Current US hypersonic weapons projects. (General)

[TomcatViP]

You absolutely nailed it. Great post. Enjoyed reading it.
The delta in air density at launch would certainly influence system architecture.
Interesting also to read the synergistic approach b/w Stratolaunch and Pegasus (given they are both orbiting NG sphere of influence wouldn't that point to a separate program than the hypothetical LM one we are discussing now?)

 

[mkellytx]

You absolutely nailed it. Great post. Enjoyed reading it.
The delta in air density at launch would certainly influence system architecture.
Interesting also to read the synergistic approach b/w Stratolaunch and Pegasus (given they are both orbiting NG sphere of influence wouldn't that point to a separate program than the hypothetical LM one we are discussing now?)

Stratolaunch was built by Scaled, which is owned by NG now. My read is there are two separate projects, one is for a hypersonic demonstrator, no clue who has the contract, if there is a contract or if it's something being worked in a SCIF. This is another gut feeling based on Stratolaunch changing their focus after Paul Allen passed and then hiring a hypersonic guy as their CTO. LM continues to keep SR-72 on life support looking for funding from DoD/DARPA, then again they just bought Aerojet which is building scramjets.

 

[Josh_TN]

I believe Northrop is making the scramjet engine for the Raytheon submission for the DARPA HAWC demonstrator. Supposedly it is entirely 3D printed.

 

[mkellytx]

I believe Northrop is making the scramjet engine for the Raytheon submission for the DARPA HAWC demonstrator. Supposedly it is entirely 3D printed.

Thanks forgot about that one. If HAWC works as advertised then I will begin to overcome some of my previous skepticism. Hypersonics is like fusion or the economy of Brazil, "It's the future technology (economy) and always will be."

 

[bobbymike]

Hypersonic Missiles Coming in Hot

Russia and China have developed a variety of hypersonic threats.

www.usni.org

 

[In_A_Dream]

Ten times the weight might be a different metric, but X-51 I think was ~3000lbs (not sure if that includes the booster). Seems like it might be a little light for a fighter, but then again maybe it would be a twin engined fighter. Plus we're just talking about a demonstrator engine. It seems like you could make a hypersonic fighter size aircraft with that engine; the hard part would be boosting an object of that size to effective scramjet speed. What would you even launch it off of, a Falcon 9?

X-51 was IIRC around 3000lb without the ATACMS booster, AF fact sheet says 4000lbs doesn't say if it's for the vehicle or the whole stack. Granted the last time I saw official X-51 documentation was over 12 years ago.

FWIW 30,000 lbs is an early F-16 in an A2A loadout, which is too big to fit under the wing of a BUFF. Why bring this up? One of the BUFF pilot, TPS instructor, then hypersonics guy, now retired just became the CTO at Stratolaunch, which announced it's focus is now hypersonic research. Coincidence?

If things scale up here, a 30,000 lb demonstrator would need a 10,000 lb booster if you can get the carrier up to 48-49,000 ft. The carrier can take up to a 500,000 lb payload to 35,000 ft, so a 30,000 lb demonstrator with a 20,000 lb booster is only 10% capacity. No need for something as big as an F9 first stage. Wonder if we're in for an announcement in the near future...

Edit:
Forgot to mention, Milkman (the CTO), who hated that call sign because he hated Karl Malone "The Mailman" (couldn't stand the Jazz), so he named himself "Doctor". So us crew dogs being crew dogs called him "Dr. Love" just to piss him off. Totally off topic funny aside, aside, Milkman/Doctor/Dr. Love was very heavily evolved in X-51 program even if Shotgun ended up flying the mission in the left seat...

And if it was a test in support of a "SR-72" platform?

 

[mkellytx]

And if it was a test in support of a "SR-72" platform?

It's not that I'm outright opposed to all things SR-72, just that as part of my interview with Hypersonics back in the day I remember discussions about Blackswift, only to see it canceled several months later. So, color me skeptical if I think there should be some intermediate step before jumping straight to a SR-72 or F-22 sized demonstrator (as Skunk Works proposed at one point) with combined cycle engine.

 

[Flyaway]

And if it was a test in support of a "SR-72" platform?

It's not that I'm outright opposed to all things SR-72, just that as part of my interview with Hypersonics back in the day I remember discussions about Blackswift, only to see it canceled several months later. So, color me skeptical if I think there should be some intermediate step before jumping straight to a SR-72 or F-22 sized demonstrator (as Skunk Works proposed at one point) with combined cycle engine.

I think you might be placing too much relevance on a project that to me at least seems like ancient history in comparison to things today in these kind of projects.

 

[Josh_TN]

And if it was a test in support of a "SR-72" platform?

It's not that I'm outright opposed to all things SR-72, just that as part of my interview with Hypersonics back in the day I remember discussions about Blackswift, only to see it canceled several months later. So, color me skeptical if I think there should be some intermediate step before jumping straight to a SR-72 or F-22 sized demonstrator (as Skunk Works proposed at one point) with combined cycle engine.

I think you might be placing too much relevance on a project that to me seems like ancient history in comparison to things today in these kind of projects.

I think it is something all the sceptics would love to be wrong about, but the fact is the US has one successful in air scramjet test in many decades. It's possible some work is completely secret, but the slow progress of HAWC is not encouraging. Hopefully both demonstrators are flown soon.

 

[In_A_Dream]

You could take one unique stance and say that public innovation is a way to mislead our adversaries & the general public.

True innovation gets a cloak, and a blank check if necessary.

 

[mkellytx]

You could take one unique stance and say that public innovation is a way to mislead our adversaries & the general public.

True innovation gets a cloak, and a blank check if necessary.

Don't get your hopes up, the last hypersonic project to leave the black world was X-37.

 

[rooster]

You could take one unique stance and say that public innovation is a way to mislead our adversaries & the general public.

True innovation gets a cloak, and a blank check if necessary.

Don't get your hopes up, the last hypersonic project to leave the black world was X-37.

I don't think that counts as a hypsersonic aircraft anymore than the shuttle. To date all we have is the x15 from 50 years ago. There were widespread news reports on AM radio circa 86 or 87 winter months i think from reuters that the USAF had "just begun" flight testing of the sr71 successor and more news would be coming out but then the story just went away. I wonder if any of you guys listened to AM remember or heard that news story. I am fairly confident they reported it as capable of mach 5. A year or two later in printed news reports came out of senators being given a showing of a hypersonic aircraft that smelled like sulfur which I am sure was popular enough for most people to remember. Given that was that same time stealth became the new kid on the block i don't put much credit in those stories as the reason to fly fast was to avoid being shot down which stealth did with less technical risk and probably cost

 

[mkellytx]

I don't think that counts as a hypsersonic aircraft anymore than the shuttle. To date all we have is the x15 from 50 years ago. There were widespread news reports on AM radio circa 86 or 87 i think from reuters that the USAF had "just begun" flight testing of the sr71 successor and more news would be coming out but then the story just went away. I wonder if any of you guys listened to AM remember or heard that news story. I am fairly confident they reported it as capable of mach 5.

That's my point, most of our free flight hypersonic data are things falling out of space, rocket powered or a few minutes of airbreathing flight.

 

[Josh_TN]

In retrospect, the US invented hypersonic flight...and then abandoned it. It seems with nuclear ballistic missiles, it seemed redundant. I probably would have made that budget choice too. Imagine if the US had thoroughly funded that research since the X-15.

 

[Zose58]

Just trying to keep them straight. So we have (pulled from a couple different articles recently posted):

1. AGM-183A - Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW). "The ARRW, like many of the emerging threats, is an air-launched, rocket-boosted unpowered hypersonic glider. To be developed under a $480 million initial contract, potentially worth $780 million including early production through 2023, the ARRW work is an extension to Lockheed’s pre-existing DARPA contract under which it is building the virtually identical Tactical Boost Glide (TBG) demonstrator." Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control

2. Hypersonic Conventional Strike Weapon (HCSW). The HCSW is a solid-rocket-powered, GPS-guided missile, and is targeted at initial operational capability on existing combat aircraft in fiscal 2022. Lockheed Martin Space Systems

3. Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept (HAWC). A scramjet-powered missile demonstrator similar in concept to the Air Force Research Laboratory/Boeing X-51A scramjet-powered vehicle that exceeded Mach 5 in a 2013 flight test. Both Lockheed Martin Skunk Works and Raytheon

4. Raytheon, which is partnered with Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems (formerly Orbital ATK) on the scramjet for HAWC, is also in final negotiations with DARPA to develop and test a TBG glide demonstrator. Raytheon’s newest work is believed to be supporting DARPA development of a ship-launched TBG for the U.S. Navy. In July, Lockheed was awarded a $40.5 million Navy Hypersonic Booster Technology Development (HBTD) contract, also believed to be related to this effort.

5. Another one of the projects in the Technology Transition Program is the Advanced Full Range Engine (AFRE), which aims to demonstrate a hybrid propulsion system that would utilize a traditional turbine engine and transition to a Dual Mode Ramjet (DMRJ) for hypersonic travel. Ground tests are planned for 2019 or 2020. This is a joint effort between DARPA and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

6. The Army and Navy are also working on developing hypersonic capabilities. The Army is working with DARPA on studying a ground-launched capability for hypersonic boost glide weapons through the Operational Fires project. This effort was funded at $6 million in FY18 and $50 million in the FY19 request. Operational Fires will also leverage work done on the Air Force TBG program. The Army was previously conducting work on the Advanced Hypersonic Weapon. A successful flight test was conducted in November 2011, but an August 2014 flight test failed due to a problem with the booster rocket used to launch the glide vehicle.

7. The Navy was tasked with a follow-on test using a downsized hypersonic vehicle. Downsizing provides the Navy with the ability to analyze possible future ship-launched capabilities. The Navy's Strategic Systems Programs office conducted this test in October 2017, dubbed Flight Experiment-1. A rocket carrying the glide vehicle was launched from Hawaii, after which the glide vehicle flew more than 2,000 miles in about 30 minutes. Other details of the test were classified.

8. In addition to the ARRW, HCSW, TBG, and HAWC, Lockheed's "Skunk Works" is believed to still be working on the High Speed Strike Weapon, which sources say is a tactical missile in the Mach 3-plus category that resembles its D-21 drone, which USAF launched from SR-71s and B-52s in the 1970s. The HSSW is derivative of the Revolutionary Approach to Time Critical Long Range Strike program Lockheed explored with the Navy in the early 2000s. (This sounds more like speculation as they seem to be conflating two different programs.)

We need to keep up the good work in this field and stay ahead before we are surprised and passed up in this technology

 

[dark sidius]

https://aerospaceamerica.aiaa.org/features/scaling-up/

 

[In_A_Dream]

True innovation gets a cloak, and a blank check if necessary.

Don't get your hopes up, the last hypersonic project to leave the black world was X-37.

And for good reason that it's been that way.

 

[AN/AWW-14(V)]

Aerojet Rocketdyne and Northrop Grumman have demonstrated large scale scramjet technologies by testing engines with thrust levels exceeding 5,897 kg as part of the US Air Force’s (USAF’s) Medium Scale Critical Components (MSCC) test programme.

USAF spokesman Bryan Ripple said on 29 December that the service will move forward with larger scale, multi-mission platforms at speeds greater than Mach 5 because both propulsion systems met the service’s performance expectations. The MSCC sets the foundation for the design of hypersonic propulsion systems across a broad range of vehicle scale and Mach operability.

The USAF in November 2020 completed a series of advanced air-breathing hypersonic engine tests on a 5.5 m Aerojet Rocketdyne scramjet engine, according to a company statement. Ripple said on 16 December that the tests were conducted at Mach 4 and greater speeds.

Northrop Grumman achieved over 5,897 kg of thrust with its own scramjet engine, the USAF announced in August 2019. The company’s engine, also 5.5 m long, endured 30 minutes of accumulated combustion time during nine months of testing. Pat Nolan, Northrop Grumman vice president for missile products, was quoted by the USAF in August 2019 as saying that these 5.5 m scramjets are fighter-engine sized.

Ripple said that both Aerojet Rocketdyne and Northrop Grumman, to make testing more affordable, made compromises to their designs to use common flow path hardware. This provided a demonstration of large-scale scramjet technologies, he said, but did not provide for absolute best performance by either team. This is why the USAF is not comparing them against each other, Ripple said.

Aerojet Rocketdyne, Northrop Grumman demonstrate large scale scramjet technologies

Aerojet Rocketdyne and Northrop Grumman have demonstrated large scale scramjet technologies by testing engines with thrust levels exceeding 5,897 kg as part of the US...

www.janes.com

 

[bobbymike]

Hypersonics Illustrate Supply Chain Vulnerabilities

Hypersonics Illustrate Supply Chain Vulnerabilities

www.nationaldefensemagazine.org

 

[rooster]

Aerojet Rocketdyne and Northrop Grumman have demonstrated large scale scramjet technologies by testing engines with thrust levels exceeding 5,897 kg as part of the US Air Force’s (USAF’s) Medium Scale Critical Components (MSCC) test programme.

USAF spokesman Bryan Ripple said on 29 December that the service will move forward with larger scale, multi-mission platforms at speeds greater than Mach 5 because both propulsion systems met the service’s performance expectations. The MSCC sets the foundation for the design of hypersonic propulsion systems across a broad range of vehicle scale and Mach operability.

The USAF in November 2020 completed a series of advanced air-breathing hypersonic engine tests on a 5.5 m Aerojet Rocketdyne scramjet engine, according to a company statement. Ripple said on 16 December that the tests were conducted at Mach 4 and greater speeds.

Northrop Grumman achieved over 5,897 kg of thrust with its own scramjet engine, the USAF announced in August 2019. The company’s engine, also 5.5 m long, endured 30 minutes of accumulated combustion time during nine months of testing. Pat Nolan, Northrop Grumman vice president for missile products, was quoted by the USAF in August 2019 as saying that these 5.5 m scramjets are fighter-engine sized.

Ripple said that both Aerojet Rocketdyne and Northrop Grumman, to make testing more affordable, made compromises to their designs to use common flow path hardware. This provided a demonstration of large-scale scramjet technologies, he said, but did not provide for absolute best performance by either team. This is why the USAF is not comparing them against each other, Ripple said.

Aerojet Rocketdyne, Northrop Grumman demonstrate large scale scramjet technologies

Aerojet Rocketdyne and Northrop Grumman have demonstrated large scale scramjet technologies by testing engines with thrust levels exceeding 5,897 kg as part of the US...

www.janes.com

Then what was the problems in propulsion with the demonstrator sr72 that led to the article being canceled?

 

[TomcatViP]

Tech readiness?

 

[mkellytx]

Then what was the problems in propulsion with the demonstrator sr72 that led to the article being canceled?

There's no demonstrator, to be canceled something has to first be a program of record, SR-72 is a Skunk Works IRAD project. Blackswift was the air breathing portion of the DARPA Falcon program, but was canceled before X-51 ever flew, similar concept though. IIRC, it was still early in the program, no metal cut, don't even think they had an engine yet, but time fades the memory.

The article @bobbymike posted nails the difficulty of scaling things up.

 

[rooster]

Then what was the problems in propulsion with the demonstrator sr72 that led to the article being canceled?

There's no demonstrator, to be canceled something has to first be a program of record, SR-72 is a Skunk Works IRAD project. Blackswift was the air breathing portion of the DARPA Falcon program, but was canceled before X-51 ever flew, similar concept though. IIRC, it was still early in the program, no metal cut, don't even think they had an engine yet, but time fades the memory.

The article @bobbymike posted nails the difficulty of scaling things up.

SR-72 Hypersonic Demonstrator Aircraft - Airforce Technology

The SR-72 is a new hypersonic demonstrator aircraft to be developed by Lockheed Martin under its Skunk Works or Advanced…

www.airforce-technology.com

Not talking about black swift, black horse or black anything. There were plans to build a demonstrator. Quellish even commented on it.

 

[mkellytx]

SR-72 Hypersonic Demonstrator Aircraft - Airforce Technology

The SR-72 is a new hypersonic demonstrator aircraft to be developed by Lockheed Martin under its Skunk Works or Advanced…

www.airforce-technology.com

Not talking about black swift, black horse or black anything. There were plans to build a demonstrator. Quellish even commented on it

Yes, the proposal to build a F-22 sized demonstrator. Still, can't cancel what's not funded, until there's a program of record this is a LM marketing campaign. Their IRAD seems to be focused on computer design tools and 3D additive manufacturing amongst other things. The dead give away is the articles from 2017 say demonstrator 2022/2023, last year's articles say demonstrator mid 2020's SR-72 2030. Also, the executives quoted in later articles say things like the demonstrator couldn't be built 5 years ago, because the digital tools and additive manufacturing didn't exist.

 

[Lc89]

https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2021-01-21

 

[greenmartian2017]

I have been reading this thread for some time now.

This needs to be said explicitly: Much of the US chronology in regards to hypersonic developments (flight articles and propulsion systems) remains black (tied up in classified programs over time, beginning with efforts back in the 1960s). So much of this remains classified that it is very difficult to have an accurate, decently encompassing discussion about this subject field from an historical viewpoint (although there have been some noteworthy efforts in this regard: Richard Hallion's multi-volume work is such an example) that isn't faced with (in my opinion, numerous) gaps. But let's not forget that even with efforts to get things declassified there are long delays: one 1960s-era hypersonic vehicle program (apparently manned) was ISINGLASS. Decently intact declassified information on this program appeared in 2010 (although there was some release in 2006 also). But rest assured that what has been released on it is not "all" the information that CIA and NRO have in their archives about ISINGLASS. (Ditto for projects like RHEINBERRY, and so on.)

A manned hypersonic vehicle that either flies in low Earth orbit, or just about flies at that altitude (highest endo-atmospheric), has been a very attractive subject for US policy makers for a very long time, over time. Just because the declassified literature "dies out" by 1971 or 1972 doesn't mean the concept wasn't pursued beyond that date. It just means that government declassification officials have deemed that follow-ons to ISINGLASS aren't to be acknowledged, or to be known by the public at this time.

Propulsion systems that operate in the hypersonic speed range (not talking about rockets or rocket-propelled things here) seem to be even more sensitive information-wise.

What a person has to do is look in the "gray" literature for hints. That's where some of the missing story lies. But only some of the story.

My two cents.

 

[marauder2048]

A manned hypersonic vehicle that either flies in low Earth orbit, or just about flies at that altitude (highest endo-atmospheric), has been a very attractive subject for US policy makers for a very long time, over time. Just because the declassified literature "dies out" by 1971 or 1972 doesn't mean the concept wasn't pursued beyond that date. It just means that government declassification officials have deemed that follow-ons to ISINGLASS aren't to be acknowledged, or to be known by the public at this time.

Even ISINGLASS seems to have fallen down in part on IR vulnerability analysis.

It's a recurring theme; you can find papers from the 80's on IR tracking of transatmospheric vehicles.

Detecting and tracking the much more modest SR-72 via a small sat constellation equipped with
some basic MWIR sensors looks quite achievable.

You are talking about 2000 K scramjet exhaust and IR spectra that's not going to be much attenuated
against spaceborne sensors at the typical scramjet altitudes.

This constellation probably isn't going to be transmitting fire control quality tracks but
accurate enough warning such that vulnerable sites can get their counter-ISR techniques in place.

 

[bobbymike]

https://aerospace.org/sites/default/files/2021-01/Wilson_HypersonicMissileDebate_20210112_1.pdf

 

[TomcatViP]

I don't like this approach that by trying to embrace theorically all cases missed to study the doctrinal aspect.
Hypersonics is not a domain segregated from other force employment like can be an air force when compared to manoeuvring ground armies. It's a vehicle for an effect (kinetic/ISR/nuclear...). On the extended battle field of tomorrow, against the millions men armies and militias, Hypersonics will provide time sensitive precision strike (in the case of kinetic) akin to what where the Stuka* during the Blitzkrieg. Speed is there to have range where a single centralized user can cover hundred of miles without having to disperse their forces.
In other terms, IMOHO, there is no dogmatic question left today. The odds are that such scenario will be the one and that only shapes the doctrinal aspect.
There will be stealth. There will be space. And all that have the ability will use Hypersonics.

*I am not thinking at an airframe here but at long range fire

 

[greenmartian2017]

A manned hypersonic vehicle that either flies in low Earth orbit, or just about flies at that altitude (highest endo-atmospheric), has been a very attractive subject for US policy makers for a very long time, over time. Just because the declassified literature "dies out" by 1971 or 1972 doesn't mean the concept wasn't pursued beyond that date. It just means that government declassification officials have deemed that follow-ons to ISINGLASS aren't to be acknowledged, or to be known by the public at this time.

Even ISINGLASS seems to have fallen down in part on IR vulnerability analysis.

It's a recurring theme; you can find papers from the 80's on IR tracking of transatmospheric vehicles.

Detecting and tracking the much more modest SR-72 via a small sat constellation equipped with
some basic MWIR sensors looks quite achievable.

You are talking about 2000 K scramjet exhaust and IR spectra that's not going to be much attenuated
against spaceborne sensors at the typical scramjet altitudes.

This constellation probably isn't going to be transmitting fire control quality tracks but
accurate enough warning such that vulnerable sites can get their counter-ISR techniques in place.

I am aware of the IR factor. The speed of the vehicle was deemed such that it didn't much matter--no Soviet missile or missile intercept attempt would get close enough. Even with some lead detection time. This was projected through at least 1980.

See the set of overhead transparencies with this particular document dated to 1968. All the calculations were done. Soviet interception not viable. Not even with nuclear warhead detonations (although if it was a hydrogen bomb, there was some expectation that there was a potential likelihood for high irradiation of the pilot(s)). "If you don't announce yourself, they can't expect to know when you'll arrive."

https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP71B00822R000100070040-7.pdf

 

[marauder2048]

I am aware of the IR factor. The speed of the vehicle was deemed such that it didn't much matter--no Soviet missile or missile intercept attempt would get close enough. Even with some lead detection time. This was projected through at least 1980.

And this was essentially the same survivability analysis that had been presented to McMillan earlier.
And he (correctly) criticized it for assuming that the Russians couldn't develop radars that could
achieve 1 degree (or less) above the horizon radar look angles, reaction times comparable to Nike-X
and IR homing. Even track-via-missile, an early 60's development, would have been an extremely threatening
development.

 

[bobbymike]

From Inside Defense pay site

SSP director: CPS program remains 'on track' despite FY-21 funding cuts​

The Conventional Prompt Strike program -- the Navy and Army project to field an intermediate-range offensive hypersonic weapon by 2025 and 2023 respectively -- remains "on track" despite a nearly 40% funding cut imposed a few weeks ago to the Navy's $1 billion request in the fiscal year 2021 defense appropriations bill, according to a senior Navy official
—————————————————
Just the beginning of the cuts I’m afraid.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Indeed.

 

[Bhurki]

Can someone compile length, diameter, weight, range of all of the hypersonic missiles concerned with this thread?

 

[bobbymike]

Australia US Teaming to Develop High-Tech Cruise Missiles

Australia US Teaming to Develop High-Tech Cruise Missiles

www.nationaldefensemagazine.org

 

[sferrin]

From Inside Defense pay site

SSP director: CPS program remains 'on track' despite FY-21 funding cuts​

The Conventional Prompt Strike program -- the Navy and Army project to field an intermediate-range offensive hypersonic weapon by 2025 and 2023 respectively -- remains "on track" despite a nearly 40% funding cut imposed a few weeks ago to the Navy's $1 billion request in the fiscal year 2021 defense appropriations bill, according to a senior Navy official
—————————————————
Just the beginning of the cuts I’m afraid.

Funding cuts? I thought those were "imaginary". Hmmm.

 

[bobbymike]

EXCLUSIVE: Pentagon's Hypersonics Director Rebuts The Critics - Breaking Defense

Independent experts and the Pentagon’s hypersonics R&D director tell us a study of hypersonics by the Union of Concerned Scientists overlooks the very real advantages the new weapons offer the US – and its adversaries.

breakingdefense.com

 

[bobbymike]

Don’t believe the hype about hypersonics

Full Page Reload

spectrum.ieee.org

 

[TomcatViP]

It's a stupid assessment of Hypersonics. Again, comparing those new weapons, like any other, in a static environment sketched in the past doesn't help.
Effectively, if both armies are standing each one in front of the other within a stabilized tactical situation where everyone enjoy perfect awareness of the movements etc... Etc... Time critical situations have no meanings. Better to bring back the Maginot line...

Now try to imagine a dynamic situation where both opponents manoeuvre at the scale of a continent with forces on one side on short supply in manpower, then time and range become an effector.
For example, instead of having to move an artillery unit in a zone close to 100 miles of your frontline operation every day, you can have a ship, offshore firing Hypersonics terminally guided shells 500 miles away that allows you to support a variety of units without the burden of a multitude of logistical train. And cut drastically the cost of your war effort.

Being deprived of Hypersonic tomorrow would be like it was sustaining your mechanized infantry with horses and carts yesterday.

 

[jsport]

In support of US hypersonic system development

Both China and Russia have already fielded hypersonic weapons with initial capabilities. It is therefore essential that the U.S. responds through development of effective defensive measures.

www.defensenews.com