User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:05:55 PM EDT
[#1]
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:08:23 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote Historyah yes the telltale sign of a helicopter search light |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:08:25 PM EDT
[#3]
as we should.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:10:05 PM EDT
[#4]
Doesn't "hypersonic" sort of automatically go along with keeping it quiet?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:12:48 PM EDT
[#5]
the name "hypersonic missile" bugs me. We have had hypersonic missiles for decades, they just don't travel through the atmosphere till the very end.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:14:01 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: the name "hypersonic missile" bugs me. We have had hypersonic missiles for decades, they just don't travel through the atmosphere till the very end. It's just like Thermobaric or any other fancy word the media and the leftist twats latch on to for dramatic effect. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:14:04 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Doesn't "hypersonic" sort of automatically go along with keeping it quiet? I was thinking it would make quite the "big bada boom" ackshually
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:15:49 PM EDT
[#8]
Sprint accelerated to Mach 10 in 5 seconds. We did that in 1975.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:16:05 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: but intercontinental ballistic missiles reach speeds of Mach 20. This isn't my forte. I know nothing about the technical side of ICBMs. But that number seems crazy high. Right? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:16:24 PM EDT
[#10]
 Sprint Missile |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:18:15 PM EDT
[#11]
Behold, the Mach 20 air launched cruise missile of your dreams. Couldn’t make it work tho, supposedly. The Super Duper Missile, it’s a thing.
 Super Duper Missile WIKI |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:19:34 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This isn't my forte. I know nothing about the technical side of ICBMs. But that number seems crazy high. Right? That seems pretty fast. I know nothing of these things. Don't we have some former silo guys here? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:20:00 PM EDT
[#13]
I laugh when the media hypes some new enemy technology and then laments that we have nothing like it. There is so much classified shit that has never been revealed that it would shock people. I always thought the "UFO's" around Area 51 were nothing more than classified experimental aircraft.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:20:45 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This isn't my forte. I know nothing about the technical side of ICBMs. But that number seems crazy high. Right? My guess would be the relative ground speed while the missile is in space. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:21:38 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: https://gizmodo.com/u-s-tested-hypersonic-missile-in-march-but-kept-quiet-1848749636 The U.S. tested a hypersonic missile in mid-March but didn’t publicize the test to avoid inflaming tensions with Russia as the country continues to decimate Ukraine with its needless war. Any confusion between the U.S. and Russia during a time of heightened world conflict runs the risk of starting a nuclear war, and the potential of destroying all life on planet Earth, something many humans who live on Earth say would be a bad thing. The news of America’s hypersonic missile test comes from CNN, which cites an unnamed senior official with the U.S. military. The missile, reportedly fired from a B-52 somewhere on the west coast, traveled at a height of 65,000 feet and a distance of 300 miles, according to the unnamed official. The hypersonic missile tested last month was part of Lockheed Martin’s Hypersonic Air-breathing Weapon Concept, though other major defense contractors are also working on hypersonic missiles for the U.S. in a race to match the capabilities of China and Russia. North Korea also claims to have tested a hypersonic missile, though details about that program are still unclear. Russia even claimed to have used its Kinzhal hypersonic missile technology against Ukraine to destroy an underground weapons depot on March 19. If true, it would be the first known use of a hypersonic missile in war. It’s not clear if the U.S. hypersonic test occurred before or after Russia’s use of the weapon because the CNN report only cites “mid-March” without narrowing it further. Related Stories Despite the name “hypersonic,” the big advantage of hypersonic missiles isn’t necessarily their speed, which is admittedly fast, but their ability to maneuver at relatively low altitudes to avoid anti-missile defense systems. Hypersonic missiles travel at Mach 5, five times the speed of sound, but intercontinental ballistic missiles reach speeds of Mach 20. But once an ICBM like the Minuteman III is launched, it can’t be rerouted to a different target like the ocean in the event of a misunderstanding. Hypersonic missile technology is still very much in its infancy, with many critics questioning its usefulness and the technology underlying the construction of these systems. Lockheed Martin’s Air-Launched Rapid Response Weapon failed in at least three tests during 2021, according to the Arms Control Association. But critics have never really kept enormous weapons systems from being produced, especially during a time of heightened alert. Russia invaded Ukraine on Feb. 24 and photos have been emerging from places like Bucha showing civilians shot dead in the streets. President Joe Biden has called for Russian President Vladimir Putin to be investigated for war crimes. The U.S. also cancelled an ICBM test on Friday, which had already been postponed from earlier in Russia’s war against Ukraine. ICBM tests are often conducted by the U.S. throughout the year and often land near the Marshall Islands. Typically, these tests don’t get much coverage (unless North Korea does them, naturally), but holding off these tests is a big deal. If Russia interpreted a test as an actual nuclear missile heading for Moscow, Putin and his advisors would have roughly 20 minutes to decide whether to retaliate. Again, you can’t recall an ICBM once it’s launched, so you don’t want that kind of misunderstanding in an already tense environment. To make matters worse, U.S. defense officials and their Russian counterparts aren’t communicating right now, making the risk of miscalculation that much worse. Let’s just hope we live to see the end of the year, given how things are going. It’s truly a miracle humanity survived the first Cold War. Our chances of surviving the second one seem less great. *I searched "hypersonic missile test". Is this article an editorial or a technical piece? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:23:37 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: as we should. This. It was so tiresome to hear "why are we so behind the Russians". How long did we have stealth before it was on display? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:23:53 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This isn't my forte. I know nothing about the technical side of ICBMs. But that number seems crazy high. Right? No, it's correct. Minuteman 3 has a top speed of something like 17,500 mph. But when it's going that speed, it's 500+ miles up in space. ICBMs are really just rockets that carry warheads instead of monkeys or Teslas or whatever. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:24:35 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sprint accelerated to Mach 10 in 5 seconds. We did that in 1975. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/10/Sprint_missile.jpg Was that before or after our scientists switched to the metric system?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:24:40 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is this article an editorial or a technical piece? Seems a bit editorialist but I didn't think y'all would have liked me posting the CNN article. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:25:20 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, it's correct. Minuteman 3 has a top speed of something like 17,500 mph. But when it's going that speed, it's 500+ miles up in space. ICBMs are really just rockets that carry warheads instead of monkeys or Teslas or whatever. How many warhead carrying monkeys do you think we have? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:26:34 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, it's correct. Minuteman 3 has a top speed of something like 17,500 mph. But when it's going that speed, it's 500+ miles up in space. ICBMs are really just rockets that carry warheads instead of monkeys or Teslas or whatever. I thought the expansion of propellant gases was limited to something like 5000 ft/s. Does that only apply to solid gunpowders? I honestly don't know. Trying to learn here. I had a .220 Swift one time and I thought 4200 ft/s was fast.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:29:21 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This isn't my forte. I know nothing about the technical side of ICBMs. But that number seems crazy high. Right? Mach 1 at sea level is 761mph. So Mach 20 is ~15,220 mph, which is right inline with ICBM speeds. IIRC about 17,000 gets you into orbit and 22,000mph gets you out of earth orbit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:30:21 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How many warhead carrying monkeys do you think we have? The real Dirk Pitt already knows that answer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:32:31 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This isn't my forte. I know nothing about the technical side of ICBMs. But that number seems crazy high. Right? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: but intercontinental ballistic missiles reach speeds of Mach 20. This isn't my forte. I know nothing about the technical side of ICBMs. But that number seems crazy high. Right? No. ICBM's are really just suborbital rockets carrying nukes. Meaning the payload goes through orbital re-entry. ETA: beat |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:34:01 PM EDT
[#25]
These threads are always fun reading.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:36:04 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Mach 1 at sea level is 761mph. So Mach 20 is ~15,220 mph, which is right inline with ICBM speeds. IIRC about 17,000 gets you into orbit and 22,000mph gets you out of earth orbit. What fuel does it take to reach those speeds, and how fast do its gases expand? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:36:56 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The real Dirk Pitt already knows that answer. How would I know what you think? |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:37:57 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I thought the expansion of propellant gases was limited to something like 5000 ft/s. Does that only apply to solid gunpowders? I honestly don't know. Trying to learn here. I had a .220 Swift one time and I thought 4200 ft/s was fast. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: No, it's correct. Minuteman 3 has a top speed of something like 17,500 mph. But when it's going that speed, it's 500+ miles up in space. ICBMs are really just rockets that carry warheads instead of monkeys or Teslas or whatever. I thought the expansion of propellant gases was limited to something like 5000 ft/s. Does that only apply to solid gunpowders? I honestly don't know. Trying to learn here. I had a .220 Swift one time and I thought 4200 ft/s was fast. Depending on what type of engine and propellant used, rocket engine exhaust velocity is typically anywhere from 1.7km/s to 4.5km/s(5500 ft/s to 14500ft/s) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:41:01 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This isn't my forte. I know nothing about the technical side of ICBMs. But that number seems crazy high. Right? Re-entry from orbit is about Mach 25. Even if the missiles are not at fully orbital velocities (I don't know jack shit about how they operate), they're going to be going very fast. One thing to remember is that the atmosphere is much less dense at the altitude where it is travelling at that speed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:42:18 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sprint accelerated to Mach 10 in 5 seconds. We did that in 1975. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/10/Sprint_missile.jpg I hate these posts, totally misses the point |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:46:50 PM EDT
[#31]
 The 20 in 1 Flying Nuclear Doomsday Device - Project Pluto |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:51:06 PM EDT
[#32]
Idonbuleeveit
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:51:57 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What fuel does it take to reach those speeds, and how fast do its gases expand? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Mach 1 at sea level is 761mph. So Mach 20 is ~15,220 mph, which is right inline with ICBM speeds. IIRC about 17,000 gets you into orbit and 22,000mph gets you out of earth orbit. What fuel does it take to reach those speeds, and how fast do its gases expand? They are probably using liquid hydrogen. Exhaust velocity is not just a component of combustion velocity, the nozzle shape/size and pressures involved will change the velocity. A gun barrel is a closed system, so what you get out is very dependent on what you put in. A ram/scramjet is using the atmosphere as not just fuel but an engine component. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:52:51 PM EDT
[#34]
Scramjet
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 2:55:16 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: ah yes the telltale sign of a helicopter search light Quote HistoryQuoted: ah yes the telltale sign of a helicopter search light Hypersonic missile-copters is ‘a thing’, yo. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 3:01:52 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted: Depending on what type of engine and propellant used, rocket engine exhaust velocity is typically anywhere from 1.7km/s to 4.5km/s(5500 ft/s to 14500ft/s) Quoted: Re-entry from orbit is about Mach 25. Even if the missiles are not at fully orbital velocities (I don't know jack shit about how they operate), they're going to be going very fast. One thing to remember is that the atmosphere is much less dense at the altitude where it is travelling at that speed. Quoted: They are probably using liquid hydrogen. Exhaust velocity is not just a component of combustion velocity, the nozzle shape/size and pressures involved will change the velocity. A gun barrel is a closed system, so what you get out is very dependent on what you put in. A ram/scramjet is using the atmosphere as not just fuel but an engine component. Thanks! I learned something today. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 3:06:01 PM EDT
[#37]
we have been doing hypersonic missile tests since the early 60's.
It was obviously classified which is why nobody really knows anything about it, its been around for a while. I mean for pete sake we had a manned flight in an X-15 that reached mach 6 in the 50's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 3:07:26 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How many warhead carrying monkeys do you think we have? 4 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 3:17:48 PM EDT
[#39]
A successful test of an air-breathing hypersonic missile would be news. The AGM-183 (the missile pictured with the B-52) is a hypersonic glide vehicle with a rocket engine, not as challenging to implement as a missile with an air-breathing engine.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 3:21:02 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sprint accelerated to Mach 10 in 5 seconds. We did that in 1975. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/10/Sprint_missile.jpg We should have continued to develop that one and keep it in service |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 3:57:08 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We should have continued to develop that one and keep it in service Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Sprint accelerated to Mach 10 in 5 seconds. We did that in 1975. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/10/Sprint_missile.jpg We should have continued to develop that one and keep it in service Not really useful for it's purpose, destroying ICBMs during reentry. Aside from the prohibitive cost (with the rise in in the number of ICBMs, and later MIRVs), there were some technical issues unrelated to the rocket itself, such as earlier explosions high in the atmosphere would effectively prevent radar tracking of following reentry vehicles. The Soviets could make the entire system obsolete by sending two or more missiles towards each target, which they designed their doctrine to do. Somewhat related, no one at the time knew about EMPs. So detonating thousands of nuclear devices high (which the Sprint was designed to do) in our own atmosphere would have done enormous damage to our electrical grid, something people tend to fret about a lot these days. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 5:42:02 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A successful test of an air-breathing hypersonic missile would be news. The AGM-183 (the missile pictured with the B-52) is a hypersonic glide vehicle with a rocket engine, not as challenging to implement as a missile with an air-breathing engine. The air breather is what recently flew. News writers just start grabbing random pictures to fill in their story. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 5:42:55 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: These threads are always fun reading. Very |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 5:48:49 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Sprint accelerated to Mach 10 in 5 seconds. We did that in 1975. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/10/Sprint_missile.jpg Honestly, we could've turned an X15 into a remote control drone with a nuclear warhead onboard. I doubt that there were any particular limitations holding us back between 1959 and '68 during it's operational history. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 6:35:08 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I hate these posts, totally misses the point No, you totally missed the point. If we had Sprint going Mach 10 in 1975 imagine what we have now that isn’t being advertised. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 6:51:41 PM EDT
[#46]
Raytheon/Northrop Grumman recently flew their HAWC design. Not Lockheed.
HAWC is a scramjet design concept being built. Downselect to single contractor isn’t for another couple of years. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 6:53:31 PM EDT
[#47]
If you removed the lefty hipster smarm snark from Gizmodo, it'd would be pretty awesom.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 7:02:41 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Thanks! I learned something today. NOBODY is using liquid hydrogen for an ICBM. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 8:16:41 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Raytheon/Northrop Grumman recently flew their HAWC design. Not Lockheed. HAWC is a scramjet design concept being built. Downselect to single contractor isn’t for another couple of years. I was incorrect. LM with DARPA/AFRL has recently flown. They did get beat to first flight though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/5/2022 8:51:16 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, you totally missed the point. If we had Sprint going Mach 10 in 1975 imagine what we have now that isn’t being advertised. COC 6 ~ Bollocks44 |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
