Author Topic: North Korea missiles  (Read 274645 times)

Offline Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #160 on: 07/17/2017 08:37 am »
Also it is worth nothing the Musadan has over a 80% failure rate whereas both HS-12 and HS-14 flew without any issues. This adds further weight to the theory that HS-12 and HS-14 use a completely new engine that is more reliable than the R-27 engine in the musadan.
The recent NK presentation on their test history shows at least one failed HS-12 launch, (there's one shown by the coast, the successful launch was inland) and according to Ankit Panda the current US gov position is there were two failed launches. Still, that's a much better success rate then Musudan, and there's no evidence of any prior HS-14 tests.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #161 on: 07/17/2017 09:18 am »
How could Hwasong 14 fly so far compared to Hwasong 10 (Musudan)?

Let me introduce you to the concept of a "second stage". In this case, a very small upper stage, designed to carry a tiny payload a great distance to provide the appearance of an ICBM.

The definition of an ICBM is demonstrated range over 5,500 km, but it has to be carrying a useful payload. Otherwise Unha 3 could be considered an ICBM.

You seem dead set on the notion that NK used Musadan technology to build this icbm. Care to share why?

Anyway if what your saying is true that NK used the 25 ton thrust engine of the musadan to power this icbm then a second stage would not be possible due to insufficient thrust in the first stage. Furthermore more why would they test a whole new engine and claim that it is made "in their own way" only to reuse tech from the musadan?

Also it is worth nothing the Musadan has over a 80% failure rate whereas both HS-12 and HS-14 flew without any issues. This adds further weight to the theory that HS-12 and HS-14 use a completely new engine that is more reliable than the R-27 engine in the musadan.

You assert that using a 25 ton thrust engine would preclude use of a second stage.

Note that the Vanguard launcher had a 15 ton thrust engine in the first stage and was able to carry a second and third stage. I believe that the Electron LV is not much larger than 25 tons and it seems to have a second stage. I had an Estes rocket that had 10 newtons of thrust in the first stage, and it had a second stage. There is no correlation between first stage thrust and ability to carry a second stage.

There is a correlation between first stage mass and second stage mass for an ICBM. Hwasong 14 falls outside of any known ICBM by that criteria.

Why I am so adamant that Hwasong 14 is related to HS10? I have seen no evidence that these are not in the same class in terms of size. If you have evidence that HS14 is significantly larger than Hwasong 14, please share.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #162 on: 07/17/2017 09:21 am »
Also it is worth nothing the Musadan has over a 80% failure rate whereas both HS-12 and HS-14 flew without any issues. This adds further weight to the theory that HS-12 and HS-14 use a completely new engine that is more reliable than the R-27 engine in the musadan.
The recent NK presentation on their test history shows at least one failed HS-12 launch, (there's one shown by the coast, the successful launch was inland) and according to Ankit Panda the current US gov position is there were two failed launches. Still, that's a much better success rate then Musudan, and there's no evidenice of any prior HS-14 tests.

This is all explainable by their adding verniers to the HS10 and calling it HS12, after teething pains with HS10, they now have a more mature engine. It also explains their confidence in putting a small second stage on HS12 after only 2 tests.

Offline Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #163 on: 07/17/2017 09:31 am »
The recent NK presentation on their test history shows at least one failed HS-12 launch, (there's one shown by the coast, the successful launch was inland) and according to Ankit Panda the current US gov position is there were two failed launches. Still, that's a much better success rate then Musudan, and there's no evidence of any prior HS-14 tests.

This is all explainable by their adding verniers to the HS10 and calling it HS12, after teething pains with HS10, they now have a more mature engine. It also explains their confidence in putting a small second stage on HS12 after only 2 tests.
I don't see how you can consider the HS-10 engine mature; the last three HS-10 tests all failed, and they've still only had one unambiguous success.

Offline Chasm

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 495
  • Liked: 230
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #164 on: 07/17/2017 03:00 pm »
I'm no image analyst, I look at what others figured out and then try to find out if it's plausible or not.
Both the armscontrolwonks and Norbert Brügge arrived at similar conclusions in their analysis.
A diameter of 1.8-1.9m for the HS-14. That is HS-13 tooling, not HS-10 (RS-27 1.5m).
45 and 47 tons takeoff thrust. The bigger diameter has more thrust, no problems there.

Where is the evidence that the HS-14 is smaller than that? Both for physical size and thrust please.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #165 on: 07/17/2017 03:35 pm »
I'm no image analyst, I look at what others figured out and then try to find out if it's plausible or not.
Both the armscontrolwonks and Norbert Brügge arrived at similar conclusions in their analysis.
A diameter of 1.8-1.9m for the HS-14. That is HS-13 tooling, not HS-10 (RS-27 1.5m).
45 and 47 tons takeoff thrust. The bigger diameter has more thrust, no problems there.

Where is the evidence that the HS-14 is smaller than that? Both for physical size and thrust please.

They could be right, and, if so, then North Korea is developing two different long range missile systems, using different tooling and different engines. Or, their estimates could be off a bit, and it's all one program. I am still looking for more than just assertions that HS10 and HS12 are significantly different systems.

http://www.38north.org/2017/05/hwasong051917/

This article says that Hwasong 10 and 12 use the same TEL, and basically the same engine.
« Last Edit: 07/17/2017 03:42 pm by Danderman »

Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #166 on: 07/19/2017 08:33 pm »
US intelligence shows North Korean preparations for a possible missile test

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/19/politics/north-korea-possible-missile-test/index.html


Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #167 on: 07/21/2017 07:58 am »

Offline K210

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 606
  • Liked: 284
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #168 on: 07/21/2017 02:45 pm »
I'm no image analyst, I look at what others figured out and then try to find out if it's plausible or not.
Both the armscontrolwonks and Norbert Brügge arrived at similar conclusions in their analysis.
A diameter of 1.8-1.9m for the HS-14. That is HS-13 tooling, not HS-10 (RS-27 1.5m).
45 and 47 tons takeoff thrust. The bigger diameter has more thrust, no problems there.

Where is the evidence that the HS-14 is smaller than that? Both for physical size and thrust please.

They could be right, and, if so, then North Korea is developing two different long range missile systems, using different tooling and different engines. Or, their estimates could be off a bit, and it's all one program. I am still looking for more than just assertions that HS10 and HS12 are significantly different systems.

http://www.38north.org/2017/05/hwasong051917/

This article says that Hwasong 10 and 12 use the same TEL, and basically the same engine.

http://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/north-koreas-hwasong-12-missile-stepping-stone-icbm/

The article above backs up a lot of my points. According to frame by frame analysis the thrust of the HS-12 engines is around 50 tons not 25. Furthermore the central engine has a exhaust which means it is not a closed cycle engine like the R-27.

There are also design similarities between the march 18 missle engine and the 80 ton thrust SLV engine NK tested in September 2016. Most likely this new missile engine is a spinoff of their 80 ton SLV engine.
« Last Edit: 07/21/2017 02:46 pm by K210 »

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #169 on: 07/22/2017 08:25 am »
The analysis starts with the assumption that the vehicle mass is 30 tons, and derives values from that assumption. They don't say where they get the 30 ton figure from.

Moreover, they claim that HS12 was fueled elsewhere and moved to the launch location. That seems a little odd to me.

They do admit that HS12 uses the HS10 TEL, without understanding what that implies for estimating HS12 size. If HS10  is derived from R-27, then so is HS12.

They claim that HS12 can carry 500kg a distance of 4500 km. In comparison, R-27 could carry 650 kg for 3000 km. I am not understanding how HS12 is not an R-27 class missile.

Offline Comet

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 361
  • Liked: 134
  • Likes Given: 21
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #170 on: 07/22/2017 08:40 pm »

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #171 on: 07/24/2017 07:04 am »
Are there similar scale drawings for HS10?

Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #172 on: 07/27/2017 08:49 am »

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #173 on: 07/28/2017 05:03 pm »
Images of Hwasong 10 and Hwasong 12 in apparently the same TEL.

It appears that Hwasong 12 is the same diameter, but is longer. This is consistent with the addition of two vernier engines, but may also indicate that HS12 has a somewhat more powerful main engine.

« Last Edit: 07/28/2017 05:06 pm by Danderman »

Offline Kryten

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 735
  • Liked: 426
  • Likes Given: 33
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #174 on: 07/28/2017 05:22 pm »
If HS-10 is a stretched R-27, wouldn't it already have four verniers?

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #175 on: 07/28/2017 05:27 pm »
If HS-10 is a stretched R-27, wouldn't it already have four verniers?

R-27 only had 2 verniers.
« Last Edit: 07/28/2017 05:27 pm by Danderman »

Offline hop

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3352
  • Liked: 553
  • Likes Given: 891
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #176 on: 07/28/2017 05:49 pm »
New launch, with early indication that flight time is significantly longer than the last one  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40757780
Quote
The latest missile was launched at 23:41 North Korea time (15:41 GMT) from Jagang province in the north of the country, South Korean news agency Yonhap reported.
...
Japanese Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshihide Suga said the missile flew for about 45 minutes - some six minutes longer than the ICBM tested in early July.
Early reports like this often turn out to be inaccurate, but if it holds, it would put it very clearly into real ICBM territory.

edit by mod: the reference to launch time has to be corrected:
14:41 UTC launch time = 23:41 Seoul local time = 23:11 Pyongyang local time



« Last Edit: 08/05/2017 02:30 pm by input~2 »

Offline Rebel44

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 565
  • Liked: 546
  • Likes Given: 2012
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #177 on: 07/28/2017 06:57 pm »
Updated DPRK ICBM range estimates from David Wright. Hint: Pretty much everything you care about. Sorry Florida.

https://twitter.com/ArmsControlWonk/status/891001298664824832

http://allthingsnuclear.org/dwright/new-north-korean-icbm

Offline Zed_Noir

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5490
  • Canada
  • Liked: 1809
  • Likes Given: 1302
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #178 on: 07/28/2017 07:50 pm »
Watch CNN news bulletin on this launch. CNN reported that the missile launch from a different location (reportedly Mupyong-ni near Wosan) from the previous launch. Does that mean this missile system is capable of remote setup for launch? Or are there multi launch sites?

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #179 on: 07/28/2017 08:01 pm »
Watch CNN news bulletin on this launch. CNN reported that the missile launch from a different location (reportedly Mupyong-ni near Wosan) from the previous launch. Does that mean this missile system is capable of remote setup for launch? Or are there multi launch sites?
Could be their mobile launcher platform...
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
0