Council of the military industrial complex: the share of modern weapons in the VKS - about 40%

The share of modern technology in video conferencing is currently 38-40%, RIA News a message from a member of the expert council of the military-industrial commission Viktor Murakhovsky.




“To date, the task of having 30% of modern weapons by the end of 2015, has already been exceeded by the Russian Aerospace Forces. In general, there we are talking about the parameter 38-43% of the total volume of the range of weapons and military and special equipment of this type of armed forces ",
declared Murakhovsky.

According to the previously adopted rearmament program, by 2020, the share of new equipment in the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation should reach 70%.

The agency’s reference: “A new type of armed forces took over combat duty in Russia from August 1 — the Aerospace Forces (AUF) were created in the country, formed by the merger of the Aerospace Defense forces and the Air Force. The command of the integrated military structure was entrusted to Colonel-General Viktor Bondarev, who previously headed the Air Force. ”
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

35 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. sever.56 20 September 2015 12: 43 New
    • 13
    • 0
    +13
    "The Russian economy is torn to shreds" ... It seems so was the loser in the life of Abama?
    Oh well...!!!
    1. Kostyar 20 September 2015 12: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      We will continue to look, spring will show who heck where ...
      1. Arh
        Arh 20 September 2015 13: 28 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        How healthy is Russia going forward !!!
        1. subbtin.725 20 September 2015 15: 23 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: Arh
          How healthy is Russia going forward !!!

          May God grant that the prophecies of Wanga come true.
      2. Nevsky_ZU 20 September 2015 14: 29 New
        • 4
        • 0
        +4
        People, fresh, military acceptance:

    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Lord of the Sith 20 September 2015 12: 59 New
      • 4
      • 0
      +4
      Quote: lonely
      The goals are of course set. But it is one thing to set goals, and it is another thing to achieve it. They can do what they say, time will tell. We will live, we will see.

      P.S. A new technology refers to a technique that is made from scratch. Overhaul technical equipment is not considered a new modern technology.

      It talks about modern, I’m wondering what they consider modern - is the equipment made in the last 15 years or in the last 5?
      1. alone 20 September 2015 13: 08 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        Greetings Sergey! I don’t even know what to say. In theory, even if the technique has been done for 5 years, it’s difficult to consider this technique modern. Science does not stand still and does not wait for officials to do what they promise. What is considered a novelty today, tomorrow is already considered old fashioned.
        1. Tanais 20 September 2015 13: 30 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Quote: lonely
          Greetings Sergey! I don’t even know what to say. In theory, even if the technique has been done for 5 years, it’s difficult to consider this technique modern. Science does not stand still and does not wait for officials to do what they promise. What is considered a novelty today, tomorrow is already considered old fashioned.

          And please name the state, which can afford every 5 years to write off "junk" and put into operation new items?

          Can you tell me how many years, the United States, with their capabilities, did not renew their air force’s fleet with “new products,” but only modernized the “old stuff”?

          Despite the fact that their new products (F-22, F-35) have very vague prospects, they still have to go this way ...
          1. alone 20 September 2015 15: 04 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: Tanais
            And please name the state, which can afford every 5 years to write off "junk" and put into operation new items?

            nobody writes them off, but they’re not called a supernova
            1. Vladimirets 20 September 2015 15: 22 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              Quote: lonely
              do not call a super novelty

              Not a single supernova gets into the troops in such a short time.
            2. Tanais 20 September 2015 18: 38 New
              • 1
              • 0
              +1
              Quote: lonely
              nobody writes them off, but they’re not called a supernova

              I totally agree! Like the F-117, outdated and worthless, already at the beginning of its design ...
    4. onix757 20 September 2015 13: 29 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      "The Ministry of Finance proposes to reduce military expenditures for the budget for 10 by less than 2016%. The closed portion of expenditures, including spending on national defense, will be reduced in 2016 by 14,6% compared to the current year’s budget, to 3,2 trillion rubles."
    5. Terner38 20 September 2015 17: 56 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      it’s our happiness that China does not refuse us carbide tools and other “consumables”. Otherwise, the entire defense industry would sit in one place, since there wasn’t one of its kind and was not expected.
      1. ssn18 20 September 2015 19: 32 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        We have enough of a hard alloy and a quick-cut, and it is domestic that is used in special production.
  2. sv68 20 September 2015 12: 44 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    they cling to fall consider ...
    1. MIKHAN 20 September 2015 13: 05 New
      • 17
      • 0
      +17
      Hurry sons ... We went through this for you in the 41st!
  3. alone 20 September 2015 12: 46 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    The goals are of course set. But it is one thing to set goals, and it is another thing to achieve it. They can do what they say, time will tell. We will live, we will see.

    P.S. A new technology refers to a technique that is made from scratch. Overhaul technical equipment is not considered a new modern technology.
    1. Oleg14774 20 September 2015 13: 08 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: lonely
      Overhauled technical equipment is not considered a new modern technology.

      On the one hand, you are 100% right, but on the other hand, if you take for example the SU35 and the deeply modernized MIG 31 and TU 22, as well as TU 160. Add the T-90, what can I say about this? The fact that this is not new, yes, but it is already modern!
      1. alone 20 September 2015 13: 17 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        T-90 17th modification of the T-72. Those planes that you list, the Su-35 is a very deeply modernized Su-27 and they have been in service for a long time. I will give you a simple example. Take the T-34 and start to stuff it with modern equipment. And what, it will be considered a modern weapon? or instant-21?
        1. Oleg14774 20 September 2015 13: 31 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          Quote: lonely
          And what, it will be considered a modern weapon? or instant-21?

          Yes, I agree with you, but if you take Amer’s F16-15-18 and Abrams and compare with what I have listed, it’s still better than the T34 and MIG21. Moreover, they themselves are not inferior to NATO, but with modern modernization, superior. In addition, there is a country's economy and cooperation between enterprises. There were no problems with the Union!
        2. MIKHAN 20 September 2015 13: 32 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          stir up the lonely again ... hi
          1. alone 20 September 2015 14: 21 New
            • 2
            • 0
            +2
            Quote: MIKHAN
            stir up the lonely again ...

            Well, yes, of course. I had to put photos of veterans here, make a fuss about you, make money on this rating))) laughing
    2. Tanais 20 September 2015 13: 49 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: lonely
      P.S. A new technology refers to a technique that is made from scratch. Overhaul technical equipment is not considered a new modern technology.

      And built on the basis of the "classic glider" Su-27go, the new Su-35?

      They are made from scratch, but on the basis of, as you put it, “junk” ...

      And is there a profound modernization of the "old", "B / U" gliders, with equipping them with new more modern engines, in general, avionics, avionics and armament ...

      This is what you call? In appearance, it’s “junk-junk” ...
      1. alone 20 September 2015 14: 20 New
        • -4
        • 0
        -4
        Quote: Tanais
        nor are they made from scratch, but on the base, as you put it, “junk” ...

        I didn’t say that the Su-27 is old. But the base of the Su-35 is an airplane that has been in service for at least 25-30 years. To call it a novelty and ultra-modern weapons is a hoax. Do you want to be deceived? Yes, please.

        And is there a profound modernization of the "old", "B / U" gliders, with equipping them with new more modern engines, in general, avionics, avionics and armament ...


        Put on the T-34 the latest SLA, active protection. Fill it with night vision devices, thermal imagers. If you consider it to be a modern weapon, then we have no reason to argue
        1. Vladimirets 20 September 2015 15: 25 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: lonely
          Put the latest LMS, active protection on the T-34. Fill it with night vision devices, thermal imagers.

          You cannot do this, why exaggerate? There is the concept of a resource or the potential of modernization. And at the Su-35 and Su-27 even gliders are different.
        2. sandrmur76 20 September 2015 16: 33 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          In a dispute, true is born. laughing There is simply an economic component. There is a technique that is still obsolete in the drawings. But the inherent potential of modernization is not an empty place. If the Su-30cm makes 18 months, then this is not a 3D printer to make changes to each new model. It will go to the Armada and T50 troops and will be considered the newest for many years.
        3. Amurets 20 September 2015 19: 03 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Lonely! Please answer, we have a new tank design that is SUPER-PUPER unsurpassed or a glider circuit SUPER-STAR. There is no modern tank coming from Renault FT-17, and the monoplane circuit is from Mozhaisky’s plane. So when you invent something fundamentally new, here then you are orientating. And now there is a modernization of the schemes proposed at the end of the 19th at the beginning of the 20th century. So forward invent new schemes that will become classics.
          1. alone 20 September 2015 19: 18 New
            • -1
            • 0
            -1
            Quote: Amurets
            Please answer, we have that the new tank scheme appeared SUPER-SUPER unsurpassed or the glider scheme SUPER-STAR. There is no modern tank coming from Renault FT-17, and the monoplane scheme from Mozhaisky airplane. That's when you invent something fundamentally new, and then orite. And now there is a modernization of the schemes proposed at the end of the 19th at the beginning of the 20th century. So forward invent new schemes that will become classics.


            I'm not screaming)) I write)) you yourself say that the foundation of all this was laid in the 19th century. The general scheme is the same)) But the conversation about what to consider the T-90 as a modern weapon does not fit into any gates. when fifth-generation airplanes are put into service in series, then we can talk about modern weapons. If you don’t upgrade the MIG-29, it will not become a fifth-generation airplane, but just a 4th-generation airplane with several pluses. Things should be called by their proper names, but not wasted in vain.
            1. Amurets 20 September 2015 19: 35 New
              • 3
              • 0
              +3
              All these generations were invented by journalists and political strategists. We were taught; if a weapon meets the tasks to be performed, if it is reliable and reliable, it is a modern weapon. And there is no need for generations of formats and other rubbish. Because until a new weapon scheme appears, ammunition built on new principles, all these new products will be modernization and modification.
  4. Alexander 3 20 September 2015 12: 48 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Want peace, get ready for war.
    1. dorz 20 September 2015 12: 53 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      There will be no veterans of the Third World War.
      1. alone 20 September 2015 13: 10 New
        • -4
        • 0
        -4
        Quote: dorz
        There will be no veterans of the Third World War.

        Exactly half of the sitting members of the forum hope not only to survive, but also to become rulers of the ruins)))
        1. MIKHAN 20 September 2015 13: 36 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Quote: lonely
          Quote: dorz
          There will be no veterans of the Third World War.

          Exactly half of the sitting members of the forum hope not only to survive, but also to become rulers of the ruins)))

          ,,,,,,,,,,,, Well, you are bent! And will Azerbaijan finally capture Karabakh? bully
          1. alone 20 September 2015 19: 20 New
            • 0
            • 0
            0
            Quote: MIKHAN
            Well, you are bent! And will Azerbaijan finally capture Karabakh?


            And what about Vitaly? and where does Azerbaijan? Oh yes, how is it with Mars)))? You were going to conquer Mars)))
  5. Tusv 20 September 2015 12: 55 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    What will happen if we cross the air defense, the air force and the nuclear shield. And the Americans are all missile defense and missile defense. At this point in time, Americans are manned space missile defense too ...
    1. FID
      FID 20 September 2015 13: 49 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      So: C-400 / 500, Hangar, Mace, Yars, etc. (you can continue) this is 40% novelty, but what about airplanes?
      1. Tanais 20 September 2015 13: 57 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: SSI
        So: C-400 / 500, Hangar, Mace, Yars, etc. (you can continue) this is 40% novelty, but what about airplanes?

        Well it turns out, sho no sho laughing fellow
  6. IAlex 20 September 2015 13: 01 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Things are going very slowly ...
  7. iliitchitch 20 September 2015 13: 10 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    We are moving correctly. One T-50, figuratively speaking, will pull "a million innovative pans with CNC", and not vice versa, as one Judah spotted, calling betrayal a conversion. We also went through this, but we’ll pick up speed ...
  8. moskowit 20 September 2015 13: 11 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Unusually, we veterans of the Soviet Army, the abbreviation VKS, do not immediately realize. For a hundred years, the Air Force has been familiar and understandable to everyone ... Well, space, so space ...
    1. boroda64 20 September 2015 13: 26 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      .
      - yeah ...
      / by the will of God
      and heaven
      - got to serve - I'm in the Air Force ... /
    2. MIKHAN 20 September 2015 13: 44 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: moskowit
      Unusually, we veterans of the Soviet Army, the abbreviation VKS, do not immediately realize. For a hundred years, the Air Force has been familiar and understandable to everyone ... Well, space, so space ...

      All things in space will be ... These are the things! hi
      1. Amurets 20 September 2015 19: 22 New
        • 1
        • 0
        +1
        There was aviation for 3000km / h. And airplanes with a flight altitude of 30000m. Well, so what. Where did the slogan Higher-all, Faster-all, real remained Farther-all. The answer to this will be the same; expediency. Why is this necessary? Speed ​​for 3000 km / h is a thermal barrier . The altitude for 20000 meters has its own problems. And the tasks of the Air Force and VKS are completely different. Why do not I understand? Maybe to the next mess?
    3. KnightRider 20 September 2015 14: 39 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: moskowit
      Well cosmic, so cosmic ...

      Aerospace. In the history of Russia there were already such troops smile Well, the abbreviation of the Air Force has not gone away, and is present, for example, in the names of the air armies - the 6th Air Force and Air Defense Army, for example, and on the keels of aircraft
  9. iliitchitch 20 September 2015 13: 40 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: moskowit
    Unusually, we veterans of the Soviet Army, the abbreviation VKS, do not immediately realize. For a hundred years, the Air Force has been familiar and understandable to everyone ... Well, space, so space ...


    I think the 6th generation of fighters will fly on the 1st space (7.8km / s). So we renamed it on time, we’ll have time to get used to it.
  10. roskot 20 September 2015 13: 56 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Give the five-year plan in the army in four years !!!
    1. Kos_kalinki9 20 September 2015 15: 31 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Stakhanova to help you.
  11. 31rus 20 September 2015 18: 27 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The numbers are a tempting thing, and interest so in general, there’s nothing to earn the conveyors at full capacity, we’ll open new shops and everything will be fine, the Ministry of Finance will reduce it as a brake on development and everything will work out, if only without hurray-patriotism, everything has its time accurately and wisely
  12. Vlad5307 20 September 2015 18: 49 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quote: Terner38
    it’s our happiness that China does not refuse us carbide tools and other “consumables”. Otherwise, the entire defense industry would sit in one place, since there wasn’t one of its kind and was not expected.

    You are wrong, the USSR had its carbide tools, though the EBN, with its corrupt young reformers, almost destroyed this industry. There are now such manufactures, but the cost of their tools is more expensive than Chinese, although they are not inferior in quality, and sometimes surpass Chinese counterparts. The whole question is in the domestic economic policy of the government of the Russian Federation - domestic credit is very expensive, and the exchange rate is unjustifiably overvalued and it is regulated not by the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank, but by the IMF. sad
    1. Amurets 20 September 2015 19: 44 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      I would say this, the quality of the Chinese instrument is much inferior to the Russian one. I mean the hard and superhard instrument. I’m not going to the financial side. Here you are right.
  13. lopvlad 21 September 2015 03: 10 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    It was ridiculed by the opinion of “experts” that this new technique was developed from scratch. Zero to zero will be zero. The time for wonderful discoveries was that the invention took place in 70-80 years. And the point is not only in the capabilities of designers but also in the capabilities of industry and science .
    That is, stupidly, the industry may not be ready to produce what you came up with in series.
    Modern weapons are those weapons that ensure the conduct of a successful war in the present and the next decade.