Slashdot Mirror


North Korea Parades Hybrid 'Frankenmissile', Then Fails Yet Another Missile Launch Test (cnn.com)

First, an anonymous reader quotes Inverse: On Saturday, the North Korean military paraded an unprecedented array of weapons through Kim Il-sung Square in the center of Pyongyang... "We're totally floored right now," Dave Schmerler of the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in Monterey, California, tells the Wall Street Journal. "I was not expecting to see this many new missile designs." Schmerler tells The Journal that the large missiles -- the "frankenmissiles," as he calls them -- in the parade appear to be hybrids of the North Korean KN-08 and KN-14 missiles, both of which are ICBMs.
But at least one arms control expert noted that while the parade included ICBM-sized canisters, "what's inside is anyone's guess" -- and there's still mixed results for the country's missile program. "An attempted missile launch by North Korea on Sunday failed, US and South Korean defense officials told CNN... At this point, US military officials don't believe the missile had intercontinental capabilities, a US defense official told CNN." The official said there was limited data -- because the missile blew up so quickly -- prompting CNN.com to run the story under the headline "Show of Strength a Flop."

Update: Slashdot reader Dan Drollette is a science writer/editor and foreign correspondent for Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, and contacted us earlier today to share his recently-published analysis "to delve into what has been happening lately...and to discredit some common tropes in the media, such as the idea that 'North Korea is about to collapse,' 'China has a lot of influence over North Korea,' 'North Korea can credibly threaten the United States right now,' 'North Korea has no reason to feel threatened,' or 'The North can be completely denuclearized.'"

18 of 296 comments (clear)

  1. Hybrid! by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's nice that they are thinking of the environment and building hybrid missiles.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  2. Re:Who cares by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just bomb them ASAP. It's clearly a criminal organization at the top. Time to put an end to it. 10,000 tomahawk missiles to strike the targets near the border at 3am. Loads of MOABs JDAMs for the rest of the country. My estimate is 2 days all done and after that South Korea can clean up the rest and integrate.

    So when they put out all the paranoid rhetoric that the US is only out to invade and bomb them, are they really being paranoid?

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  3. Re:Who cares by prisoner-of-enigma · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So when they put out all the paranoid rhetoric that the US is only out to invade and bomb them, are they really being paranoid?

    My drill instructor gave me some useful advice about thirty years ago: if someone says they want to kill you, you should take them seriously. Let's keep in mind that since the late 1950's North Korea has been militant, aggressive, threatening, and destabilizing no matter who was in the White House. Various administrations have tried various sticks and various carrots to get them to change all to no avail. If the Norks are afraid of external animosity they only have themselves to blame.

    --
    In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
  4. Nonsense by argStyopa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the 'debunking' note, I wouldn't credit Mr Drollette as being as informed as he seems?

    "âoeNorth Korea wants to demonstrate it has a deterrent. To do so, it needs to be able to credibly threaten the US mainland or our overseas assets. For that, you have to make the bomb (more correctly, the warhead) small enough to mount on a missile,â "
    No, they don't.
    Certainly, any of the 4 old Romeo-class subs that the DPRK has could accommodate a sizable warhead, and it's entirely unlikely that US antisub systems would be audacious enough to sink it if it was cruising in the Los Angeles littoral. Surfacing just outside or in the harbor, and suicidally popping that nuke would devastate Los Angeles even if it fizzled.

    "North Korea has no reason to feel threatened? "
    Oh bullshit. The US ROK exercises have gone for what, 50 years? To assert 'they infuriate the north who believes them a practice for invasion' is about as credible as Little Kims score of 18 at golf, or the insistence that he simply doesn't poop. Let's say that they have no rational reason to feel threatened and leave it at that.

    "the best and most realistic approachâ"or rather, the âleast badâ(TM) approachâ"is to negotiate a freeze on Pyongyang's nuclear program. Such a deal would in some sense be a new version of the 1994 Agreed Framework, which succeeded in slowing the North's nuclear program."
    The 1994 Agreed Framework was a complete and TOTAL FAILURE. It was intended to halt the DPRKs nuke program, and the rationalization that it "slowed it down" is utterly without basis except to the pollyannas who believe sanction just might work the next time.
    How gullible are you?
    "âoeUnder an updated version of the agreement, North Korea would impose a moratorium on nuclear tests and long-range missile launches. It would give inspectors access to its nuclear facilities. In exchange, Pyongyang would receive food, humanitarian and development aid on a regular basis"
    This is EXACTLY what the 1994 Agreement tried to do, they took the food, the aid, and cheerfully violated their side of the agreement. I'm reminded the colloquial definition of insanity is "doing the same thing over and over expecting different results".

    I'm not a warmonger. I don't believe the US can "send in special ops" or nonsense like that. But to assert blithely that an agreement with DPRK can result in anything but rewarding them with more time and western goods to limp along in their goofy separate reality is ludicrous.

    --
    -Styopa
    1. Re:Nonsense by Strider- · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not necessarily true. Diesel-electric submarines are extremely quiet when running off their batteries. Canada has a (small) fleet of diesel-electric Submarines, and is often called upon to play the role of "Opposition Forces" in military exercises. In 2007, during an exercise in the north Atlantic, HMCS Corner Brook was able to sneak up on a British carrier (HMS Illustrious) and snap a photo through her periscope. All without being detected. It's also pretty routine for Canadian subs to "Sink" US carriers during exercises in the pacific.

      Don't discount it because it's "just" diesel electric.

      Now, when it comes to the North Koreans, wouldn't trust the reliability of their crews or vessels, but that's a different question entirely.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
  5. Re:Easter missile by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's an easter missile.

    You know... easter.. the day we celebrate where Jesus turned into a fluffy bunny and went around shitting out chocolates and colored eggs.

    Back in biblical times, reanimated zombies were not a joking matter. When the zombie control team rolled back the stone and found it gone, they new they had a new outbreak. It was all hushed up by couching things in terms of messiahs and apostles and fake magic tricks, but the select few knew and their ancestors went on to make zombie movies to prepare us.

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  6. Re:NK *is* a credible threat by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They can get pretty close by simply putting it onto a boat and sailing it in the any US port. For that matter the 9700 pound Hiroshima Bomb could be built into a modest sized cabin cruiser and sailed up to the Potomac to within about a mile of the White House.

    It's really hard to protect a large modern state from a rogue nation with nuclear capabilities, which is why non-proliferation is so important. It's one of those problems that are so hard, people just ignore it and focus instead on ones that seem more accomplishable, like establishing democracy in countries that have never had one.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  7. Re:Who cares by Alwin+Henseler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Delivering a massive first strike would only give the NK regime an excuse to say to its people "see, we told you this would happen", and then retaliate in equal measure. Which would only leave losers on both sides.

    NK should not be given that excuse. Shoot down their missiles if any of them come too close to population centres outside NK. Sink a sub if it comes too close to US (or other friendly nation) shoreline. Covert sabotage operations, fine. A good dose of cyberwar, why not. Stationing extra troops near border areas as a show of preparedness. But DO NOT be the one to push the start button for a full-on war. Especially if nukes might be involved.

    Ultimately it's up to NK people to deal with their own regime. And that regime will come to an end - like everything else. It's only a matter of time.

  8. Re:NK *is* a credible threat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Assuming some NK hardware is not at least as capable is absurd.

    This is 2016, not 1942. The technology for detecting and tracking submerged vessels has improved somewhat in the last 74 years. The North Korean subs are basically vintage 1960s era technology, like much of the rest of their military. They're not going anywhere without being tracked and if they approach the United States they will be sunk, war or no war, because nobody will be watching except the ones doing the shooting. Submarines can be accident prone and the Pacific Ocean has a fearsome reputation among mariners. Nobody would have any problem believing that a North Korean submarine had an "accident" while at sea. In fact, the visibility of submarines at sea to the general public is so low that they United States could essentially deny any knowledge. Finally, the North Koreans are so unsympathetic and unpopular these days that nobody would care what happened to their submarine anyway.

  9. Re:Just like finding a crashed airliner under the by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, it's not quite that cut and dry; subs move, make noise, wakes, create magnetic anomalies in motion (and image subtraction can trivially find one of those consequent to continuous MA observation of any area where the sub is, assuming the monitoring capability is available), and while no one tries to track each jetliner using sufficient resources to never lose sight of it, there's good reason to think that we would be keeping track, as best we can with the resources we have available, any NK asset that presented a potential nuclear threat.

    That said, even if we're on them at any one point, it doesn't mean we can't lose track of them, either. Even a hardware failure of a tracking resource could put this kind of thing into play where one might ordinarily assume it wasn't. This stuff is devilishly complex. Lots of ways for tracking to fail.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  10. Re:NK *is* a credible threat by dbIII · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You want a magic pony or something, who said anything about Seoul not being damaged?

    OK, I see where you are coming from and really wish I didn't.
    WTF is it with the warmongering and complete and utter disrespect of allied nations? WTF is the point of attacking NK at all if South Korea is going to be thrown away - "being strong" or some shit like that?

  11. Re:Just like finding a crashed airliner under the by chromaexcursion · · Score: 4, Informative

    A crashed airliner is stationary, dead and cold in over 2 miles of water. A moving sub is live, and hot, in less than 200 meters of water. The NK diesels have to come to snorkel depth, maybe 30 meters. Not so hard to find

  12. Naw, it's because NK doesn't have oil by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Interesting

    or anything else besides millions of refugees. Nobody wants to pop the boil that is NK. It'd be a humanitarian nightmare that you couldn't easily ignore like we do now.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  13. Re:Just like finding a crashed airliner under the by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Informative

    Not so hard to find if you are looking in exactly the correct place and they are not running on batteries.

    They're diesel boats. They can run on batteries during the hours of daylight if necessary, but they can't run on batteries long enough to cross the Pacific (realistically, they can't run on batteries long enough to go 100km). Most of the time, they'll be running on diesels, and can be heard by anyone within a 100 km or so.

    And they can't outrun a nuke boat. Not even sounding like a freight train (diesel boat running at max).

    --

    "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  14. Re:Sound waves in water not so simple by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Informative

    They're probably thinking of things like near-field synthetic aperture sonar. You can get images as clear as this, which gives the impression that water is no obstacle. Distance, however, changes what one can do, and there's quite a difference between passive monitoring and active monitoring as well.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  15. Re:Just like finding a crashed airliner under the by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The fact that this is marked as insightful shows just how bad Slashdot has gotten.
    1. We know where the subs home ports are.
    2. Subs make noise and move under their own power.
    3. North Korea's subs all have to run their diesel to recharge their batteries.
    4. The subs of North Korea are old and loud and easy to find if they leave home waters.

    To give an example the USSR lost a Golf class SB just like the one the North Korean's have sunk 1500 miles off the coast of Hawaii in 1968. The US found and recovered part of it.
    Had that airliner been of interest to the US it would have been tracked from the start until it hit the water. Also if the airliner was still an airliner and not a collection of parts spread across the Indian Ocean we would have found it.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  16. Re:NK *is* a credible threat by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Informative

    Our boomer and attack subs are decades more modern than the junk that North Korea has. Their ocean-going subs are all old Russian Romeo, Whisky, and Hotel class subs. They have a few midget subs but they could not reach the US.
    In other words, you also do not know what you are talking about if you compare the subs of NK with US.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  17. Re:NK *is* a credible threat by swb · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The problem is they've had 60-odd years to multiply and dig-in their artillery emplacements capable of hitting Seoul. I don't think there's a scenario where Seoul doesn't experience significant damage, no matter how effective counter-battery or airstrikes are at silencing those guns. Even pessimistically, 1500 guns getting off 10 rounds each is a lot of artillery strikes for a modern city to absorb. The ability to hit Seoul with artillery is a greater deterrent than nukes, and really Kim should have invested in dumb rocket launchers and even more artillery.

    I think the only way Seoul escapes is some kind of decapitation strike that kills Kim and his immediate circle so convincingly that the rest of his military doesn't react and surrenders.

    IMHO, this isn't entirely far-fetched -- my speculation is that in a country so paranoid, field commanders are scared witless and almost trained *not* to make decisions. I would question how many of them are existentially committed to fighting to the bitter end to protect and restore a new Kim-style dynasty in the event of the inner circle's untimely demise.

    Trouble is, that decapitation strike is tactically difficult and the consequences of not doing it perfectly.