Russian casualties?
This is a follow-up post to my post from Tuesday morning: So, have 9,861 Russians really been killed in Ukraine? | Mystics & Statistics (dupuyinstitute.org)
We currently have four casualty reports coming out claiming extremely high casualties for the Russian Army in Ukraine. They are:
- The briefing posting on 22 March in Komsomolskaya Pravda that stated: “According to the Russian Defense Ministry, during the special operation in Ukraine, the Russian Armed Forces lost 9,861 people killed and 16,153 wounded.”
- This is a 1.64-to-1 wounded-to-killed ratio, which is at least half of what you would expect to see.
- I do have a book, War by Numbers, that discusses wounded-to-killed ratios in Chapter 15.
- Then there is the U.S. estimate from 18 March which reported 3,000 to 10,000 soldiers killed.
- Then there was a NATO report from yesterday that reports 7,000 to 15,000 soldiers killed, up to 40,000 casualties total.
- Then there is the Ukrainian army claim of 15,800 Russians killed as of 24 March.
- They also claim 530 tanks and 108 planes, which also seems high.
What also gets my attention is that Ukrainian Army losses are reported to be:
- 1,300 killed on 12 March as reported by Ukraine.
- 2,000 – 4,000 killed as of 9 March as estimated by U.S. DOD.
Now, it is not unheard of for an army to achieve a three-to-one kill ratio during a campaign. This happened at lot on the Russian Front in World War II (1941-1945) between Germany and Russia, with Germany usually getting the better of this exchange. It happened at the Battle of Kursk in July 1943, with Germany getting the better of this exchange, even though the Russians were on the defensive, well rested, and in prepared positions (I have a couple of books on this). Even higher exchange ratios happened in the two Arab-Israeli Wars of 1967 and 1973, with the Israeli’s getting the better of this exchange. So, it is possible.
On the other hand, the Russians, with superior firepower and air superiority, are losing at potentially an exchange of over seven-to-one if we use the higher estimates of Russian losses. This is a hard sale.
Added to that, these estimates are indicating total losses of 40,000 or greater out of a force of 150,000 (more than 25% losses). Assuming a more reasonable three-to-one wounded to killed ratio (and maybe five-to-one might be even more reasonable), then the figure of 9,861 points to 40,000 losses. The NATO figure estimates 15,000 killed and up to 40,000 casualties. This is a 1.67-to-1 wounded-to-killed ratio. If we go with a more reasonable estimate of 3-to-1 wounded-to-killed, this would mean 60,000 casualties, or 40% of the invading Russian Army. This is hard to believe.
I do not know what Russian losses are. On the other hand, I am having a hard time accepting some of these higher estimates. If Ukrainian losses were closer to 10,000 soldiers, then I could believe the higher Russian estimates, but I gather Ukrainian losses are nowhere near 10,000 soldiers.






