North Korean Hypersonic thread

Flyaway

Flyaway

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
21 January 2015
Messages
11,573
Reaction score
14,838
apnews.com

North Korea says hypersonic missile made 1st test flight

North Korea says it has successfully tested a new hypersonic missile as it continues to expand its military capabilities.
apnews.com apnews.com
North Korea has tested the Hwasong-8, a ballistic missile that utilizes a hypersonic glide vehicle (HGV).


Here's the KCNA press release.

Hypersonic Missile Newly Developed by Academy of Defence Science Test-fired

Pyongyang, September 29 (KCNA) -- The Academy of Defence Science of the DPRK test-fired a hypersonic missile Hwasong-8 newly developed by it in Toyang-ri, Ryongrim County of Jagang Province on Tuesday morning.

Pak Jong Chon, member of the Presidium of the Political Bureau and secretary of the Central Committee of the Workers' Party of Korea, watched the test-launch with leading officials in the sector of national defence science.

The development of the hypersonic missile, one of 5 top-priority tasks of the five-year plan facing the field of strategic weapon for the development of defence science and weapon system set forth at the 8th Congress of the Party, has been pushed forward according to a sequential, scientific and reliable development process.

The development of this weapon system which has been regarded as a top priority work under the special care of the Party's Central Committee is of great strategic significance in markedly boosting the independent power of ultra-modern defence science and technology of the country and in increasing the nation's capabilities for self-defence in every way.

In the first test-launch, national defence scientists confirmed the navigational control and stability of the missile in the active section and also its technical specifications including the guiding maneuverability and the gliding flight characteristics of the detached hypersonic gliding warhead.

It also ascertained the stability of the engine as well as of missile fuel ampoule that has been introduced for the first time.

The test results proved that all the technical specifications met the design requirements.

Pak Jong Chon mentioned the strategic importance of the development of the hypersonic missile and its deployment for action. He also noted the military significance of turning all missile fuel systems into ampoules.

He stressed the need for all the defence science research teams and workers of the munitions industry to rise up with higher spirit to implement the decisions made at the 8th Party Congress true to our Party's policy of prioritizing defence science and technology and thus make greater successes in the work of increasing the country's defence capabilities thousand-fold. -0-
 
The photos that were presented of this new missile looks more like a MaRV (similar to the Pershing II) than a glider vehicle (HGV).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Notice the canted installation suggesting that this is legit (roadable)

And in case the South Korean infantry is already there, it doubles down as a bayonet!
 
If China is sharing hypersonic tech with North Korea, then China can kiss goodbye any chance that Korea or Japan shy away from allowing the US to deploy IRBMs in the region (or the development of their own).
 

ONN Brief: Analysis on the 5 January 2022 Hypersonic Missile Test of the DPRK | Open Nuclear Network

| State media of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) reported on 6 January 2022 that the Academy of Defence Science had tested a hypersonic missile on 5 January 2022. This is an initial analysis based on available information.
oneearthfuture.org oneearthfuture.org
www.koreaherald.com

Seoul says N.Korea did not test hypersonic missile

The South Korean military on Friday said North Korea did not test a hypersonic missile, clarifying that the launched projectile was a Maneuverable Reentry Vehicle, or MaRV. North Korea’s state media on Thursday claimed the country had test-fired a “hypersonic missile” the previous day...
www.koreaherald.com
https://twitter.com/x/status/1479397747061149702
View: https://twitter.com/dagyumji/status/1479397747061149702
 
Last edited:
In_A_Dream said:
If China is sharing hypersonic tech with North Korea, then China can kiss goodbye any chance that Korea or Japan shy away from allowing the US to deploy IRBMs in the region (or the development of their own).
Click to expand...
If people were more informed, these comments would not exist.

aonestudio said:

ONN Brief: Analysis on the 5 January 2022 Hypersonic Missile Test of the DPRK | Open Nuclear Network

| State media of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) reported on 6 January 2022 that the Academy of Defence Science had tested a hypersonic missile on 5 January 2022. This is an initial analysis based on available information.
oneearthfuture.org oneearthfuture.org
www.koreaherald.com

Seoul says N.Korea did not test hypersonic missile

The South Korean military on Friday said North Korea did not test a hypersonic missile, clarifying that the launched projectile was a Maneuverable Reentry Vehicle, or MaRV. North Korea’s state media on Thursday claimed the country had test-fired a “hypersonic missile” the previous day...
www.koreaherald.com
https://twitter.com/x/status/1479397747061149702
View: https://twitter.com/dagyumji/status/1479397747061149702
Click to expand...
Conical warhead with fins can generate lift and doing maneuver to extend range is gliding as that is what gliders do in basic form.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1479152480776822787
View: https://twitter.com/ArmsControlWonk/status/1479152480776822787
 
There is clear confusion between the concepts.

For example, the Taepodong claims that the KN-23/24 are hypersonic missiles, they are, but they are not maneuverable like a MaRV let alone an HGV. These North Korean missiles are called aeroballistic or semi-ballistic because they don't follow a parabolic trajectory, but on a depressed trajectory, they never leave the atmosphere, and only a few ballistic missiles in the world are semi-ballistic and leave the atmosphere, but still do not meet a ballistic trajectory per se.

The people who claim that the North Koreans have tested a MaRV are correct, at least if it's the vehicle in the image I've attached, it's definitely a MaRV and not an HGV. Conical warheads that have small fins (MaRV) are not able to glide like an HGV, because of the low lift/drag ratio.

20220107000645_0.jpg

For example, a missile like the KN-23/24 could be equipped with MaRV to improve accuracy, it will meet a depressed trajectory as it does not even leave the atmosphere, so in the terminal phase, the set of fins will give an advantage in the maneuverability of the missile to hit the target more accurately, and even acting on that trajectory it will be at hypersonic speeds.

Qiam 1 is a short-range ballistic missile designed and built by Iran. It was developed from the Iranian Shahab-2, a licensed copy of the North Korean Hwasong-6, which are versions of the Soviet Scud-C missile. The Qiam 1 entered service in 2010, with a range of 800 km and 10 m precision, equipped with a MaRV.
 
BullpupRafale said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1479517445010382858
View: https://twitter.com/stoa1984/status/1479517445010382858
Click to expand...
Well as much as this guy wants to pretend he's smarter than military officials, he's got it wrong about the point being discussed here. If the new missile/warhead is faster than the speed of hypersonic regime is not the focus here. As the ROKA explained, missiles of this particular range generally exceed the top speed of Mach 5+. What's important is if such speed is sustained. ROKA says it hasn't, so does the US and they therefore have categorized the new missile and the warhead not to be a hypersonic weapon, although it's still an initial assessment. I'd obviously believe what ROKA and USFK say based on the trajectory they obtained from radars than what a mere Taiwanese twitter shitpost says.

Apart from that, it's still a worrying trend that NK is venturing into the territory of MaRV and more accurate BMs, not to mention the ampoulized fuel.
 
Maro.Kyo said:
Apart from that, it's still a worrying trend that NK is venturing into the territory of MaRV and more accurate BMs, not to mention the ampoulized fuel.
Click to expand...
There is nothing worrying about that.

They already tested a MaRV on SCUD-type ballistic missile few years back.

The more accurate they are the less chance of collateral casualties unless you're one of those people that are going to assert that they would use their military might targeting civilians instead of military targets because as if they are some comic book style villains.

Propellant tanks being ampoulized by being pre-fueled at factory and sealed means that their liquid fuel missile has much shorter preparation time by being pre-fueled and has far longer ready time unlike non-ampoulized liquid fuel missile that when fueled at most can be in ready state for a month before corrosion eats away at propellant tanks.

www.38north.org

Another North Korean “Hypersonic” Missile? - 38 North: Informed Analysis of North Korea

Information to Date On January 5, the South Korean and Japanese governments reported that North ...
www.38north.org

Maro.Kyo said:
I'd obviously believe what ROKA and USFK say based on the trajectory they obtained from radars than what a mere Taiwanese twitter shitpost says.
Click to expand...
Only time ever for example ROKA and USFK reported on North Korea launching own derivative of OTR-21 Tochka in past decade was when they launched those from western and eastern coast such as Wonsan that is 100 kilometers away from DMZ while MaRV of new missile is of smaller dimensions than ATACMS which itself is smaller than OTR-21 Tochka...

Hence how can we be sure that those radars only tracked the body while not registering MaRV itself?
 
BullpupRafale said:
In_A_Dream said:
BullpupRafale said:
In_A_Dream said:
If China is sharing hypersonic tech with North Korea, then China can kiss goodbye any chance that Korea or Japan shy away from allowing the US to deploy IRBMs in the region (or the development of their own).
Click to expand...
If people were more informed, these comments would not exist.
Click to expand...

Which part?
Click to expand...
Isn't that obvious? Implying its China.
Click to expand...
North Korea falls within China's geopolitical sphere and has been historically assisted by China. Do you believe they are developing this on their own?
 
In_A_Dream said:
North Korea falls within China's geopolitical sphere and has been historically assisted by China.
Click to expand...
...and that doesn't mean that they receive what you allege/assert.

In_A_Dream said:
Do you believe they are developing this on their own?
Click to expand...
It took China about 15 years from first SRBM to ICBM and for North Korea that figure is over 30 years.
 
BullpupRafale said:
...and that doesn't mean that they receive what you allege/assert.

It took China about 15 years from first SRBM to ICBM and for North Korea that figure is over 30 years.
Click to expand...

The CIA would like to disagree with you. Do you believe North Korea is developing their hypersonic technology independently?
 
Suetham said:
20220107000645_0.jpg
Click to expand...
Pershing?! Is that you???
 
BullpupRafale said:
Isn't that obvious? Implying its China
Click to expand...
Well you are already oh so wrong considering where the NK gets their TEL vehicles from. Talking about the possibilities of the Chinese assistance in this matter is well within the realm of reasonable, well, possibilities. Just like how the Russians provided vast amount of help in this matter.
 
In_A_Dream said:

The CIA would like to disagree with you.
Click to expand...
The very CIA you have in high regard labeled space launch vehicles as long range intercontinental ballistic missiles...

In_A_Dream said:
Do you believe North Korea is developing their hypersonic technology independently?
Click to expand...
It is possible for them to do so.

Onlt question is on extent of cooperation betwen them and Iran in matters of research and development.

Maro.Kyo said:
Well you are already oh so wrong considering where the NK gets their TEL vehicles from. Talking about the possibilities of the Chinese assistance in this matter is well within the realm of reasonable, well, possibilities. Just like how the Russians provided vast amount of help in this matter.
Click to expand...
It is very ironic ans disingenuous coming from you to label someone as being wrong.

China did not export transporter erector launchers to North Korea. It is unreasonable to consider possibility of Chinese assistance to North Korea considering many such assertions and accusations being made aren't credible as too for Russia.

Both China and Russia were accussed by some as providing rocket propellants to North Korea yet such was proven wrong by others that found facilities that produce such. If Russia was assisting then they would not intercept covert shipping of aramid fibers to North Korea. If China was assisting then we would have seen details of it in design of their ballistic missiles just we see on Pakistani ballistic missiles.

For example when North Korea had first successful test of submarine launched ballistic missile then some asserted that it must have been based on Chinese JL-1 yet it is blatantly obvious to anyone informed about topic that JL-1 has 4 nozzles and Pukguksong-1 has 1 nozzle.
 
BullpupRafale said:
It is very ironic ans disingenuous coming from you to label someone as being wrong.
Click to expand...
Oh, is it? Let's see.
BullpupRafale said:
The very CIA you have in high regard labeled space launch vehicles as long range intercontinental ballistic missiles...
Click to expand...
You mean a SLV called Taepodong missile, based on Scud technologies. Guess you would freak out to find out there are SLV versions of R-7 and the Israeli SLVs are based on their converted ballistic missiles.
BullpupRafale said:
It is possible for them to do so.

Onlt question is on extent of cooperation betwen them and Iran in matters of research and development.
Click to expand...
No, experts like ADD researchers disagree. One of them, a former researcher in ballistic missiles department wrote :
The development of North Korean missiles were too fast to be seen as an entirely indigenous effort. Even if the budget needed for such developments were able to have been covered by the money they earned selling Iran missiles and various other overseas activities, considering North Korean infrastructure and expertise, it is hard to believe they have set up the mass production cycle of Scud-B, Nodong and following missiles. The numbers of flight tests were very much limited and is substandard.
Click to expand...
BullpupRafale said:
China did not export transporter erector launchers to North Korea. It is unreasonable to consider possibility of Chinese assistance to North Korea considering many such assertions and accusations being made aren't credible as too for Russia.

Both China and Russia were accussed by some as providing rocket propellants to North Korea yet such was proven wrong by others that found facilities that produce such. If Russia was assisting then they would not intercept covert shipping of aramid fibers to North Korea. If China was assisting then we would have seen details of it in design of their ballistic missiles just we see on Pakistani ballistic missiles.

For example when North Korea had first successful test of submarine launched ballistic missile then some asserted that it must have been based on Chinese JL-1 yet it is blatantly obvious to anyone informed about topic that JL-1 has 4 nozzles and Pukguksong-1 has 1 nozzle.
Click to expand...
Firstly, then where did all those TEL vehicles come from? It must have just appeared out of nowhere, since according to you, China didn't supply those? Also you are nitpicking some of the cases in a grand scheme of things that is North Korean missile development that suits your narrative. Furthermore, by "Russian help" I didn't specify the specific period.

So then, how would you explain the Russian engineers from Makeyev design bureau who have helped NK develop their missiles?
 
Last edited:
Maro.Kyo said:
You mean a SLV called Taepodong missile, based on Scud technologies.
Click to expand...
You need to make a choice, is it ballistic missile to you or do you conceded that it is a space launch vehicle hence admit that labeling it as long range ballistic missile is of political nature with no basis on its design and trajectory that rocket was launched at, yes or no?

Maro.Kyo said:
Guess you would freak out to find out there are SLV versions of R-7 and the Israeli SLVs are based on their converted ballistic missiles.
Click to expand...
Somehow I would freak about what I already know when you assume I am not aware of that since that is conclusion you're jumping to while proving my point about you being disingenuous since it is not comparable comparison as Paektusan is not adapted from some intercontinental ballistic missile unlike for example Tsyklon-3 derived from R-36 or Titan 23G derived from Titan II.

Maro.Kyo said:
No, experts like ADD researchers disagree. One of them, a former researcher in ballistic missiles department wrote :
Click to expand...
Just by reading this sentence it already set expectation of arrogance and ignorance...

The development of North Korean missiles were too fast to be seen as an entirely indigenous effort. Even if the budget needed for such developments were able to have been covered by the money they earned selling Iran missiles and various other overseas activities, considering North Korean infrastructure and expertise, it is hard to believe they have set up the mass production cycle of Scud-B, Nodong and following missiles. The numbers of flight tests were very much limited and is substandard.
Click to expand...
...and of course the expectation is fulfilled for both, Soviet Union went from SRBM to ICBM in 12 years and mainland China in 15 years.

If we count North Korea acquiring R-17 from Egypt as very starting point of their ballistic missile program in 1979 then it took them 38 years that is more than three times longer than Soviet Union and more than two times than mainland China from SRBM to ICBM.

You take seriously someone that can't even properly refer to those missiles by actual designation as designated by North Korea along fact on making claims about North Korean infrastructure and expertise that is just another set of arrogant assertions as was accusations that North Korea got UDMH and N2O4 fuel from China or Russia along RD-250 rocket engines from Russia or Ukraine.

Whenever North Korea achieves something notable then you can read South Koreans asserting it must be from China or with Chinese assistance while those with at least very basic manners admit that its not verified yet they just shorty before made assertions.

Instead you should listen to someone that actually has attention on North Korea and its missile developments:

Jeffrey Lewis:
When we did crane analysis, one of the things we discovered North Korea's missiles were more advanced than we thought.

That the missile itself was still very strong, but much lighter than we expected.

Voice over:
Lewis believes that the North Koreans have technology and knowledge to mill so called isogrid pieces likes this.

They are as strong as solid piece of metal, but much lighter.

Jeffrey Lewis:
This is hard to do unless you have modern computer numerically controlled machines tools and that's precisely what Kim Jong Un was showing us in that building is that they have capability to do this sort of thing.
Click to expand...

Maro.Kyo said:
Firstly, then where did all those TEL vehicles come from?
Click to expand...

After years of development, the weapons programs of North Korea are now advanced enough that it is hard to predict what it might test, said Jeffrey Lewis, a researcher at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS).

U.S. military officials have said they see a long-range missile launch as one of the most likely possibilities.

Other experts said North Korea could launch a satellite, deploy the new ballistic missile submarine it says it is developing, or field new domestically produced “transporter erector launcher” (TEL) vehicles for its largest missiles.
Click to expand...

North Korea has continued to produce support equipment and launchers for one of its newer ballistic missiles through the first half of 2018, according to a recent U.S. military intelligence assessment described to The Diplomat by U.S. government officials.

According to a recent assessment released by the U.S. National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC), which analyzes intelligence regarding ballistic missile threats for the U.S. Air Force, North Korea has continued to produce vehicles and support equipment for its Pukguksong-2/KN15 medium-range ballistic missile in 2018.
Click to expand...

Maro.Kyo said:
It must have just appeared out of nowhere, since according to you, China didn't supply those?
Click to expand...
That is your conclusion as apparently only thing you're capable of is jumping to conclusion like South Koreans that it must be Chinese.

Do you see in North Korea transporter erector launchers used by mainland China or exported by them for example to Pakistan?

They produce CNC machines and heavy V8 engines, presentation by Joshua Pollack.

Maro.Kyo said:
Also you are nitpicking some of the cases in a grand scheme of things that is North Korean missile development that suits your narrative.
Click to expand...
Ironic, say that for example to Jeffrey Lewis and Joshua Pollack.

Maro.Kyo said:
So then, how would you explain the Russian engineers from Makeyev design bureau who have helped NK develop their missiles?
Click to expand...
I can't explain what has only been rumored and never confirmed in nearly 30 years.

That is just like South Koreans claiming that North Korea has Mig-25.
 
BullpupRafale said:
You need to make a choice, is it ballistic missile to you or do you conceded that it is a space launch vehicle hence admit that labeling it as long range ballistic missile is of political nature with no basis on its design and trajectory that rocket was launched at, yes or no?
Click to expand...
The word "SLV" was used to denote what you have mentioned, "space launch vehicle", not that I think it is an actual SLV developed for actual space related purposes.
BullpupRafale said:
Somehow I would freak about what I already know
Click to expand...
Someone should understand that not everything written in words mean what's written but there exists something called a satire and sarcasm.
BullpupRafale said:
...and of course the expectation is fulfilled for both, Soviet Union went from SRBM to ICBM in 12 years and mainland China in 15 years.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, just blindly comparing two east-bloc nations to a country as broke as NK, who would've guessed? As if NK was and is in identical situation as those two examples. Quelle surprise!
BullpupRafale said:
You take seriously someone that can't even properly refer to those missiles by actual designation as designated by North Korea along fact on making claims about North Korean infrastructure and expertise that is just another set of arrogant assertions as was accusations that North Korea got UDMH and N2O4 fuel from China or Russia along RD-250 rocket engines from Russia or Ukraine.
Click to expand...
Well yes, because surely I would deem some random fella on a English speaking forum more credible and knowledgeable than people such as Dr. Jung Gyu Soo who's developed ballistic missiles for more than 3 decades in ADD. Of course my friend. Before jumping to labelling anything of arrogance and ignorance, you should first go and reflect on yourself.
BullpupRafale said:
Instead you should listen to someone that actually has attention on North Korea and its missile developments:
Click to expand...
Or you should pay attention to someone who has actual ballistic missile development background
BullpupRafale said:
Do you see in North Korea transporter erector launchers used by mainland China or exported by them for example to Pakistan?

They produce CNC machines and heavy V8 engines, presentation by Joshua Pollack.
Click to expand...
Oh, as if CNC and V8 engine technologies are all you need to develop, produce, and field TEL in numbers? Also, there's already a good example of WS51200 based TEL being operated by NK, so what you gonna say now? The technology to convert those trucks into military TEL? Tell me they all originate from the NK. Moreover, I have never argued that the same TEL is being operated by China so go ahead with more strawman arguments.
BullpupRafale said:
Ironic, say that for example to Jeffrey Lewis and Joshua Pollack.
Click to expand...
Yeah, go ahead and tell your stories to Jung Gyu Soo. Researchers of CNS or not, it doesn't change that people you are quoting are mainly working with information gathered by OSINT as opposed to ADD researchers who were working and have had far more chances to access confidential data.
 
Last edited:
The analysis I did before. At least the model displayed in the parade should look like this.

1thpluqh8nux3udrrpe55nm2a.jpg
6pkr4ywvsweyjy88l0k9l54jh.jpg

The final modeling:

2e3h3if0i2gsu48kx826t6f2i.jpg

It is easy to find the obvious difference between HS-8 and DF-17.

For North Korean missile scientists, this is a smart choice, and the simplified shape as much as possible is beneficial to calculation and prediction.

At the same time, the important point is that the internal capacity of this design is also larger, allowing the installation of larger nuclear warheads.
 
hi
The new type solid hypersonic missile
Screenshot_2024-01-15-14-19-49-886.jpg
Some possible configurations, I guessed based on previous reports. But whether it is close to the actual situation still needs more information.
屏幕截图 2024-01-15 194741_074815.png
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom