Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
nsmalley said:
Maybe I am seeing the glimmerings of an off ramp for russia. Putting Wagner/Chechens/some other guy in charge means Putin can blame the whole thing on them, calling them traitors and still come out of it(to the Russians) as being someone who De-nazified etc but had to curtail due to traitors and morons.. Now Ofc we in the West can see though it, but to a domestic audience he could perhaps play the victim card..
Click to expand...
Russia would then loose the work they have been using wagner for in africa leaving china to benefit with access to natural resources.
 
NickK said:
Unless on a boat under the bridge- dispersal would cause a flame to appear all over the bridge simultaneously.
Click to expand...

Doesn't work well with the second angle where it is mostly dispersed smoke flowing under the bridge - which is why I'm kind of leery on the truck bomb angle as you'd expect to see that dust/smoke/cloud moving forced downwards and outwards rather than flowing like a stream.
 
Last edited:
Iraklis F.C. said:
whats the smallest nuke the russians have?
Click to expand...
Probably these artillery shells, somewhere betwixt 1-2.5kt.

C4Fu1AC.jpg
 
An air launched thermobaric/fuel-air could still be launced via missile, an expolsion in the air would leave less impact if the missile missed the bridge (or hit the truck)
 
Rroff said:
You could rig em to work from a truck - in some ways it would make more sense with what we are seeing here in terms of being a relatively large but not especially violent explosion for the size - but even more so than missile use you'd expect to see more evidence of the initial fuel cloud being dispersed, likely with the truck being partially visible as the source of the explosion for a few frames, before the big detonation.
Click to expand...
A fertiliser/fuel bomb (ammonium nitrate 'slurry bomb') would offer the same type of explosion - more of a 'push' than a sharp detonation. That's why it's used in quarries for moving large amounts of rock. Fertiliser and a bit of fuel would attract a lot less attention on a truck.
 
Firestar_3x said:
No, because the missile is travelling at speed, has a large mass and kinetic energy associated with it.
Click to expand...
The major damage is caused by the chemical energy stored in the explosive not the kinetic energy of the missile.

Kinetic energy is mostly useful for penetrating a structure in order to detonate the warhead inside. It's not really relevant to a bridge like this.
 
NickK said:
An air launched thermobaric/fuel-air could still be launced via missile, an expolsion in the air would leave less impact if the missile missed the bridge (or hit the truck)
Click to expand...

A wild assumption but I wonder if the train was actually the target and they missed the money shot but not by much.
 
Last edited:
Fourstar said:
The major damage is caused by the chemical energy stored in the explosive not the kinetic energy of the missile.

Kinetic energy is mostly useful for penetrating a structure in order to detonate the warhead inside. It's not really relevant to a bridge like this.
Click to expand...

All other attacks Ukraine have performed on bridges have shown the warhead penetrate the deck, which caused the most visible damage.

Anyway I disagree that a launched missile is the same as a missile exploded on the back of a truck.
 
Last edited:
ChrisLX200 said:
A fertiliser/fuel bomb (ammonium nitrate 'slurry bomb') would offer the same type of explosion - more of a 'push' than a sharp detonation. That's why it's used in quarries for moving large amounts of rock. Fertiliser and a bit of fuel would attract a lot less attention on a truck.
Click to expand...

This is another angle where it gets confusing - it would fit a lot of the circumstances but IMO one of those big enough to bring part of the bridge down would have caused substantial derailment for the train which I don't think is in evidence.
 
Firestar_3x said:
All other attacks Ukraine have performed on bridges have shown the warhead penetrate the deck, which caused the most visible damage.

Anyway I disagree that a launched missile is the same as a missile exploded on the back of a truck.
Click to expand...
Ukraine currently has very few options that would reach the Kerch bridge.
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
haha he sounds like a proper conspiracy nut. The only thing that is remotely supported by evidence in that video is that Europe is being hit very hard by the energy crisis. After that he's coming up with stuff I've seen posted on sites like The Donald :cry: :cry:
Click to expand...
Err excuse me did you not see the big ole' pile of books next to him?
 
Rroff said:
This is another angle where it gets confusing - it would fit a lot of the circumstances but IMO one of those big enough to bring part of the bridge down would have caused substantial derailment for the train which I don't think is in evidence.
Click to expand...
Train was shielded from most of the pressure wave because it was above the road and the rail bridge span absorbed most of it.

edit: Another thing - how come the train remained just opposite the explosion site afterwards? If it was moving it should have continued for some distance before it could pull up. Was it stationary?
 
Last edited:
Tephnos said:
There's a picture of it in the last page.

The truck is far too amateur for a purposeful attack by Ukraine, is my opinion. If Ukraine has the capability to hit it with rockets, why not just use the rocket? The truck is not the right tool for the job of bridge demolition.

Honestly, if it *is* the truck, then I think it is highly likely a Russian false flag attack that ended up causing more damage than they anticipated.
Click to expand...
That one picture with a bar of white at the bottom?

That looks to me like rolling shutter. All pixels in an image are not recorded at the exact same moment. The image is scanned line by line top to bottom. If the explosion took place part way through scanning a frame this is exactly what you would expect to see.

I don't understand how you think a white bar in the foreground can signify this is not a truck bomb but is instead a missile in a similar position to the truck?
 
ChrisLX200 said:
Train was shielded from most of the pressure wave because it was above the road and the rail bridge span absorbed most of it.

edit: Another thing - how come the train remained just opposite the explosion site afterwards? If it was moving it should have continued for some distance before it could pull up. Was it stationary?
Click to expand...

youtu.be

Kerch bridge explosion: CCTV appears to show Crimea bridge blast

CCTV footage appears to show the moment the bridge linking Crimea and Russia was hit by a huge explosion early on Saturday morning.Subscribe to Guardian News...
youtu.be youtu.be

I'm not sure on the pressure wave side as to the bridge span absorbing most of it.

I did wonder about your edit - it doesn't make much sense the bridge damage was sufficient to cause the train to catch fire afterwards and if it had been passing at anything other than a very slow speed or stopped at the explosion site it would have continued for quite some distance before stopping. I don't know what speed they go over the bridge though.

EDIT: Google suggests 80kmh cargo train speed limit and that most pass over at around 60.

EDIT2: Personally I don't find much makes sense about this incident at all - it is possible for some reason this train regularly ran slowly or stopped at the most strategically valuable part of the bridge to strike and was in fact the intended target :s but seems kind of incredible.
 
Last edited:
Firestar_3x said:
All other attacks Ukraine have performed on bridges have shown the warhead penetrate the deck, which caused the most visible damage.

Anyway I disagree that a launched missile is the same as a missile exploded on the back of a truck.
Click to expand...

To be fair those were much smaller ones fired by MLRS/HIMARS, IF this were a bigger rocket with a much bigger payload of explosives then perhaps there wouldn't be much of it left?

Or do you just mean on camera/you'd see it on the footage? ATACMS rockets are a bit faster, traveling at Mach 3.5 and Tochka missiles travel at 5.3 (if by some miracle they've managed to carry out some modifications to make those things more accurate).

Anyway, it would be rather lucky timing if it were a rocket to have hit the train too!

I suspect it was something detonated by a human so drone (boat), truck bomb or I guess maybe planted explosives???
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom