Hypersonic Weapons: Evolution or Revolution?

Hypersonic strike systems have become a driving force in the development of offensive weapons. Academic literature offers two perspectives on the prospects of their impact on the military-strategic situation. One approach tends to position hypersonic weapons as a revolutionary technology, while the other proceeds from the premise that hypersonic strike systems represent an evolutionary development of offensive systems. The objective of this article is to establish the specifics and limits of the hypersonic weapons impact on the existing military-strategic balance. The paper analyzes the problem of hypersonic weapons classification, their role and place in military strategy, as well as the evolution and prospects of the Russian, U.S. and Chinese programs on hypersonic weapons. The authors conclude that the advantages of hypersonic weapons cannot automatically be transformed into a guaranteed success amid a full-scale military conflict and are largely available to other strike systems based on less advanced technological solutions. The key scenario, where the benefits of hypersonic weapons can be realized the most, is a limited conflict, in which they are used for the surprise defeat of highly-protected priority targets and the establishment of theater domination. This is evidenced by the hypersonic development programs of the leading military powers – Russia, the United States, and China, – each of which is more or less committed to developing medium- and short-range systems. The implications of the unfolding hypersonic arms race for strategic stability are ambiguous. On the one hand, forward deployment of such systems increases the risks of escalation; reduced flight time to enemy strategic infrastructure facilities encourages the adversary to adopt more aggressive retaliation postures based on the principle of launch-on-warning rather than post-attack. On the other hand, the possession of hypersonic weapons by both sides in the same theater increases their mutual vulnerability and can thus play a stabilizing role.

1. NAS (2004). Evaluation of the National Aerospace Initiative. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. 146 p.

2. Acton J. (2014). Serebryanaya pulya? Pravil'nye voprosy o "neyadernom bystrom global'nom udare" [Silver Bullet? Asking the Right Questions About Conventional Prompt Global Strike]. Moscow: Carnegie Moscow Center. 228 p.

3. Arbatov A.G. (2020). Vooruzheniya i diplomatiya [Arms and Diplomacy]. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. Vol. 64. No. 6. P. 9–23.

4. Arbatov A.G. (2021). Global'naya stabil'nost' v yadernom mire [Global Stability in a Nuclear World]. Akademiya nauk i atomnaya otrasl': Nauchnye sessii Obshchego sobraniya chlenov RAN i Obshchikh sobranij otdelenij RAN. Dekabr' 2020. Moscow: Russian Academy of Sciences. P. 341–361.

5. Bogdanov K.V. (2019). Giperzvukovoe vysokotochnoe oruzhie, strategicheskaya stabil'nost' i kontrol' nad vooruzheniyami [Hypersonic Precision Weapons, Strategic Stability and Arms Control]. Ezhegodnik SIPRI 2018: vooruzheniya, razoruzhenie i mezhdunarodnaya bezopasnost'. Moscow: Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations. P. 624–639.

6. Bogdanov K.V. (2020). Giperzvukovye sistemy [Hypersonic Systems]. In: Arbatov A.G. (ed.) Kontrol' nad vooruzheniyami v novyh voenno-politicheskih i tekhnologicheskih usloviyakh. Moscow: Primakov National Research Institute of World Economy and International Relations. P. 48–58.

7. Borisov A.V. (2020). Giperzvukovye sredstva porazheniya: aktual'naya problema protivoraketnoj oborony [Hypersonic Weapons: A Topical Issue for Missile Defense]. XXI Vserossijskaya nauchno-prakticheskaya konferenciya «Problemy razvitiya i primeneniya sredstv protivovozdushnoj oborony na sovremennom etape. Sredstva protivovozdushnoj oborony Rossii i drugih stran mira, ih sravnitel'nyj analiz». 9 oktyabrya 2020. Sekcii 1–8: materialy konferencii. Yaroslavl': Yaroslavl Higher Military School of Air Defense. P. 21–27.

8. Brockmann K., Stefanovich D. (2022). Hypersonic Boost-Glide Systems and Hypersonic Cruise Missiles: Challenges for the Missile Technology Control Regime. Stockholm: Stockholm International Peace Research Institute. 25 p.

9. Bunn M. (1984). Technology of Ballistic Missile Reentry Vehicles. In: Tsipis K., P. Janeway P. (eds) Review of US Military Research and Development. McLean (VA): Pergamon-Brassey’s International Defense Publishers. P. 67–116.

10. Chekov A.D., Krivolapov O.O., Bogdanov K.V., Stefanovich D.V., Klimov V.A. (2023). Sbit' nel'zya promahnut'sya: evolyuciya PRO i eyo posledstviya dlya kontrolya nad vooruzheniyami [Shoot down cannot miss: the evolution of missile defense and its implications for arms control]. Valdai Discussion Club. 27 p.

11. Christensen H., Korda M. (2022). Chinese nuclear forces. SIPRI Yearbook 2022: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security. Stockholm: Stockholm Institute of Peace Research Studies, 2022. P. 380–397.

12. Czelusta M. Business as Usual: An Assessment of Donald Rumsfeld’s Transformation Vision and Transformation’s Prospects for the Future. Garmisch-Partenkirchen: The George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies, 2018. 57 p.

13. Cohen A. (1996). A Revolution in Warfare. Foreign Affairs. Vol. 75. No. 2. P. 37–54.

14. Curran E.T. (2001). Scramjet Engines: The First Forty Years. Journal of Propulsion and Power. No. 6 (17). P. 1138–1148.

15. Fitzsimonds R., Van Tol J. (1994). Revolutions in Military Affairs. Joint Force Quarterly. No. 4. P. 24–31.

16. Fomin V.M., Aul'chenko S.M., Zvegincev V.I. (2010). Polyet giperzvukovogo letatel'nogo apparata s pryamotochnym vozdushno-reaktivnym dvigatelem po rikoshetiruyushchej traektorii [Flight of a Hypersonic Aircraft with Ramjet Engine Along Ricochet Trajectory]. Prikladnaya mekhanika i tekhnicheskaya fizika. Vol. 51. No. 4. P. 85–94.

17. Gronlund L., Wright D. (1992). Depressed Trajectory SLBMs: A Technical Evaluation and Arms Control Possibilities. Science & Global Security. Vol. 3. No. 1–2. P. 101–159.

18. IISS. (2023). The Military Balance 2023. London: International Institute of Strategic Studies. 508 p.

19. Karaganov S.A., Suslov D.V. (2019). Novoe ponimanie i puti ukrepleniya mnogostoronnej strategicheskoj stabil'nosti [The New Understanding and Ways to Enhance Multilateral Strategic Stability]. Moscow: National Research University Higher School of Economics. 2019. 54 p.

20. Karako T., Dahlgren M. (2022). Complex Air Defense: Countering the Hypersonic Missile Threat. Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies and Rowman & Littlefield. 62 p.

21. Klaire M. (2019). An ‘Arms Race in Speed’: Hypersonic Weapons and the Changing Calculus of Battle. Arms Control Today. Vol. 49. No. 5. P. 6–13.

22. Lebow R.N. (1985). Assured Strategic Stupidity: The Quest for Ballistic Missile Defense. Journal of International Affairs. Vol. 39. No. 1. P. 57–80.

23. Marshall A. (1993). Some Thoughts on Military Revolutions – Second Version. Office of Net Assessment Memorandum. 8 p. URL: https://stacks.stanford.edu/file/druid:yx275qm3713/yx275qm3713.pdf (accessed: 09.03.2023).

24. Marsh B.Y.D. (1985). The Probability of Accidental Nuclear War: a Graphical Model of the Ballistic Missile Early Warning System: Master’s Thesis. Monterey, California: Naval Postgraduate School. 78 p.

25. Rogov S.M. (2021). Global'naya i regional'naya stabil'nost' v yadernom mire [Global and Regional Stability in a Nuclear World]. Vestnik Rossijskoj akademii nauk. Vol. 91. No. 6. P. 571–584.

26. Rautenbach P. (2020). The Threat of Conventional Weapons to Nuclear Security: A New Reality for Deterrence. Journal of International Analytics. Vol. 11. No. 4. P. 56–71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46272/2587-8476-2020-11-4-56-71.

27. Reny S. (2020). Nuclear-Armed Hypersonic Weapons and Nuclear Deterrence. Strategic Studies Quarterly. Vol. 14. No. 4. P. 47–73.

28. Savel'ev A.G., Aleksandriya O.M. (2022). Edinstvo sredstv i raskhozhdenie celej [Unity of Means and Divergence of Goals]. Rossiya v global'noj politike. Vol. 20. No. 2. P. 166–182.

29. Speier R.H. et al. (2017). Hypersonic missile nonproliferation: hindering the spread of a new class of weapons. Santa Monica: RAND. 133 p.

30. Stefanovich D. (2020) Proliferation and threats of reconnaissance-strike systems: a Russian perspective. The Nonproliferation Review. Vol. 27. No. 1–3. P. 97–107.

31. Stefanovich D. (2020). Russkij giperzvuk: chto, kogda i pochemu? [Russian Hypersonics: What, When, and Why?] Novyj oboronnyj zakaz. Strategii. No. 2 (61). P. 52–55.

32. Sun Y. (2022). Asia-Pacific Security: A Chinese Perspective. Asia-Pacific Regional Security Assessment 2022: Key Developments and Trends. London: International Institute for Strategic Studies. P. 38–57.

33. Tracy C., Wright D. (2020). Modeling the Performance of Hypersonic Boost-Glide Missiles. Science & Global Security. Vol. 28. No. 3. P. 135–170.

34. Woolf A. (2021). Conventional Prompt Global Strike and Long-Range Ballistic Missiles: Background and Issues. Washington: Congressional Research Service. 51 p. URL: https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R41464/52 (accessed: 09.03.2023).

35. Woolf A. (2022). Russia’s Nuclear Weapons: Doctrine, Forces, and Modernization. Washington: Congressional Research Service. 43 p.

36. Zhao T. (2020). Conventional long-range strike weapons of US allies and China’s concerns of strategic instability. The Nonproliferation Review. Vol. 27. No. 1–3. P. 109–122.