Soviet era reserve vehicles.

Won't stop about a gazillion propaganda pieces & little snide additions to other topics 'After the failure of Armata Russia is so desperate to fill out its Aggressive Russian Expansionist Russia Aggression army that its recommissioning WWII era tanks!!111!1!11'

Yeah, but think how much money they will be saving on tents when the temperature gets below zero degrees C... perhaps Germany has forgotten the lessons of WWII already... it is OK because they only plan to fight in summer...

The real issue is that of the enormous number of T-34s they made they barely had enough left to do what they are doing with these tanks from Laos... which suggests their other tanks in storage are probably in a usable shape but not a parade shape... which makes sense.

Of course if anyone really gets lippy about the Russians using foreign made tanks in their WWII commemoration these are probably the famous tanks that evaded the great Laotian tank eater.... so they are famous.

(For those not aware, the new gunships were tested in Laos and Vietnam during that period (60s-70s) but when they returned from missions their reports listed enormous numbers of kills, whose wrecks never seemed to be present when the recon aircraft flew over later to check the damage done... the difference in the number killed and the number of destroyed vehicles found was explained by the Great Laotian Tank eater... that these vehicles seemed to have avoided for a good 50 years it seems...)

Interesting, never heard of that.

There could be a LOT of 7.62mm size dings on the armor of these?!

i think this tank unit formed by WWII T-34s has a symbolic role mainly

i think this tank unit formed by WWII T-34s has a symbolic role mainly

A very important symbolic role... they will likely be used in the May day parades from now on...

Interesting, never heard of that.

AC-47... the original gunship...

It was initially called Puff the magic dragon, but ended up being called Spooky.

It was during missions to intercept material and trucks going down the Ho Chi Min trail in Laos that created the myth...

'After the failure of Armata Russia is so desperate to fill out its Aggressive Russian Expansionist Russia Aggression army that its recommissioning WWII era tanks!!111!1!11'

Well I wasn't too far off  
"Russia buys WWII-era T-34s for propaganda boost as supposed NATO killer T-14 tank fails to launch"
https://www.businessinsider.com.au/putin-pivots-to-wwii-t-34-tank-propaganda-as-the-t-14-fails-to-launch-2019-1
Trash propaganda so predictable

Hahahaha... some western sites are so ignorant... but then ignorance is catching... but then we knew for years about the various long range cruise missiles the Russians had, but the west didn't really take notice until they used them in Syria.

Further evidence if evidence was needed that the west is not the future and some alternative from Russia or China or indeed India is needed...

How many authors has this piece of s...? One guy alone can´t be that dumb!

There was probably an entire team of yes men encouraging each other to be dumber and dumber...

How many authors has this piece of s...?

Dunno, didn't bother to read past the headline

i selected this topic as better related because it says that BRDMs are being upgraded and delivered to various countries

Myanmar received upgraded BRDM-2MS

 According to Myanmar social networks, the armed forces of Myanmar received a batch of 33 modernized armored reconnaissance and patrol vehicles BRDM-2MS from Russia (including three in the commander’s version) from Russia. It is reported that the BRDM-2MS data is planned to be publicly demonstrated for the first time at a military parade in honor of Myanmar's Armed Forces Day on May 27.

Modernized armored reconnaissance and patrol vehicles BRDM-2MS received from the Myanmar armed forces from Russia during the passage from Yangon to Mandalay, February 2020 (c) twitter.com/NyanPwintAung1

 On the bmpd side, we recall that the previously upgraded BRDM-2MS were donated by the Russian side to Laos, Serbia, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan at no cost.

   Repair and modernization of the BRDM-2 from the storage of the Russian Ministry of Defense to the level of the BRDM-2MS is carried out by JSC 103 Armored Repair Plant in Atamanovka (Trans-Baikal Territory).

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3926328.html

I always liked the look of the BRDM-2... it looked like a neat little vehicle... and being amphibious and with those belly wheels making it cross country capable I often considered buying one and bringing it back to NZ.

My favourite model was the ATGM armed model with the fully retracting launcher, but the one with the HMG turret looked cool too.

Always thought a civilianised model made of plastic instead of metal that was lighter but still amphibious and with much larger windows would be a cool little vehicle to ride around in...

Problem is that I am quite big so fitting in to motor vehicles is generally a pain in the neck... literally...

It would be ironic if that were the case because the early T-34s included some with a high velocity 57mm guns designed for anti armour use. Its penetration performance was very very good and it would probably have been able to penetrate Tigers and Panthers if it had been used so if they had gone ahead with this 57mm gun for the T-34 the Tiger and the Panther probably would have been modified before service entry to have heavier armour which probably would have made their overall performance and production times even worse.

An upgraded T-34 with a high velocity 57mm gun would be interesting but would it be a secondary light tank?

Equipping BMPs in Armata and Kurganets and Boomerang divisions with 57mm guns to take on secondary NATO vehicles would make rather more sense than reintroducing the T-34.

Of course in the end they made the correct choice and fitted a larger calibre 76.2mm gun with a better HE round which made them far more versatile and useful on the battlefield... for all the west goes on about the Panther and Tiger in terms of numbers they were insignificant...

GarryB wrote:I always liked the look of the BRDM-2... it looked like a neat little vehicle... and being amphibious and with those belly wheels making it cross country capable I often considered buying one and bringing it back to NZ.

My favourite model was the ATGM armed model with the fully retracting launcher, but the one with the HMG turret looked cool too.

Always thought a civilianised model made of plastic instead of metal that was lighter but still amphibious and with much larger windows would be a cool little vehicle to ride around in...

Problem is that I am quite big so fitting in to motor vehicles is generally a pain in the neck... literally...

ive been inside one its actually got quite a lot of room inside, you could even fit another 3-4 guys in there although no seats for them but could stick on their rucksacks/bergens, funnily enough it was in Chernobyl lol.

Isos wrote:The best is the one with the 85mm gun. A modern 85mm HEAT would be very good against everything but tanks. Even if I would keep the APHE with updated perf.

quite agree, 85mm tank gun would still be able to deal with light armour such as recce, apc, IFV etc, as well destroy buildings, a sort of infantry support tank. A T-34-85 could still prove usefel only down side is speed and lack of armour, but add armour plates to the front and caged armour which is simple enough and u have fire support vehicle, although only worth doing if you already had them in storage, and you were facing a civil war of some kind where you wouldnt be up against high tech forces. I know syria and cuba use the chassis for various things, Syria i believe mounted D-30 (but not in a turret) a bit like a 2S5. I think from memory Cuba mounted various artillery guns, and anti aircraft guns mounted on T-34. Cuba seems to like mounting various guns on different older platforms, even a   T-55 turret onto a BTR-60 lol. below is a few pics i have, two with a D-30 in different turrets, one with a KS-19, two with 130mm M-46,(all Cuban) and then a few pics of Syrian D-30 mounted.i have also added on a few of a prototype BTR-70 armed with 85mm called 2S14 Zhalo. I have quite a few pics of other cuban and north korean mash ups of vehicles and turrets if your interested.

GarryB wrote:I always liked the look of the BRDM-2... it looked like a neat little vehicle... and being amphibious and with those belly wheels making it cross country capable I often considered buying one and bringing it back to NZ.

My favourite model was the ATGM armed model with the fully retracting launcher, but the one with the HMG turret looked cool too.

Always thought a civilianised model made of plastic instead of metal that was lighter but still amphibious and with much larger windows would be a cool little vehicle to ride around in...

Problem is that I am quite big so fitting in to motor vehicles is generally a pain in the neck... literally...

it is a neat little unit and with upgrades still fairly decent, remember seeing ones in Syria armed with added AGS-17 and zu-23-2, and one with AGS and 12.7mm instead of 14.5mm and cuban ones with 120mm mortar, pics below. There is one pic (syrian) i wasnt sure if it was a ATGW or a soft kill system/EW system, maybe you have an idea.

it is a neat little unit and with upgrades still fairly decent, remember seeing ones in Syria armed with added AGS-17 and zu-23-2, and one with AGS and 12.7mm instead of 14.5mm and cuban ones with 120mm mortar, pics below. There is one pic (syrian) i wasnt sure if it was a ATGW or a soft kill system/EW system, maybe you have an idea.

Was thinking more of a recreational vehicle I could take on holiday out in the middle of nowhere... do a bit of hunting and fishing, camping in the vehicle...

Regarding comment about the T-34... these vehicles are for parades and wont be operational for the Russian military.

Of the available weapon options I would probably go for a 120mm gun/mortar set up as it can use both mortar bombs and 120mm shells and also 120mm missiles and 122mm missiles developed for other weapons.

It would have a much more potent HE round than anything you could get for a 57m gun or 85mm gun for that matter...

For the very few times it would come up against enemy armour a diving top attack 120mm round perhaps with a tandem 120mm HEAT warhead... it would be devastating...

GarryB wrote:

it is a neat little unit and with upgrades still fairly decent, remember seeing ones in Syria armed with added AGS-17 and zu-23-2, and one with AGS and 12.7mm instead of 14.5mm and cuban ones with 120mm mortar, pics below. There is one pic (syrian) i wasnt sure if it was a ATGW or a soft kill system/EW system, maybe you have an idea.

Was thinking more of a recreational vehicle I could take on holiday out in the middle of nowhere... do a bit of hunting and fishing, camping in the vehicle...

Regarding comment about the T-34... these vehicles are for parades and wont be operational for the Russian military.

Of the available weapon options I would probably go for a 120mm gun/mortar set up as it can use both mortar bombs and 120mm shells and also 120mm missiles and 122mm missiles developed for other weapons.

It would have a much more potent HE round than anything you could get for a 57m gun or 85mm gun for that matter...

For the very few times it would come up against enemy armour a diving top attack 120mm round perhaps with a tandem 120mm HEAT warhead... it would be devastating...

if its for recreation, you would be better cutting off all the armour (from the sides up) and using fibre glass shell with a steel cage, this would reduce the weight massively and should give you better fuel consumption, but you would still retain good off road capabilities, not sure if i would go full amphibious looool.

hahaha i never expected Russia to actually use the T-34 as combat, i was talking about other armed forces who have it in stock (most likely poor countries)

I think 57mm has its place in combat and so does the 120mm gun it depends on what use you want

if its for recreation, you would be better cutting off all the armour (from the sides up) and using fibre glass shell with a steel cage, this would reduce the weight massively and should give you better fuel consumption, but you would still retain good off road capabilities, not sure if i would go full amphibious looool.

I was thinking of crossing rivers and operating near the sea so amphibious, but not using it as a boat so often as something that will pretty much go anywhere.

I was thinking a metal frame coated or easily replaceable in case of sea water rust problems with a modern plastic hull about 30-40mm thick with a design to make it naturally bouyant.

Nice big windows... double or triple glazed for strength so tree branches and bushes wont break them... but nothing about the vehicle needs to be bullet proof... I am not thinking about a WWIII vehicle...

Reduced weight and new more fuel efficient engines would be valuable, internal cooking facilities and space beside the drivers seat to the rear of the vehicle for a fold down bed. A set of solar panels that fold on the roof to keep power options open... and also a back up bed for the night when there are no mossies and no chance of rain... to sleep under the stars... Some sort of foldable trike would be interesting (ie three wheel bike) would be handy for recovering large animal carcasses without having to run the main engine all the time... a fuel cell would be useful to convert sunlight into hydrogen fuel for cooking perhaps and for power at night when the sun is not up.

The BRDM is probably a bit small... perhaps I would need a BTR-80 sized vehicle but everything just gets bigger and more expensive... would prefer to crush everything I need down into the size of your average big car...

with Syria eating quite a lot of reserves there still remains vast amounts of equipment in Russian reserve. I think Russian reserves are far larger than we actually know. And i see their reserve pool to be put into certain categories.

1/ ready reserve- items they still keep for their own reserve forces, they will want to keep a certain level of equipment
2/ reserve for export sales
3/reserve for export aid (customer will pay for overhaul or use to sweeten deals or in return other items such as textiles, rubber etc)
4/awaiting disposal/scrapping

category 1 is pretty straight forward these will be used to arm reserve forces will most likely be equipment that will be the most useful and most up to date.

the other categories slight over lap each other. With the current down turn in world economy of corona virus and oil prices for Russia we may see more sale of older equipment/ soviet equipment and some may have upgrades added. This is due to two things, with Russia losing valuable revenue from oil they will be looking at other areas of the economy to fill the shortfall of oil sales and one of the key expertise areas Russia enjoys a strong global share of is the defence sector. So although Russia will still focus on pushing lucrative new equipment sales abroad, and i suspect they will still sell new equipment but other countries may not have the money to purchase new equipment so may opt for a cheaper alternative to which Russia has many options on the table and equipment for every type of warfare need and at all budgets. As mentioned above this would also allow Russia to gain additional revenue during these low periods of cheaper oil prices.

when Russia sells items in category 2 it will most often include some form of upgrade which benefits various companies and increases sales revenue. the vehicle itself has already been paid for long ago so this is really money for old rope for Russia and allows Russia to clear out older vehicles and these vehicles can be supplied to the customer fairly quickly in comparison to newer equipment. Russia also benefits from a few other factors, such as ongoing parts and technical help and although this might not be massive amounts of money its something that can be the difference in keeping some Russians in a job and not as well as increased profits for defence companies. and most often than not Russian equipment is cheaper than western equipment even older equipment and this has what i call the deniability factor denying another competitor the chance to make a sale (this could be a western arms company or country) and once bought they are pretty much locked in for years if not a decade so Russia would benefit as mentioned parts sales and ammunition sales for the next few years if not a decade all good news for Russian arms companies.

category 3 and although Russia no longer gives out like it did during soviet times now it seems to charge the country overhaul or upgrades costs but also gains in others ways such as political influence, contracts such as oil, gas, telecoms etc etc, or in exchange for cheaper items imported from the country into Russia such as rubber, textiles, fruit, and other commodities, basically be used to sweeten deals. These aid/token sales also benefit Russia as mentioned before these pieces of equipment still need to be maintained and parts/ammunition still will need to be purchased ongoing from the receiving country and also locking out other countries sales.

and another benefit to Russia is this will save on scrapping related costs and environmental impact. this ties into category 4. And even items that Russia see as leaning towards category 4 could still be offered to the extremely poorer nations under category 3 equipment such as BTR-40, BRDM-1, BTR-152, BTR-50, BTR-60, T-54, PT-76, T-62, T-64, T-55 could still be useful to an armed forces that has next to nothing in ways of armour. BTR-40 and BRDM-1 can still be used at border check points, BTR-152 as we have seen been turned into ambulance by Vietnam for UN missions, BTR-50 turned into command vehicle, and BTR-60 used by paramilitary/ police forces etc. and various tanks been used to resupply Syria. all of the above were looked at to be scrapped.

another aspect out of reducing reserve stocks is the space generated in Russian soviet built bases, warehouses, storage facilities. It very unlikely Russia will ever go back to to having the kind of levels of equipment in storage ever again and although a decent amount will always be kept to quickly resupply eastern Ukraine, South Ossetia, Abhakiza etc etc it will never be a soviet levels. If Russia dd succed in a massive drive to clear out older stock in whatever methods they choose this will in turn create massive amounts of space not just equipment but also older ammunition. Suddenly Russia will see itself with old empty bases, warehouses, storage facilities that it really doesn't need or want to pay for the up keep of and many i would imagine are in a state that is no longer of good condition and really need demolishing, so this would give Russia the chance to either sell off old bases etc or rent them out as storage facilities etc etc to civilian firms, this would provide income either through rent or sales but also reduce the money spent up keeping these bases. Russia will only keep what it needs.

i think Russia should pursue such strategy as it s a massive win win situation for Russia in every scenario and allows Russia to boost revenue and secure various deals and influence around the globe and deny other countries sales. Of course they shouldnt wait too long as even equipment can get to the stage its no longer reasonable to sell due to bad condition of it. if they wait too long they could end up losing an opportunity and it will end up as scrap or a target on a range and there very little to zero money made. Of course sales of reserve equipment also creates a defence agreement between two countries and if the customer is happy and on good terms with Russia there may come a time that they will purchase new equipment as and when their economy allows or defence situation changes or needs change. If Russia is clever they will pursue defence sales in two ways 1. new equipment sales to those who can afford, 2. the categories above market.

question is will they do it? and do it quick enough?

and of course defence sales wont completely fill the void left by low oil prices but its a well established export/sales sector Russia has and sometimes its easier and quicker to build/expand on something you already have then to pursue a newer market. But i am sure an increase in defence sales would be warmly welcomed right now not by just the Russian government but also the defence companies and its employees.

With the exports, quite often it seems the Russians write off the cost of the original vehicle, but charge the customer for all the new upgrades and new gear... which makes a lot of sense really because you might get 10-20K for an old light vehicle, but upgrades for double that will be easier to sell, so you will likely be selling brand new engines with much better fuel efficiency and reliability which will be important to the customer if they actually want to use the things.

Another point is if they already have these vehicles then you give them 500 and they pay for the upgrade of those 500 but also perhaps get the same upgrade for the other 2,000 they already have in use... they end up with a much better vehicle fleet still standardised, much better performing and for minimum outlay.

The west would just demand they buy an all new vehicle... they will give them the money but they will have little to no choice of what they get and the money would be a loan they will have to pay back.

There would probably be a small market for museums, but you want to be careful not to give away anything still secret or something your own museums want.

Having a reserve of a few of the same thing gives a local museum something to trade with to other museums too.

And of course collectors, though they will likely prefer all original equipment...

But another line for exports would be someone like me that likes the simplicity of old Soviet gear, that does not need armour protection but cross country capacity and amphibious capability are a bonus.

They have some huge polar exploration vehicles that up to 8 men can be transported... the engine can be accessed from the inside in case it stops in the middle of nowhere at minus 60 degrees C...

I wonder if we will ever find out exactly what and how much was sent to Syria. Also how much ammo have the cleared but be shitloads of ammo. And some must have been completely exhausted (Soviet stock) I can't imagine 180mm shells, 160mm mortars etc still being left in storage could be a reason why we haven't seen much action from these systems in Syria due to stock. I doubt we will ever know.

Just noticed this image...



the large box closest to the camera is a 30mm grenade launcher in an armoured box for protection from small arms fire, but the main gun with all those baffles in its muzzle brake is a KPB... which is a KPV 14.5mm HMG but in the 23 x 115mm calibre instead of 14.5 x 114mm.

The 14.5mm round is a high velocity powerful round with about twice the energy of a 50 cal HMG with both a higher muzzle velocity and a heavier projectile.

In comparison the 23 x 115mm round has a slower projectile that is massively heavier than the 14.5mm round.

For armour peircing the 14.5mm is better with standard ammo, but in terms of anti personel use the HE rounds from the 23mm round would be vastly superior.

GarryB wrote:Just noticed this image...



the large box closest to the camera is a 30mm grenade launcher in an armoured box for protection from small arms fire, but the main gun with all those baffles in its muzzle brake is a KPB... which is a KPV 14.5mm HMG but in the 23 x 115mm calibre instead of 14.5 x 114mm.

The 14.5mm round is a high velocity powerful round with about twice the energy of a 50 cal HMG with both a higher muzzle velocity and a heavier projectile.

In comparison the 23 x 115mm round has a slower projectile that is massively heavier than the 14.5mm round.

For armour peircing the 14.5mm is better with standard ammo, but in terms of anti personel use the HE rounds from the 23mm round would be vastly superior.

But they have the grenade launcher for anti personnel so why replace with 23mm lol. I always thought the brdm-2 needed a grenade launcher along with its 14.5mm simple things like this can make a difference. I know some don't like it see OT as out dated and prefer mrap and other armoured 4x4 but for me these are still useful and they have one advantage over the armoured 4x4 and mrap and that's that they swim proper amphibious