H I Sutton's September 8, 2023 article, on the September 6 launch of North Korea's (NK's) possible 10 missile SSB, is most interesting.
My inititial thoughts are the SSB (especially in main picture below) looks too top heavy (submerged or surfaced) to be a stable missile firing platform. It may be a propaganda response to South Korea's 10 missile KSS-III Batch 2 SSB.
So it is unclear if this NK SSB has the stability to fire its missiles (then its VLS tubes are presumably backfilled with water?) and then be able to surface without dangerously leaning on its side.
To avoid such a happening the following information, of September 8, 2023, from 38 North may be very significant:
"Just 24 hours later, on September 7, in a
puzzling occurrence, the submersible ballistic missile test barge had been
moved from the south protected basin and was nested outboard of the newly
launched submarine."
This may suggest that NK may soon film firings of new larger (Pukguksong 4 or 5?) missiles purportedly launched by the SSB. But actually fired from the submersible ballistic missile test barge.
This propaganda hoax will then be believed by much of the Western mainstream media.
9 comments:
Hi pete
I would not be surprise if North Korea is attempting to revive the old Soviet era Golf class Submarine. I wonder if they possess the capability of reviving such old technology.
Hi Pete,
Oh yes, yes. The mass media is going crazy over the NEW North Korean Tactical Nuclear Attack Submarine.
If it was really new, they would not have kept the same 6.7m (22 feet) beam of the Romeo class, and lobbing off the Romeo nose to make it torpedo-like may add little to the submarine's overall buoyancy system..
There's nothing stopping them from adding external buoyancy tanks with side bulges.. except it won't look slim and sexy.
The stern in the images has been cropped in photoshopped, likely to remove the Romeo's obsolete twin screws and rudder configuration, which isn't sexy.
Also.. nothing in the NK images and videos indicates flank or sail mounted sonar arrays.
So, more about looks and appearances than anything else. I'd be extremely surprised if they could sail this from Sinpo to Vladivostok, much less perform a deterrence patrol.
Hi Nicky at 9/11/2023 5:49 AM
NK received many old rusty Golfs and Romeos from the USSR/Russia from the 1970s onwards.
What really helped them from being objects to scrap to subs that could be modernised was the sudden availability of Russian technicians in the early 1990s who were refugees from the newly bankrupt Russian submarine industry and Russ Navy.
Old parts and subs became Sinpos of various sizes and usefulnesses (or not, some being deadends) including "Hero Kim Kun Ok" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero_Kim_Kun_Ok just "launched"
Cheers Pete
Hi Shawn C at 9/11/2023 8:38 PM
Indeed the "NEW" North Korean Tactical Nuclear Attack Submarine dubbed "Hero Kim Kun Ok" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero_Kim_Kun_Ok looks like a camel (a horse designed by a committee).
The very small beam of 6.7m looks suspicious given it is meant to house some ballistic and cruise missiles in 2 rows ie. mounted Side-by-Side.
Compare this with the larger 7.5m beam of the Soviets' first SSB the Zulus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zulu-class_submarine where the 2 missiles were one Behind the other.
All meant to like bigger and sexier than the KSS-IIIs.
Interesting is an expert response at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hero_Kim_Kun_Ok#Responses eg:
"Former US Government expert Vann Van Diepen described it as "noisy, slow, and having limited range". Joseph Dempsey, a researcher at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, described it as having "fundamental limitations and vulnerabilities""
Cheers Pete
slightly off topic but what expectations are there for how the KSS 3 batch 3 are going to look like?
Good question suffolkowner at 9/12/2023 4:23 AM
With the last of 3 KSS-III Batch 2s likely to be delivered in 2030 or a bit later https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KSS-III_submarine#Batch-II_2
South Korea might be contemplating a nuclear powered sub (the fabled KSS-N) probably a technology demonstrator then an SSBN perhaps built with French assistance
see https://gentleseas.blogspot.com/2021/12/s-korean-built-nuke-sub-reactor-likely.html
SK certainly has the nuclear industrial base to build small LEU reactors
The whole issue all depends whether the US gives SK permission and/or whether a possibly more isolationist US is perceived by SK as abandoning SK.
Regards Pete
Hi Pete,
South Korea and Japan are the two countries, in my opinion, that could build nuclear weapons within five years..
South Korea has just started research to on Small Modular Reactors and Molten Salt Reactors for marine use, which could be the beginning of CVN and SSN programs in about a decade… https://www.reuters.com/world/calls-south-korean-nuclear-arsenal-unlikely-fade-despite-us-deal-analysts-say-2023-04-27/
Hi Shawn C at 9/13/2023 10:30 AM
Yes I agree, South Korea, then Japan, are the two likeliest countries to next join the nuclear weapon Club.
Particularly if those 2 countries armed themselves with nukes due to a perception of US isolationism then the same nuclear thoughts might occur to Australia.
But SK and J have different nuclear platform realities to Aus. They don't have the range-distance problems that might really demand nuclear powered subs.
SK can and is successfully arming itself with the KSS-III Batch 1 and 2 SSBs that can relatively easily and secretly move from conventional warheads on their SLBMs to nuclear warheads. With a 1,000km range they could hit any target in NK. SK SSBs with AIP and LIBs could sit on the seafloor for 5-6 weeks at least.
Similarly it is well within J's capability to build similar nuclear armed SSBs sitting bastion protected in the Sea of Japan.
Aus would need a much longer range nuclear deterrent to "impress" China, which is where an Aus SSGN with small SLBMs or hypersonic missiles come in. Lets call it VLS Virginias and SSN-AUKUS by stealth with nuclear missiles. Only problem is we totally rely on a possibly future isolationist US to provide the Virginias and
for the SSN-AUKUS would still partly rely on the US for sub combat systems especially the crucial oceanic database and even with UK built reactors US ToT permissions would be required.
So Australia cannot do a nuclear deterrent by halves. If the US isolates itself that leaves Australia 2 major options. Either Aus goes independent nuclear armed, like Israel, or it needs to follow conventionally armed neutrality like Sweden.
That's my current thinking SK, J and Aus nuke proliferation possibilities.
Cheers Pete
Hi again Shawn C at 9/13/2023 10:30 AM
Tomorrow I aim to do an article on South Korea's:
- likely submarine reactor capability
- its ambiguity toward the KSS-N issue, and
- political and popular enthusiam for an independent SK nuclear deterrent particularly noting the article https://www.reuters.com/world/calls-south-korean-nuclear-arsenal-unlikely-fade-despite-us-deal-analysts-say-2023-04-27/ that you have identified.
Regards Pete
Post a Comment