>2,088 tanks left in russian stockpiles >851 estimated to be salvagable>nothing left after thatwhat the FUCK happened?
>>65225686
>>65225686>>65225687Is this Jonpy's data?
>>65225687>T-90: 0
>>65225703NTA; it's been that way for a long time.
>>65225703Technically untrue, those 3 t90s at uralgovnozavod are STILL there.
sometimes I wonder if the purpose of those threads is for some mad Russian to leak the real numbers, like with the classified manuals leaks in warthunder forums
>>65225726Anon, with the indoor garages empty and only a limited number of storage bases to begin with, these are the real numbers. Of course, there are additional tanks that are stored at BTRZ's and are in service with active units.
>>65225687DILATE THIS
>>65225687>Those T-54/55 numbersYikes. I thought that they still had several hundred of those things at the minimum>>65225703its been like that for years now.
>>65225686St. Javelin happened.
>>65225703>>65225686They haven't even start real invasion yetYou will see
>>65225778And the eggs? What about the eggs!?!
>>65225726Ukraine has reported the real and truthful numbers from the start. Keep coping zigger.
>>65225686Still more than all of europe combined
>>65225726>the REAL numbersAh yes, the secret fleet of 100000 armatas hidden in the urals bunkers...
>>65225791they're also garbage compared to the average european tank, so your point is moot.
RETVRN TO TRAIN
>>65225804Can you conclusively prove those do not exist?That's right, you can't, checkmate.
>>65225791>Still more than all of europe combinedDa comrade, tank is tank, weak degenerate wectoid non-binary tank cant defeat mighty PUCCIA sturdy and trad armor.
pour one out for the end of russias seemingly inexhaustible horde of tanks. We never would have developed the Abrams, Apache, or A-10 (among many others) without the fear of it. It really did shape much of the Wests military doctrine and tech. Kinda sad to see the end of it in a way. Next time I feel like getting plastered, Ill do so with cheap vodka in memory of the foe that never got a chance to try and roll across europe. Da svidania you poor russian rustbuckets
>>65225687>What does the first column mean?
>>65225686Turns out leaving your tank force out in the open, exposed to the elements and illiterate kleptomaniacs that will missionkill a tank for a hundred bucks in copper wire is not a great idea. Specially when such environments are cold and humid. Doubly so when you haven't inspected them or maintained them properly, if at all, since the time Brezhnev was alive.Who would have thunk it?
>>65225686>>65225804>oversaturate the battlefield with old and busted museum pieces>overexhaust the enemy>bum rush with the top of the art modern tanks you saved up until nowTwo more weeks and everything will be known.
>>65225813https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WF71SaW5gIk
>>65225832it's sad and ironic in a way, that the inexhaustable horde of machinery meant to roll over all of europe, ended up being exhausted by a part of the union that created it, not even the foes it was designed to fight.
>>65225686The fact that the entire soviet tank force got chewed up without the help of a single A-10 or AH-64 makes me sad.
>>65225853>the help of a single A-10Retire this pig dog NOW.
>>65225832Who knows, maybe the fear of a horde of chinese ships, planes, and tanks will do something similar
>>65225703YepThey were among the first to go, because they lost a lot in the first month and T90As are easy to refurbish into T90Ms>>65225726We just like counting shit>>65225790Lol noAt best the Ukrainians are reporting no. of tanks hit rather than destroyed>>65225686Jompy also wrote this:>https://fronts.co/article/deconstructing-the-myth-that-russia-is-running-out-of-armour/>Estimates put new production at roughly 200-250 T-90Ms, some 400-480 BMP-3Ms, around 100-120 BMD-4Ms and some 500-700 BTR-82s, on top of several hundred more IMVs and MRAPs, and 2,000-3,000 refurbished armored vehicles taken from storage just in 2025. By now the Russian tank fleet likely surpasses in size the prewar fleet by a few hundred tanks, yet the overall quality has gone down considerably, with it today being a mix of high-low tech equipment, from plain, unmodernized T-54/55s to newly-made T-90Ms.
>>65225894>by now the russian tank fleet likely surpasses in size the prewar fleet by a few hundred tanksKEK no.
I hope it doesn't go extinct. Yes, it is shit, but I always found the useless eye things to be funny looking and endearing. I hope a few end up in museums somewhere where they won't get blown up.
How long do 1000 tanks last on the frontline? Ukraine makes thousands of FPV drones each day
>>65225822It is possible to prove, all we need to do is disassemble the mountain range.
Ok so the strategy was to use AD to stop NATO’s massively superior Air Force and use sheer numbers on the ground to win.Now what?
>>65225874Send them all to ukraine.
>>65225708>18 years of T-90 promotional photos>same three hulls>some tools missing in newer pictures
>>65225686vodka
>>65225894Ok this is some premium cope.
>>65225813That is amazing, like watching a dinosaur walk out of the woods.
>>65225874>>the help of a single A-10>Retire this pig dog NOWThe seethe the Warthog causes is more than enough to force the Chair Force to keep flying it. Some day, they will turn them over to the Army, where they belong. >Papa Trump should fun the A-100 next
>what the FUCK happened?Fuckin' khokhols, man, I don't know what to tell you.
>>65225894>Jompy also wrote this:>>https://fronts.co/article/deconstructing-the-myth-that-russia-is-running-out-of-armour/>>the Russian tank fleet likely surpasses in size the prewar fleet by a few hundred tanksGentlemen, I believe this is the most highly distilled, purified, and clarified cope that we have ever encountered.
>>65225832>pour one out for the end of russias seemingly inexhaustible horde of tanks, destroyed because the country of those dumb hillbilly cucks turned out to be lions and warriors
>>65225853We live in the cucked clown world, bro. These planes and helicopters should've been in Ukraine the first week of the invasion.
>>65225894>Estimates put new production at roughly 200-250 T-90Ms>some 400-480 BMP-3Ms>100-120 BMD-4Ms >some 500-700 BTR-82sI'm assuming he means in total and not just the 2025 yearly output>and 2,000-3,000 refurbished armored vehicles all taken in 2025And they probably like 2-2.5k of those refurbished vehicles>https://fronts.co/article/deconstructing-the-myth-that-russia-is-running-out-of-armour/Having read the article, it's 3/4 fluff piece where it does nothing but talk about prewar numbers and the events of 2022 with the remaining 1/4 being a mix of 1/8 cope with another 1/8 actually talking about hard numbers at the very end. As much as I can appreciate Jompy's desire for people to not call out Russia's mechanized forces as non-existent, he needs to get off Russia's cock when it comes to his delusions regarding their manufacturing capabilities. >>65225930Ukraine has so far destroyed/disabled 42 tanks in June alone so they will most likely have reached a total of 420 tanks destroyed/disabled by Junes end
>>65225894>https://fronts.co/article/deconstructing-the-myth-that-russia-is-running-out-of-armour/>>65226150>To sum it up, this will be the last great war fought with Soviet-era armor. Russia is managing to reform their core armored formations, but there are some caveats:>1. Clearly they are thinking in the long run, predicting that eventually a solution to the current drone saturated environment will be reached that allows them to bring back fast, mobile warfare via armored vehicles, and preserving and rebuilding the mechanized corps in the meantime. They could also be forced to go back to mechanized warfare if Russia fails to meet its recruitment target for this year.>2. Even if new production has surged (it is estimated that Russia barely produced 60–70 T-90Ms in 2022, rising to 140–180 in 2023), it probably has by now reached its maximum capacity and in itself won’t be able to replenish all those huge fields of Soviet tanks accumulated over decades of war economy production.>3. Russia’s war economy itself is already showing its cracks and won’t be able to maintain its current arms production rate in the long run. However, that doesn’t mean Russia won’t be able to again field huge tank formations in Ukraine if it ever finds a workaround for the current threats to armor.>4. The loss of the vast Soviet legacy stockpiles means the capability to quickly regenerate after high attritional warfare won’t be there anymore for Russia and they’ll have to change their approach to mechanized warfare, not being able to throw massive armored pushes at the enemy anymore nor waste any piece of equipment (including as a way of diplomacy by giving armor for free to friendly/satellite regimes).>In short, the death of Russian armor has been greatly exaggerated. But the impact of these last four years of fighting has not been negligible, and the impacts will echo through the Russian armed forces for years or decades to come.
>>65225686>what the FUCK happened?War were declared
>>65225782In the ass
>>65226183>I'm assuming he means in total and not just the 2025 yearly outputNo, just saw that he literally meant annually. I'm not sure where he's getting these numbers for new build T-90s because they haven't fucking shown up on the front lines at all. Nor are we aware of entire tank regiments just sitting behind Russian lines waiting for the call to rush B again
>russia economy going to collapse any day nowtheyll start buying tanks from the chinx or koreans and keep sending poor ziggers to the grinder
>>65225686>within approximately 12 months>withinI'm hoping for a christmas present.
>>65225894Pic related is what I'm assuming Jompy is counting as part of his "new build" numbers
>>65225686Tortoise formation around a towed anti-tank piece, naturally.
>>65226238Shields? In this economy?Kevlar (definitely not cheap nylon) umbrellas are the best we can do.
These threads always wrap back around to the definition of "new-build."IMO, if you are pulling a T-72 hull from storage to make a T-90M, that is NOT a new-build.
>>65226183my math is way off, I meant to put in 126 or so
>>65226208not like it matters. bet they're already at the point where they're not using the few tanks they have because commanders don't want be singled out as the tank unit with zero tanks
>C A N Y O U H E A R T H E S C R E A M I N G
>>65225769T-54/55s are so old that shoddy russian storage conditions had killed most of them well before 2022.
>>65225686This is what happens when your cost fallacy is deeper than the Sammy B.
>>65226267How soon until they send special forces to steal everything at Bovington?
>>65225791Not really, no.
>>65226253And since T-72Bs hulls were specifically used to make the various types of T-90s I doubt that Russia will be able to create "new" T-90s after the last of the usable T-72B hulls are all gone. Afterwards they'll resort to upgrade the remaining T-72As and Urals until those are all gone too.
>>65226206With what money? Bitches have managed to turn an oil export ecnomy into one in which people can't buy gas.
>>65226292One siberian oblast for 15 of china's finest.
>>65225853The VA will be treating injuries caused by the massive blue balling those pilots were given for decades to come (non-service related, BTW).
>>65225853well, maybe when ad cuckold goes into post-nut coma, thoroughly drained of all vital fluids, some a10s can safely BRRT whatever's are left in the depots
>>65225686>what the FUCK happened?Kyiv in 3 days.
>>65226159what?
Russia had a very specific belief of how things would go an dabsolutely no idea what to do if it didn't. And we've seen microexamples of this mindset, like the "controlled" demolition of the Nova Kahkovka dam they lost control of, and Prigozhin accidentally doing a mutiny because he didn't grab his rivals. They banked on "kick in the door and the house collapses" and instead their leg broke in four places.
>>65226341Russia viewed, and still views, Ukraine something similar to what the US would consider stereotypical Appalachian hillbillies or deep south swamp dwelling rednecks.
>>65226350Our countrymen, right or wrong?
>>65226198>I'm not sure where he's getting these numbers for new build T-90s because they haven't fucking shown up on the front lines at all.The numbers were from Russian media, and UVZ themselves. The Russian numbers vaguely mirrored confirmed tank losses, i.e. they said 'we built new T-90s', some of them got destroyed a little later. RUSI regarded them as 'possible' based on the fact that they built 80 'new tanks' while running on one shift with free weekends, but switched to three shifts and 7 days a week.How this breaks down into old hull with new turrets, new hulls etc., is not known.
>>65226359i assume the anon more means the stereotypical 'oh theyre just dumb hicks who can't read or write', which is a special kind of retarded in this case given ukraines role in the USSR
>>65226375I remember an interview with some Russian babushka when the war started who didn't give a fuck and pointed out that half the competent cabinet ministers during the Soviet era were Ukrainian as well as most of the industrialists, engineers and design Bureaus that actually produced successful products or designs. She then correctly predicted that the invasion would fail and within 5 years the Ukrainians would be raining shit back onto the incompetent Moscow elites.
>russia has lost most of its military vehicles and equipment>Ukraine is now the leader in drone warfare, has its own ballistic missile production and is getting more and more modern western equipmentLoling
>>65226359The US stereotypes for those regions exist because they actually exist, but not all people who live in those areas would fall into the aforementioned negative stereotypes>>65226375>i assume the anon more means the stereotypical 'oh theyre just dumb hicks who can't read or writeyou would be correct>which is a special kind of retarded in this case given ukraines role in the USSRDoubly correct. >>65226364>How this breaks down into old hull with new turrets, new hulls etc., is not known.I would assume that its 90% old hull with new turrets and 10% new hulls with new turrets. However, since Russia refuses to do propaganda videos of them making new hulls in any quantity (that I'm aware of) we need to start asking the question of "Are there ANY new hulls being produced?"
>>65226359Partly both. The Russians thought the Ukies would be dumb hicks who'd roll over the moment they faced any resistance, I'd expect Appalachians and Swamp Folk to be dumb hicks spitting out concerning guerrilla attacks for ages to come. Like the other guy said, this stance is stupid since Ukraine was one of the smarter parts of the SU, but also anyone taking on an Appalachian in Appalachia or Florida man in the swamps is in for a bad time, and I think many Americans understand that while Russia paid no heed to mud season.
>>65226187That author better be getting fellated by Svetlana under the table to produce that cope.
>>65225839>missionkill a tank for a hundred bucks in copper wire>a hundred bucksLook at the bougie degenerate, I bet you have Ikea furniture too.
>>65226404>The US stereotypes for those regions exist because they actually exist, but not all people who live in those areas would fall into the aforementioned negative stereotypesThe University of West Virginia is still probably a better school than any Russian uni.
>>65225686Cut that in half
>>65226235i can't find it, but there was a good article from 2024 about russian tank production. the russians were claiming to produce ~200+ tanks a year but only 20-30 were new hulls. the rest of the "production" was making stored tanks operational
>>65226253>IMO, if you are pulling a T-72 hull from storage to make a T-90M, that is NOT a new-build.Why so russophobic?
>>65226375>which is a special kind of retarded in this case given ukraines role in the USSRThere's no logic behind russian delusions because those "delusions" are proactive imperial propaganda viewpoint constructed for centuries. 95 out of 100 russians, even the "oppositional" and "liberal" ones will view Ukraine and its people and culture as something third-tier at best compared to russian, not realizing that they're just deep in a delusion.
>>65226410I hope he is getting great head, but ultimately he is just being extremely conservative with his numbers while also limiting his own speculation.You can look up their numbers, they really do love counting tanks.>I would assume that its 90% old hull with new turrets and 10% new hulls with new turrets. However, since Russia refuses to do propaganda videos of them making new hulls in any quantity (that I'm aware of) we need to start asking the question of "Are there ANY new hulls being produced?"We just don't know. At a very basic level, Russia certainly can make new tank hulls, new engines and transmission, Tracks and suspension, too.They had their production line open before 2022, mostly for export sales. Be interesting to find out of the T-90s delivered to india had new hulls.They really didn't have to build entirely new tanks for the past 4 years, because refurbishing old ones was easier. Now that the stockpile is pretty much gone, though?
>>65225853Mi-24s/mi-8s lit them up during the initial push though so the concept was sound.
>>65226541>At a very basic level, Russia certainly can make new tank hulls, new engines and transmission, Tracks and suspension, tooCan they?
>>65226634They can make it in principle, but who knows in which specific form and how much. For example some of the later BTRs and BMDs were IIRC not made on soviet shit (i.e. fully new hulls and such) and were actual new production, but they never produced them in large numbers. Can they make a fully new hull for T-90Ms without relying on T-72 based refurbs? Who knows. But they can technically weld some shit into a hull for something like a BMD-4, but...
>>65225686If you told me four years ago that the Russians would burn through their entire Soviet stockpiles and take a million plus casualties I wouldn't have believed you. The sheer humiliation and damage to Russian status that these losses have inflicted are historically unprecedented. How have they not cut their losses years ago?That all goes without mentioning the tactical donkeys, meat waves, rental norks, and the wagner rebellion. This makes the Russo Japanese war look like a victory by comparison, because at least then they didn't reduce themselves to a Chinese vasal state
>>65226634I'm looking at this conservatively. They are still producing the engine and transmission pack, they were exporting those to India and . . Algeria? Plus some place in South America, too.We can see the steel mill is still there, an still working.They are making new welded turrets for the T-90, at some rate. Roughly one every two days, take or leavea few, was stated.But the hulls? We know they built thousands of tanks in the past, and unless they sold or destroyed the machinery to roll and quench and cut and weld the hulls, they can still do it.I know, we've all seen the pics from inside UVZ, where tanks that were 'being built' did not move one inch over eight or ten years.And they have very probably lost a lot of know how since the early 90s, but the basic physical capability is still there.There is the question of how much money they can actually throw at the problem. Restarting sucha production line is not easy, and not cheap.And well. . . Nabiulina is on sick leave. If she actually disappears, the wild ride starts.
>>65226537>There's no logic behind russian delusions because those "delusions" are proactive imperial propaganda viewpoint constructed for centuries.I do wonder if this is somewhat related to Moscow and (to a lesser extent) Saint Petersburg residents culturally believing that everything outside their city limits are shitty backwaters. Which is admittedly somewhat understandable impression given the number of legitimate shitholes a typical privileged Muscovite might pass on the train ride to their summer vacation home in Crimea. Even if it's obviously writing off what an industrial/cultural hub Ukraine was in the Soviet Union. Of course tons of Russians who live in said shitholes also seem to whole heartedly believe that to. Despite being so thoroughly impoverished themselves as to loot Ukrainian washing machines. So it probably does come down to imperial propaganda and Vodka being a helluva a drug.
>>65226634if you really wanted to steelman their situation.. the only real purpose they have for tanks these days is to use up Ukrainian drones and mines (see turtle tank footage). they don't need to build a functional tank, they just need to put a metal box on tracks and it would manage most of what the average refurbished soviet tank accomplishes.
>>65225813Please no, please not the museum pieces, please that's like the US grabbing RGW491 and sending it to the front. As a train autist it hurts like no other piece of equipment getting sent to die.
>>65226541>>65226681Another factor that people don't bring up are the tanks taken from the Frontline because of mechanical breakdowns that can't be fixed in the field or in rear-line maintenance shops. Back in May, Uralgovnozavod released a pr letter that talks about them doing these types of repairs (the main focus was some having worked there for 15 years, but that's a moot point). So how many of these "new builds" are just repair jobs being handed back to the Russian MoD after a few days/1-2 weeks at the plant?
>>65226719>russia is steadily advancing backwards hoholFTFY
>>65225726I wonder if any one person in their MoD actually has the actual numbers.
>>65225687>775 T-62sThese fuckers are going to be getting blown up by GAU-8s on Mars aren't they?
>>65226412And indoor plumbing.
>>65226721That is something we do not know. It's really a question about how much UVZ is milking the juicy wartime contracts.i.e., they get a damaged T-72BM, drop it into the repair queue, hand over a 'replacement' T-72A and sell the repaired vehicle as 'new' T-72BM3 later that yearIt is actually entirely possible that UVZ decided to take the money while the taking is good, and set up a cut and run for as soon as the Russien financial systems starts actually spiralling.That would be an explanation for why they have not begun anything truly long-term to re-start hull production.Hedge your bets, refurbish the tanks from storage, and stash the money.By the time the long-lead stuff could be done the system might be in collapse and all the investment would be for nothing!
>>65226799>775There aren't enough to last that long, maybe if they import a Chonma-Ho production line they could actually expect to keep them around. The Soviet Union was so focused on min-maxing the cold war they didnt care about survivbility, because 50~ years ago being low profile and harder to spot/hit meant something, now it is a detriment to essentially all vintage Soviet AFV's.They are better off starting from scratch (or buying chinese) DESU...
>>65226838In the most likely scenario those Martian T-62s are from Algeria, North Korea or Ethiopia not Russia.
Ziggers don't need tanks or any other equipment - they advance on foot.And they still have millions of cannon fodder.I don't see any problem with that.
>>65226681They might have the physical equipment in place but if Putin personally marched in there and said "New hulls will leave this factory in 30 days or everyone is going to the front" they'd lose a lot of assembly plant workers to drones. I can't even imagine the restart procedure for furnaces and casting equipment that hasn't been used in decades, let alone the presses and all the other machines that need full rebuilds and have parts lead times ranging from months to bespoke "we'll call you some time in the next decade" shit.>well they can just build it themselvesThe best and most advanced industry in the USSR was located in Ukraine, and what's remained in russia has had a lot of assets either sold, scrapped, or repurposed. They'd most likely have to build a factory just to build the tools to make the factory to repair the equipment they already have.>what about ChinaSure, it'll just cost its actual weight in gold or outer Manchuria, and even then there's still the lead times.
>>65226719
>third worlders think the US losing a few planes and a helicopter is equal to Russia losing all their entire mechanized infantry, nearly the entire navy, and entire air force
>>65226865>they'd lose a lot of assembly plant workers to drones.I read somewhere that the plants are losing people because they're getting the fuck out of the country and taking their mechanical skills and expertise to neighboring countries
>>65226757So this is the power of attrition.Hopefully that accelerates
>>65226869Or that less than 20 casualties is the same as 1.5 million.These fuckups aren’t anywhere close in scale to one another.
>>65226865>>65226681>>65226648The alleged plan as of a year and a half ago was that the post war core of their infantry support armored forces would be 800 T-62Ms, the fact that the T-62 is the bulk of their reserve they have and the only tank they use that can be made entirely outside Russia should tell you the state of their industry.
>>65226869Forget your meds, stumble upon a thread about soviet tank stockpile depletion, miss the alert to take your meds, start randomly blabbing about US losses and third worlders, never take your meds.
>>65226681>But the hulls? We know they built thousands of tanks in the past, and unless they sold or destroyed the machinery to roll and quench and cut and weld the hulls, they can still do it.I've tried extremely hard in the past to find a single piece of evidence that they have made any new hulls since the mid 90s, and I can't. I simply don't think they can make usable MBT hulls anymore, in any way, shape or form. I think they had no need of new hulls from the mid-90s to now, and everyone who knew the details of the industrial process to do it left or died, and they can't iron out the details to produce hulls of acceptable material quality for use. Russia has been so desperate to show us how industrially strong they are that we've seen the inside of everything from drone to missile production lines, but never, ever, not even once, tank hull casting or rolling despite the fact that it's visually super impressive and cool, not much of a secret and has been a symbol of Russian/Soviet might since WWII in the specific way they love to larp about.There's no way they are making tank hulls. I was called insane when I first said it, and I know every agency assesses otherwise, but as time goes by I become more and more confident that they just can't.
>>65225924>>65226122>>65226150>>65226235Same analyst, same analysis. You have to take the bad with the good, gentlemen, no matter how unpalatable. The truth shall set ye free. Doing otherwise simply makes you ziggers also, just on the opposite side.
>>65226198>I'm not sure where he's getting these numbers for new build T-90sUkrainian GUR>>65226253YesUkrainian GUR claims that the ~250 estimated new production is all brand-new. They're not saying it, but implying that they seized whatever production equipment they had been using to supply the Indians with new T90Ms.>>65226513That was prewar.We think they may have expanded new-hull production capacity at least 2x if not 3x. Old hulls they have run out of.>>65226410That author is Jompy. Same person doing much of the counting which OP posted. Sources of information as above.>>65226183>he needs to get off Russia's cockUkrainian GUR provided the figures. Jane's thinks it's plausible given known prewar Russian manufacturing capacity plus projected wartime expansion. Go tell the Ukes to get off Russian cocks then?
>>65226915>There's no way they are making tank hulls. I was called insane when I first said it, and I know every agency assesses otherwise, but I still disagreeSo you think you're smarter and have better information on which to base your assessment than the Ukrainian GUR, Jane's, RUSI, and every other defence analyst saying otherwiseAnd you call them delusional
>>65225686And these fucking retards were supposed to be competitive in an actual world war?
>>65225853
>>65226940I think Russians are pretty good at certain types of counterintelligence, and post-Cold War Russia desks attracted more conservative analysts than anywhere else, resulting in a greater than normal desire not to rock the boat without the collection of a real smoking gun.
>>65226945Lel>>65226948This is still a matter of the sources of information you have in order to call a given figure "conservative".
>>65226951The absence of new evidence is usually sufficient to maintain the existing assessment, just with downgraded confidence. That's what I think has been happening. For what it's worth, the absence of some kinds of contrary evidence is reasonable evidence of my assessment - for example, we should be seeing factory new hulls on T90s showing up in strike footage and BDA, but we just don't. We don't even see the number of tank hulls of the right types in claims to match asessed new hull production figures anymore, but we also don't see stockpiling. If the null hypothesis is that a country doesn't make hulls then it for sure would stand in this case, but inertia keeps the old one going.
>>65226682Don't lump St. Pete in with this, they get shit on just as much as backwaters. Sometimes more, because they actually have almost all of what little wealth Moscow hasn't drained.I hate ziggers but I liked when I was there in 2017.
>>65225686>>2,088 tanks left in russian stockpiles>>851 estimated to be salvagable>>nothing left after that>what the FUCK happened?Russian wanted NAFO to see these numbers. The REAL numbers will be reviewed in 2 weeks. The World Please be understanding of this fact.
>>65226974
>>65226908What is this ESL shit?
>>65226959>The absence of new evidenceYesSo once again: you think you have better sources of information than the actual Ukrainian intelligence agencyYou believe that since you lack evidence that means the Ukrainians lack evidence alsoBecause of course you're at least as good as the GUR at spying on Russia, if not better
>>65225687>sad A-10 noises
>>65226936>>65226940>the Ukrainian GUR, Jane's, RUSI, and every other defence analyst saying otherwise>Ukrainian GUR claims that the ~250 estimated new production is all brand-newJompy, you need to show us their publicly available papers that state these numbers along with their sources. All I'm saying is that that number is completely full of shit. Where are you getting these mythical "Ukrainian GUR" numbers by the way? Jane, RUSI and everyone else is just parroting what the plant is spewing out from its ass. Where are the videos and pictures of entirely new hulls being produced? Where are the videos of 20-25 "new" T-90s rolling down the tracks on top of flatbed train cars every month? All we've seen from UVGZ regarding the T-90s is just them refurbishing old hulls with new turrets, not new hulls with new turrets. Meanwhile T-55s and T-72s are being blown up on a daily basis while this mythical "modern" Russian mechanical force just sit and wait in the cuckpit behind the Ural mountains just outside of our sights >>65227078Show us where they say this because I've only ever seen every defense analysts just squawk and parrot what UVGZ says
>>65227078When was the last month where Ukrainian claimed kills exceeded claimed Russian new hull production? What is the delta in between then and now? Where is the stock of new tanks being piled?I don't need to be Ukrainian intelligence to access imagery of armor stockpiles and fail to observe mountains of brand new tanks piling up.
Tanks are 20th century technology.Future wars are drones, dews, exoskeletons.To the MIC reading thisYour leadership is wasting massive amounts of $$$ and life on earth warsTheres enough resources in the near earth asteroids for trillions of humansWhoever establishes factories in orbit using the near earth asteroids cannot be defeated by any earth based militaryThe 2030-2040s materials science makes space access equivalent to air freight and you wont be able to prevent other nations from also getting space access. Shift all milindustrial budget to 2 things:1. Protecting people in natural disasters2. Space access
>>65227085>Meanwhile T-55s and T-72s are being blown up on a daily basis while this mythical "modern" Russian mechanical force just sit and wait in the cuckpit behind the Ural mountains just outside of our sightsThe thing is that we don't see tanks being destroyed anymore. We stopped seeing tanks pretty much at all when the stockpiles stopped getting smaller. So either all the new tanks are being hidden away, or there never were any. I've been saying the latter for years now and no evidence has emerged to the contrary.
>>65225686The Russians were always incompetent at fighting wars. Lend Lease and Zhukov's totally not a zerg rush were what saved them in WWII. Everything else was downhill since then.
>>65227097Ive researched the highest possible level of technology based on all known materials scienceIts Halo, without the warp drives and relativistic cannons.Btw, *graphene is not geoscarce, it cannot be bottlenecked and you can build any high performance parts with various composites*That includes:Sensors and displaysBulletproof armorBatteries and fuel cellsPerfect air and water filtersLow weight high strength electroechanical parts, lighter and stronger than steelWiring w better conductivity and thermal performance than copper or goldSuperadvanced computer chips25% efficiency flexible solar fabricAdvanced raw materials processing for recycling dirt and trash to the most high performance materials possibleWaterproof, fireproof, shock resistant clothesBy 2030 at the latest, graphene will be a standard industrial commodity that anyone on the planet can produce for about 3x the price of cardboardThe only scarce resources in 2030s:REBCO tapeRadioactive materials
>>65225791Which really doesn't matter since Europe has enough ATGMs to turn all of this into scrap.
>>65226150Yeah, this was the part that made my Spider sense tingle.
>>65226183>420 tanks destroyed/disabled by Junes end>420blaze it feggit
>>65227089I haven't really kept checking daily, but the last few months Ukraine has generally claimed more T-62 and T-55 kills, with T-72s being rare and T-90 practically absent.We have ample evidence of what they're refurbishing, if you need an autistic analysis of this check Covert Cabal.The simple fact is taht they're still running huge amounts of T-72s and T-62s. Any number of new T-90s, with or without new hulls, even 20 or 30 a months, will not stick out compared to 100+ T-72s and -62s each being refurbed per month.And they will have worked through their stockpile of T-62s and T-72s sometime later this year, in around two or so months. Then we will learn more.>>65227105They have clearly shifted their tanks back from the grey zone to make sure they never fall below a certain number of 'ready' tanks, according to some manual of theirs.
>>65226359That's like America saying that Canadians are fundamentally Americans.
>>65227105there are still a thousand or so in active service. they just don't commit them to battle anymore since they aren't very effective. sorta like how the cavalry in WWI just milled around in rear areas for most of the war waiting for a breakthrough after getting mowed down when trench warfare started.
>>65227167North Americans
>>65226648>. Can they make a fully new hull for T-90Ms without relying on T-72 based refurbs?Yes, they can. The T90s that India got were all brand new hulls because the Indians are picky as fuck when it comes to purchasing Russian hardware and will turn down co-operation when they feel it doesn't suit their needs? Remember that the street-shitters were the first ones to call out the Su-57s for being completely inadequate as a 5th Gen fighters and it was also their defense analysts who first claimed that it has the RCS of a naked Super Hornet.
>>65226350Really? Throughout entire history of Russia and its predecessors, things have been more developed and civilized the deeper west you go into Europe. More rural towards the eastern wastes.
>>65226392Based babushka.
>>65227172They're pretty much Chinese and Indians at this point.
>>65227085I'm not Jompy>https://www.ukrinform.net/rubric-ato/4033950-vadym-skibitskyi-deputy-chief-of-ukraines-defense-intelligence.html>We have a clear understanding of the figures Russia has planned for the production of new types of weapons. For example, regarding modern aircraft – Su-57, Su-35, Su-34, and Su-30 – they have planned 57 units this year. Almost 250 T-90M tanks, which are new rather than upgraded.go ahead, call Skibitskyi an ignorant zigger>>65227089>Where is the stock of new tanks being piled?>I don't need to be Ukrainian intelligence to access imagery of armor stockpiles and fail to observe mountains of brand new tanks piling upAbsence of evidence is not evidence of absence
>>65225686>suggests>"jompy"Doesn't india or vietnam or someone partial with an intelligence service do articles or journals?
>>65227166>Covert CabalWorks with Jompy, it's the same data>They have clearly shifted their tanks back from the grey zone to make sure they never fall below a certain number of 'ready' tanks, according to some manual of theirsYesBefore the war they had ~3,300 tanks on paper deployed to battalion depots, and about 10,000 tanks in those big open air mass depots. However only 2/3rds of those were in visibly usable condition, according to Covertcabal.It's clear they shat their pants when their stockpile fell from 2x of deployed tanks to 1x, and that 1x being in large part made up of obsolete vehicles because they first drew down T90s, T80s, and T72B3s and then lost those as wellP.s. any old /k/fags remember when Covertcabal was accused of being a zigger? I do...
>>65227085I wish self-confident retards like you didn't exist because your dunning-krugering only muddies the discussion.
>>65227220It's just a guess, but they probably keep several very tank-heavy BTG-like formations as a 'fire brigade' style reserve to avoid repeats of the humiliating Kursk incursion, or to be able to counteract a breakthrough and rout like Charkiv.
>>65227105>>65227166>>65227089Per Ukraine, they have destroyed and/or incapacitated nearly 530 tanks since the start of this year. That's over twice the rate of "new production" T-90s per everyone's claim. Nearly 5 times the remaining T-54/55s. And 91% of the remaining T-72 type stocks. Even if we assume that UVGZ and the plant making refurbished T-54/55s have several dozen hulls in their yards that aren't being counted for some reason than Ukraine is chewing through Russia's remaining tank stockpile at an absurd rate. The T-62s and 64s are effectively scrap metal while the T-80s are being split between Engineering vehicles and MBTs so any future "refurbished" T-80 MBTs after this year will only come from repairs that were needed to be done at the plant and not in the field or in rear line maintenance shops. So once again, I have to ask Jompy and every other OSINT/Defense Analyst retard spouting this 250 "new build" T-90 claim: Where the fuck are the new hulls? Where are the "newly built" T-90s?>>65227220So where are they? Next to the Baltics? Russia has had 530 of its tanks destroyed or incapacitated so far this year. The roughly 400-600 "newly built" T-90s are nowhere to be seen on the frontlines despite them losing tanks at an irrecoverable rate so far this year>>65227245I don't take issue with the idea that Russia is building T-90s. I take issue with the publicly stated production numbers being 250 "new builds" as well as the use of that exact verbiage being used when that is clearly not the reality of the situation. It's muddying the waters when it comes to the actual distinguishing of what a "new build" actually is (new hull-new turret), refurbishment(old hull-new turret), and the tanks being sent to the plant for repairs after having suffered mechanical breakdowns/severe, but fixable damage. >It doesn't matter what we call itYes it does refurbished T-90s that are using mothballed T-72 hulls are only going to be built for another yea and a half at max
>>65225853the A-10 sat in the cuck chair watching while drones, mines, ATGMs and artillery FUCKED the soviet armored force RAW
>>65226799
>>65227282>circularizes around the planetEh, lame. Should have done direct ascent to mun from the initial burm.
>>65225686I remember reading this same article like three years ago.
>>65227235Well yeah, they use the same sat pics.Their data is rock solid, and they clearly say they can't look into buildings and garages so their numbers are to be treated as the minimum visible.
>>65227253>they probably keep several very tank-heavy BTG-like formations as a 'fire brigade' style reservecarefulsaying shit like that gets me called a ziggercase in point: >>65227263>Where are the "newly built" T-90s?Russia is very bigwe only have the information we have so far because they were retarded / poorfag enough to stockpile their tanks in a manageable, countable number of depotseven then the figures given by Jompy et al come with the caveat: these are only estimates based on what they managed to countin the business, we say that this means there is no assurance of "completeness", meaning we cannot guarantee that the number of sites surveyed exactly equals the number of storage sites Russia HASthis is a crucial difference that seems to have gone completely over your head>So where are they?How many square miles of Russia have you visually inspected for tank storage depots? if you don't see any because you haven't looked, can you say with extreme confidence that they don't exist?
>>65226864>tfw human wave attacks were in fact real
>>65227318First off, I didn't call you a zigger. I'm calling retards like you faggots for parroting shit that ZERO people have offered proof for. "Trust me bro" does not fucking count. Secondly, you type like a faggot redditor and your posting style reeks of the insufferable "Aktually" contrarian midwits that are so common there. >How many square miles of Russia have you visually inspected for tank storage depots?> if you don't see any because you haven't looked, can you say with extreme confidence that they don't exist?This shit is why I don't and will never believe the "Actually, Russia hundreds of tanks hidden in forests and pre-established bases. No, you may not see 'proof' " shit that people are pulling out of their asses. The burden of proof is on everyone pushing the "Russia totally produces 250 T-90s" a year.
>>65225842Ah yes, the BEAR's top of the art modern tanks!Let us check on how imposing their stockpiles have grown!...Oh.
>>65225849>exhausted less than 100 miles into it
>>65225924He outright states its a worse fleet made up of naked t-55 and anything they can get moving under its own power.
>>65227418No, he stated that its a High-Low mix of T-55s, T-72s, T-80s, and T-90s
>>65227341It seems that either Poland or Greece now fields more tanks than Russia. And I mean each of them individually, lmao.
>>65225686we know for a fact that russia is manufacturing a shitload of mbt's https://www.janes.com/defence-intelligence-insights/defence-and-national-security-analysis/russia-regenerates-tank-forceand we know that they are storing them because we havent seen any of them in the frontlines for almost 1.5 years now so either they are getting ready for a big push in the future or they are simply stockpiling them
>>65227478>we know for a factWe really don't. From the outside, it's almost entirely speculation. No one has actually seen even one single complete or partial new hull. No one has seen the forges in operation. No one has seen a factory new hull on a tank. There is literally not even one single piece of publicly available imagery to support it, let alone substantiate it. I bet if we dig up Janes assessments of Russian shit from prewar, we'll find that they were grossly wrong about readiness and capability levels across the board. After Russia's extreme underperformance in almost every domain compared to prewar expectations over the last four, I am simply not willing to take assessments like this about them purely on faith anymore.
>>65227220>Absence of evidence is not evidence of absenceThat which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. Show me the evidence that Russia makes new hulls. One shred of it.
>>65227356>The burden of proof is on everyone pushing the "Russia totally produces 250 T-90s" a yearThe burden of proof is equally on you to prove why they aren't.You have, supporting your view, the opinion of (you), an anonymous nobody.And on the other side, there are all the organisations and individuals I have named above.
>>65227517see >>65227555in the absence of physical, photographic, or documented evidence, the only recourse we have is personal authority and reputation. often this is given by a panel of subject matter experts. in this case, GUR, RUSI and Jane's mutually agreeing with the view that it is more likely than not that Russia can build 250 new T90Ms, it is far more compelling evidence than "I'm an anonymous nobody on a Mongolian throat-singing discussion board and I say so!">>65227508>Iwell, that's you.>>65227418>He outright states"a tank pulled from storage doesn’t mean it’s replacing another tank that has been destroyed. Take T-80s: 1,679 were in outdoor storage in 2021, now there are only roughly 100 left, but Omsktranshmash still has another 250 or so parked in the yards outside the factory, waiting their turn to be modernized. Meanwhile current estimates place the number of T-80s in service in 2026 at 250 T-80BV/U and 350 T-80BVM, while losses remain minimal. While storage will probably reach zero this year, their T-80 fleet will also slightly increase in size at the current rate.""Russian industry now produces roughly 200–250 new T-90Ms, 400–480 BMP-3Ms, and 500–700 BTR-82s annually alongside several hundred other vehicles. Simultaneously, armor repair plants refurbished an estimated 2,000–3,000 stored vehicles in 2025, meaning the fleet now likely exceeds prewar numbers in quantity but not quality."
>>65227253They must surely keep a strategic reserve in case a republic of the Russian Federation begin to have ideas.
>>65227441And what's incorrect with that, there will be t90s and t80s still in service, but they've had to pad it out with increasingly worse tanks.
>>65227560>Squeels like a pig because people refuse to believe the fairytale nonsense about the mythical invisible fleet of hundreds of T-90s and 1k+ BMP3s and BTR-82sOnce again the burden of proof is on the people parroting the production claims put out by the Russian defense industry. Where are the motorpools filled to the brim of T-90s? BMP3s? BTR82s?>"a tank pulled from storage doesn’t mean it’s replacing another tank that has been destroyedExcept that with 530 destroyed and damaged tanks so far this year that is exactly what is happening. Especially for the T-54/55s, T-72s and T-80s. >200–250 new T-90Ms, 400–480 BMP-3Ms, and 500–700 BTR-82s annuallyIf these numbers having been consistent since 2023/24 like people are claiming then, where the fuck are they? Moscow? Belarus? Near the Baltics and Finland? Hovering just outside of Ukraine's borders?
>>65227573>if I don't look, I can continue screaming that they're just not there they're just not there they're just not there la la la
>>65227565>>65227441Neither of you are wrong, but you also have to come to terms with both of you being right, instead of (apparently) disputing with each other.Russia *can* have a larger operational tank fleet at the same time that its stockpile is greatly diminished, and the quality of its current operational tank fleet can be quite... dated, while at the same time future tank production can be robust. All these things can be possible at once.Russia went from, prewar, an operational tank fleet of ~3,300 T-90As, T80Us, and T-72B3s, to currently "hundreds more" (Jompy's estimate, see below) but over half comprising T-55s to T-72As, which are in reality less useful than a modern IFV*Jompy's estimate of Russia's tank fleet appears to be:>prewar: 3,300 operational tanks, 7,200 usable in storage, total 10,500>minus: 4,400 confirmed Oryx losses>minus: 2,300 visible in storage, per Jompyhence maybe 3,800 operational tanks
>>65227560>see ...>The burden of proof is equally on you to prove why they aren't.That's absolute mouthbreathing horseshit. The burden of proof is never to disprove something, because that's a logical impossibility. I can no more prove that Russia doesn't produce tank hulls than I can prove that Russia doesn't produce pixie dust and unicorns. I can prove that their newly built hulls have never been seen and are not in any of the places where it seems they could reasonably have been put after production, but that is as far as it can possibly go. Get fucked with your literal appeals to authority - give me some evidence or shut the fuck up.
>>65227508>we donti tend to trust janes infinely more than any random idiot from telegram and the msm on military matters
>>65227584>Russia *can* have a larger operational tank fleet at the same time that its stockpile is greatly diminished, and the quality of its current operational tank fleet can be quite... datedWhich is all I'm saying, it's not a zigger cope.
>>65227607>The burden of proof is never to disprove something, because that's a logical impossibilityWrong on a few levelsFirstly, it's not a logical impossibility, it's the basic requirement of the scientific process that a thing can be disproven in the first place. This is called "unfalsifiability".Secondly, the position you're taking is actually the null hypothesis, i.e. that Russia can make no tanks at all. and the purpose of gathering evidence is to disprove that first and foremost, before proving the hypothesis. in this case is to prove that Russia can make tanks. and we have that proof, they've been building the T90Ms for some time pre-war.Lastly, you've committed a mala fide error by knowingly and mendaciously sheltering behind what you thought was an unfalsifiable hypothesis, as proven by your next sentence:>I can no more prove that Russia doesn't produce tank hulls than I can prove that Russia doesn't produce pixie dust and unicornsOf course we can; just replace your hysterical rhetorics with "aircraft carriers" and we can disprove Russian production of those easily>I can prove that their newly built hulls have never been seenWell, show it thenAs I said: how many square miles of Russian territory have you surveyed?>appeals to authorityWrongThat's the Fallacy fallacy: that an appeal to experts is fallacious simply because it is sometimes used fallaciouslyIf this were true, defence lawyers could simply scream APPEAL TO AUTHORITY in court anytime a subject matter expert is calledor, more to the point, you could simply scream APPEAL TO AUTHORITY whenever ANY findings of any kind are presented, since you're demonstrably not poring over every piece of evidence supporting the finding.or did you count every tank you claim the Russians lost with your own eyes? noso whose authority are you appealing to, to prove that they did lose those tanks?and does that nullify your claims?and set up a double standard with how you assess other claims?
>>65227282
>>65226716Just wait until the mighty russian bear rolls out his secret tank reserve.
>>65227555Okay? There is not a single shred of evidence or any actual indicator of Russia being able to produce new tank hulls today. Nor do the organisations and individuals you named provide any of such. QED. Prove me wrong.Hint: When you demand someone prove a negative, you've lost the argument.
>>65227659Hint: >>65227632
>>65227632>Firstly, it's not a logical impossibility,It absolutely is, you utter retard. There's a reason why demanding to prove a negative is one of the most basic logical FALLACIES in existence, and one of the msot common, classic indicators of someone arguing in bad faith.>>65227661Hint: Pointing out your attempt to defend your bad faith fallacy does not make it not a bad faith fallacy.ALL actual evidence supports the claim that Russia is incapable of producing new tank hulls. Prove. Me. Wrong.>muh expertsAppeals to authority are also not actually a valid argument, retard. No matter how hard you try to cope otherwise. You want to argue with your experts, argue with what they are actually saying, with the evidence they are presenting. I very much suspect you are not doing this because you know very well that there's nothing of substance to be found there, either.>muh double standardAnd there's the projection. How unsurprising.
>>65227667https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof_(philosophy)#Proving_a_negativeYou mistook the former for the latter.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance>claim that Russia is incapable of producing new tank hulls. Prove. Me. Wrong.Sure.You claim that Russia produced zero tank hulls. Prove that claim.
How curious that Russia spends years showing off their half a dozen failed T-14 prototypes at every opportunity and claiming they are going into production 'any day now' but cannot show us a single new T-90 hull despite claiming to produce hundreds of them. Curious indeed.
Whatever the number is the situation is this: Russian tank force has been eliminated to a degree that it has no relevance on the front and newly produced/fixed/whatever ones haven't been able to change this situtation in the past two or something years. It's just gone as a fighting force and that's all that matters honestly.
>>65226290>And since T-72Bs hulls were specifically used to make the various types of T-90s Saying this 10 years ago would have had you crucified on just about any tank related forum, but now its just commonly accepted knowledge
And now we just spam the firehose and insist THEY NEVER BUILT ANY NEW T90Ms BECAUSE THEY JUST DIDN'T OKAY until the thread sages
>>65225894>url says armour>article says armorhmmm
>>65226541>Be interesting to find out of the T-90s delivered to india had new hulls.They weren't delivered at all. India's tanks were taken by Russia.
>>65227560>in the absence of physical, photographic, or documented evidence, the only recourse we have is personal authority and reputationNo. The intelligent choice is to admit you don't know.The braindead method is to trust authority like a fucking lemming despite there being no evidence.
Why bother arguing with Russian shills at all? Everyone knows they are lying, if they want to convince themselves and their people that these new tanks exist then that is a good thing. The more delusional they are the more they die and the longer they fight the more they degrade their nation. The logical thing to do is encourage their delusions and false narratives, that results in more of them dying in the long run. It is like them claiming that they shoot down every drone and missile that hits their energy infrastructure: If they had to act on the truth and halt the war then that might partially halt their decline as a relevant power and energy exporter and that does not serve the Wests interests. We need to encourage and even amplify their delusions because as soon as they accept reality they will end the war and that is not a desirable outcome, hopefully it can last at least another five years.
>>65225686>nothing left after thatThen, the abacus may finally rest
>>65227831GUR is a russian shill?
>>65225853It’s a fucking crime that the stuck gigaconvoy of doom didn’t get BRRRRRTed to oblivion. It would have been the perfect place to have the Highway of Death 2.0, but bigger and better.
>>65227708>Saying this 10 years ago would have had you crucified on just about any tank related forumOnly because they are filled with commie faggots, this was an open secret even back then for anyone who wanted to know.
>>65227555>The burden of proof is equally on you to prove why they aren't.It doesn't work like that, retard. Common logic is that you need to prove your statement, the other side doesn't need to disprove it.
>>65227906In many ways yes they are, just like Neocons are when it comes to inflating Russian capabilities. If they give an accurate assessment of Russian capabilities then Ukraine stops getting as much aid and it hurts their war effort, who needs to give Ukraine more weapons if Russia isn't a real threat? The same goes for US Conservatives, look at the absurd nonsense they told everyone about Iraq before the two Gulf wars. Keep in mind as mentioned i support both the Wests MIC and Russia itself maintaining this delusion and/or deliberate lie, it hurts Russia so that is a good thing.>>65227555>there are all the organisations and individuals I have named above.OMG SADDAM IS GOING TO DO 9/11 TIMES A THOUSAND WITH BIONUCLEAR ANTHRAX AND YELLOWCAKE ENHANCED NERVE GAS! TRUST ME WE HAVE REPUTABLE SOURCES AND ORGANIZATIONS BACKING US UP, SADDAM DID 9/11 ONCE HE WILL DO IT AGAIN!
>>65227180>Yes, they can. The T90s that India got were all brand new hulls because the Indians are picky as fuckDelusional
>>65227930so the best and most reliably source is anonymous retards, gotchu fampai
>>65227906Taking any information published by military intelligence at face value is plain stupid. Disinformation campaigns are just as important to them as intelligence gathering. Just check this out:https://www.businessinsider.com/russia-making-tanks-hundreds-western-equipment-pieces-gur-nato-ukraine-2025-9There's a claim that russians are actually producing armatas, lol. The main reason behind the publication is to shed light on western companies supplying russia, not to inform the public about russia's production capabilities.I haven't found any GUR statements on the ability of russia to produce new hulls tho.
>>65227564I also expect them to have something around Moscow (and St. Petersburg) to stop a repeat of the Wagner roadtrip, and to maintain order' in case of 'unrest' (i.e. revolution)>where the fuck are they? Moscow? Belarus? Near the Baltics and Finland? Hovering just outside of Ukraine's borders?Yes.By just having a reserve for every portion of the frontline to stop a potential Ukrainian breakthrough and exploitation move, you can have hundreds of tanks spread around, not actually doing any fighting.You can have another few hundred tanks guarding Moscow and St. Petersburg, sitting in barracks.For Belarus, I'd guess the forces are near the border, as 'reassurance' for the Potato Man. Probably somewhere close to teh two main highways.And let's not forget the rest of Russia.A few hundred tanks in the far east, and probably thousands of APCs for Rosgvardiya.
>>65227949>You can have another few hundred tanks guarding Moscow and St. Petersburg, sitting in barracks.Yeah, you can move hundreds of tanks across an entire country and no one will notice, no satellite images, not even a footage from a drunk peasant with a phone.
>>65227933Russian military intelligence is so amazingly good that they have hidden every single one of these alleged new tank hulls for thirty years right? May we see them? Even just one?>>65227949Amazing that this is all going on and not a single one has been noticed yet despite total westernsatellite dominance. Even more amazing that Ukraine has hit every location that could be holding these reserves just behind the front except the ones allegedly holding them. It truly is astonishing that almost every bit of freight and equipment that moves through Russia gets monitored by orbit or just posted on TG except these alleged new tanks and that this has been going on for decades.>for every portion of the frontline to stop a potential Ukrainian breakthrough and exploitation moveI am especially impressed how these reserves were overrun in Kursk and Ukraine just didn't notice the hundreds of tanks sitting there in the occupied areas, Russians hid them that well!
>>65227962Ziglets obsessing over assholes again>>65227661>>65227632Nta but I'm off work awaiting surgery at the moment, and I have actually put time in on Google maps trying to find these tanks. Nada. Nothing. The stockpiles do not exist. Also, what is going on with Siberia and why are there literal hundreds of square miles of craters?
>65227962Good job, mayo taster.
>>65226915I read a post from a couple months ago saying the same thing, maybe from (you). I then searched for any footage of leo2 hull being made, but couldn't find anything. Maybe tank production isn't something countries show
>>65225929it won't every country that operates T-90 outside of russia has more than them
>>65227945>There's a claim that russians are actually producing armatasZero media literacy.There is only a passing mention that Armata is a thing, which it is, and that was in the context of UVZ being Russia's only tank manufacturer from soviet-era relics to the latest. The few existing Armatas were made in UVZ, that's a fact.The article never makes any false or misleading claims about Armata's production numbers, its role in the war, etc. Just that it fucking exists, is Russia's latest MBT and is made by UVZ. The rest is your schizo delusions.It is a completely factual statement for the time of the article's publication. The only thing that has changed since then is that UVZ will no longer shit out T-72s, probably because the usable soviet stockpiles are fucking gone. All future efforts for the next 10-year plan (2026-2037) are directed at producing new T-90s, T-14s and T-80s.>I haven't found any GUR statements on the ability of russia to produce new hullsCan't even read the fucking thread.
>>65227831>Russian shillsStop pretending to be retarded.Pointing out that they spent the last years moving almost all of their tank stockpile through repair bases and tank factories for repairs, refurbishment and rebuilds is just factual. We literally saw them doing this.You can open google maps right now, look at UVZ and see they have 120 tanks sitting there, waiting, on sat pics dated this year. Pic related.The question was how high their production rate for T-90s was. We know the minimum, which was around 30 a year pre-2022.Around 80 per year in 2022, and then UVZ hired a shitload of people and went to 3 shifts and 7 days, so estimates ran as high as 240 a year for the past three years.This is the absolute high-end estimate.And even with this certainly too-high estimate, they could go on making 'new T-90s' with existing T-72 hulls for another 18 months before they run out of T-72 hulls.This is no 'Russian shilling'. This is the number of tanks that were moved from storage to refurbishment. Numbers of T-90 turrets we know they were making. The discussion wether they can make new hulls or not is largely academical.On the other side of the equation are vehicles destroyed in Ukraine.Again, we have an absolute minimum, in the form of the Oryx database, and a high end in the form of the Ukraine MoD kill claims.And if we run those numbers, doesn't matter if we use low end or high end, we end up with several hundred T-90s that Russia should still have but is not losing in Ukraine.They should also have well over 1k T-62s and T-72s each. Plus several hundred T-55s.I don't know where tehy are, I suspect they are not using them in Ukraine because they have seen that a breakthrough is impossible, but they exist.Even with all the corruption, embezzlement and incompetence, these tanks exist.Now, are they an effective fighting force? Good question.The Russians apparently think they are enough to stop a Ukrainian breakthrough.
>>65227974>hiding 2026 production for 30 yearsWhat? You are special kind of retarded.The new hulls are not going to Ukraine. Nor are they sitting in an open-air storage for old soviet wrecks.They are being dispersed all over the place for Russia's homeland defense. Look at satellite photos of russian military bases. The bases that were emptied when the war started. Look at the development of the new bases of the recently re-established pidorsburg military district. They are rapidly expanding and filling up.
>>65228144>All future efforts for the next 10-year plan (2026-2037) are directed at producing new T-90s, T-14s and T-80s>Two of these require hulls from tanks that are no longer in production and are mostly rusted to uselessness or destroyed>T-14 was never a viable design and is literally incapable of functioningSo the 10 year plan is to make a tiny handful of T-80/T-90s out of their last few remaining T-64/72s and nothing else? This seems accurate.
>>65226799martians would know not to get into one
>>65228180The plan is to produce up to 250 new tanks annually.At this point it's over 200 T-90s a year.I don't know if they even make anything out of T-14 or get T-80 production back up and running but they are streamlining their production to just 3 MBTs and dropping a bunch of older shit.
>2,088 tanks ok i'll say it, thats still a lot of tanks. for perspective:>The British Army currently operates a fleet of 288 Challenger 2s>Germany has an estimated 296 Tanks in service. >Poland currently operates around 779 modern 3rd-generation main battle tanks>The French Army has exactly 200 main battle tanks in active service, all of which are AMX-56 Leclerc models. An additional 184 older Leclerc tanks are held in reserve or storage, bringing the total French Leclerc inventory to 406
>>65228144>Can't even read the fucking thread.Oh, fuck off already. A new tank isn't the same thing as a new hull. Not to mention that the disinformation part went over your head, just like a newly made T-90 hull flew over my house.
>>65226029They don't want them
>>65228189It's a big number, but what remains is just rotten unusable soviet scrapmetal.It has forced UVZ to move to new tank production and let go of all older models.
>>65228189So what? Poland has 1900 tanks and a modern airforce on top of that. Still doubt they could beat the brits.
>>65228202so what? so whats the point of this thread? tanks are obsolete anyway
>>65225687>A NATO general masturbated to this
>>65228215He's just like me
>>65228215You didn't? Weirdo.
>>65228206Anon, russia had more than 10k tanks in storages. Now they don't. That's simply unprecedented, which is why we're discussing it here. And your passive-aggressive attempts to shut down this discussion are very telling, lmao. Just curious: have you ever claimed that Russia could roll over NATO with its endless supply of armor?
>>65225853The AD cuck at least get to fuck a RuAF once in a while. The A-10 cuck has been watching doing nothing the entre time
>>65228189>for perspective:all of your listed tanks are superior to anything Russia fieldsnot wunderwaffe levelbut superior enough that with number parity, they'd win in any scenarioseuropean militaries also all have pretty decent air forces with VASTLY better air-to-air capabilitieslike just flying with 2 dozen Meteors missile would be enough for total (regional) air supremacyand it wouldn't even be close>inb4 muh dronesalso tanks are just one part if the armiesremember the PzH2000 has a K/D ratio of >100 against armored vehicles in Ukraine (admittedly used defensively)and Germany alone fields about 120 of them right now (and rising)
>>65228161So they secretly refurbished and stored over 2k tanks and hid them 'somewhere' right? So you are claiming these tanks exist in secret but their storage areas are easily seen from sattilte at the same time? So which is it, are they secrets or can anyone with google earth find them?If they are there to prevent a Ukrainian break through where were they in Kursk? Surely this vast armored force could have prevented that, why did you need to rush 10k Norks in to save your ass?
>>65228270>Ukraine will receive the first batch of Swedish JAS 39 Gripen fighter jets equipped with long-range Meteor air-to-air missiles
Not long until Poland has more thanks than Russia.
article by jompy: https://fronts.co/article/deconstructing-the-myth-that-russia-is-running-out-of-armour/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=author-share&utm_content=jompy
got any more utm queryparams im running low
Evil wect laughs, but soon the gloves are of comings off and the REAL Russian army will be unveiled!
>>65226869do they really think that, or is it just the inferiority complex manifesting through fantasy absurdism
>>65227999Russia is too big to just find it by scrolling Google Mapsin the first place, you probably couldn't even find where all the tank depots the counting crew went through in that waythey only managed it because they knew the addresses of the depots>>65227735*some* of India's tanks were taken by Russia>>65227923>Common logic*your assumptionthe scientific process says otherwise>>65228144they're now in the>pretend not to read but continue arguingphase
When are the thousands of T90Ms and T14s going to storm the front and take Kiev in a fortnight?
>>65228309yeah and the Meteor missile is the much bigger deal (for Ukraine)it's currently the overall best BVRAAM in serviceand has by far the largest no-escape zone with ~75kmbut I think first deliveries are in 2030so gotta wait quite a bit
Why does it matter if russia is out of tanks if tanks are more or less obsolete because of drones anyway?>inb4 vatnik accusations
actually I'd like to flip the question: what proof do we have that T-90Ms are made solely from refurbished T-72 hulls and/or turrets?
>>65225686After that the gloves are blowing each other off and the real hidden armata tank force surges in ukraine like cock in ass! Trust the plan!
>>65227197Reality has never impacted Russian thought even once. Remember every accusation they make is an admission and projection and all the nonsense starts making sense.
>>65226716>As a train autist it hurts like no other piece of equipment getting sent to die.'Tis their lot to get bombed, at least they'll go down in (horribly uneven) combat.
>>65228385>tanks are more or less obsoleteNobody thinks so.Not even Russia. It is heavily investing into traditional armor for the foreseeable future.
>>65226350>>65227197it's a common propaganda tactic to accuse each other of being hicksjeets accuse each other of being hickschinks accuse each other of being hicksjaps accuse each other of being hicksetc
>>65228292They didn't 'secretly' do anything, we have had sat shots of the repair shops, getting full, then slowly emptying out. We had sat shots of the storage sites slowly emptying until only rusted out hulks remained.We have sat shots of UVZ yard fullll of tank, and vids of them working on tanks.We also had various video sources showing tanks being transported to those places in rusty, shitty condition, and being transported away looking a lot less rusty and shitty.They ran those repair shops flat out for almost three years, 3 shits, 7 days. UVZ, too. If we run those numbers, and take the Ukrainian MoD'S kill count alongside the Russian 'official' number, Russia has the roughly same number of tanks today as it did on 22 Feb 20222.This is fucking stupid, because surely both are propaganda numbers, right?Well, we just don't know. We can estimate kills, and throw in a reasonable number of damaged, and so on, but in the end we know the Rusians did SOMETHING with those tanks, the Ukies have not even claimed to have killed all of them, which leaves us with around 3000 tanks refurbished but not killed . Maybe 3300. Half of that T-62s, 300 to 600 (I'm being VERY generous here) T-90s, the rest a mixed bag of T-72s. Some T-55s, my guess is thsoe were handed over to Luganda and Donbabwe.I do not know where they are. Maybe it was all just a massive embezzlement operation, the tanks got nothing but a new coat of paint and got moved to a new storage site that has *gasp* a fucking roof so we do not see them anymore.Which leaves the question why you go and hire 3 shifts of skilled metalworkers, and actually pay them inflationary wages, if it's just embezzlement?>where were they in Kursk?They did use some T-90s there. But please note that back then Russian tank losses were WAY higher per day than they are now. Roughly ten times higher.Which indicates that they moved their tanks back from the front line, or at least stopped using them for attacks.
>>65228412Please upload the original with sound
>>65225703It's a measure of tanks in storage, not tanks in service. The T-90s all got activated because they've had decades left to rot.>>65225894Once again, service vs storage. Say Russia started with 1200 working tanks, and now they're up to 1600 working tanks but mostly ancient garbage that's only worth soaking up an FPV. Of course, now we're at the point where Russia has no more restorable tanks in storage so now that number is going to start going back down again.
>>65228459>decades left to rot.Decades less*They've only rotted a little because they're much newer than the T-62s.
>>65225853It's okay anon, there's still chinese tanks they might be able to brrrt
This T-90 new-build hull debate is devolving into the flying spaghetti monster.
>>65228478https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uErKI0zWgjgWell it's a T-34, 54, 55, 62, 64, 72, 80, 90 mobikmobile.
So where is this larger than prewar tank fleet?
>>65228531In the vodka la-la-land delirium
>>65228432It is entirely plausible that many of the T-62s and some T-55s are being refurbished in the Far East or even outside Russia. It would be monumentally stupid for Russia to use it's own resources to do that when they have a willing ally who almost certainly has more capacity to overhaul them than Russia does.
>>65228223are you passive aggressively calling me a russian lol? why is that the knee jerk reaction when you read an opinion that doesnt perfectly align with yours on any subject? very similar to a libtard's "everyone i dont like is hitler" mantra. anyway as you said even poland with 1900 tanks would get beat by the uk with 200.... hmm why is that? maybe because tanks (NATO or Russian) are obsolete? its like discussing prop planes in the jet age. *drones you*.
>>65228002Wait, there's a whole series of those? Gib original sauce.
>>65228599>like discussing prop planes in the jet ageI demand you apologize to those two guys from the KPAF. No one else mind you, just those two.
>>65228644lol wild
>>65228640Here
>>65228660Thanks!
>>65228563Not likely, no.We have seen the tanks move from storage to BTRZ to being lost on the front, for hundreds of T-72s and T-62s, a few T-80s, and a very few T-90s.All inside Russia.>>65228554So you claim Russia went through a whole lot of effort to clean out their tanks storages in Siberia, move the tanks, repaint the tanks with around the clock work and extra pay on top of good wages, and then just did. . what exactly?These tanks didn't just cease to exist.
>>65226757Wait, is that 519 sq km? At first I though it was 51933 sq km. LOL
>>65228687>These tanks didn't just cease to exist.They drove into Ukraine and got blown up, retard
>>65225853That this picture was made during the start of the invasion and the pilots are STILL blueballed makes me sad for them.
>>65227676Sure thing, here goes:They are russians and therefore incompetent gg no re
>>65226284>>65227658>Soon
>>65228740>the ghosts of allied cas/bomber pilots:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xseViI5d3_A
>>65228599>tanks are obsoleteno, they aren't, this is a midwitism.
>>65228687https://www.twz.com/russia-to-modernize-800-vintage-t-62-tanks-due-to-ukraine-losses-reporthttps://militarnyi.com/en/news/the-defence-intelligence-of-ukraine-revealed-the-pace-of-modernization-and-production-of-russian-t-62-and-t-90-tanks/https://www.armyrecognition.com/focus-analysis-conflicts/army/conflicts-in-the-world/russia-ukraine-war-2022/russia-launches-modernization-of-800-t-62m-and-t-62mv-tanks-for-deployment-in-ukraineCrap sources but it does fit with their current T-62 numbers and the plants location would greatly facilitate 'outside contractors' and supply sources. The Norks are modernizing fast enough that they are probably willing to retire their original Soviet made T-62s (about 600) for the right price, they seem intent on having a Norky version of a smaller more western style force. Combined with current Russian stocks that should be enough to reach 800, most of those Nork T-62s are probably in better shape than Russian deep storage ones and vaguely equivalent to T-62Ms. Despite speculation i seriously doubt Russia would use Chonmas; they might use individual components or even the gun (maybe the 125mm upgrade?) but the tanks themselves will have enough minor differences where interchangeability will be a problem. Besides, even Russia isn't insane enough to enable such a globally catastrophic level of Nork gloating and smugness. The fuckers must be insufferable enough as it is.
>>652257784+ years already, and they haven't even started the real invasion yet? What are they waiting for?
>>65228740They'd just win if they sent out that, but that'd be like using a nuke.
>>65225687>Russian tank forces back to 1979 tier tech levelLooks like you can't embezzle funds forever and still expect to come out on top
>>65228800As an addendum to this; if they can make Pion barrels they can (probably) make Koksan barrels, the TELS* are close enough to use the Pion chassis for the gun and their 203mm barrel stocks are probably low enough that it might be worthwhile for Russia to consider a army wide upgrade. If they combine their efforts in shell development i think it would be worthwhile for Russia to seriously consider it. They should also consider a global 'T-55 Cartel' where they consolidate stocks, upgrade options and even buy backs; Russia gives you financing for Nork weapons and they take the T-55s back, refurbish them or convert them and for every 6 rusted out T-55 hulls they haul off you get a BMPT-55 SPAAG/IFV 'Peasant Punisher' (T-55 with the cannon replaced with twin 14.5mm Gatling guns in AA mounts) for free. Something like that would probably work. *Not technically a TEL but big siege gun SP guns are close enough.
bye bye tank
there are no tanks visible in this imageclearly this means Russians don't have any tanks left
>>65228902Nice try zigger, but the claim is that Russia has nearly no tanks remaining in their storage depots, and that therefore they have nearly no tanks remaining in storage. From this point onward, every tank destroyed on the front will represent a reduction in the number of tanks Russia has on the front, and not just the quality of their tanks.
I consider it very plausible that zero new tank hulls have been produced in the Russian Federation since 1993. Every T-90 is a former T-72 and all ~12 T-14/15 Armatas are built on Objekt-195 hulls. Russia will never make another new MBT hull, there will never be a 20th production Armata.America stopped making new tank hulls in 1995. The only places still making new hulls are Greece, Worst Korea, Japan, Best Korea and China.
>>65228922>the claim is thatI know what the claim isdid you ever stop to question the underlying suppositions of the claim?
>>65225686I remember when ziggers were coping about the government refurbishing older tanks and repeating that they would ONLY be used for border patrol outside of the special needs operation area
>>65228931Jokes on you, Object 195 hulls were made sometime after 2002. The original project started in soviet times was vaporware, it didn't get anywhere before the union collapsed.
>>65228938The underlying supposition is that Russia stores their tanks that are in storage in storage depots. If they're storing their tanks somewhere else now, where are they being stored? And why would they invest in a pointless project of moving thousands of tanks in storage from one storage site to another rather than repairing them and sending them to the front?
>>65228956>The underlying supposition is that Russia stores their tanks that are in storage in storage depotsYesand what makes you think you've counted them all?>where are they being stored?under shelters>why would they invest in a pointless project of moving thousands of tanks in storage from one storage site to anotherhypothetically, such an exercise would not be pointless; it would have successfully deceived you into thinking that they have no tanks leftalso, moving tanks from one storage site to another is exactly what they've been doing in order to refurbishthis has been mentioned many times by OSINT observers>rather than repairing them and sending them to the front?who says they aren't?
>>65228979>and what makes you think you've counted them all?Satellite search is automated. tanks are metal boxes, they show up nicely on SAR, which works through clouds. So as long as they're in the open they'll be located.
>Putin wasting trillions of dollars, his nation’s youthful population, his oil hegemony, and his cultural influence for a failed war of conquest>If he had literally just waited 10 years America and Europe would have imploded from their own far-right retards destroying themselves
One thing that I feel is being overlooked in this thread is the assumption that >One tank pulled from storage equals one tanks that enters active serviceThat was maybe true in 2022, but it is not true in 2026. Multiple hulls stored outdoors for decades may be needed to make one functioning tank.
>>65228931The Turks can make new M60 hulls if i am not mistaken. Best Korea is a strange case; after making several new modern hull designs they reverted to a T-62 based hull with the left side drivers position for the Chunma 20 as their new standard design. I have a couple of theories for that:>They are autistic enough to cut T-62s in half and add road wheels to them to recycle hulls>They can add a fifth or even sixth crewmember if they have bustle stowage, like a drone control NCO next to the driver and a sensor dude where the firewall stowage is at present>It could conceivably fit a small squad in there, in theory nine guys could fit in thereSo they were making new hull designs but decided to revert to tradition by altering or making new T-62 based hull because fuck you the DPRK doesn't need to explain itself, nuclear armed autism is it's own justification.>>65228956>>65228979I have long thought that the USSRs huge amount of space was a long term mental impairment in that it made them think they had infinite space to store things in and infinite resources. The Norks have almost universal underground storage for damn near everything and are vastly more efficient in using their resources than almost any other nation. Russia has benefitted from an abundance for far too long while the Norks have been on the knife edge since Sung blessed this world with his existence. Now it is the Russians who have blunted blades and Sung's children's who have the sharp sword, the Eastern dwarves have gotten lazy and corrupt.
>>65228800>>65228866Using Nork components is entirly different from shipping the whole tank to Norkia to be rebuilt. Maybe tehy did that for some of their T-62s. It's reallly not important how tehy rebuilt teh T-62s.But shipping the whole tank would be, in short and simple terms, a fucking terrible idea because Russia has exactly one rail line into Norkia and then they have to crossload everything on the border because the railway gauge is different.Also, Russia has no fucking money to finance anything. Unless somebody is stupid enough to accept their monopoly money, sorry ruble.
>>65229024>One thing that I feel is being overlooked in this thread is the assumption that>>One tank pulled from storage equals one tanks that enters active serviceNo one has said that in this thread. The entire argument involves whether or not Russia's invisible fleet of "new build" T-90s is as large as the OSINT retards are claiming it to be. As well as it being argued that the vast majority of new T-90s are just refurbished old hulls and tanks coming back from the front for factory repairs. >>65229038>Also, Russia has no fucking money to finance anything.They're using a barter system to get what they can from NK. Gold bars, defense tech and expertise, food, fuel, etc. Transfers of actual cash are basically non-existent for the NK-Russia deals that have been happening for a while >>65229035>They are autistic enough to cut T-62s in half and add road wheels to them to recycle hullsToo much work when we know that they can design and make new tank hulls from scratch
>>65228693That is very unlikely. Not even the Russians are stupid enough the throw their last reserves ito the drone swarm.
>>65229024At this point, the tanks left in storage are mostly scrap metal. They can probably rebuild some hulls into recovery vehicles and teh like.But they are essentially at the end of their stockpile. The tanks in the repair shops and at UVZ are what they have left, plus what they actually have in service.The assumption that they have nothing left in service is hopelessly optimistic btw.
>>65229065>Not even the Russians are stupid enoughthis phrase has a horrible track recordany time some one starded a sentence with these words, they've been wrong
>>65228931>The only places still making new hullsKNDS will make new Leo2A8 hulls. At Tatra in Czechia.>Czech hulls for German tanks?We're getting the crew back together.
>>65228979>and what makes you think you've counted them all?Yes. This was done by autist spooks since like the 1960s. These days it can be done by autists with a few bucks for a fresh satellite photo.>under sheltersRussians don't even store planes under shelters. Why do you like like a russian?
>>65229065>Not even the Russians are stupid enough1. A-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.2. The term is "Vuhledaring".
>>65229093I know man. It'd be too fucking funny.But the simple reality is that they've just stopped throwing tanks into the assualt, and keep their existing tank units out of immediate drone range.
>>65229065Have you been living under a rock for the past 5 years?
>>65229038>But shipping the whole tank would be, in short and simple terms, a fucking terrible idea because Russia has exactly one rail line into Norkia and then they have to crossload everything on the border because the railway gauge is different.There have been developments on that front Comrade! After the Norks forced the Russians to build the second bridge including using explosives to break up the ice so they could try to put in the supports in FEBUARY IN THE NORTHERN DPRK WHEN THE RUSSIAN CREWS WERE THE ONES NOT GETTING PAID the new bridge is working. It is complete and no doubt moving much cargo. Vladivostok now has a rail yard section that allows standard rail lines (like the DPRKs) to use it. The road section is more important, it lets a them use trucks and heavy road haulers. >But shipping the whole tank would be, in short and simple terms, a fucking terrible idea *Ahem*We were past that point over two years ago. Koksans weigh as much or more than a tank and are much more difficult to move via train due to the issue of the 40-45 foot long barrel.>monopoly moneyThe DPRK is strictly 'Gold Bars, technology, factories or mining equipment or GTFO' since Kim doesn't accept paper promises. As the greatest counterfeiters, industrial thieves and crypto hustlers in human history the DPRK does not accept promises from untrustworthy people like Russia, only hard cash and useful goods. And yes, Russia is the untrustworthy member of this partnership not the DPRK who so far are supporting their asshole ally while being good and loyal friends no matter how distasteful or costly it may be.>As a reminder The DPRK is the only nation participating in the War in Ukraine who has not committed a verifiable war crime and has had war crimes committed against them by all parties including Russia and Chechenia. >2026: The DPRK is the most ethical army fighting in a European war.
>>65229051>Too much work when we know that they can design and make new tank hulls from scratchNormally i would agree but at least for the large scale prototyping they have done for the last decade it might make some sense at least for them. Then they....Aw fuck it, go outside and touch grass you retards, i've got better things to do with my time if you will not listen to me. It is a nice day outside.
>>65228979>under sheltersSheltering from what? Have the ukies ever actually droned any of these boneyards? Why not just use the tanks instead of upgrading their storage conditions?>who says they aren't?You say they aren't; that they're just moving them from one storage yard to another. I'm saying that the reason they're being removed from storage yards is to be activated and used.
>>65228931>America stopped making new tank hulls in 1995.nope. the egyptian abrams builds were all new plus the lima tank plant built some namers (merkava hull) for the israelis. not to mention the M10 Booker which they also built.
>>65229201>It is a nice day outsideDon't just say blatantly false shit, anon. >t. has been outsideIt's hot as fuck today.
>>65229009the only ones with that kind of (hypothetical) technology are the ones claiming that Russia IS producing 250 tanks a year>So as long as they're in the open they'll be locatedand as I said, the underlying supposition of all these tank counting has been: these are the numbers of tanks Russia has in its central open-air storage yardsNOT, for example, the ones in the photo I posted>>65229051>invisiblelook at the photo in >>65228902can you see any tanks there?does that mean they aren't there?>OSINTit's not OSINT claiming that the Russians are building 250 tanks this year>>65229107>spooksare the ones saying they have tanksrandom anons on this Indonesian batik-weaving imageboard are saying they don't>under sheltersagain, look at the photo posted aboveyou don't see any tanks, right?does that mean they're not there?>>65229221>Sheltering from what?your eyes>Why not just use the tanks insteadbecause the Ukrainians have perfected the art of zigger tank killing, and infantry infiltration tactics have for the last year been more effective than tank assaultsonce again, this is the broad consensus from the Ukrainians, Americans, professional defence thinktanks and OSINT
And still no explanation for how thousands of tanks are just not visible.
>>65229327>oh, no no no, we've meant they're BIDING, biding their time to attack hohols from the secret tunnel dug to galicia!
>>65229281Muggle i just spent a hour mowing a lawn at 35-45+ degree angles with a push mower at 95 degrees and 96% humidity according to NOAA, for a guy my age that is stroke or heart attack territory. I'd like to see you mow 46 acres bitch.>It's hot as fuck today.No, if a 0+ year old asshole like me can stand Florida levels of temperature and humidity on a mountain top in Northern Maine while pushing a lawnmower around you are just a weak bitch.
>>65229142>Vladivostok now has a rail yard section that allows standard rail linesThe crossloading remains a problem, doesn't matter where you end up doing it.It is vastly easier if you load vehicles that can move under their own power. The idea that decades-old T-62s from the boneyard are comparable to actually working military equipment is. . .esoteric.Not that it matters, no such things ever happened. Russia refurbed their own T-62s in UVZ's own BTRZs.>It is completeWould you have some proof of this?Same for the road connection.
>>65229346I've been baking in a factory without climate control all day. You dont need to lecture me about heat. Also it sounds like you're agreeing with me so I dont know what the fuck you sound so mad for.
>>6522629815,000...right? 1500...?
>>65229312>your eyesOkay, so why not erect some tarps over the storage yards instead of shipping thousands and thousands of tanks from one storage yard to another? Did these sheltered storage yards exist before the war? If so, why are they empty? If not, why did they build canopies somewhere and then move thousands of tanks into them instead of just building them over the tanks?>because the Ukrainians have perfected the art of zigger tank killing,So your solution to tank mortality is to spend lots of time and effort to keep all of your tanks in storage? When will they be used?
>>65229327They can just be parked under a sheetmetal roof, and we will never fucking see them.Not with SAR, not on IR, not in visible light.Not unless Artyom ans Semen make a video how they drunk drive their T-62s and post it.
>>65229327>no explanation for how thousands of tanks are just not visibleNigga
>>65229395>vastly easier if you load vehicles that can move under their own power. The idea that decades-old T-62s from the boneyard are comparable to actually working military equipment is. . .esoteric.It is esoteric but not the way you are thinking of it. The esoteric part is that when it comes to T-62s and overall armored might where the DPRK exceeds Russia. The Norks don't have their T-62s rotting in a boneyard, they actually work. I do believe that for over ten years i have been pointing out that the DPRK could turn Russia and Vladivostok into a parking lot for the KPA and that the KPAN could ravage the Russian Pacific Fleet into oblivion. I am not wrong.
>>65229038>>65229142https://www.nbcrightnow.com/national/russia-north-korea-connect-road-bridge-ahead-of-summer-opening/article_34717891-2389-518a-86a2-6e9b999cdd5e.htmlIt doubles their rail and truck capacity even if it is not that much in global terms. Not that it would matter in a emergency situation, the DPRK has the third or fourth largest stockpile of amphibious bridging equipment on the planet and a very narrow area where they would use it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H89vMGjk4XE&list=RD7keno2JP0sI&index=3
>>65229643Norkia isn't going to do shit, Xi will get Siberia.None of the Norkish derviatives of the T-62 are mechanically compatible with original T-62s. It is safe to assume that Nork jank is not better than Soviet rustbuckets.
>>65229697The DPRKs original Soviet made T-62s still work and Russia has no way to get new parts besides them. The DPRK is the only source of new parts and barrels on earth for T-62s. Russia cannot make their T-62s work without the DPRK. For all practical purposes the T-62 design is now the property of the DPRK, it does not belong to Russia it belongs to the Norks. Algeria can hang out with the Norks if they want.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUjqYfyvynQ&list=RD7keno2JP0sI&index=5
>>65229498Is of advanced alien cloaking technology, gib ukraine now!
>>65229695Weird. The rail link is still single track.The road is long and terrible, and cannot take heavy traffic for long periods of time. North Korea lacks huge numbers of trucks and road transport, and on teh Russian side the supplies mostly come in from China at this point.Conclusion: The usual thirdie performative theatreThe funny part is that China has the better road and rail network, because it is the sovereign in the area.
>>65229498Kane lives!
>>65229327>just pretend not to see the post immediately above>>65229425>why did they build canopies somewhere and then move thousands of tanks into them instead of just building them over the tanks?same reason nobody builds tarps over Davis Monthanthe central storage yards that were being counted are not the active operational fleetnobody has counted those either, we just assume they have another 3,300 tanks because that's what the orbat calls for>When will they be used?if you knew the actual answer to that you would probably be inducted into the Ukrainian intelligence branch(or get a polonium tea someday)
>da tovarisch, many hundred new t90>is park nect to hundreds new armata, heh
>>65229844Nope, khokhols started out as NOD-pilled scrappy guys but slowly got into GDImaxxing, you now see cruise missiles and drones, domestic AA being worked on and so on. While russia was initially the booleg GayDI conventional cucks and slowly devolved into NOD-tier light stuff like armed barns, Bukhanka buggies, attack bikes and various other forms of stuff. Plus all the terror.
>>65228385>Why does it matter if russia is out of tanks if tanks are more or less obsolete because of drones anyway?at the CURRENT frontline, tanks are pretty much obsoletebut no one things that tanks are generally obsolete, other than some x chudscountries still order and produce themand no one is seriously considering ditching themyou need tanks for local power projection and stabilitytaking over and keeping a city without tanks is virtually impossiblebesidesnon-soviet based tanks are generally pretty good at keeping their crew aliveand variants from recent years all have effective drone counter measuresalso most tank kills from Ukraine on Russian armor are with self propelled artillery or other tanksnot dronesyou just don't get videos from these as there isn't a conveniently mounted camera looking at the target available
>>65230431>an actual serious replywill wonders never ceaseyou're partly right, partly wrong, but here's something to consider about the death of the tank (yet again): SPH commanders are saying their howitzers need to be armoured up like tanks in order to survive the drone battlefieldalso, compare the death of the tank (2022) with the death of the tank (1942)
Wow, an honest to God >the real army hasn't arrived, they are fighting with one arm behind their backin big 26what a disaster
>>65228563>are being refurbished in the Far East the refurbishment facilities are pretty well knownand so are the available train trackstrain traffic is likely closely monitored (you can't really hide it...)just need a modern(ish) satellite looking at the important train transport hubsGermany, UK as well as France alone each have multiple spy satellites that are capable of that>or even outside Russiawhere?best Korea? unlikelythere's a gauge change from Russian broad gauge to standard gauge in NK and Russiayou need to reload everything, which you could see even with freely available commercial satellite footagethe only confirmed ones are M-1989 howitzers send to Russiabut no tanks going in the other directionrest is containerized, likely shells, or a small amount of missilesleaves China and IranIran only ever send drones and ammunitionall traffic goes through Caspian seaagain, ports are singular point to monitor, which is easyand nothing notable other than containers (with ammunition)China is the only country that theoretically could (somewhat) hidden send stuff to or receive from Russiabut they don'tand exchanging tanks would be difficult to hidethere is not a single (proven) instance where China has send finished weapons to Russiaonly dual-use componentsand there is no reason why they would, Russia is not their "ally" just a convenient partner and the EU market is way to important for them to go scorched earth
>>65230186>we just assume they have another 3,300 tanks because that's what the orbat calls forRussia started with 3.3k, refurbished around 7k (?) with another 2k in the pipeline.Those 2k are very much bottom of the barrel, though.They've lost somewhere between 4.3k (Oryx) and 12.1k (Ukraine MoD)
>>65230460>12.1k (Ukraine MoD)at best those are counting successful hits and damaged tanks, not permanently destroyednobody, OSINT or Allied government, has shown any trust at all in the Ukrainian figures, in part because the Ukrainians refuse to answer any requests for clarification(granted, they have other things to worry about besides war reporting)>Russia started with 3.3kyeah and what is the basis for this assumption?that's what you replied tonobody actually went out there and counted operational tanks because it's impossible>refurbished around 7k (?) with another 2k in the pipelinesee >>65227584we can see that they have drawn ~5,000 tanks from the open storage yards
>>65230438>SPH commanders are saying their howitzers need to be armoured up like tanksor even more mobilethat's why the RCH-155 order was kind of a big deal for Ukraine (still waiting for the first videos, first delivery was apparently in March)>death of the tank (2022) with the death of the tank (1942)the adaption post 1942 was thicker armor (and infantry support) the equivalent today are cope cageswhereas the actual solution are complex and brittle anti-drone weapons and a change of doctrinealso I don't think tanks will every get as dominant as they wereduring / after WW2 they got out even strongertoday, guided missiles and drones are just too goodand the only real way out is to degrade tanks to a stabilizer / controller role behind the line of contactwhich is also where modern tank development goes, tanks act as local control center for drones or even launch them themselves instead of leading pushes>>65230460>4.3k (Oryx)not wrong, just fyiOryx is pretty behind and have a huge backlog of unclassified imageswhich they said multiple times themselves (not enough time)so this 4.3k is way below a realistic bottom line
>>65230186>same reason nobody builds tarps over Davis MonthanYes, this makes sense. What wouldn't make sense is building canopies at Nellis and then shipping all of the aircraft from the boneyard to Nevada to put them under the canopies.>the central storage yards that were being counted are not the active operational fleetNo shit, that's what everyone in this thread is saying. The tanks in storage are being removed from storage in order to be overhauled and sent to the front. Now there are very few tanks left in storage. Soon there will be no tanks left in storage.
>>65230499>Soon there will be no tanks left in storage>that's what everyone in this thread is sayingah, but they're not JUST saying thatthey're also saying that this somehow proves that Russia is not producing any new tanksbecause it's IMPOSSIBLE that new production of tanks is going to covered storage, they MUST go back to those open boneyards>What wouldn't make sense is building canopies at Nellis and then shipping all of the aircraft from the boneyard to Nevada to put them under the canopiesno, what wouldn't make sense is transporting aircraft from Davis-Monthan to St Louis or Fort Worth, refurbishing them for combat, and then putting them back in Davis-Monthan, as opposed to putting them in Eglin or Edwards or Nellisor more to the point, drawing tanks from Sierra Army Depot, shipping them to Anniston for refurbishment and issue, and then putting them back in Sierra instead of sending them to Fort Hood and Fort Blissno, they just HAVE to go back to Sierra because... because... because they JUST HAVE TO OKAY
>>65230478>nobody, OSINT or Allied government, has shown any trust at all in the Ukrainian figuresAnd both are constantly proven wrong when it turns out ukies were right all along. Again.
>>65230568>1.3 million Russian KIA>please believe>don't you trust us>well um no actually we meant all casualties not just KIA>right all along
>>65230576The regional monuments to fallen soldiers and extrapolation based on it easily supports the numbers.
>>65230593>every hit is documented okay>every single hit>please believe>don't you trust us>well um no actually we meant we extrapolate based on monuments and obituaries>well um no actually we meant all casualties not just KIA (Zelensky, January 2026)>right all along
Russia collapsesPeople eating each other just to stay aliveThe last Internet capable computer gets a message out to the west..>we totally won, we just decided that it wasnt worth bringing out the real Russian army for. You western dogs are lucky that us Russians decided not to take the gloves off.
>>65230419>>65230446>>65230918>if i copy paste, i win >if i copy paste, i win>if i copy paste, i winSelect tankCtrl-cCtrl-vIt's that easy :^)
>>65231363>if I just post a meme reply, do not answer the uncomfortable questions, I winVery zigger mentality
>>65230489>4.3k (Oryx)>not wrong, just fyi>Oryx is pretty behind and have a huge backlogI suggest using Oryx as the absolute floor for 'confirmed destroyed'>>65230478>Russia started with 3.3k>yeah and what is the basis for this assumption?Posted in this thread. Might be wrong, might be made up, IISS Military Balance 2021 listed 2850 tanks in service.That same report lists 'in reserve' numbers of 4k T-80 and 7k T-72, complete fantasy,>12.1k (Ukraine MoD)>at best those are counting successful hits and damaged tanks, not permanently destroyedWe don't know. I look at this as the absolute maximum.It likely includes double counts by striking the smae vehicle multiple times, damaged vehicles that later returned to service (which are again double counts if that vehicle is then struck again), etc.Historically speaking, non-Russian militaries have generated between 25% to 30% overclaims in vehicle kills, in ground-to-ground scenarios, so I just assume we can cut the number by that % and arrive at something closer to reality.So 12k claimed, 30% overclaims: Around 8k killed as a top end, 4,3k as absolute low end.Russia has refurbed 5k, plus 3.3k initial inventory (maybe 2.8k))8.3k high end, 7.8k lower end 2k 'bad condition' in storage, see>>65225687Plus whatever is cycling through UVZ and BTRZs right now.To contrast this, IISS' The Military Balance 2026 listed 3580 tanks in service for Russia.this February.That count has 620 T-90Ms, so make of that number what you will.So. Low end, all Russian tanks are gone. High end 3k to highest estimate 3.6k left.The high end is pure fantasy, the low end is obviously wrong because Russian tanks keep getting blown up day by day.
>>65231421>IISS Military BalanceIs wrong>Posted in this threadYes, I posted it>Military Balance 2021 listed 2850 tanks in serviceAnd do you know how they got the figure? Once again, I posted the answer above: IISS and all other OSINT estimates simply take the Russian paper orbat as the operational tank fleet, because nobody has any better idea>highest estimate 3.6k leftHardlySee >>65227584And this is not the highest estimateOther Ukrainian OSINT sources even claim 4,000++I have my doubts although they clearly mean well
>>65231421And to circle back to T-90 inventory:High end numbers:350 in service pre war, per IISS 2022200 in storage 60 built in 2022up tp 160 to 180 per year since, estimate from RUSIIISS listed 370 in service in 2025IISS listed 620 in service in 2026Tese numbers reek of guesstimates and asspulls.Oryx has 213 confirmed destroyed.
>>65231501>up tp 160 to 180 per year since, estimate from RUSI>IISS listed 370 in service in 2025>IISS listed 620 in service in 2026>Tese numbers reek of guesstimates and asspullsYeah because they don't differentiate between T90As and T90Ms, and refurbs and new builds
>>65231488>highest estimate 3.6k left>Hardly>See >>65227584>And this is not the highest estimateSorry, I was not being clear. I mentioned a number of tanks at BTRZs and at UVZ's factory. These could easily be 200 to 400 additional vehicles, but I counted them 'in repair' and not 'in sevice'.Also, yes. I consider the IISS numbers to be an overly optimistic high end, not realistic.We can track this when we compare the numbers jonpy and CovertCabal counted with those listed by the IISS.I will be blunt: I do not think the Russians have anything close to this 'high' estimate left, and what they have left in storage is more scrap than tank.This is why they stopped using tanks in assaults. They can no longer afford the losses.
THE REAL ATTACK HAS NOT STARTED YET)))
>>65227220>Skibitskyi
>>65231725god i wish american troops could be there killing russians too
