Comments by "" (@tomk3732) on "Russian tanks aren't obsolete. They're being used wrong" video.

Not very easy - T-90 has a compartment in the turret but still carousel - they would need new auto loader like the French. But that means huge turret - UA actually tried that and the thing is huge.
2
People do not understand Russian tactics at all. For mobile war in the beginning Russia used TINY force. In a tiny force you have no space for infantry - light one. So everyone gets a tank or APC as force multiplier. Imagine you have 9 soldiers. You can have them as infantry - 9 dudes or as three tanks or a tank and say APC with 3 extra infantry. I think only a fool would pick 9 infantry men. After 1st month Russia changed tactics to artillery fight and started to immediately win big time.
1
But why is Russian tactics obsolete? Combined arms is a tactics employed since mid WWII - its not exactly new. Russian tactics for the last 6 months plus has been more modern or very old - depending on point of view. They heavily rely on artillery, drones, and limited armor assaults. This has caused horrendous casualties on UA side, at least 4x to 6x Russian losses. Also this has caused massive losses in armor and equipment on UA side - at least 2x Russian losses.
1
Not really - German tanks were indeed quite good - they combined decent protection with good mobility and good accessibility / visibility. They indeed were in the beginning of the war by far the best tanks. This changed on later when T-34 entered the field - but original T-34 also had a LOT of issues - it was later in 1942 that these issues were ironed out.
1
Same for UA side. Most equipment through was destroyed.
1
But are museums having any clue? We know Russian losses up to +- 100 soldiers. We have reports of losses from UA side from western MDs. UA losses are through the roof. So is Russian tactics so bad?
1
@dankengine5304 Current Russian and allied losses are 16000 rounded plus minus 100. Thanks to these grave counting guys paid by the British.
1