Obligatory nationalist thread - Accelerated Finnish maritime development TL
Note: As everyone is required to write at least one somewhat nationalistic timeline, here's my take on this. Inspired by Archangel's Megaprojects I'm including a strong civilian component here. Let's see if this is too obscure for any comments!
I The Navy Law and the Merchant Navy Law - 1925-1929
Finnish Navy was established in 1918 using a hodge-podge of Czarist Navy ships left to Finland during the chaotic "Baltic Fleet ice cruise" during the Finnish Civil War. Ships did not represent an ideal combination to Finnish defence needs and were mostly obsolescent. On less inspiring nationalist point, the officers and seamen of the new navy were not that skilled. Due to combination of these causes the new Navy suffered severe operational casualties.
The worst accident suffered by Finnish defence forces in peacetime occurred on 4 October 1925 when old torpedo boat S2 sank outside Pori with total loss of her 53 crew. The accident sparked a public outrage which was exploited by naval and industrial circles. To propagandize the need for a new fleet an organization - Laivastoyhdistys or the
Finnish Navy League - was established. At the same time newly independent Finland was seeing an unpredecented economic boom which was not only healing the wounds of the Civil War but also bringing a level of unseeming prosperity for Finnish population at large. Sales of jazz records and illegal booze boomed and skirts were shortened.
However, the new-found success in the American and South American markets could not be used for Finnish advantage as well as it could have been due to two factors. The first limit was by force of nature. Finnish ports were blockaded by ice during winter months and with present icebreaker strength only Hanko and during most winters, Turku, could be kept open throughout the winter. This was not optimal for Finnish forestry industries as the primary export harbors for forestry were Viipuri (connected via Saimaa canal to Finnish inland lakes) and Kotka. Ports of Oulu and Kemi, situated at the mouth of Oulujoki and Kemijoki respectively, capable of using large inland wood reserves, could not be exploited at all during winter months. The second limiting factor was man-made. Finnish liner companies were small and had difficulties in providing necessary services for export markets. Due to their small size they had also difficulties in being accepted into the cartel system of transoceanic lines, Line Conferences. For example, due to Line Conferences it was impossible for Finnish ships to gain coffee freights from South America to Europe. The dependence upon foreign shipping companies resulted in lost transit time and worse access to the markets. Finnish products were often sold without mention of their Finnish origins, which in practice meant inability to create lasting trade relations.
In addition to interests of forestry industries the interests of Finnish metal industry sector was also to be catered by expansion of Finnish fleet. Finnish shipbuilding had been largely sustained by Russian civilian and military markets. As Russian market had been evaporated and the penetration to new markets was difficult due to post-Great War abundance of merchant shipping the long term prospects for shipbuilding seemed bleak. Orders for state ships as well as state backed merchant shipping might revitalize the industry.
Thus there was widely accepted need not only for a revitalization of Finnish Navy but also for a Finnish Merchant Navy. The Navy League decided to push not only the Navy Law but also Merchant Navy Law in order to gain wider support for the Navy Law. The Navy Law was to provide for a naval force capable of fulfillling naval tasks of the Finnish defence, namely securing the demilitarized Åland isles in case of mobilization, assisting Coastal Artillery in case of landing attempts and securing the Finnish trade routes to Sweden. The Merchant Navy Law was to establish a maritime infrastructure capable of making Finnish maritime trade a year-round affair and to establish state-owned companies capable of conducting Finnish trade under Finnish flag to North and South America. Icebreakers were to operate under Finnish Maritime Adminstration, as was the tradition, while new Merivienti Oy was to be the state owned line company. The two existing steamship liner companies were to be allowed to have a large share in Merivienti Oy which was also not to be allowed to compete with existing companies in lucrative European trade.
In order to ensure steady flow of orders for Finnish shipbuilding industries the basic schedule to be followed was to be ordering Finnish naval ships first - to gain more experience in most modern shipbuilding techniques and to solve the lack of naval ships, then icebreakers necessary to create sustainable foreign trade and finally the merchant liners capable of creating better maritime communications. This schedule was also justified by post-war situation in the international shipping markets. Modern merchants were available fairly cheaply so it would not make sense to build them locally for quite some time.
Both laws were pushed through the Finnish legislature surprisingly easily. The Right-wing Kokoomus (National Coalition) party was dead-set against socialism but in Finnish political tradition state funding for business has never been seen as socialism. For the Navy Law their support was unanimous. The left-wing SDP (Social Democratic Party) was opposed to the Navy Law but supported the Merchant Navy Law due to it's promise for more work for industrial workers. Swedish People's Party (RKP) traditionally supported the interests of merchant marine due to voter interests. The Agrarian Party was primarily in opposition to increase of State Budget but was for improvement in national defense and also for expansion of forestry industry and the possible increase for wood prices, important for small and large landowners alike. The only party in opposition of the arrangement was the Socialist Party of Workers and Smallholders (STP), cover organization for Soviet-backed communists. Increase in national defence was against Soviet interests as was the improvement of Finnish industry as Soviet Union was much dependant upon forestry products produced with slave labour providing Soviet Union with much needed hard
currency.
The STP was, however, and the law was passed in the Finnish Parliament in April 1927 to be enacted from 1928 onwards. In practice the preparatory orders for shipbuilding industries had already taken place and numerous studies had been made by the Finnish Navy, Finnish Maritime Adminstration and Finnish industry associations on the optimal composition for the new fleets.
Ia Technological challenges - Icebreakers
Icebreaker Jääkarhu arriving in Helsinki for the first time in 1926
In 1927 Finnish icebreaker fleet was based upon six icebreakers with a total power of 23 000 horsepower. The five older ones all were coal-fired, lacking range for continuous operations. The oldest, Murtaja, of 1890 vintage, even lacked a keel propellor. The newest one, Jääkarhu, delivered by Dutch firm of P.Smit&Co in 1926 was the darling of the fleet. With width of 19,3 meters, 9200 horsepower and tilt tanks it was powerful addition to the icebreaker fleet and could single-handedly aid ocean going liners and tankers in and out of Finnish winter ports. The triple-expansion steam engines were oil-fired, providing far greater endurance than with the older generation coal-fired icebreakers. Even though Soviet icebreaker Krasin was even more powerful, Jääkarhu was clearly among the best icebreakers in the world.
However, in some respects the Jääkarhu was already obsolete. Diesel electric propulsion, to be introduced to the Finnish Navy in submarines, in it's capability to direct power easily to til pumps, keel or stern propellors whatever the need and providing for greater endurance and more economical operations was clearly the way of the future. Bubble shroud was also lacking. The Swedes were already considering diesel-electric propulsion for their "Statsisbrytaren II", to be named Ymer.
For the projected needs a need for two separate classes of icebreakers was seen. First would be a 8000 horsepower 4000 tons 14 meters wide vessel to be used to keep sealanes in Gulf of Bothnia open for large enough vessels to operate in transoceanic trade. Projected performance was to be 15kts at open waters and 6-8kts on 50 centimeter ice with maximum capability of 120cm solid ice. The projected names for the class would be Karhu, Otso, Kontio and Mesikämmen, all synonyms for bear, the traditional "King of the Forest" in Finnish folk mythology. The ships were originally scheduled to be delivered between 1933-1934 after yards had fulfilled majority of the Navy orders. Second class would be even more ambitious. Project Sisu was to be a 6000 tons and 10500 horsepower vessel with 19,5 meters width to be used to assist traffic to Kotka, Viipuri and Helsinki to keep the trade routes open for large ocean-going tankers and liners. This ship was to be delivered in 1935.
Inspired due to Civil War and First World War use of icebreakers the new icebreaker classes were to be designed from the outset to be armed if deemed necessary. The armament for both "Karhu" class and "Sisu" was to be four 4"/60 1911 pattern guns and four 40mm Bofors guns and depth charge racks. Projected wartime role for icebreakers in summer season was to be convoy escorts. Additionally, the icebreaker "Karhu" was to be prepared to be used as a tender for Navy's submarines. (like icebreaker Sisu in OTL).
Ib Technological challenges - the Navy
Although the Navy leadership would have preferred coastal monitors armed with 10" guns, (OTL Väinämöinen -class) the support for large naval ships had somewhat waned due to Merchant Navy law which was deemed to produce lucrative large civilian orders for Finnish shipyard industry. Suddenly the order of large ships, construction of which would demand special techniques of not much use in civilian shipbuilding, was not deemed as necessary by the industrial lobby. Icebreakers would be the government-funded "masterpieces" of the Finnish shipbuilding. Smaller ships, on the other hand, would allow government funded work to be spread upon more shipyards.
Thus instead of projected two coastal monitors totalling 7800 tons and complement of 800 men the primary combat element of the new navy was to be eight 1000 ton torpedo boats to be ordered in two installments, first one in 1927 and second one in 1930 to spread replacement schedule and to maximize economic support for the shipbuilding industry. To avoid association with infamous torpedo boat S2 the ships were to be called destroyers despite their diminutive size. One propagandized use for new destroyers was to be their use to enforce the Prohibition due to their fast speed.
The ship design of the first class was heavily influenced by Kockums-built Ehrenskiöld class and featured a large proportion of Swedish industrial components and equipment. The primary specifications were as follows:
Displacement: 1020 tons fully loaded
Length: 92 meters
Width: 9 meters
Draught: 2.6 meters
Speed: 31kts
Propulsion: De Laval oil-fired turbines
Armament: 3x 120mm/46 Bofors M/24C; 2x 40mm/39 Vickers AA-gun; 2x3 533mm TT, 2 depth
charge racks, two depth charge throwers, provisions for 50 mines
Delivery schedule:
Jylhä: 1930
Jyry: 1930
Jymy: 1931
Jyske: 1931
The lack of heavy gun armament provided for some advantage in field of industrial economics. Since the Independence there had been a project of founding a government gun factory which was to produce field and anti-tank artillery pieces to equip the Army. While it would be clearly not economical to produce heavy caliber artillerypieces of coastal monitors domestically the order for main armament of torpedo boats could be directed to the new factory in preparation for Army orders.
Finnish destroyer "Jyry" on trials. Due to close relation to Swedish Ehrenskiöld -class the ships of the Jylhä-class was often misrecognized.
In addition the Navy Law provided for order of three minelaying submarines, one midget submarine and four motor torpedo boats which were ordered from British firm of Thornycroft. The submarines were designed by German U-boat experts operating via Dutch cover firm "IvS" and had following features. (as OTL ).
Three submarines of Vetehinen -class:
Vetehinen, delivered in 1930
Vesihiisi, delivered in 1931
Iku-Turso, delivered in 1931
Midget Submarine Saukko. Delivered in 1930.
Note: As everyone is required to write at least one somewhat nationalistic timeline, here's my take on this. Inspired by Archangel's Megaprojects I'm including a strong civilian component here. Let's see if this is too obscure for any comments!
I The Navy Law and the Merchant Navy Law - 1925-1929
Finnish Navy was established in 1918 using a hodge-podge of Czarist Navy ships left to Finland during the chaotic "Baltic Fleet ice cruise" during the Finnish Civil War. Ships did not represent an ideal combination to Finnish defence needs and were mostly obsolescent. On less inspiring nationalist point, the officers and seamen of the new navy were not that skilled. Due to combination of these causes the new Navy suffered severe operational casualties.
The worst accident suffered by Finnish defence forces in peacetime occurred on 4 October 1925 when old torpedo boat S2 sank outside Pori with total loss of her 53 crew. The accident sparked a public outrage which was exploited by naval and industrial circles. To propagandize the need for a new fleet an organization - Laivastoyhdistys or the
Finnish Navy League - was established. At the same time newly independent Finland was seeing an unpredecented economic boom which was not only healing the wounds of the Civil War but also bringing a level of unseeming prosperity for Finnish population at large. Sales of jazz records and illegal booze boomed and skirts were shortened.
However, the new-found success in the American and South American markets could not be used for Finnish advantage as well as it could have been due to two factors. The first limit was by force of nature. Finnish ports were blockaded by ice during winter months and with present icebreaker strength only Hanko and during most winters, Turku, could be kept open throughout the winter. This was not optimal for Finnish forestry industries as the primary export harbors for forestry were Viipuri (connected via Saimaa canal to Finnish inland lakes) and Kotka. Ports of Oulu and Kemi, situated at the mouth of Oulujoki and Kemijoki respectively, capable of using large inland wood reserves, could not be exploited at all during winter months. The second limiting factor was man-made. Finnish liner companies were small and had difficulties in providing necessary services for export markets. Due to their small size they had also difficulties in being accepted into the cartel system of transoceanic lines, Line Conferences. For example, due to Line Conferences it was impossible for Finnish ships to gain coffee freights from South America to Europe. The dependence upon foreign shipping companies resulted in lost transit time and worse access to the markets. Finnish products were often sold without mention of their Finnish origins, which in practice meant inability to create lasting trade relations.
In addition to interests of forestry industries the interests of Finnish metal industry sector was also to be catered by expansion of Finnish fleet. Finnish shipbuilding had been largely sustained by Russian civilian and military markets. As Russian market had been evaporated and the penetration to new markets was difficult due to post-Great War abundance of merchant shipping the long term prospects for shipbuilding seemed bleak. Orders for state ships as well as state backed merchant shipping might revitalize the industry.
Thus there was widely accepted need not only for a revitalization of Finnish Navy but also for a Finnish Merchant Navy. The Navy League decided to push not only the Navy Law but also Merchant Navy Law in order to gain wider support for the Navy Law. The Navy Law was to provide for a naval force capable of fulfillling naval tasks of the Finnish defence, namely securing the demilitarized Åland isles in case of mobilization, assisting Coastal Artillery in case of landing attempts and securing the Finnish trade routes to Sweden. The Merchant Navy Law was to establish a maritime infrastructure capable of making Finnish maritime trade a year-round affair and to establish state-owned companies capable of conducting Finnish trade under Finnish flag to North and South America. Icebreakers were to operate under Finnish Maritime Adminstration, as was the tradition, while new Merivienti Oy was to be the state owned line company. The two existing steamship liner companies were to be allowed to have a large share in Merivienti Oy which was also not to be allowed to compete with existing companies in lucrative European trade.
In order to ensure steady flow of orders for Finnish shipbuilding industries the basic schedule to be followed was to be ordering Finnish naval ships first - to gain more experience in most modern shipbuilding techniques and to solve the lack of naval ships, then icebreakers necessary to create sustainable foreign trade and finally the merchant liners capable of creating better maritime communications. This schedule was also justified by post-war situation in the international shipping markets. Modern merchants were available fairly cheaply so it would not make sense to build them locally for quite some time.
Both laws were pushed through the Finnish legislature surprisingly easily. The Right-wing Kokoomus (National Coalition) party was dead-set against socialism but in Finnish political tradition state funding for business has never been seen as socialism. For the Navy Law their support was unanimous. The left-wing SDP (Social Democratic Party) was opposed to the Navy Law but supported the Merchant Navy Law due to it's promise for more work for industrial workers. Swedish People's Party (RKP) traditionally supported the interests of merchant marine due to voter interests. The Agrarian Party was primarily in opposition to increase of State Budget but was for improvement in national defense and also for expansion of forestry industry and the possible increase for wood prices, important for small and large landowners alike. The only party in opposition of the arrangement was the Socialist Party of Workers and Smallholders (STP), cover organization for Soviet-backed communists. Increase in national defence was against Soviet interests as was the improvement of Finnish industry as Soviet Union was much dependant upon forestry products produced with slave labour providing Soviet Union with much needed hard
currency.
The STP was, however, and the law was passed in the Finnish Parliament in April 1927 to be enacted from 1928 onwards. In practice the preparatory orders for shipbuilding industries had already taken place and numerous studies had been made by the Finnish Navy, Finnish Maritime Adminstration and Finnish industry associations on the optimal composition for the new fleets.
Ia Technological challenges - Icebreakers
Icebreaker Jääkarhu arriving in Helsinki for the first time in 1926
In 1927 Finnish icebreaker fleet was based upon six icebreakers with a total power of 23 000 horsepower. The five older ones all were coal-fired, lacking range for continuous operations. The oldest, Murtaja, of 1890 vintage, even lacked a keel propellor. The newest one, Jääkarhu, delivered by Dutch firm of P.Smit&Co in 1926 was the darling of the fleet. With width of 19,3 meters, 9200 horsepower and tilt tanks it was powerful addition to the icebreaker fleet and could single-handedly aid ocean going liners and tankers in and out of Finnish winter ports. The triple-expansion steam engines were oil-fired, providing far greater endurance than with the older generation coal-fired icebreakers. Even though Soviet icebreaker Krasin was even more powerful, Jääkarhu was clearly among the best icebreakers in the world.
However, in some respects the Jääkarhu was already obsolete. Diesel electric propulsion, to be introduced to the Finnish Navy in submarines, in it's capability to direct power easily to til pumps, keel or stern propellors whatever the need and providing for greater endurance and more economical operations was clearly the way of the future. Bubble shroud was also lacking. The Swedes were already considering diesel-electric propulsion for their "Statsisbrytaren II", to be named Ymer.
For the projected needs a need for two separate classes of icebreakers was seen. First would be a 8000 horsepower 4000 tons 14 meters wide vessel to be used to keep sealanes in Gulf of Bothnia open for large enough vessels to operate in transoceanic trade. Projected performance was to be 15kts at open waters and 6-8kts on 50 centimeter ice with maximum capability of 120cm solid ice. The projected names for the class would be Karhu, Otso, Kontio and Mesikämmen, all synonyms for bear, the traditional "King of the Forest" in Finnish folk mythology. The ships were originally scheduled to be delivered between 1933-1934 after yards had fulfilled majority of the Navy orders. Second class would be even more ambitious. Project Sisu was to be a 6000 tons and 10500 horsepower vessel with 19,5 meters width to be used to assist traffic to Kotka, Viipuri and Helsinki to keep the trade routes open for large ocean-going tankers and liners. This ship was to be delivered in 1935.
Inspired due to Civil War and First World War use of icebreakers the new icebreaker classes were to be designed from the outset to be armed if deemed necessary. The armament for both "Karhu" class and "Sisu" was to be four 4"/60 1911 pattern guns and four 40mm Bofors guns and depth charge racks. Projected wartime role for icebreakers in summer season was to be convoy escorts. Additionally, the icebreaker "Karhu" was to be prepared to be used as a tender for Navy's submarines. (like icebreaker Sisu in OTL).
Ib Technological challenges - the Navy
Although the Navy leadership would have preferred coastal monitors armed with 10" guns, (OTL Väinämöinen -class) the support for large naval ships had somewhat waned due to Merchant Navy law which was deemed to produce lucrative large civilian orders for Finnish shipyard industry. Suddenly the order of large ships, construction of which would demand special techniques of not much use in civilian shipbuilding, was not deemed as necessary by the industrial lobby. Icebreakers would be the government-funded "masterpieces" of the Finnish shipbuilding. Smaller ships, on the other hand, would allow government funded work to be spread upon more shipyards.
Thus instead of projected two coastal monitors totalling 7800 tons and complement of 800 men the primary combat element of the new navy was to be eight 1000 ton torpedo boats to be ordered in two installments, first one in 1927 and second one in 1930 to spread replacement schedule and to maximize economic support for the shipbuilding industry. To avoid association with infamous torpedo boat S2 the ships were to be called destroyers despite their diminutive size. One propagandized use for new destroyers was to be their use to enforce the Prohibition due to their fast speed.
The ship design of the first class was heavily influenced by Kockums-built Ehrenskiöld class and featured a large proportion of Swedish industrial components and equipment. The primary specifications were as follows:
Displacement: 1020 tons fully loaded
Length: 92 meters
Width: 9 meters
Draught: 2.6 meters
Speed: 31kts
Propulsion: De Laval oil-fired turbines
Armament: 3x 120mm/46 Bofors M/24C; 2x 40mm/39 Vickers AA-gun; 2x3 533mm TT, 2 depth
charge racks, two depth charge throwers, provisions for 50 mines
Delivery schedule:
Jylhä: 1930
Jyry: 1930
Jymy: 1931
Jyske: 1931
The lack of heavy gun armament provided for some advantage in field of industrial economics. Since the Independence there had been a project of founding a government gun factory which was to produce field and anti-tank artillery pieces to equip the Army. While it would be clearly not economical to produce heavy caliber artillerypieces of coastal monitors domestically the order for main armament of torpedo boats could be directed to the new factory in preparation for Army orders.
Finnish destroyer "Jyry" on trials. Due to close relation to Swedish Ehrenskiöld -class the ships of the Jylhä-class was often misrecognized.
In addition the Navy Law provided for order of three minelaying submarines, one midget submarine and four motor torpedo boats which were ordered from British firm of Thornycroft. The submarines were designed by German U-boat experts operating via Dutch cover firm "IvS" and had following features. (as OTL ).
Three submarines of Vetehinen -class:
Vetehinen, delivered in 1930
Vesihiisi, delivered in 1931
Iku-Turso, delivered in 1931
Midget Submarine Saukko. Delivered in 1930.
Last edited:
