Here’s a link for search results that will link you to a bunch of articles on this topic: usaf ends hypersonic program. My impression has been that we’ve been led to believe that this program was proceeding smoothly and successfully. But now we learn that isn’t the case.
One thing that's getting missed here is that this is part of a larger pattern. Technologically, we can no longer do stuff that we did almost a lifetime ago. NASA is claiming that the recent Artemis 1 unmanned Moon shot "aced" its test despite the loss of heat shield material. That the crew would have died had there been one isn't that big a deal, I guess. I think they're talking about a hypothetical landing in 2024 or 2025, but on the current flight schedule they won't be able to test out the hypothetical lander before then. (And the lander is still hypothetical). back in the days the Lunar module had teo manned test flights before the Big Show in July 1969.
We could not today build an SR-71 Blackbird spy plane or a B-70 Valkyrie bomber. Both were done up my smart guys with slide rules, and the advanced computers we have today can't duplicate what those guys did. Modern military aircraft can't fly as high or as fast as they did in the 60s. Or as reliably. Despite taking more time to develop the F-35 than it took to out a man on the Moon, the beast still isn't ready for prime time. It can't match the sortie rate of a 60s era F-4 Phantom.
The Russian hypersonic program was carried out with a sense of urgency since they took the possibility seriously that American missile defenses would render their ballistic missiles impotent and useless. (They need not have. Those defenses never existed in reality, but that is neither here nor there.) Our hypersonic program was the product of a bloated, over managed R&D bureaucracy hat cannot produce deployable weapons in a timely manner and at an affordable cost. It cannot even duplicate past weapons successfully. The Ford class carrier is a disaster for which people should hang.
The weapons with which we won the Cold War, the nuclear subs, ICBMs and manned bombers that provided our deterrent back in the days were built with the same urgency that the Russians brought to their hypersonic program, the same feeling that "we have to get his done or else". They were also produced by defense contractors that had to compete. The monopoly producers of today know they're getting the contract regardless with predictable results.
This time the "missile gap" is real (rather than the largely MIC fundraising ploy it was in the late '50s) and nobody gives a [bleep], because, now, the MIC gets all the money it wants entirely without regard to results.
In general, I'm all for the private sector over state sector, but in this case it seems like the Russians have this right. Their arms industry is directly controlled by the state, whereas in the US and Western Europe it is controlled by private companies who want to milk the government and taxpayer as much as possible, obsess about DIE, and produce massive, overpriced, useless junk like the F35
You were right favoring the private sector, but now everything has become politicized and the private sector makes money catering to the desires of the regime. Efficacy, ingenuity and results are less important.
A "perle" of wisdom indeed. In the late 1930s, the British knew that war was coming with Germany and that a workable radar system was essential to survival. Robert Watson-Watt and his team got on to it and developed it in time. Imagine that happening today. First, we'd spend two years making sure that every DIE box was ticked, and then we'd farm it out to some bloated, greedy private weapons company. It would be ready by 1949 and the instructions would have been in German.
It’s just one endless run of catastrophes, miscalculations, poor judgments and national embarrassments! I find it hard to believe that our military has been caught so flat footed, but then after the Afghanistan disaster, for which I saw today no one has any regrets or misgivings about, it’s to be expected. We have got to be a laughingstock for every country on earth and particularly those that we classify as enemies. Unbelievable!
I didn't know about that visit, Bobby. I do wonder why Taiwan accepts all these visits by nutcases like Pelosi and the other congress critters. It only inflames the CCP. If I were them, I'd either nix the visits or send the Minister for Dog Licences to meet them at the airport.
Appears talk is easy, if especially not cheap. US MIC is doing fine, thank you. But our 155MM rounds production is set to sextuple! 800+ billion $ 'defense' budget: I think perhaps better named 'Billionaire-maker' program would serve more truthfully. Hoping all are having a great week! (WrH)
Pravda quotes a Greek media source for this. At the time, mid March, commentators pointed out the very somber admissions by Ukraine and Zelensky that the Russians had in fact fired multiple Kinzhals and that they had been unable to intercept a single one of them. That was unusual, along with the very somber tone and Zelensky's statement to the effect that this had been a very serious strike.
We always hear that China still needs US consumers to buy its goods. I wonder how true that is. Will they be able to replace the US market with other BRICS markets?
The sad irony is that Americans are similar to Russians (of course, with some differences - let's say we are, arguably, less practical and more fatalistic). At least middle-class Americans have a good reputation among those who have had personal contacts. A common description includes adjectives such as "friendly", "open", and "not greedy". And Russians have a long tradition of distinguishing between the people and their government. The problem is that opportunities for contacts are limited and tend to shrink. The intentional use of cancel culture is not only stupid, but also dangerous in the modern circumstances.
Excellent comment. Listening to the news every day here in Europe, I'm constantly amazed at we Westerners' arrogance. We still believe we are the centre of the universe, handing out judgments and forcing crazy ideology on the 90% of the planet who aren't like us. We are in for a rude awakening. My only disagreement is that "American hegemony is ending, and that makes us less of a threat." I think it is the opposite: US hegemony is ending, but that makes the US neocons even more of a threat.
One thing that's getting missed here is that this is part of a larger pattern. Technologically, we can no longer do stuff that we did almost a lifetime ago. NASA is claiming that the recent Artemis 1 unmanned Moon shot "aced" its test despite the loss of heat shield material. That the crew would have died had there been one isn't that big a deal, I guess. I think they're talking about a hypothetical landing in 2024 or 2025, but on the current flight schedule they won't be able to test out the hypothetical lander before then. (And the lander is still hypothetical). back in the days the Lunar module had teo manned test flights before the Big Show in July 1969.
We could not today build an SR-71 Blackbird spy plane or a B-70 Valkyrie bomber. Both were done up my smart guys with slide rules, and the advanced computers we have today can't duplicate what those guys did. Modern military aircraft can't fly as high or as fast as they did in the 60s. Or as reliably. Despite taking more time to develop the F-35 than it took to out a man on the Moon, the beast still isn't ready for prime time. It can't match the sortie rate of a 60s era F-4 Phantom.
The Russian hypersonic program was carried out with a sense of urgency since they took the possibility seriously that American missile defenses would render their ballistic missiles impotent and useless. (They need not have. Those defenses never existed in reality, but that is neither here nor there.) Our hypersonic program was the product of a bloated, over managed R&D bureaucracy hat cannot produce deployable weapons in a timely manner and at an affordable cost. It cannot even duplicate past weapons successfully. The Ford class carrier is a disaster for which people should hang.
The weapons with which we won the Cold War, the nuclear subs, ICBMs and manned bombers that provided our deterrent back in the days were built with the same urgency that the Russians brought to their hypersonic program, the same feeling that "we have to get his done or else". They were also produced by defense contractors that had to compete. The monopoly producers of today know they're getting the contract regardless with predictable results.
End of rant.
https://twitter.com/imetatronink/status/1641559338262360065
That 25% number is probably about right.
This time the "missile gap" is real (rather than the largely MIC fundraising ploy it was in the late '50s) and nobody gives a [bleep], because, now, the MIC gets all the money it wants entirely without regard to results.
In general, I'm all for the private sector over state sector, but in this case it seems like the Russians have this right. Their arms industry is directly controlled by the state, whereas in the US and Western Europe it is controlled by private companies who want to milk the government and taxpayer as much as possible, obsess about DIE, and produce massive, overpriced, useless junk like the F35
You were right favoring the private sector, but now everything has become politicized and the private sector makes money catering to the desires of the regime. Efficacy, ingenuity and results are less important.
A "perle" of wisdom indeed. In the late 1930s, the British knew that war was coming with Germany and that a workable radar system was essential to survival. Robert Watson-Watt and his team got on to it and developed it in time. Imagine that happening today. First, we'd spend two years making sure that every DIE box was ticked, and then we'd farm it out to some bloated, greedy private weapons company. It would be ready by 1949 and the instructions would have been in German.
Used to be that test beds lied about their results. I guess that era is over.
Like Russian nuke tests.
Perhaps a future “Red October” hypersonic opportunity?
It’s just one endless run of catastrophes, miscalculations, poor judgments and national embarrassments! I find it hard to believe that our military has been caught so flat footed, but then after the Afghanistan disaster, for which I saw today no one has any regrets or misgivings about, it’s to be expected. We have got to be a laughingstock for every country on earth and particularly those that we classify as enemies. Unbelievable!
The American fighting soldier is second to none when well trained and led. Unfortunately, those days are gone.
Hypersonic pronouns. 5D warfare!
Yeh, we do have that goin for us. :-)
For "us"? You transphobe! For "Ze"!
I didn't know about that visit, Bobby. I do wonder why Taiwan accepts all these visits by nutcases like Pelosi and the other congress critters. It only inflames the CCP. If I were them, I'd either nix the visits or send the Minister for Dog Licences to meet them at the airport.
You’re probably right, but it’s still infuriating to think that the people in charge are so clueless and inept.
BTW, the bit about “priorities” was a nice piece of understatement-lol.
Unbelievable. The hardest R&D issue is knowing something is possible.
Expect our CIA / MI6 teams to steal it. Maybe Mossad to get Bibi back in Zhou’s good graces.
Appears talk is easy, if especially not cheap. US MIC is doing fine, thank you. But our 155MM rounds production is set to sextuple! 800+ billion $ 'defense' budget: I think perhaps better named 'Billionaire-maker' program would serve more truthfully. Hoping all are having a great week! (WrH)
As long as the 155m rounds are painted in rainbow colours, Wayne.
…and don’t forget the sling-shot!
Pravda quotes a Greek media source for this. At the time, mid March, commentators pointed out the very somber admissions by Ukraine and Zelensky that the Russians had in fact fired multiple Kinzhals and that they had been unable to intercept a single one of them. That was unusual, along with the very somber tone and Zelensky's statement to the effect that this had been a very serious strike.
We always hear that China still needs US consumers to buy its goods. I wonder how true that is. Will they be able to replace the US market with other BRICS markets?
The sad irony is that Americans are similar to Russians (of course, with some differences - let's say we are, arguably, less practical and more fatalistic). At least middle-class Americans have a good reputation among those who have had personal contacts. A common description includes adjectives such as "friendly", "open", and "not greedy". And Russians have a long tradition of distinguishing between the people and their government. The problem is that opportunities for contacts are limited and tend to shrink. The intentional use of cancel culture is not only stupid, but also dangerous in the modern circumstances.
Excellent comment. Listening to the news every day here in Europe, I'm constantly amazed at we Westerners' arrogance. We still believe we are the centre of the universe, handing out judgments and forcing crazy ideology on the 90% of the planet who aren't like us. We are in for a rude awakening. My only disagreement is that "American hegemony is ending, and that makes us less of a threat." I think it is the opposite: US hegemony is ending, but that makes the US neocons even more of a threat.