china's new hypersonic WU-14 missle Mac 10! wow

Ok wait. You just said:

Now you're saying because 25 would get through (some number you came up with, more like 16 would get through assuming they would keep the same 84% hit rate), that it would devastate America.

Last time I checked, 16 of 100 isn't a "Majority" to use your words.

Now, to further crush your credibility, you say that a satellite in "geostationary orbit" is easy to hit. Do you realize if it's in geostationary orbit, that doesn't mean it's sitting there, completely still? It's doing about 7000mph.

As if your credibility needed further smashing, in the same reply as before, you said this:

Ok, there is no nuclear weapon of 300,000kt. The largest nuclear weapon made is 58mt, by the Russians. It's been decommissioned for decades. That's 58,000kt. Not 300,000. You just pull these numbers out of your ass and think I don't know what I'm talking about. It would not come close to wiping out 100 million Americans if we stop 84% of Russias successful nuclear launches. Not even close. As it is, a completely unimpeded nuclear war would result in 180 million dead. So you want to take 16% of 180 million? Way less than 100 million.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tsar_Bomba

So would you like to be a man and admit you were wrong, or are you going to keep moving the goalposts to try to save your credibility?

 

Oh yea, the largest deployed nuclear weapon by Russia was 25mt, that's 25,000kt. Not even close to your 300,000kt claim.

 

What war? Last I heard, there was no war between America and China.
There are so many ill wishes because you interfere, murder, maim, attack and invade so many countries.

 

That's great.
Only three major American cities would be destroyed.
Fantastic - you'd better start a war.

 

I think that the point here is that China is getting so rich that has started an ambitious space program that includes the sending of a robot to the Moon, actually China is not only a worldwide producer and distributor of goods of all kind but is also the main creditor to the US, and it is logic that is in need to upgrade its military power...because there are some many people around who are full of envy...

 

the internal space station moves far quicker,17,000mph...according to your logic if it isnt easy to shoot down docking with it would be impossible right?...nah, once the trajectory is known you dont need to shoot it down just park a slower 16,500 mph moving mass on the same trajectory and it will crash into it...

 

but these can fly low like a cruse missile and be under the radar, plus the counter missile would have to fire head on to hit them.

 

Until I see one operational in a video, I'm going to call it nothing more than Chinese propaganda.

 

I bet its nearly identical to the one designed by NASA

 

The US Navy has been shooting down faster ballistic missiles with Standard missiles.

 

1st i doubt it can go mach 10 near sea level where the air is more dense. those are speeds probably attainable only at higher altitudes so i dont think any is worried.

 

Have you been shooting down ballistic missiles at re-entry speeds? Even Aegis which has an 84% success rate (in tests), would have trouble. That leaves 16% getting through...
Then there are the MIRVs which are even harder to track.

 

Ballistic targets follow ballistic trajectory----> easy to predict where they will be in the impact moment.
Aerial target does not follow ballistic trajectory----> hard to predict where they will be in the impact moment.
Is it really that hard to understand?

 

I'm not a hardware geek and have no dog in this fight, but this is faulty math and reasoning. I'm sure if you look at that statement closer you will see that for yourself.

 

That has been the tradition but that does not have to be the case tomorrow.

Under very controlled tests. We don't need a defense system against missiles because they are a waste of money unless it's a theater based system. We need a formidable deterrent nationally.

 

Taxcutter says:
A hypersonic aircraft operating in dense air will be all but ballistic. As aircraft get faster and faster, the controls tend to get harder and harder to work, and maneuvering radii become enormous. The SR-71, flying slower and in less dense high-altitude air, took hundreds of miles to turn around.

At the speeds claimed this missile will have a thermal signature as big as Kilueuea, just from skin friction. AWACS planes will see this thing hundred of miles away. The carrier need only make a small rudder adjustment and this thing will miss.

The only thing that worries the Navy is the possibility of a nuclear warhead.

 

So your comment on US Navy shooting down ballistic missiles with Standard missiles is pointless. Exactly my point!

In case you didn't know, AWACS planes "see" objects in radiowaves, not IR. In fact, plasma, created by friction, might as well absorb radiovawes, making the object a true stealth in certain wavelengths.

BS.

 

Don't you mean the LU-14?

 

You think AEW planes don't have IR sensors?

 

I'm happy if foreign militaries think that, and don't care to disabuse them of that belief, myself.

 

about as likely as you dodging a sniper bullet...

 

India is testing a mach 7 surface skimmer, so ....

 

that you're looking for and can see from 5 miles out.

 

Relative to a missile moving at mach 7-10 a carrier is motionless, a sitting duck....

 

Lasers work at the speed of light. If you develop a sufficient enough tracking system, there is no way in hell a hypersonic missle can evade it.