[GK3]

Are those ballistic missiles the oft-hyped "hypersonic" missiles I've been hearing about?

Mostly no, but in one case "sort of". The vast majority are "garden variety" ballistic missiles. The theory China is espousing is that if they locate the carrier using a LEO satellite (or other means) they can then launch a ballistic missile that will arrive very quickly, within a few tens of minutes if the Chinese command and control functions efficiently. The theory is that the carrier couldn't have gone very far during that time. The DF-21D is equipped with a Maneuverable Reentry Vehicles (MaRV) that can be "steered" somehow by a satellite that has a current picture of the carrier. Obviously this creates considerable constraints on how the weapon can be employed. First, you have to find the carrier, and second you then have to have a second satellite that is able to target the warhead. It also seems improbable that the satellite would be able to guide the reentry vehicle to the target. It doesn't have the resolution to do it. That would mean that, like the AAMRAM, there is a terminal guidance radar in the MaRV. Hard to make that work, and even if you could the MaRV vehicle is limited in its ability to maneuver (no wings or tail), its current energy state, the size of its radar antenna, and the electronics required to make all this work. Besides that, the escorts can jam the radar in the MaRV, and also can also simply shoot it down. Again, this isn't something we should ignore, but the Navy thinks it has it pretty well under control. Of course, if the MaRV carries a nuke, none of this matters.

The DF-27 is equipped with a hypersonic glide vehicle which can chase after a carrier, at least until it runs out of energy. This is the "hypersonic missile" part. This approach is better than the MaRV in that the glide vehicle has wings that will keep it in the air longer and allow it to maneuver. How this all is mechanized is unclear. More importantly, it is a "bigger" package that maybe can do a better job of finding the carrier without the help of another satellite. Otherwise, it has all the same problems. Does it work? Nobody knows. Can we shoot it down? Sure. Is it harder to hit than a Kinzhal? Probably not. In fact, it is arguably exactly the same situation. It could be stealthier, but its infrared signature and massive doppler work against that idea.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dongfeng_(missile)

Thanks, Goose, very interesting stuff.  I found this article which I am having to reread a few times as it contains a lot of information about drone warfare. 
https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Media/News/News...ing-drone-
defenses/#:~:text=At%20the%20simplest%20end%2C%20this,different%20types%20of%20communication%20systems.
What do you think of the conclusions drawn in this article?
It seems to me that drones are changing warfare like tanks did in WWI.  Now it is a "you can run, but you can't hide" problem if you can make your drones even partially jam proof. 
In the past, you could dig in and avoid most damage unless a artillery round hit your bunker, but now they just fly the drone down your trench and drop molten metal on you.  Drones seem to be making it possible for Ukraine to fend off Russians much larger manpower numbers. A million drones produced in 1 year versus 1 million draftees from Russia.
It seems like the country who makes the first unjammable drone (is that even possible?) is truly going to have the upper hand. So much of modern warfare is dependent upon command, control and supply.  If you can use your drones effectively to hit both the command centers and the supply sources you might have something. So can you makes a jam proof drone with jam proof controls becomes sort of the holy grail. I think the loss of a $400 dollar drone seems to much prefered to the loss of another soldier.  Replace bodies with drones concept might give Ukraine a chance. 
One last question, can drones be effective in areas where the ground is totally covered by jungle or similar.  Think SE Asia in 1967.

Apparently Germany is going to be making its new 155 self propelled gun availible to the Ukraine.  Turret is unmanned. Can fire 9 rounds per minute up to ranges of 25 miles and with very long range ammo, up to 35 miles. I believe those figures are far better than our 155mm guns.
I presume we must have something similar in the works, but this seems to be a significant improvement over past gear.
https://www.twz.com/land/ukraine-gets-fi...may-follow
Looking at other similar stuff, it sure appears that Germany knows how to build weapons for war. 
Drones plus this weapon can make enemy movement within 25 km of the MLR pretty difficult.

[GK3]

Are those ballistic missiles the oft-hyped "hypersonic" missiles I've been hearing about?

Mostly no, but in one case "sort of". The vast majority are "garden variety" ballistic missiles. The theory China is espousing is that if they locate the carrier using a LEO satellite (or other means) they can then launch a ballistic missile that will arrive very quickly, within a few tens of minutes if the Chinese command and control functions efficiently. The theory is that the carrier couldn't have gone very far during that time. The DF-21D is equipped with a Maneuverable Reentry Vehicles (MaRV) that can be "steered" somehow by a satellite that has a current picture of the carrier. Obviously this creates considerable constraints on how the weapon can be employed. First, you have to find the carrier, and second you then have to have a second satellite that is able to target the warhead. It also seems improbable that the satellite would be able to guide the reentry vehicle to the target. It doesn't have the resolution to do it. That would mean that, like the AAMRAM, there is a terminal guidance radar in the MaRV. Hard to make that work, and even if you could the MaRV vehicle is limited in its ability to maneuver (no wings or tail), its current energy state, the size of its radar antenna, and the electronics required to make all this work. Besides that, the escorts can jam the radar in the MaRV, and also can also simply shoot it down. Again, this isn't something we should ignore, but the Navy thinks it has it pretty well under control. Of course, if the MaRV carries a nuke, none of this matters.

The DF-27 is equipped with a hypersonic glide vehicle which can chase after a carrier, at least until it runs out of energy. This is the "hypersonic missile" part. This approach is better than the MaRV in that the glide vehicle has wings that will keep it in the air longer and allow it to maneuver. How this all is mechanized is unclear. More importantly, it is a "bigger" package that maybe can do a better job of finding the carrier without the help of another satellite. Otherwise, it has all the same problems. Does it work? Nobody knows. Can we shoot it down? Sure. Is it harder to hit than a Kinzhal? Probably not. In fact, it is arguably exactly the same situation. It could be stealthier, but its infrared signature and massive doppler work against that idea.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dongfeng_(missile)

Thanks, Goose, very interesting stuff.  I found this article which I am having to reread a few times as it contains a lot of information about drone warfare. 
https://ndupress.ndu.edu/Media/News/News...ing-drone-
defenses/#:~:text=At%20the%20simplest%20end%2C%20this,different%20types%20of%20communication%20systems.
What do you think of the conclusions drawn in this article?
It seems to me that drones are changing warfare like tanks did in WWI.  Now it is a "you can run, but you can't hide" problem if you can make your drones even partially jam proof. 
In the past, you could dig in and avoid most damage unless a artillery round hit your bunker, but now they just fly the drone down your trench and drop molten metal on you.  Drones seem to be making it possible for Ukraine to fend off Russians much larger manpower numbers. A million drones produced in 1 year versus 1 million draftees from Russia.
It seems like the country who makes the first unjammable drone (is that even possible?) is truly going to have the upper hand. So much of modern warfare is dependent upon command, control and supply.  If you can use your drones effectively to hit both the command centers and the supply sources you might have something. So can you makes a jam proof drone with jam proof controls becomes sort of the holy grail. I think the loss of a $400 dollar drone seems to much prefered to the loss of another soldier.  Replace bodies with drones concept might give Ukraine a chance. 
One last question, can drones be effective in areas where the ground is totally covered by jungle or similar.  Think SE Asia in 1967.

Apparently Germany is going to be making its new 155 self propelled gun availible to the Ukraine.  Turret is unmanned. Can fire 9 rounds per minute up to ranges of 25 miles and with very long range ammo, up to 35 miles. I believe those figures are far better than our 155mm guns.
I presume we must have something similar in the works, but this seems to be a significant improvement over past gear.
https://www.twz.com/land/ukraine-gets-fi...may-follow
Looking at other similar stuff, it sure appears that Germany knows how to build weapons for war. 
Drones plus this weapon can make enemy movement within 25 km of the MLR pretty difficult.