AC,

Kharkiv was taken, along with many Russian prisoners and equipment such as tanks because the Ukrainians had been telling the world that they were going to take Kherson so Russia moved most of their combat troops to Kherson and left Kharkiv weakened.

Kherson was taken later because in spite of a massive Russian build-up, the Ukrainians destroyed the logistical supply routes and after some weeks of fighting the Russian lines were collapsing. As the Russians began to withdraw long before the Ukrainians reached the dam wall the "threat" was non-existent. As far as trying to cross the Dnieper River The Ukrainians never tried but moved their forces to take territory in Luhansk which they did successfully.

The next logical step in my opinion would be to flood Crimea with cheap unpiloted drones to deplete the air defences, then take out the Kerch bridge with long-range ATACMS then the rail link through Tokmak

Hey shadowminister,
"Kharkiv was taken, along with many Russian prisoners and equipment such as tanks because the Ukrainians had been telling the world that they were going to take Kherson so Russia moved most of their combat troops to Kherson and left Kharkiv weakened"

- You may be right there, I'm not entirely sure but I'll grant you that its certainly possible.
All I know it that they were short on men at the time because of troop military contracts completed and not renewed.

"...destroyed the logistical supply routes and after some weeks of fighting"
- Yes, Ukrainians destroyed the Antonivka Bridge and the other railbridge 1klm upstream with HIMARS and that forced the Russian forces to use pontoon bridges, and certainly made maintaining supply difficult for them.
(There may have been more attacks on Russian ammunition depots.)
- They were still largely holding their ground on the Western side of the Dnieper, but their advances had certainly stalled.

"As the Russians began to withdraw long before the Ukrainians reached the dam wall the 'threat' was non-existent."
- It was still a strategic risk to them.

I think the decision to withdraw was more based upon the risk of flooding from the Karkovka Dam if destroyed AS WELL AS the fact the troops were better situated in defense of Melitopol at the time.

"The next logical step in my opinion would be to flood Crimea with cheap unpiloted drones to deplete the air defences, then take out the Kerch bridge with long-range ATACMS then the rail link through Tokmak"
- I'm not sure what they're planning next but I'm sure they're planning something.
They'd want to hope to be successful and not have them shot down because once they fire them Russia will be trying to locate the launchers.
- It's still going to be a big job breaking through well established defensive lines in the south now though.

AC,

The ATACMS carries a 500kg warhead, travels at Mach 3-4 changes course frequently and will almost certainly be accompanied by drones. the chances of stopping this missile are close to zero and a single strike can take down the rail bridge.

The missile can also be fired 30-40 km from Russian lines at night and the firing platform will be long gone before the Russians can react. (which is why they haven't yet managed to destroy one).

As mentioned before Russia is losing about 150 tanks a month and 3x that of IFVs while Russia's replacements are a tiny fraction of this.

Russia's army is culminating and by the end of the year, it is more likely that Russia will be pushed out of Ukraine entirely.