Inmate Central

Inmate Central, where civil and family-friendly discourse about off-audio topics (other than religion and politics) is welcome.

Return to Inmate Central

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Today's military tech review: Hypersonic Missiles

76.144.45.241
Posted on September 16, 2023 at 11:40:18
vacuous
Audiophile

Posts: 4191
Location: Corvallis, Oregon
Joined: August 25, 2000
Contributor
  Since: November 7, 2020
 Russia and China are aggressively developing this technology, but the US military has repeatedly failed in its efforts to develop a hypersonic missile. Linked article details how the USA has been losing this arms race.

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
While no one has them, the US prototypes are ahead, posted on September 16, 2023 at 11:48:54
Victor Khomenko
Manufacturer

Posts: 54238
Joined: April 5, 2000
 In fact that is what the scum is trying to copy at this time.

Keyword: Waverider.


 

The WSJ article clearly states that China and Russia have them , posted on September 16, 2023 at 13:26:34
Steve O
Audiophile

Posts: 12092
Location: SE MI
Joined: September 6, 2001
 And while the US version is under development, nothing is yet ready for deployment. The article seems credible enough.

 

And that is wrong. nt, posted on September 16, 2023 at 14:16:16
Victor Khomenko
Manufacturer

Posts: 54238
Joined: April 5, 2000
 .


 

Ok . . ., posted on September 16, 2023 at 15:07:15
Steve O
Audiophile

Posts: 12092
Location: SE MI
Joined: September 6, 2001
 How do you know WSJ reporting is wrong?

 

First - , posted on September 16, 2023 at 15:26:20
Victor Khomenko
Manufacturer

Posts: 54238
Joined: April 5, 2000
 ...by more or less regular reading on this subject.

Second - pretty much all those Wunderwaffles that puking announced in 2018 have been studied and found to be a lot of hot air. Papers like WSJ are just regurgitating the ruSSian propaganda.

And last... look at the miserable record of their "hypersonic" Kinjal missile - since the introduction of Patriot none of them made it through.

Considering how "special" and expensive these are, how desirable their targets, and seeing how it made all their attempts futile, why don't you think they have just once used their super-duper non-stoppable Avantgards, that they have "deployed" years ago, to destroy the Patriots and solve, once and for all, their rather embarrassing problem?

So far they have thrown everything, including the kitchen sink, ALL their best existing weapons, at destroying the Ukrainian military, but somehow they are still shy about using that particular miracle weapon.

Consider also their other Wunderwaffles such as their "unique" Armata and Su-57.


 

Not referring specifically to Russia , posted on September 16, 2023 at 16:08:25
Steve O
Audiophile

Posts: 12092
Location: SE MI
Joined: September 6, 2001
 But to your statement that no one has them. The article is clear that both Russia and esp China have them. It notes that Russian technology is based on Cold War work while implying that China's work is more recent and advanced. It also notes Russia has deployed hypersonic weapons against Ukraine without any assessment as to effectiveness.

You should read the article. I'd been interested in your critique of the article's assessment of the present state of hypersonics. FWIW, I've read hypersonic assessments with similar conclusions elsewhere in the last month or two so there's some consistency in the message here versus different platforms and times.

 

"It also notes Russia has deployed hypersonic weapons" That is wrong again, posted on September 16, 2023 at 16:17:40
Victor Khomenko
Manufacturer

Posts: 54238
Joined: April 5, 2000
 ruSSia may call their Kinjal "hypersonic" all it wants, but that does not turn it into one.

But yes, correct, at this point no one has working hypersonic weapons, if you discard the propaganda statements and the incorrect use of this term.

I specifically mentioned the word Waverider - the US prototype. It is interesting to note that the only published images of the ruSSian other so-called "hypersonic" missile Zircon depict the US X-51 prototype.


 

RE: "It also notes Russia has deployed hypersonic weapons" That is wrong again, posted on September 16, 2023 at 17:22:34
Oldbean2
Audiophile

Posts: 810
Location: Midwest US
Joined: March 27, 2022
 I heard back in 2019 that China has them becoming operational in an anti-shipping role, and that the US had no effective countermeasures; and that a senior official that basically said 'we have to live with it' was promptly cashiered. As I understand it now, we have caught up and surpassed both offensively and defensively. Though they're always a threat and hard to intercept.

Back for a bit again. Ignore me if you like.

 

RE: Today's military tech review: Hypersonic Missiles, posted on September 16, 2023 at 22:29:43
pictureguy
Audiophile

Posts: 22493
Location: SoCal
Joined: October 19, 2008
 How do you handle the tremendous heat of air friction?

All I got is some kind of Ceramic leading edge and nose cones......
Too much is never enough

 

RE: Ok . . ., posted on September 16, 2023 at 22:31:46
pictureguy
Audiophile

Posts: 22493
Location: SoCal
Joined: October 19, 2008
 It's called a 'fund raiser'......
Create a gap and YOU must catch up........spending huge piles of $$$

I didn't see ANY proof in the article, just conjecture and maybe........And the 15000 MPH quoted at the start of the article? Orbital speed....or close enough....
Too much is never enough

 

So far, posted on September 17, 2023 at 03:36:12
Steve O
Audiophile

Posts: 12092
Location: SE MI
Joined: September 6, 2001
 No one has presented any solid reason not to consider the WSJ article accurate.

 

Last time I spent some effort..., posted on September 17, 2023 at 10:23:09
Victor Khomenko
Manufacturer

Posts: 54238
Joined: April 5, 2000
 ...providing some strong sources to another member here. Sorry, I don't keep all that material, but the quote that you provided from WSJ on ruSSians having used them in Ukraine tell you all you need to know about their level of expertise.


 

Well, you might be right this time, Victor!, posted on September 17, 2023 at 11:50:50
vacuous
Audiophile

Posts: 4191
Location: Corvallis, Oregon
Joined: August 25, 2000
Contributor
  Since: November 7, 2020
 Yup, there appears to be an overload of hyperbole about hypersonic weapons. Especially regarding the Russian 'Kinzhal'. The link below debunks these claims. Namely:

1) Russian hypersonics are already here. False!
2) Hypersonics cannot be intercepted. False!
3) The USA is behind on its hypersonic weapons program. False!

Counterbalances the WSJ article.

The talk about hypersonic weapons reminds me of the Star Wars space-based defense program. Remember that Reagan era dream? We gonna overwhelm the Rooskies with our super technology! Except that there was never any real-world implementation of Star Wars. Was pure fantasy. Perhaps it's a similar story with these 'hypersonic' missiles.

I dunno what to believe.

 

That is a good article. , posted on September 17, 2023 at 12:17:39
Victor Khomenko
Manufacturer

Posts: 54238
Joined: April 5, 2000
 Gives much better presentation of reality.

Unfortunately, our media did its worst to create the wrong impression on part of general public. What reason they have for parroting the scum's propaganda - I am not sure, but they are doing it full time.

Be it as it may... the latest scum's Wunderwaffle was no match for a fifty year old US system. Yeah, I know... all the updates... but still...

There is one funny word play... when the scum talks about their new weapons they always use the phrase "Analogov net" (no analogous weapons anywhere), which the ruSSian jokers quickly changed to "Analo Govnet" which loosely translates as "Anal Shit"


 

While the linked article offers a nice counter perspective to the WSJ article, posted on September 17, 2023 at 15:38:14
Steve O
Audiophile

Posts: 12092
Location: SE MI
Joined: September 6, 2001
 I don't think they're really all that far apart. One of the problems is that there isn't a universally accepted definition of what a hypersonic weapon really is. The relatively primitive V2 of WW2 fits at least one definition. The different biases of the two publications also influences conclusions. There is also at least one internal inconsistency in the Brookings article: Brookings states that hypersonics can indeed be intercepted. But if no one has a deployable hypersonic, how is this interceptability such common knowledge? (Assuming of course that Russian weapons intercepted in Ukraine aren't really hypersonic in nature)

Given all that, my conclusions after reading both articles are:
1. Russia, China and U.S. are currently developing hypersonic weapon systems.
2. Hypersonic readiness for deployment by anyone is unclear at the moment.
3. Russia does not have a true, deployable hypersonic weapon at this time and is behind both US and China in development process.
4. China probably leads the US in offensive hypersonic capability development while the U.S. probably leads China in defensive capability development.
5. Overall military value of hypersonic weapons is unclear.

 

"inconsistency in the Brookings article"... Actually, no, posted on September 18, 2023 at 05:45:09
Victor Khomenko
Manufacturer

Posts: 54238
Joined: April 5, 2000
 Intercepting targets moving at Mach 5 and even faster is an established state of the art, with many test firings performed. THAAD can shoot down targets flying at Mach 8, and the Patriot is a bit behind, but still in the Mach 4-5 range.

BTW, the hyped "hypervsonic" Kinjal approaches the targets at the velocity of Mach 2-3, not even 5.

***Assuming of course that Russian weapons intercepted in Ukraine aren't really hypersonic in nature***

No need to assume anything... ballistic missiles are not hypersonic weapons. Many nations have these but only one claims some special status to theirs.

Your summary is OK as a very cautious one, I would just correct your point #2: I would state that there is no proof of any such systems in deployment.




 

Page processed in 0.030 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2023, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]