We live in a strange time. Sometimes the famous "Do not believe your eyes …" is remembered. And there is a feeling of some kind of discomfort. A person is forced not to believe himself. Imagine: do not believe yourself!
We see shelling of peaceful settlements somewhere in Ukraine or Syria. We see which side these settlements are on. We see craters from explosions and hear interviews with victims. Everything seems to be clear. But after literally a day or two, according to media reports and blog entries, we begin to doubt it. It turns out that these were self-bombings … These were provocations to discredit the militants in Syria or the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Ukraine. People even "commit suicide" in order to prove to the mythical "world community" the aggressiveness of the militants or Ukrainian warriors.
Exactly the same feeling came to me after reading some statements of quite adequate analysts on the net. Let me remind you that today many media outlets in Russia and the world are commenting on the statement made by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu at an exhibition of weapons confiscated from militants within the framework of the Army-2017 International Military-Technical Forum. I mean the statement about the use of the latest weapons and military equipment in the course of the operation.
In general, the Army-2017 forum is an interesting invention of our Ministry of Defense. Anyone can find exactly what they want. The average person can watch their favorite "babakhaki" and "dances of war machines". A professional at closed screenings - to meet with experts in their field and learn about promising developments in the defense industry. And what leaks into the press always arouses keen interest among readers.
I will question the figures that have been announced. And deliberately. Simply because these numbers "depend" on the calculation methodology. If you adapt a "contraption" invented at some factory to an old machine gun, will it be a new weapon? And if to adapt to the same machine "crap" from another plant? Or "bullshit" from the third? Officially, "according to the Ministry of Defense, 160 types of the latest Russian weapons were tested in real combat. Many of them are already being finalized taking into account invaluable combat experience."
Some opinions are striking in their cynicism. Do you know why Russia entered the fight against terrorists? Believe it or not, just to try out your new weapon systems! No more and no less … What terrorists? What is the legal authority in Syria? What kind of murdered children, women and old people? The main thing is weapons and military equipment! Russia itself is a terrorist state. Therefore, it cannot fight terrorism a priori.
Another category of commentators is more adequate. Russians have the right to use whatever weapons they have. Unless, of course, it is prohibited by international agreements. But what about the soldiers? So in Russia they have never appreciated a soldier's life … And terrorists are just an excuse for testing …
Frankly, such articles produce a disgusting impression. They do not add respect to the authors. Moreover, for myself personally, I forever "close" these names. I think that many people do this. But the question is different. The question is, have we really experienced a lot of what is already in service or will soon be?
This is not an idle question. Modern warfare is quite high-tech. Armament and equipment today "help" a soldier in combat. Moreover, sometimes they fight almost independently. This is the choice and assessment of targets, this is the aiming of ammunition at the target, taking into account all the amendments, this is the struggle for survivability. And the very training of a highly qualified specialist costs a lot of money.
The answer was given by the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation! Yes, we tested new weapons and military equipment. Yes, among the samples there were also those for which final conclusions have not yet been drawn. But why did we "remember" about it today? Wasn't there a tough conversation between Minister Shoigu and representatives of the military-industrial complex last year as part of a single day of acceptance of military products? I remember.
Back in May last year, President Putin spoke clearly about the use of weapons and military equipment in Syria.
"Russian President Vladimir Putin, speaking about the results of the operation in Syria, admitted that the hostilities revealed" certain problems ", the elimination of which will" adjust the further directions of development and improvement of the models of military equipment."
Minister Shoigu put it in a similar way.
"During the use of military equipment in the Syrian Arab Republic, a number of design and production flaws were identified."
Moreover, last year not only the military, but also production workers came to Syria. I will quote the opinion of Andrey Shibitov, Deputy General Director of the Russian Helicopters holding company for production:
"The experience of the combat use of machines is very specific. Under the conditions of the tasks of a new generation, I revealed a number of shortcomings that need to be eliminated on our machines. Of course, despite the generally successful work, we understand what we need to work on in order for our machines to be even more efficient. "We have already formed a program in which we have identified improvements that will improve the efficiency of our machines."
World history, probably, does not know a single complex mechanism that would not be modernized during operation. Not a simple lever or screw, but a complex mechanism. And modern weapons are indeed a complex mechanism. This is not a problem today. Not even yesterday. How many weapons and equipment appeared or modernized during the First World War? And how much during the Second? Compare the famous T-34 tank of 1941 and 1945. Compare the planes.
Why are there weapons. Uniforms and equipment in war sometimes change dramatically. By the way, this also happened in Syria. The problem with our technology and weapons is that we often want to "embrace the immensity." We are trying to create a weapon that would work in any conditions. Those of the readers who have visited the exhibitions of Russian weapons at least once will remember one of the lines on the stand in front of the sample. "Works effectively at temperatures from minus 50 to plus 50"! This "versatility" often hurts weapons.
The war in Syria is indeed being used by the Russian Ministry of Defense to identify deficiencies in weapons and military equipment. Those that are quite difficult to "notice" during field tests. "A perfect example of this is the Su-35 fighter. I will quote the message from the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation:
"Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov said that by the end of this year a set of nets in the air intakes will be installed on the Su-35 fighter, which will prevent debris and foreign objects from entering the engine. The deficiency was revealed during takeoffs from the Syrian base Khmeimim, located in rocky terrain. Plus "drying" can be equipped with the sighting and navigation complex "Hephaestus", which has proven itself in Syria on the Su-24. Initially, the "thirty-fifth" was designed for air battles. But after such modernization, the Su-35 will be able not only to cover bombers, but also to strike for ground targets not worse than the Su-34 ".
And here is what the commander of the Russian group in Syria, Colonel-General Andrei Kartapolov, said:
"It is a pity to spend missiles on militants that are intended for a serious high-tech enemy. For bandits, ordinary bombs are enough, which we have enough."
In general, any war either creates legends or debunks legends. Especially in the field of weapons and military equipment. The Syrian war is no exception. Look at the Americans. For decades, the entire world believed that American high-tech weapons were invincible. Europeans literally prayed for "Tomahawks", "Abrams" and other "Javelins" … Some Europeans continue to this day. So what?
It turned out that the weapons were far from the best. The Americans quickly realized that it was dangerous to go into a direct clash with the Russian. It is at least not worse, and more often better than the American one. And the Russians will have a higher level of possession of their own weapons. And this is not what we "scared the world" with at the Victory Day parade. Not "Armata", not Su-57. This is what was recently called "Soviet scrap metal".
According to some Western experts, to summarize all their statements, the Russians were supposed to arrive in Syria in T-34s, with PPSh machine guns and wearing earflaps. It would be "fair to the insurgent people." Then the world order that the Americans "built" would have been preserved on the planet. Russian weapons in Syria have done what diplomats and politicians could not do. It is the weapon! The myth of America's omnipotence has collapsed.
Weapon systems, military equipment and the army itself are designed for war. And the only indicator of their effectiveness can only be war. This is an axiom. This means that if it happens that our soldiers and officers take part in the war, they must be equipped with the very best. At least from what is in the world today. They are really dear to us. But not economically, but humanly. These are our fathers and children. Our!
