Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Russia Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: russian millitary muscle
ace    12/7/2003 6:30:42 PM
the russian army has fallen in millitary strenght drasticaly since the sovier union broke up, but their army is still quite credible. they have got numbers and technology. the t 96 has proven to be quite a tank. air power wise, the russians currently mainly use mig 29's, su 30's su 35's have introduced su 37's and are developing su 47's and mig 1.42's. all of which ,if you visit some of the web sites, are quite amazing fighters. their main bombers are the tu-160's . they can carry 40,000 kg, at a max speed of 2,200 km/h for a non refuling distance of 12,300 km and are capable of mid air re fulling. All russian misslies now have a firing range of over 60 degrees, which alowes them to lock on and fire way before the plane faces the enomy head on
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT
ace    RE:to ace   1/31/2004 2:14:30 AM
that is not entierly true.in the beggining of barbarosa, german soldiers were much better traied than the russian. half the russian soldiers never fired a gun in their life. the germans were way ahead technology wise. the russian tanks were partly made of wood, and burnet up like matches, and the russian airforce largly consisted of bioplanes. there were not enough riffles to arm every soldier, every second man was armed with a gun. it was around a year after the beggining of barbarosa that the russian millitary had gone through a miricle millitary recovery, catching up and out doing the germans in technology, and arms supply, with the new inventions of the t 34's katiucha's, ill 2's yak 3's and la 9's
 
Quote    Reply

sooner    RE:to sooner   1/31/2004 8:13:28 AM
I think you are absolutely right. Russia and America should be allies. They are both wonderful countries who could get a lot done together.
 
Quote    Reply

roadcop    Russian military in 1941 (to ace)   1/31/2004 2:49:41 PM
Hey, read some books about WW2. Russian army intensively fought with Japanese in 1930s, with Finland and Poland. Soviet forces were well equipped with modern weaponry. They've had a lot of fighting experience. And certainly Russian tanks were not made of wood. Thats ridiculous! T-34 was first deployed in 1940 (before war). KV-1 and KV-2 too. Best German tank in 1941 was PzIII with 5cm gun and 60 mm of front armor. Main German AT gun was 37 mm. Russian tankers have called it "door-knocker", because german cannons couldnt penetrate sloped armor of T-34. All German weapons and armor were inferior to Russian (except 88mm FLAK and some infantry weapons). Katyushas also were invented several yeras earlier. First such weapons have been tested in combat against Japs in 1939. IL-2 is 1940 design. Well, "ace", all this info is open. You can find it even in PC Games (West Front/East Front, Close Combat, Combat Mission, Steel Panthers Panzer General and other good wargames). In 1941 Russian lack only good commanders and generals (after Stalins purges and executions). If Red Army had good commanders those days, Berlin would be captured in 1942.
 
Quote    Reply

ace    RE:Russian military in 1941 (roadcop)   2/3/2004 3:24:09 AM
i admit, i was wrong about the t-34's and the katiuchas. yet, the russia airforce was inferior in comparison to the german airforce at the start of war. And, there wern't enough guns to arm every sodier. the germans, who had been planning and training for war way befor the invation, were better trained, and alot better prepared.
 
Quote    Reply

sooner    RE:United States   2/15/2004 9:56:56 AM
what do you mean by A O?
 
Quote    Reply

sooner    RE:russian millitary muscle   2/15/2004 10:10:43 AM
Awe, I see. Your Russian. Russia's nukes IS their military muscle. Thats it. The mig-29...ha ha ha. The American Raptor would make debris out of it. The Soviet Union-powerful; Russia alone-an inconvenience.
 
Quote    Reply

wait.wat?    Sooner   2/15/2004 1:50:51 PM
Don't make me go over there.
 
Quote    Reply

roadcop    RE:Sooner   2/16/2004 11:46:16 PM
I agree: Mig-29 is aging 4-th generation light fighter, Raptor is modern heavy fighter. Certainly Raptor can destroy dozen of Migs. But Russian Air Forces now depend on Sukhoy's Su-33 and Su-35 (and their variants) which are much more powerful. Also, Mig-31 in latest variants can send Raptors to Nine Hells (especially if supported by land-based radars and A-50).
 
Quote    Reply

ace    RE:United States   2/17/2004 1:34:04 AM
it was supposed to say A O K, but the last letter got cut out.
 
Quote    Reply

ace    RE:russian millitary muscle (sooner)   2/17/2004 1:46:25 AM
thats right. it is unfair to compare a 4th generation fighter to a 5th. try comaring the f22 to some of their latest prototypes such as the mig 1.42, su-47, su-37, su-54, and i-2000. i know they don't count since their not in service, but it still demonstartes their technology. however, there is no doubt that the US is about one hundred times stronger that russia. i didn't start this forum to try and convince people that russia is still mighty powerful, but to start a descusion about the overall situation of the russian millitary today and in the future, and to learn more about it, and despite me being russia, my veiws on russia are fairly neutural.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics