Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar
- Thread starter areksnumbr1sxylady
- Start date
- Status
You think the russians and chinese don’t too? It’s not only airspace - population and sea etc.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,826
A Pro Russian German "journalist" and "writer" has been investigated and found to have received around 600 hundred thousand euros in discrete payments from two companies owned by Putin
www.theguardian.com
I bet the Ruski bots here don't earn that swag. Probably they receive 10 million rubles for each forum post saying Ukraine should surrender, that's about 1 pence
Top German journalist received €600,000 from Putin ally, leak reveals
Influential author and broadcaster Hubert Seipel received financial support for his work on two books described by many as sympathetic to Russian president
www.theguardian.com
I bet the Ruski bots here don't earn that swag. Probably they receive 10 million rubles for each forum post saying Ukraine should surrender, that's about 1 pence
Last edited:
I would suggest they look at the former PM who put the son of an ex KGB/FSB member into the House of Lords....
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 14,312
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
That would gut most armies
That can't be sustainable for very long even with the human resource the Russians have.
They are losing a 1,000 men a day. So that's a typical monthly total at the moment.
Last edited:
They're sustainable because those losses are exaggerated, if Russia actually had that many losses the war would be over by now.
O RLY?
Bro just dropping literal 20 year old memes
Russia has a population of over 140 million.
Now assume half of those are men, that's 70 million, now assume half of them are of "fighting age" that's 35 million*.
That's a lot of food for the worms, even if you limit it to mainly people from "the provinces" where they don't get represented in government as well or can be ignored.
The numbers of Russian dead/wounded have been able to be checked to some degree by things like looking at how many people have been lost from major units, or how many insurance polices have paid out and the number of excess deaths especially where the number of men dying is much higher in proportion to women than normal.
It's fairly amazing what people can work out from related official government stats and business information even when the government in question doesn't want people to know something officially.
The big problem for Russia in terms of soldiers isn't the raw meat to feed into the grinder, it's the dressings (equipment, training, experience etc to allow them to survive on the front line long enough to actually be useful).
*IIRC Russia's average age for men is lower than most of the western world, and even if i'm way out of that very rough number, Russia still has enough men of fighting age (and more reaching it every year) that even 300k year is sustainable, at least for a few years.
Last edited:
Russia had a ton of old hardware sitting around to draw from - they could sustain those kind of losses to this point - a significant proportion of the losses are backed up with photo and video evidence, around 2.5K tank losses are catalogued for instance, some of those tanks have been recovered, repaired and damaged or destroyed all over again which will add to the numbers a bit.
Man power wise even in the region they've mostly heavily drawn from it is still only around 10% of the on paper reserves, through to many of the more affluent regions being in some cases still under 1%. Though as mentioned above things like insurance policies and inheritances, etc. give a fairly good guide - which would indicate actual losses are less than 300K dead, but almost certainly well on the way there.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,006
- Location
- Billericay, UK
Exaggerated or not the numbers the Ukrainians put out are decent guide on how each side is approaching the war. For example the amount of older tanks that Russia is pulling out of storage and that's getting blown up on the battlefield suggests they don't have time to train new soldiers on more advanced systems like the T-90M tanks and instead it's easier and quicker to show them how to use older T-62's.
The other telling number which doesn't get nearly enough attention is how good Ukrainian's counter artillery is, compared the losses of Russia's artillery systems over the last 4 months to summer last year and it helps in part explain why Russia is barely able to move forwards as artillery cover is limited. If I was a Ukrainian general counter more battery radars should be high on the shopping list.
Overall Ukrainian as a fighting force is getting stronger and Russia is getting weaker as it's unable to replace all the advanced hardware it's lost and production isn't able to ramp up to meet demand. It maybe a stalemate now but the needle has been swinging in favour of Ukraine since last Autumn, provide the west keeps supporting Ukraine with new and improved capabilities there will only be one winner and it's not Russia.
The other telling number which doesn't get nearly enough attention is how good Ukrainian's counter artillery is, compared the losses of Russia's artillery systems over the last 4 months to summer last year and it helps in part explain why Russia is barely able to move forwards as artillery cover is limited. If I was a Ukrainian general counter more battery radars should be high on the shopping list.
Overall Ukrainian as a fighting force is getting stronger and Russia is getting weaker as it's unable to replace all the advanced hardware it's lost and production isn't able to ramp up to meet demand. It maybe a stalemate now but the needle has been swinging in favour of Ukraine since last Autumn, provide the west keeps supporting Ukraine with new and improved capabilities there will only be one winner and it's not Russia.
The number of soldiers killed matches other estimates pretty well, equipment loses less well. For example, these are latest UK estimates:
Approximately 302,000 Russian military personnel killed or wounded.
Tens of thousands of Russian soldiers have deserted.
Over 7,117 Russian armoured vehicles destroyed.
Nearly 2,475 main battle tanks lost.
93 fixed-wing aircraft downed.
132 helicopters destroyed.
320 unmanned aerial vehicles lost.
16 naval vessels of all classes sunk or damaged.
Over 1,300 artillery systems of all types destroyed.
Tens of thousands of Russian soldiers have deserted.
Over 7,117 Russian armoured vehicles destroyed.
Nearly 2,475 main battle tanks lost.
93 fixed-wing aircraft downed.
132 helicopters destroyed.
320 unmanned aerial vehicles lost.
16 naval vessels of all classes sunk or damaged.
Over 1,300 artillery systems of all types destroyed.
Those are brutal losses.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,646
But isn't that just because the life expectancy is low in russia? Not because they have good youth demographics.
Soldato
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2009
- Posts
- 10,006
- Location
- Billericay, UK
The bigger issue is the lose of experienced people, sure Russia can pull down from it's vast inventories but good luck finding capable people who can use it effectively.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 3,826
The full breakdown is:
Russia
Population: 143,400,000
% female: 54
Amount male: 65,964,000
% 18-65: 61
Total fighting age men: 40,238,040
Ukraine
Population: 43,790,000
% female: 54
Amount male: 20,143,400
% 18-65: 66
Total fighting age men: 13,294,644
Russia have three times the maximum recruit-able/conscript-able man power, but they're taking well over three times the daily casualties so ignoring all other factors and looking at just a pure manpower basis they're going to run into issue first.
Of course nobody is going to burn through their entire fighting age population just to keep a war going, even Russia. Plus you have added factors, such as as due to their country/economy/industry/etc being larger than Ukraine's it requires more people to make it function, losing a working age male is more damaging to them than it may first appear.
That's actually incorrect, the reason they were spamming out T-62s from the storage facilities is simply because they were the easiest inoperable tanks to get working and off to the warzone and they were desperate because their pants were down. A T-90M will actually be much easier to operate than a T-62 partially due to those advanced systems. It's the repair/maintenance that's more complex.
I.E in a a T-90M you put the target in your crosshair and the tank will raise/lower the gun barrel to make sure the shell lands in the thing you're pointing at. In a T-62 you have to put it on your horizontal marker then spin a wheel to raise/lower the gun barrel so that the vertical line that corresponds to how far away you think it is is resting on it, then you fire and if your shell overshoots or falls short you adjust and fire again (of course you're almost certainly dead by this point, this type of advantage is how Challengers were able to steamroll T-62s and T-55s in Desert Storm).
Plus add to that the T-62 has no autoloader so you have an extra person in the tank whose job it is to put the giant bullets into the hole (spoiler: they can't do it as fast as an autoloader so if you actually avoid the artillery, drones, mines and ATGMs long enough to get into a tank duel then this is where you die).
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 14,312
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
How do you know that?
He has ZERO concept of Russia. Just mind blowing someone can apparently follow this war for so long, and not realize that men are meat to Russia. They are just like ammo... expendable.
- Status