"Tiger" vs "Iveco" - personal observations
Over the past few years, the Ministry of Defense of Russia "nightmare" of Russian manufacturers of weapons and military equipment, pointlessly and rather vaguely accusing them of either the insufficient quality of the manufactured equipment, or the fact that the proposed MO models do not meet the "modern" requirements, then " too "expensive. In fact, all the weapons and equipment offered by Russian manufacturers for the native MO, are created in strict accordance with the requirements and standards that the MO sets for such products, according to the specifications issued by the MO, which are checked and confirmed during testing. The quality and prices are monitored by the military acceptance institute — that is, direct representatives of the MOs sitting directly at the plants, checking the conformity of the manufactured products to the TU, monitoring the quality, having the right and the ability to check the level of costs and prices, indicating where and from whom to buy components. Without the signature of the military representative, not one, not even the smallest change can be made to the design. Their signatures are also on financial documents - military representatives "accept" or "do not accept" the expenses imposed by enterprises. So what could be the claims to the industry after all this?
Yes, in our opinion, the institution of military acceptance in a market economy is an anachronism, an atavism of the socialist system in the production and procurement of weapons. It is thanks to the preservation of this institution that the processes of modernizing technology are being held back, there are excesses in terms of the nomenclature and quality of equipment and equipment of equipment, the cost of products is overestimated. A couple of examples to understand the problem.
Example one: the designer in the serial model of BTT wants to replace the lamp with the old incandescent lamp with a modern, more economical and cheaper LED. However, he cannot do this without the permission of the military representative, and the military representative, in turn, will not give such permission, because the new lamp has not been formally tested for compliance with the requirements of the Russian Ministry of Defense, has not been tested, has not been certified. But, let's say, the designer really wants to replace the lamp, the sample 40-50-xx of the last century, with a modern energy-efficient product - in this case, through his manual, he can go to the manufacturer of the new lamp and offer him to undergo appropriate certification. The luminaire manufacturer is pleased with the emergence of a new consumer. He is ready to certify his product accordingly, but here the legitimate question arises: "And who will pay for certification?"
The fact is that the cost of certification costs XXXXXXX rubles, and of course it will affect the price. The manufacturer of lighting fixtures is ready to take on these expenses, provided that at least XXXXXXX units are purchased annually from him. Accordingly, he offers the customer - the manufacturer of BTT three options. Variant 1 - OK, I agree to certify and supply you with lamps at the same initial price, but you must buy from me annually in quantities of XXXXXXX units;
Option 2 - I do not care how much you will buy from me, but pay the full cost of certification; Option 3 - I pass the certification at my own expense, you buy exactly as much as you need to complete the production program, but the price will be market and, accordingly, will include the costs of certification. The manufacturer of the BTT rejects the first two options automatically - it has no money to pay for certification of someone’s products, and this, by and large, is not necessary in FIG. Calculations begin: how many such lamps are needed annually, and what will be their price for option No. XXUMX. The product requires 3 of such lamps, how many products the MO will order, it is known only to him. Perhaps, as in previous years, it will be on 3 machines per year, but again it is not known how many years such purchases will continue - maybe, like under the last contract, 100 of the year, maybe 3 years, or maybe they will not exist at all. What to do? Well, let's say 10pcs. x 3 products x 100 of the year = 3 fixtures. Then the price, subject to certification, will be ХХр (initial cost) + ХХХХХХХ / 900, i.e. somewhere XX + XXXY - just "space"! Thus, sound thought turns out to be buried.
Example two is shorter and simpler. There is plant A, which produces tractors and armored vehicles. And there, and there in the design applies a rubber hose for hydraulics with absolutely identical parameters. There are three plants B, C, D, producing these hoses in huge quantities, competing with each other, and therefore forced to raise the quality and lower prices, but these plants operate exclusively in the civilian sector and do not have military missions, which is also one of the factors reducing costs, and there is a factory E, which also produces the same hoses, but the military representative is sitting there, because orders for "military" hoses are at least, their price is 5-10 times higher than
for similar, and better, but "civilian" hoses at plants B, C and D. Plant A buys hoses for its tractors at plants B, C and D by competition, has, therefore, high-quality and cheap bundle, but for his BTT products, he is forced to buy where the military representative indicates. And the military representative can only point to plant E, because only there hoses go through military acceptance, and nevermind that there is a more expensive time in 10! Moreover, the military representative of plant A is not concerned, but the supplier of this plant is far from FIG. For him, this is a concrete headache, for having received the bill from the plant E, he must endorse him in the service of economic security, where SBShnik still needs to prove that
By purchasing the same hoses, but 10's overpriced times at factory E, you are not a thief. What is the difference in market conditions? The manufacturer must produce competitive products and be responsible for the quality: he did not develop a model of the BTT as a necessary resource, - penalty box to the manufacturer. Our Defense Ministry is now trying to act using just such methods, but at the same time it does not refuse from military acceptance. Yes, it is now mercilessly reduced, but for some reason they are not in a hurry to radically abandon this deterrent to the development of defense production under market conditions.
The crown "trick" of the Russian MO in recent times is to demand from the BTVT samples those qualities that this MO did not originally order - the product completely, in all 100% meets the requirements of the TOR issued by the MO, but the MO turns up the nose - we don’t need to! There is no logic to it at all!
Thus, the Russian Ministry of Defense frightens the defense sector with the market, and unscrews its hands by far from market methods. "Give us the cost price, we will check it, let you add 10-15, and maybe sometimes (just want to add" if you behave yourself ") and all 20% profitability - that’s what the fair price will be", - so they say Now the managers of our Russian MO, forgetting that the price calculation formula “cost + profitability” is the norm of the Soviet, not the market economy! The actions of our Defense Ministry in the procurement of weapons are very reminiscent of the methods of work of the "brothers" of the "dashing 90's", which, in fact, is not surprising, knowing who is at the head of this department.
The case of confrontation between armored cars "Tiger" and "Iveco" is a concrete example of the "elephant" behavior on the market of our MO.
The technical capabilities of both machines I personally happened to watch at the exhibition "REA-2011". I would be glad to believe the statements of the leadership of the Russian Defense Ministry about the alleged shortcomings of the "Tiger" and the same alleged advantages of "Iveco" if I had not seen it with my own eyes! In training races, "Iveco" tritely stuck on a strip imitating the real off-road with rocky boulders. There are many such places, and especially there, where the danger of the outbreak of hostilities is great - the mountainous regions of the Caucasus and Central Asia.
"Tiger-M" with the domestic engine passed the entire route without comment. After that, already in the official program of the exhibition, Iveco rode around most of the obstacles that the Tiger had easily overcome before. I did not make accurate calculations, but "by eye", he traveled such obstacles to 2 / 3. Moreover, the car was driven by a “firm” Italian crew, since somehow there was no reason for them to put their car in a bad light. Dear reader, if you were not at the RUSSIAN EXPO ARMS at that moment, then you lost a lot - the people in the stands, thousands of people, just literally giggled from laughter, seeing how Iveco famously, at a good pace, with remarkable dynamics obstacles! Those who were there and all this also, as I saw, will not let me lie and will confirm my words.
As for the "Tiger" ... well, he, too, I must say, not everything was smooth on the track. Once, very slowly climbing onto some kind of obstacle (now I’m not sure which one, but because of a hill (there are several of them on the track)), he almost stood at the top ... did not die, but just got up, it was obvious that something is missing for him - maybe torque, maybe inertia, maybe something else ... The crew of the "Tiger" did not lose: squeezed the clutch, released the brake - the car rolled back. Here they gave gas so much that it seemed that the armored car did not notice any obstacles this time - he just flew over, jumped over it. The second time, jumping over the obstacle "a la" foundation block, our "Tigrusha" painfully made a face with concrete over the front overhang: blow - boom! - the gnashing of metal - dust in the form of a concrete crumb, in the stands exclamation: “Oooooo!”, and on the faces of a grimace, it was as if everyone were immediately torn off without anesthesia. But nothing ... then I specifically approached the car - I looked at the bottom - no dents, no zamyatin - only the paint was torn off! But as for the fact that Iveco’s “bottom”, it clearly did not impress anyone - everything is kind of flimsy here and there, fans of good all-wheel-drive cars, which were not a few at the exhibition, sticking out this economy, shook their heads dejectedly and scratched their heads, - no one could understand why this Russian MO was so fond of this "tarantas"? The special forces soldiers, who were on duty at the exhibition complex, were unable to resist, so as not to “check out” the novelties of the armored car industry, because this is exactly the technique that was intended for their use. Their reaction:
- on "Iveco" - frankly spat;
- on the armored "KAMAZ" - treated them somehow evenly and sustained;
- on armored "Urals" - admired;
- on "Tigr-M" and "Tigr-6" - they squeezed enthusiastically.
In general, it was almost impossible to photograph "Tigers" in statics, so that only the car was in the frame - how many people didn’t ask 20 to step back and not interfere with the frame, nobody listened, they all stuck to these machines as if they were honey plastered. I note that the “Ivekie” stood nearby, and there was no such agiotage around them.
I almost forgot: Iveco was struck by an extraordinary tightness: in fact, the driver can fit in there and with him 3 more passengers - that's all! Moreover, how to place it in full combat gear, so that it jumped out, and everything was at hand, I won’t put my mind to it. In this regard, the "Tiger" is much more spacious and comfortable. Correctly says in his interview S. Suvorov - to transport the same number of fighters, you need twice as many “Ivek” than “Tigers”. And this, in addition to the cost of the machines themselves, is also the cost of operating the same gasoline / solarium, stupidly twice as much! Now about the notorious prices - "Tiger" costs 3-5 million rubles, "Iveco" - from 12,5 million rubles to 20 million rubles per car. Is it a lot or a little? For comparison, at the end of 2009, the new BTR-80 cost 10 million rubles, and the BTR-80 with PTK-20 million rubles. At the same cost, I'm sorry, but the BTR-80, and even equipped with a software and hardware complex (essentially a BIUS), is a machine of a much higher level. Now about the protection class. Russia has its own armored ceramics, there are special armored titanium alloys, and there is modern steel armor. A Tiger with a protection class 5 has long been supplied to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, a Tiger with a protection class identical to Iveco was also created and demonstrated at the same REA-2011 - what, do they really not know about this in the Russian Defense Ministry? Actually, the protection class is relevant only for bullet fire. Very widespread RPGs can only hold Tanks, and heavy infantry fighting vehicles, and armored personnel carriers. Mine explosions are generally ridiculous! Now militants of all stripes are practicing land mines of such power that armored personnel carriers are tearing in half, and the tank is turning inside out. So is it worth the candle? In general, what I can’t understand - the Moscow Region has an armored personnel carrier, which has a higher survivability than any tactical car, they still have a BRDM, why, for what reasons do they still need this armored car? Fashion trends ??? "Everyone has - we also need" - so what? So, yes not so ...
Technical aspects, design perfection and even its cost have nothing to do with it. It should be understood that the adoption of "Iveco" is not a whim of the MO. This is an order from the commander. But only a big commander can give an order to “close his eyes” to flaws and not take into account any arguments and arguments of opponents. And the commander possessing such power and powers we have only one — the Supreme Commander-in-Chief, who at the same time still works as the President of “All Russia”. And here he has "friends" - a friend of Nicolas and a friend of Silvio. They live and work in Europe, which is in severe economic crisis. How can friends not help here? This is not "patzanski"! Moreover, you can also beautifully pantanut before the "poor" Europeans - look, like, what we are "cool" - shit your buy, schob so good it was for you ... All this is called the "Big State policy". Only here is the same Europe, well, for example, in the face of Great Britain, it professes several other principles of the Great State Policy, namely: "England has no friends, but has interests." Russia, on the other hand, placed its national interests on the altar of a rather dubious "friendship." I advise everyone to think about this fact, especially in connection with the upcoming elections.
However, politics is politics, and the MOs are also not “suckers” sitting. No wonder the Minister did business at first and left taxes, then, learning to leave, taxes were raised. He also quickly turned around at the new location, reforming the Defense Ministry of the Russian Federation into a business structure with a very effective management. It is cuddly - just look at Oboronservis Concern OJSC, existing under the "roof" of the Moscow Region. More recently, the Minister of Defense himself was on its board of directors. Now, in obedience to the instructions of his high command, he left this governing body, but the essence did not change - at the helm of Oboronservis, both proven and faithful reliable personnel in the person of the deputy minister of the current Minister remained. Of course, all from the glorious town of St. Petersburg. Why am I talking about Oboronservis? And besides, the situation with “Iveco” was clearly played in the Defense Ministry - no-one else like “Oboronservis” will be involved in its production in the Russian Federation. Well, of course, not by itself - you can’t make you turn the screwdrivers on this organization, - there are masters of a different profile. Just created a joint venture, wholly and fully controlled "Oboronservis." But as far as finances are concerned, then yes, everything will go, do not hesitate, through this respected organization. Where? Well, of course, everything will leave Russia, to hell. How is this possible, you ask, after all, Oboronservis is like a state corporation? And it is possible that even though he is a state, and the form of ownership in the form of a joint stock company, it gives the full right to people on the board of directors to direct financial flows as they please and without any control. How do you think, why suddenly became so popular in the "defense" of various kinds of federal state unitary enterprises or state-owned enterprises? That's right! Of these, it is extremely difficult to divert profits. In addition, the company is much easier to privatize - it is necessary to sell to anyone. Once again, where does "Tiger" and "Iveco" come from? Yes, everything is very simple! When buying Tiger, the Ministry of Defense should transfer money to the Military Industrialization Company, the GAZ Group, and these are completely “other people's uncles”, and they are unlikely to share, and if they share, they will be crumbs from the “grand table” But when acquiring Iveco, the Ministry of Defense buys it as if from itself. Oboronservis will honestly give part of the money to its "friends" to Europe, and transfer the second part to the accounts of the right people in offshore areas. , to connect with the money received by Oboronservis for repairing armored vehicles for Venezuela, well, etc., etc. And then, one fine The second moment, for these money Oboronservis will be redeemed from the state, as an absolutely “unnecessary”, “non-core” MO asset. Iveco, Iveco ... And can you imagine what amounts go through Oboronservice under the construction program housing for the Armed Forces, in the line of food purchases, fuel, etc., etc. I write all this, and somehow it becomes scary ... somehow it is not accepted in Russia to appreciate, cherish and respect "freedom of speech" .
Information