John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yes, there are several C-RAM systems available. I guess the required number and how effective such systems are would be classified.
North Korean Military.
- Thread starter F-15 Eagle
- Start date
t68
Well-Known Member
Yep best thing to counter artillery is counter battery fire(artillery-rocket), I would imagine S Korea would have these up 24/7/365
I don't know. Anti ballistic missile systems, yes. Against artillery they have counter-battery fire & air attack.
Their artillery units are well supplied with counter-battery radars (though there was an embarrassing incident in 2010 when the N. Koreans shelled a S. Korean island & the radar of the S. Korean artillery battery there was out of order: it was fixed quickly, in time to return fire). They've also bought some Spike-NLOS from Israel for that use.
They have unknown numbers of their own designs of short-range ballistic missiles. The oldest (1980s) have been put in reserve. They also have their own ground & ship/submarine launched cruise missiles.
2007yellow430
Active Member
Everybody seems to be concerned over missiles and artiliary. What about tunnels? One or two nukes tunneled under Seoul would cause massive damage.
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Seoul isn't the only target, ports would seem to vulnerable to nukes smuggled in from the sea, difficult for sure but easier than tunnelling.
Another possible delivery vehicle. Low-tech but tough to defend against.
One Of North Korea's Most Dangerous Weapons Is The Ancient An-2 Biplane - The Drive
One Of North Korea's Most Dangerous Weapons Is The Ancient An-2 Biplane - The Drive
2007yellow430
Active Member
It's probably doable, at least for now. https://www.physicsforums.com/threa...und-tunnel-detection-technology-exist.906528/
Maybe a couple of years from now, detection will be easier. A lot depends on the depth. Given the length of the border, detection could be very difficult.
Art
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Interesting discussion on that physics forum. Detection of deep tunnels does appear to be a challenge, at least with detection technology in the public domain. Still, there are cheaper and faster means to smuggle nukes into NK.
gazzzwp
Member
Russia upgrades DPRK's internet.
Russian firm provides new internet connection to North Korea | Reuters
US now concerned that this will enable them to launch more sophisticated cyber attacks.
Are we seeing an escalating tit for tat series of spoiling tactics between Russia and the US? What's behind all this? Is it Russia retaliating for sanctions? Is it US involvement in Ukraine or Syria?
Will the US simply impose more sanctions on Russia in repsonse?
Russian firm provides new internet connection to North Korea | Reuters
US now concerned that this will enable them to launch more sophisticated cyber attacks.
Are we seeing an escalating tit for tat series of spoiling tactics between Russia and the US? What's behind all this? Is it Russia retaliating for sanctions? Is it US involvement in Ukraine or Syria?
Will the US simply impose more sanctions on Russia in repsonse?
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Blasting, once this technique approaches the border, I would have that thought this should be detectable, yes?
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
The Internet is a two street, the US should have better access as well to NK I would think, for whatever cyber attacks they may have in mind. As for Russia, being the cyber experts they are, perhaps they want a better way (and faster) to access what's really going on in Kim's kingdom as opposed to jerking the US around.
Tunnelling is not an efficient way to deliver nuclear weapons. It barely made for a conceivable plot in the 1967 movie, battle beneath the earth.
Battle Beneath the Earth (1967) - IMDb
Counter battery could be problematic. A lot of the North Korean artillery facing South of the Z is dug into hardened sites with armored doors than can open and close for firing. And those hardened sites are dug in on the reverse slope, accurately hitting those sites even with precision artillery would be tough.
Then you must consider, if the Nork's are shooting South, chances are war broke out so that artillery support might have other more pressing priorities such as receiving fire missions against any NK ground forces that may or may not head south. Regarding air power to attack those sites, it's doable but there are only so many planes, bombs, and missiles under UN command in South Korea, and chances are they'll be busy too. And once it's time to hit their numerous tube and rocket artillery pieces we also still have to conduct a sizeable SEAD campaign, one that will likely see at least some Allied aircraft suffering attrition.
No doubt the North Koreans would loose any war but they have such quantities of men and material that it will definitely take some time to start knocking them all down. Although, if the KPA goes the way of Saddam's Army and largely opts not to fight, that would help. But there's still strategic weapons in North Korea, keeping cities like Souel, Tokyo, and even Beijing at risk. Plus those weapons would probably have the highest priority for destruction should it come to war.
Even one chemical rocket hitting a major city-those are some of planets most populous cities as well-it would be a disaster with major and long reaching geopolitical implications.
To go along with the ultimate utility problem, namely, they don't need nukes to do massive damage to Seoul.
Now, Busan (only other major SPOD in country and also a major APOD)? Different story.
Of course, I've always thought best value out of nukes for the DPRK (aside from obvious leverage to push US off peninsula so they can re-unify) is an attack against Japan (which would leave the ROK in an a very awkward position vz whether they support/coordinate with the ROK/GOJ/USA on a response).
Hardened shelters with armoured doors that only open to fire implies a low rate of fire. Doors would have to be large if the gun's meant to fire at more than one target. They'd have to be very big indeed for multiple rocket launchers - & I wonder what it'd be like inside a shelter when one's being fired. MRLs might use shelters only for reloading.
Concealed hardened shelters on reverse slopes could be interesting in engineering terms. They couldn't be underground, for obvious reasons: they'd have to be bunkers built above ground, & thus easier to locate (good chance of spotting them being built) for any artillery inside to be able to fire over the tops, unless they fire only at very high angles. S. Korea has quite a few bunker-busting weapons.
OTOH, the US has no doubt been busy all these years identifying and mapping these installations for special attention if hostilities commenced. Another new wrinkle are advanced airborne sensors such as the F-35 DAS which has the ability to detect artillery fire.
China sending a message to NK and the world? It can only be a good sign and the US and international community should redouble diplomatic efforts to further this kind of thinking in Beijing.
Thinking the unthinkable in China: Abandoning North Korea | at DefenceTalk
Thinking the unthinkable in China: Abandoning North Korea
North Korea’s nuclear antics have rattled its alliance with China to the point that Beijing is allowing the previously unthinkable to be discussed: Is it time to prepare for the renegade regime’s collapse?...
Jia Qingguo, dean of the School of International Studies at Peking University, raised eyebrows earlier in September when he published an article entitled: “Time to prepare for the worst in North Korea”.
The paper was published in English in East Asia Forum, a website of the Australian National University, but it is unlikely that he could have released it without the approval of Chinese authorities.
Jia urged Beijing to start discussing contingency plans with the United States and South Korea — talks that the two nations have sought in the past but China has resisted for fear of upsetting Pyongyang.
“When war becomes a real possibility, China must be prepared. And, with this in mind, China must be more willing to consider talks with concerned countries on contingency plans,” Jia wrote.
Beijing, he said, could discuss who would control North Korea’s nuclear arsenal — either the United States or China.
To prevent a massive flow of refugees across the border, China could send its army to North Korea to create a “safety zone”, Jia said.
Another touchy issue would be who would “restore domestic order in North Korea in the event of a crisis”. China, he said, would object to letting US soldiers cross the 38th parallel into North Korea.
Thinking the unthinkable in China: Abandoning North Korea | at DefenceTalk
Thinking the unthinkable in China: Abandoning North Korea
North Korea’s nuclear antics have rattled its alliance with China to the point that Beijing is allowing the previously unthinkable to be discussed: Is it time to prepare for the renegade regime’s collapse?...
Jia Qingguo, dean of the School of International Studies at Peking University, raised eyebrows earlier in September when he published an article entitled: “Time to prepare for the worst in North Korea”.
The paper was published in English in East Asia Forum, a website of the Australian National University, but it is unlikely that he could have released it without the approval of Chinese authorities.
Jia urged Beijing to start discussing contingency plans with the United States and South Korea — talks that the two nations have sought in the past but China has resisted for fear of upsetting Pyongyang.
“When war becomes a real possibility, China must be prepared. And, with this in mind, China must be more willing to consider talks with concerned countries on contingency plans,” Jia wrote.
Beijing, he said, could discuss who would control North Korea’s nuclear arsenal — either the United States or China.
To prevent a massive flow of refugees across the border, China could send its army to North Korea to create a “safety zone”, Jia said.
Another touchy issue would be who would “restore domestic order in North Korea in the event of a crisis”. China, he said, would object to letting US soldiers cross the 38th parallel into North Korea.