9K720 Iskander (SS-26 Stone) SRBM

NMaude said:
As far as I know the PRC was never party to the INF treaty which was between the USA and USSR/Russia.
Click to expand...
That's what I said, neither was particularly happy because they were bound by it but China wasn't. Case in point, China has the most potent and largest arsenal of intermediate range missiles. Both Russia and the United States at various points questioned adhering to INF because of this reality, because it seems rather pointless when a third nuclear power just develops the stuff you bilaterally banned for each other.

In the long term INF was only going to work if you bring countries like China, North Korea, Iran, India, Pakistan and Israel to also sign and ratify the treaty. This didn't happen, thus neither the US nor Russia saw a reason to further adhere to it, because who in their right mind puts themselves at a deliberate disadvantage?
 
Last edited:
EmoBirb said:
Eh, Aegis Ashore would have been able to fire Tomahawk thanks to it's Mk 41.
Click to expand...
Was never loaded with Tomahawks. Russia had active missiles with a range above 500km. Iskander-M arrived in the mid-00s, Oniks well before that. Mk-41 deployment in Europe didn't happen until mid-10s.
 
I guess, without considering terminal velocity, the Iskander missile could achieve a range of 500-700 km.

Of course, the 499km range allows for a much better terminal velocity, greatly increasing the probability of penetration.This is the dilemma of quasi-ballistic missile weapons: you cannot guarantee performance at engagement range without violating treaties.Unless it's like ATACMS, with a range of only 300km,btw i still believe that ATACMS can also reach a maximum range of around 400km——Of course, this did not violate the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.
 
Josh_TN said:
I am starting to get impression Kinzhal is a bit of a disappointment, if only because air launch ruins response time.
Click to expand...
It pretty much is. Longer throw and range don't justify early warning and unpredictable accuracy. Far less of a weapon system than Tsirkon, and lower cost per munition doesn't really justify this.
There will probably be some stock for the main original purposes(ASuW, Nuclear), and that's it.
 
Ainen said:
It pretty much is. Longer throw and range don't justify early warning and unpredictable accuracy. Far less of a weapon system than Tsirkon, and lower cost per munition doesn't really justify this.
There will probably be some stock for the main original purposes(ASuW, Nuclear), and that's it.
Click to expand...

It still fills a range band other tactical weapons do not, but I think it only makes sense in context of distant NATO targets. Even then, sortie rate, size, and raid warning makes it less effective.
 
paralay said:
I am confident that the main purpose of the MiG‑31I + Kinzhal system is to engage American aircraft carriers at a distance of 2,000 km (without refueling).
Click to expand...
That would require an active seeker, plus launching in enough numbers to overwhelm the defenses.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom