Results 1 to 20 of 202

Thread: The Russian Military: Declining or Better?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Russia Lost 5 Aircraft Last Month, Linked to Too Many Exercises and Lack of Qualified Pilots http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...alified-pilots … pic.twitter.com/diBtD0kbp1

    Russia has grounded 3 fleet of aircraft due to crashes; Su-24, Mig-29, & Tu-95. http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...alified-pilots … pic.twitter.com/ESd3euow1D

    Russian source close to MoD: "There are less pilots [in Russia] than there are aircraft" http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...alified-pilots … pic.twitter.com/zMxAtRXFqf

    http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinio...rm/525556.html
    War in Ukraine Ruined Russian Military Reform

  2. #2
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    Russia Lost 5 Aircraft Last Month, Linked to Too Many Exercises and Lack of Qualified Pilots http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...alified-pilots … pic.twitter.com/diBtD0kbp1

    Russia has grounded 3 fleet of aircraft due to crashes; Su-24, Mig-29, & Tu-95. http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...alified-pilots … pic.twitter.com/ESd3euow1D

    Russian source close to MoD: "There are less pilots [in Russia] than there are aircraft" http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs...alified-pilots … pic.twitter.com/zMxAtRXFqf

    http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinio...rm/525556.html
    War in Ukraine Ruined Russian Military Reform
    Another Russian Strategic Bomber Plane Crashes In Far East http://www.rferl.org/content/russian.../27126469.html

    All Tu-95s now in Russian service are the Tu-95MS variant, built in the 1980s and 1990s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-95

  3. #3
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    http://www.ndc.nato.int/news/current_news.php?icode=830
    NOTE: there is a .pdf tied to this link

    Friday 10 July 2015

    Research Paper 117:

    "Russia's 2014 Military Doctrine and beyond: threat perceptions, capabilities and ambitions", by Polina Sinovets and Bettina Renz.

    In this latest paper by the NATO Defense College, two experts on Russia deconstruct Russia’s December 2014 military doctrine and ask a key question: To what extent does this new doctrine add anything substantially new to the understanding of contemporary Russian politics? Although on the surface the 2014 doctrine does not differ significantly from its previous versions, the devil is in the details—and the details in this case are not very reassuring. The main theme of the doctrine is rivalry with the West, which Moscow politely calls “equitable cooperation” whilst avoiding the word “partnership.”
    The doctrine was written to influence two audiences: internal and external.

    The 2014 doctrine, in comparison to its predecessor, stands out for emphasizing domestic threats to national security. Such threats include destabilisation of the political situation, including terrorist activities as well as outside political influence on Russia’s population.

    For foreign audiences the message also appears to be quite clear. Changes made since the 2010 version explain Russia’s vital concerns vis-a-vis its neighbourhood, which are discussed under both headings of military dangers and military threats. The implication of the latter is to show potential adversaries, including NATO, that intervention in Russia’s neighbourhood could, in certain circumstances, be interpreted by Russia as a casus belli. Overall, the 2014 doctrine gives an impression of deja-vu, and harks back to the great power doctrines of the past. In the manner of the Monroe doctrine, it sends Western powers the message that Russia’s neighbourhood should be regarded as its sphere of influence, which Moscow is ready to defend, if necessary by all means. The implicit concern in the doctrine over the threat to Kremlin-friendly regimes in neighbouring states is like a modern version of the Brezhnev doctrine, where direct military intervention is camouflaged by hybrid war-type activity.

    The successful use of hybrid tactics in Crimea and to an extent in eastern Ukraine has been the Kremlin’s most successful military endeavour in the past two decades for those states that Russia considers to be a part of its sphere of vital interests, this is a major concern, especially since those outside of the NATO alliance do not have the capacity to stand up against such approaches alone. Improving conventional capabilities and strong nuclear posture will only exacerbate such fears, as they deter any powerful actor or nation from interfering in conflicts in Russia’s neighbourhood.

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    So are the Russians going to blame the Ukrainians for "dirty aircraft fuel"????

    http://tass.ru/en/russia/808849

    Official says fuel likely reason for Russian strategic bomber's crash

    Russia
    July 15, 16:39

    Russian Vice-Premier Dmitry Rogozin
    "Engines never fail on their own, especially all at once," the vice-premier told journalists

    NOVO-OGARYOVO, July 15 /TASS/. Engine failure could not have been the main cause behind the Tupolev Tu-95MS plane crash. Fuel is likely to be the main problem, Russian Vice-Premier Dmitry Rogozin said on Wednesday.

    "Engines never fail on their own, especially all at once," the vice-premier told journalists. He did not rule out that low-quality fuel could have caused the Russian Air Force plane to crash.

    The aircraft crashed in the Khabarovsk Territory in the Russian Far East during a training flight on Tuesday morning.

    The flight was performed without an ammunition allowance. The plane crashed in a deserted area and there is no destruction on the ground.

    Russia’s Defense Ministry suspended the flights of Tupolev Tu-95MS (NATO reporting name: Bear) strategic bombers.

    The Defense Ministry’s press office said that a technical failure is the likely cause for the crash. A source told TASS that the strategic bomber crashed due to failure of all of its four engines

  5. #5
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
    So are the Russians going to blame the Ukrainians for "dirty aircraft fuel"????

    http://tass.ru/en/russia/808849

    Official says fuel likely reason for Russian strategic bomber's crash

    Russia
    July 15, 16:39

    Russian Vice-Premier Dmitry Rogozin
    "Engines never fail on their own, especially all at once," the vice-premier told journalists
    In last 2 months 6x #Russia air force jets fell out of the sky... b/c corrupt officers stole the maintenance funds.
    SUPER!!! :-)

  6. #6
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Two engines failure on the Russia MOD's cargo aircraft forced emergency landing. No casualties this time.

    https://twitter.com/FastSlon/status/622039994077741057

  7. #7
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    35,749

    Default

    Tymchuk: Russia is deploying more & more artillery, sending in more soldiers (non-Slavs), & intensifying the shelling of Ukrainian positions

    Read an advance report on fire support trends in the Russo-Ukraine conflict today. The trends are disturbing.


    UAS surveillance plus Russian thermobaric artillery rounds means that light infantry forces are either dug in or well done.

    Russians also use DPICM plus those thermobaric rounds. We'll soon have neither.

    In a combined DPICM/thermobaric fire mission from Russian MLRS lasting 3 minutes, two Ukrainian mechanized battalions were wiped out.

    Artillery is causing 85% (!) of casualties on both sides.

    you can cross Eastern Ukraine jumping through thermobaric ordnance and don't touch the ground

    This conflict is putting tactical development into hyperdrive. Increasing use of combined arms companies. US way behind.

    combined arms as a core competency has been neglected in defense focus for nearly 20 years

    Russia mastered loop from UAS to IDF. We haven't.

    C-RAM and C-UAS as much needed as longer range/superior performance artillery capabilities

    Russian losses of UAVs are staggering even for a "limited" conflict, if Ukrainians got better C-UAS systems that'll help a lot

    Russia is spreading artillery in battery size down to maneuver battalion level. Army concentrating it at division level. (DIVARTY)

    Smaller loop between maneuver and fires = faster, more responsive integration, which is vital.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 808
    Last Post: 12-09-2017, 06:27 PM
  2. Crimes, War Crimes and the War on Terror
    By davidbfpo in forum Law Enforcement
    Replies: 600
    Last Post: 03-03-2014, 04:30 PM
  3. SWJ Small Wars Survey 2012
    By MikeF in forum Global Issues & Threats
    Replies: 89
    Last Post: 01-19-2012, 11:57 PM
  4. Officer Retention
    By Patriot in forum Military - Other
    Replies: 360
    Last Post: 07-03-2009, 05:47 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •