A panel of national security experts say China is leading the world in hypersonic technology due to Beijing setting a clear investment strategy to its industrial base.
Hypersonic glide weapons are a threat to aircraft carriers and land air bases.
The Hudson Institute hosted a panel discussion on China’s military ambitions, specifically its hypersonic missile advances, and how the United States should respond. Hypersonic weapons travel at least five times the speed of sound and are especially challenging for U.S. defenses due to, in large part, their ability to evade the current radar and sensor architecture.
The panelists agreed that the United States needs to invest in offensive hypersonic weapons technology and boosting counter-hypersonic defensive systems.
The US will need to create a low orbit sensor layer to create an eventual hypersonic defense.
DARPA is working on the many cheap $6 million low earth orbit satellites to detect and track hypersonic weapons.
SOURCES- DARPA, Hudson Institute
Written By Brian Wang
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
One add, the SM-3 fielded by the Navy is a Mach 15 missile with a 2000km range that can hit a sat in LEO 1200 km up, its the best AA system in the world. The S-400/500 is a Russian catch-up attempt 15-20 years late. I am not an expert on this, but I do not think that modifying it to hit a ship or ground target (given the location is target-able) would be that hard.
One Ohio can wipe out the 50 largest cites in Russia, so like 90% of their population. MAD and all. I do not see the point of developing these technologies. Unless you make a reusable system with applications outside of military use, it is worthless in the grand scheme of things. In that department the US is way, way ahead. Sure the US could improve on it’s Naval arsenal of missiles for more effective ground strikes, but since there would never be a strictly conventional conflict, a few Boomers is all that is needed to keep balance.
A Trident has a CEP under 90 meters (call it good enough for government work) and carries MIRVs with a range of 12,000 km with 4 warheads per missile. In two Ohios (there are at least 10 carrying), that’s roughly 80 missiles and 320 nukes, the lot would also have about 320 decoys as well. You fire, then we fire, MAD happens. Taking out a US carrier group conventionally would have the same end result, due to the response it would trigger.
BS, the USA, without even asking for it, has the only reusable hypersoinics platform platform on earth (SpaceX F9 and the game changing Starship) and is working on the most advanced air-breathing (non-solid rocket assisted) hypersonic engine design know of (SARBE).
So let me get this straight, China straps some solid rocket boosters on a glide vehicle (something the US has been able to do for decades) and suddenly they are world leaders? The boost glide vehicles are just minor improvements on normal missile tech, they are not some revolutionary thing. Its like a small performance bump on existing ICBM tech, nothing more.
Personally, I do not consider a glorified rocket powered, single use missile, any type of real advancement in hypersonics. The US has a few hundred Tridents that are all technically hypersoinc, since they travel at Mach 18.
US money would be best spent trying to push the envelope with new technology, not try to create a minor increment in making your reentry vehicles a bit better, the Trident is already accurate and fast enough for its purpose. The exact reason the US didn’t push ahead with glide vehicles after the HPV tests almost a decade ago.
put something in it’s path, if you have spare time.
Finally, we show some teeth to the Russian bear.
https://defence-blog.com/news/us-bomber-practiced-an-attack-on-a-russian-naval-base.html
Can’t detect? Hypersonics are hot! The plasma generated complicates on-board sensors. Maneuverability is limited. Finally, all you have to do is put something in it’s path.
Drive? Try walking.
Textbook example of fascist economic policy, straight from Hitler to Xi. It works well up until it doesn’t work any longer. Enjoy the bumpy ride friends.
Neocon ‘experts’ (who are only experts because they say that about each other, nothing more) who want to scare us into thinking China is the next Russia, you mean.
Good thing Trump doesn’t listen to them nor would Bernie or even Pocahontas.
I would fear a stealthy sea skimmer more than a loud hypersonic.
Starlink will not have the capability to detect. Of course it could keep sats that do linked to the net.
The SS-18 if MARVed could destroy the major cities in Texas, Houston, Austin, Dallas-Ft Worth, San Antonio, Amarillo, and maybe one, or two that don’t come to mind. There’s no way one of them could devastate, or “blow up” the whole state of Texas. You have to drive across Texas to appreciate how huge it is.
Even if true, are they going to use it before another country catches up? Seems less than likely. Even seriously threatening to use such things against a superior military power would be a very poor idea. There is always the chance they, or, more likely, one of their crazy politicians, might actually feel threatened.
the only thing that matters is the size of your wang…like the satan missle that can blow up the entire state of texas with a single missle…
As I have said. Starlink.
Musk is the new Hughes.