This is a Chinese SR-71 Blackbird!

The WZ-8 is considered the Chinese SR-71.
Is it true?
Yes... and no. Let's see together!
Hypersonic Playlist:
• Hypersonic Weapons Ris...
#WZ8 #SR71
Join this channel to support it:
/ @millennium7historytech
Support me on Patreon / millennium7
One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com/paypalme/Mille...
Join the Discord server / discord
Buy an Aircraft Model at Air Models! airmodels.net/?aff=173
----------------------------
Ask me anything!
Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below!
forms.office.com/r/LNPQtf3Tc0
--------------------
Visit the subreddit!
/ millennium7lounge
---------------------
All images and additional video segments contained in the Thumbnails and/or B-roll segments are used in strict compliance with the appropriate permissions and licenses required from the source and in accordance with the KZbin Partner Program, Community guidelines & KZbin terms of service.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

The WZ-8 is considered the Chinese SR-71. Is it true? Yes... and no. Let's see together! Hypersonic Playlist: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y4mcpmxooZeqiZY #WZ8 #SR71 Join this channel to support it: kzbin.info/door/VDkfkGRzo0qcZ8AkB4TMuwjoin Support me on Patreon www.patreon.com/Millennium7 One off donation with PayPal www.paypal.com/paypalme/Millennium7star Join the Discord server discord.gg/6CuWEWuhsk Buy an Aircraft Model at Air Models! airmodels.net/?aff=173 ---------------------------- Ask me anything! Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below! forms.office.com/r/LNPQtf3Tc0 -------------------- Visit the subreddit! www.reddit.com/r/Millennium7Lounge/ --------------------- All images and additional video segments contained in the Thumbnails and/or B-roll segments are used in strict compliance with the appropriate permissions and licenses required from the source and in accordance with the KZbin Partner Program, Community guidelines & KZbin terms of service.

[@Fish-ub3wn]

imho the weight center is between the clamps. the classical delta dart is very pointy and wll stabilize itself n low earth orbit. remember there is no sharp line between space and troposphere, it just fades away, so pretty big as for atmospherc hypersonc flight control surfaces might be quite welcome in near earth orbit conditions.

[@mohammadsalah3319]

I think that you are a great observer and your videos are the best on KZbin

[@deven6518]

I think it might be designed to enter low altitude orbit or more likely skimming the upper atmosphere, using the control surfaces to make a circular path over the target area. That may also be the reason for the dual rocket motor, using the of center power to help turn

[@chitaegandalalake263]

. China Unveiled New Hypersonic Combat Drone With Stealth Design Can Hunt US F-22, F-35😱❗🥺😢😭 @ kzbin.info/www/bejne/fHnYkqSoptZqY9E

[@douginorlando6260]

China leans towards solid rocket engines. The two engines are likely used at different times. For example … 1… if recon over Taiwan, the first rocket gets it to M 2.8, it crosses Taiwan, then after it passed Taiwan & slowed to M 0.9, makes a turn at subsonic speed, then uses the second engine to get to M 2.8 and continues the mission, then lands. 2… if used as forward observer for targeting, then 1 rocket engine is used to reach striking range and the second engine is used to accelerate to M 2.8 at 100,000 feet for when it is actually watching the target area. 3… the H6 launch could be from 200 km East of Taiwan. The second engine fires when it gets it close to Taiwan to perform recon at high speed & altitude, then coast to landing base in China. If Taiwan chose to respond by attacking the H6 200 km from Taiwan, then that escalation would be a Clint Eastwood Dirty Harry moment. 4… this vehicle is begging for a launch high altitude and high speed. It would effectively be adding one more engine to it’s capability. And it’s one more reason China is likely designing a platform to launch heavy payloads at extremely high speed and high altitude. I.e optimized to operate in safe airspace, no stealth, no long range; just launching any heavy payload at 20,000 to 30,000 Meters and up to well over Mach 2. This includes launching many types of missiles already in their inventory. 5… the second engine could be used to evade/outrun an incoming missile

[@guitarazn90210]

This is the best theory I've heard so far. The lack of reaction control thrusters probably indicates that the PLAAF wanted a cost-effective drone they can field in huge numbers.

[@ELMS]

I really enjoy your analysis, especially things that would never occur to me. Example: Rocket powered aircraft don’t generate much electricity. That would never have crossed my mind, even though it’s obvious. Excellent videos!!

[@bastadimasta]

Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet has a weird solution to that issue.

[@epiphone5696]

The v1 rocket used a steam powered generator

[@oLevLovesLove]

Some rockets have pre-burner cycle to drive their fuel pump, it can also drive a generator.

[@comediangj4955]

@@bastadimasta now imagine, when you first saw the me 163, you only see the front. I can tell you it was quite hilarious imagining it flying with only that tiny propeller.

[@bastadimasta]

@@oLevLovesLove I am pretty sure that this aircrafts engine is neither half nor full cycle. It must have some pressurized gas for that. A lithium ion battery should do fine.

[@Inkling777]

Your theory makes sense. Anti-radiation missiles systems have to provoke an opponent to radiate even if only briefly. This drone could do that.

[@tomt4181]

What if the other side had autonomous drones in the water that could be 100 Mi away from the fleet and that's where China's drone would report as a location of the fleet. Fight drone with drone. Maybe even a couple of radar drones that don't radio any information back to the ship but act as a Decoy for China's missiles?🤔🤨😁

[@stanlogan7504]

This theory was in the book Red Storm Rising.

[@donscheid97]

Ha. I know exactly what you are talking about but to read it, it sounds like something to fight nuclear radiation. I guess we should try to use a term like anti-radar. In the military, we just used the acronym HARM missile. No need for confusion. But your point is well taken.

[@wilsonli5642]

Yeah, also explains why they wouldn't bother to make it stealthier when it should have been relatively simple to implement.

[@Phoenix_VR]

Sir.....your videos are a treasure trove of analysis. Respect.

[@lostbirdsproduction]

BS.

[@kenneth8534]

Not all of them.

[@cannonfodder4376]

Never made the mental connection between the WZ-8 and the Virgin Galactic SpaceShipTwo Unity!!! You may very well be the first KZbinr to make that connection. Quite significant differences in attitude control between them though. So I do have some reservations regarding it being an effective sub orbital platform but given its job... will probably be enough. Will probably not know its true roll for the PLAAF but your theory is the best I have heard. Excellent analysis M7*.

[@112313]

In addition to it being a decoy target as park of a strike package, there's another possibility....a high supersonic target drone for any hypersonic missile target practice.

[@bernardb8045]

This is my first video of yours and I am pleasantly impressed. Very thorough evaluation and analysis. Thank you for being so professional

[@TeeDubzz]

Interesting analysis! Determining the specific operating conditions based on the drones structure definitely poses some questions of “what is the fundamental purpose of this craft?”

[@vickydroid]

Bravo, it was like the final exposition of M.Poirrot albeit with an Italian flavour, I followed your reasoning and almost simultaneously found myself asking questions,"power, control, gimballed nozzles .etc" which you answered almost uncannily as if it were a conversation. You may be way off course in your conclusion but it was fun getting there.

[@avronaut]

To be honest: These leading edges do not look "razor thin“. Also, for a hypersonic plane, I find those primitive mounts that disrupt airflow very strange. Likewise, the control surfaces are quite large. The plane gives me the impression of a glider analogous to the space shuttle. If those things fly at all 😎

[@prjndigo]

It looks like a disposable target drone someone shoved wheels onto. All sorts of different gear bay hatches and NONE of them are safe to use above speed of sound.

[@hypocritehater1673]

It hurts to know the truth😢

[@williamforbes6291]

You think their actually supposed to be razors lol

[@williamforbes6291]

He literally explained it as thin But your sp dumb you got distracted by razor in a mere expression

[@avronaut]

@@williamforbes6291 Check leading edges from actual high speed planes.

[@srijanme]

I love your analysis and your interpretation. You are so unbiased unlike many experts who are totally biased so their videos are not even worth watching.

[@thelovertunisia]

This is amazing. Very good insight. I think you nailed it spot on.

[@markredacted8547]

I love the detailed videos, as soon as you said the Mach number at 20,000m it clicked, rockets don't suck external air and I started pointing to my roof. Because that's obviously a normal reaction to indicate higher altitude to a pre-recorded video 😂 Love your work

[@Aerospaceman]

I'm sure the Department of Defense is looking at this issue, if, they should be! This aircraft can become a threat if used as a one way ballistic missile, but have to believe this is for feedback of information to flight following missiles. The vehicle has limited flight characteristics and I don't believe it can be hypersonic with the amount of heat applied to the leading edge of the wings and the amount of shearing stresses and most likely the structural compression. At high speed those flight surfaces may become unuseable? I agree with what your saying - good job! Good Video!

[@GoSlash27]

The leading edges and structure of that thing don't suggest hypersonic flight to me. Also it seems to me that if the Chinese wanted to trigger the defenses of a CVBG, it would be much easier to do it with an actual ballistic missile.

[@tshavfengvang7831]

Will likely be supersonic but definitely not hypersonic!

[@hamonuryams6388]

After just 1 look of the vehicle, noticing its angles and the 2 conventional rocket jets in the rear. I almost spit out my drink in laughter after he said the article stated it could go hypersonic 😂

[@tshavfengvang7831]

@@hamonuryams6388 Lmao! Damn the Chinese for making a mockery of the SR-71 a fine piece of engineering they stole the design and copy it. They can't even find a suitable engine for their high end jet fighters and now they said they also have a spy plane going hypersonic. It's a piece of junk Made In China. This is more like garbage!

[@janusjones6519]

@@hamonuryams6388 It’s so wonderful that the comments have so many world class experts who totally knows what they are talking.

[@shanekhiu9884]

Could be in thin atmosphere where the air is thin and there’s low friction.

[@andrewdewar8159]

Wow, a coherent and knowledgeable analysis.

[@viktor_v-ughnda_vaudville_476]

Dude your observations are phenomenal! You seriously know your stuff. Very clever indeed well played sir!

[@solreinecke6084]

This channel : where theory and reality collide 👍

[@NoBSMusicReviews]

Great and fascinating analysis!

[@michaeldenesyk3195]

It reminds me of the D-21 SENIOR BOWL Drone that could be launched from the SR-71 or other platforms. One was lost over China.

[@jwickerszh]

But his had a ramjet engine rather than rocket engines. If this was indeed a drone for atmospheric flight at high speed it would use that.

[@randyhavard6084]

If they are using rocket engines they may be planning on using a much higher altitude, like the x15. I didn't notice if it had any control thrusters that maybe needed at extremely high altitudes.

[@randyhavard6084]

I should watch the whole video before making comments

[@JimzAuto]

@@randyhavard6084 welcome to being a typical youtube viewer :)

[@truxpratt3306]

Great video; thanks! I love your channel and your analysis. I thought I knew things. Then I watched your videos and I realized that I didn't know much at all.

[@Pincer88]

Very interesting video again. My immediate reaction was also: the PLAAF has solved the overt-the-horizon sensor-shooter (killchain) problem for their very long range Area Denial/Anti Acces and carrier-killer DF-21 missiles. And if so, it is proof that the Chinese do more than simply playing the copy cat. One thing I'm still a it puzzled about though: if this suborbital craft wants to relay useful data back, it should be able to geolocate a carrier battle group pretty accurately for the AD/A2 batteries to target singular ships. I suppose that disabling the kill chain in US doctrine also involves eliminating the Chinese equivalent of GPS. And that would mean (I'm thinking out loud now) that the craft has got to have A. rugged inertial navigation and B. sensors that can triangulate a position (or maybe between 2 or 3 of these UAVs via datalink) and finally C. a powerful datalink of sorts that sends the targetting data back to the long range missile batteries. All of that is probably not impossible, but it should pose a series of technological challenges, wouldn't you say?

[@anuvisraa5786]

a possibility is that an AWACS plane or surface station operates as rele/ reference point for the drone. at 80 000 m of altitude the line of sight is over 1000 km

[@Pincer88]

@@anuvisraa5786 Good point. Didn't think of that. And the AWAQCS would be operating far enough to be out of reach of fighter-interceptors and within its own air defence bubble. Smart thinking!

[@matthewsheeran]

You dont need continuous transmit power either: you can pulse or burst transmit every minute 5min 10min etc etc. then your transmitter will last a lot longer on batteries after the rocket burn generator is over.

[@Pincer88]

@@matthewsheeran I see. I'm not sure how much data such bursts could contain, but simple grid coordinates would suffice. I suppose that since the transmitters only have got to be directed rearward (mainly), the power required can be used more economical as well (as opposed to an ominidirectional antenna). Either way, if M7's analysis is correct (it certainly sounds very plausible) the Chinese have produced an asymmetrical and clever way to work around their potential killchain problem. The USN and allied navies seem to have yet another challenge they will have to solve, since I cannot imagine anyone considering launching very expensive Standard SM-3A or SM-6As at these - which would saturate the air defences even faster when enegaged with DF-21s or similar missiles. I can also now understand why American concepts like NGAD and the USN F/A-XX conceive of directed energy weapons (be it laser or EMP) and put so much emphasis on range, speed and payload. But since the Chinese UAV is already here and neither one of the concepts is near production or entering service, I fear the PLAN and PLAAF have a solid advantage as we speak. An erie perspective.

[@LOL-zu1zr]

@@Pincer88 the warheads use sensors on itself for terminal guidance.

[@Avscout]

I wonder if it could be a test article for a future vehicle? Much like the lifting bodies or the supersonic test vehicles the US created over the 50s and 60s. Perhaps this is a platform that will lead to something in the future that looks totally different but will have more robust operational ability.

[@billsmith5166]

Sounds spot on. It points out a HUGE problem in defending against an attack. It's another problem for lasers in defense because pretty soon there will need to be dedicated nuclear power plants on ships simply to supply huge capacitors that will provide the pulses necessary for rapid fire - if that's ever even possible with lasers in the first place.

[@MultiZirkon]

Hah! I was thinking reaction wheels (or "big gyros") in the pause you had before "What about reaction wheels?" -- You made my day ;-) But excellent analysis from you as allways!

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

😁

[@ghostindamachine]

Perhaps these drones are expendable. To be used as electronic warfare platform perhaps? Though that would likely require substantial onboard power generation. Perhaps the WZ-8 has a similar tactical use like the US made ADM-160 MALD. I can imagine, like you said, the WZ-8 performing suborbital flights. Covering for hypersonic, maneuvering glide vehicles. So the opposing forces radar and air-defense is overwhelmed and saturate with incoming targets. But which one is the real hypersonic glide vehicle? Edit: my thoughts are that this drone can mimic the full flight path of manoeuvring hypersonic glide vehicle. From suborbital all the way down to sea level.

[@92HazelMocha]

It's especially dangerous because the vast majority of surface to air platforms can't engarge targets that high. So the fairly limited stock of the missiles than can would be quickly expended.

[@todharter5195]

I am dubious. The MALD is cheap and fits on any old hardpoint, heck an A-10 can carry a dozen of them, at least. B-52 can carry MANY MALD and they're in the $150k price range. This thing is MUCH bigger, and thus far less useful. In fact its actual radar signature would be hard to disguise, plus it lacks power generation (rockets do not generate electricity). All that works against the idea. So, yes it can fly much higher/faster/maybe further than a MALD, but few, if any, aircraft fly in that regime, so what would it be pretending to be? Not a J-20, not any other fighter or bomber the Chinese currently seem to have. Being a fake D-17 reentry vehicle is not a terrible concept, but even that doesn't seem to entirely fit with the facts.

[@lagrangewei]

@@92HazelMocha there are no anti defence platform that can engage a target at hypersonic speed, so there is no point in building a decoy, as it is already impossible to shoot down, that is why US want missile in korea, you have to shoot them before they get hypersonic. so I don't believe this is a decoy, also it doesn't make sense, if it can perform the flight characteristic, you can turn it into a dumb bomb by slamming it into something for kinetic kill, it wouldn't be a decoy, but an operational bomb if it has this level of control, so I don't buy the idea that it can perform hypersonic flight of a similiar profile.

[@suisinghoraceho2403]

@@todharter5195 It doesn’t need to pretend to be anything. It just needs to signal to the carrier group that something is coming and they have to turn on active emissions to figure out what exactly. In terms of cost, it is always relative to the cost of your targets (this is the beauty of cheap drone. They are cheaper than the missiles you use to down them). Even if this plane costs hundreds of millions, it is still way cheaper than the carriers they can help disable or destroy. I think the only down side of this is what do they do if the carrier group doesn’t bite and remains radiation silent. Do the Chinese has a counter play? Even the drones can be recovered, the ballistic missiles following likely can’t.

[@todharter5195]

@@suisinghoraceho2403 Honestly, it seems to me like a D-17 and a WZ-8 are not likely to be RADICALLY different in price tag. It seems fairly odd to me that you would build your decoys using a completely different technology than the actual missiles. A real missile would just as easily force a carrier group to go active, would it not? And it is a real weapon, that doesn't require a whole other budget to develop! And yeah, it has to emulate SOMETHING dangerous if it is itself harmless, otherwise it will surely be ignored! This is again why I say an actual D-17 or whatever would perform this theorized mission better, you CANNOT ignore it, and CANNOT tell it apart from the 'real thing' because it IS the real thing! The best lie is the truth, as we say. And in terms of neutralizing IADS, which Aegis certainly qualifies as, these are standard tactics, you simply send in attackers, the opponent lights up his radars, and then you simply ride the signal in and eliminate them. This works especially well at sea where the radar and the launchers etc. are all necessarily one ship. But in any case, carriers will pretty much never turn on their big radars in combat. Some Burke class destroyer or Ticonderoga class Aegis cruiser will take that role. Nobody wants to lose those ships of course, but they EXIST to be attritted away when necessary. And nowadays an AWACS, etc. could be the active radar. This is all going to be a complex game. If these WZ-8s are cheap and expendable and can find targets, well, that's good for them. It remains to be seen.

[@danysainz-gootenberg7809]

Excellent video!! I still feel like this could be in development or at least pre-production demonstrator. In regard to the airdropped range, it seems like a solid rocket booster could be attached to get it to high atmosphere before the main engines ignite.

[@treeinafield5022]

Your estimate of mach 2.8 was actually close to the recent Pentagon document leak that indicates that the drone can reach mach 3. Well done! will you make a video about this thing again?

[@WynnofThule]

Also you have to consider the Hustler flew with only it's wingtips outside the nose shockwave. For the WZ-8, that would be the across the whole wing which would cause way more problems.

[@Jonnyblacknell]

Amazing analysis as always!!

[@MrGottaQuestion]

Enjoyed the video and analysis. I think you hit the nail on the head.

[@ramtea4639]

When i was in High school, i was so obsessed with drones and its designing. I designed several drones, and even tried building it. However, mom and dad financially struggled and i was not able to take Science (physics, Chemistry and maths) as a major. It was 2010, At that point, my dream shattered. Decided to take Economics as a major since it was way cheaper than the Science. I was so advance. Now, struggling to become a successful entrepreneur in order to be able to see my aircraft fly 😊

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

I wish you all the best!

[@petermarchant9690]

Very interesting! Your explanation at the end makes sense.

[@JessicaSeverin]

excellent analysis. The only thought I had was that the two rocket motors might be used one for the outward journey and one for return to base. The simple construction definitely makes it look low cost and potentially disposable which fits into either a decoy or reconnaissance roles.

[@roberthaines4221]

I suspect that a rocket-powered craft with its (active) engine off-center would pose all kinds of control issues for a craft whose only control surfaces seem to be the ruddervators.

[@TurboHappyCar]

Great analysis, thanks for the video! 👍

[@gpisic]

A rocket motor doesn't make any sense if you not planing on leaving the atmosphere. So yes i think your thesis sounds solid. This thing for whatever reason will go sub orbital.

[@MrDJAK777]

Rockets can be useful for getting up to the speed needed for a scramjet to take over without the need for some crazy variable design that adds a ton of complexity. A lazy solution but a quick one

[@anuvisraa5786]

not necessary out of the atmosphere but over 25000 meters that's where combustion in jets stops

[@joelau2383]

@@anuvisraa5786 Scramjet can operate much higher than 25km, but rocket has no altitude limitation.

[@LOL-zu1zr]

@@joelau2383 yeah but the sensor equipment on the drone has limitations.

[@LOL-zu1zr]

Rockets are cheaper and more expendable. Chinese jet engines are not very power efficient.

[@viceroy7792]

Thoroughly enjoyed this. Thank you!!

[@jawadkazmi5327]

A very keen eye. What a nice analysis. Cheers

[@DavyRo]

This is a very thought provoking video you've made here, I want to say thanks so much but I know you've set me up to go on a tangent & I'll be trying to research this subject all night not on YT though. On proper aerospace websites

[@andreasschrader6925]

Good research from your side. I‘m in mind of Fritz-x at the first viewing, but you mentioned targeting for ballistic missiles. It seems to be more realistic to me. Well done fella

[@Rocky-rh3rz]

i love your improved diagrams 👍🏼

[@phelansa23]

Very interesting following your train of thought. Thank you.

[@Phantom-bh5ru]

That makes a lot of sense and if the US try to take down Chinese satellites this would be their alternative to guiding ship killers onto target.

[@cortney3280]

This could get shot down from hundreds of miles away

[@graham68ktm]

I'm wondering what the US could use if their satellites were taken out ?

[@Phantom-bh5ru]

@@graham68ktm no fucking clue lol. That’s why I’m skeptical they will try to take down Chinese satellites because China can do the same to theirs.

[@totoitekelcha7628]

@@graham68ktm there's so many option out there. Ballistic missile don't need gps sattelite.

[@henriht1147]

@@totoitekelcha7628 A very big part of the older US stockpile and cold war era tech still needs solid gps guidance to attain any useful level of precision... There was an era where simply knocking out the satellites would render most of the US army structure, doctrine and strategy pretty much inoperable. It is still pretty true to a large extent, but nowadays they probably have at least some planning done for the course of action should the LEO get turned into a shrapnel field. Still, the effectivness of the structure as a whole would get seriously hampered if that ever happened.

[@OhanaSkinCareSalon]

Great analysis. I enjoyed your video

[@MrZakay]

When you meet a stray cat; The cat is frightened. That's why he bares his teeth and puffs up his fur. Will do anything to look menacing.

[@1997dartagnan]

The Chinese really just looked at middle schoolers making paper airplanes and said, “that. I want that.”

[@Splattle101]

Good analysis! Thank you.

[@jimbaughman4005]

Very well thought out...as usual.

[@johno1544]

Excellent analysis you got a new sub here :)

[@andrespinto4350]

Very informative. Thank you.

[@irvinwright4075]

Very wise interpretation, IMHO, and I would bet money you are correct regarding it's, very clever, intended use. Please make another video showing how we counter this kind of attack and send a copy of both videos to as many U.S. admirals as you can identify.

[@michaeldenesyk3195]

Could this be, in fact, a scaled-down prototype of a larger more capable platform? Using Rocket propulsion to boost the shape to close to design speeds for aerodynamic testing?

[@_FightForYourFreedom_]

He said that in the video. Why would you present this as if it's a new idea vs acknowledging where it came from?

[@_FightForYourFreedom_]

He said that in the video. Why would you present this as if it's a new idea vs acknowledging where it came from?

[@smnkumarpaul]

Looking at the construction, it seems really simple and cheap. So I think it can an expendable drone can work as decoy to overload the tracking system.

[@panayotisdamianakis3658]

Brilliant analysis! It may be wrong but it seems very correct - keep up the great insights.

[@markbrown7321]

You're a genius I love the way you explain it to us dummies in Street language so we can understand it God bless you and God bless America and her allies

[@3d1e00]

So could you make a forward canard on a pole forward and out of the nose? Almost a small delta extending forwards just to push that Mach cone forward of the main craft structure?

[@joelau2383]

Actually, you don't need a "canard" to push the mach cone. For example, French M-51 ICBM has extensible aerospike. It is possible that the metal nose on WZ-8 is also extensible for reducing drag during hypersonic flight.

[@festol1]

Metric is beautiful! Very interesting topic, unique, instead of beating the dead horse (f-35, etc). :)

[@parttimethinker7611]

Very entertaining video. Thanks

[@Ivyxpinkx]

To further support the idea that these are not mock-ups, note that the surface of the wing area shows sign of wear or corrosion. This implies that the aircraft has been flying. Also note that the horizontal elevators don't show as much wear, which implies that they are made from a different material - possibly composites - or they might have been replaced.

[@scotthill28]

Thank you for a very informative and educational video. You have a new subscriber.

[@andrewlong1230]

One more option is a boost back type of pattern. first the bomber is flown out to the middle of no where pacific and then the drone is shot back towards mainland china or anywhere else with a landing strip. For example fly the bomber north into the east china sea and firing the drone towards the south china sea bases. This would entirely cover Taiwan. Another undiscussed option is a spacex style boost back where a large land based rocket is fire towards the east then half way through the flight the rocket is restarted and is boosted back towards mainland china.

[@Oktokolo]

That system makes sense when you expect a Keppler Syndrome. It is impossible to kill Starlink without making space flight impossible - so they basically assume that there will be no satellites for anyone in case of a war they are involved in.

[@martinolivera3580]

Excellent analysis, very objective and trustworthy as always. I wonder still if the shinny cone in the tip of the drone is a detonator? Could that be?

[@danielthuku8192]

This is absolutely brilliant!

[@silentone11111111]

Great vid. You at your best 😀

[@miguelcolima8402]

Very interesting and very precise I believe

[@humanbeing9079]

excellent analysis you genuinely won't find anywhere else on youtube

[@richardoakley8800]

It could be a scale model for developing another vehicle. As for collecting data..if it was launched out to sea toward China then data recovery could be done on landing. As a weapon....a relatively small nuke could be delivered at hypersonic speeds with little or no chance of interception

[@sirmalus5153]

A small nuke would be my guess aswell. An airburst would spoil a lot of radar sets etc. However, seeing as "new stuff" is only ever put on display when it is some years old and not 'hyper' secret, this little plane is probably old tech in the grand scheme of things. It might just be a very fast drone for delivering an anti ship payload of some type that isn't nuclear based. A swarm of these would probably do quite well against an American carrier group. A hundred or far more of these turning up would soon ruin someones day I think.

[@Nurhaal]

It's hard to tell if this aircraft is ballistic hypersonic glide capable. A hypersonic glide ballistic nuclear system is a very real system we already know China has; their nuclear stockpile contains ballistic missile systems that are specifically hypersonic glide in their terminal phases. They're not easy to intercept, if at all, and is already simulated as the primary reason why the US Naval fleets lose operational capability in a Hot War scenario off the South China Sea where the nuclear doctrine is used. However, it is also known that the Nuclear Option is not likely to be used due to the very real threat of MAD. US could retaliate with a massive nuclear counter attack if nuclear weapons were used against their fleets - so this drone is really just a gorilla beating it's chest if it was actually meant as a stand off weapon. We have a bigger stockpile of hypersonic glide MIRVs than they do. So it's simply not worth it. However, it is an option and it's option already fulfilled by their ballistic missile systems. Ergo, I don't see this being a weapon's delivery system unless it was a suicide drone of some sort; but such types are best used with jet engines that allow for increased ranges and loiter times, not rocket motors.

[@973poupou]

Very interesting theory. I like it !

[@tareshsharma7827]

Hi this was a really nice analysis of the WZ-8. I agree with it, however, what if it can used as a decoy or a training platform for anti hypersonic weapons.

[@RonFella]

The "hanging brackets" pretty much seal in my mind that these are props. They would heat up and destroy the aircraft at hyersonic speeds.

[@krunchie101]

Before the end of the video I was already thinking this could be some sort of distraction drone to confuse enemy radar tracking. It can travel at high enough altitude and speed to divert attention.

[@christopherbrodie6987]

Good analysis

[@thomaslincoln401]

Interesting video. Lots of interesting thoughts in the comments too, allowe to add another. Simply disclosing a "real" capability (not vapourware) requires effort to develop a counter to it. No matter it's real capabilities, every military now has to consider it's hypothetical and claimed capabilities and work to develop SOPs for it. Decision making matrix gets more complicated and reaction time slows. An excellent decoy.

[@forbeginnersandbeyond6089]

Excellent analysis and speculation.

[@mlce4701]

Brilliant and well spoken

[@ntal5859]

Maybe the aircraft will flip (fly inverted) to transmit back to base. As if A.I. was controlling the craft it might be able to just send the relevant info like Fleet locations so only needs small time inverted.

[@El_Que_Vee]

When boxing, slipping the jab is an effective way to prepare a much poweful attack, quick jabs, using less distance and energy. WZ 8 in a way, is just like slipping the jab in boxing! That same jab can serve as a decoy for the power punch!

[@Boomhower89]

Great job

[@kbadgett123]

Excellent analysis! It even looks like a paper airplane that one would throw for a nice straight flight to pierce deep into enemy controlled air space.

[@danielhooke6115]

Nice analysis.

[@narrativegundam4710]

D21’s successor in the 21st centry. By the way, appreciate the United States of America’s donation to China’s UAV development. United States donated about 25 units of BQM34 Firebee and at least one unit of D21. Thank you uncle sam, Love from China.

[@colinl2908]

What about the 2 hangers at high mach numbers? How much drag do you think they would they generate?

[@saqibshafin]

Maybe those hangars will be separated by explosive_bolt-like mechanism.

[@92HazelMocha]

Outside of atmosphere, very little.

[@colinl2908]

Not really sure of the operating altitude, but yes, certainly at the edge of space. Even so, such a slick looking thing with 2 hangers on top seems to just look wrong.

[@oophyte]

Pictures have surfaced of WZ-8 with 2 rocket boosters attached. That, in combination of being launched from an aircraft, should raise the maximum range further. Rocket engines do have the convenience of bringing their own oxidizer.

[@arthurrod7638]

Excellent video 👍

[@michaelguerin56]

Good theory. It actually reminds me of the ‘Honor Harrington’ SF series.

[@mikexhotmail]

I think it is a target spotter that guiding the hypersonic missile on the final trajectory.

[@andrealoi4426]

Maybe it's just the shape of the vertical stabilizers on that delta, but it reminds me of the Dyna Soar. My bet would be on suborbital too.

[@johnlane8587]

Thanks for provoking thought 💭

[@AleutianIceSkater]

Awesome interpretation!

[@HauntedXXXPancake]

I agree - "This is a Chinese Lockheed D-21!" would probably have gotten measurably fewer views 🤭 Just teasing 😋. Great video as always.

[@LibertyNotLicense]

Correct on every point.👍

[@BenDover-vs7ih]

Wow they actually went ahead and molded a plane straight from a paper airplane. 😂

[@wawaweewa9159]

I thought of passive radar just as you mentioned it lol, a few missile will force the ships to engage and a stealth kamikaze drone like this could guide it self completely passively

[@wawaweewa9159]

Your end point makes more sense

[@Padtedesco]

The "soaring dragon" basically

[@matthewkuboushek1614]

@millennium 7 * HistoryTech Could you do a series about the different ways air power is employed and how to optimize an aircraft for that role? (Hypothetical episode titles to provide a sense of the kind of content) what is close air support? How to optimize a fighter for air superiority? What makes a good strategic bomber? Etc.

[@cases2939]

I like your theory.

[@cliffordterry2133]

Another excellent video.

[@Jordan-dt6qx]

I assumed this vehicle was designed to bounce on the top of the atmosphere, like Armstrong did on accident in the X-15(no idea if that's a viable concept). Or as you said, just an aircraft to test hypersonic flight. Those are the only reasons i can think of as to why to use a rocket engine that limits your range by nearly 10x, compared to air-breathing engines.

[@deaddropholiday]

Many, many years I ago used to work for Toyota Industrial Equipment. When I arrived they had recently released one of the most technologically advanced pieces of materials handling equipment anywhere on the market and it allowed them to gain a huge foothold in the market after they had been RIDICULED for the best part of twenty years for being Johnny Come Lately's who'd shamelessly copied every piece of rival manufactuers' equipment (say - Hyster, Lancer Boss, BT etc. etc.) available. Twenty years later I was stood at the biggest trade show in the country fighting off mysterious individuals who were literally sauntering up to our #1 product with tape measures and photographic equipment and sending it all back to China. Today THEY are releasing the most technologically advanced equipment on the market. Before I left the company I vividly remember a conversation I had with our chairman who was about to retire and go back to Nagoya in Japan. In a highly unusual unguarded moment (for him!) he said - "This isn't theft. Not really. It's the first stage of MANAGED GLOBAL INTEGRATION. We [Toyota] understand this. It HAS TO be this way". What you are seeing in the weapons industry is no different. They aint copying every piece of Western technology - down to the nearest rivet - solely because it's giving them a leg up the manufacturing ladder. It's also because - in twenty or thirty or fifty years we'll all be using the same equipment under one unified global government. Like the man said - "It has to be this way".