Summary
Highlights
For over a century, the Main Battle Tank (MBT) has dominated battlefields. Around 160 different models have been developed, with 140 entering service. Many have been destroyed or rendered obsolete by new technologies. The war in Ukraine presents the toughest challenge yet for modern tanks, pitting various models against each other, from the latest to relics, raising questions about their effectiveness.
Assessing tank effectiveness goes beyond simple statistics like armor thickness. It requires integrating combat data (kill ratios, attrition rates, mission success) with tactical context, production logistics, and technological evolution. A tank's performance can vary greatly depending on its mission profile and how it's used in combined operations with infantry or other support. World War Two studies showed that the side firing first had a decisive advantage. Other factors like production volume, crew training, maintenance, and integration into doctrine are crucial for a comprehensive assessment.
Reliable data on MBT performance in Ukraine is scarce due to classified information, the fog of war, and propaganda. While historical data from World Wars is available, current conflict data on kill ratios, crew training, and maintenance is largely anecdotal. Even hard data, like numbers of damaged and destroyed tanks, can be inconsistent, with significant discrepancies between Ukrainian and independent reports versus Russian figures.
Russia has suffered staggering tank losses, with figures varying widely between Ukrainian reports (11,654 tanks) and independent verification from Oryx (4,308 tanks). Ukrainian losses are also debated, with Russian figures being five times higher than Oryx's verified count of 1,371 tanks. Ukraine started the war with around 1,000 active tanks and 1,500 in storage, later receiving 777 MBTs from partners. Russia began with 3,300 active tanks and 2,478 in storage, bringing older models like T-62s and T-55s out of retirement to compensate for losses.
The war in Ukraine is the first time many tanks are facing intense 21st-century warfare with ubiquitous surveillance, networked communications, and the constant threat of drones. All tanks, regardless of their advanced features, have proven vulnerable to cheap FPV drones. Drones easily spot and target tanks, which can be disabled or destroyed, even if their armor requires more hits. This has led to the conclusion that no single tank model is 'winning' the war.
To counter drone threats, tanks on both sides are now equipped with layers of anti-drone protection, initially mocked as 'cope cages' but now evolving into comprehensive 'hedgehog' armor. These modifications, applied in the field and increasingly at production, aim to detonate drones further from the tank's armor, enhancing survivability. This has made even older models like the T-54/55 more effective. Tactics have also shifted, with 'meat waves' largely a thing of the past. Tanks are now used more sparingly, in smaller columns to clear paths for infantry, or predominantly as highly accurate, self-propelled artillery for fire support and defensive roles, reducing their attrition rates.
Despite the evolving battlefield, the future of tanks is seen differently by each side. Ukraine is increasingly requesting air defense systems, artillery, and unmanned equipment over tanks. In contrast, Russia views tanks as an indispensable component, dramatically increasing the production of new T-90s and refurbishing older models. Russia already outpaces NATO in tank production and refurbishment, though new Western models may change this. The high Russian tank losses make their increased emphasis on tanks seem counterintuitive, suggesting that 'tank effectiveness may ultimately be in the eye of the beholder'.