Next-Gen Russian POWERED ARMOR Concept Unveiled at Moscow Prototyping Center

A concept for an advanced suit of powered personal armor was unveiled late last month at the Moscow Prototyping Center, sporting hexagonal modular armor panels, full face helmet with mocked up information display, and a bullpup rifle. The suit, revealed to the internet via a YouTube video from Russian government funded RT-subsidiary Ruptly, was more conceptual mockup than prototype, evidenced by its engraved polymer “display” insert, stylized armor, and non-functional gun and mechanism. The Ruptly video is embedded below:

Soldiers of the future may indeed have helmet-mounted displays (HMDs), but it is unlikely that will be achieved via an engraved plastic insert glued directly to the helmet.

The reveal sent Western news agencies into a characteristic frenzy over the idea of “Putin’s 21st Century warriors” facing off in powered armor against allied forces in Western Europe, but it’s unlikely that Russian troops will be wearing such sophisticated gear anytime soon. The Russian Army’s “Ratnik” program, currently in development, would substantially augment the capability of the individual Russian soldier, but largely in a way that closes the gap the United States has enjoyed versus its Russian counterparts over the past decade and a half or so. While the Ratnik program includes some very impressive equipment indeed – such as a lightweight helmet, improved camouflage, upgraded weapons, and integrated comms gear – it will be quite some time before Russian Army soldiers will be “on the bounce” with advanced powered armor.

Thanks to Retiv for the tip!

Nathaniel F

Nathaniel is a history enthusiast and firearms hobbyist whose primary interest lies in military small arms technological developments beginning with the smokeless powder era. In addition to contributing to The Firearm Blog, he runs 196,800 Revolutions Per Minute, a blog devoted to modern small arms design and theory. He is also the author of the original web serial Heartblood, which is being updated and edited regularly. He can be reached via email at


  • Vince

    Yawn! Wake me when and if there is ever a working prototype.

  • Anonymoose

    >mobile suit
    >mobile armor
    Once the Big Zam is mass produced we’ll put an end to the Federation in no time!

  • TheNotoriousIUD


    A) This little super suit has the same problem as ours (except DARPA’s actually exists) in that no fuel cell with sufficient longevity exists to power it. Not unless they plan to go to war with an extension cord hanging out of their a–.

    B) Even if such a power supply were available the Russian Army could afford oh, maybe, three of them.

    • KidCorporate

      They’ll be taking a page from the Russian Navy and tow generators behind them.

    • Samuel Millwright

      People never seem to understand that part… The requirements for the power source for TALOS for example are slated to be 12-15 kilowatts constant for 12-36 i think it was hours ON USER generation or storage capacity!

      (Aka you ain’t using batteries guys! Build us a really tiny god damn generator with REALLY GOOD gas mileage lol!)

      Now, lucky for us, we’re pretty good at building such things but the Russians are likely F’ed in the A like a G because building such stuff requires pretty much the same things as building really reliable high output jet engines and turboshafts…

      Something they struggle with

      • iksnilol

        Won’t the generator be loud? Thus you can’t go all stealth like in Crysis.

        • Samuel Millwright

          Likely not nearly as loud as you’d think…

          Put it this way, it’s FAR easier to silence a generator than it is to just magically find a way to increase the amount of energy capable of being stored in a given weight and cubic volume of batteries or capacitors!

          And yes, you really would need almost an order of magnitude jump to compete with generators burning your standard hydrocarbons.

          Not only that, but you’d also need to somehow also cut the cost per watt hour of storage massively over current battery and capacitor solutions!

          Developing a really high thermodynamic efficiency quiet micro sized combustion engine and generator combo is much easier cheaper and low lead time…

          If the air farce wasn’t pulling yet another selfish jackass move with some engine tech they already have like they did with the engine for tomahawk too…. They probably wouldn’t have had to go out and find an engine technology of their own to bring from promising prototypes to fully fieldable like they’re doing.

          • Amplified Heat

            It’s always possible that nanotech will enable us to convert chemical energy to electrical via solid-state fuel cells (the platinum based ones of today are stupidly brittle as well as…made of platinum). Replacing soldiers with killbots outright at that point is massively preferable, though.

          • iksnilol

            No, that’s how you end up with the Faro Plague. No thank you.

          • noob

            There was one guy at MIT (i think) who had a glucose fuel cell inside his body which used inductive power transfer to recharge his phone from his own body fat.

          • Amplified Heat

            Cure for Obesity? Powered by diabetes? Only problem with any man power, is in the end we are too efficient (even the biggest biggo generally only has a several hundred calorie per day surplus beyond what’s needed for maintenance).

            My money’s on renewable green cellulose fuel cells (wood stoves ;))

          • iksnilol

            Hey, I’ve played horror games all my life. And if I learnt one thing, is that when firing up a genny, all the clickers and zombies hear you.

      • Warren Ellis

        I thought the Russians do built reliable high output jet engines and turboshafts though? From what I remember with the SU, their aircraft were pretty good and they were often ahead of the West in regards to missiles (at least later on.)

        • The mainenance/repair/replacement schedules for Soviet Russian jet engines are so luridly short that if you handed them to a Western MX specialist they’d think it was full of typos.

        • Sermon 7.62

          Some people on this forum are hopeless.

          • Amplified Heat

            ‘kay, which Russian turbofan companies are growing mono-crystalline turbine blades, running composite fan stages, or producing turboshaft gearboxes? In industry airshow articles, I still see tons of (ancient) low-bypass pod designs on airframes, and fuel efficiency & lifespan are stuck decades in the past.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Perhaps none.
            But is something so important as some people here seem to imagine?

          • andrey kireev

            Russian Jet engines are good performers, but maintenance wise they are a nightmare, if flown similar amount of hours as western Air Forces. You can see prime example of that if you look at Indian AF, they fly SU-30MKI, with similar flight hours as western AF, and they experience lots of engine issues.. Google “su-30MKI engine problem”

          • Sermon 7.62

            I see a lot of experts here.
            From submarines to fighter jets, the readers of this blog know all about it.

          • andrey kireev

            Well, I Dunno, I personally seen Indian jets broken down during red flag, for days at the time….that seems to coincide well with that article.

          • Sermon 7.62

            And I heard that super-super modern Lockheed Martin RQ-170 was captured by Iran.

          • andrey kireev

            Indeed it was, however, it doesn’t change the fact that Russian jets have troublesome high performance jet engines.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Yes, perhaps it is so, I am not an expert on jet engines, unlike lots of people here.

            But Lockheed Martin RQ-170 was captured by Iran.

            “US TV channel Fox News has recently reported that Russian aircraft intercepted elusive US MQ-1 Predator drones in the Syrian Sky three times.

            “A specialized military publication confirmed in 2014 that Russian anti-aircraft troops forced a US military drone to land during the time of the Crimean crisis and referendum in March 2014.

          • Bested

            This is THE pre-eminent firearms blog on the net, so… point?
            I would be shocked if there wasn’t a wealth of knowledge in these related and highly technical fields among our fellow readers.

          • Bested

            At least you are self-aware.

        • int19h

          I can’t say for turbines specifically, but Soviets could build a lot of things that Russians today can’t. A lot of engineers left the country in the 90s to work for the highest bidder, which was usually various Western companies and universities (and quite often, military contractors). Production lines often were often let rotting, and workers operating them were let go. It’s actually rather telling that when you look at what the Russian army is running with, most of the equipment is Soviet-era designs, and in many cases, Soviet-era manufacture as well.

          Putin has been busy reversing this for the past several years, but there’s a lot to catch up on. On top of that, Soviets built their manufacturing and engineering facilities all over the country, and in many cases a particular end product would have constituent components manufactured in different republics. Now that those republics are independent countries that aren’t always friendly to Russia, this often poses a problem – Ukraine in particular had a lot of defense-oriented manufacturing facilities in it, and some components for Soviet designs were only made there; so now Russia has to scramble to bootstrap its own.

          • Amplified Heat

            And a lot of that is due to how misplaced the Soviets’ priorities were; as militarist as Putin may wish Russia to be, it’s not yet at the point where toilet-paper funds are being diverted to prop up the latest arms program. Sadly, that’s exactly where the US is currently to a large degree, funding insanely expensive programs with ever higher debt allocation.

          • int19h

            They don’t (yet) have the ideological platform to keep the populace in check to permit the amount of military spending that Soviets could get away with. They’ve been trying to create some replacement for communism for a while now, from an eclectic mix of Russian civic nationalism and Orthodox Christianity, but it’s not working particularly well (yet). Certainly not well enough to motivate the populace to contend with the kind of stuff that was routine in USSR.

            Of course, it could also be argued that Soviets ultimately lost the game for similar reasons, as well. They had a better gig going, but even the best propaganda lasts only so long when things just aren’t working well.

          • Sermon 7.62

            US Air Force: Russia Has Closed Air Power Gap With NATO

            NATO’s air superiority vis-à-vis Russia is waning, Air Force (USAF) General Frank Gorenc, the commander of U.S. Air Forces in Europe and Africa told an audience at this year’s Air and Space Conference held near Washington DC.

            “The advantage that we had from the air, I can honestly say, is shrinking not only with respect to the aircraft that they’re producing, but the more alarming thing is their ability to create anti-access/area-denial [A2/AD] that are very well defended,” Gorenc said.

          • int19h

            Thing is, all US needs to do to maintain its air superiority vis-a-vis Russia is to build more F-22s. Which is to say, we already have the technology fully developed, and we have the manufacturing capacity as well, and experience using it. All that’s needed is the political will to spend $X billion more dollars on more planes.

            Russia, meanwhile, is still struggling with PAK FA. They said it was all done in 2015 and ready to go in production next year… and then it was next year… and then they said it’s going to have a new engine, so that’s a few more years. Meanwhile, the size of the expected order was shrinking as well – back in 2015 they were saying 55, now it’s 12. By the time it’s actually done, I wonder if the final prototype will be the only one that’ll go into service, primarily to show off on TV and during the V-Day parade.

            Of course, there are 200 F-22 and 0 PAK FA in service as of today, so there’s no particular concern about air superiority anytime soon. As for USAF, they just want to make sure their fat budgets stay fat – same as all other military branches and agencies. If they have to scare some congressmen with tales about how the Reds are catching up and will invade anytime in order to do so, then that’s what it takes.

          • Sermon 7.62

            That should make the Russians think about the Yellowstone “supervolcano”. You are sitting on a bomb there.

            And the Russians are bad!

          • andrey kireev

            Yeah, good luck with that… Russia is currently producing GEN 4++ fighters, even then in fairly small numbers. PAK-FA is no-where near completion… Tanker fleet is extremely small, So is the transport fleet… AWACs fleet barely exists. VVS wouldn’t be able to go head to head with USAF…. Closest it ever was, was during cold war, and gap was still pretty big, hence the reliance on self propelled AA by soviet military.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Russia has got nukes!
            And the Topol-M and the RS-24.

          • andrey kireev

            Nice attention diversion there bud. However I must point out that US has those too, as well as interceptor missiles capable of shooting some of those ICBMs down. Nuclear weapons are a deterrent. In a conventional air war VVS has very limited capabilities compared to USAF. Even nuclear bomber force is more capable.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Yes, Russia sucks.
            So said a fellow, whose name is Andrei.


          • andrey kireev

            I never said it sucks. All I’m saying is it has a lot to catch up on before it can compete on the same level.

          • Bested

            You quote US propaganda designed to validate more military spending, as an example to validate Russian technological accomplishments…

            Just a moment, please…


          • Sermon 7.62

            You’d prefer me to quote Russian sources?

        • Samuel Millwright

          Compared to current American military turbine tech?

          Not even close

          Their best fighter jet engines until very recently basically had a total engine service life in runtime hours that wasn’t even equal with the hours before first major overhaul of some of ours!

          Where they managed to still be competitive was in the fact that you could buy a whole semi trailer packed with spare engines for crazy cheap.

          • Uniform223

            “Their best fighter jet engines until very recently basically had a total engine service life in runtime hours that wasn’t even equal with the hours before first major overhaul of some of ours!”

            > too true. Look at the engines for the Indian Su-30MKI. The Indian Air Force made complaints that the engines for their Su-30s had too high of a maintenance schedule and were not reliable enough for continuous operations…


            Also the engine for the PAKFA isn’t ready yet and just recently finished static ground testing. Essentially they are trying to catch up to what the west has been able to do since the late 80s with the prototype engines used in the ATF dem/eval phase for the YF-23 and YF-22. Simply put, Russia can make very powerful engines but they don’t have the reliability of western engine designs.

        • noob
    • ColBatguano

      “Not unless they plan to go to war with an extension cord hanging out of their a–.”
      Please, don’t give them any ideas. I just know that someone in procurement is thinking “hmmm, lets run that up the bung hole and see who salutes”.

  • Kinetics

    In other words…the propaganda plan worked perfectly. Russian media come out with a “future soldier” demo that resembles what the West (or US at least) were advertising 10 years ago and Western journalists and reporters who don’t know better (Daily Mail) or anything at all, eat it up.

    Ratnik has been delayed multiple times since it was first revealed in roughly 2014, the AK-74M is still the standard Russian service rifle, they don’t field optics to anywhere near what NATO soldiers do, and 6B-43 has seen extremely limited fielding.

    And despite this, Western media are worried about exoskeleton wearing Russian’s coming to get them at night.


    • Sermon 7.62

      All existing AK-74’s should be upgraded soon. Once it’s done, optics are going to be fielded. Exoskeletons are being tested in Palmira as we speak.

      And wait for the clip I just posted.

      • Jan Moszczuk

        All 30 milion of them? That doesn’t seem very doable or affordable to me

        • Sermon 7.62

          There is a kit, it doesn’t cost much. But it hasn’t been accepted so far. It looks questinable. For now, as far as I know, 1P63 sights are used.

          • andrey kireev

            You’re talking about that upgrade kit that they slapped on AK’s, during Victory Parade ? It doesn’t look all that impressive, looks like they just cheaped out so they wouldn’t have to buy AK-12s…. Speaking of AK-12, I’m pissed off that they pretty much gutted it.

          • Sermon 7.62

            I agree.
            But RPK-16 seems to be fine.

          • Bested

            I for one am impressed.

            The Russians seem to have built a time machine, and gotten to the year 2003.

    • ReadyOrNot

      Propaganda has been the best Russian investment in the last decade or so. Those in the West who sympathize and/or lack critical thinking and analysis skills certainly eat it up.



      • Foma Klimov

        Eh? Russian propaganda effort is very limited and not very well-funded compared to the enormous Western Efforts funded by various SD/CIA fronts… spend $5 billion subverting Ukraine alone! Also, at least most of the stuff on RT is somewhat believable and written in higher than 5th grade level – unlike CNN, BBC, FOX and similar Western propaganda/fake news outfits. They actually have an investigating journalism department left at RT!

        • ReadyOrNot

          Your post is an excellent example of Russian propaganda with the typical tenants of denial and deflection present, thanks.

          • GUNxSPECTRE

            I’m half-convinced he’s being sarcastic.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Yes indeed. He should be. Shouldn’t he?

            The US has CNN, Fox News, Radio Free Europe, Voice of America, a bunch of smaller channels, and on top of all that, Operation Earnest Voice and hundreds of internet sites. Russia has RT and Sputnik.

            And RT is a good news outlet.

          • Amplified Heat

            You speak of those as some monolithic voice of the US, but Fox and most of those other channels are constantly at odds in how they cover events, and the multitude of smaller bloggers constantly discredit them all (and your Russian counterparts). It may be hard to understand, since none of these players are actually owned or operated by our federal government, just politically-sympathetic to certain figures in it.

            A better counterpoint to RT may be the Associated Press, but it’s “ownership” transcends national boundaries and is more a creature of the EU at this point, if anything. Fox, CNN, and practically everyone else here just regurgitates the stuff AP prints up for them, putting them own distinct flavor on the same article to suit their different audiences.

          • Sermon 7.62

            So, there are lots of voices that are singing the same one song, each in his own manner.

            But this is the loudest choir.

          • int19h

            RT is an unbelievably efficient propaganda outlet. As an American taxpayer, I can only wish VoA was half as good with what they get from us.

            Heh, maybe we should just offer the people running RT enough money so that they can come and work for VoA.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Have you ever heard of psychological projection?

          • RazorHawk

            But he’s right, Russia does not spend as much on propaganda as the liberals in America do. Russia can’t afford it.

        • Amplified Heat

          Touche; our propaganda ministry has certainly run amok in recent decades however, and does not really serve the interests of our own state any more. Quite the contrary, it can be easily argued.

          I will, however, state that merely throwing money at something is not necessarily an indication of the will being applied. If 5 billion was spent on subversion, it was because 4.99 billion was to be pocketed by the players involved. How much did the ‘protestors’ in striped Spetsnaz shirts with brand new grenade launchers cost, anyway?

          Whether Russia’s efforts were well funded or not, they have been either 1) wildly successful beyond any realistic expectation, or 2) the recipient of enormous unearned credit by mere coincidence. Personally, my money’s on number 2, with American Democrat politicians playing your IC communities for willing scape goats (since infamy is good for Intelligence groups)

          • RazorHawk

            Only cause Trump won, if Hitlery won, the lamestream media would still be “serving the interests of the state” like they did for 8 years with Obama.

      • Amplified Heat

        To be fair, it is certainly more cost effective than actually keeping up with the Jones’ for appearances’ sake. Gotta give the Russians credit, despite rampant corruption and inefficiency in their economic/political systems, they do often find the most honest solution to their problems (if only because of the austerity imposed by the aforementioned problems). Having limited resources to work with does wonders for aligning priorities.


      Old Cold War fear is how to motivate older voters.

      • RazorHawk

        Its not the older voters who hate Russia the most. It is the demonrat voters of obama and hitlery, especially the rainbow jihadis.

        • GUNxSPECTRE

          That’s pretty good. I needed a laugh. Good parody.

    • Uniform223

      “Russian media come out with a “future soldier” demo that resembles what the West (or US at least) were advertising 10 years ago and Western journalists and reporters who don’t know better (Daily Mail) or anything at all, eat it up.”

      > Hell we even made two video games based on the Future Combat Systems AKA Land Warrior concept…

      personally I thought the initial teaser was cooler then the final product…

  • Alex

    I love the starship troopers reference.

  • Rebelminion

    This is a mock up, non-functioning representation of a dream. You can list all the features you want something to have, but all this is good for is some cosplay at the next comicon.

  • int19h

    There won’t be a functioning prototype. Russian industry can’t even manufacture a modern CPU by itself.

    • John

      Russian components, American components, all made in Taiwan!

      • int19h

        The big difference is that we buy them from Taiwan because manufacturing them here in US would be more expensive. But if we had to, we could.

        Russians buy them from Taiwan, because they cannot manufacture them themselves. If Taiwan were to embargo them (e.g. because US politely “asked” them), they’re fücked.

        • Sermon 7.62

          Not true.

          “Russia showcases the first computers based on its indigenous Elbrus-8S processor”.

          google it

          • int19h

            Sure. The first hit in Google was, of course, Wikipedia, which says:

            “28 nm, made by TSMC”

            TSMC is Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company…

            I double-checked Russian wiki, same thing there. It also says that first devices using this CPU “are planned for manufacture in 2016”, with no further updates since then.

            It’s also worth noting that 28 nm is pretty old tech. Intel has been using 22 nm process since 2012 (and I’m talking about shipping products available in consumer retail channels here, not “demonstration” vaporware). Intel CPUs today are 14 nm.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Search the article by the title, bro. As I quoted it.

            “The PC running this chip, called the Elbrus 801-PC, runs a Linux-based operating system called the Elbrus OS. In addition to applications built for the platform, it can also run x86/x86-64 applications.

            It is not TSMC. It is MCST, Moscow Center of SPARC Technologies.

          • int19h

            Right. So, a single demo unit. Not for sale anywhere.

            MCST are the guys who *designed* the chip. TMSC are the guys who *manufacture* the chip. Like I said, Russia doesn’t have the manufacturing know-how for this. And, of course, without the ability to manufacture, you can design all kinds of pie-in-the-sky CPUs – but you still need fabbed chips to run the actual hardware. So, good luck with that.

          • Sermon 7.62

            You seem to hate Russia big time. This is sick.
            Your homeland, no?

            Here is the address: mcst_ru. Before posting more bullcrap, check it out.

            The Russians have been making processors since 1970’s, but their computers are made for state offices. You can purchase some too. The price is about $3000.

          • Amplified Heat

            No, he’s making realistic observations. Chip fabbing is a very intensive deal, more delicate than anything I’ve ever heard of Russia making. It’s more technically demanding than manufacture of the highest quality ball bearings, a feat that only a handful of nations can pull off. There’s a reason tube-based tech was still in use right up to (and beyond) the collapse in the ’80’s, and while huge advances have been made, the ability to scale up pilot programs in expensive universities to mass production still eludes them (as well as every nation that isn’t the US, its wealthiest allies, or its most important trading partners)

          • Sermon 7.62

            Elbrus processors are 100% Russian-made.

          • Amplified Heat

            Then why is Taiwan mentioned as the manufacturer of the new 8S (28nm tech node made by TSMC)? Again, the mass production aspect is what matters; I think Intel’s down to like 4nm or something crazy in the labs, but that doesn’t matter unless they can get them out on the market.

            To be fair, the US *was* in a similar situation with so many of our fabs closing & going overseas to be made more cheaply, but now we are getting significant reinvestment *from* those overseas interests like Samsung/etc, and some of their most modern plants are now in America.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Mikron Group makes 90 nm CMOS.

            “The 90 nm production facilities and design center were co-financed almost up to 50% by Rusnano.

            “Domestic production of the Elbrus-2SM microprocessor was selected by the readers of the technical magazine CNews as the most significant event of 2014.

          • Amplified Heat

            “Processors using 90nm process technology”
            “IBM PowerPC G5 970FX – 2004”
            Still pretty cool achievement, though, and you’ll catch up with us before you know it (you should’ve led with that article so we’d know *which* product line you’re talking about). Unfortunate that it’ll be too late to catch the big money that comes with being at the cutting edge, but still important as a strategic industry. The gulf between 90nm and 24nm is enormous, however; exponentially more difficult and expensive. I’m sure the scale of Rusnano’s operations vs. the total Russian semiconductor consumption is rather telling, also.

            As with Samsung, it still irks me whenever a nation must rely on state-operated monopolies to produce industry, but it seems a great many can only operate this way…even America to a great extent these days

          • Sermon 7.62

            I just replied to the Russian fellow “int19h”, who seemed to express satisfaction when he said that his homeland isn’t capable of making a CPU.

          • int19h

            My satisfaction stems largely from the knowledge that your military and dual-use tech lags behind by at least a decade. Si vis pacem, para bellum – and I want my country’s parabellum to remain bigger than yours in any foreseeable future.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Your satisfaction stems from the mental disorder, known as “Russian in the US Syndrome”.

            It is characterized as an attempt of forging a new identification, based on false patriotism and renouncement of one’s true origin.

            It looks comical to the real Yanks.

          • int19h

            It’s amusing that you believe that one’s patriotism is somehow bound to one’s ethnicity (“true origin”). It’s a very Russian perspective on things.

            The great thing about US is that it is a civic nation, bonded not by blood, but by commitment to shared values underpinning the polity. American nationalism is fundamentally civic nationalism, open to everyone willing to pledge their allegiance to it, and commit to its values.

            But go ahead, ask the “real Yanks” whether they consider taking one’s pledge of allegiance seriously to be comical.

          • Sermon 7.62

            It has nothing to do with patriotism, bro.

            A known and well-studied fact is that a person will sacrifice his self-interest, that is, to be what he is, as he is, in order to maintain the fake self-perseption that he belongs to a particular social group.

            And sometimes he will go as far as to express extreme aversion to his own kind.

          • int19h

            I don’t express aversion to Russians. You interpret my criticism of Russian government propaganda in this manner simply because you strongly self-identify with said government, and so you feel like an attack on it is an attack on you. In some sense, insofar as you defend it, it is. But, of course, you do not speak for, not represent, Russians as a nation or as ethnicity.

          • Sermon 7.62

            You are talking like a teenager now. All Russian engineers are a little retarded when it comes to something outside of their professional sphere.

            Come on, bro.

          • int19h

            You’re asked about the 28nm Elbrus-8S, and you reply about 90nm Elbrus-2SM.

            Let’s try that again: where is the 28nm Elbrus-8S made, given that Mikron can only handle 90nm?

          • Sermon 7.62

            No, bro.

            You said that Russians acquire components from Taiwan, because they can’t manufacture them. You said that Russia doesn’t have the manufacturing know-how for this. You also said that there is just one single demo unit.

            I said it wasn’t true.

          • int19h

            I said that Russians can’t manufacture *modern* CPUs themselves, and have to acquire them from Taiwan.

            Which is exactly what’s happening here. 90nm is 2003-level technology. Literally from over a decade ago, just like I said earlier.

            It’s so old that they aren’t even trying to shove it into their desktops – that desktop that you’ve mentioned earlier that can actually be purchased, runs on 65nm Elbrus-4S, which is made in… Taiwan.

            And I said that there’s just demo units (didn’t say only one) of a usable PC running Elbrus-8S. If I’m wrong, care to point out where to buy one in Russia? Not that it matters much, since the CPU is still made in Taiwan in that one…

          • Sermon 7.62

            The CPUs are made in Russia, it is just the 65 nm thing that is imported from Taiwan. And the particular model is not the point here. You are talking about a product that has been just presented a few weeks ago!

            “Rostec presents first computers based on Elbrus-8S microprocessor at CIPR” – May 30, 2017

          • int19h

            The reason why we’re talking about Elbrus-8S is because *you* brought it up. I understand why you did, of course – it’s the only thing that Russia has any claim to that’s even remotely approaching a modern CPU (although it’s a couple generations behind). As we’ve conclusively established already, though, it is only designed in Russia – Taiwan manufactures the actual hardware. The only thing that Russia can manufacture by itself is a design that’s roughly equivalent to Western CPUs from 2003 in terms of compute power.

            Now as to this:

            “The CPUs are made in Russia, it is just the 65 nm thing that is imported from Taiwan”

            If you knew anything at all about the subject matter, you’d know just how hilarious this sounds. Since you clearly do not, as evidenced by the fact that you believe this makes any sense, allow me to explain. What you just said is the equivalent of this:

            “The bullets are made in Russia, it’s just the 7.62mm thing that’s imported from Taiwan.”

            You see, the “65nm thing” is not a thing – it’s the precision of the manufacturing process. It means that individual semiconductor features on the chip are of that size. Since CPU is a single chip, there’s no further subdivision there – the whole chip is manufactured using that process. So, if a CPU is 65nm, it can only be manufactured – in its entirety – in a facility that can perform 65nm fabbing. Which is to say, a place that does not exist in Russia.

            BTW, I should have mentioned that those 90nm fabs in Zelenograd – the Russian state of the art – aren’t themselves manufactured in the country, either. Mikron simply bought the fab equipment from STMicroelectronics (French) back in 2012. This is also largely the reason why they don’t have anything better – because no-one will sell anything better, and they can’t improve the process themselves fast enough. Of course, these days, there’s also sanctions to contend with, and it’s not like they can just go and buy state of the art equipment easily anymore.

          • Sermon 7.62

            The reason I mentioned Elbrus-8S, and not Elbrus-2SM is that I knew for sure that 100% Russian-made CPU exists, and that its name was Elbrus. So I just referenced the most recent article. And since I am not an engineer, I just trust respectable sources. You are not a respectable source to me. You are biased. But please, explain to me this:

            “Russian state-owned technology Ruselectronics has demonstrated the first computers running its own domestic Elbrus-8S silicon.

            “Domestic”. Explain this, please:

            “The use of technology with foreign components poses an enormous threat, first of all in terms of data protection and preventing the influence of foreign equipment. The fact that Russia now has its own chips with 28-nm processing technology is a huge step forward.

            “Russia now has its own chips”.

          • int19h

            They’re simply fudging the meaning of words to imply something that’s not true, without saying it outright. In this case, they are (rightly) saying that national security requires electronics used for military applications to be manufactured in the country, and then immediately talk about “domestic” Elbrus without mentioning that it means “domestically designed”, not “domestically manufactured”. Note how they don’t specifically say that “own chips” are *not* manufactured on foreign equipment – it just sort of carries over from the last sentence. It’s not lying, technically, since the reader does the jump from one point to the other on their own via implication – just misleading.

            This kind of thing has been emblematic of the Elbrus program. It has been around for a very long time, and all official press releases etc have always positioned it as “domestic”, without explaining what it really means.

            In all honesty, most of the problems like these are created by the propaganda around Elbrus, not by the program itself. Having your own from-scratch CPU architecture design is an impressive achievement for any country, and very few have such (many have clones of other popular architectures, but Elbrus is its own thing). Also, having any chip fabs at all, purchased abroad or not, is pretty good – there’s less than three dozen countries in the world that can do that, and half of them aren’t even at 90nm. So when presented honestly, it’s a good program and a good achievement for Russia.

            The problem is that presenting it honestly means comparing it to Italy, India and Malaysia (some other countries that have 90nm fabs), and admitting that it’s behind US, Germany, France etc by a decade. Again, from a realistic perspective, there’s nothing wrong with that – it’s a very respectable place in the world, better by far than most, and a good starting point for further development. But from the perspective of a former superpower that’s used to being the second biggest player, it’s humiliating; and the easiest way to deal with self-perceived humiliation is to not admit that you’re in a position that triggers it. Thus, all the “не имеющие аналогов в мире” BS – and where that doesn’t work, fudging the numbers and meanings of words, so as to pretend that what you have is more than what it actually is.

            I don’t think it’s even intended to impress anyone outside the country – it only works with people who *want* to believe in miracles, and aren’t going to bother looking at the actual specs or experts’ opinions. The people actually making and using those things, including MinDef, are, of course, well aware of the limitations. But openly talking about them would be “unpatriotic” – so, they also amplify the official line, while privately working to actually improve matters (e.g. Mikron has been working on 65nm process for a while now, although they don’t have anything ready to go into production yet).

          • Sermon 7.62

            You mean that until Russia builds a plant capable of making modern chips, like these 28 nm chips, in Russia, there’s nothing to talk about, it matters not what is designed there, because it all depends on Taiwan, or something.

            Yet at the same time, if the US makes chips in Taiwan, like Russia, it’s fine because the US is not Russia, it can make it in Taiwan and still be cool. And of course there can be no assumption, that “its own” means just that. Because it’s Russia.

          • int19h

            No, of course not. If they openly said “we’ve designed a cool new CPU, but unfortunately we don’t have fabs to manufacture it inside the country, so it’s still made in Taiwan; we’re working on changing that, but we don’t have any specific schedule yet”, I don’t think anyone would have any problem with that statement. Well, except for the родина слонов crowd.

            Of course, that statement would also mean that they haven’t actually solved the problem with advanced electronics that’s necessary for military purposes being manufactured within the country – which is the problem that they themselves highlight.

            And since we’re discussing a propaganda piece from the Russian government on high-tech next-gen weaponry, this all becomes relevant in this particular discussion, because how can Russia claim to have high-tech next-gen weaponry, if it has to source components for it from countries that are in a military alliance with one of the likely opponents?

            Now, the reason why we aren’t talking about the same wrt US is because 1) Taiwan is a strong, reliable ally of US, and 2) while US does source most of its components from Taiwan for cost-efficiency reasons, it *can* make them itself if it needs to – it has numerous fabs that can do 22nm, 14nm, and even a couple of 10nm ones; and it has a lot of expertise and know-how in this area. So even if, say, China takes over Taiwan, US can still keep its military industry supplied with all the necessary components – it’ll just be more expensive.

          • int19h

            Yup. So I know better than most. On this subject in particular.

            Russia has been making CPUs, sure. But the ones that they can make are using technology that’s at least a decade old, and basically obsolete by now except in very niche applications.

            There are no chip fabrication plants in Russia that are capable even of 65 nm process, much less 24 nm. The most advanced Mikron plant in Zelenograd is working at 90 nm (that’s Elbrus-2SM, 300 MHz) – and they have only got that far in 2012.

            Therefore, Elbrus-8S cannot be manufactured in Russia. Indeed, the fact that is manufactured in Taiwan is not secret at all – merely googling for “Elbrus-8S Taiwan” in Russian gives plenty of links confirming this fact.

            Elbrus-401 – the computer that you have mentioned can be puchased for roughly $3K (actually 200k rubles, or $3300) – uses Elbrus-4S (which is still manufactured in Taiwan, because it’s 65 nm). Elbrus-4S is a 750 MHz CPU.

            The “best” part about Elbrus is how closed everything is. There are no detailed specs, no industry-standard benchmark results (e.g. they cite some random GFLOPS figures, but don’t say where these come from – is it LINPACK?), compilers are closed-source forks etc. Given that this is Russia, I can’t help but think that the spirit of Potemkin’s villages is alive and well.

          • Sermon 7.62

            That is because these products are supposed to be secure.

          • valorius

            Bro how obsolete you think the computer chips in the F-22 are? They’re DECADES out of date.

          • int19h

            Sure. We’re not talking about fighter planes, though.

          • Uniform223

            How many civilian computers can survive a 9g turn?

          • valorius

            You ever seen a Panasonic Tough book?

          • int19h

            BTW, thank you for reminding me about MCST. The funniest thing about this place is that Intel is basically using it as their hiring grounds since the 90s. In 2004, they have poached several teams wholesale in one sweep – ironically, the very same teams working on Elbrus back then.

            This, by the way, is pretty common for Russian science and high-tech industry, and is part of the reason why it is all lagging behind – Russia simply isn’t paying enough to retain top talent, even in government positions where you’d think national security considerations would prevail. The other part is widespread corruption, where most money simply doesn’t get to where it’s supposed to go – e.g. Elbrus development was funded via Rosnano, but I seriously doubt MCST saw most of that money.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Yes. Russia is not as rich as the US. And there is also corruption. I can’t blame someone for leaving it since I’m an immigrant too. But I can’t understand the people who left it and hate it for not being rich enough.

          • Connor

            Why is it that whenever I see you on here, Sermon, you’re always losing an argument?

          • Sermon 7.62

            You are a moron, that’s the main reason.

          • int19h

            I don’t hate Russia for “not being rich enough”, of course. But I can’t help but find it amusing when a country that is not “rich enough”, pretends that it actually is – and demands that everyone else participates in this make-believe.

            It’s like people buying cheap budget cars, and then ricing them out and proudly showcasing the result. There’s absolutely nothing wrong with driving a budget car per se – but when you insist that it’s “actually almost like” the much more expensive car of the rich dude next door, it’s just sad.

          • valorius

            Yet the Russians have had IRST and helmet mounted sights on their fighters for decades, and we still cant get either one on our top of the line fighters. (F22 has neither)

          • Phillip Cooper

            You’re aware the Apache has helmet-slaved sights, right?

          • TDog

            The Apache isn’t a fighter jet, though.

          • Phillip Cooper

            True, but I’m pretty sure the F22 or 35 have the same tech

          • valorius

            Is the Apache a 9g mach 2+ fixed wing fighter?

          • valorius

            If you put the Apache helmet on a fighter pilot making 9g maneuvers he’d probably break his neck.

          • Phillip Cooper

            Well that might be why we supposedly “don’t” have them issued to fighter pilots.

            Also, have you heard of this new F35 helmet?

          • valorius

            Yes, the new F35 helmet has been plagued with problems, is years behind schedule, and still doesn’t work.

            The Russian equivalent has been in service since the 1990s.

          • Uniform223

            “Yes, the new F35 helmet has been plagued with problems, is years behind schedule, and still doesn’t work.”

            > The Gen 3 HMD for the F-35 was introduced last year (2016). It solved most if not all the “major problems” of the earlier HMDs (latency and “jitters”). Accounts by F-35 pilots say that the HMD of the F-35 works as advertised.

            “The Russian equivalent has been in service since the 1990s.”

            > WRONG. Russian fighter aircraft and their pilots have nothing comparable to our current JHMCS or nothing approaching the F-35’s HMD.

          • valorius

            Having such severe vibrations that you can’t read the display is “minor?”

            Test pilots are political sales people, or they wouldn’t be test pilots.

            The Russians have had helmet mounted sights since the Mig29HMD and Su-27 was introduced decades ago.

            “ZSh-5 / Shchel-3UM
            The Russian designed Shchel-3UM HMD design is fit to the ZSh-5 series helmet, and is used on the MiG-29 and Su-27 in conjunction with the R-73 (missile).
            The HMD/Archer combination gave the MiG-29 and Su-27 a significantly
            improved close combat capability and quickly became the most widely
            deployed HMD in the world.”

            BTW, the Israelis have had HMD’s since 1986…which came AFTER the Russian systems. So the US is only, oh, 30 years behind.

          • Uniform223

            “Test pilots are political sales people, or they wouldn’t be test pilots”

            > This comment is often used by ignorant individuals to back their claims when individuals with actual knowledge and experience debunks their false preconceived notions. Test pilots are the evaluators to make sure the platform works by the time it gets to the actual end users. Even though these are not test pilots would you go up to them and call them political salesman and/or liars?

            “The Russians have had helmet mounted sights since the Mig29HMD and Su-27 was introduced decades ago.

            “ZSh-5 / Shchel-3UM
            The Russian designed Shchel-3UM HMD design is fit to the ZSh-5 series helmet, and is used on the MiG-29 and Su-27 in conjunction with the R-73 (missile).
            The HMD/Archer combination gave the MiG-29 and Su-27 a significantly
            improved close combat capability and quickly became the most widely
            deployed HMD in the world.” ”

            > This is a very rudimentary and simple system compared to what is used now (common and very widely used JHMCS, Typhoon’s HMSS, and F-35’s HMD). The Shchel-3UM is a simple monocle with a crosshair.


            the current JHMCS and HMSS isn’t just a sight system to use HOB capable missile (AIM-9X), they show basic flight and targeting data…


            Russian fighter aircraft have nothing approaching or comparable to modern western HMD/CS

          • valorius

            It is a fact that test pilots are heavily politically minded and influenced by PR concerns. To deny such is, well, ignorant.

            ” The Shchel-3UM is a simple monocle with a crosshair”…. that was completely unmatched by any operational US fighter craft for over 20 years.

          • Uniform223

            Not having an IRST on our fighter aircraft has not posed a serious operational/tactical problem for our pilots. Yes Russian aircraft came out with an (at the time of its introduction) impressive helmet mounted sight system. However they are now behind the power/learning curve. Russian fighter aircraft currently have nothing approaching our current JHMCS…



            Russian fighter pilots are currently still using a simple (when compared to JHMCS) helmet mounted sight…



            The IHADSS used on the Apache was/is more advanced as it displays basic flight data as well as targeting data to the pilot.

            Even though the F-22 doesn’t have an IRST or a HMD/CS, this has not been a problem for the F-22. The F-22 has gone up against plenty of other fighter aircraft with IRST and a HMD/CS and still manages to either hold its own or dominate. Here is what one RAAF pilot who was on an exchange program had to say when he was flying an F-15C against the F-22…


            + “I can’t see the [expletive deleted] thing,” said RAAF Squadron Leader Stephen Chappell, exchange F-15 pilot in the 65th Aggressor Squadron. “It won’t let me put a weapons system on it, even when I can see it visually through the canopy. [Flying against the F-22] annoys the hell out of me.”

            Lt. Col. Larry Bruce, 65th AS commander, admits flying against the Raptor is a very frustrating experience. Reluctantly, he admitted “it’s humbling to fly against the F-22,” – humbling, not only because of its stealth, but also its unmatched maneuverability and power. +

            The F-22 doesn’t have a HMD/CS yet but (as far as I know) the USAF still hopes to start fielding a HMD/CS for the F-22 by 2020.

          • valorius

            The Apache IHADSS is not suitable for use in fighters, the helmet is too heavy and would break a pilots neck in high G turns. Excessive weight is a problem the US has been having with it’s F35 helmet mounted sight version as well.

            US fighters haven’t had to fight any of the Russian birds that have helmet mounted sights, and have had them since the 1980s. The export planes we’ve fought have not been equipped with HMD’s.

            It’s like saying M1s are better than Russian tanks based on us fighting totally obsolete T72s in Iraq.

          • Uniform223

            First off I was merely using the IHADSS as an example in relation to the helmet mounted sight used by Russian aircraft…

            “The IHADSS used on the Apache was/is more advanced as it displays basic flight data as well as targeting data to the pilot.”

            I wasn’t saying that fighter pilots should use the helmets used by the AH-64 Apache. This is a bit of misconception. Though the helmet is part of the system, the actual main component is the monocle unit…


            this detaches from/attaches to the individual helmet


            this is unlike JHMCS



            where the projecting unit and visor is permanently integrated into the helmet which connects directly to the aircraft itself. The IHADSS monocle is the direct link/attachment to the Apache, the helmet is not.

            “the helmet is too heavy and would break a pilots neck in high G turns. Excessive weight is a problem the US has been having with it’s F35 helmet mounted sight version as well.”

            > that is a fallacy pushed by critics/know-nothings (the fact that you believe it…). The problem was the weight of the helmet in relation to the weight and height of the individual pilot during EJECTION… NOT during actual high G BFM/ACM. The Gen III HMD for the F-35 is lighter then all the previous versions to help mitigate this hazard during ejection.

            “US fighters haven’t had to fight any of the Russian birds that have helmet mounted sights, and have had them since the 1980s.”

            > our fighter pilots have faced off against (and shot down) Mig-29s in the Gulf War and later again in the late 90s during Operation Allied Force.

            “The export planes we’ve fought have not been equipped with HMD’s”

            > as far as I know, no-one in the actual “circle of knowledge” confirms or denies this. (IMO) This is often an excuse used by people on the internet to have a explanation for the failings of Russian platforms used by other users of other nations…

            “It’s like saying M1s are better than Russian tanks based on us fighting totally obsolete T72s in Iraq”

            > because fact… the M1 Abrams was/is the better tank in Iraq. IF the Iraqi T-72s were so obsolete (according to you and others on the interwebs) then the US military would have had no problems in using the M60A3s (we had at the time of the Gulf War) as the main armored force to push into Iraq.

          • valorius

            Well obviously the M1A2 was better than 40 year old export models of the T-72. The Iraqi T-72 was completely obsolete even in 1991 during the Gulf war when compared to US M1A1HA Abrams, let alone the 2003 Invasion when Compared to M1A2 SEP variants.

            Even the latest versions of the M1 have lagged far behind several modern MBT’s in both respect to technical and protection categories . Both threat and friendly alike.

            The latest modern MBT’s have various combinations of AESA radar systems, LWRs, IR jammers, active anti-missile systems and completely sealed crew compartments. (Which is why the US is finally seeking to replace the M1 entirely)

            I am highly versed in all these systems- both BLUFOR and REDFOR, btw.

          • noob

            The russian built ZSh-5 / Shchel-3UM (also used by China) is very lightweight looking.

            I don’t even know how that little glass circle displays the display. Does it reflect it at a 45 degree angle back into the eye?


          • valorius

            The Apache IHADSS uses a similar monocle at a similar angle, but it’s shrouded.

          • noob

            I wonder if the shroud weights a negligible amount when you’re in a 9g turn, or if it is safer to have the shroud in case you bang you head against the canopy.

            Either way, the newer helmets with integrated optics should be a big step up in ergonomics than something that bolts on.

          • valorius

            The IHADSS is a heavy helmet in general, that has a lot of electronics in it. In a 9g turn everything is 9 times heavier. An IHADSS helmet would probably snap a pilots neck.

          • noob

            there’s also some really funky optical waveguides by BAE Systems that have light come in on their thin edge and the light literally turns 90 degrees inside the glass to come out at your eye. BAE calls it the Q-Sight helmet-mounted display.

          • Phillip Cooper

            Put more simply:

            I’ve “designed” a car. But you can’t go sit in it and drive off.

            Same sort of thing applies.

        • Phillip Cooper

          Well, that’s only half the story.

          The rare earth minerals are the real problem- and China is sitting on the biggest deposit.

      • ArmedEthos


      • Uniform223
    • Foma Klimov

      Which is a lie. Russia can make and has the resources to make everything. It’s just cheaper to buy from China.

      • int19h

        Well then, it should be easy for you to come up with a name of just one chip fabrication plant in Russia that can handle this 28 nm process, right?

        Oh, you don’t have one? Then how do you know that you can make them?

        • Sermon 7.62

          You are a stubborn troll.

          • Klaus Von Schmitto

            I was just thinking that about you.

          • andrey kireev

            So if someone presenting facts to dispute your’s, they “hate Russia big time” and “stubborn troll”….. I wonder what you gonna label me ?

          • Sermon 7.62

            It was not a fact but a false statement and it was said in disrespectful tone.

          • andrey kireev

            I dunno, I ended up gathering that while RF makes their own processor, they do so in fairly insignificant numbers and with inferior technologies (10yr behind or so)

          • Sermon 7.62

            The ones that are 100% made in Russia are a bit outdated indeed, but the point is that Russia is capable of making them.

          • andrey kireev

            Oh boy, Russia lost EMP protection by switching away from those transistor based computers ! Referring to those Transistor lamps based computers found in MIG-31 jets for a while.

          • Sermon 7.62

            “But I have noticed this: all those Liberals and Progressives find their pleasure and satisfaction in abusing Russia.”

            Fyodor Dostoevsky, 1867

          • andrey kireev

            It was a joke, but take it as you want it.

          • iksnilol

            A bit outdated ? A decade in the computer world is like a century in the normal world.

          • Sermon 7.62

            It depends on the purpose. For now, these processors are going to be used for governmental computers.

            Also, I am not an IT expert, but it looks like that fellow is wrong.

            Russian Government will soon utilize the Baikal Processor based on Homegrown ARM Design – Intel and AMD x86 Processors to be phased out

            “The Baikal Processor is of strictly Russian design and is based on the ARM Cortex A57 Architecture with 64 bit support.

            “ARM Holdings neither manufactures nor sells CPU devices based on its own designs, but rather licenses the processor architecture to interested parties.

          • raz-0

            “The Russian fabless semiconductor company, has now announced it will create high-performance ARM-based CPUs designed for applications in embedded systems, personal computers and servers to be delivered before the end of 2017 and implemented in 28nm manufacturing process technology.”

            Fabless. That means they own no chip fabs. It means they can’t make them. It’s also an ARM57 core, which would imply they also licensed the design, so they could neither make it, NOR design it.

            It’s not that they could never, they won’t. They decided to say screw it to building manufacturing infrastructure, and now have said screw it to doing their own designs.


            You are arguing stuff you fundamentally don’t understand because you think people are saying Russians are stupid. Which they aren’t in general.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Excuse me, this is not a rocket science to understand.

            “ARM Holdings neither manufactures nor sells CPU devices”. So, that means Russia obtained the license. And these are not the same CPU I was talking about earlier.

            “The chip is being designed by T-Platforms, a Russian supercomputer maker, alongside state defence corporation Rostec”, T-Platforms is headquartered in Moscow with offices in Taiwan. So, the Russians are using Taiwan to manufacture them, so as the US uses them.

          • raz-0

            No it’s not, but you seem to be missing it. The US has chip fabs capable of producing chips that are state of the art circa 2017. We also send a buttload of business overseas for price and scale of production to meet consumer product demand. Should relations sour between our two countries, we can make those chips. A lot less of them, but we can make them. Our capacity to produce the state of the art is not zero. Our capacity to produce ten year old designs is not zero.

            The russian companies have no fabs. Their “state of the art” design developed domestically is on par with 2003 consumer grade goods from a global perspective. Should their relations sour with their manufacturing partner nations, they would not be able to produce them. What they would be able to produce is even more out of date than that. Their capacity to produce state of the art designs is zero. Their capacity to produce 10 year old designs is zero.

            Also of note is that T-Platforms stuck their subsidiary Baikal with the job of doing the ARM cpu modifications. Who farmed the work out to Synopsis Inc. apparantly if the internet is correct. Synopsis Inc is headquartered in mountainview california. USA.

            So TO date, russian design peaks at circa 2003/2004 technology. Their domestic manufacturing capacity peaks even farther back than that. It’s not because russia couldn’t if they wanted to and tried to, it’s because they haven’t and don’t want to. They don’t want to to the point that their plan for playing catch up is licensing the ARM architecture and possibly extending it. Until they have Taiwan build it, they haven’t even done that.

          • RazorHawk

            Computers didnt exist 100 years ago, so your analogy is completely bunk.

          • iksnilol

            Uhmm… They kinda did. An abacus is a computer. So is an astrolabe. If you want to get more technical, Charles Babbage built several computers ( called analytical engines) in the early 19th century.

          • raz-0

            Do you understand the definition of the word “making”

            They might be able to DESIGN them, but designing stuff that you can’t make isn’t really important in the end. The bleeding edge of what they are DESIGNING and farming out to the Chinese is still about a decade old.

          • Sermon 7.62

            You are being arrogant, man. I understand the meaning of “making” and as I said, there is a plant in Russia, it is 100% made on that plant. I am talking about the “90 nm CMOS manufacturing process in Zelenograd, Russia”.

            And perhaps it is old, but it is sufficient for the office work. And that’s the point of making them in Russia. Yet at the same time there are modern models that are manufactured in Taiwan. I suppose, in the near future those should be also made in Russia.

          • Bested

            No, you are.
            He has bested you at every point.
            Watching you back track and look for escapes and diversions is humorous. But also saddening.

          • Sermon 7.62

            No it isn’t so.

          • raz-0

            Wow, you and reality are not good freinds are you. The dude is making a legitimate point about the state of technology. You are getting all butt hurt in the pride region because he’s making informed factual statements. That’s not trolling.

          • Sermon 7.62

            That fellow is not talking about manufacturing goods. You should read it all before making a comment.

      • Amplified Heat

        What are Russia’s primary exports? Do they include precision machinery or electronics? Of course not, not even automobiles. It’s not like Taiwan/Korea are particularly competent compared to other first-world nations or anything*, they used to be purveyors of cheap garbage like everyone else; the difference is that the US has systematically labored to get facilities set up in these areas for decades as part of our mutual military/trade interests, and eventually these foreign concerns came into their own. Russia has been on its own (largely due to its foreign policy) with no advanced nation to copy notes from for going on a century now.

        *I will make a caveat regarding the crippling vestiges of Communism and rampant corruption that still plague Russia, and make multi-billion dollar endeavors like foreign chip fab investments unlikely to impossible

        • Vano

          Bla black bla. Sure Russia newer made anything, they are crazy, backwards and e everything else you favorite fake news office ever told you. And yet we have to contain it, right? To contain McCains “gas station”. We need 800 bases,
          Navy size of midium country. We must create educate and support every terrorist on a planet. Not bad for some 1 who have nothing, know nothing, make nothing and so on.
          So what about we all stick to fire arms and technology and live political garbage to a hole we think we elect in that TV show called elections?
          Just thinking aloud.

          • int19h

            A large military that’s technologically 10-20 years behind is still dangerous enough. It can’t win a big war, but it can sure deal some damage, and it can hold its own in proxy conflicts. And then of course there are the nukes. So, yes, we do have to waste time and money to contain it – at least until its economy craps out once again. Sanctions should help make it happen sooner rather than later.

          • Sermon 7.62

            The US has the largest external debt: 97% of GDP, and so is more prone to “crap out” next.

          • GhostTrain81

            I think a large number of places that people would considered “developed” and/or nice places to live have ridiculously high Debt : GDP ratios. Last I checked, Japan’s is greater than 200%.

            I like to think of it as how much a government borrows to generate 1 dollar / ruble / peso whatever of economic output.

            In the above case, the government needs to borrow 2 Yen, in order for the economy to generate 1 Yen of output…. this might seem inefficient, but it’s noticeable when you visit Japan – fantastic infrastructure, clean streets, great educational system, etc.

            So I guess what I’m trying to say is that a high ratio is not cause for alarm, nor is a sign that a government is about to default on its debt obligations.

          • Sermon 7.62

            As long as there’s piece and it keeps on running on promises? Yes, there’s no cause for alarm.

          • int19h

            US issues foreign debt in its own currency. That puts it in a unique position relative to everyone else. Every single country in the world that’s holding T-bills – this includes Russia and China – is, to some extent, committed to the stability of US economy. If we go down, we take everyone with us.

          • Sermon 7.62

            No. Just those who also are in such a high debt. You go down or sure, as soon as something serious happens.

          • RazorHawk

            I disagree, there is nothing to contain. Russia is not a threat. The real threat is muslim immigration, big govt socialism and the rainbow jihadis. In short, the demonrats.

          • Sermon 7.62

            He is one of the smartest people here, and has been fare so far.

        • Sermon 7.62

          Russia’s Top 10 Exports

          4 – Machinery including computers: $6.8 billion
          9 – Electrical machinery, equipment: $4 billion


      • raz-0

        “I could if I wanted to” is, from the personal to the national scale, bullshit.


        Your argument is like me saying I could butcher a cow because I buy beef at the store. I mean I can’t, but COULD if I wanted to. It’s just hacking a cow up right?

    • valorius

      They don’t have to, China will sell them to the Russkies by the truck load.

      • int19h

        China is not an ally of Russia. Their interests often coincide, but they have shared borders with some history of it being contested (e.g. Damansky conflict), and China has a territorial interest in the Russian Far East. Thus, they cannot be relied upon to provide components in the event of a crisis of a military nature, since they can potentially be an adversary in such a crisis, or be allied with one, or just decide that it’s a good opportunity to weaken the potential future opponent.

        This is exactly why Russia *is* trying to set up its own chip fabs… they don’t want to join any military-political alliance or bloc where they’d be guaranteed access to this tech, but which they would have to join in a non-leadership role. They’re trying to roll their own with themselves as a leader, but that means they have to maintain the technological military edge on their own.

        • valorius

          You should tell that to Russia and China, cause they seem to be quite cozy in defense sales. Russia has sold China it’s carrier, and hundreds of top line fighter craft (or the license to built them indigenously). Not to mention boatloads of the most advanced high performance anti ship missiles in the world.

    • RazorHawk

      You dont need modern cpus. Even old ones will do. You could stock up on old cpus cheap.

  • KidCorporate


    • Call Of Duty 12: Modern Teabag Party

      • Major Tom

        Call Of Duty 13: Infinite Baggin’

    • Darren Hruska

      Blyat! I got semechki stuck in my visor!

  • USMC03Vet

    Call me when the Crysis suits are available. I want to maximum strength punch a hippy before I die.

    • iksnilol

      I want to crap on Debrah’s desk while invisible… like a boss.


      >destroy daesh single-handedly
      >punch a 70 year old instead

      Good meme.

      • USMC03Vet

        Boomers almost ruined the country. ISIS just shifting dirt in a hell hole.

        • GUNxSPECTRE

          Just calling it my bias. Most of the hippies that I know are pretty chill.

          But I have to correct you on something: Boomers have AND are currently ruining the country.

  • iksnilol

    Power armor and AR-15 drones… yeah, the future is *great*.

    • Amplified Heat

      And ‘gun detecting’ AI…

      • iksnilol

        I was just expecting power armor earlier, and y’know, for it to be real.

        And don’t get me started on the flying cars.

  • john huscio

    They filming a daft punk video in russia?

    • Amplified Heat

      My thought exactly

  • gunsandrockets

    There are many and sundry reasons why something like the power-armored Mobile Infantry of Heinlein’s Starship Troopers will remain a fantasy for decades.

    But, should someone truly want to develop a near term tactical equivalent, what you are really talking about is a one manned “tankette”. Which means it is more likely to resemble a fully tracked and armored wheelchair powered by a small combustion engine and using stalk mounted vision systems. Rather than the concepts we have seen using bipedal exoskeletons.

    • ARCNA442

      The tankette has been dead since WWI for a reason. They’re nothing but underarmed tanks with limited protection and insufficient crew. They would require all the combined arms support of a tank while providing almost none of the capabilities.

      Powerarmor is so attractive because it promises to give the infantry tank-like abilities while preserving its unique mobility and flexibility.

      • gunsandrockets

        Lets talk reality instead of fantasy.

        I never claimed a tankette is practical. I just said it is more practical with current technology than a bipedal powered armor suit.

        And you will never have bipedal powered armor which preserves the “unique mobility and flexibility” of infantry. The added weight, size, and waste heat dump of an armored bipedal armor suit will never match the unique mobility and flexibility of infantry.

        And if you did have technology so advanced that you had a practical powered armor suit, then the human pilot component of that armor becomes the largest engineering drawback. Better to use a remotely piloted bipedal robot or even an autonomous bipedal robot.

        • ARCNA442

          While we can currently build a tankette (and have been able to for 100 years now), not one military in the world is doing so. While we cannot currently build tactically useful power armor, there are several military programs attempting to do so. I think that speaks volumes.

          While it is highly unlikely that a man in power armor would be just as mobile and as flexible as current infantry. The average soldier today has already sacrificed a huge amount of mobility and flexibility compared to the infantryman of 100 years ago but has gained significant lethality and survivability in exchange. Whether power armor will be worth the trade off? We will need a working suit first to see.

          As for autonomous combat androids, building one would be an infinitely more challenging task than building a suite of power armor so I’m not sure why they should be part of the discussion.

          • gunsandrockets

            I see all sorts of robotic tankettes being tested with various degrees of autonomous operation.

  • mike

    “ON THE BOUNCE”, nice Starship Troopers reference.

  • Okay but what I want to know, is can it be somehow incorporated into a system which fits an enormous folding quadcopter full of rotary cannons and guided missiles into a disguised shipping container and/or fruit delivery tractor trailer to simultaneously airdrop dozens of power armor commandos directly onto US airbases.

    Also will the system include crotch-rocket motorcycles so the drivers can escape in style when the giant quadcopter takes off.


    Powered suits are a HUGE waste of time.

    The future soldier is going to be a walking LMG-turret. The few humans left will be the dog-walkers of war-bots and top brass. And those dog-walkers will probably just be genetically engineered; they’ll need a little bit more food and water, not needing a nuclear powercell to get their powersuits ready.

    These suits are propaganda tools pure and simple.

    • int19h

      “a walking LMG-turret”

      That sounds like a roundabout way to say “convenient RPG target”.


        Because…. light armored vehicles, IFVs, close-air support, and infantry aren’t already. Except, an autonomous fighting bot doesn’t have fear or requires a lifetime of care from the VA because it lost a leg.

        You weren’t even aiming at the right target son.

        • Amplified Heat

          The bot also doesn’t get tallied on the evening news. At last, we’ll (humanity in general) have achieved “War Without Sacrifice” and hopefully bankrupt ourselves before extinction. The ‘rise of the machines’ will be at the behest of a plutocratic human government.

          • GUNxSPECTRE

            Yeah that, or we go the Star Trek route. If we figure it out soon enough, and don’t drown, maybe we’ll pull off the post-scarcity future.

        • int19h

          If we go the autonomous route, you’re right, it won’t matter. But you said “soldier is going to be a walking LMG turret”.

          Thing is, vehicles today need infantry to screen them against enemy infantry. If all infantrymen are themselves mini-vehicles, how does that work? It would seem that they’d lose mobility while presenting a bigger target to anyone who wouldn’t.

        • iksnilol

          Yeah, “autonomous fighting bot”, doesn’t that sound even slightly ominious to you? Like slight apocalypse potential.

          “Isn’t it just amazing how a century-and-a-half of science fiction did nothing to swerve our species from the path of doom?”

    • CommonSense23

      Except for the whole electronic warfare thing is going to be nasty in the next coming decades.

      • n0truscotsman


        Ralph Peters made it a theme in “War After Armageddon” and I think he was very insightful.

        • CommonSense23

          Definitely. Interesting book. Its honestly why I don’t see the end of manned fighters and bombers. Electronic warfare is going to he absolutely huge. Jamming. Spoofing. Bizarre tactics that wouldn’t work against a person. But a computer all day. Az awesome as a completely unmanned fighter could be. Removing the pilot is going to place to much faith in computers to recognize constantly changing environments with limited data.

  • Badwolf
    • Sermon 7.62

      Wait for the video that I posted.

  • Jokuvaan

    On the positive side they will trigger AT-mine detonators.

  • T

    They even failed to adopt the Ak12, and then just called an Ak74m+ “Ak12”.
    So if they even fail there, this fairy tale suit is a joke.

    • Sermon 7.62

      In the meantime, the most pistol nation is adopting a foreign pistol.
      Keep posting. Your comments are good.

      • andrey kireev

        Define “Foreign”. All of Sig’s manufacturing is located in the US, very likely designed in the US as well. Russia still uses PMs and you can easily find pictures of Spetsnaz using Glocks and Berettas.

        • Sermon 7.62

          Forget about it.
          PL-15 is the next thing.

          • andrey kireev

            Hopefully they actually adopt it and produce it. One of the last pistols they adopted couldn’t shoot 5K rounds without major part failing (Barrel or slide I believe) I need to revisit that article sometime. Some cool guns, but seems like small scale manufacturing isn’t exactly a russian thing.

          • Sermon 7.62

            Is ORSIS a small enough scale manufacturing to be mentioned?

          • andrey kireev

            Bit too small. However, what I was referring to is pistols, and their relatively small proliferation among Russian troops, and therefore fairly small numbers of them produced. Don’t have much data on soviet/Russian pistols, but remember that it took Soviets about a decade to iron out all the kinks in stamping process in AKs. Defense ministry would have to buy enough pistols for the military to fix all of the teething issues.

          • Sermon 7.62

            But stamping was a new technological process then.

        • iksnilol

          Nah, Sig Sauer Gmbh stll manufactures in Germany and Switzerland.

          Sig Sauer USA on the other hand, does manufacture everything in the US.

          • andrey kireev

            I believe they pulled all of the major manufacturing out of Germany, I think they only have their competition division there with very minor number of employees…. I believe TFB had an article on it a while back… as for Switzerland, I honestly have no idea….

          • iksnilol

            I dunno, STR is still.made in Germany.and there is those AR rifles of theirs which can also ve gotten made in Germany.

  • Uniform223
  • Amplified Heat

    Looks about as modern as a Daft Punk concert or “Master Chief” at a Comic-Con, but I do give them props for the “hexagons of futuristic-ness” and menacing but sadly mouthless helmet (I guess they’ll be living on a liquid nutrient & electrolyte diet all day). Looks more like a moto-cross outfit than actual body armor (all those little gaps in the triangular shoulder ‘armor’). The heads-up display looks more than a little ridiculous as well –are those health & stamina meters off to the sides?

    To put things in perspective, there’s an annual Power Suit competition in Japan (naturally) where guys in (tethered) suits perform feats and stuff, *for fun*, so this left over prop from Edge of Tomorrow is hardly cutting edge, let alone a threat to flesh & blood grunts.

  • DW

    But when will there be a weapon to surpass metal gears?

    • mechamaster

      “Nanomachine Son !”

  • LazyReader
  • Blake
  • Sermon 7.62

    Demo(n)cratic values.

  • Rnasser Rnasser

    Surely we’ll see it in the next action movie…

  • Raoul O’Shaugnessy

    Whats Russian for “On the bounce!”

  • RocketScientist

    “almost invented the Internet first”

    HAHAHAHA. This is great. “Russia is great, we almost invent internet first”.

    • Reef Blastbody

      Yeah, easy there Ensign Chekov! 😀

  • LCON

    wow a film quality prop…

  • valorius

    Only the UK and US trust each other. All other nations just tolerate each other. 😉

    • int19h

      Did you mean to write “thrust”? Because that would be a more accurate description of that relationship, although it goes largely in one direction. ~

      • valorius


  • Nomar Abdiel Vazquez Vazquez

    Can any grunt tell me if having a suit that granted enhanced mobility (able to jump several feet upward and forward) besides enhanced strength will help in combat in any way?

    • Mazryonh

      If it were fast and well-protected enough, suit-equipped troops would not need APCs, and could be immune to things like claymore mines. They would also be able to access certain areas (such as the higher floors of a building) just by jumping, assuming what they’re landing on could take the force and not collapse. But the real draw is allowing troops to carry and fire heavier weaponry without getting into the mobility restrictions of armoured vehicles.