CNN's Oren Liebermann reports on the explosion that damaged the Kerch bridge that links Russia's mainland with annexed Crimea. #CNN #News
Hear expert’s theory about what caused key bridge explosion in Russian war
63 comments
Leave a Reply
Recent Post
-
-
Style experts spot a ‘no-no’ inside the Oval Office
-
Amanpour: Dissent about war in Ukraine in Putin’s circle is ‘silenced’
-
Cannes Film Festival 2023: The stand-out films and stars this year
-
Anti-Putin Russians based in Ukraine allegedly stage incursion into Russia
The Kerch bridge, wasn’t an explosion, that was a special bridge dismantling operation! 👍
Just terrorism
I think it was just a “special cleaning operation” the bridge had to be dismantled and brought down to the water to be washed and cleaned, no big deal.
The fire it hits the typical pyrolysis cleaning system all russian bridges have to remove grease and soot.
no it blew itself up. someone was smoking in the ammo room, which is standard russian naval procedure
@Alex T Would that include Chernobyl? Let’s hope Russia isn’t THAT stupid 😱😱😱
so putin’s retaliation:
a) had no effect on the Ukrainian military
b) did not intimidate the Ukrainian public
c) wasted a lot of expensive weaponry which can’t be easily replaced
d) did not even hit half of their infrastructure targets as they were shot down
e) renewed the west’s support for Ukraine.
@Lord Fluffykinz Stalin? Really? That murderer killed more of his own people that anyone except maybe Mao – in the history of mankind. Research it. Stalin sent Russians into Stalingrad with the following: 1 soldier would get a gun – one bullet. 3 others would get one bullet each and no gun. Figure it all out. How do you think that went?
f) played well to the domestic audience : (
RIP to all innocent women, children and men in this senseless war from the bottom of my heart
Bad bot.
Next up: America’s Gen Z
The fact that Russia thinks they can attack a country but can’t be attacked on their homeland is baffling
The US beleives the same
@patriot let me see how patriot is spelled in Russian
@Soundoverload that sounds intellectually staved..you cant have a differing opinion unless you are russian..no wonder americans are electing the likes of AOC
@leonardo ramirez countries that asked to be members, their right, and they only became members to protect themselves from exactly what is happening now.
this investigator could have been interviewed the same day. all the video evidence is there on screen for all to see.
Yeah, I don’t understand why it takes so long to get some actual explosives experts to assess the images.
@RogerWilco These are CNN experts.
there is camera footage suggesting the bridge was hit by a drone boat from underneath.
@Ian Walton no drone needed and it would have to be the size of a 747 to carry enough explosive to make the sort of blast seen in the video.. it is centered on the truck and the marking on the rail bridge is also very clear that the explosion was on the bridge, the 2nd video clearly shows a tall funnel of flame right where the truck was and a smaller flame where the car was, consistent with the explosion//fireball coming from the truck and hitting the car.
Took 4 min to finally get to the expert and he is speculating just like everyone else
Yep no frame by frame explanation here!🤨😆🙏
Seems to be pattern of CNN dumbing down content recently.
Everybody has an opinion and an A-hole, this EXPERT is NO different!
Speculating I thought it was conspiracy theory’s???
1:15 Ukraine is calling the Russian investigation “nonsense”. So am I. Any accurate findings Russia does obtain it will probably keep to itself, because these findings reveal Russian vulnerabilities. The information they release to the public, on the other hand, will be whatever they think is in their best interest.
In these circumstances there is almost no reason to pay attention to Russia’s “investigation” at all.
@dave diamond probably better?
@Derek D nah. Seems like a coup. Russians finally sick of putin and wanting to end this all
5:26 Yes, we can tell from that video that it was NOT the truck, for 2 reasons. 1. The truck was already well up the ramp at the moment of explosion, and the explosion clearly took place a few spans behind it. 2. A blast emanating from inside the truck would have dissipate sideways and upwards (path of least resistance), which would have caused comparatively little damage to the bridge deck. The force on the bridge deck would have been downward. That would not have caused it to move far sideways on the piers.
I disagree with the expert. By the way, I have a master’s degree in structural engineering and have designed some similar bridges. So I have some expertise on which to base my opinion. The blast definitely was from underneath the deck, at the piers, exerting an upwards force on the deck. This would have been the right choice as well, because this is the “weakest link” in the bridge design. Under normal loading conditions, including predictable earthquake and high wind loads, the upward load on a bridge deck is minimal, and overcome by the dead load of the deck itself. So the connections of the deck to the piers do not need to be designed to resist upward loads.
So that makes the application of an upward load the most efficient way to use explosives. From the damage it is obvious the bridge deck was in fact separated upward from the piers. The blast from underneath and the ensuing fire would also account for the damage to the adjacent span.
The surveillance footage visible at 5:30 shows the wake of a small boat under the span furthest to the right leaving the scene. A moment later there is a small white flash at the next pier to the left, then the explosion. I believe the boat planted the explosives, then detonated them when it was safely away. During the ensuing chaos it would have been easy for a small boat to leave the seen unnoticed and make it back to the mainland.
6:15 This is why we won’t find out what really happened from the Russian “investigation”. I believe the Russians know what happened, that it was indeed a small boat, launched from just a short distance away, IN CRIMEA, by either Ukrainians living in Crimea or Ukrainians from outside who had infiltrated, or both. This reveals a serious gap in Russian security, which is why they will not acknowledge this as the source of the attack.
@John Sessoms Did it? CCTV frame rates are a bit slow. How much explosives could you pack onto a 15′ by 40′ barge and what type of explosives? A shaped charge Writ Large? An explosion so large that it lifted the bridge decks in to the air. The Blast is caught on camera and then the two spans connected to that pier collapsed. Unless you have some 1000 frames per minute video from all angles then I am guessing and speculating.
Not a truck bomb, possible missile strike, or surface bomb set under the bridge. I’ll go with floating bomb under the bridge next to that pier.
I love how they took those suspicious-looking X-ray pictures, but let the truck continue on its way regardless.
Most of this I agree with, except the boat/wake part. There’s no evidence that the people who rigged the bridge with explosives were still in the area when the explosion occurred. They would have known the blast would attract Russian forces to the area and make their escape difficult if not impossible. Most likely the explosives were planted ahead of time, and then remotely detonated when the fuel train was passing the location. The presence of the train at that exact spot on the bridge was almost certainly no coincidence.
@patrick palmer Only problem is that I’m right. Even blind freddy can see clearly it was the truck, and only the truck. The truck exploded before boat went under the span.
Is everyone refusing to see the burn marks on the road surface? 🤔
@christopher james You really have 2 seperate accounts to comment on things so it looks like someone agrees with you lmfao? And yes actually, you can very effectively direct the force from a high explosive using nothing but a thin sheet of copper or aluminum. It’s called a shaped charge. In fact you can do it with nothing but the explosive material itself if the right geometric shape is used. Maybe Google the munroe effect. And tamped charges.
The headlights of the truck is visible, and the truck was clearly still moving much after the explosion. Had it been the carrier, it would have been destroyed within milliseconds
The fact that Russia is being so “transparent” and forthcoming with their findings sounds shady.
Its a done deal.. its going down..
As soon as Russia says “This is what happened” we can immediately rule that option out. That, in cases where there are millions of possible answers, doesn’t bring us any closer to the truth. But in cases where there are only two option, it’s a dead giveaway.
They got to look good some where ,according to their previous bragging a muskrat could`nt swim across that water without being detected.
I feel like they dont want to admit the sea is unsafe and the boom came from under the bridge. That’s the only way you could destroy the supports and get a clean-cut like what happened. If it was on the bridge’s surface, it wouldn’t/shouldnt do nearly as much damage as it did. A Ukrainian unmanned boat washed up in Crimea a couple of weeks ago. Coming from the sea is entirely feasible.
The truck drove on the right lane towards the bridge. For maximum impact in case of a planned explosion the truck should most likely have been driving in the left lane close to the center of the bridge structure.
That is a good observation and gives credence to the speculation that the explosion was an accident caused by a Russian truck transporting munitions to the battle front. In other words, Putin’s army blew up their own bridge.
@Roger Brandt yes I’m wondering why nobodies saying a suicide truck bomber ??
In Virginia large trucks are required to run right lane over Newport News bridge to not impede traffic through tunnel
@Roger Brandt interesting thought however won’t it be likely for ammunition to be transported in convois with security vehicles and if so rather during day?
There were cameras on every other light pole, yet only two were working. Also that bunch of parked railway carriages up there raise even more questions than the blast itself. Russians could have screwed up searching that truck, but how on Earth did they miss a freaking train just idling on tracks?
If Ukrainians did this, their strategists must be thinking in 5 dimensions!
*Sometimes I don’t understand this diplomacy stuff, why is it that according to Putin it’s fair to attack Ukraine but it’s unfair for Ukraine to attack Russia?🤷*
It’s not. It’s just stupid Poo Tin logic.
i don’t understand the ISS shuttling cosmonauts/astronauts back and forth, all the while US supporting ukraine and sanctions on ivan.
Thanks, and we agree with him for fear of nukes?
The irony to me is that a man who has targeted apartment buildings, hospitals and playgrounds has the audacity to think he is justified in retaliation on the destruction of a bridge used as a supply route for his war.
@infocrypt lol – okay. I heard Russian soldiers killed their commander in Kherson because he wouldn’t let them surrender. 😉
@Foniks Monkee that I do find believable. plenty of people on both sides don’t want any part of it.
@infocrypt Agreed.
All that is missing is a forced confession 😢
This is so cool 😎
no worries, it’s coming soon..
Every time I seen the footage I’ve thought something doesn’t seem right. The truck was coming from Russia. So, was it a suicide bomber then or an unsuspecting driver? There always seems to be a break between the truck and the explosion that no one has explained.
This “expert” is clearly wrong. In the first frame of the bridge security camera you can see the flash started when the truck was still in tact. Also, you can clearly see a boat under the bridge just before the explosion.
Lol you might want to check your eyes BOT 😂
Two-fold observation here: both sides of the conflict have reasons to keep bridge intact, and likewise, both to attack it
Things that strike me as odd in the videos of the blast:
There evidently was strong wind that morning. Data on its strength will likely be available. The trajectory of glowing or burning debris is dropping at an angle of some 45° which, basic trigonometry applied, tells us it falls about equally as fast as the wind blows. This makes me think the pieces must be relatively dense material. This makes the fact that only roughly half a second after the blast, these pieces of debris that must have been flung out from the exploding truck and have reversed their very fast movements coming from the explosion and now are drifting with the wind. Something I only noticed while watching this video (And which might be due to it being edited for broadcasting) is the very white-ish glow of the debris which suggests there must be pieces of aluminium or magnesium burning.
At 7:23 one can see big chunks of burning debris hit the tarmac and splash into bigger flames. These are substantial chunks of matter! Just blown away by the wind in less than a second? Or was there a blast from above from a weapon that releases such debris? What does the debris cloud of an S-300 missile or a bucket bomb or a thermobaric warhead look like at night?
Played frame by frame, the total of the scene suggests there is in one single frame a center of brightness to the top left of the truck. It’s in darkness and surveillance cameras don’t do too well in such light. There will be a slower framerate of recording, so very short flashes of light are more likely missed than recorded by them.
Ukrainian vlogger Denys Davidov quoted local reports that the train had been sitting on the rails in that place for hour when the blast struck. He also pointed out that in the x-ray of the truck, there is a single rear axle of the truck and no spare wheel on the trailer visible whilst on the photographs published, the truck has twin rear axles and a spare wheel held behind the trailer’s wheels under the floor in the picture just before the truck went onto the bridge.
Besides things not adding up reasonably well in the video, there is obvious evidence that the ruSSian claims contain more lies than explanations.
What sense would it make for ruSSia to hit such a crucial bit of its own infrastructure?
In sort: Everybody knows the ruSSian troops in Ukraine are f***ed. ruSSia is running out off ammo, the morale of soldiers is low to non-existent and if things get any worse in their logistics, they’ll have to fight with sticks and stones. the ruSSian air force has proven to be by and large impotent at defeating the Ukrainian army. ruSSia is bringing pieces from tank museums to the fight to have anything to fight with at all.
There might be a wish to cut an escape route for demoralized to make them fight for their lives. Knowing they can’t hold on to Crimea, there might be the wish to establish a narrative about how vicious attack on infrastructure crippled the glorious victorious army of the ruSSian Reich. Fascists dwell on such tales. I am German, I heard these stories all my life from the mouths of old (Now luckily mostly extinct due to age) supporters of the Third Reich 1.0.
The same narrative might be quoted by the ruSSian leadership to explain escalation to the people inside their media’s filter bubble: “We always warned that if crimea or the bridge are attacked, we claim the right to go nuclear! The total destruction thus is their own fault! We warned them!”.
…for with conventional means, their army already has been defeated. Believing his own propaganda, pootin f***ed up entirely and for good, the nuclear weapons threat remains the only high card in his deck.
This “Superpower” has proven to actually be a limping imp with a big bomb tucked in under his arm. He’s about to run out off allies and supporters as it becomes obvious he can’t support anyone any longer. No one will pay attention to the man behind that curtain unless he pulls off an extremely wizardy stunt.
pootin is in all respects approaching bankruptcy and, having created a hierarchy of crooks, in the moment of dog eat dog, he knows he’s food.