Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

airforcemag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 209 posts

Re: Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

#171

Post by zardo »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #128
lumost wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth noting that at these speeds a "long" period need only be ~1 hour to reach a target from launch. A flight from Hawaii to Taipei would be 1.3 hours at Mach 5, and 54 minutes at Mach 7. These weapons represent an ability for both the US and China to conventionally intervene from their mainlands to any location within the Pacific.

> It's worth noting that at these speeds a "long" period need only be ~1 hour to reach a target from launch. A flight from Hawaii to Taipei would be 1.3 hours at Mach 5, and 54 minutes at Mach 7. > These weapons represent an ability for both the US and China to conventionally intervene from their mainlands to any location within the Pacific. Is that the kind of range these have? Almost 9,000 miles from LA to the Sout…

>Ballistic missiles of course have these kind of ranges and can carry conventional payloads.

Just call while the missile is on the way to let the people it's going to kill know its not a nuclear bomb headed their way so they shouldn't fire a nuclear bomb back.

Re: Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

#172

Post by sudosysgen »

HappySweeney wrote: post #167
sudosysgen wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Russia is finalizing field tests of hypersonics that are due to be deployed on ships in less than a year, and has actually fired them from ships at targets. China is more secretive but there is evidence there were at this stage 5+ years ago.

Why be secretive about this stuff? Isn't its whole raison d'etre to be a deterrent in the face of American anti-missile systems? Or is this something more like a Corbomite Maneuver?

The Chinese are generally quite secretive about everything unless it's been in full-scale production for a while.

They probably think that their manoeuvrable ballistic missiles are already enough of a deterrent, being hypersonic already, and those are actually deployed and ready for combat, so much more of a deterrent.

Re: Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

#173

Post by sudosysgen »

baybal2 wrote: post #153
everyone wrote: post #152

I've read in a few places that the US is way behind China and others in hypersonic missiles. Would like to hear what HN has to say on that.

May be, but I don't understand the obsession regarding hypersonic missiles. There are dozens of other surprise attack weapons to knockout a superpower level enemy to select from. Hypersonic weapons are just few of them. It's more of a psychological weapon as ICBMs are. As in most cases, a new wunderwaffe will lose out to oldschool war tricks.

Really not. Hypersonic missiles are a game changer because, without any risk of escalation, they are un-interceptable and can hit very important and high value assets very fast without requiring survivable targeting platforms.

Re: Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

#174

Post by sudosysgen »

_ettn wrote: post #70
Armisael16 wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Article 5 only applies to attacks in Europe or North America. The SCS is definitely in neither.

Fair, though in practice they would join in anyway - China would be going for them next. Better to fight with the US than alone.

Presumably the US would find itself in such a situation because it tried to stop the invasion of Taiwan. China will never have the interest or capabilities of going after Europe.

Re: Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

#175

Post by sudosysgen »

marstall wrote: post #158
throwaway210222 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> China could nuke US carrier groups assuming their satellites aren't taken out first. That spells game over for US projection of power if successful. Incorrect, the USA will probably just shrug, and call in the other 11 super-carriers and 9 amphibious assault ships. At the same time they will invoke NATO article 5 and a few other Asian mutual-defence treaties. 2 UK, 1 Spanish, 1 French, and 2 Italian carriers will a…

I've read its actually very hard to find an aircraft carrier in the open ocean, and even if you have found it, difficult to target because it will be be moving at 30 knots in a zigzag pattern?

That's true for subsonic low altitude missiles yes.

For a missile going Mach 7 at 25km altitude, the carrier has no hope of moving enough in the 9 minutes it has to evade the missile.

So you only have to find the carrier once briefly, which is not so hard.

Re: Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

#176

Post by sudosysgen »

PerkinWarwick wrote: post #8
echelon wrote: post #2

As I understand it, China has hypersonic missiles and nukes, whereas the US does not. Should a conflict in the South China sea break out, China could nuke US carrier groups assuming their satellites aren't taken out first. That spells game over for US projection of power if successful. China could deploy air and submersible drones to get around downed satellites, but these have the potential of being jammed with EMP,…

Generally, I'd say that anti-carrier strike group tactics involve simply (well, maybe not so simple) overwhelming the defenses. Quantity can work as well as quality. You might look into Russian missile work. Of course, as a land power (and not as invested in trade as China), their answers are different.

The answers of China and Russia are pretty similar. Use air power or submarines to locate the carrier, fire hypersonic missiles.

Re: Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

#177

Post by sudosysgen »

twic wrote: post #97
Enginerrrd wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, no, maybe? As far as I know, with existing known technology and defenses, there's probably a number n, such that if you launch more than n simultaneous non-hypersonic cruise missiles, an aircraft carrier is going to be unable to deal with them all. This of course assumes you can launch that many missiles, in range of the carrier, simultaneously, without advanced warning. Now, the navy also isn't dumb, so I'd ven…

I would think a conservative estimate for n is roughly (number of surface-to-air missiles ready to fire in the battle group) + (number of hits needed to sink a carrier) / (probability of hitting). I suspect the first term will dominate. If the battle group has one Gerald R. Ford class carrier, two Ticonderoga class cruisers, and three Arleigh Burke class destroyers, then it has up to 2 * 8 + 122 * 4 + 96 * 4 = 888 RI…

In reality the CSG will be unable to fire 930 missiles at a single salvo because of time and targeting constraints, as the incoming missiles will be detected simulataneously.

Also, you don't need to sink the carrier. Just prevent it from launching aircraft. Once that's done it's defenceless.

Re: Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

#178

Post by sudosysgen »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #91
tptacek wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the premise here that carrier groups would be survivable in the absence of hypersonic missiles? They... aren't at all, are they?

Eh, you see a headline every so often alleging this but they're pretty far off the mark. CSGs are defended by the entire system operating in layers. During conflict conditions they'll have airborne early warning radar flying to see threats coming a long way out. There's usually at least 4 AEGIS equipped ships. The carrier air wing will be doing patrols and intercepting threats at great distance. The carrier itself wi…

EW decoys, early warning radar, AWACS and so on is useless against passive sonobuoys, satellites, stealth camera drones, and a missile with dual-mode guidance.

Re: Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

#179

Post by sudosysgen »

krisoft wrote: post #81
tptacek wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the premise here that carrier groups would be survivable in the absence of hypersonic missiles? They... aren't at all, are they?

Every time the navy is asked about the survivability of the carrier groups they seem to start talking about the “whole kill-chain” of the enemy weapons. It sounds like they plan to knock out the targeting satelites before they could target them instead of trying to catch the missiles. Or at least thats how I read the tea leaves.

If the satellites don't work, then submarines and sonobuoys will be used. If those don't work, attritable intelligence drones will be used. If those don't work, they will go for the CSG first with whatever works, sinking the AEGIS ships, and then work their way up to the carrier.

The absolute trump card though is that they are preparing hypersonic intelligence drones. If those work out, they're going to be impossible to stop and there's no hiding a carrier from a plane flying past with line of sight.

Re: Hypersonic HAWC missile flies, but details are kept hidden

#180

Post by sudosysgen »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #39
WrtCdEvrydy wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carrier groups are supposedly survivable except for the stealth subs and hypersonic missiles but noone has tested that theory. I wonder if the future will be just a cheap ship with a large number of single-use missile launchers.

How are the hypersonic missiles guided and what is their range?

They are guided by active radar, passive radar, and optical sensors. Their range is anywhere from 5000-700km, but many can be air-launched.
Post reply on HN