Comments on: At Mach 5 and beyond, things heat up pretty fast

By: Jim

Jim — Thu, 23 Feb 2023 23:16:59 +0000

If it’s showing up in PR articles, it isn’t very secret, is it? Contrast to NSA’s digital panopticon, NRO’s real-time surveillance of every square inch of the surface of the earth, or CIA’s Joe Biden clone army.

In other words, I wonder how much the Chair Force paid to have that article placed.

http://www.paulgraham.com/submarine.html

By: Altitude Zero

Altitude Zero — Mon, 20 Feb 2023 17:57:05 +0000

Yes, and didn’t the US quit building the B-70 Valkyrie because we came to the conclusion that super-high speed was just not that great an advantage for a bomber, in this age of sophisticated anti-aircraft missiles? The US is obsessed with manned bombers, and has been for the better part of a century – it may be time to move on.

By: Adar

Adar — Sun, 19 Feb 2023 16:22:59 +0000

There it is in the nutshell from Bob Sykes.

Cost will be so prohibitive that only a few can ever be made.

I think the USAF had this concept decades ago called Dyna-Soar.

By: Bob Sykes

Bob Sykes — Sun, 19 Feb 2023 13:09:15 +0000

Both China and Russia have deployed hypersonic weapons, and they are in serial production in both countries. Russia has actually used them in Ukraine.

Whether the US can develop and deploy hypersonic weapons remains to be seen, but it is likely they can in the next several years.

I am going to speculate that a hypersonic bomber, if practical, is going to top $20 billion to $50 billion per copy. I base that on the original cost of the B-2 and the likely cost of the B-21.