Geographer
Junior Member
I read this article and am extremely skeptical of such a system. It is long on promised capabilities without any discussion of actuall systems. The most specific they get are ICBMs with conventional warheads. Wow, that is so innovative, who would have ever thought of that? That's basically a giant Scud missile. The two biggest problems with that are: ICBMs with conventional warheads look just like ICBMs with nuclear warheads so launching one could touch off a nuclear war. Also, ICBMs were designed to drop nukes within a few hundred meters of the target and let the massive nuclear explosion correct any impression, a conventional warhead must be directly on-target.
As for these hypersonic bombers and other speculations, so far those exist as a PowerPoint slide listing ideas, I have not seen any work or funding for it. Modern military projects take over a decade to field. Project pioneering radically new technologies take even longer. A hypersonic bomber would require such extremely expensive and time-consuming technologies.
Even though the US military budget is $700 billion+, NOT including war spending, big Reagan-esque projects are getting the axe under Defense Secretary Robert Gates. He's focused on current counter-insurgency wars, not hypothetical all-in wars against China or Russia. He fought like hell to pare down the F-22 acquisitions and is fighting another big battle to cancel a second engine for the F-35. Before that, the Comanche helicopter was canceled (by Rumsfeld) and the next generation destroyer Zumwalt class has been pared down from 7-8 to 3.
Budget cuts to the military are ahead. Their budget has been growing much faster than the rest of the government, or government revenues (again, not including war spending) since 2000. Clinton's last DoD budget was in the area of $300 billion, now is it ~$700 billion. This rise is unsustainable. The US deficit will be $1.6 trillion this year so something has to give, and DoD spends more than the rest of the government agencies combined. Entitlements like social security and medicare are the biggest spenders but FAR harder to cut than DoD which is discretionary spending. Maybe the military won't suffer as much as other government agencies but they will have to cut back somewhere.
Fantasy projects like C-PGS don't stand a chance. Whatever cost DoD and its contractors give, you can raise 50% for cost-overruns and delays associated with the necessary huge technological innovation. Even if it gets exploratory funds Congress will eventually take a long look at it and cut most if not all of the program, just Obama wants to cut NASA's neo-moon program.
In short, if the Chinese are confused about C-PGS it's because there is so little information or clear thinking from anyone on it. It will almost certainly not come to pass but military strategists in both countries might play it up to get more funding. The USSR was really worried and apprehensive about Reagan's Star Wars, that ridiculous boondoggle to laser down ICBMs. Maybe that is the whole point but I think China is a little smarter and more attentive that the author gives them credit for. I haven't seen any mention of C-PGS from Chinese sources. They are not going to shit themselves with fear over this defense contractor's dream.
As for these hypersonic bombers and other speculations, so far those exist as a PowerPoint slide listing ideas, I have not seen any work or funding for it. Modern military projects take over a decade to field. Project pioneering radically new technologies take even longer. A hypersonic bomber would require such extremely expensive and time-consuming technologies.
Even though the US military budget is $700 billion+, NOT including war spending, big Reagan-esque projects are getting the axe under Defense Secretary Robert Gates. He's focused on current counter-insurgency wars, not hypothetical all-in wars against China or Russia. He fought like hell to pare down the F-22 acquisitions and is fighting another big battle to cancel a second engine for the F-35. Before that, the Comanche helicopter was canceled (by Rumsfeld) and the next generation destroyer Zumwalt class has been pared down from 7-8 to 3.
Budget cuts to the military are ahead. Their budget has been growing much faster than the rest of the government, or government revenues (again, not including war spending) since 2000. Clinton's last DoD budget was in the area of $300 billion, now is it ~$700 billion. This rise is unsustainable. The US deficit will be $1.6 trillion this year so something has to give, and DoD spends more than the rest of the government agencies combined. Entitlements like social security and medicare are the biggest spenders but FAR harder to cut than DoD which is discretionary spending. Maybe the military won't suffer as much as other government agencies but they will have to cut back somewhere.
Fantasy projects like C-PGS don't stand a chance. Whatever cost DoD and its contractors give, you can raise 50% for cost-overruns and delays associated with the necessary huge technological innovation. Even if it gets exploratory funds Congress will eventually take a long look at it and cut most if not all of the program, just Obama wants to cut NASA's neo-moon program.
In short, if the Chinese are confused about C-PGS it's because there is so little information or clear thinking from anyone on it. It will almost certainly not come to pass but military strategists in both countries might play it up to get more funding. The USSR was really worried and apprehensive about Reagan's Star Wars, that ridiculous boondoggle to laser down ICBMs. Maybe that is the whole point but I think China is a little smarter and more attentive that the author gives them credit for. I haven't seen any mention of C-PGS from Chinese sources. They are not going to shit themselves with fear over this defense contractor's dream.
Last edited:
