WAR North Korea Main Thread - All things Korea May 20th - May 26th

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Sorry for being late....HC

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://38north.org/2017/05/hwasong051917/

A Quick Technical Analysis of the Hwasong-12

By Ralph Savelsberg
19 May 2017

Summary

On May 14, North Korea flight-tested a new ballistic missile, the Hwasong-12. This missile was first revealed during the April 15 military parade commemorating Kim Il Sung’s 105th birthday, and has since been the subject of much scrutiny as North Korea watchers try to assess its dimensions and capabilities, as well as what it contributes to the North’s overall ballistic missile program.

At a first glance, the successful flight-test of the Hwasong-12 appeared to have implications for North Korea’s efforts to develop an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), but to what extent is still unclear given the limited information available. In this article, I have run computer simulations to help assess the missile’s range and performance. The missile’s parameters were estimated based on close examination of the available photographs and missile trajectory, with a large focus on engine performance. Based on the results of the simulations, it would seem that the Hwasong-12 is simply a larger variant of the existing Hwasong-10 or Musudan intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) with a similar engine and a lighter construction, offering only slight gains in range but with limitations on mobility. While the new missile may serve as a testbed for some of the technology intended for an ICBM, the flight-test did not provide evidence of a major step forward in North Korea’s ICBM program.

Introduction

North Korea has displayed supposedly road-mobile ICBMs, known as the KN-08 and KN-14, during past military parades, and while Kim Jong Un announced in his 2017 New Year’s Address that the country was close to being ready to flight-test an ICBM, no test has taken place to date.

The most powerful rocket that North Korea has flight-tested is its Unha-3, which was used to successfully launch small satellites into orbit in 2012 and 2016. In 2006, an attempted launch of an ICBM based on this rocket, known as the Taepodong-2, ended in failure; the Taepodong-2 is also too large for mobile use.

The Unha-3 uses four Nodong engines for its first stage; a smaller missile with an intercontinental range will require more advanced rocket engines. So far, the most powerful liquid-fuelled engine that North Korea is known to have flight-tested is the engine used in the Hwasong-10 or Musudan IRBM. This engine is closely related to the one used in the Soviet R-27 submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM). By itself, it does not have sufficient thrust to lift the mass of an ICBM, so using this type of engine for an ICBM would require combining at least two of them. However, because the R-27 engine was uniquely tailored for use in a very compact SLBM, building a rocket stage that incorporates two is an immensely complicated task. Photographs of ground tests of what appear to be two R-27 engines mounted very close together were published in 2016, but this combination does not appear to have been test-flown. Some experts speculate that the engine used in this test was the new engine North Korea tested in March, but it is difficult to confirm this based on the photographs alone.

Additionally, North Korea has yet to demonstrate a working re-entry vehicle (RV) with a heat shield suitable for an ICBM. An ICBM’s RV enters the atmosphere at a much higher velocity than North-Korea’s known IRBMs and is therefore subject to much higher temperatures and stresses that cannot be fully replicated in ground tests. Flight-testing an RV design on the trajectory flown by the Hwasong-12 could provide more realistic conditions, but a truly convincing demonstration would have to involve even higher velocities.

Hwasong-12 Test Parameters

During the test-launch of the Hwasong-12, the missile reportedly flew on a lofted trajectory, covering a range of in roughly 30 minutes and reaching apogee at an altitude of 2,000 km.[1] This performance has led to speculation that the missile is closely related to North Korea’s efforts to build a road-mobile ICBM, and it may have indeed used the engines intended for this.[2]

Based on photographs of the test released by North Korean state media, the Hwasong-12 appears to be a single-stage missile powered by a single large engine coupled to four vernier engines (see Figure 1).[3] A single uninterrupted cable raceway is clearly visible on the outside of the missile, running from just below the re-entry vehicle towards the engine compartment at the bottom. This routes wires connecting the guidance system to the vernier engines along the outside of the propellant tanks. If the missile had multiple stages, one would expect the raceway to be interrupted near the location where the stages separate.

Other photographs show that the missile was transported on a transporter-erector-launcher (TEL) similar to the vehicle used to launch the Musudan. Video footage of the launch shows that the missile was not launched from the vehicle, but from a detachable launch table. (See Figure 2 for a series of frames.)

Figure 1. The May 14 flight-test of the Hwasong-12.
Fig1_Hwasong-Test_17-0519-300x225.jpg

http://38north.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Fig1_Hwasong-Test_17-0519-300x225.jpg
Photo: KCNA/Reuters
Missile Trajectory Simulations

To assess the Hwasong-12’s performance, I have run computer simulations of its trajectory. Parameters were estimated based on available photographs and baseline parameters of the Musudan. The diameter of the missile is similar to that of the Musudan at roughly 1.5 m, but it is longer and slightly flared at the base. Including the warhead, its approximate length is 15.7 m. The booster length is approximately 12.4 m. I assume that the single main engine is essentially an R-27 engine, as flown in the Musudan, but with the addition of two more verniers. This leads to a small increase in the mass flow and thrust.

For the propellant, I assume dinitrogen tetroxide (N2O4) as the oxidizer and unsymmetrical dimethyl hydrazine (UDMH) as the fuel, with corresponding values for the specific impulse—a measure of the fuel’s effectiveness. This is the same propellant combination as used in the R-27. The length of the missile allows estimating the propellant volume and propellant mass, leading to the parameters in Table 1.

Simulations of the lofted flight of the Musudan, in June 2016, showed that this was most likely flown with an empty re-entry vehicle, with a mass of 150 kg for just the empty heat shield.[4] I assume that this was the case for the Hwasong-12 as well. The model for calculating the trajectory is the same as that used for the earlier analysis of the Musudan.

Figure 2. Frame by frame photos of the Hwasong-12 flight test.
Fig2_Hwasong-Test_17-0519-300x196.jpg

http://38north.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Fig2_Hwasong-Test_17-0519-300x196.jpg
Photo: KCNA/ Reuters
Table 1: Parameters of the Hwasong-12 used in the simulation.
HS-12-Simulation-Parameters-298x300.jpg

http://38north.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/HS-12-Simulation-Parameters-298x300.jpg
HS-12 Simulation Parameters

With these parameters, a lofted trajectory over a distance of 700 km was simulated, with a launch originating from Kusong. The initial heading was 70 degrees. The simulation includes the effects of Earth rotation. The maximum altitude reached during the flight is 2,000 km and the total flight time is close to 30 minutes, both similar to the reported values. The simulated trajectory is shown in Figure 3, and a visualization using Google Earth is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 3. Computer simulated lofted trajectory.
Fig3_Hwasong-Test_17-05191-300x212.png

http://38north.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Fig3_Hwasong-Test_17-05191-300x212.png
Fig3_Hwasong Test_17 0519
(Image: R. Savelberg)
In order to obtain this performance, the structural mass of the booster had to be reduced to 7 percent of the total booster mass. The lengthening of propellant tanks tends to decrease this number, but its low value means that the construction of the propellant tanks is unusually light. The equivalent number for the R-27, for instance, is closer to 10 percent.

The use of a TEL to transport the Hwasong-12 suggests that it is meant to be a mobile weapon, but given these parameters, one can expect the missile airframe to be quite fragile and unsuitable for transport and erection with propellant inside. This means that the missile would have to be fuelled after being positioned vertically on its launch table, which dramatically increases launch preparation time.

The presumed N2O4 oxidizer also has a very limited temperature range in which it can be safely stored and used, further limiting the missile’s usefulness as a mobile system. Inhibited fuming red nitric acid (IFRNA) could serve as an alternative oxidizer since it is easier to handle safely, but this would result in a lower specific impulse. Therefore, if the Hwasong-12 had used IFRNA, it would not have had sufficient thrust for the trajectory it flew during the flight test.

Figure 4. Visualization of the lofted trajectory reportedly flown by the Hwasong-12 in Google Earth.
Fig4_Hwasong-Test_17-0519-300x164.jpg

http://38north.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Fig4_Hwasong-Test_17-0519-300x164.jpg
Fig4_Hwasong Test_17 0519
(Image: R. Savelberg)
The lofted trajectory of the test flight is atypical for a ballistic missile. However, the Musudan, during its single successful flight in 2016, flew a similarly lofted trajectory over a distance of 400 km, reaching an altitude of more than 1,000 km.[5] The Hwasong-12 flew both farther and higher. Consequently, if it were to be flown on a minimum-energy trajectory, which maximises the range, it can cover a longer distance than the Musudan.

With a payload of 650 kg (equivalent to the payload of the R-27, including the heat shield, but likely lighter than a North Korean nuclear warhead), its simulated maximum range is more than 3,700 km (on a 70 degreeheading, including Earth rotation) (see Figure 5). Provided that North Korea has a sufficiently accurate guidance technology, this would theoretically allow the Hwasong-12 to reach Guam, at a distance of roughly 3,400 km—a target that cannot be reached by the Musudan.

In the simulation of the lofted trajectory, the velocity during the re-entry peaks at 5.4 km/s. This is only marginally higher than the maximum of 5.2 km/s reached in the simulation of the minimum-energy trajectory. Therefore, testing a new heat shield for the re-entry vehicle is not a likely explanation for the choice of a lofted trajectory. The more likely reason for this choice is that the missile cannot be flown on minimum-energy trajectories without violating the airspace of other countries in the region, such as Japan. The velocity is a lot higher than the peak velocity reached by the Musudan, however, and is closer to ICBM velocities.

Figure 5. Simulated minimum energy trajectory with a payload of 650 kg.
Picture5-300x212.jpg

http://38north.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Picture5-300x212.jpg
(Image: R. Savelberg)
Implications

Based on photographs and computer simulations, the Hwasong-12 appears to be a longer, lighter version of the Musudan. However, the main engine is not significantly more powerful than engines North Korea has already test-flown.

The missile does have a higher performance than the Musudan, being able to deliver a payload as far as Guam, but its light construction and fuel/oxidizer mix mean that it is ill-suited for mobile use. Additionally, despite its light construction, it is still heavy compared to the thrust of this engine, which means that there is little room for further growth.

While the new missile may serve as a testbed for some of the technology intended for an ICBM—for instance the heat shield—the May 14 flight test of the Hwasong-12 did not provide evidence of a major step forward in North-Korea’s ICBM program.

[1] David Wright, “North Korea’s Missile in New Test Would Have 4,500 km range”, 38 North, May 13, 2017, http://allthingsnuclear.org/dwright/north-koreas-missile-in-new-test-would-have-4500-km-range.

[2] John Schilling, “North Korea’s Latest Missile Test: Advancing towards an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) While Avoiding US Military Action,” 38 North, May 14, 2017, http://38north.org/2017/05/jschilling051417/.

[3] It is possible that the missile is a two-stage missile, where the system is largely internal and invisible, but we cannot confirm this with the limited information available.

[4] Ralph Savelsberg and James Kiessling, “North Korea’s Musudan Missile; A Performance Assessment”, 38 North, December 20, 2016, http://38north.org/2016/12/musudan122016/.

[5] John Schilling, “A partial success for the Musudan,” 38 North, June 23, 2016, http://38north.org/2016/06/jschilling062316/.

Found in section: WMD
Tags: ballistic missile, hwasong-12, missile test, ralph savelsberg, transporter-erector-launcher, WMD

Previous Topic: North Korea’s Sohae Satellite Launching Station: Facility Upgrades Continue

----
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://armscontrolwonk.libsyn.com/the-hwasong-12-finally

Mon, 15 May 2017

The Hwasong-12, finally

North Korea has finally tested (successfully) a new missile -- and boy it is a doozy. After the April 15 parade, we called this missile the KN-08 Mod Odd and the KN-08 +/-. But North Korea calls it the Hwasong-12 and it contains a surprise: the brand-new "indigenous" engine that North Korea debuted in March.

Jeffrey and Scott discuss this new IRBM, its odd firing table and launch configuration, the propaganda of missile testing, and whether or not an ICBM is next.

MM00255799.jpg

https://assets.libsyn.com/secure/show/59527/MM00255799.jpg
Direct download: 39.mp3
Category:general -- posted at: 3:31pm EDT
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://lasvegassun.com/news/2017/may/20/north-korea-vows-to-strengthen-nukes-as-us-increas/

North Korea vows to strengthen nukes as US increases pressure

By Edith Lederer and Matthew Pennington, Associated Press
Saturday, May 20, 2017 | 1:23 p.m.

UNITED NATIONS — The U.S. defense chief warned Friday that a military solution to the standoff with North Korea would be "tragic on an unbelievable scale," while the North vowed to rapidly strengthen its nuclear-strike capability as long as it faces a "hostile" U.S. policy.

North Korea tested a longer-range missile last weekend, which experts say was a significant advance for a weapons program that aims at having a nuclear-tipped missile that can strike America. The test triggered a new U.S.-backed push for a fresh round of U.N. sanctions against the North.

At the United Nations, North Korea's deputy ambassador, Kim In Ryong, was defiant. He said North Korea would never abandon its "nuclear deterrence for self-defense and pre-emptive strike capability" even if the U.S. ratchets up sanctions and pressure "to the utmost."

Speaking to reporters, Kim hailed the test launch and said that if the Trump administration wants peace on the divided Korean Peninsula, it should replace the armistice that ended the 1950-53 Korean War with a peace accord and halt its anti-North Korea policy.

At the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said the missile test showed North Korea isn't heeding cautions from the international community. However, he stressed the need for a peaceful resolution by working through the U.N. with countries including China, the North's traditional ally and benefactor.

"If this goes to a military solution it is going to be tragic on an unbelievable scale, and so our effort is to work with the U.N., work with China, work with Japan, work with South Korea to try to find a way out of this situation," Mattis said at a news conference.

He said North Korea "probably learned a lot" from last weekend's test. He said the missile went very high and came down, but he would not characterize it as demonstrating the controlled re-entry of a missile.

Guiding a long-range missile to a target on return to Earth is a key technological hurdle that North Korea must overcome in trying to perfect a missile that could threaten the United States. The North also probably has a way to go before it can miniaturize a nuclear warhead to mount on such a missile.

All 15 members of the U.N. Security Council, the world organization's most powerful body, this week called the launch a violation of existing sanctions and vowed to take new measures, including additional sanctions.

Before an emergency meeting of the council Tuesday, U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley declared: "You either support North Korea or you don't, but you have to choose. You have to pick a side."

Kim accused the council of playing "to the tune of the U.S. again" and protested the Trump administration's demand for countries to choose allegiance between the United States and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, his country's official name.

President Donald Trump is looking to both China and Russia, the two permanent members on the Security Council that have historically been most sympathetic to North Korea, to join the U.S.-backed campaign of diplomatic and economic pressure on the North to get it to denuclearize.

Asked about Beijing and Moscow's support for the six previous rounds of U.N. sanctions, Kim said both countries are "close neighbors" who "understand our nuclear projection occurred through the U.S. continued nuclear threat and its hostile policy" toward North Korea.

If the United States "persists in anti-DPRK sanctions without understanding its rival, the (Trump) administration will have to take full responsibility for the ensuing catastrophic consequences," he warned.

"The U.S. should mind that the DPRK nuclear striking capability will be strengthened and developed at a rapidly high speed as long as the U.S. insists (on) its anti-DPRK policy, nasty nuclear threats and blackmails, sanction and pressure," Kim said.

___

Associated Press writer Edith M. Lederer reported this story at the United Nations and AP writer Matthew Pennington reported from Washington.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-...ea-already-do-without-nuclear-weapons/8543532

How much damage could North Korea unleash even without nuclear weapons?

By Michael Collett
Updated yesterday at 10:35pm

There's been a lot of focus on North Korea's nuclear ambitions, and specifically, its hopes of developing a missile that could deliver a nuclear strike on the United States.

But what can be lost in the discussion of the country's recent missile tests is the vast military capabilities the country already has.

This morning, US Defence Secretary Jim Mattis said any military solution to the North Korea crisis would be "tragic on an unbelievable scale".

This is why a diplomatic solution is widely seen as the only solution.

What do we know about North Korea's military?

Nick Bisley, executive director of La Trobe Asia and editor-in-chief of the Australian Journal of International Affairs, says the military is the second most important institution in North Korea behind the Kim dynasty.

Key players in the Kim dynasty


The Kim dynasty is long and bloody. Here's who's who in North Korea's ruling family
"The whole economy and the purpose of the state is organised around ensuring that the military has vast capacity," he said.

So despite North Korea having an estimated population of about 25 million — not much more than Australia — it has the second biggest military in Asia behind China.

Professor Bisley says its active military probably has about 1.2 million service people, and that two thirds of its army is situated within a few dozen kilometres of the demilitarised zone (DMZ).

In other words, they're right on the doorstep of South Korea and its capital Seoul. And they're pointing a gun right at it.

What could they do to the South?

North Korean military
PHOTO: Tanks take part in a military parade in Pyongyang. (Reuters: KCNA)
North Korea has vast artillery capabilities that are targeted on Seoul, which has a population of 10 million and is less than an hour's drive from the DMZ.

"If you Google some of the North Korean propaganda videos of their live fire exercises, you can see the scale," Professor Bisley said.

To put it bluntly:

"They've got the ability to destroy Seoul fairly quickly."
That's despite the fact that we're not talking about the most advanced weaponry.

"It's a slightly antiquated military. This is not cutting-edge war fighting kit," Professor Bisley said.

Nevertheless, many observers believe the artillery fire that North Korea could unleash would be so high intensity that it would have the devastation effect of a kind of nuclear attack, minus the radiation.

As well, Professor Bisley says there's no question North Korean soldiers could get across the DMZ.

"There's vast tunnel networks that would allow the North to get into the South," he said.

As for the potential death toll:

"If there was just a massive lashing out by the North on the South, you are looking at well into the millions."
What about Japan?

A missile is shown off at a military parade in Pyongyang.
PHOTO: A missile is shown off at a military parade in Pyongyang. (Reuters: Damir Sagolj)
The gun that's pointed at South Korea is also pointed at the south and west of Japan.

Professor Bisley says North Korea has short- and medium-range ballistic missiles which could hit cities like Fukuoka and Hiroshima.

Meanwhile, it's important to remember that the US itself has many service people in both South Korea (just under 30,000) and Japan (about 40,000), and most of them would also be in harm's way should the North lash out.

What is North Korea trying to achieve by getting nuclear weapons?

North Korea is many things, but it isn't mad.

Professor Bisley says leader Kim Jong-un might be completely indifferent to the suffering of his own people and those south of the border, but despite that, he's acting "perfectly rational".

N Korea's nuke capabilities


A former CIA officer says North Korea could have a 10-kiloton weapon capable of striking the US west coast and killing 100,000 people within four years.
That's because many argue that the whole purpose of North Korea's military is less about defence in the traditional sense — "someone invades us, we can see them off" — but more about having a gun pointed at the South so the international community leaves them alone.

Getting a nuclear weapon that could reach mainland US would mean North Korea has an even bigger deterrent. And to do that, they'll need more than just one nuclear-tipped intercontinental ballistic missile.

"They need to have enough that they can hit the US reliably, but also survive a pre-emptive attack and still be able to unleash a pretty nasty attack on the US," Professor Bisley said.

"They are still a fair way away from that."

Ultimately, it's all about regime security.

"Yes, there's a paranoid streak in North Korean thinking, but it's not unfounded. There is someone who's out to get them," Professor Bisley said.

Why aren't we talking about what North Korea can already do?

Mostly because it's nothing new. They've had these capabilities for many years.

We focus on North Korea's nuclear program because that's a potential game changer with massive ramifications.

Beyond that, Professor Bisley says nuclear weapons have a "perfectly understandable fascination", especially when you marry their apocalyptic imagery with the "faintly absurd 50s Stalinist aesthetics of North Korea".

Nevertheless, he says the threat that North Korea already poses should be much more part of the debate.

Topics: world-politics, unrest-conflict-and-war, korea-democratic-people-s-republic-of

First posted yesterday at 8:51pm

RELATED STORY: Nothing 'unpredictable' about dangerous North Korea
RELATED STORY: North Korea launches missile to test 'large-size nuclear warhead' capability
RELATED STORY: North Korea missile program progressing faster than expected: Seoul
MAP: Korea, Democratic People S Republic Of
 

paul bunyan

Frostbite Falls, Minnesota
Kid Korea

Hi Carl,

Thanks for the fascinating rundown on the Krazy Korean Kid and his big missile.

Paul
 
Last edited:

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
US and Japan confirm N. Korea conducted missile launch
Started by CGTech‎, Today 03:10 AM
http://www.timebomb2000.com/vb/show...pan-confirm-N.-Korea-conducted-missile-launch

Hummm....

For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017...-and-u-s-has-options-to-make-that-happen.html

WORLD

North Korea's regime must go, and the U.S. has options to make that happen

By Harry J. Kazianis Published May 21, 2017 Fox News

North Korea might just be the neediest of nation-states. Anytime the world’s attention shifts away—this time to President Trump’s trip to the Middle East—the hermit kingdom knows how to return the world’s collective gaze back to the Korean Peninsula, this time firing off another missile.

And we shouldn’t be shocked. In fact, North Korea is well overdue to test something much more menacing—another nuclear weapon. That would mark the sixth-time Pyongyang has defied the international community in its long march to develop a nuclear device that can rain down atomic terror not only on South Korea, Japan and U.S. bases throughout Asia – but eventually on the U.S. homeland itself.

So what happens next? Judging by the pace Kim Jung-un seems to be on, we should buckle up and brace for more missile and nuclear tests in the future. Kim doesn’t care how much he raises international tension, angers neighbors, his patrons in Beijing or America and its allies. His goal is survival, and the only way to survive when faced with the awesome military might of a superpower is an atomic arsenal that can kill millions at the push of a button.

Thankfully America has options to push back against Pyongyang, as I explained here last week. These include tough sanctions on anyone helping the North Koreans develop nuclear weapons or missiles, the levering of cyber weapons on a grand scale to constrain and raise the costs of missile and nuclear advances, as well as more missile defenses deployed and retained in the area around North Korea.

There is however one solution, the toughest of all solutions, that in all our hearts we know would solve this problem once and for all—one that is not for the faint of heart: the eventual change of regime in North Korea.

History tells us we must prepare, and indeed, carefully push for this eventuality. No regime as evil, as sinister, and as dangerous as North Korea —the modern day equivalent of Nazi Germany with death camps where the regime tests chemical weapons on its own people—has survived forever. The sins of its leaders continue to grow with each passing day, sealing the regimes fate—clearly a question of when, not if, it will fall.

Now, to be clear, I am not advocating for U.S. military forces to mass in Northeast Asia and invade. The preparation for such an operation would be conducted in plain view of Kim Jong-un and he would have every incentive to strike first—and with nuclear as well as his vast, and sometimes forgotten, chemical and likely biological arsenals. Indeed, U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis just last week explained that a military solution when it comes to Pyongyang’s nuclear program would be “tragic on an unbelievable scale.” But we do have options to help ensure the expiration date of the Kim regime is set in years and not decades.

For example, we do know how North Korea keeps control of its citizens—the brainwashing of its society into believing that Washington and Seoul are the enemy and that they must starve and live in destitution to support an army that is the fourth largest in the world with an economy the size of Laos. We must exploit this weakness by working to educate the North Korean people of the abuses of the regime—to help them begin to understand the tyranny they live under.

Thankfully modern technology affords us ample ways to achieve such a goal. For example, human rights groups are already helping smuggle into North Korea DVD players that access USB sticks packed with video from around the region, proving the promise of a better life. Citizens are also taking matters into their own hands—hacking government issued cell phones to talk to the outside world as well as trying to flee their prison-of-a-nation in increasing numbers.

The U.S. can help expand the above efforts dramatically. Washington could lead a covert effort, working with human rights and other interested organizations, to educate the North Korea people when it comes to the sins of their leaders. We must help awaken the hopes, aspirations and dreams of a people enslaved far too long. America must weaponize against the Kim regime the most powerful of passions—hope for a better future.

To be clear, helping the North Korean regime pass into the dust bin of history won’t be easy, and the costs of reunification—easily in the trillions of dollars—will be a bill not easy to pay. But the costs of a nuclear war, by accident or intent, with millions dead and large sections of Asia and possibly even America turned into atomic wastelands is too grim to bear. It’s time to consider a different path—and the most obvious one.


Harry J. Kazianis (@grecianformula) is director of defense studies at the Center for the National Interest, founded by former President Richard M. Nixon. Click here, for more on Mr. Kazianis.
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Evan Rosenfeld‏Verified account @Evan_Rosenfeld 29m29 minutes ago

North Korea says ready to deploy, mass produce new missile capable of reaching Japan. https://apnews.com/9809d8f555844266...n=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP … #DPRK via @EricTalmadge


posted for fair use
https://apnews.com/9809d8f555844266...n=SocialFlow&utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=AP

By ERIC TALMADGE
59 minutes ago


North Korea says ready to deploy, mass produce new missile



TOKYO (AP) — North Korea says it’s ready to deploy and start mass-producing a new medium-range missile capable of reaching Japan and major U.S. military bases there following a test launch it claims confirmed the missile’s combat readiness and is an “answer” to President Donald Trump’s policies.


The solid-fuel Pukguksong-2 missile flew about 500 kilometers (310 miles) and reached a height of 560 kilometers (350 miles) Sunday before plunging into the Pacific Ocean. North Korea’s media said more missiles will be launched in the future.

Trump, traveling in Saudi Arabia, had no immediate public comment.

North Korean leader Kim Jong Un ordered the launch and watched from an observation post, state media reported Monday. The Korea Central News Agency said the test verified technical aspects of the weapon system and examined its “adaptability under various battle conditions” before it is deployed to military units.


Kim reportedly said the launch was a success, “approved the deployment of this weapon system for action” and said that it should “be rapidly mass-produced.”

North Korea has significantly speeded up its missile tests over the past year or so and appears to be making tangible progress toward developing an arsenal that poses a threat not only to South Korea and Japan — which together host about 80,000 U.S. troops — but also toward an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of reaching the mainland United States.

It’s moving ahead with its nuclear weapons program as well.

The North conducted two nuclear tests last year. It claims one was a hydrogen bomb and the other device created a more powerful explosion than any the North has previous tested. Satellite imagery suggests it could be ready to conduct its next test — which would be its sixth — at virtually any time.

Pyongyang’s often-stated goal is to perfect a nuclear warhead that it can put on a missile capable of hitting Washington or other U.S. cities.

North Korea’s media, meanwhile, have stepped up their calls for even more missile launches because of what Pyongyang claims is an increasingly hostile policy by President Donald Trump.

“The Trump administration would be well advised to lend an ear to the voices of concern that are heard from the U.S. and the international community,” the North’s Minju Joson newspaper said in a commentary Sunday. “Many more ‘Juche weapons’ capable of striking the U.S. will be launched from this land. This is the DPRK’s answer to the Trump administration.’”

“Juche,” in this usage, refers to domestically produced and DPRK is short for the North’s official name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.


In an interview with “Fox News Sunday” U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson said the ongoing testing is “disappointing” and “disturbing.”

South Korea held a National Security Council meeting after the launch, and its Foreign Ministry said the launch “throws cold water” on efforts to ease tensions on the peninsula.

At the request of diplomats from the U.S., Japan and South Korea, a United Nations’ Security Council consultation on the missile test will take place Tuesday.

North Korea a week earlier had successfully tested a new midrange missile — the Hwasong 12 — that it said could carry a heavy nuclear warhead.

Experts said that rocket flew higher and for a longer time than any other missile previously tested by North Korea and represents another big advance toward a viable ICBM.

David Wright, an expert on North Korea’s missiles and nuclear program who is with the Union of Concerned Scientists, said the latest missile could have flown farther but was fired on a “lofted” trajectory, which sends the missile high up so that it will land in the open seas rather than flying over or splashing down near neighboring countries.

He noted the Pukguksong-2′s solid fuel is of particular concern.

Solid-fuel missiles have their fuel loaded in them before being moved into place, allowing them to be launched faster and with more secrecy. Liquid-fuel missiles, on the other hand, are fueled at the launch site in a process that can last an hour and requires fueling and other vehicles. That makes then easier to spot and easier to destroy than the solid-fuel variety.

___

AP writers Kim Tong-hyung in Seoul and Edith M. Lederer in New York contributed to this report. Talmadge is the AP’s Pyongyang bureau chief. Follow him on Twitter at twitter.com/EricTalmadge and Instagram at erictalmadge.
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Steve Herman‏Verified account @W7VOA 45m45 minutes ago

#DPRK now "a fully-fledged nuclear power," says North Korean diplomat at #UN forum.


Steve Herman‏Verified account @W7VOA 16m16 minutes ago

At #UN disarmament conference US calls #DPRK a "pariah" while North Korean rebuts it's America that really aggravates the #Korea situation.
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Steve Herman‏Verified account @W7VOA 45m45 minutes ago

#DPRK now "a fully-fledged nuclear power," says North Korean diplomat at #UN forum.


Steve Herman‏Verified account @W7VOA 16m16 minutes ago

At #UN disarmament conference US calls #DPRK a "pariah" while North Korean rebuts it's America that really aggravates the #Korea situation.

Well, both Pakistan and India "only" conducted 6 tests each and are considered as such (most of which were low yield shots) so why not consider North Korea as that as well?...
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Well, both Pakistan and India "only" conducted 6 tests each and are considered as such (most of which were low yield shots) so why not consider North Korea as that as well?...

well, I have considered them that for a while now; LOL...almost as long as DPRK has considered themselves that.
 

Bolerpuller

Contributing Member
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-40024773

South Korea says an object which drifted over the border from North Korea on Tuesday appears to have been a balloon carrying propaganda leaflets.
South Korean troops fired about 90 machine gun rounds towards the flying object.
North Korea has flown drones over the border in the past and the incident came at a time of high tension around the heavily guarded border.
The South said the balloons were likely to have come from inside North Korea.
South Korean activists have often flown balloons carrying anti-Pyongyang propaganda messages and light goods like snacks in to North Korea, to the frustration of the South's authorities.
ADVERTISEMENT

But defence ministry spokesman Moon Sang-Gyun said the object on Tuesday had been spherical, not cylindrical like activists' balloons.
'Destabilising behaviour'
South Korea's new president Moon Jae-in said last week that there was a "high possibility" of conflict breaking out at the border.
The pace of North Korean missile tests has increased in recent months and experts fear it indicates progress towards Pyongyang's ultimate goal of putting a nuclear warhead on a missile that could strike the continental US.
On Sunday, North Korea said it had carried out a "successful" test of a medium range ballistic missile.
That came a week after North Korea tested what it said was a new type of rocket capable of carrying a large nuclear warhead.
The UN Security Council held a closed-door meeting on North Korea on Tuesday evening. In a statement on Monday, it agreed to "take further significant measures including sanctions" to force North Korea to end its "highly destabilising behaviour".
But North Korea's historic ally and main trade partner China said the priority was to push for diplomatic talks.
China's UN Ambassador Liu Jieyi said: "There is no reason why dialogue is not taking place in the current situation," and he stressed all progress in the past "was achieved as a result of dialogue".
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
http://38north.org/2017/05/jschilling052417-2/

North Korea’s New Hwasong-12 Missile

By John Schilling
24 May 2017

By now, we have at least learned the name of the new missile North Korea tested on May 14: the Hwasong-12. We also have photos of the launch, as we have come to expect from the North following a successful high-profile missile test. Those photos provide us with some information about this new missile but still leave us uncertain about key technical issues and particularly whether or not this test advanced North Korea’s worrying intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) program.

Could the Hwasong-12 engine be used in advancing development of an ICBM? One obvious feature of this new missile is the engine: a single nozzle with four verniers. This is not an ex-Soviet R-27 engine as is used on the Musudan, but neither is it the dual R-27 system they developed for the KN-08 missile and tested last year. While it is difficult to tell from the photos released, the Hwasong-12 engine looks very much like a new engine North Korea tested in March, which we assessed at that time as a probable space launch vehicle engine, in large part because there didn’t seem to be a missile appropriate for it. They may still use it in their next space launch vehicle, for which it would be quite appropriate, but it seems they are using at least a variant of it in this missile. The engine used on the HS-12 might not have quite enough thrust for an ICBM, but it was likely designed to demonstrate key technologies and components for a new ICBM engine. It won’t take long to modify this design for ICBM use, if that is North Korea’s goal.

What propellant powered the rocket? The propellant combination isn’t entirely clear either, as the North Koreans have been tinkering with the color balance on some of their photos for aesthetic effect. It is certainly a liquid propellant engine, and the most likely propellant candidates seem to be inhibited red fuming nitric acid (IRFNA) and unsymmetrical dimethylhydrazine (UDMH). This is slightly less efficient than the Musudan’s nitrogen tetroxide (NTO) and UDMH, but easier to store in the field. But we can’t rule out that the new engine uses the more efficient NTO/IRFNA, or even the old IRFNA/kerosene combination of the Nodong missile. Until we know exactly what propellant was used, we can’t make a more precise estimate of the engine’s performance.

Was this a single stage or two stage rocket? Less obvious but more curious is something we can’t see. There is no sign of a stage separation joint or mechanism on the Hwasong-12. This has led to suspicion that we are seeing a single-stage missile. However, the lack of a visible separation joint is not proof. North Korea’s traditional stage separation techniques would have been clearly visible even at the coarse resolution of the launch imagery, but there are more advanced designs where the system is largely internal and invisible. We had better imagery from the parade last month, which on examination also doesn’t show a visible joint, but parade missiles are almost always mock-ups and may not have all the detailed features of a real missile.

If this is a one-stage missile, it would be remarkable. The demonstrated performance, equivalent to a range of more than 4,500 km, may be unprecedented for a one-stage system. The only historic single-stage missile that might have matched the Hwasong-12’s performance is the old Soviet R-14 (aka SS-5), which with its lightest warhead could reach about 4,500 km—but that was an 80-ton behemoth, whereas the Hwasong-12 weighs perhaps only 20 tons. In order to deliver such performance from a package the size of a Hwasong-12, North Korea would have to couple an engine more efficient than any they have built before, with a structure far lighter than they have ever built before.

Even with these enhancements, the Hwasong-12 almost certainly could not have reached the reported 2,100 km apogee with anything more than an empty fairing where the reentry vehicle and warhead should be. Essentially, this would make the entire exercise a pointless stunt—they don’t have a missile until they test the reentry vehicle, and they won’t be fooling the allied intelligence agencies that have detailed radar tracking of the acceleration profile. More likely this was a two-stage missile with a heavy payload and a new stage separation mechanism.

Does this test advance North Korea’s ICBM program? A new engine, a new structural design and maybe a new stage separation mechanism is a lot of work for a missile that can target nothing farther than Guam. Make no mistake, Guam is an important target, but it’s not “design-a-new-missile-from-scratch” important. North Korea is likely going to use the technologies demonstrated here in its ongoing ICBM development program.

The new engine would be helpful. The dual R-27 engine system offered adequate performance for an ICBM, but barely so, and it was always going to have reliability problems in service. The new engine may offer better performance, and will almost certainly offer greater reliability. It also seems to be an engine North Korea can manufacture for itself, where they may have been drawing from a limited stockpile of surplus Soviet hardware for the R-27.

A new stage separation mechanism will make little difference unless it came as part of an improved structural technology, which could improve the performance of North Korea’s KN-08 and KN-14 ICBMs. Alternately, it could be used to make the missiles more rugged and readily transportable while keeping performance constant.

These advantages may mean two steps forward and one step backward for the ICBM program. They come with a cost: the missile will have to be substantially redesigned to use the new technologies. That means throwing out years of effort already put into the old design. And it means waiting until the Hwasong-12 has finished testing, before going forward with the final design of the ICBMs. We may have to concern ourselves with a more robust and capable ICBM system, but we shouldn’t be too concerned about it entering service next year. While the success of the Hwasong-12 may advance the North Korean ICBM program by perhaps a year, deployment of an operational ICBM prior to 2020 is still unlikely.

Found in section: WMD
Tags: ballistic missile test, hwasong-12, icbm, intercontinental ballistic missile, john schilling, r-27 engine

Previous Topic: The Pukguksong-2 Approaches Initial Operational Capability
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
For links see article source.....
Posted for fair use.....
https://www.thecipherbrief.com/colu...arned-after-25-years-failed-negotiations-1090

Lessons Learned After 25 Years of Failed Negotiations

MAY 26, 2017 | JOSEPH DETRANI

Twenty-five years of failed negotiations with North Korea. Since 1993, our efforts to halt North Korea’s pursuit of nuclear weapons have failed. What have we learned from this experience?

The 1994 Agreed Framework froze North Korea’s plutonium program, but it did not halt North Korea’s desire for nuclear weapons. Thus, while the U.S., working with Japan and South Korea, was building two civilian light-water reactors in North Korea, and providing heavy crude oil in the interim, until the reactors were operational, North Korea was pursuing a clandestine highly enriched uranium (HEU) program for nuclear weapons.

We became complacent once we had the 1994 Agreed Framework. We assumed that with the new leadership in North Korea, with Kim Jong-il replacing the deceased Kim Il-sung, and with food scarcity and significant starvation, and reports of dissension in the ranks of the military, that there would be regime change from within. We were wrong.

The Agreed Framework came to an abrupt halt in 2002, due to the HEU program, and the U.S. decision to halt heavy crude oil shipments to North Korea and suspend construction of the two light-water reactors, which motivated North Korea to pull out of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT). In August 2003, with the assistance of China, the Six-Party process commenced, with China serving as the Chair, and the U.S., South Korea, Japan and Russia participating. After many plenary sessions and task force meetings, in September 2005 the six countries signed a Joint Statement, committing North Korea to complete and verifiable denuclearization, in return for security assurances, economic development assistance and the provision of light-water reactors when North Korea returned to the NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state.

The Joint Statement initially wasn’t implemented, however, because of the freezing of $24 million of North Korean money in a Macao bank, Banco Delta Asia. After a number of months, during which international financial institutions refused to deal with North Korean banks, the U.S. informed the Macao bank that it could release the $24 million to North Korea. The North Koreans insisted the money be returned to them through a U.S. financial institution to demonstrate to international financial institutions that it was fine to deal with North Korean banks. Understandably, no U.S. bank wanted to deal with North Korea, so the money was returned to North Korea via the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. This pleased Pyongyang and North Korea then started to implement the Joint Statement.

The implementation of the Joint Statement ended in late 2008, when North Korea refused to sign a monitoring and verification protocol that would permit monitors to inspect suspect nuclear sites. Since then, there have been no formal talks with North Korea.

During the five years since Kim Jong-un replaced his father in December 2011, North Korea has had over 70 missile launches, the most recent on May 14 of an intermediate-range ballistic missile. It has had two nuclear tests and is preparing for its sixth. North Korea’s nuclear weapons program has progressed exponentially, with bigger nuclear tests and the likelihood that North Korea is capable of miniaturizing its arsenal of nuclear weapons. Eventually, North Korea will test-launch an intercontinental ballistic missile (capable of reaching the U.S., potentially with a nuclear warhead.

In addition to its nuclear and missile programs, North Korea has upgraded its asymmetrical warfare capabilities, as shown by their cyber penetration of Sony Pictures in 2014 and the use of VX nerve agent to assassinate Kim Jong-nam, the brother of Kim Jong-un in February.

North Korea has made it abundantly clear that it wants to be recognized and accepted as a nuclear weapons state. It has been told this would never happen. North Korea with nuclear weapons will contribute to a nuclear arms race in East Asia, with countries like South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and others demanding that they, too, have nuclear weapons, regardless of any extended nuclear deterrence commitment from the United States. It could also result in nuclear weapons or devices or fissile material getting into the hands of rogue states and other parties, such as terrorists. There’s also the possibility of a nuclear weapon being used accidentally. Meanwhile, we should never forget North Korea’s contribution to constructing a nuclear reactor in Al Kibar, Syria, that, fortunately, the Israelis destroyed in 2007.

So, what does this all mean? What have we learned and will it help us draft a meaningful strategy for dealing with North Korea? These are some of my takeaways:

  1. Stay engaged. Don’t assume the domestic situation in North Korea will lead to regime change. Accept the fact that Kim Jong-un has consolidated power and we will have to deal with him.
  2. It’s easy to walk away from negotiations, as we did in October-November 2002, due to North Korea’s HEU program. However, to re-engage is difficult, so stay at the table and work those difficult and seemingly intractable issues.
  3. Being too eager for an agreement could reinforce North Korea’s belief that it will prevail and eventually the U.S. will accept it as a nuclear weapons state. Using the New York Federal Reserve Bank to facilitate the return of the $24 million at BDA to North Korea could have been interpreted by Pyongyang as proof that the U.S. wanted an agreement badly.
  4. Trust but verify. We were correct in demanding that North Korea permit, in writing, verification monitors to visit suspect sites in North Korea.
  5. We should not be patient with a North Korea building greater nuclear and missile capabilities. Work hard and, with our allies and partners, implement a strategy for resolving the nuclear issue with North Korea.

U.S. President Donald Trump’s strategy of “all options are on the table” is timely and necessary. It’s now possible that working closely with our allies, in South Korea and Japan, and with China more aggressively pursuing North Korea, we will get North Korea to halt its nuclear and missile programs and return to denuclearization talks.

The author was the former Special Envoy for negotiations with North Korea. The views are the author’s and not any government agency or department.

NORTH KOREA

NUCLEAR WEAPONS

DIPLOMACY
THE AUTHOR IS JOSEPH DETRANI
Ambassador DeTrani was the Senior Advisor to the Director of National Intelligence and the Director of the National Counterproliferation Center and the Intelligence Community Mission Manager for North Korea. Prior to joining the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in 2006, he served at the Department of State as the Special Envoy for Six-Party Talks with North Korea, with the rank of Ambassador, and as the U.S. Representative to the Korea Energy Development Organization (KEDO). ... Read More
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
Not a new thread started yet, so putting here, but it is from yesterday, so...

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-china-northkorea-idUSKBN18M197

Fri May 26, 2017 | 7:55am EDT
Russia, China urge caution in countering North Korea's nuclear program

Russia and China agree that the development of North Korea's nuclear program should not be used as an excuse for deploying elements of a U.S. global anti-missile system on the Korean peninsula, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Friday.

Moscow and Beijing also favor measures that would counter North Korea's nuclear program, but at the same time not hamper a political settlement in the region, Lavrov told a joint news briefing with his Chinese counterpart Wang Yi.
 

Lilbitsnana

On TB every waking moment
DeeCee‏ @DCdecals1 5m5 minutes ago

U.S. deploying more INTERCEPTOR MISSILES ????
#WW3 #NorthKorea #Iran



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ehe7O1M5A3k&feature=youtu.be

US Military to Deploy Eight Additional Interceptor Missiles In Alaska
DAHBOO77
DAHBOO77
285K
2,784 views
Published on May 27, 2017

The Pentagon plans to deploy eight additional ground-based interceptor missiles at Fort Greely, Alaska, according to the U.S. Missile Defense Agency.

Japan

posted for fair use
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-N...les-in-Alaska/1051495651239/?spt=su&or=btn_tw


Pentagon to deploy eight additional interceptor missiles in Alaska

By Elizabeth Shim Contact the Author | Updated May 25, 2017 at 7:46 AM

The Pentagon plans to update its sea-based X-band radar to deter North Korea as part of its plan to strengthen homeland defense. File Photo courtesy of U.S. Missile Defense Agency



May 24 (UPI) -- The Pentagon plans to deploy eight additional ground-based interceptor missiles at Fort Greely, Alaska, according to the U.S. Missile Defense Agency.

Japanese television network NHK reported Tuesday the U.S. military is adding eight more missile defense systems and "updating" its sea-based X-band radar to deter against North Korean threats.

The SB-X is the world's largest and most powerful phased array X-band radar in the world, and is housed inside a dome that resembles a giant golf ball.

The system's electric thrusters can propel the radar to be positioned in any location in the Pacific Ocean, according to the Missile Defense Agency.

A total of 44 ground-based interceptor missiles are to be deployed to Alaska to "improve protection against North Korean and potential Iranian [intercontinental ballistic missile] threats as they emerge," the MDA states.

An X-band radar deployed to Japan will also receive an upgrade so as to improve the system's ballistic missile tracking capabilities.

North Korea has claimed its midrange missiles, like the recently test-launched Hwasong-12, can target U.S. assets in Guam and Japan.

An X-band radar currently deployed in the Pacific for 120 days per year will be upgraded so it is operational year-round.

The report comes after the U.S. House Armed Services Committee called for a $2.1 billion increase in military spending in the Pacific, due in part to the potential North Korean threat.

About $1 billion is being allocated to munitions and another $1 billion for missile defense, including Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD.

THAAD is already operational in central South Korea.
 
Top