Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

The preference in these programs is to retain the existing overall length of the weapon as such it’s likely around the same 16” as the standard AK. In terms of performance it’s not that far from a number of civilian cartridges like 6mm ARC which fires from a standard AR15 receiver group.
Thing is I highly doubt that the Russians are in a position where they could transition to this new cartridge. Beyond the elite units like VDV, Spezatz like Vympl and Alfa maybe PMCs like Patriot. The Russian army never managed to complete their transition from 7.62x39mm to 5.45x39mm. They are a huge mixed bag of Cold War weapon's and token new equipment. The AK12/AK15 on paper is an “M4ski” but in practice the lack of optics and NVG across the Russian forces means that it’s not even in the improved versions much if any better than the Ak74M/AK103 it “replaced”.
This new cartridge 6.02x41mm and rifle AK22 has the same problem's just worse. This is meant to be the Russian reply to the American XM7/XM250 NGSW project however that project has the to be standardized XM157 a 1-8 LPVO with range finder and NV Capability. Allowing the Shooter to take advantage of the 6.8x51mm cartridge’s potential at long range. To get the most out of this cartridge the Russians would need to provide a good quality LPVO optic with some range finding capability’s (manual or digital) and in quantities to issue in militarily relevant numbers. Otherwise this is just another vanity project. Something that maybe they can finish in 2-3 decades but otherwise only shows up at arms shows and parades.

Click to expand...

In other circumstances, I would have agreed with you but seeing how Russia, thanks to the war, has been quickly adapting and incorporating new tech that otherwise would have never made it beyond the May Day parades, I'd disagree.

We have seen Russia go from barely any relevant drones, limited PGM availability, thermals, etc. in service to flooding the battlefield with this. While vanity projects like the Uran have largely been missing.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

The preference in these programs is to retain the existing overall length of the weapon as such it’s likely around the same 16” as the standard AK. In terms of performance it’s not that far from a number of civilian cartridges like 6mm ARC which fires from a standard AR15 receiver group.
Thing is I highly doubt that the Russians are in a position where they could transition to this new cartridge. Beyond the elite units like VDV, Spezatz like Vympl and Alfa maybe PMCs like Patriot. The Russian army never managed to complete their transition from 7.62x39mm to 5.45x39mm. They are a huge mixed bag of Cold War weapon's and token new equipment. The AK12/AK15 on paper is an “M4ski” but in practice the lack of optics and NVG across the Russian forces means that it’s not even in the improved versions much if any better than the Ak74M/AK103 it “replaced”.
This new cartridge 6.02x41mm and rifle AK22 has the same problem's just worse. This is meant to be the Russian reply to the American XM7/XM250 NGSW project however that project has the to be standardized XM157 a 1-8 LPVO with range finder and NV Capability. Allowing the Shooter to take advantage of the 6.8x51mm cartridge’s potential at long range. To get the most out of this cartridge the Russians would need to provide a good quality LPVO optic with some range finding capability’s (manual or digital) and in quantities to issue in militarily relevant numbers. Otherwise this is just another vanity project. Something that maybe they can finish in 2-3 decades but otherwise only shows up at arms shows and parades.

Click to expand...

Beside low volume sniper rifles, changing cartridges don't change the capabilities a lot. You can get some better scores against personnal armors, little improvement in weight but it will be easier to upgrade armors in reaction to cartridges than to do a caliber transition.

If you have allies in close proximity that use all the same cartridges it help to do a transition for standardization. If it's for yourself more or less, you clearly need to access if the cost is necessary. But you still need to do research to have options and improvements ready if needed.

Testers of the Russian kamikaze drone "Scalpel" told some details about the drone. The "Scalpel" drone is a cheap analogue of the "Lancet" drones; the estimated price of the "Scalpel" drone is 200 thousand rubles or $2,230. The design of the drone is still being finalized.

Atomicfrog said:

Beside low volume sniper rifles, changing cartridges don't change the capabilities a lot. You can get some better scores against personnal armors, little improvement in weight but it will be easier to upgrade armors in reaction to cartridges than to do a caliber transition.

Click to expand...

This isn’t a Sniper rifle. In the form you describe maybe a DMR but being AK based with what has been described it’s a DMR or standard infantry rifle candidate.
As to caliber change again without the enablers it’s pretty much useless. When the NATO armies transitioned from 7.62x51mm to 5.56x45mm it on paper was a step down in capability but as very very few of the soldiers issued the FAL, G3 or M14 actually were able to utilize that capability.
With the optic revolution of the last 20 years, with the proliferation of high quality glass scopes and multi spectrum telescopes and cameras, range finders and ballistic calculators. The limited capabilities of the mk1 eyeball, irons and best guess are not the firm laws that govern how much a soldier can get from his weapon.
The XM157, Smart Shooter Smash even the seemingly defunct Tracking point system they are the IPhone/Android of infantry marksmanship. They replicate the capabilities of a number of existing devices but consolidated into one device and integrating their capabilities synergistically.
Buzzword salad I know, but if you’re old enough to remember the days of Walkman, pagers, pocket organizers, cartridge video games. When selfies were the sole domain of Polaroid cameras and cellphones could only make phone calls. The charges it brought were an epiphany to our whole existence. They enabled a a completely different world than we lived in before.
they make the 800m effective range realistically possible for general infantry, in Armies that can take advantage of it. The Russians don’t have that industry. Nor does Belarus. China has degrees but can the Moscow regime afford that in significant numbers?

Atomicfrog said:

If you have allies in close proximity that use all the same cartridges it help to do a transition for standardization. If it's for yourself more or less, you clearly need to access if the cost is necessary. But you still need to do research to have options and improvements ready if needed.

Click to expand...

Only if you are transitioning to an established cartridge. If hypothetically the Russian army announced the launch of an AK24 chambered in 5.8x42mm as their new standard issue rifle then fine, that would be relevant to this.
Yet we are not.
The AK22 however is using a as yet unproven unestablished cartridge 6.02x41mm. Like the U.S. Army 6.8x51mm 2 years ago or the Chinese 5.8x42mm was back in 1995. No one has a stockpile. Even the manufacturer is still making them by hand in low rate batches.
To build up an actual combat capacity requires establishing an industry base that ammunition plants with tooling and dies to manufacture by thousands of rounds per month. All that well in the middle of a war of invasion that has dragged into attrition, has left them sanctioned and more and more isolated unable to access much of the outside industrial capital.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

This isn’t a Sniper rifle. In the form you describe maybe a DMR but being AK based with what has been described it’s a DMR or standard infantry rifle candidate.

Click to expand...

Never said it was sniper rifle cartridge... just that changing caliber of sniper rifle that are small batches productions compared than a standard rifle is more easy because you don't need the amount of industrial production associated with it.

Changing cartridge for your standard infantry rifle without clear and large increment in usefulness is a luxury pipedream. Still, cartridge didn't evolved a lot in the past 100 years, we still don't see caseless or combustion light-gas gun to reduce ammo size for the near future. We are still playing with the same basic cartridge design. Making new design and bullet could still be useful to establish canvas or future capabilities on paper.

Like you said, new optics and ballistic systems are quite interesting to get all what a weapon can give but I never see high tech fragile system coping well in a real war. They will need to be extremely well build and strong to survive barometric stress of artillery bombardment and long and hard use in hostile environment. All bell and whistle will be a dead weight when covered with iced mud , without time and place to do good maintenance. We don't see a lot of scopes in the trenches... but we can see some old hunting shotguns for drones warfare...

Atomicfrog said:

Never said it was sniper rifle cartridge... just that changing caliber of sniper rifle that are small batches productions compared than a standard rifle is more easy because you don't need the amount of industrial production associated with it.

Click to expand...

The number of sniper rifles would depend on the size of the army in question and the doctrine they prefer. I mean the most popular sniper calibers are well established .338,.308,.300, .50. The US has had ample opportunity to adopt .408 Chetac (10.33x76mm) yet hasn’t. Farther as they are military they still need an industrial base.

Atomicfrog said:

Changing cartridge for your standard infantry rifle without clear and large increment in usefulness is a luxury pipedream. Still, cartridge didn't evolved a lot in the past 100 years, we still don't see caseless or combustion light-gas gun to reduce ammo size for the near future. We are still playing with the same basic cartridge design. Making new design and bullet could still be useful to establish canvas or future capabilities on paper.

Click to expand...

See my comment on CT ammo. The biggest problem is the industry both manufacturers of ammunition and the weapons design. Specialized cartridges require specialized weapons which are by nature more complex and more expensive to manufacture and maintain. See the Russians AN94 or HKG11.

Atomicfrog said:

Like you said, new optics and ballistic systems are quite interesting to get all what a weapon can give but I never see high tech fragile system coping well in a real war. They will need to be extremely well build and strong to survive barometric stress of artillery bombardment and long and hard use in hostile environment. All bell and whistle will be a dead weight when covered with iced mud , without time and place to do good maintenance. We don't see a lot of scopes in the trenches... but we can see some old hunting shotguns for drones warfare...

Click to expand...

Except we already have seen them in “real wars” ballistic calculators have been in deployment for the better part of a decade on rifles like the Barrett M107. As to optics. Modern combat optics are more rugged than many give them credit. Any event that does manage to destroy the scope is just as likely to destroy the rifle host and kill the user.
Mud, Ice, dust, shock testing is standard for perspective military hardware. Yes we have seen shotgun against drones of late. But low end commercially sourced drones the wouldn’t hold to the same standards you would hold the optic and ballistic computer too.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

Except we already have seen them in “real wars” ballistic calculators have been in deployment for the better part of a decade on rifles like the Barrett M107. As to optics. Modern combat optics are more rugged than many give them credit. Any event that does manage to destroy the scope is just as likely to destroy the rifle host and kill the user.
Mud, Ice, dust, shock testing is standard for perspective military hardware. Yes we have seen shotgun against drones of late. But low end commercially sourced drones the wouldn’t hold to the same standards you would hold the optic and ballistic computer too.

Click to expand...

You talk about ballistic calculator on sniper rifle.... cannot compare the use of these on a specialized unit than the fitting of these on the standard rifle that will meet way more mishandling. It's comparing apple with orange.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

See my comment on CT ammo. The biggest problem is the industry both manufacturers of ammunition and the weapons design. Specialized cartridges require specialized weapons which are by nature more complex and more expensive to manufacture and maintain. See the Russians AN94 or HKG11.

Click to expand...

Never said in would not require change, cost on the industry level... it's just that the amplitude of production is clearly not the same.

For example, between 2013 and mid-2018, the US marines corps only produced 226 snipers in trainings. Changing the corps sniper weapons is not the same than changing the standard rifle for the 20 000 infantry members...

Changing stdr rifle caliber is a way bigger task for the industrials/logistics base.

You underestimate the capabilities of the Russian weapons industry. They have several manufacturers of advanced optics. They also have smart optics. For example this is a product that came out this year:

It is basically a rifle mounted thermal imager with a digital display, up to 6x magnification and picture in picture, which can record and send video to a computer via Wi-Fi link. The same company also makes red dot sights and lasers.

The Russian weapons industry has grown significantly since last year. If smart optics become more in demand the products will show up.

Tupolev has pattented an hypersonic aircraft design with a combined cycle engine