Chinese Hypersonic Developments (HGVs/HCMs)

escobar

escobar

Brigadier
FairAndUnbiased said:
Note that they claim 24 mile miss, not factual 24 mile miss.

How would they know where the target was?

Also, a pre programmed trajectory with orbital course update solves this problem.
Click to expand...
The FT report IS a mess and confusing. The author know nothing about missile tech. WE should be skeptical of what was ACTUALLY tested until we have more info. the article is really unclear, it could be a glider flying all around the globe or just a MaRV on a quasi-orbital trajectory.
 
O

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
escobar said:
The FT report IS a mess and confusing. The author know nothing about missile tech. WE should be skeptical of what was ACTUALLY tested until we have more info. the article is really unclear, it could be a glider flying all around the globe or just a MaRV on a quasi-orbital trajectory.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. And this whole "US intelligent officials were surprised" sounds more like the MIC scaremongering for more money.

However the test should have been real because I vaguely remember a US general some time ago hinting towards a new space weapon that China was developing
 
escobar

escobar

Brigadier
Xsizor said:
True. The report can be Factually incorrect.

But the premise must be kept in mind. Very difficult to have a maneuvering craft to have very small CEP especially when it is in hypersonic flight for most of the flight regime. Very small changes in control surfaces can create drastic alterations to the final CEP. Since the weapon is said to have travelled round the globe and that too in hypersonic flight it is a remarkable achievement.

Absolutely badass, hands down
Click to expand...
Remarkable how? FOBS IS a tech from 1960
 
L

longmarch

Junior Member
Registered Member
I would rate this test as advanced stage: it's an end-to-end test. No one would do such a test without fully test the sub-elements first. About the claim of missing target, well we have no way to know whether it's true or not. Even if it's true, it's not something so difficult to address. Isn't it similar to Chang'e sample return mission where it hops before landing?
 
escobar

escobar

Brigadier
Overbom said:
I agree with this. And this whole "US intelligent officials were surprised" sounds more like the MIC scaremongering for more money.

However the test should have been real because I vaguely remember a US general some time ago hinting towards a new space weapon that China was developing
Click to expand...
The test IS Real. There were strange NOTAM for the rocket launch.
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1449521712064647172
 
Xizor

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
escobar said:
Remarkable how? FOBS IS a tech from 1960
Click to expand...
FOBS maybe a tech from 1960s but I don't think it was a maneuvering hypersonic system. FOBS had a depressed trajectory compared to a ballistic missile and implementing the exact same approach now would make it easy prey for the BMD of US.
 
escobar

escobar

Brigadier
Xsizor said:
FOBS maybe a tech from 1960s but I don't think it was a maneuvering hypersonic system. FOBS had a depressed trajectory compared to a ballistic missile and implementing the exact same approach now would make it easy prey for the BMD of US.
Click to expand...
Depressed trajectory and MARV are also old tech.
 
Xizor

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
escobar said:
Depressed trajectory and MARV are also old tech.
Click to expand...
Indeed. And China therefore didn't do it. This isn't neither Marv or a depressed trajectory ballistic ( FOBS was) or even a combination of two.

Just see it as a very long range maneuvering hypersonic missile with a Rocket launch/ boost phase.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top