QUOTE(eddystorm @ Apr 23 2025, 11:23 AM)
Yes, they got a blue Hedgehog US admits defeat in hypersonic missile program
US admits defeat in hypersonic missile program
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:24 AM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
269 posts Joined: Oct 2021 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:26 AM
Show posts by this member only | IPv6 | Post
#22
|
![]()
Junior Member
10 posts Joined: Jan 2022 |
They can just ask Israel for their iron dome technology to counter hypersonic missile.. Lol
|
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:30 AM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
269 posts Joined: Oct 2021 |
QUOTE(Jaymeeeee @ Apr 23 2025, 11:26 AM) Don't think iron dome can counter hypersonic missilesHypersonic missiles are not conventional missiles, as its speed can go above Mach 5 which makes it very hard to shoot down. I think Japan is coming up with rail gun to counter hypersonic missiles and it looks promising |
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:36 AM
|
![]()
Junior Member
7 posts Joined: Jul 2019 |
QUOTE(30624770 @ Apr 23 2025, 10:24 AM) China also got equivalent to LRASM. It's called CJ-10 (also known as DH-10). CJ-10 is even slower. totally zero survivability in current anti-missile capability. Also, its not missile range that likely limits China strikes but detection (and missile lock) ranges.LRASM is a subsonic, stealthy cruise missile with advanced semi-autonomous guidance, while hypersonic weapons, like those in the HALO program, are designed for much higher speeds and maneuverability. The difference is US detection is at very long ranges which maximises LRASM. China has not demo-ed an AEGIS equivalent either. Hypersonics won't change the equation much for US at least in the next decade. |
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:48 AM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
269 posts Joined: Oct 2021 |
QUOTE(takbodoh722 @ Apr 23 2025, 11:36 AM) CJ-10 is even slower. totally zero survivability in current anti-missile capability. Also, its not missile range that likely limits China strikes but detection (and missile lock) ranges. China radar details are very secretive and it's very hard to compare their capabilities with AEGIS.The difference is US detection is at very long ranges which maximises LRASM. China has not demo-ed an AEGIS equivalent either. Hypersonics won't change the equation much for US at least in the next decade. The 346 and 346A radar from China is very similar to AEGIS in many ways, but it has active electronic scan array technology (AESA), which in theory is way better than passive electronic scan array. China Type 052D destroyers were built with what appears to be Type 346A. |
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:49 AM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
269 posts Joined: Oct 2021 |
QUOTE(takbodoh722 @ Apr 23 2025, 11:36 AM) CJ-10 is even slower. totally zero survivability in current anti-missile capability. Also, its not missile range that likely limits China strikes but detection (and missile lock) ranges. China radar details are very secretive and it's very hard to compare their capabilities with AEGIS.The difference is US detection is at very long ranges which maximises LRASM. China has not demo-ed an AEGIS equivalent either. Hypersonics won't change the equation much for US at least in the next decade. The 346 and 346A radar from China is very similar to AEGIS in many ways, but it has active electronic scan array technology (AESA), which in theory is way better than passive electronic scan array. China Type 052D destroyers were built with what appears to be Type 346A. Hypersonics main target is US carrier groups. If China neutralised US carriers, they already won any conflict with US |
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:51 AM
|
![]()
Junior Member
7 posts Joined: Jul 2019 |
which is exactly why US does this.
https://www.twz.com/air/sm-6-missile-closer...-destroyer-test US never play play when its comes to military. |
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:53 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
1,374 posts Joined: Feb 2016 From: Milky Way |
Ayam no weapon expert, but I think it’s just norm for US arm development. They got many experimental weapons system in development, some gets abandon some proceed to mass production.
No need to get too excited over such routine practice. |
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:56 AM
|
![]()
Newbie
7 posts Joined: Feb 2011 |
|
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:58 AM
Show posts by this member only | IPv6 | Post
#30
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
743 posts Joined: Sep 2020 |
its a strategy. say fail, but in fact is already up and running. Just keep for an opportunity to surprise
|
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 10:59 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
675 posts Joined: Jun 2014 |
sudah ade diam2 aje, dont let them prepare on it
|
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 11:08 AM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
269 posts Joined: Oct 2021 |
QUOTE(takbodoh722 @ Apr 23 2025, 11:51 AM) which is exactly why US does this. You think China play play with their military?https://www.twz.com/air/sm-6-missile-closer...-destroyer-test US never play play when its comes to military. When it comes to China, do you think what they display out in the open are their latest? |
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 11:09 AM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
135 posts Joined: Dec 2013 |
QUOTE(ZeaXG @ Apr 22 2025, 11:38 PM) Sometimes i also suspect whether US military really that advanced. Even sanctioned Russia also able to make hypersonics. Is it all propaganda and only effective against terrorist and low tech country? What gives that hypersonic missile is effective. It's expensive, the newer radar system can detect it's flight and smaller cheaper missiles can take it down. FYI Russki fires hypersonic missile in Ukraine on a static defenceless target. Currently North Korea and Iran supplying Russia armaments. So don't know what production capacity are you yapping about Russia? Needless to point out also Russia didn't replenish their destroyed Black Sea fleets. To be exact 26 Russian ships now rusting away at seafloor of Black Sea. |
|
|
|
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 11:11 AM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
269 posts Joined: Oct 2021 |
QUOTE(6so @ Apr 23 2025, 12:09 PM) What gives that hypersonic missile is effective. It's expensive, the newer radar system can detect it's flight and smaller cheaper missiles can take it down. FYI Russki fires hypersonic missile in Ukraine on a static defenceless target. Currently North Korea and Iran supplying Russia armaments. So don't know what production capacity are you yapping about Russia? Needless to point out also Russia didn't replenish their destroyed Black Sea fleets. To be exact 26 Russian ships now rusting away at seafloor of Black Sea. Ukraine claim? LOL! |
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 11:18 AM
Show posts by this member only | IPv6 | Post
#35
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
4,254 posts Joined: Nov 2011 |
QUOTE(takbodoh722 @ Apr 23 2025, 10:51 AM) which is exactly why US does this. nonsense, their capabilities are stuck in the 90-10s era. they have nothing capable to counter modern stand off weapons from 1st rate militaries. all the current US's AD systems are only capable to counter non-maneuverable ballistic missiles and supersonic ones only. modern hypersonics with glide vehicles or maneuverable hypersonics are impossible with their current aging systems. just look at Israel which has all of the best western AD has to offer and yet Iran hypersonics still met their mark back in Oct 2024https://www.twz.com/air/sm-6-missile-closer...-destroyer-test US never play play when its comes to military. think about it, US military brags about being best military and yet they have never actually encountered an actual peer modern warfare involving dense AD layers and modern systems in 2000s. the closest US has ever encountered a "real" AD system was back in Vietnam War and they lost over 10,000 aircrafts yhtan liked this post
|
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 11:20 AM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
269 posts Joined: Oct 2021 |
QUOTE(marfccy @ Apr 23 2025, 12:18 PM) nonsense, their capabilities are stuck in the 90-10s era. they have nothing capable to counter modern stand off weapons from 1st rate militaries. all the current US's AD systems are only capable to counter non-maneuverable ballistic missiles and supersonic ones only. modern hypersonics with glide vehicles or maneuverable hypersonics are impossible with their current aging systems. just look at Israel which has all of the best western AD has to offer and yet Iran hypersonics still met their mark back in Oct 2024 Hollywood builds a myth about US military and a lot of people believe that they are the best because they were involved in wars the past few decades.think about it, US military brags about being best military and yet they have never actually encountered an actual peer modern warfare involving dense AD layers and modern systems in 2000s. the closest US has ever encountered a "real" AD system was back in Vietnam War and they lost over 10,000 aircrafts |
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 11:33 AM
Show posts by this member only | IPv6 | Post
#37
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
4,254 posts Joined: Nov 2011 |
|
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 11:35 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]()
Junior Member
484 posts Joined: Jan 2010 |
deploy drone swarm to block hypersonic missils....
*oh.... forgot china also very gooding with drone tech |
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 11:43 AM
|
![]() ![]()
Junior Member
269 posts Joined: Oct 2021 |
QUOTE(marfccy @ Apr 23 2025, 12:33 PM) this, by fighting 3rd rate militaries to flex muscles. but in modern 2010 era onwards? aging systems The biggest problem with US military today is not their tech or their capabilities. It is their cost of equipment.Look at the cost for the F35 vs China's J20. F35 is about 100 million while J20 is about 50 million. You can produce 2 J20s for the price of 1 F35. Don't even talk about their so called best F22. The whole program was scrapped because it was too expensive, and a lot of people is still touting it as the best despite the plane is more than 25 years old tech. No matter how good your equipment is, you need to replace them in time of war. All the wars US fought after WW2 never encountered this problem as they do not face enemies that can really destroy their equipment. Imagine losing 1 or 2 aircraft carriers. One of the reason Germany was beaten in WW2 was due to their inability to replace their lost equipment faster that US and Soviet Union. German tanks are definitely better than US tanks in WW2 but it's too expensive to replace a destroy Panther tank than US replacing their destroyed Shermans. |
|
|
Apr 23 2025, 11:44 AM
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
2,510 posts Joined: Jan 2003 |
Cost-cutting measure. Or inter-departmental jealousy.
If it's 4D chess, they just did a more sophisticated version of Iran's IAIO Qaher-313 causing Russia and China to spend billions on new tech. I personally think missile speed technology had reached a saturation point, going ever faster simply cost too much. |
| Change to: | 0.0258sec
1.31
5 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 17th December 2025 - 11:33 AM |