Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Share

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  George1 on Sun Aug 02, 2015 1:53 am

    nastle77 wrote:The intermediate range missile was to be destroyed according to the 1987 treaty but the Military balance 1990 still lists 174 of these missiles operational then

    SO was this missile just withdrawn gradually from 1987 onward or did all of them were disarmed overnight as soon as the treaty was signed ?

    they were withdrawn gradually May 1991 (until treaty's deadline of 1 June 1991)


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    nastle77
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 137
    Points : 179
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  nastle77 on Mon Aug 03, 2015 10:30 pm

    George1 wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:The intermediate range missile was to be destroyed according to the 1987 treaty but the Military balance 1990 still lists 174 of these missiles operational then

    SO was this missile just withdrawn gradually from 1987 onward or did all of them were disarmed overnight as soon as the treaty was signed ?

    they were withdrawn gradually May 1991 (until treaty's deadline of 1 June 1991)
    ok so the Military balance 1990 still lists 174 of these missiles operational is probably quite accurate ?

    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5680
    Points : 6086
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  Austin on Thu Aug 13, 2015 10:38 am

    US claims Russia tests missile threatening Europe, Northeast Asia

    WASHINGTON, August 13. /TASS/. Russia has "tested" a state-of-the-art ground-launched cruise missile at ranges capable of threatening most of European continent and US allies in Northeast Asia, namely Japan and South Korea, a US State Department official claimed on Wednesday.

    "We continue to insist that Russia meet its legal obligations and return to compliance with this Treaty," the official said.


    "We are consulting with Allies and reviewing a range of appropriate options — diplomatic, economic, and military — to respond to Russia's continuing violation of its treaty obligations," he said, stressing that there have been no decisions regarding military responses to "the Russian violation."

    Last July, the United States announced that Russia was in violation of the INF Treaty, which bans manufacturing and tests of missiles with ranges of between 500-5,500 km (300-3,400 miles).

    "We have reminded Russia of this and have pressed Russia repeatedly to engage constructively and return to compliance. We do not want a repeat of the escalatory cycle of action and reaction that marked much of the Cold War," the official said.

    Russia’s Foreign Ministry said the US claims that Moscow is violating provisions of the INF treaty are totally ungrounded and Washington pursues the goal of discrediting Russia.

    The ministry has in its turn voiced concerns about the US plans for deploying in Romania and Poland vertical launching systems that are capable of firing Standard-3 interceptor missiles and medium-range cruise missiles Tomahawk.

    "Their deployment will be a direct violation of the INF treaty," the Foreign Ministry said.


    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  max steel on Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:12 pm

    Russia declared 1648 deployed warheads, 526 deployed launchers, and 877 total launchers. In March 2015 the numbers were 1582, 515, and 890 respectively.

    The increase of 66 deployed warheads and nine launchers is most likely due to the deployment of Bulava missiles on the Alexander Nevskiy submarine that was completed in April 2015. Also, some older missiles were probably withdrawn from service.

    The U.S. numbers in September 2015 were 1538 warheads, 762 deployed and 898 total launchers (1597, 785, and 898 in March 2015).

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  max steel on Fri Oct 09, 2015 10:35 pm

    Syria strikes, Kalibr-NK, and the INF treaty

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  GarryB on Sat Oct 10, 2015 12:13 pm

    Interesting...

    Another possibility is that it might be based on the Kh-101/102 missile family and with minor modification and a decent solid rocket booster it could have a range of more than 5,500km.

    Some official comments mention 10,000km range cruise missiles... a ground launched missile with a range of 10,000km with a high high high flight profile with a low subsonic initial flight speed that gathers speed in flight as it gets lighter to high subsonic would not be covered by the INF treaty which only applies to intermediate range weapons (ie 500km to 5,500km).

    They could have as many ground launchers as they want...

    Besides even a 2,500km range weapon might only reach 400km with reduced fuel load... what can't you test in such a state without treaty violation?


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  max steel on Sat Oct 10, 2015 5:35 pm

    I don't know why US was complaining ? It came to my attention that the missile they were talking about inf violation was sea based Kalibr-NK cruise missile which the Pentagon apparently has a name for it - SSC-X-8.


    This is a clear demonstration of a cruise missile with a range of more than 500 km.Had Kalibr-NK been a ground-launched cruise missile, it would be prohibited by the INF Treaty. However, the missile demonstrated in action today is a SLCM that the treaty does not limit in any way. Having said that, if this missile was ever test-launched from a mobile land-based launcher, it would be considered GLCM for the purposes of the INF Treaty and this test would be a treaty violation.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Thu Oct 15, 2015 12:57 am

    The idea of ​​abolishing the INF Treaty should be thoroughly discussed

    AlfaT8
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1149
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sat Oct 17, 2015 1:23 am

    Not sure where to post this question so i am posting it here.

    It's a question that's been bothering me lately. scratch

    I wanted to ask if it were possible for Russia to develop a Non-Nuclear ICBM using multiple FAOBs, and if such a weapon were indeed created what would be it's ramification with respect Treaties and deployment??

    THX in advance.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Oct 17, 2015 1:42 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:Not sure where to post this question so i am posting it here.

    It's a question that's been bothering me lately.  scratch

    I wanted to ask if it were possible for Russia to develop a Non-Nuclear ICBM using multiple FAOBs, and if such a weapon were indeed created what would be it's ramification with respect Treaties and deployment??

    THX in advance.

    FOAB or overall Thermobaric bombs have a very good yield with high TNT equivalent compared with their actual weight/content and volume, however, they still do not achieve a formadible volume/weight to achieve the necessary kT yield ICBM (MIRVS) would have to make them feasible as an ICBM. The FOAB is based on the KAB-9000 a bomb that was classed in 9000kg class, the actual weight is 11.5t which is enormous. The biggest silo based ICBM is the SS-18 which is still in service and its payload is 8470kg, to carry such a huge warhead like a FOAB with 44kT explosive force would require a big burden for the missile, the warhead itself isn't really compromise-friendly since it must spread the cloud to all directions to unleash its optimal and devestating potential, due that it needs to be relatively far front (tip) of warhead which puts to much weight at front. That much weight at front will effect the missiles performance over time, when one stage after another are jettisoned and the missile gets lighter, the tip becomes more and more center of gravity, which will have very bad inflictions on the missiles maneuverability, stability and most probably would just rip it apart mid air. If all that hasn't screwed up the ICBM mid air, the reaction of the enemy will. He can not know and will not give a damn what payload your ICBM has, non nuclear, nuclear, candybar dropper or whatever, he will always assume it is a nuke and will react with counter offensive.

    Strategic weapons as ICBM's are only good for one thing, detterence and assuring no one meddeles directly with you.

    magnumcromagnon
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4468
    Points : 4659
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Sat Oct 17, 2015 2:06 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:Not sure where to post this question so i am posting it here.

    It's a question that's been bothering me lately.  scratch

    I wanted to ask if it were possible for Russia to develop a Non-Nuclear ICBM using multiple FAOBs, and if such a weapon were indeed created what would be it's ramification with respect Treaties and deployment??

    THX in advance.

    It makes more sense to have a ground based electro-magnetic gun capable of launching projectiles at Mach 43-44 in to LEO, where the projectiles have scram-jet sustainers to maintain speed, or to build high altitude flying drones/cruise-missiles with the same EM gun built in to them.

    AlfaT8
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1149
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  AlfaT8 on Sat Oct 17, 2015 4:48 am

    Werewolf wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:Not sure where to post this question so i am posting it here.

    It's a question that's been bothering me lately.  scratch

    I wanted to ask if it were possible for Russia to develop a Non-Nuclear ICBM using multiple FAOBs, and if such a weapon were indeed created what would be it's ramification with respect Treaties and deployment??

    THX in advance.

    FOAB or overall Thermobaric bombs have a very good yield with high TNT equivalent compared with their actual weight/content and volume, however, they still do not achieve a formadible volume/weight to achieve the necessary kT yield ICBM (MIRVS) would have to make them feasible as an ICBM. The FOAB is based on the KAB-9000 a bomb that was classed in 9000kg class, the actual weight is 11.5t which is enormous. The biggest silo based ICBM is the SS-18 which is still in service and its payload is 8470kg, to carry such a huge warhead like a FOAB with 44kT explosive force would require a big burden for the missile, the warhead itself isn't really compromise-friendly since it must spread the cloud to all directions to unleash its optimal and devestating potential, due that it needs to be relatively far front (tip) of warhead which puts to much weight at front. That much weight at front will effect the missiles performance over time, when one stage after another are jettisoned and the missile gets lighter, the tip becomes more and more center of gravity, which will have very bad inflictions on the missiles maneuverability, stability and most probably would just rip it apart mid air. If all that hasn't screwed up the ICBM mid air, the reaction of the enemy will. He can not know and will not give a damn what payload your ICBM has, non nuclear, nuclear, candybar dropper or whatever, he will always assume it is a nuke and will react with counter offensive.

    Strategic weapons as ICBM's are only good for one thing, detterence and assuring no one meddeles directly with you.

    Thanks Werewolf, i guess making a single FAOB into an IRBM is also out of the question too, ooh well, i guess bombers will have to do, i hope in the future they'll make one light enough to at least be an IRBM.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Oct 17, 2015 9:56 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    Werewolf wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:Not sure where to post this question so i am posting it here.

    It's a question that's been bothering me lately.  scratch

    I wanted to ask if it were possible for Russia to develop a Non-Nuclear ICBM using multiple FAOBs, and if such a weapon were indeed created what would be it's ramification with respect Treaties and deployment??

    THX in advance.

    FOAB or overall Thermobaric bombs have a very good yield with high TNT equivalent compared with their actual weight/content and volume, however, they still do not achieve a formadible volume/weight to achieve the necessary kT yield ICBM (MIRVS) would have to make them feasible as an ICBM. The FOAB is based on the KAB-9000 a bomb that was classed in 9000kg class, the actual weight is 11.5t which is enormous. The biggest silo based ICBM is the SS-18 which is still in service and its payload is 8470kg, to carry such a huge warhead like a FOAB with 44kT explosive force would require a big burden for the missile, the warhead itself isn't really compromise-friendly since it must spread the cloud to all directions to unleash its optimal and devestating potential, due that it needs to be relatively far front (tip) of warhead which puts to much weight at front. That much weight at front will effect the missiles performance over time, when one stage after another are jettisoned and the missile gets lighter, the tip becomes more and more center of gravity, which will have very bad inflictions on the missiles maneuverability, stability and most probably would just rip it apart mid air. If all that hasn't screwed up the ICBM mid air, the reaction of the enemy will. He can not know and will not give a damn what payload your ICBM has, non nuclear, nuclear, candybar dropper or whatever, he will always assume it is a nuke and will react with counter offensive.

    Strategic weapons as ICBM's are only good for one thing, detterence and assuring no one meddeles directly with you.

    Thanks Werewolf, i guess making a single FAOB into an IRBM is also out of the question too, ooh well, i guess bombers will have to do, i hope in the future they'll make one light enough to at least be an IRBM.

    Not at all, there is Iskander with 750kg Thermobaric warhead. The equivalent of that thermobaric warhead should have above 1-2kT yield.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  GarryB on Sat Oct 17, 2015 10:44 am

    Not at all, there is Iskander with 750kg Thermobaric warhead. The equivalent of that thermobaric warhead should have above 1-2kT yield.

    Oops... no... a 750kg thermobaric warhead does not have the power of 1-2 thousand tons (ie million kgs) of HE.

    The main problem with putting FOABs in an ICBM or an IRBM or SLBMs is that they will count as ICBMs and IRBMs or SLBMs... and as you might have noticed they only have a tiny fraction of the power of a real nuclear device.

    Most importantly the velocity of fragments and blast waves from modern HE max's out at about 4-5km per second so actually making a 7 ton solid concrete warhead would have just as much effect as conventional HE... which is really not much. Replacing the 7 tons of warhead from an SS-18 with small metal cubes of a few hundred grammes each with a small bursting charge to scatter those cubes in the last milisecond before impact would have a greater effect than a full sized 7 ton payload of HE... the shock wave of the incoming warhead would be more powerful than the shockwave of 7 tons explosing and almost 7 tons of shrapnel will do rather more damage than 7 tons of HE bomb most of which turns into hot gas and small fragments.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Oct 17, 2015 12:29 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Not at all, there is Iskander with 750kg Thermobaric warhead. The equivalent of that thermobaric warhead should have above 1-2kT yield.

    Oops... no... a 750kg thermobaric warhead does not have the power of 1-2 thousand tons (ie million kgs) of HE.

    The main problem with putting FOABs in an ICBM or an IRBM or SLBMs is that they will count as ICBMs and IRBMs or SLBMs... and as you might have noticed they only have a tiny fraction of the power of a real nuclear device.

    Most importantly the velocity of fragments and blast waves from modern HE max's out at about 4-5km per second so actually making a 7 ton solid concrete warhead would have just as much effect as conventional HE... which is really not much. Replacing the 7 tons of warhead from an SS-18 with small metal cubes of a few hundred grammes each with a small bursting charge to scatter those cubes in the last milisecond before impact would have a greater effect than a full sized 7 ton payload of HE... the shock wave of the incoming warhead would be more powerful than the shockwave of 7 tons explosing and almost 7 tons of shrapnel will do rather more damage than 7 tons of HE bomb most of which turns into hot gas and small fragments.

    If a 11.5t FOAB can achieve 44kT then i think 0.75t can achieve at least 1kT equivalent explosion.

    Morpheus Eberhardt
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1967
    Points : 2092
    Join date : 2013-05-20

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  Morpheus Eberhardt on Sat Oct 17, 2015 12:36 pm

    FOAB at 7.1 tonne has a yield equivalent to 44 tonnes of TNT, not 44 kilotonnes of TNT. Probably some typo somewhere.

    Werewolf
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5391
    Points : 5640
    Join date : 2012-10-24

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  Werewolf on Sat Oct 17, 2015 12:54 pm

    Morpheus Eberhardt wrote:FOAB at 7.1 tonne has a yield equivalent to 44 tonnes of TNT, not 44 kilotonnes of TNT. Probably some typo somewhere.

    Probably.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  GarryB on Sun Oct 18, 2015 1:19 pm


    AlfaT8 wrote:Not sure where to post this question so i am posting it here.

    It's a question that's been bothering me lately. scratch

    I wanted to ask if it were possible for Russia to develop a Non-Nuclear ICBM using multiple FAOBs, and if such a weapon were indeed created what would be it's ramification with respect Treaties and deployment??

    THX in advance.


    Well the obvious problem is that any conventional launch of such a SLBM or ICBM will likely be treated lke a nuke lunch until proven otherwise.

    either side could claim they are only firing conventionally armed missiles but it will only be after impacts that the other side could be sure.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Rmf
    Master Sergeant
    Master Sergeant

    Posts : 381
    Points : 376
    Join date : 2013-05-30

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  Rmf on Sun Oct 18, 2015 10:20 pm

    with this new launches from caspian of kalibr its clear now russia can launch from every major rivers in continental east europe , so its like a surface launcher.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  GarryB on Mon Oct 19, 2015 10:41 am

    It is the best of both worlds... being ship based it can sail around the globe, but a land based version could be flown anywhere rather faster...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9451
    Points : 9943
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  George1 on Thu Dec 03, 2015 9:04 am

    Russia Accuses US of Violating Nuclear Arms Treaty

    The Russian Foreign Ministry said that Russia believes that the United States violated their bilateral deal on intermediate-range nuclear forces when it installed Mk 41 vertical launching systems in Eastern Europe.

    MOSCOW (Sputnik) — Russia believes that the United States violated their bilateral deal on intermediate-range nuclear forces when it installed Mk 41 vertical launching systems in Eastern Europe, the Russian Foreign Ministry said Wednesday.

    The 1987 INF Treaty banned nuclear and conventional ground-based cruise and ballistic missiles with a range of 300 to 3,400 miles.

    "We have grounds to regard land-based Mk 41s as cruise missile launching systems and their deployment on the ground as a direct INF violation by the US side," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

    When installed on warships, Mk 41s can be used for launching both SM-3 interceptor missiles and medium to range Tomahawk cruise missiles. Several Mk 41s are currently stationed in Romania and will be later redeployed to Poland.

    This came in response to continued US accusations that Moscow is not fulfilling its INF Treaty obligations. Washington alleges that Moscow tested a ground-launched cruise missile in violation of the INF Treaty.

    The Russian Foreign Ministry reiterated on Wednesday that Moscow considered such accusations to be baseless and accused Washington of using these claims to justify its "response" measures.

    US Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Brian McKeon said earlier today that the Pentagon was developing a "comprehensive response" to Russia's alleged military actions irrespective of Moscow’s answer.

    "The aim of this deceptive move is obvious – it is to cast a shadow on our arms controls and to deflect attention from US actions," the Russian statement read.

    It accused the United States of piling military infrastructure at the Russian border and refusing to discuss the problem. "The situation with the treaty is shamelessly used to escalate the atmosphere of chronic military tension across the Euro-Atlantic space," the Ministry said.

    Speaking at the House Armed Services Committee, Brian McKeon said that the United States would increase its rotational forces and military exercises in NATO's eastern flank, and preposition military hardware in Europe.

    Read more: http://sputniknews.com/military/20151202/1031149891/rusia-accuses-us-inf-violation.html#ixzz3tF7WueeI


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  max steel on Thu Dec 03, 2015 10:05 am




    Look like the US information is based on some "reliable sources" that they are not willing to disclose but would like Russia to fix this problem to be INF compliant. While the Russian deny they have a mobile system that breaches INF system.No one will buy argument based on Informed Sources which US is not willing to disclose , That kind of logic is same like Russian claiming VLS launcher for ABM can be used for launching Tomahawk or some other missile.

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  max steel on Tue Feb 09, 2016 6:35 pm

    US National Intelligence Claims Russia Violated INF Treaty

    According to the US National Intelligence director, Russia has violated the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty by allegedly creating a ground-launched cruise missile.

    NEW YORK (Sputnik) — Russia has allegedly developed a ground-launched cruise missile in violation of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), US National Intelligence Director James Clapper said in a testimony on Tuesday.

    “Russia has developed a ground-launched cruise missile that the United States has declared is in violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty,” Clapper said. “Russia has denied it is violating the INF Treaty.”




    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 2980
    Points : 3014
    Join date : 2015-02-12
    Location : South Pole

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  max steel on Fri Feb 26, 2016 8:57 am

    Russia Developes INF Treaty-Breaking Cruise Missile - US Intelligence Chief

    Russia has developed a new ground-launched cruise missile that breaks the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told the House of Representatives Permanent Select Intelligence Committee on Thursday.

    Clapper reiterated a claim he previously made in earlier testimony to Congress on February 9.In that earlier testimony, Clapper acknowledged that Russia had denied it was violating the INF Treaty.



    AlfaT8
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1149
    Points : 1162
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  AlfaT8 on Fri Feb 26, 2016 3:24 pm

    max steel wrote:Russia Developes INF Treaty-Breaking Cruise Missile - US Intelligence Chief

    Russia has developed a new ground-launched cruise missile that breaks the 1987 Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, US Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told the House of Representatives Permanent Select Intelligence Committee on Thursday.

    Clapper reiterated a claim he previously made in earlier testimony to Congress on February 9.In that earlier testimony, Clapper acknowledged that Russia had denied it was violating the INF Treaty.

    Pray tell, what is this new missile he's referring to, Zircon is the only new one that i am aware of.

    Sponsored content

    Re: INF Treaty - coming to the end of its life

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 6:25 pm


      Current date/time is Fri Dec 09, 2016 6:25 pm