-
#160
by
Kryten
on 17 Jul, 2017 08:37
-
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.
-
#161
by
Danderman
on 17 Jul, 2017 09:18
-
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.
-
#162
by
Danderman
on 17 Jul, 2017 09:21
-
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.
-
#163
by
Kryten
on 17 Jul, 2017 09:31
-
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.
-
#164
by
Chasm
on 17 Jul, 2017 15:00
-
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.
-
#165
by
Danderman
on 17 Jul, 2017 15:35
-
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.
-
#166
by
Websorber
on 19 Jul, 2017 20:33
-
-
#167
by
Websorber
on 21 Jul, 2017 07:58
-
-
#168
by
K210
on 21 Jul, 2017 14:45
-
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.
-
#169
by
Danderman
on 22 Jul, 2017 08:25
-
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.
-
#170
by
Comet
on 22 Jul, 2017 20:40
-
-
#171
by
Danderman
on 24 Jul, 2017 07:04
-
Are there similar scale drawings for HS10?
-
#172
by
Websorber
on 27 Jul, 2017 08:49
-
-
#173
by
Danderman
on 28 Jul, 2017 17:03
-
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.
-
#174
by
Kryten
on 28 Jul, 2017 17:22
-
If HS-10 is a stretched R-27, wouldn't it already have four verniers?
-
#175
by
Danderman
on 28 Jul, 2017 17:27
-
If HS-10 is a stretched R-27, wouldn't it already have four verniers?
R-27 only had 2 verniers.
-
#176
by
hop
on 28 Jul, 2017 17:49
-
New launch, with early indication that flight time is significantly longer than the last one
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40757780The 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
-
#177
by
Rebel44
on 28 Jul, 2017 18:57
-
-
#178
by
Zed_Noir
on 28 Jul, 2017 19:50
-
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?
-
#179
by
Rocket Science
on 28 Jul, 2017 20:01
-
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...