Wow, for such love for Koreans you know amazingly little about the war.
I repeat the original poster's question: "In which proprotions?".
South Korean Navy
- Thread starter fylr71
- Start date
Inchon involved about 8,000 ROK troops, all conscripts - out of 75,000 total in the overall Inchon operations.
These were incorporated in the US 7th ID, and formed about a third of that division.
7th ID landed on 9/18 - after the 1st and 5th Marines secured Red, Green and Blue Beach on 9/15 - and was used to reinforce the beachhead, primarily southeast of Blue Beach. In the week after that is was used to secure the flanks of 1st MarDiv on its way to Seoul.
As for ships - if anyone can give a rundown of the 320 ships involved in Joint Task Force Seven, i'll be rather impressed.
Hate Koreans? Only in your mind. Point to one word in any of my posts which indicates even a mild dislike of Koreans, & I'll quit this forum forever. BTW, I expect to be here a long time.
Now as for the substance: the South Korean army (what was left of it after the invasion by the North) was fully engaged on the Pusan perimeter, except for newly raised & perhaps not fully trained troops. Withdrawing Korean forces from there for the landings would seem to be a perverse thing to do from a purely military standpoint, & using raw troops in such an operation obviously risky, which no doubt was why the Korean troops (new recruits, from what Kato says) were among the reinforcing units, rather than the initial assault. But doing the Koreans the courtesy of including them as soon as possible was almost certainly good for their pride, both national & military. Not an insult to Koreans to say so, at all.
Secondly, I fail to see the point of your statement "Inchon invasion occurred after the initial invasion by the North that devastated the South Korean army.". as this is almost exactly what I said in post no. 275. - "landings at Inchon, behind N. Korean lines, were on S. Korean territory seized by N. Korea when it invaded the south". If you read that in context, you'll see that I was correcting someone who thought S. Korea had invaded the North & seized territory. Hatred? Hmmmm.
BTW, I believe the inclusion of Korean troops in US units was a response to the near destruction of the S. Korean army. Putting new recruits into existing American units was faster than raising new Korean units.
That, plus the 7th ID was seriously understrength - about half regular combat manpower in August still, since men from 7th ID were drawn to augment losses in other 8th Army units.
S. Korea to Ink Subs-for-Aircraft Deal With Indonesia
I would have thought that two subs would have a higher value the eight Indonesian-built advanced maritime patrol aircraft? Does this sound right?
S. Korea to Ink Subs-for-Aircraft Deal With Indonesia
By Jung Sung-ki
Staff Reporter
South Korea is nearing a $1-billion deal with Indonesia to trade two of its 1,300-ton attack submarines and related technology for eight Indonesian-built advanced maritime patrol aircraft, a military source said Monday.
Arms procurement officials from the two nations, which forged a ``strategic partnership'' in December 2006, will meet next week in Indonesia to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on the proposed deal, the source said.
``The two sides have virtually finalized the deal, as Indonesia accepted our final proposal on June 12 when its vice defense chief was visiting,'' the source privy to the deal told The Korea Times on condition of anonymity.
``As long as there are no other developments, the two sides will sign an MOU during the meeting to implement the project,'' he said.
Unless the MOU is signed during the working-level talks, Defense Minister Lee Sang-hee will address the issue with his Indonesian counterpart when he visits Jakarta this month, he said.
Russia is also competing to sell its submarines to Indonesia by offering a package of weapons systems, including attack and transport helicopters, and armored vehicles, along with cash, he noted.
Under the ``counter-purchase mechanism,'' the source said, South Korea will export two Type-209 Changbogo-class submarines, built by Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering in technical cooperation with Germany's Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft (HDW), and transfer related technology to Indonesia.
The diesel/electric propulsion sub, measuring 56 meters in length and 5.5 meters in width, can submerge to a depth up to 250 meters and has an underwater endurance of some 15 days. It has a surface speed of 11 knots and can cruise submerged at a speed of 22 knots. The sub can carry up to 33 sailors.
The Korean Navy operates nine Type-209 submarines armed with torpedoes and submarine-to-surface missiles. The per-unit price is more than $200 million.
In return, Indonesia's arms manufacturer PT Dirgantara Indonesia (PT DI) will deliver eight CN-235 aircraft for maritime patrol operations to Korea as part of offest contracts , the source said, adding the Korea Coast Guard will operate the aircraft.
The CN-235 is a medium-range twin-turbo-prop airplane, jointly developed by Indonesia and Spain, and is widely used by a number of foreign operators, such as the U.S. Coast Guard, Malaysia, Thailand and the United Arab Emirates for maritime patrol, surveillance and troop transport.
The aircraft has a top cruising speed of 509 km/h and can operate at an altitude of 9,145m. It has a range of 5,000 km with maximum fuel and 2870 km with a 4,000-kg payload. A variant for maritime patrol costs some $25 million, said the source.
Korea purchased eight CN-235s for VIP and transport units in the early 2000s in a similar trade deal with Indonesia, which bought a squadron of Korea's indigenous KT-1 Woongbi basic trainer jets and hundreds of military vehicles. The deal was worth $150 million.
The envisaged subs-for-aircraft deal is expected to help boost Korea's defense industry further by resuscitating the production line for Changbogo-class submarines, another source said.
``I believe the deal would be mutually beneficial,'' he said. ``For Korea's part, the submarine exports would not only help raise the low operational capacity of the country's shipbuilders in the future, but also offer more chances to get more submarine contracts from Indonesia and other nations.''
In a move to boost bilateral cooperation in the defense industry, Former President Roh Moo-hyun and his Indonesian counterpart, Susilo Bambang Yodhoyono, issued a joint declaration on “strategic partnership relationship” during a summit in December 2006.
The two leaders agreed to improve cooperation on defense-related technology transfer and joint development.
Last December, South Korea’s rolling stock maker Rotem agreed with Indonesia’s PT.PINDAD on the joint development and production of six-wheel-drive armored vehicles.
[email protected]
Link
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/06/205_26758.html
I would have thought that two subs would have a higher value the eight Indonesian-built advanced maritime patrol aircraft? Does this sound right?
S. Korea to Ink Subs-for-Aircraft Deal With Indonesia
By Jung Sung-ki
Staff Reporter
South Korea is nearing a $1-billion deal with Indonesia to trade two of its 1,300-ton attack submarines and related technology for eight Indonesian-built advanced maritime patrol aircraft, a military source said Monday.
Arms procurement officials from the two nations, which forged a ``strategic partnership'' in December 2006, will meet next week in Indonesia to sign a memorandum of understanding (MOU) on the proposed deal, the source said.
``The two sides have virtually finalized the deal, as Indonesia accepted our final proposal on June 12 when its vice defense chief was visiting,'' the source privy to the deal told The Korea Times on condition of anonymity.
``As long as there are no other developments, the two sides will sign an MOU during the meeting to implement the project,'' he said.
Unless the MOU is signed during the working-level talks, Defense Minister Lee Sang-hee will address the issue with his Indonesian counterpart when he visits Jakarta this month, he said.
Russia is also competing to sell its submarines to Indonesia by offering a package of weapons systems, including attack and transport helicopters, and armored vehicles, along with cash, he noted.
Under the ``counter-purchase mechanism,'' the source said, South Korea will export two Type-209 Changbogo-class submarines, built by Daewoo Shipbuilding & Marine Engineering in technical cooperation with Germany's Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft (HDW), and transfer related technology to Indonesia.
The diesel/electric propulsion sub, measuring 56 meters in length and 5.5 meters in width, can submerge to a depth up to 250 meters and has an underwater endurance of some 15 days. It has a surface speed of 11 knots and can cruise submerged at a speed of 22 knots. The sub can carry up to 33 sailors.
The Korean Navy operates nine Type-209 submarines armed with torpedoes and submarine-to-surface missiles. The per-unit price is more than $200 million.
In return, Indonesia's arms manufacturer PT Dirgantara Indonesia (PT DI) will deliver eight CN-235 aircraft for maritime patrol operations to Korea as part of offest contracts , the source said, adding the Korea Coast Guard will operate the aircraft.
The CN-235 is a medium-range twin-turbo-prop airplane, jointly developed by Indonesia and Spain, and is widely used by a number of foreign operators, such as the U.S. Coast Guard, Malaysia, Thailand and the United Arab Emirates for maritime patrol, surveillance and troop transport.
The aircraft has a top cruising speed of 509 km/h and can operate at an altitude of 9,145m. It has a range of 5,000 km with maximum fuel and 2870 km with a 4,000-kg payload. A variant for maritime patrol costs some $25 million, said the source.
Korea purchased eight CN-235s for VIP and transport units in the early 2000s in a similar trade deal with Indonesia, which bought a squadron of Korea's indigenous KT-1 Woongbi basic trainer jets and hundreds of military vehicles. The deal was worth $150 million.
The envisaged subs-for-aircraft deal is expected to help boost Korea's defense industry further by resuscitating the production line for Changbogo-class submarines, another source said.
``I believe the deal would be mutually beneficial,'' he said. ``For Korea's part, the submarine exports would not only help raise the low operational capacity of the country's shipbuilders in the future, but also offer more chances to get more submarine contracts from Indonesia and other nations.''
In a move to boost bilateral cooperation in the defense industry, Former President Roh Moo-hyun and his Indonesian counterpart, Susilo Bambang Yodhoyono, issued a joint declaration on “strategic partnership relationship” during a summit in December 2006.
The two leaders agreed to improve cooperation on defense-related technology transfer and joint development.
Last December, South Korea’s rolling stock maker Rotem agreed with Indonesia’s PT.PINDAD on the joint development and production of six-wheel-drive armored vehicles.
[email protected]
Link
http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/06/205_26758.html
Some severe thread necromancy here, for which I can only apologise. But it's the most suitable location for this
AgustaWestland has secured it's first export customer for the Wildcat, the customer being the South Korean Navy
AgustaWestland Wins First Wildcat Export Deal With South Korea - Bloomberg
Either way, I'm rather surprised. I seem to recall there being reports around last year that the Wildcat had been knocked out in favour of the MH-60R some time ago?
According to the link, the Wildcat come out on top on cost and operational sustainability as well as "other contractual agreements". Although the MH-60R did come out on top in terms of interoperability.
AgustaWestland has secured it's first export customer for the Wildcat, the customer being the South Korean Navy
AgustaWestland Wins First Wildcat Export Deal With South Korea - Bloomberg
8 seems incredibly low, but according to the link South Korea already has ~25 Lynx which - IIRC - the last few were delivered in 2000 or there abouts?
Either way, I'm rather surprised. I seem to recall there being reports around last year that the Wildcat had been knocked out in favour of the MH-60R some time ago?
According to the link, the Wildcat come out on top on cost and operational sustainability as well as "other contractual agreements". Although the MH-60R did come out on top in terms of interoperability.
Hopefully, there's already rumours circulating that it's pretty much a backhander for recent UK contracts to South Korea.
But these Wildcats are getting dipping sonar, apparently. So it'll already be more ASW capable than any in RN service, but I still can't say i'm not surprised they didn't pick the MH-60R.
But these Wildcats are getting dipping sonar, apparently. So it'll already be more ASW capable than any in RN service, but I still can't say i'm not surprised they didn't pick the MH-60R.
Depends on how old the ROKN Lynxs are. I could be wrong but I'm sure they're a bit 'younger' than the RN ones and have probably more hours left on their airframes.
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20100420/DEFSECT01/4200303/South-Korean-Navy-Grounds-Lynx-Helos
I would imagine that given the size of the Lynx, that fitting a dipping sonar and its associated equipment would take up most of the cabin space. Another possible export customer for the Wildcat is Malaysia - which is very happy with its 6 Super Lynxs and have deployed them in the Gulf of Aden - but there's competition from Eurocopter which is offering an ASW configured Cougar. I have absolutely no idea how true this is but I've been told that sufficient power supply is a problem in fitting a dipping sonar to the Super Lynx.
ROK have approved plans to buy 20 MPA.
S. Korea to buy 20 maritime patrol aircraft | YONHAP NEWS
India got 8 P-8I for $2.1bn, a standard C130J was $48mn in FY1998 dollars so that'd be out when you include the development of the concept too (unless they want second hand buys) and a C295 MPA wouldn't be any cheaper than that.
It'll be interesting to see what changes first; the budget, the number or the aircraft capability.
S. Korea to buy 20 maritime patrol aircraft | YONHAP NEWS
Surely 20 aircraft for <$900million is unreasonable? That works out at ~$45mn per airframe, I don't think any of them either are or could be available for anywhere near that price.
India got 8 P-8I for $2.1bn, a standard C130J was $48mn in FY1998 dollars so that'd be out when you include the development of the concept too (unless they want second hand buys) and a C295 MPA wouldn't be any cheaper than that.
It'll be interesting to see what changes first; the budget, the number or the aircraft capability.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
The 4 South Korea Coast Guard CN-235 MPA cost USD 100 mio or USD 25 mio each to Procured from IAe/DI.
South Korean coastguard to receive four new CN-235s
Off course the C-295 MPA will be different, however USD 45 mio seems workable, depends offcourse with what they want to put inside.
South Korean coastguard to receive four new CN-235s
Off course the C-295 MPA will be different, however USD 45 mio seems workable, depends offcourse with what they want to put inside.
Sandhi Yudha
Well-Known Member
It will be great if the South-Korean Navy will buy 20 CN235-220MPA's from IPTN/DI.
If they do it, they will definitely get the upgraded version like the one just assembled and tested for TNI-AL (AX2339).
FormerDirtDart
Well-Known Member
South Korea to pursue light carriers?
Defense News is reporting a SK politician (Rep. Chung Hee-soo of the ruling Saenuri Party) revealed information of a feasibility report on a light carrier development program.
- First, modify the second ship of the Dokdo-class LPHs with a ski ramp to operate "short-range or vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) aircraft" (The aircraft type seems confusing, maybe it was a language/translation problem and simply means V/STOL)
- Second, before 2019 build an amphibious assault ship similar to the Juan Carlos-class
- Finally, envisioned is construction of two 30K-ton light carriers, similar to the Italian Cavour, around 2028-to-2036.
S. Korea Envisions Light Aircraft Carrier | Defense News | defensenews.com
Defense News is reporting a SK politician (Rep. Chung Hee-soo of the ruling Saenuri Party) revealed information of a feasibility report on a light carrier development program.
- First, modify the second ship of the Dokdo-class LPHs with a ski ramp to operate "short-range or vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) aircraft" (The aircraft type seems confusing, maybe it was a language/translation problem and simply means V/STOL)
- Second, before 2019 build an amphibious assault ship similar to the Juan Carlos-class
- Finally, envisioned is construction of two 30K-ton light carriers, similar to the Italian Cavour, around 2028-to-2036.
S. Korea Envisions Light Aircraft Carrier | Defense News | defensenews.com
Interesting development, since their fighter comp went south (whittled down to F-15 but decided they wanted a VLO 5th Gen) and they're looking at getting the F-35 again, it's reasonable to see an A/B split fleet.
It's what the F-35B does, it's upgraded the potential of the light carrier. So basically they want a pair of assault ships backed up by a pair of light carriers. Good numbers.
Can't imagine their coatings will be any good for the F35B, it's an LPH so they're not exactly going to have spent the money for the groundwork. Easy enough fix.
It's what the F-35B does, it's upgraded the potential of the light carrier. So basically they want a pair of assault ships backed up by a pair of light carriers. Good numbers.
Can't imagine their coatings will be any good for the F35B, it's an LPH so they're not exactly going to have spent the money for the groundwork. Easy enough fix.
FormerDirtDart
Well-Known Member
IMO the modified "Dokdo" will obviously be a learning/teaching platform, as it doesn't appear to have the space/capability operate V/STOL a/c for prolonged periods.
The article also make the conclusion that given the operational timelines for the first two ships, that SK will likely try to acquire some used VTOL a/c from the US, UK or Spain. Which pretty much spells out "Harrier", so the modified "Dokdo" deck surface likely isn't seen as an initial problem.
Specifically from the article:
"The flight surface of the landing ship is already sprayed with urethane, which can withstand the heat created by the aircraft during operations."
Probably, to get them up and developing some kind of experience.
Won't have much luck getting some STOVL aircraft from the UK as we haven't got any anymore. As a matter of fact, we've not got any STOVL aircraft we'll be handing over.
Harrier would at best be a stopgap measure. If they're not happy with the performance of the F-15 vis-a-vis VLO then i'd doubt some shagged out Harriers would be much good. Even then, would buying burned out Harriers, supporting them and getting trained on them be of much use? It'll probably be a waste of funds to do so.
If they're serious about getting back into that arena then they'd be much better off trying to work themselves into the current training programs for pilots & maintainers in the US on the B or getting handlers onto some USMC ships, like what the UK is doing.
May as well take advantage of the US' experience than trying to start from step 1 yourself. But as it says, they're looking to deploy the modded ship by 2019 then it'll probably be Harrier. IIRC ROK F-35 batches (if ordered) would be arriving FY2018, so a bit too close.
At least, that's my opinion.
Won't have much luck getting some STOVL aircraft from the UK as we haven't got any anymore. As a matter of fact, we've not got any STOVL aircraft we'll be handing over.
Harrier would at best be a stopgap measure. If they're not happy with the performance of the F-15 vis-a-vis VLO then i'd doubt some shagged out Harriers would be much good. Even then, would buying burned out Harriers, supporting them and getting trained on them be of much use? It'll probably be a waste of funds to do so.
If they're serious about getting back into that arena then they'd be much better off trying to work themselves into the current training programs for pilots & maintainers in the US on the B or getting handlers onto some USMC ships, like what the UK is doing.
May as well take advantage of the US' experience than trying to start from step 1 yourself. But as it says, they're looking to deploy the modded ship by 2019 then it'll probably be Harrier. IIRC ROK F-35 batches (if ordered) would be arriving FY2018, so a bit too close.
At least, that's my opinion.
I can't see anyone wanting to buy second hand harriers in this day and age - not as a new addition to their fleet. The US won't have any to let go for a while, we've sold ours to the USMC. Spain on the other hand - they may bite - but would SK really want to use Harrier? I'd have thought perhaps stage a fledgling capability with Dodko and then get 24 or so B's for a working fleet of two Cavour style items.
It'd be an interesting shakeup to the region and I suspect it'd tip the Japanese into going down the same route sharpish.
It'd be an interesting shakeup to the region and I suspect it'd tip the Japanese into going down the same route sharpish.
FormerDirtDart
Well-Known Member
Could South Korea decide to build their own VTOL Fighter/Attack airplane?
Theoretically, there does seem that a market could be found for something between aging AV-8Bs and F-35Bs.
Spain will need to replace it's Av-8Bs relatively soon. And, wouldn't a VTOL carrier(s) make sense for Brazil?
And, it does seem the KFX/IFX program is hindered by cost, and the technical abilities of the two countries. Might a F/A VTOL a more accomplishable, less grandiose objective?
Face it, F-35Bs are never going to truly be "affordable".
Theoretically, there does seem that a market could be found for something between aging AV-8Bs and F-35Bs.
Spain will need to replace it's Av-8Bs relatively soon. And, wouldn't a VTOL carrier(s) make sense for Brazil?
And, it does seem the KFX/IFX program is hindered by cost, and the technical abilities of the two countries. Might a F/A VTOL a more accomplishable, less grandiose objective?
Face it, F-35Bs are never going to truly be "affordable".
<blinks>
Sorry, are you suggesting it'd be cheaper to develop a VTOL aircraft than a conventional fighter?
<more blinking>
Send me a rock of what you're inhaling please?
And yeah, F35B will end up being pretty competitive with some lower serial production alternatives - like Rafale and Tiffy.
F35B possibly has the brightest export future of the variants, far more so than the C for instance, because the opportunities it brings are so significant.
In the volumes being considered, a home grown F35B alternative will be stonkingly expensive.