New North Korean ballistic missiles

Scott Kenny said:
Really hard to believe that Russia would buy or even operationally test some ballistic missiles from North Korea. Too much national prestige on the line!
Click to expand...
It is cheaper and can be used as feint and decoy with secondary goal of achieving hit.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Really hard to believe that Russia would buy or even operationally test some ballistic missiles from North Korea. Too much national prestige on the line!
Click to expand...
The fact that they have to say irrefutably implies intelligence gathering still has the shadow of the Iraq WMD debacle hanging over any analysis made. In this case it's probably true but so what, there's a fairly high confidence that US manufactured missiles are being used in Ukraine. As long as NATO and Russia don't go head to head then the show will continue for the viewers.
 
piginapoke said:
The fact that they have to say irrefutably implies intelligence gathering still has the shadow of the Iraq WMD debacle hanging over any analysis made. In this case it's probably true but so what, there's a fairly high confidence that US manufactured missiles are being used in Ukraine. As long as NATO and Russia don't go head to head then the show will continue for the viewers.
Click to expand...
"Fairly high confidence" being "100%" in this case.
 
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-...wasong-19-thursday-yonhap-reports-2024-10-31/https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20241101000851315?section=nk/nk
It seems it is a new ICBM, Hwasong 19, it seems a bit longer, its TEL is larger (11 axles instead of 9 for Hwasong 18 TEL) and its shroud has a different shape.

"North Korea said the Hwasong-19 traversed 1,001.2 kilometers at a maximum altitude of 7,687.5 kilometers and flew for 5,156 seconds. It was assessed as having the longest flight time for a North Korean missile."

GbP_sX9akAcZgWn.jpg
GbP9SyPbkAADmxv.jpg
GbP9Suub0AARQgU.jpg
GbP8CpSaQAAybi3.jpg
GbP65jnakAgbO2p.jpg
 
Last edited:
Gwalker18 said:
We now know what that big TEL they built was for. Should we expect a Peacekeeper size ICBM or bigger?
Click to expand...
Not sure, assuming same diameter (at least the stage ratios are similar to Hwasong 18), it's probably not stretched enough to fit 20 or 30 additional tons of propellant.
 
From the few pictures available online, the TEL seems to have 11 axles, like the Hwasong-17. The picture from Kim's inspection of a big 12 axle TEL in September was probably faked or photoshopped to hide this new, wider missile TEL.
 
kcna-nov1-2024-kju-hwasong-19-hs19-icbm-missile-test-jindallae-guesthouse-launchpad-21.jpg

PYH2024110100550004200_P4.jpg

PYH2024110100520004200_P4.jpg
 
Once Hwasong-19 and Hwasong-18 enter in service with sufficient deployment on scale then Hwasong-17 and Hwasong-15 if there is still any could be adapted for use as sections for space launch vehicle or at very least components they have transferred to be used in SLV's. Although I wish North Korea developed nozzle that can handle Kerolox 100 ton force output since they can produce N2O4 UDMH fed turbopump that feeds two 40 ton force nozzles.
 
It's official, Kim-Young-Goon is really compensating for something. More seriously: show me a road network in North Korea that can withstand the weight of that monster, even with plenty of wheels and low pressure tyres. Also a cavern big enough to hide the beast.
 
sferrin said:
North Korea is better at making ICBMs than the US is.
Click to expand...
Jokes aside, they're now very clearly in Big 5.

Archibald said:
It's official, Kim-Young-Goon is really compensating for something. More seriously: show me a road network in North Korea that can withstand the weight of that monster, even with plenty of wheels and low pressure tyres. Also a cavern big enough to hide the beast.
Click to expand...
The latter they have in spares. An underground network is an obvious and long-since-known solution for a country with readily available cheap labor, and given that with the progress they're probably moving away from pre-planned launch pads - good luck preventing launches...
 
sferrin said:
North Korea is better at making ICBMs than the US is.
Click to expand...
Ironically yes, albeit I doubt that their buses and decoys are on modern level (most likely close to 1980s tech, albeit much more capable computers may compensate partially). Of course it mainly caused by lack of US ballistic missile development since the end of Cold War - a lot of skills were lost. Still, it's pretty ironic situation, when American military basically thinking "wish we became friends with THAT Korea; we could just buy road-mobile heavy ICBM from them"
 
Archibald said:
More seriously: show me a road network in North Korea that can withstand the weight of that monster, even with plenty of wheels and low pressure tyres. Also a cavern big enough to hide the beast.
Click to expand...
They are supposed to be based in underground tunnels, and only move to deploy before launch. The limited mobility made them significantly less vulnerable to any kind of pre-emptive strike, since there are a lot of tunnels in North Korea, and it's next to impossible to accurately guess where the missile exactly is.

BullpupRafale said:
Once Hwasong-19 and Hwasong-18 enter in service with sufficient deployment on scale then Hwasong-17 and Hwasong-15 if there is still any could be adapted for use as sections for space launch vehicle or at very least components they have transferred to be used in SLV's. Although I wish North Korea developed nozzle that can handle Kerolox 100 ton force output since they can produce N2O4 UDMH fed turbopump that feeds two 40 ton force nozzles.
Click to expand...
Agreed. North Korean seems to follow "we aren't rich enough to buy anything but very best" logic - they did not stop at just liquid-fuel ICBM, or even road-mobile liquid-fuel ICBM, they pushed to the road-mobile solid-fuel ICBM. Essentially, the preferred to spend more on development, but deploy only the system that would be able to provide optimal deterrence for its cost.
 
Hypothetical Question: If the two Koreas ever reunite, would the united Korea keep the solid-fuel Hwasong-18 and Hwasong-19 ICBMs?
 
Christopher Wang said:
Hypothetical Question: If the two Koreas ever reunite, would the united Korea keep the solid-fuel Hwasong-18 and Hwasong-19 ICBMs?
Click to expand...
They`d be very stupid not to.
But I think that would really depend on whether it was a genuine unification or just an absorption,like with east germany.
I wouldnt be at all surprised if it was the way that the unification of the 2 germanys militaries was carried out that ultimately convinced the dprk military that their best bet long term was sticking with the kims.
 
Dilandu said:
They are supposed to be based in underground tunnels, and only move to deploy before launch. The limited mobility made them significantly less vulnerable to any kind of pre-emptive strike, since there are a lot of tunnels in North Korea, and it's next to impossible to accurately guess where the missile exactly is.


Agreed. North Korean seems to follow "we aren't rich enough to buy anything but very best" logic - they did not stop at just liquid-fuel ICBM, or even road-mobile liquid-fuel ICBM, they pushed to the road-mobile solid-fuel ICBM. Essentially, the preferred to spend more on development, but deploy only the system that would be able to provide optimal deterrence for its cost.
Click to expand...
Tunnels maybe yes, exits however can still be found, as those TELs surely need to exit the tunnels to the launch pads for their end game. Those connected roads, highly strengthened in order to support the heavy TEL, will need much more material to build than normal roads. Intel as well as IMINT can help with this
 
SK2 said:
Tunnels maybe yes, exits however can still be found, as those TELs surely need to exit the tunnels to the launch pads for their end game
Click to expand...
Exits could be made multiple, camouflaged and fake ones constructed in large numbers. And since this missile is solid-fuel, it's launch time is quite rapid. It's not perfect, of course, but it guarantee North Korean ICBM's much better survivability, than silo-based missiles would have in the same situation.
 
7700km apogee... Isn't a ballistic missile apogee roughly equal to its range?



Dilandu said:
Agreed. North Korean seems to follow "we aren't rich enough to buy anything but very best" logic - they did not stop at just liquid-fuel ICBM, or even road-mobile liquid-fuel ICBM, they pushed to the road-mobile solid-fuel ICBM. Essentially, the preferred to spend more on development, but deploy only the system that would be able to provide optimal deterrence for its cost.
Click to expand...
Yeah, they're definitely following the Vimes "Boots theory"

Buy the $100 boots that last you 10 years or more, don't spend $10 on boots that only last 6 months.



SK2 said:
Tunnels maybe yes, exits however can still be found, as those TELs surely need to exit the tunnels to the launch pads for their end game. Those connected roads, highly strengthened in order to support the heavy TEL, will need much more material to build than normal roads. Intel as well as IMINT can help with this
Click to expand...
You're assuming that there is any distance between the tunnel exit and the launch location.

I'd only expect to see a long heavy-duty road between the factory where they make these monsters and the nearest entrance to the tunnel complex.
 
Scott Kenny said:
7700km apogee... Isn't a ballistic missile apogee roughly equal to its range?
Click to expand...
No, because Earth is round and spinning.

Initial two minutes is basically to go straight up to leave Earth's atmosphere and afterwards have 45 degree angle, if there is sufficient thrust depending on rocket or missile carries then orbit can be achieved.

Satellites always are falling when orbiting unless geosynchronous locked in with perfect balance to stay there long past lifespan of components.
 
BullpupRafale said:
Satellites always are falling when orbiting unless geosynchronous locked in with perfect balance to stay there long past lifespan of components.
Click to expand...

Why are they falling unless they are in geosynchronous orbit?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom