Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Army & Security Forces
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

IMG_0616.JPG

IMG_0615.JPG

IMG_0614.JPG

IMG_0613.JPG
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





RussianLand Forces Thread

This is a discussion on RussianLand Forces Thread within the Army & Security Forces forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by Waylander The problem is you can't anymore. Not in all relevant fields. Russia has to live with ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 5 votes, 4.20 average.
Old February 5th, 2012   #31
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 12,455
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waylander View Post
The problem is you can't anymore.

Not in all relevant fields. Russia has to live with the fact that in some fields it's industry has lost know how or better hasn't progressed since the Sovjet Union.
This is only half of the problem. The other half is that even if Russia was completely up to date on everything, we still can't spend that much on defense. Buying abroad in some cases is just plain cheaper then developing a domestic alternative. Even the USSR sourced some military equipment abroad (L-39 jet trainers, and landing ships come to mind). The modern Russian MIC is fairly profitable and has experienced about a decade of uninterrupted growth, but it's nowhere near large and profitable enough for the MoD to ride on the coat-tails of export orders, which means the government has to invest money into the MIC to keep it running, and they are. This doesn't mean they can afford to do everything themselves.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 5th, 2012   #32
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
alexkvaskov's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 247
Threads:
Like posters have already mentioned, problems with the Russian MIC and armed forces stem from general problems in Russia.

Decrepit industry and the diminishing number of R&D cadres means that in any case Russia's incapable of producing the numbers necessary for superpower status.

The ongoing military reform emphasizes preparedness against local adversaries and conflicts.. would a Chinese assault against Siberia count as such?
alexkvaskov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 5th, 2012   #33
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 12,455
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexkvaskov View Post
Like posters have already mentioned, problems with the Russian MIC and armed forces stem from general problems in Russia.

Decrepit industry and the diminishing number of R&D cadres means that in any case Russia's incapable of producing the numbers necessary for superpower status.

The ongoing military reform emphasizes preparedness against local adversaries and conflicts.. would a Chinese assault against Siberia count as such?
The current reforms still leave Russia with a military capable of large scale conventional warfare. Note how the brigades are organized into armies, with appropriate army-level HQ and back-end support units? Russia still maintains a military capable of fighting a world war. Not against all of NATO put together, but certainly against a single major conventional opponent.

You're right and wrong at the same time. On one hand the MIC does suffer from the same problems. On the other hand even if Russia was in great economic shape there is no way one country can develop and produce all types of modern weapon systems independently. Even the US imports designs and equipment, albeit in very modest quantities. and the US spends hundreds of billions of dollars annually. Russian defense spending will not be that high ever (within the forseeable future). So no matter whether the problems will be solved or not, Russia will need to source some military equipment abroad.

There is also a corollary to what you say. Look at IAPO or KnAAPO. They don't suffer from most of the problems that the rest of Russia suffer from. In fact they even support local social infrastructure to some extent. In other words not only do they avoid the problems that Russia suffers in general, but they contribute positively to Russia.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 8th, 2012   #34
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
Klaus's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 202
Threads:
I think it is the right strategy to buy at least a part of the
equipment abroad. Otherwise there would be less sanctions
available against companies which don't fulfill their obligations.
If everything is bought just because it's indigenous hardware
the army would suffer from this in the end.
Klaus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 11th, 2012   #35
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Los Angeles CA
Posts: 148
Threads:
now when you guys say Russia has to go abroad for some of their military needs...

how much are we talking...? Like over 30% or under
Comrade69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 12th, 2012   #36
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 12,455
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade69 View Post
now when you guys say Russia has to go abroad for some of their military needs...

how much are we talking...? Like over 30% or under
Right now it's planned to be well under 10% of the state arms procurement program.

Interesting news, the planned Tornado-G (a Grad on a Kamaz chassis with new missiles, and new FCS) delivery of 36 systems has been postponed from last year to this year because state trials did not complete on time. They're planned to finish early this year. It'll be interesting to see whether they integrate them into a unified command system.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2012   #37
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
alexkvaskov's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 247
Threads:
New Russian MBT to come online by 2015

New Russian Tank to Appear in 2013 | Defense | RIA Novosti
alexkvaskov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2012   #38
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Waylander's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein
Posts: 4,569
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexkvaskov View Post
New Russian MBT to come online by 2015

New Russian Tank to Appear in 2013 | Defense | RIA Novosti
I believe it when I see it.
Not that there weren't such articles in the past...
Waylander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2012   #39
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 12,455
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waylander View Post
I believe it when I see it.
Not that there weren't such articles in the past...
This is referencing the Armata project. It's not really a new tank, more like a redesign of Object 195 to serve as a universal chassis, and with lower requirements to save money. It's entirely possible, though I don't know if they'll be able to lower the cost substantially. Economies of scale through mass production for SP arty, HAPC, HIFV, etc. can only go so far.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2012   #40
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Waylander's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein
Posts: 4,569
Threads:
I know it's about the Armata. Nevertheless I wait till I see it before I believe in them really introducing a new tank.

It's not like the Object 195 wasn't anounced alot, too.
Waylander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2012   #41
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 12,455
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waylander View Post
I know it's about the Armata. Nevertheless I wait till I see it before I believe in them really introducing a new tank.

It's not like the Object 195 wasn't anounced alot, too.
You mean you're not sure they will actually procure it? That certainly is a question.

However Object 195 was basically completed in iirc 2010, underwent trials, and was even shown in a closed presentation to members of the government. It's unofficial, but supposedly when they found out what the cost would be they decided against it.

It will be interesting to see since they have 3 major vehicle families they want to develop. Kurganets-25 is a new medium tracked platform, Bumerang is a new medium wheeled platform, and Armata a new heavy tracked platform. This would mean they're replacing all current specialized chassis including the MT-LB (about time), and the various custom chassis used for SAMs. They also have a lot of specialized command and control vehicles based on the BTR chassis, in some cases as old as the BTR-60. It's quite ambitious to put it mildly, but if they can pull it off it will be a huge improvement over the current zoo of multiple aging vehicles.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2012   #42
Defense Professional / Analyst
General
Waylander's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein
Posts: 4,569
Threads:
Jup, I am not questioning their ability to design the Armata but I am questioning if all these procurement plans really come to frution.

As you said it is really ambitious and one could argue that a new tank is less needed than other designs (like the mentioned medium wheeled platform).
Waylander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17th, 2012   #43
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 12,455
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waylander View Post
Jup, I am not questioning their ability to design the Armata but I am questioning if all these procurement plans really come to frution.

As you said it is really ambitious and one could argue that a new tank is less needed than other designs (like the mentioned medium wheeled platform).
I tend to agree. I think the T-90AM or MS whatever you want to call it, is suitable as a new heavy tracked platform. They could transplant the Msta-S onto the chassis, BREM-1 and MTU-72 are already compatible with it. The BMO-T can also be built on a T-90 chassis (heavy APC). And by mounting a combat module on it like the Bakcha-U, they can turn it into an IFV fairly easily. There's not much else they need.

As far as wheeled platforms go, they're definitely in need of a unifying update, but not as badly as tracked ones. BTR-80 and 82 have been procured by the hundreds in the last 6 years. They've phazed out most if not all BTR-70Ms, and even a large portion of older BTR-80s. The BTR-60s still left tend to be specialized vehicles, replacements for which simply haven't been designed. Even a number of BMP-1KSh have been replaced by BTR-80 based command vehicles.

Tracked platforms on the other hand are a bigger issue. They still operate BMP-1, 2, and are still procuring BMP-3s, including Khrizantema ATGM complexes based on the BMP-3. Most BMP-1s are not used for training purposes, while combat equipment is all 2 and 3, but it's still an issue. MT-LBs are used as APCs in a lot of units. Some units in South MD have even upgraded their MT-LBs with a new combat module (namely 33rd and 34th Motor-Rifles). Also most ATGM carriers are Shturm-S based on the MT-LB. Also command vehicles tend to use a modified MT-LB chassis. Finally there is a special tracked platform used for the Tunguska, another one for the Tor, and a third for the Buk SAMs. Granted they're related chassis designs, and share some commonality, but they share almost nothing with the BMP or MT-LB chassis. This gets even worse when you realize that there are units armed with BMP that have SAMs on the GM chassis (Tunguska and Tor), and ATGMs and command vehicles on the MT-LB chassis.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 21st, 2012   #44
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 12,455
Threads:
It appears that the Nona-SVK is still in production, with not only export orders but also domestics. A whole arty btln (18) were delivered to the Land Forces last year, along with a number of exports to Venezuela.

Given experiments with sat-nav, and guided munitions for the Nona-S used by the VDV, I wonder if these new-built Nona-SVKs have an automatic fire control system like the modernized 2S19s, and 2S3s that have been getting delivered lately. They're being delivered along side, and with similar purpose, the 2S34 Hosta which is a 120mm SP arty that supposedly can also be used to fire mortar rounds.

sergeantpro -
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 14th, 2012   #45
Super Moderator
General
Feanor's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 12,455
Threads:
The first batch of 57 Lynx Iveco LMVs has begun assembly at OAO Oboronservis facilities in Voronezh, with a localization of 10%. By 2014 it's planned to reach 50% localization. They're destined for South MD.

Денис Мокрушин - Наступая на мозоль

I really have to wonder what units will be the first to get them. Para-assault are a natural choice. Right now they're rolling around in un-armored jeeps.
Feanor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:29 AM.