My very initial thoughts on the huge liquid fuel Missile displayed by North Korea. My estimates are likely within a plus/minus 10%, and loaded with some basic engineering assumptions. Much remains to be learned.... 1/n

The TEL has 11 axels, two more than Hwasong-15 TEL which is about 22m. These large vehicles are designed to be modular, so two additional axels, roughly 1.8 -2.0 m in length, were likely inserted, giving a new length of 25-26 m. The missile is about the same, 25-26 m long. 2/n
Diameter is more difficult to estimate from photos, but seems to be between 2.5 and 2.9 m. Resulting in a missile lift-off mass of 100-150 tonnes. Let’s take the middle values, 2.7m diameter and mass of ~125 tonnes. 3/n
Further assume the missile’s first stage is powered cluster of four RD-250 type chambers/engines for total sea level thrust of ~160 tonnes. This is twice that of the Hwasong-15. Lift off acceleration is then about 1.3 Gs, or thereabouts. Reasonably typical value for ICBMs. 4/n
If these estimates are close to reality, the missile, in principle, could deliver 2000 -3500 kg to any point on CONUS. This is more capable than Soviet R-16 or R-26 ICBMs that we’re never deployed. These systems had a first stage diameter of 2.7m, tho 2nd stage was smaller 5/n
Further, the old Soviet design had slightly less powerful, four chamber predecessor engines to the RD-250. 6/n
If this new missile uses auxiliary steering engine on F/S the throw weight grows. But, big question centers on S/S propulsion. Perhaps a Modified single chamber RD-250 with nozzle extensions? Performance estimates will vary significantly based on S/S assumptions. End.

More from World

All the leftists in the comments like oh no prageru made a good point lol


Polls consistently show conservative support for nuclear energy. It also has high support among elites. The myth that it is unpopular in general isn’t true—although it is unpopular in almost every specific case where they need to site it

Article is old but yeah

This study finds that risk & benefit predict individual opinion the most, followed by the share of nuclear energy already extant, followed by ideology (conservatives support more)

This one finds that journalists attitude affect public perceptions, but that energy consultants, nuclear engineers, bureaucrats, and the military show the highest support for nuclear energy

You May Also Like

I’m torn on how to approach the idea of luck. I’m the first to admit that I am one of the luckiest people on the planet. To be born into a prosperous American family in 1960 with smart parents is to start life on third base. The odds against my very existence are astronomical.


I’ve always felt that the luckiest people I know had a talent for recognizing circumstances, not of their own making, that were conducive to a favorable outcome and their ability to quickly take advantage of them.

In other words, dumb luck was just that, it required no awareness on the person’s part, whereas “smart” luck involved awareness followed by action before the circumstances changed.

So, was I “lucky” to be born when I was—nothing I had any control over—and that I came of age just as huge databases and computers were advancing to the point where I could use those tools to write “What Works on Wall Street?” Absolutely.

Was I lucky to start my stock market investments near the peak of interest rates which allowed me to spend the majority of my adult life in a falling rate environment? Yup.