Why is not Kinburn split used to build a pontoon bridge? It is far from the Russia-occupied mainland thus the bridge should be defendable. Are there strong Russian fortifications across the split?
There are not strong Russian fortifications there. A few months ago, the Ukrainians landed a company there and then I never heard another report about it.
For all the activity that has been happening around Kherson there have been very few official reports, a fact that I support. We also don't have the same information that the Ukrainian government has. In the absence of information, the best we can do i speculate.
The shortest crossing to the Kinburn spit is 4 km. That's a very long bridge, and bridge sections are at a premium. It might be better to have four 1 km bridges. Also, it is more sea than river there. I don't know the specifics of the typical sea activity there but in the (once in a century) storm yesterday there were 9 meter waves. Even in calm situations, I don't know what the current speeds are like there. With my limited information, it seems that it might be a better location for ferries than a bridge, and current speeds may impact the use of ferries.
the approach from Kinburn to the mainland is quite narrow and the terrain there is not favorable for heavier vehicles. My guess is that you can land a small number of special forces or light infantry for sabotage and infiltration but not suitable for large scale operations.
Is it possible to dig a tunnel under the Dnipro? A small one, like the tunnels drug cartels use to transport drugs across borders. Lay narrow-gauge rails and transport ammunition and everything needed. Make several tunnels, perhaps with multiple entrances/exits for each. Is this unrealistic?
I mean, not full-scale railway tunnels, but ones built by smugglers with narrow-gauge railways for transporting ammunition. With minimal space and minimal investment, like these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smuggling_tunnel
Yes, you'll need to keep pressure of the air inside the tunnel higher than the pressure of the water above it. That's why Stalin had to build air compression stations at the tunnel entrances.
Everything that can be accomplished by the smuggler's tunnel can be accomplished by transporting personnel across by rafts and barges, which the regularly do now. What they need is the capacity for transporting truckloads of fuel across the river.
There could be some semi-submerged pontoon bridges, just half a meter below the water surface when in use, then submerge when not in use. I think this has been used in WWII, too?
People from Poland like ok, now we prepared enough, good time to recall old grievances and just block all cargos for country in war. Good job, Poland, well done
Why is not Kinburn split used to build a pontoon bridge? It is far from the Russia-occupied mainland thus the bridge should be defendable. Are there strong Russian fortifications across the split?
There are not strong Russian fortifications there. A few months ago, the Ukrainians landed a company there and then I never heard another report about it.
For all the activity that has been happening around Kherson there have been very few official reports, a fact that I support. We also don't have the same information that the Ukrainian government has. In the absence of information, the best we can do i speculate.
The shortest crossing to the Kinburn spit is 4 km. That's a very long bridge, and bridge sections are at a premium. It might be better to have four 1 km bridges. Also, it is more sea than river there. I don't know the specifics of the typical sea activity there but in the (once in a century) storm yesterday there were 9 meter waves. Even in calm situations, I don't know what the current speeds are like there. With my limited information, it seems that it might be a better location for ferries than a bridge, and current speeds may impact the use of ferries.
Thanks!
the approach from Kinburn to the mainland is quite narrow and the terrain there is not favorable for heavier vehicles. My guess is that you can land a small number of special forces or light infantry for sabotage and infiltration but not suitable for large scale operations.
Thanks
Is it possible to dig a tunnel under the Dnipro? A small one, like the tunnels drug cartels use to transport drugs across borders. Lay narrow-gauge rails and transport ammunition and everything needed. Make several tunnels, perhaps with multiple entrances/exits for each. Is this unrealistic?
Stalin attempted to build two in Kyiv, but was interrupted by the WW2. The project was scheduled for 6 years https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%91%D1%83%D0%B4%D1%96%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%86%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE_%E2%84%96_1_%D0%9D%D0%9A%D0%A8%D0%A1
I mean, not full-scale railway tunnels, but ones built by smugglers with narrow-gauge railways for transporting ammunition. With minimal space and minimal investment, like these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smuggling_tunnel
Smugglers don't have to seal their tunnels from 10 meters of water running above.
That's why I'm asking, is it realistically possible to do such a thing
Yes, you'll need to keep pressure of the air inside the tunnel higher than the pressure of the water above it. That's why Stalin had to build air compression stations at the tunnel entrances.
I didn't know about the pre-war tunnel project.
Everything that can be accomplished by the smuggler's tunnel can be accomplished by transporting personnel across by rafts and barges, which the regularly do now. What they need is the capacity for transporting truckloads of fuel across the river.
There could be some semi-submerged pontoon bridges, just half a meter below the water surface when in use, then submerge when not in use. I think this has been used in WWII, too?
People from Poland like ok, now we prepared enough, good time to recall old grievances and just block all cargos for country in war. Good job, Poland, well done