South Korean Navy

[swerve]

In the event of war there isn't a doubt in my mind that China wouldn't be an ally to NK. History has shown(recent and old) that they are diplomatically close.

I don't think you meant quite what you said. Double negative.

Your statement assumes that NK, or more precisely Kim, is asking for Chinese aid. Dictatorships work much better when the general population is starving and poor, its been well proven. He has already repeatedly killed several of his ministers who suggested economic reforms and what not.

It assumes nothing. He is asking for Chinese aid, and receiving it. He also ask for (or rather demands) S. Korean, Japanese & US aid, & has received it. Public information.

BTW, N. Korean ministers must be very tough. Most people only need to be killed once.

How do you know China's policy is peaceful? The US government probably has thousands of people watching China for the moment they aren't yet some how you know China's rise will be peaceful. They've repeatedly made claims to Taiwan and Tibet. Whats more is they are communist. You are trying to claim that a socialist government is peaceful? Have you heard of the Tiannamen(sp?) massacre?

Remember Tianmen well. Watched Kate Adie on the TV, reporting on it. What's it got to do with socialism? The Kuomintang massacred a much larger number (maybe 30000) of Taiwanese in 1947. Remind me - what was the KMTs political slant? Apologised for it in 1988. Maybe the Chinese Communist Party will apologise for Tienanmen in 2030.

Taiwan & Tibet are not Korea. Taiwan has had a Chinese majority for at least 500 years, & has been formally part of China for most of the last 400 years. Tibet is more loosely connected, but has been Chinese-ruled for significant periods, & was officially regarded as part of the Chinese empire before the Chinese revolution (the first one, not Maos).

The more I read your post the more you sound like some institutional China man trying to convince me of your horse scatological reference deleted about China.

It's clear that you haven't read many of my posts, or you'd be aware that I struggle to hold down an emotional bias in favour of some of Chinas neighbours. I've mentioned before that one of my partners uncles (dead long before she was born) was a kamikaze, & her ancestors were samurai.

 

[10ringr]

In the event of war there isn't a doubt in my mind that China wouldn't be an ally to NK. History has shown(recent and old) that they are diplomatically close.

Your statement assumes that NK, or more precisely Kim, is asking for Chinese aid. Dictatorships work much better when the general population is starving and poor, its been well proven. He has already repeatedly killed several of his ministers who suggested economic reforms and what not.



It takes much more than removing 10,000 or some odd number of troops to break a military alliance between SK and US. Most of what your saying here sounds like conjecture so I'm not going to bother, but the current SK president is pro-Chinese. I doubt that the SK citizens will elect another pro-Chinese leader with China on the rise.

I'm sure China is all for a peaceful reunification but everyone knows thats not happening.



How do you know China's policy is peaceful? The US government probably has thousands of people watching China for the moment they aren't yet some how you know China's rise will be peaceful. They've repeatedly made claims to Taiwan and Tibet. Whats more is they are communist. You are trying to claim that a socialist government is peaceful? Have you heard of the Tiannamen(sp?) massacre?



What on god's earth are you talking about. USA will always want a presence in the region. They need SK and Japan, who will probably become very important allies once China rises.

The more I read your post the more you sound like some institutional China man trying to convince me of your horse scatological reference deleted about China.

From what I understand is the SK military is very wary of China's growing presence which is one of the positions they used during FTA negotiations.

Mod edit: Kindly self-moderate the language used, one is able to make a point without resorting to vulgarity.
-Preceptor

I've went this round before about China definetely siding with N. Korea. The problem is that you can't confuse these types with the facts. History duzn't convince them because of his limited rather twisted view of it. Most people when the know a little information understand they only know a little these types know a little on a subject and think they know everything. Good luck Ignognito! Hutch

 

[swerve]

I've went this round before about China definetely siding with N. Korea. The problem is that you can't confuse these types with the facts. History duzn't convince them because of his limited rather twisted view of it. Most people when the know a little information understand they only know a little these types know a little on a subject and think they know everything. Good luck Ignognito! Hutch

You remind me of someone I once knew who'd lived in France, & was convinced he knew all there was to know about it. He couldn't accept that the France he knew intimately had ceased to exist in the 40 years since he'd been there. A good source for descriptions of life in France in the 1950s, but not au fait with la vie moderne. I think you may have the same problem. What you "know" was right, when you learned it, but the world has changed.

 

[10ringr]

You remind me of someone I once knew who'd lived in France, & was convinced he knew all there was to know about it. He couldn't accept that the France he knew intimately had ceased to exist in the 40 years since he'd been there. A good source for descriptions of life in France in the 1950s, but not au fait with la vie moderne. I think you may have the same problem. What you "know" was right, when you learned it, but the world has changed.

We had a good demonstration of French integrity when it was found that their opposition was directly related to the fact that they were the ones along with Russia primarily responsible for nuclear energy and the other economic and financial interests that they willingly engaged in despite the fact that Saddam Hussein was a danger. The french have almost never stood their ground and done the right thing. They have always done the expedient thing or the short term gain despite the long term ramifications. Nevermind, they're self interests and snobbery have got them nowhere, nuclear power or not. Hutch

What has this to do with anything? How is it related to what swerve wrote or the thread. It is nothing but an attack on the French; flame bait. Unrelated, out of context, disrespectful.

And this is the second time inside 12 hrs. Is a suspension what you're aiming for?

/GD

 

[contedicavour]

My oh my, the thread is about South Korean Navy...

Ok I'll try to steer the discussion back to topic.

In terms of AAW (tracking capability, illuminators) how do the KDX-II compare with the Aegis-equipped KDX-III ? Having SM-2 aboard but without Aegis - is this really worth it ?

cheers

 

[swerve]

My oh my, the thread is about South Korean Navy...

Ok I'll try to steer the discussion back to topic.
...

cheers

Good idea.

I'm rather interested in the LPX class (Dokdo). I've read that up to four may be procured. Does anyone know what's happening? How many have been ordered?

As built, Dokdo is not suitable for operating STOVL aircraft, but could lead on to a STOVL carrier. Is there any official or semi-official talk along those lines in S. Korea?

Apologies if this has been covered. If so, just point me to it, folks.

 

[contedicavour]

Good idea.

I'm rather interested in the LPX class (Dokdo). I've read that up to four may be procured. Does anyone know what's happening? How many have been ordered?

As built, Dokdo is not suitable for operating STOVL aircraft, but could lead on to a STOVL carrier. Is there any official or semi-official talk along those lines in S. Korea?

Apologies if this has been covered. If so, just point me to it, folks.

Last time I asked, there is no official talk of a STOVL carrier or AV8B/F35 acquisition. Though I imagine any Chinese or Japanese move on carriers will automatically revive the unofficial talk about a "Dokdo plus" ...

Anybody has an opinion on the AAW effectiveness of KDX-II with SM2 but no Aegis ?

cheers

 

[10ringr]

We had a good demonstration of French integrity when it was found that their opposition was directly related to the fact that they were the ones along with Russia primarily responsible for nuclear energy and the other economic and financial interests that they willingly engaged in despite the fact that Saddam Hussein was a danger. The french have almost never stood their ground and done the right thing. They have always done the expedient thing or the short term gain despite the long term ramifications. Nevermind, they're self interests and snobbery have got them nowhere, nuclear power or not. Hutch

What has this to do with anything? How is it related to what swerve wrote or the thread. It is nothing but an attack on the French; flame bait. Unrelated, out of context, disrespectful.

And this is the second time inside 12 hrs. Is a suspension what you're aiming for?

/GD

No, course not, this is the first post I've done for awhile. I went round and round with him on this subject that's all. I hadn't been posting for awhile. Hutch

 

[10ringr]

No, course not, this is the first post I've done for awhile. I went round and round with him on this subject that's all. I hadn't been posting for awhile. Hutch

Oh yeh, sorry. I forget this is an international forum and there are rules. Sometimes I think I'm with my old army buddies and not with a mix of many nations and ideas. I'll will attempt to be more aware and respectful. Hutch

Thank you for understanding.

/GD

 

[harryriedl]

Last time I asked, there is no official talk of a STOVL carrier or AV8B/F35 acquisition. Though I imagine any Chinese or Japanese move on carriers will automatically revive the unofficial talk about a "Dokdo plus" ...

Anybody has an opinion on the AAW effectiveness of KDX-II with SM2 but no Aegis ?

cheers

in regards to the KDX-II its only got a 2D radar so i imagine a much reduced AAW effectiveness im guessing but probably around the effectiveness of the KIDD class

the DODOKO is much better optimized for Fixed wing ops compared with DDH. and the deck is prepared for the hot exhaust gases[the Urathean coting of the deck] of the F35B or AV-8

 

[Salty Dog]

Last time I asked, there is no official talk of a STOVL carrier or AV8B/F35 acquisition. Though I imagine any Chinese or Japanese move on carriers will automatically revive the unofficial talk about a "Dokdo plus" ...

Anybody has an opinion on the AAW effectiveness of KDX-II with SM2 but no Aegis ?

cheers

The KDX-II has the Thales MW08 3-D radar which gives a similar capability to the AN/SPS-48 (NTU) phased out with the USN pre-Aegis CG/DDG classes. Once the KDX-III are online, the KDX-II will be the AAW juniors. Still the KDX-II will have very capable ASW/ASUW capabilities to serve the ROKN.

I feel the Dokdo LPHs can be used with V/STOL with some modifications. Just a matter of the ROKN wanting/acquiring that capability.

Hopefully we'll have more discussion on the ROKN. The Dokdo and KDX-III are appear to be impressive hulls and IMHO South Korea is a top shipbuilder.

 

[contedicavour]

The KDX-II has the Thales MW08 3-D radar which gives a similar capability to the AN/SPS-48 (NTU) phased out with the USN pre-Aegis CG/DDG classes. Once the KDX-III are online, the KDX-II will be the AAW juniors. Still the KDX-II will have very capable ASW/ASUW capabilities to serve the ROKN.

I feel the Dokdo LPHs can be used with V/STOL with some modifications. Just a matter of the ROKN wanting/acquiring that capability.

Hopefully we'll have more discussion on the ROKN. The Dokdo and KDX-III are appear to be impressive hulls and IMHO South Korea is a top shipbuilder.

Ah - good that you resumed this interesting thread

The LPH is too small for normal ongoing F35B operations, if only it had arrived when the assembly line of the AV8B+ were still open...

I agree with you on the KDX-II AAW. I'm wondering to what extent the KDX-III will be able to guide the SM-2s from the KDX-II ?

cheers

 

[Salty Dog]

Ah - good that you resumed this interesting thread

The LPH is too small for normal ongoing F35B operations, if only it had arrived when the assembly line of the AV8B+ were still open...

I agree with you on the KDX-II AAW. I'm wondering to what extent the KDX-III will be able to guide the SM-2s from the KDX-II ?

cheers

The KDX-II uses the WDS Mk 14 (Weapons Direction System, Tartar NTU) for the SM-2 BL III with mid-course intertial guidance via STIR240, whilst KDX-III uses Aegis mid-course command guidance via data link. On paper you would think Aegis could control a NTU SM-2, however AFAIK in practice, it does not.

 

[McVine]

South Korea gained so much of their territory in a strategic move during their war with the north. As I understand it they went around the North Korean border and began fighting the war from behind enemy lines. Would this improved navy put them in any position to try and secure more territory? . . . Maybe not that could get really ugly I'm certain.

 

[swerve]

South Korea gained so much of their territory in a strategic move during their war with the north. As I understand it they went around the North Korean border and began fighting the war from behind enemy lines. Would this improved navy put them in any position to try and secure more territory? . . . Maybe not that could get really ugly I'm certain.

I think you should learn a little about the Korean war before writing about it. The American (not S. Korean) landings at Inchon, behind N. Korean lines, were on S. Korean territory seized by N. Korea when it invaded the south. The eventual ceasefire line was very close to the original partition line.

 

[kato]

And as a note, the South Korean army was pretty much annihilated before the UN struck back.

In a war nowadays, a South Korean landing attempt in the North would be suicide. Both at sea with the numbers of NK subs, and at land with the amount of North Korean artillery and medium tank forces to annihilate any beachhead.

 

[whodunit]

I think you should learn a little about the Korean war before writing about it. The American (not S. Korean) landings at Inchon, behind N. Korean lines, were on S. Korean territory seized by N. Korea when it invaded the south. The eventual ceasefire line was very close to the original partition line.

Inchon invasion involved South Korean, UN and US forces.

 

[swerve]

Inchon invasion involved South Korean, UN and US forces.

In what proportions? And how many S. Korean ships, exactly?

It was a US operation (command, most of the troops, almost all the shipping & aircraft), under UN auspices, with some assistance from other forces. S. Korean troops would be included out of courtesy, because it was their country.

 

[StingrayOZ]

The LPH is too small for normal ongoing F35B operations, if only it had arrived when the assembly line of the AV8B+ were still open...

The F-35B could proberly land and (light?) refuel with a A2A load. It might be more suitable for harriers, then again the airspace they would be entering, Harriers proberly wouldn't cut it.

 

[whodunit]

In what proportions? And how many S. Korean ships, exactly?

It was a US operation (command, most of the troops, almost all the shipping & aircraft), under UN auspices, with some assistance from other forces. S. Korean troops would be included out of courtesy, because it was their country.

Wow you really hate Koreans dont you. Inchon invasion occurred after the initial invasion by the North that devastated the South Korean army.

No they were not included out of courtesy, what kind of blatant hatred is this coming from a mod.

I dont have exact numbers but the US military history books say explicitly South Koreans were involved in nearly every operation.