American inspectors shown hypersonic "Vanguard": openness under the contract

The Russian Ministry of Defense continues to demonstrate unprecedented openness to foreign military observers. Today it became known that Russia showed the American inspectors the Avangard hypersonic missile system. It is a complex with a hypersonic glider winged block.

This is the latest hypersonic weapon, which will begin to enter the Russian Armed Forces in December of this year - in one of the parts of the Orenburg region.

The military department notes that this kind of demonstration of the latest missile technology took place as part of our country's compliance with the letters of the START Treaty (to reduce strategic offensive weapons). The openness of this agreement is demonstrated, incidentally, against the backdrop of statements in the United States about its readiness to withdraw from it.

The message gives TASS:

On the territory of the Russian Federation, the American inspection team conducted a demonstration of the Avangard missile system with a hypersonic glider winged unit.

The Russian military showed UR-100Н UTX missiles to their American ICBM counterparts, which are equipped with the same nuclear planning unit. This whole system is called the "Vanguard", being a truly advanced strategic weapon.

At the first stage, the Russian Armed Forces will receive the 2 “Vanguard” regiment, each of which will have 6 silo-based ICBMs. Recall that a hypersonic unit is capable of speeds above 20 M (sound speeds).

Against this background, the question arises: is the American side ready to admit Russian inspectors to its facilities where the latest weapons are being developed or are there copies?

Comments

[Operator]

At the disposal of the Strategic Missile Forces over thirty UR-100N UTTH

[210ox]

So what. They showed them the launch container at the position.

[Fibrizio]

I agree with the thesis.
In a similar way, we demonstrated the missile launch container and convinced our colleagues from NATO that this missile had nothing to do with the INF Treaty, because "the technical characteristics are written on that plate over there."

I think everyone has everything for a long time already, and if not explicitly, it can be quickly upgraded.

[bulvas]

Now they will declare that during the show they saw violations of the START treaty.

[hrych]

Quote: bulvas

spotted violations of the START treaty

The main thing here is to show that this is not a bluff, but a product in iron

[Prisoner]

Enough for now. God forbid they see everything, by the way, and us, too. Better not to run into. It seems to me that such events are the equivalent of the order "stop, I will shoot!" Well, again, a hint, they say, "guys, let's live together."

[Alexander Petrov1]

In vain, the American inspectors were upset, because they still have to sleep, and there are sheer nightmares about nuclear strikes in the United States, just like in the movie Terminator 2 at the mother of the young hero of the film ...

[Hunter 2]

Drove the Mattresses! Now serenades will go - that Russia violates Everything and Everywhere! But where exactly - We won’t tell you!

[Voyager]

By the way, I’ve recently revised: all the same amazing films even today and repulse any modern fantasy action movie with meaning. Moreover, the first, the second.

[Alexander Petrov1]

What did you want, filmed Great (no offense) Jews and collected these Great films-works of many billions of dollars and this for Normal people of directors and businessmen should be a challenge to follow in the whole World and even in Russia ...

[Vol4ara]

Against this background, the question arises: is the American side ready to admit Russian inspectors to its facilities where the latest weapons are being developed or are there copies?

It’s a very stupid question, we did it on our own initiative, and did it in order to show the potential enemy that in case of what we can. In fact, they were made in order to cool hotheads in Congress and the Pentagon. Americans don’t need to show us anything, because the pressure on them does not threaten us

[DenZ]

Quote: Vol4ara

Americans don’t need to show us anything, because the pressure on them does not threaten us

Well, I totally disagree. With our whining, unfounded accusations (we all know that they are unfounded), fakes, Russophobia, and again scandals in sports (only today the IOC blamed the Russian government for them), the Americans and their allies are already at war with us, and here we are completely no time to relax. They spit on our complacency and openness. With our openness to them, we are more likely to find unnecessary reasons for them to moral abuse of us. And to weaken the enemy morally, isn’t there a prelude to physically destroy him?

[Alexander Petrov1]

That's right that they showed that they were afraid and respected ...

[MoJloT]

American inspectors showed hypersonic Avangard: unprecedented openness

This is not openness, this is unprecedented stupidity.

[Nastia makarova]

very true what they showed, now let the turnips scratch

[Chit]

Do you think that if the United States has a military budget of at least 15 times the Russian budget and does not boast from each pillar and from each iron about its new military technology, then they can only scratch their turnips?

[Sky strike fighter]

Budgets are not at war. Armies are at war. A budget is an opportunity to buy more or build bases around the world and cut giants of the American military-industrial complex from this budget, buying everything at fabulous prices. Budgets are just possibilities, another thing is how to handle them, wisely or not. Compare the budget of the United States and the Taliban. Who remains in Afghanistan and who leaves? An example of Syria. How many planes and troops were there, how many planes and coalition troops, and what came out of it? If there were all as simple as you say, then on a mid-budget to hoist the winners of wars.

[Vol4ara]

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

Budgets are not at war. Armies are at war. A budget is an opportunity to buy more or build bases around the world and cut giants of the American military-industrial complex from this budget, buying everything at fabulous prices. Budgets are just possibilities, another thing is how to handle them, wisely or not. Compare the budget of the United States and the Taliban. Who remains in Afghanistan and who leaves? An example of Syria. How many planes and troops were there, how many planes and coalition troops, and what came out of it? If there were all as simple as you say, then on a mid-budget to hoist the winners of wars.

The stupidity is immense. Compare the budgets of NATO and Yugoslavia, and then the budgets of Iraq, Libya. Some armies are fighting the legacy of the USSR in leaky pants, while others sprinkle them on top with bombs without steaming, without even introducing ground forces, simply destroying the economy. The Taliban are bearded uncles who hide in the bushes and grow poppies, there is no question of any war of budgets.

[bk316]

Some armies are fighting the legacy of the USSR in leaky pants, while others sprinkle them on top with bombs without steaming, without even introducing ground forces, simply destroying the economy.

SO IT IS JUST NOT ABOUT THE BUDGETS AND ABOUT THE ARMY.
Now, if they would fall asleep with their stocks or iPhones, then, yes, about the budget

[mark2]

How are they not bragging? And a week does not pass, as in the media appear quotes of talking US heads about another wunderwafer.

[Nastia makarova]

as they said correctly, that the budget is not the most important thing in wars, they have a large budget, only they spend its main part not on the army, but on all garbage

[Arkon]

Quote: Nastia Makarova

very true what they showed, now let the turnips scratch

Yeah. Let them look at what "cannot be."

[carstorm 11]

and what is stupid? if I show you a laptop, for example, how do you know what filling it has besides my words?) any similar step goes through a bunch of analysis and opinions and the consequences are always calculated. and not for amers it is shown, but rather for countries of the same Europe. we are open and comply with contracts. and if strategic offensive arms fail, it’s not according to our actions.

[Alexander Petrov1]

As for the openness and display of the latest latest weapons, for example, Stalin - as Hitler said, - "If I knew that the USSR has a T-34 tank, then I would never have attacked the USSR in 1941" ...

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

The quote you quoted became interesting, climbed on the Internet.
He found Hitler’s words, where he says that if he knew how many tanks the USSR had, he wouldn’t attack.
Can you give your source?

[Alexander Petrov1]

A lot of World historians on different channels talked about this from our Culture to the Discovery Channel ...

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

Alas, I did not find any mention of the T-34 in this context. Perhaps the words of the one whom it is better not to call once again were unknowingly distorted.

[Alexander Petrov1]

I personally heard that on Discovery Chanell and in other programs, including Russian ...

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

In no case do not question your words. But, unfortunately, my rummaging on the Internet does not confirm them. However, this does not mean that they are incorrect. The Internet is still a dump.

[Alexander Petrov1]

Well, no matter how we treat this scum and the rapist Hitler, the whole World can confirm whoever he is, but it’s certainly to our deep regret that he’s not a fool and gave his report back ...

[Fibrizio]

Unfortunately, we have a lot of "experts", but they did not go beyond "Memories and Reflections".
If you are interested in who said what, you can read Kurt Von Tippelskirch. He is not the ultimate truth, but his sources can be checked if desired. + fresh look for a Russian person.
In general, educational reading.

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

You probably mean his "History of the Second World War".

[Fibrizio]

Yes. Great book for me. Something between a textbook and a literary work. It covers what the USSR did not talk about at all, or was mentioned as a fact, no more.
For example, I don’t remember at all that I would have been told a word about the landing of allies in Italy at school.
Then I was sure that the first landing was in Normandy (the one that was not thrown into the water, I mean).

[Alexander Petrov1]

Well, remember our displays after Stalin under Khrushchev and the satellite with an intercontinental missile and medium missiles on Red Square and the Tsar bomb and how they helped to frighten the United States during the Caribbean crisis, if Stalin so openly threatened with the latest weapons like T-34, long-range Pe-8 (But Germany didn’t have such Pe-8 long-range aircraft at the beginning of the war, and this predicted their defeat due to our evacuation of the military industry from the Urals), as well as the latest fighters and the best in World War II, according to Western experts like Yak, Mig La Cat If they were not inferior to the German, then he would hardly have attacked in 1941 ...

[Sibiriya]

I recommend reading Isaev’s books on the Second World War. Also on the Internet there are a lot of his video lectures.

[Flooding]

It will be difficult to reproduce the exact quote.
Since, as far as I know, she sounded in a conversation.
But the meaning was somewhat different: "if I knew how many tanks the USSR had."
German intelligence made a mistake in analyzing the number of Soviet armored vehicles.

[Alexander Petrov1]

No, you are wrong, Hitler was referring to the best medium tank of the Second World War T-34, because he knew the old T-26s and did not take them seriously, and he never saw the T-34s and even ordered them to be copied in 1941, but This was not suitable for Germany because of our diesel engine, since in Reich there was no capacity to produce a sufficient amount of solarium (it went 90% to submarines), and tanks and cars drove synthetic gasoline from coal ...

[Flooding]

Why argue if you can look on the Internet and find out.

[Alexander Petrov1]

What is there to argue, this is being held in the first year at a seedy institute ...

[Flooding]

Well, I'm sorry, I was not there.
Don’t bother, you still won’t find confirmation of your words.

[Vladimir_2U]

What set of stamps, you still forgot about ShKAS in the imperial chancellery.

[Alex Nevs]

C'mon .. Do you exclude the possibility of desa? Oh well .

[Lesorub]

The Russian Ministry of Defense continues to show unprecedented openness to foreign military observers. Today it became known that Russia showed the American inspectors the Avangard hypersonic missile system

Yes, indeed, the Americans do not really "show" us the latest developments (from the word at all) - I do not understand why our Ministry of Defense is showing such a lack of convergence - showing "hypersonic missiles" ??!

[Dmitry Donskoy]

When I served in the Strategic Missile Forces on the Topol-M, Americans came to our unit with an inspection. They were not interested in how much it was in service and what (they already knew). But they opened all the ancillary structures and examined them to see if we were hiding we are there an unaccounted rocket

[Beringovsky]

Rather, an unprecedented lack of principle. We are ready to hand over anything to the "partners".

[voyaka uh]

Under the strategic arms reduction treaty, both parties are required to demonstrate their strategic weapons when they begin to be put into service. When the Americans begin to replace their Minuteman 3, the Russians will also inspect their mines.

[Zaurbek]

... if by then America does not withdraw from START

[cloud catcher]

Our world looks like a decrepit house -
The rafters settle low ...
Friend, you walk too proudly.
Bend over! Then there will be no risk!
They will not be able to pierce their heads
Decaying floors ...
"I'm ready to break my head,
But I don't want to go hunching! ”

[Nikolay87]

We ourselves have not seen them. As for the Americans, they are ready to hack an agreement on an open sky. Knowing the Americans, it probably was like this: Show us the weapons and we will consider whether to renew the INF Treaty and whether to keep START-3 .... but first show.

[Starover_Z]

Against this background, the question arises: is the American side ready to admit Russian inspectors to its facilities where the latest weapons are being developed or are there copies?

They have one, constant answer to such a question:

And to this we have nothing to add!

[Sky strike fighter]

American inspectors showed hypersonic Avangard: unprecedented openness

Unprecedented stupidity.

The Russian military showed UR-100N UTTX U.S. ICBM colleagues, who are equipped with the same nuclear planning unit.

Although .... If externally only the UR-100N UTTKh ICBM was shown, and not the planning unit itself, then all the way.

Against this background, the question arises: is the American side ready to admit Russian inspectors to its facilities where the latest weapons are being developed or are there copies?

Stupid question. Of course not. We are their main enemies. What kind of openness can the enemy be talking about?

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

Now the Americans are confident that at least Avangard is not a bluff. And since this is not a bluff, it means not a bluff and everything else (laser, BPA, missile with unlimited range).
What will they be able to understand by looking at Vanguard? What materials is it made of? No. How is it managed? Also extremely unlikely.
Only the shape that they could have imagined rightly, since the laws of aerodynamics in the United States are the same as in Russia.

[DeathFromBelow]

And why so sure that they don’t know all this? The military knows about each other ten times more than what they say.

[Sidor Amenpodestovich]

Our number 16 is with you, to paraphrase the unforgettable Gleb Yegorych.

[Voyager]

Quote: Sidor Amenpodestovich

What will they be able to understand by looking at Vanguard? What materials is it made of? No. How is it managed? Also extremely unlikely.

Before all this, at least in theory, you can catch up if you just see what this planning hypersonic unit looks like in reality. Having a theory and foundation is already much easier to reproduce a similar device.

[30hgsa]

The task of the strategic deterrence forces, of which the vanguard is a part, is the deterrence so that the enemy pisses and preferably fights too. To do this, the missiles rolled along Red Square, for this they are now showing the vanguard, a superweapon about which no one knows and in which they do not believe does not solve the containment tasks.

[bk316]

Stupid question. Of course not. We are their main enemies. What kind of openness can the enemy be talking about?

Stupid answer. Read the START Treaty.

[Voyager]

This is the question, what exactly was shown and in how much detail?

[Beringovsky]

Why are you surprised? Our government and Atlas rocket engines are selling to them, with which they launch their military satellites into space, against us.
Partners are the same.

[The leader of the Redskins]

The deal is more valuable then money. If you had to, then you need to show. At least not ashamed.

[Sky strike fighter]

Only these agreements seem to be the only ones we are observing.

[Alsur]

Quote: MoJloT

American inspectors showed hypersonic Avangard: unprecedented openness

This is not openness, this is unprecedented stupidity.

I do not agree in principle. Soviet paranoid secrecy, in fact, was from their own citizens, but in the American press, photos and drawings of Soviet weapons were very often printed. And in the USSR, I would get a deadline if the photos were posted somewhere. There must be rationality and expediency in everything. You need to protect design information and constantly improve weapons. Otherwise, one day someone will steal a new model or the enemy will get to the battlefield and the secret will cease to be a secret. And from the contemplation of a launch complex or container, a lot will not change.

[Beringovsky]

Soviet paranoid secrecy, in fact, was from their own citizens,

And today’s from whom? Or showed the Russians the Vanguard? No.
But the amers showed.
And they treat us more with cartoons.

[Vkd dvk]

Quote: MoJloT

American inspectors showed hypersonic Avangard: unprecedented openness

This is not openness, this is unprecedented stupidity.

A knife hidden in a pocket and not shown to the victim will not scare. But it costs only from afar .... how the point will come into a convulsive movement.
Moreover, if you show only the PART, the victim’s imagination will draw SUCH ......
And to Orenburg, Altai, where there are many mines, you still need to get there. Our territories, sizes, rescued us many times from any enemy.

[Thrifty]

Why throw beads in front of these. ... ???? How far can our authorities go in unnecessary exits? Maybe they will also be presented with a set of documentation for Avangard ???

[Starper-xnumx]

Have you shown cartoons again? Or in real life they want to check "gentlemen, everything is gone."

[Sky strike fighter]

It's just that one of the American cartoons of his childhood did not grow up. All that is interesting is shown. All the cartoon.

[Aerodrome]

Quote: Starper-777

Have you shown cartoons again? Or in real life they want to check "gentlemen, everything is gone."

Hi Meehan! next reincarnation? banned for drinking on the site again?

[knn54]

"In 1957, the TU-130DP, an unmanned gliding plane, was developed and tested. The plane was lifted on an R-12 rocket to an altitude of 80-100 km, after which it separated from the carrier and went into a gliding flight. The target could be located at a distance of up to 4000 km, and the DP speed reached Mach 10 ".
A deep bow to our fathers and grandfathers, who left the groundwork for many years to come.

[30hgsa]

Well, for sure, the training manual was changed. They used to say that all these are cartoons, now that these are Soviet developments of the 60s :)))

[knn54]

-Changed the training manual ...
Some believe that this is due to sanctions, you want to live, be able to spin.
With very meager financial injections and a shortage of personnel, it is simply unrealistic to create something significant with "0" in a short time. As an example, the PAK DA project, which has gone into its twenties.

[KCA]

Designed? Even the mockup did not fly anywhere further than the wind tunnel, the mockup of the BOR at least was put into orbit and brought down later

[30hgsa]

Interestingly, Putin’s once-popular joke about Putin’s cartoons is still popular? Or have they changed the training manual in the State Department?

[St Petrov]

you are offending the patriots-high-level life of the VO site now. This audience issued a verdict about cartoons and will win. After all, it is known that under Putin Russia is heading into the abyss, starving and destitute - what is the construction of missiles, bridges and tanks with airplanes?

The last organ without salt is eaten up.

[Aerodrome]

Quote: s-t Petrov

without salt eat up.

well, for you it's just "chupa chups" ...

[St Petrov]

well, for you it's just "chupa chups" ...

did you decide to measure yourself here? not worth it.

[Aerodrome]

Quote: c-Petrov

well, for you it's just "chupa chups" ...

did you decide to measure yourself here? not worth it. you are so unique on this resource. Although not a fact of course. You, patriots of a high-standard of living, are somehow similar to each other

uh no ... I don't need your "glory"! your pseudo-patriotism, the site is known! you are a mountain for the bourgeoisie, because yourself ... apparently.

[St Petrov]

you are a mountain for the bourgeoisie

I burn with terpered-waffle-latent revolutionaries. therefore you are offended by me
Well, not surprised. Here you have a whole list of such saddened

[shinobi]

The act of intimidation has been carried out. We are waiting for the screech in their media. By the power of the screech we will judge the effectiveness of the scare. In war, as in war.

[faterdom]

Right. In the United States, there is such discord that it is no longer necessary to convince of something not the politicians who have driven themselves into the framework of inadequacy, but representatives of the Pentagon, a potential recipient of Vanguards without a queue. And Trump will be there or some Bloomberg ... they have already lived in any case, then everything can be purple for them.
But the guys from all sorts of unsurpassed "Force" and "Navy" it is not so indifferent. Better to let them look here, so as not to see IT at home.

[St Petrov]

I think it would be clearer to show intelligence the coordinates of that heavenly place where the elite thinks to sniff during armageddon. It’s possible to pull back with the good old Yars - in which case

[Aerodrome]

Quote: c-Petrov

I think it would be clearer to show intelligence the coordinates of that heavenly place where the elite thinks to sniff during armageddon. It’s possible to pull back with the good old Yars - in which case

so you recently stood for "Elita" like a mountain! against the bloody gebney and all that! Cho became wrong? before retirement turned out to be?

[St Petrov]

against the bloody gebney and all that!

you mixed everything up, but that's fine.

[bootlegger]

I do not really understand one point.
On the UR-100N, in combination with a reduction in the size of the warheads, it was possible to place a warhead on it with 6 individual guidance units with a capacity of 550 kt each. The Vanguard block is installed on these missiles in the amount of one piece.
Is it worth it? Will the quality interrupt the trump card of quantity? With all the desire to shoot down 6 blocks is much more difficult than one even if actively maneuvering. And even if they didn’t bring him down at all, the task of knocking down all 6 combat units was not at all real. With all the false goals and so on.
Does it make sense to fence a garden with such an unfavorable ratio of 6 to 1?

[mark2]

6 blocks - 6 goals. One block one goal. Six blocks one large city or six small. Vanguard as special forces in the army is one goal but important.
The unit not only maneuvers but also flies too fast.
They will detect, but they will not be able to bring down. No missiles faster than this-do not catch up. Encountering an attack is difficult - maneuver target.
Well something like that.

[bootlegger]

Nuclear weapons are not spetsnaz, but rather "big battalions". Their equivalent.
Special forces are not afraid of anyone, nor can they be a deterrent. But a large space bus with a dozen or so warheads is quite imaginable. This is a weapon of the apocalypse, and no one wants the apocalypse at home.
Vanguard as a weapon, of course, has the right to exist, but rather in conventional equipment. And in a nuclear war, simple statistics will be important.

[mark2]

... American inspectors were shown the hypersonic Avangard: openness by agreement

Well, stupidly did.

[-ш-]

a minute of black humor about those who wrote that it was a cartoon

[ABM]

just not sold

[Lena Petrova]

Doubters can be shown. One is the Crimean bridge, the other is the Vanguard. They don’t take money for viewing.

[2 Level Advisor]

Quote: Sydor Amenpospestovich

Now the Americans are confident that at least Avangard is not a bluff. And since this is not a bluff, it means not a bluff and everything else (laser, BPA, missile with unlimited range).
What will they be able to understand by looking at Vanguard? What materials is it made of? No. How is it managed? Also extremely unlikely.
Only the shape that they could have imagined rightly, since the laws of aerodynamics in the United States are the same as in Russia.

Your interesting logic is Sidor .. i.e. why is it that if one does not bluff the rest is also true? I’m talking about a combat laser, you’ve already sorted it out, no one has even voiced this officially yet .. I’m asking not from the point of view, I believe / I don’t believe, I just wonder why this follows one from the other in terms of your logic?
but in general, of course, it was not in vain that they showed, let them worry .. by the way, under the pre-launch fairing, they still can’t make out the shape, it is almost the same for everyone ..

[Roman RUS]

During the time it was shown by exceptional inspectors, such an unpleasant and specific odor went that it was necessary to increase the forced ventilation performance so that the smell of what was not sinking would not spread throughout the object.

[Berkut24]

And where are the joyful faces of the American inspector?

[malyvalv]

And what did the Americans agree to show us in response?
Again deflection. So the matter will come that the Vanguards will be included in the next START treaty at the request of the Americans and cut. Under the pretext that we type will not lose anything. Straight smell of 90s again smelled.

[Old26]

Quote: 210ox

So what. They showed them the launch container at the position.

The UR-100N UTTH missile has a gas-dynamic launch method and is not launched from TPK

Quote: Sky Strike fighter

Although .... If externally only the UR-100N UTTKh ICBM was shown, and not the planning unit itself, then all the way.

In principle, the display system was developed decades ago. On the site put up a product with measuring rulers. In order to show the number of warheads, the fairing is removed. But. In order not to give the enemy information about the specific aerodynamics of a particular product, deforming covers are put on the BB. That is, it is clear that there is one BB or 6 on the product, for example, but the aerodynamics of the unit cannot be observed. Photography is allowed. Like receiving printed inspection materials

Quote: mark2

6 blocks - 6 goals. One block one goal. Six blocks one large city or six small. Vanguard as special forces in the army is one goal but important.
The unit not only maneuvers but also flies too fast.
They will detect, but they will not be able to bring down. No missiles faster than this-do not catch up. Encountering an attack is difficult - maneuver target.
Well something like that.

How much is too fast? Second space speed, third? or maybe some other? All ICBMs enter the upper atmosphere at approximately the same speed. At about 6,8-7 M. And I wonder where you got stupid, that "vdagon" will shoot at the "Vanguard" or any other block, there are no madmen. Neither they nor us. Moreover, strategic interceptors GBI have speeds of more than 8 km / s. The range is up to 5000 km, the height of the defeat is up to 2500 km. They will be able to fire and strike before the Vanguard enters the atmosphere and begins to maneuver

Quote: malyvalv

And what did the Americans agree to show us in response?
Again deflection. So the matter will come that the Vanguards will be included in the next START treaty at the request of the Americans and cut. Under the pretext that we type will not lose anything. Straight smell of 90s again smelled.

Do not bend. According to the provisions of the contract, before putting into service, the parties are obliged to show a new product or a product with new military equipment. In this case, we have something to show - we show. The Americans, having begun to develop a missile in return for their Minuteman-3 or Trident-2 when they are armed, will also show them. And we at that time, maybe we won’t show anything.

About the "thread" If you had read the START-3 treaty, then no "thread" is provided there. Each of the parties defines its own quantitative and qualitative structure. Restrictions on deployed and non-deployed media and deployed warheads. Nobody can force Avangard to "cut" us if it complies with the parameters of the Treaty. And we decide what to cut ourselves. Or "Poplar" or "Voevoda"