Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What are the avg N Korean soldiers issued for small arms

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by Lonestar, Oct 18, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Lonestar

    Lonestar Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2006
    Messages:
    701
  2. offthepaper

    offthepaper Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2005
    Messages:
    1,436
    What are the average North Korean soldiers issued for small arms? Are the still using AK47's or AK74's or something else. Also, what type of sidearms are the officers issued? Light, heavy MG's. Just wondering if their "comrades" have been upgrading them over the years.
     
  3. SDC

    SDC Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    3,116
    Location:
    People's Republic of Canada
    Everything I've seen on them says they're still using 7.62x39, with their domestically-produced AKs (Type 68), and RPDs (Type 62). They might still issue their variants of the SKS (Type 63) and the PPsH (Type 49), and I'm sure they'd be using Their version of the Tokarev (Type 68) for sidearms.
     
  4. buck00

    buck00 Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2005
    Messages:
    1,078
    Location:
    Lower Silesia, PA
    This is the USMC North Korean Country Handbook.

    http://www.dia.mil/publicaffairs/Foia/nkor.pdf

    AK-47s, AK-74s, RPKs, RPK-74s, Tokarev and Makarov pistols. SVD rifles. They obviously have millions of SKS rifles (and Mosin-Nagants) in storage, which would be distributed en masse to the pesants during any war. (3.8 million reserves ready)

    Overall, the hand book is a very interesting and scary assessment of NK's convention forces. 1.2 active military members, upwards of 5 million if you factor in reserves and civilians who would be called up to fight.

    "The primary objective of North Korea's military strategy is to reunify the Korean Peninsula within 30 days of the beginning of hostilities."


    The real threat of NK isn't their nukes, it's their conventional artillery:

    "Jane's International Defense Review estimates that if North Korea launched an all-out barrage, it could achieve an initial fire rate of 300,000 to 500,000 shells per hour into the Seoul area -- home to about half of South Korea's 48.5 million people."

    If it comes to war with NK, it's gonna be a huge sh-- sandwich and everyone is gonna have a take a big bite.
     
  5. Jkwas

    Jkwas Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2006
    Messages:
    600
    Location:
    Boca Raton Fl. "The Gunshine State"
    They have 1.5mil in the army but 500,000 guns
     
  6. mp510

    mp510 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2006
    Messages:
    3,045
    Location:
    PRKt
    I have seen footage of NK troops marching with AK-74's equpped with grenade launchers.
     
  7. Manedwolf

    Manedwolf member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,693
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    That's worrying. 7.62x54R is 7.62x54R, and a tremendous "ouch" whether it comes from a Dragunov or thousands of old wooden "Noisy Magnets" poking out windows.
     
  8. Sistema1927

    Sistema1927 Member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2004
    Messages:
    4,395
    Location:
    "Land of (dis)Enchantment"
    Somebody will need to give the peasants a bowl of rice before they are able to take up arms. "Dear Leader" has been doing a really good job of starving them for the past few years.
     
  9. usp9

    usp9 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,646
    Location:
    Bowling Green, Va
    I'm willing to wager a big chunk of their artillary installations have a bulls eye painted on them from eyes in the sky. The only way NK can move forces is to come out in the open where they are very vulnerable. SK is ready and so are the American units there. IMHO.
     
  10. Creeping Incrementalism

    Creeping Incrementalism Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2005
    Messages:
    984
    Location:
    S.F. Bay Area
    I'd bet they are housed in caves/bunkers/tunnels with enough overhead protection to stop most bombs.

    Also, check out this photo from the PRK in the latest issue of Newsweek.

    [​IMG]
     

    Attached Files:

  11. Manedwolf

    Manedwolf member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,693
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    I have a feeling that this is not going to end well.
     
  12. Bruce H

    Bruce H Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    1,624
    Location:
    North Mo.
    Arclights with large loads of 250gp's work wonders on caves, tunnels and bunkers. Don't have to rearange too much top soil to make entering and leaving a real problem. The real question is how fast is the responce time between comencing hostitilities and first counterstrike. We all know the good guys wouldn't do a Red Storm Rising first.
     
  13. MudPuppy

    MudPuppy Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    1,529
    Location:
    UK and Texas
    Check my post on Poison Summer, Chapter 10 I think it is. :)
     
  14. jnojr

    jnojr Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2004
    Messages:
    1,095
    Location:
    Reston, VA
    Distributing weapons to millions of starving, repressed people sounds like a pretty good way for them to buy some more problems.

    Most of the DPRK military consists of conscripts kept in place by fear. When the bombs start falling and lines of communication are cut, it will be tempting for any unit to shoot their officers and political commisars and run for the southern border. Once we smash up their armor and artillery and send the rest of their military running north, everyone who's left behind is going to have one item at the top of their list... 1) Do not become a subject of Kim Jong-Il again!

    The first (or the beginning of) Korean War lasted four months from the time they sneak-attacked the South and steamrollered them, captured all but Pusan, were cut off by MacArthur's landing at Inchon, and got pushed all the way back to the Yalu. Only the intervention by the Red Chinese pushed us back to the environs of the 38th parallel and kept us there until a ceasefire was called. The Chinese aren't very likely to directly intervene today... they wouldn't be happy with a united, capitalist, Westernized Korea on their border, but they also do not want to cut off the Western market for all of their consumer goods, which is an enormous factor in their economy.

    Either Kim Jong-Il truly believes the world will back down to him, or he doesn't care. No amount of talking is going to resolve this problem. Nobody wants a nuclear-armed North Korea, and South Korea and Japan couldn't tolerate that any more than Israel could accept a nuclear-armed Iran.

    We will have to finish them off, well within two years from now. Otherwise, as soon as they have working atomic warheads and delivery systems, they're going to hold South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and the rest of the region hostage
     
  15. No_Brakes23

    No_Brakes23 Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    Messages:
    1,604
    Location:
    Everett, WA Recently escaped from San Diego, PRK
    Uh, this thread, the current situation or the secret invasion I haven't heard about, that everyone here is apparently talking about?
     
  16. 50 Freak

    50 Freak Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2003
    Messages:
    952
    Seeing how NK really relies upon China for food and arms. Cut the supply lines by threatening China where it really hurts and threaten to cut off all trade if they keep supplying NK and then back it up with Nukes if they refuse.

    I can see NK, left with having to invade SK (and risk our nukes) for food as I believe it will take a few months before they start running out of food.

    Remember an army marches on it's stomach. Take the food supplies from the NK, and it a matter of time before their military will turn Kim Jung ILL-minded into a pinata.
     
  17. Bartholomew Roberts

    Bartholomew Roberts Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    14,613
    Location:
    Texas
    For Official Use Only indicates that it is exempt from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. It may still be subject to disclosure (or not) depending on whether a legitimate government purpose is served by withholding the information.

    Current classification policy encourages that documents that are no longer FOUO be struck through; but it isn't required for archived documents - so this may not actually be FOUO.

    If it is FOUO, then the information is supposed to be granted a protected status by DIA where only authorized persons have access to it. We cannot be held responsible legally for the access and there are no legal penalties even for the person who put it on the DIA website (unless it somehow violated the Privacy Act); but he would probably be subject to administrative penalties.

    In this case, I don't see the point in removing the link. If DIA wants it gone, they certainly have the means to do that and more likely the link is simply a released archive document where the FOUO hasn't been updated.
     
  18. Prince Yamato

    Prince Yamato Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2006
    Messages:
    4,409
    Location:
    Texas
    And more importantly, how come Pyongyang has open carry and Texas doesn't :D
     
  19. Dave R

    Dave R Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,628
    Location:
    Idaho
    Yamato, you owe me a new keyboard. :D :D

    Way to get to the point.
     
  20. Headless Thompson Gunner

    Headless Thompson Gunner Member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2003
    Messages:
    1,255
    Location:
    North Carolina
    If war were ever to break out in Korea, the humanitarian disaster will equal the military disaster. The 1 million soldiers sent into South Korea will be accompanied by another one or two million starving refugees. Another one or two million starving refugees will progrably head north into China.

    I suspect that the US and SK military can deal with NK's military. But the sudden surge of 2 million starving refugees could prove to be a major problem.
     
  21. Tokugawa

    Tokugawa Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2005
    Messages:
    1,000
    It takes a working economy to run a war. They are a shambles. Everything is broken. I have read reports that when the Chinese sent an aid train loaded with food, the NK kept the trains as well, claiming they were part of the deal, cause thier own rolling stock was in such bad repair.
     
  22. S.P.E.C.T.R.E.

    S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2006
    Messages:
    244
    Tokugawa is correct. An army marches on it's stomach. Sure they could flood South Korea with a million troops...then what? Most people are unable to fathom the logistics of supporting even a few hundred thousand troops.

    Plus, one of the first things that the Allies would do would be to carpet bomb the DMZ 24/7 to shut down reinforcement and supply.

    Bottom line is that a Second Korean war would cause heavy damage and casualties to the South, but the North would cease to exist. Then we could get our grubby hands on all those sweet NK SKS surplus rifles!
     
  23. ozwyn

    ozwyn Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    714
    Location:
    Maryland
    3 possible reasons China would not mind North Korea losing a future war to South Korea.

    1) Rebuilding North Korea will put the brakes on South Korea's economic expansion. This means Key areas where China is beginnging to emerge into markets (like, cheap cars and more complicated electronic devlices) will be more vulnerable.

    2) Rebuilding North Korea will require massive physical and technical resources. By trading off lack of military intervention China can buy itself massive contracts with South Korea, boosting the chinese economy and giving it a more western, developed image to the rest of the world.

    3) North korea is a living, breathing reminder of the negative aspects of communism. It is like a big Tienamen square for the whole world to see. By taking an Anti-north Korea stand China can move a little closer to whitewashing darker elements of its past while continuing to develop its future as a economic superpower in the making.

    China could very easily sell out North Korea and use the process to their advantage, gaining real incentives from the US, South Korea and Japan in the process. This would work extremely well to their goal of become a global economic superpower, while costing them nothing in the process.

    China has already played the peacemaker card well, and by restarting the fence process and border checks can position themselves as a "progressive, westernized nation inthe world community" while still maintaining their political regime. (a fine piece of gamesmanship on their part, IMO)

    I am never quite sure if China's rise is a real threat or just an interesting show, but it is a heck of a thing to watch.
     
  24. AJ Dual

    AJ Dual member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    2,095
    Location:
    Wisconsin
    You and I are of the same mind.

    I was composing some very similar points in my head until I saw your post.

    Korean unification would be a huge economic burden on the South, and would reduce competition for China. ROK is going gangbusters without the North as it is. While a good thing geopoliticaly, reunification is only going to slow the South down immensely. Probably 10x the ammount the reunification burden with the East did to wealthy Western Germany.

    North Korea is a drain on China, and an embarassment to them. China is almost done moving from "Communisim" to "Authoritarian Capitalisim with Communist window-dressing", and NK's hard-line Stalinist state is quite contradictory to that.
     
  25. ozwyn

    ozwyn Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    714
    Location:
    Maryland
    Thanks!

    I am now of the opinion that China's real global strategic goal is to be an economic power equal or greater than the US, without necessarily the same entanglements, and without giving up the firm control over the rights of their citizens in the process.

    Selling out north Korea means they can be considered "one of the good guys" by the US and Europe, while still buying cheap oil from Argentina and Iran. From a strategic standpoint, they have nothing to lose by not supporting North Korea, and quite a bit to gain.

    Look at their Olympic development efforts, their space program, and even some of the counter-terrorism treaties with the US and their neighbors (many formally with negative relations with China). China is trying to step into the world stage as a superpower without the cold-war baggage invovled, and without their leaders compromising their very strong grasp on internal power.

    When China does finally get around to Taiwan, they won't use their navy, air forces or ground forces. They won't have to deal with US military or even Taiwanese military oppositions, logstical issues, or possible problems with homeland morale. They'll do it with lawyers, bankers, tough economics and clever buyouts mixed with heavy political lobbying inside of Taiwan itself.

    I think the Chinese are still reading and applying Sun Tzu's ideas very nicely.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page