Russia and other developments in Hypersonic Research

The world was astounded by a Russian successful launch of hyper-sonic missiles. It was a true breakthrough that should have frightened the West, the US in particular. All the Pentagon did was yawn and stated they'd earmark 1 billion (spare change in the defense industry) for research. Why? You'd think it would be a sputnik moment for the US and created a full-on drive to catch up.

If they recognise the breakthrough then they might get a few questions like... if we are spending 10 times more every single year on "defence" shouldn't we be ahead of everyone in absolutely everything?

And if not why not...

Publicly they will play it down, but privately they will be talking about the use of nuclear weapons until they get an equivalent capability.

The Pentagon showed no interest in Russia breakthrough hyper-sonic missile. Mainly because they'd already developed anti-gravity aircraft capable of astounding speeds of 30,000 to 40,000 mph. Capable of sudden right angle turns or instant full stops. Can you imagine if a missile were weightless upon launch? Time-to-target would be measured in mere seconds. When launched it would seem as if the missile vanished because it took off so fast – there would be nothing to see.

If the US had anti gravity technology then they would have shown a hypersonic missile of their own... when something does not weigh anything then any force can move it because all you are countering is drag. When you are in orbit you can push things around that are enormous weights, because you don't have to counter the effects of gravity holding it in place. Even a small force constantly applied can achieve enormous speeds because the only barrier to overcome is drag, so climb to an altitude where drag is no issue and then accelerate to enormous speeds.

The problem is that I will be perfecting scramjet propulsion technology before any human works out the problems of countering gravity in any meaningful way.

I remember in the 1990s when we were learning about the S-300P and S-300V and people in the west were saying it is OK because the US has secret programmes like the Mach 6 Auroura to replace the SR-71.

Made them feel better I guess, but just led to a lack of urgency that sees them today even further behind still with just Patriot and THAAD while the Russians are introducing S-500 and S-550 and with S-400 in widespread service and new S-350 and other systems entering service in numbers.

GarryB wrote:If the US had anti gravity technology then they would have shown a hypersonic missile of their own... when something does not weigh anything then any force can move it because all you are countering is drag.

A "top" Chinese  scientist who has worked on their Hypersonic program has fled to the West earlier this month (apparently to the UK). So the west might finally be able to develop Hypersonic weapons.
https://eurasiantimes.com/chinese-hypersonic-weapons-technician-df-17-missiles-defects/?amp

MDA's upcoming Missile Defense system will be based on a modular payload concept

NATzO infantilist drivel. First they screech that Russia stole their wunderwaffen which they don't even have. Now they screech that
they have magic technology to defeat any hypersonic system made by Russia. The question needs to be asked: if you don't
have the former, when did you get the latter? Clearly no brain power behind their drivel.

In an age of multifunction, they want separate modules...

That will be cheaper... NOT.

Atlantacist twaddle at its finest...

Actually I agree... these designs are going to cost the west (the bad guys) an enormous fortune at a time they can't even stop cruise missiles they think some single system will keep them safe from hypersonic manouvering threats?

The bad guys are going to pay through the nose for hair brained ideas... making it modular means you have to buy their entire range of hairbrained ideas... most of which wont work for the first 100 blocks... they will just be place holders... while you make that company rich...

In comparison Russia does have an IADS network and its has hypersonic manouvering targets designed to penetrate defended air space... the first one was Iskander of course, but they had plenty of supersonic low flying cruise missiles that tried something similar to defeat air defences by flying low and working together as a swarm...

Now they have Zircon and operational scramjet engines their interceptors can now have scramjet motors too and conceivably chase down western hypersonic weapons...

Big_Gazza wrote:Don't want to gloat ( ) but this garbage is nothing new.  

Stealth aircraft has also been called garbage by the Russia strong crowd that is until itself didn't develop one.

Never mind, keep on clowning.

Not true. We were clowning about the claims that "Stealth" makes planes invisible for radar and that planes like F-35 can fly over S-400 systems and drop bombs onto it because the radars can´t see them.

The Americans thought stealth was the solution... ignoring that the problem is complex and any solution has strengths and weaknesses, so applying multiple solutions is always best.

The western term is putting all your eggs in one basket, which is what the US is seriously guilty of.

Russia recognised that stealth is a good idea but only in specific situations and against specific threats.

The US went for extreme stealth which made it hard to achieve and very very expensive, while the Russians went for enough stealth to make their new aircraft difficult to deal with but still affordable and capable enough to be a real problem.

A rocket powered hypersonic weapon would include most big heavy SAMs of the 70s and 80s...

Not to mention ICBMs and SLBMs and or course IRBMs which have not been a thing for a while for the Soviets/Russia and the west because the INF treaty previously banned them.

Arrow wrote:I understand it so perfectly. The Kinzhal, is also advertised as a hypersonic weapon and is an ordinary rocket missile like Iskander.

The kinzhal is actively used , and is not vaporware

These vaporware systems still need to be tested on platforms, like VMF did with zircon on frigates, and with Kinzhal on Mig31

They're still far from employing them on their ships and planes

By then the interception of these targets would be mastered in form of s500

When you have a quality lead over competitors like USA, it allows to develop both the offensive and defensive means, before the enemy can even get their first system in service

Did the pindos lose the plans for the pershing 2? Because it seems that is all they want from their new "hypersonic" weapons program.

I understand it so perfectly. The Kinzhal, is also advertised as a hypersonic weapon and is an ordinary rocket missile like Iskander.

The Kinzhal and in its ground launched version, the Iskander, certainly are conventional rocket powered missiles, but unlike western equivalents like Honest John II etc, the Iskander is powered all the way to its target and has thrust vectoring rocket propulsion and sensors on board that detect interceptors that allows the missile to fly to a target like an aircraft unlike an artillery shell.

A normal ballistic weapon has a predictable path because it is launched accelerates to top speed and then glides most of the way towards the target... it does not manouver because manouvering bleeds away speed and makes it easier to shoot down... lots of heavy manouvering and it might not reach its target... plus it is generally a warhead and perhaps a terminal guidance system that detects the missiles position via GPS or INS or both and hits a coordinate or it has a radar or camera to find a target and manouver to hit it in the last phase of flight.

The Iskander and Kinzhal are not like that... their rocket motor burns all the way to the target area and they don't follow a ballistic glide path, they fly to the target like an aircraft, and they are fitted with sensors and jammers and decoys so if it detects a Patriot air defence system it will manouver to keep its distance while approaching its target... if the Patriot system is the target then it will use jammers and releasable decoys and also manouver to make if very difficult for the patriot battery to hit it... in other words it does not just manouver to hit the target properly, it actively tries to avoid approaching threats that it detects with onboard sensors...

That is what makes it different to previous weapons.

Their large Anti ship missiles have had the same capacity for decades, in addition to their pack attack or swarm attack ability for hard targets like large ships that need to be hit multiple times to ensure they sink.

Their Zircon missile just makes it all easier because four fifths of the bulk of the fuel and air a rocket carries can be removed and scooped up on the way to the target by the scramjet powered missile, and in fact it can be throttled up or down as required to conserve fuel or add energy for manouvering too.

Even in the 1990s Germany and France were working on a new missile design that used combined rocket ramjet propulsion... it was to be a tactical missile for fighters to carry... about 800kg in weight, mach 2 flight speed and 90km range... it was called ANS or something... and they couldn't decide so it didn't go anywhere...

Sound familiar?

The Kh-31 of the 1980s was a 600kg mach 3 missile with a 120km flight range for tactical aircraft for anti radiation use and for anti ship use... latest models have double that range, and they are working on scramjet powered models with three times higher speed and presumably double or triple the range.

the Iskander is powered all the way to its target and has thrust vectoring rocket propulsion and sensors on board that detect interceptors that allows the missile to fly to a target like an aircraft unlike an artillery shell.

Iskander is not a hypersonic ballistic missile. But its air launched version, Kinzhal is hypersonic. How is that possible?

Iskander is not a hypersonic ballistic missile. But its air launched version, Kinzhal is hypersonic. How is that possible?

Both are hypersonic, but neither are ballistic... ballistic means accelerated to a speed and then continue the majority of the flight on a ballistic trajectory unpowered... like an artillery shell without base bleed or rocket assistance.

Both accelerate under rocket power and then fly under rocket power all the way to the target... like a jet powered cruise missile... which is why cruise missiles are not called ballistic missiles.

Iskander flies at mach 6-7, which is hypersonic... the Kinzhal flys at mach 9+... anything faster than about mach 5 is considered hypersonic.

Before Scramjets worked the only way to fly that fast was with rocket propulsion.

Now you can use rocket or scramjet if you have the technology.