- Messages
- 1,422
- Reactions
- Nation of residence
-
- Nation of origin
-
Translation: I have a bias against those darn russians, but I trust everything the west says, especially geopolitical decisions.
I mean there are constant ongoing breakthroughs in anything missile and rocket related like Russians stating adding copper nanoparticles mixed with fuel will cause thrust to be increased 5 times the amount, Xenon being replaced with krypton fuel for satellites to thrust in space because its 10 times cheaper, no engine design breakthrough using kerosene allows a stage engine to burn for 3000 seconds instead of 300 seconds. I mean fuck do you say a space tug project that used MPD thrusters with nuclear fuel being used by the U.S. I mean there are times you have to accept we are not number 1 at everything. But back at the topic at hand in 2019 they anticipated PRSM or agm-183A was going to have manuevering capabilities and they claim that their new SAMs can deal with them because their G-loads are twice as much as the previous SAM interceptors. There are no statements about PACS-3 interceptors pulling 55 to 60 G-loads but its current G-loads are similiar to some of the S-400's previous SAM interceptors that the russians claimed would not be able to intercept PRSM or AGM-183A. Russians state they are producing more than 50 times the amount of Kinzhals and as you know there are users here that didnt give a 2nd thought assuming PACS-3=invincibility.
you never stated that I was wrong that missiles can target mobile ships through satellites when I provided U.S. and Russian sources, can be launched from underwater 1000s of kilometers away and very good chance that Zircon would be a bigger bitch to intercept than HGVs or manueverable BMs like PRSM or Kinzhal.
HTV-2 and Avangard are mach 20 vehicles that get released from ICBMs at a 100km altitude not comparable to a space shuttle by any means what you are stating. The HTV-2 is what pissed off the Russians in the 1st place claiming it as a 1st strike nuclear weapon design and began to withdraw from some treaty because of it. The U.S. did not pursue the HTV-2 project further but from the looks of it are making like mach 10 HGV projects. ICBMs travel over 1000km altitudes and when they descend they release warheads and the entire missile follows a simple trajectory which is why we have gotten recent news about their interceptions before they release their warheads. The Avangard at mach 20+ has manuevering capabilities because its an HGV and flies at a 100km altitude before hitting its target this means ground radars have less time and this requires better space sensors to track lower altitude target that does not leave earth.
Scramjets or any airbreathing missile always requires a 1st stage engine and the beauty of airbreathing missiles is that their engines dont stop until they hit their targets because they get constant supersonic airflow that mixes with the fuel offering higher combustion than any ballistic missile design that does not get airflow but has to burn more fuel which is why they were never suited for low altitudes. They are maneuverable and travel at lower altitudes than HGVs and of course are hypersonic. Russians have pursued plasma generators on the meteorit missile but they dont have to because the atmospheric calculator states that based on speed and altitude the plasma sheath could absorb low to high frequency making it difficult to track on radar which is why there was never any communication with the space shuttle entering back to earth.
So I heard the U.S. is making next generation infrared systems to track lower altitude hypersonic targets but that is not going to automatically solve the problem because you are going to need brand new SAM interceptors. Assuming the U.S. is like Russia having SAM interceptors with 55-60 G-loads, intercepting Zircon or Avangard will be a bitch. Assuming these interceptors will have greater maneuverability they will need better speeds, also the sensors will have to be extremely strong like the Zircon sensors would be enough to deal with ship size targets but the interceptors have to deal with a smaller size target to chase after with the current electronics having to deal with the heat and stress and plasma density making it more difficult to follow the zircon while the Zircon's sensors have to be sufficient enough just for ships. Even than Russia has made new breakthroughs in material to deal with kinetic heat while the U.S. has not showcased this because the HTV-2 got destroyed less than 1/3rd of its flight path.
The ATACMs had a limited range and didnt offer maneuverability, the proposal of PRSM is offering maneuverability with a longer range but eventually the U.S. will get there.
The Avangard didnt but the HTV-2 did....OOF.
. And you better be nuclear armed when you decide its time to do human rights abuse.
