Military Review

Brake for aircraft carrier

37
The state program of armament-2025 hardly fits into the economic realities


2016 year began for the Ministry of Defense of Russia rather intensely. In the context of operations in Syria, increasing the share of contractors, maintaining high standards of combat training, the most significant part of the military budget must be allocated to finance the state defense order.

The budget of the current year for the section “National Defense” assumed 3,14 trillion rubles, of which for the GOZ - 2,142 trillion or 68 percent of the funding of the Ministry of Defense. But the planned rates of rearmament may be under threat, since at the end of February it became known about the plans of the sequestration of the military department by five percent.

Five Years Relay


In absolute terms, underfunding will be about 160 billion rubles, and judging by information from sources in the Ministry of Defense, which are referred to by the media, the lion's share of reductions will fall on the state defense order (approximately 150 billion). Thus, for the purchase of new weapons, repairs, military development will be allocated already seven percent less money than planned.

The situation acquires additional drama, if we consider that 2016 should have become the year when the new State Armaments Program (GWP) was launched for the period up to 2025 (HLW-2025), which according to plans smoothly replaced and complemented the HWG-X 2011 and became the fifth in a row over the past 2020 years. If the HPV-20 is fully considered the brainchild of the former Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov, then the HPV-2020 should have become the embodiment of the approaches and views of the current minister’s team, Sergei Shoigu.

The 2016 was not chosen by chance: the rules of the LG-2020 provided for its correction every five years and the equator fell just in the current year. According to the established tradition, instead of a correction, a new program was adopted which was essentially extended for a period of five years.

Little is known about HPV-2025. For the first time, a new program was started at the beginning of 2013. Under its development, it was intended to introduce a formal set of rules that would determine the procedure for creating promising models of weapons, military and special equipment. Regarding financial indicators, it was reported that the program will be comparable to the HPV-2020 (the 19,5 volume of a trillion rubles for the Ministry of Defense in the 2011 prices with an indexing mechanism) or even less. The maximum estimates of the military amounted to 56 trillions of rubles (recall that the ceiling of the LG-2020 at the development stage is 36 trillions), but due to a certain unification of weapons, the program was significantly cheaper. At the end of the 2014 of the year, the report of the Ministry of Defense, published at the expanded collegium of the military department, included the figure of 30 trillions, which clearly exceeds the original plans, because the HPV-2020 even in 2016 prices of the year can be estimated at about 26 trillion rubles. That is, already in 2014, no parity between the two programs was possible. A few months after the panel, unnamed sources reported that the amount of HPV-2025 would be 70 percent of the funding of the current LG-2020.

Interestingly, during the development of the HPV-2020, the 13 ceiling trillions of rubles in 2011 prices of the year (17 trillions at current prices) was called a comfortable level, which is almost two times lower than the figures voiced by the Ministry of Defense. Given that 2011 – 2020 is expected to actually spend 10 – 15 trillion rubles on the LG, our estimate of the real financing of the LG-2025 does not look too low.

Brake for aircraft carrier


It can be assumed that the main reasons for the development of the new HPV-2025 were an attempt to correct the LG-2020 in the direction of greater pragmatism, taking into account the realities in the form of rejection of some programs (primarily import, the negative attitude towards which Sergei Shoigu showed before the well-known 2014 events of the year ), the delay in the implementation of a number of projects and a sharp slowdown in economic growth in the country. This explains the calls of the military-political leadership to make the LG-2025 more balanced in terms of resource provision.

The initial plans for its approval was scheduled for December 2015, but this did not happen. Probably, from the very beginning, GPV-2025 began to be considered as a kind of life buoy for GPV-2020, long-term and expensive programs from which it was proposed to be transferred to the next five-year period. In a clear order this would have happened in reality, as, for example, with the purchase of military transport aircraft Il-76MD-90A, T-50 fighters, tanks T-14, submarines. In a sense, the GPV-2025 may have been seen as an attempt to correct the distortions of its predecessor, which was obviously over-optimistic.

And if in 2011 – 2015, when expenditures on state defense orders were relatively moderate, although they increased three times in current prices (from 571 billion rubles in 2011 to 1,45 trillion rubles in 2014) ranged from 95 to 98 percent, starting from 2015, when its size rises to 1,7 trillion rubles and must be added at the same rate to 2020, the risk of underfunding increases sharply. And this is not to mention the “budget maneuver” of 2014 – 2015, according to which money for a number of programs of the Ministry of Defense was transferred to the period after 2016 – 2017.

“No to import” costs money


All this led to the fact that at the beginning of 2015, a new deadline for the start of the HPV-2025 implementation was announced - 2018 year. It remained unclear whether the program will operate before 2028, or whether it will de facto become seven years old, but without an intermediate revision in 2020 or 2021. But even this period did not last long, since already in August of 2015, under the pretext of the lack of a realistic forecast of the Ministry of Economic Development and the Ministry of Finance, all substantive work on the HPV-2025 had apparently ceased. As a result, it was decided to continue the implementation of the current HPV-2020 in the framework of the agreed indicators. It is planned to return to HPV-2025 not earlier than stabilization of the economic situation and clarity with the forecast of its development. As can be seen, the task facing the Military-Industrial Commission under the leadership of the country's president and the deputy minister of defense responsible for armaments, Yuri Borisov, is only becoming more complicated every year.



Another specificity of the HPV-2025 has become a roll towards import substitution. Already in September, after the annexation of the Crimea and the beginning of hostilities in eastern Ukraine, Western countries imposed sectoral sanctions against Russia, the ability of the defense industry to independently produce all the components necessary for the Russian army without recourse to imports was called for HPV-2014.

There are very fragmentary evidences regarding the filling of the HPV-2025 and its priorities. President Vladimir Putin, speaking of her in 2013, mentioned that emphasis would be placed on high-precision weapons and military equipment. For example, they were called automated communications and reconnaissance systems, robots, unmanned systems, and not only air, but also underwater and land, navigation and information transfer systems, battlefield visualization systems. It was reported that the new LG consists of 12 individual subroutines. Not less interesting is its peculiarity, which clearly appeared not earlier than 2014 of the year, was the emphasis not so much on quantitative indicators in the procurement of new equipment, but on its quality and the possibility of further modernization.

Conversion is delayed?


A specific hint at the contents of the HPV-2025 may be contained in the programmatic article of the candidate for President of Russia Vladimir Putin, published in February of the 2012 year. It emphasizes the need for military capabilities in space, in the field of information confrontation, primarily in cyberspace. And in the longer term - the creation weapons on new physical principles (radiation, geophysical, wave, gene, psychophysical, etc.). Most likely, in part at least R & D, these theses will be reflected in the new program.

With regard to procurement in the period until 2020–2022, emphasis was placed on nuclear forces, aerospace defense, reconnaissance and control systems, communications and electronic warfare, UAVs and robotic strike systems, and transport Aviation, individual protection of a fighter, high-precision weapons and means of dealing with him.

Apparently, in comparison with the HPV-2020, the proportion of repaired and modernized weapons should increase, although the possibilities for this are limited by the physical and moral wear and tear of Soviet-made equipment, which will become more significant in the coming years. This assumption is indirectly confirmed by the statement by President Vladimir Putin made at the end of 2013 of the year, according to which the defense industry should be prepared for conversion after 2020, as the volume of orders from law enforcement agencies will decrease.

Given the ambiguity with the timing of the approval of the new State Armaments Program, it is difficult to assess the specific nomenclature of weapons and military equipment purchased. It is obvious that a significant part will be the implementation of those projects that have already been initiated, but for various reasons do not fit into the originally stipulated time frame. Separate statements of the responsible persons allow us to give the following brief overview of the systems that are almost with 100% probability will be developed and purchased by GWV-2025.

For the Strategic Missile Forces, serial production of the Sarmat ICBM will begin. The first samples should go on combat duty in 2018 – 2020. Proposed purchase of at least 46 missiles. Promising orders include the Barguzin combat railway missile system. Deliveries will begin at the end of the decade.

For VKS it was supposed to open the R & D of a new helicopter. One of the largest R & D HPV-2025 promises to be the program PAK DA. The design of the new strategic bomber has been going on since the beginning of the 2010's. The first flight is expected in 2019 – 2020, and deliveries to the VCS are scheduled for 2023 – 2025, but are likely to be shifted due to the implementation of the Tu-160М2 program. Along with the PAK YA for the Russian VKS, the new Tu-160М2 of the new production (from 2023 of the year) will be purchased for the new HPV, the 30 series of Tu-22М3 long-range bombers will be upgraded to the Tu-22М3М version. The production of serial samples of the T-50 fighter will most likely begin with 2019 – 2020.

During 10 years, the Airborne Forces will receive more than 1500 airborne combat vehicles BMD-4М, more than 2500 BTR-MDM “Shell” armored personnel carriers. It is known that serial production of the Kurganets-2018 BMP will begin with 25. In the LG-2025, apparently, gets and the new floating conveyor for the Marine Corps. It is also obvious that the massive purchases of new generation armored vehicles (tank T-14, heavy BMP T-15, BTR "Boomerang") will be the prerogative of the new weapons program.

For the Navy, it was planned to complete the development of a new destroyer project 23560 "Leader" and, apparently, to begin its construction. Plans were announced for two research vessels of the reinforced ice class based on project 20180 weapons transport. 10 minesweepers of project 12700 will also be purchased. Major projects of the GPV-2025 on naval issues include the modernization of the Admiral heavy aircraft carrier cruiser Fleet Soviet Union Kuznetsov ”and the heavy nuclear missile cruiser“ Peter the Great ”. The construction of a new aircraft carrier for the Russian fleet by the current projects GPV-2025 is not provided.
Author:
Originator:
http://vpk-news.ru/articles/29697
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sura
    Sura 20 March 2016 06: 33
    -1
    The barrel went up, with the rise of the barrel there will be a budget adjustment ... We will see.
    1. Blackmokona
      Blackmokona 20 March 2016 08: 29
      +5
      A barrel of 9 bucks is needed to fit into the current budget. So far, the adjustment can only be a minus.
      1. Sura
        Sura 20 March 2016 10: 34
        +2
        Not yet evening...
        I wrote for someone, WE WILL LOOK.
        1. silver_roman
          silver_roman 21 March 2016 14: 18
          0
          while we are adjusting our military budget in such a tight framework solely on the basis of oil prices, what kind of aircraft carriers can we talk about?
          By the way, this is probably the only article that looks real enough in terms of timelines. And then we are constantly yelling (there are a couple of "marshals" - optimists in terms of timing) that already in 2016 we will switch to the PAK FA, and then on the nose of the T-14 and the "leader".
          Now the main thing is to bring to mind the import substitution, and on its basis to build everything else.
          By aircraft carrier, PAK YES, etc. - This will not happen, I think, until the age of 30. Maybe the PAK DA case will light up, but no further.
        2. The comment was deleted.
    2. Svetlana
      Svetlana 20 March 2016 10: 44
      0
      Barel can't go up. Barel, like a liter, is a unit of volume
      1. 1rl141
        1rl141 20 March 2016 11: 32
        +12
        Quote: Svetlana
        . Barel, like a liter, is a unit of volume


        Not BAREL, but BARREL. Not VOLUME, but VOLUME.
        And the smart ones will ship cast iron ...
        1. Mikhail m
          Mikhail m 20 March 2016 22: 25
          +1
          The smartest ones will find out what is heavier, 20 tons of luminium or 20 tons of cast iron.
          1. Gray brother
            Gray brother 21 March 2016 14: 01
            +1
            Quote: Mikhail M
            which is heavier, 20 tons of luminium or 20 tons of iron

            If you load, then luminium is harder - you have to run with it more.
      2. Zoldat_A
        Zoldat_A 20 March 2016 20: 27
        +1
        Quote: Svetlana
        Barel can't go up. Barel, like a liter, is a unit of volume

        Kilogram \ Ampere-Meter laughing
        1. goncharov.62
          goncharov.62 20 March 2016 20: 47
          0
          Kilogram \ Ampere-Meter (liter)?
    3. max702
      max702 20 March 2016 23: 22
      +2
      Money in the country is TOTAL! 97 billion in US securities confirm this .. Apparently it is much more important for the country's defense than some kind of military equipment and other defense costs ..
  2. igorka357
    igorka357 20 March 2016 06: 37
    +7
    Dear government, who saved on its defense industry, has long been in the annals of history, so think about it! Want to become history? Do you save on your deputy salaries!
    1. Zoldat_A
      Zoldat_A 20 March 2016 20: 30
      +2
      Quote: igorka357
      Dear government, who saved on its defense industry, long ago in annals stories, so think it over!

      I would like to correct a little
      Dear government, who saved on its defense industry, long ago in CANAVAH stories, so think it over!
      "Enter the annals" is a little different. But in the ditch they belong good .
  3. Pvi1206
    Pvi1206 20 March 2016 06: 42
    +4
    Maintaining parity in the field of armaments and defense is not cheap.
    But there is no other way to preserve the country's independence.
    This has been shown in the last 20 years.
    There are positive aspects. This is, above all, the development of the national economy as a whole. After all, one job in this area creates several jobs in other areas.
    And in the life of every person, the main thing is to have a workplace that makes it possible to get daily bread for yourself and your family ...
    So we will move in this direction by leaps and bounds.
    1. Zoldat_A
      Zoldat_A 20 March 2016 20: 33
      +4
      Quote: Pvi1206
      Maintaining parity in the field of armaments and defense is not cheap.
      But there is no other way to preserve the country's independence.

      good To count how many have been plundered from at least 91 to 2000 - it would be much cheaper to keep the "defense industry" like cheese in oil .... But who then needed the army ????? am I would kill the reformers ... Do it yourself ...
    2. ivanzu87
      ivanzu87 21 March 2016 10: 15
      0
      There is also China that has proven it. Having boosted the economy and only after that pulled up the defense.
      This effect is temporary.
  4. gregor6549
    gregor6549 20 March 2016 07: 08
    0
    About parity. In general, such parity exists. In any case, no one on their own initiative will dare to unleash a full-scale war with Russia. And in local wars Russia is also quite at the level. The question is different. What is the purpose of the current arms race. At one time I.V. Stalin set himself a clear goal: the victory of socialism on a worldwide scale, realizing that socialism has no other way out. Either he, or his And to this goal he went since he began to rule the country i.e. having subordinated the entire economy of the USSR to achieve this goal for almost 20 years. Here, the desire to achieve what Stalin achieved in terms of the armed forces in the pre-war years is constantly expressed. The desire is certainly good, but it would be nice to remember at what cost this preparation was given to the Soviet people. It would be nice to remember that, despite this, the "great goal" voiced by Stalin was never fulfilled. Does anyone really want to repeat that experiment again? After all, now such an experiment may end in such a way that there will be no one even to evaluate its results. Maybe enough to experiment and finally decide what kind of system Russia is building. She can't be a little pregnant all the time. It is time to give birth to something that allows ALL citizens of Russia (and not just individuals close to the body) to live no worse than the "damned capitalists".
  5. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 20 March 2016 07: 24
    +3
    With respect to procurement prior to 2020 – 2022, emphasis was placed on nuclear forces, aerospace defense, reconnaissance and control systems, communications and electronic warfare, UAVs and robotic shock systems, transport aircraft, individual protection of a fighter, precision weapons and means of dealing with it.

    If so, then there is nothing special to add, because without the speedy development of control systems, communications and electronic warfare, UAVs will be tight tomorrow.
  6. Scooter_gto
    Scooter_gto 20 March 2016 07: 34
    0
    Who does not feed his army, as a rule feeds someone else's!
  7. UralMan
    UralMan 20 March 2016 07: 34
    -11%
    addition to the article
    -----------------------
    how much they spent ... how much they will spend on the military commissar
    -----------
    so what ... then what?
    if necessary, then let them spend ... it will not hurt
    and what to procrastinate the topic ...
    here one thing is surprising ... bie boo boo boo ... few or many expenses
    so what ... from scribbling here what will change?
    Once again we stumble, that they say how much cost and cho?
    what needs to be modernized ... redo
    is that gosplan here?
    I personally drum what and how
    ---------------
    to the author - get down to business
    empty article hi
    1. UralMan
      UralMan 20 March 2016 12: 57
      -5
      hi to minus
      CHO hurt?
      come on, come on...
      ---------
      tihushniki designate ... laughing laughing laughing am
  8. runway
    runway 20 March 2016 09: 17
    +2
    Indeed, it was said on the website that the state defense order is not being fulfilled from year to year. But somehow gently, because the IUU stated that the defense-related budget items would not be sequestered. Now it is no secret to anyone that the "sacred cow" is going under the knife.
    It is not this fact that causes concern, but the fact that the officials responsible for the Budget do not know how to “add and multiply” at all. They only know how to "take away and share" (as in that joke about the traffic cop). There is money in the country. According to official data, one third of the Budget funds is spent "not in a targeted way" or "not rationally" steal, if you speak Russian. According to the results of last year, large banks and corporations dictating prices in the domestic market, trade holdings "with profit". Everyone else loses. It is sad that there is not even a prerequisite for the fact that our current leaders are making efforts to change the situation for the better, and continue to wait for an increase in oil prices .... They may not wait.
  9. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 20 March 2016 10: 54
    +4
    In absolute figures, underfunding will amount to about 160 billion rubles, and judging by information from sources in the Ministry of Defense, to which the media cite, the lion's share of the cuts will come from the state defense order (approximately 150 billion)

    There was other information - that the reduction will not affect the SDO at all.
    Thus, seven percent less money will be allocated for the purchase of new weapons, repairs, and military developments than planned.

    Or thirty. Or add fifteen. In general, now all this is fortune-telling on coffee grounds.
    And a few months after the board, unnamed sources reported that the volume of GPV-2025 would amount to 70 percent of the financing of the current GPV-2020.

    Unnamed sources are power. But it’s not clear, does this refer to the period 2016-2025 or 2018-2025?
    In general, there seem to be numbers, but no sense.
    Indirectly, this assumption is confirmed by the statement made by President Vladimir Putin at the end of the 2013 year, according to which the military-industrial complex after 2020 will need to be prepared for conversion, as the volume of orders through the power departments will decrease.

    Nothing that came after 2013 2014 with its disaster in Ukraine, sanctions and so on and so forth? Do you think the plans have not changed?
    The construction of a new aircraft carrier for the Russian fleet by the current GPV-2025 projects is not provided.

    There is other information that funding for the aircraft carrier program is already underway. Design work is underway, according to one of the leaders, a certain (unnamed) organization is developing an electromagnetic catapult.
  10. Kenneth
    Kenneth 20 March 2016 10: 55
    -1
    We will be bare ass but very dangerous
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 20 March 2016 11: 33
      0
      In the current financial environment, the fleet can be sacrificed - all destroyers and aircraft carriers after 2030.
      1. lelikas
        lelikas 20 March 2016 12: 36
        +2
        Quote: Vadim237
        In the current financial environment, the fleet can be sacrificed - all destroyers and aircraft carriers after 2030.

        Without an aircraft carrier, this is not a problem, but the complete absence of destroyers as a class can end in disaster. Maybe it’s not necessary, for now, to wave to the atomic-super-duper-Leader, but to make it a little smaller and simpler, but with enough weapons, conditionally - an enlarged version of Project 22350.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 20 March 2016 14: 52
          0
          This is why suddenly, the absence of a destroyer will end in disaster for a fleet equipped with nuclear weapons.
          1. lelikas
            lelikas 20 March 2016 16: 34
            +1
            Quote: Vadim237
            This is why suddenly, the absence of a destroyer will end in disaster for a fleet equipped with nuclear weapons.

            With the fact that everything that is available now, in the conditions of a local, nuclear-free conflict, will look very pale. And recently, it is increasingly occurring.
            1. Vadim237
              Vadim237 20 March 2016 16: 56
              0
              "Since everything that exists now, in the conditions of a local, nuclear-free conflict, will look very pale" - what are you talking about?
              1. lelikas
                lelikas 21 March 2016 10: 43
                0
                Quote: Vadim237
                - What are you talking about?

                About frigates, corvettes, rooks - further to list?
  11. Tektor
    Tektor 20 March 2016 11: 54
    +1
    On my naval curve, GPV 2020 should be based on a real budget and be affordable for the budget. Only in this case will we be able to develop the most needed and effective models of military equipment. I do not see anything critical in cutting the budget of the Moscow Region: this should become an ordinary tactical move to increase the effectiveness of the Moscow Region. When the Moscow Region begins to count money, it’s good. At the same time, kmk, it is impossible to reduce the standard nomenclature: it is necessary to develop the widest possible range of military equipment, equipment and accessories. This is a guarantee of the effectiveness of choice, diversity in making tactical decisions.
  12. sandrmur76
    sandrmur76 20 March 2016 13: 03
    +1
    Quote: 1rl141
    Quote: Svetlana
    . Barel, like a liter, is a unit of volume


    Not BAREL, but BARREL. Not VOLUME, but VOLUME.
    And the smart ones will ship cast iron ...

    good Smiled. And for the money, everything is simple, either they exist or not. First you need to deal with thieves and freeloaders and then take the budget. It seems to me that it is more difficult than flying to Mars and vice versa. crying
  13. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 20 March 2016 14: 48
    +2
    Sequestration by 10% - is it a lot or a little? Generally speaking, this is less than the accuracy of economic planning in our country (and not only in ours). When it will be 50%, then you need to strain. And in any plans for "mastering" the budget, reducing the cost of such percentages is a hint to the "sawers" to reduce their appetites. Arming the army with the latest weapons one hundred percent is an unattainable dream. Not implemented in any army in the world. And one should take it calmly. Well, the program is being implemented not in ten years, but in eleven - so what? But the aircraft carrier is a very controversial position. Its effectiveness in modern warfare with an equal adversary has not been proven. And with the Papuans, as the Syrian company showed, it is much more effective to work from stationary airfields - and cheaper, unlike, and a massive impact is guaranteed.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  14. Olegi1
    Olegi1 20 March 2016 15: 14
    -1
    I will slightly correct the author. BZHRK "Barguzin" and PAK DA are likely to be postponed. I read about "Barguzin" earlier here on VO, too lazy to look for a link. PAK YES, if we are producing TU-160M, which is very expensive, it would be reasonable to move to the right, R&D, of course, would not stop.
  15. Odysseus
    Odysseus 20 March 2016 17: 49
    +2
    Ancient General Staff wisdom says, in any incomprehensible situation, reduce the surface fleet. So it is obvious that he will fall as the first victim of the reductions (if they certainly will).
    With the Strategic Missile Forces, too, everything is clear, this is a sacred cow. Here, the maximum deadlines for Barguzin are shifted.
    Air defense will not be touched either. There are still two "victims" left - the Air Force and the Ground Force.
    And here, as I personally would not like, but objectively it is necessary to reduce programs on the Air Force.
    The programs of the Ground Forces (especially in artillery) cannot be touched and reduced. And so the rearmament here has been extremely long.