FedaykinI’m sure the boys of 30 Bty (Air Defence), Royal Artillery would beg to differ…
Besides, Argentina operated KC-130s for donkeys’ years, and did squat.
Only a couple of KC-130 and pretty much worn out, KC-390 is another thing altogether.
I would agree that 30Bty would have something to say about Argentine paratroopers popping in for tea but nevertheless an improvement in tanking capability does change the defence equation for the area.
The key question is will Argentina actually get around to getting its Mirage 3 replacement program off the ground. Another key question is how long it will take for Argentina to upgrade its Super Etendard to SEM standard (presumably taken out of retiring French airframes). The Super Etendard SEM has a rather useful PGM capability among other things, that along with the Fightinghawk with its Maverick capability might give 30Bty pause for thought.
I don’t wish to be alarmist and I do think Argentina would more then a few more tankers but nevertheless it could make things more interesting.
FedaykinNo that would be a disaster with only four Typhoon operating off the Falklands, actually make that three as the fourth is really a spare to allow maintenance.
Argentina would be able to paradrop troops right over MPA with impunity.
FedaykinIndeed they would need the pods but that is a bolt on capability.
Haven’t found anything about which pods they intend to integrate on the baseline model. Certainly underwing refueling pods ae fairly flexible, for example India uses Israeli pods on its IL78 rather then UPAZ.
FedaykinHard to say really, certainly using as much off the shelf systems as possible would help. For a frigate the sonar fit would be a major cost so they could do the same as they did with Type 45 with a competative tender. ARTISAN is pretty much set in stone and I don’t see much savings from dropping CAMM as its going in the Type 23.
I think there might be scope to drop the CODLAG gas turbine solution and go for a CODLAD configuration, the latest generation of diesel frigates have performance and range so a diesel/electric/diesel propulsion system might have savings especially if they go for an off the shelf solution already used by other vessels.
You could tender out major sections of the hull blocks to cheaper foreign yards but I see legality issues as its a war ship and you would have to keep tight quality control.
FedaykinOpinion not Fact.
Again your opinion not so according to CNN
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/11/24/north.korea.capability/index.html
As for the soldiers morale they will have more food to eat and more for their families in a United Korea.
Korea have some interesting terrain but its no Vietnam, the UN forces almost conqured it before the Chinese got involved. And every inch of DPRK don’t need to be captured, if the captial falls along with the leadership the end would be nigh. It all depends on China.
Not opinion but FACT, personally I prefer Janes and specialist millitary literature then CNN. Actually that CNN report supports what I have been saying in that North Koreas millitary is aging but sizeable and if you read the quote from the article you posted below still formidible:
There is another practical reason why a land invasion would be difficult. South Korea has built an array of obstructions on roads from the North that would force an invader’s tanks off the pavement and into rice fields. Only in the winter would those fields be hard enough to allow the tanks to cross them.
Short of a general assault, the North clearly has enough in its arsenal to cause damage and death to its adversary, as the torpedo attack in March and the barrage this week have shown. And it has thousands of artillery pieces close to the Demilitarized Zone, which is just 30 kilometers (18 miles) from Seoul. Recent events show that it is also quite ready to exploit the element of surprise.
That Korea is not great tank country is a FACT born out by events and anybody who takes an interest in millitary history would know that. Yes your right the West were able to push up to the Yalu until the Chinese became involved who then pushed the armour back with INFANTRY pretty much confirming my point!
I can’t be bothered to debate someone who clearly has no real understanding of whats going on and feels the slaughter of millions of his own countrymen is a good idea. This time I mean it…
FedaykinYou are right the North has a sh!t load of equipment, but do you really think they will be able to field a large enough force to inflict serious damage on the south considering the age of their birds and that they have been embargoed for a long time now, which will have cut non essential flights to a bare minimum. So even if they get planes up the standard of the pilots will be nowhere near the skill of their opponents.I see it just being the same as the GW II. The ground engagements though will be rather different.
As I said to quadbike the airforce isn’t the issue rather the army.
FedaykinYes Iraqi tanks got trashed during the Gulf war (the first one) but its a bit more complicated then it first looks.
The barrels of the guns on their tanks were pretty much shot out and missaligned as the manual ballistics computers were not updated properly by the crews if at all.
The guns on the allied tanks outranged the Iraqi ones.
The allied tanks had thermal imagers.
The Iraqi crews were utterly demoralised after spending weeks being bombed by allied air power.
The allies were working in perfect tank country with room to manoeuvre and control the engagements with their superior situational awareness.
Now lets look at North Korea;
Their tanks whilst obsolete in comparison to American and South Korean ones are well maintained with properly aligned barrels.
Many of their later tanks have at least half decent sights and possibly even thermal imagers.
Their crews are of reasonably high moral, training and highly indoctrinated (also they actually have food to eat).
Korea especially the North is NOT tank country, actually the Korean war of the fifties is often used as an example of the risks in tank warfare. Significant areas of land is impassable for tanks with rocky hills and rice paddies forcing the armour to stick to the roads massively increasing the risk of ambush by infantry.
Throw in all the MRLs and artillary along with the huge numbers of infantry the North can field (with anti tank missiles) and Korea from the DMZ all the way up to the Yalu river (actually a significant part of the South as well) is a pretty lethal place for tanks to operate!
FedaykinYes I did look at the link and how it shows other people share your opinion but it doesn’t make the concept of sacrificing 500million of your citizens for national pride and the win RATIONAL or SANE!
As I said, I pity you!
As for the DPRK the Mig29 isn’t the main issue rather the thousands of rockets, missiles, artillary and tanks they field!
I haven’t got anything else to say to you.
FedaykinSorry quadbike but that is an indefensible attitude to take and I worry for your state of mind.
So you are happy for yourself and your family plus millions of your countrymen to die in a conflict as long as India wins out in the end…
I pity you!
🙁
FedaykinI don’t see myself as a neo-Chamberlin I see myself as a realist!
This isn’t a case of appeasement! North Korea is already a dangerous enemy! It isn’t a case of causing more casualties…they will be huge regardless!
The price of going to war with the North is just too high, as Swerve said the South, US and Japan would more then likely gain superiority over the North in a shooting war but not before hundreds of thousands (maybe even millions) of people being killed. Massive damage would also be done to the South and Norths industries and we would have a massive refugee problem across the country.
Fedaykinbeen done before (by myself included) and usually ends up in a massive flame war!
Best leave it…
FedaykinStill prefered to the South’s show of lack of spine interms of Northern Aggression. There is nothing in NOK inventory that can counter the F 15K Slam Eagles, and with China open to a Unified Korea under southern command, a few hundred thousand casualities are may be a price worth paying. This is no veiled aggression by proxy terrorist groups, this is an act of War, shelling civilian areas and sinking a ship during peacetime. For all their problems even India and Pakistan don’t cross such boundaries.
Time to call NOKO bluff.
At the end of the day big business rules these things, SOKO has more to lose economically in a War so the corporates will do their utmost to prevent it. Sad state of affairs.
This is a forum in the end and one should take things with a pinch of salt but the attitude that…
a few hundred thousand casualities are may be a price worth paying
gets me angry!:mad:
Tell that to the dead civilians! War should always be the last option, the result of conflict with the North would almost certainly be a victory for the south but also a slaughter of the highest order. Yes the North has nothing in its inventory that could take on an F15K but how many does the South operate at the moment 40? They can’t be in all places at all time, as someone else said in the past quantity has a quality all of its own! The North can cause great damage with what its got before Southern Tac air and ground forces can engage it.
FedaykinThere are no guns in the DMZ, & most of those 10 million are out of range of all but a relatively few very long range guns & MRLs of the KPA – but yes, a war would be a catastrophe.
Well indeed lets say North of the DMZ and certainly lots can’t reach out to Seoul but enough can along with MRLS and tactical theatre level missiles to ensure a bloodbath.
FedaykinIn what possible way could you think a war with the North be a good idea!:eek:
ROKAF will be able to destroy DPRK assets really fast in anycase.
Do you know how much personel and equipment the North fields?! OK a lot of it is obsolete but it appears to work well enough and their armed forces are so brain washed they would certainly use it! There is no way the ROKAF could knock out enough of it before its too late!
Some Casualties?! REALLY!!!
It would result in a BLOODBATH! Even with the Souths technical superiority it would still result in eye watering millitary casualties and when you look at civilian casualties it would be a slaughter – if not thousands of casualties maybe even hundreds of thousands of civilians killed or injured! The population of Seoul alone is over 10million! and its in artillary range of the DMZ.
And that is not counting if the North decides to start firing missiles at Japan as well it being the most major American millitary staging post outside of South Korea.
Get real!
FedaykinNews reports this morning are that China would be willing to see reunification on SKs terms, abandoning their ‘ally’ in return for a phased withdrawal of US forces.
Another interesting story:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/11/jstars-goes-to-korea.htmlJ-Stars deployment on the peninsula. Any confirmation?
Actually I feel with this particular Wikileak that China would prefer a unified Korea under the rule of Seoul will help calm the situation down and force the North to stop being so aggressive.
North Korea until the Wikileak has always operated under the knowledge that China liked having a communist barrier between itself and the American influenced South Korea. Now they know only a few days after they ratcheted up tensions in the area that China is happy to have a unified capitalist Korea on its border and may no longer be inclined to bail them out.
Sign In
