Are hypersonic another example where the western world is so worried about Russia/Chinas hyping of the performance that we actually build versions ...

Are hypersonic another example where the western world is so worried about Russia/China’s hyping of the performance that we actually build versions that work? Russia’s only go to Mach 5.

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    yeah

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Russia’s only go to Mach 5
    Watch out, Speed! Boris and Natasha are trying to blow up the Mach 5 with a missile!

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For reference, this is what happens when the US takes russia serious.
    What should be the callsign for the new hypersonic missile? I vote for tachyon.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Are hypersonic another example where the western world is so worried about Russia/China’s hyping of the performance that we actually build versions that work? Russia’s only go to Mach 5.
      nah^ we already had hypsersanic missiles in the 1950's and decided
      >they were thirdie shit
      and moved on to 6th gen fighter jets, something 50-100 years more advanced than vatnikstan or the peoples implessive republic

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        people don't seem to realize the v2 rocket was hypersonic

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Old news buddy, you need to move with the times. Be like OP. Now that America is looking into hypersonics, you need to move on from
        >hypersonics suck
        to
        >hypersonics work and ours will be better

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Moshi moshi, Makoto tbh.

      The absolute kek. Thank you anon.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It’s a clever ploy to bankrupt the US like we bankrupted the USSR.
    Think about it: what enemy do we need hypersonics against?
    We can’t actually invade China or Russia due to nukes. Any attack on China would just be to try to contain them. But China has the antiship capability to frick the Navy if we move in thinking we can dick slap them.

    So we build hypersonics for $1 billion per missile which we don’t need to defend ourselves and which we don’t have any meaningful targets for.

    >inb4 China’s carriers
    They’re there for extending their reach to Third World nations, not for defense. China doesn’t need them to defend themselves while we’re offensively fricked when they start sinking ours.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Zircon, more than 8 machs, recent strikes were inflicted by them, launched in Crimea, reached the target in 3 minutes

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      And still got mogged by PAC-3s.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        ah yeah we all know that debris of a small missile can bring down a three story building

        riiiiight lmao

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          So they aimed their extremely expensive hypersonic at a commie block?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >hypersonic at a commie block
            well yeah... that how they win
            I hope for Pussians the theatre ticket will be sold every Friday, not just one

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      zircon isn't real

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    for every russian/chinese meme weapon you can find an us defense report from the 60s/70s concluding that they're either useless or they already posses a weapon that provides similar effectiveness
    FOBS are another example

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Yeah. We successfully tested a hypersonic cruise missile 15 years ago and closed down the project because we didn't need one. Now everyone is acting like its hot shit so congress is forcing the military to start the project back up. We will end up with a missile that not only works, but completely mogs Russian and Chinese AD.

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >hyping of the performance that we actually build versions that work?
    lol, what?, Russian hypersonic missiles are the only ones successfully tested in combat. While USA keep failing the test.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It’s not looking good

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >muh missile gap
    Hypersonic missiles aren't as crucial to the US as they are to the Ruskies/Chinks. Chang and Boris need to be able to destroy the limited number of US forward bases near them on short order in the opening hours of any war to have a chance at winning it. The US is operating on the assumption that any conflict would be on their clay, requiring a larger supply of ordinance than a few $20,000,000+ missiles that are only produced in sufficient quantities to take out a few carriers/bases. The US (rightfully) focusing on mass production of the F-35 and B-21 which can penetrate enemy airspace and strike targets with $80,000 JDAM spam.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Hypersonics are a way to defeat current western SAMs, they are working on the assumption that within 20 years China will have SAMs as good as ours so to hit a defended high priority target it'll take a hypersonic.

    I don't think anyone is military procurement is worried about current Russia "hypersonics" because they are hypersonic the same way the V-2 was, they exceed mach 5 during part of their flight.

    Western hypersonics under development will maintain over mach 5 for the duration of flight and be able to pull high G maneuvers making lead intercept a b***h.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Then why are kinzhal being shot down?

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Because they aren't true hypersonics, as I said
        >current Russia "hypersonics" because they are hypersonic the same way the V-2 was, they exceed mach 5 during part of their flight
        Can you at least read a post before responding?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *