Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
And who is the unequivocal responsible party?
Aliens, for sure.
How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline?
31–40 of 99 posts
Re: How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline?
#32While technically possible, carrying a 500 kg payload at depths beyond 50 meters is extremely challenging and would typically involve commercial diving teams, saturation diving techniques, or the use of ROVs. Handling a 500 kg payload is more feasible at shallower depths due to lower pressure and shorter decompression requirements. At 30-50m depths, the challenges increase, and more sophisticated equipment (e.g., lif…
How about we go in two trips? Your max divers are cut to 5. Two trips is not operationally impossible, and perhaps the diver swim distance allowed the asset that held the first payload was able to be close enough to make the full payload delivery in two trips. Perhaps we cut down the payload into thirds - 3.3 divers per trip, assume we can round up due to military divers being trained in mission specific tasks and physically conditioned to preform these duties above average diver capability, that could put us even lower.
Re: How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline?
#33[flagged]
Were there any reports beyond the Seymour Hersh substack post? Besides some Russian outlets nobody took that seriously. While Hersh has had some impressive scoops he also has a history of fabrication and unreliable sources. There's a reason no media outlet would touch that story and he had to self-publish. No newspaper is going to risk their credibility on a story by a disgraced journalist using a single anonymous source.
Re: How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline?
#34Only shows how little trust could be put on fixed infrastructure these days. From now on it has to be built in ways much more resistant to sabotage or attacks. In some ways this is already done: for example, renewable energy facilities are too spread out to be vulnerable, it takes too many and too powerful munitions to wreck a solar or wind power plant vs coal-fired one of comparable output. But gas pipelines are an…
I’m enthusiastic about the wind plants were building off the East Coast, but I also worry that they have single points of failure where the power cables come in from the ocean. These could even be severed accidentally. I hope they’ve considered adding some redundancy to these links. There’s even a plan to build offshore power distribution networks up and down the whole East Coast which would potentially help (or hurt.)
Re: How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline?
#35[flagged]
Those claims were by Hersh who has a …mixed record.
I can believe that the US was involved.
I strongly doubt that Norway was involved, it would have poisoned relations with the EU.
Re: How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline?
#36Only shows how little trust could be put on fixed infrastructure these days. From now on it has to be built in ways much more resistant to sabotage or attacks. In some ways this is already done: for example, renewable energy facilities are too spread out to be vulnerable, it takes too many and too powerful munitions to wreck a solar or wind power plant vs coal-fired one of comparable output. But gas pipelines are an…
I’m enthusiastic about the wind plants were building off the East Coast, but I also worry that they have single points of failure where the power cables come in from the ocean. These could even be severed accidentally. I hope they’ve considered adding some redundancy to these links. There’s even a plan to build offshore power distribution networks up and down the whole East Coast which would potentially help (or hurt…
Throughput of those cables isn't so huge. It takes an attack of enormous scale which will be impossible to hide or misattribute to cause significant power shortage over a wide area this way.
Re: How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline?
#37[flagged]
Were there any reports beyond the Seymour Hersh substack post? Besides some Russian outlets nobody took that seriously. While Hersh has had some impressive scoops he also has a history of fabrication and unreliable sources. There's a reason no media outlet would touch that story and he had to self-publish. No newspaper is going to risk their credibility on a story by a disgraced journalist using a single anonymous so…
"Were there any reports beyond the Seymour Hersh substack post?"
Not that I know of. I'm basing my speculations on Hersh's article, Biden stating openly that "we'll bring an end to it (the pipeline)" and a bit of "ciu bono?".
Re: How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline?
#38While technically possible, carrying a 500 kg payload at depths beyond 50 meters is extremely challenging and would typically involve commercial diving teams, saturation diving techniques, or the use of ROVs. Handling a 500 kg payload is more feasible at shallower depths due to lower pressure and shorter decompression requirements. At 30-50m depths, the challenges increase, and more sophisticated equipment (e.g., lif…
Do you really think that a team blowing up a pipeline as part of an on ongoing war is necessarily going to follow all best practices and safety recommendations?
I think your comment is bizarre. Did you use an LLM to write it? I don't think many humans would write Lift Bag Management with L, B, M in upper case like that.
Re: How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline?
#39While technically possible, carrying a 500 kg payload at depths beyond 50 meters is extremely challenging and would typically involve commercial diving teams, saturation diving techniques, or the use of ROVs. Handling a 500 kg payload is more feasible at shallower depths due to lower pressure and shorter decompression requirements. At 30-50m depths, the challenges increase, and more sophisticated equipment (e.g., lif…
Why would you need 500kg of explosives? That's massively overkill.
Re: How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline?
#40Only shows how little trust could be put on fixed infrastructure these days. From now on it has to be built in ways much more resistant to sabotage or attacks. In some ways this is already done: for example, renewable energy facilities are too spread out to be vulnerable, it takes too many and too powerful munitions to wreck a solar or wind power plant vs coal-fired one of comparable output. But gas pipelines are an…
> Only shows how little trust could be put on fixed infrastructure these days You either introduce redundancy to get rid of single points of failure, or you invest in more reliable means to fulfill given requirements, and keep former main "pipe" as backup.
Doesn't work with gas pipeline, especially not with undersea ones. They scale down terribly poorly, becoming incredibly expensive to build and operate per bcm/y if made thinner/"smaller" to have many of them for redundancy. Also too long, equally well attacked at any point, thus impossible to defend, and impossible to fix once attacked (saltwater getting inside -> pipes are wrecked after a few days, long before they can be sealed and drained).