The next Korean War

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

Scorpion1alpha

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

  • Posts: 1659
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:47

Unread post04 Apr 2009, 18:26

It won't be pretty.
I'm watching...
Offline
User avatar

PhillyGuy

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 02:34

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


Planeman is good, he also did the North Korean navy a while ago with his own illustrations, pretty cool.

Also, I happen to originally be from a country where you cannot go a few miles into the country side without seeing reinforced concrete and partially buried bunkers all over the hillsides. But no tank turrets on them though, just openings for heavy machine guns. They're no longer in use, and that country is now in NATO... the organization those bunkers were originally designed for. :lol:
"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 post05 Apr 2009, 03:00

The NKN isn't a worry, except for the Sang-O midget subs, but enough 688Is and Virginias should be able to take out the old rustbuckets.

I'll look up some of those North Korean targets on Google Maps and then do some analysis of my own, then link it here. It'll take some time, but meh, I can say it's for my paper. :D

The main SSK of the North Koreans is the Romeo--subs don't get much older than that, it was an evolution of the U-boats. Their surface force isn't much either, mostly missile boats and old tin cans. The USN won't have a problem taking them out, the biggest threat would be Styx/Silkworm missiles from coastal batteries--the Sea of Japan isn't that big, and some variants of that stovepipe can probably hit land targets on Honshu.



I'll take Foreign Countries for $400 Alex

A former Warsaw Pact country that's in NATO now, that was close enough to have the Russians worried that NATO would be able to overrun the territory.

Ahh, Alex, What is East Germany?


78\/
307
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline
User avatar

PhillyGuy

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 03:08

ptplauthor wrote:Ahh, Alex, What is East Germany?


It is in NATO's Southern Sector...directly East of Italy.
"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 post05 Apr 2009, 03:33

Rats, I automatically figured that the country would have been in the Warsaw Pact, thus I ignored Yugoslavia--most likely what is now Slovenia.

It seems like bunkers to defend against NATO would be a waste of money, there wasn't much worth taking, Yugoslavia was basically a thorn in NATO's side, but when you got a Bear staring you down, you don't worry about the bramblebushes.



As a side note. I'm going to be finishing up a synopsis of an air battle for my manuscript tonight, when I get it done, I'll post it here for your collective enjoyment/criticism.


78\/
307
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline
User avatar

That_Engine_Guy

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2318
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2005, 05:03
  • Location: Under an engine somewhere.

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 03:48

We're all great at criticism; topped with a healthy layer of sarcasm. :lmao:

:cheers: TEG
[Airplanes are] near perfect, all they lack is the ability to forgive.
— Richard Collins
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 03:59

oh, that's just grrreeeeeaaat!

Not only are you guys pilots, maintainers, and assorted aviation buffs, you're also literary snobs....Sierra Hotel I guess I finally found a place to fit in....

I know the #1 criticism is probably going to be that I even mention Eagles in the synopsis, but hey, 24 Eagles vs. 72 Vipers is still pretty good, and the character telling the story is a Viper pilot. It's about a massive airstrike against 7 ammo dumps inside the ROK, taking them out will relieve artillery pressure on Pusan, allowing for the CFC to breakout and head north to relieve a Marine force around Sokcho.

Oh, yeah, and there's no dialogue either, I suck at coming up with realistic dialogue.

I started a new thread for the synopsis snippet: http://www.f-16.net/index.php?name=PNph ... 184#148184

78\/
307
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline

johnwill

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2136
  • Joined: 24 Mar 2007, 21:06
  • Location: Fort Worth, Texas

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 05:54

ptplauthor,
The correct spelling of the large city at the southeast corner of ROK is Busan, not Pusan. That's a relatively recent change, but you might consider making the change in your writings.
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 06:15

The correct spelling of the large city at the southeast corner of ROK is Busan, not Pusan. That's a relatively recent change, but you might consider making the change in your writings.


10-4, thanks for noticing that. It's a different Romanization of the Hangul characters, that results in Busan vs. Pusan, I also use the N. Korean spellings sometimes, Nason/Rason, Taejon/Daejon.

When I get the whole thing consolidated into one document, I'll run a Find/Replace on the spellings. I figured not many people would have known of the different spelling, so I used the old one, but I'll switch it eventually.
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo
Offline

tank_top

Active Member

Active Member

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

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 17:01

http://www.icao.int/icao/en/nr/2009/pio200902_e.pdf

http://closingvelocity.typepad.com/.a/6 ... 61f970c-pi

Any validity to this? Is this the actual flight path rocket took or was this only expected flight path?
Offline

LordOfBunnies

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 588
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005, 05:28
  • Location: Cincinnati, Ohio

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 17:05

It did fly over Japan, but it was confirmed at a space entry trajectory and not a weapons trajecotry but it splashed down in the Pacific and never made it to space (according not NORAD, Japan, South Korea, etc. but not the North Korea lol). So guess who gets to examine it?

I still think Japan should have shot it down.
Peace through superior firepower.
Back as a Student, it's a long story.
Offline

skicountry

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2009, 17:12

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 18:31

With this latest launch Kim has provided a great advert for the Prompt Global Strike (PGS) proposal. That rocket had been a sitting duck on its launch pad for weeks. A well-placed SLBM based missile would have taken care of Mr. Kim's space-faring ambitions. And, as it is increasingly appearing that Missile Defense and Obama do not mix, PGS might not be as far off as might be thought.

Regarding the original topic, if there was ever a scenario to dust off the Army's Cold War-era AirLand Battle doctrine, this is it. Just follow the doctrine's tenets of Initiative, Depth, Agility, and Synchronization up the yellow brick road to victory. Modern maneuver warfare at its finest.

Ski
Offline

TC

F-16.net Moderator

F-16.net Moderator

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

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 18:37

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


What analysis? Hate to sound harsh here, but you don't have the proper training to "analyze" anything. You haven't been through the schooling at Goodfellow, or Langley, VA to qualify yourself as an intelligence "analyst". It takes a lot more than just hitting the ZOOM feature on Google Earth.

ptplauthor wrote:Looks like we're starting up our own little intel-shop here


No we're not! :nono:

If any sensitve information is passed on these boards, you can bet the farm that not only will it be deleted, but the poster(s) will have a bad day.

I'm keeping an eye on this thread especially. This is treacherous water, so tread very lightly.
Offline

skicountry

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 21 Jan 2009, 17:12

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 18:43

PhillyGuy wrote:Also, I happen to originally be from a country where you cannot go a few miles into the country side without seeing reinforced concrete and partially buried bunkers all over the hillsides. But no tank turrets on them though, just openings for heavy machine guns. They're no longer in use, and that country is now in NATO... the organization those bunkers were originally designed for.


Hey Philly, I'll take a stab at this one. Considering I just came in on the red-eye from Strasbourg where NATO welcomed Croatia and Albania in to the fold, I should know this. Since Albania is known to be peppered with bunker and mountain fortifications, I'll have to take Albania as my final answer. How about it? Where do I collect my prize?

Ski
Offline

ptplauthor

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

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

Unread post05 Apr 2009, 19:33

If any sensitve information is passed on these boards, you can bet the farm that not only will it be deleted, but the poster(s) will have a bad day.


I'm not after any classified info, anything off of Google Maps can be accessed by anyone. I didn't mean professional analysis anyway, just a quick inventory of what they have, I'm building off of what Planeman did, because sites may have added newer data. Besides, if I want to go to college for this kinda stuff, I figure picking on the NoKos is a good place to start. I know the latest NRO photo-recce sats are a ton better than anything that was oreleased to TerraServer (some was even Soviet, iirc) or Google or Live Search Maps. And I'm not looking to get a job with Big Brother doing BDAs. I'm not looking to expose where the US is deployed, but where the North has their guys.

Heck when I posted that stuff about NoKo's bomber bases I thought the post would be deleted. I'm not going to be counting tanks, and my monitor resolution isn't good enough to spot a tank barrel buried into the mountainside. I already use a map plotted with stuff for my book, it's the easiest way I can keep locations straight, NK's SAM sites, etc, etc. Wikimapia has a lot of stuff located already in North Korea, if they're decoys it doesn't say, but like Planeman pointed out on ATS, they don't have F-5s--and especially F-5s with two different wing shapes on the same aircraft. It's not exactly that difficult to tell the difference between a MiG-15, -17, and -19, as long as you can find a confirmed -17, going off the wing sweep angle you can figure the others out.

Amateur analysis.

-------

Depending on how deep the water is where that rocket went down, the US Navy might have to call in one of their deep-diving research subs to get it--I know there's a big trench just east of Japan--it's at least 4 miles deep.


78\/
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 3 guests