Armament of Russia and the USA: comparison. Army of Russia and America: modern weapons

2024 Author: Henry Conors | [email protected]. Last modified: 2024-02-12 02:46

Russia (USSR) has always been an adversary for the Western world. Our military doctrines have been oriented towards fighting each other for six decades now. Accordingly, the armament of Russia and the United States was also assessed. Comparison of defense capability and strike power was the driving force behind the development of science and economics. Russia is the only country in the world that can technically wipe out the United States, and also has a comparable military potential.

For decades, without entering into direct confrontation, countries have tested all types of weapons in combat conditions, except for ballistic missiles. Antagonism is not over. The ratio of the US and Russian armies, unfortunately, is an indicator of political stability on the planet. Comparing the military vehicles of both countries may be a thankless task. The two powers have different doctrines. Americans yearn for world domination, and Russia has always responded symmetrically.

Statistics are biased

Information relating to the defense sector is always classified. If we turn to open sources, then it is theoretically possible to compare the weapons of the United States and Russia. The table provides dry figures borrowed only from Western media.

Parameters	Russia	USA
Firepower position in the world	2	1
Total population, persons	146 million	327 million
Available human resources, people	145 million	69 million
Personnel in active military service, people	1.4 million	1, 1 million
Servicemen in the reserve, people	1.3 million	2.4 million
Airports and runways	1218	13 513
Aircraft	3082	13 683
Helicopters	1431	6225
Tanks	15 500	8325
Armored fighting vehicles	27 607	25 782
Self-propelled guns	5990	1934
Towed artillery units	4625	1791
MLRS	4026	830
Ports and terminals	7	23
Civil fleet ships	1143	393
Navy ships	352	473
Aircraft carriers	1	10
Submarines of all types	63	72
First rank attack ships	77	17
Military budget, USD	76 billion	612 billion

Based on these data, Russia has no chance in the confrontation with America. However, the real picture is slightly different. A simple comparison does nothing. It all depends on the training of personnel, as well as on how effective equipment and weapons are. So, in the south-east of Ukraine, the loss of military equipment is 1:4 in favor of the militias, although the weapons are the same.

Manpower and mobilization reserve

The Russian and US armies are almost comparable in size. However, the US military is 100 percent staffed by professional soldiers. The level of material and technical equipment is also high. The United States has a much greater mobilization capacity. fit forThere are 120 million people in military service overseas, we have only 46 million. Every year in the United States, 4.2 million young people reach draft age, in Russia - only 1.3 million. In a war of attrition, the Americans will be able to make up for losses much more effectively. Nevertheless, Pentagon experts over the past decade have significantly lowered the bar for the strategic capabilities of their armed forces. If earlier they were designed for the simultaneous conduct of two full-scale warriors, then after 2012 the General Staff declares the possibility of confrontation in only one conflict.

Fighting spirit

Another thing is the quality of the fighters. Hollywood and the Western media have shaped the image of the world community as an invincible and invulnerable marine with an unbending will. A very revealing moment is connected with the recent Crimean events. In the spring of 2014, NATO sent a detachment of ships to the Black Sea to intimidate Russia and demonstrate support for Ukraine, which was suffering from the "aggressor", in the spring of 2014. Among the warships of the "friendly powers" was the guided missile destroyer Donald Cook. The ship maneuvered near the territorial waters of Russia. On April 12, a Su-24 front-line bomber without standard weapons, but equipped with on-board (and not any special) electronic warfare equipment, circled the ship. As a result of this maneuver, all electronic equipment on the destroyer went out of service. The result of the demarche: 27 sailors (a tenth of the crew) filed a petition for dismissal from service due to the threat to their lives. Imagine the picture: on the morning of January 26, 1904, the crew of the Varyag cruiser facedthe upcoming battle with the Japanese detachment of cruisers writes a letter of resignation to the commander! The reason is life threatening. This is incomprehensible to any military unit.

At the beginning of this year, a similar situation happened to the crew of the cruiser Vicksburg. The attack was simulated by the Su-34. There was no electronic impact on the vessel. The Americans did not even manage to use the air defense system. The result of the flight over the ship: a letter of resignation from two dozen sailors.

Our tanks are fast

During the Cold War, the doctrine of the land strategy of the Soviet Union provided for the achievement of the Atlantic coast by armored units within four days. The backlog has been preserved. Tracked combat vehicles still remain the basis of the striking power of combat operations on land. The tanks of Russia and the United States are approximately equivalent in terms of combat qualities, however, many experts agree that a direct confrontation will be in favor of the Americans in a ratio of 1: 3. It should be borne in mind that top overseas models are dozens of times more expensive than Russian counterparts. The American army is armed with 1970 Abrams tanks of the latest modifications - M1A2 and M1A2SEP. 4800 units of earlier versions are in reserve. In Russia, until new T-14 tanks enter the troops, the T-90 of various modifications will remain the most modern models, of which there are about five hundred in combat units. 4744 gas turbine T-80s are being modernized in accordance with modern requirements and equipped with the latest protection and weapons systems.

An alternative to the expensive T-90 is the latest version of the T-72B3. How many of these tanks are in service, there is no exact information. At the beginning of 2013, there were 1,100 of them. Every year, Uralvagonzavod modernizes at least three hundred units. In total, there are about 12,500 T-72s of different versions on the balance sheet of the defense department. In terms of combat-ready units, our army retains a two-fold superiority over the US army and its NATO allies (!). New tanks will consolidate this superiority. The Americans expect to keep Abrams in service until 2040.

Infantry Armor

Russia has 15,700 armored personnel carriers (9,700 of them in service), 15,860 BMPs and BMDs (7,360 in service) and 2,200 reconnaissance armored vehicles. The Americans have more than 16,000 armored personnel carriers. There are about six and a half thousand combat-ready Bradley infantry fighting vehicles. American vehicles are better protected.

Heavy weapons

Artillery is still the queen of the fields. Russia has a fourfold superiority in self-propelled artillery and multiple launch rocket systems, and a twofold superiority in towed artillery systems. Experts talk about the higher professional training of the US Army. Indeed, heavy weapons require competent specialists. On the other hand, the domestic armed forces have weapons that have no analogues in the West and are not expected in the near future. These are, for example, the Solntsepek heavy flamethrower system or the Tornado multiple launch rocket system.

First of all - planes

Nominallythe American Air Force has an overwhelming (more than fourfold) superiority over the Russian one. However, American technology is becoming obsolete, and replacement is late. US Air Force combat aircraft in service have a two-fold superiority. One of the arguments is the fact that in Russia there are only a few 4 ++ aircraft and there is no fifth generation, while the United States already has hundreds of them, more precisely the F-22 - 195 units, the F-35 - about seventy. The Russian Air Force can counter them with only 60 Su-35S. It should be borne in mind that the F-22s have been discontinued due to the high cost of manufacture and operation. Causes criticism of the tail mount and fire control system. F-35, despite the colossal PR campaign, is far from the fifth generation. This car is pretty raw. It is possible that the advertised invisibility for radar is another myth. Manufacturers do not allow measuring the effective scattering surface.

The production of new aircraft in Russia is growing at an unprecedented pace. In 2014, more than 100 combat aircraft were built, not counting export copies. There are no such indicators anywhere in the world. In the USA, combat aircraft are produced annually:

• F-16 - no more than 18 units (all for export);
• F-18 - about 45 units.

The Russian Air Force is annually replenished with the following modern aviation systems:

• MiG-29k/KUB up to 8 units;
• Su-30M2 up to 6 units;
• Su–30CM not less than 20;
• Su–35С up to 15 units
• Su-34 at least 20.

It should be remembered that information aboutthe number of cars produced is classified. Actual production volumes can be much higher. The Su-35, Su-27 and MiG-31BM, armed with powerful radars and R-37 missiles with a launch range of 300 km, allow these models to significantly reduce their gap in front of the F-22 Raptor fighter. They can handle F-15, F-16 and F-18 aircraft without any problems.

On the guard of distant frontiers

The presence of long-range strike aircraft distinguishes the weapons of Russia and the United States. Comparison of the power of heavy bombers and missile-carrying aircraft on combat duty makes Western generals tremble. And for good reason. The numbers may not be impressive. American long-range aviation is represented by three types of bombers:

• B-52N: 44 in service, 78 in reserve;
• B-2A: 16 units in service, 19 in storage;
• B-1VA: 35 in service, 65 in reserve.

Russian strategic aviation is worthy, not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively superior to the "partner", despite the fact that it does not have aircraft like the B-2 in service. The subsonic ste alth bomber is difficult to control and ineffective in combat use. Domestic long-range aviation is represented by the following machines:

• Tu-160: all 16 aircraft in service, resumption of production planned;
• Tu-95MS: 32 are on constant combat duty, 92 are in storage;
• Tu-22M3: 40 in service, 213 in reserve.

Particular concern is the placement of the Tu-22 on the sites of the Crimea. Armed with high-precision Kh-32 missiles with a range of up to 1000 kmthe aircraft is capable of hitting any object in North Africa and throughout Europe. Without armament, in nine hours the plane will land at the Libertador air base in Venezuela. In another half an hour it will be equipped with ammunition and ready to take off.

Helicopters

Armada of rotorcraft for various purposes complements the armament of Russia and the United States. Comparison of the number of this type of technical equipment is also far from in our favor. True, from the declared list of American cars, about half are currently operational. The Pentagon has paid for the delivery of about three hundred Mi-17s over the past ten years to support its activities in Afghanistan and Iraq. Better recognition of the quality of the product and could not be desired. These machines can be added to our asset. Concern "Helicopters of Russia" annually produces more than 300 aircraft for the domestic market. Two thirds are for the armed forces.

Air Defense Forces

A large-scale ground operation is unthinkable without air support. In this case, the air defense system plays a leading role. The Russian air defense system is recognized as the most effective in the world. The basis of the combat power of anti-aircraft gunners is the S-300 complexes of various modifications and the S-400 system. To cover formations from attacks from the air in the near zone, mobile installations "Pantsir-S1" are intended. NATO experts unequivocally agree that in the event of an air attack on Russia, the air defense system will destroy up to 80% of enemy aircraft, including the latest cruise missiles flying towards the target with enveloping terrain. The American Patriot system cannot boast of such indicators. Estimates of our experts are more modest, they call the figure 65%. In any case, irreparable damage will be inflicted on the enemy. Complexes based on the MiG-31BM have no analogues in the world. The planes are armed with air-to-air missiles with a range of 300 km. According to the latest report from the analytical agency Air Power Australia, in the event of a large-scale military conflict between Russia and the United States, the likelihood of the survival of American aviation is completely excluded. The high score of opponents is worth a lot.

Rocket Umbrella

It's no secret that in a hypothetical war with Russia, the Americans expect to deliver the first rapid global strike using high-precision non-nuclear weapons. From possible aggression in the future, Russia is already quite reliably protected. Under the cover of the anti-missile umbrella, a comprehensive re-equipment of the armed forces is planned until 2020. The latest equipment and weapons are entering the troops at an increasing pace. By this time, samples of a new generation will appear, which will reduce the possibility of a direct armed confrontation between the two superpowers to almost zero.

Here we have something

At the same time, domestic aviation is capable of attacking enemy ground targets with virtually impunity. This is facilitated by the latest electronic warfare systems. Electronics does not allow approaching the aircraft at a dangerous distance: the rocket either goes to the side, changing the flight path, or is eliminated at a safe distance. The prototype system was firsttested in combat conditions during the conflict in South Ossetia in 2008. Our armed forces lost 5 planes, although the enemy side took out containers from the spent Buk missiles by trucks.

On the oceans

In what Russia is clearly inferior to its overseas partner, it is in the power of the naval forces. In terms of the power of the surface component of the American Navy, they have an overwhelming superiority. The renewal of the domestic fleet mainly concerns the ships of the near sea zone. The Americans also surpass the number of nuclear submarines (they do not build others): the US has 75 nuclear-powered submarines, Russia has 48. The US has 14 ballistic missile submarines, Russia has one more.

To be fair, the Americans do not have submarines armed with anti-ship cruise missiles like our 949A Antey. For these purposes, they are re-equipping Ohio-class strategic missile carriers. A positive aspect is the adoption of domestic multi-purpose and strategic submarines of the 4th generation. An essential trump card is the deployment of strategic missile carriers under the ice of the Arctic. In these positions, they are inaccessible to the enemy.

Nuclear Deterrent Forces

This item is subject to strict observance under the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty. The nuclear shield, also known as the nuclear club, consists of three components:

• Strategic Missile Forces.
• Submarines with intercontinental ballistic missiles.
• Strategic aviation.

The nuclear weapons of the US and Russia are approximately equivalent. The Americans have a larger number of charges in long-term storage. But the basis of our immunity is not only new types of ballistic missiles capable of breaking through any missile defense system, but also practically invulnerable ground-based complexes, as well as railway installations under development. By far the most terrifying argument for military superiority over other powers is the nuclear weapons of Russia and the United States. Comparison of one appearance of ballistic missiles can cool hot heads. The nightmare of the American warriors is the Perimeter autonomous retaliatory strike system, or, as they themselves call it, the Dead Hand. The name of the updated version is classified.

Most recently, we have achieved parity and even a slight advantage in terms of the number of deployed charges. According to experts, at the end of 2014, the numerical strength of the nuclear weapons of the two countries is expressed in the following figures:

• Russia has 528 deployed carriers, the US has 794.
• There are warheads on deployed carriers: Russia has 1643, the US has 1642.
• Total carriers (deployed and non-deployed) in Russia - 911, in the USA - 912.

By the end of 2017, both sides should have no more than 700 deployed launchers and no more than 1,550 warheads. In addition, no more than a hundred launch vehicles can be held in reserve. Across the ocean, analysts acknowledge that in peacetime, with current levels of operationally deployed nuclear weapons, US offensive forces do not have the ability to launch a surprise strike against Russia's nuclear deterrent. This position will continue in the coming decades.

Russian navy and army are intensively updated. Naturally, the same processes are taking place in the American armed forces. The priority of our strategy is the defense of the borders, and this gives us a significant advantage.