DPRK Navy ships

[SK2]

Switzerland doesn't produce missile systems, despite being old European country (i.e. industrialized by default).
Norway, Sweden - machinery(and weapons only partially)
Brazil - nothing, India - no machinery.
Vietnam - nothing...

Sweden in particular built both missiles, vessels, and machinery (remember the Volvo marine diesel?)
Brazil, missiles and top heavy vessels (lol)
Vietnam, with help by Russia, built littoral warfare vessels (Gepard 3.5), and license producing Kh-35
India - the issue isn't any machinery (they do have), the issues are planning and quality as always

 

[Hood]

Looks similar to Myanmar's Kyan Sittha.

 

[Ainen]

For the same purpose as other nations; to be able to operate outside of coastal area.

DPRK is getting out of it's isolation; it will by default involve more and more interactions with outside world.
First and primary task of a navy is ultimately protection of national access to high seas, i.e. exactly this job.

Quite a few DPRK-linked ships were boarded in international waters just because, and there was nothing DPRK could do about it.
Furthermore, DPRK aims for sea deterrent, i.e. SSB/SSBNs. Those have same requirements to perform deterrence patrols as everyone else.

The most straightforward answer to those challenges is a grey hull frigate(fleet of them), with enough capability to control space around them to prevent "accidental disappearances".

Doesn't mean it can't be easily torpedoed and sunk, but that's very discreet action to take, with very obvious potential consequences.
DPRK has global reach to retaliate.

 

[gral_rj]

Looks similar to Myanmar's Kyan Sittha.
View attachment 754033

Also, Myanmar did launch a 135m frigate last week. Shared development between them? No way to know, at least right now.

 

[DWG]

Look at the depth keel to deck level, it's about four times the height of the people standing in front. That makes hull depth less than 8m. (A quick google suggests the height of male North Korean defectors averages about 1.68m)

The Mk 41 VLS is either 5.3m (Self Defence), 6.8m (Tactical) or 7.7m (Strike) in depth. The Type 55's universal VLS is 9m deep. Even a Mk 41 Self-Defence equivalent is going to eat more hull space than you have available at the bow, you might just squeeze one in amidships, but anything larger, forget it. (Remember, the deeper you get, the narrower the hull gets). This is not a DDG on the Burke or Type 55 model, there's nearly as much Type 55 hull below the waterline as this has hull depth in total.

 

[Ainen]

Look at the depth keel to deck level, it's about four times the height of the people standing in front. That makes hull depth less than 8m. (A quick google suggests the height of male North Korean defectors averages about 1.68m)

The Mk 41 VLS is either 5.3m (Self Defence), 6.8m (Tactical) or 7.7m (Strike) in depth. The Type 55's universal VLS is 9m deep. Even a Mk 41 Self-Defence equivalent is going to eat more hull space than you have available at the bow, you might just squeeze one in amidships, but anything larger, forget it. (Remember, the deeper you get, the narrower the hull gets). This is not a DDG on the Burke or Type 55 model, there's nearly as much Type 55 hull below the waterline as this has hull depth in total.

Maybe longer Chungnam analog, with size driven by available propulsion among others?
K-pop frigates tend to be shallow seaters, too.

 

[Sineva]

Look at the depth keel to deck level, it's about four times the height of the people standing in front. That makes hull depth less than 8m. (A quick google suggests the height of male North Korean defectors averages about 1.68m)

The Mk 41 VLS is either 5.3m (Self Defence), 6.8m (Tactical) or 7.7m (Strike) in depth. The Type 55's universal VLS is 9m deep. Even a Mk 41 Self-Defence equivalent is going to eat more hull space than you have available at the bow, you might just squeeze one in amidships, but anything larger, forget it. (Remember, the deeper you get, the narrower the hull gets). This is not a DDG on the Burke or Type 55 model, there's nearly as much Type 55 hull below the waterline as this has hull depth in total.

They could simply have part of the vls mounted in a separate raised enclosure like the type 45,or in a step like the rok kdx 2,which in its case looks to be at least 2 meters in height if not more.
Theres no hard and fast rule that says a vls has to be entirely enclosed within the hull with its hatches flush mounted with the deck.
In fact I wouldnt be at all surprised if we see a step extension as there is a very large open space there thats clearly intended for mounting something.
Maybe they`ll go for one smaller vls upfront for mounting medium/long ranged sams and another larger one amidships for antiship and land attack weapons.
When it comes to the dprk if the political will is there to do something then it tends to get done.

 

[ValiantHeart]

Vietnam, with help by Russia, built littoral warfare vessels (Gepard 3.5), and license producing Kh-35

As a Vietnamese, I would like to confirm that Vietnam has not been licensed by Russia to build Gepard-class frigates and produce KH-35 missiles domestically.

The most modern and largest warships that Russia allows us to build domestically are the Tarantul 1241.8 "Molniya" class corvettes. And while it is true that we have a family of domestic anti-ship missiles and it certainly has references to the design of the KH-35, but there is no Russian hand here - Viettel did this on its own.

 

[ValiantHeart]

This ship will probably serve two purposes:

• Strategic air defense: If equipped with the Pongae-5/6 or Byeoljji-1-2, it could provide a long-range, high-altitude air defense umbrella for the North Korean fleet, which is severely under-defensed and vulnerable to US-ROK air power - especially now when they are building their naval nuclear assets. And North Korea has discussed shooting down US spy planes with an anti-aircraft warship, so it would be useful for that scenario as well.
• Nuclear deterrence: If equipped with VLS to launch cruise missiles, well... a ship that can carry 16-32 launch tubes equipped with nuclear-capable cruise missiles would be very scary if all launched at once.

Whatever they are, they will need to be built in large numbers - I personally expect 6-8. And each ship will need a lot of escorts, they cannot fight alone. It will be very busy for North Korean research institutes and shipyards.

 

[BullpupRafale]

Look at the depth keel to deck level, it's about four times the height of the people standing in front. That makes hull depth less than 8m. (A quick google suggests the height of male North Korean defectors averages about 1.68m)

All you did is demonstrate being uninformed and jumping to own desired conclusion.
Are those people in front of ship defectors in question? No, also irrelevant measure.
What you need is actual height of people and not pick lowest number there is for you.
Another is they are not right next to ship and images are taken at rather odd angles.
Bottom is further away from people than top that is closer, but at higher elevation.
Also evident what holds ship in place from leaning over is taller than people in image.
Among those people next to this frigate is Kim Jong-un that has height of 1.75 meter.
Those steel blocks at ship bow are certainly taller than that, perhaps 2 meters height.
Your measurements are way off even if it were four height of people which it is not.
Its height of more than 4 and roughly height over 8 people they we're 1.68 meter.
Though average of those people next to ship is 1.75 meter and not 1.68 meter !
From ship bow to deck is height of 14 meters and not less than 8 as you assert.
Your measurement error is statistically unacceptable to point being incompetent.

The Mk 41 VLS is either 5.3m (Self Defence), 6.8m (Tactical) or 7.7m (Strike) in depth. The Type 55's universal VLS is 9m deep. Even a Mk 41 Self-Defence equivalent is going to eat more hull space than you have available at the bow, you might just squeeze one in amidships, but anything larger, forget it. (Remember, the deeper you get, the narrower the hull gets). This is not a DDG on the Burke or Type 55 model, there's nearly as much Type 55 hull below the waterline as this has hull depth in total.

Yet in reality all of these can fit inside guided missile frigate being built at Nampo.

 

[Dilandu]

This ship will probably serve two purposes:

Actually I suppose that second role would be "flag demonstration and trade protection". There were... a lot of cases, when DRPK's merchant ships were detained, hold for prolonged search and otherwise harassed "in accordance with UN sanctions" (even if ship in question have perfectly legal cargo). North Korean leadership clearly did not like it - considering how their country depend on import of oil and other vital stuff. So they probably decided that SOME investment in "blue water navy" would pays off - not many coastal guard captains would dare to detain the foreign cargo ship if a big frigate looms menacingly nearby.

P.S. Also, Red Sea crisis. The DRPK's leadership probably reasonably worried about the situation on Mid East, and wanted to have some means to protect their merchant marine in case of future crisises.

 

[Scott Kenny]

This ship will probably serve two purposes:

• Strategic air defense: If equipped with the Pongae-5/6 or Byeoljji-1-2, it could provide a long-range, high-altitude air defense umbrella for the North Korean fleet, which is severely under-defensed and vulnerable to US-ROK air power - especially now when they are building their naval nuclear assets. And North Korea has discussed shooting down US spy planes with an anti-aircraft warship, so it would be useful for that scenario as well.
• Nuclear deterrence: If equipped with VLS to launch cruise missiles, well... a ship that can carry 16-32 launch tubes equipped with nuclear-capable cruise missiles would be very scary if all launched at once.

Whatever they are, they will need to be built in large numbers - I personally expect 6-8. And each ship will need a lot of escorts, they cannot fight alone. It will be very busy for North Korean research institutes and shipyards.

Radar apertures are only about 40ft above the waterline, that's a non-useful height. (And that's assuming 10ft deck heights, not 8)

Ticos are 100ft to the tops of the SPY antennas.

All you did is demonstrate being uninformed and jumping to own desired conclusion.
Are those people in front of ship defectors in question? No, also irrelevant measure.
What you need is actual height of people and not pick lowest number there is for you.
Another is they are not right next to ship and images are taken at rather odd angles.
Bottom is further away from people than top that is closer, but at higher elevation.
Also evident what holds ship in place from leaning over is taller than people in image.
Among those people next to this frigate is Kim Jong-un that has height of 1.75 meter.
Those steel blocks at ship bow are certainly taller than that, perhaps 2 meters height.
Your measurements are way off even if it were four height of people which it is not.
Its height of more than 4 and roughly height over 8 people they we're 1.68 meter.
Though average of those people next to ship is 1.75 meter and not 1.68 meter !
From ship bow to deck is height of 14 meters and not less than 8 as you assert.
Your measurement error is statistically unacceptable to point being incompetent.

Yet in reality all of these can fit inside guided missile frigate being built at Nampo.

Dude, I'm using 10ft between levels on the scaffolding as my height estimate.

 

[DWG]

Theres no hard and fast rule that says a vls has to be entirely enclosed within the hull

There is, however, a standard rule of naval architecture (and physics) that large amounts of weight are problematic for stability the higher you put them in the ship.

 

[DWG]

There were... a lot of cases, when DRPK's merchant ships were detained, hold for prolonged search and otherwise harassed "in accordance with UN sanctions" (even if ship in question have perfectly legal cargo).

Get caught smuggling weapons once (and it's not just once, is it?) and people reasonably suspect every ships of yours might be smuggling. It's not different to the police here pulling over every car known to be associated with county lines drug networks whenever they see them. There might not be anything in it this time, but next time there might, and it reminds the crims they're being watched.

 

[BullpupRafale]

Dude, I'm using 10ft between levels on the scaffolding as my height estimate.

We don't know exact dimensions of those unlike height of Kim Jong-un being 5.9ft ...

​

Get caught smuggling weapons once (and it's not just once, is it?) and people reasonably suspect every ships of yours might be smuggling. It's not different to the police here pulling over every car known to be associated with county lines drug networks whenever they see them. There might not be anything in it this time, but next time there might, and it reminds the crims they're being watched.

Like U.S. government smuggling cocaine and heroine worldwide through Air America.

 

[DWG]

All you did is demonstrate being uninformed and jumping to own desired conclusion.

All I did was reach a conclusion you didn't like, as the immediate resort to ad hominem demonstrates.

Are those people in front of ship defectors in question? No, also irrelevant measure.
What you need is actual height of people and not pick lowest number there is for you.

I googled "Average male height North Korea", first result was a BBC article that referenced actual academic research into North Korean height taken from defectors. Unless you can demonstrate that defectors are somehow physically atypical of the North Korean population as a whole, it's a perfectly reasonable estimate. The people in front of the ship are close to it, there's unlikely to be a significant photographic distortion between their height and the height of the ship. Height in pixels of the foreground figure I used was 80, height of the ship keel to deck was 360 pixels, 4x 1.68m is actually 6.72m, which I rounded to 8m. Which I then sanity-checked with Scott's estimate for the height of the bridge. I'd use (and have used) exactly the same methodology for anyone's ships.

From ship bow to deck is height of 14 meters and not less than 8 as you assert.

Calculated? Or do you have a reference for that?

I didn't measure from the bow, as that's not a useful point to measure from. The bow is swept slightly upwards and the forefoot slightly downwards (presumably there'll be a sonar or hydrodynamic bulb added later), while the bow as a whole is far too narrow for any major system to be installed. I measured from just in front of the bridge block. And my assessment there is you're probably not going to be able to use much more than half the hull height for a VLS, because of the shape of the hull.

Remember not to include the vertical breakwater if using a pic where that's complete as that's at least a metre above deck level.

Among those people next to this frigate is Kim Jong-un that has height of 1.75 meter.

By coincidence Kim measures 175 pixels high, height of the hull next to him, 600 pixels = 7m, add a metre for foreshortening, 8m.

Your measurement error is statistically unacceptable to point being incompetent.

Ad hominem....

 

[Scott Kenny]

We don't know exact dimensions of those unlike height of Kim Jong-un being 5.9ft ...

View attachment 754075​

Funny, if you run KJU's height over to the scaffolding, he sure looks 60% of the distance from floor to floor...

 

[Hood]

I was estimating about 8ft for the deck heights when I was estimating the array size. That was an underestimate.

There are clearly 3 decks in the forward superstructure block below the bridge - so anywhere from 24-30ft high depending on the deck height within 8-10ft (2.43-3m). Judging by Scott's scaling of Kim Jong-un by the scaffolding layers (which pretty well approximate the deck heights as well), then the deck heights are probably nearer 10ft, let's say 3m given its a nice round metric number. Given there are probably two decks in the hull (lower one will be higher to allow for machinery spaces etc.) I'd say that DWG's estimate of 8m (3+5) is in the right ball park. Gives a depth from bridge floor to keel of about 17.5-19m (57-62ft) making allowance for a double bottom.

I do agree the radar array is around 2m tall and 3m wide, which is actually getting into the ballpark of smaller arrays of other navies. The base of the array is around 11m (36ft) above the waterline.

This is no destroyer and it would be silly to suggest that it is, but it is a fairly decent size for a frigate and certainly an advance on the current warships that they have. It should be reasonably capable I would think for littoral work and supporting other smaller warships. I don't see this vessel being beyond the capabilities of NK to produce.

 

[Waterballoon]

The arrays might be X-band while there is going to be a lower band search radar somewhere else.

 

[Ainen]

The arrays might be X-band while there is going to be a lower band search radar somewhere else.

Those are prooobably S, as usual.
Kinda large for X, you must really dislike someone to do such X band arrays.

 

[BullpupRafale]

All I did was reach a conclusion you didn't like, as the immediate resort to ad hominem demonstrates.

Accurate factual description is not an ad hominem unless you find truth insulting.

I googled "Average male height North Korea", first result was a BBC article that referenced actual academic research into North Korean height taken from defectors. Unless you can demonstrate that defectors are somehow physically atypical of the North Korean population as a whole, it's a perfectly reasonable estimate. The people in front of the ship are close to it, there's unlikely to be a significant photographic distortion between their height and the height of the ship. Height in pixels of the foreground figure I used was 80, height of the ship keel to deck was 360 pixels, 4x 1.68m is actually 6.72m, which I rounded to 8m. Which I then sanity-checked with Scott's estimate for the height of the bridge. I'd use (and have used) exactly the same methodology for anyone's ships.

I do not have to demonstrate anything as you demonstrate being uninformed.
That is not ad hominem unless you find that truth about you insulting to yourself.
Population is nowhere everywhere of comparable average in any country in world.

You can take China for example a very large country:

​

Or countries such as Croatia and Bosnia on eastern Adriatic coast with far smaller population than North Korea:

​

Calculated? Or do you have a reference for that?

When I get back home from workplace.

I didn't measure from the bow, as that's not a useful point to measure from. The bow is swept slightly upwards and the forefoot slightly downwards (presumably there'll be a sonar or hydrodynamic bulb added later), while the bow as a whole is far too narrow for any major system to be installed. I measured from just in front of the bridge block. And my assessment there is you're probably not going to be able to use much more than half the hull height for a VLS, because of the shape of the hull.

Remember not to include the vertical breakwater if using a pic where that's complete as that's at least a metre above deck level.

More accurate to use steel holders as example of measurement since those are right below the bow than people that are a fair walking distance away from the bow.

By coincidence Kim measures 175 pixels high, height of the hull next to him, 600 pixels = 7m, add a metre for foreshortening, 8m.

...and Kim is not right next to the ship unlike there are images of him next to TEL's.
You have those steel holders or whatever correct term is that holds bow for example.

Ad hominem....

You can complain ad hominem is this and that and there... It is the truth.

 

[Sineva]

There is, however, a standard rule of naval architecture (and physics) that large amounts of weight are problematic for stability the higher you put them in the ship.

Only if they`re going to be doing something utterly crazy such as mounting the vls right on top of the bridge of this thing or mounting icbms in it.
I think my point still stands.
Unless of course you think that dprk ships are subject to different physical laws?

Going by your own assertions in your above posts that you could only use around 4m of the hull for a vls it should only require around a 1.5 to at most a 2.0 meter step in front of the bridge to accommodate a mk41 vls (Self Defence) equivalent.
This seems well within the realm of probability to me.

 

[Dilandu]

Get caught smuggling weapons once (and it's not just once, is it?) and people reasonably suspect every ships of yours might be smuggling. It's not different to the police here pulling over every car known to be associated with county lines drug networks whenever they see them. There might not be anything in it this time, but next time there might, and it reminds the crims they're being watched.

It's not exactly working that way on national level.

 

[Antonio]

Would you please stay on topic and avoid going personal?

 

[BullpupRafale]

Closest person to scaffolding staircases is 70 pixels and and staircase height is 450 pixels.
Regardless if person is 170 or 175 centimeters, scaffolding is at 11 meters or slightly more.
Hull depth is no less than 9 meters and width of scaffolding staircase is 250 centimeters at most.​

 

[SK2]

@DWG How dare you! North Korean's are all 12 feet tall and this is a 10,000 ton cruiser, those losing Westerners will be no match with our great power!


Back to normal, this is still a fairly large frigate for North Koreans, with single funnel and probably a large helicopter hanger. Some suggested the ESA structure could be similar to late 054A/054B's recent X-band target illumination radar.

 

[Dilandu]

Back to normal, this is still a fairly large frigate for North Koreans, with single funnel and probably a large helicopter hanger. Some suggested the ESA structure could be similar to late 054A/054B's recent X-band target illumination radar.

Well, when you did not exactly have much experience with naval technology, it's reasonable to use a bigger hull - so you could dealt with potential problems like equipment being heavier than planned, or power supply being insufficient.

 

[SK2]

Well, when you did not exactly have much experience with naval technology, it's reasonable to use a bigger hull - so you could dealt with potential problems like equipment being heavier than planned, or power supply being insufficient.

Especially when your budget can afford! However most newborn navy vessel builders will usually suffer from top-heavy designs, and it may take some time (and learning curve) to design a reasonable vessel (Tico: what about me?)

 

[Dilandu]

Especially when your budget can afford! However most newborn navy vessel builders will usually suffer from top-heavy designs, and it may take some time (and learning curve) to design a reasonable vessel (Tico: what about me?)

Yep. The large hull is more beneficial here, too; you could add more ballast to stabilize the top-heavy design.

 

[SK2]

Yep. The large hull is more beneficial here, too; you could add more ballast to stabilize the top-heavy design.

Only if they have retain space for ballast...

 

[BullpupRafale]

Honestly not a fan of design of this frigate, but I will not judge it until it is completed and put into service.

 

[GTX]

North Korea's New Warship Appears To Be Designed For Vertical Launch System, Phased Array Radar

Fresh construction images provide details on North Korea's most advanced warship project ever. The new warship is likely North Korea's biggest and certainly its most modern, with a possible vertical launch system.

www.twz.com

 

[BullpupRafale]

Literally every picture North Korea has released of this ship has lens distortion that it seems they could not taken picture of entire ship in a single frame without using it and they could not move it backward even if it was possible as frigate has already its rear almost to dock exit.

 

[DWG]

More accurate to use steel holders as example of measurement

Except that they need to be a known height to extrapolate from. That's the entire basis of sizing an unknown from a photographic image, you size them from a known yardstick. You claim the keel blocks are over 2m, yet there's a range of heights. The ones opposite the groups in the bow and side shots are clearly taller than the people near them, I'd guess around 3m, which is consistent with my estimate. The ones under the forefoot are clearly smaller than the people, IMO, perhaps 1.5m at most, the ones further aft vary in both configuration and size.

And in looking at that side-on shot with Kim, I notice I've been mis-interpreting something - the hull is cut away where the sonar or hydrodynamic bulb will be mounted later, I'd interpreted that as keel level, but the hull actually step downs directly behind the left most white-jacketed figure by at least another metre, more likely 1.5m, but it's difficult to see precisely where the keel is given shadow and the keel blocks. So boost my hull depth estimate up to 9.5m.

 

[DWG]

Going by your own assertions in your above posts that you could only use around 4m of the hull for a vls it should only require around a 1.5 to at most a 2.0 meter step in front of the bridge to accommodate a mk41 vls (Self Defence) equivalent.
This seems well within the realm of probability to me.

I agree, if you're willing to go higher than deck level then you can fit a self-defence VLS, but I'm not convinced it's going to be a particularly large one, how much of the beam of the ship is over 4m in depth at that point? The bow seems to be quite finely raked, meaning you get much less than the full beam to use - cf the Adelaide class, where there was only space to add an 8-cell Mk 41 in the bow, even when going 2m or so above deck level.

 

[BullpupRafale]

Except that they need to be a known height to extrapolate from. That's the entire basis of sizing an unknown from a photographic image, you size them from a known yardstick. You claim the keel blocks are over 2m, yet there's a range of heights. The ones opposite the groups in the bow and side shots are clearly taller than the people near them, I'd guess around 3m, which is consistent with my estimate. The ones under the forefoot are clearly smaller than the people, IMO, perhaps 1.5m at most, the ones further aft vary in both configuration and size.

I nowhere have ever claimed height of keel blocks, at least we get this estimate of yours since you're making the assertion about it.

And in looking at that side-on shot with Kim, I notice I've been mis-interpreting something - the hull is cut away where the sonar or hydrodynamic bulb will be mounted later, I'd interpreted that as keel level, but the hull actually step downs directly behind the left most white-jacketed figure by at least another metre, more likely 1.5m, but it's difficult to see precisely where the keel is given shadow and the keel blocks. So boost my hull depth estimate up to 9.5m.

My estimate is at 9 meters without sonar / hydrodynamic bulb and thus going by your addition of 1.5 meter for total of 10.5 hull depth.
Enough to house cold launch of surface to air missile 8 meter tall canister for example from S-300 analogue. as vertical launch system.
Opening for VLS seems to have ratio of 2 to 1 of width to length, at most perhaps 8 meter width and 4 meter length for VLS opening.

I agree, if you're willing to go higher than deck level then you can fit a self-defence VLS, but I'm not convinced it's going to be a particularly large one, how much of the beam of the ship is over 4m in depth at that point? The bow seems to be quite finely raked, meaning you get much less than the full beam to use - cf the Adelaide class, where there was only space to add an 8-cell Mk 41 in the bow, even when going 2m or so above deck level.

Hard to even estimate available depth when there is no image of straight up looking at front of bow nor entire side of frigate.

 

[DWG]

I nowhere have ever claimed height of keel blocks,

"Among those people next to this frigate is Kim Jong-un that has height of 1.75 meter.
Those steel blocks at ship bow are certainly taller than that, perhaps 2 meters height."

My estimate is at 9 meters without sonar / hydrodynamic bulb and thus going by your addition of 1.5 meter for total of 10.5 hull depth.
Enough to house cold launch of surface to air missile 8 meter tall canister for example from S-300 analogue. as vertical launch system

How much of the width of the hull is 8m deep? It looks to be a rather fine bow and I don't think you're going to get more than a couple of metres of usable width if you want to go that deep. Within that hull depth you also need a double bottom, bilges, bilge access, and maintenance access to the sonar dome's electronics (assuming it is one and not just a hydrodynamic bulb).

 

[BullpupRafale]

"Among those people next to this frigate is Kim Jong-un that has height of 1.75 meter.
Those steel blocks at ship bow are certainly taller than that, perhaps 2 meters height."

My bad. That was before I noticed various images were taken at different dates thus incomparable and useless to cross reference at all. Thus my mind forgot about that as it is incorrect guess I made when I have not yet noticed differences in clothing. Summer and Winter dressing.

How much of the width of the hull is 8m deep? It looks to be a rather fine bow and I don't think you're going to get more than a couple of metres of usable width if you want to go that deep. Within that hull depth you also need a double bottom, bilges, bilge access, and maintenance access to the sonar dome's electronics (assuming it is one and not just a hydrodynamic bulb).

VLS in general are not completely flush with deck floor though in rare cases may be elevated above or depressed below height of deck bow floor. Very much possible they could have 1 meter of 8 meter canister to be above bow deck floor level. We will found out by time whenever they finish the ship.

 

[Jason Dykstra (Wyvern)]

"how many countries in the world can design and build a similar ship?"

How many countries can build something that looks like a warship to civilian standards? Many.

 

[Jason Dykstra (Wyvern)]

boarded in international waters just because

Maybe it's because they take part in the international weapons and drugs smuggling trade?

Whatever they are, they will need to be built in large numbers - I personally expect 6-8. And each ship will need a lot of escorts, they cannot fight alone. It will be very busy for North Korean research institutes and shipyards.

If that is the case then one must wonder whether they have the shipyard capacity to build and maintain them in the long term. I do not doubt that the willpower is there, but I need more information regarding DPRK shipbuilding practices, operations and facilities.

I also do question the logic behind such a procurement; wouldn't it make more sense to simply build larger numbers of fast attack craft, semi-submersibles USVs, and stealth corvettes (a la Visby-class) which can make uses of the many bays and islands present in North Korea. They simply cannot fight a conventional naval conflict against the ROKN, USN and JMSDF. One can argue that it could be used for joint operations with the Russian Pacific Fleet, but the Navy of that country has had far from a stellar performance in the War in Ukraine. If this is really an oceangoing fleet as some members of this thread have seemed to insinuate, you're going to need a large number of support assets, which the North Koreans lack currently, and would take years to built up to a decent standard. From what I can see, it's a prestige piece, which does serve some limited military utility, but would otherwise simply be a speedbump in any engagement with enemy forces. Another potential use for them is as an escort in the Yellow Sea, but that would be squarely aimed at China.