By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Ukraine’s newly developed Trembita missile, currently under development for 18 months, boasts a 200km range and speeds of up to 400 km/h, utilizing a modernized pulse jet engine. A longer-range variant capable of reaching Moscow is also in development. While serial production awaits field testing, significant challenges remain, including securing funding, scaling industrial production, and maintaining security amidst ongoing Russian attacks on Ukrainian defense facilities. International partnerships are crucial to overcome these obstacles and bolster Ukraine’s missile capabilities.
Read the original article here
Ukraine is developing a missile with the potential to reach Moscow, a development that’s generating considerable discussion. The current focus is on a relatively short-range missile, tentatively named “Trembita,” utilizing a modern adaptation of the pulse jet engine technology found in the German V-1 “buzz bomb” of World War II. This design prioritizes cost-effectiveness and ease of mass production. Its speed is estimated at 400 km/h, and its range is currently capped at 200 km. However, the inherent simplicity of the design makes it an appealing candidate for scalability.
The Trembita’s noisy pulse jet engine, while a throwback to older technology, offers a practical advantage in its straightforward construction and inexpensive manufacturing. This characteristic is crucial in a conflict where a high volume of readily produced missiles could prove more impactful than a few sophisticated, complex weapons.
Despite the Trembita’s relatively limited range, Ukraine isn’t stopping there. A more powerful variant is under development, explicitly designed to extend the range to encompass Moscow. This ambition reflects a strategic shift in Ukraine’s military capabilities, aiming for a longer reach in retaliation against Russian aggression. The planned serial production will follow the completion of final field tests.
This development is particularly noteworthy because Ukraine already possesses a range of missiles with varying specifications, potentially capable of striking Moscow, albeit with varying degrees of success. Existing systems like the HRIM-2 ballistic missile, the R-360 Neptune cruise missile, the Ruta missile drone, and the Palianytsia turbojet drone missile all offer different payloads, speeds, ranges, and launch platforms. The exact ranges are shrouded in secrecy, but available information suggests capabilities ranging from 300 km to over 700 km, depending on the configuration and mission objectives. The ultimate goal seems to be exceeding a range of 1000 km.
The push to improve Ukraine’s missile production has intensified since late 2022. HRIM-2, Neptune, and Palianytsia are now in some stage of production, though the exact production rates are unclear. Palianytsia seems to be in serial production, while HRIM-2 and Neptune are likely in low-rate, constant production. The stated objective for 2025 is complete self-sufficiency in missile production, eliminating reliance on allied support, although continued collaboration and supply from partners like the UK, France, and other NATO countries remain a welcome prospect.
International collaboration is clearly a vital component of this drive to bolster Ukraine’s defensive capabilities. Several NATO nations are providing funding for research, development, and the construction of manufacturing facilities. This collaborative effort also anticipates the possibility of future export markets for Ukrainian-made missiles.
The development of a Moscow-capable missile is interpreted by many as a significant escalation. Some believe it is an attempt to provoke Russia into an overt action that could trigger a stronger NATO response. Others view this development as a necessary measure to deter further aggression and to bring the conflict closer to Russia’s own territory. The potential consequences of such an escalation are enormous and raise profound concerns about the possible trajectory of the conflict.
The proposed names for the longer-range missile are entertaining, running the gamut from the ironic (“The Economist”) to the provocative (“Putin’s Dildo”) to the straightforward (“Go home Russia”). This variety underlines the significant emotional weight of the weapon’s intended purpose and the high stakes of the ongoing conflict. The very existence of this missile program signals a critical turning point in the war, shifting the balance of power and the dynamics of the conflict in ways that remain to be seen. The world watches with bated breath.