It is difficult to provide an exact answer to exactly how many Russian tanks have been destroyed in Ukraine since there is limited and unreliable information available due to the complex nature of the conflict.
However, according to the Institute for the Study of War, the majority of Ukrainian deaths and the destruction of vehicles, including tanks, were caused by Russian forces. The Ukrainian Army claims to have destroyed over 500 Russian tanks and other military vehicles from the start of the conflict in 2014 to April 2015 alone.
Additionally, NATO has reported having observed over 150 tanks and other vehicles crossing the Russian border into Ukraine between August and November 2014. Therefore, it is estimated that hundreds of Russian tanks have been destroyed in Ukraine.
How many tanks has Russia lost in the Ukraine war so far?
According to a report from the United Nations approved in 2015, at least 6,831 military personnel and civilians have died in the conflict in the Ukraine since April 2014, when the war between Ukrainian forces and pro-Russian separatist forces began.
However, there has been no definitive report on how many tanks have been lost by either side in the war. Several studies suggest that the combined losses in tanks, other armoured vehicles and heavy artillery for both sides in the war amount to well over 1,500, based on various sources including interviews with fighters and media reports.
However, due to the fluid nature of the conflict and lack of information available, no reliable official figure on specific tank losses is available.
How many tanks have Russia destroyed?
It is difficult to pinpoint exactly how many tanks Russia has destroyed throughout its history, as records of such events often were not recorded or have been lost over time. However, there are some estimates that give a general idea of the amount of tanks destroyed by Russia.
For example, between the years 1944 to 1953, during the course of World War II and the Korean War, some estimates state that Russia destroyed more than 250,000 tanks. This number could even be higher, as many tanks were destroyed during the Siege of Leningrad, a nearly 900-day siege of the city on the Baltic Sea.
Other estimates place the number of tanks destroyed by Russia during this time period closer to 290,000. In addition, during the 1980s, an estimated 16,000 tanks were destroyed by Russia during their involvement in the Afghanistan and the Angolan Civil War.
Overall, the exact amount of tanks destroyed by Russia is unclear, however, the estimated range of tanks destroyed is likely between 250,000 and 310,000.
What percentage of Russian tanks have been destroyed?
It is difficult to accurately determine what percentage of Russian tanks have been destroyed, as there are a variety of factors that can affect this. For example, the type of tank and the battle conditions will have an effect on the number of tanks that are destroyed or damaged.
Additionally, due to the changing nature of information and the potential for discrepancies in records, the exact percentage of Russian tanks that have been destroyed is likely impossible to calculate.
However, the total number of tanks that have been destroyed can be estimated. According to some estimates, the Russian military may have lost up to 15,000 tanks in World War II, which would represent a significant portion of their total tank fleet during the decade of the war.
Additionally, there were losses in the 1970s and 1980s in various conflicts, and more recently, there were some losses in the wars in Chechnya and Georgia. Again, though, due to the changing nature of information, it is difficult to accurately determine the exact percentage that have been destroyed.
Have the Russians lost any tanks?
Yes, the Russians have lost some tanks. During World War II, they lost a huge number of tanks in battle, particularly to the Germans. According to some estimates, the Russians lost around 100,000 tanks in total during the conflict.
Furthermore, since the Soviet-era, Russian tanks have been destroyed or disabled on numerous occasions. For example, during the 1994-1995 Chechen conflict, many Russian forces used Soviet-built tanks, some of which were destroyed or damaged in battle.
In more recent years, in areas such as the Ukrainian conflict, Russian tank forces have also been exposed to unprecedented levels of firepower from anti-tank weapons. Consequently, estimates suggest that several hundred more Russian tanks have been destroyed or damaged in recent years.
Does Russia have a better tank than us?
It depends on how the comparison is being made, as there are a variety of factors to consider when comparing tanks. In terms of quantity, Russia has many more tanks in its military arsenal than the United States, with around 20,000 compared to 8,000.
It is also worth noting that the majority of Russia’s tanks are of the T-72 and T-90 variants, which are modernized with improved armor, engines, and weapons. Additionally, the Russian military has invested significant resources in developing proven and reliable Autonomous Combat AI, which can be used to operate tanks with high efficiency and accuracy.
When comparing the two militaries based on performance, the United States has had more success in modern warfare engagements, including in Iraq and Afghanistan. The United States is also known for having some of the most advanced, high-performance tanks like the M1 Abrams, which have superior armor protection and fire support capabilities.
The M1 is also equipped with the most advanced, accurate fire control systems, and is considered the most lethal tank on the battlefield.
Ultimately, it is difficult to determine which side has the better tank, as both countries have powerful and effective tanks in their inventories. It is likely that both countries have their own advantages and disadvantages when it comes to tank capabilities, so it is important to take a comprehensive look at all aspects of the comparison before making a definitive judgement.
Are Russian tanks failing in Ukraine?
It is difficult to definitively answer whether or not Russian tanks are failing in Ukraine as opinions and sources are varied. Many arguments coming from the Russian side assert that any failures of Russian tanks in Ukraine are due to the tanks being too outdated and their technologies not advanced enough to effectively operate in Ukrainian terrain.
This view is further strengthened by the fact that the Ukrainian military does have more modern tanks than those operated by Russian forces.
On the other hand, the Ukrainian side largely denies any ineffectiveness of Russian tanks in Ukraine, claiming that Russian forces have already successfully used their tanks against Ukrainian forces for over five years now.
This includes instances of Russian tanks having been seen in and around the cities of Donetsk and Luhansk in the east of Ukraine, where there is an on-going conflict between Ukrainian government forces and pro-Russian separatists.
With Poland, the United States and other allies providing military aid and equipment to the Ukrainian military, it is possible that Russian tanks may become increasingly ineffective in the future due to advances in tank technology and the forces in Ukraine having greater access to more moder equipment.
Additionally, the recent revitalization of the Ukrainian defense industry has seen a development of modern and advanced Ukrainian tanks, which are beginning to be fielded in Ukrainian troops. This could also lead to a shift in the balance of power in Ukraine, putting increased pressure on Russian forces.
Overall, it is difficult to tell whether or not Russian tanks are failing in Ukraine, as there are different interpretations of the situation depending who you ask. What is certain is that Ukrainian forces having increased access to more modern equipment, combined with the revitalization of their defense industry, is forcing Russia to reassess their tactics, weaponry and strategy in Ukraine if they are to remain effective.
What country has the fighter jets?
Most countries around the world have fighter jets as part of their military arsenal. Several major military powers are known to possess fighter jets, including the United States, Russia, China, France, the United Kingdom, and Israel.
The United States operates an array of different types of fighter jets, including the F-15 Eagle, F-16 Fighting Falcon, F/A-18 Hornet, and the F-22 Raptor. Russia has the Sukhoi Su-27 and Su-30, as well as the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG series.
China has the Chengdu J-10, Shenyang J-11 and J-15, among other versions. France operates the Dassault Rafale, and the United Kingdom flies the Eurofighter Typhoon. Israel uses the F-16, as well as the F-15 and Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II.
How many Russian Su-34 have been shot down?
Unfortunately, the exact number of Russian Su-34 aircraft that have been shot down is unclear. The Su-34, which has been in service since 2014, has only seen limited combat over the last six years, making it difficult to ascertain how many have been shot down.
Reports from Syria in 2017 of two Su-34s being hit were never confirmed, though Russia has acknowledged the loss of two Su-34s near Homs in 2016. In addition, those Su-34s lost in this incident were destroyed during a test of a new weapons system and the collision of two aircraft caused by poor visibility.
The Su-34 is highly versatile and is equipped with weaponry able to take on both air and ground targets, making it one of the most advanced fighter-bomber aircraft in the world. When combined with the relatively short time the aircraft has been in service and its limited use in combat, it is safe to say that very few if any Su-34s have been shot down.
Is the Su-34 any good?
The Su-34 is a impressive combat jet that has been in service since 2014. On the ground attacking side, it is able to stay in the air for long periods of time, allowing it to stay on target for longer.
It also offers a variety of weapons including unguided rockets, cannons, and anti-tank guided missiles.
The Su-34 is also an incredibly durable aircraft, having shown immense resilience to enemy fire and the elements. It was designed to operate in the most hostile and unpredictable environments, and its ability to take damage is extremely impressive.
In the air, the Su-34 is a formidable opponent. It has formidable manoeuvering capabilities, allowing it to outmanoeuver most other aircraft. Additionally, it also has great speed and impressive range, allowing it to quickly reach targets from long distances.
Overall, the Su-34 is an impressive aircraft and a great asset for any air force. It’s capable of performing a wide range of missions and it offers a great mix of durability and power to those who fly it.
Who would win F-35 or Su-35?
It is impossible to definitively answer the question of who would win in a hypothetical battle between the F-35 and Su-35, as many variables could influence the outcome. The F-35 is a fifth-generation multi-role fighter crafted by Lockheed Martin and is currently the most advanced fighter aircraft in the world.
It was designed with stealth capabilities as well as superior agility and maneuverability. It has an advanced avionics suite with integrated information from external sensors and advanced weapons systems.
The F-35 is equipped with air-to-air and air-to-ground weapons, making it versatile in combat.
By contrast, the Su-35 is a fourth-generation fighter designed by Russia’s Sukhoi. It is a single-role air superiority fighter designed for dogfighting and combat operations beyond visual range. The Su-35 is subsonic, with more conventional avionics, weapons and mobility compared to the F-35.
It has excellent sensors, weapons, and countermeasurescapacity.
In a hypothetical fight between the F-35 and Su-35, the F-35 would likely have the advantage thanks to its advanced avionics, sensors, and weapons. Its stealth capabilities mean that it is unlikely the Su-35 would be able to detect the F-35 before it enters combat range.
The F-35’s superior agility and maneuverability could give it a decisive edge over the Su-35 in close-range dogfights. Ultimately, the outcome of such a fight would depend on a number of variables including the pilots’ skill level, tactics on either side, and the level of experience of each aircraft.
What is Russia’s fighter jet?
The Russian fighter jet is the Sukhoi Su-57, a fifth-generation multi-role stealth fighter jet that was first introduced in 2009. The Su-57 is designed to replace the ageing Su-27 Flanker and MiG-29 Fulcrum fighters in the Russian Air Force.
It is equipped with a range of modern features, including a twin-engine configuration, supercruise capability, integrated avionics, and advanced stealth technology. The Su-57 also has extremely potent weapons payload, including a 30 mm cannon, and is capable of carrying up to 8,000 kg of ordnance.
The aircraft is fitted with powerful integrated avionics and advanced sensors, including an air-to-air radar, infra-red search and track (IRST) sensors and high-precision electro-optic targeting systems.
The Su-57 also has the ability to deploy hypersonic cruise missiles and a range of other air-to-ground ordnance from internal bays.
Is the SU better than MiG?
This is a difficult question to answer definitively because both the SU and the MiG have unique advantages and disadvantages. On the whole, the SU is generally seen as superior to the MiG in terms of military capabilities, but the MiG is better suited for certain missions.
The SU is primarily an air superiority fighter, meaning that its capabilities are geared towards attacking enemy aircraft and providing air support for ground troops. The SU boasts superior defenses and an impressive suite of high-tech capabilities, such as the ability to detect and avoid most radar detection systems.
Additionally, the SU is capable of long-range missions, making it a great asset in the sky.
The MiG is not designed for the same type of missions as the SU and instead is better suited for ground attack and close air support missions. The MiG is suited for ground attack missions due to its large payload capacity and its ability to perform extreme maneuvers.
Additionally, the MiG’s large engine provides it with excellent speed and acceleration, making it well-suited for dogfights. However, the MiG lacks the range and defensive capabilities of the SU, making it less capable in air-to-air combat.
In conclusion, both the SU and MiG have unique strengths and weaknesses that make them suitable for different types of missions. The SU is better suited for air superiority missions, while the MiG is ideal for ground attack and close air support missions.
Ultimately, it is up to the user’s mission profile and preferences to determine which aircraft is best for their particular needs.
Does the Su-34 have a toilet?
No, the Sukhoi Su-34 does not have a toilet. This multi-role fighter-bomber aircraft is designed for long-range interdiction missions of up to 4,000 kilometers and can stay in the air for up to 8 hours, so accommodation for a toilet is not necessary.
The only amenities on board are two weaponisation stations, a navigation system, and a communications system. The aircraft is intended for speed and maneuverability, and having a toilet would add extra weight and complexity to the plane.
To relieve themselves, pilots have traditionally used “relief tubes” which are portable plastic containers for them to urinate into during flight.
Which was better the F-15 or the Su-35?
It’s difficult to definitively say which aircraft is better – the F-15 or the Su-35. Both the F-15 and the Su-35 have impressive performance capabilities and impressive battle records. The F-15 has been a reliable workhorse used by the United States Air Force since 1976 and is renowned for its success in air-to-air combat.
It is highly maneuverable and has a maximum speed of Mach 2. 5. The Su-35 is a multi-role fighter that has been used by Russia since 2008 and is known for its agility and maneuverability. It also has a maximum speed of Mach 2.
5 and is equipped with highly advanced avionics, making it a formidable opponent in the skies. Both aircraft are determined by their weapons and the pilot’s ability to make the best of their aircraft, so it’s difficult to make a general comparison without more specific information on the capabilities of each aircraft.
