Russia and Ukraine flashpoint

[Bofferbrauer2]

Ryuu96 said:

Bofferbrauer2 said:

Question: Would the Ukrainian R-360 Neptune anti-ship missiles or their land-based Neptune-MD work against a bridge? As in, would they be they strong enough to cause enough damage against the Kerch bridge in such a scenario?

After all, nobody can tell Ukraine what they can and can't do with their own missiles...

In all seriousness, I've read before that Storm Shadow wouldn't be strong enough, nor would ATACMS, they'd only temporarily take out a small section of the bridge, that's why we need Taurus because it has a design to take out bridges, they really need to blow the pillars. I do not believe Neptune has a more powerful warhead than Storm Shadow but I could be wrong.

They'd probably blow a chunk out but that'll be fixed fairly quickly, the pillars need to go.

From a pure explosive power stance Taurus ain't much stronger than Storm Shadow (480kg vs 450kg warhead), but quite a bit more than ATACMS (275kg if single warhead) or Neptune (150kg), so if the Storm shadow ain't strong enough, chances are Taurus is too weak, too.

However, both Taurus and Neptune are designed more towards attacking bridges, so they could be more lethal against those targets than their pure warhead sizes would suggest.