That title isn’t just click-bait, it’s straight-up misinformation. Even the article itself says that TWISTER and ERNST weren’t abandoned, they just aren’t operational yet (and the one that was actually abandoned just didn’t work, if the other commenter is to be believed).
In general, it’s good to have counters, but I doubt that it’s actually all that critical to lack detection capability for MRBMs.
MRBMs are going to not be incredibly numerous.
If used with a nuclear warhead, there are already nuclear deterrents in place, and they don’t rely on launch-on-warning.
If used with a conventional warhead, MRBMs might be a reliable, hard-to-intercept way of delivering a payload, but not a very cost-effective one.
checks WP
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oreshnik_(missile)
Experts have noted that the accuracy of Oreshnik, as demonstrated in the footage from the Dnipro strike, is sufficient for delivering a nuclear payload but not for a conventional one.[5] According to William Alberque of the Henry L. Stimson Center, “If Russia is working on a MIRV with a conventional CEP, we’ve never seen it.”[5] Other experts have noted that the accuracy concerns from Oreshnik’s warheads could be mitigated by using submunitions.[5]
Russian nuclear policy expert Maksim Starchak suggested that the primary purpose of the missile’s use was not military damage but psychological pressure. He believes the strike was intended to frighten European residents into pressuring their governments to comply with Russia’s demands.[33] According to Meduza, the Kremlin’s intent might have been to instill fear of conflict escalation with Russia in the incoming U.S. administration, thereby influencing its policies.[34]
Based on that, it doesn’t even sound like a terribly useful way to hit a (point) target with a conventional warhead, unless Russia revises the missile to be more accurate.
EDIT: Regarding the numbers in question for the particular MRBM mentioned:
Russia currently has no more than three or four Oreshnik missiles in its arsenal, but plans to launch serial production in 2026, aiming to manufacture five or more missiles per year, Oleh Luhovskyi, First Deputy Head of the Foreign Intelligence Service of Ukraine, said in his interview with Ukrinform.
No, no they were told to abandon those projects so the US could profit from the EU using their missile warning tech, don’t delude yourselves into thinking it was about anything else other than money and now that the whole system is unraveling are they noticing this.
Did you read the article? The article completely disagrees with the title - world of difference between “abandoned” and “not operational yet”.
It was underfunded because the US didn’t want the EU to have it’s own defense capabilities, perfect racket money because the US can keep raking in the cash that could have been otherwise invested into what? INTO A FUCKING MISSILE WARNING SYSTEM!
The US has been trying to get larger EU investment into NATO and local defense for decades. Even Bush Jr. was pushing for it (and no, this includes developing domestic defense industries that would compete with the US)
Uh, no? SPIRALE was innovative but it didnt really… work and was largely abandoned as a result (it’s still kinda going on life support but iirc the small sattelites being used just didn’t have the fidelity at the time to be useful). However both TWISTER and ERNST are very actively in development. TWISTER is an ongoing umbrella project and the early warning system (called ODINS EYE II) is on schedule, having its demonstrators launched in 2024 and with more currently planned + active funding into both sides of the project. ERNST is a continuation of the ideas in SPIRALE and shows a lot of promise.
None of these projects were abandoned because of US pressure, and only one of them was even vaguely abandoned. Underfunded for what they are yes, but that’s because these kinds of systems are unbelievably expensive to develop and maintain and the EU hasn’t had a need for US level defense spending until Trump showed why that maybe it wasn’t a great idea to rely on someone else for your defense.
edit: phrasing
Jfc you just said it yourself it was underfunded and why is that? because the US already has working technology and the US needed to sell it to someone, it’s almost like a racket and it worked till now because the predecessors weren’t demented pedo fascists, at least not so openly.
The US doesn’t sell SBIRS, and stop shifting the goalposts. The fundemental premise is wrong- these projects weren’t even abandoned, and the EU underfunding a project can’t credibly be blamed singly on the US, that’s just… dumb.
