USAF Readies for Hypersonic Missile Test

[poseidon]

This is what i call a great cruise missile.

 

[Thomas]

But what if boeing completes this project, who will own the intellectual right on this? US DoD or Boeing? and secondly what will be the product target (only DoD I suspect) or will boeing be free to market it to other customers as well i.e. Europeans etc cuz their experience with SE hasn't worked out as well as hoped partially due to restrictions by DoD on export and downgrading

Boeing is only using it as a test bed to work out problems that any future systems will also likely encounter. One such problem lens damage from foreign objects.

 

[nightcrawler]

The idea of the ABL was for it to deploy it near world hot spots such as North Korea, Iran, ECT. And there wouldn't be 1 of them flying 24 hours. But a fleet of them rotating on stations. No different then the looking glass planes of the Cold War. And it is not just destroying ballistic missiles in the ascent phase but enemy fighters as well.

So this is costly...anyway talking about Cold war wasn't the Polyus project was far more economical & relatively much advanced at that time to bring down ballistics & provides greater coverage. Thnx to Gorbachev he didn't want any Space race that the program was cancelled after being fully tested..
Polyus (spacecraft) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

by the way it had enormous lasers too.

 

[SBD-3]

So this is costly...anyway talking about Cold war wasn't the Polyus project was far more economical & relatively much advanced at that time to bring down ballistics & provides greater coverage. Thnx to Gorbachev he didn't want any Space race that the program was cancelled after being fully tested..
Polyus (spacecraft) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

by the way it had enormous lasers too.

I dont see the argument of cost worth while as at current most of the AWACS platforms (except few) are also based on jet based trasports and many airforces are operating them around the globe. so it does not make sense for costs to overshoot.

 

[nightcrawler]

I dont see the argument of cost worth while as at current most of the AWACS platforms (except few) are also based on jet based trasports and many airforces are operating them around the globe. so it does not make sense for costs to overshoot.

Sir sir sir..the point of this weapon is to counter Russia & no one else [or are you thinking about Iran hehe]
To be able to hit Russian ICBMs with ABLs you will need to find some way of getting large easy flying targets inside Russian airspace... by the time they are over the north pole they will be free flying missile warheads and decoys... that is the purpose of the TOPOL-M with its high energy fast burning boosters that only burn a few minutes to reduce the time to intercept them, and the purpose of new warheads.
It should also be pointed out that anything you can put in a plane or in a satellite in space, you can put on the ground and supply with hundreds or thousands of times more power... to shoot down enemy platforms with lasers on them.

 

[Thomas]

Sir sir sir..the point of this weapon is to counter Russia & no one else [or are you thinking about Iran hehe]
To be able to hit Russian ICBMs with ABLs you will need to find some way of getting large easy flying targets inside Russian airspace... by the time they are over the north pole they will be free flying missile warheads and decoys... that is the purpose of the TOPOL-M with its high energy fast burning boosters that only burn a few minutes to reduce the time to intercept them, and the purpose of new warheads.
It should also be pointed out that anything you can put in a plane or in a satellite in space, you can put on the ground and supply with hundreds or thousands of times more power... to shoot down enemy platforms with lasers on them.

The obvious conclusions must mean then it wasn't designed for Russia.