Russian armed forces reportedly received 1 tanks in 500

According to estimates, the Russian armed forces have lost between 2 and 200 combat tanks since the start of the special military operation. These losses represent, more or less, 2% of the number of operational tanks in Russian units before the start of the conflict.

Like tanks, all major equipment used in Ukraine has experienced very high attrition rates, ranging from 15 to 20% for piloted flying equipment (combat aircraft, helicopters), to more than 70% for front-line armored vehicles, such as the BMP and the BTR.

Despite appalling losses, the Russian armies retain very significant military potential

Despite these losses which should have dissuaded any other attacker from ending the conflict, according to the Ukrainian general staff's own admission, Moscow seems, today, more determined than ever to continue its military action. , without them undermining Russian military potential to its breaking point, as shown by the failure of the Ukrainian counter-offensive.

If the absorption of human losses, all as important as material losses, is a matter of the Kremlin's control and its propaganda over minds, maintaining a significant military potential, despite the attrition of equipment, is not possible. only through a formidable industrial effort, going well beyond the capabilities of which the Russian defense industry was capable before the conflict.

Russian T-62s towards the front
Of the 1 tanks announced delivered by the Russian Ministry of Defense, a significant portion is made up of old models emerging from the cocoon, and sent quickly to the front, like this T-500

This topic has been discussed several times on this site, from January 2023. However, partly due to a very poorly balanced Ukrainian communication, aimed at presenting the imminence of a total victory as probable to support the commitment of the West, but also public opinion in the country, it was only once considered the failure of the Ukrainian summer counter-offensive unavoidable.

Not only was it then obvious that the Russian armies had retained a significant operational potential, but suddenly, the threat represented by the rise of Russian military industrial production became a strategic issue, to convince the West to increase their military aid to Kyiv.

1 tanks and 500 armored combat vehicles delivered by the Russian defense industry in 2

The figures announced this week by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu tend to confirm the reality of this threat, for Ukraine, and beyond, for Europe. In a summary document concerning Russian military industrial production for 2023, quoted by the Tass Agency, the Ministry of Defense announces, in fact, having received no less than 1 combat tanks, or at least as many as it lost over the year, probably more.

This same document relates the delivery of 2 armored combat vehicles, 200 artillery systems and rocket launchers, as well as 1 vehicles, including 400 armored vehicles over the year. No less than 12 drones of different types were also delivered this year alone.

Uralvagonzavod factory
The production of new battle tanks by the Uralvagonzavod factory today probably reaches around thirty units per month. This number could increase in the coming months, if indeed, the production of new turbines allows the resumption of T-80 production.

There are 75% of this article left to read, Subscribe to access it!

The Classic subscriptions provide access to
articles in their full version, and without advertising.

Meta-Defense celebrates its 5th anniversary!

LOGO meta defense 114 Building armored vehicles | Defense News | MBT battle tanks

- 20% on your Classic or Premium subscription, with the code Metanniv24

Offer valid from May 10 to 20 for the online subscription of a new Classic or Premium, annual or weekly subscription on the Meta-Defense website.

For further


  1. I am stunned, revolted and angry that we are not seeing any awareness and major investment in defense and production. After Ukraine, it is us who will be the target of the Russians, that is a certainty and we will be naked and they will not hesitate for a single second to crush us whether militarily, economically or by all means possible until our total collapse. Although I think that our leaders are not idiots, I am far from reassured by what I see.

  2. We must first count on ourselves.
    What are we doing in France to produce munitions (the most effective, such as cluster bombs), modern well-protected tanks, armored vehicles and means of crossing, en masse? On our own, we should make the same effort as the Poles and make the Russians want to play with us. This requires a change in the format of our conventional but also nuclear forces: if the Russians were to atomize us 50 times, they must be certain that they would be wiped out at least once by our means alone...
    There is an urgent need to produce equipment and ammunition, and to arm Ukraine so that the Russians not only cannot win on the ground, but can be pushed back from the conquered territories.
    Only force can end this war, by forcing the Russians to negotiate.
    For, they think they are strong.

  3. MoD data is, by definition, subject to caution! Their information is part of the disinformation usual in any conflict where each side increases the adversary's losses and minimizes its own. To have caused the Russians to suffer such losses, the Ukrainians must have suffered, relatively speaking, as many if not more with the disadvantage of not being able to replace them. It would therefore be interesting to know their residual capacities.
    As for the rest, I am appalled to see the effects of media disinformation: Russia is therefore preparing the invasion of Europe, something that it was incapable of achieving when it was the USSR and dominated the 3 /4 from Eastern Europe?
    Beyond the erroneous assessment relating to our nuclear capabilities, the use of which is not a matter of a level of power but of a political will to use them, I note that the reasoning remains that of defending ourselves against the Russians until 'to the last Ukrainian! As for the negotiation, should we remember that twice the Ukrainians proposed it to the Russians who were in favor of it but that the Anglo-Saxons forced Zelinski to give it up? Now that US and European aid is drying up, it would indeed be time for Ukraine to put its thumbs up even under conditions less advantageous for it.

    • Dear @Jean Michel, I note with pleasure that you take us (me) for an idiot by claiming that we are imagining the invasion of Europe by Russia, there was never any question of that. Of course I'm not afraid of the T-72s on the Champs Elysées but there are many ways to wage war on a country and destroy it than with weapons, and who better than the Russians with the experience of the USSR can know better?

      You also seem to be just as freely spitting out Russian propaganda to find out about the negotiations and the associated arguments; the war is being waged against us by Russia, not the other way around and it's not even me who's saying it…….you just have to watch their television news with the simulations of nuclear attacks on our capitals and the associated propaganda which is deployed everywhere. Moreover, it is they who theorized the policy of balance of power and fait accompli, if you do not see the DIRECT threat that they represent for us, Ukraine being only the beginning (Novorossia plan ) then there is nothing more to discuss we are not on the same planet.
      As for the Ukrainians, only they will give a thumbs up when they decide to do so and I don't want to go as far as the last Ukrainians, that's clear but without our FULL and COMPLETE MASSIVE support these are not "less" conditions. advantageous" that we are talking about…..but the end of the country purely and simply as well as a continuation of the conflict on all possible fronts (Moldova, Suwalki corridor, EU in general, Africa, etc…) and if we do not show our muscles……we will be crushed politically and economically by the Russo-Chinese axis which does not even hide it.
      Whether to support Ukraine or simply to show that we will not let this happen, a MASSIVE re-armament is obligatory to at least make up for the decades of peace dividends due to our naivety in the face of Putin and then reaffirm our Rank of power.

      • So, I can't read anymore! You write: “After Ukraine, it is us who will be the target of the Russians, that is a certainty and we will be naked and they will not hesitate for a single second to crush us whether militarily, economically or through all possible means until our total collapse. » So, I do not take you for an idiot, if that had been the case I would have said so, but for a citizen under the influence of the European media for whom Russia is evil.
        As for the negotiations, I am not spitting out propaganda at all but only citing the information collected in works relating to this conflict as well as in the European and US press, which does not seem to be your case.
        I do not in fact see any Russian danger because, here too you are wrong, Russia is not waging war on Europe but the USA is waging war on Russia and if we had not followed like oxen the economic sanctions decided by the USA – which do not bother them in any way, quite the contrary – we would not experience the current energy and consequently economic problems.
        So you are going to tell me that it is dangerous to have an aggressive Russia on the European border (although Ukraine is not Europe) but the opposite is true for Russia with NATO on its borders which since 1989, contrary to Reagan's commitments, has continued its expansion towards the East.
        A long time ago we should have considered Russia as part of Europe and got out of the thing (NATO) to take charge of our affairs and let the USA manage its international shenanigans alone (2nd Gulf War, Afghanistan between others). The way things are going, will we have to wage war on China for Uncle Sam? Well let's see, let's build boats and warn the Chinese, we're going to hold the Pacific! I see their reaction, between amazement and downright laughter. With what budget, armed with what crews, powered by what oil, with what weapons. Come back to earth, the massive rearmament you speak of is an illusion and we are no longer a great power. We may regret it, I am, but it's a fact! What remains for us is that we have know-how in certain areas which could ensure that we are protected but since I read the memoirs of VGE, who admitted that he would never have given the order nuclear fire, there is some doubt that remains in the fact that we are still a great nation.
        In any case, rest assured about the fate of the Ukrainians, it will be settled by a direct Russo-American agreement from which Europe will be excluded and everything will return to normal. The USA is what it is, but politically pragmatists and, if Putin's diplomatic vagrancy causes them problems, they will do what has to be done in their interests!

        • Obviously you have fallen into the trap of Russian propaganda.
          To argue with them was to lose one's soul and fortunately we did not do that.
          Your stories of energy and lack in France do not exist, we only have the mourners of the Lome law who fall back to earth (and it is very beneficial for my taxes)
          For the rest, you all forget a major point of a conflict and you all remain stuck in your trenches with your mortars: the third dimension!!
          When we see how the Russian anti-aircraft shines against DIY contraptions, how do they stop them? Rafale/Typhoon/F35 the Russians?

  4. You are certainly right: let's not argue with the Russians and preserve our dear souls! As a result, the war continues and the Ukrainians only lose their lives! It's not a big deal if I believe your reasoning? Europe, and finally certain countries including ours, have no worries? Really ? Having linked the price of electricity to that of shale gas that the USA sells to us 3 times that of Russian gas is not a problem for individuals as much as industry? If this isn't the case for you, that's fine.
    War is not only the quality of the materials that confront each other but also their volume and the capacity to replace them, this is called the war economy and in this area, the Russians seem to be one step ahead of We. The 3rd dimension is certainly a significant element but from a certain point, you have to occupy the ground, right? And for that, you need personnel, tanks, mortars, artillery, finally, you have to make contact.

  5. This shale gas bullshit is above all a publicity stunt by environmental activists.

    France consumes very little gas in volume compared to its electricity. And other suppliers remain solid like Norway or Qatar.

    You are confusing France and Germany for the gas issue.

    As for ground occupation, it is the doctrine that takes precedence (we just have to see what Ukraine manages to do with 3 marders and 4 CV90s). And when it comes to doctrine, the Soviets were stuck 80 years ago.

    To conclude, you remind me a little of that section of France in 1940 which thought it would solve the Hitler problem by negotiating. 6 months later the tanks were in Paris………


Last articles