madrat wrote:wrightwing wrote:The point is hypersonic ISR/strike on time sensitive targets.
This in spades. It's loitering ability on task more than likely far exceeds SR-71 even as it moves much higher and faster.
Devil's advocate wise, I don't buy this either, it's an order of magnitude different world of technological proliferation since the SR-71 mattered, and was actually a vital set of eyes.
Plus there are several good options for fairly quick strike, or loiter-strike, especially with recoverable or expendable dedicated loiter weapons, that can also provide excellent real-time ISR (including expendable LEO satellite target-quality data), and re-targeting on the fly, and that can be done short of war. So where's the vacant niche this aircraft needs to fill, because nothing else can? And if those get shot down?
As much as it may annoy USAF brass the army
will soon have a forward deployed ~2,800 km hypersonic delivery system in the western Pacific and eastern Europe, for even faster regional time-limited deep-strike capability, and probably quicker than USAF can get it done. And backed by a 750 km tactical PrSM which will also have to travel out at hypersonic speeds to reach a target that far out.
And if China or Russia can readily shoot down a satellite in space which orbits at hypersonic speed, I see them having little trouble developing a SAM that can get up in front of this aircraft to kill it. Sensors, comms and SA are also totally different now, so the concept of 'loitering' with a turning-circle wider than a small country, also makes no tactical sense to me.
Plus things with engines that go really fast, tend to run out of fuel at a rate proportional to their speed, even if they do cover a long distance quickly. So when you say 'loiter' I'm thinking maintained presence, but certainly will not be and can not be the case over a hostile country, where there would be some call to use this. If the US flew F-22A and F-35A over Iran what could they effectively do about that, directly? Not much that will help them.
So i don't buy the idea that this is a currently critical means of developing detailed ISR data that can't be done in several other ways. Long-range sensor technology and imagery plus comms networks are ubiquitous.
With the SR-71 LO design, RAM, and lower quality EO systems of the era, that provided the SR-71 altitude, speed and time to detection and tracking advantage. But I don't see how this aircraft will have such advantages.
Looking at it, it could be mistaken for a faster-breed of maneuvering practice target-drone. Does anyone seriously doubt the US Services could easily detect this early at long range, track it, and kill it with relative ease? So why can't an enemy just do the same thing?
It could however act as a stealthy "Wommera".
Wommera (noun)
The spear-thrower, or throwing-stick, of the aborigines of Australia.

We named our major weapon-testing area after that. It's a lever that allows spears to be thrown further, and faster, using more leverage, for better speed, 'ballistics', and penetration. This aircraft could fling a cheaper smaller hypersonic weapon further, with much more speed and altitude, but it won't then penetrate the airspace, it launches with a lot of standoff, from LR-SAMS, and turns away right after launch and egresses survivably.
As a conventional standoff stealthy strike platform, this makes good sense for a surprise preemptive strike option.