Russian Army to get new weaponry 2006

[bescheid]

This would be a companian to that thread introduced by Kai of," Missil Defence in Poland". It is only designed to augment that of Kai.



MILTECH
Russian Army to get new weaponry in 2006

The Russian Army will also recieve a regiment of silo-based Topol-M ballistic missiles (pictured).
by Staff Writers
Moscow (RIA Novosti) May 19, 2006
The Russian Armed Forces will get a large procurement of new weaponry by the end of this year, a deputy defense minister said Thursday.
Colonel General Alexander Belousov said the Armed Forces would receive about 30 main battle tanks, 40 infantry fighting vehicles, more than 100 armored personnel carriers, modernized surface-to-air missiles, more than 10 combat helicopters and a regiment of silo-based Topol-M ballistic missiles.

The acquisitions will be made under a major modernization program highlighted in President Vladimir Putin's state of the nation address May 10 and in statements by a number of senior military officials.

"The modernization program for 2006 envisions the procurement of about 30 new T-90 tanks and modernization of more than 180 T-72 and T-80 tanks," Belousov said, adding that this meant older tanks would stay in service longer.

He said the army would receive more than 40 new BMP-3 infantry fighting vehicles (IFVs), 100 BTR-80 and BTR-90 armored personnel carriers (APCs), new BMD-2 and BMD-3 airborne IFVs and about 4,500 Kamaz and Ural trucks. More than 350 IFVs, 170 APCs, and 90 airborne IFVs will be modernized, he said.

Belousov also said 50 frontline aircraft would be modernized, including Su-24 Fencer tactical bombers, Su-25 Frogfoot attack aircraft, Su-27 Flanker and MiG-29 Fulcrum fighters. He added that 20 surface-to-air missile systems would be modernized and equipped with new missiles.

"We have ordered more than 100 new missiles for these systems," Belousov said. The Army will also get more than 10 new Mi-28 Havoc and Ka-50 Hokum attack helicopters, he added.

"The Strategic Missile Forces will put a regiment of silo-based Topol-M ballistic missiles on combat duty by the end of this year," Belousov said.

Charles

[pieter]

Charles,

The Russians have exellent weapons for sure, saw their armsshow and Putin stating that he
will increase the defense budget on the news. Even Americans prefer an AK47 in the
Iraqi dessert before their M16's, because those good old Russian riffle's are simple, and
never hesitate are block themselves like the M16.
I remember that after the fall of the Berlin wall the MIG 29 ( www.waffenhq.de/flugzeuge/mig-29.html )
was seen as a very good figher yet, some said even better than it's western competitors.
In my view Poland should buy Russian tanks and planes if they are proved to be equally good as the
American ones, so that they could save some money on defense.
The best thing is to watch to every segement of the armed forces and make the best deal for each part
of the equipment. The benefit is that Poland has had 40 years of experiance with the Russian material
during the Warsaw Pact years, and old military experts, secret service people, and people of the
ministry of defense check out the Russian arms carefully.
The weapon countries are the USA, Russia, Germany, France, Great-Britain, Israel, Chzech republik,
Sweden (Saab planes) and South-Africa.
When you are a free country you can pick the best equipment from everywhere.

Pieter

[pieter]

I love planes since I was a kid, and so like the F-16, Tomcat F14 ( www.studenten.net/customasp/axl/plane.asp?cat_id=0&ple_id=0&page=0 ), F15 Eagle ( www.warbirds.be/web/content.php?article.60 ), the SR71;
( ttp://www.xp-office.de/SR71/Seiten/blackbird1_jpg.htm ), Mirage F1; ( www.combataircraft.com/aircraft/fmiraf1.aspx ), the Jaguar GR1 ( www.simviation.com/gallery/fsdgalleryjag1.htm ), Saab JA 37 Viggen ( www.avrosys.nu/aircraft/Jakt/123JA37.htm ), the Kfir ( www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/aircraft/kfir/Kfir.html ),
the Tupolev Tu-160 Blackjack (the Russian answer to the B-1; www.avions-militaires.net/fiches/tu160.php )
and the X35 Joint Strike Fighter (JSF F-35) ( ).
As a boy I built many model planes from the second world (Zero, Mitchel bomber, Spitfire) war to the cold war models (Tomcat F14, F16 and the Space Shuttle). In our Belgian holiday house we could often watch the Belgian airforce excercise in our
view. Decades of history of fighting yets flew buy, and a few times Apache fighting helicopters hung in the air in front of
us training to stood still in one place for an hour or so. What a noise the machines made. I still rember the smell of
the Kerosine. The region I live in in the Netherlands is a training aria for the Dutch airforce and the Airborne divisions,
so there is a heave airtraffic here. Shinaooks, Apache's, Cobra's and F-16 and other militairy planes fly over quite often.

Pieter

[bescheid]

pieter

You are so funny! I am laughing with you, not at you yes how well do I agree with you on Russian designs and manufacture of affordable weapons. They are of good solid design and straightforward.

But, a big difference between Russian arsenal storage home use weapons, and export models. The export models are what is commonly known as, monkey models. Stripped of advanced electronics/targeting laser-computer generated aqusitioning equipment. But, they are still a good value for tight budgets and local policing actions.

Only as far as not being placed in action against US built M1 Abrams. Even as far as the last design of Leopard Panzer. It is how all the systems come together into an operating offensive machine. The machine must at all odds, have the ability not to just survive an engagement, it must at all odds, kill the opposing machine with out reservation and in all foreseeable conditions.

A panzer when placed in action is many weapons at once. It is first an advanced sword designed to kill the enemy, both efficiency against human targets, machine and aerial targets as well. Once placed out of action due to vital hits completely destroying the ability of mobility, it then becomes a fortress. It has a long range cannon, offensive and defensive machine guns. Self launching antipersonnel grenades and fuel to keep the electrics/communications in operation. Once the ability to defend/oppose against the enemy, then it becomes a shell of protection for the crew. Once that is no longer attainable, then it becomes an escape protective shell for crew departure. Once the crews have departed, then if the crews have done their work, it becomes a bomb trap for incoming enemy personnel.

You have mentioned of the Russian AK 47. That is an excellent design and weapon of choice for many ,many applications. Especially applications requiring reliability, relatively unskilled personnel, and brutal operating conditions. The down side is the relatively low powered round. By far though, intended designed range of use is short and medium distances.

I was initially trained on H&K G3 (NATO 762.51mm) and STG58 (NATO 762.51mm) I liked them both. The Heckler and Koch was brutal with weight and sweat. It always worked! The chamber is a fluted chamber and as such, self cleaning in operation. As it is recoil roller lock operated, the operating system is simple, very rugged with the operating bolt handle located forward on the left side of the slide tube. The effective range in use, is easily of 600 meters. The out side perimeter of use is 800+ meters. This would be with addition of stanag ,mount/scope. With open sights, 400+ meters.

The STG58, much close to similar. The difference is with gas operating piston (similar to SKS/AK47) The STG though, has an adjustable gas sleeve. As the action becomes dirty with heavy deposits, the gas sleeve is adjusted to contain more operating gas for operating the system. Plus, it is more cleaner then the recoil operating system of the H&K.

Now of course, these weapons have long been over taken by progression of advanced designs.

The primary advantage of Heckler and Koch, is they are all a system. In other words, the long rifles and hand weapons (pistols) are designed for the needs of the user. The G3 is easily convertible to a single fire use weapon very easily (auto fire is just out right nasty and heavy) to single auto load. The hand weapon, USP9 is easily convertible to several configurations.

The Russian designs, will not hold up to the capability of these designs. But, as you mentioned, Russian designs are very good whilst kept within their design perimeters.



You have mentioned of South Africa. I am not sure of for why at this moment. But, the Russian designs as you have mentioned, work for well for use by relatively untrained users. But, again, the SADF has gone to the R-4 to replace the older L1A1 and not sure if they still use for the local police battalions, the G3.

The application of personal weapons there (South Africa) is some what different, then say, European use. The climate is very hostile to weapon operating systems and ammunition must be kept clean of airborn dirt. The ranges are generally longer ranges and if excessive luberating oil is left in the weapon, the actions tend to collect dirt and what ever is out there. Once properly cleaned, the weapon must be dried of excess lubercants.


Charles

[george]

One question. If Russian military equipment is so good, then why did practically all of it get blasted out of sight during the 91 Iraq war and the latest Iraq war. ( Russian made equipment ). Their planes were so inferior that they wouldn't let them take off, because they new they had no chance and they didn't want them wasted.

[piwo]

george said:

One question. If Russian military equipment is so good, then why did practically all of it get blasted out of sight during the 91 Iraq war and the latest Iraq war. ( Russian made equipment ). Their planes were so inferior that they wouldn't let them take off, because they new they had no chance and they didn't want them wasted.

The soviet's made many excuses for the failures of their systems and weapons during GW1 (hey, get it, Gulf War 1, George W...LOL).. anyway, many excuses were made about inferior operators and such but the bottom line is, the Russian weapons, warning systems and missile defenses were no match and were easily defeated. The 4th largest army in the world, using entirely Russian weapons, and they went without so much as a fuss. If not for one "shot in the dark" scud missile hit on an army reservist barracks, they did virtually NOTHING...

Russian small arms are excellent, and the AK design is timeless. The problem with any nation buying from too many "different blocks" are the parts, and interchangeability with one's allies. That's why NATO and Warsaw block nations used standardized cartridges, so that one could reliably use others weapons and accessories.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: Poland should buy and do what's in her best interest, and not what's in the best interest of her region, neighbors, or desired allies. The soviets are prepared to cut off import of Polish food, and export of their fossil fuels to use as a weapon of force subservience to Poland and other neighbors. I don't see where buying Ruskie "seconds" will be in her best interest, but if she gets a good enough deal, well, take what you can get, but expect nothing else.

[pieter]

Poland should buy and do what's in her best interest, and not what's in the best interest of her region, neighbors, or desired allies. The soviets are prepared to cut off import of Polish food, and export of their fossil fuels to use as a weapon of force subservience to Poland and other neighbors. I don't see where buying Ruskie "seconds" will be in her best interest, but if she gets a good enough deal, well, take what you can get, but expect nothing else.

I agree with you Piwo, Poland has it's military experts, Defense specialists, and they
know best what Poland needs for it's own defense, it's partnership of the NATO
and for it's UN peacekeeping missions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon (Unifil).
I understand that they will use American tanks, Fighting yets, helicopters and
Missile systems if they are the best, and surely would buy Russian, Chzech, German
(Leopard 2), Austrian, or Israeli (Anti-Tank Guided Missile (ATGM) systems) weapons if they are better. Poland stil has a lot of Sovjet arms, next to it's American and German equipment. Ofcourse there is also a Polish arm industry, helicopters (PZL W-3 Sokol), rifles (Tantal 5.45mm assault rifle a Polish-produced AKS-74U) and
amunition. Poland has a rich national and international history, and is taken very seriously by foreign governments around the world.

See also: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Army
and, www.wojsko-polskie.pl/wortal/index.php
www.wojsko.net/

[bescheid]

Thought perhaps this may be of interest of Tantal wz.88.

www.pmulcahy.com/assault_rifles/polish_assault_rifles.htm

tantal.kalashnikov.guns.ru/

The above is an end user inventory of product availability. This is not an arms source for sales. The intent is for educational value of the Kalashnikov product line for information purposes only.

The following url, is also for educational/information purposes. It is in the universal language of English, so knowledge of German is not needed. The factory indicated, is the Heckler&Koch manufacturing firm located at the Oberndorf am Necker plant Germany (Heckler & Koch GmbH Postfach 1329 78722 Oberndorf/N. Deutschland).

The product line projekted is rather aged, as the rifle line up in manufacture is the G3.

The end users of these products are of primarily military and police agencies world wide. The products are of expected quality as per the price of being rather on the high end. In this relationship, very seldom are these high end products being of choice to poorer nations and/or terrorist organizations to be used as throw away weapons.

In return, the end user will have in return, not just a weapon, but, a weapons system. By design, these weapons have several configurations by design, to fit the needs of the end user. These are first line weapon designs and first choice of many international military/police organizations. For the German armed forces are the prime end users of these products.

www.hkpro.com/factory.htm

www.heckler-koch.de/flashintro.html

Charles

[Eric]

It is interesting to note that the NATO/Russia border is actually closer than you think, especially when you consider that NATO is a military alliance. The militaries of Russia and Belarus are technically united, and the Kremlin ultimately has the final say in the Belarussian military, even though Lukashenko tries to deny it, because it is Russia that pays the bills for Belarus to maintain its military.

[pieter]

ericdn said:

It is interesting to note that the NATO/Russia border is actually closer than you think, especially when you consider that NATO is a military alliance. The militaries of Russia and Belarus are technically united, and the Kremlin ultimately has the final say in the Belarussian military, even though Lukashenko tries to deny it, because it is Russia that pays the bills for Belarus to maintain its military.

I agree on this with ya, Eric, it is nice to hear from you again.
Can you tell me more about the present Red army, Russian Air Force
and the Russian marine. Is it true that Putin wants to combine the
best elements of the former Sovjet system with the best elements
of the Tsarist regime before 1917?

Is there anything left of the CIS structure, or are the former Sovjet republics
totally separated. The Russian minorities have a hard time in the Caucacian
Republics. I heard that at a German literature and poetry night in Arnhem,
where a Dutch fellow was who had been working in Kazachstan, for a
Western company there. He said that former Sovjet structures were in tact
there, that in fact the dictator was in fact a former Communist party chief,
but that the Russians were disciminated by the Kazachs, and leaving.
I can't check if he is right ofcourse. Maybe you heard something about that?
Another stronge thing he mentioned, was that in the chain of Command
of the Sovjet system, the Russians were on top, and that Sovjet Germans
(the so called VolksDeutsche), had a special role in the second place as
administrators, because the Sovjets found them capable people.
Have you ever heard something about that in the Russian federation
(St.Petersburg)? I have alwyas had an interest in Russia, because my
Polish grandfather spoke Russian, wrote a lot in his memoires about his
travelling in the Caucacus during the Russian civil war, where he was after
the first world war, when he was an officer in the Tsarist army.
He studied in Kiev in the Tsarist period and was in St. Peterburg during
the Russian revolution. His life was saved by Russians who removed
his Officers signs from his uniform very bruskly.

Pieter

[pieter]

www.rfforces.net/

[Eric]

pieter said:

Can you tell me more about the present Red army, Russian Air Force
and the Russian marine. Is it true that Putin wants to combine the
best elements of the former Sovjet system with the best elements
of the Tsarist regime before 1917?

Is there anything left of the CIS structure, or are the former Sovjet republics
totally separated. The Russian minorities have a hard time in the Caucacian
Republics. I heard that at a German literature and poetry night in Arnhem,
where a Dutch fellow was who had been working in Kazachstan, for a
Western company there. He said that former Sovjet structures were in tact
there, that in fact the dictator was in fact a former Communist party chief,
but that the Russians were disciminated by the Kazachs, and leaving.
I can't check if he is right ofcourse.
Another stronge thing he mentioned, was that in the chain of Command
of the Sovjet system, the Russians were on top, and that Sovjet Germans
(the so called VolksDeutsche), had a special role in the second place as
administrators, because the Sovjets found them capable people.
Have you ever heard something about that in the Russian federation
(St.Petersburg)?

The Red Army ceased to exist at the end of WWII. Since then, it was just called the Soviet Army, and since 1991, each republic has had its own independent military. Almost all the republics simply kept the military hardware they inherited from the Soviet Union. The Baltics, for some strange reason, sent almost everything back, so they were left with a very small armed forces after independence. Lithuania actually regrets sending all of its fighter planes to Russia in the early 1990s, because now they have no air force. In the USSR, Lithuanians were often the most accomplished fliers, and in fact, the person chosen to fly the first manned flight of the "Buran" space shuttle (which actually never happened) was Lithuanian.

Today, the militaries of Russia and Belarus are at least on paper linked to each other, and Moscow pays most of Minsk's bills. Tajikistan also relies extremely heavily on the Russian military, and Central Asia is looking more and more into Russian assistance.

Transdniester exists as a semi-autonomous republic only because the Russian army is looking after the interests of those living there. Abkhazia and South Ossetia also want Russian military assistance, but Georgia, of course, is against this. Ukraine wants to kick the Russian military out of Crimea, even though there are contracts between the two countries, and almost the whole population of Crimea is Russian. (Crimea belonged to Russia until the 1950s.)

I don't know what kind of "combination" Putin is thinking of for the Russian army, but several changes are taking place. By the end of the decade, Russia is supposed to stop using conscription, and create an entirely volunteer-army, like the United States has. There are already volunteer-only groups in the army, and they are treated better than the conscripts - better living conditions, etc., in an attempt to prepare people to voluntarily join. Whether it will work, especially after Putin ends his term, heaven knows. The upper elite of the military is totally against ending conscription, so it will be a challenge.

The CIS was never very strong, but most of the members of the CIS (excluding Moldavia, Ukraine, Georgia, and I think either Armenia and/or Azerbaijan) have joined a new organization just at the end of last year, which is already giving better trading and support markets for all the members.

Relations between Russia and Ukraine, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldavia, Turkmenistan, and Georgia continue to get worse. With all the other republics, though, relations with Russia are getting much better.

In your list of who was "important" in the Soviet government, you forgot to mention Jews. People of Jewish ancestry held a disproportionately large share of the power in the Soviet government.

[pieter]

Eric,

Thank you for your long, honest and interesting reply.
Yes, I forget to mention the jews, because they were not in my mind when I wrote the text.
But you are right, but in a strange way the Jewish position in the Sovjet Union was ambivallent.
Communist atheist jews had it easier than their religious brethern, and other non communists
like the Refusniks, www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/Human_Rights/refuseniks.html