Now that was something.

Now that was something.

▪️Previous uses of the "Oreshnik" against Ukraine were non-combat.

▪️In fact, we have had not a single combat use of the "Oreshnik" anywhere on Ukrainian territory.

▪️We simply struck where it was convenient to look at the results.

▪️That applies both to Bila Tserkva and to an area of Donetsk region within the perimeter of the main fortified area.

▪️Then our drones flew into a shed that had been hit [in Donetsk region], and simply looked at how the separating warheads had been laid out. They measured to the millimeter where everything had landed.

▪️This is important for us in order to make future decisions on the full-scale use of the "Oreshnik" against designated targets, including in urban built-up areas.

So it turns out that garages in Bila Tserkva and a shed in Donetsk region (he did not specify at the same time on which territory, Ukrainian-controlled or RF-controlled) were all non-combat use. Just launching it around, testing it.

Right. Understood.

Well then, if we’re being serious. I understand the effect his threats to strike with the "Oreshnik" in urban built-up areas have, so let’s reason this out logically.

I am not a missile engineer, and I base my conclusions solely on physics and open sources. Even so.

1. The maximum warhead of the "Oreshnik," according to the stated specifications, is 1,500 kg.

2. During flight, the "Oreshnik" reaches a peak speed of Mach 11; these are data from the Main Intelligence Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine.

3. As of today, there is no data at all indicating that Russia has a conventional warhead capable of withstanding such loads. Not to mention how much payload would be eaten up by the heat-shielding casing itself, which would have to withstand such loads.

4. But let us assume that such a warhead does exist. At the same time, it is unclear whether they would pack explosives into each of the 36 blocks (6x6), or whether it would be a single monolithic warhead. Let us simply proceed from a 1,500 kg warhead.

What is a 1,500-kilogram conventional warhead? It is three "Iskanders." It is a one-and-a-half-ton guided bomb.

A very frightening and formidable weapon that lands over an area. But.

Why develop a one-and-a-half-ton warhead, with all the difficulties associated with the need for that warhead to withstand ultra-high temperatures and ultra-high loads, if you have the "Iskander"?

Why develop a multibillion weapon whose whole point is simply to deliver one and a half tons of explosives?

If it is simply irrational. If it will not produce a greater effect than one of the types of weapons already being used against Ukraine produces in total. (The warhead of the "Iskander" is 480 kg).

Can it be used against bunkers, if previous launches showed that it leaves a crater only a couple of meters deep? Given that the "Oreshnik" was originally presented precisely as a deep-penetration weapon.

Answer. Based on the above, I believe that his phrase about the "full-scale combat use of the 'Oreshnik' against urban built-up areas" is yet another method of intimidation. The "Oreshnik" with a conventional warhead, assuming it exists, does not carry any fundamentally new level of threat for Ukraine.

And the only conclusion from this is that Putin has in fact for the first time admitted that he is ready to strike civilians, "urban built-up areas." Which is what he has already been doing throughout all 4 years and 3 months of this war.