Hypersonic Missile NonproliferationHindering the Spread of a New Class of Weapons

[Vijyes]

Hypersonic missiles will pose a problem to the current world power structure. It's a disruptive force - so world powers enjoying world domination are right to be extremely worried.

Ballistic missile is much more disruptive as it travels fast and cheap to produce

 

[Kay]

Ballistic missile is much more disruptive as it travels fast and cheap to produce

There are treaties in place for ballistic missiles. Also they are easy to detect and can be retaliated against once detected. They are relatively easy to counter.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Ballistic missile is much more disruptive as it travels fast and cheap to produce

Most Ballistic missiles generally leave the atmosphere and reentry. Hypersonic missiles do not have to leave the
atmosphere this makes them hard to detect and deflect. Brahmos is a ramjet cruise missile the next generation Brahmos
will be scramjet based? Then there is shourya and the K missiles which are in a class by itself.

 

[S.Balaji]

Noob questions..apologies to digress from topic at hand....since ASAT capability was discussed in this thread...

An ASAT scenario envisages the following:-target acquisition - flight to target- target destruction

We can modify on short notice existing space vehicles as kill vehicles...but what about target acquisition capability? Do we have powerful radars for dat? For acquisition, guidance n lock? Sats in GEO travel at roughly 3kms/sec at an altitude of 36000 Kms....sats in LEO travel at roughly 7kms/sec at an altitude of upto 2000kms...dat s in a second the sat would be 7kms away from its original position. We do have midway guidance capability but wat about acquisition n lock part of such high speed target

What about the warhead to be used.. there r hundreds of sats out there of different nations...wat type of warheads r used to minimise debris field..it has to be kinetic kill n not a proximity kill? to reduce collateral damage to other countries satellites...impact fuse is used in AAM, is the same thing used?

Flight to target capability is amply demonstrated by PSLV/GSLV...but is it accurate enough for kinetic kill? (Presuming preferred type of kill is kinetic). We know that sat positioning of PSLV/GSLV have a built in error margin of few hundred meters...dats one reason dey use the satellite's motors to navigate to required accurate position after ejection from payload fairing.(one of the GSLV launch with russian cryo engine had also fell short of target altitude by a large, though managable margin of 1000kms)

During cold war USA/Russia war gamed ASAT capability using AAM on specially modified jets to get to the edge of space n use radar to guide the missile to satellite.

 

[sayareakd]

Noob questions..apologies to digress from topic at hand....since ASAT capability was discussed in this thread...

An ASAT scenario envisages the following:-target acquisition - flight to target- target destruction

We can modify on short notice existing space vehicles as kill vehicles...but what about target acquisition capability? Do we have powerful radars for dat? For acquisition, guidance n lock? Sats in GEO travel at roughly 3kms/sec at an altitude of 36000 Kms....sats in LEO travel at roughly 7kms/sec at an altitude of upto 2000kms...dat s in a second the sat would be 7kms away from its original position. We do have midway guidance capability but wat about acquisition n lock part of such high speed target

What about the warhead to be used.. there r hundreds of sats out there of different nations...wat type of warheads r used to minimise debris field..it has to be kinetic kill n not a proximity kill? to reduce collateral damage to other countries satellites...impact fuse is used in AAM, is the same thing used?

Flight to target capability is amply demonstrated by PSLV/GSLV...but is it accurate enough for kinetic kill? (Presuming preferred type of kill is kinetic). We know that sat positioning of PSLV/GSLV have a built in error margin of few hundred meters...dats one reason dey use the satellite's motors to navigate to required accurate position after ejection from payload fairing.(one of the GSLV launch with russian cryo engine had also fell short of target altitude by a large, though managable margin of 1000kms)

During cold war USA/Russia war gamed ASAT capability using AAM on specially modified jets to get to the edge of space n use radar to guide the missile to satellite.

Got all things needed for ASAT. Before every launch ISRO has to find ways to avoid other satellite and space debris. We have powerful radars to track things of our interest.
Even applications exist on android to track them

 

[Vijyes]

Most Ballistic missiles generally leave the atmosphere and reentry. Hypersonic missiles do not have to leave the
atmosphere this makes them hard to detect and deflect. Brahmos is a ramjet cruise missile the next generation Brahmos
will be scramjet based? Then there is shourya and the K missiles which are in a class by itself.

I never questioned the advantage of hypersonic missiles. The big problem here is cost and labour to manufacture them. The range is also short. So, launchers have to be close to borders and we can only use it on Pakistan.

Ballistic missiles, on the other hand, are extremely cheap and easy to manufacture. For every Hypersonic missile made, one can make 5 ballistic missile of same range. I will give an example of cost of supersonic missile - Brahmos. It is 2.7 million dollars per missile. It may become less if seeker and motor is made in India, but even without them (60% of cost), it is still costly. I can only imagine how much Hypersonic ones may cost.

If in any war, missiles are used, one can expect it to escalate and hence nucleae war may be inevitable.

Noob questions..apologies to digress from topic at hand....since ASAT capability was discussed in this thread...

An ASAT scenario envisages the following:-target acquisition - flight to target- target destruction

We can modify on short notice existing space vehicles as kill vehicles...but what about target acquisition capability? Do we have powerful radars for dat? For acquisition, guidance n lock? Sats in GEO travel at roughly 3kms/sec at an altitude of 36000 Kms....sats in LEO travel at roughly 7kms/sec at an altitude of upto 2000kms...dat s in a second the sat would be 7kms away from its original position. We do have midway guidance capability but wat about acquisition n lock part of such high speed target

What about the warhead to be used.. there r hundreds of sats out there of different nations...wat type of warheads r used to minimise debris field..it has to be kinetic kill n not a proximity kill? to reduce collateral damage to other countries satellites...impact fuse is used in AAM, is the same thing used?

Flight to target capability is amply demonstrated by PSLV/GSLV...but is it accurate enough for kinetic kill? (Presuming preferred type of kill is kinetic). We know that sat positioning of PSLV/GSLV have a built in error margin of few hundred meters...dats one reason dey use the satellite's motors to navigate to required accurate position after ejection from payload fairing.(one of the GSLV launch with russian cryo engine had also fell short of target altitude by a large, though managable margin of 1000kms)

During cold war USA/Russia war gamed ASAT capability using AAM on specially modified jets to get to the edge of space n use radar to guide the missile to satellite.

In GEO, satellites are orbiting in the same speed as earths rotation and hence the speed is canceled out. One can be sure in geostationary orbit, at which point above earth the satellite is located. It will be very easy to destroy it. In geosynchronous orbit, the satellite makes a predictable path with the same speed as earth's rotation, but not around equator as circumference. So, that too can be traced easily. Geosynchronous satellite reaches exact same spot as previous day at a certain point of time.

In LEO, the orbit is still predecided but not as easy as GEO. In LEO, orbits of satellite have a certain perigee and apogee, are elliptical in nature. But, even then after observing for a few hours or days, it can be predicted. So, even it is very simple to strike satellites as the missile already knows before it launches where exactly to hit.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

The price we are paying for Brahmos is the highest in the world for a cruise missile. Tomahawk (not hypersonic) is about 600,000 a piece. We don't manufacture cruise missiles or else the price would be lot lower because of scale. In general cruise missiles are workhorses and cheaper than ballistic missiles which need special maintenance , fuel, transport ,radar etc requirements. Cruise missiles are lighter and easier to deploy and can be fired from many different platforms. Currently all India's ballistic missiles have only one platform.
Nirbhay when completed(it wil be) will be a good backup or frontline cruise missile

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Khagesh]

Most Ballistic missiles generally leave the atmosphere and reentry. Hypersonic missiles do not have to leave the
atmosphere this makes them hard to detect and deflect. Brahmos is a ramjet cruise missile the next generation Brahmos
will be scramjet based? Then there is shourya and the K missiles which are in a class by itself.

Hypersonic projectiles will have a much much bigger detectability merely because of friction. This is the underlying basis of tracking NASA Shuttles during landings. SBIRS can detect even short range AAMs from space, at launch. A hypersonic projectile will give out a much bigger signature than that.

Hypersonic projectiles are important because you can see them but you cannot do much after that.

 

[Vijyes]

Hypersonic projectiles will have a much much bigger detectability merely because of friction. This is the underlying basis of tracking NASA Shuttles during landings. SBIRS can detect even short range AAMs from space, at launch. A hypersonic projectile will give out a much bigger signature than that.

Hypersonic projectiles are important because you can see them but you cannot do much after that.

But these Hypersonic missiles are also range limited due to high friction. Hypersonic missiles are detectable, too fast to be intercepted but it is expensive. Cruise missiles and ballistic missiles are cheaper. The question is whether 10 prithvi-2 missiles are better than 1 Hypersonic missile?

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Hypersonic projectiles will have a much much bigger detectability merely because of friction. This is the underlying basis of tracking NASA Shuttles during landings. SBIRS can detect even short range AAMs from space, at launch. A hypersonic projectile will give out a much bigger signature than that.

Hypersonic projectiles are important because you can see them but you cannot do much after that.

Exact opposite missiles like brahmos are sea skimming missiles only have 35 seconds to detect and deflect. Only major problem with hypersonic missiles is changing course mid flight.

 

[IndianHawk]

But these Hypersonic missiles are also range limited due to high friction. Hypersonic missiles are detectable, too fast to be intercepted but it is expensive. Cruise missiles and ballistic missiles are cheaper. The question is whether 10 prithvi-2 missiles are better than 1 Hypersonic missile?

Depends on the mission. If you're going for mindless destruction go for a barrage of ballistic missiles with huge payloads.

If you have limited high value targets go with precise hypersonic missiles with no payload or minimum payload.
To sink an aircraft carrier it is better to rely on hypersonic missiles as aircraft carrier is a moving Target so speed is of the essence.

 

[Vijyes]

Exact opposite missiles like brahmos are sea skimming missiles only have 35 seconds to detect and deflect. Only major problem with hypersonic missiles is changing course mid flight.

Sea skimming is meaningless in war over surface in tibet or Pakistan as these are extremely mountainous.

 

[Vijyes]

Depends on the mission. If you're going for mindless destruction go for a barrage of ballistic missiles with huge payloads.

If you have limited high value targets go with precise hypersonic missiles with no payload or minimum payload.
To sink an aircraft carrier it is better to rely on hypersonic missiles as aircraft carrier is a moving Target so speed is of the essence.

In war over sea, the sea skimming ability of supersonic missiles are enough. The hypersonic missiles don't justify the costs

 

[IndianHawk]

In war over sea, the sea skimming ability of supersonic missiles are enough. The hypersonic missiles don't justify the costs

Enough for today. Tomorrow's ship will find a solution. So missiles will have to advance too.

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Sea skimming is meaningless in war over surface in tibet or Pakistan as these are extremely mountainous.

Cruise missile would have little to no use in mountainous terrain . More practical to use heavy artillery and helicopters.

 

[Bornubus]

Exact opposite missiles like brahmos are sea skimming missiles only have 35 seconds to detect and deflect. Only major problem with hypersonic missiles is changing course mid flight.

Plus the ability to steep dive @ 75 degree

 

[LETHALFORCE]

Plus the ability to steep dive @ 75 degree

Brahmos aslo has S manuvering features can change course at hypersonic speeds.

 

[binayak95]

Sea skimming is meaningless in war over surface in tibet or Pakistan as these are extremely mountainous.

Cruise missile can be terrain following, giving them the ability to evade enemy radar in Mountainous regions and then there's the S - maneuvre and steep dive ability of the Brahmos that makes it a foe to be reckoned with. Why do you think the PLAN didn't escalate in China: Brahmos regiment in Assam + local domination by mountain arty.

The future is extended artillery (rocket powered) that can hit targets at cruise missile ranges but are far more cheap ( how many can you shoot down).

Hypersonic missiles become a strategic weapon that will be used as SEAD and in a counterforce role to knock out enemy defences and ability to respond, swiftly followed by Air Dominance and conventional armored thrusts. Now, the key thing is timing, just how soon can we achieve this, before Pakistan self-implodes or gets its hands on Chinki missiles.

 

[Bornubus]

Brahmos aslo has S manuvering features can change course at hypersonic speeds.

Though its not Brahmos

==============

 

[Vijyes]

Enough for today. Tomorrow's ship will find a solution. So missiles will have to advance too.

Hypersonic technology faces a big problem - drag, which increases as speed increases. It will be unbelievably high at Mach 5. The hypersonic missiles of brahmos range will have twice the fuel requirements which means twice the weight. Physics doesn't change tomorrow

Cruise missile would have little to no use in mountainous terrain . More practical to use heavy artillery and helicopters.

Pakistan can be hit with brahmos flying at 1km above ground by using steep dive to hit targets behind mountains. It can also be hit with ballistic missile which makes a reentry from exo atmosphere and avoids crossing mountains