Posted on 02/24/2024 5:59:01 AM PST by SpeedyInTexas
This list only includes destroyed vehicles and equipment of which photo or videographic evidence is available. Therefore, the amount of equipment destroyed is significantly higher than recorded here. Loitering munitions, drones used as unmanned bait, civilian vehicles and derelict equipment are not included in this list. All possible effort has gone into avoiding duplicate entries and discerning the status of equipment between captured or abandoned. Many of the entries listed as 'abandoned' will likely end up captured or destroyed. Similarly, some of the captured equipment might be destroyed if it can't be recovered. When a vehicle is captured and then lost in service with its new owners, it is only added as a loss of the original operator to avoid double listings. When the origin of a piece of equipment can't be established, it's not included in the list. The Soviet flag is used when the equipment in question was produced prior to 1991. This list is constantly updated as additional footage becomes available.
(Excerpt) Read more at oryxspioenkop.com ...
For those of us with NO military training, could you tell us how many are in a Russian Division, and other pertinent units of military groups. Also are they the same in US, Ukraine, and Russia. If not a breakdown would be helpful.
Interesting source
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1xwo3Xn9Ow0
From Sept 2022
**Fuller explanation of Orc military structure:
The RGF once used the Army with many Divisions. But that was during WWII and the cold war. Since there were no more major wars, the RGF downsized its unit division from Division to Battalion. However since 2012 or so they have begun to convert back to Division.
Now there is a mix of unit designations Division and Battalion.
None of the smaller divisions are even close to Western unit make up (totally forget the “BTG” terminology - a Western construct).
For instance: there are 2 kinds of Mechanized Infantry Brigades, each with a different, but similar, make up. Call them Type A and Type B.
Type A has 2 tank battalions (~60 T-72 tanks), 2 Infantry battalions, Engineer battalion, Recon battalion, 2 self propelled arty battalions (could be up to 3 battalions), MLRS (Grad) battalion, AA battalion, Comm battalion, UAV battalion (Orlon-10), Sniper battalion, and Support battalion. Self-sufficient.
Type B has 3 infantry battalions (mixed as A& B below), 1 Tank battalion.
Infantry battalions in each Brigade are of two types, call them A & B.
A has ~540 troops, 49 BTR-82s, 8 120MM Mortars, 6 AGS-17s, 15 AT missile. 3 SPG-9s. 3 companies of about 109-110 troops.
Fighting force about 300 troops.
B has ~460 troops, 42 - BMP-2s, 8 120mm mortars, 6 AGS-17s, 15 AT missiles, 3 SPG-9s. 3 companies of 91 troops.
Fighting force about 270 troops.
Troops on the frontline are never more than half, but more like 40%
This make up of troops was years ago - now its anyone’s guess - in some cases, even the Russian officers do not know.
What Russians call a Division, we call a Brigade or Regiment - somewhere between 2,000 to 5,000 people (an American Division is about 15,000 to 20,000), and around 125 Armored Vehicles.
There is the strong possibility that the reporter was unclear on the difference (common mistake, and may have been referring to the amount of gear in an American Division equivalent - roughly 500 tanks or Infantry Fighting Vehicles (abbreviated as BMP in Russian).
In either case, Russian losses attacking Pokrovsk, exceeded the pre-war population of Pokrovsk.
Thank you, that helps. Now if I was just absolutely sure of what all the 3 letter abbreviations meant. ;-)
what all the 3 letter abbreviations meant.
—
RGF = Russian Ground Forces
BTG = Battle Tactical Group
MLRS = Multiple Launch Rocket System
SPG = Self Propelled gun
UAV = Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
BTR = Armored Personel Carrier
AGS= Automatic Grenade Launcher
BMP = Infantry Fighting Vehicle
AT = Anti-Tank
where the hell is everyone?
Kyiv Independent (14 Aug):
"The twin-engine, two-seat aircraft – designed for both air superiority and ground attack –reportedly crashed for unknown reasons.
According to the Navy, Ukrainian intelligence intercepted radio communications indicating the loss of contact with the aircraft. Russian forces have launched a search and rescue operation, and debris was reportedly spotted on the sea surface. The pilots remain missing, Kyiv said."
The Kremlin is using the Alaska summit to portray Russia as a world power equal to the United States and to posture Putin as an equal to US President Donald Trump. Leading Russian negotiator and Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) CEO Kirill Dmitriev alluded on August 13 to the 1945 Yalta Conference between the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Soviet Union, claiming that the Yalta conference “won World War II” and that Putin and Trump will similarly “prevent World War III.”[19] Russian State Duma International Affairs Committee Deputy Head Alexei Chepa amplified comparisons between the upcoming summit and the Yalta Conference and claims that the United States and Russia should “talk to each other as friends.”[20] Crimea occupation head Sergei Aksyonov claimed that Trump should visit occupied Crimea in order to agree to a “new Yalta peace.”[21] Multiple Russian outlets similarly compared the Alaska summit to Yalta and claimed that “people who have a real influence on global processes” will be at the table in Alaska.[22]
Russian comparisons of the August 15 US-Russia summit with the 1945 Yalta Conference attempt to conceal the power disparity between the United States and Russia and are efforts to present Russia as having much stronger diplomatic, military, and economic positions than it does. Russia is already trying to present the very fact that Trump and Putin are meeting as a Russian victory in order to foster perceptions that Russia is an equal of the United States. Comparisons between the two meetings are also inaccurate because the 1945 Yalta Conference resulted in an agreement about post-war Europe, while Trump and other US officials have reiterated that the August 15 summit will not result in any US-Russia agreements about the end of the war in Ukraine.
ISW continues to assess that Russian forces do not control the territory east and northeast of Dobropillya where Russian forces recently infiltrated. ISW’s Assessed Russian Advances map layer does not differentiate between enduring Russian positions and limited infiltration missions. ISW’s definition of the Assessed Russian Advances layer is any area in which ISW assesses Russian forces have operated or launched attacks against but do not control. ISW uses the US Army doctrinal term “forward line of own troops” (FLOT) to indicate the most forward observed positions of forces in any kind of operation at a specific time. ISW largely uses its Assessed Russian Advances layer to depict areas within the Russian FLOT but over which Russian forces have not yet established control. ISW’s Assessed Russian Advances layer illustrates areas where ISW has observed evidence of a Russian presence but does not necessarily denote areas where Russian forces have established an enduring presence. ISW evaluates its Assessed Russian-Controlled Ukrainian Territory map layer using the doctrinal definition of “control” - a tactical mission task that requires the commander to maintain physical influence over a specified area to prevent its use by an enemy or to create conditions necessary for successful friendly operations. ISW deliberately distinguishes between the Russian FLOT and areas that ISW assesses that Russian forces control. ISW does not assess that Russian forces exercise control over the areas in their tactical penetration near Dobropillya as of August 13.
The Kremlin is likely using the upcoming Zapad-2025 joint Russian-Belarusian military exercises to facilitate its nuclear saber-rattling campaign ahead of the Alaska summit. Belarusian Defense Minister Viktor Khrenin announced on August 13 that Belarusian and Russian forces will jointly rehearse planning for the employment of tactical nuclear weapons and Oreshnik ballistic missiles during the Zapad-2025 exercises on September 12 through 16.[46] Kremlin officials and their affiliates often use nuclear saber-rattling and demonstrative military exercises as part of their reflexive control campaign that aims to push the West to make decisions that disproportionately benefit Russia.[47] Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko recently participated in a likely staged press event with Russian President Vladimir Putin on August 1, during which both amplified the Kremlin's nuclear saber-rattling narratives.[48] Khrenin’s mention of tactical nuclear weapons and Oreshnik planning exercises are likely part of the Kremlin's broader effort to posture military strength ahead of the Alaska summit. Russian officials have also used Russia's recent withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which Russia had violated for years, to threaten the United States.[49] ISW previously assessed that the Kremlin dangles the prospect of bilateral arms control talks to extract preemptive concessions from the United States about the war in Ukraine.[50] Russia may intend the announcement that Zapad-2025 will focus on the employment of Oreshnik missiles (missiles that are banned under the INF Treaty and that Russia has publicly flaunted and employed against Ukraine) and nuclear weapons to pressure Trump to engage in arms control talks, distracting from talks about the war.
Skibitskyi recently stated that Russia and Belarus are actively preparing for Zapad-2025 but that the exercises do not pose a significant threat to Ukraine.[51] Skibitskyi noted that Lukashenko does not want to be directly involved in Russia's war against Ukraine. ISW similarly assessed that Belarusian forces will not enter the war on behalf of Russia, but Belarus nonetheless plays an important role in Russia's war effort by forcing Ukrainian forces to defend the Ukrainian-Belarusian border, pinning forces that Ukraine could deploy along the frontline.[52]
Belarus continues to deepen military cooperation with the People's Republic of China (PRC). The Belarusian Ministry of Defense (MoD) stated on August 13 that Belarusian Logistics Chief of Staff Major General Alexander Mosolov will lead a Belarusian delegation to meet with PRC representatives to discuss bilateral military logistics cooperation to support the rear and visit PRC military bases in the rear.[118]
Belarus is hosting additional joint military exercises ahead of its Belarusian-Russian Zapad-2025 military exercise. Belarusian Defense Minister Lieutenant General Viktor Khrenin stated on August 13 that military forces from some Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) states will conduct military exercises in Vitebsk Oblast (in northern Belarus bordering Lithuania, Latvia, and Russia) from August 31 to September 6 and that some Russian forces have already arrived.[119]
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-13-2025
One of the workers, Jin, told the BBC that when he landed in Russia's Far East, he was chaperoned from the airport to a construction site by a North Korean security agent, who ordered him not to talk to anyone or look at anything. “The outside world is our enemy,” the agent told him. He was put straight to work building high-rise apartment blocks for more than 18 hours a day, he said.
All six workers we spoke to described the same punishing workdays – waking at 6am and being forced to build high-rise apartments until 2am the next morning, with just two days off a year. “Some people would leave their post to sleep in the day, or fall asleep standing up, but the supervisors would find them and beat them. It was truly like we were dying,” said another of the workers, Chan.
The escapees told us that the workers are confined to their construction sites day and night, where they are watched by agents from North Korea's state security department. They sleep in dirty, overcrowded shipping containers, infested with bugs, or on the floor of unfinished apartment blocks, with tarps pulled over the door frames to try to keep out the cold. One labourer, Nam, said he once fell four metres off his building site and “smashed up” his face, leaving him unable to work. Even then his supervisors would not let him leave the site to visit a hospital.
The bulk of their earnings is sent straight to the North Korean state as “loyalty fees”. The remaining fraction – usually between $100-200 (£74-£149) a month - is marked down on a ledger. The workers only receive this money when they return home – a recent tactic, experts say, to stop them running away. Once the men realise the reality of the harsh work and lack of pay, it can be shattering. Tae said he was “ashamed” when he learnt that other construction workers from central Asia were being paid five times more than him for a third of the work. “I felt like I was in a labour camp; a prison without bars,” he said.
The labourer Jin still bristles when he remembers how the other workers would call them slaves. “You are not men, just machines that can speak,” they jeered. At one point, Jin’s manager told him he might not receive any money when he returned to North Korea because the state needed it instead. It was then he decided to risk his life to escape.
The Kremlin is likely to use the Alaska summit to try to deflect attention away from peace negotiations with Ukraine and towards the Russia-US relationship in order to court the Trump administration into offering Moscow sorely needed economic rapprochement. The Kremlin's inclusion of Russian Finance Minister Siluanov and RDIF CEO Dmitriev in the Alaska delegation suggests that Russia will likely attempt to shift the focus of the summit away from its war in Ukraine and towards potential bilateral economic deals. Neither Siluanov nor Dmitriev attended the previous Russia-Ukraine negotiations in Istanbul in May or June 2025.[5] Dmitriev was present during the February 2025 US-Russia talks in Istanbul, however.[6] The Kremlin has frequently leveraged Dmitriev in order to frame Russia as an attractive economic partner to the United States and used his business experience to advocate on behalf of Russia's economic interests, as ISW has previously noted.[7] Dmitriev has notably been instrumental to the Russian narrative, claiming that Alaska is a historical part of Russia ahead of the summit and leveraging the summit to portray Russia as a world power equal to the United States, however, undermining Dmitriev’s apparent position as a neutral, economic-focused arbiter.[8] The Kremlin relies on Siluanov to downplay the detrimental effects of Western sanctions on the Russian economy in an attempt to convince the West to drop sanctions against Russia due to their falsely claimed ineffectiveness.[9] Dmitriev and Siluanov’s presence at the Alaska summit is likely intended to frame the summit as a potential business deal.
Other Russian officials have also indicated that the Kremlin will attempt to use the Alaska summit to engage in economic negotiations with the United States. Ushakov stated on August 14 that, in addition to discussing Ukraine, Trump and Putin will also speak about bilateral cooperation “in the trade and economic sphere,” where there is “enormous” and “untapped” potential.[10] State Duma International Affairs Committee First Deputy Head Alexei Chepa claimed on August 14 that Putin and Trump “may” discuss sanctions and other economic issues.[11] Russian First Deputy Chair of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs Svetlana Zhurova claimed that “Russia and the United States will conclude an economic deal in any case” following the Alaska summit.[12] These statements are likely part of a concerted Russian effort to exploit the Alaska summit to secure much-needed economic relief from the United States. ISW continues to assess that any American acceptance of Russian-offered economic deals in the absence of reciprocal Russian concessions on Ukraine in return will degrade important economic leverage that the United States currently holds over Russia.[13]
The Kremlin is coming to Alaska with a severely weakened domestic economy, which affords the Trump administration significant leverage during the summit. Bloomberg reported on August 13 that Western sanctions and Russia's wartime economy are seriously harming the Russian economy, while Putin's attempts at stabilizing the economy are failing as Russian oil revenue continues to fall.[14] Falling oil prices, coupled with heavy Western sanctions and declining energy revenue, have put a serious strain on Russia's already strained federal budget, which is now facing its highest budget deficit in 30 years, according to Bloomberg.[15] Unnamed officials told Bloomberg that Putin has repeatedly requested sanctions relief as part of any deal to be discussed in Alaska, which ISW assesses likely indicates that Putin is concerned about the state of the Russian economy and is seeking economic reprieve from the West.[16] Putin signed a law on February 25, 2022 that forced Russian lenders to issue preferential loans to war-related contracts at a government-set interest rate below the market rate.[17] The Kremlin designed this law to flood the Russian defense industrial complex with cash, which effectively subordinated Russian banks to the government and its wartime goals. ISW previously reported that Russian bankers had growing concerns over the growing number of non-performing loans and are seeking a state-funded bailout, undercutting Putin's long-standing narrative that neither the war in Ukraine nor Western sanctions are hurting the Russian economy.[18] The Russian economy's fiscal strain is eroding the Kremlin's ability to sustain its war effort in the long term, depleting reserves, and exposes underlying economic fragility. Trump previously threatened secondary sanctions and tariffs on countries that continue to import Russian oil, which ISW continues to assess would likely further impact the Russian economy by undercutting revenues essential for the Kremlin's financing of its war against Ukraine.[19] Russia is likely setting conditions to attempt to use the Alaska summit to secure economic relief, but the Trump administration indicated that it may leverage Russia's economic fragility to push Putin for concessions.[20]
The Kremlin is also likely to try to distract from the war in Ukraine by pressuring the Trump administration to engage in bilateral arms control talks at the Alaska summit. Putin held a meeting on August 14 with high-ranking Kremlin officials to prepare for the Alaska summit, wherein he claimed that the US-Russian talks would create conditions to ensure “peace...in the world as a whole” should the talks lead to agreements about strategic offensive weapons agreements.[24] Russian Presidential Aide Yuriy Ushakov claimed that Putin and Trump may “touch upon” the broader tasks of ensuring peace and security.[25] ISW has assessed in recent weeks that the Kremlin was dangling the prospect of bilateral arms control talks in front of the United States to secure Russia's desired demands in Ukraine and deflect from the subject of Russia-Ukraine peace negotiations.[26] Russia announced on August 4 that it was permanently withdrawing from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, for example.[27] Kremlin officials began to set conditions to justify Russia's withdrawal from the treaty in June 2025.[28] Russia and Belarus publicly promoted Russia's deployment of Oreshnik ballistic missiles (which the INF Treaty banned) to Belarus even before Russia's withdrawal from the INF on August 4, 2025.[29] Reuters reported on August 13 that the Middlebury Institute of International Studies and the Center for Naval Analysis both assessed that satellite imagery shows activity at the Pankovo test site in Arkhangelsk Oblast since July 2025 that is similar to activity preceding previous Russian tests of its 9M730 Burevestnik nuclear-powered and nuclear-armed cruise missile.[30] Reuters reported that a Western security source confirmed that Russia is preparing a Burevestnik test. Russia has been deliberately flaunting its missile capabilities in recent weeks in order to create the facade of an escalating situation and to pressure the Trump administration into pursuing arms talks at the Alaska summit. Russia has long violated the INF Treaty, including by launching Oreshnik missiles at Ukraine before withdrawing from the INF, and has largely failed to successfully test its Burevestnik missile; as such, the situation has not escalated in reality.[31] Russia has essentially been trying to manufacture an escalation in advance of the Alaska summit in order to coerce the Trump administration to engage in arms control talks, with the ultimate goal of extracting concessions from the United States regarding Ukraine and distracting from the Kremlin's disinterest in engaging in serious peace talks with Ukraine.
ISW continues to assess that Russian forces do not control the territory east and northeast of Dobropillya where Russian forces recently infiltrated. ISW’s Assessed Russian Advances map layer does not differentiate between enduring Russian positions and limited infiltration missions. ISW uses the US Army doctrinal term “forward line of own troops” (FLOT) to indicate the most forward observed positions of forces in any kind of operation at a specific time. ISW largely uses its Assessed Russian Advances layer to depict areas within the Russian FLOT, where ISW has observed evidence of a Russian presence, but this layer does not necessarily denote areas where Russian forces have established an enduring presence. ISW evaluates its Assessed Russian-Controlled Ukrainian Territory map layer using the doctrinal definition of “control” — a tactical mission task that requires the commander to maintain physical influence over a specified area to prevent its use by an enemy or to create conditions necessary for successful friendly operations. ISW deliberately distinguishes between the Russian FLOT and areas that ISW assesses that Russian forces control. ISW does not assess that Russian forces exercise control over the areas in their tactical penetration near Dobropillya as of August 14 and will reassess Russian advances when ISW has observed confirmed, reliable reporting that Ukrainian forces have retaken the territory.
The United Kingdom reaffirmed its commitment to providing Ukraine with long-term, post-war security guarantees. The Times reported on August 14 that following the August 13 virtual meeting between Trump, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and various EU leaders, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer stated that the UK and other European nations have developed “realistic” plans to deploy a “reassurance force” to Ukraine upon the conclusion of a potential ceasefire.[41] The reassurance force reportedly includes “air reassurance” over western Ukraine, training for Ukrainian military personnel, and mine clearance operations in the Black Sea. Starmer also noted that the UK is ready to increase economic pressure on Russia in order to force Putin into making concessions on the war in Ukraine. ISW has long assessed that Western security guarantees and continued support for Ukraine's military and economy following a potential ceasefire are critical to the development of a stable, post-war European security architecture, which will crucially bolster Ukraine's and Europe's ability to forcefully deter future Russian aggression.[42]
Ukraine's European partners continue to provide military aid to Ukraine, including through the purchase of US weapons. Germany announced on August 13 that it will fund the purchase of $500 million worth of US equipment and munitions for Ukraine through NATO's Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List (PURL) initiative, which allows NATO members and partners to finance the supply of American weapons and technology to Ukraine.[43] The Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway previously contributed a total of one billion dollars to Ukraine through the PURL initiative.[44] Czech Prime Minister Petr Fiala stated on August 13 that the Czech-led ammunition initiative has delivered one million rounds of large-caliber ammunition to Ukraine so far in 2025.[45] A US official reported to Axios on August 13 that US President Donald Trump will continue to sell weapons to NATO states that they can transfer to Ukraine even if diplomatic efforts to resolve the war fail.[46]
The Belarusian Ministry of Defense (MoD) reported on August 14 that Russia delivered another batch of Su-30SM2 multirole fighter aircraft to Belarus as part of a bilateral military-technical cooperation agreement.[123] The Belarusian MoD claimed that the Su-30s will allow Belarus to secure its airspace. Russia previously delivered a batch of Su-30 aircraft, including some SM2 variants, in May 2025.[124]
https://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-august-14-2025
Ukraine's campaign to erode Russian air power in the Black Sea region has taken a heavy toll on the 43rd Naval Assault Aviation Regiment of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, Militarnyi reports. The regiment, stationed at the occupied Saky airfield in Crimea, began 2022 with a full squadron of 12 Su-30SM multirole fighters. In the three years since the full-scale invasion began, seven of those aircraft have been destroyed in confirmed incidents, with two more damaged. The unit's fleet has been reduced to less than half its original strength.
Seems to be an uptick in Russian losses.
Any ideas why?
The Muscovites were ordered to take more ground before the Alaska meeting, so they were exposed to drone attacks.
Yet pitinistas claim Ukraine is trying to sabotage meeting by launching drone attacks on Russia, funny how Russia is always the “victim”🤔😎
Claiming Alaska as a “historical” part of Russia is a classic example of recentism. A condition where one only goes far enough back in history to support their claim or position.
Imagine the people that were living in Alaska prior to Russia’s “historical claim” would see things differently.
Another example the Lakota claim the black hills as their “historical” sacred lands, however the 7 documented changes of control of the black hills amongst involved parties before the Lakota took the lands might also dispute the lakota’s claims.
There is not a country on this planet that can claim borders since the beginning of time, only so far back, recentism
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.