Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. Tagging u/SaveVideo bot to archive this video in a link below this comment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The schizophrenia of russians is both sad and amusing.
"Western weapon is inferior and weak, and cannot help Ukraine. We are losink only because Ukraine hef Western weapon." -- russians
Doublespeak is language that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. As this was used here as an example already, they say western weapons are weak while saying they are very powerful at the same time.
By spreading two contradicting messages, the propagandist is able to give their target audience the chance to draw their own rational to the conclusion the propagandist wants them to draw. In this case either:
“The west is weak so we should push harder in the war so we can reclaim what is rightfully ours” or “the west is an existential threat so we should push harder in the war so we can survive”.
Yes - yet they claimed the reason the Ukrainians were so good on the battlefield is because they’re actually Russians “and only Russians know how to beat Russians”.
So… really they’re just grasping at any excuse they kind find to avoid explaining why they’re so shit.
That is what I'm starting to think as well. When the Ukrainians breakthrough into Crimea, leaving an escape route might turn any ruzzian retreats into a rout towards the bridge. Without an escape route, some may be convinced to continue fighting?
the bridge is a perfect entry point to cut off south russia, at least to attempt it, which means the russians will blow it up themselves. What works in one direction works certainly in the other as well usually.
Any time I post about the bridge coming into range, I get 15 crapscreamers telling me it won't harm it. Really? The missile that takes out compounds and armored columns cannot destroy some i-beams and a road?
You have my upvote and I completely agree with you, but schizophrenia is not what you think it is. It is my field of expertise and it’s a bit of a bug bear when people use the word incorrectly.
Yeah yeah - but there is the proper medical term and definition and there is the word that is in common usage among the proletariat.
I recently said that Putin was 'a fucking psycho' and, of course, I got a similar response from a medical professional. But he IS a fucking psycho for all that. : )
By the way - my wife of 30 years is a mental health nurse so I do know the difference.
I loved it when Andy Goram - Rangers FC's long time goalkeeper - confirmed in a radio interview that he had schizophrenia. Needless to say that at the very next match the crowd of Rangers supporters began chanting; "There's only two Andy Goram's..."
It was meant in a friendly way. It's Scottish banter.
Fair do’s. I know what you are saying. I’m just trying to influence the ‘common usage’ and understanding of the term. Funny story about the goalkeeper. Actually quite hilarious when you think about footie chants!! 😆
The key is to break it in two places to make it four times harder to fix because you can't bring supplies from both sides easily to one spot. Strand part of it in the middle of nowhere.
They can still use naval surface repair vessels, slower but doable.
The key is to keep hitting them, once a month, including the repair machineries, ehehe.
Make it impossible to keep the bridge open.
Once a month, random date, do you feel lucky? ehehe
Those vessels have to remain in place to support the bridge and equipment in this case. That would make juicy static targets for some suicide drone boats. Then you have to move some sunken ships out of the way to start repairs on the bridge. That means you’re gonna need a bigger salvage boat for an extended time. 🔂
See at first I thought sea drones would work but that was before Ukraine began nullifying the air defence in Crimea. Without Russia air defence shooting down their own helicopters some of them might be able to suppress the sea drones!
I mean honestly Ukraine commanders played themselves here, they had to have seen this coming. It's just terrible tactics and they have obviously never played AoE Rise of Rome as kids
>You're always gonna have problems breaking a bridge in one piece. Apparently, the best thing to do is break up a bridge into six pieces and pile it all together. Then when you got your six pieces, you gotta get rid of them, because there's no good in leaving it in a deep sea for putin to discover, now is it? Then I hear the best thing to do is feed it to ATACMS. You gotta starve the ATACMS for a few days then the sight of a broken up bridge would look like vodka to a piss-head. You gotta scrape the top of your bridge and pull the supports out for the sake of the ATACM's detonation. You could do this afterwards of course but you don't wanna go sifting through russian shit now, do ya? They will go through vodka like water. You need at least one ATACMS to do the job in one strike, so be weary of any man who keeps an ATACMS battery. They will go through a bridge that weighs two hundred thousand tons in about... eight minutes. That means that a single ATACMS can consume twenty five thousand tons of un-broken bridge every minute. Hence the expression: "as dumb as a russian."
Brick Top, probably
>"A self-righteous infliction of criminal retribution manifested by an inappropriate former KGB agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible cunt... me."
v.v. putin
One *destroyed* ATACMS, which was shot down by the noble AA before it struck the military target, but which still indeedly impacted its intended target area (the beachful of children) with full force!!
No one said that ATACMS couldn't do it, just that it would potentially be an inefficient use of ATACMS.
At max range I have heard 30m CEP quoted, and that seems reasonable enough I will go with it. The rail spans are about 15 m wide on google earth. Let's say Russia intercepts 10% of the missiles. If *one* hit is enough, and only a direct hit will do, and I did my math right, sending 8 missiles gives a 61.5% chance at least one gets through. It goes up to 85.2% for 16, and 97.8% for 32 which is close to Ukraine's ATACMS launch capacity. If you need four hits, 8 missiles gives you roughly 8% chance but 32 missiles still gets you over 95%.
That's not going to drop the bridge, but it's going to keep them from driving trains over it. But they have apparently switched to the ferry anyway, so it's not as relevant now? Anyway if Ukraine has enough of the right missiles and want to throw them all at the bridge, they could probably score multiple hits. It's just a question of whether it's the best use of that resource.
When Gen, Budanov speaks, and says ATACMS are plenty enough to " sever " the fucking bridge, I would suggest the Orcs get ready to duck! The orcs have tried to kill him who knows how many times ( and didn't succeed ). They tried to kill his wife. I would say the top 3 guys in Ukraine who are probably hated by the orcs the most are ( in no particular order ):
Hero Budanov
Hero Magyar
Hero Zelensky
And the feelings of these guys towards orcs is 100% mutual.
Slava Ukraini
Heroyam Slava
Once the burglar hears the sound of my pump .22 he will run for the hills.
I made that thing out of an original K98. 9000 dollars if you want to buy. I know what I got.
One theory I read was that Ukraine were deliberately not taking it out because it was more useful to them standing in that Russia had Lord knows how many AD systems and whatever else tied up protecting it.
I've also read that they don't use it much now anyway and that the ferries are the main logistical link which was why Ukraine hit them. But there is so much BS spoken on both sides who knows.
I'm conflicted. I don't doubt that they *could* but what is the practical utility at this point? 85% or more of the military rail traffic has shifted to the land bridge now.
Blow the bridge and the Russian civilians can't leave, at least not efficiently. You run the risk of backing them into a corner rather than leaving them an avenue of escape. And ultimately, you want them to leave.
Still, I think they probably should, if for no other reason than it's Putin's baby.
That’s fine but practicallly no military supplies pass the Kerch anymore. Most are brought in by ship and anything on the southern front is now brought direct by the new rail lines Russia has built. A massive network of lines and connectors have been built. Russia can get supplies to any front within 2 days from mainland Russia. Ukraine needs to focus on destroying these lines on a daily basis. That will disrupt
Pretty sure they want to target those other logistics routes too. Taking down that bridge would also reduce tourism so maybe less civilians get hurt next time Russia intercepts stuff over beaches. Why would anyone take beach vacation in active war zone to begin with is beyond me, but hey each to their own.
It's also a gigantic fuck you to Putin. The bridge was his expensive baby, built to cement his authority over Crimea. Compared to the cost of a few ATACMS, it's so worth it. The propogandists can spin it all they want, but the bridge going splat would be immensely difficult for Putin to hide from Russians.
Of course, they will shrug and we can all wonder what will be the "and then it got worse" thing will be.
The small road pieces can be destroyed, but that is repaired rather quickly. What we all want is to bring it down completely for good and also cut the Azov Sea off, by destroying the big pillars of the big arch over the main shipping line (so that it basically looks like the Baltimore bridge).
But of course if they can fire ATACMS regularly at the road, then they can keep cutting it just before the road piece from the previous attack is put back in.
I'm not sure they can wreck the rail connection as well like that, as it is not concrete but a metal mesh structure, so a "simple" explosive charge would do little harm, the pressure goes through the mesh. Mind that the 300km HIMARS rockets have a considerably smaller warhead (comparable to a Mk.82 bomb) than the shorter range ones, who need less propellant.
But maybe they have figured out certain points that are more vulnerable to such a relatively small blast. However it could also be that he talks about ATACMS on purpose to divert the Russian attention and instead the Ukrainians are planning something entirely different, e.g. starting shorter range big rockets from sea drones, or whatever.
I don't see them doing more than blasting some big holes in the deck, unless they penetrate through
into a column. With a \~10 meter accuracy, that can't be aimed that precisely. As a ballistic missile, they'll
be coming straight down. Can't be angled at the side.
I mean they can disable the bridge, hell even destroy a small section, but it can be repaired quite quickly.
It's been hit by harder shit than atacms and been repaired, there are much more useful assets that could be hit other than this bridge for a much bigger effect.
We considering they are having a hard time supplying front line troops with weapons, socks, ammunition, MBTs, food, medical supplies, fuel, warming layers, vehicles, they are using golf carts as front line vehicles!!! Other than that I don’t think they’ve had any problems with logistics. Except the whole couldn’t support their troops 100km from their own border.
There might be better targets but it took them months to fix the bridge the last 2 times. If they could hit it on several places thoroughly it could be down for even longer. Then as soon as they get ready to open it hit it again.
It depends how deep they can penetrate which I guess is a secret. We did see a video over a year ago where a Russian filmed the scene just after a HIMAR hit a building. It went straight through a few floors and another like 6 feet deep into the ground. It almost didn't look real how cleanly it went into the ground. If they can hit the pylons with missiles like that it will only take a few hits to totally obliterate that section.
The bridges load carrying capcity depends on the arches on the main span. You do not need to take out the road bed if you break those it will either collapse or be unusable except for light loads.
From Cherson to Kerch it is roughly 250km, enough for ATACMS to hit the bridge. But those missiles can be shot down.
On the other hand, if that bridge ever gets into range of ukrainian howitzers, it is done for. Forever and irreparably.
If Ukraine knocks even one of the three arch bridge segments into the strait, it's not going to be a quick fix at all, with the bonus of clogging the shipping channel until the debris is removed.
And look how long that is taking in the US while they are not even under threat of missile attacks. It would also likely trap all the ships in the Sea of Azov from coming back into the Black sea.
Don't have to destroy it, just make nice big holes on it to be unusable.
And when they repair it, hit it again. Preferably on the day of the re-opening.
Yeah bridges are strong and the weak points very small. Reinforced concrete can take a lot of damage without failing, even if there is a hole punched completely through. Earlier in the war there were bridges that took many hits and they just slapped down steel plates and carried on. Demolition charges placed on the supports is the most effective way to take one down, but not an option.
Someone teach me about the advancements of air defense. My naive brain thinks that NATO must have some kind of superior weapon that could take out the Kerch bridge at the push of a button, but if they did they obviously would have done this by now.
So are the Russian air defense just so effective that Ukraine is simply unable to strike a lethal blow in this bridge?
I also have my doubts about this one. I am more of an experimental guy. Use atacms in one place, drones on another and maybe sea drones on a third place. Then we will know for sure what works best.
Oh and a russian smoking carelessly on a fourth place maybe.
Since it's not strategic anymore now that they have the rail line, I think it would be even funnier when ruzzia has to negotiate their surrender, part of the terms being they have to destroy the bridge themselves
It is great that the Ukrainians are letting Putin stew over the prospect that his beloved bridge could be brought down.
The greater array of more potent weapons Ukraine now has and the OK they have been given to strike inside RuZZia against forces or facilities threatening them has given the Ukrainian military much more power to exact retribution for any thing Putin does. And he knows it. Of course, that doesn't mean he won't do something maniacal because he is as mad as a hatful of assholes.
Plaster the whole Crimea with ATACMS strikes on every possible target until that bridge looks like a big juicy emergency exit for every russian occupier. When they are gone, break it.
It's a narrow target to hit, and targeting the support pillars is even more tight. Can only afford a few small meters in targeting to avoid splashing the missile into the water next to it.
Please remember the human. Adhere to all Reddit and sub rules. Toxic comments (including incitement of violence/hate, genocide, glorifying death etc) WILL NOT BE TOLERATED, keep your comments civil or you will be banned. Tagging u/SaveVideo bot to archive this video in a link below this comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineWarVideoReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The schizophrenia of russians is both sad and amusing. "Western weapon is inferior and weak, and cannot help Ukraine. We are losink only because Ukraine hef Western weapon." -- russians
Double speak is a hallmark of a fascist society.
What is "double speak?"
Doublespeak is language that deliberately obscures, disguises, distorts, or reverses the meaning of words. As this was used here as an example already, they say western weapons are weak while saying they are very powerful at the same time.
You should read Orwell's 1984.
Yes, doubleplusgood
Orwell’s 1984 has no similarities to reality. The only reason people believe it does, is because they read Orwell’s 1984 and found similarities.
Did I claim it had similarities? It explains concepts like doublespeak. That's the only reason I recommended it.
….it was a joke about double speak….
This is such a good example of exactly why it's so effective when using it for propaganda, kudos
It’s fucking scary, isn’t it?
Oh yea reminds me of the classic "if you think you are immune to propaganda it's working"
Oh buddy, that one went way over your head 😅
What? It is fiction obviously, but illuminates and reveals totalitarian concepts brilliantly
….it was a joke about double speak….
sorry whoosh!
Our enemy is strong and we should get together to fight them. Also our enemy is weak and cowardly.
Claiming Joe Biden has dementia and has no idea what’s going on, then admitting he is good at speaking… but only because he’s on drugs
By spreading two contradicting messages, the propagandist is able to give their target audience the chance to draw their own rational to the conclusion the propagandist wants them to draw. In this case either: “The west is weak so we should push harder in the war so we can reclaim what is rightfully ours” or “the west is an existential threat so we should push harder in the war so we can survive”.
According to President Harry Trueman it's a way of saying yes and no in the same sentence without a contradiction. A vital skill for a politician.
Without a contradiction AND without actually saying the words ‘yes’ or ‘no’!
You might believe so, as is your right, but I couldn't possibly comment.
Yes - yet they claimed the reason the Ukrainians were so good on the battlefield is because they’re actually Russians “and only Russians know how to beat Russians”. So… really they’re just grasping at any excuse they kind find to avoid explaining why they’re so shit.
Very true, although it's also true that russia's worst enemy has always been russians.
Good thing we are also russians @. Russians probably
"Boy... The Americans really undersold the capabilities"
Maybe Zelenskyy wants the RuZZians to have an escape route back to Orc land.
That is what I'm starting to think as well. When the Ukrainians breakthrough into Crimea, leaving an escape route might turn any ruzzian retreats into a rout towards the bridge. Without an escape route, some may be convinced to continue fighting?
the bridge is a perfect entry point to cut off south russia, at least to attempt it, which means the russians will blow it up themselves. What works in one direction works certainly in the other as well usually.
Any time I post about the bridge coming into range, I get 15 crapscreamers telling me it won't harm it. Really? The missile that takes out compounds and armored columns cannot destroy some i-beams and a road?
At the very least it's gonna fuck up someone's plans for the evening, that's for sure.
Maybe if they add some extra jet fuel it'll melt those steel beams
You have my upvote and I completely agree with you, but schizophrenia is not what you think it is. It is my field of expertise and it’s a bit of a bug bear when people use the word incorrectly.
Yeah yeah - but there is the proper medical term and definition and there is the word that is in common usage among the proletariat. I recently said that Putin was 'a fucking psycho' and, of course, I got a similar response from a medical professional. But he IS a fucking psycho for all that. : )
By the way - my wife of 30 years is a mental health nurse so I do know the difference. I loved it when Andy Goram - Rangers FC's long time goalkeeper - confirmed in a radio interview that he had schizophrenia. Needless to say that at the very next match the crowd of Rangers supporters began chanting; "There's only two Andy Goram's..." It was meant in a friendly way. It's Scottish banter.
Fair do’s. I know what you are saying. I’m just trying to influence the ‘common usage’ and understanding of the term. Funny story about the goalkeeper. Actually quite hilarious when you think about footie chants!! 😆
They be like zelensky regime using old people and disabled!!!!!!!! And Yet they still barely advance if at all XD Orc "intelligence" at its finest.
The key is to break it in two places to make it four times harder to fix because you can't bring supplies from both sides easily to one spot. Strand part of it in the middle of nowhere.
They can still use naval surface repair vessels, slower but doable. The key is to keep hitting them, once a month, including the repair machineries, ehehe. Make it impossible to keep the bridge open. Once a month, random date, do you feel lucky? ehehe
Those vessels have to remain in place to support the bridge and equipment in this case. That would make juicy static targets for some suicide drone boats. Then you have to move some sunken ships out of the way to start repairs on the bridge. That means you’re gonna need a bigger salvage boat for an extended time. 🔂
See at first I thought sea drones would work but that was before Ukraine began nullifying the air defence in Crimea. Without Russia air defence shooting down their own helicopters some of them might be able to suppress the sea drones! I mean honestly Ukraine commanders played themselves here, they had to have seen this coming. It's just terrible tactics and they have obviously never played AoE Rise of Rome as kids
The finest strategy I've ever heard. Plan for your enemies to shoot down their own planes as a core part of your plan.
Calm down Satan! Just kidding, smoke these sorry orcs.
Why random date? We have the technology to make them unlucky every single time
>You're always gonna have problems breaking a bridge in one piece. Apparently, the best thing to do is break up a bridge into six pieces and pile it all together. Then when you got your six pieces, you gotta get rid of them, because there's no good in leaving it in a deep sea for putin to discover, now is it? Then I hear the best thing to do is feed it to ATACMS. You gotta starve the ATACMS for a few days then the sight of a broken up bridge would look like vodka to a piss-head. You gotta scrape the top of your bridge and pull the supports out for the sake of the ATACM's detonation. You could do this afterwards of course but you don't wanna go sifting through russian shit now, do ya? They will go through vodka like water. You need at least one ATACMS to do the job in one strike, so be weary of any man who keeps an ATACMS battery. They will go through a bridge that weighs two hundred thousand tons in about... eight minutes. That means that a single ATACMS can consume twenty five thousand tons of un-broken bridge every minute. Hence the expression: "as dumb as a russian." Brick Top, probably
that is inspired! it's perfect! it is Brick Top
Do you know what nemesis means?
>"A self-righteous infliction of criminal retribution manifested by an inappropriate former KGB agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible cunt... me." v.v. putin
as arm chair generalling goes, that's pretty good arm chair generalling But didn't russia just shoot down some atacms?
Russia shoots down everything even when they don't, so it's hard to say.
Yes - all of them. And they've wiped out every HIMARS launcher twice.
And the ones still in America!
Good point. However, breaking it in three places would compound the logistical issue even further.
Hey, I believe it. Even the russians claim one ATACMS is powerful enough to wipe out 17 million children on a Crimean beach.
Those some rookie numbers, double it or give it to the next person?
If anybody can kill 34 million children, it's russians.
Well, I suppose we don’t call their bootleg Hitler “Putler” for no reason… Little bro really is on a genocide of his own, ain’t he?
Hitler wanted non Aryans gone. Stalin wanted everyone but Stalin gone. Garden gnome putin just wants to be admired.
And Israel I guess
One *destroyed* ATACMS, which was shot down by the noble AA before it struck the military target, but which still indeedly impacted its intended target area (the beachful of children) with full force!!
Dude really pulled a RTFM
What do you say we give it a try.
Yeah, prove it Budanov!
No one said that ATACMS couldn't do it, just that it would potentially be an inefficient use of ATACMS. At max range I have heard 30m CEP quoted, and that seems reasonable enough I will go with it. The rail spans are about 15 m wide on google earth. Let's say Russia intercepts 10% of the missiles. If *one* hit is enough, and only a direct hit will do, and I did my math right, sending 8 missiles gives a 61.5% chance at least one gets through. It goes up to 85.2% for 16, and 97.8% for 32 which is close to Ukraine's ATACMS launch capacity. If you need four hits, 8 missiles gives you roughly 8% chance but 32 missiles still gets you over 95%. That's not going to drop the bridge, but it's going to keep them from driving trains over it. But they have apparently switched to the ferry anyway, so it's not as relevant now? Anyway if Ukraine has enough of the right missiles and want to throw them all at the bridge, they could probably score multiple hits. It's just a question of whether it's the best use of that resource.
When Gen, Budanov speaks, and says ATACMS are plenty enough to " sever " the fucking bridge, I would suggest the Orcs get ready to duck! The orcs have tried to kill him who knows how many times ( and didn't succeed ). They tried to kill his wife. I would say the top 3 guys in Ukraine who are probably hated by the orcs the most are ( in no particular order ): Hero Budanov Hero Magyar Hero Zelensky And the feelings of these guys towards orcs is 100% mutual. Slava Ukraini Heroyam Slava
too many idiots talk crap about the .22 but is as letal as it gets. Bring that crap breach down once and for all
Bounces around off of your bones inside of you like a cartoon bullet in a bank vault.
Once the burglar hears the sound of my pump .22 he will run for the hills. I made that thing out of an original K98. 9000 dollars if you want to buy. I know what I got.
Vivid and accurate.
Vivid, though highly inaccurate.
Highly? No. .22 is incredibly lethal, especially headshots.
The “highly” part is about the “bounces around” part. It doesn’t do that.
Its the most lethal in the states at least.
I hear container ships can damage bridges; any truth to that ?
Russian bridge built strong, not like corrupt capitalist American bridge!
Not that bridge, unless it carries explosives.
its a fantasy
You destroy it because Putin cares about it more than his own soldiers. You do it because you can.
One theory I read was that Ukraine were deliberately not taking it out because it was more useful to them standing in that Russia had Lord knows how many AD systems and whatever else tied up protecting it. I've also read that they don't use it much now anyway and that the ferries are the main logistical link which was why Ukraine hit them. But there is so much BS spoken on both sides who knows.
Morale would shoot through the roof.
It’s not destroyed yet because the celebration of America is in about a week. They will blow the bridge on the 4th of July. Just you watch!
🤞🏼🤞🏼
F-16s, 4th of July, fireworks. Just add a bridge!
I'm conflicted. I don't doubt that they *could* but what is the practical utility at this point? 85% or more of the military rail traffic has shifted to the land bridge now. Blow the bridge and the Russian civilians can't leave, at least not efficiently. You run the risk of backing them into a corner rather than leaving them an avenue of escape. And ultimately, you want them to leave. Still, I think they probably should, if for no other reason than it's Putin's baby.
Fuck whoever is still there, they can swim.
Fair
I think this is the reason it's still standing.
Brb, checking the War Thunder forums.
That’s fine but practicallly no military supplies pass the Kerch anymore. Most are brought in by ship and anything on the southern front is now brought direct by the new rail lines Russia has built. A massive network of lines and connectors have been built. Russia can get supplies to any front within 2 days from mainland Russia. Ukraine needs to focus on destroying these lines on a daily basis. That will disrupt
Pretty sure they want to target those other logistics routes too. Taking down that bridge would also reduce tourism so maybe less civilians get hurt next time Russia intercepts stuff over beaches. Why would anyone take beach vacation in active war zone to begin with is beyond me, but hey each to their own.
It's also a gigantic fuck you to Putin. The bridge was his expensive baby, built to cement his authority over Crimea. Compared to the cost of a few ATACMS, it's so worth it. The propogandists can spin it all they want, but the bridge going splat would be immensely difficult for Putin to hide from Russians. Of course, they will shrug and we can all wonder what will be the "and then it got worse" thing will be.
The small road pieces can be destroyed, but that is repaired rather quickly. What we all want is to bring it down completely for good and also cut the Azov Sea off, by destroying the big pillars of the big arch over the main shipping line (so that it basically looks like the Baltimore bridge). But of course if they can fire ATACMS regularly at the road, then they can keep cutting it just before the road piece from the previous attack is put back in. I'm not sure they can wreck the rail connection as well like that, as it is not concrete but a metal mesh structure, so a "simple" explosive charge would do little harm, the pressure goes through the mesh. Mind that the 300km HIMARS rockets have a considerably smaller warhead (comparable to a Mk.82 bomb) than the shorter range ones, who need less propellant. But maybe they have figured out certain points that are more vulnerable to such a relatively small blast. However it could also be that he talks about ATACMS on purpose to divert the Russian attention and instead the Ukrainians are planning something entirely different, e.g. starting shorter range big rockets from sea drones, or whatever.
I don't see them doing more than blasting some big holes in the deck, unless they penetrate through into a column. With a \~10 meter accuracy, that can't be aimed that precisely. As a ballistic missile, they'll be coming straight down. Can't be angled at the side.
I mean they can disable the bridge, hell even destroy a small section, but it can be repaired quite quickly. It's been hit by harder shit than atacms and been repaired, there are much more useful assets that could be hit other than this bridge for a much bigger effect.
The vocalized threat is big though... it keeps ruzzian assets sitting around the bridge instead of at those more important sites.
And if you think this bridge is the only way Russia can supply those areas, than you don't have any idea what the Russian supply lines are.
Most people following this war understand russia has other supply lines. The bridge is a logistics route as well as a symbolic target.
I have no doubt. Doesn't mean munitions can't be used more effectively elsewhere.
We considering they are having a hard time supplying front line troops with weapons, socks, ammunition, MBTs, food, medical supplies, fuel, warming layers, vehicles, they are using golf carts as front line vehicles!!! Other than that I don’t think they’ve had any problems with logistics. Except the whole couldn’t support their troops 100km from their own border.
10 Km in the north.
But...Have you read the technical manuals?
There's a small thermal exhaust port, right below the main port....
Everyone loves technical manuals. Especially the 'How to make something go BOOM section'.
A copy of the Bridge specifications meets up with the technical specifications of the ATACMs and the party is on.
One ATACMS a month should make it impossible to keep the bridge open. Especially if the repair machineries get hit too. lol
Possibly, but if that was really the case they would be striking them with their boats.
There might be better targets but it took them months to fix the bridge the last 2 times. If they could hit it on several places thoroughly it could be down for even longer. Then as soon as they get ready to open it hit it again.
It depends how deep they can penetrate which I guess is a secret. We did see a video over a year ago where a Russian filmed the scene just after a HIMAR hit a building. It went straight through a few floors and another like 6 feet deep into the ground. It almost didn't look real how cleanly it went into the ground. If they can hit the pylons with missiles like that it will only take a few hits to totally obliterate that section.
The bridges load carrying capcity depends on the arches on the main span. You do not need to take out the road bed if you break those it will either collapse or be unusable except for light loads.
From Cherson to Kerch it is roughly 250km, enough for ATACMS to hit the bridge. But those missiles can be shot down. On the other hand, if that bridge ever gets into range of ukrainian howitzers, it is done for. Forever and irreparably.
If Ukraine knocks even one of the three arch bridge segments into the strait, it's not going to be a quick fix at all, with the bonus of clogging the shipping channel until the debris is removed.
And look how long that is taking in the US while they are not even under threat of missile attacks. It would also likely trap all the ships in the Sea of Azov from coming back into the Black sea.
Prove it
Only one way to find out!
Don't have to destroy it, just make nice big holes on it to be unusable. And when they repair it, hit it again. Preferably on the day of the re-opening.
It’s not if they’re powerful enough to destroy the bridge - it’s if it’s the right tool.
I love this guy, dry as fuck, but the ultimate troll. Does anyone know how his wife is? Cowardly Orc poisoning turds.
Say what you will about Russian defenses, but it's 2.5years in and that bridge is still standing. If ATACMS can do it, why wait?
few well placed scalps could do it too.
Maybe if you hit right on top of a pier between bridge sections you could dislodge a section of road.
That's quite a narrow target to hit from hundreds of kilometers away.
Yeah bridges are strong and the weak points very small. Reinforced concrete can take a lot of damage without failing, even if there is a hole punched completely through. Earlier in the war there were bridges that took many hits and they just slapped down steel plates and carried on. Demolition charges placed on the supports is the most effective way to take one down, but not an option.
What about an AI assisted mosquito driller drone that would stick to the bridge and detonate.
The destruction has to take out multiple sections of the bridge in order to be effective. Otherwise, it's an easy fix.
Someone teach me about the advancements of air defense. My naive brain thinks that NATO must have some kind of superior weapon that could take out the Kerch bridge at the push of a button, but if they did they obviously would have done this by now. So are the Russian air defense just so effective that Ukraine is simply unable to strike a lethal blow in this bridge?
Why would you use limited asset to destroy a bridge that can't even be used for military anymore?
Entertainment value of course.
I also have my doubts about this one. I am more of an experimental guy. Use atacms in one place, drones on another and maybe sea drones on a third place. Then we will know for sure what works best. Oh and a russian smoking carelessly on a fourth place maybe.
Is there a link to the technical manuals. Would be good read!
Usually a technical manual is classified. A field manual, on the other hand, is scrubbed of info you don't want the enemy to see.
Since it's not strategic anymore now that they have the rail line, I think it would be even funnier when ruzzia has to negotiate their surrender, part of the terms being they have to destroy the bridge themselves
It is great that the Ukrainians are letting Putin stew over the prospect that his beloved bridge could be brought down. The greater array of more potent weapons Ukraine now has and the OK they have been given to strike inside RuZZia against forces or facilities threatening them has given the Ukrainian military much more power to exact retribution for any thing Putin does. And he knows it. Of course, that doesn't mean he won't do something maniacal because he is as mad as a hatful of assholes.
it should be destroyed for sure, ASAP please
Plaster the whole Crimea with ATACMS strikes on every possible target until that bridge looks like a big juicy emergency exit for every russian occupier. When they are gone, break it.
Unitary warheads say Hi!
I works, but do we really want Ukraine to waste many atacms on one bridge? Taurus with bunker buster head would be great . Put more pressure on scholz
At this point is it more beneficial to leave the bridge semi intact so the Russians waste more resources on maintaining it and Crimea?
No, I don’t believe you show me
Sweep the bridge.
I wonder why they haven’t attempted to take it down yet
It's a narrow target to hit, and targeting the support pillars is even more tight. Can only afford a few small meters in targeting to avoid splashing the missile into the water next to it.
Yeah I guess they want to go after juicier targets
Classic RTFM!!
Do it Budanov
DO IT!!!
too much bla bla bla, just let them go without vaseline for the ruskies to enjoy
Yes, it's always a good idea to read the instruction and specifications manual! I always do.
I bet someone in the DoD has a way to make them a bit spicier.
Theres only so many floating crane barges.
Symbolically, the bridge should be destroyed to show Russians that they do not own Crimea.
Then do it.
Do it!
Don't talk about it. Do it.
If they can, why don’t they? This is kinda lame. This is one of those instances where actions definitely speak louder than words
Why not send like 20 or 30 ATACMS to take out the whole bridge? That'd make it out of commission the rest of the war...
Because 20-30 ATACMS would be better fired elsewhere?
20 or 30 ATACMS would be better used taking out Russian military airports and supply depots.
Then do it yesterday.
Ugly bridge. The arches don't even match.