About ATACMS And "Leakers"...

 ... to those who still think that ATACMS decide anything. I totally get where Scott comes from in his apprehension about Crimean Bridge safety but let's step back and think for a minute purely tactically, considering the fact that. 

1. ATACMS have been in use in SMO for a while now. Here is one example of many, this is from October 25, 2023.

"В течение прошедших суток перехвачены две оперативно-тактические ракеты ATACМS производства США", - говорится в публикации. Кроме того, за сутки были перехвачены зенитная ракета С-200, две противорадиолокационные ракеты HARM и два реактивных снаряда системы залпового огня HIMARS производства США. Ранее военное ведомство не сообщало о перехвате ракет ATACMS, которые TВСУ получили от Пентагона.

Translation: “Over the past 24 hours, two US-made ATACMS operational-tactical missiles were intercepted,” the publication says. In addition, during the day, an S-200 anti-aircraft missile, two HARM anti-radar missiles and two US-made HIMARS multiple launch rocket systems were intercepted. Previously, the military department did not report the interception of ATACMS missiles that the Ukrainian Armed Forces received from the Pentagon.

So, as you can see, those, including its longest range (300 km) version, are being successfully intercepted by Russian AD and militarily make no difference whatsoever on the theater of operations, EVEN if they are able to achieve one or two "leakers". 

2. "Leaker" is, of course, the missile or projectile which gets through. Considering well articulated overall effectiveness of Russian Air Defense of around 95%, as stated by no other than Mr. Putin himself (In Russian), which is very close to reality because all data points towards this astonishing effectiveness, we can easily assume that in order to get even two "leakers" (most likely through combined heterogeneous salvo--Scalps/Stormshadows, ATACMS, maybe even USVs et al), in air they will need: 

                            2/5 = n/100

                            n=40 missiles.

They will need 40 missile salvo to get two leakers to the Crimean Bridge. Let's turn our civil engineering and operational minds on. 

3. Crimean Bridge is not just the bridge--it is THE longest bridge in Europe (19 kilometers), it is also the classic Linear Target which is IMPOSSIBLE to completely destroy other than maybe one or two flights of it. The juiciest of those being its main flight with the length of 235 meters. 

If you get to this flight by couple of ATACMS, theoretically you can destroy it and that will require a much longer time to restore unlike it would be the case with other flights which are shorter and easier to restore. So, Scott is correct when worrying about those ATACMS, it is possible to damage the bridge but...

4. Here comes this issue: can 404, having real time ISR from the US, actually collect 40 missile salvo? Here is a rough range of ATACMS and where it can be theoretically pre-deployed for a theoretical salvo:

This yellow segment is under control of AFU, for now. So, the possible area for salvo is shrinking. So, the most likely target will be, yet again, Sevastopol. It doesn't mean that Pentagon wouldn't stop thinking about sabotaging any other objects on Russian territory or trying to kill more Russian civilians--this they know how to do--but this is how their thinking goes. You see, Russia is not Iraq and they don't teach real war at USMA at West Point or in Leavenworth, KS. They never faced one. 

So, are "leakers" possible? Absolutely. Will they change anything? Nope. The outcome is clear and now Khohol recognized that they will actually get something around $8 billion in... loans, not those $61 billion which go to Pentagon for replenishing stocks, filling pockets of lobbyists from MIC and continuing to finance propaganda about "the finest fighting force in history". They only know how to fight PR wars. Keep this in mind, including the fact that the Bridge is well defended.