GLONASS receivers have advanced greatly over the last few years. There was a photo somewhere comparing the sizes of the GLONASS receiver chips over the years. The most current ones are almost as small now as the GPS ones. But for military equipment that isnt an issue anyway, who cares if it doesnt fit nicely into a mobile phone, as long as itll fit on a tank. In terms of the quality of localisation data it should be as good as GPS on the territory of Russia, to make it good worldwide will take a little while longer as more sats are put up.
The statements regarding the thermal sights is imho kind of weird. A modern top line thermal sight (such as the Catherine FC) will cost upwards of $1million (maybe more). It makes no sense to put those onto BTRs or BMPs, since the thermal camera will end up costing 2x the cost of the rest of the vehicle. It makes more sense to get the appropriate sights for the vehicle. So top of the line for MBTs, and second tier for BMPs, and third tier maybe for BTRs, otherwise the cost structure will be completely skewed.
In terms of the quality of localisation data it should be as good as GPS on the territory of Russia, to make it good worldwide will take a little while longer as more sats are put up.
GLONASS has and can not have any connection or restriction to the territory of Russia. Actually, the coverage is sometimes better in other parts of the world, but on a 24h level the coverage is best in the northern hemisphere (Europe, North America, Russia), which is logical because they place them accordingly. To see the actual coverage in real time, follow this link:
-I would say that a Glonass coordinate system is better than nothing at all. It may not be as effective and comfortable as a real GPS based navigation and control system but its also a lot cheaper. Nothing worrying there IMO.
-That the digital communication and coordination field is one of the big trouble childs of the Russian army is well known. So what he writes there sounds rather reasonable and realistic. However I cant judge on the satellite situation, what satellites for digital data communication are planed?
Hm, allow me to remind here that it was Soviet Union which pioneered Space navigation (aka КСН) as early as early 1970-s and produced (while United States was still using GPS--not satellite, that is not space based--Omega) Parus for military (6 + 2 satellites) and Cikada (4 + 2 satellites) for civilian purposes.Both worked just fine, while Parus was allowing an excellent СКП (средняя квадратичная погрешность) in, let's say, Northern Hemisphere even for the boomers. It is just the matter of the ultimate surprise how this advantage and unique experience were squandered and lost. Or maybe it is not surprising at all. FYI, the receivers of Parus (aka as Shluze) were initially....a revolutionary global satellite digital communication systems later converted to receivers of KSN.