Skip to comments.
New Russian Army weaponry 'inferior' to NATO's, overpriced
Ria Novosti ^
| 15/03/2011
Posted on 03/16/2011 8:41:03 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
New Russian Army weaponry 'inferior' to NATO's, overpriced

T-90
© RIA Novosti.
The most advanced weapon systems manufactured for Russia's ground forces are below NATO and even Chinese standards and are expensive, GF chief Col. Gen. Alexander Postnikov said on Tuesday.
"The weapon models that are manufactured by our industry, including armor, artillery and small arms and light weapons, fail to meet the standards that exist in NATO and even China," he said at a session of the Defense and Security Committee of the upper house of the Russian parliament.
He said that Russia's most advanced tank, the T-90, is in fact a modification of the Soviet-era T-72 tank [entered production in 1971] but costs 118 million rubles (over $4 million) per unit.
"It would be easier for us to buy three Leopards [Germany's main battle tanks] with this money," Postnikov said.
MOSCOW, March 15 (RIA Novosti)
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: armsbuildup; mbt; nato; russia
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
To: sukhoi-30mki
"Quantity has a quality all it's own"
/johnny
To: sukhoi-30mki
I think they will fall farther and farther behind in weapons development. They are about the same size (in population) as Japan.
To: JRandomFreeper
"The weapon models that are manufactured by our industry, including armor, artillery and small arms and light weapons, fail to meet the standards that exist in NATO and even China,"
They can sell it to the Indians; India seems to like Russian crap.
To: ThinkingBuddha
India is the worlds largest weapons importer. And the Ak’s created by Ivan have went toe to toe with high priced light arms.
5
posted on
03/16/2011 8:52:52 AM PDT
by
Palter
(If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it. ~ Mark Twain)
To: sukhoi-30mki
Old Soviet doctorine was based on numbers, anyway. I remember reading an account of the German study of a captured T-34 in WWII. They basically came to the conclusion the tank would not pass their QC standards for production. Nevertheless, there it was, eventually rolling through the streets of Berlin.
6
posted on
03/16/2011 8:54:10 AM PDT
by
edpc
(Tagline under construction: Your American Recovery and Reinvestment Act dollars at work.)
To: ThinkingBuddha
Probably because they can upgrade that crap with Western subsystems and get it to work.
Besides you only get some kinds of crap from the Russians.
To: Palter
There are two distinct issues here-one with the Russian military and another with the arms industry. A large number of ‘new systems’ they are buying such as frigates and bomber aircraft are based on hulls or air frames launched in the 90s. You can’t expect their armor capabilities to be much better.
To: JRandomFreeper
The Russian military is facing a dearth of both.
To: texmexis best
They are about the same size (in population) as Japan.
10
posted on
03/16/2011 9:03:37 AM PDT
by
TopQuark
To: edpc
Yeah, but their tanks and fighters haven’t done so well.
Still, I think this is more of a “negotiating stance.”
11
posted on
03/16/2011 9:04:05 AM PDT
by
Little Ray
(The Gods of the Copybook Heading, with terror and slaughter return!)
To: sukhoi-30mki
Yeah, well, I wouldn't have a full-auto AK if you gave me one.
You can disprove this by giving me one. :-)
To: texmexis best
My reply line did not display, for some reason:
They are about the same size (in population) as Japan. And it decreased by about 750,000 per year.
13
posted on
03/16/2011 9:06:30 AM PDT
by
TopQuark
To: JRandomFreeper
“Quantity has a quality all it's own”
/johnny”
Exactly that is what Stalin was saying in WWll.
14
posted on
03/16/2011 9:11:48 AM PDT
by
Cheetahcat
( November 4 2008 ,A date which will live in Infamy.)
To: edpc
The German assessment of the T-34 probably put too much emphasis on fit and finish. The T-34 was tough and quite formidable. Some say it was better than any German tank.
15
posted on
03/16/2011 9:13:54 AM PDT
by
ryan71
(Dear spell check - No, I will not capitalize the "m" in moslem!)
To: sukhoi-30mki
You can buy Leopard tanks for 1.3 million?
Mike
16
posted on
03/16/2011 9:16:18 AM PDT
by
MichaelP
(The ultimate result of shielding men from the effects of folly is to fill the world with fools ~HS)
To: edpc
They basically came to the conclusion the tank would not pass their QC standards for production. The Nazi's had QC standards requiring most tank components to last three to five years at a time when the average life expectancy for a tank was about two weeks.
17
posted on
03/16/2011 9:37:13 AM PDT
by
SeeSharp
To: edpc
The reason why the t-34 worked for them was they produced it in such numbers they lost a bunch but enough of them could take out enemy tanks and they still had many left to keep rolling.
18
posted on
03/16/2011 9:39:17 AM PDT
by
Secret Agent Man
(I'd like to tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.)
To: ryan71; edpc
Germans built their tanks to last for a long time. The Russians built theirs to be easy to manufacture, realizing that they would probably not have a long life in combat, thus didn’t expect them to ‘last forever.’
19
posted on
03/16/2011 9:40:23 AM PDT
by
GreyFriar
(Spearhead - 3rd Armored Division 75-78 & 83-87)
To: ThinkingBuddha
They can sell it to the Indians; India seems to like Russian crap.
For decades, Russian crap was all the Indians could buy. We were (and still are) busy arming the Pakistanis. But India now seems to be buying arms from Europe too. If we're smart, we'll get in on that market - could mean a lot of jobs at Boeing, Lockheed, Raytheon, etc.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson