Komeetta, mikä Komeetta: (link to build -
https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=11223.0 )
Real WorldAs detailed by the Finnish Anti-Aircraft Museum’s website {1}, Finland’s adoption of any surface-to-air missile system was a slow and tortuous process beset by indecision, political infighting, a chronic shortage of funds and a need to keep the Soviet bear happy.
In 1966, the UK was rationalizing its Thunderbird 1 missile batteries and was looking for a potential customer for the surplus systems. Initially, Finland appeared keen and several training systems were supplied along with a number of drill missiles, however, the Finnish government dragged its heals and dithered about its commit. This led to the deal falling through and the available Thunderbird systems were eagerly snapped up by Saudi Arabia.
Although the Finnish military continued to voice its concerns, there followed a decade of political disinterest before the crippling lack of anti-aircraft missile defence was again seriously considered in the mid-1970s. Even so, short of funds, the Finn’s initial venture into the missile era was limited to a few hundred Strella (SA-7) shoulder-launched missiles and three S-125 Pechora (SA-3) missile batteries which were delivered in 1978 and 1980 respectively. The relatively static, SA-3 missiles were used, primarily, in the air defence of the Helsinki region and remained operational until 2000.
What-IfThe premise of this whiff is that, in 1966, Finland goes ahead with its purchase of the UK’s 36 redundant Thunderbird 1 missiles which are employed, much like the RL SA-3s, to provide the medium-range, high-altitude area defence of the Helsinki region. Realising the need for a more mobile solution to meet Finland’s air-defence requirements but constrained by what they have to hand, the Finns start to conduct their own research and development.
In the early 1970s, the Finnish Defence Research Agency (FDRA) is tasked with looking into the possibility of making the Thunderbird system truly mobile rather than just transportable. This is a big ask and whilst it is generally expected that the missile’s significant bulk will constrain it as a practicable option, the trials go ahead anyway, even if only to gain valuable experience for the future. At much the same time, the FDRA is tasked with also conducting a set of very similar trials with their MTO-66 Permit (Styx) anti-shipping missiles. Two disarmed comet tanks are release from reserve storage to the FDRA to facilitate the trials and these vehicles, after a number of modifications, are allocated: Number 1 to the MTO-66 Permit trial, and Number 2 to the Thunderbird trial.
A number of mobility trials are conducted, firstly with drill missiles and latterly with live missiles in order to study the impact on both the transporter and the missile. As resources are limited only two missiles can be spared for the firing trials – these being recorded as numbered 01 and 02 respectively. The firing trial is to measure the impact on the launch vehicle and any degradation to the missile’s performance after the mobility trial.
Much to everyone’s surprise, the firing trial proves to be entirely successful with little or no degradation of the missile’s performance. However, as expected, the somewhat jury-rigged system is quite limited in its cross-country performance and the reload process, already rather a complex and time-consuming evolution with the relatively static basic launcher, proves to be a complete nightmare requiring the missile, in its cradle, to dangle from the jib of an unsuitably large crane. Nevertheless, the Thunderbird1 and, subsequently, the Thunderbird 2 will remain in service in the semi-static system area defence role with the Finnish army until 1990.
The Finnish military’s, next purchase in 1975 will be the 2K12 Kub (SA-6) dedicated mobile air-defence system but, with the lessons learned from the Thunderbird trials, the canny Finns will acquire more 1S91 radar vehicles and missiles than the purchased number of launchers would suggest and, subsequently, will adapt their own T-55 and T-62 hulls to ersatz TELS (please see Buzzbomb’s excellent model.
https://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=11204.0 ).
The model depicts the Thunderbird trials vehicle with missile No 01 in both the transportation and firing configurations as it appeared on the FDRA firing range. It was constructed form a Tamiya A34 Comet, a 3D printed Thunderbird 1 missile from cults3d.com, quite a lot of styrene tubing and card, some telephone wiring, some knitting needle off-cuts, and a few home-made decals.
Epilogue:
I have unearthed a couple of images from the MTI-66 Permit (Styx) trial showing the missile and the FDRA trials vehicle No 1. I have also discovered that this vehicle still exists as an exhibit at the Finnish Museum of Coastal Artillery in Kuivasaari {2}, unfortunately, at this time, the final disposal of vehicle No2 from the Thunderbird trials remains a mystery.
Footnotes:
1. ilmatorjuntamuseo.fi
2. albumit.lasipalatsi.fi
