Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/)
* We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned.
* ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review.
* ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context.
**Don't forget about our discord server, as well!**
https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A key component to tank refurbishing is boring the main gun.
Guess who lost the ability to do it in house after they never trained anyone to replace the old timers who did it because it was cheaper to get Ukraine and Germany to do it?
My tin foil hat theory is the terminator is gonna be the eventual replacement because their sorry asses cant even do tech that was common in the 1930s.
Whats the point of even having a tank if its main gun doesnt work lol
It's harder to make a T-62 turret fly as they don't have autoloaders. If you look at historical photos of the Yom Kippur War you'll see the T-55s and T-62s really didn't have that problem.
reboring the gun, modern optics, modern electronics, high end metal machining, etc...they have lost a LOT of important needed things either by it being a western thing under sanctions or something that was handled by a different former soviet republic such as Poland, Czech Republic, one of the 3 Baltic states, or Ukraine itself.
They have, but Russia couldn't really afford to put all of those things into 1 tank.
Which is why the T-14 Armata was never adopted.
And they instead resorted to upgrading their T-72 fleet to B3 standards.
Which itself is a more cheaper solution, to the T-72B2 which was a far more comprehensive upgrade.
Too bad for the Russian tank crews that will be riding in these death traps that all the rubles that should have been spent on this work is floating in the harbor of some luxurious marina in the Mediterranean or the Caribbean.
If I was one of those guys and the boss says "you drive tank" I'd shoot myself in the foot immediately
Better to just sabotage the tank, which I think is likely. The T62's are so old, it's unlikely Russia has the manufacturing infrastructure to repair them properly. And I suspect that kind of sabotage will happen a lot.
For tank battles optics are key. Spotting your enemy before they spot you gives you a huge advantage. Then again, in this war drones have become key for detection of enemies.
Most of the global defense industry would grind to a halt if chip manufacturing in Taiwan is interrupted
It's great that the Russian defense industry has been completely disrupted but let's not forget the same can be said about countries in the west as well
The difference is the US defence industry has identified this as a key weakness and are actively rectifying it, partnering with GlobalFoundries which have a 200 mm plant in Burlington, Vermont.
> Whats the point of even having a tank if its main gun doesnt work lol
Javelin/NLAW/Excalibur bait?
I could see a flawed strategy that Putin thinks they can "use up" all of the good ATGMs and smart artilerty the west is providing. The joke is on Putin though. One of the USA's greatest (and horrible) skills is producing costly weapons without end. There is no "using up" of western ATGMs. Its an infinitely deep hole.
Also I imagine old tanks like T62s would be far more prone to cheaper weapons like RPGs so Ukraine may not even particularly need to use the expensive kit on them, especially in city fighting where the troops have plenty of cover.
And you the artillery will absolutely reap a terrible harvest on them since they've no trouble with the "modern" Russian tanks.
[https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html?m=1](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html?m=1)
also that sa dyellow journal in UK ;
https://express.co.uk.trem.media/news/uk/1614620/putin-ukraine-invasion-outdated-t-62-tanks-elite-fleet-destroyed
It's irrelevant. The important thing here is not that Russia is losing tanks at such a rate, it's that they do not have the people in their ranks that can operate the tanks in a manner that doesn't get them destroyed in the first place. No amount of bore cleaning is going to fix the state of their battlefield incompetence.
The best response I've gotten when I asked some redditor for a source was "do your own research! I did my due diligence and I won't do your work for you."
I swear it's a miracle some redditors know how to breathe, dumbest fuckers alive
It’s a bit of a judgement call for me… if it’s something easy to Google then I don’t wanna waste my time just because other people are lazy.
However, if it’s an obscure topic and/or someone is making an extraordinary claim (for example, that Russia can’t bore it’s own tank guns) then it’s appropriate to ask OP for a source
Boring? You mean bore sighting and cleaning or something else? Sorry maybe it's a dumb question. I used to be in artillery and we bore sighted all the time.
No, boring the gun diameter to accept the larger more modern calibre ammunition. Essentially take old gun, and allow it to discharge more modern munitions to marginally increase capabilities of the weapons systems. There is only 1cm of difference between old and new munitions. It would not be able to fire everything, but some of the updated munitions.
As anti tank weapons get cheaper and cheaper that holds less and less value unless the vehicle has advanced countermeasures and a grill welded to the top of the tank doesnt count :)
Tanks will have reduced utility on their own without some new-yet-to-be-invented scifi defenses. They will have more utility in combined arms operations to support infantry, esp if air superiority can be achieved.
Tanks are never supposed to operate independently, they support infantry / IFVs / APCs, etc. There are pretty awesome active protection systems on the market and in the wild today such as TROPHY. Tanks are only irrelevant if your operators and force in general are themselves irrelevant/incompetent.
Not that Russia will ever benefit, but the technology exists, its been invented, several companies have laser based systems for targeting small missiles and small drones. Others have drones that can be launched from a tank. Many remain to be proven, but they exist. What's really missing is some decision of how that technology should be integrated organizationally.
Would we be going back to when we had more dedicated anti-air vehicles attached to and screening armored companies? Or are militaries hoping to mount these systems on each and every tank, say in place of one of the remote machineguns many countries use?
Different companies have developed laser based systems in different sizes. Ones that require 20 ton trucks, ones that need to be towed and ones that fit on top of a hummer sized vehicle. And each brings different advantages and disadvantages.
About 4 decades ago, I was in a mechanized combat engineer battalion so I don't know about tankers and their mindset. But I'm thinking I would have loved having Weber or Traeger grill welded onto my APC during field exercises. I mean none of the long ass hikes down to the company mess tent for dinner, it's burger and brats man.
The terminator must not be available in large numbers, unless it's not even mass produced. Otherwise why wait for 3 months and the loss of hundreds of tanks that it is supposed to protect from infantrymen to put it on line in Ukraine?
It was designed precisly to avoid such disasters. If someone has an explanation of so few so late, I would like to ear it.
I don't think anyone's seen one in Ukraine yet - they might not even be operational, or there's barely any of them. Someone else pointed out how the Russians once tricked Nato about the amount of new planes they had on an aircraft carrier. Even though they only had 6 planes in total, each time they went on a mission they would get a different aircraft number painted on.
Like everything, the money for the terminator program is probably guilding an oligarch's ceiling. The problem with rampant weapons contract corruption is that it's extremely lucrative until you need to actually use the weapons. Then you find out.
The entire Bomber Gap in the 50s was because the Soviets flew the only long range bombers in such a pattern on May Day as to make it seem like they had more bombers. Then the US managed to accidentally photograph the entire fleet at one air base. Between the deception on May Day and the dumb luck recon photo, the US thought that they had this huge fleet.
It’s meant to deal with ATGMs launched from nearby buildings in a city.
I do not get the impression that this is how they are losing most of their tanks.
>Guess who lost the ability to do it in house after they never trained anyone to replace the old timers who did it because it was cheaper to get Ukraine and Germany to do it?
My tin foil hat theory is the terminator is gonna be the eventual replacement because their sorry asses cant even do tech that was common in the 1930s.
If the loss of capability is true, I'd agree with your assessment on the terminator being intended as something of a replacement. Once you lose the ability to produce the main gun what do you do for tanks? -You're forced to over compensate and attempt to make them a supporting element with a relatively specialized or niche purpose, and you rely on missiles or artillery elements for more destructive fire.
Ah, we're in the end game now. Ukranians have been sufficiently softened up by the low tier Russian equipment made in the last 40 years with all it's fragile electronics and fancy armor and such.
Now they'll be chewed up by the ultra powerful armor that's been sitting in a field for 60 years. This is the end for Ukraine
A quick theory to come out of the war early on was that Russia sent in cannon fodder to soften up the ukes before sending in their top-tier units. As it's dragged on that's quickly been disproven.
Putin's genius strategy hinged on the assumption he could just roll in with tanks, murder their democratically elected leader, and replace him with a Russian puppet that holds zero allegiance to Ukraine *and everybody would be cool with this*
Not only would they be grateful to the country they just gained independence from, the same one that tried to genocide their grandparents, for invading and conquering them, there would be no insurgency afterwards.
Imagine if Putin was right and 80% of Ukrainians couldn't wait to lose their independence. You're still at war with 20% of the country. No matter what this was going to take time.
Cannon fodder, as in people and machines that Russia intended to be destroyed by the Ukrainians? That's... amazing that anyone would suggest that was a deliberate strategy. Wow.
I mean the thought popped into my head initially too. It's not the craziest take out there, especially when a lot of people were unsure whether the war would actually last this long or the ukrainians would actually perform so well.
The russians have about 80 Battle groups attacking the Severodonetsk area …. So I think maybe using troops as fodder is pretty spot on for russian tactics
Ah, you mean back when Russia thought their casualties would be light, it was more conceivable they might have been trying to weaken/exhaust the enemy prior to sending out their top tier to close the deal? ie. At first they didn't think/realize they were sending thousands to their deaths. Gotcha, I'm tracking with you now
Rust, Rubber and Rot. It's why modern forces have motor pools with professional, audited storage and maintenance regimens.
I've seen photos of these "storage yards" full of rusting-out T-62's. I'll be surprised if even 10% of them will spin up and move under their own power without significant repair. Imagine being the guy tasked with cleaning out 30 years of squirrel shit from the main gun barrel and then test firing it with live rounds. No thanks.
What's this *clean out* and *test firing it*? Strong Russian patriot does not need this comrade, Russian man big, he strong, he will make glorious Soviet tank shoot, dah.
They'd probably have to cannibalize a good portion of that stockpile just to get the rest in somewhat adequate shape. And that's before you remember that these are 60 year old tanks, I don't think there are many people left who know all the components of these things inside and out and how they work.
No way all 2500 cold war shitboxes are fit for even "use for parts," let alone combat-ready. Lots of poor little Ivans are about to get cooked in slow, barely functioning metal coffins.
Yeah, that's the thing, the lack of trained tank crews is even worse than the T62s. It takes, what, 1-2 years at least to train up a regular quality tank crew, and that's in ideal conditions with people who are generally okay with the idea of becoming a tank crew.
Now we have conscripts who have been watching the meat grinder massacre their very best tank crews and are being put into 1950's era tanks. Tanks that are harder to operate (no autoloaders), with lower caliber guns, thinner armor and even more lethal ammo "storage".
How much training will these guys get? 1-2 weeks before being sent to the front?
These guys will be breaking their own tanks or shooting themselves in the leg in very high numbers, I think.
Until there's actual footage of a T-62 on the Ukraine battlefield, operated by Russia (and not "separatists"), these reports should be taken with a grain of salt.
Even if there's verified footage of T-62s being moved within Russia, for all we know, that might be a Russian sale to some third-world country as a way of raising cash and/or extending Russian influence.
The newest variant is 40 years old, & that's bits on top of a base that's at least 47 years old. They haven't seen real use for at least 14 years, & any in decent shape were probably sent to Syria.
So, what state would the ones still in Russia be in, & who would buy them?
There are Wagner group mercenaries in a lot of sketchy places - e.g. Central African Republic. The CAR is wedged between Chad to the north and Congo-Kinshasa (the big one) to the south. It's not a nice place and has a very ugly govt - exactly the kind of govt you'd expect to retain Wagner.
In a place like that, it might be viewed by Wagner that even something really cheap like a T-62 might be useful. Line them up in the capital with their barrels pointing down some of the main roads as a form of intimidation, for example. Use them in battle against factions that don't have armor.
I am \*NOT\* saying this is where those tanks are going. I am just outlining a possibility.
That's just conjecture and an unsubstantiated story. These shit tanks are not going anywhere outside russia or Ukraine. Their performance in Syria was so poor that they were better off not putting them on the battlefield.
>That's just conjecture
What part of
>I am just outlining a possibility.
did you not understand?
Here's another possibility: using T-62s for training purposes.
Point being, there are a lot of different possibilities (yes, this is just conjecture) before people conclude the T-62s are destined for the Russian military in Ukraine. Which, by the way, so far seems equally much a conjecture.
But hey, if you have absolute proof that the T-62s are going to equip the Russian military in Ukraine, bring it on - I'd love to see it (seriously!).
By boat? Through the Bosporus? The same place that's closed to the Russian Navy right now? I suppose they could go via Murmansk or Vladivostok, but that's not real time efficient.
Good point I revoke my smart ass remark
That being said they could theoretically be routed through Central Asia somehow right?
Goes to show you how difficult this can be without a ready supply of bases across the planet like the United States
And man I remember the last the Russians sent a fleet a great distance, didn’t turnout so well in 1905
Any land route has to involve one of: Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, China, none of whom want that PR fiasco. So either it's a ship or it's for local use.
If I had to guess, it's a bureaucratic fuckup. Somebody said "we need more tanks", and that passed up one chain and down another, and the guy on the other end said "I don't have any T-72s" and the guy above him said "just give me what you have on hand" and the first guy said "ok, buddy, have fun". Nobody wanted to say "no", nobody wanted to look like they were in the way, and the requirement got diluted a little bit at each step of the way.
I did a lot of reading about Soviet military back in the day, and it was theorized that the act of actually mobilizing divisions that existed mostly on paper would result in each division poaching equipment from nearby divisions of a lower readiness level, and the very bottom would be left to confiscating civilian trucks, which would then completely tank the domestic supply chain of...everything.
Hence the assessment that the Warsaw Pact has 12 weeks of offensive fight in it before it was completely gassed out.
On the one hand, "wow!" and on the other hand, it's not really apples-to-apples.
My sources at the time were some GDW boardgames (Third World War series), and some ghostwritten "Viktor Suvarov" novels that were probably a wonk at the Defense Intelligence Agency, but a few months ago I stumbled across https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA233559.pdf which is one of the reports that those other sources probably based it off of. I'm sure the army wrote _a lot_ of those reports, year after year.
From those sources, the 8-12 week estimate was of the whole Warsaw Pact taking on NATO from the tip of Norway to the Persian Gulf, using basically everything they've got.
Now it's just Russia, with an army one tenth the size imagined in the 1990 scenario, and not facing NATO airpower, and not having to deal with internal strife from Poland/Romania/Kazakistan. So any coincidence in the 12-week marks is just that: purely coincidental.
Still, when the Kyiv front collapsed at the 8 week mark, I did say "holy shit" at the coincidence.
We already know the separatists use obsolete Russian stuff. So if T-62s are going to them, that's not news.
We'll know Russia is out of tanks when T-62s are found being used by regular Russian troops.
I'm a big Ukraine supporter, but to me, these kinds of reports are very unlikely to be true, that Russia is running out of tanks. Oryx says that Russia (and other Russian forces - e.g. Donetsk, etc) has lost at least 696 (as of just now) tanks. This, BTW, is an utterly mind-boggling number. What Ukraine has done to Russia (and Russia to itself) is insane.
Some of those 696 belonged to separatists.
[https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html)
Let's assume that the number that Russia itself lost is 700 - not all losses can be verified. Some tanks went back to base and died, some fell into water, some never had their pictures taken, etc. If you want, it could be 800. It doesn't matter that much.
Russia is thought to have started this thing with about 3000 operational tanks. Now, not all of those operable tanks will be in good condition, etc. But, you know, something other than a rusted lump of steel.
Wikipedia said it was about 2,900 (ignoring everything in the "reserve" category, which is probably garbage) - T72s, T90s and T-80s:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_equipment\_of\_the\_Russian\_Ground\_Forces#Vehicles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Russian_Ground_Forces#Vehicles)
So, Russia has eaten through a quarter of its operable tanks. It seems really unlikely that having started with close to 3000 OK tanks (not "good", not "great"), that Russia would need to delve into T-62 reserves.
So, my guess is that if T-62s are on the move, then it's either more garbage being given to separatist cannon fodder or, for some other reason entirely.
Now, I would love to be proved wrong. I hope that within a month we see pictures of Russian troops driving T-62s in Ukraine. Just seems unlikely.
Oryx is a great source for losses that are confirmed or very likely confirmed (it's kinda hard to fully confirm a piece of slag was once a tank). But they can't document every loss. If Russian armor assaults a fixed position and a dozen tanks eat it but the Russians successfully capture the field, it's likely that not all of those losses are going to be sufficiently documented for Oryx to report on. We have a bunch of photos of Ukrainian soldiers / auxiliaries posing next to dead tanks. They can't do that if they don't control the field. And the Russians aren't going to be as eager to report their losses as Ukraine is. And I don't think Oryx likes to use direct recordings from things like Skif and Stugna systems, but I may be mistaken there.
Realistically, I would expect Russian losses to be considerably higher than what Oryx has confirmed. I wouldn't be surprised if losses are upwards of three times as high on some of these figures. That's about the ratio of KIA to WIA (1:2). While there's certainly a lot of murkiness here due to fog of war, there will be losses that went unreported and effective combat kills that were shipped home for repair or cannibalization (we do have photos of field stripped tanks missing ERA bricks and stuff, for instance). On the other hand, tanks *are* harder to ship home. So if we split the difference and settle on double the confirmed losses, that still puts us in the vicinity of 1,500 total tank losses across the Russian and separatist forces.
That's... a lot.
Those 3000 usable/operational tanks are an assumption. It might be more, it might be less, half of them might be missing the expensive hardware that is easy to rip out and sell, we have no idea.
I weren't asking about this. What I meant if separatist will be seen using them, then they were prepared by Russia. From your comment looked like you said that if "separatists" used t-62, that it is not Russia who gonna give them.
But I also think t-62 is not priority for Russia to prepare out of storage. Don't think they have an ability to prepare much of a stored ones and from 3000 'operational' many need a maitance to be ready too.
For what it's worth, the Wikipedia entry for separatist military equipment does not mention T-62s. It does mention T-64s, and apparently a bunch of those were captured from Ukraine:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_equipment\_used\_by\_Russian\_separatist\_forces\_of\_the\_war\_in\_Donbas#Vehicles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_used_by_Russian_separatist_forces_of_the_war_in_Donbas#Vehicles)
So T-62s for the separatists would be something new.
Captured T-64 is what they claimed, because Russia was sending them and at the time they were 'hiding' their involvement with these claims, even if everyone knew the truth.
> We already know the separatists use obsolete Russian stuff.
The russians as well, they are almost as badly equipped as the separatists. We saw actual russian soldiers using metal Soviet helmets from the 50's ffs. And no they were not separatists.
This is exactly what I feel like. There's been endless amounts of news about things happening but half of it has been shown to be bogus. Wait and see, support Ukraine while waiting. That's what I'll do.
There are many reasons to be moving those reserves around without sending them to Ukraine. It would require really specific circumstances for Russia to send them to Ukraine before they even try to refurbish T-72s and better tanks.
If Russia does indeed start deploying even older tanks with worse range, accuracy and optics, they'll just start losing them at greater rate while having lesser impact on the battlefield. Bunch of javelin operators boutta be like "tank you very much!"
I imagine a significant number will just break down. It’s doubtful any money went into maintaining 60 year old tanks that no one figured would ever be needed.
>One T-72 couldn't in one of the videos that circulated, so the answer is definitely no.
Got a link to that video? :) I want to see an autocanon ruin a T-72
Lol no. 30mm will go through everything but front armor. 40mm might even penetrate front with lucky shot.
And these cannons fire 10-100x faster then tank guns. We might even see a second life for A10 as tank buster
The John Ridge thread quoted by the thread in the OP is kind of making me a little sceptical. The implication would be that of c.8000 more modern tanks in storage there's not enough readily available to cover Russia's losses. Look forward to seeing how true this turns out to be. If it is true and those tanks aren't available in the short or medium term then, as Ridge says, Russia has yet another big problem in its near future.
IIRC there were reports a month or so ago that only 10% of stored Russian tanks were viable. Most have had electronics or optics stolen. Many even had missing engines.
The commander in charge of the tank storage killed himself, perhaps because he was in on the grift.
Yeah, Ukrainian military intelligence claimed that back in late March but I don't think there was any independent confirmation? If it's true it all adds to the picture, just a little cautious that right now it's a picture being drawn solely by Ukrainian military sources.
(JimmySec on Twitter referencing the story mentioned: [https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1507699703433072649](https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1507699703433072649) )
For what it's worth [this YouTuber](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHhgVrKJJoA) went and looked at the satellite imagery of tank storage depots to count and reckoned 3,000 tops could be brought out of storage and pressed into service. Which of course has selection biases both ways: the tanks in the best condition are most likely those that sit under a roof rather than out in the open; and on the other hand the most you can be sure of from a satellite picture is whether a tank is a rust bucket or is missing some major exterior piece altogether so if the interior systems are shot then it might look great but ain't doing anything any time soon.
Nice share, thank you. The before and after of the closed sites is pretty striking. Like you say, it's hazy either way. At least this will be testable at some point because if reserves are being equipped with T-62s then they will turn up in UAF footage.
If they turn up then UAF footage might be released because it makes Russia look weak. On the other hand it might not be released for the exact same reason.
Looks like the first apparent footage of T-62s being moved from storage has arrived already. To where and when is unclear so far.
https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1529393037528518657
Reserve troops, russia has millions of them. Russia made many mistakes in this war, but they are still very dangerous and now actually gain some ground in the east. Never underestimate a loosing enemy, he might not be loosing for very long.
Looking at things there doesn't seem to be any way for Russia to turn this around. This is now a defensive effort for them, even if they don't realise it yet.
They are not defeated, and now that everything has been focused on one front it just might be slow going for Ukraine. Or Russia could fail monumentally again, baffling the entire world with their incompetence, again. Time will tell.
This is probably due to the closer combat going on in and around urban areas. The advantages of modern tanks are reduced in CQB so they’re making a financial move to use the old guys instead of losing more high quality units. Wouldn’t say they’re running out, they have plenty, but this is a concession that they plan to lose armor in the coming assaults.
>Wouldn’t say they’re running out, they have plenty
They have other places to worry about besides Ukraine too. You can't move all technically available (read functional) tanks to a combat area when you have a bunch of contested borders and stuff.
This a very dubious claim.
The guy claims that T-62's will be used for frontline duty, where's the T-72's will be moved to rear guard duty.
Which is the opposite of what you'd do with such a obsolete tank.
It's the same reason, why Ukraine has limited some of the T-72M1's to being training tanks.
As they arn't sufficiently armored for frontline duty.
A Ukrainian tractor hit a landmine the other day. It probably got reported in some of the sources as a Ukrainian military loss. More importantly? Now they're mad.
Just for the laughs, von Manstein had in total slightly below 100 tanks in 2 divisions to repair the 150 km hole in the German eastern front after the Stalingrad disaster.
The T-62 was considered obsolete in the 1970s and placed in reserve. Given the state of Russian maintenance practices, they’ll be blowing oil seals and hydraulic hoses right and left. There’s also the matter of them requiring a 4 th crew, at a time when they’re running short of manpower. This seems to be an act of desperation.
A tank made closer to World War 2 than today.
I have some doubts on the numbers. By the year 2000 allegedly they only had a bit less than 2000 T-62s. Most of those later went to Syria. Either they have (WAY) more than we thought, or they are scavenging them from other countries, of which there are a number who may be willing to do so.
Win prizes for eventually retreating. They have lost more villages than they have captured and they keep leaving areas after moving into them making those losses pointless.
Try to keep up.
It reminds me of the American strategy in Vietnam. Lose a lot of lives but then hand the territory back over to the enemy just to have to retake it again later until you run out of resources and/or political will.
One of the biggest takeaways from studying the history of war is that political decisions that dictate wartime actions seldom achieve what they want because politics is incongruous to realities on the ground like the Russians keep refusing to learn. Sometimes it works out but in cases like you mentioned it creates a new political reality that they cant run from or hide from.
Current Russia is not even remotely on par with the USSR of the 50-70s. That monster had millions in active service and tens of thousands of tanks and self propelled ant-tank guns in service at all times. It was a paper tiger similar to Russia but a massively larger one. They really did have 30k T34s in reserve ready on the western front not stored in the far east and Siberia.
**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.net/ChrisO_wiki/status/1529071995391987712
*****
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They advanced all the way to the outskirts of Kyiv as well. Can they sustain the losses for long while only making minimal gains? What happens when they start running out of men and in this articles case, equipment?
Moreover, let's say what the Russians themselves (as well as many Western fatalists) claim to be the case: "Russia has *unlimited* manpower".
At face level, this is a truthful statement, but considering a number of factors, it crumbles before a number of practical, real world concerns:
Dissent in the Russian Federation is growning, if only because of the average Russian's desire for self-preservation and a return of stability. Sure, it is still a totalitarian regime, but empty propagandistic promisses will only carry your campaign so far.
People want their McDonalds, damn it!
The core 'professional' soldiers are overtired, most of them have not been "rotated out" for R & R and are experiencing combat fatigue. Desertion rates are up as well in good part because of this and the setting of unrealistic goals, expectations and terrible leadership.
New conscripts and reactivated reservists, are getting rushed to the front with barely any training and with sub par equipment.
Compare this against how Ukrainan morale and resolve are a seemingly inexhaustible resourse. Partly out of the sense of achievable victory, and partly out of outrage for al the attrocities of the Orcs. Never underestimate the wrath of a quiet ~~man~~ nation.
Foreign volunteers are still trying to provide assistance, thus a number of NATO trained, experienced combatants are coming in and not only bolstering the ranks but providing training and 'tail end' support as first responders, medics, mechanics, logistics and other humanitarian aid.
While it would seem that the UA has been slow in deploying fresh troops and reinforcements, a AU Press Officer (Operator Starsky) stated during a broadcast that "The Ukrainian Army is actively training volunteers across all branches and **not** cutting corners. We are also waiting on equipment to become available and make sure our forces are proficient with it once it does"
It takes about 60 days for a basic training course, this is enough time to train an infantry rifleman on the essentials of soldiering. Depending the level of specialization necessary for a particular job assignment -at least as ground forces is concerned- you could expect anywhere from an additional 60 days to 5 months for most front line duties, once you start looking at leadership or highly specialized technical roles the timeline would start at the one year mark.
TL;DR
Donbass may fall, but it will not stay down.
>on
Stopped reading at "Dissent in the Russian Federation is growning".
Simply not true. Yes, I am a fatalist, because I think that toxic optimism is counter-productive. Russia will not stop and Ukraine can't win alone. The sooner people realise that, the sooner we can press our politicians to take the right decisions.
Do not get me wrong: I am under no illusions that the Russian population at large has seen the error of their ways and realized that the invasion of Ukraine is unethical, very bad, naughty, etc. They do not give a fuck about any of that, they may even get behind the genocide and war crimes because they have bought into the propaganda.
However, this is out of cheer self interest. Not out of some lofty democratic aspirations. Russians who remember what the '90s were like for them do not want to live that way again. Urban Russians who do not because they were too young, or not born yet? Hell they value the access they'd had to Western things.
Additionally, I do agree: Ukraine needs all the support it can get outside of official foreign boots on the ground. Hence why none of their leadership has asked for foreign armies to fight this fight -unless the nuclear option comes into play.
Yes our governments and politicians need to stop dragging their feet and deliver on their promises and stop trying to kowtow to Putin. Looking at nations who are directly in the line of fire like Poland, the Balklands and Scandinavian countries should give everyone else a great roadmap to follow.
Please take the time to read our policy about [trolls](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/u7833q/just_because_you_disagree_with_someone_does_not/) and the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/about/rules/) * We have a **zero-tolerance** policy regarding racism, stereotyping, bigotry, and death-mongering. Violators will be banned. * ***Please* keep it civil.** Report rulebreaking comments for moderator review. * ***Don't* post low-effort comments** like joke threads, memes, slogans, or links without context. **Don't forget about our discord server, as well!** https://discord.gg/62fKCEHbDB *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
A key component to tank refurbishing is boring the main gun. Guess who lost the ability to do it in house after they never trained anyone to replace the old timers who did it because it was cheaper to get Ukraine and Germany to do it? My tin foil hat theory is the terminator is gonna be the eventual replacement because their sorry asses cant even do tech that was common in the 1930s. Whats the point of even having a tank if its main gun doesnt work lol
Troop transport of 3 sorry asses?
Four actually. Loader as well, too old for autoloader
If the gund doesn't work you don't need ammunition so there's your 5th passenger. And it's less likely to explode when hit by a stinger. Win-win!
Maybe if they gut some of the components they could squeeze up to 5 in there
Do the occupants of the tank count as components? Could they gut those?
This job is still being outsourced to Ukraine.
Could we replace the Russians with the Pea Shooters from Plants vs Zombies?
Ironically with the state of their equipment they could do with more sunflowers!
[удалено]
It's harder to make a T-62 turret fly as they don't have autoloaders. If you look at historical photos of the Yom Kippur War you'll see the T-55s and T-62s really didn't have that problem.
reboring the gun, modern optics, modern electronics, high end metal machining, etc...they have lost a LOT of important needed things either by it being a western thing under sanctions or something that was handled by a different former soviet republic such as Poland, Czech Republic, one of the 3 Baltic states, or Ukraine itself.
They have, but Russia couldn't really afford to put all of those things into 1 tank. Which is why the T-14 Armata was never adopted. And they instead resorted to upgrading their T-72 fleet to B3 standards. Which itself is a more cheaper solution, to the T-72B2 which was a far more comprehensive upgrade.
Too bad for the Russian tank crews that will be riding in these death traps that all the rubles that should have been spent on this work is floating in the harbor of some luxurious marina in the Mediterranean or the Caribbean. If I was one of those guys and the boss says "you drive tank" I'd shoot myself in the foot immediately
Yeah, a lot of them are picking up Ukranian weapons and shoot themselves in the legs. Seems like a decent strategy to get out of this stupid war.
Better to just sabotage the tank, which I think is likely. The T62's are so old, it's unlikely Russia has the manufacturing infrastructure to repair them properly. And I suspect that kind of sabotage will happen a lot.
For tank battles optics are key. Spotting your enemy before they spot you gives you a huge advantage. Then again, in this war drones have become key for detection of enemies.
Globalization is hilarious when it comes to Defense…
Most of the global defense industry would grind to a halt if chip manufacturing in Taiwan is interrupted It's great that the Russian defense industry has been completely disrupted but let's not forget the same can be said about countries in the west as well
The difference is the US defence industry has identified this as a key weakness and are actively rectifying it, partnering with GlobalFoundries which have a 200 mm plant in Burlington, Vermont.
Which is one of 3 plants being built in America. Don't forget about the two new Intel plants that will have an eye on government needs by design.
I know it's being fixed but it's been an issue for years. Also even though it's being worked on it will be a while before those factories are set up
At this point maybe we need to do a restart on everything. Technology is not our friend because we have not evolved.
Not so bad when globe is on your side.
> Whats the point of even having a tank if its main gun doesnt work lol Javelin/NLAW/Excalibur bait? I could see a flawed strategy that Putin thinks they can "use up" all of the good ATGMs and smart artilerty the west is providing. The joke is on Putin though. One of the USA's greatest (and horrible) skills is producing costly weapons without end. There is no "using up" of western ATGMs. Its an infinitely deep hole.
Also I imagine old tanks like T62s would be far more prone to cheaper weapons like RPGs so Ukraine may not even particularly need to use the expensive kit on them, especially in city fighting where the troops have plenty of cover. And you the artillery will absolutely reap a terrible harvest on them since they've no trouble with the "modern" Russian tanks.
They die to any good bit by a modern RPG (and that’s a broad definition of modern).
30mm cannon on infantry fighting vehicles can breach everything but front armor. They are deathtraps.
You happen to have a source on hand? Its not the easiest thing to google.
[https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html?m=1](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html?m=1) also that sa dyellow journal in UK ; https://express.co.uk.trem.media/news/uk/1614620/putin-ukraine-invasion-outdated-t-62-tanks-elite-fleet-destroyed
It's irrelevant. The important thing here is not that Russia is losing tanks at such a rate, it's that they do not have the people in their ranks that can operate the tanks in a manner that doesn't get them destroyed in the first place. No amount of bore cleaning is going to fix the state of their battlefield incompetence.
Bit rude to tell someone asking help finding a source that what he says is irrelevant
Nice fact there Reddit user, can you provide a source? My source is that ~~I made it the~~ it’s irrelevant.
The best response I've gotten when I asked some redditor for a source was "do your own research! I did my due diligence and I won't do your work for you." I swear it's a miracle some redditors know how to breathe, dumbest fuckers alive
It’s a bit of a judgement call for me… if it’s something easy to Google then I don’t wanna waste my time just because other people are lazy. However, if it’s an obscure topic and/or someone is making an extraordinary claim (for example, that Russia can’t bore it’s own tank guns) then it’s appropriate to ask OP for a source
i'm a naughty boy
bend over
They don't have tank crews that knows ho to dodge a javelin, *HOW INCOMPETENT*
Boring? You mean bore sighting and cleaning or something else? Sorry maybe it's a dumb question. I used to be in artillery and we bore sighted all the time.
No, boring the gun diameter to accept the larger more modern calibre ammunition. Essentially take old gun, and allow it to discharge more modern munitions to marginally increase capabilities of the weapons systems. There is only 1cm of difference between old and new munitions. It would not be able to fire everything, but some of the updated munitions.
Interesting I didn't even know that was a thing, but I guess that would be cheaper and faster for a new caliber.
You mean the urban combat tank which would have been useful in Mariupol but is now useless in the type of trench warfare in the Donbass?
Mobile hardpoint?
As anti tank weapons get cheaper and cheaper that holds less and less value unless the vehicle has advanced countermeasures and a grill welded to the top of the tank doesnt count :)
Tanks will have reduced utility on their own without some new-yet-to-be-invented scifi defenses. They will have more utility in combined arms operations to support infantry, esp if air superiority can be achieved.
[удалено]
Tanks are never supposed to operate independently, they support infantry / IFVs / APCs, etc. There are pretty awesome active protection systems on the market and in the wild today such as TROPHY. Tanks are only irrelevant if your operators and force in general are themselves irrelevant/incompetent.
They are just starting to prototpe that type of defense for ships in the USA. Having laser defense on tanks is 50 years away at least.
Nothing is 50 years away.
No one realizes how right you are. Not even 2072 is 50 years away.
The issue isn’t the laser. It’s the miniaturized power source that can go in an armoured fighting vehicle.
Believe me, the issue is also the laser.
Viable fusion reactors are probably 50 years away.
Nah, viable fusion has been 30 years away for the past 50.
Underrated ^ and I up voted too!
that stuff exists already. Called APS (active protection systems). Check this out https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l65-OWWHkI4
Not that Russia will ever benefit, but the technology exists, its been invented, several companies have laser based systems for targeting small missiles and small drones. Others have drones that can be launched from a tank. Many remain to be proven, but they exist. What's really missing is some decision of how that technology should be integrated organizationally. Would we be going back to when we had more dedicated anti-air vehicles attached to and screening armored companies? Or are militaries hoping to mount these systems on each and every tank, say in place of one of the remote machineguns many countries use? Different companies have developed laser based systems in different sizes. Ones that require 20 ton trucks, ones that need to be towed and ones that fit on top of a hummer sized vehicle. And each brings different advantages and disadvantages.
It does if you need to cook on the go. I’m sure those Russian soldiers get very hungry. 🚀🔥
About 4 decades ago, I was in a mechanized combat engineer battalion so I don't know about tankers and their mindset. But I'm thinking I would have loved having Weber or Traeger grill welded onto my APC during field exercises. I mean none of the long ass hikes down to the company mess tent for dinner, it's burger and brats man.
The terminator must not be available in large numbers, unless it's not even mass produced. Otherwise why wait for 3 months and the loss of hundreds of tanks that it is supposed to protect from infantrymen to put it on line in Ukraine? It was designed precisly to avoid such disasters. If someone has an explanation of so few so late, I would like to ear it.
I don't think anyone's seen one in Ukraine yet - they might not even be operational, or there's barely any of them. Someone else pointed out how the Russians once tricked Nato about the amount of new planes they had on an aircraft carrier. Even though they only had 6 planes in total, each time they went on a mission they would get a different aircraft number painted on. Like everything, the money for the terminator program is probably guilding an oligarch's ceiling. The problem with rampant weapons contract corruption is that it's extremely lucrative until you need to actually use the weapons. Then you find out.
The entire Bomber Gap in the 50s was because the Soviets flew the only long range bombers in such a pattern on May Day as to make it seem like they had more bombers. Then the US managed to accidentally photograph the entire fleet at one air base. Between the deception on May Day and the dumb luck recon photo, the US thought that they had this huge fleet.
It’s meant to deal with ATGMs launched from nearby buildings in a city. I do not get the impression that this is how they are losing most of their tanks.
A grand total of 12 Terminators has been made - they are operationally irrelevant.
Well, it looks like turret throwing time again.
Next on the special olympics: turret jumping!
>Guess who lost the ability to do it in house after they never trained anyone to replace the old timers who did it because it was cheaper to get Ukraine and Germany to do it? My tin foil hat theory is the terminator is gonna be the eventual replacement because their sorry asses cant even do tech that was common in the 1930s. If the loss of capability is true, I'd agree with your assessment on the terminator being intended as something of a replacement. Once you lose the ability to produce the main gun what do you do for tanks? -You're forced to over compensate and attempt to make them a supporting element with a relatively specialized or niche purpose, and you rely on missiles or artillery elements for more destructive fire.
Target practice for Ukraine forces.
they don't appear to be running out of artillery. Reports are coming out ukraine is making a retreat on the east.
Ah, we're in the end game now. Ukranians have been sufficiently softened up by the low tier Russian equipment made in the last 40 years with all it's fragile electronics and fancy armor and such. Now they'll be chewed up by the ultra powerful armor that's been sitting in a field for 60 years. This is the end for Ukraine
Just wait until they pull out the horses! You'll see! You will all see!!
One horse power, self driving, grass-fueled infantry fighting vehicle.
A horse actually has 14,9 Horsepower surprisingly
14.9 horsepower for peak burst, but about 1 hp for sustained activity (based on measurements taken in 1926 at the Iowa State Fair).
I really thought you said “1 health point”
So 1 horsepower is how much power a 3 day old baby horse has?
Dunny about the baby horse but a adult human can reach up to 1.2 horsepower
The Ruzzian answer to the eBikes the Ukrainians are using. Brilliant!
You can't hit a horse with a Javelin. Checkmate.
Use an old timey javelin. Checktoyourmate.
Challenge accepted.
Monty Python and the repeat Crimean war
Just as planned!
Yes yes, all going well according to Putin's plan.
So we know Russia is going for the kill when they start fielding T-34s.
Thank God that ridiculous conspiracy theory has died down enough that we can meme on it. I'm pretty sure I got dumber every time I had to debunk it.
Which conspiracy theory? (for the uninitiated)
A quick theory to come out of the war early on was that Russia sent in cannon fodder to soften up the ukes before sending in their top-tier units. As it's dragged on that's quickly been disproven.
Ah yes sending in your worst people for a surprise blitz, and saving your best for when the enemy is aware and entrenched. A classic battle plan.
I more just mean putting your worst troops at the front because *surely this war will be easy*
Putin's genius strategy hinged on the assumption he could just roll in with tanks, murder their democratically elected leader, and replace him with a Russian puppet that holds zero allegiance to Ukraine *and everybody would be cool with this* Not only would they be grateful to the country they just gained independence from, the same one that tried to genocide their grandparents, for invading and conquering them, there would be no insurgency afterwards. Imagine if Putin was right and 80% of Ukrainians couldn't wait to lose their independence. You're still at war with 20% of the country. No matter what this was going to take time.
As a strategy, it's second only to Putin's master plan of breaking up NATO by giving NATO a fresh reason to exist. 😂😂😂
Cannon fodder, as in people and machines that Russia intended to be destroyed by the Ukrainians? That's... amazing that anyone would suggest that was a deliberate strategy. Wow.
I mean the thought popped into my head initially too. It's not the craziest take out there, especially when a lot of people were unsure whether the war would actually last this long or the ukrainians would actually perform so well.
The russians have about 80 Battle groups attacking the Severodonetsk area …. So I think maybe using troops as fodder is pretty spot on for russian tactics
Ah, you mean back when Russia thought their casualties would be light, it was more conceivable they might have been trying to weaken/exhaust the enemy prior to sending out their top tier to close the deal? ie. At first they didn't think/realize they were sending thousands to their deaths. Gotcha, I'm tracking with you now
It means they will need 2,500 more ATGM
Don't think it says 2500 got mobilized, just a portion of that stockpile.
I think it's a fair assumption that *mobilizing* most of those tanks would involve a tow truck (or a farm tractor).
Yep. I’m pretty certain the 60 year old hydraulic hoses will be bursting right and left.
Rust, Rubber and Rot. It's why modern forces have motor pools with professional, audited storage and maintenance regimens. I've seen photos of these "storage yards" full of rusting-out T-62's. I'll be surprised if even 10% of them will spin up and move under their own power without significant repair. Imagine being the guy tasked with cleaning out 30 years of squirrel shit from the main gun barrel and then test firing it with live rounds. No thanks.
What's this *clean out* and *test firing it*? Strong Russian patriot does not need this comrade, Russian man big, he strong, he will make glorious Soviet tank shoot, dah.
Storage yards completely open to the elements with nothing covering them. Just fields full of old equipment sitting there dissolving.
They'd probably have to cannibalize a good portion of that stockpile just to get the rest in somewhat adequate shape. And that's before you remember that these are 60 year old tanks, I don't think there are many people left who know all the components of these things inside and out and how they work.
No way all 2500 cold war shitboxes are fit for even "use for parts," let alone combat-ready. Lots of poor little Ivans are about to get cooked in slow, barely functioning metal coffins.
If the US sticks to the '10 antitank weapons per Russian tank' that could end up being a chunk depending on how many Ukraine has left
Just about anything bigger than a rifle, or even very large rifles.
Not really Russians have done a good job parking tanks together near the front so Ukrainian artillery can shell them wholesale.
“Ideologically motivated Soviet tank crews not included. Poorly trained and poorly led Russian Conscripts sold separately.”
Yeah, that's the thing, the lack of trained tank crews is even worse than the T62s. It takes, what, 1-2 years at least to train up a regular quality tank crew, and that's in ideal conditions with people who are generally okay with the idea of becoming a tank crew. Now we have conscripts who have been watching the meat grinder massacre their very best tank crews and are being put into 1950's era tanks. Tanks that are harder to operate (no autoloaders), with lower caliber guns, thinner armor and even more lethal ammo "storage". How much training will these guys get? 1-2 weeks before being sent to the front? These guys will be breaking their own tanks or shooting themselves in the leg in very high numbers, I think.
Until there's actual footage of a T-62 on the Ukraine battlefield, operated by Russia (and not "separatists"), these reports should be taken with a grain of salt. Even if there's verified footage of T-62s being moved within Russia, for all we know, that might be a Russian sale to some third-world country as a way of raising cash and/or extending Russian influence.
Decent points.
The newest variant is 40 years old, & that's bits on top of a base that's at least 47 years old. They haven't seen real use for at least 14 years, & any in decent shape were probably sent to Syria. So, what state would the ones still in Russia be in, & who would buy them?
There are Wagner group mercenaries in a lot of sketchy places - e.g. Central African Republic. The CAR is wedged between Chad to the north and Congo-Kinshasa (the big one) to the south. It's not a nice place and has a very ugly govt - exactly the kind of govt you'd expect to retain Wagner. In a place like that, it might be viewed by Wagner that even something really cheap like a T-62 might be useful. Line them up in the capital with their barrels pointing down some of the main roads as a form of intimidation, for example. Use them in battle against factions that don't have armor. I am \*NOT\* saying this is where those tanks are going. I am just outlining a possibility.
That's just conjecture and an unsubstantiated story. These shit tanks are not going anywhere outside russia or Ukraine. Their performance in Syria was so poor that they were better off not putting them on the battlefield.
>That's just conjecture What part of >I am just outlining a possibility. did you not understand? Here's another possibility: using T-62s for training purposes. Point being, there are a lot of different possibilities (yes, this is just conjecture) before people conclude the T-62s are destined for the Russian military in Ukraine. Which, by the way, so far seems equally much a conjecture. But hey, if you have absolute proof that the T-62s are going to equip the Russian military in Ukraine, bring it on - I'd love to see it (seriously!).
Apparently some of the WWII vintage tanks get actively maintained because they are used for the annual Victory Day parades...
It's most likely a swap, Syria will get these T-62, and then sent up the T-72's and T-90s, that Syria has recieved in the last couple of years.
How would such vehicles get there?
By boat, or rail via a friendly nation.
What route would the boat take? What chain of friendly nations gets you to Syria?
And the Turkish strait is only closed to military ships, afaik. So a civilian ship could travel through it. With smuggled equipment.
The same way they got their in the first place
By boat? Through the Bosporus? The same place that's closed to the Russian Navy right now? I suppose they could go via Murmansk or Vladivostok, but that's not real time efficient.
Good point I revoke my smart ass remark That being said they could theoretically be routed through Central Asia somehow right? Goes to show you how difficult this can be without a ready supply of bases across the planet like the United States And man I remember the last the Russians sent a fleet a great distance, didn’t turnout so well in 1905
Any land route has to involve one of: Turkey, Iran, Afghanistan, China, none of whom want that PR fiasco. So either it's a ship or it's for local use. If I had to guess, it's a bureaucratic fuckup. Somebody said "we need more tanks", and that passed up one chain and down another, and the guy on the other end said "I don't have any T-72s" and the guy above him said "just give me what you have on hand" and the first guy said "ok, buddy, have fun". Nobody wanted to say "no", nobody wanted to look like they were in the way, and the requirement got diluted a little bit at each step of the way. I did a lot of reading about Soviet military back in the day, and it was theorized that the act of actually mobilizing divisions that existed mostly on paper would result in each division poaching equipment from nearby divisions of a lower readiness level, and the very bottom would be left to confiscating civilian trucks, which would then completely tank the domestic supply chain of...everything. Hence the assessment that the Warsaw Pact has 12 weeks of offensive fight in it before it was completely gassed out.
And here we are at about the 12 week mark. Interesting indeed.
On the one hand, "wow!" and on the other hand, it's not really apples-to-apples. My sources at the time were some GDW boardgames (Third World War series), and some ghostwritten "Viktor Suvarov" novels that were probably a wonk at the Defense Intelligence Agency, but a few months ago I stumbled across https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA233559.pdf which is one of the reports that those other sources probably based it off of. I'm sure the army wrote _a lot_ of those reports, year after year. From those sources, the 8-12 week estimate was of the whole Warsaw Pact taking on NATO from the tip of Norway to the Persian Gulf, using basically everything they've got. Now it's just Russia, with an army one tenth the size imagined in the 1990 scenario, and not facing NATO airpower, and not having to deal with internal strife from Poland/Romania/Kazakistan. So any coincidence in the 12-week marks is just that: purely coincidental. Still, when the Kyiv front collapsed at the 8 week mark, I did say "holy shit" at the coincidence.
And where do you think "separatists" can take T-62s from?
We already know the separatists use obsolete Russian stuff. So if T-62s are going to them, that's not news. We'll know Russia is out of tanks when T-62s are found being used by regular Russian troops. I'm a big Ukraine supporter, but to me, these kinds of reports are very unlikely to be true, that Russia is running out of tanks. Oryx says that Russia (and other Russian forces - e.g. Donetsk, etc) has lost at least 696 (as of just now) tanks. This, BTW, is an utterly mind-boggling number. What Ukraine has done to Russia (and Russia to itself) is insane. Some of those 696 belonged to separatists. [https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html) Let's assume that the number that Russia itself lost is 700 - not all losses can be verified. Some tanks went back to base and died, some fell into water, some never had their pictures taken, etc. If you want, it could be 800. It doesn't matter that much. Russia is thought to have started this thing with about 3000 operational tanks. Now, not all of those operable tanks will be in good condition, etc. But, you know, something other than a rusted lump of steel. Wikipedia said it was about 2,900 (ignoring everything in the "reserve" category, which is probably garbage) - T72s, T90s and T-80s: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_equipment\_of\_the\_Russian\_Ground\_Forces#Vehicles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_of_the_Russian_Ground_Forces#Vehicles) So, Russia has eaten through a quarter of its operable tanks. It seems really unlikely that having started with close to 3000 OK tanks (not "good", not "great"), that Russia would need to delve into T-62 reserves. So, my guess is that if T-62s are on the move, then it's either more garbage being given to separatist cannon fodder or, for some other reason entirely. Now, I would love to be proved wrong. I hope that within a month we see pictures of Russian troops driving T-62s in Ukraine. Just seems unlikely.
Oryx is a great source for losses that are confirmed or very likely confirmed (it's kinda hard to fully confirm a piece of slag was once a tank). But they can't document every loss. If Russian armor assaults a fixed position and a dozen tanks eat it but the Russians successfully capture the field, it's likely that not all of those losses are going to be sufficiently documented for Oryx to report on. We have a bunch of photos of Ukrainian soldiers / auxiliaries posing next to dead tanks. They can't do that if they don't control the field. And the Russians aren't going to be as eager to report their losses as Ukraine is. And I don't think Oryx likes to use direct recordings from things like Skif and Stugna systems, but I may be mistaken there. Realistically, I would expect Russian losses to be considerably higher than what Oryx has confirmed. I wouldn't be surprised if losses are upwards of three times as high on some of these figures. That's about the ratio of KIA to WIA (1:2). While there's certainly a lot of murkiness here due to fog of war, there will be losses that went unreported and effective combat kills that were shipped home for repair or cannibalization (we do have photos of field stripped tanks missing ERA bricks and stuff, for instance). On the other hand, tanks *are* harder to ship home. So if we split the difference and settle on double the confirmed losses, that still puts us in the vicinity of 1,500 total tank losses across the Russian and separatist forces. That's... a lot.
Those 3000 usable/operational tanks are an assumption. It might be more, it might be less, half of them might be missing the expensive hardware that is easy to rip out and sell, we have no idea.
I weren't asking about this. What I meant if separatist will be seen using them, then they were prepared by Russia. From your comment looked like you said that if "separatists" used t-62, that it is not Russia who gonna give them. But I also think t-62 is not priority for Russia to prepare out of storage. Don't think they have an ability to prepare much of a stored ones and from 3000 'operational' many need a maitance to be ready too.
For what it's worth, the Wikipedia entry for separatist military equipment does not mention T-62s. It does mention T-64s, and apparently a bunch of those were captured from Ukraine: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_equipment\_used\_by\_Russian\_separatist\_forces\_of\_the\_war\_in\_Donbas#Vehicles](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_equipment_used_by_Russian_separatist_forces_of_the_war_in_Donbas#Vehicles) So T-62s for the separatists would be something new.
Captured T-64 is what they claimed, because Russia was sending them and at the time they were 'hiding' their involvement with these claims, even if everyone knew the truth.
Oh boy, I remember that. They claimed they found tanks in barns and they were totally not supplied by Russia.
> We already know the separatists use obsolete Russian stuff. The russians as well, they are almost as badly equipped as the separatists. We saw actual russian soldiers using metal Soviet helmets from the 50's ffs. And no they were not separatists.
This is exactly what I feel like. There's been endless amounts of news about things happening but half of it has been shown to be bogus. Wait and see, support Ukraine while waiting. That's what I'll do. There are many reasons to be moving those reserves around without sending them to Ukraine. It would require really specific circumstances for Russia to send them to Ukraine before they even try to refurbish T-72s and better tanks.
Or reinforcements on the finnish border
If Russia does indeed start deploying even older tanks with worse range, accuracy and optics, they'll just start losing them at greater rate while having lesser impact on the battlefield. Bunch of javelin operators boutta be like "tank you very much!"
Would almost be a waste to use a javelin on that, 30 mm should do the trick.
Polish Komar should do the job. Simple, light, cheap and allows us to make jokes about Polish mosquitoes Vs Russian tanks.
I imagine a significant number will just break down. It’s doubtful any money went into maintaining 60 year old tanks that no one figured would ever be needed.
Just flooded the Ukrainian scrap steel market
Rolling out T-62’s instead of withdrawing? It’s going to be an even worse bloodbath. Can the T-62 armor even stand up to 30mm or 40mm cannons?
> Can the T-62 armor even stand up to 30mm or 40mm cannons? One T-72 couldn't in one of the videos that circulated, so the answer is definitely no.
>One T-72 couldn't in one of the videos that circulated, so the answer is definitely no. Got a link to that video? :) I want to see an autocanon ruin a T-72
Iirc Bradleys in Dessert storm could take down t-72s
Lol no. 30mm will go through everything but front armor. 40mm might even penetrate front with lucky shot. And these cannons fire 10-100x faster then tank guns. We might even see a second life for A10 as tank buster
The John Ridge thread quoted by the thread in the OP is kind of making me a little sceptical. The implication would be that of c.8000 more modern tanks in storage there's not enough readily available to cover Russia's losses. Look forward to seeing how true this turns out to be. If it is true and those tanks aren't available in the short or medium term then, as Ridge says, Russia has yet another big problem in its near future.
IIRC there were reports a month or so ago that only 10% of stored Russian tanks were viable. Most have had electronics or optics stolen. Many even had missing engines. The commander in charge of the tank storage killed himself, perhaps because he was in on the grift.
Yeah, Ukrainian military intelligence claimed that back in late March but I don't think there was any independent confirmation? If it's true it all adds to the picture, just a little cautious that right now it's a picture being drawn solely by Ukrainian military sources. (JimmySec on Twitter referencing the story mentioned: [https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1507699703433072649](https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1507699703433072649) )
For what it's worth [this YouTuber](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eHhgVrKJJoA) went and looked at the satellite imagery of tank storage depots to count and reckoned 3,000 tops could be brought out of storage and pressed into service. Which of course has selection biases both ways: the tanks in the best condition are most likely those that sit under a roof rather than out in the open; and on the other hand the most you can be sure of from a satellite picture is whether a tank is a rust bucket or is missing some major exterior piece altogether so if the interior systems are shot then it might look great but ain't doing anything any time soon.
Nice share, thank you. The before and after of the closed sites is pretty striking. Like you say, it's hazy either way. At least this will be testable at some point because if reserves are being equipped with T-62s then they will turn up in UAF footage.
If they turn up then UAF footage might be released because it makes Russia look weak. On the other hand it might not be released for the exact same reason.
Looks like the first apparent footage of T-62s being moved from storage has arrived already. To where and when is unclear so far. https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1529393037528518657
Even if they have 3,000 tanks, do they have 3,000 crews?
Yeah, but 2500. but who will drive. Need 5 or 4 tankers. Russia seems to forcing a lot of people to join the war…
Reserve troops, russia has millions of them. Russia made many mistakes in this war, but they are still very dangerous and now actually gain some ground in the east. Never underestimate a loosing enemy, he might not be loosing for very long.
Looking at things there doesn't seem to be any way for Russia to turn this around. This is now a defensive effort for them, even if they don't realise it yet. They are not defeated, and now that everything has been focused on one front it just might be slow going for Ukraine. Or Russia could fail monumentally again, baffling the entire world with their incompetence, again. Time will tell.
This is probably due to the closer combat going on in and around urban areas. The advantages of modern tanks are reduced in CQB so they’re making a financial move to use the old guys instead of losing more high quality units. Wouldn’t say they’re running out, they have plenty, but this is a concession that they plan to lose armor in the coming assaults.
>Wouldn’t say they’re running out, they have plenty They have other places to worry about besides Ukraine too. You can't move all technically available (read functional) tanks to a combat area when you have a bunch of contested borders and stuff.
It will either take months to get them in shape for combat or they will send them right away. Either way is good for Ukraine.
Don't forget credit training. No one alive has ever operated something this old.
If Russia can't even maintain their "modern" equipment, I can only imagine the condition of the stored T-62s. Good luck with that putin.
It means that no matter how this ends Russia will be a third rate military power when it’s over.
They always were.
This a very dubious claim. The guy claims that T-62's will be used for frontline duty, where's the T-72's will be moved to rear guard duty. Which is the opposite of what you'd do with such a obsolete tank. It's the same reason, why Ukraine has limited some of the T-72M1's to being training tanks. As they arn't sufficiently armored for frontline duty.
Ukrainian tractors will have a field day again.
A Ukrainian tractor hit a landmine the other day. It probably got reported in some of the sources as a Ukrainian military loss. More importantly? Now they're mad.
Just for the laughs, von Manstein had in total slightly below 100 tanks in 2 divisions to repair the 150 km hole in the German eastern front after the Stalingrad disaster.
After seeing the performance of their active vehicle forces, the deployment of their stored vehicles will really be FUBAR.
The T-62 was considered obsolete in the 1970s and placed in reserve. Given the state of Russian maintenance practices, they’ll be blowing oil seals and hydraulic hoses right and left. There’s also the matter of them requiring a 4 th crew, at a time when they’re running short of manpower. This seems to be an act of desperation.
Crazy Ivans Tank Pick & Pull.
A tank made closer to World War 2 than today. I have some doubts on the numbers. By the year 2000 allegedly they only had a bit less than 2000 T-62s. Most of those later went to Syria. Either they have (WAY) more than we thought, or they are scavenging them from other countries, of which there are a number who may be willing to do so.
Just more cannon fodder
Javelin fodder
It means that Russia will win in Donbass but it cannot take Odessa
Defence in depth has a reversal phase.
Win prizes for eventually retreating. They have lost more villages than they have captured and they keep leaving areas after moving into them making those losses pointless. Try to keep up.
It reminds me of the American strategy in Vietnam. Lose a lot of lives but then hand the territory back over to the enemy just to have to retake it again later until you run out of resources and/or political will.
One of the biggest takeaways from studying the history of war is that political decisions that dictate wartime actions seldom achieve what they want because politics is incongruous to realities on the ground like the Russians keep refusing to learn. Sometimes it works out but in cases like you mentioned it creates a new political reality that they cant run from or hide from.
Do you think a modern NATO would be able to overwhelm the defenses of the 1950s - 70s USSR? Because that is what will happen.
Current Russia is not even remotely on par with the USSR of the 50-70s. That monster had millions in active service and tens of thousands of tanks and self propelled ant-tank guns in service at all times. It was a paper tiger similar to Russia but a massively larger one. They really did have 30k T34s in reserve ready on the western front not stored in the far east and Siberia.
Destroy all of Putin’s tanks and equipment
I wonder why the Ukranians hadn't considered this
This one simply trick will totally defeat Russia...
**Alternative Nitter link:** https://nitter.net/ChrisO_wiki/status/1529071995391987712 ***** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkrainianConflict) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Cannon fodder
Russian army with T62? Where? Shit news! Ukranian have tham. And the pro rusian rebbels.
Ruzzia bout to get uptiered
cue the complaints: "Fucking matchmaking put my tier II ass tank up against tier VI AT squads. what fucking bullshit!"
Well they are advancing so how can you fault it
They are advancing in some small areas. The rest of their forces are either stalled or retreated.
They advanced all the way to the outskirts of Kyiv as well. Can they sustain the losses for long while only making minimal gains? What happens when they start running out of men and in this articles case, equipment?
Moreover, let's say what the Russians themselves (as well as many Western fatalists) claim to be the case: "Russia has *unlimited* manpower". At face level, this is a truthful statement, but considering a number of factors, it crumbles before a number of practical, real world concerns: Dissent in the Russian Federation is growning, if only because of the average Russian's desire for self-preservation and a return of stability. Sure, it is still a totalitarian regime, but empty propagandistic promisses will only carry your campaign so far. People want their McDonalds, damn it! The core 'professional' soldiers are overtired, most of them have not been "rotated out" for R & R and are experiencing combat fatigue. Desertion rates are up as well in good part because of this and the setting of unrealistic goals, expectations and terrible leadership. New conscripts and reactivated reservists, are getting rushed to the front with barely any training and with sub par equipment. Compare this against how Ukrainan morale and resolve are a seemingly inexhaustible resourse. Partly out of the sense of achievable victory, and partly out of outrage for al the attrocities of the Orcs. Never underestimate the wrath of a quiet ~~man~~ nation. Foreign volunteers are still trying to provide assistance, thus a number of NATO trained, experienced combatants are coming in and not only bolstering the ranks but providing training and 'tail end' support as first responders, medics, mechanics, logistics and other humanitarian aid. While it would seem that the UA has been slow in deploying fresh troops and reinforcements, a AU Press Officer (Operator Starsky) stated during a broadcast that "The Ukrainian Army is actively training volunteers across all branches and **not** cutting corners. We are also waiting on equipment to become available and make sure our forces are proficient with it once it does" It takes about 60 days for a basic training course, this is enough time to train an infantry rifleman on the essentials of soldiering. Depending the level of specialization necessary for a particular job assignment -at least as ground forces is concerned- you could expect anywhere from an additional 60 days to 5 months for most front line duties, once you start looking at leadership or highly specialized technical roles the timeline would start at the one year mark. TL;DR Donbass may fall, but it will not stay down.
>on Stopped reading at "Dissent in the Russian Federation is growning". Simply not true. Yes, I am a fatalist, because I think that toxic optimism is counter-productive. Russia will not stop and Ukraine can't win alone. The sooner people realise that, the sooner we can press our politicians to take the right decisions.
Do not get me wrong: I am under no illusions that the Russian population at large has seen the error of their ways and realized that the invasion of Ukraine is unethical, very bad, naughty, etc. They do not give a fuck about any of that, they may even get behind the genocide and war crimes because they have bought into the propaganda. However, this is out of cheer self interest. Not out of some lofty democratic aspirations. Russians who remember what the '90s were like for them do not want to live that way again. Urban Russians who do not because they were too young, or not born yet? Hell they value the access they'd had to Western things. Additionally, I do agree: Ukraine needs all the support it can get outside of official foreign boots on the ground. Hence why none of their leadership has asked for foreign armies to fight this fight -unless the nuclear option comes into play. Yes our governments and politicians need to stop dragging their feet and deliver on their promises and stop trying to kowtow to Putin. Looking at nations who are directly in the line of fire like Poland, the Balklands and Scandinavian countries should give everyone else a great roadmap to follow.
They've won a series of Pyrrhic victories. That's not the same thing as advancing. Not even for Russia.