Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Question Thread: Russian Army

    Share

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  George1 on Sun Apr 29, 2012 7:19 pm

    The post referred to Soviet Army equipment not, Air Force, Navy, nuclear forces etc etc etc.

    It is about ground forces equipment

    flamming_python
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3182
    Points : 3310
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  flamming_python on Wed May 02, 2012 1:00 am

    Hmm in terms of pure casualty counts I would say something like:

    AK-74
    Grad
    Smerch
    Tochka-U
    Msta-S
    Su-25
    BMP-2

    Mkay.. something like that

    IronsightSniper
    Junior Lieutenant
    Junior Lieutenant

    Posts : 496
    Points : 520
    Join date : 2010-09-25
    Location : California, USA

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  IronsightSniper on Sun Jun 24, 2012 2:38 pm

    There's really no dispute on which modern equipment would cause the most damage, however there may be some debatable question: such as, which ADS is the best? The answer to that is, non, since the whole point of an IADS (Integrated Air Defense System) is to have all the bases covered, from short to long to anti-helicopters to anti-ballistic missiles. However, in terms of sheer versatility, the Pantsyr would probably be the most efficient ADS.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  TR1 on Sun Jun 24, 2012 7:52 pm

    Well it is hard to look at Pantsyr alone - I think more useful would be the S-400 site as a whole, protected by the Pantsir batteries.

    S-400 + Pantsir = scary.


    Tor fans might disagree though, many people are not a fan of Pantsir's wheeled base. Though that might not be a huge problem for its current role, if Army ever acquires it, it will certainly have tracked chassis.

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Zivo on Mon Jun 25, 2012 2:06 am

    TR1 wrote:Well it is hard to look at Pantsyr alone - I think more useful would be the S-400 site as a whole, protected by the Pantsir batteries.

    S-400 + Pantsir = scary.


    Tor fans might disagree though, many people are not a fan of Pantsir's wheeled base. Though that might not be a huge problem for its current role, if Army ever acquires it, it will certainly have tracked chassis.

    Like this?

    http://sphotos.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/422082_341838505839495_2021873323_n.jpg

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  TR1 on Mon Jun 25, 2012 3:24 am

    Yeah thats the one I had in mind.

    Though I suspect army might be interested in putting it on a new unified chassis.

    Zivo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1504
    Points : 1540
    Join date : 2012-04-13
    Location : U.S.A.

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Zivo on Mon Jun 25, 2012 4:08 am

    No doubt they will, the one in the pic is just a floor model at the factory.

    Anyone figured out what radar the darker pantsir in the back has? I remember seeing it sometime back when it was painted tan and I've still never found an answer to what system it is.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jun 25, 2012 11:17 am

    Different forces will use different versions of TOR and Pantsir-S1.

    The Air Force will use wheeled versions, while the Army will use tracked models of both vehicles as they have done previously. The GM-xxxx tracked vehicle chassis is made in Belarus, but there is no place for that in the heavy, medium, or light brigades as their purpose is simplified logistics and operational performance as all vehicles in the units have the same level of protection and mobility. This would mean that any missile (TOR) or Gun missile (Pantsir-S1/Tunguska-S1) regiments would need Armata, kurganets-25, Boomerang-25 or Boomerang-10 based vehicles. The Tunguska is a 34 ton vehicle so I would suspect lightened versions in all but the Armata formations. For batteries that operate with other units like S-400 batteries then wheeled versions make sense though for TOR or Pantsir-S1 batteries that operate with S-300V it would make sense to use tracked models there too for obvious reasons.

    I rather suspect for Light Brigades there will be a lighter AD vehicle... there was a suggestion that the VDV are getting a new air defence vehicle developed for them... one can only guess if that is a BMD-4 or Boomerang-10 based vehicle, though it will replace the stopgap SA-13 systems introduced to replace the ZU-23 units. It could be Phoenix or SOSNA-R, or a light Tunguska with 4 missiles and one twin barrel gun... it could even be Kornet-EM based...


    _________________
    “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

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 988
    Points : 1141
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    What does C4I mean?

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Tue Nov 06, 2012 5:15 pm

    What does C4I mean? I assume it has nothing to do with explosives?

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9432
    Points : 9924
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  George1 on Tue Nov 06, 2012 6:09 pm

    C4ISR is a term used by the U.S. military (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance)

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  TR1 on Tue Nov 06, 2012 9:38 pm

    http://lmgtfy.com/?q=C4I

    ricky123
    Senior Sergeant
    Senior Sergeant

    Posts : 223
    Points : 327
    Join date : 2012-08-20

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  ricky123 on Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:53 am

    come to india instead . $25k will last u a few years and u may even get a chance to join indian army . if at all u are not able to do that . u can still recover $25000 in less then 2 years by working in IT companies lol .... Twisted Evil

    Vladimir79
    Grand Marshal
    Grand Marshal

    Posts : 2193
    Points : 3099
    Join date : 2009-07-10

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Vladimir79 on Tue Nov 13, 2012 4:42 pm

    Is the FFL not an option? If you go there you get to join a foreign unit loaded with Russians. Make a friend who is headed back and they will sponsor you for migration to Russia. After your service you will have an EU passport and a Russian connection. Go to UK, Netherlands, Germany or wherever you want to get a job and migrate, or get your sponsor into Russia. It isn't an immediate solution but it is a path to what you want while you serve the military.


    _________________
    The true value of life knows only the paratrooper. For he is more likely to look death in the eye.  -- Vasily Margelov

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  TR1 on Tue Nov 13, 2012 9:23 pm

    Consider college before getting into something like the military.

    It will be a great failsafe and backup option.


    By the way- if there is a massive European and American economical collapse, things will not be rosy in Russia.

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  TR1 on Tue Nov 13, 2012 9:25 pm

    Vladimir79 wrote:Is the FFL not an option? If you go there you get to join a foreign unit loaded with Russians. Make a friend who is headed back and they will sponsor you for migration to Russia. After your service you will have an EU passport and a Russian connection. Go to UK, Netherlands, Germany or wherever you want to get a job and migrate, or get your sponsor into Russia. It isn't an immediate solution but it is a path to what you want while you serve the military.

    They pay solid as well.
    Probably as good or better than most jobs you can find without a college degree these days in the states.


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Thu Mar 28, 2013 12:40 am

    Actually it would be a very interesting anti helo weapon... especially in 23mm calibre with a smoothbore barrel and an APFSDS projectile, though most helos have only minimal armour so some sort of HE round might actually be more effective against a few targets.

    Of course in urban combat the APFSDS rounds able to punch through concrete walls and sand bags would be a useful weapon for attack and defence.

    From memory the 15mm AMR developed in the west was based on the 14.5mm round and could easily penetrate 40mm steel plate at 1,000m, so a hot loaded 23mm round should allow a heavier projectile at higher velocities to do even better... especially with a smooth bore barrel.

    The obvious problem however is that once the round has penetrated, how effective will it be, which suggests to me that a new sub calibre sabot round with the front designed for penetration and the rear filled with HE and incendiary material might be an ideal anti MRAP weapon that pentrates light armour but explodes inside the target for maximum effect. An APHEI round.

    Of course the weapon would be rather heavy... it would probably make more sense just to take a METIS-M which delivers a much more powerful HE charge to 2km.


    _________________
    “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

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  TR1 on Thu Mar 28, 2013 3:52 am

    Never been much need for it I guess.

    For anti-material role there are a variety of light AT launchers.

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 988
    Points : 1141
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    WP rounds for russian artillery and tanks

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Thu Jun 13, 2013 5:46 am

    The US has used them throughout the cold war and with outstanding success during the Vietnam war. Have the soviets and then Russians ever used used them? IMO they're a lot more useful than dedicated smoke rounds and grenades because they also offer a devastating incendiary effect while giving equally thick smoke.

    Also if tanks could have WP smoke grenade launchers that could also be a useful weapon.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:16 am

    Not very widely, no.

    They have incendiary weapons including the RPO-D and the ZAB series of bombs which are devastating, but AFAIK they don't carry such ammo in their tanks.

    BTW WP wasn't that effective in Vietnam... napalm was more widely used and it was used fairly indiscriminately.


    _________________
    “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

    KomissarBojanchev
    Lieutenant Colonel
    Lieutenant Colonel

    Posts : 988
    Points : 1141
    Join date : 2012-08-05
    Age : 19
    Location : Varna, Bulgaria

    Russian Biological and Chemical weapons:

    Post  KomissarBojanchev on Thu Jun 13, 2013 4:47 pm

    That means  soviet mortars, artillery and tanks had a serious  disadvantage in incendiary weapons. Pretty much any NATO tank with a rifled cannon could fire WP rounds. Not to mention 60mm+ NATO mortars.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Fri Jun 14, 2013 12:29 am

    All Soviet and Russian tanks can generate smoke screens using smoke grenades and by injecting diesel fuel into the exhaust manifold.

    The Soviets have a wide range of fuel air explosive munitions that are far more effective at killing enemy personel than Phosphorus... phosphorus burns fiercely, but will not knock down walls or shatter glass, it gives off poisonous fumes too, but FAEs burn off the oxygen and suffocate people just as effectively, but the blast and heat effects are more consistent.


    _________________
    “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

    Stealthflanker
    Major
    Major

    Posts : 808
    Points : 894
    Join date : 2009-08-04
    Age : 28
    Location : Indonesia

    Russian gun launched ATGM questions

    Post  Stealthflanker on Sun Sep 22, 2013 2:40 pm

    As in title..hmm aside from development of Kornet-D, Hermes and other type of ATGM's..i wonder how's the development of the Russian gun launched ATGM ? Steady pace so i could expect to see new form of refleks or any other stuff in the future or perhaps it's been abandoned ?

    Other question is related to doctrine.. How those gun-launched ATGM's will be used in a battle ?

    Would love to ask in tank.net.. nonetheless they're not taking new members at the moment.

    thanks for any response.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15465
    Points : 16172
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  GarryB on Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:55 am

    First of all Tank Gun launched missile is a misnomer as they have laser beam riding anti armour missiles for direct fire use and also SALH missiles for artillery use.


    They have a laser guided round designed for every tank calibre weapon and above including 122mm gun/howitzer, 120mm mortar, 125mm tank gun, 130mm naval guns, 152mm artillery, 180mm artillery shell, 203mm artillery and 240mm mortar. I have not read about any 160mm mortar round but it would no surprise me.

    I also suspect a laser guided direct fire 152mm tank round, and several new guided rounds for the 100mm rifled main gun of the BMP-3, 125mm Sokol-1 guided shell using EO guidance, and new rounds for Koalition.


    _________________
    “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

    SSDD
    Private
    Private

    Posts : 19
    Points : 27
    Join date : 2013-10-26
    Location : Bharat

    Why T 95 project was cancelled?

    Post  SSDD on Sun Nov 03, 2013 5:37 am

    Why this tank project was cancelled? This tank has to had 152 mm smooth bore gun as main armament and 30 mm autocannon as secondary weapon. It would be an extemely power full tank, why it was cancelled?dunno 

    Is there any thing to do with brain drain?confused 

    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  TR1 on Sun Nov 03, 2013 5:39 am

    Because it was a Cold War project not corresponding to the realities of warfare and economics today.

    Nothing to do with brain drain. Armata is more advanced of a project, even if it won't have a giant gun.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Question Thread: Russian Army

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 1:51 am


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 06, 2016 1:51 am