With Russia's $650 billion rearmament plan, the bear sharpens its teeth

[Clark Griswold]

8 hours ago, guineapigfury said:

The Russians are shrinking in both population and economic power.  If they want to exhaust themselves with military ventures they cannot afford, I suggest we don't interrupt them while they're making mistakes.

Maybe but it could be a longer road to get to that place than we think, hence my argument for immediate feedback to negative activity. 

2 hours ago, di1630 said:

If NATO needed to fight, they'd have a hard time getting fighters there because they'd need to deconflict the their air show schedules first.

Make no mistake. If the US didn't stop it, Putin could roll into Europe no problem.

No way, our allies are the tip of the spear ready to go at a moment's notice...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/nato-runs-short-on-some-munitions-in-libya/2011/04/15/AF3O7ElD_story.html

https://www.defenseone.com/politics/2015/06/nato-members-defense-spending-two-charts/116008/

NATO is a well balanced defense organization, sharing the burden amongst members pulling their weight and not overly dependent on the US...

 

Edited April 25, 2016 by Clark Griswold

[M2]

THREAD REVIVAL!

For those who haven't read this, it's worth the time and effort...

https://www.jhuapl.edu/ourwork/nsa/papers/ARIS_LittleGreenMen.pdf

Cheers!  M2

 

[FourFans]

Revival.  I'm a bit surprised I haven't seen more discussion here about the mounting Russian threat.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-targets-soldier-smartphones-western-officials-say-1507109402

I'm not shocked that the average American doesn't care, it's all too far away and the media isn't selling it.  I can attest that Eastern Europe and the Baltics are justly concerned however.  If Russia advances, NATO won't even be a speed bump.  US, UK, and German airpower will be the only immediate response that's even remotely effective.

These guys are evolving modern combat employment faster than anyone on the planet.

Edited October 5, 2017 by FourFans130
spelling

[SurelySerious]

Pretty interesting article; I only had a chance to skim this morning, so glad you posted. 

[MDDieselPilot]

7 hours ago, FourFans130 said:

Revival.  I'm a bit surprised I haven't seen more discussion here about the mounting Russian threat.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russia-targets-soldier-smartphones-western-officials-say-1507109402

I'm not shocked that the average American doesn't care, it's all too far away and the media isn't selling it.  I can attest that Eastern Europe and the Baltics are justly concerned however.  If Russia advances, NATO won't even be a speed bump.  US, UK, and German airpower will be the only immediate response that's even remotely effective.

These guys are evolving modern combat employment faster than anyone on the planet.

For those not WSJ subscribers, how do we view it?

[SurelySerious]

4 hours ago, MDDieselPilot said:

For those not WSJ subscribers, how do we view it?

Untitled.pdf

[FourFans]

13 hours ago, SurelySerious said:

Untitled.pdf

Thanks for the assist.

[Clark Griswold]

Relight on thread...

For armchair generals and strategists...

https://russiamil.wordpress.com/2018/01/24/russian-air-force-procurement-plans-2/

From the article:

Overall, Russian aircraft procurement has followed the path of buying more of what Russian defense industry is good at producing, rather than basing procurement on a programmatic assessment of Russian defense needs. In addition, the MOD has to some extent succumbed to pressure to support defense industry and will be procuring aircraft such as the MiG-35 that it is not particularly excited about. As a result, the air force will be faced with a proliferation of combat aircraft types, with the attendant higher maintenance and training costs. In the meantime, the long-term weakness in transport aviation will persist, limiting the improvements in military mobility that have been one of the core aspects of military reform efforts over the last decade.

Thought that statement was interesting and seems political/industry concerns trump their services own determined requirements, same as it is here to some degree..

One more for discussion...

https://warisboring.com/russias-stealth-fighter-deployment-in-syria-is-a-dangerous-farce/

Deploying the not-ready for prime time Su-57?  For potential customers or valid operational reasons?  Methinks the former 

[FourFans]

On ‎2‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 6:49 PM, Clark Griswold said:

Deploying the not-ready for prime time Su-57?  For potential customers or valid operational reasons?  Methinks the former 

"In reportedly deploying T-50s, the Kremlin is outright gambling with precious prototypes and their pilots’ lives. It has sent into an active combat zone two supposedly “stealth” fighters that are anything but stealthy, that possess inadequate and incomplete sensors, incomplete fire-control systems and self-protection suites, no operational integrated avionics and are powered by unreliable engines. They have undertaken hardly any weapons-separation testing except for two types of free-fall dumb bombs and lack any other operational weapons bar their 30-millimeter internal cannons."

...yeah, but does the OBOGS work?

Seriously, who's running this place?  Monkeys?

Edited February 26, 2018 by FourFans130
words

[FourFans]

https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2018/02/20/nato-command-change-to-address-deficiencies/

Part of me said: "Wow, NATO is going to make a logistics command?  Cool!"

Then I realized that the last sentence addressed the timeline:

"NATO is still fleshing out the details of the changes."

...right after a coffee break.

[Clark Griswold]

2 hours ago, FourFans130 said:

"In reportedly deploying T-50s, the Kremlin is outright gambling with precious prototypes and their pilots’ lives. It has sent into an active combat zone two supposedly “stealth” fighters that are anything but stealthy, that possess inadequate and incomplete sensors, incomplete fire-control systems and self-protection suites, no operational integrated avionics and are powered by unreliable engines. They have undertaken hardly any weapons-separation testing except for two types of free-fall dumb bombs and lack any other operational weapons bar their 30-millimeter internal cannons."

...yeah, but does the OBOGS work?

Seriously, who's running this place?  Monkeys?

The great Russians weapons demo continues

[waveshaper]

26 minutes ago, Clark Griswold said:

The great Russians weapons demo continues

It looks the Russians are doubling down on this demo stuff because there are now 4 Su-57s in the Syrian AO.

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2018-02-26/russia-deploys-su-57s-syria

[Clark Griswold]

It looks the Russians are doubling down on this demo stuff because there are now 4 Su-57s in the Syrian AO.
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2018-02-26/russia-deploys-su-57s-syria

Shit could get real, doubt they would try to use this against a manned asset but unmanned? Maybe

[FourFans]

Missileers everywhere are getting the tingly feelings.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43239331

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43248794

Quality of all the sources on this crap aside, I personally like how they're targeting CENTCOM...it's about time.

 

[abmwaldo]

"They're willing to go full Strangelove on us"

State of the Union addresses never include hyperbole but hyperbole usually contains a bit of truth. 

[Clark Griswold]

10 hours ago, abmwaldo said:

"They're willing to go full Strangelove on us"

State of the Union addresses never include hyperbole but hyperbole usually contains a bit of truth. 

Unconstrained by laws, lawyers, a sometimes duplicitous bureaucracy and an investigating and adversarial media... one man in control of a technologically capable and paranoid nation can do amazing / terrifying things...

[Clark Griswold]

Coming sooner rather than later unfortunately...

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/24/russia-quietly-conducted-the-worlds-longest-surface-to-air-missile-test.html?__source=twitter|main

About that HVAA stand-off plan...