Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
China

China Conducted Two Hypersonic Weapons Tests this Summer (ft.com) 90

Posted by msmash from the closer-look dept.
The Chinese military conducted two hypersonic weapons tests over the summer, raising US concerns that Beijing is gaining ground in the race to develop a new generation of arms. Financial Times: On July 27 the Chinese military launched a rocket that used a "fractional orbital bombardment" system to propel a nuclear-capable "hypersonic glide vehicle" around the earth for the first time, according to four people familiar with US intelligence assessments. The Financial Times this week reported that the first test was in August, rather than at the end of July. China subsequently conducted a second hypersonic test on August 13, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Three people familiar with the first test in July said it stunned the Pentagon and US intelligence because China managed to demonstrate a brand new weapons capability, although they declined to elaborate on the details. One person said government scientists were struggling to understand the capability, which the US does not currently possess, adding that China's achievement appeared "to defy the laws of physics." Space and missile experts have been debating the Chinese test since the FT revealed the event at the weekend. Jeffrey Lewis, a nuclear weapons expert at Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, said China appeared to have developed a new innovation, but stressed the need to maintain a degree of scepticism. "We should be open to the reality that China is also capable of technological innovation," he said.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

China Conducted Two Hypersonic Weapons Tests this Summer More

China Conducted Two Hypersonic Weapons Tests this Summer

Comments Filter:

  • farm (Score:5, Funny)

    by bugs2squash ( 1132591 ) on Friday October 22, 2021 @03:32PM (#61918507)
    We should put a number of huge towers around our coastline, each with a rotating set of blades to protect us from these low flying missiles

  • Did they really? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RobinH ( 124750 ) on Friday October 22, 2021 @03:32PM (#61918509) Homepage
    I'm quite capable of believing the Chinese can innovate new technology, even if they've spent most of their time playing catch-up and stealing other technology, but honestly, if it defies the laws of physics, and the Chinese even said it was a routine test of something else, then how much credibility does this report have? How do I know it's not just hype to get more funds for defense contractors?

    • Innovation or not, clearly what they did was successfully troll the US military....

      Well played, China. Well played indeed.

    • Re:Did they really? (Score:4, Informative)

      by lazarus ( 2879 ) on Friday October 22, 2021 @04:24PM (#61918715) Journal

      They may not have [bbc.com]:

      On Monday, foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian told a media briefing that a routine test had been carried out in July to verify different types of reusable spacecraft technology.

      "This was not a missile, this was a spacecraft," he said. "This is of great significance for reducing the cost of spacecraft use."

      I would think that if they had successfully tested a long-range hypersonic nuclear missile they would be the first to tell their people how awesome it was, but who knows?

    • Re:Did they really? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by hey! ( 33014 ) on Friday October 22, 2021 @04:24PM (#61918721) Homepage Journal

      I must have missed that lecture in physics.

      Anyhow, "hypersonic" is a buzzword; the US and Russia are also working on "hypersonic" weapon systems; the terminal phase of conventional ICBMs is technically hypersonic too.

      What the Chinese apparently have built (according to Foreign Policy Magazine [foreignpolicy.com]) is something called a "FOBS" -- fractional orbital bombardment system. The missile starts out like an ICBM, but then rockets on the delivery vehicle terminate the big parabolic arc. This cuts off a lot of the slow part of the journey near the apogee, and allows the delivery vehicle to evade anti-missile systems designed to intercept them before they can maneuver. It's an old idea. The Soviets actually deployed [globalsecurity.org] such a system, although not with warheads (cross our hearts and hope to die) because that would have violated the Outer Space Treaty.

      Such systems fell out of favor with Russian and US strategic things because they're potentially destabilizing -- the shorter response time could encourage the enemy to launch *before* warning to preempt a preemptive strike. It's a new technical capability that doesn't accomplish anything for a country's actual nuclear security. Policy makers do these kinds of systems because it *feels* right: more sophisticated weapons must somehow automatically make you more secure, right?

      The US is working on a hypersonic system called "Prompt Global Strike"; the object is to deliver a non-nuclear precision strike anywhere in the world in one hour. This is supposed to reduce the need for nuclear strikes, and therefore *not* be destabilizing, but I have my doubts on that score. That working depends on a lot of assumptions about human behavior.

      • The US DoD has had a pretty much continuous development of these 'MARV' ( Maneuvering Reentry Vehicles ) since 1959, according to the DTIC bibliography. Even testing them on a PeaceKeeper missile. And the barrier is basically thermal, how much time at which velocity your spend in the atmosphere. And those annoying funfamental physical laws come into effect - being surrounded by a cloud of essentially plasma makes transmitting or receiving any sort of guidance or terminal targeting systems unreliable, if not

    • The US and Soviet Union/Russia did these decades ago. Plenty of time for China to have stolen/bought the technology.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by haunebu ( 16326 )

      Of course China would say that. They certainly would not confirm this capability until it is fully operational, and even then they might not. Better to keep your adversaries in the dark - or you lose the element of surprise.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      In this case I think it just means they don't fully understand what happened. This isn't the Chinese saying they did something, it's Western intelligence trying to make sense of what they saw.

      • I'm just wondering what the relative cost of a missile development programme is, compared to half a dozen SFX specialists? Particularly if it makes your opponents waste a few hundred billion of their own money trying to emulate what they think you couldn't have just done.

    • Nothing was "stolen" you halfwit. The owners have still got as much of the tech as they had before.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by khchung ( 462899 )

      How do I know it's not just hype to get more funds for defense contractors?

      On one hand, of course it is to get more funding. Hype about China's "military threat" got bandied around every time Congress make a budget.

      On the other hand, did you remember why USA and USSR got into a space race? Of course it is *also* about missile capability. When a country can reliably send people up into orbit and have them come back to Earth on the right spot, it also meant they can reliably send ICBM up and hit where they wanted.

      Consider this. Do you think that China, having demonstrated hypers

      • Maybe we all heard about the other tests because they were wildly successful.
        But China didn't want to say much about this one because it wasn't.

        China only likes to tell its people the good news.
        Next time when it works properly. We will hear all about it.

  • We are ruled by the privileged cast that only cares about their little penises. People should put a stop to all this. And I'm talking about the whole world, not just China.

    • We are ruled by the privileged cast that only cares about their little penises. People should put a stop to all this. And I'm talking about the whole world, not just China.

      The U.S. is in a number of treaties with other nations that say we can't build these things. China doesn't give a fuck.

      • Lets not forget the whole hoo ha around the Anti-ballistic missile treaties that the US withdrew from in 2002

        Lets also not pretend that the US gives a fuck about treaties, it will withdraw from them the moment it doesnt benefit the currently-in-power administration.

      • We are ruled by the privileged cast that only cares about their little penises. People should put a stop to all this. And I'm talking about the whole world, not just China.

        The U.S. is in a number of treaties with other nations that say we can't build these things. China doesn't give a fuck.

        Is China also in these treaties?
        So why should they give a fuck?
        Why didn't anyone (Trump) try to get China involved in these treaties? Oh, that's right, he was too busy withdrawing from them. [bbc.com]

  • Most alarmingly... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by GameboyRMH ( 1153867 ) <gameboyrmh&gmail,com> on Friday October 22, 2021 @03:48PM (#61918571) Journal

    The most alarming thing about the test is that they tried to downplay it as a spacecraft test. But the only difference between a hypersonic spacecraft and a hypersonic nuclear missile is whether you decide to load a nuclear bomb into it.

    This quiet and downplayed approach means that this isn't a dick-waving exercise, they're serious about developing this for potential use and don't want to scare adversaries into an arms race (which could result in working defenses being developed among other unpleasant issues). This is the kind of thing the US does when it has smart leaders in charge.

    • I think we have quite enough weapons already, thank you very much. The last thing we need is a new fantastically expensive weapons system. If we could scratch together $20 billion we could end the homeless problem, permanently. $25 billion and we're in control of our borders again. But no, there's no money for our needs. But there's always plenty when it's time to spend on feeding a fire that will never warm us.

      • What do you mean "in control of our borders again"? The government is in complete control of what's happening, what part of any of this makes you think it's an accident? Hundreds of thousands of people don't simply magically get from another continent to a far away border crossing location without someone paying for transportation, food, and organization.

      • Off-topic, but...

        If we could scratch together $20 billion we could end the homeless problem,

        That's what the New Society of the mid-1960's claimed to be doing. The U.S. government has spent 50 times that amount ($1T+) since then, and while things have improved for millions hunger and homelessness still exist.

        $25 billion and we're in control of our borders again.

        How much was the Trump-funded wall gonna cost? More INS/Border Patrol agents and their perpetual salaries/costs/benefits? $25B isn't going to sto

        • How much was the Trump-funded wall gonna cost?

          Lots of not-American not-dollars.

          Even though everyone knew the Tangerine Shitgibbon was lieing through his teeth when he said it, he did promise, hand on balls, that Mexico was going to pay for it. And the American electorate brought it. Utterly hilarious.

      • Too late, the US is already in the test phase. https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/21... [cnn.com] It failed. I tend to believe China successfully tested one. Unlike the Russians, China is not bragging about their military advancements. They are just moving along. I believe they will surpass us at some point. They have more people, and view education much more importantly than the US. They are moving at a very fast rate building ships. I saw a special where they built a super sized ski slope theme park out of an old limeston
      • This attitude is why we are fucked. We might be satisfied with the status quo but our enemies are not.

        They have expansionist mentalities because they don't have enough resources and space and hate western notions of democracy and freedom because they are afraid of their own populace. The minute they have a sound and plausible shift in the balance of power and an excuse to occupy us and eradicate our way of life (or even just eradicate, human rights aren't big with China) they will take it.

        Our weaponry just

        • We definitely aren't exploiting highly intelligent and parallel swarm type devices and space capabilities like we should.

          Yes, some rando on the Internet who thinks they know the entire width and breadth of top secret DoD/DARPA research programs should totally be believed that the US isn't and hasn't been doing advanced weapons and capabilities research. /rollseyes

          • "thinks they know the entire width and breadth of top secret DoD/DARPA research programs should totally be believed that the US isn't and hasn't been doing advanced weapons and capabilities research"

            Weapons that may or may not be hiding in some super secret dark and dusty lab don't do us any good. If they aren't deployed they don't matter.

        • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

          by DNS-and-BIND ( 461968 )
          Our own government is afraid of its own populace. It regards parents attending school board meetings as domestic terrorists. It pushes destructive, racist Critical Theory as education. Our foreign "enemies" need do nothing but watch our own government destroy us.
          • "It regards parents attending school board meetings as domestic terrorists. It pushes destructive, racist Critical Theory as education."

            Our enemies are behind CRT as well. CRT is about divide and conquer. That is a separate battle but part of the same war.

            Look I'm not saying more money necessarily needs thrown at the military. The budget is plenty fat to do what needs done if it was spent efficiently. I'm saying either way we need to develop and deploy much more advanced systems. Should we get the money by

    • This is the kind of thing the US does when it doesn't have people in charge who are literally taking cash from China and serving the CCP as shills and spies.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by khchung ( 462899 )

      The most alarming thing about the test is that they tried to downplay it as a spacecraft test. But the only difference between a hypersonic spacecraft and a hypersonic nuclear missile is whether you decide to load a nuclear bomb into it.

      By this logic, the ISS is really a orbital nuclear bombardment platform that just did not have nukes loaded yet, "downplayed" as a scientific space station.

      Since the ISS passes through China's territory almost daily, well, I guess that pretty much justified China's development of missile capable of shooting down the ISS, right?

  • America is not #1 (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Friday October 22, 2021 @03:50PM (#61918581)

    We have grown fat and lazy, and so secure in our thought that we are so much more advanced and powerful and secure in our view of how things are. That we are letting other countries to be competitive and in many areas bypass us.

    Innovation for a country needs the following:
    Population: China has a huge population nearly 4x the United States
    Land: China has about the same amount of land as the US
    Natural Resources: Access to a lot of areas prime for mining, as well waterways, and borders with other large nations. While the US, is basically separated by two seas.

    America had 80 years of Being Exceptional, not because we were better people, or a more noble, smarter or harder workers than the rest of the world, but because WWI and WWII devastated Europe and Asia. While the US was unharmed.

    However, China has rebuilt, and now has a more modern infrastructure, and no longer decided to be isolationist, so they are now hitting the world as a big player, which now the US, will need to find a way to work with them, otherwise, they will just eat us alive.

    Is this an Endorsement of communism? No, not at all, Chinese Communism is the reason why China hasn't completely kicked the US Butt, because it has limited China's full potential, my making its citizens worried about shaking the norms. However their population, and access to resources is able to outbalance the disadvantage that its communist government has created.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by skam240 ( 789197 )

      Innovation for a country needs the following:
      Population: China has a huge population nearly 4x the United States
      Land: China has about the same amount of land as the US
      Natural Resources: Access to a lot of areas prime for mining, as well waterways, and borders with other large nations. While the US, is basically separated by two seas.

      What!? I could cite an incredibly long list of innovations that took place in places that had none of those things. I mean you might as well say nothing was ever innovated in the UK because they have none of those things in abundance and that certainly isnt true. Looking at it from the other side India should therefore be a power house of innovation as they excel at your metrics but that isn't true either.

      While the items you list here are certainly contributing factors they are most certainly not defining f

      • You mean the worlds largest economy, did have innovations?

        Sure America did invent and create a lot of amazing things in the 19th and 20th century. We are still inventing new stuff in the 21st... UK is a small island, Europe are a collection of small countries, where many of them were bombed to the stone ages during WWI and WWII, then pawns between the USA and the USSR during the cold war.

        However the world is changing now, and we cannot just going like we did before. Because we will get creamed, nations h

    • America's failure is 100% of its own making, due to people going out of their way to deliberately destroy the country from the inside. Look at the Pacific Northwest, where schools are literally removing the requirement to read and write for graduation because of how unbelievably corrupt and incompetent the school system is at teaching basic literacy. But you better believe every one of those kids got 12 full years of 8 hour a day, 5 day a week, wall to wall instruction that the US was the most evil country

      • I'd like to know more about this PacNW issue, have you some relevant links?

      • But you better believe every one of those Breitbart readers got 12 full years of 8 hour a day, 5 day a week, wall to wall instruction that all liberals say the US was the most evil country to ever exist and communism was the only solution to all of life's ills.

        FTFY.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by khchung ( 462899 )

        America's failure is 100% of its own making, due to people going out of their way to deliberately destroy the country from the inside.

        Inside China, people are saying the same about the Soviet Union. In 1989, it wasn't that the US "won", it was only that the Soviet Union lost by their own making.

        And now, China is just waiting for the US to lose on their own. There is no need for China to "win", they just need to continue going their own way without getting distracted with or stumble over whatever the US threw at them. While the US is focused on China, China is focused on itself*.

        When two runners racing head to head, one running is spend

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by byromaniac ( 8103402 )
      Based on my observations of working with Chinese engineers, they work very hard and generally towards a common goal of making China a 1st world nation. Mass starvations and political humiliations are fresh in their cultural memory and great motivators. Additionally, under Jinping, they basically have a competent and benevolent (to those who conform) dictatorship, which has a focused shrewdness that America's partisan democracy can't match. I don't doubt they will become the dominant superpower, and it re

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by khchung ( 462899 )

      Is this an Endorsement of communism? No, not at all, Chinese Communism is the reason why China hasn't completely kicked the US Butt, because it has limited China's full potential, my making its citizens worried about shaking the norms.

      If you thought that the current Chinese govt* is "limiting" China's full potential, you need to read more about what happened in China between 1900-2000.

      Did you know that between overthrowing the Qing dynasty in 1911 to the current PRC in 1949, China *had* tried multi-party, one person one vote democracy? Did prosperity happened? No, it resulted in a fragmented country with civil war everywhere. Not unlikely many African countries right now.

      At 1949, China's GDP was less than many African countries at tha

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by RobinH ( 124750 )
      If China were to become democratic, the other thing that democracy leads to is more peaceful relations with other democratic countries, so if they started "kicking butt" under democracy, it'd probably be fine.

  • The Chinese military conducted two hypersonic weapons tests over the summer

    Why are we only hearing about this now? ;)

  • No surprise the (Score:3)

    by oldgraybeard ( 2939809 ) on Friday October 22, 2021 @04:14PM (#61918673)
    CIA, Intelligence community( an oxymoron ) and Pentagon were caught off guard.
    They are just starting to shift away from spying on the Trumps, Republicans and their voters to their next threat, Parents!.
    Anyone living in Taiwan who does not want to live in a communist country better emigrate soon.

  • "We should be open to the reality that China is also capable of technological innovation...

    That exact idea is laid out well in "2034", where China leapfrogs American military might with one major innovation and ignites a world war that leads to nuclear exchanges and a completely different world for everyone.

    We can't be arrogant or feel superior and assume that every major innovation will always come out of the United States (or at least the West). Despite their obvious track record of stealing IP for deca

  • those words don't mean what you think (Score:3)

    by argStyopa ( 232550 ) on Friday October 22, 2021 @04:58PM (#61918831) Journal

    "...used a "fractional orbital bombardment" system to propel ..."

    FOBS is not a propulsive system. It's a warhead delivery system.

    What the fuck are they even taking about?

  • Maybe it's a ploy to get us to waste money on expensive toys. The tests could be a minimalist shell of a missile. Being hollow it can act like it has nimble abilities that an armed missile couldn't duplicate.

  • In a major war, one of the tactics is to destroy your opponent's industrial capabilities and cut off its natural resources. In WW2, Germany bombed industrial cities in Britain, and Britain bombed industrial cities in Germany.

    It strikes me that China has already crippled the industrial power of western nations, without dropping a single bomb. Our native industries have withered away, because China can do everything cheaper. Even if severe tariffs were imposed on Chinese goods, with a view to protecting local

Slashdot Top Deals

If all else fails, lower your standards.

Close