Current US hypersonic weapons projects. (General)

I believe this is the right thread for this Defense Updates video concerning the USAF's current and future strike and interceptor missiles:


The war in Ukraine, the withdrawal from INF Treaty due to Russian non-compliance, Iran & North Korea’s significant military buildup as well as Chinese aggression in the South China Sea has pushed the U.S. military to come to terms with new realities.Gone are the days when it was waging wars against adversaries with no-to-limited high-tech weaponry.The US military is taking key steps to evolve and one crucial aspect of this endeavor is adding new cutting-edge missiles to its inventory.
Click to expand...
In this video, Defense Updates analyzes what new missiles the U.S. military will bring to the fight in the coming days?
Click to expand...
#defenseupdates #futureusmissiles #usmilitaryhttps://www.youtube.com/hashtag/usmilitary
Click to expand...
Chapters:
00:11 INTRODUCTION
02:08 AIM-260
03:07 PrSM
04:21 MAKO
05:34 LREW
06:21 TOMAHAWK BLOCK V
07:31 LRHW -Dark Eagle
08:21 LRAAM
09:55 AIM-174B
11:19 NEXT GENERATION INTERCEPTOR
12:36 SENTINEL ICBM
Click to expand...
 
Forest Green said:
Guam (left), Rammstein (right)
1721811212492.png
1721811425869.png
Click to expand...
OT (sorry) ... but *LOL*!! :D

The US base in Germany is named Ramstein. Rammstein is the well-known hard rock band. They are famous for the extensive use of pyrotechnics in their shows, but I think a full-scale LRHW launch would be a bit over the top :p.
 
Andreas Parsch said:
OT (sorry) ... but *LOL*!! :D

The US base in Germany is named Ramstein. Rammstein is the well-known hard rock band. They are famous for the extensive use of pyrotechnics in their shows, but I think a full-scale LRHW launch would be a bit over the top :p.
Click to expand...
I have 4 albums, I assumed the spelling was the same for some reason.

kqcke for you said:
Did Lrwh have a warhead or was it full kinematics?
Click to expand...
Usually tested with an inert warhead, my guess.

Josh_TN said:
Is the army test going to use the real launcher or just a test stand?
Click to expand...
I would assume so, but we will find out.
 
Alex Hollings from Sandboxx has just put out a video concerning LM's Mako:


-- BREAK --
Click to expand...
Lockheed Martin has released new details about the air-launched hypersonic Mako missile, which promises to be the first hypersonic weapon in the world that can be launched from the internal weapons bay of not just the F-35, but the F-22 Raptor as well.
Click to expand...
This new missile has been under development for seven years and has been touted by Lockheed officials as a “multi-mission” weapon system capable of maritime strike, counter-air defense, and a variety of other surface-attack operations. It was originally developed for the U.S. Air Force, but now may find a home with the U.S. Navy instead.
Click to expand...
Let's talk about what we've learned about this groundbreaking new weapon.
Click to expand...
You can catch our first deep dive into the Mako Missile here: • The new HYPERSONIC missile that fits ...
And you can read our full coverage of this development on Sandboxx News here: https://www.sandboxx.us/news/lockheed...
Click to expand...
 
Andreas Parsch said:
OT (sorry) ... but *LOL*!! :D

The US base in Germany is named Ramstein. Rammstein is the well-known hard rock band. They are famous for the extensive use of pyrotechnics in their shows, but I think a full-scale LRHW launch would be a bit over the top :p.
Click to expand...
As if Rammstein wouldn't accept a request to perform at the launch of an LRHW... :D
 
I wonder if the plan is to have it re-enter at the start of the marked area and then pull up and manoeuvre the rest of the way. Looks like they might be firing two. Anyone notice that there is another 'red' area marked higher up and the central red area appears to diverge, with the top part being in line with the upper read zone later on. Is this where the booster will fall? Is the C-HGB also going to perform an exo-atmospheric diversion manoeuvre? :eek:

1721921337109.png
 
Last edited:
It looks CB like there is a divert area, or else more than one shot. What is the significance of the purple line vice the red line to the reentry point? 3400 km vice 4450?
 
Josh_TN said:
It looks CB like there is a divert area, or else more than one shot. What is the significance of the purple line vice the red line to the reentry point? 3400 km vice 4450?
Click to expand...
It looks like two missiles are being fired to me but the divert area does not line up with the launch point for the upper one, so there must be a divert in space. It's fairly confusing either way TBH.

I think the purple line is just measuring to the start of the re-entry area and the red to the end. Whether this implies the C-HGB re-enters at the start and manoeuvres to the end in atmosphere or not I don't know. It could be.

I don't think you can say much about minimum range form where the stages land. That's just where they land on that launch trajectory.
 
Forest Green said:
It looks like two missiles are being fired to me but the divert area does not line up with the launch point for the upper one, so there must be a divert in space. It's fairly confusing either way TBH.

I think the purple line is just measuring to the start of the re-entry area and the red to the end. Whether this implies the C-HGB re-enters at the start and manoeuvres to the end in atmosphere or not I don't know. It could be.

I don't think you can say much about minimum range form where the stages land. That's just where they land on that launch trajectory.
Click to expand...

The trapezoid area starts almost a thousand miles off the Cape.

Do we know anything about the trajectory/altitude? Does the system truly enter space in the technical sense (100km)? Is there a reentry similar to a medium/intermediate ballistic missile?

Also if 4450km/2700mi is the splashdown, then the previous “1750mi” range given by the army was clearly politically motivated.
 
Actually thinking about it more - if the trajectory is truly ballistic, with the glider reentering and then maneuvering, then it should be coming down roughly in the same area as the booster until it catches enough atmosphere to pull up. That *would* mean that the minimum range was not much shorter than the booster splash down.

Alternatively, I thought that test they did with the Atlas missile in the 60s actually went horizontal rather quickly and was largely endoatmospheric. I do not know enough about aerodynamics or rocketry to understand the LRHW's trajectory. If it were flatter, I assume that would mean a second stage with a long sustainer grained motor. If it is ballistic, then I assume hard burn all the way and that the RV falls into enough atmosphere to maneuver not to far in front of the spent stage. I am not knowledgeable enough to know what kind of trajectory it has though.
 
Josh_TN said:
The trapezoid area starts almost a thousand miles off the Cape.

Do we know anything about the trajectory/altitude? Does the system truly enter space in the technical sense (100km)? Is there a reentry similar to a medium/intermediate ballistic missile?
Click to expand...
It would have to enter space to achieve anything like that range.
 
Josh_TN said:
The first red trapezoid looks configured to allow a stage separation for either of furthest impact zones. If that’s the case, it’s worth noting this AUP has a huge minimum range. Not surprising, but worth measuring.
Click to expand...
I’d think more along the lines of glide body reentry on the first shape and terminal maneuver for the second. It is not a ballistic trajectory.
 
Calphor said:
I’d think more along the lines of glide body reentry on the first shape and terminal maneuver for the second. It is not a ballistic trajectory.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but would not glide body reentry if anything even more accurately indicate minimum range?
 
Josh_TN said:
Fair enough, but would not glide body reentry if anything even more accurately indicate minimum range?
Click to expand...
For the exoatmospheric flight paths, yes.

I'm not willing to accept that there isn't an alternative where the upper stage goes parallel to the ground like that Atlas HGV test in the 60s.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I'm not willing to accept that there isn't an alternative where the upper stage goes parallel to the ground like that Atlas HGV test in the 60s.
Click to expand...

Didn't the Atlas boosters reach an altitude of about 30-40 miles (After shutdown and separation of the booster engines) before they pitched over?
 
NMaude said:
Didn't the Atlas boosters reach an altitude of about 30-40 miles (After shutdown and separation of the booster engines) before they pitched over?
Click to expand...
1722068902869.png
February 26, 1968
"A typical BGRV flight trajectory and footprint is illustrated in Figure 12. In profile, the Atlas missile would fly to an altitude of about 130,000 feet, turn to horizontal flight to gain speed, and then would separate BGRV on a glide-path at over Mach 15 toward 110,000 foot altitude. The vehicle would spin up, establish a lifting angle of attack to offset gravity, and glide with little change in attitude, managing its energy to reach the desired destination. In the target area, programmed steering equations would take over and turn the vehicle into a terminal dive and maneuver to the intended aimpoint.

Because of its enormous kinetic energy and high L/D, BGRV could glide downrange nearly 5,000 miles or turn out of plane cross range about 2,000 miles. At altitudes near 100,000 feet, there was so little atmosphere; turns took long distances to accomplish and resulted in higher loss of energy than forward fight. The entire flight to maximum range was almost 45 minutes, about twice as long as ballistic missile transit."
 
Forest Green said:
In profile, the Atlas missile would fly to an altitude of about 130,000 feet, turn to horizontal flight to gain speed, and then would separate BGRV on a glide-path at over Mach 15 toward 110,000 foot altitude.
Click to expand...

I don't know what altitude an Atlas would normally shutdown its' booster engines but at 130,000Ft (~25 miles) that would have to be right after it shut down and jettisoned the booster-engines or shut them down early. Anyway 130,000Ft for a rocket like that is a very low altitude, the aero thermal loads must've been significant.
 
NMaude said:
I don't know what altitude an Atlas would normally shutdown its' booster engines but at 130,000Ft (~25 miles) that would have to be right after it shut down and jettisoned the booster-engines or shut them down early. Anyway 130,000Ft for a rocket like that is a very low altitude, the aero thermal loads must've been significant.
Click to expand...
It flies horizontally on boost to gain speed.
 
Forest Green said:
It flies horizontally on boost to gain speed.
Click to expand...

It wouldn't have needed the boosters once it got that high due to a significant proportion of its LOX/RP-1 propellant would've been burned and the Atlas D (I assume it was an Atlas D) had a sustainer rocket-motor thrust of ~81,000Lb. No doubt the booster-section would've been shutdown and jettisoned to avoid over-speeding.
 
NMaude said:
It wouldn't have needed the boosters once it got that high due to a significant proportion of its LOX/RP-1 propellant would've been burned and the Atlas D (I assume it was an Atlas D) had a sustainer rocket-motor thrust of ~81,000Lb. No doubt the booster-section would've been shutdown and jettisoned to avoid over-speeding.
Click to expand...
fly to an altitude of about 130,000 feet, turn to horizontal flight to gain speed, and then would separate BGRV on a glide-path at over Mach 15 toward 110,000 foot altitude

If Mach 15 was the designed release speed, maybe they just fired the release mechanism, shut down the engines, and let drag separate them.
 
Whether the flight path is flat or ballistic, it seems likely to me the first red zone of the NOTAM is booster splash down and that this represents either burn out and separation of the glider or reentry of the spent booster and glider. Either way, it is probably a minimum range of the system. There may be further limitations on the glider when it is operating at its maximum speed and thermal load. If this estimate of minimum range (~1000mi/1500km) were accurate, that has a lot of consequences for basing - for instance basing in Southern Japan or Northern PI would actually put a huge number of likely desired targets far too close.
 
Josh_TN said:
Whether the flight path is flat or ballistic, it seems likely to me the first red zone of the NOTAM is booster splash down and that this represents either burn out and separation of the glider or reentry of the spent booster and glider. Either way, it is probably a minimum range of the system. There may be further limitations on the glider when it is operating at its maximum speed and thermal load. If this estimate of minimum range (~1000mi/1500km) were accurate, that has a lot of consequences for basing - for instance basing in Southern Japan or Northern PI would actually put a huge number of likely desired targets far too close.
Click to expand...
Tought maybe Opfires could solve that problem to some extend with that development in an future Version of it.
 
kqcke for you said:
Thanks. Does it have an warhead for life rounds ?

Edit: i remember that it was talked about in some thread but i can't find it anymore.
Click to expand...

I don’t think we know, but I would assume at least some kind of bursting charge and proxy fusing for soft targets.
 
kqcke for you said:
Thanks. Does it have an warhead for life rounds ?
Click to expand...
Highly likely.
Josh_TN said:
Whether the flight path is flat or ballistic, it seems likely to me the first red zone of the NOTAM is booster splash down and that this represents either burn out and separation of the glider or reentry of the spent booster and glider.
Click to expand...
Don't see where that logic is coming from. You could fire it on a trajectory with a higher apogee;
1722105345876.png
Or given that it's a MaRV, use a depressed trajectory. Where the booster lands on this test only indicates where the booster lands when fired to this range. I mean even a Trident D-5 can be fired on an 1,850km trajectory.

Josh_TN said:
LRHW is two stage, correct? Where is the NOTAM for the first stage? It must separate in a matter of se ones after launch.
Click to expand...
If the second stage leaves the atmosphere during burn it will probably re-enter where the C-HGB does, since there is no drag in space and it's moving at the same speed. However, it will likely burn up on re-entry as it's not designed for that, hence no need for NOTAM.
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
Highly likely.

Don't see where that logic is coming from. You could fire it on a trajectory with a higher apogee;
View attachment 735509
Or given that it's a MaRV, use a depressed trajectory. Where the booster lands on this test only indicates where the booster lands when fired to this range. I mean even a Trident D-5 can be fired on an 1,850km trajectory.


If the second stage leaves the atmosphere during burn it will probably re-enter where the C-HGB does, since there is no drag in space and it's moving at the same speed. However, it will likely burn up on re-entry as it's not designed for that, hence no need for NOTAM.
Click to expand...

Fair enough.
 
Was there a technical paper written about these 1968 test-flights using the Atlas launch boosters? Something that maybe available online from the DTIC website?
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom