Hypersonic Missiles versus ICBMs

Hypersonic Missiles vs ICBMs - Which is better? > . 

23-8-15 Oppenheimer's nuclear warnings more relevant than ever - Caspian > .

23-8-10 ‘Detect, Control, Engage’: The Aegis Concept - UNI > .

23-6-13 NATO IAMD | NATO Integrated Air and Missile Defence > .

23-6-11 Missiles, cannons, long-range precision | US army outranged? - Perun > .

22-10-1 America's Missile Defense Problem - Poly > .

22-4-9 Drones, Missiles, Mercenaries in Future of Militaries - CNBC > .

22-4-8 How Many Nuclear Missiles Can the United States Intercept? - nwyt > .

Russia, China, United States race to deploy ‘blazingly fast’ hypersonic weapons > .

Russian S-400 system | U.S. opposition | S-400 vs. Israeli Iron Dome - Amit > .
Scramjet Engines in Hypersonic Weapons > .

What is a hypersonic missile? - Forces > .

2021 Difference between Ballistic & Cruise missile - Amit Sengupta > .

2021 Race for Hypersonic missiles | Space weaponization | China 2049 plan - Amit > .

2021 Why New Chinese Missiles Outperform Those of the US - CoCa > .

2021 India's Agni5 ICBM tested - Can strike anywhere in China - Defense > .

2021 HR McMaster on China's bypassing the USA's military-tech strengths - Hoover > .

22-1-15 Logic Behind the Patriot Missile System - CoCa > .

22-2-23 New Space Race is More Insane than Ever - RealLifeLore > .

GMD - Ground-Based Midcourse Defense > Air Defense >>

24-4-19 GMD - America's Missile Defense - T&P > .

24-4-19 Over The Horizon Super Radars: Australia (JORN), US, Xina, Ruscia - S&AC > .

US vs Russia - CoCa >> .

Weapon Specs - CoCa >> .

> Xina's nuclear weaponry >>

22-13-8 China's Nuclear Weapons are Garbage! - serpentza > .
22-8-24 How Dare You Question China's Military! - cfc > .

Hypersonic Missiles ..
Hypersonic Missiles versus ICBMs ..

Missiles - R&D ↠

Sidewinder - Heat-Seeking Missile ↠

Comment 1 Speed has very little to do with penetrating Missile Defences. It’s the high altitude flight profile that reduces the engagement envelope of a SAM. For instance, Zircon has a flight ceiling of 30 km which is twice that of supersonic AShMs like Oniks/Brahmos. This puts it beyond the envelope of ESSM, older Block SM-2 as well as Aster-15/30 until the terminal phase. 

The SM-6 with ~35 km flight ceiling can intercept Zircon throughout its flight but only from reduced range. The engagement envelope can be reduced to 1/3 when intercepting a high altitude Mach 8+ target because of very different flight trajectory of the interceptor (negligible lofting). So SM-6 with ~400 km range against aerodynamic target may only have around 150 km range against Zircon. Medium range ballistic missiles (MRBM) like DF-21D and Kinzhal doesn’t pose a huge threat to Aegis which can engage them from late boost-phase and mid-phase with exo-atmospheric SM-3 to terminal phase with SM-6, but they do create a challenge for Navies lacking an exo-atmospheric interceptor as they’re only limited to terminal phase interception. 

Finally, HGVs pose a significant threat as they can exploit a big gap that exist today. Current Missile Defences can’t intercept anything between the 40 to 80 km altitude. The SM-3 can engage exo-atmospheric targets but the next in-line SM-6 Block IA has a flight ceiling around 35 km, leaving a large gap in the upper atmosphere that’s beyond the engagement envelope. 

HGVs like DF-17 with an endo-atmospheric flight ceiling around 60 km exploits this gap. Some ballistic missiles also fly a depressed trajectory for the same reason, although they’re quite limited and face a huge range-penalty when doing so. 

Deployment of HGVs like DF-17 is what prompted the US Navy in developing a modified version of SM-6, the SM-6 Block IB with 55% bigger motor (21″ vs. 13.5″) which will significantly increase both speed and flight ceiling. The SM-6 Block IB is scheduled to be tested against a HGV later this year and will be operational around 2023.

Comment 2: Sensationalized weapon. HGVs lose speed, terminal velocity is Mach.3 after 7000km. Zircon averaged Mach.4.9 according to the data they released, it only reached Mach.8+ at 30km altitude mid flight. Still useful as a prompt strike weapon but not undefeatable.

Comment 3: Ground based midcourse defense which is the fastest hypersonic missile in the world capable of mach 33 built by the US or the SM3 which is a midcourse phase ICBM interceptor. This video has a lot wrong though. 

Hypersonic missiles are covered in plasma, any IRST let alone AESA radar can track it. Shooting it down is where it is harder. Tracking it is easier then a subsonic sea skimming, under the radar horizon missile. 

They literally stated hypersonic missiles fly below the radar horizon like a god damn sub sonic cruise missile which is hilarious. The radar horizon has to do with Earths curvature and not space, where these missiles fly... LOL. Hypersonic missiles are also not maneuverable in their terminal phase. They literally have to shut their engines off, can lose stability because they have no engine power, and even self destruct from the thicker air density all according to the Russians own patent. They literally got someone who had no idea what they are talking about to make stuff up. That's amazing to me. Say they could maneuver, using the mach 10 speed stated here that's 3.4km/s rounding down for ease say you wanted to move a single degree for 5 seconds at 3km/s you would be off course 15km. Math is math, patents are patents. Bad video. 

"Russian patent number 2579409 relates to the field of rocket technology, and more specifically to hypersonic cruise missiles equipped with a hypersonic ramjet engine. The invention describes a method of application and device hypersonic cruise missile (CRPD), allowing to solve the problem of performing a combat mission to destroy ground and surface targets of such a missile. The described invention is designed to maximize the combat potential of the CMP with the scramjet. 

The design mode for the scramjet are high-altitude cruise conditions while maintaining the estimated cruise speed, and the need to reduce the altitude and flight speed creates difficult technical problems due to the fact that: an engine designed to perform a hypersonic mid-flight at high altitude is not able to continue to work at low-altitude trajectory sections associated with a decrease in the flight number M, hence, the rocket must approach the ground or surface target with an inactive engine; characteristics of sustainability and controllability of CRPD with inactive scramjet significantly deteriorate, loss of stability becomes possible; there is also a danger of destruction of the scramjet design due to the increase in pressure in the flow part of the engine while reducing the CMP from the march height before hitting the target."