(3) About the Dec 23, 2015 test, which is said to be bogus.
Video Analysis of North Korean Missile Test. James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey, Jan 14, 2016
www.nonproliferation.org/video-a ... orean-missile-test/
("A full explanation of how CNS researchers analyzed the footage, and details of their conclusion, were published on the blog ArmsControlWonk")
, which supplied a link to:
James Pearson, North Korea Faked Missile Test Footage: US Experts. Reuters, Jan 12, 2016.
http://www.reuters.com/article/u ... USKCN0UQ0CC20160112
Note:
(a) The Reuters report stated, "James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS) shows two frames of video from [N Korea] state media where flames engulf the missile and small parts of its body break away."
Catherine Dill, Video Analysis of DPRK Footage. Arms Control Wonk, Jan 12, 2016.
www.armscontrolwonk.com/archive/ ... -dprk-slbm-footage/
("Compared to Soviet-era test footage of an R-27 launch–the KN-11 is based on the R-27–the failure seems clear. * * * There are a number of cautions to this sort of analysis. Some of our colleagues wonder how closely the KN-11 resembles the Soviet R-27 and whether the ejection system is the same. We had hoped to examine this hypothesis, but the number of anomalies means at this point we can’t yet tell what the missile was supposed to do. And, of course, the footage looks nothing like what the DPRK released in May 2015")
(A) Middlebury Institute of International Studies at Monterey
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mi ... Studies_at_Monterey
(MIIS; graduate school of Middlebury College [which is based in Middlebury, VERMONT]; The Institute [MIIS], which was founded in 1955, is located in Monterey, California; section 1 History, section 1.2 Middlebury connection: in th year of 2005)
(B) R-27 Zyb
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R-27_Zyb
(a submarine-launched ballistic missile developed by the Soviet Union and employed by the Soviet Navy from 1968 through 1988; section 3.1 Current operators: N Korea and Iran)
(b) The Reuters report also states "In an analysis on the 38 North monitoring website, John Schilling, an aerospace engineer who is a specialist in satellite and launch vehicle propulsion systems, said it appeared from the video that the launch was conducted from a submerged barge rather than a submarine [without elaboration]."
John Schilling, North Korea Tests a Submerged-Launch Ballistic Missile, Take Three. 38 North, Jan 12, 2016.
38north.org/2016/01/jschilling011215/
Quote:
"North Korea did release a video of the launch, although closer examination of the video itself has revealed inconsistencies that suggest [with linkage to the Reuters report in (3)(a)] it has been spliced together to show success.
"What we can learn from the video, is that for just a few frames * * * is what looks like the stern of a vessel [ie, boat] * * * it [the boat that can be seen in a satellite photo of the ] would be just about right, and quite necessary, for a submerged barge [did not explain].
"Commercial satellite imagery from December 23, 2015, just two days after [sic] the most recent test * * * the most pressing issue would be to remove or replace the launch canister [AFTER the test according to Mr Schilling -- but in retrospect, if S Korea military is correct, that the launch was conducted on Dec 26, 2016, then the crane might be LOADING, not replacing, the launch canister], and that would require a crane. Indeed, we see such a crane at the dock—next to the submersible test barge, not the submarine.
My comment: There are simply too many loose ends to believe these experts. |
发表于 4-23-2016 08:43:22
收藏
分享
支持
反对
楼主