Russian losses in the battle of Avdiivka are off the scale -its worst defeat of the war:
https://twitter.com/naalsio26/status/1715532513899069753
Current armoured vehicle loss ratio as at 21/10 based on OSINT is 29:1 in favour of Ukraine.
It may be the worst armour loss ratio ever, and since no meaningful territorial advances were achieved, surely its the most disastrous armoured offensive ever launched?
0
1
The ratio at Cambrai was higher I think.
0
1
It doesn't matter if it's 100:1 if there's enough replacements coming up.
And for those who think "they can't keep it up like that forever" - Napoleon and General MacArthur would like a word.
1
2
The ratio at Cambrai was higher I think.
Heh!
Tank nerd joke - Cambrai was first ever use of tanks and only Brits had them.
0
1
https://twitter.com/Tatarigami_UA/status/1716492677875748978
At least 109 Russian vehicles lost up to today's date.
0
0
Damages claim will be yuge if they're relying on credit hire.
0
1
It is more fashionable to stand with Palestine now. Didn’t you know?
0
1
Ukraine who- kraine?????
0
1
Hotblack Desiato23 Oct 23 15:56
The ratio at Cambrai was higher I think.
Heh!
Tank nerd joke - Cambrai was first ever use of tanks and only Brits had them.
____________________________________________________________________
Flers–Courcelette was the first tank battle, as anyone with a Sabbaton album knows, it was over a year before Cambrai
0
1
Is Aviidka even armoured on the russian side at the moment? From what I can see they are now sending hundreds of young lads up towards the front in stolen civilian trucks and then, when they come under fire, kicking them out and telling them to advance. Does that even count as an armoured assault?
1
1
Rof Royalty23 Oct 23 21:50
Is Aviidka even armoured on the russian side at the moment? From what I can see they are now sending hundreds of young lads up towards the front in stolen civilian trucks
_________________________________________________________
yes it is,
thanks to the magical russian trait of smekalka - which doesn't directly translate but would be something along the lines of "resourcefulness" or "inventiveness" of which russians are very "proud"
in reality it's a throwback to russia being a backwards hovel and the shortages of material things during soviet times. When you see some guy lashing a cart to the back of a bus, that's smekalka, the cope cages on the tanks, smekalka, pulling a WW2 naval gun off a boat and sticking it on an APC smekalka
importantly russians seem to remain oblivious to the reception of these 'innovations' in the outside world, they view them as amazing feats of ingenuity and genius only a russian (ethnic russian at that) could come up with, rather than the very clear advert for a state where all the good shit has been flogged and the cash pocketed due to corruption and the poor chumps in the street just get a literal bag of shit to make do with.
0
1
Neat demonstration there of How to fook up the presentation of a ridiculously simple chart.
3
1
“the worst armoured offensive battle in history?”
No probably not. Probably just your odd tendency to massive one eyed exaggeration again.
0
0
Call us when they get to 73 Easting level:
United Kingdom
19[3] wounded (2nd ACR)
1 M2 Bradley lost to enemy fire[4]
1,300+ prisoners[5]
160 tanks
180 personnel carriers
12 artillery pieces
80 wheeled vehicles
Several anti-aircraft artillery systems[6]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting
0
1
I think we're still a long way from the Battle of Kursk in terms of armour / tanks / soldiers.
0
1
It's the ratio for the attacker though. 73 Easting was the US and the UK attacking. This is Russian self-pwnage. The Ukrainians must be delighted at having such an easy way to vaporise an entire brigade's worth of armour.
And bear in mind that vehicles selected for offensive operations will have to be in good mechanical order, stocked up with ammo and in many cases full of troops - again, assault troops will be some of the best available infantry.
We're not talking essentially immobile T-62s used as artillery, or injured men rushed back into service to hold a trench, but some of the best vehicles and the fittest troops the Russians have.
0
1
First of all HBD, armour battles don't really neatly fall into 'offensive' and 'defensive' categories quite as neatly as you seem to think
Secondly, 73 Easting involved long periods where coalition forces were stationary fighting off hordes of attacking Iraqi tank and infantry formations.
Thirdly, I'm not sure that suggesting an 'attacker' losing more vs a 'defender' is somehow a more successful battle than an 'attacker' losing losing less than a 'defender'.
It's an angles on the head of a pin type argument, but on any analysis 73 Easting makes the Ukrainians look like amateurs, which of course in relative terms they largely are.
Join the discussion