Explosion on the Crimean bridge. To the question of the value of oral competitions
I have a lot of respect for TopWar and its authors, and especially its readers. Both of these audiences are very different from other resources. On TopWar, both of these audiences are adults (30+, if not 40+), and both, if not “versed” in military affairs, including technical or historical its sides are at least those who are interested in it and own the terminology and the basic conceptual apparatus.
And that is why it is precisely for us that we are ashamed to talk reactively and superficially on military topics. I urge us to think thoughtfully and deeply, and most importantly, honestly.
I am upset that a “competition” has begun on TopWar in expressing ideas and even “evidence” that the explosion on the Crimean bridge was organized and carried out by the “Gang of Zelensky”, the “Kyiv regime” and that it was assisted by “Western intelligence agencies”.
He was upset, because he did not expect from TopWar, that is, from us - such a popular popular hat-throwing “atu, atu”. We did not study for this and were interested in military affairs.
I propose to stop this competition and express sound, and most importantly, factually substantiated ideas, and precisely “in fact”.
What do we have for reflection, what is the array of information?
The Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation designated the official starting point - a car explosion occurred on the Crimean bridge, which led to damage to the bridge and the fire of fuel tanks on the railway part of the bridge, the destruction of several vehicles and the death of three people.
This is the official position of the state, and it does not include any information about terrorist actions or military actions, there is only the wording “undermining”, that is, the actuation of an explosive device or the impact on an explosive object that led to its explosion.
This is important to understand because discussion of this topic in the context of the SVO with a deviation from the official position can be interpreted as violating the law.
We also have information about the explosion itself - there was an explosion on the automobile part of the bridge in the place where the truck was located.
You need to understand that there is nothing more at the disposal of those who argue, both patriots and enemies of everything bright.
Three elements of disruption
So, firstwhat we have, and the simplest.
Departure to the Crimean bridge of a truck, in which explosives turned out, does not require any special skills, means, any “special operations” and the participation of “super spies”. No (I emphasize - no) check of the transport following the bridge, such a check - which can detecting explosives in trucks is not carried out. A visual inspection that does not reveal in any way that the crates of bottled sunflower oil actually contain explosives, and that the pesticide barrels also contain explosives. By the way, on all "translucent" scanners, boxes of soap, as well as barrels of technical lubricants, look exactly the same as explosives. And vice versa.
That is, the very fact of a car with explosives leaving the bridge did not require any special reconnaissance operations. It is obvious that the driver who went to heaven in the form of a cloud of steam did not even know that he was lucky there. It is impossible to wish for eternal memory, even “down in peace”… In other words, this fact does not say anything about the degree of qualification of the organizer and customer.
Second and too simple, unfortunately.
Making explosives. Here we all understand that this is a question of "nowhere". Until chemical analysis data are published, there is nothing to say about the type, brand and manufacturer of explosives. However, we are not on Instagram (banned in the Russian Federation) and not on Tiktok, we are on TopWar, and therefore we we knowthat making any amount of explosives is, unfortunately, not a problem. All components are commercially available, and production requires more time than special knowledge. By the color of the explosion, by the number of objects burning in the air for a long time, by the relatively weak blast wave and the lack of direction of the explosion, it can be seen that the explosive device and the explosive itself (BB) are very handicraft.
Scattered in all directions and smoothly falling burning pieces indicate that not the entire volume of the explosive reacted - it scattered to the sides and caught fire. The fact that it caught fire says that the temperature was not high, otherwise the explosive would have evaporated and burned out in the form of steam, and here are burning pieces. I'm trying to be simplistic and aware of all the inaccuracies that arise, but the fact remains.
The color of the flame (adjusted for the overall color gamut of the camera) indicates the low temperature of the explosion, and even the first flash did not overexpose the camera's matrix. Look at the footage of the military chronicle - from the flash of military explosives, the cameras simply “go blind” for 100–200 seconds, the matrices temporarily lose their entire dynamic range. It's a very cold flash.
There is practically no blast wave, at least at the level of the camera. But pay attention - other cars were not even thrown away by the explosion, the camera did not show the vibrations of the bridge, that is, the blast wave was very extended in time (I'm simplifying). The bridge deck fell, shifting within the expansion joints. That is, the explosive effect was also very average.
What is not used in this explosive device, although it was available to a manufacturer of any qualification?
First of all, the explosive was not filled with striking elements - there are no marks from the expansion of explosives on the bridge structures. If they were, they could riddle the tanks and turn the fire into a very serious one, and not into a burnout of the draining fuel.
The striking elements could damage a lot of elements of the bridge, suspension system, etc., that is, lead to the need for a complete examination and replacement of these elements. To make striking elements is easier than a lung, I assure you, moreover, armor-piercing, it is simply illegal to discuss the technology. But it's very simple.
Further, the explosive did not have a strong container, which greatly increases the damaging factors of the explosion, increasing the pressure, that is, the high-explosive action, not to mention the use of the container as a source of fragments.
Another explosive was blown up by one volume, although it is possible to undermine the charges by placing them concentrically, which gives a high explosive effect.
Then - the explosive was blown up without creating a directed explosion, which would turn the details of the bridge, especially the support - into dust, and not just knock out two or three sections of the canvas from the fasteners.
Finally, the device is not made cumulative, which is not very difficult with such a large volume of the car body, and the cumulative device could be guaranteed to destroy the bridge structures.
That is, this is the simplest "firecracker", albeit a large one. I emphasize that I am simplifying the technical aspects and not giving everything - after all, this is just an article, not an exam. I'm only showing what features some, not one.
The third, also simple and also - unfortunately.
Remote detonation of the device. Those of us who have traveled along the Crimean bridge know that there is mobile communication on the bridge, both 3G and 4G are available. That is, there are no problems with remote detonation. The operator could be both on the shore, watching through binoculars, and calmly ride in the car before truck, about 200 meters, to roughly represent, based on its speed - where the truck is. Then it's just dialing...
The choice of the place of the explosion is noteworthy - it is not the most profitable from the point of view of the danger to the bridge and from the point of view of controlling the explosion. I would venture to suggest that an explosion on an elevated bridge section would be much more dangerous for the bridge, and the restoration of such a section is more difficult.
That is, all three elements of disruption tell us that this is a primitive event.
And this does not lead to the conclusion that this event was carried out by the reconnaissance and sabotage service of some state.
I draw the attention of everyone that the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation does not contradict this.
Customer
Let's move on to the customers, since there are no such traces that would allow us to assume the artist. There is no trace of a rocket characteristic of a certain type of engine, no fragments drone with markings, no intercepted coded radio signal characteristic of a certain foreign system, etc. There are no traces indicating the artist. So let's move on to the customers.
The customer is identified in three ways.
First option - the customer announced his victory. Confession. Let's be materialists - this is not the case. The official state authorities of Ukraine did not declare that they were the customers, organizers or executors of the explosion.
Joy over the damage to the Russian Crimean bridge? Yes, she is. Vengeful satisfaction? This is not only not a confession, it is not even a reason to suspect. If the fetters of slavery fall from someone in Africa, then the leadership of the Russian Federation, of course, will officially express its joy, but this does not mean that these fetters have been broken by Russia, does it?
Statements by individual leaders of Ukraine, even official ones? Like, we poured "bad Muscovites"? Let's think about what else to say to them? That they are sorry that there was a catastrophe on the bridge in Russia? That they sympathize with the family of the deceased driver? For example, if an explosion occurs on a bridge in Ukraine, then we will not seriously listen to any of the Russian officials, except for the official command, right? Even if officials pour and drink live on air "for such a thing", loudly shouting "Glory to Russia" and "Here we will punish you, damned Bandera."
All this not only "does not prove" - it all shows that the official authorities of Ukraine do not say anything about their involvement.
That is, there is no recognition.
The second option - Whoever benefits, he did. "Quie bono", "camo coming", etc.
Is the terrorist attack on the Crimean bridge beneficial to the leadership of Ukraine? Considering that it is waging a war against Russia and that it declares its desire to seize the Russian Crimea, destroy everything Russian, it turns out that this fits into the logic of “beneficial”.
Moreover, the bridge is like a thorn in their eye, and if they destroy anything, then it is in the first place.
Yes, it is beneficial for the leadership of Ukraine both from the political, and from the propaganda, and from the military-economic side - for the bridge to be destroyed. Does that mean they are?
Are there any reasons why this is unprofitable for the leadership of Ukraine? Do they need to be compared?
From a moral point of view, a strike on the Crimean bridge "unties" the hands not only of the leadership of the Russian Federation, but also of the population, which sees that "they are completely insolent", "nothing is sacred", and which does not really mind that the territory of Ukraine and civilian objects were dealt destructive blows.
Further, this blow, no matter how you turn it, is an act of terrorism, and since the conflict will end someday, and since no one assumes that it will end with the capitulation of Russia, this act will be pulled out, and someone will be charged. And in front of the eyes of the “world community”, the strike on the bridge, on which there was no military equipment, looks like barbaric. As a matter of fact, he is.
Finally, the bridge is not damaged. The bridge is already in operation. And will soon be completely renovated. Is such sabotage beneficial to the leadership of Ukraine, which does not put the bridge out of action and even allows Russia to demonstrate that “we the greats do not care”, “here is the repaired bridge for you” and, finally, “the Russian bridge is too tough for Ukrainian Nazis”?
So a simple, that is, a primitive option - who benefits - does not give us anything. We can blame, but we must recognize - there is no factual reason to believe that this is Zelensky. No matter how you want.
Third Embodiment – the customer was handed over by the accomplice. There is a complete zero. No one signed up as "accomplices" and said - I did it together with Zelensky.
I am ready to listen to any objections (on the topic), but I invite everyone to return to reality and admit that we (ordinary people) do not see there are no facts that would indicate that - this barbaric explosion was carried out by Ukraine or Ukrainian “militants”, “saboteurs”, etc. If the leadership of Ukraine, the command of the Ukrainian armed forces and formations have something to do with it, then you have no information about it.
Who is to blame?
But we have information that on the territory of Russia, on one of the symbols of its modern life - the Crimean bridge - there was an explosion, cars were destroyed, the bridge was damaged and people died. It wasn't a car tank explosion, it was an explosive device explosion, it was a crime.
And so we have questions - how did the FSB of the Russian Federation and other services not prevent this crime?
This is not about how they let the car onto the bridge, why they didn’t inspect it, how they didn’t see it, how they didn’t look at it, didn’t look in, didn’t smell it and didn’t poke their fingers, and why there are guys with machine guns on the bridge ...
The point is that special services exist so that no one could not make explosives so that no one can assemble an explosive device. It is for this work that the special services have the authority, special means, it is for this that they have a complex organization, many qualified employees, equipment - and all this at the expense of the budget, that is, at the expense of the people, and all this is a pure "expenditure". No "income".
And that's what laws are for, which not only give them powers - laws limit rights and freedoms of citizens, so that special services could collect information, restrict the freedom of citizens, oblige citizens to do what they do not want, seize property, prevent organizations from freely paying money, and much more. Limit so it pays off securityand guaranteed security.
Intelligence agencies are required to know in real time know - that everyone capable of making explosives is either busy with something else, or does not have access to raw materials and components, or - right now they are doing it - under the "supervision" of an embedded employee who will control its movement up to another group of "bad guys" , who will not only be “taken hot”, but also with pre-prepared soldering irons, configured precisely to help in sincere recognition - who, when и How ordered all this to be organized.
As a citizen of our country, I want to say that the explosion on the Crimean bridge is not a victory for our enemies, it is a dazzling example of the negligence of law enforcement agencies and special services, our bodies and services. And the fact that the explosion is weak, and the bridge is intact is not their merit. It's just our luck, which we did not deserve.
And such negligence is much worse than the anger, money and technical equipment of the enemies, multiplied by their number.
We do not need oral competitions on the topic "why this is beneficial to the Ukronazis." "It" can be beneficial to anyone. The main thing is that it is "unprofitable" us. If you think differently, then there will be no Victory.
Information