Ukraine fires new ‘Flamingo' missile that can strike Moscow for the first time after it was ‘inspired by British bomb'
The breakthrough weapon can hit targets sitting more than 3,000km away with a menacing 1,000kg warhead - and its design takes inspiration from a British bomb.
8
8
8
Extraordinary footage showed the warhead being shot from a ramp before launching into the sky at breakneck pace.
The cruise missile, which is reportedly already in serial production, fires from a twin-axle ramp before propelling itself with a turbofan.
The "Flamingo" has a six-metre wingspan and reaches speeds of up to 900km/h before decimating its targets.
And its maximum flight time is a whopping four hours.
Engineers designed the bomb to feature three main priorities: range, warhead mass and rapid deployment.
Its developer, Fire Point, said the systems are being manufactured at a highly protected facility in the Carpathians, in the west of Ukraine.
The breath-taking design also features a dorsal air intake for a jet engine and an X-tail.
To make sure the missile hits its target, it is also equipped with resistance to electronic warfare.
The "Flamingo" is reportedly closely modelled on the FP-5 missile design - an unmanned cruise missile which can hit targets at subsonic speeds.
The FP-5 is made by British weapons firm Milanion, a UAE-headquartered defence contractor which has supplied Ukraine in the past.
Scheming Putin WON'T draw a line under Ukraine - here's why he won't give up the Donbas
The new Ukrainian missile will dramatically boost the county's long-range strike capabilities to face down Putin's bloodthirsty regime.
And it would be a gamechanger in defending against the invasion which started over three years ago.
The "Flamingo" missile would also complement Ukraine's cutting edge aerial arsenal - which consists of long-range drones and other extended-range missiles.
It would also be able to deliver a more powerful blow against any fortified or high-value targets such as oil refineries or air bases.
Ukraine has slowly but surely built up its missile program over the last few years to help defend against Putin's invasion.
In April 2022, near the outbreak of the war, the "Neptune" anti-ship missile was fired to sink the Russian Moskva cruiser.
8
8
8
It comes as Putin continues to launch vicious assaults on Ukraine, while European allies work with Donald Trump to put together security guarantees for the war-torn country.
The Don met with the likes of Sir Keir Starmer, Emmanuel Macron, Giorgia Meloni and other European leaders at the White House on Monday.
The US President phoned Vladimir Putin during the summit to push him to meet with Zelensky face-to-face.
It remains unclear where the two will meet, but the bilateral summit is set to be followed by a trilateral one involving Trump.
Switzerland could host the summit between the Russian and Ukrainian leaders, in the city of Geneva - and the country promised they would not arrest wanted war criminal Putin if he came for peace talks.
The Zelensky-Putin meeting could take place "within two weeks", German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who was also at Monday's talks, said after the summit.
Trump has also ruled out the prospect of US troops on the ground as a security guarantee for Ukraine.
But the White House did not rule out the prospect of supportive American support by sea or air.
The US president also admitted Putin could have no interest in securing a deal - but warned that he would face a "rough situation" if he doesn't come to the table.
European leaders floated the idea of Nato Article 5-like guarantees for Ukraine, but it is unclear what they would look like as part of any peace deal.
Article 5 of Nato states that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all, obliging allies to come to each other's defence.
8
8
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
27 minutes ago
- BBC News
Why Donetsk matters so much for Ukraine's defences against Russia
A key takeaway from the summit in Alaska is that Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly wants to freeze the war in Ukraine along its current front line in return for the surrender of the rest of Donetsk holds about 70% of the region (oblast), including the regional capital of the same name, after more than a decade of fighting in which Donetsk and neighbouring Luhansk have been the bleeding heart of the Russia to gain all of Donetsk would cement its internationally unrecognised claim to the oblast as well as avoiding further heavy military Ukraine to withdraw from western Donetsk would mean the grievous loss not just of land, with the prospect of a new exodus of refugees, but the fall of a bulwark against any future Russian we look at why the territory matters so much. What does Ukraine still control? According to an estimate by Reuters news agency, Ukraine still holds about 6,600 sq km (2,548 sq miles) of territory in a quarter of a million people remain there, local officials said urban centres include Kramatorsk, Slovyansk, Kostyantynivka and forms part of Ukraine's main industrial region, the Donbas (Donets Basin), though its economy has been devastated by the war."The reality is these resources likely will not be able to be accessed for arguably a decade at least because of the [land] mines..." Dr Marnie Howlett, departmental lecturer in Russian and East European Politics at the University of Oxford, told Reuters."These lands have been completely destroyed, these cities completely flattened."Resignation and betrayal: What handing Donbas to Putin would mean for UkraineUkraine in maps: Tracking the war with RussiaWhat security guarantees for Ukraine would actually mean Where is the territory's military value? A recent report by the US-based Institute for the Study of War (ISW) describes a "fortress belt" running 50km (31 miles) through western Donetsk."Ukraine has spent the last 11 years pouring time, money, and effort into reinforcing the fortress belt and establishing significant defense industrial and defensive infrastructure," it from the region speak of trenches, bunkers, minefields, anti-tank obstacles and barbed forces attacking in the direction of Pokrovsk "are engaged in an effort to seize it that would likely take several years to complete", the ISW are certainly part of the Ukrainian defence but so is the topography."The terrain is fairly defensible, particularly the Chasiv Yar height which has been underpinning the Ukrainian line," Nick Reynolds, Research Fellow for Land Warfare at the UK-based Royal United Services Institute (Rusi), tells BBC he adds: "If you look at the topography of the Donbas, eastern Ukraine in general, overall the terrain doesn't really favour the Ukrainians.""The city of Donetsk is high ground. It's all downhill as you go west, which isn't great for the Ukrainians in terms of running defensive operations. "That's not just about drawing in for the close fight or difficulties going up and down hill, a lot of it is also about observation and thus the ability to co-ordinate artillery fires and other forms of fire support without putting drones up."Likewise bits of high ground are better for radio wave propagation, better for co-ordination of drones."Chasiv Yar, which the Russians recently claimed to have captured, "is one of the last bits of high ground the Ukrainians control", he via satellite imagery, whether provided by Ukraine's international partners or commercial, is very important, Reynolds notes, "but it is not the same as being able directly to co-ordinate one's own tactical missions". Does the Russian military need all of Donetsk? Western Donetsk is just a small part of a front line stretching some 1,100km but it has seen some of the fiercest Russian attacks this were Moscow to channel its ground forces in any different direction, it is doubtful whether they would make any better progress."In the south, the front line in Zaporizhzhia is now very similar to the one in the Donbas, so that would be just fighting through extensive defensive positions as well," says Reynolds."The Russians face the same problem trying to bash through in the north, so they certainly wouldn't be pushing on an open door." Would Ukraine be able to rebuild its defences further west? In theory, in the event of a peace deal, the Ukrainians could move their line back further would, of course, be the issue of unfavourable terrain, and building deep defences would take time, even with the help of civilian contractors not having to work under fire. But theory is one thing and Rusi's land warfare research fellow cannot see the Ukrainian military giving up western Donetsk without a fight."Even if the Trump administration tries to use ongoing US support or security guarantees as leverage," Nick Reynolds says, "based on previous Russian behaviour, based on the explicitly transactional approach that the US administration has taken, it is hard to see how the Ukrainian government would want to give up that territory." Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has said his country will reject any Russian proposal to give up the Donbas region in exchange for a ceasefire, arguing that the eastern territory could be used as a springboard for future attacks.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
I know the Home Office is hiding the real costs of asylum
Our immigration system sometimes feels like an organised conspiracy against the British people. For decades, the public have voted for drastic reductions in immigration, only to see the numbers go up and up. For years, they have demanded an end to the Channel crossings and the asylum crisis, only to see politicians refuse to do what is necessary. When governments do move in the right direction, they are undermined by weak enforcement, litigious and often publicly-funded NGOs, activist judges who are often former claimant lawyers in the immigration tribunals, and human rights laws that make securing the border an impossible job. Not that governments should be let off the hook: ultimately our constitution allows Parliament to change the law. The last Conservative government had the right idea to stop the Channel crossings. Deporting every migrant coming to Britain without permission – to their home country or a third country like Rwanda – is ultimately the only way to end this wave of illegal immigration. But the plan was never going to work unless we left the European Convention on Human Rights, and that government – with exceptions like Robert Jenrick, who resigned for this reason as immigration minister – was unwilling to go that far. Immigration is the biggest single reason my party is in the predicament it is in, and we must be brutally honest about our record and radical in our solutions if we are ever to win back the trust of the British people. Labour's approach, however, is even worse. They abandoned the policy of deporting migrants who cross the Channel and are now rushing illegal immigrants through the asylum system. Approvals are up, and once asylum is granted, the migrants are hidden in the social housing and welfare systems, where it is impossible to track their costs. The Office for Budget Responsibility calculates that the average 'low-wage migrant worker' arriving aged 25 will cost the British taxpayer over £400,000 by the time they reach 81. Ministers muddy the waters by claiming they are deporting record numbers of people. But this is dishonest. First, the numbers they use include migrants who leave voluntarily. And second, only about three per cent of Channel crossers are ever removed. It's no surprise that Channel crossings are up – by almost 50 per cent – under Labour. And the court injunction won by the Conservative council in Epping, which stops a local hotel being used to house migrants, throws the Government's policy into further chaos. But while the injunction is undoubtedly a clear victory for the local residents – vilified as 'far Right' by those who should know better – it may yet mean more trouble for communities affected by 'asylum dispersal'. Those hoping for a policy of detention and deportation will soon be disappointed. Human rights laws can prevent deportation, and Labour reject automatic deportation for those who cross the Channel. So the migrants will still end up housed in towns and cities across the country. There are already more than twice as many migrants in private housing, including houses of multiple occupancy, than in hotels. And accommodation like this may suit a government as cynical as this one better than hotels. Individual houses provide less of a focal point for protest than hotels, and the Home Office, working with Serco, has been building up its property portfolio for some time. With 1.33 million people on local waiting lists for social housing, this is a serious breach of the fundamental deal offered by citizenship. Foreign nationals – who broke into our country knowing it was illegal – are being offered housing that is not available to British families in need. And the unfortunate residents who live nearby are very deliberately kept in the dark. As an MP elected last year, I have been horrified by the secrecy with which ministers handle housing migrants. When I asked why MPs are not informed about migrants being moved into their constituencies, the immigration minister said we would only be told when it is 'lawful, proportional and necessary.' In other words: never. After the disorder last year, we learnt from press leaks that an internal government paper had said asylum hotels had 'stoked community tensions' and were a 'critical factor behind the summer riots.' Yet when I used the Freedom of Information Act to request a copy of the paper, the Government said while the information was held, it would not be released because ministers needed a 'safe space' to think about policy. The truth is that Labour's immigration policy means surrender and secrecy. The illegal immigrants crossing the Channel will keep on coming, Labour will keep granting them asylum, and ministers will do everything to keep the consequences – for housing, for crime, for the cost to the taxpayer – a secret from you.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Myanmar's military retakes a strategic town 2 years after the resistance captured it
Myanmar 's military has regained control of a strategic town in eastern Kayah state from the opposition's armed forces after nearly two years, state media reported Wednesday. The recapture of Demoso in Kayah state — also known as Karenni — came as the military has stepped up activity in recent months, on the ground and with airstrikes, to retake areas controlled by the resistance ahead of elections it has promised to hold on Dec. 28. Demoso, located about 110 kilometers (70 miles) east of the capital Naypyitaw, has been a focal point for Myanmar's civil war since the military took power from the elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi in February 2021. The town had been under the control of the Karenni Nationalities Defense Force, or KNDF, and allied resistance forces in Kayah since the groups launched joint offensives against army bases in the state in November 2023. A report in the state-run Myanma Alinn newspaper on Wednesday said Demoso, near the state's capital of Loikow, was captured by the army on Tuesday after 16 days of operations to retake it. The report said six bodies and five weapons were seized, adding that some members of the security forces were also killed. The newspaper published photos of soldiers who recaptured the town in front of the hospital, fire department and town hall. The KNDF and other local resistance groups did not immediately respond to requests for comment. In a statement posted Monday on Facebook, the KNDF accused the military of carrying out unlawful arrests of civilians, deliberate shootings and killings without cause and the use of civilians as human shields in attacking Demoso. Kayah, the smallest of Myanmar's seven states and dominated by the Karenni ethnic minority, has experienced intense conflict. The provisional government formed by resistance groups in Kayah, including the KNDF, said Monday that at least 32 civilians were killed, five were wounded and several were missing after the military on Sunday bombed a hospital in the town of Mawchi, about 80 kilometers (50 miles) south of Demoso. In a separate incident, an airstrike killed at least 21 people Thursday in the town of Mogok, the center of the Southeast Asian country's gem mining industry, according to reports in Myanmar's independent online media. The army has not mentioned the strikes and usually says it only attacks legitimate targets of war, accusing the resistance forces of being terrorists.
