Airborne Forces receive new means of landing armored vehicles - PBS-950U and PBS-955

The Information Department of the main defense department of the country announces the start of deliveries of new serial airborne landing equipment to the troops. We are talking about the means that allow the landing of military equipment units of the Airborne Forces (Airborne Forces).

The report says that the delivery of parts and connections of the airborne airborne parachute systems. These are PBS-950U and PBS-955. Using these means from the air, it is possible to carry out the landing of such armored vehicles armed with the Airborne Troops, such as BMD-4M, BTR-MDM "Shell".

The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation notes that parachute strapdown systems allow for additional mobility of the Airborne Forces.

The mentioned systems are used on all types of military transport IL-76. The development of new parachute strapdown systems was carried out within the framework of the R & D "Bahcha-U-PDS".

Earlier, VO informed readers that, when testing new systems, the landing was carried out using mass-dimensional models of equipment. At least 70 such tests were carried out. The tests were considered successful.

Prior to the delivery of these means to the troops, the P-7 parachute platforms with the MKS-5-128R multi-dome system were used to drop equipment and cargo. PBS-916 and PBS-925 with the multi-dome system MKS-350-9 were also used.

Comments

[svp67]

The mentioned systems are used on all types of military transport IL-76.

That is, it will be possible to use on the promising IL-276 ...

[Thrifty]

sv67-Sergey the main thing is that the system "goes" - without failures, so that it does not turn out to be too expensive and unnecessarily complicated!

[bessmertniy]

The main thing is that parachutes should not fail during landing, and the aircraft will be delivered and dropped reliably. The rest is from the skill of the paratroopers.

[ltc35]

All transporters provide for the possibility of landing and dropping cargo.

[svp67]

Quote: ltc35

All transporters provide for the possibility of landing and dropping cargo.

So it’s true, but the plane is specifically mentioned here and this is IL-76

[ltc35]

Unfortunately, at the moment there is no alternative to IL-76. An-12 is no longer used, and IL-276 only in the future. Other transporters for throwing airborne vehicles are not considered.

[Positiv]

The country is huge and the mobility of troops is a priority ..!
Well for the airborne

[DDZ57]

Air transport is one thing, and air landing is absolutely another.

[Positiv]

Quote: DDZ57

Air transport is one thing, and air landing is absolutely another.

Well you're right! I am for airborne airborne descent ..

And damn us not a brother!

[crjhgbjyec 2039]

The combat charter of the Airborne Forces provides for airborne assault landing of airborne forces and aircraft, both by parachute and landing method. All depend on the conditions, opportunities and a bunch of factors.

[Thrifty]

Well, God forbid, so that we do not have "emergency situations" during the landing of equipment. As for the personnel, I can say that every jump in them ends with a parochute opened above their heads!

[Gray brother]

Does it make sense to reinvent the wheel? What exactly is the profit?

[yustas]

. Does it make sense to reinvent the wheel? What exactly is the profit?

, well, I'm not sure of course, but I am more comfortable with a bicycle with pedals and on wheels with a camera or a non-camera. And you, as I understand it, impresses with a wooden frame with wooden wheels? The one who does not go forward sooner or later falls down, I prefer to go, and you?

[Gray brother]

Quote: yustas

And you, as I understand it, impresses with a wooden frame with wooden wheels?

No, I'm just interested in specific differences. Nothing is written in the article.

[Vladimir_2U]

Quote: Gray Brother

Nothing is written in the article.

This is written here:
These are PBS-950U and PBS-955. Using these means from the air, it is possible to carry out the landing of such armored vehicles armed with the Airborne Troops, such as BMD-4M, BTR-MDM "Shell". It is simply not indicated that: PBS-916 and PBS-925 with the multi-dome system MKS-350-9. for BMD-2, BTR-D, i.e. lighter cars.
In addition, the parachutes "crumble", and they just need to be changed, after about ten years, and in ten years they probably came up with something on the little things and not very much, some materials were changed, and they ran into a new system. )))

[yustas]

It is clear, I apologize for my sarcasm, I misunderstood you. And with the coming, you

[DDZ57]

But do military vehicles need airborne descent in modern conditions.
Landing with equipment was carried out only in exercises.
The most successful parachute landing (even without equipment) was carried out by P. Grachev in Afghanistan, when he dropped sandbags on parachutes and opened the fire system of the Mujahideen.
The requirement for "airborne landing" has turned the airborne assault vehicles into cans that will be filled with stew from the crews even in a small local conflict. BMDs pierce through with armor-piercing bullets of large-caliber weapons.
Transport aircraft will be shot down at least 100km before the conflict lines.
This direction is still developing China (it allows human and financial resources).
After 5 years (maximum), the airborne forces, in the form in which they are presented now, will disappear,

[water]

Five years later - hardly. But after 10 - the changes, I think, will be noticeable. You better try to explain to me: are the mentioned BMDs being decanted together with the crew, or BMD separately, the crew separately?

[Saxahorse]

Quote: watermark

Five years later - hardly. But after 10 - the changes, I think, will be noticeable. You better try to explain to me: are the mentioned BMDs being decanted together with the crew, or BMD separately, the crew separately?

Fortunately for the crew - separately. Because there are precedents.

[DDZ57]

The army needs airborne descent to perform gendarmerie functions on the territory of Russia (to support the national guard in suppressing the actions of the population), when there is no means of counteraction.
Under these conditions, everything will be in order with the intestines on the tracks and you can show your agility and daring.

[crjhgbjyec 2039]

Lying on the couch you can rant about the need for any kind of troops. And, most importantly, safely.

[DDZ57]

Since 1956 (after the events in Hungary) there has not been a single military operation where airborne troops participated with the use of parachutes.
The results of the use of the USSR Airborne Forces (with the use of parachutes) in World War II are also very "effective" - ​​on the corpses.
See how many BMV airborne collapsed in 2019. (in peacetime greenhouse time).

[Mordvin 3]

Quote: DDZ57

there was not a single military operation where the Airborne participated with the use of parachutes.

It was. In Afghanistan.

[DDZ57]

I wrote about AFGAN above. Operation Magistral is the smallest and most successful parachute landing.
In "beloved" Syria, with the complete domination of the Russian Aerospace Forces in the air and control of the airspace of the ZRV, for some reason, no one dares to drop parachute landings. Even "landing" methods are not used.
Ukraine tried "landing" in Donetsk - the result of IL-76 and a mountain of corpses.

[Gray brother]

Quote: DDZ57

Army needs airborne descent to perform gendarme functions in Russia

Once again I am convinced that the rejection of punitive psychiatry was clearly premature.

[DDZ57]

I may be a patient of a punitive psychiatrist, but I have never been a cannibal or a non-human being with other perverted inclinations, which you seem to have.
The army of Russia, then the USSR, and then again Russia - i.e. always used to perform gendarme functions on its territory, but not only on its own. Examples:
-AND. Suvorov defeated, put him in a cage and delivered E. Pugachev to St. Petersburg; he is well remembered by the population of Belarus and Poland;
- M. Kutuzov, after retreating from Borodino, allocated combat units to the landlords in order to pacify the peasants;
- SA in 1962. shot the workers in Novocherkassk;
- RA in 1993 shot the Supreme Council of the Russian Federation;
- war in Chechnya.
The army of Russia (USSR) shed blood not only of its people on its territory, but was also marked by bloodletting in adjacent territories. In Soviet times, these were Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and Afghanistan. In tsarist times, examples are also available.
Now participation in the civil war is on the side of one of the participants - in Syria and quite possibly in Libya.
When in Vladivostok the local riot police refused to disperse the protesters, then special forces were delivered from other cities of Russia by BTA planes.

[crjhgbjyec 2039]

You, dear, have cereal in your head! You don’t need to hang your problems, the problems of the country and the authorities on the Army. Detailed information about the episodes you described on the network is more than enough. Take care of your health.

[DDZ57]

I have no mess in my head, no problems.
The army is an attribute of the state and therefore to separate the country, power and army is not correct and not right. And if the government turned the country into a colony, then the army is directly involved in this and meets these requirements. What is happening in the units regularly climbs into the media (for example, Transbaikail and Novaya Zemlya).
What are the Russian cannibals that have passed the army capable of (and later representatives of PMCs or the army) watch a video from Syria. I especially do not want to discuss these issues with anyone, because history regularly puts everything in its place, as nails have the ability to independently regularly climb out of the canvas bag and painfully prick. If I'm wrong about something, then correct it.

And the fact that the landing of military equipment of units by parachute method is not used anywhere in combat conditions is already an axiom.
Military equipment, which is intended for parachute landing, does not provide protection for the crew and the landing force even against large-caliber small arms. This is also commonly known; it also has a number of other problems. Such equipment is absent and not produced in developed countries (except China).
Airborne landing by parachute method of personnel leads to unjustifiably large losses of the landing or its complete destruction (history has confirmed).
And the parachute throwing out of fighters and equipment during exercises is a very expensive type of party, the result of which is clips on state television channels to fool the population. Absolutely not giving any experience for the battle with a real enemy, but allowing you to gain experience in blocking cities with striking slaves and to help the nat. guard to pacify these slaves.

So please explain to me why spend billions of rubles on new means of landing of armored vehicles - PBS-950U and PBS-955.
The absence of these and other parachute systems, etc. not to allow Russian experimenters to play and translate what they saw into reality. And how the personnel were experimented and created with it, and what results were obtained if the USSR lost in World War II, Afghanistan, the results of the Chechen wars, etc.
So what am I wrong about yet?