If North Korea can why can't we

ISKANDER - A NEW CLASS OF TBM

TBM = Theater Ballistic Missile
Iskander-M = Russian exclusive (500 KM range)
Iskander-E = Export (280 KM range)

DPRK most likely received knowhow of Iskander-E from Russia.

1. Iskander derivatives execute a depressed ballistic trajectory.



https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-9db30e9644ca9660b59d1be7ee055184.webp

2. Iskander derivatives have a small CEP (< 25 feet) or incredibly accurate; these can take cues from GLONASS (or GPS) for midcourse corrections (if necessary), and can also be equipped with a terminal phase guidance system for excellent engagement results (radar or EO/IR).

3. Iskander derivatives do not feature a separating warhead but the cone is large enough to accommodate submunitions or decoys (optional).

---

Iskander derivatives at a glance below.





Ukraine = Grom
Hyungmoo-2 = South Korea
Iskander-M = Russia
Iskander-E (refined) = DPRK

South Korean Hyungmoo-2 in action

- nearly pinpoint accuracy.

@Horus

Qualities of Iskander derivatives highlighted above, can be accurate like a cruise missile and difficult to defeat in theory.

HOWEVER

South Korea will receive PAC-3 MSE class interceptors which are designed to defeat Iskander-M types and more.

FYI: https://www.defensenews.com/global/...ew-pac-3-interceptors-to-counter-north-korea/

"The MSE's exact range and altitude capabilities against various types of targets are classified, but it's clear that the updated missile will allow MIM-104 Patriot batteries to cover far more area and have greater defensive capabilities against tactical ballistic missiles than its progenitors. The upgrades to the missile's motor, control system, software, front-end thermal protection, among other modifications, result in a far more effective weapon." - Tyler Rogoway

Even the original PAC-3 standard interceptors are capable of defeating maneuverable warheads and missiles in general.

A PAC-3 standard interceptor defeat another PAC derivative in a GTA style show of spectacular maneuvers (PAAT phenomenon); objective was to stress-test the interceptor in all aspects.

A PAC-3 standard interceptor defeat Perishing II MaRV (STORM MTTV) in a show of operationally-relevant maneuvers.

Storm Maneuvering Tactical Target Vehicle

The Storm Maneuvering Tactical Target Vehicle (MTTV) rocket, which performed its mission as planned, was used as a target to test the Patriot missile defense system.

"It has been an extraordinarily busy and successful two-week period for our launch teams, culminating with the successful MTTV launch for the Missile Defense Agency," said Mr. Ron Grabe, Executive Vice President and General Manager of the Company's Launch Systems Group.

"We are very proud of our record of supporting MDA's flight test programs with the most reliable target vehicles in the industry. We look forward to our future missions that will help MDA develop, test and deploy effective missile defense systems."

Orbital provided and tested the rocket's guidance and separation systems, performed all vehicle design, production and integration activities and conducted all launch day mission operations.

The MTTV rocket is a single stage vehicle which uses a retired U.S. government rocket engine from the Minuteman ICBM program and a modified Pershing II reentry vehicle.

Details in this link: http://www.spacedaily.com/news/bmdo-04zl.html

In summary:-

"The mission sequence was a two missile ripple-fire against the modified PAAT, closely followed by a two missile ripple-fire against the Storm target. Once the targets were intercepted and destroyed, the two remaining PAC-3s executed a preplanned self-destruct sequence."

NOTE: The MIM-104 Patriot defense system featuring improved AN/MPG-63 radar system, and the PAC-3 family of interceptors, is absolutely capable of target discrimination (telling numerous types of decoys and submunitions apart from actual warheads).

"Raytheon is upgrading the US Army Patriot radars. The upgrade kits provide greater power for the radar and the addition of a wideband capability for improved target discrimination."

Link: https://www.army-technology.com/projects/patriot/

In fact, the MIM-104 Patriot defense systems are receiving cutting-edge AN/TPS-80 (GaN technology) radar systems which will open a new chapter of 'intercept possibilities' with the PAC-3 family of interceptors.

Link: https://www.janes.com/article/82186/usmc-takes-delivery-of-first-gan-g-ator

THEREFORE

It would be much better for DPRK and South Korea to shake hands and bring an end to this madness.

Link: https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019...s-letter-president-trump-190623061535080.html

Iskander derivatives will make no difference whatsoever, in the Korean peninsula to say the least.

ADDITIONALLY

A ballistic missile equipped with an MARV (concealed design), shown in this post: https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/if-north-korea-can-why-cant-we.622238/#post-11529010

- simulated the flight capabilities of the Chinese DF-21D ASBM (maneuverability aspect including) for an Arleigh Burke class destroyer in a complex live-fire event in 2016. Guess what was the outcome?

Link: https://defense-update.com/20161215_df21d_target.html



--- --- ---

@Fawadqasim1
@The Deterrent

SEE ABOVE

Meaningful information surfacing in the public domain, thanks to declassification policy and better publicity. American weapon-testing regime is definitely incorporating operationally-realistic scenarios.

Disarmament lobbies are busy fooling people with typical acronyms (wobbling/tumbling/maneuvering/dangerous/depressed ), most likely funded by Russian sources.

KGB officials were active in fueling mass protests in Europe against the deployment of Pershing II MaRV tipped ballistic missiles in the region.

Link: https://www.nytimes.com/1983/07/26/world/kgb-officers-try-to-infiltrate-antiwar-groups.html

I do not mind Pakistan improving its defenses over time, these investments are worth every penny in the light of an increasingly aggressive (fundamentalist) India.

US always had a soft corner for India (people were not paying sufficient attention). However, US-India relations are not supposed to be at the expense of US-Pak relations, IMHO.

FATF and COIN notwithstanding, Pakistani leaders need to engage US with the mindset of inviting more American companies to invest in Pakistan, American companies new manufacturing plants in Pakistan, and tourism opportunities (increased levels of people-to-people engagements).

Nothing is easy in life, you have to STRUGGLE to make ends meet. Country-to-Country engagements are a CONSTANT WORK as well.

Whatever happens in the long-term, Pakistan should try its best to adopt a neutral course and stay away from the COLD WARS of superpowers.