but Submarines do and they are not included in MTCR.A correction here. UAVs were invented before MTCR. Btw, MTCR is primarily for delivery systems that can deliver nukes. UAVs don't really come in that category.
The MTCR does not deserve to last. It must go. So it is a good thing if there are violations. But irrespective of that ...U.S. willful blindness to Indian Agni V MTCR violation - New Century China Forum
India is making a mockery of the MTCR
At Krad (on another forum), are you seriously trying to argue that a laser ring gyro and an electronic guidance system for an ICBM may have a dual use? A laser ring gyro may also be used for the navigation of a commercial jet. India lacks the technology to build commercial jets. You can eliminate that dual-use argument. Furthermore, the electronic guidance system for an ICBM has only one use: to guide an ICBM.
India has demonstrated that it has violated the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime) and the United States should come out and demand an immediate halt to further exports and violations of the MTCR by India and the supplier country. If the United States continues its willful blindness, India will make a mockery of the MTCR and the United States will be silently complicit in aiding long-range missile proliferation.
Let me narrow down the list to make it easier for the United States to identify the missile proliferator in violation of the MTCR. There are only five countries that have proven electronic guidance systems for an ICBM. All five countries also happen to sit on the U.N. Security Council with a permanent veto (i.e. UNSC P-5).
1. United States
2. China
3. Russia
4. Britain
5. France
Among the five suspected countries, we can rule out the United States and China. The United States would not actively help India in developing an ICBM. To the contrary, the United States has a history of imposing sanctions and technological prohibitions on India. Also, it is obvious that China would not help India to develop the Agni V "China killer" to hit cities like Shanghai.
There are only three viable violators of the MTCR: Russia, Britain, or France.
This statement is an error USA violated MTCR giving trident missiles to Britain and China has violated
MTCR giving missiles to North Korea and Pakistan (China is not a MTCR signatory)
The United States should publicly condemn the MTCR violator and demand that they stop destabilizing the world and proliferating ICBMs that carry WMDs (weapons of mass destruction). The U.S. effort to save the MTCR is worthwhile; even if the guilty party says "nyet."
Submarines only hold the nukes in a stealthy environment. The delivery is still done by the unmanned system, AKA a missile.but Submarines do and they are not included in MTCR.
You are right P2P, the point i was trying to make is MTCR is not a complete there are still loopholes.Submarines only hold the nukes in a stealthy environment. The delivery is still done by the unmanned system, AKA a missile.
MTCR applies only to unmanned delivery systems, or in other words, Missiles.
That's why the term Missile Technology Control Regime.
A UAV is not a missile.
This range is an issue for Brahmos but not for Nirbhay? This maybe the reasondoesn't MTCR allow maximum
range up to 300km and that's why official range of brahmos is the same.
There is no Russian involvement in Nirbay development. brahmos range is much more than published one.This range is an issue for Brahmos but not for Nirbhay? This maybe the reason
an air launched version of Brahmos is being developed?
So in future if UAVs are developed will they come under MTCR. I believe I read an article some time back where an American UAV manufacturer was seeking changes to MTCR to clear the export of more UAVs. Don't exactly remember but I think he was from Lockheed Martin.A correction here. UAVs were invented before MTCR. Btw, MTCR is primarily for delivery systems that can deliver nukes. UAVs don't really come in that category.
I don't believe that this is true. If you post was true it would be the biggest loophole as it would make it possible for nation to import all the components of a long range missile separately and then just assemble them. I believe that no nation is allowed to sell the technology that "can" be used to make long range missiles.There is no violation of MTCR in this deal..MTCR as a whole states that a country should not be supplied with a missile unit or its knocked down kits which when assembled can cross more than 300kms..But here we are just getting a turbojet engine, and we may also use it for missiles ranging less than 300 kms..The MTCR can't dictate us how to use this..
UAV certainly falls in the unmanned delivery system category, even if it is not a missile. I guess the term missile is what makes the difference?Submarines only hold the nukes in a stealthy environment. The delivery is still done by the unmanned system, AKA a missile.
MTCR applies only to unmanned delivery systems, or in other words, Missiles.
That's why the term Missile Technology Control Regime.
A UAV is not a missile.
Then techincally MTCR nations cannot cooperate with non signatories in Space explorationI don't believe that this is true. If you post was true it would be the biggest loophole as it would make it possible for nation to import all the components of a long range missile separately and then just assemble them. I believe that no nation is allowed to sell the technology that "can" be used to make long range missiles.
As for India, boo to MTCR, if it hampers Indian defence.U.S. willful blindness to Indian Agni V MTCR violation - New Century China Forum
India is making a mockery of the MTCR
At Krad (on another forum), are you seriously trying to argue that a laser ring gyro and an electronic guidance system for an ICBM may have a dual use? A laser ring gyro may also be used for the navigation of a commercial jet. India lacks the technology to build commercial jets. You can eliminate that dual-use argument. Furthermore, the electronic guidance system for an ICBM has only one use: to guide an ICBM.
India has demonstrated that it has violated the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime) and the United States should come out and demand an immediate halt to further exports and violations of the MTCR by India and the supplier country. If the United States continues its willful blindness, India will make a mockery of the MTCR and the United States will be silently complicit in aiding long-range missile proliferation.
Let me narrow down the list to make it easier for the United States to identify the missile proliferator in violation of the MTCR. There are only five countries that have proven electronic guidance systems for an ICBM. All five countries also happen to sit on the U.N. Security Council with a permanent veto (i.e. UNSC P-5).
1. United States
2. China
3. Russia
4. Britain
5. France
Among the five suspected countries, we can rule out the United States and China. The United States would not actively help India in developing an ICBM. To the contrary, the United States has a history of imposing sanctions and technological prohibitions on India. Also, it is obvious that China would not help India to develop the Agni V "China killer" to hit cities like Shanghai.
There are only three viable violators of the MTCR: Russia, Britain, or France.
This statement is an error USA violated MTCR giving trident missiles to Britain and China has violated
MTCR giving missiles to North Korea and Pakistan (China is not a MTCR signatory)
The United States should publicly condemn the MTCR violator and demand that they stop destabilizing the world and proliferating ICBMs that carry WMDs (weapons of mass destruction). The U.S. effort to save the MTCR is worthwhile; even if the guilty party says "nyet."