Military Review

North Korea - not the caliber!

29
Dear readers, I do not in any way try to claim the ultimate truth, but the longer I look at North Korea’s attempts to catch up with the United States in the nuclear arsenal, the stronger my confidence that the North Koreans have chosen not the best approach in this matter. Moreover, it is obvious that the strategic nuclear forces of the DPRK will not be able to threaten the United States either now or in the foreseeable future, and can only give the Americans reason to unleash another bloody drama on our borders.


For a start, let's see what the "DPRK has for today / in the foreseeable future" and how it can deter its enemies.

The main argument of S. Korea is long-range nuclear missiles, but how many nuclear bombs does the DPRK have? Will there be enough of them for use as a fire extinguisher for hot heads? Let's try to figure it out.

The main nuclear facility of the DPRK is the Jenben Center, located in 90 km north of Pyongyang. In the 1986 year, a gas-graphite reactor was launched there, it was his experts who considered the main source of weapons-grade plutonium (capable of producing up to 6 kg per year). The CMB of the IMEMO RAN cites data on which Pyongyang has about 2017-50 kg of weapons-grade plutonium at 60 year.

It is known that creating a megaton class warhead (capable of destroying a million-plus city) requires about 30-40 kg of plutonium, and for a bomb of tens of kilotons (Hiroshima, Nagasaki) the 5-6 kilograms of this substance will be enough. So, DPRK theoretically can have up to two plutonium bombs of the megaton class or 6-7 of plutonium bombs of lower power.

In addition to plutonium, the DPRK also produces uranium. Since 2010, a plant has been opened that can produce 2 tons of low-enriched uranium or 40 kg of weapons-grade per year. Of course, we are interested in the second.

So, theoretically, the DPRK could produce 280 kg of weapons-grade uranium. First in stories atomic bombs contained about 60 kg of this substance, modern - about 30 kg. The progress of the DPRK in nuclear warheads is unknown, so for the calculation we use the minimum value - 30 kg. S. Korea could accumulate uranium on 10 bombs.

At the same time, with 2006, the DPRK conducted 6 nuclear tests. So, the first five were either with uranium bombs or with non-hydrogen plutonium. The power of the tested bombs ranged from 20-30 kilotons of TNT. The sixth bomb, tested on September 3 2017, was hydrogen.

This means that DPRK could theoretically have 5 uranium and one hydrogen bomb.

Total: 6 nuclear warheads, one of which may be megaton class.


Problems with carriers should not arise, the number of missile tests indicates an adequate supply of missiles.



In addition to nuclear weapons, S. Korea can threaten the shelling of the South Korean city of Seoul, which is located in 24 km from the border and where 10 million people live, as well as other South Korean settlements along the border.

Here, by and large, and all. More S. Korea has nothing to restrain such enemies as the United States and Japan.

But what about the enemies? How can they fend off the "Korean threat"?

Japan has 190 PU Patriot PAC-2 and 16 PU PAC-3 (1 PU contains 4 missiles). In addition, the Japanese Self-Defense Forces have 6 URO destroyers (in fact missile cruisers) of the Congo and Atago type with a total of CWPs for the Standart family of missiles on approximately 550 missiles.

The Japanese Self-Defense Forces are armed with the Zen Standart 2 (ships), and MIM-104 (Patriot PAC-2), which are not capable of intercepting BDBD, but are capable of catching BRSM, several hundred of which from S. Korea.

The fleet of the Republic of Korea includes:

- three destroyers (light missile cruisers) KDX-I (19 UVP Zur Standart on each, excluding Sea Sparrow);



- six destroyers (light missile cruisers) KDX-II (32 UVP Zur Standart on each);

North Korea - not the caliber!


- three specialized light air defense missile cruisers KDX-III (112 UVP Zur Standart on each, standard loading 80 ZUR).



The total potential of surface air defense / missile defense fleet South Korea - 489 SAM Standart.

In addition, the United States has placed a number of Patriot complexes in the republic, probably Pac-3.



Now the main thing: the potential of the United States in the region.

America has three military bases in Korea. It:

- Osan Air Force Base, located about 50 km from Seoul. It hosts the 51st aviation fighter-interceptor wing. It is equipped with A-10 Thunderbolt II attack aircraft and F-16 light fighters. There is also the headquarters of the 7th US Air Force. All this is protected by more than 90 Patriot launchers, which can be quickly transferred to Seoul;

- US Air Force base Gyeongsang. Along with the base Osan one of the most powerful US Air Force bases on the peninsula. Located in the west of South Korea, by the Yellow Sea. It houses the 8 aircraft wing;

- Camp Humphreys. US Army Base. Already, more than 17 000 troops are deployed there.

We will not list the US bases in Japan - there are many of them there, their potential is huge, and it can quickly and widely vary.

However, the following is interesting ... Patriot, even Pac-3, as well as the shipboard standard 2 SAM, are not capable of intercepting a DBDB, but this could be a THAAD ground-based transatmospheric interceptor. And it turns out that the THAAD battery will be deployed in 2017, where would you think? - in South Korea! The first parts of the missile defense are already at the US Air Force Base in Osan. And in 2018, THAAD will be placed in Japan. Moreover, the THAAD battery is already on duty on the island of Guam, covering the US naval base and the airfield of strategic aviation from the possible attacks of North Korean ballistic missiles.



The DPRK has practically taken up the anti-missile ring, and it is quite obvious that neither the BDBD nor the BRSD or even the six nuclear warheads can penetrate such a defensive potential.

It is also obvious that the UWP of the American ships will be crammed with the latest Standart 3 over-the-atmosphere interceptors, which also does not contribute to North Korean success.

The threat of shelling Seoul is also not a panacea:

- first, Seoul has a metro total length of 560 kilometers;

- secondly, nobody canceled the counter-battery shooting. The RSZO, helicopters and attack aircraft of the Republic of Korea will not allow Seoul to be shot with impunity, the positions of the DPRK artillery are likely to be quickly suppressed.

So, the perennial question: what to do? The hero of the famous film said: “Everything is already stolen before us”, and the Koreans want to say: comrades, everything has already been invented before you. It is only necessary to turn to the experience of the state, once already solving this problem. But first, another background ...

17 July 1962, a motorcade of scientists, military and dignitaries, crossed the distant desert in southern Nevada to witness a historic event. Among them were persons such as Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy. The highlight of the program was a mysterious device called "Davy Croquet."

The installation was a recoilless gun mounted on a jeep. If necessary, it could be transported by the calculation of three people and externally looked like the most common mortar of a battalion link ...



However, in reality it was the first battalion mortar in the world that fired tactical nuclear weapons!

Davy Crocket used the M388 nuclear shot with 20 tonnes in TNT equivalent. The penetrating radiation was able to kill all life in the 500 radius from the explosion, and the strike zone remained impassable for enemy troops for another day. Before you historical footage.



2 of these guns were included in the infantry and airborne battalions, mainly in Eastern Europe to counter the Soviet tank to the waves. Since 1956, 2100 units have been produced.

Similar work was also conducted in the USSR. Their crown was the creation in 70-ies of a number of tactical nuclear weapons for serial SAUs. A distinctive feature of Russian cars: shells could be used in the ACS without any modification. The enemy could not know which of the thousands of AUs is an ordinary projectile, and which one with the "vigorous loaf."

For example, for the ACS Acacia, a ZBV3 projectile with a power of 1 kt of TNT was developed, for a Tulip mortar, an active rocket mine of ZBV11 with a 2 kt capacity, and so on.

North Korea has a developed artillery. And instead of six warheads, in the opinion of the author, it would be more useful to make sixty nuclear shots for existing SAUs.

First, such an approach will make it difficult to detect "nuclear" cannons and simplify the preparation of a nuclear slap in the face: where exactly the "loaf" the enemies cannot know in advance.

Secondly, the threat to Seoul will be catastrophic: even one battery of ACS (and even one of ACS), having made several volleys “hearty loaves”, can cause catastrophic damage, not to mention the consequences of a nuclear explosion.

For the same reason, it becomes a catastrophic threat to enemy troops. Even the Americans, even with full control of the sky, cannot be sure that from any cracks in the mountains they will not be treated with a “sweet bread”.

Finally, Pyongyang can appear in a favorable light, declaring the refusal of the BDBM / BRSD instead of easing / lifting the UN sanctions. At the same time, he can leave TNW, stating that the range of its use is limited to the range of the gun shot and does not threaten absolutely anyone except the Republic of Korea. But he is not going to shoot at it first.


North Korea - not the caliber!
Author:
29 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 1 November 2017 06: 41
    +9
    the longer I look at the DPRK’s attempts to equal the US in the nuclear arsenal ...

    The author, why did you get the idea that the DPRK considers it possible in the near and even distant future to catch up with the United States in nuclear weapons? Today, it is enough for them that there is and this makes it possible for the Koreans to exist for now. Therefore your conclusion
    North Korea - not the caliber!
    It is only relevant for the DPRK's proposal to immediately raise their hands and surrender to the "mercy" (disgrace) of the virtual winner. The DPRK is precisely that "caliber" that so far holds back the world gendarme.
    1. Grandfather
      Grandfather 1 November 2017 10: 03
      +3
      To begin with, let’s figure out what “today / in the foreseeable future” the DPRK has and what it can hold back its enemies
      . How to "figure it out"? everything is secret. the article is so-so "from the finger", some assumptions ...
      1. NIKNN
        NIKNN 1 November 2017 14: 11
        +4
        Quote: Dead Day
        How to "figure it out"? everything is secret. the article is so-so "from the finger", some assumptions ...

        Not even from the right finger.
        But what about the enemies? How can they fend off the "Korean threat"?
        Interestingly, and the enemies will agree on the probability of the destruction of even one city for their own ambitions?
    2. Finches
      Finches 1 November 2017 12: 17
      +2
      There is a very significant point - the Winter Olympics in South Korea in 2018 and Seoul, I think, just belittles, and not only Seoul, that the Americans would calm down Una! Nobody wants to endure an unpredictable neighbor during the sports world session, and the IOC fears that there may be refusals to attend competitions from famous athletes, plus business risks, not many who dare to travel to a turbulent region! We need reinforced concrete guarantees of peace from the DPRK, confirmed with the obligations undertaken by Russia and China, or ... a lightning and victorious war - the Yankees, as the world gendarme, are ready, but a little pissing, because a failure in the DPRK is a complete collapse of the authority of America on the world arena - and the tit is crumpled ... And time is inexorably passing!
      We had such a problem before the Olympics in Sochi, the unpredictable Mishiko, with an armed choir of wild genatsvale, the unrecognized Abkhazia, bordering Sochi ... - played as if by sheet music - all the same, it’s not in vain that Bush ml. with Putin in a very good relationship .... laughing
  2. inkass_98
    inkass_98 1 November 2017 07: 05
    +9
    The author initially has the wrong premise at the beginning of the article. The DPRK is unable to compete with the United States in any areas, either in size, in human resources, or in economic development. Their goal is to deter and create a real threat of a retaliatory nuclear strike. Even one missile with a nuclear warhead flying to the United States will be a weighty enough argument to think twice before attacking the DPRK.
    The USSR did the same, creating its own nuclear weapons. It was the information about the presence of the bomb and its carriers in the USSR that cooled hotheads in Washington and made impossible the implementation of the "Unthinkable" and "Dropshot" plans.
    So from a defensive point of view, the actions of the DPRK are justified, but the defiant behavior of young Kim inspires some concern.
    And here there is only one way out - negotiations, and not mutual threats and buildup of forces.
    1. To be or not to be
      To be or not to be 1 November 2017 10: 06
      +5
      What is the goal of the United States in fueling the situation with the DPRK?
      1. To create chaos, the underbelly of China, and here the DPRK's nuclear program is the REASON for the intervention of the United States and the "Civilized" world in the region. And reformatting the whole region in the interests of Trump's Pacific strategy .. We look forward to his speeches at the forums in the TOZ in nobra
      2. The DPRK’s nuclear program can only be resolved if the United States stops shaking its muscles in front of North Korea and gives guarantees of its non-interference in its affairs and the lifting of sanctions. So here are the problems again:
      USA do not want this. They have GOALS and other tasks ...
      - who believes them today .. laughing
      3. To bomb North Korea, the war was already in Korea. The result is known.
    2. Reserve officer
      Reserve officer 1 November 2017 13: 08
      +3
      Comparing the DPRK and the United States militarily is incorrect. But Koreans will stand to their death for their home. Inspired by:
      - Whose house did you crawl into?
      - Abdul sent me. We need grenades, and you have them. And get up when the second lieutenant is talking to you!
      The roar of breaking shutters, the second lieutenant's body flies out of the window.
      - Well, what is it?
      - Yes, he has the wrong grenades ...
  3. andrewkor
    andrewkor 1 November 2017 07: 10
    +1
    The dear Author, of course, laid out everything well on the shelves in the context of strategic symmetry, in which no one on the Mother Earth can compare with the USA and the collective West at the moment. But options for the DPRK's asymmetric response to possible aggression have been discussed more than once (in that North Korea will start the first I personally do not believe). Maybe now a certain truck with Coca-Cola is already defending itself in the terminal in Yolstone itself or nearby, there are plenty of options, choose to your taste.
  4. Cat Marquis
    Cat Marquis 1 November 2017 07: 29
    +2
    How would compact charges for artillery more difficult than large for missiles, not?
  5. Gormenghast
    Gormenghast 1 November 2017 09: 03
    +5
    Major miscalculation - 25 nuclear reactors in the Republic of Korea + Japanese reactors were not counted.

    For defense purposes, they can be hit by any means - even with antediluvian missiles (of which there are many, according to the author), even with artillery shells; yes down to the juche saboteurs!

    The long-term consequences of the destruction of one reactor are incomparable with the explosion of even a megaton bomb. A bomb will kill a million people - for example. The volume of activity of one nuclear reactor will make the whole territory of the republic unsuitable for living.
  6. erofich
    erofich 1 November 2017 09: 46
    +4
    The point is not in comparison, but in the possibility of an answer. If there was a Bomb in Yugoslavia, then no one would bomb it and history would go a different way.
  7. CentDo
    CentDo 1 November 2017 09: 46
    +3
    secondly, nobody canceled counter-battery fire. MLRS, helicopters and attack aircraft of the Republic of Korea will not be allowed to shoot Seoul with impunity, the DPRK artillery positions are likely to be quickly suppressed.

    North Korea has strengthened its artillery position for decades. It will not work to crush them quickly. I don’t think that the South Korean army has sufficient counter-battery combat skills, and attack aircraft and helicopters will have to deal with air defense (albeit outdated), covering artillery positions.
  8. Old26
    Old26 1 November 2017 09: 47
    +4
    Quote: rotmistr60
    The author, why did you get the idea that the DPRK considers it possible in the near and even distant future to catch up with the United States in nuclear weapons? Today, it is enough for them that there is and this makes it possible for the Koreans to exist for now. Therefore your conclusion

    And, of course, not the author, but I can answer such a question. DPRK claims to be equal to US on nuclear potential in the near future. So here the author did not sin against the truth, saying that the DPRK will never be equal ...

    By the way, I do not agree with the author on the quantity of ammunition in the DPRK. The amounts of uranium and plutonium needed for charges are given in its most primitive form. using such additional "chips" as reflectors, the amount of material can be reduced by about 2 times. Therefore, IMHO the number of charges in the DPRK is closer to 10-15 than to those 5-6 about which the author speaks

    Quote: andrewkor
    The dear Author, of course, laid out everything well on the shelves in the context of strategic symmetry, in which no one on the Mother Earth can compare with the USA and the collective West at the moment. But options for the DPRK's asymmetric response to possible aggression have been discussed more than once (in that North Korea will start the first I personally do not believe). Maybe now a certain truck with Coca-Cola is already defending itself in the terminal in Yolstone itself or nearby, there are plenty of options, choose to your taste.

    Do you yourself believe in these tales? If someone does not know, I repeat. In the late 80s, a joint Soviet-American experiment was conducted on the Black Sea. From a helicopter it was determined whether the containers of the Slava cruiser (EMNIP) contained missiles with a nuclear warhead. And this is taking into account the fact that the container itself was protected and did not give an exit of "radiation", plus the weapon itself was already of such a class that it did not.
    Now we take the Korean weapon. With all due respect to North Korean scientists and engineers, I doubt that they have the same background as the Soviet one in the late 80s. Experience is still not enough. Plus, equipment has been improved since the end of the 80s, over 30 years. Therefore, only in the cinema can a nuclear warhead be conducted in the United States, and so that no one detects it ...

    Quote: Gormengast
    Major miscalculation - 25 nuclear reactors in the Republic of Korea + Japanese reactors were not counted.

    For defense purposes, they can be hit by any means - even with antediluvian missiles (of which there are many, according to the author), even with artillery shells; yes down to the juche saboteurs!

    The long-term consequences of the destruction of one reactor are incomparable with the explosion of even a megaton bomb. A bomb will kill a million people - for example. The volume of activity of one nuclear reactor will make the whole territory of the republic unsuitable for living.

    And rightly so, that are not taken into account. The probability of their defeat is extremely small. Modern nuclear power plants rely on the condition of maintaining the reactor even when a jet plane crashes onto it. The distance to the reactors from DMZ is from 200 to 400 km. To destroy the reactor, it is necessary that there is at least a direct hit of the rocket in the reactor, which is difficult to achieve with the KVO that North Korean missiles have. Yes, and there is no 100% guarantee that the reactor will collapse from 600-700 kg of explosives. Well, what about saboteurs. Protecting 4 groups of reactors is much simpler than 25. Yes, and saboteur, what can he supply? Mines weighing 5 kg? Can. But you should not assume that such objects will be completely defenseless
    1. Selevc
      Selevc 1 November 2017 12: 31
      0
      Quote: Old26
      Modern nuclear power plants rely on the condition of maintaining the reactor even when a jet plane crashes onto it.
      Do you feel the difference between the crash of a jet plane at a nuclear power plant and the explosion of a hydrogen bomb near a nuclear power plant ??? - the difference in the number of megatons !!! )))
      Fukushima failed immediately after the earthquake and tsunami, although during the construction it was counted on them !!! Even without war and without the use of nuclear weapons !!!
  9. the same doctor
    the same doctor 1 November 2017 10: 09
    +1
    the author is trying hard to simulate the war in Korea. The war in Korea, the United States will not stop. To prevent a war, one must be able to inflict unacceptable damage on the part of the United States. Does the DPRK have such an opportunity?
    .
    Option one - the explosion of a kamikaze boat or guided mine under the AUG. Theoretically possible. To improve this opportunity, you must have several boats or mines. Moreover, the DPRK has not signed an agreement on the non-deployment of weapons on the seabed.
    .
    Option two is the same in the San Francisco area.
    .
    Well, when the missiles are ready, they will finally make an attack on the DPRK impossible.
  10. Sailor
    Sailor 1 November 2017 10: 33
    +1
    The article is about nothing, the DPRK does not need to bombard RK with nuclear ammunition, they need the United States as a “guarantor of world peace and security,” and for them, if even one arrives there will already be a serious slap in the face of pride, and the victims are certainly big.
  11. Selevc
    Selevc 1 November 2017 12: 22
    +1
    The article is complete nonsense !!! There can be no question of any nuclear parity between the DPRK and the USA. The fact is that can the DPRK strike a crushing blow at the US metropolis itself?
    It doesn’t matter how many missiles, planes or cruisers ... In order to detonate a hydrogen bomb in the harbor of any American coastal megacities with a million-plus population, a medium-sized fast boat is needed (it was on ships of such dimensions that the last official or not very marine tests of nuclear weapons in the ocean took place). If such a charge is blown up - well, how do the author calculate the consequences for the United States and the rest of the world? Yes, in the USA, because of this, a real civil war can begin - after all, it is one thing when the war goes there far beyond the ocean, and it is a completely different thing when suddenly the lands and homes of American millionaires turn into Chernobyl !!! Tjust don’t have to write standard phrases like “This will be the beginning of the 3rd World War” - don’t think that politicians around the world after the 1st nuclear explosion will press red buttons like crazy !!! Although the chain of events leading to the beginning of World War 3 may well occur, however, such chains can be imagined quite a lot ...
  12. Old26
    Old26 1 November 2017 14: 28
    +2
    Quote: Selevc
    Do you feel the difference between the crash of a jet plane at a nuclear power plant and the explosion of a hydrogen bomb near a nuclear power plant ??? - the difference in the number of megatons !!! )))

    Do they exist to spend on megatons at atomic power stations? Or are Koreans likely to try to cover the bases with them?

    Quote: CentDo
    secondly, nobody canceled counter-battery fire. MLRS, helicopters and attack aircraft of the Republic of Korea will not be allowed to shoot Seoul with impunity, the DPRK artillery positions are likely to be quickly suppressed.

    North Korea has strengthened its artillery position for decades. It will not work to crush them quickly. I don’t think that the South Korean army has sufficient counter-battery combat skills, and attack aircraft and helicopters will have to deal with air defense (albeit outdated), covering artillery positions.

    So what? What is the point of placing in the same reinforced positions of the MLRS, which needs room? Or 170 mm with a trunk dyne of 8 meters. What kind of construction is needed so that this fool would freely maneuver, setting the necessary elevation angles of the trunk.
    The air defense that North Korea has is not intended by and large to perform these functions. the bulk of the systems are S-75 and S-125. Missile systems of the class "Arrow-10" they have or not at all or a small amount. So North Korean air defense just doesn’t roll to cover artillery positions

    Quote: also a doctor
    Option one - the explosion of a kamikaze boat or guided mine under the AUG. Theoretically possible. .

    Theoretically, it can and is possible. The question is, who will enable the kamikaze boat to approach the AUG. Guided mine - what's this? And they (North Koreans) have such guided nuclear mines ??

    Quote: also a doctor
    To improve this opportunity, you must have several boats or mines. Moreover, the DPRK did not sign an agreement on the non-placement of weapons on the seabed ..

    Do you know the composition of the submarine forces of the DPRK?

    Quote: also a doctor
    Option two is the same in the San Francisco area.

    For this, the main thing is necessary. So that the boat at least in the surface could reach San Francisco. I'm not talking about underwater, since the autonomy of the boat is less than necessary.

    here someone already suggested blowing up a charge in the harbor of San Diego (base of the US Pacific Fleet). True, the author didn’t even think about what such a vessel (boat) could not enter technically there (see the base diagram)

    Quote: also a doctor
    Well, when the missiles are ready, they will finally make an attack on the DPRK impossible.

    It is not worth considering a few DPRK missiles as a panacea for the US attack on the DPRK. These few missiles will simply be intercepted. This would be a panacea when the DPRK had at least a half-a hundred hundred ICBMs.
    1. Selevc
      Selevc 2 November 2017 16: 27
      +1
      Do they exist to spend on megatons at atomic power stations? Or are Koreans likely to try to cover the bases with them?
      What is the difference on what to spend megatons? If Korea actually has a more or less perfect hydrogen bomb, then everyone will get it and South Korea will get especially !!!
      And you buy for example your child a mobile phone from a country in which there was a nuclear war? I think that the vast majority of the people of the world do not think so - so if Kim is craving even only in South Korea (not to mention the USA) then their Samsung and other corporations will have a full word from kirdyk !!!
  13. Old26
    Old26 1 November 2017 14: 34
    +2
    Quote: Dead Day
    To begin with, let’s figure out what “today / in the foreseeable future” the DPRK has and what it can hold back its enemies
    . How to "figure it out"? everything is secret. the article is so-so "from the finger", some assumptions ...

    About conspiracy theories went. As soon as someone doesn’t know something, an argument immediately comes into play, but "because it is classified"
    But what, just to calculate how much plutonium has been accumulated at the Yonben reactor, taking into account all the shutdown times, is weak? Or is it also "top secret data"?
  14. alibabaewitch.vasilij2018
    alibabaewitch.vasilij2018 1 November 2017 14: 52
    0
    so what !! Kina will not be ??
  15. Mikado
    Mikado 1 November 2017 23: 26
    +2
    My opinion: The text and meaning are interesting. The article was prepared professionally, in its own language, structured, with inserts of content, topics The author knows well. This is not an insert from another site, the author created specifically for VO. Two aspects are of interest (I hope the respected Author will read it): 1. as a person interested in creativity, who published the third article on VO yesterday (https://topwar.ru/128150-nemnogo-o-tvorchestve-i
    -ego-mnogoobrazii.html), will the Author continue to be published? 2. whether he will participate in the discussion.
    If the author does not complicate, and there is a desire, let him write in a personal. hi Sincerely, Nikolay, St. Petersburg
  16. Old26
    Old26 2 November 2017 16: 44
    0
    Quote: Selevc
    What is the difference on what to spend megatons? If Korea actually has a more or less perfect hydrogen bomb, then everyone will get it and South Korea will get especially !!!
    And you buy for example your child a mobile phone from a country in which there was a nuclear war? I think that the vast majority of the people of the world do not think so - so if Kim is craving even only in South Korea (not to mention the USA) then their Samsung and other corporations will have a full word from kirdyk !!!

    No need to translate the arrows. I SPECIALLY ASKED THE QUESTION. Do the North Koreans have enough mega tonnage to cover in South Korea. God grant that he had enough to cover 3-4 military bases. And you have already started ... Buy or not buy ...
  17. Nemesis
    Nemesis 2 November 2017 17: 31
    +1
    It would not hurt the author of the article to watch a film about the tests of nuclear weapons by the Nazis on Rugen Island, so North Korea can have far more nuclear charges than the author can imagine, although not as powerful as those that are in service with the Strategic Missile Forces of the Russian Federation, or China but still capable of inflicting huge casualties on a missile attack on densely populated cities such as San Francisco, Seoul, Nagasaki, Tokyo ... and the like. It’s a kind of (dirty bomb) that in densely populated cities to turn into ashes an area of ​​about 500 square meters, cause radioactive contamination of the area, kill and irreparably destroy the health of thousands of people.
  18. 11 black
    2 November 2017 19: 32
    +2
    Dear Readers As the author of this article, let me thank you for your attention and time. In the comments, I saw exactly what I expected - from constructive and competent criticism (for which special thanks to you) to completely fantastic theories that caused a smile smile
    I can only say that the USSR, when it was developing the Strategic Missile Forces, was absolutely sure of a nuclear strike against the United States, and the United States was sure of this - there could simply not be any protection against the ballistic missile defense.
    Now the situation is somewhat different - the DPRK is creating weapons from which the enemy already has protection, and this causes concern.
    PS - I rarely write such articles, rarely publish, but this is exactly the problem that I decided to identify, to hear criticism and support, I thank everyone again.
  19. Evgenii Xolod
    Evgenii Xolod 3 November 2017 12: 31
    0
    They have submarines ....... And kamikaze people, (capable of killing to kill more). How do you like a nuclear (in the sense of a nuclear mine self-propelled)
    submarine off the coast ????
  20. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 3 November 2017 16: 31
    0
    The main nuclear facility of the DPRK is the Jenben Center, located in 90 km north of Pyongyang. In the 1986 year, a gas-graphite reactor was launched there, it was his experts who considered the main source of weapons-grade plutonium (capable of producing up to 6 kg per year). The CMB of the IMEMO RAN cites data on which Pyongyang has about 2017-50 kg of weapons-grade plutonium at 60 year.

    1986 years passed from 2017 to 31. During this time, the reactor in Yenben beat only 7 or 8 years, the rest of the 23 years it worked and if only 6 kg. in a year it turned out that it turns out not 50-60, but 120-130 kg of plutonium.
    In addition, he worked in the DPRK, from the 70th anniversary of the research reactor whose thermal power was brought to 1/3 of the reactor in Yenben. If he produced only 2 kg per year for at least 30 years, another 60 kg of plutonium could be produced.
    In addition, in 1994, overhead construction stopped two more reactors, respectively, 10 and 50 times more powerful than the Jenben reactor. Was he put into operation somewhere underground, although one of them will not be able to enlist.
    And finally, there is information that, until 1994, the DPRK purchased spent fuel from the friendly states of AEC which contained more than 200 kg of plutonium. This is information that can be easily found on the net.
    It is known that creating a megaton class warhead (capable of destroying a million-plus city) requires about 30-40 kg of plutonium, and for a bomb of tens of kilotons (Hiroshima, Nagasaki) the 5-6 kilograms of this substance will be enough. So, DPRK theoretically can have up to two plutonium bombs of the megaton class or 6-7 of plutonium bombs of lower power.

    What can be found on the net is less than 10 kg of plutonium for 20-4 kilotons for the first stage of a two-stage charge.
    In addition to plutonium, the DPRK also produces uranium. Since 2010, a plant has been opened that can produce 2 tons of low-enriched uranium or 40 kg of weapons-grade per year. Of course, we are interested in the second.
    So, theoretically, the DPRK could produce 280 kg of weapons-grade uranium. The first atomic bombs in history contained about 60 kg of this substance, modern ones - about 30 kg.

    Again from the net. The uranium enrichment program in the DPRK is much earlier than 2010. There, cooperation with the PRC broke even during Mao in the 70s. Did the gas-diffusion installation of enrichment, as it did in China, then beat it?
    first centrifugal installation in operation since at least 2000. At first, its capacitance could beat only 40 kg of weapons-grade uranium per year, but by 2010 it was only that the DPRK had set aside its opulent VVER for fuel and showed the Americans such capacitance. Military installations by this time already produced 4-5 times more. The fact that theoretically North Korea currently has at least 1500 kg of weapons-grade uranium and 10-15 kg of uranium is enough for the first stage of a powerful two-stage charge.
    Bottom line: the DPRK now has at least 150-200 charges of 10-20 kilotons. How many of them have already been finalized to 250-500 kilotons is unknown. For guaranteed destruction of the United States, of course, this is not enough, but for unacceptable damage it is quite enough if half of them are reached to the goal.
    Problems with carriers should not arise, the number of missile tests indicates an adequate supply of missiles.

    Just the opposite. There are still few carriers for the USA. The stock of large ICBMs at the Unha base is only 20-30. ICBM Hwason-14 may bit even less. Submarines with CR should be a bit larger, but only a few submarines with BR.
    The DPRK has practically taken up the anti-missile ring, and it is quite obvious that neither the BDBD nor the BRSD or even the six nuclear warheads can penetrate such a defensive potential.

    There is no missile defense ring there and the American missile defense is a complete bluff.
  21. bk316
    bk316 3 November 2017 19: 19
    +2
    Nonsense. I will not even try to argue with the author, I even admit that from a military point of view he is right. ONLY Eun is not going to fight. His nuclear weapons are not for war - they are for preventing war.
    And our SNF is also to prevent war. Think for yourself which U.S. president will give the order to strike, if there is at least a 1% chance that a megaton bomb will fly in response and kill 10000000 electors, and another 40 million will fall ill, lose their loved ones and lose property in the end.
    Now tell all this. Your missile defense ring provides 100% interception of 6 warheads. 99% and 100%?
    That's the same thing.

    But to spit on an ally and let him be ironed by nuclear weapons, the United States may well. They threw allies in Vietnam. And since then, their flexible morality has become MUCH more flexible. Now they are not only Korea, they and Europe will gladly sacrifice.
  22. Wolka
    Wolka 3 November 2017 19: 30
    0
    at the same time, the “y-ns” made the Yankees and their henchmen clearly understand that they would not remain in debt and would not seem to anyone in the event of aggression, this is a deterrent factor, because it is guaranteed to get an answer, even posthumously for the terrible country. ..