Russian tanks were widely considered to be the most powerful military force for a long period. These massive tanks made of steel were the subject of a lot of conversations. People were discussing how these monsters were rolling through Europe and the Middle East. However, the outcome of the battles in Ukraine and Syria has changed the situation drastically. The armies that used these tanks (mainly the T-72 and its derivatives) have re-labeled them. They are currently characterized as the heavily damaged vehicles that have the most significant defeat history globally.
Conceived for Offense, Not Stamina
The T-72 came from the Cold War Soviet rules. It was not made to do many tasks, unlike most Western main tanks. Its job was to move fast at the front, smash through enemy lines, and make way for others following. To save money and make more quickly, it used an auto-loader allowing just three men to run it, and its smooth design made it stay low in fight areas.
A retired T-72 commander once distilled it to: “versatile, quick, simple to operate, [and a low-cost killing machine.” That ethos extended to subsequent Russian tanks, which continued to borrow extensively from the T-72’s rudimentary design template. But though periodic upgrades provided improved armor and firepower, the foundational design never really transformed to keep pace with contemporary combat requirements.
Harsh Lessons in Ukraine, Syria, and Iraq
The past ten years have been harsh for the T-72 family. Ukraine alone has lost close to 2,000 T-72s, T-80s, and T-90s in more than a year of combat, frequently against Ukrainian troops running older T-64s supported by Western anti-tank missiles. Images and footage of Russian tanks charred beyond recognition have become so ubiquitous that they’re all but a dark standard of the conflict.
Syria shares the same tale. The Syrian Arab Army lost nearly 1,000 T-72s in under a decade, and most of them were destroyed by barely armed insurgents. American, Iraqi, and Saudi Abrams tanks in similar situations suffered greatly fewer losses throughout an extended timespan. Even Russian accounts concur on the magnitude of these defeats.
A Design That Punishes Its Crews
One of the largest design failures in Russian tanks is the storage of ammunition. In the T-72 and its variants, the shells are stored in a carousel loader under the turret, directly beneath the crew. If an opposing round penetrates the armor, the ammunition will explode on the spot, frequently sending the turret flying into the air in a now-notorious “jack-in-the-box” movement.
Western tanks, such as the Abrams or Leopard, in contrast, keep their ammunition within armor compartments with blow-out panels, so if the ammo cooks off, the explosion vents away from the crew. That detail has saved thousands of Western tankers—and killed many Russian crews.
Training, Leadership, and the Human Element
Hardware alone is not sufficient. The proficiency and rigor of the personnel can significantly influence whether the capability of a tank is transformed or not. In addition, badly trained crews in T-72s operating in Iraq could hardly confront Western forces. Some of the same problems have also appeared in Ukraine and Syria, namely unskilled crews, lack of coordination, and defeatist behavior when under attack.
One of the most popular viral clips came from Ukraine and depicted a highly skilled Bradley Fighting Vehicle crew taking out Russia’s best-of-the-line T-90M with a round into the weakly armored rear. The Russian crew didn’t even fight hard, leaving their tank to be finished off by a drone. Military analysts maintain that a lot of Russia’s most skilled tank crews were lost in early fighting, replaced by inexperienced troops inadequately trained for high-intensity battles.
Western Armor Compared
Western tanks such as the Leopard and Abrams typically weigh more, are more expensive, and have much better optics, armor, and survivability. Even the Bradley—technically an infantry fighting vehicle, not a tank—is a repeat destroyer of Russian armor when operated by experienced crews with modern ammunition and fire control systems.
The Bigger Lesson
The destruction of Russian tank armies is not only a matter of old designs. It is a matter of the combination of the tanks’ inherent weaknesses, poorly trained crews, and a modern battlefield full of drones, guided missiles, and precision munitions.
The T-72 was built for a war that is drastically different from the one today. In a current conflict, having a large number of tanks is not sufficient for winning. The factors of survivability, flexibility, and crew ability weigh more, and the experience of Russian armor in Syria and Ukraine is the evidence.
More related images you may be interested in:
