Russia to drop defense budget by 27% in 2017

[Penguin]

All insignificant and irrelevant to the point I was making. The exchange rate fluctuations in such small amounts won't matter. The Russians have a huge budget considering the cost of their equipment.

The Chinese bought 24 Su-35s for just $2B, that says a lot.
​

Those are the complete official budget numbers.

I don't care what they are. Point is, if you disagree with the 27% figure, you need to examined what the Financial Times got a look at, that led them to report that figure. For your clarity, it is not about your or my opinion or interpretation here.

It is not irrelevent to note that there are russian arms IMPORTS, when you say there aren't. Over the past 22 years, SIPRI points out that the value for this indicator has fluctuated between [ a high of] 201,000,000 in 2014 and [a low of] 4,000,000 in 2006. More interesting is that the trend is down 1992-2006, whereas the trend is up 2011-2014. In addition, please note that these amounts are actual imports of complete systems or system-components. Not included is the value of e.g. assembly or licence production in Russia. Hence, the numbers are conservative.

You completely ignored the remark over analysis of defence spending often going beyond what is listed on the defence budget. This is clear in the case of China, it is also the case for Russia. Hence the need to look at what exactly FT got a view of.

 

[randomradio]

I don't care what they are. Point is, if you disagree with the 27% figure, you need to examined what the Financial Times got a look at, that led them to report that figure. For your clarity, it is not about your or my opinion or interpretation here.

It is not irrelevent to note that there are russian arms IMPORTS, when you say there aren't. Over the past 22 years, SIPRI points out that the value for this indicator has fluctuated between [ a high of] 201,000,000 in 2014 and [a low of] 4,000,000 in 2006. More interesting is that the trend is down 1992-2006, whereas the trend is up 2011-2014. In addition, please note that these amounts are actual imports of complete systems or system-components. Not included is the value of e.g. assembly or licence production in Russia. Hence, the numbers are conservative.

You completely ignored the remark over analysis of defence spending often going beyond what is listed on the defence budget. This is clear in the case of China, it is also the case for Russia. Hence the need to look at what exactly FT got a view of.

Notice that I didn't say the figure is wrong, I just said that the figure is silly. The reason why it is silly is because the exchange rate doesn't matter and gives the wrong picture.

The Russian budget has dropped by 27% because the GBP-ruble exchange rate has dropped by a similar amount, that's about it. It in no way affects Russia's defence expenditure negatively.

We have a term for this, it's called yellow journalism. Silly news stories that grab eyeballs, but do not tell anything important.

Look at this-
https://www.rt.com/business/russia-increases-military-spendings-702/

It's estimated the Russian military budget for 2014 will be $78 billion. The national plan is to increase defense spending by more than 44 percent over the next three years, to $98 billion in 2016, according to IHS Jane’s Annual Defense Budgets Review.

Does it make any sense?

This will help explain.
https://www.rt.com/business/217003-russian-ruble-tumultuous-history/

By the time of publication, it had recovered to 62.7, compared to 32.9 at the beginning of 2014.

The ruble had collapsed. That's all there is to it.

Let me explain it in a much simpler way. In 2014, a Su-35 cost $35M or 1.2B rubles. The ruble collapsed, so the cost of Su-35 still stayed the same 1.2B rubles, but it costed less than $20M because of the exchange rate after 2014. What this means is there is no change in the cost of purchasing the Su-35 for the RuAF, but the Su-35 became dirt cheap in the export market. That's why they say that when a currency depreciates, your country's exports become more profitable.

The ruble has become horribly undervalued.
https://www.rt.com/business/334393-deutsche-bank-ruble-undervalued/
Despite facing sanctions, falling oil prices and recession, the Russian ruble is the most undervalued currency in developing Europe according to Deutsche Bank.

https://www.rt.com/business/354167-ruble-big-mac-index/
The Big Mac price indicates this exchange rate undervalues the ruble by nearly 60 percent, and that one dollar should currently cost 25.8 rubles instead of Monday’s official exchange of 66.40 rubles to the greenback.

Do you know what this means? It means that the actual Russian defence budget today is $109B based on the Big Mac index. Now the Big Mac index is nowhere near actual reality because beef isn't the same as titanium, but even if we use the 2014 figure of 30 rubles to a dollar, the defence budget this year is at least $95B, which is quite similar to the article I posted above which says they were aiming for a $98B budget by 2016. There is no real drop of 27% anywhere, it's less than 5% since last year.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-defense-budget-idUSKCN0W80TL
Russia’s defense budget will be cut by 5 percent in 2016, Russian Deputy Defence Minister Tatiana Shevtsova said, according to the RIA news agency.

Now, with the oil production capped, it is possible that the ruble will strengthen quite significantly over the next year or two, this will balance out all the empty rhetoric.

Knowing this stuff is extremely important. This is how China grew from a $2T economy to $10T in a short span of just 5 years while Russia's fell from $2.8T to $1.4T in just two years. What happened is the yuan appreciated while the ruble depreciated. That's about it.

If you want to know actual defence expenditure, then you should only look at the currency of the respective countries and not the converted value because that's pointless.

 

[Beast]

Russia doesn't import?
http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/russia/arms-imports

• How about Israeli drones? (Multiple orders. Assembly taking place in Russia)

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Po...rt-Russia-purchased-ten-Israeli-drones-415575​

• How about (Thales) targeting pods?

http://www.wikiwand.com/en/Damocles_(targeting_pod)
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/a...to-use-thales-damocles-targeting-pods-220747/​

• (Thales) Gun sights?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-90
​

As for the Janes reference to Russian defence expenditure, those numbers refer to spending plans announced by the government. In addition, there are estimates/projections of defence spending done by defense analyse companies and government institutions that augment such information with numbers that are not put in the budget as defence items but that are considered 'hidden defence expenditures'. This is quite common. So, I would suggest checking the original articles source of the numbers and calculation method.

For all clarity, I am not going to debate specific numbers here with you.


Right.
http://www.bestchinanews.com/Military/3600.html


I believe PLAN uses 2 project 956E and 2 project 956EM? And seeing as China is currently in the proces of modernizing these ships with new (Chinese) weapons, PLAN will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. Today, the primary destroyer of the Russian fleet is the GTu powered Udaloy class (Project 1155 Fregat), of which 9 remain in service (out of 15 planned an 13 completed). By comparison, of 21 complete Sovremeny's, there remain only 5 active, 3 ongoing modernization and 2 in reserve in Russia

You are so clever to mention 4 earlier sov imported destroyer while ignore a total of 10 indigenous AESA destroyer with more joining soon. Did you see any Sov accompany CV-16 Liaoning in SCS?

As for the black smoke. You are using a old jiangwei trying to compare to Russia CV? Shan't u compare a peer to peer Carrier for reference?Russian carrier is sprouting black smoke throughout its whole journey and the only time not doing so is when tow by tugboat. You need to accept the fact Russian carrier is a step below Chinese better one.

How abt Russian deck crew lose a plane due to incompetence and poor training? Maybe you still want to claim Russian is in better condition and than PLAN?

Fancy calling yourself professional. Can't even get basic right and so many emotion and biased posting.

 

[ito]

Russian economy is in doldrums and still Putin is unnecessarily getting Russia involved in wars

 

[Penguin]

Notice that I didn't say the figure is wrong, I just said that the figure is silly. The reason why it is silly is because the exchange rate doesn't matter and gives the wrong picture.

The Russian budget has dropped by 27% because the GBP-ruble exchange rate has dropped by a similar amount, that's about it. It in no way affects Russia's defence expenditure negatively.

We have a term for this, it's called yellow journalism. Silly news stories that grab eyeballs, but do not tell anything important.

Well, I suppose, in that case, you should write the editor of the Financial Times and explain.

Look at this-
https://www.rt.com/business/russia-increases-military-spendings-702/


Does it make any sense?

This will help explain.
https://www.rt.com/business/217003-russian-ruble-tumultuous-history/


The ruble had collapsed. That's all there is to it.


Let me explain it in a much simpler way. In 2014, a Su-35 cost $35M or 1.2B rubles. The ruble collapsed, so the cost of Su-35 still stayed the same 1.2B rubles, but it costed less than $20M because of the exchange rate after 2014. What this means is there is no change in the cost of purchasing the Su-35 for the RuAF, but the Su-35 became dirt cheap in the export market. That's why they say that when a currency depreciates, your country's exports become more profitable.

The ruble has become horribly undervalued.
https://www.rt.com/business/334393-deutsche-bank-ruble-undervalued/
Despite facing sanctions, falling oil prices and recession, the Russian ruble is the most undervalued currency in developing Europe according to Deutsche Bank.

https://www.rt.com/business/354167-ruble-big-mac-index/


The Big Mac price indicates this exchange rate undervalues the ruble by nearly 60 percent, and that one dollar should currently cost 25.8 rubles instead of Monday’s official exchange of 66.40 rubles to the greenback.

Do you know what this means? It means that the actual Russian defence budget today is $109B based on the Big Mac index. Now the Big Mac index is nowhere near actual reality because beef isn't the same as titanium, but even if we use the 2014 figure of 30 rubles to a dollar, the defence budget this year is at least $95B, which is quite similar to the article I posted above which says they were aiming for a $98B budget by 2016. There is no real drop of 27% anywhere, it's less than 5% since last year.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-defense-budget-idUSKCN0W80TL
Russia’s defense budget will be cut by 5 percent in 2016, Russian Deputy Defence Minister Tatiana Shevtsova said, according to the RIA news agency.

Now, with the oil production capped, it is possible that the ruble will strengthen quite significantly over the next year or two, this will balance out all the empty rhetoric.

Knowing this stuff is extremely important. This is how China grew from a $2T economy to $10T in a short span of just 5 years while Russia's fell from $2.8T to $1.4T in just two years. What happened is the yuan appreciated while the ruble depreciated. That's about it.

If you want to know actual defence expenditure, then you should only look at the currency of the respective countries and not the converted value because that's pointless.

Ah, RT.... one of my favorite state-owned propaganda sources ;-)

Look, you don't need to explain stuff to me, as I indicated. So, I don't know why you bother.

 

[Kashmiri Pandit]

You saw that !!!!!

How a fall in currency impacts a Country .
Russia is no pushover .

 

[Penguin]

You are so clever to mention 4 earlier sov imported destroyer while ignore a total of 10 indigenous AESA destroyer with more joining soon. Did you see any Sov accompany CV-16 Liaoning in SCS?

I'm not ignoring anything. I'm just pointing out that China continues to use those lousy Sovremenny's. The reason they are not accompanying the Liaoning? They aren't in the same Fleet. The Sovremenny's are in the East Sea Fleet, directly facing Taiwan, which is perfectly in line with one of the things they were designed to do: using their twin-barrel 130mm artillery support for amphibious landings. That plus dealing with surface ships (originally with Moskits). This close to mainland China, they would have substantial cover by landbased aviation.

As for the black smoke. You are using a old jiangwei trying to compare to Russia CV? Shan't u compare a peer to peer Carrier for reference?Russian carrier is sprouting black smoke throughout its whole journey and the only time not doing so is when tow by tugboat. You need to accept the fact Russian carrier is a step below Chinese better one.

The Jiangwei II (Type 053H3) and Jiangwei I (053H2G) have CODAD propulsion with newer diesels rather than Kuznetsovs older gas-fired boilers and steamturbines. But the point is of course not the Jianwei's. It is the smoke seen with other - far newer and more modern - ship types, including USNs LCS, JMSDFs Ise class LPD. That illustrates that under the right conditions, many ships can develop a smoke cloud, you just need to be there when it happens and take a pic. I know how often the Kuz burps smog. Then again, it is a ship that has been in commission since 1990 and reaching the end of its service life. It simply is comparing apples and oranges when you compare to Liaoning, which hasn't been around that long and which probably no longer has a comparable propulsion plant.

How abt Russian deck crew lose a plane due to incompetence and poor training? Maybe you still want to claim Russian is in better condition and than PLAN?

I've never made such a claim, nor will I. But I'm also not spouting PLAN alledged superiority to everyone and everything, unlike some here..

Fancy calling yourself professional. Can't even get basic right and so many emotion and biased posting.

Boohooo on you yourself.
Where exactly did I call myself anything here?
What basics are wrong?
What emotion?
What bias (with a beam in your own eye, you are complaining at best about a splinter in mine)?

Lost face again, pal.

 

[randomradio]

Well, I suppose, in that case, you should write the editor of the Financial Times and explain.

Even they know it's yellow journalism.

Ah, RT.... one of my favorite state-owned propaganda sources ;-)

It doesn't matter, facts are facts.

Look, you don't need to explain stuff to me, as I indicated. So, I don't know why you bother.

Since you quoted my post, you got a reply.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Regardless, Russia will still be a formidable military opponent. They still have the military-industrial complex of a former superpower.

I agree with this.