Russia Cancels Arms Programs

[buglerbilly]

Ares

A Defense Technology Blog

Russia Cancels Arms Programs

Posted by M Pyadushkin at 4/8/2010 8:28 AM CDT

On April 5 the Russian government discussed the program for the development of the national defense industry for 2011-2020. The Prime Minister Vladimir Putin appealed to the military to define what weapons they really need and for what tasks. He stated that 40% of defense R&D programs don’t result in anything representing just a waste of resources.

The military was quick to respond. Two days later deputy defense minister and chief of armaments Vladimir Popovkin announced that a number of programs for development of new armor and artillery weapons will be cancelled. The main victim is the mysterious Object 195 program that was aimed to develop a new generation main battle tank to replace existing T-80 and T-90 tanks in the Russian Army. The new tank also dubbed T-95 has been developed by Nizhny Tagil Uralvagonzavod armor manufacturer in complete secrecy for more than 15 years. Popovkin said the military will focus on modernization of the T-90 instead.


Koalitziya-SV artillery system (credits: www.army-guide.com)

Among other cancelled development programs are the 152 mm Koalitziya-SV self-propelled double-barrel artillery system, BMD-4 airborne combat vehicle, 125 mm Sprut-SD self-propelled anti-tank gun and BMPT tank support combat vehicle. All these programs were in the phase of prototype testing. Popovkin said these weapons hadn’t been included in the defense procurement program, but the government will reimburse the designers for their development expenses.

[Riđđu]

Good, good. Interesting that they decided to cancel artillery and armoured vehicles, though. Maybe that shows what kind of capabilities they want to develop.

[SteveJH]

Or that the companies who had the contracts to do the design work were just incompetent.

[Gubler, A.]

Like much of the rest of the world the Russians face COIN threats and latest tank or SP arty is not going to be much of a difference compared to the old stuff fighting the Chechyans. Protected mobility, infantry equipment, command and intelligence gear is what is needed.

Of they just didn't have the money... because eventually building such vehicles would have meant doing so on the clapped out Soviet era industrial base or spending big to upgrade it. One can look at the shipbuilding disasters the Russians are producing and apply that to tanks if they went ahead with T-95 etc production. What infastructure investment they have seems to be going to aviation and even then it is small scale compared to the west.

[Deks]

Just, wow. Looks like they killed all the fun stuff

[Marc 1]

Just, wow. Looks like they killed all the fun stuff

Indeed. What was the idea beind the double barrelled SP arty system? Was it as simple as having double the firepower or could they load two different natures of ammo? IE illum whilst still firing an HE mission?

[Weasel]

Indeed. What was the idea beind the double barrelled SP arty system? Was it as simple as having double the firepower or could they load two different natures of ammo? IE illum whilst still firing an HE mission?
No, just an easier way to get rounds on target simultaneously at range. I am surprised they dropped the arty, as it ( M-777, PZh 2000, etc, etc) has been a life saver in Afghanistan.

Oh, and please, re the industrial crapola argument. Russia was far and away superior to the USA in many areas when it came to metallurgic advances, especially in manufacturing techniques. Even though a lot of that talent migrated to the USA in the 90's, (to places like Oshkosh :D) there is still a good residual base present.

Crappy planes? maybe. But crappy tanks, arty and things with wheels that move in the mud.... much sucking of teeth. On first pass, I would never*** (better to say "..be extremely reluctant to...") count them out.


cheers

w

[Gubler, A.]

I’m not saying the Russians don’t have good technology here and there. But the state of their factories is atrocious. This is what is meant by production infrastructure. They are desperate for investment in modernisation across their industry base.

As to artillery they have plenty of effective towed and self propelled pieces that can drop shells on people’s heads. They just don’t need a twin barrel system. Which BTW is a lot of extra weight and complexity to carry around when something like the over breech ready second round on the PzH2000 enables very rapid firing of two rounds.

[Chunder]

... Would like to see the reloading mechanism (if any) on that DB SP Arty... if the PzH is anything to go by it's either be a nightmare to flesh or a thing of beauty...

[Riđđu]

Like much of the rest of the world the Russians face COIN threats and latest tank or SP arty is not going to be much of a difference compared to the old stuff fighting the Chechyans. Protected mobility, infantry equipment, command and intelligence gear is what is needed.


Indeed. Then again Russia wants to be a great power. In order to show this it has to be able to challenge other great powers. That means the Russians have to keep in pace with USA, China and others in certain key areas.

Their nuclear forces have always been strong but are now aging, they still have airborne divisions which are not cheap to maintain and their air force hasnt´t got force multipliers like in many western countries.

Lately they have improved their capabilities to conduct media warfare and cyber operations. What they lack is C3I.

Or what do you think?