China, nuclear strike anywhere in the world.without warning.

[Jarhyn]

"China, nuclear strike anywhere in the world.without warning." -- Catchy title, but was this intended to part of some claim? I haven't bothered to dig around to verify anything about the "without warning" part, but I would guess that the US knew about the rocket launch within a minute. So what this could do is render defensive missile systems obsolete. But since the US doesn't even have a national missile defense system against ICBMs, it is mostly noise. We still haven't really left the age of nuclear MAD, so this is largely a lot of noise over a mole hill... I've seen a couple articles with such scare mongering that are also vacuous...

Noise over the molehill? I'd argue that China is creating the most dangerous situation in the history of the planet. The world was very close to being discontinued during the cold war. There were several near nuclear wars between USSR and the US. While Russia was expansionist (you can argue that the US was also); Russia had no economic ability to hurt the US. China can. China is expansionist and would like to conquer Taiwan. Forget for a second that Taiwan is a sovereign country that has done nothing to gain this level of bullyism. But the Chinese invasion will also destroy the world's economy. We could go into recession due to supply chain and chip manufacturing. Think what will happen when china attacks Taiwan. We'll need to go back to transistor bulbs after China destroys Taiwan. The world is a in lot of trouble and I really don't see a way to prevent it. China's bruised ego could destroy the world... Please tell me that I'm exaggerating.

It does not sound like exaggerating to me. China is very much ahead of the US right now in practically every measure.

There is one thing good I can say about this though. At least now the even the slowest liberal dimwits are going to realize that Russia has never nor will ever be the threat China currently is. Perhaps we will finally get over having to endure any more impeachment trials over a Russia conspiracy threat.

"This is a big threat so you should pay attention to it and literally nothing else that is a lesser threat" sounds like a really easy way to not get smallpox and to definitely get dysentery and still be just as dead.

 

[funinspace]

The advantage of hypersonic travel is not being undetected... they are detected the same as any object of sufficient size. With light, not sound. The advantage is it is very hard to intercept such an object from a ground-controlled flight-based countermeasure. One would need to use light (laser) to counter a hypersonic missile... without another, faster, hypersonic missile.

About the Congress' House Armed Sevices Commitee
https://www.defensenews.com/pentago...s-solving-a-hypersonic-weapons-detection-gap/

...
“The committee is concerned about the inability of current radar systems to detect, track, engage and defeat emerging threats from hypersonic weapons,” an amendment added to the HASC markup states. “As identified by the National Defense Strategy, the Department of Defense has an immediate need to reinforce efforts to counter these weapons.”
...

Neocon alert.... Radar systems only track. The 'engage and defeat' part is what can't be done...bluring for the fear factor...

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

"China, nuclear strike anywhere in the world.without warning." -- Catchy title, but was this intended to part of some claim? I haven't bothered to dig around to verify anything about the "without warning" part, but I would guess that the US knew about the rocket launch within a minute. So what this could do is render defensive missile systems obsolete. But since the US doesn't even have a national missile defense system against ICBMs, it is mostly noise. We still haven't really left the age of nuclear MAD, so this is largely a lot of noise over a mole hill... I've seen a couple articles with such scare mongering that are also vacuous...

Noise over the molehill? I'd argue that China is creating the most dangerous situation in the history of the planet. The world was very close to being discontinued during the cold war. There were several near nuclear wars between USSR and the US. While Russia was expansionist (you can argue that the US was also); Russia had no economic ability to hurt the US. China can. China is expansionist and would like to conquer Taiwan. Forget for a second that Taiwan is a sovereign country that has done nothing to gain this level of bullyism. But the Chinese invasion will also destroy the world's economy. We could go into recession due to supply chain and chip manufacturing. Think what will happen when china attacks Taiwan. We'll need to go back to transistor bulbs after China destroys Taiwan. The world is a in lot of trouble and I really don't see a way to prevent it. China's bruised ego could destroy the world... Please tell me that I'm exaggerating.

It does not sound like exaggerating to me. China is very much ahead of the US right now in practically every measure.

Except for the ability to lay waste to every first world country on the planet. We still are tops there.

There is one thing good I can say about this though. At least now the even the slowest liberal dimwits are going to realize that Russia has never nor will ever be the threat China currently is.

Yeah... Russia. Did you ever read any posts between 2017 and 2020... or did you just fill in the gaps?

Perhaps we will finally get over having to endure any more impeachment trials over a Russia conspiracy threat.

Pictures, thousand words... secret meeting with just a translator and this is how the two come out of said meeting. Perfectly normal.

 

[TomC]

MAD is alive and well.

I'm not sure that's true.

I think the gravest danger is another U.S. President like Trump. Not China or Iran or Pakistan. The USA.

Tom

More, the greatest danger is "leaders who have nobody else to answer to in undertaking nuclear actions".

It's fascism/strong-man governments that we have to worry about, specifically. The USA is definitely vulnerable to that these days, but it's far from alone in that.

The thing is that over the last decade the TeaParty Republicans have done such a good job of undermining fundamental institutions. The beauracracy and balance of power kept a check on the craziest people. Without those institutions, the USA is the nuclear power run by the most irrational, self-serving, people.

You know what I mean.

Tom

 

[none]

About the Congress' House Armed Sevices Commitee
https://www.defensenews.com/pentago...s-solving-a-hypersonic-weapons-detection-gap/

Neocon alert.... Radar systems only track. The 'engage and defeat' part is what can't be done...bluring for the fear factor...

I posted that because last year I heard it mentioned.
The detecting is what my interest is.
The ability to detect. Bringing this type of missile down is not that big a deal given the geopolitical awareness of the fallout of a successful strike.

 

[Elixir]

MAD doesn't go away simply because of speed.

If you have speed, you can shoot down the enemy missile before it even reaches your border.

That is exactly the kind of ignorant nonsense that would fill the heads of a Kim or a Trump while giving an order that would result in the EOCAWKI.
So far, even those morons haven’t proven stupid enough to believe it, thank Dog.

 

[funinspace]

About the Congress' House Armed Sevices Commitee
https://www.defensenews.com/pentago...s-solving-a-hypersonic-weapons-detection-gap/

Neocon alert.... Radar systems only track. The 'engage and defeat' part is what can't be done...bluring for the fear factor...

I posted that because last year I heard it mentioned.
The detecting is what my interest is.
The ability to detect. Bringing this type of missile down is not that big a deal given the geopolitical awareness of the fallout of a successful strike.

Here's a quality link that would go into details of why it is largely hype:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/hypersonic-missiles-are-being-hyped-2652903653
Don't Believe the Hype About Hypersonic Missiles

 

[Keith&Co.]

It does not sound like exaggerating to me. China is very much ahead of the US right now in practically every measure.

Except for the ability to lay waste to every first world country on the planet. We still are tops there.

There is one thing good I can say about this though. At least now the even the slowest liberal dimwits are going to realize that Russia has never nor will ever be the threat China currently is.

Yeah... Russia. Did you ever read any posts between 2017 and 2020... or did you just fill in the gaps?

Perhaps we will finally get over having to endure any more impeachment trials over a Russia conspiracy threat.

Pictures, thousand words... secret meeting with just a translator and this is how the two come out of said meeting. Perfectly normal.
View attachment 35742

Wait, Russia isn't the threat China is, therefore it was surplus to needs to investigate Trump's connections to Russia that may have compromised him?

So, if we just list countries by their threat potential, then Ukraine is far less of a threat than Russia, therefore we shouldn't have bothered about Hunter Biden getting a job there?
That's how this works?

 

[funinspace]

Except for the ability to lay waste to every first world country on the planet. We still are tops there.

Yeah... Russia. Did you ever read any posts between 2017 and 2020... or did you just fill in the gaps?

Perhaps we will finally get over having to endure any more impeachment trials over a Russia conspiracy threat.

Pictures, thousand words... secret meeting with just a translator and this is how the two come out of said meeting. Perfectly normal.
View attachment 35742

Wait, Russia isn't the threat China is, therefore it was surplus to needs to investigate Trump's connections to Russia that may have compromised him?

So, if we just list countries by their threat potential, then Ukraine is far less of a threat than Russia, therefore we shouldn't have bothered about Hunter Biden getting a job there?
That's how this works?

Unless there is yellow porn on that laptop...oh wait, that looks like Trump under a showering in that vid. It's a FALSE FLAG!!!!!

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Hypersonic or not, our much slower nuclear missile subs would level China. MAD doesn't go away simply because of speed. Our weapons are too numerous and in too many places. If China wanted to hurt us, they could... but it wouldn't go well for them either.

I think our ballistic missiles are faster than this weapon.

As you say, though, it doesn't matter. Boomers aren't about speed, they are about second-strike capability.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"China, nuclear strike anywhere in the world.without warning." -- Catchy title, but was this intended to part of some claim? I haven't bothered to dig around to verify anything about the "without warning" part, but I would guess that the US knew about the rocket launch within a minute. So what this could do is render defensive missile systems obsolete. But since the US doesn't even have a national missile defense system against ICBMs, it is mostly noise. We still haven't really left the age of nuclear MAD, so this is largely a lot of noise over a mole hill... I've seen a couple articles with such scare mongering that are also vacuous...

5x the speed of sound
And lower altitude
Honestly I was hoping for more technical data on these type of devices
But yes hypersonic is undetected from what I can tell, unless of course you're the one launching the missle

The advantage of hypersonic travel is not being undetected... they are detected the same as any object of sufficient size. With light, not sound. The advantage is it is very hard to intercept such an object from a ground-controlled flight-based countermeasure. One would need to use light (laser) to counter a hypersonic missile... without another, faster, hypersonic missile.

Unless you're at the target. Then it becomes an issue of adjusting the warhead fusing to make it explode a little earlier but the intercept isn't that hard. In all aspects other than cost it's inferior to a ballistic missile.

 

[bilby]

About the Congress' House Armed Sevices Commitee
https://www.defensenews.com/pentago...s-solving-a-hypersonic-weapons-detection-gap/

Neocon alert.... Radar systems only track. The 'engage and defeat' part is what can't be done...bluring for the fear factor...

I posted that because last year I heard it mentioned.
The detecting is what my interest is.
The ability to detect. Bringing this type of missile down is not that big a deal given the geopolitical awareness of the fallout of a successful strike.

Detection is utterly irrelevant to MAD.

China launches a nuke at the US that is detected ten minutes before it arrives on target, it destroys the target, the US retaliates and wipes out China

China launches a nuke at the US that arrives on target completely undetected, it destroys the target, the US retaliates and wipes out China.

What's the strategic difference? What's the political or tactical difference?

Either way, the retaliatory strike likely doesn't happen until after the US target has been destroyed. There's insufficient warning to protect or evacuate the target in any meaningful way. So who cares whether the first indication of an attack is a radar tech saying "That's odd...", or the Pentagon and most of DC disappearing and being replaced by a mushroom cloud?

A surprise attack against the USA, no matter how effective it is in achieving its immediate objectives, or at striking undetected until things start going 'bang!', is going to be very bad news for the attacker. Just ask the Japanese.

 

[none]

I posted that because last year I heard it mentioned.
The detecting is what my interest is.
The ability to detect. Bringing this type of missile down is not that big a deal given the geopolitical awareness of the fallout of a successful strike.

Detection is utterly irrelevant to MAD.

China launches a nuke at the US that is detected ten minutes before it arrives on target, it destroys the target, the US retaliates and wipes out China

China launches a nuke at the US that arrives on target completely undetected, it destroys the target, the US retaliates and wipes out China.

What's the strategic difference? What's the political or tactical difference?

Either way, the retaliatory strike likely doesn't happen until after the US target has been destroyed. There's insufficient warning to protect or evacuate the target in any meaningful way. So who cares whether the first indication of an attack is a radar tech saying "That's odd...", or the Pentagon and most of DC disappearing and being replaced by a mushroom cloud?

A surprise attack against the USA, no matter how effective it is in achieving its immediate objectives, or at striking undetected until things start going 'bang!', is going to be very bad news for the attacker. Just ask the Japanese.

It was a toss up between posting in the science area and the politics area for me.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I posted that because last year I heard it mentioned.
The detecting is what my interest is.
The ability to detect. Bringing this type of missile down is not that big a deal given the geopolitical awareness of the fallout of a successful strike.

Detection is utterly irrelevant to MAD.

China launches a nuke at the US that is detected ten minutes before it arrives on target, it destroys the target, the US retaliates and wipes out China

China launches a nuke at the US that arrives on target completely undetected, it destroys the target, the US retaliates and wipes out China.

What's the strategic difference? What's the political or tactical difference?

Either way, the retaliatory strike likely doesn't happen until after the US target has been destroyed. There's insufficient warning to protect or evacuate the target in any meaningful way. So who cares whether the first indication of an attack is a radar tech saying "That's odd...", or the Pentagon and most of DC disappearing and being replaced by a mushroom cloud?

A surprise attack against the USA, no matter how effective it is in achieving its immediate objectives, or at striking undetected until things start going 'bang!', is going to be very bad news for the attacker. Just ask the Japanese.

It was a toss up between posting in the science area and the politics area for me.

Wouldn't we detect it launching to begin with? Tracking might (?) be harder, but don't we take notice of activity at launch sites well before they press a button?

 

[funinspace]

It was a toss up between posting in the science area and the politics area for me.

Wouldn't we detect it launching to begin with? Tracking might (?) be harder, but don't we take notice of activity at launch sites well before they press a button?

Actually, it would be almost easier to track. Launch sites are noticeable with liquid fueled rockets, as they have to be filled just prior to launch. The prep for a solid rocket booster is minimal. This had been the issue NK was trying to upgrade for ICBMs, as we pretty much would always know about test launches before they happened. Quote from linky I already provided:
https://spectrum.ieee.org/amp/hypersonic-missiles-are-being-hyped-2652903653

Second, this heating renders hypersonic missiles vulnerable to detection by the satellite-mounted sensors that the United States and Russia currently possess, and that China is reportedly developing. Hot objects emit light in proportion to their temperature. These satellites watch for light in the infrared band to warn of missile strikes. Ballistic missiles are visible to them during launch, when fiery rocket plumes emit a great deal of infrared light, but become harder to see after rocket burn-out, when the warhead arcs through outer space. Hypersonic missiles, on the other hand, stay hot throughout most of their glide. Our calculations indicate that incoming gliders would remain visible to existing space-based sensors not only during launch, but for nearly their entire flight.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It was a toss up between posting in the science area and the politics area for me.

Wouldn't we detect it launching to begin with? Tracking might (?) be harder, but don't we take notice of activity at launch sites well before they press a button?

It depends on what it takes to launch. In the old days you could see things like fueling missiles. Then the missiles moved inside, the first indication that anything is going on is when the doors fly open and the missile fires a few seconds later. Chances are even if someone was looking at the right spot at the right time that the launch detection will be thermal, not visual. Even SAM motors are hot enough to see--and even if the flight motor is a jet the launch will be on a rocket. (Since a missile will only be used once it's cheaper to stick a solid rocket motor on it's ass to get it up to flight speed than to make the wings big enough that it can take off on it's own. Furthermore, using small wings means it's stealthier.)

 

[Trausti]

 

[TV and credit cards]

Here’s a good article on the subject. Spells out the real trouble with this technology.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/10/18/hypersonic-china-missile-nuclear-fobs/

 

[funinspace]

Here’s a good article on the subject. Spells out the real trouble with this technology.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/10/18/hypersonic-china-missile-nuclear-fobs/

A good article, and the main point of FOBS is to retain the mutual in MAD, as the US tries to break it down with defense systems:

So that’s an FOBS. It’s not new technology, but it is weird. So why is China doing this? For the same reason the Soviet Union did—to defeat U.S. missile defenses.

This isn’t really that complicated. You can’t deter someone from nuking you unless you can nuke them back. Russia and China look at U.S. nuclear forces, which are pretty large and capable, and ask themselves two simple questions: If the Americans hit us with everything they have, how many of our nuclear weapons will survive to retaliate? How many of those will get through U.S. missile defenses? That’s it. If the answer for the foreseeable future is enough, then great. But if it’s not, then Moscow and Beijing have to do something about that.
<snip>
Over the years, Republicans turned away from the ABM Treaty and toward Reagan’s vision. That turn was completed when President George W. Bush withdrew the United States from the ABM Treaty in 2002 and built a national missile defense site in Alaska to protect the United States from ICBM attacks taking the most direct route over the North Pole.

In the decades since that decision, China has increased the size of its nuclear forces—something the U.S. intelligence community predicted was an inevitable response.In the decades since that decision, China has increased the size of its nuclear forces—something the U.S. intelligence community predicted was an inevitable response. But overwhelming a defense with sheer numbers isn’t the only strategy. Orbital bombardment offers another route over the South Pole.