Britain v. Russia: who could win if it came to war

Last week Vladimir Putin tried to demonstrate RussiaRussia’s military at the annual parade on Moscow’s Red Square.

The event is an annual tradition and a key date in the Russian calendar, marking the capitulation of the Nazis in World War II. But instead of demonstrating the strength of his country, his plan was not the first to be unfavorable.

Just hours before the Russian president was to watch the spectacle, British defense leaders blew up the demonstration, questioning the “aging” of the Russian army’s ammunition.

The Ministry of Defense in London stressed that Russia’s “shortcomings” Ukraine was caused by their use old rockets with many of their modern high-precision weapons used in the early stages of the attack.

The use of such weapons has adversely affected the ability to strike accurate blows by Russian forces “on a scale”.

As a result, Putin’s generals went on indiscriminate shelling and air strikes, killing countless civilians in Ukraine.

Russian media reports were doing something alarming threats towards the UK – But is it worth worrying about?

A recent briefing by the Defense Ministry in London assessed Russian operations in Ukraine.

It read: “At the beginning of its invasion of Ukraine, Russia publicly promoted its ability to inflict surgical blows and limit collateral damage.

“It said that Ukrainian cities would be safe from bombing.

“This has forced the use of readily available but old munitions that are less reliable, less accurate and easier to intercept.

“Russia is likely to fight to replace the high-precision weapons it has already spent.

“Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has revealed shortcomings in its ability to strike accurate blows on a large scale. Russia has subjected Ukrainian cities to intense and indiscriminate bombardment, with little regard for civilian casualties. “

Russia’s attack on the neighboring country began on February 24, and the Russian leader was expected to address his country in an attempt to unite his armed forces amid reports of low morale in some military units.

Putin’s early plan, which included capturing Kyiv in a matter of days, has now been refocused and will now be directed to the Donbass region in eastern Ukraine, where the Donetsk and Luhansk regions are held by Moscow-backed separatists.

According to the BBC, the only major cities captured by Russian forces are Luhansk, Mariupol, Donetsk and Kherson. But despite these victories, closer to the capture of the capital Kiev is not.

So far, Britain has avoided involvement in the conflict itself, but has supplied Ukraine with anti-tank missiles, air defense systems and other weapons.

An additional £ 1.3 billion in military support and assistance to Ukraine was announced last week (May 7) ahead of a planned video link between Boris Johnson and the President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky.

The new promise is said to have nearly doubled Britain’s previous commitments on spending on Ukraine, with the government believing it is the highest level of spending on the conflict since the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

In a statement after the announcement, the British prime minister said: “Putin’s brutal attack not only causes vague destruction in Ukraine, but also threatens peace and security throughout Europe.”

It still seems unlikely that Britain will cooperate with Russia, but if the Department of Defense questions the quality of its arsenal, what deadly weapons can we deploy?

The British Arsenal of Deadly Weapons

The Army, the Royal Marines and the RAF Regiment use NLAW (next-generation light anti-tank weapons) and another form of missile known as Javelin, which really complement each other and are important forms of defense for infantry that oppose enemy tanks.

Both weapons are used against tanks, but while NLAW is designed for use by regular troops who don’t have to be anti-tank specialists, Javelin is heavier, more distant and is used by specially trained units.

NLAW fires at the target before taking it away and striking from above, where tanks and other armored vehicles are weaker.

In addition to this mode of overflight, the weapon also has a direct attack mode, which allows you to use it against bunkers.

To use NLAW, the shooter puts it on his shoulder, uses the sight to capture the target, and then releases a 150mm anti-tank missile from the launcher.

It is known as a weapon of firing and forgetting – that is, it can fire one missile, reload, and then train to another target, thus “forgetting” the first target and allowing you to knock out the second.

Its maximum effective range is 600 meters.

Javelin is considered the next step compared to NLAWs. The weapon can effectively fire up to 2,500 meters and is used by specialized anti-tank platoons.

To use Javelin, you need two crew members, one of whom acts as a shooter, and the other – a charger.

Like NLAW, it is a weapon of fire and oblivion and has both a top-down mode and a direct fire mode. This means that it can also be used to strike at stationary targets such as bunkers and buildings.

In addition to anti-tank weapons, the army also uses anti-aircraft missile systems. Only one such weapon is called the High Velocity Missile Starstreak (or HVM).

Unlike Javelin and NLAW, Starstreak launches rocket canisters containing three smaller explosive darts.

They work in a similar way to a shotgun that sprays a target with shotguns. In this case, the rocket sprays any low-flying aircraft, such as helicopters or airplanes.

This increases the chances that the target will be hit. According to the Department of Defense, Starstreak is effective in the range of up to five and a half kilometers, although manufacturer Thales said it has been increased to seven.

Other weapons used in the military include missiles known as LMM, GMRLS, rapier, Heavenly Sword and Hellfire (Romeo version). More information on these weapons can be found below, as well as on the weapons used by the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force.

Comparison of missiles of the British Armed Forces:

(Source: Forces.Net)

Britain against Russia

While all this is impressive equipment, well, impressive, all of this might not be considered a large size of the Russian army.

They are said to have the second most powerful armed forces in the world, according to Business Insider, lagging only behind the United States.

Meanwhile, the UK is in ninth place, after Italy, South Korea, France, India, Japan and China.

In addition, compared to the UK, Russia has an estimated total of three million troops, while the UK has only 275,660.

Russian aviation is also far superior: 4,163 aircraft such as fighters, transports and helicopters, while the UK has 733.

Another slightly scary figure shows that Russia has 12,950 tanks compared to 227 in the UK.

The UK has a total of 5,000 armored vehicles out of 27,000 in Russia. However, in one area we are superior to two British aircraft carriers compared to Russia.

But unfortunately, this is not the same story when it comes to ocean combat vehicles such as submarines and destroyers. Russia owns 16 destroyers and 62 submarines, as well as 6 and 10 in the UK.

One reason for Russia’s dominance may be the country’s decision to continue conscription after the end of the Soviet Union.

Men between the ages of 18 and 27 are drafted into the army every year. Then they are divided into service in the army, the Interior Ministry, border troops and other branches of the Russian military arsenal.

The Evening Standard reported that conscription in Russia has been severely criticized by domestic critics, with some arguing that rich people can give bribes for not spending their time.

Those who are unhappy enough to be called up must serve a minimum of 12 months – a reduction of two years reduced as a result of the 2008 reforms.

To get more latest show business news from the Daily Star, be sure to subscribe to one of our newsletters here.