Comments by "afcgeo" (@afcgeo882) on "Surveillance footage captures large explosion on key bridge to Russian-annexed Crimea" video.

  1. That explosion wasn’t from the truck. If you slow down the video, you can see it came from below the roadway.
    260
  2.  @justsomedudeyouknow8372  There was no truck bomb! A truck bomb would do no significant damage to the bridge as almost all of the blast energy would escape up and to the sides.
    6
  3.  @datmanz5890  Unlikely. Russians are pretty good at bridge building and it’s been serving well. Either way, the blast came from below the roadway, which isn’t all that high up above the surface of the water. It’s very possible to take a boat at night and place charges, then detonate as the train was in the right place. It’s a daring op, even for special operations, but Russians have had lax security on the water.
    4
  4. They didn’t destroy either. The damaged them.
    4
  5.  @syryder3236  It’s not unrepairable, but most people know that to blow up a structure you need to blow up its weight-bearing points.
    4
  6.  @datmanz5890  Bruh…. grow a brain… that’s post collapse of the roadway.
    3
  7.  @bigchills7194  Yes, and given that this happened at a section of the roadway that was just above the water surface (causeway), it’s logical to exclude a barge. Most likely, it was a special ops team in a zodiac, at night, placing the shaped charges, and blowing it up remotely, when the train came into the area. It also explains why the blast was directed toward the railroad bridge (a target with more value than the roadway bridge), and why the railway bridge wasn’t detonated itself - it was too high off the water to access.
    3
  8.  @omi_god  False. That’s post-collapse of the roadway section.
    2
  9.  @franklin3271  I agree that it’s repairable. Technically, everything is repairable. How long it will take to repair is another question.
    2
  10.  @johndavidwolf4239  Likely planned.
    2
  11.  @okdenny  No, YOU disagree, because you’re an uneducated moron. A cinderblock building isn’t a bridge. The reason McVeigh chose to park his Ryder truck where he did was because it was a weakly constructed building. He parked it at the base of the building, because that’s what you blow up… bases of structures - to use gravity to collapse the structure. If you blow it up on the roof, you will have NOTHING.
    1
  12.  @justsomedudeyouknow8372  Not at all similar. Rebar melting over a period of time because fuel oil spilled and burned is a real consideration, but that’s not at all what happened here. This was a blast. Different physics at work here.
    1
  13.  @syryder3236  Agreed, though this bridge isn’t really a full bridge. About 80% of it is a causeway above landfill.
    1
  14.  @vgaportauthority9932  You have no idea of what you’re talking about. Zero. First off, missiles carry nuclear weapons. Second, trucks are searched before entering that bridge. Third, if an explosion happened below, it would have been either from an impact against the structure (a missile) or a specifically placed shaped charge against the structure. The OP was right that VBIEDs are significantly less powerful as explosives and are designed to kill people, not destroy massive structures. Besides, if you slow down the video you can see the explosion came from below the roadway.
    1
  15.  @Seasniffer69  No, they aren’t. not a single VBIED has ever been successful at taking out hardened infrastructure that’s below it. Not a single one in history. They don’t work that way. Also, unless you shape a charge attached to the structure you want blown, it won’t help you. Energy spreads in all directions, but blast waves take the easiest route and almost all of that will blow to the sides and up with a VBIED, which is excellent for many applications, but not blowing up a bridge.
    1
  16.  @ieagleproductionsarjan9254  Extremely unlikely as the bridge is very tall.
    1
  17.  @terrencehealy3748  What boat? A row boat?
    1