Posted on 03/21/2022 5:52:29 AM PDT by Red Badger
Russia's claim that it launched a hypersonic missile against a military depot in Ukraine has drawn skepticism from Western defense sources who say the alleged strike came from a 1980s-era system that likely did not hit the presumed target.
Russia announced on Saturday that it fired its much-vaunted hypersonic Kinzhal missile for the first time in a war setting, demolishing a Ukrainian underground arms warehouse in the country's western sector. The report prompted commentators to note that the attack, if true, in part demonstrated that the U.S. has not kept pace with Russian hypersonic technology.
But the Kinzhal is "nothing special," defense sources told Just the News.
"Yes, it's a hypersonic missile, but so are all the other ballistic missiles anywhere," a Pentagon official said. The official is not authorized to speak to the press and spoke on the condition of anonymity. "Anything that can exceed around 3,800 miles per hour is technically hypersonic. This is nothing new."
Neither is the Kinzhal, the official said. At least, not technically. "It's an upgrade of a system that was developed in the 1980s," the official said. "The name is new."
In a TV interview on Sunday, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin did not verify whether Russian President Vladimir Putin launched the Kinzhal into Ukraine.
"I cannot confirm or dispute whether or not he's used those weapons," Austin said on the CBS news program "Face the Nation."
Even if he did use them, Austin said, he wouldn't be impressed.
"I would not see it as a game changer," Austin said.
Others doubted whether the Kremlin showed authentic video when announcing the alleged strike.
Writers for The Drive questioned whether Russia actually launched a Kinzhal, writing on Saturday that the claim "doesn't all add up."
The journalists later updated their story to write that the alleged strike video did not portray a hit on a weapons depot in western Ukraine.
"We can now say for certain that the strike depicted happened nowhere near the western part of the country and not at some major military weapons storage area," the authors wrote. "It happened at a heavily bombarded rural area in the far eastern area of Ukraine."
Putin used the Kinzhal missile as expected, in order to achieve war aims, Austin said.
"I think again, the reason that he's resorting to using these types of weapons is because he's trying to reestablish some momentum," he said, reiterating, "I don't think that this in and of itself will be a game changer."
The Kremlin in 2018 announced that the Kinzhal — which means "dagger" in Russian — was online and ready for war.
The system would "help deter possible adversaries from rushing headlong into action," Russia's Aerospace Force Commander-in-Chief Sergei Surovikin said, according to the Russian news agency,Tass.
"The missile's maneuvering at speeds exceeding the speed of sound by several times allows it to reliably breach all air defense and anti-ballistic missile defense systems that exist or are being developed," Surovikin said.
The Pentagon chief on Sunday questioned why Putin would use and announce a hypersonic strike: "Is he running low on precision-guided munitions? Does he have like complete confidence in the ability of his troops to reestablish momentum?"
The Kinzhal hypersonic missile is carried aboard MiG-31K fighter jets, and is believed to have a range of 1,240 miles. Other countries that have been building hypersonic weapons include the United States, China, and North Korea.
I trust Lloyd Austin about as much as I trust Jen Psaki.
Beat me to it.
I don’t trust either of them as well but Russia did fire a hypersonic missile, so what, is it a game changer, NO, so far it’s made zero difference in Ukraine
Maybe it’s supposed use was a demonstration to the west, who knows
“Maybe it’s supposed use was a demonstration to the west, who knows”
I believe that to be the case. As far as I know, the hypersonics are nuclear capable and there is no defense.
Message sent.
“I would not see it as a game changer,” Austin said.
*************
Translation: “I would not ADMIT it is a game changer.”
Jennifer Griffin @JenGriffinFNC
Senior US official confirms Russia did fire more than one hypersonic missile Saturday based on speeds observed but US officials do not view this as an escalation toward possible use of nuclear weapons. Perhaps could be indication Putin is running out of precision guided missiles.
8:16 AM · Mar 20, 2022
She’s certainly no Russian bot.
All we have is a large inventory of hypersonic liars.
Why do you need a hypersonic space missile if your enemy is the next country over? Is this meant to kill Ukrainians or scare Biden?
I don’t dispute that a hypersonic was used, I dispute that Austin downplays it.
IMO there is no defense against any nuclear attack conventional or hypersonic, if Russia fired a significant number of nuclear missiles at the USA all from different locations including submarines what chance would the USA have in stopping more than a couple at best, my guess Zero
“IMO there is no defense against any nuclear attack conventional or hypersonic”
And John Kerry says that would be a worry for the climate!
“I trust Lloyd Austin about as much as I trust Jen Psaki.”
Me too, and hitting a land target at M10 (or whatever) is somewhat silly. But I’d be interested in how our carriers hold up against it, should the Deep State gets its way and expand the war.
Maybe just a real-world test of its capabilities.
Never let a war go to waste.....................
Alex, I’ll take “Scare Biden” for $100
Love that image that portrayed power and competence to the world. I never trust what he says unless he is in a power mask and shield.
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2021/07/30/12/46082167-9843021-Pictured_United_States_Defense_Secretary_Lloyd_Austin_seen_left_-a-62_1627644231879.jpg
It seems to me that the big whoop about hypersonic missiles is their high speed maneuverability. Therefore, they can’t be defended against as they are coming in. This really matters if you’re trying to defend against an incoming nuclear warhead.
However, if they’re only carrying a conventional explosive warhead, I don’t see why it matters, other than as a vehicle field test. The hypersonic speed simply converts some of the initial fuel into higher than usual kinetic energy, which is added to the warhead’s explosive energy on impact.
;>)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
