• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

North Korea...how do we know...

MaggieD

MaggieD

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,664
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
When NK launches a test missile over the head of Japan, do we know it's trajectory soon enough to shoot it down if we had to? And how do we know it isn't nuclear?

Anyone know?
 
All countries have missile defense systems that alert their generals of vehicles that are on potentially hostile trajectories.

Black Brant 1995 is an example of such a thing.
 
MovingPictures said:
All countries have missile defense systems that alert their generals of vehicles that are on potentially hostile trajectories.

Black Brant 1995 is an example of such a thing.
Click to expand...
Yes, the compute satellite-fed info is almost instantaneous for predicting where said missile is going. The problem is that we do not have a 100% kill accuracy missile defense system. It is much better, however, than even five years ago.

The best defense is a dead Kim.
 
MaggieD said:
When NK launches a test missile over the head of Japan, do we know it's trajectory soon enough to shoot it down if we had to? And how do we know it isn't nuclear?

Anyone know?
Click to expand...

I would think it would be better to shoot them just over the ground. They're rather slow at that point.
 
MovingPictures said:
All countries have missile defense systems that alert their generals of vehicles that are on potentially hostile trajectories.

Black Brant 1995 is an example of such a thing.
Click to expand...

I suspect that US generals are alerted before takeoff.
 
joG said:
I suspect that US generals are alerted before takeoff.
Click to expand...
Yes, spy satellites help inform the DoD of where there is activity suspected of being a potential missile launch.
 
So far, NK launches have been vertical and very elliptical. What this means is that these missiles travel upwards a great distance yet always land relatively close (Sea of Japan) to the launch point. Telemetry and mathematics allows NK engineers to then calculate how far these missiles would travel on an intercontinental (more horizontal) flight path. Current NK missiles reach a zenith (height) of ~2,300 miles. For comparison, the International Space Station is ~250 miles up. The trick to becoming a ballistic nuclear-power is to combine rocket distance with a payload capacity sufficient to deliver a nuclear warhead. The most advanced nuclear states such as the US and Russia can deliver MIRV nose cones (with multiple independent warheads) virtually anywhere on the globe with an accuracy of roughly 100 meters. Basically, NK requires three ballistic competencies ... #1 distance #2 payload capacity #3 acceptable accuracy. It seems they have conquered the distance requirement. Further testing is now necessary to upgrade #2 and #3 competence.
 
Rogue Valley said:
So far, NK launches have been vertical and very elliptical. What this means is that these missiles travel upwards a great distance yet always land relatively close (Sea of Japan) to the launch point. Telemetry and mathematics allows NK engineers to then calculate how far these missiles would travel on an intercontinental (more horizontal) flight path. Current NK missiles reach a zenith (height) of ~2,300 miles. For comparison, the International Space Station is ~250 miles up. The trick to becoming a ballistic nuclear-power is to combine rocket distance with a payload capacity sufficient to deliver a nuclear warhead. The most advanced nuclear states such as the US and Russia can deliver MIRV nose cones (with multiple independent warheads) virtually anywhere on the globe with an accuracy of roughly 100 meters. Basically, NK requires three ballistic competencies ... #1 distance #2 payload capacity #3 acceptable accuracy. It seems they have conquered the distance requirement. Further testing is now necessary to upgrade #2 and #3 competence.
Click to expand...

What an informative answer! Thank you very much.
 
I've heard rumors otherwise, but I don't think we have a reliable means of knowing whether they payload is nuclear while the missile is still in flight.
 
MaggieD said:
What an informative answer! Thank you very much.
Click to expand...

I should probably elaborate a bit further. You cannot place WWII era atomic devices like "Little Boy" (Hiroshima) and "Fat Man" (Nagasaki) on ballistic missiles. They are far too large and too heavy. What is needed are "miniaturized" nuclear devices that are smaller, lighter, and yet deliver significantly higher nuclear blast yields. NK says they have accomplished the miniaturization process, but it is impossible to verify this competency without additional data. Another critical item is reentry. In order to perform correctly, a nuclear ICBM missile warhead must be able to survive reentry into Earth's atmosphere .... which induces bow shock, atmospheric drag, and aerodynamic heating. If the nose cone lacks 'compressive strength' it will explode into thousands of metal shards. It's quite technical, but angle of reentry is critical in determining the ablative materials needed to survive the friction-generated heat which can reach many thousands of degrees Celsius. To recap, 'miniaturization' is probably the most difficult weapon phase to master, and 'atmospheric reentry' is probably the most technologically difficult ballistic phase to master. Mastery of both facets is required to present a credible nuclear ICBM threat. In order to validate their designs and materials, NK will at some point have to implement more onerous and realistic tests.
 
JamesBY said:
Yes, the compute satellite-fed info is almost instantaneous for predicting where said missile is going. The problem is that we do not have a 100% kill accuracy missile defense system. It is much better, however, than even five years ago.

The best defense is a dead Kim.
Click to expand...

I think one of his inner cabinet will do the deed, not that the truth will be made public!
 
Slingshot Bob said:
The how, matters not at this point, just that he soon takes a dirt nap. Hopefully a crazier bastard does not fill his shoes!
Click to expand...



And that's where I think we make a mistake. I heard enough evidence years ago to question whether his dad was really in charge. My belief is that's it's junta-style government which, over the years, has been creating a whole mythology around "dear leader" the same way the Japanese had come to believe they were unconquerable because of Hirohito.
 
MaggieD said:
When NK launches a test missile over the head of Japan, do we know it's trajectory soon enough to shoot it down if we had to? And how do we know it isn't nuclear?

Anyone know?
Click to expand...

North korea is so secretive we truly know little. We know of their torture and their famine and poverty, but outside that the united states is acting on what few spies it can get into the country, and most is a mystery.
 
Rogue Valley said:
I should probably elaborate a bit further. You cannot place WWII era atomic devices like "Little Boy" (Hiroshima) and "Fat Man" (Nagasaki) on ballistic missiles. They are far too large and too heavy. What is needed are "miniaturized" nuclear devices that are smaller, lighter, and yet deliver significantly higher nuclear blast yields. NK says they have accomplished the miniaturization process, but it is impossible to verify this competency without additional data. Another critical item is reentry. In order to perform correctly, a nuclear ICBM missile warhead must be able to survive reentry into Earth's atmosphere .... which induces bow shock, atmospheric drag, and aerodynamic heating. If the nose cone lacks 'compressive strength' it will explode into thousands of metal shards. It's quite technical, but angle of reentry is critical in determining the ablative materials needed to survive the friction-generated heat which can reach many thousands of degrees Celsius. To recap, 'miniaturization' is probably the most difficult weapon phase to master, and 'atmospheric reentry' is probably the most technologically difficult ballistic phase to master. Mastery of both facets is required to present a credible nuclear ICBM threat. In order to validate their designs and materials, NK will at some point have to implement more onerous and realistic tests.
Click to expand...
That was a good answer. Keep in mind the missile does not have to be accurate,
nor does it have to be able to re-enter the atmosphere for there to be an EMP attack.

Next, I never hear on these discussions that the way there technology advanced so rapidly is because they bought it from Ukraine.

I only hope I added to a healthy discussion

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom