Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
Podlodka77 wrote:I joked in the last post that I wrote that Garry was taking us to the front. I just wanted to see the reaction.
This is my opinion on the development of the Russian Armed Forces after this operation.
As for the price of use of cruise missiles, supersonic missiles or precisely guided anti-tank missiles and the fact that it is also expensive ...Well, it's not, because I'm convinced that Russia produces one Caliber for a price far less than one million dollars. The loss of a military plane is far more expensive, while the construction of attack and strategic nuclear submarines is incomparably more expensive.
* As far as I can see, Russia also uses a large amount of non-modernized T-72B and T-80BV tanks. Even those are enough against the AFU. The West will continue to talk about "Russia will not have the money to produce new tanks after this operation", even though that West has no tanks. First of all, France, Germany and GB do not have enough of them. Even the T-72B3 and T-80BVM tanks are only a temporary measure until mass production of the T-14 begins. In fact, I am convinced that in the next few years, the T-90M will be the number 1 tank in terms of the number of copies produced. As for infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers, well, those vehicles of Russian and Western production simply do not have armor to protect themselves from tank grenades and ATGM such as "Chrysanthemum" or "Cornet". There is no chance that famous german Puma IFV can stand a direct hit even from ukrainian T-64.
It is my opinion that the following weapon systems will be primary for the development of the future Russian army. Navy will be in the first place.
1. Attack submarines (nuclear), non-nuclear submarines, Project 22350 and 22350 M frigates, 20380/5/6 corvettes, new attack submarines, and future naval combat systems. I think the Navy will have a lot of new projects in a couple of years.
2. Su-57 and Tu-160, Su-75, Su-34M, Su-35S, Su-30SM2, Ka-52M, Mi-28NM. Also; Il-76MD-90A, Il-78MD-90A, A-100. As far as war aviation is concerned, I cannot determine the amount of Su-30SM2 / 34M / 35S produced in the future. Multirole; One thing is for sure, the Su-57 is becoming a priority and I think that the Su-75 will be developed rapidly, as well as that we can expect PAK-DA and PAK-DP in the near future. Transport aviation and helicopters; The Ka-52M and Mi-28NM helicopters have a secure future just like the Il-76MD-90A transport planes. The development of Il-112 and Il-276 needs to be completed.
3. Strategic missile troops and SSBN's, hypersonic weapons, poseidon carrying submarines. Strategic troops already have more than 80% of new intercontinental missiles and are largely rearmed. This will be added ; The RS-28 Sarmat, the additional amount of Avangard, Poseidon topredos, as well as the hyperonic missiles 3M22 Zircon, H-47M2 Kinzhal and 9K720 Iskander. Of course, there will be some new hypersonic rockets.
4. UAV's, tanks like T-14 and T-90M, 2s35 Koalitsiya howitzers, BMP's like Kurganets and APC's like Boomerang. Russia, even with non-modernized tanks, has too many tanks that the West simply cannot swallow. Also, Russia, like the West, has modern anti-tank missiles.
1.
- The Navy is definitely up for expansion as a process of containment of Russia and China will begin, with military interventions against potentially many countries in the world. Also, the risk of full-blown conflict with NATO is not 0.
- Submarines are a priority, particularly multi-purpose SSNs of a new-generation like the Husky, that can be fitted with Zirkons among other things.
- The Russian naval infantry also needs expansion. More manpower, and large landing ships of a new generation. They can be used to support military assistance to other countries or prop up friendly governments against proxy wars.
2.
- Russia needs more fighters, and cheap ones - so the SU-75 is a priority.
- Ideally, it will develop those companion UCAVs as well, and for air-to-air combat as well as air-to-ground roles.
- It's clear that stealth is key, as NATO radars can see everything that's flying towards the Ukraine and in it, and soon there will be air defense systems that need only switch their own targetting radars on for a few seconds, to get a lock and launch an active radar-homing system, that can take commands from radars further away.
- The only other option to avoid being detected on radar is to fly low and fast, but this brings its own disadvantages; easier to get shot down by enemy fighters, much lower chance of successful ejection if shot down, chance of crashing due to pilot error, and inability to use certain types of weapons while others will have their ranges shortened. Furthermore, AWACS or enemy fighters in the sky can detect low-flying penetration aircraft anyway; their main advantage is to prevent air defense systems getting a lock even with advanced warning.
- The approach of multi-role aircraft or tactical bombers such as the Su-30SM, Su-34 or MiG-29M using stand-off air-to-ground missiles against infrastructural or tactical targets is showing its age - as these weapons typically have less range than modern air-defense systems and you can't solve this without making the missiles bigger. Instead Russia is relying more on cruise missiles. There is still a need for such capability, as the employment of the Kh-59 shows, but you might as well use gliding bombs when you can to save costs. While when you have clear skies, even a Su-24M with dumb bombs will suffice as Syria shows.
- Su-25s are still very good close air-support aircraft when the sky is relatively secured, but it's possible to replace them with unmanned aircraft
- As for helicopter gunships - the Gostomel operation and successful employment of the aging Mi-24 showed, as well as their role in destroying all sorts of Ukrainian artillery emplacements and armored vehicles in the following weeks, and escorting convoys - has all shown that there is a place for them on the battlefield in all roles and strategies. Whether close air-support, or escort, or precision attack. They suffered few losses. Nevertheless they are vulnerable in an environment where the enemy has advanced short-range missile systems or AAA. In order to increase their effectiveness, both the Ka-52 and Mi-28N must be integrated with UAVs and be able to launch them. There is some such capability for the Ka-52M, not sure about the Mi-28NM.
- UCAVs of course
- More UAV jammers and anti-UAV cannon systems like the 57mm autocannon
3.
- I tend to think the strategic deterrent and hypersonic weapon plans are fine as they are, they're already working on all sorts of things and currently the nuclear triad is already the most modern in the world
- Hypersonic and ABM defense should be focused on though
4.
- I'd say the existing tanks are mostly protected fine. Their main bane in this conflict has been artillery or the occasional ATGM ambush. However, they do need APS, as well as front-line vehicles such as BMPs. The APS used can vary from expensive to cheap.
- Tanks need a battlefield management system; even the older models such as T-72s and T-80s.
- Counter-battery radars are needed for any column and tactics for friendly artillery to be able to immediately respond back with their own fire even if the formation is on the march. This requires a battery perhaps to always cover any advance. I presume this is done already though.
- A greater focus on roboticization in the ground forces is needed. Roboticized tankettes, tanks, and ATGM vehicles.
- UAVs need to be integrated, mainly for reconnaissance and for directing artillery fire.
- UAVs UCAVs will be useful for taking cities as well. For taking cities, precision-guided shells of various calibres for artillery are a must to destroy various ambush points and enclosed enemy vehicles
- Mini UCAVs will be great for urban fighting as well, armed with some small rockets or small arms, so that they can attack any strong point, snipers, armoured vehicle, fortified building or whatever else
- A reorganization towards more organic fire support. There was a case recently where a Russian unit was attacked by a platoon of saboteurs, who then disengaged from the firefight and took cover in the nearby forest. A TOS then scorched their hiding place. It's good that a TOS was available there as fire support. However a TOS should be available to any company. For this you can't keep them in some seperate NBC company or battallion, but rather spread them out.
Briefing by Russian Defence Ministry
The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation continue the special military operation in Ukraine.
During the day, operational-tactical aviation of the Russian Aerospace Forces and missile troops hit 65 military assets of Ukraine. Among them: 4 command and communication hubs, 3 logistics depots, as well as 41 strong points and areas of Ukrainian military equipment concentration.
In total, 127 aircfaft and 98 helicopters, 428 unmanned aerial vehicles, 2,037 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 229 multiple launch rocket systems, 886 field artillery and mortars, as well as 1,941 units of special military vehicles of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were destroyed during the operation.
On the evening of April 8, the Kiev regime made another unsuccessful attempt to evacuate the Ukrainian Nazi leaders by sea.