Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

USAF Hypersonic Missile Test: successful

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

USAF Hypersonic Missile Test: successful

Old 19th May 2022, 02:42
  #21 (permalink)  
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: UK/OZ
Posts: 1,806
Originally Posted by SATCOS WHIPPING BOY View Post
Article implies the main target will be static land-based or slow moving ship targets. Manouverability shouldn't be a major requirement for a missile travelling at 6000 or so m/s.
So the China test lasted 5 seconds! At what range of identification from target, does such a threat become indefensible? Identify, track, target, launch, travel to impact. 5 seconds (?) for each of first 4 stages but the missile has travelled 120km before a counter measure is deployed. Mind boggling if they can be launched with nuclear warheads from subs.
mickjoebill is offline  
Old 20th May 2022, 05:53
  #22 (permalink)  
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 4,488
From the limited teaching we had on the SR-71 on the hard sums coarse I know that a suitably light SR71 that was somehow / actually in the best bit of the CofG envelope, with sufficient LN2 density, operating at a lower altitude that also happened to be unusually cold, with intakes in fully automatic (and trusting that they would remain so(!)) at a reduced mach number (say M3.0 or below), in a flight regime that allowed up to 25 AoB whilst remaining within the limited AoA range etc, then you could probably achieve a turning radius of under 100nm. Easy.
None of what you postulate is relevant I’m afraid, see graph.

Centre of Gravity limitations were numerous, but basically,

Take Off – Forward of 22% MAC

Subsonic – 17 to 22%

Supersonic below 3.2M – aft limit 25% (desired position as there is a 50 nm loss of range per % CoG forward of 25%). Fuel transfer used to keep it there.

I recall that real-world ops tended to have few, if any, of the favourable conditions above and with an AoB limits reducing towards zero makes turning at operational altitudes / mach a serious challenge. I do recall (with reasonable certainty) that any manual control of the intakes (as an example) at typical operational altitudes had a 0 AoB limit. Tricky.
Manual control of intakes imposed no flight restrictions, though did impose cautions. The only non turning flight limitation on high altitude turns was for flight at or above the Maximum Altitude Cruise Profile for the existing Mach, gross weight and ambient temperature, a 35 angle of bank at this altitude the angle of attack would exceed the 8 supersonic limit. A 2,000 ft descent prior to turn entry was recommended ie to the Intermediate Altitude Cruise Profile.
megan is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.