Never heard of "parallel import" via countries like Kazakhstan and Belarus? North Korea is also under sanctions for years, how do they produce anything, including nuclear weapons?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Russia uses Tu-214SR (strategic communication) with Israel routinely. and Israel is the country that has launched thousands of strikes on smallest of targets. do you think Russia does not learn from them how to effectively apply airpower when they sit right next to them for decades. this Su-57 radar before the Su-57M is 650km range.Hi,
beside churning out fighter or bombers and helicopters Russian really has to
do something about their early warning and control systems AKA awacs which
they are really far far away even from the minimum strength to guide their long range
missiles or their fighters, so they need awacs asap and some special mission long
range planes for jamming and spoofing etc
thank you
last week 3 Tu-160 suppose to launch missiles but could not launch any weopon and one of it didnot even take off. Previously Ukranian thought they never use it for strike. The point i am making this plane has role in this group action even though it may not fire weopons.
Struck by lightning: Russia's Tu-160 was unable to launch missiles at Ukraine, — Russian media
03.09.2025 at 21:19
The Tu-160s can carry up to 12 cruise missiles. But due to the importance of this aircraft, Russia, as already noted, almost never uses it to strike Ukraine.
“The Tu-160 is the most modern strategic aviation aircraft in the Russian fleet. That’s why it still keeps them. And in principle, it doesn’t see the need to use them, including against Ukraine, because it has sufficient resources of other aircraft. The Tu-160s are supersonic. "They are considered primarily as carriers of tactical nuclear weapons to counter Western countries," explains Bohdan Dolince.
05 February 2022, 19:55
"Circular Defense": Tu-160M Will Be Able to "Launch Missiles in Four Directions"
The modernized Russian strategic bomber-missile carrier Tu-160M will be equipped with "reverse launch" missiles that will be able to intercept targets "behind" it. Gazeta.Ru investigated how such missiles are launched and maneuvered.
"This is very important for a bomber, as it is a very large and relatively unmaneuverable target. The Tu-160 all-round defense system consists of optical-electronic and radar systems. Basically, all radars on both fighters and bombers are installed in the front hemisphere. In order to be able to work all-round, at 360 degrees, for the purposes of aircraft defense, radars or antennas are needed, located along the perimeter of the aircraft. In this case, the Tu-160M uses a rear-view radar. The side sectors also overlap due to the fact that the viewing sectors of the front and rear radars can intersect. This achieves all-round visibility, as well as independent aiming and missile launch both in the front and rear hemispheres," Popov said.
According to him, the radar’s work is differentiated based on the principle of determining where the maximum threat comes from – this is important so that the system “attacks faster and understands the distribution of the target object relative to the aircraft.”
Hi,Russia uses Tu-214SR (strategic communication) with Israel routinely. and Israel is the country that has launched thousands of strikes on smallest of targets. do you think Russia does not learn from them how to effectively apply airpower when they sit right next to them for decades. this Su-57 radar before the Su-57M is 650km range.
last week 3 Tu-160 suppose to launch missiles but could not launch any weopon and one of it didnot even take off. Previously Ukranian thought they never use it for strike. The point i am making this plane has role in this group action even though it may not fire weopons.
thanks for the info about Tu21SR, here I can’t understand the point of your sharing with Israel you want to
say Israeli are helping Russia to bomb Ukraine? If I’m wrong then what did they learn from Israel, my post was about blocking or jamming signals or Ukrainian awacs been given to them by SAAB and another one will be on its way soon if Russian su57 radar can detect 650km then I would say nine of the Ukrainian airforce fighter should be able to fly form Ukrainian bases and if they are flying from NATO bases then even once in Ukrainian territory they should be having a R37M behind their back through network centric warfare they might be having good fighters around but no so good early warning in the air and some state of the art cyber warfare they need to display like a real power who once use to be a super power
if you have some more knowledge about their assets please enlighten me like you share the info about sharing
communication with Israeli military
thank you
The point i am making is Russia has actual battlefield experience and it does secure communication with Israel who itself use airpower most often at longest distance. by this time Russia should be able to figure out which platform are important and which are less. They have some thing like 15 or 20 A-50 that hardly used. they can be upgraded to A-50U standard but whats the point of keeping this crew if its suboptimal in most situations. remember we are in age of aero ballistic and hypersonic missiles and about to enter into 6G communication era. no one has time for an hour with this slow moving AWACS which is likely to be hit on ground or in air with ultra long range missiles.Hi,
thanks for the info about Tu21SR, here I can’t understand the point of your sharing with Israel you want to
say Israeli are helping Russia to bomb Ukraine? If I’m wrong then what did they learn from Israel, my post was about blocking or jamming signals or Ukrainian awacs been given to them by SAAB and another one will be on its way soon if Russian su57 radar can detect 650km then I would say nine of the Ukrainian airforce fighter should be able to fly form Ukrainian bases and if they are flying from NATO bases then even once in Ukrainian territory they should be having a R37M behind their back through network centric warfare they might be having good fighters around but no so good early warning in the air and some state of the art cyber warfare they need to display like a real power who once use to be a super power
if you have some more knowledge about their assets please enlighten me like you share the info about sharing
communication with Israeli military
thank you
Ukraine is separate issue. Russia has special approach to it to prolong the conflict and it has nothing to do with application of technology.
Not of military grade electronics. Think Catherine FCS Thermal sights from Thales or space grade electronics as examples. The Russians have been unable to import those since 2014.Never heard of "parallel import" via countries like Kazakhstan and Belarus? North Korea is also under sanctions for years, how do they produce anything, including nuclear weapons?
Civilian grade electronics sure. But those the Russians can still get today.
A new batch of BMP-3 and BMD-2 was transferred to the Russian troops by the High-Precision Systems Holding. BMP-3s are equipped with multi-component additional protection kits, anti-cumulative grids and upper hemisphere protection. The BMP also has means of reducing visibility, made of synthetic heat-insulating and radio-absorbing material. In addition, all BMP-3s are equipped with electronic warfare systems. Also, as part of the fulfillment of the state defense order, BMD-2 airborne combat vehicles were transferred to the troops after major repairs with elements of modernization.
Russians pretty much standardized on the BMP-3 and the BTR-82A as their battle buses, with the exception of the VDV with their BMDs. New production centers on the BMP-3, every quarter or so, a new batch comes out. Don't hear much about the refit centers, the last time, work was centered on the BMP-2M with the Berezhok turret. I don't see or hear about the BMP-1AM these days, compared to the Ukrainian forces which still fields the BMP-1TS but in numbers that I would consider rare due to attrition. BTR-82A now seems standardized with the BTR-82AT edition with thermals and ATGMs. The BMP-3 is leaning with it's use more like a light tank and fire support vehicle while the BTR-82A is more favored as the battlefield taxi but situational circumstances can mean the roles switch given who is available to take the job. The BMP-3 is sometimes used with the 100mm gun firing indirectly at maximum range (7km) using a drone spotter. The gun has an elevation of 60 degrees so it's kind of like a smoothbore howitzer.
You had the recent news about the higher power UTD-32T engines for the BMP series.
I also recently heard news of a new version of the YaMZ engine.
I expect them to start producing either Manul or Kurganets in 1-2 years.
They have a shitton of BMP-1 hulls which are totally obsolete. They have to upgrade them somehow. Not just the BMP-2 hulls. If this will be like BMP-1AM or some other configuration we will see.
I also recently heard news of a new version of the YaMZ engine.
I expect them to start producing either Manul or Kurganets in 1-2 years.
They have a shitton of BMP-1 hulls which are totally obsolete. They have to upgrade them somehow. Not just the BMP-2 hulls. If this will be like BMP-1AM or some other configuration we will see.
Last edited:
You had the recent news about the higher power UTD-32T engines for the BMP series.
I also recently heard news of a new version of the YaMZ engine.
I expect them to start producing either Manul or Kurganets in 1-2 years.
They have a shitton of BMP-1 hulls which are totally obsolete. They have to upgrade them somehow. Not just the BMP-2 hulls. If this will be like BMP-1AM or some other configuration we will see.
Kurganets-25 is too expensive for now. At $4 to $5 mil a copy, versus $1.7 for a BMP-3, the difference can buy you a heck of a lot of drones. And that's still way cheaper than a $10 mil a CV-90 or another Western IFV will cost.
Manul would require a brand new hull even if it reuses other BMP-3 components. That will cause an interruption in the production pace right when you need to put more vehicles in the field. Manul will give you the proper rear exit hatch door, but it doesn't seem that important now given that FPV drones know when to wait for the hatch to open.
Instead the BMP-3 is being upgraded in a way it doesn't interrupt the production. That's why they can do the UTD-32 engine. It's a mod from the UTD-29 engine and can skip in easily. The stronger the engine can be, the more armor add one the BMP-3 can take, more and more Turtle Tank. The current add one have already taken a toll on it's performance.
They can also upgrade the BMP-3 with a Berezhok turret or even the Bumerang turret. If you get rid of the 100mm gun, you remove the risk of it's ammo cook off if the vehicle is penetrated. It can also reduce the weight of the vehicle and expand internal space.
However it turns out the 100mm is often used with both direct and indirect shots at fortification and strongholds, and removing the 100mm is a downgrade. That's also resistance to the Kurganets-25.
The BMP-3 is used more like a light tank and a fire support vehicle (FSV) in support of infantry. It's the BTR-82A instead that's the favored battlefield taxi. Costs might be lower than the BMP-3, with the BTR-82A might be coming at $1.4 million a copy. Despite having no rear hatch, the BTR-82A appears to be very popular with the RuAF and is even used aggressively in close combat during a drone free environment.
While the doors of the BTR-82A opens on the side and conventionally is viewed as a mistake, during drone warfare, it has its points. A drone waiting to ambush troops usually swoops in at the rear hatch as the hatch opens. But if the doors open at the side, the drone has to pick which side. If the drone attacks one side, the troops escaping on the other gets free. Doors to the side also means the shortest line ducking to the bushes at the side of the road for cover.
With the BTR-82A, which is currently at the AT variant with thermals and ATGM support, there seems to be of a need for the Manul and Kurganets-25 at the moment.
The wheels on the BTR-82A is also quieter than using a tracked vehicle which helps with stealthy assaults. That's also a plus for the Stryker over the Bradley.
The big wheels of the BTR-82A also helps with floatation over mud along with its lighter weight. Over the Ukrainian black earth, floatation is life. I have seen too many Russian and Ukrainian vehicles stuck in the mud, forcibly being abandoned, captured or scuttled by drones. I also would think the wheels are easier and faster to repair over tracks.
Basically Manul is a better bus over the BMP-3 but the bus function is already being taken up by the BTRs. As a light tank and FSV, the Manul isn't going to be significantly better than a BMP-3.
The Russian Army has another battle bus besides that's growing in number and that's the Typhoon-K. Add to the tactics of using motorcycles and ATVs, there's less of a pressing need for another bus with a rear hatch. Once again, Typhoon-K, motorcycles and ATVs are rubber wheeled, helpful with stealth assaults that's becoming the norm these days.
As for the BMP-1, the approved upgrade is the BMP-1AM, which is the BMP-1 using the turret from the BTR-82A. Unlike the Ukrainian Army, I just don't see the generic BMP-1 with the original 76mm gun still being used. Every BMP-1 in the Russian Army has the turret upgrade. The problem is that it shares this turret with the BTR-82A and as hulls of the BTR-82A being scaled up, every one of these turrets are likely to go on top of the BTR-82A which is prioritized. You would need to scale production of the turret to the point there is enough surplus that can go to upgrading BMP-1s.
As for the BMP-2M, the Berezhok appears to have its own production line and it's not sharing the turret with anyone. The vehicle is popular with the Russian Army, and there's even pressure to restart it's production. However restarting it will cause a disruption on BMP-3 production, and for the same reasons as Manul, it's not going to happen. Should note within this week, a tank division assigned to the Moscow region were given a new batch of BMP-2M.
There's some talk about the BTR-87 proposal having some interest. This is like the BTR-82A but with a new hull with the engine in front and rear hatches, but I also think it's not going to happen.
Russian defense industry is in a state of hyper optimization under Belousov that reminds me of the German wartime industry under Albert Speer. Here you focus on a handful of key platforms and toss away the rest---like with the Germans, the BF-109, FW-190, Panzer Mk. 4, where peak production was still achieved even with Allied bombing. It appears the BMP-3 is one of these platforms for the Russians along with the BTR-82A, T-90M, T-80BVM, MSTA-S, 2S43/44, Tornado-K and so on.
Last edited: