The losses of the Russian army increased significantly: the Armed Forces “minus” more than 900 invaders

Vitaly Sayenko08:19, 06/28/23

13 armored fighting vehicles and 6 artillery systems were also destroyed.

The defense forces of Ukraine destroyed more than 900 Russian invaders in the past day. This is stated in the summary of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the Facebook social network.

In particular, the total combat losses of the enemy from February 24, 2022 to June 28, 2023 approximately amounted to:

  • personnel – about 227 thousand 100 (+930) people were eliminated,
  • tanks – 4036 units,
  • armored combat vehicles – 7847 (+13),
  • artillery systems – 4089 (+6),
  • RSZV – 627 (+1),
  • air defense equipment – 387 (+1),
  • planes – 314,
  • helicopters – 308,
  • UAVs of operational-tactical level – 3499 (+7),
  • cruise missiles – 1261,
  • ships/boats – 18,
  • automotive equipment and tank trucks – 6774 (+2),
  • special equipment – 563.

UNIAN collage
UNIAN collage

Russia’s losses in Ukraine are the main thing 

According to the results of last week at the front,  the total losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in terms of killed were 8 times lower than that of the Russian occupying army, Deputy Minister of Defense Hanna Malyar noted earlier.

Recently, the Russian Federation has suffered the greatest losses in the Tavria direction. On June 23, the Armed Forces of Ukraine eliminated more than three companies of Russian soldiers and more than fifty units of their equipment there.

According to British intelligence , the Russians have suffered the highest losses since March. They noted that the most active battles are taking place in the southeast of the Zaporizhzhia region, around Bakhmut and further west in the Donetsk region. 

(C)UNIAN 2023

6 comments

  1. And still Russia bombs pizza restaurants and other civilian things on a daily basis…………….

  2. zolotov(former body guard of putler) pressing for more power and position taking wags surrendered arms:

Leave a Reply to Bill B.Cancel reply