Does NK have nuclear missiles?

They have missiles which can reach Guam, also much further. What is unknown is whether they have developed their nuclear weapons to fit their missiles.
 
I read something recently that suggested that NK very likely couldn't launch an ICBM from a mobile launcher like the ones they usually show in their state TV propaganda. Even the US more or less gave up on mobile launch platforms for nuclear ICBMs.

On that basis, unless NK has some secret underground silos or something, it is questionable as to whether they can fit a nuclear device to an ICBM.
 
James R said:
I read something recently that suggested that NK very likely couldn't launch an ICBM from a mobile launcher like the ones they usually show in their state TV propaganda.
Click to expand...
If you "read something recently", that used phrasing such as "... that suggested ... that NK very likely couldn't...", then whomever authored whatever you "read" would seem to have been less than 100% confident in their analysis.

James R said:
Even the US more or less gave up on mobile launch platforms for nuclear ICBMs.
Click to expand...
"more or less gave up"...?

- The below quoted from November 12, 2014 : http://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2014/11/last-thing-us-needs-are-mobile-nuclear-missiles/98828/
TOM Z. COLLINA / JACOB MARX said:
In September, Lt. Gen. James Kowalski, vice commander of U.S. Strategic Command, which oversees the military’s nuclear forces, said that the Air Force favors a new system to replace the current Minuteman III nuclear-armed missiles, and hinted that it could eventually be based on a mobile platform. This, to put it mildly, is a non-starter. Dead on arrival. Failure to launch. If the United States did not need a mobile intercontinental ballistic missile, or ICBM, during the Cold War, why would it need one now?
Click to expand...

- The below quoted from November 14, 2014 : http://gizmodo.com/why-the-lgm-135a-midgetman-was-americas-shortest-lived-1657920701
Andrew Tarantola[/URL said:
However, there is renewed interest in mobile ICBMs. A 2011 study suggested that both China and Russia had begun redeveloping their previously-scrapped SICBM platforms. That said, a recent RAND study commissioned by the USAF itself found that the cost of developing new SICBM systems "will very likely cost almost two times—and perhaps even three times—more" that just using what we've already got—that's about $200 billion. And you thought the F-35 was a waste of money.
Click to expand...

- The below quoted from April 2016 : https://www.armscontrol.org/ACT/2016_04/News/Air-Force-Seeks-Mobile-ICBM-Option
Kingston Reif said:
The U.S. Air Force is planning to design a next generation of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) that will have the capability to be deployed on mobile launchers, a knowledgeable source told Arms Control Today last month.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
dmoe:

I don't much appreciate your nit-picking.

dumbest man on earth said:
If you "read something recently", that used phrasing such as "... that suggested ... that NK very likely couldn't...", then whomever authored whatever you "read" would seem to have been less than 100% confident in their analysis.
Click to expand...
I didn't "read something recently". I read something recently. Real reading, not reading in scare quotes. If you insist on using scare quotes all the time, at least work out how to use them properly.

I didn't quote any phrasing. In fact, I didn't quote anything. This was from memory of something I read recently. Like I said.

The lack of confidence is my lack of confidence. In other words, I was honestly admitting a lack of expertise on this matter.

Also, none of the snippets you have quoted above claim that the US currently has mobile launch platforms for ICBMs. So, nothing you have said contradicts what I wrote previously. Sure, there is speculation that, at some undefined time in the future, the US or Russia or somebody might eventually develop such a platform. But from the invention of ICBMs to the present, there are no such platforms, as far as I am aware. But I reiterate: I am not in any way claiming to be an expert on this, and I have not researched the matter.

Satisfied?
 
mathman said:
They have missiles which can reach Guam, also much further. What is unknown is whether they have developed their nuclear weapons to fit their missiles.
Click to expand...

Moreover, at least when it comes to ICBM's reaching the continental US, the range and accuracy of any missile will be significantly reduced by the weight of the warhead as compared with an empty missile carrying no payload. There are also issues with the warhead surviving atmospheric re-entry, and then reliably detonating upon arrival. These are all issues for NK that can be surmounted in a relatively short time with enough effort, but they still remain issues for the moment.
 
mathman said:
They have missiles which can reach Guam, also much further. What is unknown is whether they have developed their nuclear weapons to fit their missiles.
Click to expand...

I agree:
  1. They have missiles, up to medium-range ICBMs
  2. They have 'nuclear devices' up to the kiloton range [I'm reserving judgement on the megaton device of the most recent test]
  3. They have not demonstrated an ability to mate # 1 & # 2 [no enhanced radiation around open-air missile tests]
  4. If # 3 is incorrect, then they have not demonstrated a great degree of accuracy in their guidance systems
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top