Dmytro Makagon (D.M.): "The fact that the building stood and did not collapse after the missile strike indicates that it was probably erected in compliance with modern construction standards, which take into account the aspect of progressive destruction. That is, even if several columns and walls are destroyed by an explosion, the building itself does not collapse. Modern high-rise buildings are the strongest in this regard. They have "cores of rigidity" made of concrete — these are elevator and staircase units. The taller the building, the thicker the columns should be in order to withstand the weight of the building and wind loads. And the larger the column of the wall, the better it can potentially withstand side explosions. The example of the house in Tatarka, where the rocket hit the first floors, also confirms this.And this is not some invention of recent years, these are norms that have been applied to high-rise buildings for a long time. For example, the television center (known as "Olivets", or The Pencil) and the building of the Ministry of Infrastructure, built in Soviet times, also have such "cores of rigidity".

Of course, this does not mean that any 25-story high-rise will withstand any missile attack. Even if it has survived this specific missile, it may not survive an "Iskander"."

D.М.: "Odesa is special in the sense that the southern regions of Ukraine implement even stricter requirements for the strength of buildings. After all, there is a possibility of seismic activity, so the buildings must be even more stable. The building built in 2012, which was hit by a rocket, just like the high-rise in the capital, did not collapse precisely because of the presence of a "core of rigidity". Of course, we have not seen the results of the examination and do not know the full description of the nature of the destruction, and we did not conduct research, but visually the "torn" part of the house appears to be restorable without the dismantlement of the entire entrance."

D.М.: "Old houses — and this applies not only to panel structures — are not designed to prevent progressive destruction. In the case of concrete panel objects, a bomb could destroy only one or two upper floors. But as soon as those panels are destroyed, they begin to fall on top of each other and turn into a "projectile" themselves. And the taller this building is, the more the "collapsed" upper panels will press on the lower floors and also cause destruction. There is also the danger that the wall panel can be knocked out by an explosion because it rests on collateral parts. Then, the absence of one panel can cause the entire section to collapse. In this way, the entire section "folds down" not only because of the destructive power of the bomb or missile (although this can also be a factor), but because of the features of the design. This also applies to domestic accidents, for example, a gas explosion.

Additionally, we can see the consequences of the fire in the photo. Concrete and steel reinforcements can be destroyed, and the ceiling can collapse (“fold down”) from high temperatures. It is very difficult to determine what share of this destruction is because of the direct impact of the bomb, and which part was done by the ensuing fire. The panels, which were accidentally left "hanging" on the upper floors, no longer rest on other panels, nor carry the ceiling, but only "carry" themselves. The load on them is small, so when the rest of the section "got out", they were left hanging. This is, of course, only for a while. Because one way or another, the fasteners are deformed, and sooner or later they will collapse, unless people do not dismantle or demolish them. Unfortunately, most likely, the buildings shown in the photo are subject to complete demolition, as the destruction and fire, most likely, have damaged the entire structure."

D.М.: "One can notice on the photo from Chasiv Yar that panel slabs were overlapping in those houses. That is, if a broken slab falls down and crashes on another slab below, the effect continues and makes the entire structure collapse. Panel apartments, where the walls are made of reinforced concrete, are similar by design to brick houses, which also have overlapping panel slabs. 4 powerful missiles hit a dormitory in Chasiv Yar, hardly anything would have survived there, even if the ceilings were monolithic, as in modern houses. The bricks experience the load from the blast wave worse than concrete.

In the building from the photo taken in Kharkiv, it seems that the brick wall on which the floors rested was destroyed. And so they collapsed, breaking through the lower floors. When the floors lost their support, they in turn also collapsed. If the building featured monolithic overlapping, this would not have happened, or at least there would have been more chances for the building to survive, that is, the impact of the explosive wave from the rocket could have been insignificant. By and large, it is possible to disassemble the part which was destroyed, and the rest of the house can most likely be restored. Judging by the photo, there was no fire, only destruction from the impact. But of course, each specific case should be considered separately. The tilt of the building due to the shockwave is not visible to the human eye, it must be measured with instruments.

The hotel in Chernihiv is structurally similar: brick walls and concrete floor slabs are strips that were displaced by the impact of an aerial bomb. It seems that everything, down to the first floor, was destroyed. The destruction follows the contour of the crater, meaning the blast wave acted in the same way as if this bomb had fallen to the ground. That is, the epicenter coincides with the deepest damage and from there it spreads further to higher floors. Here we see that the walls are quite strong and thick, and thanks to this, while the slabs were torn apart, the walls remained due to their thickness. Of course, everything here will be demolished."

D.М.: "Here we see characteristic signs of destruction caused by fire. When the concrete was heated, the reinforcement was exposed. If it was a peaceful time and the relevant services were working, they should have quickly localized and extinguished the fire in 1-2 hours. But when the fire burns for half the day, it is no longer possible to restore, due to the fact that it is not known how the armature behaved at a high temperature. Of course, it does not melt like the Terminator in the movie, but 500 C (about 930 F) is enough for it to begin to deform and expand. This leads to cracks in the concrete, and its pieces begin to break off. That is, the structure no longer meets the requirements of safety and reliability."