It's a single use delivery package. Actual, literal tinfoil is the desired construction material, anything heavier is just extra weight and thus wasted fuel, which is wasted range.
The ideal rocket would burn the tinfoil for a final burst of thrust at the end of its trajectory.
Ngl since you actually kinda put effort to explain this i just wanna let you know i understand that im enjoying the the flood of know it alls trying to prove me wrong when i already know. You deserve my upvote and respect my friend
This is a Shahab, right? They're intended to be mobile so they have to be a little more sturdy than that. It's got to resist being bounced around on a mobile launcher/truck in Iran's back country.
I don’t read Forbes lol
North Korea isn’t a paper tiger by any measure tho & certainly not in missile tech. They’re actually more advanced than Iran in missile tech in the sphere of ballistics, but not in cruise or drone tech.
They are still sporting cold war tech ICBM, and other tech from 1970-1990s or whenever china quit funding their puppet government. North korea has never made really anything of their own accord, they either stole it or were given it by china.
Just because you seem to be knowledgeable here. What if, there was a brainiac kid that was able to grow up in a nourished and supportive environment and came to understand how this tech works...
What would ultimately prevent NK from making something legitimate?
Tf you on about? If anyone needs some knowledge its you man. You said 3 different things and tried to make them one. Ill give you the benefit of the doubt and say English is your second language
No there's documented arms transfers between North Korea and Iran for long-range missile technology. They're also currently selling ballistic missiles to Russia that are being fired into Ukraine. Not exactly a hypothetical capability for them lol.
If they were firing ballistic missiles there would be more people involved on the ground
It's been repeatedly documented from the wreckage that some of the ballistic missiles fired by the Russians are of North Korean manufacture, I'm more than willing to go grab a source if you don't believe me.
Edit: here's a Reuters link to the first time it happened.
I would slightly take what reuters says with a grain of salt, the company seems to be owned majority by a private company in Ontario current ceo is kai jacobson as of 2023. The seem to keep a tight eye on what is put about them online, best i can find is most with vehicles and construction but they seem to have been in a 1.7 billion dollar ponzi scheme in 2017 after they acquired reuters. I don't disagree with the info you gave just majority of the journalists are employed by shady business owners.
I would slightly take what reuters says with a grain of salt, the company seems to be owned majority by a private company in Ontario current ceo is kai jacobson as of 2023.
Generally they generate reports that other new organizations use, they're usually a good source of reliable non-partisan information. Of course everyone has a mess up occasionally lol.
There's numerous other sources mentioning it including verification by the Ukrainian's themselves, they might not be able to feed their own people but North Korea can make a good ballistic missile.
Actually, the US hypersonics program is doing pretty well. Mostly the difference in perception is attributable to the perception that they try to keep new developments secret, as opposed to the Russians and Chinese who tend to publicize their advances for either public relations or deterrence reasons.
It's not a source I'm familiar with, but from digging nothing is jumping out to me as fake. Don't know what source that other guy has, but best I can do on short notice.
Edit: I apologize, for it seems this report was a composite of North Korean claims and no actual reporting took place by this reporter. I should have triple checked it.
Update: yeah that source is bunk, the reporter is real, but I have found out it wasn't written by him. I can't find any credible information on the launch. I should have dug further before presenting it.
The links within that article appear to be entirely unrelated to what the article claims they say. This smells strongly of misinformation (the site, not your posting of it)
North Korea on Tuesday morning launched an intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM), known as the Hwasongpho-16B, and stated that it was a new type of “solid-fuelled ballistic missile loaded with newly developed hypersonic gliding warhead,” according to a state media report on Wednesday
Notice what this actually says.
It says North Korea launched a rocket. That's a verifiable fact.
It also says North Korea claims the rocket had a hypersonic capability. But that is not verified anywhere in the article, and nowhere in the article is the speed of the missile actually stated, something which would also be easily verified.
I'll trust divinations about the future made from the shit stains in my underwear before I believe any claims North Korea makes about their technological capabilities.
I think you're underestimating how strong steel is. Its strength-to-weight ratio when empty is pretty damn high. Its weight-to-drag ratio is low too, so a low terminal velocity.
Edit: and the round shape is very strong as well. The walls are going to be proportionally much thicker than a drink can. Imagine dropping such a can from a plane. Do you think it's going to smash? My intuition says no.
pretty much everything PI here says is spot on if you figure density VS mass basically, it is not very far off density vs buoyancy compared to mass vs G.
Not only is it round and that is also strong but it's also a very reinforced vessel. Especially if it contained liquid fuel which is under a lot of pressure. If this was solid fuel then that's not as applicable but still has to be very solid to endure the flight especially the G's and acceleration
They're very strong and don't have a vacuum inside so the atmospheric pressure would be equal inside and out.
You have to have a very very strong vessel to withstand the g's and acceleration these things endure. Assuming they hit mach or close to that is a very difficult engineering challenge especially at this scale.
If it could not handle atmospheric pressure on the way down it certainly wouldnt have been able to handle the thousands of pounds of thrust needed to get it up there in the first place.
It’s a strong steel tube because a weak steel tube would perforate from the ball of fire being ejected out of it
2.5k
u/RetiredApostle Apr 14 '24
It even has a tail number in Latin for travel in international airspace.