this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
1302 points (99.4% liked)

World News

46063 readers
3053 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Apparently, Ukrainian drones pushed through and started a chain reaction.

Explosions reportedly continued for hours, and authorities evacuated nearby settlements. Initial reports indicate that the site, previously protected by one of Russia’s densest air defense networks, suffered catastrophic damage.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 179 points 2 days ago (10 children)

I'm pretty sure competent militaries store their munitions in networks of dozens if not hundreds of earthen bunkers per site, specifically so shit like this can't happen.

264 kilotons is a fuckload of bombs.

[–] perestroika@lemm.ee 118 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

Competent ones, I think they do.

Possible explanations:

  • yet another time, someone had set money aside for personal use, consequently the bunkers had doors made of plywood or roofing tin :)

  • arrival of drones was timed to match the loading / unloading of an ammunition train (that's when even competent militaries have to bring their stuff out)

[–] paraphrand@lemmy.world 47 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago

someone had set money aside

That's a very nice way to say "embezzle".

[–] Gobbel2000@programming.dev 37 points 1 day ago (1 children)

In their infinite wisdom they apparently stored a bunch of ammunitions out in the open.

[–] The_v@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

Russia has a long history of open storage at these sites. They also lost a ton of bunkers a few months ago at other sites. So they likely did not have much of an option, and they chose open store it at their "best defended" base.

I personally would bet that site was overstocked as it was likely the primary ammo dump by default. All of the newly manufactured missiles and shells going there directly from the factories.

[–] vxx@lemmy.world 33 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It could hold that much, but according to Ukraine it was 105000 tons that exploded. Huge success though.

[–] Klear@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago

I'm making a note here.

[–] StaticFalconar@lemmy.world 21 points 1 day ago

But you can save money by putting all of them in one place

[–] Corngood@lemmy.ml 32 points 2 days ago

Assuming I'm looking at the right thing on google maps, it does seem to be a lot of earthen bunkers with berms separating them. There are also quite a few free standing buildings scattered around.

I looked at Hawthorne Army Depot (US) to compare, and that one is a lot less dense, but it's absolutely gigantic.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago

I assume that bunkers protect you from a chain reaction, but that at some point the explosion is big enough that a chain reaction is exactly what you get.

This definitely seems like it would have been big enough to cause a chain reaction (and/or big enough to show that a chain reaction happened). If so, I wonder what fraction of bunkers exploded. I'm glad we live in an age of civilian satellites, so it's probably just a matter of time before we get to see the damage for ourselves.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago

That's like ten small nukes.

[–] AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

They may not have enough manpower to guard a more distributed site, especially if they’re afraid of internal groups seizing some of it.

[–] AdamEatsAss@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I guess we don't have an accurate source on what percentage of munitions his was.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 23 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I would confidently assume 100% of it was munitions

[–] perestroika@lemm.ee 25 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

If you think of the fill percentage, I think that's too optimistic, since they're in a war. There is constant demand. However, even 50% would be an extremely big amount, and relieve Ukrainians from a lot of pressure (last year, when a similar thing happened in Toropets, it had effects on the front within weeks). This time, from the videos I saw, there was enough to keep detonating for a long time.

Whatever the fill percentage and loss percentage, the site is closed for a long time - if something remains, it cannot be reached, it has to be examined and re-certified. But more likely, very little will remain.

In the coming days, satellite photos will tell what the situation is.

[–] milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee 5 points 1 day ago

I think they meant 100% of the explosions were munitions, not 100% of the munitions exploded. 'Twas a joke.

[–] raltoid@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago

Competent being the key word in that sentence, and not an accurate one based on the last few years of intel.