Military Review

Media: this year in the Airborne Forces will begin to form tank companies

67
In the second half of this year, the formation of the Airborne Forces will begin tank the mouth, equipped with T-72B3, transfers TASS message from a military source.




"From the second half of the year, the formation of tank companies with T-72B3 tanks will begin, in the next two years they will expand to tank battalions",
said the source.

The agency notes that the official confirmation of this message does not have.

Last year, Air Force commander Vladimir Shamanov said that "six tank companies will appear in the Airborne Forces by the end of 2015 of the year."

Why these plans were not implemented by the deadline, the interlocutor did not specify.

Help agency: “The T-72B3 is the latest upgrade option for the T-72 tank. This model differs from its predecessors, in particular, with new sighting equipment and communication systems, dynamic protection "Relic", and a more powerful engine. This version of T-72 gained fame thanks to participation in the Tank Biathlon competition. ”
Photos used:
ITAR-TASS / Dmitry Rogulin
67 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 11 May 2016 17: 10
      +1
      Capture the airfield
      1. Observer2014
        Observer2014 11 May 2016 17: 33
        +4
        Stormbreaker (1) RU Today, 17:10 ↑ New
        Capture the airfield

        "Media: this year, the Airborne Forces will begin to form tank companies" No, no gentlemen. I read somewhere back last year that Russia wants to create new military transport aircraft capable of delivering in one fell swoop to any point on Earth 7 tanks "Armata" Thought to put it mildly an exaggeration. And here everything is like that and goes to this. Well, okay, as they say, "we will see further" hi
        1. Nevsky_ZU
          Nevsky_ZU 11 May 2016 17: 51
          +12
          This means that the concept by analogy with the US Marine Corps wins - "away from the sea", and we have the airborne forces "away from the air". A function of the seizure of nodes and the airfield gradually depart MTR (operations). Then it is better to transfer the Airborne Forces immediately to the T-90, as advanced combat-ready units. And at the same time Armatu’s heavy infantry fighting vehicle, and then our paratroopers will have enough time to attack the BMD in the forehead after passing a march in 300 km. The last time correct airborne and as intended used in Budapest 1956 of the Year. in all other conflicts, our conditionally heavy motorized infantrymen came second, after light conditionally landed airborne troops, who did not conditionally fight head-on against the enemy and far from the enemy's rear. hi
          1. Blondy
            Blondy 11 May 2016 21: 41
            +5
            As far as I was unable to google, tvnki from the air do not drop, the limit of parachute systems is 25 tons. That is, tanks will be dropped by VTA from captured airfields. In my opinion, the military branch does not play a special role in this case; it would be more expedient to work out the interaction between them. And being in the Airborne Forces tanks will have very limited use, provided that airfields are captured.
            1. Ratmir_Ryazan
              Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 22: 34
              +4
              Airborne Forces is our elite, the most combat-ready parts of Russia, fighting traditions and fighting spirit, they only fight on their heads better than everyone else ... Airborne Forces are mobility above all, and not necessarily throwing behind enemy lines as before .. Now air defense covers everything like that, a bat mouse will not slip ... It’s one thing for motorized rifles to drag for example to the Far East and quite different airborne airborne forces - paratroopers and light infantry fighting vehicles and everything else from the air, and tanks to our nearest airfield that can take them, motorized rifles for a week they will only go by train, provided that there is a train immediately. and this will not happen, but the Airborne Forces are already digging in and will take the line in a few hours !!!
            2. The stranger
              The stranger 12 May 2016 03: 40
              0
              And this question is even older than "arrow / armor".
              "How" is solvable. Somehow they will end up together. But "whose" - ...
              There will be non-flying tanks at the Airborne Forces - infantry pulling for themselves. There will be no tanks - to anything. They don’t need the Air Force at all - they don’t fly, missiles - drones don’t shoot down. And the fleet does not need to - the land issues are still decided on the ground.
              And on land they are generally fish in the aquarium. Curious, beautiful, and no more.
              I've served in the airborne battalion of the tank brigade. There were two of them - for three tank battalions - two landing troops. One - with good motorized rifle training, to escort, and the other - with parachute and other show-offs. I got there from a motorized rifle regiment, so tankers glued me worse than near-army women. According to his youth, he chose the stupidities incorrectly, and then the glade was where the power was, and quietly moved to the normal infantry.
              Romance is romance, but having a howitzer division on the wire is more comfortable than one missile on a walkie-talkie, and even then.
              It is understandable - there will be nowhere to go without special forces. But special forces are not airborne.
        2. Thunderbolt
          Thunderbolt 11 May 2016 17: 55
          +1
          Quote: Observer2014
          at 7 o'clock to deliver in one fell swoop to any point on Earth not a lot, not a few 400 Armata tanks
          The reconnaissance group will light fires on the White House lawn and our "strong man" will land right on the green grass! On the Internet, they will write about it. I remember the discussion of that article on this forum. Glorious times were hi
          1. Observer2014
            Observer2014 11 May 2016 18: 01
            +3
            Thunderbolt The scouting group will light fires on the lawn of the White House and our "strong man" will land right on the green grass! On the Internet, they will write not that. I remember the discussion of that article on this forum. Glorious times hi

            And then! hi
        3. Alekseev
          Alekseev 11 May 2016 20: 27
          +1
          Quote: Observer2014
          Yes, gentlemen. I read somewhere else last year.

          Airborne Forces are troops whose units are trained and equipped for airborne landing.
          If the need arises.
          And if it arises the need to act on the ground as a motorized rifle unit? Moreover, we now have fewer motorized rifles than, for example, border guards.
          The Airborne Command wants to have its own means of reinforcement in the form of these same tank companies or battalions.
          Yes, and throw 10-20-30 heavy VTA vehicles in the air through the air to the desired direction.
          It is advisable to have a separate tank regiment as part of the Airborne Forces for the most reasonable and problem-free organization of combat training and technical support, rather than attach the tank company to the parachute regiment, where it will be the fifth wheel in the cart.
          1. Ratmir_Ryazan
            Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 22: 37
            +1
            They wrote that they would later expand to battalions ... New units are not just transferring equipment and everything is .. you want, you also need to prepare people ... Who will give ready-made specialists ?! And this is not a single day ...
  2. evil partisan
    evil partisan 11 May 2016 17: 08
    +5
    Well, why so soon! Introduce the paratrooper on the tank - this is a nightmare of the Baltic states and Psheks. Right now they’ll conquer again ... sad
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. PKK
      PKK 11 May 2016 17: 54
      0
      Tanks, this is not only armor and a long gun, it is also the best defense against nuclear weapons. Airborne landing forces with tanks become unkillable.
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 22: 43
        +1
        Well, it’s not quite so, unfortunately ... It’s just that the Airborne Forces are no longer throwing enemy lines behind, but the rapid movement of troops across OWN territory is first and foremost ... And there’s no problem flying to your nearest airfield to the scene of action and marching from there there isn’t any avant-garde that has already strengthened at the turn ... Nobody will do it faster and better, and it’s better to launch tactical missiles and artillery shells on the enemy’s heads, it’s almost impossible for a transport aircraft to break through the air defense system, but it’s now necessary to have mobile forces, especially considering the size of our country ...
  3. vglazunov
    vglazunov 11 May 2016 17: 09
    0
    Flying tanks is great. Tanks not only fly, but also shoot in flight smile
  4. Prisoner
    Prisoner 11 May 2016 17: 13
    +3
    Both on! Landing with its tanks. God forbid the tankers health and patience. winked They said that tanks wouldn’t fly. We would fly, and even Busurman destroyers would fly around.
  5. brosai_kurit
    brosai_kurit 11 May 2016 17: 15
    +5
    Tanks, of course, are good. But how does this relate to the concept of the use of airborne troops on theater?
    1. Poppy
      Poppy 11 May 2016 17: 20
      +5
      apparently the concept is changing
      paratroopers have long ceased to make massive parachute casts over the front line
      they fight as elite infantry and means of amplification they need
    2. igordok
      igordok 11 May 2016 18: 58
      +2
      Quote: brosai_kurit
      Tanks, of course, are good. But how does this relate to the concept of the use of airborne troops on theater?

      But for some reason in 2005, he formed an airborne assault component of the Airborne Forces - two airborne assault formations (76 guards airborne brigades of two-regiment composition and 31 guards single-battalion brigades of three-battalion composition). First of all, the "attack aircraft" will be armed with tanks.
    3. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 11 May 2016 19: 12
      +4
      Quote: brosai_kurit
      Tanks, of course, are good. But how does this relate to the concept of the use of airborne troops on theater?

      And this is precisely the comprehension of the experience of using the Airborne Forces over the past 40 years.

      Over and over again, in each of the conflicts, the Airborne Forces were used as an elite mobile infantry to strengthen motorized riflemen. And each time it turned out that the airborne forces are not enough for this firepower and security. And it was necessary to strengthen the parts of the reinforcement at the expense of those whom they should not reinforce - to give the Airborne Forces tanks and artillery of motorized riflemen and tankers. And with prolonged use - in general, transplant airborne assault on army equipment (345 ogvpdp an example).

      And so, in order not to ask the infantry for equipment for reinforcement every time, the Airborne Forces decided to acquire their own heavy equipment (talk about this has been going on since the days of Afgan). First there were Strela-10. Now - tanks. And it seems to me that the next will be SPGs.
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 22: 56
        -1
        Yes, yes, and self-propelled guns must be, because we have some problems with artillery gunners in the Airborne Forces and the GRU, instead of finding the enemy and pointing artillery at them, our groups come into contact and not always successfully and without losses ... And it should be like this — they found, pointed, smashed everything to smithereens, approached, documented it on a digital camera, collected documents and samples if they stayed home ... But when some have artillery and others go, it’s always nonsense ... Especially when those who walk don’t even know how to direct artillery right on target or know but don’t do it because it needs to be coordinated somehow, but it’s all complicated, it’s easier, as usual, we found a group of spirits and shoot either we or us ... And this should not be, we should have an advantage over these gangs and thoughtful tactics!
    4. Dart2027
      Dart2027 11 May 2016 19: 30
      0
      At the current level of air defense systems, I do not really understand how it is generally possible to carry out a classical landing. In fact, now the Airborne Forces is an elite infantry.
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 23: 03
        0
        Very simply, the troops are not only thrown to the enemy in the rear, but also on their territory they must be moved very quickly to strengthen and defend certain directions, and the Airborne Forces are just the fastest that we have and the most combat! It's good that they were smart enough not to disband these units, otherwise some "smart people" have already tried under Yeltsin, like why do we need the Airborne Forces, everyone already has air defense systems ... But how, for example, to quickly transfer motorized riflemen to the Far East? No way, the train is only a week on the way !!! And the Airborne Forces - six hours later the paratroopers sat down and the BMD dug in and occupied the line, and the tanks and, in the future, the self-propelled guns will be unloaded at the nearest airfield, and from there they can march to strengthen the entrenched vanguard ... )
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 12 May 2016 10: 27
          +1
          Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
          It’s very simple, the troops not only throw to the enemy in the rear, but also on their territory they must be moved very quickly to strengthen and defend certain directions, and the airborne forces are just the fastest that we have and the most fighting !!!

          The problem is that the Airborne Forces were fast while they were light. And as the weight increases, the speed of their transfer will be equal to the linear parts.
          Let me remind you that loading the T-72 into the IL-76 is a circus trick that so far only Indians perform. For the gaps on the sides between the tank and the fuselage in this case are about 15 cm.
          Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
          But how, for example, to quickly transfer motorized rifles to the Far East? No way, the train only takes a week to go !!! And the Airborne Forces - the paratroopers sat in six hours later and the BMD dug in and occupied the line, and in the future tanks and self-propelled guns were unloaded at the nearest airfield, and from there the march strengthened the entrenched vanguard ...

          While the tanks and self-propelled guns load, fly, unload and reach the vanguard - they will roll it out already. For the basis of the firepower of the compound is artillery. And with her, landing is very bad.
          What can entrenched paratroopers oppose to the 152-155 mm self-propelled guns and the MLRS battery (without which no self-respecting tactical group now walks)? Nothing - they can neither find them nor get them.
    5. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 22: 48
      0
      It's elementary ... Now the concept of the Airborne Forces is not a throw to the enemy's rear, but the mobile movement of troops across its territory ... For example, a conflict with China or Japan ... How long a motorized rifle regiment and a division will get there from the center of Russia - a month until the trains will be allocated while they are loaded, they will unload, and this is if the canvas is not blown up, or maybe longer ... And the Airborne Forces - infantry and infantry fighting vehicles directly from the air to the occupied line, while they dig in, tanks to the nearest airfield, and from there they will march and strengthen the entrenched vanguard. .. And there the motorized riflemen will arrive by train))) ... And we will send them "Caliber" to the rear ... Here is a new concept))) ..
  6. Dulat
    Dulat 11 May 2016 17: 17
    0
    Imagine tanks on a parachute, spectacular
    1. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 23: 06
      +1
      Tanks with a parachute are only in moronic American films ... But the parachute system has a real limit of about 20 tons, and a tank of 50 or more ... No, everything will not be so ... The landing and BMD are as usual from the air, and tanks to the nearest airfield to the place of action, and from there to march to reinforce the paratroopers who already occupied the line ...
      1. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 12 May 2016 10: 29
        0
        Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan
        But in reality, the parachute system has a limit of about 20 tons, and a tank of 50 or more ...

        EMNIP, already for the "Sprut" had to be perverted with the landing system, since the total mass of the ACS + the system itself was close to the limit.
  7. BARKAS
    BARKAS 11 May 2016 17: 19
    +18
    It remains to build an aircraft carrier for the Airborne Forces!
    1. Lt. Air Force stock
      Lt. Air Force stock 11 May 2016 17: 57
      +1
      Quote: BARKAS
      It remains to build an aircraft carrier for the Airborne Forces!

      More likely, a space landing will appear than such a flying aircraft carrier ...
  8. Alexander 3
    Alexander 3 11 May 2016 17: 19
    0
    These tanks were only transported to the airfield, and I wouldn’t know what they were landing on. I don’t know what.
    1. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 23: 07
      0
      That's right, it’s impossible to drop a tank ...
  9. tomket
    tomket 11 May 2016 17: 22
    +3
    Why Airborne Forces T-72? It seems that there are "Octopuses" with 125mm cannons. Or are the Airborne Forces in fact becoming ordinary motorized riflemen?
    1. avt
      avt 11 May 2016 17: 32
      +4
      Quote: tomket
      Why Airborne Forces T-72? It seems that there are "Octopuses" with 125mm cannons. Or are the Airborne Forces in fact becoming ordinary motorized riflemen?

      No. They are expanding according to the principle that the US has practiced in almost the 70s. An analogue of the corps of quick reaction forces, they then singled out 82, 101 and 6, seemingly lightly infantry, or 9th, I don’t remember, in a separate corps of constant readiness, and ours pack the airborne assault as a parachute landing technique, well, the first throw, and combined arms. More turntables under them and harmonious with them.
      1. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 23: 13
        +1
        That's right, since we have already created the forces of special operations and the airborne forces they just enter ... Airborne Forces - mobility is the last thing, and not just throwing in the rear ...
    2. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 23: 11
      0
      Octopus is not that, there is only a cannon from the tank, no armor, no protection ... Airborne Forces are special operations forces in a new way ... And they are intended for quick troop transfer ... And the tanks will simply be transported to the nearest to the scene of action airfield and from there a march to the troopers already on the BMP already entrenched ... Wonderfully invented, no one has this !!! They also need to allocate enough self-propelled guns in sufficient quantities ... Nona Nonoi, but 152 mm Msta or the Coalition will not be superfluous, they will be hidden from afar and taken out further, well, the MLRS also needs airborne ...
  10. FenH
    FenH 11 May 2016 17: 22
    0
    The idea is good, but why not the T-90?
    1. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 23: 15
      0
      Yes, this is not clear, maybe because all the T-90s are already in units and they are no longer being produced, but now they are doing only the modernized T-72B3 ... Do not take them away from the motorized rifle))) ... Then they will probably switch to Almaty ...
  11. FenH
    FenH 11 May 2016 17: 29
    +4
    not the topic, but also topical European buggers demand:
    "The Airports Council of Europe asked Medvedev to cancel total screening at airport entrances"
    see again nastiness conceived
    1. Camel
      Camel 11 May 2016 17: 40
      +4
      I'm embarrassed to ask why they asked Medvedev? Is he the head of state again? Or are they afraid to personally turn to the Darkest One ?! Well, according to the news, "Council of Europe's airports" - who is this? As the saying goes: "We do not know you and we see shallowly" lol
      1. FenH
        FenH 11 May 2016 17: 46
        0
        Quote: Camel
        I’m embarrassed to ask, why did they ask Medvedev? Is he again the head of state? Or are they afraid to personally turn to the Darkest ?!

        Feel free to ask. why did they decide to turn to Medvedev, this is basically not the point. It is important that this question arose at all and for what?
        Quote: Camel
        Council of European airports "- who is this? As the saying goes:" We do not know you and we see small " lol

        The association consists of 500 members - representatives of 45 countries.
        1. Camel
          Camel 11 May 2016 17: 55
          +2
          HZ why did they decide to turn to Medvedev, this is basically not the point. It is important that this question arose at all and for what?

          And they probably just became envious that at our airports (and thank God) the terrorist attacks had decreased significantly, and that’s raging. Yes, here also their terrorist attacks began, I repeat, now they are furious.
    2. Aljavad
      Aljavad 12 May 2016 03: 18
      +2
      FenX RU Yesterday, 17:29 New
      not the topic, but also topical European buggers demand:
      "The Airports Council of Europe asked Medvedev to cancel total screening at airport entrances"
      see again nastiness conceived


      My humble thinking is to spread the best of Belgian experience. (he is so tolerant! ...) repeat
  12. Lieutenant Izhe
    Lieutenant Izhe 11 May 2016 17: 30
    0
    It’s high time to reorganize this Pantylight Light Infantry (Airborne Forces) into full-fledged airmobile units with heavy weapons!
    And then it is impossible to look at their shell-like "shells" without tears.
    The armament of the current Airborne Forces is clearly inferior to NATO's "heavily armed" brigades ...
    Babaev is still good enough to scare in underdeveloped corners of the planet, but against the "armored cavalry" brigades of the United States it is extremely WEAK!
    1. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 23: 22
      0
      Firstly, the Airborne Forces are the most combat-ready units in the Russian Federation and this is a proven practice, and not just antlers. Secondly, why compare the forces of special operations and tank units of Western countries, we also have full motorized rifle brigades and divisions and a tank army has already been created !!! And tanks in Russia under 20, against 000 in England, 400 in Germany and 250 in France and 450 in the USA !!! Moreover, our tanks are growing every day, and they have all the limits ... And thirdly, no one is going to send the Airborne Forces to the front line in the presence of enemy air defense - their task is to quickly move through the territory under our control in order to quickly strengthen necessary directions, as we will not quickly transfer any other forces !!!
  13. Dmitry Potapov
    Dmitry Potapov 11 May 2016 17: 40
    +2
    The landing party will beat, the tanks will be rammed so that the landscape is not obscured! In general, there is little good for spustats, in the conditions of modern maneuverable war the mobility of the Airborne Forces, coupled with the firepower of tanks, is a serious thing! Their Baltic and Polish bridgeheads will be swept away in a matter of hours: a cruise missile strike, an airborne assault, a tank strike to support the Airborne Forces, and then a classic, motorized riflemen, "Hitler (Obama) kaput!", Acceptance of surrender.
    1. Lieutenant Izhe
      Lieutenant Izhe 11 May 2016 17: 58
      0
      cruise missile strike, landing, tank strike to support the airborne

      don’t remember ... WHERE and WHOM were the last time MASSIVE parachute units were thrown after the Second World War?
      1. Seren
        Seren 11 May 2016 18: 32
        +3
        Sinai company of the 56th year. The landing of the paratroopers Rafael Eitan in the area of ​​the Mitle Pass
        1. rudolff
          rudolff 11 May 2016 18: 55
          +1
          Thanks for the tip, Seran. He knew nothing about this operation in the Mitle region. Found on the internet, read with interest. I thought that after the second world mass landing by parachute method was not carried out. It turns out there was a deal.
    2. Lieutenant Izhe
      Lieutenant Izhe 11 May 2016 17: 58
      0
      cruise missile strike, landing, tank strike to support the airborne

      don’t remember ... WHERE and WHOM were the last time MASSIVE parachute units were thrown after the Second World War?
      Harder to shoot down a crow with a shotgun than a Patriot trooper crying
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Sorokin
        Sorokin 11 May 2016 18: 37
        0
        Che something surprised. What did not arrive in the form of cons. Along the way, people were distracted. Although I am an infantry car, I can answer. We were specifically prepared for the fight against the landing. And you will knock them all down. And pull the heavy parts to the landing site. And a schukher is above his head. And communications with authorities will ruin. There will be a lot of govt. The National Guard under the tanks also doesn’t have a god yet. It also refers to them.
        1. leo3972
          leo3972 11 May 2016 19: 14
          +2
          One paratrooper is a problem for separation, and a company ...
          Just hang yourself laughing
          1. corporal
            corporal 11 May 2016 20: 31
            0
            Quote: leo3972
            One paratrooper is a problem for separation, while a company

            I don’t know about the company, but the department created trouble for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 2014.
            Do not squint, but you will not be judged.
  14. Alexez
    Alexez 11 May 2016 17: 49
    +1
    Armored cavalry brigades, airmobile units ... it’s easier to look at things - no one is going to drop tanks, rather, the Airborne Forces cut tasks for working at corners of the planet far from their homeland and their tanks in this case, oh, as needed especially if you work right off the bat. Just all the last major exercises about it literally speak in plain text ... Especially if PAK-TA doesn’t fail me, up to 4 tanks in those tasks should be taken aboard (almost 1 tank platoon). And why the T-72B3, it’s just lighter than the T-90 by 4,5 tons, naturally, due to this, more ammunition and other things can be taken on board.
    1. Lieutenant Izhe
      Lieutenant Izhe 11 May 2016 18: 26
      +2
      nobody is going to drop tanks, rather, the Airborne Forces cut tasks to work on corners of the planet far from their homeland and their tanks in this case, oh, how are they needed especially if you work right off the bat

      Well, well-armed Ground Forces, are they NOT able to perform these tasks (at a "distance from the Motherland") (and for what reason), then WHY are they (Ground Forces) needed?
      1. Dart2027
        Dart2027 11 May 2016 19: 35
        0
        Quote: Lieutenant Izhe
        DO NOT (and for what reason), then WHY they (NE) are needed

        Any army consists of units that differ in the type of training and, in particular, the capabilities of rapid deployment. The landing was originally created in order to be a highly mobile military branch designed for the fastest possible transfer.
      2. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 23: 27
        -1
        Delivery speed ... How long is the train with equipment and people and how long does it take to load a plane and throw it in the right area? In the first cases of the week, in the second hours! But tanks can also be sent to the nearest airfield to the scene of action 100 km and you can go under your own power, you can more ...
    2. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan 11 May 2016 23: 26
      0
      Or maybe because the T-90 is no longer being manufactured, and nobody is going to take their tanks from the tankers? And the T-72B3 is now being supplied to the troops, so far they will arrive in time for them, and there the T-14 ...
  15. Volksib
    Volksib 11 May 2016 17: 55
    +1
    Shamanov is a far-sighted, practical, serious commander. He knows the technique; in Chechnya, the T-72 and the T-62 were mainly used. As the saying goes, a proven tit in hand is more like a crane but "raw" (T-14 "Armata"). And the deadlines are obviously running out to pack the winged infantry into armor ...
  16. Viktr458
    Viktr458 11 May 2016 18: 43
    0
    These units (for the most part) play the role of rapid response units at the borders of the Russian Federation (they may continue). For stability in the conduct of hostilities in this case, heavy armored vehicles are needed. (at the beginning of this year he met in the media information that all parts of the airborne forces, parts of the MP and a number of other formations will enter the quick reaction force)
  17. bad
    bad 11 May 2016 19: 08
    0
    In the second half of this year, the formation of tank companies equipped with T-72B3 will begin in the Airborne Forces
    IMHO, the landing should be better, Armata or t-90ms what
  18. Number 17
    Number 17 11 May 2016 19: 22
    +1
    Okay, everything is fine, but you don’t want to drop the tankers with a parachute. The tank, like other army equipment, has one that runs across the field with a range of 500 km.
    1. Bramb
      Bramb 11 May 2016 19: 46
      +1
      The paratrooper is designed for 15 minutes of battle (V. Margelov).
      Therefore, the tanks are not T-90, but only T-72 advanced. And then here some argue about Almaty for the landing ... On the T-72 and the 5th grader will leave, but for Almaty it is necessary to study!
      And the fitters immediately offer all the secrets to the enemy. Strategies ...))
      1. The stranger
        The stranger 12 May 2016 03: 57
        0
        If for something you need three higher educations, then it is not a weapon, but a technical perversion. Strategic missiles and submarines are probably the exception, but there are few of them. But the tanks that need mechvody - engineers - candidates of science ...
        I have my opinion about the filling of Almaty, is not yet ready to share. But I already respect what I have already done the risk.
  19. Bramb
    Bramb 11 May 2016 19: 41
    0
    But didn’t the airborne forces have tanks?
    Do not believe your eyes, or what?
    1. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 12 May 2016 10: 36
      0
      Quote: Bramb
      But didn’t the airborne forces have tanks?
      Do not believe your eyes, or what?

      EMNIP, the airborne forces have not had their tanks since the days of Afghanistan. Were attached from the ground forces.
      But in Afghanistan, the 345th Guards Rifle Regiment in 1982 received a T-62 company. However, by that time, only the name remained in the regiment's paratroopers - "as unnecessary, the airborne support units and the regiment's airborne service were disbanded", and the paratroopers moved to the BTR-70 and BMP-2.
      1. strannik1985
        strannik1985 12 May 2016 12: 26
        0
        There were, under Grachev, a tank regiment was part of the Airborne Forces.
  20. kon125
    kon125 11 May 2016 22: 49
    0
    Homeland will order the tanks will fly.
    1. Bryanskiy_Volk
      Bryanskiy_Volk 13 May 2016 20: 04
      0
      Not those times ... Now even satellites do not fly properly request
  21. Forest
    Forest 12 May 2016 00: 03
    -2
    It is high time. And then the guys are wound up on cans without normal armor.
  22. Evil 55
    Evil 55 12 May 2016 05: 12
    +2
    Winged infantry is formatted as a winged tank infantry .. Only somehow it does not fit with the concept of the use of airborne forces ..
  23. Evil 55
    Evil 55 12 May 2016 05: 14
    +1
    The best armor for the paratrooper is mother earth-trench, fire, maneuver and means of amplification ..
  24. sogdianec
    sogdianec 12 May 2016 11: 58
    0
    Can rename the Airborne Forces Tank Airborne Forces (TVD)?

    Does religion prevent motorized rifle and tank units from being thrown by aviation?
  25. chunga-changa
    chunga-changa 13 May 2016 13: 18
    0
    The Airborne Forces have long been a separate branch of the military, and if the Airborne Forces need tanks, it is easier to introduce them into the state than to beg every time from the army. I would not be surprised if the Airborne Forces have their own Iskanders and S-400s.