Very interesting, thanks. Does anyone know what condition the equipment coming out of storage is in? Is it a case of the better stuff is used up first and the quality is decreasing?
It's almost certainly decreasing. They need all they can use as soon as they can, so they will first pull the items that will work right away or after some minor refurbishment. What comes after these are depleted is stuff that needs major repairs, or to be taken apart and their bits scavenged to fix other pieces.
I've read that Russia's climate also has its role. The US has conveniently arid areas to store machinery, where they will deteriorate much slower. Russia is damp, so their stockpiles are rotting away quickly.
Generally it seems that newer (ru) and refurbished (ussr) tanks are evenly rotated and introduced into the battlefield.
There is nothing particular visible there. However, I noted one thing, increased usage (relatively) of t-62s during Kherson/Kharkiv offensive, back in 2022, and now a bit in recent months.
I think you're misinterpreting that classification. "Russian or modernized" must be including the refurbished ussr tanks. Otherwise it would not match the detailed tank model stats.
Only T-90 is Russian, T-72 and T-80 are Soviet tanks that haven't been in production for decades but are still being refurbished/modernized. Since the vast majority of losses are T-72 and T-80, they must be split 50:50 between refurbished variants and "fresh out of storage" variants.
Russian and even western sources often miscount refurbished equipment as manufactured, thus creating an inflated idea of Russia's manufacturing capacity, and obscuring the extent to which Ukraine is actually fighting (and depleting) the old USSR stockpiles.
You probably correct, I am not expert in this. So I am not clear how many of t-80 or t-72 were in stocks and now modernized. And I do not think that visually it is possible to discern between modernized, and newly produced.
Basically it seems, though there is still lots of stored tanks remain. The speed of "resurrecting" those is around 70 per month recently, means all the better and fast to recover are gone. Plus around the same amount of new, maybe. Means 140-150 new and refurbished added monthly.
The number of tanks replenished should roughly equal the number of tanks lost. If they were less or more, Russia would decrease or increase the number of tanks they send to the frontline, so the numbers will end up equalizing again. So if Russia has lost 80 per month on average, they're replenishing 80 on average. If they're replenishing 150, then they're losing 150.
But the exact numbers are not as important as the ratios. From what we can see about 5-10% of losses are newly manufactured T-90, 40% are refurbished older tanks, 50% are non-refurbished older tanks. That means, 90% of Russian tank replenishment isn't new production. Which means that we're basically waiting for the storage to run out, at which point Russian tank "production" will drop 10x.
Probably your surmise that the better stuff is used up first and the quality is decreasing is correct.
Certainly if one believes the rumours that the corrupt Russian army sold a lot of stuff from their storage, for example, it is claimed many of the tanks no longer have their optical sights which are expensive to replace even if available.
While the good stuff goes first, there is also the issue of how the depot is run and where its located. If the guys are corrupt as hell (highly likely), then lots of the gear is going to be poorly maintained and missing key parts (the ones easily sellable). If the storage area is in a spot with bad weather (lots of damp and rain), then the stuff is going to be in worse condition. While the deserts in California are not good for much, they are GREAT for stockpiling armored vehicles, and Russia doesn't quite have that one asset.
I would say like 25% ru tanks and other machinery (BTR, BMP) in storages are impoosible to refurbish at all: due to bad weather conditions, spares cannibalizmus and corruption
With artillery even worser: there is huge lack of barrels and as good as fewer plants able to produce them at all
Argee with u there. Since russia is just at the sice of Lichtenstein, Monaco or The Vatican state there is nowhere with a good climate to store equipment. :-)
Snicker, good point, but the joke is that most if not all of those spots are actually in the various Stans that broke away. Most of the sites I see are way up north where its obviously much wetter.
The Ukrainian military is mobilizing workers of its defense industry as there is a time gap between one's attending a military recruitment office and receiving an exemption from service. Another issue is that some specialties, including drone operators, cannot get the exemption. https://www.epravda.com.ua/news/2024/06/3/714597/
During summer offensive RF losses amounted to almost 70.000 personal according to the graph where UAF was decimated not even reaching first Sorovkin line of defense?? What are the losses of UAF?? Just asking since last week there was exchange of bodies collected on battle field between RF and UA , where RF returned 450 bodies to UA and UA returned 120 bodies of RF soldiers. How do you explain this??
So why then UAF did not exchange more bodies? If the bodies are in UAF control? I am asking question and looking forward to get factual answer. Same I asked Tom, does he have any military combat experience . No reply...so he is one of these writers that read and wrote a books but without experience of combat fighting. It the very same article published in UA , UA got 200 PoW exchanging for 70 RAF PoW. Those figures are just showing how the bad situation is on the battlefield. Moreover , summer offensive saw push in depth of some 10 up to 15 km inside Russian held territory so UAF could collect more bodies since they advanced. Inflated figures on losses will not change the course of the battles won or lost on battlefield.
I will not reply on the same manner . Can you educate me than how UAF are counting losses if most losses happen on territory under control of RAF? I been in real war for more than 38 months so comparitive figures of PoW and bodies collected from the battlefield speak a volume. Only deluded are believing that despite the advantage in heavy artillery shells 5:1 or more and dropping 100 FABS per day are having less impact on ZSU than what Don share as impact on RF. And please behave otherwise you present mirror of education what you got from your parents. Have a wonderful evening
So are you saying that the army that is on offensive is having 3:1 casualties? The graph of RF losses during summer 2023 offensive are approximately 70.000. Using same logic losses of ZUS would be than 210.000. Don is only showing confirmed drone footages of UAF strikes, if you want to have balanced approach you check as well pro Russian channels and you see the same. Impact of FAB is not measurable. Just arguing for the same of 520.000 losses of RAF as stated by ZSU , only deluded believe in those figures. All in all war or attrition and those having resources will unfortunately prevail.
That the comment....Well educated you are. Parents are proud of you. I been in war for 38 months in BiH, I work in organisation that is assisting authorities on both sides to recover the bodies of dead soldiers as well as to visit PoW. So I think that I have informations about the situation on the ground much better than you do. Have a nice evening
First territory not controlled by Ukraine is not exactly the same as territory controlled by RuAF.
Second, have you ever seen any war footage from Ukraine? Do you realise that most casualties are the effect of drones and drone directed artillery, and therefore DA is done in real time using video, but bodies cannot be collected?
Who had told you such bshitz? Missing soldier is worsest status ever: not PoWed, not invalid, not killed. No pension, no payments, no white Lada Kalina
WTF are you talking about? They exchanged bodies, now you are asking how they count them? And btw could you link any article about the numbers you cited because the only info I found says: "Earlier in the day and at the same location, Ukraine and Russia also swapped bodies of their fallen soldiers — Ukraine returned 212 bodies and Russia 45."
So you start to read. Since the beggining of the year total number of exchanged bodies are, same article , than you find other articles ornfigures re PoW ? At least you did some reading . Ratio is 4: 1 unfortunately.
1. Ru is not interested in Pow exchange not talk about bodies. More bodies->more payments, more exchanges->more witnesses. Nobody in Ru is interested. On the other side: less exchanges with UA->more pressure inside UA. Simple logic
2. 70 vs 200. It was very special exchange: 70 kadyroffs vs 200 ZSU/spetsnaz/Azovs. Every kadyrov soldier is like 3-4 ru simple soldiers. That exchange was performed by Chechenian FSB and Kadyrov deputy - Alautdinov. Nobody had asked MoD Ru or federal FSB
"Only time will tell if the average Russian man will ever decide that the money isn’t worth the risk."
- A man with no hope or prospects will almost always choose a war. And anyone who has seen the provincial Russia knows that its unbelievably grim.
As for Russian strategy they just think that they can win quicker by applying more pressure. That so far is failing and if/when they realize it then they can very well dig in and just wait as Ukraine is the one who has to liberate the land.
So in essence they have 2 victory options here. The fast and the slow one.
And its understandable that they would prefer the fast one as Russian elite also wants to get back rest of "their lost territories" (Central Asia, Caucasus). All this is on hold until the Ukrainian question isnt resolved. And the quicker and brutal the solution the better example it is for the other Soviet republics to accept the Russian supremacy.
Do they even think they have a quick option any more? It was a good idea during the shell drought but now that's over, there's only attritional slaughter along the entire frontline for tiny gains. Isn't it more likely that Putin makes unrealistic demands like liberate Donetsk and Luhansk by Victory Day, and his generals merely nod their heads, keep their lips sealed, and get on with throwing poorly trained infantry into their leader's latest meat grinder. You can see the consequences of speaking out against this madness in the recent purge.
Regarding the number in question. The fact is there are several UA (and ru) sources that report numbers, and when you compare them and follow the patterns of battles, they do add up. And also they reveal some other things.
For example from doing some stats it becomes clear that on average KIA is about 30-35% of total ru losses. And also it becomes clear that total losses reported are KIA+WIA+MIA.
But anyway, comparing various separate UA sources, and also non official ru sources, numbers add up. For example a UA public source mentioned that ru losses during the battle of Avdiivka were 47 K. And then ru source, "Murz", mentioned publicly 16K KIA. Which is exactly 34%.
1. MoD reports figures only for MoD: no NG, Storms, mobs, DPR/LPR mobs, Pmcs etc included
2. Since when account of a dead ru influencer serviced somewhere at Krynky, Kherson could be put as a reliable source of confirmed Ru losses on 1400km long frontline?
3. Simple maths: Ru mobilizes 30k new walking deads monthly. 180k invaded+300k mobilized in 2022 and at least +30*15->450k mobilized during 2023-1q2024 = 930k cannon fodder turnover, around 500-550k operates in UA now (Pu, Shoygu, Belousov). So, total loss kia-wia-mia is like 400k. Taking into account awful MEDEVAC Ru i would estimate 50/50 ratio. So, around 200k KiA.
Exact amount of KiA mobs from DPR/LPR we will never know, prisoners - as well, maybe in 25 years, when (if) FSB archives will be open for scientists
Hmm, okay… Mix of various things, and this makes me think.
Firstly, if you want to speak about ru blogger, actually active combatant, then why do you think he was ever connected to Krynky? He stayed all the time in ldnr. Secondly, I said battle for Avdiivka, which is not 1400 km front, just one battle on the local front that started in October 2023 and ended in February 2024. So for 4.5 months for maybe 20 km front, one town, 16K kia and 30+ wia. Thirdly he has deleted this post, with numbers, after his commander requested (per his words) and then he commited suicide few days after.
We are speaking about connections, and at various stages of the battle there are different examples. He is only one of the data points so to speak.
And the method you are offering, gives a valid perspective as well. For Bahmut offensive there were also separate numbers available from Prigozhin himself and cross sources. As far as I remember they were even higher around 70k total for that one battle.
Just to clarify a point: are the estimates of Russian losses coming from Ukraine? While the general developments (peaks and troughs) should be trustworthy enough, there is the possibility of the estimates being on the too-optimistic side, for Ukraine.
This is not to discount the analysis, which I find eminently plausible, but to put some caveats on the data.
We have to rely on the estimates of others and then try to interpret them. As Monkey Brains points out, we can have high confidence in some data when the methodology is explained. It's not a complete estimate but it is a strong supporting piece of evidence.
Governments don't want to share their sources and methods for obvious reasons. I noticed that the Ukrainian estimates were 15% higher than UK and US estimates. I decided to be conservative and use the UK/US numbers. That said, the Ukrainian numbers are now only 1.5% higher than the UK/US estimates.
When looking for trends, the exact numbers aren't as important as consistency of methods.
when i was in my pirme, back in the 80' every male person had to serve, so i guess my country could provide 2mill ppl with bad training, and we are a small country :-)
Even the American Revolution was a war of attrition. Britain had superior numbers and technology, and America had time and just enough formally trained leadership to understand that long-term survival was key to winning independence. Even then it took nine years.
More than attrition, the Americans simply had to not be defeated in order to win. If Washington lost his army at Brooklyn Heights or Assunpink Creek it may have been enough to convince the Americans they lost.
In order to sustain morale and supplies, they needed the occaisional win. Decisive wins, such as Saratoga, Cowpens and Yorktown, were a bonus.
The most salient point is that the Russians are increasing intensity (e.g. Karkhiv offensive) at this time, despite low returns for their effort, indicating time pressure on their side. All the other points are reliant on estimates of numbers, which can be debated or refuted. However, the Russian actions speak louder than all the statistics.
Very interesting, thanks. Does anyone know what condition the equipment coming out of storage is in? Is it a case of the better stuff is used up first and the quality is decreasing?
It's almost certainly decreasing. They need all they can use as soon as they can, so they will first pull the items that will work right away or after some minor refurbishment. What comes after these are depleted is stuff that needs major repairs, or to be taken apart and their bits scavenged to fix other pieces.
I've read that Russia's climate also has its role. The US has conveniently arid areas to store machinery, where they will deteriorate much slower. Russia is damp, so their stockpiles are rotting away quickly.
Dear Rob,
Please check this link, and "war spotting: tanks" link in particular: https://lookerstudio.google.com/reporting/dfbcec47-7b01-400e-ab21-de8eb98c8f3a
Generally it seems that newer (ru) and refurbished (ussr) tanks are evenly rotated and introduced into the battlefield.
There is nothing particular visible there. However, I noted one thing, increased usage (relatively) of t-62s during Kherson/Kharkiv offensive, back in 2022, and now a bit in recent months.
I think you're misinterpreting that classification. "Russian or modernized" must be including the refurbished ussr tanks. Otherwise it would not match the detailed tank model stats.
Only T-90 is Russian, T-72 and T-80 are Soviet tanks that haven't been in production for decades but are still being refurbished/modernized. Since the vast majority of losses are T-72 and T-80, they must be split 50:50 between refurbished variants and "fresh out of storage" variants.
Russian and even western sources often miscount refurbished equipment as manufactured, thus creating an inflated idea of Russia's manufacturing capacity, and obscuring the extent to which Ukraine is actually fighting (and depleting) the old USSR stockpiles.
You probably correct, I am not expert in this. So I am not clear how many of t-80 or t-72 were in stocks and now modernized. And I do not think that visually it is possible to discern between modernized, and newly produced.
Maybe this will add some insight: https://drukarnia.com.ua/articles/numbers-speak-statistical-analysis-of-russian-tank-losses-zgOeo
And this, though needs translation: https://www.vishchun.com/post/pidrakhunok_ta_analiz_tankovoho_potentsialu_moskovii_na_pochatku_2024
Basically it seems, though there is still lots of stored tanks remain. The speed of "resurrecting" those is around 70 per month recently, means all the better and fast to recover are gone. Plus around the same amount of new, maybe. Means 140-150 new and refurbished added monthly.
The number of tanks replenished should roughly equal the number of tanks lost. If they were less or more, Russia would decrease or increase the number of tanks they send to the frontline, so the numbers will end up equalizing again. So if Russia has lost 80 per month on average, they're replenishing 80 on average. If they're replenishing 150, then they're losing 150.
But the exact numbers are not as important as the ratios. From what we can see about 5-10% of losses are newly manufactured T-90, 40% are refurbished older tanks, 50% are non-refurbished older tanks. That means, 90% of Russian tank replenishment isn't new production. Which means that we're basically waiting for the storage to run out, at which point Russian tank "production" will drop 10x.
Probably your surmise that the better stuff is used up first and the quality is decreasing is correct.
Certainly if one believes the rumours that the corrupt Russian army sold a lot of stuff from their storage, for example, it is claimed many of the tanks no longer have their optical sights which are expensive to replace even if available.
While the good stuff goes first, there is also the issue of how the depot is run and where its located. If the guys are corrupt as hell (highly likely), then lots of the gear is going to be poorly maintained and missing key parts (the ones easily sellable). If the storage area is in a spot with bad weather (lots of damp and rain), then the stuff is going to be in worse condition. While the deserts in California are not good for much, they are GREAT for stockpiling armored vehicles, and Russia doesn't quite have that one asset.
I would say like 25% ru tanks and other machinery (BTR, BMP) in storages are impoosible to refurbish at all: due to bad weather conditions, spares cannibalizmus and corruption
With artillery even worser: there is huge lack of barrels and as good as fewer plants able to produce them at all
Argee with u there. Since russia is just at the sice of Lichtenstein, Monaco or The Vatican state there is nowhere with a good climate to store equipment. :-)
Snicker, good point, but the joke is that most if not all of those spots are actually in the various Stans that broke away. Most of the sites I see are way up north where its obviously much wetter.
Excellent stuff. Agree with everything here
> "counteroffensive in direction of Kursk"
-- should be Kharkiv
Nope :)
Great update-just unbelievable at how rulers will go to no ends to prop up their legitimacy-Putin and Netscape together…scary stuff.
"extend the war until Ukraine has a manpower crisis"
-- Kyiv subway runs fewer trains now as their drivers have been mobilized https://kyivcity.gov.ua/news/iz_3_chervnya_u_stolichniy_pidzemtsi_zminyat_grafik_rukhu_pozdiv/
The Ukrainian military is mobilizing workers of its defense industry as there is a time gap between one's attending a military recruitment office and receiving an exemption from service. Another issue is that some specialties, including drone operators, cannot get the exemption. https://www.epravda.com.ua/news/2024/06/3/714597/
:(
During summer offensive RF losses amounted to almost 70.000 personal according to the graph where UAF was decimated not even reaching first Sorovkin line of defense?? What are the losses of UAF?? Just asking since last week there was exchange of bodies collected on battle field between RF and UA , where RF returned 450 bodies to UA and UA returned 120 bodies of RF soldiers. How do you explain this??
Most Russians die in areas that are not under Ukrainian control.
So why then UAF did not exchange more bodies? If the bodies are in UAF control? I am asking question and looking forward to get factual answer. Same I asked Tom, does he have any military combat experience . No reply...so he is one of these writers that read and wrote a books but without experience of combat fighting. It the very same article published in UA , UA got 200 PoW exchanging for 70 RAF PoW. Those figures are just showing how the bad situation is on the battlefield. Moreover , summer offensive saw push in depth of some 10 up to 15 km inside Russian held territory so UAF could collect more bodies since they advanced. Inflated figures on losses will not change the course of the battles won or lost on battlefield.
Are you stupid or something? Read it again: most Russians die in areas that are not under Ukrainian control.
I will not reply on the same manner . Can you educate me than how UAF are counting losses if most losses happen on territory under control of RAF? I been in real war for more than 38 months so comparitive figures of PoW and bodies collected from the battlefield speak a volume. Only deluded are believing that despite the advantage in heavy artillery shells 5:1 or more and dropping 100 FABS per day are having less impact on ZSU than what Don share as impact on RF. And please behave otherwise you present mirror of education what you got from your parents. Have a wonderful evening
"I will not reply on the same manner . Can you educate me than how UAF are counting losses if most losses happen on territory under control of RAF?"
The majority of losses are inflicted by both sides through accurate fire monitored with drone recon.
That's the main reason why all offensives' operations immediately devolves into senseless attritional carnage.
So are you saying that the army that is on offensive is having 3:1 casualties? The graph of RF losses during summer 2023 offensive are approximately 70.000. Using same logic losses of ZUS would be than 210.000. Don is only showing confirmed drone footages of UAF strikes, if you want to have balanced approach you check as well pro Russian channels and you see the same. Impact of FAB is not measurable. Just arguing for the same of 520.000 losses of RAF as stated by ZSU , only deluded believe in those figures. All in all war or attrition and those having resources will unfortunately prevail.
You just make an impression of a person so stupid it's a wasted time to try to explain you anything.
That the comment....Well educated you are. Parents are proud of you. I been in war for 38 months in BiH, I work in organisation that is assisting authorities on both sides to recover the bodies of dead soldiers as well as to visit PoW. So I think that I have informations about the situation on the ground much better than you do. Have a nice evening
First territory not controlled by Ukraine is not exactly the same as territory controlled by RuAF.
Second, have you ever seen any war footage from Ukraine? Do you realise that most casualties are the effect of drones and drone directed artillery, and therefore DA is done in real time using video, but bodies cannot be collected?
So today count of RF losses is 1270? How meticulous they are...and you belive in that. Just asking
Russia is not interested in returning the bodies because in such a case families receive no compensation. The fact is well known and documented.
That is not truth, those that are considering missing , families are still receiving payments. What is the situation in UA?
Oh, i see, we have hear the advocate of the Russian invasion. It is no use discussing with such a person.
Who had told you such bshitz? Missing soldier is worsest status ever: not PoWed, not invalid, not killed. No pension, no payments, no white Lada Kalina
Because MOST OF THE russian bodies are in the areas not controlled by Ukraine.
Who counted them than?
WTF are you talking about? They exchanged bodies, now you are asking how they count them? And btw could you link any article about the numbers you cited because the only info I found says: "Earlier in the day and at the same location, Ukraine and Russia also swapped bodies of their fallen soldiers — Ukraine returned 212 bodies and Russia 45."
So you start to read. Since the beggining of the year total number of exchanged bodies are, same article , than you find other articles ornfigures re PoW ? At least you did some reading . Ratio is 4: 1 unfortunately.
Easy explanation:
1. Ru is not interested in Pow exchange not talk about bodies. More bodies->more payments, more exchanges->more witnesses. Nobody in Ru is interested. On the other side: less exchanges with UA->more pressure inside UA. Simple logic
2. 70 vs 200. It was very special exchange: 70 kadyroffs vs 200 ZSU/spetsnaz/Azovs. Every kadyrov soldier is like 3-4 ru simple soldiers. That exchange was performed by Chechenian FSB and Kadyrov deputy - Alautdinov. Nobody had asked MoD Ru or federal FSB
Bruh there is not even a point in arguing. This is where people go for reassurances. 12 billion slavic orcs are killed every day and that's that ;)
Thanks for sharing. How do you define "losses"? I guess some wounded should be able to return to the front after some time.
Moreover, there is any data about foreigners fighting for one of the two countries?
Numbers present an interesting picture indeed.
"Only time will tell if the average Russian man will ever decide that the money isn’t worth the risk."
- A man with no hope or prospects will almost always choose a war. And anyone who has seen the provincial Russia knows that its unbelievably grim.
As for Russian strategy they just think that they can win quicker by applying more pressure. That so far is failing and if/when they realize it then they can very well dig in and just wait as Ukraine is the one who has to liberate the land.
So in essence they have 2 victory options here. The fast and the slow one.
And its understandable that they would prefer the fast one as Russian elite also wants to get back rest of "their lost territories" (Central Asia, Caucasus). All this is on hold until the Ukrainian question isnt resolved. And the quicker and brutal the solution the better example it is for the other Soviet republics to accept the Russian supremacy.
Do they even think they have a quick option any more? It was a good idea during the shell drought but now that's over, there's only attritional slaughter along the entire frontline for tiny gains. Isn't it more likely that Putin makes unrealistic demands like liberate Donetsk and Luhansk by Victory Day, and his generals merely nod their heads, keep their lips sealed, and get on with throwing poorly trained infantry into their leader's latest meat grinder. You can see the consequences of speaking out against this madness in the recent purge.
Many thanks, Don!
One remark/question. Wouldn‘t the capacity to conscript people also needed to be taken into consideration?
Yes, as mentioned. It seems to be something he only wants to do as a last resort.
So what you are describing is a self eating snake
Dear Don, thank you for writing this!
Regarding the number in question. The fact is there are several UA (and ru) sources that report numbers, and when you compare them and follow the patterns of battles, they do add up. And also they reveal some other things.
For example here, though not reporting anymore: https://t.me/otarnavskiy
For example from doing some stats it becomes clear that on average KIA is about 30-35% of total ru losses. And also it becomes clear that total losses reported are KIA+WIA+MIA.
But anyway, comparing various separate UA sources, and also non official ru sources, numbers add up. For example a UA public source mentioned that ru losses during the battle of Avdiivka were 47 K. And then ru source, "Murz", mentioned publicly 16K KIA. Which is exactly 34%.
Ru makes same trick again and again:
1. MoD reports figures only for MoD: no NG, Storms, mobs, DPR/LPR mobs, Pmcs etc included
2. Since when account of a dead ru influencer serviced somewhere at Krynky, Kherson could be put as a reliable source of confirmed Ru losses on 1400km long frontline?
3. Simple maths: Ru mobilizes 30k new walking deads monthly. 180k invaded+300k mobilized in 2022 and at least +30*15->450k mobilized during 2023-1q2024 = 930k cannon fodder turnover, around 500-550k operates in UA now (Pu, Shoygu, Belousov). So, total loss kia-wia-mia is like 400k. Taking into account awful MEDEVAC Ru i would estimate 50/50 ratio. So, around 200k KiA.
Exact amount of KiA mobs from DPR/LPR we will never know, prisoners - as well, maybe in 25 years, when (if) FSB archives will be open for scientists
Hmm, okay… Mix of various things, and this makes me think.
Firstly, if you want to speak about ru blogger, actually active combatant, then why do you think he was ever connected to Krynky? He stayed all the time in ldnr. Secondly, I said battle for Avdiivka, which is not 1400 km front, just one battle on the local front that started in October 2023 and ended in February 2024. So for 4.5 months for maybe 20 km front, one town, 16K kia and 30+ wia. Thirdly he has deleted this post, with numbers, after his commander requested (per his words) and then he commited suicide few days after.
We are speaking about connections, and at various stages of the battle there are different examples. He is only one of the data points so to speak.
And the method you are offering, gives a valid perspective as well. For Bahmut offensive there were also separate numbers available from Prigozhin himself and cross sources. As far as I remember they were even higher around 70k total for that one battle.
Sorry, i confused Murz with “The 13th” - same truth-seeker among Voyenkors. My bad
Just to clarify a point: are the estimates of Russian losses coming from Ukraine? While the general developments (peaks and troughs) should be trustworthy enough, there is the possibility of the estimates being on the too-optimistic side, for Ukraine.
This is not to discount the analysis, which I find eminently plausible, but to put some caveats on the data.
The only reliable casualty data with actual evidence ( obituaries etc ) to back its claims up is produced by the BBC and mediazona
https://kyivindependent.com/mediazona-confirms-identities-of-nearly-54-200-russian-soldiers-killed-in-ukraine/
We have to rely on the estimates of others and then try to interpret them. As Monkey Brains points out, we can have high confidence in some data when the methodology is explained. It's not a complete estimate but it is a strong supporting piece of evidence.
Governments don't want to share their sources and methods for obvious reasons. I noticed that the Ukrainian estimates were 15% higher than UK and US estimates. I decided to be conservative and use the UK/US numbers. That said, the Ukrainian numbers are now only 1.5% higher than the UK/US estimates.
When looking for trends, the exact numbers aren't as important as consistency of methods.
I wonder if entire west could provide 30.000 man (and boys) monthly for combat operation sustainable, for months?
Oh, wait! I just remember: you have lots of Ukrainians in your own countries so you can first sent them back to fight!
when i was in my pirme, back in the 80' every male person had to serve, so i guess my country could provide 2mill ppl with bad training, and we are a small country :-)
Even the American Revolution was a war of attrition. Britain had superior numbers and technology, and America had time and just enough formally trained leadership to understand that long-term survival was key to winning independence. Even then it took nine years.
More than attrition, the Americans simply had to not be defeated in order to win. If Washington lost his army at Brooklyn Heights or Assunpink Creek it may have been enough to convince the Americans they lost.
In order to sustain morale and supplies, they needed the occaisional win. Decisive wins, such as Saratoga, Cowpens and Yorktown, were a bonus.
I hope it so
The most salient point is that the Russians are increasing intensity (e.g. Karkhiv offensive) at this time, despite low returns for their effort, indicating time pressure on their side. All the other points are reliant on estimates of numbers, which can be debated or refuted. However, the Russian actions speak louder than all the statistics.
Whatever the margin of error, the statistics have established trends that are supported by observable events.