The shuttle had promise. But once they found out that the NASA shuttle was actually not a military weapon, and with their financial situation getting more dire by the month, the politicos had to divert it elsewhere.
Posted on 04/11/2005 9:19:39 PM PDT by TapTheSource
Iskander-E 'designed to counter Western TMDs'
By ALON BEN-DAVID JDW Correspondent Tel Aviv
Russia's Iskander-E short-range ballistic missile is designed to defeat Western ballistic missile defence systems, particularly the Patriot Advanced Capability PAC-2/3 low-to-high altitude air-defence system, according to Uzi Rubin, former director of Israel's Missile Defence Agency.
The Iskander-E is the export version of the Kolomna-designed 9M72 short-range ballistic missile currently in service with the Russian Armed Forces. The 9M72 has a given range of 400 km; Iskander-E a given range of 280 km.
Following a 21 February Russian TV report, which presented the missile's features, Rubin concluded that Iskander-E "is the first ballistic missile ever to include built-in countermeasures against the West's growing range of deployed theatre missile defence [TMD] systems".
The report, broadcast on Moscow's Channel 1 news programme, specified four countermeasures installed in the missile:
* Boost phase manoeuvring
*Depressed trajectory (apogee of 50 km)
*Low radar signature, achieved by "a special composite" and Terminal phase manoeuvring
"Missileers are usually wary of showing their hands regarding countermeasures," said Rubin. "I can only interpret the Russians' bout of transparency as a marketing effort toward customers who face TMD systems."
Gee, I wonder which enemies our "Ally in the War on Terror" (Russia) is marketing these OFFENSIVE missiles to??? I wonder what Dubya thinks of Putin now.
ping!
Frankly, why should anyone be suprised. Russia was feeding complex weaponry to Saddam right up until the invasion. Every scumbag country in the world will be buying from the Russians who need hard cash -- like North Korea, France, Germany, they will sell any type of onerous device to the highest bidder, be damned with world security -- the short term buck is far more important to these bottom-feeders.
Of these Iran would seem to be the most likely customer, because they have large numbers of missiles targeting the the Straights which would likely be countered by Patriots. The Iranians would like seek any advantage that preserved the effectiveness of their batteries.
The shuttle had promise. But once they found out that the NASA shuttle was actually not a military weapon, and with their financial situation getting more dire by the month, the politicos had to divert it elsewhere.
Ineresting name ... Iskander ...
Very funny Rumsfeld impersonation! But it's not an anti-missile, it's an offensive missile designed to give our defensive missiles the slip.
You made it seem as if the Buran was a failure in itself. It wasn't. It was a failure of political will, a failure of intelligence (the main impetus of building it was the fear that the NASA shuttle was a military weapon, and the Soviets were all wrapped up in their extremely stupid strategy of trying to match everything Uncle Sam did .....a strategy that literally drove them to the ground).
What the Buran was NOT was a failure in itself. It performed remarkably well, even for today's standards. The project was killed once the Soviets realized that there was no real tangible military benefit, and the project was sucking up much needed (especially then) funds. But the Buran in itself was far from a failure. It is the Soviets who failed. (And if the heat shields in the Columbia were as robust as the ones in the Buran it wouldn't have faced the same level of danger due to frozen foam packing impacting on the heat shielding)
As for it been a replica of the shuttle. Yep, and I wouldn't be surprised if some Soviet spooks had something to do with that. The Soviets were caught off-guard by the US' announcement in the early 70s that it would make the Space Shuttle a primary project of its manned space program. In order to counter the 'Shuttle Threat' they started the Energia-Buran project in 1976. While there were some differences between the NASA shuttle and the Buran (eg in the Buran a heavy-lift launcher could be used with or without a winged orbiter), there is a very good possibility that the NASA designs somehow made their way to Moscow.
Actually another 'interesting' US-Russian similarity in design can be found when you compare our B-1B Lancer with their Tupolev Tu-160 Blackjack.
B-1B Lancer:
Tupolev TU-160
ping to my closest FRiends only. Ping others as you wish.
A.A.C.*
{*the most conservative member of F.R.}
Iskander = ALEXANDER
I suspect that the PRC have been codevelopers of the Iskander series. What tells me this is, out of the blue, at the last big November Airshow in the PRC, they unveiled a short range missile that was suspiciously similar to SS-X-27. For a few years now, Russian missile engineers have been resident in the PRC and while difficult to prove, there is a suggestion that Russia uses covert "outsourced" / offshored labs, R&D facilities and other sites, in the PRC, to develop stuff under the radar screen (and, more importantly, not subject to SALT-2, INF and the like!). This is not their original idea. Between WW1 and WW2, Germany developed stuff off the books (and not subject to the Treaty of Versailles) in Russia, Czechoslovakia, and the Netherlands then insourced it after Hitler came to power.
Actually the Soviet Space Shuttle, the Buran, worked extremely well...
Not really. Jimmy Carter's NASA let them have all the blueprints for the price of the photocopies...
Pinging.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.