poesel

but we need a washing machine flavor item for sure

'hundreds' protesting in a democracy of 80 millions is basically nothing. About 10% of the population adhere to far right ideas which, in Germany, include Nazis, Pro-Russians, Anti-Vaxxers, Qanon and the like. That is a potential group of 8 million people.
It would be a noticeable movement with 5 digit protestors and I would worry with 6 digits.
TL;DR: there are idiots everywhere
In a way, yes. 'Unwilling' may be a bit harsh. I'd go for 'has not realized it is war'
No, sorry, but that is really wrong. Again, speaking for Germany, this is a minority of about 15% (10% extreme right, 5% extreme left).
Of course, no one is happy about energy cost, but a discussion about stopping help for Ukraine to fix that issue simply does not exist.
The one and only reason we do not send more weapons, is fear of WWIII (don't discuss that with me...)
The GDR was occupied by the Russians and every mayor decision had to go through them. But for most of the part, the East-Germans did the occupation unto themselves (and effectively, of course...). I guess, very generally, the Russians were the least hated in the GDR of all East-Block countries.
A lot more changed in West-Germany after the 3rd Reich than did in the East. That difference is still very visible after 30 years.

When viewed from space Elon musk’s ego causes a minor eclipse of Zelensky’s balls, but only briefly. 

'hundreds' protesting in a democracy of 80 millions is basically nothing. About 10% of the population adhere to far right ideas which, in Germany, include Nazis, Pro-Russians, Anti-Vaxxers, Qanon and the like. That is a potential group of 8 million people.
It would be a noticeable movement with 5 digit protestors and I would worry with 6 digits.
TL;DR: there are idiots everywhere
In a way, yes. 'Unwilling' may be a bit harsh. I'd go for 'has not realized it is war'
No, sorry, but that is really wrong. Again, speaking for Germany, this is a minority of about 15% (10% extreme right, 5% extreme left).
Of course, no one is happy about energy cost, but a discussion about stopping help for Ukraine to fix that issue simply does not exist.
The one and only reason we do not send more weapons, is fear of WWIII (don't discuss that with me...)
The GDR was occupied by the Russians and every mayor decision had to go through them. But for most of the part, the East-Germans did the occupation unto themselves (and effectively, of course...). I guess, very generally, the Russians were the least hated in the GDR of all East-Block countries.
A lot more changed in West-Germany after the 3rd Reich than did in the East. That difference is still very visible after 30 years.

'hundreds' protesting in a democracy of 80 millions is basically nothing. About 10% of the population adhere to far right ideas which, in Germany, include Nazis, Pro-Russians, Anti-Vaxxers, Qanon and the like. That is a potential group of 8 million people.
It would be a noticeable movement with 5 digit protestors and I would worry with 6 digits.
TL;DR: there are idiots everywhere
In a way, yes. 'Unwilling' may be a bit harsh. I'd go for 'has not realized it is war'
No, sorry, but that is really wrong. Again, speaking for Germany, this is a minority of about 15% (10% extreme right, 5% extreme left).
Of course, no one is happy about energy cost, but a discussion about stopping help for Ukraine to fix that issue simply does not exist.
The one and only reason we do not send more weapons, is fear of WWIII (don't discuss that with me...)
The GDR was occupied by the Russians and every mayor decision had to go through them. But for most of the part, the East-Germans did the occupation unto themselves (and effectively, of course...). I guess, very generally, the Russians were the least hated in the GDR of all East-Block countries.
A lot more changed in West-Germany after the 3rd Reich than did in the East. That difference is still very visible after 30 years.

'hundreds' protesting in a democracy of 80 millions is basically nothing. About 10% of the population adhere to far right ideas which, in Germany, include Nazis, Pro-Russians, Anti-Vaxxers, Qanon and the like. That is a potential group of 8 million people.
It would be a noticeable movement with 5 digit protestors and I would worry with 6 digits.
TL;DR: there are idiots everywhere
In a way, yes. 'Unwilling' may be a bit harsh. I'd go for 'has not realized it is war'
No, sorry, but that is really wrong. Again, speaking for Germany, this is a minority of about 15% (10% extreme right, 5% extreme left).
Of course, no one is happy about energy cost, but a discussion about stopping help for Ukraine to fix that issue simply does not exist.
The one and only reason we do not send more weapons, is fear of WWIII (don't discuss that with me...)
The GDR was occupied by the Russians and every mayor decision had to go through them. But for most of the part, the East-Germans did the occupation unto themselves (and effectively, of course...). I guess, very generally, the Russians were the least hated in the GDR of all East-Block countries.
A lot more changed in West-Germany after the 3rd Reich than did in the East. That difference is still very visible after 30 years.

'hundreds' protesting in a democracy of 80 millions is basically nothing. About 10% of the population adhere to far right ideas which, in Germany, include Nazis, Pro-Russians, Anti-Vaxxers, Qanon and the like. That is a potential group of 8 million people.
It would be a noticeable movement with 5 digit protestors and I would worry with 6 digits.
TL;DR: there are idiots everywhere
In a way, yes. 'Unwilling' may be a bit harsh. I'd go for 'has not realized it is war'
No, sorry, but that is really wrong. Again, speaking for Germany, this is a minority of about 15% (10% extreme right, 5% extreme left).
Of course, no one is happy about energy cost, but a discussion about stopping help for Ukraine to fix that issue simply does not exist.
The one and only reason we do not send more weapons, is fear of WWIII (don't discuss that with me...)
The GDR was occupied by the Russians and every mayor decision had to go through them. But for most of the part, the East-Germans did the occupation unto themselves (and effectively, of course...). I guess, very generally, the Russians were the least hated in the GDR of all East-Block countries.
A lot more changed in West-Germany after the 3rd Reich than did in the East. That difference is still very visible after 30 years.

'hundreds' protesting in a democracy of 80 millions is basically nothing. About 10% of the population adhere to far right ideas which, in Germany, include Nazis, Pro-Russians, Anti-Vaxxers, Qanon and the like. That is a potential group of 8 million people.
It would be a noticeable movement with 5 digit protestors and I would worry with 6 digits.
TL;DR: there are idiots everywhere
In a way, yes. 'Unwilling' may be a bit harsh. I'd go for 'has not realized it is war'
No, sorry, but that is really wrong. Again, speaking for Germany, this is a minority of about 15% (10% extreme right, 5% extreme left).
Of course, no one is happy about energy cost, but a discussion about stopping help for Ukraine to fix that issue simply does not exist.
The one and only reason we do not send more weapons, is fear of WWIII (don't discuss that with me...)
The GDR was occupied by the Russians and every mayor decision had to go through them. But for most of the part, the East-Germans did the occupation unto themselves (and effectively, of course...). I guess, very generally, the Russians were the least hated in the GDR of all East-Block countries.
A lot more changed in West-Germany after the 3rd Reich than did in the East. That difference is still very visible after 30 years.

'hundreds' protesting in a democracy of 80 millions is basically nothing. About 10% of the population adhere to far right ideas which, in Germany, include Nazis, Pro-Russians, Anti-Vaxxers, Qanon and the like. That is a potential group of 8 million people.
It would be a noticeable movement with 5 digit protestors and I would worry with 6 digits.
TL;DR: there are idiots everywhere
In a way, yes. 'Unwilling' may be a bit harsh. I'd go for 'has not realized it is war'
No, sorry, but that is really wrong. Again, speaking for Germany, this is a minority of about 15% (10% extreme right, 5% extreme left).
Of course, no one is happy about energy cost, but a discussion about stopping help for Ukraine to fix that issue simply does not exist.
The one and only reason we do not send more weapons, is fear of WWIII (don't discuss that with me...)
The GDR was occupied by the Russians and every mayor decision had to go through them. But for most of the part, the East-Germans did the occupation unto themselves (and effectively, of course...). I guess, very generally, the Russians were the least hated in the GDR of all East-Block countries.
A lot more changed in West-Germany after the 3rd Reich than did in the East. That difference is still very visible after 30 years.

No need to google
Steel will get soft (or forgeable) at around 1150 - 1250 °C. Melting begins at around 1400 °C. That amount of heat has surely gotten into the rebars, especially since it burned quite long. The structural integrity of this bridge is toast.

Huh. I kinda like Master and Margherita.
There is a very amusing O'Brien article ('what Cruz doesn't understand') linked to from that one. I can hear the heads of manly men popping all round the world
 

it is enough in the sense of restoring the territorial integrity of Ukraine.  I think however Russia needs to be treated as the pariah state it is.  To restore relations to the west, Russia needs to pay reparations and war crimes trials.  Until that happens the west should continue to isolate Russia economically and politically.

It doesn’t have to be nearly that hot to lose strength.  Even ~200 C you have to derate it by about 10%, and about 50% by 500 C, depending on the steel.  So you can relax out the prestress at temps much lower than where it gets soft.

No need to google
Steel will get soft (or forgeable) at around 1150 - 1250 °C. Melting begins at around 1400 °C. That amount of heat has surely gotten into the rebars, especially since it burned quite long. The structural integrity of this bridge is toast.

I'm waiting for that, too. But as for Germany, there is currently nothing.
The strikes on NS1&2 didn't faze anyone because we weren't getting gas from there anyway. The railway thing...., well - a 3h outage with the Deutsche Bahn is quite a common happenstance. Nothing new.
So don't count on public outrage, yet.

I'm retracting my argument against a missile strike. I said, that a missile strike would have been against the arched part of the bridge and not the flat one.
As a precondition, I assume that the target of the attack was to destroy as much as possible (rail & road) of the bridge.
An arch has much more resistance versus pressure from above. The forces from the explosion would be led into the base of the arch, which is designed to withstand a lot of pressure. The deck of the road is also bent outwards, so it is more unlikely to cave in comparison to a flat surface.
Also, the rail track is on the same height as the bridge at the arch. An explosion could only hit the top of the rail track. The rail track is designed to withstand lateral force (the weight of the train) but not excessive horizontal force.
Put together, it would totally make sense to attack at the junction between flat and arched part. There is the weakest part of the bridge, since there will be some horizontal forces from the arch going into the flat part. You can attack both lanes from the top and the rail track from the side. Hitting the fuel train was absolutely intentional in the hope of further fire damage.
I guess that, whoever planned it, is now a bit disappointed that only one lane caved in and none of the fuel cars toppled over to further damage the other track.
Still, impressive planning and success!

I'm retracting my argument against a missile strike. I said, that a missile strike would have been against the arched part of the bridge and not the flat one.
As a precondition, I assume that the target of the attack was to destroy as much as possible (rail & road) of the bridge.
An arch has much more resistance versus pressure from above. The forces from the explosion would be led into the base of the arch, which is designed to withstand a lot of pressure. The deck of the road is also bent outwards, so it is more unlikely to cave in comparison to a flat surface.
Also, the rail track is on the same height as the bridge at the arch. An explosion could only hit the top of the rail track. The rail track is designed to withstand lateral force (the weight of the train) but not excessive horizontal force.
Put together, it would totally make sense to attack at the junction between flat and arched part. There is the weakest part of the bridge, since there will be some horizontal forces from the arch going into the flat part. You can attack both lanes from the top and the rail track from the side. Hitting the fuel train was absolutely intentional in the hope of further fire damage.
I guess that, whoever planned it, is now a bit disappointed that only one lane caved in and none of the fuel cars toppled over to further damage the other track.
Still, impressive planning and success!

Guys were in a proper place in a proper time. 
Kalibr, for example, has march speed 0,8M (and 2-2.5M at the target), so it can be intercepted with some probabbility with MANPAD. 
 

This is a comment from another forum, and as an engineer I think this is totally correct:
The rail bridge was engulfed in a high intensity fire for hours. This will most likely have compromised the steel inside the concrete beams. Those bridge elements usually consist of prestressed concrete, meaning concrete that contains steel cables under tension when poured. This gives the elements stability and rigidity. In a high intensity fire those cables heat up which leads to the tension being released. Even after cooling, the tension is gone. The elements might look ok, but their load baring capabilities are most likely severely compromised.

TL;DR: rail bridge is ****ed. Good luck sending heavy trains over it
 
Edit: just found out I don't have to add the **** myself

This is a comment from another forum, and as an engineer I think this is totally correct:
The rail bridge was engulfed in a high intensity fire for hours. This will most likely have compromised the steel inside the concrete beams. Those bridge elements usually consist of prestressed concrete, meaning concrete that contains steel cables under tension when poured. This gives the elements stability and rigidity. In a high intensity fire those cables heat up which leads to the tension being released. Even after cooling, the tension is gone. The elements might look ok, but their load baring capabilities are most likely severely compromised.

TL;DR: rail bridge is ****ed. Good luck sending heavy trains over it
 
Edit: just found out I don't have to add the **** myself

This is a comment from another forum, and as an engineer I think this is totally correct:
The rail bridge was engulfed in a high intensity fire for hours. This will most likely have compromised the steel inside the concrete beams. Those bridge elements usually consist of prestressed concrete, meaning concrete that contains steel cables under tension when poured. This gives the elements stability and rigidity. In a high intensity fire those cables heat up which leads to the tension being released. Even after cooling, the tension is gone. The elements might look ok, but their load baring capabilities are most likely severely compromised.

TL;DR: rail bridge is ****ed. Good luck sending heavy trains over it
 
Edit: just found out I don't have to add the **** myself

This is a comment from another forum, and as an engineer I think this is totally correct:
The rail bridge was engulfed in a high intensity fire for hours. This will most likely have compromised the steel inside the concrete beams. Those bridge elements usually consist of prestressed concrete, meaning concrete that contains steel cables under tension when poured. This gives the elements stability and rigidity. In a high intensity fire those cables heat up which leads to the tension being released. Even after cooling, the tension is gone. The elements might look ok, but their load baring capabilities are most likely severely compromised.

TL;DR: rail bridge is ****ed. Good luck sending heavy trains over it
 
Edit: just found out I don't have to add the **** myself

This is a comment from another forum, and as an engineer I think this is totally correct:
The rail bridge was engulfed in a high intensity fire for hours. This will most likely have compromised the steel inside the concrete beams. Those bridge elements usually consist of prestressed concrete, meaning concrete that contains steel cables under tension when poured. This gives the elements stability and rigidity. In a high intensity fire those cables heat up which leads to the tension being released. Even after cooling, the tension is gone. The elements might look ok, but their load baring capabilities are most likely severely compromised.

TL;DR: rail bridge is ****ed. Good luck sending heavy trains over it
 
Edit: just found out I don't have to add the **** myself

This is a comment from another forum, and as an engineer I think this is totally correct:
The rail bridge was engulfed in a high intensity fire for hours. This will most likely have compromised the steel inside the concrete beams. Those bridge elements usually consist of prestressed concrete, meaning concrete that contains steel cables under tension when poured. This gives the elements stability and rigidity. In a high intensity fire those cables heat up which leads to the tension being released. Even after cooling, the tension is gone. The elements might look ok, but their load baring capabilities are most likely severely compromised.

TL;DR: rail bridge is ****ed. Good luck sending heavy trains over it
 
Edit: just found out I don't have to add the **** myself