NORTH KOREA Airforce and Air defences

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

18 years 5 months

Posts: 480

This short and seemingly rediculous account of North Korea's armed forces made me make this thread hoping to filter out as much nonsense as possible. Also, to try to create some more realistic sense of what they could actually use "tomorrow" to attack South/US troops.

http://www.defencetalk.com/north-koreas-military-firepower-39072/

AIR FORCE
The air force, designed for quick strikes across the border in South Korea, has an estimated 80 bombers, 541 fighters and ground attack fighters, 316 transport planes, 588 transport helicopters, 24 attack helicopters and at least one unmanned drone as well as an ample supply of air-to-air missiles and surface-to-air missiles

Read more: http://www.defencetalk.com/north-koreas-military-firepower-39072/#ixzz1hHYbCCI4

How can they have that many aircraft ...316 transport planes. Does that include two seat single propeller An-2s? 588 transport helicopters??? Who has that many helicopters ?!!

Original post

Member for

18 years 5 months

Posts: 480

thank you. Lots of good read.

Do you suppose their Mig-17s, Su-7s and Mig-19s are still in service?

Do you suppose their ground attack IL-28 aircraft would have any role in a war with South?

any mor erecent info on air fleet upgrades of Mig-29s or anymore potent SAM systems.

thanks again!

Member for

18 years 3 months

Posts: 5,267

A significant proportion of their fleet is in service on paper only! In respect of fast air I would say some of their later build J-7 are probably still being flown and the most potent aircraft in their fleet the Mig-23 and Mig-29 are still active albeit availbility and flight hours are very low.

Russia is no longer going to supply aircraft and China wants hard currency for anything new.

The fact is asymetric systems like missiles and mini submarines are a better investment at the moment.

Member for

14 years 4 months

Posts: 2,114

A significant proportion of their fleet is in service on paper only!

That sums it up. Imho those bewildering numbers are ridiculous. Gorssly inflated to make them look more threatening than they are.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 11,742

That sums it up. Imho those bewildering numbers are ridiculous. Gorssly inflated to make them look more threatening than they are.

I see it similar. Most of that "easy meat" for an ordinary Stinger f.e.. ;)

Member for

18 years 3 months

Posts: 5,267

The real threat is the artillery both tube and rocket based. Also it should be remembered that it isn't tank country so their ground forces can get up rather close.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 11,742

The real threat is the artillery both tube and rocket based. Also it should be remembered that it isn't tank country so their ground forces can get up rather close.

All that is limited in range and just the smaller part of that is capable to inflict local damage by that. Even a local success of their ground forces by tactical surprise and/or numbers will not tip the balance of power in their favor. Without military aid by the Chinese there is no realistic chance to start a war with limited targets even. Smart weapons do no longer allow to utilise the terrain like in the 50s. The Chinese can not see some gains from a local conflict there except a power change within NK after a lost border battle. ;)

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 11,742

For the intrested one the DMZ is ~250 km or ~155 miles and just 4 lines of approach are of some military intrest at first. Every tactical surprise is time limited and the high mobility of ROK forces will strangle that in short notice. Compared to NK forces the ROK and US-forces have "unlimited" support by overhelming air-power that limited area in mind.

Member for

18 years 3 months

Posts: 5,267

All that is limited in range and just the smaller part of that is capable to inflict local damage by that. Even a local success of their ground forces by tactical surprise and/or numbers will not tip the balance of power in their favor. Without military aid by the Chinese there is no realistic chance to start a war with limited targets even. Smart weapons do no longer allow to utilise the terrain like in the 50s. The Chinese can not see some gains from a local conflict there except a power change within NK after a lost border battle. ;)

Well hmmm, quite alot of that artillery has good range capability and they have plenty of it. As was shown in the Korean war artillery is king there! Also their SRBM's and IRBM's can hit quite a few cities in the region. I agree that the southern forces would win out in the end but all analysis shows that it would be an utter slaughter before that point.

Also agree that China does not want to see a local conflict and arguably they are the important power broker in the area.

Member for

18 years 9 months

Posts: 13,432

For the intrested one the DMZ is ~250 km or ~155 miles and just 4 lines of approach are of some military intrest at first.

The UN forces made that mistake in 1950. Infantry are not as constrained by lines of approach as heavily mechanised forces.

This short and seemingly rediculous account of North Korea's armed forces made me make this thread hoping to filter out as much nonsense as possible.

"AIR FORCE
The air force, designed for quick strikes across the border in South Korea, has an estimated 80 bombers, 541 fighters and ground attack fighters, 316 transport planes, 588 transport helicopters, 24 attack helicopters and at least one unmanned drone as well as an ample supply of air-to-air missiles and surface-to-air missiles"

How can they have that many aircraft ...316 transport planes. Does that include two seat single propeller An-2s? 588 transport helicopters??? Who has that many helicopters ?!!


I think the numbers may be exaggerated, & they're certainly distorted. For example, the IISS in 2003 listed 306 helicopters - including 139 Mi-2, 80 Hughes 500D, 15 Mi-8/17 & 48 Z-5. Note that most are light, or light utility helicopters. About 300 of the 'transport' aircraft are An-2/Y-5, intended to infiltrate sniper teams into the S. Korean rear.

Most of that "ample supply" of AAMs & SAMs are museum pieces, like most of the fighters.


Do you suppose their Mig-17s, Su-7s and Mig-19s are still in service?

Do you suppose their ground attack IL-28 aircraft would have any role in a war with South?!


I expect that many of the ground attack aircraft can get into the air, but are probably capable of one way missions only, & most of the pilots have very little flying time. AFAIK they preserve aircraft by rarely flying them.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 11,742

Well hmmm, quite alot of that artillery has good range capability and they have plenty of it. As was shown in the Korean war artillery is king there! Also their SRBM's and IRBM's can hit quite a few cities in the region. I agree that the southern forces would win out in the end but all analysis shows that it would be an utter slaughter before that point.

Also agree that China does not want to see a local conflict and arguably they are the important power broker in the area.

I am well aware about that and you can kick a lot of stones and sand with it for little effect.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPAY0m3pJ3I
(At least the mountain is not hitting back and still there!)
The military purpose is to support own ground forces to lend some extra fire power to fulfill a limited task. All the numerous SRBM's and IRBM's are limited in fire-power compared to an ordinary general purpose bomb and without pin-point accuracy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Lebanon_War
gives an idea about civilian losses by such kind of fire.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_L%C3%BCbeck_in_World_War_II
gives an idea about civilian losses by such kind of fire against a Korean city of similar size.
Whenever NK will start an attack the civilians will suffer and the own military can not do much about that at first. My personal feelings aside not exceptional compared to other conflict somewhere or a single atomic bomb can bring to a city.

Member for

18 years 3 months

Posts: 5,267

Well I could talk about population density but lets just say no party in the area wants to find out the result of a war.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 11,742

Well I could talk about population density but lets just say no party in the area wants to find out the result of a war.

I see it similar. :)

Member for

14 years 9 months

Posts: 211

I noticed a pattern.

North Korea has sunk SK ship and shelled SK targets last year. Nothing happened. Plus it tested nukes.

Libya gave up nukes and turned its military into an internal security, on the premise it wont be attacked. It was bombed and militias were given support to overthrow recognised government.

North Korea is doing something right. Bristling with WMDs it can buy time to improve economy.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 805

I noticed a pattern.

North Korea has sunk SK ship and shelled SK targets last year. Nothing happened. Plus it tested nukes.

Libya gave up nukes and turned its military into an internal security, on the premise it wont be attacked. It was bombed and militias were given support to overthrow recognised government.

North Korea is doing something right. Bristling with WMDs it can buy time to improve economy.

North Korea made a statement when the bombs started falling on Tripolli which said much the same. People who are still hoping they will trade in their nukes are dillusional.

Member for

12 years 6 months

Posts: 226

Libya doesnt boarder China.

Member for

14 years 9 months

Posts: 211

North Korea made a statement when the bombs started falling on Tripolli which said much the same. People who are still hoping they will trade in their nukes are dillusional.

That is the point I am making. Thus, you are correct. NK are not gonna disarm, i dont blame them. They said that in March 2011 on a news broadcast.

Does anyone have any idea of NK chemical weaponary?

@19k11

Iran also does not border china.

Member for

18 years 9 months

Posts: 13,432

Libya gave up nukes and turned its military into an internal security, on the premise it wont be attacked. It was bombed and militias were given support to overthrow recognised government.

North Korea is doing something right. Bristling with WMDs it can buy time to improve economy.


Libya didn't have nukes to give up. It was trying to get them, but it hadn't got very far.

It didn't turn its military into an internal security force. It had well over 1000 tanks, lots of heavy artillery, many SAMs, & far more jet fighters than any internal security force would need.

North Korea isn't buying time to improve its economy. In order to improve the economy, it would have to reform it in ways which the rulers refuse to do, & cut spending on the conventional armed forces which gobble up far too many resources to allow economic improvement. The economy has become more militarised as it has declined, not less, with civilian manufacturing production declining far more than military. There's no sign of that trend reversing. The role of WMDs appears to be to make up for the reducing effectiveness of the conventional military, as the continued economic disaster reduces N. Korea's ability to maintain & support them, their equipment becomes increasingly obsolete & worn-out, & the troops become smaller & weaker due to worsening diet. Why improve the economy when you can use threats of war to extort enough money from the neighbours for a tiny ruling clique to live in luxury?