For years, Russian tanks have been the epitome of brute force on the battlefield—barroom legends of steel behemoths storming across Europe and the Middle East. But in the modern wars in Ukraine and Syria, those same tanks—particularly the T-72 and its numerous variants—have developed a very different reputation: they’re the most battered postmodern tanks on the planet.
Conceived for Offense, Not Stamina
The T-72 was a product of Cold War-era Soviet doctrine. It was not a jack-of-all-trades like most Western main battle tanks. It was meant to lead the charge, break through opposing lines, and cut a path for supporting units. To minimize cost and speed up production, it employed an auto-loader that permitted a smaller three-man crew, and its sleek design kept it low on the battlefield.
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 is only half the battle. The skill and discipline of the crew can make or break a tank’s effectiveness. In Iraq, poorly trained crews in T-72s were no match for Western forces. In Ukraine and Syria, similar issues have surfaced: inexperienced crews, poor coordination, and panic under fire.
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 isn’t solely a matter of old designs. It’s a matter of the intersection of inherent weaknesses, poorly trained crews, and a contemporary battlefield filled with drones, guided missiles, and precision munitions.
The T-72 was designed for a type of warfare that does not now exist. In modern conflict, numbers are not enough to secure victory. Survivability, flexibility, and the ability of the crew count much more, and the experience of Russian armor in Syria and Ukraine confirms it.
More related images you may be interested in:
