Frog is a tactical misile system, while Scud is a short range ballistic missile.

IIRC Scuds were in Army level units in the Soviet ground forces, FROG was divisional level. They were replaced by SS21 and SS23 (? number may be wrong can't remember the NATO reporting names - Scarab and ?)

Can confirm from a reasonably reliable source: FROG-7 (70km) replaced by SS-21 (Scarab)(100km) (Divisional command) SS-1 (Scud-B)(300km) replaced by SS-23 (500km) (Army command) SS-12 (Scaleboard)(900 km)replaced by SS-22 (885km)(Front command)

The Scud may be obsolete, but its still a pain in the bum. The Norks have taken to mounting them on container vessels as a sea based SRBM platform. That in itself has caused some angst as far as reviewing what damage they could do if entering an unprotected port facility or coastal town. It also means that they have sufficiently managed to come up with a working gyrospace and guidance meachanism impervious to sea states and constant platform motion.

H'mm, the real question is 'how reliable is this information?'. My understanding is that all variants of Scud are liquid fuelled and fuelling takes place shortly before firing. Doen't know what the fuel and oxidant are but one is probably seriously unpleasant stuff. What you never see in all the propaganda pics is this aspect, dig around for some old pics of Corporal fuelling and you'll see what I mean (and Corporal was the same vintage and same ancestry as Scud). Could be lots of fun at sea, which is why most if not all sea based missiles have been either solid fuel or the MMAs could store fuel and oxidant.

well, I'm not sure how viable it is, but remember these are the same people who are putting T55's on barges to act as riverboat mortars. they might be lateral thinkers - but no one says that they are logical. ;)

Norks? North Koreans?