Is Russia Really Using MUSEUM Tanks on the Front Line?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 лют 2025
- Has Russia truly resorted to deploying museum tanks in the Russo-Ukrainian War? We’ve investigated claims, focusing on T-34s and T-62s, to reveal the surprising truth behind these battlefield rumors.
Love content? Check out Simon's other UA-cam Channels:
MegaProjects: / @megaprojects9649
SideProjects: / @sideprojects
Casual Criminalist: / @thecasualcriminalist
Today I Found Out: / todayifoundout
Brain Blaze: / @brainblaze6526
Places: youtube.com/@P...
Astrographics: youtube.com/@A...
Simon's Social Media:
Twitter: / simonwhistler
Instagram: / simonwhistler
There's no reason for Russia to pull tanks out of museums when they have fields full of these old tanks from the Soviet era. I think it would be more fair to call some of these tanks museum age rather than saying that they are from museums
That's what I was thinking. The Soviets, and then Russians, never got rid of anything. There are 1,000s of tanks in some type of storage.
@@pkt1213well in the 2000s there were thousands scraped
The scrapyards are beginning to run out of armor. Not to mention thousands of tanks were scrapped at the end of the USSR lowering that number of tanks. You can subtract from that number even more with tanks that are beyond repair and those tanks that require long term repair then you see why they're just taking tanks out from museums and stuff like that. The tanks that are easily repairable have likely all been pulled from the yards
@@pkt1213 to be fair they did export a lot of gear when it became obsolete as hand me downs to much of the third world
Correct, and thank you.
The Leopard A1 is also pretty close to museum ready. In fact a few years ago the Canadian army sold all theirs- one ended up in the possession of a farmer near Edmonton, who was using it as a very heavily armed and armoured device to pull things around his farm. Then Afghanistan happened and after a bit of battlefield experience, the army called up and asked if they might possibly have the thing back.
Strangely appropriate, considering that tanks originated from tractor-type equipment, and were "hidden" early on by the Nazis as "tractors". (Side note: if you want to clear stone or pull stumps, you probably couldn't do much better than a tank! 😄)
@@cpfs936 a lot of ww2 tanks ended up as farming tractors post war
@@cpfs936 so did the British, why they're called "tanks" of course...
@@gedq Tank was just a code name given by the British to the first tanks because the project was top secret. It had nothing to do with their intended purpose or because they looked like some sort of tank, they simply referred to them as water tanks, or just tanks for short, so that nobody would have any clue about what they were really working on.
where did you get this info? im curious to find some article that this happened lol
"Shackled as we are by facts."
Thank goodness you are. The recent push for journalists wanting to "move beyond objectivity" is simply repugnant.
Journalist have always moved beyond Objectivity. They are simply returning to their roots.
Yeah agree thanks for this
@@silverhawkscape2677Human behavior, seems to me. Some journalists are better at objectivity than others.
Shackled by a false narrative. 😅
@@kevinschuurmans7738 This video's narrative is false?! Oh so in that case Russia actually ARE pulling tanks out of museums then!
Many thanks for confirming, Kevin.
My cousin is a drone operator in Ukraine, he's destroyed or participated / had a drone present in the destruction of several dozen Russian tanks. Says he's never once seen a T-34 nor heard from other operators about a T-34 in Ukraine.
Because there's no point in pulling them out Russia dosent make the ammo for them
Lies
The T-34 is only usable in prades and for demonstration purposes. There are pictures of the SU-152, T-34 and SU-100 on training grounds. Those are dated and geo located. But they return to the base museum right after the demonstration.
Several dozens 😂
@@BIGHEADjr51 Thorazine comes in vanilla nowadays according to my wife the nurse. Neither side is dominating. The Ukrainian armed forces had reduced the Ru occupation from 27% to 18%. Russia is now slowly enlarging it back to 19% but losing everything in the process.
They lost the initial number of troops used to invade and everything modern in the Ru army. The only thing preventing a complete collapse of the Russian armed forces are the private military companies, prisoners and they now are getting weapons and soldiers from North Korea. Russia went from being a well armed trained force to untrained beggars in two years time. They only have local number superiority but that is nearly gone with the loss of 1500 men each day (MIA, WIA, KIA and POWs) for a few meters of gains.
Indian Jones: "That tank belongs in a museum!"
Russia: "It will be fine!"
Angry business man: so do you!!
theyre goin for godmodes irl
Ah yes, my favorite action movie "Indian jones"
@@sumdumguy6449+30,000 SL🦁
*Indiana Jones
Covert Cabal has done a number of videos about Russian tank storage facilities using the most recent available satellite images. It's good stuff if you're interested in that sort of thing.
yeah, he's good for that kind of stuff.
When I hear "using museum tanks" I just think of tanks that you might find in a museum not necessarily literally taking a tank from a museum display.
UK has a T72 tank (and a T80) in a museum. War trophies from Iraq. The museum (Bovington) is also used to train tank crew on tank design.
@@zedeyejoe and the main Swedish tank museum contains a Strv122B and Strf 9040C, the latest version of both vehicles that's currently in service both in Sweden and donated to Ukraine.
@@SonsOfLorgarUkraine doesn’t call themselves a world super power…😂 Ukraine is using any weapon they can find. Russia is supposed to be an elite military force according to itself
@@zacharyberry5019 I wonder how Ukraine would respond to the USA offering M60 tanks..."Nice offer, but our junkyards are full enough" :)
@@just4funallday508 Yea little benefit to such things. Maybe in an exchange with third countries to send more ex-soviet tanks to Ukraine.
12:35 the second the Daily Mail is mentioned in the same sentence as “journalism”, you might as well forget any actual truth..
Seriously. The Daily Fail is your source? Do better, Fact Boy!
@@vic5015 It's not their source. But it's probably where the (mostly baseless) claim originated.
@@vic5015the fact it was the source of the story this video then pulled apart didn't need doing better. They ripped it apart very well and I good detail.
@@vic5015 What more did you want? The only thing missing was a Brain Blaze style tangent about what a POS the Daily Mail is and that wouldn't have been super appropriate in a serious video.
@@Narangarathyeah BB/DtU are where he openly dishes on the Daily Mail 😂
I've called Russian armour "museum pieces" before, I don't literally mean "tanks pulled from museums." They have massive storage feilds of tanks that the Russians consider serviceable and I would say belong in a museum.
Yeah I have never read anything from someone insisting they were from actual museums. They were using it as a phrase..
This video is weird hah.
Not so much now those tank storage parks are emptying fast.
Many belong into scrapyards😂
They don’t anymore, those fields are empty
@@FelipeScheuermann1982 well no most are fine and just need the engine fixed up
A UA-cam channel putting accuracy over clickbait? Staggering.
He's good, many channels....many...enjoy
My brother in law was in the Battle of Mogadishu ( Blackhawk Down ) he was a Navy Seabee who was fighting with the Marine Corps and he said that when they were just about to be overrun other NATO forces arrived and many countries were using tanks from WW2 , Korean War and Vietnam. He said they were never more happy to see outdated tanks coming to the rescue.
Kinda a different situation. The Somalians had mostly man portable weapons. Even 20-50 year old armor provided good protection in 1993. Today many man portable arms pose a much greater threat to old armor that doesn't have battlefield awareness and advanced defenses. Up armored HMMWVs were decent protection in Mogadishu. Blackhawk down emphasized the HMMWVs in the event were thin skin, not up armored. Remember the junior soldier that complained about the lack of up armored HMMWVs, the dramatic response, and subsequent development of MRAPs.
The quoted storage numbers for T-55s and T-62s are very obsolete/inaccurate - people like Covert Cabal have repeatedly counted and IDed Russian tanks in storage and actual numbers are far lower.
I was extremely surprised that the person on the phone was so candid calling the war in Ukraine an invasion, instead of calling it "a special military operation"
As long the government doesn't hear it and you have the plausible deniability to refute it if they do. It should be okay
Simon said that they translated it themselves so who knows what he said. Then again if he was convinced he was speaking with people from outside the country, he might have chosen not to use the official terminology.
Could be that invasion was just their translation, but the actual word used was more in line with the official line.
They might not care as much if it's said to foreigners. Like how Chinese officials can refer to Taiwan as Taiwan if they're talking to western journalists when that's a big NO-NO at home.
That museum curator is dead probably
Thirty T-34 tanks, produced in 1944, were brought back to Russia from Laos and passed to Russian ministry of defense. They are supposed to be used for parades, I don't see them being sent to Ukraine.
Now it turns out that Ukraine did use a Panther tank at a road block. It was a film prop, based on a T55. No one would use a Panther, they are just too valuable.
Great video, love that you actually went so far as to phone into Russia and get a primary source.
It's ludicrous UA-camrs do more fact checking than respected news agencies, the press should be ashamed.
News agencies should face fines if caught spreading fake news/misleading stories for profit.
1st time commenting, thoroughly enjoy all Simon's channels and the content the brilliant writers produce.
Simon didn’t do any of that, his help did. He just reads the scripts
@scottmeredith3359 you'll be shocked to learn the same is true of most newscasters
@@scottmeredith3359they thanked the writers in their comment.
I'm pretty sure most Simon fans don't think Simon is anything more than a manager and face, his writers are very good at their jobs though, and the fact that they keep coming back tells me that Simon pays them well.
@@scottmeredith3359But he got his channels to that point where he just reads texts 😅 that's culmination of years of effort, sweat and toils from his side
I'm not sure how much stock I'd put in anything Russia itself say's. Remember, they also claim to shoot down 99% of all the missiles and drones and when a factory/ammo dump/air base/oil refinery takes a hit it is always invariably claimed that it was debris that hit them and caused all the massive explosions, lol.
The T-62 und T-64 are two completely different designs. While the 62 is simpler coming from the T54/55 line, the 64 was basically the first sovjet MBT with even better performance than the later T-72.
Also there was some video evidence of a IS3 being reactivated - but not sure by which side.
I believe it was reactivated from a Ukrainian memorial by the actual separatists in 2014 before the "separatists" arrived.
The T64s were Iraqs second tank to the T72 back in the 90s , they also had alot of T55s apparently. An I don't mean they just had them those were their main Armor. I was in the Army 96-98 an remember those 3 being the main ones we were trained to identify those an the BMPs. Not sure though as I never saw combat .
The IS-3 was started up by some Pro-Russian Ukrainians in the Donbas region in 2014
@@TaitLawrence-xl2xb"Pro-Russian Ukrainians" = Russians
Russia funded terrorist group which has promised 12 foot wife and mansion if they betray own country 👺@@TaitLawrence-xl2xb
I was in kubinka museum this summer, all the tanks are still there. all. Even the most modern looking ones the t-72 B too
there is no reason at all to use tanks from the museums, this was just another bullshit by western trolls, russia has a shit ton of t-55/t-62/t-64 that they can use before even considering reviving some t-34 tanks
I've looked into this as well and found one instance of Russia pulling an old tank from a museum, but not for the front lines. They pulled one as it was well maintained, the parts and instructions were well documented, and they also "borrowed" the mechanic who worked on it. Basically they wanted it as an example for them to update the fields of armor they already had, and returned the tank afterwards after some back and forth. There may have been others since they have factories here and there, and needing an example of what the thing should look like after you are done would be useful.
Depends on what you call a museum tank. T-34, no. T-55 most certainly, yes, which is only a decade older than the T- 34. T-34s were seen on a training ground.
T-55 is younger than the T-34, T-34 was 1940, T-55 was 1948.
Only a decade younger*
While true, the Soviets unlike the U.S. took very active measures to modernize their older vehicles. So a lot of t-55 are going to be better than western tanks from the same era
Not to mention that the vast majority of tank use in this war is for infantry support and not tank v tank combat, where the t-55 would preform just fine
@@therealgaben5527There is no scenario where western powers would send tanks from 1948 to the frontlines
I know a neat trick. If you destroy a tank, photograph it from 5 different angles then say "Look at these 5 tanks we destroyed."
You need to be carful with the background to not give it away though
T-55 has absolutely been used by Russia in Ukraine.
Unsurprisingly it was destroyed quickly.
T- 54 Also by both side.
they use them as artillery, every gun that shoots a big HE across the field is better then no gun and they used some t-54s as drones, they packed them full with explosives and let it drive into the ukranian trenches
Yeah as a literal suicide vehicle rigged with explosives to take out trench line or used as indirect artillery they arent used in active kinetic combat.
Thanks!
This video is complete bs good job bro
@b.i.s9915 lol ok
The report on the Museum could also be a case of a "miss translation or miss labeling" as I know there at least was a Tank dump/mothball (where you store older tanks long term... something the Soviet/Russia loves to do) and them been labeled as outdoor museum (what museum would have 10000 identical copies of the same T-60 tank is another question).
note some of those Tank stodge can be visited (limit on when and what part but you can visit them like a museum so I can see that slip past).
No tanks left, they use mighty shovels spiced with chilly peppers.
You know, I have a lot of respect for Museums and those that run them. If they're saying that their inventories are fine, then I believe them. I think they'd say if they didn't have the tanks too. The people there understand the importance of a proper accurate historical record, and they worked well with international museums before.
I agree with your vision.
Slight correction Simon, the T-64 isn't actually the younger sibling of the T-62, that would be the T-72. The T-64 is a different tank line which was designed by Ukraine and is the older sibling of the T-80. This is also the reason Ukraine have lost way more of them than Russia, because they actually use them whereas Russia captured all their T-64 from Ukraine. In addition the T-64 was/is actually a more advanced design than the T-72, which was designed primarily as a cheaper less capable alternative to the T-64 that could be produced in greater numbers and exported.
I’m confused as to why it matters that they are directly from Museums if they are soo old and obsolete that they should be in museums…
Nothing is old or obsolete if it can be used for a specific task. Those machines use 115mm ammo that is available in large numbers in stock and it is free. They are field guns for long range indirect fire on static positions. This is evident of the destructions back of the contact line 3-5km or more. When damaged or the gun is no longer serviceable, they are used to haul other machines to repair shops or rigged with explosives and sent to fortified positions like battering rams or to clear mines. There are many things one can do if something is basically free. Ukraine has been provided some engineering vehicles based on M60 (that is also very old tank) exactly to remove mines and haul other damaged machines.
@ that’s not true because it can still obsolete for the task it was created for. Which was being a battle tank not self propelled artillery or a tow truck… And my point was that it feels like semantics them making a video about tanks being pulled from museums when the tanks in question are old enough to be in museums… and are!
@@MrRatludthe m60 is closer to a t72 then a t55
What russia is currently doing would be = of the us useing m46 tanks
Even the first m60 is much better then t55s
(Ignoring that all were upgraded in all countrys soo long ago)
Because it paints a clear picture of how desperate Russia is that they can’t rely their assembly lines to produce new tanks, or can’t simply pull existing tanks from storage facilities where they’ve been maintained and kept in a functional state.
Having to pull literal museum pieces out or museums for the war would show just how desperate they are to get any kind of armored vehicle to the frontlines.
propaganda, its just to underline the western narrative that russia is losing, they are losing so badly that they have more land then last year
You know things are dire when you're borrowing troops from your unfriendly neighbourhood dictator, and bring out the antiques.
There's a major difference between "it ain't broke so don't fix it' (B52) and 'were broke so lets fix it' (Russian Tanks).
You believe western propaganda way too much
@@basixs88 Famous western propagandist, Vladimir Putin.
You spelt “slaves” wrong
@@basixs88 chief i dunno, even with "western propaganda at play" introducing NK to your turf war ins't doing you any geopolitical credit score favors, also it's so funny that you people point and laugh at "western" propaganda but say nothing about all the kremlin outlets, hmm yeah, yall sure winning a lot of followers by being hypocrites.
0:45 - Chapter 1 - T34S
6:35 - Chapter 2 - T62S
14:15 - Chapter 3 - Losses & performance
I was the loader in a museum tank(leopard C2) used in Afghanistan on the front lines. It was the only tank platform we had that we could put the mine rollers on at the time. We had to install a new barrel since it was filled in with concrete.
The T34s have only been on the training ground so far, but I give it a 50/50 chance we see one in Kursk before December.
Yeah
Same as the t55
First only for training
Then only for artillery
Then used for frontal assults
Jesus christ there, desprate
Braindead
Yeah so desperate and Ukrainians control went from 1287Skm to 489SKM wich failed measurably.
Russia make 90-120 tanks per month , 900-1200 per year
@Giganibba511 wtf is "SKM"
Russia "makes" 120-90 tanks a month
Russia doesnt make nearly as many new hulls
Visualy confirmed russian tank looses (meaning the lowest possible number of looses) is over 3k
10:00 To paraphrase : "I am the representative of this tank museum and an official spokesperson of the Russian military. And I can assure you that everything the Russian military says is true."
10:08 - Would any Russian really use the world "invasion" when denying they're not using their stored vehicles in the invasion of Ukraine or did you paraphrais there a bit?
Bro, Simon, this is the best looking video I've seen you put out. Can you use these settings on the rest of your empire?
An interesting man once said. "Never let the truth get in the way of a good story"
I appreciate you and the team doing full research and doing so in a non biased manor, way to rare these days. Thanks for the hard work fellas!
I am glad that Simon remains shackled by facts
3:39 this tank was taken by pro-russian separatists in 2015 in the city of Antratsyt, Ukraine
Simon can we kill the frantic background music - or use it more sparingly?
(Just my opinion - disregard if others don’t feel that way)
I feel like it was better in this one. There have been some I thought it was too loud but this one I diddnt notice it.
@@drewlovely2668yeah they’ve definitely controlling the Colin better recently so I don’t mind
T-62 are upgraded for the modernisation.. They are not from the museums, they have enough in the depot and they are modernised for the that. Ucooled thermals, Composite addon composite armor, Relict ERA on the front, laser rangefinder and 3BM-21M APFDS... On the other side Ukrainan Army Using Leopard 1 and T-55 (from the Slovenia) as MBTs...
They may look old but I still wouldn't like to be on the receiving end of one at all
From the sounds of it I wouldn’t want to be in one either
no you see, according to reddit generals the Russians are supposed to dump them in the ocean and outproduce the entire world for half a decade in order to exclusively use new machinery that does the same thing.
Only Harrison Ford could truly state with certainly whether something belongs in a museum.
12:20, just came back from cubinka. The first vehicle is a BMPT prototype, which wouldnt be of much use anyways, and the second is a t-80b. Can confirm both are still at their place.
@@tanketkal3 согласен, был там месяц назад
Mark Felton made a video saying NK has around 200 of T-34 in active service
13 T-55s on Oryx so far... they were horribly out of date in the 1st Gulf war 33 years ago
A friend of mine (ex-British army) said the Iraqi police had T-55s. I bet our police wish they had T55s.
Oryxx LMAAAO , False counting , Counting Blur vids , Counting from different angles , Fake counting. Even Ukrainians don't use that as main source lol
This is the journalistic integrity I like to see. I've seen too many "news" reports on here that seems a bit off, because they tend to repeat reports they gave a day prior
I'd be more worried about the lack of proper modern rifles. Don't get me wrong, the AKM and AKS series, specially the modernized ones are good, but in most videos they're not using the latest versions. If you can't provide your frontline troops the best available gear, how do you even expect they'll get modern tanks?
When the media says that russia is using museum pieces, I didn't, for an instant, think they were literally raiding museums, rather that it was a reference to the age of the equipment.
I also assumed that that is how everyone else took it, guess I was wrong.
People actually believe The Daily Mail?
Technically as long as it has a gun it's never obsolete as a weapon. Bayonet training is still in practice.
Not obsolete doesn’t however mean effective
Some people, eh? A T34 would take longer to refit and reactivate than it would last on the battlefield 🙄
You can say that about a lot of the T-62s as well
I'd think they'd be too unreliable after all that time. Not only that, they probably have something from the 1970s and 80s that would be more likely to be fielded.
10:10 I highly doubt that the staff-member used the word "invasion" here.
He said they were surprised to hear them refering to it as an invasion as well.
Germany sort of did their at that by the end with the Battle of Berlin. They pulled out preserved WWI tanks as last stand against USSR
While there was significant tank development between those wars it was only 20-25 years so the ammunition difference was most likely smaller then with old Cold War tanks
The reasons Russia now pulling old T-55 and T-62 out of storage is because of its simplicity to repair ), easier to train and operate by conscripts or new recruits. Russia also is getting low on 125mm ammo use by T-72/T-80s, while having bulk of old soviet 115mm ammo and massive supply from North Korea.
You’re overlooking the fact that the reason it’s easy to maintain and learn to use is that it’s obsolete. It doesn’t need high tech parts that ruSSia is struggling to procure.
They are easy to destroy and crew can't be cheaply manufactured in a factory.
@@viceralman8450that would requier russia to care
Theres a reason why all credible death numbers are much higher for russia then ukraine
@@morstyrannis1951why are you referring to Russia as Russian when Ukraine actively operates Nazi battalions like azov who use those symbols???
@@ARKSH_22 task force rusich doesn't exist in your brain? 🤡🤡🤡
Why pull them from museums when there's plenty of them in boneyards? Even when a war machine is retired, they are not immediately scrapped and instead are conserved in boneyards. Not that conservation is very good, Russia is after all a wet place with rough weather but they can be restored to somewhat functional condition with enough effort.
USA similarly has boneyards with ancient war machines but USA has the luxury of dry deserts. There are Vietnam era airplanes in desert boneyards that can be quickly restored to working condition. You know, just in case. Though the boneyards are actively working through scrapping worst ones for spares for those that can be restored and they are not meant to be kept around forever. And spares for those that are still in active use. Retired F-15s and 18s and such.
Trick question, a lot of their hardware is so obnoxiously dated that it should be in museums by now anyways.
Yeah, even if they're not literally emptying museums, the point is that most of what they're using is so obsolete the only place it really should belong is a museum.
@@Flight_of_Icarusyeah
What russia is pulling out is basicly the same as the us pulling out m46 tanks (maybe even m26) would be
The Abrams is a tank from the 1980's and the Leopard 1 is from the mid 1960's. Both of which are technically speaking, outdated platforms yet are being used by Ukraine. But nobody talks about that
It seems like using tanks from the 60-80s is a common thing even in NATO countries. Probably because it's easier and cheaper to upgrade old tanks rather than design and build new ones...
@FrostbiteDigital the diffrence is that they are upgraded
Russia is pulling out unmodifed t55s
A late 40s design
@nikolaideianov5092 I doubt those T-54/55's are all unmodified. One video featuring one unmodified tank doesn't cut it. Also Russia has upgraded, modernized T-72s, T-80s and T-90s, it's not like their hardware is "obnoxiously outdated" as OP implies
I remember hearing some of them didnt even have chairs. So im just imagining Dimitri here slav squatting in the drivers place lol.
Could you guys do an episode breaking down the exact tank losses on both sides? Would be much appreciated.
Just watch a Perun vid, my lad, the guy has all the data!
Do you not watch Perun?
Fun fact russia has 2times more tanks on frontlines than 2022
The T-64 is not even close to a T-62, autoloader, far superior cannon and composite armor before upgrades.
The upgraded variants are far from the best tanks on the battlefield, but they are decent enough especially compared to truly obsolete vehicles like the T-55 and 62.
not if they stood out rotting for decades
If I recall, there are precious few T-64s vs T-62s, no? It was given to more elite units and wasnt widespread, again, iirc.
considering that most agressive armor of ukrainian army is international maxxpro t-55 does not looks that obsolete
@@JohnDoe-fo7yi Yes, but they made in Kharkiv and was the primary MBT for post war ukraine along with the T-80UD.
@@dianapuskina3448lol
At least try to make the propaganda make sense
This statment is so clearly not true
Literal museum pieces? No. Are they outdated as hell and deserve to BE in a museum? Oh hell yeah. There's not been any T-34s used in combat, but there have been T-55s, which is the next best, or I guess worse, thing. My God.
It's obviously bogus, museum pieces are deactivated and not mechanically functioning. They're also not maintained, and would require more work to get in operational condition than just building a new tank from scratch.
have you seen the obj279 running, maybe not but there is vidéo proof of it running and that's a prototype from the 60s with a pretty unique engine and transmission, a lot of the tanks in the kubinka museum are working (maybe exept for the gun) if they are soviet tanks, obviously the maus can't run (with the plans for a majority of the parts having beiing destroyed) like many non soviet tanks
A report I saw once said that both sides were using old tanks - not to fight with
but as decoys to draw fire from the enemy -
with no one inside the tanks.
That Kubinka staffer is cooked.
Why?
@rolandohiebert2144 they called the invasion, well, an invasion. Officially it's a "sPeCiAl MiLiTaRy OpErAtIoN" and didn't rule out entirely the possibility of Russia being so desperate as to pull obsolete reserves for active use.
Tl;dr they're fucked for being honest
10:10 "to assist with the ongoing invasion of Ukraine"
Okay, look, let me help you out. This is a felony right there. No Russian official would ever call it an "invasion". It's literally a crime to call it a "war" or an "invasion" or anything other than a SMO (Special Miitary Operation), punishable by up to five years in jail and up to fifteen years for repeated offense. Just remember that the next time you make something up. No need to thank me.
No, Russia is not literally pulling tanks out of museums and sending them to Ukraine. But they ARE using tanks that are so old most countries WOULD have them in museums. Many of their tanks were built or designed in the 60s and 70s.
That's not as bad as it sounds. The Abrams is a 70s design. The F-15 is a late 60s design. The F-16 even is a late 70s design. We in the states do actually have those in museums right now. While also still using the rest in active service.
@sprolyborn2554 It’s really not the same thing; yes, the F-15 and F-16 are also Cold War-era jets, while the Abrams was designed in the same timeframe. The difference is that all of these vehicles have been upgraded continuously ever since their original combat debut. Most Abrams, F-15s and F-16s in service today rolled off the assembly line in the late 90s or the 2000s, and are outfitted with the latest electronics, countermeasures and weapons systems. Most of Russias Cold War era vehicles were built during the Cold War, left in storage for decades, and hastily reactivated after Russia's limited number of modern weapons were either rendered inoperable or canceled due to Western sanctions.
@ManiaMac1613 right but you did say "designed in the 60s and 70s". All I was pointing out is that that alone is not really a point against them.
@@sprolyborn2554 lol not that bad for example the americans already scrapped all the M60's, its like america was useing the damn M-46 Patton in combat now a days ridiculous.
@@viceralman8450 I mean, the m46 would be like a half step above Russians actually using the t-34. The whole argument of the Abrams and t-72 is an apt comparison seeing as how they are the same era. So yeah, not that bad.
When people face something they don't want to accept, they often go through five stages:
1. Denial: Refusing to acknowledge the reality of the situation, not wanting to believe it has happened.
2. Anger: Feeling angry and perceiving the situation as unfair.
3. Bargaining: Trying to negotiate or make changes to avoid or reverse what has happened.
4. Depression: Experiencing deep sadness, disappointment, or helplessness.
5. Acceptance: Gradually accepting reality and beginning to find ways to move forward.
THIS IS WHAT THE WEST IS GOING THROUGH
In what stages. Nobody seriosly thought that anyway
What!
The Daily Mail can't be trusted 😭
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
Well, not that shocked.
Considering the Daily Mail's track record for supporting autocrats and dictators, I'm surprised that the Daily Mail aren't being Putin's cheerleaders considering they supported Oswald Mosley and his Blackshirts.
The US has massive stockpiles of old military equipment sitting in storage. It would be foolish to think that the Russians don’t do the exact same thing.
8 comments saying they are first lol
I'm first
First!
first
Those participation trophies are in high demand.
Imagine spending all this time trying to verify the Daily Fail.
You should have known before you started that the mythical “report” simply doesn’t exist and the Fail is simply lying.
16:20 I went onto reddit and within 10 seconds i found a video of Russians making a t-54/55 into a turtle tank...
The only one I could see them digging out of a museum would be the ISU-152, they made over 4000 of them up until 1959 and a 152mm anti concrete shell would be useful as short-range artillery and bunker busting. Also, the fact they don't have a turret and have a flat top would make it easier to make an anti-drone shed on them without inhibiting the gun.
“Warfronts in Daily Mail spouts garbage shocker” 😂🤣😂
(Why it took >18 minutes to come to this conclusion is a separate question)
I really got to applaud the amount of research you and the team did. Stupendous job
I think the point was missed here - while they are not being pulled out museums, they are being pulled to the frontline, from the very rear. They are tanks that should have been, either scrapped, or in a museum, not on a battlefield. The T-62 was specifically the evolution of the T-55 and a medium tank, while the T-64 was supposed to be this revolutionary new design that scared the west, when in reality, it had massive issues throughout its lifespan. The T-72 was developed to replace it, based on the T-62 in the 70's, as the T-64 still had issues. Some would call the T-64 a light tank, due mainly to the smaller turret and crew size and the fact that the USSR wanted to keep in under 40 tons, for bridge crossings. The USSR produced a heck of a lot more T-55s and T-62s. The real replacement, based on the T-64, however, was the T-80. As Russian tanks are destroyed, its really important to remember, that Russia spent its load on tanks and they have a lot - about 17,500, prior to them invading Ukraine. They have produced much less T80's and T-90's in that stack and their T-14 Armata which is still in development - producing approximately 50 of them, so far. They have leaned back into to producing T-90's. Outside of T-90 production, Russia is running out of modern battlefield tanks, but at the same time - we are getting close to the end of tank even being a thing, on the modern battlefield. In terms of defining what should be in a museum - anything that is over 20 years old in automobiles, is considered a classic, anything over 50 years old, with homes, is considered historic. LOL. T-72 and older are antiques, in 2024.
This video delved so deep that it made me feel like it devolved into a troll video for media even deciding to run with this narrative lmao😂
It's never a good sign when you have to fight cutting edge drones and weapons with tanks that are so old their armour is greying.
Thats just bio-urban camo
Simon... how many channels do you own?
I joked last year Russia will be sending T34's in next...
I recently watched the movie T-34, a Russian WW2 film. Simple and well-done movie, but I also thought “man I wonder if they’ll use those IRL… 80 years later”…
The end of 2022 we joked about T62 and those got sent to the front. Early 2023 we joked about T54/T55 and T34......yeah....
I will not be surprise if they are using the T34 that Laos GAVE BACK TO THEM back around..2016 or 2017. I recall in the 80s or 90s the Soviet "lease" Laos like 30 something T34/85. Around 2016 or 2017 Laos returned these tanks back after the lease was up.
That was really sporting of the Russian tank museum to answer the question so completely and candidly, despite the increased tensions between East and West since 2022. 👍
I'm quite liking the new Soldier Simon channel. All war and sh*t.
What a curious choice of topics. The first one I understand but the second seems more niche.
As you said Russia is fielding equipment thas been in storage for decades such as the T-54, T-62 and T-64, these tanks were never all that good in the first place. It is scarping the barrel, like the US deploying M-48 Pattons!
Lol. NATO supplied Ukraine with Leo 1s. No one comment anything.
yepp and they still work
@@leichtmeisteryea i have videos from training in Denmark with NATO leo 1 and M113 APC
Dammit, as an early Barbarossa Tabletop gamer, I am hoping to see the glorious BT series back in action!
I'm getting German Volkssturm vibes from this where Germans did the same.
Same reasons too. They didn’t expect a long war, so didn’t put industry on a war footing until it was too late, and now have to use whatever can be kludged to fill the need
So what we are establishing is that the statement is hyperbolic.
They aren't literally from museums, but some of the tanks being fielded are ones that belong in a museum over a battlefield.
The B-52 enters the chat...(over 70 years ago)
The M-2 Machine gun enters the chat... (over 100 years old)
M1911 is upset he wasn't invited to the party
True, but the buff is an exception not the rule. Case in point our bomber inventory as of 70 years ago was more substantial in terms of variations and types that have since been retired from service. The M2 is a heavy machine gun which still has utility in infantry engagements. A T55 on a modern battlefield without a proper modernization is just a nice target or as Wagner forces used them, an improvised self propelled gun.
@theofficialken1755 The 1911, while I love it, is obsolete. The M2 is not, full stop. BUFF was saved from becoming obsolete by getting new engines and a new role (strategic bombing is obsolete, but B-52s are decent launch platforms for AShMs and hypersonics). A single-action semiauto with a single stack magazine has no place on the battlefield anymore.
The C-130 Hercules (70 years old) joins his old friends 😉❤️
It wouldn't be hard at all to update the 1911 to take a double stack magazine. 9mm 1911's already exist and hold 8+1.
17 rounds would put it on par with the army's current service pistol which uses an extended magazine by default.
'Great work! 💛
the brave #UA are holding the wall against fascism
Don’t think anyone will read this but.
Or if this has been said already.
Like in most wars if you take tanks off an area that you are attacking. The pressure of tanks stop and gives the other enemy a chance to push forward knowing they don’t face tanks. The older tanks are just there to keep the pressure on as the newer tanks get repaired and reloaded.
Problem is these vehicles are useless in modern warfare. All anti armor is designed to slice right through solid steel. Its ridiculous to bring any armored vehicle into the conflict that lacks ERA or composite armor so even in a desperate situation it shouldnt be used, sinply because of the logistical implications.
I'd rather be in an armored vehicle than on foot. But that's just me.
@@erasmus_lockethe problem is that yes you would be better protected in a tank
But you will also be a much bigger and more importent target
@@nikolaideianov5092 and less mobile. so your insignificant importance will not help you. you cannot hide from thermal camera in the air
Those storage areas for old armored vehicles have already lost most of their previous inventories. The remainder is of increasingly dubious serviceability status.
am i first??
Probably not.
@@Hillbilly001 agreed
During the Falklands War, the British Army took an automatic weapon out of the Small Arms School Museum at Warminster for field us. My father was working there at the time.
Not sure where they got their numbers but oryx has listed 227 T-62 losses with 146 being destroyed
No. Next question, please
Thought he was saying new zealand until I checked the subtitles😅😅
T62s being used on the front lines is crazy, they aren't exactly f15s
It is a matter of record that Russia has taken tanks from companies that have kept them to rent out for use in films. These were commandeered. That story appeared in Russian and Ukrainian media several months ago. I don't know about museums though. It is also true that satellite inspection has revealed a serious draw down of tanks that were in Soviet era storage yards before the war. Many of these storage bases are empty of serviceable tanks. T55 and even earlier tanks have also appeared on the battlefield.