All targeting solutions for sublight speed are computable.

    • Korkki@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Then how does it react when the missile is going 3x as fast and sweeps right when the counter missile is sweeping to left towards the missiles previous position and misses, in that case it needs to be faster than the incoming missile itself. Yes, the speed would not be a problem towards a predictable trajectory, that’s how ballistic missiles are intercepted even if they go super fast. it’s basically a high school math problem in that case to calculate the point of interception in a firing solution. It’s also fine if missile can change course, that’s how cruise missiles are shot down, because the counter-missile can still race with them when they turn, but when the missile is fast and can change directions mid flight then it doesn’t much help how fast the computer calculates if the hardware can’t react fast enough. it’s basically like if your mind were able to move at superhuman speed but your body is still human and you get shot and only thing you can really do is to watch the bullet approaching but being unable to dodge fast enough.

      • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The issue with hypersonic missiles is that they go so fast that the air around them heats up enough to become a plasma. This prevents radio, microwave, and infrared based comms and radar systems from working. So any proper hypersonic missile is stuck with using either optical sensors (which require a ton of processing power and is slow) or inertial sensors (which aren’t very accurate due to drift) in order to plot its course.

        The Russians are the only ones with “hypersonic missiles” because they’re using a different definition. Theirs are just ballistic missiles that move at hypersonic speeds, which by definition can’t change course and have a huge IR and radar signature, so it’s not that difficult to set a slower patriot missile to be in it’s way to intercept.

        • Korkki@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Khinzal for example is meant to be both a ground targeting missile and a “carrier killer”. That alone should mean it’s indeed maneuverable in flight.

          • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            There’s always a significant difference in what the Russian MOD says their equipment is meant for and what it’s capabilities actually are.

            Also, if Khinzal was really that maneuverable then how were the Ukrainians able to intercept multiple with the much slower Patriot missiles?

            • Korkki@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Also, if Khinzal was really that maneuverable then how were the Ukrainians able to intercept multiple with the much slower Patriot missiles?

              One can put serious doubt on their claims. Ukrainain MoD has every incentive to lie and on top of that they did show off some empty soviet era bombshells as remnants of a shot down Kinzhal.

              • mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ukrainain MoD has every incentive to lie

                And Russia doesn’t? Besides, it’s already common knowledge that Khinzal is just a ballistic missile