Key Points and Summary – Ukraine’s war has chewed through Soviet-era T-72 tanks on both sides, with visually confirmed losses in the hundreds.
-The design’s three-man crew relies on an autoloader that stores ammunition in a carousel beneath the turret—good for a low profile, but catastrophic when penetrated, unlike NATO tanks with blow-out panels.
T-72 Tank. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
-Ukraine fields odd hybrids, while India plans to keep 2,400 T-72s by upgrading to 1,000-horsepower engines.
-Hopes of transferring Indian tanks to Kyiv have faded. Sanctions and bottlenecks slow Russia’s newer T-90s, pushing Moscow to keep refurbishing T-72s—likely guaranteeing more battlefield attrition as offensive pressure continues.
The Soviet Union’s T-72 Main Battle Tank in Ukraine
Although the T-72 boasts a smaller profile and a larger main gun than its Western counterparts, the risks its three-man crew faces from internally stored ammunition igniting are offset by the potential gains.
In the course of the ongoing war in Ukraine, attrition on both sides of the conflict has accumulated to a great degree. Losses of men and materiel are incredibly high—hence this war’s position as the bloodiest conflict on the European continent since the devastation of the Second World War. One of the pieces of kit that has suffered significant losses? The Soviet-era T-72 main battle tank.
Oryx, an open-source website that collates visually documented equipment losses on the Ukrainian and Russian sides, places T-72 losses on the Ukrainian side in the hundreds. On the Russian side, the losses are even steeper, with several hundred T-72s across all variants and counting.
Compared to their NATO counterparts, Soviet and Russian tank designs prioritize automation, opting for a three-person crew over the four-person crew preferred by American M1 Abrams main battle tank crews. There are inherent advantages and disadvantages to this design choice.
Distinct Tank Design Characteristics
Thanks to an automated loading mechanism, which stands in for a fourth loader crew member, both the tanks of the Soviet Union, as well as today’s Russia—the inheritor of thousands of Soviet-era main battle tanks—the tanks in Russian service today are significantly shorter than, say, the M1 Abrams or Germany’s Leopard 2. It’s a very specific design consideration.
Rolling across the flat plains endemic to parts of Europe, smaller, lower-profile main battle tanks present their adversary with a smaller target to aim at, making them more challenging to hit. However, that smaller size comes at a cost. Nestled inside the T-72, and, indeed, most of the T-series tanks, is a doughnut-shaped ammunition carousel, which rotates and keeps the T-72’s autoloader supplied with Russia’s 125mm tank shells and explosive charges.
Compare this loading system to that of the M1 Abrams, which stores ammunition in specially designed bustles arranged around the turret. These compartments’ specially designed blow-out panels ensure that, should the tank suffer a penetrating hit and its stored ammunition explode, the force of the blast is directed outward and away from the tank’s crew. It is a useful design consideration.
Russian T-72 Tank Ukraine War. Image Credit: Creative Commons.
While the M1 presents a larger target, its crew is safer for it. And unlike the M1, Russia and Ukraine’s T-72s risk a catastrophic explosion should their ammunition ignite.
Among some of the more exotic T-72s is one hybrid mash-up in Ukrainian service. That platform is a kind of Frankenstein’s monster that combines a 2S19 Msta-S self-propelled howitzer with the turret of a T-72 main battle tank. This adaptation salvages some of the hybrid tank-howitzer’s use as an indirect fire platform.
The Indian Connection
The T-72’s battlefield performance in Ukraine aside, in at least one country, they’ll receive an extensive refurbishment. India, operator of one of the world’s largest T-72 fleets, would like to update its Cold War-era tank platforms and revamp them for the rigors of combat against more technologically advanced adversaries, ensuring its main battle tanks can excel in India’s unique terrain. India’s T-72 fleet comprises approximately 2,400 units, and the country also operates a substantial T-90 fleet of around 1,300 units.
Earlier this year, India signed a deal with Russia to upgrade its fleet, part of a broader $248 million agreement. Under the terms of the agreement, Indian T-72s would replace their relatively modest 780-horsepower engines with a significantly more powerful 1,000-horsepower alternative.
“T-72 is the mainstay of tank fleet of the Indian Army which is at present fitted with 780 HP Engine,” India’s Defence Ministry said in a statement covering the deal. It added that “equipping the existing fleet of T-72 Tanks with 1000 HP Engine will enhance the battle field mobility and offensive capability of Indian Army.”
Though there had been some interest in purchasing and transferring a substantial portion of New Delhi’s T-72 fleet to Ukraine’s embattled defenders, those efforts proved stillborn, with India seemingly intent on operating the fleet for many years yet to come.
In 4 Words: Old Tank, Getting Older
Russian tank design has progressed significantly since the T-72 entered service with the Soviet Army. Since then, Russia has built and fielded several advanced iterations of the T-72, incorporating steadily increasing capabilities and upgrades that boost armor protection, low-light targeting, and automation. However, the future of Russia’s tank production may be somewhat uncertain.
With T-90 production hampered by Western sanctions and industrial bottlenecks, including electronic components such as microchip processors and main gun barrels, Russia may be forced to rely on its existing fleet of T-72s until it is utterly exhausted.
In light of the current Russian push in Ukraine—and the incredibly steep losses Moscow’s forces have suffered as part of that drive—future significant T-72 losses can be anticipated.
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.
More Military
China Says It Can Kill B-21 Raider Bomber
3 Planes Canada Could Choose to Replace the F-35
F-35I Adir: Israel Has a Custom Stealth Fighter
