The Birds
A South Korean naval vessel sank with more than 100 aboard “and Seoul was looking into whether it was due to a torpedo attack by the North, South Korea’s YTN TV network reported.” Seoul later backpedaled on speculation saying a flock of birds may have been responsible for radar returns which prompted South Korean return fire. They also said the ship may have run around or been the victim of an internal explosion.
The vessel in question was ROKS Cheonan, a 1,200 ton corvette armed with Harpoon antiship missiles, 76 mm cannon and torpedoes. It sank in the vicinity of Baengnyeong Island, the site of several clashes between North and South Korea.
It is a wild and isolated spot. Wikipedia says “the Chinese egret, which is considered to be one of the fifty rarest birds in the world, can be found here. Taiwanese President “Ma Ying-jeou activated the country’s national security mechanism on Friday after a South Korean naval ship sank in the Yellow Sea, the island’s Central News Agency reported.”
Last week the US wrapped up its annual exercises with South Korea. Exercise Key Resolve was aimed at preparing for transitioning the wartime command of Korean forces to Seoul.
“We are standing up the organizations already to be able to make sure that the organizational structures … are completely up and operational,” Sharp said. Both U.S. Forces Korea, which will become U.S. Korea Command when operational control transfers, and the South Korean military headquarters and components are preparing for the transition.
In the meantime the US continues to exercise formal influence on affairs. The Guardian says that North Korea may be testing the waters. But it is not sure whether South Korea can be completely restrained. Some form of retaliation is possible.
If the sinking of Cheonan was intentional, it creates a serious crisis for the Koreas’ neighbours and for the United States. None of the US, Japan, or China desire the threat of major military action on the Korean Peninsula. The US, still embroiled in Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn’t want another military confrontation on its plate. At the same time, it will be difficult for the US to restrain South Korea from some form of retaliation. Japan’s patience with North Korea has similarly run thin, and it is unlikely that Tokyo could be relied on too heavily as a voice of caution. Beijing has only limited affection for its North Korean client, but certainly does not want war, or even the threat of war. North Korea’s intentions remain mysterious; if it intended to signal its toughness and resolve to South Korea, it may have bitten off more than it can chew.
Until a definitive conclusion is reached one can only review the types of naval threats that have been revealed in recent years. During the 2006 Lebanon war the Sa’ar 5 class Israeli corvette Hanit was hit by a C-802 antiship missile. Four crewmen were killed and the warship had to be towed back to base. The North Koreans are reported to possess Silkworms, whose prowess is shown in the video below.
embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt
The other threat mentioned is the naval torpedo. Small torpedo boats can be armed with something like the TP613 torpedo whose effects are shown in the 2nd of 3 videos below. The gold standard for destructiveness is the US Mk 48 heavyweight torpedo, which as can be seen in the last of the three videos, is capable of snapping an older target destroyer like a twig.
embedded by Embedded VideoYouTube Direkt
Tip Jar or Subscribe for $5
Unclear how we’ll ever know what the ROK naval command knows, and it may be wondering if it, too, will ever know what happened aboard the Cheonan. If the situation is ambiguous (and it seems to be; or is being spun in that direction) then that makes it hard to declare it casus belli, But there is an inverse relationship between the ambiguity and the impact. This was not a fender-bender. Bad enough to lose a ship of the line. But 100 lives or more? No way to ignore that. So even if the situation remains ambiguous at its heart, or is played that way for public consumption to avoid the Chinese losing face when their client state gets called out, I would think that unless the navy is satisfied that the Norks were in no way culpable, the absence of immediate and open declaration of war will not mean much. More likely a series of “errors” and “accidents” over the next 6-12 months in which a surprising number of Nork military assets and personnel just…blow up. Or disappear. If that leads the Norks to declare war, fine, the ROK will be as ready for that as it can be.
In the meantime I imagine Obama will bring our troops home. He won’t back up the ROK but he couldn’t stand the heat if the Norks nuke Americans. Which they would do.
I think that S. Korea should test a nuke in May, and then go on to develop a “first strike” capability vs. the Norks. They could work with India, which should also develop the ability to do a decapitating strike on Pakistan.
If the situation is ambiguous (and it seems to be; or is being spun in that direction) then that makes it hard to declare it casus belli
Oh, I don’t know, I think Remember the Cheonan! has a nice ring to it. Something similarly ambiguous launched one of our favorite little wars, and acquired for us Wretchard’s original homeland.
My eaten post on the last thread about this follows. If you find it in limbo there wretchard please delete it.
(fm the BC thread “The Gathering Storm”)
Regarding my suspicions on the cause of today’s possible naval conflict off Korea reported by Subotai Bahadur I did a little homework.
A couple of searches on “offshore drilling equipment” and “oil exploration yellow sea” yielded some interesting results. Clearly the DPRK is exploring in the area.
The industry is large and complicated this is a good web site, SubSea.org, but has little on the North China/Yellow Sea area.
The Norks are against the wall. If the industry told China that they can not do business as long as the waters are not safe then the DPRK may get defanged. The South Koreans manufacture much of the drilling equipment so there may be an opening to induce China to apply pressure.
My expectation is that in the event of a real war North Korea might simply implode leaving a humanitarian disaster behind. The biggest constraint on South Korea is not the mayhem that the North could inflict for 24 to 72 hours, which is real given the proximity of Seoul to the DMZ, but the cost of absorbing their impoverished cousins. The burden that West Germany assumed by unification with the DDR was seen. For 20 years now the ROK governments have paid to keep the North on life support.
This time “Some damn fool thing in the Balkans” can happen anywhere.
Alright it relented, I will calm down. To much time and emotion get invested in things.
Why does China support an independent North Korea?
If they do so to put pressure on a perceived threat from a US lead alliance of South Korea, Japan and the legacy of SEATO then they are viewing the situation exactly backwards. SEATO is dead and buried and there is zero chance of any outside power intervening in East Asia except for the United States or possibly Russia. The local nations are bound in ASEAN, which is not a military alliance or are linked by bilateral relations with Japan or Taiwan. The nearest regional powers are Australia and India.
What would happen if the Chinese pressed for the peaceful unwinding of the Pyongyang regime? Normal regional politics, that have been frozen by the imposition of a Cold War division between the United States and whoever is supporting North Korea, would proceed. The American military presence would rapidly decline. This would probably happen more dramatically than it did in Europe after the Cold War. The Republic of Korea would be transformed from an American client forced into an uneasy quasi-alliance with Japan into a strong neutral balancing between China, Russia and Japan. The benefits for trade and resource development for all concerned would be significant.
The Chinese could upset this scenario by escalating tensions with a drive for resources that mimics the drive of Imperial Japan 70 years ago. In that worst case eventuality how much of an asset would North Korea prove to China? Would they serve as a club to hold off Japan or the ROK cooperating with America or would they prove to be a liability? My suspicion is that China would regret being tied to an alliance with the DPRK as much as Nazi Germany learned to regret being tied to Fascist Italy after Mussolini dragged Hitler’s forces into the distraction of the Balkans.
LOTM (#4): thanks for the oil-side insights. These things usually are driven, or sparked, by resource needs. The Japanese only started WW2 when they lost access to oil and rubber. So the Norks probably see great advantage in seizing a place at the table –or more likely, threatening to spoil everyone else’s chances to sit there if they aren’t paid off. As for their desperate status, that’s certainly my impression; and keeping the regime on “just enough” life support has been agonizingly hard. Too much and the South has merely increased the Norks’ boldness and appetite. Too little and the South is hit with unprovoked war and then swamped with refugees whose lives it must immediately and unfailingly improve to the highest aspirations of the NGOs and the media. Who would want that job?
LOTM
“My expectation is that in the event of a real war North Korea might simply implode leaving a humanitarian disaster behind. The biggest constraint on South Korea is not the mayhem that the North could inflict for 24 to 72 hours, which is real given the proximity of Seoul to the DMZ, but the cost of absorbing their impoverished cousins.”
There (above) is the understatement of the century.
NK is about ready to implode now. Their military has been on short rations for months and they are the only ones that are eating that much. The population is one day from starvation. Revolt? They should – but they should have revolted and overthrown the NK government anytime in the last fifty years.
It is hard to get out from under the foot of the oppressor, Americans should know and understand this fact.
Papa Ray
Papa Ray #8: “they should have revolted and overthrown the NK government anytime in the last fifty years.” Sure. But who will bell the cat? When the regime has the guns, the troops, the trucks, the command lines, it is always outnumbered (even against an unarmed populace) but it can always put unacceptable levels of pain on any aspirants for local revolt. That collective action problem –accepting personal sacrifice/risk to achieve a net gain for the group– is the stopper.
Ways to lower the imbalance? Build local capacity. Figure out how to connect with other like-minded players. Trusted comm networks are key. No wonder the Norks have done their best to keep their populace deaf, dumb and blind.
I admire the Chinese and appreciate their efforts to recover from communism and join the productive countries of the world. (And they’ve warned us not to become communist–it’s unproductive.)
However, their foreign policy seems excessively stupid. If they used common sense, they would already have convinced Taiwan to rejoin the mainland government. They would also have used a much softer touch in running Hong Kong. They would also have destroyed the communist regime of North Korea and courted the South Koreans so that Korea would once again become a client state of China.
The Koreans relate to China in the same way that Americans, Canadians, and Australia relate to England. That’s the source of their culture–with local modifications. There is no inherent hostility so long as China is no longer a communist country.
I see all you wingnut neocon imperialists are at it again. Haven/t you had enough of this foreign interventionism? We’ve been in that kimchi-ridden place for over 50 years now.
Time to bring the boys home and bring them home NOW!
All US military personnel on or around the Korean peninsula should report to the Yalu River immediately for appropriate transportation back to the USA!
Seriously folks: North Korea is running an extortionist racket. And all extortionists
eventually have to either (a) turn themselves in or (b) start making good on their threats.
What do YOU think the Norks will do?
So: Demand an apology for the Cheonan along with reparations and the return of the Pueblo to its rightful owners. When they do not come through, a formal Declaration of War is in order.
As it APPEARS they have run their conventional forces into the ground, an invasion SHOULD go somewhat smoothly.
Then comes the hard part. The US and the ROKs
will have to feed the north for a year or maybe two. But then the very hardiness of Koreans should come to the fore and they will
become self-supporting. In the meantime,
ROKs can take over the administrative duties of occupation which is where the US always has a rough time.
And I daresay that evangelical Korean Christians will lend a mighty hand in restoring an ethical society up there.
Course, we need to get us a new Congress and CiC first. Maybe the Good Lord will see to it that time does not run out on us before we get our own house in order.
All US military personnel on or around the Korean peninsula should report to the Yalu River immediately for appropriate transportation back to the USA!
Well, if they reported at the Yalu, there wouldn’t be much need to remain in Korea…
… except to deal with the humanitarian crisis noted above.
My guess is that it was a mine. And the ROK navy will not admit it.
#10: “The Koreans relate to China in the same way that Americans, Canadians, and Australia relate to England. That’s the source of their culture–with local modifications. There is no inherent hostility so long as China is no longer a communist country.”
The South Korean attitude toward China is historically one of caution, tempered with a small dose of resentment. To suggest that South Korea would willingly become a client state to mainland China creates a wrong impression of the South Korean mindset. They are a proud and independent people. Look at their historical sagas for a clue on how they regard China’s relationship to their culture. They have progressed too far technologically and politically to ever submit to becoming a vassal state.
The North Koreans are sometimes referred to as the “Norks.” I can imagine lookouts yelling, “Nork Snork’” causing unfortunate, uncontrollable giggling by an inattentive helmsman.
It has been sixteen years since I was responsible for knowing things about North Korea, but technologically speaking it isn’t a country that has been forging ahead in naval matters.
From my past knowledge of North Korea naval technology, it seems more likely the ship hit a mine, or as the news reports are implying as the result of some internal explosion (the preferred conclusion by the Obama administration, I’m sure). The DPRKN has “awash” submersibles that could be rigged for explosive ramming, but which would be difficult against an underway warship.
The DRPKN has some mini-subs oriented toward harbor attacks, but as I recall, they were not capable of taking on a warship underway.
They do have Romeos, but my guess is the majority are now all rusted and barnacled beyond repair. They went to sea as much as the DPRKAF went into the air. Perhaps they cannibalised enough to make themselves one topnotch Romeo, but who has the experience to take the boat on a run? The North Korea submarine fleet bears a strong resemblance to the French Fleet in Napoleonic days.
All sorts of vessels can lay minefields. The DPKRN would be capable of pulling that off.
The Pohang class Corvette comes in two variants; ASuW [Anti-Surface warfare] and ASW [Anti-Submarine Warfare]. ROKN Cheonan [PCC-772] was the ASW variant.
The only data point we have, other than the approximate location, was that she suffered an explosion on or under the stern. I tend to discount the ROK government and the American regime’s favorite explanation of it being an internal explosion. The engineering spaces are more amidships. She ran on an LM-2500 gas turbine, which is one of the most widely used ship engines in our fleet. Pretty much all of our modern surface warfare vessels use one or more of them and they are not known for explosive tendencies. Pohang‘s also have two cruising diesels for loiter capability, and diesels don’t go bang. Her Mk. 46 ASW torpedoes are amidships. No missiles. Aft she had 1 OTO Melara 76mm and of course the magazine. OTO Melara’s are standard and operational on board Western warships all over the world. They have been around for decades. While I admit that I may have missed it, I have never heard of one of them being the cause of an internal explosion. I would also note that while there are more than a few major cultural differences between our forces and the ROK’s; the ROK’s tend to take care of their weapons; being very serious about the idea of them working so that they can kill people and break things without worrying about their weapons failing in the process.
That leaves 12 racked depth charges on the stern. If I remember correctly, there is one rack on the portside of the fantail. If one of the charges went off, there is no way that there would not have been a ripple of sympathetic explosions. It took over 4 hours for Cheonan to sink. If the depth charges had gone off, there would likely not have been anything left to sink aft of the funnel.
My guesses [and I would weight them according to bottom topography at the sinking site, which we do not have] would be either a mine or a torpedo. The set of possibilities as to the owner/operator of either is somewhat limited.
The ROKs, for their own reasonable strategic reasons, do not want a full scale war to break out. They do not fear losing it. They fear the cost, with their capitol in artillery range, and the prospects of dealing with the aftermath of victory.
Buraq Hussein fears a war breaking out, because he wants America’s enemies to win and North Korea can’t, and he fears having to defend an ally of America and the domestic and international sequalae of cutting and running given the somewhat irate mood at home and abroad. A premature attack by his ideological allies at this sensitive point in time would be a “black swan” event not covered by his 5-Year Plan. I suspect that the Blue House in Seoul has received a number of messages from DC that are less than supportive. I hope that said messages have biased the ROK’s towards developing their own strategic deterrent, given that they really cannot depend on us.
The ROK Navy has indicated that it intends to raise the wreck of the Cheonan. That would imply fairly shallow water. They also have experience with such, having raised several North Korean vessels they have sunk after they entered South Korean waters. I would be more than passing interested in seeing pictures of the damage, if they allow such to be published. The decision of whether to publish or not, and/or the coverage of the pictures, would itself be a non-probative indicator of the cause of the sinking.
Subotai Bahadur
Thomas P.M. Barnett has been pushing for us to bribe the Chinese somehow to unwind the Norks for years. The logistical bottlenecks for a massive inflow of humanitarian aid to the North in the event of collapse however, are severe.
“All US military personnel on or around the Korean peninsula should report to the Yalu River immediately for appropriate transportation back to the USA!”
Dave:
Evacuate from South Korea by invading North Korea?
Poole @19: you are starting to show glimmerings of human intelligence. That famed Conflict Resolution Specialist from Virginia, Thomas J. Jackson, says the idea has some merit. Uncle Billy concurs.
@ #20 – Here’s hoping Kim Jong Il invites you to his palace & asks you to stand a “rittle to your reft”. I suspect the quality of comments around here would improve…
#21 rotsa ruck. After rittle to reft it will be adda skoshi and fire fer effect.
Doncha think though it would be nice to charter some of those underutilized cruise ships for the trip home? That way the boys could bring their yobos with them rather than sending for them later. Not have to spend so much chargie for the chaji.
Anyongi ke sip sio—–you all.
BTW: My memory is playing tricks on me. Anybody here recollect how you say “reach for the sky” in Han Gung Mal?
Time for the dufus Han Guk Saram with the funny haircut to improve his posture. Afterwards
some .45 caliber dancing lessons will let his cha-cha all the way to his choo-choo for the ride to boot hill.
LBJ’s not president! “Shooting at whales, by our navy, in the Gulf of Tonkin,” will never, ever, ever, again, start a conflict. Not for the koreans (crazy on both sides of their Dean Rusk created, FAKE, two sides.) One side, though hasn’t ever been given electricity.
And, the ship went down because of KOREAN incompetence. They want to see the USA showing up? I hope not!
Ms. Herman
It was Dean Acheson who forgot to describe Korea as within the US’s sphere of influence (and in doing so etched a “line”), and has been held responsible by some for inviting the Korean War.
Have the ROKs made rash statements? Have the Americans?
It seems quite the contrary.
Off hand it seems you are shooting-from-the-hip in your alleging others are intent on shooting-from-the-hip.
RECAP:
That Particular vessel was an ASW Corvette.
She has a Gun mount at extreme aft, Torpedo launch capability as well as some depth charge racks (12 rounds) so an internal explosion in that section of the ship is plausable. either the turret/barbette exploded or the depth bombs/Torpedo’s did.
It is also plausable that the Corvette was chasing a sub contact and the sub either fired a small torpedo or launched a mine to escape.
It is also quite plausable that The POTUS is not ready to handle a Korean war event and has decided to act as if the whole event was an accident.
Conspiracy folks can also say it’s plausable the POTUS arranged for the event to cover up his health care take over.
For the majority of Navy ships any handling of ordinance would involve safety procedures that would limit the damage caused by an accident such as going to a closed hatch setting. The Corvette took two to three hours to sink.
I plan to sit quietly and see what happens now, not dwell on events that happened almost forty years ago.
Hmmm. Seems as though there are a few souls
who are concerned that a very evil regime might wind up getting vanquished.
Moola me!
Just an update.
ROKN CHEONAN [PCC-772] was sunk in fairly shallow water. Reports from Korea say it is about 79′. That would make her salvagable and divable, albeit the water is bloody cold [about 4 degrees C. which means a very short life expectancy for unprepared survivors in the water] and there are some major currents.
The ship apparently either split in two, or the aft section disintegrated, the bow section floating capsized for some time. There is a major outcry by the families to “save” the lives of the 46 crew who have not been rescued; but to be honest there is no hope as even if they were in intact compartments on the sea bottom, as either asphyxiation or hypothermia would have killed them by now.
The captain’s testimony that he was trapped in his cabin for some time by the explosion would indicate that they were not pursuing a contact or at General Quarters.
The ROK Navy has laid out 4 possibilities:
hitting a submerged rock which set off ordnance.
malfunction and internal explosion.
mine
torpedo
It is interesting that from the translated press releases, they do not seem to be considering a mine to be an “attack” like a torpedo. Laying mines in another country’s waters strikes me as an attack.
The ROK Navy is tending to rule out grounding as a cause because the area is well charted and very flat without shoals.
They also are highly dubious of an internal malfunction, as there is no history of such in their navy. To be honest, once ships stopped burning coal in the early 1900′s [coal dust is dangerous stuff], and went away from high pressure boilers, such explosions pretty much went away. CHEONAN was gas turbine and diesel powered, no boilers, no coal, and no aviation fuel on board as she has no helicopter. There has been some mention of possible “missiles” on board, which may be the 1960′s vintage ASROC launcher for the Mark 46 torpedo, which is less of a missile than a rocket booster. They are not known to be unstable. But my information is that she had simple rack launchers for the Mk. 46′s.
That leaves a mine or torpedo. Interrogation of the crew might help, because if the sonar picked up a transient just before the explosion that would reinforce the probability of it being a torpedo.
I would consider a mine to be a form of attack, but everybody seems to be downplaying the possible role of the North Koreans.
I find it noteworthy that the other ROK Navy vessel that supposedly opened fire on a “flock of birds” immediately afterwards has not been named. Assuming that she was also of the Pohang class, she would be carrying Samsung/Marconi ST-1810 Surface search radar, Samsung/Marconi ST-1802 fire control radar, and the Samsung/Ferranti WSA 423 combat system. Anyone here have any information about how likely that these would generate a fire control solution for a flock of birds within range of a 76 mm OTO Melara [20 km]? Further, one would like to look at her logs, because if they were tracking these “birds” before the explosion, it would indicate that possibly they were not birds.
As can be expected, we are not seeing everything here. The truth may not come out in its entirety. Watch for the blast damage if the rear part of the hull is salvaged.
Subotai Bahadur
Of course it was a mine.
A torpedo, only if the captain and crew were totally incompetent. TOTALLY.
The other answers make even less sense.
Do we know exactly where the ship was when the explosion occurred, in relation to the international boundary?
Do the NoKos use mines that could break loose and drift without disarming themselves?
My guess is everyone involved knows damn well what happened and they can’t figure out what to do about it. NoKo having nukes and all…
Foretaste of what the Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea will be like in a year or so, after Iran has nukes.
We are all SO f***ed.
Despite claims in Wikipedia, which frequently gets things wrong; the CHEONAN does not carry either Harpoon missiles as far as I can tell [they would be on the earlier ASuW version of the ship, not the later ASW version which the CHEONAN belonged to] or ASROC. ASROC launchers are large and conspicuous and are about the size of the main gun turrets. Here is a picture of one:
http://tinyurl.com/ylfynwu
Here is a picture of the CHEONAN herself:
http://tinyurl.com/yc6grtx
An ASROC launcher would be mounted centerline to be trainable to either beam. As you can see, there is no such launcher here. If you look at the edge of the upper deck level just aft of the funnel, you can see what looks like 3 cylinders stacked laying horizontally with one on top of two; and the forward ends of the cylinders are reddish-range. These are Mk. 46 antisubmarine torpedoes in a rack launcher, instead of on the end of an ASROC. No ASROC on board, no Harpoons on board. Any claim later that it was a rocket/missile fuel explosion will need to be taken with a grain of salt as big as Kim Jong-il’s ego.
Subotai Bahadur
freekorea.us
Via this CNN report, which carries video from YTN, we get our first brief glimpse of the hull of the ROKS Cheonan (see also here). It’s just a glimpse of a small piece of the keel from the half of the ship — the bow, apparently — still floating on the surface, but at 2:59, you can see that the metal next to the break appears to be dented inward, lending support to theories that some sort of external explosion sank the Cheonan
Subotai Bahadur,
No ASROC on board, no Harpoons on board
Good work, it is strange to me that an ASW ship would have no ASROC or helicopter. The onboard Mk-46 tubes, like the depth charges on the fantail, are only useful for close in work and that is not how you want to fight a submarine. The reason may be that the Pohang corvettes are designed to deal with NorK minisubs, which are really suicide weapons, in a coastal or harbor defense role. The US Navy has not even carried depth charges for decades.
For a Carrier Battle Group ASW is conducted in layers. Ideally the engagement takes place at a distance with the weapons delivered by an aircraft. These can be fixed wing like the P-3 for large area patrols, in WW-II we used blimps, or helicopters with a tactical range greater than that of the submarines torpedoes or anti-ship cruise missiles. For a threat closer than half a dozen miles response time is critical and the best thing to have is an ASROC. If the enemy is detected within the destroyer screen or closer than a few thousand yards then the best thing to do is dump a torpedo in the water and pray. Getting out of Dodge may not be an option.
The only remaining question is could the RoKs have run over their own mine? Either they court martial their own Commanding Officer or they charge the NorKs with either deliberately attacking them or with the war crime of using floating mines. As I read this there is no other choice.
To be blogged under the title “Sub Hunting.”
From the AP
SKorea: Mine from NKorea may have sunk naval ship
Published: 20 minutes ago
BAENGNYEONG ISLAND, South Korea (AP) – South Korea’s defense minister says North Korea may have intentionally floated a mine to damage a naval ship that exploded and sank this week.
Forty-six crew members are missing and believed trapped within the wreckage of the ship, which went down Friday. Fifty-eight were rescued
While the cause of the explosion is unknown, Defense Minister Kim Tae-young told lawmakers in Seoul on Monday that rival North Korea may have floated a mine toward the ship. He also said the explosion could have been caused by a mine placed during the Korean War.
South Korean officials had earlier said they did not believe the North was behind the explosion.
The two nations remain at war because their 1950-53 conflict ended in a truce, not a peace treaty.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE.
—–
Surprise!
For the AP this is a decent piece of reporting.
The speculation that a mine from 60 years ago could have broken lose is a new twist. Like in space it is a big ocean and things can turn up after a long time out of sight. The following original AP story makes clear that no one is alive but the public does not want to hear that message.
32. Lifeofthemind:
It is my guess [take it for what it is worth] that the creation of a ASuWversion of the Pohang‘s was to supplement the newer Ulsan-class frigates and the 5 Chungbuk/Kwang Ju-class modified GEARING class former US destroyers which were armed with Harpoon missiles; to give the ROK’s a more credible surface warfare credibility. It is noteworthy that these units were just coming on line in the early 1980′s as navies were converting from all gun for surface warfare to a combination of gun and surface to surface missiles. I found the confusion about the first 4 units of the Pohang‘s and the Harpoon. The first 4 units [ASuW] carry the French Exocet missile and fire control [which had a certain cachet in those days], but the rest have the Harpoon combat data system, but not the missiles and launchers. The ROK’s liked that computer system, and it may be that they intended to use them for datalinking for OTH targeting for missiles coming from the Harpoon armed vessels of other classes.
Pohang‘s are designed to be used for close inshore patrol. Korea has a lot of small bays, coves, and little islands. I think that they are planning for the close in, back alley knife fight version of ASW in tight waters. In such a case, they may not expect to be able to either detect a submarine at range in those noisy waters with weird thermoclines, or to need the reach.
A further factor may be what an ASROC would do to the seaworthiness of the ship. ASROC box launchers are not light, and were designed to fit on our DD’s and up which were well over 2200 tons. You would need to have it forward, so it could launch into your sensor envelope while minimizing your profile to the sub, and you need it elevated, which would mean on the upper deck, most likely in the “B” position where the BREDA 40 mm is. That would lead to questions about ship’s stability and handling, metacentric height, actual physical space and clearance for the mount,drive, and power source; and there is the problem of the back blast of a launch. It is not a good thing if every time you fire, you singe the bridge watch’s shorts.
Conjecture, mind you. I defer to naval architects for those questions, and I long ago gave up on trying to figure out what politicians and bureaucrats in charge of procurement are thinking.
Subotai Bahadur
Wouldn’t the nature of the injuries sustained by the survivors and recovered dead offer a clear indication as to whether or not the blast originated from outside the ship or from inside?
Subotai Bahadur,
When I owned Deck Division on a cruiser and had to clean around the thing the ASROC always struck me as a Rube Goldberg ASW contraption. It was a model of lethal efficiency compared to the world’s worst AAW system, the BPDMS (pronounced beep-a-deemus) that I owned on an amphib.
wildiris,
Yes, if it was a mine the questions of whose? and how old was it? will be answered by the glamorous only on TV forensic team. Assuming the NorKs did it what will the response be? My prediction is, nothing if the Americans get to decide.
Thanks, Lifeofthemind. That’s what I thought. This info together with a simple visual inspection of the wreckage would have already told everyone at the scene whether or not it was an internal explosion or an external one. The only conclusion I can reach at this point is that the RoK’s already know what happened, so the silence at this point is telling.
There was a vertical launch version of ASROC under development in the late 1980′s.
IIRC, a small production run was made and deployed with the US Navy. A few might have gone to foreign military sales.
This is from the FAS web site:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/missile/vla.htm
The VLA program was initiated in the early 1980s to fulfill the need for a mid-range attack capability for surface ships with vertical launch systems. The VLA program was canceled in April 1988, in anticipation that another acquisition program, Sea Lance, would result in a longer-range ASW standoff weapon. In late 1988 Congress provided funding for a one-time buy of 300 VLAs until the surface ship-launched Sea Lance was fielded. This quantity was subsequently defined as 100 missiles for LRIP, with an additional 200 missiles for full production. VLA development continued, with OPEVAL occurring in August 1990. COMOPTEVFOR concluded that VLA was not operationally suitable and that low reliability precluded evaluation of operational effectiveness. FOT&E was conducted during June through August 1992 (missile assembly and encanisterization at the intermediate maintenance activity at the Naval Weapon Station, Yorktown, VA during June-July, and at-sea operational testing at an underwater test range of the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands, HI during late August).
and this is from the US Navy Fact File:
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_display.asp?cid=2200&tid=1500&ct=2
Vertical Launch Anti-Submarine Rocket ASROC (VLA) Missile
Description
The Vertical Launch Anti-Submarine Rocket (ASROC) (VLA) is a missile designed to deliver the Mk46 Mod 5A(SW) torpedo to a water-entry point.
Background
The VLA is intended to provide vertical-launch-capable surface combatants with an all-weather, 360-degree quick-reaction, standoff antisubmarine weapon capability. It is carried by Aegis-equipped ships (cruisers and destroyers) equipped with the Mk41 Vertical Launching System (VLS) and the SQQ-89 ASW Combat System. VLA includes a solid-propellant booster with thrust vector control (TVC) to guide the missile from a vertical orientation through a pitch-over maneuver into a ballistic trajectory intended to deliver the torpedo to an aim point on the ocean surface. Originally deployed with the MK46 Mod 5A(S) torpedo, all VLAs have been upgraded with the Mk46 Mod 5A (SW) torpedo. This variant of the Mk46 torpedo provides improved performance in shallow water. With Initial Operational Capability (IOC) of the Mk54 Lightweight Torpedo in 2004, a program is currently underway to upgrade the VLA inventory with the Mk54 Lightweight Torpedo.
Point Of Contact
Public Affairs Office
Naval Sea Systems Command Office of Corporate Communications (SEA 00D)
Washington, DC 20376
General Characteristics, VLA Missile
Contractor: Lockheed Martin
Propulsion: Solid propellant rocket
Length: 16.7 feet
Diameter: 14.1 inches
Weight: 1,650 pounds
Range: over 10 miles
Warhead: 96.8 pounds, high-explosive
Last Update: 17 January 2009
The descriptions of the damage suffered by ROKS Cheonan from the crew very closely match the damage shown from a Mk48 torpedo life fire test at this link:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mark_48_Torpedo_testing.jpg
This is a description of the photos from the link.
On Monday, June 14, 1999, the Australian Collins class submarine HMAS Farncomb fired a Mark-48 war-shot torpedo at the 28-year-old former Destroyer Escort Torrens. The firing was part of the Collins class trials requirements and was designed to validate the submarine’s combat system. The submerged Farncomb fired the Mark-48 torpedo at the stationary hulk of the 2700-ton Destroyer Escort from over the horizon. The plume of water and fragments shot some 150 meters skyward as the blast of the torpedo cut the ship in two. The stern section sank rapidly after the torpedo hit; the bow section remained afloat, but sank sometime later.
Has anyone looked at the semi submersables mentioned as possible attack platforms?
Taedong B and C carry mines and Torpedos lie in ambush in shallow water and attacks at high speed in a rush.
The torpedo carried is a 12″ and not considered powerful enough to do the damage done but the mines are listed as rocket assisted.