That's just it, you don't know what's happening to the track under the burning cars; and you don't know if they have enough structural integrity to transmit the drawbar pull of the locomotives shortly ahead of them to the remainder of the train.Was there a derailment? Wouldn't the SOP for such an emergency be to get the heck off the bridge, if at all possible, to avoid further damage?
Been likewise thinking that. And I wonder how much 'zoom lens distance compression', or whatever the proper technical term for it is, is in the CCTV image.I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it wasn't a truck bomb. The main reason is that the truck doesn't appear to be in the right spot when the explosion hits in the Guardian video above.
Added to that, why did the engineer stop? Was there a derailment? Wouldn't the SOP for such an emergency be to get the heck off the bridge, if at all possible, to avoid further damage?
That's just it, you don't know what's happening to the track under the burning cars; and you don't know if they have enough structural integrity to transmit the drawbar pull of the locomotives shortly ahead of them to the remainder of the train.
It seems to me that it would be difficult, almost impossible, for a bomb on the highway bridge to catch, not one, but several railcars on fire simultaneously.
That was quite a blast, the tank cars could easily have been punctured by shrapnel. Also could have had burning material from the bomb itself strike them.
I agree. The more I look at the video the more it looks like the explosion is coming upwards from the lower right, out of view. But what ever caused it/how it was done is was a very large explosion. And as I noted in an earlier post the direction the truck was traveling was from the East, the Russian side of the bridge.I don't think it was a truck bomb. The Guardian footage shows the blast happening to the right of the road. All those glowing bits in the video are from the bomb[?] and they are moving from right to left. It had to be a large bomb. I have seen 500lb up to 2000lb bombs go off and there isn't a large fireball like that. But then they were hitting the ground rather than a bridge, and I was a few miles away, although there was a giant video screen showing the impacts from closer. The ATACMS use a 500lb warhead and the blast looks much larger than that. Trouble with that guesstament is the spans in the water don't look like they got hit with a large bomb. I wonder if a under water bomb might have done it. Maybe a bunch of sea mines.
Everyone seems to focus on that number. The warhead is the same used in the Harpoon and has a net explosive weight less than half that.ATACMS impact from a 500 lbs warhead - definitely maybe.
Well played, Mr. Danilov…well played!From an AP article:
"The secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, Oleksiy Danilov, tweeted a video with the Kerch Bridge on fire and Marilyn Monroe singing her “Happy Birthday Mr. President” song. Putin turned 70 on Friday."
Shoot, the Putin bastid is only 4 years older than me. I turned 66 on 10/02. Turning out to be as bad as Khrushchev and Stalin. Though admittedly Khrushchev probably didn't kill as many in the gulags and work camps as Stalin. Stalin was the "king" of killing Russians and native peoples in their territory claimed by Russia by famine and execution. Maybe 20 million dead. Makes Adolf Hitler look like a "wimps#it". Read about the "Great Purge" in the Soviet Union and the several famines that occurred over the years in that country in the name of the "Great Socialism". Pitiful, very pitiful!From an AP article:
"The secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, Oleksiy Danilov, tweeted a video with the Kerch Bridge on fire and Marilyn Monroe singing her “Happy Birthday Mr. President” song. Putin turned 70 on Friday."
A vintage year.And, there sure are a lot of 1956 babies. It seems half the people I know were born in '56.
And, there sure are a lot of 1956 babies. It seems half the people I know were born in '56.
Different kind of boom but...They didn’t call it a Boom for nothing.
Russia's Response to Kerch Bridge Attack
Oct 10, 2022 Russia has replaced the overall leader of military forces in Ukraine with General Sergei Surovikin. A military officer with a history of crushing protesters with armored vehicles and decimating cities with artillery in Chechnya and Syria.
That relates to something I just read,It's funny. I've seen a number of purported experts (honestly, I can't tell how expert they are) with 100% diametrically opposed positions.
But the strategy of disinformation, evasiveness and counteraccusation from Ukraine and its allies about the audacious attack allows them to sow disinformation or at least confusion — and keeps the Kremlin, as well as influential military bloggers and hawkish television presenters, guessing at Ukraine’s capabilities.
The more I look at the video of the explosion the more I'm convinced that the the explosion came from down below on the right side of the video.It's funny. I've seen a number of purported experts (honestly, I can't tell how expert they are) with 100% diametrically opposed positions. There's a camp that says that it was 100% a boat bomb, and a camp that says it was 100% a truck bomb. I suppose at some point we'll know. If it was a truck bomb, I really wonder what happened at the truck inspection before it got on the bridge. The truck bomb folks are all saying it was 2000+ pounds of explosives, which is several barrels worth of ammonium nitrate-fuel oil. It's kinda hard to hide that big a bomb.
Regardless, a bridge used to carry military equipment is absolutely fair game under the Geneva Conventions. Playgrounds and apartment blocks are not.
I agree with all of that. I also find it hard to square an unwitting driver with a truck inspection. I suppose they could have slotted the bomb barrels into a legitimate delivery of barrels to Crimea that had appropriate paperwork, but I would think that the risk of exposure is far, far higher. On the other hand, an unwitting driver isn't going to tip off the inspectors by acting weird at the checkpoint.Forensics aside, a truck bomb would require either remotely controlling the vehicle after it has passed the inspection point with the driver disembarked and vulnerable to capture, or a driver that was an unwitting enemy combatant. Suicide truck bombs do not play well in the western information space, so it would need to be covered up with an ongoing risk of exposure. It all seems much more complicated than a remotely controlled boat or even a missile, so I would go with Occam’s Razor on this one.
Yes, he makes a strong case that the object appearing in the water above the pylon was a barge. Others are less committal. The charring pattern on the road decks towards the railway seems to radiate away from the pylon which somehow survived the high explosive.Watch the video Modeltrains posted. (Who is the guy in the video by the way?)
Enter your email address to join: