On 16/10/2022 04:21, Don Y wrote:
> On 10/15/2022 10:05 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>> On 14/10/2022 17:11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 11:45:10 AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 7:27:19 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 10:14:41 AM UTC-4,
>>>>> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
>>>>>> Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>> news:2552e00e-d982-4e98...@googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>>>>> Does Ukraine have some Stealth Missiles not detected by Russian
>>>>>>> air defence? We might have to wait until the war is over to get
>>>>>>> answers.
>>>>>> If you think that Russia has good detection systems set up as they
>>>>>> retreat, you are even more stupid than I originally estimated.
>>>>> I'm pretty sure they're not going to retreat from Crimea. It's an
>>>>> autonomous republic within the Russian Federation and has been for
>>>>> 8 years now.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Saky airbase is about as permanent an installation as you can
>>>>> get. It's not some hastily set up field station of a retreating army.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saky_(air_base)
>>>> And the Crimea bridge is the most heavily protected site in the
>>>> world, with many air defence systems in place, if only they are
>>>> effective.
>>>
>>> You need a big bomb to disable the bridge. The experts are estimating
>>> about 50,000 lbs was used, and that's about right. A missile is
>>> comparatively a firecracker compared to that- maybe create a pothole.
>>>
>>> The bridge is not vital. It was only recently completed. A big barge
>>> ferry is good enough for them.
>>
>> Conjecture in the UK is that the bomb was delivered either by boat,
>> barge or aquatic drone see the second video on this page. There is a
>> wake near one of the supports just before the big bang.
>>
>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63192757
>>
>> Even on the first video you see substantial amounts of water raining
>> down from the right which would be consistent with an explosion
>> underneath the road deck (exploiting the design of a bridge to damage
>> it). Gravity acts downwards so sudden upwards forces can do a lot more
>> damage to the structure on the recoil when it falls back down again.
>
> Big signs of fire/explosion on top of the roadway -- yet
> none underneath??
>
> <https://twitter.com/N_Waters89/status/1579196213156810752/photo/2>

Possibly because any soot that might have been deposited on the
underside was immediately pressure jetted off again by the water that
you see raining back down onto the road deck a few seconds later.

Water and powerful shockwaves can do strange things.

If the explosion had been on the road itself I reckon any shockwave
hitting the water would drive water away from the bridge not upwards.

Much of the soot seen on the road deck probably comes from the fires
afterwards. If we assume it was a good quality military explosive there
will not be much soot left behind. We may never know quite how it was
done unless someone who designed the device explains how they did it.

I'm a bit surprised the extent to which both cameras were completely
blinded by the detonation flash. Only the foreground girder shading
remains visible in that frame.

>> I doubt if anything even using military high explosives that could be
>> manhandled off the back of a lorry would give such a very big bang.
>

--
Regards,
Martin Brown

On 10/16/2022 1:44 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> On 16/10/2022 04:21, Don Y wrote:
>> On 10/15/2022 10:05 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
>>> On 14/10/2022 17:11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 11:45:10 AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 7:27:19 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 10:14:41 AM UTC-4,
>>>>>> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
>>>>>>> Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> news:2552e00e-d982-4e98...@googlegroups.com:
>>>
>>>>>>>> Does Ukraine have some Stealth Missiles not detected by Russian
>>>>>>>> air defence? We might have to wait until the war is over to get
>>>>>>>> answers.
>>>>>>> If you think that Russia has good detection systems set up as they
>>>>>>> retreat, you are even more stupid than I originally estimated.
>>>>>> I'm pretty sure they're not going to retreat from Crimea. It's an
>>>>>> autonomous republic within the Russian Federation and has been for 8
>>>>>> years now.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The Saky airbase is about as permanent an installation as you can get.
>>>>>> It's not some hastily set up field station of a retreating army.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saky_(air_base)
>>>>> And the Crimea bridge is the most heavily protected site in the world,
>>>>> with many air defence systems in place, if only they are effective.
>>>>
>>>> You need a big bomb to disable the bridge. The experts are estimating about
>>>> 50,000 lbs was used, and that's about right. A missile is comparatively a
>>>> firecracker compared to that- maybe create a pothole.
>>>>
>>>> The bridge is not vital. It was only recently completed. A big barge ferry
>>>> is good enough for them.
>>>
>>> Conjecture in the UK is that the bomb was delivered either by boat, barge or
>>> aquatic drone see the second video on this page. There is a wake near one of
>>> the supports just before the big bang.
>>>
>>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63192757
>>>
>>> Even on the first video you see substantial amounts of water raining down
>>> from the right which would be consistent with an explosion underneath the
>>> road deck (exploiting the design of a bridge to damage it). Gravity acts
>>> downwards so sudden upwards forces can do a lot more damage to the structure
>>> on the recoil when it falls back down again.
>>
>> Big signs of fire/explosion on top of the roadway -- yet
>> none underneath??
>>
>> <https://twitter.com/N_Waters89/status/1579196213156810752/photo/2>
>
> Possibly because any soot that might have been deposited on the underside was
> immediately pressure jetted off again by the water that you see raining back
> down onto the road deck a few seconds later.

Dunno. None of the photos seem to have precise location identifications.
It seems like lots of random imagery is being pasted together and pitched
as indicative of something conclusive (I particularly enjoyed the X-ray
imagery of the alleged truck bomb).

> Water and powerful shockwaves can do strange things.
>
> If the explosion had been on the road itself I reckon any shockwave hitting the
> water would drive water away from the bridge not upwards.

Unless it drove something (bridge part) *into* the water.

> Much of the soot seen on the road deck probably comes from the fires
> afterwards. If we assume it was a good quality military explosive there will
> not be much soot left behind. We may never know quite how it was done unless
> someone who designed the device explains how they did it.

I don't think the "designer" would necessarily have *expected* the
results we see -- though he may be able to rationalize them, after
the fact.

I look at this and try to identify motive, means and opportunity,
*possibly* leveraging a resolution of any one to help explain the
others.

It seems as if a Ukrainian attack would have chosen a different
target (e.g., the railroad crossing instead of the roadway).
The height of the RR span, at that point, isn't a deterrent as
they could have chosen a point before the RR lines had climbed
to that elevation-over-water.

And, you'd think they would have approached (and attacked) from the south.

A *Russian* attack (false flag), OTOH, would likely have AVOIDED the
critical RR supply line in favor of just "drumming up outrage"
by damaging the less important roadway. (if you assume internal
factions are trying to force Putin's hand)

I'd like to see an assessment of the amount of explosive force
involved and an analysis of the LIKELY size/volume of an explosive
(available to Ukranian vs. Russian actors) required to do that
much damage. That would help size the delivery vehicle.

Finally, an assessment of the timing (not just "now" vs. "then"
but time of day, etc.) and why that was "opportune" (assuming
one would choose the BEST time for such an attack)

So far, all I see are speculation (and my limited surfing
has turned up all sorts of wild conspiracy theories that
each "smell bad" logically).

One can bet that the militaries (of many nations) have better
assessments of these data even if they aren't publicly sharing
them.

What can't be ignored is that taking down all bridge traffic is
not inconceivable and may be far more likely than Putin may
want to admit, given their inability to protect against THIS
incident.

> I'm a bit surprised the extent to which both cameras were completely blinded by
> the detonation flash. Only the foreground girder shading remains visible in
> that frame.

It would be nice if there was high-speed video available for a more
fine-grained analysis. A lot can happen in the time of a single
video frame!

>>> I doubt if anything even using military high explosives that could be
>>> manhandled off the back of a lorry would give such a very big bang.
>>
>

On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 11:41:26 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 10/15/2022 8:30 PM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> > On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 4:08:31 PM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >> On 10/15/2022 8:23 AM, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> >>> On Saturday, October 15, 2022 at 10:15:10 AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Not an expert on high explosives but it seems like getting a sub to
> >>>> navigate in a shallow sea (6-7 fathoms), undetected AND carry a munition
> >>>> sufficient to cause that sort of damage AND approach from the north
> >>>> (russian held territory) AND target the roadway instead of the railway AND
> >>>> escape AND cause the blast damage to appear on the TOP of the roadway
> >>>> surface seems a bit too far-fetched.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.pci.org/PCI/Design_Resources/Building_Engineering_Resources/Design_for_Blast_Resistance.aspx#:~:text=Precast%20concrete%20provides%20excellent%20Anti,structures%20providing%20protection%20and%20resiliency.
> >>>
> >>> Not all concrete is created equal. Use your common sense. In addition to
> >>> constant exposure to highly corrosive influences in the sea water and air,
> >>> the bridge components need to be about the strongest available to handle the
> >>> dead load of the bridge itself as well as the live load of fast moving heavy
> >>> vehicles. Those piers they have are positively HUGE. The equivalent weight
> >>> of TNT explosives required to knock stuff like that down is an integer
> >>> multiple of the weight of the concrete- so that makes it a really large
> >>> amount.
> >> Had you been less aggressive in your quoting, you'd have found:
> >> I bet it's a mini-sub firing stealth missiles from the north. Same type
> >> ---------------------------------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >> that hit the Saky airfield.
> >> I.e., something that came OUT of the water to target the structures
> >> atop the piers:
> >> AND cause the blast damage to appear on the TOP of the roadway
> >
> > There is this:
> >
> > https://news.usni.org/2022/10/11/suspected-ukrainian-explosive-sea-drone-made-from-jet-ski-parts
> >
> > UK gave them some underwater drones, but they were strictly to be used for mine clearing.
> >
> > Ukraine Navy otherwise doesn't have any submarines.
> <https://www.coffeeordie.com/ukraine-kamikaze-drone-boats>
>
> But, none of this is really "evidence".

Some group in Russia did it to justify the bombardment of Ukrainian population centers.

On Sunday, October 16, 2022 at 5:21:47 AM UTC-4, Don Y wrote:
> On 10/16/2022 1:44 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> > On 16/10/2022 04:21, Don Y wrote:
> >> On 10/15/2022 10:05 AM, Martin Brown wrote:
> >>> On 14/10/2022 17:11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> >>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 11:45:10 AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
> >>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 7:27:19 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
> >>>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 10:14:41 AM UTC-4,
> >>>>>> DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
> >>>>>>> Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote in
> >>>>>>> news:2552e00e-d982-4e98...@googlegroups.com:
> >>>
> >>>>>>>> Does Ukraine have some Stealth Missiles not detected by Russian
> >>>>>>>> air defence? We might have to wait until the war is over to get
> >>>>>>>> answers.
> >>>>>>> If you think that Russia has good detection systems set up as they
> >>>>>>> retreat, you are even more stupid than I originally estimated.
> >>>>>> I'm pretty sure they're not going to retreat from Crimea. It's an
> >>>>>> autonomous republic within the Russian Federation and has been for 8
> >>>>>> years now.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The Saky airbase is about as permanent an installation as you can get.
> >>>>>> It's not some hastily set up field station of a retreating army.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saky_(air_base)
> >>>>> And the Crimea bridge is the most heavily protected site in the world,
> >>>>> with many air defence systems in place, if only they are effective.
> >>>>
> >>>> You need a big bomb to disable the bridge. The experts are estimating about
> >>>> 50,000 lbs was used, and that's about right. A missile is comparatively a
> >>>> firecracker compared to that- maybe create a pothole.
> >>>>
> >>>> The bridge is not vital. It was only recently completed. A big barge ferry
> >>>> is good enough for them.
> >>>
> >>> Conjecture in the UK is that the bomb was delivered either by boat, barge or
> >>> aquatic drone see the second video on this page. There is a wake near one of
> >>> the supports just before the big bang.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63192757
> >>>
> >>> Even on the first video you see substantial amounts of water raining down
> >>> from the right which would be consistent with an explosion underneath the
> >>> road deck (exploiting the design of a bridge to damage it). Gravity acts
> >>> downwards so sudden upwards forces can do a lot more damage to the structure
> >>> on the recoil when it falls back down again.
> >>
> >> Big signs of fire/explosion on top of the roadway -- yet
> >> none underneath??
> >>
> >> <https://twitter.com/N_Waters89/status/1579196213156810752/photo/2>
> >
> > Possibly because any soot that might have been deposited on the underside was
> > immediately pressure jetted off again by the water that you see raining back
> > down onto the road deck a few seconds later.
> Dunno. None of the photos seem to have precise location identifications.
> It seems like lots of random imagery is being pasted together and pitched
> as indicative of something conclusive (I particularly enjoyed the X-ray
> imagery of the alleged truck bomb).
> > Water and powerful shockwaves can do strange things.
> >
> > If the explosion had been on the road itself I reckon any shockwave hitting the
> > water would drive water away from the bridge not upwards.
> Unless it drove something (bridge part) *into* the water.
> > Much of the soot seen on the road deck probably comes from the fires
> > afterwards. If we assume it was a good quality military explosive there will
> > not be much soot left behind. We may never know quite how it was done unless
> > someone who designed the device explains how they did it.
> I don't think the "designer" would necessarily have *expected* the
> results we see -- though he may be able to rationalize them, after
> the fact.
>
> I look at this and try to identify motive, means and opportunity,
> *possibly* leveraging a resolution of any one to help explain the
> others.
>
> It seems as if a Ukrainian attack would have chosen a different
> target (e.g., the railroad crossing instead of the roadway).
> The height of the RR span, at that point, isn't a deterrent as
> they could have chosen a point before the RR lines had climbed
> to that elevation-over-water.
>
> And, you'd think they would have approached (and attacked) from the south..
>
> A *Russian* attack (false flag), OTOH, would likely have AVOIDED the
> critical RR supply line in favor of just "drumming up outrage"
> by damaging the less important roadway. (if you assume internal
> factions are trying to force Putin's hand)
>
> I'd like to see an assessment of the amount of explosive force
> involved and an analysis of the LIKELY size/volume of an explosive
> (available to Ukranian vs. Russian actors) required to do that
> much damage. That would help size the delivery vehicle.
>
> Finally, an assessment of the timing (not just "now" vs. "then"
> but time of day, etc.) and why that was "opportune" (assuming
> one would choose the BEST time for such an attack)
>
> So far, all I see are speculation (and my limited surfing
> has turned up all sorts of wild conspiracy theories that
> each "smell bad" logically).
>
> One can bet that the militaries (of many nations) have better
> assessments of these data even if they aren't publicly sharing
> them.
>
> What can't be ignored is that taking down all bridge traffic is
> not inconceivable and may be far more likely than Putin may
> want to admit, given their inability to protect against THIS
> incident.
> > I'm a bit surprised the extent to which both cameras were completely blinded by
> > the detonation flash. Only the foreground girder shading remains visible in
> > that frame.
> It would be nice if there was high-speed video available for a more
> fine-grained analysis. A lot can happen in the time of a single
> video frame!
> >>> I doubt if anything even using military high explosives that could be
> >>> manhandled off the back of a lorry would give such a very big bang.
> >>
> >

I don't see the road deck being lifted, so that theory is out. HE doesn't flash, thermite does. HE would produce a distorted image looking trough its compression blast wave, I don't see any of that. HE would have wiped that traffic right of the road, none of that happened. A much, much smaller concentrated thermite charge to cut those I-beams would produce all that flash. Ukraine frogmen scaled the pier and installed the charges. This stuff about most surveilled bridge in the world is bs.

On Sat, 15 Oct 2022 08:15:07 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 8:23:48 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 03:01:01 -0700 (PDT), Ed Lee
>> <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Ukraine claims responsibility of Saky airfield attack. No air defence alarmed and/or activated.
>> >
>> >https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62821044
>> >
>> >The supposed truck bomb driver is alive and well, under Russian custody. He must be superman to survive such blast from his truck.
>> >
>> >https://www.npr.org/2022/10/13/1128625322/crimea-bridge-attack-theories
>> >
>> >Enforcer has detail analysis of damages, likely side impact of some projectile.
>> >
>> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6ltMCxKOPU
>> >
>> >Does Ukraine have some Stealth Missiles not detected by Russian air defence? We might have to wait until the war is over to get answers.
>> The Russian military equipment, and the operators, are junk. Probably
>> all the tubes were stolen years ago.
>
>To be sold on a black market or EBay... They probably have miscreants "throwing" military successes to Ukraine as well as giving them weapons- FOR A PRICE. "We're going to do a tactical withdrawal today- and leave those ammo depots right where they are. We're not taking them."
>
>In Chechnya relatively high ranking Russian military were selling their advanced SAMs to the separatists.

One advantage to the US style political parties is that they police
one another for corruption. China and Russia are kleptocracies.

I worked on a construction site in the USSR for a while. Not many
people worked much but they stole anything portable. "It doesn't
belong to anybody."

On Sat, 15 Oct 2022 12:55:37 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:

>On 10/14/2022 8:23 PM, John Larkin wrote:
>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 03:01:01 -0700 (PDT), Ed Lee
>> <edward.ming.lee@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Ukraine claims responsibility of Saky airfield attack. No air defence alarmed and/or activated.
>>>
>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62821044
>>>
>>> The supposed truck bomb driver is alive and well, under Russian custody. He must be superman to survive such blast from his truck.
>>>
>>> https://www.npr.org/2022/10/13/1128625322/crimea-bridge-attack-theories
>>>
>>> Enforcer has detail analysis of damages, likely side impact of some projectile.
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6ltMCxKOPU
>>>
>>> Does Ukraine have some Stealth Missiles not detected by Russian air defence? We might have to wait until the war is over to get answers.
>>
>> The Russian military equipment, and the operators, are junk. Probably
>> all the tubes were stolen years ago.
>>
>
>Whew, good thing the DOD spent like 2 trillion dollars over the past 30
>years to "keep up" with all their "advanced hardware."

Our military stuff mostly works when it matters.

On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 3:35:04 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Oct 2022 12:55:37 -0400, bitrex <us...@example.net> wrote:
>
> >On 10/14/2022 8:23 PM, John Larkin wrote:
> >> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 03:01:01 -0700 (PDT), Ed Lee
> >> <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ukraine claims responsibility of Saky airfield attack. No air defence alarmed and/or activated.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62821044
> >>>
> >>> The supposed truck bomb driver is alive and well, under Russian custody. He must be superman to survive such blast from his truck.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.npr.org/2022/10/13/1128625322/crimea-bridge-attack-theories
> >>>
> >>> Enforcer has detail analysis of damages, likely side impact of some projectile.
> >>>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6ltMCxKOPU
> >>>
> >>> Does Ukraine have some Stealth Missiles not detected by Russian air defence? We might have to wait until the war is over to get answers.
> >>
> >> The Russian military equipment, and the operators, are junk. Probably
> >> all the tubes were stolen years ago.
> >>
> >
> >Whew, good thing the DOD spent like 2 trillion dollars over the past 30
> >years to "keep up" with all their "advanced hardware."
> Our military stuff mostly works when it matters.

So they want you to think.

Take the first Patriot AA missile as an example. It did work flawlessly with it's flawed design to guarantee it couldn't shoot down a flying barn, so to speak.

Theodore Postal explains:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Postol#Patriot_missiles_in_Operation_Desert_Storm

They had some other wirelessly guided aerial bomb in First Gulf. There was no end of official videos showing this thing going right into target building openings and ventilation grills causing a horrendous explosion that obliterated the entire structure. It was only later the Air Force admitted the videos represented just 3% of the drops.

John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in
news:18brkhd1dmkajtt3l1t7rm28vqv9jt4tm5@4ax.com:

> One advantage to the US style political parties is that they police
> one another for corruption.

UTTER BULLSHIT.

MAGA is LAME.

If you do not state against them, you are for them.

Their anti-semetic fascist platform needs to be called out and
rebuked.

FUCK ALL ReThugLeTards, and if you do not agree, then you are one
of them. And you should be exterminated along with them.

You all need to be fed the same hatred you spout. So if you agree
with Trump, you are an anti-semite.

So one lset fucking time, we need to lower ourselves to your level
to put an end to the hatred. Their is no riding the fucking fence on
this.

<https://youtu.be/Ic8tCP2O0qU>

Fred Bloggs wrote:
> On Monday, October 17, 2022 at 3:35:04 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
>> On Sat, 15 Oct 2022 12:55:37 -0400, bitrex <us...@example.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/14/2022 8:23 PM, John Larkin wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2022 03:01:01 -0700 (PDT), Ed Lee
>>>> <edward....@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Ukraine claims responsibility of Saky airfield attack. No air
>>>>> defence alarmed and/or activated.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-62821044
>>>>>
>>>>> The supposed truck bomb driver is alive and well, under
>>>>> Russian custody. He must be superman to survive such blast
>>>>> from his truck.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.npr.org/2022/10/13/1128625322/crimea-bridge-attack-theories
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
Enforcer has detail analysis of damages, likely side impact of some
projectile.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6ltMCxKOPU
>>>>>
>>>>> Does Ukraine have some Stealth Missiles not detected by
>>>>> Russian air defence? We might have to wait until the war is
>>>>> over to get answers.
>>>>
>>>> The Russian military equipment, and the operators, are junk.
>>>> Probably all the tubes were stolen years ago.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Whew, good thing the DOD spent like 2 trillion dollars over the
>>> past 30 years to "keep up" with all their "advanced hardware."
>> Our military stuff mostly works when it matters.
>
> So they want you to think.
>
> Take the first Patriot AA missile as an example. It did work
> flawlessly with it's flawed design to guarantee it couldn't shoot
> down a flying barn, so to speak.
>
> Theodore Postal explains:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Postol#Patriot_missiles_in_Operation_Desert_Storm
>
> They had some other wirelessly guided aerial bomb in First Gulf.
> There was no end of official videos showing this thing going right
> into target building openings and ventilation grills causing a
> horrendous explosion that obliterated the entire structure. It was
> only later the Air Force admitted the videos represented just 3% of
> the drops.
>
>
>
>

All weapons are unknown until used in the field.

Don't look into the Mark 14 torpedo then:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQ5Ru7Zu_1I&t=4s

Wicked-good treatise on the thing.

--
Les Cargill

A follow-up.

Recently, videos from some USVs (Unmanned Surface Vehicles) apparently
attacking the Russian Black-Sea fleet near Sevastopol (Crimea) were
released.

..<https://twitter.com/bayraktar_1love/status/1586356804673339392>

..<https://twitter.com/uaweapons/status/1572683229366308864>

..<https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/2022/09/ukraines-new-weapon-to-strike-russian-navy-in-sevastopol/>

This same kind of USV may have been used to attack the Kerch bridge
between Crimea and Russia.

Joe Gwinn

On Sat, 15 Oct 2022 19:37:27 -0400, Joe Gwinn <joegwinn@comcast.net>
wrote:

>On Sat, 15 Oct 2022 18:05:35 +0100, Martin Brown
><'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>On 14/10/2022 17:11, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 11:45:10 AM UTC-4, Ed Lee wrote:
>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 7:27:19 AM UTC-7, Fred Bloggs wrote:
>>>>> On Friday, October 14, 2022 at 10:14:41 AM UTC-4, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
>>>>>> Ed Lee <edward....@gmail.com> wrote in
>>>>>> news:2552e00e-d982-4e98...@googlegroups.com:
>>
>>>>>>> Does Ukraine have some Stealth Missiles not detected by Russian
>>>>>>> air defence? We might have to wait until the war is over to get
>>>>>>> answers.
>>>>>> If you think that Russia has good detection systems set up as they
>>>>>> retreat, you are even more stupid than I originally estimated.
>>>>> I'm pretty sure they're not going to retreat from Crimea. It's an autonomous republic within the Russian Federation and has been for 8 years now.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Saky airbase is about as permanent an installation as you can get. It's not some hastily set up field station of a retreating army.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saky_(air_base)
>>>> And the Crimea bridge is the most heavily protected site in the world, with many air defence systems in place, if only they are effective.
>>>
>>> You need a big bomb to disable the bridge. The experts are estimating about 50,000 lbs was used, and that's about right. A missile is comparatively a firecracker compared to that- maybe create a pothole.
>>>
>>> The bridge is not vital. It was only recently completed. A big barge ferry is good enough for them.
>>
>>Conjecture in the UK is that the bomb was delivered either by boat,
>>barge or aquatic drone see the second video on this page. There is a
>>wake near one of the supports just before the big bang.
>>
>><https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-63192757>
>>
>>Even on the first video you see substantial amounts of water raining
>>down from the right which would be consistent with an explosion
>>underneath the road deck (exploiting the design of a bridge to damage
>>it). Gravity acts downwards so sudden upwards forces can do a lot more
>>damage to the structure on the recoil when it falls back down again.
>>
>>I doubt if anything even using military high explosives that could be
>>manhandled off the back of a lorry would give such a very big bang.
>
>I agree. Also, if it were a truck bomb, the bridge decking would be
>ripped up and the guardrails torn off, but the decks look just fine
>and the guardrails et al are still there.
>
>Joe Gwinn