Iskander-M/K (SS-26 Stone):

http://s68841.cdn.ngenix.net/mp4/ur9u5ki00002p6o8n1wgirx34j0.mp4

Iskander launch from todays drills

Isos wrote:US missiles have a range of 2000 km so what your saying is wrong. US have long range cruise missiles

What cruise missile ? Surely not conventionally armed TLAM (even more the submarine launched version) Even the nuclear armed version never came close to this range , ever ......


Reality is much more simple : since about four months in western high security rooms persist an high level of frenzy due to the sudden realization of the huge technological gap between the most advanced TLAM and domestic version of Калибр.

Domestic version of Калибр hugely surpass the most advanced of TLAM in all cardinal parameter , and above the others just in the range departement, to the point that just in those weeks in the USA is in examination a very expensive plan, for the next decade, to attempt to pose a remedy to this deadly dangerous strategical gap.

Similar huge technological gap ,at US disfavor, is true for air delivered cruise missile, both conventionally and nuclear armed.

Do you know : a thing is the public media propaganda full of "air-dominance TM" ,"naval dominance TM", "situational awareness TM" and similar void low level posturing garbage, another is the cold technical assessment of the capability of a 3М-14 in comparison to an RGM/UGM-109 or a Kh-101/102 in comparison with a AGM-86.

Someone got the bright idea to attempt to employ the UGM-109s of an Ohio class on a Federation target just 600/700 km from the shore ?

No problem that Ohio can happily stop at 400/500 km from Russian shore and merely initiate the missile salvo sequence (......the very slow and inefficient one characteristic of that largely outdated cruise missile) and quietly wait to discover how much the domestic version of 91Р series differ from that offered for export.

Don't worry, it will not be a long wait : 6-7 of those cute gift-bringing specimens will very quickly reach its position at high supersonic speed, the crew will surely enjoy the series of "welcome firework" within its hull.

Obviousily also in this instance no NATO nation has in its inventory something even only in the same class.

Mindstorm wrote:

Isos wrote:US missiles have a range of 2000 km so what your saying is wrong. US have long range cruise missiles

What cruise missile ?  Surely not conventionally armed TLAM (even more the submarine launched version)  Even the nuclear armed version never came close to this range , ever ......


Reality is much more simple : since about four months in western high security rooms persist an high level of frenzy due to the sudden realization of the huge technological gap between the most advanced TLAM and domestic version of Калибр.

Domestic version of Калибр hugely surpass the most advanced of TLAM in all cardinal parameter , and above the others just in the range departement, to the point that just in those weeks in the USA is in examination a very expensive plan, for the next decade, to attempt to pose a remedy to this deadly dangerous strategical gap.

Similar huge technological gap ,at US disfavor, is true for air delivered cruise missile, both conventionally and nuclear armed.

Do you know : a thing is the public media propaganda full of "air-dominance TM" ,"naval dominance TM", "situational awareness TM" and similar void low level posturing garbage, another is the cold technical assessment of the capability of a 3М-14 in comparison to an RGM/UGM-109 or a Kh-101/102 in comparison with a AGM-86.

Someone got the bright idea to attempt to employ the UGM-109s of an Ohio class on a Federation target just 600/700 km from the shore ?

No problem that Ohio can happily stop at 400/500 km from Russian shore and merely initiate the missile salvo sequence (......the very slow and inefficient one characteristic of that largely outdated cruise missile) and quietly wait to discover how much the domestic version of 91Р series differ from that offered for export.

Don't worry, it will not be a long wait : 6-7 of those cute gift-bringing specimens will very quickly reach its position at high supersonic speed, the crew will surely enjoy the series of "welcome firework" within its hull.

Obviousily also in this instance no NATO nation has in its inventory something even only in the same class.

Well current production variant Block IV TLAM-E has reported range of 1600-1700km in land attack version ofc, and now destroyed and retired TLAM-Ns had range of 2500km (do not exist since 2011.).

Militarov wrote:Well current production variant Block IV TLAM-E

It has a reported engagement range ........a very "optimistic" one, how in the best over Atlantic tradition since Cold War, for its very well known aerodynamic layout and propulsion,..... up to 900 nautical miles for the Block IV (about 1600 km).

Obviously the submarine launched one show an effective range sensibly lower than that (and the same is true obviously, with the due proportion, for Калибр too.

Isos wrote:

It looks a lot like kalibr

Zivo wrote:

Isos wrote:

It looks a lot like kalibr

Iskander-K to be exact, which uses an allegedly "gimped" version of 3M-14 Kaliber cruise missile that complies with the INF treaty.

I believe Iskander missiles are really not nuclear but we are to pretend they are.

max steel wrote:I believe Iskander missiles are really not nuclear but we are to pretend they are.

They (Iskander-M/K) are capable of carrying thermonuclear warheads but are using conventional warheads 99.9% of the time. INF restricts the use of ground based munitions with a range of 500-5,500 km range regardless if they're thermonuclear or conventional.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

They (Iskander-M/K) are capable of carrying thermonuclear warheads but are using conventional warheads 99.9% of the time. INF restricts the use of ground based munitions with a range of 500-5,500 km range regardless if they're thermonuclear or conventional.

Don't you think both Iskanders and ATACMS are same in performance ? US will be making 500km range ATACMS. But do they both follow same trajectory ?

whats the actual maximum range of that cruise missile??

George1 wrote:whats the actual maximum range of that cruise missile??

Russians claim its 500km so it does not break INF Treaty. But they have potential to have same or similar range of Kalibr, aka 1500-2000km depending on warhead type. Its basically weaken Kalibr.

so it is in the same range as the ballistic missile of Iskander

George1 wrote:so it is in the same range as the ballistic missile of Iskander

Yeah, but its range can be extended 3 or 4 times if you ignore threaty. Also its should be cheaper as it shares most of its components with Kalibr and its variants.

Isos wrote:

Militarov wrote:

George1 wrote:so it is in the same range as the ballistic missile of Iskander

Yeah, but its range can be extended 3 or 4 times if you ignore threaty. Also its should be cheaper as it shares most of its components with Kalibr and its variants.

There was some concerns from the pentagone that russia tested a new +2500km cruise missile for Iskander. Maybe it's not this one.

Yeah, this one. But there were also few never finished USSR projects that they claim Russians might have reactivated.

Isos wrote:

Statement from Russia's Defense Ministry said:

"The missile, made with the use of the radar signature reduction technology, was not detected by electronic warfare from the imaginary enemy and destroyed the target successfully". [It] was flying at an altitude of 40-50 kilometres (25-31 miles) while manoeuvring with 20-fold G force in some parts of the flight."

Missiles launched from the Iskander-M have a range of 500 kilometres (250-310 miles), at 2100–2600 m/s (Mach 6–7), with the system capable of delivering several types of 500kg (1,100lb) warheads to destroy a wide variety of ground targets.

The guided missiles can locate targets either via satellite or aircraft, through a conventional intelligence centre, or from aerial photos scanned into a computer.

They can be re-targeted during flight if engaging mobile targets, and use stealth technology as well as electronic warfare jamming devices for suppression of enemy radar.

The Iskander launch platform can be transported by any means of transport, including airplanes, with this mobility making it harder to prevent launches. It was outfitted with a new aeroballistic missile late last year.

It takes 16 minutes to launch a missile from the complex, but this can be cut to four minutes in case of operational readiness. A second missile can be launched in under 50 seconds.

Extremelly interesting !!!

Explains much about the Iskander about what mindstorm has been saying

Russia Focussing on Exploiting Vulnerabilities of NATO Missile Shield

Good, its about time for the next contract and I suspect quite a large one

Chemezov: missile systems, "Iskander" will not go for export

7th brigade switched to SS-26

http://bmpd.livejournal.com/1988614.html

ok has anyone heard of this? i dont really see the point when they have such a good system already the Iskander.

http://tass.com/russia/800059

Russia developing upgraded version of Oka tactical missile system — defense ministry

"There is no need in restoring the old system. We’re developing a new complex," Borisov said, adding the new missile system would be based on the Oka principle.

Could it be Frontier?

Whats the point developing a Iskander like missile ? They already have a INF compliant BM and then develop a new one ?

Austin wrote:Whats the point developing a Iskander like missile ? They already have a INF compliant BM and then develop a new one ?

A smaller compact Iskander means cheaper missiles that could be bunched in greater numbers on a launcher. Maybe instead of #2 450-500km missiles per launcher, the same launcher could hold #4 250km missiles, or maybe #8 125km missiles.

It can differentiate itself from normal MLRS by having many of the same "tricks" the normal Iskander-M has, and be used specifically to overwhelm IAD with a ground based SEAD/DEAD barrage.

Austin wrote:Whats the point developing a Iskander like missile ? They already have a INF compliant BM and then develop a new one ?

In a word; saturation.

...and what Magnum mentioned.