Current US hypersonic weapons projects. (General)

Its good news re starting things like x 43B its time now technology start to be mature and in the race with China it is Time to win
 
The velocity will continue to bleed during the glide. So I suspect we are, among other things, seeing average speed conflated with max speed at burnout. Still, all of those seem higher than I would have thought. The 2017 test covered 2200 miles in under 30 minutes, which works to an average of ~Mach 6. But it would be the case that the longer the flight, the lower the average speed. I doubt we will ever truly know the envelope for the weapon, and I feel after you reach a certain threshold the difference is a little moot.

EDIT: is IR CSP a separate program/different missile than CSP? Or did it just get renamed?
 
The velocity will continue to bleed during the glide. So I suspect we are, among other things, seeing average speed conflated with max speed at burnout. Still, all of those seem higher than I would have thought. The 2017 test covered 2200 miles in under 30 minutes, which works to an average of ~Mach 6. But it would be the case that the longer the flight, the lower the average speed. I doubt we will ever truly know the envelope for the weapon, and I feel after you reach a certain threshold the difference is a little moot.

EDIT: is IR CSP a separate program/different missile than CSP? Or did it just get renamed?
In the test of March 19 it reached the speed of mach 17, but I think it can also go faster if they launch it from further away, as with the test in 2014 from the island of Kodiak in Alaska to Kwajalein in the Marshall Islands, which however exploded at the moment of launch.
 
Last edited:
...
 

Attachments

  • httpsboeingvirtual.eventsAFAASC2020-master.ts_snapshot_00.17_[2020.09.17_22.11.03].jpg
    httpsboeingvirtual.eventsAFAASC2020-master.ts_snapshot_00.17_[2020.09.17_22.11.03].jpg
    370.4 KB · Views: 58
  • httpsboeingvirtual.eventsAFAASC2020-master.ts_snapshot_00.29_[2020.09.17_22.11.39].jpg
    httpsboeingvirtual.eventsAFAASC2020-master.ts_snapshot_00.29_[2020.09.17_22.11.39].jpg
    213.2 KB · Views: 58
  • httpsboeingvirtual.eventsAFAASC2020-master.ts_snapshot_00.35_[2020.09.17_22.11.59].jpg
    httpsboeingvirtual.eventsAFAASC2020-master.ts_snapshot_00.35_[2020.09.17_22.11.59].jpg
    294 KB · Views: 60
  • httpsboeingvirtual.eventsAFAASC2020-master.ts_snapshot_00.35_[2020.09.17_22.12.25].jpg
    httpsboeingvirtual.eventsAFAASC2020-master.ts_snapshot_00.35_[2020.09.17_22.12.25].jpg
    184.8 KB · Views: 62
Presumably the first airbreathing super/hyper sonic would be based on one of the HAWC demostrators. They are supposedly much smaller/lighter than ARRW. Their are quotes indicating that the USAF envisions B-52s being armed with "14 to 20" air breathing hypersonics; that would tend to put the weapon in the size and weight class of AGM-86 or perhaps a bit larger.

I have a hard time believing the B-1 fleet will ever be modified for hypersonics; we're basically talking about two dozen combat coded airframes that will be the first to the bone yard when the B-21 is introduced. Where as B-52's will hopefully be get an engine upgrade and be flying until 2040-50.
 
Someone mentioned on that Twitter thread that using the pylons breached the START treaty?
 
Which I think is no longer in force. I think New START only restricts the total number of 'launchers' and 'warheads' as defined in the treaty, and puts no restrictions on bombers outside the fact that denuclearized bombers and nuclear bombers cannot be based in the same location (some of the B-52s have been denuclearized). In fact each bomber counts as a single 'warhead' per the language of the treaty, so bombers that count as nuclear launchers have no restrictions in terms of load. The only limit is a total of 800 launchers/700 deployed launchers. To get to that level, the SSBN fleet had four tubes filled with ballast and 50 ICBMs silos were taken out of operations, along with the B-52s (and I believe several B-2s as well; I can't explain why several were hanging out by themselves in Hawaii otherwise).


USAF presidential/vice presidential transport visible in top left corner.



The B-1 fleet is totally denuclearized so it would have no current restrictions as far as I know.
 
Those aren't the LRASM-B design. The design was different and the program was cancelled about 5 minutes after they announced it years ago.
Yes. Boeing stresses that both hypersonic missiles (boost-glide and airbreather) depicted are 'generic' designs based on unclassified data
 
Who's to say AGM-183A weighs 7,000lbs?
Umm.. Roper?!
7,300 lbs, 270"x30" was quoted..
Also, those dimensions match the ones deduced from the pic from B52 flight tests, so i don't see the mass deviating too much from whats announced.

Also, considering other solid rockets on various missiles of similar size(atacms on x51, iskander/kinzhal, df-11, skybolt), this seems the appropriate mass based on these dimensions.
Any chance of a link? I don't recall seeing either a weight or length given for AGM-183.
View: https://mobile.twitter.com/TheDEWLine/status/1233523377782054912

Did you READ the link? AGM-183 is a Lockheed Martin product. "And Boeing showed a “multipurpose booster” on centerline on #AWS20 display model, weighing 7,300lb and 270-in long." This is the Boeing missile they're referring to:

View attachment 639836
Well, i said something about the matching dimensions as well. Arrw literally is the same length/diameter as this, and it won't be entirely dubious to assume its weight as identical as well.
What on Earth are you on about?
Dare, i say it again arrw is 7300 lbs..
22,000/3

View: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1308511553633820678
 
Last edited:
Plus ça change... Reports on Myrabo's Lightcraft concept:



A book co-authored by Dean Ing and Leik Myrabo, The Future of Flight can be found on eBay, Abebooks etc.

Interviews with Leik Myrabo on The Space Show here.




Found this too. The original article is dated 1995.


... and that date reminds me of the feeling I get increasingly often when I watch movies on Netflix or wherever: "Oh that one's good, I think I saw it in a theatre couple of years ago in... 1995. Oh shit, I'm old."
 
Last edited:
It's also easy to understand that harvesting energy from space (Celestial bodies or space vacuum) will be of a primordial strategic importance. (way easier to lase/beam from space than from earth)
Contested will also be the "shipping lines" where energy will be routed to us.
It might then be conceivable that futur (technological) wars will be the ones won by who secures the best their space harvesting energy facilities.
 
Last edited:
Looking that far into the future, it seems likely there will be war over exploiting the resources in space and that it might spill over to Earth. One country loses in orbit, decides to take it dirt side where it has more of an advantage.
 
Any estimate as to how much does the entire missile stack weighs? Diameter and length are ascertained to be 0.88m and 10m respectively. (Skybolt?!)
 
Any estimate as to how much does the entire missile stack weighs? Diameter and length are ascertained to be 0.88m and 10m respectively. (Skybolt?!)

At least 8.5 Metric Tonne. Using quick estimate on E.Fleeman's tactical missile design book.
 
“Hypersonic missiles are hitting their targets with a variance of only a mere 6 inches,” he said during his speech at the virtual opening ceremony Oct. 13.

McCarthy was referring to the Army and Navy’s successful hypersonic glide body flight test this year, which launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Kauai, Hawaii, on March 19, an Army spokesperson confirmed.

 
“Hypersonic missiles are hitting their targets with a variance of only a mere 6 inches,” he said during his speech at the virtual opening ceremony Oct. 13.

McCarthy was referring to the Army and Navy’s successful hypersonic glide body flight test this year, which launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Kauai, Hawaii, on March 19, an Army spokesperson confirmed.


Every guy thinks he's six inches...

That level of accuracy would seem to indicate a guidance system beyond GPS, or at least some kind of enhanced GPS with local corrections. It occurs to me that the projectile would benefit from having a large number of GPS satellites in the line of site over the course of its full trip at its altitude; perhaps this contributes to the higher positional accuracy? Minor in accuracies from one set of satellites to the next get averaged out?
 
“Hypersonic missiles are hitting their targets with a variance of only a mere 6 inches,” he said during his speech at the virtual opening ceremony Oct. 13.

McCarthy was referring to the Army and Navy’s successful hypersonic glide body flight test this year, which launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Kauai, Hawaii, on March 19, an Army spokesperson confirmed.


Every guy thinks he's six inches...

That level of accuracy would seem to indicate a guidance system beyond GPS, or at least some kind of enhanced GPS with local corrections. It occurs to me that the projectile would benefit from having a large number of GPS satellites in the line of site over the course of its full trip at its altitude; perhaps this contributes to the higher positional accuracy? Minor in accuracies from one set of satellites to the next get averaged out?
As these are tests is it six inches to the aim point or six inches CEP? At those speeds I guess it probably doesn’t make a difference other than it appears hyper-accurate.
 
“Hypersonic missiles are hitting their targets with a variance of only a mere 6 inches,” he said during his speech at the virtual opening ceremony Oct. 13.

McCarthy was referring to the Army and Navy’s successful hypersonic glide body flight test this year, which launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility in Kauai, Hawaii, on March 19, an Army spokesperson confirmed.


Every guy thinks he's six inches...

That level of accuracy would seem to indicate a guidance system beyond GPS, or at least some kind of enhanced GPS with local corrections. It occurs to me that the projectile would benefit from having a large number of GPS satellites in the line of site over the course of its full trip at its altitude; perhaps this contributes to the higher positional accuracy? Minor in accuracies from one set of satellites to the next get averaged out?
As these are tests is it six inches to the aim point or six inches CEP? At those speeds I guess it probably doesn’t make a difference other than it appears hyper-accurate.
6 inches is about 15cm, which sounds about right for military level GPS guidance.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom