Timur Kadyshev
kadyshev.bsky.social
Timur Kadyshev
@kadyshev.bsky.social
Wissenschaftlicher Mitarbeiter
https://www.hamburg-armscontrol.de/en/staff/timur-kadyshev-2/
IFSH https://bsky.app/profile/ifshhamburg.bsky.social
All views mine. RTs/Likes mean I found it interesting, not that I agree.
Profile photo ©IFSH
So... according to Ukrainian sources, the missile was used 23 times, of which once to about 1,200 km range. Only one? And 22 times to <500 km?
October 31, 2025 at 2:22 PM
Yes, and Russia denied this, see e.g. london.mid.ru/en/press-cen...
Thus the "damned uncertainty". To resolve it, a proof must be presented of either a test or a use of this missile to >500 km range, while calculations of maximum theoretical range are irrelevant.
london.mid.ru
September 3, 2025 at 11:16 AM
Mine has never done this ...so far.
August 17, 2025 at 9:54 PM
- therefore the question of whether 9M729 was in violation with INF Treaty or not cannot be decided by calculation of its maximum theoretical range, it’s a purely political question - until Russia or the US reveal a definitive information about it.
2/2
August 14, 2025 at 1:02 PM
To advance this argument you need to state (and prove) which known Russian INF-range ALCM or SLCM the allegedly offending 9M729 actually is.
6/6
bsky.app/profile/frho...
Would we be having the same discussion if the US had deployed Tomahawk CMs on a ground-mobile launcher in 2014, but claimed the range was magically below the theoretical maximum simply because it hadn’t tested them beyond 500 km?

It would have been just as preposterous then as this is now.

5/5
August 14, 2025 at 12:52 PM
Russia of course could have demonstrated something definitive out of good will. Unfortunately, what they did - the January'19 briefing - raised more questions than it answered. But then again, they have the right to protect sensitive information as much as the US, aren't they?
5/6
August 14, 2025 at 12:52 PM
Russia would have explaining to do if the US said exactly what, when and where was tested in violation of the Treaty. What they did say instead was what the allegedly offending missile was NOT. I understand that this was to preserve their sources, but it does not help the situation.
4/6
August 14, 2025 at 12:52 PM
By your calculation, maximum range of 9M728 is >500 km, correct? If yes, why was it not considered to be in violation?
Once more, calculation of theoretical maximum range is not a definitive way to determine GLCM’s actual maximum range, see Article VII.4 of the Treaty.
3/6
bsky.app/profile/frho...
So once more: we can absolutely determine who is right and wrong when it comes to the 9M729.

While calculating the exact range is difficult, it is clear that Russia had explaining to do, and it simply could not or would not provide it.

4/5

bsky.app/profile/kady...
the question boils down to whether one believes the Russian or US account.
Ultimately, whether 9M729 violated the INF Treaty cannot be determined by calculating its theoretical maximum range. At present it's a political judgment, not a technical one, though additional evidence could change that.
6/6
August 14, 2025 at 12:52 PM
For GLCM maximum range in its standard design mode can be very different from its range in the mode optimized for maximum range (as illustrated in my thread you're answering to). That’s why the treaty has "standard design mode" in the range definition.
2/6
bsky.app/profile/frho...
For GLCMs, maximum range is much simpler to determine, as it is almost entirely a function of engine efficiency and fuel load.

No intrusive testing is needed to establish this, as I, and others before me, have demonstrated.

3/5
August 14, 2025 at 12:52 PM
Yes, that's what I said, "the United States found the “Russian Federation in violation of its obligations under the INF treaty not to possess, produce, or flight-test a GLCM with a range capability of 500 to 5,500 km, or to possess or produce launchers of such missiles.”
August 11, 2025 at 9:36 PM
I cannot deny (or confirm) what I don't know. The US official statement is that 9M729 was tested at "over 500 km" range, and objectively at this time everything else is just speculation.
While Russia’s credibility is doubtful, the US version is not necessarily definitive.
August 11, 2025 at 8:24 PM
On the 9M729 Controversy Under INF Treaty Rules
A followup to my reply bsky.app/profile/kady... to the discussion on 9M729 (re)initiated by @frhoffmann.bsky.social
Under the INF Treaty, “range capability” is defined for ballistic missiles as “the maximum range to which it has been tested,”
1/6
Interesting post by ‪@frhoffmann.bsky.social‬
My own ball-park calculations on the subject: let's take Tomahawk 1,600 km range-optimized version and try to estimate its range at very low altitude for the duration of the flight. 1/3 bsky.app/profile/frho...
August 11, 2025 at 7:26 PM
the question boils down to whether one believes the Russian or US account.
Ultimately, whether 9M729 violated the INF Treaty cannot be determined by calculating its theoretical maximum range. At present it's a political judgment, not a technical one, though additional evidence could change that.
6/6
August 11, 2025 at 7:24 PM
The 9M729 controversy is not about its theoretical maximum range (which, if not corresponding to its standard design mode, would be irrelevant), but about US allegations that it was tested to more than 500 km from a mobile launcher. There is no verifiable open-source evidence to confirm this and
5/6
August 11, 2025 at 7:24 PM
The decisive point is not the theoretical maximum range, but whether the missile was tested to the range in question or not.
In the case of the 9M728, which could theoretically be flown much further than 500 km, no range-related issue arose because it was never tested beyond that threshold.
4/6
August 11, 2025 at 7:24 PM
For GLBMs, a missile tested to less than 500 km could theoretically fly farther, and one tested above 5,500 km could fly shorter ranges. The same applies to GLCMs: a missile designed and tested for under 500 km in its standard design mode could, in a different mode, fly farther.
3/6
August 11, 2025 at 7:24 PM
and for cruise missiles as “the maximum distance which can be covered by the missile in its standard design mode flying until fuel exhaustion.” While the wording differs, in both cases the underlying criterion is the missile’s tested capability.
2/6
August 11, 2025 at 7:24 PM