As we known that……J-6 (Mig-19),Q-5 and Lockhead XST,they all use two low thrust turbojet.Why don't we think that the North Korea want to create a modernized XST and it have the Bomb Bay (from early Q-5)?
 
Last edited:
As we known that……J-6 (Mig-19),Q-5 and Lockhead XST,they all use two low thrust turbojet.Why don't we think that the North Korea want to create a modernized XST and it have the Bomb Bay (from early Q-5)?
What garbage is this? You jump from MiG-19 to the LM XST and then pose a ridiculous question about creating a modern XST!
 
For any more recent advancement in aerospace, we can look at their missiles, cruise, ballistic and surface to air.
The ability to produce missiles does not necessarily mean an ability to produce aircraft and/or key sub-components such as modern gas turbines.
 
As we known that……J-6 (Mig-19),Q-5 and Lockhead XST,they all use two low thrust turbojet.Why don't we think that the North Korea want to create a modernized XST and it have the Bomb Bay (from early Q-5)?
What garbage is this? You jump from MiG-19 to the LM XST and then pose a ridiculous question about creating a modern XST!
LM XST was powered by two J85-GE-4A that had output of 13kN each.

RD-9BF-811 provides more than double dry thrust than J85-GE-4A.

But there is no point in creating such modern XST in this day and age.
For any more recent advancement in aerospace, we can look at their missiles, cruise, ballistic and surface to air.
The ability to produce missiles does not necessarily mean an ability to produce aircraft and/or key sub-components such as modern gas turbines.
That is an non-argument you're making in consideration of topic of country in question, being North Korea that has quasi ballistic missiles that require robust ballistic / flight control and guidance system complex and wound fiber filament used on solid fuel missile casings.

View: https://twitter.com/nktpnd/status/1315464503602053120


View: https://twitter.com/nktpnd/status/1315467048559030272


Fiber materials are extensively used on aircraft's around world.




Structures-of-composite-used-in-military-aircraft-Courtesy-of-Composites-Horizon-Inc.jpg
 
The ability to produce/use composite fibre material or other 'aerospace' materials such as titanium or high grade aluminium alloys, does not necessarily lead to the ability to produce modern combat aircraft lest I might as well argue that a company producing golf clubs (which also use titanium and carbon fibre composite materials) is automatically an aerospace company.

There is a lot to producing such which is why there are so few doing so these days even in the first world. Moreover, there is to the best of my knowledge, not a single North Korean indigenously designed/produced combat aircraft in service or even in work. Talking about theoretical possibilities is one thing but please don't try to purport that it is anything more unless there is actual evidence.

As for their ballistic missile capabilities, it is true that they have developed such a capability over roughly a 45yr period using a combination of indigenous work undoubtedly, but also by standing on the shoulders of, and using the assistance of, those such as the USSR/Russia/China over the years. Again though, just having the ability to do this does not necessarily mean that they have the ability to do anything similar with combat aircraft. Again, I could argue that someone such as Ferrari produces high end sports cars up to and including Formula 1 models and has been doing so for nearly 75 yrs. These too use 'aerospace' materials and rely heavily on aerodynamics and modern computer design for their performance. However, to then argue that they have the ability, or more to the point, an active Ferrari combat aircraft would be equally wrong.
 
There is absolutely no evidence of North Korea receiving assistance from Soviet Union nor Russia nor China unlike there is evidence for South Korea receiving assistance from America for their ballistic missile program which there after North Korea started their program.

There were accusations that China and or Russia provided North Korea with UDMH only to be found out they produce it themselves while only credible assistance North Korea may have is from Iran as they cooperate with each other in missile and space technologies.

Hence talk about evidence coming from you doesn't have any credibility when they have indigenous jet powered aircraft, UAV in 2012.

Zil-130-truck-North-Korean-drone.jpg


It is deflection to mention some golf club or car producing company to reject notion of experience of using materials and knowledge applied to ballistic missiles that exert far greater stress on material than high end fighter jet, let alone some one ton high end car.

Long range land attack cruise missiles are effectively aircraft considering size and weight, North Korea demonstrated it in 2021.

E_H7l4JWUAA6upf.jpg


Thrust needed to propel such large cruise missile probably has enough to propel a light trainer jet:

With two such would be enough to have for a light trainer jet with credible ground attack capability:

Priority for North Korea are missiles, just because they don't show publicly aspirations and prototypes of desired manned aircraft like Iran doesn't mean that there isn't something in works in North Korea, even if just on paper specifications and designed on computers.
 
As we known that……J-6 (Mig-19),Q-5 and Lockhead XST,they all use two low thrust turbojet.Why don't we think that the North Korea want to create a modernized XST and it have the Bomb Bay (from early Q-5)?
What garbage is this? You jump from MiG-19 to the LM XST and then pose a ridiculous question about creating a modern XST!
LM XST was powered by two J85-GE-4A that had output of 13kN each.

RD-9BF-811 provides more than double dry thrust than J85-GE-4A.

But there is no point in creating such modern XST in this day and age.
For any more recent advancement in aerospace, we can look at their missiles, cruise, ballistic and surface to air.
The ability to produce missiles does not necessarily mean an ability to produce aircraft and/or key sub-components such as modern gas turbines.
That is an non-argument you're making in consideration of topic of country in question, being North Korea that has quasi ballistic missiles that require robust ballistic / flight control and guidance system complex and wound fiber filament used on solid fuel missile casings.

View: https://twitter.com/nktpnd/status/1315464503602053120


View: https://twitter.com/nktpnd/status/1315467048559030272


Fiber materials are extensively used on aircraft's around world.




View attachment 670812
If the bomb bay of North Korean modernized XST could install tactical nuclear weapon (like B61 or B57)?
Hey!we will see the stealth kamikaze from North Korea!
 
Last edited:
If the bomb bay of North Korean modernized XST could install tactical nuclear weapon (like B61 or B57)?
Hey!we will see the kamikaze from North Korea!
That doesn't make any sense.

It is far more likely for them to develop Su-25 equivalent to replace Mig-15 17 19.
 
There is absolutely no evidence of North Korea receiving assistance from Soviet Union nor Russia nor China
Rubbish. If nothing else their ballistic missile program has a foundation with the USSR's Scud missiles and thus the technology developed there. There is also evidence that their UAVs/cruise missiles have Russian and/or Chinese foundations/technology. See the following for example:


THE NORTH KOREAN BALLISTIC MISSILE PROGRAM

Now I will admit that the North Koreans have undoubtedly developed an indigenous capability with their ballistic missiles but I still contend that they did so by by standing on the shoulders of, and using the assistance of, those such as the USSR/Russia/China over the years.

even if just on paper specifications and designed on computers.
Or a figment of someone's imagination :rolleyes:

I am tempted to move this thread to the Alternative History and Future Speculation if there is no evidence but just simply uninformed speculation.
 
Long range land attack cruise missiles are effectively aircraft considering size and weight, North Korea demonstrated it in 2021.

View attachment 670823


Thrust needed to propel such large cruise missile probably has enough to propel a light trainer jet:

With two such would be enough to have for a light trainer jet with credible ground attack capability:

Priority for North Korea are missiles, just because they don't show publicly aspirations and prototypes of desired manned aircraft like Iran doesn't mean that there isn't something in works in North Korea, even if just on paper specifications and designed on computers.
Sure, you could design a lightweight jet trainer around a cruise missile engine, and yes, such an aircraft would be an important first step towards a fighter jet. But this is a thread about a North Korean fighter/attack aircraft, not a trainer. And IMO it's quite a stretch to say that Polish trainer you cited has "credible" ground attack capability. 400 kg of weapons and a cannon is a pretty miniscule armament; if that's the level of strike you're going for you'd be much better off with an attack helicopter or armed drone.
 
There is absolutely no evidence of North Korea receiving assistance from Soviet Union nor Russia nor China
Rubbish. If nothing else their ballistic missile program has a foundation with the USSR's Scud missiles and thus the technology developed there. There is also evidence that their UAVs/cruise missiles have Russian and/or Chinese foundations/technology. See the following for example:


THE NORTH KOREAN BALLISTIC MISSILE PROGRAM

Now I will admit that the North Koreans have undoubtedly developed an indigenous capability with their ballistic missiles but I still contend that they did so by by standing on the shoulders of, and using the assistance of, those such as the USSR/Russia/China over the years.

You say rubbish then you proceed to admit you're wrong, make up your mind.

Are you going to admit that DPRK didn't receive assistance from USSR or are you going to lie and say that they did, which is it? Just because they acquired examples of Soviet R-17 from Egypt doesn't equate to receiving assistance from USSR.

Acquiring examples of weapon designed, made and produced by X country doesn't mean that Y country received technical assistance from X country simply for themselves being able to produce it without license after reverse engineering and reproducing technology.

Your argument was that North Korea received assistance and now you are moving goal post about origin of technology that they managed to reverse engineer as if that doesn't require comparable amount of effort when doing that from few examples without any manufacturing tools nor having material science knowledge required, they basically started from zero unlike South Korea with NHK.

Using small scale drones made up primarily or solely of foreign made components gives certain degree of deniability unlike something like RQ-170 that was brought down through jamming inside Iran hence the USA could not deny their involvement in infraction.

That large jet powered UAV is their design and though of course when it showed up some asserted it must be based on MQM-170 and when North Korean patrol boats had multiple barrel rotary heavy machine gun then it was asserted as being American gatling gun.

If North Korea did stand on shoulders of, and using the assistance of, those such as USSR/Russia/China over the years then what that makes of America, Britain and USSR/Russia that captured German scientists and had direct access to manufacturing tools, documents, designs and examples of ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, jet engines and aerodynamics of jet aircraft hence transfer of technology.


even if just on paper specifications and designed on computers.
Or a figment of someone's imagination :rolleyes:

I am tempted to move this thread to the Alternative History and Future Speculation if there is no evidence but just simply uninformed speculation.
This thread is already in Alternative History and Future Speculation and as far as I can remember always has been, point of this thread.

Long range land attack cruise missiles are effectively aircraft considering size and weight, North Korea demonstrated it in 2021.

View attachment 670823


Thrust needed to propel such large cruise missile probably has enough to propel a light trainer jet:

With two such would be enough to have for a light trainer jet with credible ground attack capability:

Priority for North Korea are missiles, just because they don't show publicly aspirations and prototypes of desired manned aircraft like Iran doesn't mean that there isn't something in works in North Korea, even if just on paper specifications and designed on computers.
Sure, you could design a lightweight jet trainer around a cruise missile engine, and yes, such an aircraft would be an important first step towards a fighter jet. But this is a thread about a North Korean fighter/attack aircraft, not a trainer. And IMO it's quite a stretch to say that Polish trainer you cited has "credible" ground attack capability. 400 kg of weapons and a cannon is a pretty miniscule armament; if that's the level of strike you're going for you'd be much better off with an attack helicopter or armed drone.
TS-11 Iskra is as an example and that trainer jet aircraft can carry twice the bomb load of Mig-15Bis and has at least a cannon...

Unlike for example L-39 Albatros that pales in comparison that doesn't have a cannon and less bomb carrying capacity.

Onto speculation...

North Korea acquired several Kh-35 from Russia that were propelled by TRDD-50 that is more advanced compact medium bypass turbofan than R95-TP-300 used on Kh-55 by being lighter, providing greater thrust at better specific fuel consumption.

Considering that land attack cruise missile that North Korea tested at 1500 kilometer range with maneuvering and that flew for little over 2 hours is notable in case turbofan engine in question is derived and improved upon TRDD-50 since standard Kh-35 did 130km.

Russia has variants of TRDD-50 aka 36M, 36MT, 37 that can work for more than 10 hours. J85 was disposable engine for decoy cruise missile, then improved and used on various fighter and attack aircraft. Same for R-15 that was designed for supersonic cruise missile and later recon drone, then improved for interceptor fighter jet. Indian Stealth Wing Flying Testbed for Ghatak UCAV is powered by 36MT.


TRDD-50 aka 36MT lives on...

View: https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1458758908957368322


TRDD-50 specific fuel consumption is 0.71 kg per kgf per hour while for R95-TP-300 it is 0.78 kg per kgf per hour.

TRDD-50 is twin shaft with 450kgf output and R95-TP-300 is single shaft with 400kgf output.

640 kilograms of jet fuel would be needed for 2 hours of operation for TRDD-50 / 36M series for DPRK's LACM range.

Here basic math for a single seat light attack jet...

164kg two compact turbofan jet engines TRDD-50 equivalent

90kg K-36 ejection seat

640kg jet fuel

76kg pilot

That is 970kg and goal should be maximum take off weight of 2700kg hence leaves 1730kg.

Perhaps 900kg to 1000kg at most for rest of air airframe such as wings, tail, landing gear, pylons, etc...

Loadout such as 5 rocket pods of B8M-1 with S8 rockets, HE-FRAG type for total of 35 rockets or three S24 rockets.
 
Last edited:
Sheesh..calm down everyone.
I must admit, it will be interesting to see how NK goes about renewing its airforce.
At the present time, they are wisely investing in missiles and WMD. I say wisely from a doctrine point of view.
Same with the navy. Assymetric developments such as mini subs, and subs in general.
There will, however, come a time when they will need to refresh, however modestly, their airforce, if for nothing else than to keep pilots current, basic intercept , or current capabilities alive. Something like the Jf-17 is tailor made for them, but this will depend on the political situation.
Like much of what they've done so far, it will be very interesting to see the path they choose.
 
That all falls upon on their perspective that is decisive on allocation of resources thus for example if they go all in and they were to laser focus any part of military industry that involves aerospace then they could achieve a lot such as involving reverse engineering engines.

Most promising engine for short term is R-35-300, mid term RD-33 and long term D-30.

There is no point in considering R-25-300.
 
Analysis of Hwasong-12 intermediate ballistic missile:

Isogrid are applicable to aircraft's as evident by A350 and A330neo:


Also for example F119 and F135 turbofan engine also incorporated isogrids for structural reinforcement.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
Rumor has it that a MiG-29 radar was placed on a different aircraft for reasons that I imagine we could only really guess at. Which is an important part of their defence strategy, fostering rumors through secrecy. I haven't seen a photo of a DPRK H-5 with cruise missiles, or of their supposed H-6. Which are aircraft that you would imagine they would parade. Although parades are very much a flawed source for assumptions, from the "hermit kingdom" we take what we can get.
 
Rumor has it that a MiG-29 radar was placed on a different aircraft for reasons that I imagine we could only really guess at. Which is an important part of their defence strategy, fostering rumors through secrecy. I haven't seen a photo of a DPRK H-5 with cruise missiles, or of their supposed H-6. Which are aircraft that you would imagine they would parade. Although parades are very much a flawed source for assumptions, from the "hermit kingdom" we take what we can get.


Actually this is new to me ... the latest rumour I heard is that the NK AF is getting retired J-10As and its pilots are already training on them in Northern China.
 
I hope the admins accept a little bit of leeway into the realm of rumor, due to the lack of available information in the case of the hermit kingdom. The reason being that defectors from the country sometimes talk about nuclear systems or their development, and these represent capabilities that we have seen no evidence of, such as a nuclear submarine, nuclear sea mine, and in the case of this article, the Banghyun-5 drone, which is a radiological weapon but falls into the general description of how we got wind of it. The defectors are often qualified officials, which makes one wonder if they're fed misinformation as government propaganda, or if they publicly spread misinformation that makes the DPRK look stronger in an attempt to spare their families back home. Anyway, the article contains a small error where they say S-200 where they should say S-125. they have not made the S-200 mobile.
 
Last edited:
I haven't seen a photo of a DPRK H-5 with cruise missiles, or of their supposed H-6.
Having read through the article more thoroughly, I believe that it could be a typo that got through the editing, as there was no previous mention of the H-6, and the previous paragraph was talking about the H-5. Another thing is that the H-6 isn't a small aircraft, so would've been bound to see it on satellite images, and I'm certain they would've been paraded around, had they got them.
 
Yeah my main po
I haven't seen a photo of a DPRK H-5 with cruise missiles, or of their supposed H-6.
Having read through the article more thoroughly, I believe that it could be a typo that got through the editing, as there was no previous mention of the H-6, and the previous paragraph was talking about the H-5. Another thing is that the H-6 isn't a small aircraft, so would've been bound to see it on satellite images, and I'm certain they would've been paraded around, had they got them.
Yeah, my main interest is in the H-5s modified to launch anti-ship missiles. Their existence is considered credible, but I haven't seen them paraded... perhaps the test program was unsuccessful? Being a "carrier killer" system, one would think it would be shown off, but it's not the only relatively advanced weapon that's believed to exist but not publicly displayed. Prime other examples are the SSC-9 Scourge anti-ship missile, and M-1994 shorads system.
 
Google translation of above: "Domestic twin-engine aircraft ... Yak-6-based airplanes manufactured by North Korea in the 1980s and 1990s. It was equipped with the CJ-6's AI-14 engine and was equipped with radar and sights. It is said to be a training aircraft for transport aircraft and bomber crews, although its origin, use, and whereabouts are unknown. Flying is possible."

I am presuming it never entered large scale production given it is not generally seen elsewhere. I suspect those shown in these photos might even be the only ones.
 
Article related to NK Aircraft development: "The North Korean Air Force: A Declining or Evolving Threat?"
I have to address content this article...

Its content is flawed as it is evident it relies on mere text reference when there is no visual confirmation because there are no Q-5A nor Mi-24 in North Korean inventory unlike for example ground vehicles like T-72 and ZSU-23-4 being present in one documentary.

As for air defense section of that article, there is no evidence of 7.62x54R gatling machine gun being in service and nor 30mm gatling cannon for which there isn't any image of it unlike odd omission of 14.5x114mm gatling heavy machine gun.

Anyway there is also no mention of maintainance and production capacity of RD-9 turbojet used by Mig-19/J-6 that also provides explanation why older continue flying such as Mig-15 and 17 along Il-28.

Also being article from 2018, outdated thus something as significant as Su-25 with laser designator integrated in nose and armed with Kh-25 and or Kh-29 laser guided air to ground missile. As too suspected capability of North Korean Il-28 being able to launch cruise missiles.
 
While there may be some minor elements that are dated or otherwise (and I never said it was a definitive reference), the key message that NK's capability for meaningful indigenous aircraft development/production is certainly limited. This is backed up by multiple other references/resources/analysis.

BTW, in relation to your ascertains re the Q-5A, some of these were reported as being delivered but I acknowledge there are no photos to prove. Re the Mi-24, there are reportedly 20 in service though again I have not seen any photos.
 
Last edited:
We don't know if their capabilities are certainly limited or is it just being lack of interest towards manned aircraft unlike other military assets such as armored fighting vehicles, artilery, cruise and ballistic along surface to air missile systems complexes.

There are no images of Q-5 nor Mi-24 unlike Ka-28 and Mi-14 while if they had Q-5 and of Mi-24 then we would have seen them participate in military parades by now considering MD-500 are being featured which North Korea acquired those around same time its rumored they acquired Q-5 and Mi-24. Not to mention at some point South Korea claimed North Korea had Mig-25, South Koreans must have snorting some white powder of something.
 
Found this North Korean - Chosun Film posted called Virgin Assault Squadron (Google Translate); it features a woman's combat unit flying the Yakovlev Yak-18 or some Nanchang CJ-5 variant?
There's also a few MiG 15s included and what looks like some fake models used to represent USAF planes attacked at the end.
Interesting to note the use of a Polish PZL-104 Wilga at the 1:00:28 mark, which if the story line is within the Korean War would in fact be ten years prior to the plane's first flight!
Unknown what year this propaganda film was made and its only in Korean with no English sub-titles

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tbRTPwF0Z_A

 
Last edited:

Japanese article on North Korean MALE UAV, translated by use of DeepL Machine Translation Language web tool:
1 Introduction
 On September 25, 2022, a satellite image of North Korea's Panghyeon Airfield revealed an unfamiliar aircraft in one of the facilities at the airfield.

Image.
Enlarged view of a hangar or maintenance facility (unmanned aircraft parked in the center) Image ©︎ 2022 Maxar Technologies
Image
Enlarged view of the location of the drone Image ©︎ 2022 Maxar Technologies
 This Fangbang Airfield is an airbase equipped with older MiG-17 fighter jets located in Gusong, Northwestern North Pyeongan Province, North Korea, and differs from other bases in that it is equipped with extensive maintenance facilities.
 It is also known as the airfield where then First Secretary Kim Jong-un personally piloted a light aircraft purportedly made in Japan around late March 2015.

Image.
Fangbang Airfield is located about 100 kilometers north of Pyongyang
 In addition to the fact that the newly confirmed aircraft is completely different in shape from existing North Korean aircraft, and in light of the "Five-Year Plan for Scientific Development of National Defense and Weapon System Development (commonly known as the Five-Year National Defense Plan)" presented by North Korea at the 8th Congress of the Workers' Party of Korea in January 2021, it is likely that the aircraft will be developed as an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) or unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), as mentioned in the plan. (For the sake of convenience, we will refer to them as UAVs in this article.

Image.
Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) exhibited at JSDF-2021 (left side of the screen)
2 Location of the shooting
 The detailed location where this aircraft was found is on a corridor near the entrance and exit of a hangar or maintenance facility of a group of facilities on the airfield (coordinates: 39°55'5.23 "N, 125°12'45.53 "E).
 Usually, aircraft awaiting (or finished) maintenance are parked in this corner of the facility, and in the past many MiG-23 fighters, Su-25 ground attack aircraft, and An-2 transport aircraft have been seen (between September 20 and 25, two An-2 aircraft were moved north of what appeared to be UAVs). (Between September 20 and 25, two An-2s were moved to the north of what appeared to be UAVs).

Image
Image ©︎ 2022 Maxar Technologies
3 About the UAV photographed this time
(1) Examination of whether or not it is a UAV
 As mentioned above, the shape of the aircraft is clearly different from the known North Korean aircraft. We considered the possibility that it could be another aircraft or the wreckage of some other aircraft based on the image quality and sunlight reflection.

1 The shape of the aircraft is peculiar and does not appear to be a manned aircraft
2 There is absolutely no case of a damaged aircraft being parked at the airfield.
(3) There are reports that small UAVs have been tested at Fangye Airfield in the past.

(3) The fact that there have been reports of small UAVs being tested at Banghyeong Airfield in the past, we have concluded that there is a very high probability that this is a UAV.

(2) Shape
  Assuming that this aircraft is in fact a UAV, we observed that it has a wing with a high aspect ratio, which is a common shape for medium-altitude long-range airborne vehicle (MALE) UAVs.
  Regarding the size of the aircraft, it is about 20 meters wide and 9 meters long, and its overall width is so long that it does not match that of foreign-made MALE UAVs.
  In the satellite image, in addition to the absence of a horizontal tail fin, what appears to be a vertical tail fin and its shadow can be seen, but the problem arises that it is impossible to even fly without a horizontal tail fin (in general, MALE UAVs have a V-shaped wing at the rear of the fuselage that serves as both a horizontal and vertical tail fin). However, close examination of satellite imagery shows that it appears to be a V-shaped wing rather than a vertical tail, so it goes without saying that we will need to keep a close eye on future developments.

Image.
Enlarged image of the drone (black areas are shadows) Image ©︎ 2022 Maxar Technologies
Image
Ref: Ethiopian Air Force's Biraktar TB2 (left) and Winged Dragon I (center and right)
Image ©︎ 2022 Maxar Technologies
(3) Related equipment
 No ground control station (GCS) or other equipment that might be related to the aircraft was observed in the satellite images obtained this time. Therefore, it is unclear whether the remote control system of this aircraft will use satellite communications (SATCOM) or whether it will be limited to line-of-sight (LOS) communications only, like the well-known Turkish-made Bailaktar TB2 (the five-year defense plan calls for a 500-km radius of operation, so the latter is a possibility given the aircraft's size). (Given the size of the aircraft, the latter is likely to be the case).

(4) Armed or not armed
The Five-Year National Defense Plan mentions that UAVs "have completed the design of various electronic weapons, unmanned strike equipment and reconnaissance detection means, and military reconnaissance satellites," and that "the most important research to develop reconnaissance means, including UAVs that can conduct precision surveillance at a range of up to 500 km, will be promoted in earnest. It suggests that a wide variety of UAVs and UCAVs will be developed, but it is unclear if the UCAV photographed this time is a UCAV. However, it is not unnatural to assume that it is a UCAV based on the size of the aircraft.
 The problem is armament, but this is not likely to be a major issue since a new AGM that closely resembles China's Blue Aro-11 air-to-surface missile (AGM) was displayed at the "Self-Defense-2021" national defense development exhibition held in Pyongyang in October 2021 (the missile's guidance system is unknown, but North Korea equipped and developing semi-active laser-guided anti-tank missiles (ATGMs) and a portable infrared imaging (IIR) guided ATGM that closely resembles the "Spike SR").

Image.
New air-to-surface missiles similar to the "Blue Arrow 11" (center and far right)
(5) Others
(a) Electro-optical sensors to be installed
 UAVs are usually equipped with electro-optical sensors such as forward-looking infrared (FLIR) devices as a means of search and target indication. Many may question whether North Korea possesses such advanced electronic equipment, but this does not mean that it does not have the capability to develop such equipment, as it was confirmed that the same type of sensor was installed on its naval vessels as of November 2013, and a new type of sensor was introduced in 2018.

Image.
Electro-optical sensors for naval vessels

(a) The pros and cons of North Korea's ability to develop UAVs
 Many may question the impossibility of developing UAVs, which require advanced technology, because North Korea has low technological capabilities.
 However

1 Possesses a certain level of aircraft manufacturing capability through domestic production of the An-2 transport aircraft, etc.
2 The company already has experience in manufacturing and operating UAVs (including self-destruct models).
3 Must be selling UAV control technology to foreign countries through front-line entrepreneurship
4 Must be self-sufficient as there is no prospect of improvement in air power
5 In other words, we are forced to focus on the development of UAVs with low technical difficulty
6. The development of domestically produced UAVs is flourishing in Africa and Southeast Asia, and North Korea is no exception to this trend.

North Korea is no exception to this rule, and this is considered quite natural.

4 Future Trends
 It has been confirmed that North Korea exhibited several types of UAVs at the time of the "Self-Defense-2021. Since the "Five-Year National Defense Plan" is expected to be accomplished in 2025, only about three years remain at this point.
 Therefore, tests will be conducted and possibly inspected by Kim Jong Il. Although there are many unknowns, such as the means of attack, it can be inferred that the development of the UAV is progressing smoothly through the presence of an aircraft that appears to be the UAV photographed this time.
 Although the UAV announced by North Korea does not have the capability to reach Japan, it is by no means an entity that should be ignored, as it is believed to reflect the country's current national power, including its technological characteristics.

Also a year ago it was reported a successful test of a recon and attack drone/UAV.
 
Well if their IR Heat Seeker AAM were to have at least 20 if not 30 kilometer range, would increase performance of KPAF across board.
This is true because it seems to me that only the following IR missiles are used by KPAF at the moment:
R-3S/PL-2 on MiG-17/F-5, F-6C, MiG-21F-13/F-7A & PFM. :eek:
R-13M ? on MiG-21MF. :oops:
R-60 on MiG-21bis, MiG-23ML, MiG-29B/SE. :)
It seems that they never received R-73s. At least there are no pictures of them.
 
Last edited:

The appearance of these missiles, as well as, for example, research of materials for RCS reduction (see the pic) or the general reconstruction of Sunchon airbase, indicate that the DPRK is working on a large-scale air force modernization program.
They have the ability to produce advanced electronics including radars and EW systems (see Pongae 6 with radar complex) so we can expect upgrade of avionics and board systems of key NK aircraft to a level comparable to MiG-21Bison, MiG-23-98 or MiG-29SM.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20221123_183809.jpg
    Screenshot_20221123_183809.jpg
    210.6 KB · Views: 74
Last edited:
It is said that they have a production licence for the MiG-29SE and have built about 15 of them. If this is true they could build an advanced variant like the Chinese have done with the Su-27 improved to the J-11B.
 
It is said that they have a production licence for the MiG-29SE and have built about 15 of them. If this is true they could build an advanced variant like the Chinese have done with the Su-27 improved to the J-11B.

It all depends on whether they can make an analogue of the RD-33. Personally I'm sure that sooner or later it will happen.
 
Well if their IR Heat Seeker AAM were to have at least 20 if not 30 kilometer range, would increase performance of KPAF across board.
This is true because it seems to me that only the following IR missiles are used by KPAF at the moment:
R-3S/PL-2 on MiG-17, F-6C, MiG-19F-13 & PFM. :eek:
R-13M ? on MiG-21MF. :oops:
R-60 on MiG-21bis, MiG-23ML, MiG-29B/SE. :)
It seems that they never received R-73s. At least there are no pictures of them.
Introducing new IR AAM would take least amount of modifications compared to new SARH or ARH AAM.
Syria and Iran have R-73 that could provide examples for reverse engineering to reproduce R-73 or at least learn new technologies.

It is said that they have a production licence for the MiG-29SE and have built about 15 of them. If this is true they could build an advanced variant like the Chinese have done with the Su-27 improved to the J-11B.

It all depends on whether they can make an analogue of the RD-33. Personally I'm sure that sooner or later it will happen.
North Korea only assembled Mig-29 and it is suspected they got license to produce R-60M AAM's.
They have knowledge to produce more modern radar such as PESA type thus could upgrade their fighter jets.
They only produced jet powered target drones / suicide drones along turbofan powered cruise missiles.
 
Well if their IR Heat Seeker AAM were to have at least 20 if not 30 kilometer range, would increase performance of KPAF across board.
This is true because it seems to me that only the following IR missiles are used by KPAF at the moment:
R-3S/PL-2 on MiG-17, F-6C, MiG-19F-13 & PFM. :eek:
R-13M ? on MiG-21MF. :oops:
R-60 on MiG-21bis, MiG-23ML, MiG-29B/SE. :)
It seems that they never received R-73s. At least there are no pictures of them.
Introducing new IR AAM would take least amount of modifications compared to new SARH or ARH AAM.
Syria and Iran have R-73 that could provide examples for reverse engineering to reproduce R-73 or at least learn new technologies.

It is said that they have a production licence for the MiG-29SE and have built about 15 of them. If this is true they could build an advanced variant like the Chinese have done with the Su-27 improved to the J-11B.

It all depends on whether they can make an analogue of the RD-33. Personally I'm sure that sooner or later it will happen.
North Korea only assembled Mig-29 and it is suspected they got license to produce R-60M AAM's.
They have knowledge to produce more modern radar such as PESA type thus could upgrade their fighter jets.
They only produced jet powered target drones / suicide drones along turbofan powered cruise missiles.
Very interesting discussion. Following on from the 38north.org reference above, there is also a nice article in this regard at:-


Regarding the new IR AAM referenced above, it sort of looks like a PL-10 to me. The other image that I found interesting was a some-what 'Sparrow' - looking BVR missile. Wonder if NKor got this from China (PL-11) or perhaps even from Iran (see https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iriaf-news-and-discussions.358559/page-548 ), the 'red' AIM-7E2.

Frankly, when I look at all of NKor's weapons developments two Q,s come to mind.

- Where did the tech come from, and
- Where did the funds come from.

Thorn
 
Well if their IR Heat Seeker AAM were to have at least 20 if not 30 kilometer range, would increase performance of KPAF across board.
This is true because it seems to me that only the following IR missiles are used by KPAF at the moment:
R-3S/PL-2 on MiG-17, F-6C, MiG-19F-13 & PFM. :eek:
R-13M ? on MiG-21MF. :oops:
R-60 on MiG-21bis, MiG-23ML, MiG-29B/SE. :)
It seems that they never received R-73s. At least there are no pictures of them.
Introducing new IR AAM would take least amount of modifications compared to new SARH or ARH AAM.
Syria and Iran have R-73 that could provide examples for reverse engineering to reproduce R-73 or at least learn new technologies.

It is said that they have a production licence for the MiG-29SE and have built about 15 of them. If this is true they could build an advanced variant like the Chinese have done with the Su-27 improved to the J-11B.

It all depends on whether they can make an analogue of the RD-33. Personally I'm sure that sooner or later it will happen.
North Korea only assembled Mig-29 and it is suspected they got license to produce R-60M AAM's.
They have knowledge to produce more modern radar such as PESA type thus could upgrade their fighter jets.
They only produced jet powered target drones / suicide drones along turbofan powered cruise missiles.
Very interesting discussion. Following on from the 38north.org reference above, there is also a nice article in this regard at:-


Regarding the new IR AAM referenced above, it sort of looks like a PL-10 to me. The other image that I found interesting was a some-what 'Sparrow' - looking BVR missile. Wonder if NKor got this from China (PL-11) or perhaps even from Iran (see https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/iriaf-news-and-discussions.358559/page-548 ), the 'red' AIM-7E2.

Frankly, when I look at all of NKor's weapons developments two Q,s come to mind.

- Where did the tech come from, and
- Where did the funds come from.

Thorn

The IR missile is a little reminiscent of the PL-10, but really only a little. It's definitely not a PL-10.

And the second missile definitely has nothing to do with the AIM-7E2, it has a completely different ratio of the span of the surfaces to the diameter of the body.

And why would the North Koreans need a prehistoric Sparrow when they can handle dual-pulse technology themselves? Times are changing.

There is no mystery when it comes to acquiring technology. Basically, it is a combination of bits of technology and know-how acquired (in various ways) abroad with the results of one's own educational system and educational infrastructure. It is worth reading something about it, even just about the 12-year compulsory schooling system.

So it happened that at the turn of the millennium they brought Tochka from Syria, and in twenty years they fired a weapon better than Iskander. Simple story.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom