A question for the Russians
 

Thanks for your work on the OOB but can you answer a couple of questions about troop carriers.
1) If possible a rough guide by era as to how common some are.
Really want to know the most common like for instance I think the BTR 50P & BTR 60 were far more common than later models 70, 80 for a long time after they were introduced?
Would it be correct to say forces facing Central Europe (WGF) would tend to have the newer stuff while others would be maily equiped with earlier versions

2) There are many types BMP, BTR & BTR light
The BTR Light Company in the OOB comes without RPG teams.
My question is if possible & realise it may vary is which formation Normal or Light represents troops attached to an Armored Regiment & which a Mech Regiment.

Спасибо для вашей работы на OOB но могут вы ответить несколько вопросы о несущих войск.

1) Если возможно грубый направляющий выступ к эра о, то как общее некоторые. Действительно те знать самые общие как например я думают & BTR 50P; BTR 60 был далеко более общим чем более поздно моделирует 70, 80 в течение длительного времени после того как они ввел? Он был бы правильно сказать что усилия смотря на Чентрал Еуропе (WGF) будет клонить иметь более новое вещество пока другие maily были бы оборудованы с ранними версиями

2) Много типов BMP, & BTR; Свет BTR BTR Свет Компания в OOB приходит без команд RPG. Мой вопрос если возможное & осуществьте что он может поменять которому образованию нормальному или светлому представляет войск прикрепленных к Armored & полка; которо Mech полк.

Re: A question for the Russians
 

As a general rule, yes. In practice it was not an absolute. Aside from obvious expections, such as T-80UDs issued to the
4th Guards tank division near Moscow, there would be units in Germany still using T-55s while units in some backwater would get T-72s or, in some cases, even T-64s.

Re: A question for the Russians
 

Imp,
a place to start:
http://www.geocities.com/Pentagon/90...s.html#6%20CAA

Modern APCs and Armor are not so common as we amateurs may think...

but I don't think we need to find out the ... "hard" way eh! :D

Re: A question for the Russians
 

Thanks Imp.

If I understood you correctly, you need a real composition of our forces during the Cold War?
If so, I will give you a link to the PDF-file (Russian language), which lists and describes the full and actual composition of our armies 1946-1991.
In this file a lot of data and they are all in Russian. Translate this file is very difficult if you're looking for any specific military or periods and locations, you tell me about it and I will try to help you with the translation.
If I do not understand, please - reformulated his question.

Best regards

Re: A question for the Russians
 

link to PDF-file:

http://files.filefront.com/yandbtm2p.../fileinfo.html

Re: A question for the Russians
 

Thanks all turns out my infantry have had rides that conform to the "luxury" end of the market much as I suspected.

Re: A question for the Russians
 

Just have a look at the action in South Ossetia, you'll see likely forces mix for such a sudden "flare-up", IOW for most likely scenario.
1) regular troops - Motor Rifle Division, equipped with T-72B and a mix of BMP-1 and 2. And 2S3 for artillery, no fancy Msta-S.
2) various composite units hurried to the area, composed from experienced soldiers - VDV, "kontraktniki"... But equipped from wartime reserve stocks. So VDV with BMD-1, mech troops with BMP-1 and T-62...

Re: A question for the Russians
 

When you actually start looking at the numbers of high end gear available to certain armies you realise that you are in no way using a representative force.
Russia do have some really really nice toys but cant see them attacking anyone with them, logistics must be a nightmare with the variety of types available.

Re: A question for the Russians
 

Well, depends on country and on post-Cold War force reductions ;) Say Czech Republic clearly can send out ONLY high-end toys (as it has just 2 brigades, so it will be either MR Bde with T-72M4 and BVP-2 or MR Bde with Pandur II) ;)

Re: A question for the Russians
 

http://www.yaplakal.com/findpost/371...pic220364.html

new NK MLRS M-1991 240mm with self targeting AT ammo and claster ammo against infantry. And few pictures from 2008 year mainly.

Re: A question for the Russians
 

Well the T-62s were upgraded, they weren't just ordinary T-62s. However the war saw a mix of Russia's elite soldiers and those who fought in the Second Chechen War. So if doing this scenario, the Russians should have higher experience points. There were some T-80s being used, but no T-90s were used.

It's not so much a nightmare, as it is that different types are intended for different terrain/seasons. Russia even has some "winter-only" equiptment. You can't really use a force that represents the entire country. That's impossible with Russia.

Re: A question for the Russians
 

The 62's were for sure upgraded, though seemed not to be last variants (ie M with BDD or MV).
As for the T-80, interesting, any pics or more info on version and on unit it was used in? All I saw were T-72B model 1989 or those T-62's...

Re: A question for the Russians
 

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...gia-2008-1.htm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...eorgia/mod.htm

The Army of Georgia was at about 37,000 in 2007, with no plans to increase it. AFAIK, they had no armor, no artillery beyond mortars, limited ADS and no Air force. A two ship navy/coastguard. Georgian defense was based on getting help from NATO. We saw how well that worked.
So T-62's were all that was needed. 'ell, T34/85's would have done the job. The ONLY change to prevent the Russian's rape of Georgia was to close down the Roki tunnel.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roki_Tunnel

Closing the tunnel would have required the use of a B-2 and 1/2 a dozen 2,000Lb JDAM's. President Bush decided not to do it. History will record that as one of the worst decisions ever made by an American president. Worse then JFK's no balls call at the Bay of pigs.
a simple smack down of the Russians in Georgia would have prevented the war that will happen after the Russians take the Ukraine back. NATO is a hollow shell, propped up by the USA for some unknown reason. Habit?
{snipped}
"After its partial reform and unification, by 2003 the Group of Russian Forces in Transcaucasia (GRVZ) remained the most capable in the region. At that time, 8,000 soldiers, 153 tanks, 241 armored fighting vehicles, and 140 artillery systems were concentrated at the two military bases stationed in Georgia (the 12th in Batumi and the 62nd in Akhalklaki).

Two more Russian groups, operating under the flag of CIS peacekeeping forces, were concentrated in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. In Gudauta (Abkhazia), a separate peacekeeping-reserve motorized rifle battalion, and two other battalions operated on the line dividing the opposing sides along the Inguri River and in the Kodori Gorge. There were 1,600 servicemen in Abkhazia, about 100 pieces of military hardware (BMP-1s and -2s [infantry fighting vehicles] and BTRs [armored personnel carriers] of various modifications). The peacekeepers' staff was located in Sokhumi. In South Ossetia, the Russian peacekeeping battalion controls the territory around Tskhinvali and along the Georgian military road. The battalion includes 600 men, plus no less than 50 pieces of combat and aviation hardware."

Should the need arise, Russian Forces in Georgia could be augmented by units and sub-units from the 102nd Military Base in Gyumri (Armenia), where 74 tanks, 165 BMP-1s and -2s and BTR-70s and -80s; and 84 artillery weapons are concentrated. Besides this, the base is reinforced by an air defense squadron with 14 MiG-29s, S-300V air defense systems (with a 100-km strike radius, or 40-km for ballistic missiles), and Obzor-3 and Nebo-SV radio tracking stations (RTSs), with a range of up to 300 km.

Re: A question for the Russians
 

Wrong on all four counts actually. Georgian T-72s, backed by artillery and SU-25s were used in the initial attack on Tskhinvali.
In case you missed it in the "big bad russians raping poor little Georgia" noise it was the deliberate georgian all out assault against the Ossestia capital which started the high intensity part of the war.

http://www.mod.gov.ge/?page=-10&Id=25&lang=1
You can see from the above they even have a couple of dedicated artillery brigades for example. And incidentally they had no qualms about using them against populated urban areas.

Listen, "smack down" is for childish games NOT for messing around in the an other nuclear power backyard. That's why the "smack them down" crowd who think they have everything figured out are not put in charge of such decisions.
Besides how can you talk about the "war that will happen after the Russians take the Ukraine back" ?
Are you a time traveller? Or do you have working a crystal ball?

Frankly the russians are no saints but these rants about how the big bad evil russians are always doing dastardly deeds against poor little innocents and how great things would be if the US just bombed a lot of them are better left for certain others websites...

Re: A question for the Russians
 

Worst decision ever made by an American President?? I think thats a bit of a stretch. First of all, Georgia is NOT a part of NATO and therefore the alliance was under no obligation to act militarily to protect Georgia. Thus far, Georgia is only a member of the NATO Partnership for Peace (a NATO sub-group).

For NATO and the US to risk a conflict with Russia, espescially with many units tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan just isnt prudent. Part of politics is not just knowing WHO to fight, but WHEN and WHERE.

Re: A question for the Russians
 

The subject matter of this forum is the game SPMBT. Keep on topic. If you want to discuss political what-ifs take it to another forum.

Don