hanabusa says no worry beef curray
and of course schatz always has something negative to say about the POTUS - no bipartisanship there
http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/36092282/amid-rising-tensions-north-korea-threatens-preemptive-strike-against-guam

Best way to prevent an attack is to take Little Kim out.  I don't think he has any official heirs.  There will probably be a civil war in NK to see who takes power and whomever wins is more likely to be a better leader. The leaders and citizens there want to speak out and change things, but are too afraid to do so with the Kim dynasty in power.

So apparently NK shot of a few more missiles.  I saw reports from different US commands that stated that US mainland as well as Hawaii and Guam (feedback from different commands) were not in jeopardy. 

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/08/28/north-korea-fires-unidentified-missile-reports-say.html

Then I get texts from my GF (who is in Japan now) saying that the news was giving warnings of NK shooting another missile this morning and advising people to take shelter in "strong buildings". 

I'll be leaving for a trip with friends to Japan on Saturday.  And more of this crap. . .

So apparently NK shot of a few more missiles.  I saw reports from different US commands that stated that US mainland as well as Hawaii and Guam (feedback from different commands) were not in jeopardy. 

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/08/28/north-korea-fires-unidentified-missile-reports-say.html

Then I get texts from my GF (who is in Japan now) saying that the news was giving warnings of NK shooting another missile this morning and advising people to take shelter in "strong buildings". 

I'll be leaving for a trip with friends to Japan on Saturday.  And more of this crap. . .

I don't blame the Japanese for taking a missile launch so seriously considering they fly them over their country. I think the U.S just ought to let them shoot down every missile that NK launches over them. Use their missiles as test fodder for our missile defense system. I personally don't see anything wrong with that as long as the missiles are flying through Japan's airspace.

Sorry you will have to deal with this while visiting Japan. Safe travels, DRCK.

Oh shit we are in deep kimchee now. North Korea reveals new fighter bomber....

Oh shit we are in deep kimchee now. North Korea reveals new fighter bomber....

Funny you posted this. I read this article yesterday and forgot to post it up for everyone:

North Korea's antique airplane could be its most dangerous weapon yet

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/08/29/north-koreas-antique-airplane-could-be-its-most-dangerous-weapon-yet.html

"While the concept of Pyongyang using these Stalin-era planes seems far-fetched considering the nuclear weapons at its disposal, the aircrafts could be North Korea’s most deadly weapon.

The dated aircraft raisesthe concern that they could be used to transport a nuclear bomb to be dropped quite easily without triggering any radar at any specific target."

Funny you posted this. I read this article yesterday and forgot to post it up for everyone:

North Korea's antique airplane could be its most dangerous weapon yet

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/08/29/north-koreas-antique-airplane-could-be-its-most-dangerous-weapon-yet.html

"While the concept of Pyongyang using these Stalin-era planes seems far-fetched considering the nuclear weapons at its disposal, the aircrafts could be North Korea’s most deadly weapon.

The dated aircraft raisesthe concern that they could be used to transport a nuclear bomb to be dropped quite easily without triggering any radar at any specific target."

Bwaahahahaha we really in deep doo doo!

😜😱😬

My wife was in Japan when they launched that missile over Japan. I want to know why they didn't shoot it down. I also want to know that next time North Korea launches a missile in the direction of Japan, South Korea, or the US, we fire a retaliatory strike.

I am not a missile expert but I am assuming that you cannot determine where it will land by its simple trajectory given modern technology to change direction mid flight.

My wife was in Japan when they launched that missile over Japan. I want to know why they didn't shoot it down. I also want to know that next time North Korea launches a missile in the direction of Japan, South Korea, or the US, we fire a retaliatory strike.

I am not a missile expert but I am assuming that you cannot determine where it will land by its simple trajectory given modern technology to change direction mid flight.

I read an analysis on this. And the so called expert said that the technology needed to shoot down a missile is much more sophisticated than all the space, satellite and weapon technology combined. And it is just in its infancy. The fact is that we have missed as many test missiles as we have hit them. With that in mind the expert said if we were to attempt to hit the missile and we miss it not only would be an embarrassment, but it would also send an unintentional message to NK and the the rest of our enemies that we are full of hot air and our missile defense system does not work. This would embolden NK to not only continue but they will probably stop at nothing to get to the nuclear power country status that seems to be their goal. He said some other things which I don't remember at this time but that was the gist of his comments.

This is not my opinion I am just repeating what I remember from the analysis.

I read an analysis on this. And the so called expert said that the technology needed to shoot down a missile is much more sophisticated than all the space, satellite and weapon technology combined. And it is just in its infancy. The fact is that we have missed as many test missiles as we have hit them. With that in mind the expert said if we were to attempt to hit the missile and we miss it not only would be an embarrassment, but it would also send an unintentional message to NK and the the rest of our enemies that we are full of hot air and our missile defense system does not work. This would embolden NK to not only continue but they will probably stop at nothing to get to the nuclear power country status that seems to be their goal. He said some other things which I don't remember at this time but that was the gist of his comments.

This is not my opinion I am just repeating what I remember from the analysis.

I'm not sure about the conclusions.  We tried to shoot down almost every SCUD that was fired from Iraq.  Even though the hit ratio was low (40-50%), it showed we have the capability, even if the reliability and effectiveness isn't 100%.  If we can hit 50% of their missiles, they have to increase launches by 100% to ensure they hit the same number of intended targets.

We had permission from the countries bordering Iraq to shoot at the SCUDs,  NK is different.  When a missile is in NK air space, and then travels into international air space, they have every right for that missile to be there.  Once it crosses into another country's airspace, then they/we can legally shoot the missile down -- or try to.

Just because we can hit a missile doesn't mean we legally have that right.  Just because we try and miss doesn't mean the anti-missile systems are worthless.  Chances of success are about 50%, but that's much better than 0%.

I don't blame the Japanese for taking a missile launch so seriously considering they fly them over their country. I think the U.S just ought to let them shoot down every missile that NK launches over them. Use their missiles as test fodder for our missile defense system. I personally don't see anything wrong with that as long as the missiles are flying through Japan's airspace.

Sorry you will have to deal with this while visiting Japan. Safe travels, DRCK.

Yeah, gotta take that stuff seriously.  Though kind of reminds me of that scene from 300 when Leonidas goes to meet the emissary and the "pray that the are that stupid" to assassinate him and start the "real" war. 

While NKs belligerence will certainly be on my mind while I am there, I'm not that concerned about it.  One of my best friends and his whole family is already there.  I join them this weekend.  Really looking forward to the trip.  Well, maybe not the two days at Disneyland and Disney Sea with a 3 yo and 1 yo.  Haha.  Well, I am looking forward to it, but the young ones can make things very fun as well as, uh, test my patience.  Haha. 

I read an analysis on this. And the so called expert said that the technology needed to shoot down a missile is much more sophisticated than all the space, satellite and weapon technology combined. And it is just in its infancy. The fact is that we have missed as many test missiles as we have hit them. With that in mind the expert said if we were to attempt to hit the missile and we miss it not only would be an embarrassment, but it would also send an unintentional message to NK and the the rest of our enemies that we are full of hot air and our missile defense system does not work. This would embolden NK to not only continue but they will probably stop at nothing to get to the nuclear power country status that seems to be their goal. He said some other things which I don't remember at this time but that was the gist of his comments.

This is not my opinion I am just repeating what I remember from the analysis.

That analysis is basically %100 bull. 

We've operationally been able to shoot down missiles since at least the 90s. The Israeli's have gotten to the point where they can shoot down tiny rockets with low trajectories and hit SAM missiles (which is damn impressive btw) selectively after calculating whether or not they pose a risk, along with SRBMs, MRBMs, and likely ICBMs. Pretty amazing. Of course it's not %100. Nothing is, big whoop.

NOW, whether or not the US and regional allies choose to deploy and use those systems remains to be seen. People underestimate just how expensive it would be to actually protect the entire West coast. We are talking about billions if not trillions.

If you want possible answers about why nobody shot it down, here's just a few:

1) The trajectory was clearly attempting to not overfly Japanese land as best as possible. NK chose their best option for launching a missile which has to overfly someone due to their geographic location. They're not going to choose China or Russia out of their 4 options. So, there is no point in wasting millions of dollars on a missile for nothing.
2) We don't want to show our poker hand for a harmless missile.
3) We don't care (or would like) an inert warhead missile strike on a very, very, low population density Japan as it provides a good reason to go to war.
4) We want to observe exactly where their technology is at, what it does, etc.

That analysis is basically %100 bull. 

We've operationally been able to shoot down missiles since at least the 90s. The Israeli's have gotten to the point where they can shoot down tiny rockets with low trajectories and hit SAM missiles (which is damn impressive btw) selectively after calculating whether or not they pose a risk, along with SRBMs, MRBMs, and likely ICBMs. Pretty amazing. Of course it's not %100. Nothing is, big whoop.

NOW, whether or not the US and regional allies choose to deploy and use those systems remains to be seen. People underestimate just how expensive it would be to actually protect the entire West coast. We are talking about billions if not trillions.

If you want possible answers about why nobody shot it down, here's just a few:

1) The trajectory was clearly attempting to not overfly Japanese land as best as possible. NK chose their best option for launching a missile which has to overfly someone due to their geographic location. They're not going to choose China or Russia out of their 4 options. So, there is no point in wasting millions of dollars on a missile for nothing.
2) We don't want to show our poker hand for a harmless missile.
3) We don't care (or would like) an inert warhead missile strike on a very, very, low population density Japan as it provides a good reason to go to war.
4) We want to observe exactly where their technology is at, what it does, etc.

You obviously don't understand as you are mixing up two completely different defense systems for two completely different types of missiles. Our THAAD Missile Defense system is the missile defense system you are referring to being in place since the 90's is designed to shoot down short, medium and intermediate ballistic missiles with shorter ranges than the ICBM that North Korea launched. The missile defense system that is designed to defend against ICBM's is a completely different system and is still under development. And it has only about a 50% success rate so far. It is a lot harder to shoot down a missile moving much faster and going into outer space than it is to hit a much slower moving short, medium and intermediate ballistic missile.

Now as to the analysis as to why we have not tried to shoot it down, to me the analyst makes sense based on the reality of only about a 50% success rate for new technology. I'll let your arguments as to why stand as I am no expert in this sort of gamesmanship.

I would prefer that we try and use the NK missiles as test fodder. But again I am not an expert here.

You obviously don't understand as you are mixing up two completely different defense systems for two completely different types of missiles. Our THAAD Missile Defense system is the missile defense system you are referring to being in place since the 90's is designed to shoot down short, medium and intermediate ballistic missiles with shorter ranges than the ICBM that North Korea launched. The missile defense system that is designed to defend against ICBM's is a completely different system and is still under development. And it has only about a 50% success rate so far. It is a lot harder to shoot down a missile moving much faster and going into outer space than it is to hit a much slower moving short, medium and intermediate ballistic missile.

Now as to the analysis as to why we have not tried to shoot it down, to me the analyst makes sense based on the reality of only about a 50% success rate for new technology. I'll let your arguments as to why stand as I am no expert in this sort of gamesmanship.

I would prefer that we try and use the NK missiles as test fodder. But again I am not an expert here.

No, I'm not confusing the systems. You're response was directly in response to someone asking why we didn't shoot down a missile that had a SRBM or MRBM trajectory (regardless of NK's claims of theoretical distance)...you said you read an analysis about that, and also just said "missiles". Please re-read your post with the quoted post above and you will understand my post:

Also, almost any IRBM/MRBM goes into "outer space" like you say, that's not the difference between it and an ICBM...maybe you're the one who doesn't understand (and why get personal if its not your opinion?) Ballistics missiles of varying ranges are not "completely different" by any stretch of the imagination.

Lastly, that you think NK has an ICBM that can "change direction in mid flight" really says something about your understanding of this all.


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote from: eyeeatingfish on August 30, 2017, 11:25:57 PM
My wife was in Japan when they launched that missile over Japan. I want to know why they didn't shoot it down. I also want to know that next time North Korea launches a missile in the direction of Japan, South Korea, or the US, we fire a retaliatory strike.

I am not a missile expert but I am assuming that you cannot determine where it will land by its simple trajectory given modern technology to change direction mid flight.
I read an analysis on this. And the so called expert said that the technology needed to shoot down a missile is much more sophisticated than all the space, satellite and weapon technology combined. And it is just in its infancy. The fact is that we have missed as many test missiles as we have hit them. With that in mind the expert said if we were to attempt to hit the missile and we miss it not only would be an embarrassment, but it would also send an unintentional message to NK and the the rest of our enemies that we are full of hot air and our missile defense system does not work. This would embolden NK to not only continue but they will probably stop at nothing to get to the nuclear power country status that seems to be their goal. He said some other things which I don't remember at this time but that was the gist of his comments.

This is not my opinion I am just repeating what I remember from the analysis.

Lastly, that you think NK has an ICBM that can "change direction in mid flight" really says something about your understanding of this all.

Actually, you're wrong.

ICBMs do have the ability to make sudden, sharp changes in direction for the express purpose of avoiding anti-ballistic missiles.  It's a feature that was added once the risk of an ABM hit became reasonable.

What ICBMs do NOT do is change targets in mid-flight.  Once they launch, there is no way to change the target coordinates remotely.  That's to prevent another party from possibly changing the target coordinates so it misses them, or even using the missile against the country that launched it.

Do some research.  You'll see I'm right.

I wonder if these NK ICBMs are open-sourced powered by Android?

I wonder if these NK ICBMs are open-sourced powered by Android?

Raspberry Pi.

I'm not sure about the conclusions.  We tried to shoot down almost every SCUD that was fired from Iraq.  Even though the hit ratio was low (40-50%), it showed we have the capability, even if the reliability and effectiveness isn't 100%.  If we can hit 50% of their missiles, they have to increase launches by 100% to ensure they hit the same number of intended targets.

IIRC, that was using the Patriot system, which was designed as an anti-aircraft system.  The missile kill capability was an add-om I believe.  Sort of like the evolution of the Standard misslie?

IIRC, that was using the Patriot system, which was designed as an anti-aircraft system.  The missile kill capability was an add-om I believe.  Sort of like the evolution of the Standard misslie?

Yes, the Patriots were around since about 1969, and the  anti-missile defense function came later.  They weren't as concerned about a direct hit as they were getting close enough to explode and cause shrapnel and the shock wave to damage the incoming missile enough to cause a crash.

The work being done at PMRF on Kauai is for all ABM development and testing -- cruise missiles, ICBMs, short range missiles, etc. 

These systems combine to make up our missile defense shield.