specnaz - Page 3


Read more about @KJ 1. There was NO IEDs hanging "all over the place" there was a bunch of small explosives. 2. If you did read (and you did not) what i posted you'd see Russia


  International Military Forums > >
User Name
Password

 
March 7th, 2010   #21
Panzercracker
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie.
Forgive me if I misunderstood you, but according to these two sources:

Source 1: Russia has the 5th highest military expenditure of $58.6 Billion USD [As of 2008]

Source 2: Russia has the 3rd highest military expenditure behind China and the United States at $50.0 Billion USD

I might have misunderstood you however, so please tell me if I have.
No you didnt misunderstood me, you just have no idea how military budgets work.

I'll keep it simple, you need to divide any given sum by the amount of forces you have, the kind of equipment they posses, the infrastructure they run.

US total military budget is 680~ billion USD total for just over 1.3 milion troops, Chinese military budget is only 70~ billion USD.

The difference? More then 50% of Chinese hardware is over 30 years old.

Now Russia has over a million troops, a much larger fleet, much more ground equipment to keep then both China and US combined and its budget is 50 billion USD.

This translates to an average Russian unit receiving less then 1/20th funding of an average Western European unit and less then 1/10th of an average central European unit.

To give you a picture, just recently russian navy got boiled eggs for breakfreast which was hailed as a major feeding reform.

Of course there are some units that are better funded but even the elites are well below what the Western world considers as average.
 
--
March 9th, 2010   #22
Supostat
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Panzercracker
As for training though saying anything authoritative is impossible given that Russian spends 3200USD on its most elite troops yearly (by comparison US spends 129.000 USD, Germany 75.000 USD, Poland 42.000USD) then their training is likely severely lacking.

Doing simple math, take out living costs and you get maybe 500USD for bullets which is what? 200 shots a year?
On other hand, the cost of Russian soldier is much lower than cost of Western soldier, in terms of both equipment and wage. For example - as far I know, AK-74M with sling, bayonnet and complect of mags costs ~100$, while similar kit of M-16 costs ten times or even more... And I am not sure, is the Western soldier, equipped with M-16 kit, ten times effective than Russian soldier with cheaper AK-74M kit...

Regarding training - lot of that could be trained without large expenses; I do not see any obstacles to train tactics and hand-to-hand combat while lacking financial resources.

What comes to small arms ammunition - I guess they still have supplies produced during USSR


 
March 11th, 2010   #23
Panzercracker
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
On other hand, the cost of Russian soldier is much lower than cost of Western soldier,
Of course it is! He doesnt shoot, he doesnt learn field tactics, if he's lucky he'll go onto field excersizes once a year, he cant drive or operate most vehicles in his army, he cant administer first aid, yeah he's a cheap bastard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
in terms of both equipment and wage.
Many conscripts do not receive any wage, professionals get between 70$USD and 90$USD, their equipment often remembers early cold war, i can easily dig up 2010 pics with Russian professionals carrying AK-47s without the works.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
Regarding training - lot of that could be trained without large expenses; I do not see any obstacles to train tactics and hand-to-hand combat while lacking financial resources.
No it couldnt, transportation, training facilities, ammenities and the lot cost money, yes jogging and hth combat are free but they're hardly the most important thing and even they're lacking.

For example the invasion in Georgia showed that Russian NCOs cant read maps, that marksmanship is horrendously low and tactics non existent so even the cheap stuff is neglected but this is more due to low discipline and military culture then money.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
What comes to small arms ammunition - I guess they still have supplies produced during USSR
No they dont, do the math, you have about 200k soldiers doing yearly shootings, how long will the stockpiles last? Not to mention calibers change.
 
March 12th, 2010   #24
Supostat
 
 
Quote:
Of course it is! He doesnt shoot, he doesnt learn field tactics, if he's lucky he'll go onto field excersizes once a year, he cant drive or operate most vehicles in his army, he cant administer first aid, yeah he's a cheap bastard.
Can I quote this sentence in `Humor` part of Russian military forum?
Quote:
Many conscripts do not receive any wage, professionals get between 70$USD and 90$USD
130 $ per month for contracted soldier @ 2002. 400...500$ per month for contracted soldier from 2007.
Quote:
their equipment often remembers early cold war, i can easily dig up 2010 pics with Russian professionals carrying AK-47s without the works.
Yes, please, post some of them.
Quote:
No it couldnt, transportation, training facilities, ammenities and the lot cost money, yes jogging and hth combat are free but they're hardly the most important thing and even they're lacking.
Tactics could be trained within low costs, what comes to transportation, Russians have cheap fuel, and they have a lot of training grounds.

In general, I can agree in certain elements Russian soldiers are trained worse than their Western colleagues, however the difference is not so high as you are trying to state.

Besides - you forgot about combat bears
 
March 12th, 2010   #25
captiva303
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aussie.
Forgive me if I misunderstood you, but according to these two sources:

Source 1: Russia has the 5th highest military expenditure of $58.6 Billion USD [As of 2008]

Source 2: Russia has the 3rd highest military expenditure behind China and the United States at $50.0 Billion USD

I might have misunderstood you however, so please tell me if I have.
dude, Australia's budget is working its way up to thirty billion $$$ and we have, what?
50000 troops?
and russia has 1 million troops, so when you break it down there isn't much of the pie to go around...
even when taking into consideration, the fact that costs would be lower , it isn't hard to tell that the Russian military is under funded, and this isn't exactly a secret. even the Russians admit this...


The oath to serve my country as a soldier did not include a contract for the normal luxuries and comfort enjoyed within our society. On the contrary it implied hardship, loyalty and devotion to duty regardless of rank.

Last edited by captiva303; March 12th, 2010 at 08:51..
 
March 12th, 2010   #26
Supostat
 
 
Of course they are underfunded! And becasue of it they decrease number of troops (for example, former divisions have being reorganized in smaller units such as brigades or even regiments), are not able to provide pilots flight hours necessery to maintain their qualification, and so on and so on.

However, it doesn't mean their army do not train at all or jog instead of tactical exercises.
 
March 12th, 2010   #27
captiva303
 
 
i would have to say that the quality of tactical training does have a lot to do with what you can afford. its like comparing professional sprts clubs and non professional clubs they all train but the professional one will have better routines and methods and will be more up to date techniques.

so in this respect the Russian military must be suffering. it is impossible to say that it wouldnt effect quality of troops if you cant afford proper facilities up to date training modern equipment etc. etc.

it will all effect their quality.
 
March 12th, 2010   #28
KJ
 
 
Vympel,s mission has shifted since you got your facts.
Overall that was quite an accurate post Supostat.

(Your original one that is.
Since then you have been baited into a humor discussion)


//KJ.


"We are the pilgrims, Master
We shall go always a little further,
it may be beyond the last blue mountain barred with snow,
Across that angry or glimmering sea..."
 
March 12th, 2010   #29
Panzercracker
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
Can I quote this sentence in `Humor` part of Russian military forum?
Its ok, your posts are humorous enough as it is, i dont know whether you're a Russian logged under a different flag?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
130 $ per month for contracted soldier @ 2002. 400...500$ per month for contracted soldier from 2007.
Since you're so well informed, do you know whats the price of a loaf of bread in Moscow? Also you failed to mention that increases include money in lieu of food rations which translates to as much as 20% less actuall money:http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../mo-budget.htm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
Yes, please, post some of them.
Invasion of Georgia:



More:



Several points of interest here, note that instead of relatively modern T-80s or T-90s they use old T-64s even without ERA, note the AK-47 carried by a soldier on the left of the PKM gunner.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
Tactics could be trained within low costs, what comes to transportation, Russians have cheap fuel, and they have a lot of training grounds.
No they can not, facilities cost a fortune to build and maintain, fuel is never cheap when you have hundreds of thousands of troops to get from point A to point B annualy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
In general, I can agree in certain elements Russian soldiers are trained worse than their Western colleagues, however the difference is not so high as you are trying to state.
As the Georgian war showed the difference is massive on virtually every level.

And since you seem to be a fan of images and i too believe they speak louder then words.



This picture is fun, a mechanized unit in Georgia, these guys wear "Ushanka" hats that are about 40 years old and have no protective uniforms, in case there's a fire they're going to be living torches also note the cool diving goggles (no they're not standard issue) with a custom rubber strap on the driver!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
Of course they are underfunded! And becasue of it they decrease number of troops (for example, former divisions have being reorganized in smaller units such as brigades or even regiments), are not able to provide pilots flight hours necessery to maintain their qualification, and so on and so on.
However the general number of troops is not being decreased and thats what matters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supostat
However, it doesn't mean their army do not train at all or jog instead of tactical exercises.
Of course they train, but the amount and quality of training makes a regular russian trooper into a little more then armed militia.

Last edited by Panzercracker; March 12th, 2010 at 17:22..
 
March 12th, 2010   #30
Atasas
 
ok guys, I might get involved in to "half row" myself
When I have served for my Country I have had quite few feelings, that are present today, regarding anything Russian anything. Yeas appearance etc is of some contest, but by no means ever I would discount SpecNaz (awfully generalized name) as for any of they abilities. Yeas, there are better troops for most likely any potential scenario around the world, but Russian SF are not bad or really badly trained. Differently- yes, but still capable (please hold me not to start another row regarding some opps) and very importantly also- financially maybe neglected, but not to the extent of ridiculing here by some here- they have decent force!... regrettably...
 



Tags
blood, soldiers, specnaz, swim, wire