I wonder if intelligence out of Ukraine is being used to develop those missiles.
US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt
11–20 of 171 posts
Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt
#12Given that the bomber gap, missile gap and the cruiser gap was all shown to be fictional, I do wonder if the perceived hypersonic gap is real.
That's a very reasonable question, though in cases like these it seems prudent to err on the side of being too paranoid rather than the opposite.
Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt
#13Quoted post unavailable.
Give it up. Why are you so bent on pushing nonsense?
Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt
#14Given that the bomber gap, missile gap and the cruiser gap was all shown to be fictional, I do wonder if the perceived hypersonic gap is real.
Correct. No one has "real" hypersonic missiles that travel in the atmosphere for extended periods(*1). The heating problems for shock impingment in non-"simple conicals" has *not* been overcome and won't be. "Hypersonic" missiles are mostly just ICBMs with a very brief passage through the dense lower atmosphere where there's enough lift. And if they try to go higher up to escape the heat flux there's not enough for lift. See, https://exrocketman.blogspot.com/2022/06/about-hypersonic-ve...
Tangential: the USA had a mach 5 phoenix missile back in the 1970s on the F-14 and now they're re-fitting them with new guidance/etc to make a hypersonic test bed.
*1: Of course, when you're going hypersonic you only need tens of minutes to travel to the other side of the Earth.
Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt
#15I predict they will keep pouring money into this pit until they get a success...and then quietly wind down the program. The cost-per-mission will end being ridiculously high with no meaningful gains over just using Tomahawks in volume, overwhelming any defense with numbers. Recall that we also once thought it was imperative to develop a "stealth" destroyer
Russia already has hypersonic. And there is no realistic defense against them. They scare the crap out of DC because a Russian sub could pop up off the coast of New Jersey and 5 million people including 99% of all US politicians would be dead 6 minutes later. So of course the US needs them.
The US having our own hypersonic missiles is not actually a defense against this scenario you have outlined?
Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt
#16No post body was provided.
Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt
#17Our rockets always blow up.
Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt
#18Given that the bomber gap, missile gap and the cruiser gap was all shown to be fictional, I do wonder if the perceived hypersonic gap is real.
Don't forget the ekranoplan gap.
Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt
#19I predict they will keep pouring money into this pit until they get a success...and then quietly wind down the program. The cost-per-mission will end being ridiculously high with no meaningful gains over just using Tomahawks in volume, overwhelming any defense with numbers. Recall that we also once thought it was imperative to develop a "stealth" destroyer
I wonder if one hypersonic missile would cost like 10 Tomahawks? 20 Tomahawks? Overpowering defenses is not always easy. One Tomahawk is about $2M. Also, time to reach the target may play a role, given that the launching platform cannot come closer than, say, 500 miles in either case. We assume that the adversary can detect the launch in either case; the time to react would be very different for a Tomahawk (about 0.7…
Saddam Hussein allegedly wouldn’t spend more than 90 minutes in any one location during the Gulf War because he was afraid of being taken out by a Tomahawk.
Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt
#20I predict they will keep pouring money into this pit until they get a success...and then quietly wind down the program. The cost-per-mission will end being ridiculously high with no meaningful gains over just using Tomahawks in volume, overwhelming any defense with numbers. Recall that we also once thought it was imperative to develop a "stealth" destroyer
Russia already has hypersonic. And there is no realistic defense against them. They scare the crap out of DC because a Russian sub could pop up off the coast of New Jersey and 5 million people including 99% of all US politicians would be dead 6 minutes later. So of course the US needs them.
20 minutes later Russia would be dead. 20 minutes later the world.
Been like this for many decades. That it hasn’t happened is kind of surprising.