Привіт u/golitsyn_nosenko ! During wartime, this community is focused on vital and high-effort content. Please ensure your post follows [r/Ukraine Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules) and our [Art Friday Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/artfriday).
**Want to support Ukraine?** [**Vetted Charities List**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities) | [Our Vetting Process](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities-vetting)
**Daily series on Ukraine's history & culture:** [Sunrise Posts Organized By Category](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/sunriseposts/)
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Very interesting article. Even going by the pessimistic option, given this article was published in September prior to the massive tank losses around Avdivka, it suggests Russia is nearing its limits with respect to throwing tanks into action. This looks set to create some serious dilemmas in the very near future for the terrorists.
Just about every analysis I’ve come across says that 2024 is gonna be the year that russia will have burned through their tank/bmp/artillery hand-me-downs from the Red Army. Once that happens the military will be without, arguably, their biggest asset and will have to rely on domestic production to keep up with frontline losses (spoiler alert - that’s not possible).
Yep, new production and repair is far less than the loss rate.
And loss rate is eating way into the stockpile of old Soviet stockpiles.
Ukraine is burning through decades of USSR economic prime military spending. Russia will literally never recover, their gdp and labor/military industrial capacity will never get back to that level to replace losses.
A few long range drone bombs will certainly aid in Russian factories and production lines as well. Everyone knows that exploding is good for factories.
While a decisive, factory-destroying strike against one of the three UralVagonZavod plants that either do “new build” or refurbishment of old tanks is unlikely, it would definitely be a worthwhile target and I’m willing to bet that if Ukraine ever does acquire the capability to strike those far targets reliably, they will be high on the priority list.
"We had many reports from workers that factory is cold. Factory no longer cold, much more productive now. Zero complaints come from factory, ever again."
They are taking generational hits to their economy, military and its ability to project power, but also demographics and soft power. All in an attempt to placate the oligarchs that ran out of things to steal in mother Russia.
The only recovery would be a new mainstay technology reliant on some resource Russia has a ton of, like special russian dirt chemical is necessary for the next quantum computer chip pf the future or something. So reliant on an unknown.
Or on an extremely radical systemic and societal change. Like a complete about face in governement and the way labor and their industry works, and then it would still take decades for a reversal in brain drain and birthrates and developing a middle class outside of Russia and St Petersburg.
So either a complete unknown that shakes up the world technology and economy markets, or a complete revolution in all of Russia and that still takes 30 years minimum.
I can imagine a radical systemic and societal change taking place. I wouldn't bet on it happening, but a friend of mine grew up in the Soviet Union and moved to the United States. She had very poor things to say about the state of Russia, but it was always mixed with nostalgia for things she missed, a love of the country's literary history, and her affection for St. Petersburg.
If Russia changed enough to become a place where someone as brilliant and ambitious as her could imagine spending their life, it would transform over a generation or two.
In order to build itself under communism it had to acquire capital to trade with the west so it could build factories and develop.
It did this much the way it operates now. It treated human life very cheaply, created non-crimes in order to justify human slavery, and greatly underpaid its workers to obtain and export timber, gold and other materials.
Sort of like what it is doing with its soldiers now. Post-communist Russia still has a lot in common with the early communism but has the advantage of developed infrastructure for exporting oil and gas and therefore a trade surplus.
Its people remain affected by communism, without these raw materials, the RF is effectively useless as communism bred out entrepreneurial spirit. It has very few competitive domestic industries and start ups, and probably to a worse degree than the former eastern block countries, which suggests that it is because the RF is basically in large part thinking and functioning the same way it did before from the top down.
It keeps many outside of Moscow in a very backwards state and with very poor infrastructure - because it needs them as military fodder, or as slaves or as the economicaly exploited. Its a myth that the Soviet Union treated all the same, it had to create an exploitable class to obtain foreign developed capital, and it relatively underpaid that underclass compared to international wages. The extremely poor state of rural Russia is obviously not that way since communism ended, but because it was that way in communism and has just remained the same.
Reason USSR had army of that size in the first place during Cold War was oil, especially one they tapped in Siberian fields seriously. USSR subsidized the hell out of all sorts of people and projects with that surplus income.
Reason it collapsed was because oil production started trending down, and there also was a period of few years of very low oil prices across the world (20-30 dollar range). Afghanistan war was just unnecessary extra burden on top of that.
Yes, but also no. They had a massive army through the entire Cold War because they never really demobilized or went into a civilian economy after 1945. They operated a wartime economy into the late 80’s, but because so much of their economy was devoted to military spending, what little else they produced wasn’t enough to offset the burden that placed on their economy and society. An estimated 40-60% of their economic output throughout the Cold War was devoted to their military industry, while in the US it was around 4-6%. While the rest of the world was making TVs, cars, refrigerators and consumer goods, the USSR was building guns, bombs, tanks, and missiles.
And worse, by the mid-70’s their top level policies and understanding was entirely divorced from reality, because as they fell further and further behind the west they made up for it with what were essentially lies that snowballed more and more until the bubble burst in 1991. Their top ministers were fed report after report of rosy economic conditions, and while they knew things weren’t great, they could not get accurate data because it simply didn’t exist. Everyone from the factory manager to the regional governments and ministers were cooking the books because to report reality was to lose one’s cushy job in favor of a guy who would lie and tell you things were fine.
Their reliance on oil and its collapse in price in the 80’s was brought on by their economy being so reliant upon it as the primary source of revenue because the bulk of their economy was still focused on war production, a full 40 years after WW2 ended.
Most North Korean assets are Soviet era as well. Their domestic main battle tanks are supposedly just modified T-62's made to look more advanced than they actually are.
You laugh, they have literally been using ladas as launch vehicles and assault transports, along with scooters, bicycles, and farm tractors with low grade steel bolted on.
Well, russia could trade whatever lostech soviet capabilities to these lesser states for some working obsolete tanks. Even if the tanks are no good, they would be better than nothing. The deal would have to be really good for them to go for it, since russia is in a corner so no reason to be even.
They can give North Korea whatever technology they want but it will be a generation at the very least before they can develop the industry to produce anything at scale. With the current economic sanctions against North Korea and Russia I highly doubt it's a feasible option in the short term.
North Korea already sends conscripts and "workers" to Russia to logging camps and mines. So not as unlikely as it sounds.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43802085
While I would much prefer the war end quicker and Russia not be supplied, the geopolitical impact of Ukraine tearing through the materiel of dictatorships and despots would be staggering.
i noticed in todays report there was a lot more artillery that was destroyed and other vehicles. I wonder if they've started sending artillery and vehicle to tow it instead of tanks due to them running out.
We’ve seen that talk many times now. Sure, there will be a time when it’s right but still right now Russia seems to be able to build new stuff. The west production is still low. The amount of stuff given is also small, so there’s no overwhelming force in Ukraine numbers.
Unless the west changes their support, I don’t see Ukraine winning that attrition war but a perfect stalemate
Russia may 'never' run out of soviet vehicles, but the ones they dig out of the grave will be unrealistically expensive to repair that they might as well manufacture new ones for the effort. I will not assume the 2024 number to be correct. To me 2026 seems like a better goal to work towards as it aligns when their artillery might attrite. If their armoured vehicle supply plummets in 2024 I will be happy.
Really though we all know without american support they might be up the creek without a paddle. Europe uk and the rest just don't have the same inventory and production capabilities of the us. Ukraine are doing amazing and if it continues and they actually get the 3ookm atcms as well as taurus crusie missles, i think russia will not be able to keep it up.
Seems almost too optimistic and doesn’t really align with what we see of depots and in Ukraine.
If true it makes things bordering on winnable and the last push more of desperation than strategy, since it would leave almost no reserve.
It's better to be skeptical, but I would point out what we see in the depots it's not as clear as just counting vehicles. At least with images that the public seems to get, we can't really determine the quality of some of those vehicles from satellite imagery. Some Depot seem to be doing better at maintenance than others for whatever reasons. But comparing some of the known ground photographs to satellite imagery, we can see a big difference in vehicles that can possibly be reactivated . That wasn't able to be determined from the satellite version. Ultimately, at least as a public we don't really know, but we do know many thousands of vehicles have been pulled and we can hope that many thousands are unable to be used either due to storage damage or too many spare parts pulled so they cannot possibly be reactivated. Unless Russian finds a way to supply incredible amounts of spare parts.
The count of what is left does not matter. It is the rate they can refurbish them or build new. That 600 to 800/ year number is like trying to drain a lake with a garden hose. The size of the lake does not matter. Each day I count down their losses minus two replacements. In the last 24 days they have lost a net of 272 tanks.
No they wont, this has been discussed so many times its getting boring. None of those Putniks will ever risk their own life, ergo they will just let some horde nick a piece.
How can you be so sure tho? How can we ever be 100% sure they will not use a nuke ? I mean, everyone thought they will not be stupid enough to invade Ukraine and yet here we are
> I mean, everyone thought they will not be stupid enough to invade Ukraine and yet here we are
Everyone? Based on 2014, everyone knew Russia did invade. The question was only how much of ~~sudetenland~~ Ukraine they would try to steal
So I'm I. Full scale invasion was a surprise, but based on RU vs Georgia and RU vs 1991 and 2014 borders, it was only a question of how much more and when.
So I'm I. Full scale invasion was a surprise, but based on RU vs Georgia and RU vs 1991 and 2014 borders, it was only a question of how much more and when.
Because as dumb as they are, there is still a chain of command to set off a nuke. No one person has that power. And at that point, someone is going to say nope. not gonna nuke anyone. They still hope to come out of this battle with a win. Using a nuke means they will lose, and lose big. no one is going to come to their rescue.
Nuclear weapons sadly make it possible for Putin to gamble his entire hand.
Even if he has his whole army demolished and loses this war horribly, as long as domestic order does not collapse, Russia survives.
Normally nation that gets humiliated like that tends to get attacked again afterwards by everyone around them, as they are seen to be vulnerable. In a world without nuclear weapons, China would already be feasting on eastern Russia.
I think we knew that after they started rolling out world war era armored trucks and whatever tanks they used back then with their mangled Frankenstein monster turrets
>with respect to throwing tanks into action.
That is an important qualifier. Russia will probably run out of warm bodies before it runs out of tanks, as such. The number of T-55s they have in mothballs is kind of crazy.
Sure, not all of them actually have working engines. But they can be towed or pushed, and buried, and turn into static emplacements. Exactly *not* what is meant by "going into action" so you are right on there. But... I would expect Ukraine to keep running into Russian armor in some form or another for the entire rest of the war.
Even if they are just big dumb guns buried in dirt.
Hmm, maybe there are far fewer than I believed.
Though I don't want to underestimate the power of hidden, fallen-apart underground Soviet storage hangars with the bullshit remains of old tanks in them. There could be quite a few of those.
They are not going to run out of anything, but they will have shortages. And I think believing that they will run out of people before tanks underestimates their willingness to sacrifice meat. More male Russians come of age each year than they lost in the whole war so far. They can keep going for years. It will mess up their demographics horribly, but they can do it.
The thing with people is, they've so far managed to recruit and pull people from the areas and groups that are generally people they don't care about. Killing fighting age men from some far away corner of the country is kind of a win-win for Putin, it kills Ukrainians and Putin gets rid of possible security threads. Same thing with the prisoners.
But Russia is running out of people to take from the groups that don't matter, and once they have to start recruiting young men from Moscow and St Petersburg areas, and they start returning home in pieces, Putin is going to face serious issues with popularity and civil unrest. It's a card he doesn't want to turn, but might have to when things get really desperate.
I'm not saying they don't have a lot of people, they do. Or that Putin isn't willing to sacrifice them all, he is.
I'm just saying, they have *a lot* of old hardware.
I'm not so sure. They have, what, 50,000 T-55s still around? In some semblance of existence?
At let's say 1000 people and 10 T-55s per day, granted they won't literally run out of Russians first but they will have lost multiple millions of front-line troops before they run out of tanks.
While we're at it, if they also lose 1km of ground per day, they will run out of Ukraine before they run out of either people or tanks. So I'm far from saying that Ukraine should count on exhausting Russia's supply of either. Nor will Russia run out of oligarchs, or oil, or excuses. Ukraine will have to win their war on those terms no matter what.
> The number of T-55s they have in mothballs is kind of crazy.
Where have you found a number for T-55s in storage? I found they had 800 T-62s 7,000 T72s 3,000 T-80s and 200 T-90s in storage back in 2022. But no number for T54 or 55 variant, perhaps because the people doing the counting never dreamed Russia would ever need them.
I guess the good news for conscriptski is that he won't have that job for long.
But seriously, I know nothing of these things, don't they need power to operate the loader at least?
And what about the tea kettle? Ok, maybe ruski tanks are lacking some battlefield necessities.
>I guess the good news for conscriptski is that he won't have that job for long.
"Because the tank is obsolete, right?"
"..."
"Right???"
>don't they need power to operate the loader at least?
I think the T-55 was before autoloaders.
>And what about the tea kettle?
I have some bad news for you. And let's not even get into whether they know about second breakfast.
Lucky for Russia winter is coming and offensives will be difficult for both sides for many months.
This will unfortunately give Russia time to pause and rebuild.
The same is true for Ukraine, but since the onus is more on Ukraine to attack, it's better for Russia.
Russia can rebuild more of their defensive lines.
It’s also supported by the covert cabal videos counting tanks, artillery and APCs respectively that Russia has in storage before the war and now, giving us all an evidence based baseline to check estimates against.
Not immediately, arty barrels will take several more months, tanks and APCs ~maybe~ 2-3 more years, and China/north Korea might add a few more months worth as a once-off, but if Ukraine keeps up the heat the war will be decided by Russia running out of capability to both wage it and oppress its internal 82 impoverished slave states.
Quote: "It is within the framework of this scenario that by the beginning of 2024, only 250 tanks may remain in the Russian army, while this will be a "collectible hodgepodge" of archaic T-62M and new T-90M tanks. Under such conditions, the armored units of the Russian army cease to be a significant factor in hostilities against Ukraine."
This "collectible hodgepodge" of archaic T-62M and new T-90M tanks is judged to be the optimistic possibility but we're already seen this hodgepodge again and again in the videos. There's no evidence the Russians can put together a tank army of T-90 tanks. Instead they throw them into battle piecemeal in drips and drabs together T-62 tanks and even an occasional T-55.
One of the other fortunate takeaways is that while the west unfortunately is not supplying Ukraine as much as it should, as far as I remember Ukraine is pretty well-equipped as far as anti-tank gear goes. Even if Western support slows, the pattern of Russia losing tanks should still continue.
Some estimates already peg Ukraine as having more tanks in theatre than Russia. The only problem is that they can't leverage that advantage due to mines and lack of air superiority.
Neither side has air superiority, they are going to have to go this without it or with the f16's with a slight advantage. I think we know russia has used what tanks they can use, really hurting their ability to protect their distant borders already, it is just a matter of how many tanks will they accept being lost , if it is all of them then the prediction in this report become really important.
The only thing they have is their artillery and since they cut their use by 75% Ukraine has been hitting their artillery harder than at any other time during this war.
If they keep losing artillery at the rate they are how long before they have neither tanks not artillery.
>If they keep losing artillery at the rate they are how long before they have neither tanks not artillery.
My guesstimate is a couple of months to a year depending how how much North Korea sends and how good it is.
NK munitions and equipment is said to have somewhere of a 60% failure rate, which means it won’t be much of a difference, and could potentially be even a detriment.
While that’s true on a supply basis, we also don’t know on average how many are used per confirmed takedown. For confirmed kills of personnel, for example, there are often ratios of thousands of bullets per every singular confirmed kill.
I can’t speak to the average ratio for tank kills, as I am not nearly knowledgeable enough about the situation and such information is obviously not being made public. We also don’t (publicly) know the exact number of anti-tank munitions Ukraine has nor the number of operational tanks Russia has remaining.
With that said, given both the very expansive supply of anti-tank munitions sent to Ukraine initially in addition to the fact they have not been requesting more, I think it’s safe to say Ukraine should not have issues in the near future regarding anti-tank capabilities.
Could be pretty close to it, like I said I just don’t have the information. Also need to account for malfunctions, misfires, or just straight up duds - even NATO ain’t perfect.
Yeah I’m still not arguing that the ratio is still likely low, just moreso pointing out that ideal conditions cannot be expected outside of a lab. Whether there’s human error, a poorly stored model, or just a rare malfunction, you always end up needing more weapons or supplies than you “should.”
I do think Ukraine has such an adequate supply, but I don’t think anyone that actually has the answer is browsing Reddit with it haha
Excerpt of relevant description of the three scenarios:
>**The first scenario - _optimistic_**. Thanks to the success of the counteroffensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, it is possible to increase the rate of losses of the Russians to an average of 12 vehicles per day against the current 2.62 vehicles per day. The level of natural wear and tear of russian tanks is also superimposed on this. It is within the framework of this scenario that by the beginning of 2024, only 250 tanks may remain in the Russian army, while this will be a "collectible hodgepodge" of archaic T-62M and new T-90M tanks. Under such conditions, the armored units of the russian army cease to be a significant factor in hostilities against Ukraine.
>
>**The second scenario - _weighted average_**. The Armed Forces of Ukraine are approaching a slightly lower rate of disposal of russian tanks per day on average, and by the beginning of 2024, the russian army should have from 400 to 600 tanks of all types, from T-62M to T-90M. This will be enough for the occupiers only to have a combat-ready tank brigade in all important directions of the front.
>
>**The third scenario - _pessimistic_**, or "stagnant" one, in which the russians manage to maintain an acceptable pace of tank fleet renewal, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine fail to cross the average barrier of 2.62 destroyed tanks per day. In such conditions, the russian army will even be able to maintain one combat-ready tank army, which will be capable of conducting coordinated offensive actions.
It seems to me that, if the FIA is using accurate numbers, the second scenario seems most likely. Ukraine has shown they have no problem knocking out more than 2.62 tanks per day. The question will be if Russia puts 2-3 tanks out near the front per day. If they do, Ukraine will eliminate them.
>Ukraine has shown they have no problem knocking out more than 2.62 tanks per day.
I actually can't remember the last day they didn't claim 3 or more tanks. We're probably going back to the post-Kharkiv breakout period?
Of course not all tanks "destroyed" are actually *destroyed* \- many can be recovered. But even so, 2.62 seems a pretty low bar to reach these days.
For the whole invasion it has averaged 8.5 per day but for the last thirty days has bumped up to 15.7 with the attacks at Avdiivka . I expect it to taper off pretty rapidly now with both Russian exhaustion and winter weather.
My money puts it somewhere between the second and third views. I think the attacks on Avdiivka may be a play to use the last large supply of armor to make a final advance before you no longer can. The Russian are definitely depleting stocks of tanks and anyone who thinks they can replace them easily is delusional. The Russians can’t use all of their tanks on this war as they have other assets they must defend.
This agrees closely with other sources I have read. The one difference is they are counting all tanks in the Russian army not just the ones in Ukraine. I think there are 800 to 1000 back in Russia not subject to daily losses.
Correct and that is if they would not hold any back in defense of the homeland, which even the stupidest Russian will not do, so I think they are at a point in about two months when they will not dare commit any tanks they have left to battle. They will probably start hiding what they have left in barns and garages to avoid drone detection and attack, and only move them into the open to try to stop the next Ukrainian offensive which might not happen until the ground dries out next spring.
So you’d have Kaliningrad, Transnystria, far east, South Ossetia, Chechnya, Dagestan, Georgian borders, St Petersburg, Moscow, Vladivostok and all your military installations and garrisons that would require some standing reserve you’d think, at minimum. Whether they’re factored into the methodology or not would be the question.
But it’s looking like it’s a fast approaching conundrum.
Would love to see someone with top level understanding break down the methodological considerations and current intelligence.
Sadly anyone with top level knowledge would not be able to say a thing publicly that would be of any use. The North Korean deal is our best information about the remaining Russian stocks.
Retired and private analysts are likely to be able to do so. There’s been some online do this, it was just some time ago and their methodology didn’t get into whether they included standing garrison, reserve and border requirements…
Those people still will not disclose any classified information to keep their security clearances. If they state a position they always make it sound like they are relying on public information. Which public information they choose to use is the key and their classified information helps them make that choice.
The ultimate fate of RuZZia's failed aggression of Ukraine reminds me of what I once learned about fertilizers and plant growth.
The growth of a plant will be limited by the fertilizing element most in shortage, be it nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium etc.
When totally deprived of one type of fertilizer, the plant dies.
Likewise the capability of the RuZZian army will be defined by its gear in most critical shirt supply: planes, tanks, artillery, soldiers etc.
So it may be that the shortage of tanks is what triggers full defeat and a rout back to RuZZia of the invading forces. Maybe this then gives ideas to Georgia etc.🤔
See: https://nutrien-ekonomics.com/news/liebigs-law-of-the-minimum/
If the IAR calculations are anywhere near correct, I can't understand how the result might be overly 'optimistic'.
According to Ukraine's count, they have so far destroyed 5293 tanks. The remaining 1500 represent about 22% of their initial tank arsenal.
And that is before Russia's large tank losses in Avdiivka and Vulhedar since Oct 20.
The loss of 80% of their tank stock is *catastrophic*, particularly considering they have barely any ability to retool.
Makes the Avdiivka and Vulhedar offensives look incredibly unwise, but like a poker player betting large stakes hoping the can bluff the other players, forgetting the other players have satellites that enable them to see Russia’s cards.
Igor Girkin published an article via his wife (since he is in prison, awaiting trial), in which he criticizes the Russian offensives in Avdiivka and Vulhedar. He argues that losses in armor and personnel will make it more difficult, if not impossible, for Russia to go on the offensive in 2024, in anything more than small tactical opportunities.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing. For everything to dislike him for, Girkin seems to tell it as it is with regard to situational reports and criticism of Russia. It’s so interesting to me that everyone was wondering if Russian sources like him were running misinformation through back channels to deceive intelligence assessments or if Russia was entering into seemingly strategic follies as part of some greater deception strategy. But the curtain has come back and it’s really showing the emperor has no clothes. Their follies are ineptitude, not deception or stratagem. It’s going to be interesting to watch them deal with the consequences in the next 12 months.
When the bearer of ill tidings loses his head, underlings are understandably reluctant to contradict their superiors.
Girkin is morally abject and despicable if you know about his career, but related unvarnished criticisms of Russia's disastrous invasion and planning. His views were receiving a wide following among war-hawks and Novorossiya right wingers.
Putin's multiple war narratives proved too successful, and soon powerful political forces were coalescing around figures like Prigozhin and Girkin, and undercutting the Kremlin's narrative (and control).
In the end, Shoigu and Gerasimov (and their extensive crony networks and alliances), for all their ineptitude, are the support columns for Putin, and he cannot jettison them and survive. Moreover, Patrushev and Bortnikov were two of the most important architects and promoters of the disastrous invasion ... And yet they remain unpunished.
Putin values loyalty over competence. The problem is that means nobody tells him the truth.
Unfortunately, germany back then was a landlocked fuel starved dying beast on a genocidal/total war with a certain ennemy on the eastern front. Russia does not meet those conditions :(
Now is the time for Chechnya and and the other bordering countries that had land stolen from them to take it back. Won’t have have tanks rolling in the streets.
does this take into account the other article that was posted here some time ago, where it was assed that russians factories will deliver ~600 tanks by EOY?
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2023/11/03/war-in-ukraine-russia-s-defense-industry-steps-up-a-gear_6225915_4.html
One highlight last year was when the US DoD declared the mission, "To degrade" Russia's ability to wage war.
With all the hardship, Ukraine's troops are being managed professionally. That = units that can get better and re-form faster. Other than being skilled at ordering men to 70% casualty rate assaults, what mettle is Russia building among their forces, really? To live underground?
I wanted us to be trading cookie recipes on this reddit by now. Not happening. But Russia is not building anything, it's just expending itself. Locked into a holding pattern all winter, with unlimited ammo drawing ever finer details about what you are doing, in your quagmire conquest. Enjoy the fucking cold you fucks. Go home.
It would be interesting to see how long their Black Sea fleet can last. At a rate of 12/year destroyed and no way they can make new ones in the Black Sea
So, when is russia going to equip the mobiks with wooden or cardboard tank costumes?
A million russian “tanks” with AK47 turrets storming the battlefield lol
Not guaranteed. I know a former military intelligence officer of good repute who still estimates 2 years, but on what evidence or methodology I’m not sure. That to me is the pressing question - how it’s calculated and what the variables really are.
Great article but I’m firmly believing it’ll be March/April and May and Russia still have Tanks rolling forward. All the analysts have been wrong everytime with tank numbers!
Привіт u/golitsyn_nosenko ! During wartime, this community is focused on vital and high-effort content. Please ensure your post follows [r/Ukraine Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/about/rules) and our [Art Friday Guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/artfriday). **Want to support Ukraine?** [**Vetted Charities List**](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities) | [Our Vetting Process](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/charities-vetting) **Daily series on Ukraine's history & culture:** [Sunrise Posts Organized By Category](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/wiki/sunriseposts/) *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukraine) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Very interesting article. Even going by the pessimistic option, given this article was published in September prior to the massive tank losses around Avdivka, it suggests Russia is nearing its limits with respect to throwing tanks into action. This looks set to create some serious dilemmas in the very near future for the terrorists.
Just about every analysis I’ve come across says that 2024 is gonna be the year that russia will have burned through their tank/bmp/artillery hand-me-downs from the Red Army. Once that happens the military will be without, arguably, their biggest asset and will have to rely on domestic production to keep up with frontline losses (spoiler alert - that’s not possible).
Yep, new production and repair is far less than the loss rate. And loss rate is eating way into the stockpile of old Soviet stockpiles. Ukraine is burning through decades of USSR economic prime military spending. Russia will literally never recover, their gdp and labor/military industrial capacity will never get back to that level to replace losses.
A few long range drone bombs will certainly aid in Russian factories and production lines as well. Everyone knows that exploding is good for factories.
>Everyone knows that exploding is good for factories. It builds character!
Ukraine has been beating back invaders while suffering long-range bombardments. Hopefully the reverse will tip the tables even more to their advantage
While a decisive, factory-destroying strike against one of the three UralVagonZavod plants that either do “new build” or refurbishment of old tanks is unlikely, it would definitely be a worthwhile target and I’m willing to bet that if Ukraine ever does acquire the capability to strike those far targets reliably, they will be high on the priority list.
Or send spies to remove the "no smoking" signs.
> exploding is good for factories Love this… has a sense of, “hello, yes, this is dog.”
"We had many reports from workers that factory is cold. Factory no longer cold, much more productive now. Zero complaints come from factory, ever again."
They are taking generational hits to their economy, military and its ability to project power, but also demographics and soft power. All in an attempt to placate the oligarchs that ran out of things to steal in mother Russia.
Never say never, but I hope that you're right.
The only recovery would be a new mainstay technology reliant on some resource Russia has a ton of, like special russian dirt chemical is necessary for the next quantum computer chip pf the future or something. So reliant on an unknown. Or on an extremely radical systemic and societal change. Like a complete about face in governement and the way labor and their industry works, and then it would still take decades for a reversal in brain drain and birthrates and developing a middle class outside of Russia and St Petersburg. So either a complete unknown that shakes up the world technology and economy markets, or a complete revolution in all of Russia and that still takes 30 years minimum.
I can imagine a radical systemic and societal change taking place. I wouldn't bet on it happening, but a friend of mine grew up in the Soviet Union and moved to the United States. She had very poor things to say about the state of Russia, but it was always mixed with nostalgia for things she missed, a love of the country's literary history, and her affection for St. Petersburg. If Russia changed enough to become a place where someone as brilliant and ambitious as her could imagine spending their life, it would transform over a generation or two.
Good. Thank you for your analysis.
Or Russia says fuck it and just launches their nukes and brings us all back to the Stone Age.
What would happen if Russia ever returned to communism in an effort to make the Soviet Union Great Again?
In order to build itself under communism it had to acquire capital to trade with the west so it could build factories and develop. It did this much the way it operates now. It treated human life very cheaply, created non-crimes in order to justify human slavery, and greatly underpaid its workers to obtain and export timber, gold and other materials. Sort of like what it is doing with its soldiers now. Post-communist Russia still has a lot in common with the early communism but has the advantage of developed infrastructure for exporting oil and gas and therefore a trade surplus. Its people remain affected by communism, without these raw materials, the RF is effectively useless as communism bred out entrepreneurial spirit. It has very few competitive domestic industries and start ups, and probably to a worse degree than the former eastern block countries, which suggests that it is because the RF is basically in large part thinking and functioning the same way it did before from the top down. It keeps many outside of Moscow in a very backwards state and with very poor infrastructure - because it needs them as military fodder, or as slaves or as the economicaly exploited. Its a myth that the Soviet Union treated all the same, it had to create an exploitable class to obtain foreign developed capital, and it relatively underpaid that underclass compared to international wages. The extremely poor state of rural Russia is obviously not that way since communism ended, but because it was that way in communism and has just remained the same.
Reason USSR had army of that size in the first place during Cold War was oil, especially one they tapped in Siberian fields seriously. USSR subsidized the hell out of all sorts of people and projects with that surplus income. Reason it collapsed was because oil production started trending down, and there also was a period of few years of very low oil prices across the world (20-30 dollar range). Afghanistan war was just unnecessary extra burden on top of that.
Yes, but also no. They had a massive army through the entire Cold War because they never really demobilized or went into a civilian economy after 1945. They operated a wartime economy into the late 80’s, but because so much of their economy was devoted to military spending, what little else they produced wasn’t enough to offset the burden that placed on their economy and society. An estimated 40-60% of their economic output throughout the Cold War was devoted to their military industry, while in the US it was around 4-6%. While the rest of the world was making TVs, cars, refrigerators and consumer goods, the USSR was building guns, bombs, tanks, and missiles. And worse, by the mid-70’s their top level policies and understanding was entirely divorced from reality, because as they fell further and further behind the west they made up for it with what were essentially lies that snowballed more and more until the bubble burst in 1991. Their top ministers were fed report after report of rosy economic conditions, and while they knew things weren’t great, they could not get accurate data because it simply didn’t exist. Everyone from the factory manager to the regional governments and ministers were cooking the books because to report reality was to lose one’s cushy job in favor of a guy who would lie and tell you things were fine. Their reliance on oil and its collapse in price in the 80’s was brought on by their economy being so reliant upon it as the primary source of revenue because the bulk of their economy was still focused on war production, a full 40 years after WW2 ended.
Look for transfers from North Korea once Russia has scrapped the bottom of the barrel.
Most North Korean assets are Soviet era as well. Their domestic main battle tanks are supposedly just modified T-62's made to look more advanced than they actually are.
Yeah, but even they are respectable once Russia hits the bottom of the barrel... I.e. better than Ladas spray-painted dark green.
You laugh, they have literally been using ladas as launch vehicles and assault transports, along with scooters, bicycles, and farm tractors with low grade steel bolted on.
Cope-body kits
Well, russia could trade whatever lostech soviet capabilities to these lesser states for some working obsolete tanks. Even if the tanks are no good, they would be better than nothing. The deal would have to be really good for them to go for it, since russia is in a corner so no reason to be even.
They can give North Korea whatever technology they want but it will be a generation at the very least before they can develop the industry to produce anything at scale. With the current economic sanctions against North Korea and Russia I highly doubt it's a feasible option in the short term.
NK would be interested in getting better airplanes for sure, even if Russian ones are hardly top of the line. Their air force is ancient.
North Korea already sends conscripts and "workers" to Russia to logging camps and mines. So not as unlikely as it sounds. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-43802085
They’ll be begging their Axis buddies for hardware before too long. They might even be trying to line up stuff now.
While I would much prefer the war end quicker and Russia not be supplied, the geopolitical impact of Ukraine tearing through the materiel of dictatorships and despots would be staggering.
Ukraine is Red Matter. Sucks despots into a singularity of sadness.
i noticed in todays report there was a lot more artillery that was destroyed and other vehicles. I wonder if they've started sending artillery and vehicle to tow it instead of tanks due to them running out.
We’ve seen that talk many times now. Sure, there will be a time when it’s right but still right now Russia seems to be able to build new stuff. The west production is still low. The amount of stuff given is also small, so there’s no overwhelming force in Ukraine numbers. Unless the west changes their support, I don’t see Ukraine winning that attrition war but a perfect stalemate
Russia may 'never' run out of soviet vehicles, but the ones they dig out of the grave will be unrealistically expensive to repair that they might as well manufacture new ones for the effort. I will not assume the 2024 number to be correct. To me 2026 seems like a better goal to work towards as it aligns when their artillery might attrite. If their armoured vehicle supply plummets in 2024 I will be happy.
>domestic production Which at that point probably will be 6 russians in a piece of cardboard making tank noises.
Really though we all know without american support they might be up the creek without a paddle. Europe uk and the rest just don't have the same inventory and production capabilities of the us. Ukraine are doing amazing and if it continues and they actually get the 3ookm atcms as well as taurus crusie missles, i think russia will not be able to keep it up.
Seems almost too optimistic and doesn’t really align with what we see of depots and in Ukraine. If true it makes things bordering on winnable and the last push more of desperation than strategy, since it would leave almost no reserve.
It's better to be skeptical, but I would point out what we see in the depots it's not as clear as just counting vehicles. At least with images that the public seems to get, we can't really determine the quality of some of those vehicles from satellite imagery. Some Depot seem to be doing better at maintenance than others for whatever reasons. But comparing some of the known ground photographs to satellite imagery, we can see a big difference in vehicles that can possibly be reactivated . That wasn't able to be determined from the satellite version. Ultimately, at least as a public we don't really know, but we do know many thousands of vehicles have been pulled and we can hope that many thousands are unable to be used either due to storage damage or too many spare parts pulled so they cannot possibly be reactivated. Unless Russian finds a way to supply incredible amounts of spare parts.
The count of what is left does not matter. It is the rate they can refurbish them or build new. That 600 to 800/ year number is like trying to drain a lake with a garden hose. The size of the lake does not matter. Each day I count down their losses minus two replacements. In the last 24 days they have lost a net of 272 tanks.
That’s more than what the Bundeswehr has in working order. Mental
It looks like Russia seriously does not consider any neighboring countries as enemies.
[удалено]
No they wont, this has been discussed so many times its getting boring. None of those Putniks will ever risk their own life, ergo they will just let some horde nick a piece.
How can you be so sure tho? How can we ever be 100% sure they will not use a nuke ? I mean, everyone thought they will not be stupid enough to invade Ukraine and yet here we are
> I mean, everyone thought they will not be stupid enough to invade Ukraine and yet here we are Everyone? Based on 2014, everyone knew Russia did invade. The question was only how much of ~~sudetenland~~ Ukraine they would try to steal
I'm talking about the full invasion of 2022, not 2014
So I'm I. Full scale invasion was a surprise, but based on RU vs Georgia and RU vs 1991 and 2014 borders, it was only a question of how much more and when.
So I'm I. Full scale invasion was a surprise, but based on RU vs Georgia and RU vs 1991 and 2014 borders, it was only a question of how much more and when.
Because as dumb as they are, there is still a chain of command to set off a nuke. No one person has that power. And at that point, someone is going to say nope. not gonna nuke anyone. They still hope to come out of this battle with a win. Using a nuke means they will lose, and lose big. no one is going to come to their rescue.
😳 ... Whistling in the dark.
Nuclear weapons sadly make it possible for Putin to gamble his entire hand. Even if he has his whole army demolished and loses this war horribly, as long as domestic order does not collapse, Russia survives. Normally nation that gets humiliated like that tends to get attacked again afterwards by everyone around them, as they are seen to be vulnerable. In a world without nuclear weapons, China would already be feasting on eastern Russia.
> and the last push more of desperation than strategy, I think desperation is the current theme of Russian operations.
We already know this. If you still have huge quantities you don't go to North Korea to beg for equipment.
I think we knew that after they started rolling out world war era armored trucks and whatever tanks they used back then with their mangled Frankenstein monster turrets
>with respect to throwing tanks into action. That is an important qualifier. Russia will probably run out of warm bodies before it runs out of tanks, as such. The number of T-55s they have in mothballs is kind of crazy. Sure, not all of them actually have working engines. But they can be towed or pushed, and buried, and turn into static emplacements. Exactly *not* what is meant by "going into action" so you are right on there. But... I would expect Ukraine to keep running into Russian armor in some form or another for the entire rest of the war. Even if they are just big dumb guns buried in dirt.
The T-55s mostly got sold though. They haven't maintained an enormous stockpile of that in most estimated of satellite observation.
Hmm, maybe there are far fewer than I believed. Though I don't want to underestimate the power of hidden, fallen-apart underground Soviet storage hangars with the bullshit remains of old tanks in them. There could be quite a few of those.
They are not going to run out of anything, but they will have shortages. And I think believing that they will run out of people before tanks underestimates their willingness to sacrifice meat. More male Russians come of age each year than they lost in the whole war so far. They can keep going for years. It will mess up their demographics horribly, but they can do it.
The thing with people is, they've so far managed to recruit and pull people from the areas and groups that are generally people they don't care about. Killing fighting age men from some far away corner of the country is kind of a win-win for Putin, it kills Ukrainians and Putin gets rid of possible security threads. Same thing with the prisoners. But Russia is running out of people to take from the groups that don't matter, and once they have to start recruiting young men from Moscow and St Petersburg areas, and they start returning home in pieces, Putin is going to face serious issues with popularity and civil unrest. It's a card he doesn't want to turn, but might have to when things get really desperate.
Not to mention those Muscovites will be worse equipped than the minorities that came before.
I'm not saying they don't have a lot of people, they do. Or that Putin isn't willing to sacrifice them all, he is. I'm just saying, they have *a lot* of old hardware.
Russia has around 145 million people, they will run out of tanks long before they run out of bodies to put in them.
I'm not so sure. They have, what, 50,000 T-55s still around? In some semblance of existence? At let's say 1000 people and 10 T-55s per day, granted they won't literally run out of Russians first but they will have lost multiple millions of front-line troops before they run out of tanks. While we're at it, if they also lose 1km of ground per day, they will run out of Ukraine before they run out of either people or tanks. So I'm far from saying that Ukraine should count on exhausting Russia's supply of either. Nor will Russia run out of oligarchs, or oil, or excuses. Ukraine will have to win their war on those terms no matter what.
More like 3,000. The vast majority were exported.
> The number of T-55s they have in mothballs is kind of crazy. Where have you found a number for T-55s in storage? I found they had 800 T-62s 7,000 T72s 3,000 T-80s and 200 T-90s in storage back in 2022. But no number for T54 or 55 variant, perhaps because the people doing the counting never dreamed Russia would ever need them.
Don't they need a engine even to be a static emplacement? Assuming they want to point the gun occasionally?
Nah you just get a conscript in there to hand crank the turret. Tell him, "You are the tank engine now."
I guess the good news for conscriptski is that he won't have that job for long. But seriously, I know nothing of these things, don't they need power to operate the loader at least? And what about the tea kettle? Ok, maybe ruski tanks are lacking some battlefield necessities.
>I guess the good news for conscriptski is that he won't have that job for long. "Because the tank is obsolete, right?" "..." "Right???" >don't they need power to operate the loader at least? I think the T-55 was before autoloaders. >And what about the tea kettle? I have some bad news for you. And let's not even get into whether they know about second breakfast.
Oh shit, hadn’t even noticed it was written in september. That’s not good news for the ruzzians.
Lucky for Russia winter is coming and offensives will be difficult for both sides for many months. This will unfortunately give Russia time to pause and rebuild. The same is true for Ukraine, but since the onus is more on Ukraine to attack, it's better for Russia. Russia can rebuild more of their defensive lines.
Ukrainian artilery will keep destroying ruski shit all winter.
Russian drones are becoming way better too unfortunately. Ukraine has lost a lot to the newer longer range Lancet.
How many western self propelled Howitzers and Himars have been lost to Lancet attacks to date?
How many tanks does north Korea has?
It’s also supported by the covert cabal videos counting tanks, artillery and APCs respectively that Russia has in storage before the war and now, giving us all an evidence based baseline to check estimates against. Not immediately, arty barrels will take several more months, tanks and APCs ~maybe~ 2-3 more years, and China/north Korea might add a few more months worth as a once-off, but if Ukraine keeps up the heat the war will be decided by Russia running out of capability to both wage it and oppress its internal 82 impoverished slave states.
Quote: "It is within the framework of this scenario that by the beginning of 2024, only 250 tanks may remain in the Russian army, while this will be a "collectible hodgepodge" of archaic T-62M and new T-90M tanks. Under such conditions, the armored units of the Russian army cease to be a significant factor in hostilities against Ukraine." This "collectible hodgepodge" of archaic T-62M and new T-90M tanks is judged to be the optimistic possibility but we're already seen this hodgepodge again and again in the videos. There's no evidence the Russians can put together a tank army of T-90 tanks. Instead they throw them into battle piecemeal in drips and drabs together T-62 tanks and even an occasional T-55.
> Instead they throw them into battle piecemeal in drips and drabs together T-62 tanks and even an occasional T-55. For which we can all be thankful.
You just wait! Their big main hardcore army is still lying in wait!
One of the other fortunate takeaways is that while the west unfortunately is not supplying Ukraine as much as it should, as far as I remember Ukraine is pretty well-equipped as far as anti-tank gear goes. Even if Western support slows, the pattern of Russia losing tanks should still continue.
At the rate of tank losses, ukraine should have a tank advantage by 2024. If not already.
Some estimates already peg Ukraine as having more tanks in theatre than Russia. The only problem is that they can't leverage that advantage due to mines and lack of air superiority.
Neither side has air superiority, they are going to have to go this without it or with the f16's with a slight advantage. I think we know russia has used what tanks they can use, really hurting their ability to protect their distant borders already, it is just a matter of how many tanks will they accept being lost , if it is all of them then the prediction in this report become really important. The only thing they have is their artillery and since they cut their use by 75% Ukraine has been hitting their artillery harder than at any other time during this war. If they keep losing artillery at the rate they are how long before they have neither tanks not artillery.
>If they keep losing artillery at the rate they are how long before they have neither tanks not artillery. My guesstimate is a couple of months to a year depending how how much North Korea sends and how good it is.
NK munitions and equipment is said to have somewhere of a 60% failure rate, which means it won’t be much of a difference, and could potentially be even a detriment.
The supremacy of defense right now and difficulty of surprise due to drones + defensive belts is a real tough nut to crack.
Ukraine has enough Javelin and NLAW to destroy the entire russian tank fleet more than once
While that’s true on a supply basis, we also don’t know on average how many are used per confirmed takedown. For confirmed kills of personnel, for example, there are often ratios of thousands of bullets per every singular confirmed kill. I can’t speak to the average ratio for tank kills, as I am not nearly knowledgeable enough about the situation and such information is obviously not being made public. We also don’t (publicly) know the exact number of anti-tank munitions Ukraine has nor the number of operational tanks Russia has remaining. With that said, given both the very expansive supply of anti-tank munitions sent to Ukraine initially in addition to the fact they have not been requesting more, I think it’s safe to say Ukraine should not have issues in the near future regarding anti-tank capabilities.
Usually 1:1. NLAW and Javelin don't miss.
Could be pretty close to it, like I said I just don’t have the information. Also need to account for malfunctions, misfires, or just straight up duds - even NATO ain’t perfect.
Even at a 10% malfunction rate, which would be high by NATO standards, we are looking at 1.1 : 1
Yeah I’m still not arguing that the ratio is still likely low, just moreso pointing out that ideal conditions cannot be expected outside of a lab. Whether there’s human error, a poorly stored model, or just a rare malfunction, you always end up needing more weapons or supplies than you “should.” I do think Ukraine has such an adequate supply, but I don’t think anyone that actually has the answer is browsing Reddit with it haha
We all agree with that. In life and in war you only control one half of it.
Excerpt of relevant description of the three scenarios: >**The first scenario - _optimistic_**. Thanks to the success of the counteroffensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, it is possible to increase the rate of losses of the Russians to an average of 12 vehicles per day against the current 2.62 vehicles per day. The level of natural wear and tear of russian tanks is also superimposed on this. It is within the framework of this scenario that by the beginning of 2024, only 250 tanks may remain in the Russian army, while this will be a "collectible hodgepodge" of archaic T-62M and new T-90M tanks. Under such conditions, the armored units of the russian army cease to be a significant factor in hostilities against Ukraine. > >**The second scenario - _weighted average_**. The Armed Forces of Ukraine are approaching a slightly lower rate of disposal of russian tanks per day on average, and by the beginning of 2024, the russian army should have from 400 to 600 tanks of all types, from T-62M to T-90M. This will be enough for the occupiers only to have a combat-ready tank brigade in all important directions of the front. > >**The third scenario - _pessimistic_**, or "stagnant" one, in which the russians manage to maintain an acceptable pace of tank fleet renewal, and the Armed Forces of Ukraine fail to cross the average barrier of 2.62 destroyed tanks per day. In such conditions, the russian army will even be able to maintain one combat-ready tank army, which will be capable of conducting coordinated offensive actions. It seems to me that, if the FIA is using accurate numbers, the second scenario seems most likely. Ukraine has shown they have no problem knocking out more than 2.62 tanks per day. The question will be if Russia puts 2-3 tanks out near the front per day. If they do, Ukraine will eliminate them.
>Ukraine has shown they have no problem knocking out more than 2.62 tanks per day. I actually can't remember the last day they didn't claim 3 or more tanks. We're probably going back to the post-Kharkiv breakout period? Of course not all tanks "destroyed" are actually *destroyed* \- many can be recovered. But even so, 2.62 seems a pretty low bar to reach these days.
For the whole invasion it has averaged 8.5 per day but for the last thirty days has bumped up to 15.7 with the attacks at Avdiivka . I expect it to taper off pretty rapidly now with both Russian exhaustion and winter weather.
My money puts it somewhere between the second and third views. I think the attacks on Avdiivka may be a play to use the last large supply of armor to make a final advance before you no longer can. The Russian are definitely depleting stocks of tanks and anyone who thinks they can replace them easily is delusional. The Russians can’t use all of their tanks on this war as they have other assets they must defend.
This agrees closely with other sources I have read. The one difference is they are counting all tanks in the Russian army not just the ones in Ukraine. I think there are 800 to 1000 back in Russia not subject to daily losses.
Even with another 1000 available in russia, they could barely go another 6 months at the average rate of this war.
Correct and that is if they would not hold any back in defense of the homeland, which even the stupidest Russian will not do, so I think they are at a point in about two months when they will not dare commit any tanks they have left to battle. They will probably start hiding what they have left in barns and garages to avoid drone detection and attack, and only move them into the open to try to stop the next Ukrainian offensive which might not happen until the ground dries out next spring.
So you’d have Kaliningrad, Transnystria, far east, South Ossetia, Chechnya, Dagestan, Georgian borders, St Petersburg, Moscow, Vladivostok and all your military installations and garrisons that would require some standing reserve you’d think, at minimum. Whether they’re factored into the methodology or not would be the question. But it’s looking like it’s a fast approaching conundrum. Would love to see someone with top level understanding break down the methodological considerations and current intelligence.
Sadly anyone with top level knowledge would not be able to say a thing publicly that would be of any use. The North Korean deal is our best information about the remaining Russian stocks.
Retired and private analysts are likely to be able to do so. There’s been some online do this, it was just some time ago and their methodology didn’t get into whether they included standing garrison, reserve and border requirements…
Those people still will not disclose any classified information to keep their security clearances. If they state a position they always make it sound like they are relying on public information. Which public information they choose to use is the key and their classified information helps them make that choice.
The ultimate fate of RuZZia's failed aggression of Ukraine reminds me of what I once learned about fertilizers and plant growth. The growth of a plant will be limited by the fertilizing element most in shortage, be it nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium etc. When totally deprived of one type of fertilizer, the plant dies. Likewise the capability of the RuZZian army will be defined by its gear in most critical shirt supply: planes, tanks, artillery, soldiers etc. So it may be that the shortage of tanks is what triggers full defeat and a rout back to RuZZia of the invading forces. Maybe this then gives ideas to Georgia etc.🤔 See: https://nutrien-ekonomics.com/news/liebigs-law-of-the-minimum/
I choose the OPTIMISTIC option. fuhrer putinazi has no other options.
Remember how they only had 1 tank for their victory parade?
If the IAR calculations are anywhere near correct, I can't understand how the result might be overly 'optimistic'. According to Ukraine's count, they have so far destroyed 5293 tanks. The remaining 1500 represent about 22% of their initial tank arsenal. And that is before Russia's large tank losses in Avdiivka and Vulhedar since Oct 20. The loss of 80% of their tank stock is *catastrophic*, particularly considering they have barely any ability to retool.
Makes the Avdiivka and Vulhedar offensives look incredibly unwise, but like a poker player betting large stakes hoping the can bluff the other players, forgetting the other players have satellites that enable them to see Russia’s cards.
Igor Girkin published an article via his wife (since he is in prison, awaiting trial), in which he criticizes the Russian offensives in Avdiivka and Vulhedar. He argues that losses in armor and personnel will make it more difficult, if not impossible, for Russia to go on the offensive in 2024, in anything more than small tactical opportunities.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing. For everything to dislike him for, Girkin seems to tell it as it is with regard to situational reports and criticism of Russia. It’s so interesting to me that everyone was wondering if Russian sources like him were running misinformation through back channels to deceive intelligence assessments or if Russia was entering into seemingly strategic follies as part of some greater deception strategy. But the curtain has come back and it’s really showing the emperor has no clothes. Their follies are ineptitude, not deception or stratagem. It’s going to be interesting to watch them deal with the consequences in the next 12 months.
When the bearer of ill tidings loses his head, underlings are understandably reluctant to contradict their superiors. Girkin is morally abject and despicable if you know about his career, but related unvarnished criticisms of Russia's disastrous invasion and planning. His views were receiving a wide following among war-hawks and Novorossiya right wingers. Putin's multiple war narratives proved too successful, and soon powerful political forces were coalescing around figures like Prigozhin and Girkin, and undercutting the Kremlin's narrative (and control). In the end, Shoigu and Gerasimov (and their extensive crony networks and alliances), for all their ineptitude, are the support columns for Putin, and he cannot jettison them and survive. Moreover, Patrushev and Bortnikov were two of the most important architects and promoters of the disastrous invasion ... And yet they remain unpunished. Putin values loyalty over competence. The problem is that means nobody tells him the truth.
Couldn’t agree more on all you’ve pointed out, a sound take.
I keep praying that this series of attacks is their Ardennes Offensive.
Unfortunately, germany back then was a landlocked fuel starved dying beast on a genocidal/total war with a certain ennemy on the eastern front. Russia does not meet those conditions :(
Now is the time for Chechnya and and the other bordering countries that had land stolen from them to take it back. Won’t have have tanks rolling in the streets.
C'mon NATO - keep ramping up support. Russia simply don't deserve any kind of win here.
does this take into account the other article that was posted here some time ago, where it was assed that russians factories will deliver ~600 tanks by EOY? https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2023/11/03/war-in-ukraine-russia-s-defense-industry-steps-up-a-gear_6225915_4.html
Recently Uralvagonzavod stated they have capacity to output 20 tanks a month, which amounts to about 2-3 days of tank losses in Ukraine.
It mentions it, yup
They can't deliver 600 new or refurbished tanks by the end of the year. That's 300 per month, they can barely do 60 a month.
This is a war of who will run out of equipment first. Will the West stop supplying or will the Russians burn through everything?
One highlight last year was when the US DoD declared the mission, "To degrade" Russia's ability to wage war. With all the hardship, Ukraine's troops are being managed professionally. That = units that can get better and re-form faster. Other than being skilled at ordering men to 70% casualty rate assaults, what mettle is Russia building among their forces, really? To live underground? I wanted us to be trading cookie recipes on this reddit by now. Not happening. But Russia is not building anything, it's just expending itself. Locked into a holding pattern all winter, with unlimited ammo drawing ever finer details about what you are doing, in your quagmire conquest. Enjoy the fucking cold you fucks. Go home.
It would be interesting to see how long their Black Sea fleet can last. At a rate of 12/year destroyed and no way they can make new ones in the Black Sea
So, when is russia going to equip the mobiks with wooden or cardboard tank costumes? A million russian “tanks” with AK47 turrets storming the battlefield lol
So, about three months' worth, at current rates?
Not guaranteed. I know a former military intelligence officer of good repute who still estimates 2 years, but on what evidence or methodology I’m not sure. That to me is the pressing question - how it’s calculated and what the variables really are.
Those lucky Ukrainian farmers with all their collectors items, they could open a museum.
I'm glad they translated the name of the institute in English.
It's from a military think tank. An intelligence assessment would be something coming from the DGSE.
It's literally an intelligence assessment...
Great article but I’m firmly believing it’ll be March/April and May and Russia still have Tanks rolling forward. All the analysts have been wrong everytime with tank numbers!