4 ms·

No one cares about 'just' a hypersonic per se. The world's militaries want a homing hypersonic missile, to avoid AEGIS missile defense and attack a US Carrie

No one cares about 'just' a hypersonic per se. The world's militaries want a *homing* hypersonic missile, to avoid AEGIS missile defense and attack a US Carrier moving at 35MPH, trying to actively dodge out of the way. That means steering and thrust on the way down, likely staying at hypersonic speeds until it impacts the moving target. The world's militaries are trying to kill the US Carrier Strike Force.

superkuh 4y ago
There's no need for air breathing, or other, thrust for this. Maneuverable reentry vehicles have existed for quite a while. We can call them hypersonics for nationalistic reasons but the speed is only achieved after the atmosphere and very briefly in it going down. If the goal is to avoid looking like an ICBM trajectory to avoid the other nation states thinking it's a nuclear attack then it makes sense. But it's still not achieveable for long periods of flight so the ICBM is required regardless.
- nautilius 4y ago
  > "[Hypersonic] Maneuverable reentry vehicles have existed for quite a while" I keep reading this comment on HN. It's like saying "What's the deal with Chuck Yaeger breaking the sound barrier, we've had supersonic bullets that do that for a long time". There is zero overlap between the two. Maneuverable reentry vehicles can wobble around a bit while falling, whereas the point of hypersonic weapons is maneuverability for a significant part of the trajectory.
  - tomatotomato37 4y ago
    Not just maneuvearable, but actively maneuverable, aka able to sense some type of input inside the cone of visibly superheated air around it. This is different than an ICBM RV drifting around with RCS before re-entry or a cruise missile idling about before it's accelerated to attack speed. Unrelated but that's also why any talk of stealth with hypersonic is stupid; everything around the projectile is going to give off more of a signature than the projectile itself
    - dragonwriter 4y ago
      > Not just maneuvearable, but actively maneuverable, aka able to sense some type of input inside the cone of visibly superheated air around it. For ICBMs these are called MARV warheads and they were first demonstrated in the early 1980s, and every major power has had them, though many don't have any operational now.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> avoid AEGIS missile defense and attack a US Carrier moving at 35MPH They want a propaganda tool. As the other comment mentions, manoeuvrability is cheap. And projectile defenses’ vulnerability to swarming is well know. But launching tens of thousands of explosive-laden drones sounds low tech, so we get Xi and Putin touting hypersonics and our military-industrial complex smelling money in the counter.
brianwawok 4y ago
You do not need to manuver to hit a carrier? 35mph is "slow" relative to a missle, and a carrier takes literally minutes to speed up / slow down / turn. You can math out and shoot a literal cannonball and hit a moving 35MPH carrier within a few inches...
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  Two problems: First, you need accurate, current location info on the carrier. That's not easy. Second, you need something that can launch your cannonball. That's not easy, either, because if you're within cannonball range of a carrier, then you are within range of an enormous amount of return fire from the carrier strike group, and you're dead long before you get a chance to fire your cannonball. The problem is getting current targeting information to a launcher that's 1000 miles away from the carrier, and then the carrier still moves enough to really matter during the time that your missile travels that 1000 miles.
  - Justin_K 4y ago
    Using satellite imagery or a swarm of drones would make it easy to know and predict the rough location of a carrier within a couple of miles
    - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
      Well, let's see. Say "hypersonic" is 4000 MPH. 1000 miles/4000 MPH is 1/4 hour. At 35 miles/hour, in that time the carrier can move 8.75 miles. If it's traveling more-or-less in a straight line, you can predict where it will be to within a couple of miles. If not...
    - nradov 4y ago
      Where does that "swarm“ of drones come from? Any drones cheap enough to use in a swarm have very limited endurance and weak sensors. Possibly useful in the littorals, but a total joke for blue water operations. Satellites are limited and impossible to hide. The carrier strike force knows exactly when they are in view of an adversary's reconnaissance satellite. In any future major conflict the satellites will be the first casualties. There is a very active arms race in anti-satellite weapons.

No one cares about 'just' a hypersonic per se. The world's militaries want a *homing* hypersonic missile, to avoid AEGIS missile defense and attack a US Carrie

superkuh 4y ago

There's no need for air breathing, or other, thrust for this. Maneuverable reentry vehicles have existed for quite a while. We can call them hypersonics for nationalistic reasons but the speed is only achieved after the atmosphere and very briefly in it going down. If the goal is to avoid looking like an ICBM trajectory to avoid the other nation states thinking it's a nuclear attack then it makes sense. But it's still not achieveable for long periods of flight so the ICBM is required regardless.

nautilius 4y ago
> "[Hypersonic] Maneuverable reentry vehicles have existed for quite a while" I keep reading this comment on HN. It's like saying "What's the deal with Chuck Yaeger breaking the sound barrier, we've had supersonic bullets that do that for a long time". There is zero overlap between the two. Maneuverable reentry vehicles can wobble around a bit while falling, whereas the point of hypersonic weapons is maneuverability for a significant part of the trajectory.
- tomatotomato37 4y ago
  Not just maneuvearable, but actively maneuverable, aka able to sense some type of input inside the cone of visibly superheated air around it. This is different than an ICBM RV drifting around with RCS before re-entry or a cruise missile idling about before it's accelerated to attack speed. Unrelated but that's also why any talk of stealth with hypersonic is stupid; everything around the projectile is going to give off more of a signature than the projectile itself
  - dragonwriter 4y ago
    > Not just maneuvearable, but actively maneuverable, aka able to sense some type of input inside the cone of visibly superheated air around it. For ICBMs these are called MARV warheads and they were first demonstrated in the early 1980s, and every major power has had them, though many don't have any operational now.

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> avoid AEGIS missile defense and attack a US Carrier moving at 35MPH They want a propaganda tool. As the other comment mentions, manoeuvrability is cheap. And projectile defenses’ vulnerability to swarming is well know. But launching tens of thousands of explosive-laden drones sounds low tech, so we get Xi and Putin touting hypersonics and our military-industrial complex smelling money in the counter.

brianwawok 4y ago

You do not need to manuver to hit a carrier? 35mph is "slow" relative to a missle, and a carrier takes literally minutes to speed up / slow down / turn. You can math out and shoot a literal cannonball and hit a moving 35MPH carrier within a few inches...

AnimalMuppet 4y ago
Two problems: First, you need accurate, current location info on the carrier. That's not easy. Second, you need something that can launch your cannonball. That's not easy, either, because if you're within cannonball range of a carrier, then you are within range of an enormous amount of return fire from the carrier strike group, and you're dead long before you get a chance to fire your cannonball. The problem is getting current targeting information to a launcher that's 1000 miles away from the carrier, and then the carrier still moves enough to really matter during the time that your missile travels that 1000 miles.
- Justin_K 4y ago
  Using satellite imagery or a swarm of drones would make it easy to know and predict the rough location of a carrier within a couple of miles
  - AnimalMuppet 4y ago
    Well, let's see. Say "hypersonic" is 4000 MPH. 1000 miles/4000 MPH is 1/4 hour. At 35 miles/hour, in that time the carrier can move 8.75 miles. If it's traveling more-or-less in a straight line, you can predict where it will be to within a couple of miles. If not...
  - nradov 4y ago
    Where does that "swarm“ of drones come from? Any drones cheap enough to use in a swarm have very limited endurance and weak sensors. Possibly useful in the littorals, but a total joke for blue water operations. Satellites are limited and impossible to hide. The carrier strike force knows exactly when they are in view of an adversary's reconnaissance satellite. In any future major conflict the satellites will be the first casualties. There is a very active arms race in anti-satellite weapons.