Russian military outguns UK army in battle: Report

[Nike]

BTW, it is always the British who on offensive mode in the last century

they maintain a robust expeditionary type forces, capable to sustain prolonged mission on hostile soil thousands miles away from their Natives home. Maybe they small in number, but they own they still maintain their quality in equipment's and training

the same can't be said regarding the Russians, they always fighting inland and near their home, the farther expedition they ever conduct in modern warfare is a mere airstrike against rebels in Syria. Meanwhile, British army, several times they conducting land operation against enemy far from their homes, like in Falkland, Iraq and Afghanistan....

 

[Henry ME 95]

BTW, it is always the British who on offensive mode in the last century

they maintain a robust expeditionary type forces, capable to sustain prolonged mission on hostile soil thousands miles away from their Natives home. Maybe they small in number, but they own they still maintain their quality in equipment's and training

the same can't be said regarding the Russians, they always fighting inland and near their home, the farther expedition they ever conduct in modern warfare is a mere airstrike against rebels in Syria. Meanwhile, British army, several times they conducting land operation against enemy far from their homes, like in Falkland, Iraq and Afghanistan....

In the "Falklands", Iraq & Afghanistan they had US logistical aid. they didn't send expeditionary forces on solely their own power.
the last expeditionary force they sent only under their own power would be the one in Egypt in the 50s to retake the Suez canal.

 

[Malik Alashter]

UK relies for air defence of the UK on fighter aircraft. It has not operated long(er) range missiles since 1991, when the last Bristol Bloodhound (85km) missiles retired. UK relies on NATO assets for AD missile (e.g. Mim-104Patriot of US, Germany, Netherlands, Greece and Spain, but also Eurosam SAMP/T aka Aster land based of France and Italy. NATO now also has 2 landbased AEGIS sites with Standard 3 and 6 missiles for ABM). UK, like most NATO countries, does not and has never fielded the array of AD weapons that the Soviet Union/Russia has had. Part of the reason to adopt such an array is e.g. the likelihood of NOT achieving air superiority.

For ground based air defence is operates the stationary or Land Rover mounted Starstreak Lightweight Multiple Launcher (LML), the Alvis Stormer tracked AFV mounted Starstreak SP HVM and the towed Rapier Field Standard C SHORADS. These are all low level AD systems organic to army units.
The Starstreak HVM (High Velocity Missile) is designed to counter threats from very high performance, low-flying aircraft and fast 'pop up' strikes by helicopters. Starstreak can also be used as a surface attack weapon, capable of penetrating the frontal armour of even IFV's.
The Rapier Field Standard C is an advanced Short Range Air Defence System (SHORAD), which is compact, mobile and air-portable, making it suitable for worldwide operations. It is a 24-hour, all-weather guided weapon system that can simultaneously engage two different targets. CAMM(L) is the land-based variant of CAMM that will replace the Rapier missile batteries of the British Army in near future

These systems are properly compared to MANPADs and light, lightly armored and mobile SHORADS e.g. SA-13,
ZSU-23-4 "Shilka", 9K33 Osa aka SA-8, Tunguska, Pantsir. Comparing them with surface-to-air missile systems designed for intercepting and destroying intercontinental ballistic missiles as well as hypersonic cruise missiles and aircraft is kind of silly, and ignores to NATO combined defence doctrine.


UK operates the M270 MLRS . Strike range depends on the munitions being used. UK has adopted the M30 round, which makes the MLRS now the Guided Multiple Launch Rocket System (GMLRS), nicknamed the '70 km Sniper' or 'GSRM (Grid Square Removal System)'. The M30/M31 round has a range of 84km and so the difference with BM-30 is not 30km but a whopping 6km. The M270 launch vehicle can also fire the ATACMS missile, which can reach 123km to 300km, depending on specific missile version. It the event of conflict of UK with Russia, it is quite likely the ATACMS missile would be made available from the US on short notice if the need arose.

The UKs standard SPGH is the L131 AS-90 155mm/L39 self-propelled howitzer. This is state of the art. The AS90 was upgraded with a Laser Inertial Artillery Pointing System, digital gun sight. The LINAPS provides the gunner with the position of the gun and the exact bearing and elevation of the barrel. It includes the FIN3110 ring-laser gyro based, strap-down Inertial Navigation Unit with embedded military Global Positioning System. THe gun system has a fire rate of 3 rounds in 10 seconds in burst fire, 6 rounds per minute for 3 minutes in intense firing and 2 rounds per minute for 60 minutes at sustained fire. It carries 48 rounds, 31 of these are stored in the turret bustle magazine. The range is 24.7km using conventional ammunition. The AS90 also fires assisted rounds, which provide an extended range to 30km. Fitting a 52-calibre barrel instead of the standard 39 calibre extends the range beyond 40km.

BAE systems were awarded a contract to upgrade 96 of the AS90 to a 52-calibre Length gun to increase its unassisted range to 30 km and with long-range ERA ammunition to 40km. The project was however cancelled by the British Army due to technical problems with the ammunition. The Braveheart turret is scheduled to be built under licence in Poland as part of their new Krab SPG using a German 155mm Cal Length 52 main gun.

With all due respect but quantity always win against quality.

Also the quality of the new Russians hardware are on par with the Western one don't forget the Russians try to abandon the soviet era design mentality.

BTW, it is always the British who on offensive mode in the last century

they maintain a robust expeditionary type forces, capable to sustain prolonged mission on hostile soil thousands miles away from their Natives home. Maybe they small in number, but they own they still maintain their quality in equipment's and training

the same can't be said regarding the Russians, they always fighting inland and near their home, the farther expedition they ever conduct in modern warfare is a mere airstrike against rebels in Syria. Meanwhile, British army, several times they conducting land operation against enemy far from their homes, like in Falkland, Iraq and Afghanistan....

The Brits if you observed their operation they are most of the time following the U.S they can't do a thing without uncle sam.

Britain lost it's power after the second world war due to the effect of the same war now the real power is the US, China and to some extent Russia these are the three behemoth. who will dominate the earth for this century at least and I can see INDIA, BRAZIL and INDONESIA in the future may be the next 30 years.

 

[Penguin]

With all due respect but quantity always win against quality.

Also the quality of the new Russians hardware are on par with the Western one don't forget the Russians try to abandon the soviet era design mentality.

This isn't about quantity v quality. It is about comparing apples with apples and oranges with oranges.

You see e.g. two different AD/AAW doctrines and approaches, both of which employ good systems and sufficient quantity (sufficient, given the chosen doctrine).