other systems as well in place (the navy, mobile MRLS on land, guided missiles, drones, there's a dude with a laser targeter behind the bush on that rock etc) ...the fact that they already HAVE those coastal gun batteries means that ...why NOT use them? They are perfectly usable and they have a long tradition of training men to use them. As long as a single well placed gun battery is operational, the enemy will think twice before sending their ship in it's effective range. It's yet another hurdle to overcome.Fun fact: When Finland was building up it's road network at the coastline at the 1800's, they specifically chose to build all major roads like 20 km inland from the coast. Because they would then be outside the range of any age-of-sail ship-of-line's cannon range, and could not be damaged by an enemy navy sailing off the coast of Finland.It made sense back in the day. Even the biggest naval cannons could not reach that far. Nowdays, they still have those roads at those places, even though you probably could get much more tourist visitors if you had your roads zig-zag along the coastline, showing off those awesome marine vistas. But naah, all the roads are well inland... because that's where they were built back in the day.The historical momentum often dictates why things are where they are, and why they are still used that way. It made sense to build a coastal gun battery network at the time before guided missiles, so now it's still there. There hasn't been a good reason to dismantle it, as it can still be useful third or fourth line of defense. After all, it's there and it's already been paid off. Why not use it?
>>65091432>Imagine had Hitler not chimped out over PolandThat would be an interesting timeline but that's like expecting Trump to be modest.
>>65091715>Historian hereSo is everyone else here. Get in line. Right behind Jerred Diamond.
>>65091688hi. Historian here again. While it is somewhat true that coastal artillery has been somewhat de-prioritized by the armed forces, that doesn't mean it has been the designated shit-can. For instance, Finland quite sneakily built up one of the largest artillery force in Europe using a loophole in the arms treaties. When the international arms inspectors checked how many guns Finnish military had, Finns always informed them a realistic and believable number that would match the number of guns that the inspectors would see. However, those treaties about arms limitations often did not include coastal or naval guns. As in, you don't have to include the numbers of every gun that goes on a warship or on your coastal batteries. (because back in the day, a single frigate might have a beqildering array of different caliber guns, so you just had to report the number of frigates, not individual guns). So Finns bought like a DOUBLE the amount of guns they would declare, but would right away designate half of them into naval or coastal duty."Why yes we have lots of big guns, but those are meant for warships! They are not for the army! Please ignore the fact that they are on wheels and very easily attached in the back of any military vehicle for towing into the front line!"And by the time the other nations figure out that "They have awfully lot of guns compared to a very small navy" Finns had already amassed a field artillery bigger than the rest of the Europe combined.
>>65091432>Imagine had Hitler not chimped out over Poland he could have allied with the Bongs and Frogs and said 'Hey lets go save Finland'But Stalin attacked Finland because of the secret deal he made with Hitler to divide eastern Europe. Which included them splitting Poland.
>>65091405You know sweden and norway have lappland too right? It's named for the indigenous up here. Fucks sake we arguably have more of it than the binns.t literally fucking live in norrbotten, which is part of lapplandI know the fucking forests.
>>65091962>norway and sweden have lappland toowhich makes it impossible for Finland to hide hyperwar tech in there?I think you're reading too deep into a retarded joke I made, my swedistani friend
