- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Hypersonic missiles - you buying the US doesn’t have them or a defense for them?
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:31 am
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:31 am
Granted I’m not as versed in this as I should be. But I’ve seen some back and forth on here about China having these missiles, and us not having them, or just getting them.
I have a hard time believing China didn’t steal that tech from us or one of our allies. I get there is gross corruption and incompetence in the MIC but we had to have thought about this before China did.
Do you believe we have them and are just playing coy? Do you think we have a deterrent for them?
I have a hard time believing China didn’t steal that tech from us or one of our allies. I get there is gross corruption and incompetence in the MIC but we had to have thought about this before China did.
Do you believe we have them and are just playing coy? Do you think we have a deterrent for them?
This post was edited on 8/2/22 at 10:34 am
33
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:33 am to Yaboylsu63
Almost impossible to tell. Like truths, I bet it falls somewhere in the middle. China's shite isn't as good as they claim (honestly, is anything they make)? And America probably has them or has a defense for them. If not, they're scrambling hard to catch up in a few years.
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:34 am to Yaboylsu63
Well, we have our own alien spacecraft that we can fly and it even amazes our own military pilots, so there’s that...
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:35 am to Yaboylsu63
I remember reading a while back that the tech the military has is usually a decade or so beyond what the public knows.
I don't know how accurate this is, but it wouldn't surprise me. Also, I read this like a decade ago, so it may be even wider of a gap as technology progresses exponentially.
I don't know how accurate this is, but it wouldn't surprise me. Also, I read this like a decade ago, so it may be even wider of a gap as technology progresses exponentially.
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:37 am to Yaboylsu63
quote:
I have a hard time believing China didn’t steal that tech from us or one of our allies.
They didn't have to steal it. Bill Clinton sold us out and gave it to them.
Clinton Approves Technology Transfer to China
NYT
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:38 am to Yaboylsu63
Yes we would have and I would bet the ones others have is due to stolen technology. I would think we have a working laser wartime capability as well
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:41 am to Chazreinhold
I think hyper missiles are extremely unreliable and inaccurate currently (from what I've looked at in regards). Russia claimed to have used one but no one really knows and it can't be proven.
I'm sure we are developing both missiles and a defense from them if we don't have them currently, but I'd bet we are further along than publicly stated. Honestly tomahawks seem to be doing fine last I heard
I'm sure we are developing both missiles and a defense from them if we don't have them currently, but I'd bet we are further along than publicly stated. Honestly tomahawks seem to be doing fine last I heard
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:42 am to Yaboylsu63
Take the past to apply to the present...
When the Soviets were developing their cruise missiles, they would fire them into the Sea of Okhotsk. The US Navy, in their deviant brilliance, would use subs to monitor, watch, and track the launches and the crash landings of these missiles, then go pick them up. This was during the cold war.
We'd have to be complete morons not to still be doing the same today. It is with a high degree of certainty, we have most of the components to NK's missiles.
Never underestimate spec ops and their resolution to complete the mission.
When the Soviets were developing their cruise missiles, they would fire them into the Sea of Okhotsk. The US Navy, in their deviant brilliance, would use subs to monitor, watch, and track the launches and the crash landings of these missiles, then go pick them up. This was during the cold war.
We'd have to be complete morons not to still be doing the same today. It is with a high degree of certainty, we have most of the components to NK's missiles.
Never underestimate spec ops and their resolution to complete the mission.
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:42 am to Yaboylsu63
China almost certainly stole it from us. I’m sure we have them, but I’m not sure we have a defense for them.
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:43 am to Yaboylsu63
what they have is not what we consider true hypersonic missiles. We have true hypersonic missiles but not in full deployment stage and we have a defense for them that LM developed.
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:50 am to Yaboylsu63
quote:
I have a hard time believing China didn’t steal that tech from us or one of our allies.
We sorta gave it to them but that doesn't mean we have a good defense for them. Just because you can make a gun doesn't meant you can make a vest that stops the bullet.
We have defenses for them but they are far from perfected. If they shot 10 no way we'd get 10 out of 10. It's not my area but I have a college friend whose life has revolved around this issue, and from the comments he can make this isn't a problem that's been solved. We're not at 0% but we're a long way from 99%.
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:54 am to Yaboylsu63
No, and not buying the no defense arguments either. Those massive black budgets are there for a reason. 30 years ago the USAF was launching ASATS off of F-15's, add successful missle defense testing from the Navy and there's a lot of systems we know absolutely nothing about.
Posted on 8/2/22 at 10:55 am to lsu777
quote:
We have true hypersonic missiles but not in full deployment stage
I always assumed we most likely did have them and were ready to deploy them, but didn't want pictures of F15's toting them around everywhere to get out.
Defending them I understand being much more difficult, but we might have a laser CIWS fielded by now???
Posted on 8/2/22 at 11:01 am to Yaboylsu63
quote:No.
Hypersonic missiles - you buying the US doesn’t have them or a defense for them?
quote:Yes. Yes.
Do you believe we have them and are just playing coy? Do you think we have a deterrent for them?
As a point of reference, we had the F-117 stealth fighter OPERATIONAL for almost a decade before the public became aware of it.
This post was edited on 8/2/22 at 11:09 am
Posted on 8/2/22 at 11:02 am to Yaboylsu63
Their kids have not spent the last several decades spending half their school learning about fuzzy wuzzy liberal policies. Why is it hard to believe their scientists are at the very least as capable as US scientists when it comes to weapons development? They are actually raising kids that know how to do productive shite.
Posted on 8/2/22 at 11:03 am to Yaboylsu63
Yes, we have them. They have been successfully tested as of 3 months ago.
Yes, we have 2 "announced" countermeasures. How smart would we be to reveal which one is functional as tested?
Once you have the weapon, the counter measure is next in line.
Yes, we have 2 "announced" countermeasures. How smart would we be to reveal which one is functional as tested?
Once you have the weapon, the counter measure is next in line.
Posted on 8/2/22 at 11:04 am to Laugh More
quote:
I remember reading a while back that the tech the military has is usually a decade or so beyond what the public knows
No, it’s more like 2-3 decades
Posted on 8/2/22 at 11:07 am to Yaboylsu63
The USSF has got this covered.
Posted on 8/2/22 at 11:07 am to dmaginnisiv
quote:
Why is it hard to believe their scientists are at the very least as capable as US scientists when it comes to weapons development?
Because they have stolen most of their tech
Posted on 8/2/22 at 11:11 am to Nosevens
I support a lot of scientific minds in the DoD and the physicists at Edward's, Vandenberg, China Lake, White Sands, Yuma, Redstone and the Atlantic Test Range. There is significant info that is classified and can't be addressed or even acknowledged.
However, there are multiple issues involved with tracking and interceptions of hypersonic missiles that are apparently problematic. A Hypersonic missile can travel between 1100-1200 miles in one minute. Not only that, it can also be maneuverable (hence: unpredictable). It could be programmed to fly into areas where land-based tracking systems can't see it. Even if it did, it would be so fast that a tracker can't possibly follow it fast enough before the missile is out of range.
The only way to really track and take down one is from space. Which, supposedly (wink*wink), is illegal, as space weapons are forbidden by treaty. So how can they be tracked and stay within the confines of our space weapons treaty?
In short, an effective missile would employ stealth technologies and make it difficult, if not almost impossible to track and intercept, but the achilles heel (there is one) of these is a physics phenomenon that DoD research (at Redstone Arsenal) has discovered and that is what would be exploited by sensors on satellites to track, triangulate and employ both air and ground-based systems to intercept these missiles. I can't tell you what it is, but I know that it is an amazing discovery that creates a signature so strong that it's a weakness we are able to exploit not only in tracking, but in how to avoid it in our own missiles.
That said, we are still very vulnerable at this stage. Lots of work left to do.
However, there are multiple issues involved with tracking and interceptions of hypersonic missiles that are apparently problematic. A Hypersonic missile can travel between 1100-1200 miles in one minute. Not only that, it can also be maneuverable (hence: unpredictable). It could be programmed to fly into areas where land-based tracking systems can't see it. Even if it did, it would be so fast that a tracker can't possibly follow it fast enough before the missile is out of range.
The only way to really track and take down one is from space. Which, supposedly (wink*wink), is illegal, as space weapons are forbidden by treaty. So how can they be tracked and stay within the confines of our space weapons treaty?
In short, an effective missile would employ stealth technologies and make it difficult, if not almost impossible to track and intercept, but the achilles heel (there is one) of these is a physics phenomenon that DoD research (at Redstone Arsenal) has discovered and that is what would be exploited by sensors on satellites to track, triangulate and employ both air and ground-based systems to intercept these missiles. I can't tell you what it is, but I know that it is an amazing discovery that creates a signature so strong that it's a weakness we are able to exploit not only in tracking, but in how to avoid it in our own missiles.
That said, we are still very vulnerable at this stage. Lots of work left to do.
This post was edited on 8/2/22 at 11:12 am
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News