Russia’s New Hypersonic Missile Travels Nearly Two Miles a Second

Popular Mechanics ^ | December 26, 2018 | Kyle Mizokami

[TXnMA]

"Place a cloud of fragments in the path of a Mach 8 object. If you thought a jet hitting a drone could be bad "

Hmm -- maybe the time for "Metal Storm" for defensive applications has arrived...

TXnMA
 

[trebb]

as long as their isn't a fingerprint on the optics, a laser beam can travel 186,000 mph or >25x faster.

So can the beam from a penlight.....I get your point but targeting and keeping on target might be tricky with something moving that fast...no matter how fast the "projectile" trying to take it out.

[jpsb]

Flight time from 300 miles away is

300 miles
——————— = 0.048 hours = 174 second
6200 mile/hour

So the ship has less the 3 minutes to defend itself. And there is nothing that is gong to shoot down a missile going mach 8. At 30 knts the ship will be within a 9000 feet of where it was at launch. I would think flight software could solve a 9000 foot problem.

A mach 1 missile launched from the same distance would need to solve a 15 mile problem. A mach 8 air breathing missile is a game changer.

[jpsb]

Wouldn’t do much the debris would still hit you at mach 8.

[Yo-Yo]

Assuming a conventional warhead or a kinetic warhead:

1) You would have to detect and accurately know the precise coordinates of the target from 300 miles away, and do so before launch.

B) The mach 6 missile would have to be able to detect the exact location of the target while traveling at, well, mach 6. Atmospheric heating around the missile would preclude the use of infrared sensors for target detection, and ionization of the air around the missile would preclude the use of active radar for target detection. So how is the missile going to determine the corrections necessary for a hit?

III) Assuming that the missile does have a means for terminal detection of the target, at mach 6 there isn't much course correction maneuvering the missile can do, so we're back to 1) above, you need a near perfect firing solution before launch.

Which all boils down to a missile that is more suited for a nuclear first strike, not conventional warfare.

[jpsb]

Well these missiles are built for aircraft carriers. So I would imagine there would be an enemy submarine in the area providing guidance info. Enjoyed the exchange. Later.

[kosciusko51]

Ablative materials on the exterior will help keep it intact during operation.

[rlmorel]

Heck, I am not offended at all, TXnMA...I was simply remarking on the way firing solutions for non-guided munitions is dependent on a variety of things, but...of course, they will be only as good as the people who run them...

And THAT is the rub...

[rlmorel]

There is a lot of kinetic energy involved in any collision with a body traveling at Mach 8, even if one of them is a BB traveling as subsonic speeds...

I have always thought that Metal Storm was a great concept looking for an application...:)

[daniel1212]

A third-world economy with nukes, and now “Fired from a submarine off the Eastern Seaboard, a hypersonic missile could hit a target at 186 miles in just 109 seconds,” is to be taken seriously.

The issue is whether the damage the enemy could receive makes it worth.

[adorno]

A third-world economy with nukes, and now “Fired from a submarine off the Eastern Seaboard, a hypersonic missile could hit a target at 186 miles in just 109 seconds,” is to be taken seriously.

No question about that. But, that's not the point I was arguing. Even Iran and N. Korea, with nuclear weapons, should be taken seriously. But, again, those are not the kind of economies which can keep up with the U.S. in a weapons race or a military buildup.