Current US hypersonic weapons projects. (General)

NMaude said:
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?
Click to expand...
Check out
books.google.ca

Lightning Bolts

History shows that demands of wartime military and political leaders have often motivated development of new and advanced technologies. The German desire to attack American cities with long-range variants of V-2 missiles during the latter years of World War II stimulated development of...
books.google.ca
 
bobbymike said:
Check out
books.google.ca

Lightning Bolts

History shows that demands of wartime military and political leaders have often motivated development of new and advanced technologies. The German desire to attack American cities with long-range variants of V-2 missiles during the latter years of World War II stimulated development of...
books.google.ca
Click to expand...
Thanks:).

Edit: I checked on Amazon and the book is available (There's no listing at all) although the author is mentioned.
 
Last edited:
NMaude said:
Thanks:).

Edit: I checked on Amazon and the book is available (There's no listing at all) although the author is mentioned.
Click to expand...
Amazon Germany has one available... For close to 800 dollar.

Abebooks has one for 250:

Lightning Bolts: First Maneuvering Reentry Vehicles - Yengst, William: 9781615665471 - AbeBooks

Lightning Bolts: First Maneuvering Reentry Vehicles by Yengst, William - ISBN 10: 1615665471 - ISBN 13: 9781615665471 - Tate Pub & Enterprises Llc - 2010 - Softcover
www.abebooks.com
 
Hypersonic weapons might be a technology of the future but at least four of the Pentagon’s six ongoing development programs are failing to take full advantage of modern engineering techniques, a Government Accountability Office report released July 29 found.
 
bobbymike said:
Hypersonic weapons might be a technology of the future but at least four of the Pentagon’s six ongoing development programs are failing to take full advantage of modern engineering techniques, a Government Accountability Office report released July 29 found.
Click to expand...
*shrug* So? If the makers aren't familiar with the new techniques, it's cheaper for this project to continue to use the older ones.

Unless the US.gov wants to pay for the contracting company to become familiar with those techniques?
 
The program, and not the contractors, set the terms on what sort of capability they need. Lockheed and Raytheon are doing digital engineering on several other programs across the various munition and platforms being developed for the DOD. Some of the hypersonic programs mentioned in the report are quite old as programs especially if you go back to their parent programs (DARPA HAWC/TBG etc) which they are leveraging heavily to compress schedules and reduce risk.
 
Last edited:
bobbymike said:
www.twz.com

Hypersonic Weapon Just Tested In Florida, Results Unclear

Vague details about a recently "initiated" test comes after the Army scrubbed three planned hypersonic missile launches last year.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
Click to expand...
In the comments section a useful graphic:
1722327787380.png

The boost-glide vehicle at the tip of the AURs for Dark Eagle/LRHW and IRCPS is a conical design with a high degree of maneuverability. This, together with the weapon’s extreme speed, makes it very challenging for defenders to spot and track, let alone intercept, and reduces the time an opponent has to react in any way.

The Army has said in the past that the weapon, at least when employed in its ground-launched form, is expected to reach a peak speed of at least Mach 17 and have a range in excess of 1,725 miles (2,775 kilometers). The warning notices that are believed to be associated with the recent test from Cape Canaveral suggest the maximum range could be between around 2,112 and 2,796 miles (3,400 and 4,500 kilometers). For traditional ballistic missiles, intermediate-range is generally defined as anything between 1,864 and 3,418 miles (3,000 and 5,000 kilometers).
Click to expand...

All in all the article is another classic case of interviewing the keyboad, with an aim to poke the military because they haven't released information.
 
Last edited:
Hypersonic technology has reshaped U.S. national security and upended strategy in modern warfare. Russia’s reported use of a Zircon hypersonic cruise missile in Ukraine and China’s leading hypersonic arsenal, as noted in the Pentagon’s 2023 report, highlight that U.S. adversaries are increasingly able to challenge its hegemony in a way unseen in the last 35 years. Meanwhile, the U.S. military branches are actively developing hypersonic weapons and interceptors to counter these threats.
 
Talking about hypersonic weapons and missiles to intercept them is there a thread dealing with Indian ABM interceptors and systems, if not a relevant thread for them?
 
bring_it_on said:
They haven't confirmed what or even if they tested, but we saw some nice tweets gather traction on X so let's file an article so we can claim to be the first one to cover the test.
Click to expand...
So...did anything ever happen?
 
Josh_TN said:
45 by law, if I understand it correctly.
Click to expand...
Even so, more than a bit of a gamble by the Air Force there. Though with the remaining airframe hours on the B-1Bs fast being gobbled up, they may feel that they have no choice but to roll the dice and hope for the best.
 
Grey Havoc said:
Even so, more than a bit of a gamble by the Air Force there. Though with the remaining airframe hours on the B-1Bs fast being gobbled up, they may feel that they have no choice but to roll the dice and hope for the best.
Click to expand...

I think if the USAF had its choice it would retire the B-1 fleet now. We can debate the wisdom of that but I their is only an act of Congress that keeps the type in service, and it will retire as soon as the USAF can replace it one for one by law.
 
Josh_TN said:
I think if the USAF had its choice it would retire the B-1 fleet now. We can debate the wisdom of that but I their is only an act of Congress that keeps the type in service, and it will retire as soon as the USAF can replace it one for one by law.
Click to expand...
I think the USAF would not retire the Bones until they have very close to a 1:1 replacement in B21s, even without that law.

Because they'd have to release all those officers from service and nobody wants to lose that many bodies.
 
Scott Kenny said:
I think the USAF would not retire the Bones until they have very close to a 1:1 replacement in B21s, even without that law.

Because they'd have to release all those officers from service and nobody wants to lose that many bodies.
Click to expand...
There's always an aircrew shortage. They'd find places for them, especially staff jobs which are perfect for field graders that lost their airframes and aren't worth retraining on another platform. WSO's can always be stuck in the back seats of F-15E/EX's, or if they're young enough/don't have Coke bottle glasses sent to UPT, or if they're really not liked, sent to UAV's.

That said, the Bone still provides enough value that they will hold off until the Raiders start rolling off the line in Palmdale.
 
The mako is the way. We must go with as inexpensive and simple a missile as possible and as quickly as possible. If God forbid a global war sparks off we can saturate Russian and Chinese air defenses to bypass them or outright destroy them.

i think in the short term that means a solid rocket motor and low hypersonic speeds. Then we will have some very deadly kit while we develop the more complex and higher speed hypersonic weapons like the detonation and scramjet and glider based weapons.
 
TMA1 said:
The mako is the way. We must go with as inexpensive and simple a missile as possible and as quickly as possible. If God forbid a global war sparks off we can saturate Russian and Chinese air defenses to bypass them or outright destroy them.

i think in the short term that means a solid rocket motor and low hypersonic speeds. Then we will have some very deadly kit while we develop the more complex and higher speed hypersonic weapons like the detonation and scramjet and glider based weapons.
Click to expand...

Mako is the losing bid for SiAW. So I cannot imagine it has any special capabilities or cost savings. At least in the mind of the USAF, it was less desirable.
 
Josh_TN said:
Mako is the losing bid for SiAW. So I cannot imagine it has any special capabilities or cost savings. At least in the mind of the USAF, it was less desirable.
Click to expand...
Probaly the only good about it can be replicated with SiAW / AARGM-ER which would be the digital design with Lots of additive manufacture. Tought do we know SiAWs guidance? Will it maybe be based on PrSM guidance Increment 2? Also what guidance would Mako have? Probaly something based of PrSM
 
Last edited:
This seems to imply the last test was also unsuccessful:

‘The Army needs to have confidence “it’s safe and effective to actually put in a unit that might have to go to war,” he said. “We haven’t had that test event yet where it’s fully succeeded, but we’re going to have, hopefully have, it this year“‘
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom