12 ms·

The Crimean Bridge Is on Fire

139 points by frogger8 4y ago

qaq 4y ago
Belated birthday present for Putin
ShivShankaran 4y ago
wow this is crazy. I guess this mean either more mobilization or straight out war. Didn't Putin say that crimea was a red line?
- themodelplumber 4y ago
  It's pretty wild. We've learned that Putin doesn't really think in fixed positions as much as he says, so it'll be interesting to see how things go from here. Putin prefers to think more situationally and kind of saves up his logic for the moment that arrives, previous statements notwithstanding. So any prior statements about Crimea were just as likely due to the burden of needing to reassure specific Russians living there at the time, and there's really no specific red line, even though one might be figured out looking back on all this someday...
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- dimitar 4y ago
  It is war between Ukraine and Russia, regardless how Putin markets it. Ukraine hit an airfield inside Russia on the 25th of February. They are not going to use nukes
- sorokod 4y ago
  "more mobilization" Not likely since the mobilization system is saturated and not coping well with the current volume. In fact, the schedule regular mobilization has been delayed for thi reason. "red line" Many red lines have been declared and ignored.
- Lazare 4y ago
  More mobilization is impractical; the current mobilization seems to already be far more than the system can handle. And as for straight out war...the war went hot in Feb. Russia has been holding nothing back in its (so far futile) efforts to defeat Ukraine on the battlefield. And Crimea has been attacked many times already, it's clearly not a red line, nor has Putin expressed any clear "red lines". (Many red lines have been hinted it, many have been blown through without a response.)
  - throwaway777845 4y ago
- krisoft 4y ago
  > straight out war A war you say? What would you call what was going on until now then?
  - scyzoryk_xyz 4y ago
    Just a special military operation obviously /s
  - sorokod 4y ago
    Not to belittle what is experienced by Ukrainians, but the Russian Federation is truly not at war - yet. The mobilization has barley started and seems to be mismanaged, the industry has not been transformed to war effort, the legal system was not adjusted ( there is a challege to the legality of mobilization, military with contracts were allowed to break those) political system hasn't changed to support war style decision making. It is not clear if the RF can do all these things without tearing itself apart.
    - hdjjhhvvhga 4y ago
      Yes, they do everything not to call this war a war. But practically speaking, even if they haven't transformed their industry into total war machine yet (they started the process already), the war has been going on, it's just a question of semantics.
    - johnthewise 4y ago
      Do you mean total war?
      - sorokod 4y ago
        I think there is a scale where the max setting says total war. Russia is nowhere near that setting.
      - Aachen 4y ago
        As someone not into war, I didn't know those words meant anything different from just large scale war or all out war. From Wikipedia, yes it seems total war is what is meant: > Total war is a type of warfare that includes any and all civilian-associated resources and infrastructure as legitimate military targets, mobilizes all of the resources of society to fight the war, and gives priority to warfare over non-combatant needs.
- bambax 4y ago
  What would "more mobilization" achieve? Will they fill the gaps in the bridge with corpses of ill-prepared middle-aged Russians?
  - hdjjhhvvhga 4y ago
    It will deplete Russian population and weaken the Russian army even more. Nevertheless, Putin seem the kind of person who is afraid to admit defeat so I wouldn't count on him giving up too soon.
frogger8 4y ago
Wikipedia updated. https://mobile.twitter.com/bradyafr/status/1578609848543240192 https://mobile.twitter.com/bradyafr/status/15786098485432401...
- andrewflnr 4y ago
  "Destroyed" seems likely to be premature. The damaged section is relatively small, so I'd be surprised if it's not repaired eventually.
  - synu 4y ago
    Presumably Ukraine would have to lose the war for that to happen now.
    - andrewflnr 4y ago
      Whoever wins will want it repaired eventually.
      - andrewflnr 4y ago
        On further review, this is actually stupid, but OTOH the bridge is still slightly alive, so my original point was not completely wrong.
rendang 4y ago
Would be interested if anyone with civil engineering expertise here could estimate the time it would take Russia to repair this
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  I am not that person but Trent Telenko is a retired DoD logistics guy who is active on Twitter and gives exhaustively detailed analysis, so I expect he'll write about it at length in the next day or two. He's unabashedly pro NATO/Ukraine so you should keep that bias in mind, but I've found his posts consistently illuminating since the outset of the conflict. https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1578501990513975296 https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1578501990513975296 My immediate impression of the aftermath was that the collapse of the road deck looked very much like the failure of the San Francisco Bay Bridge following the 1989 earthquake, which was fixed in a month (which seems like lightning speed by today's standards). https://dot.ca.gov/programs/public-affairs/mile-marker/winter-2019-2020/copy-of-loma-prieta https://dot.ca.gov/programs/public-affairs/mile-marker/winte...
  - canadianfella 4y ago
    Can you explain the bias comment? I don’t understand.
    - icelancer 4y ago
      I think he was just pointing out that Trent is pro-NATO/Ukraine and is not really an impartial source of news/information. Don't think he was implying anything wrong with it.
    - anigbrowl 4y ago
      I mean he might emphasize Russian failings and avoid talking much about their logistic successes, and likewise I assume he's circumspect about Ukrainian shortcomings in public. Just don't expect pure impartiality. I am also biased in favor of Ukraine.
    - StanislavPetrov 4y ago
01100011 4y ago
https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical is covering this pretty well. Russians are claiming it was a truck bomb and this is backed up by recently posted footage of the truck disappearing into a ball of doom. Videos of the explosion(trigger warning: people are dying in these videos): https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1578632284173131776 https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/157863228417313177... https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1578633221041844225 https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/157863322104184422... Update: Looks like it might have been a boat https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1578633877849272321 https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/157863387784927232...
- rippercushions 4y ago
  Boat tweet deleted as "too speculative"? Also, while some people on the bridges almost certainly died in the explosions, there's no actual gore (or any visible people at all, really) in the videos.
  - captainmuon 4y ago
    Not much more speculative than the truck. Here is another view (can't vouch for the source): https://twitter.com/L_Team10/status/1578642087284998144 https://twitter.com/L_Team10/status/1578642087284998144
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  This recent tweet has by far the clearest footage of the aftermath, shot in daylight from the edge of the destroyed bridge deck; the actual extent of the destruction isn't fully apparent until the end. Honestly somewhat surprised there isn't a Russian information blackout on this since it seems to me like a major logistic setback. https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1578639387843526656 https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1578639387843526656
  - mirekrusin 4y ago
    Can single explosion collapse two parts so far away from each other or we're talking about two explosions? If you look frame by frame, it doesn't look like explosion comes from those cars at all. It looks more like military strike where bridge is hit quite far on the right hand side (or boat, whatever) - the explosion is clearly underneath.
laborcontract 4y ago
This is a scene straight out of RRR.
- stjohnswarts 4y ago
  what is RRR?
  - commoner 4y ago
    RRR is the most expensive Indian film produced to date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RRR_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RRR_(film) See some of the film's action sequences here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32790428 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32790428
  - kuroguro 4y ago
    Indian film, here's the bridge part in the trailer: https://youtu.be/NgBoMJy386M?t=60 https://youtu.be/NgBoMJy386M?t=60
    - Balgair 4y ago
      Wow, that looks pretty good actually.
TekMol 4y ago
Here is something I don't understand about this war: Russia probably has many thousands of rockets with which they can attack Ukraine's territory, right? How can the Ukraine hold on to any territory in this situation? Can't Russia just level any area held by Ukrainian forces with rockets? Maybe someone here on HN has the military expertise to explain this?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- delecti 4y ago
  Russia has leveled many areas held by Ukraine. But as things have progressed, the west has been giving Ukraine a ton of support, including anti-missile defense systems. The war has also demonstrated quite clearly that Russia's military might was overblown, and they've actually been severely undermined by decades of corruption.
  - stjohnswarts 4y ago
    I suspect that it is very "overblown" at this point. Russia are using shit equipment all over. Maybe they're afraid those "thousands of missiles" will land on their heads instead of where they're aiming it because they haven't been maintained for decades.
    - bnt 4y ago
      Russia is using shit, but that shit caused 100s of billions in damage. Yes, Ukraine is pushing them out with more superior weaponry, but the damage Russian “shit” left will be felt for decades. Source: lived through something similar 30 years ago, sponsored by Russia.
    - smcl 4y ago
      There have been a few cases of Russian missiles being launched then after 50 metres or so turning round and targeting their own launch site. So you’re not far off Here’s one: https://youtu.be/6IwqmezeSuQ https://youtu.be/6IwqmezeSuQ
atoav 4y ago
I was of the believe that Ukraine did not explode that bridge yet because they would not benefit from it. My thinking went as follows: A.) breaking it would make the land bridge they are fighting the Russians for much more valuable, therefore the Russians would invest more resources to doing so, B.) Breaking it might cut off the escape route for Crimean civilians and therefore turn them against the Ukrainians. C.) The bridge was expensive and in some far future they would probably like to make use of it themselves. Of course that bridge is in a sense both military and civilian infrastructure, so it might just be, that we reached a moment where the points mentioned above no longer outweighed the military/logistcal disadvantage the Ukrainians gained from letting it unharmed. Of course another possibility would be that they just were not able to attack it successfully before and this was the first attempt that worked. In that case however we might have noticed some of the bodged attempts.
- sofixa 4y ago
  > Of course another possibility would be that they just were not able to attack it successfully That was the official version of the Ukrainian side. > A.) breaking it would make the land bridge they are fighting the Russians for much more valuable, therefore the Russians would invest more resources to doing so, But it would make those Russians fighting there a nightmare to supply (and as we've seen, Russia logistics suck even without obstacles such as a big bodies of water), which will weaken their resistance. > B.) Breaking it might cut off the escape route for Crimean civilians and therefore turn them against the Ukrainians. Many already run away when Ukraine started hitting targets in Crimea, so it's safe to assume the rest don't want to evacuate. > C.) The bridge was expensive and in some far future they would probably like to make use of it themselves. Ukraine won't have a need for a Crimea - Russia land bridge in the foreseeable future, considering how long it will take for relations to be fully repaired.
  - atoav 4y ago
    I think the three points might have held some truth in an earlier phase of the war. Now that the Ukrainians gained some ground in Lyman (important logistical train hub in the east), the advantages of cutting off the bridge might have multiplied. In hindsight cutting the east train hub first and then cutting the bridge certainly seems to be the better strategical order of operations than the other way around.
pvaldes 4y ago
A couple months ago an interesting video in youtube covered extensively why, being such strategical route this had not happened yet in seven months of war. Destroying the bridge was a major priority for the Ukrainian army. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C630mzkvwk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C630mzkvwk The situation has changed. With the North route cut, moving an hypothetical tactical nuclear bomb to Crimea or refresh troops is now much more difficult and dangerous. Supporting logistically the current Crimean troops with food or winter clothes is also much more expensive now
- Taniwha 4y ago
  And in August there was this: https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1561775821257379840 https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1561775821257379840
  - Kailhus 4y ago
    Sorry but that video is hilarious
- fit2rule 4y ago
- tpmx 4y ago
  > moving an hypothetical tactical nuclear bomb to Crimea or refresh troops is now much more difficult and dangerous Eh, no, unfortunately not. Moving small numbers of small things is still easy. The big impact that this attack had is that moving lots and lots of very heavy things suddenly gets a lot harder.
tromp 4y ago
The damage to the rail-bridge must be quite limited, since Russia’s transport ministry reports trains will be running again at 8pm local time tonight [1]. [1] https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/railway-traffic-over-crimea-bridge-to-resume-on-saturday-interfax https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/railway-traffic-over-c...
- admissionsguy 4y ago
  Maybe, maybe not, but it's been the standard operating procedure of Russian government to - in reaction to setbacks during this war - produce a gradient of progressively worse news instead of giving out the whole truth at once.
- mmastrac 4y ago
  If that's what the Russians are saying, it must be completely destroyed and unrepairable.
- Balgair 4y ago
  With fuel fires burning that long on the rail bridge, the steel is useless now. I haven't seen any images of RU fire-fighting on the bridge to put anything out. They'll need to replace the tracks at the very least. Likely they'll need to replace all of those sections of rail bridge. That would take ~2 weeks to a month in the US in peace time. As RU doesn't have span launchers, it's going to take them months to repair, if they even can get the pre-made spans to do so, what with sanctions. That bridge is kaput for at least 3 months, if not the whole war.
- mlindner 4y ago
  Even if they can run trains over it, they're not going to be able to run full loads safely. The fire will have weakened the steel, removing some of the margin of the bridge strength.
wrp 4y ago
Security camera footage of the explosion. (https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1578638952885784576 https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1578638952885784576) If it was a truck bomb, it would had to have been a suicide bomber, but I have doubts. Observe the small car that was just going past in the opposing lane at the instant of the explosion. It kept going and you can see it driving toward the camera. If it had been next to such a large truck bomb, it would have been blown off the road.
layer8 4y ago
A quick video showing the damage: https://nitter.net/Osinttechnical/status/1578605334062473216 https://nitter.net/Osinttechnical/status/1578605334062473216
Balgair 4y ago
UKR also seems to have struck at the only other rail line for southern Ukraine today [0,1]. If true, then the only supply route to Kherson and Crimea is the M14 highway and the one lane of the Kerch bridge. The M14 is problematic at it runs through areas of high UKR partisan activity. The one last lane on the Kerch bridge is also not likely to last long if it is going to be used as a main supply hub for all of RU operations, not only due to UKR strikes, but just normal wear and tear in winter. Supplying via sea is also a no-go as we saw with the sinking of the Moskova and the strikes against RU airbases in Crimea. There is likely no workable method of supply or reinforcement for RU forces in southern Ukraine this winter. [0] https://euromaidanpress.com/2022/10/08/himars-strike-destroys-fuel-station-in-russian-occupied-ilovaisk-videos/ https://euromaidanpress.com/2022/10/08/himars-strike-destroy... [1] https://twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1578635797359898625 https://twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/15786357973598986...
drran 4y ago
The bridge, The bridge, The bridge is on fire! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adgx9wt63NY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adgx9wt63NY
diimdeep 4y ago
Real war is on the streets, people dying, and it is unacceptable. Meanwhile, propaganda in social media, with all these memes, jokes and threats, and are very disturbing and sickening, because they take worst from real war, inhuman and twisted jokes and package them in meme content for everyone to consume. All this was unimaginable 10 years ago. Also, in my opinion, the worst war propaganda content comes from pro Ukraine usernames, I can not explain why, and what is the point. Bridge is partially reopened for traffic [1] [1] https://www.rt.com/russia/564303-crimean-bridge-traffic-resumed/ https://www.rt.com/russia/564303-crimean-bridge-traffic-resu...
- mlindner 4y ago
  I find your post disingenuous and possibly propaganda itself, especially because you're quoting a Russian government news source in your post. The thing that is unacceptable is the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Nothing about Ukraine trying to push the invaders out of it's own country in any means they can is unacceptable. The memes and jokes in media are trying to turn something extremely grim into something a little more lighthearted to release stress. Otherwise people would lose their minds amidst all the tortures, mass murders of civilians and other activities being performed upon Ukrainian civilians by the Russian invaders. And yes, social media being heavily involved would be something unimaginable 10 years ago, because the proliferation of cell phones has now reached much of the world, giving us direct access to the horrors of war. And no, the worst war propaganda comes from Russia where they literally advocate for the elimination of Ukrainian civilians among other atrocities.
  - diimdeep 4y ago
    > I find your post disingenuous and possibly propaganda itself, especially because you're quoting a Russian government news source in your post. Instead of humble meta discussion about propaganda, you mark my point of view as propaganda, which in turn reads as propaganda itself. I would happily quote some top western news media, only if it would not be completely one-sided. There is no democracy anymore there, where you paint one-sided picture and block other sides news sources. > The memes and jokes in media are trying to turn something extremely grim into something a little more lighthearted to release stress. I would argue that it is unethical, and mostly about warmongering and not stress release. > all the tortures, mass murders of civilians and other activities being performed upon Ukrainian civilians by the Russian invaders. > And no, worst war propaganda comes from Russia where they literally advocate for the elimination of Ukrainian civilians among other atrocities. Either that or you live in a media bubble so different, that our opinions exactly opposite. Thankfully, it is just an opinion, and not a ground truth.

139 points by frogger8 4y ago

qaq 4y ago

Belated birthday present for Putin

wow this is crazy. I guess this mean either more mobilization or straight out war. Didn't Putin say that crimea was a red line?

themodelplumber 4y ago
It's pretty wild. We've learned that Putin doesn't really think in fixed positions as much as he says, so it'll be interesting to see how things go from here. Putin prefers to think more situationally and kind of saves up his logic for the moment that arrives, previous statements notwithstanding. So any prior statements about Crimea were just as likely due to the burden of needing to reassure specific Russians living there at the time, and there's really no specific red line, even though one might be figured out looking back on all this someday...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
dimitar 4y ago
It is war between Ukraine and Russia, regardless how Putin markets it. Ukraine hit an airfield inside Russia on the 25th of February. They are not going to use nukes
sorokod 4y ago
"more mobilization" Not likely since the mobilization system is saturated and not coping well with the current volume. In fact, the schedule regular mobilization has been delayed for thi reason. "red line" Many red lines have been declared and ignored.
Lazare 4y ago
More mobilization is impractical; the current mobilization seems to already be far more than the system can handle. And as for straight out war...the war went hot in Feb. Russia has been holding nothing back in its (so far futile) efforts to defeat Ukraine on the battlefield. And Crimea has been attacked many times already, it's clearly not a red line, nor has Putin expressed any clear "red lines". (Many red lines have been hinted it, many have been blown through without a response.)
- throwaway777845 4y ago
krisoft 4y ago
> straight out war A war you say? What would you call what was going on until now then?
- scyzoryk_xyz 4y ago
  Just a special military operation obviously /s
- sorokod 4y ago
  Not to belittle what is experienced by Ukrainians, but the Russian Federation is truly not at war - yet. The mobilization has barley started and seems to be mismanaged, the industry has not been transformed to war effort, the legal system was not adjusted ( there is a challege to the legality of mobilization, military with contracts were allowed to break those) political system hasn't changed to support war style decision making. It is not clear if the RF can do all these things without tearing itself apart.
  - hdjjhhvvhga 4y ago
    Yes, they do everything not to call this war a war. But practically speaking, even if they haven't transformed their industry into total war machine yet (they started the process already), the war has been going on, it's just a question of semantics.
  - johnthewise 4y ago
    Do you mean total war?
    - sorokod 4y ago
      I think there is a scale where the max setting says total war. Russia is nowhere near that setting.
    - Aachen 4y ago
      As someone not into war, I didn't know those words meant anything different from just large scale war or all out war. From Wikipedia, yes it seems total war is what is meant: > Total war is a type of warfare that includes any and all civilian-associated resources and infrastructure as legitimate military targets, mobilizes all of the resources of society to fight the war, and gives priority to warfare over non-combatant needs.
bambax 4y ago
What would "more mobilization" achieve? Will they fill the gaps in the bridge with corpses of ill-prepared middle-aged Russians?
- hdjjhhvvhga 4y ago
  It will deplete Russian population and weaken the Russian army even more. Nevertheless, Putin seem the kind of person who is afraid to admit defeat so I wouldn't count on him giving up too soon.

frogger8 4y ago

Wikipedia updated. https://mobile.twitter.com/bradyafr/status/1578609848543240192 https://mobile.twitter.com/bradyafr/status/15786098485432401...

andrewflnr 4y ago
"Destroyed" seems likely to be premature. The damaged section is relatively small, so I'd be surprised if it's not repaired eventually.
- synu 4y ago
  Presumably Ukraine would have to lose the war for that to happen now.
  - andrewflnr 4y ago
    Whoever wins will want it repaired eventually.
    - andrewflnr 4y ago
      On further review, this is actually stupid, but OTOH the bridge is still slightly alive, so my original point was not completely wrong.

rendang 4y ago

Would be interested if anyone with civil engineering expertise here could estimate the time it would take Russia to repair this

anigbrowl 4y ago
I am not that person but Trent Telenko is a retired DoD logistics guy who is active on Twitter and gives exhaustively detailed analysis, so I expect he'll write about it at length in the next day or two. He's unabashedly pro NATO/Ukraine so you should keep that bias in mind, but I've found his posts consistently illuminating since the outset of the conflict. https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1578501990513975296 https://twitter.com/TrentTelenko/status/1578501990513975296 My immediate impression of the aftermath was that the collapse of the road deck looked very much like the failure of the San Francisco Bay Bridge following the 1989 earthquake, which was fixed in a month (which seems like lightning speed by today's standards). https://dot.ca.gov/programs/public-affairs/mile-marker/winter-2019-2020/copy-of-loma-prieta https://dot.ca.gov/programs/public-affairs/mile-marker/winte...
- canadianfella 4y ago
  Can you explain the bias comment? I don’t understand.
  - icelancer 4y ago
    I think he was just pointing out that Trent is pro-NATO/Ukraine and is not really an impartial source of news/information. Don't think he was implying anything wrong with it.
  - anigbrowl 4y ago
    I mean he might emphasize Russian failings and avoid talking much about their logistic successes, and likewise I assume he's circumspect about Ukrainian shortcomings in public. Just don't expect pure impartiality. I am also biased in favor of Ukraine.
  - StanislavPetrov 4y ago

01100011 4y ago

https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical is covering this pretty well. Russians are claiming it was a truck bomb and this is backed up by recently posted footage of the truck disappearing into a ball of doom. Videos of the explosion(trigger warning: people are dying in these videos): https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1578632284173131776 https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/157863228417313177... https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1578633221041844225 https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/157863322104184422... Update: Looks like it might have been a boat https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/1578633877849272321 https://twitter.com/Osinttechnical/status/157863387784927232...

rippercushions 4y ago
Boat tweet deleted as "too speculative"? Also, while some people on the bridges almost certainly died in the explosions, there's no actual gore (or any visible people at all, really) in the videos.
- captainmuon 4y ago
  Not much more speculative than the truck. Here is another view (can't vouch for the source): https://twitter.com/L_Team10/status/1578642087284998144 https://twitter.com/L_Team10/status/1578642087284998144
anigbrowl 4y ago
This recent tweet has by far the clearest footage of the aftermath, shot in daylight from the edge of the destroyed bridge deck; the actual extent of the destruction isn't fully apparent until the end. Honestly somewhat surprised there isn't a Russian information blackout on this since it seems to me like a major logistic setback. https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1578639387843526656 https://twitter.com/JimmySecUK/status/1578639387843526656
- mirekrusin 4y ago
  Can single explosion collapse two parts so far away from each other or we're talking about two explosions? If you look frame by frame, it doesn't look like explosion comes from those cars at all. It looks more like military strike where bridge is hit quite far on the right hand side (or boat, whatever) - the explosion is clearly underneath.

laborcontract 4y ago

This is a scene straight out of RRR.

stjohnswarts 4y ago
what is RRR?
- commoner 4y ago
  RRR is the most expensive Indian film produced to date: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RRR_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RRR_(film) See some of the film's action sequences here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32790428 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32790428
- kuroguro 4y ago
  Indian film, here's the bridge part in the trailer: https://youtu.be/NgBoMJy386M?t=60 https://youtu.be/NgBoMJy386M?t=60
  - Balgair 4y ago
    Wow, that looks pretty good actually.

TekMol 4y ago

Here is something I don't understand about this war: Russia probably has many thousands of rockets with which they can attack Ukraine's territory, right? How can the Ukraine hold on to any territory in this situation? Can't Russia just level any area held by Ukrainian forces with rockets? Maybe someone here on HN has the military expertise to explain this?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
delecti 4y ago
Russia has leveled many areas held by Ukraine. But as things have progressed, the west has been giving Ukraine a ton of support, including anti-missile defense systems. The war has also demonstrated quite clearly that Russia's military might was overblown, and they've actually been severely undermined by decades of corruption.
- stjohnswarts 4y ago
  I suspect that it is very "overblown" at this point. Russia are using shit equipment all over. Maybe they're afraid those "thousands of missiles" will land on their heads instead of where they're aiming it because they haven't been maintained for decades.
  - bnt 4y ago
    Russia is using shit, but that shit caused 100s of billions in damage. Yes, Ukraine is pushing them out with more superior weaponry, but the damage Russian “shit” left will be felt for decades. Source: lived through something similar 30 years ago, sponsored by Russia.
  - smcl 4y ago
    There have been a few cases of Russian missiles being launched then after 50 metres or so turning round and targeting their own launch site. So you’re not far off Here’s one: https://youtu.be/6IwqmezeSuQ https://youtu.be/6IwqmezeSuQ

atoav 4y ago

I was of the believe that Ukraine did not explode that bridge yet because they would not benefit from it. My thinking went as follows: A.) breaking it would make the land bridge they are fighting the Russians for much more valuable, therefore the Russians would invest more resources to doing so, B.) Breaking it might cut off the escape route for Crimean civilians and therefore turn them against the Ukrainians. C.) The bridge was expensive and in some far future they would probably like to make use of it themselves. Of course that bridge is in a sense both military and civilian infrastructure, so it might just be, that we reached a moment where the points mentioned above no longer outweighed the military/logistcal disadvantage the Ukrainians gained from letting it unharmed. Of course another possibility would be that they just were not able to attack it successfully before and this was the first attempt that worked. In that case however we might have noticed some of the bodged attempts.

sofixa 4y ago
> Of course another possibility would be that they just were not able to attack it successfully That was the official version of the Ukrainian side. > A.) breaking it would make the land bridge they are fighting the Russians for much more valuable, therefore the Russians would invest more resources to doing so, But it would make those Russians fighting there a nightmare to supply (and as we've seen, Russia logistics suck even without obstacles such as a big bodies of water), which will weaken their resistance. > B.) Breaking it might cut off the escape route for Crimean civilians and therefore turn them against the Ukrainians. Many already run away when Ukraine started hitting targets in Crimea, so it's safe to assume the rest don't want to evacuate. > C.) The bridge was expensive and in some far future they would probably like to make use of it themselves. Ukraine won't have a need for a Crimea - Russia land bridge in the foreseeable future, considering how long it will take for relations to be fully repaired.
- atoav 4y ago
  I think the three points might have held some truth in an earlier phase of the war. Now that the Ukrainians gained some ground in Lyman (important logistical train hub in the east), the advantages of cutting off the bridge might have multiplied. In hindsight cutting the east train hub first and then cutting the bridge certainly seems to be the better strategical order of operations than the other way around.

pvaldes 4y ago

A couple months ago an interesting video in youtube covered extensively why, being such strategical route this had not happened yet in seven months of war. Destroying the bridge was a major priority for the Ukrainian army. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C630mzkvwk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C630mzkvwk The situation has changed. With the North route cut, moving an hypothetical tactical nuclear bomb to Crimea or refresh troops is now much more difficult and dangerous. Supporting logistically the current Crimean troops with food or winter clothes is also much more expensive now

Taniwha 4y ago
And in August there was this: https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1561775821257379840 https://twitter.com/DefenceU/status/1561775821257379840
- Kailhus 4y ago
  Sorry but that video is hilarious
fit2rule 4y ago
tpmx 4y ago
> moving an hypothetical tactical nuclear bomb to Crimea or refresh troops is now much more difficult and dangerous Eh, no, unfortunately not. Moving small numbers of small things is still easy. The big impact that this attack had is that moving lots and lots of very heavy things suddenly gets a lot harder.

tromp 4y ago

The damage to the rail-bridge must be quite limited, since Russia’s transport ministry reports trains will be running again at 8pm local time tonight [1]. [1] https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/railway-traffic-over-crimea-bridge-to-resume-on-saturday-interfax https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/railway-traffic-over-c...

admissionsguy 4y ago
Maybe, maybe not, but it's been the standard operating procedure of Russian government to - in reaction to setbacks during this war - produce a gradient of progressively worse news instead of giving out the whole truth at once.
mmastrac 4y ago
If that's what the Russians are saying, it must be completely destroyed and unrepairable.
Balgair 4y ago
With fuel fires burning that long on the rail bridge, the steel is useless now. I haven't seen any images of RU fire-fighting on the bridge to put anything out. They'll need to replace the tracks at the very least. Likely they'll need to replace all of those sections of rail bridge. That would take ~2 weeks to a month in the US in peace time. As RU doesn't have span launchers, it's going to take them months to repair, if they even can get the pre-made spans to do so, what with sanctions. That bridge is kaput for at least 3 months, if not the whole war.
mlindner 4y ago
Even if they can run trains over it, they're not going to be able to run full loads safely. The fire will have weakened the steel, removing some of the margin of the bridge strength.

wrp 4y ago

Security camera footage of the explosion. (https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1578638952885784576 https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1578638952885784576) If it was a truck bomb, it would had to have been a suicide bomber, but I have doubts. Observe the small car that was just going past in the opposing lane at the instant of the explosion. It kept going and you can see it driving toward the camera. If it had been next to such a large truck bomb, it would have been blown off the road.

layer8 4y ago

A quick video showing the damage: https://nitter.net/Osinttechnical/status/1578605334062473216 https://nitter.net/Osinttechnical/status/1578605334062473216

Balgair 4y ago

UKR also seems to have struck at the only other rail line for southern Ukraine today [0,1]. If true, then the only supply route to Kherson and Crimea is the M14 highway and the one lane of the Kerch bridge. The M14 is problematic at it runs through areas of high UKR partisan activity. The one last lane on the Kerch bridge is also not likely to last long if it is going to be used as a main supply hub for all of RU operations, not only due to UKR strikes, but just normal wear and tear in winter. Supplying via sea is also a no-go as we saw with the sinking of the Moskova and the strikes against RU airbases in Crimea. There is likely no workable method of supply or reinforcement for RU forces in southern Ukraine this winter. [0] https://euromaidanpress.com/2022/10/08/himars-strike-destroys-fuel-station-in-russian-occupied-ilovaisk-videos/ https://euromaidanpress.com/2022/10/08/himars-strike-destroy... [1] https://twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/1578635797359898625 https://twitter.com/PhillipsPOBrien/status/15786357973598986...

drran 4y ago

The bridge, The bridge, The bridge is on fire! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adgx9wt63NY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adgx9wt63NY

diimdeep 4y ago

Real war is on the streets, people dying, and it is unacceptable. Meanwhile, propaganda in social media, with all these memes, jokes and threats, and are very disturbing and sickening, because they take worst from real war, inhuman and twisted jokes and package them in meme content for everyone to consume. All this was unimaginable 10 years ago. Also, in my opinion, the worst war propaganda content comes from pro Ukraine usernames, I can not explain why, and what is the point. Bridge is partially reopened for traffic [1] [1] https://www.rt.com/russia/564303-crimean-bridge-traffic-resumed/ https://www.rt.com/russia/564303-crimean-bridge-traffic-resu...

mlindner 4y ago
I find your post disingenuous and possibly propaganda itself, especially because you're quoting a Russian government news source in your post. The thing that is unacceptable is the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Nothing about Ukraine trying to push the invaders out of it's own country in any means they can is unacceptable. The memes and jokes in media are trying to turn something extremely grim into something a little more lighthearted to release stress. Otherwise people would lose their minds amidst all the tortures, mass murders of civilians and other activities being performed upon Ukrainian civilians by the Russian invaders. And yes, social media being heavily involved would be something unimaginable 10 years ago, because the proliferation of cell phones has now reached much of the world, giving us direct access to the horrors of war. And no, the worst war propaganda comes from Russia where they literally advocate for the elimination of Ukrainian civilians among other atrocities.
- diimdeep 4y ago
  > I find your post disingenuous and possibly propaganda itself, especially because you're quoting a Russian government news source in your post. Instead of humble meta discussion about propaganda, you mark my point of view as propaganda, which in turn reads as propaganda itself. I would happily quote some top western news media, only if it would not be completely one-sided. There is no democracy anymore there, where you paint one-sided picture and block other sides news sources. > The memes and jokes in media are trying to turn something extremely grim into something a little more lighthearted to release stress. I would argue that it is unethical, and mostly about warmongering and not stress release. > all the tortures, mass murders of civilians and other activities being performed upon Ukrainian civilians by the Russian invaders. > And no, worst war propaganda comes from Russia where they literally advocate for the elimination of Ukrainian civilians among other atrocities. Either that or you live in a media bubble so different, that our opinions exactly opposite. Thankfully, it is just an opinion, and not a ground truth.