Comments on: Missile Flop: Norks in Tight Spot

By: The Disseminating Machine

The Disseminating Machine — Sun, 21 Jun 2009 02:00:04 +0000

North Korea should relax.
_______________
SCANDAL! SCANDAL! SCANDAL!
EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY! EMERGENCY!
George W. Bush continuously criminally stalked Margie Schoedinger to the point that she could not get away from it, and she committed suicide in desperation to escape: he murdered her.

By: John E. Caey

John E. Caey — Fri, 14 Jul 2006 07:12:58 +0000

We have seen a remarkable few weeks of successes for the U.S. Missile Defense System:
–The National Missile Defense System was successfully activated and stood “on alert” during the face-off with North Korea. Though not needed because the North Korean Taepodong-2 failed, we were ready.
–The same can be said of U.S. and Japanese AEGIS ships at sea.
–THAAD had a successful flight test.
Suggested reading: http://washingtontimes.com/commentary/20060625–112553-8880r.htm

By: Moose

Moose — Sat, 08 Jul 2006 07:42:23 +0000

MTC, Look a the ballistic arc projections here:
http://www.physicstoday.com/pt/vol-57/iss-1/images/p30fig1.jpg
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/dprk/td-2-trajectory.htm
An ICBM’s arc over the globe produces an arced path on the globe, an ICBM aimed at the West Coast couldn’t overfly Japan, the trajectory would be all wrong. An ICBM aimed at hawaii (or the vicinity), would just cut across Hokkaido on its way. The projected splashdown zone is perfect for a failed launch at Hawaii’s vicinity. And the area of the crash is very close to the splashdown of the TD-1 first stage splash from 1998, the second stage of which DID overfly Japan. I don’t think they were trying to not overfly anyone, I think they were aimed at Hawaii.
As for improper fueling, this was a (probably) three-stage booster. Even if stages 2 and 3 were unfuelled, they still would have separated from stage 1 after S1 burnout, and without the extra mass and aero disadvantage they would have glided along a ballistic arc farther downrange than stage one. Yet all information so far says the missile came down in one big wreck. Did they also intentionally sabotage their stage separation mechanism? To what point?

By: Brian

Brian — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 23:36:32 +0000

MTC,
First, we’ll never be sure exactly what happened. This is all speculation, and any half-way plausible theory is as good as any other half-plausible theory. That’s what makes dealing with North Korea so hard. No one ever really knows what “Dear Leader” is thinking.
It’s like the mind of Dale Gribble (King of the Hill). With Kim Jong Il, EVERY conspiracy theory is possible. Is he a brilliant schemer? Is he a madman? Both? No one knows exactly how crazy he is, nor exactly how much support he believes he has from China.
Would Kim Jong Il fire a missile over Japan, even if hardline Japanese said it would be an act of war? He would if he thought China had his back.

By: dave

dave — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 03:18:58 +0000

The most interesting of the latest news (reuters) is that “data from U.S. and Japanese Aegis radar-equipped destroyers and surveillance aircraft on the missile’s angle of take-off and altitude indicated that it was heading for waters near Hawaii”.
All that blue water and they still have to try to stick a thumb in our eye.

By: Noah Shachtman

Noah Shachtman — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 03:03:39 +0000

Allen:
The graphic is from the L.A. Times.
nms

By: Moose

Moose — Fri, 07 Jul 2006 01:12:12 +0000

Yes, beucase a full burn of the stage-1 booster would still have gone over Japan, and if was on a ballistic trajectory for a pacific splashdown when launched. it failed, period.

By: Allen Thomson

Allen Thomson — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 23:32:39 +0000

Where did the TD-1 and TD-2 landing areas shown in http://www.defensetech.org/images/lat_nork_graphic.jpg come from?
They are not consistent with other information that I know of (z.B., the TD-2 couldn’t have landed very far from the launch site if it failed at less than a minute into flight.)

By: Joseph

Joseph — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 23:15:04 +0000

A few things.
Are we sure that N.K. didn’t set this up to fail?
Also the fact that we detected it, sounds good but weren’t we staring right at that point w the I.R. sat’s?
Another thing I think that gets lost is that both sides learn about the other even if there is a failure. We learn about there capabilities and they learn what went wrong.
Over all it seems that N.K. has egg on there face and we learned a bunch about there program, seems like a win for us.

By: Moose

Moose — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 21:45:16 +0000

We’re apparently well defended, and militarially in a good position. But how are we in terms of actually working toward a resolution to the whole conflict? If NK tossing missiles around cannot dislodge China and Russia, what can?
The Bush admin, or the next one if Bush can’t be bothered, needs to find a way to break this stalemate Russia and China are imposing on every conflict out there, whether through negotiations with them or with the priniciples involved, or this potentially deadly Status Quo will continue to reign.