New North Korean ballistic missiles

CiTrus90 said:
I don't know why the quote is in a different thread from where I posted, but still...
Click to expand...
I've moved the reply to this thread since this thread is more fitting than the drone thread.

CiTrus90 said:
These are the differences I see:View attachment 704748
The HGV shown recently is more reminiscent of a wing-body configuration, unlike the wedge shape of the Hwasong-8.
Granted, payload and guidance system might still be the same, but the aerodynamic differences are significant enough to consider it a new platform in my opinion.
Click to expand...
KUMA said:
It is worth noting that the model written on the display board is not Hwasong-8 but Hwasong-12B (12 나)
View attachment 704749
Click to expand...
Oh, you're right. I haven't noticed that designation there. Though the lineage wouldn't be completely separate from one another I feel.
 
Forest Green said:
How come DPRK seems to have a copy of everything China has?
Click to expand...
When you start studying them, you soon encounter a few interesting details:

1, despite the "evident" and ever-present expectations of China, there are very few Chinese connections. Chips (a way to slip by sanctions - and by no means the only one) and some heavy-duty carrier vehicles ... and that's most of it. Same with Russia(almost zero for many decades).
That North Korea does - it does either by itself (developing its own/self-obtained Soviet legacy), or with...

2, Iran. Iran can be found everywhere in DPRK military systems, and wise versa; moreover, it's to the point of visible cooperation and specialization of sorts. DPRK is tending to take more of heavy industry part of the spectrum, being much closer to an old-style industrial nation than Iran.

3, DPRK doesn't copy China all that much. What they do is they to their best ability counter/match(or overmatch where they can) ROK military in their eternal arms race. With....mixed results, but few nations do as well as them when economic disparity is this crushing - you have to give them that.

The same situation as with everyone - when they're sure what they're doing - they create their own systems. Where they aren't - they copy that works (recent totally not MQ-4/9 are a perfect example, copied to the last external curve).
Sometimes systems from both groups compete with each other.

4, With missiles/space specifically they simply aim for what they can - i.e. ground and sea-based deterrent, as well as tactical weapons.
No large surface vessels - it's utterly pointless, no big airspace - it's utterly unaffordable.

5, NK is quite capable in engineering terms. Ultimately, they have quite a lot of working development groups, supported by a significant education base.
Brain drain isn't a big problem for them(go try), there is a consistent state interest in explosive/flying stuff, and NK state can easily provide their engineers with conditions/prestige to make it a highly desirable career path. Prestige is a relative thing, after all, relative to people around.
 
Not bad i think the Israelis did something like that on a smaller scale with extended sails on their newest Submarines. The North Koreans seem to be advancing shockingly fast this days, Solid fuel ICBMs and now SLBMs.
 
Forest Green said:
Here are the alleged differences.

View attachment 715932
Click to expand...

According to Jeffrey Lewis these differences are relatively significant, at least to the point where it shows that the Hwasong 11 isn't just a straight reverse-engineered copy of the Iskander:

-Igniter access port on the Hwasong 11 has 20 evenly spaced bolts whereas Iskander has 18 bolts in 6 groups of 3.

-Hwasong 11 also has different pattern fastening points on the edge of the casing at the top of the motor.

-The housing for jet vane actuators of the Hwasong 11 are boxy and trapezoidal, whereas those of the Iskander are rounded.

-The Hwasong 11 has no ports for penaids unlike Iskander.
 
https://twitter.com/x/status/1755222346158182905
View: https://twitter.com/astraiaintel/status/1755222346158182905?s=20


Russia hit only two military targets upon firing 24 North Korean ballistic missiles at Ukraine in recent weeks, Ukraine's top prosecutor said on Friday, casting doubt on the reliability of Pyongyang's much-feared, but little-known weaponry.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
Russia hit only two military targets upon firing 24 North Korean ballistic missiles at Ukraine in recent weeks, Ukraine's top prosecutor said on Friday, casting doubt on the reliability of Pyongyang's much-feared, but little-known weaponry.
Click to expand...
This is just as true as Ukraine intercepting majority of missiles/drones as they were asserting several months ago. A fairytale.
 
BullpupRafale said:
This is just as true as Ukraine intercepting majority of missiles/drones as they were asserting several months ago. A fairytale.
Click to expand...
If nearly 100 missiles and drones are fired, shooting down a majority can still mean that nearly 50 get through. From what I see on liveuamap, even when >90 missiles are fired at Kyiv, less than 5 ground explosions are registered. The fairytale was the 'unstoppable missiles'.
 
Forest Green said:
If nearly 100 missiles and drones are fired, shooting down a majority can still mean that nearly 50 get through. From what I see on liveuamap, even when >90 missiles are fired at Kyiv, less than 5 ground explosions are registered. The fairytale was the 'unstoppable missiles'.
Click to expand...
I see you are unaware of censorship.
 
Last edited:
Forest Green said:
Censorship would imply the ground explosions not being registered on-line.
Click to expand...
That is the case.
Forest Green said:
You sure it's not the other way around?
Click to expand...
It's on both sides. Cease and desist from deflections.
lancer21 said:
How ironic, and kinda hilarious, the west was/is always screaming and shouting how Russia and China is supposedly sending DPRK all kinds of stuff for their missiles etc, when it was themselves all along. Presumably such western components would conceivably be found in DPRK nuclear ICBMs an the like, even more ironic.
Click to expand...
Market globalization doing it's things.
 
Where's the actual assembly line/workers/tooling? What I'm seeing is a warehouse and a maintenance storage facility.

I.e. an assembly line:

1716194866845.png
1716195065866.png
1716195178981.png
 
Last edited:
Sineva said:
Proof positive that the north koreans are now building their own TELS
[Tho this had been suspected for a while]

GN2UUBfXYAEvBwM
GN2UUBcXEAES3dk

GN0bFdMXYAAPwJb

https://twitter.com/x/status/1791751329771057211
https://twitter.com/x/status/1791618034093727809
Click to expand...
The first photo appears to show 7 Hwasong-18 TELs and 8 Hwasong-17 TELs. They seem to be retaining some Liquid-fueled missiles as an option (Hwasong-17 can carry more warheads or a FOBS).
 
BullpupRafale said:
Why you ignore crane or whatever that is that does same thing which is to lift and lower components/materials.
Click to expand...
Too few cranes and jigs for a vehicle production line, especially for heavy vehicles. However the visit by the Premier could be a reason.
 
www.spacewar.com

N. Korean test of likely hypersonic missile fails: Seoul military official

Seoul (AFP) June 26, 2024 - North Korea test-fired what appeared to be a hypersonic missile on Wednesday, but the launch ended in a mid-air explosion, an official from Seoul's Joint Chiefs of Staff said.
www.spacewar.com

www.spacewar.com

N. Korea says successfully tested multiple-warhead missile

Seoul (AFP) June 27, 2024 - North Korea successfully tested its multiple-warhead missile capability, state media said Thursday, as dozens more trash-laden balloons from Pyongyang landed in the South.
www.spacewar.com
 
Last edited:
I see two possibilities here - 1) a malfunction similar to the Bulava SLBM test failure observable from Norway in 2009, or 2) a glide vehicle with a deliberate rolling motion to spread heat load on the same principle as BGRV. Since NK HGVs exhibited to date were lifting-body wave-riders and a BGRV-like vehicle should be spinning cleanly about its longitudinal axis rather than spiraling, I'm leaning toward 1).

ETA: the kink in the trail need not indicate a maneuver, it could simply be a shear in the winds aloft. Similar effects are commonly observed with conventional missile and rocket launches.
 
Reverse image search says Nike-X assembly at Douglas in Charlotte, NC (1958).

www.alamy.com

1958 - Charlotte, North Carolina - Conveyor line where final assembly of US Army Nike Hercules Missiles is accomplished by the Charlotte Division of the Douglas Aircraft Company. Photo shows missile frames in production Stock Photo - Alamy

Download this stock image: 1958 - Charlotte, North Carolina - Conveyor line where final assembly of US Army Nike Hercules Missiles is accomplished by the Charlotte Division of the Douglas Aircraft Company. Photo shows missile frames in production. - KG4P76 from Alamy's library of millions of...
www.alamy.com www.alamy.com
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom