How Hot is Ukraine Gonna Get?

[chrisl]

3 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Very true. I can't imagine HDDs keeping up with modern data throughputs of 2k, even at 15ps, for a usefully reliable timeframe. 

I'm curious what you mean by "incompressible" video.  All digital video is fundamentally compressible so are you operating according to external, end user delivery requirements/parameters? 

Don't want to come across as snarky, just genuinely interested. 

It's 3D data compressed to 2D as a physical part of the data acquisition process, so it's already compressed by the time it hits the detector and lossless compression doesn't reduce the size.  You can do lossy compression, but then you can't get the 3D data back.

[Vet 0369]

On 10/7/2022 at 7:28 PM, sross112 said:

So with the new laws/decrees or such in Russia that will no longer allow service members to refuse to serve that number should start translating into POWs. Or at least a certain percentage of it probably will. Another chunk will be deserters and the remaining number will be very poor soldiers. If that is translated across the rest of the RA units it is at least 40% basically ineffective/unreliable personnel prior to contact. Throw in the new round of mobiks and probably a bunch of conscripts now that Russian thinks the occupied oblasts are Russian soil and I just can't see how the RA survives. They sucked as a pretty much all volunteer force so going forward it ought to be a real flustercluck.

I thought that the Russian Charter or Constitution, or whatever it’s called, doesn’t allow conscripts to be used outside the country. Perhaps that’s why Putin illegally annexed the territories in Ukraine, to keep his mobilization “legal?”

[chrisl]

12 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Hmmm. 

A single explosion at the road surface, in the middle of a span? That shouldnt push the whole span sidewayss, off its pinning. It should just rip a lot of steel apart and fracture/break the rebar support beams. 

To push the whole span sideways requires an enormous amount of force, and needs to come from a direction non-perpendicular to the surface. 

A blast favouring one side of the span (eg above one lane as you mention)  might do it. But it's a big ask... 

That road is probably pretty floppy when you're driving it with the kind of energy a point explosion of a truck bomb (or bigass missile, for Steve) would put in. It's going to both ripple longitudinally and have twisting modes.  It could walk/bounce itself off to the side a little and then tumble to get the amount of offset that's there.  It also looks like the longitudinal beams sit on small pier blocks on top of the big piers, so it would be tipping off those to one side and could have had enough momentum to tumble as much as it did.

[Vet 0369]

23 hours ago, Probus said:

Zeppelins!

We create our own natural gas here in the U.S. We use “Boston Baked Beans” and “Pizza!”

[Kinophile]

25 minutes ago, chrisl said:

It's 3D data compressed to 2D as a physical part of the data acquisition process, so it's already compressed by the time it hits the detector and lossless compression doesn't reduce the size.  You can do lossy compression, but then you can't get the 3D data back.

Very interesting. What's the recording device? 

[Kinophile]

19 minutes ago, Vet 0369 said:

I thought that the Russian Charter or Constitution, or whatever it’s called, doesn’t allow conscripts to be used outside the country. Perhaps that’s why Putin illegally annexed the territories in Ukraine, to keep his mobilization “legal?”

That's exactly why. 

[chrisl]

1 minute ago, Kinophile said:

Very interesting. What's the recording device? 

Just a 2kx2k camera, and the data are optically encoded.

[Kinophile]

19 minutes ago, chrisl said:

That road is probably pretty floppy when you're driving it with the kind of energy a point explosion of a truck bomb (or bigass missile, for Steve) would put in. It's going to both ripple longitudinally and have twisting modes.  It could walk/bounce itself off to the side a little and then tumble to get the amount of offset that's there.  It also looks like the longitudinal beams sit on small pier blocks on top of the big piers, so it would be tipping off those to one side and could have had enough momentum to tumble as much as it did.

Very true. Those piers, and the pinning designs (which seem pretty routine)  are inadequate for anything dynamic, like what you've described.

[Kinophile]

4 minutes ago, chrisl said:

Just a 2kx2k camera, and the data are optically encoded.

Ah.  You're 360 scanning rooms/spaces right? 

Edited October 9, 2022 by Kinophile

[chrisl]

6 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Very true. Those piers, and the pinning designs (which seem pretty routine)  are inadequate for anything dynamic, like what you've described.

I've been thinking of how to model it at home.  Hot wheels tracks are too elastic.  Basically it's like laying a long thin piece of sheet metal across some supports (chopsticks?)with the ends weakly constrained in the long direction. Then using a spring loaded center punch to bang it off center between the supports. Make sure you wear safety goggles, and maybe gloves if the sheet metal is sharp...

Edited October 9, 2022 by chrisl

[chrisl]

1 minute ago, Kinophile said:

Ah.  You're 360 scanning rooms/spaces right? 

Very tiny ones.

[Kinophile]

12 minutes ago, chrisl said:

Very tiny ones.

Curiouser and curiouser! 

 

[Kinophile]

https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/crimean-bridge-3d-1977dbf64436435e9836713dccaa5006

Not quite the section hit but gives a good sense of the overall structural approach. 

[chrisl]

2 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/crimean-bridge-3d-1977dbf64436435e9836713dccaa5006

Not quite the section hit but gives a good sense of the overall structural approach. 

Nice.  The long beam mounting doesn't really match what it looks like in the pics, but I imagine whoever did it had to guess and wasn't really building a model to analyze its collapse.

[Kinophile]

4 minutes ago, chrisl said:

Nice.  The long beam mounting doesn't really match what it looks like in the pics, but I imagine whoever did it had to guess and wasn't really building a model to analyze its collapse.

Exactly,  it stops being accurate a few hundred meters past the bridge heads. Definitely pre construction. The roads were brought lower, I wonder why. Cost reduction, possibly.  The railway stays level because,  well,  trains. 

[dan/california]

6 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Curiouser and curiouser! 

 

I am guessing it is a very fancy 3D microscope. There are some amazing toys out there when your budget is in the low six figures per piece. That is just the mid grade stuff. 

Random example

https://www.olympus-lifescience.com/en/laser-scanning/fvmpe-rs/

If you have to ask, you can't afford it...

[sross112]

3 minutes ago, Kinophile said:

Exactly,  it stops being accurate a few hundred meters past the bridge heads. Definitely pre construction. The roads were brought lower, I wonder why. Cost reduction, possibly.  The railway stays level because,  well,  trains. 

Someone on here said it was built quite fast for a bridge of its size, so maybe for speed of construction as well as cost. The rail bridge took 20 months longer to build than the road bridge so it would make sense.

[Vet 0369]

20 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

They'll do what they always do... try and make the best of a bad situation by brute force workarounds.  The ferries are obvious tools for them to use and, unlike with the Dnepr, are unlikely to be directly attacked due to the range.  Barges/sipping is also a given.  Rerouting stuff through Mariupol i also a given.  Other options, like laying down a pipeline, aren't practical in the short term.

This is going to be a huge problem for Russia going into the winter.  With all those forces in need of supply... yeah, it isn't going to be pretty at all.

Steve

In all of our “how did this happen,” let us not forget the largest and most important factor, RUSSIA BUILT IT!

[Vet 0369]

20 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

They'll do what they always do... try and make the best of a bad situation by brute force workarounds.  The ferries are obvious tools for them to use and, unlike with the Dnepr, are unlikely to be directly attacked due to the range.  Barges/sipping is also a given.  Rerouting stuff through Mariupol i also a given.  Other options, like laying down a pipeline, aren't practical in the short term.

This is going to be a huge problem for Russia going into the winter.  With all those forces in need of supply... yeah, it isn't going to be pretty at all.

Steve

We might be looking at the 1930’s “Bitter Harvest” of 2023.

[cesmonkey]

Listening to the latest Kofman dialogue, I didn't find anything too insightful but there were a few things to think about.
https://podcast.silverado.org/episodes/what-the-kerch-bridge-attack-means-for-the-war

He thinks the timing of the attacks on the Kerch Bridge and Ilovaisk indicate a coordinated Ukrainian strike designed to actually hinder Russian logistics.  And from that, he goes on to make the point the Ukrainians have a distinct advantage over the Russians in their ability to shift units quickly to different sections of the front line in order to exploit weaknesses because of their shorter internal lines of transport.

He still thinks the likelihood of Putin resorting to nuclear weapons is low.  Rather, if the Russians continue to lose territory slowly, Putin will seek to extend the war as long as possible in the hope of eventually outlasting Ukraine and the West.  However, if the Russians suffer a dramatic defeat, that would increase the chances of him resorting to nuclear weapons.

 

 

[Battlefront.com]

4 hours ago, Kinophile said:

- Road 2 possibly directly impacted BUT: (A) it's broken in two similar positions and lies in similar arrangement, (B) it's pushed off its piers, the spans are not structured to survive that type of twisting deformation (from direct force and sudden change in dead load configuration). So Road 2 took downward angled force, that shoved it laterally away, sheering the connection to its purr.  Not the steel pinning themselves -  they still stand up, so probably the concrete /steel of the span was ripped through by the pins as it moved sideways, away from the blast center.  Once off the pier centers the span folded and broke from its own weight (not impacts) and also the current catching it and shoving it back against its own piers.

Another thought I had was that a missile comes in at an angle.  I don't know for sure, but I think the kinetic energy released from the explosives would not be directed evenly.  Some amount of the energy would be aligned with the vector of the missile.  Which would mean the detonation would hit the outer lanes at a some degree of an angle instead of just downward.

Not my area of expertise, but it might be in the mix of explaining why the inner road bridge stayed intact while the outer one got shoved off its piers.

Steve

[LongLeftFlank]

28 minutes ago, cesmonkey said:

Listening to the latest Kofman dialogue, I didn't find anything too insightful but there were a few things to think about.
https://podcast.silverado.org/episodes/what-the-kerch-bridge-attack-means-for-the-war

He thinks the timing of the attacks on the Kerch Bridge and Ilovaisk indicate a coordinated Ukrainian strike designed to actually hinder Russian logistics.  And from that, he goes on to make the point the Ukrainians have a distinct advantage over the Russians in their ability to shift units quickly to different sections of the front line in order to exploit weaknesses because of their shorter internal lines of transport.

He still thinks the likelihood of Putin resorting to nuclear weapons is low.  Rather, if the Russians continue to lose territory slowly, Putin will seek to extend the war as long as possible in the hope of eventually outlasting Ukraine and the West.  However, if the Russians suffer a dramatic defeat, that would increase the chances of him resorting to nuclear weapons.

Which in spite of a lifetime of distinguished scholarship and analysis, is advertising him as pants at any actual kind of negotiation.

Kofman just keeps insisting on playing the game Putin has set up. Meanwhile, UA just keeps setting fire to various squares across the (now divided) Red half of the board.

(OK, have I burned that metaphor to the waterline yet?)

[chrisl]

14 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Another thought I had was that a missile comes in at an angle.  I don't know for sure, but I think the kinetic energy released from the explosives would not be directed evenly.  Some amount of the energy would be aligned with the vector of the missile.  Which would mean the detonation would hit the outer lanes at a some degree of an angle instead of just downward.

Not my area of expertise, but it might be in the mix of explaining why the inner road bridge stayed intact while the outer one got shoved off its piers.

Steve

If the explosion was close to the deck of the outer road bridge there wouldn't be much pressure load on the inner one.

The pressure from the explosion is gong to be mostly parallel to the deck of the adjacent inner road bridge, and the only things that would get it directly are the railings (which were blown over). The side of the inner road deck would be mostly shadowed by the outer road deck, so it wouldn't see much pressure from the explosion and thus not much force (pressure times exposed area) and not get knocked off its bearings.  The outer roadway got whacked like a big rectangular drumhead and probably would have been interesting to watch if you could see it without being close enough to catch shrapnel or the shock wave.

Edited October 9, 2022 by chrisl

[Battlefront.com]

3 hours ago, chrisl said:

That road is probably pretty floppy when you're driving it with the kind of energy a point explosion of a truck bomb (or bigass missile, for Steve) would put in. It's going to both ripple longitudinally and have twisting modes.  It could walk/bounce itself off to the side a little and then tumble to get the amount of offset that's there.  It also looks like the longitudinal beams sit on small pier blocks on top of the big piers, so it would be tipping off those to one side and could have had enough momentum to tumble as much as it did.

Catastrophic failures are often a relatively small amount of force/energy applied to the wrong place in the wrong way or for the wrong amount of time.  Think about the Twin Towers.  The structural damage from the collision itself was relatively small in the context of the entire structure.  However, with the fire and the collapsing of the stories above, there was no ability for the rest of the structure to withstand the impact of the pancaking floors and so total collapse happened.  The condo building in Florida was an even smaller direct event coupled with structural decay.

The point here is that conspiracy types look at catastrophic failures and don't understand them nor don't trust the people who do.  They base their conclusions that something else must have happened because they don't accept how delicate even the biggest structures can be when the wrong things happen to it.  Therefore, we non-engineers should not be so sure that structural failures have to have very obvious visual cause and effect.

Steve

[chrisl]

6 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

Catastrophic failures are often a relatively small amount of force/energy applied to the wrong place in the wrong way or for the wrong amount of time.  Think about the Twin Towers.  The structural damage from the collision itself was relatively small in the context of the entire structure.  However, with the fire and the collapsing of the stories above, there was no ability for the rest of the structure to withstand the impact of the pancaking floors and so total collapse happened.  The condo building in Florida was an even smaller direct event coupled with structural decay.

The point here is that conspiracy types look at catastrophic failures and don't understand them nor don't trust the people who do.  They base their conclusions that something else must have happened because they don't accept how delicate even the biggest structures can be when the wrong things happen to it.  Therefore, we non-engineers should not be so sure that structural failures have to have very obvious visual cause and effect.

Steve

The twin towers was a much more complicated structural setup and they survived the collisions just fine.  The heat of the fire weakened the columns and then too many columns started failing to support the floors above them and it collapsed in a domino effect because even full strength floors couldn't support the mass of floors above them piling up.

The Kerch bridge is a much more straightforward structure - it's a lot like a Hot Wheels track, with segments defined by the longitudinal beams and a relatively thin web of steel and asphalt tying them together.  Each segment is resting across multiple piers and mostly held in place by gravity with some flexible constraints to keep it from cracking due to thermal expansion/contraction and wind.  The two decks don't appear to be really tied together - they rest separately on their piers, which are pretty solid (though susceptible to earthquakes and ice), isolated by the bearings that accommodate the expansion/contraction.  So very little of the force that went into the outer deck was transmitted to the inner deck through the structure, and it's just the pressure from the shock wave that did moderate damage to the deck and railing.  

The catch is that there's probably latent damage to at least the nearest bearings on the inner deck.  It got enough force to dent and crease it near the point of explosion, so some of that would have been transmitted.  It's now one of those roads that you take in a small car because you to make a trip and have no choice, but if they drive a bunch of heavy trucks loaded with tanks and ammo over it, it could have cracks that propagate and fail catastrophically.  Especially since it's in a saltwater environment and suffers things like winter and ice.  Water is terrible stuff, especially if it can freeze and thaw (which I'm sure you have more experience than you want with).

The rail bridge is also suspect - it took the pressure wave broadside because it wasn't shadowed, so there could be some hidden cracks started (or expanded if they were already there).  On top of that it had many hours of burning fuel on the steel in multiple spots.  That's going to change the steel properties there, and if they just run trains at full speed over it like nothing happened, they could get a surprise later.