i see, do you foresee a similar problem for the PLAN when/if the dark eagle hypersonic missile is deployed? or are you more capable of chinese protection systems
Ask anything Thread
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
They could just put HQ-19 on ships as it was advertised to be able to intercept HGVs and hence probably HCMs as well
Not really, because USN has exactly three ships capable of launching them. Even with no protection whatsoever that's not a gamechanger. HGVs won't be standard-issue munitions for USN the way they are for PLAN.
Land-based launchers are a different story, of course.
Last edited:
Not even. Only one Zumwalt of the two active (third one is not in service yet) is currently being refitted for CPS missiles. At-sea testing is still 2-3 years away, so realistically even this one refitted ship won't reenter operational service until 2028/2029. Regardless of that, the main issue here is how abhorrently expensive it is. The land-based version, LRHW, is $43M(!) per shot. I still wonder how. A ship/sub-launched one is even more complex and will cost more.
If we assume say $47M per CPS missile, and a Zumwalt/Blk 5 Virginia can carry a maximum of 12 CPS missiles, that means to just launch all of those, would cost over $560M (!!) just to launch all twelve. That's the cost of a single Type 052D DDG. Add in two for 24 missiles, that would be well over a $1B dollars. An entire Type 055 would be cheaper to purchase which can carry anywhere from 32-40+ YJ-17/YJ-20/YJ-HCM that all have long ranges. Let's say you launch 24, and assume even a "low" interception rate of say 70%, that means only 16-17 of that 24 get through to their targets. So you just spent over $1B USD to just hit a few targets. You better hope that whatever you're targeting is extremely high value and will benefit your goals in the short/long term.
It simply isn't sustainable and why I think its not that potent of a weapon even if it is good. Like you said, hypersonic munitions will only be expensive niche capabilities for the US rather than them being critical and main weapons that play a much broader role in China's doctrine and tactics of their use.
Before worrying about the cost and sustainability.
Better to first worry about the deliverance, both in terms of performance and time.
Because for current day US (MIC results and trend for last 20 years), default expectation for new stuff should be under deliver in performance with huge delays.
How well could a 55 function as a fire support platform for an amphibious invasion force? Like I mean as troops land on the shores the type 55 could launch missiles from a distance at multiple targets.