SDF equipment if you worked for Rosoboronexport

hi garry whats the general view of the upgraded T-72 in terms to western modern systems, as some people have on other forums that its still an old tank and that modern western stuff would still easily destroy them,

The use of the term 'easily' shows ignorance. Several models of T-72 had very heavy armour... they weren't called super dolly partons for nothing.

Adding new ERA along will likely make them invulnerable to most western main gun ammo... does someone still think they are easy to defeat?

The fact of the matter is that the purpose of the upgrade is largely to deal with communication and control as well as the ability to use new longer ammo and the addition of new night and all weather optics.

With these upgrades the only advantage the T-80s had was power to weight ratio, which is pretty good anyway on the T-72s because they are not very heavy.

I argued the fact it was cheaper to upgrade T-72's than to buy newer tanks, and that the upgrades brought them upto a decent standard of a modern tank capability.

With new battle management hardware and software the upgraded vehicles can now practise net centric operations and with the new thermals they will be able to see through smoke and dust and train at night and in bad weather.

Within the next ten years they will move to a next generation of system that will include tanks with the armour of a BMP or less, but also the armata MBT with much better armour.

its makes sense to buy a fully upgraded T-72 than a T-90, of course a T-90 is better but we all cant have the best equipment when a budget has to be considered.

A difficult question.

The upgraded T-90 would certainly be more expensive, but it would also be better protected so even with a limited budget I would still save up for a fleet of all T-90s unless you want thousands of tanks.

Certainly a mixed fleet of upgraded T-72s and T-90s might make sense in the short term... perhaps take some T-80s with a Black Eagle upgrade to begin with and then when they are worn out buy some T-90s (by then they will be cheaper and likely more capable).
(and got the thread back on topic).

A way to invest in the Ukraine would be to get the Russians to apply their black eagle autoloader upgrade to their T-80s and then put a new Ukrainian diesel engine in them to reduce operational costs.

A change of calibre to 120mm would keep NATO compatibility too.

Why not buy from the Ukrainians a few T-84 yatagan tanks? They have NATO compatible 120mm guns that are longer and I doubt with their current economic situation Kharkov would sell them for a very high price.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:Why not buy from the Ukrainians a few T-84 yatagan tanks? They have NATO compatible 120mm guns that are longer and I doubt with their current economic situation Kharkov would sell them for a very high price.

buying from Ukraine is also a good idea and the t-84 are decent tanks and like u said will no doubt be cheap.

I am visiting Ukraine in May, going with a few friends, one of them has a friend in the chernobyl ministry so were getting a tour of chernobyl (ive already been once already) but this time getting to see things tourists dont get to see, we are also staying in the zone at the ministry for 3 nights (something tourists cant do) ive also arrange some weapons to shoot (as i do in all my holidays) list of russian weapons i will be firing are: AK-47, Mosin Nagant revolver and rifle, Dragunov, and Ukrainian Fort pistol, and a few other weapons from various countries. Unable to do RPG shooting with the Ukrainian army due the current situation

Wouldn't they just get Challangers from the UK?

Or some other used Euro tank, forget about Ukraine lol.

buying from Ukraine is also a good idea and the t-84 are decent tanks and like u said will no doubt be cheap.

If you want quality you wont be getting it legally if it is cheap... if you could then the Ukrainian Army would have them and they don't because they are not cheap.

If Scotland were to buy a large batch of several thousand they might take the loss of selling a dozen cheap to seal the deal but the rest will not be cheap and they will try to make as much money as they can... because no one else seems to be buying...

Challenger 2 have rifled gun and with that special ammo, so if Scots want to be in NATO standard with 120 mm gun, but independent, it would be better to go with Leclerc or Leopard 2, because they are fully French or fully German without foreign parts in it. But they are expensive. But whatever Scotland buy from the West will be used, because in the West no new tanks were produced for more than a decade. From Russia they could buy new T-90 or wait for Armata, if they will be available with 120 mm NATO standard gun, but I doubt T-80 could be a good idea, because spare parts will be dependent on Ukraine.

TR1 wrote:Wouldn't they just get Challangers from the UK?

Or some other used Euro tank, forget about Ukraine lol.

Why do you always hate on the Kharkov designs?

TR1 wrote:Wouldn't they just get Challangers from the UK?

Or some other used Euro tank, forget about Ukraine lol.

well you would think that Scotland would get its share of the UK's challenger 2, but its can't be certain that the rest of the UK might say no or fallout over who gets what, and the Chobham armour is a state secret and they may make it awkward for them to have it, so it may be given a money settlement instead, which means they will have to look for tanks to purchase, and a newly independent country may want to try and save some money and go for something alittle cheaper than Leopard 2 any other euro tank. Upgraded T-72's would maybe be better for a defence force.

KomissarBojanchev wrote:

TR1 wrote:Wouldn't they just get Challangers from the UK?

Or some other used Euro tank, forget about Ukraine lol.

Why do you always hate on the Kharkov designs?

Who said I hate on Kharkov designs?

The fact remains:

1.) They can barely build tanks today due to the unfortunate circumstances they found themselves in post 1991
2.) The Yagatan does not confirm to modern standards without necessary modification: its not even a serial tank, kind of like T-90MS.
3.) You seriously think if Scotland was looking for tanks they would look @ Ukraine? Get real.

If Scotland got independence and a messy divorce happened and Scotland was left with a blank canvas for its military what it's needs be in terms of equipment and numbers covering air force, air defence, army, navy. (Of course this unlikely to happen blank canvas I mean not independence

d_taddei2 wrote:If Scotland got independence and a messy divorce happened and Scotland was left with a blank canvas for its military what it's needs be in terms of equipment and numbers covering air force, air defence, army, navy. (Of course this unlikely to happen blank canvas I mean not independence

A few fishery protection ships and aircraft plus a regiment of soldiers for the Edinburgh Tattoo should sort it.

Well I would really not look to the Ukraine for anything at the moment... the second the cheque cleared everyone involved at their end might disappear in a flash and you end up with the 3 prototypes they only ever had... if that.

Do you need tanks?

Not trying to be a smartass here, but in New Zealand we decided that tanks were not worth the cost of moving/transporting, so we pretty much ditched them.


We have LAVIIIs which have pretty good armament but we mostly use them for peace keeping duties... we really only get involved in peace keeping duties and demining duties these days.

Of course if I was in charge then some sort of BTR-82A modification for most vehicles plus a sprinkling of vehicles with a bit more HE fire power... like a BTR-82 with a BMP-3M turret with 100mm rifled gun support to beef up the fire power without having to use expensive guided weapons... a 100mm HE round out to 7km range would be a potent feature and save what would otherwise be likely an ATGM shot, which would be much more expensive... and not necessarily more effective.

d_taddei2 wrote:If Scotland got independence and a messy divorce happened and Scotland was left with a blank canvas for its military what it's needs be in terms of equipment and numbers covering air force, air defence, army, navy. (Of course this unlikely to happen blank canvas I mean not independence

Well if it's Soviet/Russian equipment then it'll have to be...

Fixed-wing and rotary-wing aviation:

- Yak-130 for air-policing/light-interdiction (new)
- Yak-152 for pilot training (new)
- Mi-35 for CAS (refurbished or new)
- Mi-17 for medium transport/utility (refurbished)
- Ka-226 for light transport/utility & as ship helicopters (new)
- Il-114 for maritime patrol/SIGINT/ASW/S&R (new)
- An-74 for light cargo & personnel transport (refurbished)

Air-defence

- Pechora-2M for medium-range air-defence (modernized from old stocks)
- Sosna-R for army short-range air-defence (new)
- Igla-S for MANPADs (2nd hand)
- Zu-23M1 on MT-LB chassis for AAA and tracked fire-support (modernized from old stocks)

Small arms

- Ratnik infantry kits (new)
- PL-15 for officer's side arms (new)
- A-545 for infantry assault rifles (new)
- PKM for squad machine-guns (2nd hand)
- Dragunov SVU for squad marksman rifles (new)
- PP-2000 for backup vehicle crew guns (new)
- NSV for HMGs (2nd hand)
- AGS-30 for company/platoon grenade-launchers (2nd hand)
- Orsis T-5000 for sniper rifles (new)
- KSVK 12.7 for anti-material rifles (new)
- RPG-32 for grenade launchers (new)
- RPO-A Shmel for infantry flamethrowers (2nd hand)
- Metis-M for ATGMs (2nd hand)

Artillery

- 2S34 Hosta for tracked 120mm howitzer support (modernized from old stocks)
- 2S24 for tracked 82mm mortar support (new on top of old stocks)
- 2S23 Nona for wheeled 120mm mortar support (new on top of old stocks)

Armoured vehicles

- T-72B3 for MBTs (modernized from old stocks)
- MT-LBM with varying turrets for tracked APCs and light IFV duty (modernized from old stocks)
- BTR-80A for wheeled APCs (modernized from old stocks)
- BRDM-2M for recon vehicles (modernized from old stocks)
- MAZ turret (http://muromteplovoz.ru/product/mil_cs_ma3.php) on top of BTR-80 and MT-LB chassis for ATGM vehicles (new on top of old stocks)
- UDZM for tracked engineering vehicles (modernized from old stocks)
- BREM-K for wheeled engineering vehicles (modernized from old stocks)

I think this list of equipment gives a nice balance between capability for a country the size of Scotland and its likely limited military budget. While also balancing between modern equipment and equipment that's so old as to be hard to maintain and procure in reasonable condition at this point.
Another thing is to try and unify platforms whenever possible. So Mi-17 and Mi-35. MTLB, BTR-80 and Ka-226 chassis for a range of uses. And so on.

A lot of the specific Russian modernizations of Soviet models I've listed can easily be substituted for Polish/Romanian/Serbian/Slovenian/Czech/Slovak/Belorussian/Ukrainian equivalents; in order to save more money. Just be on the look-out for those NATO standards that won't play nice with the rest of your logistics.

I'll make a follow up post about naval, EW, coast guard, border guards and other equipment some time later.

The gist of it is that Scotland will have about 2 mechanized infantry brigades (1 wheeled and 1 tracked) & a seperate tank brigade. These will all have ATGM vehicles, engineering vehicles, artillery vehicles, etc... on the march with them (as well as a couple companies of tanks for the tracked brigade) so it is like a proper 80s Soviet motor-rifles force; albeit small - it's self-sufficient and can pack a walloping. No towed artillery either - everything is self-propelled.

The air-force is geared towards supporting the army, with an emphasis on CAS and transportation. The Yak-130s can patrol the airspace but there isn't much they can do against Britain's far superior fighter aviation; this task is left more to Scotland's ground-based air defence network which consists of medium-range SAMs for coverage of the airspace, and mobile air defence that moves with its army.

Infantry equipment is the most modern compared to anything else. Firstly because it's the cheapest to make modern. Secondly because that gear will come in handy in case it comes down to partisan warfare; whereas all the vehicles and so on would have been destroyed by then.

GarryB wrote:Well I would really not look to the Ukraine for anything at the moment... the second the cheque cleared everyone involved at their end might disappear in a flash and you end up with the 3 prototypes they only ever had... if that.

Do you need tanks?

Not trying to be a smartass here, but in New Zealand we decided that tanks were not worth the cost of moving/transporting, so we pretty much ditched them.


We have LAVIIIs which have pretty good armament but we mostly use them for peace keeping duties... we really only get involved in peace keeping duties and demining duties these days.

Of course if I was in charge then some sort of BTR-82A modification for most vehicles plus a sprinkling of vehicles with a bit more HE fire power... like a BTR-82 with a BMP-3M turret with 100mm rifled gun support to beef up the fire power without having to use expensive guided weapons... a 100mm HE round out to 7km range would be a potent feature and save what would otherwise be likely an ATGM shot, which would be much more expensive... and not necessarily more effective.

New Zealand doesn't have the British for a perspective neighbour

flamming_python wrote:

Fixed-wing and rotary-wing aviation:

- Yak-130 for air-policing/light-interdiction (new)
- Yak-152 for pilot training (new)
- Mi-35 for CAS (refurbished or new)
- Mi-17 for medium transport/utility (refurbished)
- Ka-226 for light transport/utility & as ship helicopters (new)
- Il-114 for maritime patrol/SIGINT/ASW/S&R (new)
- An-74 for light cargo & personnel transport (refurbished)

Air-defence

- Pechora-2M for medium-range air-defence (modernized from old stocks)
- Sosna-R for army short-range air-defence (new)
- Igla-S for MANPADs (2nd hand)
- Zu-23M1 on MT-LB chassis for AAA and tracked fire-support (modernized from old stocks)

Small arms

- Ratnik infantry kits (new)
- PL-15 for officer's side arms (new)
- A-545 for infantry assault rifles (new)
- PKM for squad machine-guns (2nd hand)
- Dragunov SVU for squad marksman rifles (new)
- PP-2000 for backup vehicle crew guns (new)
- NSV for HMGs (2nd hand)
- AGS-30 for company/platoon grenade-launchers (2nd hand)
- Orsis T-5000 for sniper rifles (new)
- KSVK 12.7 for anti-material rifles (new)
- RPG-32 for grenade launchers (new)
- RPO-A Shmel for infantry flamethrowers (2nd hand)
- Metis-M for ATGMs (2nd hand)

Artillery

- 2S34 Hosta for tracked 120mm howitzer support (modernized from old stocks)
- 2S24 for tracked 82mm mortar support (new on top of old stocks)
- 2S23 Nona for wheeled 120mm mortar support (new on top of old stocks)

Armoured vehicles

- T-72B3 for MBTs (modernized from old stocks)
- MT-LBM with varying turrets for tracked APCs and light IFV duty (modernized from old stocks)
- BTR-80A for wheeled APCs (modernized from old stocks)
- BRDM-2M for recon vehicles (modernized from old stocks)
- MAZ turret (http://muromteplovoz.ru/product/mil_cs_ma3.php) on top of BTR-80 and MT-LB chassis for ATGM vehicles (new on top of old stocks)
- UDZM for tracked engineering vehicles (modernized from old stocks)
- BREM-K for wheeled engineering vehicles (modernized from old stocks)

I think your pretty much spot on. Scotland would need a highly mobile and versatile forces  being fairly cheap and streamlined. The Yak -130 is ideal for patroling with cheap running costs and being able to carry a variety of weapons. I think in addition/substitute from what you listed i would suggest the following:

Buk M3 for eventual replacement for the penchora and penchora to be mounted on
MT-LB and a wheeled chassis like Belarusian stilet thus adding another missile to the system.

Small number of pantsir for protection of naval base, air base, and head of state etc.

A small number of mig-29M2 about 8 this would bolster air defence. The cheaper running yak -130 would do patroling etc and if and foreign aircraft was approaching the migs could be deployed could be used as a QRF

UAV and UCAV

IL -38N (second hand ) could be used as cheaper alternative

An-140 (Russian built) and/or An-32 if it's still available to buy (ukrainian built)

Two  il-76 (refurbished)

Two mi-26 would be ideal due to the sheer number of islands majority without runway.

Ansat and ansat 2RC this would fulfil light transport and allow 2RC as recce/light attack and possibly one or two could be situated on a frigate.

Ka-27M and PS  (S&R) /transport for frigate and naval operations. (Refurbished)

Bdrm-2 with Azerbaijan upgrade to Zdkm and possibly anti tank version with metis or konkurs
(Second hand upgraded )

Two battalions with tigr some armed with metis (am sure it wouldnt be hard to maje a version) and gibka-s or zu-23m1. Bpm-97 and bulat could also be used if they wanted cheaper.

Rpg-7v added

And second hand upgraded BM -21 (about 6/


Not huge amount extra really the mig-29M2 being the biggest added expense.

The last time independencewas mentioned the Scottish Government produced a paper on the subject which to be honest wasn't very detailed and wasn't great. But the budget was £1.5-2bn
Or $2.08- 2.77bn Which isn't bad

You should also be smart and not 15 year old in your choices... the first priority for most new members of NATO seems to be flash show fighter planes when every NATO country has plenty of those... they really don't need any more.

A much smarter purchase would be a half a dozen transport planes... spend a bit of money and buy 6 Il-476s... they will be greatly valued within NATO for moving stuff around and when not being used for your NATO or EU commitments you can use them yourself to earn money and shift loads around the place for major Scottish companies... your crews get flight experience around the world and your companies get some cheaper transport options to boot.

Obviously first priority is military, but if you can help out that is even better.

BTW the SOSNA-R missiles would be excellent as being low footprint... very effective... and very cheap to actually use... they are laser beam riding very very fast missiles. ALARM would be useless against them.

I would eventually add some Pantsirs to ensure protection from any superior neighbour with more impressive aircraft... if you know what I mean... it would give you assurance you could not be directly bullied, but without the open threat buying two dozen Su-35s would result in...

Regarding small arms, I would pretty much agree with FP, but would replace the PP2000 with Kashtan in 9x19mm, and I would go with Kord instead of NSV in the HMG role... in 12.7x99mm if you must.

Equally the other weapons in NATO calibres would remove the option for second hand, but would retain compatibility with NATO while new build means you can add your flash new mounting systems to the AK-100 series weapons and other weapons... new model SVDs come in 7.62x51mm and so does the PKPs if you want them... including that nice heavy barrel bullpup SVD called VS-121....

Of course you could go exotic and go for the ADS in 5.56mm calibre if you want a bullpup rifle and the RPK-16 with a 95 round drum and replacable barrel sounds rather better than the LMG version of the SA-80...

Of course after you have been a reliable customer for a while you could formulate your own requirements and create a joint venture with a Russian company and develop your own gear suited to the sort of wars you expect to be fighting and the way you want to fight... I am sure there are plenty of universities in Scotland working on battle robots... imagine the face of Craig Charles when your bot turns up armed with a Kalashnikov...

GarryB wrote:You should also be smart and not 15 year old in your choices... the first priority for most new members of NATO seems to be flash show fighter planes when every NATO country has plenty of those... they really don't need any more.

A much smarter purchase would be a half a dozen transport planes... spend a bit of money and buy 6 Il-476s... they will be greatly valued within NATO for moving stuff around and when not being used for your NATO or EU commitments you can use them yourself to earn money and shift loads around the place for major Scottish companies... your crews get flight experience around the world and your companies get some cheaper transport options to boot.

Obviously first priority is military, but if you can help out that is even better.

BTW the SOSNA-R missiles would be excellent as being low footprint... very effective... and very cheap to actually use... they are laser beam riding very very fast missiles.  ALARM would be useless against them.

I would eventually add some Pantsirs to ensure protection from any superior neighbour with more impressive aircraft... if you know what I mean... it would give you assurance you could not be directly bullied, but without the open threat buying two dozen Su-35s would result in...

Regarding small arms, I would pretty much agree with FP, but would replace the PP2000 with Kashtan in 9x19mm, and I would go with Kord instead of NSV in the HMG role... in 12.7x99mm if you must.

Equally the other weapons in NATO calibres would remove the option for second hand, but would retain compatibility with NATO while new build means you can add your flash new mounting systems to the AK-100 series weapons and other weapons... new model SVDs come in 7.62x51mm and so does the PKPs if you want them... including that nice heavy barrel bullpup SVD called VS-121....

Of course you could go exotic and go for the ADS in 5.56mm calibre if you want a bullpup rifle and the RPK-16 with a 95 round drum and replacable barrel sounds rather better than the LMG version of the SA-80...

Of course after you have been a reliable customer for a while you could formulate your own requirements and create a joint venture with a Russian company and develop your own gear suited to the sort of wars you expect to be fighting and the way you want to fight... I am sure there are plenty of universities in Scotland working on battle robots...  imagine the face of Craig Charles when your bot turns up armed with a Kalashnikov...  

Not sure who the 15yr old choices comment was made against but your wrong sorry. And nobody mentioned flash jets I would hardly call a mig-29M2 or yak -130 flash jets when su-35 and mig-35 are around

And you also failed to remember that Scotland has made no mention of joining NATO in fact they stated it would be up for a vote with the nation to be a member and what I can tell u from living and being in the country only small number would want to join. The people of Scotland were against balkans Iraq and Libya we don't want nukes and a very solid we don't want nukes. In fact during the debate back in the last independence push nato heads stated that if Scotland was to stay in nato that it would have to agree with rest of uk to keep the nukes in Scotland something that wouldn't happen so we wouldn't join on that issue. Also why would Scotland need to be a member? Because the media tells us that big bad Russia would invade us? Scottish people are not impressed by nato campaigns and not appetite to join. And it isn't a requirement to join the EU. Not only on all these issues scotland wouldn't accept the terms of minimum nato spending on defence not that other nations do though.

As for the transport idea it could work considering the rest of uk would be out of EU and the tunnel made not be favourable and it's likely a bigger transport port will open up in Edinburgh for direct trade to the EU. Ur idea would have to researched for viability. But not in large numbers due to not being a nato member.

A small defence force with a good navy small airforce with basic capabilities (yak -130 & mig -29M2 naval aviation ) and a small flexible highly mobile ground force that would only ever be used abroad on UN missions. That's alL you would need. Biggest threat Scotland has like any other western nation is terrorism so a strong police force good Intel services and a special forces unit geared for anti terror ops. The reason for the pantsir that mentioned is to protect key areas against the ever increasing UAV threat and this would be good enough to last many many years against such threats.

Not sure who the 15yr old choices comment was made against but your wrong sorry. And nobody mentioned flash jets I would hardly call a mig-29M2 or yak -130 flash jets when su-35 and mig-35 are around

Not directed at anyone...

The worst offenders are the air forces themselves who busily equip themselves with nice shiny fighter planes... whether they actually need any or not.

Here in New Zealand we had A-4 skyhawks.

Considering they were naval based attack aircraft they were actually rather impressive machines... could operate from carriers... we had no carriers... could carry quite an enormous payload for their size... though not that far... and they were quite nimble and impressive little things.

We didn't have any use for them way down here at the bottom of the Pacific ocean... any country powerful enough to get here with air power that would require us to have some fighter planes would wipe the floor with our little A-4s.

For peace keeping and demining operations with the UN they were of no use either.

The only two things we actually used them for was to pretend to be sea skimming anti ship missiles for the new zealand and australian navy, and for airshows... except they were all based in the north island of new zealand and coming down here was just too much effort so I hardly ever saw them... which didn't make me love them any more.

At the end of the day it was a total waste of time and money and energy, but the AF pilots loved them... like a fat old bald guy loves his ferrari.

And you also failed to remember that Scotland has made no mention of joining NATO in fact they stated it would be up for a vote with the nation to be a member and what I can tell u from living and being in the country only small number would want to join.

New Zealand and Australia are not members of NATO either but we use the NATO calibres for commonality.

If you are not going to join NATO or EU why do you need any military forces at all?

What are they going to be doing?

A small defence force with a good navy small airforce with basic capabilities (yak -130 & mig -29M2 naval aviation ) and a small flexible highly mobile ground force that would only ever be used abroad on UN missions.

UN missions almost never require fighter planes... or more accurately unless you are answering the call of the UN on your own every other major country sending help will send fighter planes too... it is the impromptu barbeque where everyone brings salad and no one brings the meat...

As for the transport idea it could work considering the rest of uk would be out of EU and the tunnel made not be favourable and it's likely a bigger transport port will open up in Edinburgh for direct trade to the EU. Ur idea would have to researched for viability. But not in large numbers due to not being a nato member.

Lets be honest... the rest of the UK is going to try to punish Scotland for leaving... they will do everything they can to fuck you guys over... not out in the open where they are clearly the bad guys, but behind closed doors so it looks like you are fucking up and they just told you so... in such a situation I think rather than wasting time on fighter aircraft you really need to look at transports... air and sea because they might try to cut you off and isolate you... of course you will need to be able to control your air space to prevent it being abused too so I suppose a few fighters would not be a bad idea.

Scotland will not be in Nato, because Nato would make it a stipulation that the rUKs nuclear force remains at faslane no government would get voted in supporting a foreign nuke base in Scotland, so we can rule out arm sales from NATO countries, thus the rUK would be less inclined pass on modern equipment to a independent Scotland  ie Typhoons, Apaches, Challenger 2, Ajax ifv  ... so Scotland will be in the market for 17 -20 strike/fighter aircraft .. we can rule out the Typhoon, Rafale, F-15, F-16. F-18, F-35, and the Saab Grippen half it's components is from the USA and the rUK .... that leaves Russia or China

Navy according to the white paper of 2012 we intend to build 4 frigates over the first 2 parliaments and require a helicopter transport dock
20,000 troops (mechanised units no MBTs ... i can't see that staying the same)


17 - 20 Eurofighters (that will not happen due to non nato membership), Transport aircraft, Trainers, Helicopters and maritime partol aircraft,  those will have to come from Non Nato nations as i said could only mean Russian/or Chinese made

we don't have a strong history in automotive industry so more likely our APC/IFVs will be from either Sweden & Finland or another country


i reckon Indyref2 will be october 2018 or february 2019

GarryB wrote:

Not sure who the 15yr old choices comment was made against but your wrong sorry. And nobody mentioned flash jets I would hardly call a mig-29M2 or yak -130 flash jets when su-35 and mig-35 are around

Not directed at anyone...

The worst offenders are the air forces themselves who busily equip themselves with nice shiny fighter planes... whether they actually need any or not.

Here in New Zealand we had A-4 skyhawks.

Considering they were naval based attack aircraft they were actually rather impressive machines... could operate from carriers... we had no carriers... could carry quite an enormous payload for their size... though not that far... and they were quite nimble and impressive little things.

We didn't have any use for them way down here at the bottom of the Pacific ocean... any country powerful enough to get here with air power that would require us to have some fighter planes would wipe the floor with our little A-4s.

For peace keeping and demining operations with the UN they were of no use either.

The only two things we actually used them for was to pretend to be sea skimming anti ship missiles for the new zealand and australian navy, and for airshows... except they were all based in the north island of new zealand and coming down here was just too much effort so I hardly ever saw them... which didn't make me love them any more.

At the end of the day it was a total waste of time and money and energy, but the AF pilots loved them... like a fat old bald guy loves his ferrari.

And you also failed to remember that Scotland has made no mention of joining NATO in fact they stated it would be up for a vote with the nation to be a member and what I can tell u from living and being in the country only small number would want to join.

New Zealand and Australia are not members of NATO either but we use the NATO calibres for commonality.

If you are not going to join NATO or EU why do you need any military forces at all?

What are they going to be doing?

A small defence force with a good navy small airforce with basic capabilities (yak -130 & mig -29M2 naval aviation ) and a small flexible highly mobile ground force that would only ever be used abroad on UN missions.

UN missions almost never require fighter planes... or more accurately unless you are answering the call of the UN on your own every other major country sending help will send fighter planes too... it is the impromptu barbeque where everyone brings salad and no one brings the meat...

As for the transport idea it could work considering the rest of uk would be out of EU and the tunnel made not be favourable and it's likely a bigger transport port will open up in Edinburgh for direct trade to the EU. Ur idea would have to researched for viability. But not in large numbers due to not being a nato member.

Lets be honest... the rest of the UK is going to try to punish Scotland for leaving... they will do everything they can to fuck you guys over... not out in the open where they are clearly the bad guys, but behind closed doors so it looks like you are fucking up and they just told you so... in such a situation I think rather than wasting time on fighter aircraft you really need to look at transports... air and sea because they might try to cut you off and isolate you... of course you will need to be able to control your air space to prevent it being abused too so I suppose a few fighters would not be a bad idea.

Yeah your right it would be messy hence I mentioned access to the tunnel will likely be stopped or hassle. And mentioned a large transport port in Edinburgh and possibly Glasgow. Transport aircraft yes but not huge amount.

On the fighter jets maybe you missed the part where I said small flexible highly mobile ground force that would only be used abroad on UN missions peacekeeping etc jets weren't included in this. Although if they took part in UN /AU mission in Somalia is the only way aircraft could be used. In fact maybe if they did might see some progress.

It really gets to me that if the western governments got involved with Somalia as much as they did in the middle east it would have been on its road to recovery long ago. But nothing gain hence the half hearted help. Maybe this could be somewhere Russia could get involved with once Syria is sorted and actually think 6-8 months and it would be done. They would gain respect from majority of the world gain rebuilding contracts and possibly a naval base from it. Great location for transport and also oil exploration. China is building next door in Djibouti and UAE is considering somaliland. With Ethiopia economy growing and no sea access it could be successful transport hub. Cheap labour and nation looking for stability and jobs. AU troops would do most of the fighting Russia just support like Syria. Respect amongst african nations would be great.

The reason for Scotland needing an airforce compared to neighbours like Ireland is simple. Ireland doesn't have oil rigs loads of islands and a nasty ex partner now a neighbour who lost out massively ( financially ) in a divorce settlement lol. The aircraft isn't fancy yak -130 for patroling etc mig - 29M2 for inception of uk aircraft abusing Scottish air space. But I think that having the migs will make some people feel safe and that we still have a deterrence. Yak -130, mig -29M2 and mi-35 would be multi role ground / air / naval / recce but mostly geared for last 3 mentioned. And I am only talking small numbers.

The great thing about being independent and not a nato member means you can choose what u want. Calibre etc Scotland needs cheap reliable fit for purpose equipment and let's face it western stuff is too expensive both to buy and maintain and unnecessary. Two areas of cooperation between Russia and Scotland could be oil/gas and shipbuilding. Scotland has shipbuilding facilities capable of building any size of vessel the aircraft carriers are being built in Rosyth. Russia could do joint projects or get Scotland to build Russian vessels that are for export this would allow Russia to speed up production and take more orders on. How many customers get put off at the prospect of waiting times for their vessels to be made I wonder? This would help Scotland as well keeping shipbuilding projects coming in.

Of course if uk spits their dummy out and won't do joint military exercises Scotland could do them with nordic, batiks, and Russia. Repairing friendly ties with Russia would be beneficial for trade and Russia would only be bomber buzzing uk not Scotland anymore lol.

medo wrote:

d_taddei2 wrote:hi garry whats the general view of the upgraded T-72 in terms to western modern systems, as some people have on other forums that its still an old tank and that modern western stuff would still easily destroy them, and that no matter what upgrades you give them. I argued the fact it was cheaper to upgrade T-72's than to buy newer tanks, and that the upgrades brought them upto a decent standard of a modern tank capability.

Also i believe that most forces these days are focusing on more mechanised and a force that is highly mobile rather than a seriously heavy force, times have changed since the cold war. But i do believe that its still wise to have a tank force, as war can be unpredictable.

making reference about a thread that i created some time ago about a Scottish defence force, i think for a defence force/small force or a country with a small budget, its makes sense to buy a fully upgraded T-72 than a T-90, of course a T-90 is better but we all cant have the best equipment when a budget has to be considered. I think that even a mix of T-72 and T-90 would be better if budget allowed. A defence force may only have 2-4 tank regiments at most so you could have 1 regiment of each, and when Russia finally starts to replace its tank forces(wont be for a long time) you could replace the T-72's with T-90's.

Hm, wasn't Scotland historically more connected with France? Maybe you could buy some used Mirages and surplus Leclerc tanks.

Historically yes but France came out as against Scottish independence and backed Westminster. A move towards Russia could be a step in healing relations. But this suggestion not likely to happen thread.

Godric wrote:Scotland will not be in Nato, because Nato would make it a stipulation that the rUKs nuclear force remains at faslane no government would get voted in supporting a foreign nuke base in Scotland, so we can rule out arm sales from NATO countries, thus the rUK would be less inclined pass on modern equipment to a independent Scotland  ie Typhoons, Apaches, Challenger 2, Ajax ifv  ... so Scotland will be in the market for 17 -20 strike/fighter aircraft .. we can rule out the Typhoon, Rafale, F-15, F-16. F-18, F-35, and the Saab Grippen half it's components is from the USA and the rUK .... that leaves Russia or China

Navy according to the white paper of 2012 we intend to build 4 frigates over the first 2 parliaments and require a helicopter transport dock
20,000 troops (mechanised units no MBTs ... i can't see that staying the same)


17 - 20 Eurofighters (that will not happen due to non nato membership), Transport aircraft, Trainers, Helicopters and maritime partol aircraft,  those will have to come from Non Nato nations as i said could only mean Russian/or Chinese made

we don't have a strong history in automotive industry so more likely our APC/IFVs will be from either Sweden & Finland or another country


i reckon Indyref2 will be october 2018 or february 2019

Backs what I said earlier about nato membership and nukes. The rUK will try and give Scotland the older equipment etc what think may happen is Scotland will keep some ships as they can easily fix maintain them themselves for the rest they are better just accept a money settlement that way they can buy what they need and want. I think if they were to get that number of aircraft some would just sit idle decaying or have to be sold due them being advanced expensive and getting parts etc. 8-12 each of yak -130, mig - 29M2 and mi -35 and some yak -130, yak-52 trainers transport etc and your done on MBTs I think one or two battalions would be max.

As garryb said military transport could be good to earn experience, money and a needed facility for Scotland mi-26 ideal for the many islands. Mi-17 civilian version could be introduced to provide a transport system for the islands especially useful in times of rough seas and medical transport these could be flown by military personnel keeping flying hours up while providing a service.

Mi-35
Mi-26
Mi-17
Ansat & Ansat 2RC
Ka-27 (naval and based on ships)
Is max types of helicopters needed ansat if you really wanted could be dropped off the list as mi-35 could also be used for light transport.

I hope it's February 2019 as I should be back to Scotland by then. Hopefully celebrating

I imagine if Scotland did separate from England and started developing its own forces, it will be entirely based of American and European equipment. Reason is that Scotland wants to be part of the EU. Even down to their combat rifles, they will opt for German, Canadian or American made. I doubt they would buy anything from Russia aside some Mi-8's or Mi-16 helicopters. Even then they may purchase American or Italian helicopters at that point.

miketheterrible wrote:I imagine if Scotland did separate from England and started developing its own forces, it will be entirely based of American and European equipment.  Reason is that Scotland wants to be part of the EU.  Even down to their combat rifles, they will opt for German, Canadian or American made.  I doubt they would buy anything from Russia aside some Mi-8's or Mi-16 helicopters.  Even then they may purchase American or Italian helicopters at that point.

I wouldn't be so sure. What ur actually talking about is if a country was pursuing a Nato membership. Usa France Spain Belgium and many others were against Scottish independence which is two faced because as soon as they were independent they would then welcome them with open arms. But Scotland might remember that they didn't back them and we're actually against them would you them spend billions with them? Being in the EU doesn't mean nato membership nor join an proposed EU army. I think likely scenario is they will keep what they are owed and buy a small number of items to fill the gaps but only problem with that is majority of spares etc are in England which then fuck them over with either high costs or refuse to sell. Better to get a money settlement then they can buy what they want. Scotland doesn't really need or want the equipment it's entitled to 20-30 typhoons Apaches a wad of challenger 2 etc. Not to mention that challenger 2 there would be serious problems as Chobham armour is classified as top secret so would they allow them to have them? I doubt. Some money would definitely be given Scotland share of the aircraft carriers would obviously be money settlement.

miketheterrible wrote:I imagine if Scotland did separate from England and started developing its own forces, it will be entirely based of American and European equipment.  Reason is that Scotland wants to be part of the EU.  Even down to their combat rifles, they will opt for German, Canadian or American made.  I doubt they would buy anything from Russia aside some Mi-8's or Mi-16 helicopters.  Even then they may purchase American or Italian helicopters at that point.

we might be part of the EU ... but the USA controls Nato and many of the weapons systems contain American components like US forced France to cancel Scalp-EG sale to Egypt last month because it has US components ... can't see us buying the G-36 after the problems with them and Germany about to ditch them

@ d_taddei2 it doesn't work that way Scottish taxpayers have contributed greatly towards UK military hardware and receiving just old equipment would not wash ... best option is starting armed forces from Scratch with a £8 -9 billion in cash .... that won't happen either as the rUK will have to pay brexit bill... Scotland contributes around £3.5 billion per year towards UK defense spending or just over $5 billion that is a decent budget their is nothing to stop us spending more as our economy grows and we know our real GDP and not one made up by the UK .... i would rather go for Su30MKs and SU-32s, and Kamov 52 attack helos and Mil Mi17 transport helos, transport aircraft either the Chinese Y-20 or the Russian Ilyushin Il-76-MD-90A

light mechanised ground forces will not cut it, we will need tanks at the challenger 2 is to heavy and obsolete to be used in rural Scotland ... i would like to see a combination of T-90MS and BMPT-72 (terminator 2s)

Ireland spends 800 million Euros on defence and they have more maritime assets than the UK ... Ireland had to help the UK hunt for a non existent sub in the firth of clyde a couple of years ago because the UK had no such assets

I'm just saying. It would be cool if they did do that but we know that the EU and US will strong arm Scottish government.

I mean, new Zealand and Australia are neither EU or NATO, but they exclusively buy US/EU weapons.