Originally Posted by
langleybaston
The very long-term ratio of wounds to deaths in war [and indeed in "accidents"] is not far from 3: 1, and whereas a wound requires a lengthy and costly medical chain, a death is [at worst] easily buried or cremated. And dead men tell no tales.
In prior conflicts, I would have expected those figures. In this conflict, considering the Red teams force structure, the figure seems to be lower.
- BTG structures are based on mechanised troops for the bulk of the forces. A single-vehicle kill has a high risk of fatalities vs injuries from cookoff and fires, apart from the shock/fire/kinetic effects of the munition causing the vehicle kill.
- Red force observed casualty care in the field from drones seems to be to leave the injured to their fate. There is less evidence of attempts to care for wounded compatriots to get to first aid.
- No evidence of dust-off or casevac operations by Red force.
The majority of losses seem to be related to vehicle kills, less from indirect fire or small arms. For indirect/small arms, there is an increase in the number of injuries that may permit the saving of casualty compared to being in a tank that is cooking off.
Ukraine is more likely to have a 3:1 or higher injury to fatality ratio, they are taking care of casualties, and are conducting a lot of small unit interdiction or fighting from prepared defenses. They are also conducting casevac of their injuries.
Red forces exhibit very low morale, and presumably, that isolates the individual to personal survival needs rather than working for collective care.