John Kettler Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 (edited) Brother Charles sent me this most interesting piece on ex-Spetsnaz gear (owner killed, reportedly by ISIS) recovered near Palmyra, Syria. http://armamentresearch.com/russian-sof-equipment-captured-by-is-in-syria/ Of particular interest is this remarkable MIB (no, not those guys!) grenade cum mine, referred to as a grenade mine. Q would be impressed, methinks. http://armamentresearch.com/russian-mib-type-multi-function-munition-captured-by-is-in-syria/ Regards, John Kettler Edited April 14, 2016 by John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VladimirTarasov Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Looks like the equipment is Russian, But knowing that the various terrorist organizations in Syria would post a few pictures of the dead body makes me wonder if it was taken off a Russian special forces operator. Equipment doesn't look like it belonged to a FAC or FO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted April 15, 2016 Author Share Posted April 15, 2016 (edited) Ivanov, The breakdown of the gear is most interesting (be sure to read comments), and the included response from ARES on differential ID of the AK-12 is quite valuable, as is the current status of the weapon (still in troop trials). http://armamentresearch.com/differential-identification-of-ak-12/ What throws me, though, are repeated references to the OP weapon having a thermal sight. Frankly, I don't see that as at all being likely. The Raytheon TWS (Thermal Weapon Sight) is based on the Hughes TWS, and it so happens my dad was the technical honcho for the Hughes TWS. It was his baby. This is what the current family of sights looks like. Note particularly the size and length. I don't know what the sight on the ex-Spetsnaz AR is, but I feel pretty confident, given the considerable US advantage when it comes to thermal sights, we're not seeing one on it. Regards, John Kettler Edited April 15, 2016 by John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempestzzzz Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 I'm with Vladimir on this-doesn't look like FO gear. In fact it looks pretty sparse compared to what some Somali took off a dead French operator in a rescue attempt that went bad about 2 year ago. Or maybe we haven't been shown all that was recovered. Plus the Russians said the FO called in strikes on his position-so everything here doesn't look in bad condition. FWIW. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzersaurkrautwerfer Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 1 hour ago, Tempestzzzz said: I'm with Vladimir on this-doesn't look like FO gear. In fact it looks pretty sparse compared to what some Somali took off a dead French operator in a rescue attempt that went bad about 2 year ago. Or maybe we haven't been shown all that was recovered. Plus the Russians said the FO called in strikes on his position-so everything here doesn't look in bad condition. FWIW. Dunno man. A lot depends on the Russians being honest in what they do or do not have on the ground, and frankly expecting that after the last few years would be foolish. Some of the kit is awful specialized too. It's an interesting point of data in an otherwise fairly dark area. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempestzzzz Posted April 17, 2016 Share Posted April 17, 2016 (edited) Reading some articles this week-these items well could be from a Russian contract fighter. I understand the Russians may be going that route since they they have to pay soldiers a lot to serve there anyway and Russian Army casualties are a sensitive subject at home. Edited April 17, 2016 by Tempestzzzz 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted April 17, 2016 Author Share Posted April 17, 2016 Tempestzzzz, A contract fighter is a volunteer professional member of the Russian Army, not a mercenary. Such individuals provide professionalism and stability in a force otherwise made of endlessly cycling conscripts serving only one year. The term "contract" applies because the individual signs on for a specific term of service. The link below explains thing, but I should point out it dates to 2002!http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/18/world/in-unit-with-paid-volunteers-russia-marches-haltingly-toward-military-reform.html?pagewanted=all This, by contrast, is from 2015 and asserts the Red Army now has more contract soldiers than it does conscripts--a historic first.http://sputniknews.com/military/20150428/1021491573.html Meanwhile, you can now theoretically enlist in the Red Army. Doubt we'll be seeing any American (Russian) contract soldiers in CMBS! Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tempestzzzz Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 Hey thanks for the clarification. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted April 18, 2016 Author Share Posted April 18, 2016 (edited) Tempestzzzz, You're welcome. I also learned some new things while putting together my reply. Perhaps our Russian contingent will chime in on the topic? Regards, John Kettler Edited April 18, 2016 by John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.