F-22Raptor
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2014
- Messages
- 16,980
- Reaction score
- 3
- Country
- Location
Experts are suggesting the in-flight failure and crash of the missile launched by North Korea on Wednesday could have been the result of a "left-of-launch" attack by the United States.
Wednesday's missile has been identified as a liquid fuel, extended-range Scud and was launched shortly after dawn from near the city of Sinpo, on the east coast of the Korean Peninsula. US Pacific Command estimates that the weapon flew for a maximum of nine minutes and travelled less than 40 miles before spinning out of control into the Sea of Japan.
North Korea's missile programme has a high rate of failure with another medium-range weapon failing during flight earlier in March. In early 2016, a Musudan missile fired to mark the anniversary of the birth of Kim Il-sung, the founder of the nation, blew up immediately after launch and damaged its mobile tractor-erector-launcher unit.
In November 2015, the North's attempt to launch a ballistic missile from a submarine ended in failure, with the weapon breaking up underwater and failing to breach the surface.
And while these failures - and others - may have been the result of poor engineering on the part of the North Koreans, they may also have been deliberately brought down by the US, experts have told The Telegraph.
In 2014, then-President Barack Obama authorised additional research into "left-of-launch" efforts to neutralise North Korean missiles, as opposed to the more traditional deployment of anti-missile systems to destroy inbound weapons.
"Left-of-launch" strategies involve electromagnetic propagation or cyber attacks against missiles immediately after launch, including through infected electronics aboard the weapon that confuse its command and control or targeting systems.
North Korea relies on sophisticated electronics for the internal controls of its weapons - all of which have to be imported, in violation of international sanctions.
Part of the beauty of a "left-of-launch" attack, said Lance Gatling, a defence analyst and president of Tokyo-based Nexial Research Inc, is that the North Koreans cannot be sure that any imported electronics have not been deliberately permitted to evade sanctions because they are infected with malware. Similarly, when a launch fails they are also unable to determine what brought the missile down.
"There are many things that can go wrong with a missile launch, but it would be impossible to tell from outside if something had affected the internal guidance or control systems", Mr Gatling told The Telegraph.
Mr Gatling referred to reports in the press of "left-of-launch" attacks targeting the North: "It has been openly mentioned that there is a possibility that the North's supply chain for components has been deliberately infected, and they might never know."
"It is quite possible that parts that they are importing are intentionally faulty because, through history, there have been similar attempts to sabotage an enemy's capabilities," he said, citing Allied efforts during the Second World War to infiltrate agents into Nazi Germany's programme to develop V2 rockets.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...h-attacks-may-bringing-north-korean-missiles/
Wednesday's missile has been identified as a liquid fuel, extended-range Scud and was launched shortly after dawn from near the city of Sinpo, on the east coast of the Korean Peninsula. US Pacific Command estimates that the weapon flew for a maximum of nine minutes and travelled less than 40 miles before spinning out of control into the Sea of Japan.
North Korea's missile programme has a high rate of failure with another medium-range weapon failing during flight earlier in March. In early 2016, a Musudan missile fired to mark the anniversary of the birth of Kim Il-sung, the founder of the nation, blew up immediately after launch and damaged its mobile tractor-erector-launcher unit.
In November 2015, the North's attempt to launch a ballistic missile from a submarine ended in failure, with the weapon breaking up underwater and failing to breach the surface.
And while these failures - and others - may have been the result of poor engineering on the part of the North Koreans, they may also have been deliberately brought down by the US, experts have told The Telegraph.
In 2014, then-President Barack Obama authorised additional research into "left-of-launch" efforts to neutralise North Korean missiles, as opposed to the more traditional deployment of anti-missile systems to destroy inbound weapons.
"Left-of-launch" strategies involve electromagnetic propagation or cyber attacks against missiles immediately after launch, including through infected electronics aboard the weapon that confuse its command and control or targeting systems.
North Korea relies on sophisticated electronics for the internal controls of its weapons - all of which have to be imported, in violation of international sanctions.
Part of the beauty of a "left-of-launch" attack, said Lance Gatling, a defence analyst and president of Tokyo-based Nexial Research Inc, is that the North Koreans cannot be sure that any imported electronics have not been deliberately permitted to evade sanctions because they are infected with malware. Similarly, when a launch fails they are also unable to determine what brought the missile down.
"There are many things that can go wrong with a missile launch, but it would be impossible to tell from outside if something had affected the internal guidance or control systems", Mr Gatling told The Telegraph.
Mr Gatling referred to reports in the press of "left-of-launch" attacks targeting the North: "It has been openly mentioned that there is a possibility that the North's supply chain for components has been deliberately infected, and they might never know."
"It is quite possible that parts that they are importing are intentionally faulty because, through history, there have been similar attempts to sabotage an enemy's capabilities," he said, citing Allied efforts during the Second World War to infiltrate agents into Nazi Germany's programme to develop V2 rockets.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...h-attacks-may-bringing-north-korean-missiles/
