Great work as always! I'm trying to figure out what happened with all these stored tanks. The number of deployed and destroyed don't seem to add up to the many more that have been removed from storage. Is it possible they have been moved to repair/refurbishment plants awaiting to be refurbished or cannibalized for spare parts?
2 ideas why the base is not emptying: - They don't want to strip Siberia of reserves completely (China?) - one former base commander sold all the engines
I believe the video was right, consolidating the remaining reserves and this one is closer to Ukraine (where most of the tanks that can be made to run will go to be dismantled) without being in easy range to get dissassembled while in storage.
@@57thorns The only real point of territorial dispute between Russia and China is still Mongolia. Which means that is the most likely reason why this site was chosen to remain stocked. The distances in the far-East are so vast that "close" is still a huge shipping time and most of these vehicles will have to stop at a depot for refurbishment before going to Ukraine anyway.
@@johnsmith1953x China already has greater military power than Russia. The only thing it lacks is a motive to take any chunk of Siberia its wants. I imagine if the RF fell apart due to a civil war or otherwise fragmented, the Chinese will probably feel obliged to send a "peace keeping" force to occupy.
@@obsidianjane4413 That's not what I meant. Russia's clear enemy in the next 10-30 years is the USA and not China. Why waste storing thousands of tanks/ammo/etc near the Chinese border?
I am from Kazakhstan. We have over a thousand T-72s and hundreds of T-62M in storage, in good condition. I really hope they aren’t being secretly transferred to Russia.
@@billfarmer7984I wouldn't put it past him. The last time they failed an invasion, the Soviet Union collapsed because of it. He might try to go out in a blaze of glory this time.
Honestly, I don't see the point. There's, what, ten seconds of 3D model footage in the whole video? It doesn't add any information to the video, and it must have taken days of work.
They are just consolidating whats left. They arent pulling many T-64,T-72 and T-80 tanks out of storage lately because they all use the 125 mm shells , which is already low in stock The T-62 however uses a 115 mm shell , which Russia has a much larger supply of so those are being refurbished , given better optics/radios and sent to Ukraine and used as tanks. The T-54 and 55 , with their 100mm guns are being used as artillery pieces , and once the barrels wear out they turn them into "turtle tanks" which is basically a tank used as an armored truck. After you remove all the ammo , there is an area about the volume of two pickup truck beds in and below the turret you can store stuff in and they also use the area behind the turret as a cargo area. The tank can also carry 250 gallons of fuel internally with another 150 gallons in its external tanks. So there's quite a few T-55 "Turtle tanks" that spend their day driving from supply dumps to the front dropping off supplies and then driving back because Ukrainian drones keep destroying any supply truck that gets within 5 miles of the front. The "turtle tanks" are also being used as command and scout vehicles because after you put the "cope cage from Hell" over the entire tank and remove all the ammo from the turret , they actually provide decent protection.
Don't forget the main reason is because of their design; they're not candidates for the Olympic Turret Toss championships. They're saving those as a good reserve. And as to their mm sizing, it's easy to change barrels and other parts to upgrade to other sizes. Any good machine ship can do it.
@@mutteringmale Not really as that usually involves changing the turret design and ring. Also, the space for the auto loader, unless you mean going the other way--aka down grading 125mm to the 115mmm or 100mm. That would be easier, but probably not cost effective.
Amazing, you managed to spew a wall of BS that has ZERO in common with reality or common sense. Tank trucks? LOL, I haven't heard dumber idea in years...
@@1Learn2Swim3 I feel like most of these content creators are very greedy because they only came to TH-cam after it was a free content platform for 10+ yrs and are trying to inject their monetization mindset in to every aspect of the content production.
It's more understandable on this channel than say a video essay one, dude is making 3d models and buying satellite images. That requires serious money.
Most probably most of the tanks still in storage were or are stripped for spare parts. -If a tank is stored for 20 years gaskets getting brittle, oil gets hard, diesel gets hard in pipes and injection pumps, electronics corrode. It is hard work to make it run again. - The tanks used need spare parts, barrels, bearings, fuel pumps, water pumps, motors,
let's imagine that the maintenance was completed correctly ( big assumption ) so all the liquids were stabilized or drained, gaskets can be conditioned and other aspects protected, it is after all military equipment built in the 50s. but this is rzza, so it's probably all garbage
@@theorenhobart My understanding of maintenance on vehicles like this is that white glove proper treatment, as nice as it may be, isn't sufficient. You actually have to *continuously* care for and check on each vehicle. I'm thinking you might get one good full inspection out of these guys, if that, then the front vehicles are the ones that turn on or look good from 20m for the next 20 years. Do they not have dry deserts for hand me downs so water and rodent intrusion isn't such a problem? I watch quite a few car buying videos and anyone can tell the difference between a car from the North vs South.
Thanks to you and your Team for the exceptional work you do. I'm sure that despite high resolution images, there are tens of hours of painstaking analysis that needs to be done to each image. Thank you for your patience and dedication to this, very important information. (I'll bet the Pentagon uses your videos to support their suspicions.)
Neat! I'm going to take a guess that tomorrow some NRO analyst office will be talking about this video. Probably just as office gossip, but still an impressive feat. It's amazing what you're doing.
@@beeble2003 I think their point was that they (analyst) likely doesn't know *civilians* know this and are openly discussing it on social media to hundreds of thousands of viewers.
Big depot, lots of movement in and out ... and no direct railway link. All these steel boxes must somehow cross the last mile to the station on their own. An insurance against shipping unsalvageable junk?
I remember on Combat approved, a russian yt military channel they were going over tanks that were piled up like these , believe it or not , the russians actually do maintainence to these vehicles, just they dont bother if the exterior of the tank can give someone tetanus or if its covered in moss and fungus. But they actually marked these vehicles for certain parts, i think black means the vehicle is fully operation conditions, red means not good for anything, white for the armament and yellow for engine
Do you also remember that the Ukrainians were notorious on the black and open market for selling tanks, artillery and such under the corrupt pro-Russian governments after the breakup? You could fly to Kiev and make bids on a nice tank and have it shipped anywhere you want.
@@mutteringmale I don't think it was just the Ukrainians. You could have probably done that with most of the former Warsaw pact countries in the first few years after the breakup. They were poor and lots of people were trying to make a buck.
@@d3faulted2 You're right. There is another factor. Only people who bought these POS were collectors. Almost all other countries knew Soviet equipment was crap, and then there was Iraq; Bradleys took out 50% of the Rus tanks and 25% were destroyed by aviation and then our tanks.
@@mutteringmale They were very decent tanks for their time, hell, the T-64 basically made NATO shit their pants when it came out. But they are outdated, fighting in a kind of war that was never even thought possible when they were built and often used improperly. If nothing, NATO countries scrambling to add anti drone countermeasures to all their vehicles is proof of that, every single tank currently in service is a decades old platform unsuited to a modern battlefield filled with drones. And in some niche cases these old soviet tanks still have a leg up on NATO vehicles, as even the ukrainians found out, NATO hasn't made proper HE shells since the 60s, so T-72s end up being better at doing fire support missions simply because things like the leopard 2 and challengers don't have the needed ammunition. Shit, using the basically untrained Iraqis of all people as a point against T-series tanks is wild, you could have given them the latest Abrams and they would still have gotten smoked from the air after their air force collapsed in a matter of hours.
@@mutteringmalethey are perfectly servicable if your enemy is using the same russian junk. Most this stuff went to countries fighting eachother with russian stuff at both sides. And is still going on.
The Russians obviously didn't think the war would drag on this long. Now that it has, it does make sense to consolidate the types of tanks (and other vehicles) in a specific type per base. It makes finding the best ones easier as well as cannabilozing the others for parts. The number of stored T-80s will be exhausted soon and it is doubtful the Russians will activate any T-64s until they absolutely have to. That leaves T-62s and early T-72s. From everything I've veiwed, it looks like these are pretty roached out, and it take a lot of time to get some into battlefield condition. To me, it looks like the Russians will have to go on the open market and buy some vehicles or get some old vehicles to Noeth Korea (and maybe Iran). One thing is for sure - there are be a lot less armor available when war is over.
For anyone who, like me, was initially a bit confused as to why they’d preferentially use T-62s over the slightly newer T-64: it actually does make sense for Russia to do that. The T-64 was designed for tank-on-tank warfare and uses the same ammunition as the T-72 and T-80. The T-62 was designed for infantry work and uses a different gun caliber than the later Russian tanks. There’s also many more of them, and so there are more available to cannibalize for repair parts and spares. It also means that it isn’t drawing from the same ammo stockpiles as other Russian tanks, which is presumably becoming more important as Russia is increasingly facing shortages of large-caliber ammunition after two and a half years of Putin’s 3-day “special military operation”.
@@michaelimbesi2314The Soviet Union did produce a vast quantity of t64 however, seeing as they were designed for tank on tank combat a vast majority of them as far as I can tell, were stored in Ukraine to be a rapid response fleet to any potential NATO incursion.
@@michaelimbesi2314, the T-62 requires an extra crewman as it doesn't have an autoloader. It also uses an odd type of ammo as it has a 115 mm gun. The "advantage" is that is a technically simpler tank with a simpler optics. This is key. With western sanctions in place, the Russians do not have access to more advanced optics so the T-62 can be put into service more quickly, hypothetically speaking. At this point, there are few tanks left in storage that are in good shape and it will require more time to reactivate any tank. This is why I think the Russians will dip into North Korean stocks.
Their plan B was ready for a long war. That's why they needed only a few months to re-articulate their whole forces on the frontline in Ukraine. If not ready, it generally take more than a year or 2 to do so for any military. Like the US in Iraq with the Surge (i think it almost took 3 years for the US to do so), or Ukraine with the Zaporizhia offensive. Plus, thinking that Russia is fighting quick wars is kind of strange. Because it never happened historically. They generally prefer methodic long wars.
Love your work! It is awesome that you have the patience to identify and count all these vehicles. 🙂 Would really have loved to hear some context on these tanks and their numbers, and what that implies for their usage rates, and potential hard limits on numbers that we can see being deployed over the next year, or so. Even a quick paragraph at the end would have been great.
It's an ongoing series. Check out the other videos and similar channels (they collab) for more information and context. tldw; Tank numbers in storage are steadily decreasing, probs run out in 2026.
Because it'd make sense to have a few depots dedicated to actually repairing/preparing older vehicles, they're not just storing them forever, they're actively pulling what they can and restoring it for battle. That or it's the dumping ground of completely unrecoverable vehicles.
SO Russia learned they lesson and instead off building new weapons they invest money in to lyxury yachts, at one point off 50 most expensive yachts in the world 30 were owned by Russians
The advance of drone warfare seems to have made all tanks and APCs far more vulnerable. Assuming many of these old tanks can be refurbished and put back into service, the most valuable thing at risk of being blown up on the battlefield is not a bunch of old tanks, it is their crews.
Still amazes me that Russia has burned through so much of its Soviet stock. It's like seeing a hoarder get to a point where they actually need new things
I cant find it now but there was a report on them recently, they're frontline mechanics now. They set up shops a few miles outside of artillery range, and repair salvaged armor that gets taken out in russian pushes, the mechanics interviewed said they can completely refurbish some 70% of the recovered armor.
@@ivan____________________973 Those are vehicles that were working and then took battle damage. If these tanks have been stored as badly as a lot of us think they have, they may be even harder to get running.
When you consider that security doctrine for most countries, including russia, stipulates you always need to keep half of your equipment inside your country for self defense in case of invasion and also to put down civil unrest......so not all the depots will empty. And of course if the location is outdoors and they are all in a state of very bad disrepair, many of those left behind, need repairs or cant be used. With no spare parts or labour russia is having problems even refurbishing some models.
Wonder if we may start seeing some T-62’s with there turrets removed and replaced with like a 57mm or some kind of ZPU cannon like the 14.5-23mm which both use?.
750 tanks at one storage facility sounds like a huge amount to almost any country but even if one was generous and assumed that 350 were usable Russia would run through that many tanks on the battlefield in just 50 days or so after making a significant effort to refurbish them. If the war lasts another two years that's 730 days. Having 50 days worth of tanks in storage at one storage facility when many other tank storage facilities are virtually empty isn't going to do anything to help Russian forces deal with equipment shortages in 2026.
Russia is advancing, 70% of recovered vehicles are refurbished and put back on the front line. This is why they haven't run out of equipment and their storage yards remain full.
Is similar imagery available for airfields that are currently storing old aircraft like the MiG-23 and Mig-27, which Poland is saying are potentially going to be re-commissioned, upgraded and made airworthy by Russia?
@@richardjoseph9002 why has Poland put this into several intel reports then? If it’s not possible to upgrade MiG-23 and Mig-27 aircraft and put them back into operation, there shouldn’t be any minor mention of it nor any unsubstantiated supposition made by neighboring governments.
@@momosgarage "why has Poland put this into several intel reports then?" Poland said this so it must be true? Countries can say a lot of things, doesnt make them true..
@@masoodjalal1152 no it’s doesn’t mean it’s true, but what’s the point of talking about an idea that is so far fetched that it’s not just improbable, but absolutely impossible, where stockpile numbers can easily be confirmed through third party consultants, like Jane’s for example.
@@olcankanicok9125 There is new training footage from Russia with North Korean troops where a T-34-85 and ISU-152 is shown, so they aren't all in storage.
@@olcankanicok9125 That is what people said about the T-54 also. Either way they are using pre-WW2 field guns so ISU-152 in combat use wouldn't surprise me anymore.
@@XxXnonameAsDXxX it would yes! To me it shows both how desperate Putin is *and* hypocrisy, always whining about NATO and yet he brings support from elsewhere too...
I have absolutely no use for this information but the TH-cam algorithm thinks I would be interested. And it was right. Whether it's women's javelin competition or old tank storage in Russia, it's always right.
It has been a strange fact that Russia kept most of the T-72s in the storage rather than pulling them out at war, while others declined. The stable numbers of tanks in 349th base proves this.
Never been very reliable to begin with and then decades outside in the rain, imagine them encountering some Leopards or Abrams...Russians are running out of tanks and soon gonna have to get in their Lada's...
I think you missed it. But Russia launched a program right before the 20s to restore massive amount of tanks in the far east depots and notably T-62M, because against threats from central asia and the far east, T-62 with their Bastion missiles massive stocks are perfect in these flat grounds. Lot of tanks would be rebuilt/modernized before being sent back to those depots. That could explain why these depots see movement but are not decreasing.
At this point are they just putting all their T-90s into action? Or are they all effectively destroyed at this point? I noticed there isn't a storage site cited for them...
In January 2022, estimates were 400 T-90 in active duty and only 200 in storage. Compared to the numbers discussed here, that was a drop in the bucket already before the war. By now, the salvageable ones have most likely been transfered from storage to active duty (whether in Ukraine or otherwise).
This backs up what former military commanders are saying that Russia is sol come 2025. They are losing equipment way faster than they can replace it period.
@Gstyle1 Thats because that number takes into account refurbishment and cannibalization. They are "making" new weapons in droves but all but artillery and even that they cannot produce enough to overcome loss or usage rates.
@Gstyle1 let's say, for sake of argument, Russia produces 100 tanks per month. If 80 of those are refurbished tanks from storage, then they are really only making 20 new tanks per month. Eventually, and likely soon, they won't have enough tanks in storage that can be refurbished to working order. At that point, the extra 80 tanks they ship out will vanish from their production numbers.
It's pretty expensive because there's a minimum spending requirement. You can't just buy one square kilometer. Ballpark it's $500 minimum if you want a decently high quality image.
@@someusername121 Interesting. Going with $1-$3/1000 views (my numbers are a little outdated, probably closer to $1) for a TH-cam video, these videos seem to just about pay for themselves, not even counting the many hours spent counting pixel soup. This one has a lot of earning to do, making up for the stuff that showed up on Google...
@@artnull13 T-54/55 is as low as they can go, there's only a handful of T-34's that run. Russia relatively recently had to buy some abroad and ship them back in order to have them for events and parades.
The rate they are going through them they will get to even the rustiest of rust buckets at some point. But even Russians must have some logic so consolidating makes sense - they have limited (skilled) manpower and spares so consolidating by type and bringing the work to them makes sense.
Problem with this channel. is that the Ukrianian general even amdits Russia built more tanks since 2022 than they lost. So you have to take every informaiton here with a large pinch of salt. Because we saw Russia transporting the T-55's, but we never saw them for example in combat. So at this point maybe they are just melting them down.
Russia has shown that they wont consume the quantity of a certain platform below 10-15%. When they are running low, they shift to a different model or caliber inorder to safeguard the few remaining. This has been demonstrated with their choice of missiles, drones, sam systems, apc's, & tanks. The fact that t34s are being used for training says to me that t72 & newer tanks are indeed getting low. They undoubtedly have some remaining, but t55 & t62s are being retrofitted for upcoming use.
One thing that perplexes me is that Oryx has the number of destroyed to be around 3k. We already see that many thousands have been moved. Open source suggests that the Russian army has around 3k deployed which begs the question where are the thousands of these that have been moved? My guess is that they have all been moved to tank repair and refurbishment plants to be refurbished or cannibalized for spare parts. I think a video of satellite imagery around these plants may hopefully answer a lot of questions.
Oryx has a habit of including Ukrainian lost tanks as russian if not flat out double counting russian losses. If Oryx was correct, russia has none to few Su-34s left, yet in reality, more than half of their Su-34s are still flying.
A lot of them have already been deployed. Not all of them are going to be refurbished. Anything that runs and has a gun is being sent to the front. They don't have time or the capability to refurbish thousands of tanks fully.
@@torlekjpec5708 Unfortunately even Oryx isn't immune to mistakes. Firstly depending on the state of a vehicle when it is photographed it is nearly impossible to identify the faction it belongs to. Both Ukraine and Russia use T-72's for example, but a burned out hulk won't tell you a lot by sight alone. Secondly, vehicles can also get captured and put into service by the opposing faction so a Bradley would normally be a Ukrainian loss, but we know Russia has captured a few similarly T-90's were not owned by Ukraine prior to the war, but a few have been captured by Ukraine from Russia. Thirdly there can be duplicates taken from different angles and fourthly new production/reactivation of old equipment happens constantly by both sides.
@@torlekjpec5708you think. The losses I've seen are all with vids AND geolocation. The ones without video evidence aint reported at all, to my knowledge. Btw: can you show a few of the vids they've counted wrong: you said instead of russian loss its ukrainian loss? Thnx 👍
As production starts ramping up I wonder if these older tanks will start being given to militias vs the standard army like what happened with the south ocetians, Donteskians and Luganskians who all are now mechanized with older tanks vs the standard russian and Chechen forces.
He purchased images and then, a week later, they were posted to Google Earth for all to see. Not poor planning at all; just a bit of bad luck. But I'm sure the creators would welcome your Patreon donation to assist with additional images!
I'd love a video about what equipment Russia will depend on North Korea for first to avoid running out (for example, will they run out of howitzers before tanks or rocket artillery, etc)
@@king_kiff3969 "Each missile is worth near the same as the tanks" A simple Google search provides one M26 rocket's cost: 40.000 dollars which is way below any tank price. Aren't you ashamed of even not doing a simple search before spitting horse turd from your mouth? How many HIMARS can you show to be destroyed, Mr. Coping Clown?
I love how these people think Russia has lost the war, has no shells, has no tanks Reading these comments I 😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Poor western people literally brainwashing themselves having no actual idea what’s going on just living off wet assumptions
The difference between the wars entered into by US and Russia is the PURPOSE. US made war with some countries to stop them from being aggressive, brutal, adventurous, despotic, repressive, autocratic, terroristic, crime lord, regime change, etc. Whereas, Russia initiated wars to gain land, excert control and undue influence among the countries she invaded.
@ also. most of the money sent is in equipment, made in the US and the deals are lend lease. So Ukraine will be paying money back that never left the economy. I don’t understand how all Americans aren’t on board with the support. It makes no sense to me.
That made some sense when they expected that most would end up as recycled steel. At best they would be rebuilt and updated with new engines and turrets, which would replace all of the wiring and electronics. But stripping out the wiring and recovering the gold from the electronics does leave the vehicle absolutely unrepairable. It's almost impossible to replicate equipment from the 1970s and 1980s. The targeting complexes were also valuable, both for the internal components and as whole assemblies to be upgraded by niche companies.
Honestly, as someone who's studying in the field of security and defence, if I went on a date with someone and they knew all that information about me just from my phone number, I would know I'm going on a date with the right person.
how much cost for a single T-62 to be kept alive until this day? - 60 years repair, maintenance and administration - 60 years training crews on an obsolete vehicle ( it's basically a T-55+) - 60 y. not investing in new tech or infrastructure - Finally reaching the front line meeting a Javelin this T-62 harmed the Soviet Union and Russia more then any Leopard I or II ever could.
Obvious math and logic problems. T62 was in production till 1973, so not 60 years. Obviously not all 20000 tanks were kept, most were recycled. Obviously investments in both tech and infrastructure were made - t72, t64, t80 gradually replaced it and t62 that were left in service were gradually upgraded to be relevant. Moreover its decent as light tank even now, comparable in weight and capabilities with m10 booker (upgraded versions of t62m ofc). And if it would detect javelin team before they do - can dispatch them just as easy. Given disparity in firepower, protection and range - javelin dudes have to hide hard, shoot fast and run like hell. With abrams tho, you might be correct on all points, except years. US could have made next gen tank a decade ago.
come on dude, you make it sound like the russian army is growing fast. what i see is that they cant really take more russian men, becouse they also need worker at home, so now they need to begs NK for men xD
I wondered what happened to all those tanks.back in the 90s they had so many 50,000 at the largest point that for years they put them back on railway an melted them down for steel they needed. Approximately 30,000 tanks where available at the beginning of smo . That doesn't mean working order. As can be seen the loss is greater than production, less tank beginning used while they can in part replenish the supply . Bcs of drone strike. Tank has no immunity.
I know there is huge misinformation online, but there are videos and images of WW2-era tanks being pulled by the Russians for refurbishment and use in training. Are there storage facilities that show these vehicles (T-34/85, ISU-152, IS-2/3) being pulled?
T-34's don't exist in Russia except as a museum pieces. There are less T-34's than there are T-14's, lol. As for the IS-2's and IS-3's... they are also museum pieces. The ISU-152 is an interesting question... Though I expect they too don't exist in Russia anymore. Maybe they are still in secondary markets... but the video on Self-Propelled Artillery probably contains your answers.
Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code CABAL at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: incogni.com/cabal
Thanks
🎃
Fantastic video
Any chance on a Russian S-300,-400 and other Air Defense Count? Awesome work! Enjoy the weekend.
Great work as always! I'm trying to figure out what happened with all these stored tanks. The number of deployed and destroyed don't seem to add up to the many more that have been removed from storage. Is it possible they have been moved to repair/refurbishment plants awaiting to be refurbished or cannibalized for spare parts?
2 ideas why the base is not emptying:
- They don't want to strip Siberia of reserves completely (China?)
- one former base commander sold all the engines
I believe the video was right, consolidating the remaining reserves and this one is closer to Ukraine (where most of the tanks that can be made to run will go to be dismantled) without being in easy range to get dissassembled while in storage.
I don't think Russia has to worry about China in the next 10-20 years.
@@57thorns The only real point of territorial dispute between Russia and China is still Mongolia. Which means that is the most likely reason why this site was chosen to remain stocked. The distances in the far-East are so vast that "close" is still a huge shipping time and most of these vehicles will have to stop at a depot for refurbishment before going to Ukraine anyway.
@@johnsmith1953x China already has greater military power than Russia. The only thing it lacks is a motive to take any chunk of Siberia its wants.
I imagine if the RF fell apart due to a civil war or otherwise fragmented, the Chinese will probably feel obliged to send a "peace keeping" force to occupy.
@@obsidianjane4413 That's not what I meant. Russia's clear enemy in the next 10-30 years is the USA and not China. Why waste storing thousands of tanks/ammo/etc near the Chinese border?
I am from Kazakhstan. We have over a thousand T-72s and hundreds of T-62M in storage, in good condition. I really hope they aren’t being secretly transferred to Russia.
Probably not. Kazakhstan knows they're next on the chopping block for Putin. Or at least near the top of the list
@@ElderrionPutin doesn't have the men or equipment to put anyone else on the chopping block. He's on the chopping block.
@@billfarmer7984I wouldn't put it past him. The last time they failed an invasion, the Soviet Union collapsed because of it. He might try to go out in a blaze of glory this time.
Why not openly sell them to Ukraine?
@@RedTail1-1
He won't be allowed to.
He will be stopped by his own, when they sense the heat getting closer to themselves.
Thanks for the effort of creating a full 3D model of these bases! I understand that it must have been a difficult endeavor, but these are awesome!
Honestly, I don't see the point. There's, what, ten seconds of 3D model footage in the whole video? It doesn't add any information to the video, and it must have taken days of work.
The disassembly of tanks wasn't stopped, it was just outsourced to Ukrainian contractors.
Lol
It took me a sec, but I see what you did there... coffee hasnt kicked in yet...
😂😂😂
Selidovo status?
@@usun_politics1033Herson status? Still with russia forever?? Sudja (kursk) status?
This info would have been highly coveted secret intel a few decades ago. Now, it's entertainment.
some would say educational
Ikr, it still blows my mind
Yeah 60's CIA would kill for Intel this good.
They are just consolidating whats left.
They arent pulling many T-64,T-72 and T-80 tanks out of storage lately because they all use the 125 mm shells , which is already low in stock
The T-62 however uses a 115 mm shell , which Russia has a much larger supply of so those are being refurbished , given better optics/radios and sent to Ukraine and used as tanks.
The T-54 and 55 , with their 100mm guns are being used as artillery pieces , and once the barrels wear out they turn them into "turtle tanks" which is basically a tank used as an armored truck.
After you remove all the ammo , there is an area about the volume of two pickup truck beds in and below the turret you can store stuff in and they also use the area behind the turret as a cargo area.
The tank can also carry 250 gallons of fuel internally with another 150 gallons in its external tanks.
So there's quite a few T-55 "Turtle tanks" that spend their day driving from supply dumps to the front dropping off supplies and then driving back because Ukrainian drones keep destroying any supply truck that gets within 5 miles of the front.
The "turtle tanks" are also being used as command and scout vehicles because after you put the "cope cage from Hell" over the entire tank and remove all the ammo from the turret , they actually provide decent protection.
Don't forget the main reason is because of their design; they're not candidates for the Olympic Turret Toss championships. They're saving those as a good reserve.
And as to their mm sizing, it's easy to change barrels and other parts to upgrade to other sizes. Any good machine ship can do it.
Still, junk..
@@mutteringmale Not really as that usually involves changing the turret design and ring. Also, the space for the auto loader, unless you mean going the other way--aka down grading 125mm to the 115mmm or 100mm. That would be easier, but probably not cost effective.
@@mutteringmale Russia lacks good machine shops, machinists, and money.
Amazing, you managed to spew a wall of BS that has ZERO in common with reality or common sense. Tank trucks? LOL, I haven't heard dumber idea in years...
Content starts at 1:54.
Thanks this dude always has a way too long ad in every video
@@1Learn2Swim3 I feel like most of these content creators are very greedy because they only came to TH-cam after it was a free content platform for 10+ yrs and are trying to inject their monetization mindset in to every aspect of the content production.
It's more understandable on this channel than say a video essay one, dude is making 3d models and buying satellite images. That requires serious money.
Me: "Hey, CIA, Covert Cabal updated."
CIA: "we know, come back to bed."
Talk about being in bed with the CIA.
This is false. Everyone knows the NSA is the only government organization that listens to the people.
@@ChucksSEADnDEADI was just seeing that too lol
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD ngl CIA head real damn good tho
why bother? He's proved himself wrong now for 2 straight years...
Most probably most of the tanks still in storage were or are stripped for spare parts.
-If a tank is stored for 20 years gaskets getting brittle, oil gets hard, diesel gets hard in pipes and injection pumps, electronics corrode. It is hard work to make it run again.
- The tanks used need spare parts, barrels, bearings, fuel pumps, water pumps, motors,
let's imagine that the maintenance was completed correctly ( big assumption ) so all the liquids were stabilized or drained, gaskets can be conditioned and other aspects protected, it is after all military equipment built in the 50s. but this is rzza, so it's probably all garbage
@@theorenhobart My understanding of maintenance on vehicles like this is that white glove proper treatment, as nice as it may be, isn't sufficient. You actually have to *continuously* care for and check on each vehicle.
I'm thinking you might get one good full inspection out of these guys, if that, then the front vehicles are the ones that turn on or look good from 20m for the next 20 years.
Do they not have dry deserts for hand me downs so water and rodent intrusion isn't such a problem? I watch quite a few car buying videos and anyone can tell the difference between a car from the North vs South.
Thanks to you and your Team for the exceptional work you do. I'm sure that despite high resolution images, there are tens of hours of painstaking analysis that needs to be done to each image.
Thank you for your patience and dedication to this, very important information. (I'll bet the Pentagon uses your videos to support their suspicions.)
Neat! I'm going to take a guess that tomorrow some NRO analyst office will be talking about this video. Probably just as office gossip, but still an impressive feat. It's amazing what you're doing.
You think they don't already know all of this?
@@beeble2003 I think their point was that they (analyst) likely doesn't know *civilians* know this and are openly discussing it on social media to hundreds of thousands of viewers.
Big depot, lots of movement in and out ... and no direct railway link. All these steel boxes must somehow cross the last mile to the station on their own. An insurance against shipping unsalvageable junk?
Or it just breaks down that way. When life gifts me a sifting mechanism, I use it
There are only 3 YT channels that I drop whatever I'm doing to watch when a new vid pops up on my sub list... and this is one!
I hope that Perun is on your list...
u win nut prize
Mr Cabal, welcome back!
We missed you!
You post this exact message on all his videos? Thats kinda weird
I finally get to see your videos fairly quickly now after months of trying to engage as much as possible in addition to setting for notifications
I remember on Combat approved, a russian yt military channel they were going over tanks that were piled up like these , believe it or not , the russians actually do maintainence to these vehicles, just they dont bother if the exterior of the tank can give someone tetanus or if its covered in moss and fungus. But they actually marked these vehicles for certain parts, i think black means the vehicle is fully operation conditions, red means not good for anything, white for the armament and yellow for engine
Do you also remember that the Ukrainians were notorious on the black and open market for selling tanks, artillery and such under the corrupt pro-Russian governments after the breakup? You could fly to Kiev and make bids on a nice tank and have it shipped anywhere you want.
@@mutteringmale I don't think it was just the Ukrainians. You could have probably done that with most of the former Warsaw pact countries in the first few years after the breakup. They were poor and lots of people were trying to make a buck.
@@d3faulted2 You're right. There is another factor. Only people who bought these POS were collectors. Almost all other countries knew Soviet equipment was crap, and then there was Iraq; Bradleys took out 50% of the Rus tanks and 25% were destroyed by aviation and then our tanks.
@@mutteringmale They were very decent tanks for their time, hell, the T-64 basically made NATO shit their pants when it came out. But they are outdated, fighting in a kind of war that was never even thought possible when they were built and often used improperly. If nothing, NATO countries scrambling to add anti drone countermeasures to all their vehicles is proof of that, every single tank currently in service is a decades old platform unsuited to a modern battlefield filled with drones. And in some niche cases these old soviet tanks still have a leg up on NATO vehicles, as even the ukrainians found out, NATO hasn't made proper HE shells since the 60s, so T-72s end up being better at doing fire support missions simply because things like the leopard 2 and challengers don't have the needed ammunition.
Shit, using the basically untrained Iraqis of all people as a point against T-series tanks is wild, you could have given them the latest Abrams and they would still have gotten smoked from the air after their air force collapsed in a matter of hours.
@@mutteringmalethey are perfectly servicable if your enemy is using the same russian junk. Most this stuff went to countries fighting eachother with russian stuff at both sides. And is still going on.
The Russians obviously didn't think the war would drag on this long. Now that it has, it does make sense to consolidate the types of tanks (and other vehicles) in a specific type per base. It makes finding the best ones easier as well as cannabilozing the others for parts. The number of stored T-80s will be exhausted soon and it is doubtful the Russians will activate any T-64s until they absolutely have to. That leaves T-62s and early T-72s. From everything I've veiwed, it looks like these are pretty roached out, and it take a lot of time to get some into battlefield condition. To me, it looks like the Russians will have to go on the open market and buy some vehicles or get some old vehicles to Noeth Korea (and maybe Iran). One thing is for sure - there are be a lot less armor available when war is over.
For anyone who, like me, was initially a bit confused as to why they’d preferentially use T-62s over the slightly newer T-64: it actually does make sense for Russia to do that. The T-64 was designed for tank-on-tank warfare and uses the same ammunition as the T-72 and T-80. The T-62 was designed for infantry work and uses a different gun caliber than the later Russian tanks. There’s also many more of them, and so there are more available to cannibalize for repair parts and spares. It also means that it isn’t drawing from the same ammo stockpiles as other Russian tanks, which is presumably becoming more important as Russia is increasingly facing shortages of large-caliber ammunition after two and a half years of Putin’s 3-day “special military operation”.
@@michaelimbesi2314The Soviet Union did produce a vast quantity of t64 however, seeing as they were designed for tank on tank combat a vast majority of them as far as I can tell, were stored in Ukraine to be a rapid response fleet to any potential NATO incursion.
@@michaelimbesi2314, the T-62 requires an extra crewman as it doesn't have an autoloader. It also uses an odd type of ammo as it has a 115 mm gun. The "advantage" is that is a technically simpler tank with a simpler optics. This is key. With western sanctions in place, the Russians do not have access to more advanced optics so the T-62 can be put into service more quickly, hypothetically speaking. At this point, there are few tanks left in storage that are in good shape and it will require more time to reactivate any tank. This is why I think the Russians will dip into North Korean stocks.
Their plan B was ready for a long war. That's why they needed only a few months to re-articulate their whole forces on the frontline in Ukraine. If not ready, it generally take more than a year or 2 to do so for any military. Like the US in Iraq with the Surge (i think it almost took 3 years for the US to do so), or Ukraine with the Zaporizhia offensive. Plus, thinking that Russia is fighting quick wars is kind of strange. Because it never happened historically. They generally prefer methodic long wars.
Still every Russian glimpse of reason is a sad thing.
Love your work! It is awesome that you have the patience to identify and count all these vehicles. 🙂
Would really have loved to hear some context on these tanks and their numbers, and what that implies for their usage rates, and potential hard limits on numbers that we can see being deployed over the next year, or so. Even a quick paragraph at the end would have been great.
It's an ongoing series. Check out the other videos and similar channels (they collab) for more information and context.
tldw; Tank numbers in storage are steadily decreasing, probs run out in 2026.
Much awaited, much appreciated looking forward to excellent insights as always from you.
i know its probably a lot of hassle but i love the 3d imaging and they really set your videos from others. Thank you for posting
One of the best war channels out there!
Lol this guy gives you some number and you believe it 😂😂😂😂
Any other one?
@@515coldfireSo where's your research and sources?
@@gyasiansa3358Perun is goated.
Thanks. Excellent information as usual.
great analysis and coverage, as usual!
wow, just found your channel from a Jake Broe vid. This analysis is amazing. Thanks for your efforts! Subscribed.
It would be great to see a full count of the nuber of vehicles in those 4 central storage bases
Just eye-balling it, it looks like the one with the T-80s is mostly empty, but I agree. A complete break-down would be nice
Must be the t -14 storage right? 😉
Also T-80UM3 “Burlak”
Only the T-90 is in production at the moment.
Something like 15 per month.
@@warriorson7979 Didnt RU claim to restart production of the T80?
@@yves2932 they want to restart t80 factory, but it's gonna take time before anything is actually manufactured, it's been shut down for a long while
All 5 of the t14"s 😂
Railway logistics and operations would be the reason for much shuffling around as priorities change.
Because it'd make sense to have a few depots dedicated to actually repairing/preparing older vehicles, they're not just storing them forever, they're actively pulling what they can and restoring it for battle. That or it's the dumping ground of completely unrecoverable vehicles.
6:30 hey, that’s a Canadian 🇨🇦!
Thanks for all the work...
The number of tanks and armored vehicles the soviets stockpiled is insane. No wonder the soviet union collapsed.
I mean, communism may have also played a role.
SO Russia learned they lesson and instead off building new weapons they invest money in to lyxury yachts, at one point off 50 most expensive yachts in the world 30 were owned by Russians
The advance of drone warfare seems to have made all tanks and APCs far more vulnerable. Assuming many of these old tanks can be refurbished and put back into service, the most valuable thing at risk of being blown up on the battlefield is not a bunch of old tanks, it is their crews.
Still amazes me that Russia has burned through so much of its Soviet stock. It's like seeing a hoarder get to a point where they actually need new things
Finally I have something to talk to people about at a Halloween party I'm going to!
Halloween, the one time when you can talk about all the blood and guts, yet people won't look at you funny OR ask you to leave.
RIP for those staff of the other decommissioned tank parks. They were probably sent to the Ukraine front.
you're saying it as it was something bad
I prefer "RIH". You can fill in what the "He" stands for.
@@mutteringmale Hey, moron, we're not talking about ukronazis so STFU and let adults talk ok?
I cant find it now but there was a report on them recently, they're frontline mechanics now. They set up shops a few miles outside of artillery range, and repair salvaged armor that gets taken out in russian pushes, the mechanics interviewed said they can completely refurbish some 70% of the recovered armor.
@@ivan____________________973 Those are vehicles that were working and then took battle damage. If these tanks have been stored as badly as a lot of us think they have, they may be even harder to get running.
I really appreciate these videos, CC!
When you consider that security doctrine for most countries, including russia, stipulates you always need to keep half of your equipment inside your country for self defense in case of invasion and also to put down civil unrest......so not all the depots will empty. And of course if the location is outdoors and they are all in a state of very bad disrepair, many of those left behind, need repairs or cant be used. With no spare parts or labour russia is having problems even refurbishing some models.
maybe not get your crews in a political stunt of an invasion? Putin: Impossible
Russia views Ukraine as a civil conflict though. So that fits into state calculations.
Again, great commentary and investigation!! 👍
Probably pro-Russians here leave unpleasant messages. Be sure you are doing great and I know a lot of officers are your subscribers. 👏
Wonder if we may start seeing some T-62’s with there turrets removed and replaced with like a 57mm or some kind of ZPU cannon like the 14.5-23mm which both use?.
and in 1994, I thought our SCI imagery was high speed.
Wow, brilliant content. Thanks 🙏
Im here mister covert
750 tanks at one storage facility sounds like a huge amount to almost any country but even if one was generous and assumed that
350 were usable Russia would run through that many tanks on the battlefield in just 50 days or so after making a significant effort to refurbish them.
If the war lasts another two years that's 730 days.
Having 50 days worth of tanks in storage at one storage facility when many other tank storage facilities are virtually empty isn't going to do anything to help Russian forces deal with equipment shortages in
2026.
Russia is advancing, 70% of recovered vehicles are refurbished and put back on the front line. This is why they haven't run out of equipment and their storage yards remain full.
Is similar imagery available for airfields that are currently storing old aircraft like the MiG-23 and Mig-27, which Poland is saying are potentially going to be re-commissioned, upgraded and made airworthy by Russia?
and flown by who though? You cannot a) just magically recommission aircraft, and b) not just have trained pilots appear to fly them.
@@richardjoseph9002 why has Poland put this into several intel reports then? If it’s not possible to upgrade MiG-23 and Mig-27 aircraft and put them back into operation, there shouldn’t be any minor mention of it nor any unsubstantiated supposition made by neighboring governments.
@@momosgarage "why has Poland put this into several intel reports then?" Poland said this so it must be true?
Countries can say a lot of things, doesnt make them true..
@@masoodjalal1152 no it’s doesn’t mean it’s true, but what’s the point of talking about an idea that is so far fetched that it’s not just improbable, but absolutely impossible, where stockpile numbers can easily be confirmed through third party consultants, like Jane’s for example.
Totally fascinating observations.
But which facility has the T-34s?
They only have 10 of them and they are probably stored in garages like the t14s
@@olcankanicok9125 There is new training footage from Russia with North Korean troops where a T-34-85 and ISU-152 is shown, so they aren't all in storage.
@@FirstDagger Maybe they put them out of storage for the training and parades, but dont expect them that they will use them
@@olcankanicok9125 That is what people said about the T-54 also. Either way they are using pre-WW2 field guns so ISU-152 in combat use wouldn't surprise me anymore.
@@FirstDaggerlol that is for the parade.
Thx for the good work
One day China is going to walk into Siberia.
QQ: Whatever happened to the "Tac Ops" podcast? You guys did a great job with that. :)
Are you going to make a video about the NK troops being deployed in eastern Ukraine?
Would be interesting to see where they trained them and how they shipped them etc
@@XxXnonameAsDXxX it would yes!
To me it shows both how desperate Putin is *and* hypocrisy, always whining about NATO and yet he brings support from elsewhere too...
I have absolutely no use for this information but the TH-cam algorithm thinks I would be interested. And it was right. Whether it's women's javelin competition or old tank storage in Russia, it's always right.
Video starts at 1:55
It has been a strange fact that Russia kept most of the T-72s in the storage rather than pulling them out at war, while others declined. The stable numbers of tanks in 349th base proves this.
Never been very reliable to begin with and then decades outside in the rain, imagine them encountering some Leopards or Abrams...Russians are running out of tanks and soon gonna have to get in their Lada's...
I heard that bs, about a year ago Nothing happened
I think you missed it. But Russia launched a program right before the 20s to restore massive amount of tanks in the far east depots and notably T-62M, because against threats from central asia and the far east, T-62 with their Bastion missiles massive stocks are perfect in these flat grounds.
Lot of tanks would be rebuilt/modernized before being sent back to those depots. That could explain why these depots see movement but are not decreasing.
At this point are they just putting all their T-90s into action? Or are they all effectively destroyed at this point? I noticed there isn't a storage site cited for them...
In January 2022, estimates were 400 T-90 in active duty and only 200 in storage. Compared to the numbers discussed here, that was a drop in the bucket already before the war. By now, the salvageable ones have most likely been transfered from storage to active duty (whether in Ukraine or otherwise).
I doubt if those have working engines anymore. You might be able to recover some tank gun barrels, but a bit of work getting them operational.
This backs up what former military commanders are saying that Russia is sol come 2025. They are losing equipment way faster than they can replace it period.
Than why the EU says Russia produces weapons faster than they lose them
@Gstyle1 Thats because that number takes into account refurbishment and cannibalization. They are "making" new weapons in droves but all but artillery and even that they cannot produce enough to overcome loss or usage rates.
@Gstyle1 let's say, for sake of argument, Russia produces 100 tanks per month.
If 80 of those are refurbished tanks from storage, then they are really only making 20 new tanks per month.
Eventually, and likely soon, they won't have enough tanks in storage that can be refurbished to working order. At that point, the extra 80 tanks they ship out will vanish from their production numbers.
@@stirlinggerbic-forsyth3345 thank you for better explaining my point.
I think we should call that group of tanks at 4:24 THE BRICK
How much does it cost to buy the images for an average base? And how much $$ does it hurt to find it on Google Earth a week later?
It's pretty expensive because there's a minimum spending requirement. You can't just buy one square kilometer. Ballpark it's $500 minimum if you want a decently high quality image.
@@someusername121 Interesting. Going with $1-$3/1000 views (my numbers are a little outdated, probably closer to $1) for a TH-cam video, these videos seem to just about pay for themselves, not even counting the many hours spent counting pixel soup. This one has a lot of earning to do, making up for the stuff that showed up on Google...
3:56 typical isnt, you hang on to something for years and then need it just after youve thrown it away
The fact that the main tanks they have are T-62 is pretty sad tbh
They've gone as far as using T-54/55's.
@@Calzaghe83 the question is how much further can they go down?
@@artnull13 lol, technically they can go down to zero.
@@artnull13 T-54/55 is as low as they can go, there's only a handful of T-34's that run. Russia relatively recently had to buy some abroad and ship them back in order to have them for events and parades.
@@artnull13A T-34 showed up at a training ground the other day, but I doubt they seriously intend to use it
2 minute ad for a 7.5 Min video is wild
The rate they are going through them they will get to even the rustiest of rust buckets at some point. But even Russians must have some logic so consolidating makes sense - they have limited (skilled) manpower and spares so consolidating by type and bringing the work to them makes sense.
Problem with this channel. is that the Ukrianian general even amdits Russia built more tanks since 2022 than they lost. So you have to take every informaiton here with a large pinch of salt. Because we saw Russia transporting the T-55's, but we never saw them for example in combat. So at this point maybe they are just melting them down.
They still produce new T-90 and T-80 tanks. They produce a lot of them, actually. Don't count on them running out.
Вы глупый.
В России отсутствует полное производство танков.
Только восстановление и модернизация.
Почитайте лучше
В России нет производства т 80.
Вы хоть почитайте сперва чем такую чушь нести а т90 в каком количестве?
@@xXx-gi1hi They build new tanks, many of them actually.
Caught the Cabal upload, let's go
half your vid is a GD ad clicked off
just skip it, he paid for the satellite images he deserves an income
Lovely work. 🙂
still waiting for the one with the elusive 20k t-72´s
So... IOW, the Russians are doing a good job of rotating and utilizing their vast resources of tanks and BMPs. They're not hurting for anything.
Your 3D rendering was missing the Tower of Vlaudron. It’s only 18cm high though. So, it’s just possible it was hidden behind a tree stump.
Russia has shown that they wont consume the quantity of a certain platform below 10-15%. When they are running low, they shift to a different model or caliber inorder to safeguard the few remaining.
This has been demonstrated with their choice of missiles, drones, sam systems, apc's, & tanks.
The fact that t34s are being used for training says to me that t72 & newer tanks are indeed getting low. They undoubtedly have some remaining, but t55 & t62s are being retrofitted for upcoming use.
One thing that perplexes me is that Oryx has the number of destroyed to be around 3k. We already see that many thousands have been moved. Open source suggests that the Russian army has around 3k deployed which begs the question where are the thousands of these that have been moved?
My guess is that they have all been moved to tank repair and refurbishment plants to be refurbished or cannibalized for spare parts. I think a video of satellite imagery around these plants may hopefully answer a lot of questions.
Oryx has a habit of including Ukrainian lost tanks as russian if not flat out double counting russian losses.
If Oryx was correct, russia has none to few Su-34s left, yet in reality, more than half of their Su-34s are still flying.
@@torlekjpec5708 Cope. They do a good job with the information they have been given.
A lot of them have already been deployed. Not all of them are going to be refurbished. Anything that runs and has a gun is being sent to the front. They don't have time or the capability to refurbish thousands of tanks fully.
@@torlekjpec5708 Unfortunately even Oryx isn't immune to mistakes. Firstly depending on the state of a vehicle when it is photographed it is nearly impossible to identify the faction it belongs to. Both Ukraine and Russia use T-72's for example, but a burned out hulk won't tell you a lot by sight alone. Secondly, vehicles can also get captured and put into service by the opposing faction so a Bradley would normally be a Ukrainian loss, but we know Russia has captured a few similarly T-90's were not owned by Ukraine prior to the war, but a few have been captured by Ukraine from Russia. Thirdly there can be duplicates taken from different angles and fourthly new production/reactivation of old equipment happens constantly by both sides.
@@torlekjpec5708you think. The losses I've seen are all with vids AND geolocation. The ones without video evidence aint reported at all, to my knowledge.
Btw: can you show a few of the vids they've counted wrong: you said instead of russian loss its ukrainian loss? Thnx
👍
As production starts ramping up I wonder if these older tanks will start being given to militias vs the standard army like what happened with the south ocetians, Donteskians and Luganskians who all are now mechanized with older tanks vs the standard russian and Chechen forces.
Plot twist, this is Russia's tank-shaped bouncy castle storage and all of the children have been conscripted.
Because they are running out of Trained Tank Crews. The Auto Loader does have the penchant of taking the gunners collar with it. They are that close.
Good lesson from this video: always check open sources like Google Earth before buying satellite images.
He purchased images and then, a week later, they were posted to Google Earth for all to see. Not poor planning at all; just a bit of bad luck.
But I'm sure the creators would welcome your Patreon donation to assist with additional images!
I really like the threes though, you can do a short from the view of one
Can you make video of Russian aviation?
great insights, thanks!
They will sing songs and tell stories of the LEGENDS of Ukraine.
I'd love a video about what equipment Russia will depend on North Korea for first to avoid running out (for example, will they run out of howitzers before tanks or rocket artillery, etc)
Big thanks to Himars for helping us see the tank stocks deplete over time!
imagine thinking Himars that have now been destroyed was a good trade off. Each missile is worth near the same as the tanks...
@@king_kiff3969Imagine taking kremlin money to spread lies 🤣🤣
@@king_kiff3969 "Each missile is worth near the same as the tanks" A simple Google search provides one M26 rocket's cost: 40.000 dollars which is way below any tank price. Aren't you ashamed of even not doing a simple search before spitting horse turd from your mouth? How many HIMARS can you show to be destroyed, Mr. Coping Clown?
Great work! Subscribed :)
I love how some people think that removed from outdoor storage = losses. I think General Cavoli would not agree.
I love how these people think Russia has lost the war, has no shells, has no tanks
Reading these comments I 😂🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Poor western people literally brainwashing themselves having no actual idea what’s going on just living off wet assumptions
One long commercial is not what I need
The difference between the wars entered into by US and Russia is the PURPOSE. US made war with some countries to stop them from being aggressive, brutal, adventurous, despotic, repressive, autocratic, terroristic, crime lord, regime change, etc. Whereas, Russia initiated wars to gain land, excert control and undue influence among the countries she invaded.
👍🏻🇺🇦
The 349th is probably for Stunts and Victory Parades… or for flipping them off rain cars 😂
It’s insane to me that Americans are complaining about a fraction of their annual military budget being spent to drastically weaken russia.
Exactly
@ also. most of the money sent is in equipment, made in the US and the deals are lend lease. So Ukraine will be paying money back that never left the economy. I don’t understand how all Americans aren’t on board with the support. It makes no sense to me.
Americans don't think we're at war with Russia like the media wants us to be in. Americans aren't for the perpetual war machine to continue.
That’s the depot which Putin’s nephew was allowed to strip out all the wiring for scrap.
That made some sense when they expected that most would end up as recycled steel. At best they would be rebuilt and updated with new engines and turrets, which would replace all of the wiring and electronics.
But stripping out the wiring and recovering the gold from the electronics does leave the vehicle absolutely unrepairable. It's almost impossible to replicate equipment from the 1970s and 1980s.
The targeting complexes were also valuable, both for the internal components and as whole assemblies to be upgraded by niche companies.
Honestly, as someone who's studying in the field of security and defence, if I went on a date with someone and they knew all that information about me just from my phone number, I would know I'm going on a date with the right person.
I dont know about Ukraine, but Putin is indeed demilitarizing Russia. Genious.
remember the topo Marines building 3D scale models..
how much cost for a single T-62 to be kept alive until this day?
- 60 years repair, maintenance and administration
- 60 years training crews on an obsolete vehicle ( it's basically a T-55+)
- 60 y. not investing in new tech or infrastructure
- Finally reaching the front line meeting a Javelin
this T-62 harmed the Soviet Union and Russia more then any Leopard I or II ever could.
still, i'm sure corporal poo-poo is grateful for their existence
Obvious math and logic problems. T62 was in production till 1973, so not 60 years. Obviously not all 20000 tanks were kept, most were recycled. Obviously investments in both tech and infrastructure were made - t72, t64, t80 gradually replaced it and t62 that were left in service were gradually upgraded to be relevant.
Moreover its decent as light tank even now, comparable in weight and capabilities with m10 booker (upgraded versions of t62m ofc).
And if it would detect javelin team before they do - can dispatch them just as easy. Given disparity in firepower, protection and range - javelin dudes have to hide hard, shoot fast and run like hell.
With abrams tho, you might be correct on all points, except years. US could have made next gen tank a decade ago.
Thanks.
Russian army size is growing rapidly as well as its maintenance capabilities.
come on dude, you make it sound like the russian army is growing fast. what i see is that they cant really take more russian men, becouse they also need worker at home, so now they need to begs NK for men xD
The amount of men yes. It’s equipment no. Over 60% of its entire conventional land army equipment is gone and what is left looks decidedly like junk.
I wondered what happened to all those tanks.back in the 90s they had so many 50,000 at the largest point that for years they put them back on railway an melted them down for steel they needed.
Approximately 30,000 tanks where available at the beginning of smo .
That doesn't mean working order. As can be seen the loss is greater than production, less tank beginning used while they can in part replenish the supply . Bcs of drone strike. Tank has no immunity.
Check latest convoy nr 33
NAFO 69th Brigade ✌✌🇺🇦✌✌
Wild Hornets Drones & Pickup Trucks. 👊😊👍
I know there is huge misinformation online, but there are videos and images of WW2-era tanks being pulled by the Russians for refurbishment and use in training. Are there storage facilities that show these vehicles (T-34/85, ISU-152, IS-2/3) being pulled?
T-34's don't exist in Russia except as a museum pieces. There are less T-34's than there are T-14's, lol. As for the IS-2's and IS-3's... they are also museum pieces.
The ISU-152 is an interesting question... Though I expect they too don't exist in Russia anymore. Maybe they are still in secondary markets... but the video on Self-Propelled Artillery probably contains your answers.