China claims to have hypersonic infrared tracking ability that can counter the F-22

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: majesticgent

China also claimed to have the first quantum radar, which would render stealth obsolete, which turned out to have a range of about 60 miles.

Actually that's pretty impressive even for China.
Regardless, I'd still be watching China. They may not be perfect, but they are also not far behind.

a reply to: nugget1

Don't forget the golden goose for these people: the american consumer.

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: majesticgent

First there is NO WEAPONS TECH that does not have a counter measure that is developed to beat it.

it is a continuous we have A so they make B to counter and we make C to counter B, ect ect ect.

so this concept of something to target and destroy our F-22 and "stealth" is not unrealistic.

second.. the claim "they cant do this" and/or "this tech is not stoppable" has been disproven OVER AND OVER for the history of warfare.
i could go into examples how the "mighty USA (or insert country of your choice) " tech is the best/unbeatable has ended in disaster with much loss of life .

third.

I think people here (and the article is directly or indirectly implying it) are mixing together two different parts / tech as one thing.

it is a hypersonic missile that is to kill the target with an infrared TARGETING SYSTEM designed to target the F-22 and stealth.

lets start with the "infrared" tracking system.
taking it at face value (imo probably underrated) that it has detection/engaging stealth and F-22 at 60 miles.

when taken that most aircraft cannot launch weapons at Mach speeds (even bombers) if it is detected at that range you have some time (yes small but is there) / window to engage.

if they are going Mach 1 plus alot of stealth abilities are lost and standard detection methods (radar and infrared to name two) become much more effective.

Now to the hypersonic missile.

a hypersonic anything means something going mach 5 or greater.


now that you detected the aircraft the abilities of the hypersonic missile come into play.

again almost all aircraft have to go sub sonic to launch weapons.. maybe some can (like on a bombing run) launch a weapon at that speed.. but its still (for lack of a better description) going to be going straight for some amount of time to launch said weapons.
even at mach speed at most going to be Mach 2 with more likely between Mach 1+

the hypersonic missile will be going 5 times plus that speed (maybe even faster).

in perspective the aircraft will be going much SLOWER than the missile by factor depending if sub sonic or mach 1-2.
it is like trying to dodge someone shooting a bullet at you , targeted center mass .
your "speed" even if a bruce lee martial artist is so much slower than the bullet you (unless in an action movie) not gonna get out of the way in time.

so that 60 mile detection range even if dropped 10 miles due to time of target/launch (btw every country has computer systems more than capable for this task and fast too) that leaves 50 miles to be covered by a missile going a minimum 3836.35 miles an hour..

almost no time to react if the system works as currently claimed.
we also dont know its maneuverability (to try again if missed) , if it has a proximity fuse and what that blast range would be.

to sum it up

we KNOW china is not a "backwater" country and can / does make weapons to match and even defeat US systems/weapons.

to continue this "weenie waving" denial the outcome can be seen in when this was applied in such conflicts as WWII , korea, and Vietnam.

only this time with our mentality of having enough weapons/supplies for a "60 day conflict" , thinking our technical superiority will beat numbers (how that work out for germany in WWII) , and that we dont have the luxury of time/distance like we enjoyed in WWII (for example) to learn from our arrogance/mistakes.

we need to take this SERIOUSLY .

scrounger

Ah 6 0 miles..too bad we can drop THESE at 69 miles.

GBU stormbreaker

JSOW weapon

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: majesticgent
However I doubt that they would even get to use them. They are assuming that the US would ever get close enough for them to use that. We'd make sure all those would be out of service before attacking.

One possible solution would be to make these missiles available on ships and then place a dragnet of ship-based SAMs both conventional and hypersonic.

I don't know much about said YLC-8E, but if it is also possible to be ship-based, then the South China sea could become inaccessible to opposition aircraft.

Another possibility would be the put them on the islands in the South China sea along with constant fighter patrols in order to achieve air superiority over the hotly contested area. It would make taking them out a difficult proposition.

originally posted by: nugget1
It's so nice of America to have spent the last few decades insuring China becomes the number one world power. They couldn't have done it without the help of China Mitch, China Joe, Big Pharma, and all the manufacturers who've only had their best interests and profits at heart.
I'd say 'wake up, people' but it's a little late for that. You might just as well stay asleep.

In the global scale of the modern world, nations are irrelevant. There is the technocracyglobal elite and us, the serfs.

They really wouldn't have it any other way.

originally posted by: Halfswede
It still isn't a huge game-changer as there are really only two scenarios where they would be used. One is a major power doing a preemptive strike to wipe out another major power's defenses before a nuclear attack (basically the same mutually assured destruction that already exists), or a superpower taking out some larger infrastructure in a preemptive lopsided war with a smaller power.

I believe the initial hypersonic missiles were envisioned to defeat the AEGIS and CIWS defense systems protecting US aircraft carrier groups and render said carriers inoperable or destroyed.

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: majesticgent
the hypersonic missile will be going 5 times plus that speed (maybe even faster).

in perspective the aircraft will be going much SLOWER than the missile by factor depending if sub sonic or mach 1-2.
it is like trying to dodge someone shooting a bullet at you , targeted center mass .
your "speed" even if a bruce lee martial artist is so much slower than the bullet you (unless in an action movie) not gonna get out of the way in time.

so that 60 mile detection range even if dropped 10 miles due to time of target/launch (btw every country has computer systems more than capable for this task and fast too) that leaves 50 miles to be covered by a missile going a minimum 3836.35 miles an hour..

almost no time to react if the system works as currently claimed.
we also dont know its maneuverability (to try again if missed) , if it has a proximity fuse and what that blast range would be.

That is what I'm curious about. A missile going that fast doesn't have much time to track and seems as if it will only have one shot to get close enough to make a hit. If it misses it will be very far away before it has a chance to turn back around for another go.

Perhaps the hypersonic stage of the missile is only for closing in on the target then after which a conventional motor is used for the final tracking stage. That's still a lot of energy to bleed before getting to the target and overshooting.

Lots of speculation at this point.

originally posted by: EarthShine
Russia has been developing hypersonics also. Google says about Russia's hypersonic weapons: 10 air-launched Khinzal ballistic missile and the sea-launched Zircon anti-ship missile, and the Mach 27 Avangard, a nuclear-armed glider boosted high into the atmosphere atop an ICBM.

Yes, I'm aware of these. This article was the first I've read that said hypersonic weapons would be used against aircraft; stealth aircraft at that. Specifically, the F-22 (the F-35 was mentioned too.)

originally posted by: yuppa
Ah 6 0 miles..too bad we can drop THESE at 69 miles.

GBU stormbreaker

JSOW weapon

True, but air superiority is probably a good idea before using these weapons.

originally posted by: majesticgent

originally posted by: yuppa
Ah 6 0 miles..too bad we can drop THESE at 69 miles.

GBU stormbreaker

JSOW weapon

True, but air superiority is probably a good idea before using these weapons.

yeah well normally they cant detect the planes till 65 miles, soo....

a reply to: yuppa
too bad those have to be deployed at SUB SONIC speed.
thus conventional detection (or even this system) can see them longer range and engaged as such

add hypersonic missile and still screwed

scrounger

a reply to: majesticgent

The problem is that the radar would first have to detect incoming aircraft and then direct the missiles to the aircraft. Where the missiles ir would then guide them in.

So the radar would need to be closer to the coast or on an island to detect the aircraft. But at that point we will take out the radar once we get a fix. Unless it's on a ship or something that can be moved quickly. Then the hypersonic missile could be also submarine launched, assuming that it can be fitted into a vertical launch tube. It get's complicated.

a reply to: scrounger

The advantage to hypersonic antiaircraft missiles is their speed. The big disadvantage to hypersonic antiaircraft missiles is their speed. To hit a moving target, you need a pretty precise weapon. The AIM-54 was technically hypersonic, with a top speed of Mach 5, and against a fighter sized target had issues. One of two engagements in Desert Storm using the Phoenix, the MiG-23 it was fired at changed course and the missile flew into the ground.

Directed energy weapons make aircraft and missile speeds irrelevant. EOD - "end of debate".

a reply to: havanaja

Except…. They don’t. You still have to detect said aircraft, it still has to be in range, and you still have to target it. And lasers have limited range and are affected by atmosphere.

originally posted by: ressiv
depends wat the US can steal from other country's... looking into history there is very less the US devellopt them self
starting with the sidewinder wich they stole from an suisse inventor

Really? Maybe you might want to tell William McLean that.

From Wikipedia and other sources.
"William Burdette McLean (1914–1976) was a United States Navy physicist, who conceived and developed the heat-seeking Sidewinder missile. The Sidewinder was the first truly effective air-to-air missile; its variants and upgrades are still in active service.

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: yuppa
too bad those have to be deployed at SUB SONIC speed.
thus conventional detection (or even this system) can see them longer range and engaged as such

add hypersonic missile and still screwed

scrounger

What part of a bomb coming in undetected and set on target with the aircraft staying beyond detection range do you not grasp? they can drop these outside the 65 mile detection range and even stay there and guide the bombs as long as they stay out of range IF they do not have internal guidance.

Oh somethng new that just came out this week,a air dropped cruise missile package that is dropped out of transports. they can hit targets on chinas coastline and stay out of hypersonic missile range too.

Those missiles china has are annoyances,not unstoppable. same as the f-22 all weapons have weaknesses.

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: scrounger
a reply to: yuppa
too bad those have to be deployed at SUB SONIC speed.
thus conventional detection (or even this system) can see them longer range and engaged as such

add hypersonic missile and still screwed

scrounger

What part of a bomb coming in undetected and set on target with the aircraft staying beyond detection range do you not grasp? they can drop these outside the 65 mile detection range and even stay there and guide the bombs as long as they stay out of range IF they do not have internal guidance.

alot of IF there buddy.. the 60 mile range is what is CLAIMED by china.. What country would let you know EXACTLY what their range is? along with so you did release the bomb. is it targeted at the anti aircraft site targeting the releasing aircraft? along with "yeay we hit the target"... too bad the attacking aircraft (that relies on tech vs numbers) didnt get back to base to celebrate it.

Oh somethng new that just came out this week,a air dropped cruise missile package that is dropped out of transports. they can hit targets on chinas coastline and stay out of hypersonic missile range too.

AGAIN you presume your out of the missile range. as we all know detecting and tracking can be two things.. along with in your example its a TRANSPORT AIRCRAFT.. one of the easiest to detect and one of the slowest. the intercept point and speed of hypersonic its dead meat by any standard. yes a cruise missile carrier is a deadly platform.. but your still a target and still both we and an enemy take that system (or should) into account. thus prepared for it.

Those missiles china has are annoyances,not unstoppable. same as the f-22 all weapons have weaknesses.

your final comment has been stated since the dawn of warfare.. with those words having to be eaten over and over. along with many brave men/women paying the price for that arrogance. need i remind you of the zero and long lance torpedo of WWII.. the "unstoppable and always accuracte" claims of air to air missiles in vietnam that also lead to early aircraft not armed with guns.. or even pilots trained in dogfighting (thus red flag created).

you are correct all weapons systems have weaknesses...
but to make the presumption "my country is the best" is constantly disproven folly.

or as the old saying goes

those that do not learn from (warfare) history are doomed to repeat the same mistakes (and pay in blood for it).

scrounger

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: scrounger

The advantage to hypersonic antiaircraft missiles is their speed. The big disadvantage to hypersonic antiaircraft missiles is their speed. To hit a moving target, you need a pretty precise weapon. The AIM-54 was technically hypersonic, with a top speed of Mach 5, and against a fighter sized target had issues. One of two engagements in Desert Storm using the Phoenix, the MiG-23 it was fired at changed course and the missile flew into the ground.

true but to be fair thats more of a failure of the targeting/prediction hardware not the missile itself.

along with a direct hit warhead vs proximity fuse.
to put that into perspective the U 2 flown by mr powers was not hit directly nor even the missile get next to it.
they predicted (DUE to THE PRESIDENT DEMANDING HE FLY THE SAME COURSE OF LAST MISSION over objection of kelly johnson) were it would be, sent up a few missiles and set them off near him.. ripping the tail off the aircraft.

also to be fair in your example the aim-54 was used (by your own words) TWICE and only one time did it fail.
thats a 50 percent effectiveness right out of the gate.
not bad for such a small sample size used to determine if it "hypersonic" missile is effective or not.

In short to ASSUME that their system is no good is to court folly and some pilot is gonna pay the price.

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger

Yes, but even with a proximity fuse, which most missiles are, you still have to get close. And if you have a target that has a way of seeing the missiles launch, and can maneuver onto a different track and force the missiles to maneuver, you’re making the kill chain that much harder. And that’s the important thing. There’s a lot more than just an improved prediction algorithm that needs to happen to make an effective hypersonic antiair missile against a stealthy target. It will happen eventually, and this may very well be the first step, but that doesn’t mean it’s going to be barely as effective as China claims.

The Phoenix was used twice in combat. It was used multiple times in testing and training scenarios that showed issues with hitting targets. Depending on the target altitude, and profile the Phoenix had issues with targets.