There’s nothing in that wrecked hulk, I’d want to see up close and personal.
3 Likes
Yep, especially if using DU rounds. 
2 Likes
CAESAR again
Oldie recycling ?
H.P.
5 Likes
Ah… the pristine promise of what may be!
Darn, it looks like it came straight from a storage facility after standing decades out in the open…
1 Like
The venerable MAZ above is used by the Donetsk People’s Republic militia in Mariupol.
Rather Shrek than Terminator…
I wonder where Mr P. got his idea of the “V” marking ? 
H.P.
1 Like
Some Russian tanks have found a different way of traveling…
H.P.
3 Likes
Ukrainian ressourcefullness : NLAW transport case used as a portable shower :
H.P.
6 Likes
H.P.
3 Likes
That would mean they’re scraping the bottom of the barrel…
https://twitter.com/i/status/1529404520828133380
H.P.
4 Likes
C’mon, T-62’s? That’s sad. We know they only had 900 running T-72’s to begin with, but did they go through all of those already? I guess so. I can’t believe the Russians haven’t prioritized getting some of their 8,100 deadlined T-72’s running again. That would be far preferable to fielding T-62’s. Russia’s equipment shortage is obviously much, much more serious than first thought and they only have examples of their latest vehicles numbering in the dozens or less. Russia is a massive facade. The huge Soviet war machine is obviously a hulking, rusting carcass unavailable to the Russians, like the rotting hulls of Russian nuclear subs leaning on one another in ports around their country.
6 Likes
Unless they are saving those for home defense in case someone gets froggy.
3 Likes
Nope. They have 8,100 T-72 that are missing parts and entire engines. No replacement parts. They won’t be running anytime soon. They only have 9 BMPT Terminators. They only have 334 T-90’s which have been discovered to be no better than the T-72’s. Most of them are stationed out east in units along the Chinese border. They have 19 T-14’s.
T-62’s today?
T-55’s tomorrow?
T-34-85’s next week?
Pulling KV-1’s out of museums by New Year’s at this rate?
1 Like
I have read and seen pictures of T-62’s deployed in Afghanistan, Chechnya and Georgia during the wars there. Now I’m not sure about ‘scraping the barrel’ or that sort of thing- but the reason for them being deployed during these earlier wars was about cost. In Afghanistan they did not face any serious opposition armor (the odd old or captured piece) so why deploy newer, more costly platforms like the T-64/72/80, when all that was needed was a cheaper T-62 of which there were still many about. In Chechnya it was about cost- the rather cash-strapped Russian government (during the first war) saw using the T-62 as a cost-saving measure while still retaining an armor force- they had already lost quite a few T-72 and 80s both to user error and the enemy. The T-62 fulfilled the role of armor adequately and cheaper. The same was broadly true of Georgia where the most advanced Georgian tanks were upgraded T-72s and, with complete and effective Russian air superiority, not much of a threat.
I would not be at all surprised to find a similar conclusion has been made here- whether that is ‘scraping the barrel’ or prudent I can’t say but I just thought some might find the info interesting.
2 Likes