North Korea Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
What are the parameters for which it is indicated as a frigate?
Destroyer in modern world mostly means aegis destroyer. Non-aegis destroyer is a term mostly applied to outdated ships, not capable of performing that now is destroyer function.
A ship capable of effective theater-level AA engagements against multiple targets, individual or collective, including at significant range over the horizon.
I.e. powerful, long range multiple-electronic array radar system (area ABM rapidly turns into must), heavy SAM, integrated collective fire control.

When term destroyer is used in relation to something else (Daring, Kolkata), drawing any factual capability line becomes very difficult - i.e. for all intents and purposes, even those ships are technically AA frigates. Case point: Visakhapatnam v. Nilgiri.
Size per se doesn't matter all that much - frigates can be easily larger than destroyers.

Original point was that DPRK exceeded Russia - because they built a destroyer when Russia only builds frigates.
Gorshkov (entered service 11 years ago, designed in mid-2000s) may be a frigate, but it's of the same size, and is still most probably more capable in every single specific metric.
 
Last edited:

sahureka

Junior Member
Registered Member
Destroyer in modern world mostly means aegis destroyer. Non-aegis destroyer is a term mostly applied to outdated ships, not capable of performing that now is destroyer function.
A ship capable of effective theater-level AA engagements against multiple targets, individual or collective, including at significant range over the horizon.
I.e. powerful, long range multiple-electronic array radar system (area ABM rapidly turns into must), heavy SAM, integrated collective fire control.

When term destroyer is used in relation to something else (Daring, Kolkata), drawing any factual capability line becomes very difficult - i.e. for all intents and purposes, even those ships are technically AA frigates. Case point: Visakhapatnam v. Nilgiri.
Size per se doesn't matter all that much - frigates can be easily larger than destroyers.

Original point was that DPRK exceeded Russia - because they built a destroyer when Russia only builds frigates.
Gorshkov (entered service 11 years ago, designed in mid-2000s) may be a frigate, but it's of the same size, and is still most probably more capable in every single specific metric.
And how do you understand today that Choi Hyun (51) will not be able to do it?
 

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
And how do you understand today that Choi Hyun (51) will not be able to do it?
Lack of visible directional data link arrays. Just not here. Horizon for now is unavoidable, and I don't think Elon will open starlink services to DPRK military anything soon.

Relatively small (fair for frigate, but no, that's not SPY-6v1 and not even SPY-1) main radar arrays, likely not at the bleeding edge of AESA technology.
Enough for area defense (not being bombed) against non-stealth targets OtH, but mostly within radar horizon.

Compact size of main(32) small VLS grid, insufficient for effective AA engagements at hundreds of kilometers away(likely within couple dozen nm really).
Other VLS sizes present, even if they have AA capabilities, at best support one engagement per size - numerically.
 

mack8

Junior Member
Some personal analysis:
View attachment 150727
  • The 100/130mm gun was the first surprise, as initially it was expected that she would be armed with a stealthy OTO Melara 76mm gun. The design looked Chinese.
  • There are 3 types of VLS seen: 12 medium-sized cells at the front are probably for launching cruise missiles, 10 large cells at the rear (tail) are for launching ballistic missiles. The rest are smaller cells for launching naval SAMs.
  • The original design seemed to have called for the phased array radar panels to be mounted below the bridge, a location that many considered suboptimal. It seems Kim and his engineers read that and moved them up the mast :V
  • In the middle of the hull is a hangar-type structure similar to that found on the Amnok/Tuman-class frigates. More cruise missiles?
  • A whole Kashtan CIWS!!! For real!!!
  • Another angle shows two small helicopter hangars leading to the helipad. Small enough to fit a helicopter UAV in, and there are two of them.
Regarding the CIWS, that looks a lot more like a Pantsir-M system!
 

yugocrosrb95

Junior Member
Registered Member
Lack of visible directional data link arrays. Just not here. Horizon for now is unavoidable, and I don't think Elon will open starlink services to DPRK military anything soon.

Relatively small (fair for frigate, but no, that's not SPY-6v1 and not even SPY-1) main radar arrays, likely not at the bleeding edge of AESA technology.
Enough for area defense (not being bombed) against non-stealth targets OtH, but mostly within radar horizon.

Compact size of main(32) small VLS grid, insufficient for effective AA engagements at hundreds of kilometers away(likely within couple dozen nm really).
Other VLS sizes present, even if they have AA capabilities, at best support one engagement per size - numerically.
You clearly do not even grasp the scale of Choe Hyon.

Previously it seemed radars would be mounted on superstructure where bridge is with size of 3.5 meter width and 2.5 meter height.
Now with finalized design that moved radar to above bridge, went from 2 at front to 4 that cover 360 degrees along increase dimensions.
It seems each radar might be 3.5 meter wide and 4 meter tall thus far larger than for example Israeli EL/M-2248 MF-STAR by over 50% !

Along it is more heavily armed than Visakhapatnam-class destroyer from India as an example.
 

mack8

Junior Member
Any idea what this ship is? Among the developments of larger DPRK warships this seems to have been overlooked, pretty sure some while ago a similar ship was pointed somewhere on X, but have to try to find that again. It appears to be smaller than the Amnok class and doesn't seems to be a Tuman, but something smaller. Seems to have a RBU type launcher at the bow.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Warships/comments/1e12v8j
 

Valiant 1002

Junior Member
Registered Member
Any idea what this ship is? Among the developments of larger DPRK warships this seems to have been overlooked, pretty sure some while ago a similar ship was pointed somewhere on X, but have to try to find that again. It appears to be smaller than the Amnok class and doesn't seems to be a Tuman, but something smaller. Seems to have a RBU type launcher at the bow.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Warships/comments/1e12v8j
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

Gloire_bb

Major
Registered Member
You clearly do not even grasp the scale of Choe Hyon.
I don't think scale matters all that much.

F125 is over twice as large; Zumwalt(as finished), almost 3.

The former is officially classified as a frigate (and performs as one), the second one is not...but for practical purposes was downgraded into constellation level capabilities (well below Burke), just with more, larger VLS of two kinds. Effectively something like a strange, underprotected Soviet CG.
Previously it seemed radars would be mounted on superstructure where bridge is with size of 3.5 meter width and 2.5 meter height.
Now with finalized design that moved radar to above bridge, went from 2 at front to 4 that cover 360 degrees along increase dimensions.
It seems each radar might be 3.5 meter wide and 4 meter tall thus far larger than for example Israeli EL/M-2248 MF-STAR by over 50% !
With all due respect, that's a wtf argument. It was always going to be 360 deg coverage, ships aren't designed with "here we fight here we don't".
Everyone from school can do diagram of fields of fire. Korean engineers can too.

Being larger than MF-star isn't that much of argument, this isn't an especially large or capable system that fits quite well on Sa'ar 5.
For 2020s destroyer, we're looking at big configurations of SPY-6/7 or 346, etc. Just in order to actually see - and engage in time - small return targets (ballistic, VLO planes) at OtH ranges.

Also, while at it, don't look at exact size just yet. Radars are not installed yet, that's essentially guaranteed. Covers are in exact same color as ship plating around them, i.e. those are still temporary shields.
Along it is more heavily armed than Visakhapatnam-class destroyer from India as an example.
It is, at least in number of cells. But destroyer in modern great navies isn't just "something larger than a frigate". Thus I above questioned whether Visakhapatnam is in the same category anyway. When even in Indian navy itself, concurrent frigate is strictly speaking more capable.
National pride aside, of course, if we do a comba force calculation, do we count(and expect to perform) Visakhapatnam together with Nilgiri, or with 055?
How is Daring class not a destroyer!?!?!
Per national classification it is a destroyer. Just as Iranian destroyers.

Realistically, it isn't even all that high up among modern frigates in capability. There's little reason to separate it from other modern AA frigates, capable of doing more or less same thing.
 
Last edited:
Top