The lower artillery losses number in the report compared to tank losses makes me think they aren’t putting as much effort into confirming artillery losses.
With more starting artillery and ease of knock out, you would think those loss numbers would be much higher.
“With more starting artillery and ease of knock out, you would think those loss numbers would be much higher.”
PIF’s postings have often highlighted the critical role of Artillery in this war.
During the second phase of the war (Russia’s crushing Artillery barrage in the Donbas), we often commiserated that an answer was needed to Russia’s Artillery supremacy. Back then, it seemed that Ukrainian counter-battery fire was no where near sufficient, and that other missions received priority of fire.
Since then, the Ukrainian forces have been equipped with better and longer range 155mm Artillery systems, and much longer range HIMARS and MLRS to disrupt ammunition supplies. They have captured some goodly part of the guns that were firing on them from Izyum, and have gotten even better counter-battery radar systems and surveillance drones for targeting. This is all in addition to the attrition of Russian guns and crews.
The relative balance of Artillery has shifted significantly toward the Ukrainian forces, with even the Ukrainians now enjoying local Artillery superiority across the Dniper River (the Western or Right Bank of the river) in Kherson.
But I have still not heard direct reports of improved counter-battery kill rates. It might well be happening, but I have not seen data.
Artillery losses - those pieces are usually many kilometers behind the front and not accessible to anyone except Russians. They can only confirm those found at positions abandoned and the pieces photographed by some one on the ground.