Is Ukraine about to have a war?
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,975
Received 2,884 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,975
Received 2,884 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
Facinating analysis of the damage to the road bridge, they believe they were Excaliber shells that hit it.
Ok this is the translation of each section of the link below, the bottom link is in English
Damage assessment
Ok this is the translation of each section of the link below, the bottom link is in English
About the damaged Antonovsky Bridge in Kherson. I was wondering if it could really be MLRS missiles that caused the damage we see in the pictures.
A MLRS has 90kg HE. Here it is tested against a smaller bridge. But the road surface should be of equivalent dimensions.
The size of the holes varies. Some holes have not penetrated but are more like pits. I guess you try different settings on the spark plugs. You can set the ignition on directly or with delayed ignition, as the grenade penetrates into the construction.
The big hole on the left is probably two or three hits. Here you can see the small pits better.
How much damage does a 155mm M982 Excalibur grenade do? The grenade is precision-guided and guided towards its target using GPS or laser. The grenade strikes at a high angle, which is consistent with images of the damage where you do not see the butterfly pattern from low angles.
The grenade is penetrating. "Increment I has a unitary penetrating warhead for use against stationary targets" It can penetrate at different depths before it detonates. Below are pictures of a "regular" 155mm grenade that penetrates concrete and then detonates.
Here, the grenade penetrates 150 cm of concrete with rebar. The width of the hole is at least one meter.
Here the penetration is 56cm. The width maybe 1 meter?
Here 62cm penetration. Width?
At an angle of 20 degrees, the penetration decreases to 37 cm.
The size of the holes matches quite well with the test of 155mm grenades against concrete.
A MLRS has 90kg HE. Here it is tested against a smaller bridge. But the road surface should be of equivalent dimensions.
The size of the holes varies. Some holes have not penetrated but are more like pits. I guess you try different settings on the spark plugs. You can set the ignition on directly or with delayed ignition, as the grenade penetrates into the construction.
The big hole on the left is probably two or three hits. Here you can see the small pits better.
How much damage does a 155mm M982 Excalibur grenade do? The grenade is precision-guided and guided towards its target using GPS or laser. The grenade strikes at a high angle, which is consistent with images of the damage where you do not see the butterfly pattern from low angles.
The grenade is penetrating. "Increment I has a unitary penetrating warhead for use against stationary targets" It can penetrate at different depths before it detonates. Below are pictures of a "regular" 155mm grenade that penetrates concrete and then detonates.
Here, the grenade penetrates 150 cm of concrete with rebar. The width of the hole is at least one meter.
Here the penetration is 56cm. The width maybe 1 meter?
Here 62cm penetration. Width?
At an angle of 20 degrees, the penetration decreases to 37 cm.
The size of the holes matches quite well with the test of 155mm grenades against concrete.
Damage assessment
Yeah, you're right. I did the calc in pounds/feet and then converted to metric. Early morning, must have made an error somewhere.
What's wrong with that ? The reinforcement comes from the metal and it doesn't really matter (AFAIK ) if it's rather twisted. Filling in the holes with concrete would allow passage of vehicles, but I have no idea up to what weight limit.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,975
Received 2,884 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
Nope, try reading my second link in 7223.
The bridge deck is supported along its length by 4 hollow box sections, these carry the weight of the bridge deck and the loads carrried upon it, two of these are damaged and punctured so the structural integrity of the length of bridge is compromised, a simple patch job is not going to do it.
The bridge deck is supported along its length by 4 hollow box sections, these carry the weight of the bridge deck and the loads carrried upon it, two of these are damaged and punctured so the structural integrity of the length of bridge is compromised, a simple patch job is not going to do it.
Not an engineer, but bridge decks serve to distribute the load to the bridge pillars.
In this case, with the supporting box girders ripped open by explosives, that is no longer quite the case.
I'd be very queasy driving a point load such as a tank over this structure now, despite safety factors.
Separately, some of the images show a pattern of holes, presumably from submunitions.
The big hole may be from a unitary warhead, 95kg explosives according to the manufacturers website.
The effect would be greater if the bridge deck were not hollow, but even as is, I think the bridge is militarily a writeoff.
In this case, with the supporting box girders ripped open by explosives, that is no longer quite the case.
I'd be very queasy driving a point load such as a tank over this structure now, despite safety factors.
Separately, some of the images show a pattern of holes, presumably from submunitions.
The big hole may be from a unitary warhead, 95kg explosives according to the manufacturers website.
The effect would be greater if the bridge deck were not hollow, but even as is, I think the bridge is militarily a writeoff.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,810
Received 136 Likes
on
64 Posts
Perhaps the RF could test it by driving a couple of tanks over it … for confidence purposes? That would seem to be their simplistic approach, using conscript drivers of course (just in case).
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,975
Received 2,884 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
Read my posts in 7223 they think the damage is from Excalibur arty round not HIMARS.
Guest
Maybe but an A10 might encourage them to change tactics.
Guest
I know they are banned and politically sensitive but it's a shame Ukraine cannot shower the bridge with cluster munitions.
Denial is sometimes just as effective as destruction. Sometimes more so.
Denial is sometimes just as effective as destruction. Sometimes more so.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,975
Received 2,884 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
Russia uses clusters, ban or not.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,810
Received 136 Likes
on
64 Posts
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,975
Received 2,884 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
I agree, just pointing it out.
Guest
The Precision Guidance Kit is more like $12k
M31 is $150k according to the Ukranians, but they tend to exagerate.
dumb 155mm are $300
Last edited by peter we; 21st Jul 2022 at 22:28.
If those beams are ok - as they look to me - then the bridge is safe..?
So maybe some steel plates over holes would suffice after all..?
Not being a structural engineer or a missile explosive expert, how come (if was a HIMARS), didn't blow the s**t out of the bridge? Looks like it, went straight through the concrete.
Not sure if posted, but Ukraine have said they are are not going to release what weapons and ammo are going in.
So maybe some steel plates over holes would suffice after all..?
Not being a structural engineer or a missile explosive expert, how come (if was a HIMARS), didn't blow the s**t out of the bridge? Looks like it, went straight through the concrete.
Not sure if posted, but Ukraine have said they are are not going to release what weapons and ammo are going in.
Last edited by Obba; 21st Jul 2022 at 23:07.
With the announcement of Ukraine maybe getting some A10's, I thought this might be of interest - A10 vs Su25 Frogfoot in a dogfight.
I'm sure that the A10's won't be involved in to much dogfighting, they'll be going in as ground attack I think.
I'm sure that the A10's won't be involved in to much dogfighting, they'll be going in as ground attack I think.
If you really want to wreck this bridge for a long time, you'd aim for a box beam to pillar joint.
If you hope to put a bridge out of easy use so that you can later repair the bridge for your own purposes, then you just blow a few holes in the deck.
If you hope to put a bridge out of easy use so that you can later repair the bridge for your own purposes, then you just blow a few holes in the deck.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,975
Received 2,884 Likes
on
1,231 Posts
If those beams are ok - as they look to me - then the bridge is safe..?
So maybe some steel plates over holes would suffice after all..?
Not being a structural engineer or a missile explosive expert, how come (if was a HIMARS), didn't blow the s**t out of the bridge? Looks like it, went straight through the concrete.
Not sure if posted, but Ukraine have said they are are not going to release what weapons and ammo are going in.
So maybe some steel plates over holes would suffice after all..?
Not being a structural engineer or a missile explosive expert, how come (if was a HIMARS), didn't blow the s**t out of the bridge? Looks like it, went straight through the concrete.
Not sure if posted, but Ukraine have said they are are not going to release what weapons and ammo are going in.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...