Military Review

Reforming the Airborne Forces

102
The airborne troops of Russia are the most important component of the armed forces and, therefore, must show the highest combat capability. At the moment, the Airborne Forces are fully capable of solving all the tasks assigned; in the future they must maintain their potential. To maintain and increase combat effectiveness, various changes are proposed at the organizational level and in the area of ​​the material part. All such plans that can affect the structure and capabilities of the Airborne Forces allow us to speak about the implementation of this reform.


Exercise experiment

In September last year, the Vostok-2018 exercises were held, which involved all the main structures of the army, including the airborne troops. Within the framework of the main stage of practical actions at the Tsugol airfield, an important experiment was conducted. 31-I Guards separate assault assault brigade tested in practice a new organizational structure, designed to improve the effectiveness of combat work. According to domestic media, the first transformations in the brigade began in the 2017 year, and at last year’s exercises they were tested in large-scale maneuvers.



Some details of the experiment are known. Two new airmobile battalions appeared in the 31 Guards troop unit, which were equipped with light equipment, including unarmored ones. In the course of the experiment, the brigade reassigned one combat and three transport helicopter squadrons from the air force. With the help of helicopters of a number of models, it was possible to carry out the landing of the landing force, and their translation into submission to the brigade simplified the interaction.

Based on the results of the experiment at Vostok-2018, conclusions should be drawn that determine the further development of individual formations and the Airborne Forces as a whole. The first conclusions are already known. The reassignment of the Air Force squadrons to the Airborne Forces headquarters increases the efficiency of their joint work in combat, but complicates service for organizational reasons. In this regard, there was a proposal to form their own aviation units in the Airborne Forces. The appearance of such units will allow the landing troops to solve some of the tasks independently and without the help of other types of troops.

While we are talking about the creation of a separate helicopter brigade. It may include 4-5 squadrons on multi-purpose, transport and transport-combat helicopters of various types. The formation of new units as part of the Airborne Forces will begin this year. How exactly their equipment park will be built is unknown. It is possible to purchase new helicopters, but we can not exclude the transfer of vehicles from the Air Force.

Last year, the Airborne Forces Command indicated other ways of developing the ground component. The question of the creation of air defense and missile defense units included in the overall battlefield control system was considered. However, while detailed data on the development of air defense and missile defense did not appear. Probably, such information will be announced in the near future.

Fifth Division and First Artillery Brigade

A few weeks ago, part of the current plans was revealed by the Commander of the Airborne Forces, Colonel-General Andrei Serdyukov. In an interview for Red Star, he spoke about the formation of a new compound. He noted that the total number of troops is constantly growing - this is one of the measures in the framework of the implemented Concept of construction and development of the Airborne Forces. The concept also provides for the improvement of the organizational structure.



Now there are four airborne and air assault divisions and the same number of airborne assault brigades as part of the Airborne Forces. Before 2025, a new amphibious division will appear in the troops. The formation of a new artillery brigade is also planned. Reform of special-purpose and collateral parts is not reported. Perhaps the planned changes are not affected. The same applies to educational institutions of the Airborne Forces.

You can make predictions about the equipment of new parts and connections. The Fifth Airborne Division is unlikely to be fundamentally different from the existing formations in terms of structure and material part. The future artillery brigade is much more interesting in this context. It is quite possible that new armaments of self-propelled artillery will arrive at its armament, while they are at different stages of development work.

Park technology

The current programs of modernization and renewal of the army, including the airborne troops, provide for a massive purchase of a variety of weapons and equipment. In recent years, the Airborne Forces received a number of modern models, mass-produced in the required quantities. In the foreseeable future, the fleet of airborne vehicles will be replenished with new products of various kinds - almost all such samples are already known to the general public.

Since 2016, deliveries of tracked armored personnel carriers BTR-MDM and BMD-4M airborne combat vehicles have continued. Modernization of self-propelled guns "Nona". Also in the Airborne Forces formed tank units equipped with the main battle tanks T-72B3. The development of armored cars and vehicles with various equipment continues. Attention is paid not only to combat vehicles, but also to reconnaissance and control equipment. So, all new samples have modern means of communication. It is proposed to obtain enemy data using UAVs of a number of types and reconnaissance radar stations.



According to the current State Armaments Program, which is in force until 2020, the share of modern models in the Russian armed forces should reach 70%. A few days ago, Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu indicated that, to date, this parameter has reached 63,7% in the Airborne Forces. Thus, in the very near future, the landing troops will complete the task, and their fleet of equipment and weapons will reach the required degree of novelty.

This year, the Airborne Forces will have to conduct military tests of a number of promising combat vehicles. First of all, you need to "break in" a new version of the self-propelled antitank gun "Sprut-SDM1". It is also expected to begin testing of artillery systems created under the program "Sketch". This is a self-propelled gun "Phlox", as well as self-propelled mortar "Grock". Expected exit on the test self-propelled "Lotus".

Planned for the formation of air defense and missile defense units need appropriate weapons that meet the characteristic requirements of the Airborne Forces. As an addition and then replacing existing models, an airborne airborne “Birdies” system is being developed. According to known data, this machine will be as unified as possible with other airborne equipment. She is scheduled to be put to the test next year.

A future separate aviation brigade will operate various types of helicopters. To solve the characteristic tasks of the Airborne Forces, it needs both combat helicopters Mi-24 or Ka-52, as well as multi-purpose Mi-8 and heavy transport Mi-26. It is not yet clear how the fleet of the brigade will be formed. For her, the Ministry of Defense can order new cars, but it is also possible to transfer finished equipment from the units of other branches of the military. It is also possible to "rent": the Airborne Forces will temporarily receive foreign helicopters, which will then be replaced by new equipment and returned to the owners.

Problems and solutions

The current plans of the Airborne Forces Command and the armed forces as a whole are aimed at increasing the combat effectiveness and getting rid of the existing problems. Indeed, while in the landing troops, not everything is perfect, and some features of the current situation may worsen the overall potential of the troops.



One of the main problems of the Airborne Forces is still a fairly high proportion of old models of weapons and equipment. Thus, in the field of armored combat vehicles, products of previous models, developed several decades ago, still dominate. So, according to known data, the number of BMD-4М airborne combat vehicles in parts has already exceeded 200 units, but the old-fashioned BMD-2 remain the most popular example of this class - there are five times more of them. A similar situation is observed with the fleet of armored personnel carriers, which is based on the old BTR-D.

It should be noted that the problem of obsolescence of equipment in the Airborne Forces is already being actively solved. Due to the modernization, the potential of the existing equipment is maintained, and at the same time new models are being built. Thus, the achievement of the share of new technology in 70% and the further growth of this parameter are exclusively a matter of time.

The second characteristic problem of the Airborne Forces is the interaction with military transport aviation. The Air Force has a large fleet of transport aircraft of different models, but not all of them can be involved in the tasks of transporting and dropping an assault force. In addition, not any domestic transport can carry armored vehicles of the Airborne Forces. Finally, BTA has other tasks besides ensuring the work of the Airborne Forces. All this to a certain extent makes it difficult to plan joint operations.

However, it is not yet entirely clear whether the current state of affairs in the VTA is considered a problem for the airborne forces. During the last combat training sessions, the landing force did not have to face serious transport problems. The air force allocated the necessary number of aircraft for the transfer and disembarkation of troops, and, apparently, other directions did not suffer from this.



At the same time, measures affecting other transport operations have been taken. In the Airborne Forces it is planned to form its own aviation units, which will be armed with transport helicopters. This will allow the landing party to move and receive air support without the need to interact with other branches of the military.

Creation of squadrons on shock and transport-combat helicopters will also reduce the dependence of the airborne forces on the air force and relieve them of organizational problems. However, it is obvious that the appearance of own helicopters at the landing does not exclude the need for interaction with front-line aviation.

Improvement of the troops

To date, the Russian airborne troops are a very serious force capable of starting work in a given area in the shortest time possible. However, there are certain problems that need to be addressed, and further development is needed to preserve and increase the required capacity.

The basis of the current modernization is the concept of airborne development, compiled several years ago. This document takes into account the threats and challenges of the present time and the foreseeable future, and with their consideration suggests ways of restructuring the airborne troops. It provides for simultaneous work in several directions.

The renovation of the material part has been going on for several years now, carried out through the supply of new products and samples of all the necessary types and classes. In addition, new systems are being developed to replace existing ones or to be placed in completely new niches. The results of the modernization of the airborne troops in the material sphere are well visible, and in the future these processes will continue.

The existing organizational structure should undergo some changes. It is planned to create a number of divisions and connections of various kinds. First of all, it is necessary to increase the number of airborne divisions, as well as to form a separate artillery brigade. This year there will be a separate helicopter brigade of transport and combat purposes. In the future, the formation of air defense and missile defense is expected.

In parallel with the formation of new compounds, it is proposed to change the structure of existing ones. Now, on the basis of one of the airborne assault brigades, a new version of the structure is being worked out. He has already shown his potential in a large-scale exercise, and is likely to be deployed everywhere soon.

Thus, the Ministry of Defense and the command of the airborne troops continue to implement the approved Concept for the development of this type of troops in order to increase its combat effectiveness. Works are simultaneously proceeding in several directions, from the purchase of new samples to the formation of new compounds and the restructuring of old ones. All this allows us to consider the current processes not just modernization, but a real reforming of the Airborne Forces. However, their significance does not depend on the term used.

The proposed and ongoing reform will have positive consequences for both the airborne troops and the entire Russian army. The Airborne Forces are already capable of solving the assigned combat missions in the conditions of a modern armed conflict, and the activities being carried out will enable them to maintain and increase such capabilities in the future. According to the results of these works, by the middle of the next decade, the Russian Airborne Forces will seriously change and become stronger.

On the materials of the sites:
http://mil.ru/
http://redstar.ru/
https://russian.rt.com/
https://vpk-news.ru/
https://vz.ru/
https://tass.ru/
https://ria.ru/
Author:
Photos used:
Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation / mil.ru, NPK "Uralvagonzavod" / t-digest.ru
102 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. g1v2
    g1v2 22 March 2019 19: 42
    +7
    Well, in essence, the Airborne Forces are becoming our counterpart to the US Marine Corps. Its own line of equipment, autonomous submission and the ability to conduct autonomous and expeditionary hostilities. Your transport again.
    1. Izotovp
      Izotovp 22 March 2019 19: 56
      +5
      Only unlike the ILC, our airborne troops can carry out their operations only within the range of the VTA. Further, to bow to the sailors.
      1. Nick
        Nick 22 March 2019 22: 10
        +3
        Quote: Izotovp
        Only unlike the ILC, our airborne troops can carry out their operations only within the range of the VTA. Further, to bow to the sailors.

        The Navy has the Marines.
        1. YOUR
          YOUR 23 March 2019 03: 07
          +2
          Yes, how much of that Marine Corps. Under the USSR, the number did not exceed 17 thousand people, i.e. if you compare with the motorized rifle troops a little more than the division and this is for the whole country. Now the number does not exceed 8 thousand people. Moreover, according to information from the MO site, there is no mobilization reserve. Somehow it is not clear. Reduce what the Marines want. Marine officers are trained by only one school in Blagoveshchensk, only one platoon. And something recently they are less and less found in the city.
          Yes, and the Airborne Forces are not big, only 45 thousand people. Minuscule.
          Compare with the U.S. ILC and the U.S. Airborne.
          The U.S. ILC is almost 182 thousand people, the number of airborne forces is comparable with our airborne forces.
          For rapid deployment in overseas territories, the United States still has a Rapid Deployment Force. One example is Israel. In Israel, there are 6 warehouses of the SBR. Armaments, equipment, ammunition for a pair of full-fledged divisions and aviation wings. And ammunition for a year of intense warfare. The same warehouses in Europe.
          1. Su24
            Su24 23 March 2019 04: 04
            0
            > Airborne forces are comparable in number to our Airborne Forces.

            But at the same time they do not have their own heavy equipment.
            1. YOUR
              YOUR 25 March 2019 07: 17
              0
              In order not to copy here read the composition of the 18th Airborne Corps of the United States. In addition, in the US Army, heavy equipment is almost always attached.
          2. svp67
            svp67 23 March 2019 04: 10
            0
            Quote: YOUR
            Under the USSR, the number did not exceed 17 thousand people, i.e. if you compare with the motorized rifle troops a little more than the division and this is the whole country.

            And where are the numbers about 17 thousand? The USSR Marine Corps was represented by three brigades, in the Northern, Baltic and Black Sea Fleets and one division, this is in the Pacific Fleet. Do not go to a fortuneteller, but the number was higher. So not only that, at the end of the existence of the USSR, four divisions from the Ground Forces were transferred to the BV Navy. Although they were called the Coast Defense Division, their action program also included questions of action as part of the naval assault. So the numbers must be recounted.
            By the way, the NATO command poked our command that in this way the USSR hid part of the forces from reduction, since exactly after that the USSR signed an agreement on the reduction of conventional weapons and the fleet was not mentioned in it.
          3. Nick
            Nick 23 March 2019 18: 10
            +1
            Quote: YOUR
            Yes, how much of that Marine Corps. Under the USSR, the number did not exceed 17 thousand people, i.e. if you compare with the motorized rifle troops a little more than the division and this is the whole country. Now the number does not exceed 8 thousand people.

            Question: Is this a lot or a little? Answer: It all depends on the tasks assigned to the MP of the Russian Navy. It is incorrect to compare their number with the number of MP in other armies. I suppose that in Belarus there are no MP units at all, since there is no sea coast.
            The same goes for the Airborne Forces. hi
          4. Skifotavr
            Skifotavr 24 March 2019 00: 37
            +4
            Quote: YOUR
            Yes, how much of that Marine Corps.

            How much of that fleet - so much of that marine corps ...
    2. Oden280
      Oden280 23 March 2019 14: 25
      +6
      The only question is: why are they needed at all? DSB in the role of tactical landing operations is understandable. But the airborne divisions and strategic landing operations in the current conditions are from the field of unscientific fiction.
      1. Skifotavr
        Skifotavr 24 March 2019 00: 46
        0
        Quote: Oden280
        But the airborne divisions and strategic landing operations in the current conditions are from the field of unscientific fiction.

        Who knows ... In 2014, one fantasy has already become a reality.
        1. Thunderbolt
          Thunderbolt 24 March 2019 00: 55
          0
          Precisely, only today I watched again the videos of ours transferring airmobile units to the Crimea. This APU was lucky that they had such a weak army at that moment, otherwise they would not have parachuted in the area of ​​the glorious city of Zaporozhye by parachuting In a way, Russian paratroopers would descend from heaven.
        2. Oden280
          Oden280 24 March 2019 17: 04
          0
          Do you really believe that now our Air Force is able to ensure complete air supremacy?
      2. bayard
        bayard 24 March 2019 03: 45
        -1
        Quote: Oden280
        But the airborne divisions and strategic landing operations in the current conditions are from the field of unscientific fiction.

        Well, let's fantasize. For example, from Afghanistan to Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and through them to Kyrgyzstan, to Kazakhstan, several tens of thousands of ISIS fighters who have been transferred there from Iraq and Syria break through. How will we respond? What? What forces and means? Let's move motorized rifle units from the Volga region and Eastern Siberia? And we will have time, taking into account that the armies in these republics of the former Union are revered as not? If there were, maybe air support and special forces would be enough ... But they are not. And the Airborne Forces can quickly deploy anywhere in the region and stop the problem.
        Or Far East in case of aggravation of the situation with Japan, for example. If you need to quickly strengthen the group.
        Or, to fantasize in such a way in the real world, for example, Libya asks for help and deployment of bases in order to prevent a re-intervention of NATO. They have something to calculate. Whom do we detach? And again, nothing but the airborne forces comes to mind. The Airborne Division is rapidly deployed in Libya, conducts demonstration exercises, ensures the deployment of air defense systems and coastal systems of the RCC, shares experiences and souvenirs with the local military and ... leaves for its location, leaving a couple of battalions to guard the bases, which together with the marine corps will remain to observe the interests of the motherland in a distant and friendly country ...

        You can still fantasize, but this is already as opportunities grow and, accordingly, the ambitions of the beloved Homeland.
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 25 March 2019 18: 54
          0
          There is one subtle point ... for everything described by you, it is not at all necessary to equip all the airborne forces with a unique parachute-landing technique, in which the performance characteristics of the parachute are sacrificed. Because this transfer will occur from one airport to another. And army equipment is also thrown in the same way in a landing way.
          All-out armament of the airborne airborne assault parachute BMD and BTR-D are just the vestige of Soviet times and strategic parachute landings.
          1. bayard
            bayard 25 March 2019 23: 22
            0
            The Airborne Forces is a specific type of troops, an extra option in his armored vehicles will not hurt him. Moreover, the equipment for landing is lighter than the combined-arms analogue, and therefore it is possible to take more units at one transport board at a time. So in one transport Il-76 from two to three (max. For Il-476) "Octopus" can be taken ... And not a single combined-arms tank. Tanks only "Ruslans".
            Airborne Forces - this is a whip, not a crowbar and not a sledgehammer. Speed, flexibility and unpredictability - these are their qualities.
            1. Alexey RA
              Alexey RA 26 March 2019 16: 12
              0
              Quote: bayard
              The Airborne Forces are a specific type of troops; an extra option in his armored vehicles will not hinder him. Moreover, the technique for landing is lighter than the combined-arms analogue, and therefore it is possible to take more units at a time on one transport board.

              The problem is that with this technique the airborne forces will have to fight in the same ranks with the army. Because the main task of the Airborne Forces of the last 70 years is to strengthen motorized rifles and tankers.
              In the last war, the Airborne Forces marched in front of motorized rifles - in the same famous battle at the crossing. And when meeting with the enemy they asked the army - help with armor and fire.
              Quote: bayard
              Moreover, the technique for landing is lighter than the combined-arms analogue, and therefore it is possible to take more units at a time on one transport board.

              Can. That's just to fight on this technique the airborne forces will not have with the third echelons of NATO and the territorial forces of Germany (as planned), but with the advanced units of the enemy. And then the exchange of armor to the mass can be fatal.
              1. bayard
                bayard 26 March 2019 16: 37
                0
                I completely agree with you. Therefore, they reinforce the Airborne Forces with tanks, armored personnel carriers, in Afghanistan, their BMDs were also quickly changed to BMPs with enhanced armor. But if the Vitebsk division in 1979 had not been armed with BMDs, but with BMPs, then the number of combat vehicles during the assault on Kabul would have been significantly less and it is not known if they could have saved our Alpha, Vympel and Vympel groups so effectively and quickly. " Muslim battalion ", as well as employees of our embassy ...
                My brother took part in that operation as part of the Vitebsk division, his BMD was at the head of one of three columns that broke into Kabul ... And he was the first sentry at the Soviet embassy. Then the commander of Alpha said to him "If you were late for an hour or two, we would be gone."
                Therefore, sometimes the whip is more important and more useful than a sledgehammer.
  2. military pensioner
    military pensioner 22 March 2019 20: 03
    +3
    All this is great. One thing is not clear how the tanks will be used? Only if unloaded from aircraft at a captured airport. But who will allow transport workers to sit on foreign territory ...
    1. Izotovp
      Izotovp 22 March 2019 21: 06
      +6
      For this, there are special forces for capturing bridgeheads. A group landing landing method is the only acceptable. During the Second World War, everyone tried a group landing, wept and now only small special forces units are jumping in groups in real combat situations.
      1. Su24
        Su24 23 March 2019 04: 04
        0
        the Germans were able
        1. bayard
          bayard 24 March 2019 03: 53
          +2
          In Crete? And how was the loss there? Hitler then lost almost half of the personnel of his airborne forces. They didn’t plan any more such nonsense ... But they dreamed of landing in England ...
    2. svp67
      svp67 23 March 2019 04: 14
      +5
      Quote: military pensioner
      One thing is not clear how the tanks will be used?

      Well, firstly, the Airborne Forces plays more the role of the Guards Infantry, that is, not from heaven to earth, but like ordinary infantry, everything is on the ground. So the tanks here are not out of place, especially their own. And secondly, the most important issues of conducting an airborne operation are the seizure of the enemy’s airfield or airfields, the creation and retention of corridors for the passage of their BTA. So, purely theoretically, there’s a delivery of tanks to the enemy’s rear, it remains only to realize it, but here a lot depends on our skill
      1. CTABEP
        CTABEP 23 March 2019 22: 43
        +3
        It’s already a no brainer that in the conditions of modern warfare, maximum BTGr can be dropped by parachute method. Total elite troops, having the best composition and training in the country, ride on cardboard combat vehicles, and in real databases suffer losses that could probably have been avoided. The entire existing VTA fleet can barely regiment 2 regiment, well, taking into account not 100% readiness of equipment - the division.

        But the tanks are just understandable - since we usually fight without any parachutes - heavy armored vehicles need their own, not dowry. And normal armored vehicles are needed, not cardboard BMDs. And the artillery is full. In total, only the name will remain from the Airborne Forces (although, as for me, it’s necessary. For a GK reserve, 1 division with 2 RAPs is enough for the ears, plus for the DShBr with 1 RAP in the district subordination).
        1. Thunderbolt
          Thunderbolt 24 March 2019 01: 25
          +2
          Quote: svp67
          theoretically, delivery of tanks to the rear of the enemy is, it remains only to realize it, but here a lot depends on our skill

          I think that we should not forget that the Airborne Forces are highlighted in the doctrine of defense of our country as the highest readiness troops, capable of most quickly moving out in threatened directions. A couple of years ago, I listened to one rank from the General Staff, he determined that our spaces are huge, but not in threatened directions you can always concentrate heavy brigades, especially if there are few of them. Here against this background the Airborne Forces come forward, which, due to their qualities, bind the enemy in battle, and then .... he explained .... advanced heavy squads are pulled // / well, these are MS, artillery and tanks /// brigades. Therefore, tanks for paratroopers will not be superfluous at all, the question is, if only they would not be hindered by their rapid deployment within the borders of the CIS. Because speed is their main trump card, along with training. And since everyone came on the battlefield on time, then the tanks there definitely won’t interfere In addition, the deployment of the Airborne Forces can take place in the first two stages. First, mobile light forces, and tanks, either a handful in the air or faster than ordinary tankers, will advance, for example, to one of the Asiatic air forces, but for this, I think, you need to have a lot of money providing tanks in the same Kant or in Armenia, but no one wants to transfer them to their balance sheet, and the Airborne Forces themselves do not have extra storage bases on the budget either. So, we’ll just have a tank battalion in each winged division, which is also not bad for them .
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 25 March 2019 19: 27
      0
      Quote: military pensioner
      All this is great. One thing is not clear how the tanks will be used? Only if unloaded from aircraft at a captured airport.

      Yes, in the same way as the last 70 years - to support the airborne forces, which strengthened the army in the threatened direction.
      Forget about the landings. Airborne Forces today are highly mobile units landing by landing method and operating in conjunction with the ground forces.
      Tanks were given to them so that arrivals to gain the paratroopers did not demand from the army to give them armored vehicles, thus weakening those who arrived to strengthen (such a paradox). Plus, their tanks are always better in terms of well-established interaction, technical condition of the equipment and training of l / s (because they usually give for reinforcement what they themselves can’t really use).

      In short - everything goes to the same point as 345 GVPDP in Afghanistan.
  3. andrewkor
    andrewkor 22 March 2019 20: 10
    +1
    So the experience of the Vietnam War in the creation of airmobile units did not disappear in the tuna! 60 years have passed, however!
  4. Momotomba
    Momotomba 22 March 2019 20: 24
    +6
    Quote: Izotovp
    Only unlike the ILC, our airborne troops can carry out their operations only within the range of the VTA. Further, to bow to the sailors.

    An interesting idea is to land an airborne regiment at the BDK and send ... well, for example, to Africa :) So you leave our marines without work :)
    1. Corn
      Corn 22 March 2019 20: 38
      -1
      Quote: Momotomba
      So you leave our marines without work

      It was high time to unite them, because And the preparation, and the tasks, and the requirements for technology almost coincide.
      1. Momotomba
        Momotomba 22 March 2019 21: 19
        +2
        Of course combine. And motorized rifle there. The tasks are the same: to fight on foot with a machine gun in hand ... differ only in the means of delivery to the battlefield ...
        1. Izotovp
          Izotovp 22 March 2019 21: 49
          +6
          After the Second World War, all motorized arrows jumped 4 jumps)). If my memory serves me right. Then canceled.
          1. Evil echo
            Evil echo 22 March 2019 22: 12
            +2
            Maxim Perepilitsa jumped on exercises drinks
            1. bayard
              bayard 24 March 2019 03: 57
              0
              Margelov personally insisted that Perepelitsa jump, visual agitation, so to speak.
        2. Corn
          Corn 22 March 2019 21: 57
          -1
          Ideally, of course, it would be done as you wrote. But zhist dictates its own conditions, it is impossible for absolutely all motorized riflemen to be given the same level of training as paratroopers.
          differ only in the means of delivery to the battlefield
          formally differ, but in fact the airborne forces are working out the forcing of water obstacles, and the MP is working out a program for jumping and helicopter landing. And alright, there would be differences in the transportability of equipment, but the same bmd4 swims no worse than the btr82.
          1. Momotomba
            Momotomba 22 March 2019 22: 08
            +2
            Quote: Corn
            it is impossible to give absolutely all motorized rifles the same level of training as that of paratroopers.

            And what is stopping you?) Let's be honest: the Airborne Forces are the same infantry, only with parachute training.
            I completely agree that there are no special differences in tactics of the Airborne Forces and the MP. But if the Airborne Forces are needed to solve operational problems in the interests of the land explorers, the MP resolves issues in the interests of the fleet.
            1. Corn
              Corn 22 March 2019 22: 18
              +1
              So it turns out that the separation of the Airborne Forces and the MP is solely in the interests of .... an interdepartmental bureaucracy. A place to establish interaction between the types and types of troops, we continue to build walls between them.
              A similar approach with virtually autonomous military organizations operates in the United States, and competition between the troops supposedly raises the overall level of combat readiness, but this approach is also very, very expensive. Should I try to repeat without a dollar press in my pocket? - Personally, I can’t answer, but for yourself you decide.
              1. Momotomba
                Momotomba 22 March 2019 22: 26
                +2
                Let's go along your path, combine the airborne forces and the MP in one structure. To whom will we subordinate: the fleet, aviation, land?
                How will the problems of the remaining species and genera be solved?
                Well, and what form will we give them? Try to take the blue beret from the landing))) well, or the marines have black)) and the vests are different ... By the way, this is also a serious problem ...
                For me, the similarity of tasks should lead to the same equipment and weapons, and not the unity of the structure. As in nature: the same living conditions lead to the development of the same traits in completely different animals.
                1. Corn
                  Corn 22 March 2019 22: 39
                  -1
                  To whom will we subordinate: the fleet, aviation, land?
                  in a separate branch of the army.
                  How will the problems of the remaining species and genera be solved?
                  exactly as they were decided before.
                  Well, and what form will we give them? Try to take away the blue beret from the landing))) well, or the marine is black))
                  such trifles that I don’t even know. In the fields, one fig is all in caps, but they want to wear the way themselves in the RPD (for example, let's do it like with the intelligence officers, let the commander of the military unit determine the form of clothes himself).
                  unity of structure.
                  the unity of the structure will greatly simplify management, increase flexibility of application, improve the quality of training, reduce secondary costs and simplify the supply.
                  I consider it necessary to leave planes and landing ships with those who can take better care of them. For landing operations, close interaction with the Air Force and Navy is still required.
                  1. Momotomba
                    Momotomba 22 March 2019 22: 54
                    +2
                    Gorgeous ... now I will tell you what will happen in this case in my opinion.
                    Quote: Corn
                    in a separate branch of the army

                    if now to solve the tasks of the fleet the fleet commander sets the task to two of his subordinates: ships and MP, then in your case the two commanders will have to agree ... and the troops completing this new year, in addition to the fleet, also have infantry with aviation ... or to conduct new exercises the kind of troops the commander will run to both the flyers and the sailors ... with the Airborne Forces the same story, if now they are in the reserve of the Supreme The General Staff sets the task for them, then in your case there will be much more problems ... That's just what the various interagency squads and inconsistencies will begin ...
                    Let's not forget that teaching people to parachute while sitting in the sea on a ship is, to put it mildly, difficult ... a conclusion? This kind of troops will consist of 2 subgenera: paratroopers and marines.
                    As for the form ... it’s not a trifle ... I understand that I’m going to suffer - I fell in love, but ... there will be many conflicts ...
                    Quote: Corn
                    structural unity will greatly simplify management

                    management of what will it simplify? Separate troops - yes. To solve problems in general - no ...
                    Here is my opinion
                    1. Corn
                      Corn 22 March 2019 23: 11
                      -1
                      if now to solve the problems of the fleet, the fleet commander sets the task to two of his subordinates: ships and MP
                      no, the rate sets the task for him, and he already solves this task on the basis of available forces (i.e., he will be given the task of landing the Marines on Mars, if he does not have the resources for this)
                      or to conduct exercises of a new kind of troops, the commander will run to both flyers and sailors
                      it will do just that, but what’s the problem? Now the same thing, and the MP and the Airborne Forces are asking the winged to fly and nothing, no one has yet broken.
                      if now they are in the reserve of the supreme, i.e. GS sets the task for them, then in your case there will be much more problems
                      strange, usually the one-man command in the army, on the contrary, is fully welcomed, but here a whole full-fledged military branch does not follow the General Staff ... just a dream of reason. As far as I know, even the United States ILC does not have such independence
                      Let's not forget that teaching people to parachute while sitting in the sea on a ship is, to put it mildly, difficult ... a conclusion?
                      as I understand it, healthy aromas have already run out and are you suggesting airborne landing of a submarine?
                      1. Momotomba
                        Momotomba 22 March 2019 23: 52
                        0
                        Quote: Corn
                        no, he sets a task for him, and he already solves this problem on the basis of available forces

                        in the end, what is he doing? Correctly! He sets task 2 to his subordinates)) one immerse and fight, the second - accept and transport))
                        and tasks are not always set by the General Staff) the commander has the opportunity to come up with something himself, otherwise he would not be needed ...
                        Quote: Corn
                        Now the same thing, and the MP and the Airborne Forces are asking the winged to fly and nothing, no one has yet broken.

                        Well, I went too far with the teachings, I agree ... Not the best example
                        Quote: Corn
                        as I understand it, healthy aromas have already run out and are you suggesting airborne landing of a submarine?

                        submarine hovercraft))
                        I wanted to say that there will be a sharp separation: some jump, others ride on steamers ... well, it will be difficult to load our 98th Guards on ships) but it’s necessary, the kind of troops is such: we land anywhere from wherever)
        3. Izotovp
          Izotovp 23 March 2019 00: 10
          +1
          In fact, a slightly different division is necessary based on the available levels of technology, armor, delivery vehicles ..: light, medium and heavy infantry. And to set tasks and teach them to perform in accordance with the equipment. Light infantry is imprisoned as quick reaction forces, raids, hunting, seizure of bridgeheads, heavy assault, and then comes the average to control the territory. Everyone has their own line of BMP / BTR, tanks, self-propelled guns and so on. Everything is now created, just can not systematize. If you apply this approach, everything falls into place.
          1. bayard
            bayard 24 March 2019 04: 45
            0
            If the question really arose like this, then the Airborne Forces, the MP and the MTR could be conditionally combined into the Rapid Response Forces, which they, each individually, are. And here the convenience would be, not so much in the unification of weapons, as in the issue of personnel training. And it is best to do this on the basis of the Ryazan School, for the same marines to have a specialized faculty. However, many Ryazan graduates were sent to the MP before. There is no need to change the form - these are traditions, continuity, healthy chauvinism ... unless you add "SBR airborne forces" or "SBR marines" on the chevrons - it will only add status. And as they have served, they will continue to serve - some in the navy, some in the fields and at airfields. Leadership is carried out through the Main Command of the SBR. And leave operational subordination, the marines - to the fleet, the rest - to the General Staff and the Supreme ...
            The main gain here could be precisely in the training, accounting and distribution of personnel. For cadres, as Comrade Stalin said, decide everything ...
    2. Izotovp
      Izotovp 22 March 2019 21: 03
      +3
      I did not offer, but simply stated a fact. In fact, the operational area of ​​our Airborne Forces is neighboring states. And overseas and so went either GRU special forces or marines.
      1. Momotomba
        Momotomba 22 March 2019 21: 42
        +1
        Who studied what)
        And why throw the airborne forces further? Quickly and unexpectedly behind enemy lines to operational depth. This is the main difference from motorized rifle. Anyway, during a special period, no one will send troops to another continent, but in peacetime at least bring them to the BDK)
        1. Izotovp
          Izotovp 22 March 2019 21: 48
          +4
          I do not argue and never put some troops higher than others. The army is a single organism.
          1. Momotomba
            Momotomba 22 March 2019 22: 09
            +1
            And communication is the nerves of the army!)))
            1. bayard
              bayard 24 March 2019 04: 48
              +1
              Communication is our EVERYTHING! wink
      2. Doliva63
        Doliva63 23 March 2019 19: 34
        0
        Quote: Izotovp
        I did not offer, but simply stated a fact. In fact, the operational area of ​​our Airborne Forces is neighboring states. And overseas and so went either GRU special forces or marines.

        SPU GRU went overseas either as instructors, or an internship to adapt. Do you have other information? Share it.
        1. Izotovp
          Izotovp 23 March 2019 19: 41
          0
          What for ? Seeker let him find it.
          I do not think that I have the right to spread something in such open sources. It’s necessary to have at least a little filter.
          No offense to you.
          1. Doliva63
            Doliva63 25 March 2019 20: 11
            0
            Quote: Izotovp
            What for ? Seeker let him find it.
            I do not think that I have the right to spread something in such open sources. It’s necessary to have at least a little filter.
            No offense to you.

            Could say - walked. I would pull the tail of comrades and colleagues). And so - sort of blown away. I do not mind. drinks
            In my youth, we had a neighbor. 9 years in Africa as an instructor. SPN Soviet bottling. A friend and colleague lived there for 5 years. Again, instructor. VUS - the use of special intelligence of the Airborne Forces. Once upon a time they served in one company. But no one spoke about the "work" of the regular teams of our Armed Forces.
            1. Izotovp
              Izotovp 25 March 2019 20: 45
              +1
              It’s not my proper profession. Maximum platform Sea launch, Kourou or spacecraft control ship. Therefore, I do not take too much on myself and I say the specifics of the work of such specialists from other people's words. More precisely, I try not to speak so as not to say too much.
  5. Momotomba
    Momotomba 22 March 2019 20: 31
    0
    I’m exaggerating, of course, but why can’t we take MSBs and instead put BMPs (BTR) on transport or military transport helicopters? Give a little combat helicopters ... Can there really be no place for such units in the structure of the army and in the tactics of use?
    1. shura7782
      shura7782 22 March 2019 23: 46
      0
      Dmitry, you are late; army aviation will cope with these tasks a long time ago.
    2. Doliva63
      Doliva63 23 March 2019 19: 18
      0
      Quote: Momotomba
      I’m exaggerating, of course, but why can’t we take MSBs and instead put BMPs (BTR) on transport or military transport helicopters? Give a little combat helicopters ... Can there really be no place for such units in the structure of the army and in the tactics of use?

      Separate DShB in each GSVG army were approximately the same, but still had BMD.
  6. vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 22 March 2019 20: 44
    +2
    Good luck to you guys. You deserve respect and deserve more.
  7. bone1
    bone1 22 March 2019 21: 30
    -3
    Why do we need this airborne? In the past wars there was no sense in the application, but now how are they going to be used?
    1. Momotomba
      Momotomba 22 March 2019 21: 56
      +5
      One opportunity to get an enemy regiment in the rear forces one to keep a slightly larger reserve. And the capture of the bridgehead on the flank? And the opportunity to transfer your reserve not in a week by train, but in a few hours? And throw them on their territory at a distance of 10-15 km from the front and thus create a 2-tier defense?
      Why do we need the Airborne Forces
      1. bone1
        bone1 22 March 2019 22: 41
        +1
        All this was theorized in front of 2MB-and so silly theories, and the regiment left behind is good, of course, but we need a lot of transport planes that the enemy’s aviation just won’t look at, and she’ll dump the paratroopers, scattering a huge area where their task will at least be gathered in something decent; Airborne regiment is much weaker than the army and, most importantly, does not have decent supplies, no fire support, no transport capabilities; and if you’re fighting not in a sparsely populated area, you have enough units in the rear to transfer them to the landing site and destroy the troops.
        1. Momotomba
          Momotomba 22 March 2019 23: 37
          +4
          I agree that it is not easy to throw a regiment of airborne forces behind enemy lines. Aviation and air defense will not allow to arrange training exercises on investment. But such an opportunity cannot be completely ruled out. So, just in case ....
          I agree that the landing will sweep the devil where: until they find their car, until they get together ... in order not to get together, they need to be disturbed. And in order to interfere, we need forces and means ... again, the front end must be weakened ...
          Quote: Bone1
          Airborne regiment is much weaker than the army and, most importantly, does not have decent supplies, no fire support, no transport capabilities

          I agree again ... therefore, the task for this regiment should be either to divert forces and resources, or to seize a bridgehead and hold out for a day, well, a maximum of two ... no one needs to open 2 fronts))
          Quote: Bone1
          you have enough units in the rear to transfer to the landing site and destroy the landing.

          during World War II, the Germans left large territories in their rear without occupation troops ... only policemen and forest brothers ... and it was very difficult to transfer them there)
          you can not consider landing as an end in itself, only together with something for something ... well, yes, not everyone will return ... by the way, in 41, we threw troops into the rear of the Germans, read about this experience, if interested. ..the second front wasn’t opened, but distracted the enemy normally, and the rear was smashed a little
          1. bone1
            bone1 24 March 2019 18: 17
            0
            "The task of the regiment is to hold out for a day or two" -It is necessary to assume before the approach of their own? not on the territory with the absence of troops, but the result? -the closest part of the enemy in half an hour will approach the landing site and after another half an hour, with minimal losses, will destroy the landing (which, as previously agreed, has no transport, does not have artillery, only wearable ammunition and will not dig trenches along the way).
            And yet, the main problem of the unsuitability of the Airborne Forces — organizational — is not in the division of a regular regiment — a battalion — company of the Airborne Forces with standard planes — and the division commander, having come up with such a plan, will have to coordinate with the corps or army commander, the one with the front line, the one with bid-bid will puzzle the commander of the Airborne Forces ...- who, for the sake of petty tactical benefit, will do this gimorrh? -and if they do it as an exception and very rarely, and the rest of the time what the Airborne Forces will do? -like in practice, 2MB will be dropped as infantry to plug some unexpected breakthrough.
            1. Momotomba
              Momotomba 25 March 2019 08: 25
              0
              I completely agree with you, they will fight like ordinary infantry, plug holes in the defense.
              If we are preparing for World War II ... we’ll bury the tanks in the ground again, so that only the towers stick out ... we will open the trenches from the White to the Black Sea ...
              Our teacher on tactics p / p-to B. after each pair said: "The material has been read, the goal of the lesson has been achieved! And what will actually happen is up to you, comrade cadets."
              There are plenty of opportunities and you need to understand at the right time how and what to apply, and you just say that everything is bad :)
              Again ... the experience of World War 2 showed that a small airborne assault force, when used correctly, greatly simplifies the assault on the fortified area. And the fact that we did not throw regiments beyond the front line, so maybe it was just not possible?
              1. bone1
                bone1 25 March 2019 18: 54
                0
                Simplifying the assault on UR-Eben-Emael? And I'm not saying "everything is bad" - I just said that the theories of the Airborne Forces of the 20-30s were not confirmed by the experience of WW2 - and, especially, in the post-war period, especially parachute assault forces, with the advent of helicopters with sufficient carrying capacity, an excellent opportunity appeared to transfer conventional army units with standard equipment, without creating small-scale, therefore expensive in production and maintenance, equipment for the Airborne Forces.
    2. Nick
      Nick 22 March 2019 22: 14
      +1
      Quote: Bone1
      Why do we need this airborne? In the past wars there was no sense in the application, but now how are they going to be used?

      A very bold statement, and unproven.
      1. bone1
        bone1 22 March 2019 22: 31
        0
        The history of all past wars - for you - is unproven? - a bold statement laughing
        1. Nick
          Nick 22 March 2019 22: 32
          0
          Quote: Bone1
          The history of all past wars - for you - is unproven? - a bold statement laughing

          Arguments, specific examples.
    3. Reklastik
      Reklastik 24 March 2019 17: 16
      0
      In principle, you are right, of course - after all, the Supreme Commander-in-Chief has already been asked in a straight line the question of the huge humanoid robots guarding the borders of our country ....
  8. Lieutenant Colonel of the USSR Air Force in stock
    +2
    Army General Grachev had the idea of ​​making quick reaction troops based on the Airborne Forces, MPs, BTAs and other aviation support equipment, landing and other naval support equipment. However, the plans remained plans. Alas, it should be understood that the entire BTA (about 600 aircraft) with the involvement of GA aircraft could carry only one full Airborne Division in one flight.
  9. Maltus
    Maltus 22 March 2019 21: 38
    +1
    Parachute landing of large connections, it is yesterday unnecessarily vulnerable to delivery.
    1. bone1
      bone1 22 March 2019 21: 59
      +3
      Parachute landing of large compounds is not yesterday, it is unfulfilled fantasies of the 20s.
      1. Lara Croft
        Lara Croft 23 March 2019 00: 12
        0
        Quote: Bone1
        Parachute landing of large compounds is not yesterday, it is unfulfilled fantasies of the 20s.

        Tell this to the Führer parachute and mountain parachute formations when capturing Crete .... laughing
        1. curio
          curio 23 March 2019 04: 52
          +2
          At the capture of Crete ... the history of the German Air Forces ended ... stop
          1. Lara Croft
            Lara Croft 23 March 2019 12: 48
            +1
            Quote: curio
            At the capture of Crete ... the history of the German Air Forces ended ... stop

            It's right...
          2. bone1
            bone1 23 March 2019 19: 44
            0
            It ended at the whim of the Führer, who allegedly took pity on the paratroopers — and sent the only airborne division, as the usual unit near Leningrad (and this is the airborne forces with a minuscule heavy support weapon and no transport) - he regretted laughing
            1. curio
              curio 24 March 2019 04: 52
              0
              I do not know about the whim of the Fuhrer, everything can be. But Malta did not have enough strength. and this was a strategic miscalculation, which in the future will come back to light with the defeat of the Germans in Africa.
              1. bone1
                bone1 24 March 2019 17: 55
                0
                Even the strategic? -A, I realized that in Africa the outcome of the war was decided laughing
                1. curio
                  curio 25 March 2019 01: 57
                  +1
                  And where did you see in writing that the outcome of the war was decided in Africa (the failure to take Malta influenced the defeat in Africa. But how Rommel's victory in the desert would affect the entire course of the war is another question, but as we all know history does not know "history does not tolerate the subjunctive moods! "
                  1. bone1
                    bone1 25 March 2019 19: 01
                    0
                    I saw in the term "strategic miscalculation" - and "Rommel's victory in the desert" could not affect "the entire course of the war" - but about the last phrase, the study of history and there is a consideration of alternative options for some event, to assess the "correctness" of what was actually adopted solutions.
                    1. curio
                      curio 26 March 2019 04: 34
                      0
                      and Rommel's victory in the desert "could not influence" the entire course of the war "- this is a moot point. England is clear 1) -the capture of Alexandria (the main fleet base in the Mediterranean) 2) Suez. This is the very first thing that comes to mind. But from The position of Turkey on entering the war also depended on Rommel's success.
                      "Crete!? The British have thousands of islands around the world and you (the Germans) have one Bismarck (battleship), take Gibraltar, Alexandria, then let's talk about this dialogue took place in the spring of 1941.
        2. bone1
          bone1 23 March 2019 19: 39
          0
          And what about Crete? —The Germans didn’t have the opportunity to deliver troops there — the conditions for use are ideal — the enemy had no aviation at all — the British had pine trees — mostly rear + plus all the Greeks there — and the island was mainly captured by mountain shooters planted in a landing way.
          1. Lara Croft
            Lara Croft 23 March 2019 19: 47
            0
            Quote: Bone1
            among the English with pine trees, mostly rear + plus all the Greeks there, and they captured the island mainly mountain shooters, planted in a landing way.

            By no means.
            By the beginning of May, there were about 30 British, Australian and New Zealand soldiers exported from mainland Greece, as well as units deployed from Egypt in April, as well as auxiliary personnel of the Air Force and Navy. Contrary to popular legend, the level of training and morale of the troops were high. On April 29, the commander of British troops in the Middle East, General Archibald Wavell reported to London:

            «In addition to the former permanent garrison, consisting of three infantry battalions, two heavy and three light anti-aircraft batteries and coastal artillery batteries, there are at least 30 British troops evacuated from Greece in Crete ... The personnel are in a good mood. Armament: mainly carbines and a small number of light machine guns. We also have several units formed from Greek recruits, which are entrusted with the protection of airfields and the protection of prisoners of war. "

            https://warspot.ru/10585-bitva-za-krit-nakanune-shvatki
            1. bone1
              bone1 23 March 2019 19: 55
              0
              What kind of combat capability and mood can the British defeated in Greece and in panic evacuated to Crete? -And armed of the type "mainly carbines and a small number of light machine guns"?
              1. Lara Croft
                Lara Croft 23 March 2019 20: 22
                0
                Quote: Bone1
                What kind of combat capability and mood can the British defeated in Greece and in panic evacuated to Crete? -And armed of the type "mainly carbines and a small number of light machine guns"?

                Not at all. Crete was attended (more than 5 thousand people) by the army of the old garrison of the island ...
                You have not read the article to which I gave a link, because such stupid comments ...
                The defenders had islands and tanks. Usually, only 9 light vehicles are mentioned, but at the beginning of May there were 16 Vickers Mk.IV light tanks on the island, and before the German attack, the fleet brought 8 or 9 infantry tanks here. It is also known that at least 2 vehicles that supported the attack on Maleme airfield on the morning of May 21 were cannon Matilda. In any case, the 60 mm armor of the infantry tanks made them invulnerable to German artillery.
                Seven anti-aircraft batteries were a powerful force, so there is no reason to talk about the weakness of the island's air defense.

                ibid.
                The Germans who stormed Crete had rifle and rifle-artillery weapons, the Germans had better training and endurance ....
                Forces and means of landing. Disembarkation plan
                The operation received the code designation "Mercury". To participate in it was allocated the order 23 German soldiers from the 11th air (paratrooper) corps of Lieutenant General Kurt Student: 7th Parachute Division (commander - Lieutenant General Zyusman); 5th Mountain Jaeger Division (commander - Major General Ringel) and parachute assault regiment. It is worth noting that not all of these forces came to Crete before the end of the fighting.

                there ...
      2. curio
        curio 23 March 2019 08: 50
        0
        Rather, even the day before yesterday and the Allied landings in 1944 in Normandy showed this.
        1. Lara Croft
          Lara Croft 23 March 2019 12: 53
          +1
          Quote: curio
          Rather, even the day before yesterday and the Allied landings in 1944 in Normandy showed this.

          Operation Overlord ("Vegetable Garden") showed that the Airborne Forces can carry out their tasks as intended ....
          During the years of the Cold War, the transfer of one parachute regiment to Bulgaria by the USSR prevented an attack by Greece (during the reign of the junta "Black Colonels" in Greece) ....
          1. Town Hall
            Town Hall 23 March 2019 13: 06
            0
            Quote: Lara Croft
            Overlord "(" Vegetable Garden ")



            I'm sorry, what?)
            1. Lara Croft
              Lara Croft 23 March 2019 13: 18
              0
              Quote: Town Hall
              Quote: Lara Croft
              Overlord "(" Vegetable Garden ")

              I'm sorry, what?)

              I mixed up the English name, I got attached, wrote correctly in Russian, you can put a minus sign in my joy ... what kind of people ....
              Operation Market Garden

              https://topwar.ru/7001-operaciya-market-garden.html
              1. Town Hall
                Town Hall 23 March 2019 13: 22
                0
                ))). Google translator at least include chtoli. Kitchen garden)
                1. Lara Croft
                  Lara Croft 23 March 2019 13: 24
                  +1
                  Quote: Town Hall
                  ))). Google translator at least include chtoli. Kitchen garden)

                  Why, I use the primary sources
                  At a meeting of the allied command of 10 in September, Field Marshal Montgomery demonstrated his plan to strike Germany in the rear, with the final goal of ending the war before Christmas - Operation Market Garden (Vegetable Garden).

                  ibid.
      3. Reklastik
        Reklastik 24 March 2019 17: 17
        0
        But what about the landing in Normandy in 1944?
  10. cobalt
    cobalt 22 March 2019 22: 59
    +1
    The question is, why did they liquidate the army aviation, if now it needs to be reinstated, otherwise it is not clear what it was, how it will end. The problem is that now we don’t have a helicopter with a carrying capacity of 10 tons or more, the Mi-6 analog, which was put into re-melting long ago, the Mi-26 is very small, the Mi-8,17 cannot carry anything heavier than an UAZ or 2 compartments . In fact, at present, without subordination of aviation units, the airborne forces are now elite infantry, not airborne troops.
    1. Doliva63
      Doliva63 23 March 2019 19: 08
      0
      Quote: cobalt
      The question is, why did they liquidate the army aviation, if now it needs to be reinstated, otherwise it is not clear what it was, how it will end. The problem is that now we don’t have a helicopter with a carrying capacity of 10 tons or more, the Mi-6 analog, which was put into re-melting long ago, the Mi-26 is very small, the Mi-8,17 cannot carry anything heavier than an UAZ or 2 compartments . In fact, at present, without subordination of aviation units, the airborne forces are now elite infantry, not airborne troops.

      In my time, the Mi-8 "dragged" an airborne assault platoon with weapons, communications and parachutes drinks, and Mi-6, yes, it was a very respected "cow" laughing
  11. shura7782
    shura7782 22 March 2019 23: 32
    0
    The creation of squadrons on attack and military transport helicopters will also reduce the dependence of the airborne forces on the air forces and relieve them of organizational problems.
    It will save you from some problems, for others it will add. army aviation It solves the indicated tasks and closely interacts with dry troops, in particular with the airborne forces on the Mi-8 and Mi-24, and this is quite enough. I wonder how many airplanes will satisfy at least an airborne regiment? There is a lot of text in the article, few specifics.
  12. Lara Croft
    Lara Croft 23 March 2019 00: 15
    0
    In this regard, there was a proposal to form their own aviation units in the Airborne Forces. The appearance of such units will allow the landing troops to solve part of the tasks independently and without the help of other combat arms.
    While it comes to creating one separate helicopter brigade. It may include 4-5 squadrons on multi-purpose, transport and transport-combat helicopters of various types. The formation of new units as part of the Airborne Forces will begin this year.

    God heard my prayers ... apparently the creation of tank battalions and companies as part of the Airborne Forces, this was a temporary idiocy ....
  13. Diverter
    Diverter 23 March 2019 01: 02
    -2
    The sprouts of the mind are breaking through my vibes !!!
    Already wrote my own project.
    RF needs:

    5 SDA of three regimental composition with support units.
    where the regiment consists of three reinforced linear battalions (BTG type).
    where the security is divided into three parts (one for each battalion).
    Goal \ task: maintaining a database in adjacent territories.

    5. DSD of three ........... further down the line everything is the same.
    plus a helicopter division, armed with which
    MI 35 and MI 8 \ 17.
    Purpose / task: repelling external aggression ("break the aggressor's mouth")
    or an attack on neighboring territories if we attack,
    breakthrough to RAP / special forces, etc.

    5 DFS (mountain) three ........ the rest as DFS.
    The purpose \ tasks of maintaining a database in the mountains.

    PyS: cool T 72 tanks to give to the tank crew.
    ПЫ СЫ2: MP do not touch !!!! other plans for them)))
    Py Sy3 cool KA 52 and ordinary MI 28 give SV
    Refute.
  14. Samara_63
    Samara_63 23 March 2019 10: 16
    0
    Strange Generals in the MO sit What are the most important? Even under Margelov, the airborne forces were auxiliary! The Most Important Motorized Rifles!
  15. Lieutenant Colonel of the USSR Air Force in stock
    0
    Quote: svp67
    Unread

    I don’t remember some mass airborne transport of tanks ABOUT the air, because if it is a dilemma to transport lighter infantry fighting vehicles or infantry fighting vehicles, it is probably economically feasible to transfer more light vehicles. At the same time, in comparing armaments, the FFMD and the Airborne Forces Airborne lost unambiguously in heavy weapons and needed to be strengthened. It is probably easier to have tank calibres on lighter carriers ...
    As for the massive deep-landings of operational and strategic importance, it is even theoretically difficult to imagine: 1) The capabilities of the BTA of the Russian Federation and the BTA of the USSR are different. Even with the involvement of the GA, we can talk about no more than two regiments of the PDP at a time, probably. 2) Suppressing enemy ground and air defense systems in the area of ​​overcoming the front line by BTA aircraft and in operational depth along the flight route seems to me a very difficult task. 3) The limited resources of the dismantled group will need constant replenishment of l / s, b / t and MTS by parachute and landing method. The airborne division on the bridgehead alone will not be able to provide organized resistance for a long time (as far as I remember, up to 3 days). During this time, the landing forces must either reunite with the advancing ground troops, or appropriate human and other resources must constantly arrive via air, water.
  16. Lieutenant Colonel of the USSR Air Force in stock
    +1
    I don’t remember some mass airborne transport of tanks ABOUT the air, because if it is a dilemma to transport lighter infantry fighting vehicles or infantry fighting vehicles, it is probably economically feasible to transfer more light vehicles. At the same time, in comparing armaments, the FFMD and the Airborne Forces Airborne lost unambiguously in heavy weapons and needed to be strengthened. It is probably easier to have tank calibres on lighter carriers ...
    As for the massive deep-landings of operational and strategic importance, it is now theoretically difficult to imagine even this: 1) The capabilities of the BTA of the Russian Federation and the BTA of the USSR are different. Even with the involvement of the GA, we can talk about no more than two regiments of the PDP at a time, probably. 2) Suppressing the forces and means of enemy ground and air defense systems in the area of ​​overcoming the front line by BTA aircraft and in the operational depth along the flight route seems to me a very difficult task. 3) The limited resources of the airborne group will need constant replenishment of l / s, b / t and MTS by parachute and landing method. The airborne division on the bridgehead alone will not be able to provide organized resistance for a long time (as far as I remember, up to 3 days). During this time, the landing forces must either reunite with the advancing ground troops, or appropriate human and other resources must constantly arrive via air, water.
  17. Doliva63
    Doliva63 23 March 2019 19: 03
    +1
    A country is enough 2-3 VDD as part of the Airborne. All the rest is the SDBR (with its aviation, as it was before) as part of the districts and the SDBB ​​as part of the armies. Everything has already been invented before us.
  18. storm
    storm 24 March 2019 03: 05
    0
    One of the main problems of the Airborne Forces remains a fairly high proportion of old weapons and equipment. So, in the field of armored combat vehicles, products of previous models, developed a few decades ago, still prevail. Thus, according to well-known data, the number of BMD-4M airborne combat vehicles in units has already exceeded 200 units, but the old BMD-2 remains the most widespread model of this class - five of them more.


    The number of parachute airborne regiments is currently equal to four, and they need to be reequipped for the BMD-4M and BTR Shell.
    4 regiments = 12 battalions.
    The battalion kit includes 31 units. BMD-4M and 16 BTR-MDM,
    those. for the re-equipment of all airborne parachute units that really need airborne landing equipment, TOTAL is needed:
    - 372 units -BMD-4M
    - 192 BTR-MDM
    4 divisions of self-propelled guns LOTOS = 72 units
    4 divisions of the "Poultry" air defense missile system = 72 units.
    4 divisions Sprut-SDM = 72 units
    4 battalions Typhoon-Airborne = 124 units for 4 reconnaissance and airborne battalions in the regiments.
    Such a quantity of new airborne descent equipment should be purchased for the Airborne Forces.

    BMD-2, NONA-S, BTR-D should be kept in warehouses in the areas where the BTA is based as a mobilization reserve.
  19. Clone
    Clone 25 March 2019 02: 56
    0
    I regret that one cannot put minuses to the enthusiastic author of the article ... because, even within the limits of individual paragraphs, there are "thoughts" that are diametrically opposite in meaning. Anyway...
    We already passed the "unarmored infantry" when, in the same Novorossiysk, for almost two years we formed SOMETHING SOMETHING on cars, and then ... hastily dispersed what we had done because of complete "professional unsuitability".
  20. Doliva63
    Doliva63 26 March 2019 18: 06
    0
    Quote: Izotovp
    It’s not my proper profession. Maximum platform Sea launch, Kourou or spacecraft control ship. Therefore, I do not take too much on myself and I say the specifics of the work of such specialists from other people's words. More precisely, I try not to speak so as not to say too much.

    Got it - not in the know, and thanks for that! hi