DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Those Nutty Norks » Epic Fail: North Korean Bottle Rocket Assumes Underwater Trajectory

Epic Fail: North Korean Bottle Rocket Assumes Underwater Trajectory

kim jong il.jpgNorthern Command reports:

North American Aerospace Defense Command and U.S. Northern Command officials acknowledged today that North Korea launched a Taepo Dong 2 missile at 10:30 p.m. EDT Saturday which passed over the Sea of Japan/East Sea and the nation of Japan.
Stage one of the missile fell into the Sea of Japan/East Sea. The remaining stages along with the payload itself landed in the Pacific Ocean.

Sounds like the second stage never separated –or ignited– giving the birdie about as much thrust as a slab of granite. Hence the splish-splash just east of Japan. No doubt if we were the shooters, we’d call it a catastrophic success. Bureaucracy!
I’m sure the only people more disappointed than the Nork regime are our friendly neighborhood MDA suits, who were counting on the launch to calibrate their radars and to remain relevant.
Quote of the day, from the most righteous Arms Control Wonk blog: Oh-for-three. These guys really suck.
–John Noonan

Share |

April 5th, 2009 | Those Nutty Norks | 442820 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2009/04/05/epic-fail-north-korean-bottle-rocket-assumes-underwater-trajectory/Epic+Fail%3A+North+Korean+Bottle+Rocket+Assumes+Underwater+Trajectory2009-04-05+20%3A28%3A45lowe You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Tactical Impact: Stalingrad | Israel Can Go the Distance » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Literate Person says:
    April 5, 2009 at 8:12 pm

    If the first stage fell into the Sea of Japan/East Sea and the remaining stages and payload fell into the Pacific Ocean, there was a stage separation and some thrust, implying ignition and early shutdown of the second stage engine.

    Reply
  2. pedestrian says:
    April 5, 2009 at 8:53 pm

    NORAD did NOT disclose rather the second stage has succeed to separate. The only comment made was that the rest of the rocket has landed on Pacific Sea. Repeat, Pentagon did NOT disclose rather or not the second stage has succeed to separate. Japan claimed recently that the rocket did not exceed the minimum speed to launch a satellite into space. It is more likely that the rocket was a missile test bed.

    Reply
  3. John says:
    April 5, 2009 at 9:35 pm

    We’re all just speculating here, my friend.

    Reply
  4. Valcan says:
    April 5, 2009 at 10:41 pm

    Have to admit pedestrian it certainly is possible. But hell he can launch all he likes worst hell get from the UN is a strongly worded letter.
    Unless the japanses decide to smash him.

    Reply
  5. mike says:
    April 5, 2009 at 11:03 pm

    “Quote of the day, from the most righteous Arms Control Wonk blog: Oh-for-three. These guys really suck.“
    Well you know that we sucked too, back in the day. As I recall Vanguard only had two successful launches out of ten. Explorer was better but not by much.

    Reply
  6. richardb says:
    April 5, 2009 at 11:11 pm

    To the thumb suckers opposed to any missile defense, please explain the success of Iran in using Nork technology to ORBIT a satellite last year? That was a real ICBM derived from NORK, Russian and or Chinese technology.
    How many more hostile countries must have ICBM’s before the US embraces BMD?

    Reply
  7. pedestrian says:
    April 6, 2009 at 12:01 am

    >But hell he can launch all he likes worst hell get
    >from the UN is a strongly worded letter.
    China and Russia will veto any punishment and sanction against Iran and North Korea. Nothing will be accomplished within UN. Only putting North Korea back on the terror sponsor list is the option President Obama could execute.

    Reply
  8. xfactor says:
    April 6, 2009 at 2:22 am

    China and Russia did in fact veto any UN action, and not even a sternly worded statement can be made.
    North Korea has shown again that they really know how to play nations off against each other. In reality they know this is not about the U.N. vs. the DPRK, and more about China vs. Japan & the U.S. played out through global politics. I don’t know enough about Russia to understand their motives.
    North Korea & China: 1
    Japan, Sth Korea and America: 0

    Reply
  9. DGC says:
    April 6, 2009 at 5:06 am

    I consider an equal epic fail that either the US or Japan didn’t try to shoot it down despite so much talk in the previous days. Norks and their petty regime have acted bully and pissed so much out of the toilet since the 50s that they need to be confronted with more that strongly worded letters or puny sanctions from the UN.

    Reply
  10. Ivan says:
    April 6, 2009 at 5:57 am

    Well if China and Russia will veto any punishment and sanction against Iran and North Korea, we the rest of the world should make them responsible for their actions.

    Reply
  11. Joe Buff says:
    April 6, 2009 at 6:29 am

    it’s likely the usn sub force is picking the pieces off the ocean floor right now. more will be known in secret re what went right and wrong than the public will ever hear about.

    Reply
  12. Watching Them, Watching Us says:
    April 6, 2009 at 6:45 am

    “Quote of the day, from the most righteous Arms Control Wonk blog: Oh-for-three. These guys really suck.“
    Just like the equivalent early US long range rocketry efforts then ?
    http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​V​a​n​g​u​a​r​d​_​r​o​c​ket

    Reply
  13. Schrott says:
    April 6, 2009 at 7:54 am

    Quote of the day, from the most righteous Arms Control Wonk blog: Oh-for-three. These guys really suck.“
    Just like the equivalent early US long range rocketry efforts then ?
    http://​en​.wikipedia​.org/​w​i​k​i​/​V​a​n​g​u​a​r​d​_​r​o​c​ket
    Posted by: Watching Them, Watching Us at April 6, 2009 06:45 AM…
    Ok, can you please tell me WHEN the Vanguard program was? You DO know what year it is, right?? 2009, the last i checked, not 1949. By the time the Norks can pull their heads out of their bungholes and actually make it work, our interceptors should be dead on…
    The norks can’t even feed their own people. Eventually, they will wake up and find out that it’s the 21st century.

    Reply
  14. Musson says:
    April 6, 2009 at 8:12 am

    Do you think they might be getting tagged by a laser during launch phase?

    Reply
  15. Valcan says:
    April 6, 2009 at 10:52 am

    Well if China and Russia will veto any punishment and sanction against Iran and North Korea, we the rest of the world should make them responsible for their actions.
    Posted by: Ivan at April 6, 2009 05:57 AM
    —————
    But ivan!!! that would mean “going it alone” how dare we consider our rights over the reast of the worlds!!! I mean shouldnt we accept the rest of the worlds will. I mean sure by the rest of the worlds will we have stopped pverty…wait no, no.…well the world has stopped the wars in africa!!.…wait no they havent.…radical islam.…there kinda spreading it.…um…DARFUR!!!.…oh wait they just stopped talking about it…world hunger…emmm
    Ok so maybe the world has done pretty much nothing but hey we dont have a moral right to judge.
    Im so glade obama is in office now we can cooperate with the rest of the world in finacial systems and energy policy in geneva. Wait a minute…crap..didnt we have a huge war cause we decided that ppl in other countries werent going to tax us.…..sigh.
    Ok im gonna go listen to the Who. and drink

    Reply
  16. Max says:
    April 6, 2009 at 12:23 pm

    Though a lot of people see this launch as a failure I would argue that N. Korea is making progress towards getting a successful launch. This last launch went much better than their first, which disintegrated within minutes of launch. More info here, http://​www​.newsy​.com/​v​i​d​e​o​s​/​n​o​r​t​h​_​k​o​r​e​a​_​s​_​f​a​i​l​u​r​e​_​a​n​d​_​s​u​c​c​e​ss/

    Reply
  17. Darrell says:
    April 6, 2009 at 3:46 pm

    Any chance we could recover the upper stage?

    Reply
  18. Chris says:
    April 9, 2009 at 10:14 am

    OK, it fell in the ocean. Are we going to get it? Are we going to let another country get it?
    Nobody seems to be asking.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • Those Wonderful Sea Lines of Communication
    • Army’s GCV Not Just MGV Warmed Over
    • Cancel Cyber Command
    • Rough Week for F-35
    • Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer (Part 3)
    • China’s Military Spending Slows
    • Army React To NLOS-LS Missile Miss
    • Is the F-35 Militarily Vital?
    • Quote Of the Week
    • Taking Back the Infantry Half-Kilometer (Part 2)
    Recent Comments
    • Fix Bayonets!
      meant to say are NOT.. my bad. proofreading not done.
      chris king
    • Fix Bayonets!
      The scope, the bayonet, all of it should bear "God Bless...
      chris king
    • Army’s GCV Not Just MGV Warmed Over
      I hope they doing something so the guys ridding...
      The Seer
    • Cancel Cyber Command
      I keep telling people if a computer is hooked to the Internet it...
      KevinInTac
    • Rough Week for F-35
      But the F-22 is Air Force only, not for export, and would almost...
      DualityOfMan
    • Army’s GCV Not Just MGV Warmed Over
      Nitpicking a little more: the Abrams with all the...
      TMB
    • Cancel Cyber Command
      Where does Obama and crew find these people, a first year IT...
      KevinInTac
    • Army React To NLOS-LS Missile Miss
      Having been present for one of those spit storms,(...
      KevinInTac
    • Army’s GCV Not Just MGV Warmed Over
      Actually, to refine my previous thought....
      Armchair Warlord
    • Army’s GCV Not Just MGV Warmed Over
      It would be nice if these vehicles were...
      Mad Mike Weber
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage