Ukrainians captured a third T-90M

My question is: how can the russians allow this?
Nevermind the other hundreds of tanks they already captured, this is the best of the best in their inventory, yet they don't even try to blow it up before abandoning it. The ukrainians disabled the engine and the crew simply left.
I can't imagine another country leaving a Challenger 2, Abrams M1A2 or Leopard 2A6 in almost perfect condition to an enemy able to repair and use them 3 times in a row.

https://mobile.twitter.com/front_ukrainian/status/1636260285341155333

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The generosity of the Russians is unmatched. Why wouldn't Ukraine want to rejoin them after receiving over 500 tanks from them?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      millions of tanks ukrainians refuse to use, but the 12 leopards will do it

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Yes, truly stupid of them to ask for modern NATO MBTs instead of using broken down soviet pieces of shit

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Leopards were designed against Soviet Ts

  2. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    But that soldier has pooped his pants so that's a win for russia

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I'm OP, made me kek

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        It's nice to meet you OP.

  3. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >how can the russians allow this?
    they have so much gear it doesn't really matter

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Nice cope, here's your (you)

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      May we see it?

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >The enemy gains our best tank with our most modern technology? Pah, we have a gazillion t-62s in storage (do not ask if they're operational comrade).

      This is why Russia is losing, any major loss is not concerning because they place their confidence on false maintenance and storage reports.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        You are getting it wrong. The losses are of no concern because they won't be reported, at the very most they reach one or two steps up the command ladder before being buried or wrapped in bullshit to make them more palatable.

        That is how it has to be because the lower levels are personally responsible for the failure, especially the one who reports them. What little social cohesion the units have would implode if the people can't trust that their comrades lie with them.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >We never really wanted that T-90M anyways

  4. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    why are there no T-80s? as an operation flashpoint veteran not into tanks, I thought that was russias main tank

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      All went down wth the 4th GTD

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous
        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >04/28/22
          >shit will really have hit the fan though when we start to see T-62M [...] hitting the battlefields
          Christ. I remember when people here shitposted about that being a possibility ("lol no way"), and now it's just... normal. It's amazing how far Russia's army has fallen in a single year.

          • 1 year ago
            Anonymous

            I thought at most we'd have to chew through a big mass of T-72As and BMP-1s, I never thought we'd be seeing T-62s and MTLBs

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              We've seen MT-LBs from the start of the war, anon

            • 1 year ago
              Anonymous

              mt-lbs dont count they were in active service before the war. btr-50s and pt-76s on the other hand might make a comeback soon

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I can not wait to read the fricking books about this special needs operation and how it unfolded

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/xKJDzbU.jpg

        jesus frick I am so glad to not be russian
        better to be a gringo, or a chink, or even a pajeet than this clownshow of a nation

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        it's so sad my favourite urss made tank will be shit on because of the fricking moron that yolo rushed keev.
        at least ukranian t-84 will be remembered as good tanks.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Pre-war they had about 850 active T-80s of all variants, about 830 have been documented by Oryx.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Fewer than 500 actually
        But that still effectively makes the T-80 series an endangered species

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Unironically all were lost. Either destroyed, captured or broken down.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      The Russians have started to use the T-90M in increasingly risky situations like their attempt at a breakthrough in the Kreminna area led to them losing 2 in a day (same location as this capture), which seems like they are becoming increasingly desperate since it's one of the tanks they've got the least of (40-50 built).

      Pre-war they had about 850 active T-80s of all variants, about 830 have been documented by Oryx.

      Fewer than 500 actually
      But that still effectively makes the T-80 series an endangered species

      They've already gone through their rough pre-war stock of T-80's, seems like they had a lot of T-80BV's stockpiled so we've seen an increasingly large amount of them on the battlefield compared to T-72's since last year.

      Honest question: do they actually have 13,000 more T-72s and T-80s in storage? Never mind what models.

      Rough estimate is 4000-5000 tanks total in various condition, including stuff like the T-72U and T-62.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        The guy who made this round down his estimates of stored T-72s from 6.8k to ~2k. Russia/Soviet Union exported a lot of T-72s so their number isn't actually that large

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      (Almost) all lost. I'm not kidding. They lost many in the early phases of war and they can't get more since they've been made in Kharkiv factory.

  5. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >I can't imagine another country leaving a Challenger 2, Abrams M1A2 or Leopard 2A6 in almost perfect condition to an enemy able to repair and use them 3 times in a row
    pretty sure ISIS captured at least a dozen of M1A1s a couple years ago

    >inb4 M1A1 =/= M1A2

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Point stands: were they able to use them? Or drive them? Or repair them?

      They were cool to take pics with, but useless for insurgents who can't even use the remaining ammo

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Arab nations don't count.

  6. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    why blow it up empty when you can blow it up with hohli inside it

  7. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >I can't imagine another country leaving a Challenger 2, Abrams M1A2 or Leopard 2A6 in almost perfect condition to an enemy able to repair and use them 3 times in a row.
    Why?
    If your tank is disabled, you GTFO. Destroying the tank is a second thought and won't happen everytime, regardless of your army.
    Sure, well trained western crews might fare better but still.

  8. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >I can't imagine another country leaving a Challenger 2, Abrams M1A2 or Leopard 2A6
    ????
    why?
    tank gets disabled, you run the frick away before you get pasted.
    the crew wont give a shit about the wreck.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      It's not just about the crew, it's about the fact they ended in that situation.

      How moronic can you be to maneuver your VERY limited most advanced tanks in a way that gets them capture 3 times?

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        4km/h reverse.

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >How moronic can you be to maneuver your VERY limited most advanced tanks in a way that gets them capture 3 times?
        modern warfare is so utterly over-saturated with anti-tank weaponry, it doesnt matter if its a T90, or a super duper T9000, it gets blown up either way.

        We advanced waging war so much, it actually went back to 1914 levels.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >it actually went back to 1914 levels
          you don't know how right you are
          the improvised grenade dropping from drones exactly mirror the earliest aerial warfare where pilots would toss hand grenades, daggers and bricks at ground troops.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      You are meant to destroy it to prevent it being captured ivan.

  9. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    And you people said India wasn’t supplying Ukraine. Sure it had a to a few extra steps but still

  10. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The crew was probably reluctant to scuttle their tank seeing as how it's one of 50(?) in Russia's entire inventory. Imagine the (literal) buttfricking you'll get if it turns out that your regiment had an armored recovery vehicle in the area that could have dragged it away under cover of darkness later. Alternatively, it's possible that the crew just lacked the means to destroy it, since grenades and demolition charges aren't really standard issue for tankers. In any case, it's not like there's anything really sensitive to risk being dissected on a T-90M at this point. Enough Relikt/Sosna-U equipped tanks have been captured that if anyone wanted to reverse engineer Russian tech, they would have done it by now.

  11. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    Honest question: do they actually have 13,000 more T-72s and T-80s in storage? Never mind what models.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      They don't. None actually knows how many working tanks in storage they have because they don't keep records themselves

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        Honest question: do they actually have 13,000 more T-72s and T-80s in storage? Never mind what models.

        Some guy went and counted.

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          >Some guy
          Covertcabal is a very good autist, balanced and fair in assessment, I've long been a subscriber to his channel

          Yes and no. There's a very good video on youtube from "Covert Cabal" that goes in depth and breaks it down. The short version is that while Russia may have those tanks in those numbers, the actual number of serviceable tanks is probably closer to 6000, including what's been lost already. Russians store surplus vehicles in less-than-ideal conditions out in Siberia, and 30+years of disuse has almost certainly left many of them just intact enough to exist on paper, but completely unsalvagebale for any practical combat purposes.

          yeah I know
          the video is inconclusive
          he counts ~6,000 hulls visible by satellite in various states of repair, and says the IISS 13,000 figure is likely to have shrunk significantly, but acknowledges that the thousands of T-72s and T-80s reported may still exist

          many of those exposed hulls are older models

        • 1 year ago
          Anonymous

          its a great floor number,

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        >None actually knows how many working tanks in storage they have because they don't keep records themselves
        ah, the 4d strategy: nobody can predict what you'll do when you yourself have no idea

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Yes and no. There's a very good video on youtube from "Covert Cabal" that goes in depth and breaks it down. The short version is that while Russia may have those tanks in those numbers, the actual number of serviceable tanks is probably closer to 6000, including what's been lost already. Russians store surplus vehicles in less-than-ideal conditions out in Siberia, and 30+years of disuse has almost certainly left many of them just intact enough to exist on paper, but completely unsalvagebale for any practical combat purposes.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      they are modernizing t-62's. So yeah, I'm sure they have a lot of t-80's around ready to go

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        I still can't believe that, it's only slightly more upgraded than a t54

  12. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    ://mobile.twitter.com/front_ukrainian/status/1636260285341155333
    WEBM.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Thanks man, I posted from my phone so no webm

      • 1 year ago
        Anonymous

        No worries, OP-anon, I use cloudconvert .com to covert MP4s to WEBMs when I use my phone.

  13. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The little advantage T-90M has in such situation over other vatnik garbage is too small to make a difference.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      >The little advantage T-90M has in such situation over other vatnik garbage is too small to make a difference.
      Russian military kit deserves a good ridiculing, but that's going a bit too far. T90M has a lot of modernizations that make it comparable to a lot of modern NATO tanks. The main technical deficiencies are poor crew ergonomics and the garbage reverse speed.

      The real deficiencies of the T90M is they're being operated by Russians. And the Russian military industrial complex simply cannot produce shit this advanced on a large scale. Hence why we're seeing so much literal soviet era junker tanks like the T-80BV showing up as combat loss replacements.

  14. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    so what is the vatnik cope on this ?
    >why do you think the t90m is a wunderwaffe lol , we have a gazilion of these , are you gonna be the same when the russians capture a m1a1 (all be it without du armor) in 2024 ?

  15. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    The T-90M is a piece of shit. The T-90 itself was an upgraded T-72 that Yelstin renamed to make it sound like a new modern tank. That T-90M was probably in a horrible state of long-overdue maintenance and refresh. If Russia couldn’t manage the vehicle then Ukraine absolutely can’t.

    They’ll tow it to some jalopy junkyard and get stripped for parts. IF it’s lucky and the junk-master there can patch up the engine and primary system still sort-of work then it might sit somewhere in Ukraine’s bastion defenses not doing anything.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      I think Ukraine has been in a "take what we can get" from the start

  16. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >I can't imagine another country leaving a Challenger 2, Abrams M1A2 or Leopard 2A6 in almost perfect condition to an enemy
    I just hope they train the Ukies on how to properly scuttled your vehicle too.

  17. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    its the mud season meaning lack of fuel supplies making it in time for a stuck tank consuming

  18. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    I think this is why we will never see T-14s deployed.

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, that’s why, not the fact that they have made 5 of them and 3 are inoperable because they need spare parts that are sanctioned.

  19. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    It doesn't look very usable, shits on fire.

  20. 1 year ago
    Anonymous

    >I can't imagine another country leaving a Challenger 2, Abrams M1A2 or Leopard 2A6 in almost perfect condition to an enemy able to repair and use them 3 times in a row.
    In a war where both sides are static with moments of movement in the front captured equipment is common. Don't be surprised when Ukrainians will let western tanks get captured

    • 1 year ago
      Anonymous

      There should be routines for scuttling tanks though, which I'm pretty sure the ukes have been trained in by our Western partners. Didn't perun get that tank autist to talk about once?

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *