Delta Force

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
23 May 2013
Messages
75
Reaction score
14
I once read that there were rumors that the DPRK would begin domestic production of a MiG-21 type design in the early 1990s, but those projections obviously never came true. They did assemble MiG-29s from parts supplied by the Soviets and other countries throughout the late 1980s and early to mid-1990s.
 
I've read that the North Koreans are heading of ingeniously develop a modified variant of Mig-29 fighter jet.Does anyone heard anything?
 
Jemiba said:
That design (which is shown on http://www.deviantart.com/morelikethis/artists/113164906?view_mode=2, BTW) quite
clearly is the Ye-8, or at least very closely based on it. Starting with a design, that now is about 50 years old may not
be a superb idea to boost the capabilities of the NK aviation industry, I think.

Probably a more reasonable goal though? Also, with upgraded avionics it could still be fairly effective against 4th generation opponents.
 
Avimimus said:
Jemiba said:
That design (which is shown on http://www.deviantart.com/morelikethis/artists/113164906?view_mode=2, BTW) quite
clearly is the Ye-8, or at least very closely based on it. Starting with a design, that now is about 50 years old may not
be a superb idea to boost the capabilities of the NK aviation industry, I think.

Probably a more reasonable goal though? Also, with upgraded avionics it could still be fairly effective against 4th generation opponents.

I think in this context "reasonable" has started to loose some meaning. North Korea clearly had/ has zero chance of producing a domestic viable fighter aircraft. They have little to no domestic aircraft development and/or manufacturing experience or capability. Essembling a handful of MIG29 in kit form proved beyond them (I'm not daming them for this, more than my home country ever did in this field). Building an obscure early sixties aircraft is in absolute terms probably even harder, and that's before you get trying to turn a flying shell into a viable 21st century weapon system.
 
I've read recently that North Korea intends to try to copy Mig-29.

Any more info?
 
I think the paper variant more likely.
 
To build their latest drone, North Korea imported a PAC 750 turbo-prop airframe from New Zealand and installed a fancy auto-pilot.
Pacific Aircraft Company got in trouble for selling an airplane to North Korea, even if the sale went through a third party.

PAC 750 is a very slow airplane best suited to crop dusting or hauling skydivers. A single P&WCPT6A turbo-prop engine does not drive it anywhere near supersonic speeds!
Hah!
Hah!
It has fixed landing gear and a very simply airframe that lacks even the de-icing boots to fly into known icing.
 
Last edited:
I just received this awesome book:

The Armed Forces of North Korea: On the Path of Songun

And the chapter about North Korean air force contains info (and even photos!) about several domestic aircraft projects, such as:

- single-engine propeller attack aircraft from 1970s, apparently a hybrid of Il-10 and Yak-18, maybe one prototype only
- twin-engine propeller attack and/or training aircraft from 1980s, apparently similar to Yak-6, only small series manufactured
- modified MiG-15UTI with a dorsal fuel tank, similar to the MiG-21SMT design
 
I just received this awesome book:

The Armed Forces of North Korea: On the Path of Songun

And the chapter about North Korean air force contains info (and even photos!) about several domestic aircraft projects, such as:

- single-engine propeller attack aircraft from 1970s, apparently a hybrid of Il-10 and Yak-18, maybe one prototype only
- twin-engine propeller attack and/or training aircraft from 1980s, apparently similar to Yak-6, only small series manufactured
- modified MiG-15UTI with a dorsal fuel tank, similar to the MiG-21SMT design
About NK Fulcrums…


There are enough rumours about the supply of the MiG-29 to the DPRK, about the limited licensed production of these aircraft and also about the NK ability to keep these aircraft operational under embargos.

These rumours have a wide range - from a few serviceable pieces to several dozen aircraft, including a certain ability to produce aircraft till now. Apparently, the DPRK has the ability to repair even most components of RD-33 engines.

In any case, as recent parades show, NK technologies are in fact underestimated rather than overestimated… The DPRK modernized Fulcrum's avionics about 10 years ago, including the installation of big MFD in the cockpit:

KPAF_MiG-29.jpg

Source:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5fUrDww5Bc&t=1112s
(21:35)

This video is from 2014 - and in the meantime the DPRK has literally made a technological leap. We may be very surprised in the near future...

(Jinak tě srdečně zdravím. Jirka O. ;))
 
Yes, there are also several paragraphs about MiG-29s.
The book states that they were assembled in the DRPK and deeply modernized, MFD included.
 
I just received this awesome book:

The Armed Forces of North Korea: On the Path of Songun

And the chapter about North Korean air force contains info (and even photos!) about several domestic aircraft projects, such as:

- single-engine propeller attack aircraft from 1970s, apparently a hybrid of Il-10 and Yak-18, maybe one prototype only
- twin-engine propeller attack and/or training aircraft from 1980s, apparently similar to Yak-6, only small series manufactured
- modified MiG-15UTI with a dorsal fuel tank, similar to the MiG-21SMT design
Are there any available pictures or drawings for these aircraft in the west, or are sources for such aircraft completely non-existent? Is any performance data or armament known?
 
Are there any available pictures or drawings for these aircraft in the west, or are sources for such aircraft completely non-existent? Is any performance data or armament known?

I have already tried to google something, but so far no success. In the book, there are several photos of the aircraft mentioned above, also two color profiles by Tom Cooper, and short descriptions and assessments.
 
I just received this awesome book:

The Armed Forces of North Korea: On the Path of Songun

And the chapter about North Korean air force contains info (and even photos!) about several domestic aircraft projects, such as:

- single-engine propeller attack aircraft from 1970s, apparently a hybrid of Il-10 and Yak-18, maybe one prototype only
- twin-engine propeller attack and/or training aircraft from 1980s, apparently similar to Yak-6, only small series manufactured
- modified MiG-15UTI with a dorsal fuel tank, similar to the MiG-21SMT design
About NK Fulcrums…


There are enough rumours about the supply of the MiG-29 to the DPRK, about the limited licensed production of these aircraft and also about the NK ability to keep these aircraft operational under embargos.

These rumours have a wide range - from a few serviceable pieces to several dozen aircraft, including a certain ability to produce aircraft till now. Apparently, the DPRK has the ability to repair even most components of RD-33 engines.

In any case, as recent parades show, NK technologies are in fact underestimated rather than overestimated… The DPRK modernized Fulcrum's avionics about 10 years ago, including the installation of big MFD in the cockpit:

View attachment 651193

Source:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5fUrDww5Bc&t=1112s
(21:35)

This video is from 2014 - and in the meantime the DPRK has literally made a technological leap. We may be very surprised in the near future...

(Jinak tě srdečně zdravím. Jirka O. ;))
Didn't knew about such efforts, probably overshadowed by their nuclear missile program. Even with those avionics improvements, I can't really think of those situations where a few dozen Fulcrums, including those that could have possibly been license produced in NK, doing much work in case an all-out war breaks out. Probably the reason these improvements were not widely known as well.
 
These planes are from the 70's - 80's, technologically much older.
But 40 years have passed since then and the development in the DPRK has certainly not stopped. It certainly has adequate dynamics.
It would be very interesting to know what is current level the DPRK aviation industry, when we look at the technological level of new "M-2020" tanks, "Kimskander" missile systems etc.
 
They have consistently shown they are smart enough to direct their defence spending towards things that matter: Making an invasion way too an expensive and difficult a prospect for anyone.

Primarily, the ability to deliver a nuclear payload via missile to the homeground of anyone contemplating that. It also forces a political dynamic to matters.
The ability of their ground forces to make it very difficult and bloody for an invasion.
The ability of their navy to try and influence matters via a varied submarine force.

The rest, such as up-to-date fighter jets and more, bigger vessels for the surface fleet, is a nice-to-have, but not essential to this deterrence doctrine. No point in competing in an arena that is so costly for little positive outcome. So, funding will likely continue for nukes, missiles, ground forces, and special forces primarily.
I have said it before... it's a smart, practical doctrine from their perspective.

From an aviation perspective, about the only sensible indigenous project might be in the field of a helicopter, a light primary trainer, and perhaps a dual trainer/light attack jet aircraft at the upper end...assuming they can't purchase overseas.
The world seems to be retreating into camps or blocs, so I reckon when the time comes to warm over the interceptors or higher end combat jets, and bigger ticket items, they will simply look next door to their neighbours.

Edit: Having said that, the MFD on the Mig-29 is interesting. Thanks, I hadn't picked that up before.
I agree that NK is constantly underestimated in many areas.
It's partly a result of the low standard of speculative journalism churned out combined with unverified rumour mongering, and partly a result of disinformation here in the Western media, that goes hand in hand with NK's own disinformation.
 
Last edited:
North Korea bought SU-25K in 1980s and there is no information they bought SU-25T nor SM nor any upgrade package yet we saw recently their SU-25 with laser designator along Kh-25L and Kh-29L, also if I remember correctly Kh-25L were also next to Mig-29s.

Some North Korean IL-28/H-5 were modified to launch Kh-35 cruise missiles.

It would not be surprising if Mig-29 in North Korean service was modified to do it too.

North Korea is known to be capable of producing RD-9 turbojet engine used on Mig-19 and remember that initial prototypes of SU-25 were powered by RD-9 then production models were by R-13 turbojet that was also used on Mig-21, just without afterburner.

North Korea managed to produce RD-250 rocket engine and improve it by increasing lifetime to 190 seconds that is 50% increase along gimballed nozzles like its RD-180.

70 ton Hwasong-15 intercontinental ballistic missile that by itself could put into low earth orbit 100 kilogram satellite as 120 ton Unha-3 space launch vehicle.

They successfuly tested and produced own equivalent of S-300 PMU1 / PMU2 with 30N6E phased electronically scanned array radar and 48N6 surface to air missile.

Honestly I would not be surprised if they could produce Mig-25 with Mig-31 avionics.
 
Last edited:
North Korea bought SU-25K in 1980s and there is no information they bought SU-25T nor SM nor any upgrade package yet we saw recently their SU-25 with laser designator along Kh-25L and Kh-29L, also if I remember correctly Kh-25L were also next to Mig-29s.

Some North Korean IL-28/H-5 were modified to launch Kh-35 cruise missiles.

It would not be surprising if Mig-29 in North Korean service was modified to do it too.

North Korea is known to be capable of producing RD-9 turbojet engine used on Mig-19 and remember that initial prototypes of SU-25 were powered by RD-9 then production models were by R-13 turbojet that was also used on Mig-21, just without afterburner.

North Korea managed to produce RD-250 rocket engine and improve it by increasing lifetime to 190 seconds that is 50% increase along gimballed nozzles like its RD-180.

70 ton Hwasong-15 intercontinental ballistic missile that by itself could put into low earth orbit 100 kilogram satellite as 120 ton Unha-3 space launch vehicle.

They successfuly tested and produced owned equivalent to S-300 PMU1 / PMU2 with 30N6E phased electronically scanned array radar and 48N6 surface to air missile.

Honestly I would not be surprised if they could produce Mig-25 with Mig-31 avionics.
I think that they just could make fighters like the chinese J-8……
(0v0)
 
To build their latest drone, North Korea imported a PAC 750 turbo-prop airframe from new Zealand and installed a fancy auto-pilot.
Pacific Aircraft Company got in trouble for selling an airplane to North Korea, even if the sale went through a third party.

PAC 750 is a few slow airplane best suited to crop dusting or hauling skydivers. A single P&WCPT6A turbo-prop engine does not drive it anywhere near supersonic speeds!
Hah!
Hah!
It has fixed landing gear and a very simply airframe that lacks even the de-icing boots to fly into known icing.
There is absolutely no source and North Korea produces domestic variants An-2s equipped with terrain following radar implemented in some, not to mention large suicide drones in mid 2010s. It is known that they at least in terms of large jet engines that they produce RD-9 as used on Mig-19.

This year they tested land attack cruise missile with range of 1500 kilometers while it did maneuvers, longer range than any Iranian cruise missile and comparable to Chinese though former may provide technical detail while later would never.

If North Korea wanted to produce a decent fighter jet, they could.

Would it make sense for them in current situation? No.

Maybe after they start producing solid fuel ICBMs.
 
“If North Korea wanted to produce a decent fighter jet, they could.”

Comes down to what would be considered “decent”. Zero evidence that they could produce anything remotely competitive versus contemporary fighter aircraft being produced elsewhere. And they very clearly have very different priorities.
 
North Korea literally produces more modern PESA radar compared to one in initial production model of Mig-31 that they could choose to simply upgrade electronics and radars of Mig-21/J-7 that would give comparable or greater radar range than Mig-29A.

Considering that there are commonalities in technology between turbopumps for rocket engines and jet engines for aircrafts thus with performance of North Korean improved RD-250 that they are capable of producing R-25 turbojet that is used on venerable Mig-21Bis and two R-25s would be enough to lift Mig-29 and go Mach 2.

Or go with something like diabolical Mig-23 with single huge turbojet or two of those and go for Mig-25 kinetic performance and have radar equivalent to one in Mig-31.

Then they can mount KN-23 on it and launch 200 to 300 kiloton fuck you at 1500-2000 kilometers away American carrier group in case of total war and nuclear apocalypse.

But will they invest that? No.

They invest in ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and surface to air missiles along some conventional forces where it matters the most and is most cost effective detterence.
This is what supergaleb considers a "decent" fighter: a 1960s airframe and engine with a PESA radar. I.e. something that's not going to stand up well against Korean and American F-15s, F-16s, F-35s, and KF-21s, nor Chinese Flankers and J-10s.
 
“If North Korea wanted to produce a decent fighter jet, they could.”

Comes down to what would be considered “decent”. Zero evidence that they could produce anything remotely competitive versus contemporary fighter aircraft being produced elsewhere. And they very clearly have very different priorities.
I have clearly stated that they have very different priorities nor have I suggested that they should do it now which you could see in my post if you bothered to re-read what I have written since your reply doesn't make sense unless you didn't understood meaning of what I wrote.

You know what it comes down when you say that there is zero evidence? Ignoring inconvenient facts about their industry and achievements as production of ground radars is not entirely separate from radars used in fighter jets, production of surface to air missiles it not entirely separate from production of air to air missiles, production of turbopumps for rocket engines is not entirely separate from jet engines for aircrafts as all of them have some commonalities in design, technology and manufacturing that are usable for both.

Be it their SAM equivalent of S-300 PMU1 or PMU2...

Be it their equivalent of RD-250 used on their ICBMs...

Be it their SRBM equivalent of 9K720 or Hyunmoo-2...

Wholly separately they have worth nothing for fighter jet program...

But if you combine knowledge that is usable then you have something to work with...

If someone told you in 2011 that North Korea in ten years would produce all of three equivalents I mention, you would call them crazy.

Do not underestimate capability of North Korean scientific base and heavy industry nor science and technology behind those three examples I gave of systems they produced as that is some evidence whenever you like it or not when you go on about zero evidence.

This is what supergaleb considers a "decent" fighter: a 1960s airframe and engine with a PESA radar. I.e. something that's not going to stand up well against Korean and American F-15s, F-16s, F-35s, and KF-21s, nor Chinese Flankers and J-10s.

Vast majority if not all of aerial combat between fighter jets will be BVR and not neck to neck dogfights like its 1950s all over again thus maneuvering is not as critical as having competent radar and carrying capacity to carry a heavy air to air missile.

Vast majority of F-16's have pulse-doppler radar, none PESA and only very few if any have AESA.

North Korea recently tested a new SAM system with surface to air missile seemingly taking cues from 9M96E2 used in S-350 with booster stage added to extend range to or beyond 48N6 equivalent missile that their equivalent S-300 PMU1/PMU2 SAM complex.
 
The thing about rocket science... it's not brain surgery....:cool:

Seriously though, these things are only common at the most basic levels. If they tried very hard they might be able to make better MiG-21s, but the cost and effort would be out of all proportion to the reward. More sensible to stick to rockets.
 
Vast majority if not all of aerial combat between fighter jets will be BVR and not neck to neck dogfights like its 1950s all over again thus maneuvering is not as critical as having competent radar and carrying capacity to carry a heavy air to air missile.

Vast majority of F-16's have pulse-doppler radar, none PESA and only very few if any have AESA.

North Korea recently tested a new SAM system with surface to air missile seemingly taking cues from 9M96E2 used in S-350 with booster stage added to extend range to or beyond 48N6 equivalent missile that their equivalent S-300 PMU1/PMU2 SAM complex.
Maneuvering is most certainly still an important part of air combat, even if the situational awareness of a better radar is the most important factor. Maneuver, after all, dramatically affects the accuracy of air to air missiles on both the shooter and target ends, even in BVR combat. Arguably especially in BVR combat, when you're very often lobbing missiles with short burns and which are maneuvering unpowered when they reach the range of their seeker head.

Not to mention one of the few post-1991 examples of an aerial shootdown we have, the Su-22 shootdown over Syria a few years back, happened in WVR. I would submit that putting all of your eggs in the BVR basket is unwise.

As far as the F-16, you're correct. Which is why the USAF is replacing the F-16 with the F-35 as fast as they can build the latter, and why the Koreans are spending the equivalent of over a billion dollars upgrading 133 out of their 167 F-16s with the AESA APG-83, among other things. Not to mention acquiring F-35s themselves, and the AESA-equipped KF-21.
 
I've read recently that North Korea intends to try to copy Mig-29.

Any more info?
No,It just could be a fighter with double RD-93 engine.and then,they might make their fighter to be a hodgepodge of west korean second-generation fighter……View attachment 665632View attachment 665640View attachment 665641View attachment 665642View attachment 665633View attachment 665634View attachment 665635View attachment 665636View attachment 665637View attachment 665638View attachment 665639
If North Korea have some stealth technology,I think that their fighter perhaps have the air inter from LTS、the rear of fuselage from ATD-X and the movable leading edge of the strake wing from Su-57……
 
I don't think jet engines are as easy as you think. It seems China, which is otherwise equal to other major powers in technology has trouble producing a jet engine for fighters.
 
Yes.
During more than 30 years of use and self-sufficient service, they had to know literally "every screw" of RD-33. And during the last LRCM test they officially confirmed that the turbofan technology itself is no stranger to them at all ...
 
I am sure they know every single detail about dimensions, weight and purpose of each component of RD-33 while question is do they have metallurgy and machinery capable to achieve comparable or better quality than RD-33 used in Mig-29s as RD-33 is much larger than mini-turbofans than something like R95-300/MS-400 or TRD-50.
 
Last edited:
The thing about rocket science... it's not brain surgery....:cool:

Seriously though, these things are only common at the most basic levels. If they tried very hard they might be able to make better MiG-21s, but the cost and effort would be out of all proportion to the reward. More sensible to stick to rockets.
Any progress even at most basic level of commonality is progress nonetheless applicable to aircraft design, development and production.

It is more sensible for them to stick with rockets and missiles to be able to retaliate effectively and at some point they will reach to degree where it doesn't make sense anymore to just maintain current pace of development of one part of military technology without allocating some resources to another as at that point dividends in terms of improving military capabilities would be greater there.

Anyone saying for example as you do that they might be able to make a better Mig-21 are clearly ignoring facts about achievements that North Korea achieved in technologies applicable to design, development and production of aircrafts along what they have in inventory from what they can learn from as they have SU-25 and Mig-29 for over 30 years to analyze components.

It is only matter of priorities and they have all the bits and pieces of technology they mastered along examples of components to reverse engineer and master more advanced degree of some technologies thus with cooperation between all relevant industries they could make something like JF-17 that would be just right amount of decent performance and cost for aerial territorial air defense role.

Though to have some degree of possibility to counter anything throw at them and for it to developed in short notice then something like Mig-25 in size and complexity of airframe with nothing fancy radar wise which would be PESA.
Maneuvering is most certainly still an important part of air combat, even if the situational awareness of a better radar is the most important factor. Maneuver, after all, dramatically affects the accuracy of air to air missiles on both the shooter and target ends, even in BVR combat. Arguably especially in BVR combat, when you're very often lobbing missiles with short burns and which are maneuvering unpowered when they reach the range of their seeker head.

Not to mention one of the few post-1991 examples of an aerial shootdown we have, the Su-22 shootdown over Syria a few years back, happened in WVR. I would submit that putting all of your eggs in the BVR basket is unwise.

As far as the F-16, you're correct. Which is why the USAF is replacing the F-16 with the F-35 as fast as they can build the latter, and why the Koreans are spending the equivalent of over a billion dollars upgrading 133 out of their 167 F-16s with the AESA APG-83, among other things. Not to mention acquiring F-35s themselves, and the AESA-equipped KF-21.
First paragraph of your reply reads to me as if I said that maneuverability doesn't matter for air to air missile when I clearly stated it involves the aircraft and by maneuverability I clearly meant turning ability when I mentioned Mig-25 which is like F-4 kind of situation.

What matters most in modern day is capability of radar seeker and vast majority of air to air missile that are radar guided are passive and not active as they rely on instructions from aircraft that launched it along maybe whatever signal bounces from target aircraft.
If North Korea have some stealth technology,I think that their fighter perhaps have the air inter from LTS、the rear of fuselage from ATD-X and the movable leading edge of the strake wing from Su-57……
North Korea is known to have developed in the past some paint / coating that reduces radar cross section and they actively pursue aramid fibers aka kevlar as way to reduce weight and increase strength of their solid fuel rocket motors for ballistic missiles hence why Pukguksong-3 identical in dimensions involving diameter and length of each stage to Pukguksong-2 has demonstrated over 50 percent increase of range thus we can assume that they could implement some components utilizing aramid where it makes sense for aircraft.
I don't think jet engines are as easy as you think. It seems China, which is otherwise equal to other major powers in technology has trouble producing a jet engine for fighters.
Do not generalize, it depends on complexity if its turbojet or turbofan while also size of it and staging...

WS-10 and WS-20 are as large and complex as Russian and American counterparts while there is a reason why French Rafale and Typhoon of European Union have two smaller jet engines than single large one. China is focusing on WS-10 as they decided that both single and two engine fighter jets are going to be powered by one model with some variants here and there.

That is most smart thing one can do which China did by standardizing.

North Korea could focus on trying to reverse engineer RD-33 turbofan because then they could maintain Mig-29 and it can fit inside Su-25 and Mig-21 thus decrease weight and fuel consumption of aircraft while increase range and speed thus flight time.
 
Vast majority if not all of aerial combat between fighter jets will be BVR and not neck to neck dogfights
Yeah, you might want to ask both the USAF and Russian Air Force how well that line of thinking has worked for them. Designers have thought that air to air combat would be purely BVR for decades. Guess what? Almost every single A2A engagement we've had since missiles were introduced was WVR.
 
Yeah, you might want to ask both the USAF and Russian Air Force how well that line of thinking has worked for them. Designers have thought that air to air combat would be purely BVR for decades. Guess what? Almost every single A2A engagement we've had since missiles were introduced was WVR.
Sure, but nowadays IFFs and GPS are more reliable and accurate that you can distinguish between friend or foe and only reason why there was WVR with F-15 and Syrian Su-22 was that former went to threaten latter and when that didn't work out then it tried to engage with heat seeker that Su-22 evaded and then lastly with radar guided missile.
 
Sure, but nowadays IFFs and GPS are more reliable and accurate that you can distinguish between friend or foe and only reason why there was WVR with F-15 and Syrian Su-22 was that former went to threaten latter and when that didn't work out then it tried to engage with heat seeker that Su-22 evaded and then lastly with radar guided missile.
You do know the American fighter involved was a Super Hornet and not an Eagle, right? Also that to say that the Su-22 "evaded" the X-Sidewinder fired at it is perhaps not the best descriptor of a ground attack aircraft that popped off flares and saw the missile go stupid.

We the public don't actually know why the AIM-9X failed. There's theories that it's the old "dirty Russian flare" problem of the AIM-9P come back to haunt the Navy. There's also theories it just... broke. The only people who know are Raytheon and the Navy.
 
It really doesn't matter what American fighter jet is as AIM-9X is a heat seeker and not radar guided thus does not rely on aircraft that launched it for instructions to the target that it is being launched at which in this case is fighter jet of Soviet / Russian design.

Anyway we really went off-topic.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom