State Armaments Program 2011-2020

What you say has some merit ,but why do you think that corruption will take 20%?

More importantly when you have stamped out corruption, can we deal with the murder rate and then gambling addiction and perhaps alcoholism... and everything else and then the prisons will be empty and Russia will save so much they can afford to spend much more on other things.

However, spending big amounts and having 20% corrupted away and sent overseas.........this should be stopped.....somehow! tough but possible!!

You should have said this in the first place... can you not see the difference between talking about dealing with corruption by cutting spending, and just dealing with corruption with better accounting practises?

It is like getting someone to buy your groceries for you and you suspect they are keeping the change. The solution is to ask for the receipt and checking that all the goods bought are in the bags they deliver. The solution is not to just give them less money and buy fewer things each week.

Can you not see that spending less money will not stop corruption but will drag out the upgrade of the military over a longer more painful process?

If Russia does not stop rampant corruption in its society, then it will remain a backward nation in comparison to the west.

First of all Rubbish. Corruption is theft. Name one country that does not have thieves? In the US a private company can give a lobbiest a million dollars to get a law change or a law written that benefits them. That lobbiest will target specific senators and wine and dine them and give them gifts like cars and hookers and eventually the laws go through. How is that not corruption? Yet it is public knowledge that it happens...

The problem for Russia is that they have plenty of corruption, they just haven't made it part of the system yet.

The trickle down economic effect will not happen for general population and they will not be able get exposed to modern way of life.

The role of the government is not to drive the economy and create innovation. The governments role is to ensure there is infrastructure and education and health to support the population and allow the population to drive the economy forward by keeping them healthy, by making transport and movement cheap and easy and by giving the people access to training and education to give them the skills to do what they want.

Regarding Pentagon spending, like I said before, America can spend itself to total oblivion, that's not my problem.

Not your problem, but it is Russias problem. Part of their role is defence of Russia... and the greatest threat to Russia is the US. They need to first overhaul and upgrade the Russian military and then build a system that counters the high price ticket items the US will use that is not as expensive, but is effective.

Russia needs to have very efficient and strategic outlook towards defense spending and make sure whatever is invested does not end up in overseas accounts of corrupt officials in MIC.

Good accounting and an active FSB are solutions to that... not reducing spending.

Btw, where did my postings give you the idea that I am pro America and Pentagon is my favorite. Please clear up your understandings before jumping to conclusions.

Your sources are generally pro America, and you seemed to be in love with the F-22...

The main reason rest of the world buys Boeing and Airbus is their planes are very fuel efficient in comparison to anyone else.

BS. In fact western planes really do not suit Russian airlines... they need expensive infrastructure at air ports, there are no cloakrooms for the passengers to Siberia to put their heavy clothes so they have to freeze walking to the terminal at small airports. And most western aircraft have only two crew, with no engineer, which increases the workload of the pilot and copilot, and more importantly means that you are likely to need more pilots that are multilingual for international flights.

If Boeings and Airbuses are so wonderful why are they both fined so regularly for corruption? Without military orders increasing production numbers and reducing costs to produce them they would be too expensive to buy.

Russian planes for one are gas guzzlers and running an airline on those planes cannot result in profits.

All Russian planes? Makes you wonder why Il-76 and An-124 aircraft are in such demand if they are such inefficient aircraft.

You clearly are believing the western propaganda about Soviet and Russian planes, which is not really a surprise.

The main problem with modern Russian civilian airliners is that the Russian military has not ordered a few batches for different purposes that would start full scale production and reduce prices and risk.

That is why Russian Antanov and Illyusin planes are sold at deep discount on the airplane marts.

Those transports are in heavy demand internationally largely because of corruption... and that is US corruption.

You have read about the F-35 being designed from the outset to have parts made in various US states so that the congressmen from those states will not cancel it.

The C-17 was the first aircraft to do such a thing and despite costing as much as an SSBN they are still making them because the pentagon gets money for them even when it doesn't ask for it. Half a trillion dollars for a medium transport plane... and you talk about corruption in Russia?

The only other competition is the C-5 and there are no civilian models to compete with the An-124.

Problem is folks cannot take or accept the hard truth.

The Russian word for truth is Pravda. The American equivalent is Fox News, which is where you seem to get your information about Russian civilian airliners.

Soviet airliners were always competitive, the Tu-154 was a very good aircraft, as was the Il-62, but there has been a gap of 20 years with no orders and a loss of a closed market. Aircraft prototypes were designed and made but there were no orders, and engines were designed but never made for much the same reasons.

Saying all Russian and Soviet airliners are gas guzzlers is simply ignorant.

A bit like saying all Americans are fat, or all black people are good at sport.

Was over 700 billion rubles, lowered by 25 billion.

Which as worked out on his site is about 1.9 billion dollars less spending.

Yeah, no offense, but this gas guzzler theory....really, has no reason when explaining why Tu-204 did so poorly, for example.

Il-96 has a hard time competing with new large twinjets, but much the same could be said of say the A-340.


The Soviet airliners of their time were perfectly competitive, if anything post USSR airliners are comparatively much less impressive (when compared to the big market players).

The Soviet airliners of their time were perfectly competitive, if anything post USSR airliners are comparatively much less impressive (when compared to the big market players).

Soviet "companies" are not different from any companies anywhere... when they have orders from domestic and foreign military customers then they keep their skills up, they keep maintaining their production facilities and they develop new technologies to remain competitive.

20 years with no sales and the sudden loss of Eastern Europe as a market for their products makes things very hard... which is made worse by the fact that the Russian Air Force is not spending money on replacement aircraft for Tu-142 maritime patrol aircraft (MPA) or Il-38 MPAs, or Il-22 Elint aircraft, or Il-78 tanker aircraft etc etc.

In comparison Boeing cranked out hundreds of 707s for tanker aircraft for the USAF alone and wants to get the contract for the replacement aircraft now too.

When it comes to modern airliners the engines are critical and powerful but fuel efficient engines make or break an aircraft design. The Russians had some incredible engines in development but with no one buying their aircraft they didn't get into production. A military order could have solved that problem and led to at least Russian carriers buying Russian aircraft plus perhaps the "rogues" like Iran etc who prefer to not buy western aircraft for lots of different reasons.

TR1 wrote:

victor7 wrote:I think the $600B earmarked is for the NEW weapons alone and this is in addition to the annual budget of Russian Forces which is roughly $50B currently.

No way, that would be utterly unaffordable. The program is the total spending over the time laid out. Hence why the budget suddenly pushed up to slightly over 70 billion per year. It was much less before. If this was just for new stuff Russia would be essentially doubling military spending.

Im not sure, if I understood you correctly, as you usually are on the map in military stuff, but Im going to assume, that I did.

It indeed isn't the total spending. The 749 billion dollars is for new material production(including the industrial infrastructure and R&D) exclusively. Russia IS essentially doubling its military spending, that's the point. You are not going to be able to compensate the 20years of almost total standstill spending some 70 billion per year, which isn't that much more than what for examble the UK spends and it didn't go through the 20 years of fall. Russia's total military budget is very probably going over 100 billion per year by 2015, if the economy doesn't crash. According to SIPRI Russia spent 71,9 billion dollars in 2011 and a increase of 53% in real terms(i.e. the influence of inflation is nullified) up to 2014 is planned.

No, I will repeat: the 700 billion is NOT exclusively for new purchases. It is the entire budget - and even then, is still a huge increase compared to mid 2000s spending. Just look at the money allocated for new purchases in 2011, in 2012, for example. It is not anywhere near 70 billion USD, and there is no plan to raise it that high through the decade either.

The military wanted the equivalent of ~120 billion per year to do what they wanted in terms of modernization, but the had to compromise.
Take a look at Goszakaz for 2012, it is less than 2011.


http://russiandefpolicy.wordpress.com/2011/01/14/is-the-gpv-doable/

TR1 wrote:No, I will repeat: the 700 billion is NOT exclusively for new purchases. It is the entire budget - and even then, is still a huge increase compared to mid 2000s spending. Just look at the money allocated for new purchases in 2011, in 2012, for example. It is not anywhere near 70 billion USD, and there is no plan to raise it that high through the decade either.

The military wanted the equivalent of ~120 billion per year to do what they wanted in terms of modernization, but the had to compromise.
Take a look at Goszakaz for 2012, it is less than 2011.


http://russiandefpolicy.wordpress.com/2011/01/14/is-the-gpv-doable/

Just by spending the 71,9 billion dollars a year, Russia would pretty much reach the stated 749 billion. So that would be no problem considering that Russia's economy is expected to grow. When you look what Russian can produce with the 70 billion for-all-military-spending-budget it is absolutely obvious, that with it Russia can't get even near the equipment levels that are visioned in the 2011-2020 SAP. The money allocated for new purchases hasn't been anywhere near the 70 billion, but there IS a plan to raise it that high. What do you think the hulabaloo is for? What Kudrin is complaining about? Average 74,9 billion per year for all military spending 2011-2020 would be absolutely nothing, no reason for anybody to complain. I already referred to the SIPRI report in the last post, go look it up: SIPRI

According to what is the producement money for 2012 less than it was in 2011? There was a recent news at least by lenta.ru, that money for defence producement was lowered from the intended 23,8 billion dollars to 23,0 for 2012, but is it less than in 2011? According to this the money in 2011 should have been about 19 billion, so it would more even after the cut for 2012.

I will settle for any Russian source that indicates the budget will be for 700 billion for new purchases only, disregarding other spending. New purchases are less than half of the defense budget at the most, so what you are suggesting is that under GPV-2011-2020 average spending per year will be in the 140-150 billion dollar range. That is fantasy.
You are confusing the GOZ and the GPV.



Regrading Goszakas 2011 and 12, take a look here:

http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2012/04/25.html

And:
http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20111124/496870505.html
THis latest cut to the GOZ isn't even the first- you can see it was significantly reduced compared to what Ivanov originally floated (before elections, shocker).

http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/news/view/60263/

Goszakaz was higher than 19 billion in 2011 counting credit and lending.

TR1 wrote:I will settle for any Russian source that indicates the budget will be for 700 billion for new purchases only, disregarding other spending. New purchases are less than half of the defense budget at the most, so what you are suggesting is that under GPV-2011-2020 average spending per year will be in the 140-150 billion dollar range. That is fantasy.
You are confusing the GOZ and the GPV.

Regrading Goszakas 2011 and 12, take a look here:

http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2012/04/25.html

And:
http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20111124/496870505.html
THis latest cut to the GOZ isn't even the first- you can see it was significantly reduced compared to what Ivanov originally floated (before elections, shocker).

http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/news/view/60263/

Goszakaz was higher than 19 billion in 2011 counting credit and lending.

It seems there are conflicting numbers for both 2011 and 2012, so you may be right about these years, but really hard to say anything definite with that kind of contradictions coming from different sources. And indeed it would be difficult to understand why they wouldn't increase spending from 2011 to 2012 as the economy grew some 4% making it relatively painless. Although there might have been some significant raises on social spending this year, so it could explain it, but anyway better to wait some solid data like from SIPRI, before making conclusions.

The new purchases are less than a half of the defence budget, but that doesn't mean that they would be less than a half if the defence budget would be 140 billion, because the other costs(like salaries) doesn't have to rise in the same pace as the purchases. So even if the purchases constitute only 20 billion of the 70 billion budget, if you would raise the budget to 120 billion, all the new money could go just for the acquisitions so that they would actually be worth 70 billion. Now if we assume that the money for rearming the Russian armed forces isn't 749 billion dollars between 2011-2012, but for examble 500 billion. And if the other costs of the military budget constitute about 50 billion dollars, then the average military budget for 2011-2020 would have to be only 100 billion. Ok, it is still quite a bit, but completely achievable asssuming that the economy keeps growing and it was my understanding that the plans were made with that assumption in mind.

I don't know where you got the idea that the rearmament money(749B) would be for complete military budget, as every source I have seen has stated clearly that the money is explicitly intended for the rearmament process. And as already stated 749B in 10 years is nothing(as a complete defence budget), just keeping the level of 2011 spending would be enough and it is obvious that with a growing economy the spending is going to go up. Even in 2011 Russia's defence spending was less of the GDP than that of USA, so there is room for growth. Also it should be assumed that Russia at least tries to achieve the goals stated in the State Armament Program, it would require much greater level of purchases than those of 2011, it would require that the stated money(749B) is indeed for equipment acquisitions and stuff related to it. Who knows what will actually materialize, it is quite possible that the figure won't be achieved, but from the logic of things it should be clear that what is meant with the Big Number.

Here is interesting article on the subject

from lenta.ru

Rogozin called the re-timing of the Russian army



The number of modern weapons in Russia will bring up to 70 percent by 2016, said Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin, in an interview to "Interfax" .
According to Rogozin, the troops will get new weapons in the previously adopted program of a modern high-precision weapons. Morally and physically obsolete weapons Deputy Prime Minister proposed to recycle, sell or give to other countries.

The transition to modern weapons and military equipment provided for the state defense order for 2011-2020. The program is planned for 70 percent of the upgrade not only the weapons and equipment, but the entire military-industrial complex of Russia. To finance the defense order will be spent 23 trillion rubles.

In September 2011 Chief of Staff of Russian Armed Forces Nikolai Makarov, said the transition of the Ministry of Defense to purchase only high-precision weapons for the Air Force. The acquisition of ammunition nevysokotochnyh Defense, according to Army General, refused.

As opportunities to perform all the tasks the state defense order in time questioned former Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin . In his view, the implementation of all planned projects of the military-industrial complex would take 15 years.

In 2012, the needs of the state defense order will be allocated 677.4 billion rubles. Originally planned for this purpose to spend 704.3 billion rubles, but in April 2012 the volume of military purchases, it was decided to reduce by 25 billion rubles. As of April 15 the Defense Ministry signed a contract for 77 percent of the defense order for the current year.

So we have new moments here.

1. Entire MIC along with Army/Navy/Aviation will be 70% new by 2016 - optimistic to say at least

2. Old weapons will be given/sold to others (as Garry pointed many times it should)

3. 780 billin $ will be spend (thats an increase if Im not mistaken)

Notio wrote:

TR1 wrote:I will settle for any Russian source that indicates the budget will be for 700 billion for new purchases only, disregarding other spending. New purchases are less than half of the defense budget at the most, so what you are suggesting is that under GPV-2011-2020 average spending per year will be in the 140-150 billion dollar range. That is fantasy.
You are confusing the GOZ and the GPV.

Regrading Goszakas 2011 and 12, take a look here:

http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/2012/04/25.html

And:
http://ria.ru/defense_safety/20111124/496870505.html
THis latest cut to the GOZ isn't even the first- you can see it was significantly reduced compared to what Ivanov originally floated (before elections, shocker).

http://www.warandpeace.ru/ru/news/view/60263/

Goszakaz was higher than 19 billion in 2011 counting credit and lending.

It seems there are conflicting numbers for both 2011 and 2012, so you may be right about these years, but really hard to say anything definite with that kind of contradictions coming from different sources.
Yes, that is the issue- the budget is different when different people in the gov say it, and if any election/sensitive political moment is around. The issue is the media reports the numbers each time as if they are firm numbers.

The new purchases are less than a half of the defence budget, but that doesn't mean that they would be less than a half if the defence budget would be 140 billion, because the other costs(like salaries) doesn't have to rise in the same pace as the purchases.
Orly? Take a look at the recent salary increase= they are HUGE, even accounting for less-than-stellar distribution and many issues. Certain parts of the armed forces, naval personell, officers, kontraktniki, just got a massive bonus boost, for the first time they make more than they would (on average) make in Grazhdanka (civilian life). As the Russian military continues to increase its volunteer component, they will have to increase the payments as well. No one is gonna volunteer for half the income they could make as a civie. And that is not the only cost that would increase massively- if they really would spend 700 billion on new equipment like you suggest, that will require a brand new, costly, service system for the new expensive stuff, aviation, AFV and naval alike.

I don't know where you got the idea that the rearmament money(749B) would be for complete military budget, as every source I have seen has stated clearly that the money is explicitly intended for the rearmament process.
This is the issue, what sources? I am going from everything in the RUssian language, because translations can miss the meaning and misinterpret statements. There has been absolutely no creditable source in Russian, or official ministry or government announcement, that says the 700 billion is the Goszakaz total for 2011-2020. they DO however say the GPV 2020 is over 700 billion, but that is, I repeat, NOT new purchases exclusively.

And as already stated 749B in 10 years is nothing(as a complete defence budget),
It is something when you take a look at average spending in late 90s to late 2000s, when it was around half that number.
. Even in 2011 Russia's defence spending was less of the GDP than that of USA, so there is room for growth.
The US is in off shore wars + has huge commitments worldwide, so it is not exactly an apt comparison. Plus, let us hope Russia does not drive itself into the same credit hole, something the massive military budget is not helping with in the US.
Also it should be assumed that Russia at least tries to achieve the goals stated in the State Armament Program, it would require much greater level of purchases than those of 2011, it would require that the stated money(749B) is indeed for equipment acquisitions and stuff related to it. Who knows what will actually materialize, it is quite possible that the figure won't be achieved, but from the logic of things it should be clear that what is meant with the Big Number.

I am just gonna reply to specific points in bold, I think it will be easier.

TR1 wrote:
Orly? Take a look at the recent salary increase= they are HUGE, even accounting for less-than-stellar distribution and many issues. Certain parts of the armed forces, naval personell, officers, kontraktniki, just got a massive bonus boost, for the first time they make more than they would (on average) make in Grazhdanka (civilian life). As the Russian military continues to increase its volunteer component, they will have to increase the payments as well. No one is gonna volunteer for half the income they could make as a civie. And that is not the only cost that would increase massively- if they really would spend 700 billion on new equipment like you suggest, that will require a brand new, costly, service system for the new expensive stuff, aviation, AFV and naval alike.

The kontraktniki process is on a hold. I read recently from a SSI report on Russian military modernization that the number of kontraktniki is now lower than it was few years ago. It would be just too expensive to carry out both the professionalization and the State Armament Program at the same time. The SAP is the first priority for this decade as the equipment is now getting hopelessly old and worn out, it has to be replaced now, it can't be pushed for the next decade anymore. Of course there can be exceptions on some branches and so on, but on a large scale, this is the reality.

Sure they might have given a rise to salaries now, but as they are planning to make the 53% raise to spending by 2014, it is clear that the extra 53% is by heavy majority intended for the equipment purchases. If they would just keep raising the salaries, the budget would be soon be over 100B just from the personnel costs. Those costs has to be controlled so that the purchases can be realized. Surely you do recognize the need for the SAP to be the first priority for this decade? If we would go on with the model you are presenting, the salaries would go on up through the decade, but the spending would stay at some 70B, obviously that would mean that the money for purchases and such would actually decrease. You must realize that it just can't go like that. Well it could go, if things go badly, but that surely is not what the MoD is planning.

TR1 wrote:
It is something when you take a look at average spending in late 90s to late 2000s, when it was around half that number.
The US is in off shore wars + has huge commitments worldwide, so it is not exactly an apt comparison. Plus, let us hope Russia does not drive itself into the same credit hole, something the massive military budget is not helping with in the US.

That period from the 90s to recent years was a complete catastrophe. The spending has risen and the situation has stabilized, but where as other countries used those 20 years to get new equipment and modernized their armed forces, Russia didn't. You know, spending on a more standard level now, doesn't get you back those 20 years. Unfortunately Russia is not in the situation of UK, France, Germany or Japan, and it doesn't have to commitments and wars of US, but it does have 20 years of catching up to do. Thus 749B for modernization, for fulfilling the SAP. That kind of spending does come with some risks, that is why Kudrin is complaining.

Ok, we can disagree about the details, but the issue remains. What Russian source is there, that actually says over 700 billion is NOT for the GPV but for procurement specifically? Words out of the mouths of actual officials?

I have seen absolutely nothing to indicate that.

New Arms Program to Change Russia by 2020 - Rogozin

KRASNOGORSK, February 23 (RIA Novosti) – Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said the implementation of Russia's ambitious arms procurement program will bring drastic changes to the country by 2020.

“By 2020, the moment of the weapons program implementation, we will be living in a quite another country…In the country, which will surely get off the oil and gas needle, in the country which will have new modern plants, in the country, where the cult of an engineer and constructor will be created,” Rogozin, who is in charge of the defense industry, said.

“We will turn the tide, this will be an industrial power,” Rogozin said on Saturday at a meeting of Russian patriotic organizations in Krasnogork, in the Moscow Region, marking the holiday, known as Defender of the Fatherland Day.

Russia's ambitious 2011-2020 arms procurement program stipulates the upgrade of up to 11 percent of military equipment annually and will allow the country to increase the share of modern weaponry in the Armed Forces to 70 percent by 2020.

Russia allocated about 908 billion rubles (about $30.7 bln) on state defense order spending in 2012.The sharp increase in spending was necessary to boost R&D and put new weaponry into mass production, Rogozin said last December.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, who attended a concert marking Defender of the Fatherland Day, said: “Ensuring Russia’s reliable defense capacity is a priority of our national policy… Bringing drastic changes to the military sphere is a difficult and complicated process but it is long overdue. Postponing it means putting the country’s security under threat.”

Is this the case of usual Rogozin shooting off his mouth or some truth in his statements ?

Mouth shooting no doubt, but that doesn't make what he says wrong.

Recent statements from Putin in 2013 indicates SAP funding has been revised , Now Airforce gets more fund 5 Trillion roubles and Navy gets 4 Trillion rouble , not sure why Airforce got priority but revised figure is as below

SAP 2020 Break Up of 23 trillion rubles

Army and Airborne Force - 2.6 trillion rubles [ $ 80.5 billion ]
Navy - 4 trillion rubles [ $123.5 billion ]
Airforce - 5 trillion rubles [ $165 Billion ]
Strategic Rocket Forces - 1 trillion rubles [ $ 30.8 billion ]
Air and Space Defence - 4 trillion rubles [$123.5 billion ]
Classified Program - 3.4 trillion rubles [ $100 billion ]

Total 20 trillion rubles [ $627 billion ]

MIC Program - 3 Trillion [ $ 92.6 billion ]

Total MIC/Defence Program - 23 Trillion Rubles [ $ 719 billion ]

They also mentioned MIC Program will get additional 3 trillion rouble from private funding , god knows how.

Austin, it would help if you provided links to material containing that information. I am trying to google the same combination of numbers and keyword but I can't find anything yet. Any help?

Anyway, I wonder what the 165 billion dollars for air force would be spent. What does that include? It won't be just purchase of material as one could easely buy over 2300 aircraft each worth an average of 70 million dollars (and just su34 cost less, su35 won't cost much more, helicopters cost easely half or third that amount etc). Missiles and simulators could also be bought it ridiculous numbers with such a figure, they can't be the culprits. Development programmes may run into several billion dollar territory, but even that can't cover such a figure. With some realistic course of developing new systems and buying them, none of that alone can account for the figure by 2020, or even 2025. So that number needs to cover a lot of things. which?

SAP 2020 is the Military Budget of Russian Armed Forces and not just Capital Expenditure for Russian Military hardware.

From what i recollect its 70:30 Ratio , 70 % of that money will be spent on Capital Expenditure which is new equipment buy and 30 % is for Salaries ,Maintenance, Upkeep , Social Welfare etc

I will try to get the link , I did this calculation some months back and i reposted it since the figures have changed now for Russian Airforce getting $ 1 trillion more compared to previous estimate and the navy loosing similar amount in the bargain , so balancing toward the airforce.

Some Links for you to support those calculations.

Navy 4 Trillion Roubles http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_01_10/4-trillion-rubles-to-be-assigned-for-Russian-Navy-modernization-Putin/

Airforce 5 Trillion Roubles http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2013/3/7/1561/

Land and Airborne Forces 2.6 Trillion Roubles http://lenta.ru/news/2012/07/03/trillion/

Secret Weapons 4 Trillion http://lenta.ru/news/2012/07/04/weapon/

SRF get 1 Trillion http://lenta.ru/news/2012/07/04/weapon/

The rest goes to ASD 3-4 Trillion Roubles

Simple

Thank you for the links. I am not sure about the 70:30 ratio, though. I haven't seen any statement confirming such a ratio. Usually ratios are reverse from that.

But anyway, just for fun, if one DOES get 70% of 165 billion dollars for new equipment - that would still be whopping 115 billion dollars. What could that get by 2020?
150 su35 for 100 million each. 15 billion.
50 pakfa for 150 million each. 7,5 billion.
150 su34 for 70 million each. 10,5 billion.
100 su30sm for 70 million each. 7 billion.
100 mig29k/mig35 for 70 million each. 7 billion.
50 su25sm3 for 40 million each. 2 billion.
150 yak130 for 20 million each. 3 billion.
80 il476 (transport and tanker) for 100 million each. 8 billion.
20 or so special mission elint, awacs etc planes. 300 million each? 6 billion.
50 or so various other light transport or utility planes - 1 billion?
67 billion total.
Plus modernization of remaining tu22m, mig31, su25, a50... 4-5 billion?

if one buys 400 attack choppers (30 million apiece?), 800 mi17 (15 million?), 300 lighter helos such as ansat and ka-62 (5-10 million?) that'd add another 27 or so billion dollars.

So we'are at perhaps some 100 billion dollars. There is still a lot of money to go around for weapons, simulators, etc. And we got some 1500 helicopters and 900 aeroplanes. Which is quite a bit more than the announced 2000 aircraft by 2020, even if all those 2000 will be newbuilds and not modernizations. Most of the plans for procurement by 2020 are known and it is not likely we would actually see the numbers i've fantasized about here. Plus the costs i used here will, no doubt, be called out by many as unrealistically high. In certain instances I've used costs higher than what some foreign customers paid for similar products. Domestic customer, the Russian armed forces, are bound to get them cheaper.

A more realistic figure for procurement alone would seem to have to be based on at least 25% less aircraft and at least 25% lesser prices. It seems to be a more realistic procurement total would be some 50-55 billion dollars. That is, like we could see from the list above, still a HUGE amount of money which is still sort of unreachable with currently planned production by 2020, unles further contracts will be put into action and fulfilled by then. 50-55 billion sort of is around 30 or so percent of the total figure marked for air force.

None of this is supported by anything other than speculation, of course. I too, like many others, would much rather have solid official sources and figures, instead of having to guess.

Putin said for VVS by 2020 it will be 2000 Aircraft and Helicopter with 5 trillion roubles.

The number of helicopter is 1200 and the remaining 700-800 will be aircraft of all types.

Thank you for the links. I am not sure about the 70:30 ratio, though. I haven't seen any statement confirming such a ratio. Usually ratios are reverse from that.

You are right... within normal organisations the numbers are reversed, but amongst normal organisations most of the in service material does not need replacement as urgently.

Infrastructure also needs a serious upgrade too, and maintainence and training need money spent.

I just don't see how 5 trillion rubles can be spent on just 800 planes (out of which not all are expensive combat planes) and 1200 helicopters (whose average flyaway price is probably in the 10 million dollar range. perhaps 15 if we account in the inflation) So how does one spend 165 billion dollars in 10 years?

It is hard to find prices russia will pay for equipment but that price is bound to be lower than export prices, no? anyway, those 2000 aircraft, even with some prices from 2015-2020 still shouldn't go over 65-70 billion dollars. Yes, total cost of owning and using a plane can reach 300% of initial flyaway cost, but that includes everything - from salaries of people using it, cost of training, maintenance, fuel, etc. And that is all spread over at least 30 years. Here we have a situation where majority of those 2000 aircraft will be serving less than 5 years. Yes, the training portion of the cost will be there. But cost of maintennance, fuel and salaries will be just 15% or less of the total sum of such costs.

There may be development costs, sure. But pakfa program is nearing its development end, most of costs for that are already spent. UAVs may be developed, but even in US those don't eat up so much money. Plus one can't just use US development costs as salaries are higher over there. Only really big development program is PAK-DA, which is still dwarfed by the remaining sum, plus we have no way of knowing which parts of its development will be paid by the secret part of the budget. Since pakfa is newest and strategic asset, it is quite plausible at least part of it will be paid from those 4 trillion rubles of secret projects budget. (Just like next US bomber will be paid from secret budget)

Weapons development and weapons procurement are never costly enough to go over some 20% of the costs of planes. There is just a huge gap between those 2000 aircraft (and all the added costs for using them by 2020) and the figure of 165 billion dollars.
Short of a big devalvation of ruble in the coming period i don't see how those two can meet together. So I will just assume we are not being told everything, there is some important info missing to put everything in perspective.

Let assume the worst if its 70:30 ratio i.e 70 for maintenance , salaries etc and 30 % for Weapons procurement.

Then $700 Billion ( 20 Trillion ) , the weapons procurement will be 210 billion dollars. Its still a big amount.

But I am certain the capex is much bigger than than.

Some have even suggested that the entire 20 trillion is just for weapons procurement as extra grants while defence budget come from the normal budget.

We need more clarification here for sure

It would need to include 70% new equipment by 2020, so it is not just 2,000 aircraft, it is new aircraft shelters, new airfields, new air defences, new radars and electronics and equipment... and while some of those aircraft will be cheap... some will be very expensive including jammer aircraft and intel aircraft.

Equally the entire inventory of precision guided weapons needs to be bought including sufficient reserves.