Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 61 posts

Re: North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

#51

Post by ckozlowski »

belter wrote: post #30
ckozlowski wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup! Those aspects are covered in the Outer Space treaty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Space_Treaty Most satellites are registered and their orbital data published. This includes reconnaissance satellites. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Registration_Convention You can find them here: https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/spaceobjectregister/index.htm... If you drill into the submissions from say, the USA, you can look…

The treaty does not require disclosure of all orbital parameters. And spy satellites do not publicly disclose specific orbits, even if they are not difficult to discover. "China berates US after ‘close encounters’ with Elon Musk satellites - Beijing urges US to act responsibly after two near misses that it says posed serious threat to astronauts’ lives" (2021) - https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/dec/28/china-c…

With regards to Starlink, there's a backlog. The link there shows Starlink launches in 2023. If you look at the register (https://www.unoosa.org/oosa/en/spaceobjectregister/index.htm...), there's a list of submissions yet to be processed. But for those that have been, Starlink makes up a majority. For example: https://www.unoosa.org/res/osoindex/data/documents/us/st/sts...

Note the "USA-###" launches in there as well with the basic orbital characteristics. (USA-327 being the first mentioned above, a ocean reconnaissance satellite.)

I take comments of China berating the US with collision threats with a grain of salt. But it does of course highlight the need to share such data and for parties to act in good faith.

Re: North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

#52

Post by LatteLazy »

nradov wrote: post #39
josefresco wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One man's satellite delivery rocket is another man's ICBM. Ongoing progress in rocket design and experience is more concerning to me than a rise in value of 2 defense stocks.

Well yes and no. While it is technically possible to use a satellite launcher to deliver a nuclear weapon, those technologies have almost completely diverged in most countries. Satellite launch rockets are almost all liquid fueled now in order to maximize payload. Some early ICBMs were also liquid fueled, but that made them less effective as deterrents due to long launch delays. Modern ICBMs are solid fueled: not eno…

For advanced rockets, this is true. But not for first gen. First gen is the same tech for both.

That is why Sputnik was such a big deal: it was not JUST a huge science/engineering breakthrough, it said "you know your huge strategic airforce that means we cannot bomb you? Well actually we can still bomb you, and we can do it faster and more accurately". Older, surplus, ICBMs were routinely used for space launches back in the day (eg the Titan 2 which were even used for manned spaceflight). I think at point point it was a major source of income for early post-soviet russia?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_(rocket_family)

Re: North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

#53

Post by ThinkBeat »

jl6 wrote: post #2

Are the orbits of spy satellites agreed with any international institutions (e.g. to avoid collisions) or is it all secret and a free-for-all?

Starlink was not agreed upon by any international institutions. It appears to be free for all and up to each nation to decide how many thousand satellites they wish to have orbiting our planet.

I have been expecting that soon the US will take to the airwaves and announce the urgent need for an international body to regulate how many satellites can be put into orbit and by whom.

Starlink is of course grandfathered into the new system.

Yes, we approved the launch of thousands of satellites by ourselves but what is done is done, what we need now is to stop other nations from doing the same.

Re: North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

#54

Post by BillyTheMage »

m000 wrote: post #24
BillyTheMage wrote: post #13

"Defense stocks rise" bothers me infinitely more than "North Korea might have a satellite sometime next year"

That reads a bit like a SimCity/Railroad Tycoon in-game newspaper pop-up.

Could definitely be a Chirp on Cities Skylines.

Re: North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

#55

Post by BillyTheMage »

htag wrote: post #50
kevviiinn wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it's equal, why can we do it and they cannot?

That's kind of the point. International law isn't equal, there is often an 'us vs them'. The two are very different realms.

All law is written by crooks for their own benefit. National law has 'us vs them' baked into it just as much as international law.

Re: North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

#56

Post by SiempreViernes »

cmilton wrote: post #43
SiempreViernes wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Fun" fact: both South Korea and North Korea plan on being the first to strike the other in case of a war. I'm sure you can see how that would make them more prone to take the risk. It's also not enough to have ICBMs, they have already credibly tested those years ago, they want so many ICBMs that the US feels threatened by it (this is what deterrence means in practice), but not so many the US decides it has to do any…

Do you have a source for the "fun" fact? What circumstances would ignite a war outside of striking first?

https://carnegieendowment.org/2022/08/15/south-korea-s-decap... provides this account of official ROK strategy:

> Every Pyongyang district, particularly where the North Korean leadership is possibly hidden, will be completely destroyed by ballistic missiles and high-explosive shells as soon as the North shows any signs of using a nuclear weapon.

For the DPRK the official strategy is not known as far as I know, but in 2022 they passed a new law explicitly authorising preventive nuclear strikes if "it is judged" that ROK is going to strike state leadership. See https://www.apln.network/analysis/commentaries/north-koreas-... which also links to a janky translation of the law.

Re: North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

#57

Post by SiempreViernes »

belter wrote: post #41
SiempreViernes wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Fun" fact: both South Korea and North Korea plan on being the first to strike the other in case of a war. I'm sure you can see how that would make them more prone to take the risk. It's also not enough to have ICBMs, they have already credibly tested those years ago, they want so many ICBMs that the US feels threatened by it (this is what deterrence means in practice), but not so many the US decides it has to do any…

The distance between Pyongyang and Seoul is about 190 Km (120 Miles). Fancy a Nuclear War? Edit: Just to clarify...I mean the distance between both is so short, a Nuclear War is absurd. There is no way to Nuke one country, without making your own country a radiation fallout zone.

The DPRK is probably planning to strike Busan or other ports where American reinforcements would be disembarking.

Re: North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

#58

Post by perihelions »

nradov wrote: post #39
josefresco wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One man's satellite delivery rocket is another man's ICBM. Ongoing progress in rocket design and experience is more concerning to me than a rise in value of 2 defense stocks.

Well yes and no. While it is technically possible to use a satellite launcher to deliver a nuclear weapon, those technologies have almost completely diverged in most countries. Satellite launch rockets are almost all liquid fueled now in order to maximize payload. Some early ICBMs were also liquid fueled, but that made them less effective as deterrents due to long launch delays. Modern ICBMs are solid fueled: not eno…

Key context (for those not following this): North Korea has had a parallel solid-rocket program for years, and have test-launched their first solid-fuel ICBM two months ago. They are almost certainly replacing their 60's-style liquid-fuel ICBM's with these things.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35568032 ("North Korea tests ‘breakthrough’ solid-fuel ICBM")

Re: North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

#59

Post by perihelions »

jvanderbot wrote: post #15
LatteLazy wrote: post #3

If you can put an object into orbit, you can put it into any major (US or other) city within about 45min and no one can intercept it.

Is it true that a single icbm cannot be intercepted?

Definitely can't be intercepted if you completely go around the interceptors—launching north, going around the world once, and hitting North America from the south. That's the fractional-orbit [0] concept the parent comment alludes to.

If North Korea were to attack the US in the most cost-effective way – crossing the Pacific east – there's GMD interceptors in Alaska that could try to hit them in space, several thousand km's above the ocean. It's unclear how well those work. The *public* version of the story is that they have about a 60% success rate, against simple targets without countermeasures; and that they intend to fire four interceptors against each incoming warhead to boost this probability [1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_Orbital_Bombardment...

[1] https://www.economist.com/united-states/2018/01/11/there-is-...

Re: North Korea to Launch Military Spy Satellite for Monitoring U.S. Drills

#60

Post by cmilton »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #56
cmilton wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have a source for the "fun" fact? What circumstances would ignite a war outside of striking first?

https://carnegieendowment.org/2022/08/15/south-korea-s-decap... provides this account of official ROK strategy : > Every Pyongyang district, particularly where the North Korean leadership is possibly hidden, will be completely destroyed by ballistic missiles and high-explosive shells as soon as the North shows any signs of using a nuclear weapon. For the DPRK the official strategy is not known as far as I know, but i…

Who would be "striking first" if "the North shows any signs of using a nuclear weapon"? Using a nuclear weapon would indeed be deemed an act of war. That sounds like self defense.
Post reply on HN