Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

Discussions on other historical eras.
Locked
Tom Peters
Member
Posts: 1545
Joined: 04 Sep 2004, 22:18
Location: GA

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#46

Post by Tom Peters » 04 Sep 2022, 22:21

Cult Icon wrote:
04 Sep 2022, 17:37
Tom Peters wrote:
04 Sep 2022, 17:34

....and you wonder why the RU sources are complete shit. [facepalm]
I have your trolling on the ignore list. Put you on the ignore list once I saw your antics in the "Soviet concepts" thread. How many times have you quoted my posts? You quote my posts like an internet stalker.

What are your 'special sources'. I see nothing. Provide sources and not extreme anti-Russian bias. Then when the trolling stops you will get a conversation with me.
If you dont like me rebutting your posts, stop saying things that are deliberately childish. I dont post a lot on threads like this unless it is to call bullshit.

Once again, whether you like it or not, using official RU or UKR MOD as sources of info is just plain dumb. Claiming "rumors say" some random crap like Bradley IFV are present in a battle doesnt add to our information, it just adds more noise instead of signal.

Sources ? How about Oryx ? Unique pictoral evidence along with geolocation where possible. Oh wait, is that extreme anti-Russian bias ? You dont like Oryx ? Try https://lostarmour.info/ and see if you get a different answer. Last time I checked they gave about the same tallies for UKR losses.

How about RU sources ? We can imply the degree of RU losses by the extreme measures the RU MOD is taking:

- greatly widening the age limits of enlistment
- massively increased enlistment bonuses
- bringing back retired personnel (General Kanamat Botashev) who were cashiered for incompetance
- increasing participation in private armies (Wagner)
- recruiting from prisons

These are Russian actions. Do you dispute any of them ?

Ignore me if you wish, I do not care. I dont want this forum to degrade into rumormongering sites like Freerepublic or moonofalabama.

Mad Dog

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 12:24
Location: Russia

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#47

Post by Yuri » 05 Sep 2022, 05:42

Tom Peters wrote:
04 Sep 2022, 17:16
Yuri wrote:
03 Sep 2022, 18:12


In each motorized rifle regiment there is a sapper company, in which there is a platoon of bridge-laying - only four machines for laying the span of the bridge.
Each bridge-builder lays a span across a moat up to 11 (eleven) meters wide.
You can see how our bridge builders acted in this video clip starting at 33:00
https://youtu.be/N2VYhAg-w5g?t=1929

Further, each motorized rifle (tank) division has a sapper battalion. The technical equipment of such a battalion allows you to build a bridge with a span of up to 25 meters in less than an hour.
Remember, if the bridge supports are not damaged, then it will not be a big problem to transfer the span between the supports.
In our case, the Antonovsky Bridge is used by military vehicles.
Civilian vehicles are transported across the Dnieper on ferries because during one of the attacks, one civilian was killed and several other people were injured, and one was very seriously wounded.
Yuri, I am confident we all understand how a tracked bridgelayer works - which has nothing to do with the Antonovsky bridge. Each bridge span is about 45m in length. A tracked bridgelayer (MTU-72) gets you 18m. That might work for the spillway for the Nova Khalkosa bridge, but not here.

Each of those bridge spans are pre-stressed. When you damage a span in the manner that has happened, you are losing structural strength in that span. Slapping some concrete to fill the holes does not restore the original strength of the span. The rebar has been cut. You have deformed elements of the entire span. In areas outside of a combat zone, the bridge would be closed and the entire span would be replaced. That isnt going to happen until the war is over.

There is a good reason the RU are not using the bridge for heavy traffic - they dont want to damage it further. Ironically neither do the UKR. They both want the bridge largely intact for their own purposes. UKR is perfectly capable to knocking the damaged span down.

The RU are reduced to using ferries because they have no real choice.

Mad Dog
Hi,Tom.
BridgeAntonovskySkizze.jpg
I know what stressed concrete is (stressed rebar).
This is a drawing of the section of the span of the Antonovsky Bridge. The drawing will help to understand:
a) the bearing elements in the span are longitudinal beams- 4 pieces;
b) a solid concrete slab on top of the longitudinal beams is designed to evenly distribute the load on the longitudinal beams.
c) the holes in the concrete slab do not violate the bearing capacity of the entire span;
e) to stop movement along the span, it is necessary to destroy at least three of the four longitudinal beams in the span.And even on one beam it is possible to organize the passage of transport

The amount of explosive in the HIMARS MLRS rocket is not enough to destroy even one beam.
In the SMERCH MLRS or the TORNADO-S rocket, the explosive is four times larger - 96 kg. However, I believe that even the SMERCH MLRS missiles will not destroy the beam.
Here you need an aircraft bomb weighing 500 kg.
Last edited by Yuri on 05 Sep 2022, 10:11, edited 1 time in total.


User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 4506
Joined: 04 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#48

Post by Aida1 » 05 Sep 2022, 09:04

Yuri wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 05:42
Tom Peters wrote:
04 Sep 2022, 17:16
Yuri wrote:
03 Sep 2022, 18:12


In each motorized rifle regiment there is a sapper company, in which there is a platoon of bridge-laying - only four machines for laying the span of the bridge.
Each bridge-builder lays a span across a moat up to 11 (eleven) meters wide.
You can see how our bridge builders acted in this video clip starting at 33:00
https://youtu.be/N2VYhAg-w5g?t=1929

Further, each motorized rifle (tank) division has a sapper battalion. The technical equipment of such a battalion allows you to build a bridge with a span of up to 25 meters in less than an hour.
Remember, if the bridge supports are not damaged, then it will not be a big problem to transfer the span between the supports.
In our case, the Antonovsky Bridge is used by military vehicles.
Civilian vehicles are transported across the Dnieper on ferries because during one of the attacks, one civilian was killed and several other people were injured, and one was very seriously wounded.
Yuri, I am confident we all understand how a tracked bridgelayer works - which has nothing to do with the Antonovsky bridge. Each bridge span is about 45m in length. A tracked bridgelayer (MTU-72) gets you 18m. That might work for the spillway for the Nova Khalkosa bridge, but not here.

Each of those bridge spans are pre-stressed. When you damage a span in the manner that has happened, you are losing structural strength in that span. Slapping some concrete to fill the holes does not restore the original strength of the span. The rebar has been cut. You have deformed elements of the entire span. In areas outside of a combat zone, the bridge would be closed and the entire span would be replaced. That isnt going to happen until the war is over.

There is a good reason the RU are not using the bridge for heavy traffic - they dont want to damage it further. Ironically neither do the UKR. They both want the bridge largely intact for their own purposes. UKR is perfectly capable to knocking the damaged span down.

The RU are reduced to using ferries because they have no real choice.

Mad Dog
Hi,Tom.
BridgeAntonovskySkizze.jpg
I know what stressed concrete is (stressed rebar).
This is a drawing of the section of the span of the Antonovsky Bridge. The drawing will help to understand:
a) the bearing elements in the span are longitudinal beams- 4 pieces;
b) a solid concrete slab on top of the longitudinal beams is designed to evenly distribute the load on the longitudinal beams.
c) the holes in the concrete slab do not violate the bearing capacity of the entire span;
e) to stop movement along the span, it is necessary to destroy at least three of the four longitudinal beams in the span.And even on one beam it is possible to organize the passage of transport

The amount of explosive in the HAMERS MLRS rocket is not enough to destroy even one beam.
In the SMERCH MLRS or the TORNADO-S rocket, the explosive is four times larger - 96 kg. However, I believe that even the SMERCH MLRS missiles will not destroy the beam.
Here you need an aircraft bomb weighing 500 kg.
HIMARS can prevent the bridge from being used and eventually parts could collapse.

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 12:24
Location: Russia

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#49

Post by Yuri » 05 Sep 2022, 10:10

"can prevent" or not can prevent,
"could collapse" or not could collapse,
it's God's will for everything and as the dice will fall. But HIMARS will not help here too small for such a task.

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 4506
Joined: 04 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#50

Post by Aida1 » 05 Sep 2022, 12:06

Yuri wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 10:10
"can prevent" or not can prevent,
"could collapse" or not could collapse,
it's God's will for everything and as the dice will fall. But HIMARS will not help here too small for such a task.
Wishful thinking. HIMARS can make a bridge unusable. It is already doing that.

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 12:24
Location: Russia

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#51

Post by Yuri » 05 Sep 2022, 14:25

Aida1 wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 12:06
Yuri wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 10:10
"can prevent" or not can prevent,
"could collapse" or not could collapse,
it's God's will for everything and as the dice will fall. But HIMARS will not help here too small for such a task.
Wishful thinking. HIMARS can make a bridge unusable. It is already doing that.
Alas, it is no longer being done and, as a result, it will no longer be able to do it. According to Ukrainian sources: Air defense is too effective against HIMARS missiles and the use of these missiles has not justified itself. The Armed Forces of Ukraine refused to use HIMARS to destroy such a powerful structure as the Antonovsky Bridge.
M777_BridgAntonov_ M982 Excalibur.jpg
The Ukrainian armed forces have switched to using M777 and guided 155 mm Excalibur shells to destroy the Antonovsky Bridge.
But, frankly speaking, I doubt the effectiveness of these shells against such a structure as the Antonovsky Bridge.
They are too expensive to produce and too few of them. It is necessary to strike either with a heavy bomb, or to conduct a prolonged massive fire raid of towed and self-propelled artillery.
But let's see, we have nowhere to hurry, time is no running out for us.

Gooner1
Member
Posts: 2776
Joined: 06 Jan 2006, 13:24
Location: London

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#52

Post by Gooner1 » 05 Sep 2022, 14:42

Yuri wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 14:25

Alas, it is no longer being done and, as a result, it will no longer be able to do it. According to Ukrainian sources: Air defense is too effective against HIMARS missiles and the use of these missiles has not justified itself. The Armed Forces of Ukraine refused to use HIMARS to destroy such a powerful
Ukranian 'sources' or Russian ones?

Anyway, the bridge not looking too healthy

Image


User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 12:24
Location: Russia

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#53

Post by Yuri » 05 Sep 2022, 14:52

Gooner1 wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 14:42
Yuri wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 14:25

Alas, it is no longer being done and, as a result, it will no longer be able to do it. According to Ukrainian sources: Air defense is too effective against HIMARS missiles and the use of these missiles has not justified itself. The Armed Forces of Ukraine refused to use HIMARS to destroy such a powerful
Ukranian 'sources' or Russian ones?

Anyway, the bridge not looking too healthy

Image

I have a Ukrainian source.
But in this case, you have a Russian source.
And if you know how to distinguish the explosion of a HIMARS rocket from the rupture of a 155 mm projectile, then you would immediately understand that in this case there is a rupture of a 155 mm projectile and not a rocket.

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 4506
Joined: 04 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#54

Post by Aida1 » 05 Sep 2022, 14:59

Yuri wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 14:25
Aida1 wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 12:06
Yuri wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 10:10
"can prevent" or not can prevent,
"could collapse" or not could collapse,
it's God's will for everything and as the dice will fall. But HIMARS will not help here too small for such a task.
Wishful thinking. HIMARS can make a bridge unusable. It is already doing that.
Alas, it is no longer being done and, as a result, it will no longer be able to do it. According to Ukrainian sources: Air defense is too effective against HIMARS missiles and the use of these missiles has not justified itself. The Armed Forces of Ukraine refused to use HIMARS to destroy such a powerful structure as the Antonovsky Bridge.
M777_BridgAntonov_ M982 Excalibur.jpg
The Ukrainian armed forces have switched to using M777 and guided 155 mm Excalibur shells to destroy the Antonovsky Bridge.
But, frankly speaking, I doubt the effectiveness of these shells against such a structure as the Antonovsky Bridge.
They are too expensive to produce and too few of them. It is necessary to strike either with a heavy bomb, or to conduct a prolonged massive fire raid of towed and self-propelled artillery.
But let's see, we have nowhere to hurry, time is no running out for us.
SAM is not effective against HIMARS.
Last edited by Aida1 on 05 Sep 2022, 15:57, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#55

Post by Cult Icon » 05 Sep 2022, 15:09

The Kherson front has another day of muted activity. But it's still higher than prior to the Ukrainian counteroffensive, as the Ukrainians are actually attacking instead of being static all the time.

This offensive activity has temporarily slowed Russian efforts in the Donbass as well, despite the movement of 3rd Army Corps into region.

If this is a longer-term "offensive" like the Russians in the Donbass then operational-level results will take many weeks. But eventually the Ukrainians will run of equipment and their best troops which they stored up for this offensive, and then the Russians will be ahead of them if they don't achieve big gains towards Kherson. Russian success will depend on them holding their ground and inflicting catastrophic human and material losses on them, leading to a premature end to the offensive.

Even in the best case scenario with Kherson contested I doubt that they will be able to outfight the Russians with their exponentially superior fire support and air support, plus the great number of units south of the Dniprio. The Russians at the same time would raze Kherson like they did at Mariupol.

User avatar
Yuri
Member
Posts: 1969
Joined: 01 Jun 2006, 12:24
Location: Russia

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#56

Post by Yuri » 05 Sep 2022, 15:12

In the absence of a background of MLRS GRAD, URAGAN and SMERCH missiles, 100% of the 12-rocket salvo of HIMARS missiles is shot down. In the presence of a background of these missiles, about 60% of the HIMARS missiles are shot down.
The problem is the cost of anti-aircraft missiles, now they are still expensive. However, there is full confidence that special (small) anti-aircraft missiles against HIMARS missiles will be manufactured. An experienced company is already in business.
By the way, when I served in the infantry in 1972, anti-aircraft gunners from our company (armed with Strela-2 MANPADS) trained by shooting down missiles launched by the legendary Katyusha (BM-13).

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 4506
Joined: 04 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#57

Post by Aida1 » 05 Sep 2022, 15:15

Yuri wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 15:12
In the absence of a background of MLRS GRAD, URAGAN and SMERCH missiles, 100% of the 12-rocket salvo of HIMARS missiles is shot down. In the presence of a background of these missiles, about 60% of the HIMARS missiles are shot down.
The problem is the cost of anti-aircraft missiles, now they are still expensive. However, there is full confidence that special (small) anti-aircraft missiles against HIMARS missiles will be manufactured. An experienced company is already in business.
By the way, when I served in the infantry in 1972, anti-aircraft gunners from our company (armed with Strela-2 MANPADS) trained by shooting down missiles launched by the legendary Katyusha (BM-13).
SAM has not been effective against HIMARS. Actually, Sam systems themselves can be taken out by different weapon systems, including HIMARS.What you are stating is factually wrong.
Last edited by Aida1 on 05 Sep 2022, 16:15, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Aida1
Member
Posts: 4506
Joined: 04 Aug 2019, 09:46
Location: Brussels

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#58

Post by Aida1 » 05 Sep 2022, 15:16

Cult Icon wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 15:09
The Kherson front has another day of muted activity. But it's still higher than prior to the Ukrainian counteroffensive, as the Ukrainians are actually attacking instead of being static all the time.

This offensive activity has temporarily slowed Russian efforts in the Donbass as well, despite the movement of 3rd Army Corps into region.

If this is a longer-term "offensive" like the Russians in the Donbass then operational-level results will take many weeks. But eventually the Ukrainians will run of equipment and their best troops which they stored up for this offensive, and then the Russians will be ahead of them if they don't achieve big gains towards Kherson. Russian success will depend on them holding their ground and inflicting catastrophic human and material losses on them, leading to a premature end to the offensive.

Even in the best case scenario with Kherson contested I doubt that they will be able to outfight the Russians with their exponentially superior fire support and air support, plus the great number of units south of the Dniprio. The Russians at the same time would raze Kherson like they did at Mariupol.
Deluded prorussian wishful thinking as always.

User avatar
Cult Icon
Member
Posts: 4472
Joined: 08 Apr 2014, 20:00

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#59

Post by Cult Icon » 05 Sep 2022, 15:22

Yuri wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 15:12
In the absence of a background of MLRS GRAD, URAGAN and SMERCH missiles, 100% of the 12-rocket salvo of HIMARS missiles is shot down. In the presence of a background of these missiles, about 60% of the HIMARS missiles are shot down.
The problem is the cost of anti-aircraft missiles, now they are still expensive. However, there is full confidence that special (small) anti-aircraft missiles against HIMARS missiles will be manufactured. An experienced company is already in business.
By the way, when I served in the infantry in 1972, anti-aircraft gunners from our company (armed with Strela-2 MANPADS) trained by shooting down missiles launched by the legendary Katyusha (BM-13).
Interesting personal account.

Yuri it seems like the HIMARs stuff is more in the area of propaganda than of military significance. I have noticed that the Western/Russian media puts outsized attention towards the HIMARS but if there was no propaganda value they would have ignored it as 'business as usual'.

The Ukrainians could have used their Tochka U and their heavy MLRS against the same targets. If they did there would be little to rave about. The US army and marine corps have hundreds of HIMARS units. If we cared so much about Ukraine, as if it was our home ground these masses would have immediately be given instead of token quantities.

The Ukrainian political stance now is that they are attacking to drop observed fire rather than to take terrain.

Gooner1
Member
Posts: 2776
Joined: 06 Jan 2006, 13:24
Location: London

Re: Blowing the Kerch Causeway?

#60

Post by Gooner1 » 05 Sep 2022, 15:38

Yuri wrote:
05 Sep 2022, 15:12
In the absence of a background of MLRS GRAD, URAGAN and SMERCH missiles, 100% of the 12-rocket salvo of HIMARS missiles is shot down. In the presence of a background of these missiles, about 60% of the HIMARS missiles are shot down.
I haven't seen such confidence in Russian air defence since, well, before HIMARS arrived.

Russian air defence also complicated by the fact that they may not want to have their radar on all the time lest they come to some HARM.

Locked

Return to “Other eras”