Ukrainian Ballistic Missile Development and Deployment

NATO codes got canceled over the 9K111.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh and its gone....
Anyway the thing with the image that was Off the most is the missile housing which seems to be the same design as Topol tho it doesnt make sense to make this switch (+ it would be more volume inefficient). At the same time the truck is completly different to any known (atleast for me) trucks operating in ukraine. Anyway there was also a lot of blur in areas where it shouldn't be
 
Forest Green said:
Intyeresting launcher image, looks different to previous Sapsan images. I wonder is this for the FP-9 or just some AI BS.
Click to expand...
Definitely AI.
It's getting better. Less detectable. But there are patterns that can be detected by software. There are websites that can do an AI generation test for free.
 
Last edited:
Why didn't you try this before posting then?
 
Forest Green said:
I see:
sightengine.com

AI Image Detector. Detect AI-Generated Images

Check the authenticity and provenance of images with our AI image detector. Automatically detect fake images.
sightengine.com sightengine.com
View attachment 794848
Click to expand...
To be quite frank, these publicly avaliable 'ai detection' websites (and even most buisness equivalents) are notoriously bad at actually detecting what is AI and what isn't. Iirc one gave out a 90%+ probability that a photo of the US constitution was AI generated.
 

Confirmation that the Sapsan is in serial and systematic use. I think soon we will see some interesting videos of S-400/300 systems getting hit.

Also looking at the physical shape of the FP-7/FP-9 ballistic missile I really wonder if its meant to serve a dual purpose as part of FirePoint's Ballistic missile defence program as well as the confirmed use for ground launched Ballistic missile program.
 
Is there some reason to consider the source as authoritative?

Also it seems extremely unlikely there is any public proof of usage, unless the Russians are so inclined. The system has no video link and a long range; BDA is probably limited to post strike satellite photos.
 
Arjen said:
One of the reasons for NATO reporting names was that precise Soviet designations were not always known to NATO member states.
Search for Iskander or Kinzhal, and you will get more hits than for their corresponding NATO codes/reporting names. Even on this site.
Click to expand...

I always use the US DoD/Nato reporting name wherever possible.
 
Last edited:
slroger said:

Confirmation that the Sapsan is in serial and systematic use. I think soon we will see some interesting videos of S-400/300 systems getting hit.

Also looking at the physical shape of the FP-7/FP-9 ballistic missile I really wonder if its meant to serve a dual purpose as part of FirePoint's Ballistic missile defence program as well as the confirmed use for ground launched Ballistic missile program.
Click to expand...
Balistic missiles seem to be rather easy to intercept, no reason to believe Ukrainan missile would do better than american one,

New Rusi paper with some interesting insights about Russian Air Defence:

Russia SAM&AA operators quickly learned to counter HARMs
GMLRS success rate is down to 8% in 2025 as RU has learned to intercept.
Storm shadow & western cruise missiles only 50% hit rate when fired in complex salvos.
It now takes 10 ATACMS to destroy one RU radar.
static.rusi.org
 
Technically, BMs are harder to intercept than CMs. Shorter response times, harder to counter maneuvers.
They also require specialized munitions while CMs can be countered by a lot of things.

The mentioned statistics are all incomparable, which is suspicious but expected of a Russian source.

Success rate depends on 3 factors: Hit rate, target type, and success definition.

Hit rate is simpler. Though might need clarification on how many hits were on decoys.

Shots per target type is variably interpretable. 10 missiles per radar could definitely mean a 100% hit rate if Ukraine fires 10 missiles per battery, aiming to hit radar, C2, TELs, and auxiliaries.
It could also mean that 1/10 of ATACMS targets are air defenses.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Big_Zukini said:
Technically, BMs are harder to intercept than CMs. Shorter response times, harder to counter maneuvers.
They also require specialized munitions while CMs can be countered by a lot of things.

The mentioned statistics are all incomparable, which is suspicious but expected of a Russian source.

Success rate depends on 3 factors: Hit rate, target type, and success definition.

Hit rate is simpler. Though might need clarification on how many hits were on decoys.

Shots per target type is variably interpretable. 10 missiles per radar could definitely mean a 100% hit rate if Ukraine fires 10 missiles per battery, aiming to hit radar, C2, TELs, and auxiliaries.
It could also mean that 1/10 of ATACMS targets are air defenses.
Click to expand...
No need for BS

RUSI is British (The Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) is the world’s oldest and the UK’s leading defence and security think tank) and most of the sources are Ukrainian, you have to separate alternate reality BS Ukraine doles out for the sheeple and intended for chasing our tax money which is then regurgitated uncritically by MSM and plethora of paid shills that are literaly buying advertising space to push the content. 90+% of what you get out of Ukraine is pure propaganda to try and keep our money flowing to keep them afloat and buy some more golden toilets.


Most of the Authors are Ukrainian as are the sources.
''Dr Jack Watling , Nikolay Staykov, Maya Kalcheva, Olena Yurchenko, Bohdan Kovalenko, Olena Zhul, Oleksii Borovikov, Anastasiia Opria, Roman Rabieiev, Nadiia Reminets and Alex Whitworth''

www.rusi.org

Disrupting Russian Air Defence Production: Reclaiming the Sky

This paper offers a comprehensive analysis of the manufacturing process of Russian air defence systems, demonstrating significant vulnerabilities in their production that could be exploited to disrupt their modernisation and output.
www.rusi.org www.rusi.org
 

Attachments

  • G8DJDEBXoAAw-wS.jpg
    G8DJDEBXoAAw-wS.jpg
    306.2 KB · Views: 34
  • G8DJDEGWkAAaW6R.jpg
    G8DJDEGWkAAaW6R.jpg
    295.2 KB · Views: 35
  • G8DJDD7WkAExbBi.jpg
    G8DJDD7WkAExbBi.jpg
    187.7 KB · Views: 37
Last edited by a moderator:
In any case, Sapsam is a much larger weapon more like Iskander M in size and speed. If it is in use, I expect it probably proves similarly difficult to shoot down in a timely fashion.
 
I posted its from RUSI paper and web link ,and stats are exactly as quoted in the text, not much deviation except no context , lets just say more accurate than most of the posts that have single twitter post as a source.

-Russia SAM&AA operators quickly learned to counter HARMs -check
-GMLRS success rate is down to 8% in 2025 as RU has learned to intercept. -check
-It now takes 10 ATACMS to destroy one RU radar. - check -up to
-Storm shadow & western cruise missiles only 50% hit rate when fired in complex salvos. -check ,over 50% even in complex salvos
 
Manwhile it seems Flamingo produced one per day taken as gospel a while ago turned out a bit of a tall story ,like most news out of Ukraine , owner is now mostly dodging folks trying to suicide him to tie lose ends

tvpworld.com

Czech donors ‘reassess’ gifting Ukraine two rockets amid corruption

The deal may change following reports that the missile’s maker, is linked to a corruption probe.
tvpworld.com tvpworld.com
 
Mr.T said:
Manwhile it seems Flamingo produced one per day taken as gospel a while ago turned out a bit of a tall story ,like most news out of Ukraine , owner is now mostly dodging folks trying to suicide him to tie lose ends

tvpworld.com

Czech donors ‘reassess’ gifting Ukraine two rockets amid corruption

The deal may change following reports that the missile’s maker, is linked to a corruption probe.
tvpworld.com tvpworld.com
Click to expand...
Yeah the Flamingo never presented a viable missile, and Ukraine was a major corruption risk even before the war.
Not at all surprised by this.

If any of these donors had done their due diligence and contacted an SME they'd be told instantly that the Flamingo is vaporware.
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1999882641039151447
View: https://x.com/DnKornev/status/1999882641039151447?s=20

From link:

In December 2025, it was reported that four types of homing heads were created for the missile.

These are likely the following seekers (according to a 2018 video):
- optical correlation
- radar correlation
- passive anti-radar
- combined radar with a combined optical and IR channel
Click to expand...

Also of not is the rocket mass of 2.5t, so it may be air transportable after all, maybe by an Su-24.

Mr.T said:
Balistic missiles seem to be rather easy to intercept, no reason to believe Ukrainan missile would do better than american one,
Click to expand...
It's a longer range missile, higher speed, harder to intercept, greater reach, more areas need BM defence, therefore air defence allocation stretched. Russia has only had to deal with MLRS rockets so far. Nothing resembling a proper SRBM has been fired at them.

Also, a large part of misses has been jamming (in areas that have it) of the GPS rather than SAM hits, but from the above the Grim-2 will have terminal homing.

It should also be noted that those stats are against well-defended areas, not a holistic analysis.
 
Last edited:
Mr.T said:
Balistic missiles seem to be rather easy to intercept, no reason to believe Ukrainan missile would do better than american one,

New Rusi paper with some interesting insights about Russian Air Defence:

Russia SAM&AA operators quickly learned to counter HARMs
GMLRS success rate is down to 8% in 2025 as RU has learned to intercept.
Storm shadow & western cruise missiles only 50% hit rate when fired in complex salvos.
It now takes 10 ATACMS to destroy one RU radar.
static.rusi.org
Click to expand...
US drip feeding supply of ballistic missiles has given Russia opportunities to adapt their systems to the scale at which Ukraine deploys them(which is low). So dont think its fair to say intercepting ballistic missiles is easy when Ukraine hasnt yet deployed nor received in mass, a mass produced ballistic missile of the type we're discussing(300km,500km,750km range and beyond). Of the two countries(Ukraine, Russia) Russia has deployed more of the tactical ballistic missile systems that we're talking about here(Over 939 ballistic and quazi ballistic missiles since 2022, Iskander M, Khinzal, and even 100s of S-300 in land attack mode). For example Ukraine has received no more than 100 ATACMs(Iran fired 120 ballistic missiles at Israel in one night back in April 2024).

As well compared to even Israel, Iran, still Ukraine has a dearth of ballistic strike systems at its disposal. Israel has Jericho class ballistic missiles that can go beyond 1000km, ground launched LORA bm that can go beyond 300km. Iran has ground launched ballistic missiles that can go beyond 1000km such as Shahab-3,Sejjil,Dezful. And we saw how these led to higher expenditures of even Israeli GBAD interceptors. So I would even say that Ukraine's biggest weakness in their current strike arsenal is this lack of ballistic strike options.

So the possible introduction of Ukrainian produced tactical ballistic missiles in considerable quantities is going to make interception more difficult and attrition rates higher of Russian GBADs as well as the expenditure of interceptors higher. Fundamentally what I'm saying is Ukraine has been primarily relying on relatively slow flying drones and cruise missiles for DEAD missions against Russian GBADs. So until Ukraine deploys Sapsan and FP-9 or FP-7 in meaningful quantities, we cannot draw firm conclusions about the performance of Russian GBADs under conditions where tactical ballistic missiles are the primary strike system.
 
Plus nothing under 500km in range really counts as a ballistic missile IMO. I'd probably stipulate a minimum 500kg (or at least 300kg) for warhead mass to qualify too.
 
Wakanda for ever - cartoonish picture of Ukraine painted by MSM

Where would this mass production take place? Its different with drones that can be built in relatively small spaces .practically in homes and garages ,manual assembly and soldering of small parts bought imported from china and western manufacturers.

Balistic missile manufacturing can not be dispersed that easy. Easyest is to have them manufactured in poland ,as far as i understand new batch of Mig29 will be traded for missile and drone tech
''Matrix map includes data on over 850 FPV drone workshops, around 720 large UAV production facilities, 45 marine UAV sites.........''

Remember this by now they should have 100+ missiles ready .....
https://twitter.com/x/status/1998804941192966495
View: https://x.com/i/status/1998804941192966495


Talking Balistic numbers as if Ukraine did not have some 500+ Tochka-U balistic missiles in 2022 , and many other ,as if it only started with ATACMS. ATACMS impact at the time was amplified not my missile itself as much as by extensive US inteligence gathering and targeting support.

Obr2azets-ob2lozh33ky.jpg
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
Plus nothing under 500km in range really counts as a ballistic missile IMO. I'd probably stipulate a minimum 500kg (or at least 300kg) for warhead mass to qualify too.
Click to expand...
I don't know how popular it is but a few years ago long range rockets were redesignated CRBMs - Close Range Ballistic Missiles.
Mr.T said:
Wakanda for ever - cartoonish picture of Ukraine painted by MSM

Where would this mass production take place? Its different with drones that can be built in relatively small spaces .practically in homes and garages ,manual assembly and soldering of small parts bought imported from china and western manufacturers.

Balistic missile manufacturing can not be dispersed that easy.
''Matrix map includes data on over 850 FPV drone workshops, around 720 large UAV production facilities, 45 marine UAV sites.........''
Click to expand...
Manufacturing can be dispersed. The west can provide the mixers, or even do the mixing on their soil and deliver ready SRMs.
Mixers can be built under ground, as well as all the other infrastructure and the final assembly halls.

Russia has long range munitions and it has large warheads. It doesn't have long range munitions with large warheads.
 
Mr.T said:
Wakanda for ever - cartoonish picture of Ukraine painted by MSM

Where would this mass production take place? Its different with drones that can be built in relatively small spaces .practically in homes and garages ,manual assembly and soldering of small parts bought imported from china and western manufacturers.

Balistic missile manufacturing can not be dispersed that easy. Easyest is to have them manufactured in poland ,as far as i understand new batch of Mig29 will be traded for missile and drone tech
''Matrix map includes data on over 850 FPV drone workshops, around 720 large UAV production facilities, 45 marine UAV sites.........''

Remember this by now they should have 100+ missiles ready .....
https://twitter.com/x/status/1998804941192966495
View: https://x.com/i/status/1998804941192966495


Talking Balistic numbers as if Ukraine did not have some 500+ Tochka-U balistic missiles in 2022 , and many other ,as if it only started with ATACMS. ATACMS impact at the time was amplified not my missile itself as much as by extensive US inteligence gathering and targeting support.

View attachment 795174
Click to expand...
They can make the missiles outside Ukraine if need be.

As for Tochka-Us, definitely not a ballistic missile by modern standards, shorter range even than the latest artillery rockets, like GMLRS-ER. Poor accuracy too.
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
As for Tochka-Us, definitely not a ballistic missile by modern standards, shorter range even than the latest artillery rockets, like GMLRS-ER. Poor accuracy too.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the SS-21 Scarab is currently all that Ukraine has in that class of missile, that should change though with the introduction of the Hrim-2/Sampsan missile.
 
Yeah, Fire Point origins and connections are troubling. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_Point_(Ukrainian_firm)

As I often said, arms and oil money have a very strong corrupting power attached to them. Case in point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bofors_scandal

Now if even Sweden can be corrupted by arm deals... all the billions poured on Ukraine to buy weapons and produce them may have triggered or fanned existing corruption.

As in : "I want a slice of that huge cake". In order to get closer from the U.E Ukraine has certainly made progress curbing corruption, but it remains a major problem. Which is obviously compounded by the ongoing war and its emergency measures. And all the billions dumped on the country.

This duly noted, it remain to be seen whether Fire Point is a) truly capable of delivering weapons (the FP-1 says yes) or b) an empty shell to pump foreign weapons money into corrupt oligarch pockets. The truth is probably: somewhere between the two.
 
Another interesting project is currently under development - a multifunctional missile complex. The idea of such a complex is to have a single, universal platform for launching various weapons - rockets like GMLRS for HIMARS and missiles for various purposes.
Click to expand...
A mobile cruise-and-ballistic-missile launch platform; firing destruction on all cylinders. Interesting idea albeit with one major caveat: if it eats an Iskander, lots of firepower is lost in just one strike. Plus it makes a fatter target, harder to conceal. Better not to put too many eggs into a single basket, as the proverb says...
 
Isjander already has separate ballistic and cruise missile components to the complex, though not at the same time on one vehicle. I doubt any Ukr system will do that either, though there are advantages to having as much commonality as can be arranged.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom