Goes without saying, really.
Missile strikes on the bridge at Kherson did not destroy the bridge spans, only punching holes in the bridge surface, making it impassable to vehicles. You’re right that the railway bridge might be a better target from a logistics point of view, which might make manually-placed demolition charges or maritime drone seem less likely. That might therefore suggest vehicle bomb.
The seagoing drones are the most logical weapon. Lower spans were targeted because of the limited explosive power. Reaching the upper/higher rail spans wasn’t practical.
For the site of last year’s explosion, height would be an issue:
However, at the location of the recent explosion, there does not appear to be a height difference:
Ukraine have said they did it with maritime drones:
whats up with his right hand? … sits there like a piece of ham …
I think that depends on what section of the bridge you are …
Both sections of the bridge are much higher over the maritime navigation channel between Tuzla Island and Crimea. The traffic portion climbs to the additional height quite steeply, while the railway of course climbs much more slowly over a longer distance. This results in the rail bridge being significantly higher than the traffic bridge in some places.
This strike occurred between Tuzla and the Russian mainland, where both bridges are much less elevated since they need not accommodate maritime traffic.
Could be related:
Yeah right, Vlad:
Putin feels that better military targets are Ukraine schools and hospitals.
The sooner this madman is defenestrated the better.
In what world do all military decision makers have perfect judgment regarding strategic targets?
I’m thankful the US and NATO got this wake up call now. There was far too much complacency there wouldn’t be another prolonged war.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/07/18/politics/ukraine-critical-ammo-shortage-us-nato-grapple/index.html
The ISW report on the damage to the bridge:
Summary:
No damage to railway.
Minor damage to the roadway. This is affecting primarily the civilian tourists rushing to leave Crimea, and causing large traffic jams in both routes of supply (the bridge over the strait, and the “land bridge” through the conquered areas).So this also slows military vehicles , and temporarily hinders the Russian army’s logistics.
My question is -What is the role of Crimean vacations in Russian society? Are the vacationers there just doing a typical family trip to a sea shore, like Americans going to Disneyland? Or is it a cultural and political thing that Putin encourages, to show Russian ownership of Crimea ?
And will Putin continue to encourage civilians to travel there, to keep his political propaganda machine going, even if it interferes with his own military needs?
Yep. The Black Sea has for a long time been the southern summer beach destination for Russia. Odessa in particular was famous for its summer tourism. But Crimea in general was a major destination as well. Here’s a 2014 BBC article talking about how in the aftermath of the Russian takeover the tension and sanctions was tanking traditional tourism, even though nationalist Russians were deliberately vacationing there as a show of support. Russia has definitely been pushing tourism in Crimea since then, Odessa being a poor choice these days for Russians. But even subsidized tourism becomes problematic in war zones.
This morning I was half paying attention to a news clip on YouTube from yesterday, that in passing mentioned that the bridge appeared to have been attacked from the north. Ukraine, of course, has no current access to the Sea of Azov. I’m trying to read up on the attack now, but am not finding the claim I heard reported this morning repeated on other media sources. Since I didn’t catch the source, I’m going to conclude it was probably Ukrainian misinformation. Has anyone else heard or read anything about the direction of attack?
Well, @Walken_After_Midnight’s linked Tweet speculates that a group of small fast-moving boats SE of Snake Island may be related to the attack.
If there is a connection, that would imply that the Ukrainian USVs rounded the coast of Crimea and artacked the bridge from the south.
Wait, people are going to Crimea for vacations right now? I mean, I know that the peninsula isn’t exactly on the front lines, but it’s still very much a part of the war zone. Surely, the Russian state media can’t delude them into thinking the war is going that well.
Chronos: I dunno where the “tourist areas” of the Crimean coast are, but assuming they’re on the southern end of the peninsula, they’re roughly 150 miles from the front. So maybe to the average Russian it’s worth the relatively small risk. Unless, of course, the Kerch Strait Bridge is taken out of commission; then they’re screwed.
I seem to recall photos of tourists on a beach looking at the plumes of smoke from an attack on the Saky airbase in Crimea last August. That area is on the western coast of Crimea, significantly closer to the front lines as they exist now (maybe 80-90 miles as the crow flies).
But I’m with you … if I’m a Russian, I don’t care how badly I want a beach vacation in 2023. I ain’t heading to Crimea.
“War? what war, gospodin? Haven’t you been watching the news on tv? There is no war on. There is a special denazification operation going on in some parts of so-called Ukraine, but the Crimea is in Russia.”
Bulgarian 155mm NATO standard HE shells?? Why yes, probably, with a small fig leaf of deniability.