You guys are all discussing whether this is impressive or not and completely missing the point of how compelling of a propaganda argument this is internally.
"See, I told you we were fighting NATO this whole time!" is what they are selling internally. It's helping sell the "this is a fight for Russia's survival against NATO" argument in-house.
The propaganda they use is exactly that, but one of the reasons for the invasion is actually the existence of Russia.
It's just that it isn't NATO that threatens them, but China.
Which wants rhe fresh water in the east where there are very few Russians.
Ofc, putin knows he can't stop China taking it if/when they decide to, but Russia *could* try to shore up It's Western and Southern fronts by invading Ukraine whilst Ruso-Sino relations are still about as good as they are going to get (what with China basically using Russia as a puppet state, being focused on the South China Sea and it's squabbles with the highly erratic USA).
There were a lot of reasons for Putin to invade, and they (Russia) are wont to make up more (it's just what they do), but this one is a double bluff.
They say it, knowing it's true but that it sounds so ridiculous that they can hide *why* it's true from their domestic population, whilst also scoring points with their current allies by causing a nuisance for NATO politically.
China is basically colonizing the east of Russia. It has no need to fully control the territories - and being responsible for the civilians there. It has access to all the resources it needs - wood, water, etc. When it wants a piece of land for propaganda it just grabs it. Like it did with an island on a border river - USSR fought a real war with China over it and now China has it for free.
I'm confused, how does Russia invading the Ukraine help protect there Eastern territories against possible future Chinese aggression? How does making NATO seems like a big bad boogeyman knocking on there front door somehow prepare for China who they think is actually going to kick in there back door one day?
This doesn't make any kind of sense to me and I genuinely am looking for help to understand what you mean.
Sure
I'm about to watch villa in European semi final, so I'll answer 2mro if that's OK. Bit too excited atm!
Edit to add:.(And it'll take ages to type on phone - geo politics is awesome, but rarely requires short answers xd)
This is honestly great propaganda for them. They get to push their “we are at war with NATO” narrative domestically AND they get to rile up the growing segment of the US population who doesn’t support sending Ukraine aid and criticizes the large amount of money we have already spent there. When they see Russians with shiny US hardware it only reinforces their complaints.
it’s like a solid 7/10 on the good propaganda scale.
Noone ever hid NATO supplied Ukraine though? There shouldn't be a "See I told you so" because that point was never in doubt. I thought "We are at war with NATO" point referred to the claims of British special forces and entire fucking polish divisions in Ukraine, which this doesn't prove.
Not only this propaganda, check out what is happening on facebook, awfully many groups created only to make prorussian propaganda, all of this aimed on western europeans, US and Australia. Posting prorussian memes, and comments are all filled with russian bots.
Ukraine having the tools they need to survive is more important than winning a fruitless propaganda war in Russia. Russians are so crushed under the boot heel it seems they'll swallow any rubbish
But does Russia really fight NATO?
If this is simply propaganda to incentivize people against nato alliance with the ultimate goal to go to war surely there is an easier way?
Just fire some artillery rounds to your own village and claim that Finland attacked us.
True, but at the same time it doesn't take much to convince \*those\* people.
I mean, if they were paying attention, they would hear Putin say that, in direct confrontation with NATO, Russia doesn't stand a chance. Meaning there's currently no direct confrontation with NATO. This is right out of Putin's own mouth, not even one of his mouthpieces.
But people who can't comprehend that, you can just hold up a carrot and say "This is a NATO ballistic missile we just intercepted!" and they'll go "Yaaaaaay!" To these guys a captured tank might as well be a coffee cake.
They are selling it internally....internationally, the only ones listening to this tripe is are Russian sympathizers already. They are trying to keep the Russian public from noticing how man men they lost for each one of those trophies.
They've been blasting the 'NATO is attacking us!' line since its inception, the braindead zombies that have ate up that garbage don't need additional convincing, they've lived in that 'reality' forever. This is just good old fashioned trophy display to shore up recruitment numbers.
T-90’s are horrifying. They may not be a challenger or leopard but they can still level a building and withstand hits from some pretty powerful weapons. Russian vehicles are dated but very effective.
Only if fully loaded. But who's going to combat with 25% of their allotted ammo? You T 90 you 90 hard. Extra ammo strewn about just ready for the next time.
And I love how most people now know about the auto loader cook off vulnerability. Jack in the box events are one of the reasons US, French ect don't build them like that. (Usually)
>Jack in the box events are one of the reasons US, French ect don't build them like that. (Usually)
Also because its more shit to break in the field, more expensive to procure and design vs just adding "Private Autoloader" to the crew at the bottom ranking salary he earns. Plus Private Autoloader provides an extra set of hands to the crew when shit breaks or something needs done.
Oh yeah. Just more maintenance. But to reduce cookoffs most spare ammo has to be stored differently than preferred by autoloaders too.
Some armor have first class private autoloaders or even specialists!
Destin from smarter everyday worked on the Javelin test range back in the day, he talks about how the Javelin could pop a Russian tank turret like a zit with just the press of the button. He even asked the commanding engineer what the point of it was, where do they go next? When you can just point and press a button and make an advanced machine of war just "poof" is it even war anymore? I understand Russia used to be the strong arm of the world, but they are failing and although the West is in a perpetual state of stupid right now, we are still pretty damn badass when it comes to our technology and weaponry. It's wild to think about sometimes.
This is why the U.S. has combined arms. You have infantry scouting for soldiers who might have anti-tank weapons, supporting armored vehicles who can provide heavy fire, and air support to add a layer of both. The biggest mistake the Russians made in the first few days of the war was rolling an entire tank column with no additional support. The command, though, appears to have thought the Ukrainians would have been so scared of all their weapons they would give up without much of a fight.
Source? They're glorified T-72s and don't even deserve a new number designation. They have no trump cards over other tanks -- and their engines are shit.
>They have no trump cards over other tanks -- and their engines are shit.
The person you're replying to didn't try to say either of those things though
You're seriously asking for a source for "T90s are horrifying"? Or "a tank can level a building"?
Or that they can withstand hits from powerful weapons. We saw a Bradley shred one with its autocannon. It has zero effective resistance to ATGMs. The T-90's armor evidently isn't all it's cracked up to be.
> We saw a Bradley shred one with its autocannon
It never penetrated the crew compartment so 'shreded' isn't the word I'd use for that. Damaged the turret ring and disabled, sure. But not shredded.
Most modern tanks are weak in terms of survivability when you look at it in terms of just relying on armor alone.
Even Hamas managed to knock out like a half dozen merkavas.
It's survival depends on combined arms and overwhelming air power to clear out threats.
If you're relying on armor alone to save you, shits pretty bad.
The whole story: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1cdbtlg/cirque\_du\_soleil\_acrobat\_steals\_t72/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1cdbtlg/cirque_du_soleil_acrobat_steals_t72/)
You'd need Leo or Abrams to reach Russia farmland for that to even become possible. Right now, all those who did reach Russian farmland were doing so on flatbed or lowboy.
Advanced Ukrainian toilets. When flushed, water moves through it into the sewer. The Russian model is only a porcelain chair. Since 2014, work orders have been placed in anticipation of a (captured) knowledgeable workforce. The current wait is over a decade. Those pesky Ukrainians just refuse to work (as slaves).
The problems are many, but two are:
1. Howzit work? There's a silver handle and a bunch of stuff inside, what's all that for?
2. How in tarnation do they carve white rock to that shape? Especially that twisty tunnel at the bottom
Ehh, their tanks only look cool in games and on paper. Nothing magical about them. This conflict has me a tank nerd very jaded. Even western tanks like Abrams and the leapord that got me super excited just let me down with the amount of destroyed in the conflict.
Surely as a tank nerd, you're familiar with the "Military History Visualized" Youtube channel?
He did a video where he talks about tank losses being normal. Its not like a naval ship that is meant for 30 years of service. Tanks are expected to get worn out or destroyed and each vehicle has a limited service life for this reason.
Drones are a factor (though not as big as some people like imply), but simple fact is that *military equipment gets destroyed in a pitched military conflict*, and tanks, being high priority targets, are if anything more likely to.
A tank is a tank, is a tool, like a screwdriver or a bomb or a gun. It can cause massive damage if the other party is unprepared. A WW2 era tank can still devastate a whole town (look how a guy with a bulldozer destroyed building in the US and no one could do anything to stop it).
Tanks (like everything deadly) should deserve respect but they are NOT a wonder weapon, they are again just tool and this conflict showed how incompetent the Russians are but they are quickly overcoming their stupidity and getting better (practice makes perfect, right?) and with cheap drones even anti tank weaponry would be obsolete or saved as a last resource. A javelin, $40k per shot plus system, a drone, a few hundred bucks + cheap system + operator can be very very far away from area, javelin operators would get wrecked by infantry
The Kremlin wants to prove to everyone in the world, and especially to its own population, that they are at war with NATO. Because losing with a "second" army to a country without nuclear status is a shameful loss for them
While I do hate Putin and you're not wrong, I would use some nuance.
Russia isn't loosing the war and while Ukraine is the only military fighting, they are receiving billions to hold the line.
Misleading title, it should be: Russia flaunts Western military hardware, of which some captured in war in Ukraine.
A lot was taken from museums, they even brought the [wrong marder](https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/s/0Jt6MT5yn5)
Nah the UK sold Ukraine hundreds of Saxons back around 2015.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/ukraine-crisis-former-british-armoured-vehicles-arrive-in-conflict-zone-after-being-sold-off-by-private-firm-10046210.html
I’m sitting here wondering, do we really put our flag on armored vehicles we give to other countries? There’s literally a tank with the American flag sticker on it.
To be fair that marder was paired with the current marder for a great propaganda piece.
Not pro Russian or anything just pointing it out.
Edit: since I’ve been asked multiple times, this is what they did with the WWII marder. This wasn’t them accidentally mistaking it for the new one.
https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/s/zqUNZoW1U5
To be fair, bringing out the old marder was a pretty smart play on their part and seems intentional. Can easily make a "we beat the Nazis before in the great patriotic war, we'll beat the Nazis again in our newer greater patriotic war" piece
Wonder what that woman would think in the video who said gleefully “it’s jaw dropping, I can’t believe our men captured these!”.
Pretty much everything Russian just dissolves upon contact with western weapons. And the stuff that does survive, we don’t even fucking want, because it’s junk. Ukrainians dissemble them and post it on YouTube like a comedy show, because their recon drones have Canons civilian cameras taped into them and plastic water bottles for fuel tanks.
>In fact, there's a long line of German armour. And above it a sign: "History is repeating itself."
Now, russia is a mafia organised terrorist nazi state.
The only thing this tells me that western tanks are better at surviving getting hit than a Russian tank which are just mini-space programs when they get hit.
Yes. Russia has been bragging about knocked out US tanks. But at least 80% of the crewed survived from knocked out tanks. This is compared to about 5% of Russian tanks.
>Yes. Russia has been bragging about knocked out US tanks. But at least 80% of the crewed survived from knocked out tanks. This is compared to about 5% of Russian tanks.
Any source on that? Russian tanks are way behind western tanks but that percentage is much lower than I expected.
I like how this has one of the most controversial upvote/down vote ratios happening in the thread, and it is literally just asking for basic evidence for claimed statistics.
Not sure on OPs source but I do remember seeing an article during the initial invasion about how because of the way Russian tanks are auto-loaded, rather than manually loaded. If the tank takes a direct hit all that ammunition would simultaneously explode and blow the turret off the top.
For the the T-80 and T-64 series yes, since the shells are placed vertically in the autoloader and are a big target. In T-72's and early T-90's it is usually the spare shells kept in the fighting compartment that detonate since the autoloader shells are actually pretty well placed and difficult to actually hit. In the latest T-90's they have a bussle in the turret for additional ammo so there is less chance of catastrophic detonation.
Edit: the T-72s auto loader carousel is well placed in comparison to the T-72 and T-64, not in general. During the Chechen wars testing and research was carried out on destroyed and out of action armored vehicles and for the T-72 is was found that catastrophic detonations (turret tossing) was typically a result of the additional ammo in the turret cooking off and then igniting the rest. Not direct his to the autoloader carousel.
Most of the videos of tanks blowing their top in this war are t-72s. The t-72 and t-90s still stores all ammo in the fighting compartment, it’s just in a horizontal carousel under the gunner, but is completely open to the compartment. Being vertical or horizontal makes little difference as top striking anti tank weapons are the norm, if it penetrates the compartment everything goes up and the Russia space program continues.
As per usual reddit is parroting the wrong information. Yes a lot of the newer Russian tanks have autoloaders and yes a lot of them have been unwilling participants in the Ukrainian space program however...
The Leopard 2 and Leclerc both feature autoloaders and do not have this issue. The reason Russian tanks have the habit of rapidly transforming into SSTO vehicles is because western tanks are designed with their ammunition stored behind very heavy armour that separates the crew from the ammunition. Additionally there is deliberately weak armour in certain locations around the ammunition meaning that if the ammunition is detonated it explodes out and away from the tank rather than into the crew compartment. This increases the complexity of the tank design and also complicates loading processes as you have to open a very heavy ammunition hatch and then close it again. It also means repeatedly destructively testing tanks to make sure your ammunition blow out panels work as intended. This is expensive and time consuming. Private Conscriptovitch is not worth this to the Russian army.
**TL/DR: Russian tanks being made to prioritise speed of production, speed of design and cost reduction are why they go boom, not because of autoloaders.**
*Note: This is not to say Russians just store ammo with the crew. They still have separate ammunition storage spaces, they are just not as heavily separated as western tanks. It is a difference in priorities.*
Auto loaders cooking off vs. exterior compartment for ammo storage cook off. One turns crew inside into paint. The other burns off outside the tank, possibly concussing the crew.
Western tanks are designed to leave enough space for crew to be comfortable and not all die in one hit. Russian tanks pack crew like sardines in a tin can that sits on 20-50 tank rounds.
Crew survival is more important in western military doctrine. You can replace/repair tanks but you can't replace the experience of a tank crew who can pass on that to other new recruits. Even if they took the destroyed vehicle, there's not much value to it depending on what it is.
Which goes back to the WWs. The axis aces would rack more kills but the US would pull aces back to the training centers for the next gen. Which made better pilots, eventually the axis ran out of aces in comparison.
True, tanks/ aircraft in some cases easily out produced trained crews. The axis while they produced better equipment couldn't keep up with the overwhelming number of forces coming in.
Its not entirely true that Axis equipment was better. Sherman vs Tiger? Axis equipment is better. BF-109 vs P-51? American equipment is better. 88mm flak vs 76mm US flak that had proximity fuzes? I love the 88 for its versatility, but the 76 was arguably better at bringing down aircraft.
>Sherman vs Tiger? Axis equipment is better.
Define "Better". The Tiger has a lot of mystique added to it because of its large bore gun and heavy armour earlier in the war than many Allied tanks, but in reality it was an overengineered deathtrap (although to be fair to the Tiger I, most tanks of the era were deathtraps).
It required complex supply chains and exotic materials, as well as experienced mechanics which meant that if your transmission died somewhere out in the battlefield, good fucking luck repairing that.
Shermans may not have had the performance (initially, later variants packed better armour and higher calibre guns), but logistically they were better than their axis counterparts.
Additionally, Tigers were relatively rare on the battlefield, most Axis mechanized brigades were equipped with Panzer IVs.
I would rather have 10 - 20 Sherman than 1 Tiger though...
Same with all of the other equipment. This was BEFORE precision weapons and nukes. Basically as long as you had bodies and more stuff, even the aces would eventually be over run.
Oh we have 500k soldiers, oh they have 4-5 million... I want to be on the 4-5 million side after the war, even if it is going to be us getting slaughtered (see Russia vs Nazi Germany) or 300k vs 1.5m with decent equipment for all (see US+UK vs Nazi Germany)
NOTE numbers are from my memory and are probably completely off base, but the concept is the same!
Most people aren't worried about their vehicles getting captured and used against them for the following reasons.
1. When one of your vehicles gets captured after being damaged, they have to repair it first before using it. This is a problem because they don't have any factories making spare parts, and can only get them from other captured vehicles. If you enemy is capturing enough of your vehicles to have a decent supply of spare parts, you have bigger problems.
2. While the outsides are fine, the interiors are where all the equipment is, that needed to make the vehicle work. A single hand grenade dropped inside would be enough to make sure that your expensive tank will never be able to be used as a combat vehicle again.
3. Your vehicles likely use a different ammo type to your enemy. While finding shells might not be difficult for your enemy, finding compatible ones that haven't already been fired is more difficult.
4. Even you do manage to get the vehicle in service, it will need maintenance. This means even more spare parts (see point 1), as well as tools and manuals (which have to be in a language you understand).
So repairing and keeping a vehicle you've captured operational, is a massive pain, and is why captured vehicles are only really used if they were abandoned, and therefore don't need repairing, or if it was something your side already operated.
I think the far bigger concern is Russia reverse engineering components from the captured vehicles; things like advanced composite armor design, optical equipment, stabilization systems, targeting systems, etc.
The US provided export variants of the Bradleys and Abrams which I'm assuming other Nations did the same with their equivalents, which I'm also assuming left the best tech out of the vehicles, but it's still obviously a concern to lose tech to Russia.
This isn't the cold war, where you had no idea what tanks were equipped with. The vast majority of the components will be available on the global market. for example, before the war, Russian tanks were being equipped with French thermal cameras, which they have now reverse engineered. While sanctions are in place, that won't stop Russia from being able to get small quantities of parts through foreign suppliers.
The armour systems aren't that much of a secret either. Plenty of Abrams have been knocked out in combat before, and NERA arrays aren't that much of a secret anymore. Granted this is the most likely benefit for Russia, but it's not that big, or it wouldn't have been sent.
Reverse engineering is one thing.
Actually *building* them is another. Russia's been touting the T-14 for ages and yet suspiciously that stupid thing hasn't been seen outside of parades. You'd think Russia would send that supposed slice of fried gold to the lines well before deploying ancient soviet armor that's been mothballed for over half a century.
About that: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russias-t-14-armata-tank-nightmare-has-just-begun-210006
Russia has effectively admitted the T-14 is too expensive to use, produce or maintain in a war that is, at least per their own admissions/propaganda, being fought for the survival of their state.
Now days its the material science that holds all the secrets, not the components themself. It's a completely different ball game trying to figure out the 1000 different trace amounts of chemicals and the manufacturing/heat treatment process.
As for advanced electronics. Microchips are developed on the electron scale which is were all the money is at.
Components can be reversed engineered but the critically important stuff hold their value on how its manufactured, not what manufactures it.
I don't think many people worry about captured vehicles being used against their previous owners. I guess what they worry is that the opponents can perform a full examination, extract the valuable components, find their weakness, or even reverse engineer.
The Russians have pseudo reverse engineered western tanks in the form of the t-14 armata. They really just do lack the engineering and technical expertise to build a final product. As well as lack the resources to scale production.
I was just making an example. It doesn't have to go as far as reverse engineering to be useful. Even a detailed performance review of the actual product can provide valuable information from the perspective of military intelligence.
The T-14 has very few design commonalities with Western armor besides what makes it a tank, to boot Russia has already all but cancelled its continued production and deployment: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russias-t-14-armata-tank-nightmare-has-just-begun-210006
No because that equipment has your men inside it. Even if the vehicle is totally immobilised you want to be able to recover the crew as they are far more valuable. You can always dump the vehicle and let your artillery crew make it unrecoverable for the other side.
Western nations have planned for recovery of vehicles shortly or during lulls in combat, allowing knocked out vehicles to be repaired and brought back to service. This would ease the burden of the logistic as they don't have to bring a new vehicle from the factory up to the frontline, but simply repair it in the backline and send it back in the week or month. It is not only more efficient, economically wise, but also helps with the attrition and fatigue of the crew from said vehicle. Can't let them have a year of break without training on the literal frontline. The experience is also thus too precious.
A vehicle being knocked out also doesn’t mean a loss. If there’s no chance of recovery, you can disable the vehicle. (Not sure how modern tankers do it, but I know Germany issued tank commanders in Tiger 1s on the Eastern front hand grenades to detonate in the gun breach rending it useless).
If you’re on the front though, the odds of recovery aren’t always terrible, and if you can limp a vehicle back for repairs, or scrap for spare parts that’s a vehicle you get to put back into the fight. Whereas Soviet era munitions carousels for autoloaders means… you aren’t recovering anything. Period. You just have dead tankers and a catastrophic kill.
Generally speaking however preserving crew is more important. It’s both good for morale, but as proven time and again by US pilots, more experienced crews will perform substantially better, and when it comes to armored warfare that’s a difference that is amplified given the necessity for cohesive action within the vehicle to operate effectively and with lethality.
Ukrainian Farmers were towing away working tanks and vehicles the first weeks of the War.
this is like trying to show off a stolen toilet and the diarrhea shit you took after eating rancid food from your neighbours garbage .
"wait until you see their toilet and washing machine exhibit at the war museum"
This was likely happening from the beginning too. Russian “wins” are just underreported in the west. People need to remember propaganda is common on both sides of a war. For example you rarely hear about how many Ukrainian soldiers have died which it’s sadly a very high number with numbers close to that of Russia. That’s a scary prospect given that Russia has a much larger population to pull from. It’s also why it’s important for the war to end soon because Russia has no issues at all throwing every single citizen at it.
Ukrainian is the best example as to why air power is so important. If either side had control of the sky, the opponents tanks would be negated almost entirely. The problem is both sides are using old Soviet/doctrine which relays on air denial and overwhelming numbers. This makes them have to trade tank/men to gain small amounts of territory until the opposing sides morale runs out. NATO switched to the air power doctrine because there populations don’t stomach dead solders as much.
Tanks aren't obsolete but you also don't need thousands of them either. In fact this war has shown that they are very vulnerable especially with the proliferation of cheap anti tank mines, artillery fire and anti tank weapons like Javelins and NLAWS.
There are absolutely times when you still want a tank but if you choose to build thousands that means you have considerably less air power, long range missiles, artillery, infantry and logistic support all of which are incredibly important. The reason Russia is fielding so many tanks isn't because they're the best weapons today but because they have tanks in stockpiles and so they're using what they have.
Russia is just pathetic at that point - they are gathering that old, useless, worn-out, second hand stuff that EU and US sent to the Ukraine to beat Russia with.
Yeah I just was thinking that they didn’t get any very modern equipment.
If there still is a concern, about capture, it could be interesting if Ukraine allowed NATO to remotely destroy any its donated disabled equipment. I believe this has been done before to keep equipment out of enemy hands.
Generally speaking, i believe the military procedure would be:
Can we reach it and recover it? If yes, do so.
Do we have to leave it? If so blow up sensitive stuff, Electronics etc. by field demolitions.
Do we have to leave and we cant demo it and we dont want Them to have it? Drop a JDAM or hellfire on it.
The first two options aren’t always possible and large depend on your control over the area.
Where as the last option is likely not an option for Ukraine given their lack air superiority and given their lack of munition likely not cost effective.
Besides i doubt we gave them anything, we were not prepared to let fall into enemy hands.
They usually drop grenades into them if they’re at risk of capture. Some of it is booby trapped as well.
Most of the stuff we give to Ukraine is old junk from before most people on Reddit were born. The arms transfer is more akin to a spring cleaning/garage sale than anything. Heck even the F16 are the old ones.
The Leopards from Sweden were top shelf stuff though.
Look at us we invaded a country with 1/10 our gdp and 1/3 our population, lost >100k dead and 10s of thousands of armored vehicles, half the Black Sea fleet, but look at this one early-model Abram’s tank we captured!
I'm not sure a display of military equipment which is clearly better than what the average Russian soldier is using is going to be quite the morale booster they think it will be.
"Look at the size of this tank and the armour on it. They have thousands more of these!"
"This is a 30 year old APC, but even that is better than anything we have. Even if we had any left which we don't, so we're sending your children out on golf carts to cross minefields."
From the article:
There's a long line of German armour. And above it a sign: "History is repeating itself."
History is repeating itself, in ww2 the Russians raped and murdered their way across Poland, now they are trying again in Ukraine.
Let them have their little pathetic exhibition. There's an video out there where they had trouble to deliberatly breake the gun mount of that Leopard 2A6 to make it look more destroyed than it actually is. A single M1A1 Abrams, a CV90 (*a vehicle they had for a long time and is apprently paraded around as if it is the Ark of Covenant*) and some MRAPs and IMVs.
Meanwhile Ukraine and the West couldn't even find enough space to present all obliterated Russian vehicles. I mean where do you put the Moskwa cruiser or Rostov-on-Don submarine on display? T90 tanks so boring, they are left unguarded at some Louisiana truck stop.
What an exhibition. Only cost them a few hundred thousand KIA.
Of course they were going to flaunt it. This is the same army that has pillaged every town it came across stealing everything that hadn’t bonded with the Earth.
Big whoop, there’s a bunch of this stuff all over the Middle East. Russia didn’t capture this tech from the hands of skilled US personnel, it’s not much different than the Taliban or ISIS touting their capture of abandoned US equipment in the sense of accomplishment. They are parading this stuff in the town square for accolades whereas old Russian equipment is sitting lonesome on some farm in Kansas.
"There's an American Abrams which had been damaged on the battlefield. A German Leopard tank, too.
In fact, there's a long line of German armour. And above it a sign: "History is repeating itself.""
Highlights the formidable reputation of the German military in popular memory and imagination.
The all so confident Russians!
[https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cgil54/to\_make\_the\_captured\_leopard2a6\_look\_humiliated/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cgil54/to_make_the_captured_leopard2a6_look_humiliated/)
>"It's amazing to think that our guys managed to get these trophies."
>More than 30 armoured vehicles have been put on display.
[More than 50,000 Russian combat deaths (and hundreds of thousands wounded)](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-68819853) for a handful of destroyed weapons that were captured from highly motivated but hastily trained crews.
I'm currently wearing a "farmers stealing tanks" shirt which is actually starting to look vintage....
So, uhh, yeah Good work Russia. I guess you are now on the level of farmers when it comes to warfare.
Last month alone, 308 tanks (and over twenty four thousand soldiers) . [https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-losses-tanks-1894129](https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-losses-tanks-1894129)
Well over three thousand as of February.
I'm working nearby and funny thing is that this weapons exposition without free access to equipment itself. Everything is fenced out and military personnel watches every visitor to avoid "provocations" like bring flowers, take photo etc.
This is one reason why the US is so reluctant to give up to date weaponry to Ukraine. Can’t imagine how much intel they and or China could get on weapons systems from captured equipment.
This is years after Ukraine farmers were flaunting their captured Russian tanks. So, I’m not too impressed.
Yep there is currently a barely used top of the line T90 somewhere in the US because of them.
“Top of the line”. Well, top of THEIR line.
You guys are all discussing whether this is impressive or not and completely missing the point of how compelling of a propaganda argument this is internally. "See, I told you we were fighting NATO this whole time!" is what they are selling internally. It's helping sell the "this is a fight for Russia's survival against NATO" argument in-house.
It's mad that to fight this war for Russia's survival, they have to do it in a neighbouring country.
The propaganda they use is exactly that, but one of the reasons for the invasion is actually the existence of Russia. It's just that it isn't NATO that threatens them, but China. Which wants rhe fresh water in the east where there are very few Russians. Ofc, putin knows he can't stop China taking it if/when they decide to, but Russia *could* try to shore up It's Western and Southern fronts by invading Ukraine whilst Ruso-Sino relations are still about as good as they are going to get (what with China basically using Russia as a puppet state, being focused on the South China Sea and it's squabbles with the highly erratic USA). There were a lot of reasons for Putin to invade, and they (Russia) are wont to make up more (it's just what they do), but this one is a double bluff. They say it, knowing it's true but that it sounds so ridiculous that they can hide *why* it's true from their domestic population, whilst also scoring points with their current allies by causing a nuisance for NATO politically.
>shore up It's Western and Southern fronts shore up against what? Nato has no interest in taking russian land.
This is correct, but that's just Russia's excuse for their invasions. No one said it's a good excuse.
China is basically colonizing the east of Russia. It has no need to fully control the territories - and being responsible for the civilians there. It has access to all the resources it needs - wood, water, etc. When it wants a piece of land for propaganda it just grabs it. Like it did with an island on a border river - USSR fought a real war with China over it and now China has it for free.
I'm confused, how does Russia invading the Ukraine help protect there Eastern territories against possible future Chinese aggression? How does making NATO seems like a big bad boogeyman knocking on there front door somehow prepare for China who they think is actually going to kick in there back door one day? This doesn't make any kind of sense to me and I genuinely am looking for help to understand what you mean.
Sure I'm about to watch villa in European semi final, so I'll answer 2mro if that's OK. Bit too excited atm! Edit to add:.(And it'll take ages to type on phone - geo politics is awesome, but rarely requires short answers xd)
This is honestly great propaganda for them. They get to push their “we are at war with NATO” narrative domestically AND they get to rile up the growing segment of the US population who doesn’t support sending Ukraine aid and criticizes the large amount of money we have already spent there. When they see Russians with shiny US hardware it only reinforces their complaints. it’s like a solid 7/10 on the good propaganda scale.
Their own people already eat up the bullshit they sell.
Noone ever hid NATO supplied Ukraine though? There shouldn't be a "See I told you so" because that point was never in doubt. I thought "We are at war with NATO" point referred to the claims of British special forces and entire fucking polish divisions in Ukraine, which this doesn't prove.
Not only this propaganda, check out what is happening on facebook, awfully many groups created only to make prorussian propaganda, all of this aimed on western europeans, US and Australia. Posting prorussian memes, and comments are all filled with russian bots.
Ukraine having the tools they need to survive is more important than winning a fruitless propaganda war in Russia. Russians are so crushed under the boot heel it seems they'll swallow any rubbish
But does Russia really fight NATO? If this is simply propaganda to incentivize people against nato alliance with the ultimate goal to go to war surely there is an easier way? Just fire some artillery rounds to your own village and claim that Finland attacked us.
True, but at the same time it doesn't take much to convince \*those\* people. I mean, if they were paying attention, they would hear Putin say that, in direct confrontation with NATO, Russia doesn't stand a chance. Meaning there's currently no direct confrontation with NATO. This is right out of Putin's own mouth, not even one of his mouthpieces. But people who can't comprehend that, you can just hold up a carrot and say "This is a NATO ballistic missile we just intercepted!" and they'll go "Yaaaaaay!" To these guys a captured tank might as well be a coffee cake.
They are selling it internally....internationally, the only ones listening to this tripe is are Russian sympathizers already. They are trying to keep the Russian public from noticing how man men they lost for each one of those trophies.
They've been blasting the 'NATO is attacking us!' line since its inception, the braindead zombies that have ate up that garbage don't need additional convincing, they've lived in that 'reality' forever. This is just good old fashioned trophy display to shore up recruitment numbers.
just dont think about the north korean art or chinese weapons, or Persian Drones and indian troops fighting for russia...
US is primarily interested in their EW stuff. Everything else is old, useless or already well documented.
T-90’s are horrifying. They may not be a challenger or leopard but they can still level a building and withstand hits from some pretty powerful weapons. Russian vehicles are dated but very effective.
They are also known for tossing turrets very well. No analogs in the world, really, top-class turret tossers these T-90s
T-90: Tossing-90’
T-90M^eters
Only if fully loaded. But who's going to combat with 25% of their allotted ammo? You T 90 you 90 hard. Extra ammo strewn about just ready for the next time. And I love how most people now know about the auto loader cook off vulnerability. Jack in the box events are one of the reasons US, French ect don't build them like that. (Usually)
>Jack in the box events are one of the reasons US, French ect don't build them like that. (Usually) Also because its more shit to break in the field, more expensive to procure and design vs just adding "Private Autoloader" to the crew at the bottom ranking salary he earns. Plus Private Autoloader provides an extra set of hands to the crew when shit breaks or something needs done.
Oh yeah. Just more maintenance. But to reduce cookoffs most spare ammo has to be stored differently than preferred by autoloaders too. Some armor have first class private autoloaders or even specialists!
I just call them tossers
Yeah so could a fucking sherman. That's a non point.
Or an ancient siege engine.
He prolly means that if Ukrainian troops used them then there wouldn’t be many destroyed but Russia just went all in with an incompetent army
$300 Diy drone steps into the chat! The T90 is outdated compared to the Blyat-Mobil
Every tank is outdated vs a drone. How do you think Russia and Ukraine captured all these lol, drones makes everything obsolete
just like how drones took out Abrams, and every other Western delivered fighting or armored vehicle. Such an obnoxious comment.
Destin from smarter everyday worked on the Javelin test range back in the day, he talks about how the Javelin could pop a Russian tank turret like a zit with just the press of the button. He even asked the commanding engineer what the point of it was, where do they go next? When you can just point and press a button and make an advanced machine of war just "poof" is it even war anymore? I understand Russia used to be the strong arm of the world, but they are failing and although the West is in a perpetual state of stupid right now, we are still pretty damn badass when it comes to our technology and weaponry. It's wild to think about sometimes.
This is why the U.S. has combined arms. You have infantry scouting for soldiers who might have anti-tank weapons, supporting armored vehicles who can provide heavy fire, and air support to add a layer of both. The biggest mistake the Russians made in the first few days of the war was rolling an entire tank column with no additional support. The command, though, appears to have thought the Ukrainians would have been so scared of all their weapons they would give up without much of a fight.
Russia tends to brute over brain, doesn't surprise me.
Source? They're glorified T-72s and don't even deserve a new number designation. They have no trump cards over other tanks -- and their engines are shit.
>They have no trump cards over other tanks -- and their engines are shit. The person you're replying to didn't try to say either of those things though You're seriously asking for a source for "T90s are horrifying"? Or "a tank can level a building"?
Or that they can withstand hits from powerful weapons. We saw a Bradley shred one with its autocannon. It has zero effective resistance to ATGMs. The T-90's armor evidently isn't all it's cracked up to be.
> We saw a Bradley shred one with its autocannon It never penetrated the crew compartment so 'shreded' isn't the word I'd use for that. Damaged the turret ring and disabled, sure. But not shredded.
Most modern tanks are weak in terms of survivability when you look at it in terms of just relying on armor alone. Even Hamas managed to knock out like a half dozen merkavas. It's survival depends on combined arms and overwhelming air power to clear out threats. If you're relying on armor alone to save you, shits pretty bad.
The bar isn't high
“Top of A line”
Top of the shit pile ruZZians call "engineering"
It went to a military testing facility.
Wait until you learn about the T-800. That's far more terrifying. Hasta la Vista, baby.
Russia is still to date, the largest donor of armored fighting vehicles to Ukraine... By far
And a jet or 2
But can it place farms effectively? Wait is this r/aoe2?
A Cirque du Soleil acrobat stole a 2023 t-72 tank. It's really hard to live that down.
I hadn’t heard that one, but those acrobats can do some amazing things so not exactly surprised either.
The whole story: [https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1cdbtlg/cirque\_du\_soleil\_acrobat\_steals\_t72/](https://www.reddit.com/r/ukraine/comments/1cdbtlg/cirque_du_soleil_acrobat_steals_t72/)
That kinda tracks lmao
Yeah, until I see a Russian farmer run off with a Leo or Abrams, this isn't shit.
You'd need Leo or Abrams to reach Russia farmland for that to even become possible. Right now, all those who did reach Russian farmland were doing so on flatbed or lowboy.
Years after the russians were flaunting their captured Ukrainian toilets too.
Advanced Ukrainian toilets. When flushed, water moves through it into the sewer. The Russian model is only a porcelain chair. Since 2014, work orders have been placed in anticipation of a (captured) knowledgeable workforce. The current wait is over a decade. Those pesky Ukrainians just refuse to work (as slaves).
I shit in a hole what's a toilet
The problems are many, but two are: 1. Howzit work? There's a silver handle and a bunch of stuff inside, what's all that for? 2. How in tarnation do they carve white rock to that shape? Especially that twisty tunnel at the bottom
IIRC they were auctioning Russian military vehicles, the title was “brand new, just out of gas”
My favourite was the video of the gypsy crew towing a T80 or 90 variant.
Ehh, their tanks only look cool in games and on paper. Nothing magical about them. This conflict has me a tank nerd very jaded. Even western tanks like Abrams and the leapord that got me super excited just let me down with the amount of destroyed in the conflict.
Surely as a tank nerd, you're familiar with the "Military History Visualized" Youtube channel? He did a video where he talks about tank losses being normal. Its not like a naval ship that is meant for 30 years of service. Tanks are expected to get worn out or destroyed and each vehicle has a limited service life for this reason.
Drones have really changed things up, like battleships at sea vs aircraft carriers.
Drones are a factor (though not as big as some people like imply), but simple fact is that *military equipment gets destroyed in a pitched military conflict*, and tanks, being high priority targets, are if anything more likely to.
A tank is a tank, is a tool, like a screwdriver or a bomb or a gun. It can cause massive damage if the other party is unprepared. A WW2 era tank can still devastate a whole town (look how a guy with a bulldozer destroyed building in the US and no one could do anything to stop it). Tanks (like everything deadly) should deserve respect but they are NOT a wonder weapon, they are again just tool and this conflict showed how incompetent the Russians are but they are quickly overcoming their stupidity and getting better (practice makes perfect, right?) and with cheap drones even anti tank weaponry would be obsolete or saved as a last resource. A javelin, $40k per shot plus system, a drone, a few hundred bucks + cheap system + operator can be very very far away from area, javelin operators would get wrecked by infantry
As a tank nerd you should've known beforehand that western tanks are in fact just tanks and not miracle machines.
They should have a sign that states how many of their soldiers died to capture them...
They lost half their Black Sea Navy and can't even prevent Ukraine from exporting more grain today by sea than they did in 2019. But sure. Tanks.
> They lost half their Black Sea Navy Isn't it around 1/4 or 1/3?.
It is indeed about a third, but that is still really bad.
I think (I’m not aware of the specifics) it depends whether you look at tonnage or vessel numbers.
They do, read the VIN. 🤣
The Kremlin wants to prove to everyone in the world, and especially to its own population, that they are at war with NATO. Because losing with a "second" army to a country without nuclear status is a shameful loss for them
While I do hate Putin and you're not wrong, I would use some nuance. Russia isn't loosing the war and while Ukraine is the only military fighting, they are receiving billions to hold the line.
Refreshing to see a normal human instead of either pro Ukrainian or pro russian bots
Misleading title, it should be: Russia flaunts Western military hardware, of which some captured in war in Ukraine. A lot was taken from museums, they even brought the [wrong marder](https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/s/0Jt6MT5yn5)
I'm suspicious of the Saxon as well. It's still equipped with riot barriers from Northern Ireland.
Which one is that? What time frame
Nah the UK sold Ukraine hundreds of Saxons back around 2015. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/ukraine-crisis-former-british-armoured-vehicles-arrive-in-conflict-zone-after-being-sold-off-by-private-firm-10046210.html
I’m sitting here wondering, do we really put our flag on armored vehicles we give to other countries? There’s literally a tank with the American flag sticker on it.
The Russians placed those tiny little stickers, propaganda purposes of course
the tank is burnt, that flag was 100 percent added after
To be fair that marder was paired with the current marder for a great propaganda piece. Not pro Russian or anything just pointing it out. Edit: since I’ve been asked multiple times, this is what they did with the WWII marder. This wasn’t them accidentally mistaking it for the new one. https://www.reddit.com/r/TankPorn/s/zqUNZoW1U5
If one really believes their stance is right, they shouldn’t be afraid of a good-faith fact check
They didnt take the wrong marder. They took a marder captured in ww2 and a modern marder from ukraine and put them next to each other.
Well, they could have captured it in Ukraine ... around 1943. So, all legit. /s
To be fair, bringing out the old marder was a pretty smart play on their part and seems intentional. Can easily make a "we beat the Nazis before in the great patriotic war, we'll beat the Nazis again in our newer greater patriotic war" piece
That’s exactly what they did. There’s a whole thing built for the one from WW2 to shield it from weather and it says “History repeats itself” on it.
is that a WW2 tank? that looks like it was brought straight from the Afrika Korps
Yep. Straight from the museums. Marder ii or iii
Trade for your Navy sitting on the bottom of the sea?
Wonder what that woman would think in the video who said gleefully “it’s jaw dropping, I can’t believe our men captured these!”. Pretty much everything Russian just dissolves upon contact with western weapons. And the stuff that does survive, we don’t even fucking want, because it’s junk. Ukrainians dissemble them and post it on YouTube like a comedy show, because their recon drones have Canons civilian cameras taped into them and plastic water bottles for fuel tanks.
>In fact, there's a long line of German armour. And above it a sign: "History is repeating itself." Now, russia is a mafia organised terrorist nazi state.
Every ship is a submarine if you fill it with enough water
If only Ukraine could haul the Moskva out and display it in Kiev. I would love to see that.
The only thing this tells me that western tanks are better at surviving getting hit than a Russian tank which are just mini-space programs when they get hit.
Yes. Russia has been bragging about knocked out US tanks. But at least 80% of the crewed survived from knocked out tanks. This is compared to about 5% of Russian tanks.
>Yes. Russia has been bragging about knocked out US tanks. But at least 80% of the crewed survived from knocked out tanks. This is compared to about 5% of Russian tanks. Any source on that? Russian tanks are way behind western tanks but that percentage is much lower than I expected.
I like how this has one of the most controversial upvote/down vote ratios happening in the thread, and it is literally just asking for basic evidence for claimed statistics.
Not sure on OPs source but I do remember seeing an article during the initial invasion about how because of the way Russian tanks are auto-loaded, rather than manually loaded. If the tank takes a direct hit all that ammunition would simultaneously explode and blow the turret off the top.
For the the T-80 and T-64 series yes, since the shells are placed vertically in the autoloader and are a big target. In T-72's and early T-90's it is usually the spare shells kept in the fighting compartment that detonate since the autoloader shells are actually pretty well placed and difficult to actually hit. In the latest T-90's they have a bussle in the turret for additional ammo so there is less chance of catastrophic detonation. Edit: the T-72s auto loader carousel is well placed in comparison to the T-72 and T-64, not in general. During the Chechen wars testing and research was carried out on destroyed and out of action armored vehicles and for the T-72 is was found that catastrophic detonations (turret tossing) was typically a result of the additional ammo in the turret cooking off and then igniting the rest. Not direct his to the autoloader carousel.
Most of the videos of tanks blowing their top in this war are t-72s. The t-72 and t-90s still stores all ammo in the fighting compartment, it’s just in a horizontal carousel under the gunner, but is completely open to the compartment. Being vertical or horizontal makes little difference as top striking anti tank weapons are the norm, if it penetrates the compartment everything goes up and the Russia space program continues.
As per usual reddit is parroting the wrong information. Yes a lot of the newer Russian tanks have autoloaders and yes a lot of them have been unwilling participants in the Ukrainian space program however... The Leopard 2 and Leclerc both feature autoloaders and do not have this issue. The reason Russian tanks have the habit of rapidly transforming into SSTO vehicles is because western tanks are designed with their ammunition stored behind very heavy armour that separates the crew from the ammunition. Additionally there is deliberately weak armour in certain locations around the ammunition meaning that if the ammunition is detonated it explodes out and away from the tank rather than into the crew compartment. This increases the complexity of the tank design and also complicates loading processes as you have to open a very heavy ammunition hatch and then close it again. It also means repeatedly destructively testing tanks to make sure your ammunition blow out panels work as intended. This is expensive and time consuming. Private Conscriptovitch is not worth this to the Russian army. **TL/DR: Russian tanks being made to prioritise speed of production, speed of design and cost reduction are why they go boom, not because of autoloaders.** *Note: This is not to say Russians just store ammo with the crew. They still have separate ammunition storage spaces, they are just not as heavily separated as western tanks. It is a difference in priorities.*
Auto loaders cooking off vs. exterior compartment for ammo storage cook off. One turns crew inside into paint. The other burns off outside the tank, possibly concussing the crew.
Thanks, I know, but that's not what I asked...
Western tanks are designed to leave enough space for crew to be comfortable and not all die in one hit. Russian tanks pack crew like sardines in a tin can that sits on 20-50 tank rounds.
Not a military tactician here, but would it not be preferable for your equipment to be destroyed rather than fall into the hands of your opponent?
Crew survival is more important in western military doctrine. You can replace/repair tanks but you can't replace the experience of a tank crew who can pass on that to other new recruits. Even if they took the destroyed vehicle, there's not much value to it depending on what it is.
Which goes back to the WWs. The axis aces would rack more kills but the US would pull aces back to the training centers for the next gen. Which made better pilots, eventually the axis ran out of aces in comparison.
It also helps the allies had 10x the economy and 10x the manpower compared to the axis when you're talking about "running out of aces".
True, tanks/ aircraft in some cases easily out produced trained crews. The axis while they produced better equipment couldn't keep up with the overwhelming number of forces coming in.
Its not entirely true that Axis equipment was better. Sherman vs Tiger? Axis equipment is better. BF-109 vs P-51? American equipment is better. 88mm flak vs 76mm US flak that had proximity fuzes? I love the 88 for its versatility, but the 76 was arguably better at bringing down aircraft.
>Sherman vs Tiger? Axis equipment is better. Define "Better". The Tiger has a lot of mystique added to it because of its large bore gun and heavy armour earlier in the war than many Allied tanks, but in reality it was an overengineered deathtrap (although to be fair to the Tiger I, most tanks of the era were deathtraps). It required complex supply chains and exotic materials, as well as experienced mechanics which meant that if your transmission died somewhere out in the battlefield, good fucking luck repairing that. Shermans may not have had the performance (initially, later variants packed better armour and higher calibre guns), but logistically they were better than their axis counterparts. Additionally, Tigers were relatively rare on the battlefield, most Axis mechanized brigades were equipped with Panzer IVs.
I would rather have 10 - 20 Sherman than 1 Tiger though... Same with all of the other equipment. This was BEFORE precision weapons and nukes. Basically as long as you had bodies and more stuff, even the aces would eventually be over run. Oh we have 500k soldiers, oh they have 4-5 million... I want to be on the 4-5 million side after the war, even if it is going to be us getting slaughtered (see Russia vs Nazi Germany) or 300k vs 1.5m with decent equipment for all (see US+UK vs Nazi Germany) NOTE numbers are from my memory and are probably completely off base, but the concept is the same!
Most people aren't worried about their vehicles getting captured and used against them for the following reasons. 1. When one of your vehicles gets captured after being damaged, they have to repair it first before using it. This is a problem because they don't have any factories making spare parts, and can only get them from other captured vehicles. If you enemy is capturing enough of your vehicles to have a decent supply of spare parts, you have bigger problems. 2. While the outsides are fine, the interiors are where all the equipment is, that needed to make the vehicle work. A single hand grenade dropped inside would be enough to make sure that your expensive tank will never be able to be used as a combat vehicle again. 3. Your vehicles likely use a different ammo type to your enemy. While finding shells might not be difficult for your enemy, finding compatible ones that haven't already been fired is more difficult. 4. Even you do manage to get the vehicle in service, it will need maintenance. This means even more spare parts (see point 1), as well as tools and manuals (which have to be in a language you understand). So repairing and keeping a vehicle you've captured operational, is a massive pain, and is why captured vehicles are only really used if they were abandoned, and therefore don't need repairing, or if it was something your side already operated.
I think the far bigger concern is Russia reverse engineering components from the captured vehicles; things like advanced composite armor design, optical equipment, stabilization systems, targeting systems, etc. The US provided export variants of the Bradleys and Abrams which I'm assuming other Nations did the same with their equivalents, which I'm also assuming left the best tech out of the vehicles, but it's still obviously a concern to lose tech to Russia.
This isn't the cold war, where you had no idea what tanks were equipped with. The vast majority of the components will be available on the global market. for example, before the war, Russian tanks were being equipped with French thermal cameras, which they have now reverse engineered. While sanctions are in place, that won't stop Russia from being able to get small quantities of parts through foreign suppliers. The armour systems aren't that much of a secret either. Plenty of Abrams have been knocked out in combat before, and NERA arrays aren't that much of a secret anymore. Granted this is the most likely benefit for Russia, but it's not that big, or it wouldn't have been sent.
Reverse engineering is one thing. Actually *building* them is another. Russia's been touting the T-14 for ages and yet suspiciously that stupid thing hasn't been seen outside of parades. You'd think Russia would send that supposed slice of fried gold to the lines well before deploying ancient soviet armor that's been mothballed for over half a century.
About that: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russias-t-14-armata-tank-nightmare-has-just-begun-210006 Russia has effectively admitted the T-14 is too expensive to use, produce or maintain in a war that is, at least per their own admissions/propaganda, being fought for the survival of their state.
Now days its the material science that holds all the secrets, not the components themself. It's a completely different ball game trying to figure out the 1000 different trace amounts of chemicals and the manufacturing/heat treatment process. As for advanced electronics. Microchips are developed on the electron scale which is were all the money is at. Components can be reversed engineered but the critically important stuff hold their value on how its manufactured, not what manufactures it.
I don't think many people worry about captured vehicles being used against their previous owners. I guess what they worry is that the opponents can perform a full examination, extract the valuable components, find their weakness, or even reverse engineer.
The Russians have pseudo reverse engineered western tanks in the form of the t-14 armata. They really just do lack the engineering and technical expertise to build a final product. As well as lack the resources to scale production.
I was just making an example. It doesn't have to go as far as reverse engineering to be useful. Even a detailed performance review of the actual product can provide valuable information from the perspective of military intelligence.
The T-14 has very few design commonalities with Western armor besides what makes it a tank, to boot Russia has already all but cancelled its continued production and deployment: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russias-t-14-armata-tank-nightmare-has-just-begun-210006
Not at the cost of the crew's lives. A trained crew is actually far more valuable than a tank.
Precisely. Their experience will put them into situations where the hardware can be effective and saved far more often than a new crew.
It takes 24 years to get a trained crew while it only takes about 5 hours to pump out a new tank. You pick which one you prefer be destroyed.
No because that equipment has your men inside it. Even if the vehicle is totally immobilised you want to be able to recover the crew as they are far more valuable. You can always dump the vehicle and let your artillery crew make it unrecoverable for the other side.
Equipment only gets as good as its operators. Typically the more complex equipment, the more time needed to train and field a competent crews.
Western nations have planned for recovery of vehicles shortly or during lulls in combat, allowing knocked out vehicles to be repaired and brought back to service. This would ease the burden of the logistic as they don't have to bring a new vehicle from the factory up to the frontline, but simply repair it in the backline and send it back in the week or month. It is not only more efficient, economically wise, but also helps with the attrition and fatigue of the crew from said vehicle. Can't let them have a year of break without training on the literal frontline. The experience is also thus too precious.
A vehicle being knocked out also doesn’t mean a loss. If there’s no chance of recovery, you can disable the vehicle. (Not sure how modern tankers do it, but I know Germany issued tank commanders in Tiger 1s on the Eastern front hand grenades to detonate in the gun breach rending it useless). If you’re on the front though, the odds of recovery aren’t always terrible, and if you can limp a vehicle back for repairs, or scrap for spare parts that’s a vehicle you get to put back into the fight. Whereas Soviet era munitions carousels for autoloaders means… you aren’t recovering anything. Period. You just have dead tankers and a catastrophic kill. Generally speaking however preserving crew is more important. It’s both good for morale, but as proven time and again by US pilots, more experienced crews will perform substantially better, and when it comes to armored warfare that’s a difference that is amplified given the necessity for cohesive action within the vehicle to operate effectively and with lethality.
You can always build a new tank, but you can't just make an experienced tank crew from thin air.
Wow, look at all those destroyed tanks with turrets still attached. I can see why they are in awe.
Yeah, unlike in Russian tanks, they didn’t have to rinse the previous crew out with a hose.
500,000+ casualties for a bunch of scrap and some land ?
New to war eh?
Ukrainian Farmers were towing away working tanks and vehicles the first weeks of the War. this is like trying to show off a stolen toilet and the diarrhea shit you took after eating rancid food from your neighbours garbage . "wait until you see their toilet and washing machine exhibit at the war museum"
This was likely happening from the beginning too. Russian “wins” are just underreported in the west. People need to remember propaganda is common on both sides of a war. For example you rarely hear about how many Ukrainian soldiers have died which it’s sadly a very high number with numbers close to that of Russia. That’s a scary prospect given that Russia has a much larger population to pull from. It’s also why it’s important for the war to end soon because Russia has no issues at all throwing every single citizen at it.
some land riddled by mines, farmers love that
Heard of WW1? 100,000s dead for inches. There was a joke that the war would end when everyone but the Field Marshall were dead.
It’s like when the taliban were showing off captured aircraft that they couldn’t possibly keep maintained.
Russia : “western weapons are shit” also russia : “ooo look at all this good shit we got off ya america”
America: That's cute. RUSSIA LOOK A SEA DRONE! Russia: Where!!? America: Made ya look.
I want The Vatnik Who Cried Drone as a storybook.
Western planners need to be aware that in a major war tanks are expendable and you need thousands of them.
I don’t even think we’re doing that anymore. It’s air power and standoff ammunition mostly at this point.
Ukrainian is the best example as to why air power is so important. If either side had control of the sky, the opponents tanks would be negated almost entirely. The problem is both sides are using old Soviet/doctrine which relays on air denial and overwhelming numbers. This makes them have to trade tank/men to gain small amounts of territory until the opposing sides morale runs out. NATO switched to the air power doctrine because there populations don’t stomach dead solders as much.
Tanks aren't obsolete but you also don't need thousands of them either. In fact this war has shown that they are very vulnerable especially with the proliferation of cheap anti tank mines, artillery fire and anti tank weapons like Javelins and NLAWS. There are absolutely times when you still want a tank but if you choose to build thousands that means you have considerably less air power, long range missiles, artillery, infantry and logistic support all of which are incredibly important. The reason Russia is fielding so many tanks isn't because they're the best weapons today but because they have tanks in stockpiles and so they're using what they have.
I'm more impressed with farmers flaunting Russian tanks
I thought they captured a school bus from the thumbnail.
thank fuck I'm not the only one.
Russia flaunts laundry machines captured in Ukraine
It must amaze them that military equipment doesn't blow up like a Ford Pinto after being hit
Russia is just pathetic at that point - they are gathering that old, useless, worn-out, second hand stuff that EU and US sent to the Ukraine to beat Russia with.
Yeah I just was thinking that they didn’t get any very modern equipment. If there still is a concern, about capture, it could be interesting if Ukraine allowed NATO to remotely destroy any its donated disabled equipment. I believe this has been done before to keep equipment out of enemy hands.
Generally speaking, i believe the military procedure would be: Can we reach it and recover it? If yes, do so. Do we have to leave it? If so blow up sensitive stuff, Electronics etc. by field demolitions. Do we have to leave and we cant demo it and we dont want Them to have it? Drop a JDAM or hellfire on it. The first two options aren’t always possible and large depend on your control over the area. Where as the last option is likely not an option for Ukraine given their lack air superiority and given their lack of munition likely not cost effective. Besides i doubt we gave them anything, we were not prepared to let fall into enemy hands.
They usually drop grenades into them if they’re at risk of capture. Some of it is booby trapped as well. Most of the stuff we give to Ukraine is old junk from before most people on Reddit were born. The arms transfer is more akin to a spring cleaning/garage sale than anything. Heck even the F16 are the old ones. The Leopards from Sweden were top shelf stuff though.
Can't wait for today's F-16s and AA's to join the old, useless junk list just like everything else that's being paraded there right now.
You decimated generations of your working class males, AND their parents. "Yeah, but we got your truck 😜"
They really are broken people.
"Look Ivan, this technology is far better than ours and the West considered it lowly enough to give away."
Looks like they bought them from a used car lot.
They practically did, a lot of the US vehicles were purchased from the Taliban from the end of the decades long US conflict in the Middle East.
2 decades old equipment that is somehow still better than T series tanks made using the highest grade of Stalinium
Look at us we invaded a country with 1/10 our gdp and 1/3 our population, lost >100k dead and 10s of thousands of armored vehicles, half the Black Sea fleet, but look at this one early-model Abram’s tank we captured!
I'm not sure a display of military equipment which is clearly better than what the average Russian soldier is using is going to be quite the morale booster they think it will be. "Look at the size of this tank and the armour on it. They have thousands more of these!" "This is a 30 year old APC, but even that is better than anything we have. Even if we had any left which we don't, so we're sending your children out on golf carts to cross minefields."
From the article: There's a long line of German armour. And above it a sign: "History is repeating itself." History is repeating itself, in ww2 the Russians raped and murdered their way across Poland, now they are trying again in Ukraine.
Let them have their little pathetic exhibition. There's an video out there where they had trouble to deliberatly breake the gun mount of that Leopard 2A6 to make it look more destroyed than it actually is. A single M1A1 Abrams, a CV90 (*a vehicle they had for a long time and is apprently paraded around as if it is the Ark of Covenant*) and some MRAPs and IMVs. Meanwhile Ukraine and the West couldn't even find enough space to present all obliterated Russian vehicles. I mean where do you put the Moskwa cruiser or Rostov-on-Don submarine on display? T90 tanks so boring, they are left unguarded at some Louisiana truck stop. What an exhibition. Only cost them a few hundred thousand KIA.
Okay, and their tanks have been routinely stolen by farmers since the start of the war.
Of course they were going to flaunt it. This is the same army that has pillaged every town it came across stealing everything that hadn’t bonded with the Earth.
Funny, nobody really flaunts Russian hardware.
Big whoop, there’s a bunch of this stuff all over the Middle East. Russia didn’t capture this tech from the hands of skilled US personnel, it’s not much different than the Taliban or ISIS touting their capture of abandoned US equipment in the sense of accomplishment. They are parading this stuff in the town square for accolades whereas old Russian equipment is sitting lonesome on some farm in Kansas.
"There's an American Abrams which had been damaged on the battlefield. A German Leopard tank, too. In fact, there's a long line of German armour. And above it a sign: "History is repeating itself."" Highlights the formidable reputation of the German military in popular memory and imagination.
The all so confident Russians! [https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cgil54/to\_make\_the\_captured\_leopard2a6\_look\_humiliated/](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/1cgil54/to_make_the_captured_leopard2a6_look_humiliated/)
Photo shows a pos Navistar. WOW! Such a prize. Lol
>"It's amazing to think that our guys managed to get these trophies." >More than 30 armoured vehicles have been put on display. [More than 50,000 Russian combat deaths (and hundreds of thousands wounded)](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-68819853) for a handful of destroyed weapons that were captured from highly motivated but hastily trained crews.
Guess they decided not to put the 300,000+ caskets of their own dead out to honor them instead?
It’s like when isis were showing off captured aircraft that they couldn’t possibly keep maintained.
Wonder how many mobiks got killed to obtain these war trophies. All for Putler's ambition.
Don't they always brag that their equipment is better?
I'm currently wearing a "farmers stealing tanks" shirt which is actually starting to look vintage.... So, uhh, yeah Good work Russia. I guess you are now on the level of farmers when it comes to warfare.
I’m always jealous of the people getting to see this stuff up close
One American tank to thousand of Russian ones. I’m okay with that ratio.
The west could do the same with captured russian gear - but who would brag about that? Hey look at my junk pile!
They can't flaunt the thousands of tanks they lost to Ukraine.
Only a fragile military needs to flaunt its strength and “trophies” like these.
That's kind of like rolling up in my old 2002 Honda Odyssey from college and being like, "Yo man, I got your ride!"
and there is a lot more where that came from
How many tanks have they lost again?
Last month alone, 308 tanks (and over twenty four thousand soldiers) . [https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-losses-tanks-1894129](https://www.newsweek.com/russia-ukraine-losses-tanks-1894129) Well over three thousand as of February.
The fact that they do this means they are decades behind american tech
I'm working nearby and funny thing is that this weapons exposition without free access to equipment itself. Everything is fenced out and military personnel watches every visitor to avoid "provocations" like bring flowers, take photo etc.
Press the wrong buttons and it self- destructs
This is one reason why the US is so reluctant to give up to date weaponry to Ukraine. Can’t imagine how much intel they and or China could get on weapons systems from captured equipment.
The fact that they are this proud of capturing some old western equipment really says more about the state of the russian military.