Damn. Missile shield is now useless.
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-tests-hypersonic-glide-vehicle/
Nice.
America's getting increasingly BTFO.
Sino-Russian hypersonic doubleteam disarmament strike on the US when?
Russia strong
America BTFO
so what's russian for "troll thread"?
remove burger
>>29701977
>icbm's already reenter past mach 7
>russians make missile that goes mach 5 -10 on its best day maybe.
oy vey US BTFO it's almost like HTV2 never hit mach 20 and russia and china have been playing catchup since
>>29701977
>what is a laser
oh these russians... always trying to create the perfect weapon for the battlefields of yesterday
>>29703158
>put a bomb inside an htv2
>russians nuked before they can get their le ebin hypersonic rocket ready
>>29703158
>HTV-2
>Two tests so far
>Both failures
B-BUT IT ACHIEVED ITS OBJECTIVE (by failing hard all the time) WE GOT THE DATA!
Meantime, the Chinese WU-14/DF-ZF has just completed its 7th (seventh) successful flight test yesterday - wait for Bill Gertz to deliver that news.
And now, even the economically rekt Russians manage to successfully pull off a hypersonic strike weapon test.
http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2016/March%202016/March%2011%202016/Who%E2%80%99s-Ahead-in-Hypersonics.aspx
>China is “way ahead” in hypersonics, Deputy Defense Secretary Robert Work said Wednesday night. Speaking at an AFA Mitchell Institute event in Washington, D.C., Work said hypersonics technology is “part and parcel” of his “third offset” strategy to recapture a wide lead over adversaries, but competitors are pouring resources into the field as well. “The Chinese are way ahead in terms of hypersonics. The Russians are behind them, and I would say, we’re somewhere in between,” Work assessed. China’s “got hundreds of hypersonic wind tunnels,” he said, wondering “how do they pay for the overhead? But they are pursuing it in a big, big way.”
BURGERFATS ON SUICIDE WATCH
CRIMEA BELONGS TO RUSSIA
>>29701977
Russian submarine-launched Bulava missiles have a 50% fail rate. And those have been around for a while. Wouldn't count on anything coming out of Russia right now. Country is in shit economically, even the military suppliers are letting factory workers go by the thousands.
Sure they tested something, but who cares? They can't produce it right now.
>>29703374
>meanwhile in reality
>bleached niggers are waiting for 4 hours in a line to get a cheeseburger at mcdonald's
>>29703337
>missile moves at mach 20 and melts its control surfaces everytime they use it because materials science isn't there yet
>chinks see it crash in the south china sea and decided atmospheric skipping is a neato idea
>slap a glider on a short range balistic missile that leaves the atmosphere and will trigger mad deadmans witches and have it move at less than half the speed of htv2
>it works woah
>defense deptment man wants moar money for them programs
memes
>>29703422
The best part is when they pretend HTV-2 is the only hypersonic vehicle being tested by America.
I like the part where they pretend that the USA hasn't had this down pat for decades, just kept secret.
>WHOAAA CHINA STRONG
>WHOAAA RUSSIA STRONG
America's defense budget dwarfs both of those nations - combined - and that's only the known spending, to say nothing of all the black budgets and cooked books.
Wouldn't surprise me if the Americans had a missile that could intercept either of these weapons.
>>29701977
Can't wait for us to break out the lasers to zap this shit and crush vatnik dreams.
>time for the liberators to get liberated, with help from the unleashed Germans after their socialist SJWs are purged for being terrorist supporters.
We'll fuck you all harder then Mongolia did.
>>29703417
>picture taken 31st January 1990
>parroting same shit since then
>every damn time Vatnik posts anything that triggers you
great rebuttal there m9
if you want to BTFO Vatniks, at least bring more valid arguments
>>29701977
>freebeacon
>>29703663
>not being allied with Russia against the Middle Eastern Islamic Coalition
>>29701977
Yes, because America's deterrence relied on the ability to intercept every ICBM that comes its way and not its own massive stockpile of ICBMs built solely for the purpose of fucking up anybody dumb enough to try and first strike them.
>>29703642
>>29703583
>I-IDS A SECRET GUISE! I SWEAR! THAT'S WHY WE COULDNT SHOW A SINGLE WORKING PIECE OF EQUIPMENT TILL NOW!
>>29703417
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UER0kdrer00
Hopefully cheap ak's again.
>>29703750
honestly I hope trump makes vatniks suffer for american upkeep costs by forcing the eu to pay a "you get to live tax" on russian oil that comes to them.
>>29703750
Or maybe DARPA figured out from HTV that hypersonic glide vehicles were either not as feasible or as effective as Russia and China claim, or they just don't have a need for it. And either way, HTV gave them the data they needed, which we're seeing them put to use in other hypersonic projects like X-37 and X-51.
I dont understand why those things are worth anything when ICBMs with MIRVS are still unstoppable. Alternatively, using it as a non nucleared weapon is just a waste of money. Can someone tell me what good are those things beyond waving penises?
>>29704878
I think the end game is currently to use them in a more "cruise missile"-esque fashion. Considering this is China and Russia we're talking about, AShMs seem like the most likely route. Make one big enough and you can probably forgo a warhead entirely; just make a hypersonic anit-ship kinetic-kill missile. Still doesn't offer much over ICBMs as it stands, but perhaps when the technology comes into it's own it will offer a smaller package that is just as hard to counter.
USA and Russia should be allies though.
>>29705041
How much maneuvering can they even do? Probably still easy to intercept
And then they need to be fed targetting data so they can maneuver to hit a ship
I don't think it'll work out
>>29704878
HGV can fly low and hide under the horizon as it travels around the globe, since radar works in straight lines. The extra free maneuverability messes up the track/intercept control loop, which was already marginal. Also plasma is semi-conductive and has interesting radar absorbing (stealth) effects, a HGV naturally gets enveloped in aerodynamically-generated plasma.
>>29705616
Ok so how is that more cost effective than a goddamn unstoppable ICBM coming at your face in 30 minutes?
>>29703337
Every now and then, I need to post this, just to slap your dumb ass with history. read a book nigger.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprint_%28missile%29
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvZGaMt7UgQ
I am glad both Russia and China have developed time machines, and are competing with America circa 1965.
Congratulations to Russia on the hypersonic weapons test.
>>29705658
It isn't, which is why the US has never really invested in HGVs on a strategic level. Tactical hypersonic cruise missiles are certainly useful, which is why the US is planning to roll one out by 2020.
Really, I think the Russia/China HGV craze is a kneejerk reaction to the US expanding its THAAD network, which scares the shit outta them.
>>29705684
It really should. Its time to quit fucking stirring the pot, and get on with the god damn program. Its globalization time.
>>29705684
Yea I'm not really seeing the value of maneuverability vs a warhead that no one can stop moving at mach 20 on reentry.
>>29703750
>it is so secret I can google it
>>29703694
cry harder
>>29705673
Shitty two-stage solid rocket interceptors might be hypersonic but they have nothing to do with HGVs and not much to do with hypersonics. Its rather just ignoring the air altogether.
>Interfax, quoting a source familiar with the Russian test, confirmed it involved a “prototype hypersonic aircraft” that will be deployed on current and future long-range missiles.
>Interfax, quoting a source familiar with the Russian test,
>Interfax
>>29701977
When can we glass Moscow
>>29705236
If I remember correctly, the maneuverability was pretty substantial. Don't quote me though, was awhile go.
Developments to ICBMs are mostly pointless. You can make them faster, more accurate, etc. it's still a WMD that will only be used once and that occasion will mark the end of the world as we know it. No missile shield will be 100% effective and even if you somehow thwart nukes you will face other weapons like biological or chemical that cause just as much death.
What happen to Avangard program?
>>29702808
Why didn't you bother putting even a slight amount of effort into your shitposting?
If I remember correctly, the US tests first failed and then finally maxed out at Mach 8.7 before the melting destroyed the hull enough to make it go poof.
The Russians probably boded the same.
Just not enough time has passed since the accidental discovery of Carbon Fiber Graphite mass production due to a Methane leak (who remembers that). (Hint: Caltech)
>>29707003
The evidence provided for its maneuverability was high altitude contrails like these.
Reminder that the last Zircon test was a failure.
>>29701977
I'm pretty sure a laser can go even faster.
Damn guys, with a successful test launch like this Putin really has the upper hand on us. I guess I'm #ShootinForPutin now!
>>29707841
....and?
>>29703713
No need.
We could solo them all with our nukes and covert WMDs still in development or are secret. And then colonize the entire middle east to be a hybrid of American free state and pre-Islam Mesopotanian, Greek, Christian, or other non-muslim culture. Mostly to turn the entire region into Nova Arizona or Libertalia.
Because I want to see future football teams like the Nova Arizonan Rangers go up against the Mesopotanian Mavericks at the center of what used to be known as Baghdad, and now renamed New Phoenix, the capital of the American Empire in the Middle East.
Nice. Too bad it will be absolutely useless because U.S developed laser CIWS.
Too bad lasers can't penetrate high strength alloys for shit
>>29701977
Haha just in time to be useless against our lasers. Money well spent my friends.
>>29707968
What if the nose of the middle is a mirror?
>>29708056
I FIGURED THEY WOULD WANT IT TO BE RADAR ABSORBING, WHICH WOULD MAKE THE LASER MORE EFFECTIVE. ALSO, CAPSLOCK IS ON AND IM TOO LAZY TO RETYPE THIS.
>>29707980
Rail guns can though
>>29705041
This
The point for china is to fuck over its competitors in the scs race
You dont have to use your assets when your enemy think they work, US vs China isnt the point here, and it wont be before at least a decade.
>>29701977
>hypersonic glider
i am confus
So this thing is an unpowered vehicle boosted to sub-orbital altitude? What makes it different from a ballistic missile?
>>29703337
>“You use small wind tunnels for research, and big ones for development of vehicles,” Lewis explained. “China’s biggest hypersonic tunnel is about twice the size” of the biggest one in the US. He was slightly less pessimistic than Work, however, saying the US probably has a narrow lead in hypersonics for another two years or so
This is the more important quote from that article. "hundreds of hypersonic wind tunnels" doesn't really mean anything.
>B-BUT MUH ICBMS
>MUH MIRV
Hypersonic missiles are not for nuclear endwar. That field is all well and is in no need of any development - nuclear parity stil upholds fine and Russia with US can effectivel take out each other despite any missile defense.
Hypersonic missiles are for AShM use, making Aegis and shit obsolete, and therefore turning CVSGs from impenetrable fortresses into big juicy sitting ducks.
>>29703337
>iraq has WMD's
>al qaeda did 9/11
>china has hyperbombs
it's a nice meme, but it's not actually true.
>>29708237
Regardless of how good a missile is, the launch platform is the most vulnerable part. If it's being carried by a Tu-160, Tu-22, or launched from a sub. Fleet aircraft and ASW resources will be on alert and trying to kill the platforms before they can launch.
>>29708237
I'll take "things beet and rice niggers have been saying for literally three decades now" for 800, Alex.
>>29703224
Megawatt class solid state are coming. Ever missile on earth is obsolete.
>>29708271
Of course. Its just that ATM, even supersonic missiles are not invulnerable to anti-missile defenses of the fleet, and therefore have to be launched en-masse to reliably overwhelm them and cause damage.
Hypersonics will straight out ignore everything on Ticas, so even one launch will guarantee an incapacitated CV, sans the missile malfunctions.
>>29708272
And your point is?..
>>29708319
It never happened then either
>>29707968
>laser CIWS
>destroying a hypersonic glide vehicle
How I love such knee jerk posts!
The missiles will always get through.
Ask Oppenheimer.
>>29708332
Well, JTF program is over two decades old by now. Does this fact give me authority to say that "F-35 in service" is a meme and never going to happen?
Never mind that Russia had this slight hiccup in it's military development called "Soviet Union breaking the fuck apart".
>itt 3rd world faggots jelly of america wishing someone better than them will step up
stay mad fags
“U.S. programs involving hypersonic vehicles are modest by comparison,” Schneider said. “I would be surprised if we actually deploy one. If we do, it will likely be conventional. Russian hypersonic vehicles will likely either be nuclear armed or nuclear capable since this is the norm for Russia.”
Jane’s Intelligence Review disclosed last year that the Russian hypersonic strike vehicle is called the Yu-71. The report said the Russians could deploy up to 24 hypersonic gliders as nuclear delivery vehicles at Dombarovsky between 2020 and 2025.
Why are journalists so fucking dumb?
>>29703337
BUT THE BEST PART IS LIBERALS WHINE WHEN BARACK FUCKING OBAMA SPENDS A TRILLION ON NUCLEAR MODERNIZATION INSTEAD OF FOOD STAMPS
>>29703762
fuck yisss
if Russia collapses again and we get all those Dragunovs, RPKs, AK-100 series rifles, etc.
>>29708339
speed of light engagement vs hypersonic re-entry vehicle
who wins?
>>29708446
dat baiting
>>29705673
>Nuclear ABM as an example
You're not the brightest one out there, aren't ya?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/53T6
>>29708339
>>29708056
>>29707980
The point isn't to just vaporize the glide vehicle, it's to destabilize it.
One of the things about hypersonic vehicles is that they are always under massive stress while traveling hypersonic, and any disruption of their structural integrity will most likely cause near instant fatal stresses on the vehicle. So hitting a vehicle with a laser beam that (very) rapidly heats a portion of the vehicle would cause a massive amount of structural instability and cause the glide vehicle to be ripped apart by the natural forces that come with hypersonic travel.
>>29708056
If you invent a high quality x-ray mirror I'm sure that will be a great idea.
>>29708499
Watching a tiny flaw make an object in a super sonic airflow tear itself apart is always nice.
>>29701977
Can Amerifats ever recover from this?
>>29708499
Too bad this doesn't happen at any even remotely effective range and speed.
>>29708552
Been there, done that (over a decade ago)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_X-43
>>29708564
>10 seconds
Maybe in 2020 they have something worthwhile, by that time most American children will be Spics and Niggers anyway.
>>29708560
>megawatt class laser
>can deliver insane amounts of energy at many miles through atmosphere depending on wavelength.
>basically at the horizon
>remotely effective range
Also the destruction of the glide vehicle would be nearly instantaneous considering the pressure and temperature extremes the leading edge already experiences. Also consider chance are the vehicle is already traveling at what has to be very close to its highest stress tolerance already, adding any more stress will kill it.
>>29708581
Lazers are limited to striking objects as they appear on the horizon.
By the time you 'see' a hypersonic it will already be too late.
>>29708579
>Your country will officially be non-white by 2020
Cultural Marxism
Not even once.
>>29708581
Too bad so far it was what, like a plastic boat at 1 km? Oh wait, I know, a car hood! Why are laserfags so fucking pathetic?
>>29708579
>10 seconds to accelerate faster than the russians without using an ICBM to do it
Top fukin kek.
Well, you want more. Ok. Here is a test from over half a decade ago.
>On 18 November 2011, the first Advanced Hypersonic Weapon (AHW) glide vehicle was successfully tested by the U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command as part of the Prompt Global Strike program.[13] The missile was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Hawaii, and struck a target at the Reagan Test Site on Kwajalein Atoll, over 3,700 kilometres (2,300 mi) away, in under 30 minutes.[14] The prototype, which incorporated technologies developed by Sandia National Laboratories, was used to gather data to assist the development of future hypersonic warheads.[15] The AHW followed an endo-atmospheric (within earth atmosphere, at altitude below 100 kilometers) non-ballistic trajectory during the test flight.
>in atmosphere
Check
>hypersonic
Check
>non ballistic tajectory
Check
>functioning guidence package
Check
>sucessfull testing
Check
God damn, it must seriously fucking suck to be so far behind.
>>29708606
>Why are laserfags so fucking pathetic?
Like most techfags they lack appreciation of how long it takes for systems to mature and become reliable.
>>29708592
>implying these missles are anywhere close to ground hugging
>>29708595
>cultural marxism
the prevailing meme among people who have failed at life.
>>29708618
As long as they are endo-atmospheric it will be very difficult for a lazer defense system to respond in time. Especially if the hypersonics have countermeasures to buy precious time.
Good but I sense the burgers and chinks are not far behind so its like never going to be used.
>>29708610
>10 seconds on a powder keg
Top kek indeed.
>3,700 kilometres (2,300 mi) away, in under 30 minutes
So Mach 6 then? Kudos, such a vast improvement over Kh-22M from 70s, lol.
Beehive round shooting down missle when
doesn't the US already have a hypersonic weapon? I mean our defenses are useless now - but so are theirs.
this isn't really gonna change too much.
>>29702875
le troll thread
>>29708783
ICBMs are faster than hypersonic.
It's all about hypersonic glide vehicles. And no the USA doesn't have them. They have also no program running right now unlike China and Russia.
>>29708798
really?
it mentioned an army launch in '14 so I'd imagine the program is still around.
>>29708806
All news about the US hypersonic program went dark after their last test. Its most likely it went into top secret development and hidden away from sight.
>>29708648
Well, being that they are launched with ICBMs, they are not.
>>29708662
>powder keg
Funny, because the russian ones are launched from a much bigger one.
>So Mach 6 then?
Assumeing it took 29 minutes 59 seconds, yes. Being that we dont know the actual time, it could be much faster. Mach 6 being the absolute slowest.
>Kudos, such a vast improvement over Kh-22M from 70s, lol.
Well being that its AT LEAST one mach faster and 6x the range, why yes, yes it is.
>>29708798
>It's all about hypersonic glide vehicles
Dumb ballistic (or atmo skipping) bullshit, useing an actual ICBM to get it there. Can be seen from forever away, and in engagement ranges of current interceptors.
Its about powered inatmo flight. Far, far less horzion and can perform a litney of evasive manuvers. Something nobody BUT the US has.
>>29708783
>this isn't really gonna change too much
The point is the CVBG's ability to defend itself against something that can be used by anything that is not the entirety of Russian Northern Fleet. It goes something like
>- Well CVBG is fukken awesome. Nobody can do shit to it. Hey Russia, can you do shit to a fukken CVBG?
>- Well, that Aegis shit you got is rad, but we have a fuckton of supersonic missiles on our fleets so we can probably overwhelm it, so even if you take our fleet out with conventional weapons - we will take yours out too.
>- So, a parity. Ok. I'm gonna go use these CVBS to bully everyone without a decent fleet with a ton of missiles, then.
>- Oh. Fine. And BTW, have you heard about this hypersonic missile thing I'm working on?
>- Huh?
>- You know...
>- Russia plz
>-...it would be a shame...
>- Russia no.
>- IF SOMEONE SOLD ONE OR TWO TO SOME GOATFUCKERS
>>29708840
>but we have a fuckton of supersonic missiles on our fleets so we can probably overwhelm it
You left out the laughter of the entire USN at this remark.
>And BTW, have you heard about this hypersonic missile thing I'm working on?
"Why yes russia, did you hear about our mach 30 closeing intercept?"
>>29701977
>If we do, it will likely be conventional. Russian hypersonic vehicles will likely either be nuclear armed or nuclear capable since this is the norm for Russia.
Because America would never do something involving nuclear capabilities, that's so unlike them.
>>29708859
>You left out the laughter of the entire USN at this remark.
>Ticas can intercept a infinite amount of any sort of missiles, even thought it has been shown that supersonics are a huge issue for them
Gotcha. American Navy is once again absolutely invulnerable.
>Why yes russia, did you hear about our mach 30 closeing intercept?
- I never heard about anything like that being installed on your ship, provide link.
>>29708890
>Even though it has been shown to be a huge issue for them
>Laughing standard missle series.
Its not the cold war anymore, friend.
>I never heard about anything like that being installed on your ship, provide link.
Then you are one ignorant newfag. Lurkmore.
![289661[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/wD751xQ.jpg "289661[1].jpg")
>>29703417
>meanwhile
>1990
>>29708897
>Its not the cold war anymore, friend.
Sure. Granite is still rather capable of getting through CVBG's anti-missile defense.
>Then you are one ignorant newfag. Lurkmore.
I suspect that you might be talking about anti-satellite capabilities, but in that case you would be talking out of your ass since that has nothing to do with ability to protect the formation from an AShM.
>>29708932
>Granite is still rather capable of getting through CVBG's anti-missile defense.
Not when its seen at ~500 nautical miles and engaged at ~200.
>but in that case you would be talking out of your ass since that has nothing to do with ability to protect the formation from an AShM.
So you are telling me a mach 10-15 interceptor is going to have issues intercepting a ballistic glide missile going mach 6 when it has proven to intercept far, far, far faster targets.
You are actually saying there is a major difference between a BGM and a falling sat when the LEAP kill vehicle goes terminal?
>>29708932
You really do seem to be ignorant of USN's ability to protect itself, so it is understandable that you are getting angry.
>>29708950
Oh, keep in mind that not only did the LEAP projectile make course corrections during the sub second terminal engagement at mach 30 intercept speeds, it hit a specific part of the satellite, not just the sat itself.
>>29707697
remember when americans have a faulty equipment it's "Lol america never catch up, america behind everyone else"
When rus or chin get 1 test out of 10 failed launches it's "america btfo"
>>29708806
No, the focus changed.
DARPA has now changed its focus for the program from global/strategic strike to high-speed tactical deployment to penetrate air defenses and hit targets quickly from a safe distance.
>>29708998
>DARPA has a "focus"
Top fuckin kek m8ty
Prompt global strike is still very much a thing.
>>29705673
What gundam is that?
Sure, Bush's withdrawel from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in 2002 backfired quite hard.
>>29709050
>implying russia follows treaties
>implying it matters anyways when china is around.
>>29709062
russia only follows treaties since it has no money not to
>>29708986
Actually it is exactly the opposite.
>>29708950
>So you are telling me a mach 10-15 interceptor is going to have issues intercepting a ballistic glide missile going mach 6 when it has proven to intercept far, far, far faster targets.
Yes. Because a satellite with a well plotted course is a one thing, and a sudden maneuvering AShM is somewhat of another thing.
SMs are yet to hit anything that is not a satellite or a warhead dummy. So yes - Granit is an issue for them unless proven otherwise.
>>29709181
>sudden maneuvering AShM is somewhat of another thing.
>Hypersonic glider
>sudden maneuvering
AHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
The lets ignore the fact that the LEAP warhead is much, much lighter with TDAC and 3D manuvering is much more nimble than whatever lead slead it is killing.
>So yes - Granit is an issue for them unless proven otherwise.
Well by that logic granit has not been fired at anything that was not a test target so therefore its not an issue unless proven otherwise.
What is it going to use to keep from getting spotted by the E-3?
>>29709194
>E-3*
*E-2
>>29702808
I get paid per hour by the Public Security Bureau, not per post.
>>29702906
Yes.
>>29709194
>AHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Well that's certainly a solid argument.
Anyway, we were talking supersonic Granit, not hypersonics. As far as we know no country on Earth yet has means of defending against a theoretical hypersonic AShM.
>The lets ignore the fact that the LEAP warhead is much, much lighter with TDAC and 3D manuvering is much more nimble than whatever lead slead it is killing.
Yes, since in theory it can be bee's knees, but in practice it's ability to intercept supersonic AShM are yet to be tested.
>Well by that logic granit has not been fired at anything that was not a test target so therefore its not an issue unless proven otherwise.
That's one false analogy. A CV is exactly as maneuverable as a target as the test targets Russians used for P-700, and under similar circumstances, so such tests are an acceptable proof of Granit's ability to HIT a CV. The ability of actually taking out a CV is the matter for another talk over warheads and ship's endurance.
Meanwhile dummy ballistic targets and a falling satellite are indeed QUITE different from a AShM, and intercepting the latter is a somewhat of a different task.
>>29709062
>greentext
>implying
>>29709062
China always kept their warhead count constant at about 240+. while keeping missiles and nukes stored seperate to lower their readiness. All for their doctrine of "minimal deterrence".
Now, the US PGS and withdrawal from the ABM treaty has forced China to put their nukes back to hair-trigger alert, invest heavily in ABM-buster systems like the WU-14, and increase warhead count with MIRVed ICBMs.
China had MIRV technology since the 80s, but only now chose to integrate them into their DF-5Bs.
All because of America.
The Communists in China are usually very corrupt people who love to be in peace with the US because they could save their bank-accounts and their spouses at Harvard there - but now, even these corrupt people got scared enough by the US aggressiveness that they see the US no longer as a friend and save haven anymore.
You have noone to blame than yourself.
>>29709238
>As far as we know no country on Earth yet has means of defending against a theoretical hypersonic AShM.
Except the US has extremely high hypersonic interceptors that has intercepted hypersonic targets.
>it's ability to intercept supersonic AShM are yet to be tested.
Its tested all the time, silly.
>A CV is exactly as maneuverable as a target as the test targets Russians used for P-700, and under similar circumstances,
Are you saying the US is unable to replicate a granit missle flight profile with a target drone?
>>29709249
>minimal deterrence
No it had everything to do with party leaders not trusting the military. There's a reason why their officers spend a third of their work week doing political indoctrination
>>29709267
>Except the US has extremely high hypersonic interceptors that has intercepted hypersonic targets.
Ballistic dummies and falling satellites have their courses measured and plotted well in advance, so intercepting them is only a matter of delivering explosives to a predetermined point, which can be done with a subsonic firecracker (like the way Chinese do it, for example), so - no game.
>Its tested all the time, silly.
Well give me a link for a successful supersonic AShM interception test.
>Are you saying the US is unable to replicate a granit missle flight profile with a target drone?
I'm only saying that I haven't heard of such an accomplishment. Please prove me wrong if I am.
>>29709275
But now they do?
http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear-weapons/us-china-relations/china-hair-trigger#.VxtVefmLSUk
Bullshit.
Minimal Deterrence was a thing since Deng Xiaoping wiped the floor with the military and concentrated everything on economy and building a good relationship with the US.
And your 'political indoctrination'-meme is bullshit as well. The PLA spent more time doing illict business than to read the Mao Bible.
All until now, that Xi Jinping is reviving Maoist practices and aims to reform the PLA into the high readiness fighting force that fought the Korean War at a short notice back then.
>>29709294
>For that reason, the PLA has to engage in constant “political work” at the expense of training for combat. This means that 30 to 40 percent of an officer’s career (or roughly 15 hours per 40-hour work week) is wasted studying CCP propaganda, singing patriotic songs, and conducting small group discussions on Marxist-Leninist theory. And when PLA officers do train, it is almost always a cautious affair that rarely involves risky (i.e., realistic) training scenarios.
>For that reason, the PLA has to engage in constant “political work” at the expense of training for combat. This means that 30 to 40 percent of an officer’s career (or roughly 15 hours per 40-hour work week) is wasted studying CCP propaganda, singing patriotic songs, and conducting small group discussions on Marxist-Leninist theory. And when PLA officers do train, it is almost always a cautious affair that rarely involves risky (i.e., realistic) training scenarios.
>>29703158
>ICBMs
>only mach 7
ICBMs go mach 20+. Always have. Mach 7 is IRBM territory.
>So this thing is an unpowered vehicle boosted to sub-orbital altitude? What makes it different from a ballistic missile?
In theory, if the L/D is high enough, it lets you achieve more range with less velocity, which in turn lets you lob larger, heavier or more numerous payloads to intercontinental ranges (applications include heavier conventional/kinetic warheads a la Prompt Global Strike or just increasing the number of nukes/decoys on an existing ICBM, or looking back on more optimistic time periods there are even manned proposals like Silbervogel, the X-20 Dyna-Soar and Qian Xuesen's intercontinental rocket-glider airliner concept). However, judging by the apparent loss of interest following the HTV-2 tests, I assume they concluded that the waverider lift intended to improve L/D to make this viable isn't panning out and decided to drop the project.
The other difference, which I assume is what China and now Russia must be interested in, is in using the semiballistic gliding trajectory to avoid the high arcing ballistic trajectory which betrays modern ICBMs to early-warning radar systems. By gliding in through the upper mesophere instead, warheads can remain below the radar horizon of these early-warning systems until they are much closer to their targets, thereby reducing the enemy's ability to defend and/or retaliate.
>>29708499
Hypersonic vehicles likely already have ablative thermal protection coatings on their exterior to protect against the already-high reentry heating rates. A laser won't do shit to it.
>>29709285
Are you seriously asking for a standard missile test against an supersonic target?
If a troll, 4/10, if serious fucking Lurkmore or read a fucking wiki.
>>29709194
>>Hypersonic glider
>sudden maneuvering
>AHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
...M-AHEM.
Aerodynamic maneuvering at high Q can produce far higher lateral accelerations than exoatmospheric maneuvers with lateral thrusters. As long as the glider dives into denser atmosphere when nearing the threat area, it should be able to produce some very dramatic maneuvers akin to a MARV. LEAP itself is not really designed to handle flight in the atmospheric regime at all, so you'd more likely use an SM-2 or SM-6 against an atmospheric target than an SM-3. However I think the SM-3's third stage may be also be capable of aerodynamic maneuvering and terminal homing for atmospheric intercepts, without actually releasing the LEAP.
>>29709435
>LEAP itself is not really designed to handle flight in the atmospheric regime at all
There is nothing that prevents it at all. Manuverung thrusters work regardless of altitude, they just work better with less atmo.
There has been in atmo intercepts
>>29709329
nerd alert
>>29707172
>biological or chemical that cause just as much death.
>>29709383
I am seriously a retarded slav. Please educate me, massa. I beg you.
>>29709508
>Since 2002, a total of 19 SM-3 missiles have been fired in 16 different test events resulting in 16 intercepts against threat-representative full-size and more challenging subscale unitary and full-size targets with separating warheads.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RIM-161_Standard_Missile_3
>>29709238
>no country on Earth yet has means of defending against a theoretical hypersonic AShM.
Hypersonic AShMs are incapable of manouvering very quickly and are unlikely to be seaskimming very low. As long as there was a response within the time frame, interception wouldn't be difficult.
>>29709563
>SM-3
For once - you're a bleeding retard. SM-3 has a GPS/IR exoatmospheric guidance system. If I have to explain why that can't and won't do against a low-flying AShM targets then it's a fucking sad planet I have to live on. SM-3 are NOT anti-AShMs FFS and will never be used for that.
You could have half an argument if you mentioned SM-6, since it did have ONE case of intercepting a supersonic target:
http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2073
Which brings us to my earlier point:
>Well, that Aegis shit you got is rad, but we have a fuckton of supersonic missiles on our fleets so we can probably overwhelm it
>overwhelm it
I.e. - Granite is not invulnerable to CVBG intercept (and actually it wasn't even before SM-6), since it can take down one or two. But now how about a 20 sitting on a Kirov-class? Can you guarantee a 100% intercept on all? I don't really think so.
>>29709616
>If I have to explain why that can't and won't do against a low-flying AShM targets
The topic at hand was orginally about a hypersonic glider on an ICBM. SM-3 is in regard to that.
Granit was more generalized, and i talked about an SM-6 capability (CEC).
Never did i say you would use an SM-3 for a granit.
>You could have half an argument if you mentioned SM-6, since it did have ONE case of intercepting a supersonic target:
Are you saying SM-2's didnt have sucessful tests?
>>29708829
>Well being that its AT LEAST one mach faster and 6x the range, why yes, yes it is.
So it's 80s, not 70s Russia that you are trying to compete here? I beg your pardon.
>>29709670
Two Air Force MaRV programs over 1961-1964 that saw Mach 10+ vehicles doing sharp turns while approaching their targets. During this period, the US designed MaRVs that came in at such low altitudes (500-1,000 feet) on their final (one minute) low-altitude run-in to their target that they would have needed terrain-avoidance radar to keep them from hitting elevated terrain while approaching their targets. The US pioneered hypersonic control flaps, nosetips and homing sensors for such MaRVs.
Congrats on Russia and China catching up to where the US was in the 1960's.
>>29709670
>never achived hypersonic flight
>>29709668
>The topic at hand was orginally about a hypersonic glider on an ICBM. SM-3 is in regard to that.
First - Yu-71 is known to be capable of endoatmospheric maneuvering flight, which is the whole fokin point of it.
Second - our little thread have deviated a bit to the issue of AShMs and CVBG's ability to protect itself against those.
>Are you saying SM-2's didnt have successful tests?
I just fucking SAID EXACTLY THAT:
>Granite is not invulnerable to CVBG intercept (and actually it wasn't even before SM-6)
>and actually it wasn't even before SM-6
>AND ACTUALLY IT WASN'T EVEN BEFORE SM-6
I'm only repeatedly stating that supersonic AShM's are a difficult target for existing anti-missile defenses and are capable of overwhelming it, and a hypersonic AShM would be straight out of it's capability.
>>29709715
>I just fucking SAID EXACTLY THAT:
>Both SM-2 variants have successfully intercepted targets and are lethal against subsonic, supersonic, low- and high- altitude, high-maneuvering, diving, sea-skimming, anti-ship cruise missiles fighters, bombers and helicopters in an advanced electronic countermeasures environment. SM-2 has extensive area- and self-defense flight test history with more than 2,650 successful flight tests from domestic and international ships.
http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/sm-2/
Ruh roah...
Why in gods name did you think it was not tested?
>>29709715
>and a hypersonic AShM would be straight out of it's capability.
Quick question on your point.
Are you saying that your opinion is:
a) Current missile defense systems can not defend against hypersonic systems that are being developed but have yet to be deployed
b) missile defense systems that are being developed but have yet to be deployed will not be able to intercept hypersonic missiles that are under development but have yet to be deployed.
>>29709715
>First - Yu-71 is known to be capable of endoatmospheric maneuvering flight,
Nope, straight to the mesosphere like the WU-14.
>>29709746
Learn fucking reading comprehension.
>>29709747
A, obviously. We're yet to see a proper response to such a threat, but certainly it will come sooner or later.
>>29709747
YES
>>29709783
>Learn fucking reading comprehension
You positively responded to my direct question about your statement.
You previously stated that only SM-6 has intercepted supersonic targets. I gave you a chance to recant, you doubled down instead.
Dont be a faggot, just admit you were wrong.
>>29709783
So why is this a big deal? Why are we comparing currently deployed defense systems against yet-to-be-deployed missiles?
Why are we comparing apples to oranges?
>>29709705
Did you just non-ironically try to compare a cruise missile to an IRBM warhead, lol?
>US designed MaRVs that came in at such low altitudes (500-1,000 feet) on their final (one minute) low-altitude run
Do you sense it? Smells like wet fantasy. Sorry to interrupt it, but unless you have something concrete to object on the matter of such things like R-27K, Kh-90 and OTR-23 you better shove that burger up your throat and keep your mouth shut.
>>29709706
According to a post on /k implying implications?
>>29709839
According to this.
http://missilethreat.com/missiles/kh-90-as-x-19/
It was also a failure. Ahead of its time maybe, but a failure.
>>29709811
>Granite is not invulnerable to CVBG intercept (and actually it wasn't even before SM-6)
>AND ACTUALLY IT WASN'T EVEN BEFORE SM-6
see to the left
>>29709816
>So why is this a big deal
I never made it to be. It's just possible that new developments will make CVBGs more vulnerable, and the means to damage them would be available for more countries. Again, with feeling - it's POSSIBLE, not guaranteed.
>Why are we comparing currently deployed defense systems against yet-to-be-deployed missiles?
Because new SMs JUST BARELY entered service and we're yet to hear about the next generation of defenses?
>>29709839
The Pershing II was not real?
>>29709853
Im talking about your implications about lack of supersonic tests on current interceptors.
>>29708350
>"F-35 in service" is a meme
171 already built is a meme
>>29709864
Im sorry, not implications, outright statements.
>>29709864
>>29709872
Which is something you made up. The statements, not the tests.
>>29709870
I said "in service"
>>29709849
Yeah, it also claims that it weighed 3 tonnes, was never made, was somehow comparable to AGM-129 and was in service in 1976-1992. I.e. your link is a bile of crap. It's a top notch late Soviet military project. Best thing you can possibly get to know about it for the next 50 yeas is that it was a long range hypersonic cruise missile.
>>29709858
>Pershing II
>Mach 10+
>Early 60s
>>29709883
> with flight trials beginning several years later in 1980.
Lel, why even lie anon?
>>29709892
Now look back at the page.
>>29709881
>which is something you made up
>"Are you seriously asking for a standard missile test against an supersonic target?"
>>I am seriously a retarded slav. Please educate me, massa. I beg you.
>>Since 2002, a total of 19 SM-3 missiles have been fired in 16 different test events resulting in 16 intercepts against threat-representative full-size and more challenging subscale unitary and full-size targets with separating warheads.
>SM-3 are NOT anti-AShMs FFS and will never be used for that....You could have half an argument if you mentioned SM-6, since it did have ONE case of intercepting a supersonic target:
>>29709902
Done.
Your move.
>>29703417
>meanwhile in the "first world"
>an american "white man" dreams of supremacy
>>29709886
There was MARV tests in the late 70s.
If you will focus on the date, then your right.
Pershing II also pushed to mach 10, max speed depends on when you do the popup
>>29709912
Are you mentally challenged? The link is full of mutually exclusive bullshit.
>>29709853
>we're yet to hear about the next generation of defenses?
Do you just not pay attention to these things?
>>29709839
>compare a cruise missile
No.
You are a fucking moron.
They were ballistic weapons.
>>29709923
R-27K was _in service_ by mid 70s.
>>29709929
Are you? Why are you incapable of admitting you were wrong?
>>29709945
Kh-90 was a ballistic weapon, lol? Are you like panicking now or is this flow of bullshit genuine?
>>29709946
The R-27K was never operational due to SALT.
>>29709948
Your own link implies that in was in service in 1976-1992, began flight trials in 1980 and never made it past the development stage in one fucking paragraph. Speaking about inability to admit being wrong, lol.
>>29709946
It never entered service.
The Soviets were not willing to trade the Accountable Launchers under SALT for the launchers for the R-27K.
>>29709958
I said in service.
>>29709983
What is the difference in your mind between "In service" and "operational"?
>>29709980
>Following the initial trials, the K-102 continued making trial launches with both the R-27 and the R-27K, until it was accepted for service on 15 August 1975.
Putting something in service and making it operational is two different things, whoop-dee-fucking-doo. The point is that it was developed, built, tested and accepted to service. By mid 70s.
>>29709983
It was never, ever, in service.
It was accepted FOR service, i.e, was deemed mature enough for it.
There was only testbed that could launch it too. Yankee class subs never came about.
Also, im pretty sure it was never hypersonic.
>>29709999
No anon, it was accepted FOR service, not TO service.
Learn to read. For FUCKS sake.
>>29709999
>operational is two different things, whoop-dee-fucking-doo.
Sorry.
It's just when you are confusing terminology you might put off the impression that you don't really know what you are talking about.
I know you wouldn't want that.
>>29709992
It means that it was officially accepted for service but not yet deployed on any platform. Sort of how Tu-160 became operational in 80s, but was not accepted into service until 00s, only vice versa.
>>29710001
>im pretty sure it was never hypersonic
Please, provide us with your wonderful research of non-hypersonic ballistic missiles.
doesn't the US have a hypersonic system in near service?
the army has the AHW - Advanced Hypersonic Weapon, and the Air Force has the X51 Waverider, reported on last year to freak out russia.
so I don't think this will change shit.
t. https://warisboring.com/america-s-far-off-hypersonic-weapons-freak-out-russia-e95ac401a516#.kbxfc1r7x
>>29710008
I wanted to point out that it was a pretty much a finished project ready for deployment by that time, not that it was operational.
>>29710014
"Accepted for service" means that the system has passed all benchmarks and is ready to be...
"IN service" which means that the system has begun to be issued to the units that will use the system. Once enough of the systems have been placed "in service" we can declare the system....
"Operational" which means that the system is fully capable of performing its mission.
Example:
The BM-1 Ballistic missile program has developed several entries from competitors. One is selected and it begins testing.
Once it has finished testing, and all modifications requested are done, and the BM-1 can reach the goals (xxx Km range, y CEP, z speed, etc) the service branch accepts it.
It has now been accepted for service.
Next production begins. The BM-1 Missiles are built, and they are moved to training facilities and to the units that will operate them.
The BM-1 is now "In Service"
The original requirement for the BM-1 was to provide a deterrent against the evil Whatistanis. The program office determined that 150 missiles deployed to silos in the border area will be sufficient to provide that deterrence.
Once that level has been reached, the system is said to be "Operational".
>>29710036
Looking at the range and target footprint, im not sure it was a true MRBM.
740 km absolute max range, target zone of 50km. It would be interesting to see how high and how fast it was flying.
Its performance is much less than a normal R27 zyb
>>29709035
i believe its giant gorg
>>29710059
I never could get that distinction right.
thanks.
also - a general question, are hypersonic weapons kinetic, conventional, or nuclear?
info on their payloads - or even if they have any, is nonexistent.
>>29710100
These are not weapons. They are just testbeds at the moment.
The only "weapon" that could be considered as such was the US armys that launched, flew, and hit a target.
Now that was most likely still a testbed, and the target was most likely runway sized, but thats as close as anyone got.
>>29709339
this
>>29709339
>>29710130
The future of hypersonic missile defenses will probably be found in the legacy of the SIDO D-2 program.
In my opinion.
>>29710088
Much smaller Scud missiles were flying at Mach 5 in the 60s.
>>29708237
this
>>29709339
>Hypersonic vehicles likely already have ablative thermal protection coatings on their exterior to protect against the already-high reentry heating rates. A laser won't do shit to it.
This guy gets it. Lasers can't do shit to hypersonic vehicles. You need a kinetic strike vehicle to neutralize it.
>>29701977
Missile shield was always useless
>>29706403
>Commie tears
Burgers more commie then slavs now.
>>29703713
This dream died @ obama. Bush jr was very close to at least coming to some form of military agreement with putin for the middle east
I like how people argue in these threads like they have anything to do about the topic.
You're all just tax slaves arguing which of your masters is better, like kids on a playground making the "my dad can beat up your dad" argument.
>>29710594
>hurrhurr we can't discuss anything of interest unless it's in our immediate surrounding
Normies, everyone
SUICIDE WATCH
>>29709920
>meanwhile in russia
>everyone dies because of aids
>b-b-but muh missaaal!?!?!
>>29710436
sorry, we ain't poor as dirt
nor do we have to stand in line for a piece of bread for 2 hours
>>29710816
>AIDS infested shithole #rekt the US of A
Can't make this shit up.
>>29710874
you rekt nothing except your own economy
So how many they will build? Probably 10.
>>29701977
What is Waverider? It was tested successfully in 2009.
>>29710936
First, they will claim that this shit is soo good that they will replace everything with it
Then they will calm down and say that they will build several thousands/hundreds
Then they will become sober and say that they will only build a few
Then they will become realistic and put the 3 prototypes back into the garage
>>29710886
>>29710989
>>29711002
This. People who take all this shit seriously is fuckin blind. Just look at the Pak Fuck or Armata.
>>29710984
>Mach 5
Welcome to 1962.
>>29711002
>B-but muh dollar...
>>29711099
>PPP
>>29711141
>MUH DOLLAR!
>>29711160
still the currency no1 in the world
do you have a problem with that you whiney little bitch?
meanwhile in russia: ruble is still eating ass
like every good russian
how is that rape problem in your army going? im sure there are no links to your increasing aids problem :^)
>>29711181
>D-DOLLAR!
>>29711181
USA is finished. All American women having babies with black men. The next generation of Americans will be a bunch of retarded mongrel criminals who listen to hip-hop and shoot towards the air.
>>29711199
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1Kqh8cTi34
this is russia, moscow to be exact
you are finished, not the US
enjoy the last day of your pathetic existence, a chechen will cut your troat soon
>>29711249
>AIDS and muslim infested shithole #rekt the US of A
Can't make this shit up.
>>29710317
If it's ablative, then it's probably already ablated. Can't exactly load up on it when it's a factor in drag and weight.
>>29701977
>typical subhuman vatnik/yuropoor thread on /k/
How embarrassing OP. You accidentally clicked on the weapons board, and your country doesn't allow you to have those without first begging them on your hands and knees. Sorry about that buddy
>>29711190
Something you wish you had apparently.
good job OP, /k/ never fails to turn a bait thread into an at least 100 reply one.
>>29707326
I wonder if the development wasn't already there and they have 'accidents' to justify how leaps were able to be made public.
>>29708592
while the destruction might not be instantaneous, it is going to happen very fast
>>29710136
Yes... I know what that acronym is.
For all the retards who can't into google, what is it?
>>29711530
>retards
>who can't google
>google not literally made for retards
Uh...anon...
We have returned to our origin.
>>29711544
I've tried SIDO D-2
>DARPA
>missile
>laser
>military
>hypersonic
>horizon
And got doctors, Spanish and a program being run out of San Fran for stray dogs.
>>29711604
Yeah, fair enough
>google: for retards by retards
I keep forgetting about their whole results monetization thing.
>>29711623
I've tried DuckDuckgo, Startpage and Bing too which is frankly useless for anything but porn.
WHAT DO YOU KNOW OPPENHEIMER
>>29711650
>bing useless for anything but porn
I like the fact that I can counter-monetize them tracking me with bing in the form of giftcards for friends and co-workers
>>29709326
>the diplojap
>>29703337
>Meantime, the Chinese WU-14/DF-ZF has just completed its 7th (seventh) successful flight test yesterday - wait for Bill Gertz to deliver that news.
NOTAM
A0850/16 - A TEMPORARY RESTRICTED AREA ESTABLISHED BOUNDED BY:
N403148E1042317-N402324E1051854-N394106E1050741-N394926E1041236
BACK TO START. GND - UNL,
22 APR 02:54 2016 UNTIL 22 APR 03:35 2016.
CREATED:21 APR 08:37 2016
A0851/16 - A TEMPORARY RESTRICTED AREA ESTABLISHED BOUNDED BY:
N411543E0955700-N411001E0970820-N405356E0970556-N405935E0955454
BACK TO START. GND - UNL,
22 APR 02:55 2016 UNTIL 22 APR 03:30 2016.
CREATED:21 APR 08:39 2016
A0854/16 - THE FLW SEGMENTS OF ATS RTE CLSD:
1.B215: NUKTI-N4027.9E09724.1.
2.A596: YABRAI VOR 'YBL'- DENGKOU VOR 'DKO'.
22 APR 02:50 2016 UNTIL 22 APR 04:05 2016.
CREATED: 21 APR 13:39 2016
http://liuqiankktt.blog.163.com/blog/static/12126421120163222442952/
Peace Peace!
>>29710317
>>29709339
>Ablative thermal tiles as anti-laser armor.
They don't work like that. Getting tagged by an x-ray laser can easily compromise the tiles and make the vehicle disintegrate.
>2015+1
>thinking lasers aren't primarily going to be used for thermal expansion
>thinking something that fast is going to manage course correction at those speeds
>thinking the nose going up or down a few degrees won't result in catastrophic failure
>>29712044
>They don't work like that. Getting tagged by an x-ray laser can easily compromise the tiles and make the vehicle disintegrate.
you're full of shit. fucking prove it.
these hypersonic missiles have similar coating as space shuttle tiles.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp9Yax8UNoM
laser won't do shit to them.
>>29712262
>those tiles
Holy crap
>>29712262
There's a difference between friction and radiation.
>>29712349
kek'd. what the fuck do you think heat it?
>>29711530
>>29711604
>>29711650
Sorry.
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a345781.pdf
It is/was a projectile that was fired at insane velocities, and was able to track and maneuver to intercept maneuvering hypersonic targets.
For short range it had an IIRH seeker, longer range version employed a SARH seeker.
It was intended to be fired rapidly from a railgun.
Much less expensive than SM series missile, and with the ability to put dozens into the air per launcher, it seems like the ideal way to deal with hypersonic missile spam.
The whole program went dark around 1995, but I would not be surprised if development has continued, given that most of the information from the project was transferred in 2005 to the Office of Naval Research Division 352. This division is the "Air Warfare and Naval Weapons Applications" division, and one of their programs is the Electromagnetic Railgun project.
>>29712388
Tell me more about how much x-ray radiation you think a thermal tile is going to stop
>>29712396
Holy fug
>>29712424
>Tell me more about how much x-ray radiation you think a thermal tile is going to stop
holy shit, you don't even have HS physics.
>>29712449
>thermal tiles stop radiation that requires large blocks of lead to slow down
>there are no sensitive electronics behind those tiles and said radiation does nothing to them
Never go full potato.
>>29712449
>thinking radio wave radiation is the same as ionizing radiation
>>29712484
>>29712503
retards, nuϲⅼear warheads already have shielding.
>>29712533
>guidance systems are located in the warhead
>EM hardening works against directed radio wave radiation
>>29712558
what prevents them to have some shielding around it you dumb fucker? do you even know how small that shit is?
god damn indoctrinated jingoist retards.
