Chinese Hypersonic Developments (HGVs/HCMs)


enroger

Junior Member
Registered Member
Good enough radars can detect micro-motion of decoys and warheads to classify them but I don’t know how well it works.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
but obviously not available for now.

In theory the mass to drag ratio difference might be differentiable, but yeah don't know how well it works... all it takes to defeat it is for the warheads to make a tiny tiny tiny deceleration (or for decoy to produce a tiny tiny tiny thrust) to fool it.

The neutron beam thing sounds pretty rad
 

SEAD

Junior Member
Registered Member
Depends on the trajectory. SM-3 has only shot down (and supposedly can only shoot down) targets in space in mid course intercepts. DF-21 and DF-26 (former less so than latter) can be fired FAR inside China for targets well within first island chain. Of course to hit beyond first island chain require DF-26 launchers to be placed closer to the coast but in any case, SM-3 launch platform would have to be relative close to ASBM launch site to perform mid course intercept which it is designed for.

In western Pacific scenarios involving CBGs and ASBMs, the ASBMs would have MaRVed and re-entered atmosphere before mid course interceptors have the horizontal range to engage. Let's say the engagement range is at first island chain area. DF-26 would have been launched in Xinjiang and Tibet and DF-21 launched in the middle of China to eastern provinces and their MaRVs re-entered atmosphere just around China's coast or a bit further east. SM-3 launched from first island chains cannot engage those ASBMs while they are still in space. It would require SM-3 to be at least nearly as large as the ballistic missiles themselves to have that sort of energy.

If you want to imagine it as SM-3 warhead stages simply "orbiting" to reach their targets, it would require them to be launched extremely quickly in response to ASBM launches which is doable, but it really depends on the specifics of when and where the ASBM's MaRVs are deployed and begin re-entering atmosphere. USN's main defences against ASBMs from China would be SM-6s for intercepting MaRVs rather than SM-3s for midcourse intercept. SM-3s are far more ideal for intercepting ICBMs.
ICBM defense is another story in which cost is a larger obstacle for BMD. Since interceptors are so expensive, it's worthy to install some high end equipments in ICBMs to defeat them. Some analysts said the object dropped by Chinese FOBS in Aug 2021 test is actually an anti-ABM-missile, I doubt if it's true but after all it's possible and reasonable. Given the 2500kg LEO capacity of LM-2C, it wouldn't surprise me to find anything in the FOBS: radar, ECM, RWR, decoys, IR warning/imaging, laser dazzler etc. etc. Basically everything we can find in an aircraft.

Starship+space based interceptors should be a real game changer for ICBM defense, but we can safely assume they will not be in service even in 2030s.
 
Last edited:

SEAD

Junior Member
Registered Member
ICBM defense is another story in which cost is a larger obstacle for BMD. Since interceptors are so expensive, it's worthy to install some high end equipments in ICBMs to defeat them. Some analysts said the object dropped by Chinese FOBS in Aug 2021 test is actually an anti-ABM-missile, I doubt if it's true but after all it's possible and reasonable. Given the 2500kg LEO capacity of LM-2C, it wouldn't surprise me to find anything in the FOBS: radar, ECM, RWR, decoys, IR warning/imaging, laser dazzler etc. etc. Basically everything we can find in an aircraft.

Starship+space based interceptors should be a real game changer for ICBM defense, but we can safely assume they will not be in service even in 2030s.
LEO capacity of LM-2C is 4000kg, I’m sorry for any misleading. Anyway it doesn’t affect the analysis.
 

TK3600

Junior Member
Registered Member
Basically equal to USN pacific fleet and JMSDF combined in counter force of conventional A2AD (not HGVs, ASBMs, HCMs, and whatever else China has/developing). This doesn't mean 1:1 and same capability and modernity but a direct counter e.g. for every two anti-ship ordinance an available F-35 can launch, there can be two LR missiles for the F-35, four MR missiles for intercepting ordinance, and for example 2 HQ-10 missiles and 1000 rounds and maybe 5 seconds of fire time for Type 730/1130. Rather than simply having one J-35 with more or less exactly equal ability to do the same against a US fleet.

This stuff is near impossible to determine accurately and I'm not suggesting that but PLAN and PLAAF are very far from achieving numerical parity here even if tech parity or superiority in some platforms are achieved e.g. Burke flight II compared to Type 055 and SM-6 compared to the latest HHQ-9. The gaps in numbers for surface fleet, carriers, fighter wing are too low and sub warfare is quite unknown. On submarines themselves, Type 093 even improved ones are nowhere near the current gen US SSNs. Type 039A is only comparable to Japanese diesel electrics. 096 will close the gap but the numbers gap is huge.

A2AD weapons like ASBMs, HGVs, HCMs etc are what hold the US back. Of course China's current naval capability is very strong close to its coast with land based support and USN operating in this area is really stretched thin. Their aim is to create a 6th gen aircraft that enhances operational range several times the distance of F-18 and F-35 so their carriers can remain well outside of Chinese A2AD land based weapons. China is countering with putting into service, ship borne ASBM, HGV, and HCM. This is an arms race struggle of engagement range. Until China's navy and airforce is built up to the numbers of at least the entire USN pacific fleet, a great portion of the deterrence fall onto the shoulders of the PLARF firing hypersonics and anti ship ballistic missiles. Being able to do this via air and ship is a great additional boost though. When PLAN and PLAAF get to those numbers of in service highest tier platforms, the deterrence can be relied on that alone. Even if PLAN trade 3 for 1 equivalents, that's a huge part of USN gone and tens of thousands of lives lost for USN and more than enough political deterrence.
Ask Japan how that turned out. China should deter the entire USN not just one fleet.
 

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Seems to be a big breakthrough and quite a lot of new details on this article
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
China is developing a heat-seeking hypersonic weapon that will be able to hit a moving car at five times the speed of sound, according to scientists involved in the project.
The research team, led by Yang Xiaogang from the PLA Rocket Force University of Engineering in Xian, said “important progress” had been made towards solving the main problem of how to pinpoint a moving target at extreme speeds.
Yang and his colleagues from the university’s College of Missile Engineering have been given a deadline of 2025 to come up with solutions to the seemingly intractable challenges of hypersonic technology.
Because a superfast missile can travel long distances in a split second, a tiny error in the positioning and guidance system can lead to a huge miss, they explained in a paper published in Chinese peer-reviewed journal Infrared and Laser Engineering.
Over distance, the infrared signature of a small moving target “constitutes just a few pixels without detailed information such as shape, texture and structure”, making identification and tracking “extremely difficult”, they said.
The heat sensor needs an extremely cold environment, but the surface temperature of the missile can reach several thousand degrees Celsius, producing a huge amount of background noise.
But, with the new heat-seeking technology, the Chinese military will be able to eliminate high-value targets from long distances with unprecedented speed, to “significantly expand the scope of application of hypersonic weapons in a regional war”, said Yang in the paper, part of a series published by the journal.
A traditional heat-seeker analyses the images produced by infrared sensors frame by frame. But at Mach 5 or faster, the difference between two adjacent frames can be huge, making it difficult for the computer to find a consistent pattern, especially when the target is small and moving.
The new hypersonic missile does not take a new image for granted, the paper said. Instead, it will use the data collected by motion sensors to adjust every pixel, so that most elements in the new image will remain consistent with those in earlier shots in terms of viewing angle, lighting or size.
The hypersonic heat-seeker would also be able to go after a target in the air, according to a separate paper in the series by Qin Hanlin from the school of optoelectronic engineering in Xidian University.
Qin and his team demonstrated a technology that would allow a hypersonic ground-to-air missile to hit a target as small as a commercial drone. The missile could distinguish the drone hanging low over buildings or trees with nearly 90 per cent accuracy, they said.
A number of hardware breakthroughs have made these achievements possible, according to the scientists, including improvements in sensor technology that mean heat signals can be detected over distance as a unique wave form, producing clear images at hypersonic speeds.
The Chinese scientists also found a low-cost replacement for the precious materials, including diamonds, used for the window of the infrared detector so that it can survive the harsh environment. Glass made of zinc sulphide, at a fraction of the cost, also provides a crystal-clear view, they said.
The PLA’s hypersonic programme employs about 3,000 scientists – 50 per cent more than those working on traditional weapons, according to a study published in January by Chinese peer-reviewed journal Tactical Missile Technology.
The average contribution to the increase of China’s military strength by a researcher in a hypersonic programme was estimated to be twice as high as a researcher working on aircraft or warships, the study found.
 

escobar

Banned Idiot
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Near Space Hypersonic Vehicle (NSHV) refers to the ability to fly in near space at an altitude of 20~100 km, with a cruise flight Mach number of 5~25, and is used to perform global fast and precise strikes, long-range delivery, surveillance and reconnaissance. A class of aircraft for strategic combat missions. This kind of aircraft not only has the characteristics of ultra-long-range attack and small Radar Cross-Section (RCS) similar to ballistic missiles, but also has the ability of lateral large-span maneuvering that ballistic missiles do not have.
Therefore, it is difficult for a single sensor to track it continuously and stably throughout the entire process. Integrating existing sensor resources and constructing an integrated detection network of multi-source heterogeneous sensors in the sky, sea and earth is an inevitable means of effective and continuous detection and tracking of hypersonic aircraft, and an important prerequisite for intercepting ultra-long-range weapons.
img_2.png
 

Hyper

Junior Member
Registered Member
Does a rotating detonation engine have any advantage over scramjets ? If so what ?
 

SEAD

Junior Member
Registered Member
Does a rotating detonation engine have any advantage over scramjets ? If so what ?
It can cover a large speed range (subsonic to Mach6 or even faster), while scamjet can only work roughly between Mach5 and 7.

Thrust of scamjet is pretty small considering its volume and fuel consumption. On the same conditions, RDE has larger thrust and much less fuel consumption.

As a result, the size of a weapon powered by RDE can be 1/10 or even 1/100 of a scamjet powered one.
 
Last edited:

Top