HackerTube.dev

Missile defense multiple kill vehicle hover test

theworacle · 1.7M views · 2008-12-08 · 1:36

Open on YouTube ↗

If playback is restricted in your region, try opening the original video. Use Mark watched to add it to your marked videos.

Overview

Short US Missile Defense Agency footage of the December 2008 free-flight hover test of Lockheed Martin's Multiple Kill Vehicle. The test showed it hovering for 20 seconds while tracking a simulated target.

On Hacker News

HN cites it as striking evidence of long-standing kinetic interceptor and hover-control technology.

Recommended by 1 HN people across 1 months · HN mentions 2021–2026

Topics

Search by tags

What people said

ge96 · 2023-11 · Recommendation

Semi tangent, the MKV thing is so rad, I don't understand how it kills ballistic missiles but yeah -- I thought this thing was supposed to operate in space. [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗
mrguyorama · 2026-03 · Reference

[LINK] This is what we had to build in the 60s to allow a missile to know where it physically existed precisely enough to allow it to 50% of the time hit within a circle of ~50 meters. When you get to certain points in physics, certain energy regimes, you no longer are building machines or tools or something mass market. You are building artisan scientific instruments, and then sometimes gluing explosives to them. Even modern laser ring gyros do not even share a dinner table with the precision and accuracy of the above singular component of the Peacekeeper ICBMs, and that was a long time ago. "Tech" and some of the developments of the past few decades have really confused people. The miniaturization of the transistor, and building billions of transistors on a small slice of silicon is an aberration, an anomaly. Most things don't get "Better and better and cheaper and cheaper" like that because shit just doesn't scale infinitely and in general materials science isn't that precise. For these ground based midcourse interceptors, they have to precisely loft the interceptor package at an incoming projectile. They have to shoot a bullet with a bullet, except the target bullet might even be moving around a bit, and your ability to precisely quantify the exact parameters of it's position and velocity is already limited. Is your position and velocity measurement an inch off? Two inches? Is that too much? How well have you quantified the thrust of your rocket engine? THIS specific rock

Read the original HN comment ↗
datadrivenangel · 2024-05 · Reference

Reminds me of the MKV-L ballistic missile interceptor tests: simple physics, with impressive engineering implementation [0]. 0 - [VIDEO] (the rapid fire rockets are a little loud)

Read the original HN comment ↗

Sources

Video by theworacle, played through YouTube.

Data and selection notes

HN summaries and labels may contain AI errors. HN dates refer to discussions, not video publication.

HN Library: HackerTube export (2026-10-31) and open-index/hacker-news. Upstream summaries and classifications may contain AI errors.

Views, duration and playback status refresh separately from the published catalog. When an update fails, existing data remains visible.

Selection checks
  • SaaS & AI candidates: Topic keywords do not match
  • Editor-approved picks: Editorial review is required

Rule matches identify candidates. They do not guarantee video quality or financial results.

About the library and its sources