The adopted State Armament Program for 2011–2020 makes the main stake on the acquisition of new equipment and weapons. But is the stake on new weapons and military equipment justified? Isn't it more logical to simultaneously purchase new equipment in large quantities and modernize the old one?
In most countries, this is exactly what they do: they modernize the existing armament park by purchasing batches of new armaments in areas where there are serious "gaps" in the country's defense capability.
The problem of the technological barrier
The last time humanity overcame the technological barrier "thanks" to the Second World War - aviation switched from propeller driven machines to jet engines, atomic energy was mastered, ballistic missiles were created, etc.
For a technological breakthrough, huge financial investments are needed, which from the point of view of the near future will not pay off. Such investments are capable of states that are preparing for a war for world domination or for their survival, such as the Third Reich, the USA and the USSR. These three powers made a "leap" and dragged all of humanity with them.
After this breakthrough - in the late 1930s and early 1960s - the great powers switched to a strategy of improving existing developments. All countries "technology donors" - Russia, USA, Germany, France, Great Britain - have buried themselves in this barrier; inevitably, the industrial powers, which use the best practices of Russian, European, and American engineering - the PRC, India, Iran, will also rest against it.
Under these conditions, the cycle of the "life" of military equipment begins to grow, for example, the aircraft of the 30-40s became obsolete and gave way to their successors "in the first line" after 3-5 years, the late 40s - early 50s - during 6-8 years, 50-60s - after 15-20 years, etc.
Aircraft of the 4th generation, which were created in 12-17 years and required huge material costs, currently form the basis of the fleet of combat aircraft of the leading powers and will remain so for more than a decade.
The "ceiling" of the 4th generation aircraft is difficult to overcome, taking into account the financial and resource constraints, their improvement continues mainly by replacing the onboard equipment - although the technological barrier in electronics is already visible, it has not yet been reached. The aircraft of the 5th generation of the USA F-22, which have been adopted, will not replace the fleet of aircraft of the 4th generation, since they are very expensive and difficult to operate. Putting them into service en masse means "freezing" all other military programs.
A similar situation is also developing in the field of other weapons and military equipment - just look at the development time of modern main battle tanks both in Russia and in the West, at the main types of small arms and the most common artillery systems, at warships and missile weapons. Continuous modernization allows you to keep long-established products at the level of today's requirements.
For example: the Russian T-90 tank is a modernization of the Soviet T-72 tank, produced since 1973, the main tank of the Bundeswehr Leopard 2 has been produced in Germany since 1979. During this time, the car went through six major modernization programs and is currently being produced in the 2A6 version. From 2012, it is expected to start serial production of the next version - 2A7 +. The United States fights on M1A2 Abrams tanks, upgrading the M1 of 1980, and Israel - on the Merkava Mark IV - a descendant of the Merkava Mark I of 1978.
As a result, we see that almost all types of weapons on the modern market are advanced developments of very distant times. The eternal design dispute about who will do the best has shifted to the plane, who will modernize better. So, Soviet tanks, which are in service with many countries, for example, the T-55, are proposed to be upgraded to the level of modern tanks by Ukrainian, Israeli, and Russian companies.
Do I need to buy new equipment?
Of course, yes, fundamentally new systems with capabilities inaccessible to platforms of the previous generation, and often without predecessors, are still being created. They have a pretty big advantage over the modernized samples.
In addition, the lack of serial purchases of weapons and military equipment threatens the degradation and disintegration of the military-industrial complex, which cannot exist only through the modernization of previously released samples. This will undermine the country's defense capability, deprive the country of additional income from the sale of arms and military equipment abroad, make a lot of highly qualified people unemployed, thereby complicating the social problem. Finally, not all types of weapons and military equipment are distinguished by such longevity as tanks or military transport aircraft; many systems have to be changed simply because of their physical wear and tear.
Main goals
- Nowadays Russia faces two main tasks in the field of military affairs. Firstly, this is the development of the military-industrial complex, which should be able to equip the Ground Forces, the Air Force and the Navy with modern weapons.
- Secondly, the actual strengthening of the Armed Forces in the face of the approach of the Great War. The army, aviation and navy need such models of weapons and military equipment that will make it possible to effectively respond to military threats to national security.
Problem of choice
It is clear that the serial purchase of samples of new weapons and military equipment cannot cover all the needs of the Armed Forces, for this there is neither money nor physical capabilities - the Russian military-industrial complex can no longer provide new weapons on a massive scale (deterioration of the material base, loss of personnel - 20 years of collapse and degradation). This is especially true for expensive models such as combat aircraft, air defense systems, etc.
In such conditions, the modernization of weapons and military equipment of previous generations is extremely necessary; it is a question of the combat effectiveness of our armed forces, and therefore of the entire civilization. Among those types of weapons and military equipment that will certainly serve in a modernized form for many more years, one can name front-line and strategic aviation aircraft, combat helicopters, anti-aircraft missile systems, nuclear submarine missile carriers, and many others. other. So, aviation must be modernized at a faster pace - the number of improved Su-27SM in six years has exceeded only fifty machines, and the MiG-31BM has not yet reached this figure.
We must follow the example of the United States. The States also faced this problem, they are experiencing a serious shortage of new aircraft (the F-22 fighter is too expensive for a large series, and the F-35 will still not go into it), they are very actively engaged in the modernization of old aircraft. Currently, work is underway to convert the A-10A attack aircraft into the all-weather version of the A-10C. The improvement of the fleet, numbering nearly 200 vehicles, is expected to be carried out within a little over three years. They are also modernizing the fighter fleet.
The modernization of about 10 aircraft per year is incapable of meeting the needs of the Russian Air Force for updating equipment and threatens a serious failure of their combat capabilities in the near future.
Navy: The situation in the Navy is even more difficult - upgrading ships is so expensive (in most cases) that it is easier (faster) and cheaper to build a ship from scratch. And right now. Otherwise, after the destruction of the last Soviet ships, we will not have a fleet, there will be only single copies for exhibitions.
But in the field of shipbuilding, it is necessary not only to massively build ships, but also to modernize part of the fleet. This applies, for example, to strategic nuclear submarines of Project 667BDRM, which are equipped with the Sineva missile system during repair and modernization, to the only aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral Kuznetsov, to missile cruisers of projects 1144 and 1164: if properly repaired, they can serve dozens more years, having received modern radio-electronic equipment and weapons systems. These giants from the Soviet era can become the core of the Russian fleet of the future.
Modernization of a number of other projects is also possible, for example, large anti-submarine ships of project 1155, which today are perhaps the most "running" combat units of the surface fleet. Equipping them with modern weapons, including anti-ship missiles, could significantly increase the potential of these ships. Extending their service life with the help of major repairs will significantly reduce the load on the shipbuilding industry.
Ground troops: On the one hand, the weapons and military equipment in their units require replacement both in terms of physical wear and tear and obsolescence - domestic tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers do not always meet modern requirements (especially regarding the protection of crews). On the other hand, there is no possibility of mass replacement of armored vehicles, therefore, it is necessary to modernize the existing one, while simultaneously creating new models.
Strategic Missile Forces: there is also a synthesis of both approaches, as the most positive option. Extension of terms and modernization of strategic aviation of multi-unit ICBMs of the "Voevoda" and "Stilet" type while simultaneously creating a new heavy ICBM, preparing for the adoption of the sea-based ICBMs "Bulava" and the adoption of new "Yars".
