Missile Failures

[Guest Lester Weevils]

This isn't the first NK missile test failure. On the other hand the USA had numerous such failures early on, and even today it is hardly unknown for us to ruin an occasional launch.

A few times lately when a NK missile fails, I think about the YAL-1. Supposedly the YAL-1 was cancelled, though it did have a few successful tests. This is EXACTLY what the YAL-1 was designed for.

Am curious, if we were to surreptitiously burn an inconvenient hole in a NK booster, using a remote infrared laser, would it light up the air so much that everybody and his brother who happens to be watching in infrared, would know about it? Or would it be kinda difficult to prove? That COIL laser is supposedly 1.315 micrometers, well into the infrared. Invisible to the naked eye unless such a strong power level can excite the air in the beam path causing secondary visible emissions? Dunno anything about it.

It seems pretty certain that numerous interested parties would have been watching with infrared-capable gear. Even many ordinary video chips are real good in infrared unless you intentionally filter it out.

Just wondering, if something like that were to happen would there be obvious-to-god-and-everybody smoking gun evidence?

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Boeing_YAL-1

Edited April 13, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[Jonnin]

there are a lot of ways someone who knows what is what could fubar such a project from afar without a lot of trouble. There was a team that showed how to bring down a fighter jet with just household electronics a couple of years back.

You can jam its coms. You can bork the gps signal. You can poke a hole in it. You can hack into it and take control. You can EMP it. Physical damage as you noted. And so forth. If prepared and in place, no one would be the wiser except NK, who no one would believe.

Edited April 13, 2012 by Jonnin

[Mike.357]

dunno what happened but it makes me smile to think that maybe, just maybe, our guys played a part in it not working.

[Jonnin]

Could be, but, ICBM tech is difficult. Only the most advanced countries really understand the engineering behind it and have what it takes to pull it off. The ability to launch and hit anywhere in the world is.... not simple. So, on one hand its hard, and on the other hand you have a country like the USA that messed up those centrifuges in iraq with computer trickery.... could be either one.

Edited April 14, 2012 by Jonnin

[MacGyver]

You have to ask yourself which is better, surreptitious "failure" or Japan shooting it out of the air and causing a MAJOR international incident when it crossed into their airspace.

I was kind of pulling for the Japanese, but kudos to whoever ensured its failure.

[mikegideon]

Could be, but, ICBM tech is difficult. Only the most advanced countries really understand the engineering behind it and have what it takes to pull it off. The ability to launch and hit anywhere in the world is.... not simple. So, on one hand its hard, and on the other hand you have a country like the USA that messed up those centrifuges in iraq with computer trickery.... could be either one.

Guidance is easier than it's ever been, but you still gotta make a multi-stage rocket work. That's not new science. Maybe the failure WAS helped along some.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If not, then the North Koreans won't make it for the timing of the Mayan calendar ending. Have to look elsewhere.

Suitcase nukes from Pakistan, anyone?

[Mike.357]

heck they might have just not been able to pul it off. Maybe they are still too far in the dark ages to shoot a rocket.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Mike, I think they didn't get the right Cliff Notes for the multi-stage rocket plans from China and keep screwing it up.

China uses them for plausible deniability in their quest for world domination.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Thanks all for the good ideas. Jonnin may likely be correct that there could be easier and less-detectable ways to fubar, if given lead time to get equipment in place and such. Am very ignorant of it.

Watching tv news reports had first got the impression it was a daylight launch. Guess they were showing stock footage of a day launch and I mistook it for the real deal. At least one web news article said it was a night launch. Guess that detail doesn't matter to the facts of interest on many news articles, more concerned with international consequences than the conditions of launch. Had to look at several articles to find one mentioning either day or night.

Had mainly been curious if a strong high-altitude laser would have enough atmospheric scatter to be real obvious to infrared gear. Was thinking MAYBE daylight could mask it but hadn't read any comments about how much scatter such wavelengths have at altitude. Maybe it would even be undetectable at night, but am kinda guessing at night it would be more obvious than a big zit on yer forehead (to an infrared tracking camera). Its just interesting and maybe the military isn't too terribly chatty about details of their new toys.

Kinda difficult to believe the YAL-1 was really cancelled unless it was quietly replaced with something better? It actually did work a few times. You'd think something like that which even occasionally works, they would keep around unless it is just buggier than a fireant hill?

[Guest TankerHC]

What Jonnin said. But in the case of the recent launch failure, it was just an 850 million dollar POS.

[tnhawk]

heck they might have just not been able to pul it off. Maybe they are still too far in the dark ages to shoot a rocket.

After all, they haven't figured out how to feed the people of their country yet.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Back in the early days of the space race the USA seemed to be having more failures than successes. Haven't looked at the numbers lately, but I was a little space-nut kid and paid close attention. Got real disappointed every time they would blow up a rocket, and remember being disappointed a whole lot in the era between sputinik 1 and the end of the mercury program. Even with the escape rockets on the capsules, those early astronauts must have been brave to the point of near-suicidal, they were blowing up so many rockets on the launchpad or within a minute of launch. Russian roulette may have been safer than the early manned flights.

Edited April 16, 2012 by Lester Weevils

[Jonnin]

Guidance is easier than it's ever been, but you still gotta make a multi-stage rocket work. That's not new science. Maybe the failure WAS helped along some.

It should be easy, but it is not really. The USA has been doing this stuff for a long, long time, and we still blow up the occasional airplane, space shuttle, or rocket. We have failed hundreds of rockets in our time, maybe thousands. NK will figure it out eventually. And, as nutty as they are, I doubt they attack the south or anyone else. Bluster and boast, parade and flaunt, but actually attack? They know better.

[Guest HvyMtl]

So, the odds they now do a nuke test?

[gjohnsoniv]

So, the odds they now do a nuke test?

Chernobyl repeat.

[tnhawk]

Chernobyl repeat.

Hopefully they'll get it right this time.