The non-ballistic variety that Russia claimed was unstoppable has been stopped several time in the past couple weeks now that Ukraine has Patriot systems. Seems like they’re not really a big deal at all.
The Kinzhal is AFAIK ballistic. The Russians refer to it as a hypersonic weapon because it sounds scary, but really it’s just an air launched SRBM. The Russians do have a maneuvering hypersonic weapon, the Avangard, but it’s strictly nuclear and launched from an ICBM booster, not a plane.
It's worth watching the videos of the Kinzhal/Patriot showdown in Kiev. As far as I can tell the actual raw videos are pretty rare anywhere mainstream. I found the Telegraph with a minute of it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4sTZ1_9Cn8
Objectively as possible it looks like ~30 Patriot missiles were fired (plausibly the whole 32 missile battery). The production rate of these by Lockheed Martin is 500 missiles, annual. Up to 550/year starting this year. They're apparently attempting to intercept somewhere between 2-6 Kinzhals fired, and it appears 1-2 of those Kinzhals (i.e. between 15-100%) got through and struck the Patriot battery and at least damaged it. That's around 3 weeks total annual production of Patriot missiles fired in 2 minutes at a handful of targets with at best partial success.
So it's both correct that Kinzhal is really just an air-launched SRBM not a hypersonic glide weapon, and that our existing missile defense looks at best barely capable of partially defending against very limited numbers of conventional SRBM.
Apparently, the biggest issue with true hypersonic weapons (including missles) is that they can’t ‘see’ - the plasma created by their speed stops radar, any high resolution optical, etc. systems from working effectively.
Everyone else however can see them just fine.
So they might be able to maneuver (normal ballistic missiles can usually do last minute maneuvering too!), but without data it’s blind.
Maybe useful if already programmed with a decent random walk, but it doesn’t help it actively avoid something coming for it, and it doesn’t let it aim for moving targets that can adjust course.
Slower stuff doesn’t have this issue, but is of course slower.
This is the same reason why supercavitating torpedos seem really cool on paper, but are not actually all that useful or scary (unless nuclear tipped). Unless the blast radius is huge or the target is fundamentally fixed (a large building), you can just… move out of the way.
Kinzhal is simply an air-launched 9K720 Iskander, though, and it was always known to be interceptible because its trajectory is deterministic. You just need good radars.
No, hypersonics are a legitimate new development, Russia just deceptively brands some of its low-tech arsenal.
I agree. But I don’t think the article makes that clear. In fact I think it strongly implies otherwise that the missiles being used against Ukraine are the scary maneuvering kind.
Agreed. And the article goes in great detail of why a non-ballistic hypersonic projectile is so difficult to stop -- everything is going at extreme speeds and there's little to no time to maneuver, so if it deviates from the predicted trajectory you cannot intercept it at all.
Why ignore all of the article? If a hypersonic missile can be intercepted by a Patriot, then it stands to reason it wasn't truly maneuverable, i.e. it was ballistic!
Not commenting on GP post, but it is an area where I would not trust domain experts. This kind of work is typically very classified and experts have clearances. Having a clearance mean you can't talk freely, the more you know, the less you can say. Ideally you say nothing at all about your work, but I know some of them will simply repeat what is found in newspapers when asked. The less accurate, the better.
People without clearances, working on a domain that is tangential but not the domain itself are probably more reliable, as they don't know truths that cannot be told, but they know enough to make informed guesses.
I take this article as informative but only for the general idea. The part about which country has what capabilities, I give absolutely no credence.
The article begins by referring to Russia using Hypersonic missiles against Ukraine, and then goes into detail about what defenses are necessary to defend against these weapons.
It’s a good article. But the reality is that the Russian missiles making headlines don’t meet the specs of the article. Ukraine is shooting them down just fine using decades old technology.
Seems like a footage of Patriot system firing out millions worth of ammunition and being destroyed/damaged afterwards by a ballistic missile is a big deal for its sales prospectives.
The Patriot had minor damage. Regardless, all SAM systems, regardless of how good they are, have vulnerabilities to massed attacks. My understanding in this case is that the Patriot performed very well.
not really. If a Patriot systems fires out $5M of ammo, gets destroyed, but shot down missiles that otherwise would have destroyed 5 tanks, that might be an absolute bargain. similarly, if it shot out $5M ammo against $20M worth of missiles fired at it..
Deception is always possible, but both Ukraine and the US have claimed only minor damage to the Patriot, repaired and back in service within a day. Patriot batteries are also made up of a number of different launchers; damage to one doesn't take out the whole thing.
All we have in the footage to go on is a flash. No indication of what kind or how much damage was done in it.
cameldrv|2 years ago
themgt|2 years ago
And just some rando with the closest to the original raw video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjxX2gqdlkQ
Objectively as possible it looks like ~30 Patriot missiles were fired (plausibly the whole 32 missile battery). The production rate of these by Lockheed Martin is 500 missiles, annual. Up to 550/year starting this year. They're apparently attempting to intercept somewhere between 2-6 Kinzhals fired, and it appears 1-2 of those Kinzhals (i.e. between 15-100%) got through and struck the Patriot battery and at least damaged it. That's around 3 weeks total annual production of Patriot missiles fired in 2 minutes at a handful of targets with at best partial success.
So it's both correct that Kinzhal is really just an air-launched SRBM not a hypersonic glide weapon, and that our existing missile defense looks at best barely capable of partially defending against very limited numbers of conventional SRBM.
lazide|2 years ago
Everyone else however can see them just fine.
So they might be able to maneuver (normal ballistic missiles can usually do last minute maneuvering too!), but without data it’s blind.
Maybe useful if already programmed with a decent random walk, but it doesn’t help it actively avoid something coming for it, and it doesn’t let it aim for moving targets that can adjust course.
Slower stuff doesn’t have this issue, but is of course slower.
This is the same reason why supercavitating torpedos seem really cool on paper, but are not actually all that useful or scary (unless nuclear tipped). Unless the blast radius is huge or the target is fundamentally fixed (a large building), you can just… move out of the way.
mensetmanusman|2 years ago
airgapstopgap|2 years ago
No, hypersonics are a legitimate new development, Russia just deceptively brands some of its low-tech arsenal.
fauxpause_|2 years ago
unknown|2 years ago
[deleted]
up2isomorphism|2 years ago
the_af|2 years ago
Why ignore all of the article? If a hypersonic missile can be intercepted by a Patriot, then it stands to reason it wasn't truly maneuverable, i.e. it was ballistic!
GuB-42|2 years ago
People without clearances, working on a domain that is tangential but not the domain itself are probably more reliable, as they don't know truths that cannot be told, but they know enough to make informed guesses.
I take this article as informative but only for the general idea. The part about which country has what capabilities, I give absolutely no credence.
fauxpause_|2 years ago
It’s a good article. But the reality is that the Russian missiles making headlines don’t meet the specs of the article. Ukraine is shooting them down just fine using decades old technology.
vezuchyy|2 years ago
zip1234|2 years ago
adgjlsfhk1|2 years ago
ceejayoz|2 years ago
All we have in the footage to go on is a flash. No indication of what kind or how much damage was done in it.
fauxpause_|2 years ago
*have been stopped
JanSt|2 years ago
credit_guy|2 years ago