Ukraine - Russia Conflict
- Thread starter randomradio
- Start date
A million men is for the entire armed forces, not the army. The army's force organisation doesn't need a lot of manpower, it's centered around heavy weapons. Future technologies will further reduce the need for more manpower with new designs and automation via the Armata family.
For example, with a million man army, that's 1000 BTGs, they need 16000 tanks and 24000 IFVs.
Yeah, in terms of numbers, it's small. It's just 200-300k soldiers. Rations and fuel would be an immediate problem though, but it's something they can manage as well, as the units start moving out.
So to add 200000 man they need to add 3200 tanks and 4800 IFVs
Democracy was allowed to die because the Afghans decided not to defend it. And I'll ask again, did India help?
You don't seem to understand what that phrase means.sour grapes, as usual I am not buying your stuff sell it to @Hydra he has a good appetite for such stuff.
They have a million soldiers.
Putin boosts Russian forces by 10 percent amid Ukraine war
President orders Russian military to increase its number of soldiers to a total of 1.15 million.
So where are they? One Russian media mouthpiece has asked the very same question.
The Armata still needs a crew of 3, and I suspect it will turn out to be rather less effective than advertised, much like previous generations.
They don't have nearly that many tanks or IFVs.
Last edited:
They have everything necessary to produce. This story about electronics is merely a limitation due to commercial considerations. They have the competence necessary. The same with machine tools.
The story about the pilot is an example of the propaganda I am speaking of. It's pretty normal to get the wrong people called up, only to have them sent back during the screening process. It's just local leaders trying to meet their weekly quota. Send as many as possible, and many will get filtered out. It's easier to make excuses post that. Even this will get streamlined in time.
Mobilisation happens in stages, it's pretty normal for more recent reservists to be sent to battle much earlier than older reservists.
Good luck with that.So to add 200000 man they need to add 3200 tanks and 4800 IFVs
No, I mean, if the Russians drop another 120 BTGs into the fight, effectively doubling their presence, there's not much the Ukrainians will be able to do, regardless of what the propaganda machinery tells people.
For example, the Feb operation in Kiev was inadequate in terms of the number of units used to take the city by force, which is why it failed. The Russians didn't expect they had a fight on their hands. Kool-Aid much. They are unlikely to repeat that mistake.
If India doesn't use its Strike Corps against Pakistan, and only its Pivot Corps, the same situation will repeat. The Russians entered this war thinking they won't have to fight.
Arent the taliban , a western creation/ by product? when west created jihadi taliban did they ask India ?
dint west sing the same song like it is doing before for afghanistan as well?
Asking these questions knowing very well their cause, only makes your posts totally disingenuous. As I said nobody is buying that nonsense anymore.
The military would normally check inventory before mobilisation happens. I don't buy this story of underequipped troops.
Unskilled troops, I'll give you that, they will have to learn on the job, like the Ukrainians did.
Small packages to combat units, that's normal. It happens in stages. The first set of troops act as reserves to replace frontline troops. Then slowly new units are trained and raised. 300 tanks and some 100-150 IFVs are needed to form an armoured division worth of units to launch an offensive. That's effectively 10 tank BTGs, with around 7000 troops. Another 10 IFV BTGs will be necessary to protect the flanks, so that's another 7000 men. So about 15000 men with 450 tanks and IFVs each are necessary to launch an offensive out of the 200,000 mobilised troops. So these units can be separately trained over the next 2-3 months over the winter before renewing their offensive next year while the rest hold the line.
A similar sized unit can be raised for a different front as well. So 30000 men, another 10000 in reserve, 40 BTGs, you get 2 strike corps, effectively.
When west handed over afghanistan to a bunch of terrorists they dint see India or democracy, now they see every thing. All we need to do is...
Waiting for a report to declare that India is undemocratic, human rights issues are present and underneath it a laundry list of what they want.
Nah. One word: China.
So to add 200000 man they need to add 3200 tanks and 4800 IFVs
Many of those will be attrition replacements for existing units, not all new units.
They have a million soldiers.
Putin boosts Russian forces by 10 percent amid Ukraine war
President orders Russian military to increase its number of soldiers to a total of 1.15 million.www.aljazeera.com
So where are they? One Russian media mouthpiece has asked the very same question.
The Armata still needs a crew of 3, and I suspect it will turn out to be rather less effective than advertised, much like previous generations.
They don't have nearly that many tanks or IFVs.
That number is for the entire armed forces, not the ground forces. Before the war, the ground forces had 300,000 troops. The rest were in the navy, aerospace force, strategic forces etc.
You are very mistaken here. Russian army is extremely dependent on manpower.
While Western armies have pursued heavy automation and optimization because they have shrunk and professionalized, the Russian army remains a conscript army. There were reforms to professionalize and imitate the West, but they were never finished. The Russian army remains largely conscript-based. (That's why there were these sham annexations referenda. A way for Putin to give himself the right to send conscripts outside of Russia, something that is not supposed to happen outside of a formal state of war. Legally, this is still "a special military operation"...)
A simple example is ammunition logistics. With small armies (at least compared to their Cold War size), the West couldn't afford to throw the same kinds of volume of ordnance as they could during WW1 and WW2. Hence the focus on precision: instead of launching a hundred shells and hoping one of them will hit the target, let's throw just one, but one that's guaranteed to hit. It's much more expensive -- maybe a hundred times more expensive, even -- but you get the same effect and it's just one hundredth of the logistics weight, you therefore need less ammunition, less canons, and less personnel. Likewise, logistics were improved to go faster. Palettization was a big thing, allowing to expedite tremendously any sort of transfer from boat to train to airplane to truck -- just a lot faster with less work and less workers. Russians? No such thing happened. Everything is done manually. Transferring ammo boxes from a train to a truck takes hours as each box must be moved by hand individually.
Russia didn't push for the same level of automation because they've got conscripts, so who cares? Workforce is abundant. The entire structure of the Russian armed forces is built around the idea that they have a ton of cheap human labor. Conscripts account for 30% of each BTG, that's the official proportion, without the conscripts a BTG is only at 70% strength, it's how the whole thing has been designed.
The Armata is a joke, like the Felon. Neither will ever enter mass production.
Brussels Seeks Hard Evidence Of Iranian Involvement In Ukraine War, Says EU's Top Diplomat
The European Union is seeking concrete evidence for any Iranian involvement in Russia's war on Ukraine, the bloc's top diplomat, Josep Borrell, said on October 17.
www.rferl.org
No, they absolutely don't have the competence. They did not have it during the Soviet era, and they have it even less now. They never managed to keep up with the West's electronics, in terms of performances and reliability, and their uncompetitive domestic industry simply died off once they got access to Western electronics.
History of computing in the Soviet Union - Wikipedia
Nope, the Taliban is actually a collection of warring tribes who band together for common goals. The warring tribes were created by the Soviet-backed socialist coup in 1973, which deposed the king and redistributed lands, thus creating rivalry and hatred among the tribes. Pre-1973 Afghanistan was a decent country.
The West's goals were originally just to kill Bin Laden following 4 terror attacks, they achieved that, the rest was mission creep. I'll ask again, if India wanted a stable, democratic Afghanistan, why didn't it help?
'Soldiers' implies army only.
What? Is he awake or asleep?Brussels Seeks Hard Evidence Of Iranian Involvement In Ukraine War, Says EU's Top Diplomat
The European Union is seeking concrete evidence for any Iranian involvement in Russia's war on Ukraine, the bloc's top diplomat, Josep Borrell, said on October 17.