Damian Posted January 3, 2016 Posted January 3, 2016 Similiar to some US designs, like the one for TTB.
M48A5K Posted January 4, 2016 Author Posted January 4, 2016 (edited) Similiar to some US designs, like the one for TTB.Haven't heard of any tech transfer related to this, but I guess developers were influenced by some of the foreign armor designs(mostly US). Even one of the concept considered for the K2 is almost identical to the FMBT featured in July-August 1993 ARMOR magazine. Edited January 4, 2016 by M48A5K
Simon Tan Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 I think those would be awesome additions to the Kurdistan Light Horse in place of their equally geriatric T-54s.
swerve Posted January 4, 2016 Posted January 4, 2016 You mean there were some news about KF-X as of late? Because the cooperation agreement was signed already in 2010. Also, they recently chose KAI AND Lockheed Martin to do the job, what can potentially hurt their exports - US will have to agree to the sales. Also it looks like it won't be 'pure' 5th gen fighter, but still more stealthy than EF or Rafale. And I don't want to say it's not impressive, quite the contrary.After the issues with T-50 (not being allowed to fit the radar of its choice & being required to fit older technology), I can only imagine that S. Korea assumes that it must do what the USA wants, however inconvenient or unpleasant. And that includes signing agreements which allow the LM & the US government to limit what S. Korea can buy for its armed forces, who it can sell the weapons it makes to, etc..
tankerwanabe Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 Did the SKoreans ever try to sell off their T-80u? What does retirement mean? Mothballing them just in case? Or scrap?
urbanoid Posted January 5, 2016 Posted January 5, 2016 After the issues with T-50 (not being allowed to fit the radar of its choice & being required to fit older technology), I can only imagine that S. Korea assumes that it must do what the USA wants, however inconvenient or unpleasant. And that includes signing agreements which allow the LM & the US government to limit what S. Korea can buy for its armed forces, who it can sell the weapons it makes to, etc.. Let's not forget that after being denied JASSM they simply went on to buy Taurus. I don't think the USians were that mad, it's probably them who reached some conclusions - no problem in selling JASSM to both Poland and Finland after that. Of course, there may be various ways to sweeten the 'unequal' deal - if e.g. T-50 becomes a basic trainer for USAF and SoKor has a share in production of all of them, it may well be worth more than potential exports to 'restricted' countries. Not that the trainer variant is doing so well on the market, it lost to M-346 in Israel, Singapore and Poland.
Chris Werb Posted January 8, 2016 Posted January 8, 2016 After the issues with T-50 (not being allowed to fit the radar of its choice & being required to fit older technology), I can only imagine that S. Korea assumes that it must do what the USA wants, however inconvenient or unpleasant. And that includes signing agreements which allow the LM & the US government to limit what S. Korea can buy for its armed forces, who it can sell the weapons it makes to, etc.. Let's not forget that after being denied JASSM they simply went on to buy Taurus. I don't think the USians were that mad, it's probably them who reached some conclusions - no problem in selling JASSM to both Poland and Finland after that. Of course, there may be various ways to sweeten the 'unequal' deal - if e.g. T-50 becomes a basic trainer for USAF and SoKor has a share in production of all of them, it may well be worth more than potential exports to 'restricted' countries. Not that the trainer variant is doing so well on the market, it lost to M-346 in Israel, Singapore and Poland. How is the BAe Hawk T2 doing? I haven't heard much about that one of late.
swerve Posted January 10, 2016 Posted January 10, 2016 After the issues with T-50 (not being allowed to fit the radar of its choice & being required to fit older technology), I can only imagine that S. Korea assumes that it must do what the USA wants, however inconvenient or unpleasant. And that includes signing agreements which allow the LM & the US government to limit what S. Korea can buy for its armed forces, who it can sell the weapons it makes to, etc.. Let's not forget that after being denied JASSM they simply went on to buy Taurus. I don't think the USians were that mad, it's probably them who reached some conclusions - no problem in selling JASSM to both Poland and Finland after that. Of course, there may be various ways to sweeten the 'unequal' deal - if e.g. T-50 becomes a basic trainer for USAF and SoKor has a share in production of all of them, it may well be worth more than potential exports to 'restricted' countries. Not that the trainer variant is doing so well on the market, it lost to M-346 in Israel, Singapore and Poland. Fair point about Taurus, but I think S. Korea's still accepting some US restrictions which the USA makes no attempt to impose on European allies. BTW, T-50's sold to Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand & Iraq.
2805662 Posted January 12, 2016 Posted January 12, 2016 How is the BAe Hawk T2 doing? I haven't heard much about that one of late.Seems uncompetitive against the current crop of trainers. Not surprising, age (of the base airframe) considering. Apparently it's not even being offered in the USAF competition.
urbanoid Posted January 12, 2016 Posted January 12, 2016 Fair point about Taurus, but I think S. Korea's still accepting some US restrictions which the USA makes no attempt to impose on European allies. BTW, T-50's sold to Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand & Iraq. Why would they accept restrictions NOT imposed on European allies? And why would the US impose more restrictions on SoKor? I mean, sure, US restricts a lot when it comes to mil. equipment and it's understandable, but why should be SoKor treated differently? In this particular case I can totally see them buying some AESA radar from the Juice. I know about those deals for T-50s, was there a competition against M-346 in any of them? Obviously money is money, but you must admit that my cases were more ... erm ... prestigious?
swerve Posted January 12, 2016 Posted January 12, 2016 (edited) Why? Ask the S. Koreans & USians. I think it dates from the Korean war, when the broken remnants of the S. Korean armed forces were placed under US command. They stayed under US command until surprisingly recently. I think that subservience to the USA became a deeply ingrained habit, & largely unquestioned by either country. Consider the T-50. It was shown at an air show several years ago with a Selex Vixen 500E radar beside it, & displays saying it was being offered as an option for the armed version. But Lockheed Martin vetoed that & insisted on an older technology radar (preferably a particular US model, but they eventually agreed to the Israeli EL/M-2032), & because of a clause in the joint development agreement, LM could do that. Why was that clause there? Because the Koreans hadn't argued when LM put it in, & hadn't questioned its implications. They pretty much trusted the big brothers. So T-50/FA-50 doesn't have an AESA radar because of an American veto. They did the same with mobile telephony, where in the 1990s they adopted a US system which was incompatible with 80% of the mobile phones in the world, so Koreans travelling abroad couldn't use their phones in most places they travelled to & most foreign visitors couldn't use their phones in S. Korea. Even the majority of US visitors, as the more common European-developed GSM system was also used widely in the USA. That was later publicly stated by a S. Korean government minister to have been a mistake & due to blind obedience to US requests regardless of S. Korean interests. The US embassy had lobbied for the adoption of US technology, & the S. Koreans obliged. It was how things were. It's changed, & is continuing to change, but I think there's still a lot of that thinking remaining. Edited January 12, 2016 by swerve
TOW-2 Posted January 17, 2016 Posted January 17, 2016 They need a first strike nuke capability. Agreed.
Laser Shark Posted January 30, 2016 Posted January 30, 2016 K9 Thunder during the recent winter trials in Norway:
JasonJ Posted February 13, 2016 Posted February 13, 2016 Cobra Gold exercise maybe? SEOUL, Jan. 29 (Yonhap) -- South Korean combat forces will join a United States-led multinational military exercise to be held next month in Thailand, the Navy said Friday. Some 440 Navy and Marine soldiers will depart for Thailand on Saturday to join the Cobra Gold exercise, which will run from Feb. 6 through 19. It is an annual peacekeeping operation exercise, led by the U.S. Pacific Command and the Thailand military. In this year's gathering, some 7,900 forces will take part from Japan, Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia beside the three countries, along with five warships, 24 armored vehicles and 35 airplanes. China, Britain, Australia and 13 other countries will join as observers. In 2002, South Korea joined the exercise, which was launched in 1982, as an observer before becoming a full-time member in 2010. For this year's exercise, South Korea will send the 4,900-ton Cheon Wang Bong amphibious landing ship and eight combat tanks. After arriving at the Sattahip port, the South Korean team will carry out drills in the fields of command post exercise, humanitarian civil assistance and field training exercise, all aimed at multinational training to resolve a conflict situation, according to the Navy. "The Cobra Gold exercise is a joint humanitarian drill to get training on what the United Nations forces have done during the Korean War," a Navy official said. "The Navy and the Marine Corps will continue to improve our combat capabilities to prepare against various types of threats and protect our people and interests in any part of the world."http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2016/01/29/0200000000AEN20160129003500315.html
PKman Posted February 18, 2016 Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) How is the BAe Hawk T2 doing? I haven't heard much about that one of late. They all retired in early 2013. They weren't ROKAF's favorite trainers due to high price (close to that of early F-16s) and bad compatibility. Edit: Just found out that you mentioned T2... Edited February 19, 2016 by PKman
urbanoid Posted February 19, 2016 Posted February 19, 2016 (edited) Edited February 19, 2016 by urbanoid
Dark_Falcon Posted February 24, 2016 Posted February 24, 2016 A K-1 disembarks from an LST in March of last year:
Damian Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 Wow, these photos are extremely interesting, thanks M48A5K!
Panzermann Posted March 29, 2016 Posted March 29, 2016 Wow, these photos are extremely interesting, thanks M48A5K!+1 In the nineties or eighties we would never ever have seen these. Tank manufacturing was top secret or something.
JasonJ Posted April 2, 2016 Posted April 2, 2016 This 2016 parade is by the 20th Mechanized Infantry Division to commemorate it's beginning on February 9th, 1953. Over 340 vehicles participated for the review. It was carried out in Yangpyeong County, Gyeonggi Province.
JasonJ Posted April 2, 2016 Posted April 2, 2016 South Korean forces in 2016 Cobra Gold. K1 disembarking on the beach at the end. Some US and Thai forces is also shown.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now