Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Russia - Military Strength vs Expenditure. How do they do it?

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Russia - Military Strength vs Expenditure. How do they do it?

Old 29th Jan 2022, 10:14
  #81 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,575
Received 18 Likes on 10 Posts
Of course the Russians could use their tried and tested tactic, perfected in Chechnya and Syria, of killing anyone who looks vaguely threatening along with anybody who happens to be standing in their vicinity, AKA the "No people, no problem" doctrine (or "What RoE?")
dead_pan is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2022, 16:19
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Rhone-Alpes
Posts: 1,160
Received 244 Likes on 140 Posts
Originally Posted by MPN11
I?

. Same with China, if you want consumer electronics etc. The West doesn’t have the leverage with the Communist States any more … we have sold out long ago.
There is an awful lot of Chinese electronics that are not necessary. If the West doesn't buy it, the Chinese can't eat it.
Tartiflette Fan is offline  
Old 29th Jan 2022, 16:24
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Rhone-Alpes
Posts: 1,160
Received 244 Likes on 140 Posts
Originally Posted by meleagertoo
Inended to match captured NATO stock isn't it, unless I'm mistaken?. Not daft, that, is it?
Isn't the NATO round 5.56 mm ?
Tartiflette Fan is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2022, 06:14
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Russian Federation
Age: 36
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by aerobat77

Even never systems appear to shine only on the paper . Lets take the fancy s-400 air defense system . In theory superior to patriot , in practise in syria or armenia turkish drones and missiles were able to perform their mission nevertheless .

Russia never showed off military strenght big scale since ww2 , in fact they even struggled to force out few thousand rebels out of aleppo in syria , the same in chehen war .
Totally disagree here.
First of all comparing Russian Forces today to what they were in the 90's and early 2000's is a comparison on it's own. Restructuring and rearming started I believe in 2009. Even comparing salaries pentions and benefits then and now show night and day. In the 90's pathrtic salaries (forget about pensions) weren't paid for months. Yes, salaries aren't close to UK level, but not far by purchasing power comparison.

As for Syria, this operation actually shows in my opinion a major success. In 4 years the bad guys (except for sleeper cells) have been eliminated in Syria. This is something the US hasn't managed to do in Iraq and Afghanistan using greater numbers, much more financing and much heavier involvement.
Don't forget that Russian Forces only provided intel gathering, air support, logistics and special forces on the ground. In addition to this the allies are Syrians, who no offence, aren't most disciplined warriors out there.

As for your Armenian comparison, Russian Forces weren't involved in the conflict of Armenia vs. Azerbaijan+Turkey in Karabakh so no clue why you used this scenario at all. Armenian president Sargisyan pissed off Russia to the point that when the conflict started he was on his own. Under the ODKB treaty of mutual assistance Russia denied his request for assistance because the fighting took place in Karabakh, which even Armenia recognised as Azerbaijani territory. Azeris and Turks were careful not to cross or shoot across the border into Armenia. The conflict pretty much ended when Azerbaijan accidentally took out a Russian Mi-24 that was escorting a Russian convoy, promptly apologized, paid out hefty compensation. Putin said "enough", and that same day a ceasefire was signed.

Armenia doesn't have any S-400's, only S-300's which they didn't even use in the conflict. And even using Soviet-era Air defense systems they took out 15 or something Bayraktars. If they had Pantsirs (preferably latest version with post-Syrian upgrades) and used not as stand-alone units but as they are supposed to be - in complex with long range systems and proper detection radars, they could have denied Azerbaijan air superiority.
The Pantsir has proven itself pretty capable in taking out UAV's.
Vitek is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2022, 10:05
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Vitek
As for Syria, this operation actually shows in my opinion a major success. In 4 years the bad guys (except for sleeper cells) have been eliminated in Syria. This is something the US hasn't managed to do in Iraq and Afghanistan using greater numbers, much more financing and much heavier involvement.
Don't forget that Russian Forces only provided intel gathering, air support, logistics and special forces on the ground. In addition to this the allies are Syrians, who no offence, aren't most disciplined warriors out there..
Don't forget: systematic and deliberate bombing of hospitals and civilian infrastructure. That was classy, and Ukrainians know what to expect... I should not mention that video of Russians beating a Syrian guy to death, and trying to sever his limbs with a shovel before hanging his corpse upside down and burning it, they were "employed by a private company"... Good guys.
fab777 is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2022, 11:03
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,321
Received 98 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by Vitek
Totally disagree here.
As for Syria, this operation actually shows in my opinion a major success. In 4 years the bad guys (except for sleeper cells) have been eliminated in Syria. This is something the US hasn't managed to do in Iraq and Afghanistan using greater numbers, much more financing and much heavier involvement.
Hmm, dunno. That success was rather due to the Syrian Army plus no RoE by the Russian militias. Obviously by killing everyone who looks remotely like an enemy you can 'win' a war where the allied regular Syrian Troops were much better equipped already than the opposition. IS has been mostly eliminated by the US and the Kurds. The Russian Forces rather manged to decimate the other Syrian opposition forces. I wouldn't really consider this as a shining example.
Hmmm, OK, maybe Syria is a good outlook when it comes to the question what Ukranian Hospitals will be facing.
henra is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2022, 19:17
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Russian Federation
Age: 36
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by fab777
Don't forget: systematic and deliberate bombing of hospitals and civilian infrastructure. That was classy, and Ukrainians know what to expect... I should not mention that video of Russians beating a Syrian guy to death, and trying to sever his limbs with a shovel before hanging his corpse upside down and burning it, they were "employed by a private company"... Good guys.
Show me a map of a city in Syria and without any intel I will show you where the bad guys are.

Hint: hospitals are usually the headquarters, schools are often the garrisons or warehouses.

Sorry and sad as may be, but these assholes used civilian infrastructure in this way. Hanging around a bunch of bearded assholes with guns in a warzone is a stupid idea. Get out of the city or at least get away from where these guys are hanging out. Otherwise don't be surprised when something comes flying in.
Vitek is offline  
Old 30th Jan 2022, 19:29
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Russian Federation
Age: 36
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by henra
Hmm, dunno. That success was rather due to the Syrian Army plus no RoE by the Russian militias. Obviously by killing everyone who looks remotely like an enemy you can 'win' a war where the allied regular Syrian Troops were much better equipped already than the opposition. IS has been mostly eliminated by the US and the Kurds. The Russian Forces rather manged to decimate the other Syrian opposition forces. I wouldn't really consider this as a shining example.
Hmmm, OK, maybe Syria is a good outlook when it comes to the question what Ukranian Hospitals will be facing.
No offence to the Syrians, have been there half a dozen times at least in the last 5 years and have Syrian friends. They are nice people but when it comes to fighting it's just not their thing. They are great when it comes to loading your weapons, cooking your food, helping you however they can, but when it comes to fighting they empty their clip "in the general direction of the enemy" and say "mafi" (nothing) and slowly withdraw. Can't say that about them all, but that's the general picture.

As for the US, well the US is the main reason ISIS even started to exist from the start. As for their "help" in Syria, lets just say there would be much less casualties, ruin to the economy if they just stayed out. I hope it is just due to US incompetence (and not actual intention), but most of that assistance one way or another it got into the hands of ISIS.

Vitek is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2022, 06:33
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Outer ring of HEL
Posts: 1,653
Received 190 Likes on 85 Posts
Originally Posted by Vitek
Totally disagree here.
First of all comparing Russian Forces today to what they were in the 90's and early 2000's is a comparison on it's own. Restructuring and rearming started I believe in 2009. Even comparing salaries pentions and benefits then and now show night and day. In the 90's pathrtic salaries (forget about pensions) weren't paid for months. Yes, salaries aren't close to UK level, but not far by purchasing power comparison.
Russian forces in late 90's vs today are different beasts no doubt. But what has the Russian Forces actually achieved in the past 30 years to support any actual performance claims in the light of majority of the goods being soviet era? Managed to shoot down a civilian airliner? Being shot down by Turkish F16? CSAR then shot down for no cover? The newest gadget may be good on paper, but what has happened to eg Armata, or why bother re-building the cold-war era Tu160's. The Su57 program hasn't been such a success it is claimed to be as it has been postponed wtih more than ten years from original dates and it is still not feasible for mass production.
Beamr is offline  
Old 31st Jan 2022, 08:01
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,060
Received 64 Likes on 39 Posts
They certainly advanced in information warfare while their hardware looks dated and structurally not modern. They spent a lot on the military but while doing so burned through the inherited budget from the golden years of western trade deals. It doesn't make sense to keep some totally oversized WW3 invasion army unless you want to use it.
Wait.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2022, 07:58
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Age: 47
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Vitek
As for Syria, this operation actually shows in my opinion a major success.
I think syria - especially fights of aleppo - tells a lot like previously said . It tells russia had to try hard for a victory forcing some few thousands rebels out of a city where the rebels had no airforce, no airdefence systems and no sophisticated weapons at all

Now imagine a run for the entire ukraine ...

When we look at civilian sectors we see that current russian technology in aviation , electronics and other advanced products is highly inferior to western products and there is no reason to believe its different in military technology when we compare latest russian to latest us systems .

Its not about blaming or underestimating russian military, the problem is russia would like to represent itself as a world class hightech military superpower which it simply is not .
aerobat77 is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2022, 14:30
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Technology good enough for shooting down a passing by airliner, between the hands of trigger-happy military. Thus, we airline pilots should be concerned when flying over the area.
fab777 is offline  
Old 1st Feb 2022, 20:20
  #93 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: SE of there
Age: 43
Posts: 252
Received 48 Likes on 32 Posts
Originally Posted by fab777
Technology good enough for shooting down a passing by airliner, between the hands of trigger-happy military. Thus, we airline pilots should be concerned when flying over the area.
Meh, it's not like it didn't happen to the other side too. Granted, somewhat away and earlier.
admikar is online now  
Old 2nd Feb 2022, 01:35
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: aus
Posts: 1,280
Likes: 0
Received 95 Likes on 61 Posts
Originally Posted by admikar
Meh, it's not like it didn't happen to the other side too. Granted, somewhat away and earlier.
Russians have shot down 3 airliners and one of thier own AWACS. They are way ahead
rattman is offline  
Old 2nd Feb 2022, 02:36
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Outer ring of HEL
Posts: 1,653
Received 190 Likes on 85 Posts
Originally Posted by rattman
Russians have shot down 3 airliners and one of thier own AWACS. They are way ahead
I've counted five plus other attempted shoot downs.

OH-ALL finnish AERO JU-52, shot down by soviet DB-3's in 1940 en route from Tallinn to Helsinki and a soviet sub then "saved" the French diplomatic mail it was carrying. Seven PAX and two crew died.

Aeroflot 902, shot down in 1962 with a missile near soviet training area. All hands lost.

Korean 902, a B707 shot down by Soviet SU-15's in 1978. 107 survived.

korean 007, B747 shot down by soviey SU-15's in 1983. No survivors.

Malaysian flight 17, a B777 downed with a russian BUK in 2014. All perished.

And the russians did try to hit even more, eg the Finnair flight 915 that was shot at by Soviets in 1987. The word is that it was not an isolated incident. It seemed to be common practice for the russians to use overflying civilian aircrafts as practice targets with occasional mishaps (eg the aeroflo 902 mentioned above). Rather astonishing really.
Beamr is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2022, 05:21
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Russian Federation
Age: 36
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by aerobat77
I think syria - especially fights of aleppo - tells a lot like previously said . It tells russia had to try hard for a victory forcing some few thousands rebels out of a city where the rebels had no airforce, no airdefence systems and no sophisticated weapons at all

Now imagine a run for the entire ukraine ...

When we look at civilian sectors we see that current russian technology in aviation , electronics and other advanced products is highly inferior to western products and there is no reason to believe its different in military technology when we compare latest russian to latest us systems .

Its not about blaming or underestimating russian military, the problem is russia would like to represent itself as a world class hightech military superpower which it simply is not .
I don't see where Russia had to "try hard" in Aleppo. There was a lot of special ops involved with air support. Had there been a possibility to level the city, it would have been much easier.

Using your argument, we can come to the conclusion that the US military is inferior to just about anyone because they fled from Afghanistan after 20 years of having superior technology and boots on the ground (something Russia doesn't have in Syria other than special forces here and there) fighting against the same bearded guys with AK's, IED's and pick-up trucks.
Vitek is offline  
Old 21st Feb 2022, 07:57
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: PLanet Earth
Posts: 1,321
Received 98 Likes on 49 Posts
Originally Posted by Vitek
Using your argument, we can come to the conclusion that the US military is inferior to just about anyone because they fled from Afghanistan after 20 years of having superior technology and boots on the ground (something Russia doesn't have in Syria other than special forces here and there) fighting against the same bearded guys with AK's, IED's and pick-up trucks.
I would be careful to derive the military capability in an all-out war from the results in an attempted stabilisation mission in a remote country. Thes Soviet Army fled Afghanistan back in the day but I would never ever have concluded from that, that they might be incapabale of leading an all-out war. Just that they were tired of losing soldiers to ambushes in a strategically largely irrelevant sh*t hole Country.
henra is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2022, 19:11
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 7 Posts
An interesting article from Fox News.. In the end, one only finds out how well the military machine works during actual combat. It appears that the Bear is not as manacing as one might expect. Lets hope that the Chinese are a paper tiger........

Ukraine war: Russia's corruption is 'no doubt' affecting its military's combat performance | Fox News

"Historic corruption in Russia may have hit its military and eroded its ability to maintain its war efforts in Ukraine.

Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24, and the war has not unfolded the way Russian President Vladimir Putin would have wanted. The British Ministry of Defense and U.S. officials regularly note that the Russian military has made slow progress, taking several days to even address day-one targets.

But more troubling for Russian troops would be the shortcomings in supplies and equipment: Pictures on social media indicate that troops carried rations that expired in 2015 and the equipment appears dated, with radio communication transmitting over open channels and lacking long-range capabilities. Tanks and vehicles
show evidence of poor maintenance and care.

The Russian Federation budgets for roughly $60 billion to $70 billion per year to fund its military, which helps finance salaries and training costs, maintain gear and facilities and develop or buy new weapons, gear and vehicles. If the military is not translating that into its war effort, it raises questions about whether Russia’s corruption has undermined its combat ability.

Rebekah Koffler, a former Defense Intelligence Agency officer, said that Russia has a habit of holding onto outdated equipment, but corruption is "absolutely" affecting everything, including the military, with both private businessmen and the mafia taking cuts.


"Corruption is so rampant," Koffler told Fox News Digital. "There’s not the same scrupulousness in Russia – it’s former Soviet Union, and it’s not even in the culture to check the expiration because no one would trust it anyways."

The setup in Russia between the oligarchs – billionaires who control whole sections of Russian industry – and the mafia is fairly unique compared to the West. Retired U.S. Army Lieutenant General Thomas Spoehr told Fox News Digital that while there is no specific organized crime ring in the military, it’s "certain" organized crime operates in the Russian military to some degree.

"We talk about how the U.S. military is a reflection of U.S. society, and we had this issue with gangs in the military not terribly long ago," Spoehr explained. "By that same notion, it would be astonishing if there wasn’t organized crime in the Russian military because Russian society is rife with organized crime. It’s almost like another economy the way Russia operates."

He said the Russian military prioritizes its navy over its army, which may contribute to the poor rations and guns seen on social media. But he added that while the Russian military ostensibly acquires new weapons and equipment through its bureau of acquisitions, there is no doubt "a certain amount of corruption." "There is graft, malfeasance, all those kinds of things," Spoehr said. "So people are skimming off the top, maybe in some cases accepting shoddy goods, sometimes enriching themselves by directing contracts to their favorite oligarch – all that stuff happens."

But Spoehr stressed that strategic issues and logistical shortcomings are likely more responsible for Russia’s shocking performance in Ukraine than could any possible corruption.

Dan Hoffman, a Fox News contributor and former CIA station chief in Moscow, argues that we can’t know to what degree corruption has impacted the Russian military – only that the troops are "challenged" and cannot say what the cause is.

He argued it is just as likely that the planned revitalization of supplies and forces following the Georgia invasion in 2008 never took hold as it should have, or it could be that the military hadn’t tried to stage a full invasion since World War II and wasn’t prepared for the realities of such an operation. "
punkalouver is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2022, 19:17
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 257
Received 33 Likes on 8 Posts
I would be more worried about what they do after all this is over. I bet you they sort these problems out. Lessons I expect will be learned just as we did after flaklands, gw1 and2 , Kosovo etc etc etc
dagenham is offline  
Old 6th Mar 2022, 19:37
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Outer ring of HEL
Posts: 1,653
Received 190 Likes on 85 Posts
I thought they would've learned in 1939 not to take division size convoys to battle field on a single road but I was wrong. They were destroyed then in Finland, they are destroyed now in Ukraine.
Beamr is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.