A new giant Ukrainian cruise missile is rumored to carry a 1,000-kg warhead for strikes 1,800 miles deep inside Russia
The Flamingo is rumored to have a range of 1,800 miles and looks to be a huge conventional weapon.
A missile of such range and power could allow strikes on vital production hubs deep inside Russia.
Ukraine has started making a new cruise missile said to be capable of carrying a 1,000 kg warhead with a range of 1,800 miles, according to its defense minister.
Denys Shmyhal, who was appointed as defense minister in July, said at a public event on Monday that serial production of the missile, dubbed the Flamingo, had begun.
The minister declined to discuss the missile further, saying that more details would be disclosed "when the right time comes."
But his announcement comes a day after other sources in Ukraine reported on its specifications. Efrem Lukatsky, an Associated Press photographer, published an image on Monday of a large missile that he identified as the Flamingo.
Lukatsky's Facebook post said the photo was taken on Thursday at a workshop run by Fire Point, a Ukrainian defense company. He also wrote that the missile had a range of 3,000 kilometers, or roughly 1,800 miles.
After Lukatsky's Facebook post, the Ukrainian newspaper Mirror of the Week uploaded a video on Monday of what appears to be the missile being launched from an open field.
In the clip, the Flamingo is seen rail-mounted on a canted platform before it is fired. The missile starts climbing upward almost immediately after launch.
Mirror of the Week reported that the video depicted a Flamingo missile launched at a Russian target, indicating that the weapon is already being used in combat.
In another video from the outlet, the missile is seen with fixed wings, like the Flamingo photographed by Lukatsky.
The outlet wrote in a report on Monday that Fire Point said it tested the Flamingo several months ago and that the missile had entered mass production. Mirror of the Week also reported that the missile can carry a maximum payload of 1,150 kg with a range of 1,800 miles.
The Flamingo looks a lot like another new missile
The Flamingo bears a striking resemblance to the FP-5 produced by Milanion Group, a defense firm headquartered in Abu Dhabi that's been working with Ukraine since at least 2021.
That year, the firm signed a memorandum of understanding with a Ukrainian company. Since the full-scale war started, it's also been providing its Alakran mobile mortar system and uncrewed ground vehicles to Kyiv's troops.
Milanion Group showcased the FP-5 in February at a defense expo in Abu Dhabi. There, it said the missile is equipped with anti-jamming tech and satellite navigation and can fly for up to four hours at a top cruise speed of 559 mph.
The firm also said the FP-5 can carry a payload of up to 1,000 kg and fly 1,800 miles.
That capability also means the FP-5 is a gargantuan missile, with a 20-foot wingspan and a take-off weight of 6,000 kg, or 6.6 tons. That kind of size and weight for a cruise missile hasn't typically been seen in modern Western militaries since the early Cold War.
By comparison, the US-made Tomahawk cruise missile has a take-off weight of up to 1,600 kg and carries a 450-kg warhead. And Russia's long-range Kh-101 cruise missile, which can fly up to 3,400 miles, has a take-off weight of roughly 2,400 kg.
In its brochure on the FP-5, Milanion Group said it could build over 50 of the missiles a month.
Despite these similarities, it's still unconfirmed if the Flamingo or the FP-5 are directly related. Milanion Group did not respond to a request for comment about the Flamingo sent by Business Insider outside regular business hours.
Ukraine wants a long-range threat
A range of 1,800 miles would allow Ukraine to strike deeper into Russia, potentially at military production facilities. A new missile of such devastating power and range means it can potentially threaten Russian hubs for armor, infantry fighting vehicles, drones, and artillery systems in the Ural Mountains, located some 1,000 miles from Ukraine.
So far, Kyiv has relied mainly on slower one-way attack drones that resemble Cessna-style aircraft to attack Russian oil refineries and manufacturing plants in the Moscow area and beyond. The distance between Kyiv and Moscow, for example, is just 450 miles.
Yelabuga, a special economic zone where Russia is believed to be manufacturing its version of the Shahed drone, is also roughly 800 miles from Ukraine.
Ukraine has shown before that it can locally manufacture cruise missiles while at war. Its homemade anti-ship missile, the Neptune, is a subsonic truck-launched weapon that was used to sink the Moskva, the flagship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet.
Read the original article on Business Insider
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
29 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump cancels Bedminster vacation to work on Ukraine-Russia talks
President Trump canceled his August vacation to his Bedminster resort to work on talks to end the Ukraine-Russia war, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Tuesday. Leavitt said Trump considered continuing peace talks while at his New Jersey golf resort but decided to stay at the White House instead. 'This is normally the time when the president goes on vacation, but not this president,' she said. 'There [were] discussions about him working from Bedminster for a couple of weeks, but he decided against it.' 'He's a man on a mission. He wants to move. Get things done quickly,' Leavitt added. 'He wants to strike when the iron is hot.' Presidents typically take a vacation in August while Congress is out for its recess. Trump took a 17-day trip to Bedminster in 2017 during his first term. Trump has been focused on ending the Ukraine-Russia war and met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday. Days later, on Monday, Trump hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and several European leaders at the White House for talks. The president announced after those talks that he is working to arrange a bilateral meeting between Putin and Zelensky, followed by a trilateral meeting that would involve him. When asked about the timing of the trilateral meeting, Leavitt replied, 'It's hard to judge. I think he wants to see how the bilat goes.' The White House has been optimistic about the meetings taking place, without giving a timeline. Leavitt told reporters that Putin promised he would have a direct meeting with Zelensky.
Boston Globe
29 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump offers assurances that US troops won't be sent to help defend Ukraine
The Republican president, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and other European leaders held hours of talks at the White House on Monday aimed at bringing an end to Russia's war against Ukraine. While answering questions from journalists, Trump did not rule out sending U.S. troops to participate in a European-led effort to defend Ukraine as part of security guarantees sought by Zelenskyy. Trump said after his meeting in Alaska last week with Russian President Vladimir Putin that Putin was open to the idea of security guarantees for Ukraine. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up But asked Tuesday on Fox News Channel's 'Fox & Friends' what assurances he could provide going forward and beyond his term that American troops would not be part of defending Ukraine's border, Trump said, 'Well, you have my assurance, and I'm president.' Advertisement Trump would have no control over the U.S. military after his term ends in January 2029. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt later on Tuesday emphasized that 'U.S. boots will not be on the ground' as part of any potential peacekeeping mission. The president also said in the interview that he is optimistic that a deal can be reached to end the Russian invasion, but he underscored that Ukraine will have to set aside its hope of getting back Crimea, which was seized by Russian forces in 2014, and its long-held aspirations of joining the NATO military alliance. Advertisement 'Both of those things are impossible,' Trump said. Putin, as part of any potential deal to pull his forces out of Ukraine, is looking for the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, as well as recognition of Crimea as Russian territory. Trump on Monday said that he was arranging for direct talks between Putin and Zelenskyy. But the Kremlin has not yet said whether Putin, who has resisted previous calls by Trump and others for direct negotiations on ending the war, is committed to a face-to-face meeting with the Ukrainian leader. Asked whether Putin has promised Trump that he'll meet directly with the Ukrainian leader, Leavitt responded affirmatively. 'He has,' Leavitt said of Putin. Trump, early on Monday during talks with Zelenskyy and European leaders, said that he was pressing for three-way talks among Zelenskyy, Putin and himself. But after speaking to Putin later in the day, Trump said that he was arranging first for a face-to-face between Zelenskyy and Putin and that three-way talks would follow if necessary. 'It was an idea that evolved in the course of the president's conversations with both President Putin, President Zelensky and the European leaders yesterday,' Leavitt explained. But when discussing a phone call held after the meeting between Trump and the Russian leader, Putin's foreign affairs adviser Yuri Ushakov gave no indication that either a bilateral or a trilateral meeting with Ukraine had been agreed. Trump said he believed Putin's course of action would become clear in the coming weeks. Advertisement 'I think Putin is tired of it,' Trump said. 'I think they're all tired of it. But you never know. We're going to find out about President Putin in the next couple of weeks. That I can tell you.'
CNN
29 minutes ago
- CNN
Ukraine wants a ‘ceasefire,' Putin and Trump want a ‘peace deal.' Here's the big difference
Russia Donald Trump War in Ukraine ImmigrationFacebookTweetLink Follow US President Donald Trump has ditched his call for a ceasefire in Ukraine, backing instead Russian President Vladimir Putin's push for a permanent peace agreement. That has not stopped some European leaders from pushing for a temporary truce first, even though the US president has seemingly decided one is not necessary. It's not that Kyiv and its allies don't want peace. But they understand that the kind of deal sought by Russia can't happen unless the most basic principle underpinning the global order – that a country cannot get what it wants by force – is thrown under the bus. And Kyiv's European allies are not willing to risk that, not least because they could well become the next target of Russia's aggression. Speaking to the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and several European leaders in the Oval Office on Monday, Trump adopted some of Moscow's talking points, questioning whether a ceasefire was 'necessary' if a broader peace deal could be achieved. But international law experts and analysts say that any deal that would force Ukraine to give up its land to stop the killing of its people by Russia would be completely illegal under the UN Charter, a key international agreement which most countries signed up to after the horrors of the Second World War. While often thought of as essentially the same thing, there is a big difference between a peace deal and a ceasefire in the eyes of international law. During a ceasefire, warring parties agree to stop fighting with each side keeping hold of the territory under its military control. But the understanding is that the pause is temporary – usually to provide a window to negotiate, deliver humanitarian help or evacuate civilians. Kyiv and its European allies suggested that a ceasefire might be a precursor for a meeting between Zelensky and Putin, followed by a trilateral meeting between Trump, Zelensky, and Putin. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, who attended the summit on Monday, said that he 'can't imagine that the next meeting will take place without a ceasefire.' A ceasefire can be short – like the 1914 Christmas Truce that lasted a few days – or it could stretch to decades. The ceasefires between Cyprus and Turkey, and between India and Pakistan have been in place for decades with no permanent peace settlement in sight. What Putin wants – and now, apparently, Trump as well – is a permanent peace agreement. Under international law, a peace agreement is meant to be a formal, long-term treaty that dictates the future relationship between two countries. And that's where things get complicated. 'There is a uniquely core principle to international law that is inscribed front and center in the UN Charter: Use of force is emphatically prohibited. So what that also (means) is that any treaty that you procure by use of force is effectively illegal and is inherently void,' said Jeremy Pizzi, an international lawyer and a legal adviser of Global Rights Compliance, a human rights foundation. Little detail has been shared about the kind of peace deal Putin discussed with Trump last week, but it is clear that the Russian leader has not abandoned some of his maximalist demands, including that Ukraine give up the entire eastern Donetsk and Luhansk regions, known as the Donbas, and is banned from joining NATO in the future. This would make the deal doubly illegal under international law: illegal because of the way it would be reached – by force – and illegal because of its content. But even if he wanted to – which he does not – Zelensky cannot agree to give up territory. Under the Ukrainian constitution, any change to the country's borders must be approved by a referendum – a rule that is in place partly because of Russia's tendency to install puppet governments in foreign countries. A survey conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology (KIIS), a leading public opinion pollster, in May and June found that the vast majority of Ukrainians reject the idea of recognizing Ukrainian territories as part of Russia. An even bigger majority is against giving up control over territories that are currently controlled by Ukraine. Speaking to CNN from Kyiv, Pizzi said that even if the Ukrainians somehow changed their minds and voted in favor of giving up their land – which they are unlikely to do, according to KIIS – the agreement would still be illegal under international law. 'Regardless of the Ukrainian constitution, Zelensky, or no one, can hand over territory linked to aggressive military conquest. The prohibition of using armed force to conquer territory is absolute under international law,' Pizzi said. There are also practical and strategic reasons why Ukraine cannot agree to Moscow's demands. The Russian military currently controls almost all of Luhansk and more than 70% of Donetsk, which means that Putin is asking Kyiv to give up even more than it has lost so far. But the parts of the Donbas region that are still under Kyiv's control include infrastructure that is crucial for Ukraine's defense. A string of industrial cities including Sloviansk, Kramatorsk and Kostiantynivka that are connected by main roads and railways form the backbone of Ukraine's defenses. If they were to be taken by Russia, the road to the western parts of the country would be wide open. There is also little incentive for Kyiv to trust Moscow, Pizzi said. 'Russia has engaged in armed attacks against Ukraine for over 10 years now, consistently, repeatedly during that time. Russia has feigned negotiations, feigned good faith, while continuing to use violence and keeping up the same illegal maximalist goals in the background and Ukrainian authorities are painfully aware of this,' he said. 'There is no logical, sensible reason to trust Russia in the absence of a precursor, a good faith decision or engagement that they make on their part to hold off from killing more Ukrainians,' he added. Kyiv, backed by the Europeans, has indicated that it is willing to recognize the current reality on the ground in order to stop the killing. This would likely mean freezing the conflict along the current front lines and essentially giving up on trying to regain its land while the ceasefire is in place. Analysts at the Eurasia Group wrote in a note on Monday that the European leaders would no doubt make it very clear to Trump that there can be no question of acceptance of a permanent annexation of Ukrainian territory by force. 'While there is openness to recognition of the de facto military position on the ground, neither Ukraine nor the Europeans will accept that Russia should be 'given' more land than it has captured,' they said, quoting a Western intelligence assessment that it would take Russia more than four years to occupy the rest of the Donbas. And, crucially, even if Kyiv were to recognize that the reality on the ground gives Russia the de-facto control of some of its land, it would certainly not agree to make this a permanent recognition. Kyiv's goal remains to regain all of its territory in the future. The Eurasia analysts said there was some doubt in the European minds that 'Trump understands, or cares about, the importance of the distinction' between the two. A ceasefire might be the only way out of the current violence. A permanent peace deal would be against international law. 'The reality is that (international law) makes it almost politically impossible to conclude a peace treaty when the victim is not winning. And my response to that is: That's the point,' Pizzi said.
