Ukraine War Update NEWS: AP's Long Equipment Loss List
Table of Contents 📖
"if you could attack with really good tanks like 50 tanks or like a huge attack with a column of 50 vehicles where you've got maybe 10 tanks and 20 of your best infantry fighting vehicles and then 20 of your best APCs do one massive attack you would do that if you could why aren't you doing that because you can't because you're lacking the personnel and you're lacking the equipment"
Hello Team
🎦 00:00-00:16⏩
Jonathan welcomes viewers to another ATP Geopolitics video. This video will focus on a recently released equipment loss list from Andrew Perpetua, published shortly after Jonathan's own hits and losses video. The list, with a 10:1 ratio of Russian to Ukrainian losses, is described as "big".
Return to top⤴️
🪦 DISCLAIMER FOR GENERAL STAFF LOSSES DATA
- These are real people with real lives and real families who love them. Don’t let the numbers sap your humanity.
- These numbers probably aren’t accurate but they’re the best we have and we don’t need them to be accurate to be indicative of patterns of activity.
- All losses are estimates. Losses cannot be counted with accuracy because of the conditions on the ground.
- Both sides would see it to be of their advantage to minimize their own losses maximize the other side’s losses.
- Neither side releases their losses but we have enough transparency from the Ukrainian side to have confidence in they are indicative.
- Personnel losses are hard to count. If a soldier gets injured, heals up, and returns to the front line only to get injured again, is that one loss or two? Also, how to deal with losses from PMC’s or soldiers fighting with RF from occupied territories?
- Equipment losses are hard to count. If an AA complex involves several parts and one part gets disabled, is that a loss, or a fraction of a loss? If a tank gets disabled, repaired, back into the fight, then disabled again, is that one lost tank or two?
- All recorded losses are vulnerable to multiple reporting. We have already seen numerous cases of multiple drones in the air reporting the same loss from different angles as multiple engagements.
- Losses are not always reported on the same day they occurred. It is frequent that drone losses are reported at least 24 hours after other terrestrial equipment losses. Certain losses may not be reported for days or weeks for military intelligence reasons.
Analysis of Ukrainian equipment losses
🎦 00:16-01:34⏩
Jonathan begins by analysing Ukrainian losses, noting that there is "nothing of significant value" aside from an unmanned surface vehicle (USV) hit by a drone, an M1 Abrams, and a Leopard 2A6 - both described as "fairly high value". He provides detail on how these losses occurred (e.g. "abandoned then hit by a Krasnopol" - a laser guided precision guided munition for the Leopard).
Return to top⤴️
Analysis of Russian equipment losses
🎦 01:34-03:30⏩
Jonathan then turns to the Russian losses, starting with a Buk M1 or M2 air defence system described as "fairly high value" - likely destroyed by a guided multiple launch rocket system (GMLRS), followed by an excavator and an EOV-3521 engineering vehicle. He highlights the large number of tanks lost - T-72s, T-80s and T-90s ("damaged" and "destroyed"). He notes that there are "quite a few damaged tanks as opposed to destroyed tanks", which he considers unusual. Moving onto infantry fighting vehicles, he points out that most of the BMP-1s, BMP-2s, BMP-3s, BTRs and BMDs are abandoned or destroyed, with only a few damaged. He then highlights the large number of MT-LBs (armoured personnel carriers) lost.
Return to top⤴️
Analysis of the impact of Russian equipment losses
🎦 03:30-06:38⏩
Jonathan observes a significant increase in the number of trucks, civilian vehicles, and motorbikes on the loss list. He speculates that this could be due to the Russians using smaller, less valuable equipment, possibly requisitioned from the public. He connects the high number of visually confirmed equipment losses to reports from the Ukrainian general staff and Andrew Perpetua suggesting that Russia is running out of equipment. He argues that these losses explain the lack of mechanised equipment in recent Russian offensives (e.g. Kharkiv, Vovchansk) and the reliance on infantry, golf carts, and motorbikes. He believes that the loss of equipment is significantly impacting Russia's ability to carry out effective combined arms manoeuvres. He concludes that while there are no individually high-value losses in this list (except for the Buk), the sheer volume will heavily impact Russia's ability to sustain large-scale offensives.
Return to top⤴️
Wrap up
🎦 06:38-06:49⏩
Jonathan concludes the video by describing it as a "little addendum" to his previous video. He plans to move on to his military aid video next.
Return to top⤴️
