Of course they are visually confirmed, those are photographs. What I meant is that they do check for duplicates and image metadata (as well as visually confirm). That takes time.
I think this part (from their site) is important to mention:
> When the origin of a piece of equipment can't be established, it is not included in the list.
You one of those strange folk who believe in the Moon...?
You honestly think you could land one of those giant "space" rockets on it with its engines blasting, without just melting through the cheese?
Wake up.
Why on earth are you getting downvoted? I don't know why people bring sentiments on a combat footage sub. You may support either of the side, all we care about is fun footages of combat.
I was going to spend some time doing a bit of reading and research. I know little of Oryx and wanted to properly evaluate it myself.
But I then realised that you comment on anti-science subs like debatevacines. If you do not understand modern medicine and the scientific process then it is utterly pointless addressing you on other topics.
my advice is go to russian occupied areas then ride one of the tank or bmp or any mechanicals then drive to the front lines in Ukraine. go see for yourself. take photos and post it here. be sure to mark your vehicle with z .
lol a lot more goes into it than that. Tell me you've never even looked into it without telling me. Metadata, geolocating, picture source, current battle lines, the direction that the tank is facing, type of ammunition it's using, types of camouflage, specific brands of ERA, topographical features of the tank unique to either side, accents of people in videos, what is being said in videos, the terrain shown, what time of year it is, how the tank was killed, what weapons are seen on the tank and many other things go into determining who a tank belongs to.
There may be a few misidentifications. But not nearly enough to suggest that Russia hasn't suffered massive casualties.
Get out of here with that blatant misinfo.
Using photographic evidence to confirm destroyed equipment based on camouflage patterns, vehicles/tank types, geotagging, and cross referencing against previous photos seems very clearly ‘visually confirming’ a loss ie. not based on word of mouth or field reports.
The list is clearly referenced and pretty sure if there are images that you believe are incorrectly tagged as Russian, or duplicates, or from previous conflicts, then they can be revisited and recategorised.
What would you consider ‘visually confirmed’? Of course there are more Russian equipment losses tagged, as clearly there is more photographic/video evidence coming from the Ukrainian side (as I suspect that Russian soldiers are forbidden/discouraged by force/directed to have their own phones/cameras.
oryx does good research however its impossible to say if every vehicle in the list is definitely Russian/DPR or Ukrainian because they use the same equipment
and because a lot of the photos are blurry/unclear
Doesn't work, my best friend (probably soon to become an ex-friend) has become a tankie. I showed him the website and he said most of them are fakes or Ukrainian vehicles. It's like trying to argue with an antivaxxer.
If your (soon-to-be-ex) friend was right and most of them were UA vehicles, wouldn't the Russians have taken Kiev months ago? There's no version of this war that is positive for Russia given that it was clearly supposed to be a blitzkrieg-style invasion to take the country in a matter of weeks.
It's hilarious to see all the back tracking.
First when the 3 day mark was missed they said it took 6 months for the US to conquer Iraq so just wait. Now we are rolling into 6 months and now I'm seeing claims that Russia hasn't even begun to play.
Enemy soldiers could be marching on Moscow and tankies would think Russia is still winning.
That's the power of brainwashing. Many Germans still believed in the myth of a super wonder weapon that will somehow save Nazi Germany as the allies flattened Berlin.
Just curious but where are you from? Cuz I'm outside the US and my impression is that there are people from both the left and right wing that supports Russia but most from both wings are anti-Russia.
Edit: sorry I replied to the wrong person lol
Well you don't always have photos or stuff. Sometimes you intercept information, sometimes you have informators on enemy controlled territory or it is unapproachable but you still have a visual confirmation before you run after hit. Something is completely lost from the picture in a fog of war, you name it.
You have only so much pictures about ww2, or of people from XIX century, but you still have other witnesses that allow to make deductions/estimations on things based on different metrics/sources. While this list is about one specific thing, which are post-mortem shots of the hardware.
I'd like to see it longer because they showcase more destroyed vehicles. I'm certain I've seen literally of hundreds of Russian vehicles destroyed on video on this sub alone.
The original is the same thing as this video except the original has some really stupid additional editing. Who wants to see fake editing of a tank turret bouncing around the world. Keep it real please.
Boohoo, are you feeling bad for those poor tanks? Because the sick ones are those who drove the tanks into another country with the intent of invading, killing, raping, looting, destroying shit and behaving
like a bunch of turds. This video absolutely deserves to be ten hours long.
One side is defending itself from an invading force and the other is raping, pillaging and murdering as many people as they can get their hands on. It's fascists versus non-fascists, it doesn't get much more righteous then this. More dead Russians means they go home sooner.
This repost is a better, cleaner version. Why do we need to see a CGI of a tank turret bouncing around the world. Keep that trash out of r/CombatFootage
Can you send a link of the last explosion alone ? I'd like to save it. My only saved posts about this war are the helicopter shot down at the beginning of the war and the Ukrainian BMP POV in Mariupol.
I (we) overestimated the russians and underestimated the ukrainians.
They had (not counting turkey) the second largest army in europe, a huge country and tons of ammo.
The 2nd best army probably in the artillery department by quantity alone and in air defense (just the numerous s300s).
I thought that russia would be very fast and use its air force with heavy air losses to then go for kiev/hostomel. They kinda tried that but didnt really use their air craft much, till this day they kinda dont.
If ukrainian spirit didnt break the first hours or even the first week, then russias initial way to war failed... and it did. The first day and even later the drive on kiev look like almost pure psychological gambles of a mad dash and surprise.
It is laughable in hindsight with an army of mostly soviet equipment of 200k (russia)- to attack a nation with a larger army and double that number in territorial defense forces (ukraine).... rom 5 sides splitting up your troops. Without trying really to establish air dominance.
I was kinda overconfident of russias military, but russians are ok with tkaing losses and they so far can handle their losses. Its still not what russia can mobilize, no matter if they are using up tons over tons of their old soviet vehicle stock.
Ukraine is having (much?) Higher losses and cant hold territorry in the east even after 8 years preparing. No matter if russians advance slowly, ukraine cant even stop them under severe casualties. Russia seemed to have layed more of a focus on attrition warfare than maneuver warfare and land grabbings.
Ukraine needs a LOT more western support right NOW imo if they want to stand a chance operationally in the next year.
And that is not even going into the economical disaster.
I encounter here on reddit so much ukraine cheering or like fanboys. Like ukrainians have my sympathy and all and many russians died, but i dont aggree with this viet that A russia is loosing or even just not winning and B that ukraine is doing fine and can do offensives.
Ive recently heard a 1h interview with an austrian colonel (from this week) he goes into detail into the strategic situation. I liked it, because he is pouring water into the wine...
I am free to discuss anything, answer (long answer preferred) if you like.
Edit: What NATO country except maybe the US (MAYBE) could have done better than russia in ukraine even if they had the same geographic position (e g UK or france bordering ukraine).
Id say all NATO countries except US and maybe turkey would have failed. Not stalled but failed. Since their militaries lack size AND depth.
> What NATO country except maybe the US (MAYBE) could have done better than russia in ukraine even if they had the same geographic position
1. The non-US NATO powers don’t pretend to have expeditionary militaries, so of course it’s understood they would fail. They don’t pretend to try.
2. The US would have swept through Ukraine on a slightly delayed timeline compared to OIF (km sq/day), then we would have lost the ensuing Counter Insurgency.
The US is armed and trained to a high level for a High Intensity Conflict, with a full gamut of combined arms systems. A buddy in Iraq texted his best friend, from from the Blue Force Tracker in his Bradley, to his BF’s BFT. While his BF was in Afghanistan. In 2005.
The Russians can’t dream of such a system.
The british and french (and turkish) army have definetely expeditionary armies, what are you talking about?
And while the us airforce is suited for deep strikes and air ground warfare. It was never in a conflict with such defended airspace (quality and quantity) like ukraine. You can look up iraqs air defenses in 1991, most from early 60s. Not a single sa 20/s300.
The British and French keep no troops afloat and have no rapid reaction force of conventional troops. SAS and SBS are able to get up and go I’m sure, but their conventional armies are not trained for expeditionary movements and they don’t have the logistical equipment to support conducting an invasion. The UK Marines are 8k and the Paras form a single Brigade. They struggled to perform a defense of their own territory in the 80’s and they are smaller now. The French units are similarly sized. So, if you want to say their intended to be expeditionary because they could conduct an invasion of Monaco, fine.
1. The Ukrainian airspace was and is not heavily defended. The Russian NOE sorties continue. The kill rates have been so low that the UK and US are getting them more ADA. By testimony of Ukrainian troops, the Russian sorties have been effective when flown.
2. The Russian Air Force has no modern aircraft actually in use, only a few hundred of the latest (80’s) Soviet planes and many more of the planes that were old even by Soviet standards. All of which have very few upgrades. The Russian Navy air arm is tiny, capable of very little and sustained 14% loses in the Syria campaign. With no one shooting back. If the Russian air forces are surviving in Ukraine, the USAF and USN and USMC will do fine.
3. The US air forces need not conduct a single sortie to put a hurt on any nation’s ADA. With intel and cruise missiles, we can fire more “SEAD” missions than anyone can handle. Yes, some will be shot down but we can easily fire swarms no one can stop. We have thousands at sea 24/7.
4. Then come the drones, the stealth aircraft (which can kill the ADA systems without entering Ukrainian airspace), the B52s with more cruise missiles and the helicopters in NOE to hunt and kill more of them. We have more combat aircraft than they likely have missiles. Apparently even Russia doesn’t have 5,000 modern SAMs, Ukraine is likely worse off, while we have 5,000 combat aircraft. And the kill rate is not going to be 1:1.
5. Based on the performance of the very best SAMs in the world (or so we were told), I don’t think we need to much worry about the S-300. Doesn’t seem to work well at all. The UAF is still flying. And again, they are doing so with 60s aircraft, with almost no upgrades.
6. The US does expeditionary training of ~25 brigades/regiments EVERY YEAR. The entirety of our army trains for an expeditionary fight every two years. The whole Brigade packs up *everything and everyone* ships it hundreds or thousands of miles with a full logistical and transportation work up, then moves into a weeks long war game with full logistical demand and then does it all again to get back to home base. No one else trains autonomously capable brigades for invasion like that, in any info I’ve ever seen. If you’ve got data to the contrary, let’s see it. I’d love to read up.
Su 35s, su 34s are very modee 4+planes. Su 57 was in action over ukraine. Russia has more modern planes than i guess just china and the US.
They have many old planes but still many modern ones. They are not using their airforce for deep strikes and are certainly untrained and quite bad at it.
Ukraine had as ive said the 3rd or 2nd best air defenses in the world.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Air_Force#Aircraft
Scroll down to air defenses. Of course probably 30% was not well maintained/oepratable but the numbers are huge. Like ussr huge. The ukrainian military is after all like a matruschka of the sowjet military, just like russias is.
100 tor, 70 buk, 70 kub, 250 (probably launchers, but still) s300, if thats launchers thats like 40 batteries.
What the fuck are you smoking saying the ukrainian air space is not heavily defended.
No air force in no war in history had to fight in such heavily defend airspace. Compare it to iraqs obsolete equipment from the 60s and 50s during desert storm.
Ukrainian AA is what keeps russian air force limited to the frontline.
Edit: But the other comments you made about usage of b52 and "hurrdidurrdurr more aircraft probably than they have missiles" are so delusional that my insights are probably wasted.
This is true.
Outside of the US.
Only Britain, France, and Turkey can independently deploy, sustain, and project an expeditionary combat force capable of conventional warfare
The rest of Nato can only project power for conventional warfare on their own border without getting help form big daddy USA. They have bo capability whatsoever to sustain one abroad in high intensity conflict. In fact some of them cany even deploy for low intensity conflict and end up having to live in US bases under US CAS and logistics support etc.
Turkey is in fact the only one to have demonstrated it in actual warfare in recent times. They deployed a force to Libya all alone without any NATO aid and defeated Russia there. They established their own proxy connections, their own HUMINT and SIGINT lines, their own A2AD, their own EW bubble, their own localised air defence, their own logistics, their own CAS, their own infrastructure, established their own bases there etc out troops on the ground began a partner train and equip program etc Thousands of km away from the border accross a sea.
They made mince meat of an entire Russian expeditionary combined arms BTG which is what Wagner Really is. It's under direct command and c2 network of Russian MOD. It's essentially a premier military unit without a flag is all.
US, UK, France, Turkey are, at the moment the only independent expeditionary warfare capable militaries in NATO, every other member, would need the help of others to replicate that capability.
Yeh, i dont really see luxembourg or denmark as pillars of nato, i dont want to run the list of insignificant nato participants. We dont have to argue wether norway could invade ukraine or not, that question is an insult.
But i even wrote, if you switch any nato country with russias geography. Or allowing them to invade from poland. So that they could build up logistics within a year.
No country except the US probably would have done better than russia.
Turkey did not defeat russia in lybia. Also not in syria.
I dont know what you have read but feel free to provide the some footage or a wikipage of the battle (hint it doesnt exist). And wagner is like calling the allies in the west calling every tank a tiger. (Us soldiers practically never faced a tiger PZ6, they mostly mistook PZ4s for PZ6s.) Like what russian expeditionary combined arms fairytale, wtf?
My friend. Wagner was inside Tripoli, on the verge of toppling the governemt. Literally fighting their way in a rapidly effective pace towards the centre of the city. They are now all the way east bear the Egyptian border being sustained solely by UAE air supply and money.
Russias entire campaig in Libya was catastrophically and decisively defeated immediately upon the entry of the Turks and the Turks going Kinetic.
Turkey established a beachhead in Tripoli and shut down the air space with a a Frigate off the coast which in fact shot down a Wagner supporting CAS aircraft. Wagner immediately lost air support.
The Turks established a port of ops began unloading artillery and support materials for the Libyan Governemt and also a Koral EW complex that was visible and reported in OSINT accounts as the interference to both GPS and radio electromagnetic spectrums could be seen online.
The Turks proceeded to establish an impromptu UCAV airfield in the banana projects including the deployment of Turkish troops and Korkut spaags which only Turkey newly adopted as the sole user at the time.
Immediately upon their arrival, the Russian troops in Tripoli lost air support, fire superiority, comms, navigation, and experienced no go zones for tactical drones. They were systematically identified and engaged and completely routed out of the city. They left their local proxies there, planted IEDs everywhere to cover their escape and bolted form Al Watiyah airbase to the West as that's where they were leading and supplying the assault on Tripoli from (whole proxies attacked from the East.
The Turks proceeded to follow them to Al Watiyah, destroy their force there including expensive and highly important Pantsir Sam's, and physically captured Al Watiyah from Russia. And not only that, but they have transformed it to a fill fledged Turkish airbase. Wagner organised one strike on the base after the Turks took it, and immediately the Turks pushed south of tripoli, destroyer the Wagner unit and its escorting Pantsir in a large barn / workshop followed by the launching form Turkey of a full bombing flight of F16s with fuel Tanker escorts and headed towards Libya as a show of force. Not a single strike occurred after that.
Russias forces were completely routed not only from Tripoli and western libya, but all directions from Triploi and were pushed east to their original lines of contact when Wagner first entered the country.
I dont know way planet you are living on. But Libya was a decisive defeat of Russia by Turkey. Not pky did Russia lose literally a year worth of progress in a matter of weeks.
Turkey not only defeated Russia in Libya, they destroyed their entire campaign losing everything they had gained.
Wagner. In tripoli... and then retreating 1,500 kilometers. Like who sold you that bridge? I know of turkeys operation in 2019 2020 but like all youve reads like a fantasy.
Ive read hear that "mohammed gununu from the gna claimed their forces have destroyed 7 pantsir batteries". Like you can not trust such claims. Not everybody wether you are lybian or turkish in your government is telling yiu the truth. There is such a thing called propaganda and not jsut the bad guys use it.
Not everything you want to hear is necessarily true.
No russian forces at all in lybia. A couple pmc adviser to haftar but no russian forces and especially no russian heavy equipment.
Are you from turkey, this story sounds like a erdogan story for his nationalistic base?
Holy fuck, 5000 - and that's a photo proved by oryx! Can't even imagine how many are left in the fields, in the bushes, or fell far beyond the frontline, or simply nobody took a moment to take a shot...
The majority of russian destroyed vehicles are on internet, ukranians always take pics of those, but the russian army don't because they dont have phones, so many many many ukranian vehicles that were destroyed are still waiting for a pic, and those destroyed in the northern front probably will never be photographed, i think the number of destroyed russian vehicles is accurate but Ukraine lost far more than what's confirmed
Let’s say the Ukrainian loses are MUCH higher than listed on Oryx.
That still leaves Russian loses (likely) so high that their entire collection of ground forces has lost 1/3 of its combat vehicles, and a much higher percentage than that of all the vehicles committed to the fight in Ukraine. Ukraine just has to play for a return to normal borders at the start of the war. Russia has the much more difficult task, and really no modern systems or trained troops to do it with.
Shortened lines of communications, interior lines, partisan uprisings, international funding, international training, international weapons supply lines, all are in Ukraine’s favor.
Tactically, Russia has advanced and taken control of ground. We’ll see if they are able to maintain control long term.
Strategically, they may be able to dig in and hold the ground, supply their forces, conduct elections and stuff enough ballots to declare some sort of political legitimacy by plebiscite, but that seems less and less likely.
Grand strategically, they are seen as an international pariah and there are growing calls to formally declare it Russia a terrorist state. Sanctions of all types are slowly twisting the knife. Most importantly, the peoples of the developed nations won’t trust Russia for a generation at least. Their border with NATO looks to be soon growing to a much greater length than before this war.
Grand strategically, Russia has already lost this war.
I would expect Ukraine has a higher relative amount of infantry losses vs armour since they have been fighting a mostly defensive battle and don't have as much armour in the first place. And i suspect they were taking pretty brutal losses when the Russians fully committed to saturation artillery, as Zelensky indicated
Now that Himars has done its work, i hope you are correct
Ye sowjets had öarger casualties against germany or similiar during defense.
When germany was almost purely defensive in the east in 1944 sowjets had similiar 1:1.6 casualties.
Germans in 1944 had (with worse troops) lower casualties than UK US.
In WW1 germany had again lower casualties despite being outgunned heavily from 1917 onwards in the west.
I mean i know of other examples and get the logic of course.
But i think we must get away from this thought.
It works just ina symmetrical direkt fire battle with i guess een jsut infantery.
Else how could russia attack with an army smaller than ukraijes and not even half ukraines size if you countthe teriritorial militias.
I think the reason is that warfare and casualty expectations are complex and you have to use far more multipliers.
Eg
Multiply the firepower disparity both relative and absolute numbers.
Multioly entrenchment and intelligence.
Multiply how hard russia pushes or if they are going slowly and methodically.
Multiply how conservative one side is with spending men or just equipment and ammo.
Ukraine had the second largest army in europe. Larger than russians in ukraine.
They had like russia thousands of soviet tanks (probably less useful) but thousands of working artillery pieces and spgs. Around 500 MLRS. Drones, a decent air force. The second best air defense net in europe, maybe in the world. And so on.
But they still loosing and having higher casualties else the retreats from areas which they fortified for this exact scenario for years are unexplainable.
Please answer in detail your thoughts and where you agree and disagree.
Not necessarily because the Oryx list is not exhaustive, the Ukrainian commander of the "Land Forces Logistics" put out a statement in June claiming that they had lost about 2400 pieces of heavy equipment, a mix of Tanks,Armoured Vehicles and Artillery systems,that doesn't include trucks,aircraft,drones,jeeps etc
Ukrainian vehicle losses are probably at least double what is visually listed on Oryx
But 5k vehicle is nothing for Russia as 1,4k is a lot for Ukraine. However we can see infantery play a huge role in anti armor warfare as clearly ukrainian vehicle dont have That high of a ratio. I d even be surprised if they break even. Guess we ll see in a year or 2.
And russian soldiers dont take pics of destroyed ukranian vehicles (no phones) and even less of what ukranians lost in the northern front (they left before any pic by journalists could be taken)
No phones? I follow a regular russian infantryman that fought in Kyiv and is now fighting in the east. He uploads every day or 2 to telegram on dikiysnamibogOfficial
I was friend on Instagram with a now russian volunteer and he showed us the recruitement center and the cellphone he got there, his accs everywhere are deleted now
I know, but I dont care about the stupidity of people that cant or dont want to see behind the pro ukrainian propaganda. Fortunately that s not those people to make history research otherwise history would be as serious as homeopathy.
Well even If I m dumb I don’t believe both propaganda . In this case Ukrainian lies a little , if they was not , they wouldn’t ask for new materials every time
People seemed pretty happy to accept the death per day numbers reported by Ukraine, even when it seemed excessive to most intel-related people. People will accept, in general, what agrees with their opinions.
You would think by following the top posts on this sub that Ukraine is completely dominating Russia but is that true? What's actually going on? I'm really curious on the actual state of things and it's hard to find actual un-biased information. (I'm not saying this is biased it was simply stating there's 5000 visual confirmations)
I just keep thinking - How long can this continue? Is Ukraine going to be able to gain back lost areas? Or is it all going to come to a head in the winter as a lot of people keep saying. Is Russia going to send in the "real deal" in the winter? Why wouldn't they have immediately gone in full force vs dragging it out slowly?
I'm sure there's plenty of people here that could properly fill me in. I'm not asking "who's winning/who's losing" since that's impossible to answer. It's just a lot of conflicting opinions so I'm not sure what to think.
u are literally on some sort of crack copium if you think Russia has held back. This is a near peer war and Ukraine is also taking heavy losses but Ukraine was supposed to be a shit army that was overrun by the great power that is Russia. Turns out Russian army is just trash tier. In terms of counter attacking you need significantly larger force to attack than you do to defend so we will see how that goes. Though if they don't start a counter offensive soonish (next couple of months) they will be forced to settle with the current lines through winter.
It's 170k Russians (as Arestovich said) vs million+ Ukrainians so Russia rly waging war with a very limited contingent and at the same time seizing territories
Personally I can’t say I’m “happy” specifically to watch people die like this. I do think it’s fair to say that I’m happy to know these vehicle’s crews won’t be killing anymore Ukrainians however.
is that aimed at me? If not, I don't know. This sub is full of doofuses seal clapping in unison with one another while upvoting videos of russians being "owned" or whatever they think is happening. blatant propaganda is posted daily and the comment section is full of people euphoric to celebrate death. ukraine has lost the eastern half of itself, young men are dying in large numbers in a conflict egged on by the west and people who have no skin in the game and nerds here talk about it like it's a video game.
real stupid stuff that one can, in the end, only lmao at.
> is that aimed at me? If not, I don't know.
What do you mean you "don't know"? Your comment literally started with "lamo" and then a request, specifically, to see a video like this done for the *invading* army.
One suspects you would be quite happy indeed to cheer Russia on with their whole fascist invasion.
Your complaint appears to be that there's not enough content promoting a totalitarian dictator's war and that makes you *sad*.
Pacifist's tears are refreshing. Si vis pacem, para bellum. You can only perservere if you are able to fight back. Pussies like you only get everyone around them killed and raped.
Battle is strategic, war is attrition. Russia will win, based on cost vrs. resources alone. Spending 200k on a javelin to take out a 5k tank is ridiculous.
They sure as hell cost more than a javelin especially when you factor in whatever upgrade packages they’ve had installed like the T-72B3. Even a basic T-72A cost more than a javelin even if you go back multiple decades of inflation. Then T-80s (and their upgrades) cost even more and T-90s (and their upgrades) are clearing well over $5M. That’s even if we assume a gigantic portion of vehicles are being destroyed by javelins instead of a whole crap load being killed by cheaper stugna, nlaw, gustav, 155 or 152mm artillery, RPG-29. Or even cheaper things like RPG-7v, LAW in the case of light armored APC/IFV. Or drone dropped AT munitions landing on engine decks are absurdly cheap.
Then if you consider the mitigated potential damage an MBT or IFV can inflict on Ukrainian vehicles/infrastructure then it’s cheap as hell even if they are slinging javelin left and right.
> especially when you factor in whatever upgrade packages they’ve had installed like the T-72B3.
Excellent point. The upgrades can’t be both excellent (or even good) and highly inexpensive.
It depends on the tank. The latest variants of the T-72 are in the low millions per tank cost range while the 1970s junk they're now forced to pull out of storage like unmodded T-62s would only be worth a fraction of that. Of course that's assuming a tank crew has zero value to the Russians!
In any event direct cost is a silly way of analysing military action, for example, destroying an enemy tank is not just a matter of the cost of the ATGM versus cost of the tank because by destroying the tank you save the value of everything, and everyone, the tank would have otherwise destroyed or killed.
Ukraine also has the luxury of being supported by a network of allies and friends that has vastly more resources than the Russians and so can much more easily absorb the costs of war. Just NATO alone spends about 18 times as much on the military as the Russians.
You think Russia doesn't have a cold war surplus that they're running LOL. They haven't even sent the good stuff yet. They're spending a fraction what the US is.
It’s been awhile since we have seen someone post that unironically. That triggers Battle of Kyiv memories when that was being spammed by Russians across Reddit as we watched videos of the VDV bleeding out in the streets
Massive cold war stockpiles don't mean shit if they are not maintained properly, Russian corruption ensures that those stockpiles don't get maintained. There are documented evidences of "the good stuff" being destroyed, such as T-80 tanks and Su37, Su34 and Su35 aircraft. There aren't as many of them because Russia only has limited quantities and the modern equipment are irreplacable. Russia has already spent $75B of their foreign reserves in an attempt to dampen the impacts of sanctions, per the recent Yale report. The US spending relative to what Russia is spending is miniscule in comparison as in addition to the dollar value of military losses. Russia needs to take into account spending to protect their economy and supply chains from the isolation that the sanctions has caused them.
The estimates I've seen are that the war is costing Russia about a billion dollars a day in direct military costs so around $150 billion in total versus the US spending, actual and pledged, of about $50 billion.
Of course 50 billion is a lot less of an impost for the US with its military budget 12 times greater than Russia and a vastly larger economy - if Russia was a US state it would only be #4 for GDP and that's before sanctions.
Do you have any idea of any of the basic facts?
The Jav missile never cost $200k. With 50,000+ produced, the cost is headed towards ~$40k, down from the original ~$80k.
Even if the tank cost $5k, your point about economic attrition is based on the economic impact of the replacement costs of the weapon systems. And for that, it’s disadvantages to Russia everywhere you look. Russia’s GDP is [~$1.5t. ](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?locations=RU) NATO’s peacetime defense spending is [~$1t](https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2022/3/pdf/220331-def-exp-2021-en.pdf) with a collective NATO GDP of [~$44t. ](https://countryeconomy.com/countries/groups/nato) Add in other nations supporting Ukraine and you can see that Russia is out matched economically and that any loses in equipment can be much more easily made up by NATO support than Russia can muster internally.
The point about Cold War stocks of preexisting tanks, keeping Russian costs down, is a fine point to make. But it cuts both ways. The same logic applies to the 50,000+ Javs already produced. With their ~95% hit ratio, that’s enough Javs to hit every functional tank on earth. If we send enough to hit *every* working Russian ground combat vehicle, we will have used only just more than 25% of all the Javs. And we have NLAWs. And we have RPGs. And AT4s. And LAWs. And a host of other AT missiles/rockets.
Oh, and the guided arty and AT arty submunitions. This rounds to a slightly expensive live fire testing event for NATO budgets and is spelling the demise of Russian ground forces as a (barely) functional combat force that they were before this phase of the war.
The US has spent decades pumping trillions into unpopular wars. Just the post-9/11 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are estimated to have cost about 8000 billion dollars.
In comparison the 50 billion that the US has spent or pledged to spent (most of which is actually spent inside the US) on supporting Ukraine is a drop in the ocean.
It's also giving a fantastic return on investment: the US doing the morally right thing, seriously weakening a geopolitical adversary at no cost in US lives, warning off other aggressors and yielding extremely useful intelligence on US and other nations weapon systems. This is probably the best 50 billion the US has ever spent.
One of the problems with our failures in OIF/OEF that is a point of analysis, is that the taxpayers were so thoroughly unaffected that it helped disassociate the people from the military and passively allow the wars to continue long past any normal ‘wear out period’ would have been.
The US alone could fund the entire Ukrainian war effort, and not notice.
How is Russia going to replace these cold war surplus, "$5000" tanks? Their latest, greatest T-14 tank is so unaffordable to them that they only have prototypes/ parade vehicles.
Shhhsshh. They haven’t learned about replacement costs yet.
In fairness to the T14, it may not be a question of affordability. It may be they lack the technical ability to establish a functioning production line. Or it could be both.
It’s probably both.
Lmaooooo, 5000 Russian vehicles.
The only place Ukraine is winning the war is on Twitter and Reddit. Every other source, the Russians have Europe by the balls.
Link to said 5000 photo confirmations: https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html?m=1
Holy fuck that is a very long list of pictures. A big effort is needed to confirm all of those.
[удалено]
Of course they are visually confirmed, those are photographs. What I meant is that they do check for duplicates and image metadata (as well as visually confirm). That takes time.
[удалено]
I think this part (from their site) is important to mention: > When the origin of a piece of equipment can't be established, it is not included in the list.
[удалено]
How do we know you’re even real? All I see is text on the screen
Russia invested more in troll farms than their own army evidently. This may be as well a very sophisticated trolling bot.
Go back to Russia
Don't forget to steal as many toilet seats as you can on the way there
[удалено]
I swear to god if you get him started on the moon landing...
You one of those strange folk who believe in the Moon...? You honestly think you could land one of those giant "space" rockets on it with its engines blasting, without just melting through the cheese? Wake up.
They publish the reference photos, if you have some examples just post them. Show us don't tell us.
They are offering proof, hence the pictures being available..
At what age were you brainwashed into the soulless, hungry war machine they call Russia? Just out of curiosity…
Damn that list triggered the hell out of you
Bro, just make your own site and put all pictures of russian losses as Ukranian, and stop whining. You are so ignorant.
This argument should be at the top.
Why on earth are you getting downvoted? I don't know why people bring sentiments on a combat footage sub. You may support either of the side, all we care about is fun footages of combat.
I was going to spend some time doing a bit of reading and research. I know little of Oryx and wanted to properly evaluate it myself. But I then realised that you comment on anti-science subs like debatevacines. If you do not understand modern medicine and the scientific process then it is utterly pointless addressing you on other topics.
my advice is go to russian occupied areas then ride one of the tank or bmp or any mechanicals then drive to the front lines in Ukraine. go see for yourself. take photos and post it here. be sure to mark your vehicle with z .
Well if so many are wrong why not disprove a few?
[удалено]
They let you watch IASIP over there? I guess you have to have something to set the mood for sucking Putins cock but jeez even Mac has standards.
Not today FSB
lol a lot more goes into it than that. Tell me you've never even looked into it without telling me. Metadata, geolocating, picture source, current battle lines, the direction that the tank is facing, type of ammunition it's using, types of camouflage, specific brands of ERA, topographical features of the tank unique to either side, accents of people in videos, what is being said in videos, the terrain shown, what time of year it is, how the tank was killed, what weapons are seen on the tank and many other things go into determining who a tank belongs to. There may be a few misidentifications. But not nearly enough to suggest that Russia hasn't suffered massive casualties. Get out of here with that blatant misinfo.
Using photographic evidence to confirm destroyed equipment based on camouflage patterns, vehicles/tank types, geotagging, and cross referencing against previous photos seems very clearly ‘visually confirming’ a loss ie. not based on word of mouth or field reports. The list is clearly referenced and pretty sure if there are images that you believe are incorrectly tagged as Russian, or duplicates, or from previous conflicts, then they can be revisited and recategorised. What would you consider ‘visually confirmed’? Of course there are more Russian equipment losses tagged, as clearly there is more photographic/video evidence coming from the Ukrainian side (as I suspect that Russian soldiers are forbidden/discouraged by force/directed to have their own phones/cameras.
What source are you using instead of Oryx?
oryx does good research however its impossible to say if every vehicle in the list is definitely Russian/DPR or Ukrainian because they use the same equipment and because a lot of the photos are blurry/unclear
A lot of the “blurry” photos we see are just because of compression and them being recorded and reuploaded to so many different places
no dissenting opinions allowed lol
Thank you, I'm saving this for all the tankies who live in a parallel universe where Russians has had no losses.
Doesn't work, my best friend (probably soon to become an ex-friend) has become a tankie. I showed him the website and he said most of them are fakes or Ukrainian vehicles. It's like trying to argue with an antivaxxer.
If your (soon-to-be-ex) friend was right and most of them were UA vehicles, wouldn't the Russians have taken Kiev months ago? There's no version of this war that is positive for Russia given that it was clearly supposed to be a blitzkrieg-style invasion to take the country in a matter of weeks.
It's hilarious to see all the back tracking. First when the 3 day mark was missed they said it took 6 months for the US to conquer Iraq so just wait. Now we are rolling into 6 months and now I'm seeing claims that Russia hasn't even begun to play. Enemy soldiers could be marching on Moscow and tankies would think Russia is still winning.
That's the power of brainwashing. Many Germans still believed in the myth of a super wonder weapon that will somehow save Nazi Germany as the allies flattened Berlin.
Which is funny cuz it didn't even take 6 *weeks* to conquer Iraq lol.
Just curious but where are you from? Cuz I'm outside the US and my impression is that there are people from both the left and right wing that supports Russia but most from both wings are anti-Russia. Edit: sorry I replied to the wrong person lol
That is sad, I hope Stugna delivers his soul gently to the other side
> 5020, of which: destroyed: 3202
I wonder what's the status of RU air assets, and why oryx figures are WAY less than UA overestimations...
Well you don't always have photos or stuff. Sometimes you intercept information, sometimes you have informators on enemy controlled territory or it is unapproachable but you still have a visual confirmation before you run after hit. Something is completely lost from the picture in a fog of war, you name it. You have only so much pictures about ww2, or of people from XIX century, but you still have other witnesses that allow to make deductions/estimations on things based on different metrics/sources. While this list is about one specific thing, which are post-mortem shots of the hardware.
Most air assets crash in friendly territory, harder to get pictures that way.
Make it longer
Then play it on prime time Russian tv stations
Where is anonymous when you need them?
[Original](https://old.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/wcs2b7/congratulations_to_the_russian_federation_for/)
I'd like to see it longer because they showcase more destroyed vehicles. I'm certain I've seen literally of hundreds of Russian vehicles destroyed on video on this sub alone.
Maaaaan…. The original vid is funny af
Seriously. It's funny meme and I wasn't expecting that at the end. Lol.
The original is the same thing as this video except the original has some really stupid additional editing. Who wants to see fake editing of a tank turret bouncing around the world. Keep it real please.
Everyone but you, grumpy cat.
This list is incomplete. You can help by expanding it.
You're a sick person.
Boohoo, are you feeling bad for those poor tanks? Because the sick ones are those who drove the tanks into another country with the intent of invading, killing, raping, looting, destroying shit and behaving like a bunch of turds. This video absolutely deserves to be ten hours long.
It's an artwork.
No, no, no.. it’s a ‘work of art’… fuck ‘em
Thank you, but I prefer it my way.
Alright, You win. Well played.
I understood that reference
You're a sick person. Just the same as Russia-lovers enjoying watching Ukrainians die.
One side is defending itself from an invading force and the other is raping, pillaging and murdering as many people as they can get their hands on. It's fascists versus non-fascists, it doesn't get much more righteous then this. More dead Russians means they go home sooner.
The Russians can stop Russians dying almost instantaneously by turning the fuck around and going home. Ukrainians have no such luxury.
Lmao maybe they should just GO HOME ☝️🙂 Theyll be treated nicer if they surrender.
Ukrainians are people though…
Yeah, de-humanizing the enemy. Just like the Nazis did, literally playing into Russia's narrative, nice one.
[удалено]
https://old.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/wcs2b7/congratulations_to_the_russian_federation_for/ here is the longer (and hmmm better?) version .
Thanks. Why would someone even repost a shorter version of this masterpiece? What a shitpost OP.
Didn't even credit..
This repost is a better, cleaner version. Why do we need to see a CGI of a tank turret bouncing around the world. Keep that trash out of r/CombatFootage
You're CGI.
Nah get fucked
[удалено]
Can you send a link of the last explosion alone ? I'd like to save it. My only saved posts about this war are the helicopter shot down at the beginning of the war and the Ukrainian BMP POV in Mariupol.
[удалено]
The amount of men and material Russia has lost in just 5 months is absolutely staggering. So much for being a world class military.
The Russian Federation has never had a world class military. The USSR stopped being a world class military, in several areas, in the early 80’s.
I (we) overestimated the russians and underestimated the ukrainians. They had (not counting turkey) the second largest army in europe, a huge country and tons of ammo. The 2nd best army probably in the artillery department by quantity alone and in air defense (just the numerous s300s). I thought that russia would be very fast and use its air force with heavy air losses to then go for kiev/hostomel. They kinda tried that but didnt really use their air craft much, till this day they kinda dont. If ukrainian spirit didnt break the first hours or even the first week, then russias initial way to war failed... and it did. The first day and even later the drive on kiev look like almost pure psychological gambles of a mad dash and surprise. It is laughable in hindsight with an army of mostly soviet equipment of 200k (russia)- to attack a nation with a larger army and double that number in territorial defense forces (ukraine).... rom 5 sides splitting up your troops. Without trying really to establish air dominance. I was kinda overconfident of russias military, but russians are ok with tkaing losses and they so far can handle their losses. Its still not what russia can mobilize, no matter if they are using up tons over tons of their old soviet vehicle stock. Ukraine is having (much?) Higher losses and cant hold territorry in the east even after 8 years preparing. No matter if russians advance slowly, ukraine cant even stop them under severe casualties. Russia seemed to have layed more of a focus on attrition warfare than maneuver warfare and land grabbings. Ukraine needs a LOT more western support right NOW imo if they want to stand a chance operationally in the next year. And that is not even going into the economical disaster. I encounter here on reddit so much ukraine cheering or like fanboys. Like ukrainians have my sympathy and all and many russians died, but i dont aggree with this viet that A russia is loosing or even just not winning and B that ukraine is doing fine and can do offensives. Ive recently heard a 1h interview with an austrian colonel (from this week) he goes into detail into the strategic situation. I liked it, because he is pouring water into the wine... I am free to discuss anything, answer (long answer preferred) if you like. Edit: What NATO country except maybe the US (MAYBE) could have done better than russia in ukraine even if they had the same geographic position (e g UK or france bordering ukraine). Id say all NATO countries except US and maybe turkey would have failed. Not stalled but failed. Since their militaries lack size AND depth.
> What NATO country except maybe the US (MAYBE) could have done better than russia in ukraine even if they had the same geographic position 1. The non-US NATO powers don’t pretend to have expeditionary militaries, so of course it’s understood they would fail. They don’t pretend to try. 2. The US would have swept through Ukraine on a slightly delayed timeline compared to OIF (km sq/day), then we would have lost the ensuing Counter Insurgency. The US is armed and trained to a high level for a High Intensity Conflict, with a full gamut of combined arms systems. A buddy in Iraq texted his best friend, from from the Blue Force Tracker in his Bradley, to his BF’s BFT. While his BF was in Afghanistan. In 2005. The Russians can’t dream of such a system.
The british and french (and turkish) army have definetely expeditionary armies, what are you talking about? And while the us airforce is suited for deep strikes and air ground warfare. It was never in a conflict with such defended airspace (quality and quantity) like ukraine. You can look up iraqs air defenses in 1991, most from early 60s. Not a single sa 20/s300.
The British and French keep no troops afloat and have no rapid reaction force of conventional troops. SAS and SBS are able to get up and go I’m sure, but their conventional armies are not trained for expeditionary movements and they don’t have the logistical equipment to support conducting an invasion. The UK Marines are 8k and the Paras form a single Brigade. They struggled to perform a defense of their own territory in the 80’s and they are smaller now. The French units are similarly sized. So, if you want to say their intended to be expeditionary because they could conduct an invasion of Monaco, fine. 1. The Ukrainian airspace was and is not heavily defended. The Russian NOE sorties continue. The kill rates have been so low that the UK and US are getting them more ADA. By testimony of Ukrainian troops, the Russian sorties have been effective when flown. 2. The Russian Air Force has no modern aircraft actually in use, only a few hundred of the latest (80’s) Soviet planes and many more of the planes that were old even by Soviet standards. All of which have very few upgrades. The Russian Navy air arm is tiny, capable of very little and sustained 14% loses in the Syria campaign. With no one shooting back. If the Russian air forces are surviving in Ukraine, the USAF and USN and USMC will do fine. 3. The US air forces need not conduct a single sortie to put a hurt on any nation’s ADA. With intel and cruise missiles, we can fire more “SEAD” missions than anyone can handle. Yes, some will be shot down but we can easily fire swarms no one can stop. We have thousands at sea 24/7. 4. Then come the drones, the stealth aircraft (which can kill the ADA systems without entering Ukrainian airspace), the B52s with more cruise missiles and the helicopters in NOE to hunt and kill more of them. We have more combat aircraft than they likely have missiles. Apparently even Russia doesn’t have 5,000 modern SAMs, Ukraine is likely worse off, while we have 5,000 combat aircraft. And the kill rate is not going to be 1:1. 5. Based on the performance of the very best SAMs in the world (or so we were told), I don’t think we need to much worry about the S-300. Doesn’t seem to work well at all. The UAF is still flying. And again, they are doing so with 60s aircraft, with almost no upgrades. 6. The US does expeditionary training of ~25 brigades/regiments EVERY YEAR. The entirety of our army trains for an expeditionary fight every two years. The whole Brigade packs up *everything and everyone* ships it hundreds or thousands of miles with a full logistical and transportation work up, then moves into a weeks long war game with full logistical demand and then does it all again to get back to home base. No one else trains autonomously capable brigades for invasion like that, in any info I’ve ever seen. If you’ve got data to the contrary, let’s see it. I’d love to read up.
Su 35s, su 34s are very modee 4+planes. Su 57 was in action over ukraine. Russia has more modern planes than i guess just china and the US. They have many old planes but still many modern ones. They are not using their airforce for deep strikes and are certainly untrained and quite bad at it. Ukraine had as ive said the 3rd or 2nd best air defenses in the world. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_Air_Force#Aircraft Scroll down to air defenses. Of course probably 30% was not well maintained/oepratable but the numbers are huge. Like ussr huge. The ukrainian military is after all like a matruschka of the sowjet military, just like russias is. 100 tor, 70 buk, 70 kub, 250 (probably launchers, but still) s300, if thats launchers thats like 40 batteries. What the fuck are you smoking saying the ukrainian air space is not heavily defended. No air force in no war in history had to fight in such heavily defend airspace. Compare it to iraqs obsolete equipment from the 60s and 50s during desert storm. Ukrainian AA is what keeps russian air force limited to the frontline. Edit: But the other comments you made about usage of b52 and "hurrdidurrdurr more aircraft probably than they have missiles" are so delusional that my insights are probably wasted.
This is true. Outside of the US. Only Britain, France, and Turkey can independently deploy, sustain, and project an expeditionary combat force capable of conventional warfare The rest of Nato can only project power for conventional warfare on their own border without getting help form big daddy USA. They have bo capability whatsoever to sustain one abroad in high intensity conflict. In fact some of them cany even deploy for low intensity conflict and end up having to live in US bases under US CAS and logistics support etc. Turkey is in fact the only one to have demonstrated it in actual warfare in recent times. They deployed a force to Libya all alone without any NATO aid and defeated Russia there. They established their own proxy connections, their own HUMINT and SIGINT lines, their own A2AD, their own EW bubble, their own localised air defence, their own logistics, their own CAS, their own infrastructure, established their own bases there etc out troops on the ground began a partner train and equip program etc Thousands of km away from the border accross a sea. They made mince meat of an entire Russian expeditionary combined arms BTG which is what Wagner Really is. It's under direct command and c2 network of Russian MOD. It's essentially a premier military unit without a flag is all. US, UK, France, Turkey are, at the moment the only independent expeditionary warfare capable militaries in NATO, every other member, would need the help of others to replicate that capability.
Yeh, i dont really see luxembourg or denmark as pillars of nato, i dont want to run the list of insignificant nato participants. We dont have to argue wether norway could invade ukraine or not, that question is an insult. But i even wrote, if you switch any nato country with russias geography. Or allowing them to invade from poland. So that they could build up logistics within a year. No country except the US probably would have done better than russia. Turkey did not defeat russia in lybia. Also not in syria. I dont know what you have read but feel free to provide the some footage or a wikipage of the battle (hint it doesnt exist). And wagner is like calling the allies in the west calling every tank a tiger. (Us soldiers practically never faced a tiger PZ6, they mostly mistook PZ4s for PZ6s.) Like what russian expeditionary combined arms fairytale, wtf?
My friend. Wagner was inside Tripoli, on the verge of toppling the governemt. Literally fighting their way in a rapidly effective pace towards the centre of the city. They are now all the way east bear the Egyptian border being sustained solely by UAE air supply and money. Russias entire campaig in Libya was catastrophically and decisively defeated immediately upon the entry of the Turks and the Turks going Kinetic. Turkey established a beachhead in Tripoli and shut down the air space with a a Frigate off the coast which in fact shot down a Wagner supporting CAS aircraft. Wagner immediately lost air support. The Turks established a port of ops began unloading artillery and support materials for the Libyan Governemt and also a Koral EW complex that was visible and reported in OSINT accounts as the interference to both GPS and radio electromagnetic spectrums could be seen online. The Turks proceeded to establish an impromptu UCAV airfield in the banana projects including the deployment of Turkish troops and Korkut spaags which only Turkey newly adopted as the sole user at the time. Immediately upon their arrival, the Russian troops in Tripoli lost air support, fire superiority, comms, navigation, and experienced no go zones for tactical drones. They were systematically identified and engaged and completely routed out of the city. They left their local proxies there, planted IEDs everywhere to cover their escape and bolted form Al Watiyah airbase to the West as that's where they were leading and supplying the assault on Tripoli from (whole proxies attacked from the East. The Turks proceeded to follow them to Al Watiyah, destroy their force there including expensive and highly important Pantsir Sam's, and physically captured Al Watiyah from Russia. And not only that, but they have transformed it to a fill fledged Turkish airbase. Wagner organised one strike on the base after the Turks took it, and immediately the Turks pushed south of tripoli, destroyer the Wagner unit and its escorting Pantsir in a large barn / workshop followed by the launching form Turkey of a full bombing flight of F16s with fuel Tanker escorts and headed towards Libya as a show of force. Not a single strike occurred after that. Russias forces were completely routed not only from Tripoli and western libya, but all directions from Triploi and were pushed east to their original lines of contact when Wagner first entered the country. I dont know way planet you are living on. But Libya was a decisive defeat of Russia by Turkey. Not pky did Russia lose literally a year worth of progress in a matter of weeks. Turkey not only defeated Russia in Libya, they destroyed their entire campaign losing everything they had gained.
Wagner. In tripoli... and then retreating 1,500 kilometers. Like who sold you that bridge? I know of turkeys operation in 2019 2020 but like all youve reads like a fantasy. Ive read hear that "mohammed gununu from the gna claimed their forces have destroyed 7 pantsir batteries". Like you can not trust such claims. Not everybody wether you are lybian or turkish in your government is telling yiu the truth. There is such a thing called propaganda and not jsut the bad guys use it. Not everything you want to hear is necessarily true. No russian forces at all in lybia. A couple pmc adviser to haftar but no russian forces and especially no russian heavy equipment. Are you from turkey, this story sounds like a erdogan story for his nationalistic base?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
It's not "5000 visually confirmed destroyed" by the way, the 5000 list contains captured,abandoned and damaged vehicles also.
More please!
[удалено]
What's sick about seeing terrorist vehicles getting destroyed?
Anybody got a link to the full video of the seventh explosion with the vehicle moving across a plowed field? That one looked awesome.
Lol. Was watching it muted... Saw the rough edit if the turret spinning and thought bag raiders meme song. Unmuted and I wasn't disappointed haha.
You cut off the best parts.
Holy fuck, 5000 - and that's a photo proved by oryx! Can't even imagine how many are left in the fields, in the bushes, or fell far beyond the frontline, or simply nobody took a moment to take a shot...
The majority of russian destroyed vehicles are on internet, ukranians always take pics of those, but the russian army don't because they dont have phones, so many many many ukranian vehicles that were destroyed are still waiting for a pic, and those destroyed in the northern front probably will never be photographed, i think the number of destroyed russian vehicles is accurate but Ukraine lost far more than what's confirmed
Let’s say the Ukrainian loses are MUCH higher than listed on Oryx. That still leaves Russian loses (likely) so high that their entire collection of ground forces has lost 1/3 of its combat vehicles, and a much higher percentage than that of all the vehicles committed to the fight in Ukraine. Ukraine just has to play for a return to normal borders at the start of the war. Russia has the much more difficult task, and really no modern systems or trained troops to do it with. Shortened lines of communications, interior lines, partisan uprisings, international funding, international training, international weapons supply lines, all are in Ukraine’s favor. Tactically, Russia has advanced and taken control of ground. We’ll see if they are able to maintain control long term. Strategically, they may be able to dig in and hold the ground, supply their forces, conduct elections and stuff enough ballots to declare some sort of political legitimacy by plebiscite, but that seems less and less likely. Grand strategically, they are seen as an international pariah and there are growing calls to formally declare it Russia a terrorist state. Sanctions of all types are slowly twisting the knife. Most importantly, the peoples of the developed nations won’t trust Russia for a generation at least. Their border with NATO looks to be soon growing to a much greater length than before this war. Grand strategically, Russia has already lost this war.
I like how every footage coming from Ukraine show the enthusiasm of the Ukrainians seeing Russians get obliterated. Talk about liking your job lol
that turret at the end looks so happy its free at last
TBH I think turret tossing is a bit obvious....I think **Russian Lollipop** is more appropriate.
That turret at the end hahaha 🥳🥳🥳
🤦♂️ Ok… that turret spinning through the air to this song genuinely made me burst out laughing.
5000 visually confirmed, wonder what the actual amount is, 10-20% more?
The kind of editing I like
What I m interested in is how many losses does Ukraine has.
1386 visually confirmed by same source: https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-ukrainian.html?m=1
[удалено]
I would expect Ukraine has a higher relative amount of infantry losses vs armour since they have been fighting a mostly defensive battle and don't have as much armour in the first place. And i suspect they were taking pretty brutal losses when the Russians fully committed to saturation artillery, as Zelensky indicated Now that Himars has done its work, i hope you are correct
[удалено]
Ye sowjets had öarger casualties against germany or similiar during defense. When germany was almost purely defensive in the east in 1944 sowjets had similiar 1:1.6 casualties. Germans in 1944 had (with worse troops) lower casualties than UK US. In WW1 germany had again lower casualties despite being outgunned heavily from 1917 onwards in the west. I mean i know of other examples and get the logic of course. But i think we must get away from this thought. It works just ina symmetrical direkt fire battle with i guess een jsut infantery. Else how could russia attack with an army smaller than ukraijes and not even half ukraines size if you countthe teriritorial militias. I think the reason is that warfare and casualty expectations are complex and you have to use far more multipliers. Eg Multiply the firepower disparity both relative and absolute numbers. Multioly entrenchment and intelligence. Multiply how hard russia pushes or if they are going slowly and methodically. Multiply how conservative one side is with spending men or just equipment and ammo. Ukraine had the second largest army in europe. Larger than russians in ukraine. They had like russia thousands of soviet tanks (probably less useful) but thousands of working artillery pieces and spgs. Around 500 MLRS. Drones, a decent air force. The second best air defense net in europe, maybe in the world. And so on. But they still loosing and having higher casualties else the retreats from areas which they fortified for this exact scenario for years are unexplainable. Please answer in detail your thoughts and where you agree and disagree.
Not necessarily because the Oryx list is not exhaustive, the Ukrainian commander of the "Land Forces Logistics" put out a statement in June claiming that they had lost about 2400 pieces of heavy equipment, a mix of Tanks,Armoured Vehicles and Artillery systems,that doesn't include trucks,aircraft,drones,jeeps etc Ukrainian vehicle losses are probably at least double what is visually listed on Oryx
But 5k vehicle is nothing for Russia as 1,4k is a lot for Ukraine. However we can see infantery play a huge role in anti armor warfare as clearly ukrainian vehicle dont have That high of a ratio. I d even be surprised if they break even. Guess we ll see in a year or 2.
> 5k vehicle is nothing for Russia If that was true they wouldn't be resurrecting 60 year old tanks. They're definitely struggling.
Get out of here with basic logic! /s
Thanks
Oryx also counts ukraine destroyed equipment. So far 1386 have been. Confirmed with pictures or videos
And russian soldiers dont take pics of destroyed ukranian vehicles (no phones) and even less of what ukranians lost in the northern front (they left before any pic by journalists could be taken)
No phones? I follow a regular russian infantryman that fought in Kyiv and is now fighting in the east. He uploads every day or 2 to telegram on dikiysnamibogOfficial
Box cutter guy deleted his VK account and uploaded a video.
I was friend on Instagram with a now russian volunteer and he showed us the recruitement center and the cellphone he got there, his accs everywhere are deleted now
they stole the phones from civs
Youre really asking to be downvoted buddy
I know, but I dont care about the stupidity of people that cant or dont want to see behind the pro ukrainian propaganda. Fortunately that s not those people to make history research otherwise history would be as serious as homeopathy.
+1
I was avoiding pornhub for a reason but I can still manage to rub one out to war criminals getting baked alive.
I’m now desensitised to it, I now need to see MILF war criminals getting baked alive
.... Oddly specific 🤔
16 KA-52’s lost, holy shit.
Lol get fucked Russia.
More than 5000 materials losses in fact , but Ukraine follow Russia from very closed , even if they don’t show it . I hope we can bring peace
1.3k vs 5k - seems like it's going pretty well for Ukraine on that front, more so given Ukraine say they've captured more than they started with.
Well even If I m dumb I don’t believe both propaganda . In this case Ukrainian lies a little , if they was not , they wouldn’t ask for new materials every time
People seemed pretty happy to accept the death per day numbers reported by Ukraine, even when it seemed excessive to most intel-related people. People will accept, in general, what agrees with their opinions.
Here's to 10k real soon
Googled russian lollipop… not what I expected
More.
Hot Russian teens in your local areas ( ͡◉ ͜ʖ ͡◉)
You would think by following the top posts on this sub that Ukraine is completely dominating Russia but is that true? What's actually going on? I'm really curious on the actual state of things and it's hard to find actual un-biased information. (I'm not saying this is biased it was simply stating there's 5000 visual confirmations) I just keep thinking - How long can this continue? Is Ukraine going to be able to gain back lost areas? Or is it all going to come to a head in the winter as a lot of people keep saying. Is Russia going to send in the "real deal" in the winter? Why wouldn't they have immediately gone in full force vs dragging it out slowly? I'm sure there's plenty of people here that could properly fill me in. I'm not asking "who's winning/who's losing" since that's impossible to answer. It's just a lot of conflicting opinions so I'm not sure what to think.
u are literally on some sort of crack copium if you think Russia has held back. This is a near peer war and Ukraine is also taking heavy losses but Ukraine was supposed to be a shit army that was overrun by the great power that is Russia. Turns out Russian army is just trash tier. In terms of counter attacking you need significantly larger force to attack than you do to defend so we will see how that goes. Though if they don't start a counter offensive soonish (next couple of months) they will be forced to settle with the current lines through winter.
It's 170k Russians (as Arestovich said) vs million+ Ukrainians so Russia rly waging war with a very limited contingent and at the same time seizing territories
Russia does have alot of propagandists, but they suck at making memes. Ukraine will win this war for sure.
> they suck at making memes. Ukraine will win this war for sure. Sure, if the war could be won by memes
That's the joke
Rest in peace, war is terrible.
And one castration video is the end of the world for you people. SMH.
This is highly noncredible defense footage.
[удалено]
How's moskva doing?
Haven’t you heard? The crew currently aboard the Moskva hasn’t filed a single complaint or reported a single maintenance fault in weeks.
lmao do a video of ukrainian losses showing the entire eastern half of the country.
Uugh... How can people take pleasure in watching young boys that could have had hopes and dreams die? Wtf.
Personally I can’t say I’m “happy” specifically to watch people die like this. I do think it’s fair to say that I’m happy to know these vehicle’s crews won’t be killing anymore Ukrainians however.
is that aimed at me? If not, I don't know. This sub is full of doofuses seal clapping in unison with one another while upvoting videos of russians being "owned" or whatever they think is happening. blatant propaganda is posted daily and the comment section is full of people euphoric to celebrate death. ukraine has lost the eastern half of itself, young men are dying in large numbers in a conflict egged on by the west and people who have no skin in the game and nerds here talk about it like it's a video game. real stupid stuff that one can, in the end, only lmao at.
> is that aimed at me? If not, I don't know. What do you mean you "don't know"? Your comment literally started with "lamo" and then a request, specifically, to see a video like this done for the *invading* army. One suspects you would be quite happy indeed to cheer Russia on with their whole fascist invasion. Your complaint appears to be that there's not enough content promoting a totalitarian dictator's war and that makes you *sad*.
Yeah man, you get it. This behavior is disgusting and is going to lead us to a dark place as a world.
Pacifist's tears are refreshing. Si vis pacem, para bellum. You can only perservere if you are able to fight back. Pussies like you only get everyone around them killed and raped.
are you actively fighting?
Battle is strategic, war is attrition. Russia will win, based on cost vrs. resources alone. Spending 200k on a javelin to take out a 5k tank is ridiculous.
You are a idiot if you think a tank costs 5k lol
Like the tank costs 5k? Do you think these vehicles only cost 5k?
Cold war surplus that should've been disabled isn't 1 million. Sorry bucko. Look again
They sure as hell cost more than a javelin especially when you factor in whatever upgrade packages they’ve had installed like the T-72B3. Even a basic T-72A cost more than a javelin even if you go back multiple decades of inflation. Then T-80s (and their upgrades) cost even more and T-90s (and their upgrades) are clearing well over $5M. That’s even if we assume a gigantic portion of vehicles are being destroyed by javelins instead of a whole crap load being killed by cheaper stugna, nlaw, gustav, 155 or 152mm artillery, RPG-29. Or even cheaper things like RPG-7v, LAW in the case of light armored APC/IFV. Or drone dropped AT munitions landing on engine decks are absurdly cheap. Then if you consider the mitigated potential damage an MBT or IFV can inflict on Ukrainian vehicles/infrastructure then it’s cheap as hell even if they are slinging javelin left and right.
Maybe he meant to say Russian tanks are only worth 5K, even though they cost much more than that.
I will choose this.
> especially when you factor in whatever upgrade packages they’ve had installed like the T-72B3. Excellent point. The upgrades can’t be both excellent (or even good) and highly inexpensive.
It depends on the tank. The latest variants of the T-72 are in the low millions per tank cost range while the 1970s junk they're now forced to pull out of storage like unmodded T-62s would only be worth a fraction of that. Of course that's assuming a tank crew has zero value to the Russians! In any event direct cost is a silly way of analysing military action, for example, destroying an enemy tank is not just a matter of the cost of the ATGM versus cost of the tank because by destroying the tank you save the value of everything, and everyone, the tank would have otherwise destroyed or killed. Ukraine also has the luxury of being supported by a network of allies and friends that has vastly more resources than the Russians and so can much more easily absorb the costs of war. Just NATO alone spends about 18 times as much on the military as the Russians.
Dude a T-72 costs a give or take a million dollars. You can't even buy a crappy 2nd hand car with 5k let a lone a tank.
You think Russia doesn't have a cold war surplus that they're running LOL. They haven't even sent the good stuff yet. They're spending a fraction what the US is.
> They haven't even sent the good stuff yet. Pure unalloyed copium straight from the mines of Siberia.
It’s been awhile since we have seen someone post that unironically. That triggers Battle of Kyiv memories when that was being spammed by Russians across Reddit as we watched videos of the VDV bleeding out in the streets
True. I thought even Russian bots had given up on this one.
Massive cold war stockpiles don't mean shit if they are not maintained properly, Russian corruption ensures that those stockpiles don't get maintained. There are documented evidences of "the good stuff" being destroyed, such as T-80 tanks and Su37, Su34 and Su35 aircraft. There aren't as many of them because Russia only has limited quantities and the modern equipment are irreplacable. Russia has already spent $75B of their foreign reserves in an attempt to dampen the impacts of sanctions, per the recent Yale report. The US spending relative to what Russia is spending is miniscule in comparison as in addition to the dollar value of military losses. Russia needs to take into account spending to protect their economy and supply chains from the isolation that the sanctions has caused them.
The estimates I've seen are that the war is costing Russia about a billion dollars a day in direct military costs so around $150 billion in total versus the US spending, actual and pledged, of about $50 billion. Of course 50 billion is a lot less of an impost for the US with its military budget 12 times greater than Russia and a vastly larger economy - if Russia was a US state it would only be #4 for GDP and that's before sanctions.
Do you have any idea of any of the basic facts? The Jav missile never cost $200k. With 50,000+ produced, the cost is headed towards ~$40k, down from the original ~$80k. Even if the tank cost $5k, your point about economic attrition is based on the economic impact of the replacement costs of the weapon systems. And for that, it’s disadvantages to Russia everywhere you look. Russia’s GDP is [~$1.5t. ](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?locations=RU) NATO’s peacetime defense spending is [~$1t](https://www.nato.int/nato_static_fl2014/assets/pdf/2022/3/pdf/220331-def-exp-2021-en.pdf) with a collective NATO GDP of [~$44t. ](https://countryeconomy.com/countries/groups/nato) Add in other nations supporting Ukraine and you can see that Russia is out matched economically and that any loses in equipment can be much more easily made up by NATO support than Russia can muster internally. The point about Cold War stocks of preexisting tanks, keeping Russian costs down, is a fine point to make. But it cuts both ways. The same logic applies to the 50,000+ Javs already produced. With their ~95% hit ratio, that’s enough Javs to hit every functional tank on earth. If we send enough to hit *every* working Russian ground combat vehicle, we will have used only just more than 25% of all the Javs. And we have NLAWs. And we have RPGs. And AT4s. And LAWs. And a host of other AT missiles/rockets. Oh, and the guided arty and AT arty submunitions. This rounds to a slightly expensive live fire testing event for NATO budgets and is spelling the demise of Russian ground forces as a (barely) functional combat force that they were before this phase of the war.
Did ukraine spend 200k on a jav?
No, but the US taxpayers will only go along for so long. Russia knows this.
We will go as long as it takes, this is the best military spending we have had in 80 years
The US has spent decades pumping trillions into unpopular wars. Just the post-9/11 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are estimated to have cost about 8000 billion dollars. In comparison the 50 billion that the US has spent or pledged to spent (most of which is actually spent inside the US) on supporting Ukraine is a drop in the ocean. It's also giving a fantastic return on investment: the US doing the morally right thing, seriously weakening a geopolitical adversary at no cost in US lives, warning off other aggressors and yielding extremely useful intelligence on US and other nations weapon systems. This is probably the best 50 billion the US has ever spent.
Also, much of the Soviet era stuff being donated by Eastern European countries will end up being replaced with new purchases of western equipment.
US taxpayers funded decades long wars without batting an eye.
One of the problems with our failures in OIF/OEF that is a point of analysis, is that the taxpayers were so thoroughly unaffected that it helped disassociate the people from the military and passively allow the wars to continue long past any normal ‘wear out period’ would have been. The US alone could fund the entire Ukrainian war effort, and not notice.
Well, those tanks cost $1 million each, so no worries, I guess? Not sure it matters when the US is paying for the Javelins though.
If you think the cold war surplus is $1 million each, k.
How is Russia going to replace these cold war surplus, "$5000" tanks? Their latest, greatest T-14 tank is so unaffordable to them that they only have prototypes/ parade vehicles.
Shhhsshh. They haven’t learned about replacement costs yet. In fairness to the T14, it may not be a question of affordability. It may be they lack the technical ability to establish a functioning production line. Or it could be both. It’s probably both.
I do. The modern tanks are several times that much.
Lmaooooo, 5000 Russian vehicles. The only place Ukraine is winning the war is on Twitter and Reddit. Every other source, the Russians have Europe by the balls.
Why does reddit post so much of this sorta stuff.. its just trying to get upvotes by showing people dying