It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Sky watcher
While sometimes the Russians have made some cool things I think we can all agree that they have allot of catch up to do.
Even you Steller with your over quoting self. Russia is having a hard time feeding its army and most of their troops don't even get socks.
They build all these great weapons with their wonderfully claims of being unstoppable with not one shred of proof.
The Russians can build some great rockets and I will give them that, This is something we know that they are good at.
The question needs to be will any Russians be alive to pull the trigger in a real war situation. I think as of now one can only say that their nuclear ICBM arsenal is one that they can rely on.
Their Navy and air force is just to far behind right now to say otherwise.
This is my opinion and the opinion of most of the intelligent world so I wont sit here and argue the point.
So lets have some more of the fantasy land Plasma stealth type BS claims and over quotes from Steller and the other Soviet lovers who are not even Russian.
What do you think about the advances in Railgun technology Iskander? Do you believe it has the possibility of ever being a threat to missiles such as these? I believe its projectile can be fired well beyond hypersonic speeds.
Originally posted by rogue1 Everyone loses.
If the Russians say they can do this any that wothour any actual proof, then it must be true.
So basically Iskander and Stellar really are just playing guessing games, which they shouldn't be passing off as some informed opinion, it simply isn't.
ingone
Had to do a little bit of my high school math as Iskander pointed out......however it is not easy on forums to use mathematics, and eventually when the mathematics gets more and more complicated in nature you get to a point where nothing can be proved. There are serious scientific philosophical flaws as you move towards the more fundamental mathematical ideas. Anyways.......
This Russian site claims the Sunburn can perform evasive maneuvers at "exceeding" 10 g. I doubt any "hypersonic" anti-ship missile can perform any better in this regard.
As far as RAM is concerned the sidewinder missile that it is built around can turn at 50 g.
Ok, taking into account the 5 to 1 ratio as far as maneuverability goes the hypersonic activity of a missile is possibly nullified to a large extent. Especially when one considers the fact that both missiles will be approaching one another at possibly more than mach 8. The difference between a hypersonic and supersonic approach becomes very slim at these speeds and ranges.
The US navy has reported successful very successful kill ratios against supersonic missiles with terminal-maneuverability, a greater than 95% kill rate.
Iskander, your idea that Sea Ram would fail against a hypersonic target is pure speculation.
The reaction times between a supersonic intercept and hypersonic intercept would be below a 10 second difference in all actuality. It's pure speculation from both sides actually. You say, "do your high school math" throughout this thread.....well, the numbers show that Sea Ram is extremely effective in all areas.
You truly don't know the answer to the situation. I don't either. All we know is that in its current form Sea Ram is EXTREMELY effective against supersonic maneuverable missiles.
....predicts he will be thoroughly degraded and slapped on the wrist for speaking such nonsense.
Oh, and Iskander you can degrade and call people stupid (in a slightly less obvious way) as often as you like, but it makes conversations with you far less appealing. It makes people defensive and you're attacking people's intelligence in a forum format (which isn't all that easy of a way to communicate). The least you can do is show people who are "trying" to do research and present ideas with respect because honestly 80%+ of this stuff is speculation.
Another question.........why does this site define hypersonic as mach 3.5-7? Is there some speculation as to the use of this term?
In aerodynamics, hypersonic speeds are speeds that are highly supersonic. In the 1970s, the term generally came to refer to speeds of Mach 5 (5 times the speed of sound) and above. The hypersonic regime is a subset of the supersonic regime.
High speed flight can be roughly classified in five categories:
• Subsonic: Ma < 1
• Sonic: Ma=1
• Transonic: 0.75 < Ma < 1.2
• Supersonic: Ma > all airflow above mach 1. Plane must be above mach 1.2
• Hypersonic: Ma > 5
Is hypersonic relative in some way?
Average detection zone is about 30 kilometers. With the novel speed of 1 kilometer per second, the total system reaction time is only 30 seconds, which includes target detection, establishing of radar lock/target tracking, and deployment of the weapon systems to destroy the target.
A hypersonic target traveling at a minimum speed of Mach 5 will cover those 30 kilometers in less then 1 second.
With air-to-air missiles it’s called F-pole, and as with numerous MiG-25 encounters, just by having sheer speed, a low G tolerance Foxbat was able to repeatedly outrunning all kinds of missiles with out having to perform violent maneuvers.
You should read from page 1 of this thread, and you'll see Stellar posted the U.S. admitting Russia preety much has those weapons, Lasers, Direct Engery Stuff.
Originally posted by rogue1
If the Russians say they can do this any that wothour any actual proof, then it must be true. No one here knows what will work and what won't. What one side is really developing.
So basically Iskander and Stellar really are just playing guessing games, which they shouldn't be passing off as some informed opinion, it simply isn't.
And Stellar silly notion of Russia building it's forces to survive nuclear wihih they will initiate with the US is ridiculous. Everyone loses.
Sorry, had to point out the obvious mistake of you saying that a mach 5 missile would move 45km per second. That's why math sucks so much in a forum setting. You're trying to calculate quickly and so forth and the numbers are fumbled easily. It messes up the entire flow of everything.
Also, it is extremely important to point out the fact that SeaRam does stand up to all current anti-ship threats. It has a proven effectiveness of greater than 95% against supersonic missiles that fly in the range of mach 2.5.
The Yakhont designers assume that at a distance of 300 km the enemy may detect a missile launching and do whatever necessary to destroy the missile. But being "deaf" to jamming a Yakhont missile, flying at a speed of 750 meters per second and performing complex tactical maneuvering during the flight, will reach its target anyway. No navy in the world has effective means against the Russian missile.
while hypersonic cruise/AShMs are still a touchy political subject, and while they officially existed since the 80s
EADS, the Netherlands-based aeronautics, defense and space company, has successfully tested a low-flying missile that can fly at Mach 6.6, fast enough to intercept ballistic missiles. "Extreme speeds are always an advantage to the person who fires first," said Program Manager Peter Gleich at a recent EADS-sponsored technical conference in Paris. The development of the missile, shown here, is part of a new European effort to develop a military force with technology comparable to that of the United States, but independent of the authority of U.S.-controlled NATO.