North Korea Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Valiant 1002

Junior Member
Registered Member
I think that North Korea is better off with the submarines really. They only need small patrol or missile boats for surface vessels.
Perhaps. But now the North Koreans are setting their sights on a large fleet of ballistic missile submarines. They will certainly need to be protected in some way. Surface combatants with green-water capabilities will be needed, at the very least.

That said, I would bet on the North Koreans working with Russia, Myanmar or Iran to assist, as I don't feel North Korea could effectively design such large ships on its own. The last two years have also witnessed North Korean hackers attacking Korean shipbuilding companies and stealing design drawings. I guess they'll use it for something.
 
Last edited:

sahureka

Junior Member
Registered Member
And that shows that they've never built a ship that big, right? It's purely a paper design. The largest surface warships that North Korea can build are only about 1,600 tons.

With that fact, from Myanmar's perspective, even if they wanted to buy a 2000t warship from abroad, they would not want to bet on a contractor with unproven quality like North Korea.
That's not what the Myanmar commission said.
They didn't question the North Korean project, they simply wrote that it had similar characteristics to the frigate they were building (work began in 2008).
Moreover, in the following days during the visit to China, they were not interested in newly built Chinese frigates or corvettes, but in second-hand type 053H1 frigate:

<< In China, the group had the opportunity to observe a frigate. It was a 103.32-meter long, missile frigate type 053H1, and therefore, it is not too different from the frigate Burma is building, and it weighs only 1960 tons.
The weapons on that type 053H1 are as follows:
(1) Two dual barrel 100 mm main gun;
(2) Four dual barrel 37 mm AA gun;
(3) 5 barrel 250 mm anti-submarine rocket launcher;
(4) SY-1 SSMs missile;
(5) Command and control system;
(6) Electronic warfare weapon system (923-1 decoy launcher).
(d) Compared to the frigate naval ship built in Burma, that ship will have C802 SSM (120) km, as an update to the SY-1 missile. Their frigate is smaller and lighter than ours, and it has no torpedo weapons that can destroy above- and under-water enemies, and therefore, the weapons need to be updated to be modern.>>


Who then purchased two of those frigates to quickly upgrade the fleet while awaiting the completion of their next two frigates F12 (UMS Kyansitta), F14 (UMS Sin Phyu Shin)
 

Valiant 1002

Junior Member
Registered Member
Online someone has highlighted the extreme similarity of the landing gear with that of the J-7 aka Mig-21 fighter, the rear one which differs due to the inversion in the closure of the landing gear.
As they say about necessity, virtue, using what is already available and well known.
View attachment 124053

View attachment 124054

View attachment 124055
View attachment 124056
View attachment 124057
Who knows if it uses the same turbojet as the J-7/Mig-21 Liyang Wopen-13F or Tumanskij R-13 without afterburner ?
1705641604235.png
I found an analysis on Weibo: he assessed that the R-13-300 engine seems to be being used as the main thruster. The reason for the obvious choice is simple - this is a well-researched, easily accessible engine suitable for North Korean conditions.

The maximum flight range of a UAV with such an engine is estimated by the author to be 8,000 - 9,000 km, equal to 1/3 of the American RQ-4, (the RQ-4 can fly from 22-25,000km).

However, given the geographical size of the Korean Peninsula and adjacent seas, this is quite enough to carry out multi-hour patrols aimed at monitoring the airspace around the Korean peninsula, as well as Sea of Japan.
 
Last edited:

yugocrosrb95

Junior Member
Registered Member
Person that made analysis also posts on secretprojects.co.uk forum.
Thing is it could also be R-25 turbojet engine based on nozzle.
Also that does not mean it is certain to stay that way.

After all use of MiG-21 / J-7 landing gear along engine from is precaution.
Known quantity of available parts that are established for decades.
Maybe later on those are replaced by components made for it.
 

zhangjim

Junior Member
Registered Member
71038d1dly1hlyqlxdx5aj210n0jiwu3.jpg
According to North Korea's official Chinese propaganda, the new underwater nuclear weapon system they are testing is called "Tsunami-5-23"
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

71038d1dly1hlu6uzlaxlj20mu0dzab2.jpg71038d1dly1hlu723rk3uj20mv0e0jru.jpg71038d1dly1hlu7706jd1j216k0e0q62.jpg

"电波震长空XYY"is a military enthusiast who pays more attention to North Korean weapons.
It can be seen here that North Korea is testing a new type of naval gun and installing it on a new type of warship. He believes that this new warship is different from the type 661 corvette(Namp) currently displayed by North Korea.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

71038d1dly1hly0jlu982j20m80etaeh.jpg
"주체107년식 155mm 자행형곡사포"(the 155mm self-propelled howitzer of Juche 107),this is its official name.
I also noticed a more detailed wiki:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 

sahureka

Junior Member
Registered Member
omissis
According to North Korea's official Chinese propaganda, the new underwater nuclear weapon system they are testing is called "Tsunami-5-23"
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

View attachment 124160View attachment 124161View attachment 124162

omissis
I published the news and photos of the new naval cannon last Monday here on page 90, but it's not that new, Kim Jong Un showed it during an armaments exhibition 12 October 2021,
12-10111893-screenshot-20211012-215421-chrome.jpg

furthermore the ship isn't even new, but it's the photos have been circulating on the web for a few years and is defined as the Tunan class.
The only news is that this new cannon has finally been installed on that ship which seems to be derived from the Oto Melara 76/62 Compact, furthermore a video shows rapid fire exercises being carried out.
In the meantime, better quality images have been published which I attach.
16-11928349-004.jpg

16-11928349-005.jpg

including a mast with various navigation and detection radars, including an optronic system
16-1192851-tuman.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 12-10111893-screenshot-20211012-215421-chrome.jpg
    12-10111893-screenshot-20211012-215421-chrome.jpg
    67.8 KB · Views: 3

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
GD5-Zju3-XAAAdm-Ah.jpg

:cool: have achieved this, so rumors that they are working on creating a domestically designed and produced fighter aircraft may come tru
View attachment 123941
North Korean stealth fighter is not on my bingo card.
 

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
View attachment 124020View attachment 124021
The 155mm M-2018 self-propelled gun is being mass produced. Do you think they are switching to the 155mm caliber to replace the Soviet/Russian 152mm?
Yes. The 155mm system is much more advanced than simple caliber difference. It is likely following the design by Gerald Bull.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

I suspect this is the true reason caliber is being changed. If adopting a more advanced design render old ammunition incompatible, then may as well go with international standard.
 

gelgoog

Brigadier
Registered Member
The Soviet Union used to have longer range artillery than US artillery. Gerald Bull basically made changes to Western artillery types to extend their range. And the artillery modified by his designs had more range than Soviet artillery. His designs incorporated longer barrels and larger propellant changes. Rounds with so called extended range base bleed ammunition were introduced.

But with the Koalitsiya the Russian artillery once again recovered its range superiority. The Russians had base bleed ammunition for a long time already. And with the Koalitsiya you have both the longer barrel and the ability to dial in the amount of propellant. It also uses an electric ignition system which means the propellant burns all at the same time which increases its effectiveness.
 

TK3600

Major
Registered Member
The Soviet Union used to have longer range artillery than US artillery. Gerald Bull basically made changes to Western artillery types to extend their range. And the artillery modified by his designs had more range than Soviet artillery. His designs incorporated longer barrels and larger propellant changes. Rounds with so called extended range base bleed ammunition were introduced.

But with the Koalitsiya the Russian artillery once again recovered its range superiority. The Russians had base bleed ammunition for a long time already. And with the Koalitsiya you have both the longer barrel and the ability to dial in the amount of propellant. It also uses an electric ignition system which means the propellant burns all at the same time which increases its effectiveness.
I don't think Russia is sharing the Koalitsiya style artillery technology to NK so Gerald Bull style designs is the best they have access.
 
Top