Defense is the "headline" goal. Less-clicky (but similarly important) goals are (1) easing trade & travel with the countries which the Finns expect to be doing the great majority of their trade & travel with, and (2) getting massive EU funding for the rebuilding & modernization of a whole lotta old Finnish rail infrastructure.
Even if the goal is defence it doesn't look like the best way to spend many. Finland is not a huge country, logistic using track is possible and incompatible rail gauge is a weak defence. IMHO it would be better to spend money on military to get a fast effect and in 20-30 years at most the threat will likely will be no longer relevant.
Dual gauge trains are technically much more complicated, making them more expensive to build, maintain, repair etc. Dual gauge do not work well (or at all depending) in the cold climate of Finland and if they did, the changeover takes time which adds up when you are trying to move thousands of cars worth of material. Dual gauge trains still need changeover stations, which are themselves expensive and complicated, as well as being targets for attack.
Unloading to new trains carry the same problems; expensive, time consuming, and make for excellent targets. Logistics are the least interesting part of war for most people, but are one of, if not the most, important part.
Far easier is to just destroy the train tracks with explosives that connect between Finland and Russia (or demolish them like done in Salla after letting them rot).
There's no defensive reason for this other than in the cabinet talks.
First of all it's not just so easy to destroy infrastructure in a way that can't be rebuilt quickly; thousands of miles of train tracks would be difficult to destroy. This is happening all over Ukraine.
Second, blowing up your own country's rail infrastructure means you can't use it, either, which means you lose an advantage you have that your trains can move on your rails but your enemy's cannot.
IIRC Russian army had, prior to the outbreak of the current war, several tens of thousands of soldiers specialized just in emergency railway construction and repairs. IDK how many remain now.
Russians aren't stupid, they know that the enemy will try to destroy the tracks when retreating, so they train to fix/bypass the problems quickly.
That includes some transportable improvised bridges ready for deployment.
bell-cot|9 months ago
citrin_ru|9 months ago
dotancohen|9 months ago
542354234235|9 months ago
Unloading to new trains carry the same problems; expensive, time consuming, and make for excellent targets. Logistics are the least interesting part of war for most people, but are one of, if not the most, important part.
anticensor|9 months ago
varsketiz|9 months ago
burmanm|9 months ago
There's no defensive reason for this other than in the cabinet talks.
thehappypm|9 months ago
First of all it's not just so easy to destroy infrastructure in a way that can't be rebuilt quickly; thousands of miles of train tracks would be difficult to destroy. This is happening all over Ukraine.
Second, blowing up your own country's rail infrastructure means you can't use it, either, which means you lose an advantage you have that your trains can move on your rails but your enemy's cannot.
inglor_cz|9 months ago
Russians aren't stupid, they know that the enemy will try to destroy the tracks when retreating, so they train to fix/bypass the problems quickly.
That includes some transportable improvised bridges ready for deployment.
dh2022|9 months ago
chinathrow|9 months ago