First of all, it is worth noting that an unnamed source in journalism can mean anything from a very high-ranking source to rumors. So, any “unnamed” information that does not receive any support for facts or confirmation in official form should be treated with skepticism. The very wording of the wording outlined sounds weird. They say that they chose between avo-ballistic hypersonic military equipment (AGGB) Avangard and Rubezh, and found that the first is more necessary, and there is money only for one complex. Against the background of the already well-known (but also nothing, in general, not officially confirmed) postponing the program of the Barguzin combat railway complex of the Strategic Missile Forces seems to sound convincing. But not so simple.
From the very beginning, the Barguzin had a lot of ill-wishers inside the Strategic Missile Forces. More precisely, not so - within the command and military-scientific structures of the Strategic Missile Forces there are several prevailing points of view on the development of troops and the required combat missile systems and everything else. And about the revival of BZHRK and "science", and "industrialists", and the troops themselves had from the very beginning two points of view, that we need it, and that is not necessary, and we can get along. Fortunately, the increased combat properties of the Yars PGRK, including survivability, and the ability to carry the separable warheads of individual guidance (RGCHIN) and the increased cast weight and the capabilities of the complex missile defense equipment (PCB), and sharply increased combat patrol areas, allow really do without the "rocket trains." Moreover, the BZhRK should have been created on the basis of a decently converted (here otherwise there is no difference between mine rockets and mobile rockets, and the “train” and even so requires rework), but unified with the mobile and mine options, of the same Yars ( or "Yarsa-S", rather). So that the head parts and PCB PRO were the same. So the opponents of BZhRK referred to the fact that why produce a spreader, they say, a rocket is almost the same, it reduces costs, but the costs of deploying a BZHRK group will be substantial, including due to the creation of solid support for them on the railways ( although there is no need for specially fortified tracks and other things with the Barguzin, because the ICBM in it does not weigh 105, but the order of 50, and the car, of course, is also much easier than the one used in the Molodets BZHRK).
Therefore, solid opposition BZHRK was (and including the developer himself, represented by MIT, the same Y. Solomonov did not hide his skeptic opinion on this issue), and, despite the completion of the initial stages of OCD and the transition to throwing tests, managed to win a temporary victory and to achieve the postponement of the issue with BZHRK, no, not forever, but for several years, so to speak, in store. Or, say, with the activation of the program earlier, in the event of withdrawal from the START-3 Treaty and the transition to the development of strategic nuclear forces according to a long-standing development program in the absence of contractual restrictions (the programs should be for any occasion). The facts show that the program is probably postponed to a later date - there was no information about new launches.
But there was no confrontation between Avangard and Frontier, as between BZHRK and PGRK. And could not be. Here it is necessary to clarify the picture.
Well, firstly, the Avangard 15Ü71 AGGB does not exist by itself, but as part of a combat missile system with the 15А35-71 rocket. The equipment, as was officially reported, is already entering the series, which means it is being installed on 15-35 (UR-100NUTTH) ICBMs of the 3 generation, turning an obsolete rocket into one of the worst weapons in our arsenal of SNFs. Yes, and such missiles are "dry" (not filled and unencapsulated, that is, stored without loss of properties, in the right conditions, almost forever) at one time Ukraine was purchased for a reason - they will be useful. Now they will become "units of the special forces of the Strategic Missile Forces" thanks to Avangard - one should understand that so far the use of the URBN is necessary for anything, but not for breaking through the useless, mythical, US missile defense system (which has not mastered the most primitive ICBMs so far ), because even with the breakthrough of the “ideal missile defense”, which it would have been in the dreams of the Pentagon generals and the stories of the Senate subcommittees, the modern unmanaged and non-maneuvering ICBM and SLBM warheads perfectly cope with the latest complex of missile defense weapons. Avangard is needed for other, while very specific tasks, including even in non-nuclear execution, if necessary.
And also, probably, this same AGBO, but no longer on the 1 piece on the ICBM, will be used on the heavy ICBM Sarmat, say, up to the 3 pieces per rocket. However, no one knows for sure the weight and dimensional parameters of the product, all estimates based on the weight of the old 15А35 MBR are being made, and the known data on the Sarmatian’s throw weight, nevertheless, that the drop weight is not synonymous with the payload of the rocket, it is more her. But judging by the fact that references to Avangard-R or Avangard-Rubezh slipped through in open sources (because of the latter, many confused these two complexes for a long time, which was convenient as part of the cover legend) probably in a different, reduced size and weight version, should have been applied on the “Frontier”. And here it is necessary to figure out what is the "Boundary", and why he could be "moved away" from deployment?
A combat missile system with a small-sized ICBM of increased accuracy began to be developed somewhere in the middle of the “zero” years at MIT. The relatively small weight and dimensions of the product allowed the use of a smaller and lighter chassis, which increases the maneuverability and the survivability of the complex. Instead of the standard for Yarsov MZKT chassis with the wheel formula 16х16, at the initial stage it was supposed to use the MZKT-79292 with the wheel formula 10х10, and then it turned out that this chassis was not enough and took the basis of the MZKT-79291 12х12. When began throwing the product starts is unknown. The first real launch took place from Plesetsk in September 2011. and was declared unsuccessful - the rocket fell in 8km from the starting point. It is possible, however, that the launch was a throwout, and the failure was announced for cover. Then there was another launch from Plesetsk in May 2012. on a completely intercontinental distance - to the Kamchatka Kura, in this launch, as reported, there was a mock-up of a single-block warhead.
But then all subsequent launches were made from Kapustin Yar, which already says a lot - this point is not observed by the enemy’s technical means, and when we want to experience something that Uncle Sam should not be seen, for example, the characteristics of starting or breeding fighting blocks, or a maneuvering BB, or a new PCB PRO - then it flies from KapYar and usually to Sary-Shagan, along the "southern short" or "internal" route. That is how the tests for prospective combat equipment or missile defense missile defense were usually conducted. But they demanded, as a rule, the use of special carriers capable of partially imitating flight conditions at a very short distance, in particular, entering the atmosphere, at a far greater range - we are talking about such carriers as K-65MR and replacing it with Topol-E (alteration of old ICBM "Topol").
And "Frontier" flew from KapYar, first to Kura, in the same 2012. flew just as successfully to Sary-Shagan. Then there was another launch there in the summer of 2013g. and also successful. Then starts were tolerated for a long time, and already in March 2015g. The 5 start-up of the Rubezh, also on the southern short route, was also successful and it was already the test control test - on the basis of it, a conclusion was issued with a recommendation to adopt Rubezh BRK. There were vague information that in all launches, except the first successful one, the already divided head of the individual guidance was tested. Moreover, there were rumors in the media that the Frontier would have maneuvering BBs as a standard vehicle, but it seems that this is not the case, at least not at the initial stage. It seems more like he has - standard head pieces for our new lightweight ICBMs and SLBMs - that is, "Yars" and "Maces", which include up to medium power 6 BB. Such a short cycle of rocket tests may indicate that the design used a lot of what was worked out on previous rockets, that is, stages, combat equipment, and so on. Steps, probably two.
And so, after a successful start-up, although more launches were expected in 2016-2017. - was not yet one. As we can see, the matter stalled before the new GPO, although there was information about preparations for the deployment of the "Boundary" in two missile divisions in the west and east of the Russian Federation.
What is the matter? Here you should pay attention to the range shown by this small and light (approximately less than 40t) rocket. The longest range was shown in the second launch and it is slightly more than 6000km. And the rest starts - on the range of order 2000-2500km. “Short” launches are generally a serious test for a rocket, no matter how difficult it is to launch a maximum distance. The lack of a launch to check this very maximum range, as usual “to the remote Pacific Ocean”, together with very “short” launches, convinced the Americans that the “Frontier” is not an ICBM, but a BRSD. And since then, he has regularly appeared in American accusations against the Russian Federation about the violation of the INF Treaty.
The Americans accuse ours, as is known, of the fact that the Iskander-M OTRK includes the land-based 9М728 KR, and now the 9М729, one of which looks like a slightly shortened version of the Kan 3М14 marine KP (with ranges, as is known , of the order of 2.5-3.5 thousand in non-nuclear and nuclear versions), and the second - as its full copy. Of course, if you see a beast that looks like a cat, behaves like a cat and is the size of a cat, then you should assume that this is a cat. But the Americans are unable to prove the identity of these missiles - the external similarity is small, but officially, on land, these CRs for the "forbidden" under the INF Treaty have not been launched over 500km. That is, not caught - not a thief. Similarly, Americans blame us for "Boundary." They say that you have MRBR, and on 6000km it flew with a reduced load in order to "climb" into the START-3 Treaty.
It would seem, live and enjoy - the Russians, in your opinion, the BRSD, which does not threaten the US (and they don't care about Europe), are counted as ICBMs, depriving themselves of some positions on the carriers in the Treaty, which is not so critical for the Russian Federation, which has a large margin places on carriers - we have less of them than is limited by the Treaty. It is much worse that they, it turns out, will be forced to consider the charges in the Treaty, in fact, non-strategic. But they, however, itching to do, the desire to hurt Russia and accuse it is stronger than logic.
The Russian Federation officially denies all accusations, putting forward a response to the United States. In the creation of target rockets with characteristics similar to MRSD, and in creating opportunities for placing Tomahawk RNRS in Europe as part of placing SM-3 Block 1B missiles in vertical launch modules Mk-41 on 8 cells (taken from the US Navy, where these settings are also used to place "Tomahawks"). But even if the Tomahawks are actually put in there, there will be very few of them, for our air defense this number means nothing. In addition, the nuclear "Tomahawk" has long been converted into normal, and the charges for them have long been disposed of, and there is nowhere new to take. The Russian Federation also accuses the United States of creating long-range drone UAVs, which is estimated from the point of view of the INF Treaty also as a violation (although there were no such vehicles at the time of its signing), although no drone carries any nuclear charges.
The parties accuse each other, but no one wants to be the first to leave the Treaty. The Americans, on the contrary, recently announced that they want to "return to the ships of the Kyrgyz Republic in nuclear equipment" and "put on the SLBM Trident-2" BB very low power ", and this supposedly will force the Russian Federation to" return to the INF Treaty. " Logic in such a statement - like a chicken, and assessments of reality and their capabilities - like a chicken, crossing the road. The US currently does not have any nuclear-based sea-based missile systems (SLCMs), and even if you recreate the nuclear Tomahawk or create a new SLCM under the NGLAW program, this will not help, there are no nuclear charges for them anywhere in the arsenal. At the beginning of last September, the 3822 warhead remained (now the process of “strengthening America’s nuclear power” cannot be stopped by a cheerful tweet from Uncle Donald), of which less than 2000 W76-1 and a little more than 300 W88 on the Trident 2 SLBM, a little less 500 W87 ICBMs "Minuteman-3", less than 600 W80-1 the CD air-launched AGM-86V, the rest - the remnants of the bombs in nedorezanny-83 and about five hundred bombs in-61, which is planned to be turned into 350-600 in-61- 12. Americans will not be able to produce new charges very soon, only in 2030-s. Well, it is not very clear, even if these statements were not a pure bluff, then how would these measures "force" us to "correct" violations, "are they real or not?"
Russia, too, is not in a hurry from the Treaty - for now we are satisfied with being there, and we also don't give a damn about the accusations, and we clearly do not intend to saw the winged Iskanders, because there is no evidence. Therefore, probably, "Boundary" and slowed down, so as not to give regular grounds for accusations. Although the "Frontier" formally present nothing, too: according to the range shown, it fits in the ICBM, and it cannot be excluded that it can fly even lower payloads.
And not the fact that this rocket was created as a potential MRSD, rather, everything is somewhat more cunning. It can also be an ICBM, especially with equipping with aeroballistic hypersonic military equipment — say, a ballistic missile is working on 6 + thousand km, and further to the target in the upper atmosphere, a hypersonic gliding and maneuvering apparatus slides, a smaller version of the Avant-garde, say, thousands another three kilometers - that’s the intercontinental range. And the continental nuclear tasks for a "large average" range, which are not very convenient to perform with conventional ICBMs, would be decided by Rubezh.
But after all, for the "Frontier", the AGBO, if it was in development, was hardly tested - if so, then why deploy a complex like an ICBM, since it is not quite so far? To annoy the Americans? Maybe it's better to wait? Let “Frontier” for now, which, if desired, can be launched into the series very quickly and deployed in small quantities too, will stay in stock. Say, until Trump writes the next few tweets from the bay and comes out of the INF Treaty, telling how this will increase the nuclear power and what kind of smart missiles he has. By that time, perhaps, the chassis from the MZKT will be replaced by the chassis created by the KAMAZ OCD - it is more promising, and in terms of maneuverability with all steering wheels will give a lot of points ahead to the Minsk chassis, and everyone has a cabin ” Platform "armored, which is also a plus.
Although judging by the development of relations between the Russian Federation and the United States, which are rolling down almost as fast as the American nuclear arsenal, even faster - many of the agreements between the two superpowers may cease to exist soon enough. Or maybe the mind, nevertheless, is enough not to make such rash steps with treaties on issues of strategic stability. Although, as the practice of previous American steps shows, that with the ABM Treaty, that with a "hypersonic challenge" in the form of a "fast global strike" - the Americans did worse only for themselves, and Russia got an advantage. So it will be with the INF. Yes, and it would be better for Americans not to take other hasty steps.
This, of course, is about the military confrontation in Syria - Stormy Daniels is, of course, a prominent lady with outstanding qualities, but not beautiful Elena, and Trump is never young Paris, not only war but armed incidents because of her super powers to arrange.