North Korea Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

A

AndrewJ

Junior Member
Registered Member
taxiya said:
Look at shadows in the red circled areas, how is the fabric or plastic floating above water without anything to support?
View attachment 152773
Click to expand...
sahureka said:
Unlike the initial announcement, there were no holes made at the warship's bottom, the hull starboard was scratched and a certain amount of seawater flowed into the stern section through the rescue channel.
Experts estimated that it will take two or three days to keep the balance of the warship by pumping up the seawater from the flooded chamber and making the bow leave the slipway and 10-odd days to restore the warship's side.
The accident investigation group reported the relevant investigation content to the Central Military Commission of the Workers' Party of Korea on May 22.
The extent of damage to the warship is not serious and the result of the flooding process immediately after the accident is only information necessary to take practical rehabilitation measures. The above-said data have no connection with the cause of the accident and the identification of its responsibility.
It is necessary to make clear the cause of the accident.
No matter how good the state of the warship is, the fact that the accident is an unpardonable criminal act remains unchanged, and those responsible for it can never evade their responsibility for the crime.
Regarding this accident as a serous matter is not because of the damage to the warship or economic loss. The aim of doing so is to deal a telling blow to incautiousness, irresponsibility and unscientific empiricist attitude prevailing in any field and to sound an alarm bell.
Click to expand...

From this image, can see the ship's front section and rear section are not in the same plane, so the ship is already broken & split apart from somewhere in the middle. And the keel has been twisted. That's why the blue cloth is there, to cover up the real damage positions, especially possible holes, cracks, etc.

It's the image not legit? Or Kim is lying? :oops:

Meanwhile, unscientific empiricist means someone failed to do a mission he once managed to do before. Did this small shipyard ever build & launch such a big ship before? The entire DPRK has never side-launched a such large ship. These reasons are nonsense. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
S

sahureka

Junior Member
Registered Member
From another satellite photo one might think that the small vessel or barge indicated by the arrow was positioned in that position to prevent the destroyer from listing further to that side; it appears that the large command superstructure rests on it.

Screenshot_2025-05-23-11-00-34-309~2.jpeg
 
A

AndrewJ

Junior Member
Registered Member
sahureka said:
From another satellite photo one might think that the small vessel or barge indicated by the arrow was positioned in that position to prevent the destroyer from listing further to that side; it appears that the large command superstructure rests on it.

View attachment 152793
Click to expand...

What happend in the middle part? Look at position marked with purple pointer. The body indeed seems split apart in the middle. :oops:

nk.jpg
 
M

mack8

Junior Member
Any updates on salvage work on the destroyer? I would imagine satellites are watching closely day and night.

Also, back to the new AAM for DPRKAF MiG-29, some put forward the laughable imo theory that the PL-12NK shown under the MiG-29's wing behind KJU is PS, which is nonsense, at the very least it's a mock-up of the AAM if it's not a live missile. But has anyone or can draw how the missile is attached to the AKU-470 pylon? One can see the mid fins being pretty far back, i'm curious how far the rear of the missile portrudes beyond the launch rail.
 
P

Phantom Chuck

New Member
Registered Member
Virtup said:
The superstructure looks properly aligned to me. So the claims that the hull was split are wrong IMO.
Click to expand...
Tracing the line of the f’c’stle sheer and extending it to the stern seems to show the bow deflected upwards relative to the to stern. Also the hull seems to be twisted, so the stern half is learned over at at least 90 degrees, but the bow half seems to be leaning at a lesser angle. This suggest the keel is broken. Although the two halves of the ship does not appear to be displaced with respect to eachother by as much as suggest by the marker sketch above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top