North Korea OOB
 

In light of the recent Korean tensions I have taken a look again at the north Korean OOB and drawn a list of possible changes. Here are the first ones.

Formations 111-112 SP-Rocket Bty and SP-Rocket Pl
Initial availability date should changed to 1/1953 or 1/1954 (more likely). The BM-13s were not in north korean inventory at the beginning of the war.

Unit 286 Strela-10M from the russian oob could be imported with related formations. SA-13s have been paraded by North Korea in 2012.

http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/96/sa13p.png/

Unit 108 VTT 323 w/ MRL
1)Icon could be changed to n. 398
2)Twin 14.5 in slot 4 should be replaced with weapon n. 47 14.5 ZPU-1 AAMG
3)Armor should be uniformed to the basic of the VTT-323.
4)Speed should be reduced to 21 or less.
The MRL variants of the VTT-323 lacks a turret. Speed is usually listed as 60 or 65 kph

http://img163.imageshack.us/img163/7...etlauncher.png
http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/667/topjd.png
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/1...uncherbm21.png


Unit 271 M1993 SPM
Armor should be reduced to the same values of the standard VTT-323.
It appears to be VTT-323 fitted with a turret mounted breech loaded mortar.

http://img211.imageshack.us/img211/8...0539380036.jpg

Re: North Korea OOB
 

The first photos not showing

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Does this work?
http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1041/sa13p.png

Re: North Korea OOB
 

That works...

BTW there are two different rocket systems shown in the photos in the first post about the VTT 323 w/ MRL


Don

Re: North Korea OOB
 

I included the latter because it seems it is actually closer to icon n. 398 and thus a possible alternative if it is deemed worthwhile.

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Units 42-43 VTT SPAAGs
1)Vision should be reduced to zero.
2)Unit 43 could have its speed increased, say 20 land and 2 water.
They do not appear to be fitted with night vision equipment. Besides comparable vehicles such as ZSU-57 etc don’t have it either as tank style IR searchlights/sights would be of no use against aircrafts. I would suspect that at least the version with the quad 14.5mm should be amphibious.

http://imageshack.us/a/img5/4163/spaag37mm.jpg
http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/6...05ef7aa32z.jpg

Unit 5 Type 82 and unit 589 M-1985
1)Armor reduced to 3 front, 2 side and rear and 1 top, both hull and turret.
2) Unit 589 should be given a water speed of 3
3)HE ammunition increased with AP/HEAT reduced.
They are the same vehicle, or variants of the same at any rate, which is variously referred to as PT-85, Type 82 and M-1985 in the literature. Some suggest suggest it may be related to the Type 11 APC and if a dedicated icon is deemed worthwhile it could be based on its hull. High turret armor seems a carryover from the Chinese type 63 (which too might be a bit too high, but this would be for a separate discussion) light amphibious tank but the north korean design is home grown, with a welded turret.
http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/2197/pt853.png

A light tank company should be added. Availability date could be 1/1966-12/2020.
Structure would be a command tank and three formations 141 Light Tank Pl

Formation 243 Heavy Wpns Co
Mortar platoon in slot 4 should be replaced by formation n. 114 Hvy Mortar Pl

Re: North Korea OOB
 

I have to add in regards to the SA-13 is that while they have appeared only recently I would suspect they were purchased in the late 80’s together with the various Mig-29s, SU-25s etc.

Unit 60 BTR-80
1)Name changed to BTR-80A
2)Armament in slot 1 changed to weapon n. 76 30mm 2A42 A/C. Ammo load changed to 20 HE 10 sabot.
3) FC might have to be increased. BTR-80A in the Russian OOB uses 15, I don’t know if that much is warranted though, 1PZ series sights seem relatively plain affairs.
The BTR-80s purchased were A models with the 30mm gun, as listed by SIPRI and confirmed by visual evidence.

http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/9339/btr80y.jpg

Unit 984 UAZ Faktoriat from OOB 11 Russia should be added
1)Availability date 1/1988-12/2020
2)Armament weapon n. 151 9M111 Fagot

http://img827.imageshack.us/img827/7406/uaz469atgm.jpg

Unit 54 VTT 323 25mm
It could be given an X3 radio code. It seems to be a chinese variant and not listed or shown among the ones in north korean inventory. The KPA seems satisfied with the twin 14.5mm for even the newer designs.

Units 52-53-106-107-108-272-273 VTT-323
Land speed might be reduced to 21. Speed is usually listed as 60-65 km/h. Even if the north koreans squeezed in a few extra hp over the original YW531 they stretched the chassis and added a turret, as the chinese did with the B-531, so it is unlikely to be faster.

Unit 9 T-55 from the Russian OOB could be imported
Availability date 1/1967-12/2020
The north Koreans seem to have still in service the baseline T-55 model.
http://img42.imageshack.us/img42/2914/t55basic.png

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Unit 65 Type 11 APC
1)It should have some basic night vision capabilities, say 15 or 20.
2)Weapon n. 63 7.62mm PKT CMG could be added in slot 2
IR projector is fitted and it appears also that a coax MG is present.

http://img153.imageshack.us/img153/7435/coax.png
(the close up is actually of the locally produced BTR lookalike but the turret is basically the same mounted on the type 11)

Unit 460 SU-76
Ammunition could be changed to something like 48 HE and 12 AP

Unit 402-412-422 DShK HMG
Unit 90-171-650 76mm Zis-3
Unit 91-170 122mm M30 FG
Unit 637 37mm AA-Gun
Unit 3 PT-76B
Unit 42 VTT 37mm SPAAG
Final availability date extended to 12/2020
It is quite apparent from the footage of parades and exercises I have seen recently that the KPA seldom retires anything.
Zis-3 guns have been paraded around together with the M30s and have also reportedly been used during the bombardment of Yeonpyeong.

http://img580.imageshack.us/img580/7335/zis32.png

Weapon n. 155 Susang Po ATGM
HEAT penetration increased to 52 or at least 46
It is reported to be a local Sagger copy, thus penetration could be increased to at least the basic level.

Unit 293 Susang Po Team
A RPG-7 could be added in slot 4 for good measure, given the significant minimum range.

To be added
A formation with four trucks
It would make things more handy with the four gun batteries

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Self propelled artillery
Sorting out north korean self propelled tube artillery is a difficult task. Broadly speaking it seems that north Korean self propelled artillery development has taken such forms.
1)Towed guns of various types mounted on the rear of the standard ATS-59 tractor
http://img404.imageshack.us/img404/9676/y2ei.jpg

Source: Jedsite

2) Assorted guns mounted on an armored chassis based on ATS-59 in open topped mounts without full traverse.
http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/7378/yj8n.png

3) Assorted guns (but on the lighter side, such as D-30s and antitank pieces) mounted on a VTT-323 APC derived chassis, in open topped mounts without full traverse.
http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/8995/zcq.png

4) Assorted guns mounted in a fully enclosed, turret equipped SPA.
http://img856.imageshack.us/img856/6485/dknz.png

5)In addition to this some miscellaneous types, such as the 170mm Koksan, the 120mm turret mortar etc.

The last three categories are decently represented as it is. The first two might require some changes. It is not easy as the designations are generally given for year and caliber but often they are not clear about which model of gun is fitted to which chassis. On the basis of Bermudez and other sources I would suggest the following changes.

Unit 281 M1974, unit 283 M1991 and unit 466 M1985 would be deleted

Unit 465 M1975 SPG
1)Icon changed to n. 2346 or a dedicated icon
2)Speed reduced to 13
3)Ammunition could be reduced, say by half or more.
This would be the basic non armored ATS-59 based version. Being apparently an ad hoc installation probably not much space for on board ammo is available.

A clone of the above unit 465 added with the following changes
Name changed to M1974
Rearmed with weapon n. 111 152mm D-20 FH. ROF and ammo load changed as needed

A dedicated icon for the armored version of the ATS-59 based chassis might be worthwhile.
Armament would be in three variants
M1981 with a D-74 122mm gun
M1981 with a 130mm gun
M1985 with a D-20 152mm gun

The closest to a top view I could get.
http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/6185/8fg7.jpg

I would suggest low armor values, maybe 2 for the hull front, 0 on top and 1 elsewhere. Speed could be set to 15. Availability dates could be set at about the nominal year or so. Ammunition load same or slightly higher than the non armored variant, still less than the fully enclosed Chuch'e-Po

Formation 75 SP-Mortar Bty
Number of units increased to 9

A SP-Mortar Pl could be added with three vehicles

A clone of formation 245 Mech Bn Spt could be added with the following changes
1)Mot Mortar Pl in slot 5 replaced by formation n.75 SP-Mortar Bty
2)Wheeled ATGM Pl in slot 6 replaced by formation 60 Tracked ATGM Pl.
3)Availability date 1/1985-12/2020
To account for the availability of VTT-323 based variants.

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Relatively minor addition: add in a MD-500 variant armed with Susang Po missiles. They were publicly displayed on parade a few months ago. Doesn't seem to have showed up in the other threads regarding helicopters and the like yet.

Also, strangely enough, the current NK orbat doesn't seem to include MiG-29s, even though NK is confirmed to have them.

Re: North Korea OOB
 

North Korea recieved 35-40 MiG-29A aircraft from Russia in the mid to late eighties. It is believed that only ~20 are even capable of flight at this time. I will not speculate as to why the N. Korean OOB doesn't have them however I do know (or think) they shouldn't be entered. The MiG-29A is strictly a short ranged tactical fighter that had no conventional bomb carrying capability. We in fact just last year after I made contact with a DDR MiG-29A pilot, deleted them from the E. German, German and Polish OOB's for that very reason. People know how I feel about "fighters" with bombs being in the game, they are useless in the game context as compared to a true fighter-bomber. The issue however as I found out is a very complex one involving all "game types" or "options" we have in playing the game in trying to cull them for slot space in the more developed countries. Anyway the Jets and Planes Thread covers this all.
The first MiG-29 to be ground attack capable was the MiG-29S. Russia did modify MiG-29A fighters to carry a battlefield tactical nuke the 30KT RN-40. Below is an excellent MiG site for further reference. There are is no apparent info on any improvement/modification programs by N. Korea concerning the MiG-29.
http://toad-design.com/migalley/inde...ig29-variants/

Regards,
Pat

Re: North Korea OOB
 

exactly why

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Okay, makes sense.

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Who doesn't love a parade? Well North Korea certainly does love them, to the point of mixing in mock equipment with the real. During the 60th Anniversary Parade in the fly over of North Korean military transport planes it was later found they were from the national airline painted in military colors. Another interesting item were the intercontinental missiles paraded, among some other minor issues concerning them was the lack of retro rockets which is not so a minor issue. You really need them-trust me. Then the real Hughes 500E helos (pair) did a fly over of some tanks they were "supporting" in battle. So ended at least 30 years of speculation concerning them. Well I wasn't content with what the current info provided, I went to the past for the answers we need. So to Jan. 22nd 1987 we find that 87 Hughes helicopters were sold between the spring of 1983 -Jan. 1985 the type were the Hughes 300C (1 ONLY), 500D and 500E (As seen this past Sep.) These helos are the civilian version of the Vietnam era OH-6 better known as the "LOACH".
Bottomline: Yes as with the modern MD series helos, the Hughes 500D and 500E could be and were (Rhodesia for one.) weaponized. Only one I can find that was is the 500E however and just my feelings here, I suspect the 500D was armed as well by North Korea. It should be added it seems the current sources agree on 4 AT-3 SAGGER ATGW missiles.
Sometimes you have to look "over your shoulder" and back to find the answer, not to mention preventing being "stabbed in the back"!?! :p
http://articles.latimes.com/1987-01-..._1_north-korea
http://www.nytimes.com/1987/01/22/us...rth-korea.html
http://www.boeing.com/boeing/history/mdc/cayuse.page

Regards,
Pat

Re: North Korea OOB
 

The MiG-29 was in the older versions of the OOB but with wrong stats. I recommeded deletion, instead of corrections on the basis of the following:
1) The type is primarily an air defence fighter (I was under the impression it could carry bombs but in practice designed and most likely used for air to air).
2) It is the only "modern" fighter in their inventory, so it is doubtful it would waste precious flight hours over ground attack training. As a matter of fact in the NK training footage older types,of which they have zillions, such as MiG-23 or earlier can be seen dropping bombs while MiG-29s just fly around (not an ironclad proof but..). In wartime it would be busy with air to air.
3) The units equipped with it are based to protect the capital and brigaded together with the SU-25s so even in a coup/civil war scenario they would still be doing air to air most likely even if they were bomb capable.
4) CAS isn't high on KPAF list as far as it can be told. Some of their older types have been modified for or have been tasked with ground attack but this is likely to be against targets in the enemy rear.

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Anyway IMHO given the scope of the game there is not much point in trying to add as many aircrafts as possible. The combination of planes and loadouts used by a major power in over 70 years would clog any OOB. The main types used for ground attack with a moderate variety of war loads should suffice.
Otherwise we will be adding stuff like the Su-15 Flagon with gunpods or other theoretically possible but unlikey combinations.

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Yeah half the "fun" of doing an OOB is aircraft.

What aircraft types are owned?
How many? Enough to matter?
How ARE they used vs how CAN they be?
What ordnance load DO they carry vs what CAN they carry?

Re: North Korea OOB
 

With all due respect; Post #11 answers all your questions. I guess the real issue here is how embedded are they in the existing scenarios and campaigns in the game. This was the roadblock in my proposal to cull the fighters from the more advanced countries to open slots in them as these countries are as we know fighter-bomber and ground attack aircraft heavy. As Don indicated in response to that idea it would be a very intensive effort. That discussion is in the Jets/Planes Thread about 2 yrs. ago.


Regards,
Pat

Re: North Korea OOB
 

If anyone bothers to look THERE ARE NO MIG-29'S in the NK OOB so I'm not sure why this has become an issue

Re: North Korea OOB
 

I should've indicated Post #11 was in response to #10 from sabresandy that asked about the MiG-29 and MD-500 helos-sorry-but I had to get ready for work. Post #14 covers the rest. But now I really see the point Suhiir was making and my apologies I just had to kick in the "Marinegolese". :p No matter what the equipment I love going through those steps and I'll always have the fond memories of the GREAT French 105mm question we finally settled on last year and two years of following the Malaysian LEOPARD's to find early last winter by watching an Armed Forces Day video of them showing off their new LEO A24 modified tanks and not their A26 ones THAT EVERYONE reported on and now resides in the game. Who got it right from the start? SIPRI. Don sorry I just ran out of time getting the refs together before the deadline. Guess who I'll be using more often. Suhiir is so right, anyone who seriously does this out here knows how much "fun" it really is. That'll be over two years of tracking those tanks I'll never get back. :D

Regards,
Pat

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Sorry a bit tired-NOT MALAYSIA but INDONESIA :doh: sorry for the inconvenience and GOOD NIGHT!! That's 5 minutes I'll never get back!?! That's "Bubblenese" for my Marine friend.

Regards,
Pat

Re: North Korea OOB
 

That's OK, no one really expects anyone who's lived in a pressurized tin can for months on end to be "normal".

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Marcello where ever you've gotten off too, this one is for you and your hard work here and other places...

You will see this in the MBT & SPA/SPAA Threads as well. I've been waiting for this data to come out since last Friday. Couldn't tell if the Pokpung-ho was mounting a new double barrelled MG or if it was a Grenade Launcher now that question has been answered. Did some work on this OOB a few years back with Don and the "resident" expert on the subject Marcello. We've had some "interesting" discussions ourselves but, I have always respected his opinions. Don't know what's happened to him but, he made me better out here when I first decided to start posting out here going back to the start of my MRAP Thread. It will be posted where this belongs but first I need them in my working threads. These are mostly I think minor change issues to existing (Copy) units.

Any information from a reliable source as this is worth it's weight in gold when it concerns North Korea.
http://www.armyrecognition.com/april..._11704172.html

Might surprise some, but this is "how I roll".

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Yes but which anti-tank guided missiles are they ? I'm going to guess it's the Susang Po......and those don't look like 40mm GL..... 30 maybe

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Thinking that maybe this is him

http://www.massimotessitori.altervis...-2010-8x8.html

There is a link to this forum in one post..... I could be wrong though

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Went to that site the link is there to this thread. I think it's him though not sure. But the site in the tank section specifically for the Pokpung-ho at the bottom of the page it reports of a "new antitank missile, Bulsae-3" fired in Feb. 2016 against a Chonma-216 a "sub variant" of the Pokpung-ho. Hopefully the below will open to this page note the two bottom pictures of the page.
http://www.massimotessitori.altervis...okpung-ho.html
https://www.nknews.org/2016/03/new-v...n-north-korea/
http://www.popularmechanics.com/mili...-tank-missile/
http://www.military-today.com/tanks/m2002.htm

Sounds like it's modified from the Russian KORNET.

I agree that a 30mm GL is more in line as well. A 40mm would be a little more obvious I think. I didn't even think about the 30mm to be honest with you.

On the other missile well guess from where and whom note last item of first post on this page this came off the web...
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showt...t=43303&page=2

Don't do "PEN math" but, agree with assessment and comparative missile equivalent which is in line with the web though there's less here than with the above ATGW.

Oh Great Rabbit in the sky PLEASE let there not be too many "rabbit holes" here. Unlike India lots less info here normally. Like India can very easily be a PITA. :p

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: North Korea OOB
 

So I started looking into a North Korean v South Korea scenario in June 1985 and ran down the rabbit hole of North Korean Amphibious Forces.

Known ships/craft put together from looking at old declassified CIA reports:

"Construction and Modification of North Korean Naval Combatants January 1983 through July 1986"
"NORTH KOREAN NAVAL SHIPBUILDING, JULY 1980 - AUGUST 1982"
"NORTH KOREAN MILITARY CAPABILITIES AND INTENTIONS TOWARD SOUTH KOREA" - May 1975

declassified Marine Corps Books:
MCIA-2630-NK-016-97 - NORTH KOREA COUNTRY HANDBOOK - May 1997

US Army Books:
ATP 7-100.2, North Korean Tactics; July 2020

and Wikipedia:
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...eople%27s_Navy)

and CSIS
https://beyondparallel.csis.org/nort...-bases-part-1/
https://beyondparallel.csis.org/nort...bases-part-ii/
https://beyondparallel.csis.org/nort...ases-part-iii/
https://beyondparallel.csis.org/nort...bases-part-iv/

H.I. Sutton's Covert Shores:
http://www.hisutton.com/Demystified%...n%20craft.html

=========================================

Midget Submarines (SSM)

Basically assume that from 1975-1992 that a North Korean Midget Sub can deploy a squad (up to 8 men) of troops along the coastline. From 1992 onwards, larger Midgets may be capable of deploying two squads (14 men) along the coastline.

34 meter "Sang-O" (Shark) SSM - The first unit was observed under construction in the late 1980s on satellite intelligence, and construction of the first unit was completed in 1991. As of 2021, forty (40) are in service. Displaces 370 tons submerged. This class was made infamous when one ran aground in the 1996 Gangneung submarine infiltration incident; when after deploying a three man special operations recon team in South Korea -- it ran aground.

1 x 32 meter SSM -- first observed around 1984. First North Korean Midget with external torpedo tubes. Resembles WWII German UCIII U-Boat.

37 x 18/21 meter "Yugo" SSMs -- only six 21 meter (110 ton) SSMs have been seen. The rest (31) are the 18 meter (90 ton) version. They have been under construction since the 1970s; apparently based off the six 16 meter SSMs imported from Yugoslavia in 1973-74.

By mid-1983 they had 19 of these in the inventory; indicating a production rate of 4 a year. In 1984, the North Koreans tripled this rate to 12 a year. Both variants have a range of 550 nautical miles (1,020 km) at 10 knots (19 km/h) on the surface and 50 nautical miles (93 km) at 4 knots (7.4 km/h) submerged. They can carry about 4 to 6 special forces troops.

=========================================

Special Warfare Support Craft/Agent Boats (LCW)

The early versions of these craft from the 1950s to the 1970s were simply fast launches disguised as fishing boats, but by the 1980s, they had semi-submersible craft. By the 1990s, they were fully submersible, but couldn't run underwater; the submersible mode being used for evasion, waiting for someone, or caching them. By the 2000s, they could move underwater via electric motors. They can insert as before about 4 or so special forces troops.

================================================== ==

Amphibious Doctrine

The North Koreans began to construct a amphibious landing and fire support capability starting in 1971; aimed not at recreating Inchon, but rather, the capability to complicate South Korea's defensive positions by placing infiltrators rapidly along the coasts:

Per the USMC Intelligence Activity in 1997:

"Amphibious assaults against CFC [South Korea] probably would be small, clandestine landings involving two to six NAMPO craft; CHAHO or other naval craft could provide fire support."

Per the US Army in ATP 7-100.2, North Korean Tactics; July 2020:

"The two navy sniper brigades, one stationed on each coast, possess about 3,000 combat troops apiece.

These units have been placed under the operational control of the KPAN in order to enable amphibious operations. Construction of hovercraft bases for the brigades was previously observed at Sasulpo on the west coast and Tapchonri on the east coast, but these areas were later repurposed. The new west-coast hovercraft base will most likely be located at Yongbong-ni, and it is unknown where the east-coast hovercrafts will be based. The navy sniper brigades’ missions are similar to those of the KPAGF brigades, but the navy snipers will most likely land on the South Korean coastline. North Korea fields numerous types of landing craft, and it is estimated the KPA could deliver 5,000 to 7,000 personnel in one lift targeting both coastlines. Navy sniper brigade team missions would include:

 Supporting a KPA ground offensive by securing river-crossing sites.
 Conducting amphibious raids to destroy critical coastal targets in the enemy’s rear area.
 Harassing enemy rear area logistical operations.
 Attacking or destroying the enemy’s combat service support units.
 Attempting to delay the movement of enemy reinforcements forward to the main combat area.
 Attacking or destroying enemy airbases or naval facilities.
 Occupying or raiding critical coastal islands.
 Attacking enemy C2 and communications nodes.

Should hostilities erupt on the peninsula, a standing mission for KPAN sniper units is the capture of the five northernmost South Korean islands along the Northern Limit Line in the Yellow Sea, called the West Sea by South Korea."

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...orth_Korea.jpg
Northern Limit Line Islands

...

"The KPAN fields three amphibious light infantry brigades, totaling 13 battalions. The primary differences from regular light infantry brigades are that these units routinely operate using naval landing craft and continuously practice amphibious landings on various types of beaches. One defecting navy sniper in 2011 boasted he traveled more than 32,000 km by sea on floating tubes during his training. These units train on a variety of landing craft, from the 350-ton Hantae-class utility landing craft, to hovercraft that can travel at 80 kph, to rubber rafts launched from larger ships for the purpose of infiltrating along the coast. The amphibious light infantry brigades can also use mini submarines or semisubmersible boats. The navy sniper brigades and the amphibious brigades use the same landing craft, but if all landing craft supported the amphibious brigades, the KPAN could conduct two brigade- and several battalion- or company-size landings along both coasts simultaneously. Once on the ground, these amphibious brigades would attack enemy combat service support units in the rear areas and seize key terrain to facilitate the onward movement of the KPAGF, which are advancing from the north."

================================================== ==

Amphibious Craft, Conventional

7 x Hanchon LCU -- 117.1 ft LOA, 25.9 ft Beam, 3.9 ft draft; 10 kt top speed.


10 x Hantae LCU -- 154.2 ft LOA, 21.3 ft Beam, 5.6 ft draft; 22.5 kt top speed. The Hantae most closely resembles an LSM, having an enclosed well deck and clamshell doors at the bow, and was originally designated as such. However, the class is not considered to have a blue-water capability because of its size (only 46 meters long with a beam of 7 meters) and has been redesignated an LCU. These craft can carry 3 to 4 light tanks and are armed with 4 x 25mm Twin Barrel Weapons.

https://i.imgur.com/1aMxo5e.jpg
Hantae # Image 1

https://i.imgur.com/kDYIH0s.jpg
Hantae Image 2

Operational availability of this class was:

Hantae #1: 1978
Hantae #2: 1979
Hantae #3: 1981
Hantae #4: 1981
Hantae #5: 1983
Hantae #6: 1985
Hantae #7: 1984
Hantae #8: Unknown
Hantae #9: Unknown
Hantae #10: Unknown

18 x Hungnam LCM 55.8 ft LOA, 14.1 ft beam, 3.9 ft draft; 9 kt top speed. No details or photos available.

99 x Nampo Fast Personnel Landing Craft (LCP) / (PB) -- This design is based off the Soviet Union's P-6 torpedo boat hull. It has a maximum speed of 40 kts and a combat radius of 335 nautical miles at 28 knots. It is 26 meters long with a bow ramp and clamshell bow doors. It has two twin 14.5mm AA Guns fore and aft. It carries 30 to 35 people. NOTE: At least 22 of the 99 Nampos were converted to Fast Patrol Boats via removing the bow ramp and welding the doors shut.

https://i.imgur.com/q36WLI5.jpg
Image of P-6 Torpedo Boat in Bangladesh for example

================================================== ==

Amphibious Craft, Air-Cushion

2 x Nampo A/B LCPA Hovercraft

These are a pair of large hovercraft of the dimensions 55.8 ft LOA, 22.6 ft beam and capable of 50 knots top speed. Presumably they are prototypes constructed in the late 1970s and early 1980s to help with development of the Kong Bang production Hovercraft.

136 x Kong Bang I/II/III LCPA Hovercraft

These are a series of very closely related hovercraft all being roughly the same dimensions:

Kong Bang I: 75.5 ft LOA x 29.5 ft Beam
Kong Bang II: 68.9 ft LOA x 26.2 ft Beam (some sources claim 50 kts and 50 troops)
Kong Bang III: 60.7 ft LOA x 23 ft Beam (some sources claim 40 kts and 40 troops)

Organizationally, they're deployed in Hovercraft squadrons of 16 to 18 hovercraft each, attached to the Amphibious Assault Command of the North Korean West Sea Fleet HQ.

Deployment is at two bases, with two "forward deployment" bases constrructed but currently empty:

Kibong-dong hovercraft base (39.6147°, 124.6325°) built in the 1980s (54 hovercraft shelters)
Tasa-ri hovercraft base (39.8081° 124.4126°) built in the early 1990s (16 hovercraft shelters)
Sasŭlp’o (38.1920° 124.9045°) built 2010-2012; not yet actually used by 2017. (52 hovercraft shelters)
Yami-dong (38.2254° 124.9028°) built 2010-2012; not yet actually used by 2017. (16 hovercraft shelters)(a
(a whole bunch more constructed in the 2010s -- type them up later if I'm serious)

Per CSIS:

"If used as a staging area for an attack, the hovercraft units from Kibong-dong could land as many as 2,700 special force troops on South Korea’s western islands within two to four hours. Units from Tasa-ri could land an additional 800 troops within 2.5 to 4.5 hours of a first wave attack."

CSIS again on the main deployment bases constructed in the 1980s and 1990s:

"The distance from Kibong-dong to the northernmost ROK island of Baegnyeong-do (백령도) is approximately 182 km and to the port city Incheon (인천) approximately 373 km. Under ideal conditions these voyages would take approximately 2 and 4 hours respectively for hovercraft operating from Kibong-dong. If all hovercraft were carrying their maximum number of troops such an attack has the potential to land 2,700 troops in an initial assault wave. Potentially, a second wave could be landed 4-8 hours later."

CSIS again on the forward deployment bases constructed in the 2010s:

"For example, the distances to the northernmost ROK island of Baegnyeong-do (백령도) and the port city Incheon (인천) is reduced from approximately 182 km and 373 km when operating from the Kibong-dong hovercraft base to approximately 50 km and 215 km, respectively, from the Sasŭlp’o and Yami-dong bases. Thus, reducing the voyage time to approximately 30 minutes and 2.5 hours, respectively. Significantly, about half of a voyage from Sasŭlp’o and Yami-dong to Baegnyeong-do would be masked from South Korean radars located on Baegnyeong-do by the Yongyŏn-bando (i.e., Yongyŏn Peninsula) affording a KPN assault on the island a higher degree of surprise."

================================================== ==

Gunboats

54+ x Chongjin MGB -- Based off earlier Chao design, but with 85mm ZiS-53 gun for fire support.

59+ x Chaho MGB -- Based off Soviet Project 183 patrol boats.

9 x Chongju -- this was originally designed to be a fire support unit, with an 85mm gun turret in the bow, and a rocket launcher amidships and reloads on the stern for the rocket launcher, but only one unit was in service with this fire support configuration from 1975-1976, and it was scrapped late in 1976.

Of the 9 x Chongju, three became missile boats, four became patrol craft (85mm gun, 25mm guns, 37mm guns, RBU) and one became a torpedo boat.

Sinhung PT -- At least 74 were constructed between 1966 and 1974. Production then ceased for ten years, before resuming in February 1981 and by the Fall of 1982, the North Koreans had at least 92; rising to 120 in 1983 before Sinhung production was terminated that year for the second time. They basically have torpedoes and a pair of fore and aft 14.5mm HMGs.

Re: North Korea OOB
 

Supreme Leader
just proposed Russian president that he can send 100 000 "volunteers" to Ukraine to help fight with "Nazis". Russians just consider this proposition now. This North Korean soldiers will be sent to Donbas and attached to DPR&LPR army because they recognizes this two breakaway states.

https://www.news.com.au/world/europe...8ad2d9fa38dff0