Ukraine's Armoured Front: An Update

As the war in Ukraine continues, we take a look at recent developments and the use of armour and other weapons systems on both sides, including the use of Western AFVs donated to the Ukrainian Army.
Support The Tank Museum & Get great perks:
► Patreon: / tankmuseum
► KZbin Membership: / @thetankmuseum
00:00 | Intro
00:19 | Recap
02:14 | Western & Russian Armour
12:21 | Artillery & Air Force
16:50 | Conclusion
#ukrainewar #ukrainenews #ukrainerussia

[@postcollapse1170]

Kudos that the Tank Museum uses real combat footage despite youtubes guidlines.

[@gruffelo6945]

youtubes guidelines are shitty

[@felldin]

Daring, indeed!

[@dosenkohl564]

They allready used combat footage from ww2. What is new about that? They show and explain how destructive devices work, to use an US law word. So weapons of war. Only Warships are bigger than tanks.

[@Skorpychan]

They're crowdfunded, and have an established webstore. They don't need to have a monetized channel so much, since it's just advertising for the museum itself.

[@kristofferjohansson3768]

Giving us some nice turret tossing contestants.

[@crapphone7744]

It never ceases to amaze me that in the year2023, General Mud still commands the battlefield.

[@Ninebellsandalliswell]

Good for you mate :)

[@MetapeterUndMetagreta]

yeah, they could use hovercrafts...

[@Ninebellsandalliswell]

@@MetapeterUndMetagreta Interesting!

[@sparkyfromel]

Wehrmacht general ....amazing how cold Russia it is in winter , who would have guessed ! Nato adviser .... mines , naahh , nobody use those things anymore

[@abas656thegodemperor9]

​@@MetapeterUndMetagretathe hovercrafts that do actually exist are even more vulnerable,so unless hovercraft tech has a breakthrough, its unlikely they'll be used for land vehicles.

[@yesiamarussianbot3076]

Calling that Challenger damaged, is like calling the Ukrainian offensive a success.

[@ebperformance8436]

Or calling a T-14 a real tank? We already seen a T-14 get knocked out of a parade! Russian parades are like land mines to a T-14, Russian parades exposes a T-14s propaganda, plot armor. The T-14 was finally recovered….but it was hard! The tank recovering vehicle had trouble removing the T-14 off the parade roads….the T-14 crew made it out alive, and probably awarded with a Extended stay at Club Gulag. Question? Do T-14s come with the option to disconnect the final drive…..to move the parade shy T-14 off the road? Or maybe the Incompetent, tank crew forgot to bring the tool to do it? You would think a tool like that is kept in the tank.

[@yesiamarussianbot3076]

@@ebperformance8436 I wouldn't know, I served on a Leopard 2A6. Also I don't see what a T14 has anything to do with my remark.

[@ebperformance8436]

@@yesiamarussianbot3076 with so many Russian bots, it’s hard to tell these days….your KZbin name is a tell tell sign, you’re a Russian bot….If you’re not a Russian bot….then you’re a liar’ based on your name’ No matter how you slice it….I either call BS on the Validity of your story, or you’re name. Soooo….Which one is it? The subject on this video is tank related? Is it not? Ok then! A leopard 2 is a superior tank….compared to the T-14’ Do you agree? Or disagree? let’s see where this goes.

[@yesiamarussianbot3076]

@@ebperformance8436 The subject of the video is tank related but it's about the Challenger, not the T14 Armata. To be sure the T14 hasn't been at the front lines although the propaganda videos would like people believe otherwise, also the T14 seems to have many problems in its development. I think it's hilarious that people think that when someone disagrees with them they are a Russian bot. I actually used that as my Themtube name for a long time. If you don't know what a beakie is, well that's on you

[@user-te4rk1td9j]

@@ebperformance8436 Everyone is a Russian bot if you don't agree lol. Also most YT names got butchered (like mine) after some update.

[@adfab5344]

Problem is that they are armoured for other tanks but only 5 % of losses are to other tanks. Plunging artillery, drones & ATGM (possibly after being immobilised via mines) seem to be the main threat.

[@brianjones2899]

Exactly. Any side needs tanks if they can get in play, but in this war it is rare that they get the opportunity.

[@SuperIv7]

That's been the case for the last century, nothing new here. Tanks do not fight tanks, that's not the idea, there are much better specialized anti-tank weapons, from helicopters to ATGM's.

[@bryangrote8781]

I've read many reports on tank losses from WW2 and a few from other conflicts as well. In WW2 enemy tanks were only about 15-20% of the targets engaged by their own tanks regardless of whether the source of the reports were Allied or German. Artillery, mines, and infantry carried weapons each caused a similar percentage of tank losses in that conflict vs other tanks and far more collectively. This has been true in nearly every other conflict that I've read about. As to aircraft, they were responsible for only 4-8% of losses in WW2 regardless of theater or or side and were responsible for a far smaller percentage of tank losses than initially believed. This has also been true in every conflict since WW2 as well, even during the Gulf War in 1991 after precision guided weapons were used in large numbers. I think it's likely with the addition of drones this percentage will climb up vs prior conflicts once those statistics are known, but may once again be lower than initially believed. Regardless of source enemy tanks have been a less common source of tanks lost in every conflict I've read about and this one will be no different.

[@benjones4365]

@@SuperIv7 Most of the average man out there, believes the image of Tank on Tank battles, they are very rare indeed, not even Kursk, where the majority of Tanks were not knocked out by other Tanks. The only Tank on Tank battle that I can think of was the Battle of 73 Easting.

[@TheRelativy]

This is why T-55 is still very useful tank despite west laugh about it. It can still destory anythink other than MBT and survive hits from everything that is not dedicated anti tank weapon. If they would be equipped with more modern optics it is almost a perferct solution for this war. Cheap, easy accesible, less resource hungy, and also mobile, protected sufficiently and poses enough firepower.

[@bobandrew8884]

‘severely damaged’ that a euphemism for being blown to bits? edit to add the Challenger 2 is indestructable we all have to agree

[@AKUJIVALDO]

Nothing is indestructible, except time lol

[@Tuck-Shop]

You can either advance quickly through minefields and defences or minimise losses. Not both.

[@nickcharles1284]

Ukraine can do neither. If you go slowly through minefields, Russian artillery - which has been meticulously mapped out just for this reason - will come to bear and take a terrible toll. Which is what has happened, over and over and over,

[@Tuck-Shop]

@@nickcharles1284 [EDIT: Removed unnecessary barb for intro.] Counter arty, drone strikes, interrupting logistics etc eliminates Russian arty. And Ukraine are doing a good job. Takes time though so it seems slow. This minimises losses. The second option. Going through a minefield without taking care of arty is the first option. Faster, lots of dead. Ukraine can, and is minimising losses by striking arty with precision strikes, hitting ammo dumps with HIMARS or cruise missiles. Nerfing the arty before the Ukrainians even move forwards. Hence delays. And those strikes have happened so much it's not even worth mentioning on daily updates anymore. Nice try though. Just for the final twist of the proverbial knife let's quote you. "will come to bear and take a terrible toll" Will? ... When? Even you admit it hasn't happened yet and the offensive is currently ongoing. Lines of defences have already been breached. When? You are waiting for something yet to happen.

[@cerberus2373]

@@Tuck-Shop my brother in christ its been nearly four months and they havent even reached the first line of defences.

[@deixtra]

​@@cerberus2373the first lines of defense have been passed for a month or two now in key areas. Give them more gear and they will do it in a day. At this point the west is just making fun of them by not providing more. "Boo hoo this will anger our buttslut putin" "

[@derPetunientopf]

@@cerberus2373 False. By Russian definition they are just about over the first line and by Ukrainian definition they are just over the second one.

[@heinedenmark]

Artillery, still King of Battle

[@anthonykaiser974]

Come rain, snow, sleet or hail, Field Artillery will always deliver the "hate mail."

[@PavewayJDAM]

This war is fascinating in how technology has almost unknowingly shifted warfare. $1000 drones wiping out whole squads with hand grenades. FPV drones flying into open tank hatches killing the crew.

[@alexbowman7582]

If you can believe the propaganda apparently the World’s first use of autonomous drones.

[@DrLoverLover]

fell for the propaganda ?

[@phil-jc8hp]

The lancert is actually 100,000$l

[@solaireastora5394]

​@@DrLoverLoverhello Ivan

[@moistwienor4572]

@@DrLoverLoverwhat do you mean propaganda? Theres endless clips of Ukrainian drones with hand grenades and explosive charges terrorizing russian soldiers who can barely fight back against a such a target.

[@hellshigh9895]

Love the fact you could buy the 1 to 35 model of the Ukrainian M1A1 before they actually got there

[@siy1580]

And models of them have been made of them well before they where even considered

[@alangordon3283]

@@siy1580there’s models of many fictitious things . So what is the point from the pair of you .

[@dominuslogik484]

@@alangordon3283 I think its because they find it funny to be able to buy a model of something that was fictional when it was made but is no longer fictional now. there is a level of Irony to it

[@markwilliams2620]

​@@alangordon3283 Oh Alan, who tinkled in your porridge?

[@PitchBlackYeti]

CAPITALISM BABY!

[@ph6560]

Quite nice to see the gentleman do these kind of analysis as well. *_Really hope to see more of this._*

[@SMGJohn]

Just turn on BBC and you will never run out of content.

[@SMGJohn]

@@karmakazi101 Greetings King of Obvious

[@anthonyhowrard526]

he talked about human wave tactics I think He is confused about the mostly fictional Enemy at the Gates. hoorah!

[@kyledabearsfan]

The drone/artillery relationship has seemed to be the biggest threat by any side so far. Super cheap and replaceable, swarm tactics. It's quite terrifying.

[@tylerclayton6081]

It’s not if you can gain air supremacy. But Ukraine and Russia and equally matched so neither one is powerful enough to gain any advantage over the other in the air or on the ground or sea. Which is quite sad for Russia considering that their Navy and airforce are 10 times larger than Ukraine’s and supposedly more modern as well. The only modern equipment Ukraine has comes from the west and even that is sent in very low numbers

[@davidgoodnow269]

Drone detection is the highest immediate priority for everyone not currently under fire, I am sure. The issue is that while humans can be trained to be superb at drone detection as long as their senses are undamaged, (A) war is very hard on the senses, and (B) a decision has blatantly been made that information and materials for training to detect drones will not be distributed. Since all equipment for augmenting natural human senses is quite inexpensive and legal to buy and own anywhere in the world but requires a trained human user to use, what can you do? An EM rifle sells for €12,000, or can be built by anyone with access to HAM radio guides and equipment for 1/10th that, with a 5 km reach. Not enough to bag true top-shelf reconnaissance and surveillance drones; those you need either a high-energy laser or similar battlefield directed-energy weapon, or creative use of directional electromagnetic-frequency broadcast equipment and a real disrespect for the way things are supposed to be used, plus creativity. Artillery with no fire direction is no danger.

[@LayronPK]

You know, as we here say it: if you think the offensive is too slow - you can always come here and show yourself how it should be done!

[@gaptaxi]

Look at Gulf War 1, months and months of Artillery and Air Force Bombing before the heavy units moved in, just a pity the US didn´t provide F-16 last year?

[@julius7539]

I mean, it has been slow, but that is part of their plan. They have decided against high-risk operations so that they can minimize their casualties while bleeding the Russians dry over time. And it's working. All one has to do is look at the daily losses for each side to see how well the Ukrainians are doing. They are on the offensive but the Russians are the ones taking more casualties.

[@interpl6089]

You should surrender, Kievan elites are just throwing you into the meat grinder while buying expensive houses in Spain and elsewhere.

[@Alan.livingston]

With the Russian attack choppers, they did move to pretty much exclusively lobbing rockets, but more recently there is a bit of footage of them using atgw from max range to engage vehicles trapped in lanes through minefields and whatnot. Seems that they have found their niche on the defensive.

[@markus717]

Right. Luckily the F-16's with good AA missiles can eliminate that threat to Ukrainian armour.

[@DrLoverLover]

@@markus717 🤣

[@paulking7019]

There could be as few as twenty five KA 52s total left now. This in part is due to recent use of longer range laser guided MANPADS that have been used to great effect against russias attack helicopter fleet. ⌛🍿😎🍿

[@mcal27]

@@paulking7019 well let’s see your proof to back that.. but even if it were the case, they have Mil-28 and mi-35 both being adapted to handle the new Vikhr ATGM’s that (so far) lets them engage out of range of western manpads

[@mcal27]

@@markus717 yeah once the pilots have learnt English, then finish flight training, then hedge hopped their way to where the KH-52’s are as it’s the only way to dodge the Mig-31/Su-35/S-400/Pantsir defences in their 1982 vintage F-16A’s..

[@viandengalacticspaceyards5135]

The Americans might have the most gear, but nobody beats the Brits at calm level-headed commentary. Thanks to the Tank Museum. It's refreshing.

[@saratov99]

Unless you don't have loicense for that.

[@a3b36a04]

It gets even better when they showcase freshly received Western equipment for Ukrainian offensive with a full screen "Start praying ORCS!!!" caption while talking about their "meat wave" assaults on Russian lines.

[@aymonfoxc1442]

True but you can't talk the enemy to death... Well, not very easily and not very quickly 😂

[@RiteKnight]

@@aymonfoxc1442 It's got less to do with beating the Russians with words and more to do with keeping Western populations at home compliant and supportive.

[@babaganoush6106]

it is. wish our politicians were as level headed; prepared to listen to our armed forces and give them what they want.

[@gl3411]

Imagine you are being sent in Robotyne area now, chances to survive around 20%. RIP

[@marcelogonzalez8547]

Also, the carrusel discussion that we see time and again becomes moot when you realize that both the Challenger and Leopard 2 both stow ammunition in the hull. Only the M1 Abrams has the full compliment of ammunition stored in a separated compartment with blow-out pannels.

[@piotrd.4850]

Yes-no. Challenger and Leopard 2 carry primary warload in isolated magazines and additional round in the hull. Since T_64 in Soviet tanks, crew sits ON the primary ammo storage and is surrounded by secondary ones. Placement of autoloader carousel wasn't bad for the time but has it's consequences.

[@marcelogonzalez8547]

You must be confused by how soviet tanks store extra ammo and mixing it up with how western tanks do, wich is actually different from tank to tank, and generalizing it, the same mistake the presenter of the video made, as he also generalized how western tanks stow ammunition too. Both the Leopard 2 and Challenger 2 have different ways of stowing ammunition each, and neither is as you describe. The Leopard 2 has 2 main ammunition storages, on in the turret bustle with blowout pannels, the only one completely isolated from the crew, and one of even higher capacity in the front left hull next to the driver without any blowout pannels. The Challenger 2 uses 2 part ammunition and only the projectile parts are stored in the turret bustle with no blowout pannels, and the propellent charges are stowed entirely in the crew compartment mainly around the back turret floor without any separation from the crew and next to the driver in the front left of the hull. @@piotrd.4850

[@danbendix1398]

Imagine the amazement of our WWI and WWII forefathers if they learned we can guide artillery rounds directly into a specific target (tank, machine gun nest, bridge, etc).

[@bernhardlangers778]

You may want to Google "Fritz X". Yes, it is a glide vehicle, but still darn impressive for that time.

[@hippoace]

and strapping mortar rounds to flying drones...

[@573gwills3]

Schrödinger’s summer offensive! If Ukraine loses they can say they lost the fight because you changed the result by measuring it!

[@Archer89201]

Although the western MBTs have excellent armor and firepower , a major problem is that artillery and atgms can still kill them and mines immobilize them the same. Also damaged tanks have to be sent all the way to Poland for repairs for Leopard 2s and maybe all the way ti Britain for Challengers, M1A2s maybe in western Europe. Also lately the Russians have been hitting targets successfully beyond hundred kilometers of tge frontline with Tornado-S and Iskanders spotting them it drones that seems to indicate shortage of air defense systems or gaps in the coverage. They hit trains and the Kharkov tank plant multiple times this week

[@mikewingert5521]

As a former soldier; 24 years, i have nothing but praise for Ukraine. It’s a slogging match and no mistake.

[@Ben1159a]

Same here, 12 year vet of the US military and nothing but respect for Ukraine.

[@Orcawhale1]

As a former armchair general of 30 years, i must agree with the soldier above. It's a slogging match, no doubt.

[@leonidjoseph5483]

Good thing that the woke europe and us will fight till the last ukranian. At least russia is not running unlike some from afganistan, vietnam, laos, combodia, iran with tail between the legs

[@stc3145]

Ukraine second poorest country in Europe doing alone what some believe Nato as a whole would struggle with

[@1337flite]

It's hard for anyone with the slightest bit of military experience or knowledge not to admire the Ukrainians as a people and their armed forces. They've done extremely well - magnificently - despite western governments who seem to be want them to have to fight the hardest, dumbest way. Slava Ukraini!!! 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦

[@thewayofbiutze3899]

Unfortunately, the analyses regarding the Russian tank production capacity do not reflect the realities. Russian military production numbers surpass NATO's total production in every aspect. This is an unexpected development, and the Ukrainian army is paying a heavy price for this mistake. Just looking at the monthly production of T90M tanks reveals the severity of the situation.

[@astrolabe88]

I don't know if this video is a reupload or this gentleman doesn't read the news, but the Ukrainian counter-offensive started 3 month ago. I know the anglos are very invested in this war, but it is important to stay objective and leave the copium to nafo twitter accounts

[@rosstisbury1626]

dont forget the FAB500 and now 1500kg warhead model gliderkit bombs

[@elliottsw]

Growing up near Dorchester I've always been proud that the Chally 2 has never been taken out by enemy action, now I'm even *more* proud that one *was* taken out but the crew all survived. It did its job perfectly.

[@alphana7055]

Getting destroyed is its job?😂

[@AWMJoeyjoejoe]

​@@alphana7055Keeping the crew alive you melon.

[@user-bf3dv7hu7c]

It’s just strange that you have such a double standards, if there were 100 challengers hit and all crew were fine, your logic could be accepted, but first challenger went to fire line and was hit immediately by kornet, directly in the front plate with big angle and still it was enough to get tank destroyed, so what are you proud about ? Maybe there is a video where crew went out unharmed, but I didn’t see it, or it just what Ukrainians told you ?

[@AWMJoeyjoejoe]

​​@@user-bf3dv7hu7cYou just blindly believe everything Kiselyov tells you, don't you.

[@user-bf3dv7hu7c]

@@AWMJoeyjoejoe Actually I’m not watching tv for 8 years and was supporting Navalnyi, participating demonstrations. But I was serving in army and have many mates on the frontline in 200 brigade of Northern Fleet in Artemovsk ( Ukrainians named it after Bakhmut ) so I have all news from first lips, let’s say. Yes, there are problems in Russian army, but they are way far from what you’ve been told in Ukrainian propaganda and western media, by the way send hello to mister Arestovich, we love his show, always keeps us in shape of good and funny mood.)

[@Stuka87]

Thank you for this more detailed update. The news reports very generalized current events.

[@BCase56]

love the level headed commentary on the current goings with relevant history

[@tedteddington6223]

Level headed? Listen more carefully... He talks about Leopard 1's being donated to Ukraine, with no qualification about their condition or capabilities. He then talks about T55's and talks about their state, conditions and capabilities. Is that level? His commentary ''style'' though, was level headed.

[@rousseautyl15]

@@tedteddington6223he did say the Leo 1s were being adapted to modern standards prior to being sent

[@pinkyfull]

9:10 whole true for Abrams and Leo 2 (though leo 2 and abrams both have hull stowage that doesnt have blowout panels) the challenger notably does not. On fact there is a video of a chally 2 burnt out in ukraine that clearly shows it had a fatal ammo explosion within the turret. Now due to the way in which it was stowed the crew did get out. But dont imagine that there arent flaws in western mbt design.

[@Br1cht]

Only a bigot would say that about the Western Wunderwaffen!!! They transcend the Law of physics don’t you know?

[@rgriffinRETIRED_SHEEPDOG]

That was an excellent update. Thank you.

[@ljoe7038]

I dont understand,what's the problem? Ukrainians received their guns, they need just to go there and reconquer territories and then each of them receives ten russian untermensches as slaves and money and glory and european citizenship and do on, they mist just go there , ruzzians are "stupid cowards with poor genetics with stupid leaders and dont deserve to live" - this is what you were t told many years , is it no true? Ukrainians , you must just go there , is it so really hard to understand?

[@Br1cht]

Didn’t age well though.

[@davydatwood3158]

If anyone on KZbin knows the reality of returning 60 year old tanks to servicability, it will be the Tank Museum!

[@Les537]

It allows the 60 year old conscripts to return to their youth.

[@bryangrote8781]

It's unfortunate that the way things are going the Tank Museum may end up having most of the surviving tanks. They certainly have more tanks than the British Army.

[@blackbird-25]

the footage I saw of the challenger being struck was clearly an atgm in the mid RHS. the explosive plume was horizontal. later footage appeared to show the turret displaced and the commanders hatch missing. indicating a possible internal explosion which the crew would not have survived. it is the policy of the RF forces to destroy damaged equipment with follow up strikes so it's not clear from the footage if the tank had already been vacated by the crew. the challenger takes its place alongside Abrams leopard 2s and merkavas that have been destroyed by, probably. kornet atgms I must push back against the general tenor here, the Ukrainian offensive has been a catastrophic failure incurring losses of men and equipment on a scale we can't imagine. As far as I know they have not breached the first defensive line but have suffered this disaster in the forward defensive zone that is actually intended to yield, which it mostly hasn't

[@garynew9637]

Ukraine is dead in the water. Western idiots governments are either ignoring this or simply don't care.

[@lugerun]

Mainstream media already acknowledged the offensive failed while only yielding high losses for the afu. Even more hilarious is the 'russia running out of chips (or insert anything else)' myth still getting repeated while also mentioning the ever increasing amount of lancets.

[@marioshobbyhq]

I like how "a British challenger 2 has been reported as severely damaged" was being said while the background scene shown a blacked out smoking wreck with dislodged turret of that tank. Love British humour.

[@44johnburton]

Only worst than some that are still in storage

[@skepticalbadger]

It likely was burned out and should be chalked up as destroyed, but the turret isn't dislodged. That's how it's supposed to look!

[@pestomystic]

​@skepticalbadger that's a cope friend. Very obvious that the turret is hanging too far over the hull. 2/2 on turret pops for the chally 2.

[@ratatatatata5290]

@@skepticalbadgerchallenger 2 still uses 2 stage ammunition & can’t even be unloaded / re-packed once it’s in the breach. Challenger has no blowout panels and instead “fire resistant” ammunition containers within the hull. Sadly challenger has been left in the past & is IMO a very subpar tank with a doctrine that will not shine in a very fast paced conflict like UA vs. RU. Mobility & Crew protection must be key.

[@thehumus8688]

its like monthy python Black knight. *only torso and head left This is only flesh wound

[@iatsd]

Lots unsaid that should have been said. For example, the fact that the *reason* the Ukrainains will have to be careful with their Challenger ammunition is because the UK simply doesn't make it any more and there's no more to be had beyond existing stocks held by the UK and Jordan.

[@j.f.fisher5318]

I've been saying since spring this wasn't going to be fast. The brilliant successes last year were only possible because of Russian incompetence around Kharkiv and the untenable position in Kherson. I haven't expected Ukraine to reach the Sea of Azov. It would take a Russian collapse and expecting that is like expecting to win the lottery as one's retirement plan.

[@Zarcondeegrissom]

also, a lot of stuff never happened that was discussed last year, like training for F16's for one. so much political feet dragging.

[@altratronic]

The Ukrainian plan in the south is to destroy as much Russian men and materiel as possible, especially including Russian logistics systems, before committing enough forces for a big push to Azov.

[@adamesd3699]

Also the Russians were severely low on troop numbers in 2022. Putin basically relied on bluff to win the war in the first few days. The army he sent in Feb 2022 was far too small and under-supplied to win the war if Ukraine fought back, especially as the West flooded Ukraine with weapons, ammo, money, reconnaissance & intelligence, etc. He apparently thought Zelensky would panic when he saw a few hundred tanks and missiles coming at him, and either surrender or run for his life. He probably thought “I’m ex-KGB and he’s an ex-TV comedian, this will be quick!” Obviously that’s not how things turned out. In 2023 the Russians are taking the war much more seriously and are doing better. This is a recurring theme in Russian history. They tend to do badly in the first few months of wars and then begin to get their act together after a year or so. This seems to be happening in 2023 and will probably be much more apparent in 2024. I actually believe Russia will outright win the war in 2024 or early 2025.

[@tehgerbil]

Yeah you're pretty much right. Russia fumbled the start of this conflict, and then sorted itself out (honestly surprised how quickly they did that, considering the rampant corruption) and has conducted itself pretty successfully since. Without massive commitment (and quality training) we can't expect what is basically a heavily armed militia to remove Russia from its position.

[@ryanyoder2694]

Russia also had barely mobilized during the offensive last year. Now they have a numerical advantage that only grows more and more.

[@kennogawa6638]

Drone Wars have changed tank warfare.

[@kez0o9]

I think this conflict is the one which will be remembered as when drones came into there own on the battlefield. Just wondering when they will have a fully autonomous hunter/killer version ? I would say that could be reality within @10years

[@jumi9342]

Nothing changed the battlefield as much as advancements in reconnaissance and communication

[@laxikaksi]

Drones in co-operation with mobile artillery have to a degree taken over the role tanks used to have in positional warfare.

[@Doomer1984]

​@@kez0o9there is some evidence that some of the drones were self guided

[@kiele218]

@@kez0o9 Ты удивишься, но они уже лет 5 как есть

[@wrxs1781]

A war of attrition, hard tp predict the outcome. Also the video was much enjoyed for its news of the conflict and modern day warfare.

[@nickcharles1284]

It is easy to predict: name a war of attrition that was won the the smallest country with the least soldiers and equipment and 1/100th the economic industrial base. Spoilers: none. Zero.

[@AWMJoeyjoejoe]

​​​​@@nickcharles1284Vietnam and Afghanistan (both times)

[@martinbabl1635]

I am not sure that you can call that tank burning at the end as severely damaged. Its burnt out, only good as cover.

[@ianleary5780]

From what I've read, electronics store poorly. So the more modern tanks in storage that the Russians would want to use may be in tolerable shape mechanically but not so much so in terms of their electronics. Older tanks in storage won't have electronics to age poorly, but several decades of winters in the open might have ruined them mechanically. I wonder how some of these machines would have fared in storage if they had been parked in sheds to keep the worst of the weather off them.

[@ThePurplePassage]

There's also the factor of parts embezzlement by Russian officials - the tanks that see the greater number of exports are more likely to have had more demand for spare parts, resulting in cannibalisation for personal profit

[@procrastinator41]

Good Point 💰

[@highjumpstudios2384]

Yeah but sheds cost money and I already used the funding I received to buy sheet metal to provide kickbacks for my supply officers.

[@ianleary5780]

@@ThePurplePassage Absolutely. We'll probably never know how much that has affected readiness.

[@ljoe7038]

I dont understand,what's the problem? Ukrainians received their guns, they need just to go there and reconquer territories and then each of them receives ten russian untermensches as slaves and money and glory and european citizenship and do on, they mist just go there , ruzzians are "stupid cowards with poor genetics with stupid leaders and dont deserve to live" - this is what you were t told many years , is it no true? Ukrainians , you must just go there , is it so really hard to understand?

[@terencemorgan4506]

This could be a modern version of WW1, Year 1918: War of attrition on Western Front is clearly going on, Germany throws all it’s resources attempting a final breakthrough offensive during spring and summer of 1918 and fails. Afterwards, a weakened German army gets ground down into a slow retreat back to Germany resulting in the Armistice day in November. The only question is whether Ukraine can organize another offensive attempt?

[@MusicScala]

I dont understand the premise of this video, the counterattack is already fully going and even already coming to an end in a month or two. Its just that there arent any substantial advances made, because of the immense fortifications built by russia. And as said in the video, nothing is not being noticed on the battlefield. That makes it quite difficult to muster a suprise attack

[@Archer89201]

They said they would reach Sea of Azov by October, its October already and there is still combat going on near Robotyne that way the starting point. I knew things were bad when they started making excuses for the failed attacks as simple probes.

[@Ubique2927]

Tactics need to change. It always needed to change and they have always changed.

[@truthsRsung]

Do you mean resolving problems at a table instead of turning places we grow food into toxic wastelands?

[@AWMJoeyjoejoe]

​@@truthsRsungThat's up to the Russians. Only they have the power to end the war tomorrow

[@marvwatkins7029]

These updates are great TM. Keep them coming!

[@theromanorder]

Please do more tank doctrine videos

[@laxikaksi]

In positional warfare, the combination of drones and mobile artillery have to a large degree taken over the role previously played by tanks. Drones are more difficult to detect and if shot down don’t cause any loss of human lives, while mobile artillery now has longer range, equal or better accuracy and is just as mobile as tanks.

[@jm9371]

Well timed, awesome update!

[@aidancreager4095]

Thanks for using real footage

[@catriona_drummond]

The Ukraine war is an excellent opportunity for Western military leaders to take a break and rethink what to do if their coveted combined arms warfare doctrine doesn't work as intended.

[@Doomer1984]

It might work if you have air superiority. Bit difficult against Russian air defence

[@catriona_drummond]

@@Doomer1984 This is - partly - what I mean. Combined arms warfare is a difficult thing to pull off under good circumstances. And here? we have basically seen both sides fail at it. And I am not sure any western military would fare much better.

[@julius7539]

@@catriona_drummond Ukraine is still able to penetrate Russia's air defenses and they barely have an air force (although that is going to change pretty soon). They've taken out multiple s400s, the jewels of Russia's air defense network, in just the past couple months. They've launched strikes on Russia and Russian-occupied territories that have destroyed strategic-level assets (strategic bombers, a submarine, a landing ship, radars for their SAM defense system) and killed high-ranking officers. This has all been done with the limited equipment that they have been provided. And what we do provide to them always comes with restrictions, eg., storm shadows cannot be used within the borders of Russia proper and we only send them the short-range variants. The Russian air force has not been able to achieve air superiority because they are a second-rate air power with severe corruption problems. You are smoking something if you think that the massive and well-equipped air forces of the West would not totally devastate the Russian military. There might be a fair amount of casualties at first, but their air defenses would eventually be overwhelmed.

[@Destroyer_V0]

@@catriona_drummond Interesting thing that. Russian pilots sucks at DEAD and SEAD missions. they should have been able to crush ukrainian air defences, yet they still persist, and if anything, expand through western supplied systems. Why is this? Lack of flight hours in their combat aircraft, means a lack of experience. And different training priorities certainly doesn't help matters. Ukraine, meanwhile, is limited on both airframes and pilots. But has proven capable of both SEAD AND DEAD missions by combing the assets they have with artillery systems, with evidence of such in Crimea recently and the success of hitting important, downright critical targets that WERE protected there (Certain headquarters facilities, among others). Again however, they are limited in scope. Particularly america, and nato as a whole? Specifically trains for, and has the equipment to carry out both SEAD and DEAD missions via air power alone, let alone artillery. And while yes, america is a massive military power. Alone, there is a good bet they could wipe out every single air defense system currently restricting ukrainian airspace. I would put good odds on the polish airforce being able to do the same, albeit with casulties greater than the US.

[@Doomer1984]

Far as I can tell, American combined arms is just overwhelming firepower from everything you can get. It works

[@DeeEight]

The Leopard 1s offer something similar in performance to the new US Army M10s. The 105mm L7 gun is still perfectly good at killing T-72s and older, and the HESH rounds they offer are much more useful for softer armored vehicles and bunkers/fortifications and that's liable to be the majority of what they're shooting, as pointed out, there have been very few MBT vs MBT engagements.

[@ruinerblodsinn6648]

Has there been even one documented tank battle in this war? I haven’t seen any video

[@Mthammere2010]

​@@ruinerblodsinn6648look up Weeb Union and Red Effect. I'm sure you can find more.

[@DeeEight]

@@ruinerblodsinn6648 yes, video emerging last week of a leopard 2 mauling a pair of Russian tanks.

[@ruinerblodsinn6648]

@@DeeEight links please

[@interpl6089]

And if Lancet touches it, it's toast. It's got practically no armor and mine protection...

[@guy4698]

great info

[@stephenwarhurst6615]

Hope this War ends soon

[@jabezhane]

Cut the funding today and it will be over by next Friday.

[@kristoffer3000]

Tell NATO that, they won't listen but y'know... Stoltenberg (head of NATO) even admitted they made this war inevitable and were pushing for it

[@Zarcondeegrissom]

russia could just go home, that would end it. lol.

[@jabezhane]

@@Zarcondeegrissom Yeah more to it than that.

[@Tiberium_Tiger]

(((They))) want a regime change in Russia so they can exploit and strip mine it just like (((they’re))) doing to the USA as we speak

[@grooverchan1600]

Just started a project about this for my EPQ. PERFECT TIMING!

[@sir_vix]

with talk of UKR working to breach RU defensive lines before the autumn rains arrive and turn the fields to mud, I'm left wondering why there has been so little talk about how those things will impact RU positions: i. how will minefields be effected (UXO mobility, sinking, reduced effectiveness of IR mine spotting) ii. how will entrenched positions and troops be impacted (most russian trenches seem poorly constructed with bare unworked earth walls, little to no drainage management, waste discarded haphazardly around positions, thus a high probability of sanitation issues) iii. how reduced mobility will change the artillery / counter-battery fight, as mobility is impacted for both sides of the equation, as well as the logistical systems which underpin them (I expect that HIMARS will win out here due to extended range and precision affording a smaller logistical foot print, with potentially shorter lines of communication.)

[@mcbain434444]

the challenger 2 sure did'nt vent its ammo unless you count the turret ring

[@heinrichzerbe]

I thoroughly enjoyed this video. Informative without trying to be sensational.

[@alexbowman7582]

Remember when Gorbachev agreed that Eastern Europe would be freed as long as they didn’t join NATO and NATO replied “not one inch towards Russia”?

[@derdude9654]

So it's ok that one nation dictates how other souvereign nation has to live?! These nation Poland,Baltics etc are no Russian colonies aren't they?! Russia knows quite well NATO will not attack, or do you think they would expose their borders now with just 20% of material left there???

[@jasper8291]

That has never been agreed upon on paper. Nevertheless, it were the individual countries that decided to join, in contrast to the Soviet Union that persuaded countries to join and violently suppressed its peoples.

[@renaudrodier6059]

Remember when Russia guaranteed Ukraine’s territorial integrity in exchange for its nuclear arsenal? no? strange…

[@kiele218]

Помним

[@kiele218]

@@renaudrodier6059 Тоже помним

[@peterwait641]

Did you you hear about the CR3 suspension scandal, a number of the new MK 3 units with upgraded low friction internals were fitted and gassed up with excess thread pitch clearance in the cylinder which would have risk of failure ! KPI's before safety .

[@ryanj610]

Ukraine needed massive amounts of heavy duty mine clearing vehicles. Quite literally at this point, the cannons are less important than mine clearance. I don't know if such vehicles even exist, or can move at speed.... but one or two leading a convoy is the disaster we've seen play out.

[@piotrd.4850]

For supposed geniuses Ukrainians are claimed to be, they sure seem to have lot of trouble converting T-55s and BMP-1s to modern equivalent of Hobbart's Funnies.

[@davidgoodnow269]

Something like the rocket-propelled engineering mine-clearing sleds, but you need, what, three of them to clear a single lane for one kilometer? So figure on ten of them to provide even minimal room for avoidance maneuvers, in case of artillery, for each kilometer, and deploying each 100-kilogram sled of high explosives while under both direct and indirect fires. Or, mounting mine rollers or flails on every armored vehicle. Option 2 sounds better since it increases survival for every single vehicle, and probably it's cheaper. Didn't Ukraine have a lot of such engineering kits, or did the Soviet Union not think they needed them to deal with N.A.T.O. minefields?

[@sichere]

The Western tanks supplied to Ukraine are not being deployed in a way that they would be if in NATO as they do not have air supremacy. I thought the Tanks supplied to Ukraine were protected by Chobham armour not Dorchester and the T14 Armarta has only been filmed on a training sortie well inside Russia but reported as Ukraine

[@gaptaxi]

Chobham was the earlier version on Challenger 1 IIRC? The UK offered Chobham and Dorchester to the UK to use them on Abrams. What are Allies for? ;)

[@interpl6089]

Armata was in Ukraine tested in indirect fire, it was later moved from the line.

[@sichere]

@@interpl6089 Nope

[@davidgoodnow269]

It could be both; if the new 125 mm gun is as-claimed it could be well inside Russia and firing field-test missions across the border.

[@jjsmallpiece9234]

The problem for both sides is that there has probably never been a war when just about anything of significance is easily seen, making it very difficult to assemble an attack without being seen and then subject to artillery fire. Then given the obvious fact that Ukraine is still greatly outnumbered, even if by conscripts

[@Mugdorna]

Which is precisely why Ukraine is being very strict on publishing troops videos/pictures.

[@jamesgornall5731]

Both sides use conscripts...a "volunteer" with 3 weeks training is NOT a professional soldier

[@lugerun]

@@jamesgornall5731 Its so sad seeing these 'volunteers' beaten into vans like swines knowing they are going to the butcher 😥💔

[@jamesgornall5731]

@@lugerun it's bad, but I live in Britain and when our Navy was short on recruits...yep, we'd simply send out the press-gang around the places sailors used to drink and round them up, pick them up off the flo8r and went they sobered up they'd be starting a new adventure on a 2 year voyage somewhere... during the Napoleonic wars, anything from 1/4 to 1/3 of the entire Navy was "recruited" in this manner, it having g been decided that "nationL security" was at stake... nothing ever changes

[@RobFeldkamp]

I believe the chieftain, not long ago, said something to the effect that the likelyhood of the TOP flying of a T-tank due to the carousel is largely overblown. Af a round in an Abrams stowage gets hit the game is euqaly over.

[@andreiyevanov]

The Western advisory group always warned Ukraine to not fall into the Russian trap. Kyiv keep ignoring it. If I were General Staff of Ukraine, I would given ear to the advice and instead of Surovokin line took it at North. Surovokin line is formidable and death trap.

[@ncormontagne]

I think the T-55s case of tanks taking dust and needing to be rebuilt is likely to be the case for the Belgian Leopards. We haven't used them in a while and let them rot in a storage. So, I'm not sure that they're combat ready, even with hefty upgrades

[@maxmagnus777]

Well the real question should be "are T-55's needed now, today"? If they are needed then they will be upgraded. Who would use them? What role would they be used for? If they are needed as fire support or for militia's they will be sent because those units can adopt them fast and get a lot of practice using them before T-90's replace them.

[@Shoelessjoe78]

Given a choice you take the leopard every day of the week and twice in Sunday over a T55

[@maxmagnus777]

@@Shoelessjoe78 Leopard ones were not maintained. It is a piece of junk. There are no spare parts. T-55 were maintained and were kept well. Choose again...

[@gaptaxi]

The Danes are sending their Leo1A2´s, they have been is use until quite recently. Their rifled 105mm guns can be used very easily as mobile Artillery, much more versatile in fact than Leo2 or even Abrams 120mm smoothbore guns. The Belgian Leopards have always been held in warehouse buildings with the intension of being sold on, most Russian T-55 and T-72 tanks were in fields let to rot. Big, very big difference.

[@maxmagnus777]

​@@gaptaxi most doesn't mean all. I've seen some preserved machinery. You put it deep into oil, split some parts if you have to. It can stay the same for 100 years. I've seen videos of Russians just removing the outer layers of rusted metal from T-72's and replacing a part here or there. Those get restored fast. The problematic T-72's from the start of this war were DPR and LNR tanks. Those were captured from Ukraine in 2015. 4-500 of them. Those were in worst shape. As for the survivability of Leo1 as mobile artillery, well there was already a lot of it in the field. It gets blown away every single day. It vastly inferior to real artillery. If you send them in battle as tanks, they have thinner armor than BMP's. They are outdated. There are videos of T-72's surviving 8 hits and still going. Leo-1 is a laughing stock at this point.

[@yesterdiegazza817]

Very Informative and technical. Thank you Sir

[@jorgeguanche5327]

I personally spoke with the arms dealer Who bough those leopard 1. He bough them for 25.000€ each. Then he sells them back to the goverment at 250.000€ each.

[@justinmcculloch7644]

shodingers summer offensive is one of the best ways to summarize what ive seen of the war

[@MrWadstw]

Splendid presentation and well delivered ,most informative and interesting analysis

[@black_triton9264]

I appreciate that this video is only lightly biased with very, very little politicization. A museum shouldn't descend into that 👍 But, as "Cold Warriors" we know that the UA hasn't broken through to anything. Since 4 June (120 days ago), all they managed to do is secure a foothold in the Security Zone (identify enemy main axis, delay ops, combat out posts, local c/atks, attrit the en before they reach the main defensice positions MDP, etc, etc).That's the name we were taught. Apparently, the Soviets/Russians call it the Destruction Zone. Which i think we can now say is a truer description of their doctrinal activities in this zone. Seeing that UA has committed what was supposed to be 3rd echelon exploitation forces - like the 82nd Air Aslt Bde with their Challenger tanks - for battles in the security/destruction zone instead of Rommeling througha gap in the last defensive line - would strongly indicate that this offensive is over. In fact, it culminated long ago. 15 km advance in one tiny area "Bradley Square". With another 85 km still to go in order to reach Sea of Azov objectives... According to the rhythm of operations, the UA should expect a strong backhand blow. Let's see when, where and, indeed, if it happens.

[@Doomer1984]

Quite agree I suspect the Russians are quite satisfied bleeding Ukraine white on its defence. I think it's too late in the year for a major assault. A slow steady creep is my guess

[@lugerun]

But with the help of T55s (slovenian M55S) or equally outdated leo1s they will be able to break through 😂

[@raulduke6105]

Excellent!

[@MPenzlin]

best part: as 12:32 the stihl chain saw for "close quarter combat"

[@nellynelson965]

That was probably the most coherant factual information given on the Ukraine war and boths sides tanks and other technical abilities. "Bloody Good".

[@Elzimbabwe.]

lol, no

[@ZS-rw4qq]

0:01 Nearing its first decade * There, I fixed this for you

[@monatrhaugen9187]

What was the first tank that had a fire control system?

[@gaptaxi]

Chieftain in the 1970´s, I was using the new Laser sight about 1976, I was faster with the .50 Browning to be honest, come a long way since then. The German`s might have an impressive KZbin Video with a Maßkrug full of beer, but our gun was stabilised just as well.

[@NickWard-bz4jo]

Excellent service 👏 More of this, please 🙏

[@johnnysex3230]

Человеческие волны солдат срочников, лол, а как же штрафники Бахмута, сражающиеся лопатами?

[@BhfuilIAm1312]

Bringing up the T-55s, it's important to remember that the Allies were still using WW1 tanks in WW2 in the rear in airfield defence and patrols, to free up newer tanks which could then be sent to the front. This could be the case here.

[@Ubique2927]

What? Name them.

[@Mugdorna]

Which WW1 tanks were still in use in WW2? None.

[@jamesgornall5731]

Leopard 1 was 1960s desig with virtually zero armour, yet we clap and wave flags

[@aymonfoxc1442]

Could you give some examples? I think the main concern here is the age of the T-55 and how vastly technology (particularly fire control systems) has evolved. At the beginning of WW2, tanks from WW1 would not have seemed out of place on the battlefield and they remained an exotic luxury or ambition for many countries. The T-55 is both commonplace and generations behind current production models but it can still be useful in infantry support, urban / ambush combat, and as maje shift artillery (plugging holes in Russian defensive lines). WW1 era tanks likewise filled these roles during the interwar era.

[@RZakelis]

@@jamesgornall5731 Ukrainians are happy to get Leopards 1, it is still better than nothing.Beggars can't be choosers.

[@pastorDbow]

I have seen a report that the south towards Chimea is less subject to mud in the rainy season, is this correct?

[@fungunsun1]

Yes

[@radekmajcher7431]

Not if a dam got blown up

[@stuartbailey9287]

@@radekmajcher7431 Northern part of the Crimea gets so little rain that it is very close to being classed as a desert. Most of the water which turned it into good agricultural land came via canal from the Dnipier river. Following dam being blown up Crimea is not getting that water and so slowly turning back into semi-desert. Not sure if this will have any effect on tanks apart from all the extra dust but its really bad for farming.

[@feedyourmind6713]

Well done. It's new warfare, which require learning curves.

[@KettyFey]

"if the total number of Western tanks noted as destroyed were in fact damaged and could be recovered and repaired, the total losses could be as little as single figures" - Oryx's Blog's list shows 19 lost Western tanks, like Leopard and Challenger. 11 of them are listed as damaged.

[@mcal27]

And that’s before we get to ‘Bradley Square’ where US AFV’s goto die…

[@alka7145]

@@mcal27 Is that the footage the Russians released the other day, that was then quickly geolocated to show vehicle losses from nearly 2 months ago as the Ukrainians broke through in Zaporizhzhia? And you know there are more armoured vehicles in the West that will continue to be imported as this 3 day special military operation drags on?

[@mcal27]

@@alka7145 err no… 1.5 months ago… do keep up!

[@mcal27]

@@alka7145 if you care to read the ‘3 day’ thing was never mentioned by Russia.. it was western analysts.. so wrong on two counts… newbie lol

[@Argosh]

​@@mcal27yes, of course Putler, being the greatest military strategist of all times, wanted a never ending quagmire that would forever remove Russia from international relevancy and make them Beijings b*tch... Cope harder tovarish, surely the commissars don't accept weak and obvious nonsense like this?

[@tedzehnder961]

There seems to be too much maneuvering during daylight hours.Tanks out in the open make big targets so ease of observation is another reason for a lot of tanks being taken out other than mines.I hope that Ukraine finds a way to make forward placement of tanks in the dark less dangerous and more of a surprise so they can get the maximum effect from them.

[@Ganiscol]

A couple weeks ago I saw an interview with a Leopard 2 crew and they specifically mentioned that they use this tank primarily between dusk and dawn due to its excellent night fighting abilities and to protect it from death from above. But that does nothing to mitigate the extremely extensive minefields they have to overcome...

[@deixtra]

Doesnt matter if its day or night. Infact drones see you better at night... only part of day a tad less dangerious is dusk or dawn

[@interpl6089]

There are Thermals equipped KA-52s and Mi-28s hovering in the dark...

[@GutkowskiMarek]

A little nitpic. It is not Western tanks that are designed to have ammunition explosion vent out. It is the Abrams, so the American tank. Leopard 2 has ammo stored not only in the turret rear but also forward in the hull. At least one Turkish Leo2 had its turret blown off by an ammo explosion. Challenger 2 has even more ammo storage in the hull and the only confirmed loss of a Chally had its turret blown off as well.

[@raygrant2439]

Thank you, very informative.

[@rinkadink66]

very interesting..thank you..

[@Talex-jb8bp]

The war currently reminds me of the battles on the western front of World War I because the tanks didn’t have much influence on the battles of World War I either they had some, but it was mainly artillery there, too

[@gaptaxi]

At first it cleared the German trenches, later they knew how to knock them out, they were a great Propaganda tool for the British, but the reality was quite different, look up Beutepanzer.

[@bryangrote8781]

I agree. Artillery (and machine gun fire) made it nearly impossible for troops to advance across open ground. Without the tank the troops would never have been able to leave the trenches, but the tanks alone could not win the fight. It took a long time to make tanks effective through new tactics and combined arms. Modern ISR and precision targeting have made tanks less effective and artillery is still doing the biggest job. The same assets making tanks more vulnerable are also making artillery, and everything else for that matter, more vulnerable as well however. Perhaps manned platforms of any kind are becoming obsolete or perhaps more effective counters to drones and missiles will be devised and the trend will go partially back to manned platforms again. There is always a counter to everything. Interesting times.

[@whya2ndaccount]

I'm not sure the RAC has enough vehicles to consider a SQN's worth to be "surplus".

[@Wladislav]

Very insightful, thank you.

[@jordanreeseyre]

Clarification: NATO tanks with blow-out panels for ammunition explosions include the Abrams & Leopard 2. Challenger 2 stores all (& Leopard 2 stores some) of its ammunition in armoured bins in the hull, so both tanks are capable & have in the past dislodged their turrets in ammunition explosions.

[@gareththompson2708]

I'm actually uncertain about the degree to which tanks struggling to exert influence. Yes, we have seen lots of tanks get destroyed by ATGMs, FPV drones, and precision artillery. But I seriously doubt we would have seen any fewer tanks destroyed by anti-tank guns had camera-equipped drones been so omnipresent in WW2. Alongside the footage of them being destroyed, we are also seeing lots of footage of them firing into enemy positions and generally doing an effective job of providing direct-fire support to infantry attacks. It's true we haven't seen many armored breakthroughs, but I think it may be a mistake to assume that that's still the role of the tank on the modern battlefield. I'm less concerned with whether we see massive armored maneuvers, and more concerned with whether or not individual tactical level attacks carried out with tank support tend to suffer fewer casualties or tend to be more likely to succeed than attacks carried out without tank support. If an in-depth study finds that attacks made with tank support were no more likely to succeed and took no fewer casualties than attacks made without tank support in this war, then I will have no choice but to concede that the tank is dead. But I'm not convinced yet. I suspect that the biggest issue for the tank in this war isn't the ATGM or the FPV drone, but that they are far less replaceable than they were in earlier wars. Russia is not the major industrial power that it was when it was the core of the Soviet Union. Every tank they lose on the battlefield reduces a finite stock of stored Soviet era tanks, and once those run out they are effectively out of tanks (they are probably producing some newly built tanks per year, but probably not enough). Ukraine is getting its resupply of tanks from the west. But none of the western countries are at war, so they haven't really scaled up armaments production to wartime levels. So the west is only supplying tanks in very small numbers (a dozen tanks here and there from each country, adding up to a couple hundred tanks in total, is about an order of magnitude lower than we need to be seeing for a war of this scale). This means that neither side can really afford to lose tanks at the kind of rates that would have been normal in earlier wars. I suspect this is why Ukraine is being very careful with their use of tanks, and leading most of their attacks with infantry. The mud season is not going to put an end to campaigning. The Ukrainians have specifically stated that they intend to continue the offensive through the fall and winter. The mud will be a complication, but not an insurmountable one. Mud is a serious impediment to rapid mechanized maneuvers. But if should have less influence on the mostly infantry-led bite and hold style attacks that the Ukrainians have resorted to. The Ukrainians are not outnumbered, as far as we can tell. The Russians have about a 3.3:1 advantage in the size of their population. But a larger population does not automatically translate to a larger army. Last I heard there were probably around 600-700 thousand Ukrainian soldiers who are probably facing around 400-500 thousand Russians soldiers. The autoloader carousel isn't the problem (well, the carousel is in the perfect spot to harness the catastrophic explosion to toss the turret, but it isn't the cause of the catastrophic explosion). The T-72 turret-toss is actually significantly less likely to happen if you don't cram every available space with additional ammunition. The Americans learned the same lesson in WW2 (funny that Shermans became a lot less likely to catastrophically explode when there wasn't extra ammunition packed into every available space). I don't know why tankers apparently need to relearn this lesson in every single war. DON'T CRAM EXTRA AMMUNITION INTO EVERY AVAILABLE CORNER. sigh, someday people will actually listen to historians... Anyway, I'm betting the Russians have finally learned this lesson, since most of the knocked out Russian tanks I've seen lately still had their turrets on. 2,800 T-55s? Where'd we get that estimate from? Covert Cabal's best attempt so far to estimate how many tanks the Russians have of each type only came up with 270 usable T-55s. So far Oryx still only lists 2 T-55s lost by the Russians, which I think supports that they probably don't have very many of them. I have noticed increasing number of T-80BVs showing up on Oryx though. At the beginning of the war they were mostly losing relatively modern T-72B3s and T-72B3Ms. That they now seem to be overwhelming using vintage Soviet era T-80BVs would definitely seem to support the view that they have largely run down their stocks of more modern tanks. The T-80BV is certainly better than any T-55, but it still is not a modern tank.

[@timoteiafanasie4894]

600-700 k Ukrainians vs 400-500 k Russians? Very interesting. Where did you get those numbers? Ops, just to remember: NATO trained Ukrainians vs Russian idiots. There you go. Now we can easily understand what's happening and why Ukraine is almost, almost winning. Just pour some more billions and they will win for sure 😃😃😃

[@nvelsen1975]

It's the opposite of survivor bias basically: "We're seeing a lot destroyed by ATGMs" = Good luck unless you have an ATGM on hand. There's not that much you can do about a tank putting HE onto your position. It's either have an ATGM or call in artillery.

[@banditdelta7172]

Thumbnail maker props to you

[@Taurevanime]

There is no question about whether or not this is an offensive or not. It started back on June 5th and we've seen them attacking and pouring men and equipment at the defensive lines on the road towards Tokmak. And the losses sustained are tremendous with only a small salient to speak for after five months of this, which now acts as a firebag attracting Russian artillery and FPV drone attacks on anyone and anything trying to move inside it. The desired breakthrough was not achieved and the position held now is one that is draining Ukraine of valuable manpower and equipment to hold or expand it. attrition

[@kaymish6178]

I think next generation tank upgrades are going to end up with a number of short range radars to compliment active protection systems and help target acquisition. especially any anti drone systems they get equipped with.

[@Zarcondeegrissom]

or a combination of stuff via "combined arms" yeah.

[@Mugdorna]

T-80BVM had this. It was too dangerous to be used with friendly infantry nearby. The single prototype was knocked out months sgo.

[@v4skunk739]

@@MugdornaThere are hundreds of new T-80BVM. They were built / upgraded like 4 years ago.

[@davidgoodnow269]

"Australian cardboard drones."

[@christopherwebber3804]

Sound very like World War 1 with the constant attempts to make a breakthrough of a static, heavily fortified line and huge announcements that "we took a village!" or "we advanced 100 metres!"

[@adrianjorgensen3750]

Everyone keep up the pressure on your governments to keeping the supplies flowing to Ukraine 🇺🇦

[@simon-pierrelussier2775]

5:46 the problem with Challenger 2 is likely going to be the vulnerable tracks and the lightly armored chassis.

[@drew1427]

Being that we've already seen a challenger 2s turret pop I'd say theyre better then nothing but theyre certainly no superweapon.

[@user-qv1vl8bn2m]

​​@@NeilHawkins-zq7bm the challenger ran into mines and the crew had time to bail, no different to many many T-tanks throughout this war The challenger 2 has no blowout panels, stores ammunition everywhere and is 2-piece so the gun cannot be unloaded in battle, not to mention it's around 70-tons which is extremely heavy sinking it into the ground and breaking bridges other tanks wouldn't It's pretty subpar in reality and is only kept around because we can't afford to replace them Ideally we'd have gotten rid of them by now but the ever dwindling budget says no

[@thesalopian1389]

Love the classic British understatement...."one Challenger has been severely damaged".

[@chadimirputin2282]

2 have been destroyed, the videos are online. 🤣

[@TotalRookie_LV]

How is that an understatement? For comparison, when Russians claim "a drone was downed by AA fire, only it's wreckage fell on an airfield" it means - a drone got through and damaged something, when they say "aircraft was slightly damaged by Ukrainian drones" it means total loss of at least one Russian aircraft.

[@pluemas]

​@@chadimirputin2282 there is only one confirmed loss. There was one additional rumoured loss, but the video used as proof most likely was showing a different type of tank as (whilst it was very grainy) it didn't have the same features. It was also on a different front than where the other challenger's was shown to be working in.

[@obsidianjane4413]

buff right out.

[@inisipisTV]

@@pluemas- No, both Western and Neutral experts confirmed at Least 2 Challenger 2 are destroyed. 3 more are reported destroyed in another area but not neutrally confirmed.

[@jasonmartin1668]

As always,, educational, professional and extremely well done !!

[@wessexdruid7598]

You can take the officer out of the cavalry, but...

[@Dan_TheCatman]

INCREDIBLE quality in your videos as always

[@domino2560]

LMAO

[@ljoe7038]

I dont understand,what's the problem? Ukrainians received their guns, they need just to go there and reconquer territories and then each of them receives ten russian untermensches as slaves and money and glory and european citizenship and do on, they mist just go there , ruzzians are "stupid cowards with poor genetics with stupid leaders and dont deserve to live" - this is what you were t told many years , is it no true? Ukrainians , you must just go there , is it so really hard to understand?

[@blaisep112]

Oh, and please do not forget about that the AFU is doing its counter offensive without air superiority.

[@kez0o9]

I don't see any of those tanks being "easily repaired" if they have been burning for any amount of time . The logistics and infrastructure is not there. It would be easier and cheaper to just replace the vehicle.

[@1BigBen]

first 4 damage Leopard 2A4 where back in poland with few days also as No challenger 2, Abrams nor leopard 2 hull production is at this time * All hull are cover in due cause and make into new Tank *KF-51(AKA Leopard 3) if it will be put into production will most likely use New production of 2A4 hull

[@kylespainhower7936]

Looks like someone made a video after watching BBC

[@igorGriffiths]

The one danger for the Ukranians as was pointed out will be the sheer range of tanks they have to maintain and arm, especially as many of these will be unknown to their maintenance teams

[@Jeff-mv2vm]

Pretty much, just get rid of any armor that doesn't help crew survival. Give them drone control and an excellent gun that isn't focused on killing tanks, but being a long range assault gun. Modern munitions are too good. That's my amateur take