Russia unveils new hypersonic missile

Project 4202 could turn out a limited number of glide vehicles armed with nuclear warheads by 2020, and up to 24 with new hypersonic payloads could be deployed at the Dombarovsky base between 2020 and 2025, the Intelligence Review said.

I Believe some of this has been covered on the board, though I'm not sure if this is the same ICBM's that were talked about. The previous posts put new numbers at around fourty though this one is aiming more at 24. This comes in response to the wests interests and actions in the former Soviet region and some sort of retaliation was certainly expected.

I am not so much alarmed that there was retaliation but more so by the time line given hence that being the part of the article that I quoted. 2020-2025, looking like everyone is settling in for the long haul as my generation seems to digress from lessons learned long ago.

More details and some technical details such as the Mach ten capability. I am interested to see responses from those who know much more of this than me but I imagine we will be working hard to counter, and so we begin or continue the new arms race, something that has definitely proven dangerous should a catalyst provoke use.

Russian hypersonic missile

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Here's a question I have wondered for a while on this topic. Intercontinental ballistic missile reentry vehicles come in normally around 15,000 mph . Aren't they already hypersonic?

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Here's a question I have wondered for a while on this topic. Intercontinental ballistic missile reentry vehicles come in normally around 15,000 mph . Aren't they already hypersonic?

Yes media hype is alot of this. For a decade now we have been hearing this. There are all ready several threads on ATS.

a reply to: Greathouse

I guess there maneuvering is more erratic than conventional missles and they travel around 7000 mph. Not sure about the 15000 mph thing though....

a reply to: Greathouse

Interesting point, and just what I'm looking for on this topic. And not to answer but only say some of my assumptions.

Even the first time I read this I new speeds of this sort were obtained in different applications and you may be right on this is nothing that has not been done before but I noticed you said reentry and if you read the article it says this is on a glider, so I wonder maybe if that implies it will be carried on an aircraft that has already reached substantial speeds allowing the glider to reach good speeds on exit? Also on aircraft would imply the European shield to boy be so helpful. Again not too educated on technical specs of aviation so I'm looking for things the article didn't suggest or lead into, I am aware mainstream media does love to demonize Russia by fear mongering their decisions.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yea i think the gliding thing is the major difference, as i understand them they reach near orbital speed then immeadiately dives back into the upper atmosphere before reaching its maximum speed. Don't ICMB's just go in an arch?

a reply to: Thorneblood

I wiki'ed The information. They said currently normal reentry vehicles come in at 15,000 mph now older ones came in around 6000 miles an hour. The targeting on the newer ones is supposed to be down to a few feet.

I'm just giving what information I know on this topic.

But I have been wondering about this question for quite a while?

a reply to: Greathouse

But they still only fire and land in arch pattern right?

These operate more like this......nose up just like a space shuttle. Wild.


But yea, I have been wondering a lot about these too. Mostly because I could see Hypersonic Drones being a very big part of combat in the upper atmosphere or even being the first War Drones to operate solely in space. Could be fun to fly to the moon and strafe some targets or blow up a rogue satellite.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Yes. It is likely air launched like the USAF x-51 waverider it used an air launched mgm-140 atacms rocket then detached and turned on its main engine achieving the longest known hypersonic flight.

The USAF x-37 also has a re-entry speed of up to mach 25. That's 25 times the speed of sound. the x-37 is boosted into space on an atlas rocket then is detached, orbits and re enters under its own power.

The x51 project ended in success and not much has been said since its testing was completed.

There are a few x-37's operational and their missions are classified.

There was also the HTV tests and the HTV 2 tests

a reply to: dragonridr

Well I hope this is not a duplicate as I do no time think it is the same as recent Russian ICBM as this is focusing on the glider vehicle that looks like it plays a new and specific role in part of the process of an ICBM. Probably implying it defeats the shield system in some way. Also the aim of this post is not to raise any kind of fear but to focus on the time line offered for such a technology that would prove to be expensive and take attention from other projects. Showing that either side may not see diplomacy to our differences in the short term, proving to be another long and costly cold war type tension.

a reply to: Thorneblood

I could see where the maneuverability would cause a quicker strike now that it doesn't leave the atmosphere thanks .


But I'm still wondering how significant the time difference would be compared to the cost . After all with current targeting accuracy they are still going to hit the same spot ?

a reply to: Greathouse

Yes, a ICBM is already hypersonic. What these do is to reenter the atmosphere much sooner, on a flatter trajectory and basically "glide" at hypersonic speeds. That gives much less time for a missile defense system to target them in the exoatmospheric phase of flight.

a reply to: Greathouse

I recall seeing a video in which a Hypersonic glider was shot from a Russian Mothership/sub combo. It flew over an area dropping multiple warheads. So I dont know, its a wild technology.

Space Wars should be fun.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Thank you so it is a targeting issue and they are less vulnerable on their downward trajectory.

a reply to: Greathouse

Basically, yes. Once a missile reenters it's much harder to hit and kill.

Russia, Putin and his diseased gang!!!


Carry on!!

originally posted by: rigel4
Russia, Putin and his diseased gang!!!


Carry on!!

No offense but I don't think viewing the situation as a whole like that is conducive to a solution. You must view Russia like any country any of us are from, as a proud sovereign country with their own interests. Whatever your side on this it's not like they aren't being provoked and antagonized. It's not about who's right or wrong their is a conflict right now meaning there are 2(+) participants. And if Putin was an American president with the same aggressiveness I would imagine America would approve and defend him as we have of similar presidents that we've had.

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Greathouse

Basically, yes. Once a missile reenters it's much harder to hit and kill.

Well yes and no aegis system functions perfectly well in or out of atmosphere thanks to leap. So intercepting it in space or on re entry doesn't matter. As far as ground based well there just isn't that many missile I know last time I looked about 25 total. This was the old star wars program and frankly isn't getting funding. The only vulnerability of aegis is stealth if it can't track it it can't hit it.

a reply to: dragonridr

The normal Aegis system isn't designed to stop hypersonic missiles. The BMD is designed to kill them outside the atmosphere.

a reply to: dragonridr

I thought THAAD and the THAAD-ER were the new GBMD systems that were the be all end all of ground based intercepters.

I do not know how many are produced but they had really good test results.