Stop looking with old eyes at the new Russian army
After the publication of an article on the new Arms Program of the Russian Army, it became necessary to narrow the topic somewhat. Agree, reading in all seriousness that the new Program will be adopted in this form because there is not enough money in the country, it’s quite difficult without a smile. It is strange that we do not know this ... Just like reading about the need for new tanks, guns, planes. For some reason, some people absolutely do not want to "remember" what they themselves have repeatedly written and talked about. In particular, about the generals who are preparing for past soldiers.
Alas, but conservatism in thinking, about which our proverbs and sayings constantly remind us (including, by the way, the one I wrote about above), is so deeply embedded in us that we no longer consider ourselves conservatives. No, we think in a new way ... Only in the old categories.
For a start, I want to ask a simple but important question to readers. It is clear that the question from the area (God forbid) fiction, but still. Dear, you are going to fight where? Purely geographically? “The old fashioned way,” as suggested by our former brothers from one of the southern countries? When should the enemy "enter your house", and then you will arrange the St. Bartholomew night from caches and other dugouts? And it does not matter at all that even after your victory, if it comes, which is doubtful, your house will turn into ruins. The main thing is victory.
Or are you still going to win so that your house, family, your town remain intact? You are going to protect what you must protect! Protect, but not destroy. As it is written in the military doctrines of most countries. By the way, "by age" both points of view on the "future war" are probably "same age".
Here is an example of our thinking. Very often, and this is probably correct, we compare our tanks with Western ones. Especially often we write about the Israeli tank and our promising. Just because colleagues from Israel really "own the material" and adequately argue their statements. The argument is endless ... Endless simply because the tank of Israel and the tank of Russia were originally designed for different purposes. Throw the "Israeli" in our forests or on the roads of the Baltic, for example. After how many minutes you need a tractor to save him. Conversely, the same tank in defense. Yes, and prepared. The conclusion is simple. Our tanks - this weapon is not so much defense as a breakthrough. And able to act independently. The "Israelis" were originally defensive machines. The concept of such in them was laid in the design. The main thing is to protect the crew ...
I do not want to, but let me remind you again the beaten truth. The army should possess weapons and military equipment in sufficient quantities. This is the concept of necessary sufficiency. In modern war, no one will give you a new production "beyond the Urals". And the war itself will not be measured in years. We must repel the enemy and strike back.
And now that some of our readers do not want to notice. About the new weapons, which are already known. Not about those who "came to us from the USSR", but about truly Russian developments. After all, it is in the future armament of the army and fleet we will find the answer to my question. Not in theoretical debates about the advantages of a particular strategy, not in scientific disputes about the possibility of using WMD. The answer is weaponsthat we have or will have. Are US aircraft carriers designed to defend the country? Or submarine missile carriers? Anyway, the Strategic Missile Forces? And what about new air defense systems for attack?
Let's start with the first part of the combat mission, which the Armed Forces of the country are required to perform - repel the enemy attack. What do we see today in this direction? Look at our latest generation of anti-aircraft missile systems. Almost all of them significantly increased the range. Why?
For a military man, the answer is obvious. The Russian army should be able to repel a strike at the far approaches to its borders. And have time to respond to their blow. Do not let the enemy to the troops. Moreover, developing this idea, such a concept speaks about one more feature of the “Russian” strategic thinking. Such a strike response does not imply the use of a WMD! Will be used conventional weapons.
Many today talk about Russia's critical lag in the production of unmanned aerial vehicles. And not only aircraft. We do not brag about our drones. From this, some conclude that they do not exist. Okay, but if you look carefully?
The land drones of Russia are quite competitive with any Western ones. And combat vehicles, and special. The Syrian war showed the successful use of some of them. But the main reproach is still to the UAV. We do not have expensive shock drones. And even about the development of such machines can not be heard.
It seems to me that here again it is worth talking about the concept of the development of this "branch of armament". Initially, we went different ways with the West. For the Western armies, the drone is nothing more than a substitute soldier. Thanks to Hollywood. From here, these drones will develop along the same lines, as was shown in a series of films about the terminator. In the beginning, just a machine that is controlled from a distance. Then the machine with the possibility of "independent thinking". Well, then "artificial intelligence". Simply put, a dead end. And the cost of such smart machines is exorbitant.
And we have? And we are developing quite cheap, one might even say disposable, machines for reconnaissance and adjustment of artillery fire. And they are often used for tactical purposes. And the number of such UAVs is growing at a pace worthy of a good sprinter. With the appearance of “artificial intelligence”, creating a mechanic is not a problem ...
From the same part of our combat mission and the development of new EW systems. Talk about the capabilities of modern Russian EW systems is not necessary. Those who closely follow the publications in the press know what these systems are. "Cap invisible" in action. Well, and sometimes, a means for "losing consciousness" of modern "smart ammunition."
There is another topic. But to talk about it today, I can not. Not because the topic is closed. Not. Just because what they are talking about on this topic is most often the thoughts of specialists or the speculations of "specialists." I'm about cyber weapons. Therefore, it will be enough to express the opinion of Western analysts and specialists. Russia today can quite effectively confront the West in cyber warriors.
Probably enough to describe the capabilities of our army in the field of protection, I am sure that the "narrow" experts will be able to expand the list of these "opportunities." My task is different. Let me remind you, the conversation about the concept of development of the new Russian army.
So, the second part. The response of the new army to the attack. Amazingly, I am again observing "thinking from 80's." Remember our last “Hurray!”? Precisely in terms of the use of weapons? How did Russia surprise the world with NK Caliber? How many words have been said about our "defenders." Well deserved. The rocket did not fail. But where did this rocket come from? And she flew in from 80's ... It was then that the idea and embodiment came about. Then just a revision. In the same way, one can write about Iskander-M.
And what do we see from 2000's? In particular, in Syria? And we see surprisingly good and productive work of our HQ. Unlike Western airstrikes, the Russians are much more accurate. At the same time, judging by the picture from the TV reports, the Western coalition uses high-precision weapons, and we are ordinary. How is it going? Pilot skill?
And this too. Only, it seems to me, there is another explanation. It's all about the quality of ammunition. Most recently, our southern neighbor had another Peremoga. Tested a new "high-precision" rocket for the MLRS. I took the high-precision word in quotation marks simply because, according to the test results, the deviation from the target of this rocket to 15 meters ... In terms of field application, taking into account the mass of explosives, it is quite "high-precision". And on the equipped positions? Where is an accurate hit required? Similarly, in Syria. Americans "high-precision" bombed on the squares.
I repeat, in my opinion, I do not have exact data and cannot be, we use precisely high-precision weapons. A single bomb or rocket is enough to destroy an object. The rest, already really ordinary, destroy the infrastructure. It is here that affects the skill of the pilots. Fully their merit.
So, in the new Russian army great attention will be paid to precisely precision weapons. In a situation where an opponent’s salvo immediately follows an otvetka with an accurate hit on the battery, it is doubtful that the fighters of the next battery will gladly work off their volley. A peculiar tactic of intimidation of the enemy with the subsequent destruction ...
Let's look further. And then the C-500 SAM ... Next hypersonic "Zircon" ... Next PAK FA and PAK DA ... Next Armata with the company ... If you look at the line of future weapons, not in terms of the possibilities of its production and creation, here Our engineers and designers have proved many times that almost everything can, but from the point of view of application, a completely clear picture is obtained. We will fight outside the country ...
Yes, it is outside ... We, I think, Russia is forced, but rightly so, to change the approach to its army. We will not smash one and all. Release those who then again "forget" everything. We reserve the possibility of a response to a group strike. For this, the necessary and sufficient mass of weapons will be saved. But we will, and in many ways we can already, be able to deliver single, but accurate, strikes against the enemy.
Today, nuclear weapons are no longer deterrent weapons. If you look at the statements of some politicians, you can see complete indifference to the consequences of a nuclear strike. We will strike and all. And there are already problems of the enemy. Yes, and ordinary people have become somehow disregard for the WMD. He recalled how one of the highly respected Israeli military experts had recently responded to the transmission of our TV to the question of a nuclear bomb in his country. "Maybe there ... Maybe not ... But I do not advise you to try to take it away from us ...". The quote is not literal. But the meaning is exactly that.
A completely different "pugalka" came to the fore today. This is an opportunity to really get in response to the exact same bomb ... Not hypothetically, but real. No options. And the Russian army will soon be ready to provide such an opportunity to a potential enemy ... Even without using nuclear weapons. On the American "mother of all bombs" there is always a "dad". And to treat our army today, as in 90, is already silly.
In general, today we cannot be drawn into the arms race. There is no money, but we hold on ... Changes in world politics, breaking the old system of relations between states, almost always ended in military conflicts. So, the possibility of such a situation today, no one denies.
However, for the third time I will remind readers that it’s not the amount of weapons that determines the capabilities of the army. Possibilities are determined by the necessary sufficiency of armaments ... Not only the world is changing, but also the derivatives of this world. Including such specific as war. It is important to notice such changes in time. And take steps to eliminate the backlog from rivals and opponents ...
Alas, but conservatism in thinking, about which our proverbs and sayings constantly remind us (including, by the way, the one I wrote about above), is so deeply embedded in us that we no longer consider ourselves conservatives. No, we think in a new way ... Only in the old categories.
For a start, I want to ask a simple but important question to readers. It is clear that the question from the area (God forbid) fiction, but still. Dear, you are going to fight where? Purely geographically? “The old fashioned way,” as suggested by our former brothers from one of the southern countries? When should the enemy "enter your house", and then you will arrange the St. Bartholomew night from caches and other dugouts? And it does not matter at all that even after your victory, if it comes, which is doubtful, your house will turn into ruins. The main thing is victory.
Or are you still going to win so that your house, family, your town remain intact? You are going to protect what you must protect! Protect, but not destroy. As it is written in the military doctrines of most countries. By the way, "by age" both points of view on the "future war" are probably "same age".
Here is an example of our thinking. Very often, and this is probably correct, we compare our tanks with Western ones. Especially often we write about the Israeli tank and our promising. Just because colleagues from Israel really "own the material" and adequately argue their statements. The argument is endless ... Endless simply because the tank of Israel and the tank of Russia were originally designed for different purposes. Throw the "Israeli" in our forests or on the roads of the Baltic, for example. After how many minutes you need a tractor to save him. Conversely, the same tank in defense. Yes, and prepared. The conclusion is simple. Our tanks - this weapon is not so much defense as a breakthrough. And able to act independently. The "Israelis" were originally defensive machines. The concept of such in them was laid in the design. The main thing is to protect the crew ...
I do not want to, but let me remind you again the beaten truth. The army should possess weapons and military equipment in sufficient quantities. This is the concept of necessary sufficiency. In modern war, no one will give you a new production "beyond the Urals". And the war itself will not be measured in years. We must repel the enemy and strike back.
And now that some of our readers do not want to notice. About the new weapons, which are already known. Not about those who "came to us from the USSR", but about truly Russian developments. After all, it is in the future armament of the army and fleet we will find the answer to my question. Not in theoretical debates about the advantages of a particular strategy, not in scientific disputes about the possibility of using WMD. The answer is weaponsthat we have or will have. Are US aircraft carriers designed to defend the country? Or submarine missile carriers? Anyway, the Strategic Missile Forces? And what about new air defense systems for attack?
Let's start with the first part of the combat mission, which the Armed Forces of the country are required to perform - repel the enemy attack. What do we see today in this direction? Look at our latest generation of anti-aircraft missile systems. Almost all of them significantly increased the range. Why?
For a military man, the answer is obvious. The Russian army should be able to repel a strike at the far approaches to its borders. And have time to respond to their blow. Do not let the enemy to the troops. Moreover, developing this idea, such a concept speaks about one more feature of the “Russian” strategic thinking. Such a strike response does not imply the use of a WMD! Will be used conventional weapons.
Many today talk about Russia's critical lag in the production of unmanned aerial vehicles. And not only aircraft. We do not brag about our drones. From this, some conclude that they do not exist. Okay, but if you look carefully?
The land drones of Russia are quite competitive with any Western ones. And combat vehicles, and special. The Syrian war showed the successful use of some of them. But the main reproach is still to the UAV. We do not have expensive shock drones. And even about the development of such machines can not be heard.
It seems to me that here again it is worth talking about the concept of the development of this "branch of armament". Initially, we went different ways with the West. For the Western armies, the drone is nothing more than a substitute soldier. Thanks to Hollywood. From here, these drones will develop along the same lines, as was shown in a series of films about the terminator. In the beginning, just a machine that is controlled from a distance. Then the machine with the possibility of "independent thinking". Well, then "artificial intelligence". Simply put, a dead end. And the cost of such smart machines is exorbitant.
And we have? And we are developing quite cheap, one might even say disposable, machines for reconnaissance and adjustment of artillery fire. And they are often used for tactical purposes. And the number of such UAVs is growing at a pace worthy of a good sprinter. With the appearance of “artificial intelligence”, creating a mechanic is not a problem ...
From the same part of our combat mission and the development of new EW systems. Talk about the capabilities of modern Russian EW systems is not necessary. Those who closely follow the publications in the press know what these systems are. "Cap invisible" in action. Well, and sometimes, a means for "losing consciousness" of modern "smart ammunition."
There is another topic. But to talk about it today, I can not. Not because the topic is closed. Not. Just because what they are talking about on this topic is most often the thoughts of specialists or the speculations of "specialists." I'm about cyber weapons. Therefore, it will be enough to express the opinion of Western analysts and specialists. Russia today can quite effectively confront the West in cyber warriors.
Probably enough to describe the capabilities of our army in the field of protection, I am sure that the "narrow" experts will be able to expand the list of these "opportunities." My task is different. Let me remind you, the conversation about the concept of development of the new Russian army.
So, the second part. The response of the new army to the attack. Amazingly, I am again observing "thinking from 80's." Remember our last “Hurray!”? Precisely in terms of the use of weapons? How did Russia surprise the world with NK Caliber? How many words have been said about our "defenders." Well deserved. The rocket did not fail. But where did this rocket come from? And she flew in from 80's ... It was then that the idea and embodiment came about. Then just a revision. In the same way, one can write about Iskander-M.
And what do we see from 2000's? In particular, in Syria? And we see surprisingly good and productive work of our HQ. Unlike Western airstrikes, the Russians are much more accurate. At the same time, judging by the picture from the TV reports, the Western coalition uses high-precision weapons, and we are ordinary. How is it going? Pilot skill?
And this too. Only, it seems to me, there is another explanation. It's all about the quality of ammunition. Most recently, our southern neighbor had another Peremoga. Tested a new "high-precision" rocket for the MLRS. I took the high-precision word in quotation marks simply because, according to the test results, the deviation from the target of this rocket to 15 meters ... In terms of field application, taking into account the mass of explosives, it is quite "high-precision". And on the equipped positions? Where is an accurate hit required? Similarly, in Syria. Americans "high-precision" bombed on the squares.
I repeat, in my opinion, I do not have exact data and cannot be, we use precisely high-precision weapons. A single bomb or rocket is enough to destroy an object. The rest, already really ordinary, destroy the infrastructure. It is here that affects the skill of the pilots. Fully their merit.
So, in the new Russian army great attention will be paid to precisely precision weapons. In a situation where an opponent’s salvo immediately follows an otvetka with an accurate hit on the battery, it is doubtful that the fighters of the next battery will gladly work off their volley. A peculiar tactic of intimidation of the enemy with the subsequent destruction ...
Let's look further. And then the C-500 SAM ... Next hypersonic "Zircon" ... Next PAK FA and PAK DA ... Next Armata with the company ... If you look at the line of future weapons, not in terms of the possibilities of its production and creation, here Our engineers and designers have proved many times that almost everything can, but from the point of view of application, a completely clear picture is obtained. We will fight outside the country ...
Yes, it is outside ... We, I think, Russia is forced, but rightly so, to change the approach to its army. We will not smash one and all. Release those who then again "forget" everything. We reserve the possibility of a response to a group strike. For this, the necessary and sufficient mass of weapons will be saved. But we will, and in many ways we can already, be able to deliver single, but accurate, strikes against the enemy.
Today, nuclear weapons are no longer deterrent weapons. If you look at the statements of some politicians, you can see complete indifference to the consequences of a nuclear strike. We will strike and all. And there are already problems of the enemy. Yes, and ordinary people have become somehow disregard for the WMD. He recalled how one of the highly respected Israeli military experts had recently responded to the transmission of our TV to the question of a nuclear bomb in his country. "Maybe there ... Maybe not ... But I do not advise you to try to take it away from us ...". The quote is not literal. But the meaning is exactly that.
A completely different "pugalka" came to the fore today. This is an opportunity to really get in response to the exact same bomb ... Not hypothetically, but real. No options. And the Russian army will soon be ready to provide such an opportunity to a potential enemy ... Even without using nuclear weapons. On the American "mother of all bombs" there is always a "dad". And to treat our army today, as in 90, is already silly.
In general, today we cannot be drawn into the arms race. There is no money, but we hold on ... Changes in world politics, breaking the old system of relations between states, almost always ended in military conflicts. So, the possibility of such a situation today, no one denies.
However, for the third time I will remind readers that it’s not the amount of weapons that determines the capabilities of the army. Possibilities are determined by the necessary sufficiency of armaments ... Not only the world is changing, but also the derivatives of this world. Including such specific as war. It is important to notice such changes in time. And take steps to eliminate the backlog from rivals and opponents ...
Information