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

161–170 of 209 posts

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

#161

Post by dotancohen »

rini17 wrote: post #159
dotancohen wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alright then. With the authority vested in my by HN comment #28691569 (2021-09-29, rini17) I hereby declare all expansion ambitions of the United States of America on the North American continent after 1776 as territorial conquest. Furthermore, I declare all United Nations military presence on soil not under US control in 1776, especially soil not on the North American continent, to be territorial conquest.

Now notice how no one is going to "harmonize" you.

Can you restate that? I honestly don't understand.

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

#162

Post by sudosysgen »

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.

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.

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

#163

Post by 3pt14159 »

justicezyx wrote: post #45
3pt14159 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Follow Arms Control Wonk. There's a bunch of OSINT folks in the podcast slack channel including friends of mine that have been interviewed by magazines like The Economist. I'm there more for the cyberwarfare takes, but from what I understand nobody is seriously worried about a power imbalance between China and America regarding missile speed since interceptors aren't accurate enough, but that's just me regurgitating…

https://openosint.slack.com/?redir=%2Fmessages%2Fosint%2F This one?

Should have mentioned, it's a private slack for supporters, mostly to keep the quality high.

https://www.patreon.com/acwpodcast

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

#164

Post by throwawaylinux »

varjag wrote: post #160
throwawaylinux wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is a proportionate response if most of China's army and navy are on the mainland? Nuclear strikes on the mainland?

Yes, is it surprising in any way? Nobody would have raised an eyebrow at this concept back during the Cold War, just shows how comfortable in peace we are now. The concept of unilateral nuclear strike did not exist; all models were of nuclear exchanges and question was only if it could happen in any limited way or escalate into a total one. Both game-theoretic calculus and political pressure at home would make nuclea…

It's not surprising, it just isn't exactly proportionate (well it is by one definition of the word I suppose). That strike would cause China to retaliate against the US homeland, wouldn't it? And the retaliation for that would aim to dismantle China's military and industrial base.

If that's the case then I can't see how isolated tactical nukes against carriers makes sense for China. They might as well throw everything they have to begin with.

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

#165

Post by varjag »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #164
varjag wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, is it surprising in any way? Nobody would have raised an eyebrow at this concept back during the Cold War, just shows how comfortable in peace we are now. The concept of unilateral nuclear strike did not exist; all models were of nuclear exchanges and question was only if it could happen in any limited way or escalate into a total one. Both game-theoretic calculus and political pressure at home would make nuclea…

It's not surprising, it just isn't exactly proportionate (well it is by one definition of the word I suppose). That strike would cause China to retaliate against the US homeland, wouldn't it? And the retaliation for that would aim to dismantle China's military and industrial base. If that's the case then I can't see how isolated tactical nukes against carriers makes sense for China. They might as well throw everythin…

I mean, sure: that's what my original point was, it's not just nuking the carrier group. China knows the dynamic, the likely escalation route from that and it knows at the end of it, it lays in radioactive ruin. Nuking is just not an option; even a conventional attack (with much less guarantee of success) is already a pathway to full scale war, just not immediately nuclear.

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

#166

Post by throwawaylinux »

varjag wrote: post #165
throwawaylinux wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not surprising, it just isn't exactly proportionate (well it is by one definition of the word I suppose). That strike would cause China to retaliate against the US homeland, wouldn't it? And the retaliation for that would aim to dismantle China's military and industrial base. If that's the case then I can't see how isolated tactical nukes against carriers makes sense for China. They might as well throw everythin…

I mean, sure: that's what my original point was, it's not just nuking the carrier group. China knows the dynamic, the likely escalation route from that and it knows at the end of it, it lays in radioactive ruin. Nuking is just not an option; even a conventional attack (with much less guarantee of success) is already a pathway to full scale war, just not immediately nuclear.

Well that's really what I was getting at with my question, so if that's also what you were suggesting then we're both questioning the previous poster's idea that they can just happily "spam" nuclear missiles at all of America's carriers around the globe, let alone even a single one operating near China's waters.

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

#167

Post by HappySweeney »

sudosysgen wrote: post #162
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.

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?

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

#168

Post by kubanczyk »

throwawaylinux wrote: post #150
kubanczyk wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, armies do not have their finger on nuclear trigger with a time horizon of 30-ish minutes. We are not in the 1960s when at times it was literally true. The concept of nuclear triad is that, yes, armies very strongly depend on their second-strike capability. So, the game is for the subs to not to become compromised.

> No, armies do not have their finger on nuclear trigger with a time horizon of 30-ish minutes. > We are not in the 1960s when at times it was literally true. You are claiming that not only China, but the US and Russia don't have the capability of launching strikes from 30 minutes? (i.e., well beyond the time to respond to ballistic missile launch detection)? Do you have a source for this? This doesn't appear to agre…

Yes, I was writing about launch-on-warning posture although I can now see I could have been more clear. As far as I know no country is presently assuming that it is able to detect, interpret, and authoritatively decide to enter full-scale nuclear war within ~25 minutes of enemy ICBMs' launch. (Leaving say ~5 minutes to implement the decision.)

What you cited is sad, but firstly it is still an "ongoing debate", and secondly the road from declarations to the actual ability is long with this one. And may it never materialize again.

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

#169

Post by nautilius »

fnord77 wrote: post #133
nautilius wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And the maneuverability - if you just adjust the course slightly ten seconds before impact, at these speeds, that’s a big difference. Ballistic mostly just falls down, i.e. you know what it will hit when you observe the launch (somewhat simplified).

Missiles since the 80s or so don't just fall down. The discontinued Pershing MARV could perform 25G maneuvers/corrections and was radar guided and had terrain mapping.

Well yeah, hence "(somewhat simplified)". One is a lifting body that control its flight path and can decide whether to strike or to just keep flying for another 1000 miles, the other can slightly adjust its falling down path and wobble enough to hopefully confuse countermeasures.

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

#170

Post by nautilius »

ashtonkem wrote: post #124
nautilius wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of pressures do you have in a barrel?

Lots! The maximum chamber pressure allowable for a given civilian caliber is set by one of two regulatory bodies, SAAMI (US) or CIP (EU). In some countries firearm barrels will be tested (“proofed”) at 125% of set pressure to ensure consumer safety, and then stamped with a proof house specific mark. My understanding is that the US doesn’t require this, but any imported barrels will be stamped. Specifically CIP sets t…

Oh wow, that is a lot! Thanks!
Post reply on HN