-
#340
by
Danderman
on 22 Sep, 2017 14:31
-
I never heard of anyone testing a nuke without the capability of monitoring the results. A missile launch would take the nuke beyond telemetry range unless they tried flying a very high elevation trajectory, which would mean that an engine failure would put the nuke close to land.
A ship could be intercepted.
Therefore, most likely, this is Guam all over again.
-
#341
by
Rocket Science
on 22 Sep, 2017 14:46
-
I never heard of anyone testing a nuke without the capability of monitoring the results. A missile launch would take the nuke beyond telemetry range unless they tried flying a very high elevation trajectory, which would mean that an engine failure would put the nuke close to land.
A ship could be intercepted.
Therefore, most likely, this is Guam all over again.
They may detonate on a ship, no launch needed and they have hidden weapons on board that got past inspectors during intercepts...
There has been unusual submarine activity in the last month or so in international waters and so it could even be a sub launched missile for all we know:
"North Korea’s latest submarine is a step in a different direction, the so-called Sinpo or Gorae (“Whale”) class ballistic-missile submarine (SSB). The SSB appears to blend submarine know-how from previous classes with launch technology from the Soviet Cold War–era Golf-class ballistic-missile submarines; North Korea imported several Golf-class subs in the 1990s, ostensibly for scrapping purposes. Both the Golf and Gorae classes feature missile tubes in the submarine’s sail. The tubes are believed to be meant for the Pukkuksong-1 (“Polaris”) submarine-launched ballistic missiles currently under development."
http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/north-koreas-submarine-fleet-big-threat-or-big-joke-20300Edit to add:
-
#342
by
Danderman
on 24 Sep, 2017 03:41
-
I will stick my neck out and predict that we are not going to see a Pacific test of a nuke for many years, not an intentional one, except if carried out by a large ship.
-
#343
by
Johnnyhinbos
on 24 Sep, 2017 12:13
-
-
#344
by
WulfTheSaxon
on 24 Sep, 2017 14:33
-
-
#345
by
Archibald
on 24 Sep, 2017 17:10
-
-
#346
by
Star One
on 24 Sep, 2017 22:50
-
Live test of Polaris A1, 1962.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150329041813/http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_24/frigate_bird.htm
Last atmospheric nuclear test was China in October 1980.
If North Korea really do that... well, the gloves are off. It will create quite a dangerous situation.
What is different since the last atmospheric tests is that nearly every nation on Earth has since signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. An open air test by North Korea would be a nasty affront to the rest of this planet's inhabitants - and that is the best possible outcome. Worse would be setting the thing off in the midst of naval or air traffic, or having test fallout affect islands or transiting traffic.
- Ed Kyle
Our oceans are not exactly in the best of health these days and such a test certainly wouldn’t do much for them in the vicinity.
-
#347
by
Johnnyhinbos
on 24 Sep, 2017 23:07
-
Live test of Polaris A1, 1962.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150329041813/http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_24/frigate_bird.htm
Last atmospheric nuclear test was China in October 1980.
If North Korea really do that... well, the gloves are off. It will create quite a dangerous situation.
What is different since the last atmospheric tests is that nearly every nation on Earth has since signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. An open air test by North Korea would be a nasty affront to the rest of this planet's inhabitants - and that is the best possible outcome. Worse would be setting the thing off in the midst of naval or air traffic, or having test fallout affect islands or transiting traffic.
- Ed Kyle
Our oceans are not exactly in the best of health these days and such a test certainly wouldn’t do much for them in the vicinity.
As someone who has dedicated their professional - and personal - life to the world’s oceans, I’m mortified by this threat.
-
#348
by
WulfTheSaxon
on 25 Sep, 2017 05:32
-
Live test of Polaris A1, 1962.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150329041813/http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_24/frigate_bird.htm
Last atmospheric nuclear test was China in October 1980.
If North Korea really do that... well, the gloves are off. It will create quite a dangerous situation.
What is different since the last atmospheric tests is that nearly every nation on Earth has since signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. An open air test by North Korea would be a nasty affront to the rest of this planet's inhabitants - and that is the best possible outcome. Worse would be setting the thing off in the midst of naval or air traffic, or having test fallout affect islands or transiting traffic.
- Ed Kyle
Our oceans are not exactly in the best of health these days and such a test certainly wouldn’t do much for them in the vicinity.
As someone who has dedicated their professional - and personal - life to the world’s oceans, I’m mortified by this threat.
I can only assume that the plan is for an airburst. Am I mistaken in my understanding that the many dozens of prior tests over the ocean caused no lasting harm?
-
#349
by
catdlr
on 25 Sep, 2017 08:32
-
Live test of Polaris A1, 1962.
https://web.archive.org/web/20150329041813/http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_24/frigate_bird.htm
Last atmospheric nuclear test was China in October 1980.
If North Korea really do that... well, the gloves are off. It will create quite a dangerous situation.
What is different since the last atmospheric tests is that nearly every nation on Earth has since signed the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. An open air test by North Korea would be a nasty affront to the rest of this planet's inhabitants - and that is the best possible outcome. Worse would be setting the thing off in the midst of naval or air traffic, or having test fallout affect islands or transiting traffic.
- Ed Kyle
Our oceans are not exactly in the best of health these days and such a test certainly wouldn’t do much for them in the vicinity.
As someone who has dedicated their professional - and personal - life to the world’s oceans, I’m mortified by this threat.
I can only assume that the plan is for an airburst. Am I mistaken in my understanding that the many dozens of prior tests over the ocean caused no lasting harm?
Not unless you're on a scheduled trans-pacific flight. (remember Un is not going to provide a NOTAM for his test).
-
#350
by
Bubbinski
on 25 Sep, 2017 18:28
-
This morning NK apparently threatened to shoot down US bombers even if they weren’t over NK airspace. Do they have long range SAM’s for that? Next missile firing from there might be that if not the threatened open air nuke test.
Regarding the nuke test Tony’s right, if I’m a passenger on a jetliner over the Pacific I wouldn’t feel good about the situation. Depending on how high the air burst was EMP could come into play. What’s the minimum airburst height for EMP to affect a wide area? And how would a NK airburst over the Pacific affect ISS or other satellites?
-
#351
by
Zed_Noir
on 26 Sep, 2017 02:58
-
<snip>
Setting off a nuclear warhead without a NOTAM would be insane. Beyond Cuban Missile Crises crazy. How would the world know it wasn't an act of war gone awry?
- Ed Kyle
It is about the equivlant of determining if any approaching warplane might be doing an attack run on your facilities and leadership if you are the DPRK. Remember the US and the DPRK are still technically at war
You got to think of the mindset of the North Korean leadership after being threaten by the POTUS.
One should not be poking a cornered animal without taking some risk of being attack by said animal.
-
#352
by
Websorber
on 01 Oct, 2017 19:09
-
-
#353
by
Websorber
on 01 Oct, 2017 19:11
-
-
#354
by
Danderman
on 03 Oct, 2017 22:39
-
Speculation ON
Given that China's new line of launchers is based on the RD-120 engine, and it is not clear how China got the design, is it possible that the same source provided the design to NK, which then converted the engine to storable fuels?
Speculation OFF
-
#355
by
russianhalo117
on 03 Oct, 2017 23:02
-
Speculation ON
Given that China's new line of launchers is based on the RD-120 engine, and it is not clear how China got the design, is it possible that the same source provided the design to NK, which then converted the engine to storable fuels?
Speculation OFF
China's are from Ukraine. They are almost identical and their are threads on this. As for North Korea there is not any strong evidence to support this theory and the UN has yet to issue its findings from its recently conducted review. All I can say is wait for a bit.
-
#356
by
Danderman
on 04 Oct, 2017 14:12
-
The fact that China's RD-120 derivatives originated from a Ukrainian source somehow means that NK could not purchase from the same source?
-
#357
by
SmallKing
on 04 Oct, 2017 14:23
-
The fact that China's RD-120 derivatives originated from a Ukrainian source somehow means that NK could not purchase from the same source?
Converting the engine to storable fuels? This is not easy. For NK, apparently there are some better choices
-
#358
by
pippin
on 04 Oct, 2017 14:23
-
No, it’s more that the photos and videos Yankton NKs engines show them to be very, very different from RD-120
-
#359
by
Star One
on 07 Oct, 2017 19:05
-
North Korea preparing long-range missile test: RIA cites Russian lawmaker
MOSCOW (Reuters) - North Korea is preparing to test a long-range missile which it believes can reach the west coast of the United States, a Russian lawmaker just returned from a visit to Pyongyang was quoted as saying on Friday.
Anton Morozov, a member of the Russian lower house of parliament’s international affairs committee, and two other Russian lawmakers visited Pyongyang on Oct. 2-6, Russia’s RIA news agency reported.
“They are preparing for new tests of a long-range missile. They even gave us mathematical calculations that they believe prove that their missile can hit the west coast of the United States,” RIA quoted Morozov as saying.
“As far as we understand, they intend to launch one more long-range missile in the near future. And in general, their mood is rather belligerent.”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-missiles-russia/north-korea-preparing-long-range-missile-test-ria-cites-russian-lawmaker-idUSKBN1CB21T