Losses occur. Could be 5 or 10 or 20. This is expected.
Ukraine doesnt have a shortage of tanks. I want to know how many crew have been lost from those 14/20.
I was about to suggest that many of these lists are conservative because they rely on (often only OSINT) visually documented losses, but I’ll let *the opening statement of the linked article itself speak for me:*
> This list only includes destroyed vehicles and equipment of which photo or videographic evidence is available. Therefore, the amount of equipment destroyed is significantly higher than recorded here.
So 20 actual is likely within the margin of error of 14 visually confirmed.
In the end, it’s kind of nitpicking. Either is actually a big chunk of what they had, but losses happen (the US lost several Abrams over the last 20 years to insurgents without armor). But as tank battles go, we were hoping for a Battle of 73 Easting.
That was a very unique set of circumstances, though, where the desert provided the perfect environment for longer range optics and targeting. In Eastern Europe, it’s more like WW2 battles, *in which it’s estimated 50-60% of Shermans were damaged or destroyed.*
I personally think that from a logistics and expense standpoint, there were better choices than Abrams, but that doesn’t mean that the individual units weren’t useful in combat. So without knowing the type of damage/destruction/mobility kills/capture/what engaged them/their mission risk profile/successful missions prior to the loss, those numbers really don’t mean much.
Despite any shortcomings the basic principle of the Oryx database is still the best. If you see a claim made check Oryx first. If Oryx is way off think why. Add a comment on the original post about letting people know, then move on. Fighting the bots is useless. The mods need to do that and we can’t.
6 comments
Here you all go. So stupid
https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/s/OPRWrmDhJq
“Over 20 Abrams lost or captured”
Losses occur. Could be 5 or 10 or 20. This is expected.
Ukraine doesnt have a shortage of tanks. I want to know how many crew have been lost from those 14/20.
I was about to suggest that many of these lists are conservative because they rely on (often only OSINT) visually documented losses, but I’ll let *the opening statement of the linked article itself speak for me:*
> This list only includes destroyed vehicles and equipment of which photo or videographic evidence is available. Therefore, the amount of equipment destroyed is significantly higher than recorded here.
So 20 actual is likely within the margin of error of 14 visually confirmed.
In the end, it’s kind of nitpicking. Either is actually a big chunk of what they had, but losses happen (the US lost several Abrams over the last 20 years to insurgents without armor). But as tank battles go, we were hoping for a Battle of 73 Easting.
That was a very unique set of circumstances, though, where the desert provided the perfect environment for longer range optics and targeting. In Eastern Europe, it’s more like WW2 battles, *in which it’s estimated 50-60% of Shermans were damaged or destroyed.*
I personally think that from a logistics and expense standpoint, there were better choices than Abrams, but that doesn’t mean that the individual units weren’t useful in combat. So without knowing the type of damage/destruction/mobility kills/capture/what engaged them/their mission risk profile/successful missions prior to the loss, those numbers really don’t mean much.
Despite any shortcomings the basic principle of the Oryx database is still the best. If you see a claim made check Oryx first. If Oryx is way off think why. Add a comment on the original post about letting people know, then move on. Fighting the bots is useless. The mods need to do that and we can’t.
Wow. This is such a rule-breaking title