MOSCOW, June 20 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's Armed Forces will receive up to 250 types of advanced weaponry in 2006, a deputy defense minister said Tuesday.

"This year we will finish testing about 250 new types of weapons," General Alexei Moskovsky said. "I hope that all of them will be put into service with the Russian army."

The general said that Russia's orbital group would receive new satellites, and that Glonass system of navigational and global positioning satellites would be fully restored to operational condition.

Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said in March that the Russian orbital group consisted of 96 satellites, of which 59 are used for military purposes. The Glonass system currently has 17 satellites and two laser reflectors in orbit.

Moskovsky also said the Russian Air Force would receive modernized Su-27 Flanker fighters, Su-24 Fencer tactical bombers, and Su-25 Frogfoot close support aircraft, and that the Land Forces would get modernized T-72 and T-80 tanks, and new T-90 main battle tanks.

A government minister said in May that Russia's state defense order would increase by 20% to 303.7 bln rubles ($11.2 bln) in 2007.

Its good to see the effects of Russia's economic development reflected on the Rusian military .....But the real fugure of defense order seems to be far more than 11bn $..Russia has an old habit of decreasing the real defense expenditures .

Hmm, I'd hardly call modernising old weapons, ' new ' weapons systems. Sounds more like bravado than anything else.

Originally posted by rogue1
Hmm, I'd hardly call modernising old weapons, ' new ' weapons systems. Sounds more like bravado than anything else.

The fact is that you can hardly bear the fact that Red army is regaining her lost glory .

Most new developments in military are basically mordernisation of old exsisting ones...atleast that's the trend in most countries where we have something called "tradition"

The greatest invention of WW2 was said, by some especially in foxholes, was the Model P38 can opener every GI was issued and carried. Small, foolproof in operation and always worked. Let's see the Ruskies beat that!

[You can still order them via Google for $1 each.]

Originally posted by prelude
The fact is that you can hardly bear the fact that Red army is regaining her lost glory .

The Red Army died in 1991, even then it was a shadow of it's former self. It's not as though you could reinvade Eastern Europe or anything LMAO.

Most new developments in military are basically mordernisation of old exsisting ones...atleast that's the trend in most countries where we have something called "tradition"

LOL, well that's one way to put it. It's still old equipment, there isn't anything new about, but hey if it makes the Russian generals think they hvae a bigger set than they do......good for them.

The Su-27 Flankers mentioned will have significantly better avionics and possibly AA-13 AAMs as a stop-gap between current Flanker/Foxhounds and the PAKFA. They were ordered last year. Sorry, can't remember all the details.

Moscow June 20 RIA Novosti - Russia's Armed Forces will receive up to 250 types of advanced weaponry in 2006, a deputy defense minister said Tuesday. "This year we will finish testing about 250 new types of weapons," General Alexei Moskovsky said. "I hope that all of them will be put into service with the Russian army." The general said that Russia's orbital group would receive new satellites, and that Glonass system of navigational and global positioning satellites would be fully restored to operational condition.

Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said the Russian orbital group consisted of 96 satellites, of which 59 are used for military purposes. The Glonass system currently has 17 satellites and two laser reflectors in orbit. Moskovsky also said the Russian Air Force would receive modernized Su-27 Flanker fighters, Su-24 Fencer tactical bombers, and Su-25 Frogfoot close support aircraft and the Land Forces would get modernized T-72 and T-80 tanks, and new T-90 main battle tanks. A government minister said in May that Russia's state defense order would increase by 20% to 303.7 b. rubles ($11.2 b.) in 2007.[Edited by Don W]

CBS 60 Minutes had a blip showing Russian spending $19 B. on defense - American euphemism for war - which was less than Japan, Germany or Italy. This story said the US spends $455 B. On budget. Not counting “off” budget. Point? Sure, the Ruskies may get a new main battle tank, but so how many? I’d say a half dozen. 6. Six. Compared to the US stock of 8,000 M1A1s. Big deal. Same ratios in the new jet planes. The Russian’s will be lucky to get enough to fill one squadron. Satellites? Most are “dead” and cannot be resurrected. Face it, only the US is fully committed to war and the weapons of war.

The"problem" with the US approach to the world, is that our presidential advisors have no other options open to them. It is war or it is our way. This is not their fault, altogether. We have been buffaloed since the 1979 Hostage thing. We're a one track mind-set and one track won't always take you to the best destination, or even to one you'd like yourself.

posted by rogue1

The Red Army died in 1991, even then it was a shadow of it's former self. It's not as though you could invade Eastern Europe again. LMAO. Most new developments in military are basically modernization of old excising ones . . [Edited by Don W]

The US military intelligence industrial complex found it useful to bloat up the USSR’s military potential and inflate its industrial capacity. Foreign governments knew this all along but could do nothing about it. If US leaders and the American people were so enamored with war and the weapons of war, who could/would dare stop them? Afghan? Iraq? NK? Iran? Hmm? True Cold Warriors!

Meanwhile, around the world, a lot of ordinary people are improving their lot in life while in America, 80% of our population is worse off in 2006 than 20 years ago. And sure as heck not safer despite the child-like “look’em in the eye” braggadocio of our Magnificent Leader.

Plus, the R&Fs are putting a half trillion dollar a year of the cost of our own bloated government - especially our military looking for an enemy - Gads! - scraping the bottom of the barrel with North Korea an Iran - onto our grand-children. Geez.

How low can you go? Talk about “no child left behind” most of our poorer kids won’t get out of the starting gate.



[edit on 6/21/2006 by donwhite]

Im still shocked GLONASS is not fully operational. I think it should be clear to everyone by now the benefits of such systems are huge and proven thanks to GPS.

Russia was at 14 satellites in 2005 I think but now is at 12 right? and I think you need atleast 24 satellites for full global coverage. Even the European Galileo is not full operational so right now all countries must rely on the US military fully controlled system if they want full global positioning.

I dont know about everyone eles but I always thought that was strange that other global powers havent pushed harder for their own systems.

posted by ShadowXiX

I don’t know about everyone else but I always thought that was strange that other global powers haven’t pushed harder for their own systems.
[Edited by Don W]

Look, as I see it, the "Cold War" was over in 1991. Actually, it was over long before then, but it was over symbolically when Gen. Sec. Gorbachev ordered the Red Army to "stand down" in the Eastern European Velvet Revolution. That’s why he got the Nobel Peace Prize. And well worth it!

I don’t know about our country. I can’t accept that every president from Roosevelt to Bush 43 is a conspirator on some evil mission to take over the earth. But our people do look strange under the looking glass of history. Rhetoric is 180 degrees out of kelter with practice. Call it Machiavellian or call it high treason, it sure is strange.

I understand the cold wars over but even our allies dont like the level of control we have over the GPS system why do you think Europe is creating the Galileo systems?

The military still has "Selective Deniability" and can shut the system off in different parts of the world or non US military systems. They can degrade the signal or just shut the whole system down.

I personally wouldnt even want the UK having that amount of control over a US military system let alone Russia or China.

[edit on 21-6-2006 by ShadowXIX]

posted by ShadowXIX

I understand the cold war is over but even our allies don’t like the level of control we have over the GPS system; why do you think Europe is creating the Galileo systems?

The US military has "Selective Deniability" and can shut the system off in different parts of the world or deny to non US military systems. They can degrade the signal or just shut the whole system down. I personally wouldn’t even want the UK having that amount of control over a US military system let alone Russia or China. [Edited by Don W]

Well, S19, you’re right, in the context of war. It is really too bad we can’t produce anything without including a war angle. It is the symbol of our American problem as I see it. Our leaders have only one option - war or do it our way. We are now talking about “weaponizing” near-space. To do that ought to be a war crime. A crime against humanity.

For a variety of reasons none of which were malevolent, or conspiratorial, the US has lost or failed to develop the philosophy of alternative means and capability of imposing levels or degrees of coercion of other countries. We’ve fallen into the “trap” of having only one available response. It is patently clear to me that the other side is pushing us “shouting and cheering” into bankruptcy by leverage. They spend a few million, we counter their small expenditure by spending many billions.

We cannot keep up the war on terrorism fighting it that way. It will bankrupt us and in the meantime the R&Fs who have gained control of the governmental processes on the demagoguery of the Nine Eleven Event. The R&Fs are paying less and less and the poor and poorer are paying more and more.

Every dollar our government borrows today is a bonus to the R&Fs that the poor and poorer will ultimately either have to pay back or to do without. Or their children. And grand-children.



[edit on 6/21/2006 by donwhite]

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Im still shocked GLONASS is not fully operational. I think it should be clear to everyone by now the benefits of such systems are huge and proven thanks to GPS.

Russia was at 14 satellites in 2005 I think but now is at 12 right? and I think you need atleast 24 satellites for full global coverage. Even the European Galileo is not full operational so right now all countries must rely on the US military fully controlled system if they want full global positioning.

I dont know about everyone eles but I always thought that was strange that other global powers havent pushed harder for their own systems.

You don´t need a global positioning system if you don´t have global military interests

Anyway, no wonder that Galileo isnt up and running, thze project was officially started not long ago in the year 2000 and is still in development (GPS needed about two decades for the actual planning, too) - interestingly enough the american pressure over the Gulf War 3 dispute actually saved Galileo from being stuck in development and budget hell.

Well, and GLONASS as a global positioning system was effectively dead following the economic troubles, and there are more important things for Russia right now than achieveing coverage of more than their home turf, although the improving India-Russia cooperation boosted the program recently. There are some indications that Russia might team up with Galileo however to achieve the global coverage.

Originally posted by Lonestar24

You don´t need a global positioning system if you don´t have global military interests

It seems Russia, India and the like agree with me on this one since they are planing for a full global system. Perhap they and europe have some global military interests

posted by ShadowXIX

It seems Russia, India and the like agree with me on this one since they are planing for a full global system. Perhaps they and Europe have some global military interests . . ?

I think the French satellite has a near monopoly on the “eye” in space. It seems to have more and more uses every day. If you want your own “eye in the sky” you also want your own locator system. Regardless of military usages. By the bye, if the French had not opened this technology to us common folk, do you think the DoD would ever had made it available to the taxpaying public? (If it is).

How much Commercial Value though? The US GPS cost 400 million a year to maintain for a service they give away for free. I dont see the huge gains there

BTW the US made GPS available to the public first (all be it a degraded signal) not the French and Clinton let out the good signal to the public years ago. They allowed the public to have it.

What French satellite are you talking about anyway? Space Imaging's IKONOS satellite is one of the best the public can use and I dont think thats French.

Not for a single time there was any sort of comparison between the Russian Stituation and the American situation from my side.....If you people really consider Russian things to be so insignificant are you type what makes you take care of the Russian developments?
what shall I call this cloudy state of mind: Fear or Envy or Inferiority complex?

May God bless America.

I think Russia has some cool equipment.

And post all you want Prelude. Just no more cold wars, ok.

posted by ShadowXIX[/I]

What French satellite are you talking about anyway? Space Imaging's IKONOS satellite is one of the best the public can use and I don’t think that’s French.

I don't know. I thought it was the French who first offered imaging. I was mixed up on GPS. It does seem imaging is not worth much without GPS.

posted by Lonestar24

You dońt need a global positioning system if you dońt have global military interests . . no wonder Galileo isn’t up and running . . the project was started in 2000 and is still in development - (our GPS needed about two decades for the actual planning) - it was American pressure over the Gulf War 3 dispute that saved Galileo from being stuck in development and budget. GLONASS as a global positioning system was effectively dead following the [Russian] economic troubles, and there are more important things for Russia right now than coverage of more than their home turf . . improving India and Russia cooperation boosted the program recently. There are some indications Russia might team up with Galileo to achieve global coverage.
[Edited by Don W]

L24, because I call the March 18, 2003 endeavor, the Second Punitive Expedition to Iraq, what are you referring to as “Gulf War 3?" As long as Geo W is the leader of America, no country can afford to trust the US on survival issues. And we are blessed/damned to that condition until January 20, 2009. Which I have called a serious American Constitutional flaw. To be able to govern without responsibility or accountability.

posted by prelude

Not for a single time there was any sort of comparison between the Russian Situation and the American situation from my side . . If you really consider Russian things to be so insignificant what makes you take [so much] care of Russian developments? What shall I call this cloudy state of mind: Fear or Envy or Inferiority complex? God bless America.
[Edited by Don W]

Well, Prelude, I’d offer it is not envy. I’d also say it is no longer fear although once it was. That leaves only “inferiority complex.” I’m not sure what it means, why we “worry” over Russian military expenditures when the US spends more every month than Russian spends in 2 years. In fact, we spend more than all other nations combined.

All these guns and bullets and no one to shoot? We've scrapped the barrel and all that's left is Iran and North Korea. The danger is, “If you’ve got’em, you'll use’em.” It takes a lot more brains to accomplish your honorable goals without guns that it does to do what passes as honorable with guns.

I mean, who else would have thought that with 10 supercarriers the US would build 2 more? Instead of decommissioning 6 of them? The world has been receptive to PEACE since 1991, but not the US. I don't know how long the window will remain open. Let's hope it’s still open after 2009. And we have someone here to look through it.



[edit on 6/21/2006 by donwhite]

Originally posted by prelude

Not for a single time there was any sort of comparison between the Russian Stituation and the American situation from my side.....If you people really consider Russian things to be so insignificant are you type what makes you take care of the Russian developments?
what shall I call this cloudy state of mind: Fear or Envy or Inferiority complex?

May God bless America.

They are worried ? They might have one or 2 things worth looking more closely at, but, the majority of these 250 'new ' weapons are just basic upgrades of inferior weaponry anyway.