the Battle of Kiev ... Russia's T-90s didn't do so well
Posted on 01/30/2023 10:26:48 PM PST by ganeemead
This isn't Russia's latest tank (that would be the T14 Armata)
The T90M appears to be the latest that they can actually put out in the field in numbers, as of now. It includes many of the Armata features.
But the kicker is this. About six or seven months ago HoHo MOD Ichabod Zapoopski (or whatever his name was) stated that he needed an entire new army including around 300 - 400 main battle tanks. Russian MOD Shoigu OTOH has just announced that Russian forces will shortly be receiving around 400 BRAND NEW military vehicles including some large number of these T90M tanks, i.e. Russia is doing in reality what Zelenski and Zapoopski and nato can only dream about...
A good tank type (older “Tiger” type proposed being sent to Ukraine) capability break-down here:
Recent Ukrainian v. Russian close range tank dual:
“”Russia is doing in reality what Zelenski and Zapoopski and nato can only dream about...””
What does that mean?
The 400 number seems to include reconditioned tanks. Its a realistic number for 2023. Russia was making, new, about 100 a year in 2022. It also started pulling T72 hulls out of stock and overhauling them.
NATO can probably match that in 2023. About half of that will come from Poland, between PT-91’s and Leopard IIs.
And thats not a T-90.
But Russian casualties have been very heavy.
Where do you get this license to lie, like James Bond and his license to kill people? How much does it cost??
I base that on the excellent people at Oryx, and common sense.
They have achieved what no one else ever has, during an active war.
Putin started this invasion with 270,000 troops last February
in September Russia had to call up another 300,000
that’s almost 600,000 troops Russia has used so far, and they’re still not winning, and now need to call up another 500,000 or whatever
obviously, there would be no need for further call-ups if the losses suffered already weren’t huge ... like 75,000-100,000 killed
I am neither pro Ukraine nor pro Russian. I am pro logic. You idiots on both sides need to burn in hell. I mean you need to be consumed in the fires of hell. You are warmongers. Evil. Pure scum.
The top, like the armata, would need to be towed.
They also retreated from Kyiv, losing the battle of Hostomel airport and then the battle for Kyiv
This war needs to end, loathes. The way for it to end is for Russia to retreat back to its 2013 borders and leave Ukrainian territory.
That will only happen when Putin decides or is made to decide to leave.
The point of failure for most of the Russian tanks is the autoloader combined with the placement of the ammo in a ring around the turret. So long as they continue to follow that design we’re all gonna have fun placing bets to see how high the turret flies when hit by an antitank missile.
CC
If you believe that the crew is going to survive a hit enough to set the ammunition then you need to research the Israeli Lebanon incursion. Even though the turrets remained in place for the most part the tanks were still destroyed and the crews dead.
The most common figure I see is something like 160K HOHO KIA and another 300K so badly maimed as to be permanently out of the warfare business and Russian casualties are not close to that. There is at least the 5-1 kill rate that you read and my own guess is that it hass to be higher than that, likely more like 8-1 or 10-1.
You are a fictitious BS liar.
It has happened multiple times that Abrams tanks were hit and the ammo blew, but the crew survived.
I take Oryx as a floor, and for vehicle losses only. Then one can assume a factor to multiply it as a swag to account for all that Oryx hasn’t managed to count, from 1.15-1.5 X
The Ukrainian MOD swag is 2X or so Oryx, which is high for this IMHO, but low for propaganda.
As for personnel losses, forget it. Wait until the war is over.
Modern German, British, American, and French MBTs and even upgraded Polish model T90s will quickly shoot Russian tanks to pieces at distances that exceed the effective range of the Russian models. Many Russian tanks and crews will die before they even see the NATO model MBTs that kill them.
Notably, NATO combat doctrine has MBTs shooting up enemy tanks, while IFVs like the Bradley and Marder and such carry out anti-infantry missions and seize and hold terrain. In contrast, Russian doctrine is that their tanks mostly go against soft targets and exploit openings in the enemy lines. Built to carry out that doctrine, Russian tanks are vulnerable to modern NATO MBTs and to infantry anti-tank weapons. That is why the initial Russian armored attacks failed, and that is why any new Russian armor formations will fail as well.
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.