Military Review

Shamanov spoke about the strengthening of the Airborne Forces before 2020.

66
Shamanov spoke about the strengthening of the Airborne Forces before 2020.

The combat power of the Airborne Forces will be increased due to the formation of airborne assault and paratrooper regiments, new regiments will be formed before 2020, said Commander of the Airborne Forces of the Russian Federation Colonel-General Vladimir Shamanov.


"By the same date, it is planned to equip parts and formations with new weapons and military equipment at 70 percent and fully switch to contract service," Shamanov said at a meeting with military attaches of foreign powers on Tuesday, ITAR-TASS reports.

The headquarters of the Airborne Forces explained that it was a question of including in the current airborne assault and airborne divisions of the two-regiment composition of the third regiment, and each regiment should have an army company aviation and a unit for unmanned aerial vehicles.

Speaking about the prospects for the development of the Airborne Forces before 2025, the commander said that it was planned to switch to a mixed manning of airborne divisions, which would have three components - airborne, lightweight airborne, and airborne assault.

“The first of them is planned to be equipped with airborne combat vehicles capable of parachuting from military transport aircraft. It is planned to use such brigades at any continental theater of military operations, ”said Shamanov.

According to him, the light airborne component, represented by the relevant brigades, will be equipped with light armored combat vehicles on a wheelbase. This technique can be used in the mountains and urban environments.

The colonel-general emphasized that the brigades would participate in peacekeeping operations and local armed conflicts.

As for the promising airborne assault brigades, then, according to the commander, it is envisaged for them to supply promising airborne assault vehicles and other military equipment, unified with the equipment of the Ground Forces.

“These brigades are intended to carry out air assault operations both as part of a group of troops and independently,” Shamanov said.

30 May Shamanov spoke on the development prospects of the Airborne Forces at a meeting of the Defense Ministry board. After that, he told reporters that the Airborne Forces Command considers it necessary to have in the "winged infantry" formations army army units, unmanned aerial vehicles and An-2 aircraft.
Originator:
http://www.vz.ru/
66 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vtel
    Vtel 13 June 2013 11: 17 New
    +3
    Moreover, each regiment should have a company of army aviation and a unit of unmanned aerial vehicles.

    Anto shaw for the company of aviation and lope there vehicles on the nose. Interesting unfolding innovations that seem specialists.
    1. skeptic-
      skeptic- 13 June 2013 11: 38 New
      +6
      Quote: Vtel
      Anto shaw for the company of aviation and lope there vehicles on the nose. Interesting innovations unfold,


      Their delivery vehicles, with the full development of landing and support. In the Air Force, as elsewhere - its own shirt is closer to the body. Need evacuation, or reinforcements, ammunition, and they have their own urgent tasks. As a result, unjustified losses. By lope there devices - in the army there is such a small feature as military secret, which in the end should be there.
      1. Orel
        Orel 13 June 2013 11: 46 New
        +3
        I don’t know what all of this will turn out to be, but if the task of the landing is swift action, the capture and retention of strategically important objects until the main forces of the field armies approach, will there not be such a complicated structure for the landing troops? Heavy weapons are certainly good, but depending on what tasks are set. Or are we turning the landing troops into an independent structure that is capable of advancing and defending without the support of field armies?
        1. Mizhgan
          Mizhgan 13 June 2013 12: 32 New
          +6
          Exactly so ... An independent structure, as it was, it will be so ... There is practically everything in the regiment ... He served - I know. But modernization is needed ... And the Shamans know this ...
          1. Orel
            Orel 13 June 2013 12: 46 New
            +1
            Exactly so ... An independent structure, as it was, it will be so ... There is practically everything in the regiment ... He served - I know. But modernization is needed ... And the Shamans know this ...


            As far as I understand, we are talking about the fact that almost tanks will appear in the air assault regiments (military equipment unified with the technology of the ground forces). Will this affect the speed of deployment and the speed of the landing, which is their trump card and advantage?
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 13 June 2013 12: 52 New
              +5
              Lighter components will ensure the landing of heavy equipment in a landing way.
            2. Mizhgan
              Mizhgan 13 June 2013 16: 56 New
              +4
              You are a little mistaken. The airborne forces have completely different tasks in reality - this is the seizure of the territory and retention until the arrival of the main forces, the destruction of important strategic objects .... etc. And your misconceptions are simply explained ... The landing was always not for its intended purpose, for the simple reason - it was the most combat-ready part of the army at all times of the airborne forces .... And as a result, they threw it not quite for its intended purpose into battle, although Margelov was planning a completely different thing ....
              But in spite of all these small (????) shoals of our military leaders, the date of "August 2" is known to every resident of the Russian Federation who did not even serve in the airborne forces ...
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Oleg14774
            Oleg14774 13 June 2013 16: 43 New
            +1
            Quote: Mijgan
            And the Shamans know this ...

            I can add that Shamanov not only knows this, but knows how to do it!
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Atrix
      Atrix 13 June 2013 12: 02 New
      +5
      Such a question as some “patriots” like to write here. What are we going to do with the enemy’s air defense, how to drop troops on the enemy’s territory where there is air defense? Or, as some “patriots” like to write again, does it work only against banana countries without air defense?
      Anyone who served in the Airborne Forces with a higher rank? As previously imagined landing on enemy territory if there is air defense, because the downing of an airplane with paratroopers is already a disaster?
      1. urich
        urich 13 June 2013 12: 14 New
        +2
        http://ria.ru/analytics/20130226/924696124.html#13711111732644&message=resize&re
        lto = login & action = removeClass & value = registration
        Here is a link to a very good (in my opinion) article. There is in passing an answer to your question.
      2. igor36
        igor36 13 June 2013 13: 05 New
        +3
        Quote: Atrix
        As previously imagined landing on enemy territory if there is air defense, because the downing of an airplane with paratroopers is already a disaster?

        A set of measures is being developed to ensure the landing, including: jamming, suppressing air defense, ensuring air supremacy during landing, without which it is senseless to send transporters.
      3. Bort radist
        Bort radist 13 June 2013 15: 15 New
        +1
        Quote: Atrix
        What will we do with enemy air defense,

        They write those who have no idea about the rules of landing, that's about the distant 70s. “With regard to the capabilities of powerful ATP, their work even on one medium made it possible to drown out radio systems in a small state at once. When conducting exercises in Ukraine in 1973, the An-12PPS pair, rising from Starokonstantinov, interfered “in full”, disrupting not only air defense control, but also disrupting communications and flight control at nearby airfields. The bosses, having sorted through all the backup channels, barely managed to shout to the "noise men" with the order: "Turn everything off to ...... mother!" Nowadays, science does not stand still; successes in this field are kept silent, the more unexpected, the better the effect. Here is a link for "noise" - http://www.xliby.ru/transport_i_aviacija/aviacija_i_kosmonavtika_2011_03/p5.php
        1. Atrix
          Atrix 13 June 2013 15: 37 New
          +2
          Quote: Bort Radist
          Quote: Atrix
          What will we do with enemy air defense,

          They write those who have no idea about the rules of landing, that's about the distant 70s. “With regard to the capabilities of powerful ATP, their work even on one medium made it possible to drown out radio systems in a small state at once. When conducting exercises in Ukraine in 1973, the An-12PPS pair, rising from Starokonstantinov, interfered “in full”, disrupting not only air defense control, but also disrupting communications and flight control at nearby airfields. The bosses, having sorted through all the backup channels, barely managed to shout to the "noise men" with the order: "Turn everything off to ...... mother!" Nowadays, science does not stand still; successes in this field are kept silent, the more unexpected, the better the effect. Here is a link for "noise" - http://www.xliby.ru/transport_i_aviacija/aviacija_i_kosmonavtika_2011_03/p5.php

          Yeah, that is, when they say about the extension of our air defense by suppressing its electronic warfare, everyone here is laughing wildly and they find hundreds of examples of the impossibility of this. But the potential enemy of its air defense, we so easily took and drowned. Do you yourself believe that everything was so simple the plane took off and drowned out all the air defense, and then the paratroopers flew in and captured everything?
          1. Bort radist
            Bort radist 13 June 2013 18: 08 New
            +2
            Quote: Atrix
            You yourself believe that everything is so simple the plane took off and drowned out all the air defense

            "Noise Makers" were our neighbors (on the shelves of the BTA). They once worked at 70% of capacity, no one "saw" anything their own, either. I’m far away that they can turn everything off, but it’s impossible to “shoot like a dash”.
        2. s1н7т
          s1н7т 14 June 2013 12: 54 New
          0
          So in the "stagnant years" to ensure the landing of one battalion was calculated to attract forces and means of aviation only! - as for covering OA, as I recall.
    3. Rustam
      Rustam 13 June 2013 12: 28 New
      0
      I wrote for a long time that the Airborne Forces need their own specific equipment - the US Marine Corps should be taken as a basis

      here are my previous posts, some concerns came true sad


      Rustam  December 9, 2012 14:27 | The adoption of the Russian Airborne Forces BMD-4 resolved

      what to say BMD-4
      in which version will be normal or M ??
      Pros
      1) replacement of obsolete mashiy type bmd-1 and 2
      2) the main complex melon

      Cons
      1) old chassis
      2) the high price and what I don’t like will be given to the Kurganmashzavod, which successfully failed the BMP-3 supply program to our army (a debt of 75 cars is hanging, money is allocated, there are no cars) a debt of 10 bmd-4
      Shamanov himself spoke unflatteringly about the managers of the Kurganmashzavod
      3) you can pick up better samples, cheaper in the west

      RESULTS - At least something will get our airborne forces - since the former commanders specially recently developed the development of the airborne forces and specially hindered their development
      and there are a lot of ideas and plans (to make it in the likeness of the US Marine Corps, which is a separate view and under it they make equipment like Cobra helicopters, osprey, hugh, armored vehicles, etc., etc.

      still hanging in limbo programs and ideas
      1) their helicopters (ka-52,50 (?) Mi-17
      2) transport an-70, spanish s-295
      3) new tracked air defense systems
      4) blah

      so bmd-4 is the first step, and the situation with the kurganmash is not clear

      And the last
      you need to think globally and not be too happy about receipt (possible)
      BMD-4
      I wrote about the development of the airborne forces and everyone agrees with this but did not give the development of the airborne forces fearing too much independence
      As a model and example, I see the Moscow infantry of the United States which acts as a separate branch of the armed forces having its own aviation helicopters armored personnel carriers tanks etc - made specifically for them
      example - when there was a question about closing the Bell V-22 Osprey program - only the marines rested their horn - only ospri and all (which they didn’t offer in return) we want it and that's it

      that’s what I see as the development of the Airborne Forces and we will come to this
      as well as they reduced the role of our Mo infantry by lowering its status and reducing it (before that, Gorshkov was cherishing it and she was getting all the best)

      like this my friends
      U.S. Marine Corps photo and us marins video as Pentagon separate fist

      1. Atrix
        Atrix 13 June 2013 12: 46 New
        +3
        Well, the Marine Corps during landing is less vulnerable than the Airborne. And also the Marines can land normal armored vehicles, which significantly increases its effectiveness for warfare.
        And it seems to me that tactics 101st Airborne USA helicopter landing are best suited right now. More precisely, helicopters can better overcome an unnoticed front line or border to capture key points than transport aircraft.
        1. Rustam
          Rustam 13 June 2013 12: 55 New
          0
          You misunderstood my thought

          I repeat the proposal-On the development of the Airborne Forces I wrote above and everyone agrees with this but did not give the development of the Airborne Forces fearing too much independence
          As a model and example, I see the Moscow infantry of the United States which acts as a separate branch of the armed forces having its own aviation helicopters armored personnel carriers tanks etc - made specifically for them
          example - when there was a question about closing the Bell V-22 Osprey program - only the marines rested their horn - only ospri and all (which they didn’t offer in return) we want it and that's it

          An example of the US Marines is that they operate autonomously having samples designed and made just for them
          1. Atrix
            Atrix 13 June 2013 13: 09 New
            +2
            Quote: Rustam
            You misunderstood my thought

            I repeat the proposal-On the development of the Airborne Forces I wrote above and everyone agrees with this but did not give the development of the Airborne Forces fearing too much independence
            As a model and example, I see the Moscow infantry of the United States which acts as a separate branch of the armed forces having its own aviation helicopters armored personnel carriers tanks etc - made specifically for them
            example - when there was a question about closing the Bell V-22 Osprey program - only the marines rested their horn - only ospri and all (which they didn’t offer in return) we want it and that's it

            An example of the US Marines is that they operate autonomously having samples designed and made just for them

            I understand what you are saying. But look who will deliver the same tanks for the Airborne Forces? After all, the concept of the Airborne Forces is the landing on the enemy’s rear to capture a point and hold until the arrival of the main forces, and the Marine Corps is another tactic. For the US, the Marine Corps is a major force simply for the reason that all its geopolitical opponents are overseas. And there is no heavy offensive equipment in the Airborne Forces, for the simple reason that it cannot be disembarked from aircraft.
          2. Scoun
            Scoun 13 June 2013 18: 17 New
            0
            Quote: Rustam
            as a model and example, I see the Moscow infantry of the USA which acts as a separate branch of the army having their aviation helicopters armored personnel carriers tanks t d - made specifically for them
            example - when there was a question about closing the Bell V-22 Osprey program - only the marines rested on their horn - only ospry and that's it

            Straight on the points plus plus ..
            Must be a standard well-equipped, educated .......
            about ospri ..
            When I said, well, when did they give out a similar device, the people were ready to kick my ears .. with the words he’s difficult to manage))) but what is complicated is their problem and not ours .... but the device itself takes off a wonderful thing and it lands like a helicopter and flies at a speed of almost twice as much as a helicopter
            Ours made a T-50 that flies better than the F-22 so why not make a tiltrotor better ..))
        2. Metlik
          Metlik 13 June 2013 13: 19 New
          +1
          Quote: Atrix
          More precisely, helicopters can better overcome an unnoticed front line or border to capture key points than transport planes.


          Definitely: Airborne + helicopter support = explosive mixture.
          Mi 35 is perfect for landing.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 13 June 2013 13: 37 New
            +2
            This will not be the Airborne Forces.
            1. Bort radist
              Bort radist 13 June 2013 15: 21 New
              +1
              Quote: Spade
              This will not be the Airborne Forces.

              Airborne forces should not stand still and tactics of application should change ......
            2. Rattenfanger
              Rattenfanger 13 June 2013 15: 27 New
              +3
              Quote: Spade
              This will not be the Airborne Forces.

              What for? I quote from memory: “Airborne troops are a mobile type of troops capable of vertical maneuver (coverage)” ... and hereinafter.
              Landing from helicopters (by parachute or landing method) is not a vertical maneuver?
          2. Rustam
            Rustam 13 June 2013 14: 09 New
            -1
            Agree, even if you take the MI-35m it is not very intended for tactical landing (although it has a compartment for accommodating fighters)
            The Airborne Forces want to have a drone Ka-52, and for the transportation of personnel new Mi-17.

            But this is only the Shamanov Wishlist
        3. Mizhgan
          Mizhgan 13 June 2013 13: 36 New
          +1
          Rustam, did you serve in the Airborne Forces?
          1. Rustam
            Rustam 13 June 2013 13: 41 New
            0
            Hello. I did not serve in the Airborne Forces.
      2. Army1
        Army1 13 June 2013 14: 53 New
        +1
        Quote: Rustam
        As a model and example, I see the Moscow infantry of the United States which acts as a separate branch of the armed forces having its own aviation helicopters armored personnel carriers tanks etc - made specifically for them

        Perhaps, but then the number of airborne forces should be increased, and front-line aviation should be given.
        In general, the physical appearance of the American Marines is impressive, I used to think it was only in the movies, it turns out not, right to pick, all strong are dense. Apparently, due to age and because of the service life, our soldiers are rather thin.
        1. Rattenfanger
          Rattenfanger 13 June 2013 15: 33 New
          +4
          They are stupid fools. There’s no boom in my head. They climb under the barbell, they increase the meat. Shake bitsukha in front of the young ladies well on the beach. And in real life, the soldier should sinewy and hardy. And with this, as practice shows, they have strained.
          We have run from fizuhi (like a cowboy’s horse), horizontal bars / bars / main press. Push-ups for every taste and color. KSU (Cooper test). As a result, dope like the Is-2 tank, and not a gram of excess meat in six months.
          As a result, a conscript soldier in a year fulfills the standard of a professional ranger from the 75th regiment.
        2. Atrix
          Atrix 13 June 2013 15: 42 New
          0
          Quote: Army1
          In general, the physical appearance of the American Marines is impressive, I used to think it was only in the movies, it turns out not, right to pick, all strong are dense. Apparently, due to age and because of the service life, our soldiers are rather thin.

          You just need to believe less in agitation and look more at reality. People are the same everywhere and what a Russian soldier can do can be any other soldier, and also a turn. They also seem to be gaining from the age of 18, but there is a professional army that is engaged in training and exercises, and not like in our 90s the construction of summer houses for generals. Yes, and they have been paying decent money for a long time, and we only recently. And the prestige of the army there is very great, but with us you yourself know how they relate to the military.
          1. SASCHAmIXEEW
            SASCHAmIXEEW 14 June 2013 10: 14 New
            0
            The people treat the Army well and treat their children as badly as possible !!! A bad attitude to thieves in uniform, and idiots !!! Type stools !!!
        3. Mizhgan
          Mizhgan 13 June 2013 17: 04 New
          0
          Quote: Army1
          Perhaps, but then the number of airborne forces should be increased, and front-line aviation should be given.
          In general, the physical appearance of the American Marines is impressive, I used to think it was only in the movies, it turns out not, right to pick, all strong are dense. Apparently, due to age and because of the service life, our soldiers are rather thin.

          So thin, it’s from an understatement ... Mothers are afraid that their sucker-son will be a little overstrained when running from the mornings ... That’s what they do by all means ... When I was at the recruiting station, I had a very tough selection ... The “Buying Lieutenant” drove the conscripts very harshly. The selection was ... And quite tough ... 1991 was probably the last year of such a selection. ((((
    4. SASCHAmIXEEW
      SASCHAmIXEEW 14 June 2013 09: 58 New
      0
      So the special told you, the most important special !!!
  2. erased
    erased 13 June 2013 11: 33 New
    +2
    Third regiments in divisions are good. What kind of aviation company? Turntables or what? They are more reasonable to include in the staff of the division as part of the regiment. Three types of divisions are overkill. Driving lightly armored vehicles into the city is a mistake. There should work equipment class BMPT with tank protection. Armored vehicles are good for delivering personnel outside the area of ​​direct fire contact, or contact of low intensity.
    1. Aleks tv
      Aleks tv 13 June 2013 15: 34 New
      0
      Quote: erased
      Three types of divisions - busting.


      Quote:
      ... the commander said that it was supposed to switch to mixed manning of the airborne divisions, which would have three components - the airborne, light airborne and assault ...

      Not three types of divisions but three components, these are two different things.

      Quote: erased
      Driving lightly armored vehicles into the city is a mistake. BMPT class equipment with tank protection should work there.


      Actually, Shamanov’s speech is about this, therefore, attention is drawn to the components ...
      This is just a replica, did not understand you. Your comment below.
  3. fisherman
    fisherman 13 June 2013 11: 34 New
    +2
    Shamans certainly well done, and local authorities need to provide for the construction of new fountains ...
    1. SASCHAmIXEEW
      SASCHAmIXEEW 14 June 2013 10: 16 New
      0
      Yes, without fountains we are nowhere !!!
  4. a.hamster55
    a.hamster55 13 June 2013 11: 37 New
    +2
    And yet the air defense squadron and the phalanx of the nuclear submarine! Dvoeshniki plaque fly!
  5. s1н7т
    s1н7т 13 June 2013 11: 44 New
    +2
    "Army Aviation Company ..." laughing I suspect that the phrase does not belong to Shamanov, but to the journalist. Well, and also some regiments, then brigades. Or did I read inattentively?
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 13 June 2013 12: 03 New
      +3
      Maybe Shamanov just made a reservation. The fact is that American experience is clearly used here. And there it is the companies, battalions and brigades of army aviation.
      1. DeerIvanovich
        DeerIvanovich 13 June 2013 12: 29 New
        -1
        Are you hinting at the unification of the names of formations under foreign owners?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 13 June 2013 12: 35 New
          +2
          I hint at a deep study of the topic and the use of other people's experience.
          1. DeerIvanovich
            DeerIvanovich 13 June 2013 18: 37 New
            0
            yes, Serdyukov is remembered that way and justified his reforms.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 13 June 2013 18: 46 New
              +1
              Which ones in the area of ​​OSH? So our brigades have nothing to do with the American, except for the name.
    2. bddrus
      bddrus 13 June 2013 12: 04 New
      0
      what's wrong? or a company is not enough? although it certainly sounds like a clumsy
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 13 June 2013 12: 15 New
        +1
        The company is not enough. The Americans in the airborne division have one army aviation brigade (54 attack, 53 multi-purpose, 12 transport helicopters, plus 12 attack drones), and in the landing assault as many as two.

        http://pentagonus.ru/publ/materialy_posvjashheny/2000_nastojashhij_moment/tipova

        ja_organizacija_brigad_armejskoj_aviacii_sukhoputnykh_vojsk_ssha_2012/122-1-0-22

        11
        1. Ivan.
          Ivan. 13 June 2013 12: 35 New
          0
          Quote: Spade
          Rota is small

          So after all, for a regiment and not a division + separately drones, a battalion will be obtained for a division - also not enough, it may come from real capabilities or others set tasks. But this is my mistake -
          completely switch to contract service
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov 13 June 2013 12: 42 New
            +1
            Quote: Ivan.
            But this is my mistake -
            completely switch to contract service

            If this is not done, then the units and subunits of the airborne forces will be impossible to use in full force. And the combined units that did not pass combat coordination are evil.

            The norm "for war no earlier than after six months of service" has not been canceled.
            1. Ivan.
              Ivan. 13 June 2013 13: 24 New
              0
              This is all understandable, but in case of mobilization these troops will not change numerically, they will not be able to serve urgent in these troops to get into them, I hope soon they will increase their service life to 1.5 years, provided that they are engaged in non-formal training, then this is enough, everyone should go through urgent and if you increase the share of contracted troops, where will the conscripts serve? Many types of troops require professionals due to the use of increasingly advanced technology and electronics. In general, I would like to be taken into the army at the age of 21 or after high schools (formed bodily, spiritually and intellectually).
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov 13 June 2013 13: 38 New
                +1
                Conscripts need to be trained not in the army, but in training centers.
                1. Ivan.
                  Ivan. 13 June 2013 16: 06 New
                  0
                  Quote: Spade
                  Conscripts need to be trained not in the army, but in training centers.

                  and serve there?
                  1. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 13 June 2013 16: 15 New
                    +1
                    This will be the service. Year of study at the training center. It is enough to prepare a reservist, which can be put into operation during mobilization
  6. True
    True 13 June 2013 11: 55 New
    -1
    One could be glad for this if the words did not diverge from the deed.
  7. cartridge
    cartridge 13 June 2013 12: 02 New
    0
    Everything would be fine, but I strongly doubt that Shamanov, due to his age, will command the Airborne Forces in 2020.
    Although any strengthening of our army, including and Airborne I welcome unequivocally.
  8. hramckov2012
    hramckov2012 13 June 2013 12: 03 New
    +1
    shamans will not do worse. and how to enter the city he knows us better
  9. Lopatov
    Lopatov 13 June 2013 12: 04 New
    +2
    Finally, they began to think about how to reconcile the airborne forces with the current realities. A big step forward.
  10. igordok
    igordok 13 June 2013 12: 08 New
    +1
    The 76 DSD consisted of the 242 separate military transport aviation squadron. After these innovations, the An-2 and Mi-8 disappeared from their field airfield.

    Tell me where (and when) the small emblem of the Airborne Forces with planes and a paratrooper disappeared, but now it’s unusual.
  11. a.hamster55
    a.hamster55 13 June 2013 12: 11 New
    +1
    In aviation, there are: VA, hell, up, squadrons, squads. And the companies are only in the Air Force support units!
  12. Rattenfanger
    Rattenfanger 13 June 2013 12: 31 New
    +1
    The headquarters of the Airborne Forces explained that it was a question of including in the current airborne assault and airborne divisions the two-regiment composition of the third regiment

    Did I miss something? Just 6 years ago in the 7th Guards Division there were just 3 regiments: 108 Novorossiysk, 247 Stavropol and Anapa artillery regiments (1144, it seems).
    1. Victor
      Victor 13 June 2013 12: 52 New
      +3
      Quote: Rattenfanger
      Did I miss something? Just 6 years ago in the 7th Guards Division there were just 3 regiments: 108 Novorossiysk, 247 Stavropol and Anapa artillery regiments (1144, it seems).

      You are somewhat wrong. You described the division of the double-regiment, because art. regiments have always been considered a reserve and strengthening of the division commander. For example, my native 98 Guards. Until 1998, the VDD included (like the other divisions of the Airborne Forces) three airborne regiments and one artillery regiment. In 1998, one parachute airborne regiment (299th Guards. Regiment in which I served) was disbanded. It was the same in other divisions. Now the third RAP is being returned and the VDD is again becoming a three-regiment, because it is the RDP that is the main independent combat unit of the VDP. All other regiments (artillery, anti-aircraft missile, army aviation) serve to ensure the performance of combat missions by parachute airborne regiments, reinforcing any of their components. For example, there is a self-propelled artillery division in the RAP, it can be strengthened to the artillery group of the paratrooper regiment at the expense of the artillery regiment, etc. If something is not clear, ask, I will explain.
      1. Rattenfanger
        Rattenfanger 13 June 2013 15: 36 New
        +1
        I made a mistake, I admit. Allow on the head soldier
        laughing
        1. Victor
          Victor 13 June 2013 17: 35 New
          +2
          Quote: Rattenfanger
          I made a mistake, I admit. Allow on the head

          It’s not necessary on the head, this is the most, it is, in the sense of the head, a paratrooper a very necessary tool. My heart feels, very soon it will be necessary to become in service again and to recruit warriors again from the old guard. drinks soldier
  13. Senzey
    Senzey 13 June 2013 12: 41 New
    +1
    The main thing is that the conversion to new equipment is being planned. Aircraft of their own support are certainly needed, even if only a company (squadron). Well, in tactical terms, the three manning options are logical, let's not forget that all the equipment will also land, and in different conditions, manning the regiment will matter. Shamanov good luck in the implementation of plans to strengthen the airborne!
  14. Andrei
    Andrei 13 June 2013 12: 50 New
    +3
    The third regiments in the divisions is good news, but I have a question: if, given the current number of airborne forces, we cannot completely transfer all units to a contract, then where will we get “recruits” for new units, if, according to recent news, the airborne forces will become completely “contracted”? (in my opinion all this was started in vain). In my opinion, it was nice to take the Soviet system of three-regiment divisions and rework it a little - the first regiment is fully contracted, ready to “break” and “move” at any time, the second regiment is partially contracted, partly from “conscripts” but also having a high combat willingness and ability to quickly advance to the aid of the first, and the third regiment will consist of only permanent officers / warrant officers and contract sergeants, but at the same time they will undergo training in reserve and reserve (not so long ago this news was discussed on this site ) and young soldiers who have just arrived from training units. Then there will be a “quick response” regiment in the divisions and at the same time, in case of war, (2nd regiments) will be created and support / retrained (Third regiments) mob. reserve.
    1. Ivan.
      Ivan. 13 June 2013 13: 37 New
      +1
      It’s very reasonable + a new strategy, to test and finish the equipment at the beginning on the contract parts and at the same time to prepare the trained replenishment in the draft units in case of mobilization and losses. In our setting, both varieties and a call and a contract are needed.
  15. Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 13 June 2013 14: 21 New
    +6
    Recreate the 3 Regiment in the divisions.

    VDP - landing technique.
    ICP - heavy equipment.
    Peacekeepers on armored vehicles MPAP.

    Shamanov said well, shortly and clearly: Each theater has its own organizational structure and its own equipment..
    In principle, this was the case when the tanks gave the Airborne Forces during ground operations, and now they will introduce heavy equipment into the state, leaving them also airborne.
    And then Mlyn, the BMD-4m non-landing party has already lured from all sides to suck ... You must jump to the Chinese border on BMD, Sprut and Nona. And enter the cities of Kurgan and Armata.

    Good luck, Commander.
    The real battle general.
  16. user
    user 13 June 2013 15: 44 New
    +2
    All this is wonderful. Only in what form do you want to see aviation? Because if you introduce the aviation component into the state of the Airborne Division (well, at least for the staff of the 101st division of the USA), a lot of interaction issues arise from personnel, deliveries and repairs of aviation equipment, training of flight personnel, Flight Control Center, etc., etc., etc. ...
    The most interesting thing in the Soviet Army did not completely solve this problem, since the paratroopers did not find understanding among the pilots and vice versa.
    By the way, the best aviation organization was in Nazi Germany, the commander Hermann Goering. With small forces (compared with the Soviet Army + Allied Aviation) he was able to organize decent aviation support. This is achieved due to over-centralization of aviation in the same hands (with all + and -). All this made it possible to concentrate large forces in one place.

    And we have parts of the Air Force, Air Defense, FSB and so on, so on. . .

    Even a single control center has never been
  17. a.hamster55
    a.hamster55 13 June 2013 16: 20 New
    -1
    I envy the pilots who were subordinated to the army command, this is a fount of jokes! And master the flights in chrome boots, and you can get through the parade in boots.
  18. Petro
    Petro 13 June 2013 16: 29 New
    +2
    A joke is the presence of army aircraft in the Air Force.
  19. a.hamster55
    a.hamster55 13 June 2013 16: 48 New
    0
    Yes, develop your own NPP, create your own ATC and let it fly! There was already army aviation: + more general posts; - disgusting supply of all types of food allowances and hp; - the duration of the coordination of each sneeze with the structures of the Air Force and Air Defense. The usual answer is you who, or aviation or infantry in general, went to ...
  20. a.hamster55
    a.hamster55 13 June 2013 17: 10 New
    0
    And what do you think, how much time does it take for the departure of a helicopter of the Ministry of Emergencies or the ambulance in the capital
    Our Motherland - I think for at least an hour. But in the garrison of whatever N-ska you take a list with the heaps of heaps of switches and for a long, long time trying to shout! And it’s better to do this one day from the event.
  21. Petro
    Petro 13 June 2013 17: 40 New
    -1
    After the transfer of AA to the Air Force, nothing has changed, as 10% remained in good order, the post of general command of the Air Force and Air Defense took over, while reducing the number of Air Force, the first to send AA and UAV units for reduction. Departmental egoism is not good.
  22. a.hamster55
    a.hamster55 13 June 2013 18: 03 New
    +1
    Guys do not forget to remember the 17 of June of the Hero of Russia B. Vorobyov - eternal memory to him and KA-50. Already
    15 years ...
  23. jungler
    jungler 14 June 2013 10: 57 New
    +2
    In my unenlightened view. The Airborne Forces as a branch of the armed forces have basically outlived themselves. Skydiving is the destiny of small special forces and intelligence groups. It is not serious to talk about the massive use of landing in modern air defense. But ... the army is strong in spirit. But jumping as an element of psychological training, I would oblige all military personnel to introduce. Like a litmus test. What is the "nerd" behind the remote control in the Strategic Rocket Forces? Expensive. Very expensive ... but .. he lacks masculinity and an understanding of seriousness. Since the war for him is not sweat and blood but ... "DOOM"