PDA

View Full Version : Gnarly Russian Training


B. Lahey
July 30, 2009, 04:55 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtPif9enfNc&NR=1

1:12 Some kind of strangling-avoidance technique.

3:06 Practicing sewing up wounds by cutting your leg open on purpose.

4:00 Downrange drill.

And my favorite...

4:12 Breaking roof-tiles with a self-piledriving leaping headbutt.:D

All of it is pretty entertaining (mostly because I don't have to do it).

Huntergirl
July 30, 2009, 05:17 PM
Ah, just like basic training. Been there done that...:D
No actually, in my Army basic training days, we were taught some pretty practical things. I ran marathons and half marathons while in the Army. Since basic training taught me how to go the distance, endurance, everything else came easy. And I mean that. My later on husband was an officer pilot, and his training nowhere matched mine, yeah I know back in the day, officers and sargeants didn't...but they did, and often got married. We did, and then got out. I kept running, he didn't. I don't know how basic training is anymore, but I was grateful for it back then.

Tuzo
July 31, 2009, 12:04 PM
RenTV programs some sensational stuff from Russia. Showing far-fetched military training is a RenTV's bread and butter fare. The fellow cutting and then sewing up his wound is described as a lieutenant colonel combat instructor in St Petersburg. Notice how the two fellows holding a stangling rope move with Lt Col Andrei as he steps forward. A realistic situation would have Andrei on the ground dead or nearly dead. He was probably paid an incentive to suture his self-inflicted wound. The Chinese Spetsnaz breaking tiles with their heads is another stunt. Notice the tiles are ribbed and they are broken along the weak axis. I have done something similar, accidently, with porcelain tile. As an aside, notice that when wood boards are broken during karate demonstrations that they are broken along the structurally weak grain axis not the stronger perpendicular axis.

Take any stuff you read or see from Russian TV with many grains of salt, especially when their special forces are depicted. Some Russian documentaries are factual but these mock-u-mentaries just barely believable.

Lived and worked in that part of the world for several years and would never buy anything labeled "made in Russia" other than art.

Huntergirl
July 31, 2009, 12:09 PM
Just like some of the "cold war" era sideshows. We later learned it was all smoke and mirrors.

BlueTrain
July 31, 2009, 03:40 PM
You ought to understand that the US Army undergoes somewhat more thorough training, at least compared to what I had, these days. My son's tank unit practiced giving one another blood or plasma transfusions.

Dwight55
August 1, 2009, 05:49 PM
When I was in the guard, . . . one of our officers picked up a copy of a Russian training film. It was on airborne techniques, . . . and went through a lot of different things on it: suiting up, . . . taking stuff with you, . . . properly exiting the aircraft, . . . coming down, . . . landing, . . . etc.

I have only edited a few home videos, . . . but I know I could of, . . . and would of edited that film a whole bunch better than they did, . . . unless of course that was their technique.

Just about every one of their guys did a perfect three point landing, . . . feet, knees, and face.

I never heard my platoon laugh like I did when they saw that flick.

Anyway, . . . may God bless,
Dwight

ranburr
August 1, 2009, 07:10 PM
Nobody ever accused the russians of being smart.:D

Sodbuster
August 1, 2009, 09:02 PM
would never buy anything labeled "made in Russia" other than art

You mean to tell me, Tuzo, that you didn't come back with a Rocketa watch?! :eek:

Tuzo
August 2, 2009, 11:48 AM
In 1998 I received a gift watch that is touted as the best Russian-made wristwatch, a Commando. The worker's and peasant's paradise did indeed produce a unique watch. A "modern" windup with a floppy winding stem and instead of tick-tocking it goes clink-clanking. Visit the former soviet union and you will see very few Russian-made automobiles, mostly Japanese and German, because no one wants a Russian Lada, Moscvitch, or Volga. Russian-made trucks and busses are still popular because they are cheap and come standard from the factory with ungreased wheel bearings and pre-rusted body panels.

Lack of quality in Russian manufactured goods dates to the 1600's as Russia was trying to emerge as a modern nation. However, from then and up to today the Russian goal of manufacturing is to make something "just good enough." Russians will buy a Russian-made appliance only as the positively last resort. For example, refrigerators produced in Poland or Belarus are preferred and of much higher quality than the Russian stuff.

My work entailed use of two new (16 kilometers on the odometer) de-militarized Russian armored personnel carriers. These machines provided endless amounts of entertainment. The engines leaked so much oil that each driver would bail the oil from the engine compartment and return it to the crankcase. The bulkhead between the driver's compartment and engine bay had a 6" gap at the base and the poor driver suffered a lake of hot oil at his feet and fumes. The transmission is semi-automatic and entails use of a clutch to shift from range to range resulting in bogging down in soft material whenever shifting.

At the local military/civilian airfield Russian military and civilian jets leaked lots of assorted fluids. The toilets in some of the Tupelovs I flew in were procelain (a touch of home). We had to deplane a Tupelov short of the gate one time in Baku because the brakes caught fire. No panic because the crew and regular passengers were used to this type of situation.

Gun related (sort of): did Americans know that Kubrick's movie "Full Metal Jacket" is banned in the US? That is what the captives of the USSR were told when the film debuted across the US. An abortion of an ideology - communism - kept great populations of people shackled by lies, gun prohibition, and force. To a certain extent it continues in Russia.

I flinch every time I see an AK, SKS, and any other Russian firearm and will never own one. Shot a full-house Russian AK47 in 1969 - pretty junky.

raftman
August 3, 2009, 01:52 AM
Nobody ever accused the russians of being smart.

Umm. First off, kinda offensive.
Second off, they did accomplish a lot in art, literature, music, and science.

I've actually lived in the USSR and Russia for about 5 years myself, and have a rather different impression, but then again I am the kind of person who doesn't see only the negative, nor to tell wild and exaggerated tales in an attempt to justify xenophobia.

As for firearms-related, you can't get a better gun, than a Russian gun for they prices they sell for.

ranburr
August 3, 2009, 10:12 AM
Umm. First off, kinda offensive.
Second off, they did accomplish a lot in art, literature, music, and science.

I've actually lived in the USSR and Russia for about 5 years myself, and have a rather different impression, but then again I am the kind of person who doesn't see only the negative, nor to tell wild and exaggerated tales in an attempt to justify xenophobia.

As for firearms-related, you can't get a better gun, than a Russian gun for they prices they sell for.

I don't really care if it came across as offensive to you. It sounds as if you need to lighten up. They did create great works of art centuries ago. All of their modern science stems from WWII German technology. The only quality anything they have is from imports. I have done a great deal of business with Gazprom. It is essentailly dealing with the mafia. They truly are the enemy of this country.

raftman
August 3, 2009, 10:41 AM
Most of that comment wasn't directed at you, just the first 2 sentences. It's not offensive to me personally, it's just offensive to the intelligence of gun-owning people.

It is frequently said, that the statements made here can service to represent gun-owners to the rest of the American public, that everyone here is an ambassador of sorts as a result, so when someone basically says "Russians are dumb, and are our enemy." We all look like the types who rode the short busses to school.

Tuzo
August 3, 2009, 02:53 PM
Ужасные российской качества. Translation is "crummy Russian quality." This applies to most Russian goods. Their advancements in science, culture, and art came about prior to the bad old days of Lenin and his successors. Any artistic endeavor that did not abide the party line was quite surreptitious. A great deal of their science was developed cheaply through outright theft of western ideas. For example, I read an elementary history text from commie times citing the discovery of the telephone as purely Russian.

As some of you have worked with Russians and lived in Russia or the former soviet union, you have discovered that 70 years of commie indoctrination and philosophy is still much alive in their leadership. My dealings with Russians involve dancing around bribery, patronage, veracity, and honesty. It is near impossible being the Boy Scout that I am and deal with Russians. That said, many Russians are sincere and honest but they are not in control. Until that occurs Russia will continue to remain a relatively backward country plagued by corruption and a sense of inferiority.

Pray for me because I have to return to Russia in the coming months. Спаси меня.

Nnobby45
August 3, 2009, 03:25 PM
I kept running, he didn't. I don't know how basic training is anymore, but I was grateful for it back then.

Not trying to change the subject, but regarding a related story that provides interesting contrast:

A recent accidentally declassified memo indicated a high % of Brits military personnel are too obese to be deployed. They're called PUD's (personnel unable to deploy). Many thousands are LD's. (limited deployment).

Makes you wonder about the rest of NATO.

http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1065237/UK-troops-'too-fat'-for-Afghanistan

raftman
August 3, 2009, 05:10 PM
If you're to argue their advancement in art, culture, science came prior to the Soviet days, then you're overlooking folks like Rodchenko, Tarkovsky, Shostakovich, Voznesenskiy, Korolev, among many others. Bash their politics, politicians, and the problems that these things have caused (such as outdated consumer goods of debatable quality). But if one thinks they are not a smart people, then one in all seriousness doesn't know what one is talking about.

I lived in Russia during the USSR's collapse, spent the end of the 1980's in Novosibirsk, and the 90's in Moscow. I've driven Russian cars, worn Russian watches, taken pictures with Russian cameras, flown in their planes, and of course dealt and lived with the people. Yes, of course, their consumer goods have been considerably and badly behind the times, but in most cases not really as crappy of quality as is often claimed. I still have 2 Russian watches, one is a quartz movement Slava that I've had since the 80's, and it still keeps perfect time, and I still wear it from time to time, the other is a Komandirskiye mechanical one that's more recent, it's old technology, but definitely dependable enough for me to use nearly every day. I have a Zenit 35mm SLR camera that I've kept too, it's more than 40 years old, still meters accurately and takes photos that will easily impress. All of these things were heavily outdated from the day they were introduced, and far nicer, fancier goods were being made outside of the USSR at the same time, but what do you expect from a society whose consumer goods rarely if ever have had to compete with foreign goods until recently? My impression is, at the very base of things, the Russians know they can't go back to the way things were, regardless of what they nostalgic may say, and recent times have certainly served as a reality check and I hope they do succeed in becoming a more modern and free state, despite the struggles and pains these efforts are experiencing nowadays.

Tuzo
August 3, 2009, 09:41 PM
Raftman, you are correct in all respects. But recall that Rostopovich, etal, expressed their genius within the constraints of ideology. And all who defected, think Baryshnikov, blossomed in the west when free of ideological shackles. Russian manufactured goods and their poor quality are merely another aspect of that flawed ideology. Capitalism as practiced today in Russia is a near free-for-all whose big winners are those who first claimed the spoils of Russian industry doled out by Yeltsin after 1991.

Many miss the days of Stalin because his buildings were prettier than Krushchev's and many also miss the stability of the soviet system. Those who don't miss the old days don't even remember Yeltsin and relish the freedom to travel, cruise the internet, buy Head and Shoulders shampoo, and (almost) say whatever they wish.

I'll repeat what I said earlier: Russia is still in the grip, however relaxed, of corruption, bribery, etc. This is little different from the commie days when these non-virtues were commonly practiced. By the way, many of my Russian friends feared walking around Moscow as late as about 2002 when the crime rate began to settle down.

johnwilliamson062
August 3, 2009, 10:44 PM
It is a steroids commercial.

raftman
August 3, 2009, 11:43 PM
I guess to bring back to firearms, that's one of few Russian products that DID have to compete with foreign competition and what was produced often stacked up favorably against the competition. This is why Russian-designed weapons such as the AK, SKS, Tokarev, Makarov, Mosin Nagant are rather popular in USA and they have a very solid reputation among the shooters than own them. People get them because they are cheap, but keep them and recommend them because for the price they're very good. They're not the absolute best guns out there, but for the price they sell at, it's just about impossible to get a better gun.

goldsamurai26
August 4, 2009, 01:32 AM
I work with a lot of them currently here in Iraq and they have a philosophy, "Only horses and fools work." Maybe that is partly to blame for their situations.

Master Blaster
August 4, 2009, 07:56 AM
Ah my friends and relatives the Russians and the indestructible AK-47.

I saw a film a while back making its way around the Internet. It showed how indestructible the AK-47 was. First the gun was dug out of the mud, see they are rust proof!!, then its dropped out of a building and run over by a truck. Then the army guy picks it up and fires it full auto.

Now I own a couple mil spec AKs (not full auto though), and I can flex the receiver with my fingers, and guess what its sheet metal!! If you really burried on in the mud for a week you would dig up a pile of rust, and if you ran it over with a truck or even a small car, the receiver would be badly bent or crushed and there is no way the gun would fire...

But who am I to cast aspersions on other's fantasies of indestructibility.:)

5whiskey
August 4, 2009, 09:20 AM
Russian weapons are what they are. Robust weapons with very violent operating systems that will slam rusty, pitted ammo into battery. Since they will slam almost anything into battery, they will cycle darn near anything. They were made to mass produce very cheaply, and be very reliable in the hands of those with little to no training.

Try taking the bullet guide out of your AK. I bet money that the round hitting the breach face instead of sliding into the chamber will unseat every round and jam the projectile into the casing. Actually, don't do that, it's not all that safe:o. Also, the gas system lets A LOT of gas through, basically able to pull damn near any ammo out of the chamber. Hell, you could pit the chamber and fire brass ammo, and I bet it would still rip the rim off of the casing if it didn't extract case in full.




With all that being said, an AK is a darn good weapon for the price... er well it was a good weapon for the price. These days... not so much. It is not indestructible, It is not rust proof (nor are most finishes on AKs of any comparable quality to most western weapons), and it will not survive being run over by a humvee unless you run over 2 inches of the muzzle and nothing else. They're decent rifles that fit in with Russian military doctrine. With that said, I'll take our version of the assualt rifle any day of the week if I have to go to war.

Philo_Beddoe
August 4, 2009, 09:21 AM
A significant number of historians consider the oppression of Rus' by the Mongols to be the major cause of what is sometimes called "the East-West gap" - approximately 200 years delay in introducing major social, political and economical reforms and scientific innovations in Russia comparing to Western Europe. Specifically, the isolation from the West may have caused Russia's later non-involvement in the Renaissance, the Protestant Reformation, and failure to develop a middle class.[6]Some argue that the yoke had a severe destructive influence on the delicate system of unwritten laws regulating everyday life of society. For instance, Valeriya Novodvorskaya mentions that the death penalty, long-term imprisonment and tortures had not existed in Rus' before the Mongols invaded the country. Over half the population of Rus may have died during the Mongol invasions.[7] However, Colin McEvedy (Atlas of World Population History, 1978) estimates the population of Russia-in-Europe dropped from 7.5 million prior to the invasion to 7 million afterwards.[8]

The period of Mongol rule over Russia included significant cultural and interpersonal contacts between the Russian and Mongolian ruling classes. By 1450, the Tatar language had become fashionable in the court of the Grand Prince of Moscow, Vasily II, who was accused of excessive love of the Tatars and their speech.[9] Many Russian boyar (noble) families traced their descent from the Mongols or Tatars, including Veliaminov-Zernov, Godunov, Arseniev and Bakhmetev. In a survey of Russian noble families of the 17th century, over 15% of the Russian noble families had Tatar or Oriental origins. [10] In the religious sphere, St. Paphnutius of Borovsk was the grandson of a Mongol baskak, or tax collector, while a nephew of khan Bergai of the Golden Horde converted to Christianity and became known as the monk St. Peter Tsarevich of the Horde.

Tuzo
August 4, 2009, 09:24 AM
Russian designed firearms are simple to manufacture and cheap to buy. I mentioned that I fired a full-house AK47 many years ago and was not impressed. Certainly not enough to diminish my trust in the M16. Also had a Russian made captured SKS (marked "CKC" in cyrillic) that I traded for a handgun because that rifle was simply not impressive. Popularity of various soviet firearms stems from simple economics - they are cheap - not extreme reliability. Few recreational shooters will steep their AK's in a mud pit then roll over it with a bulldozer to prove how wonderful their firearm can be; yet this is cited as rationale for owning a commie weapon.

Philo_Beddoe
August 4, 2009, 09:35 AM
Popularity of various soviet firearms stems from simple economics - they are cheap - not extreme reliability


?

The M-16 I we used for qualification in ROTC jammed constantly, and yes we cleaned and lubed them.

I have fired many civilian AK and SKS, chinese, yugo, romania, russian, bulgarian, hungarian, etc and never had a failure.

My makarov is extremely reliable, every bit as reliable as other more modern guns I have owned.

My experiance with Russian firearms are that they are durable, reliable, accurate enough for intended purposes, yet crude and lacking refinement, such as the AK's poor sights, clunky selector/safety and the makarov's poor sights and heel clip magazine release.

raftman
August 4, 2009, 11:15 AM
Cheap is not the bottom line for popularity, if it's cheap and crappy, most people will avoid. Look at Jimenez/Davis/Jennings/Bryco, it seems like 95% of the people that have something to say about them, have something bad to say. If people ask on this board, "should I get one of these?" The answer will be a unanimous no. Some go so far as to debate whether it's better to have no gun at all, than relying on one of these "ring of fire" pistols.

In contrast, when someone asks, "should I get a Tokarev?" The response would be a near-unanimous "Heck yeah, you should!" I like inexpensive firearms, the most I've spent in any gun is $240. I could get a brand new Jimenez .22 for $119 or a .380 for $189, so if cheap were the bottom line, I'd have one already, or two. And yet, there is not a chance in the world I would ever get one, unless it was given to me for free, and even then, I'd probably use it as a trade-in for something else, best to do that before it gets a chance to get broken. And yet, I, and many here, have no issue at all with getting a used, 50+ year-old Tokarev and almost no one regrets their purchase. If these guns were bad, then even low prices would not afford them the popularity that they have.

5whiskey
August 4, 2009, 11:54 AM
The M-16 I we used for qualification in ROTC jammed constantly, and yes we cleaned and lubed them.

I admit that M16s are a little more finicky of a design than AKs... however in a professional army with trained armourers and soldiers an M-16 is just as reliable. What I'm really saying is... I'm not sure ROTC rifles would be the best examples of a well kept rifle. The ROTC unit probably obtained them from the military after they had already been rode hard and put away wet, and I would be willing to bet that their tenure at ROTC wouldn't see the same quality of maintainence that you would get from the Army or Marine Corps. There are a few things that will cause an M-16 to jam besides being dirty. Most of them are easy fixes. AKs are less prone to jamming because they could slam a square peg into the round chamber from spring tension alone. BTW, I have seen many an SKS that was a jam-o-matic. I'm not talking about bubba'd conversions either.

Cheap is not the bottom line for popularity, if it's cheap and crappy, most people will avoid. Look at Jimenez/Davis/Jennings/Bryco, it seems like 95% of the people that have something to say about them, have something bad to say. If people ask on this board, "should I get one of these?" The answer will be a unanimous no. Some go so far as to debate whether it's better to have no gun at all, than relying on one of these "ring of fire" pistols.

In contrast, when someone asks, "should I get a Tokarev?" The response would be a near-unanimous "Heck yeah, you should!" I like inexpensive firearms, the most I've spent in any gun is $240. I could get a brand new Jimenez .22 for $119 or a .380 for $189, so if cheap were the bottom line, I'd have one already, or two. And yet, there is not a chance in the world I would ever get one, unless it was given to me for free, and even then, I'd probably use it as a trade-in for something else, best to do that before it gets a chance to get broken. And yet, I, and many here, have no issue at all with getting a used, 50+ year-old Tokarev and almost no one regrets their purchase. If these guns were bad, then even low prices would not afford them the popularity that they have.

I agree with this post 100%... as long as you accept that there are cheap, reasonably accurate, reliable firearms to be had but they usually aren't as wonderful and great as some make them out to be. We've all heard the unreal stories about an AK. They never jam. You never clean them. They never rust. They never malfunction. You can run it over with a tank and it will still fire. While I think they were excellent firearms for the money (before they went up drastically), don't turn them into something they're not. I've seen them jam, you can not throw one in salt water for 2 years and then pulll it out and fire it, and a tank will flatten the stamped reciever. Great weapons, but just as everything else they have their limitations.

Mr. James
August 4, 2009, 04:16 PM
I agree with this post 100%!

I agree with this post 100%... as long as you accept that there are cheap, reasonably accurate, reliable firearms to be had but they usually aren't as wonderful and great as some make them out to be. We've all heard the unreal stories about an AK. They never jam. You never clean them. They never rust. They never malfunction. You can run it over with a tank and it will still fire. While I think they were excellent firearms for the money (before they went up drastically), don't turn them into something they're not. I've seen them jam, you can not throw one in salt water for 2 years and then pulll it out and fire it, and a tank will flatten the stamped reciever. Great weapons, but just as everything else they have their limitations.

There are other reasons folks buy Russian-made or -designed weapons I haven't seen mentioned yet, including the relative novelty of them, the historic significance of them, and the simple I-don't-have-one-of-those factor.

I happen to have an CKC :p and a Mosin-Nagant 91/30, and will, no doubt, add other Russian/Soviet weapons (including possibly a handgun or two) as time goes on. They are fun to shoot. They are reasonably accurate for their intended purpose.

Works of firearms artistry they ain't!

Ian0351
August 11, 2009, 03:29 PM
Who ever said the Russians were smart? How about the political intelligentsia in America for almost 40 years? Can you think of another reason that we spent countless hundreds of billions of dollars building nuclear weapons, trying to improve our submarine design and funding CIA operations to learn about and de-stabilize the second most powerful regime in the world post WWII? Regardless of the eventual outcome of the Cold War, at the time it was very real and very scary.

I think ignorant is more apt than offensive.

digdeep74
August 13, 2009, 10:45 AM
I remember watching one of those reality tv shows that shows fights and different police videos and seeing soome of the training those guys go through and it looked extremely painfull.
There being hazed by kicked and punched over and over to build tolerence to pain.