DPRK M2020 Tank

It looks like the DPRK has produced a heavily upgraded version of the M-2020
Gc8hrnLaAAI26tn

Gc8j5_Ja4AAy2vH

The M-2024
With RWS and twin movable APS launchers

Heres another pic showing the left top and rear of the turret
PYH2024112200720004200_P4.jpg
 
Last edited:
+a proper CITV this time(though jeez it's fov is obstructed). Still manually reloaded, same gun(115?).
 
Gwalker18 said:
Did the North Korean's get a chance to examine the M-1's captured in Ukraine?
Click to expand...
Probably, but rather unlikely to the point of getting one to study themselves.
Though, to be fair, as number of them in Russian hands grows, it's now quite likely PRC and DPRK will get some.
 
BullpupRafale said:
This is probably successor to Songun-915.
Click to expand...
Seems quite possible. Can you elaborate your thesis?
Scott Kenny said:
Not likely to really get much out of that. I mean, those were just M1A1s, no fancy armor. About the only thing they might get out of it is the ballistic computer.
Click to expand...
Worth noting that both DPRK and PRC made their new gen MBTs from pirated t-72 solutions.
While it's unlikely PRC will get all that much from 40-years old platform anymore, North Korea only relatively recently managed to catch up to world-level MBTs. They probably can find many solutions interesting.
 
Ainen said:
Worth noting that both DPRK and PRC made their new gen MBTs from pirated t-72 solutions.
While it's unlikely PRC will get all that much from 40-years old platform anymore, North Korea only relatively recently managed to catch up to world-level MBTs. They probably can find many solutions interesting.
Click to expand...
Okay, fair point.
 
Gwalker18 said:
How likely will those tanks be paraded in Moscow for May 9th?
Click to expand...
I have to say, i didn't thought of this possibility, but who knows, maybe the DPRK contingent in Russia might have some indigenous weapons system with it (Pyoljji-3 SAM, maybe some AFVs, possibly SRBMs?), so there could be a remote chance to see them in the parade. I don't recall seeing anything to hint at that from the parade rehearsal videos to date though.
 
Last edited:
lancer21 said:
I don't recall seeing anything to hint at that from the parade rehearsal videos to date though.
Click to expand...
Unfortunate, would have been a cool opportunity to see more DPRK gear in broad daylight.

I also would have thought they would perhaps include captured US/EU equipment, with lowered guns, on flatbeds or something.

Clearly I should run their propaganda efforts from now on! >:v
 
Some tanks havent installed the twin missle launcher. The tank look, a mix of an Altay with T-14, specialy when you look the version without the launcher.
Livining aside if it goo or not, I like it visualy.
 
After doing some numbers to confirm it, I think that the gun probably is 115 mm (question I've had for a while). That would make the Songun-915 the only DPRK tank with a 125 (if it has the auto-loader is unconfirmed as far as I know).

After collecting the best images available, the ratio muzzle diameter / bore diameter (pic 1), I'm omitting the ± error, but the Soviet numbers are considerably more accurate:
Korean:
Sogun-ho: 1.36 (1.39, 1.38, 1.36, 1.35, 1.34)
Cheonma 2: 1.44 (1.41, 1.47, 1.45, 1.45, 1.43, 1.43)
Soviet:
115 mm - 1.44
125 mm - 1.38 - 1.39 (the 2A46M has slightly thicker walls than the 2A46)
Even if Soviets abandoned (no modernization besides projectiles) the 115 mm has a relatively large chamber volume (10.2 L against 12.7 L of the 125 mm and 10.4 L of the Rh-120) and low chamber pressure compared to the 125 mm 2A46s (360 MPa against 510-650 MPa).The gunpowder of the U-5TS restricted by the low chamber pressure of a 1950s design seems to be the reason why the 115 mm has "low" muzzle energy (7.3 MJ), with 4.25 kJ/g is considerably lower than the 5.35 kJ/g of the 125 mm that Soviets began to use a decade after (at a considerable cost to the barrel's lifespan).

Edit (2): The kJ/g are a simplified calc and with a wrong assumption (that's why I cross them out). The muzzle energy estimates in the table below are simple extrapolations of the reported values for 3BM-6 (U-5TS), 3VBM17/42 Mango (2A46M).

And North Koreans seem to have increased the chamber volume by ~20%, this is more a guess based on that blurred pic (trying to estimate the profile from that censored pic. I am much less certain about the accuracy of this)

NATO 120, 115K-1, 115K-2, 115.jpg Comparison.jpg blurred.jpg

I don't know if they were trolling or that extra long barrel is a real prototype or variant, I included assuming that they simply made the barrel longer after the bore extractor (as M????)
Chonma 20 0.jpg
The summary would be: they (may) have modernized the metallurgy of the U-5TS for their new tank instead of using the 125 mm with a new cartridge and chamber. The estimation for the new 115:
115115(K) - estimated125 (2A46M)
Chamber volume10.2 L12.2 L12.7 L
Chamber pressure360 MPa(similar to the 125)650 MPa
Propellant charge7.4 kg8.1 (extrap. 125) - 8.9 kg (extrap. 115)8.4 kg
Muzzle energy7.1 MJ9.5 - 11.0 MJ10.2 - 11.6 MJ
The drawings (pic 2) should be accurate enough are based on photos (best available and corrected by distortion, perspective, etc) and considerably better than similar drawings that are incomplete or contain inconsistencies.
 

Attachments

  • North Korean 115 mm, scale.png
    North Korean 115 mm, scale.png
    2 MB · Views: 18
  • 125 46M5.jpg
    125 46M5.jpg
    381 KB · Views: 14
Last edited:

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom