Another good essay. It is not quite up-to-date but may be especially useful in reaching people who know little to nothing about this important story about a new offense and a new defense.
It illustrated a modern version of Catch 22.
CATCH 22,000
And regrettably it is a matter of life and death potentially for millions or billions of people (if/when Hypersonics carry nuclear weapons)! Back to your video essay:
The US will not lose "SOME" carriers if they are used to attack China. They will lose ALL Carriers and battle groups within reach, because China will use Hypersonic missiles. But why do you, or US publications, assume China does not have AIR-LAUNCHED hypersonic missiles?
Russia does.
Don't you think China realizes that medium-range ground launched missiles have a limited range that is less than air-launched?
You cannot rely on US publications for realistic strategic analysis.
Try alt- Media experts, like MIT Prof. Ted Postal who can prove that the Trump boondoggle GOLDEN DOME air defense system will cost ~US$4 TRILLION in capital cost BEFORE it can be tested to show it can shoot down ONE missile... even a NON-Hypersonic Missile. All-in cost to protect the US Homeland, if the US is certifiably insane: $400 Trillion (in 2025 Dollars) = just part of CATCH 22000.
HOW CAN THE US prove a new Air Defense System CAN hit Hypersonic targets?
The Russians indicate that their "Prometheus" S500 Air Defense System can hit a Hypersonic Missile. They have the Hypersonics to launch to prove the S500 works.
The USA, if they tried to develop an air defense to knock out a Hypersonic target, could not be sure they were making progress: because they have nothing to test it with.
You must HAVE a Hypersonic TARGET to test an interceptor before you start spending $100s of Billions to make the advanced Air Defense System. The countries that the US has attacked are not going to provide the US with dozens of hypersonic test targets.
I call this part of "CATCH 22,000" because there'd be no need to "borrow" Hypersonics (to develop a defense) if the US had not made so many competent enemies AND decided to unilaterally withdraw from the Anti-ABM Treaty.
Essentially the US war budget has been spent already on Carriers and f-35s that are both extremely vulnerable to missiles given the 2020s level of missile tech.
And US isn't catching up, it is falling further behind.
Russia announced it had Hypersonics in March 2018, and has used them multiple times in Ukraine.
Which makes it hard to believe that China is actually ahead of Russia in hyerpsonic development.
I know China has more of the super smart engineers needed than the rest of the world. But Russia has plenty too and is more focused having been the world leader in rocket tech since end ww2.
Such a good investigative report. One factor, however, needs to be added to the "objectives" and "cost" question about "is it worth it?" This is an issue for rational military leaders and politicians. I have not seen much evidence that current Western leaders are rational. What I see is political sociopaths creating mayhem and military fantasists who have apparently lost any notion of alternative plans or any care for a scenario involving the future.
Those hypersonic missiles are one of the things cooling USA's ambitions to go toe-to-toe in a 'hot' war with Russia, Iran or China.
Mind so much of that is talk for the domestic audience.
❤ Love too You & Yours Mr. Walmsley, Stay Healthy, Happy & Clever! 😃
Good to know we’re safe in China now.
Another good essay. It is not quite up-to-date but may be especially useful in reaching people who know little to nothing about this important story about a new offense and a new defense.
It illustrated a modern version of Catch 22.
CATCH 22,000
And regrettably it is a matter of life and death potentially for millions or billions of people (if/when Hypersonics carry nuclear weapons)! Back to your video essay:
The US will not lose "SOME" carriers if they are used to attack China. They will lose ALL Carriers and battle groups within reach, because China will use Hypersonic missiles. But why do you, or US publications, assume China does not have AIR-LAUNCHED hypersonic missiles?
Russia does.
Don't you think China realizes that medium-range ground launched missiles have a limited range that is less than air-launched?
You cannot rely on US publications for realistic strategic analysis.
Try alt- Media experts, like MIT Prof. Ted Postal who can prove that the Trump boondoggle GOLDEN DOME air defense system will cost ~US$4 TRILLION in capital cost BEFORE it can be tested to show it can shoot down ONE missile... even a NON-Hypersonic Missile. All-in cost to protect the US Homeland, if the US is certifiably insane: $400 Trillion (in 2025 Dollars) = just part of CATCH 22000.
HOW CAN THE US prove a new Air Defense System CAN hit Hypersonic targets?
The Russians indicate that their "Prometheus" S500 Air Defense System can hit a Hypersonic Missile. They have the Hypersonics to launch to prove the S500 works.
The USA, if they tried to develop an air defense to knock out a Hypersonic target, could not be sure they were making progress: because they have nothing to test it with.
You must HAVE a Hypersonic TARGET to test an interceptor before you start spending $100s of Billions to make the advanced Air Defense System. The countries that the US has attacked are not going to provide the US with dozens of hypersonic test targets.
I call this part of "CATCH 22,000" because there'd be no need to "borrow" Hypersonics (to develop a defense) if the US had not made so many competent enemies AND decided to unilaterally withdraw from the Anti-ABM Treaty.
Yes
Essentially the US war budget has been spent already on Carriers and f-35s that are both extremely vulnerable to missiles given the 2020s level of missile tech.
And US isn't catching up, it is falling further behind.
Love the whole series.
Russia announced it had Hypersonics in March 2018, and has used them multiple times in Ukraine.
Which makes it hard to believe that China is actually ahead of Russia in hyerpsonic development.
I know China has more of the super smart engineers needed than the rest of the world. But Russia has plenty too and is more focused having been the world leader in rocket tech since end ww2.
Such a good investigative report. One factor, however, needs to be added to the "objectives" and "cost" question about "is it worth it?" This is an issue for rational military leaders and politicians. I have not seen much evidence that current Western leaders are rational. What I see is political sociopaths creating mayhem and military fantasists who have apparently lost any notion of alternative plans or any care for a scenario involving the future.