I've only read a few short blurbs about this. What makes you think the booster doesn't follow a normal ballistic trajectory?

▲

sgc 21 hours ago | parent [-]

That's pretty much the entire point of what people are calling hypersonic missiles. All ballistic missiles fly at hypersonic speeds. The advance is being able to do so at low altitude with maneuverability.

▲

larkost 20 hours ago | parent | next [-]

You are correct, but I should point out that Russia has described its Kinzhal missiles as hypersonic, when they are really more of a traditional ballistic missile fired horizontally. So very fast (Mach 10), but not as maneuverable as what the U.S. has been calling hypersonic.

Since the original story here does not provide many details, we can't know which side of that fence this falls on (assuming it is real).

	▲	justin66 4 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Was there any evidence that the Kinzhals fired, for example, toward Kyiv during the current conflict were fired on a depressed trajectory? I remember reading one account that looked like a plain old interception of a ballistic missile. (which is impressive enough to someone who remembers when "Patriot missile" was not exactly synonymous with excellence)
	▲	fooker 20 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Kinzhals being intercepted all the time could also be propaganda or missile defense having progressed more than publicly known. It's not a great idea in war to assume your enemy is incompetent (even when they are).

▲

justin66 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> That's pretty much the entire point of what people are calling hypersonic missiles.

Most missiles endowed with the "hypersonic" moniker are simply theater ballistic missiles used for standard ballistic missile things, which is part of why I asked the question.

> The advance is being able to do so at low altitude with maneuverability.

Hate to burst your bubble but arms dealers and governments are as capable as anyone else of marketing spin.