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.
Hi

Thanks for your reply, especially also regarding the second missile. I was wondering.

Thorn
 
Last edited by a moderator:
What do you mean by :
BullpupRafale said:
Since its unmanned aircraft, if ever paraded it will be likely be hauled on a transport truck.
I have trouble understanding the meaning of your phrase and what it refers to. :confused:
 
What do you mean by :
BullpupRafale said:
Since its unmanned aircraft, if ever paraded it will be likely be hauled on a transport truck.
I have trouble understanding the meaning of your phrase and what it refers to. :confused:
If they ever show UCAV during military parade, it is likely that it will be trailer of a truck and not flying when shown off.
 
I just want to comment and laugh at the same time at what some of these DPRK "experts" paid big money to write the stuff they do. Regarding that supposed light attack aircraft cross between a Yak-18 and Il-10 (itself a ridiculous idea, how do you cross a 300HP trainer with a 2000HP armoured attack plane?) turns out it's a prop for a DPRK war film, the stills themselves come from there. Same as the americans did with those T-6s masquerading as Zeros. I suspected it was the case and i was looking for that film for a long time but finally stumbled on it today.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUTd9gyuaeo&t=926s


God knows why mr Oryx thought that was a light attack plane, he must have seen it in the same film. DPRK at the time they were converting MiG-15/17 for ground attack and receiving Su-7s as well.

Wonder if it's the same for the twin engine plane.
 
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

Would you have by any chance the name of the film with korean characters? Maybe it can be found somewhere. Pitiful to see all these bans on DPRK stuff from the western media like a mere film.
 
Well over a year has passed and there is need for concise update on the subject with various developments.

North Korea has has launched as at least 14 long range land attack cruise missiles with range from 1500 to 2000 kilometers.
Unveiled compact standardized nuclear warhead that based on size estimates probably has weight of 500 kilograms.
Carrying such weight at average of 750 kilometers per hours with up to 3 hours of flight time is remarkable.
North Korea has drone program, one possibly turboprop driven and two seemingly jet powered.

Fn0OdbAWIA8qBfp.jpg
FoDMXfWaIAY29Fh.jpg

It would be viable for North Korea to develop a trainer jet consideration of range, flight time and payload of their LACM.
Only question is what is lifespan of turbofan engines that propel their LACM with 3 hours at most demonstrated.
But limited showcase considering limited size of LACM and their single use nature that they have.
Thus not worth to produce engine that has lifecycle of dozens if not hundreds hours.
But pursuit of trainer jet would justify using higher quality materials.

At most trainer jet could have 3800 to 4000 kilograms maximum weight if powered by two miniature turbofan jet engines.
Considering that Russia had TRDD-50 two spool turbofan for their Kh-35 and other cruise missiles, former sold to North Korea.
Along one example of Kh-101 malfunctioning and crashing in Iran when it was on way to bomb terrorists in Syria.
Likely reverse engineered and or basis for indigenous development of compact turbofan engine.

As example I looked at some of earliest trainer jets from France such as Morane-Saulnier MS.760 Paris and Fouga CM.170 Magister.
Both powered by 3.9kN Turbomeca Marboré II turbojet engine with 1.08 lb/lbf/h SFC vs 4.5kN of TRDD-50 with 0.71 lb/lbf/h SFC.
Former has dry weight of 130 kilograms while latter is 82kg with greater thrust, higher efficiency while smaller and lighter.
On engines there would be 96kg weight reduction, due to smaller size less space thus material needed to house those.
Along that less fuel is needed for comparable range and flight time thus airframe volume could be further reduce.

Hence for example could carry FAB-250 bomb per wing and SPPU-22 23mm gunpod with 260 rounds mounted on center line pylon.
Basically on par with Mig-15UTI trainer jet while consuming far less jet fuel by reducing it to one third while comparable firepower.

Though since there is trend of developing unmanned wingman drones along unmanned fighter jets, this could interest North Korea.
Since there would no need to train fighter pilot, instead develop AI that would be used in unmanned combat drones.
Thus size would be much smaller and radar cross section a fraction of any aircraft in North Korean air force.
 
Sounds interesting...
 
Sounds interesting...


Really?? Is this credible?
 
Sounds interesting...


Really?? Is this credible?
Nothing new. This just sums up what we know about a possible North Korean production of Fulcrum.
 
"Domestically produced twin-engine aircraft...At least four Yak-6-based aircraft built by North Korea in the 1980s and 1990s, powered by CJ-6 AI-14 engines and equipped with radar and sighting equipment. Origin, use, and whereabouts are unknown, but they are said to have been training aircraft for transport and bomber crews. It is flyable."
From rules : "ALWAYS post images via the forum's attachment option, not as links."
E0BV1dVVcAAt8b5.jpg E0BV1KQVUAMb-Nz.jpg E0BV03CVkAEEwzq.jpg E0BV10_UYAIAsMF.jpg
 
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

The link no longer works, what was the name of the film in Korean ?
 
Sounds interesting...


Really?? Is this credible?
Nothing new. This just sums up what we know about a possible North Korean production of Fulcrum.
 

Is North Korea’s MiG-29 Fleet Growing ?​

License production contracts with Russia and technical assistance deals may be strengthening North Korea’s air force.

North Korea’s armed forces learned during the Korean War the potentially devastating consequences of losing air superiority in a conflict with the United States, and air defense has ever since been a key priority in the country’s military doctrine. The Soviet Union emerged as a key supplier of arms for this purpose, expanding the small Korean War-era fighter fleet throughout the 1950s and granting generous military aid alongside reconstruction assistance. North Korea was the only foreign client for the Soviet S-25 surface-to-air missile system, a high-end platform tasked with the defense of Moscow itself, and Pyongyang would continue to upgrade its air defense network and fighter fleet throughout the Cold War.


With the collapse of the USSR in 1991, it was widely believed that North Korea would be unable to acquire modern military hardware for high end aerial warfare, or even parts to maintain and modernize existing systems, giving the United States and its allies an overwhelming advantage in the case of a future war on the Korean Peninsula. However, an analysis of the developments in the North Korean defense sector since the late 1980s and the potential for continued Russian assistance to its East Asian neighbor, help explain why the country’s ability to wage a war in the skies has remained strong despite all expectations.

In the wake of North Korean leader Kim Il Sung’s visit to the Soviet Union in October 1986, Moscow agreed to supply the country with its first MiG-29 Fulcrum fighter jets — an elite combat platform that had entered service in the Soviet Air Force only the previous year. With the heavier Su-27 Flanker struggling in its early days and being produced in very limited numbers, the MiG-29 was the most capable fully operational fighter in the USSR at the time. Pyongyang had gone to great lengths to strengthen its defense partnership with the neighboring superpower since 1984. Alongside a boom in trade and considerable Soviet investments in high-end industries in the aftermath of the leader’s visit, the USSR also helped to modernize North Korean aerial warfare capabilities. This included the provision of MiG-23 fighters, Su-25 attack jets, a Tin Shield early warning radar system, and S-200 air defense batteries, among other advanced armaments.

While North Korea is thought to have received approximately two dozen MiG-29 jets from the USSR, the country’s Air Force would go on to enlarge its fleet considerably by acquiring a permit and technological assistance from the Soviet Union to manufacture the elite fourth generation jets under license. The permit was given in 1987, and North Korea opened a small production line and manufactured two to three fighters per year. The Fulcrums were manufactured in Kwagsan and Taechun in North Pyongan province in the country’s northwest. By the end of the 1990s 15 fighters had reportedly been manufactured — a modest number compared to the Soviet production lines, which produced dozens of aircraft per year, but nevertheless a considerable addition to the North Korean fleet.

The first of the North Korean-built MiG-29 jets flew on April 15, 1993, and the performance was comparable to those built by the Soviet Union and Russia themselves — more sophisticated than the export variants marketed to clients such as Iraq and Iran. Nevertheless, a number of key components were required from Russia to maintain production. In 1997, North Korea signed a contract with Russian state-run arms dealer Rosvooruzhenye for military cooperation, which included continuing assistance for the manufacture of MiG-29 jets in North Korea. While the country’s Fulcrum fleet is estimated to have numbered around 35 jets at the time, extending indigenous production would see it grow considerably larger.

Russia today continues to maintain close defense ties to North Korea particularly in the field of air defense, having signed a number of military agreements including an agreement in 2015, declared their “Year of Friendship,” specifically facilitating close cooperation in air defense and intelligence. Visits to Moscow by high ranking delegations from the North Korean Air Force remain frequent, and according to U.S. sources Russia has continued to supply its East Asian neighbor with components key to maintaining its fighter fleet. It has repeatedly been pointed out that if the 2006 UN arms embargo against North Korea had been fully enforced, the majority of the North Korean fleet would today be unflyable – indicting that acquisitions of Russian parts has continued. A number of analysts have also speculated that Russia played a role in aiding North Korean in developing its KN-06 long range surface-to-air missile system, which entered mass production in 2017 as an analogue to the S-300 and may well use a number of Russian-made components.

A capable North Korean air defense network remains strongly in Russia’s interests to protect the country’s vulnerable Far East in the event of war with the United States, as well as to deter military action on the Korean Peninsula by Washington. With North Korea retaining the facilities needed to produce MiG-29 fighters of its own with a few minor inputs of Russian components, it remains likely that Moscow has continued to supply these inputs to keep production lines active. Without providing the country with a new class of fighter entirely, Russia can quietly assist its neighbor to expand its Fulcrum fleet and thus strengthen its aerial warfare capabilities. With no one entirely sure how many Fulcrums the North Korean Air Force actually fields, and many of the country’s airbases located underground, it is extremely difficult to prove any violations on Moscow’s part. Key components crossing the border are far easier to disguise than fighter airframes, and can therefore continue to be supplied inconspicuously without providing evidence to the United States to substantiate its accusations that Russia has violated the U.S. drafted UN sanctions regime against North Korea.

With Russia having reportedly already provided North Korea with advanced variants of the R-77 and R-27 long range air-to-air missiles, it is also a significant possibility that Moscow has also lent assistance in modernizing the MiG-29 jets in production by providing more advanced components for sensors and avionics. With North Korea having indicating its willingness to acquire cutting edge Su-35 air superiority fighters, an acquisition which would have cost approximately $1 billion for even a small contingent of just a dozen fighters, Pyongyang is well within its budgetary limits to afford modernization and a continuous manufacture of the MiG-29 — a lighter aircraft that comes at a fraction of the cost of the heavier Su-35. The fact that the country’s armed forces had some hope for a potential acquisition of the Su-35, Russia’s most capable fighter, indicates that a basis of high-level cooperation already exists in the field of aerial warfare.

The continued growth and modernization of the North Korean MiG-29 fleet remains a potent and cost-effective means of keeping the country’s air force viable against the threats posed by its leading potential adversaries. Continued cooperation to facilitate such growth is likely to continue be perceived by both Pyongyang and Moscow as strongly in their interests.

Abraham Ait is a military analyst and expert on Asia-Pacific security. He is the founder of Military Watch Magazine.
(29 November 2018)
 
Really?? Is this credible?


If they had produced the MiG-29 there would be some kind of factory visible, almost certainly with a runway. Given the general state of their air forces and industrial infrastructure I find it very unlikely they have a production line, and have seen no evidence that one exists.
 
Really?? Is this credible?


If they had produced the MiG-29 there would be some kind of factory visible, almost certainly with a runway. Given the general state of their air forces and industrial infrastructure I find it very unlikely they have a production line, and have seen no evidence that one exists.

According to "The North Korean Air Force: A Declining or Evolving Threat?" (https://besacenter.org/north-korea-air-force/) :

The most ambitious local production effort was the assembly of MiG-29 aircraft using “knocked down” parts. The KPAF established dedicated facilities near the Panghyon Air Base to support the arrival of the first aircraft in 1988. Over the next decade, North Korean engineers reportedly produced Mig-29B single-seat fighters and MiG29 UB dual-seat trainers. By the time production ended in 1999, approximately 35 aircraft had been assembled.38 However, operational losses and spare parts shortages have reduced the number of indigenously produced Mig-29s to fewer than 30.

Panghyon Air Base and attached Panghyon Aircraft Factory are the center (or rather, entirety) of the North Korean aircraft industry. At this time the facilities there support the maintenance and overhaul of aircraft rather than production or development - and this has probably always been the case. The facilities, roads, runway, etc. are in a poor state of repair and could not reasonably support the production of complete aircraft. There is not even a way to move a completed aircraft such as a MIG-29 from the "factory" to the air base runway.
 
Production of an aircraft does not require having it all in one place, not even close at all as evident by Eurofighter Typhoon in EU.
Both at Panghyon airbase and Panghyon aircraft factory there were new drones as evident by satellite imagery.
Fn0OdbAWIA8qBfp.jpg
FoDMXfWaIAY29Fh.jpg
Satellite imagery acquired and posted by International Institute for Strategic Studies.​
 
Production of an aircraft does not require having it all in one place, not even close at all as evident by Eurofighter Typhoon in EU.
Both at Panghyon airbase and Panghyon aircraft factory there were new drones as evident by satellite imagery.
View attachment 696827
View attachment 696828
Satellite imagery acquired and posted by International Institute for Strategic Studies.​

The analysis you are referencing is here: https://www.iiss.org/online-analysi...rth-korean-uavs-small-intruders-big-ambitions

The Panghyon Aircraft Factory is located at approximately 39.878662, 125.256326.
The Panghyon Airport / Air Base is at 39.925501, 125.205177, approximately 6 km from the factory.

The point I was making in my previous post is that the air base has very limited facilities. There are only a few hangars and other infrastructure. There are plenty of MiG-17/19 aircraft parked and in various stages of disassembly - probably being cannibalized for parts.

The factory is in much better shape, but is 6 km away and the roads between the factory and the air base would not allow a fighter-sized aircraft to be moved completely from the factory to the air base. Moving it in components to be assembled at the air base would also be unlikely due to the lack of facilities. Building a fighter (or MALE UAV) at the factory and transporting it to the air base does not seem possible. The factory is more geared towards the production and refurbishment of replacement parts.

The images you have included in your post, sourced from that analysis, are of an area at the air base, not the factory. The author of the analysis does not seem to make a distinction between the two.

The first "unseen UAV" mentioned in that analysis as a swept wing "fast-target drone or reconnaissance UAV" is visible in satellite images taken during March, April, and May of 2022. The object is positioned in front of a blast deflector. In several images the object is more clear than the image you have referenced, and in some there is a second aircraft. Using images that have the correct metadata and have been orthorectified, it is possible to approximate the dimensions of the objects. They are 55-60 feet long with a wingspan of approximately 30 feet. The wing sweep is about 60 degrees.

These are almost certainly Su-7 fighters. One of the aircraft is being cannibalized to repair the other. Between this and confusing the air base with the factory, I have concerns about the analysis in the article.

Strangely, many of the analyses out there concerning "rogue state" UAVs ignore a very important component: the uplink. Any UAV that operates at long range or long endurance needs more than a line of sight data link (and even those are problematic in the terrain of NK).

If North Korea is developing a MALE UAV, how are they communicating with it? Using relay aircraft? Using a satellite? If a satellite, who does it belong to? If they are using a commercial satellite or a Chinese satellite, their UAVs can be shut down by outside parties easily. That does not sound very Juche.

Satellite imagery acquired and posted by International Institute for Strategic Studies.[/CENTER]

And as a side note, the images you included are copyrighted by Maxar, not IISS. IISS does not operate the satellites or own the original images. While the same images may be available in Google Earth, if they were provided to IISS by Maxar under license they are probably not available to use by anyone but IISS. Satellite image providers very rarely allow wide distribution of their images and when they do the licenses are very, very expensive.
 
That is not Su-7 as he asserts.
Su-7 is not used by North Korea for decades.
He mentions higher quality images and date.
Yet provides none to prove own assertion.
If it was Su-7 then wings would be larger.
Along we could have seen large tail fins.
It has different airframe length to width ratio.

Maxar is credited in image itself prominently.
I stated IISS acquired and posted it publicly.
Not that IISS took satellite image of NK there.
Which he asserted against me.

He says impossible to move jets from factory.
When NK had many jet UAVs on Zil-130 trucks.
Along having cranes to lift fighter jets.
Thus those can be placed on towed trailer.
NK has mobile truck based cranes.
That have lifted solid fuel SLBMs.
Larger than 4650kg heavy 9K720 Iskander.

NK produces RD-9 turbojet engines.
Arguably most complex part of entire fighter.

As for MALE UAV.
Western part Korean peninsula basically flat.
Comms equipments can be on mountains.
Purpose would be to observe the border.
Perhaps IMINT and SIGINT of border area.
Those certainly won't go deep into SK.
 
Just a translation of the above article :
North Korean MM-1 drone

North Korea has been operating and building unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) since the late 1980s, mostly small propeller-propelled reconnaissance platforms and a few DR-3 Reys systems that appear to have been acquired from Syria. It appears to have been in the mid-2000s that North Korea began developing a new reconnaissance/strike UAV.

Commonly referred to as the MM-1, it was first recognized in February 2012 when South Korean media reported that North Korea had purchased several MQM-107D Streaker air-targeting aircraft from the Middle East and was developing a drone based on the platform. Syria was initially suggested as the source, but Egypt and Iran, which operated early models of the MQM-107, were more likely.

Less than two months later, on April 15, 2012, North Korea unveiled its first drone at a ceremony in Pyongyang.

A detailed review of ground observation photos and satellite imagery reveals that the MM-1 bears some similarities to the MQM-107, but it is not a complete copy of the system.

The MM-1 is a different size than the MQM-107, with a larger wingspan, a straight wing shape rather than a retractable wing, a different vertical stabilizer position, gimbal sensor mountings extending under the fuselage and in front of the engine intake, and a different engine geometry. In addition, the wing section has four small winglets above the wingtips and one winglet below the wingtips.

There is currently no reliable data on its performance characteristics or power, including downlinks for real-time communications, onboard sensors, and weapons.

The MM-1, which was unveiled at a feverish ceremony in 2012, was set up for reconnaissance, but on March 20, 2013, North Korea's Korean Central News Agency reported that, under Kim Jong-un's leadership, the country had tested three precision strike unmanned aerial vehicles.

The live-fire drills took place at the Taesandong training center southeast of Pyongyang, and video footage released showed that the aircraft used in the drills were the same as those unveiled at the 2012 festival. While there is nothing to prove it at this point, it would not be a stretch to assume that North Korea has modified the MM-1 for electronic warfare or electronic espionage.

Two types of rail-type launchers have been seen so far. One is a vehicle launcher, which is a modification of the Zil-130 light truck undercarriage that was featured in the thermals, and the other is a four-wheeled towed launcher, which appears to be a modification of the top of a heavy anti-aircraft gun. Regardless of which launcher is used, the MM-1 is equipped with two launcher auxiliary rockets to aid in the launch cycle, one under the tail of the main wing and one on each side.

The MM-1 drone has been featured frequently in North Korean military parades since 2012. Observations suggest that the MM-1 may have a nose radome, but no other visible antennas.

In addition, there were no noticeable changes to the system's geometry over the years.

The fact that the Zil-130 vehicle launcher is operated by the North Korean People's Army suggests that the MM-1 is an Army system, not an Air Force system.

It is now known that North Korea is capable of maintaining jet engines for its fleet of aircraft and is capable of producing engines for the MiG-19 fighter jet. However, it is unclear whether North Korea is capable of designing and producing a small jet engine like the one used in the MM-1. Therefore, it is likely that the engine used in the MM-1 was acquired from abroad. China appears to be a likely source, but there is no evidence to support this claim.
Joseph S Bermudez Jr
###

For more information, please contact Jihyun Noh at Julie.Noh@ihsmarkit.com.
MM-1 drone.jpg
 
That is not Su-7 as he asserts.
Su-7 is not used by North Korea for decades.

Su-7 is still in use by NK. They can be seen on airfields, obviously being moved around and serviced.

He mentions higher quality images and date.
Yet provides none to prove own assertion.

I do not have a license to post those images. To obtain the license for a single image would be thousands of dollars. Satellite photography is typically licensed for "internal use", i.e. not to publish. A license that allows publishing is a whole different thing.

If it was Su-7 then wings would be larger.
Along we could have seen large tail fins.
It has different airframe length to width ratio.

Again, the image in the analysis was not orthorectified, etc. which distorts the image. Using correct images gives dimensions that correspond to a first generation Su-7.

Which he asserted against me.

My post was not a personal attack against you. I am disagreeing with the analysis you were referencing.

He says impossible to move jets from factory.
When NK had many jet UAVs on Zil-130 trucks.
Along having cranes to lift fighter jets.
Thus those can be placed on towed trailer.
NK has mobile truck based cranes.
That have lifted solid fuel SLBMs.
Larger than 4650kg heavy 9K720 Iskander.

Not on the roads from the factory to the airfield, no, I do not think it would be doable. The clearances, condition of the road, angles of the turns, etc. are not conducive to the kinds of tasks we are talking about.
 
Su-7 is still in use by NK. They can be seen on airfields, obviously being moved around and serviced.
1680460540465.png
Mig-19
Snapshot from Google Maps 2023.

I do not have a license to post those images. To obtain the license for a single image would be thousands of dollars. Satellite photography is typically licensed for "internal use", i.e. not to publish. A license that allows publishing is a whole different thing.
Tough luck for you, if you can't post those images then all we can do is take your word for it without any evidence to support your claim.

Again, the image in the analysis was not orthorectified, etc. which distorts the image. Using correct images gives dimensions that correspond to a first generation Su-7.
If North Korea was still flying Su-7 then there would have been recent images and videos of Su-7 flying in recent decades, there is none.
Its far more likely to me that what you have seen is Mig-19 that NK still flies and produces replacement parts for such as turbojet engine.

Not on the roads from the factory to the airfield, no, I do not think it would be doable. The clearances, condition of the road, angles of the turns, etc. are not conducive to the kinds of tasks we are talking about.
1680460880791.png
There is more than enough space to maneuver to exist aircraft factory.
1680461107496.png
Along wide enough road to go straight to runway or aircraft parking lot.
 
I do not have a license to post those images. To obtain the license for a single image would be thousands of dollars. Satellite photography is typically licensed for "internal use", i.e. not to publish. A license that allows publishing is a whole different thing.
Tough luck for you, if you can't post those images then all we can do is take your word for it without any evidence to support your claim.
Maybe you can give a link to these images ? :)
 
It is true that the Su-7s are well recognizable on GoogleMap, but for my part, I have never seen them active. While most of the KPAF aircraft were seen during the recent exercises, the Fitters were not present.
Today, it is very likely that it has been withdrawn. :)
On the other hand, if the aircraft seen at the factory is a Su-7, it can be a non-flying one ?
 

The MiG-19 is 41 feet long. The object in question is 55-60 feet long. There are MiG-19s or MiG-17s in the same images parked near the runway, which was mentioned previously. Those are smaller, and very obviously MiG-19s or -17s. The wing sweep on the object does not match the MiG-19 either, as mentioned previously.

Of course, if it is a Su-7 OR a MiG-19, it is still not a UAV as the analysis argues.

Tough luck for you, if you can't post those images then all we can do is take your word for it without any evidence to support your claim.

Yes, I am not going to publish photos I do not have the rights to publish.


There is more than enough space to maneuver to exist aircraft factory.
Along wide enough road to go straight to runway or aircraft parking lot.[/CENTER]

First, those images are of the air base, not the factory. The factory is 6km away.
The roads in the images you posted illustrate my point. They are clearly in disrepair, have sharp turns, etc. You are not moving brand new, fragile fighter sized aircraft over them without breaking something.

The roads from the factory to the air base are also in disrepair, have sharp turns, etc. and portions of the road do not have enough clearance to move an assembled fighter sized aircraft. The facilities at the air base are spartan enough that doing "final assembly" there would be impractical and would impact other activities. They need a few more hangars. They have, like, 3.
 

The MiG-19 is 41 feet long. The object in question is 55-60 feet long. There are MiG-19s or MiG-17s in the same images parked near the runway, which was mentioned previously. Those are smaller, and very obviously MiG-19s or -17s. The wing sweep on the object does not match the MiG-19 either, as mentioned previously.

Of course, if it is a Su-7 OR a MiG-19, it is still not a UAV as the analysis argues.
1680468020899.png Su-7 vs Mig-19 1680468055115.png
1680469096385.png 1680469898281.png
Su-7 are there in 2023 as they were for decades compared to Mig-19 at the airbase/airport.
Yes, I am not going to publish photos I do not have the rights to publish.
Then do not make a claim that you can not back it up with some sort of evidence, again are we supposed to take your word for it?
First, those images are of the air base, not the factory. The factory is 6km away.
The roads in the images you posted illustrate my point. They are clearly in disrepair, have sharp turns, etc. You are not moving brand new, fragile fighter sized aircraft over them without breaking something.

The roads from the factory to the air base are also in disrepair, have sharp turns, etc. and portions of the road do not have enough clearance to move an assembled fighter sized aircraft. The facilities at the air base are spartan enough that doing "final assembly" there would be impractical and would impact other activities. They need a few more hangars. They have, like, 3.
Found it, I hope you're not confusing shadows of pedestrians on road with pot holes on road not far off from the aircraft factory.
Also Soviet aircraft were designed to work in not so ideal environment/condition of roads and runways unlike western aircraft.
Also since you're American from what I can guess at your profile picture, you're probably thinking of American and not European trucks.
1680471188617.png
Location of both "Su-7" and MALE UAV 39.918117,125.212680
Fn0OdbAWIA8qBfp.jpg
 
Last edited:
Then do not make a claim that you can not back it up with some sort of evidence, again are we supposed to take your word for it?

Anyone is free to subscribe to services like Planet, Skywatch, Maxar, etc. or buy imagery through a third party like Apollo and come to their own conclusions.

In this thread there are claims that North Korea is producing indigenous aircraft, fighters, and MALE UAVs. These are extraordinary claims that are not supported by extraordinary evidence.

The analysis that was linked in this thread concerning MALE UAVs is not supported by the evidence provided, and there are more mundane explanations for the data. It is far more believable that a North Korean airfield has a Su-7 than a UAV longer than 50 feet. That happens to have the same dimensions as an Su-7. It does not help that the analysis has confused the location of the North Korean aerospace factory.

Found it, I hope you're not confusing shadows of pedestrians on road with pot holes on road not far off from the aircraft factory.
Also Soviet aircraft were designed to work in not so ideal environment/condition of roads and runways unlike western aircraft.

Yes, those are the 3 hangars at the air base. Not the factory. The factory is 6km away. The coordinates are in a previous post in this thread.
Soviet aircraft are not built for 4-wheeling off road adventures.

offroad.jpg

The roads from the air base to the factory are in severe disrepair.

Also since you're American from what I can guess at your profile picture, you're probably thinking of American and not European trucks.

I do not understand what you mean by this statement.
 
Anyone is free to subscribe to services like Planet, Skywatch, Maxar, etc. or buy imagery through a third party like Apollo and come to their own conclusions.
Doesn't change fact that you did not provide any evidence for assertion that you have made about there supposedly being Su-7 along supposed higher quality images.

Now you're asking us to spend money to see if you are right or wrong about your assertion about aircraft allegedly being an Su-7.
In this thread there are claims that North Korea is producing indigenous aircraft, fighters, and MALE UAVs. These are extraordinary claims that are not supported by extraordinary evidence.
2013:
thediplomat-2021-03-01-15.jpg
UAV powered by jet engine.

April 2015:
KJU-at-aircraft-factory.png
North Korea is producing Cessna-172 clone.

North Korea is producing aircrafts domestically.
The analysis that was linked in this thread concerning MALE UAVs is not supported by the evidence provided, and there are more mundane explanations for the data. It is far more believable that a North Korean airfield has a Su-7 than a UAV longer than 50 feet. That happens to have the same dimensions as an Su-7. It does not help that the analysis has confused the location of the North Korean aerospace factory.
No one is going to believe you nor should they take your word for it at all on supposed Su-7 is at airbase in present day according to you.

You provide no evidence to support the claim.

April 2017:
Perceived industry capabilities.
Difference between North Korea in mid 2017 by now in mid 2023 is basically night and day when they have long range cruise missiles.

Yes, those are the 3 hangars at the air base. Not the factory. The factory is 6km away. The coordinates are in a previous post in this thread.
How did supposed "Su-7" reach it when you assert roads are at "severe disrepair" while also arguing its not possible to transport aircraft from factory to airbase.
Soviet aircraft are not built for 4-wheeling off road adventures.
Never said that, you just did so in this thread.
The roads from the air base to the factory are in severe disrepair.
Yet both unknown UAV and what you assert as being "Su-7" are there at the air base despite "severe disrepair" of the roads as you assert.

I do not understand what you mean by this statement.
Because you don't know the difference between European and American trucks, former can maneuver far more than latter.

Especially when road corners are sharp.
 
Now you're asking us to spend money to see if you are right or wrong about your assertion about aircraft allegedly being an Su-7.

Actually it is the companies that produce the images that want you to spend money.
I have provided money to the companies to provide me with images. You can too, that is up to you. I do not see how this is difficult to understand...?

North Korea is producing aircrafts domestically.

Are they producing fighters or MALE UAVs?

Never said that, you just did so in this thread.

Previously in the thread:
Also Soviet aircraft were designed to work in not so ideal environment/condition of roads and runways unlike western aircraft.

The roads/runways are not "not so ideal environment/condition", they are basically not roads anymore. This is more than just the potholes the size of people you previously mentioned.

Yet both unknown UAV and what you assert as being "Su-7" are there at the air base despite "severe disrepair" of the roads as you assert.

The Su-7 is at the air base, not the factory. I assume it flew there.
I do not know what unknown UAV you are talking about in addition to the Su-7. I have been saying the "unknown UAV" is the Su-7.


Because you don't know the difference between European and American trucks, former can maneuver far more than latter.

Especially when road corners are sharp.

Trucks, no matter where they are manufactured, cannot violate the laws of physics.
 
Last edited:
While this could be a mock-up/decoy of some sort, there is the tantalizing possibility this COULD be DPRKs long awaited indigenous combat aircaft. They wouldn't have developed those AAMs we saw previously in a vacuum.

IF so, it is quite small, about JF-17/MiG-21 size, not unexpected as they need something modern but cheap and in numbers to rejuvenate their air force.

This was posted by Sahureka2 at defence.pk
 

Attachments

  • FvOvTr_XsAIUvvN.jpg
    FvOvTr_XsAIUvvN.jpg
    522.9 KB · Views: 46
While this could be a mock-up/decoy of some sort, there is the tantalizing possibility this COULD be DPRKs long awaited indigenous combat aircaft. They wouldn't have developed those AAMs we saw previously in a vacuum.

IF so, it is quite small, about JF-17/MiG-21 size, not unexpected as they need something modern but cheap and in numbers to rejuvenate their air force.

This was posted by Sahureka2 at defence.pk
It is strange, because why this aircraft would be parked with Su-25 without wingtips. The Frogfoot seem to be used as a spare parts reserve.
Maybe it's a partially dismantled Fulcrum.
Or maybe an unsuccessful prototype that was abandoned there.
In any case, this is really interesting and I'm looking forward to seeing more !
 
what do you think,
1) Faux Wood/Plywood Plane
2) a new drone
3) a new advanced trainer aircraft
4) a new single-engine light combat aircraft

PS
it has much smaller dimensions than the Mig-29 that is present in the image

NK.jpg


NK-2.png
 
Probably much heavier than MiG-21 if actual aircraft since wide enough for 2 engines.
 
PsyOps mockup made to mess with the heads of Western intelligence agencies

Edit: that's my guess, not saying that's definitively what it is, though given what we know of NK's aircraft industry, it seems the most likely option
 
We know they are capable of producing RD-9 turbojet engine, maybe since 1980s.
We know they have produced jet powered unmanned aerial vehicles since 2010s.
We know they produce miniature low bypass turbofan for land attack cruise missiles.
 
At the moment everything is possible, from the mock-up to deceive the prying eyes of opponents, as well as a +/- size drone of the Turk Bayraktar “KIZILELM , but it is also possible that it is a new (or prototype) of an aircraft advanced trainer aircraft with secondary combat capabilities or even a light combat aircraft. Recall that North Korea desperately needs to withdraw most of its air fleet.
The biggest mistake that is made with the DPRK is underestimating its capabilities, then with the facts they have denied everyone.

Let's take for a moment the hypothesis of the new aircraft:
To date, the DPRK is subject to UN sanctions and embargoes on all types of armaments, therefore no one, not even its newfound great neighboring friends, would supply new, advanced and known combat aircraft, with the exception of some Mig-21/F7 or Mig- 29 - SU-25 which could be camouflaged with others already in service.
On the other hand, any technical and planning help is different.
Therefore, if the DPRK wants to maintain a minimum manned air force, within a few years it must create the conditions to achieve something internally.

PS
and sorry if I went long in my answer

looking at satellite photos, some have also noticed structural differences in the SU-25s, for example some have wings with a very low angle of inclination that are almost straight. and here again the assumptions are different from being fake aircraft as well as a simplified North Korean variant of the SU-25.
What is certain, these images have aroused enormous curiosity.

I wish a good day to all users
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom