Military Review

From armor and guns to Iveco and Mistral

142
Russia since the times of Ivan III was one of the largest buyers of weapons in the West


The tenure of Minister of Defense Anatoly Serdyukov (2007 – 2012) and the Chief of the General Staff General Nikolai Makarov (2008 – 2012), who served as the main ideologist of the military reform, marked the first turn to the possibility of Russia acquiring weapons in the West. This new trend was presented in a sensational way, and the first contracts for the purchase of directly foreign “platforms” (Mistral, Iveco) concluded in this connection caused fierce controversy.

Of course, a turn to the West in many respects marks a real military-technical, political and mental revolution, since over the past few decades the desire of the USSR was customary, and then, by inertia and post-Soviet Russia, to provide almost all national production with weapons. Still, if you look back at the Russian military historyit is easy to see that the purchase of weapons and military technology abroad over the centuries has been an important part of the Russian military efforts. The period of more or less fully autarkic self-sufficiency of Russia (USSR) takes only a relatively small segment of Soviet history from 1945 to 1991 a year - however, even then, the USSR actively connected allied enterprises of Eastern Europe to the production of part of weapons and equipment.

The reasons for Russia's imports of armaments over the centuries are fairly obvious. Already in the early stages of the formation of a Russian centralized state, tendencies towards its technological and economic lagging behind the countries of Western Europe emerged. Prolonged Mongol conquest (1240 – 1480), constant wars with nomadic neighbors, rarity of the population, continental character of a country with huge spaces and distances, difficulty of communication, harsh climate contributed to low profitability of agriculture, weak cities, underdeveloped trade and crafts. Under these conditions, Russia was forced to import a significant part of the products of material production, including weapon, from Europe, where cities and industry have received rapid development.

Old Russia

As a result, Russia becomes a buyer in the West of firearms and what today would be called strategic materials (namely, non-ferrous metals necessary for the production of guns and cannons), already under Prince Ivan III (1462 – 1505), which, in fact, created centralized Russian state. The privileged partner of Moscow during this period was Denmark, which became the main supplier of modern weapons at that time.

From armor and guns to Iveco and MistralRussia actively bought weapons and resorted to the help of Western military specialists and engineers both during the 16th century, especially during the first Tsar Ivan IV the Terrible (1533 – 1584), and during the 17th century, when the most intensive ties were established with Sweden.

It was the Swedish kingdom, which actively fought against Moscow’s historical adversary, Poland, for almost a hundred years that became for Russia the main source of cannons and iron.

In the 17th century, under the tsars Mikhail Fedorovich (1613 – 1645) and Alexey Mikhailovich (1645 – 1676), the formation of a Western-type army began on a regular basis (regiments of the new system), to which officers employed in Europe were widely involved. Arms and armor for the new regiments were mostly imported from Europe: the lances were bought mainly from the Netherlands, and firearms from Germany. At the same time, large-scale measures were taken to create their own military industry, and again based on Western knowledge and experience. At the direction of Tsar Mikhail Fedorovich, in the year 1632, the Dutchman Andreas Vinius founded state-owned iron manufactories, which became the main supplier of cold and firearms and armor for the Russian army. However, the own production of guns in Russia has traditionally lacked, and their simultaneous purchases abroad were conducted almost until the end of the XIX century.

Needless to say, the colossal role played by foreign military specialists and foreign purchases during the reforms of Peter the Great (1689 – 1725), when the regular army and navy of the European type were finally created. Almost all the military news in the XVIII – XIX centuries came to Russia from Europe.

A new surge in foreign acquisitions occurred a century and a half later. The transition to steam shipbuilding in the middle of the XIX century led to the need to purchase steam engines for ships in England. Moreover, on a number of Russian steam warships, even the mechanics were originally hired by the British, despite the fact that Russia and Great Britain soon entered the Crimean War of 1853 – 1856 with each other.

The Crimean War clearly demonstrated Russia's noticeable technological lag behind the advanced industrializing Western powers. The second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century became the time of rapid development of military technologies in the West. Russia here inevitably once again found itself in the role of catching up. As a result, during this period until the collapse of the imperial regime in 1917, the country became an increasingly large buyer of foreign weapons. The then rapidly changing generations of small arms and artillery demanded large purchases of relevant samples, licenses and patents abroad. In 1867, the Austrian rifle Krnka became the standard rifle of the Russian army. With the 1870, it was replaced by the American rifle Berdan. The latter, in turn, was replaced in 1891 by the famous Mosin rifle, developed using the design of the Belgian inventor Nagant. Revolvers for the Russian army were also mainly purchased in the United States, until the license issue in 1895 of the Nagan revolver began, which became the standard pistol of the Russian army for almost half a century.

In the field of artillery, the transition to rifled systems was carried out in Russia based on Germanic Krupp system samples. He developed and produced the main types of Russian 1867 and 1877 sample guns, with Russia initially purchasing large quantities of guns in Germany. Before World War I, the country held a number of international competitions for the selection of heavy artillery guns, acquiring licenses for a number of French Schneider systems and German Krupp systems.

According to Western models, domestic shipbuilding was also actively developing. The first Russian armored ship was the First-born armored floating battery ordered in 1861 in England. In the future, Russia systematically ordered ships of almost all classes abroad, including battleships. Destroyers ordered in whole batches, and then built under license.

Particularly indicative in this regard is the composition of the Russian fleet in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904–1905, when almost all of the most efficient and modern ships were either acquired abroad or built in Russia according to more or less modified foreign projects. Ships of a purely Russian origin, with some exceptions, did not differ in brilliance of combat and technical characteristics. Purchases of ships and mechanisms abroad continued after the Russo-Japanese War - just remember the British-built powerful armored cruiser Rurik-II and German steam turbines for Russian destroyers of the Novik type.

Arms import reached its natural maximum during the First World War (1914–1918), when the Russian defense industry in the first three years of the war was unable to meet the colossal needs of the army in small arms, machine guns, artillery, gunpowder and ammunition. Almost completely originally imported planes and cars, and even creating their own aviation industry until 1917 did not eliminate dependence on imports of aircraft engines, which remained Russia's weak point before the revolution. On the eve of the Bolshevik coup, negotiations were held on the purchase in France and the UK tanks.

Capitalist weapons for the dictatorship of the proletariat

Although the Bolsheviks came to power with the slogans of the struggle against world imperialism and constantly denounced the tsarist regime for backwardness, it was the first half to two decades of Soviet military construction that became the heyday of the purchase of foreign weapons and military technologies on a huge scale. The Soviet Union in general created its defense industry, unsurpassed in many respects, to a large extent with foreign (German mainly) participation.

In this case, two factors coincided: the collapse of the Russian military industry as a result of the 1917 – 1922 civil war and the mass flight or extermination of qualified personnel, as well as the Bolsheviks' striving for the forced modernization of the country and the general Bolshevik worship of technology. Soviet military theorists dreamed of creating powerful mechanized armies and air fleets, with no basis for this in a country that was in decline after the destructive revolution. There was no place to take modern military equipment, except to buy from the Western imperialists.

As a result, throughout all 20-s and the beginning of 30-s, the material part of the Soviet Air Force was mainly Western production. And initially, they were based on combat aircraft that were massively purchased in the UK, despite the fact that “British imperialism” was considered the enemy number 1. Airplanes were also purchased in France and Italy, but the greatest effect was the cooperation with the German aviation industry, which to a large extent worked for Moscow in the 20s. In addition to the purchase of a large number of aircraft in Germany and their release under licenses, a base was created for all-metal aircraft construction - the Junkers plant at Fili in Moscow. Virtually all Soviet aviation engines 30 – 40-x were licensed German, French or American models or their further upgrades. Even at the end of 30, licenses were purchased for a number of American aircraft, including the famous DC-3 and the Catalina seaplane.

Tank building in the USSR was created on the basis of British (Vickers of different types) purchased in 1930 – 1931 and American (tank Christie) samples. As a result, all the Soviet 30 tanks baked in thousands were essentially copies of the purchased ones or their variations. The further development of the Christie machine (built as BT in the USSR) led to the creation of the T-34 tank in the USSR.

The basis for the development of artillery was the extensive cooperation at the end of 20-x and the beginning of 30-s with the German group Rheinmetall, under the license of which a number of well-known samples were launched into the series. A secret collaboration developed with the Czech company Skoda and the Swedish Bofors, who also gave the USSR a number of specimens of tools launched into production.

Already after Hitler came to power, the German companies under the 1934 contract of the year developed for the Soviet fleet a project of the submarine E-2, then built in large quantities in the USSR as the type "C". In Italy, torpedoes were bought, then mass-produced in the Soviet Union. Also in Italy, in 1934, the USSR ordered the ultrafast leader of the Tashkent destroyers and two patrol ships for its fleet. On the eve of the Second World War, the design of a number of types of ships was ordered in the United States and even negotiations were held on the possible construction of battleships and destroyers for the Soviet fleet in America, which were unsuccessful due to opposition from the American government.

The Second World War became a new stage for the mass import of weapons to the USSR. Initially, the Soviet Union successfully reaped the fruits of its 1939 pact of the year with Germany, purchasing from the Germans to study a significant amount of the most modern weapons and military technology, as well as carrying out massive imports of German equipment for its military industry. Including in Germany, the unfinished heavy cruiser Lutzow was even bought - however, due to the start of the war, it was not fully commissioned.

Launched in June 1941, the war with Germany made the USSR a key ally of Britain and the United States. As a result, the Anglo-American military lend-lease assistance surged into the Soviet Union (it is appropriate to note that some of the first purchases in the UK in 1941 were carried out on a commercial basis). The USSR received a huge amount of modern weapons and supplies. And if the supply of military equipment (tanks and aircraft) played a subordinate role in relation to Soviet defense production itself, the supply of vehicles, gunpowder, food and many military materials were of critical importance for the USSR. As part of the Lend-Lease, the Soviet Union gained access to a number of advanced military technologies, such as radar stations.

Along with the “mastering” of German trophies and captured German military technologies, the “absorption” of Lend Lease helped the USSR to make a qualitative technological leap in the military sphere in the first post-war years.

However, then a whole series of highly significant acquisitions in the West was accomplished. For example, in the second half of the 40s in the UK, Rolls Royce Nene II and Derwent jet engines and licenses for them were quite legally purchased.

Mastered by production in the USSR, these engines were installed on almost all Soviet main jet fighter planes of the first generation, including the mass serial fighter jet MiG-15. In addition, it is curious to note that before the 1951 of the year, push-button automatics for protection of the Siemens electrical grid were installed on the MiG-15.

Movement to the era of Serdyukov

Even the post-war USSR, which built a self-sufficient and quasi-avtarki defense-industrial system, nevertheless had to resort to purchases abroad in a number of cases. Suffice it to recall that within the framework of the Warsaw Pact, there was some military-industrial specialization. In this specialization, Czechoslovakia, for example, became the main developer and manufacturer of training and light passenger aircraft for the USSR and other countries of the Eastern bloc. Poland produced light aircraft and helicopters and built for the Soviet fleet medium and large landing ships, as well as auxiliary vessels. In Czechoslovakia, for deliveries, including in the USSR, licensed production of Soviet infantry fighting vehicles BMP-1 was set up, in Bulgaria self-propelled howitzers and armored tractors, in Poland - mortars, in the GDR - anti-tank missiles.

In Finland, throughout the post-war period, auxiliary vessels for the navy were ordered. But there were also more exotic cases of foreign procurement, including in capitalist countries. In a number of Soviet weapons, subsystems and components purchased in the West were used. So, for patrol ships and minesweepers in 60-ies in Germany, Flettner wing thrusters and thrusters were bought. At the beginning of the 80-s in Japan, three-meter-diameter Bridgestone tires were purchased for the MAZ-7904 transport-launcher of the Celina mobile strategic missile system, since the Soviet industry did not manufacture such tires. In 80, a license was acquired for German diesel engines Deutz specifically to equip the new series of Soviet military vehicles (after the collapse of the USSR, the newly built factory for the production of these engines remained in Kazakhstan).

Thus, the return of Russia under the Minister of Defense Serdyukov to the practice of importing weapons and technologies from the West became in essence a return to the historical norm lost in specific conditions after the Second World War. Moreover, if we analyze not only the historical, but also the actual international context, it will become clear that there are practically no autarkic military-industrial systems left in the world. Practically all large arms exporters are at the same time more or less large importers. This applies even to the United States, which possesses colossal economic, technological, and financial strength, which, in theory, allows this country to fully cover its needs by the forces of the national industry. Every year, the United States buys arms, equipment and equipment abroad for several billion dollars. True, the bulk of these purchases falls on the UK, whose defense industry has largely lost its national identity and is in fact an appendage of the American military industry.

It is clear that Russia today is too small an economy to allow itself to have a completely autonomous defense industry complex, as a result of which integration into international specialization seems to be an inevitable imperative. In general, it should be noted that the import of military equipment in general is cheaper than the content of its own developed defense industry. Another thing is that the rejection of the national defense industry in Russian conditions may be tantamount to the rejection of national sovereignty. In this sense, the Russian Federation is now faced with the task of finding the optimal balance between the two extremes - the rate exclusively on purchases abroad and a focus on the preservation of military-industrial autarky.

In addition to financial and economic, there are purely military imperatives of arms imports. In a number of segments, the lag of the Russian industry from the leaders is so great that overcoming this lag is either impossible in principle or would require an unacceptably high investment of time and resources. Meanwhile, the Armed Forces of Russia must solve the task of ensuring military security not in the distant future, but today. And accordingly, they cannot wait for the years that are needed for R & D (without any guarantee of their success) and the deployment of mass production, for example, unmanned systems.
Author:
142 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Vladimirets
    Vladimirets 10 July 2013 15: 39 New
    28
    Went for popcorn. smile
    1. VAF
      VAF 10 July 2013 15: 52 New
      20
      Quote: Vladimirets
      Went for popcorn.


      Yes. You are right .... probably worth drinks !

      After such articles, "Glory to Taburetkin, the only" savior of the "Armed Forces of Russia" wassat ... no words ... only letters.

      It remains to wait for the extreme "pearl" - the appointment of Taburetkin to the post of chief (senior), Advisor (assistant) to the President, on the issue of the Army, Aviation and Navy ......... uryayayayaya tovarizchi request
      1. il grand casino
        il grand casino 10 July 2013 15: 56 New
        10
        Taburetkin monument must be put ... growth with the Motherland Mother ... that's who the country together with the army saves)))
        1. VAF
          VAF 10 July 2013 15: 59 New
          +9
          Quote: il grand casino
          Taburetkin monument should be erected ... the growth of Motherland ...


          So already in extreme times .. they are preparing us for this ... in my opinion! +! recourse
        2. fzr1000
          fzr1000 10 July 2013 17: 28 New
          +8
          Only the monument should be in the pose of a deer.
          1. VAF
            VAF 10 July 2013 17: 43 New
            +2
            Quote: fzr1000
            Only the monument should be in the pose of a deer.


            And not better ... in the "Romberg" pose wink + drinks

          2. Hon
            Hon 11 July 2013 08: 53 New
            +1
            And it would be nice to roll Perdukova himself into concrete
        3. LION
          LION 10 July 2013 17: 46 New
          +4
          And here she is with his sword-KISS on the ear
        4. Semen Semyonitch
          Semen Semyonitch 10 July 2013 17: 53 New
          +4
          Quote: il grand casino
          Taburetkin monument must be put ... growth with the Motherland Mother ... that's who the country together with the army saves)))

          Well, Yeltsin’s worth it. And a volleyball tournament in his honor is being held ... Is it just that the athletes are not a bit of a jerk for him? Or just money, and nothing personal ??? Can still stir up a tournament named after a stool? Or an order (in the form of a sewer hatch) ...
      2. Ghenxnumx
        Ghenxnumx 10 July 2013 15: 59 New
        10
        The author’s reluctance to indicate% of the equipment ordered in capitalist countries from the production in the USSR is surprising — either he doesn’t know such subtleties, or he deliberately omits the figures what ? There are many articles on this subject, including on our website, where data on orders is presented - not more than 10% of the goods produced in the territory of the airborne countries, and that is due to the 100% workload of their industry. hi
        1. VAF
          VAF 10 July 2013 16: 04 New
          11
          Quote: Ghen75
          The author’s reluctance to indicate% of the ordered equipment abroad from the production in the USSR is surprising


          Really .. surprising? lol I haven’t thought about it already or ... I'm sorry .. I didn’t notice sarcasm wink

          This article is not about that. but about ... that only Taburetkin with Makarkin ... was re-equipped, re-equipped, shaped, gave a push to a new round of development, etc. and if not for them, then all our Armed Forces would have ended their existence in agony ... gnawing on the remaining sapper shovels (may the marines forgive me drinks ) !!!
          1. Ross
            Ross 10 July 2013 16: 15 New
            +2
            Quote: vaf
            Quote: Ghen75
            The author’s reluctance to indicate% of the ordered equipment abroad from the production in the USSR is surprising


            Really .. surprising? lol I haven’t thought about it already or ... I'm sorry .. I didn’t notice sarcasm wink

            This article is not about that. but about ... that only Taburetkin with Makarkin ... was re-equipped, re-equipped, shaped, gave a push to a new round of development, etc. and if not for them, then all our Armed Forces would have ended their existence in agony ... gnawing on the remaining sapper shovels (may the marines forgive me drinks ) !!!


            Sounds like a custom article ....
            1. timurpl
              timurpl 10 July 2013 19: 01 New
              +2
              Quote: Ross
              Sounds like a custom article ....

              The same thoughts arose in me ...
              - only the signature is missing: "The sponsor of the article is not guilty Serdyukov"
          2. Tersky
            Tersky 10 July 2013 21: 33 New
            +4
            Quote: vaf
            Re-equipped, refitted, shaped, given jolt

            Hi, hello! maybe more correctly - leaked in a jolt everything that has been created for decades, and this is what the "reformers-innovators" bought
            1. The comment was deleted.
      3. nov_tech.vrn
        nov_tech.vrn 10 July 2013 16: 27 New
        +2
        he just mixed up the resource, went in the wrong direction, already a minus for it, and I can’t put the second one.
      4. starshina78
        starshina78 10 July 2013 20: 21 New
        +4
        I in no way shield Serdyukov, but ... In difficult times, such as the post-revolutionary devastation, the war against fascism, why not buy imported weapons. But now, in our time, when our factories are half asleep due to the lack of orders, this is sabotage. That it is impossible to build landing ships at our shipyards according to the scheme usual for our fleet? Can ! Modify projects to meet new requirements, develop a new information and control system, and build normal ships, carrying weapons in addition to landing craft. As for "Iveco", then about this purchase agreement, the conversation about corruption immediately started. Why buy a car that is worse than our "Tiger", which was baptized by fire in Chechnya and showed itself not bad. For this alone Serdyukov must be shaken for something.
        1. wasjasibirjac
          wasjasibirjac 10 July 2013 21: 08 New
          +3
          pay attention - the USSR bought technologies and the right to change them, after which it released what it considered necessary, and reworked it the way it needed - you must admit that there is a huge difference between the BT-5 and the T-34, despite the seemingly similar suspension , like Christie. Serdyukov and Co. acquired individual samples that cannot be converted into what was needed. The same Lynx - how many planned - 4000 pieces? and then? After all, the machines are worn out, and given that this is a Fighting vehicle, the enemy is trying to destroy it. after the Lynxes are burned, what will the army ride? UAZ and Niva, because the Tiger in this case, not being adopted for service and will be produced in a year, a few units. I understand that the acquisition of some kind of "exotic" required in small quantities is quite justified, but what is required routinely must be done on its own territory, in extreme cases - on the territory of an ally.
          1. combat192
            combat192 10 July 2013 23: 05 New
            +4
            What is the argument about? ALL countries stole each other and steal (sometimes buy) military developments and technologies. And this is NORMAL! Another thing, what then to do with it: stupidly copy or creatively develop?
            And to read the article, it’s so amazing how, as if the military design idea of ​​Russia, the USSR, and again Russia, never created anything of its own! I don’t even want to enter into polemic, as far as mister is not right R. Pukhov. The feeling that the article is custom-made, and written for those who, for the first time in their lives, get acquainted with the history of Russian and Soviet military equipment. And he studied history from books, the publication of which is funded by the Soros Foundation.
            Article minus.
            Pukhov Ruslan Nikolaevich
            Director of the Center
            In 1990-1994, he studied at the Faculty of International Information, Moscow State Institute of International Relations, MGIMO-University of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In 1994-1996, he was a student of the Franco-Russian Master in Political Science and International Relations. In 1996-1997 he was an employee of the Conventional Arms Project of the Center for Political Studies in Russia (PIR Center). From 1997 to the present - Director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies. He is the author of a number of articles on the subject of trade in conventional arms and the situation in the military-industrial complex of Russia and France.
            http://www.cast.ru/about/managment/puhov/

            The enemy must know in person!
          2. Nayhas
            Nayhas 11 July 2013 07: 47 New
            0
            Quote: wasjasibirjac
            pay attention - the USSR bought technologies and the right to change them, after which it released what it considered necessary, and remade it AS it needed

            Production licenses were seldom acquired, often received as they are now China.
        2. Soldier
          Soldier 11 July 2013 07: 46 New
          0
          The article is, of course, a huge minus. That's what kind of fool we are. And we can’t do anything, except to copy something primitive. And for the author I’ll give examples purely for aviation. AIR-20 aircraft (Aleksey Ivanovich Rykov) Polikarpov Design Bureau, co-designer then unknown to anyone Yakovlev. It was a very modern fighter. In the early 1s, heavy bombers TB-30 (Tupolev) and I-3 fighters (Polikarpov) were created on that moment had no world analogues. I can continue examples.
    2. user
      user 10 July 2013 20: 27 New
      +1
      Who does not want to feed his army, will feed someone else's
      1. Setrac
        Setrac 10 July 2013 20: 52 New
        +1
        Quote: user
        Who does not want to feed his army, will feed someone else's

        Dear User, everyone can quote classics here.
    3. Kolya
      Kolya 11 July 2013 02: 19 New
      +2
      If you take something from behind a hillock, then only "quietly" as the Chinese do, and not spit on everything native. The article was ordered, under the justification of Serdyukov, they began to launder with the stolen money.
  2. My address
    My address 10 July 2013 15: 43 New
    +6
    And the president in these times was DAME. Of course, Gorbachev pereklizal authorities of the West. But the merits of the ladies in trying to become there their indisputable. And the results of his initiatives inside the country deserve a separate poem.
    1. VAF
      VAF 10 July 2013 15: 49 New
      +8
      Quote: My address
      And the president at that time was DAM


      "And someone else and ... something else that they don't talk about. What they don't write about at school." lol +! drinks
  3. Strashila
    Strashila 10 July 2013 15: 53 New
    +6
    Any state buys weapons abroad, the only question is how much it is justified and meets the security of the state. negative
    1. Vladimirets
      Vladimirets 10 July 2013 15: 57 New
      +5
      Quote: Strashila
      the only question is how much it is justified and meets the security of the state.

      It can be seen from the article that all this is justified with us and we did all our history that we bought foreign weapons, and then, on the basis of the slushy one, we tried to sculpt something of our own.
      1. VAF
        VAF 10 July 2013 16: 53 New
        +2
        Quote: Vladimirets
        It can be seen from the article that all this is justified with us and we did all our history that we bought foreign weapons, and then, on the basis of the slushy one, we tried to sculpt something of our own.


        Yeah +++++++! drinks It's all just hope ..... that "the west will help us" wassat

        Themselves .... it turns out to be impossible ... only the stool .. "saved" wassat





      2. Vadivak
        Vadivak 10 July 2013 21: 32 New
        +4
        Quote: Vladimirets
        and we all our history just did that we bought foreign weapons


        And to charge Munchausen into a Russian invention in the Kremlin and shoot at a window to Europe
    2. VAF
      VAF 10 July 2013 17: 11 New
      +2
      Quote: Strashila
      Any state purchases weapons abroad,


      well, yes ..... how have you not yet "managed" the extreme "super purchase" to purchase wassat

      aviation container .... "sighting and sniffing"
      ot; laughing

      1. il grand casino
        il grand casino 10 July 2013 17: 33 New
        +2
        Quote: vaf
        Quote: Strashila
        Any state purchases weapons abroad,


        well, yes ..... how have you not yet "managed" the extreme "super purchase" to purchase wassat

        aviation container .... "sighting and sniffing"
        ot; laughing



        This is a complex ... urgently in service! And what, feed cheaply, those service is minimal.))) + Laughed heartily
        1. VAF
          VAF 10 July 2013 17: 47 New
          +2
          Quote: il grand casino
          This is a complex ... urgently in service! And what, feed cheaply, those minimum maintenance


          That the most interesting thing is really a fact ... a dog is pulled down and raised on a winch ... and it suffers good

          1. il grand casino
            il grand casino 10 July 2013 18: 11 New
            +1
            Quote: vaf
            That the most interesting thing is really a fact ... a dog is lowered and raised on a winch ... and suffers the same good


            Yes, dogs do not tolerate that. They are carried for 6 or more hours in a small cage in the cargo compartment of a passenger plane. Also not a fountain))) My "Pirate" (mongrel) and did not endure that while I was small. As soon as you tear him off ten centimeters from the ground he turned into a statue. Anything to do with him
      2. Pablo_K
        Pablo_K 10 July 2013 20: 00 New
        +1
        Quote: vaf
        aviation container .... "sighting and sniffing"

        And what's so funny?
      3. Gecko
        Gecko 10 July 2013 22: 54 New
        +1
        And this is a weapon of mass destruction, a shit-throwing device.
  4. svp67
    svp67 10 July 2013 15: 59 New
    10
    The author confuses many things and turns the facts "upside down" ...
    Even the post-war USSR, which built a self-sufficient and quasi-autonomous defense industry system, nevertheless had to resort to procurement abroad in a number of cases.
    The USSR did not buy weapons during this period just because it did not have it. Part of the weapons - in the overwhelming majority developed in the USSR - were transferred for production to the countries of the Warsaw Pact. But this does not mean that the USSR could not produce them. Even the good Czechoslovak training aircraft L-39 "ate" not nearly the worst aircraft of the Yak company, which we closed for the sake of conscientiousness, and if the Czechs had not created the Albatross, they would have released the Yak ... And under Serdyukov, as under the tsars , something from which we have lost the habit happened, our army is armed with weapons DEVELOPED and PRODUCED at FOREIGN PLANTS and not produced at factories in our country.
  5. psv910
    psv910 10 July 2013 15: 59 New
    +5
    It is necessary to take everything advanced from potential partners and let it out.
    1. VAF
      VAF 10 July 2013 17: 50 New
      0
      Quote: psv910
      We must take all the best from potential partners and


      And ... and the girls are the same? wink And what if we "take", then everything is included fellow

      1. TSOOBER
        TSOOBER 10 July 2013 22: 53 New
        +1
        Hello hello! About this type of photo, projects of this type are being developed in Russia. There are a lot of conversations about aircraft carriers, only what to equip without DRO, as without eyes and ears!
  6. avt
    avt 10 July 2013 16: 01 New
    +6
    “Undoubtedly, the turn to the West in many respects marks a real military-technical, political and mental revolution, since over the past few decades the USSR's aspiration, and then, by inertia and post-Soviet Russia, to provide weapons almost entirely to national production was customary." ... .... Another white-gondon delirium of an amateur of the “civilized west” with its imperishable intermediate human values ​​in the form of pederasty. But the military-technical connection to politics and mentality is something in general. Asserting about the self-isolation of the USSR in the production of weapons, the author of the campaign has no idea HOW the military-industrial complex of the USSR worked and about cooperation of production with far from always friendly CMEA countries and HOW its needs were provided by the military-technical intelligence of the USSR. So, for the general development, I would read how the nuclear the project after the war and what role exploration played in it in terms of information extraction by technology. Yes, they dragged as best they could, but they could then be quite cool, and technologies and samples, but everything that was bad and good. Well, what you did yourself was to explain to the author that it was good and not bad, not hunting at all, not feeding a horse. negative Well, about the "cooperation" of the United States, well, I would read how Airbus won the tender for the suppliers and would see who the refuellers, despite the won competition, are supplying. True, this does not fit into this ode of international cooperation.
  7. razved
    razved 10 July 2013 16: 04 New
    +7
    Quote: svp67
    The author confuses many things and turns the facts "upside down" ...

    It seems to me that the author does not confuse, but purposefully distorts both history and facts. the article is clearly custom-made. two questions: who ordered and why.
    1. VAF
      VAF 10 July 2013 16: 21 New
      +2
      Quote: razved
      two questions: who ordered and why.


      In my opinion, the question here is simply obvious, +! wink

      Remember? - "Execution cannot be pardoned"? wink So, the comma has already been put after the word is impossible (we have not 37 wassat ) therefore only to have mercy, but if you have mercy, then you need ... to whitewash the "most honest and devoted" lol "business" bully (that's just what "business" wassat) stooltkina.nu and all his .. "gop-company" belay
      1. Vladimirets
        Vladimirets 10 July 2013 16: 30 New
        +1
        Quote: vaf
        Remember? - "Execution cannot be pardoned"? So, the comma has already been put after the word `` no '' (we are not 37 years old)

        In my opinion, put two commas, and what you want, then think.
        1. VAF
          VAF 10 July 2013 16: 50 New
          +2
          Quote: Vladimirets
          In my opinion, put two commas, and what you want, then think.


          I repeat, in my opinion it’s already unambiguous .. they put one comma recourse , which in principle is quite expected and .. not surprising wink +! drinks
    2. Iraclius
      Iraclius 10 July 2013 16: 59 New
      +3
      Who are the two characters who put the article pluses? what
      1. Akim
        Akim 10 July 2013 17: 03 New
        -1
        Quote: Iraclius
        Who are the two characters who put the article pluses

        One of them is I. And let them peck, but in many ways he is right.
        1. VAF
          VAF 10 July 2013 17: 17 New
          +1
          Quote: Akim
          One of them


          Akim, dear, you're wrong crying wink

          1. Starover_Z
            Starover_Z 10 July 2013 19: 06 New
            +2
            Almost a frame from the movie (IMPORTED !!!) - "SCREAMS" 1995
        2. Iraclius
          Iraclius 10 July 2013 17: 18 New
          +6
          I praise that they admitted.
          I will say that the article turned out to be exceptionally one-sided. Its purpose is to make readers believe that Russia's dependence on the West is a historical inevitability. This is emphasized in each paragraph. From the era of Ivan III to the mighty USSR.
          But the fact is that this is not true. I don’t even want to go into details.
          I’ll draw attention to a wonderful collage in the heading of the article - it shows a gorgeous topfhelm and chain mail, more precisely a flat-uncleaned canoe. The author believes that in Russia they flaunted in Western European helmets, but did not know how to chain mail themselves?
          I won’t wish him luck, because after a couple of such statues you can safely rattle in a fool. Where is he and the place.
          1. VAF
            VAF 10 July 2013 17: 24 New
            +2
            Quote: Iraclius
            I’ll draw attention to a wonderful collage in the heading of the article - it shows a gorgeous topfhelm and chain mail, more precisely a flat-uncleaned canoe. The author believes that in Russia they flaunted in Western European helmets, but did not know how to chain mail themselves?


            +++++! drinks And, perhaps, the author thinks that since "his socks are longer, then it is more obvious for him." wassat

          2. Akim
            Akim 10 July 2013 17: 26 New
            -4
            Quote: Iraclius
            I will say that the article turned out to be exceptionally one-sided. Its purpose is to make readers believe that Russia's dependence on the West is a historical inevitability

            If he expanded the article, it would have turned out to be voluminous. We already know what we have done for the West, with the help of Zvezda, Step March, Military Secret, etc. He simply said what is not customary to talk about on the air or to give it in minimal doses. gave it just undiluted.

            "
            1. Vadivak
              Vadivak 10 July 2013 21: 37 New
              +4
              Quote: Akim
              He just said what it’s not customary to talk about on the air.

              Wow, for some reason no one recalls Herzen's words about the author of a window to Europe

              the incorrigible westerner A. Herzen wrote about Peter the Great: “... The government, landowner, officer, capital head, ruler (quartermaster), foreigner only did what they repeated - and this for at least six generations is the order of Peter the Great : stop being Russian and you will do a great service to humanity ”
          3. aksakal
            aksakal 11 July 2013 22: 06 New
            0
            Iraklius, the laugh is that the author is telling the truth at first - Russia had no worse samples, but production capacity and productivity (and labor productivity is the old Achilles' heel of Russia to this day) did not allow itself to be fully supported, hence the import. This is true, alas. But how then does the author of SABZH's own weak production capacity, with the available excellent samples, miraculously turn into "technological backwardness"? The difference is tangible .... Either you, in principle, are not able to create even at the level of a prototype, or you have already created and mass-produced, it is simply not a lot and quickly - here in Odessa they say there are two big differences! The author of SABZH shamefully manipulates concepts
      2. fzr1000
        fzr1000 10 July 2013 17: 31 New
        +2
        I also put +. Maybe something else will write "smart" R. Pukhov?
        1. ssergey
          ssergey 10 July 2013 17: 54 New
          0
          Will not write. Wrong caliber of thinking.
      3. il grand casino
        il grand casino 10 July 2013 17: 35 New
        +2
        Quote: Iraclius
        Who are the two characters who put the article pluses?


        But in fact, you have to plus ... otherwise they will be offended and will leave the site. There will be nothing to discuss))))
        1. Iraclius
          Iraclius 10 July 2013 17: 54 New
          +3
          Guys, with humor you are all right. good Perhaps you are all right - that’s how you react to such articles. I really wanted to write a detailed answer to Mr. Pukhov with a clear periodization of when, how much and what someone ordered from whom. Yes, here, I understand that this is pointless. The order is immediately visible. request
          1. VAF
            VAF 10 July 2013 18: 08 New
            +4
            Quote: Iraclius
            You guys are all right with humor.


            And when was it different? At least in aviation with humor .. always on good wink .. well, everything is as in Vysotsky - "then we went to dance in the hut. then they fought not out of malice ...." drinks

            No need to write, but to ask ... together with Mistrals we also buy the most "progressive and advanced landing systems"? lol

            1. Wedmak
              Wedmak 10 July 2013 22: 07 New
              +1
              However, that's where nanotechnology comes in! "If you're reading this, add gas"? Will he have time? laughing
      4. Nayhas
        Nayhas 11 July 2013 07: 50 New
        -1
        Quote: Iraclius
        Who are the two characters who put the article pluses?

        I do not know who the first two are, but I was 23.
  8. shpuntik
    shpuntik 10 July 2013 16: 05 New
    12
    Russia has always made up for the lag from the fact that it has always defended itself. These are the Teutonic sons of bitches, but the Vatican invented everything: from poisons to a nuclear bomb. People who sow grain and do not think about expansion do not need "crusades". By the way, I congratulate the Russians on the anniversary of the victory over the Swedes, near Poltava, today is July 10, in 1709 Petya shortened them :-)
    1. Konsmo
      Konsmo 10 July 2013 16: 56 New
      +2
      Under the supervision of Petit 1 and the management of Alexander Danilovich Menshikov (there was a son of a bitch, but a hero to all heroes)
  9. Akim
    Akim 10 July 2013 16: 06 New
    -5
    And I liked the article. It does not say that Taburetkin is a super-hero, oh and do not shy away from the fact that import is present. These are just high-profile purchases with Mistral and Lynx, and so Russia buys a lot of products from other countries. And nothing. No one in the world considers her army import-dependent.
  10. Samminosh
    Samminosh 10 July 2013 16: 08 New
    0
    The Chinese are now successfully adopting such a technique
  11. Gur
    Gur 10 July 2013 16: 10 New
    10
    What kind of horse in an overcoat is this author, or is it my Russian chauvinism speaking in me? Eka stsuka, how cleverly everything turned around. This can only be answered with an anecdote about the X-ray of Ivan the Terrible who said to the Tatar ambassadors: - "I can see you through." And here, well, if it were not for the west, well, we wouldn’t have anything, but the fact that submarines were designed and built back in tsarist Russia, then that artillery systems were developed and produced by Russia itself, making a number of design changes in general in art production. Well, no, this is just a pancake, for some reason, we did not have a Cherepanov steam locomotive, there was no Papov radio, everything is west, everything is west.
  12. Igarr
    Igarr 10 July 2013 16: 12 New
    12
    Where did this R. Pukhov come from with such broadcast statements?
    Read sickeningly.
    I can’t even write, one math rewind in my head.
    Unicorns, Porokhovshchikov, Mozhaysky, Sikorsky, Fedorov ... so, dust underfoot.
    Great are you, Mother Russia!
    What kind of eccentrics, in the letter - M - you do not carry on yourself.
    I wish I could meet this Ruslan - a goat. Straighten him .. face muzzle.
    1. Djozz
      Djozz 10 July 2013 17: 52 New
      -1
      Well done, General! Another Tsar Bell must be remembered.
    2. shpuntik
      shpuntik 11 July 2013 13: 50 New
      +2
      He receives money for this :-)
      Ruslan Pukhov,
      Director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST), Member of the Scientific Council of the Franco-Russian Analytical Center Observo

      1. Igarr
        Igarr 12 July 2013 18: 35 New
        +2
        Vo, Roman, thanks for the photo.
        I liked ... the face of Ruslan Pukhov. Something, it seems to me, is already straightened.
        But I would add to him .... brutality !! In the style of "The Man Who Laughs" V. Hugo.
        For example - I would kill and continue ... a dimple on the chin - through the crown to the tailbone.
        Some kind of sad - I would have spoken to him .. "eternal" smile - from ear to ear.
        He would have done his eyes more expressively - something is interfering with the eyelids, obviously it is necessary to cut it off.
        The nose would normalize - a blowtorch helps well - to drive off the excess fat.
        .
        Well, there, in little things - a "Colombian tie" - would be quite suitable for a suit.
  13. seller trucks
    seller trucks 10 July 2013 16: 13 New
    +7
    some garbage

    Even the post-war USSR, which built a self-sufficient and quasi-autonomous defense industry system, nevertheless had to resort to procurement abroad in a number of cases.


    These are block states, "Warsaw Pact", by the way, we have them for this tanks and planes, and also dragged into space with us.

    the purchase of weapons abroad is a blow to its own defense industry, secondly it leads to technical backwardness and thirdly makes it economically / politically dependent on importing countries

    I would attribute this opinion to sabotage and betrayal, therefore, shoot the author, and article (-)
  14. shpuntik
    shpuntik 10 July 2013 16: 18 New
    +1
    The author must be sent to the United States, their government to agitate to purchase (at least a little) weapons in Russia. It will be more confusing.
    Here they are handsome:
    The award was restored by Adolf Hitler in 1939. The Iron Cross of the 1st class became a mass award, for the rewarding of which it was necessary to complete up to five especially dangerous tasks, and to be previously awarded the Iron Cross of the 2nd class. There were also additional requirements for Luftwaffe officers - getting 5 points for actions in aerial combat, and for kriegsmarine, accumulating 50000 tons of sunk enemy tonnage. Over the years, over 1 people have been awarded the 450000st Class Iron Cross. At its core, this award was an order established by King Frederick William III in 1813. Hitler restored it by changing the design.




    And let someone say now that the fate of peoples is not related to their beliefs. After the years 869-870, the Vatican, as they departed from Orthodoxy, today hobbles with Satanists, hence the result of what is happening in the world.
  15. Mizhgan
    Mizhgan 10 July 2013 16: 26 New
    +3
    The author obviously with a hangover smoked a pickled something. Although the author’s opinion is his opinion.
    From me personally - a minus article.
  16. AVV
    AVV 10 July 2013 16: 30 New
    +2
    The guy overheated however !!!
    1. VAF
      VAF 10 July 2013 17: 15 New
      +3
      Quote: AVV
      The guy overheated however !!!


      However, summer is in the yard .. everything is hot, so ... it happens +! drinks



      If this is really due to "ignorance" or "zhaoe, and not according to ..." wassat
      1. ansons
        ansons 10 July 2013 22: 49 New
        +1
        Dear, you lifted her up to God. I'm because of you, in 15 minutes the third time I change the screen saver on the desktop good
        1. North
          North 10 July 2013 23: 43 New
          +1
          ansons
          Quote: ansons
          Dear, you lifted her up to God. I'm because of you, in 15 minutes the third time I change the screen saver on the desktop good
          - same stuff.
  17. Starover_Z
    Starover_Z 10 July 2013 16: 31 New
    +2
    I wonder who ordered this article?
    The author is a meager, trying to represent the Union and Russia as world dependents, after all that was done in the Union during the period that it WAS (it was, it did not exist)!
    1. Akim
      Akim 10 July 2013 16: 49 New
      +2
      Quote: Starover_Z
      The author is a meritor trying to represent the Union and Russia as world dependents

      I once had a desire to translate my article from English "French style in Russian weapons"... But today I am convinced not worth it. Painfully somehow such information is perceived In some way we will fit, but quickly if necessary we catch up. Then they remembered Sikorsky. And he developed the first Russian fighter, taking the French Nieuport IV as an example, and this did not prevent him from creating excellent bombers. The fact that the daughter of Yaroslav the Wise Anna was the regent of France (in fact, the whole family of kings was from her), we perceive normally, but the fact that the Cossacks borrowed the tactics of the Musketeers is unpleasant to hear. But the fact that they took the slingshots and the palisade from us - no one says this. So everything goes quietly and in agreement. "You tell me, I tell you." But you can continue to give examples further, almost until the Ka-60.
      1. shpuntik
        shpuntik 10 July 2013 17: 26 New
        +3
        Akim Today, 16:49 ↑
        ... but the fact that the Cossacks adopted the tactics of the musketeers is unpleasant to hear.

        Why is it unpleasant? On the contrary, it says that the Cossacks are not fools :-)
        But .. Dear Kim, it is one thing to borrow tactics, and quite another to buy: give money to a possible adversary
        stop .
        1. Akim
          Akim 10 July 2013 17: 33 New
          0
          Quote: shpuntik
          and buy something completely different: give money to a potential adversary

          Well bought "Mistral". On the scale of the war, it is a penny. But Russia will be able to build its own UDC. At the beginning of the 20th century, all Russian submarines were built in America. And in the 30s, Soviet submarines were considered one of the best in the world.
          1. VAF
            VAF 10 July 2013 17: 55 New
            +4
            Quote: Akim
            Well bought "Mistral".


            And the next thing that we will buy wink

            1. Akim
              Akim 10 July 2013 18: 19 New
              0
              Quote: vaf
              And the next thing that we will buy

              You know better. Russia is building An-142, but there are no load-carrying classes up to the Il-76 yet, but that does not mean that it cannot. We had to build the UDC ourselves without experience and puff with it for many years as "Vikramaditya". Fortunately, it was modernized for Indian money
              1. VAF
                VAF 10 July 2013 18: 32 New
                0
                Quote: Akim
                You know better. An-142 Russia stands,


                Russia has already ... "rebuilt" An-124. Unfortunately request According to IL-476 .. it's also .... "walk and walk"!

                Quote: Akim
                We had to build the UDC ourselves without experience and puff with it for many years as "Vikramaditya".


                A moot point .. not having ships to have UDC ????? Who will protect him will Varyag ???? and further only Grachenka or from the list of 36 ships that will be in 2013 request

                I'm not a "naval" man. on = this topic of the Navy we pass "by", there are worthy professionals in this matter!

                But in general, the concept of UDC .... I imagine a little differently than the barge Mistralka! soldier

                1. shpuntik
                  shpuntik 11 July 2013 00: 51 New
                  +3
                  vaf (1) Today, 18:32 ↑
                  A moot point .. not having ships to have UDC ????? Who will protect him will Varyag ???? and further only Grachenka or from the list of 36 ships that will be in 2013

                  Here is an opinion close to the point, in my opinion.
                  http://shipbuilding.ru/rus/articles/Mistral_240111/
                  "A helicopter carrier is not so much a military ship as a police ship. It is capable of delivering attack and landing helicopters to zones of local conflicts, acting as a deterrent in such zones, evacuating civilians from hot spots, patrolling sea routes, fishing zones, and the Arctic shelf."

                  How to change the beginning. The General Staff, and suffered figures.
                  And one more thing about them: http://shipbuilding.ru/rus/articles/Mistral_back/
          2. shpuntik
            shpuntik 11 July 2013 00: 39 New
            +2
            Akim Today, 17:33 ↑
            Well bought "Mistral". On the scale of the war, it is a penny. But Russia will be able to build its own UDC.

            We have already discussed this topic, and you are all for your own: -) I then said that two stocks on the "Admiral" are waiting for them, they will not wait.
            The Mistral's hull is not comparable to the Vikramaditya (Admiral Gorshkov). Essentially a ferry. Quote:
            "Moreover, the head of the USC, Roman Trotsenko, partially agrees with these estimates, who believes that the Mistral is a fairly simple ship, most of all resembling a cargo-passenger ferry."
            http://shipbuilding.ru/rus/articles/Mistral_240111/
            Why were they "fiddling" with "Vikramaditya"? Quote:
            "Sevmash is the flagship in the field of submarine shipbuilding in Russia. The experience that it received is difficult, but extremely useful: the modernization and repair of the aircraft carrier" Vikramaditya "became, in fact, its creation from scratch. Russia now has an enterprise (albeit the only one for now) has experience in building ships of this class, "- said Shlemov."
            http://shipbuilding.ru/rus/articles/Ship_pay_Russia/
            To summarize: the article is intended to form public opinion in the right direction. This direction, in a strategic plan, weakens the Russian economy and its shipbuilding.
            Tactically, yes, you can buy, but what is the benefit? Who is talking about "kickbacks", who is talking about friendship with a member of the Entente, I personally do not understand ...
      2. Corsair5912
        Corsair5912 10 July 2013 18: 36 New
        +7
        Cossacks adopted the tactics of the musketeers

        Cossacks dealt with musketeers only in cartoons; in real life, they never contacted. Musketeers, initially, are regular infantry with firearms, and Cossacks, initially this is an irregular, light cavalry with melee weapons and their tactics are different.
        1. Akim
          Akim 10 July 2013 18: 50 New
          +2
          Quote: Corsair5912
          Cossacks dealt with musketeers only in cartoons

          There are many historical facts that the Cossacks were the "first foreign legion" in France, long before the Swiss. Russia never fought in France as long as there were blood ties. Only after the French revolutions and the "left" king did battles begin.
          And about the cavalry you are wrong. The Cossacks had all kinds of units, including a light fleet.
        2. svp67
          svp67 10 July 2013 19: 12 New
          +1
          Quote: Corsair5912
          Cossacks only dealt with musketeers in cartoons,

          No, they fought with them a lot and often, since for a long time the musketeers formed the basis of the infantry units of the army
      3. svp67
        svp67 10 July 2013 18: 39 New
        0
        Quote: Akim
        but the fact that the Cossacks borrowed the tactics of the musketeers is unpleasant to hear
        what or what tactics?
        1. Akim
          Akim 10 July 2013 19: 02 New
          0
          Quote: svp67
          what or what tactics?


          This will not be a comment, but a separate article. Search the web. There are many materials on this topic. Tip: read also French sites. True, there is very little affected by this topic.
      4. Setrac
        Setrac 10 July 2013 21: 03 New
        +2
        Quote: Akim
        and the fact that the Cossacks borrowed the tactics of the musketeers is unpleasant to hear.

        The musketeers appeared much later than the Cossacks, so it’s ridiculous to say that they taught the Cossacks something, it’s the musketeers who adopted the techniques from the Cossacks. Exaggerating I will say this, the Cossacks defeated the musketeers, and not vice versa.
        1. Akim
          Akim 10 July 2013 21: 22 New
          0
          Quote: Setrac
          Cossacks defeated the musketeers, and not vice versa.

          I won’t even argue, because I agree. But the French had a lot to learn. Combat formation, offensive tactics, fire weapons and their distribution. Nobody licked them cleanly and in hand-to-hand combat the musketeer was less likely, although they also fought well, but a Cossack saber is better than a sword.
          1. svp67
            svp67 10 July 2013 21: 28 New
            0
            Quote: Akim
            Nobody licked them cleanly and in hand-to-hand combat the musketeer was less likely, although they also fought well, but a Cossack saber is better than a sword.
            Not a fact - the sword is very good when fighting in cramped conditions, which the French and Spaniards successfully proved ...
            1. Akim
              Akim 10 July 2013 21: 56 New
              0
              Quote: svp67
              Not a fact - the sword is very good when fighting in cramped conditions

              During the second assault on Azov, all soldiers were rearmed with sabers, like archers and Cossacks. Only they could resist the scimitar.
              1. svp67
                svp67 10 July 2013 22: 38 New
                0
                Quote: Akim
                During the second assault on Azov, all soldiers were rearmed with sabers, like archers and Cossacks. Only they could resist the scimitar.

                In 1741, in the ranks of the infantry, the straight sword was replaced by a half-saber. Cold weapons, a kind of saber, characterized by a somewhat shortened and straightened blade.
                It appeared in the 18 century, in Russia - in the middle of the 18 century, when the ordinary musketeers swords were replaced by semi-sabers with a hinged hilt. In the second half of the 18 century, hilt half-sabers began to be made saber type.
                The semi-sabers of the times of Catherine II were of various lengths; By the end of the 18 century, blades are becoming longer and more massive. Under Paul I, half-sabers again received a fencing hilt. The sheath of all half-sabers of the 18 century was wooden, covered with leather with a hook for the belts. In the 19 century, the half-saber shape changes slightly, the blades become more curved and double-edged at the end.
                In the 1826, a half-saber is an officer weapon that had a rounded bow guard and a hook for the shoulder blade of a sword belt on the mouth of a wooden scabbard fitted with patent leather. A silver galoon lanyard with two stripes of black and orange silk at the edges was imposed on its hilt. The width of the lanyard was 2,5 cm, and the length was 53 cm. Half-sabers with 1830 were introduced for officers and admirals of the Russian Navy and were an obligatory attribute of the parade uniform. From the beginning of 19, the Russian army introduced hatchets that supplant half sabers.
                1. Akim
                  Akim 10 July 2013 22: 44 New
                  0
                  Quote: svp67
                  svp67

                  I once saw a program, in French (I don't understand it well. But still) "Musketeer vs. Samurai". Naturally the musketeer won. laughing And against the Janissary he lost (oddly enough). am
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 10 July 2013 23: 35 New
                    0
                    Quote: Akim
                    "Musketeer vs. Samurai". Naturally the musketeer won. And he lost against the Janissary (oddly enough).
                    and then "double standards" ...
      5. Vadivak
        Vadivak 10 July 2013 21: 47 New
        +4
        Quote: Akim
        and the fact that the Cossacks borrowed the tactics of the musketeers is unpleasant to hear.


        Ask them if they knew who these musketeers were?

        Quote: Akim
        daughter of Yaroslav the Wise Anna was regent of France

        Well, they just got lucky

        There are plenty of examples when great discoveries are made by different people independently, and some especially gifted ones ascribe to themselves other people's inventions
  18. Gato
    Gato 10 July 2013 16: 35 New
    +7
    The article is a little truth to the huge barrel of complete nonsense.
  19. timhelmet
    timhelmet 10 July 2013 16: 36 New
    +4
    And I will express my thoughts more radically:
    The author is a sent Cossack. I would like to say "the author should be put on a stake," but hesitated.
    What inspired Mr. Pukhov when writing his creation? What guided what thought, thought, dreamed?
    And, especially, where, fellow author, FACTS?!?
    Where are the sources, links, statements by officials, statistical reports, etc.
    My opinion is a spoonful of ointment (I almost wrote "khovna") with salt on the honey wound.

    The defense industry rises from its knees! It is foolish to deny it.
    Any lousy articles with cheap text will not help to change or hide a positive trend.
    Article VOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO such minus.
    1. vadimN
      vadimN 10 July 2013 16: 59 New
      +3
      Quote: timhelmet
      What inspired Mr. Pukhov when writing his creation?


      I believe that a fee from any foreign fund and a surcharge personally from ex-minister Taburetkin ...
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak 10 July 2013 21: 49 New
        +2
        Quote: vadimN
        I believe that a fee from any foreign fund


        Grants for life earns
  20. adg76
    adg76 10 July 2013 16: 36 New
    +5
    Unpleasant sediment. As in ****** dunked
  21. Mizhgan
    Mizhgan 10 July 2013 16: 39 New
    +1
    Looked at the publications of this author, typing in the search engine of the site "author Ruslan Pukhov". Even little positive, mostly negative.
  22. Yuri Y.
    Yuri Y. 10 July 2013 16: 42 New
    +1
    Quote: seller trucks
    the purchase of weapons abroad is a blow to its own defense industry, secondly it leads to technical backwardness and thirdly makes it economically / politically dependent on importing countries

    Absolutely to the point. Its defense industry in the collapse, without orders, it will generally die.
    Moreover, it wasn’t bought by God that they themselves could have done. And something cool
    we will not be sold. Okay, now they have come to life, orders have even gone.
  23. Konsmo
    Konsmo 10 July 2013 16: 48 New
    +4
    Grandfather Stalin conducted industrialization and tears west of the supply needle for Russia after the war. Nobody can boast of key technologies before us now. Although Gaidar de-industrialized the country, today it is necessary to again raise factories and high-tech enterprises. Now almost all schoolchildren go to institutes, and then what are the jobs for them. McDonald's and shawarma all that remains, and furniture to trade. How to raise if the plants have their own owners. But no one canceled the carrot and stick. Long-term plans for the development and reorganization of industry need to be drawn up. Does the owner want to? I went to .. sell and no matter what you see, otherwise the path to Khodorkovsky is trodden. A delicious carrot you yourself understand orders and denyuzhka and our reverence. So since the time of the Stroganovs and Demidovs it was instituted.
  24. Samminosh
    Samminosh 10 July 2013 16: 50 New
    +1
    Electronics-frizz is almost completely ordered over the hill, as well as high-tech communications and surveillance. Components for example, thermal imagers, too.
    We can’t get away from import if we want to make weapons at the proper level.
  25. serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 10 July 2013 16: 51 New
    +5
    The author should have made a clearer distinction between the concepts of "arms procurement" and "technology procurement". Already in the (roughly) 19th century, Russia did not buy weapons on a massive scale. In extreme cases, small lots were bought, production licenses. Or they made their own models and put them into series. This practice, already in the "purchase of samples and technologies" variant, continued in the USSR. The break was during the Second World War, and it is clear why.
    Technological lag - yes, it was. It was actively overcome immediately before 1 MV, and in the 30s to 2 MV. After 2 MV there was parity in military products, the lag was eliminated almost instantly.
    I see nothing wrong with the procurement of advanced military (and not only military) technologies and models abroad and their development. So did (and do) all countries.
    The author is right in saying that in developed countries there are practically no self-sufficient industries left and everyone is cooperating. Such cooperation was also in the Warsaw Pact Organization. However, the Russian Federation cannot afford such a luxury - only the Army and Navy remained as allies.
    1. Akim
      Akim 10 July 2013 16: 59 New
      0
      Quote: serge-68-68
      In droves, Russia already in the (roughly) in the 19th century did not purchase weapons

      It was only possible to say NO, because during the Russian-Turkish war, the soldiers were with the Belgian rifles of Berdan, and the officers were with the Colts, and 1 MV was a huge batch of Arisak rifles, Austin armored cars and French helmets, Lewis and Shosh machine guns. This is a normal occurrence. Take it without patriotic insults.
      1. Gato
        Gato 10 July 2013 17: 25 New
        +3
        It was just possible to say NO, because during the Russian-Turkish war the soldiers were with the Belgian rifles of Berdan

        You confuse it to say the least.
        The Berdan Rifle No. 1 was developed by the American colonel, the hero of the Civil War, Hiram Berdan, and improved by the Russian Colonel A.P. Gorlov and Lieutenant K.I. Gunius. (together with the author). In the same America, it was called russian rifle.
        Russian troops were armed with Russian-made rifles, only a small "pilot" batch was made in England.
        As for the Colts, you are also confusing, the American Smith-Wesson revolver (again modified at the request of A.P. Gorlov) was in service. By the way, since 1885 it began to be produced in Tula.
        In addition, at that time, officers were allowed to buy any kind of personal weapon for their cost.
        1. Akim
          Akim 10 July 2013 17: 45 New
          0
          Quote: Gato
          Gato

          Thanks for the amendment. But this does not change the meaning of what has been said. That Russia then bought weapons over the hill. And along with Mosin carbines at the Don Cossacks, one could meet the Winchester M1895 under our patron.
          1. Gato
            Gato 10 July 2013 18: 40 New
            +1
            Thanks for the amendment. But this does not change the meaning of what has been said. That Russia then bought weapons over the hill

            Well, no one argues with this - the amendment is that technologies were purchased to a greater extent. And the purchase of weapons and equipment that is needed "right now" is a common practice, not a "special way" for Russia.
            The Americans in WW1 bought British and French planes and tanks (did it badly affect the American aircraft and tank building?), The British in WW2 bought old American destroyers and transports. So what? Why is Russia worse? Did "students", "wilis" and "hercobras" turn out to be superfluous?
          2. Tersky
            Tersky 10 July 2013 21: 55 New
            +4
            Quote: Akim
            . And along with Mosin carbines at the Don Cossacks

            Not a carbine, but a Cossack rifle, an analogue of a dragoon. Mosin carbine appeared later in 1938.
      2. avt
        avt 10 July 2013 17: 38 New
        +3
        Quote: Akim
        This is a normal occurrence. Take it without patriotic insults.

        And no one denies the obvious, and the point here is not in military-technical cooperation and the purchase of a certain amount of weapons, depending on the need. China now, as in its time the USSR, does the same without ceremony. You missed the main message of the article, for which the author muddied everything ============= ,, Of course, the turn to the West signifies a real military-technical, political and mental revolution, "======= key words TURN TO THE WEST and POLITICAL AND MENTAL REVOLUTION. The author was ashamed to develop an element of the mental revolution - the latest achievements of the West in the field of de-Christianization and pederastic legislation, as a result triumph of this mentality, followed by tolerastic Islamization.Well, if anyone has a desire to follow the European choice, the wind is in the air ... Everything else in the article is a verbal tinsel from the known and indisputable facts of military-technical development, written to cover the main, joyful for the author, , reversal to the West "Here are some who write that the author is confusing. Nothing like this ! He does not confuse anything, rather confuses, diverting attention from the main, joyful for him action.
      3. serge-68-68
        serge-68-68 10 July 2013 17: 55 New
        +4
        Just in case - Berdan rifles for Russia in Belgium were not made.
        At the Colt plant 30000 pieces of Berdan No. 1 were ordered and in England - 30000 Berdan No. 2. The production of the Berdan rifle has been established at the Tula, Sestroretsky and Izhevsk factories since 1870.
        And a little more: on September 21, 1870, Minister of War Milyutin imposed the following resolution on all of Gorlov’s reports: “If G. Gorlov had in mind the convenience of ordering Henry-Martini rifles in England, this reason alone can hardly justify a new change in design - Russia not Egypt, not papal possessions, to limit itself to buying rifles abroad for the entire army. We must set up our plants for the manufacture of our guns in the future ... ”
      4. svp67
        svp67 10 July 2013 18: 58 New
        +1
        Quote: Akim
        This is a normal occurrence. Take it without patriotic insults.
        This is NOT NORMAL, as many questions immediately arise regarding the provision of ammunition, repairs, etc., etc.
      5. Vadivak
        Vadivak 10 July 2013 21: 55 New
        +2
        Quote: Akim
        because in the Russo-Turkish war the soldiers were with the Belgian rifles of Berdan, and the officers with the Colts, This is normal.

        This is an abnormal phenomenon, but the stupidity of the German tsars, who were sure that the Russians could not create anything and that now they could equal them?
    2. Gato
      Gato 10 July 2013 17: 42 New
      +2
      Totally agree with you.

      Only one small remark:
      as allies she had only the Army and Navy

      For some reason, the Allies do not list the military-industrial complex. Until recently, he was generally treated either as an annoying burden, or as a cash cow.
      It seems that our military-industrial complex is more an "ally" of India and China than Russia.
    3. Pusher
      Pusher 10 July 2013 21: 26 New
      0
      By the way, a link to Pukhov’s conversation about army reform: http://youtu.be/3uZXSt_B_DQ
      which reveals the topic of procurement of technologies, not weapons.
  26. Kovrovsky
    Kovrovsky 10 July 2013 16: 57 New
    +4
    The author writes about "Russia's economy is too small." But what about the second place of Russia in the world in the export of arms? For this, probably, the economy is not needed!
    1. Poppy
      Poppy 10 July 2013 17: 13 New
      +1
      here it’s a little bit about something else, about author
      even the USSR could not afford full self-sufficiency, only together with CMEA
      and Russia is now smaller than the USSR
      1. MIKHAN
        MIKHAN 10 July 2013 17: 31 New
        +1
        Quote: Poppy
        here it’s a little bit about something else, about author
        even the USSR could not afford full self-sufficiency, only together with CMEA
        and Russia is now smaller than the USSR

        The USSR was a self-sufficient country Now we live on this (even despite the robbery ..) Here not long ago a list of bankrupt enterprises was put up (a small part) A very sad article was about its former power .. But the plus is that we can repeat it again !! ! From an agrarian country (at the beginning of the 19th) it will turn into a world-class Power (which it can produce at home, starting with condoms))))
  27. Aleks tv
    Aleks tv 10 July 2013 17: 27 New
    +5
    If the author thus tried to whitewash the stool, it turned out to be pale spirochete.
    Crumpled into a bunch of people and horses.
    Yes, historically foreign weapons have always been purchased, but as samples for study or technology to create a quick production cycle. Lend-lease does not count.

    What did the stool do?
    About iveko everyone has already slobbered: yes a good, beautiful car in its class, yes, worthy of study.
    What happened ?
    They spat on the domestic military-industrial complex, without even setting the requirements for performance characteristics and technical specifications, and stupidly bought car kits for thousands of cars for the entire army (there is a separate conversation about accelerated tests).
    Those. full dependence on spare parts and other crap, without which their continuous operation is impossible. Block Italy faucet and all this armada will inevitably become a joke.
    Production technology not purchased, screwdriver assembly. Did you get an Italian screwdriver? Handed over. That's all, wrap on it what you want to the best of your fantasies.

    And this is already called undermining the combat readiness of the army and smacks of treason.
    How much can you talk about what obvious things ???

    After all, by and large, no one is against Iveco. But how it was done is a SHOCK.

    The same can be said about other foreign purchases and attempts. The acquisition of several units of tankers on the basis of Volvo is just what it costs (discussed on the site) - this is generally a blatant impudence to cut, which was not in the arc or in the red army with the need for foreign technology.

    By all fibers I do not believe in the care of stools for fighters, loot, loot, loot - this is his only goal.
    And hundreds of thousands of military people think so, these units can be mistaken, and not ALL.

    So, Ruslan Pukhov, I'm sorry, but you're wrong. If so you insist on your innocence, go ahead, pliz, to the nearest barracks of the “federals” and read your lecture there.
    And everything will fall into place, the brain will definitely be cured.
    1. Djozz
      Djozz 10 July 2013 18: 00 New
      0
      Sell ​​them, to hell, civilians, and invest the proceeds in their own developments. Many will buy for show-off, like "Hummer".
    2. itkul
      itkul 10 July 2013 18: 57 New
      -1
      Quote: Aleks tv
      Those. full dependence on spare parts and other crap, without which their continuous operation is impossible. Block Italy faucet and all this armada will inevitably become a joke.


      And I don’t understand what kind of dependence, well, they’ll do it like in a taxi, 12 cars on the +1 line for spare parts are business, in the extreme case, two workers can always be made out of three faulty ones.
      1. Aleks tv
        Aleks tv 10 July 2013 21: 35 New
        +1
        Quote: itkul
        12 machines on the line + 1 for spare parts


        And to do this with the 3000 machines that the stool planned to deliver?

        In the army there is such a thing as "standard number of armored vehicles". There are no extra cars. So the units will be understaffed: some on the lynx, others on anything. And, for example, on the march - is everyone waiting, will it break, or will we leave along the road?
        Brad.

        And there is the concept of "exploitation". These are spare parts and repair and maintenance. During the period of the machine’s life, not a few funds and forces are swelled into it, a profiled system is created with the appropriate training of personnel - is this also down the drain? And all this at the country level? Take an interest in Zampotechs.
        Brad.

        Sorry, I don’t want to be rude, but do you understand the very concept: “exploitation” on the scale of all Armed Forces? This is a SYSTEM.
        Look at the history of F-14 in Iran, very entertaining. No offense.
  28. chauvinist
    chauvinist 10 July 2013 17: 39 New
    -3
    As I see the quilted jackets nobly bombed. However, do not forget that the military-industrial complex is not in good shape, and therefore Mistral was bought, since there is no alternative to our military-industrial complex.
  29. Djozz
    Djozz 10 July 2013 17: 42 New
    +2
    With the "Mongol conquest" be careful not to look ridiculous.
  30. assaker
    assaker 10 July 2013 17: 43 New
    -1
    We bought weapons and produced under license, but honestly, and did not steal someone else's !!!
    1. fzr1000
      fzr1000 10 July 2013 17: 53 New
      +4
      Why be shy? Stealing, copying, upgrading and surpassing the source is aerobatics!
    2. svp67
      svp67 10 July 2013 23: 10 New
      +2
      Quote: assaker
      We bought weapons and produced under license, but honestly, and did not steal someone else's !!!
      And I don’t see anything shameful in the fact that our industry often copied foreign models, this indicates the level of development of our industry. And the fact that often without a license, so then there were such times ...
  31. ssergey
    ssergey 10 July 2013 17: 51 New
    +4
    "Revolvers for the Russian army were also mainly purchased in the United States, until the licensed production of the Nagant revolver began in 1895, which became the standard pistol of the Russian army for almost half a century."
    The author, apparently, is such a major specialist in the field of armaments that he does not see the difference between a pistol and a revolver. But this is his misfortune. Although big.
    Maybe he is a historian? Then why does he not know (or do not want to talk?) That even under Ivan the Terrible, Russia imported guns into Holland!
    1. chauvinist
      chauvinist 10 July 2013 17: 59 New
      0
      SHIELD? Guns? Imported?
    2. Aleks tv
      Aleks tv 10 July 2013 18: 02 New
      +5
      Quote: ssergey
      The author, apparently, is such a major specialist in the field of armaments that he does not see the difference between a pistol and a revolver.


      Well, he’s excusable, Sergey, he’s not just a major specialist, but ... "Director of the Center for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (CAST), Member of the Scientific Council of the Franco-Russian Analytical Center Observo"
      So he signs up. And that says it all, and he is also a member of the observatory.
  32. serge-68-68
    serge-68-68 10 July 2013 18: 08 New
    +2
    The first 20000 pieces of Nagan revolvers were manufactured at the Nagan factory in Liege, and since 1898 their production was started at the Tula Imperial Arms Factory, and the Tula revolvers cost the treasury half the price and met the conditions for interchangeability of parts, which did not provide Liege samples. From the beginning of production to December 1, 1917, about 1,5 million units were produced.
  33. Alexanderlaskov
    Alexanderlaskov 10 July 2013 18: 19 New
    +1
    External layout should be engaged in the search for modern technology in the West. In Soviet times, we created a nuclear bomb like that. Honor and praise to our Soviet separation.
  34. Corsair5912
    Corsair5912 10 July 2013 18: 26 New
    +1
    The author is either a complete ignoramus or intentionally lies and slanders.
    Russia-Russian Empire-USSR never depended on Western weapons, on the contrary, the West bought firearms and cold steel from the Russians under Ivan III and Ivan IV. It is Russia and Russia that have always surpassed the West in armaments.http: //hrolv99.livejournal.com/280638.html
  35. Djozz
    Djozz 10 July 2013 18: 27 New
    +2
    These centers of analysis and institutions, bred like a bobby of fleas, hell knows who finances them, every educated person fancies himself Napoleon. With a clever look says "space" nonsense. Without thinking that a "virus" can be built into an imported microcircuit
  36. Suhov
    Suhov 10 July 2013 18: 30 New
    +1
    It is clear that Russia today is too small an economy to allow itself to have a fully autonomous military-industrial complex, as a result of which integration into international specialization seems inevitable imperative.

    Everything was clear and understandable in the article until I came to the "unfamiliar" word - imperative.
    I do not understand. Why instead of Russian words use their foreign counterparts?
    No matter how the same thing happened with weapons.
    There is a threat that instead of the existing domestic weapons they will buy foreign.
  37. vladsolo56
    vladsolo56 10 July 2013 18: 31 New
    +4
    The author is just one of those who prays for America, for whom America is the crown of civilization and an example of the best economy in the world, well, usually in such cases we have a pen in the ass
  38. MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 10 July 2013 18: 32 New
    +3
    Quote: Alexanderlaskov
    External layout should be engaged in the search for modern technology in the West. In Soviet times, we created a nuclear bomb like that. Honor and praise to our Soviet separation.

    And not only ...! How many billions have been saved .. !!
  39. Ivan Tarasov
    Ivan Tarasov 10 July 2013 18: 33 New
    +2
    For acquaintance it is necessary to purchase, but not thousands?
  40. pensioner
    pensioner 10 July 2013 18: 49 New
    0
    As the saying goes: read, read, but non-read ... What was that?
  41. datur
    datur 10 July 2013 18: 59 New
    +3
    strange, but the guns of the breech-loading were invented by our, illiterate, ancestors 100 years before the krupp! belay apparently drunk !!! wink
  42. MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 10 July 2013 19: 00 New
    +1
    Quote: Ivan Tarasov
    For acquaintance it is necessary to purchase, but not thousands?

    We bought documentation .. for our designers .. and the military. First we copied like the Chinese (at the beginning of the 19th), but now Russian brands in high technologies are undeniable .. !!! The first satellite is the first man in space .. etc .. This cannot be stolen copied .. !!! And our air defense !!! And the fighters !! We build nuclear plants around the world ..
  43. cherkas.oe
    cherkas.oe 10 July 2013 19: 10 New
    +3
    Well, and T-B-A-R-b is this scribe, like the "stool" did everything correctly, well, and what did he acquire so important that would allow us to copy at least some technology that is a little more useful for the defense industry? It's just that J-O-P-U tried to wash the huckster and the thief, but only we are not made with a finger, everyone can see and understand everything, I hope. what
  44. vadson
    vadson 10 July 2013 19: 35 New
    +3
    The article didn’t put anything, the author certainly went too far, but of course no one will refuse to slam someone else’s technology (hello to the whales), vivid examples are known. This is to say that progress in science is not being made right this second, the USSR after nearly half a century has quietly developed, and the Western countries. In the United States, devastation has not been a long time. Stayed ahead in many aspects. One pleases any empire comes to an end. And at the expense of technology - not a single country will refuse.
  45. waisson
    waisson 10 July 2013 19: 46 New
    +2
    the author seems to be still the mishandled Cossack-kakavo to you, but after work, it was so hard for me to digest
  46. PPO-1980
    PPO-1980 10 July 2013 20: 08 New
    +4
    Dear author! Everything, a hundred of you, is presented beautifully. But the "revolver Nagan, which has become a standard pistol" is how? And Nagan developed his revolver specifically for the Russian Empire, and they chose him because he was the best in many respects. Peter, as far as can be judged from the history of technology, taught his subjects and developed their science here, taking into account Russian realities. And you point out that the USSR built here and there its equipment under a license (from the countries of the Warsaw Treaty). Yours. The T-34 tank, although it was developed on the basis of an American, was recognized even by the same Americans as the best SOVIET. The Mosin rifle was produced in the states under license (and as far as I know it is still being produced) and was recognized by them that year (2012) as one of the best (more precisely, 2nd place after AK). And even they do not try to claim that this is plagiarism or a license. The patron under the same Mosinka is called RUSSIAN all over the world !!!! The Makarov pistol is recognized by the same states as the best example of the last century. The topic of ekranoplanes began to be developed abroad only in this century, and we? It is forbidden to sell the s-300 complexes, and even more so the s-400 (not so much because they are outdated?). So, what if we do not have enough capacity and technology is one thing. But why buy the deliberate junk (from comparative tests of the same tiger and lynx, I think everything is clear). Moreover, on such enslaving terms. I think there are few opponents against the acquisition of super modern technologies. For God's sake. But firstly, who will give them to us, and secondly, their potential.
    1. serge-68-68
      serge-68-68 10 July 2013 20: 38 New
      +2
      The T-34 tank was not developed "on the basis of the American". This is a completely different car. The Christie tank is a BT family. About PM and Mosinka, where did the firewood come from? The ratings of their classes are Glock-17 and Mauser-98. Having the second category in shooting from PM (PM-1), I can say that I never liked him.
  47. Alexanderlaskov
    Alexanderlaskov 10 July 2013 20: 11 New
    +3
    We must raise our defense from the ruins. For this, the firm will of the country's leadership is needed.
  48. voliador
    voliador 10 July 2013 20: 15 New
    +7
    The article is really nasty. I specially registered to leave my comment. The article is clearly ordered, and was written, in my opinion, at the request of all kinds of liberal mold. And it is designed for some imbecile, with drunken brains of youngsters. Comparing the 1913th century with our time - it was cooler only in the days of the USSR, when until recently everything was compared with 90. This time. And for two - not for three hundred years the country was growing industry, so that later on, according to different tions, such orders were enlarged. Enough of the liberals of the XNUMXs, who almost ruined all production in the country. Such large orders not only allow dozens of large enterprises to operate normally, such orders allow investing in production development and research and development. Otherwise, over time, we will not be able to do anything for ourselves, nor for export - and the production will go nuts! Well, three - it will still be necessary to check this Mistral up and down - go and know what "bugs" there the frogs could cram! From all this, the conclusion: an article is a fat-and-and-and-a-big minus.
  49. earthling
    earthling 10 July 2013 20: 27 New
    +5
    Military reforms should be carried out by military specialists. And furniture makers should do the furniture. And the author of the article is just a sneak.
  50. Sergey47
    Sergey47 10 July 2013 20: 32 New
    +2
    Yes, he is simply drunk in the "fluff" this Pukhov, and it would be better to quickly turn to dust.