Russia’s supply of T-80 main battle tanks numbers in the low triple digits, according to one close watcher of the war in Ukraine, and points to how steep losses have been for the Russian war machine. Posting on X, formerly Twitter, one open-source analyst wrote that there are only 203 T-80s parked outside Omsktranshmash, a Russian state-owned engineering company in Omsk.
Oryx, a website that uses images and video of damaged or destroyed equipment to tabulate losses for both sides in Ukraine, counts nearly 4,400 Russian tanks damaged, destroyed, abandoned, or captured. Ukrainian losses — like Russian losses, only those that have been visually confirmed — are significantly less, at just over 1,400.
T-80 Tank Russian Army. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
But both numbers point to a crucial aspect not just of this war, but of conflict past and future: parties to long, drawn-out wars that can activate a large defense industrial base have a distinct advantage and can absorb losses more readily than parties with small reserves.
It is a vital aspect of defense. But, strangely, it is also seemingly being ignored by a founding member of the NATO alliance.
Small Tank Fleets Are Not Just a Russian Issue
Definitive figures about Russia’s tank reserve are a notoriously tricky issue to pin down. Less difficult, however, are the implications of a small fleet of tanks — and the United Kingdom is a prime example.
The British Army is moving away from its legacy Challenger 2 main battle tanks toward a new platform, the upcoming Challenger 3, also a main battle tank. Though outwardly rather similar — the Challenger 3 is, in essence, a Challenger 2 hull with a new main gun housed inside a new turret — the Challenger 3 will bring new capabilities to the Brits.
In a significant break from decades of precedent, the Challenger 3 eschews the rifled barrels of previous British tanks in favor of a rifled, 120mm alternative.
Consequently, British tanker crews will no longer field the multipurpose squash-head ammunition they have ridden into battle with for generations. But by opting for a NATO-standard rifled main gun, British tanker crews can leverage the full range of ammunition in service with their NATO allies, a boon for compatibility and logistics.
Challenger 3 Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
The Challenger 3 Main Battle tank. The latest edition to the Armoured family of the British Army. Displayed during PROJECT HERMOD 2. British Army Photo.
The issue for the United Kingdom and the British Army is not the main gun itself but the size of the Challenger 3 fleet.
Almost inexplicably, the Challenger 3 fleet will number only 148 in total, an extremely diminutive number that places London’s future tank fleet among the smallest in Europe and the NATO alliance.
One of the strongest criticisms of the platform is not its technical aspects but its anticipated fleet size. The ongoing war in Ukraine has laid out in very stark terms how quickly opposing sides can burn through all kinds of war materiel, including ammunition, air interceptors — and armored vehicles — making this acquisition decision rather confounding.
High-profile British Resignations
In a sign of how controversial London’s current defense trajectory is, several of the country’s top defense officials resigned, signaling their dissatisfaction with military spending. On Thursday, Armed Forces Minister Al Carns quit on the heels of Defence Secretary John Healey, who also resigned. The move puts additional pressure on British Prime Minister Kier Starmer.
In his resignation letter, former Secretary Healey wrote that Prime Minister Starmer has “been unable, and the Treasury has been unwilling, to commit the resources that the nation needs to defend the country at this time of rising threats.”
Former minister Carns broadly echoed that sentiment in his own letter and wrote that “the character of conflict is changing faster than our procurement can keep up with.” But, Cairns added, “we are still purchasing capability suitable for the last war while our adversaries arm for the next one. Platforms that cost billions can be defeated by systems that cost thousands. Any serious Defence Investment Plan has to start from that reality.”
Preparing for the Long War: Numbers Matter
Attritional conflict like that currently seen in Ukraine could well be a facet of the next war, be it a wider European conflagration with Russia, in Asia, or elsewhere. The Russian experience underscores how important a reliable production pipeline for war materiel is — as are existing stocks of ammunition, armored vehicles, and other resources.
Russia likely has some hundreds, if not thousands, of older main battle tanks in storage.
And while those legacy Soviet vehicles are almost assuredly in various states of readiness, their usefulness is not to be gauged in a head-to-head fight against leading Ukrainian armored vehicles, but rather in aiding the Kremlin in quickly bringing mass to a fight.
Quantity has a Quality of its Own
An oft-quoted but perhaps apocryphal quotation from Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin holds that quantity has a quality of its own.
Despite the nebulous attribution, however, that adage remains as valid today as it was during the Second World War — and it would be wise not to forget that lesson.
About the Author: Caleb Larson
Caleb Larson is an American multiformat journalist based in Berlin, Germany. His work covers the intersection of conflict and society, focusing on American foreign policy and European security. He has reported from Germany, Russia, and the United States. Most recently, he covered the war in Ukraine, reporting extensively on the war’s shifting battle lines from Donbas and writing on the war’s civilian and humanitarian toll. Previously, he worked as a Defense Reporter for POLITICO Europe. You can follow his latest work on X.
