Iraq turns its eye on Russian weapons

Thanks for the update Sheytan. If that's the case then the initial info of the helo contract (6 Mi-35M and 36 Mi-28NE) is right out the window. Perhaps the more recent figures of 24 Mi-35M and 19 Mi-28NE would be closer to the truth then?! It is very interesting that as far as i know there have been no images whatsoever from the Rostov spotters showing iraqi Mi-35Ms in testing, since last autumn. Perhaps they have been asked to tighten their security? This can also mean that we could very well have missed any eventual testing of the first iraqi Mi-28NEs! Recent news were also suggesting that the delivery for june is supposed to be made of 4 Mi-35M and 3 Mi-28NE, is that correct? Any info on that front? Again, recent news just say delivery of Mi-28NE would start "sometime" in 2014. The unknown quantity here is Motor Sich, whether they still deliver engines to Russia or not we don't know.

I think 3x Mi28Ne will be delivered within June.

The T90S tanks it seems won't arrive until 2015.

Thanks mate. Really valuable information. Keep them coming!

sheytanelkebir wrote:I think 3x Mi28Ne will be delivered within June.

The T90S tanks it seems won't arrive until 2015.

2015 is not far. The most important thing is that contract exists   

It is surprising how secretive rosoboronexport have been about the deals. literally only find out about items once the iraqi mod newspaper shows it!

But the T90S deal for the armoured divisions has been a major "slap in the face" for US armaments. It seems that the Abrams tanks will be eventually "demoted" for Mechanised Infantry use alongside the T72A and Type 69 tanks. OUCH.

Hopefully they get the correct urban kits for the T-90s, or they won't be having a fun time against Kornet and RPGs either.

TR1 wrote:Hopefully they get the correct urban kits for the T-90s, or they won't be having a fun time against Kornet and RPGs either.

We still don't know if it's the T90S or the modernized T90S ( T90SM/MS). The only difference is that one is a modernized version. It might as well be the T90MS with all useful upgrades like Iraq's MI35M. Earlier on Iraq rejected the T90S version without the modernization, we will have to wait to know, i'm expecting the T90MS.

After experiencing ATGW & RPG attacks on the Abrams lately i'm sure they will add SHTORA & Arena.

iraqidabab wrote:

TR1 wrote:Hopefully they get the correct urban kits for the T-90s, or they won't be having a fun time against Kornet and RPGs either.

We still don't know if it's the T90S or the modernized T90S ( T90SM/MS). The only difference is that one is a modernized version. It might as well be the T90MS with all useful upgrades like Iraq's MI35M. Earlier on Iraq rejected the T90S version without the modernization, we will have to wait to know, i'm expecting the T90MS.

After experiencing ATGW & RPG attacks on the Abrams lately i'm sure they will add SHTORA & Arena.

They are T90S... and from some people close to the military they're claiming that they're "naked"... i.e. without bells and whistles. Maybe this was done out of budgetary considerations and they would "buy" the add on bits later... but then, the Iraqi MOD did the same thing with the ABRAMS tanks (supposed to come with TUSK kit) but then they "cheapened out" at the last minute and even asked the americans not to include the commanders independent sight to save a few pennies. There are some proper retards running around the Iraqi MOD sadly

They might as well buy 2nd hand T72's if they are going to buy the basic T90 with no upgrades.

Any T90 other then T90MS would be a mistake, buying 80's/90's based tanks in thousands of numbers isn't required anymore unless the order of 200-400 tanks is a stop-gap measure for T99 or a negotiated deal for local assembly of some sort of tank.

You must understand that the number one priority for the Army people is to equip their 3 armoured division with tanks that are easy to maintain at the lowest cost possible... but without buying chinese. So whilst the Abrams tanks were cheaper to "buy" with teaser prices for the tanks, they got hit hard with the maintenance contracts and the low servicability... so they ran around looking at other things and ended up with T90S. If they add the "bells and whistles" to the tanks now, they would only have enough money for 2 divisions leaving one armoured division riding around in Dodge Pickups.

So that's the "best compromise" they came up with. Of course in my opinion its better to let one divisions "suffer" for a few years and buy decent tanks for 2 other divisions... but then I'm not in charge there.

Bells and whistles like good urban ERA and slat coverage are not very expensive though. If they get them T-90C is perfectly viable for service.

Panoramic sights, top of the line Catherine XP thermals, V-93 engines, that kind of stuff costs money, and probably would not make a critical difference in the kind of fighting Iraqi tankers are finding themselves in.

Agree that basic defensive measures like those are the main thing to worry about, the rest isn't critical,
and the MS standard can be skipped to later upgrade to superior standards, perhaps based off Armata tech.
What was the name of the more advanced T-90 upgrade with new autoloader that nobody has bought yet, T-90MA?

sheytanelkebir wrote:You must understand that the number one priority for the Army people is to equip their 3 armoured division with tanks that are easy to maintain at the lowest cost possible... but without buying chinese. So whilst the Abrams tanks were cheaper to "buy" with teaser prices for the tanks, they got hit hard with the maintenance contracts and the low servicability... so they ran around looking at other things and ended up with T90S. If they add the "bells and whistles" to the tanks now, they would only have enough money for 2 divisions leaving one armoured division riding around in Dodge Pickups.

So that's the "best compromise" they came up with. Of course in my opinion its better to let one divisions "suffer" for a few years and buy decent tanks for 2 other divisions... but then I'm not in charge there.

Dj elliot's blog

The speech by the Engineer Talal Hussain Salman, Director of the Ibn Al Walid state enterprise (a part of the ministry of industry and mining) said in his speech: The Ibn Al Walid company was established in 1987 to produce T72 tanks after an agreement with the Soviet Union. Now it is being re-established and is collaborating with companies in Germany, England, Italy, Spain and Russia to rebuild its capabilities.

Also mentioned in a 2013 Khaima magazine was that the coming orders ( T90 ) will deal with the shortage of tanks, both these facts point out that the T90 order is a stop-gap measure until tanks will be produced locally.
They might have discussed the T99 Armata for local production, another possibility is South Korea's K2 as they mentioned more military deals with Korea were on it's way.

iraqidabab wrote:
Also mentioned in a 2013 Khaima magazine was that the coming orders ( T90 ) will deal with the shortage of tanks, both these facts point out that the T90 order is a stop-gap measure until tanks will be produced locally.
They might have discussed the T99 Armata for local production, another possibility is South Korea's K2 as they mentioned more military deals with Korea were on it's way.

That is just wishful thinking. If they do produce anything locally it would be kit assembly of T90S tanks and maybe conversion of some of their Type 69 / T72s to other roles.

I can see Iraq purchasing some K2 tanks directly from Korea but no local assembly or production.

The only item I can foresee being locally built in the near future would be a replacement for the armoured HUMVEES and maybe facilities for overhaul and conversion of field artillery to SP and other "smaller" things.

Priority in funding is for the air force and army aviation for better or worse. The army will have to "make do" with what they can get.

interestingly an Iraqi newspaper published an article saying that the "2 planes Iraq leased" from Russia were SU-25s to be used for operations in the ongoing Anbar battles.

The paper stated Iraq had air and ground crews familiar with the type (although obviously haven't flown it for 10+ years!).

There is plenty of growth potential in the T-90S which means you can buy relatively cheaply now, but increase performance levels without scrapping them and buying completely new vehicles.

Thermals sights are not just for night fighting... being able to see through the dust and smoke on a battlefield is very useful... you can't hit what you can't see.

They could eventually locally produce (assemble) T-90s to the MS standard with active protection systems they could be very effective.

they are not limited by the russian military decisions and could revive Burlak with the underfloor autoloader carrying 22 rounds ready to fire and a further 31 rounds in a turret bustle autoloader also ready to fire. Those 31 rounds might be vulnerable to enemy fire but you could choose to fire those rounds first in an engagement so if they are hit you still have 22 rounds to fire on your way back to a rear area for repair.

In terms of air support Su-25SMs would be ideal with a range of unguided weapons offering low cost but effective enemy suppression due to the improved accuracy of the fire control systems and self defence suite.

sheytanelkebir wrote:interestingly an Iraqi newspaper published an article saying that the "2 planes Iraq leased" from Russia were SU-25s to be used for operations in the ongoing Anbar battles.

The paper stated Iraq had air and ground crews familiar with the type (although obviously haven't flown it for 10+ years!).

And if those planes show their worth which Im sure they will than this could end with first contract for that kind of plane which is most suitable for counter terrorist operations and much

more in its modernized versions.

Viktor wrote:

sheytanelkebir wrote:interestingly an Iraqi newspaper published an article saying that the "2 planes Iraq leased" from Russia were SU-25s to be used for operations in the ongoing Anbar battles.

The paper stated Iraq had air and ground crews familiar with the type (although obviously haven't flown it for 10+ years!).

And if those planes show their worth which Im sure they will than this could end with first contract for that kind of plane which is most suitable for counter terrorist operations and much

more in its modernized versions.

The key is that the Iraqis are looking to rapidly induct a COIN type. they asked the US for a quote on the AT6C-Texan II recently (24 aircraft) and got a price of about $790M (about $30M per aircraft). China is offering armed UAVs and it seems now that Russia's got some second hand SU25s in the offer.

2 squadrons of 2nd hand SU 25 ( upgraded later ) instead of AT 6 will be far better.


terrorists just overran some parts of Samarra with a huge convoy as their strategy is to use the civillians as human shields. Waiting 2-3 years on light AT 6 is useless.

I would rather send to Iraq retired Su-24Ms, which were replaced with Su-34. Su-25 for now doesn't have a replacement. Su-24M in Syria does an excellent job.

medo wrote:I would rather send to Iraq retired Su-24Ms, which were replaced with Su-34. Su-25 for now doesn't have a replacement. Su-24M in Syria does an excellent job.

May'be Russia could sell a lot of retired 1 engine aircraft sitting in storage in bundle packages at a very low price, may'be add in self-defense suites like MAWS, FLIR/Laser targetting suites, and extra old and 2nd hand jamming pods.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

medo wrote:I would rather send to Iraq retired Su-24Ms, which were replaced with Su-34. Su-25 for now doesn't have a replacement. Su-24M in Syria does an excellent job.

May'be Russia could sell a lot of retired 1 engine aircraft sitting in storage in bundle packages at a very low price, may'be add in self-defense suites like MAWS, FLIR/Laser targetting suites, and extra old and 2nd hand jamming pods.

Agree, retired MiG-27K could be very useful for Iraq and they don't have many flight hours, as they were build in 1985-1986 and were retired in nineties. But here is a question in what shape they are now and how many works they need to fly again. Su-24M are still active and they are getting replaced with new Su-34. They could fly to Iraq any time. Iraq maybe still have crews for them to operate.

medo wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

medo wrote:I would rather send to Iraq retired Su-24Ms, which were replaced with Su-34. Su-25 for now doesn't have a replacement. Su-24M in Syria does an excellent job.

May'be Russia could sell a lot of retired 1 engine aircraft sitting in storage in bundle packages at a very low price, may'be add in self-defense suites like MAWS, FLIR/Laser targetting suites, and extra old and 2nd hand jamming pods.

Agree, retired MiG-27K could be very useful for Iraq and they don't have many flight hours, as they were build in 1985-1986 and were retired in nineties. But here is a question in what shape they are now and how many works they need to fly again. Su-24M are still active and they are getting replaced with new Su-34. They could fly to Iraq any time. Iraq maybe still have crews for them to operate.

MiG-27K were produced well before the mid 80s- they were some of the earliest MiG-27s accepted into the VVS (and the most advanced, they went for cheaper ones after).

They are abolutel ancient and rotted out by now. you would be better off building a new plane.
The same goes for any single engine birds

medo wrote:I would rather send to Iraq retired Su-24Ms, which were replaced with Su-34. Su-25 for now doesn't have a replacement. Su-24M in Syria does an excellent job.

Su-24s are crashing the most out of the RuAF, giving them to an operator with less experience with the type is a recipe for disaster.

Iraq did used Su-24MKs from 1989 i think (they got 30 in all). Surely there would be a few pilots (and mechanics) around that have flown them back in the day. One was flown up to 2003 i think.