Read the forum code of contact
By: - 12th October 2004 at 18:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Here's a slightly more detailled article from RIA Novosti:
MOSCOW, October 12 (RIA Novosti) - By January 1, 2005, the Russian Armed Forces will be reduced by 8% and total 1.1 million men. Initially it was assumed that dismissed would be not combatant officers, but military sportsmen, builders, instructors of military departments in civil educational institutes and others. But, since the number of such positions was only 40-45 thousand, it remained unclear what arms would be considered less important and subjected to most massive reduction.
According to Nezavisimaya Gazeta, now one may safely say what principle the reduction follows: the troops have received an applicable directive. The scheduled changes will touch upon all services and arms of the Armed Forces.
In particular, two Tu-22M3 long-range bomber regiments of the Air Force will be put into reserve. Subject to the reduction will also be fighter regiments: two MiG-29 regiments, two MiG-31 regiments and one Su-27 regiment. Reduced at the same time will be two bomber regiments (Su-24M) and two attack aircraft regiments (Su-25). Several Mi-8MT and Mi-24 helicopter regiments will cease their existence. At the same time, the current Air Force reduction provides for introducing some improvements. For example, some airfields after reduction of the air regiments will be turned into air materiel storage bases. The materiel will be maintained by air bases technicians, while pilots will shift to rotational service: if required they will be brought to the air field from neighbouring regiments not subject to reduction.
The Navy following the reduction will no longer be responsible for storing decommissioned nuclear submarines at holding anchorage bases and stations (they will all be handed over to the Federal Atomic Energy Agency). As for the Navy combat equipment, reduced will be two Project 941 Akula (Shark) submarines in the Northern Fleet an all Project 667BD submarines in the Northern and Pacific Fleets.
The Strategic Missile Forces will assume new duty pattern. If earlier all regiments were on level readiness duty, now some of the regiments will have reduced organization (for switching to level readiness they will require from several hours to several days), and some will be turned into missile storage bases. Besides, the Strategic Missile Forces will lose one missile division equipped with 15A18 Satan intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Reduction of the Army will particularly involve the nuclear, biological and chemical protection forces. Besides, the Defense Ministry plans to optimize the strength of its military educational establishments (most of them are part of the Army) through disbanding small-scale schools by merging or closing them. As a result almost eight thousand military instructors will be dismissed.
In general by the end of the year the strength of the Air Force will be reduced by 36 thousand personnel, the Army - by 20 thousand, the Navy - by 16 thousand, the Construction Corps - by nine thousand, the service support forces - by six thousand, the Strategic Missile Forces - by three thousand, the Airborne and Railroad Troops - by two thousand, the Space Troops - by one thousand personnel. Reduction will also involve command and control structures, their staff being cut by 10%. Besides, over five thousand uniformed officials - service members detached to federal governmental authorities - will be dismissed.
By: - 14th October 2004 at 10:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How is it that nobody seems interested enough in a, seemingly comprehensive Russian Armed Forces downsizing, to comment on it?
By: - 14th October 2004 at 11:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Because it is not the bottom-line. No surprise, just reallity kicks in.
The average age of pilots is close to 40. How many new pilots are trained as replacements? How many flying hours for each? Situation for ac are similar!
By: - 14th October 2004 at 12:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How many aircrafts are there in a Regiment??
By: - 14th October 2004 at 14:14 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Differs, from ~15-45 (Tu-160 or Su-25). Most fighter Rgts ~30 now with 3 sqns.
Modern RAF sqns and Russia 1. sqns are very similar in strength.
By: - 14th October 2004 at 18:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
In particular, two Tu-22M3 long-range bomber regiments of the Air Force will be put into reserve. Subject to the reduction will also be fighter regiments: two MiG-29 regiments, two MiG-31 regiments and one Su-27 regiment. Reduced at the same time will be two bomber regiments (Su-24M) and two attack aircraft regiments (Su-25). Several Mi-8MT and Mi-24 helicopter regiments will cease their existence. At the same time, the current Air Force reduction provides for introducing some improvements. For example, some airfields after reduction of the air regiments will be turned into air materiel storage bases. The materiel will be maintained by air bases technicians, while pilots will shift to rotational service: if required they will be brought to the air field from neighbouring regiments not subject to reduction.
The reform seems rather comprehensive. What would be even more wonderful : Russia shifting to all volunteer armed forces.
Sens: once can do without the derision, friend. Russia is passing through some tough times now, but it ain't licked. It will come back stronger, surely.
I remember a popular Russian saying :""No matter how much you feed a wolf, an elephant still has bigger balls."
By: - 14th October 2004 at 19:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The saying sounds more Indian. ;)
Russia is lucky, living in a peacefull surrounding right now. It is interesting to learn, how much it has to scale back to achive a stable basic. The Russian population is ~ 150 mio from former ~300 mio. , no more satellite nations to share the defence burden. Just 10%+ of Japanese BIP or similar to India. :eek:
Welfare of people in mind I wish Russia a fast economic recovery. :)
By: - 14th October 2004 at 19:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
(1) I assure you it is a Russian saying. :)
(2) A determined terrorist conflict plagues Russia in Chechnya, how is that Lucky?
(3)
Just 10%+ of Japanese BIP or similar to India.
Could you explain what BIP is? I tried to Google, but am unable to come up with a satisfactory answer.
PS: Russia ended 2003 with its fifth straight year of growth, averaging 6.5% annually
By: - 14th October 2004 at 19:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
(1) I assure you it is a Russian saying. :)(2) A determined terrorist conflict plagues Russia in Chechnya, how is that Lucky?
(3)
Could you explain what BIP is? I tried to Google, but am unable to come up with a satisfactory answer.
PS: Russia ended 2003 with its fifth straight year of growth, averaging 6.5% annually
1) OK, why not. :) The strongest animal in Russian wildlife is the polar-bear.
2) A small hostile population of 0,9 mio within 150 mio is more a noiseance than a real threat. The outcome there shows some shortcomings of Russian forces too. Internal problem. :eek:
3) BIP = Brutto Inland Product = value of all services generated/produced from Russia in a single year. It has dropped till the end of the 90s and is recovering now from an alltime-low. ;)
By: - 14th October 2004 at 20:09 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"What would be even more wonderful : Russia shifting to all volunteer armed forces."
I agree to an extent. The only way that this would work is if this professional force was supported by a large and well equipped part-time territorial defense force (a la British TA or US National Guard but larger and more significant than both of these). The reason for this is that Russia, unlike Britain and the US still faces a theoretical threat of land invasion and in order to be able to defend itself against this must have a large force of trained troops to call upon if such a scenario presents itself.
Another reason is Russia's physical size. Russia wouldn't be able to maintain a large enough professional army to ensure the protection of all its borders as well as dealing with Chechnya and future Chechnya style scenarios (not to mention fulfilling its international obligations such as UN peacekeeping missions).
On the other hand, in order to better deal with Chechnya scale conflicts (and to perform better in UN peacekeeping missions) Russia has to have a greater number of professional units. Professionalising Speznas and the Airborne forces (and maybe the air force as well) would be a good start.
An interesting way to do things might be to have some units and functions in the armed forces completely professional (such as those mentioned above and others) while still conscripting for others (perhaps such as secondary and tertiary roles).
By: - 14th October 2004 at 22:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"What would be even more wonderful : Russia shifting to all volunteer armed forces."I agree to an extent. The only way that this would work is if this professional force was supported by a large and well equipped part-time territorial defense force (a la British TA or US National Guard but larger and more significant than both of these). The reason for this is that Russia, unlike Britain and the US still faces a theoretical threat of land invasion and in order to be able to defend itself against this must have a large force of trained troops to call upon if such a scenario presents itself.
Another reason is Russia's physical size. Russia wouldn't be able to maintain a large enough professional army to ensure the protection of all its borders as well as dealing with Chechnya and future Chechnya style scenarios (not to mention fulfilling its international obligations such as UN peacekeeping missions).
On the other hand, in order to better deal with Chechnya scale conflicts (and to perform better in UN peacekeeping missions) Russia has to have a greater number of professional units. Professionalising Speznas and the Airborne forces (and maybe the air force as well) would be a good start.
An interesting way to do things might be to have some units and functions in the armed forces completely professional (such as those mentioned above and others) while still conscripting for others (perhaps such as secondary and tertiary roles).
:confused: Please name three theoretical enemies, capable and willing to invade Russia for what purpose? At least when Russia keeps its atomar deterence forces in good shape, which it has so far. :)
By: - 14th October 2004 at 23:24 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
1) OK, why not. :) The strongest animal in Russian wildlife is the polar-bear.
There isn't a Siberian Elephant?!?
To go with the Siberian Tiger?!
By: - 14th October 2004 at 23:59 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
3) BIP = Brutto Inland Product = value of all services generated/produced from Russia in a single year. It has dropped till the end of the 90s and is recovering now from an alltime-low. ;)
Hmmm, I guess you mean GDP - Gross Domestic Product - IIRC, that's the English term for what you mean.
In my place, we say PIB - produto interno bruto.
By: - 15th October 2004 at 00:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
PIB is ok, it is better than GDP. :)
By: - 15th October 2004 at 00:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There isn't a Siberian Elephant?!?To go with the Siberian Tiger?!
:) I know about that Tiger, still to find at the Amur/Heilong I wish and hope.
But the polar-bear is still heavier. ;)
By: - 15th October 2004 at 09:07 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
noooOO!!! they CANT take those Backfire-Cs off duty! GRRRR
how many would that leave in active service?
By: - 15th October 2004 at 09:11 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
russian GDP has actually risen 30% since the early 90s. please correct me if im wrong.
fromt ~800 billion to ~1.2 trillion... growing @ 7.3% that's pretty good. (CIA info)
By: - 15th October 2004 at 11:56 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
russian GDP has actually risen 30% since the early 90s. please correct me if im wrong.fromt ~800 billion to ~1.2 trillion... growing @ 7.3% that's pretty good. (CIA info)
I will not dispute numbers. From 1999 it rises again. If the last number is true, it is still lower than the GDP of Great Britain. ;)
By: - 15th October 2004 at 12:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
I will not dispute numbers. From 1999 it rises again. If the last number is true, it is still lower than the GDP of Great Britain. ;)
:eek: dionis you confused Rubels with Dollars, so it is much lower than that of GB. :)
Please look:
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3183.htm
By: - 15th October 2004 at 18:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"Please name three theoretical enemies, capable and willing to invade Russia for what purpose?"
I can name two - although I concede they seem unlikely. 1. China, with the long disputed border with Russia and a growing Chinese population on the Russian side of this border 2. The US and NATO, which must still be considerred as a potential enemy. While these seem unlikely it must be remembered that the last century saw Russia (or the Soviet Union) 'invaded' or attacked by large formations of land troops several times.
Furthermore, Russia has a large muslim population, many of whom are concentrated in largely muslim provinces and must, therefore, be wary of an expansion of chechen style seperatism.
Posts: 3,269
By: ink - 12th October 2004 at 15:49
According to an article from the Belgrade daily "Politika":
RUSSIAN ARMY REFORM
RETIREMENT OF 100,000 TROOPS
Russian armed forces will number 1.2 million troops from 2005.
The largest cutbacks are expected in the Air Force.
Moscow – The Russian Army has received a directive to reduce the strength of all its elements by a total of 100,000 troops by the end of 2004, by approximately 8% of current strength, thereby reducing the size of the armed forces to 1.1 to 1.2 million members, as reported by the Komepcaнт news agency.
The largest cutbacks are expected in the Air Force and the smallest in the Cosmic Forces, Railway Troops, PVO and Strategic Rocket units.
Structural changes are also anticipated.
The Air Force will be reduced by 36,000 members, the Army by 20,000 and the Navy by 16,000.
The reduction will also hit Strategic Aviation with the retirement of two reserve regiments of the long-range Tu-22M3 bomber. The clipping of Strategic Aviation wings will also impact on fighter, bomber and fighter-bomber strengths.
On the other hand, the PVO will remain practically untouched; furthermore it is expected to become one of the elementary components of the Air/Space Defence Force that is being formed in the Russian armed forces.
The news from the Navy is that the responsibility for the decommissioning of nuclear submarines will pass to the Federal Nuclear Energy Agency.
As regards military equipment, the cutbacks will include two submarine types from the Northern Fleet and all type 667BD submarines from the Northern and Pacific Fleets.
The Strategic Rocket Forces will be left without even one division equipped with the 15A18 “Satan” ICBM.
One of the three Rocket Armies, the one stationed near Orenburg, will be retired; thereby reducing the costs of maintaining these units, according to the logic of the Ministry of Defence.
Reductions in the Land Army include the retirement of the Head Quarters for Battle Preparation of the Armed Forces, a reduction in the number of members of the ABH units and the closing or integration of a number of military academies.
Translated by Ivan Kovanovic
Any more detailed information would be much appreciated - as would a general discussion of the impact of these reforms and whether they are far-reaching enough (which to me they don't seem to be).