Comments: The Dollar on the Move

I did a little bit of checking on the Russian hardware claims that appeared in the second article linked above. The claims were popularist and lacked accuracy:

"[The] supersonic cruise missile has existed for ages, but it operates at a very high level, plunging down on the target almost vertically - very hard to defend against, hence the F14 with tactical nuclear AAMs targeted against the launch vehicle. A supersonic cruise missile at sea level would in no way be stealthy. Firstly, great power is needed to maintain M2.5 supersonic flight at low altitude, there would be an immense rocket or afterburner plume for all to see. It would also be detectable by the satellites, which have been tracking afterburning aircraft for years. Its skin temperature would also be very high, detectable easily by IR detectors. Aegis class cruisers carry a sea version of Patriot and should be able to deal with a low level supersonic threat."

To which "anon" responded: "There's considerably more to it than you give it credit for: "

No news on this wundertorpedo as yet. But, the speed of sound in water is something like 1400m/s and up, so this would be some piece of kit, travelling underwater at 5 times the speed of your average Boeing.

Which puts the military aspects of the article as "read with care", so only journalistically accurate. I'd guess the same might be true for the rest of it - take with a grain of salt!

Posted by Iang at April 3, 2004 10:15 AM
MT::App::Comments=HASH(0x55d6e0d72d38) Subroutine MT::Blog::SUPER::site_url redefined at /home/iang/www/fc/cgi-bin/mt/lib/MT/ line 125.