Posted on 08/25/2014 8:27:59 PM PDT by Robert A Cook PE
I’m not saying the S turns were a weapon delivery idea because it would have to land after. The idea is that it was hypersonic and gliding in the atmosphere. I’m not going to look up the details for how high or fast, but they were up there.
The primary reason is to defeat our Anti-Ballistic missile capabilities. That has been stated directly from the Chinese PLA.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3195758/posts
So, it can achieve its speed in such a manner (theoretically), and I may be entirely wrong with my previous post, but I think the theory is not without merit as orbital speed is well above what we would call “hypersonic” in the atmosphere.
Given that, I STILL could be wrong, and I am not adverse to admitting such! :)
B4L8R
OK, I see their wishful thinking but our anti-missile-missile system works on radar and it won’t matter.
I put this into the basket of wishful thinking by the chinks. Of course, you know they have already put men on the moon, don’t you? LOL They are much more creative with their science fiction than the ruskies were.
I'm wondering if they are on the right path as laser weapons utilized during the boost phase would make such a platform ineffective anyways.
I suppose it depends on numbers. If you can get several through the boost phase, Hypersonic terminal velocity vehicles would certainly have a better chance to defeat our current generation of anti-missile defenses, but I would hope that DARPA and the government would be working on upgrades or future defenses would take such capabilities into account.
Alas, you did not get the joke! ... %100 ... 100$ ... Get it?
I got it, but in fact, I WAS somewhat wrong and hopefully I’ve corrected my mistake. :)
i’d call it the president dingleberry craps his pants scenario.
“increase in terminal velocity”
Our systems can take a ballistic missile out. How much faster will their gliders go than that?
Maybe it will be cheaper but I doubt it. They would still have to get to almost orbital altitudes.
Just more red Chinese bluster; “ours is faster, ours goes higher, ours is bigger, ours is stealthier”.
They hope to win by overwhelming numbers, just as they tried in their historical battles. North Korea for example. Our F22 can fight and kill 6 or 7 planes at once but how is it gonna do against 100, 1,000, 10,000? They had those kind of numbers on the ground in Korea but not in the air. Now they have the technology and money to build huge numbers.
The Russian hypersonic weapon also passed...
Ballistic missiles are easy to spot, after all they come over the horizon and don’t evade. Unlike us, the Chinese have been desperately working on ballistic missile defenses.
A hypersonic missile can come in at a much lower altitude and presents a much smaller window to countermeasures.
Only if you are expecting 1960's era warheads. Current warheads are maneuverable and include junk to spook defensive systems.
Simple maneuverability: Consider a cone, with the axis of rotation straight down the center. Slice the cone about one-quarter or one-third down from the tip, but make the cut line not parallel to the base. As the tip of the cone rotates, the body will no longer be axisymmetric. When this body re-enters the atmosphere, it will veer off a pure ballistic path. I'm sure that current warheads are more sophisticated than that.
Maybe they had it upside down, when they lit the fuse, like the old buzz bombs on the 4th of July when it was too dark to read the directions.
You can learn more from failures than successes.
Edison said that a couple times.
Ah, I hadn’t heard that, but it makes perfect sense.
That’s something any good engineer understands.
Smart thing would be to "marvel" at their achievements. Let them feel important - it's their psychological need. In the meantime, I hope we are developing what we need covertly...
The missile itself doesn’t really maneuver prior to bus separation, though, which is what I’m getting at.
“A space platform rail gun would be much better.... and cheaper.”
Why do you think that? I would think the weight, power generation, and logistics of reloading it with projectiles would make this ultimately more expensive.
I’m interested to hear what you think a cheap version would look like. It could be as simple as sending up a bunch of rods in a barrel, so to speak, where the rods are targetable. Still, weight, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.