Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Share
    avatar
    AirCargo

    Posts : 103
    Points : 107
    Join date : 2014-05-19
    Location : Seattle, WA. United States

    US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  AirCargo on Tue May 27, 2014 2:39 pm

    nemrod can you please post a link for that, thanks.
    avatar
    Hannibal Barca

    Posts : 1241
    Points : 1263
    Join date : 2013-12-13

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  Hannibal Barca on Tue May 27, 2014 2:46 pm

    Gosh! the poor man just posted a video of 3706 seconds and you ask him for a link!

    nemrod: I prefer to feel it than listen to it  Razz 
    avatar
    AirCargo

    Posts : 103
    Points : 107
    Join date : 2014-05-19
    Location : Seattle, WA. United States

    General Martin Dempsey takes note about US-Russia parity

    Post  AirCargo on Tue May 27, 2014 4:50 pm

    Sorry not all the graphics open on my end, thanks thought. Embarassed Embarassed 
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  nemrod on Tue May 27, 2014 11:19 pm

    AirCargo wrote:Sorry not all the graphics open on my end, thanks thought. Embarassed Embarassed 
    Mister:
    Firstly - the only link that I have is in french. This article came from Alfredo Jalife-Rahme at this link : Voltaire article, It is not translated in english yet : http://www.voltairenet.org/article183980.html.
    Secondly- you have the chance to be a native english tongue, it is the most important asset nowadays, and it ask you just a concentration of about one hour- obviously, if you want-.

    Sorry, untill now I could not provide you an english link other than the best reliable source, the video of the Gen. Demsey itself.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  nemrod on Wed May 28, 2014 11:51 pm

    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    USAF AND RUSSIAN AIR FORCE – A COMPARISON

    Post  nemrod on Wed May 28, 2014 11:59 pm

    I think the figures could mean all and nothing.
    It would be interresting to compare how much fighters F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35 ? Against, how much Mig-29 familly, and Su-27 Familly, Mig-25 familly ?
    Moreover the shift of balance is near, as China will overtake next the first place. It is only a matter of time.
    Furthermore it would be relevant to compare US Air Force with Russia and China air force. The great difference between US and China/Russia is the concept. US air force was design in order to maintain the huge empire, on contrary to China, and Russia, where their air force were designed to maintain the protection of their territorry.

    Could someone among you provide some figures about this subject ?
    F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35  against Mig-29 familly, Su-27 Familly and Mig-31.



    http://www.migflug.com/jetflights/usaf-and-russian-air-force-a-comparison.html
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  Werewolf on Thu May 29, 2014 8:26 pm

    This side is a joke on first look and not much better on 2nd look, biased alone on the part where it states "Wars and conflicts"

    It says:

    Conflict:

    Country involved (of Russia and the US)

    War in Afghanistan

    US

    Somali Civil War

    US

    Al-Qaeda insurgency in Yemen

    US

    War in North-West Pakistan

    US

    Syrian Civil War

    Russia, US

    Iraq War

    US

    Ukraine crisis:

    Russia

    Like russia having a war with Ukraine, or Russia is involved in Syria.

    Those numbers and the lack of classification of what is meant by stating Aircrafts as "Attack" and another time as "Attack".

    Those numbers are not really detailed and hard to understand what they are actually referring.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  nemrod on Thu May 29, 2014 9:12 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    Those numbers are not really detailed and hard to understand what they are actually referring.

    I agree with you, this is why, in this link
    http://www.russiadefence.net/t3191-usaf-and-russian-air-force-a-comparison

    I asked if someone among you could provide some figures about :
    How much F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35 against how much Mig-29 familly, Su-27 Familly and Mig-31.
    avatar
    Werewolf

    Posts : 5357
    Points : 5588
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  Werewolf on Thu May 29, 2014 9:27 pm

    nemrod wrote:
    I agree with you, this is why, in this link
    http://www.russiadefence.net/t3191-usaf-and-russian-air-force-a-comparison

    I asked if  someone among you could provide some figures about :
    How much F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35  against how much Mig-29 familly, Su-27 Familly and Mig-31.

    I think it is a job for stealthflanker.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  nemrod on Thu May 29, 2014 10:41 pm

    Werewolf wrote:
    nemrod wrote:
    I agree with you, this is why, in this link
    http://www.russiadefence.net/t3191-usaf-and-russian-air-force-a-comparison

    I asked if  someone among you could provide some figures about :
    How much F-15, F-16, F-18, F-22, F-35  against how much Mig-29 familly, Su-27 Familly and Mig-31.

    I think it is a job for stealthflanker.

    Let's wait StelthFlanker  Very Happy 
    avatar
    BlackArrow

    Posts : 131
    Points : 111
    Join date : 2013-05-17

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  BlackArrow on Fri May 30, 2014 5:44 pm

    Your question is not clear. Do you mean how many American built combat aircraft compared to the number of Soviet and Russian aircraft in service? I would have thought there were more American built combat aircraft in service today. Virtually nobody still flies the MiG-25 today, maybe the Russian air force, I am not sure.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Begining of Shift of military balance: Russia surpassed US in production of new combat planes

    Post  nemrod on Thu Dec 04, 2014 4:30 pm

    Who could be astonished ?
    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/04/pentagon-worries-that-russia-can-now-outshoot-u-s-stealth-jets.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+thedailybeast%2Farticles+%28The+Daily+Beast+-+Latest+Articles%29#



    “We—the U.S. [Department of Defense]—haven’t been pursuing appropriate methods to counter EA [electronic attack] for years,”
    A senior Air Force official with extensive experience on the F-22 told The Daily Beast.
    Really ? For years among the best fighters in the world last the SU-35, and Mig-35, if not the best. And their so called effectiveness of air-to-air missiles -especially AMRAAM- are just hoax, as their stealth technology.
    US Air Force are admitting that their philosophy did not work. Now, ask money to US tax payers.




    Pentagon Worries That Russia Can Now Outshoot U.S. Stealth Jets

    American fighter planes are the fastest, most maneuverable jets in the world. But their weapons are becomingly increasingly obsolete—and that has some in the U.S. Air Force spooked.

    High flying and fast, the F-22 Raptor stealth jet is by far the most lethal fighter America has ever built. But the Raptor—and indeed all U.S. fighters—have a potential Achilles’ heel, according to a half-dozen current and former Air Force officials. The F-22’s long-range air-to-air missiles might not be able to hit an enemy aircraft, thanks to new enemy radar-jamming techniques.

    The issue has come to the fore as tensions continue to rise with Russia and a potential conflict between the great powers is once again a possibility—even if a remote one.

    “We—the U.S. [Department of Defense]—haven’t been pursuing appropriate methods to counter EA [electronic attack] for years,” a senior Air Force official with extensive experience on the F-22 told The Daily Beast. “So, while we are stealthy, we will have a hard time working our way through the EA to target [an enemy aircraft such as a Russian-built Sukhoi] Su-35s and our missiles will have a hard time killing them.”

    The problem is that many potential adversaries, such as the Chinese and the Russians, have developed advanced digital radio frequency memory (DRFM) jammers. These jammers, which effectively memorize an incoming radar signal and repeat it back to the sender, seriously hamper the performance of friendly radars.

    Worse, these new jammers essentially blind the small radars found onboard air-to-air missiles like the Raytheon AIM-120 AMRAAM, which is the primary long-range weapon for all U.S. and most allied fighter planes.

    That means it could take several missile shots to kill an enemy fighter, even for an advanced stealth aircraft like the Raptor. “While exact Pk [probability of kill] numbers are classified, let’s just say that I won’t be killing these guys one for one,” the senior Air Force official said. It’s the “same issue” for earlier American fighters like the F-15, F-16, or F/A-18.

    Another Air Force official with experience on the stealthy new F-35 Joint Strike Fighter agreed. “AMRAAM’s had some great upgrades over the years, but at the end of the day, it’s old technology and wasn’t really designed with today’s significant EA in mind,” this official said.

    Like boxers, every missile has a reach, a range, a limit to how far it can hit. In the not-too-distant future, the AMRAAM might also be out-ranged by new weapons that are being developed around the world. Particularly, Russia is known to be developing an extremely long-range weapon called the K-100 that has far better reach than anything currently in existence.




    “While we are stealthy, we will have a hard time targeting Russian Su-35s and our missiles will have a hard time killing them.”

    The problem is not a new one. Historically, the Pentagon has always prioritized the development of new fighters over the development new weapons—it’s a uniquely American blind spot. During the 1970s, the then brand new F-15A Eagle carried the same antiquated armament as the Vietnam-era F-4 Phantom II. It wasn’t until the 1990s that the F-15 received a weapon in the form of the AMRAAM that could take full advantage of its abilities. The same applies to short-range weapons—it wasn’t until the early 2000s with the introduction of the AIM-9X that the U.S. had a dogfighting weapon that could match or better the Russian R-73 Archer missile.

    The Air Force officials all said that some of the American missiles would get through during a fight—there is no question of that—but it would take a lot more weapons than anyone ever expected. The problem is that fighter aircraft don’t carry that many missiles.

    The Raptor carries six AMRAAMs and two shorter range AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles inside its weapons bays. At the moment, the F-35 carries only four AMRAAM missiles inside its weapons bays, but that might be expanded to six in the future. Older fighters like the Boeing F-15 Eagle carry no more than eight missiles—while the F-16 usually carries no more than six weapons.





    That means that if a fighter has to fire—for instance—three missiles to kill a single enemy fighter, the Pentagon is facing a serious problem.

    “Getting a first shot is one thing,” said a former Air Force fighter pilot with extensive experience with Russian weapons. “Needing another shot when you have expended your load is another when your force structure is limited in terms of the number of platforms available for a given operation.”

    There are some potential solutions, but all of them mean spending more money to develop new missiles. former Air Force intelligence chief Lt. Gen. Dave Deptula said it’s “critical” that the U.S. and its allies move “air-to-air weapons into a future where they can effectively deal with adversary electronic attack.”

    One relatively simple fix would be to develop a missile that picks out its targets using radars with a completely different frequency band. Current fighter radars and missiles operate on what is called the X-band, but they don’t necessarily have to. “Getting out of X band is on option,” said one senior Air Force official.

    The Pentagon could also develop a new missile that combines multiple types of sensors such as infrared and radar into the same weapon—which has been attempted without much success in the past.

    Right now, the Defense Department—led by the Navy—is working to increase the range of the AIM-9X version of the Sidewinder by 60 percent to give the Pentagon’s fighter fleet some sort of counter to the jamming problem. But even with the extended reach, the modified Sidewinder won’t have anywhere close to the range of an AMRAAM.

    The other option is to stuff fighters like the F-22 and F-35 with more missiles that are smaller. Lockheed Martin, for example, is developing a small long-range air-to-air missile called the “Cuda” that could double or triple the number of weapons carried by either U.S. stealth fighter. “Look to a new generation of U.S. air-to-air missiles, like Cuda, to neutralize any potential numerical advantage,” one senior industry official said.

    The industry official said that despite the small size, new weapons like the Cuda can offer extremely impressive range because it doesn’t have an explosive warhead—it just runs into the target and destroys it with sheer kinetic energy.

    But the senior Air Force official expressed deep skepticism that such a weapon could be both small and far-reaching. “I doubt you can solve range and the need for a large magazine with the same missile,” he said.

    This official added that future weapons would be far better at countering enemy jamming—so much so that future fighters will not need to have the sheer speed and maneuverability of an aircraft like the Raptor. “I think top end speed, super cruise, and acceleration will all decline in importance as weapons advance in range and speed,” he said.

    For a military that’s committed hundreds of billions of dollars to such advanced fighters, such developments might not exactly be welcome news.


    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  GarryB on Fri Dec 05, 2014 10:12 am

    What a stupid ignorant article...

    American fighter planes are the fastest, most maneuverable jets in the world.

    The F-16 is mach 2 or less, F-22 is Mach 2.2, F-15 is mach 2.4 perhaps...

    MiG-35, and Su-35 and their predecessors... MiG-29 and Su-27 are Mach 2.4 fighters, and the MiG-31 can fly at Mach 2.8 for about 5 minutes and about mach 2.6 for 20 minutes and Mach 2.4 for as long as it likes.

    With thrust vector engine control both the MiG-35 and Su-35 are both far more manouverable than any US fighter.

    Particularly, Russia is known to be developing an extremely long-range weapon called the K-100 that has far better reach than anything currently in existence.

    The R-37M has a flight range of 280km... rather more than the Phoenix missile... a weapon currently only in service in the Iranian AF. The export model of the R-37M which is currenly entering Russian AF service with the new upgrades of MiG-31BMs and also likely operational with the Su-35 and MiG-35, is called RVV-BD and could be in service fairly quickly in the Indian AF if they want it.

    Otherwise the article is just self centred whine...


    _________________
    “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
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Begining of Shift of military balance : When Russia surpassed U.S. in production of new combat planes

    Post  nemrod on Mon Dec 22, 2014 9:33 pm

    http://theaviationist.com/2014/12/17/russia-produces-more-combat-planes/

    It is no use to tell that SU-35 outclasses most of the western fighters, including F-22. The Mig-35 outclasses most of US fighters, including the F-22, and the incomming F-35.
    The problem with Russia, Russian air force cannot afford to build up more SU-35, and Mig-35, and their number are still not enough. Let's hope an effort next.



    According to the Joint Stock Company UAC (United Aircraft-building Corporation), Russia has produced more combat aircraft than the U.S., in 2014.

    As reported by Russian media outlets, in an interview with Ekho Moskvy radio station, Vladislav Goncharenko, deputy head of the military aviation programmes department at UAC (the a Russian holding which encompasses Irkut, Mikoyan, Sukhoi, Ilyushin, Tupolev, Beriev and Yakovlev), Moscow has surpassed the U.S. in the number of produced combat aircraft.

    Whilst in 2013, UAC companies delivered 68 planes, 100 aircraft, 95 of those are combat planes for the Russian Air Force were produced and delivered in 2014.

    Along with the production of more planes, UAC subsidiaries have carried out the modernization of existing aircraft and the development of new weapons systems, Goncharenko said.

    Even though we don’t know the corresponding U.S. figures, the number of new aircraft delivered to the front-line units of the Russian Air Force is a clear sign Moscow is strongly supporting its renascent military power.

    For sure “quantity” does not always come with “quality” and, most probably, U.S. technology will still be ahead of Russian (or Chinese) one for several decades. However, it’s impossible to foresee the outcome of a dogfight in which few, advanced American 6th Generation fighter jets, face outnumbering Russian 5th Generation warplanes.

    In the meanwhile, PAK-FA T-50 prototypes have been quipped with Himalayas EW defense systems to increase jamming resistance and self-protection capabilities. The delivery of the first production PAK-FA 5th Generation stealth jet to the Air Force is planned for 2016 whereas new type of combat and reconnaissance drone will appear by 2018. 6th Generation aircraft are being studied as well.

    By 2020, 55 PAK-FA fighters will be in service with the Russian Air Force.

    H/T to @Missilito for the heads-up
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  GarryB on Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:29 am

    Russia cannot afford to build too many planes too quickly an end up with too many planes in service, or large production capacity factories now idle because they made planes too quickly and now have no orders.

    Slow production gives time to build infrastructure like aircraft shelters, and also train enough pilots and crew to actually operate the aircraft.

    it also means that the companies have more time to get orders from foreign customers so that production facilities can continue to make planes well after the Russian air force is equipped.

    Russia has the enormous advantage over the US that they still have MiG-29s and soon MiG-35s and Su-30s and Su-35s and Su-34s all in current production and will soon have PAK FAs in production too.

    In comparison the US has F-35 and F-18E/F in production AFAIK.


    _________________
    “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

    F-15E

    Posts : 103
    Points : 94
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  F-15E on Tue Dec 23, 2014 12:53 pm

    nemrod wrote:

    It is no use to tell that SU-35 outclasses most of the western fighters, including F-22. The Mig-35 outclasses most of US fighters, including the F-22,

    What did you smoke dude ?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16532
    Points : 17140
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  GarryB on Wed Dec 24, 2014 8:40 am

    Both Russian aircraft can outmanouver either US aircraft and at the end of the day I would expect Russian ECM equipment should be able to deal with AMRAAM and AIM-9X, so if it comes down to a cannon fight... my money would be on the Russian fighters.


    _________________
    “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
    nemrod

    Posts : 809
    Points : 1305
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  nemrod on Thu Dec 25, 2014 12:44 am

    GarryB wrote:Both Russian aircraft can outmanouver either US aircraft and at the end of the day I would expect Russian ECM equipment should be able to deal with AMRAAM and AIM-9X, so if it comes down to a cannon fight... my money would be on the Russian fighters.

    We talked several times in the past about the subject relating air to air missiles.
    I remember, I answered by giving you this link , where Tom Cooper explained that between 1992-2002, US engaged several F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18 using amraam missiles against Mig-25. If indeed, there were few success swaggered by US media here :

    using an hollywood montage that only americans have the secret, nevertheless the reality is less shining. As I explained US engagement's doctrin oblige a fight  only by respecting a ration at least 5 against 1, if not 10 against 1. Each time, when this ratio is not respected, US gave up the fight. They remembered the hard lessons in Vietnam, and in Korea. Their so-called suprematy became only hype, and they realized -in Vietnam- how the air to air missiles and radars were not reliables.
    It is evident if you launch several dozens of missiles -amraam-, if none reach their target, it would be unfortunate-and it occureed several times-.
    Tom Cooper explained in Acig.org, that US used to launch several dozens of amraam and several times all missed their target. Take care! I talked about AMRAAM. The old iraqis Mig-25 could evaded US, and british air to air missiles them easily. If US air force that was in that time in position of suprematy against iraqi air force were not able to down easily old Iraqi Mig-25 with their so-called state of art weaponneries, what would be happened against modern russian and chinese fighters ?

    In that time, there were no internet, no specialists that could explained us how US used to lie. Nowadays, Russia air force has nothing to see with the failing economy of the 90's. And it is important to add that Yeltsin's adminstration behaved like cowards, they used to sell, to give their secret weapons to US. Meanwhile, US gave nothing. And it is important to mention that, in that time, US could access easily to some strategic secrets relating to Mig-23-25-27-29-31, and SU-22-25-27. I don't know if they have the secret of russian Mig-33, and SU-33.
    Russia nowadays is another country, a real superpower. For that reason, Russia's new fighters are a real threat for american fighters. This time for US, the threat won't be virtual, it will be real, and russian -including indian, chinese- air force could easiy kick-assed US air force.
    avatar
    max steel

    Posts : 2967
    Points : 2998
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  max steel on Thu Apr 02, 2015 11:51 pm

    Analysts say Russia needs quality growth of its armed forces

    Analysts say Russia needs quality growth of its armed forces



    QUERY : Where does Russia armed forces lack as compared to US armed soldiers ? what quality do they lack unshaven ? Less experience ? scratch
    avatar
    henriksoder

    Posts : 24
    Points : 41
    Join date : 2015-04-03

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  henriksoder on Sat Apr 04, 2015 7:43 am

    max steel wrote: Analysts say Russia needs quality growth of its armed forces  

    Analysts say Russia needs quality growth of its armed forces



    QUERY : Where does Russia armed forces lack as compared to US armed soldiers ? what quality do they lack unshaven  ? Less experience ? scratch

    I think US army got better got better equipment on the battlefield, for example high-technology drones, tanks and aircrafts with high precision and weapons which is stronger than Russia's. US army is better trained, they can better obtain a stronger offensive and defensive than the Russian army can. Still, Russia got almost three times more tanks, many well experinced soldiers and can almost control the sea with their many corvettes and warships. They can fulfil a stronger offensive than US army can, but US army is better equipped to face a Russian invasion than the Russian army are.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Apr 04, 2015 7:47 am

    henriksoder wrote:
    max steel wrote: Analysts say Russia needs quality growth of its armed forces  

    Analysts say Russia needs quality growth of its armed forces



    QUERY : Where does Russia armed forces lack as compared to US armed soldiers ? what quality do they lack unshaven  ? Less experience ? scratch

    I think US army got better got better equipment on the battlefield, for example high-technology drones, tanks and aircrafts with high precision and weapons which is stronger than Russia's. US army is better trained, they can better obtain a stronger offensive and defensive than the Russian army can. Still, Russia got almost three times more tanks, many well experinced soldiers and can almost control the sea with their many corvettes and warships. They can fulfil a stronger offensive than US army can, but US army is better equipped to face a Russian invasion than the Russian army are.

    What?

    Do you know how they train in Russia?  Do you know the equipment they field?  Russia also has high quality tanks, aircrafts and drones with high percision weapons.  KAB missiles are all guided, Kh missiles are all guided and high percision.  Su-27's are all high tech.  T-90s and T-72B3's are all high tech.  Russian army has plenty of experience and their training is pretty much no difference.  Plenty of surprise drills, and now aircraft pilots train as much as US pilots per hour. Or are you the type to believe that M4's mean high tech and skills?
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  TR1 on Sat Apr 04, 2015 7:59 am

    US has far more precision weaponry in service. It is not even a comparison....
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:04 am

    TR1 wrote:US has far more precision weaponry in service. It is not even a comparison....

    I never actually seen any numbers on the amount of KAB and Kh weaponry in storage.  I know they love to use dumb bombs as the nation is probably swimming in them, but I never seen any estimates on the guided munitions.  But they have been stockpiling for decades but rarely use them.  So I cannot comment on the number of precision guided munitions in terms of numbers.  But weapons like Iskanders and Tochka's fall under that too and they have far more of these short range BM's than the west.

    I remember reading how France had ran out of guided munitions when in the Libya campaign and had to use concrete bombs.

    Now with this said, is there any news regarding guided kits for dumb bombs in Russia? I know there was something proposed but never heard beyond that.
    avatar
    TR1

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 5708
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  TR1 on Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:07 am

    LOL @ whoever down-voted that.


    You have to be utterly delusional to not think the US has a massive lead in precision weapons. Compare the number of Russian precision weapons bought in past few years, to what the US has since the end of the Cold War.
    Tactical Missile corps has published the number of guided weaposn they sold for a number of years. Not impressive numbers by any stretch.

    US has far more platforms that can use precision weapons as well.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7252
    Points : 7546
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  sepheronx on Sat Apr 04, 2015 8:09 am

    TR1 wrote:LOL @ whoever down-voted that.


    You have to be utterly delusional to not think the US has a massive lead in precision weapons. Compare the number of Russian precision weapons bought in past few years, to what the US has since the end of the Cold War.


    Well, I didn't do it so doing point at me.

    But I am curious about the numbers. Cause KAB series and Kh series have all existed for decades and I imagine the soviet government purchased a ton of them and probably stored them, and now I know recently Russia has been purchasing a lot but curious what the numbers are from the soviet era to now in storage.

    And I edited my last post, but I am wondering if you know TR1, but are there any known guidance kits for dumb bombs for Russia? I know something was proposed and shown but heard nothing beyond that.

    Sponsored content

    Re: US-NATO Armed Forces vs Russian Armed Forces

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Oct 22, 2017 7:16 pm