The photo is here, in this (not-bad) North Korea milblog, after the 14:32 entry.
I think the caption is wrong. That looks like a parallel of our Nike and Zeus missiles, or an evolution of a V1. I’d say it’s a short range surface-surface missile rather than anything AA. I don’t think anyone, even the US or USSR, had anything like intelligent AA missiles or RPVs in that era.
Agreed, the caption is wrong. It looks very much like an SS-N-2 Styx anti-ship missile.
Other photos of the Styx:
I’m no military buff, but I seriously doubt that’s a Styx. First of all, it’s got the old-fashioned open-nose fuselage used in jets before designers realized they could put inlets next to the fuselage. Secondly, it’s got a semi-t-style tail, rather than having the elevators mounted directly on the fuselage.
A survey of the results from images.google.com shows a few sites identifying it correctly as an FKR-1 cruise missile and quite a few identifying it as an anti-aircraft weapon or other defense weapon.
Here are some links:
An accurately captioned version of the picture: http://blogs.fas.org/security/2012/10/cubanmissilecrisis/
A picture of another FKR-1 http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:FKR-1_Havana_Weapons_Exposition.jpghttp://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:FKR-1_Havana_Weapons_Exposition.jpg
Mean little FKR, ain’t it?
I just read something about the Cuban Missile Crisis, can’t dig up where, that claimed the US’s ignorance of anti-ship missiles in Cuba could have precipitated a major disaster. IIRC, the writer claimed that had the US Navy moved any closer to Cuba, it would have taken major damage from these missiles, leaving us with few options. I may have that a bit garbled and the writer may have been FOS, but it’s interesting to see a picture of the FKR-1 that was the centerpoint of the discussion.
S-2 “Sopka” anti-ship missile.
AKA KS-1 Komet
D’oh:smack:, you’re right, it’s not a Styx, it’s an FRK-1 or in its NATO designation SSC-2.
I’ve no idea how good the homing was for the SSC-2B “Samlet” depicted in the photo, nor what ECM tricks against it the USN had up its sleeve. The next chronological naval SSM the Soviets made, the SS-N-2 “Styx” that Dissonance was talking about above, gave the world’s navies a rude awakening when they sank the Israeli destroyer Eilat in 1967. If the Samlet was roughly as effective as the Styx, and the USN didn’t have a good handle on how to jam or interfere with the missile’s guidance, then yes, the USN might have had a bad day. Especially if the Soviets shipped the optional nuclear warhead for the missiles… More data on older Soviet air to surface (which the SSC-2 is filed under, originating out of the AS-1 design) and naval surface to surface missiles than you probably wanted to know.
I know they had shipped some lesser ranged tactical nukes to Cuba at the time of the Crisis, and also delegated authority for their use to the judgment of the local Soviet commander of forces in Cuba, but I don’t know if those nukes were for coastal missiles like the Samlet.