0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
100 $

China Successfully Tested Its First Hypersonic Aircraft Capable Of Carrying Nuclear Warheads (Video)

Support SouthFront

China Successfully Tested Its First Hypersonic Aircraft Capable Of Carrying Nuclear Warheads (Video)

Photo: Science and Technology Daily

On August 6, China announced that it had successfully tested a new hypersonic aircraft which could carry nuclear warheads and penetrate any current missile defenses.

The Xingkong-2 or Starry Sky-2, completed its first test flight on August 3 at an undisclosed location in northwestern China. During the test flight the Starry Sky-2 conducted extreme turning manoeuvres, maintained velocities above Mach 5.5 for more than 400 seconds and achieved a top speed of Mach 6, or 7,344km/h, according to a statement by the China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamics.

The statement also said that the aircraft landed in a designated target zone and described the test flight as a “huge success”.

More about hypersonic weapons in SF’s analysis “Restoring Strategic Balance: Russia’s ‘Invincible’ Nuclear Weapons“:

Support SouthFront


Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

SF: HEADKLINE ALERT! Surely this is ballistic missle, not “aircraft”?


Refers to the warhead. Like the Russian reentry vehicle.


Seems to me it’s not a hypersonic aircraft, but a missile.


Xingkong though does have a ring to it, almost like King Kong!

Jim Bim

You sure sound like an expert. Hypersonic is from Mach 5 – 10. I don`t know if you can read, but the article says Mach 5.5 – Mach 6.

Igor Dano

very good answer to a question, which has not been asked.

Bobby Twoshoes

Don’t know if it was even that, he basically told us that a hypersonic craft reached hypersonic speeds. With so many words and so little information, I’m guessing he’s an American :)


It is rocket with some sort of glider aircraft mounted on the top of the rocket as 2nd stage…

John Whitehot

“And when Sarmat is ready they will use the glider to put it in the Sarmat’s warhead”

I don’t think so.

Sarmat is a heavy ICBM, it will be used to deliver huge nuclear warheads in large numbers as MIRVs, after the Hypersonic Avangards/Kinzhals cleared the way from US built, zionist paid “missile shields”.


You don’t think so because you are wrong It is not that I have just invented it. I was reading about that. HERE professional military blog “War is Boring” https://warisboring.com/how-russias-avangard-hypersonic-weapon-will-launch/ —————————————————— “Russia will apparently use surplus UR-100UTTKh — NATO: SS-19 Stiletto — and the RS-28 Sarmat liquid-fueled intercontinental ballistic missiles as the launch vehicle for its Avangard hypersonic boost-glide weapon.” —————————————————————- HERE ———————————————————— “With the acceptance of heavy RS-28 Sarmat missiles for service, such vehicles will be mounted on them as well,” ————————————————————— HERE —————————————————————- Of course, a massive ICBM such as the Sarmat — or even the UR-100N UTTKn — could possibly carry multiple Avangard glide vehicles if needed. —————————————————————— I have impression that you try to present yourself as an expert on the subject that is not maybe your strongest point.

Avangards are not “hyper -sonic” they go above that speed = ( 20 times speed of sound ) and “hyper -sonic” speed is only (from 5 to 10 times speed of sound) .

Also Kinzhals are anti-ship and air to ground missile with hyper-sonic speed of Mach10 and Avangards are “glide vehicles”- gliders not missiles. So one should not mix them up because they are different weapons. Also I was not talking about Kinzhals anyway.

So once they put MIRV’s on Sarmat they will not have Avangards on them and vice versa…

John Whitehot

war is boring is pentagon propaganda.

in fact, i don’t even waste a second in your walltexts, you have gotten a real analysis from me, now go read war is boring and get brainwashed.


What exactly was “pentagon propaganda” in the text?!! I don’t care about your “analysis” That doesn’t fit with anything I have read on the subject You don’t give shred of evidence for your so called “analysis” or at least to prove that text I have sent is wrong. All you know is to dismiss it by labeling it with cheap comment of “propaganda” not bothering to give SINGLE proof! to confirm your claim. Your attitude is more than arrogant.

viktor ziv

When Soyuz is launched, do You see Soyuz taking off or Proton (heavy rocket -carrier)? Any rocket carrier is reaching hypersonic speed otherwise it couldn’t place satellite into the orbit. But in this article it is stated manouver at 5.5 mach. The rocket can’t do it, so it must be about object carried by rocket. I believe something is lost during translation.


that happens when you copy articles from indian sites

John Whitehot

they probably used the term “aircraft” while they should have used “vehicle”, in that way it makes sense.

Brother Ma

Come on guys! Aircraft is obviously a translation error. Of course it is an aircraft in a general sense but in Everyday English we would normally call it a rocket or missile. Give Sf a break,English is not their mother tongue.


Perhaps good, WWIII and makind will be over in lest yhan one hour it seems.


The article is not very clear, they show a rocket and talk about an aircraft, hypersonic glide vehicles move a lot faster than Mach 5-6, if it is an aircraft airlifted by a missile for take off purposes, it must be relatively small craft.

Promitheas Apollonious

when the rocket that take the vehicle to orbit the cone in the front of the rocket is released. That part, is the vehicle or craft.


If the craft is deployed in outer space, it’s travel velocity would be a lot higher than Mach 5-6. Ballistic missiles travel at +7kms per second in outer space.

Promitheas Apollonious



See I knew the story was bullshit, they called a missile an aircraft. the story is completely wrong.

Promitheas Apollonious

your level of judgement and concluding astound, me.

You can call me Al

Do you mean it was absolutely a fantastic comment, or he made himself look like a complete twat ?.

Promitheas Apollonious

the second


You don’t do tongue in cheek do you?

You can call me Al

Sorry guys, but please check the article before posting it.

John Whitehot

it wouldn’t surprise me if Russia and China shared some data on general hypersonic principles, or even if they researched some of them jointly, as it is of the utmost strategical importance for them (and for all those that still value peace and justice) to be at least one pace ahead of the US ballistic missile “shield”.

So far the correlation is in favor of RU/PRC, as they both succesfully tested (and possibly are producing) hypersonic missiles, while the US is still unable, with the current iteration of SAMs, to intercept conventional ICBMs.

It’s pretty much sure that when the US will be able to deploy systems able to intercepts current ICBMs, RU/PRC will already have hypersonics in operational service.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x