Why Russia is Struggling With Gaining Ground 

Thanks to HelloFresh for sponsoring today's video. Go to strms.net/hellofresh_covertcabal and use code POGCABALAUG50 for 50% off plus Free Shipping!

I once read someone saying about the initial push for Kyiv that the Russian army treated it like a military exercise. Everyone should just show up, do as their told, work down the checklist, and everyone is happy. There were no contingencies, like what if the VDV fails to take Hostomel Airport, what if the fields turned out to be a huge mudpit forcing all the vehicles along the roads where they were sitting ducks, what if the locals resisted in huge numbers, what if the logistics turned out to be a complete disaster... In short, there was no Plan B, which is completely unforgivable for a military operation.

A lot of people are noting the superior crew survivability of western tanks, but they are also forgetting one another very important advantage they have over Soviet designs: the existence of actually good reverse gears. How many times have we seen Soviet tanks either struggling to back out of a minefield or artillery strike or waste time trying to turn around and show their vulnerable rear to the enemy and get an ATGM up their tailpipe for their trouble? Western armor is much easier able to extricate themselves from sticky situations and fire and maneuver more quickly. This helps with crew AND tank survivability.

I think one of the biggest benefits of modern western tanks, over models from 40 years ago, would be crew survivability.

I note that while expensive western armoured vehicles are still vulnerable to mines and artillery, the crews of those are far more likely to survive than in Russian armoured vehicles.

The Western tanks and armored vehicles may be vulnerable to ATGM's and other tank killers just like their Russian counterparts, but they still have a huge advantage in crew suitability. Their operators can live to fight another day and learn from mistakes. That's why Ukrainians love them and want more.

Hard to gain ground when you keep losing it.

Russia is no longer the second biggest arms exporter in the world. They were until 2021 but were overtaken by France in 2022. Russian arms export have been constantly dropping for several years and this trend was speeded up by the invasion of Ukraine.

On drones, if I were a betting man, I'd wager that the next step in active protection would no longer be intercepting HEAT shells and missiles, but quick-reacting net launchers that intercept incoming drones and short-range jammers that would try to throw off loitering munitions.

I still detest the idea that drones are new. When the US invaded Iraq in 2003, unit level drone usage for recon and spotting was common. Drones were being used regularly in western force before then. Small drones became a staple in the post-invasion Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Recon & Intelligence became the key combat components beyond firefights or artillery. It's more shocking how Russia lacked this in 2022, when basically every other military was using drones at the unit level.

To your question about whether multi-million dollar tanks are worth it... You have to remember that the drone revolution isn't over. Unmanned Ground Vehicles will also be coming... and that's the eventual shape that the "tank" will evolve into. It will be a semi-autonomous unmanned field-piece. Lightly armored to withstand small arms, but nothing more... after all there are no crew to protect. Without most armor, and without a crew compartment, but with the same engine, same gun, and same all-terrain capabilities it will have a lower profile and a fantastic power to weight ratio making it much faster, much more maneuverable, and much lower weight and thus able to maneuver in boggy or other mud-conditions.

I think millennium7's video summed up the situation perfectly. His concept of the transparent battlefield is dead on. The reality is modern technology has recreated WW1.

The great benefit of modern tanks over decades-old tanks is that the crews will likely survive a strike that disables the modern tank, and the modern tank is also more likely to be reparable after such a strike.

7:28 I’d say crew survivability is a good reason to go for a leopard over t-72, even if everything else was equal.

Saying that russian military presented itself on the good side during the first few weeks of the invasion is some kind of total misunderstanding. Utterly failed to dominate the skies, daily (EDIT: monthly, I know I miswrote) casualties in the 1000s, infamous supply issues(60km convoy lmao). Don't even try to disagree, they abandoned 2 attack vectors

The short and skinny: they underestimated the Ukrainians

I'd forgotten that 540 odd days ago one of their stated objectives was to demilitarise Ukraine! Ukraine is now one of the most heavily militarised countries in the world. They should have stated the objectives were to commit as many war crimes as possible before retreating in haste to set up defensive lines, lose 250,000 plus men, have an international arrest warrant issued against your leader, inadvertently initiate a military coup against your own regime and all whilst desperately trying to cover up a tanking economy. Then they would have achieved 100%.

You argument about going to older tech vs the leopard 2 has some points you missed. Ukraine according to Oryx, and Osint compilations, and western governments has had a total of only 5 Leopards lost/destroyed after 6 weeks of breaching operations. They have had dozens damaged and abandoned initially, but all of those have been recovered and repaired or are being repaired. None have been captured. The Bradley has been noted for its high crew and troop survivability. And now the Counter offensive is starting to gather some steam with about 10km taken around Robodyne and Verbove, with several widening breaches in the lines in the vicinity over the last 2 weeks. While moving 10km in the month previous While yes one would prefer 10km a day but that may be unrealistic. Ukraine's gains since going on the attack in June are dramatically more than Russia's from its December to May push of this year. That cannot be ignored when talking about why "Russia can't advance" and chalk it up to the enviroment of warfare has changed while Ukraine, has to some degree, in the same environment. People also forget for Ukraine's case about the Kherson Offensive last year. That was a 4-month campaign with relatively static lines until Russia just couldn't hold it anymore and the lines collapsed. Ukraine played a battle of attrition and won and appears to be going through the same strategy in the south. With the recent gains begs the question if the Russians are starting to give out under the pressure. No one but the Russian's know, and we will only know after the campaign is over one way or another. Something that never gets mentioned is the inherent bias in the drone videos. Despite having a thousand-mile front, and half a million troops going at it and according to RUSI up to 1000 drones per KM of front going at one time, you only see maybe a dozen successful drone attacks on any given day, and many of those are unsuccessful but the video cuts off before that is made clear. A huge percentage of the drone dropped munitions videos are going on already disabled equipment and not maneuvering units. These drones have not taken out active western tanks, and attacks that have occurred have caused only light damage and occasionally temporary disablement. This needs to be repeated. ATGMs and mines are the responsible party for all of the destroyed Leopards. Also Ukraine is a unique environment for this. Driven by Russian ineptness in the early war, its propensity to do mass human wave assaults in the midwar, its complete lack of effective air doctrine, and Ukraine's relative weakness early on causing a stalemate and these mass fortifications and static defenses to keep everyone in place. This partially mirrors the Iran- Iraq war and all wars after that did not turn out to emulate that either. Armored Vehicles and manuever warfare is the answer to drones. Some times exact format of these vehicles may need to change. But it is the answer.

Always exciting to see another video. Thank you for your work.

great video,well say well explain 👍

I remember when every news channel was predicting that Ukraine would fall in like 2 days. A year later, Ukraine still stands. I hope they can have their victory soon enough.

Fast forward 7 months and the shovels and washing machines have started flying......

Can't wait for the next count video!

This video literally just rehashed the problems that we already knew...

So much Vatnik cope in the comments

"Is it worth giving western tanks to Ukraine" Well, western tanks have proven to be much more survivable than Russian tanks. Same for the APCs. That footage of destroyed Bradleys and Leopards? Ukraine released footage of the loss, and it showed the crews bailing out, and that specific Leopard was recovered and fixed, meaning the crews that survive can be given a new tank and use it immediately instead of needing to train another crew once more. You don't see that with Russian tanks.

Interesting video) Will there be another how-many-tanks-left video any time soon?

Those initial declarations - "still #2 or #3", some form of "desirable exports" - are some serious leaps of faith.

Also in my opinion, many soviet vehicle designs are technologically dead ends that shouldve been abandoned ages ago, but russia cannot do that, cuz if they did, they would not be able to replace em in appropiate numbers And so, troops have to put up with T-72 with exploding autoloaders, BTR-80s with horrible troop hatches and BMPs that offer degraded troop protection for the sake of a barely working amphibious capability

Tanks like the Abrams can still be taken out by mines and missiles, but one huge advantage they have over Russian tanks is how/where the ammo is stored. RU tanks have the crew sitting on top of the ammo, Abrams the crew is safe. Leo and Challenger still store some ammo in the hull, but not all underneath the crew.

excellent video as always keep it up ma man

The biggest advantage of modern, more expensive Western tanks is their improved crew survivability, which allows trained personnel to get back into the fight. Oh and I guess it saves lives or whatever

So you're saying Russia not so stronk?

HelloFresh requires a huge amount of recycling. Otherwise, you will produce a big pile of plastic and chemical trash. The stuff they use for in-box cooling is not recyclable. If you responsibly take care of all recycling, I am not certain it saves you any time. Ah, the last thing, once you register with them, they won't let you go. Deleting your account will require a ton of time, jumps over the hoops, shaman dancing with tambourine, begging of clerks, etc. I started this process 2 months ago. They still keep my account with all my personal data.

Excellent video!

Good analysis..

KREMBOTS ARE LOSING THE FN MINDS IN THE COMMENT SECTION😂😂😂

I've been hearing that, while western tanks are more expensive, their capabilities and most importantly crew survivability are much better than what Russia fields. So ya they might get taken out by a cleverly placed mine, but the crew will likely not get incinerated in the blast and can fight another day.

I can't believe you didn't say "Quantity has a quality all its own" especially in a video literally about russia! :O

Lots of cool B-roll on this one!

We must consider that we didn't knew how a war between regular forces would be with the current tech, maybe we are now at a similar position from pre WW1 where defensive weapons are "stronger" then offensive.

👍🤝 Everything this channel puts out is great content🙏

9:38 I just love that lone Buhanka in the back

Ask those Leopard 2 crews in Zaporozhye about western mbt's survivability :) Or the Challenger crew, they'll tell you all about it :D

CC coming in clutch! I was about to go mow the lawn but now I gotta stay in my chair and watch this. 😃

Where have you been?

Video idea......The graphic at 0:26 showing the arms exportation. I am so curious about the smaller percentage countries like Italy and what it is that they export. Care to do a video on some of the smaller exporters and what they sell? Thanks keep up the good work!

Title should be: "Why Russia is struggling to hold land taken in the invasion."

"The war began good for Russia" - I would qualify that by specifying it began well on the eastern front. Their main decapitation strike at Hostomel Airport - on which practically their entire plan depended - was a disaster from Day One.

Love this.

You opened my eyes Thank for letting me know ❤

Whatever happened to switchblade loitering munition(s)? Less effective than cheaper drones?

Yes Abrams, Leopards and Challengers are just as susceptible to land mines as 40-year-old tanks. I think the difference is, those modern tanks offer greater crew survivability and rarely suffer the catastrophic effect of secondary explosions which in turn, allows them to be recovered, repaired and re-introduced into the fight. Is that plausible?

Are those Type 99 MBTs at 9:37? Where is that footage from?

Thanks!

I doubt that Russia is still the second largest exporter of weapons. Not only do they need all of their production for themselves, but their equipment hasn’t exactly attained a reputation for excellence on the battlefield.

7:25 The Leopard 2 (especially older variants) is the most vulnerable of all NATO main battle tanks, that's not necessarily true of others that have been supplied. As others noted, even then, survivability of the crew is much better than on any russian tank, as the ammunition is stored in a separate compartment. 7:47 russia does operate glide bombs, most notably the KAB-500, albeit in somewhat low (but increasing) numbers. 8:30 It's not hard to verify russian army corruption, those affected talk about it all the time. Only, they appeal to their dear leader for more effective genocide tools, rather than ask for the russian army to pull out.

Excellent

You do exceptionally fine work Sir! It's a pleasure to watch your well-researched videos.

Hasn't this been proven many times already, in Finland, Vietnam and Afghanistan, that the size of the army does not matter if the large attacking army does not have as much motivation as the defender.It's quite a different thing to fight for a piece of land than to defend yourself for existence

Good lesson for other militaries

And in the very last seconds of the video we see the highly armoured Scooby Doo van for high ranking officers 🤓👍

If there is anything to learn from wars in Russia - it is the fact that territory is a last thing one should care during war.

Covert Cabal is the best OSINT channel on RU-vid, thank you for your work bro

Russia plan came straight from Hearts of iron where making a mad dash to the capital leads to victory, when it didnt work they went full pika face

7:30 Hell yes it's worth it, survivability of the crew. - Trained personell is priceless.

The myth of Russia having a large population to draw from continues to linger. A pre-war population of appox. 140 million (this included the occupied Ukrainian territories) is comparable to the population of Mexico. Factor in those Russians that fled conscription and unrelenting meat grinder tactics resulting in daily losses in personnel nearing 1000 men per day means that they're fast draining their resources, human and material.

Excellent photography! I wonder how much steel trash and mines have been scattered across Ukraine?

Everyone is talking about crew survivability, but operational availability and combat awareness is a huge bonus for western vehicles as well. Compared to Russian equipment, they have superior nightvision, detection, and communication equipment. Even if training and unit readiness were equivalent, the ability for Ukrainians to fight effectively at night or in adverse conditions gives them real combat advantages over the vehicles they are facing, and if those combats are occurring in the attacks on Russian fixed defenses then a 2:1 or 3:1 numerical advantage can be enough to carry the position, where otherwise 4:1 or greater numbers might have been required.

Conventional military theory has it that an attacking force needs 14:1 ratio of men and equipment over the Defenders. Of course in very specific circumstances that ratio can be reduced, at risk of losing or at the very minimum sustaining unsustainable casualties.

Crashing the ruble is a genius Russian innovation.

The biggest problem of Russia is lack of any empowered Senior NCO corps, who are real backbones of any modern military. Russia is still a conscript based army and no conscript based army can have a bottom up structure with empowered NCOs and empowered junior level commissioned officers. Conscript based armies are essentially heavily top down in their structure. Even if NCOs are present , they are not given any real powers and everything has to be top down

Good video

Its kinda ironic to post this in the middle of the much hyped ukrainian offensive which is failing

You put the RAD in comrade bro 😎👍

Maybe it's because they still have zero concept of a combined arms action, among plenty of other issues.

Are they even still gaining or losing them

"The best thing about Hello Fresh is you can skip weeks" You're a natural salesman, Covert

im sorry but i used to highly respect your channel, totally understand that you have an audience to cater to as most us military expert channels. but when the war started putin literally said he was not conquering all ukraine but liberating the russian speaking areas in the east and south east land bridge. Watch the progress map, as russia withdraws from outside kiev, they literally consolidate the territories they were intending to grab, there was a couple cities in donbass that was not strategically needed. By all means russia won military, you can argue all day about diplomatically/economically or that russia lost the social media campaign. But its a fact that russia achieved military what putin said in his FULL invasion speech

The advantage of the new tank's is Crew Survivability

covert cabal sponsored by hello fresh. ive seen everything i needed today, back to bed

About Ukrainian air defence - it is now in 'survival' mode. What does it mean? Radars are directed inland (but not towards the enemy) so it makes it risky to fly too deep into Ukraine and comeback safe. Such tactic keeps those radars safe from antiradiation missiles. Just another form of war of attrition but in the air.

You made many great points but left out one of the most important factors...pure Russian incompetence lol

count the tanks again!!

Hi I had an interesting vid topic, since you seem like your keeping up with the loses, could you maybe trying doing a vid on how much Russian $ have been spent/destroyed in this war? Like how much did all those tanks cost ect.

PAPER TIGER saved you the effort

To say Russia started well is a bit generous

Apparently I see alot of vatniks in the comments. Keep up the great work Corvert Cabal! I watch your every video from start to end :)

0:52 lol that box cutting out the old promo code might be the laziest photoshop I've ever seen

There are other things like poor armor and helmets that can't stop rounds like 7.62 which is a standard sniper rifle round.

Murdering the only man that made any gains probably wont help their case

You mean russia second army in Ukraine?

Why doesn't both sides try using tunnel boring machines to dig under the ground like Beneath Hill 60 in ww1?

No new information. This is just a summary of lessons learned.

Thanks for this perspective. Like most long-term dictators, Putin became increasingly isolated and detached from reality, leading to poor decisions. When you snuff out all political opposition and surround yourself with yes-men, you become infatuated with your own personal infallibility. Ukrainians love Russia, they will welcome us, our superior military will roll into Kiev within a week, Ukrainian military is nothing, Zelensky will flee the country -- and so the decision for war. Sorry Vladmir, you got your assumptions/facts wrong, and now Russia will feel the consequences for generations to come.

Geee…. It could be they’re all drunks and drink in their trenches and dugouts, they don’t get paid, they have little to no medical care, and hardly any food….. you wonder why nobody wants to fight

Well a difference with Leopard tanks and Western armoured vehicles is that when you hit the mines or get shot at the crew can survive and fight another day in a repaired vehicle. The Soviet/Russian vehicles explodes beyond repair with the crew dead. Numbers is important yes but only if they have some minimum standard.

funny thing the more advanced army enemies have, the more they can deny others, like air superiority (that leads to tranches wars ww1) or jamming everything, the closer conflict lead to direct man to man fight lol (like for example dune warriors with literally swords)

I'm not sure Russia as a society can adapt the same way Ukraine can. They simply don't allow their officers and soldiers to question things, to publicly state when things aren't working. Because free thinking is dangerous to their leadership. Ukraine has to fight smarter than the Russians, and I think that's exactly what we're seeing.

In the middle of Ukraine's failed counteroffensive, you've decided to make a video about why Russia is failing to gain ground. 😂