Russian military recorded a video clip on joint training in Egypt

October 26 2016 49

Russian servicemen mounted a video for the song “Winged infantry” from frames taken at the joint Russian-Egyptian teaching, the agency said Ридус.

On the teaching "Defenders of Friendship-2016".

Recall recently a joint Russian-Egyptian exercise "Defenders of Friendship-2016" was held in Egypt, to participate in which 500 paratroopers, ground combat equipment, as well as airplanes and helicopters of various purposes were involved on both sides.

"The servicemen of the Russian Airborne Forces and the Egyptian Airborne Forces carried out a joint landing, which was carried out from a height of 3 thousands of meters from the Casa plane of the Egyptian Armed Forces to the limited landing area Tallet," the Russian Defense Ministry said.

As noted in the press service of the military department, during the maneuvers, “the soldiers of Russia and Egypt freed from the conventional militants a settlement specially built for these purposes, fired from various types weaponsincluding hand grenade launchers and other combat missions. ”

Andrey Chaplygin / RIA News

Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

News Zen Telegram

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

hirurg

+5

26 October 2016 10: 25

I am proud of such guys.
Holoy

+11

26 October 2016 10: 25

Airborne - in general, auxiliary troops ...
1. hirurg
  
  +15
  
  26 October 2016 10: 29
  
  Even my speechlessness disappeared from your comment ...
  Well then all the auxiliary troops?
  Airborne spear point !!!
  1. Holoy
    
    +17
    
    26 October 2016 10: 35
    
    The main ones in the war have always been, are, and will be Motorized Rifle units, and Tank ... Airborne Forces perform auxiliary functions ... Airborne Forces do not break through the front ... they most often die ... for the spear point they lack firepower, in fact light infantry ...
    
    Airborne forces are only good at Local Conflicts ...
    1. dmi.pris1
      
      +7
      
      26 October 2016 10: 39
      
      And the aviation, and the navy, engineering troops? Without coordinated actions of all branches of the armed forces it is impossible to win. Tankers and infantry on their own can do nothing .. You even forgot about simple artillery .. The sofa will help you in the "attack".
      1. Holoy
        
        +6
        
        26 October 2016 10: 50
        
        See Point-1 in my comment about you ... a little lower ...
        
        Yes, and again, just in case, pull up the mat part, since we started here about common truths ... Artillery, Tanks, Engineering units, Signalers, Air Defense ... Motorized riflemen have their own ... There are commanders in the war who need them forces, but the main striking power is precisely Motorized Riflemen and Tankers ...
        
        Yes, and slogans do not need to be addressed to me ...
        
        dmi.pris1
        
        +3
        
        26 October 2016 10: 54
        
        For slogans, it’s you who are going to Starper .. And about the mat part .. What is it with the ignoramus who most likely did not serve to argue anywhere.
        
        Holoy
        
        +5
        
        26 October 2016 10: 59
        
        I wrote everything, I have nothing to add ...
        
        You probably haven’t served anywhere, this can be seen right away ... You have a complex ...
        
        Unfortunately in the great war, our Airborne Forces in conducting classical operations had only failures and huge losses; they were reorganized into infantry units ...
        
        In Afghanistan, the same 103 Vitebsk Division and 345 regiment were re-equipped according to the requirements of Motorized Riflemen ... they did not jump there ...
        
        In100gram
        
        +1
        
        26 October 2016 13: 43
        
        Quote: Holoy
        Unfortunately in the great war, our Airborne Forces in conducting classical operations had only failures and huge losses; they were reorganized into infantry units ...
        
        I am very sorry that there are no downsides. Already in the "turtles" was. What are the "classic operations" for the Airborne Forces? Calm down. Have read books from the times of WWI. It is a pity that you can register on the site for October. Airborne forces are by definition suicide bombers. Read the Charter
        
        The comment was deleted.
      2. kenig1
        
        +1
        
        26 October 2016 10: 58
        
        I’ll tell you a secret, in motorized rifle (tank) units and formations all this is.
    2. hirurg
      
      +1
      
      26 October 2016 10: 41
      
      The main ones in the war have always been
      Oh well. Now you will hear so much flattering !!!
      And victories are made by all kinds and types of troops and auxiliary troops here and there cannot be.
      1. Holoy
        
        +2
        
        26 October 2016 10: 45
        
        See Point-1 in my comment about you ... a little lower ...
      2. Berkut752
        
        +2
        
        26 October 2016 15: 14
        
        Quote: hirurg
        The main ones in the war have always been
        Oh well. Now you will hear so much flattering !!!
        And victories are made by all kinds and types of troops and auxiliary troops here and there cannot be.
        
        I completely agree with you that what about the Airborne Forces, THEN WERE CREATED AS "REAR" PARTS. That is, a drop to the rear, and then their work, BUT THIS IS IN A CLASSIC WAR. What will be the war now, most likely like in Syria, without a solid front.
    3. Ivan Tucha
      
      +2
      
      26 October 2016 11: 16
      
      then the landing for them dissipated the entire 90s
      1. Holoy
        
        +2
        
        26 October 2016 11: 22
        
        In the 90s there were only Local conflicts ... And there in the 90s there was a mess and the Airborne Forces everywhere ... it’s not clear who dared for whom ...
    4. Shark Lover
      
      +11
      
      26 October 2016 11: 43
      
      Quote: Holoy
      The main ones in the war have always been, are, and will be Motorized Rifle units, and Tank ... Airborne Forces perform auxiliary functions
      
      Although he himself served in the Airborne Forces, your truth. Just now, against the background of a mass of local conflicts, such an opinion has begun to prevail, airborne forces forward. In fact, the entire main burden of any war is borne by infantry, tankers, and artillery, including all their support units. Without these arms, any airborne operation is about nothing. Nothing in a global sense.
      After the DRA, he served in the DDR ORB. The words of the battalion commander, I don’t think personal. You sit in the turntables, go on the technique for the task, I am recruiting a new staff. If you survive, no one knows where and how you will float further.
      
      Is your nickname related to Father Russky? If yes, my respect to you.
    5. Rose13
      
      0
      
      27 October 2016 05: 34
      
      yes you are a nice person an ordinary provocateur
  2. Eragon
    
    +8
    
    26 October 2016 11: 10
    
    Quote: hirurg
    Even my speechlessness disappeared from your comment ...
    
    Please bring back your speechlessness. Indeed, the main work in the war is performed by the SV. The Airborne Forces can seize the bridgehead, the object, but not hold it and do not carry out offensive actions of a strategic scale. Yes, for this they are not intended. Like it or not, the Airborne Forces are assistants to the Ground Forces.
  3. peter-tank
    
    +2
    
    26 October 2016 16: 33
    
    Airborne troops (Airborne Forces) - a branch of the Armed Forces designed to cover the enemy through the air and carry out tasks in his rear to disrupt command and control, capture and destroy ground elements of precision weapons, disrupt the advance and deployment of reserves, disrupt rear operations and communications, as well as covering (defending) certain areas, areas, open flanks, blocking and destroying landed airborne assault forces, breaking through enemy groupings, and performing other tasks. Also, the Airborne Forces are often used as quick reaction forces.
    
    This is for the Airborne. They are not auxiliary troops, but specific ones. And the spearheads of our aircraft are armored forces - the main striking force Ground forces.
2. dmi.pris1
  
  0
  
  26 October 2016 10: 32
  
  Where the Airborne Forces are, there is victory. You have ever heard such a term from the mouth of the military! Yes, there is no such concept, "auxiliary troops".
  1. Holoy
    
    +7
    
    26 October 2016 10: 43
    
    In war, do not fight in terms and slogans ...
    
    You would be in the DPRK .... They like blinded and illiterate ...
    
    Paragraph 1:Are you going to teach me? It’s possible in general, but for this you have a small amount of knowledge, why was the Airborne Forces motto attributed? The Airborne Forces do not have such a motto ... they have another ...
    1. Simak
      
      +1
      
      26 October 2016 13: 27
      
      That's right. "Nobody but us!"
  2. kenig1
    
    +3
    
    26 October 2016 11: 02
    
    Let's say it sounds like "No one but us")) I will disappoint you, such a cry is shouted only by the paratroopers, you cannot praise yourself, no one will.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Holoy
      
      +1
      
      26 October 2016 11: 12
      
      Quote: kenig1
      "Where the airborne forces are, there is a victory"))
      
      Yeah...How difficult are you... There is no such motto in the Airborne Forces,This is the motto of the Marine Corps.V Airborne has its own motto
      "Nobody except us!"
      
      The Marine Corps has its own motto - Where we are, there is victory!
      
      Are you an addict to Stole?
      
      Yes, and the motto has already been edited, not the right one ... Okay, at least that way, better late than never ...
      
      And let's not, but that’s exactly what it sounds and is pronounced!
  3. Berkut752
    
    0
    
    26 October 2016 15: 19
    
    Films seen enough.
    Quote: dmi.pris
    VDV, ESTABLISHED AS "REAR" PARTS. That is, a drop to the rear, and then their work, BUT THIS IS IN A CLASSIC WAR. What will be the war now, most likely like in Syria, without a solid front.
  4. Prapor-527
    
    0
    
    27 October 2016 18: 56
    
    Quote: dmi.pris
    Where the Airborne Forces are, there is victory. You have ever heard such a term from the mouth of the military! Yes, there is no such concept, "auxiliary troops".
    Actually, "Where we are - there is victory!" - the motto of the Marines, the Airborne Forces - "Nobody but us!" ...
3. Forest
  
  0
  
  26 October 2016 11: 51
  
  Quote: Holoy
  Airborne - in general, auxiliary troops ...
  
  Now the war does not imply a clear front line. There are light striker teams in the United States. Here we have the Airborne Forces occupy the same niche. And they should be the first to enter the breakthrough.
  1. gray smeet
    
    +4
    
    26 October 2016 11: 59
    
    Quote: Forest
    And they should be the first to enter the breakthrough.
    
    In 2008, the 58th Army entered Georgia .... notice not the Airborne Forces (quick response, seizure of bridgeheads, etc.), but the 58th Army! Although the best units of the Airborne Forces were preliminarily introduced into this army, having gathered them from different regions of the country ... But this can only say that this army was understaffed (quickly in time) to the requirements of wartime, professionals, of which the Airborne Forces are ..
    1. Forest
      
      0
      
      26 October 2016 21: 22
      
      The airborne forces needed to be entered into the breakthrough, and here, first, the Georgians had to be stopped, thrown back to their line of defense and only then broke through. After the breakthrough, the troops there had fun in the rear.
4. edge
  
  0
  
  26 October 2016 12: 52
  
  Quote: Holoy
  Airborne - in general, auxiliary troops ...
  
  The Airborne Forces is actually a separate type of force having a strategic character of influence (and this is akin to the Strategic Rocket Forces, VKS, Navy) .....
5. uncle
  
  +2
  
  26 October 2016 13: 22
  
  as a famous character said: are you ill?
cniza

+5

26 October 2016 10: 26

Servicemen of the Russian Airborne Forces and the Egyptian paratroopers made a joint landing, which was carried out from a height of 3 thousand meters from the Casa plane of the Egyptian Armed Forces to the limited Tallet landing site, ”the Russian Defense Ministry said in a statement.

The USA grinds with teeth, on health.
Lieutenant colonel

0

26 October 2016 10: 30

Well done boys!
The song is good!
More exercises - in different parts of the world!
But seriously - the guys did a very important job for the country, God forbid, not just the last time.
Engineer

+2

26 October 2016 10: 32

Very vocalist voice is not enough masculinity, to be honest.
1. Nyrobsky
  
  +2
  
  26 October 2016 10: 46
  
  Quote: Engineer
  Very vocalist voice is not enough masculinity, to be honest.
  
  Well, not all the same songs to Buinov or Marshall to sing)))
Ivan Tucha

+2

26 October 2016 11: 18

musical accompaniment does not match the video series. the clip is perceived somehow childishly.
BULB TARAS

+1

26 October 2016 11: 42

Why are so many offended by the Airborne Forces due to lack of attention to other types of troops ??? Well, be better !!! ;) And whining here about the uselessness and inferiority of the Airborne Forces is not worth it. First study the history of the Airborne Forces and then "dance" from this ... but for now, starting from Stalingrad and up to now, the Airborne Forces is a "fire brigade" which plugs all the holes.
1. Velizariy
  
  +1
  
  26 October 2016 12: 10
  
  Nobody spoke about uselessness and inferiority.
2. Izotovp
  
  +3
  
  26 October 2016 17: 34
  
  With all due respect to the Airborne Forces, not only you are so smart and beautiful. You don’t want to remember how holes were plugged by marines in the Second World War or in the Caucasus? But there is also a parachute landing method, but not only that. And in Soviet times and motorized infantry parachuted. By the way, having a terrible negative experience of mass airborne landing in the Second World War, now it is used either against popuars or in small groups.
Pirate

0

26 October 2016 13: 02

Still, why do not we use either optics or collimators? Not so expensive, but it makes shooting easier at times.
1. Vladycat
  
  0
  
  26 October 2016 14: 36
  
  Not long ago there was an article about collimators. In short, with them "not everything is so simple."
Boris55

0

26 October 2016 16: 59

The green form on the background of sand looks class
Deputy on the rear - reprimand.
Petrik66

+2

26 October 2016 17: 19

In fact, due to the possibility of selecting the highest-quality contingent of conscripts in the Airborne Forces, the most prepared both physically and morally, it is due to this that the "selected" troops are created. The only question is, when was the last time the Airborne Forces were used for their intended purpose - parachute landing by the forces of at least a battalion. And with the use of their wonderful bulletproof BMD, etc. Tell us where: DRA, Ossetia, Chechnya ???? Maybe the Americans threw out their own in Iraq or Afghanistan? We are not talking about sabotage groups, but about units.
1. BULB TARAS
  
  0
  
  27 October 2016 10: 05
  
  In the Airborne Forces, a jump is just one of the delivery methods and an element of the psychological training of a fighter). Americans in the second war in Iraq were thrown by parachute at night near Mosul to capture the runway and oil fields. "Thrown out" also by landing method. The trouble when "nails are hammered with a microscope" the use of the Airborne Forces for other purposes is a problem of the higher fathers of the commanders and the country's leadership. But they do this because others at a certain point in time are not ready for it or are not very mobile, no matter how super-armed they are. In Ossetia, it was lucky that the 58th army stood side by side in the fields. Well, the Pskov paratroopers in Ossetia and in Abkhazia the Novorossiysk paratroopers took part in the operation, by the way, and on the BMD ... it is better to go badly than to run well and for a long time) The main thing is that the troops fulfill the assigned task, but like by plane or helicopter by sea or by road by car or even on foot. The Airborne Forces are coping with this. The problem is how other "very beautiful" and "very armed" units then use this, which, in theory, should replace them, but as a rule, after completing their task, you have to solve other people's tasks for others.
tundra

+1

27 October 2016 10: 00

I don’t have anything against, Airborne Forces, Marines, and Brass.
remember the movie, Only old people go into battle.
And the words of the protagonist, the first on the wall of the Reichstag to sign, Private, infantry Vanya.
Whatever they say there, everyone, the major wars of Russia, carried the Infantry on their shoulders.
everyone else to help her.
No matter how cool they are, the rest of the armed forces, and infantry captures cities and territories.
Well nowhere without her, Queen of the fields.
Mentat

0

28 October 2016 21: 43

Quote: Holoy
Airborne - in general, auxiliary troops ...

These are special forces. Their tasks differ significantly from the tasks of motorized rifle units. Why are you trying to put an equal sign in their application, is covered in darkness.

Strengthening the infantry is only one of the roles they perform. The main purpose of the Airborne Forces is completely different, both throughout the history of their existence, and today.

You recall the failures, remember why this branch of the army was formed and examples of its successful application.
Mentat

0

28 October 2016 21: 49

Quote: Petrik66
Tell me where: DRA, Ossetia, Chechnya ???? Maybe their Americans in Iraq or Afghanistan threw? This is not about sabotage groups, but about units.

What for? You do not understand why the Airborne Forces are used, therefore you ask similar questions.