The War in the Ukraine

Storm bombardier said:

As an army power and always emphasizing the strength of the tank - armored force, the Russian Army currently has the largest fleet of main battle tanks (MBTs) in the world. In the initial stages of the current confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, the Russian Army's tanks and armored troops sustained significant damage.

How many tanks has the Russian Army actually lost since the conflict between Russia and Ukraine started?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Interesting. 450 tanks since the beginning of war. When they had reportedly 3000 operational and total of 10000 stored, this is an acceptable loss. Given that

1. Most of the losses happened at the beginning phase of the war,
2. Half of the losses are probably made up by taking tanks from Ukraine when Ukraine side abandon their territories.
3. The Russians still have their industrial capacity to pump out more new tanks.

It is barely a dent on their total fighting capacity.

footage of helicopter attacks

Storm bombardier said:

As an army power and always emphasizing the strength of the tank - armored force, the Russian Army currently has the largest fleet of main battle tanks (MBTs) in the world. In the initial stages of the current confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, the Russian Army's tanks and armored troops sustained significant damage.

How many tanks has the Russian Army actually lost since the conflict between Russia and Ukraine started?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

What I am more curious and concerned about is personnel.

Losing one tank and you can just pluck 10 more from the storage. Russia has loads of tank in storage.

Losing one tank crew and you'll need at least another 18 years to raise them to replace. This is related the available manpower - Russia does not have the swarm of manpower like they did during the Warsaw Pact era.

AT-15 tank destroyer


Destroy the Kiev regime Pion howitzer.

ACuriousPLAFan said:

What I am more curious and concerned about is personnel.

Losing one tank and you can just pluck 10 more from the storage. Russia has loads of tank in storage.

Losing one man and you'll need at least another 18 years to raise one to replace. This is related the available manpower - Russia does not have the swarm of manpower like they did during the Warsaw Pact era.

Click to expand...

So you always have to ask, compared to whom? In this case the Russians are pitting their human capacity against Ukraine. Unless NATO enters the war, Ukraine side will deplete way faster. In fact, we are seeing it happen. Inducting women into the fighting units is not a good sign. Neither is dragging people from their cars and other gatherings and put them straight into the frontline with a few days of training. The Russians are rotating their troops and resting them. They have fresh units for the next battle when they completed the last one.

reservior dogs said:

Interesting. 450 tanks since the beginning of war. When they had reportedly 3000 operational and total of 10000 stored, this is an acceptable loss. Given that

1. Most of the losses happened at the beginning phase of the war,
2. Half of the losses are probably made up by taking tanks from Ukraine when Ukraine side abandon their territories.
3. The Russians still have their industrial capacity to pump out more new tanks.

It is barely a dent on their total fighting capacity.

Click to expand...

I've noticed that Western accounts of Russian tank losses in this campaign tend to assume Russia can't produce many more tanks. They seem to believe that sanctions somehow prevent T72B3 or T-90M from being made.

It fits the overall Western narrative/desire that the operation in Ukraine is 'blunting' or 'reducing' Russian mobile offensive power.

Someone needs to compile the amount of tanks that Russia produced for, for example, India over a multi-year period.

Russia is now in full wartime production mode in several industries. It has been producing T-72 and descendants uninterrupted for decades now. It is in a sea of cash right now thanks to energy prices. It learned how to produce French thermals (circa 2014) and now produces them domestically for their tanks.

I personally don't see what is stopping Russia from producing an avalanche of T-72B3, T-90, BMP-3M, Tigr, and BTR-82AM.

A lot of it will come down to procurement decisions.

A lot of money that was flowing out of Russia before 2-22-2022 is now flowing inside Russia. And then some. Old ideas of "let the EU build it, we will buy from the West" are dead. Russia is investing in Russian factories, tooling, expertise. Import substitution replacing globalization on a large scale.

----------------------

Meanwhile, Western publications seem abnormally fixated on narratives of Russian tank losses, and inability to produce. I guess they thought that Russia would just throw armoured formations at Ukrainian defenses, while Russia's economy collapsed. That seems to have been NATO's 'plan.'

But this is an artillery war, and an economic war, that Russia is winning. So I would like to see a more mature discussion about the changes taking place in Russia, what they can or cannot produce, than "lolz, Russia lost 400 tanks." Western coverage of the military aspects are reductive and autistic, seeking to undermine the perception of Russia's tank forces. So I think a more intelligent discussion, one not directed by NATO influencing, would look at how Russia is retooling industry to replace losses and move forward in an era where they can no longer count on "official" Western parts. [You can believe they will be getting 'Western' electronics, regardless.]

Latest word regarding Seversk

ACuriousPLAFan said:

What I am more curious and concerned about is personnel.

Losing one tank and you can just pluck 10 more from the storage. Russia has loads of tank in storage.

Losing one man and you'll need at least another 18 years to raise one to replace. This is related the available manpower - Russia does not have the swarm of manpower like they did during the Warsaw Pact era.

Click to expand...

This is a valid question, and one driven by what we're seeing.

They have a lot of tanks in storage, and one question that has to be answered is their 'true' condition. (i.e. the number that can be quickly put into service, or ever, may be lower than reported).

I've read accounts from tank crew on Russian websites. Take from it what you will. But what I got from it was that Russian tankers, by in large, are surviving as a corps. Here are some points:

-T-80s are effective tanks in this war. They have better speed/mobility than other tanks, and better reverse speeds. This has turned out to be tactically relevant in several instances.

-Russian T-80s [and some other models] are only operating with the rounds inside the armoured carousel during anti-tank missions. [~10 rounds available?] This is to reduce the chance of catastrophic detonation upon penetration.

OTOH, Russian tankers report that Ukrainian tanks are loaded to maximum with shells. This has led to catastrophic detonations during combat.

-There are several Russian armour units that have performed successful anti-tank operations during this campaign, making them veteran units. They seem to believe, conversely, that Ukraine's armoured personnel have been severely depleted during the military operation. Ukraine may no longer have the body of professional tankers that it began with.

Yes, there are interesting accounts out there, and I think there's a paucity of discussion of them in the English language. We're learning, for example, that T-80 gas-turbine mobility may be more useful than the Russian procurement plans suggested. Learning the value (maybe) of going out on missions with only the rounds in the armoured carousel.

Sadly, I don't see a lot of discussion of this, just the discussion generated by Western sniping that is disguised as "reporting." [i.e. Russia lost x number of tanks]. Russia has been increasing the speed of its advances over the past months, so that does not suggest catastrophic armoured losses on their part. And you're seeing Ukraine military driving around Donbass in civilian vehicles.

Surpluswarrior said:

Meanwhile, Western publications seem abnormally fixated on narratives of Russian tank losses, and inability to produce. I guess they thought that Russia would just throw armoured formations at Ukrainian defenses, while Russia's economy collapsed. That seems to have been NATO's 'plan.'

But this is an artillery war, and an economic war, that Russia is winning. So I would like to see a more mature discussion about the changes taking place in Russia, what they can or cannot produce, than "lolz, Russia lost 400 tanks." Western coverage of the military aspects are reductive and autistic, seeking to undermine the perception of Russia's tank forces. So I think a more intelligent discussion, one not directed by NATO influencing, would look at how Russia is retooling industry to replace losses and move forward in an era where they can no longer count on "official" Western parts. [You can believe they will be getting 'Western' electronics, regardless.]

Click to expand...

You really think what I highlighted is actually something that can happen here in western media??? (spoilers: not possible lol)

I do think they might actually have some more competent and good discussions and analysis' within their military/intelligence agencies, but for something like that to be more public? No way.

Surpluswarrior said:

Ukraine may no longer have the body of professional tankers that it began with.

Click to expand...

At the rate things are going, Donbass will be done by the end of August. When Donbass is finished, Ukraine will be lacking in professional soldiers of any kind. Losing Donbass means losing the best, most professional soldiers they had. What is left must be divided up to defend the several big cities as well as to hold the frontline. Don't forget they are still steadily losing their artillery and armor, though I believe the armor is severely depleted, or you will see more of them in action during Lysychansk.

If you can't rotate the troops and they are killed off one unit at at time, your fighting capability will be degraded as the battle hardened troops are taken out. The Russian side are rotating their troops and spreading their losses across many units. This means for each unit, most of the experience from fighting the war is still intact and they can replace these loses with fresh troops and there will be someone to ramp up these fresh troops while the unit can still function as a fighting machine. Studies have shown that losses for a given unit significantly decrease after a certain number of days in the battle as each unit gels and learn to work with each other in a war setting. The Ukrainian side don't get nearly as much benefit from this kind of experience.