The Hill: Putin built a hypersonic arsenal, while the Pentagon slept

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

From today's article:

In the course of his lengthy annual address to the Russian Federal Assembly this year, President Vladimir Putin excoriated the United States for abandoning the 1987 Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty while asserting that “the work on promising prototypes and weapon systems that I spoke about in my Address last year continues as scheduled and without disruptions.”

Putin went on to say that Russia had entered serial production of the Avangard hypersonic glide system, which was to be deployed later in 2019. He added that the Sarmat intercontinental ballistic missile, which he asserted was “of unprecedented power,” was in the test stage, as was the Peresvet laser missile and air-defense weapon, likewise to be deployed this year. He noted that the Kinzhal hypersonic ballistic missile, having undergone operational testing, “proved [its] unique characteristics during test and combat alert missions while the personnel learned how to operate them.” Finally, he asserted that the Burevestnik nuclear-powered cruise missile “of unlimited range,” and the Poseidon nuclear-powered unmanned underwater vehicle, were successfully undergoing tests.

Since Putin’s speech in February, the work on at least one of those systems has suffered rather serious “disruption.” Despite Putin’s assertion that Burevestnik missile testing was going well, it was that very missile that Western analysts believe was being tested when a nuclear explosion, first reported earlier this month, killed seven scientists and forced an initial evacuation order for at least one nearby village because of potential exposure to deadly radiation.

more

So while Fat Donnie is running around beating his chest and proclaiming the greatness of the U.S. military solely because of him, Russia is making progress on several weapon systems. A hypersonic ballistic missile would be virtually impossible to defend against, and an unlimited range nuclear powered cruise missile could orbit just outside the air defense identification zone (ADIZ) in international airspace.

Meanwhile, we're dumping our resources into IQ45's "Space Force," whose mission has yet to be defined. All we know so far is that Trump likes saying the words, "Space Force."

Militarism of space is not only expensive, but dangerous. The ideal weapon system would be a constellation of orbiting missiles with multiple independent reentry vehicles (MIRV), essentially a cluster of nuclear bombs. From low orbit (around 150 miles), the time from ignition to impact would be less than a few minutes, versus the half hour or so it takes a land based ballistic missile to transit over the pole to its target. An orbital missile doesn't have to use any energy to overcome gravity, and thus could use less fuel, which means lighter weight, which translates into faster acceleration. Plus, gravity is also helping. There is no ballistic trajectory -- the missile would travel in a straight line from orbit to target.

Wouldn't it be nice to know there are several hundred of these missiles orbiting the earth at a given time? Wouldn't you feel a lot more secure?

There was an effort to use space peacefully as a shared resource of all mankind. The word "shared" is not in Trump's vocabulary, so we're going to be stuck with this white elephant forever.

[Newest Reality]

1. Along those lines...

With all the super-duper cool weapons there are and that are in development, (in lieu of using resources for constructive and beneficial efforts) there is an old saying that comes to mind: "Everything contains within itself the seeds of its own destruction."

We have arsenals of armaments and a boat load of those seeds. What could go wrong? This "tough guy" World thing between nations is still a thing? Who are we defending really, and for what purpose? At this point is is, and has been, clear that these monkey shines are very dangerous and deadly and they only continue to get worse. Do the strong-arm leaders really get to take us there for their own benefit? Do they really win if it turns into a massive, planet scarring Armageddon?

Oh, I know, deterrence and all that. Well, of course, that is the case if the leaders and countries are all on the same old game board with the same old rules and playing pieces. It seems to be self-supporting and reinforcing in that case. And yeah, resources and battles for booty, I know. And that is going to accelerate, too, with potable water being the next major item of contention.

All things considered, you can develop and build billions and billions of dollars worth of weapons, (and the US is #1, YEAH!) in order to take or hold on to land and resources, or, gee, how much would it cost for cooperative, world-wide efforts to prevent and mitigate the problems? There are probably some studies on that to look up, and I shall. My speculations steer towards something more like a Global, resource-based economic system, and like civilization, we should consider the idea of giving it a try.

[RKP5637]

2. Humans are often a very sick species delighting in hoarding and killing others. There have to be

other more intelligent ways for societies to advance/get along without needless deaths and maiming ... and calling it progress.