Recently leaked conversation of German top military officials about Taurus missiles and their capability to destroy the Crimean Bridge, a russian monumental passage that connects the continental part of the russian federation with the occupied Crimean Peninsula, has reignited discussions of plausibility of causing significant damage to this structure.
Being a crucial logistical route for resupply of russian invasion forces in southern Ukraine, it has become a priority target for the Ukrainian Armed Forces. But German officials doubt there can be much done, even if their bunker-buster long-range Taurus KEPD 350 cruise missile is employed. Since Taurus is the only standoff weapon in Bundeswehr's arsenal, it practically means Germany would not be capable of solving this problem at all. But what about other countries?
Read more: Leaked Luftwaffe Commander's Wiretap Recording Exposes How Cruise Missiles are Transported to Ukraine and Why Taurus Won't Destroy Crimean Bridge
Defense Express has prepared a few hypothetical scenarios to show the scope of the problem faced by Ukraine and what weapons and tactics can realistically lead to a complete and certain destruction of the Crimean Bridge.
For our analysis, we chose the United States of America, Israel, and France, the important rule is that neither of them can use nuclear weapons for that purpose (as for Israel, it officially does not possess any nukes but will use them if necessary).
And before we start, a brief reminder that the Crimean Bridge is a sturdy structure, moreover, heavily protected with air defense systems, including russia's most advanced S-400, surrounded by several airfields with fighter jets ready to take off; the Black Sea is almost entirely a no-go zone within the range of russian anti-ship missiles. Another rule is that the bridge must be put out of order completely, with multiple spans destroyed.
How the U.S. would destroy the Crimean Bridge
For the United States, while possessing a wide array of long-range weapons, options like Tomahawk cruise missiles or ATACMS warheads (340 kg and 220 kg, respectively) may lack the necessary impact.
Instead, the Pentagon could opt to its traditional warfare concept, relying on achieving total air superiority, which in our case would require wiping out all the russian air defense forces in the area. In that case, cruise missiles like Tomahawk and JASSM would be more useful by targeting airfields and anti-aircraft missile launchers, while fighters clear the skies off russian aviation.
Then, the only thing left to do is make sure the American aircraft flies above 6 km so it cannot be reached by MANPADS, and the rest is a matter of time: for that, the U.S. has a variety of precision-guided bunker-buster munitions.
For starters, F-15E Strike Eagle fighters can deliver some 2.1-ton GBU-28 bombs with a semi-active guidance system compatible with this type of aircraft. The impact of such bombs would be fatal for the piers of the bridge because they penetrate up to 5 meters of reinforced concrete. Alternatively, a few 874-kg BLU-109 bombs enhanced with JDAM guidance kits can be dropped from an F-16.
If this is not enough, there is a special non-nuclear GBU-57 bomb for the B-2 bomber with an impressive weight of 12.3 tons. This weapon was produced in a limited series, it can penetrate up to 16 meters of concrete. Once used, there will hardly be anything left of the piers holding up the bridge, and the resulting seismic shifts will likely cause the entire structure to collapse.
How Israel would destroy the Crimean Bridge
Although Israel has a powerful aviation component, too, its resources would not be enough for a similar full-fledged blitzkrieg operation for the total conquest of air superiority: the Israeli Defense Force has around 340 combat aircraft, including 39 F-35i Adir multirole fighters.
However, the LORA short-range ballistic missile system, with its 430-km range and 600-kg penetrating warheads could be effective against the Crimean Bridge, even though the weapon is officially not yet adopted by the IDF. Still, the operation would require additional diversionary strikes with glide bombs, EW suppression of air defense systems, etc.
How France would destroy the Crimean Bridge
Among the three countries, France would have the hardest time dealing with the challenge. The French have very limited reserves of long-range weapons and a comparatively smaller fleet of 220 combat aircraft, including 137 Rafale multirole fighters.
The Tomahawk analog, Missile de Croisière Naval (MdCN) is in particularly short supply, only 200 units were produced in total, according to information in the public domain. All the ballistic missiles are intercontinental, designed for carrying nuclear warheads only.
France could use SCALP cruise missiles, which already made a name for themselves thanks to Ukrainian strikes on Crimea, or AASM Hammer guided bombs.
Speaking of SCALP, the maximum effect they can inflict on the Crimean Bridge is to make a few holes in the spans, just like the German Taurus. However, the lack of firepower could be offset by utilizing an older version of this missile, called Apache.
It is basically the first iteration of this missile designed for strikes on enemy airfields, it carries 10 bunker-buster Kriss munitions, 50 kg each. That won't blow the bridge apart but will certainly make the holes bigger. The downside is, the range of Apache is only 140 km.
For a certain and full destruction of the bridge, the French aircraft would need to fly even closer, within 70 km to the target in order to use the AASM Hammer. The name refers to a guidance and gliding kit with a jet engine, that is installed on a previously mentioned BLU-109 bomb of 874 kg in weight.
In conclusion, although each of the three countries in this hypothetical scenario has the appropriate tools to defeat such a formidable target as the Crimean Bridge, this is far from being a trivial task nonetheless.
Read more: russian Occupiers Prepare to Hold Crimea In Fear of Ukraine’s Troops Offence
