South Korean Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

ACuriousPLAFan

Colonel
Registered Member
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Speaking of which, here's the "Joint Firepower Ship" arsenal ship model exhibited by Hanwha.

Posted by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on Twitter.

FyAZrlBaIAc85zZ.jpeg
FyAZ4hoaMAA1zjq.jpeg
FyAbHYeaMAIu0DQ.jpeg

Basically looks like a stretched version of 055, lol.

Armament wise, other than 2 CIWS and one gun, it has 48 KVLS-1, 32 KVLS-2 and 15 L(Large?)-KVLS.

Three main (personal) critiques:
1. Why even bother with 3 different variants of the K-VLS on a single hull? Just fit more K-VLS1 (or alternatively, KVLS-2 with quad-pack capability with that L-KVLS grouping in the rear.
2. That's a huuuuuuge waste of space forward of the superstructure.
3. Those L-VLS arrangement is just really... sigh...

I can bet 20 bucks that some Chinese military 3D modeler on Weibo can do a much better arsenal ship model than Hanwha.
 
Last edited:

ACuriousPLAFan

Colonel
Registered Member
Three main (personal) critiques:
1. Why even bother with 3 different variants of the K-VLS on a single hull? Just fit more K-VLS1 (or alternatively, KVLS-2 with quad-pack capability) with that L-KVLS grouping in the rear of the main superstructure.
2. That's a huuuuuuge waste of space forward of the superstructure.
3. Those L-VLS arrangement is just really... sigh...

I can bet 20 bucks that some Chinese military 3D modelers on Weibo can do a much better arsenal ship model than Hanwha.
Minor corrections.
 

pevade

Junior Member
Registered Member
Speaking of which, here's the "Joint Firepower Ship" arsenal ship model exhibited by Hanwha.

Posted by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on Twitter.

View attachment 114069
View attachment 114070
View attachment 114071

Basically looks like a stretched version of 055, lol.

Armament wise, other than 2 CIWS and one gun, it has 48 KVLS-1, 32 KVLS-2 and 15 L(Large?)-KVLS.

Three main (personal) critiques:
1. Why even bother with 3 different variants of the K-VLS on a single hull? Just fit more K-VLS1 (or alternatively, KVLS-2 with quad-pack capability with that L-KVLS grouping in the rear.
2. That's a huuuuuuge waste of space forward of the superstructure.
3. Those L-VLS arrangement is just really... sigh...

I can bet 20 bucks that some Chinese military 3D modeler on Weibo can do a much better arsenal ship model than Hanwha.
I mean at this point whats the difference between this and a type 55D?
If you're gonna go full arsenal ship, just send it. Ditch the radars except for the CIWS illuminators and rely on accompanying ships to provide targeting or rather just slave the ship to the whole fleet and let them decide what to engage.
Also what is the dimensions of the KVLS-I (are they firing some short ranged SAM)? Aren't these escorts/fleet ships supposed to be reaaaallly far apart in IRL combat formation which basically renders the KVLS-I sized missiles useless as ship defense for the arsenal ship's escorts (apart from personal ship defense).
Or am I missing something here.
 

nimitz123

Just Hatched
Registered Member
What is
Speaking of which, here's the "Joint Firepower Ship" arsenal ship model exhibited by Hanwha.

Posted by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on Twitter.

View attachment 114069
View attachment 114070
View attachment 114071

Basically looks like a stretched version of 055, lol.

Armament wise, other than 2 CIWS and one gun, it has 48 KVLS-1, 32 KVLS-2 and 15 L(Large?)-KVLS.

Three main (personal) critiques:
1. Why even bother with 3 different variants of the K-VLS on a single hull? Just fit more K-VLS1 (or alternatively, KVLS-2 with quad-pack capability with that L-KVLS grouping in the rear.
2. That's a huuuuuuge waste of space forward of the superstructure.
3. Those L-VLS arrangement is just really... sigh...

I can bet 20 bucks that some Chinese military 3D modeler on Weibo can do a much better arsenal ship model than Hanwha.
What is the massive VLS used for? IRBM perhaps?
 

BoraTas

Captain
Registered Member
Speaking of which, here's the "Joint Firepower Ship" arsenal ship model exhibited by Hanwha.

Posted by
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
on Twitter.

View attachment 114069
View attachment 114070
View attachment 114071

Basically looks like a stretched version of 055, lol.

Armament wise, other than 2 CIWS and one gun, it has 48 KVLS-1, 32 KVLS-2 and 15 L(Large?)-KVLS.

Three main (personal) critiques:
1. Why even bother with 3 different variants of the K-VLS on a single hull? Just fit more K-VLS1 (or alternatively, KVLS-2 with quad-pack capability with that L-KVLS grouping in the rear.
2. That's a huuuuuuge waste of space forward of the superstructure.
3. Those L-VLS arrangement is just really... sigh...

I can bet 20 bucks that some Chinese military 3D modeler on Weibo can do a much better arsenal ship model than Hanwha.
I am not going to criticize its VLS arrangement despite it including 3 different launchers, which is a weird choice for a post-2025 ship.

What I am going to criticize is the rationale for such a ship.

1- A ship like this makes no difference against North Korea, which is conventionally overmatched greatly.
2- A ship like this makes no difference against China. ROKN wouldn't be survivable against PLA and South Korea could just launch missiles from trucks.
3- Against Japan it does make some sense. It can establish new attack vectors and can be defended. But its opportunity cost must be evaluated well. Large naval vessels are fantastically expensive and defending these ships to their launch points and back would tie up a lot of aero and naval resources. It should be evaluated if the obtained capability is worth all of this.
 

Gloire_bb

Captain
Registered Member
I am not going to criticize its VLS arrangement despite it including 3 different launchers, which is a weird choice for a post-2025 ship.

What I am going to criticize is the rationale for such a ship.

1- A ship like this makes no difference against North Korea, which is conventionally overmatched greatly.
2- A ship like this makes no difference against China. ROKN wouldn't be survivable against PLA and South Korea could just launch missiles from trucks.
1 - is it?
NK firepower is quite impressive - and, as Karabakh and now Ukrainian conflict shows, was developed in a very right direction.

Worst Korea looks fancier, but apart from the airforce (which North simply can't get from anywhere), i would be careful talking overmatches. Especially great ones.

2 - RK navy has a relatively safe geographical backyard in the sea of Japan - and it's already large enough to matter (all 3 East Asian navies are).
It of course depends on the political setup of the conflict(North Korea? Japan?), but dismissing ROK navy is wrong.
 
Top