3 ms·
I doubt this will see much traction. A nuclear powered ramjet will not be a small device (like the ALCM, or the upcoming LRSO), and will not be cheap. If it's l
by greedo 9y ago
I doubt this will see much traction. A nuclear powered ramjet will not be a small device (like the ALCM, or the upcoming LRSO), and will not be cheap. If it's large, putting out a lot of heat, it will be detectable. If it can be detected, it can be shot down.
- JoeAltmaier 9y agoCruise missiles fly very, very low. No chance of ground-based radar noticing them for long enough to shoot anything (milliseconds as they streak overhead). So space-based, or some pursuit missile seems like the only chance of shooting them down.
- greedo 9y agoCurrent plans are for fighters to be directed by AWACs. But the larger the missile, the higher it has to fly. It's difficult on an airframe to fly low and fast, so the detection range will increase the higher the altitude.
- JoeAltmaier 9y agoOften height is for fuel efficiency? Thinner air up there. With an atomic engine, that's moot.
- greedo 9y agoHigher altitude to avoid CFIT (controlled flight into terrain). The faster you fly, the less reaction time you have. So instead of being able to hug the ground at say 100ft AGL, you have to bump up to 1000ft.
- greedo 9y agoAlso, the reason the US stopped development of it's own nuclear powered cruise missile (Pluto project) was because of the research into OTHB (over the horizon backscatter) radars that can detect cruise missiles.