15 Soldiers Died Every Day Last Week From Donetsk Republic Alone
Not counting Lugansk, Russia, Ukraine
Donetsk again updates its weekly military losses as it always does. In the last 7 days, 108 of its soldiers were killed, about 15 each day.
I speculate that Lugansk losses are likely smaller (due to its somewhat smaller population and army) but in the same general range, so perhaps 10 each day.
Donetsk and Lugansk are contributing only the minority of troops so if their losses were 25 killed daily then Russian ones could have been anywhere from at least time number to up to 4 times higher.
My best guess would be that Russian losses are twice what Donetsk and Lugansk have sustained. So perhaps 50 Russian KIA daily, or 75 daily for the entire Russia-led coalition.
If the same formula is applied to the total 1821 Donetsk military deaths so far then one could be looking at 1200 Lugansk KIA and 6000 Russian KIA for a total of 9000 on the Russia-led side.
Or if Donetsk military deaths are greatly overrepresented on the Russia-led side relative to the number of troops it is contributing then the numbers could be closer to 900 Lugansk (just half of Donetsk) and 3200 Russian KIA (Donetsk and Lugansk times 1.5) for just under 6000 KIA on the Russia-led side.
Ukrainian losses are likely even higher, but since the proposed combined number for the Russian side is already so uncertain an estimate of Ukrainian deaths derived from that would have such a range and be so uncertain as to have little value. Anything from 6000 to 18000 seems plausible depending on what your favored number for the other side is.
In general daily losses on the Russian side are lower than they were during the first month of the war. Troops are perishing at perhaps half the rate early on, however, the difference is that for these deaths the Russian side can point to only small territorial gains. Far smaller than what was being accomplished early on. On a theoretical lives-lost-per-kilometer-taken basis the war has become more costly rather than less so. Radically so.
In reality methodical, slow warfare does not reduce casualties. Fast warfare reduces casualties, albeit it compresses the casualties it does produce into a much smaller timeframe. Militaries know this. The only reason you would go slow, which is the expensive way to advance, is because you don’t have the correlation of forces required to go fast.