Its Reuters citing anonymous sources, I'd take it with a bag of salt. They have been caught bullshiting the past few months blatantly.
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
The western media are just recycling year old news to imply there's a split between Russia and China...There was no mention of China being the country that was involved when it was reported by TASS last year.Last time I read that the Russian scientist had published an article in an Iranian publication. They cannot even get their narrative to be coherent.
They've ran this probably because it coincides very well with Kissinger's recent comments. Next expect to hear about China moving aircraft carriers into Siberia.
A lot of the concepts that the Russian military conceptualized between 2008-2022 have actually been proven entirely correct.
Russian national defense strategy correctly identified that the initial period of war will strongly define the rest of the war.
Russian concepts of recon-fire, have pretty much defined this conflict. Ironically, Russia was initially very poor at executing it, but they've gotten a lot better over time. In the absence of clear air superiority, ground based fires are the fallback. I'm unsure of what lessons RuAF are taking away from this conflict, but I hope that with the emergence of new systems like Mylta, and proliferation of guided artillery rounds, RuAF have learned that mobility, speed, and precision, will trump volume.
Russia, or as in the former USSR, has always pursued ground based firepower all along, which you can see from the enormous reserve of artillery units and SPGs. They always assumed that air superiority is never a guarantee, thanks to the lag in aircraft technology and not having an economy to build and sustain such. Ground based fire is not a fall back but a prime doctrine. The Soviet Army is built around it. This is also connected to the development and invest of ground based air defenses. Such policy is more affordable and executable with smaller, less economically endowed nations.
Ironically, as a splinter of the Soviet Union, the Ukrainian armed forces also followed this initially and had success with it. Despite a massive attrition and being greatly outnumbered in artillery forces, there are still in areas where they achieve local superiority in artillery. Early phase Ugledar for example.
Also this explains why North Korea also has an enormous inventory or artillery units, rockets, and shells.
Russia, or as in the former USSR, has always pursued ground based firepower all along, which you can see from the enormous reserve of artillery units and SPGs. They always assumed that air superiority is never a guarantee, thanks to the lag in aircraft technology and not having an economy to build and sustain such. Ground based fire is not a fall back but a prime doctrine. The Soviet Army is built around it. This is also connected to the development and invest of ground based air defenses. Such policy is more affordable and executable with smaller, less economically endowed nations.
Just to be clear, I'm not saying otherwise. I am simply pointing out that in general, when a military force cannot achieve air superiority, it will fallback to ground based firepower. I am aware that Russia is doctrinally, an artillery-based army.
Though, given what I saw in Syria 2015, Russia has also effectively evolved in how they view airpower. With the agglomeration of the VVS and VVKO under one umbrella of VKS, it is clear that they view strike missions and air defense as one unified system that's necessary to enable the mission of the ground forces. In hindsight, I think they should probably put all Iskander batteries under their VKS as well.
Agreed. There is really nothing to betray between China and Russia in the field of hypersonic. We even invited Russia to participate directly in the construction of our national missile defense system. The issue of hypersonic weapons can be resolved with a simple phone call. Why would spies need to sneak around? Additionally, do Westerners really believe that Russian hypersonic weapons are ahead of their Chinese counterparts, so the Chinese have started “stealing” again? Don’t they consider the possibility that China is on par or even ahead in this field?The western media are just recycling year old news to imply there's a split between Russia and China...There was no mention of China being the country that was involved when it was reported by TASS last year.
They've ran this probably because it coincides very well with Kissinger's recent comments. Next expect to hear about China moving aircraft carriers into Siberia.
Just to be clear, I'm not saying otherwise. I am simply pointing out that in general, when a military force cannot achieve air superiority, it will fallback to ground based firepower. I am aware that Russia is doctrinally, an artillery-based army.
Though, given what I saw in Syria 2015, Russia has also effectively evolved in how they view airpower. With the agglomeration of the VVS and VVKO under one umbrella of VKS, it is clear that they view strike missions and air defense as one unified system that's necessary to enable the mission of the ground forces. In hindsight, I think they should probably put all Iskander batteries under their VKS as well.
Yes indeed.
I would think that currently, even if temporarily, there's union with the VKS and Army units being Surovikin, who is an ex Army General, is the head of the VKS but has free run of the campaign with all ground forces in the battlefield including VDV, Naval Infantry, DPR, LPR and paramilitary forces including Wagner and BARS special units.
China is definitively not ahead of Russia in hypersonics. Where is their equivalent of the Zircon?Additionally, do Westerners really believe that Russian hypersonic weapons are ahead of their Chinese counterparts, so the Chinese have started “stealing” again? Don’t they consider the possibility that China is on par or even ahead in this field?
I would say right now Russia is first with China second. Given China's massive investment into hypersonic wind tunnels, and vastly more powerful supercomputational facilities however I expect China to be in the lead eventually.
Bro, we never know BUT what I can say is the Russian version is combat proven therefore can be improved, this is where the Chinese are lacking and want technical cooperation with Russia.China is definitively not ahead of Russia in hypersonics. Where is their equivalent of the Zircon?
I would say right now Russia is first with China second. Given China's massive investment into hypersonic wind tunnels, and vastly more powerful supercomputational facilities however I expect China to be in the lead eventually.
I don’t know, I really don’t know anything… The damn Dongfeng-31 leak case taught them to keep the significant progress of many important projects absolutely confidential for five or even more years before entering the normal confidentiality process. Military enthusiasts like me who aren’t that smart have long given up on tracking related projects.China is definitively not ahead of Russia in hypersonics. Where is their equivalent of the Zircon?
I would say right now Russia is first with China second. Given China's massive investment into hypersonic wind tunnels, and vastly more powerful supercomputational facilities however I expect China to be in the lead eventually.