this is a couple of weeks old but found this interesting. It tells a story of its own about Russia’s untenable position in this conflict (assuming the numbers are reliable).
Those numbers are based on claimed Russian KIA by the Ukrainians, which are almost certainly significantly inflated. However, they probably have a significant correlation with the actual numbers (i.e., published numbers higher than actual numbers, but when published numbers trend up actual numbers are probably trending up as well) , which doesn’t make the graph any good for Russian prospects.
This is the second time in as many weeks that Prigozhin/Wagner PMC has claimed they’re not getting the ammo they want/need to continue offensive operations. This creates the impression it has less to do with the political power struggle between the MoD and PMC’s that was suggested a couple weeks ago, and more to do with the general supply situation the entire Russian army is currently facing. The Russian winter offensive may be culminating on Bakhmut’s front doorstep.
The British Defence Ministry has said that they think the Ukrainian figures are largely accurate but of course there’s no reason why Britain would want to undermine Ukrainian communications.
Ukraine claims to have inflicted on Russia 153,770 “eliminated personnel”. A couple of weeks ago, British Defence Intelligence estimated 40-60,000 Russians killed in the war:
The graph says it’s made by UK Ministry of Defence, but based on figures by the General Staff of the Ukraine Armed Forces. The numbers cited are unlikely to be accurate, but the trend of increasing numbers of daily casualties may be.
Perhaps unsurprisingly this has been a point of confusion and we’ve discussed this quite a few times in these threads. Even if the numbers are at the lower end it seems that Russian forces are incurring terrible losses, and the numbers appear to be getting worse for them. It feels unsustainable.
A post was split to a new topic: Will the shelling in Ukraine be as bad an environmental impact as the WWI shelling in some areas?
As the type of off-topic question likely to distract from the thread, but a very good question, I spun off a new thread.
The damage was mostly done by Russian tanks systematically going up and down the streets destroying anything that could be used as cover to shell the pro-Russian strongholds in the area. Marinka got a head start on the current war and was the target of pro-Russian paramilitary attacks in
2014, 2015, and 2016.
This blog post suggests a wounded-to-killed ratio of 4-to-1 for Russia, based on Donetsk Peoples Republic (DPR) data, which I think is a reasonable estimate. So 20% of casualties die. This is a bad ratio for modern times, reflecting poor medical provision. For comparison, the U.S. wounded-to-killed ratio today ranges anywhere from 10:1 to 17:1 (5-9% of casualties die).
If Ukraine’s “eliminated personnel” are supposed to be KIA, then Russia would also have suffered over 600,000 wounded, which would mean most or all Russian soldiers in Ukraine would have been killed or wounded, which is unrealistic.
Unless Russia is keeping track of their own casualty figures and Ukraine intelligence sources have access to that data, then Ukrainian estimates of Russian casualties are likely to be an accumulation of optimistic guesses.
Are the Russians facing artillery as well as small arms? We could be talking about being wounded when artillery blows off limbs, and the guy bleeds out before aid can arrive or be reached.
I would assume that KIAs are counted as such on the basis of outcome before reaching first-level (aid station) medical care. Both instantly fatal and slowly mortal wounds count, as long as the victim expires before reaching battalion-level medical facilities. (That would be the NATO definition, anyway.)
Wait. Russian tanks actually moving? Gah-wan!
They are being pushed or pulled by stolen Ukrainian tractors.
Thanks gnoitall. I was thinking when reported wounded, but the NATO concept makes sense, a doctor pronounces death.
But this link hints at the opposite conclusion, I think.
https://thehill.com/policy/international/3885893-wagner-chief-warns-of-collapse-of-russian-frontline-if-there-is-retreat-from-bakhmut/
The article covers Wagner repeating their demand for more ammo, but also states why: Because Wagner is afraid of being blamed for the loss of Bakhmut.
"If we [i.e. Wagner] step back, we will go down in history as the people who … lose the war,”
I’m guessing that Putin realizes that giving supplies to Wagner’s army will set up his own downfall, because Prigozhin will claim the victory, and eventually claim the right to rule Russia., because Putin was too weak.
“Give me what I want or I’ll be a convenient scapegoat for your problems” always works well with tyrants. 
The article does suggest that, however, given that Prigozhin appealed to the Powers That Be that Wagner was being deprived of critical supplies two weeks ago and ended up getting their supplies filled after complaining signals that they thought the drive on Bakhmut was so critical they prioritized the resupply and made it happen. The fact that two weeks later and the very same thing happens again suggests to me, at any rate, that the Powers That Be are aware of how critical the situation is but simply don’t have the resources available to supply them.
EDIT: in other words if it was a political decision, then Prigozhin would not have gotten any supplies two weeks ago, which they did. Now after getting the supplies two weeks ago they’ve run into the same situation again, lacking adequate supplies. I really think this is systemic, not political.
Thanks, I did not know that. That seems like an even stupider use of assets than just using artillery.
I have no problem believing the 4 to 1 ratio. Russia has historically had a rather high disregard for wounded soldiers. Plus, it fits in with the general lack of preparedness and professionalism that seems rampant throughout the Russian military.
I don’t think that we will have accurate numbers from Russia even after the war is long over. They won’t admit to such losses, simply because of how bad it makes them look.
I also suspect that Ukrainian casualties will be much higher than they currently admit to. Not that I blame them.
Ooh! Good one. 
It also shows what a waste of time and supplies all that was. A landscape like that would have been a target rich environment for Ukraine tank killer teams. The fact that tanks moved around freely should have been sign enough there were no enemy in the town.
Or at least a different kind of political. I mean, incompetence at the highest levels of government manifesting in a host of systemic issues that make it impossible to effectively wage war (a war one’s own government started, no less!) is a political issue.