Military Review

Updated Airborne Forces will be able to become rapid reaction forces.

48
During the modernization of the Russian armed forces, it is planned not only to update the fleet of military equipment, but also to change the structure of a number of units, units and formations. The current plans of the Ministry of Defense imply the strengthening of the airborne troops, for which some units will be handed over to them. In addition, up to 2020, new formations will appear as part of the Airborne Forces. It is expected that such measures will increase the combat potential of the landing forces.


Updated Airborne Forces will be able to become rapid reaction forces.


The first notable step in updating the airborne troops was the decree of the President of October 11 and the directive of the Chief of General Staff, according to which the airborne forces will include three units. The air assault brigades deployed in Ussuriysk, Ulan-Ude and Kamyshin were previously part of the Eastern and Southern military districts. Now they should become airborne units. In the near future, all the procedures necessary for the transfer of brigades under the command of the Airborne Troops Command will be carried out. Special commissions should check the condition of the equipment and infrastructure. Already on December 1, the air assault brigades should begin a new academic year on training programs developed for the Airborne Forces.

According to the commander of the Airborne Forces, Colonel-General V. Shamanov, the aim of transferring three brigades is to create a single command of all airmobile forces of the army and “rapid reaction forces”. For the convenience of command and control of troops, all airmobile units are now subject to the command of the airborne troops, which should have an appropriate effect on their capabilities and interaction.

Over the next years, it is planned to take a number of measures aimed at increasing the combat effectiveness of the Airborne Forces. In May of this year, Colonel General V. Shamanov told what work is planned to be carried out in the foreseeable future. So, in accordance with the current State Arms Program, until 2020, the airborne troops will receive new weapons and military equipment (IWT). By this time, the troops should have at least 70% of the new military equipment. In addition, by the end of the decade, the Airborne Forces will fully transfer to contract service. Another feature of the reform of the airborne troops is the rejection of the two-regiment divisions. In the future, a third regiment will appear in the composition of the airborne and airborne assault divisions. At the same time, an army company will be part of all regiments aviation and a unit for unmanned aerial vehicles.

It should be noted that some measures designed to strengthen the Airborne Forces will be taken in the near future. By 2016, a new airborne assault brigade will appear, which, according to reports, will be based in Voronezh. It has already been announced that the new brigade will receive the 345 number - in honor of the 345 Guards Bagram paratroop regiment. In addition, the 45 th Special Guard Regiment will be reformed into a brigade.

The current plans of the command of the airborne troops, calculated to the end of the decade, were drawn up on behalf of the Minister of Defense. In February of this year, S. Shoigu ordered the implementation of a defense plan, as well as provide for the use of airborne forces as a rapid reaction force. Thus, all ongoing and planned for the future changes in the structure of the airborne troops can be considered a consequence of the instructions of the head of the military department.

An interesting fact is that the order to consider the use of airborne forces as a rapid reaction force was issued in February, and work on it was completed in the fall, followed by the first orders determining the further development of the armed forces. Such a pace of work can speak volumes. In particular, an opinion appeared in the foreign press, according to which with the help of such steps Russia intends not only to increase its defense capability, but also to protect itself from possible threats of the near future.

Thus, the Foreign Policy edition is inclined to associate the transformation of the structure and purpose of the Russian Airborne Forces with the expected events in Central and Central Asia. In the foreseeable future, NATO troops must leave Afghanistan. According to popular belief, after the departure of the Americans and their allies, the current Afghan government will not be able to hold power for long and will soon fall under the pressure of the Taliban. The result may be a complication of the situation in the region, to which, according to Foreign Policy, Russia is preparing, transforming the most mobile branch of the military.

The version of foreign analysts looks interesting and plausible. Nevertheless, possible problems in Central and Central Asia may not necessarily be the reason for such a rapid pace of creating a new development plan for the Russian Airborne Forces. At the same time, the rapid-reaction force, which is to become airborne troops, may well take part in the defense of the southern borders of the country in the event of an attack. It should be noted that the Airborne Forces, being the most mobile arm of the troops, must respond to any threats, and not just to those coming from the south. Regardless of the specific threats that may be faced in the future by airborne forces, the current measures are aimed at strengthening them and increasing their combat capability. Such an update and improvement of this type of troops should be carried out as soon as possible, without waiting for a reason in the form of any armed conflict.


On the materials of the sites:
http://ria.ru/
http://vz.ru/
http://ng.ru/
http://svpressa.ru/
http://foreignpolicy.com/
Author:
Photos used:
Alexey Malgavko / RIA News
48 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. kafa
    kafa 28 October 2013 10: 04
    10
    Updated airborne forces will be able to respond quickly !!!!!!!!!
    and before that it’s like sleepy koalas or something repeat
    the author be careful with the names
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 28 October 2013 10: 26
      +5
      "Rapid Reaction Force" is a common term.
    2. unclevad
      unclevad 28 October 2013 11: 25
      11
      Rapid response forces are not only the speed of deployment, but also the speed of decision-making and passing orders. Not for nothing that the units were taken out of subordination of military districts.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 28 October 2013 11: 33
        +4
        Quote: unclevad
        Not for nothing that the units were taken out of subordination of military districts.

        No, it’s just that Shamanov’s grasping reflex worked. There is no particular sense in this reassignment. Rather, the opposite.
        For example, the Southern District. They need to saddle some Cross Pass. Previously, they would simply have given the command of the Kamyshin DShBr, now they will have to coordinate everything long and tediously with Moscow, with the headquarters of the Airborne Forces. At this time, the Georgians will finish off the 4th military base in South Ossetia, turning the Roki tunnel.
        1. Volkhov
          Volkhov 28 October 2013 14: 00
          -5
          Shamanov’s Syria is ahead and the Airborne Forces are too tough, and that’s reinforcing. After all, they are peacekeepers of quick reaction ... and when they will have to be rescued - then infantry and partisans, you can’t immediately pull men from factories and guards - you need a definite reason.
          1. bask
            bask 28 October 2013 19: 56
            0
            Updated Airborne Forces will be able to become rapid reaction forces.

            MAY, but for this, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation should completely rearm the Airborne Forces.
            To roll up and staff all divisions, BMD4M, SU, Octopus-SD, self-propelled guns, Vienna, etc.
            1. Pimply
              Pimply 28 October 2013 21: 28
              +2
              That's just what they should not arm.
              1. bask
                bask 28 October 2013 21: 43
                +2
                Quote: Pimply
                That's just what they should not arm.

                What is modern in existence. There are no other armored vehicles and will not exist until the 20th year (minimum).
                Of course, I would like to see what was like the US Marine Corps, and its own front-line aviation, heavy armored vehicles, self-propelled guns, Mrap.

                And the main armament, a modular armored car on the main gun and a wheeled chassis.
                1. bask
                  bask 28 October 2013 22: 29
                  0
                  Quote: Pimply
                  No one talks about take away. But sharpening all the equipment under it - with modern realities - is stupid.

                  New armored personnel carrier for the US Marine Corps:
                  1. BAE Systems and Iveco. MPC is an enlarged version of SuperAV. The new BTR / BMP provides ballistic protection and the STANAG 4569 Level 4 mine clearance.
                  2. Lockheed Martin and Patria have successfully completed the testing program for the new Havoc APC / IFV.
  2. Pimply
    Pimply 28 October 2013 10: 20
    0
    Well, logical. Creating an analogue of the ILC. Even if they don’t give paper equipment and finally get away from the emphasis on parachute landing - there will be sense.
    1. Kolovrat77
      Kolovrat77 28 October 2013 11: 03
      +4
      Quote: Pimply
      Well, logical. Creating an analogue of the ILC
      +


      Quote: Pimply
      they will not give a paper technique
      yes tons so under 60


      Quote: Pimply
      and finally they will leave the focus on parachute landing - there will be sense.

      Yes, and the sailors are forbidden to swim. But Seriously: I understand your joy and experience, for ours, one of the most combat-ready combat arms, not only do I fully share this desire, but too lazy to write. You are a smart man, decipher the reduction, everything is already being done. And to take away the parachute from the landing (I hope you didn’t propose this out of malicious intentions? Is it so) it will no longer be the landing.
      1. SIT
        SIT 28 October 2013 14: 37
        +1
        Quote: Kolovrat77
        And to take away the parachute from the landing (I hope you didn’t propose this out of malicious intentions? Is it so) it will no longer be the landing.

        The parachute was used as a means of landing, not because it was the most suitable, but because there were no others. Now for these purposes there are helicopters, which are much more convenient and can minimize risk at the very first rapid stage of throwing and landing, because on a helicopter, on the contrary, first landing, and then landing.
      2. Pimply
        Pimply 28 October 2013 21: 29
        +2
        Quote: Kolovrat77
        I understand your joy and experience, for ours, one of the most combat-ready combat arms, not only do I fully share this desire, but too lazy to write. You are a smart man, decipher the reduction, everything is already being done. And to take away the parachute from the landing (I hope you didn’t propose this out of malicious intentions? Is it so) it will no longer be the landing.

        No one talks about take away. But sharpening all the equipment under it - with modern realities - is stupid.
  3. Fuzeler
    Fuzeler 28 October 2013 10: 24
    +2
    It’s time to rename the Airborne Forces as NDV (Ground Forces), because they have not been used for their intended purpose for a long time.
    The guys who served in these troops! You shouldn’t be offended if I offended you in my own words, but it’s true: in recent conflicts, the airborne forces were used as ordinary infantry.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 28 October 2013 10: 28
      +3
      You are not quite right. For the second Chechen, the Kamyshinsky DShB-shnikov were used for their intended purpose — helicopter landing on the border with Georgia.
    2. Kolovrat77
      Kolovrat77 28 October 2013 11: 12
      +2
      Quote: Fuzeler
      It is time to rename the Airborne Forces as NDV (Ground Forces)

      Yes, this is a thought, and also to select banners, awards and a guards name, and most importantly, to select those 50 grams of meat per day that they are idlers eating, eating around the RF Armed Forces.
      1. Lopatov
        Lopatov 28 October 2013 11: 17
        0
        Take away the oil too.
    3. user
      user 28 October 2013 11: 17
      +2
      The last GRU special forces brigades are being pulled over to other departments, and there are still a few left after reduction
  4. avt
    avt 28 October 2013 10: 24
    +1
    They can’t - they must become the basis of these forces.
    Quote: kafa
    and before that it’s like sleepy koalas or something

    These are different things, just compare what and how it enters the Amer’s quick reaction force and how the structure, including management, is structured.
  5. Kolyan 2
    Kolyan 2 28 October 2013 10: 27
    +2
    Quote: Pimply
    Well, logical. Creating an analogue of the ILC. Even if they don’t give paper equipment and finally get away from the emphasis on parachute landing - there will be sense.

    The emphasis on parachuting in the Airborne Forces is not being made, but in life everything happens for this and they undergo landing training in order to know. hi
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 28 October 2013 10: 46
      +3
      In fact, they have all the equipment for this truly "emphasis" sharpened. And like any normal emphasis, this one prevents the expansion of its combat capabilities.
      1. Metlik
        Metlik 28 October 2013 12: 07
        +1
        If you switch to landing from a low height (100 meters) - the efficiency will be much greater, especially when blocking small groups.
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 28 October 2013 12: 19
          0
          But isn't it the other way around? NATO members from low altitudes generally lose weight
          1. Abracadabra
            Abracadabra 29 October 2013 03: 16
            0
            Here, n.p., what the Americans throw off for "child weights"
          2. Metlik
            Metlik 29 October 2013 10: 39
            0
            Quote: Spade
            But isn't it the other way around? NATO members from low altitudes generally lose weight

            At low altitude, the aircraft itself is harder to shoot down.
            The paratrooper is less in the air, where it is quite vulnerable.
            The accuracy of the landing in theory should be higher.
  6. 222222
    222222 28 October 2013 11: 11
    +2
    .. the concepts of "rapid reaction forces" and "special operations forces" ..
    "The Rapid Reaction Forces are part of the armed forces that are designed to deal with unexpected tasks in various regions.
    As such forces are usually used airborne troops, marines, units of the ground forces of increased combat readiness, as well as special purpose units. "
    "The Special Operations Forces are a highly mobile, trained and equipped group of forces designed to perform various tasks abroad and domestically by special methods."
  7. KOH
    KOH 28 October 2013 11: 48
    +1
    Quote: 222222
    .. the concepts of "rapid reaction forces" and "special operations forces" ..
    "The Rapid Reaction Forces are part of the armed forces that are designed to deal with unexpected tasks in various regions.
    As such forces are usually used airborne troops, marines, units of the ground forces of increased combat readiness, as well as special purpose units. "
    "The Special Operations Forces are a highly mobile, trained and equipped group of forces designed to perform various tasks abroad and domestically by special methods."


    I will fully support ... on this the GRU term was detached from the name ... these were groups trained to work on enemy territory, for sabotage operations, now they want to attach them to the SOBR ... for some reason, I personally don’t really like this idea, after all, one can say there were piece specialists, in recent years, and so they have gouged all the special equipment, apparently they want to finish it to the end ...
  8. erased
    erased 28 October 2013 11: 57
    +1
    If regiment 45 becomes a brigade, will they add another battalion to it? And will the current brigades be tri-battalion? And is it worth adding a third regiment to the division, can deploy brigades based on regiments? If the airborne forces become the main striking force of the army, they need to increase firepower. Art systems, aviation, shock drones. Maybe even BMPT class cars.
    Let's see what will happen in a year.
  9. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 28 October 2013 11: 58
    0
    When this or that task suddenly arises that requires an immediate quick response, such as capturing and holding an object before the main forces approach, they can be paratroopers, but they will not win the war. Since the Soviet and Russian paratroopers were not able to face equal strength adversary, one has to rely on the experience of Germany, which has very successfully used its paratroopers in Holland and Crete.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov 28 October 2013 12: 10
      +3
      And I heard that Crete became the swan song of the German paratroopers. That they raked so nobly there that no more such large operations were carried out. Only a third of the BTA aircraft.
      1. Standard Oil
        Standard Oil 28 October 2013 12: 24
        0
        But they accomplished the task of mastering Crete. I mean, in general, that simply using the paratroopers on their own without the support of other branches of the armed forces is simply pointless to lose them. In the fight against terrorists, it may help, but there are still "partners" and " friends".
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov 28 October 2013 12: 42
          0
          The fact is that the use of paratroopers, even with the support of other troops, does not guarantee the success of large amphibious operations. On this the Germans were burned, ours were burned, the Americans were burned, and twice in Operation Overlord and in the Market Garden that followed.

          And since then, the Airborne Forces have been used either as light infantry, or for small operations to capture weakly protected airfields with subsequent build-up of forces by landing method.

          But the air car owners, yes, they have notably advanced in the post-war years
          1. Standard Oil
            Standard Oil 28 October 2013 13: 02
            0
            So maybe then it makes sense to use not only and not so much paratroopers for a quick and maneuverable war, but to develop delivery vehicles, let's say the same helicopters, both for transporting people and equipment, like the Americans in Vietnam.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov 28 October 2013 13: 19
              +1
              Quote: Standard Oil
              let's say the same helicopters, both for transporting people and equipment, like the Americans in Vietnam.

              These are not airborne assault forces, these are airmobile units. With its own specifics, with its weapons sharpened under them.
              1. Standard Oil
                Standard Oil 28 October 2013 13: 38
                +1
                So maybe it is worth creating these very airmobile units, and not touching the paratroopers? All the same, the most correct, if I may say so, the use of paratroopers was among the Germans in Holland and Belgium to seize bridges and a fort, and among the Americans in Operation Overlord, when, despite for all the blunders, the American paratroopers were able to prevent the Germans from advancing to the landing points of the main forces. But Crete, this is exactly the option "Let's take the paratroopers and throw them into an unknown place with practically no support", and only the high professionalism of the German paratroopers + the stupid defense of the island allowed the Germans to win, albeit at a high cost, after which Hitler banned the use of airborne forces without his personal permission.
                1. Lopatov
                  Lopatov 28 October 2013 13: 44
                  0
                  Quote: Standard Oil
                  So maybe it’s worth creating these very airborne units, rather than touching the paratroopers?

                  As far as I understand, it is they who are created. And about "not touch" - why? Why are they needed for use as lightly armed infantry units? Airborne troops should receive normal vehicles
                2. Corsair
                  Corsair 28 October 2013 13: 46
                  +2
                  Quote: Standard Oil
                  So maybe it’s worth creating these very airborne units, rather than touching the paratroopers?

                  "Airmobile" subdivisions in a not so distant history with "brilliance" demonstrated their "efficiency" at the exercises of the Ukrainian army (if I am not mistaken in 2008), when the subdivisions were transferred to the place of the event for a couple of days on "steam locomotives" ...
                  1. Lopatov
                    Lopatov 28 October 2013 13: 48
                    +1
                    And ours will have problems - helicopters are needed. Many and different. Today is just a holiday at the army aviation
                    1. Corsair
                      Corsair 28 October 2013 14: 53
                      +1
                      Quote: Spade
                      And ours will have problems - helicopters are needed. Many and different. Today is just a holiday at the army aviation

                      I agree in the context of re-equipping the Armed Forces, it needs TOTAL and MUCH, and army flyers WITH A HOLIDAY!
          2. avt
            avt 28 October 2013 15: 23
            +1
            Quote: Spade
            the Americans were burned, and twice - both in Operation Overlord and in the subsequent Market Garden.

            In the "vegetable garden", in general, the intelligence did not see parts of the 6th Panzer SS, and the Angles, poured their own on their heads, to summarize briefly, and the Americans completed their tasks. In general, the operation was originally developed moronic.
  10. Romanychby
    Romanychby 28 October 2013 14: 11
    0
    Another reform in the Russian army. As if again not mired in the bureaucracy.
  11. Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 28 October 2013 14: 20
    0
    Sound decision. ACCESSORIES OF RESPECT! soldier
  12. malikszh
    malikszh 28 October 2013 15: 00
    0
    then how many units will the airborne forces?
  13. SIT
    SIT 28 October 2013 15: 07
    +1
    So all the same, what will be the purely airborne or airborne divisions? What is the overall concept for using these updated airborne forces? Purely how parachute landing units? Well, at the current level, even light weapons, hanging under slings is not very promising. If it will be airmobile parts, then here it is necessary to start from the stove and develop the concept of an air-ground operation. In the course of development, first of all, the system of command and control of troops and the structure of interaction between various types of troops will become clear. It is clear that at such speeds and with such a short decision-making time, all control should be based on a LAN with a powerful data processing center in the command center. And then you need to determine what weapons will be needed to solve problems, the composition and number of units, etc. etc. Do we have such a well-developed concept?
    1. Letnab
      Letnab 28 October 2013 16: 09
      0
      and what is there to think! Well, there will be an analogue of airborne divisions, the essence will not change if the name of the Airborne Forces remains, one way or another, delivery by air is ensured, the landing is from helicopters, that from airplanes is still called landing .. And according to the article, it will be seen that these will be quick reaction forces. And certainly the concept of application for them will be developed, if not already developed.
      1. SIT
        SIT 28 October 2013 16: 34
        +1
        Quote: Letnab
        And certainly the concept of application for them will be developed, if not already developed.

        I fully admit that this is exactly the way it is. Only it should be the other way around - tasks, the concept of use, and then what troops, what forces, what weapons. If you adjust the concept to what it is, it may well turn out that then you will have to solve the problems with orders such as defend at any cost, I forbid the withdrawal, give it to the tribunal, etc. etc.
        1. matross
          matross 28 October 2013 17: 42
          0
          Quote: SIT
          tasks then have to be solved by orders such as defend at all costs, I forbid withdrawal, give to the tribunal, etc. etc.

          Does anyone doubt this? This is Russia ... we have no heroism of subordinates because of the gouging of commanders in any way ...
  14. t-95-70
    t-95-70 28 October 2013 18: 25
    +1
    Yes, how many stonotiks you have, no matter what is being done, everything is bad. The main thing is to cheat everything,
  15. The comment was deleted.
  16. freedom2013
    freedom2013 28 October 2013 21: 15
    0
    At the same time, the company’s army aviation and a unit of unmanned aerial vehicles will be part of all regiments.

    The thing is undeniably necessary - BUT !!! What is this company of army aviation. I know the link, I know the squadron, I know the regiment, I don’t know the company. Same questions on the UAV unit.
  17. Alekseev
    Alekseev 28 October 2013 21: 51
    0
    Airborne as a quick reaction force?
    Of course, this is their task. That's why airmobile units are created, with lighter weapons, a more compact staff, staffed (should be) by contract.
    But in order for the Rapid Response Force based on the Airborne Forces to be able to carry out their tasks, both the Rapid Reaction Force in transport and combat aviation, and the capable bodies of the VOSO are needed, and leaking, leaking, leaking ...
  18. Stalinets
    Stalinets 29 October 2013 04: 45
    +1
    Airborne Forces have always been such forces .. yes
  19. Marek Rozny
    Marek Rozny 30 October 2013 13: 30
    0
    I understand that in Russia, something like the Airmobile Forces (AB) of Kazakhstan will be done on the basis of the Airborne Forces.
    In Kazakhstan, AB (ex-Airborne Forces) is the lion's share of the republic's armed forces (6 deployed brigades. For comparison, there are 10 ordinary motorized rifle brigades). They are the reserve of the Supreme Commander.
    They are intended for:
    • prompt response to crisis situations with sharp changes in the military-political situation;
    • fulfillment of tasks that suddenly arise in order to protect the national interests of the state and strengthen the grouping of troops in the operational areas;

    They can take part in fulfilling the international obligations of the Republic of Kazakhstan to maintain peace and stability both in the country and abroad.
    They are kept in constant readiness for transfer to threatened directions or to areas for fulfilling suddenly arising missions both in peacetime and in wartime.

    They include: air assault units, units and formations, as well as special units, units of rear and technical support.
  20. malikszh
    malikszh 24 August 2014 22: 26
    0
    The Ussuri brigade needs to deploy a division since there is no airborne unit in the east.