Military Review

Completed tests ICBM RS-26 "Frontier"

40
Last summer, it was reported that, already in 2015, strategic rocket forces would begin to receive a new intercontinental ballistic missile, which is intended to replace existing weapons with an expiring service life. As a replacement for some aging missiles, the Fronteer RS-26 complex is proposed. The other day there were new reports on the progress of this project.



26 March edition of Kommersant, citing its sources in the Ministry of Defense announced the completion of tests of the new ICBM. Over the past few years, the military and specialists of the Moscow Institute of Thermal Engineering (MIT), which developed the PC-26 project, conducted four test launches of the new rocket. The last test run took place just a few days ago - March 18. The recent launch was considered successful and became the fourth in a series of successful tests. The rocket launched from a mobile launcher at the Kapustin Yar test site and hit an educational target at the Sary-Shagan test site. All the stages of the launch and flight of the rocket, according to the source of the Kommersant publication, went through regularly. The correct operation of all systems, components and assemblies is confirmed by the received telemetry.

The fourth successful test launch in a row opens the way to the troops for the new missile complex. According to an unnamed source in the Ministry of Defense, the military is ready to adopt a new missile. Deliveries of serial products and their deployment in the combat units of the Strategic Missile Forces should begin as early as next year. Thus, in the next few months, the Russian strategic rocket forces will begin implementing a new program to upgrade their weapons.

Unfortunately, the data on the new test launch of the Rubezh missile, as well as its imminent adoption, is not yet confirmed by officials. According to Kommersant, the press service of the military department and representatives of the Moscow Institute of Heating Engineers refused to comment on such news. Perhaps the first official information about the successful completion of the development and testing of the “Rubezh” ICBM will appear in the very near future, but so far it is necessary to rely only on unnamed media sources.

According to reports, the development of the PC-26 rocket complex "Frontier" was launched no later than the middle of the last decade. During the first years the project was classified and its existence was not announced. The first mention of the new rocket took place in an interview with MIT General Designer Yuri Solomonov, published in March 2011. At the same time it was reported that in the near future the first test launch of the new product should take place, and the project development is scheduled to be completed on the 2013 year. Previously, in parallel with the name "Frontier", the designation "Avant-garde" was encountered, but by now the latter has fallen into disuse.

The first launch of the rocket took place on September 27 2011, at the Plesetsk test site. These tests ended in failure - an experienced rocket fell in 8 km from the launcher. According to some data, during the exit from the transport and launch container, the rocket damaged the first stage; according to others, it was not a full-fledged launch, but throwing tests to test the missile launch systems. The first full launch took place only 23 May 2012 of the year. The rocket, which took off from the Plesetsk test site, successfully delivered the training unit to the Kamchatka test site. The third launch (October 24 2012 of the year) was held at the new site, which was the Kapustin Yar test site. To date, with the first unsuccessful, five test launches have been conducted, the last of which took place on March 18.

Completed tests ICBM RS-26 "Frontier"


According to the available fragmentary data, the Rubezh missile system will be used with mobile launchers. In addition, some sources mention the possibility of mine-based. Accurate information about the architecture of the rocket and the composition of the equipment used is not yet available, because of which it is necessary to make various assumptions based on information about other projects and a common sense.

Probably, the PC-26 rocket has a three-stage layout and is equipped with solid-fuel engines. The starting weight of the product is estimated at 40-50 t. According to various estimates, the maximum range of the Rubezh missile must be at least 6-8 thousand km. Given the need to replace existing weapons, we can talk about large values ​​of this parameter. The combat equipment, apparently, should be made in the form of a split head part with individual guidance.

The launches of the Rubezh experimental missiles from the Kapustin Yar proving ground at targets at the Sary-Shagan proving ground became a pretext for claims from foreign countries. The fact is that the distance between these polygons is much less than 5500 km, which are the conditional boundary between medium-range missiles and intercontinental missiles. Thus, the PC-26 project began to be accused of inconsistency with the existing Medium and Small-Range Missile Treaty, according to which Russia and the United States are not entitled to develop, produce and operate ballistic missiles with a range from 500 to 5500 km.

Nevertheless, the Rubezh rocket confirmed the possibility of flying an intercontinental range. It is developed and planned for use just as an ICBM. In addition, it is in this quality that a new product is declared in existing international agreements. Thus, all claims are contrived and should not entail any consequences of a political nature.

Currently, several types of missile complexes are in service with the Strategic Missile Forces: these are the systems of the Р-36М family, the UR-100UTTX, RT-2М Topol, RT-2ПМ2 “Topol-M” missiles in mine and mobile design, as well as mobile complexes RS -24 Yars. The new complex PC-26 "Frontier" is designed to complement the latest system of the Strategic Missile Forces, as well as gradually replace obsolete missiles with similar characteristics. Probably, over time, "Boundary" will replace the "Topol" complexes. The start of shipments and combat duty of PC-26 missiles is scheduled for 2016 year.

On the materials of the sites:
http://kommersant.ru/
http://ria.ru/
http://bmpd.livejournal.com/
http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-553.html
Author:
40 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sergey Sitnikov
    Sergey Sitnikov 30 March 2015 07: 05
    +14
    Frontier! Damn does not sound, I would call - "Hello monkey", well, or at least not "Frontier" but "ABROAD".
    1. NEXUS
      NEXUS 30 March 2015 07: 47
      +14
      Quote: Sergey Sitnikov
      Frontier! Damn does not sound, I would call - "Hello monkey", well, or at least not "Frontier" but "ABROAD".

      The border is a good name. As for the "cool and sonorous" so the Americans, when they see what our missiles are capable of, give them nicknames, which is very stressful for their digestive tract.
      Pay attention to what we give the names of good, peaceful, bright: Pinocchio, Voivode, White Swan, Ash ... and amers how it all sounds the same? Satan, Black Jack, Ocean Monster.
      Range to 8 thousand? It seems that the conversation was about 5500 ... well, okay, 8000 is even better good hi
      1. Dangerous
        Dangerous 30 March 2015 08: 38
        +2
        It seems that that week there was information that the launch range of the Rubezh range from 2000 to 6000 km, although no one will tell the exact information. If this is true, then this is a real medium-range missile, after which Europe should think about whether to continue the US anti-loser policy or not
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 30 March 2015 12: 47
          -13
          Correctly. This is not an ICBM, but a medium-range missile.
          Or Russia should withdraw from the agreement on medium-range missiles
          or the Americans will have to return the Pershing to Europe.
          The flying time, that Boundary, that Pershing is tiny. Can
          hit launchers of ICBMs before they are launched. Is it necessary?
          1. Dog of war
            Dog of war 30 March 2015 14: 48
            0
            "or or" otherwise what? The Americans received the telemetry of the rocket flight, from Plesetsk to the Kura more than 5500 km, and whether it flew there empty or not, this is the third thing and little provable.
            1. crazyrom
              crazyrom 31 March 2015 03: 58
              0
              Since this is a new and successful weapon, May 9 must show it!
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. gjv
            gjv 30 March 2015 15: 47
            +1
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Correctly. This is not an ICBM, but a medium-range missile.

            Well, it depends on where to place it. For example, the Ureliki – Chicago flight is quite intercontinental. fellow
          4. Tektor
            Tektor 30 March 2015 18: 16
            +2
            Correctly. This is not an ICBM, but a medium-range missile.
            Using your logic, then Topol is also a medium-range missile: maximum range - 11000 km; minimum range - 1000 km.
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 31 March 2015 10: 33
              -6
              The border between ICBMs and medium-range ballistic missiles was set at
              contracts in 5000 km. The "Rubezh" has just 5000.
              Those. Russia can try to scare him with his help
              Europe, aiming missiles at European capitals, as was the case in Brezhnev’s time.
              But Europe was so scared that it asked the Americans to place
              I have Pershing. And the exact Pershing turned out to be more convenient to beat the mines
              and launchers of ICBMs, not cities. 5 minutes - that's all. And then the USSR went to
              medium-range BR banning agreement.
              1. rubin6286
                rubin6286 31 March 2015 17: 04
                +2
                Due to insufficient range, the Pershing could not hit the Soviet silos and PGRK, but our Oka, Pioneer and Topol at that time could do it with ease. Russia never scares anyone. but always appeals to prudence and warns.
              2. Dry_T-50
                Dry_T-50 April 1 2015 20: 56
                0
                Quote: voyaka uh
                But Europe was so scared

                that France withdrew from NATO. For several decades.
          5. Allen
            Allen 30 March 2015 19: 56
            0
            Hit the launchers of ICBMs?
            First let them find where to beat ... There is no mine option.
            Everything is mobile, unlike most NATO ICBMs.
            It is based on the Belarusian tractor MZKT-79291, built according to the 12x12 formula.
            Today he is here, tomorrow for 300-400 km.
            1. James Cameron
              James Cameron 30 March 2015 20: 51
              0
              For some reason, everyone forgets that the RS-20 mines withstand the direct hit of several nuclear warheads, and are able to make a return launch (there were tests in the USSR). But mobile tractors are most likely tracked by satellites and can be disabled by a massive strike (including non-nuclear weapons like the KR)
              1. Aleks.Antonov
                Aleks.Antonov 30 March 2015 22: 02
                0
                Sorry, but can you tell me when such tests were carried out? And where?
                At the same time, they would give links to the source. Of course, soil complexes are tracked by intelligence. But they still have more chances to survive than missiles in mines. Another thing is that when anti-missiles arrive on a visit, the mines should already be empty.
                1. James Cameron
                  James Cameron 31 March 2015 00: 04
                  +1
                  I will not tell you from the original sources, unfortunately (do you mean the official performance characteristics of the mine?) They have a "higher" protection class with a max. pressure in the region of 6 MPa (60 atmospheres approximately) and a depreciation system.

                  Correction - a direct hit, of course, I said it incorrectly, there was a mine survival rate associated with the missile’s CVO, since it is possible to fly into the Minuteman mine’s cover only by chance (but the axis axis of the mine is set as the target).

                  But I don’t know how mobile PU will survive the shock wave. It would be interesting to see the results! Most likely, in the future, all mobile installations will be under the gun of hypersonic cruise missiles with non-nuclear warheads - a fundamentally different situation. And here the air defense echelons such as the S-500 will play an important role, because in them the work on such missiles (and generally promising goals) was laid down initially. But, it is obvious that in the presence of several types of basing of our strategic nuclear forces, a quick disarming global strike is much more difficult to implement. So this is a guarantee against the escalation of the conflict.



                  PS In fact, the real problem is the state of the nuclear warheads themselves, not the fact that they will explode at all.
              2. Bronis
                Bronis 31 March 2015 00: 28
                +1
                Quote: James Cameron
                But mobile tractors are most likely tracked by satellites and can be disabled by a massive strike (including non-nuclear weapons like the KR)

                In theory, maybe yes ... but in practice - it is unlikely ... far from base locations from areas of possible launch of the Kyrgyz Republic ... KR, especially considering their great flight time (even if you solve the problems with range) ...
                And as far as the news is clear, this will continue. small-sized BR, the possible revival of the BZHRK - confirmation of this
          6. Allen
            Allen 30 March 2015 19: 58
            +1
            and more:
            “The Americans are not making any official claims on the RS-26 missile,” the military department emphasized. - Because there are no grounds for these claims. "The telemetry of test launches RS-26 was presented to the American side, which clearly proves that the new missile belongs to the class of intercontinental ballistic."
          7. opus
            opus 30 March 2015 22: 18
            +3
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Correctly. This is not an ICBM, but a medium-range missile.

            Not properly.

            This is an ICBM
            A range of about 6 thousand km with a light warhead and 2-4 thousand km with a heavy / or "multiply charged" / or non-nuclear.
            Reincarnation of the Speed ​​IRBM (Complex 15P666 Speed, missile 15Ж66) at a new level.

            Everything is like that of MIT: the new 15Zh66 rocket represented the second and third stages of the Topol. Cheap and cheerful.
            The same is with the RS-26 Rubezh: 2 + 3 stages of the Yars ICBM

            Quote: voyaka uh
            Or Russia should withdraw from the agreement on medium-range missiles
            or the Americans will have to return the Pershing to Europe.

            1. Do not put a shadow on the fence: the INF Treaty, envisaged the elimination of two classes of nuclear missiles - medium-range ("firing" at a distance of 1000 km to 5500), and a shorter range ("firing" at a distance of 500 to 1000 km) .
            Eliminated, no missiles.

            2. There is no pershing and no production
            There is JBF from Pershing -The W85 nuclear warhead was not destroyed and was used to equip free-falling bombs of the Mk 61 Mod 10 type
            3.And does Europe agree to host the Pershing?
            Quote: voyaka uh
            One can
            hit launchers of ICBMs before they are launched. Is it necessary?

            How so?
            -RS-26 doesn’t get to the position area of ​​the silos of the silos of ICBMs LGM-30G "Minuteman-3" = Malmstrom air base (state of Montana), them. Francis Warren (wyoming) and Minot (North Dakota).
            If ... If they don’t place (as needed) in Kamchatka.
            But still it’s not
            Quote: voyaka uh
            The flying time is tiny.


            -MGM-31C Pershing II, if "reincarnated", with its 1770 km nor how not get it

            Vladimir, Ozerny / Vypolzovo, Bologoe-4, Yoshkar-Ola, Kozelsk, Krasniye Sosenki / Teykovo-6, Svetly / Tatishchevo-5, Rostoshi, Orenburg, Yasny / Dombarovsky, ZATO Svobodny, Omsk, Irkutsk, Barnaul, Novosibirsk-95, Uzhur-4 and so on
            1. alex86
              alex86 31 March 2015 08: 15
              0
              Quote: opus
              Quote: voyaka uh
              Correctly. This is not an ICBM, but a medium-range missile.

              Not properly.

              The question is how the States will perceive it.
              Quote: opus
              Quote: voyaka uh
              One can
              hit launchers of ICBMs before they are launched. Is it necessary?

              How so?

              It was understood that Pershing (or their substitutes) will be able to hit our ICBM launchers and whether we need to start a race on the BMBM in Europe, while for us it will be strategic missiles (from the States), while we are using our missiles medium range US territory will not reach.
              1. opus
                opus 31 March 2015 11: 15
                +1
                Quote: alex86
                The question is how the States will perceive it.

                Perceived as it should be:
                rocket test launches from Plesetsk in Kamchatka confirmed her intercontinental range and it was announced as the new ICBM under the current Strategic Arms Treaty of the Russian Federation and the USA.
                / what the American media are cracking is not related to the reaction of the official State Department


                Quote: alex86
                It was understood that Pershing (or their substitutes) will be able to hit our ICBM launchers


                Can not.
                Quote: opus
                MGM-31C Pershing II, if "reincarnated" with its 1770km it doesn’t get enough


                / 42 BRs are held at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.
                1. alex86
                  alex86 April 2 2015 21: 45
                  0
                  Quote: opus
                  Perceived as it should be:

                  God forbid, but they can use it as an excuse for deploying something of their own (not this missile, but another; or stating that we are lying - for example, we can only launch from the 2nd and 3rd stage)
                  Quote: opus
                  Can not
                  - cannot yet, because there is nothing.
                  Quote: opus
                  42 BR are in storage at Fort Sill, Oklahoma.

                  that is, they are not drunk and can be transported - "what a crack": we would not need them in Europe.
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. samoletil18
      samoletil18 30 March 2015 08: 55
      +3
      Quote: Sergey Sitnikov
      Frontier! Damn does not sound, I would call - "Hello monkey", well, or at least not "Frontier" but "ABROAD".

      No problem. The Americans themselves will name it correctly. "Voivode" - "Satan", for example.
    3. Civil
      Civil 30 March 2015 17: 10
      +1
      In light of the deployment of US troops in Europe, this is probably even the Last Frontier
    4. sent-onere
      sent-onere 30 March 2015 17: 48
      0
      I especially liked the pink head of "Frontier" in the picture, if the head is solid enough (solid fuel) and separates, our "partners" will be delighted) ..
      Glory, Strategic Rocket Forces!
    5. sent-onere
      sent-onere 30 March 2015 17: 50
      0
      The rocket is three-stage, according to the picture. I immediately remembered the reasoning of the experts in Aviation Week. (Without quotes, their full-time experts). Who reasoned in the sense that you need to see how this RS-26 looks. If 3-speed - everything is OK, ICBM. If 2 - the guard, violate the INF. My reminder that the SS-18 Satan is a two-stage ICBM has obviously puzzled experts.

      In the case of the RS-26, a 3-step scheme, possibly just the opposite. allows you to reduce the range. just NOT lighting one of the upper steps. It is impossible to cut off a solid propellant rocket engine.
      1. Allen
        Allen 30 March 2015 20: 11
        0
        sorry, but as if advised the mat part to look a little.
        Solid fuel and separable from various operas.
        3rd step to reduce range? Our engineers would be awesome at such an idea.
    6. Allen
      Allen 30 March 2015 19: 53
      +1
      “America has noted with concern the growing missile containment capabilities. I am so sorry. As I understand you! ”, Dmitry Rogozin wrote on his Twitter about the capabilities of the RS-26 Rubezh.
    7. Saburov
      Saburov 30 March 2015 22: 19
      +4
      By the way, gentlemen, members of the forum, today is Mikhail Ivanovich Sokolovsky’s anniversary - general designer, first deputy general director, corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, doctor of technical sciences, professor.
      Full member of the Russian Academy of Rocket and Artillery Sciences, academician of the Russian Academy of Cosmonautics, Lenin Prize laureate, Goskomoboronprom Prize, RF Government Prize, Stroganov Prize Laureate. He was awarded the titles “Honored Worker of Science and Technology of the Russian Federation”, “Honored Creator of Space Technology”, “Veteran of the Cosmonautics of Russia”, “Honorary Worker of the Gas Industry”.
      Has been working at the enterprise since 1958 of the year after graduating from the Leningrad Military Mechanical Institute. From 1994 to 05.10.2012, General Designer and General Director of OAO NPO Iskra.
      A scientist and designer in the field of creating high-pulse solid-fuel installations for missile systems for various purposes for the Navy, Strategic Rocket Forces and space systems.
      He is the author of 9 monographs, more than 300 scientific and technical publications and 170 inventions.
      Actively transfers his experience and knowledge to young specialists, students and teachers of the Perm National Research Polytechnic University, heading the Department of Rocket and Space Technology and Power Plants. By the way, the third step of the Scalpel, in terms of energy efficiency, is unparalleled, yes, yes, it is that missile on the BZHRK. He turned 80 years old, may God grant health to this person, the world holds onto such.
  2. Moore
    Moore 30 March 2015 07: 18
    +7
    The launches of the Rubezh experimental missiles from the Kapustin Yar firing range for targets at the Sary-Shagan firing range became a cause for complaints from foreign countries.

    Well, actually, if I'm not mistaken, in 2007 a Topol with an anti-missile defense system was fired from Kapyar into this very Sary-Shagan. And there were no special screams about this.
    Why go there, and not on the Kura, is because the radar support of the Kura test site does not allow recording the maneuvers made by the warheads after they have separated from the ICBMs. In addition, these maneuvers are tracked by American measuring instruments stationed in Alaska. And the parameters of the flight from Kapustin Yar to Balkhash are carried out exclusively by Russian means of control.
    In general, the adoption of the Rubezh ICBM, with a range obviously less (8 thousand) than on the same Yars (10 thousand), can only be explained by the introduction of some special technologies for overcoming missile defense on the new product, or an increase in the number of BB ... Naturally, these are my own speculations.
    Correct if anyone is more specific.
    1. James Cameron
      James Cameron 30 March 2015 19: 20
      0
      As far as I know, the maximum range of the RS-26 has not been specified anywhere, so continuity is quite possible - i.e. the same 11000 km as for the RS-24 Yars. The starting weight of the RS-26 is indicated in the article as 40-50 tons, for the RS-24 - 49 tons, there are no cardinal differences. The main difference is the significantly lower mass of the launcher (80 tons versus 120 tons), you can see the developments for unification with the new Barguzin BZHRK
  3. samoletil18
    samoletil18 30 March 2015 09: 01
    +3
    It is interesting, of course, to read all the parameters in the article, but military secrets and other secrets are worth a lot. And the data shown on the range, information that will be very interesting to Europeans.
  4. MAX2014
    MAX2014 30 March 2015 09: 16
    +3
    Russia is a big country. If you need to hit Europe, then you can just put the ICBM somewhere in Siberia.
  5. albanian
    albanian 30 March 2015 09: 51
    +3
    New mobile systems are good, but as soon as possible they started to make heavy missiles, only 52 governors left from the heavy one, and by the time of cancellation, what should replace them with? There, one rocket weighs more than seven tons, it will need to be done by a hundred Sarmatians or several hundred analogs of poplar, in my opinion it's time to boost production.
  6. Engineer
    Engineer 30 March 2015 10: 00
    +1
    Usually this picture of heavy Sarmat ICBMs is ascribed
  7. kursk87
    kursk87 30 March 2015 10: 59
    +2
    Nuclear deterrence forces should be replenished with new high-precision missiles. Unfortunately, the nuclear shield is currently the only guarantee of security against military aggression.
  8. kotyara1963
    kotyara1963 30 March 2015 11: 11
    0
    Babama must have turned into a white man, - so pale with a fright!
  9. kotyara1963
    kotyara1963 30 March 2015 11: 11
    -2
    Babama must have turned into a white man, - so pale with a fright!
  10. qwert
    qwert 30 March 2015 15: 51
    +1
    I wonder what they will replace her? If the Governor, then it's like, change Su-34 to Su-25. If the flight range is 6000km with 40t weight, then this is also not clear. For comparison, we take the old P-29 for a submarine with 6 warheads and a range of 9000km with a mass of 42 tons. What did our effective managers do there, and what do they want to replace with this?
    1. James Cameron
      James Cameron 30 March 2015 19: 24
      0
      Nowhere was there a talk about max. range of 6000 km! Just speculation in the style of "at least 6000-8000 km" or "more than 5000 km". Nobody will say the exact har-k yet. There is every reason to believe that the range and launch weight are about the same as that of Yars (49 tons, 11000 km)
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 31 March 2015 00: 14
      0
      Quote: qwert
      I wonder what they will replace her?

      Most likely Topol. And also to put on "Barguzins" ... there is an opinion that the "Rubezh" missile is hypersonic, and even with more than one warhead. But it makes no sense to assert that all the performance characteristics of this missile are secret.
      Quote: qwert
      If the Governor, then it's like, change Su-34 to Su-25

      "Voevoda" will be replaced by "Sarmat" (YAZ 200 mgt)
  11. Ascetic
    Ascetic 30 March 2015 16: 07
    +4
    In the picture, a variant of a heavy ICBM. The border can, with some exaggeration, be called the reincarnation of the PGRK Courier with new military equipment and SU, Fr. We will have it most likely in two versions of dirt and rail. The first regiment will be in Irkutsk 29th Guards. therefore, all the insinuations about the BRDS are in the woods.
    1. gas113
      gas113 30 March 2015 21: 01
      +1
      Courier in weight category 15 t
  12. P. Yaroslav
    P. Yaroslav 30 March 2015 16: 19
    0
    Happy! A good response from the EU to sanctions) There will be an occasion to especially zealous to think about the consequences of rash actions. And the name-name to the point, because at our borders it is restless.
  13. tchoni
    tchoni 30 March 2015 18: 50
    0
    Yes, poplar needs to be changed ... and the sooner the better .... The mobile launch complex, however, causes some bewilderment ... Tracking it will not be difficult ... if only they would mask it as trucks .. ....
    1. James Cameron
      James Cameron 30 March 2015 19: 29
      0
      There is information that it is on the basis of the RS-26 (well, this is actually an improved Yars, possibly with a large number of IN warheads and with electronic warfare means) the Barguzin BZHRK (RS-28?)
    2. family tree
      family tree 11 June 2015 00: 37
      0
      Quote: tchoni
      even if they were disguised as trucks ...

      Furu, it’s just easier to track, she, damn it, only where you can drive. MZKT-79221 can, by sight, crushing the Christmas trees and bushes into the forest for a hundred kilometers, go further, disguise and look for the echo of the wind in the forest
  14. opus
    opus 30 March 2015 21: 58
    +2
    Quote: Author
    Completed tests ICBM RS-26 "Frontier"

    The photo shows the launch of the Topol-E ICBM



    The Zvezda TV channel showed the real launch of the Topol-E ICBM from the Kapustin Yar training ground in 2014
    ====================================================================== =============
    "Frontier" as if YaRS, but without the 3rd step
  15. Yves762
    Yves762 31 March 2015 00: 02
    0
    Eh ... it would have been used My "Horse" 1118th yak of our missiles .. crying
    Can the development of domestic buckets also be given to MIT ??? You see, they won’t go ... they will fly !!! fellow
    1. Tjeck
      Tjeck April 8 2015 14: 21
      0
      Joking as a joke, but I would really trust these guys, unlike tank and aircraft, our rocket launchers always do everything on time.
  16. Old26
    Old26 11 June 2015 00: 22
    +1
    Quote: tchoni
    Yes, poplar needs to be changed ... and the sooner the better .... The mobile launch complex, however, causes some bewilderment ... Tracking it will not be difficult ... if only they would mask it as trucks .. ....

    In a sense, how does it work? And the trucks - there are no trucks that the "Poplar" will fit in.
  17. Old26
    Old26 5 July 2015 19: 43
    +1
    By the way, Kirill! I just noticed the photo at the beginning of the article. An article about RS-26 "Rubezh", and a photo ... "Topol-E"