Chinese Hypersonic Developments (HGVs/HCMs)

plawolf

Lieutenant General
Wasn't it a LM rocket that launched it. If that's the case then the SBIRS Satellites can easily ( and do easily) pick up. Almost every rocket launch is tracked by the NRO and the possible splash locations be monitored throughout.

Except the whole point of FOBS is that it’s hard to track and predict its course and target. If they could have tracked it and plotted its target so accurately then there wouldn’t be any need for the collective hyperventilating we are seeing from the west.

I am almost certain that they just looked at satellite imagery of the impact site and drew a straight line from that to the nearest target on the missile range.
 

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
Except the whole point of FOBS is that it’s hard to track and predict its course and target. If they could have tracked it and plotted its target so accurately then there wouldn’t be any need for the collective hyperventilating we are seeing from the west.

I am almost certain that they just looked at satellite imagery of the impact site and drew a straight line from that to the nearest target on the missile range.
But FOBS happened in the 60s. The early US sensing capabilities were not adequate enough to counter it. SBIRS took shape
during the end and after the USSR - late 80s and 90s.
 

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
??

The next tranche of SBIRS promises advanced capabilites in midcourse and full course tracking. Most of the early SBIRS Satellites only had solid Boost phase tracking capabilities.

Newer Satellites have enhanced sensing and information sharing capabilites. It's a pacing threat ( to borrow from US lingo ) and thus China is right in pursuing such novel systems. I see this as a response to continued US ambiguity and perceived aggravation - deployment of AN-TPY2 in SK, development of SM-3,SM-6 and continued investments in advanced SBIRS and other distributed infrared sensing systems.

The same concerns that propelled Russia to develop the Nuclear cruise missiles and Poseidon Torpedo nuke is propelling China.

I'm patiently waiting for a Chinese peer of Poseidon nuclear Torpedo. It'll happen soon enough as it's a low hanging fruit for China.
 

Hendrik_2000

Lieutenant General
China also researching anti hypersonic kill chain From Jamestown

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

China’s Air Force Engineering University (空军工程大学, Kongjun gongcheng daxue) has studied the feasibility of deploying a cluster of widely spaced UASs to intercept hostile hypersonic strikes.[16] The conceptual design makes use of high-altitude, long-endurance (HALE) UAS that can loiter in the forward theater. Because UAS payloads are smaller than manned warplanes, Chinese researchers envisage that the drone cluster will be divided between two missions: early warning and interception.

In order to provide effective early warning, the UAS that are involved need collaborative decision-making, networked target acquisition, and beyond visual range communications to provide long-range detection and tracking capabilities. The early warning UAS cluster would be part of the networked sensors comprising space-based infrared satellites, land-based early warning radars, and early warning aircraft. Per the Air Force Engineering University’s conceptual design, the interceptor UAS will carry six 250 kg, 200 km range airborne missiles.[17] The proposed defense architecture also calls for robust battle management and C2 systems. The researchers divide warfighting into four stages: patrol and combat readiness, early warning, target acquisition, and intercept capabilities. They have conducted systems analysis to determine the optimal deployment strategy for both early warning and interceptor UASs.[18]

The Chinese open source literature summarized above provide a very high-level concept of operations (CONOPS) and warfighting applications against hypersonic weapons. Applied with systems engineering, CONOPS can be refined and transformed into top-level systems requirements for design, development, integration, testing, and IOC. This does not mean that China is on the verge of developing these missile defense systems, but the extensive research undertaken thus far, nevertheless brings China a step closer to achieving a hypersonic defense capability
 

escobar

Brigadier
This whole stressing about how much it is supposed to have missed its ‘target’ is both highly dubious and misleading.

Firstly, how would the west know what the target was? Assuming there even was a target? It would have almost certainly been set to touch down in one of China’s many missile ranges, but just because there was a target on the range doesn’t mean it’s the target this thing was meant to hit. Most likely this was just meant to hit the missile range, and I seriously doubt they would have reasonably expected better accuracy than that.

Secondly, which reinforces the above point, who the hell puts terminal guidance on a first test proof-of-concept flight? That’s like suggesting the US put terminal guidance equipment on the first X47 ever launched. No one does that.

As such, even if it did indeed miss a target area by a couple dozen miles, that would have been done with no terminal guidance. Which would be about right in terms of ballpark expectations.

Once the design is further refined and they slap terminal guidance on it, it should have vastly improved accuracy.

I think the key question is going to be whether that refined accuracy is going to be good enough for conventional precision strike, or merely nuclear delivery. But I think that’s a question even the Chinese scientists who developed this beastie doesn’t yet know, and will need to be proved via tests. That’s still probably years down the line, and it’s only then that we might have an actual answer.
When CN was testing Df-ZF DOD Said it had pretty good CEP and everyone accept that. But now people think DoD IS lying on the 24 miles miss claim...
 

escobar

Brigadier
DoD is lying ? Did DoD release a statement regarding this test? If so, do post it.

Financial Times reporting and DoD aren't the same.
FT don't have SBIRS so the 24 miles miss claim Come from the USG.
The report on DF-ZF also Never came directly from DOD. Always leaked to WP or NYT....
 

Xizor

Captain
Registered Member
FT don't have SBIRS so the 24 miles miss claim Come from the USG.
The report on DF-ZF also Never came directly from DOD. Always leaked to WP or NYT....
That's very different from a DoD statement.
You insisted "everyone" accepted something and then "people" rejected another. It's quite clear that you are not being faithful to the subject topic but interested in raising a hue about something else.

Some tried to reason about the miss.
 

escobar

Brigadier
That's very different from a DoD statement.
You insisted "everyone" accepted something and then "people" rejected another. It's quite clear that you are not being faithful to the subject topic but interested in raising a hue about something else.

Some tried to reason about the miss
Faithful?? What i mean IS almost no one ever doubt over the good df-Zf cep claim but now some have doubt on this.
 
Top