Japan's spy sats, ICBM, and possible future nukes

The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
9,526
Reaction score
1,653
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Gathering_Satellite

Information Gathering Satellite is a Japanese spy satellite program. It was started as a response to the 1998 North Korean missile test over Japan. The satellite program's main mission is to provide early warning of impending hostile launches in the neighborhood.

Just launched, an IGS radar sat with announced 1 meter resolution:

[video=youtube;N5z3YPBklII]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5z3YPBklII[/video]

Probable Japanese ICBM program - hidden in plain sight.

Epsilon

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epsilon_(rocket)

Excerpts:

Due to a function called "mobile launch control",[11] the rocket needs only eight people at the launch site, compared with 150 people for earlier launches.[12]

In November 2012, JAXA reported that there had been a possible leak of rocket data due to a computer virus. JAXA had previously been a victim of cyber-attacks, possibly for espionage purposes.[23] Solid-fuel rocket data potentially has military value,[23] and Epsilon is considered as potentially adaptable to an intercontinental ballistic missile.[24] The Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency removed the infected computer from its network, and said its M-V rocket and H-IIA and H-IIB rockets may have been compromised.[25]




Its "Compact Liquid Propulsion System" could be considered to be the 4th stage payload (warhead) bus for trajectory tweeks.

Apr 27 2014
Japan Producing Huge, Lightly Guarded Stockpile of Plutonium

https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/f...ge-lightly-guarded-stockpile-plutonium-n49376

Mar 11, 2014
Japan Has Nuclear 'Bomb in the Basement,' and China Isn't Happy

https://www.cnbc.com/2014/03/11/japans-bomb-in-the-basement.html
 

markkoelsch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
4,364
Reaction score
150
Japan has embraced nuclear power. They are one of the most technologically advanced nations in the world. Anyone who thinks they do not know how to build a multistage nuclear device is crazy.

They are close to the crazy man in North Korea, and a similar distance from China. Both are nuclear powers now. Being in the region, having the capability, and not exercising that capability seems foolish to me.

Having a missile that can deliver a satellite gets you to an icbm- at least close. I have figured that Japan has been a nuclear armed country for several decades. If the Chinese are upset about I would say too bad for them. If they want Japan to disarm, then perhaps the Chinese and North Koreans should as well.
 

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
9,526
Reaction score
1,653
Japan has embraced nuclear power. They are one of the most technologically advanced nations in the world. Anyone who thinks they do not know how to build a multistage nuclear device is crazy.

They are close to the crazy man in North Korea, and a similar distance from China. Both are nuclear powers now. Being in the region, having the capability, and not exercising that capability seems foolish to me.

Having a missile that can deliver a satellite gets you to an icbm- at least close. I have figured that Japan has been a nuclear armed country for several decades. If the Chinese are upset about I would say too bad for them. If they want Japan to disarm, then perhaps the Chinese and North Koreans should as well.
Yep, counting on the US as a nuclear deterrent has always been dicey for allies. Would the US actually risk personal involvement in what could possibly escalate into all-out nuclear war for ANY kind of nuclear attack on ANY ally? That's the claim, but what's the reality? Who knows?
 

Rex R

LV2
Joined
Apr 21, 2010
Messages
6,101
Reaction score
150
given their history of miniaturizing things...I wouldn't be surprised if the Japanese develop the 1st antimatter warhead :).
Rex
 

Peartree

Cyborg Rocketeer
Staff member
Administrator
Global Mod
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
5,647
Reaction score
1,096
Location
Alliance, Ohio
Yep, counting on the US as a nuclear deterrent has always been dicey for allies. Would the US actually risk personal involvement in what could possibly escalate into all-out nuclear war for ANY kind of nuclear attack on ANY ally? That's the claim, but what's the reality? Who knows?
Yup.

Scenario: China launches a nuke at Japan during a major dispute of some sort. At the same time, possibly prior to doing so, the Chinese ambassador delivers a message to the president of the United States saying essentially, "This is a private matter between China and Japan. We intend to launch one, but no more than three, nuclear devices at Japan. The United States, as an ally, is welcome to provide aid to Japan, but any military intervention beyond providing relief to Japan will result in a nuclear strike on Los Angeles, San Diego, New York, and other major US population centers."

In such a case, the probability of the US doing exactly what the Chinese asked, and leaving Japan out in the cold, is extremely high regardless of the party in power.
 

rharshberger

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2014
Messages
10,029
Reaction score
1,952
Location
Pasco, WA
Yup.

Scenario: China launches a nuke at Japan during a major dispute of some sort. At the same time, possibly prior to doing so, the Chinese ambassador delivers a message to the president of the United States saying essentially, "This is a private matter between China and Japan. We intend to launch one, but no more than three, nuclear devices at Japan. The United States, as an ally, is welcome to provide aid to Japan, but any military intervention beyond providing relief to Japan will result in a nuclear strike on Los Angeles, San Diego, New York, and other major US population centers."

In such a case, the probability of the US doing exactly what the Chinese asked, and leaving Japan out in the cold, is extremely high regardless of the party in power.
I disagree on the grounds that the US maintains bases on Japan and any strike that so much as damages them will be grounds for reprisal.
 

boatgeek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2014
Messages
3,661
Reaction score
2,281
I disagree on the grounds that the US maintains bases on Japan and any strike that so much as damages them will be grounds for reprisal.
As I understand it, that's one of the reasons we have troops in S Korea--so that an attack crossing the DMZ is an attack on the US Army and gets the US involved.

To Peartree's scenario, if the Chinese don't give warning before nuking, I don't see how there aren't Tridents inbound before the message gets to the President. If they do give a warning, the answer is something like "We'll stand by our allies and our missile defense is ready to take down your nukes. If we are struck, we will destroy every major city in China. Do you want to take that risk?" I'm not saying the President necessarily would fire back instantly after a warned attack on Japan, but they can't be seen as wavering or the whole MAD system doesn't work.

Taking two steps back, I'm really not worried about the Russians or Chinese or Indian nukes. Everyone in the leadership of those countries knows where their bread is buttered, and it's on keeping the economy going and trade flowing. If China were to even threaten something like the scenario above, they risk losing access to markets that's the country's lifeblood, not to mention keeping people employed rather than thinking about revolution. To some extent that's true of Iran, too because the senior leadership are all getting rich off of what trade is available, and they don't want to upset that money stream, plus anything bad that happens to Israel will result in buckets of instant sunshine over Teheran. Pakistan is a little spooky because the intelligence services and military are a little closer to the Taliban than I'm comfortable with. N Korea is downright scary, since the leadership is actually crazy.

And way back to the OP, I'd be surprised if Japan actually had a bomb, just because of obvious political and historical issues. I would be equally surprised if they couldn't go from deciding they want to build one to test in a few months or less.
 

XolveJohn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
5
After Fukushima, which is still melting down, they should have learned to just avoid everything nuclear. They have nothing to worry about. One thing we can count on is Trump pushing all the buttons if he has to! Of course there will be a tweet first. "DEFCON 1. Now I am mad. China is acting very badly. We need to rebuild the arsenal anyway. GOODBYE PUNKS."
 

markkoelsch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
4,364
Reaction score
150
given their history of miniaturizing things...I wouldn't be surprised if the Japanese develop the 1st antimatter warhead :).
Rex
We were the first to work on smaller warheads.

I read an article recently in wish they were talking small nukes- 5 maybe 10 pounds. Like .1 kiloton yield that could fit in a purse/ pocket sort of thing. Interesting a scared at the same time.
 

markkoelsch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
4,364
Reaction score
150
As I understand it, that's one of the reasons we have troops in S Korea--so that an attack crossing the DMZ is an attack on the US Army and gets the US involved.

To Peartree's scenario, if the Chinese don't give warning before nuking, I don't see how there aren't Tridents inbound before the message gets to the President. If they do give a warning, the answer is something like "We'll stand by our allies and our missile defense is ready to take down your nukes. If we are struck, we will destroy every major city in China. Do you want to take that risk?" I'm not saying the President necessarily would fire back instantly after a warned attack on Japan, but they can't be seen as wavering or the whole MAD system doesn't work.

Taking two steps back, I'm really not worried about the Russians or Chinese or Indian nukes. Everyone in the leadership of those countries knows where their bread is buttered, and it's on keeping the economy going and trade flowing. If China were to even threaten something like the scenario above, they risk losing access to markets that's the country's lifeblood, not to mention keeping people employed rather than thinking about revolution. To some extent that's true of Iran, too because the senior leadership are all getting rich off of what trade is available, and they don't want to upset that money stream, plus anything bad that happens to Israel will result in buckets of instant sunshine over Teheran. Pakistan is a little spooky because the intelligence services and military are a little closer to the Taliban than I'm comfortable with. N Korea is downright scary, since the leadership is actually crazy.

And way back to the OP, I'd be surprised if Japan actually had a bomb, just because of obvious political and historical issues. I would be equally surprised if they couldn't go from deciding they want to build one to test in a few months or less.
Considering how well understood nukes are I am not sure they would need to actually test...certainly not anything large. The physics are well established, and they can design and manufacture as well as anyone.
 

XolveJohn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
5
I don't like the lack of real testing. Simulations don't cut it. They do some kind of subcritical test that is on edge of blowing up, but a waste of time. We should go back to testing like NK does. Smoke 'em if you got 'em. :cool:
 

markkoelsch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
4,364
Reaction score
150
I don't like the lack of real testing. Simulations don't cut it. They do some kind of subcritical test that is on edge of blowing up, but a waste of time. We should go back to testing like NK does. Smoke 'em if you got 'em. :cool:
In a limited sense, I actually agree. Considering the fissile/fusion material should last a long time how well do the arming and firing components hold up? I am not saying we should be testing like crazy, but a few tests would not hurt.
 

JStarStar

Well-Known Member
TRF Supporter
Joined
Jun 6, 2009
Messages
2,543
Reaction score
67
If Japan builds nukes, it's not going to build five of them, they're going to build 500. They already know how to build rockets.

And if Japan all of a sudden has 500 nukes it can launch anywhere it wants, they're not going to want to tell NK what to do, but somebody else.

How long before some reality-show buffoon runs for PM of Japan on the platform of "Making Japan Great Again," "No More Taking Orders," and "Revenge for 1945" ?

And all of a sudden Hawaii goes boom again.
 

rharshberger

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2014
Messages
10,029
Reaction score
1,952
Location
Pasco, WA
In a limited sense, I actually agree. Considering the fissile/fusion material should last a long time how well do the arming and firing components hold up? I am not saying we should be testing like crazy, but a few tests would not hurt.
Nuke maintenance is a large part of the military budget, the weapons need to be refurbed at intervals as pieces exceed their design lives and become unreliable.
 

XolveJohn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
341
Reaction score
5
Mark: the fuze is the least of the worries. The radioactive material ages and changes. It corrodes metal around it. PU is very strange, goes thru 4 phase state changes over its temp range, during one it actually contracts when heated. During the Manhattan project, it was difficult to make parts that would hold their dimensions. A perfectly flat sheet, for example, a few weeks later would curl up like a potato chip.

The initiator at the center, some say it is as hard to design as the whole rest of the bomb, has polonium (Putins poison!) and another metal, that mix when the pressure and temp is right, tossing out a handful neutrons that start the party. If you have one 50 years old are your sure it will still work? Tritium gas has to be replaced maybe twice a year, bad half-life. Not to mention batteries, rubber parts which degrade, and who knows what else. Even the HE implosion charges may age badly. There are people whose full time jobs are nothing but trying to figure this out.
 

markkoelsch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2009
Messages
4,364
Reaction score
150
John, thanks for the explanation. This is why I think there should be limited testing.
 

Winston

Lorenzo von Matterhorn
Joined
Jan 31, 2009
Messages
9,526
Reaction score
1,653
The initiator at the center, some say it is as hard to design as the whole rest of the bomb, has polonium (Putins poison!) and another metal, that mix when the pressure and temp is right, tossing out a handful neutrons that start the party.
These days, external electronic neutron generators are used.
 

Latest posts

Top