Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Share

    Poll

    Vote (multiple choice allowed) for the armored vehicles under 15 tons performing well enough in the War of Donbas to avoid a total decommission by the end of this decade.

    [ 12 ]
    21% [21%] 
    [ 12 ]
    21% [21%] 
    [ 2 ]
    3% [3%] 
    [ 9 ]
    16% [16%] 
    [ 1 ]
    2% [2%] 
    [ 7 ]
    12% [12%] 
    [ 8 ]
    14% [14%] 
    [ 4 ]
    7% [7%] 
    [ 1 ]
    2% [2%] 
    [ 2 ]
    2% [2%] 

    Total Votes: 58
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Sat Nov 19, 2016 4:30 am

    One of the most interesting sources about decommissioned material comes from the Departament of Property Relations, and their sales and auctions.

    http://economy.mil.ru/economy/disposal_of_assets/movables/lots.htm

    For the year 2016, most of the sales and auctions have been related with land transport trucks and other material, but also it has been some sales related to land warfare, in this case in the form of scrap material or spare parts. My impression is that the amounts have been lower than in previous years, something that would be consistent with the fact of a reduction of the scrapping activity derived from the decommission wave of 2010-2013.

    The sales and auctions affected to the following models of land warfare:

    In low amounts:

    BMP-3: Sale and auction of scrap material related to some engineering vehicle.
    2S1: Sale and auction of scrap material related to some engineering vehicle.
    MT-LB: Sale and auction of scrap material.
    BMP-2: Sale and auction of scrap material.

    In bigger amounts:

    BRDM-2: Sale and auction of spare parts.
    BTR-60: Sale and auction of spare parts.

    T-64: Sale and auction of scrap material related to engineering vehicles.
    T-55: Sale and auction of scrap material related to engineering vehicles.
    T-54: Sale and auction of scrap material related to engineering vehicles.
    BTR-50: Sale and auction of spare parts.
    PT-76: Sale and auction of spare parts.

    Both the scrap material and the spare parts come likely from decommissioned and scrapped units. This is why this source is good to check the recent scrapping activity.

    From the reports I would assume that in 2016 only has been scrapping activity for armoured vehicles that are engineering variants of the T-54, T-55, T-64, and in lower amounts of the 2S1 and BMP-3. In the case of the BPM-2 and MT-LB the sales and actions can come from some brocken part and it is possible that some unit has been scrapped recently canibalized for spare parts.

    In the case of the BRDM-2, BTR-60, BTR-50 and PT-76, the sale and auction of spare parts likely means that the scrapping process was done in previous years, and that the Russian Armed Forces has not a need of them. It is possible that the spare parts from/for BRDM-2 be compatible with the SA-9 too. In the case of the BTR-50 and the PT-76 likely means a total liquidation of the stocks of spare parts.



    PS: In the case of land transport vehicles, there is even a sale of units that are in use still. There a Catalog from 2015 that you can see in the following link:

    http://economy.mil.ru/files/morf/katalog_vdvi_2_ochered.pdf


    Last edited by eehnie on Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:00 pm; edited 8 times in total (Reason for editing : Update with late reports in the year)

    par far

    Posts : 1472
    Points : 1631
    Join date : 2014-06-26

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  par far on Sat Nov 19, 2016 3:41 pm

    eehnie wrote:One of the most interesting sources about decommissioned material comes from the Departament of Property Relations, and their sales and auctions.

    http://economy.mil.ru/economy/disposal_of_assets/movables/lots.htm

    For the year 2016, most of the sales and auctions have been related with land transport trucks and other material, but also it has been some sales related to land warfare, in this case in the form of scrap material or spare parts. My impression is that the amounts have been lower than in previous years, something that would be consistent with the fact of a reduction of the scrapping activity derived from the decommission wave of 2010-2013.

    The sales and auctions affected to the following models of land warfare:

    In low amounts:

    BMP-3: Sale and auction of scrap material related to some engineering vehicle.
    2S1: Sale and auction of scrap material related to some engineering vehicle.
    MT-LB: Sale and auction of scrap material.
    BMP-2: Sale and auction of scrap material.

    In bigger amounts:

    BRDM-2: Sale and auction of spare parts.
    BTR-60: Sale and auction of spare parts.

    T-64: Sale and auction of scrap material related to engineering vehicles.
    T-55: Sale and auction of scrap material related to engineering vehicles.
    T-54: Sale and auction of scrap material related to engineering vehicles.
    BTR-50: Sale and auction of spare parts.
    PT-76: Sale and auction of spare parts.

    Both the scrap material and the spare parts come likely from decommissioned and scrapped units. This is why this source is good to check the recent scrapping activity.

    From the reports I would assume that in 2016 only has been scrapping activity for armoured vehicles that are engineering variants of the T-54, T-55, T-64, and in lower amounts of the 2S1 and BMP-3. In the case of the BPM-2 and MT-LB the sales and actions can come from some brocken part and it is possible that some unit has been scrapped recently canibalized for spare parts.

    In the case of the BRDM-2, BTR-60, BTR-50 and PT-76, the sale and auction of spare parts likely means that the scrapping process was done in previous years, and that the Russian Armed Forces has not a need of them. It is possible that the spare parts from/for BRDM-2 be compatible with the SA-9 too. In the case of the BTR-50 and the PT-76 likely means a total liquidation of the stocks of spare parts.



    PS: In the case of land transport vehicles, there is even a sale of units that are in use still. There a Catalog from 2015 that you can see in the following link:

    http://economy.mil.ru/files/morf/katalog_vdvi_2_ochered.pdf



    Instead of doing this, why don't they clean up the stuff, make sure it is working and send it to Syria?
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Sun Nov 20, 2016 3:11 am

    par far wrote:
    eehnie wrote:One of the most interesting sources about decommissioned material comes from the Departament of Property Relations, and their sales and auctions.

    http://economy.mil.ru/economy/disposal_of_assets/movables/lots.htm

    For the year 2016, most of the sales and auctions have been related with land transport trucks and other material, but also it has been some sales related to land warfare, in this case in the form of scrap material or spare parts. My impression is that the amounts have been lower than in previous years, something that would be consistent with the fact of a reduction of the scrapping activity derived from the decommission wave of 2010-2013.

    The sales and auctions affected to the following models of land warfare:

    In low amounts:

    BMP-3: Sale and auction of scrap material related to some engineering vehicle.
    2S1: Sale and auction of scrap material related to some engineering vehicle.
    MT-LB: Sale and auction of scrap material.
    BMP-2: Sale and auction of scrap material.

    In bigger amounts:

    BRDM-2: Sale and auction of spare parts.
    BTR-60: Sale and auction of spare parts.

    T-64: Sale and auction of scrap material related to engineering vehicles.
    T-55: Sale and auction of scrap material related to engineering vehicles.
    T-54: Sale and auction of scrap material related to engineering vehicles.
    BTR-50: Sale and auction of spare parts.
    PT-76: Sale and auction of spare parts.

    Both the scrap material and the spare parts come likely from decommissioned and scrapped units. This is why this source is good to check the recent scrapping activity.

    From the reports I would assume that in 2016 only has been scrapping activity for armoured vehicles that are engineering variants of the T-54, T-55, T-64, and in lower amounts of the 2S1 and BMP-3. In the case of the BPM-2 and MT-LB the sales and actions can come from some brocken part and it is possible that some unit has been scrapped recently canibalized for spare parts.

    In the case of the BRDM-2, BTR-60, BTR-50 and PT-76, the sale and auction of spare parts likely means that the scrapping process was done in previous years, and that the Russian Armed Forces has not a need of them. It is possible that the spare parts from/for BRDM-2 be compatible with the SA-9 too. In the case of the BTR-50 and the PT-76 likely means a total liquidation of the stocks of spare parts.



    PS: In the case of land transport vehicles, there is even a sale of units that are in use still. There a Catalog from 2015 that you can see in the following link:

    http://economy.mil.ru/files/morf/katalog_vdvi_2_ochered.pdf



    Instead of doing this, why don't they clean up the stuff, make sure it is working and send it to Syria?

    Russia makes some money.

    As resume we can say that all this come from:

    - Engineering vehicle variants of BMP-3, 2S1, T-64, T-55 and T-54.
    - Spare parts of BRDM-2, BTR-60, BTR-50 and PT-76 of units scrapped before 2016.
    - A few brocken parts or parts of canibalized units of MT-LB and BMP-2

    Not really useful for combat in Syria, except the spare parts.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16702
    Points : 17310
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  GarryB on Sun Nov 20, 2016 4:15 am

    The cost of cleaning it up and even giving it some minor upgrades to make it more useful does make it expensive charity.

    If you could get a country to take it for a nominal fee and perhaps pay Russia to refurbish and upgrade it before sending it it would be worth the effort.

    Otherwise it simply makes more sense simply to auction it off as scrap or to museums around the world that might want a vehicle or two in their display... and of course the odd collector...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Sat Jan 21, 2017 1:03 pm

    One of the most interesting sources about decommissioned material comes from the Departament of Property Relations, and their sales and auctions.

    http://economy.mil.ru/economy/disposal_of_assets/movables/lots.htm

    For the year 2016, most of the sales and auctions have been related with land transport trucks and other material, but also it has been some sales related to land warfare, in this case in the form of scrap material or spare parts. My impression is that the amounts have been lower than in previous years, something that would be consistent with the fact of a reduction of the scrapping activity derived from the decommission wave of 2010-2013.

    The sales and auctions affected to the following models of land warfare:

    In low amounts:

    BMP-3: Sale and auction of scrap material related to some engineering vehicle.
    MT-T: Sale and auction of scrap material realted to some engineering vehicle.
    2S1: Sale and auction of scrap material related to some engineering vehicle.
    BMP-2: Sale and auction of scrap material.

    In bigger amounts:

    MT-LB: Sale and auction of scrap material.
    BRDM-2: Sale and auction of scrap material and spare parts.
    BMP-1: Sale and auction of scrap material and spare parts.
    BTR-60: Sale and auction of scrap material and spare parts.

    AT-T: Sale and auction of scrap material of engineering vehicles.
    T-55: Sale and auction of scrap material only related to engineering vehicles.
    T-54: Sale and auction of scrap material only related to engineering vehicles.
    BTR-50: Sale and auction of scrap material and spare parts.

    PT-76: Sale and auction of spare parts.
    BRDM-1: Sale and auction of spare parts.

    Both the scrap material and the spare parts come likely from decommissioned and scrapped units. This is why this source is good to check the recent scrapping activity.

    In the case of the units of the BMP-3, 2S1 and BMP-2 is possible to talk about isolate cases of broken pieces or canibalized units. We can see in the reports that the recent scrapping activity has been centered in units of the MT-LB, BRDM-2, BMP-1, BTR-60 and engineering units based in the T-55 and AT-T. Also there is still some activity with T-54 and BTR-50, but lower.

    Looking at the reports I tend to think that:
    - The scrapping process of the BRDM-1 was finnished before 2016, including sales and auction fo scrap material. In 2016 would be the liquidation of the spare parts.
    - The scrapping process of the PT-76 was finnished before 2016, including sales and auction of scrap material. In 2016 would be the liquidation of the spare parts.
    - The scrapping process of the BTR-50 can be totally finnished, even with a liquidation of the spare parts.
    - The scrapping process of the T-54 tanks can be totally finnished, including the engineering variants.
    - The scrapping process of the T-55 tanks can be totally finnished, while it is possible that some engineering units remain to be scrapped in 2017.
    - The scrapping process of the T-64 tanks can be totally finnished, including the engineering variants.
    - The scrapping process of the AT-T engineering vehicles seems close to the end, while it is possible to see increasing the scrapping in 2017.

    Note that since this comment T-64 and MT-T are considered separate warfare.


    Last edited by eehnie on Tue Nov 07, 2017 4:26 am; edited 3 times in total
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2655
    Points : 2693
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  franco on Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:41 pm

    Volumes of utilization of various types of weapons

    The Ministry of Defense placed on the federal portal of draft normative legal acts a draft amendment to Presidential Decree No. 775 "On changing the procedure for the release of military property, corporatization and privatization of military trade enterprises," as a result of which the only implementer of ferrous and non-ferrous metals scrap belonging to the military department will be OOO "TransLom". In the explanatory memorandum, among other things, the volume of armaments disposed to 2020 is indicated:

    *****
    At present, the movable property of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, which is not in demand in the interests of state protection, includes weapons and other property.
    Exemption from not found use in the Ministry of Defense of Russia weapons is carried out through disposal within the GOZ with the involvement of budgetary funds.

    Background: by the end of 2020, it is necessary to dispose of 9.9 thousand units of armored vehicles, 21.5 thousand units of missile and artillery weapons, about 7 million small arms, more than 150 million pieces of ammunition, 140 thousand conventional weapons , Almost 2 thousand aircraft and helicopters , a significant number of other types of weapons. The implementation of works on the disposal of this amount of weapons, military and special equipment will require more than 50 billion budgetary appropriations.

    Taking into account the reduction of budgetary allocations within the framework of the Agreement on Cooperation between the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and the State Corporation for the Promotion of the Development, Production and Export of High-Tech Industrial Products Rostek in the implementation of measures for the comprehensive utilization of weapons, military and special equipment, On the residual book value without the involvement of the federal budget.
    Other property, including scrap of ferrous and non-ferrous metals, is sold in accordance with Presidential Decree No. 775 of July 23, 1997 "On changing the procedure for selling released military property, corporatization and privatization of military trade enterprises", the Government of the Russian Federation from October 15, 1999 No. 1165 "On the sale of released movable military property" and Order of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation of June 24, 2016 No. 377.

    For reference: in 2016, the Ministry of Defense of Russia sold 207,800 tons of ferrous scrap and 5,300 tons of nonferrous scrap, in 2017 it is planned to sell 230,000 tons of scrap metal.

    At the same time, the expansion of the geography of application and the scope of tasks facing the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, including in the Arctic zone and the regions of the Far North, the terms for the release, sale and export of scrap of ferrous and nonferrous metals from the territory of military units do not meet modern requirements. Long periods of time spent in the park and warehouse areas of decommissioned military equipment (including those that are subject to disposal) require additional financial costs associated with its protection, create prerequisites for theft, as well as cause a negative reaction in the media and, as a consequence, worsening public opinion On the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation as a whole.
    In addition, the military command and control bodies, with the release of scrap of ferrous and non-ferrous metals, are responsible for disassembling and dismantling the source of its formation, as well as carrying out works to bring the property into a state that excludes the use for its intended purpose, which requires additional detachment of personnel for tasks, Not related to the combat readiness and training of troops.
    Analysis of the ferrous and nonferrous metals scrap market showed that one of its main participants is LLC "TransLom", which is the only specialized organization that has in the Russian Federation the largest branch network, its own production facilities with the ability to pre-cut, prepare and transport scrap, Including in hard-to-reach regions, in the required volumes (more than 250 thousand tons per year). At the same time, it is necessary to ensure the minimum time for removal of scrap from the territory of military units.
    It is believed that the granting of the priority right of the specialized organization LLC "TransLom" to purchase scrap of ferrous and non-ferrous metals formed from decommissioned (recycled) property will significantly shorten the terms for the liberation of the territory of the Ministry of Defense from environmentally hazardous secondary materials, Reduce the risks of their loss (theft) and exclude a negative reaction in the media.
    In addition, the exclusion of intermediaries (resellers) from the chain "seller-enterprise-processor (metallurgical enterprise)" will increase the flow of funds to the budget of the Russian Federation from the sale of scrap of ferrous and non-ferrous metals.
    The introduction of these changes will not lead to an increase in the number of federal state civil servants of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation and will not require the involvement of additional budgetary funds.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Thu Apr 06, 2017 3:48 pm

    Recently has been published The Military Balance 2017.

    While in overall terms the data offered seems in line with other sources, there are two groups where The Military Balance fails:

    1.- In the refered to the ground forces of Russia, the publication shows its habitual resistance to include the newer warfare. Weapons present today but excluded of the report:

    T-14
    2S35
    T-15
    Typhoon-U
    Typhoon-K
    Bulat 6x6 APC
    BTR-90

    2.- In the other side, some very old material is listed still as present. Concretely they keep saying without update since at least 2008, that Russia has:

    2000 T-64
    2800+ T-55
    2500 T-62
    0000+ T-54

    0100 BM-13
    0000+ SA-9
    0000+ BTR-50

    1075 D-20
    0650 M-46
    0100 ML-20
    0040 B-4(M)
    0000+ ZU-23-2
    0000+ S-60

    3750 M-30
    0700 D-1
    0300 M-160

    0100+ BPM-97 (surely mixed with the Bulat 6x6 apc)

    Note that the 2B9 Vasilek is in the report, but only for Syria, not for Russia.

    Analyzing the results of the scrapping process, and the public references to recent use of the weapons in the Russian Armed Forces, today I do not think the presence of these weapons is real, except in the case of the engineering veriants of the T-64, but obviously in very lower amounts. Also, in the refered to the artillery pieces, these data remain unchanged in the last 10 editions of the publication, since The Military Balance 2008, at least, like we can see here:

    http://www.russiadefence.net/t1606p200-russian-gun-artillery-discussion-thread#176385

    The last decommission process (2011-2014), and the military help of Russia to Syria, makes these data about the oldest warfare incompatible with the reality.

    The effect of these two mistakes combined is to make the overall picture of the Russian armament looks significantly older and less modern than it is in reality.


    Last edited by eehnie on Sun May 28, 2017 7:54 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Wed Apr 12, 2017 8:44 am

    http://economy.mil.ru/economy/disposal_of_assets/movables/lots.htm

    In the refered to the land material, the analysis of the results of the scrapping process in the first quarter of 2017, detailed in the references 17.0001 to 17.0049, gives the following results:

    - In the refered to the combat/armoured equipment, in this quarter only appeared material coming from the scapping process of AT-T engineering vehicles. Nothing else. Also there is not material of spare parts of no-one type of vehicle offered to auction. All it reinforces the idea of low scrapping activity on armoured vehicles, after the scrapping work related to the last decommission wave being almost totally done.

    - At same time, in the cited references there is a lot of material comming from the scrapping process of land auxiliary vehicles, non armoured. Basically from a good number of truck types with many variants for different roles (transport, engineering variants, radars,...), including variants of the Kamaz-4310, Ural-4320 and many older series, and from trains.

    At this point I expect the liquidation of the AT-T. Older vehicles, including T-64 tanks maybe totally finnished today.


    Last edited by eehnie on Sun May 28, 2017 7:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Wed Apr 12, 2017 9:25 pm

    Looking at the performance of the oldest warfare, the evolution of the warfare in the War of Donbass always has been take into account.

    The recent publication of The Military Balance 2017 allows to a comparation between the new data with the data offered just before the begin of the war in The Military Balance 2014.

    These would be the differences in the refered to land warfare (the data would include engineering variants in every case):

    - 100.00% SA-2
    - 100.00% SA-5
    - 100.00% SA-3
    >-100.00% S-60
    >-100.00% ZU-23-2
    > 000.00% D-20

    - 025.00% D-30
    - 021.21% Msta-B
    - 017.43% Giatsint-B
    =000.00% (M)T-12
    =000.00% Nona-K

    >-087.48% First group
    >-010.97% Second group
    >-051.012% Total heavy towed warfare

    -100.00% BM-13

    - 100.00% FROG-7
    - 027.49% T-64
    =000.00% T-55
    =000.00% T-54

    >-100.00% SA-13 (note the symbol > applied to a negative number: -90>-100)
    >-070.00% BTR-60
    - 038.57% BTR-80
    - 038.00% BTR-70
    - 027.83% BRDM-2
    - 023.08% BDM-2
    - 023.00% BMP-1
    - 020.80% BMP-2
    - 020.00% 2S9
    - 014.71% BM-21
    - 010.00% BMD-1
    =000.00% MT-LB
    =000.00% BTR-D
    not present 2S23
    not present BMD-3
    not present BMD-4

    - 100.00% SA-4
    - 100.00% SS-1 Scud
    >-100.00% SA-8
    - 026.53% SA-11/17
    - 025.00% 2S5
    - 012.96% 2S3
    - 011.03% SA-10/12/20/23
    - 006.25% BM-30
    - 003.03% 2S7
    =000.00% MT-T
    =000.00% BM-27
    =000.00% SA-19/2S6
    =000.00% SS-21
    =000.00% T-80
    =000.00% BM-30
    >000.00% T-72
    +055.48% 2S1

    - 100.00% First group
    - 029.14% Second group
    >-028.77% Third group
    >-011.41% Fourth group
    >-023.05% Total mobile land warfare

    >-028.41% Total Sovietic/Russian heavy land warfare


    These data are not giving a recount of loses, this would be the overall difference that the source see on the data after including, war loses, own decommission of material and introduction of new material.

    Also it is necessary to take into account that not all the material listed as present in 2017 or 2014 must be combat ready.

    Taking into account that there are known certified loses for every type of warfare, which data we can see in sources like lostarmour.info, there are data in this information that are not compatible with the total number of war loses plus own decommissions. The data of the Military Balance compared to the data of lostarmour.info is showing how new material of some types has been coming to Ukraine (likely from the rest of the countries to the West of Russia and Belarus). The types of warfare where the data of The Military Balance combined with the data of lostarmour.info would show how Ukraine received external warfare of Sovietic origin are bolded and marked in red.

    In the case of three types of warfare, the data of The Military Balance 2017 is bigger than the data of The Military Balance 2014, especially in the last case:

    D-20
    T-72
    2S1


    Last edited by eehnie on Sun May 28, 2017 7:09 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Sun May 28, 2017 3:57 pm

    As resume of the offers of material to sale and auction from scrapping and spare parts, in the reports of first half of 2017, we see:

    All the material refered to land combat material is coming from engineering vehicles.

    More modern in low amounts:

    - 2S1: Some spare part for engineering variants.
    - T-72: Some isolate unit of engineering variants.
    - BTR-60: Some isolate unit of engineering variants.

    More modern in bigger amounts:

    - MT-T:

    Oldest warfare, likely the last units:

    - AT-T: Important number of units.
    - T-54: Some unit of engineering variants.
    - T-55: Some unit of engineering variants.
    - SU-100: Some isolate unit of engineering variants.


    Last edited by eehnie on Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:00 pm; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:24 pm

    In the last decade, aproximately, it has been a process of total decommission of a good number of types of land warfare, where a good number of types of land warfare effectively disappeared of the Russian Armed Forces. At the begin, an strong wave of decommissions was planned, but also this process has been favored by the needs of supplies generated by the wars in Donbass and Syria. From the analysis of different sources, this would be the list of warfare that totally disappeared these years or that is being totally finnished surely by the end of this year.

    SU-122

    085mm D-44
    076mm M-1938
    130mm KS-30
    037mm 61-K
    085mm 52-K KS-12 M-1938
    100mm KS-19
    122mm D-74
    014.5mm ZPU-1/2/4
    SA-3
    SA-2
    SA-5
    ASU-57
    BM-14
    BM-16
    PT-76
    ASU-85
    ZSU-57-2

    082mm Vasilek
    FROG-7


    152mm D-1 (TMB2004-2005 700 units; TMB2017 700 units)
    122mm M-30 (TMB2004-2005 3750 units; TMB2017 3750 units)
    160mm M-160 (TMB2004-2005 300 units; TMB2017 300 units)
    203mm B-4(M) (TMB2004-2005 40 units; TMB2017 40 units)
    152mm ML-20 (TMB2004-2005 100 units; TMB2017 100 units)
    057mm S-60 (TMB2004-2005 >0 units; TMB2017 >0 units)
    130mm M-46 (TMB2004-2005 650 units; TMB2017 650 units)
    152mm D-20 (TMB2004-2005 1115 units; TMB2017 1075 units)
    BTR-50 (TMB2004-2005 1000 units; TMB2017 >0 units)
    SA-9 (TMB2004-2005 >0 units; TMB2017 >0 units)
    BM-13 (TMB2004-2005 <50 units; TMB2017 100 units)
    T-62 (including engineering variants) (TMB2004-2005 3000 units; TMB2017 2500 units)
    T-55 (including engineering variants) (TMB2004-2005 <1360 units; TMB2017 >2800 units)
    T-64 (including engineering variants) (TMB2004-2005 4350 units; TMB 2017 2000 units )

    100mm BS-3
    023mm ZU-23(-2) (TMB2004-2005 >0 units; TMB2017 >0 units)
    GT-MU
    T-54 (including engineering variants) (TMB2004-2005 0 units; TMB2017 >0 units)
    AT-T

    Note that the bolded types of warfare have been present in the war of Syria.

    The Military Balance is giving still some of them as present, but their data about the presence of these weapons in Russia have been erratic, as we can see comparing their data of 2004-2005 with their data of 2017, with some weapons increasing their numbers, and have been deficiently updated.

    After checking a high number of official news of 2017 (around 1500), I only saw some reference to a real presence of the last five of the list, while almost all of the more modern warfare was present. These are the news:

    100mm BS-3: http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/ground/news/more.htm?id=12124507@egNews

    023mm ZU-23(-2): (TMB2004-2005 >0 units; TMB2017 >0 units) http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/ground/news/more.htm?id=12118392@egNews

    GT-MU: http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/ground/news/more.htm?id=12119244@egNews

    T-54: http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/ground/news/more.htm?id=12136067@egNews

    AT-T: http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/ground/news/more.htm?id=12115728@egNews
    http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/ground/news/more.htm?id=12114781@egNews
    http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/strategic_rocket/news/more.htm?id=12108830@egNews
    http://structure.mil.ru/structure/forces/strategic_rocket/news/more.htm?id=12109547@egNews

    In adition to this there is only some reference more to old weapons taking part in memorial parades and celebrations.

    In overall terms we can consider these weapons as finnished in the Russian Armed Forces. If there is still some unit in Russia, South Ossetia, Novorussia or Abkhazia, will go fast to scrapping or to Syria, and is very likely to be finnished by the end of 2017. The fact that the AT-T engineering vehicles are the most scrapped land warfare in 2017 is in agreement with all this. The alone weapon that despite to be totally decommissioned can have still a longer timeline until to be totally finnished would be the T-64, that still seems not needed in Syria.


    Last edited by eehnie on Mon Aug 07, 2017 4:07 pm; edited 2 times in total
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Fri Jul 14, 2017 6:34 pm

    NEXT LAND WARFARE IN LINE FOR A TOTAL DECOMMISSION UNDER THE STATE ARMAMENT PROGRAM 2018-2025

    100mm 2A19/29 (M)T-12: This will be the less powerful, less capable and less modern heavy weapon remaining in the Russian Armed Forces after 2017. After the likely apparition of 125mm Rocket Assisted Projectiles and new ammunition of longer range for the TOS-1, the (M)T-12 will be the alone heavy land weapon that only can work inside the range of the man-portable weapons of the adversaries of Russia. Very important numbers of this weapon are likely to go to Syria when the armament cited in the previous comment (except maybe the T-64) is totally exhausted.

    In an environment of war and needs of supplies to friend countries, it is unlikely to see Russia scrapping warfare. The total decommissions will likely come by exhaustion after use or help to friend countries.

    Also in line after the (M)T-12, but less likely to be totally finnished in the short-term:

    120mm 2B16 Nona-K
    152mm 2A36 Giatsint B
    122mm 2A18 D-30
    152mm 2A65 Msta B

    BTR-60
    BMD-1
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16702
    Points : 17310
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  GarryB on Sat Jul 15, 2017 9:19 am

    The advantage of the 100mm MT-12 is not its power, it is its low cost and light weight and mobility.

    Not every vehicle attacking a Russian position will be an Abrams or Leopard, so for armoured vehicles like IFVs and other platforms the 100mm gun is plenty and small light and cheap.

    However they can't keep it operational for ever, so replacement would remove that round from the inventory.

    I would say a guided top attack 120mm round based on the 120mm gun mortar systems they have would be a good solution as it remains in service on mortar carriers, and is a versatile weapon that is light and mobile... with unguided rounds not as accurate as a direct fire 100mm gun, but with guided munitions rather more capable and potent.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2655
    Points : 2693
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  franco on Thu Sep 07, 2017 8:29 pm

    This should make some of you happy...

    Interfax 21:06
    RUSSIA HAS REDUCED PACE OF SOVIET ARMORED VEHICLES DISPOSAL 2.5-FOLD, NOW UPGRADING THEM AMID CHANGES IN INT'L SITUATION - DEFENSE MINISTRY
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1005
    Points : 1171
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  d_taddei2 on Mon Oct 02, 2017 11:42 pm

    franco wrote:This should make some of you happy...

    Interfax 21:06
    RUSSIA HAS REDUCED PACE OF SOVIET ARMORED VEHICLES DISPOSAL 2.5-FOLD, NOW UPGRADING THEM AMID CHANGES IN INT'L SITUATION - DEFENSE MINISTRY

    Problem is we never actually know the numbers of equipment take T-62 and T-64 they stated they were being scrapped and the next thing they turn up in eastern Ukraine and T-62 in Syria. I always thought that T-62 could be easily upgraded he'll if Ukraine can do it Russia can. Also T-64 could easily have the
    T-72 upgrades available I never understood why Russia wanted to scrap them when T-64 could be exported. Even T-55 upgraded or different turret could still be sold. Although some stuff does have to be scrapped. I wonder if T-64 will make an appearance in Syria but I suspect that Russia still has many T-62 in stock to send. Maybe after the war T-64 might be supplied but I would bet that upgraded T-72 will definitely be send after the war
    avatar
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 1489
    Points : 1489
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  miketheterrible on Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:02 am

    I recall many years ago Russia showcased upgrades to their older tanks, particularly the T-55. They had something like T-55M5 and M6 which showcased armor similar to that of the T-80U tanks. I imagine with modern ERA like Relict mixed with additional composite armor placements, new welded turret (even unmanned) and extension of the chassis and bigger engine could make the T-55's modern and capable (of course newer FCS and optics), but in the end, a newer tank is a better option.

    There are so many old T-72's that could be modernized to newest capabilities, and it would work just fine. Regardless what the corrupt Indians love to bitch and complain about their T-72's and T-90's, these tanks have actually proven themselves in Syria (guess the optics work compared to what the Indians claim) and upgrading those to even newer standards is the most ideal thing to do. The older tanks, I imagine will be sent to Syria to continue their needed use in the conflict there before they would be scrapped.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16702
    Points : 17310
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  GarryB on Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:36 am

    The problem there though is that those upgraded T-55s were basically upgraded with a bigger engine, new lighter wheels, a bit more armour and newer ERA and a T-72 turret complete with gun.

    It would be rather easier and cheaper just to upgrade a T-72 which already has better hull armour and a better engine.

    In many situations users don't need 125mm guns and for them a modest upgrade of a T-55 or T-62 makes a lot of sense, but when all new Russian tanks have 125mm or soon 152mm guns it does not make sense to upgrade old tanks to keep their old calibre guns in service.

    They have the MT-12 which is a high velocity smoothbore gun in 100mm calibre, a BMP-3 with a medium pressure 100mm rifled gun, and the 100mm rifled gun of the T-54/55... none of which are compatible... so the first Russian upgrade of a T-55 or T-54 or indeed T-62 will be to replace the whole turret, but when you have old T-72s with better armour and better engines etc why bother except for export either sales or donations.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Tue Nov 07, 2017 4:44 am

    d_taddei2 wrote:
    franco wrote:This should make some of you happy...

    Interfax 21:06
    RUSSIA HAS REDUCED PACE OF SOVIET ARMORED VEHICLES DISPOSAL 2.5-FOLD, NOW UPGRADING THEM AMID CHANGES IN INT'L SITUATION - DEFENSE MINISTRY

    Problem is we never actually know the numbers of equipment take T-62 and T-64 they stated they were being scrapped and the next thing they turn up in eastern Ukraine and T-62 in Syria. I always thought that T-62 could be easily upgraded he'll if Ukraine can do it Russia can. Also T-64 could easily have the
    T-72 upgrades available I never understood why Russia wanted to scrap them when T-64 could be exported. Even T-55 upgraded or different turret could still be sold. Although some stuff does have to be scrapped. I wonder if T-64 will make an appearance in Syria but I suspect that Russia still has many T-62 in stock to send. Maybe after the war T-64 might be supplied but I would bet that upgraded T-72 will definitely be send after the war

    At this point I do not think Russia has still many T-62 in stock to send. I think the stock has been totally (or almost totally) moved to Syria, not only what reached the frontline. It means Russia would not need to think about updates of the T-55 or the T-62.

    In other related topic you argued against the total decommission of the (M)T-12 as help to Syria. Here you think upgraded T-72 will be provided. I do not understand the point. The help is not about what Syria needs, is more about what Russia can provide without damaging its own defense if possible.
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1005
    Points : 1171
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  d_taddei2 on Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:44 am

    eehnie wrote:
    d_taddei2 wrote:
    franco wrote:This should make some of you happy...

    Interfax 21:06
    RUSSIA HAS REDUCED PACE OF SOVIET ARMORED VEHICLES DISPOSAL 2.5-FOLD, NOW UPGRADING THEM AMID CHANGES IN INT'L SITUATION - DEFENSE MINISTRY

    Problem is we never actually know the numbers of equipment take T-62 and T-64 they stated they were being scrapped and the next thing they turn up in eastern Ukraine and T-62 in Syria. I always thought that T-62 could be easily upgraded he'll if Ukraine can do it Russia can. Also T-64 could easily have the
    T-72 upgrades available I never understood why Russia wanted to scrap them when T-64 could be exported. Even T-55 upgraded or different turret could still be sold. Although some stuff does have to be scrapped. I wonder if T-64 will make an appearance in Syria but I suspect that Russia still has many T-62 in stock to send. Maybe after the war T-64 might be supplied but I would bet that upgraded T-72 will definitely be send after the war

    At this point I do not think Russia has still many T-62 in stock to send. I think the stock has been totally (or almost totally) moved to Syria, not only what reached the frontline. It means Russia would not need to think about updates of the T-55 or the T-62.

    In other related topic you argued against the total decommission of the (M)T-12 as help to Syria. Here you think upgraded T-72 will be provided. I do not understand the point. The help is not about what Syria needs, is more about what Russia can provide without damaging its own defense if possible.
    I think your getting me mixed up with someone else what I said about MT-12 was that I don't think it will be decommissioned by 2025 due to no real replacement and sheer number in stock. Your thread stated what would be decommissioned by 2025 and stated the above. So if you read correctly I wasn't against decommission just it unlikely due to replacement and number still in stock and we talked about possible replacements if I was totally against decommission then would I talk about replacement? ???? I think not. I even stated that Algeria has recently mounted MT-12 on trucks and I even stated that it still has a use as most use then as indirect artillery than anti tank guns now and in other threads I've praised use of anti tank guns in Syria and I am sure you know that. So maybe you don't read so well or understand English fully I don't know
    avatar
    d_taddei2

    Posts : 1005
    Points : 1171
    Join date : 2013-05-11
    Location : Scotland UK

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  d_taddei2 on Tue Nov 07, 2017 7:54 am

    Here is what I said. And the reason I also stated that I believe in selling/donating items and I am pretty certain that is what Russia has been doing to Syria so therefore come under the donating part.


    "
    Post n°20
    Re: State Armament Program 2018-2025
    Post  d_taddei2 on Thu Oct 12, 2017 6:19 pm
    Without joining the current calibre debate. I personally believe that all types of equipment you mention in the poll will still be in service and/or in reserve for one I can't see Russia getting rid of the huge number of MT-12 anytime soon without having to totally scrap them even though their pretty obsolete in future plans. But Russia harbours a lot of equipment and I am a firm believer of selling the stuff or donating/deal sweetners etc. But the longer they keep it the older/outdated it gets and the more it's less likely to sell or donate. And it's not just Russia but Ukraine and Belarus also harbour vast amounts"
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1533
    Points : 1558
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  eehnie on Wed Nov 08, 2017 1:40 pm

    After the total decommission of older material, in the other topic was said that the (M)T-12 would be first in line to help to allies (today Syria needs it), and its total decommission by 2025 or not would depend of the needs in the war. Now a new stage of the war begins, the stage post ISIS.

    Taking into account that tank and antitank weapons are of the same nature, there is not a real problem for the replacement of the (M)T-12 in active service with weapons of 125mm in the form of tanks, today in the reserve. Checking the orders of battle is easy to see how almost all the (M)T-12 in active service are deployed in units that also have tanks, and the change only would mean to increase the number of tanks. Plus, the reserve of Russia would suffer less giving the (M)T-12 as help than giving tanks. Even it is possible to see help to Syria in the form of (M)T-12 before than help to Syria in the form of T-64. As military concept the T-64 remains more modern than the (M)T-12, basically because of its caliber and mobility.

    A proper management of the defense resources of Russia would lead to a help to Syria with (M)T-12 and a replacement of the units of (M)T-12 in active service with tanks in the reserve (T-72 and T-90), before than to a help to Syria with T-72 (less still if are modernized). This way, the Russian Armed Forces active service and the Syrian Armed Forces, both, would have an improvement at minimum cost for Russia.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Older warfare performance and short/mid-term decomissions

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:32 am