Russian Armed Forces

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
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 »

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: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
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

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 »

BlueD954 wrote:Russia conducted an anti-satellite test and the West is scared.

:mrgreen:

BlueD954
Member
Posts: 233
Joined: 02 Oct 2020, 05:11
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
Singapore

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by BlueD954 »

SKB wrote:
BlueD954 wrote:Russia conducted an anti-satellite test and the West is scared.

:mrgreen:
Well in that fiction, it was a non-state actor capturing state-launched capsules.

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 »

Russia seems to be deploying its Peresvit mobile laser system at mobile ballistic missile sites with the intention or ability to blind satellites monitoring such sites, this would allow the dispersal of such mobile missile carriers undetected, to pre-launch positions
https://www.thespacereview.com/article/3967/1

J. Tattersall
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by J. Tattersall »

seaspear wrote:Russia seems to be deploying its Peresvit mobile laser system at mobile ballistic missile sites with the intention or ability to blind satellites monitoring such sites, this would allow the dispersal of such mobile missile carriers undetected, to pre-launch positions
https://www.thespacereview.com/article/3967/1
Only thing of be wary of its that Russia, like the USSR before it, practices strategic deception. That's just as much about exaggerating its true capabilities as it is about keeping things secret. Reacting to a fictitious, or over-egged, capability will draw valuable resources away from other areas our defences. Russia is well aware of this, it is the supreme deceiver.

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 »

I would add this article suggests that Russia may certainly have the capability of acting against low orbital satellites with mobile laser based vehicles
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org ... g-globally

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 »

The treaty that covers the technical ability to monitor via satellite the 2010 new strategic arms reduction treaty expires in February next year
https://spacenews.com/op-ed-u-s-satelli ... ed-lasers/ certainly America China India and France have committed resources to either design or deployment of such devices

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 »

Not the best commentary but an interesting video of Russian fast jets operating in Syria.

The commentary is heavily laced with propaganda and some is very hard to believe but there are a few interesting nuggets.

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 »

Lord Jim wrote:heavily laced with propaganda
Zvesda Network (like our Forces TV) 'broadcasting' like VOA in the OpFor language (English,as opposed to Russian) about how their A-10s call the shots... i.e. Russia calls the shots, anyway they like :)

Two minutes in, yes v interesting.
- there was a vid of the same a/c in the Georgia war
- at the time the pilot had to hang a/ his own(?) Garmin GPS in front of him for his more detailed navigation of the land features below him
... things must have progressed since then
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 now officially has the largest model ship fleet in the world. :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 »

PLAN did much better in a Shanghai naval show where they exhibited models of 'all' their aircraft carriers, side by side. Six of them
- 5 and 6 looked much like :) the ones the Americans are getting into water
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
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 3196
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
Has liked: 5 times
Been liked: 25 times
France

Re: Russian Armed Forces

Post by Tempest414 »

Putting aside they will never build it I do like the lay out might work well for a 220 meter by 40 meter LHD

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 819
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 25 times
United Kingdom

Future Russian Combat Aircraft Developments

Post by Defiance »

https://www.defensenews.com/air/2021/01 ... t-project/
MOSCOW — Rostec announced this week it has begun developing the MiG-41, a fifth-generation fighter jet set to replace Russia’s MiG-31 jets currently in service. However, amid a number of other ongoing military aerospace projects, experts are questioning whether industry has the resources to produce the aircraft by its deadline of 2030.

...

According to Russian news reports, the MiG-41 will be equipped with stealth technology, reach a speed of Mach 4-4.3, carry anti-satellite missiles, and be able to perform tasks in Arctic and near-space environments.

...

Douglas Barrie, who focuses military aerospace for the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said Russia’s aerospace sector is already committed to numerous projects, including further developing the Su-75, upgrading the Su-34, and modernizing various bombers such as the Tu-160 Blackjack, Tu-22M Backfire and Tu-95.

“Some would argue that the sector has already more than enough to try to manage without the additional or a project potentially as complex as a new heavy interceptor, or indeed whether there would be realistic levels of funding for a program,” he said.

He added that both China and India will likely want to cooperate on the MiG-41. The latter left a joint project to develop a fifth-generation fighter aircraft based on the Su-57 in 2018.

But Barrie questioned the export potential of the MiG-41, saying the number of similar jets being built elsewhere is rapidly growing.

“Even if such an aircraft were eventually to be developed, it would — were it to meet the same role as the MiG-31BM Foxhound C — have a very limited export appeal.”
Russia has a lot of fingers in a lot of pies and it doesn't look good for the future. The VKS is reportedly very favoured towards the Su-family and the high/low mix of Su-27/MiG-29 families is in decline as the MiG-35 procurement is very lacklustre and looks more like an effort to prop up MiG.

Su-57 rollout is slower than planned and it remains to be seen if the 76-strong Su-57 buy will actually be delivered. This has resulted in the procurement of more Su-35S/Su-30SM2 and modernisation efforts across a fighter force that is becoming increasingly Flanker-heavy with all of the associated acquisition and sustainment costs. A prime example of this is the replacement of the relatively cheap Su-25/Su-24 attack fleets with the Su-34 and the decline of the MiG-29 numbers in the VKS.

We are seeing a similar effort with PAK-DA (next gen bomber) reportedly to begin flying in 2023. This very expensive effort is behind and likely struggling for funding hence why we are seeing the modernisation efforts progressing resulting in the Tu-160M modernisation and the remanufacture of brand spanking new Tu-160M2.

What are the chances that PAK-DP (or MiG-41) succeeds? Almost nil. If the rollout of key components of their fighter force and strategic nuclear forces are falling behind what chances does an incredibly niche, high-supersonic interceptor have? The article does discuss China/India as potential exports and maybe that may emerge, but likely not because they want the aircraft actually in service. It's much more likely they would partner for the industrial gains they receive. But then again as India/FGFA demonstrates there's no guarantees that you get access to the forbidden fruits in the manner you desire.

The Russian economy is in the crapper and they're going to have to make a call, sooner or later, on what projects to quit. They are in the same position as the West regarding the need to replace signifiant portions of their combat air fleet as it gets older and less efficient to operate. The US has been chastised to a degree by even looking at the option to buy additional F-16 but for the Russian Air Force, remanufacturing of existing aircraft with upgraded systems may end up being their only option in the medium term.

(Thread created as I find this such an interesting topic and it may be drowned out in the wider Russia thread - a combat aircraft discussion threat I thought could be a valuable one)

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 2820
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Has liked: 15 times
Been liked: 37 times
United Kingdom

Re: Future Russian Combat Aircraft Developments

Post by SW1 »

I would suspect there biggest issues will be around power plant development and manufacture which is probably driving them toward a larger platform to achieve their aircraft requirements. They have quite advanced machine shops particularly for titanium thanks to quite a lot of investment form Boeing in the area around Yekaterinburg

There will also be a sort of gamesmanship with various western powers announcing new aircraft programs and they need to be seen to be keeping up. But what is interesting that like the US and it’s decision to keep things like the B52 going the ability to have a large relatively simply aircraft able to launch large numbers of stand-off missiles or unmanned systems, along with the ability to swap sensor payloads is becoming more important now the full cost and complexities of going down the all low observable route are being fully realised.

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

Re: Future Russian Combat Aircraft Developments

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Defiance wrote:the MiG-35 procurement is very lacklustre and looks more like an effort to prop up MiG.
and keep some decent flying hours going, without wearing out their hi-end fighter fleet.
Defiance wrote:remains to be seen if the 76-strong Su-57 buy will actually be delivered.
I thought that was conditional on the new engine emerging... has it?
Defiance wrote:they're going to have to make a call, sooner or later, on what projects to quit
Yeah, the AF is seen as a jewel in the crown of a 'superpower' and the first cuts will come elsewhere - like the surface fleet has already been shrinking and there are no more 'rust buckets' from the Soviet days to refurb.

In isolation, the anti-satellite missiles is an interesting mention
... we will offer a lot of low-orbit targets, I hear
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
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1709
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 5 times
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: Future Russian Combat Aircraft Developments

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

Defiance wrote:Snip
Merging this with the Russian Armed Forces topic.

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 »

Ohh; back to earth.

Officially the fairly recently unified internal security force of of 400k costs only 10% of the total defence outlays. That is unlikely to be true. If strategic forces consume about 30%, then 60% is left to pay for a nearly mln man & fairly hi-tech forces (though a qrtr of that manpower is accounted for by "zero wage" conscripts).

Anyway, the end of the road when Russia, seeing itself as an energy superpower, could fund all the trappings of a global power and at the same time build palaces like some of the ‘petrostates’ is nigh - simply because it has a relatively large (and aged) population.
- Whereas Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Norway, all wealthy countries with
populations of five million or less, have annual net exports of hydrocarbons of 40 to
60 tonnes (oil equivalent) per capita,
- in Russia that same total is barely three tonnes per capita.

Anyway, lots of blue lights and fairly indiscriminate violence are showing on the vast screens of the Presidential situation center (separate from the more widely publicised MoD center). I would think that rather than inviting leading folks from Belorus to see and learn how "it is done properly", there is true worry about the stability out to the elections due for the summer, and how the legitimacy of the government can be rescued in the runup to them
- part of the answer is of course that the national TV does not show the same 'programming' that is on our screens - or on those of the situation centre, over there
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)

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 »

Putin and his Dons learnt the lesson well from the fall of Communism in the late 1990s. They now use what was seen a corner stones of democracy against those who disagree with anything, using the Media, court system, Police and internal security forces and paramilitary groups that in reality equate to the Hitler Youth organisation in 1930s German. Until a part(s) of the system breaks away and sides with the opposition things will never change in Russia.

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 »

Lord Jim wrote: court system, Police and internal security forces
That unified security force, often referred to as national guard, was even given a name reminiscent of the 'good' old NKVD that ran Stalin's killing machine and watched the borders so that no one could escape.

Not many can cut through the maze and secrecy in Russian budget numbers, so I have to go back to 2007 when Julian Cooper (an emeritus professor) in his paper about the funding for the power agencies of Russia separated them into four categories: security services, public order agencies, provision for emergencies, and the armed forces of the Ministry of Defence.
- Little attention was devoted to the latter as their funding has been analysed elsewhere, so its inclusion was more of a benchmark for the other main categories

Putin's rise and power consolidation goes back to the second Cheznya war (as the first one had been a public humiliation of both Russian politics and the regular army)
- the second one was won by creating an army within the army, e.g. through massive funding and expansion of OMON (interior ministry troops, all full time, as opposed to the army that was a run-down cadre, stuffed with conscripts to make it look big). OMON and the border guard are the nucleus of the new national guard. The former previously numbered only 11 000 and I don't have numbers for the border guard

Before we fast forward to today, we need to consider the modernisation and professonalisation of the armed forces (a benchmark for the internal security spending) but also the ' more objective' head count numbers (without the FSB, GRU and all the likes that at the end of the Soviet rule counted for hundreds of thousands and for which there - now - are not even head count numbers).Lets start with the 2007 budget breakdown where the armed forces only accounted for 37% of the state security spending. That 37% in 2007 may have gone up to, say a round 50% in the rebuild stage of the armed forces, but has been a pretty steady 3 to 4% GNP share since reaching its peak. The Rand Corporation has used inflation-adjusted dollars, and on that measure the budget of the peak year,2013, stood at $66.1 billion, and was the fourth largest in the world. They may have missed the (since then introduced) federal budget item for "international relations" - read Ukraine and Syria, but so what: everybody else has, too, found that foreign wars are expensive and a Treasury Contingency account thus needs to be drawn on ;) .

To get the rest of the total of 100%, as per above, the power agencies of Russia divide into four categories: security services, public order agencies, provision for emergencies, and (then, as the fourth) the armed forces of the Ministry of Defence.

Back to the topic & today:
Spending on internal security, though well camouflaged, matches that on external security (the forces under the MoD) and the two together account for c. 7% of the GDP
- considering the sensitivity of the federal income to the takings from energy exports, the sustainability at that level can be questioned
- in the short term, budgets can be brought towards a balance by 'devaluing' the rouble so that the same exports (or even a lesser quantity) bring in more 'account' roubles as spending is mainly in domestic roubles
- doing such tricks for longer means that all real money in Russia has to be excavated from under the 'soil' and only the few (and the state apparatus keeping them in power) have access to that wealth. The others have plentiful access to the wrong end of the baton
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 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote: asking if the Belorus crisis is a local one or a geopolitical one translates to what military/ defence dimensions does it have
Still an open question. Belarus would seem to have the third lowest incidence of Covid in Europe. Is this because
A. the borders (other than the one with Russia) are hermetically sealed, or
B. the stats have been manipulated (don't even exist in reality?)?

Regardless, the two countries have moved a tad closer in their trajectories as both Yuliya Navalnaya ja Svjatlana Tsihanouskaja (the wives of opposition leaders) have moved abroad. As any other key nodes (people) are either thrown in prison, or put under house arrest (with comms cut).
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 »

Since giving Russian intelligence a 'scoop' while talking on the phone to the US emissary (or was it ambassador) to Ukraine, Victoria Nuland (you know, when asked about Europe's role in cooling that conflict, her view was e@f Europe) is back as the Undersecretary for Political Affairs - if the nomination gets confirmed.

What's changed since?
1. Ukraine was a tougher than expected nut to crack; so we have a frozen conflict
2. Russia has told Europe the same, perhaps not in exactly the same words. The EU High Representative put it like this:

"deep concerns over the perspectives of development of Russian society and Russia’s geostrategic choices. My meeting with Minister Lavrov and the messages sent by Russian authorities during this visit confirmed that Europe and Russia are drifting apart.”

Put this together :?: with the fact that:
in recent days work has restarted on the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline from Russia to Germany, a project the United States and some European governments have long opposed for fear that it would undermine energy security in Europe and give Russian President Vladimir Putin new opportunities to use gas as a tool of political coercion.

and it seems that policy making and practical actions with respect to Russia are far from coordinated - and thus will do nothing to temper Putin's instinct to tamper with those neighbours' affairs who exhibit any independent thinking
... unless, of course, they happen to be in NATO. Then the actions are more covert and more deniable. Not that there wouldn't be any.
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