China testing hypersonic weapon with intercontinental range, says USNORTHCOM commander

[FairAndUnbiased]

Ballistic requires only 2 points measured along the way to predict the hit point, that's what makes it easy.

Usually one post boost, and an apex correction.

Now imagine doing them every time an external force acts on a vehicle. You have to do them pretty much continuously

Yes, which is called dynamic instability, and was solved by avionic systems since the F-16.

 

[rott]

I am better educated than you. Your smilies with zero content here prove it.

Better educated than me? Your English proves otherwise.

 

[riscol]

So after the Russians now the Chinese too will have a 20+ Mach weapon in operation once all tests have passed. The US lacks far behind these two powers and it considers itself the undisputed super power? Someone was arrogantly saying that we live in an American World.

 

[gambit]

I'm not anywhere close to an expert at this. However, the question wasn't a specialist question. It was a layman question that asked "if there is no sensor, how does a rocket find a stationary target". The answer is, as you said, INS can be pre-programmed to hit a certain geographic location through dead reckoning. If the target is stationary then it works.

Dead reckoning is not finding, whether the question is layman's level or more technical in depth. The falsity in your comment compounds the technical errors in your next comment about hypersonic flight, as I will show...

This works for ballistic missile warheads. Their aerodynamics are simple: with a blunt shape and no control surfaces, they will just fly more or less ballistically if designed correctly. This can all be known before flight.

In controlled hypersonic flight, there are additional challenges, as you stated, due to INS possibly overcompensating, or because of structural failure. However, I don't think these challenges are physically impossible to solve. These problems are also not solvable by external guidance, which is what the original poster asked.

In order to reach hypersonic flight, there has to be, at least, steady state propulsion. Any ballistic flight, whether it is a rifle bullet, a mortar or an artillery round, or even a ballistic warhead, eventually degrades in speed. Simply put, there is no propulsion after the initial boost. So in order to reach hypersonic speed, the vehicle must have its own propulsion.

https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/...iferation/missile-basics/hypersonic-missiles/

You falsely stated: "...dead reckoning declines in accuracy with passing time due to random drift of accelerometers - however, a hypersonic projectile is in flight for only 30 minutes, so this drift doesn't really matter.

In aviation history, it is proven that as speed increases, so must sophistication in avionics, whether that speed increase comes from gravity assist or propulsion.

Let us take the simplest ballistic flight -- that of the rifle and bullet.

The initial sophistication here lies with the rifleman who must control how he is going launch the bullet. He must calculate from variables such as wind, temperature, distance to target, and so on. The next level of sophistication is with the rifle in terms of quality such as material and engineering. The next level and the simplest is with the round itself regarding casing, powder, and bullet. Once the bullet is launched, any flight errors will come from external influences and will be uncompensated.

The next level of parabolic flight is that of the artillery round. The parabolic arc here is greatly exaggerated compares to that of the rifle bullet due to distance and the intention of getting over obstacles. The greater this combination, the greater the initial sophistication that must come from the artillery crew. To assist target accuracy, we have things like radar guided artillery that while cannot affect the first artillery round once it left the barrel, the radar can tell the artillery crew on how to make adjustments for the next artillery round.

Now we come to the greatest parabolic flight of all -- that which spans hundreds and thousands of kms. Like the rifle and the artillery gun, the ballistic warhead is on its own once separated from its launch vehicle. Because of the distance and the exaggerated parabolic arc, which works against gravity, we created a package called a 'missile'. A missile is essentially an aircraft because its initial flight is in atmosphere. The missile contains propulsion and a flight controls system. Target accuracy is affected by launch vehicle sophistication in terms of avionics. The fact that this aircraft is tubular and have the barest of flight controls does not detract from the need of maintaining flight stability until warhead separation. Course deviations equals to location deviations.

The hypersonic weapon is like the SR-71 in terms of speed but differs in mission type. In flight controls avionics, surface deflections -- to execute maneuvers -- comes from calculating altitude (pressure air) and speed (ram air). For example, at 200 KIAS, a stabilizer may deflect 1 deg at 10,000 ft altitude but 1.5 deg at 20,000 altitude because there is lower pressure at 20,000 ft. Same ram air but different pressure air equals to different deflections. So what this mean is at Mach 5+, flight controls avionics must be able to compensate for any course deviations from any influences with greater finesse than with avionics for subsonic flights, no matter flight time. In the absence of a pilot, course corrections comes from the guidance system, which includes components like the INS, flight controls computers, air data processors, accelerometers, and gyroscopes.

At the Daytona 500, one lap equals to 2.5 miles but at speed 200+ mile per hour. It it farther than 2.5 miles for me to get groceries but which situation is more dangerous, even if we remove other drivers in both situations?

The problem with so many on this forum is that emotion trumps technicalities. It is not merely ignorance. There is nothing wrong with ignorance. That is why we have subject matter experts (SME) like doctors, auto mechanics, and plumbers. What is wrong -- on this forum -- is when a person feels the irrational need to 'beat' the US at any cost, even to defying the laws of nature.

What you said about one thing was wrong, then it compounded the technical error on a related issue, so now you misled people. But hey...You got 'Thanks' for it and that is all that matters.

 

[Viet]

Better educated than me? Your English proves otherwise.

I am smarter than you.

101 percent!

 

[riscol]

was it not this mongrel who said Huawai is finished? i hardly call this an intelligent person, Vietnamese are more likely dumb than smart

 

[rott]

I am smarter than you.

101 percent!

Okay given you're smarter because we all need to trust your words for it, right?
Seriously, You're a joke.

was it not this mongrel who said Huawai is finished? i hardly call this an intelligent person, Vietnamese are more likely dumb than smart

He's dumber than dumb. We just need to give him some slack.
Which intelligent species call himself intelligent? Except the one who's dumb needs to prove he's intelligent.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

Dead reckoning is not finding, whether the question is layman's level or more technical in depth. The falsity in your comment compounds the technical errors in your next comment about hypersonic flight, as I will show...


In order to reach hypersonic flight, there has to be, at least, steady state propulsion. Any ballistic flight, whether it is a rifle bullet, a mortar or an artillery round, or even a ballistic warhead, eventually degrades in speed. Simply put, there is no propulsion after the initial boost. So in order to reach hypersonic speed, the vehicle must have its own propulsion.

https://missiledefenseadvocacy.org/...iferation/missile-basics/hypersonic-missiles/

You falsely stated: "...dead reckoning declines in accuracy with passing time due to random drift of accelerometers - however, a hypersonic projectile is in flight for only 30 minutes, so this drift doesn't really matter.

In aviation history, it is proven that as speed increases, so must sophistication in avionics, whether that speed increase comes from gravity assist or propulsion.

Let us take the simplest ballistic flight -- that of the rifle and bullet.

The initial sophistication here lies with the rifleman who must control how he is going launch the bullet. He must calculate from variables such as wind, temperature, distance to target, and so on. The next level of sophistication is with the rifle in terms of quality such as material and engineering. The next level and the simplest is with the round itself regarding casing, powder, and bullet. Once the bullet is launched, any flight errors will come from external influences and will be uncompensated.

The next level of parabolic flight is that of the artillery round. The parabolic arc here is greatly exaggerated compares to that of the rifle bullet due to distance and the intention of getting over obstacles. The greater this combination, the greater the initial sophistication that must come from the artillery crew. To assist target accuracy, we have things like radar guided artillery that while cannot affect the first artillery round once it left the barrel, the radar can tell the artillery crew on how to make adjustments for the next artillery round.

Now we come to the greatest parabolic flight of all -- that which spans hundreds and thousands of kms. Like the rifle and the artillery gun, the ballistic warhead is on its own once separated from its launch vehicle. Because of the distance and the exaggerated parabolic arc, which works against gravity, we created a package called a 'missile'. A missile is essentially an aircraft because its initial flight is in atmosphere. The missile contains propulsion and a flight controls system. Target accuracy is affected by launch vehicle sophistication in terms of avionics. The fact that this aircraft is tubular and have the barest of flight controls does not detract from the need of maintaining flight stability until warhead separation. Course deviations equals to location deviations.

The hypersonic weapon is like the SR-71 in terms of speed but differs in mission type. In flight controls avionics, surface deflections -- to execute maneuvers -- comes from calculating altitude (pressure air) and speed (ram air). For example, at 200 KIAS, a stabilizer may deflect 1 deg at 10,000 ft altitude but 1.5 deg at 20,000 altitude because there is lower pressure at 20,000 ft. Same ram air but different pressure air equals to different deflections. So what this mean is at Mach 5+, flight controls avionics must be able to compensate for any course deviations from any influences with greater finesse than with avionics for subsonic flights, no matter flight time. In the absence of a pilot, course corrections comes from the guidance system, which includes components like the INS, flight controls computers, air data processors, accelerometers, and gyroscopes.

At the Daytona 500, one lap equals to 2.5 miles but at speed 200+ mile per hour. It it farther than 2.5 miles for me to get groceries but which situation is more dangerous, even if we remove other drivers in both situations?

The problem with so many on this forum is that emotion trumps technicalities. It is not merely ignorance. There is nothing wrong with ignorance. That is why we have subject matter experts (SME) like doctors, auto mechanics, and plumbers. What is wrong -- on this forum -- is when a person feels the irrational need to 'beat' the US at any cost, even to defying the laws of nature.

What you said about one thing was wrong, then it compounded the technical error on a related issue, so now you misled people. But hey...You got 'Thanks' for it and that is all that matters.

The original post had NOTHING to do with the US. WTF are you even talking about. They asked a simple question about "how a missile can find a city target without external guidance". I provided them with a simple answer - use of inertial navigation, which is proven to be used on missiles since the 1950s. Nobody is saying jack shit about the US. Where is the US even mentioned?

They never even mentioned hypersonics flight in particular. It doesn't matter for the basic premise that there's additional sophstication in the flight controls for hypersonics. Of course there is. But see, I'm not paid for this shit so I don't see the need to spend hours researching this.

 

[Galactic Penguin SST]

By trying to change the status quo with an arms race, Russia only provokes ALL big powers to do the same!

After China and the U.S., now even Japan is developing its own version of missile defence defeating ICBM!

Jan 30, 2020

Well, after Japan's Epsilon rocket, this makes another one with dual-use civilian-military, latent ICBM capabilities!

Which begs the question, of which nation will be targeted by South Korea with the tacit accord of the U.S.A., at more than 5'000 km distance? Probably the same as Japan.

After China, Japan, and North Korea, it will be the 4th powers with such capability in East Asia.

While this year the Republic of China (R.O.C.) will also access to satellite launch capability and solid propellant ballistic missile capability of its own with more than 2'000 km range!

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/south-korea-defence-forum.193709/page-9#post-12056224 ​

Jan 14, 2019

The fundamentals that dictates the policies are: territorial cores (Kuril island, Dok Island, Senkaku Island, etc), strategic ressources (rare earth, hydrocarbons, oceanic seabed metals, etc). Plentyful of frictions here, but worse, like during the collapse of the Mongol Empire, the splinters will start to fight against each others. Look at the Soviet Union after 1991, and even today! Can you tell us that the day the U.S. Dystopian Empire collapses, Japan will not be the first to shoot? The possession of he Epsilon rocket gives Japan an ICBM capability comparable to the Chinese DF-41!

PLA DF-41 ICBM
Mass ~80t
Length ~21 metres
Diameter ~2.25 m
Operational range ~14,000–15,000 kilometres

Japan Epsilon rocket
Mass 91 t
Length 26 m
Diameter 2.5 m
Operational range ~14,000–15,000 kilometres

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/japan-defence-forum.316803/page-143#post-11097810 ​

And now to evade the missile defence:

Japan mulls anti-aircraft carrier gliding missiles for remote island defense

February 25, 2020 (Mainichi Japan)

TOKYO -- Japan's Defense Ministry is considering upgrading its "hyper velocity gliding projectiles" (HVGP), a new type of missile it is seeking to deploy in fiscal 2026 for the defense of remote islands, to add an anti-ship capability to them, it has been learned.

The move is aimed at improving the defense of the Nansei Islands in southwestern Japan amid China's maritime activities in the region. HVGPs can glide at high velocity after payloads are detached from a rocket in the upper atmosphere where air resistance is low. The missiles are capable of following complex trajectories under the guidance of GPS and other systems, making it harder for an adversary to intercept them than conventional missiles.

The Defense Ministry eyes equipping HVGPs with a new type of payload that is capable of penetrating the deck of aircraft carriers. However, enhancing the firing range and other capabilities of Self-Defense Force (SDF) equipment could be called into question over its consistency with Japan's exclusively defense-oriented policy. The ministry therefore is planning to give due consideration, such as limiting the missile range to around 500 kilometers or less.

The development of HVGPs will come in two stages. In the first stage, an early equipment type will be developed for possible deployment by the Ground Self-Defense Force (GSDF) in fiscal 2026, targeting a potential enemy invading Japan's remote islands. In the second stage, an upgraded type will be developed for possible installation in fiscal 2028 or later, featuring claw-shaped payloads, enhanced speeds and firing ranges, and more complex trajectories.

Furthermore, the ministry is also mulling introducing advanced anti-ship and anti-surface missiles, which are currently under investigation by the Acquisition, Technology & Logistics Agency. If these technologies are incorporated into HVGPs, the projectiles can penetrate aircraft carrier decks, which are harder than its external walls, before being detonated inside the vessel to make it impossible for aircraft to take off or land, as well as destroy targets within a range of several hundred meters squared.

Behind the ministry's move lies China's intensifying maritime moves in waters near the Senkaku Islands in Okinawa Prefecture and other parts of Japan. In 2012, China commissioned its first aircraft carrier Liaoning, and the second such vessel, Shandong, was launched in 2019. Shandong is the first Chinese-made carrier. Beijing is said to be further seeking to add at least two more carrier vessels.

Chinese government vessels have been frequently spotted navigating in contiguous zones near the Senkaku Islands and intruding into Japanese territorial waters. While the main island of Okinawa and the Senkakus are about 420 kilometers apart, the GSDF's current missile range is set at just over a hundred kilometers. The introduction of longer-range gliding missiles to protect the Nansei Islands would make it possible for Japan to respond to China's activities without deploying the Maritime Self-Defense Force's vessels and aircraft.

The Defense Ministry allocated a total of 18.5 billion yen in the fiscal 2018 and 2019 budgets for research on HVGPs for the defense of remote islands, and plans to add another 25 billion yen in the fiscal 2020 budget. However, some legislators in the Diet have pointed out that acquisition of the new capabilities could "make it possible for the SDF to directly attack other countries' territories" and "deviate from Japan's exclusively defense-oriented policy." The development of the new technologies is also feared to threaten Japan's neighbors.

The government has defended the HVGP development, stating, "They are intended for homeland defense and are not considered attacking weapons."

(Japanese original by Yusuke Tanabe, Political News Department)

http://archive.is/R6E2H/927a2edb7ffd152c1bfd090c30d69c43b0909a5f.jpg ; https://archive.is/R6E2H/38b4389c374042a177ab4f977142c3852b9bc04a/scr.png ; http://web.archive.org/web/20200226...1/2020/02/25/20200225p2a00m0na019000p/9.jpg?1 ; http://archive.ph/AvTEx ; http://web.archive.org/web/20200226...english/articles/20200225/p2a/00m/0na/012000c
▲ 1. Japan's Defense Ministry is considering upgrading its "hyper velocity gliding projectiles" (HVGP).


https://mainichi.jp/english/articles/20200225/p2a/00m/0na/012000c ​

It only requires to put the new HGV on an Epsilon ICBM, to evade the missile defence over Moscow!

Conclusion, this continuous arms race will only be sustainable by military powers that have the most scientific capacities.

 

[gambit]

I provided them with a simple answer...

Yup...That you did. And that is why I had to step in. We have enough of 'Chinese physics'.

But see, I'm not paid for this shit so I don't see the need to spend hours researching this.

You sure you are not paid for this?