It became known who in the USA will be engaged in the hypersonic weapon

64
Raytheon wins a $ 63,3 million forward-looking United States Department of Defense Research Department contract in which the corporation will continue to develop a hypersonic tactical program. weapons. One of the main tasks that the United States Air Force and DARPA set for the contractor will be the creation of an advance project, one of the key steps in the development of any new technology.





In the description of the technical specifications of the "extended range tactical weapons" to achieve hypersonic speeds (speeds exceeding 5M), "the rocket accelerates the payload to the peak, after which it separates and flies to its destination without an acceleration unit."

The US military believes that the hypersonic weapon will allow them to reduce the response time to threats and to fire from distances more distant and with an efficiency higher than the current weapons systems allow.

This contract will be another successful case in the growing package of our company's projects related to hypersonic weapons.


- said Dr. Thomas Bussing, vice president Raytheon Advanced Missile Systems.

Raytheon is one of the largest companies operating in the arms and cyber security market. In 2018, its revenues amounted to 27 billions of US dollars. The corporation employs 67 thousand employees, its products are shipped to more than 80 countries.

The company has become one of the main contractors of the United States armed forces, concerned about the development of hypersonic weapons in connection with the lag in this area from Russia and China. America is consistently increasing its financial support for the development of promising technologies in this area.

For example, in the 2018 year, Lockheed Martin made two deals totaling 1,7 billion dollars to make such missiles for the Air Force. And then received a bonus contract in the amount of 846 million dollars - for the same purposes.

Hypersonic weapons are becoming increasingly important to us.


- said Senator Jack Reed, during the hearing of the Committee on the Armed Forces, held with the participation of the United States Air Force General John Heithen from the US Strategic Command.

The senator said the American defense was designed to counter older technology.

As our opponents move to new cruise missiles and develop hypersonic technology, this challenges our ability to provide the means to detect these threats and their effective deterrence methods.


- noted the representative of the Strategic Command at the same hearing.
64 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +11
    5 March 2019 19: 40
    A strange reaction to Russian cartoons. request
    1. +6
      5 March 2019 20: 11
      And remember how we were scared by the US cartoons in the eighties and these cartoons were called Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI, Strategic Defense Initiative), also known as "Star Wars"
      1. 0
        5 March 2019 20: 30
        And then we bought in the end the USSR rested ...
      2. -4
        5 March 2019 20: 44
        Quote: Borik

        Do you remember how we were scared by shtatovskih cartoons in the eighties

        No, I don’t remember. I then all was a damn thing, I studied at school - lessons had to be done.
        1. +1
          6 March 2019 10: 32
          The Americans also did not have a horse lying around in hypersound; now they only make plans on this subject.
  2. +2
    5 March 2019 19: 41
    Funny - "Raytheon is one of the largest companies operating in the arms market, in 2018 its revenues were 27 billion US dollars, the corporation has 67 thousand employees, its products are supplied to more than 80 countries" - what's the product? belay - "the big secret" laughing
    1. +2
      5 March 2019 20: 09
      For example, Mark 82 bombs, which the Saudis drop in Yemen, smashing into pieces civilians.
    2. 0
      5 March 2019 20: 16
      Raytheon has developed both tomahawks and stingers and a bunch of rockets. So, everything is logical.
      1. 0
        5 March 2019 20: 29
        Of course, the channel is checked ... lol
      2. 0
        5 March 2019 20: 30
        Tomahawk is spelled with "a" - and they sold tamahawks for 18 lars in 27? laughing
    3. +4
      5 March 2019 21: 12
      Quote: Bone1
      Funny - "Raytheon is one of the largest companies operating in the arms market, in 2018 its revenues were 27 billion US dollars, the corporation has 67 thousand employees, its products are supplied to more than 80 countries" - what's the product? belay - "the big secret" laughing


      And the entire volume of the American radar field - whose production?
      In the entire American EW - whose production?
      And all the American missiles, missiles, missiles, anti-tank missiles - whose production?
      all American military electronics - whose production?

      What’s the secret here?
      A secret for those who are sitting on a military forum and not a bit interested specifically in military topics?
      For money chtoli sit?
  3. 0
    5 March 2019 19: 41
    Amounts for the development of new weapons systems in the USA are allocated simply astronomical! Why do we have them at least an order of magnitude lower? And the results are sometimes better ...
    1. +3
      5 March 2019 19: 49
      Quote: ltc35
      Why do we have them at least an order of magnitude lower?

      Because the law on lobbying through the Duma could not be carried out. And we do not have separate ministries for each branch of the army, where everyone also wants to live well.
      You’ll understand who in Russia you need to give a bribe to get your price embraced - the bastard Serdyukov smashed all the raspberries.
    2. +5
      5 March 2019 19: 50
      Quote: ltc35
      And the results are sometimes better ...

      Because you can’t buy a scientific school. You can outbid its representatives, but this is a dead end .. As there is a dead end in the development of processors .., the revolution in the USA happened with the arrival of Soviet microelectronics .. they are already old .. Now they are again stupidly increasing the number of transistors and the flicker frequency ... I use everything tighter X86 ..
    3. +3
      5 March 2019 19: 54
      Quote: ltc35
      Why do we have them at least an order of magnitude lower?

      Salaries are lower, raw materials are cheaper, and the state sets the bar both in terms of costs and margin.
    4. +1
      5 March 2019 19: 59
      Quote: ltc35
      Amounts for the development of new weapons systems in the USA are allocated simply astronomical! Why do we have them at least an order of magnitude lower? And the results are sometimes better ...

      They have 2 / 3 go to salaries. And this is a big expense.
      1. +4
        5 March 2019 20: 01
        Quote: Aron Zaavi
        They have 2 / 3 go to salaries.

        Yeah, for the "salaries" of congressmen and other interested parties.
        1. +2
          5 March 2019 20: 19
          Quote: Gray Brother
          Quote: Aron Zaavi
          They have 2 / 3 go to salaries.

          Yeah, for the "salaries" of congressmen and other interested parties.

          Not . It is on the salaries of the employees of the group that won the tender.
          1. +2
            5 March 2019 20: 37
            Quote: Aron Zaavi
            It is on the salaries of the employees of the group that won the tender.

            I counted here and it turned out here that then all employees, up to the floor polishers, receive an average of $ 261194 a year - this is bullshit.
        2. +1
          5 March 2019 20: 28
          Our kickbacks are ridiculous for them ... Yes
    5. -2
      5 March 2019 20: 02
      Why do we have them at least an order of magnitude lower?
      Check out the Vesta ad, then ride a Mercedes laughing
      1. +4
        5 March 2019 20: 07
        Quote: GibSoN
        Check out the Vesta ad, then ride a Mercedes

        And Mercedes has long been producing cars in the class C? Maybe Vesta is comparable with a classmate .. and everything is not so rosy for a German car there ...
        1. -1
          5 March 2019 20: 40
          Maybe Vesta is comparable with a classmate .. and everything is not so rosy for a German car there ...
          It may be so) It only turns out that Vesta is a cheap version of Renault))
          1. +6
            5 March 2019 20: 42
            Quote: GibSoN
            It only turns out that Vesta is a cheap version of Renault))

            You are a humanist ... In the news from Renault .. nothing .. Confused with X-ray .. Do not try to talk on unfamiliar topics .. the request is provided ..
        2. 0
          5 March 2019 21: 14
          Quote: dvina71
          Quote: GibSoN
          Check out the Vesta ad, then ride a Mercedes

          And Mercedes has long been producing cars in the class C? Maybe Vesta is comparable with a classmate .. and everything is not so rosy for a German car there ...


          Those. you do not know the Mercier A, B, C - rulers?
          So compare Vesta with Mercedes V200, for example ...
          1. 0
            5 March 2019 21: 16
            Quote: SovAr238A
            So compare Vesta with Mercedes V200, for example ...

            Starting with a complete set or price?
            Or with the fact that the V200 is a minivan ..?
            1. 0
              5 March 2019 22: 25
              Quote: dvina71
              Quote: SovAr238A
              So compare Vesta with Mercedes V200, for example ...

              Starting with a complete set or price?
              Or with the fact that the V200 is a minivan ..?


              Why on earth?

              You yourself began to "play" in the size classes of cars ...
              To begin with, both cars in the B-segment ...
              and that’s it. on this and legitimize.
              For us, the dimensions are 4410mm plus or minus 1cm - as an indicator of a segment, they are important. and not a complete set or type of a body ...
              Vestav SV or Mears - not generalists?
              1. 0
                5 March 2019 22: 30
                Quote: SovAr238A
                You yourself began to "play" in the size classes of cars ...
                To begin with, both cars in the B-segment ...

                Lada in segment V .. there is no Mercedes in this segment .. Of the Germans, this is Polo ..
                1. 0
                  5 March 2019 23: 00
                  Quote: dvina71
                  Quote: SovAr238A
                  You yourself began to "play" in the size classes of cars ...
                  To begin with, both cars in the B-segment ...

                  Lada in segment V .. there is no Mercedes in this segment .. Of the Germans, this is Polo ..


                  come on?
                  Those. Mercier A-series and B-series - do not match the size of Vesta?

                  Are you talking about cars?
                  1. -1
                    5 March 2019 23: 08
                    Quote: SovAr238A
                    Are you talking about cars?

                    Yes, for sure .. Why do you take the Mersevian gradation and stuff the entire global automobile industry into it?
                    Accepted..
                    A-mini
                    B-small
                    C medium
                    Mercedes starts with C ... except for smart..on in A ..
                    With Vesta in the Polo Only category ..
                    In general, it is customary to compare cars of one category and price niche ..
                    Let’s then compare West with Rolls .. take a walk like that ..
                    1. 0
                      6 March 2019 08: 26
                      Graduation is taken according to the size of the car.
                      Again.
                      The dimensions of Vesta and Mersey A-class (A180) and B-class (B200) are exactly the same.
                      Cars are absolutely the same dimension.
                      Why do you separate them into other classes?
                      Have you ever read the characteristics of these machines?
      2. +1
        5 March 2019 20: 11
        [quote = GibSoN] [quote] Why do we have them at least an order of magnitude lower? [/ quote] Check out Vesta’s ad, then ride a Mercedes: Mercedes doesn’t drive in a war.
        1. -6
          5 March 2019 20: 42
          Mercedes doesn’t roll in a war.
          Are you going to live or what? If anything, do not bother others to live. Rope-soap-suitcase ...
          1. +3
            5 March 2019 20: 43
            Quote: GibSoN
            Mercedes doesn’t roll in a war.
            Are you going to live or what? If anything, do not bother others to live. Rope-soap-suitcase ...

            I tell you about your analogies. Only.
  4. +1
    5 March 2019 19: 43
    with the same success as the fu-35
  5. +1
    5 March 2019 19: 44
    So the new round of the arms race has begun! Only, it will cost us several orders of magnitude cheaper than the United States, knowing their ability to draw even a penny weapon at a price for a ballistic missile! So their hypersonic weapons at a price will defeat America itself.
    1. +2
      5 March 2019 20: 27
      He certainly did not stop, but now the US is rubbing its hands, they want to use the old script.
    2. 0
      5 March 2019 21: 17
      Quote: Thrifty
      So the new round of the arms race has begun! Only, it will cost us several orders of magnitude cheaper than the United States, knowing their ability to draw even a penny weapon at a price for a ballistic missile! So their hypersonic weapons at a price will defeat America itself.


      Well yes. Thanks to government procurement, it’s now more expensive for the army. And fuel, and metals and all ...
      Everything goes 20-30% higher than market exchange prices ...
      moreover, at every stage - kickbacks for winning the tender be prepared.
      For the Terms of Reference are pre-registered for a specific "winner".
      And you continue to think that it will be cheaper for us ...
      1. +2
        5 March 2019 23: 29
        Are you participating in tenders? And can you (know how) "prescribe" TK for a specific supplier? I dare to assure you, it is not easy at all ... Special For "simple" supplies - metal, raw materials, products ... Even for the supply of complex equipment ... "Kickbacks"? Do you want prosecutorial checks? I take part ... And I know how NOT SIMPLE
        1. 0
          6 March 2019 08: 23
          Quote: Mountain Shooter
          Are you participating in tenders? And can you (know how) "prescribe" TK for a specific supplier? I dare to assure you, it is not easy at all ... Special For "simple" supplies - metal, raw materials, products ... Even for the supply of complex equipment ... "Kickbacks"? Do you want prosecutorial checks? I take part ... And I know how NOT SIMPLE


          Participated earlier.
          I wrote the terms of reference from the supplier for the customer as follows. so that the supplier "was".
          I saw TK repeatedly prescribed for a specific and even seeing TK I understood by whom specifically.
          At FAS it was repeatedly at first, when Tz was already completely overwhelmed and we tried to protest them and stopped the procedure.
          Not easy, but very simple.
          Prosecutorial checks? don’t tell me, it’s necessary to be completely reckless and to do such arrogance. so that things go further than the OFAS.
  6. +3
    5 March 2019 19: 51
    The prices are with them! They cause shock. They themselves will win. First, on development, and then on release ... Let them catch up ...
    1. +2
      5 March 2019 20: 24
      They lived and live by the concepts of the printing press, but the rest of the world, they put on a tight binding of GDP and national emissions. currencies, it seems their freebie is over and now there is a snowball over them.
  7. +3
    5 March 2019 20: 12
    For the breakthrough development of technologies for hypersonic flight, simple and understandable fundamental solutions are necessary both for the theoretical justification of such flights and for their practical implementation. However, this is obviously no one owns such knowledge.
    1. +3
      5 March 2019 20: 21
      From theory to practice, in addition to distance, there was always the state of the "brains" and if these "brains" lagged behind, then the distance increased exponentially, I described this in your style. lol
    2. +1
      6 March 2019 06: 28
      However, this is obviously no one owns such knowledge.

      Own.

      American development - X-51 hypersonic rocket with ramjet engine.



      Characteristics in the illustration. Starts with the B-52. After separation of the upper stage, the remaining 700 km flies on a ramjet engine, spending 12 kg of kerosene.



      One of the problems with starting a once-through engine was - in case of a hurricane in the combustion chamber, let the ignition spark pass.

      And Zircon is only in development, the prototype is only on paper and in cartoons.
      1. 0
        6 March 2019 08: 17
        It’s easier to light any burda in a hurricane stream of air. This is not a problem of implementing a well-known physical process, but a problem of implementing system knowledge transferred to solve a specific problem
        1. +1
          6 March 2019 10: 55
          It’s easier to light any burda in a hurricane stream of air.

          These are not my words. This was a problem for the X-51 developers. And they were talking about her, not me.
          After separation of the upper stage, the speed of the X-51 is 3-3,5 Mach. This is necessary so that the incoming air flow creates a high pressure in the direct-flow combustion chamber, that is, an increase in the oxygen concentration per unit volume. But at a speed of Mach 3-3,5, there was a problem to miss the ignition spark.

          In general, you said that at the moment no one has the knowledge to create a hypersonic missile. I have provided the facts that such a rocket already exists. So you began to find fault with the details. This is not serious.
          1. 0
            6 March 2019 11: 07
            Sorry, nothing personal. I do not consider personal issues at all. I'm only interested in science and technology for resolving issues. Therefore, it is not enough to crush the mixture in the nozzle. This process is not enough. It is necessary that the channel ends are not only under high voltage, but also with high current. Then we get a well-known physical effect with a set of conditions conducive to the goals. However, this is far from all.
            1. +1
              6 March 2019 11: 20
              However, this is far from all.

              But the X-51 flies, which means that all the problems encountered in the process of creating the rocket, by the developers, have been resolved.

              And the X-51 is not a combat missile, it is a prototype. It fulfills all the characteristics needed for a military missile.
              1. 0
                6 March 2019 11: 29
                If you think that the desired results in terms of speed and maneuvering have been achieved, then success for you and all further.
                1. +1
                  6 March 2019 11: 32
                  If you think...

                  Do you have a bad reading? I specifically mentioned that the X-51 is not a military missile in the series. And a prototype on which characteristics are worked out and emerging problems are eliminated.
  8. +3
    5 March 2019 20: 15
    Nothing new. Raytheon has developed both tomahawks and stingers and a bunch of rockets. It would be logical that they will continue to move America’s military-industrial complex in terms of missiles.
    From myself, personally, I wish them to close this project in the same way as Zumvalt, Comanche, SAU crusader and many others.
    1. +1
      5 March 2019 20: 18
      The main thing is that their appetite is very good, let them feed them.
  9. +1
    5 March 2019 20: 17
    “Hypersonic weapons are becoming increasingly important to us.”


    They pretend to be pouty and important turkeys, but in fact plucked crows ...
  10. +2
    5 March 2019 20: 35
    You can wish for different things. The reality is that units will survive and remain dominant. Therefore, give my best, but I have reached my goal. Even if they do not take advantage of the most effective solutions, there will still be conjugate and indirect positive
  11. +2
    5 March 2019 20: 40
    Usually breakthrough discoveries are made far from inflated administrative structures. Therefore, we will see how they are going to solve these issues. The main thing is on what theoretical foundations they will be based
    1. +1
      5 March 2019 21: 05
      Therefore, we will see how they are going to solve these issues.

      Simple questions:
      "It" can be bought? Where to bring?
  12. 0
    5 March 2019 20: 48
    Raytheon wins $ 63,3 million DARPA Advanced Defense Research Projects Office contract under which the corporation will further develop its tactical hypersonic weapons program

    It’s here that we can develop hypersound for such money, and in the FSA you will draw a sketch for the maximum amount
    1. AAK
      +1
      5 March 2019 20: 59
      So it goes on about the development of the concept, it is the sketches "Raytheon" will draw for the specified money
  13. 0
    5 March 2019 20: 55
    For such money, even the most ardent patriots from the camp of American enemies will work for them
  14. +2
    5 March 2019 22: 23
    Specialists should take control of the body movements of company employees. Their brains are clearly not enough. They will seek a delicate place among ours. Man is weak.
  15. 0
    6 March 2019 02: 01
    5M ... ??? Are you ... seriously? We just started with Mach 27, and you ...? And, the rest ... as the Pentagon cuts, budget funds, we know) Wait, new railguns, Zumwalt, F-35 and other ship's laser guns.
  16. 0
    6 March 2019 11: 16
    I find that many people are completely unaware that the technology of hyper speeds is not only the technology of manufacturing the corresponding equipment and devices. This is, first of all, the technology of analysis of such superdynamically changing physical processes, and therefore the mathematical technology of analysis of such processes should also be changed
  17. 0
    6 March 2019 11: 42
    Quote: Serjio
    For example, Mark 82 bombs, which the Saudis drop in Yemen, smashing into pieces civilians.

    Or missiles "Standard" of all modifications, including SM-3 and SM-6

    Quote: Romeo Tarzanov
    5M ... ??? Are you ... seriously? We just started with Mach 27, and you ...?

    Would you, my friend, taught materiel. And then you have a mess in your head. 27 mach and they develop on their ballistic missiles. But bringing the direct-flow tank with hypersonic speeds to stable operation is a completely different matter. And then it makes no difference that with us this winged one will fly at a speed of 9M, and they have 7M. The main thing is it should STABLE to fly