It is becoming not a very good tradition - on the basis of the words of high-ranking officials, to adjourn our next "unparalleled in the world" invention.
Just quite recently, we talked about the complete collapse of the PAK DA project, then about the Su-57, which, if it is in the troops, then in single quantities and it is not clear in general why. To train is understandable, but the point in training, if the plane will not go to the troops?
The reason is the same: there is no money. That's right, where should they come from, if you need Deripasoks and other close oligarchs from poverty to save and build mausoleums all over the country for the first president. Deripaska's welfare is a topic for spending. And the Moscow Yeltsin Center. And the tanks …
Former Deputy Shoigu, and now Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov again gave the foreign media a reason to gloat over the Russians. On Monday, shedding a stingy man's tear, Mr. Borisov said that the army would be glad to buy thousands of "Armata", but the trouble is the price is terrifying. Our budget cannot handle it. No way.
Of course, Borisov could not help saying that the T-72 in service is much more attractive to the military, both technically and financially. Indeed, why do we need "Armata", why do we need "Vladimir" (T-90MS), if there is a very good tank, T-72. And its modification T-72B3 is generally fire, not like these "Abrams" and "Leopards"!
And the tank is not old! What is 44 years old? For a tank - nothing! This is not a Priora, it will not rot. And over there the German "Leopard" (the first) will also be older. And in general, who said that tomorrow is war? Moreover, if the war, the studied T-72 will come in handy.
And "Armata" looks good at the parade. Here are a dozen of them - and that's enough. Expensive.
It makes sense to quote the words of another expert, Alexei Leonkov from the magazine "Arsenal of the Fatherland".
This is normal today. If there is an uncomfortable question, then (as in the case of the pension "reform") experts immediately appear who intelligently and reasonably prove that everything is true and correct.
Likewise, Mr. Leonkov is broadcasting that, in fact, "Armata" is a prototype weapon. With the letter "O". It is not clear who and where could see this letter, but we will believe. The expert is the same.
And when such samples are created, this implies that they are not made out of technical interest, but for the solution of some specific problems.
Here's how! Great, but I already started to think that in all our design bureaus there are people sitting and just thinking to come up with such a thing. And let's cut down an uninhabited tower. And we will distribute to all experts.
According to Leonkov, there is no point in creating expensive equipment if combat missions are not foreseen for it, which only these models can do.
Delightful, isn't it? It immediately resembles 1941, when the 57-mm anti-tank guns were no longer produced, because there were no targets for them. And then the comrades stood in Stalin's office, stained the dress pants and bleated when it turned out that there was, in general, nothing to beat the Tigers with.
Mr. expert clearly describes what exactly these tasks, which nothing, except for "Armata", will fulfill, and determine the amount of ordered equipment. And if there are no such tasks, then "Armata" is not needed either! That's beauty, right?
I quote:
A counter question: why then the Ministry of Defense solemnly roared, drowning out the march "Thunder of victory, sound!" about a thousand "Armats" that will be in our army? And why is not even a intelligible whisper on this topic heard now?
Oh, yes, there is no money … Sorry, I forgot. But one more, literally, the last quotation of the "expert".
"Armata" is just such a technological breakthrough that puts it a generation higher than all the models of tank equipment that exist not only in Russia, but also in the world. Therefore, it simply does not have worthy competitors on the battlefield - all "Abrams" and "Leopards" can serve as "sparring rivals" for the newest Russian tank.
Right! That is why we will not release it! This is not fair to potential (and not so) opponents! Well, how is it, our tankers will be on the "not having …" tank against the ancient "Leopards"? Well, gentlemen, not 1945, you have to understand.
We must (hypothetically, for now) ruin our crews in the T-72. It will be chivalrous. And the fact that someone will die there … Come on, right, gentlemen? They are still giving birth … Perhaps.
Well, what Mr. Expert came to in the end is what we wrote about two years ago, when fanfare roared, and hurray-idiots banged their heads in hysterics on all resources, that "Armatavsekh will ruin!"
We then said that everything was premature. And joyful shouts, and victorious reports. That there is nothing for a new generation tank: neither a training base, nor a repair base, nor crews. Then our loud-voiced patriots criticized us. OK.
Two years have passed.
And now the same words are quietly whispered by the "experts" hired by the rulers. But at least they honestly whisper that yes, there is no base, nothing, but the main thing is that there is no money.
And if there is no money, there is nothing.
But not everything is so sad. Still sadder. Apparently, a kind of parity emerged in the clash between the financiers and the military. And the financiers said like “Damn with you, you will have a new toy. But not for that kind of money."
“The words of the Deputy Prime Minister about“Armata”do not mean that a cross is being put on it. In the foreseeable future, a certain batch of these machines will go into trial operation in the Russian army, during which it will be possible to figure out what caused this high cost: the costs of the plant, the cost of components or other factors."
That is, now all the same, this unfortunate test batch will be made, however, there are persistent rumors that the number of tanks in it has been corrected again.
It is worth recalling that the demand for "Armata" was initially estimated at 2,300 units. Then the Ministry of Defense announced the construction of 1,000 vehicles "for the first time." Then "blah blah blah" went, and the number was reduced to a trial batch of 100 cars.
Now they say that 20 are enough to carry out full-fledged tests.
But the most interesting thing is these tests. Ask, why test, state tests passed, the tank seems to have been adopted for service?
Yeah, accepted. It also seems to be.
New "tests" of the "Armata" are needed so that specialists can understand which of the tank's innovations are really necessary, and which can be abandoned, thereby reducing the price of it.
Degrease, so to speak.
We tried to find numbers, but alas. Everything is behind a veil of secrecy.
"Our tanks have never been more expensive than the Abrams, and if the Armata is at a price somewhere like the T-90, while without reducing the tactical and technical characteristics, then the issue of its production will not be so acute."
Kindergarten, junior group. Our tanks were not more expensive than the Abrams. Well, incredibly simple! And these are the words of the already quoted Mr. Borisov. Vice Premier. Who is trying to explain on his fingers about the cost of the tank.
Okay, the Abrams is worth about $ 6 million. T-90, depending on the letters - 3.5-4 million. "Armata" must be shoved in the middle.
Madhouse? Madhouse.
So I want to tell these "experts" that this, you know, is a TANK! It has no leather seats and no bar. This is not a jeep for 4-5 million rubles, on which you ride, gentlemen. This is a combat vehicle.
And the war machine was invented and designed by people who have been doing just this all their lives. That is, by designing combat vehicles. There can be nothing superfluous.
The tank cannot be made of metal from oil barrels. The tank cannot be left without optics and electronics. We do not understand at all how it is possible to reduce the price of such a car so that it becomes cheaper than the Abrams, which is on its way to its 40th anniversary.
What can be thrown out of a combat vehicle to make it cheaper? What's unnecessary there? And what kind of "specialists" will decide this?
And this heresy is broadcast by the country's top officials … Apparently, they have uninhabited towers, unlike our tank troops - a common phenomenon.
