News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive fail... by jandrewrogers on Friday July 01, 2022 @12:37PM (#31948994)
When developing advanced military capabilities, the US usually runs offensive and defensive programs in parallel. Beyond the "what if our enemy had this" aspect of the conversation, having a good model of what an advanced defensive system might look like informs design choices on the offensive side.

Too many people conflate the US deeming a weapons technology relatively ineffective given the (classified) capability matrix of their other systems with them not having the technology. Hypersonic endo-atmospheric guided missiles, for example, is an area where the US has deep design expertise going back several decades. They were designing and testing hypersonic guided missiles for battlefield(!) use in the 1980s.

Re:US hypersonic missile fails in test- 2nd consecutive fail... by jasonwatkinspdx on Friday July 01, 2022 @03:14PM (#31951310)
This is entirely correct. A basic example is how the US doesn't prioritize SAM systems to the same degree as Russia. This doesn't mean the US isn't capable of producing similar or even superior systems at volume, it's just that it doesn't make sense given the overwhelming scale of the US Air Force. Likewise there's a similar relative de-emphasis on some forms of artillery.

Now after shaking off decades of counter insurgency warfare and pivoting to address a multipolar world instead it's not surprising they want to change up the mix. It doesn't mean there's some dire technology or capability gap fundamentally however.

Military stuff is entire operational systems vs other operational systems, yet nearly all these forum warrior conversations treat it as some sort of swipe left or swipe right pairwise comparison of two pieces of specific equipment.