China Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear Arms Thread

[enroger]

From the drive warzone ( good regarding US technological developments):

"Hypersonic Ingress" indicates the Vintage Racer loitering munition has the ability to get its target at hypersonic speeds, defined as above Mach 5. It's not clear how the munition gets to the target area at these speeds, but

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

seems most plausible based on the information publicly available now. An

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

could be another option, but this seems less likely given the high cost and complexity associated with those types of weapons and their current developmental state. It's also not clear from the Pentagon budget documents if the Office of the Secretary of Defense conducted a full flight test of the complete system or just the loitering munition component.

---

Vintage racer can be described as an intelligent loitering warhead that can be carried by Ballistic or Cruise missiles.

My guess is that it is deployed by hypersonic means (BM/HGV...etc), once it gets there it loiters at subsonic speed.

Ok I guess it's fair to say maybe it bear a little resemblance to what FT has described here. But I just don't see the point of this overly complicated contraption if that is what it really is, if you want to hit multiple targets won't it be simpler to send multiple individual HGVs VS one big HGV dropping bomblets?

Maybe there is something we don't know, maybe one big HGV is actually simpler/cheaper compared to multiple small ones...

Still the FT article is a dumpster fire, I'm scratching my head here. And honest I won't completely rule out that part of the story maybe fabrication.

 

[escobar]

My guess is that it is deployed by hypersonic means (BM/HGV...etc), once it gets there it loiters at subsonic speed.

Ok I guess it's fair to say maybe it bear a little resemblance to what FT has described here. But I just don't see the point of this overly complicated contraption if that is what it really is, if you want to hit multiple targets won't it be simpler to send multiple individual HGVs VS one big HGV dropping bomblets?

Maybe there is something we don't know, maybe one big HGV is actually simpler/cheaper compared to multiple small ones...

Still the FT article is a dumpster fire, I'm scratching my head here. And honest I won't completely rule out that part of the story maybe fabrication.

The only important thing worth considering in this article is that something was released from the HGV over the SCS. Everyone can speculate what this thing is, lol

 

[enroger]

The only important thing worth considering in this article is that something was released from the HGV over the SCS. Everyone can speculate what this thing is, lol

That's a reasonable take

 

[Xizor]

My guess is that it is deployed by hypersonic means (BM/HGV...etc), once it gets there it loiters at subsonic speed.

Ok I guess it's fair to say maybe it bear a little resemblance to what FT has described here. But I just don't see the point of this overly complicated contraption if that is what it really is, if you want to hit multiple targets won't it be simpler to send multiple individual HGVs VS one big HGV dropping bomblets?

Maybe there is something we don't know, maybe one big HGV is actually simpler/cheaper compared to multiple small ones...

Still the FT article is a dumpster fire, I'm scratching my head here. And honest I won't completely rule out that part of the story maybe fabrication.

If you are talking about the Chinese one then it's likely that the Chinese hypersonic vehicle released a countermeasure intended against Anti Hypersonic weapons.

But we are speculating on top of speculations. What I don't understand is how FT (or sources within) got information about the missile seperation/release by hypersonic vehicle.

Economics works same in China as US in many emerging sectors. Cutting edge systems like these cost around the same and China must have decided to throw considerable money at it. I think, considering the cost, there would be only one HGV. And since survivability of this single HGV is very important, missile countermeasure has been encorported.

China is planning for mass producing Hypersonics ( Institute of Mechanics is/was in talks with Hefei government for setting up dedicated facilities). It was reported back in 2018.

 

[escobar]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1462663148033433602

 

[plawolf]

My guess is that it is deployed by hypersonic means (BM/HGV...etc), once it gets there it loiters at subsonic speed.

Ok I guess it's fair to say maybe it bear a little resemblance to what FT has described here. But I just don't see the point of this overly complicated contraption if that is what it really is, if you want to hit multiple targets won't it be simpler to send multiple individual HGVs VS one big HGV dropping bomblets?

Maybe there is something we don't know, maybe one big HGV is actually simpler/cheaper compared to multiple small ones...

Still the FT article is a dumpster fire, I'm scratching my head here. And honest I won't completely rule out that part of the story maybe fabrication.

The significance is that this is a massive leap towards a hypersonic bomber. So China’s official line that this wasn’t a missile test, but rather a test of a spacecraft, would indicated that this test is far more significant than if it was just another hypersonic missile test.

A hypersonic bomber can potentially carry many independently targeted missiles, and will be reusable, making the costs of each target hit significantly less than using hypersonic missiles. Thus this could give China conventional, sustained mass strike capability against CONUS targets. Let that sink in for a second and you will realise why the US would be worried by this and see it as such a huge step up from just another hypersonic missile, even an intercontinental ranged one.

 

[Temstar]

The significance is that this is a massive leap towards a hypersonic bomber. So China’s official line that this wasn’t a missile test, but rather a test of a spacecraft, would indicated that this test is far more significant than if it was just another hypersonic missile test.

A hypersonic bomber can potentially carry many independently targeted missiles, and will be reusable, making the costs of each target hit significantly less than using hypersonic missiles. Thus this could give China conventional, sustained mass strike capability against CONUS targets. Let that sink in for a second and you will realise why the US would be worried by this and see it as such a huge step up from just another hypersonic missile, even an intercontinental ranged one.

Something like the old Silbervogel concept?
Launch on a rocket then glide all the way around the globe in the upper atmosphere, dropping some hypersonic bombs while you're above the target before landing and recovery in friendly territory. The Germans gave it a really blatant name: Amerikabomber

 

[escobar]

The significance is that this is a massive leap towards a hypersonic bomber. So China’s official line that this wasn’t a missile test, but rather a test of a spacecraft, would indicated that this test is far more significant than if it was just another hypersonic missile test.

A hypersonic bomber can potentially carry many independently targeted missiles, and will be reusable, making the costs of each target hit significantly less than using hypersonic missiles. Thus this could give China conventional, sustained mass strike capability against CONUS targets. Let that sink in for a second and you will realise why the US would be worried by this and see it as such a huge step up from just another hypersonic missile, even an intercontinental ranged one.

Well, US HTV-2 was to lead to the development of an HTV-3X vehicle, known as Blackswift, which would have formed the basis for deployment of a reusable Hypersonic Vehicle, an unmanned aircraft capable of taking off from a conventional runway and strike targets 16,650 km away in under 2 hours...

 

[enroger]

If you are talking about the Chinese one then it's likely that the Chinese hypersonic vehicle released a countermeasure intended against Anti Hypersonic weapons.

But we are speculating on top of speculations. What I don't understand is how FT (or sources within) got information about the missile seperation/release by hypersonic vehicle.

Economics works same in China as US in many emerging sectors. Cutting edge systems like these cost around the same and China must have decided to throw considerable money at it. I think, considering the cost, there would be only one HGV. And since survivability of this single HGV is very important, missile countermeasure has been encorported.

China is planning for mass producing Hypersonics ( Institute of Mechanics is/was in talks with Hefei government for setting up dedicated facilities). It was reported back in 2018.

I'm fairly sure that it won't be some kind of countermeasure against ABM or some new anti-hypersonic system.

The whole point of HGV is that it can bypass ABM due to it's maneuverability. If there're missile based anti-HGV systems out there that can actually intercept it then the point is moot.

If we're going to launch countermeasure against enemy interceptor anyway, it would be much easier to do it with conventional warhead that is drifting in space versus a HGV that is gliding in atmosphere.

Besides, active countermeasure requires situation awareness on the HGV system, complexity and costs spiral out of control if you add those....

 

[Xizor]

The significance is that this is a massive leap towards a hypersonic bomber. So China’s official line that this wasn’t a missile test, but rather a test of a spacecraft, would indicated that this test is far more significant than if it was just another hypersonic missile test.

A hypersonic bomber can potentially carry many independently targeted missiles, and will be reusable, making the costs of each target hit significantly less than using hypersonic missiles. Thus this could give China conventional, sustained mass strike capability against CONUS targets. Let that sink in for a second and you will realise why the US would be worried by this and see it as such a huge step up from just another hypersonic missile, even an intercontinental ranged one.

A hypersonic bomber launched by a Rocket? I wouldn't dare to go that far. Bombers (excusing stealth /VLO) have become very vulnerable and costly systems.

Something did happen on that fateful day of tests. Something that made US uncomfortable. Something that China doesn't want too much attention for.

I'm fairly sure that it won't be some kind of countermeasure against ABM or some new anti-hypersonic system.

The whole point of HGV is that it can bypass ABM due to it's maneuverability. If there're missile based anti-HGV systems out there that can actually intercept it then the point is moot.

If we're going to launch countermeasure against enemy interceptor anyway, it would be much easier to do it with conventional warhead that is drifting in space versus a HGV that is gliding in atmosphere.

Besides, active countermeasure requires situation awareness on the HGV system, complexity and costs spiral out of control if you add those....

I think the video explains potential adversary's plan. Ofcourse, Space based assets are going to be the most significant player.

You are indeed right that it would very hard for a hypersonic vehicle to detect incoming anti-HGV missiles. The plasma that'd form around the HGV would impede with EM transmission. But could there be a chance for decoys?