So How Many Ancient T-54s Does Russia Still Have? 

Is their technology that can remotely control the old tanks, so it can be used as distraction from a main attack?

As much everyone doesn't want to admit or spread fear Russia is winning this as they take Bakhmut Ukraine has to prepare for defense of Kiev again lets hope the ghost of Kiev will defend again cause the Luck of logistics is not going to be same. Or Russia will Target Odessa will if they take it Ukraine will land locked that will spell bad news for Moldova which masses already pro Russian.

Even the Russian state-sponsored TV are kinda taking the mick out of them. Speaks volumes.

I bet they have a few thousand laying around…..even adjusted for inflation they can sell well under 100,000$……javelin missiles cost more……really good idea really…..hope they swing down and pay the pope a visit

is it possible they are gonna use those tanks to do first part of training for new crew so that they can use their training tanks for less time for final stages of training? also is it possible that they are just tranporting those tanks to scrap for metal and use raw metal for new modern tanks?

Might as well fork over the cash for an export abrams

Are you sure? More like your dreams come true, if you look at another perspective

Now how will I defend my house against burglary 😢

Um. Given how corrupt their army is. Your chances of buying a tank on blackmarket is much higher. Really hope Western intelligence are actively buying stuff from Russian black market to corrode their army and supply the Ukrainians.

just go ask an ukrainian farmer for one

That would be a perfectly sensible use of these old tanks, which have been kept in storage in the first place for such a purpose.

If these end up in Ukraine, my thinking is that these will be set up for defense in depth in preparation for upcoming Ukrainian offensives. You can pre-sight them to approaches around strategic positions. They'd be near useless against hard armor, but even HE rounds will give an IFV a pause, and they're more than sufficient to take out soft skin vehicles and approaching infantry. They're also less of a big deal to lose, thus making more sense why you might want to cluster them around areas you expect you might lose. In that capacity, you can also still use them as indirect fire support, which you can also pre-sight on pre-set paths of travel that you can encourage with use of minefields. This is what makes the most intelligent use of these, and if that is correct, then these indicate that Russia is preparing to try to mitigate losing ground.

@@defective6811 they are not a big deal to lose but the crew is...

The tank’s role is mostly artillery in Ukraine. T55 just as useful as the next tank in that role. What’s really needed is lightweight truck artillery. Setup, fire a few drone guided rounds and move. The cheaper the better.

I saw somewhere that Iran has literal tons of 100mm HE shells that they are "donating" to Russia, which I think would support the indirect fire theory. I also saw a video on the current condition of the "modern" Russian artillery being in dire need of rebarreling, so the T55/54 for indirect the fire could take the load off while the existing artillery is serviced.

That was the intention for the T62s, that were sent to Ukraine, but they've since been used as front line tanks.

Ruskies not that smart! Maybe they will de mine an area for the main assault by the Russians. That's more likely. You don't have to train anybody that way.

The 1st Guards Tank Army has been spotted with T-62s. That is supposed to be their premiere, elite, front line unit.

I honestly don't know about that. Is it logical? in the event of a Ukrainian breakthrough, they would be sitting ducks. They have bad optics, modern tanks would see them well in advance. They have terrible gun stability, making it hard to actually hit their target. And, they have weak and outdated cannons, which should be made irrelevant by half decent composite armor and ERA. Not to mention the T-54's abysmal reverse speed, making it next to impossible to retreat, especially when faced with a nimble enemy. More of an embarrassment than anything.

@@quinnjackson9252 What about the artillery dispersed anti-tank mines? Did a lot of damage at Vuledar. I hope the Ukrainians have a stock pile of those.

shill for ukraine and US and NATO ! LOL!!! notice how he never shows ukraine casualties, ukraine has lost 6000 tanks to the russians.

Probably T-10's instead of IS's

Those old heavy tanks could barely go 300km without a serious breakdown when they were brand new.. they will barely make it off the train

@@emperorfancypants2512 Considering current pace of russian advances are something like 100 meters a day, then 300 km is more than enough.

@@fanta4897 you really think you can start the engine every day and it just working? When you need it most it wont work, believe me

@@emperorfancypants2512 Yeah I know. I'm not stupid. And neither are Russians (at least not that stupid). I'm pretty sure that if they do pull them out of the scrapyard, or wherever they store them, they will at least get it up to working order.

As always a tank is better than no tank.

95% of all vehicles in ukraine arent tanks and can easily be disabled with much smaller guns So I find the discussion about tank calibers klinda pointless because most tank kills are done by drones, artillery, RPGs or ATGM or even IFVs with autocannons that disable those tanks

More Russian tanks means bad news for Ukraine. Ukraine doesn’t really have modern tanks in huge numbers. So even older tanks are a big threat to their infantry.

@@realnapster1522 this was the comment I was looking for. As this war has always been a numbers game. If Ukraine has one MBT against 20 T-54/55 it doesn’t matter what the MM is. A stationary tank is a dead tank.

@@jordanazevedo5688 Actually, one modern Abrams, Leopard II, or Challenger II could probably take out most of those 20 T-55s all by itself if it is well-handled. The modern MBT could start taking them out over a mile away, and they couldn’t return the favor until they were literally right next to it, unless they managed a rear shot or a close-range shot to the side (both of which are unlikely). And then there’s the fact that Ukrainian infantry could and would be taking out those T-55s with just an original-flavor RPG. Even some WWII HEAT rounds could take those things out.

I believe the bore evacuator was added later on as a modification. In fact, even in this video you can see in some of the pictures the tanks that don't have it.

@@MaxCroat the only reliable way to differentiate between T55 and T54 is the ventilation mushrum on the turret (T55 is CBRN rated and they removed that vent to make it sealable )

@@biro9328 i never said that the bore evacuator is a way to distinguish them, but yes as was said in the video that is the only difference between them, all the other modifications were put om both tanks

Yep, and that makes a HUGE difference compared to the russian ones with their original latest spec guns.

And modern electronics, optics, a new motor, and upgraded armor. Slovenians kept theirs in perfect condition.

slovenia transferred all its shells for the m55, but it did not have modern shells for it, there is simply no other equipment using the L7 in ukraine to use them for these m55, although it is possible that they were given modern L7 shells additionally, although this was not announced

​@@denismilic1878 nah, it isnt much better than a regular t55, it has no thermals, an old gun wich cant fire a he round and it doesnt have any composite armour. But still those would be better than plain t55's

@@CrocodileCe Leopard 1 which is said to be delivered to Ukraine soon has a L7 too. Also the gun been widely used across Nato and some other countries before Rheinmetalls 120mm replaced it. There should be some ammunition leftovers and production capabilities for fairly modern shells. Also Leo1 and M55S are likely only used as borderguard near Belarus and Belgorod region not needing shells as much as frontline used tanks.

Yeah, if you weren’t paying attention. The rest of us saw this happening during the Maidan coup.

​@@nicknick9081 Cry about it.

@@nicknick9081 don’t be stupid

@@nicknick9081 "coup" ruzzian fascist detected

@@nicknick9081 revolution* Go outside, touch some grass, and talk to Ukrainians.

Russia has thousands of artillery pieces in storage according to the Military Balance 2022, the very fact that barrels are wearing out on the frontline speaks to the horrendous state of Russian logistics. They literally just need to send replacement guns to the front and send the worn-out ones back, and yet this has not been happening on the scale required to sustain this volume of artillery fire.

@@justindyer8911 I guess it depends on the caliber and range of the artillery pieces in storage. If they're older types with shorter range than what is being used now, then it might not be practical to take the old artillery out of storage if it'll get destroyed by longer range counter battery fire from Ukraine. That's just speculation on my part as I don't know the types and numbers the Russians have in storage. Given Russia is the epitome of using the "King of Battle" (artillery), the idea of them running low on artillery is even more amazing than their apparent shortage of functioning tanks on the front line. It wasn't long ago there was a report of them getting millions of artillery rounds from N. Korea. The U.S. has been emptying its artillery stockpiles as well to aid Ukraine but the arsenals that make the shells are running overtime to restock. Not sure if Russia has the capability to restock quickly enough to meet their battlefield needs. Be it corruption, incompetence or some combination of both, Russias logistics is losing them this conflict... or even if they "win", it'll cost way more than it should've. This will go down as a pyrrhic victory.

It is also a way to conserve 122mm and 152 mm artillery rounds and build up some stocks since these don't use those shells.

Both sides use tanks as artillery. It is even said that tanks have better accuracy in this role.

Remember, this war was supposed to last a few weeks at most. So of course they didn't make any long term plans ...

I doubt Russia would find anything more than 20 tanks from all IS variants that would still technically work

"EDIT: And 100 mm projectiles are in bigger stocks than "odd" 115 mm." How do you know? They haven't manufactured them for 40 years...and they've been selling them off in the 90's and 2000's to anyone who would take them. Huge amounts have gone to Syria since 2012 as well.... The T-54/55's gun is also not the same as the T-12/MT-12 Anti tank guns...thats a smoothbore, the T54/55's is rifled. Totally different ammo. Plus MT-12 has remained in service...unlike the tank.

Using tanks ripped from museum for "indirect fire" tells nicely how the "special" military operation is going for the ruskies.

@@Alemikkola Yup

@@ryanlabarbera2510 I also doubt they would work. I only remember that they were mentioned pre-2022 as being in deep reserve - up to 100 of them. More of a joke really.

For training? Maybe, but it would be kind of like teaching somebody how to drive using a tractor instead of a car.

@@robertmaybeth3434 No it wouldn’t. The basic mechanics are the same for all Russian tanks, they use sticks instead of wheel and have manual gearbox. However from the footage that’s posted I believe that they need to supply older tanks to the frontline

I'm sorry but when it's 2 or 3 generations out of date it's not storage it's hoarding. I mean Jesus who is in charge of supply. I wouldn't be surprised if every tank comes with a bowl of stuck together ribbon candy.

LPR and DPR were integrated into russian army

@@hphp31416 they work in conjunction and in support of the Russian Army but they aren't apart of the Russian Army similar to Wagner group.

Not really. BMPs and other lighter vehicles would be better in providing fire support, if they ever use these T-55s then they're gonna be used as a field fortification. This way they won't have to worry about them being fully functional, only the gun working would be good enough.

They said that about the T-62. Then used them in assaults.

Just when I think you guys reach maximum cope you somehow still manage to surprise me lmao

Ukraine is also recieving Abrams, Bradleys and leopards

@@oam6626 Yeah bro, facts are totally "maximum cope".

@@carso1500 T-55 is a quite relevant threat to Bradleys and other IFVs. As for modern heavy MBTs, T-55 of course shouldn't face them head-on.

They'll be in a better position by then. They started this war off poorly unprepared. They've been making moves since to play catch up. The longer this drags on, the more it'll benefit them.

@@finsfan90 that might be true when it comes to ammo. Not tanks (which is the topic of this video). They are burning through their reserves of tanks that can be quickly sent to the front far faster than they can make and refurbish. Even if they have several thousand left in storage it does not mean much if at max capacity they can only restore a few hundred a year.

@@finsfan90 In the state that they are in now, attrition will be MUCH harder for them, just by the sanctions alone.

NATO is running out of ammo and weapons...and not even fighting.

Well Ukraine is in no better position either. Most of their tanks are destroyed. That’s why they are begging every nato nation.

You sound so ignorant.

where did you et the idea that Russia has no tanks left?

​@@user-yj8vj3sq6j If Russia is pulling T-55s out of storage for frontline service they are seriously scraping the bottom of the barrel. Russia might not be out of tanks, but this is a sign they are running seriously low on anything that even resembles a modern MBT. Imagine if the US had to pull old Patton tanks out of storage when it invaded Iraq.

@@gingerlicious3500 how do you know that the T55 are for frontline service? Right know we don't know that. So you shouldn't spread that misinformation.

@@Jehty_ That's why I said "if". And hell, even if they aren't pressing them into frontline service it is a bad sign for Russia.

👍😅😆

That gives me a cope-hard-on.

"they" haven't sent their best yet 😂

These T54 and T55 tank fan boys are coping so hard they are starting to sound like Hitler in the movie DOWNFALL. Remember in DOWNFALL when Hitler said something about Steiner? Once Steiner attack everything will be okay. Yep. Steiner is going to smash the Soviet in the east and turn around to smash the allies at the west. These Russian Tank fan boys believe that once Russia mobilize, line up, organize these tanks and attack in massive wave these T54 and T55 will break through turning this war around. 🤣

They might be wishing they had 1500 T-14's at this point... or maybe not. YT channel called Lazerpig did an interesting video on the T-14 Armata and the problems it has. Whether or not a eccentric drunken pig is your go-to source for info is up to you but the actual guy apparently has/had a job in British Intelligence so maybe he's good at analysis. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE--opSlCGLGQ4.html

@militarypower4093 Seriously think finding a loader is such a big problem?

@@victorzvyagintsev1325 Yes, it is. There’s a lot more to being a loader than just putting a round in the breech. That’s the easy part. Now try doing it in a dark, moving, bouncing tank, without taking forever and giving the enemy time to fire 5 rounds to your 1. Oh, and you have to do it without getting your hand taken off in the process. And to top it all off, the only people who still know how to load tank rounds in T-54s/55s are in their 70s and 80s and probably don’t remember.

@@bluemarlin8138 Can pull loaders from Rapira 100mm AT gun crews. Although not compatible, the rounds are similar and the loaders will require less time to get used to the new position. In any case, my bet is that these tanks will be converted to something else. There were plans to a poor-mans BMPT on a T-55 chassis for example.

dont get behind it and dont lose your hand and its all good

It's a little more involved than that, and takes time and repetition. Doing it in a moving vehicle, in near dark, in a rotating turret basket in that moving vehicle, memorizing where the ammunition racks are and exactly what is in which rack etc. It's I bit more difficult than eating junk food as you drive your car along.

Loaders do more than just load.

@@kieranh2005 T-55s don't even have a turret basket floor. An untrained loader is a hazard not only to himself, but the whole tank.

@@kieranh2005 Well its not the best vehicle anymore to use it that way. It will probable used dug in at a defensive position. And even a half trained loader could be pretty effective then. Besides Russia has more man to spare then equipment and they aren't as squimish about losses then the west.

Training crews on the wrong tank type is actually worse than just sending the T-55.

@@ChucksSEADnDEAD "In the basics". Firing the gun, loading it, and most importantly of all driving the tank and working together as a team inside a tank. Basic maintenance tasks could also be trained. A mechanic doesn't need to be retrained for every car they repair, but they will do a better and faster job on ones they're specifically familiar with. While those T-72s are away in workshops you might as well use that time to train up the enormous amount of tank crews needed for them. Assuming Russia's new 2,000-a-year tank production figure is true (probably not) that means they'll need to train 6,000 crew for them all, and that would be without any reserves. They would need additional training on a T-72 or T-90 before going into combat but look at Ukraine, they're using tank crews that did six months training on Soviet tanks to use Leopard 2s and Challenger 2s in six weeks, because they have all the basics down.

@@shaddaboop7998 But the new russian tanks have an autoloader. There is no loader in the crew. Only T-54/55 and older will require loaders.

@@2ftg So you use them to train on everything but loading.

@@2ftg T-62 is currently widespread in Russian service and requires a manual loader. Russian crews train manual loading for T-72 and T-90 anyway in case of a mid-battle autoloader malfunction (this happens more than you might think).

The T55 main gun has a maximum of 2,000 meters. Most everything in Ukraine can take them out at 4500 meters plus. They’re coffins.

And the one just before a Syrian flag. Those pics are just to show the difference between the tanks. They aren't meant to show Russian tanks.

I would agree. A modern weapons system without ammo isn't really worth that much. I wonder if the usage patterns have all militaries rethinking their stores and what would be needed to battle modern militaries.

@@jamesgrimm9121 One of the challenges with the "smart" munitions, is that they have very limited shelf lifes, especially for the batteries, and are constantly being obsoleted with new tech. I think they are going to have to re-think when/where they use the smart weapons, and start adopting some lower tech weapons, such as the Carl Gustof recoiless rifle, as the US army recently did. They finally realized that sending Javelins into caves, and apartment building was expensive, and made no sense.

Russia had a lot of tanks, how many are operational?

The answer could be this? Maybe Russia never had OVER 10,000 TANKS in the first place? They just inflate the numbers to make themselves LOOK BIGGER.

Before the war Active:2,300-2,700 Able to reactivate:4,000 Beyond repair or not feasible: 5000-6000

@@omarrobertosantillanmenese5736 thanks! 👍

If this war has proven anything, it's that logistics wins wars and Russians logistics are terrible.

Problem is, they make very bad artillery. All the resources invested in these could otherwise be spent on more up-to-date and suitable equipment.

​​@@jrd33 Last time Turkey tryed to use their Leopards as artillery they got destroyed also tank shells don't produce as much shrapnel as artillery shells

They are basically Assault guns

Read that there are millions of rounds of 100mm ammunition in storage. So, as field artillery, it is better than nothing. Giving the other artillery pieces a break and manufacturing a chance to catch up with ammunition supplies for artillery in service on the front lines. A bridging exercise and secondary defensive line, perhaps.

@@jrd33 That assumes they can get such things. Beggars can't be choosers, as my Dad used to say.

Also they enjoy using lots of emojis

@TetisPinkman 91 I'll have to start looking at that... I started digging on "buying" followers and comments etc... the bot industry is gigantic Plus there's a reason Russia doesn't block RU-vid

All available tanks that work are in Ukraine

@@GerManBearPig So how do they train the new recruits?

yes but buildings doesnt move fast

if they can beat the geological movement of the earth they will produce 1meter by 1 meter whole in that building. But the time runs fast and the ''working day'' will pass too...the crew will ask their rubles at the end of the month for their 3buildings destroyed I guess... THIS IS THE MAXIMUM

When did you get your PhD in predictions? Yesterday! So lovely to read those experts. Laughter elongates our life (old russian proverb)

Most likely is 3rd, Russia is recycling some old tanks and giving them to territorial defense / Donbass guard forces. Very good use. Russia has plenty of T-72s and T-90s for offensive operations. But there is never enough tanks for everyone.

​@@tomk3732 if it's using t-62/t-55, it doesn't have many tanks left. easy as that.

@@stefanobonaiuti8243 Why? Ukraine has been using some WWII tanks - does it mean they have none left?

@@nich7622 Well, well, so you have stolen even proverbs from us Central Europeans, and call it "old russian"? Lets try to find at least a single person who is surprised.

well even at their best, the russians can only "up grade 10 tanks a month if they are lucky, and their idea of up grading is a laugh at best... on the russian tank crews

Would be about time if you ask me!

I have no experience in any of this other than an armchair student of history my whole life but that sounds like a fantastic idea. Facing a virgin field that hasn’t been crossed? Send a few RC 54s across first. Anyone hiding in the bushes with anti tank weapons may take the bait.

Armored cannon fodder manned by soft cannon fodder.

Your cost analysis is off, one source puts the NLAW at $30,000 USD. The fuel and maintenance alone to get 4 of these tanks to the front costs more than $30,000

@@Inspectorzinn2 For something as thinly armored as a T-55, there's even cheaper options. A good old fashioned RPG-7 will do the trick and there's approximately infinity of those in Ukraine right now. ATGMs are cheaper the tanks, even old tanks. As you said, fuel and maintenance costs to get a 50 ton vehicle to the front rival the cost of even advanced modern ATGMs designed to take out much better armored vehicles.

@@Inspectorzinn2 I think for one of the German anti-tank weapons, munitions are like $7K/round.

S-300 is an overkill. They are mostly tackled by Toyota technicals with machine guns

They're not even that cheap. The component analysis from wreckages shows they do use high quality aircraft grade components.

The primary weapon of the Ukrainians against the low-and-slow Iranian Shahed "moped drones" are usually Soviet-type .50 cal (12.7x101) DShK "Dushka" heavy machine guns and not the heavy hitters like the S-300. The Dushkas are usually installed in manually operated twin-mounts on light trucks aka civilian heavy duty pickups and come with analog computing gunsights like the ones on late WW II USAF fighters plus night vision. Especially at night further assistance in targeting and ranging is provided by detached support units equipped with night-vision rangefinders and laser designators to aid the gunner in target acquisition. The Ukrainians have formed a large number of these light, mobile anti-drone units around their large cities and key infrastructure. They comprise mostly of elderly territorial soldiers or volunteers with some kind of gun experience and can be alerted on short notice once incoming Shaheds are reported by the Ukrainian air defence. The territorials and volunteers usually live close to the areas they have been designated to defend and both the Dushka and its ammunition are cheap and plentiful and a used civilian HD pickup also doesn't cost an arm and a leg. These Shahed-hunter-units have proven extremely effective against this new kind of low-tech threat - cheap being beaten by even cheaper and some ingenuity.

One of the saving graces of those drones it they're also slow and loud. Ukraine tries to take them out with guns first. If there is an aa gun around, for sure it will take it down. A guy with a machine gun, less effective.

@@Gen.Tomsky Lol Ukraine even sends fighter jets to interecept and take down those drones with missiles, one drone even managed to down a fighter jet.

People also claimed that about T-62. Ended up being used by VDV and other Russian regular soldiers on frontlines.

If they are able to repair anything or take them out of storage because they lack parts and electronics from the west

Russsia: moves T-55 from the hellhole on the eastern fringe somewhere to the west. Experts in youtube comments: frothing

And they were discussing possible ceasefire resolutions with China recently, maybe they are losing resources

Russia has lost to date 1.888 MBTs if they are pulling the museum pieces that means they are running out of modern armor.

They said exactly the same thing about T-62 tanks. Duh, UAF just really kicked some Russian ar$e and Putler's fanboys just don't want to admit it

They’ll say it about the 34’s when they ship those in!!! Hahaha! Tragic…

and how many 100mm rounds do they have sitting around that are any good? As for trajectory......ramped upward provides a "howitzer" trajectory instead of line of site...although it would only be useful in an anti-personnel round. The distance to target is another thing to consider....would end up being more of a "mobile armored mortar carrier". BUT...as soon as the Ukrainians spotted it, the next RPG is going to barbeque that crew.

@@josephcernansky1794 I'm sure Ukrainians could zerg-rush these tanks with RPG-equipped infantry and destroy many of them, as they have done many times against Russian tanks with all kinds of anti-tank weapons. But the thing is, they suffer many times more casualties than the Russians while doing that, which is kind of the point of heavy equipment: a force multiplier, not some indestructible superweapon.

They probably would never meet. These are not meant to be used in the frontline as main battle tanks.

T54/55 unless upgraded,have optic sights and rangefinder,no ballistic computer,weak armour,no thermals,have to stop to fire,cant fire on the move,and a weak gun in comparison to a leopard1a5 that have laser rangefinder,ballistic computer,thermals and a more powerful gun and can shoot on the move.

And fulfill original purpose of tank: supporting infantry while being resilient to MG fire.

@@piotrd.4850 Original purpose of tanks is to destroy other tanks,IFVs carry infantry

Leo 1 can use M900 APFSDS which is enough to take out most of Russian armor.

Need to be careful with Russia. If one artillery doesn't hit the target, use ten. If ten artilleries still miss, flatten the whole area that the target might be in.

See his previous video's...they don't have as many as Think Tanks thought...

They probably still have thousands of reserve of T-72 and T-80

Considering that even in the said satellite images there's a LOT more T-62's in storage than 55's, likely there's a shit ton of tanks, it's just they want to use cheapest and most useless as fodder now so others would get at least some half-assed upgrades in the future; mind that even highest estimates of Russian tank losses barely scratch the surface of all the storage machines available

@@user-gc1hg9sp9k There's a huge difference though between: 1- A reserve tank in storage that has been rusting for decades. 2- A reserve tank in storage that is in perfect condition and has been upgraded with newer tech. So Russia may have thousands of tanks in storage, but how many of them can actually fight?

For one thing, Russia won't be sending its remaining best units to Ukraine as they are stuck doing guard duty in Moscow and Saint Petersburg...

See his previous videos...but here's some rough maths with a pinch of salt added in... Pre-war they had 3,000 in their regular Army core fleet, all T-72, T-80 and T-90, with c6000 in storage (but as c800-1,000 of those are T-54/55/62, that leaves 5,000 of later T-seres variants, exc T-64 which appear to have all gone now). So of those 8,000 (3,000+5,000) they've lost at least 2,000 (Oryx has c1800 at present, but thats only the ones that have been video'd/photographed). That leaves 6,000....but previously CC has estimated that only half of the ones in storage are recoverable at all/in a reasonable timeframe. That removes 2,500....which leaves them with 3,500 left of the T-72/80/90 variants. But also thats not the whole story....at least 800 of their losses are their best tanks (T-80BVM, T-72B3's etc, T-90 and T-90M). The quality of their tank fleet is dropping faster than the quantity... And most of their pre-war main tank fleet has been running on its tracks for close to 15 months now in war time conditions (the war and the previous large exercises). Thats absolutely ruinous for maintenance and force generation. A big chunk of their fleet must be either utterly worn out, cannibalised for parts or just plain knackered. And there isn't the tank repair capacity or spare part production to put it right.... Remember they will still need some post war...they can't run their numbers down to zero, otherwise Russia is undefended...previously they had 3,000 in their core fleet, evidently thats what they think they need to defend Russia at a minimum... Ultimately no-one knows exactly, but....from the fact that they're digging out T-62 and T-55 we know they're in trouble, we know that Russian industry cannot keep up with spares, repairs or new production as well. The Russian's might be reaching the point where they are cutting into their 'core' fleet of 3,000 available tanks that they need for territorial defence, hence the desperation to get anything else out on the battlefield...when they get to that 'core' number left they're going to have to make some serious decisions about whether they can continue the war...

@@dogsnads5634 Excellent response.

@@dogsnads5634 Yep armchair general with internet PhD in warfare analysis, keep spreading shit information

drones help correct indirect fire from tanks

I also watched "ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-awmAAStrtlM.html" by military history not visualized.

But how well can a MBT really do at playing SPA? I presume they lack some elevation specific fire control gear and such to fully function as artillery?

​@@andersbjrnsen7203 dig a ramp like you saw towards the end of the video and pre-sight on important targets like crossroads

@@colinhobbs7265 yeah, I saw it later in the vid and had an "of course" moment😀

@@andersbjrnsen7203 No one is asking to replace long range artillery here. A tank can work in an artillery role 5 km from the target.

Lol. You do know that many European countries employ soviet tanks, do you?

@@user-yj8vj3sq6j Yup, sending them to Ukraine to get rid of them and ordering American, German and South Korean tanks.

IF they actually hit Thats another RARE '' thing... an APC not seeing a camouflaged sitting tank FIRST ?

Amoving T 55 would struggle a great deal hitting a moving target even with highly trained crew

@@kukulroukul4698 yes, I think they are just another number on the battlefield to spread the reducing Ukrainian army on. I wouldn't want it be in one of those easy targets.

Not just rare in this war - non-existent it seems. Tanks seem to be back where they were in WW1 - mobile artillery.

The last big battle between tanks was battle of Kursk. And after that 1965 Indo Pak war. After that Gulf war. But gulf war was between two unequal powers. Ukraine seems to be evenly matched against Russi.