5 ms·

What ordinance and yield is it designed to deliver?

iwwr 15y ago
Surveillance camera, faster and less predictable than a satellite (and faster than the SR-71). Nothing can fly as fast inside the atmosphere, no way to lob a missile or artillery at it.
- troels 15y ago
  Nothing can fly as fast inside the atmosphere, no way to lob a missile or artillery at it. Assuming it's going in a straight line (Which wouldn't be unreasonable at that speed), you just need to send something up to block its path.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - protomyth 15y ago
    The US Air Force understands the concept of high speed spy planes with the SR-71 and knows how to deal with intercept attempts. A slight turn takes the plane well away from harm. [edit] now if the enemy builds its own with the same speed / range then all bets are off
    - burgerbrain 15y ago
      When you're flying in a straight line, which at these speeds this plane, unlike the SR-71, will be doing, it is only a matter of time until another Zoltan Dani comes along and pops it out of the sky.
      - protomyth 15y ago
        You and all the down voters are crazy if you don't believe this thing can change directions. Looking at the whole D-21 / SR-71 program for what this do.
        burgerbrain 15y ago
        Do the math. It will have a turning radius measured in the hundreds of miles.
        protomyth 15y ago
        that is still a turn and given the need to line up a shot, just as effective.
        burgerbrain 15y ago
        It's a turn wide enough to be effectively a straight line over a good deal of countries. We don't have to calculate out trajectories on the backs of notebooks anymore, we have systems that can do that in milliseconds. This is just one more in a long line of "unshootable"/"unsinkable" projects which will prove the opposite.
  - pointyhat 15y ago
    We already have the technology to shoot it down and have done for years: http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/ekv/ http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/ekv/ Inevitably, someone else probably has it too.
    - arethuza 15y ago
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_%28SAM%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_%28SAM%29
  - dredmorbius 15y ago
    I'd think directed energy weapons (e.g.: lasers) would probably be effective here. Any Mach-20 vehicle is going to have an extremely limited thermal tolerance, and thermal shielding is likely to be applied specifically to those elements of the vehicle which require it for aerodynamic reasons. Lasers could acquire and track with the target despite evasive maneuvers better than any kinetic weapon. Though a large-dispersion scatter weapon (ball bearings) would probably be sufficient. Each bb impact would be about the equivalent of a gram or two of TNT.
Anti-Ratfish 15y ago
Thought the US had enough low intensity wars on it's hands already! Special forces in 70 countries at last count. Still, bombing them will sort it all out. http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/08/20118485414768821.html http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/08/2011848...

iwwr 15y ago

Surveillance camera, faster and less predictable than a satellite (and faster than the SR-71). Nothing can fly as fast inside the atmosphere, no way to lob a missile or artillery at it.

troels 15y ago
Nothing can fly as fast inside the atmosphere, no way to lob a missile or artillery at it. Assuming it's going in a straight line (Which wouldn't be unreasonable at that speed), you just need to send something up to block its path.
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- protomyth 15y ago
  The US Air Force understands the concept of high speed spy planes with the SR-71 and knows how to deal with intercept attempts. A slight turn takes the plane well away from harm. [edit] now if the enemy builds its own with the same speed / range then all bets are off
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    When you're flying in a straight line, which at these speeds this plane, unlike the SR-71, will be doing, it is only a matter of time until another Zoltan Dani comes along and pops it out of the sky.
    - protomyth 15y ago
      You and all the down voters are crazy if you don't believe this thing can change directions. Looking at the whole D-21 / SR-71 program for what this do.
      - burgerbrain 15y ago
        Do the math. It will have a turning radius measured in the hundreds of miles.
        protomyth 15y ago
        that is still a turn and given the need to line up a shot, just as effective.
        burgerbrain 15y ago
        It's a turn wide enough to be effectively a straight line over a good deal of countries. We don't have to calculate out trajectories on the backs of notebooks anymore, we have systems that can do that in milliseconds. This is just one more in a long line of "unshootable"/"unsinkable" projects which will prove the opposite.
- pointyhat 15y ago
  We already have the technology to shoot it down and have done for years: http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/ekv/ http://www.raytheon.com/capabilities/products/ekv/ Inevitably, someone else probably has it too.
  - arethuza 15y ago
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_%28SAM%29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-400_%28SAM%29
- dredmorbius 15y ago
  I'd think directed energy weapons (e.g.: lasers) would probably be effective here. Any Mach-20 vehicle is going to have an extremely limited thermal tolerance, and thermal shielding is likely to be applied specifically to those elements of the vehicle which require it for aerodynamic reasons. Lasers could acquire and track with the target despite evasive maneuvers better than any kinetic weapon. Though a large-dispersion scatter weapon (ball bearings) would probably be sufficient. Each bb impact would be about the equivalent of a gram or two of TNT.

Anti-Ratfish 15y ago

Thought the US had enough low intensity wars on it's hands already! Special forces in 70 countries at last count. Still, bombing them will sort it all out. http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/08/20118485414768821.html http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/08/2011848...