Russia and other developments in Hypersonic Research

George1 wrote:Development of anti-hypersonic missiles in the USA

The United States Missile Defense Agency (MDA) on August 30, 2019 issued to three American corporations - Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Raytheon - contracts for their development on a competitive basis of the submitted projects - "concepts" of means of combating hypersonic weapons (Hypersonic Defense Weapon Systems Concept). Materials about this are published on the federal website of US procurement (Federal Business Opportunities).

 Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control (a division of Lockheed Martin Corporation) received a $ 4.442 million fixed price MDA contract to develop a system concept called the Valkyrie Interceptor Terminal Hypersonic Defense. Work should be completed by May 2, 2020.

 Accordingly, Boeing received an MDA contract worth $ 4.357 million for the development of the concept of a system called Hypervelocity Interceptor (HYVINT) Concept for Hypersonic Weapons within the same period.

 Raytheon Missile Systems (a division of Raytheon Corporation), in turn, received an $ 4.445 million MDA contract for the development of the concept of a system called SM3-HAWK (and, apparently, based on the standard SM-3 anti-missile system).

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3762008.html

Hilarious, they'll dole out a trillion Dollars for the F-35 program, but they'll allocate less than $5 billion for this. Priorities...

Given the ludicrous prices charged for goods and services for the US government, these five billion are nothing. The yanquis have failed
and hard. Their ABM shield is now receding into oblivion and the launchers in Romania and Poland will be used to launch salvos of nuclear
cruise missiles against Russia. That they can "defeat" Russian hypersonic missiles and maneuvering warheads is simply delusion. This
will take decades of new research and development. And Russia will not be sitting still while yanquis "figure it out" (using imported
talent).

The three programs together are roughly 13 Billion. But they are just concepts = someone will create a few models and a nice animated video.

George1 wrote:Development of anti-hypersonic missiles in the USA

The United States Missile Defense Agency (MDA) on August 30, 2019 issued to three American corporations - Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Raytheon - contracts for their development on a competitive basis of the submitted projects - "concepts" of means of combating hypersonic weapons (Hypersonic Defense Weapon Systems Concept). Materials about this are published on the federal website of US procurement (Federal Business Opportunities).

 Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control (a division of Lockheed Martin Corporation) received a $ 4.442 million fixed price MDA contract to develop a system concept called the Valkyrie Interceptor Terminal Hypersonic Defense. Work should be completed by May 2, 2020.

 Accordingly, Boeing received an MDA contract worth $ 4.357 million for the development of the concept of a system called Hypervelocity Interceptor (HYVINT) Concept for Hypersonic Weapons within the same period.

 Raytheon Missile Systems (a division of Raytheon Corporation), in turn, received an $ 4.445 million MDA contract for the development of the concept of a system called SM3-HAWK (and, apparently, based on the standard SM-3 anti-missile system).

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3762008.html

Sorry for posting old news


http://www.trud.ru/article/17-03-2016/1335410_opasnee_kalibra_rossija_nachala_ispytanie_giperzvukovoj_rakety_tsirkon.html
The head of the rocket heats up, and a plasma cloud forms around. Missiles moving at such speeds are almost impossible to intercept: control systems have too little time to make decisions, and interceptor missiles are not able to catch up with Zircon and can only be used in oncoming courses. A plasma vortex, among other things, absorbs radio waves, and as a result, a rocket that has reached hypersound is covered, as it were, with an invisibility cloak: radars stop seeing it.

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/ai.../lowhyper.html

For aircraft speeds which are much greater than the speed of sound, the aircraft is said to be
hypersonic. Typical speeds for hypersonic aircraft are greater than 3000 mph and Mach number
M greater than five, M > 5. We are going to define a high hypersonic regime at M > 10 to account for re-entry aerodynamics. The chief characteristic of hypersonic aerodynamics is that the
temperature of the flow is so great that the chemistry of the diatomic molecules of the
air must be considered. At low hypersonic speeds, the molecular bonds vibrate, which changes the magnitude of the forces generated by the air on the aircraft. At high hypersonic speeds, the molecules break apart producing an electrically charged plasma around the aircraft. Large variations in
air density and pressure occur because of shock waves, and expansions.

Every US fanboy that dislikes anything Russian made was laughing about the covered plasma missile being technically invisible to radar by saying it is not possible but immediately shut up when I bring up a US source showing its feasible. The problem of intercepting scramjet missiles are 1. flight ceiling is stupidly low meaning radar horizon is limited to track. 2. possibility that's maneuverability is better than missiles like kinzhal. 3. physics from both sources dictate that air density being different at lower altitudes allow with high hypersonic speeds will form plasmas in which the Russians believe such missiles will be invisible on radars. I had some actual retards that tried to argue with me that infrared technology sensors can track such a target but yet to prove that infrared technology could intercept ballistic missiles.

I am guessing whatever project the MDA is trying to achieve will surely not be capable of dealing with scramjet missiles. If we all look at the dates of the Kholod project scramjet technology is a bitch to deal with because it is taking about 3 decades to just field them into service. But I am wondering why Putin never included the zircon missile with the burevestnik, avangard, sarmat, poisedon, kinzhal and peresvet in his speech. It is in fact more dangerous than any of these hyped up projects in my opinion. If we compare the size of the onyx missile to the zircon it is possible that 2 Yasen-Ms with 10 VLS each can hold 40 zircons each with the capability to sink 80 ships. Yet everyone laughs that a country with a GDP less than California cant be a threat.

These NATO fanbois lack the IQ to understand physics. They don't even associate the radio-out regime when the Shuttle and previously
the crew modules from orbital rocket launches lose contact with the ground. This happens exactly when these objects are surrounded
by plasma during very rapid descent through the upper atmospheric layers. Hypersonic missiles and warheads are just naturally
reproducing this effect. And they can generate a plasma sheath without much effort. It is vastly more difficult to generate a
plasma sheath around a slow moving object since the plasma needs to be generated by some sort of devices protruding from the skin
that ionize ambient gases.

BTW, as a total OT: for some bizarre reason the red shift effect on light traversing plasma is not considered in astrophysics.
Quasars likely have very high redshifts because they are very active and have vast amounts of inter-stellar plasma. A diffuse cold
plasma will result in non-conservative (energy loss) scatter of photons off free electrons and nucleons (primarily protons).
So the attribution of quasars on the time axis is wrong. Their cosmological redshift is smaller than their total redshift.
Taking into account the plasma effect resolves the "conundrum" of these galaxies forming too early after the Big Bang.

Putin mentioned Zircon in this years speech.

Putin didn't mention Zircon because it is an anti ship missile that might have some land attack capabilities and might evolve into something bigger and better, but it is not a strategic weapon of deterrence... of course having air launched versions that could easily destroy any of the 15 billion dollar US carriers if they sail anywhere near Russia would make them strategic, but that is just a useful byproduct.

GarryB wrote:Putin didn't mention Zircon because it is an anti ship missile that might have some land attack capabilities and might evolve into something bigger and better, but it is not a strategic weapon of deterrence... of course having air launched versions that could easily destroy any of the 15 billion dollar US carriers if they sail anywhere near Russia would make them strategic, but that is just a useful byproduct.

With nuclear warhead and a sub launched version of 1000+km it is a strategic weapon.

Strategic or not depend on how you use it. Zirkon can't be intercepted and even without land attack capability the nuclear version will be precisice enough to destroy a city.

Based on one Pentagon General comments , i think was sputnik the report..
They , the pentagon , the only possibility to intercept a Hypersonic missile
is on the early phase ,before it reach hypersonic speeds. but that once it reach
full speed.. (He Told) their radars will lose track of the missile.  and the only defense
they had is their nuclear response.. if attacked by them..

So in other words the Pentagon today have no way to intercept a hypersonic missile.
When it comes to Heat seekers.. it might be possible to launch a missile that intercept
a hypersonic missile if armed with a heat seeking warhead.. But for that , it will likely
need to be a hypersonic interceptor other wise the missile will not Catch ,the missile,
in a race ,if following from behind..  perhaps heat seeking warheads.. can only follow/chase
from behind a heat source , but not predict a flight path of interception.. if it wants to intercept it from the front for example..  move ahead of the missile flight path and explode
when its close..  However if the hypesonic missile do maneuvers.. it could be very challenging even for a heat seeking missile to keep the pace and chase.. even if it is as fast as the missile is chasing..

So like Putin told.. perhaps is true.. that to intercept avangard hypersonic missile you need
to throw at least 800+ interceptor missiles (probably heat seeking missiles ,he mean)
in order to intercept them..

Eventually with technology ,is always a cat and mouse game ,and better radars and technology invented that could make heat detection passive radars as good and as precise as radio waves radars with the same range.  Because i don't think is possible to hide Heat
from a missile tail even if plasma is present..  there will be always parts of the smoke tail behind to show as heat on special heat equipment..

I think that a perfect example of this Plasma TRUE Stealth SHield , capabilities
, is when Soyuz reentry capsule comes to earth , that NASA and Roscosmos lose
comunications ,when the capsule fly at reentry hypersonic speeds and fire covers the soyuz.
so it becomes literary invisible to radars and radio communications blocked ,when the Soyuz crew is covered by this fire/plasma shield..when they enter the atmosphere at hypersonic speed.

So this means that intercepting hypersonic missiles ,will be required a totally new generation of Radars and or heat sensors.. with either hypersonic misiles to intercept other hypersonic missiles or perhaps Energy weapons in space ,like Laser cannons from start wars movies.. and operated manually , by humans , using visual aid to more or less aim in the direction of the missile flying.. Such technology , of Gigawatts laser cannons in space might not be possible until the next 10 to 20 years. you will need to send a giant gun in space
with a powerful nuclear reactor to supply the energy the cannon will need.. Naturally such
weapon will break all Space treaties..but who said US ever follow any international treaty?

This is why i was saying the most ideal ,most scariest ,deterrent weapon that Russia military
could ever design ,is a HyperSonic near space bomber.. that fire hypersonic missiles.. either
armed with nukes or conventional weapons.. it will allow Russia airforce to fly with impunity over US main land deep inside over any city or state and Pentagon not even aware ,the
is a bomber over their heads .. The lethality of a near space bomber , even if it is not hypersonic ,could also be very dangerous for US navy , because Russia space force ,could position in plane their bombers right above US aircraft carrier formations.. and in just 30 seconds, strike their positions with a nuclear warhead.. and wipe out hundreds of warships
without they even aware of whats happening.. if Russia can pull such a near space bomber,, it will force US military to come to negotiating table ,this time under more favorable conditions for Russia.. and US accept to remove all their military bases and nukes from Europe ,in change for Russia ,cancelling their near space bomber program.

So the top weapons Putin could build , are
1)a near space bomber ,that can fly at satellites altitude and strike with hypersonic missiles
any naval formation.. (it could be hypersonic or slower).
2)a hypersonic long range interceptor..that can fire hypersonic weapons..

from those 2 , Russia is doing the #2..or almost there.. if the claims are true..
that Mig-41 will fly at Mach 4++ speeds.

With nuclear warhead and a sub launched version of 1000+km it is a strategic weapon.

Not in the accepted sense... a nuclear warhead armed Zircon wont be targeting Brussels or London or Paris or Washington... it will be aimed at a US or NATO carrier group with the view of destroying the carrier and most of the cruisers operating with it.

Zirkon can't be intercepted and even without land attack capability the nuclear version will be precisice enough to destroy a city.

That is perfectly true, but the fact that Russian ships wont be wasting weapons on such tasks as ground launched missiles will suffice for that role and the Russian Navy being outnumbered by NATO ships will be more interested in dealing with those and the ports they come from than hitting western cities.

Big_Gazza wrote:

kvs wrote:...these objects are surrounded by plasma during very rapid descent through the upper atmospheric layers.   Hypersonic missiles and warheads are just naturally reproducing this effect.   And they can generate a plasma sheath without much effort.  It is vastly more difficult to generate a plasma sheath around a slow moving object since the plasma needs to be generated by some sort of devices protruding from the skin that ionize ambient gases.  

Here's a crazy idea.  Is it possible to enhance the plasma around a hypersonic cruise missile, eg with intense ionising radiation from a high-output nucleonic generator?  Something like a number of sub-critical masses of a radionuclide where the fuel is kept segregated until needed, at which time the fuel elements are brought into close contact to trigger a brief super-criticality before temperature rise causes a new equilibrium but at a massively higher activity level (eg something like the known criticality accidents by the "Demon Core" in Los Alamos).  The high flux generates (or enhances) a plasma field to absorb EM and prevent detection of the vehicle by radar.

Further conjecture - could the recent accident in Nyonoksa have been a field trial of such a device?  The (hypothetical) super-critical fuel assembly failed to stabilise at expected outputs and the reactor containment failed catastrophically?

I'm not suggesting it was, just thinking about the feasibility of such a device.

Locating an ionizing radiation source at the tip of the missile will definitely spread some air plasma over a substantial part of the missile. One
would have to do fluid dynamics simulations to see how the air separates from the body of the missile away from the tip. Then one would have
to add additional sources to cover the rest of the missile.

A detail I forgot to mention is that neutralization and plasma diffusion increases with air density. So the life of the plasma is much shorter
in the troposphere compared to the upper mesosphere. This follows trivially from the rate of collisions between air molecules which can
transfer the excess electrons. For natural ionization processes such as galactic cosmic ray bombardment, the persistence of the ionized
air is reduced since the electrons can more quickly recombine with the positive ions. In the ionosphere the air density is so low that
ions can persist for a long time before neutralizing.

This density effect makes it more difficult to coat a slow moving device with a plasma sheath. But it is still doable even if ugly. Just
have "ring" plasma generators spread out every 50 cm on the missile. This would raise the problem of air drag that becomes hard to resolve
unless you can bury the generators just beneath the skin of the missile. I have no idea how much weight this would add to a missile.
Maybe with a nuclear power source it does not matter.

Your idea about the failed test involving plasma stealth is plausible since such tests will be done at some stage. But we have no
specific information on this for the particular failed test. I lean more towards reactor testing at the present time as the more likely
case.

Arrow wrote:hypersonic missiles are surrounded by plasma, which blocks electromagnetic radiation, how the missile will get and see to the target and how it communicates with other missiles and, for example, with GPS?

Pre-programmed coordinates, and inertial guidance. Inertial guidance is accurate enough now to rival satellite guidance, it's been proven reliable in the Gefest-T/SVP-24 upgrade the main backbone of the VKS air campaign in Syria.

From 404 source not found,

"Common plasmas temperature and density in fluorescent light tubes and semiconductor manufacturing processes are around several eV and 109-12per cm3. For a wide range of parameters and frequencies, plasma is electrically conductive, and its response to low-frequency electromagnetic waves is similar to that of a metal: a plasma simply reflects incident low-frequency radiation. Low-frequency means it is lower than the characteristic electron plasma frequency. The use of plasmas to control the reflected electromagnetic radiation from an object (Plasma stealth) is feasible at suitable frequency where the conductivity of the plasma allows it to interact strongly with the incoming radio wave, and the wave can either be absorbed and converted into thermal energy, or reflected, or transmitted depending on the relationship between the radio wave frequency and the characteristic plasma frequency. If the frequency of the radio wave is lower than the plasma frequency, it is reflected. if it is higher, it is transmitted."

Lets say they allowed the characteristics they allow the plasma to absorb 1-12 GHZ the fire control frequency range. they can use KU-band to send communication updates to the missile. There is slight interference of rain but this issue can be mitigated with a good satellite network and better power consumption. Other good news is that their country is dominant in the photonics industry so this will enhance performance even further because these electronic systems offer less noise interference than conventional mmics. Lets see if RTI's proposed satellites get launched because their company claims that their satellites with supercomputers and software to determine algorithms makes it possible to track low altitude targets which was not feasible before because of interference. So since this is RTIs satellite and they have tested photonic radar balloons and other radar prototypes it wont be a surprise that it is based off of FICs because other countries ahead of Russia in the MMIC field have not yet made such a claim as far as I know.

INS and pre-programmed coordinates is a good suggestion but lets not rule out that communication can still be feasible with a plasma covered missile and the possibility of their photonics industry making radars that allow frequencies as high as 100ghz to be possible because lasers remove electronic noise. There is also no RF conversion loss using photodetectors and modulators to multiply and divide the frequencies in comparison to conventional radars that have a more limited frequency band.

https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6732/6/2/35/htm 100ghz+ comms is feasible and which other country do we know that keeps talking non-stop about having their military use photonics?

kvs wrote:

Big_Gazza wrote:

kvs wrote:...these objects are surrounded by plasma during very rapid descent through the upper atmospheric layers.   Hypersonic missiles and warheads are just naturally reproducing this effect.   And they can generate a plasma sheath without much effort.  It is vastly more difficult to generate a plasma sheath around a slow moving object since the plasma needs to be generated by some sort of devices protruding from the skin that ionize ambient gases.  

Here's a crazy idea.  Is it possible to enhance the plasma around a hypersonic cruise missile, eg with intense ionising radiation from a high-output nucleonic generator?  Something like a number of sub-critical masses of a radionuclide where the fuel is kept segregated until needed, at which time the fuel elements are brought into close contact to trigger a brief super-criticality before temperature rise causes a new equilibrium but at a massively higher activity level (eg something like the known criticality accidents by the "Demon Core" in Los Alamos).  The high flux generates (or enhances) a plasma field to absorb EM and prevent detection of the vehicle by radar.

Further conjecture - could the recent accident in Nyonoksa have been a field trial of such a device?  The (hypothetical) super-critical fuel assembly failed to stabilise at expected outputs and the reactor containment failed catastrophically?

I'm not suggesting it was, just thinking about the feasibility of such a device.

Locating an ionizing radiation source at the tip of the missile will definitely spread some air plasma over a substantial part of the missile.  One
would have to do fluid dynamics simulations to see how the air separates from the body of the missile away from the tip.   Then one would have
to add additional sources to cover the rest of the missile.  

A detail I forgot to mention is that neutralization and plasma diffusion increases with air density.   So the life of the plasma is much shorter
in the troposphere compared to the upper mesosphere.   This follows trivially from the rate of collisions between air molecules which can
transfer the excess electrons.    For natural ionization processes such as galactic cosmic ray bombardment, the persistence of the ionized
air is reduced since the electrons can more quickly recombine with the positive ions.    In the ionosphere the air density is so low that
ions can persist for a long time before neutralizing.    

This density effect makes it more difficult to coat a slow moving device with a plasma sheath.   But it is still doable even if ugly.   Just
have "ring" plasma generators spread out every 50 cm on the missile.   This would raise the problem of air drag that becomes hard to resolve
unless you can bury the generators just beneath the skin of the missile.   I have no idea how much weight this would add to a missile.
Maybe with a nuclear power source it does not matter.

Your idea about the failed test involving plasma stealth is plausible since such tests will be done at some stage.   But we have no
specific information on this for the particular failed test.    I lean more towards reactor testing at the present time as the more likely
case.  

Apparently the Kh-80 (Meteorite-A/N) had a plasma cloud generator installed on to it:

Guaranteed Nuclear Destruction: Meteorite-N would wipe the West to dust



In the 80s in the USSR, along with subsonic cruise missiles, they actively worked on products that outstripped the speed of sound three times. We are talking about the Meteorite 3M25 cruise missile.

More is known about its marine and airborne variants, but the land mobile version of Meteorite-N was also to appear. Its adoption would be an unpleasant surprise for the West.

With a weight of 6 tons and a small length of 12 meters, she could destroy targets distant 5500 km. The maximum speed of 3M25 was supposed to reach 3,500 km. And the flight altitude is 24,000 m.

At the same time, Soviet designers provided measures to reduce visibility. So, on board was a special generator that created a plasma cloud, made the Meteorite invisible to enemy radars and allowed to deliver a thermonuclear warhead to the target.

Work on the ground version was discontinued after the conclusion of the INF Treaty with the United States. The refinement of the marine and air variant also ceased by the beginning of the 90s.

Dmitry Lemeshko


https://translate.yandex.com/translate?url=https%3A%2F%2Fvestnik-rm.ru%2Fnews%2Foborona-i-bezopasnost%2Fgarantirovannoe-yadernoe-unichtozhenie-meteorit-n-sterli-by-zapad-v-pyl%3Futm_source%3Dwarfiles.ru&lang=ru-en

There's also the development of electro-magnetic opaque aerosols for hypersonic vehicles, which the Federation has had in service for 20+ years. People already know of the use of electro-magnetic opaque aerosols (made up of aluminum-silicon microscopic spheres) employed by Federation armored vehicles (smoke grenades) and Engineer Troops used by vehicles that stay still or move relatively slow in dense low altitude atmosphere. However not many people know that there is an electro-magnetic opaque aerosol designed for hypersonic vehicles in upper/thinner atmosphere.

One of the many features of Topol-M, the tip of the warhead emits a electro-magnetic opaque aerosol which is made up of sodium-lithium composition primarily used to mask the IR-signature, but likely masks the entire electro-magnetic spectrum:

Missile defense system of advanced missile defense: to overcome the potential missile defense of a potential enemy, the RT-2PM2 missile is equipped with a new missile defense system of missile defense created using elements of the Sura missile defense complex of missile defense (which, in turn, was created during the work on "Universal"), and consisting of passive and active false targets and means of distorting the characteristics of the head part. LCs are indistinguishable from warheads in all ranges of electromagnetic radiation (optical, laser, infrared, radar), allow you to simulate the characteristics of warheads in almost all breeding attributes on the extra-atmospheric, transitional and significant part of the atmospheric section of the descending branch of the flight path of the warhead missile units, They are resistant to the damaging factors of a nuclear explosion and radiation from a superpower laser with a nuclear pump, etc. For the first time, LCs capable of withstanding ultra-resolution radars have been designed. Means of distorting the characteristics of the head part consist of a radio-absorbing (combined with heat-shielding) coating of HF, generators of active radio interference, aerosol sources of infrared radiation, etc. PCB missile defense is designed to significantly increase the time required by a prospective missile defense of a potential adversary to detect warheads among many false targets and interference, thereby significantly reducing the likelihood of intercepting warheads. According to a number of data, the mass of the Topol-M ICBM missile defense ICBM exceeds the mass of the American Peacekeeper ICBM missile defense system. In perspective


https://translate.yandex.com/translate?url=http%3A%2F%2Frbase.new-factoria.ru%2Fpub%2Ftopol_tomorrow%2Ftopol_tomorrow.shtml&lang=ru-en

Interesting information. So there is not much boundary layer separation in these hypersonic missiles. This allows a plasma sheath to
form in the boundary layer from a single source near the tip. But so far plasma stealth has been applied to fast moving missiles and
warheads where it is easier to maintain compared to slower moving and lower altitude devices.

hypersonic missiles are surrounded by plasma, which blocks electromagnetic radiation, how the missile will get and see to the target and how it communicates with other missiles and, for example, with GPS?

The Soviets perfected a long time ago a secure communications system for satellites that use lasers... plasma does not block light.

GarryB wrote:

hypersonic missiles are surrounded by plasma, which blocks electromagnetic radiation, how the missile will get and see to the target and how it communicates with other missiles and, for example, with GPS?

The Soviets perfected a long time ago a secure communications system for satellites that use lasers... plasma does not block light.

Plasma affects all EM radiation. It has to since the photons are interacting with charged particles (ions, electrons) that do not scatter
or transmit these photons conservatively. There is some acceleration involved during collision (quantum mechanics does not turn
everything into magic) and accelerating charges radiate. By contrast, in neutral matter (e.g. atmospheric gases) the photons can
traverse the medium and conserve their energy. The only impact is Rayleigh scattering which is why we see the sky as blue. Here
quantum mechanics is necessary to account for the prefect conservation of photon scatter or transmission through atoms consisting
of positive nucleons surrounded by a cloud of electrons. The trick is that the atom is not a classical system where the electrons
orbit the nucleus. The electron cloud is a non-local, coherent wave-function resonance pattern inside a potential well.

So a laser beam will get red shifted when it traverses a plasma. But the plasma has to be super thick or extensive to fully attenuate
the laser beam photons. Sending a digital signal and accounting for a frequency shift allows for robust communication. But as noted
in a previous post, there is frequency dependence of the opacity of the plasma to EM radiation. So one does not need a laser to
"punch through" the plasma.

GarryB wrote:The Soviets perfected a long time ago a secure communications system for satellites that use lasers... plasma does not block light.

The Norwegian company Nammo has unveiled a ramjet powered artillery shell. Why would an artillery shell need a ramjet? Just to increase range?

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/21531/yes-this-is-a-ramjet-powered-artillery-shell-and-it-could-be-a-game-changer

Hilarious article from Popular Cranks...err I mean Popular Mechanics. Apparently they think the solution to defeating hypersonic weapons is A.I. That's their just thrown out there vapid fix-all solution for the problem lol!   They admit that civilian airliners may get shot down in the process lmao!

In the United States proposed a dangerous way to intercept Zircon missiles

Russian Zircon hypersonic missiles pose a real threat to the US Navy - primarily the aircraft carriers for which they are destined, military experts say Popular Mechanics . The new weapon is a step away from mass production, the first Zircons can get submarines of the Ash type - flight tests of the missile will be held in 2020 from the Kazan nuclear submarine.

The giant speed of the rocket makes it difficult to intercept mainly because it does not leave the enemy time to make a decision. After the start, the Zircon rises to a height of about 30 kilometers and then follows the target. At a speed of 8 Machs, a rocket overcomes 160 kilometers per minute. The powerful SPY-1 radar of the Aegis air defense system - equipped with, for example, American cruisers of the Ticonderoga type - is capable of detecting a threat at a distance of about 300 kilometers - provided that the rocket flies high. In this case, the cruiser team has two minutes to organize the interception.

If the Zircon, like other Russian anti-ship missiles, after gaining cruising speed drops to an extremely low altitude, a surface ship will detect it at a distance of only 50 kilometers. And the crew will have less than 20 seconds to take action, which is clearly not enough.

The publication offers two ways to solve the problem. Firstly, you can place radars in the atmosphere at high altitude - just like two balloons with JLENS equipment constantly hang over the US east coast, protecting Washington from missile attacks. Secondly, it is possible to entrust the decision to open obstructive fire to artificial intelligence, acting much faster than human. However, this is risky if interception is necessary in the area of ​​busy civilian air traffic.

By the way, the same JLENS is designed to detect low-flying cruise missiles. The USA has no protection against hypersonic weapons.

https://rg.ru/2019/09/25/v-ssha-predlozhili-opasnyj-sposob-perehvata-raket-cirkon.html

magnumcromagnon wrote:Hilarious article from Popular Cranks...err I mean Popular Mechanics. Apparently they think the solution to defeating hypersonic weapons is A.I. That's their just thrown out there vapid fix-all solution for the problem lol!   They admit that civilian airliners may get shot down in the process lmao!

In the United States proposed a dangerous way to intercept Zircon missiles

Russian Zircon hypersonic missiles pose a real threat to the US Navy - primarily the aircraft carriers for which they are destined, military experts say Popular Mechanics . The new weapon is a step away from mass production, the first Zircons can get submarines of the Ash type - flight tests of the missile will be held in 2020 from the Kazan nuclear submarine.

The giant speed of the rocket makes it difficult to intercept mainly because it does not leave the enemy time to make a decision. After the start, the Zircon rises to a height of about 30 kilometers and then follows the target. At a speed of 8 Machs, a rocket overcomes 160 kilometers per minute. The powerful SPY-1 radar of the Aegis air defense system - equipped with, for example, American cruisers of the Ticonderoga type - is capable of detecting a threat at a distance of about 300 kilometers - provided that the rocket flies high. In this case, the cruiser team has two minutes to organize the interception.

If the Zircon, like other Russian anti-ship missiles, after gaining cruising speed drops to an extremely low altitude, a surface ship will detect it at a distance of only 50 kilometers. And the crew will have less than 20 seconds to take action, which is clearly not enough.

The publication offers two ways to solve the problem. Firstly, you can place radars in the atmosphere at high altitude - just like two balloons with JLENS equipment constantly hang over the US east coast, protecting Washington from missile attacks. Secondly, it is possible to entrust the decision to open obstructive fire to artificial intelligence, acting much faster than human. However, this is risky if interception is necessary in the area of ​​busy civilian air traffic.

By the way, the same JLENS is designed to detect low-flying cruise missiles. The USA has no protection against hypersonic weapons.

https://rg.ru/2019/09/25/v-ssha-predlozhili-opasnyj-sposob-perehvata-raket-cirkon.html

And in any war Russia for some insane reason will leave the JLENS systems alone, right? Yanqui f*cktards need to evolve brains.

The problem is not how fast a decision can be made, it is what interception system will be engaged. So the AI clearly cannot solve
this problem.

This powerful SPY-1 radar couldn´t see slow flying drones allegedly coming from Iran.

Well the radar balloon idea is not that bad. But absorption of EM waves should be considered and what the actual RCS of the Zircon missile will be which they claim it cant be seen on radar. The weight and size of a floating radar balloon to track ballistic missiles besides scramjets(they have minimum time because of flight ceiling, lesser reaction time to track because of low or no RCS and maneuverability throwing off guidance systems) would have to be enormous to the point that it is not feasible. Also Russians have been testing a photonic radar balloon(pic related) in one of their many articles I have found. JLENS has been cancelled because of costs.

The AI shit is just stupid because it is just a missile that makes decisions that are best to reach their goals(hitting land targets, intercepting missiles, etc) it would have to rely on its sensors to make the best decision. For example passive/active homing and it would make decisions that should it trust its own host radar, or go follow an EW systems sending RF signals with passive sensors.