Talk:RS-26 Rubezh

Military history: Technology / Weaponry / Russian & Soviet

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force

Russia Low‑importance

	Russia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rocketry Low‑importance

	Rocketry portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rocketry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of rocketry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RocketryWikipedia:WikiProject RocketryTemplate:WikiProject RocketryRocketry
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WARNING: ACTIVE COMMUNITY SANCTIONS

The article RS-26 Rubezh, along with other pages relating to the Russo-Ukrainian War, is designated by the community as a contentious topic. The current restrictions are:

Only extended-confirmed editors may make edits related to the topic area, though editors who are not extended-confirmed may post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area on article talk pages. Should disruption occur on article talk pages, administrators may take enforcement actions against disruptive editors and/or apply page protection on article talk pages. However, non-extended-confirmed editors may not make edits to internal project discussions related to the topic area, even on article talk pages. Internal project discussions include, but are not limited to, Articles for deletion nominations, WikiProjects, requests for comment, requested moves, and noticeboard discussions.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be sanctioned.

Remedy instructions and exemptions
Enforcement procedures: Violations of any restrictions and other conduct issues should be reported to the administrators' incidents noticeboard. Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense. An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. This article is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing this article:

You must be logged-in to an extended confirmed account (granted automatically to accounts with 500 edits and an age of 30 days)

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Archives

Archive 1

Treaty compliance wording

"The missile demonstrated, with a light or no payload, the ability to reach above the agreed 5500 km limit of the treaty."

I get what the author intended to say, but this is confusing for newcomers unfamiliar with the agreed IRBM restrictions. It could be misinterpreted, if you thought the 5500km was a MAXIMUM and not a MINIMUM. With consent of others, I'd like to reword this to something clearer, such as

"Intermediate-range ballistic missiles with ranges between 500 - 5500km are prohibited by international treaty, due to concerns their very rapid flight time to impact leads to escalating conflict at a time of heightened nuclear tension. Russia asserts that the RS-26 is a compliant ICBM, having achieved just beyond the minimum legal range during test fires with limited or no payload. However, subsequent deployments with greater payload installed have demonstrated a range around 2000km, directly in the prohibited IRBM category which has been the subject of concern since the 1980s."

Obviously I'd double check all of the above with links to relevant articles. Thoughts? ElectronicsForDogs (talk) 15:12, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that it's referring to present tense (e.g. "are prohibited by international treaty") for a treaty instrument that is not in force. Russia and the US suspended the INF treaty in 2019; and the U.S. withdrew from it later that year. Since it was a bilateral with now no opposite partner, the treaty is defunct and ended with the U.S. withdrawal. So we should not be referring to it in any form of present tense in the first place. Secondly, the INF is framed as a prohibition, not an allowance, meaning it prohibits missiles between specific range bands (500-5500km), rather than explicitly allowing missiles shorter or longer than this. Thus it would be appropriate to refer to 5500km as the maximum under the treaty: it's the maximum distance *disallowed* by the treaty. Framing it as a minimum would be confusing, because the minimum *allowed* range is zero. So to be clear, we just need to include what the terms of the INF are, which I'll just edit in to clarify now. This doesn't need to be overthought. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 20:09, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, that is a significant improvement. I proofread and made two very minor changes to improve the grammar, but other than that, I'm completely satisfied. Thanks for rewriting it! ElectronicsForDogs (talk) 00:06, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 November 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"the" before NATO should be deleted. The should be omitted before an acronym, unless its speaking of a singular adjective.

Previous: "coming to the aid of the NATO's newer eastern members that are located closer to Russia's borders"

After: "coming to the aid of NATO's newer eastern members that are located closer to Russia's borders" Nvblue (talk) 20:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done... - Adolphus79 (talk) 20:31, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cost?

Would be useful to know the manufacture cost of these missiles. Please add if known. Fig (talk) 10:11, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Russian costs are very difficult to factor due to PPP differences and the fact that most if not all major Russian weapons manufacturers are state owned or state controlled. Western systems are highly inflated in cost vs Russian, hence why the Russians can outpace the west in most

cases. 78.152.215.104 (talk) 21:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]