4 ms·
Kinetic intercept has been reliable since (at least) the 1990s, it is why virtually all new weapon systems for the last decade or so are designed around it. The
by jandrewrogers 7y ago
Kinetic intercept has been reliable since (at least) the 1990s, it is why virtually all new weapon systems for the last decade or so are designed around it. They don't need to test the concept, just the implementation. Similar for decoy discrimination.
Many people conflate kinetic intercept with an unrelated design problem: at hypersonic velocities, material ablation limits both the speed and precision of maneuvering. An ordinary missile can easily intercept a hyperkinetic missile, due to the former having much more operational maneuverability and precision, but not the reverse. Over the last few decades, the research has been figuring out how to reliably deliver similar precision on hyperkinetic intercept platforms across all operational environments.
Maneuverability in the atmosphere at hypersonic velocities is significantly constrained by the limits of material physics. What you gain by reducing reaction times you give up in agility.
- LargoLasskhyfv 7y agoThey don't have to dogfight, flying loops or barrel rolls. Just widening the cone of ballistic trajectories, deforming the cone of possible trajectories into something else make them harder to intercept, by requiring more defense sites over a larger area, which have to react in less time.