Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => The Roundtable => Topic started by: Ben on January 19, 2023, 09:42:43 AM
-
I would have never guessed that the norks have more tanks than we do.
https://www.visualcapitalist.com/top-25-fleets-of-combat-tanks/
-
I would have never guessed that the norks have more tanks than we do.
Target rich environment.
Note this for the Russian tank numbers.
According to a Pentagon official speaking in early November 2022, Russia has lost half of their tanks since their “special military operation” began on February 24, 2022.
If true OUCH!
-
Note this for the Russian tank numbers.
If true OUCH!
Yeah, my first thought when I saw the Russian numbers on the chart was, "Why didn't the ruskies just send half their tanks into Ukraine and do a von Clausewitz?" Then I read further down. Do they have babushkas as tank commanders or something?
-
Yeah, my first thought when I saw the Russian numbers on the chart was, "Why didn't the ruskies just send half their tanks into Ukraine and do a von Clausewitz?" Then I read further down. Do they have babushkas as tank commanders or something?
How many of those tanks had/have been sitting in fields for years with zero maintenance and had been stripped of parts to keep the other half going? Plenty of reports of tanks abandoned on the roads to Kyiv missing key parts and basically falling apart.
-
I think I also saw commentary that many of the older tanks did not have modern thermal optics so they were at a severe disadvantage to anyone who did. However, I figure the maintenance issues and Ukrainians disrupting the supply convoys were the bigger impacts.
I think the Chieftain mentioned that the latest thermals would let them see infantry lining up anti-tank weapons at a pretty long range.
-
Even if Russia legitimately had that many fully operational tanks in good repair with competent crews to man them and all the latest in optics, I don't think their logistics could come close to supporting their use.
-
Also when they say they lost half their tanks is that half of their total tanks or half of the tanks they sent? I'm thinking the latter.
-
Also when they say they lost half their tanks is that half of their total tanks or half of the tanks they sent? I'm thinking the latter.
Has to be half of what they sent. Never seen an estimate that they've even tried to deploy 6k tanks in Ukraine.
Oryx puts their tank losses at "1619, of which destroyed: 951, damaged: 73, abandoned: 59, captured: 536"
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html
-
I've seen a couple of analyses that say of of those 12,000+ tanks in the Russian fleet?
Only 4,000 to 5,000 of them were combat ready BEFORE the Ukraine incursion, and it's even fewer than that now.
I've also seen some write ups that feel that the T-14 Armata, or whatever its designation is, is in the top tier of most capable battle tanks in the world today, easily in the same class as the Leopard 2, Challenger 2, or the Abrams 2. Those were also written before the Ukraine incursion. It's a pretty good bet that while the tank may be capable, the Russians manning the things... aren't.
Whoops... NOT the Armata, which hasn't entered service yet... the T-90.
-
On the Nork fleet: Riding in to battle in a Type 59 or T-55 is just a loud, uncomfortable way to die. While it's true that quantity is it's own quality, hoping the enemy runs out of ammo before he finishes one-shoting your Armor Corps is not a great plan.
The Russian 12,000 number is likely including a whole bunch of T34 to T56 era tanks under a mountain somewhere. Like all the Mosins in cosmoline the Bear never really got rid of anything. THe ~2600 "modern" tank number is probably pretty accurate, pre invasion of Ukraine.
-
I suspect that most of the commie countries (Russia, China, N. Korea) "fleets" are a pretty thin façade of power over a steaming pile of corruption resulting in poor to horrendous maintenance practices, substandard training and support and a laughable disaster of logistics support that renders the bulk of their forces ineffective in any prolonged engagement. I would include land, sea and air assets in this evaluation. Not to say that any of them couldn't make a formidable initial showing in a conflict but as we see with Russia in Ukraine, even in their own back yard it quickly turned into an actual quagmire. It would not surprise me too much to see Putin pop a nuke or two in Ukraine as a petulant last act of a dying tyrant.
Sadly, I also suspect NATO forces aren't more than a step or two better off. And US capability is stretched pretty tight as well.
-
And US capability is stretched pretty tight as well.
It would be true to say that actual US military strength is nowhere near our paper strength, but at some point the disparity is so great it doesn't really matter.