From: Dusty town, somewhere inside central valley of CA
Zaloga once pointed out the difference between NATO and PACT tanker's quality back in 1989, mentioned about the logistic support for training, criteria of training and training condition, average salary and pension system for NCOs. I don't have abook at my hand now, but IIRC, he used example of unrealistic training criteria for PACT tankers (PACT tankers supposed to kill TOW jeep with 5~7 coaxial MG), and also mentioned an episode when Marshal S. Akhromeyev visited Fort Hood, comparing salary and quality of life for tanker NCOs. As far as remember, he also pointed out that single NATO tank used 100~200 training round per a year, while PACT used 20 for normal units, and 50 for elite units per a year. There were also comments about training system like MILES, and the limitation of PACT (Soviet) tankers due to 2 year limitation of conscript tankers, which makes them relatively less trained units compared to NATO crews.
IIRC, his overall conclusion was, NATO have very good advantage over degree and support of training, and overall support for crews. However he mentioned that Soviet army will be changed, commented that they clearly know about the issue of crew quality and training quality. Unfortunately, USSR falls and overall upgrade for Russian tankers couldn't realized during 1990s, and that caused Battle of Grozny.
Please check Zaloga, Steven J., Tank War-Central Front: NATO vs. Warsaw Pact, Osprey Publishing, 1989
< Message edited by exsonic01 -- 11/24/2018 3:31:32 PM >