Ukraine's Systematic Shelling of the ZNPP? August 5-7

September 10, 2022

(rough, incomplete) - last edits 9/29/22

I'm finally looking into the swirling allegations over military attacks at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP). Russian forces are accused of militarizing the site by basing forces there (seems undeniably true to some degree) and launching attacks from there (not so sure, but troubling if so - I'll have some to say on this in another post). 

Attacking from a nuclear plant makes it "impossible" for the Ukrainians to respond, as they frequently say. Yet rockets and drones continue to attack military and other locations well within the compound, near the reactors and spent fuel storage sites, causing frequent alarm. According to Ukraine, Russia is launching these strikes themselves, attacking the same plant they occupy and attack from, just to escalate their orcish nuclear terrorism, even at the risk of "nuking" their own troops first and foremost.  

Let's start here with a few allegations about shelling incidents on August 5-7. 

Clashing Reports

The latest IAEA report (PDF) relates in its annex 1:

• On 5 August, the ZNPP was targeted in shelling resulting in several explosions near the electrical switchboard of a 750 kV external power supply line that caused the shutdown of the electrical power transformer and two backup transformers. One reactor unit was affected. The emergency protection system of the affected unit was triggered, diesel generators were set in operation to ensure the power supply for this unit. This unit remains disconnected from the grid. 

• On 5 August, renewed shelling hit the area of the ZNPP’s nitrogen-oxygen station. Firefighters quickly extinguished the fire; however, the station required repairs.

Video gets split-off below, but this is brief, just kept here under reports, and so the images are more spread out on the page: https://twitter.com/TpyxaNews/status/1555576435997392900 - smoke near power pylons, unfinished building - composite view:

That's probably south of the main control building and training center, at the south edge of the main complex, facing south onto a massive unfinished building stretching further south along its edge. Google Maps street view, 2015:

So this fire is a bit southeast of the main area. I don't have anything further to say on what happened here. Back to reports and such:

Ukraine's President Zelenskyy responded: "Today, the occupiers created another extremely risky situation for everyone in Europe – they fired on the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, twice in one day. This is the largest nuclear power plant on our continent, and any attack on this facility is an open, brazen crime and an act of terror.

Russia must bear responsibility for the very fact of creating a threat to the nuclear power plant. And this is not just another argument in favour of recognizing Russia as a state sponsor of terrorism.

This is an argument in favour of applying tough sanctions against the entire Russian nuclear industry – from Rosatom to all related companies and individuals. This is purely a matter of safety. A country which creates nuclear threats to other nations is definitely not capable of using nuclear technologies safely". (Pravda)

Further attacks came on August 6 and/or 7 - IAEA report (PDF), annex 1, lists attacks on 2 days with enough similarities it sounds like the same story repeated:

• On 6 August, one ZNPP staff member working in the area of the dry spent nuclear fuel storage facility was injured during a new episode of shelling. Ukraine reported that ZNPP staff had restricted access to the ZNPP on-site emergency crisis centre. Communication between the ZNPP and the nuclear regulators was reported to be very limited.

• Shelling on 7 August near the ZNPP’s dry spent fuel storage facility damaged the plant’s external power supply system, injured a Ukrainian security guard, and damaged walls, a roof and windows in the area of the spent fuel storage facility, as well as communication cables that were part of its radiation control system, with a possible impact on the functioning of three radiation detection sensors. A 750 kV high voltage line was shut down as a result of this round of shelling. At the same time, the emergency protection system of reactor Unit 4 was triggered.

This doesn't address who launched the attack(s), but as usual, both sides would blame each other, each seeming to use a different date. The plant managers of Ukrainian nuclear utility Energoatom would report one version dated late on the 6th:

In the evening of August 6, the Russian Federation carried out another missile attack on the site of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and the city of Energodar. "They hit the site of the ZNPP directly next to the Stationary Dry Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel (SSNF). Apparently, they aimed specifically at the spent nuclear fuel containers that are stored in the open air near the firing sites. 174 containers, each of which contains 24 assemblies of spent nuclear fuel! " - reads the message of "Energoatom". According to him, three radiation monitoring sensors around the SSVYAP site were damaged. "Therefore, timely detection and response in the event of deterioration of the radiation situation or leakage of radiation from containers of spent nuclear fuel is currently impossible," warns Energoatom. (

DW Ukraine on Telegram)

The Russians would report ON the 7th, regarding an attack that might have been the night before. "The administration of Russian-controlled Enerhodar said that Ukrainian forces "launched a strike using a 220-mm Uragan MLRS rocket" towards the ZNPP and that it had "managed to open up and release fragmentation submunitions" while approaching, whereas Ukrainian state-owned plant operator Energatom stated that the Russian forces on 6 August "fired rockets at the site of the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and the city of Energodar" hitting next to the ZNPP's facility where spent nuclear fuel is stored. 

https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/ukraine-russia-blame-each-other-for-nuclear-plant-shelling/

Add 9/15: Zveda video of rocket remains, Aug. 7 at 3:00 am: "At night, the Ukrainian Armed Forces struck the Zaporozhye NPP with the use of the Uragan MLRS" The date Aug. 6 is agreed. https://t.me/zvezdanews/88346

If this all of this correlates to one attack, we might see damage from cluster munitions and a spent Uragan engine in the vicinity of the spent fuel storage area. As I explain below, we do see that, and so this probably all correlates. But it comes in two version. Which version is more credible? 

Cameras Not Lying

Rooftop Impacts

As far as I've seen, just the Russian side provided images of the aftermath. One photo comes with that same Euractiv report: "A still image taken a handout video provided by the Russian Defence Ministry's press service shows damage at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station (ZNPP) in Enerhodar, southeastern Ukraine, 7 August 2022. ...

With another Euractiv report, a second photo, apparently taken from the same roof: "A still image taken a handout video provided by the Russian Defence Ministry's press service shows damage at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Station (ZNPP) in Enerhodar, southeastern Ukraine, 7 August 2022. [Handout image/EPA/EFE]"

What else is shown in this handout video? I should try and find this. The time on these is mid-morning, consistent enough with events of the preceding day.

Location: not 100% certain, but probably this roof marked in pale blue, roughly 50m west of the spent fuel storage site in question (more than 160 containers lined up in a roofless courtyard). The lines of sight - from the reactor domes, over a wide, near building with a huge smokestack - almost require this is it. The next best fit seems too far out, but is also marked in blue for good measure. (base image: Maxar 8/29 (on Twitter), rotated to app. true north)

The building's details aren't fully clear in satellite views - an external ladder can't be seen clearly, but makes most sense at the NW corner, and might be visible there. The impact by the ladder has a small crater and some fragmentation marks. The other impact is visibly near the SW corner, where a ventilation pipe was damaged. The satellite view doesn't show this object at all, let alone damage to it. 

The damage pattern isn't very clear in either case, and if this is from cluster bombs as reported, they would scatter with their own radial direction from a descending missile or rocket - which might be falling vertically - so their own directional clues don't show the missile or rocket's original direction. 

Rocket Impact

One 220mm Uragan rocket was specified as delivering those bomblets. That's likely the same one seen in this photo - "Russian Defense Ministry Press Service via AP/File" - unrelated to the August 11 news story it came with, but predating it, and probably just the rocket/missile reported on the 6th/7th. 

The location (explained next) is next to the large spent fuel storage site mentioned - blue-and-yellow panels, gray shack at the gate - over 160 containers inside in satellite views -photo from August 7 with another Euractiv report. And that fits with those reports of the 6th and 7th. 

The fins look like those on a 220mm Uragan as reported. It also looks like a smaller Grad or other kind of MLRS rocket, but the scale seems correct to be 220mm - nearly 9 inches across vs. 4.5" for a Grad. The Uragan is in use by Russia and Ukraine. It's an unguided artillery rocket, which means it should travel on a parabolic arc, and its impact will probably reveal its direction of travel - as it apparently does. https://weaponsystems.net/system/1045-220mm+9M27

Location: views to the north and south pin it ~330m east of reactor 6 's dome, 35m from the gate to spent fuel storage:

Then more exactly on Maxar 8/29 view, rotated to north, + "sharpness" - some extra dirt color may be visible there between the trees, but from space it's not very clear. So here I covered the spot with a crude little sketch of a trench angling alongside these 2 trees nearest the roadway - outer trench and displaced soil in orange and yellow, apparent center of trough = line of travel, marked red. Note how the rocket rests a bit off this line. 

Add 9/15: More updated location - finally seeing a 3rd tree in this outer rows, the satellite view makes more sense. The scale and angle change, but so do the lines between the trees, and these roughly cancel each other out. Trajectory estimate ... yet to re-do, but quite similar to what it was. 

By this, the rocket's tail points to the east or southeast, to Russian-held areas. Flash News Ukraine for one might have known that, or might have just seen the opposite of what a Russian said, which was taken as it came from Ukrainian territory. It's commonly assumed the tailfins will point back to the point of origin, and so the Russian expert's opposite claims are taken by Flash as a joke - he says the rocket turned 180° just before impact! LOL!

I can't make out the few words in Russian, but from the gestures, he seems to say the rocket was spinning until impact, as they're designed to do, and then it bent forward after impact, which is also common enough. At right, one of the improvised rockets used in the 2013 Ghouta sarin attack, with tail bent forward at an angle over its displaced soil. A Uragan is more rigid than this was, but still, he's almost certainly right about what happened. 

As shown above, the soil dispersion is roughly in the same direction as the tail points, But it should be the opposite, if this rocket came from the southeast, as some people think. An air bomb or a missile coming straight down will send dirt evenly in all directions, forming a round crater and a ring of debris around it. But if the thing is moving laterally at all, the blast's residual momentum will add a bit to the spread of debris, displacing the ring of soil a bit forward to form more like a crescent that's "fattest" to the northwest. Instead, we see roughly the opposite.

This impact looks slightly explosive, but may just mechanical - a heavy spent tube angling in after it had dropped its cluster bomb payload, just digging in a ways and displacing some soil with the general shock wave of its impact. That too will be mainly in the forward direction, with very little blown to the sides and none to the back. Yep, that's what we see. 

So the dirt points one way (SE) and the tailfins somewhat the same way - and thus somewhat the opposite way. Soil dispersion is the more fundamental clue here, considering rocket tubes often bend forward on a shallow impact, whereas soil doesn't usually disperse backwards, nor does it usually get moved around to look that way. Therefore, this rocket came - most logically - from the northwest, displacing soil to the southeast, before it presumably bent forward.

And More on the Rocket

I pointed this out in a tweet I forwarded to Flash - "When it arrives, its back keeps moving after the front stops, so it'll flip (and/or spin) forward. That's common. You think it blew out soil 180° backwards? 🇷🇺 violates laws of physics trying to nuke themselves? So smart to catch them?" 

As I would later show it:

Presumably self-appointed, gaslighting gatekeeper K. Johnson - "A Spin of the Wheel" (whoever he really is - I don't care) - and another suspiciously selective expert - JMCSMS with "just under 20 years as weapons tech" - disputed this with varying lucidity. Over and over they insisted I knew nothing, yet agreed with me that usually dirt spreads further in the forward direction: 

"It can be seen the missile threw out dirt/rocks at the front when penetrating the earth. That is probably a combination of blast & the momentum transfer to dirt particles/clumps I was speaking about. The dirt distribution looks much like expected from a grad type detonation." (KJ), "Soil dispersion will be non-uniform because the missile struck at an acute angle to the vertical." (KJ) YES! the difference in angle is NW-SE. It's slight, and perhaps non-explosive, hence the limited spread. 

JMCSMS was less specific, but acknowledged the scene looked "hooky" or "it really doesn't look right" for an impact from the east or southeast, which they both favored. One point raised was "It doesn't look any uxb rocket crater I've come across  - it's too big and elongated." Almost like a dug trench? I agree, and more so the more I look. I don't think there was a detonation at all. If there was - maybe one cluster munition that never fell? Johnson might have mentioned the elongated crater too, but I couldn't relocate it if so. But he did argue against the evident spread he otherwise noted, saying: "Momentum transfer to dirt at the front would likely distribute it further in range, spreading it out more thinly & widely rather than creating a pile right next to the missile body." That could be explained by the dirt being moved around afterwards - OR it being just barely spread by a non-explosive impact.

For his part, JMCSMS steadfastly refused to discuss further until - basically - he had been there himself, by a time machine if necessary, to see the thing as it was, with his toolkit of professional measuring tools. Anything less is just reckless, these gatekeepers pontificate ... whenever they don't like what the evidence has to say.

KJ kept going. He was correct to challenge my starting claim that the rocket engine - seen as short - had "flipped" forward. It would be more embedded and would have to bend to explain what we see, as I soon decided. From there, all he had was a sad effort at gaslighting me. Since the rocket isn't PROVEN to have bent forward, invisibly underground as that would be, he insisted it didn't bend, or at least we should assume that, and so it came from the east. Sage advice from KJ: "The missile is not bent. The dirt has likely been disturbed given the crowd around it. You are wasting your time & looking foolish." 

All the soil ejected to the NW was simply shuffled around, almost 180 degrees! And also I look foolish! Laugh Out Loud there. And at the base, it's been packed under the rocket .. that can't be accidental. In a more lucid frame, he'll suggest the Russians faked it to look like a forward-folded impact from the NW.  And it does look like one! Or it looks "hooky," or however you might put it.

That is physically possible, but it's a pretty stupid conspiracy theory.  Closer views reveal better and better clues that this happened like the Russians say, or they did some quite elaborate staging to cover up - again - their own inherently dubious shelling of the nuclear plant they occupied at the time. 

* note at right how there's a gap between the tube and the packed soil: it bent forward into the dirt as soon as it piled up, packed it on that curve, and finally sprung back a tiny bit when the elastic process was done. 

* the forward hinge on one of the tailfins may have snagged a shallow tree root during plowing and pivoting 

* in the BBC view below, next to the 03:11, roots are pulled forward, and were anchored at that angle when the soil came to rest 

* It's not clear to me if any fins are distorted, or if they should be.

So ... That's the scene and what it says. I can only visually estimate the implied trajectory relative to those trees, but that gives me the red line below, along with a very broad range sure to include the actual trajectory. That Uragan rocket was fired from somewhere in the Nikopol area, or probably nearer to Prydniprovske, or nearby Kamianske or Musiivka - all Ukrainian-held, about 15 km or further to the northwest. 

Combined with the rooftop cluster bomb impacts, I can propose this basic relation. Numerous other explosive impacts are expected in the purple circle, or in a circle or oblong of uncertain size somewhere around there. I've only seen those two.

Update 9/29: more from the Russian MoD video included in some news videos: France 24, Aug. 9 -  WION, Sept. 2.  The impacted roof is seen more fully and looks more like two roofs, one smaller and lower. So I now suspect the vent damage is on the smaller building marked 1, and the other seems to belong where I had it, now numbered 2. 

I can also see 3 impacts on the ground nearby; #3 is along the walkway by the larger building. 

#4 and 5 are impact craters in the grass in front of the guard shack. There are likely 

a couple of others, but just these two are clear. This gives a linear but incomplete area of bomblet dispersion, still all northwest of the rocket shell's impact. 

9/29 later: A new view clarifies the roof impacts are both on the one roof after all. The NW corner hit seen so the whole west wall is visible - at the SW corner, we can see the same outer pipe and matching corner details. The apparent height difference and possible scale differences were illusory, and it's the pink 1 on the above map. Glad I kept it there as a maybe. 

Photo source:  

https://twitter.com/mission_rf/status/1567039319470219265

CNN Turns a Blind Eye to Ukraine's Systematic Shelling of ZNPP

All these clues were present well before CNN would feel compelled, with a 5-author report on August 19, to find nothing that happened on the 5th to 7th as seen above - nor anything between June 19 and August 19 was any big deal, or it wasn't "systematic" enough to worry about, suggesting that it was exaggerated or perhaps made-up by the Russians. Or anyway, it seems like that from outer space.

First on CNN: Satellite images show no signs of "systemic shelling" at nuclear plant despite Putin’s claim

"There are no signs of "systemic shelling" at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, new satellite images from Maxar Technologies show. This counters Friday's claims by Russian President Vladimir Putin that the Ukrainian military was conducting repeated military strikes at the plant."

"The latest satellite images from Maxar Technologies were taken Friday morning. CNN has analyzed a number of satellite images of the nuclear power plant complex located in Enerhodar, Ukraine, and it shows little to no change in damage or destruction since July 19, when a Ukrainian military strike on three tents just under 1,000 feet from one of the nuclear reactors."

I don't think these July 19 images are publicly available to check. If so, I haven't found them yet. But to the extent there's no change, it just as well means no sign of the systematic RUSSIAN-shelling of the Russian-occupied plant alleged by Kiev on several occasions. But really what it shows is secondary to what it misses; photographed roof damage and an embedded rocket engine - at least - actually existed, but as we've seen, they were too small-scale to appear at this resolution. By choosing a view from OUTER SPACE, CNN opted to effectively squint the evidence away. And so they reported how "little to nothing" was actually happening on the ground, among the stored radioactive materials, pipes and devices necessary to avoiding nuclear catastrophe. The flippancy of this report on such a serious subject is essentially criminal.

The damage isn't massive so far, even by now; it's more visible than it was on the 22nd, but still largely invisible from space. But weapons were fired distressingly close to sensitive areas, before and since, several times destabilizing the situation so corrective measures were needed. In the case of the Uragan rocket on August 6/7, it seemingly came from a Ukrainian-held area. As other posts will show, the same hold for at least some other impacts, and perhaps all of them. 

Now, is it systematic? We saw Zelenskyy's response to the August 5 shelling, urging some firm response to Russia's acts of nuclear terrorism and such. An article at EBC Tech, August 7, relates the responses to this Uragan attack from the northwest: "The director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Rafael Grossi, said that he was “extremely concerned about yesterday’s shelling of Europe’s largest nuclear power plant,"" an act that “highlights the very real danger of a nuclear catastrophe" with global implications.  Grossi called on “all parties” to exercise restraint, and he again insisted on a visit by the IAEA investigative mission to the besieged site. 

As EBC Tech noted and as I think few people realized, "Ukraine opposes the visit by the IAEA mission to the Zaporizhzhia NPP and condemns the idea of ​​a visit to the occupied territories without the consent of the Ukrainian authorities. The Russian invaders actively supported such a visit and even prepared for it." 

Similar reported by BBC, Aug. 3: "The IAEA's director-general said he was trying to put together a mission as soon as possible to visit the plant but this required the approval of both the Ukrainian and Russian sides ...  In June, Ukraine's state nuclear company said Ukraine had not invited the IAEA - and any visit would legitimise Russia's presence there." Al Jazeera, Aug. 8: "In a statement, Russia’s foreign ministry said it wanted the (IAEA) to visit ... but that Kyiv was blocking a potential visit. ... Zakharova also claimed Moscow had done everything it could to facilitate a visit by the UN’s nuclear watchdog to the plant but that Kyiv saw it as “beneficial to keep the IAEA away”." Bloomberg Aug. 8: "Russia told diplomats it’s ready to welcome international monitors" but "Grossi said he needs permission from Ukraine’s government" but he still didn't have it. They would eventually concede, and opinions were starting to shift at this time; "Ukraine’s nuclear utility, Energoatom, wanted "a mission of peacekeepers and experts from the IAEA and other organizations.” They wanted the Russians out, mainly. That plus a site visit was OK by them.

Back to EBC Tech, Aug. 7: The head of Military Administration, Alexander Starukh, is one who would oppose the simple, non-military mission the Russians and IAEA had agreed to. He declared instead “The situation requires a real response, not an expression of concern” nor any Russian-sponsored media stunt to smear the glorious heroes of post-Maidan Ukraine with any on-the-ground facts the IAEA team might discover. 

Kiev had apparently just launched cluster bombs next to the spent fuel storage site, and to that illogical "Russian shelling" of the Russian-occupied plant, the only response they wanted to see was something "real." Direct, international military action against Russia captures the spirit best, but Zelenskyy was pedaling new and "tough" sanctions to cripple Russia's nuclear industry, adding to the measures meant to bring its people finally to their knees.

I think I can make out a system at work behind this, even from this belated and cursory review.