Russian Armed Forces

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 365
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by Phil Sayers »

Is the Pantsir / SA-22 a completely useless piece of kit? It is advertised as being capable against UAVs but in both Syria and Libya it seems simply to be a target for UCAVs. In Syria both Israel and Turkey have destroyed them and released footage of doing so while in Libya a real Turkey shoot is taking place against those the UAE has supplied to the LNA. Half a dozen Pantsir systems (some while the radar has been operating) struck in the last 48 hours and a further one captured intact.

No doubt the Russian defence industry will point to the quality of the crews and that the ones destroyed are export models but nevertheless this is a serious embarrassment for one of their most actively promoted exports.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by abc123 »

Phil Sayers wrote:Is the Pantsir / SA-22 a completely useless piece of kit? It is advertised as being capable against UAVs but in both Syria and Libya it seems simply to be a target for UCAVs. In Syria both Israel and Turkey have destroyed them and released footage of doing so while in Libya a real Turkey shoot is taking place against those the UAE has supplied to the LNA. Half a dozen Pantsir systems (some while the radar has been operating) struck in the last 48 hours and a further one captured intact.

No doubt the Russian defence industry will point to the quality of the crews and that the ones destroyed are export models but nevertheless this is a serious embarrassment for one of their most actively promoted exports.
Agreed.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by seaspear »

Perhaps a play on the name but has the f35a lived up to this new moniker lol
https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... s-panther/

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

seaspear wrote:Perhaps a play on the name but has the f35a lived up to this new moniker lol
https://www.popularmechanics.com/milita ... s-panther/
Wonder why this one is here?
Anyhow, we may have had a 15% production share also in one of the previous Panthers: "The F9F-5 then followed and these were essentially F9F-4 airframes outfitted with the Pratt & Whitney J48 engine (licensed version of the British Rolls-Royce RB.44 "Tay"). A total of 616 were produced to this standard, becoming the quantitative mark of the whole Panther series. Additionally, the variant included a water injection system to increase thrust output to 7,000lbs."
- shades of the boost used by Harriers momentarily, while landing?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by Timmymagic »

Phil Sayers wrote:No doubt the Russian defence industry will point to the quality of the crews and that the ones destroyed are export models but nevertheless this is a serious embarrassment for one of their most actively promoted exports.
The 'Monkey Models' moniker they used to use, did them no favours when it came to sales. Actively telling everyone that the versions that they sold were inferior and nigh on useless in combat, and thats if you believed it, might have played well with Russian's nationalists but must have made Russian arms salesmen wince. But it was always nonsense, the idea that the limited differences between Russian and export variants suddenly made the kit that bad just doesn't stand up to close examination. You have to wonder what differences the Chinese have between domestic and export.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Some known cases:
T72 armour; just like the armour on M-1s made in Egypt is not the same as those produced at the same time in the US

Thales thermal sights on tanks; only India has been offered then on export models (as Russia needs all that can be produced for refurbing their own tanks)

I am not saying it has been systematic
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by abc123 »

Timmymagic wrote:
Phil Sayers wrote:No doubt the Russian defence industry will point to the quality of the crews and that the ones destroyed are export models but nevertheless this is a serious embarrassment for one of their most actively promoted exports.
The 'Monkey Models' moniker they used to use, did them no favours when it came to sales. Actively telling everyone that the versions that they sold were inferior and nigh on useless in combat, and thats if you believed it, might have played well with Russian's nationalists but must have made Russian arms salesmen wince. But it was always nonsense, the idea that the limited differences between Russian and export variants suddenly made the kit that bad just doesn't stand up to close examination. You have to wonder what differences the Chinese have between domestic and export.
Agreed. Considering how T-80s fared in Chechenya..
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

Initially yes, but if the US had sent in Abrams and use the same tactics the results would have been the same. They learnt their lessons and when the went back the losses in tanks was but a fraction of the first attempt.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

Found this music video which is rather intriguing.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

OK, falls within the metal genre: a rough man (in this case: lots of them) and an angelic female vocalist
- the guitars played second fiddle to the other kind of 'metal' - of which there was plenty on display

What would you do, if a proper video is beyond budget? Well, ask the patriotic army to provide the props
- over to abc, for the lyrics :)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7930
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by SKB »

Lord Jim wrote:Found this music video which is rather intriguing.
I thought the Eurovision Song Contest was cancelled this year? (!) :mrgreen:

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7930
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by SKB »

Image

serge750
Senior Member
Posts: 1068
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by serge750 »

Perhaps russia could buy the Liang from china to replace him, when china commissions their first CATOBAR carrier :D cant really the point in china keeping Liang when a couple of CATOBAR carriers enter service...maybe late late 20's.....

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

Kuznetsov is like the two Kirovs, it is a prestige platform and so will eventually be made seaworthy again by orders form the top.

In the meantime the Russian Navy is deploying more and more light frigates with substantial capabilities including greater firepower(anti air, anti ship, anti submarine and land attack) than most western full sized frigates. Yes their range is limited but for operations up north , in the Black Sea or in the eastern Mediterranean they are very viable warships, especially if operating under land based air cover.

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1626
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by xav »

Russian Navy Kirov-Class Cruiser Admiral Nakhimov Back In The Water
Image
The upgraded Kirov-class nuclear-powered guided missile cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov" (Project 11442M) left the pool of Sevmash Shipyard and berthed at the embankment for systems fitting out, the enterprise said on 18 August.
...
For the record, the “Admiral Nakhimov” (Project 1144 “Orlan”) was named “Kalinin” until 1992. It was laid down on May 17, 1983 at the Baltic Shipyard. Launched on April 25, 1986 and commissioned with the Soviet Navy on December 30, 1988. On April 22, 1992 it was renamed “Admiral Nakhimov”.

The vessel arrived from Severomorsk to Severodvinsk at Sevmash shipyard to undergo repair and modernization back in 1997. On August 14, 1999, the ship was officially accepted for repair and modernization at the shipyard. However, the work did not start fora while, and only in September 2008 the spent nuclear fuel was unloaded.
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... the-water/

What a mess... ETA for post-modernization sea trials is 2022 at best....

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

xav wrote:ETA for post-modernization sea trials is 2022 at best....
1997-2022... reminds me of Soviet era jokes: A person buying a Lada and is told it will be delivered on a Friday, in 9 years' time.
"will that be a.m. or p.m.?"
"why would that matter?"
"the plumber is due a.m. :) "

Anyway, Russian shipbuilding sources say that Adm N's hull is of much better quality than Pjotr's... so it will eventually be the sole survivor. I.e. the prestige flagship for an otherwise coastal surface navy.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

An excerpt from the above linked:
" According to H I Sutton, the cruiser will be also armed with the 3M22 Zircon hypersonic anti-ship missile, possibly a total of 60 missiles."

I wonder what the Zircon range will be, when not launched high up, from a Mach3 fighter plane?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7930
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
England

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by SKB »



^ Russia's new carrier?! :mrgreen:

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

A daylight shooting in Berlin (of a Russian exile), the poisoning of Navalnyi, the silent support for what is going on in Belorussia... means that Merkel is finally prepared (?) to kick someone who she has showed much tolerance for (only Trump has trumped her in that) where it hurts... Nordsream2
... keep an eye on an announcement; will probably come from NATO in the name of energy security (as opposed to a political announcement by a single country, which do not count - rather just attest to the efficacy of Putin's 'divide and conquer' plots)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

As it is 150 km less from Minsk to Moscow, compared to the distance from Kiev, and considering to what extreme lengths Putin went to stop Ukraine from fully joining the "West's orbit", it is interesting to note the Carnegie Moscow Centre assessment of what will happen next:

"Russia will want to play the Belarusian elite against each other [...] It doesn't want to annex the country altogether. But it would like to control its foreign and security policy, while outsourcing any domestic issues to the Belarusian elite."

Despite the basing of Russia's early warning radar station, Belorussia declined to accept the basing of a fighter wing. We (and they) did get a taste of what Russia's 'rolled-forward' defence on the ground might look like at a very short notice, as per RUSI analysis of Zapad-17:

" the Russian Ministry of Defence requested the use of 4,162 train carriages to transport its military equipment to Belarus, specifically mentioning that all those carriages were return services.

This represents a massive increase on the 2015 and 2016 transport requirement, which were 125 and 50 carriages respectively, a rise in requirements which one can only assume as necessary to fulfilling the day-to-day needs of the Russian forces permanently deployed to Belarus.

Still, this leaves approximately 4,000 currently contracted train carriages to deliver Russian forces to Belarus for exercises and then withdraw them. We know that approximately 250 carriages were already used earlier this year to transport elements of the Russian rear and support elements, with the stated goal of preparing the infrastructure for Zapad-2017, although the transportation of the 6th Tank Brigade alone takes 734 carriages.

Bearing in mind that the transportation of the ‘Kantemirovskaya’ Division takes 2,180 carriages one way, which leaves approximately 850 carriages to deploy 1,500–5,000 more troops, depending on the type of units/formations in Belarus. (The lower estimate corresponds only with deployment of the personnel-light, equipment-heavy combat engineer units.)

Meanwhile, in addition, Zapad-2017 includes formations of the Russian 11th and 14th Army Corps, as well as the Russian Airborne Troops, taking part unannounced. These formations number around 41,000 troops, taking the cumulative count of troops involved to 65–70,000 – considerably higher than the Vienna [notification] requirements."

... perhaps the time to dig up the follow-on report "The reasons for inclusion of other, unannounced, Russian troops in the total count of the Zapad-2017 exercises will be [were] discussed in the second part of this analysis."
- Should be found in their Whitehall Papers series.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Russia may be on a back-foot in Belorussia, Moldova, Armenia...

BUT: several years ago Putin talked about setting up two foreign bases, and none of those in ex-Soviets count as 'foreign' in that speak.

Tartus one; the nearby added airbase can't be counted as the second; it was rather dictated by the events in Syria

So, the second one emerges:
"MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin has ordered the defence ministry to conclude an agreement with Sudan on setting up a Russian naval facility in the African country, TASS news agency reported on Monday, citing an order.

Russia plans to create a logistics hub for its navy in Sudan, which will accommodate up to 300 troops and staff.

Reporting by Vladimir Soldatkin"

Quite small compared to the US/ China/ France along the Red sea coast
- but it is a navy base, as opposed to China's , which allegedly also is a navy base, but has a much beefier manning (of all sorts)
- France decamped their air element to the UAE yonks ago
... and the US is there mainly because of the elements in Yemen needing attention, well before the civil war there broke out (into the open)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Valdai (an East-West Forum, where 'friendly' journalists ask questions that Putin wants to 'answer' without proclaiming policy... like he declared INF very likely to be dead two years before it finally died.
- funny how both sides, just months after the fact, are busily testing their hyper-weapons, most of which would clearly have been within the INF parameters

Now, at a meeting of the Valdai Discussion Club before the U.S. presidential election Putin again made an interesting comment. Asked whether it was possible to conceive of a military alliance between China and Russia, Putin replied, “It is possible to imagine anything.… We have not set that goal for ourselves. But, in principle, we are not going to rule it out, either.”

I.e. messaging to the incoming Administration that they should be nice(r) to him, or there might be a strategic price to pay
- of course, if you cut yourself totally off the West/ their markets, Siberia will turn into a China colony sooner than anyone could think
- so, in effect a balancing act, without much of a military dimension?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Those not interested in aviation history can skip the first 12 minutes

and the rest deals with what has been made of the hi-altitude fast interceptor... and whether a Mig-41 is in the works
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

"In 1975, Kiev appeared, followed by her sister ships Minsk (1978), Novorossiysk (1982), and Baku (1987)".
Spot the odd one out; which one has not seen an armed conflict on Russia's near-abroad yet - internal strife does not count?

So asking if the Belorus crisis is a local one or a geopolitical one translates to what military/ defence dimensions does it have, should the crisis deepen? The answer depends on the way out:

If the economy nose dives, a Russian bailout is far more likely than a EU one.
As a reward Russia probably would not push the long-touted federation between the two countries, but rather enhance their 'forward defence, rather than presence' and e.g. repeat the request for an airbase for a fighter wing. [The early warning radar station as well as the comms station for Russian subs are already in the country.]
- so from local towards geopolitical, NATO vs. Russia in close vicinity
- whether Belarus would be in any position to resist other attempts to curtail its sovereignty would remain an open question

A second scenario would transform the Belarusian revolution into a geopolitical event in a more creeping manner, by eroding pro-Russian sentiment among Belarusians.
- 'Ukraine and Georgia like' scenes, from a decade back, repeating where the N. European plain opens up to a wide 'road' straight to Moscow would probably cause Russia to place itself behind the current regime's violence machinery even more sternly that already is the case. The hardened internal repression in Russia, after all, resulted from the fear that 'colour revolutions' would catch up within Russia itself.

A further scenario that through a democratic process a pro-West leader would replace the current dictator barely seems credible for now - regardless of the fact that rigging the election was to pre-empt exactly that. Should that happen, though, then Putin's Russia could not hide behind somebody else's security machinery doing the beatings for them. And suddenly there would be another Ukraine on the door step... even closer to 'home'.
- so geopolitical indeed
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

BlueD954
Member
Posts: 233
Joined: 02 Oct 2020, 05:11
Singapore

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by BlueD954 »

Russia conducted an anti-satellite test and the West is scared.

https://www.space.com/russia-launches-a ... -test-2020

Post Reply