DreDay

I think that's what you guys call "effective managers", right?

To be fair, I think that they are very far from "having created it". The article just mentions that the specifications for BMD-5 are being worked on. As of now VDV is concerned with procuring more BMD-4Ms (they are expecting to have 4 battalions armed with them by the end of 2017) and working out it's quirks...like actually making it truly airdrop-able. Any BMD-5 plans are premature by many years.

Yeah, as I've said - I can live without them in CMBS perfectly fine; the RPOs do need to be fixed though as they are next to useless right now... quite contrary to their real life reputation.

I suppose it's possible, but why? It's not like T-72B hulls are super-expensive, and Russia certainly has plenty of them in storage...

Yep, that's what I am saying... same guys that are using RPO-Ms in CCMB

Here is a video of them being used by regular army units; no idea how many have been purchased so far, but I doubt that they came from the tender for SSO and 45th ORBr that you are referring to..

Any idea where they are getting the matrices for thermal sites? I have a strong suspicion that they are still communing from France despite the highly publicized embargo,,,

I would like to know where the association with AK-400 comes from. I have heard the new "SSO" model being called AK-74M3, which is much more in line with KK's naming. Also, as it has already been pointed out - it is very poor etiquette to quote Survivor. In this particular case his argument is not factually based. All weapon calibers are designed based on very strict design specifications that are set out for them. Russians had no issues using 12mm caliber for field guns, howitzers, tank cannons and naval tertiary - most of those systems had used different ammo and loading methods. Same goes for 76.2mm and 155mm. In fact the new A65B and MSTA-S systems don't even except older 152mm ammo.. yet the Russians don't seem to be too bothered by it...

That's not entirely correct. GM-94 is also issued to SSO units (as was evident during their actions in Crimea) and engendering units, which are actually present in CMBB. It is said to be a very effective and handy weapon system. However given the way that the game designers have nerfed RPOs, I would not really miss expect anything from it in the current game engine.

Gentlemen, Thank you both. I find that pretty interesting. Any idea on whether there is any reason for this or is that just due to some organizational oversight? I also wonder if that's a case of squad level gunners using RPKs in peace-time and then switching to PKMs/PKPs before deploying to a combat zone; as was a common practice with units deploying to KTO in North Caucasus in late 1990s..

Are you sure about that friend? Can you think of any present-day Motor-Rifle units that deploy RPKs at squad level? I have not see reference to any since the "Serdyukov" reforms of late 2000's. I am only aware of Russian Naval Infantry continuing to use RPKs (God knows why); but I would appreciate any sources pointing to the contrary...

John, your points certainly have a lot of validity; but they are also a bit one-sided. The truth is that the service age of Russian strike aircraft operating in Syria is comparable to that of any other major Airforces operating there (i.e. aircraft made in the 80s and upgraded in mid 2000s.). Yes, Su-24M1/M2s are very complex and high-maintenance birds, but their operational record is comparable to that of their contemporaries (i.e. Tornado and F-111). Under the circumstances (minimal AD coverage and plenty of time to service them); they should function just fine, flying 1-3 sorties a day (with multiple crews). Same goes for SU-25SM (which is a lot simpler and cheaper to service). SU-34 is a pretty new bird, so we don't know too much about it; but it is reasonable to assume that its maintenance needs are similar to SU-27/30/33/35. Russians have been flying 70-120 sorties from Latakia daily and that is a pretty much their maximum capacity at this point. Any further flights would have to be conducted from other airfields (if that is what they intend); and we will probably hear about that shortly...

There have been quire a few shots of T-90As in (supposedly) Aleppo area coming out for the past couple of weeks. There was also a direct quote by Putin published in Russian media stating that Russian allies that were fighting a tough war; were in great need of T-90s and other advanced armor (and it's pretty much accepted that he was not talking about DLNR...). The real question at this point is who is actually operating them. I have read several theories, but the general consensus among Russian observers (for what it's worth) is that they are crewed by Iranian volunteers..

Just a quick update for Russian-speakers and Google-Translate studs - here is an official reference to a presidential decree in question. As I've said - it's not entirely new (issued on 5/28/2015) and did not go unnoticed in Russian media (including the "opposition" outlets). http://publication.pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001201505280001?index=0&rangeSize=1

Right. I was told by my Russian sources (who are by no means an ultimate authority on this, but do happen to have more inside information than any of us) that there are around 100 Russian active duty KIAs from that conflict. However, that number does not account for Russian volunteers (i.e. not active duty) that had traveled to Donbas either independently or as part of Russian voluntary training/deployment system. There is also an ambiguous category of Russian volunteers and advisors that were recruited from active duty personnel, but deployed to Donbas as either PMCs or volunteers independently of their organic units. Those numbers are likely to be much higher, and I am not even sure that they are fully accounted for.

That's exactly right, it would make zero sense for Ukrainians to send off T-72s to be upgraded in Poland; while their own Kharkov tank plant (arguable the most respected Soviet design bureau) has a suite of their own T-72 upgrades that are at least competative with PT-91s. Besides, does PT-91 upgrade (which seems to be a fine package in its own right) apply to T-72Bs (which is what Ukrainians have)? As far as I know, it was designed for T-72A/M1 platforms that are quite different from T-72B in many ways. I can only see it happening as some political gesture to support Polish tank makers that have not had a ton of success on foreign markets; but the Ukrainian government simply does not have the funds to pay for it. If such a contract was to occur, it would be a form of Polish welfare for their weapon makers by proxy of Ukraine…

I think that there is some confusion that is caused by OP's article. The new government decree in question (which is not that new btw – it was announced over a month ago) allows for non-disclosure of casualties incurred in special operations. It does not specify what particular units it applies to and does not draw any distraction between special vs. conventional forces. Obviously this action has been enacted due to Russian actions in Ukraine. However, this policy is not Ukraine-specific and allows Russian government more flexibility when conducting clandestine operations abroad. While this policy obviously limits the freedom of speech and information while further prevents public oversight government actions; it is also worth noting that it was an openly issued decree that was coverd and discussed in all forms of Russian media.

Yep, that's why I wrote "besides small squad size"

Right on, ma man. I am not entirely sure if there are any BMD-1s or BMD-3s left in active duty anymore; but let's also not forget BRD-ZD, BTR-RD, 2S9, and a whole host of other support vehicles. It would also be really interesting to figure out the proper tactics for BMD’s 5-man squads and to see how much their superior training and morale can account for relatively small squad size. Much of the same would apply to USMC (besides small squad size) as well. There are certainly plenty of other add-ons that would be a welcomed addition. However, I can't think of any that would add more realism, challenge, and pure enjoyment as VDV and USMC…

Agreed. It is generally safe to assume that a Motor-Rifle Brigade would have 3 BTR/BMP battalions and one tank battalion; while a tank brigade would have exactly opposite ratio... In that sense, new Russian brigades seem to follow the structure of old soviet Regiments (albeit with more support assets). Still though, there are some anomalies that simply don't make sense - for instance 27th Sevastopol Motor-Rifle Brigade (a relatively elite unit) of Western Military District deploys BTRs and BMPs at the same time... Why? Your guess is as good as mine..

Boche, you bring up a great question; but unfortunately it's almost impossible to give an accurate answer to it. Russian army has inherited the Soviet tradition where every formation had somewhat unique structure and TOE. They had made a conscious effort to standardize their brigade-level TOE in the late 2000s; but that effort seems to have failed due to a multitude of social, economic, and operational reasons. However, there are still some basic commonalities that are shared by most ground forces. For instance, a Motor-Rifle brigade would generally consist of 3 Motor-Rifle Battalions, 1 Tank battalion, a recon battalion (broken down into LRRP and Electronic recon companies), at least 2 mixed artillery/rocket battalions, and an AD/AAA battalion along with some other support assets. However, each brigade has some unique equipment and org structure that varies from others. It is also important to note that Russians have been fighting with BTG formations (that are even more unique and dynamic than proper brigades). BTGs tend to be even more unique in their structure due to the resoures that are available to them, and special tasks that are placed upon them.

You are correct, old friend. There are a few small differences between Russian motor-rifle and naval-infantry armaments and org structure; and Naval Infantry's use of RPK-74s at squad level (only God knows why) is one of such distinctions. Don’t' get me wrong, I would love to see Russian Naval Infantry and a whole host of other Russian/Ukrainian/US specialized units. However, VDV and USMC are very much on top of my wish list due to their very unique armament and OOB.

I have mentioned it before a couple of times - Russian Naval Infantry has pretty much the same structure as BTR motor-rifle battalions; albeit they are privy to higher training standards and fighting spirit - still though, they can be modeled in CMBS already. VDV and USMC on another hand, use entirely unique equipment and OOB - their addition would bring some much needed new blood into the game.

That's actually a good point. If we are to have rebel/militia type forces; then the MRAP and other lightly armored vehicles of National Guard would be a welcomed addition. They could also be given some "westernized" small arms like TAR-21 made by RTC FORT and some advanced sniper rifles.