hellfish Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 I thought this would make for an interesting contrast to the Stryker brigade concept. For many years now the Soviets and, later, Russians have pioneered the concept of rapidly deployable armored forces. For all intents and purposes, the Russian airborne divisions are light mechanized units about half the size of a US division, operating with equipment that is very quickly deployable by all aviation assets (including most helicopters) of the Russian military. Some of the modern Russian airborne equipment: BTR-D APC BTR-D with Kornet ATGM 2S9 Nona 120mm self propelled mortar/assault gun 2S25 Sprut Light Tank with 125mm gun BMD-4 IFV (with 100mm gun/missile launcher and 30mm coax) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hoolaman Posted August 21, 2006 Share Posted August 21, 2006 Nice pics, I especially like the three tone camo on the first couple. Very reminiscent of the old German patterns, and very effective even while they are sitting in the parking lot. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 The BTR, BMD type of IFVs were introduced in the mid 70's, is this the most modern equipment the Russians have in their inventory? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSgt Viljuri Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Is that parachute marking on the sides of those vehicles meant for aiming? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted August 22, 2006 Author Share Posted August 22, 2006 Originally posted by Nidan1: The BTR, BMD type of IFVs were introduced in the mid 70's, is this the most modern equipment the Russians have in their inventory? The current version of the BMD is pretty modern. The 2S25 is brand new. The BTR-D is kind of like a mini M113, so it's not particularly modern. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 If the 2S25 points its 125mm to the side and fires will it flip over? Looks like a cartoon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J Ruddy Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq): If the 2S25 points its 125mm to the side and fires will it flip over? Looks like a cartoon. You're thinking of the MGS... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cassh Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 IIRC the old Soviet Western Strategic Direction had three desant "divisions" of brigade strength that formed the spearhead of their deep operational forces; that along with the OMGs formed their strategic/operational mobile "extraordinary force" (as opposed to the "ordinary force" of the Fronts' Armies that provided holding and armoured/shock breakthrough forces. Whilst the first echelon forces such as 2nd GTA and 3rd SA batter the hell out NATO divisions in the North German Plain the idea was to "land" these airborne mechanised brigade forces deep in the rear of our defences. The "operational worth" of mechanised forces able to manoeuvre and fight a mobile battle/operation in NATO's rear area was viewed by many as a huge force multiplier. So to be able to deploy these forces very rapidly by surprise in deep penetrations/landings by air was seen as an even greater operational multiplier. Whether these desant units could actually have made a safe passage through an air corridor let alone sustain a mobile battle via air supply is dubious. However if an airborne mech brigade suddenly turns up in Antwerp it makes SHAPE sit up and take note. I personally think that the ability of these desant brigades to wreak havoc to our C4I, airfields, communications and logistics tail and prevent follow-on "Re-forger" type reinforcements and the collection/marry-up with POMCUS equipment would be wholly dependant on a WARPACT air supremacy that was always doubtful. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Will the infantry these vehicles carry still prefer to sit on top rather then inside? What's with that anyway? Especially nowadays with IEDs a big threat you would think the squishies would wan't to be on the inside. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted August 22, 2006 Share Posted August 22, 2006 Most of the time it isn't their choice. Plus Russian vehicles are notorious for being extreemly cramped inside. Once you pack them full of gear though Brads, 113s, and BMPs are about the same. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted August 22, 2006 Author Share Posted August 22, 2006 I dunno - I was in a BMP1 and it was tiny. The MTLB made me nearly panic with claustrophobia. Didn't have a problem with the 113, but now that I think about it the Brad is pretty cramped. big turret basket. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLeftFlank Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 Originally posted by cassh: Whether these desant units could actually have made a safe passage through an air corridor let alone sustain a mobile battle via air supply is dubious.... ... wholly dependant on a WARPACT air supremacy that was always doubtful. Yes, I did a college thesis on the VDV in 1985 that reached much the same conclusion. A division- sized desant complete with BMDs and arty would also have required about 70% of all the Soviet airlift capability (IL-76s and AN-22s) then available, Aeroflot included. An airborne coup de main against Antwerp or Frankfurt was a fantasy. Battalion scale attacks -- maybe. For purposes of my thesis, far more interesting was the location of the 7 VDV division bases: in a loose ring around Moscow HQ'ed at Tula-Ryazan, and convenient to the major highways into town. While the VDV divisions made a useful elite rapid deployment force for places like Afghanistan and Czechoslovakia (and they were almost sent to Egypt in 1973), their primary purpose in the late Soviet era was not to execute WWII style airdrops. It was rather to act as a praetorian guard, counterbalancing the KGB and MVD units and the (ceremonial) Taman Guards. That was one thing Suvorov (Rasun) was quite right about -- one of the CPSU's governing principles was to ensure that no one organization had a monopoly on armed force. And as it turned out, in 1991 guess who showed up at the Kremlin en masse in their BMDs and sailor shirts for the failed anti-Gorbachev coup (and then withdrew equally promptly once it failed)? And while we're speaking of that, what do you think the US 82nd Airborne Division gets special training for? Remember who integrated the schools in Little Rock in 1956 when the Arkansas National Guard proved unreliable? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 The pics are great, with several AFVs I've not seen before, but the designators confuse me. When I was in the threat business, the BTRs, except for the fairly rare BTR-50, were all wheeled: BTR-152, BTR-60/70/80. BMPs came in the BMP-1 and BMP-2 flavors. The ASUs (57 and 85) were all tracked, and the BMDs were mini BMP-1s. Now, though, we have BMDs with the various BMP turrets, and something which is basically a stretched BMD called a BTR-D. Wakarimasen. I don't get it! FWIW, Soviet Airborne Operations was my first exposure to Glantz. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjhouston Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 Roughly (my Russkie ain't that good): BTR = Brone TRansporter = armored transporter BMP = Boyevaya Mashina Pekhota = fighting machine, infantry BMD = Boyevaya Mashina Desanta = fighting machine, airborne The BTR-D is an armored personnel carrier not a fighting vehicle, thus the designation. [ August 23, 2006, 01:10 AM: Message edited by: jjhouston ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarkus Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 fytinghellfish, Any idea what the tubes protruding from the nose on either sides of the first two pics' vehicles are for ? Looks like MG muzzles... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted August 23, 2006 Author Share Posted August 23, 2006 RPK light machineguns if I remember correctly. Fired by troops inside. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 Originally posted by fytinghellfish: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Nidan1: The BTR, BMD type of IFVs were introduced in the mid 70's, is this the most modern equipment the Russians have in their inventory? The current version of the BMD is pretty modern. The 2S25 is brand new. The BTR-D is kind of like a mini M113, so it's not particularly modern. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted August 23, 2006 Author Share Posted August 23, 2006 No, I've only got second hand reports that 50-75 have just been ordered. I'm working on getting the original source of the figures. It sounds like the Russian Marines are getting some to replace their PT-76s with too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted August 23, 2006 Author Share Posted August 23, 2006 Here you go: http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/2006/russia-060713-rianovosti01.htm Russia set to buy 69 Topol-M missile systems by 2015 RIA Novosti In-Depth Coverage 13/07/2006 15:18 VOLGOGRAD, July 13 (RIA Novosti) - Russia is planning to purchase 69 silo-based and mobile Topol-M ballistic missile systems in the next decade, the defense minister said Thursday. "We are planning to buy 69 [Topol-M] systems by 2015," Sergei Ivanov said at a meeting with defense industry officials in the Volgograd Region. Ivanov, who is also a deputy prime minister, said the defense ministry was also planning to procure 60 Iskander-M tactical ballistic missile systems to equip five missile brigades, 57 Sprut-SD self-propelled guns, 499 Rakushka airborne armored personnel carriers, and several Bereg mobile coastal artillery systems. The defense minister earlier said that Russia's 2006 defense order would total $9 billion and increase by 20% to 303.7 bln rubles ($11.2 bln) in 2007. However, Ivanov reiterated that defense industry enterprises should not rely solely on increasing state orders and must rapidly develop production of dual-purpose and civilian goods to stay competitive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 fytinghellfish, RPK light machineguns if I remember correctly. Fired by troops inside.I know the BMP-3 has two positions for the Squad's RPKs to be fire from while mounted, so I'm assuming this is the same deal. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 Originally posted by fytinghellfish: No, I've only got second hand reports that 50-75 have just been ordered. I'm working on getting the original source of the figures. It sounds like the Russian Marines are getting some to replace their PT-76s with too. Maybe the Russians are also thinking along the lines of lighter, easily deployable forces, for asymetrical warfare. Or perhaps they just don't have the rubles to spend on lavish military equipment. [ August 23, 2006, 11:39 AM: Message edited by: Nidan1 ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted August 23, 2006 Author Share Posted August 23, 2006 IIRC they placed another order earlier this year for something like 40 T-90 tanks. But overall I think you're right - they're investing in intervention forces. Besides, the T-80s they've got now are more than adequate for any conventional threat they may face. Most of their money seems to be going into nuclear weapons, though - probably because thats the easiest and best deterrent to trouble they can afford now. Russia is actually pretty flush with cash at the moment, but I don't think the Army is at the top of the food chain. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nidan1 Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 I also understand that Hugo Chavez from Venezuela recently placed an order for military gear from the Russians...to the equivalent tune of Three Billion US Dollars. Maybe some of that new gear is for him...I think he is afraid that Aruba may invade soon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted August 23, 2006 Share Posted August 23, 2006 "I think he is afraid that Aruba may invade soon." Actually, I heard that when the Bush administration started discussions about how best to respond to the 9/11 terror attacks some in the cabinet suggested that he should hit the terrorists where they'd least expect ...that's right, you guessed it. About Russian paratroops. Wouldn't mind seeing them show up in a CMSF module someday. No, wouldn't mind that one little bit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted August 23, 2006 Author Share Posted August 23, 2006 I think it'd be fun to have the Russian VDV included in a European module just to see how they'd fare with similar forces in similar circumstances. And FWIW - there has been some paranoia about Venezuela actually taking Aruba and some of those other islands, as there is a belief that the Dutch would be largely incapable of retaking them. 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.