Military Review

"Ground operations" does not happen

66
Yes, and a massive strike can not be done by the squadron


Recent news, appeared on the tapes of news agencies: "France opposed ground operations in Syria." It must be said that lately all sorts of false critics and false oracles have a lot of copies broken around this very "ground operation". Some pseudo-experts also call it a "land operation."

Uninformed assistants put this incorrect term even in the speeches of some politicians. Unfortunately, among these advisers there is not one who owned at least three of the established military terminology. Or he knew which books to look into.

In fact, in the theory of operational art (there is such) there are no "ground", as well as "land operations". And can not be. And what happens then?

"Ground operations" does not happenLet's start from the beginning - with the definition. It is still useful to us. An operation is a set of simultaneous and consecutive battles, battles, strikes and maneuvers of troops (forces) coordinated and interconnected by purpose, tasks, place and time, conducted according to a single plan and plan for solving strategic, operational or operational-tactical tasks in the theater a) military action, strategic (operational) direction or in a certain vast area (zone) in a fixed period of time. Operations are conducted by associations of one or several types of armed forces and differ in scale, types and time.

So, operations are combined-arms, all-fleet, joint and independent.

In relation to Syria, we can speak only about the hypothetical necessity of a combined-arms operation (that is, front-line, army, corps or equal to them). And it is more correct to speak not about the operation, but about the deployment in this country of full-scale military operations involving all types of armed forces and armed forces.

Combined-arms operations are organized and carried out by combined-arms unions with the participation of various types of armed forces, types of troops and special forces under the leadership of the combined-arms command for the simultaneous solution of interrelated strategic and operational tasks. If someone is once again going to talk about the "ground operation" in Syria, it still makes sense to be guided by the theory of operational art.

One more question. Can a regiment of one of the armed forces, for example, conduct an operation? The answer in this case is only negative. The regiment of operations by definition is not able to. The regimental commander can only decide on the fighting. In the extreme case, the military unit may take part in systematic hostilities.

Operations are carried out only by associations of the branches of the armed forces. In particular, earlier in the Air Force of the USSR there were operational formations - air armies. For example, at one time in the combat composition of the 16th Air Army of the Group of Soviet Forces in Germany there were more than forty aviation regiments. Each regiment has 36 combat aircraft plus six UB - combat training (twin). And two trained crews for each plane. That is, in one air army, there were more than 1500 combat aircraft. This operational formation could indeed conduct an air operation. By the way, the USSR Air Force had twenty-one air forces. Now it is impossible to believe in it.

Any operation is limited in time. Say, frontal offensive can be held for 20 – 25 day. Then the resources released for the operation simply end. And the forces too (both moral and physical - at least try not to sleep for the first three days). Air operation lasts for about five to seven days. A certain resource is allocated for it. Say, before the 20 regimental departures.

Finally, during the operation, at least operational-tactical tasks must be solved. For example, neither a division nor a regiment of operational tactical tasks can be solved by definition. This is beyond their combat capabilities.

So, carefully, comrades, as my full namesake Mikhail Mikhailovich Zhvanetsky says. And to know the difference between a medical operation and a strategic operation in the continental theater of operations.

Now about the bumps. News agencies spread the news: “Last night, the French Air Force dealt a massive blow to the positions of the Islamic State group in the Syrian city of Ar Raqqah. 10 fighters who dropped 20 bombs took part in the operation. ” I must say: everything is wrong here, except for the fact of the strike.

Let's start with the strike itself. Strikes can be: in scale: 1) strategic, 2) operational, 3) tactical. Depending on the means used: 1) nuclear, 2) fire (rocket, rocket-artillery, aviation), 3) strikes by troops (forces). By the number of involved means and affected objects: 1) massive, 2) group, 3) single.

That is, the French Air Force launched an air strike. In scale - tactical. 20 bombs do not pull to strike a strategic or operational scale.

Now we understand what a massive blow.

Is 10 Aircraft Much or Little? Pulls this number on a massive blow or not? As one of my teachers at the Military Command Air Defense Academy said: “Does one hair on one's head mean a lot or a little? Probably not enough. And in the soup? Probably a lot. Therefore, criteria are needed. ”

So, a massive strike is delivered only (I emphasize: only) by the air army (that is, the operational force of the Air Force). Anything lower (air corps, division) is already a group blow.

Al-Raqqah was bombed not by an air army, but only by a squadron (10 aircraft, in truth, do not reach as much in number as the aircraft).

As my other teacher used to say, a senior teacher at the Department of Operational Art at the Military Academy of the General Staff at the very first lesson: “Learning of operational art is impossible. That's the art. But I am obliged to teach you the basics. ”

And in fact, in fact. There is a musical notation. Not everyone can write symphonies. But you must master musical notation.

So you need to know the terminology, if it is useful to talk about operations and strikes. But recently, pseudo-experts and false experts have divorced us a dime a dozen. They learned how to speak fluently in a television camera and skillfully hesitate along with the general line of the party. And the basics of operational art and instruction in operational training have not been learned. And how could they know if many false experts did not even command battalion companies, not to mention the service at the operational and operational-strategic level headquarters.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/28163
66 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Teberii
    Teberii 26 November 2015 10: 29
    +1
    There is no need to send troops to Syria.
    1. SS68SS
      SS68SS 26 November 2015 10: 40
      +8
      Quote: Teberii
      There is no need to send troops to Syria.


      There are enough of their (local) forces, they only need to be well supported from the air and sea, as well as information and weapons.

      vvp2412 (2) RU Today, 10:32
      it seems that the author decided to ponder his knowledge of terminology ...
      It reminded me of a "Trudovik" at school ....
      The "skin" is hanging on your dick ... and this is sandpaper ..
      they "skin" only in the pockets in the entrance, and iron them with sandpaper ....
      "Hole" in your ass, and this is a technological hole .....


      I fully agree with the article. It’s not necessary to get smart ...
      1. Baikonur
        Baikonur 26 November 2015 10: 44
        +3
        Whenever I hear “ground operation” (“land operation”) I think that it is the Americans who introduced these terms to regulate the voltage! For the people, taxpayers! Like this is the worst thing that can be. And bombing is more precise, more modern, etc. And if someone introduces a land military, then hysteria is the invaders, invaders, killers! And they are a democracy, a struggle with a dictator, a tyrant! That's all!
        1. Temples
          Temples 26 November 2015 12: 05
          0
          They only learned to talk in a television camera and skillfully hesitate along with the party’s general line.

          This is already at the genetic level, probably in the so-called "elite".
          If time was calmer and GDP with humor, then a new batch could be put together and timed.
          To fix the records of the movement of the "elite" from one party to another.
          TRP for the functionary.
          Author PLUS. Thank.
      2. hartlend
        hartlend 26 November 2015 11: 24
        +4
        This is a sign of our time - it is customary to be stupid, and when there is nothing to say, say "don't be smart." The author told what they teach at the military academy, you are unlikely to find out about this elsewhere.
      3. dauria
        dauria 26 November 2015 11: 29
        0
        I fully agree with the article. It’s not necessary to get smart ...


        Okay to you ... The waves fell like a swift jack. Sometimes in the "Zvezda" under the Soviet regime, such bloopers were published that just hold on. Who teaches them now? Make a discount ... smile
      4. shuhartred
        shuhartred 26 November 2015 12: 53
        +3
        Quote: SS68SS
        I fully agree with the article. It’s not necessary to get smart ...

        In my opinion, the author finds fault with the words. The overwhelming majority of viewers do not have a military education and everything that the author said for them is a meaningless set of words, which in turn requires an explanation on the "fingers". And who needs it? I have no military education, but when they talk from TV about a ground operation (no matter how much this phrase jarred on the author's ear) I at least understand what they mean. And then the combined arms, tactical, etc. straight apocalypse is drawn in the imagination. Millions of infantry, thousands of tanks and aircraft. Make allowances for the military illiteracy of the majority.
        PS I warn you right away, I think that comments in the style of "nothing to do in VO if you don't understand military terminology" are incorrect. The site is not only for warriors.
    2. 79807420129
      79807420129 26 November 2015 10: 41
      10
      It doesn’t matter what it’s called, it’s important to defeat the barmaley, the French are certainly more PR, but we do not have an air army, but it works many times more efficiently than the whole Western coalition.
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. sovetskyturist
      sovetskyturist 26 November 2015 10: 44
      +3
      at home they are waging a war on terror .. Europe is turning into a "paramilitary concentration camp." After the attacks on Paris, Orwell's times come to Europe? ...... http: //www.newscom.md/eng/evropa-prevrashaetsya- v-voeniziro
      vannij
      -kontce
      ntratcionnij-lager_.html
    5. Tor5
      Tor5 26 November 2015 11: 42
      +3
      Well, I think this little educational program was useful to us ("generals" and "marshals").
    6. The comment was deleted.
    7. Max_Bauder
      Max_Bauder 26 November 2015 11: 43
      +2
      The author, of course, wrote brilliantly from the point of view of the theory of operational art. All true, there is no "ground operation". But bad luck, there are such hostilities in life that do not fall into any theories and terminology (hybrid war?) The VKS operation, according to the author, does not fall under any operation, because there are no more than 150 aircraft involved, for various purposes, assault, fighter, bomber aircraft, other types of troops, rear support, construction, marines, tanks, armored personnel carriers, air defense and soon there will be even a Strategic Missile Forces. So this is just fighting? no matter how it is, they manage such a small collection of types and types of troops from the point of view of military science, you cannot name it otherwise, because the formation and formations include a large number of one or different types of troops, the Minister of Defense himself controls, through subordinates, staff officers who still command the operation, based on the objectives of the tasks, this is a large-scale war. So we can call it an operation, but not in the sense in which the original meaning is laid. This is normal, before they attacked on a wide front, now battles are local in nature, where one company acting in contact with the enemy should have representatives of almost all types of ground forces, the soldiers themselves on armored vehicles, scouts on ATVs, mobile mortars on wheels like tulips, several tanks for reinforcement + a couple of BMPTs, snipers, artillery spotters in the rear, a signalman with army aviation, attack helicopters and rescue mi-8. In short, everything is as Napoleon did. One military unit should be a miniature army, with its own infantry, cavalry and artillery, without dependence on a large army (division, brigade, corps, front, etc.) army in the army.

      PySy. rather, this term was invented by journalists (possibly from the lips of high-ranking government officials) so that for ordinary people it would be clear that of all the types of troops except the Air Force (VKS), the other two, the Ground Forces and the Navy, would not participate. Although the latter began to take an active part. And the Mi-8 and Mi-24 helicopters belong to the army aviation, it is possible that the Mi-28th will also arrive.
      1. sso-xnumx
        sso-xnumx 26 November 2015 12: 03
        0
        Quote: Max_Bauder
        So this is just fighting?

        I'm sorry, but this is exactly fighting! Now, if the Armed Forces of the Syrian Republic, under the cover of the Russian Aerospace Forces, began a large-scale offensive in a certain direction, for example, towards the Turkish border, displacing and destroying the igil groups located there and securing this territory for the Syrian administration, reinforcing it with bayonets and explosive barrels (in our definition) , with a complete cleaning of the possible agents of Assad's opponents, then it would be an operation. And what we have today is "local battles" ....
      2. Riv
        Riv 26 November 2015 12: 49
        +1
        How do you know how the General Staff evaluates our group in Syria? Maybe just like a union? After all, a regiment also does not have to have exactly forty-two aircraft. There may well be two or three aircraft, and a regiment can even conduct military operations. The same with parts of other military branches. In combat conditions, the company that the sergeant commands can remain from the payroll of the company. And this sergeant will directly report to the division commander. It is possible (although very unlikely) a situation in which the sergeant, who took command of the unit, will give orders to officers sent to the posts of platoon commanders. But the senior lieutenant, the company commander, in which platoon commanders colonels and lieutenant colonels is the most normal occurrence.

        So initial military training is certainly a good thing, but there are enough miracles in life. And "land operation" is an American term. They have ground forces, probably also ground operations. What is the point of comparing terms from different statutes?
      3. The comment was deleted.
  2. avvg
    avvg 26 November 2015 10: 31
    +5
    Not everything is so simple, Victory is never easily given. Everything must be done wisely. Defending Syria unequivocally, we protect ourselves.
    1. Mr shrek
      Mr shrek 26 November 2015 10: 55
      +2
      Quote: avvg
      Not everything is so simple, Victory is never easily given. Everything must be done wisely. Defending Syria unequivocally, we protect ourselves.

      That is true. All this radical evil should be like a purulent acne, to the nail.
      By the way, the bearded with the Turks have already gone too far, scraped to the fullest.
    2. sovetskyturist
      sovetskyturist 26 November 2015 10: 58
      +3
      http://maxpark.com/community/politic/content/4838733 Кому служит Турция?
      "The crash of the military plane is a 'very dangerous' escalation and is probably carried out with the permission of NATO and Washington," added Daniel Patrick Welch.

      “All of this is at the service of sociopaths in Washington who, for some unknown reason, are eager to fight Russia,” Welch told Press TV on Tuesday.
      He noted that Turkish President Erdogan was “completely at the service” of the United States and supported terrorist groups (ISIS).

      “The trouble is that Erdogan has been completely at the service of the empire and ISIS for many years. So this is a very, very, very dangerous thing, this is a crazy thing. ”
      Behind any throne there is something more than a king - you always need to look who and zakam stands
  3. nazar_0753
    nazar_0753 26 November 2015 10: 32
    15
    I see nothing but the author's indignation over the terminology, and therefore he decided to dig into the words. Though zaminusuyte, this is my opinion. But he didn’t give an assessment to the article - it was still interesting to read
    1. Andrea
      Andrea 26 November 2015 10: 53
      +5
      In fact, he rudely hints that amateurs, if not illiterate, are completely out of place.
      The press can be forgiven, for the sake of a red word, they will not spare their father, although they must understand, in a word, they can be killed (there are also illiterates, a dime a dozen)
      But our generals, not ours, are simply obliged to know the terminology; there must be blood.
    2. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 26 November 2015 10: 58
      11
      The people! Why are you outraged? Listening to an intelligent person is useful for broadening one's horizons. And thanks to the author. hi
      1. Andrea
        Andrea 26 November 2015 11: 13
        0
        Who would argue ... hi
    3. Koshak
      Koshak 26 November 2015 11: 18
      0
      Quote: nazar_0753
      I see nothing but the author's indignation over the terminology, and therefore he decided to dig into the words. Though zaminusuyte, this is my opinion. But he didn’t give an assessment to the article - it was still interesting to read

      I agree. The main thing is that everyone understands what is meant when they talk about "ground operations" or "air strikes." And the rest is a show-off of the author, who decided to show off his knowledge.
  4. vvp2412
    vvp2412 26 November 2015 10: 32
    14
    it seems that the author decided to ponder his knowledge of terminology ...
    It reminded me of a "Trudovik" at school ....
    The "skin" is hanging on your dick ... and this is sandpaper ..
    they "skin" only in the pockets in the entrance, and iron them with sandpaper ....
    "Hole" in your ass, and this is a technological hole .....

    And what is the salt? The fact that not everyone is required to know the terminology, the main thing is that they understand each other.
    In physics there are so many different letters .... And in principle, you can designate the strength or weight yourself as you want, the main thing is to know the essence of the formula - what to multiply or divide by ....
    Do not shine with your knowledge is not the case ...
    1. demo
      demo 26 November 2015 10: 41
      +5
      You did not understand.
      Anyone who has read the article to the end can safely put on the shoulders of the shoulder straps of the second lieutenant (reserve) and continue to smartly comment on the article.
      So hello to the author and a plus sign.
      Enlightened.
      Well done.
      By the way.
      Those with a higher rank may not worry.
      They will not be lowered.
      1. hydrox
        hydrox 26 November 2015 11: 10
        +3
        The author decided to teach a lesson to the brain-brained (but brainless!) Pen sharks, and indeed, these magazines have already gotten their illiteracy!
        1. Per se.
          Per se. 26 November 2015 13: 41
          0
          Quote: hydrox
          The author decided to teach a lesson to the brain-brained (but brainless!) Pen sharks, and indeed, these magazines have already gotten their illiteracy!
          What's the lesson? For children at school, clever pedants write textbooks on the same mathematics as if they write not for children, but to shine with their terminology. Why this author's quirk, what other operations do not exist? Come on, "operation" more surgeons here will discuss what an operation is and what is picking in the nose. The special services also conduct operations, why bother with concepts, if an article is written for the public, or a statement is made, this should be clear to ordinary people. Victory in Syria is important, and not what the military actions will be called if we lose, what the teacher - senior lecturer of the Department of Operational Art at the Military Academy of the General Staff said there will not make it easier.
    2. lukewarm
      lukewarm 26 November 2015 10: 57
      +6
      Quote: vvp2412
      that not everyone is required to know the terminology

      And if you call yourself an expert - you still need to. Alas! And why did you dislike the Trudovik? Roughly, but intelligibly taught you to use terminology.
      Quote: vvp2412
      Do not shine with your knowledge is not the case ...

      Who identified the case or not?
  5. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 26 November 2015 10: 33
    +5
    Author! Exit the office already. smile

    Time has not stopped. You tell us more
    military theory of the times of the 1 World ...
    1. Good me
      Good me 26 November 2015 10: 42
      +4
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Time has not stopped. You tell us more
      military theory of the times of the 1 World ...


      There is also an extremely fascinating story of the Punic Wars — conflicts between Rome and Carthage (264 — 146 BC) yes
    2. mojohed2012
      mojohed2012 26 November 2015 10: 44
      +8
      Not Well, this terminology needs to be known even to the layman who wants, at least a little, to understand the news field. So the French proudly attacked Daesh with 10 airplanes, so what?
      Is ISIS dead? No. The author simply, as I understand it, wants to convey to us: "The attacks of 10 carrier-based aircraft of France, even in the system, are a drop in the ocean and will not give any strategic or operational effect, but only tactical advantages, but to whom? Assad - no, There is no "free Syrian army" either, because it is part of ISIS ISIS. Therefore, it should be concluded that these attacks by the French on Raqqa and other places are Hollande's propaganda reaction to the terrorist attacks in Paris. even before the end of his term in office: "And what will our president do in response to terrorist attacks?"
    3. Moore
      Moore 26 November 2015 11: 43
      0
      There is nothing to do with it. A certain headquarters culture was not only during the WWII, but also in the army of Ancient Rome. Why did it suddenly take to drop to the level of unicellular now?
      To follow the fursenki-type idea that in view of the general stupidity of the population, it is necessary to be simpler and write a parachute with "y", and count coffee as "it"?
  6. venaya
    venaya 26 November 2015 10: 35
    +3
    Indeed, with definitions we always suffer, sometimes we come to the point that a clear victory is called some kind of slurred defeat. In general: everything is relative. And it is necessary to win, and in all cases.
    1. hydrox
      hydrox 26 November 2015 11: 01
      +2
      Take an example from kaklov: they have only two concepts: zrad and overpower.
      And nothing, they understand each other ... laughing
  7. 787nkx
    787nkx 26 November 2015 10: 36
    +1
    Blow is not a blow.
    The author himself swims in military terminology.
    And the media (except specialized) should give out inf. in a language that the reader understands.
    The average person is generally clear, the professional - too.
    Minus.
    1. Army soldier2
      Army soldier2 26 November 2015 13: 50
      0
      I'll intercede for Misha Khodorenko. He is a competent officer. But, there is one BUT. Occupying the position of head of group 1 of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff, Misha began to "leak" official information to the press. He was caught and expelled from the army by the Chief of the General Staff, General of the Army A.V. Kvashnin. Check out his official biography. He just graduated from the Military Academy of the General Staff and entered the reserve at the age of 46. After his dismissal, he offered his former comrades in the service to sell him information, but did not find understanding. But Misha harbored an offense. Often in his articles under pseudonyms he tried to distort the facts to prove the incompetence of the leadership of the State Educational Institution and the General Staff.
      And so, he's so smart.
    2. Army soldier2
      Army soldier2 26 November 2015 13: 50
      +1
      I'll intercede for Misha Khodorenko. He is a competent officer. But, there is one BUT. Occupying the position of head of group 1 of the Main Operations Directorate of the General Staff, Misha began to "leak" official information to the press. He was caught and expelled from the army by the Chief of the General Staff, General of the Army A.V. Kvashnin. Check out his official biography. He just graduated from the Military Academy of the General Staff and entered the reserve at the age of 46. After his dismissal, he offered his former comrades in the service to sell him information, but did not find understanding. But Misha harbored an offense. Often in his articles under pseudonyms he tried to distort the facts to prove the incompetence of the leadership of the State Educational Institution and the General Staff.
      And so, he's so smart.
  8. Vladimir71
    Vladimir71 26 November 2015 10: 39
    0
    The paths are open for volunteers, all the more so with the help in the supply of weapons, everything is in order, but troops should not be officially introduced
  9. papont64
    papont64 26 November 2015 10: 39
    +2
    Until the eggs of the Russian soldier hang over the enemy’s trench, it’s too early to talk about victory.
    1. Mr shrek
      Mr shrek 26 November 2015 10: 52
      +3
      And these eggs, I must say steel, were tapped to many by their beards.
  10. Comrade Bender
    Comrade Bender 26 November 2015 10: 40
    +1
    Information in the media is given to a simple layman in an understandable form and terminology, and not to generals, at a meeting of the General Staff’s operations department. Therefore, there is no need for such moralizing and cleverness.
    1. bocsman
      bocsman 26 November 2015 11: 03
      +1
      Quote: Comrade Bender
      Information in the media is given to a simple layman in an understandable form and terminology, and not to generals, at a meeting of the General Staff’s operations department. Therefore, there is no need for such moralizing and cleverness.

      So, a specialist and a well-educated person should go down to the level of the layman and speak the language of the Offeni, if it is more clear to him!
      In the article I have not met a single incomprehensible or abstruse term. Much easier. And so it’s been simplified to the point that soon the Russian language will be forgotten!
    2. bocsman
      bocsman 26 November 2015 11: 03
      +3
      Quote: Comrade Bender
      Information in the media is given to a simple layman in an understandable form and terminology, and not to generals, at a meeting of the General Staff’s operations department. Therefore, there is no need for such moralizing and cleverness.

      So, a specialist and a well-educated person should go down to the level of the layman and speak the language of the Offeni, if it is more clear to him!
      In the article I have not met a single incomprehensible or abstruse term. Much easier. And so it’s been simplified to the point that soon the Russian language will be forgotten!
  11. Engineer
    Engineer 26 November 2015 10: 41
    0
    To the fool of this, you ... I strongly recommend reading the works of the Marshal of the Soviet Union Nikolai Ogarkov, where in 70 he described how they are now fighting in modern wars and not write, or rather copy-paste other people's ravings of sofa specialists.
  12. The comment was deleted.
  13. bocsman
    bocsman 26 November 2015 10: 43
    +5
    Any literate person should express himself competently, and especially if he undertakes to comment as a specialist on certain events! So I agree with the author. And then in our age of co-makers, you wonder what the dullness of "specialists" has come to!
  14. Denis DV
    Denis DV 26 November 2015 10: 49
    0
    Gee, and upon receiving the "marshal's shoulder straps", visitors to VO will be given a certificate of a graduate of the special course of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces laughing laughing laughing Of course, if comments with the "correct" terminology are fellow laughing laughing laughing
    1. iouris
      iouris 26 November 2015 12: 05
      0
      Thesis.
      The term designates (limits) the concept. The development of science consists in the development of a conceptual apparatus for reflecting reality. If a term is not associated with a concept, then speech is meaningless. And shoulder straps are given not for "quality", but for "quantity"
      Information is that which destroys uncertainty, and does not produce it.
      99% of all is nonsense. 95% of all - complete nonsense. This also applies to this forum.
      Sometimes it's better to chew than write.
  15. miv110
    miv110 26 November 2015 10: 50
    +6
    As my teacher says, "The term and definition are central to a systematic approach to everything." When this is not observed, amateurism flourishes, confusion appears in which no one can really figure it out. Such a disease is typical for the media (pursuit of a sensation or hot news, a thirst to be the first, a biting, attractive headline leaves no time for thoughtfulness and professionalism) and it is from there that a stream of such incidents comes, which are picked up even by responsible and respected people. In the end, they will say: "What's the difference, comrade?" After all, the main thing is the fact itself and the more beautifully it is presented, the better, albeit not competently, but sonorous!
    1. miv110
      miv110 26 November 2015 11: 57
      +1
      In continuation of the topic I want to add the following - I see an analogy with the use of certain words in my native language. For example, a fireman or fireman how to? From the point of view of most dictionaries, the same thing. But try to call a fireman a fireman. There was also such a thing in the people - firefighters called false burners who beg for alms. In addition, in criminal jargon a fireman is a thief who either fires to steal valuable things, using the panic, or looting during the fire . Some firefighters claim that firefighters are the ones who set fire in general, its victims. Finally, there is an insect firefighter beetle, whose official name is the soft-footed red-legged.
      (http://www.kakprosto.ru/kak-840042-kak-pravilno---pozharnyy-ili-pozharnik#ixzz3
      saSQj6Cf) Now think about concepts and definitions. A whole semantic layer is revealed. And people, by the nature of their activity, should be guided in philology (for example, television announcers) it is a shame to make such mistakes.
  16. lukewarm
    lukewarm 26 November 2015 10: 52
    +6
    The author is great. I put it on the shelves. I put iksperdov and couch analytes in their place. The level of the majority of "experts" is far from expert. You should not use terms, the meaning of which you do not understand, just to give weight to your opinion (information).
    1. figter
      figter 26 November 2015 12: 46
      +2
      The author is more than well done!
      This is a theory, but practice without a theory is dead. Without knowing such fundamentals, it is impossible to plan and then organize military operations. At the moment, of course, this is not an operation at all, but the tactical actions of a mixed aviation regiment aimed at direct air support of the ground forces in the offensive, and nothing more. The decision of the regiment commander for such actions is regulated by the Combat Charter and instructions for the service of staffs and it is obliged to include not only the general plan of military operations, but also all parties and aspects of comprehensive support and interaction, including with other branches of the armed forces. Based on the decision of the commander, a Combat Order is issued, which concretizes the combat plan and tasks for individual units. This is the very systematic approach.
  17. sa-zz
    sa-zz 26 November 2015 10: 55
    0
    Thank you for the lesson.

    about
    there are no "ground", as well as "ground operations". And it can’t be


    I think, in this case, the politician wants to say in such a way that it becomes clear not only to the officers, but also to the rest of the people.
  18. tveritianin
    tveritianin 26 November 2015 11: 00
    10
    Mikhail Khodorenok has two higher military education. this is first!
    Secondly. he is a military expert in the field of the use of weapons and the Armed Forces in the aggregate of his knowledge and vast experience of service.
    And thirdly, when a layman undertakes to teach or criticize a person who has special knowledge and experience in the topic under discussion, then pies and boots are immediately recalled.
    The author did not try to get stuck or mount. His goal was to explain that the media (As stupid as some politicians), having no idea in the military sphere, give out information in such a distorted light that their ears fade.
    The layman is also not much in terms, as one of the commenters noted, but he does not need it. But politicians and journalists are at hand, especially pocket ones. Since Give an air strike to 10 aircraft with twenty bombs for a massive or strategic strike and a simple layman will not count the numbers, he will hear what they want to put into their brains: STRATEGIC, MASSED !!! This is achieved. And then the strikes of our aircraft, which we do not attribute to either massive or strategic, are called empty saber-rattling, and their STRATEGIC strikes are presented as a major victory.
    So I ask you not to run into the author, but often think about the terms that are used by the enemies and foolish friends of Russia!
    And so, to be honest to the end, I’ll say that the author is my fellow student at the best air defense school in the USSR and a classmate at the strongest academic school - the Air Defense Forces named after Zhukova G.K. I do not defend him. but the truth.
    But I am for objectivity and an explanatory presentation of the essence of things, and not for simple paper scrabbling in the comments.
    1. rotmistr60
      rotmistr60 26 November 2015 11: 31
      +1
      So I ask you not to run into the author, but often just think about the terms

      No one runs into the author. Comrade protection is a good thing. But I want to note that there are specialists at the HE among visitors who at one time graduated from higher military schools, and some also graduated from the academy. Therefore, understand military terms. Not all to the heap.
    2. 787nkx
      787nkx 26 November 2015 11: 36
      +3
      I apologize .
      Your friend has an error in the article.
      Compositional, to be exact.
      A professional will figure it out, but the average person will not notice.
      So for whom is an academician's article?
      It is not clear to the average person, such decryption is not necessary for professionals.
      1. Bashibuzuk
        Bashibuzuk 26 November 2015 12: 06
        +2
        Well, let the author and share how EXPERT -
        how to urge zhurnalyug to the correct use of terms.
        ..
        For example, I can suggest that everyone — the journal — receive certification from Mikhail Khodorenok.
        And without such certification - do not let print open spaces.
        ...
        Well, what shall we do?
        ..
        Or, for example, Mikhail will publish his PUBLIC explanations for each incorrect term in the Washington Post, Di Welt, on RT ... everywhere is shorter - how to write correctly.
        ...
        But we don’t need to agitate for Soviet power.
        They didn’t command, you see, companies-battalions .... but the author than what commanded?
        ...
        And what are the actions of mixed forces called in isolation from the infrastructure, in the expeditionary version?
  19. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 26 November 2015 11: 05
    +2
    Competent concepts should first of all be used by people of these professions. If an ordinary person begins to explain everything competently, then an ordinary person will not understand anything at all. Therefore, there is a language for a "teapot" and it is not a fact that you need to harness a rhinestone to be smart. one hundred and each has acceptable concepts and there are "offensive" concepts, try to say the word pillar to some electrician or give light - they will laugh and call the dumbbell. And there are a lot of examples. Military affairs are a great thing, in the light of the events in Syria, there are many reports, perhaps you should not be so implacable about every concept, because it does not change the essence and is understandable to everyone.
    1. miv110
      miv110 26 November 2015 11: 21
      0
      And this is true, but as the author of the article noted, one and the same event can be stated in different ways, and most importantly, in an accessible, understandable and correct way (a massive strike is a group strike, about the same thing, but in the latter case it doesn’t and doesn’t decrease the significance of events for the layman).
  20. WYCCTPUJIA
    WYCCTPUJIA 26 November 2015 11: 08
    +1
    You may not be a poet, but you should know ABC !!! tongue
  21. Lord_Sita
    Lord_Sita 26 November 2015 11: 27
    0
    So, operations are combined-arms, all-fleet, joint and independent.

    And what is "self-operation"? According to the canons of operational art?
  22. Shpagolom
    Shpagolom 26 November 2015 11: 31
    +2
    Those frostbitten militants who fired at the parachutes of the pilots, it turns out, are not "Syrian Turkmens", but real Turks who came to Syria to fight.
    And from the organization "Bozkurt", "Gray Wolves", the very ones ...
    Muslims, yes, but do not belong to the Islamists.
    Rather, to ultra-nationalist-panturinists ...

    Sobsno no difference, the same two-legged beast, it is a beast. How all sides of the Syrian war are literally! How many are there - 7? 10 ?
    In short.
    These bloggers from NTV calculated the leader - and what is the name and where from Turkey,
    and a glorious battle path since Afghanistan ...
    The boy loved to act ...
    He has a specific name - Alpaslan Celik. But in reality, he is not a Turkman, but a real Turk, originally from the city of Keban in the province of Elazig. Alpaslan is the son of the former mayor of this town, and the city itself is here. Turkmens there and does not smell.
    http://ntv.livejournal.com/426110.html#comments
  23. Wolka
    Wolka 26 November 2015 11: 31
    0
    as they say, comments are redundant here ..
  24. Abrekkos
    Abrekkos 26 November 2015 11: 34
    +4
    With all due respect, I don’t understand what this article is for.
    The author criticizes writers for the popular exposition of military terms, but he himself gives a completely populist and inaccurate interpretation.
    All that is written here refers to a full-scale war with the fronts, maps taken from the storerooms of the General Staff, etc.
    This has nothing to do with modern lockdowns. Just these terms are not applicable.
    And nobody uses them in real operations.

    Anyone who at least once stood next to the commander of a regiment stationed in the conflict zone, and even more so in the combat zone, will tell you that the statement that "makes a decision on combat actions" will distort this commander. He's not the commander of a partisan unit. And in aviation this is even more so because it does not act independently in such conflicts. If the author was not only taught something about he also visited somewhere in the last 20 years, and even more so served outside the General Staff, then he should know this.

    So what will this article give?
    There will also be a number of pseudo-experts who, having thought up, based on articles with not entirely appropriate and not entirely correct (popularized) interpretations, will come up with their vision and begin to pour in an important form with terms that they did not understand at first and then perverted.

    So in my opinion, with the generally correct message, the article will only bring confusion to the minds and give rise to many pseudo experts.
    Thus achieving the opposite goal.
  25. S-cream
    S-cream 26 November 2015 11: 39
    +1
    And why did the author so agitate? As noted above, professionals must use special terminology. For the layman, everything should be clear.

    And, so, not in reproach to the author, but simply, sapienti sat, as they say: "full namesake" - this is when the name, surname, and patronymic coincide, and not just the name and patronymic.
  26. anderles66
    anderles66 26 November 2015 11: 44
    +1
    It was a little curious, I read it to the end. Thanks. But here's what I thought - to try to instill professional terminology in the media is pointless. Media laws and the laws of professional communities overlap little, if at all. It is better not to listen or read the media at all, otherwise you can get used to the verbal chewing gum. I agree with the author as a whole, but here is the choice of a journalist (or his speechwriters) - to say "French bombers carried out the defeat of tactical ground targets with bomb weapons" or "delivered a massive strike"? Well, it seems to me that the choice is obvious, and not only in terms of brevity, but above all, in terms of public perception. I remember, I started fixing blunders in the media, then I just got tired. One of the blunders: "on the night from Friday to Monday." And the majority of "experts" who broadcast in the media are often lower in professionalism than other journalists. The same goes for the "ground operation". Well formulate your message to the media using the field manual winked Note that it should be short, capacious, catchy, so that people hawala. Here it is.
    1. Stinger
      Stinger 26 November 2015 12: 07
      0
      Note that it should be short, capacious, catchy, so that people hawala.
      That's for sure. Like a volley of Aurora from one tank gun. And in the long run volleys from one mortar, a tank, and even from an assault rifle went. And all this fell upon a stunned reader (listener) with a swift jack.
  27. Sergej1972
    Sergej1972 26 November 2015 12: 00
    +1
    "That is, in one air army, there were more than 1500 combat aircraft. This operational formation could indeed conduct an air operation. By the way, the USSR Air Force had twenty-one air forces. Now it is impossible to believe in it." Forgive the amateur if you are wrong. But I think that not all air armies in the USSR were of 40 regimental composition and with 1500 aircraft, like the air army mentioned in the text as part of the GSVG. After all, 30000 combat aircraft in the USSR in the 70s and 80s. did not have.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. creak
      creak 26 November 2015 14: 51
      0
      Quote: Sergej1972
      But I think that not all air armies in the USSR were of 40 regimental composition and with 1500 aircraft, like the air army mentioned in the text as part of the GSVG. After all, 30000 combat aircraft in the USSR in the 70-80s. did not have.


      Exactly so, and this applies not only to the Air Force - in the internal districts of the SA (such as, for example, Kiev, Ural, etc.), many formations and units were cropped, with only one or several units deployed.
      And the GSVG is not a typical example - there were no cropped formations and units and could not be by definition - based on their tasks that the Group faced.
      In the days of the USSR, it was the most powerful and combat-ready group (of the first hour) and it was assumed that all districts during the times of the USSR also had similar striking force, at least unprofessionally ...
      PS As for the terminology, lately I have often come across in the media, for example, on this - a surface-to-air missile instead of a ground-to-air missile and other liberties ... Unfortunately, now many are not doing their own thing and act according to the principle - I've read two articles, and I'm already writing the third myself ...
  28. Gunther
    Gunther 26 November 2015 13: 26
    0
    Author Quote: .... as my full namesake Mikhail Mikhailovich Zhvanetsky says. And know the difference between a medical operation and a strategic operation on continental theater military operations.

    The author opened my eyes to the tactical interaction of the theory of operational art with the Russian language)
    I look forward to continuing, about the theater.
  29. Conscience
    Conscience 26 November 2015 13: 58
    0
    smart ... smart ... but stupid.
    who needs a story?
    half did not know and now will not understand - the point?
    but the sediment is not good after the article remained ...
  30. Next
    Next 26 November 2015 14: 27
    +2
    Quote: shuhartred
    Make allowances for military majority illiteracy.


    Or maybe we will increase our literacy? Moreover, studying is never too late, and is not something shameful. I didn’t know either, now I know. Thanks to the author for the article. Briefly, intelligibly and to the point.
  31. Forest
    Forest 26 November 2015 15: 07
    0
    Thanks to the author for a great article! hi
  32. tokens2
    tokens2 26 November 2015 21: 22
    0
    One more question. But can an operation be carried out, for example, by a regiment of one of the armed forces? The answer in this case is only negative.

    can.
    PMV.France. Speech of course about the Russian regiment.
    The regiment of operations, by definition, is not able to carry out. The regiment commander can make a decision only on military operations. In extreme cases, a military unit may take part in systematic combat operations.

    Systematically raised the morale of the French allies.
    Yes, after the war, the strategic task was actually accomplished ... let me remind you: well, the French soldiers and officers did not want to actively fulfill their "military duty" during the intervention in Soviet Russia.
    Yes, there’s a regiment ... remembering the actions
    of a platoon of Panfilov’s. our heroes-Spartans of the Second World War. In a bottleneck they blunted you know a tank wedge.
    And the tankman Kolobanov?
    And so the offensive and defense agree, the essence is two different things. However, the effect is comparable.
    Do you think there were many Russian soldiers on the Ugra River? Yes no.
    The governors quickly and clearly followed the Horde. On the opposite bank laughing
    Without any instructions from the command, so to speak. There was no time.
    before putting with vodka laughing