How did divers manage to blow up the Nord Stream pipeline? We went to find out

It's well worth reading the Spiegel piece from a year ago, which is far more in-depth and goes over a lot more of the evidence and plausibility of the scenario. It's odd to me ARD would put out this highly similar but 90% slimmed down and far less convincing article and not even mention the earlier and more authoritative Spiegel report.

https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/investigating-th...

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., lift bags with remote controls) is likely required.

Typically, multiple large lift bags are used to make the payload neutrally buoyant or slightly negatively buoyant. The operation of these bags requires at least two divers, but ideally, a team of 3-4 divers should manage the lift bags to control the ascent and descent accurately. The payload needs to be guided and stabilized during the descent to prevent it from spinning, tilting, or drifting. This typically requires 2-3 divers focusing solely on keeping the payload steady.

At such depths, safety divers are essential. They provide assistance in case of emergencies, such as a diver getting entangled with the payload or a lift bag malfunctioning. At least 2-3 safety divers would be advisable. A dive supervisor or lead diver should be responsible for overseeing the operation, managing communications, and coordinating the divers' actions.

Minimum Team Size: Lift Bag Management: 3-4 divers. Payload Control: 2-3 divers. Safety and Supervision: 2-3 divers (including a dive supervisor). This brings the total minimum team size to around 7-10 divers.

In addition to the divers in the water, a surface support team, including a dive supervisor, tender, and possibly a medic, is essential. If available, remotely operated vehicles (ROVs) can assist with the operation, potentially reducing the number of divers needed for direct handling.

It is bizzare that one arrest warrant was issued when many people were involved.

As a person not following the details of Nordstrom case, this article didn't tell me anything new except how a skeleton crew on a shabbily maintained skiff could/couldn't blow up a pipeline (better technical discussion offered by user:greenavocado in other thread). Are there other state actors involved? Maybe. Is it being used as a distraction for some cover-up? Possibly. Who knows

And the icing: the person charged criminally is 'one Mr. Volodymir Z, who denies being involved' :)

Eventually leadership realized that this was a terrible angle, and now the story is that they have no idea who did it.

My take is that it was either Ukraine or the U.S. And even if it was Ukraine, it was done with the U.S. president's approval and tactical support.

If it was close enough, activate the charge remotely. Otherwise, just leave it there without activating it.

Or it could be precisely why that boat was not used for anything of the sort.

This kind of argumentation reminds me of, "only a guilty man would protest that much against the charge laid against him".

I think anyone with a mission hard enough wouldn't make it harder on themselves on such a triviality. Special missions will nerf themselves for a variety of reasons but here it's not coming out across as a particular good reason

What is missing....there was several entities tracking one distinct Russian ship big enough to cause such damage before and after the even occurred...then several years later...nothing about that specific ship....

Here's the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWUuhNd37WI&t=11

USA likely blew it up.