Russian Armed Forces

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2795
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by abc123 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:In case someone did not get his/her fix this year:
... from 3 minutes on the national hymn may sound familiar (from before)
They should have stayed with Glinka. :think:
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…

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

bobp wrote: Great until I spotted Stephen Seagal in the Grandstand
Not a huge surprise: holds American, Serbian, and Russian citizenship.

Nothing much to do with armed forces but the most memorable moment of him in Russia was when a Russian won in judo world Championships. The guy asked Seagal to come onto the tatami many times, and when this one finally accepted, it took like 2 seconds :)
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: 2795
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by abc123 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote: Nothing much to do with armed forces but the most memorable moment of him in Russia was when a Russian won in judo world Championships. The guy asked Seagal to come onto the tatami many times, and when this one finally accepted, it took like 2 seconds :)
You mean this: ?
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…

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

No, these guys are from within the same sport.
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: 2795
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by abc123 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:No, these guys are from within the same sport.
I can't find anything about that.
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…

Phil Sayers
Member
Posts: 85
Joined: 03 May 2015, 13:56
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 1 time

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: 2795
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

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: 1758
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
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: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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: 2341
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 5 times
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: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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: 2795
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

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: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
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: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by Lord Jim »

Found this music video which is rather intriguing.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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: 7231
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 9 times
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: 7231
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 9 times
England

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by SKB »

Image

serge750
Member
Posts: 841
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:34
Has liked: 18 times
Been liked: 3 times

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: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
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: 1533
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 5 times

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: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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: 7231
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 9 times
England

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by SKB »



^ Russia's new carrier?! :mrgreen:

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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)

Post Reply