Does the Russian army look pale against the background of the military power of NATO?
Today, the Russian Army (RA) is involved in the largest military conflict in Europe since 1945. Based on the results achieved in the NMD, one can compare the capabilities of the Russian army and the NATO armies.
The first conclusion: inflating the Russian military threat to Europe in the West, cultivating fear of the allegedly possible invasion of the Russian army, has absolutely no reason!
The fighting in Ukraine showed that Vladimir Putin did not prepare the army for a blitzkrieg in Poland, and even more so for a march tank avalanches to the English Channel! Apparently, the Kremlin's strategy in a potential military conflict with NATO comes down to conventional and nuclear missile strikes against the enemy. That is, in the confrontation with NATO, the bet is made exclusively on nuclear deterrence.
Missile power
Let's start with the good ones News: the hypersonic missile system "Dagger" is not a cartoon! During the JMD, Russia confirmed that it has hypersonic missiles, against which NATO does not yet have protection.
By hitting military and strategic targets in Ukraine, Russia has demonstrated the impressive power of its missile weapons long-range - in the form of mass launches of cruise missiles (CR), hitting targets with high accuracy. KR air-based X-101 is capable of hitting targets almost at an intercontinental range of 5,5 thousand kilometers.
The arsenal used by Russia in thousands of missiles and the ability to send a hundred missiles to targets in a salvo put Russia in second place after the United States in the world rating of powers possessing missile weapons.
Russian missile systems make it possible for Russia to terrorize all of Europe and even the coast of the United States with missiles in any circumstances. Poland will be the most fun of all, since its territory is within the radius of destruction of all missile systems in service with the Russian army.
Aviation
The Russian Aerospace Forces during the SVO demonstrated significantly lower capabilities than expected from them. The air campaign of the Aerospace Forces in Ukraine, in terms of the results achieved, is many times inferior to the results achieved during the air offensive of the Multinational Force (MNF) against Iraq in 1991 and the bombing of Yugoslavia aviation NATO in 1999.
The reasons for this result will someday be explained by experts, to whom I do not belong. I propose to look at the differences between the Russian Aerospace Forces and the Western Air Forces that emerged during the NWO.
There is no exact figure for the number of aircraft and helicopters involved in the NWO. Before the start of the NMD, according to the estimates of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, voiced by the speaker of the command of the Air Force of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Yuri Ignat:
“Around Ukraine, Russian aviation groups amounted to 700 aircraft - 450 aircraft and 250 helicopters.”
In the future, the grouping of the VKS, according to the estimates of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, increased to 800 combat vehicles - by increasing the number of helicopters to 360 pieces.
For comparison, in 1991, in the air campaign against Iraq, the MNF deployed 2000 combat aircraft and more than 400 attack and anti-tank helicopters. In 1999, in the bombing of Yugoslavia, NATO used an air force grouping of 1000 combat aircraft.
The scale of the tasks facing the Aerospace Forces in Ukraine is no less than the tasks facing the Air Force of the MNF in Iraq, and the air defense of Ukraine, equipped with more modern air defense systems, is much more dangerous than the air defense of Iraq. At the same time, the Russian Aerospace Forces involved a much smaller aviation group.
An interesting fact: the F-117A stealth aircraft were used for the first time in Operation Desert Storm in Iraq. With a strength of only 2,5% of the total number of aircraft deployed in the Persian Gulf zone, the F-117A hit about 40% of all strategic targets attacked by the MNF using laser-guided bombs. The Russian Aerospace Forces also has several Su-57 stealth aircraft, which, according to the Russian Ministry of Defense, successfully solve their tasks, but many strategic goals in Ukraine remained undestroyed during the year of hostilities!
The air forces of NATO countries use various means and systems to cover and support combat aircraft in strike missions. I will only point out those systems that NATO has, but not in the Russian Aerospace Forces:
1. MALD simulator missiles are designed to complicate the operation of ground and air AWACS and RER systems to such an extent that the computing facilities of SAM surveillance radars and airborne fighter radars will be overloaded due to the huge number of airborne aviation simulators.
In the NVO Aerospace Forces, they tried to use the Enix E-95 air target to provoke the air defense of Ukraine and the R-37 long-range explosive missiles to reload the air defense of Kyiv. That is, the command of the Aerospace Forces has an understanding of the need to use decoys, but there are no simulator missiles themselves!
2. The EA-18 Growler electronic warfare aircraft is designed for fire destruction and electronic suppression of ground and ship radars, as well as radio communication networks and radio control lines of enemy air defense systems when it is located mainly in combat formations.
There was a similar aircraft in the USSR, this is the Su-24MP, after the collapse of the USSR they remained in Ukraine. In Russia, they were not puzzled by the creation of such an aircraft. Today it is fashionable to look at what is there in China, which is trying to copy everything useful for itself. In China, a similar aircraft was created, this is the Shenyang J-16D.
3. Long-range air-to-surface surveillance aircraft E-8 Joint STARS (Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System) - designed to recognize and classify a target and its route in all weather conditions. The E-8 radar covers an area of about 50,000 km² (19,305 mile²) and is capable of continuously tracking 600 targets at a distance of up to 250 km (152 miles). All moving objects of sufficient mass and density, such as cars, are detected by the radar, and stationary objects can also be imaged. The radar and computer subsystems on the E-8C can process and display detailed information from the battlefield, and the E-8C provides communications/data, command and control.
There is no such aircraft in Russia, but work is underway on the Ka-31SV helicopter (Gorkovchanin ROC), designed to conduct round-the-clock radar reconnaissance in simple and difficult weather conditions of radar-contrast moving and stationary ground objects.
4. Satellite-guided jet-powered UAVs, RQ-170 Sentine, RQ-4 Global Hawk, Taranis. These UAVs allow you to carry out reconnaissance and, possibly, strike missions without danger to pilots, at a great distance from your forces in the so-called restricted areas, in which the risks of losing aircraft are high. In Russia, the S-70 Okhotnik UAV is being developed with similar capabilities.
5. Gliding high-precision JDAM bombs make it possible to drop bombs outside the enemy air defense coverage area and hit targets at ranges up to 70 km. VKS aircraft, not having such bombs, can hit targets with less powerful Kh-38 missiles at a distance of up to 40 km.
The presence in the arsenal of the Aerospace Forces of Kh-31P anti-radar missiles and Kh-59 tactical missiles, guided bombs (KAB), as well as the Tu-214R electronic intelligence aircraft and Il-22PP "Chopper" electronic warfare aircraft, unfortunately, was not enough to avoid sensitive losses and gain air supremacy in Ukraine.
Unlike the NATO Air Force, which mainly operates light aircraft: F-16, Eurofighter, Rafal, with a maximum take-off weight of 21-24 tons, the main strike aircraft of the Aerospace Forces are heavy two-seat Su-30 and Su-34 fighter-bombers, with a maximum take-off weight of 34-45 tons.
The avionics of Russian aircraft makes it possible to use guided high-precision munitions and hit targets with them from medium altitudes and at a distance of 250 km. Our planes are shot down in Ukraine mainly when trying to hit targets with conventional FABs, from low altitudes, because FABs and NURS are the main ammunition in the VKS arsenal.
Everything written above suggests that the Russian Aerospace Forces have an insufficient number of strike aircraft and are not balanced. Since aircraft that are advanced in their capabilities are forced to use the simplest means of destruction, completely leveling the capabilities of the avionics of these aircraft, and these factors are exacerbated by insufficient saturation of the airborne forces with aircraft cover and support systems in strike missions!
I will express my amateurish opinion: in my opinion, the VKS needs a less sophisticated than the Su-34, and a much cheaper strike aircraft. Such an aircraft could well be the MiG-27, keep the VKS in combat strength. Within the framework of the SVO, the modification of the MiG-27 with maximum unification with the Su-34 in terms of engine and avionics, with the replacement of the gun with the GSh-30-2, would be a more suitable platform for using FAB and NURS in strike missions deep in Ukraine.
Defense
Considering that there is no absolute weapon! Despite the fact that the enemy occasionally manages to deliver strikes, VKS fighters and ground air defense forces are a fairly reliable shield against air threats.
Army air defense has learned to deal with long-range MLRS missiles and small-sized UAVs.
Long-range air defense systems set records for the range of destruction of enemy aircraft. Fighters in cooperation with AWACS A-50 aircraft leave few chances for the “Reinforce the Forces of Ukraine” to effectively prove themselves.
In principle, today the Russian air defense forces can still be considered the strongest on the planet.
UAV
There is an expression: "Generals are preparing for the wars of the past." And this saying perfectly describes the situation with UAVs in the Russian army.
In 2021, according to Vladimir Putin, more than 2000 UAVs were in service with the Russian army. But with the beginning of the NMD, it suddenly turned out that the 2nd army of the world was inferior in saturation to the UAVs of the 22nd army!
The underestimation of the importance of small UAVs for infantry units and artillery has led not only to a shortage of quadrocopters in the troops, but also to the absence of highly effective means of combating them in the RA.
Today there are stubborn battles near Artyomovsk (Bakhmut). Russian troops were able to bypass the city from the flanks, but so far it has not been possible to take it at least into an operational encirclement. It takes about 10 km to close the ring. Through this ten-kilometer segment, the Armed Forces of Ukraine replenish and supply the garrison, rotate forces.
NATO armies would hang over this area strike UAVs, such as the Bayraktar TB2 or MQ-9 Reaper, capable of both attacking any targets on their own and issuing artillery or aviation control centers, and thereby would carry out the operational encirclement of the Artyomovsk garrison.
In Russia, the Orion strike UAV is formally available, but in fact there are practically none in the troops! But Russian kamikaze UAVs have become the hallmark of the NWO. "Lancet" as an effective means of combating Western self-propelled guns and other equipment, and "Geran-2" has become a nightmare for the rear areas of Ukraine.
Thanks to the active work of volunteers and the Russian Ministry of Defense, many shortcomings in the provision of UAVs of the Republic of Armenia were eliminated. But the situation is still far from perfect, and President Vladimir Putin also drew attention to this. In Russia, work has begun on a state program for the development and production of UAVs. Of course, this should have been done yesterday, but as they say, better late than never!
Artillery
The NVO confirmed the pre-war assumption that the basis of the firepower of the RA is artillery. Based on the importance for the combat capability of the army, this type of troops should have had a priority development.
But the fighting in Ukraine showed that the artillery in the Republic of Armenia is completely composed of the Soviet heritage! The troops do not have a single instance of modern development. Only modernized Soviet models are modern: these are the Msta-SM2 self-propelled guns of the 152-mm caliber, the Malka self-propelled guns of the 203-mm caliber and the Tornado MLRS - the modernization of the Grad MLRS (Tornado-G) and Smerch (Tornado -WITH).
As a result, Russian cannon artillery is inferior in range and accuracy to the latest generation of Western self-propelled guns entering service with the Armed Forces of Ukraine, such as the Caesar self-propelled guns (France), PzH 2000 (Germany) and the expected Archer self-propelled guns (Sweden).
In addition, Western self-propelled guns use a wider range of ammunition, including high-explosive fragmentation shells, shells with a radio fuse for air blasting, and long-range high-precision shells with GPS guidance "Excalibur".
Despite the identified shortcomings, due to the huge numerical superiority in the number of barrels, Russian artillery still dominates the battlefield. The upgraded systems meet modern requirements in terms of the quality of control and the speed of hitting targets. In the arsenal of the RA there are also projectiles corrected by a laser beam, which, with external illumination, allow hitting even moving targets from the first shot.
For the Tornado-S MLRS, new missiles 9M549 have been developed - with a fragmentation warhead and 9M544 - with a cumulative fragmentation. These ammunition have: satellite navigation; allow the introduction of individual PP; homing heads. This allows Tornado-S to be as efficient as the HIMARS MLRS promoted in Ukraine. True, to date, high-precision guided RS GMLRS are standard for rocket systems.
HIMARS in Ukraine, but the massive use of their counterparts in Tornado-S is not reported.
In general, thanks to Soviet reserves and the efforts of the military-industrial complex, showing the ability to maintain the combat effectiveness of numerous artillery, the RA still retains a leading position in firepower on the battlefield. And thanks to the modernization and increased efforts to produce advanced ammunition for artillery, it also has the potential to increase the capabilities of artillery even on the basis of existing artillery systems!
Armored vehicles
What Western tanks and infantry fighting vehicles are capable of in a full-scale war, according to the announcements of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, we will find out this spring. And with regards to Russian armored vehicles, we can draw some conclusions from the experience gained.
The basis of the material part of the armored forces is the rich legacy left by the USSR in the form of incredible stocks of weapons, including armored vehicles! The Russian Defense Ministry is actively using the legacy, maintaining the relevance of existing armored vehicles through its modernization.
The modernization of light armored vehicles is primarily aimed at increasing firepower, by almost completely equipping all armored vehicles with a 30-mm cannon, as an example of the BTR-82. The modernization of Soviet tanks is being carried out in the direction of increasing survivability and increasing the capabilities of the SLA.
For current purposes on the battlefield, the firepower of the armament of tanks and light armored vehicles is sufficient.
The armor of Russian tanks often takes a hit, including from 3rd generation ATGMs, but does not guarantee 100% protection. Therefore, the use of additional protective equipment for armored vehicles is an urgent need.
In the SVO, an extremely important criterion for adequate armor protection for light armored vehicles has become resistance to being hit by fragments of heavy artillery shells, caliber 152-155 mm. Unfortunately, only the armor of the BMP-3 more or less protects against fragments of large-caliber shells, the BMP-2 and BTR-82 have insufficient protection against artillery fragments. Russian light armored vehicles do not have any protection against ATGMs or RPGs.
It is assumed that the heavier and, accordingly, better protected Western BMP "Bradley" and "Marder" will better endure artillery fire. BMP "Bradley" can be equipped with dynamic protection that can withstand RPG grenades. The anti-mine resistance of Western vehicles is also supposedly better, and no anti-mine structures are provided in Soviet light armored vehicles!
The T-90M tanks participating in the SVO are equipped with a Visibility Reduction System (KSSZ) called the Cape. It reduces the likelihood of a tank being hit by NLAW and Saint Javelin systems by reducing the visibility of the tank in the infrared range, which makes it difficult to aim at it using thermal imaging sighting systems.
In Syria, also on T-90 tanks, the Shtora KOEP was used, which interferes with laser-guided combat systems by firing aerosol grenades and using special searchlights that disorient the guided projectile, taking it away. In Ukraine, cars equipped with Shtora were not seen.
Both complexes help to reduce the likelihood of hitting an armored vehicle and complement each other. If their effectiveness is confirmed by practice, then they should be mandatory equipment for all armored vehicles operating on the front line!
Thanks to the rich heritage and the work set for the mass modernization of Soviet armored vehicles, as well as the mass production of new armored vehicles, in particular the T-90M, the Republic of Armenia has a large fleet of armored vehicles. Soviet technology does not remain relevant in everything, but is still quite combat-ready. Therefore, the mechanized units of the RA are not inferior in their capabilities to the units of the NATO armies.
Hack and predictor Aviator
Despite all the shortcomings of the RA revealed during the NMD and given that not everything is going smoothly in the NATO armies, in general, a certain status quo remains between the Russian army and the NATO armies. NATO's advantage in strike UAVs is leveled by the power of Russian air defense, and due to the advantage in firing range of Western self-propelled guns, the RA solves the tasks of counter-battery combat with the help of Lancets.
On many of today's problems of the Republic of Armenia in Russia, there are already groundwork, allowing, with due efforts, to close the problematic issues in the near future. CBO today acts as a catalyst that accelerates the necessary work.
Despite the existing criticism of the Russian Ministry of Defense in general and Defense Minister Sergei Kuzhugetovich Shoigu in particular, in my opinion, it was under him that the Russian army had an understanding of what kind of weapons it needed!
The troops began to be massively saturated with new and modernized BTR-82, T-72B3 and T-90 tanks, Tiger and Typhoon armored vehicles, Pantsir air defense system, Su aircraft, etc.
The current leadership of the Ministry of Defense has shown that it is able to organize systematic work to solve a specific problem. This inspires hope that today's tasks of providing the troops with the equipment and weapons necessary for victory will be solved!
Information