North Korea Defence Forum

[yugocrosrb95]

Hwasong-12 may have range of atleast 5000 km up to 6000 km which is inside range of an ICBM performance that would mean DPRK could target entire Alaska and China while also northern Australia.

4500-5000 km range estimate is for 2000 km altitude and 700 km range while media has wrongly reported same range estimate for 2111.5 km altitude and 787 km range when actual range would be 5000-5500.

If the test warhead in test missile was around a ton then minituarized warhead that was pictured with Kim Jong Un which has diameter of 60-70 cm and weighs aproximately 300-400 kg thus use of lighter warhead would mean ICBM range for Hwasong-12.

Chances for THAAD to intercept an ICBM for which it was not designed to deal with is non-existent nor was it tested against ICBM nor was SM-3 which has in theory very slim chance of success while GMD had a test that is basically rigged to succeed nor indicative of what a real world DPRK ICBM would perform.

The Pongae-5 LRSAM is at least equal to S-300PMU while in latest test it was evident that radar was separate/stand-alone rather than on command post/unit and also considerably larger, it is possible they are aiming at PMU-2 level with 200 km to be used in future, maybe.

"Ultra-high precision" warhead used on new SCUD variant with alleged accuracy of 7 m which would mean surgical strikes with high explosive, bunker buster and nuclear warheads.

Latest test of Kumsong-3 was on a land based variant which has extended body and RF/IR/FLIR camera added below radar for higher degree of precision, the missile has range of 200 km which is comparable to RBS-15 Mark-3.

This is my take on variour tests that happend, a week has passed and by the time I post this a test could have happened.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

DPRK tested last week a new variant of Kumsong-3 with extended body and RF/IR/FLIR camera in front below radar with a range of 200 kilometers which is comparable tk RBS-15 Mark 3.

DPRK imported MQM-107D from Middle East, possibly Egypt since export designation 999M may be D variant while L and E are B variant if I remeber correctly.

RBS-15 Mark 3 and MQM-107D both use turbojet engine Tri-60-5 from Microturbo(Turbomeca), DPRK showcased turbojet powered drones in 2012 that seem to be based on MQM-107D with Kh-35 like missile have been tested in 2014.

When assembling C-802's, Iran used Tri 60 too, thought it is not known which variant and what sub-model.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

So recent NK threads have been merged, reading some of the posts makes me lose faith in humanity at stupidity and ignorance...

I spent a year researching DPRK with information that was available online.

When World War 2 ended with capitulation of Japanese, there was a Korean goverment which was left leaning socialist.

USSR took the North and US the South under short term control mid-late 1945 with US shortly afterwarde forcefully absolving the Korean goverment in south while it continued to exist in north.

US set up a regime in south which most/majority of higher ups being collaborators with Japanese and have done atrocities which they continued under this newly assembled regime.

Singman Rhee's and his regime killed hundreds of thousands before Korean War which was not started by Kim Il Sung as SK troops invaded NK as they captured border villages and cities including Haeju and before that they had troops inside NK territory as they occupied a hill which NK troops drove them out. Commander of SK military wanted to invade NK after NK took back its territory(how dare they) and commander was a former collaborator too.

SK troops had made more raids and fired shots first before war and during war they framed their crimes on NK like US did when they massacree civilians on No Gun Ri.

Majority of war crimes were done by SK and US who flatlined entire NK and destroyed dams... 1/5 of NK ended up dead.

Chinese helped NK, I wonder if they remember how NK assisted them against nationalists by sending 50 to 100k fighters to assist.

I could go on all day and remind myselt and be depressed at bullshit that DPRK goes through.

 

[Raphael]

Former US Defense Secretary says THAAD should be removed if Moon doesn’t want it
Posted on : Jun.15,2017 16:39 KST Modified on : Jun.15,2017 16:39 KS
http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_northkorea/798952.html

Former US Defense Secretary William Perry gives a keynote address in a seminar about ways to bring peace to the Korean Peninsula that was held in Washington under the joint auspices of the Institute for Korean Studies at George Washington University and the Korea Peace Network, June 13. (by Yi Yong-in, Washington correspondent)

William Perry expresses doubt in THAAD’s ability to distinguish real missiles from North Korean decoys

On June 13, former US Defense Secretary William Perry, 89, said that the THAAD missile defense system would be little use for defending against North Korean missile attacks and that THAAD should be removed if the administration of President Moon Jae-in doesn‘t want it.Perry made the remarks during a Q&A session following his keynote address in a seminar about how to bring peace to the Korean Peninsula that was held in Washington under the joint auspices of the Institute for Korean Studies at George Washington University and the Korea Peace Network. The Korea Peace Network was established on Oct. 3, 2015, by groups such as the American Friends Service Committee, Women Cross DMZ and the National Association of Korean Americans (NAKA) that have worked for private-sector exchange with North Korea and for peace on the Korean Peninsula.Perry began by expressing his doubts about the utility of the missile defense system, mentioning that “there are very wrong views about the missile defense system as a whole.” “Worst of all, there are doubts about the only major reason for providing THAAD to South Korea,” he said.THAAD is being deployed in South Korea, Perry said, because the previous administration under former president Park Geun-hye (2013-16) had accepted it. “It’s very unclear whether the current administration [under President Moon Jae-in] wants it [THAAD] or not. If they don‘t want THAAD, the US ought to be gracious and remove it,” he said.Perry also made a few remarks about THAAD’s usefulness. “The US probably gave South Koreans a positive impression about THAAD’s defensive capabilities. But objectively speaking, THAAD probably wouldn’t be that good at defending against a North Korean missile attack,” he said.The former defense minister explained why: “THAAD is known to have had some problems even in interception tests. In particular, it‘s completely defenseless against North Korean decoys.”“We don’t know whether North Korea has developed decoys, but it’s really easy to make them,” Perry went on to say. “So if the South Korean government or public were to ask if THAAD could defend against an attack by a North Korean missile, I would say no.”American missile experts such as MIT professor Theodore Postol have argued that THAAD and other American missile defense systems are fundamentally limited in their ability to distinguish an incoming missile’s actual warhead from its decoys. If powerful explosives placed in the missile were used to break it into multiple fragments at a high altitude, interceptor missiles that had already been launched and were approaching the missile would be completely unable to distinguish between the real warhead and the harmless missile fragments, these experts say.“The North Korean regime may be reckless, but it‘s not crazy. North Korea’s first goal is the preservation of the Kim dynasty; its second goal is earning the respect of the international community; and its third goal is economic recovery. But North Korea can sacrifice its economy for the survival of the regime. Pyongyang has said it‘s developing an ICBM [intercontinental ballistic missile] that can reach the continental US. That [the development of an ICBM] is no longer a matter of if, but when,” he said, stressing the urgency of finding a solution.“If we manage to combine a stick with a diplomatic approach through cooperation with China, we can successfully freeze North Korea’s nuclear weapons and long-range missile programs. The diplomatic approach means listening and listening some more. We first need to hear what North Korea’s primary interest is,” Perry said. “We need to create meaningful dialogue [with North Korea] and ultimately normalize relations with them.”Perry served as Secretary of Defense from 1994 to 1997, during the presidency of Bill Clinton. After Clinton named him North Korean policy coordinator in 1998 with the goal of resolving the North Korean nuclear and missile issue, he visited North Korea in 1999 as Clinton’s special envoy. This and many other interactions with North and South Korea were the basis for a report Perry released in Oct. 1999, which calls for engagement with North Korea.In related news, the Wall Street Journal reiterated its hardline stance on North Korea in a June 13 editorial titled “South Korea’s Defense Blunder.” “Mr. Moon wants to play a balancing role between the regional powers and convince North Korea to negotiate an entente. This naivete puts South Korea’s security in peril,” the editorial said.It also stated, “Mr. Moon still has time to fix his mistake before he meets President Trump in Washington later this month. Environmental assessments can and should be waived when national security is at stake.”

 

[TaiShang]

Pyongyang has said it‘s developing an ICBM [intercontinental ballistic missile] that can reach the continental US. That [the development of an ICBM] is no longer a matter of if, but when,”

Hopefully they will manage and demonstrate it sooner than later because that would effectively end the US side of aggressive and militarist posture, forcing the sides to the negotiation table.

Now the US has the luxury of going aggressive and terminating any chance for dialogue because they feel safe at home. They couldn't care less about the Korean lives on both sides. But, once the DPRK has ability to hit the US (even the likelihood of it) would shot the US aggression down to a great extent.

 

[Oldman1]

Hopefully they will manage and demonstrate it sooner than later because that would effectively end the US side of aggressive and militarist posture, forcing the sides to the negotiation table.

Now the US has the luxury of going aggressive and terminating any chance for dialogue because they feel safe at home. They couldn't care less about the Korean lives on both sides. But, once the DPRK has ability to hit the US (even the likelihood of it) would shot the US aggression down to a great extent.

What they going to do? Blackmail the U.S. to sign a peace treaty? Accept a unification of South Korea under Kim's rule? Lift of sanctions? Probably more aid?

 

[TaiShang]

What they going to do? Blackmail the U.S. to sign a peace treaty? Accept a unification of South Korea under Kim's rule? Lift of sanctions? Probably more aid?

No. I do not think they will not ask for anything or do anything. It is just the desired effect of missile delivery capability build-up, which may naturally result in a decrease in US aggressions and derailment of political process to ensure a sort of peace arrangement between the two sides.

 

[Oldman1]

No. I do not think they will not ask for anything or do anything. It is just the desired effect of missile delivery capability build-up, which may naturally result in a decrease in US aggressions and derailment of political process to ensure a sort of peace arrangement between the two sides.

What sort of peace arrangement?

 

[TaiShang]

What sort of peace arrangement?

I do not know. They probably won't ask me. A formal agreement for non-aggression (on both sides) would be a dramatic step. Something that would undermine chances for any US derailment for subsequent negotiations.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCtg0sjXgAA4klC.jpg:small

North Korea is blamed for murder of Otto Warmbier by American public and Politicians who ignore or are ignorant of Otto Warmbier's parents admitting that they commited the murder.

This could be used for rallying cry for war and North Korea should prepare for war.

 

[Oldman1]

I do not know. They probably won't ask me. A formal agreement for non-aggression (on both sides) would be a dramatic step. Something that would undermine chances for any US derailment for subsequent negotiations.

You mean a peace treaty to end the war?

 

[925boy]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DCtg0sjXgAA4klC.jpg:small

who ignore or are ignorant of Otto Warmbier's parents admitting that they commited the murder.
.

That suggestion is completely ridiculous. Can you provide evidence that his parents killed him?

 

[yugocrosrb95]

That suggestion is completely ridiculous. Can you provide evidence that his parents killed him?

I can't because they denied autopsy to be made on him.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

You see this picture?

Now focus on the missile... You see it? You know what it is? No.

That is Kornet and picture is from 2014.

Only K1A2 and K2 have decent chance to survive frontal hit.

I need a kornet for ice cream.

 

[yugocrosrb95]

Source is in Russian

https://topwar.ru/60673-koreyskaya-narodnaya-armiya-protivotankovoe-vooruzhenie.html