Chinese Hypersonic Developments (HGVs/HCMs)

caudaceus

Senior Member
Registered Member
Cunningham's Law states "the best way to get the right answer on the internet is not to ask a question; it's to post the wrong answer."

Similarly, posting the wrong information on SDF seems to attract experts (and a ban).
It's not Cunningham's Law but Betteridge's law.
 

KangarooPriest

New Member
Registered Member
3. By assuming a 50s burning time per stage, average speed of HGV warhead is around 2.8km/s.
That's only about mach 8. If it has a DF-26 booster like we expect, that's a lot slower than I would have expected.

The distance travelled is by itself pretty uninteresting though, and shouldn't be seen as indicative of anything since that's just the space they have to test it on.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: CMP

clockwork

Junior Member
Registered Member
According to NOTAM info posted by @HenriKenhmann

Some personal takeaway:

1. 2,100km is indeed the distance between the launch zone to the impact point. HGV warhead traveled around 1,750km after the second stage burnout.

2. The warhead did horizontal maneuvering until it hit on the impact point.

3. By assuming a 50s burning time per stage, average speed of HGV warhead is around 2.8km/s.

View attachment 110847

How did you get the 1750 figure?
 

Kalec

Junior Member
Registered Member
That's only about mach 8. If it has a DF-26 booster like we expect, that's a lot slower than I would have expected.
Why? It is a pretty decent number considering the warhead spent a lot more time in the atmosphere suffering air drag than traditional ballistic warhead. HGV warhead doesn't have black magic to provide so much velocity and the beauty of it is to make a huge maneuvering to avoid interception.
How did you get the 1750 figure?
Google earth measure tool between impact point and second stage fallout zone. I know the warhead didn't re entry straight after burnout but there is no way to know when it entered terminal phase.
 

CMP

Senior Member
Registered Member
That's only about mach 8. If it has a DF-26 booster like we expect, that's a lot slower than I would have expected.

The distance travelled is by itself pretty uninteresting though, and shouldn't be seen as indicative of anything since that's just the space they have to test it on.
This is impressive because of the flat trajectory and high maneuverability, which makes it nearly impossible to shoot down. Also, Mach 8 is solidly within hypersonic regime. You need Mach 10 and above to hit the next regime up (high-hypersonic). That would be a new ballgame as far as thermal control and corrosion resistance, not to mention probably being infeasible in terms of cost (except for reusable platforms like a bomber). Ballistic missiles hit much higher velocities because of little to no maneuvering, along with their simple ballistic trajectory, so it's unreasonable to expect an HGV to be maneuvering anywhere close to DF-26's terminal velocity.

Why? It is a pretty decent number considering the warhead spent a lot more time in the atmosphere suffering air drag than traditional ballistic warhead. HGV warhead doesn't have black magic to provide so much velocity and the beauty of it is to make a huge maneuvering to avoid interception.

Google earth measure tool between impact point and second stage fallout zone. I know the warhead didn't re entry straight after burnout but there is no way to know when it entered terminal phase.
He doesn't know what he's talking about. Immediate add to the ignore list.
 

sunnymaxi

Captain
Registered Member
This is impressive because of the flat trajectory and high maneuverability, which makes it nearly impossible to shoot down. Also, Mach 8 is solidly within hypersonic regime. You need Mach 10 and above to hit the next regime up (high-hypersonic). That would be a new ballgame as far as thermal control and corrosion resistance, not to mention probably being infeasible in terms of cost (except for reusable platforms like a bomber). Ballistic missiles hit much higher velocities because of little to no maneuvering, along with their simple ballistic trajectory, so it's unreasonable to expect an HGV to be maneuvering anywhere close to DF-26's terminal velocity.
China have largest hypersonic infrastructure in the world with extensive spending on this tech. so we can expect more high hypersonic missiles in coming years. they also claimed to breakthrough in next generation hypersonic. heat seeking tech

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Heat-seeking capability allows Chinese hypersonic missiles to home in on almost any target – including stealth aircraft, aircraft carriers and moving vehicles on the street – with unprecedented accuracy and speed, according to the researchers.
 

KangarooPriest

New Member
Registered Member
Ballistic missiles hit much higher velocities because of little to no maneuvering, along with their simple ballistic trajectory, so it's unreasonable to expect an HGV to be maneuvering anywhere close to DF-26's terminal velocity.
The terminal speed of a ballistic missile is not its max speed, since like you said atmospheric air resistance exists. With the same booster then, an HGV and a conventional ballistic missile should have roughly the same max speed, but lower terminal speed.

I'm not aware if there's anything specific out in the public in terms of the DF-26's max speed but it should be somewhere in the mach 15 zone. A mach 8 glide would be a significant slowdown, especially compared to the DF-17, which has a glide speed only slightly slower than its max speed.
 

CMP

Senior Member
Registered Member
China have largest hypersonic infrastructure in the world with extensive spending on this tech. so we can expect more high hypersonic missiles in coming years. they also claimed to breakthrough in next generation hypersonic. heat seeking tech

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Heat-seeking capability allows Chinese hypersonic missiles to home in on almost any target – including stealth aircraft, aircraft carriers and moving vehicles on the street – with unprecedented accuracy and speed, according to the researchers.
I'm extremely excited to see these come to fruition. It's a fairly safe bet to predict that the world's first high-hypersonic missile or HGV will be Chinese. Both the Russians and Americans will be a distant second and third place (if at all). Key will be getting production scaled up and costs way down.
 

clockwork

Junior Member
Registered Member
The terminal speed of a ballistic missile is not its max speed, since like you said atmospheric air resistance exists. With the same booster then, an HGV and a conventional ballistic missile should have roughly the same max speed, but lower terminal speed.

I'm not aware if there's anything specific out in the public in terms of the DF-26's max speed but it should be somewhere in the mach 15 zone. A mach 8 glide would be a significant slowdown, especially compared to the DF-17, which has a glide speed only slightly slower than its max speed.
Ironic he said you don't know what you're talking about lol, some people here, cringe. The low average speed this time is simply due to the low range, were it at full range then it would be much higher, initial reentry speed about the same as the IRBM.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: CMP

CMP

Senior Member
Registered Member
Ironic he said you don't know what you're talking about lol, some people here, cringe. The low average speed this time is simply due to the low range, were it at full range then it would be much higher, initial reentry speed about the same as the IRBM.
There is no reentry (Mach 25+) in the case of HGVs or hypersonic missiles, regardless of the range. HGVs do not exit and reenter the atmosphere like ballistic missiles do. They stay within the atmosphere through the entire course of flight, barely even entering the lowest altitude parts of the themosphere before flattening out within the stratosphere. Looks like another clown for the ignore list. Birds of a feather clearly flock together.
1681238238443.png
 
Last edited:
Top