North Korea

Would think if the projected landing spot is in a bit of ocean then the standing order would be to do nothing to avoid rapid escalation. That might change now though...
 
The Running Man said:
I don't understand why the US haven't intercepted all the missiles fired so far tbh.
Click to expand...

Ballistic missiles can only be intercepted at the boost or terminal phases. Its what the T in THAAD stands for. Basically, you have to be intercepting close to the launch site or the target. Until now, they can't get at them at launch because its in North Korea and they don't know when they will launch, and the targets have been the ocean.

Oh, and THAAD has been tested fairly sucessfully

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_High_Altitude_Area_Defense

Publicly available information obviously. If anyone knows anything more, they possibly shouldn't be talking about it here. Remains to be seen how it will perform in real life obviously.
 
Stolly said:
Ballistic missiles can only be intercepted at the boost or terminal phases. Its what the T in THAAD stands for. Basically, you have to be intercepting close to the launch site or the target. Until now, they can't get at them at launch because its in North Korea and they don't know when they will launch, and the targets have been the ocean.

Oh, and THAAD has been tested fairly sucessfully

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_High_Altitude_Area_Defense

Publicly available information obviously. If anyone knows anything more, they possibly shouldn't be talking about it here. Remains to be seen how it will perform in real life obviously.
Click to expand...

Ah there we go then, too late if launched from within N Korea and no point wasting $ if you know its landing in water.
 
Rroff said:
IIRC they do but only very small quantities - mostly they smuggle crude IIRC and then resell the refined product.

EDIT: Not something I know anything about but quick google suggests that coking coal is better for producing liquid fuel while NK has large quantities of Anthracite coal.
Click to expand...

I imagine Coking coal has a higher proportion of volatile hydrocarbons (Coal tar and trapped gas) so is better for crude distillation.

Coal to Gasses to Liquids should be less critical but more technically complex

I could see a possible issue with making synthetic fuels is that although there are various ways of producing hydrogen and CO from Coal (Water gas reaction etc) the carbon/hydrogen ratios end up wrong for making the lighter liquid fuels and hydrocarbon gasses. There still needs to be an "Extra" source of hydrogen for efficient production.

Getting that extra hydrogen could be a significant problem for NK

Stolly said:
Ballistic missiles can only be intercepted at the boost or terminal phases. Its what the T in THAAD stands for. Basically, you have to be intercepting close to the launch site or the target. Until now, they can't get at them at launch because its in North Korea and they don't know when they will launch, and the targets have been the ocean.
Click to expand...

This of course raises a different problem.

Nork missiles are likely to be less than accurate, The result of this might well be that it might well be possible to effectively defend (Say) LA, only to have the warhead come down in the middle of death valley.

Even if this didn't do much in the way of physical damage it would be very embarrassing for a warhead to get through un-intercepted...
 
Orionaut said:
I imagine Coking coal has a higher proportion of volatile hydrocarbons (Coal tar and trapped gas) so is better for crude distillation.

Coal to Gasses to Liquids should be less critical but more technically complex

I could see a possible issue with making synthetic fuels is that although there are various ways of producing hydrogen and CO from Coal (Water gas reaction etc) the carbon/hydrogen ratios end up wrong for making the lighter liquid fuels and hydrocarbon gasses. There still needs to be an "Extra" source of hydrogen for efficient production.

Getting that extra hydrogen could be a significant problem for NK



This of course raises a different problem.

Nork missiles are likely to be less than accurate, The result of this might well be that it might well be possible to effectively defend (Say) LA, only to have the warhead come down in the middle of death valley.

Even if this didn't do much in the way of physical damage it would be very embarrassing for a warhead to get through un-intercepted...
Click to expand...

Yep, thats part of the issue. An intercepted missile will break up and hit the ground over a wide area. Even if the warhead does not work radioactive material will be spread over a very wide area.
 
Stolly said:
Ballistic missiles can only be intercepted at the boost or terminal phases. Its what the T in THAAD stands for. Basically, you have to be intercepting close to the launch site or the target. Until now, they can't get at them at launch because its in North Korea and they don't know when they will launch, and the targets have been the ocean.

Oh, and THAAD has been tested fairly sucessfully

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_High_Altitude_Area_Defense

Publicly available information obviously. If anyone knows anything more, they possibly shouldn't be talking about it here. Remains to be seen how it will perform in real life obviously.
Click to expand...

I'd also wager that any such defensive action would be deemed an act of war by the North and from there things would escalate very quickly indeed...
 
Hambut_Bulge said:
I'd also wager that any such defensive action would be deemed an act of war by the North and from there things would escalate very quickly indeed...
Click to expand...

The launch interception ? Yes, and they'd be right. Unless there is a shooting war going on already how will anyone be able to know it wasn't another "test" ?
 
Stolly said:
The launch interception ? Yes, and they'd be right. Unless there is a shooting war going on already how will anyone be able to know it wasn't another "test" ?
Click to expand...

It is a danger and you absolutely never know with NK - however if it was an intentionally provocative move they'd know to expect the possibility of some kind of response so you'd probably see wider preparation to react to that.
 
Stolly said:
The launch interception ? Yes, and they'd be right. Unless there is a shooting war going on already how will anyone be able to know it wasn't another "test" ?
Click to expand...

However it would do a few things, stop them from being able to gather data from testing them. And aren't they banned from testing them anyway? If they knew that every one they launched would get blown to bits before it left the atmosphere they'd probably stop sooner than later.
 
beachBOYken said:
Can't they just drop a bomb on the nuclear test site, problem solved.
Click to expand...

Depends if they have reserve capabilities - likely they have other sites and don't put all their eggs in one basket. Also outcome could be unpredictable - NK might retaliate by firing on SK, etc.
 
Smokey Deza said:
I just want to come in here and laugh at everyone who thinks the US would roll over NK in 48 hours.
Click to expand...

Two factors to that - the realworld constraints versus on paper numbers i.e. on paper comparisons don't take into account unacceptable civilian casualties but also there are the factors of experience and moral, etc. how battle hardened the forces on either side are can have huge implications - it might be the US went on the offensive and the NK army folded overnight or they might turn around and put in a fight to the bitter end from prepared positions.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom