Military Review

Postponed or closed. Project PGRK "Rubezh" and its prospects

37
Postponed or closed. Project PGRK "Rubezh" and its prospects

Topol-M missile launch. In the medium term, this type of PGRK will have to be written off and replaced. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation


The Strategic Missile Forces operate the Topol and Yars mobile ground-based missile systems. In the past, the development of another complex of this class, known as the RS-26 "Rubezh", was carried out. Work on it was stopped in 2018 due to the limited capabilities of the army and industry. However, it cannot be ruled out that the Rubezh project will be resumed in the future or will become the basis for a new PGRK.

Development process


According to various sources, the development of a promising PGRK started in the middle of the 26s and was carried out by the Moscow Institute of Heat Engineering, which has extensive experience in this area. The public was told about the existence of such a project later, in the early tenths. For some time, the exact parameters of the complex and even its name remained unknown. The designations RS-XNUMX, Rubezh and Avangard appeared in various statements and messages. As it became clear later, the last cipher belonged to a completely different project.

According to the reports of the first half of the tenths, by 2013-15. it was planned to complete the development of a new complex, conduct tests and put it on duty. These plans were not fully implemented. Within the specified time frame, the industry was able to complete the design and conduct several test launches, but no more.

The first launch of the Rubezh rocket took place in September 2011. According to some data, these were successful throw tests, according to others - an emergency start. In May 2012, a new launch took place from the Plesetsk test site for a conditional target at the Kura site. In October of the same year, it became known about the launch from the Kapustin Yar test site at the target at Sary-Shagan. In this case, a special flight mode was used, which reduced the launch range.


RS-24 Yars is the main mobile complex of the Strategic Missile Forces of Russia. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

In 2013-15. conducted several more test flights on a reduced program for a limited range. As a result of these events, news on the adoption of the RS-26 into service with the Strategic Missile Forces in 2016. It was also reported about the need for several new tests for the final development of the complex.

The tests on a short route between the Kapustin Yar and Sary-Shagan training grounds attracted the attention of foreign military and politicians, and also became a reason for sharp and prolonged criticism. Russia was accused of creating an intermediate-range ballistic missile that violates an existing international treaty. In response to this, the Russian side indicated that the maximum flight range of the "Rubezh" corresponded to the intercontinental class, and therefore there were no violations.

A matter of priorities


In March 2018, the existence of a number of new strategic weapons of different classes was officially announced. In particular, the key features of the Avangard missile system have become known. A few weeks after that, the Russian media, citing their sources in the defense industry, clarified the prospects for new projects.

It was reported that in the new State Armaments Program for 2018-27. earlier it was proposed to include the previously developed PGRK "Rubezh", the railway complex "Barguzin" and the promising hypersonic "Avangard". However, then it became clear that the Ministry of Defense would not be able to provide simultaneous and full-scale funding for several projects. An analysis of the possibilities and prospects was carried out, based on the results of which it was decided to continue work on the Avangard. In this regard, the work on the "Rubezh" and "Barguzin", at least, was postponed to the future.


Experienced chassis MZKT-79291. It was assumed that "Rubezh" will be carried out on its basis. Photo MZKT

Financing of "Rubezh" in the State Program for 2018-27. not provided. The further fate of this project will be decided in the middle perspective, closer to the end of the current program. Upon receipt of a positive decision, work will continue no earlier than 2028.

Technical features


There are very few official data on the RS-26 "Rubezh", but various estimates and forecasts are known. How much they correspond to reality is unclear. At the same time, one can imagine the general appearance and main capabilities of the promising complex.

It is assumed that the "Rubezh" is a mobile missile system, made on a special six-axle chassis. At various times, the possibility of using a platform such as MZKT-79291 or KAMAZ-7850 was mentioned. Fighting vehicle "Rubezh" should be significantly smaller and lighter than launchers "Topol" or "Yars" with a corresponding gain in mobility and maneuverability.

The RS-26 rocket was built according to a three-stage scheme with a dilution stage and was equipped with solid-propellant engines. According to various estimates, the length of the product ranges from 15 to 18 m. Weight - no more than 50 tons. Tests have shown the missile's ability to fly at a range of about 2-2,5 thousand km or up to 8 thousand km, depending on the trajectory.


The MZKT-79292 chassis is a modification of the MZKT-79291 with a closed platform. Photo of the military-industrial complex of the Republic of Bashkortostan

The Rubezh project assumed the use of a number of new technical solutions aimed at improving all the main characteristics. So, new grades of solid fuel with increased energy and new body materials were expected. An improved control and navigation system with increased characteristics and, possibly, new modes could be used.

Assessments were made about the possible development of a new multiple warhead, incl. with hypersonic gliding warheads. The missile must necessarily carry the means of overcoming the anti-missile defense of a modern appearance, which is in service with a potential adversary.

Thus, the Rubezh PGRK continued to develop the ideas of previous projects, complemented by new technologies and solutions. This made it possible to obtain a lighter and more mobile complex with increased flexibility of combat use. It could complement the existing Topol and Yars mobile systems, giving the Strategic Missile Forces some new capabilities. In the future, such a complex can become the basis of a mobile group of missile forces.

Postponed or closed?


At the beginning of the last decade, it was assumed that no later than 2015-18. the promising PGRK RS-26 "Rubezh" will go through all the stages of checks and tests, after which it will enter service with the Strategic Missile Forces and take up combat duty. For objective reasons, work on this complex dragged on - and was curtailed until real results were obtained. The army did not find opportunities for the simultaneous implementation of several projects, leaving only Avangard.


Start of "Yars". Probably, the launch of "Rubezh" looks the same. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation

If the reports of 2018 correspond to reality, then the further fate of the "Rubezh" will be determined in 2025-27, in the course of drawing up the next State Armaments Program, starting in 2028. It is not known what conclusions the authors of the program will come to. It is equally likely that the project can be resumed or abandoned.

PGRK "Rubezh" has certain advantages and is of great interest for the Strategic Missile Forces and the Strategic Nuclear Forces as a whole. The resumption of the project will allow the missile forces in the distant future to get a new effective weapon to supplement and then replace existing designs. It should be borne in mind that during the suspension, the "Rubezh" project will become outdated to some extent and will need at least revision. Moreover, it is possible to abandon the RS-26 in favor of a new project with varying degrees of continuity.

We can only say with confidence that in the future our Strategic Missile Forces will receive a new PGRK of one model or another. The newest of such complexes, the RS-24 Yars, entered service in 2009, and now the troops are receiving the upgraded Yars-S. Obviously, by the beginning of the thirties, the oldest Yars and Topoli-Ms will need to be replaced - which requires a modernized RS-24 or a completely new complex.

Thus, our country has in reserve a new project of a mobile missile system with a number of important advantages, which has passed all stages of development and testing. Depending on the capabilities and needs of the Strategic Missile Forces, it can be brought to production and operation or reworked with the aim of a new increase in performance. The final decision on the "Rubezh" project, apparently, has not yet been made. But it is clear that any measures in the future will be aimed at further developing the missile forces and maximizing benefits.
Author:
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. S. Viktorovich
    S. Viktorovich 13 May 2021 18: 09
    +5
    Yuri Semenovich is great, he has thought over the situation for tomorrow.
  2. Anachoret
    Anachoret 13 May 2021 20: 33
    +4
    Project Rubezh, judging by the declared dimensions, is clearly dual-use with targeting to Barguzin. Apparently, because of him, the Barguzin project has been postponed for the time being. They will finish the rocket, there will be a railway option right away
    1. kapitan92
      kapitan92 13 May 2021 21: 06
      +6
      Quote: Anchorite
      Project Rubezh, judging by the declared dimensions, is clearly dual-use with targeting to Barguzin. Apparently, because of him, the Barguzin project has been postponed for the time being. They will finish the rocket, there will be a railway option right away

      RS-26 "Rubezh" mobile ground-based strategic missile system. Further development of "YARS", / RS 24 /, with new MIRVs.
      The range is 2000-6000 km, and the installation of the mobile complex itself was 40 tons lighter than that of the RS24.
      The deployment was supposed to start in 2017, and only in the mobile version.
      In 2018, Rubezh and Barguzin were excluded from the rearmament program until 2027. Instead, the Avangard was included in the GPV-27. The reason for the exclusion is the impossibility of simultaneous financing of the above programs.
      It's a shame that almost everything came up to the series at the Votkinsk plant, and a bummer. The giraffe is big .....! hi
      1. Anachoret
        Anachoret 13 May 2021 21: 09
        +3
        I would like to hope that the project will be reanimated before 27, because, in any case, it will need to be updated taking into account the technical realities of competitors. Therefore, such a project cannot be postponed for a long time due to the threat of loss of competencies.
        1. kapitan92
          kapitan92 13 May 2021 21: 10
          +1
          Quote: Anchorite
          I would like to hope that I will revive the project before 27,

          I want to believe it! Money, everything depends on it.
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 14 May 2021 08: 57
            +10
            I want to believe it! Money, everything depends on it.

            Money is important. But if the complex was badly needed, they would be found. yes
            IMHO, the characteristics of the Frontier are such that the consequences of placing it on the database could be undesirable and endanger what the military leadership did not want to pose.
            In the current situation, its pluses can be its minuses.
            For example, we are trying to persuade Europe not to deploy US-based INF missiles, but in return promised not to deploy our own INF missiles in the European part of Russia.
            A strategic PGRK, with a minimum range of 2000-2500 km, would not allow us to play such a game.
            I can assume that the adoption by us of the Frontier was announced to those who need it in NATO as part of our "response" to the deployment of state-run INF in Europe.
            Such a version would explain both the demonstrative testing for "short" range, which attracted a lot of attention, and why the practically completed complex was never accepted into service.
            I repeat once again - the complex is quite advanced and unique.
            If you wanted to put it into service, you would find the money. hi
            Our leadership does not need an arms race, but a containment of the West.
            In this sense, the threat of the Frontier deployment is quite a working tool. And the money spent on its creation is well spent. yes
            1. D16
              D16 14 May 2021 13: 11
              -2
              For example, the state's RIAC, we persuade Europe not to place

              What rockets? How to place what is not there? It became straightforwardly interesting.
              A strategic PGRK, with a minimum range of 2000-2500 km, would not allow us to play such a game.

              Does the ancient UR-100UTTH with its minimum range of 1000 km bother anyone in Europe?
              the threat of the Frontier deployment

              It is a threat to our budget, since there is no sense in deploying it. It is smarter to spend money on the development of real RSM, rather than hybrids at the price of ICBMs or even higher. And threaten to deploy them. At least for the same money they will get more, and each Euro dog will know for whose soul they are without any ambiguity.
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 14 May 2021 13: 51
                0
                What rockets? How to place what is not there? It became straightforwardly interesting.

                If "really interesting", then you can recall our concern that Tomahawks can be placed in the missile defense system mines in Romania and Poland.
                Such complexes can be deployed in many places if desired.
                They have everything. The only question is what "fittings" are in the Mk-41. wink

                Does the ancient UR-100UTTH with its minimum range of 1000 km bother anyone in Europe?

                These missiles under the Vanguards are cherished, as far as I know. For missile defense of the most unfriendly country. bully

                It is smarter to spend money on the development of real RSM, rather than hybrids at the price of ICBMs or even higher. And threaten to deploy them.

                States are confident that "real RSD" we already have.
                In any case, ours did not promise accommodation.
                There was no talk of a refusal to develop. wink
                1. D16
                  D16 14 May 2021 15: 40
                  +1
                  You may recall our concern that Tomahawks could be placed in the missile defense mines in Romania and Poland.

                  Purely theoretically. And most importantly: Why? What will this very limited number of slow conventional warhead missiles do? These stationary objects are too expensive to lose in this way.
                  These missiles under the Vanguards cherish, as far as I know

                  All rockets with liquid propellant rocket engines are very flexible in terms of throttling. Previously, the UR-100 was the most common missile. And for some reason nobody in Europe was embarrassed. Intercontinentalism is determined by the maximum range. The rest of the characteristics are secondary.
                  The States are confident that we already have "real RSD".

                  You never know what they are sure of. The Europeans probably have their own opinion on this matter. Who tested the P-500 at medium range? No one. What is it all about? You shouldn't mix Trump's political quirks and the continent's nuclear security into one pot. They will make an analogue of the Pioneer, then Europe will get nervous. In the meantime, they are doing well lol .
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 14 May 2021 15: 51
                    -2
                    Purely theoretically. And most importantly: Why? What will this very limited number of slow conventional warhead missiles do? These stationary objects are too expensive to lose in this way.

                    Do you continue to persist? wink
                    The United States Marine Corps intends to acquire 2021 Tomahawk cruise missiles in fiscal 1 (starting October 2020, 48) for deployment on mobile coastal launchers... According to The Drive, these missiles will be used as anti-ship munitions. In total, it is planned to spend $ 125 million on the purchase of missiles.

                    You have no doubt that these anti-ship missiles will easily hit stationary targets, do you? This is only the ILC. Everything is ready for them. yes

                    Intercontinentalism is determined by the maximum range. The rest of the characteristics are secondary

                    I am ready to agree. 1550 BB just barely enough for the "exceptional". It's a pity to spend them on less exceptional ones.

                    You never know what they are sure of. ... What is it all about?

                    "What is your evidence"? Did I understand you correctly? wink
                    Ours are quietly sawing Caliber-M.
                    Zircon will fit perfectly in Bastion's PU instead of Onyx.
                    There is a rumor that work is underway on a version 3000 km away.
                    There are many options if you think about it. hi

                    In the meantime, they are doing well. lol

                    lol
                    1. D16
                      D16 14 May 2021 20: 56
                      -2
                      According to The Drive, these missiles will be used as anti-ship munitions.

                      You never know what The Drive writes there. After withdrawing from the treaty, the Americans made a demonstrative ground launch of the ax. The launcher was collected from sticks and cat feces. It was naive to talk about some kind of complex.
                      You have no doubt that these anti-ship missiles will easily hit stationary targets, do you? This is only the ILC. Everything is ready for them.

                      For a start, it would be nice to find out where they will fly from. I have not heard about new PUs yet.
                      Ours are quietly sawing Caliber-M.

                      This Caliber, especially the M, until it reaches the target, or the war ends, or is shot down on the way. Better to do Eskander medium range. Fast, reliable and special. Warheads in stock.
                      Zircon will fit perfectly in Bastion's PU instead of Onyx.

                      If something stands up somewhere, this does not mean that this nesting doll makes sense.
      2. garri-lin
        garri-lin 13 May 2021 21: 13
        +1
        The frontier was the same increase in the nomenclature that everyone haunts in tanks, submarines and other industries. Yars for the 20th decade is quite relevant. As it begins to become obsolete, the Frontier will do something new. Actual.
        1. bayard
          bayard 14 May 2021 00: 08
          +6
          "Frontier" was created for the same role as "Pioneer" at one time. Our Strategic Missile Forces have targets not only on the North American continent, but also targets in Europe, Southeast Asia, and from Chukotka they will be able to cover almost the entire western coast of the United States with their zone of destruction.
          And what if such complexes are to be placed in the future, say, in Venezuela?
          From the southern direction of the United States, its missile defense system is not covered.
          If the United States starts deploying its medium-range missiles in Europe, Southeast Asia, Japan ...
          But this will require a Fleet and WILL.
          1. garri-lin
            garri-lin 14 May 2021 07: 20
            +1
            Not Venezuela. Not Cuba. Nobody will agree. Or they will quickly organize a revolution and regime change. It is worth counting only on your territory.
            1. bayard
              bayard 14 May 2021 15: 16
              +1
              The deployment of overseas bases with such weapons is not possible until the end of this decade. And during this time, a lot can happen.
              In the meantime, it is too early to stutter about this - for such ambitions the Navy is needed.
              And at the end of the decade, it may already appear.
              1. garri-lin
                garri-lin 14 May 2021 18: 15
                -2
                It's not about the navy. Any government in the vicinity of the United States will be overthrown if they are so close friends with Russia.
                1. bayard
                  bayard 14 May 2021 21: 13
                  +3
                  It didn't work in Venezuela. Overthrow. But they tried more than once.
                  In Venezuela, we have great interests (with state and not only corporations), and we have given a loan to Venezuela and it has not been repaid yet. So, in purely capitalist terms, "this is our cow."
                  And the intentions to create a serious naval base in Venezuela, with an airfield and full minced meat, were announced a couple of years ago. The time of putting into operation was called - 2027.
                  Venezuela has the most powerful and modern army in the region, so it's fraught with its neighbors. And with our naval base, like Tartus and Khmeimim, and the United States, the sturgeon will be cut.
                  But without the Navy, such an undertaking is not only risky ... it is simply impossible.
                  1. garri-lin
                    garri-lin 14 May 2021 22: 33
                    -1
                    In Venezuela it is still unclear whether it worked or not. And the naval base is one thing and the missile silos is another
                    1. bayard
                      bayard 14 May 2021 23: 26
                      +2
                      "Rubezh" has always been viewed as a mobile complex on a wheeled chassis.
                      Our "Pioneers" were once deployed in Europe - in response to the US deployment of "Pershing-2" and the CD in Germany and Italy .... But it was necessary to deploy in Cuba.
                      And for the "New Caribbean Crisis" then our Navy was quite an ocean one, and our MPS and SSGNs went like home in the Caribbean Sea.
                      I didn’t say “absolutely necessary”. I said that in response - in the event of the appearance of American MRBMs and KR in Europe and Southeast Asia.
                      1. garri-lin
                        garri-lin 15 May 2021 07: 10
                        0
                        There is a concept of price / efficiency. Medium-range missiles are cheaper and are quite adequate for striking Europe. But financially placing them in Venezuela is illogical. Cheaper than a dozen Sarmatians. Than a dozen Frontiers plus a base in Wennswell. But close neighbors can be kept in tension by the Frontier.
                      2. bayard
                        bayard 15 May 2021 09: 43
                        0
                        The base in Venezuela is conceived as a naval and aviation base.
                        MRBM can go as an option.
    2. Aag
      Aag 14 May 2021 17: 38
      0
      "... and the installation of the mobile complex itself was 40 tons lighter than that of the PC24 ..."
      Can you justify?
  3. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 14 May 2021 00: 55
    0
    Quote: Anchorite
    They will finish the rocket, there will be a railway option right away

    There were several "complaints" about the Barguzin project, in addition to the presence or without the presence of a rocket!
  • antivirus
    antivirus 13 May 2021 20: 51
    -7
    here is the answer about AV - there was not enough money for the expanded development of the Strategic Missile Forces. only hyper perspectives.
    At a new stage of development, all the bumps are all over again. not up to 10 pcs of Av with 100 VI to fight with what they give in hand.
    1. D16
      D16 13 May 2021 23: 31
      +4
      there was not enough money for the expanded development of the Strategic Missile Forces

      With the termination of the INF Treaty, the violinist is no longer needed. The range of 6000 km for RSD is redundant. There are other means for this.
  • CastroRuiz
    CastroRuiz 13 May 2021 21: 20
    0
    Novy RS "Kedr" is a modification and modernization of the RS-26 "Rubezh".
  • Sancho_SP
    Sancho_SP 13 May 2021 23: 14
    -4
    And how was it fundamentally different from Poplar? The size doesn't really matter. Is it at a price? It means that there was probably no price gain.

    A qualitatively more interesting project would be a fundamentally smaller rocket, but nevertheless capable of delivering a small monoblock warhead to the desired range.

    But at the same time, it fits in size and weight in a standard short-foot container. It is then that strategic mobility increases fundamentally.
  • Vadim237
    Vadim237 13 May 2021 23: 33
    0
    The Ministry of Defense is not up to the Rubezh now, since the US withdrawal under the INF Treaty forces the creation of a new MRBM.
  • Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 14 May 2021 05: 07
    +1
    Here is the author well done.
    At first, he honestly warned that he did not have accurate information.
    Then he repeated the same "maybe, probably" three times.
    Added a couple of times "if only if only"
    And voila, the article is ready.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 14 May 2021 07: 56
    0
    those. Is this a replacement for Poplar and Yars? in a more compact design ?. Is it possible to leave 2 stages and get an MRBM with a range of up to 5000 km in the dimensions of Scud, Elbrus on an 8x8 MZKT chassis?
    1. Vadim237
      Vadim237 14 May 2021 23: 54
      +1
      The replacement of Poplar M and Yaras is Yars S and Kedr.
  • Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 14 May 2021 11: 11
    +2
    "Frontier" ... "abroad" ... That used to be ... Times (!) ... and now so .... "moments"! For example, there was the Pioneer RCSD ... a two-stage ... And it was created simply ... from a certain 3-stage ICBM, one stage was taken away ... so we got the Pioneer! And another wonderful complex was being created ... "Courier"! From the smallest ICBM! Only 17 tons! Should be hiding in the truck! Increase the weight of the BB ... we will get the RSD ... How many "ideas" are left of the Union!
    1. Aag
      Aag 14 May 2021 19: 39
      +4
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      "Frontier" ... "abroad" ... That used to be ... Times (!) ... and now so .... "moments"! For example, there was the Pioneer RCSD ... a two-stage ... And it was created simply ... from a certain 3-stage ICBM, one stage was taken away ... so we got the Pioneer! And another wonderful complex was being created ... "Courier"! From the smallest ICBM! Only 17 tons! Should be hiding in the truck! Increase the weight of the BB ... we will get the RSD ... How many "ideas" are left of the Union!

      You seem to state it correctly ... Only, like many commentators, "dance" from the rocket (like from a stove))) - which, in general, is true. Yes, - dimensions, dead weight, thrown weight, range, determine the architecture of the carrier (PU-launcher), and (!), - the complex as a whole.
      But, the fundamental difference between the "Topol" and the "Pioneer" is that it does not have a launcher (launcher), but an APU (autonomous launcher) capable of performing a task (launching an ICBM), and even carrying a DB for some time (Combat duty ), without deploying support and control units (in some cases). What is more important for the tactics of the type, since 2001, the branch of the armed forces (Strategic Missile Forces), the PGRK began to be able to launch from the patrol route (starting with the Topol). I let it only from pre-prepared in the engineering, geodetic plan, memorized positions (Yars, in this regard, has even wider possibilities). What is all this for? To expand the conditions of use, to reduce the time of readiness for launch (outside the PPD, - points of permanent deployment, BSP-combat launch positions). That is, to increase the "flexibility" - the main feature of the PGRK)). mines benefit from security, sustainability ...
      Excuse my boredom, it looks like you know all this hi .but I am writing for all those interested ... (Note, I operate with information before finding it in the public domain))), the 010th will not be sewn))).
      So, based on the foregoing, for those who reason, they say, the "machine" (launcher) is smaller, more compact, more inconspicuous ... Yes, it would be nice ... Only a launcher is not only a rocket + chassis! By the way, the length of the missiles in Wikipedia is bare, without TPK (transport launch container), throw another 2-3 meters) On the chassis (conveyor), the mass of all necessary tripe: communications, "climate control" (solid fuel critical for this parameter), BU (combat control), hydraulics (we want these 40-50 tons in the pre-final stage
      raise the products to a vertical position, having previously lifted and leveled the entire unit), and the PZ (the flight task, which can change, is not counted on the calculator), but in order to "count", I suspect, you need to know your coordinates (well, if, of course , we want to get where we were aiming, with a given KVO), I do not think that with GPS, from a smartphone they enter))) ... And, we get the following alignment by the mass of the APU: 1/3-mass of the rocket, 1/3-mass of the chassis (slightly less), 1/3-mass of equipment, units, systems, devices that ensure the operation, operation, use of the product (missile) for its intended purpose.
      Rough, but this mass ratio has been maintained (for now) for more than 30 years. soldier
  • Vikxnumx
    Vikxnumx 14 May 2021 15: 36
    +2
    The RS-26 rocket was built according to a three-stage scheme with a dilution stage and was equipped with solid-propellant engines. According to various estimates, the length of the product ranges from 15 to 18 m. Weight - no more than 50 tons. Tests have shown the missile's ability to fly at a range of about 2-2,5 thousand km or up to 8 thousand km, depending on the trajectory.

    Rocket "Topol" approx. 40 tons ...
    "Yars" - 44 tons.
    And where is the decrease in mass?
    START missiles and warheads are limited. We need to make a small medium-range missile of the Pershing-2 type with the ability to move along public roads.
  • nobody75
    nobody75 15 May 2021 15: 50
    0
    I used to think the same thing that the INF Treaty is a betrayal ... And then I thought ... I counted ... A heavy subsonic drone with an aerobalistic missile has greater combat stability than a PGRK or "Molodets" ...
    Sincerely
  • MinskFox
    MinskFox 18 May 2021 12: 45
    0
    This is how a project is already underway to replace Poplar and YARS - "Kedr" is called, there was news recently.
  • Crabong
    Crabong 20 May 2021 03: 00
    0
    It is necessary to make a rocket with an LPRE. They are more durable.