The next Korean War

Discuss air warfare, doctrine, air forces, historic campaigns, etc.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

TC

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 3998
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2004, 07:06

Unread post03 Apr 2009, 04:37

You hit the nail on the head Gums! The Chinese helped the NoKos last time. It would not be a huge surprise to see the exact same thing again.
Offline

Meathook

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3304
  • Joined: 13 May 2004, 23:37

Unread post03 Apr 2009, 05:09

Roger that, too good...
More than likely have "been there and done that at some point", it sure keeps you young if done correctly
Offline
User avatar

StolichnayaStrafer

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 893
  • Joined: 20 Jan 2008, 16:50
  • Location: Dodge City, Moscowchusetts

Unread post03 Apr 2009, 12:20

Chesty Puller, NOT your candy coated substitute for straight answering leadership.

Thanks for the real perspective, Gums- we seem to be missing it more and more in the 21st century.
:salute:
Why is the vodka gone?
Why is the vodka always gone... oh- that's why!
Hide the vodka!!!
Offline

tank_top

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2008, 22:59

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 01:02

OK, what "if" we did first strike with assets in place? Say maybe we have two Aircraft carrier battle groups doing "maneuvers" in the Sea of Japan and a half dozen subs all started lobbing Tomahawks while S Korean and US forces over there all opened up on the North? Would that signi9ficantly reduce casualties in the South and greatly shorten ground ops? Would a large enough chunk of the North Koreans just waive the flag?
Offline

Meathook

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3304
  • Joined: 13 May 2004, 23:37

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 01:04

The world might turn on us even more then they have already
More than likely have "been there and done that at some point", it sure keeps you young if done correctly
Offline

tank_top

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: 01 Nov 2008, 22:59

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 01:11

Well that's just two of our Aircraft carriers... Just kidding...
Offline

TC

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 3998
  • Joined: 14 Jan 2004, 07:06

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 01:13

First strike is never a good option. Just as Meathook said, it would likely cause more problems than it would solve. Since we have plenty of assets directly across the fence from N.Korea, we will know when or if they plan to take any act of aggression against the US or our allies.

Starting trouble right now, is trouble we don't need.
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 736
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
  • Location: Titletown, USA

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 02:07

I, too, do not see the US taking a chance on restarting the Korean War (for those that don't know, the Korean War has never ended officially), the current leader is possibly mentally unstable and has access to chemical weapons, including nerve agents. Any strike against the DPRK would require a massive first strike that would eliminate Kim.

We may not start the trouble, but if it does start, we're going to have to finish it.

But, since this thread is geared towards what might happen, and not what WILL happen, here's a small sampling of what would be definite targets on any ATO--this is also the target list I used when writing my book:

WMD targets:
Musudan-ri missile facility
any known chemical plants
Yongbyon nuclear facility

Airbases--all would be hit, but these would be the most in need of attention--aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons:
Uiju AB: H-5 Beagle
Orang AB: H-5 Beagle
Taetan AB: H-5 Beagle
Koksan AB: Q-5 Fantan

Other targets:
C3I
Government ministries
IADS

This list isn't all-inclusive, but it touches on some of the most vital areas that would be hit--I used Wikipedia, Google, and GlobalSecurity as sources--so it shouldn't violate OPSEC.

Just with those targets in mind, I'd guess the number of aircraft that would have to be deployed would be more than what the US sent to kick off OIF.

Don't underestimate the power of two CVWs--that's nearly 200 top-of-the-line strike aircraft, enough to blunt a good portion of the KPAF. The USAF would likely stage aircraft out of the bases on Japan, and pack them tighter than sardines. Army Patriot batteries and Navy Aegis ships would protect the bases from TBMs.



307
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline

Meathook

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3304
  • Joined: 13 May 2004, 23:37

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 02:16

You seem pretty informed, what's the source of your research - just wondering?
More than likely have "been there and done that at some point", it sure keeps you young if done correctly
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 736
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
  • Location: Titletown, USA

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 02:45

I used Wikipedia, Google, and GlobalSecurity as sources--so it shouldn't violate OPSEC.


Wikipedia's article on the KPAF includes links to the Google Maps imagery where the aircraft are visible on the flightlines. Musudan-ri imagery is available through Globalsecurity, and I'm using a couple of the references for my term paper on Japanese reaction to North Korea going Nuclear. I'm looking to become an intel analyst after college, so stuff like this has become a hobby.

On top of that, I used the book I'm reading now on Chuck Horner as a basis for target selection.

Also, I'm a repository of useless information, that's why when you see me on Jeopardy, I'll be demolishing Ken Jennings's record like it was nothing, just gotta hope I don't get a game where they give me Opera, Shakespeare, Greek Mythology, Ballet, and Black & White Movies as categories.

Aww, nuts, that's my Achillies heel, better not let Trebek see this...

307

P.S. Say this out loud, "Kebert Xela"

That should get rid of him.....
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline

Meathook

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3304
  • Joined: 13 May 2004, 23:37

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 03:00

Humm...good job, I think I'll nick-name you "Snoops", research was well done, have a good weekend - The Hook
More than likely have "been there and done that at some point", it sure keeps you young if done correctly
Offline
User avatar

PhillyGuy

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 637
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2006, 03:07

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 04:13

ptplauthor wrote:I used Wikipedia, Google, and GlobalSecurity as sources--so it shouldn't violate OPSEC.


You might want to search on Google Books for the GAO (Unclass) report on Air Power during Desert Storm. The detail, in terms of targets attacked and considered etc., is pretty good for a white report.
"Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest."
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 736
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
  • Location: Titletown, USA

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 04:25

You might want to search on Google Books for the GAO (Unclass) report on Air Power during Desert Stormm. The detail, in terms of targets attacked and considered etc., is pretty good for a white report.


Sounds like a good source, I'll look it up after I finish my term paper, when I have the time to devote to my book.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline

skyhigh

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 467
  • Joined: 27 Feb 2009, 11:01

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 09:51

I have this article from Above Top Secret.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread212394/pg1
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 736
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2008, 00:09
  • Location: Titletown, USA

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 17:06

Sierra Hotel, sky, Bravo Zulu

I've found some of the airfields but never had time to do a proper analysis.

The poster on ATS makes out the presence of Mi-26s to be an earth-shattering revelation, a few extra cargo eggbeaters isn't going to help them very much--if it had been Su-27s or Su-30+s I could see it being a problem.

Looks like we're starting up our own little intel-shop here--sweet.

He has another interesting point where he circles a picture of what appears to be a tank turret. In The Bear and The Dragon, bunkers built into a hillside topped with JS-3 and KV-2 tank turrets are mentioned as a key Russian defensive position. Seeing as how DPRK was allied with the Big Red Bear for some forty years, could it be possible that these are the same type of installation?

I'm considering the Soviet/Russian installations as real--until I learn otherwise--due to the fact the layout given in the novels seems very plausible, and I believe the author did some on-site recce.

7B\/
307
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
PreviousNext

Return to Air Power

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests