| Welcome to Philippines Defense Forces Forum. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Shall we go Russian? | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Aug 28 2004, 02:35 PM (13,389 Views) | |
| Numbers | Jul 12 2005, 06:27 PM Post #61 |
|
PDFF Moderator
|
The BMP is a very versatile vehicle and with the advent of new gen turrets and modular systems, its quite possible to upgrade the BMP into a highly capable platform combining cheap and rugged Russian engineering with advanced Western weapon systems. Example is Poland's upgrade of their venerable BMP-1 to what they designate as the BWP-40, now fitted with a Bofors 40mm cannon:  My suggestion is let's acquire BMP-1 hulls and refit them with turrets of our choice and convert some to variants suitable for our needs like this Indian Army mortar carrier: http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/...Images/0361.jpg |
|
One little two little three little four little... Behind every successful man, there is a woman And behind every unsuccessful man, there are two. A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk, I have a work station.... | |
 |
 
|
| gunpdr | Jul 13 2005, 03:16 AM Post #62 |
|
Trainee
  ![]](http://z1.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)
|
Russian/Soviet made equipment seem to still soldier on in the hot spots of the world - the T-55s, T-62s, BMPs, MiG 21s, even the venerable T-34. However, we cannot determine if these equipment are really maintainable or in fact just supported by a cannibalization program from vast quantities of similar equipment purchased at an initial low acquisition cost. We get what we pay for - there is one reason why these equipment are cheap. Are we willing to bet our soldiers' life on them? Their QC (Quality Control) program is not stringent to ensure a high level of safe operation. During my 2001 visit to Russian Armed Forces Museum in Moscow, I was not happy with the quality of manufacture of the relatively modern weapons systems on display - Su27 Flanker, Mig 29, Mi 24, Mi 28, Mi 35 etc. Loose revits, poor fittings, etc. At least with US made equipment, if anything goes wrong and is proven to be a design or manufacturing defect, we can sue the pants off the manufacturer. Try that with a Russian Government owned ordnance factory. Another thing I do not like about Russian made equipment is the low priority placed on creature comforts. Try riding in a UAZ jeep cross country and you will have a bone rattling experience. Have done it in the middle of winter and damm near froze my nuts off. No soldier, no matter how tough will be in the mood to dismount and fight after that ordeal. Of course riding in a Humvee driven at close to full speed by a well known SR captain along a dirt trail to the Katampakan firing range in San Miguel, Bulacan may be easy on the ass, but still a terrifying experience all together. Let us have a realty check and be aware which side of our bread is buttered. The US of A may be an SOB - but he is our SOB! |
|
|
|
| City Hunter | Jul 14 2005, 01:11 PM Post #63 |
|
Member
|
What must be understood when trying to adapt ComBloc technology to ours is that they had a different set of logic when it comes to war fighting. Take for instance the built of their machines. Seemingly poor in quality control plus made of cheap materials. These is because these were designed for wartime production, cheap cost and the fastest way to get something made that works. As long as it meets these criterias it is approved by their leaders. These are also not meant to be serviced in the field as we know of. Instead, all those broken down and destroyed hulks that may still be recovered are pulled back and reconstituted to another fighting unit. And each fighting unit must be self-sufficient to achieve its mission. Units that are suffering no headway and heavy casualties are not subject to reinforcement. They have followed the methods of Genghis Khan and Napoleon. They only reinforce those units that are meeting success no matter how small this success may be. The ComBloc soldier of old was meant to be resupplied with ammo only during its mission period which is about three days. They are not resupplied with anything else. The same goes with their equipment. Their tanks are meant to take with it enough fuel to insure that it could travel a so number of miles. It is only resupplied with ammo during its run. The same could be said to other assets. Now, if one is damaged or destroyed they are pulled back to repair farms. When fixed, these assets along with soldiers from units that have now suffered much casualites along with those soldiers that have recovered from their wounds are reconstituted into a new fighting unit under the colors of a unit that was pulled back. Creature comforts is obviously neglected as the design must be as simple as possible. The GAZ jeep is more probably like the old American jeeps. I used to take a ride on those at our province and driving through the back roads is very much like riding a ship in a storm. Still, it gets us to our destination although admittedly not in a very comfortable shape.. If we are then to take on Russian equipment, these details plus others must be studied first. We cannot afford such a system, the fast availability of replacement engines, as our industry and economy is not war capable and ready. Instead, we replace and modify some of the techniques to make them uniquely our own. Take for instance their MiG 29. We cannot at this point afford to set up a manufacturing plant for its engines and other spares. What we may possibly do is marry it with a Western engine that we can afford and easily acquire from our allies in case war breaks out. Take too its avionics. It was designed to their type of fighting doctrine that emphasizes on centralized control. We need to change those to our type of fighting doctrine that emphasizes more on initiative and flexibility. Still, some of its systems must remain such as its simple non fly-by-wire capability, ability to take off on rough runways, ability to be serviced in the field and its dual role of doing anti-tank work (the reason why Russian planes sport now 30mm cannons). To sum things up, we mix the best of both worlds with what our resources can do. Let us say we can afford some of their BMP-1s. Do we have enough funds to adapt it to our kind of fighting and logistics? If it would cost more in the end it is then only practical to avoid acquiring these in the first place. If we do have the resources on the other hand to mod these and as locally as possible then we go for it provided the numbers and costs are maintained. |
|
Command is about authority, about appointment to a position. Effective leadership is different. It must be learned and practiced in order for it to rise to the level of art. You must love those you lead before you can be an effective leader. You can certainly command without that sense of commitment but you cannot lead without it; and without leadership, command is a hollow experience. .. a vacuum often filled with mistrust and ignorance. Gen. Eric K. Shinseki | |
|
|
|
| saver111 | Jul 14 2005, 01:43 PM Post #64 |
PDFF Moderator
|
Until our colonial mentality is not erased, anything Russian ain't good enough. But, it's always the concern to be afraid of with our neighbours equipped with such. |
 Justice for Daniel Lorenz Jacinto HELP END PIRACY NOW!: http://www.itfseafarers.org/petition.cfm | |
|
|
| edwin | Jul 16 2005, 05:20 PM Post #65 |
|
Member
|
I'm not a Russian fan, specially when it comes to combat aircraft. Mostly Russian hardware are very Good on paper but it cannot deliver the right performance as advertized. There are so many hidden disadvantages when acquiring Russian war material.. Maybe, Russian hardware that are worth considering by our AFP are those sturdy AK-Rifles in 5.56 mm version, SAM batteries/Anti Aircraft Gun and TAnks. BMP-3 with adequate firepower and additional reactive armor for more protection is such a nice idea for our Marines. Peace to all. |
 It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of today and reality of tomorrow. | |
|
|
|
| datu | Jul 17 2005, 02:30 AM Post #66 |
|
Member
|
Some things to wonder about Russian, AFP has experience with M72 LAW, so why not buy the Russian copies of it. The Russian RPG-18/22/26. The Russians developed a further development on the their copies of the M72-RPG-18 first copy, developments are -22/-26 a development on RPG-22-, while the US went with the AT-4. RPG-22/26 are still fired like the M72 but has an improved warheads. The AFP received 500 M72LAW in 1989 from US when they were given to loyal troops in the coup, since they have been seen with special forces possibly for fire support/bunker buster to even out the mujihadeens with RPGs. Some US company still manufactures M72s, but politics...and if the Russians can deliver in bulk then why not. Marines recently bought 20 Armbrust LAWs from Singapore for evaluation. But unlike the RPG-22/26, the Armbrust is not collapsible/extendable, and is bulky if carrying it by special forces in the jungles. But the armbrust can be fired in confined spaces, very quiet firing, smokeless. A trade-off.  -RPG-22 extended  -RPG-26 extended  -Armbrust |
|
"F*ck it, Dude. Let's go bowling." ---The Big Lebowski | |
|
|
|
| gunpdr | Jul 17 2005, 04:21 AM Post #67 |
|
Trainee
|
While I largely agree with your post, there are some points where I beg to differ: "What must be understood when trying to adapt ComBloc technology to ours is that they had a different set of logic when it comes to war fighting." Agreed "Take for instance the built of their machines. Seemingly poor in quality control plus made of cheap materials. These is because these were designed for wartime production, cheap cost and the fastest way to get something made that works." Agreed "As long as it meets these criterias it is approved by their leaders. These are also not meant to be serviced in the field as we know of. Instead, all those broken down and destroyed hulks that may still be recovered are pulled back and reconstituted to another fighting unit. And each fighting unit must be self-sufficient to achieve its mission. Units that are suffering no headway and heavy casualties are not subject to reinforcement." Agreed "They have followed the methods of Genghis Khan and Napoleon. They only reinforce those units that are meeting success no matter how small this success may be." I do not believe the Russian penchant for "mass" warfare, and the practice of "Units that are suffering no headway and heavy casualties are not subject to reinforcement." bear any semblance to Khinghis Khan's tactics nor those of his successors - Ogedei, Mongkhe, Khublai. Khinghis Khan's armies were generally able to best their enemies in the 12th and 13th century because of their superior strategy, mobility, and military intelligence. Khinghis developed a well organized and trained army. He refused to divide his troops into different ethnic enclaves, creating a sense of unity, while he punished even small infractions against discipline severely. He also divided his armies into a number smaller groups, taking advantage of the superb mobility of his well-trained mounted archers to attack their enemies on several fronts at once. Khinghis Khan preferred to offer opponents the chance to submit to his rule without a fight, but was merciless if he encountered any resistance. Khinghis Khan's conquests were characterized by wholesale destruction on unprecedented scale and radically changed the demographic situation in Asia. According to the works of Iranian historian Rashid al-Din, Mongols killed over 70,000 people in Merv and more than a million in Nishapur. China suffered a drastic decline in population. Before the Mongol invasion, China had about 100 million inhabitants; after the complete conquest in 1279, the census in 1300 showed it to have roughly 60 million people. How many of these deaths were attributable directly to Khingis and his forces is unclear. I worked as a white collar expatriate in Mongolia for more than four years and in my readings as well as discussions with Mongol historians it seems that there are wide spread misconceptions about Mongol military strategy and customs. One reason is the dearth of written history done by the Mongols themselves and those accounts that did survive were written by non Mongols and subject nations who were the targets of the Mongols' psychological warfare. One significant stategy that is not generally known is that the Mongols were an expert in the use of biological warfare. They have a collection of marmots (akin to the prairie dogs) that are a carrier of bubonic plague. These are catapulted into the seiged cities' water supply to spread the plague among the enimies' population. (BTW, K in Mongol is silent so the pronounciation is "Hinghis Han"). "The ComBloc soldier of old was meant to be resupplied with ammo only during its mission period which is about three days. They are not resupplied with anything else. The same goes with their equipment. Their tanks are meant to take with it enough fuel to insure that it could travel a so number of miles. It is only resupplied with ammo during its run. The same could be said to other assets. Now, if one is damaged or destroyed they are pulled back to repair farms. When fixed, these assets along with soldiers from units that have now suffered much casualites along with those soldiers that have recovered from their wounds are reconstituted into a new fighting unit under the colors of a unit that was pulled back. Creature comforts is obviously neglected as the design must be as simple as possible. " One reason for the short timetable for ammo and fuel supply and the "expendable" nature of the design of their weapons systems is that the Soviet Union never planned for a long drawn out conventional war. After a short period of time, they reasonably expected that any hostilities with NATO to be escalated to a nuclear war where conventional forces may be relegated to mopping up and occupation operations. "The GAZ jeep is more probably like the old American jeeps. I used to take a ride on those at our province and driving through the back roads is very much like riding a ship in a storm. Still, it gets us to our destination although admittedly not in a very comfortable shape.." Agreed - they are designed like the WWII jeeps. "If we are then to take on Russian equipment, these details plus others must be studied first. We cannot afford such a system, the fast availability of replacement engines, as our industry and economy is not war capable and ready. Instead, we replace and modify some of the techniques to make them uniquely our own. Take for instance their MiG 29. We cannot at this point afford to set up a manufacturing plant for its engines and other spares. What we may possibly do is marry it with a Western engine that we can afford and easily acquire from our allies in case war breaks out. Take too its avionics. It was designed to their type of fighting doctrine that emphasizes on centralized control. We need to change those to our type of fighting doctrine that emphasizes more on initiative and flexibility. Still, some of its systems must remain such as its simple non fly-by-wire capability, ability to take off on rough runways, ability to be serviced in the field and its dual role of doing anti-tank work (the reason why Russian planes sport now 30mm cannons)." I have an Indian Air Force colonel acquaintance who was a veteran of the Indian - Pakistani wars. He claims with a degree of truth that the most capable Migs and Su fighters in the world are built and flown by the Indian Air Force. They have a higher degree of quality control in manufacturing (he was the first one I talked to who had first hand experience of the atrocious quality of Soviet craftmanship) and they used Western Europe designed avionics. They did not change the engines to western designed/built ones as they believed they were uneconomical. To sum things up, we mix the best of both worlds with what our resources can do. Let us say we can afford some of their BMP-1s. Do we have enough funds to adapt it to our kind of fighting and logistics? If it would cost more in the end it is then only practical to avoid acquiring these in the first place. If we do have the resources on the other hand to mod these and as locally as possible then we go for it provided the numbers and costs are maintained. You have hit it right! Most if not all of the AFP's officer corp are trained in US and western doctrine either locally or abroad. Also I personally feel that our troops safety and welfare should be maintained with the most capable and safest equipment that we can afford to buy, beg or borrow! |
|
|
|
| gunpdr | Jul 17 2005, 05:39 AM Post #68 |
|
Trainee
|
K-141 Kursk (also known by its NATO reporting name of "Oscar-II" class) nuclear cruise missile submarine - pride of the Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy. Kursk sank on August 12, 2000 with all 118 hands lost. The Bekaa Valley (Lebanon) air battle of June 1982. At the end of July 1982, Syria had lost at least 87 Soviet built aircraft, while Israeli losses amounted to a few helicopters, one RF-4E, and an A-4 Skyhawk downed by a PLO SA-7.16 Air to Air Victories in Desert Storm- http://www.rjlee.org/aakill.html#Rodriguez-1 Almost half of the former East German navy's Soviet designed ships sinks on its way to Indonesia after their purchase by the latter. An erroneously perceived notion of "colonial mentality" has nothing to do with my choices. The above are emperical proof that "anything Russian ain't good enough". I have flown in a Viet Nam Airlines TU 154 plane (I was in the front row and a few minutes after take off, the Russian captain goes out of the cabin and sleeps on the seat next to me - drunk), ridden in a Lada car, UAZ jeep, Kamaz truck, T55 tank, shot an AKM, RPD, RPK, SVD (an atrocious "sniper" rifle) lived in an Russian designed apartment using a Russian built stove, fridge, appliances, lights and fixtures, etc. With first hand experience I can say Russian equipment seldom meet their design parameters, are prone to frequent breakdowns and short life cycles. A contributing factor to low QC is the high level of alcoholism in the work force - even Yeltsin was more often drunk than not. My Danish colleague was often late for work because his Lada would frequently overheat during summer and freeze cold during winter. My Russian colleague would buy Western /East Asian built products over Russian made ones because he knows he will be shafted if he does otherwise. The roads in Moscow are filled by a majority of West European, American and Japanese cars for a good reason. My friend who was one of the first Filipinos to do business with Russia after the Soviet Union broke up, sold a Kamaz truck to the Philippine Army for T&E. I saw the subject truck a couple of years later at the old FSRR compound in Fort Bonifacio - junked. I am sorry but unless their quality improves, I will not endorse Russian made products. 
|
|
|
|
| possible | Jul 17 2005, 06:16 AM Post #69 |
Member
|
always wondered about that. russians i met in bali spent more time in the bars than on the beach  btw, brilliant posts. |
|
War. What is it good for?--James Brown What's love got to do with it?--Tina Turner Only the intelligent are brave. | |
|
|
|
| City Hunter | Jul 17 2005, 01:06 PM Post #70 |
|
Member
|
Sir gunpdr, could you share to us a more detailed account of your experience with Russian made hardware. The small bits that I know and have experienced with them are almost in par with your accounts. The CIS-flag ship that was with us in the pier once though seemingly well equipped and modern seemed to be a bit aged in design. The aircrafts that were displayed and on demo here back then was ok though again of seemingly old design. I didn't get to check out the MiG 29 much as Erap was in the way (and they pulled out the ladder afterwards and had to get back before breaktime was over). Still, was impressed when the MiG 29 went vertical before us. The AK and other Russian firearms seem to be made of cheap metal too. Even the ammo is made of laminated cheap iron. Seems to be that ComBloc ammo is configured to fire in a different action hence the bad reports before of its performance when used with Western firearms. And indeed configuring a MiG 29 to accept a new engine is a tough task. Unlike electronics which is faster and easier to switch and swap mechanicals are tougher to do. The most likely improvement that could be made is improve the design and materials of the engine to make it perform better and be more fuel efficient too. Any suggestions what is worthwhile for us to adopt to for our AFP's use? Oh, as for their ballistic missile use idea my references indicate that they plan to use it as soon as possible so that they won't need to protect it. Their populace being equipped with bomb shelters and such already would survive a nuclear exchange. Thank God that those godless Communists didn't bother to test that theory. |
|
Command is about authority, about appointment to a position. Effective leadership is different. It must be learned and practiced in order for it to rise to the level of art. You must love those you lead before you can be an effective leader. You can certainly command without that sense of commitment but you cannot lead without it; and without leadership, command is a hollow experience. .. a vacuum often filled with mistrust and ignorance. Gen. Eric K. Shinseki | |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
 Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." Learn More · Register Now |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Military and Law Enforcement · Next Topic » |
2:46 PM Jul 13