That is quite the feat. How the hell do you conceal/mount something on a hypersonic vehicle and not have it completely wreck the aerondynamics during deployment?
This test is a mystery with both the various US and the Chinese version of events sounding like either bullshit or reworking 60\70s batshit ideas.
The Chinese claim it was merely a "spaceplane" test. But the dates do not match up with a known and announced Chinese spaceplane test. There was a discrepancy with launch numbers that the likes of Dr Jeffrey Lewis (of the arms control wonk blog) suggested was a possible launch vehicle for this vehicle. Spaceplanes included the obvious STS (Shuttle) and Buran. But also include the X-15, SpaceShipTwo etc. It was an idea floated in the 50s and 60s as a way of "bombing" countries but on the whole you get vastly more mass by launching on the minimum energy trajectory that ICBMs mostly follow.
US versions have variations on the story seem to be closer to it being a FOBS (fractional orbital bombardment) trajectory when you punt the payload with enough velocity to enter orbit then deorbit from a funky direction, usually over the Antarctic to the US. They also include the manoeuvring and deployment of a payload aka missile or nuclear weapon. FOBS were a big idea back in the 60s to allow the USSR to make a first strike on the US undetected by the US north facing radars, usually it involved an attack with high altitude detonations to fry the US defences with EMP. They were made totally obsolete by SLBMs, radars to defend SLBMs and a radar in Elgin AFB Florida to track inbound FOBS attacks so one of the most powerful radars in the world is currently running to track this "super sneaky" attack that uses to seriously payload limiting technologies (FOBS and hypersonic glide vehicles).
Ejecting or ditching something at "hypersonic" speeds is not really all that. It already happens with ICBMs deploying various "penetration aids" (not as much fun as they sound). Also re-entering vehicles on Earth Mars and other planets ditch drop heat shields and deploy various bits and bobs at what is technically hypersonic velocities. Just the air density that matters. There is a huge difference between something moving at 10 000kmh and firing a guided weapon at 20km altitude and something moving at perhaps 5000kmh and firing at 70km altitude.
China and Russia seem to be building some very expensive and exotic systems to avoid the US mid course interceptors in Alaska. They are expensive as fuck and the US only has about 44 of them. They were designed to intercept a future DPRK attack on the US, but Russia and China seem to think they have serious potential to expand more cheaply. Russia has built a new hypersonic glide vehicle warhead, avangard that is supposed to be able to come in low and glide round the US Alaska defences. The Chinese may (probably may not) being going for that via the south pole.
The mass penalties are huge.
Anyway the takeaways are:
Something was tested everyone is probably fibbing about what.
All the possibilities seem to be dated ideas re-animated to avoid the supposedly shit defences in Alaska.
Chinese and Russian Defence establishments are even more paranoid than the US ones.
www.ft.com
www.forbes.com
