This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hypersonic weapon article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Hello @Andrew Davidson: you have reverted most of my edit without any explanation, as if it had been vandalism. Do you really think it was so very wrong to add
My apologies. I was making several changes and, when I looked at your edit, the diff highlighted the correction of the Avangaard spelling so I didn't notice the addition of those other entries too. I have restored them, ok? Andrew🐉(talk) 13:15, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This page could use some more additions, main areas of concern would be additional background + making the list a bit more expansive. I discuss this because the page would be extensively restructured by such an edit. Anthropophoca (talk) 06:14, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
One of the references is Scientific American's Overhyped: The Physics and Hype of Hypersonic Weapons.[1] Would it be reasonable to mention some about this? Gah4 (talk) 12:35, 21 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hypersonic: The US Army (August 2018) has no tested countermeasure for intercepting maneuverable hypersonic weapons platforms,[1][2][3] and in this case the problem is being addressed in a joint program of the entire Department of Defense.[4] The Army is participating in a joint program with the Navy and Air Force, to develop a hypersonic glide body,[5] by mutual agreement between the respective secretaries[5][6] In order to rapidly develop this capability, a dedicated program office was established,[7][8][9][10] in behalf of the joint services.[11] A division of responsibility was agreed upon, with researchers who demonstrated hypersonic capability in 2011, teaching industrial vendors, to transfer the technology.[12] Joint programs in hypersonic are informed by Army work;[13][14] however, at the strategic level, the bulk of the hypersonic work remains at the Joint level.[15][16][6][17][12]Long Range Precision Fires (LRPF) is an Army priority, and also a DoD joint effort.[14] The Army and Navy's Common Hypersonic Glide Body (C-HGB) had a successful test of a prototype in March 2020.[18] After the US realized that a catch-up effort was needed, billions of dollars were expended by 2020.[17] A wind tunnel for testing hypersonic vehicles is being built at the Texas A&M University System' RELLIS Campus in Bryan, Texas (2019).[19] The Army's Land-based Hypersonic Missile "is intended to have a range of 1,400 miles".[11]: p.6 [12] By adding rocket propulsion to a shell or glide body, the joint effort shaved five years off the likely fielding time for hypersonic weapon systems.[20][21]
Countermeasures against hypersonic[22][23][24] will require sensor data fusion: both radar and infrared sensor tracking data will be required to capture the signature of a hypersonic vehicle in the atmosphere.[25][26][27][28] In 2021 the GAO counted 70 separate hypersonic projects, in both offense and defensive categories overseen by DoD's Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering, which oversees only research and development, and not DoD's Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment —DoD's acquisition and sustainment office, which do not need oversight until the hypersonic projects are ready for the acquisition phase.[29][30]
By 2021, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) realized that it almost had a countermeasure to hypersonic boost-glide weapons, by using existing data on the adversary hypersonic systems which were gathered from existing US satellite and ground-based sensors.[31] MDA then fed this data into its existing systems models, and concluded that the adversary hypersonic weapon's glide phase offered the best chance for MDA to intercept it.[32] MDA next proffered a request for information (RFI) from the defense community for building interceptors (denoted the GPI —glide phase interceptor) against the glide phase of that hypersonic weapon.[32] GPIs would be guided by Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensors (HBTSS).[25][33] These GPI interceptors could first be offered to the Navy for Aegis to intercept using the C2BMC,[34][35] and later to the Army for THAAD to intercept using §IBCS.[32][36][37][35]
References
^In, for example Waverider hypersonic weapons delivery, China has flown a Mach 5.5 vehicle for 400 seconds, at 30 km altitude, demonstrating large-angle deviations from a ballistic trajectory, as well as recovery of the payload. See
^Jen Judson (20 August 2019) US Missile Defense Agency boss reveals his goals, challenges on the job Increase the discrimination of the radars and other sensors. Use Large aperture sensors. Use Space-based missile sensors. An SM-3 Block IIA missile test against ICBM is scheduled for 2020. Plan out the detection, control and engagement; the sensors, the command-and-control, the fire control, and the weapons (the kill vehicles).
^Center for Strategic & International Studies (7 Feb 2022) Complex Air Defense: Countering the Hypersonic Missile Threat Dr. Tom Karako, Director of the CSIS Missile Defense Project; Ms. Kelley Sayler, CRS; Dr. Gillian Bussey, Director of the Joint Hypersonics Transition Office; Dr. Mark Lewis, Executive Director of NDIA's Emerging Technologies Institute; Mr. Stan Stafira, Chief Architect at the Missile Defense Agency (MDA)
According to the Iranian officials fattah 2 is a hypersonic cruise missile! the English Medea has miss informed the public when they reported it as another ballistic missile. 88.236.65.96 (talk) 11:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, the Houthi's *claim* to have a hypersonic missile. What they have, is a missile that by all accounts appears to be a modified Fatteh, with no actual indication that it's hypersonic capable. Per that link you gave: Given the footage published by the Houthis, it is unlikely that the "Hatem-2" possesses that kind of advanced capability. "Hypersonic in this case is clearly a buzzword, trying to create hype," said Schiller. The newly announced munition is likely similar to the Fattah anti-ship missiles already fired by the Houthis several times, Schiller said.⇒SWATJesterShoot Blues, Tell VileRat!19:17, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This article was created in 2019. After that period, it was not edited at all for years. Until February 2022. Just before Russia invaded Ukraine. It seems the entire term 'hypersonic weapons' is a Russian propaganda invention. About a weapon that only Russia possess and we in the west should be very scared about. This article seems to be completely uncritical and unaware of this propaganda angle to this entire term. I am actually going to check now if the IP addresses of the first edits are Russian. If they were made by Russian intel, they probably spoofed their IPs, but it will be fun to check. For anyone that actually edits wikipedia, there should be a section about how Russia introduced this term. And how Russian's fabled 'hypersonic' weapons are not actually what they told us they are.
--86.84.200.125 (talk) 09:02, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not helpful, nor accurate. If you believe the term "hypersonic weapons" is a Russian propaganda invention, you're wildly misinformed; if you believe that "only Russia possesses" them, you're wildly misinformed; if you believe that you can identify "Russian intel" by checking the IP addresses of anonymous editors on this page, you're also wildly misinformed. Please stop; this article is not a battleground for your fringe conspiracies. ⇒SWATJesterShoot Blues, Tell VileRat!20:00, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Like -- Iri1388 (talk) 19:21, 22 November 2023 (UTC)