If we look at the February 2024 video and the most recent ones, we see a drop in towed and self-propelled artillery systems of about 1.000 pieces. However, Ukraine claims almost 9.000 pieces destroyed in that same time. Where is this discrepancy coming from?
Hey kid, I don't mean to be an a-hole here, but are you now just openly telling the world that you partner with Radio Free Nobody? How did that happen? Did they come to you, or did you go to them? We'll know based on how fast this comment gets deleted. For seventy-four effing years these guys have been run by the US State Dept, CIA, and a whole lot of other people way worse. And you're working with them now??? These guys are the archetypes of message management --- and by the way they've killed an AWFUL lot of innocent people -- people who were not bullies. I don't know who the f you think you're helping in this world. But whatever they gave you, turn it down. Whatever they threatened you with, tell them to do their worst. We don't have time for this.
I remember reading the book Red Storm Rising by Tom Clancy, which was written in the mid 80s, and one intel officer tells another that the USSR still has WW2 artillery in reserve. I remember thinking how ridiculous that sounded, and here we are now another forty years down the road with Russia actually using those WW2 pieces.
Clancy way overestimated the Russian's capabilities. He didn't take their corruption into account. (Red Storm Rising is a great book. Absolutely well worth the read.)
@@Kyle-sr6jm Red Storm Rising devotes multiple chapters to resolving the Soviet corruption problems. It is also very clear that Soviet corruption, while troublesome, did not match the severity of Russian corruption in 2022. Clancy also overestimates the West. Tank battles are hideously idealistic, and his fictional version of the F-117 Nighthawk is much more like an F-22 than the real thing. In Red Storm Rising, this is extremely significant--the Frisbees take down the Soviet AWACS fleet on day one, which cripples their air war and in turn cripples the land war. This couldn't happen, because the F-117 didn't even have so much as an RWR, let alone active radar to acquire targets.
@@Kyle-sr6jm he and Larry Bond did in Red Storm Rising: they had officers executed for lying on unit task reports. Besides, this was the Soviet Army then, not the Russians now.
Great report. An additional problem with older equipment is that due to lower accuracy, more shells will have to be fired to destroy the target - which will increase ammunition consumption and accelerate barrel degradation. And older gun models have a shorter range, which will only increase combat losses. It's a snowball - the problems will only increase over time.
@@czinn327 I think this war will not last until winter. Trump's election is the Russians' last hope - they will survive until the beginning of November - counting on Trump giving them Ukraine for free. If Kamala wins, it may end with a sudden breakdown in morale for the Russians - because they will know that there is no hope for victory as long as Ukraine has support.
@@czinn327 I think the conflict will not last until winter. Trump's election is the Russians' last hope - they will do absolutely everything to survive until the beginning of November - counting on Trump to give them Ukraine for free. If Kamala wins, it may end with a sudden breakdown in morale for the Russians - because they will know that there is no hope for victory as long as Ukraine has support.
@@czinn327 The last hope of the Russians is the election of Trump in the USA. The Russians will hold on until November, hoping that they will get Ukraine for free from Trump. If Harris wins, their morale may finally break - because they will not be able to win as long as Ukraine has support from the West. Winter won't help them in any way - the previous ones didn't help.
I did my Finnish conscript service in artillery, and one downside of towed artillery is what to do if counterbattery fire is expected. Self-propelled artillery can fire a strike and drive far outside the CIP oval of stuff which soon comes whistling down.
Modern warfare as shown in Ukraine has kamikaze and reconnaissance drones. So even if towed artillery is moved before the counterbattery fire starts, that doesn't mean that drones wouldn't swarm over the area in search of their "prey". PS If Russia's remaining artillery is with effective range less than 15km, then they've got to get pretty close to zero line meaning more easily get discovered by air and be neutralized.
@fredthefish581 I don't think that SPArty has inherently more range, itss advantage is that the window between firing and getting the hell out of there is much shorter
One thing that often goes unmentioned in these videos is that if artillery is too inaccurate it can actually be counterproductive to fire. With counter battery radar once the shells start falling the enemy can see your position and shoot back. If you can destroy your target and then move within a minute or two then that's okay but if you give away your position and can't hit your target then it would have been better to just not shoot to begin with. In terms of artillery if the quality is bad enough you eventually hit a point that you can't make up for it with quantity.
Imagine planners in the 60s knowing that in 60 years the public will get 30cm resolution satelite imagry from Russia, only 9 times worse than the theoretical maximum resolution of space base satelite imagry. They would be mind blown.
There's no single maximum resolution It depends on the altitude, aperture and wavelength It's entirely possible to go lower and have a bigger aperture synthetically - SAR
@@karliszauers1 tor optics and satellite there is a limit given the presence of atmosphere. It is about 5cm per pixel and it was reached almost a the dawn of spy satellites program back in 60th as we now know.
@@karliszauers1 well, eventually you will run out of photons to detect, so yeah, there are physics theoretical limits to that too, which is incidentally also why it is positively impossible to detect a civilisation like ours by any radio or laser emissions we could possibly muster, from more than approx. 200 light years from earth.
@@karliszauers1 as to SAR there is still the time-integration limit, as in, you would need to capture photons over extended amount of time. So yes, there are good physical limits there
Both of those sound like they'd offer significant advantages in tactical mobility over what Russia is actually having to use. A toad-mounted artillery, hopping around the battlefield, brings a new meaning to the term shoot and scoot.
@@StrangerHappened M30s have been confirmed on the frontline ... so whats the "fairytale"? also - if this war is not in crisis for Russia - why is it even still onging - did russia really plan on a multiyear war in which ukrainians would occupy parts of russia?
@bloodlustshiva1 the man pays THOUSANDS of dollars on high quality satellite imagery. He could put out 1 video a week that's just ads and I'd still support him
Man i would not want to be a new crew member given a 50 year old arty. "hey what happened to the last team and our new cannons?" "ehhh if you hear buzzing duck and you wont end up like them" O_O
The fact that people can now buy high-resolution satellite images of military bases worldwide is so insane. Remember how the USA and the USSR were breaking the bank to develop stealth planes to take areal pictures of each other? How Americans taking pictures of Chernobyl from space was a big deal in unveiling the scale of the disaster? How times have changed. Thank you for your work.
Russian military bases... "Remember how the USA and the USSR were breaking the bank to develop stealth planes to take areal pictures of each other?" ekhm, that was 60+ yers ago... "The Treaty on Open Skies establishes a program of unarmed aerial surveillance flights over the entire territory of its participants. The treaty is designed to enhance mutual understanding and confidence by giving all participants, regardless of size, a direct role in gathering information about military forces and activities of concern to them. It entered into force on 1 January 2002, and currently has 34 party states."
The reason you use spy planes is because satellites have a maximum resolution due to the atmosphere, not because of Cameras. We reached that maximum pretty much at the dawn of satellites.
There are statements online from supposed Donetsk area Russians that Artillery is not attached at all in that area, that all fire missions are requested of what may be mercenary units, but certainly stand-alone, and that the quality of artillery is generally, as you noted, old and bad.
The Ukrainians just opened up another front in Kursk. The Kursk offensive is slowing down because the Russians had to divert approx 40,000 troops there, creating the need for another mobilization.
It will be interesting to see how many of the remaining third are usable or even good for parts. Given the massive reported Russian artillery loses, it's clear Ukraine is well aware of their impending shortage and are doing everything they can to accelerate the depletion of the stored artillery.
Yeah, if Ukraine wanted to focus on degrading Russia's artillery prior to a counter offensive then that would make a lot of sense. At this rate it doesnt look like the war will end until some counter offensive by Ukraine in 2026.
It is possible that most of the remaining pieces in storage might still be viable. This is just a thought I've had. But what if the russians are actually scrapping the carcasses of old artillery once they've been stripped of useful components? That would get a lot of old, decrepit pieces out of the storage yards (in addition to all the good guns that get shipped off to Ukraine). The remaining guns would then mostly be of 'mediocre' quality: old, need some work to get fully functional, but not absolute garbage. I don't know. It'd be a reasonable thing to do, but this is russia. If it is to someones advantage to keep rusting scrap on the books, not only will it stay on the books but they'll look for ways to get useful equipment declared as scrap.
@@kulio1214 Probably my comment was a bit misleading. It's clear that only part of the removed weaponry was destroyed, some was used as spare parts, and another part is still in service. But we don't really observe increase of artillery usage throughout the war, the most intense usage was in the first year of the invasion. As russians started to field guns from the 40th and 50th like M-46, we can assume high arty losses and Russia burning though its soviet stocks quite fast. Of course, they still have a lot and it will not be like tomorrow they end up with no artillery, but the trend is promising.
@@afcgeo882 He did account for them. He explicitly mentioned that these pieces need to be shipped into battle and destroyed before they can truly be counted as lost.
@martinchabot_FR there once was a 130mm, and I'm quite sure some of the old tanks were actually pressed into services as SP artillery, simply because otherwise unusable ammo was available for them.
The real issue, to my mind, is the lack of maintenance that these older pieces doubtlessly suffered from for decades. How many of them are still operable? They might be able to cannibalize some for repair parts, but that would require time, and decrease the overall amount of pieces available.
@@michaelf7093 Yeah in limited use - M 46 field gun uses 130mm - it has a range of over 40km and was for few decades longest ranged artillery in the world. After 30 years++ it was surpassed by today's modern western stuff.
I have a couple of questions. First, how many of the pieces taken out of storage are to replace lost equipment versus reinforcing existing units or equipping new ones? Second, what is Russia's barrel production? Manufacturing whole artillery units is more complex and resource-intensive than manufacturing individual parts, so what is Russia's industrial ability to continue to maintain its deployed units?
Their industrial capacity is their main strength. They're running 24 hour shifts making shells, vehicles, tanks, etc. Combining that with their random stockpiles of spares, they're miles ahead of Ukraine at the moment - even with international support which is slowly waning.
"how many of the pieces taken out of storage are to replace lost equipment versus reinforcing existing units or equipping new ones" I'm not sure how you determine the difference between replacing losses and reinforcing. You mean strengthening a unit by adding additional artillery pieces? Someone with more military experience than me can probably answer how useful it is to attach towed artillery to an infantry platoon. I haven't heard anything to make me think Russia is forming a significant amount of additional units and not just replacing losses. If they are, they're doing it out of range of a mobile phone network, or they confiscated all the smartphones of the soldiers. Or the soldiers are actually maintaining secrecy for a change. Regardless of which of the three it is, I'd be amazed they pulled it off. "what is Russia's barrel production" We don't know, but we do know we probably shouldn't believe anything Russia tells us. They have no reason to tell the truth, and every reason to lie. And, additionally, have been known to lie about such things. "what is Russia's industrial ability to continue to maintain its deployed units?" As we don't have sufficient information, we don't know the exact details except that the overall answer is 'insufficient'. The reason why we can say that it is insufficient is because we see older and older equipment among the visually confirmed losses at the front. They weren't scrapped for parts, they were being used and either were destroyed or got too worn down to be used. There is no reason to bring ww2 era artillery to the front if you're able to maintain your deployed units with better equipment.
@@oskar6661 the point is it not just about production but also about usage. The russien way of war tends to use a lot more artillery to have a tendency of a smaller effect on target. It begins with the caliber and ends just with the pur amount the russiens are firing compared to the ukrainens and what those pieces of equipment are achiving because so far I cant see a front line where the russiens have made a war deceding breakthrough. At this rate the war will be going on far a couple of years to come and than slowly but surely they will encounter problems concerning their production numbers and their loss rates and as long as ukraine has nato support I cant imagen a world where the ukrainiens will reach the breaking point before the russians do.
so i know Russia has no own barell smith rotating machines. Some are US made of the late 40th and one from Austria 2018. So they have only spare barrels for the old guns in stocks and for newer guns a limited production. A 152mm barrel must be changed after 1000 shots or the gun is more and more inaccurat, but i think Russions dont care about.
So you tow out a single gun somewhere, have it shoot one round at the enemy, the people run away, the enemy uses their radar and shoots a bunch of other things at the now-abandoned and obsolete artillery piece that probably wouldn't get many shots through its barrel anyway. That would seem like a pretty good tactic in the attrition warfare, if the enemy is also running very low on artillery.
yeah this 0-1 thinking of most people is annoying. tank can be destroyed - therefore its useless, obsolete. Arty can be destroyed by counter batter - useless, obsolete.... --.-- infantry can be destroyed by everything, including fucking rocks. And guess what, its stil the most important part of the battlefield
Modern gun barrels are rotary hammer forged, it requires special purpose facilities but these are not expensive or time consuming to make. Existing barrels can be relined in the same facility bringing the barrel back to new condition..
Another interesting take is a RUclips show on US equipment that is surprisingly successful, the Korean War Howitzer. It is SUV towable and easier for a small mobile crew to operate. The physically bigger artillery on either side are increasing victims of fast drones and anti-battery attacks. Like the Afghanistan War, stuff mounted on the bed of a pickup or Manpad portable may be increasing be how man operated warfare must be conducted between near peer adversaries even.
Smaller artillery of shorter range means they have to be closer to the front. That makes them easier to detect and to counter battery from outside their range.
The rate Russians are losing artillery has increased as Ukraine now has more drones, more and better counter-battery radar systems, and the Russians are using low quality ammunition from N. Korea which can result in howitzer barrels exploding.
@@planetmikusha5898 lol just cause I’m contradicting or questioning info about Ukraine or Russia doesn’t mean I’m a Putin bot, I do not support his war whatsoever nor do I support another dictator since he won’t hold the elections in Ukraine. Ukraine has been winning the media war since the start but on the actual frontline? Doesn’t look like it whatsoever since they have been pushed back for a while now down south, the Kursk invasion didn’t really help the situation since they sent some very good units that had decent equipment that could have been used on the front instead, but no they sent them for a pr stunt and are now paying the price with their losses. If this keeps going they WILL lose the war and their pr stunts are not helping whatsoever, at this point all Zelensky is doing is sending men into the meat grinder.
@@banana6837the frontline that still to this day hasn’t reached the same amount of territorial control as the Russians had the first couple weeks of the invasion? the one that is literally progressing slower than a snail (not joking, someone graphed out the speed of a snail starting in 2022 traveling east it would have reached the polish border this year)
The problem with this math is we don't know how many have been destroyed in the war and how many are still in active service. Gun disappearing from storage doesn't necessarily mean they were destroyed it just means they aren't in storage anymore and have been deployed.
That is kind of true, but since we are not seeing massive amounts of new artillery units being formed, we can assume they haven't doubled the number of artillery in active service. Or at least we aren't hearing reports of the hard to miss fact that they are firing twice as many shells.
@peterroe2993 The problem is we're aren't hearing anything numbers wise that can be considered accurate. Ukraine is going to be claiming that every hit is destroyed and Russia is not saying anything. Both are understandable, but they leave a lot of fuzz.
@@ADobbin1 that's not relevant to this data, we see artillery pieces being taken out of storage and your theory is they are being deployed, I'm asking where they are, yes there are *some* in new units, but we are talking about 8000 guns unaccounted for, if they are deployed who has them? And also what are they doing? Russia has been firing about 10,000 shells a day, so all Russian guns are firing one shell a day on average? That doesn't make any sense.
@@ADobbin1 Any hit on a barrel is effectively a destroyed gun at this point. Russian industry can manufacture less than one artillery gun barrel per day, so any replacements beyond that require them pulling the barrel out of an existing stockpiled gun.
Just remember, the rate of losses is not the same as the rate of consumption. The Russian army has expanded its size considerably from the start of the conflict so the depletion rate in depots is not the current loss rate. Coupled with the fact we do not also know what the production rates are of newer equipment are, in the end they could have considerably more longevity then it appears.
Russian artillery activity has been going downhill since 2022. At this point, depletioin rat ein depots very much IS loss rate, given virtually non-existent manufacturing of replacement (which we DO in fact know about if we're not being wilfully ignorant) and no measurable increase in artillery on the frontlines.
Russian forces have only notionally expanded in size. From all the reports that have been coming in, while theoretically Russia's army is now close to 1.3 million troops in actuality it's not much larger than what it was going into the war. We have reports from officers, soldiers and POW's all attesting to brigades that are nominally 900 strong actually being closer to 3-400 due to attrition and lack of replacements. In Kursk we've seen naval staff (including the crew of the Kuznetsov reportedly) and guards from the air and space force deployed to shore up the gaps while Russia tries to maintain the pressure in Donetsk. Russia simply doesn't have the manpower to push in Donetsk and recover Kursk at the same time which isn't indicative of a much larger force than what entered Ukraine in 2022.
To be fair, Russia honestly did have a ridiculously huge arsenal of all kinds of artillery at the beginning of the war. Before we had the chance to watch Ukraine chew through them at a frankly shocking pace, the suggestion that Russia would run out (Or even low, for that matter) did seem very fanciful.
Russia is running out of artillery just like they were running out of missiles and tanks and all the other stuff we were told they were running out of lol.
@@Teknokraatti "Before we had the chance to watch Ukraine chew through them at a frankly shocking pace" Dude, do you have any understanding of reality? For every Russian artillery destroyed, there's 5-7 Ukrainian ones destroyed. And with the large numbers destroyed in and near Kursk, that ratio has likely increased further in the last few months. Lets say it like this, based on WESTERN reporting about Ukraine mobilisation, if they had taken ZERO casualties, they should currently have around 3.5 million active troops. They're estimated to have around 300 thousand. You think the rest went on vacation? Russia started SMO with 100 thousand troops with 250 thousand in reserve. Today they have at least 900 thousand active or in reserve, aimed at UA, over 1.2M by some sources. "the suggestion that Russia would run out (Or even low, for that matter) did seem very fanciful." How can you be so delusional as to believe Russia is running low? When we have Ukraine openly and repeatedly reporting that Russia is INCREASING the number of artillery along the frontlines.
"I'm stunned that they are running out of artillery pieces, almost to the point of disbelief." Then why don't you take a moment to THINK about reality? Ask yourself why Ukraine is reporting that Russia today has over 3 times as many artillery in active use at the frontlines compared to 2022. Hmm, maybe the people that have already been caught lying to you are lying again?
@@Teknokraatti it stillis hilariously stupid to believe that. Russia can produce shells at the pace 30 times more than the US along with allies plan to produce after their new factories are once start manufacturing...
We all know Ru can't go on like this indefinitely. I'm really curious how things will unfold when they finally run out of stocks. It's thinkable that NK might provide some equipment at some point, but again, there will always be more GMLRS than artillery pieces. Short time spans of a few weeks at max aside where numbers were lower, Ukr has been neutralizing approximately 50 artillery pieces per day ever since they started to fully utilize Himars for counter battery fire, which I believe was roughly in Spring of 2023. The short time span with lower numbers were probably dips in GMLRS supply, but otherwise that's basically 1.5 years with 50 Ru artillery pieces gone each day, day after day. Ru had lost artillery before Himars was fully utilized for counter battery fire, but not as much as consistently.
Based on your 'estimate' that would be over 23k Russian artillery pieces destroyed, and yet somehow, Russia maintains a firepower advantage along the front.
It is also morally reprehensible and sheer terrorism. Hundreds of innocent people are also victims of those explosions, kids as well, not to mention that tons of innocent people do not have access to the much needed medical assistance that the targets now occupy. To condone this but condemn the hamas attacks is just insane on any ethical level.
@@SkyGlitchGalaxy it seems like some people's arguments are so weak that they just have to delete other folk's comments. And it always seems to be the same kind of whiners that do it. I don't know how they live with themselves being so unable to engage in conversation that they just shut down anything they don't agree with.
Towed artillery is one of the best defensive weapon. 105 mm M101 howitzer is cheap, easy to move and operate. Humvee can tow it anywhere. Limited than 155mm in range and power, but enough to defend rather wide battlefront line.
I really thought about the same earlier today even before the video. 105mm artillery is still a great tool for defennding combat outpost in lower intensity conflicts. in a modern high intensity war 105mm towed artillery would suffer hard, because it would loose the artillery duell with most 152/155mm self propelled howitzers and most MLRS system because of lack of reach and mobility. Especially if scatter or chemical munition is used. I just put smoke directly on your position and see if you really can work blind. And in times when manpower is the limiting faktor 8-10 men to operate towed artillery are too vulnerable. 10 men can be a batterie of self propelled guns, which needs the same logistik tail to supply the ammunition. And the ammunition for 105 is just too limited in comparisson to modern 155mm. You can get scatter munitions/mines and smart munitions for the 155mm which makes it just a better tool against a deverse opponent. But in low intensity conflicts it can be a great system too defend outposts, especially in combinations with drones you can pretty good defend from guerilla mortar attacks because you can spot them with drones and outreach them with your 105. Especially if the logisitical burden can be spread among the combat troops inside the fire bases. Some designes are timeless and when combined with modern munitions and recon tech not only effizient but effektiv.
@@dgthe3The M101 and M119 are actually pretty evenly matched in range to the Soviet D-30, M-30 and D-1 artillery pieces, with the D-30 especially making up a lot of the Russian force. You’re right though, that all of the systems of this range are vulnerable to newer 152mm/155mm systems.
Not really. Its limited mobility and range means its highly vulnerable to counter-battery and various interdictions. Drones, infiltrating SF teams, and good old fashioned being over run by the front lines.
Deployed with who exactly? There are a few new artillery units but not enough to explain a fraction of the missing artillery. If they are not in storage where are they?
@@peterroe2993 a few? Did the extra 500,000 guys they mobilized not get any artillery? Plus arming Donetsk forces that are now folded into RF? Add to that the pieces don't go straight to the front when they get pulled from these yards. There is a supply chain that starts with refurbishing. Some are doubtless still in the chain.
@@earlygenesistherevealedcos1982 Those 500,000 soldiers are replacements, the troop numbers at the front have remained consistent by all accounts. But that's just reports, they could be wrong, the big question is, If Russia brought in another 8000 towed artillery what are those guns doing? They aren't shooting that's for sure, again that would mean the average artillery piece fires one round a day.
@@earlygenesistherevealedcos1982 The extra 500k guys did not lead to a substantial increase in russian frontline strength. Your supply chain is barely keeping up with losses to ukrainian counterbattery efforts, by depleting those stockpiles.
Yes from what I hear, that is why Russian artillery is not being used properly as support in the current offensive at Kursk due to a shortage of Russian SPGs , most of the Russian arty at Kursk are towed arty. which in a battle of maneuver can really have a disadvantage since its cumbersome and awkward to drag towed arty around while SPGs are more mobile with a faster set up time. and now the Russians are going to have a towed arty shortage, Not surprised if the Russians start buying North Korean artillery both towed and SPGs hahah
Mostly they just didn't have enough artillery to support that section of the front since it was "quiet" and not a direction of interest for them. I have not seen credible sources that say where Russia is drawing its artillery and other heavy equipment for the Kursk defense/counter attack. From out of theatre or redeployed from the East.
You have a poorly trained conscripted force run by people who are good at systematic bribery being directly by a crazy leader. Stories out of Russia and people being drafted and sent to the front trenches in two weeks with a gun and a couple of magazines of ammo are crazy. it takes time, and resources, to train people effectively.
@@obsidianjane4413 sadly worked for them when the Soviets had their backs to teh wall vs. the real German nazis back in WW2, now the Russians dont have their backs to the wall. yah the other time they did this was in WW1 , 3 years of war the Russian empire collapsed in civil war and the Czar and his family kaput. Same might happen to Czar putin
"You see, Rossiya will win because 3x more population and a gorbillion tanks and IFVs! Wha- Hey! No! Don't look at the satellite photos. Just- Just pretend we have infinite stockpiles okay?!"
The attrition of artillery can be attributed to 2 possibilities. One, some of them have been lost in direct enemy action (killed kinetically.) The second is wear and tear. A barrel is rated to for a certain number of firings, after which it has to be scrapped and melted down. If they don't have replacement barrel for a towed artillery piece, it could have been cannibalized for spare parts. Its also possible that Russian forces have been repositioning or dispersing their assets to guard against being targeted by deep missile and drone strikes from Ukrainian forces. That may explain some of the missing equipment.
@@MrDael01 I assume that you knew that is not true even as you were typing it.. The M1s being fielded today by the US Army are NOT 50 years old. Same line of tanks, not literally the same tanks.
@@rick7424 It's not just that the design has not changed. These artillery pieces were LITERALLY built 50 years ago, as in that specific piece of metal is 50 years old.
The artillery is not "gone". It is in use. I know they lost a lot but this is not a good way of measuring how many they have left. There is no way they are sending anything back for storage right now.
Barrels wear out, and the majority of these systems are no longer in production, barrels included. You can only refinish an artillery tube so many times before the metal gets worn too thin to be safely fired, and that’s still assuming they have the tooling and equipment to refinish them. It’s likely that a lot of these expended guns are piling up in storage facilities in eastern Ukraine, which may be off-limits for commercial satellite imagery since it is internationally recognized as Ukrainian territory.
The pulled equipment goes somewhere where it is needed. Once these fields are empty the supply to that need dries up. What disapears here is clearly an input into their army that is required for their opperations. Remove that input and those opperations will be disrupted and eventually drop of significantly.
@rogerk6180 i think u missed his point, his point Is that if 10000 artillery pieces are pulled from storage since you can deploy them somewhere useful opeven if it's a part of the front that never really sees action. We need to account for the difference in artillery pieces in use as well
Ok question? Why would these storage deposits be emptying if they are not being worn through? I don't disagree there going to the front but why would they need to pull everything emptying entire yards if they weren't running a deficit?
Videos like this also don't calculate which artillery pieces are being refurbished, which are being broken down for spare parts/barrels. How much of this reserve stuff has been moved forward to various other locations (and is still sitting dormant waiting for refurb/deployment), etc. It doesn't cover all the angles, so it's of limited value - unfortunately.
You have to be careful recycling that military scrap. It will come in heaps at a time, and then live ammunition goes off and destroys your equipment, your people and your company. I am not saying it can't be done, it is just there is a long history of accidents in that line of work.
@cryptickcryptick2241 Your correct, but I assume after all the wars, there is a sizeable quantity of dangerous material to be disposed of for sure. Not the kinda job I'd do.
@@cryptickcryptick2241 Live ammunition goes off all the time in foundries, it's not a problem. All you notice is a pop from the furnace. Not even a large caliber round, such as a .50 or a 20 mm can do much damage if blows up outside of a gun. There's nothing to direct its energy, and the projectile won't have much energy.
So... could we get a sort of rough estimation for when Russia *at current rates of usage* will run out of tanks, APCs, artillery etc... that would be an interesting estimation. Even if current usage changes, which it almost certainly will as they get lower.
The Institute for the Study of War estimates 2026. According to this video, it took Russia 2 years to burn through 2/3 of their towed artillery, so about a year assuming all of the remaining units in storage are good and actually useful. Of course, given Ukraine's destruction of Russian artillery pieces has increased in the past year due to better weapons, and the very real possibility of at least SOME stored artillery units are in poor shape, I'd say less than a year but a year at max. It's hard to put a specific time as to when total Russian war capability will be exhausted, but the timeframe is definitely taking shape.
An alternate answer Russia won't ever really 'run out'. There will be no point at which they won't have artillery or tanks or whatever anymore. What will happen is that they'll have to scale down their operations to the point where their losses are equal to the replacements. That will probably mean they'll have to pretty much stop any offensive actions, but they'll still be able to organize one hell of a defense. Digging them out of Ukraine is not going to be easy. The tipping point is expected to be in 2026, but since exact numbers on Russian production capabilities are unknown, as is the state of their reserves, this is a very rough estimate.
@@gerritvalkering1068 no you're wrong, the russians have already surrendered and the west is sending generals to control russia right now. west won the war.
The vast majority of what they’re still manufacturing is self propelled. Their newest systems are the 2S34 Chosta, 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV, 2S40 Floks and 2S43 Malva, but the lines that manufacture these are all extremely small scale and likely hampered by electronics sanctions. Russia likely doesn’t have more than 100 of these systems altogether. The other system that they’re still manufacturing new is the 2S19 Msta-S, production rate unknown. But they’re estimated to have 600 in active service and a little under 100 in reserve. A lot of “new” production will consist of modernizing those units in reserve that date back to the USSR. Once that runs out, production of the 2S19 will slow further. The Msta-S uses the same barrel as the Msta-B towed artillery piece, so it’s possible they’re able to manufacture the Msta-B as well, though again, quantities unknown. The last piece they may still be manufacturing is the 2S9 Nona and 2S23 Nona-SVK. These are 120mm self-propelled mortars based on the BTR-D APC and BTR-80 APC, respectively. At present, they are converting those APCs in storage to SPGs by manufacturing just the turret. While the BTR-D is long out of production, the BTR-80 chassis is still manufactured new so the Nona-SVK is another system that could still feasibly remain in active production.
there is also a few selling points for towed. they can get to places self propelled can´t. Like try and get a artillery piece out to some forest that have zero road network (like the road is a dirt path... not one that can fit a car... but something you can push a bike along). Another is that usally a towed artilery is a lot smaller. like I seen people sneak in a towed artillery between two houses that can´t even fit a car. self propelled artillery forget about it it might be able to stick the barrel between them but the ide of hiding between two houses naa.
problem is that the missing artillery pieces are not actually accounted for on the battelfield - maybe several hundred to 1 thousand can be confirmed destroyed. It is more likely that they were transferred to new storage facilities/refurbishment centres that are better hidden from satellites and closer to the actual battlefield.
Also only a portion of actually destroyed pieces will end up being visually confirmed. Sometimes people just have better things to do than making pics of destroyed military equipment and uploading it to the internet
Because only a fraction of them are getting destroyed by enemy fire. Most are just scrapped to produce replacement barrels for mobile howitzers. They are estimates that they replaced over 5000 barrels this way. But they already have used practically all which could be used that way.
One reason I heard of why they are burning through artillery so fast isn’t because they are being destroyed by enemy action but because they are using them to the point they just catastrophically fail. They just pour through rounds until they break and use another one instead of maintaining or switching them out. It’s wasteful and brutish but what do u expect from Russia?
Not all of these are useable. Besides the ones which are in poor condition, Russia has also been pulling the barrels off of towed artillery for their SPGs.
Artillery taken out of storage doesn't mean lost, why would anyone think that? Lots of it is serviced and prepared for deployment, deployed on the frontline or simply transported closer to the frontline to be used when needed. Its really hard to destroy towed artillery, the machine is hard to hit and damage with drones and usually only the crew suffers.
I don't think any one is disagreeing with the first part. However the idea that artillery is somehow harder to damage than an IFV is questionable. At its core it is just a hunk of metal. It takes more than a grenade but just as much as a standard armored vehicle to destroy it. And if there is ammo next to it all you might need to do is set that off.
100% guaranteed that a lot of what's left is in absolute garbage condition, same as with their tanks. There's no reason towed artillery would fare any better.
@@isaacgriffin5690 Because the army still has artillery on the frontline? like, think this through a bit before you comment. If there werent any at the front, they would take the rest out of storage. Leave it up to Z shills to be as retarded as possible.
@@isaacgriffin5690For Ukraine, “winning” is holding off a country with four times the population and nearly the entire Soviet inheritance. Ukraine has fought Russia to a stalemate, and the advantages Russia has in regards to equipment will disappear in around a year.
With drones around, having towed artillery and hiding sometimes is even way safer than having self-propelled artillery. With drone warfare, it has some upsides.
I disagree. Because as soon as you fire, the enemy can triangulate where you fired from. The enemy will send counter-battery fire to rain down on your position. Or, in the age of drones, they know WHERE to send the drones to hunt you. Drones _are_ scary. Which is exactly why you don't want to be in the area when they show up.
As you allude to at the end of your video, the number in storage is not the total number they have. This does not count those actually at the front line, which will be MANY since Russia has been heavily reliant on artillery for their advancements. So even after the storage depots are empty, it will still be a couple of months before those on the front line are destroyed in sufficient numbers to make a difference in the conflict.
Supposedly, Russia has been about to run out of everything from tanks to manpower to shells since about a week into this invasion. I'm going to save the champagne until we can observe a corresponding decrease at the frontline.
Whoever was saying Russia will run out of equipment 3 weeks into this war was lying or delusional they had the biggest military stockpile out of any country. Talking about right now though I think it makes sense to say in 1-2 years Russia will start running low/have shortages in some equipment sections like tanks and artillery.
@@rogerwilco5918 cause it’s easier for Russia to fix the less sophisticated older tanks than the newer ish more electronic tanks but they are definitely already running low ish on tanks
I ll take it with a grain of salt. Influencers were saying the same about missiles and planes a year ago. Yet Russia still keeps using them. They will have emptied their storage of old junk for sure, but meanwhile they are upping their production of new gear.
If I recall correctly, the bottleneck in production for both SPGs and towed artillery is barrels, it is not a simple hollow steel tubes, it needs very specialized machinery; the last number I saw was ~50 barrels per year. Even if it was somehow 4 times that, (North Korean production, new machines, whatever) that would cover for a month or two of losses, so not anywhere near to sustain the attrition that the Russian artillery is sustaining.
This video just shows that 40% has been withdrawn from storage in three years. So a good part of it is in various workshops preparing for use. Roughly speaking, at that rate, Russia, just from the warehouse, has these tools for another 5-6 years of such use without new production.
Those fourty percents are open ground stockpiles, they had reserves always underground in warsaw pact countries. There are rumors, they have nowdays stockpiles in the Ural mountains, and near Moscow.
If the ukranian numbers are to be believed, than the atrition rate for towed artillery has massively increased in the last year. So chances are, we see serious shortages of guns way sooner. Also there is the possibility that the production of shells might become a bottle neck, as the production capacity between the different calibers varies and a slow change from more 152mm to smaller 122 or 100mm might lead to shortages of the needed calibers.
But at the same time, Ukrainian officers are expressing that they're encountering more armour and artillery than ever before. Russia is still producing a crap ton of artillery shells at the moment (with no need to slow down anytime soon). I think these videos - while interesting - are kind of ignoring the rest of the pipeline. They don't add up with much "on the ground" information coming out.
@@oskar6661 I see your point but exactly the point this video makes is that there is still stuff left in the pipeline which means it is going to get worse at least for the next 6 months or year i guess and after that in 2-3 years it will be a different conversation. I just hope ukraine gets the help it needs from nato to be able to reach that point.
Take your personal data back with Incogni! Use code CABAL at the link below and get 60% off an annual plan: incogni.com/cabal
If we look at the February 2024 video and the most recent ones, we see a drop in towed and self-propelled artillery systems of about 1.000 pieces. However, Ukraine claims almost 9.000 pieces destroyed in that same time. Where is this discrepancy coming from?
@@jehandesains8674 This channel is just western B.S. WIshful thinking for the Ukranazi lovers.
🇺🇦
Oh please. More nonsense bs
Hey kid, I don't mean to be an a-hole here, but are you now just openly telling the world that you partner with Radio Free Nobody? How did that happen? Did they come to you, or did you go to them? We'll know based on how fast this comment gets deleted. For seventy-four effing years these guys have been run by the US State Dept, CIA, and a whole lot of other people way worse. And you're working with them now??? These guys are the archetypes of message management --- and by the way they've killed an AWFUL lot of innocent people -- people who were not bullies. I don't know who the f you think you're helping in this world. But whatever they gave you, turn it down. Whatever they threatened you with, tell them to do their worst. We don't have time for this.
I remember reading the book Red Storm Rising by Tom Clancy, which was written in the mid 80s, and one intel officer tells another that the USSR still has WW2 artillery in reserve. I remember thinking how ridiculous that sounded, and here we are now another forty years down the road with Russia actually using those WW2 pieces.
Add another dollar to the comically large jar for things Tom Clancy was right about
Clancy way overestimated the Russian's capabilities.
He didn't take their corruption into account.
(Red Storm Rising is a great book. Absolutely well worth the read.)
@@Kyle-sr6jm Red Storm Rising devotes multiple chapters to resolving the Soviet corruption problems. It is also very clear that Soviet corruption, while troublesome, did not match the severity of Russian corruption in 2022.
Clancy also overestimates the West. Tank battles are hideously idealistic, and his fictional version of the F-117 Nighthawk is much more like an F-22 than the real thing. In Red Storm Rising, this is extremely significant--the Frisbees take down the Soviet AWACS fleet on day one, which cripples their air war and in turn cripples the land war. This couldn't happen, because the F-117 didn't even have so much as an RWR, let alone active radar to acquire targets.
@@Kyle-sr6jm he and Larry Bond did in Red Storm Rising: they had officers executed for lying on unit task reports. Besides, this was the Soviet Army then, not the Russians now.
WW2 arty is better than no arty
Great report. An additional problem with older equipment is that due to lower accuracy, more shells will have to be fired to destroy the target - which will increase ammunition consumption and accelerate barrel degradation. And older gun models have a shorter range, which will only increase combat losses. It's a snowball - the problems will only increase over time.
It's mud season soon. Russia may hope General Winter will stall things and give them a break re-arm.
@@czinn327 I think this war will not last until winter. Trump's election is the Russians' last hope - they will survive until the beginning of November - counting on Trump giving them Ukraine for free. If Kamala wins, it may end with a sudden breakdown in morale for the Russians - because they will know that there is no hope for victory as long as Ukraine has support.
@@czinn327 I think the conflict will not last until winter. Trump's election is the Russians' last hope - they will do absolutely everything to survive until the beginning of November - counting on Trump to give them Ukraine for free. If Kamala wins, it may end with a sudden breakdown in morale for the Russians - because they will know that there is no hope for victory as long as Ukraine has support.
@@czinn327 winter works for both sides, not just one. And the barrels get replaced/restored, so no issues there, either.
@@czinn327 The last hope of the Russians is the election of Trump in the USA. The Russians will hold on until November, hoping that they will get Ukraine for free from Trump. If Harris wins, their morale may finally break - because they will not be able to win as long as Ukraine has support from the West. Winter won't help them in any way - the previous ones didn't help.
I did my Finnish conscript service in artillery, and one downside of towed artillery is what to do if counterbattery fire is expected. Self-propelled artillery can fire a strike and drive far outside the CIP oval of stuff which soon comes whistling down.
Modern warfare as shown in Ukraine has kamikaze and reconnaissance drones. So even if towed artillery is moved before the counterbattery fire starts, that doesn't mean that drones wouldn't swarm over the area in search of their "prey".
PS If Russia's remaining artillery is with effective range less than 15km, then they've got to get pretty close to zero line meaning more easily get discovered by air and be neutralized.
@@БориславВълков-м7рThey still have plenty of self propelled that can be out of range
@fredthefish581 I don't think that SPArty has inherently more range, itss advantage is that the window between firing and getting the hell out of there is much shorter
@fredthefish581 among lots of other advantages (integrated computers, more resilience to CBF, cool features like burst etc)
@@thodorisevangelakos Modern artillery definitely has more range than the WW2 artillery pieces Russia now is bringing to the front lines
Good to see you still putting out videos.
One thing that often goes unmentioned in these videos is that if artillery is too inaccurate it can actually be counterproductive to fire. With counter battery radar once the shells start falling the enemy can see your position and shoot back. If you can destroy your target and then move within a minute or two then that's okay but if you give away your position and can't hit your target then it would have been better to just not shoot to begin with. In terms of artillery if the quality is bad enough you eventually hit a point that you can't make up for it with quantity.
@@ethank5059 agreed
Why? EVERY video he's put out on this war he's been proven WRONG with time?
@@rflats771 when it comes to stockpiles, their estimates are pretty good.
Imagine planners in the 60s knowing that in 60 years the public will get 30cm resolution satelite imagry from Russia, only 9 times worse than the theoretical maximum resolution of space base satelite imagry. They would be mind blown.
There's no single maximum resolution
It depends on the altitude, aperture and wavelength
It's entirely possible to go lower and have a bigger aperture synthetically - SAR
@@karliszauers1 tor optics and satellite there is a limit given the presence of atmosphere. It is about 5cm per pixel and it was reached almost a the dawn of spy satellites program back in 60th as we now know.
@@karliszauers1 well, eventually you will run out of photons to detect, so yeah, there are physics theoretical limits to that too,
which is incidentally also why it is positively impossible to detect a civilisation like ours by any radio or laser emissions we could possibly muster, from more than approx. 200 light years from earth.
@@karliszauers1 as to SAR there is still the time-integration limit, as in, you would need to capture photons over extended amount of time. So yes, there are good physical limits there
@@JurekOK when we run out of photons we'll start detecting electrons!
Not to be confused with Toed Artillery, or Toad Artillery.
Both of those sound like they'd offer significant advantages in tactical mobility over what Russia is actually having to use.
A toad-mounted artillery, hopping around the battlefield, brings a new meaning to the term shoot and scoot.
Towed
"towed toed toad artillery" melts my autistic brain in the best of ways
@@Evan_Bell seems it was built along the design philosophy of "feeling froggish? leap"
The Toad artillery is excellent when you have to fight in swamps or river estuaries.
I remember Perun mentioning how Russia has resorted to using WW2 era M-30 howitzers. That should tell you something.
russians are using shovels, and russia is already surrendered, you don't see on western media?
Perun is just as reliable fairy tale story channel as this one. So no wonder “the crisis point” never comes,
@@StrangerHappenedthe crisis point doesn’t come because everyone keeps saying sometime in 2025 through 2027. Is it 2025 where you live?
@@StrangerHappened M30s have been confirmed on the frontline ... so whats the "fairytale"?
also - if this war is not in crisis for Russia - why is it even still onging - did russia really plan on a multiyear war in which ukrainians would occupy parts of russia?
@@StrangerHappened So.....why are you bothering posting here then.
Great analysis as always - to the point and no padding for video time
Would be nice if 1/4 of the video wasn't an ad.
@bloodlustshiva1 the man pays THOUSANDS of dollars on high quality satellite imagery.
He could put out 1 video a week that's just ads and I'd still support him
The D1 is so shortrange that it has a bayonet lug
🤣😂🤣😂
They even thought of the eventuality of the Space Marines using them. Clearly a superior military power.
thank you for this, I belly laughed for like 10 seconds
Me: "Hey, @CIA, Covert Cabal uploaded again!"
CIA: "We know, we saw it as he was editing."
New paranoia unlocked
That sounds more like something the NSA will say.
@@David-e1b3t as long as you dont have middle eastern pagers you are ok, maybe.
@@Lookingformorefun man, this planet is soooo messed up
@@David-e1b3tRelative to what other planet? This could be as good as it gets lmao.
Man i would not want to be a new crew member given a 50 year old arty. "hey what happened to the last team and our new cannons?" "ehhh if you hear buzzing duck and you wont end up like them" O_O
@@Apothicary-v7p 80* year old arty
The steel barrels are known to go bad because that's what happens to thick machined metal.
If anything I might be relieved to get hopeless old equipment, maybe I won't be high up on the drones' priorities
@@ryanrehfuss facts lol
The fact that people can now buy high-resolution satellite images of military bases worldwide is so insane.
Remember how the USA and the USSR were breaking the bank to develop stealth planes to take areal pictures of each other? How Americans taking pictures of Chernobyl from space was a big deal in unveiling the scale of the disaster?
How times have changed.
Thank you for your work.
Russian military bases...
"Remember how the USA and the USSR were breaking the bank to develop stealth planes to take areal pictures of each other?" ekhm, that was 60+ yers ago...
"The Treaty on Open Skies establishes a program of unarmed aerial surveillance flights over the entire territory of its participants. The treaty is designed to enhance mutual understanding and confidence by giving all participants, regardless of size, a direct role in gathering information about military forces and activities of concern to them. It entered into force on 1 January 2002, and currently has 34 party states."
@@Bialy_1 The sentence started with "remember" and ended with a question mark, I think they knew it was 60 years ago.
The reason you use spy planes is because satellites have a maximum resolution due to the atmosphere, not because of Cameras. We reached that maximum pretty much at the dawn of satellites.
I'll never be able to stop hearing Toad Artillery
Somehow I keep hearing it as toed artillery.
the toad artillery is the sister arm to the missile toad. The Russians also have a shortage of missile toads...LOL
They're all homophones.
Turn on YT captions, and, yep, toad artillery. :D
@@rcchin7897 Insert reference to EDF 5/6 here;
There are statements online from supposed Donetsk area Russians that Artillery is not attached at all in that area, that all fire missions are requested of what may be mercenary units, but certainly stand-alone, and that the quality of artillery is generally, as you noted, old and bad.
Yeah I wouldn’t take too much stock in that. They’re keeping the Ukrainians at bay in those places, so whatever it is must still be effective, right?
@@afcgeo882 theres no Ukrainian offensive there?
The Ukrainians just opened up another front in Kursk. The Kursk offensive is slowing down because the Russians had to divert approx 40,000 troops there, creating the need for another mobilization.
@@Psyclonknight No. No offensive in Donetsk.
Even with degraded artillery, pushing into prepared defenses and mine fields is hard.
Thanks!
Edit. You upload, I drop everything and watch!
Keep up the good work.❤
A good day when you upload :)
Finallyi can get my fix again xD
It will be interesting to see how many of the remaining third are usable or even good for parts. Given the massive reported Russian artillery loses, it's clear Ukraine is well aware of their impending shortage and are doing everything they can to accelerate the depletion of the stored artillery.
Yeah, if Ukraine wanted to focus on degrading Russia's artillery prior to a counter offensive then that would make a lot of sense. At this rate it doesnt look like the war will end until some counter offensive by Ukraine in 2026.
Probably not much. The worst gets saved for last, the best gets cannibalized or recalled into service first.
They seem to be doing this by making themselves targets for enormous Russian artillery fire without being able to fire much back
It is possible that most of the remaining pieces in storage might still be viable. This is just a thought I've had. But what if the russians are actually scrapping the carcasses of old artillery once they've been stripped of useful components? That would get a lot of old, decrepit pieces out of the storage yards (in addition to all the good guns that get shipped off to Ukraine). The remaining guns would then mostly be of 'mediocre' quality: old, need some work to get fully functional, but not absolute garbage.
I don't know. It'd be a reasonable thing to do, but this is russia. If it is to someones advantage to keep rusting scrap on the books, not only will it stay on the books but they'll look for ways to get useful equipment declared as scrap.
Yeah we see ukr is making great gains and retaking towns on their march westward.
And lions share of the remaining arty seems to be either in the "unknown" category. Or ancient M-30. Awesome.
Russia slowly running low on artillery, who could have thought this just couple years ago? I just hope Ukraine can endure.
*Russians:* "It's so over"
_(For illustrative purposes only. Based on a controlled environment, results may differ in real-world conditions)_
Meh… not really. How many of those pieces are currently fighting in Ukraine? He didn’t account for them.
@@AlexejGubin items not in storage does not mean they are destroyed
@@kulio1214 Probably my comment was a bit misleading. It's clear that only part of the removed weaponry was destroyed, some was used as spare parts, and another part is still in service. But we don't really observe increase of artillery usage throughout the war, the most intense usage was in the first year of the invasion. As russians started to field guns from the 40th and 50th like M-46, we can assume high arty losses and Russia burning though its soviet stocks quite fast. Of course, they still have a lot and it will not be like tomorrow they end up with no artillery, but the trend is promising.
@@afcgeo882 He did account for them. He explicitly mentioned that these pieces need to be shipped into battle and destroyed before they can truly be counted as lost.
The remaining units, especially the older ones, probably aren't in the greatest condition either.
Neither is Vuhledar. It just fell to Russia, the defenders surrounded. How did that happen, hm?
Some older pieces may use ammo no longer in production, and thus become useless when stockpiles are exhausted.
most use standard ammo 152/122/76mm since the beginning of 20th century. So no issue with ammunitions
@martinchabot_FR there once was a 130mm, and I'm quite sure some of the old tanks were actually pressed into services as SP artillery, simply because otherwise unusable ammo was available for them.
The real issue, to my mind, is the lack of maintenance that these older pieces doubtlessly suffered from for decades. How many of them are still operable? They might be able to cannibalize some for repair parts, but that would require time, and decrease the overall amount of pieces available.
No, Russia used 152.4 for the last 100+ years.
@@michaelf7093 Yeah in limited use - M 46 field gun uses 130mm - it has a range of over 40km and was for few decades longest ranged artillery in the world. After 30 years++ it was surpassed by today's modern western stuff.
I have a couple of questions. First, how many of the pieces taken out of storage are to replace lost equipment versus reinforcing existing units or equipping new ones? Second, what is Russia's barrel production? Manufacturing whole artillery units is more complex and resource-intensive than manufacturing individual parts, so what is Russia's industrial ability to continue to maintain its deployed units?
Their industrial capacity is their main strength. They're running 24 hour shifts making shells, vehicles, tanks, etc. Combining that with their random stockpiles of spares, they're miles ahead of Ukraine at the moment - even with international support which is slowly waning.
@@oskar6661Not many people in this comment section get it.
"how many of the pieces taken out of storage are to replace lost equipment versus reinforcing existing units or equipping new ones"
I'm not sure how you determine the difference between replacing losses and reinforcing. You mean strengthening a unit by adding additional artillery pieces? Someone with more military experience than me can probably answer how useful it is to attach towed artillery to an infantry platoon. I haven't heard anything to make me think Russia is forming a significant amount of additional units and not just replacing losses. If they are, they're doing it out of range of a mobile phone network, or they confiscated all the smartphones of the soldiers. Or the soldiers are actually maintaining secrecy for a change. Regardless of which of the three it is, I'd be amazed they pulled it off.
"what is Russia's barrel production"
We don't know, but we do know we probably shouldn't believe anything Russia tells us. They have no reason to tell the truth, and every reason to lie. And, additionally, have been known to lie about such things.
"what is Russia's industrial ability to continue to maintain its deployed units?"
As we don't have sufficient information, we don't know the exact details except that the overall answer is 'insufficient'. The reason why we can say that it is insufficient is because we see older and older equipment among the visually confirmed losses at the front. They weren't scrapped for parts, they were being used and either were destroyed or got too worn down to be used. There is no reason to bring ww2 era artillery to the front if you're able to maintain your deployed units with better equipment.
@@oskar6661 the point is it not just about production but also about usage. The russien way of war tends to use a lot more artillery to have a tendency of a smaller effect on target. It begins with the caliber and ends just with the pur amount the russiens are firing compared to the ukrainens and what those pieces of equipment are achiving because so far I cant see a front line where the russiens have made a war deceding breakthrough. At this rate the war will be going on far a couple of years to come and than slowly but surely they will encounter problems concerning their production numbers and their loss rates and as long as ukraine has nato support I cant imagen a world where the ukrainiens will reach the breaking point before the russians do.
so i know Russia has no own barell smith rotating machines. Some are US made of the late 40th and one from Austria 2018. So they have only spare barrels for the old guns in stocks and for newer guns a limited production. A 152mm barrel must be changed after 1000 shots or the gun is more and more inaccurat, but i think Russions dont care about.
Honestly with artillery radar out there, this semi fixed artillery pieces are death trap.
So you tow out a single gun somewhere, have it shoot one round at the enemy, the people run away, the enemy uses their radar and shoots a bunch of other things at the now-abandoned and obsolete artillery piece that probably wouldn't get many shots through its barrel anyway. That would seem like a pretty good tactic in the attrition warfare, if the enemy is also running very low on artillery.
Do you seriously think every Ukrainian unit comes with a modern artillery battery, complete with radars and shit, and none of it ever gets destroyed?
yeah this 0-1 thinking of most people is annoying. tank can be destroyed - therefore its useless, obsolete. Arty can be destroyed by counter batter - useless, obsolete.... --.--
infantry can be destroyed by everything, including fucking rocks. And guess what, its stil the most important part of the battlefield
Modern gun barrels are rotary hammer forged, it requires special purpose facilities but these are not expensive or time consuming to make. Existing barrels can be relined in the same facility bringing the barrel back to new condition..
Another interesting take is a RUclips show on US equipment that is surprisingly successful, the Korean War Howitzer. It is SUV towable and easier for a small mobile crew to operate. The physically bigger artillery on either side are increasing victims of fast drones and anti-battery attacks. Like the Afghanistan War, stuff mounted on the bed of a pickup or Manpad portable may be increasing be how man operated warfare must be conducted between near peer adversaries even.
Smaller artillery of shorter range means they have to be closer to the front. That makes them easier to detect and to counter battery from outside their range.
Great work.
Love it.
Thanks! I have been waiting for this one!
The rate Russians are losing artillery has increased as Ukraine now has more drones, more and better counter-battery radar systems, and the Russians are using low quality ammunition from N. Korea which can result in howitzer barrels exploding.
The frontline alone contradicts what your saying
@@banana6837 Instead of Putin's troll farm, try taking your information from Oryx!
@@banana6837 The front lines do not contradict that statement. They can be moving fast but also burning through equipment faster and faster.
@@planetmikusha5898 lol just cause I’m contradicting or questioning info about Ukraine or Russia doesn’t mean I’m a Putin bot, I do not support his war whatsoever nor do I support another dictator since he won’t hold the elections in Ukraine. Ukraine has been winning the media war since the start but on the actual frontline? Doesn’t look like it whatsoever since they have been pushed back for a while now down south, the Kursk invasion didn’t really help the situation since they sent some very good units that had decent equipment that could have been used on the front instead, but no they sent them for a pr stunt and are now paying the price with their losses. If this keeps going they WILL lose the war and their pr stunts are not helping whatsoever, at this point all Zelensky is doing is sending men into the meat grinder.
@@banana6837the frontline that still to this day hasn’t reached the same amount of territorial control as the Russians had the first couple weeks of the invasion? the one that is literally progressing slower than a snail (not joking, someone graphed out the speed of a snail starting in 2022 traveling east it would have reached the polish border this year)
The problem with this math is we don't know how many have been destroyed in the war and how many are still in active service. Gun disappearing from storage doesn't necessarily mean they were destroyed it just means they aren't in storage anymore and have been deployed.
Fair point.
That is kind of true, but since we are not seeing massive amounts of new artillery units being formed, we can assume they haven't doubled the number of artillery in active service. Or at least we aren't hearing reports of the hard to miss fact that they are firing twice as many shells.
@peterroe2993 The problem is we're aren't hearing anything numbers wise that can be considered accurate. Ukraine is going to be claiming that every hit is destroyed and Russia is not saying anything. Both are understandable, but they leave a lot of fuzz.
@@ADobbin1 that's not relevant to this data, we see artillery pieces being taken out of storage and your theory is they are being deployed,
I'm asking where they are, yes there are *some* in new units, but we are talking about 8000 guns unaccounted for, if they are deployed who has them?
And also what are they doing? Russia has been firing about 10,000 shells a day, so all Russian guns are firing one shell a day on average? That doesn't make any sense.
@@ADobbin1 Any hit on a barrel is effectively a destroyed gun at this point. Russian industry can manufacture less than one artillery gun barrel per day, so any replacements beyond that require them pulling the barrel out of an existing stockpiled gun.
I am here because of Anders. Liked and subscribed
Great video, very clear, very educational. Thanks for what you are doing!
Just remember, the rate of losses is not the same as the rate of consumption. The Russian army has expanded its size considerably from the start of the conflict so the depletion rate in depots is not the current loss rate. Coupled with the fact we do not also know what the production rates are of newer equipment are, in the end they could have considerably more longevity then it appears.
Russian artillery activity has been going downhill since 2022. At this point, depletioin rat ein depots very much IS loss rate, given virtually non-existent manufacturing of replacement (which we DO in fact know about if we're not being wilfully ignorant) and no measurable increase in artillery on the frontlines.
Russian forces have only notionally expanded in size. From all the reports that have been coming in, while theoretically Russia's army is now close to 1.3 million troops in actuality it's not much larger than what it was going into the war. We have reports from officers, soldiers and POW's all attesting to brigades that are nominally 900 strong actually being closer to 3-400 due to attrition and lack of replacements. In Kursk we've seen naval staff (including the crew of the Kuznetsov reportedly) and guards from the air and space force deployed to shore up the gaps while Russia tries to maintain the pressure in Donetsk. Russia simply doesn't have the manpower to push in Donetsk and recover Kursk at the same time which isn't indicative of a much larger force than what entered Ukraine in 2022.
Appreciate what you do!
The Russians had a hell of a propaganda machine. I'm stunned that they are running out of artillery pieces, almost to the point of disbelief.
To be fair, Russia honestly did have a ridiculously huge arsenal of all kinds of artillery at the beginning of the war. Before we had the chance to watch Ukraine chew through them at a frankly shocking pace, the suggestion that Russia would run out (Or even low, for that matter) did seem very fanciful.
Russia is running out of artillery just like they were running out of missiles and tanks and all the other stuff we were told they were running out of lol.
@@Teknokraatti "Before we had the chance to watch Ukraine chew through them at a frankly shocking pace"
Dude, do you have any understanding of reality?
For every Russian artillery destroyed, there's 5-7 Ukrainian ones destroyed. And with the large numbers destroyed in and near Kursk, that ratio has likely increased further in the last few months.
Lets say it like this, based on WESTERN reporting about Ukraine mobilisation, if they had taken ZERO casualties, they should currently have around 3.5 million active troops.
They're estimated to have around 300 thousand.
You think the rest went on vacation?
Russia started SMO with 100 thousand troops with 250 thousand in reserve. Today they have at least 900 thousand active or in reserve, aimed at UA, over 1.2M by some sources.
"the suggestion that Russia would run out (Or even low, for that matter) did seem very fanciful."
How can you be so delusional as to believe Russia is running low? When we have Ukraine openly and repeatedly reporting that Russia is INCREASING the number of artillery along the frontlines.
"I'm stunned that they are running out of artillery pieces, almost to the point of disbelief."
Then why don't you take a moment to THINK about reality?
Ask yourself why Ukraine is reporting that Russia today has over 3 times as many artillery in active use at the frontlines compared to 2022.
Hmm, maybe the people that have already been caught lying to you are lying again?
@@Teknokraatti it stillis hilariously stupid to believe that. Russia can produce shells at the pace 30 times more than the US along with allies plan to produce after their new factories are once start manufacturing...
Always great information. Thank you. 😎
Those 2025 predictions are looking pretty accurate.
Great video, I love your detailed analysis of stockpiles.
We all know Ru can't go on like this indefinitely.
I'm really curious how things will unfold when they finally run out of stocks.
It's thinkable that NK might provide some equipment at some point, but again, there will always be more GMLRS than artillery pieces.
Short time spans of a few weeks at max aside where numbers were lower, Ukr has been neutralizing approximately 50 artillery pieces per day ever since they started to fully utilize Himars for counter battery fire, which I believe was roughly in Spring of 2023.
The short time span with lower numbers were probably dips in GMLRS supply, but otherwise that's basically 1.5 years with 50 Ru artillery pieces gone each day, day after day.
Ru had lost artillery before Himars was fully utilized for counter battery fire, but not as much as consistently.
Based on your 'estimate' that would be over 23k Russian artillery pieces destroyed, and yet somehow, Russia maintains a firepower advantage along the front.
Yeah, I'm not sure about your 50 artillery pieces per day...
Tactical Nukes
They can still go on longer than ukraine. If you think Russia is struggling with men an equipment, look at ukraine. 10x worse.
probably just trade goats to korea for more
I love these videos: great work covert cabal. It paints a much clearer picture of the equipment losses that Russia can’t really hide.
@@weirjf 😂🤦🤡
This comment section is gold 😂😂😂
Know anything about pagers?
:p
I don't care how they pulled that off, it's such a power move. Now so damn many of them will be scared shitless to touch any electronics.
@@michaelhowell2326Israel and Ukraine could learn a lot from each other.
It is also morally reprehensible and sheer terrorism. Hundreds of innocent people are also victims of those explosions, kids as well, not to mention that tons of innocent people do not have access to the much needed medical assistance that the targets now occupy. To condone this but condemn the hamas attacks is just insane on any ethical level.
@@SkyGlitchGalaxy it seems like some people's arguments are so weak that they just have to delete other folk's comments. And it always seems to be the same kind of whiners that do it. I don't know how they live with themselves being so unable to engage in conversation that they just shut down anything they don't agree with.
thanks for uploading this
Towed artillery is one of the best defensive weapon. 105 mm M101 howitzer is cheap, easy to move and operate. Humvee can tow it anywhere. Limited than 155mm in range and power, but enough to defend rather wide battlefront line.
I really thought about the same earlier today even before the video.
105mm artillery is still a great tool for defennding combat outpost in lower intensity conflicts.
in a modern high intensity war 105mm towed artillery would suffer hard, because it would loose the artillery duell with most 152/155mm self propelled howitzers and most MLRS system because of lack of reach and mobility.
Especially if scatter or chemical munition is used. I just put smoke directly on your position and see if you really can work blind.
And in times when manpower is the limiting faktor 8-10 men to operate towed artillery are too vulnerable. 10 men can be a batterie of self propelled guns, which needs the same logistik tail to supply the ammunition.
And the ammunition for 105 is just too limited in comparisson to modern 155mm. You can get scatter munitions/mines and smart munitions for the 155mm which makes it just a better tool against a deverse opponent.
But in low intensity conflicts it can be a great system too defend outposts, especially in combinations with drones you can pretty good defend from guerilla mortar attacks because you can spot them with drones and outreach them with your 105.
Especially if the logisitical burden can be spread among the combat troops inside the fire bases.
Some designes are timeless and when combined with modern munitions and recon tech not only effizient but effektiv.
And fairly exposed to counter-battery fire due to that limited reach.
@@dgthe3The M101 and M119 are actually pretty evenly matched in range to the Soviet D-30, M-30 and D-1 artillery pieces, with the D-30 especially making up a lot of the Russian force. You’re right though, that all of the systems of this range are vulnerable to newer 152mm/155mm systems.
Not really. Its limited mobility and range means its highly vulnerable to counter-battery and various interdictions. Drones, infiltrating SF teams, and good old fashioned being over run by the front lines.
@@westphalianstallion4293 But everything suffers hard in high intensity. I think arty gets a bad rap, even from me.
Artillery barrels can only shoot around so many rounds before you have to replace them.
Just because the artillery is not in those yards doesn't mean Russia does not have them anymore. Most of them are probably deployed somewhere.
Deployed with who exactly? There are a few new artillery units but not enough to explain a fraction of the missing artillery. If they are not in storage where are they?
@@peterroe2993 a few? Did the extra 500,000 guys they mobilized not get any artillery? Plus arming Donetsk forces that are now folded into RF? Add to that the pieces don't go straight to the front when they get pulled from these yards. There is a supply chain that starts with refurbishing. Some are doubtless still in the chain.
@@earlygenesistherevealedcos1982 Those 500,000 soldiers are replacements, the troop numbers at the front have remained consistent by all accounts.
But that's just reports, they could be wrong, the big question is, If Russia brought in another 8000 towed artillery what are those guns doing? They aren't shooting that's for sure, again that would mean the average artillery piece fires one round a day.
@@earlygenesistherevealedcos1982 The extra 500k guys did not lead to a substantial increase in russian frontline strength. Your supply chain is barely keeping up with losses to ukrainian counterbattery efforts, by depleting those stockpiles.
"Most of them are probably destroyed somewhere"
fify
Thanks all for the hard work!
Yes from what I hear, that is why Russian artillery is not being used properly as support in the current offensive at Kursk due to a shortage of Russian SPGs , most of the Russian arty at Kursk are towed arty. which in a battle of maneuver can really have a disadvantage since its cumbersome and awkward to drag towed arty around while SPGs are more mobile with a faster set up time. and now the Russians are going to have a towed arty shortage, Not surprised if the Russians start buying North Korean artillery both towed and SPGs hahah
Mostly they just didn't have enough artillery to support that section of the front since it was "quiet" and not a direction of interest for them. I have not seen credible sources that say where Russia is drawing its artillery and other heavy equipment for the Kursk defense/counter attack. From out of theatre or redeployed from the East.
@@obsidianjane4413 not only that they are sending whatever arty they have in storage back the east.
You have a poorly trained conscripted force run by people who are good at systematic bribery being directly by a crazy leader. Stories out of Russia and people being drafted and sent to the front trenches in two weeks with a gun and a couple of magazines of ammo are crazy. it takes time, and resources, to train people effectively.
@@cryptickcryptick2241 But they have a lot of them and well, "horde" tactics has sadly worked for them in the past.
@@obsidianjane4413 sadly worked for them when the Soviets had their backs to teh wall vs. the real German nazis back in WW2, now the Russians dont have their backs to the wall. yah the other time they did this was in WW1 , 3 years of war the Russian empire collapsed in civil war and the Czar and his family kaput. Same might happen to Czar putin
One of the best channels on youtube. Keep up the good work.
"You see, Rossiya will win because 3x more population and a gorbillion tanks and IFVs! Wha- Hey! No! Don't look at the satellite photos. Just- Just pretend we have infinite stockpiles okay?!"
So Ukraine is winning?
The war will end in November, Ukraine will be forced to surrender.
So Afghanistan lost the afghan-ussr war? @@johannuys7914
@@johannuys7914 It depends on whether you look strategically or tactically
@@MrKakibuy The answer is still no in both cases
So much to be learned in this war. It seems towed artillery simply isn't mobile enough to survive.
The attrition of artillery can be attributed to 2 possibilities. One, some of them have been lost in direct enemy action (killed kinetically.) The second is wear and tear. A barrel is rated to for a certain number of firings, after which it has to be scrapped and melted down. If they don't have replacement barrel for a towed artillery piece, it could have been cannibalized for spare parts.
Its also possible that Russian forces have been repositioning or dispersing their assets to guard against being targeted by deep missile and drone strikes from Ukrainian forces. That may explain some of the missing equipment.
I remember Russia was only capable of producing 8 artillery barrels a day. Less than half of what they need.
For towed artillery the biggest losses are most likely counter-battery. Especially for the smaller caliber ones.
Also Russian army grown by 100% in size... maybe they need equipment ;)
with 20 shops per day - the barrel last 100 days on the field
No lie I kept checking the channel the past cpl days like a mad man for a new video
Another great video👍👍👍👍
I wonder what Russia's current artillery piece production is
Clearly just a fraction of their consumption rate. Otherwise stocks would not decrease.
Probably not even one barrel a day.
@@Apjooz sources claim roughly 8 barrels a day, less the half of what they need to replenish what they’re using
About the same as their new tank production (which is to say, not very many).
Dude the difference between the 60cm and 30cm satellite imagery is insane. Makes me wonder about classified satellites that can get to 5cm or less.
I am simple man, I see a new Covert Cabal video, I press like
Great bit of analysis.
I find it comical that the "new" pieces are 40-50 years old.
I mean, if we're being pedantic...that's the same in most modern militaries.
The Leopard 2 tank is 50 years old. The M1 Abrams about the same age.
@@MrDael01Not the Leopard 2a7 or the M1A2 SEP 3.
Yet these artillery pieces have no really changed
@@MrDael01 I assume that you knew that is not true even as you were typing it.. The M1s being fielded today by the US Army are NOT 50 years old. Same line of tanks, not literally the same tanks.
@@rick7424 It's not just that the design has not changed. These artillery pieces were LITERALLY built 50 years ago, as in that specific piece of metal is 50 years old.
Thank you as always for all of the work and effort you put into these videos, and to HIMARS as well!
I love this channel
Impressive! Thank you for preparing that.
It's not "impressive" it's 24 karat 🤡ass bs
Covert ❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
They are being used for parts not to replace lost (a portion is being replaced altogether due to loses but not as many as you make it seem)
They also lost the men and boys using that equipment. I blame putin for that.
Great video!! Like your work.
The artillery is not "gone". It is in use. I know they lost a lot but this is not a good way of measuring how many they have left. There is no way they are sending anything back for storage right now.
Barrels wear out, and the majority of these systems are no longer in production, barrels included. You can only refinish an artillery tube so many times before the metal gets worn too thin to be safely fired, and that’s still assuming they have the tooling and equipment to refinish them. It’s likely that a lot of these expended guns are piling up in storage facilities in eastern Ukraine, which may be off-limits for commercial satellite imagery since it is internationally recognized as Ukrainian territory.
The pulled equipment goes somewhere where it is needed.
Once these fields are empty the supply to that need dries up.
What disapears here is clearly an input into their army that is required for their opperations. Remove that input and those opperations will be disrupted and eventually drop of significantly.
@rogerk6180 i think u missed his point, his point Is that if 10000 artillery pieces are pulled from storage since you can deploy them somewhere useful opeven if it's a part of the front that never really sees action. We need to account for the difference in artillery pieces in use as well
Ok question? Why would these storage deposits be emptying if they are not being worn through?
I don't disagree there going to the front but why would they need to pull everything emptying entire yards if they weren't running a deficit?
Videos like this also don't calculate which artillery pieces are being refurbished, which are being broken down for spare parts/barrels. How much of this reserve stuff has been moved forward to various other locations (and is still sitting dormant waiting for refurb/deployment), etc. It doesn't cover all the angles, so it's of limited value - unfortunately.
Thank you for the video!
Finally! You've Upload Again Bruh.
Good report ! 💪💪🇺🇦🇺🇦🫡🫡🇨🇦🇨🇦
Interesting analysis
Scrape metal prices have to be at rock bottom. Once the foundrys are up, Ukraine will have ample scrap for years to come.
You have to be careful recycling that military scrap. It will come in heaps at a time, and then live ammunition goes off and destroys your equipment, your people and your company. I am not saying it can't be done, it is just there is a long history of accidents in that line of work.
@cryptickcryptick2241 Your correct, but I assume after all the wars, there is a sizeable quantity of dangerous material to be disposed of for sure. Not the kinda job I'd do.
Well, if Ukraine is just a region in Russia.
What "Ukraine"?
@@cryptickcryptick2241 Live ammunition goes off all the time in foundries, it's not a problem. All you notice is a pop from the furnace. Not even a large caliber round, such as a .50 or a 20 mm can do much damage if blows up outside of a gun. There's nothing to direct its energy, and the projectile won't have much energy.
Much awaited, much appreciated excellent insights as always from you.
So... could we get a sort of rough estimation for when Russia *at current rates of usage* will run out of tanks, APCs, artillery etc... that would be an interesting estimation. Even if current usage changes, which it almost certainly will as they get lower.
The Institute for the Study of War estimates 2026. According to this video, it took Russia 2 years to burn through 2/3 of their towed artillery, so about a year assuming all of the remaining units in storage are good and actually useful. Of course, given Ukraine's destruction of Russian artillery pieces has increased in the past year due to better weapons, and the very real possibility of at least SOME stored artillery units are in poor shape, I'd say less than a year but a year at max. It's hard to put a specific time as to when total Russian war capability will be exhausted, but the timeframe is definitely taking shape.
dude your mom already won the war. rofl keep eating up misinformation, cause you want to believe delusions so badly. ahahhahaa!
2 years
An alternate answer
Russia won't ever really 'run out'. There will be no point at which they won't have artillery or tanks or whatever anymore. What will happen is that they'll have to scale down their operations to the point where their losses are equal to the replacements. That will probably mean they'll have to pretty much stop any offensive actions, but they'll still be able to organize one hell of a defense. Digging them out of Ukraine is not going to be easy. The tipping point is expected to be in 2026, but since exact numbers on Russian production capabilities are unknown, as is the state of their reserves, this is a very rough estimate.
@@gerritvalkering1068 no you're wrong, the russians have already surrendered and the west is sending generals to control russia right now. west won the war.
What about the barrels of these legacy pieces? Are there new ones being produced or machines being tooled to produce them?
North Korea and China produce them.
Is Russia manufacturing new artillery pieces ? If they are how much ?
If they are it is far short of their consumption rate. If it was at consumption rates these stocks would not be decreasing.
The vast majority of what they’re still manufacturing is self propelled. Their newest systems are the 2S34 Chosta, 2S35 Koalitsiya-SV, 2S40 Floks and 2S43 Malva, but the lines that manufacture these are all extremely small scale and likely hampered by electronics sanctions. Russia likely doesn’t have more than 100 of these systems altogether. The other system that they’re still manufacturing new is the 2S19 Msta-S, production rate unknown. But they’re estimated to have 600 in active service and a little under 100 in reserve. A lot of “new” production will consist of modernizing those units in reserve that date back to the USSR. Once that runs out, production of the 2S19 will slow further. The Msta-S uses the same barrel as the Msta-B towed artillery piece, so it’s possible they’re able to manufacture the Msta-B as well, though again, quantities unknown. The last piece they may still be manufacturing is the 2S9 Nona and 2S23 Nona-SVK. These are 120mm self-propelled mortars based on the BTR-D APC and BTR-80 APC, respectively. At present, they are converting those APCs in storage to SPGs by manufacturing just the turret. While the BTR-D is long out of production, the BTR-80 chassis is still manufactured new so the Nona-SVK is another system that could still feasibly remain in active production.
there is also a few selling points for towed.
they can get to places self propelled can´t.
Like try and get a artillery piece out to some forest that have zero road network (like the road is a dirt path... not one that can fit a car... but something you can push a bike along).
Another is that usally a towed artilery is a lot smaller. like I seen people sneak in a towed artillery between two houses that can´t even fit a car.
self propelled artillery forget about it it might be able to stick the barrel between them but the ide of hiding between two houses naa.
problem is that the missing artillery pieces are not actually accounted for on the battelfield - maybe several hundred to 1 thousand can be confirmed destroyed. It is more likely that they were transferred to new storage facilities/refurbishment centres that are better hidden from satellites and closer to the actual battlefield.
Also only a portion of actually destroyed pieces will end up being visually confirmed. Sometimes people just have better things to do than making pics of destroyed military equipment and uploading it to the internet
Because only a fraction of them are getting destroyed by enemy fire. Most are just scrapped to produce replacement barrels for mobile howitzers. They are estimates that they replaced over 5000 barrels this way. But they already have used practically all which could be used that way.
Unfortunatly i exspect north korea to jump for help. Their army is even more based on artillery and will have a lot of stock...
One reason I heard of why they are burning through artillery so fast isn’t because they are being destroyed by enemy action but because they are using them to the point they just catastrophically fail. They just pour through rounds until they break and use another one instead of maintaining or switching them out. It’s wasteful and brutish but what do u expect from Russia?
Thats the dumbest thing I read this year
Not all of these are useable. Besides the ones which are in poor condition, Russia has also been pulling the barrels off of towed artillery for their SPGs.
Thanks from CBR AU, CC
Video starts at 01:45
❤ thanks
Fantastic thanks again
Artillery taken out of storage doesn't mean lost, why would anyone think that? Lots of it is serviced and prepared for deployment, deployed on the frontline or simply transported closer to the frontline to be used when needed. Its really hard to destroy towed artillery, the machine is hard to hit and damage with drones and usually only the crew suffers.
Why are they serviced and prepared?
Artillery destroys itself as it fires, and Russia has been firing a lot of artillery.
I don't think any one is disagreeing with the first part. However the idea that artillery is somehow harder to damage than an IFV is questionable. At its core it is just a hunk of metal. It takes more than a grenade but just as much as a standard armored vehicle to destroy it. And if there is ammo next to it all you might need to do is set that off.
100% guaranteed that a lot of what's left is in absolute garbage condition, same as with their tanks. There's no reason towed artillery would fare any better.
So why isn't Ukraine winning? Lololol
@@isaacgriffin5690 These propagandists can never answer this questions.
@@isaacgriffin5690 Because the army still has artillery on the frontline? like, think this through a bit before you comment. If there werent any at the front, they would take the rest out of storage. Leave it up to Z shills to be as retarded as possible.
@@isaacgriffin5690For Ukraine, “winning” is holding off a country with four times the population and nearly the entire Soviet inheritance. Ukraine has fought Russia to a stalemate, and the advantages Russia has in regards to equipment will disappear in around a year.
@@johannuys7914 Says the Kreml bot😂
I sleep more soundly at night when I know Russia's fucked in a different way.
You'd have to be dreaming to believe this.
@@isaacgriffin5690 You'd have to be in denial not to.
@@isaacgriffin5690 You have to be dreaming to believe russia is winning or that they will force ukraine to surrender soon
Unless you are Ukranian or Russian... I dont see why it should matter to you.
@@bloodlustshiva1white boy, your beloved Ukrainskaya Army is winning on CNN, BBC, Fox and MSNBC😅 keep watching !!
Good analysis
With drones around, having towed artillery and hiding sometimes is even way safer than having self-propelled artillery. With drone warfare, it has some upsides.
I disagree.
Because as soon as you fire, the enemy can triangulate where you fired from.
The enemy will send counter-battery fire to rain down on your position.
Or, in the age of drones, they know WHERE to send the drones to hunt you.
Drones _are_ scary. Which is exactly why you don't want to be in the area when they show up.
Mobility is life.
Towed artillery is only really useful if the enemy cannot reach you back.
Yeah, but drones can hunt towed artillery as well. It's less expensive than losing a SP artillery piece, but it's still lost.
As you allude to at the end of your video, the number in storage is not the total number they have. This does not count those actually at the front line, which will be MANY since Russia has been heavily reliant on artillery for their advancements. So even after the storage depots are empty, it will still be a couple of months before those on the front line are destroyed in sufficient numbers to make a difference in the conflict.
Supposedly, Russia has been about to run out of everything from tanks to manpower to shells since about a week into this invasion. I'm going to save the champagne until we can observe a corresponding decrease at the frontline.
Whoever was saying Russia will run out of equipment 3 weeks into this war was lying or delusional they had the biggest military stockpile out of any country. Talking about right now though I think it makes sense to say in 1-2 years Russia will start running low/have shortages in some equipment sections like tanks and artillery.
Why do you think they have to beg Iran and North Korea for weapons?
@truechaosmulala3831 so, then why are they using 50 year old tanks?
@@rogerwilco5918 cause it’s easier for Russia to fix the less sophisticated older tanks than the newer ish more electronic tanks but they are definitely already running low ish on tanks
@truechaosmulala3831 😆 "everything is going according to plan" , huh?
Could it be that they’ve also decided to start reconditioning these and storing them elsewhere?
Ssssshhhhh don’t ruin the propaganda !!
great work... it good to know, there stocks will not last past 2025, and in most important categories past end of this year...
The war will end in November, so it doesn't matter.
Well, don't sleep on it.
I ll take it with a grain of salt.
Influencers were saying the same about missiles and planes a year ago.
Yet Russia still keeps using them.
They will have emptied their storage of old junk for sure, but meanwhile they are upping their production of new gear.
Okay, warehouses. Are there any numbers on the production of new SPGs and artillery from factories?
If I recall correctly, the bottleneck in production for both SPGs and towed artillery is barrels, it is not a simple hollow steel tubes, it needs very specialized machinery; the last number I saw was ~50 barrels per year. Even if it was somehow 4 times that, (North Korean production, new machines, whatever) that would cover for a month or two of losses, so not anywhere near to sustain the attrition that the Russian artillery is sustaining.
This video just shows that 40% has been withdrawn from storage in three years. So a good part of it is in various workshops preparing for use. Roughly speaking, at that rate, Russia, just from the warehouse, has these tools for another 5-6 years of such use without new production.
Those fourty percents are open ground stockpiles, they had reserves always underground in warsaw pact countries. There are rumors, they have nowdays stockpiles in the Ural mountains, and near Moscow.
@@ElveszettMajdMeglelt Assets of the first reserve class are kept indoors, the second and third classes are kept outdoors.
Thanks Man!
What about barrel replacements? Is that a limiting factor, have they already stripped the remaining 1/3 of artillery for spare barrels?
Barrel replacements? Why replace the barrels? That costs money and takes time. Money better spent on a new lake side dacha.
If the ukranian numbers are to be believed, than the atrition rate for towed artillery has massively increased in the last year. So chances are, we see serious shortages of guns way sooner. Also there is the possibility that the production of shells might become a bottle neck, as the production capacity between the different calibers varies and a slow change from more 152mm to smaller 122 or 100mm might lead to shortages of the needed calibers.
But at the same time, Ukrainian officers are expressing that they're encountering more armour and artillery than ever before. Russia is still producing a crap ton of artillery shells at the moment (with no need to slow down anytime soon). I think these videos - while interesting - are kind of ignoring the rest of the pipeline. They don't add up with much "on the ground" information coming out.
@@oskar6661 I see your point but exactly the point this video makes is that there is still stuff left in the pipeline which means it is going to get worse at least for the next 6 months or year i guess and after that in 2-3 years it will be a different conversation. I just hope ukraine gets the help it needs from nato to be able to reach that point.
Why would you ever believe Ukrainian numbers?
@@johnclay2716you definitely love bbc
@@johnclay2716 because they align with Russian progress and actions? prighozin has confirmed them before he died too.
Thank you.....
Old F-4 Shoe🇺🇸