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

US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 171 posts

Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt

#61

Post by tintor »

treeman79 wrote: post #20
swamp40 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How would US attribute who's sub it was?

They would have to retaliate on every other (non-allied) country.

Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt

#63

Post by deelowe »

ren_engineer wrote: post #6

both test failures seem to have been during the booster rocket phase and they weren't even able to test or collect data on the missile component Lockheed is in charge of development, just like the SLS program. I'm curious how hard it would be to have SpaceX make an attempt or if they would even be willing. Seems safe to say they know rockets far better than Lockheed

> Lockheed is in charge of development, just like the SLS program.

Several big defense contractors are involved, but Lockheed isn't one of them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System

Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt

#64

Post by dragonwriter »

tintor wrote: post #61
treeman79 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How would US attribute who's sub it was? They would have to retaliate on every other (non-allied) country.

> How would US attribute who's sub it was?

The US has quite a.lot of ASW resources, can identify subs, and you can't do that attack without providing a position fix.

Also, the US has other intelligence sources.

Also, current political situation helps narrow likely attackers.

Also, and perhaps most importantly, not a lot of people have hypersonic weapons and subs to deliver them near the US. Flashy unique capabilities are great in many ways, but they are absolute crap for obscuring responsibility.

Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt

#66

Post by missedthecue »

Victerius wrote: post #41
jeffbee wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems irrelevant. It has been conclusively demonstrated that the U.S. (like everyone else) lacks any kind of meaningful ready air defense. Some trucker crashed a Cessna into the White House, and DCA flights pass within 5km of the Capitol. If you wanted to decapitate the U.S. you wouldn't need a submarine, you'd just load your weapon into a 747 and file a flight plan for DCA. Nobody will stop you.

Oh boy, this comment is all kinds of wrong. Everything changed after 9/11. There is a permanent Flight-Restricted Zone above the capital now.

he said 5km from the capitol

Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt

#67

Post by torginus »

edenceover wrote: post #5

Given 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.

I generally find that the US lags in weapons technology whose biggest utility lies in countering American superweapons - carriers and stealth fighters.

I think it's quite understandable why this is the case - imagine spending hundreds of billions on carrier procurement, and simultaneously developing a weapon that more or less renders them obsolete.

The situation has changed in that there's news that the Russians and Chinese have overtaken the US in this field, as well as the Chinese started fielding similarly high-end carriers of their own, creating a legitimate target for US hypersonics.

Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt

#68

Post by JumpCrisscross »

swamp40 wrote: post #57
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Anyone pitching this is talking tripe. Russia can already do this. They’ve been able to do this since the 60s. We have no missile defence against a MAD attack, which is what you propose involves. Also, mechanically, Russia’s hypersonics are air-to-ground, anti-ship and ballis…

I don't disagree with you, but Russia IS firing the 3M22 Zircon from nuclear subs now. At Mach 9, that's about 2-3 minutes to impact DC. And everyone knows, first strike, best strike. Putin would survive.

> Russia IS firing the 3M22 Zircon from nuclear subs now

A semi-ballistic cruise missile.

> At Mach 9, that's about 2-3 minutes to impact DC

ICBMs go Mach 20+ in their final stage. Falcon 9 flies faster than Zircon. Hypersonics don’t instantly accelerate. Their advantage is in flying low and plasma stealth, both of which are good against ground-based radar but not against anything in the air or in space.

If your stealth comes from submarine launch, you gain little from flying hypersonic. It’s faster than cruise or short-range ballistic, but much less accurate for a decapitation strike.

> Putin would survive

So would most of the U.S. government. (Not the civilian government, perhaps. But again, this is old news.) Certainly almost all of its military.

Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt

#69

Post by pdabbadabba »

swamp40 wrote: post #57
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Anyone pitching this is talking tripe. Russia can already do this. They’ve been able to do this since the 60s. We have no missile defence against a MAD attack, which is what you propose involves. Also, mechanically, Russia’s hypersonics are air-to-ground, anti-ship and ballis…

I don't disagree with you, but Russia IS firing the 3M22 Zircon from nuclear subs now. At Mach 9, that's about 2-3 minutes to impact DC. And everyone knows, first strike, best strike. Putin would survive.

He might survive the strike, but would probably not survive the aftermath--just like the rest of us.

Re: US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive failed attempt

#70

Post by bee_rider »

swamp40 wrote: post #57
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 Anyone pitching this is talking tripe. Russia can already do this. They’ve been able to do this since the 60s. We have no missile defence against a MAD attack, which is what you propose involves. Also, mechanically, Russia’s hypersonics are air-to-ground, anti-ship and ballis…

I don't disagree with you, but Russia IS firing the 3M22 Zircon from nuclear subs now. At Mach 9, that's about 2-3 minutes to impact DC. And everyone knows, first strike, best strike. Putin would survive.

Why does it matter what order the strikes are in? Unless the first strike somehow manages to wipe out the ability to retaliate, the order just determines how we queue up for the reaper (I guess first is best, there'd be a billions long line).
Post reply on HN