But the problem is that they did not place them in a dry climate control environment but stored a sizable lot of them outside in fields where they have been rusting away.
Can Russia regain it's Military Might?
- Thread starter scarey1989
- Start date
- Status
That is a broad statement to make by anybody, at what conclusion are you basing that statement from.
jennery587
New Member
Okay Okay
Guys Dont Forget About China , China Is A Giant Sleeping Power
We All Talking About Usa Uk Fr Russia We Forget About China And India Even Iran
Guys Dont Forget About China , China Is A Giant Sleeping PowerWe All Talking About Usa Uk Fr Russia We Forget About China And India Even Iran
I do not think that anyone would leave China on the sidelines, seems that Mr. Putin is doing everything possible to make China a close ally, How do you think that Russia`s aviation stacks up against China`s.
We All Talking About Usa Uk Fr Russia We Forget About China And India Even Iran
In almost non-existant state. But every year there are about 200.000 new conscripts enter/leave army. So, if we accept what any conscript retain his skills for at least 3 years - there are 600.000 right away. Plus, at least another 100.000 of professional soldiers what leave army for whatever reason - age, seeking of better life, etc. If we accept what they retain good skills for 5 years - then it is another 500.000. They are fully ready for 1st and 2nd grade units.
Plus, most peoples what served in army even 20 years ago - can serve now as simply infantry.
As for storage quality... in 2nd grade units technic is maintained at relatively good shape (useally). They have enouth manpower to carry any service operations. Of course, a lot is depended from local division commander.
China is a regional power I think everybody would agree with that, but it lacks any kind of capability or training , and they have huge numbers and lots of old equipment such as JH-6 for example , China is growing fast though but id say its not a serius threat to any major power, not for about 30 years at least.
Money
everbody is talking about a lack of money in russia. but they had a budget surplus of 48 billion dollars in the first seven months of 2007 and have fast growing reserves of about 540 billion dollars(currency reserves + stabilization fund) as of today. there is almost no debt left. in fact their debt is below 10 % of gdp, compare that with the us at above 60 %. The defence budget is growing fast at about 25-30 % a year. 36.8 billion dollars in 2008, and it will reach 46.2 billion dollars in 2010. (they are now making three year budgets). The ruble is still undervalued at about 50 %, so it's acually higher. That isn't that bad. And don't forget it's economy is growing fast(8 % in the first 6 months 2007). Defence exports of about 6-7 billion dollars a year are also contributing to the defence sector. Programs like the pak-fa are fully funded, much has changed since 1998.
Don't forget that russia has not the burden of iraq and afghanistan, and has not a zillion military bases like the us has to pay for.
Of course they can not keep the forces at current levels, but nobody will. Just look at reductions in germany or in the royal navy. The us will be also forced to reduce it's numbers, look at the virginia attack sub for example. They won't build 50 of them like with the los angeles class.
Russia also doesn't have to protect shipping lines like other countries, they have all resources themselves.
I believe if they make the right joices they will be one of the greater powers in the world. They can become Europe's largest economy before 2020, and with the resource wealth they could be come a military like France + Germany plus a much larger nuclear force, and, because of the borders more tanks of course. they will not build an intervention force, because they don't need to mess around in the world. So perhaps there will be a second carrier, but not more. They'll be strong enough that nobody will attack them.
everbody is talking about a lack of money in russia. but they had a budget surplus of 48 billion dollars in the first seven months of 2007 and have fast growing reserves of about 540 billion dollars(currency reserves + stabilization fund) as of today. there is almost no debt left. in fact their debt is below 10 % of gdp, compare that with the us at above 60 %. The defence budget is growing fast at about 25-30 % a year. 36.8 billion dollars in 2008, and it will reach 46.2 billion dollars in 2010. (they are now making three year budgets). The ruble is still undervalued at about 50 %, so it's acually higher. That isn't that bad. And don't forget it's economy is growing fast(8 % in the first 6 months 2007). Defence exports of about 6-7 billion dollars a year are also contributing to the defence sector. Programs like the pak-fa are fully funded, much has changed since 1998.
Don't forget that russia has not the burden of iraq and afghanistan, and has not a zillion military bases like the us has to pay for.
Of course they can not keep the forces at current levels, but nobody will. Just look at reductions in germany or in the royal navy. The us will be also forced to reduce it's numbers, look at the virginia attack sub for example. They won't build 50 of them like with the los angeles class.
Russia also doesn't have to protect shipping lines like other countries, they have all resources themselves.
I believe if they make the right joices they will be one of the greater powers in the world. They can become Europe's largest economy before 2020, and with the resource wealth they could be come a military like France + Germany plus a much larger nuclear force, and, because of the borders more tanks of course. they will not build an intervention force, because they don't need to mess around in the world. So perhaps there will be a second carrier, but not more. They'll be strong enough that nobody will attack them.
It's very hard to describe Russia as isolationist. Russia now, and as before, takes an active and some rather muscular role with it's near abroad neighbors, and the rest of the world. Also, even with it's rusty military today, who can invade russia?
No, the function of russia's army is to promote it's foreign policy, control the near abroad, and keep the rebellious parts under control. Russia's climate, size, history, and nuclear weapons are quite a formidable deterrence.
That'd provide plenty of manpower to bring all the 2nd line units up to full strength. But if the reserve recall system is hardly operating, then I don't see it being possible to get them into units "almost instantly".
Both will continue to have "proxy" fights. (supplying weapons to each other's enemies)
jennery587
New Member
China is a regional power I think everybody would agree with that, but it lacks any kind of capability or training , and they have huge numbers and lots of old equipment such as JH-6 for example , China is growing fast though but id say its not a serius threat to any major power, not for about 30 years at least.
WE DONT KNOW WHAT KIND OF WEAPONS CHINA HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED FOR THOSE PAST COUPLE YEAR, CHINESE SPY NETWORK NOW ARE STRONGE THEN EVER NOBODY KNOW WHAT KIND OF INFO THEY HADE ABOUT THE WEST, MY OPINION I CANT EASYLY SAY THAT CHINA IS NOT A SERIOUS THREAT TO ANY MAJOR POWER,
WE DONT KNOW WHAT KIND OF WEAPONS CHINA HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED FOR THOSE PAST COUPLE YEAR, CHINESE SPY NETWORK NOW ARE STRONGE THEN EVER NOBODY KNOW WHAT KIND OF INFO THEY HADE ABOUT THE WEST, MY OPINION I CANT EASYLY SAY THAT CHINA IS NOT A SERIOUS THREAT TO ANY MAJOR POWER,
It is hardly operating in the sense what no additional training is done. The system is fully operational in the sense what all data for all mens are stored in special "conscripts draw" offices which are located in every city, and national law allows quick reservist drafting. So if needs arise there will be no problem to get all these peoples back to service.
Are you 12 years old ? Drop the caps.
There is something called intellegence , ever heard of that?
Only 38th and 39th Group Army is modern , the rest is very old and outdated , the training is not even worth mentioning
Their doctrine is all based on artillery , work , how will artillery help when you can use precision bombing , the Airforce is in similar state , pilot training is bad , aircraft are old , except those 200-250 modern fighters that don't have a chance against Raptor anyway .
The navy is a joke in all sincerity , old diesel subs , old ships , only few ships can offer nice firepower , even though they can they have no amazing naval doctrine or training to work and cooperate good etc..
In all honesty China's military is a joke compared to Russia and even a bigger joke compared to USA , and country's like UK or France have a far better training , newer equipment and more important tehnology.
scarey1989
New Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #55
I think that Russia and China are both respectable regional powers, however, both countries rely heavily on quantity of hardware rather than qaulity. Todays modern conflicts ie Afghanistan involve technologically advanced munitions (PAveways,HOPE/HOSBO's etc) aswell as technologically advanced armour and other hardware. large numbers of soviet relics which are fine in a cold war senario are less efective.
Ah - better than I thought. Thanks for the information.
The infrastructure being in place should certainly mean that it's workable, but not as smoothly as it would if it had the practice that regular conscript recalls for training would give.
Russian equipment quality are mostly not exactly comparable to UK/US or such , but comparing them to China is absolutely ridicilous.
Or must I remind you again which has obsolete equipment such as JH-6 , and all below Type 98 , old diesel subs etc. and which already took that kind of equipment from service many years ago.
wittmanace
Active Member
well, these examples do beg the question...is this true? the reality is (and not to open a can of worms here but..) afghanistan and iraq are not victories...they are in fact not good examples for the topic. although the soviet union failed in afghanistan, one wonders if in fact a larger presence with perhaps lesser technology would be the answer in these conflicts. to maintain the tech edge in these conflicts, not much tech is needed...perhaps there is in fact overkill in the tech applied. look at the tech used, and then consider the success levels....clearly not satisfactory given the troop surges.
perhaps using the same funds for larger numbers would be more appropriate after all....ie..in this situation, use the funds to get the iraqi army 300 more bmps rather than the coalition forces deploying 100 more bradleys. this seems to be what could be applied in afghanistan for example. it would allow for greater presence, rather than a limited one with overkill tech. consider the limits of the uk presence in afghanistan or in basra in iraq...the complaints of lack of harriers in helmand some months ago, etc. would a higher number of lesser aircraft not perform a greater role here?
the assumption seems to be that the objective is to compete with the u.s. directly. this is only partly true, if that even...the reality is not so, i would suggest. look at the current major conflicts, and those of the last 30 years. there has to be a tier system whereby there is cheaper lower tech available en mass, as well as a tip of the sword, so to speak. this obviously increases per unit cost of the latter, but both are nonetheless necessary in the current climate.
Afghanistan and Iraq
There is one problem with the so called modern warfare - the us and nato have - cost. the iraq war cost is nearing 500 billion dollars, and one should not forget that all those modern military equipment is over schedule and has extreme cost overuns. A F-22 can't help you in iraq or afghanistan. You can't win such a war. Some us generals should have talked to their russian counterparts first - the afghan war is lost as the iraq war is lost.
I'm feeling very sad for all those brave soldiers who gave their lives.
But back to the topic:
I believe it's too easy to just compare some statistics about a military. There are a lot of factors that decide about winning or loosing a war. For example russia could easily take 20 million barrels a day of oil production from the market, in the way of shutting down their own exports and hitting nearby pipelines and terminals in poorly defended countries. and manpower alone doesn't make a victory, what about the logistics for 10 million man ? In eastern russia for example there are only a couple of railways and very few streets which are easily destroyed - and then you have to cope with the famous russian mud - good luck - hitler could tell you something about that, and that was in the european part of russia, not in siberia.
What about the economy ? How powerful are the chinese if they can't export anything anymore, and are blocked from vital imports ? Lack of oil was one of the main problems germany faced in WWII. Who feeds 1.3 billion chinese if water systems of the agriculture are attacked (lack of water is a big problem in china)? What about the us if china and russia sell it's dollars, and russia doesn't accept dollars for metals or oil or gas ? Perhaps russia has a few advantages in this area...but let's hope nobody will ever try to find out.....
There is one problem with the so called modern warfare - the us and nato have - cost. the iraq war cost is nearing 500 billion dollars, and one should not forget that all those modern military equipment is over schedule and has extreme cost overuns. A F-22 can't help you in iraq or afghanistan. You can't win such a war. Some us generals should have talked to their russian counterparts first - the afghan war is lost as the iraq war is lost.
I'm feeling very sad for all those brave soldiers who gave their lives.
But back to the topic:
I believe it's too easy to just compare some statistics about a military. There are a lot of factors that decide about winning or loosing a war. For example russia could easily take 20 million barrels a day of oil production from the market, in the way of shutting down their own exports and hitting nearby pipelines and terminals in poorly defended countries. and manpower alone doesn't make a victory, what about the logistics for 10 million man ? In eastern russia for example there are only a couple of railways and very few streets which are easily destroyed - and then you have to cope with the famous russian mud - good luck - hitler could tell you something about that, and that was in the european part of russia, not in siberia.
What about the economy ? How powerful are the chinese if they can't export anything anymore, and are blocked from vital imports ? Lack of oil was one of the main problems germany faced in WWII. Who feeds 1.3 billion chinese if water systems of the agriculture are attacked (lack of water is a big problem in china)? What about the us if china and russia sell it's dollars, and russia doesn't accept dollars for metals or oil or gas ? Perhaps russia has a few advantages in this area...but let's hope nobody will ever try to find out.....
There is no such thing as a JH-6. There are H-6s, and at least five regiments of them (20-24 aircraft each) of H-6H and H-6M between the PLAAF and the PLANAF that are newly built acting as antiship and precision cruise missile carriers (using the electro optical guidance).
There is another five regiments of JH-7/7A between the two branches, also with similar weapons, and these can fly fast and low acting as low level interdictors. In addition to these weapons, it now appears that Beidou guided bombs and glide bombs are now operational (FT-2, LS-6) along with the LS-500 LGB.
Why don't you figure out how many R-77 capable planes does Russia have now?
China has about 100 Su-30MKK/MK2 that is capable of using the R-77. In addition, another 105 J-11s are also modded for this. A new J-11 variant, the J-11B is now coming into service in a full regiment with the PL-12, China's equivalent of the R-77. They are supported by another 76 Su-27SKs and UBKs, of which another 28 appear to have the R-77 upgrades. Alone China has the world's second largest Flanker fleet in paper, but the largest one if operational status is concerned.
There are currently four known regiments of J-10 in service, all capable of using PL-12 active radar guided BVRAAM. In addition to that there four regiments of J-8F, which is capable of using the PL-12. Plus one known regiment of J-8D's that have been electronically upgraded and there can easily be more, since China has six regiments of J-8D at least. Each regiment is 28 to 32 aircraft, so that can give you a good idea of the numbers. Add this all up and you have hundreds of aircraft that can use an active guided BVRAAM between the PL-12 and R-77 users.
The Su-30s, the J-10s and the J-11Bs add to the H-6s and JH-7s that can delivery precision munitions guided capability. In addition to that, the JH-7s, the J-10s, the J-11Bs, the J-8F and upgraded J-8D, and even the J-7G are all using slotted array monopulse radars with modern microprocessors, which is already a generation or two ahead of the Soviet Union material.
In support of these aircraft, China now appears to have two flights (4 aircraft each) of KJ-2000s Mainrings that acts AEWC aircraft and appears to be working on more using the Y-8 platforms with phase arrays. Each KJ-2000 uses a 3 faced phase array.
As for tanks, estimates vary between 300-500 ZTZ-98/99 tanks, plus another 1500 to 2000 ZTZ-96/96G among the modern welded turret ERA equipped tanks.
On the surface ship side, they have four Sovremannies, the two 956EM is better fitted than whatever the aging Sovs the RuN still have. Plus 2 ea of the 052B which is equivalent to a modern Sovremanny, 2 AEGIS-like 052C with four faced phase array and HQ-9 VLS, and 2 051C with the S-300 RIF-M. There are now joined by the 054 frigates plus 4 and still counting 054A that managed to bring a VLS Shtil-1 clone into operation ahead of the Russians. And there are joined by 20 to 30 stealthy Type 22 FACs, each capable of launching 8 AshMs each.
For modern subs, the PLAN has 12 Kilos, of which 10 belong the Kilo 636 type, and 8 of which are capable of using the Klub. Two of the remaining 636 Kilos have been refitted just last month, possibly to the same standard. In addition to that, there are 14 to 16 new Song class submarines, all capable of firing long range AshMs underwater, with digital sonars and command centers. The new Yuan class is now in production, there could be at least 4 by the end of this year. At least 3 of the new 093 nuclear attack submarine has been built with a fourth either done or on the way. The Hans have been gotten more upgrades lately, so does the Xia. Plus one new 094 Jin class boomer along with the upgraded Xia class.
So if you think about it, the PLA has a lot more modern stuff than what Russia has now, and these acquisitions show no sign of stopping.
There are also a lot of older stuff, like the Jianghu and Jiangwei frigates, the Luhus and Ludas, the hundreds of J-7s and older J-8s, the T-59/69/80s, but unlike what happened to the Soviet Union equipment, the PLA older stuff are not mothballed, they are well maintained, upgraded and continuously used, even for training. Thus there are no rusting mothballed fleets here, and all the older stuff can be promptly thrown into battle in support of the modern fleets.
- Status