I won't go into the accuracy of the sources but for what it's worth the IISS Military balance 2022 says Russia has:
580 T-80
417 T-90
That's in active service, IF you don't count T-72, like you asked.
When one uses oryx blog numbers for tanks lost in Ukraine, (22 T-64, 440 T-72, 135 T-80, 20 T-90, 130 unknown type)
those figures get adjusted to:
445 T-80
397 T-90
(providing one disregards the unknown type tanks.)
BUT.
I strongly advise against not counting T-72s as those make up the bulk of russian tank force. Not only that, but labeling all T-72s as one type, inherently less capable than all T-80s, for example, is not advisable either. There are many subvariants of T-72 and the later ones are quite a bit more capable than early T-80 variants, for example.
Furthermore, there are indications Russia has taken some of tanks from reserve and put them in service in Ukraine. So *some* of the tanks lost don't actually count against the active service ones. It's almost impossible to say which, though. But it's likely that T-64s for example have been taken out of the reserves.
So, actual active service russian tanks would be:
580 T-80
417 T-90
2320 T-72
And adjusted for oryx claims, assuming those are true and do not represent reserve tanks -
active service tanks would be:
445 T-80
397 T-90
1880 T-72
Also, Russia does have quite a few tanks in reserve. MB 2022 says as many as 7000 T-72, 3000 T-80 and 200 T-90.
Now, it's likely that many of those, possibly over half, are in such bad condition that they can't really be put back in service without some major refurbishment.
Anyway, hope this helped.
They were seen transporting some T-62s to Ukraine recently.I won't go into the accuracy of the sources but for what it's worth the IISS Military balance 2022 says Russia has:
580 T-80
417 T-90
That's in active service, IF you don't count T-72, like you asked.
When one uses oryx blog numbers for tanks lost in Ukraine, (22 T-64, 440 T-72, 135 T-80, 20 T-90, 130 unknown type)
those figures get adjusted to:
445 T-80
397 T-90
(providing one disregards the unknown type tanks.)
BUT.
I strongly advise against not counting T-72s as those make up the bulk of russian tank force. Not only that, but labeling all T-72s as one type, inherently less capable than all T-80s, for example, is not advisable either. There are many subvariants of T-72 and the later ones are quite a bit more capable than early T-80 variants, for example.
Furthermore, there are indications Russia has taken some of tanks from reserve and put them in service in Ukraine. So *some* of the tanks lost don't actually count against the active service ones. It's almost impossible to say which, though. But it's likely that T-64s for example have been taken out of the reserves.
So, actual active service russian tanks would be:
580 T-80
417 T-90
2320 T-72
And adjusted for oryx claims, assuming those are true and do not represent reserve tanks -
active service tanks would be:
445 T-80
397 T-90
1880 T-72
Also, Russia does have quite a few tanks in reserve. MB 2022 says as many as 7000 T-72, 3000 T-80 and 200 T-90.
Now, it's likely that many of those, possibly over half, are in such bad condition that they can't really be put back in service without some major refurbishment.
Anyway, hope this helped.
Well...I wonder if they still have T-34/85, T-54 / 55 somewhere in storage...
Probably. Meanwhile another train-load of museum artefacts makes it way slowly to Ukraine. Clearly Russian losses must be very low.I wonder if they still have T-34/85, T-54 / 55 somewhere in storage...
It could be were it not for there having been several train loads of more modern tanks previously and quoted tank losses nearing 1500 (1465 - not including APCs - 3573). The T-90s they're likely reserving, not that many in Ukraine from what I've seen. So the number is largely made up of T-72s, T-80s and some T-64BVs. So many of the better operational tanks are gone and Russia is probably keeping some behind for security reasons.Could it be that russian forces are planning to use those t62 as some sort of relocatable realistic decoys? means to confuse the opponent as to how many real forces are deployed where?
I don't get why they would use stored t62 for combat, when they have thousands of stored t72. Which are both more capable and logistically more compatible with existing forces.
It’s thought that perhaps the 10,000 T-72/80s in storage haven’t been maintained in operational condition while the T-62 stocks had recently underwent maintenance for donations to Syria and other allies. So the the T-62s were easier to press into service on short notice. That said, I would expect a crash program to refurbish more modern tanks yet I’ve seen no evidence of such so far, which is surprising.Could it be that russian forces are planning to use those t62 as some sort of relocatable realistic decoys? means to confuse the opponent as to how many real forces are deployed where?
I don't get why they would use stored t62 for combat, when they have thousands of stored t72. Which are both more capable and logistically more compatible with existing forces.
There have been some captured on video yes.Pretty sure I have read the T-62's have been/are being handed to the DPR.
And as prevalent as the urban warfare scene is there, why send in new equipment to eat anti-tank.weapons when all you are using them for are armoured SPG's? Are there any recorded battles between MBT's to date in theater? Not to my knowledge.
Just to add. All current tank manufacturing resources in Russia have been put into T-90Ms.The T-72s were built in two places. UKBM Nizhny Tagil in Russia stopped making tanks 30 years ago.
The Malyshev Factory in Kharkiv is now awarzonesite of special military operations but were still building and upgrading all the T-80, T-72 and T-64s until recently and may still be in limited operation to support the Ukraine military.
Given that Russian factories are running out of spare parts it seems possible that they simply can't repair and upgrade all the modern tanks they want to. As the T-64s are older they may need less complicated maintenance.
It does mean cheaper missiles can be used though. Even an M72 LAW is overkill for a T-62. It was regarded as a failure even at launch, 3 times the cost of a T-55 and not much better, sharing the T-55's ability to crush crew members by accident. Four man crew due to lack of autoloader, it's more likely to provide a way of soaking up personnel.As a method of 'soaking up' missile stocks, probably cheaper than some methods. Conscripted staff are cheaper too.
I've not seen figures that high from any credible source. Most have at most 3,000. With 2,800-2900 the more usual estimate.Pre war, Russia was thought to have 3500-4000 MBTs
Have a look at the video higher up in the thread. It appears that number is massively overstating the numbers today. It appears its more like 6,000.with the 10,000+ number in reserve being thrown around.
I think this is the most likely explanation.So many of the better operational tanks are gone and Russia is probably keeping some behind for security reasons.
And all the while this is going on...it appears that through captures, restoring tanks from reserve and supply of tanks from Poland, Bulgaria and Slovakia that the Ukrainian's might have more operational tanks than they started with
Probably a little of both. The rate of attrition to date has probably gotten the attention of logistics officers worldwide looking at what's been stockpiled/mothballed, what kind of condition it is in, and what/how long it would take to get them serviceable.I wonder if these are active tanks from garrison units or if a mass refurbishment program is underway?
Karpenko's figures were 'out of action', which includes full losses and tanks pulled out of the line for repair. What percentage of those are recoverable is not know. The Ukrainian's will retain some capability to do that, but can also send tanks out to Slovakia for repair.According to Karpenko, that's not remotely true. I assume his information is better than yours...
Lord knows, they've been extremely reliable, so far...View attachment 679959Probably a little of both. The rate of attrition to date
Okay, so how does that translate to "more operational tanks than they started with"?Karpenko's figures were 'out of action', which includes full losses and tanks pulled out of the line for repair.
Because they have salvaged and repaired many abandoned tanks and also had tanks donated by other NATO countries.Okay, so how does that translate to "more operational tanks than they started with"?
Okay, so how does that translate to "more operational tanks than they started with"?
A tank battalion on T-62M was formed from Ossetian volunteers in Ukraine Unlike more modern tanks, such as the T-72 and T-80, the T-62M is easy to operate, and also does not require much time for the military to master the technology. With the support of the head of the Republic of North Ossetia Sergey Menyailo, the volunteer detachment "Alania" performs combat missions in the south of Ukraine. A large number of military personnel in its ranks became the reason for the creation of its own tank unit. As a result, a battalion equipped with T-62 M tanks was formed. Combat vehicles have recently been removed from storage
Not really, more can be produced. T-72s are dead cheap to produce in Eastern Europe.They've received over 270 T-72 variants from NATO countries with more on the way (although there is obviously an upper limit to how many can be sent).
Probably not in a timely fashion, though. Anything not in active service tends to be in non operable condition. Not sure if there's much more T series to give away outside the Polish P-91s.Not really, more can be produced. T-72s are dead cheap to produce in Eastern Europe.They've received over 270 T-72 variants from NATO countries with more on the way (although there is obviously an upper limit to how many can be sent).
Tell me honestly, you yourself believe in that one?View attachment 679959Probably a little of both. The rate of attrition to date
The official NATO estimates are about 75-80% of that, so it's probably not far off. 60% of the tank number has been visually photographed at close range and itemised by Oryx. Some of the remains probably aren't that easy to get to - occupied areas, active bombardment etc.Tell me honestly, you yourself believe in that one?
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/ukraine-nato-united-states-russian-casualties/Do you have a link for the NATO estimates? I didn't realize they even attempted to quantify that. The most I've ever see is a casualty range that varied by 100% from the bottom to top and a DoD statement indicating it thought roughly a thousand MBTs had been lost, without specifying what was being counted as a "loss". I don't read Russian/Ukrainian but going by the icons it seems unlikely the totals from that graphic are at all accurate across at least several of those categories. The aircraft counts in particularly are no where near the totals confirmed in open source, and one would expect most of those to fall into Ukrainian held territory.
Everyone agrees that the aviation figures are likely not accurate. Missile shootdowns probably isn't massively out (it might also include crashes), helicopters is at least double the real total (although Oryx's list is good it doesn't include Russian losses around Kherson Airport that are known to have been heavy, we'll have to wait until the UAF retake that area to be sure, they're 10km from it now). Fixed wing though is clearly a long way from accurate.The aircraft counts in particularly are no where near the totals confirmed in open source, and one would expect most of those to fall into Ukrainian held territory.