Author Topic: North Korea missiles  (Read 274650 times)

Offline Chasm

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 495
  • Liked: 230
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #120 on: 07/06/2017 08:34 pm »
Why would North Korea expend so much national treasure developing a missile that can only reach "Alaska"? 

Another step in a series of increasingly potent missiles that got revealed so far. This missile was not in the parade. Even if we say it was represented by one of the containers that leaves one more mystery missile.

The usual armscontrolwonk suspects are currently modeling the missile from the footage. Looks like the first stage is not just a Hwasong-12, it is larger in diameter. They are trying to calculate the maximum range which seems to be higher than demonstrated. If their model pans out that would be interesting.
Another aspect is the RV design, this one used a shroud which was not expected. I'm not exactly sure what the implications of that are.

Offline Rocket Science

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10586
  • NASA Educator Astronaut Candidate Applicant 2002
  • Liked: 4548
  • Likes Given: 13523
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #121 on: 07/06/2017 09:26 pm »
Folks shouldn't get too fixated on the range of the missile in that can "only" hit Alaska/Canada which would devastating enough. This is a weapon of terror and thus serves a purpose to Kim. That aside, a threat that gets little attention is the damage caused by a high attitude detonation via EMP to satellites and other sensitive electronics... It "may" also explain the unusual trajectory of extreme altitude vs downrange in test... In other words taking-out "communications, eyes and ears"...
« Last Edit: 07/07/2017 03:37 pm by Rocket Science »
"The laws of physics are unforgiving"
~Rob: Physics instructor, Aviator

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #122 on: 07/07/2017 07:11 am »
North Korea’s Hwasong-14 Missile Launch Site Identified: The Panghyon Aircraft Factory

http://www.38north.org/2017/07/panghyon070617/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+38North+%2838+North%3A+Informed+Analysis+of+North+Korea%29

I'd say his argument is nonsense as has been explained in other articles it clearly does have a new engine.

Other than images of engine tests of a 4 vernier engine, what proof is there that this is not a re-work of the 4D10 engine?

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #123 on: 07/07/2017 07:16 am »
The article mentioned above makes a fairly compelling argument that the flight profile described for the test fits a R-27 derived first stage and a second stage that masses about the same as what R-27 could carry.

More to the point, the 2nd stage shown in the launch images is tiny in comparison to the first stage, such a configuration lends itself to high range, low payload flights, as typified by Atlas F-Burner missions. The question is why the mismatch between stages if the intent is to develop an ICBM?
« Last Edit: 07/07/2017 10:14 pm by Danderman »

Offline K210

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 606
  • Liked: 284
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #124 on: 07/07/2017 11:11 am »
It is highly likely the first stage engine used on Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-12 is a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine north korea tested in september 2016. Furthermore by studying the launch images you can see the second stage is rather small. It is possible north korea may stretch the upper stage down the track and achieve greater payload/range. If some improvements are made to the design the hwasong-14 could easily be made into a 10,000 Km class icbm which would put pretty much the entire world into range.

Given the rapid progress NK has made with rocket engine technology i think the world is in for quite a surprise when they reveal their new LV.....

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #125 on: 07/07/2017 12:44 pm »
It is highly likely the first stage engine used on Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-12 is a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine north korea tested in september 2016. Furthermore by studying the launch images you can see the second stage is rather small. It is possible north korea may stretch the upper stage down the track and achieve greater payload/range. If some improvements are made to the design the hwasong-14 could easily be made into a 10,000 Km class icbm which would put pretty much the entire world into range.

Given the rapid progress NK has made with rocket engine technology i think the world is in for quite a surprise when they reveal their new LV.....

Is it possible assistance has been given the area of engine development?

Offline K210

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 606
  • Liked: 284
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #126 on: 07/07/2017 03:40 pm »
It is highly likely the first stage engine used on Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-12 is a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine north korea tested in september 2016. Furthermore by studying the launch images you can see the second stage is rather small. It is possible north korea may stretch the upper stage down the track and achieve greater payload/range. If some improvements are made to the design the hwasong-14 could easily be made into a 10,000 Km class icbm which would put pretty much the entire world into range.

Given the rapid progress NK has made with rocket engine technology i think the world is in for quite a surprise when they reveal their new LV.....

Is it possible assistance has been given the area of engine development?

Maybe. Without any verified specs it is impossible to tell.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #127 on: 07/07/2017 10:05 pm »
It is highly likely the first stage engine used on Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-12 is a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine north korea tested in september 2016. Furthermore by studying the launch images you can see the second stage is rather small. It is possible north korea may stretch the upper stage down the track and achieve greater payload/range. If some improvements are made to the design the hwasong-14 could easily be made into a 10,000 Km class icbm which would put pretty much the entire world into range.

Given the rapid progress NK has made with rocket engine technology i think the world is in for quite a surprise when they reveal their new LV.....


Is there any proof that this engine has 80 tons of thrust? Could you compare this engine with that used by Hwasong 10? Is that also an 80 ton thrust engine?

For comparison, the R-27 engine (4D10) is a 25 ton engine.  The alleged ICBM tested a few days ago is clearly close to R-27 in dimensions; if it were equipped with an 80 ton engine, it would have accelerated much more quickly than the videos indicate.

Do you have better estimates of the size and mass of Hwasong-14?

My view is that the many years that have passed since the introduction of R-27 technology into the NK missile program tells us that their progress has been slow.

« Last Edit: 07/07/2017 10:13 pm by Danderman »

Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #128 on: 07/08/2017 05:00 pm »
Hwasong 14 Contributors Arrive to Pyongyang


Offline K210

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 606
  • Liked: 284
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #129 on: 07/08/2017 06:37 pm »
It is highly likely the first stage engine used on Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-12 is a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine north korea tested in september 2016. Furthermore by studying the launch images you can see the second stage is rather small. It is possible north korea may stretch the upper stage down the track and achieve greater payload/range. If some improvements are made to the design the hwasong-14 could easily be made into a 10,000 Km class icbm which would put pretty much the entire world into range.

Given the rapid progress NK has made with rocket engine technology i think the world is in for quite a surprise when they reveal their new LV.....


Is there any proof that this engine has 80 tons of thrust? Could you compare this engine with that used by Hwasong 10? Is that also an 80 ton thrust engine?

For comparison, the R-27 engine (4D10) is a 25 ton engine.  The alleged ICBM tested a few days ago is clearly close to R-27 in dimensions; if it were equipped with an 80 ton engine, it would have accelerated much more quickly than the videos indicate.

Do you have better estimates of the size and mass of Hwasong-14?

My view is that the many years that have passed since the introduction of R-27 technology into the NK missile program tells us that their progress has been slow.

The engine used on the hwasong-12 and hwasong-14 is probably a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine they are developing for their new SLV. For ICBM application they have probably lowered the thrust to 40-60 tons level and added some steering engines. It is likely NK has scrapped the R-27 engines completely at this point given how unreliable they have proven (90% of tests were failures in 2016).

North korea seems to be moving beyond using left overs from the soviet union and developing their own tech from the ground up. At least that is what it looks like from the outside.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #130 on: 07/08/2017 09:47 pm »
It is highly likely the first stage engine used on Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-12 is a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine north korea tested in september 2016. Furthermore by studying the launch images you can see the second stage is rather small. It is possible north korea may stretch the upper stage down the track and achieve greater payload/range. If some improvements are made to the design the hwasong-14 could easily be made into a 10,000 Km class icbm which would put pretty much the entire world into range.

Given the rapid progress NK has made with rocket engine technology i think the world is in for quite a surprise when they reveal their new LV.....


Is there any proof that this engine has 80 tons of thrust? Could you compare this engine with that used by Hwasong 10? Is that also an 80 ton thrust engine?

For comparison, the R-27 engine (4D10) is a 25 ton engine.  The alleged ICBM tested a few days ago is clearly close to R-27 in dimensions; if it were equipped with an 80 ton engine, it would have accelerated much more quickly than the videos indicate.

Do you have better estimates of the size and mass of Hwasong-14?

My view is that the many years that have passed since the introduction of R-27 technology into the NK missile program tells us that their progress has been slow.

The engine used on the hwasong-12 and hwasong-14 is probably a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine they are developing for their new SLV. For ICBM application they have probably lowered the thrust to 40-60 tons level and added some steering engines. It is likely NK has scrapped the R-27 engines completely at this point given how unreliable they have proven (90% of tests were failures in 2016).

North korea seems to be moving beyond using left overs from the soviet union and developing their own tech from the ground up. At least that is what it looks like from the outside.

Again, you are asserting that NK has an 80 ton thrust engine with no proof. I am not saying you are wrong, but I cannot accept an analysis based on a feeling.

You do seem to admit that the Hwasong 10 uses the 4D10 derived engine, which is a 25 ton class engine. Therefore, you should understand that it is unlikely that Hwasong 12 and 14 have an engine that is significantly more powerful, since all three missiles are roughly the same size.

The more likely scenario is that the Hwasong 10 failures were symptoms of teething pains for R-27 based technology, and as time passes and more tests were conducted, the technicians fixed some of the problems.

One further note: the much larger Unha satellite launcher uses 4 Scud class engines clustered in the first stage. NK is probably going to have to either cluster the R-27 engine or seriously upgrade it to generate an ICBM with a usable payload and usable range.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #131 on: 07/08/2017 10:22 pm »
It is highly likely the first stage engine used on Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-12 is a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine north korea tested in september 2016. Furthermore by studying the launch images you can see the second stage is rather small. It is possible north korea may stretch the upper stage down the track and achieve greater payload/range. If some improvements are made to the design the hwasong-14 could easily be made into a 10,000 Km class icbm which would put pretty much the entire world into range.

Given the rapid progress NK has made with rocket engine technology i think the world is in for quite a surprise when they reveal their new LV.....


Is there any proof that this engine has 80 tons of thrust? Could you compare this engine with that used by Hwasong 10? Is that also an 80 ton thrust engine?

For comparison, the R-27 engine (4D10) is a 25 ton engine.  The alleged ICBM tested a few days ago is clearly close to R-27 in dimensions; if it were equipped with an 80 ton engine, it would have accelerated much more quickly than the videos indicate.

Do you have better estimates of the size and mass of Hwasong-14?

My view is that the many years that have passed since the introduction of R-27 technology into the NK missile program tells us that their progress has been slow.

The engine used on the hwasong-12 and hwasong-14 is probably a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine they are developing for their new SLV. For ICBM application they have probably lowered the thrust to 40-60 tons level and added some steering engines. It is likely NK has scrapped the R-27 engines completely at this point given how unreliable they have proven (90% of tests were failures in 2016).

North korea seems to be moving beyond using left overs from the soviet union and developing their own tech from the ground up. At least that is what it looks like from the outside.

Again, you are asserting that NK has an 80 ton thrust engine with no proof. I am not saying you are wrong, but I cannot accept an analysis based on a feeling.

You do seem to admit that the Hwasong 10 uses the 4D10 derived engine, which is a 25 ton class engine. Therefore, you should understand that it is unlikely that Hwasong 12 and 14 have an engine that is significantly more powerful, since all three missiles are roughly the same size.

The more likely scenario is that the Hwasong 10 failures were symptoms of teething pains for R-27 based technology, and as time passes and more tests were conducted, the technicians fixed some of the problems.

One further note: the much larger Unha satellite launcher uses 4 Scud class engines clustered in the first stage. NK is probably going to have to either cluster the R-27 engine or seriously upgrade it to generate an ICBM with a usable payload and usable range.

That's a bit of a poor argument as it can easily be turned round and asked of you what evidence do you have for certain that they don't have a new engine. All you're presenting above is suppositions which are no better than what you are accusing the OP of.

It's effectively you saying my guesswork is better than yours.
« Last Edit: 07/08/2017 10:26 pm by Star One »

Offline jak Kennedy

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 261
  • Liked: 134
  • Likes Given: 743
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #132 on: 07/08/2017 11:01 pm »
And most of Europe is in range. don't forget that. Personally, I think his few bombs would be most effective at striking Moscow and other Russian cities, maybe Bejing too. Why? Because in the chaos that follows Russia might let loose in every direction.
... the way that we will ratchet up our species, is to take the best and to spread it around everybody, so that everybody grows up with better things. - Steve Jobs

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #133 on: 07/08/2017 11:42 pm »
On the contrary. It is commonly agreed that Hwasong 10 uses R-27 technology for its engine. R-27 has a 25 ton class engine.

It is fairly obvious from photos that Hwasong 14 is comparable to Hwasong 10, as they seem to share a TEL.

That tells us that Hwasong 14 uses the same class engine as Hwasong 14, albeit with minor modifications.

Still waiting for proof of that 80 ton class engine.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #134 on: 07/08/2017 11:43 pm »
With a throw weight of 650 kg, including the mass of the second stage, not so much.

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #135 on: 07/09/2017 04:48 am »

Offline K210

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 606
  • Liked: 284
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #136 on: 07/09/2017 12:25 pm »
It is highly likely the first stage engine used on Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-12 is a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine north korea tested in september 2016. Furthermore by studying the launch images you can see the second stage is rather small. It is possible north korea may stretch the upper stage down the track and achieve greater payload/range. If some improvements are made to the design the hwasong-14 could easily be made into a 10,000 Km class icbm which would put pretty much the entire world into range.

Given the rapid progress NK has made with rocket engine technology i think the world is in for quite a surprise when they reveal their new LV.....


Is there any proof that this engine has 80 tons of thrust? Could you compare this engine with that used by Hwasong 10? Is that also an 80 ton thrust engine?

For comparison, the R-27 engine (4D10) is a 25 ton engine.  The alleged ICBM tested a few days ago is clearly close to R-27 in dimensions; if it were equipped with an 80 ton engine, it would have accelerated much more quickly than the videos indicate.

Do you have better estimates of the size and mass of Hwasong-14?

My view is that the many years that have passed since the introduction of R-27 technology into the NK missile program tells us that their progress has been slow.

The engine used on the hwasong-12 and hwasong-14 is probably a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine they are developing for their new SLV. For ICBM application they have probably lowered the thrust to 40-60 tons level and added some steering engines. It is likely NK has scrapped the R-27 engines completely at this point given how unreliable they have proven (90% of tests were failures in 2016).

North korea seems to be moving beyond using left overs from the soviet union and developing their own tech from the ground up. At least that is what it looks like from the outside.

Again, you are asserting that NK has an 80 ton thrust engine with no proof. I am not saying you are wrong, but I cannot accept an analysis based on a feeling.

You do seem to admit that the Hwasong 10 uses the 4D10 derived engine, which is a 25 ton class engine. Therefore, you should understand that it is unlikely that Hwasong 12 and 14 have an engine that is significantly more powerful, since all three missiles are roughly the same size.

The more likely scenario is that the Hwasong 10 failures were symptoms of teething pains for R-27 based technology, and as time passes and more tests were conducted, the technicians fixed some of the problems.

One further note: the much larger Unha satellite launcher uses 4 Scud class engines clustered in the first stage. NK is probably going to have to either cluster the R-27 engine or seriously upgrade it to generate an ICBM with a usable payload and usable range.

In September 2016 North Korea claimed they had tested a 80 ton thrust rocket engine. Analysis of the blast scar at the test stand showed that the engine was indeed significantly more powerful than anything NK had tested before. Here is a link to a report by a expert: http://www.38north.org/2016/09/jschilling092116/

I have doubts that a 25 ton thrust engine could be used to power a icbm given the fact that the 1000 Km range Rodong missile is powered by a less efficient but more powerful 27 ton thrust engine. It is likely NK used the experience gained from the R-27 engine to build their own engines based on a more simpler gas generator cycle.

Also it is worth noting that iran may also be involved either through direct technical assistance or financing as they  recently have alluded to a new family of rockets powered by a 80 ton thrust engine.

Either way it is impossible for anyone outside north korea to say with 100% confidence what NK is up to. All we can do is study information avaliable and come to our own conclusions.

Offline K210

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 606
  • Liked: 284
  • Likes Given: 25
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #137 on: 07/09/2017 12:33 pm »
On the contrary. It is commonly agreed that Hwasong 10 uses R-27 technology for its engine. R-27 has a 25 ton class engine.

It is fairly obvious from photos that Hwasong 14 is comparable to Hwasong 10, as they seem to share a TEL.

That tells us that Hwasong 14 uses the same class engine as Hwasong 14, albeit with minor modifications.

Still waiting for proof of that 80 ton class engine.

Hwasong-14 is quite a bit taller and wider than hwasong-10. Hwasong-14 also seems to have provision for MIRV capability according to onboard camera footage realised by NK. My guess is they have taken the hwasong-10 design and improved upon it with new engines and a second stage to create a entry level icbm. Also if NK's claim of being able to carry a "heavy nuclear warhead" is true then it is possible they have increased the payload to 1-2 tons like most other icbms.

Offline Star One

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13997
  • UK
  • Liked: 3974
  • Likes Given: 220
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #138 on: 07/09/2017 05:31 pm »
It is highly likely the first stage engine used on Hwasong-14 and Hwasong-12 is a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine north korea tested in september 2016. Furthermore by studying the launch images you can see the second stage is rather small. It is possible north korea may stretch the upper stage down the track and achieve greater payload/range. If some improvements are made to the design the hwasong-14 could easily be made into a 10,000 Km class icbm which would put pretty much the entire world into range.

Given the rapid progress NK has made with rocket engine technology i think the world is in for quite a surprise when they reveal their new LV.....


Is there any proof that this engine has 80 tons of thrust? Could you compare this engine with that used by Hwasong 10? Is that also an 80 ton thrust engine?

For comparison, the R-27 engine (4D10) is a 25 ton engine.  The alleged ICBM tested a few days ago is clearly close to R-27 in dimensions; if it were equipped with an 80 ton engine, it would have accelerated much more quickly than the videos indicate.

Do you have better estimates of the size and mass of Hwasong-14?

My view is that the many years that have passed since the introduction of R-27 technology into the NK missile program tells us that their progress has been slow.

The engine used on the hwasong-12 and hwasong-14 is probably a derivative of the 80 ton thrust engine they are developing for their new SLV. For ICBM application they have probably lowered the thrust to 40-60 tons level and added some steering engines. It is likely NK has scrapped the R-27 engines completely at this point given how unreliable they have proven (90% of tests were failures in 2016).

North korea seems to be moving beyond using left overs from the soviet union and developing their own tech from the ground up. At least that is what it looks like from the outside.

Again, you are asserting that NK has an 80 ton thrust engine with no proof. I am not saying you are wrong, but I cannot accept an analysis based on a feeling.

You do seem to admit that the Hwasong 10 uses the 4D10 derived engine, which is a 25 ton class engine. Therefore, you should understand that it is unlikely that Hwasong 12 and 14 have an engine that is significantly more powerful, since all three missiles are roughly the same size.

The more likely scenario is that the Hwasong 10 failures were symptoms of teething pains for R-27 based technology, and as time passes and more tests were conducted, the technicians fixed some of the problems.

One further note: the much larger Unha satellite launcher uses 4 Scud class engines clustered in the first stage. NK is probably going to have to either cluster the R-27 engine or seriously upgrade it to generate an ICBM with a usable payload and usable range.

In September 2016 North Korea claimed they had tested a 80 ton thrust rocket engine. Analysis of the blast scar at the test stand showed that the engine was indeed significantly more powerful than anything NK had tested before. Here is a link to a report by a expert: http://www.38north.org/2016/09/jschilling092116/

I have doubts that a 25 ton thrust engine could be used to power a icbm given the fact that the 1000 Km range Rodong missile is powered by a less efficient but more powerful 27 ton thrust engine. It is likely NK used the experience gained from the R-27 engine to build their own engines based on a more simpler gas generator cycle.

Also it is worth noting that iran may also be involved either through direct technical assistance or financing as they  recently have alluded to a new family of rockets powered by a 80 ton thrust engine.

Either way it is impossible for anyone outside north korea to say with 100% confidence what NK is up to. All we can do is study information avaliable and come to our own conclusions.

Your third paragraph is the key here as I wouldn't be surprised if assistance hadn't been given considering how they've managed to catch the world out with this missile.
« Last Edit: 07/09/2017 05:32 pm by Star One »

Offline Danderman

  • Extreme Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10288
  • Liked: 699
  • Likes Given: 723
Re: North Korea missiles
« Reply #139 on: 07/09/2017 07:29 pm »
On the contrary. It is commonly agreed that Hwasong 10 uses R-27 technology for its engine. R-27 has a 25 ton class engine.

It is fairly obvious from photos that Hwasong 14 is comparable to Hwasong 10, as they seem to share a TEL.

That tells us that Hwasong 14 uses the same class engine as Hwasong 14, albeit with minor modifications.

Still waiting for proof of that 80 ton class engine.

Hwasong-14 is quite a bit taller and wider than hwasong-10. Hwasong-14 also seems to have provision for MIRV capability according to onboard camera footage realised by NK. My guess is they have taken the hwasong-10 design and improved upon it with new engines and a second stage to create a entry level icbm. Also if NK's claim of being able to carry a "heavy nuclear warhead" is true then it is possible they have increased the payload to 1-2 tons like most other icbms.

Is Hwasong 14 so much taller and wider than Hwasong 10 that it represents an increase from a 25 ton class to an 80 ton missile?

 

Advertisement NovaTech
Advertisement Northrop Grumman
Advertisement
Advertisement Margaritaville Beach Resort South Padre Island
Advertisement Brady Kenniston
Advertisement NextSpaceflight
Advertisement Nathan Barker Photography
1