Current US hypersonic weapons projects. (General)

bobbymike said:
Eagerly anticipating X-Bow Systems next test. If they are specifically talking about larger diameter they’re only 12” away from Midgetman’s 46” diameter.

Could make a nice IRBM for hypersonic strike.
Click to expand...
They are already at CPS/Dark Eagle size with this motor. I don't think an even larger (Polaris-sized, probably) IRBM makes much sense for the Pacific given the lack of land area for dispersal. Ranges from southwest Alaska to northern China will be in ICBM class at 5,500 - 6,500 km, and those flight paths will overfly Russia without aggressive doglegs. Northern Australia could be a good dispersal area, with ranges of roughly 4,500 km to southern China, but then you are gambling the utility of an entire weapon system (one that could easily be used for nuclear weapons) on Australian politics. CPS already gets you from Guam to Nanchang.
 
bobbymike said:
Eagerly anticipating X-Bow Systems next test. If they are specifically talking about larger diameter they’re only 12” away from Midgetman’s 46” diameter.

Could make a nice IRBM for hypersonic strike.
Click to expand...
We have the GBI > NGI transition so it could be a play for homeland defense focused large diameter SRMs. I'm more excited about X-Bow finalizing the development and certification of the MK 104 DTRM and the Mk 72 booster which should allow the Navy and Army to increase the Sm-6, Sm-3 and future Navy interceptor rates quite dramatically.
 
Sferrin said:
View attachment 811316
Click to expand...
What is that?

bring_it_on said:
We have the GBI > NGI transition so it could be a play for homeland defense focused large diameter SRMs. I'm more excited about X-Bow finalizing the development and certification of the MK 104 DTRM and the Mk 72 booster which should allow the Navy and Army to increase the Sm-6, Sm-3 and future Navy interceptor rates quite dramatically.
Click to expand...
It was mentioned in the hypersonic defense thread that the 34.5 inch motors could be used for SBIs.
 
Forest Green said:
What is that?


It was mentioned in the hypersonic defense thread that the 34.5 inch motors could be used for SBIs.
Click to expand...
No idea. It looks like they just slapped on the minimum amount of structure required to fly the motor but I don't know why they'd do that. South Korea did it with a big solid booster but I've not heard of other companies in the US doing that.
 
Forest Green said:
What is that?


It was mentioned in the hypersonic defense thread that the 34.5 inch motors could be used for SBIs.
Click to expand...

They are on contract to develop the second source motor for one of the stages of the LRHW/CPS. I was specifically commenting on the reference to even larger diameter SRMs mentioned by them.
 
bring_it_on said:
They are on contract to develop the second source motor for one of the stages of the LRHW/CPS. I was specifically commenting on the reference to even larger diameter SRMs mentioned by them.
Click to expand...
Larger than 34" is most like NGI as you say. GBI is ~50" I think. The only other realistic possibility is a secondary source for LGM-35A and UGM-133A stages.
 
Forest Green said:
Larger than 34" is most like NGI as you say. GBI is ~50" I think. The only other realistic possibility is a secondary source for LGM-35A and UGM-133A stages.
Click to expand...
GBI SRMs are 50” diameter, but NGI is significantly bigger than GBI. More energy needed at a longer range. Sentinel is at least as large as MMIII (Sentinel is bigger, but not sure by how much) and D5 is 83” diameter. Maybe D5 third stage which is about the same diameter as CPS SRMs. D5 is also class 1.1 propellant and there is only one facility in the US currently capable of mixing and casting large class 1.1 motors.
 
Last edited:
https://x.com/L3HarrisTech/status/2057144322403770592?s=20

L3Harris Achieves Major Milestones With Latest Series of Rotating Detonation Engine Tests​

https://www.l3harris.com/newsroom/e...-milestones-latest-series-rotating-detonation

https://twitter.com/x/status/2057592641215156429
View: https://x.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/2057592641215156429?s=20

https://twitter.com/x/status/2057799150318530896
View: https://x.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/2057799150318530896?s=20
The US Air Force's air-launched high-speed strike portfolio has a structural problem. The current roadmap is bifurcated between two expensive and exquisite options. On one end sits the AGM-183A Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon (ARRW), an exquisite boost-glide system that uses a high-impulse booster to lift a highly maneuverable, high lift-to-drag hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV). On the other sits the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM), powered by a third-generation scramjet derived from the DARPA Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept (HAWC) program. Both platforms carry limited warhead mass. Both run between $5 Million and $13 Million per round depending on production volume and inventory objectives. Nothing sits between or below them.
Click to expand...
Stripping out the boost-glide complexity lets the Air Force fill the operational space between shorter-range tactical strike weapons like the Stand-in Attack Weapon (SiAW) and the exquisite hypersonic systems at the top of the stack.
Click to expand...
A balanced strike architecture needs a high-low operational mix. The ALBM is the low end. ARRW and HACM remain at the top, reserved for the most heavily defended, time-critical fixed, relocatable or mobile targets where unpredictable, low-altitude lateral maneuvering is required to bypass early-warning radars and high-end integrated air defenses.
Click to expand...

The options here are to reuse the ARRW's 25.9inch SRM booster or the Ursa Major LFR.
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
https://x.com/L3HarrisTech/status/2057144322403770592?s=20

L3Harris Achieves Major Milestones With Latest Series of Rotating Detonation Engine Tests​

https://www.l3harris.com/newsroom/e...-milestones-latest-series-rotating-detonation

https://twitter.com/x/status/2057592641215156429
View: https://x.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/2057592641215156429?s=20

https://twitter.com/x/status/2057799150318530896
View: https://x.com/AirPowerNEW1/status/2057799150318530896?s=20




The options here are to reuse the ARRW's 25.9inch SRM booster or the Ursa Major LFR.
Click to expand...
Is there zero evidence that the USAF will come in on the USN's Blackbeard (MACE program winner) Affordable Aeroballistic/Hypersonic Missile?!?
That would make sense to me especially with the growing F-15EX procurement numbers.
They could (depending on size/weight) likely haul 4 while carrying 3 drop tanks out to 400 or 500nmi*!
 
It’s hard to believe Castelion would not be considered a candidate for ALBMs, especially as the USN has alreacontracted for F-18 integration. But likely the USAF will bid the program and see what industry can bring to the table. They may be interring multiple sources/production lines, especially as it appears the army and navy are already going to heavily employing whatever they produce (presuming there is a finished product on the near horizon).
 
Quite honestly the $5 million price point does not seem that bad for HACM, given the range and the fact it can maintain consistently high speed over almost its entire envelope.
 
Last edited:
Josh_TN said:
It’s hard to believe Castelion would not be considered a candidate for ALBMs, especially as the USN has alreacontracted for F-18 integration.
Click to expand...

What's the warhead on the Blackbeard GL? By the looks of it it appears something like a hybrid between a GMLRS ER and a PrSM with a smaller warhead than either of them. Hard to see it being very useful for the heavy bombers. Obviously the company is free to design something unique for Air Force requirements.

Josh_TN said:
Quite honestly the $5 million price point does not seem that bad for HACM, given the range and the fact it can Maia consistently high speed over almost its entire envelope.
Click to expand...
Its actually very good if it can be achieved at that program's volumes. Less than 50% of the cost of the ARRW. We'll have to wait to see if Raytheon and Northrop Grumman can deliver on that.
 

Lockheed Unveils Low-Cost Hypersonic Glide Missile​



https://aviationweek.com/defense/mi...eed-unveils-low-cost-hypersonic-glide-missile
lmh.jpg.png
 
More on story.

https://defence-blog.com/us-hypersonic-race-lockheed-bets-on-affordable-glide-body/
Key Points
  • Lockheed Martin announced the Next Generation Glide Body hypersonic weapon on June 24, 2026, completing Preliminary Design Review with a flight demonstration planned for 2027.
  • The NXGB is designed for multi-platform, multi-domain launch with greater range and speed than current designs, using a manufacturing-first approach to reduce production costs.
Click to expand...
The Next Generation Glide Body, referred to internally as NXGB, differs from earlier American hypersonic programs primarily in its design philosophy. Previous hypersonic development programs, including the Army’s Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon and the Navy’s Conventional Prompt Strike program, both of which use the Common Hypersonic Glide Body developed by Dynetics and Sandia National Laboratories, focused on achieving hypersonic performance as the primary engineering goal, with cost and production rate treated as secondary considerations. NXGB inverts that hierarchy, starting from manufacturing requirements and working backward to the aerodynamic and materials design, a approach Lockheed Martin describes as a manufacturing-first design methodology. The company says this approach delivers greater range and velocity than current designs while reducing per-unit cost, though specific performance figures and cost targets were not disclosed in the announcement.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Yes I’ve never worked in aerospace directly but question for our knowledgeable members.

With all this AI/3D help why would an initial design take a year for a prototype to be built. It’s like longer for this than the first A-12/SR-71 to be built.
 
bobbymike said:
Yes I’ve never worked in aerospace directly but question for our knowledgeable members.

With all this AI/3D help why would an initial design take a year for a prototype to be built. It’s like longer for this than the first A-12/SR-71 to be built.
Click to expand...
CYA. I'll bet WAY more time is spent in meetings these days. You think Kelly Johnson would ever be quadruple booked all day every day?
 
bobbymike said:
Yes I’ve never worked in aerospace directly but question for our knowledgeable members.

With all this AI/3D help why would an initial design take a year for a prototype to be built. It’s like longer for this than the first A-12/SR-71 to be built.
Click to expand...

Looks like an IRAD project, so they're probably being more calculated with risk and ensuring they can deliver on their marketing.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom