Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Kalibr missile system

    Share

    coolieno99
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 136
    Points : 159
    Join date : 2010-08-25

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  coolieno99 on Wed Sep 29, 2010 8:09 pm

    CGI video showing various cruise missiles.


    Austin
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5665
    Points : 6071
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Age : 40
    Location : India

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  Austin on Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:37 am

    The Russian Navy Chief confirmed the range of Kalbir/klub missile system is 2000 km far cry from export version of 220 and less then 300 km.

    http://vpk.name/news/54672_gosti_morskogo_salona_v_peterburge_uvideli_korabli_budushego.html

    The next object of attention of the guests was a small patrol corvette project 20 382 "Tiger", who enjoys well-deserved attention from foreign customers. Project 20380 corvettes same type of "quick-witted" and "Guarding" successfully introduced into the Russian Navy, said of the next commander in chief of the layout of the Navy Vladimir Vysotsky. Now fifth ship of this series, but the project 20385, is now being built, and it will be found not only tactical nuclear weapons, and antiaircraft complex long-range strike system "Caliber" range of up to two thousand kilometers, he added.

    "Also, it established an integrated opto-mast. It will be entirely on the active phase shifter, with the scanning signal and the vertical and horizontal, and the primary processing of approximately 500 targets and the order of several tens to a secondary treatment target designation for other ships.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jul 10, 2011 1:39 pm

    That is very interesting...

    The thing is that the Kalibr or sometimes Calibr system the 3M14 or land attack subsonic missile in the Club family.

    A range of 2,000km is no great surprise for this system as that particular missile is the same size as the SS-N-21 before it.

    This weapon makes the ships fitted with the USUK launchers that much more flexible and powerful.

    The thing is if the subsonic land attack model Club has a range of 2,000km in the domestic model then you have to wonder if the range of the subsonic anti ship and supersonic anti ship models also have much longer range in their domestic versions.

    Equally you might wonder about the difference in range performance between Brahmos and Yakhont and the domestic Onix.

    coolieno99
    Junior Sergeant
    Junior Sergeant

    Posts : 136
    Points : 159
    Join date : 2010-08-25

    Kalibr missile system

    Post  coolieno99 on Fri Nov 11, 2011 4:26 am

    Club-S missile animation


    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  GarryB on Wed Feb 15, 2012 12:34 am

    Have a look at this model:



    On the left side top is a picture of the Klub cruise missile on the Iskander tactical missile vehicle, but if you look on the right hand side you will see the standard UKSK launcher.

    If you look at the top you will see 8 hatch covers (two rows of 4 hatches) but if you look underneath you will see two very large diameter tubes.

    The standard UKSK launcher has 8 missile launch tubes, but each UKSK launcher is made of two modules each with four launch tubes.

    Each of the 8 launch tubes on the UKSK is designed to hold one Klub or Kalibr or Oniks/Yakhont/Brahmos missile.

    All of which are long relatively slim missiles.

    The vertical launch system that causes confusion is the Redut SAM system, which is for SAMs what UKSK is for cruise missiles.

    Being a unified launcher for Russian Naval SAMs means it has to deal with huge missiles like the S-300 Rif-M and the large S-400 missiles as well as smaller missiles like the new Vityaz missiles based on the smaller S-400 missiles.

    This results in the missiles being carried in different capacities as the large missiles need to be accommodated in the launch tubes, while the smaller Vityaz missiles are quite long, but are narrower and can be put in smaller tubes.

    Because the tube size is fixed of course that means they have special adaptor sleeves to allow 4 of the smaller missiles to be fitted in one tube, so a 14 tube launcher of Redut can either carry 14 large long range heavy SAMs or 14 x 4 of the smaller missile or 56 of the smaller missiles.

    With even smaller missiles like Morfei the number that can be fitted is unknown, but obviously with such large tubes using smaller missiles gets very inefficient unless you can stack them on top of each other and use the full length of the tube.

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3225
    Points : 3349
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  Vann7 on Sat Aug 31, 2013 8:59 am



    Is there any place to learn about all family of Caliber Missiles.. the non export version ,ie... the ones Russian Navy will operate?
    and if possible in English?



    TR1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5840
    Points : 5892
    Join date : 2011-12-06

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  TR1 on Sat Aug 31, 2013 9:05 am

    Vann7 wrote:

    Is there any place to learn about all family of Caliber Missiles.. the non export version ,ie... the ones Russian Navy will operate?
    and if possible in English?


    Very limited info - what are you looking for?

    It shares the same guidance and approach principles, the most striking difference being range.
    We were all suspicious for a long time why a missile the size of Club and with that engine had such low range compared to say Granat...now we know.

    So far we have only info on the supersonic and subsonic anti-surface versions being operated, nothing about the anti-sub ones. Seeing is believing, and no sight of em yet.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Kalibr missile system

    Post  GarryB on Sat Aug 31, 2013 11:06 am

    So far we have only info on the supersonic and subsonic anti-surface versions being operated, nothing about the anti-sub ones. Seeing is believing, and no sight of em yet.
    The export versions are called Klub and pretty much come in 5 different weapon versions for export... the subsonic all the way land attack missile, the subsonic all the way anti ship missile and the subsonic approach and mach 3 (2.9) terminal attack anti ship model, plus two different anti sub models which both use solid rocket boosters for the ballistic phase and a homing torpedo payload section for the terminal phase. The difference between the two anti sub missiles is that one is designed to be sub launched from a UKSK launcher bin and the other is designed to be launched from a UKSK launch bin on a surface vessel.


    _________________
    “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

    Viktor
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 5629
    Points : 6282
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 36
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  Viktor on Mon Nov 03, 2014 7:03 pm

    Nice article about Caliber missile system from Charly blog - nothing we did not know but still nice summary  thumbsup

    The accounts of the Russian missile system Caliber ...

    chicken
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 83
    Points : 88
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  chicken on Tue Nov 04, 2014 4:43 am

    Viktor wrote:Nice article about Caliber missile system from Charly blog - nothing we did not know but still nice summary  thumbsup

    The accounts of the Russian missile system Caliber ...

    Hi new guy here, just some questions.

    What's the size difference between the 3M-54-1 and the 3M-14? Is the 3M-14 as big as Granat? Because one has a range of only 600km and the other has 2600km while they look almost the same. Also why not use 3M-14 as basis for an anti ship missile instead of the 3M-54-1? Is the seeker that different between the two as to merit a 2000km difference in range?

    Also why is there no Google Earth image for the Caspian Sea?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  GarryB on Tue Nov 04, 2014 8:28 am

    Look at the top of that range chart and ponder on the meaning of the word Especulacion...



    _________________
    “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

    chicken
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 83
    Points : 88
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  chicken on Sat Nov 08, 2014 6:34 am

    GarryB wrote:Look at the top of that range chart and ponder on the meaning of the word Especulacion...


    Okay, then let me modify/rephrase my question.

    Why is there a size difference between the 3M-54-1 and the 3M-14? One has a range of 1600km (oficial not especulacion according to that blog) and the other has lesser range (300km exportacion/ 600km especulacion) while they look almost the same. Why not use 3M-14 as basis for an anti ship missile instead of the 3M-54-1?

    Is 3M-54-1 only for export? Which means his especulacion about the 600km range is useless.
    Or were they suppose to quadpack it in one launcher?

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3225
    Points : 3349
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  Vann7 on Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:05 am

    chicken wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Look at the top of that range chart and ponder on the meaning of the word Especulacion...


    Okay, then let me modify/rephrase my question.

    Why is there a size difference between the 3M-54-1 and the 3M-14? One has a range of 1600km (oficial not especulacion according to that blog) and the other has lesser range (300km exportacion/ 600km especulacion) while they look almost the same. Why not use 3M-14 as basis for an anti ship missile instead of the 3M-54-1?

    Is 3M-54-1 only for export? Which means his especulacion about the 600km range is useless.
    Or were they suppose to quadpack it in one launcher?

    You made a valid and interesting question.
    As far i have read the anti-ship missiles warhead and electronics devices have way more than land attack missiles.
    Because anti-ship missiles need to target mobile targets and they have to have powerful engines to do heavy turns and fly fast and also have decoys to fool enemy defenses.. land attack missiles do not need any of that since their targets are static and they can cover/hide while closing a target  behind  a mountain . So i suspect the difference in range had to do with the extra equipment of anti-ship missiles which is extra weight. The numbers i saw for the 3m-14 was 2600km range ,and 3m-54 anti ship up to 700km perhaps the ones with greater range are subsonic and fly most of the time at that speed and only accelerate in the last second of impact and have way less equipment inside than anti-ship missiles.

    edit..

    After looking at at wiki it looks is more an treaty thing the differences more than anything. the Kh-55 a soviet nuclear cruise missile with up 3,000km range some versions..  apparently Russia and USA have an agreement to limit the range of their anti-ship weapons no higher than 600km.  however in a real war such treaties will be mean nothing.., Nothing stop Russia once a war start to use ICBM nuclear armed missile to disable aircraft carriers convoys communications and radars. You blind a naval fleet first with a torpedo with a nuke that will explode away of the range of ship close gatlin gun defenses destroying its electronics and seriously damaging a warship and later finish them with a cruise missile or torpedo ,without any resistance.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  GarryB on Wed Dec 24, 2014 10:00 am

    Why is there a size difference between the 3M-54-1 and the 3M-14? One has a range of 1600km (oficial not especulacion according to that blog) and the other has lesser range (300km exportacion/ 600km especulacion) while they look almost the same. Why not use 3M-14 as basis for an anti ship missile instead of the 3M-54-1?

    I don't know for sure, but suspect the shorter range weapon is designed to hit ships and mobile targets, while the weapon with the longer range is a land attack weapon.

    The shorter range weapon needs onboard radar to find and attack its target and might also carry chaff and flares and disposable jammers to enable it to penetrate the target ships defences... and may have a larger explosive payload.

    Likely both missiles will have a domestic and export version with export models limited to 300kms or less.

    Another factor could be detection range... enemy land threats that are fixed could be targetted from a wider range of places whereas finding enemy ships that can be clearly IDed as enemy and can be reached by a subsonic missile before it leaves the area means shorter range shots make more sense anyway.


    _________________
    “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

    chicken
    Corporal
    Corporal

    Posts : 83
    Points : 88
    Join date : 2014-09-04

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  chicken on Fri Dec 26, 2014 5:08 am

    GarryB wrote:
    Why is there a size difference between the 3M-54-1 and the 3M-14? One has a range of 1600km (oficial not especulacion according to that blog) and the other has lesser range (300km exportacion/ 600km especulacion) while they look almost the same. Why not use 3M-14 as basis for an anti ship missile instead of the 3M-54-1?

    I don't know for sure, but suspect the shorter range weapon is designed to hit ships and mobile targets, while the weapon with the longer range is a land attack weapon.

    The shorter range weapon needs onboard radar to find and attack its target and might also carry chaff and flares and disposable jammers to enable it to penetrate the target ships defences... and may have a larger explosive payload.

    Likely both missiles will have a domestic and export version with export models limited to 300kms or less.

    Another factor could be detection range... enemy land threats that are fixed could be targetted from a wider range of places whereas finding enemy ships that can be clearly IDed as enemy and can be reached by a subsonic missile before it leaves the area means shorter range shots make more sense anyway.

    At first I thought the 3m-14 was to be fired using 650mm torpedo tubes while 3M-54-1 can be fired with 533mm tubes. But other sites list both as can be fired using 533mm tubes with only 1 source listing the 3M-14 as 620mm and 3M-54-1 as 510mm, so I guess I'm wrong. Also I read somewhere that the 3m-54-1 uses the Kh-35's seeker, so probably the size is just for cost cutting? They're for low priority targets like transport ships? Cheap swarm missiles?

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Caliber missile system

    Post  GarryB on Sat Dec 27, 2014 10:09 am

    Also I read somewhere that the 3m-54-1 uses the Kh-35's seeker, so probably the size is just for cost cutting? They're for low priority targets like transport ships? Cheap swarm missiles?

    The Kh-35 is reported to have a very sophisticated MMW radar seeker that has excellent range and discrimination that is very difficult to jam or fool.

    Don't underestimate it.


    _________________
    “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

    Vann7
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3225
    Points : 3349
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    `Sizzler' Missile

    Post  Vann7 on Tue Apr 14, 2015 12:35 pm

    US Navy Lacks Plan to Defend Against `Sizzler' Missile  




    ``This is a very low-flying, fast missile,'' said retired Rear Admiral Eric McVadon, a former U.S. naval attache in Beijing. ``It won't be visible until it's quite close. By the time you detect it to the time it hits you is very short. You'd want to know your capabilities to handle this sort of missile.''

    The Navy's ship-borne Aegis system, deployed on cruisers and destroyers starting in the early 1980s, is designed to protect aircraft-carrier battle groups from missile attacks. But current and former officials say the Navy has no assurance Aegis, built by Lockheed Martin Corp., is capable of detecting, tracking and intercepting the Sizzler.

    ``This was an issue when I walked in the door in 2001,'' Thomas Christie, the Defense Department's top weapons-testing official from mid-2001 to early 2005, said in an interview.

    `A Major Issue'

    `` The Navy recognized this was a major issue, and over the years, I had continued promises they were going to fully fund development and production'' of missiles that could replicate the Sizzler to help develop a defense against it, Christie said. ``They haven't.''



    3M-54E Sizzler Anti-ship missile fired from coast.. (can also be launched
    from subs and warships ie.. Yasen Submarines or Newest Russian corvettes and frigates in service.)




    All the variants of Sizzler missile.




    Cyberspec
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 1946
    Points : 2117
    Join date : 2011-08-08
    Location : Terra Australis

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  Cyberspec on Thu Oct 15, 2015 7:35 am

    Pretty good summary on the Kalibr system....different versions and the vessels that are armed with them

    Russian Navy’s Long Arm: Kalibr missile family
    http://southfront.org/russian-navys-long-arm-kalibr-missile-family/



    Big_Gazza
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 507
    Points : 531
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  Big_Gazza on Thu Oct 15, 2015 2:31 pm

    Cyberspec wrote:Pretty good summary on the Kalibr system....different versions and the vessels that are armed with them

    Russian Navy’s Long Arm: Kalibr missile family
    http://southfront.org/russian-navys-long-arm-kalibr-missile-family/

    I took particular notice of this sentance:

    "The Project 949AM submarines will carry up to 72 Kalibr-PL and Oniks missiles."

    It certainly sounds like 3x Klub/Kalibr/Oniks per Granit launch tube! Very Happy

    I can well imagine the carnage potential of a trio of modernised Oscars with a land-attack load-out. Jihadist scum and Pentagon nazis had best beware! russia

    max steel
    Colonel
    Colonel

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

    Kalibr missile system

    Post  max steel on Thu Oct 15, 2015 4:15 pm

    I'm not disrespecting your service so don't get pissed off. Very Happy


    https://plus.google.com/116024248756604391725/about

    His Blog : http://smoothiex12.blogspot.in


    https://disqus.com/by/smoothiex12/


    M.S. Naval Engineering, specialization in Gyro-Inertial Navigational Complexes of the Naval Strategic Missile Systems based on projects. 667 B-BD (Delta I-II). Class of 1985 of one very famous naval academy in USSR. Practiced on subs of projects 613, 641B. Was pretty much on most nukes. Served on the surface ships, though, and then on the shore his class alone (not the whole graduate class of 1985-that was several hundred people), out of roughly 30 graduated officers, produced two COs of subs. One of them SSK, the other--nuke.

    George1
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 9424
    Points : 9916
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  George1 on Thu Oct 29, 2015 3:16 pm

    Russia's Cruise Missiles Have Changed Strategic Military Balance

    From the blog Arms Control Wonk wrote:A few days ago Bill Gertz alerted the public to a new Russian sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM), SS-N-30A, known in Russia as Kalibr. The new supersonic missile, he said, was tested last month and is ready for deployment. It could reach targets across Europe and represents a threat akin to SS-20 intermediate-range missiles, which the Soviets deployed in the late 1970s – early 1980s and which were eliminated under the 1987 INF Treaty. “A cruise missile variant also is being developed that officials said appears to violate the 1987 Intermediate­ Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty”, he added.

    The disclosure is very interesting, but not particularly informative. The missile is not new – it has been in testing mode for seven years, if not longer, and is based on an even older SLCM. It is not exactly supersonic. The quote above is misleading: all versions of Kalibr are cruise missiles; Gertz probably meant a test flight from land-based launcher, which is the likely reason for the American accusation that Russia is in violation of the INF Treaty. And, although the reported capacity of Kalibrs to reach targets across Europe from submarines is a concern, he missed a significantly greater challenge stemming from the recent versions of that missile.

    The history of Kalibr is complicated and designations in Russian open sources are contradictory. Here is a short, simplified version.

    Kalibr is a new-generation SLCM, which is based on a Soviet long-range SLCM known as Granat, which, in turn, was a Soviet response to the American Tomhawk (TLAM-N). After the breakup of the Soviet Union, when Russian defense industry began to actively seek foreign markets, Novator design bureau, which produced Granat, created a new family of SLCMs. The first to be publicly unveiled was Kalibr 3M-14E, which could have been mistaken for a brand new missile because it was much smaller than Granat. The smaller size achieved two purposes: first, the new anti-ship missile had to fit into standard NATO torpedo tubes (which are shorter than the Soviet standard) and it had to have a range less than 300 km to remain under the MTCR-mandated limit (Granat had the range of 3,000 km). Reportedly, in 2006 3M-14E Kalibr missiles were sold to India.

    Novator did not stop there and eventually created a whole family of cruise missiles: in addition to 3M-14E, it also advertises 3M-54E and 3M-54E-1. These three missiles are part of systems known as Klub-S (for submarines), Klub-N (for ships), and Klub-M (land-based anti-ship missiles for coastal defense); Novator also offers a Club-A system for aircraft. All these missiles have the declared range below 300 km, which is natural for weapons intended for export. Designation “E” traditionally denotes the export version of weapons systems.

    Part of the Kalibr family, however, is intended solely for “domestic consumption” (known as 3M14, 3M54, and 3M541) and their ranges are many times greater (some sources use the “E” designation for missiles not intended for export, which is an obvious mistake). Depending on the source, their range is either 2,600 km or 1,500 km; some hypothesize that the longer range is associated with missiles equipped with nuclear warheads while conventionally armed Kalibr SLCMs have the 1,500 or somewhat greater range.

    All these missiles are subsonic with one important exception: the last stage of the three-stage 3M54 can accelerate to three times the speed of sound 20-40 km before the target (3M541 is a shorter, two-stage subsonic missile that has a more powerful warhead). Acceleration helps penetrate ship defenses and builds inertia to penetrate the body of the target ship. Although all these cruise missiles were initially developed as anti-ship (including basing on submarines, surface ships, and on shore for coastal defense), they have recently also been given capability against targets on land.

    Kalibr missiles are designated as high-precision and can travel a complex trajectory with up to 15 turns along the path. For example, if the target ship is on the other side of an island, the missile(s) will fly around that island to reach it.

    Kalibr missiles are reported to have dual (nuclear and conventional) capability. The Russian Navy has always stubbornly insisted that it needs nuclear anti-ship missiles to balance the overwhelming power of US Navy and there is no reason to believe it will completely abandon nuclear capability; there is also no reason to believe that it has abandoned the political obligation of Russia under the 1991 Presidential Nuclear Initiatives (PNI) to store warheads for non-strategic nuclear weapons on shore, even though in 2004 Moscow declared that it no longer considered itself bound by PNIs.

    Conventionally armed Kalibr SLCMs deserve much more attention then the “nuclear side” of the family. They fit very well the goal of reducing reliance on nuclear weapons that was proclaimed in the 2000 Military Doctrine and has been confirmed in its subsequent (2010 and 2014) versions. The value of precision-guided long-range conventional strike assets has been amply demonstrated by the United States in a series of limited wars since 1991. Unlike nuclear weapons, their conventional counterparts are usable and, if necessary can be credibly threatened against a potential opponent.

    It appears that the geography of planned deployment of Kalibrs reflects the emphasis on conventional capability. They will be deployed on Project 885 (Yasen) SSNs; they will also be deployed on diesel Varshavyanka-type submarines; there are plans to arm with them Shchuka B-class submarines of the Northern Fleet. Certain categories of surface ships, such as the Project 1155 “large anti-submarine vessel” will also be refitted with these missiles, as well as two large heavy cruisers, including Petr Veliki, Project 1150 destroyers, and the future Project 11356M frigates. Of greatest significance perhaps is the decision to equip missile ships of the Caspian Fleet with Kalibr missiles; moreover, Caspian ships have already flight-tested them several times from different ships.

    Overall, the Northern, the Baltic, the Black Sea, and the Caspian Fleets can hold at risk wide swaths of territory in Europe and the Middle East, perhaps reaching as far as parts of the Persian Gulf region. Even assuming the range of conventional Kalibrs at 1,500 km, the reach is truly global. The vast majority of countries within that range do not have nuclear weapons of their own or US nuclear weapons in their territories. Thus, Russia cannot threaten them with nuclear SLCMs, but conventional SLCMs are a whole different ball game.

    The new strategic situation goes well beyond the gloomy, but, in truth, pretty timid warnings of Bill Gertz. This is not just about Europe and perhaps not necessarily about Europe: Moscow is on the path toward breaking the US monopoly on conventional long-range precision-guided strike weapons. Kalibr is not the only class of such weapons: Moscow has already started deployment of a dual-capable Kh-101/102 air-launched cruise missile and plans to develop and deploy a liquid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missile that, some reports suggest, will be primarily intended for conventional warheads (given the long and successful history of Soviet liquid-fuel ICBMs, this project will hardly encounter any challenges except financial).

    Of course, large-scale deployment is still mostly plans. Development of Kalibr family systems has been completed, but deployment takes time and money; the latter is in particularly short supply these days. Thus, the security challenge should be judged as potential, but worth serious consideration. A response in kind would amount to an arms race. Arms control tools seem infinitely preferable, but that would mean breaking one of the long-standing taboos in American arms control policy – putting long-range conventional strike assets on the table. This option remains possible while Russia has not yet embarked on large-scale deployment of the new family of systems; once it has moved reasonably far along that way, it will lose interest in arms control.

    The worst news about the continuing improvement and upgrades of the Kalibr family is its new launcher. Russian missile designers apparently have imagination that is allowed to run amok. They have put a launcher with four Kalibr missiles into a standard shipping container that cross oceans by hundreds of thousands loaded onto standard commercial vessels.

    Available pictures show two classes of Kalibr missiles in shipping containers – the “export” (shorter) version and also the longer missiles with greater, “non-export” range. In effect, this means that any vessel carrying standard shipping containers that approaches a “country of interest” of the Kremlin could be carrying long-range cruise missiles capable of sinking ships or striking targets on land. Similarly, any part of Russian coastline that appears unprotected can all of a sudden feature anti-ship missiles brought by inconspicuous trucks in inconspicuous shipping containers.

    Just imagine what Bill Gertz would have written had he known about this unorthodox basing mode…

    Deployment of Kalibr missiles with capability to strike land targets in seas around Europe (including the Atlantic), indeed, could defy the purpose of the 1987 INF Treaty, which eliminated all land-based missiles with ranges between 500 and 5,500 km. There is no escaping that, however. It was, after all, the United States and NATO that ensured during INF that sea- and air-launched missiles should be excluded from that Treaty. It was the United States that successfully insisted during START I talks that long-range nuclear SLCMs should be subject only to rudimentary unverifiable confidence building measures and that conventional long-range SLCMs are completely exempted from it. The tables have turned. US monopoly on these assets has lasted two decades and is now on the verge of its end. If one throws into the picture long-range ALCMs and short-range Iskander systems that reach almost the entire Poland and perhaps also a piece of Germany from Kaliningrad Oblast (a Russian exclave between Poland and Lithuania), the emerging Russian conventional and potentially nuclear capability looks particularly impressive.

    Kalibr has apparently affected the INF Treaty in another way – it was the likely source for the recent US accusation that Russia is in violation of that Treaty. US government has only revealed that the reason for the accusation was a test of a long-range ground-launched cruise missile (GLCM); such missiles are prohibited by the INF Treaty. Russia has denied any wrongdoing and demanded details, which the United States refused to provide (probably to avoid disclosing methods of intelligence gathering). At the center of the controversy is probably a flight-test of an R-500 short-range ground-launched cruise missile for Iskander system from Kapustin Yar range in May 2007. Even then, that test gave rise to speculations that it could have been the test of one of long-range Kalibr-family SLCMs. If the latter is the case, then the situation becomes complicated.

    Under the INF Treaty, Russia has the right to flight-test SLCMs from land provided that it is conducted “at a test side from a fixed land-based launcher which is used solely for test purposes and which is distinguishable from GLCM launcher” (Article VII, paragraph 12). The test was certainly from an official test range; the launcher was without doubt not a GLCM launcher (all those were eliminated long time ago). It all boils down to two questions: was this a fixed launcher and was this a launcher that is used exclusively for flight tests?

    Indeed, if the 2007 test was for one of Kalibr missiles, a controversy seems possible given the long-standing tradition of Russian defense industry to pay little attention to international agreements. In the past, that propensity created more than one head-ache for both the Foreign Ministry and the military. Is it possible that designers chose not to mess with a unique launcher for a SLCM and used the same that was later used for R-500? The public will not know until US and Russian officials move beyond the current stage of mutual recriminations and graduate to discussing technical details. In any event, it remains possible that Kalibr family had something to do with yet one more source of contention between the two countries.

    http://russia-insider.com/en/military/how-russias-cruise-missiles-change-strategic-military-balance/ri10730


    _________________
    "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: Kalibr missile system

    Post  max steel on Thu Oct 29, 2015 4:02 pm

    These ignorant muritard stink tanks know nothing. If kalibr violates INF then morons US violated INF by bringing SM class missiles and LRASM and Kalibrs are supersonic only but the one used in Syria were not.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15458
    Points : 16165
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  GarryB on Fri Oct 30, 2015 7:45 am

    Technically land based tests of SM-3 in Europe and of course any use or deployment of long range UAVs also technically violates the INF treaty... I mean they could simply claim the Kalibr is a UAV for example...


    _________________
    “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 : 9424
    Points : 9916
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  George1 on Tue Dec 08, 2015 9:21 pm

    Kalibr launch from Imp Kilo submarine from a submerged position



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


    Militarov
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 4799
    Points : 4846
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  Militarov on Wed Dec 09, 2015 1:24 am

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVvUE0xU8AA5gwX.jpg:large

    Some say Putin with this sentence confirmed that Kalibr exists also in nuclear warhead variant Smile

    Sponsored content

    Re: Kalibr missile system

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 3:28 am


      Current date/time is Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:28 am