Consider the following:

Did you know that Pyongyang has ocean access on both coasts? Il sung built a huge tidal wall on the east coast to exclude salt water, reclaim crop land, raise the river level so ocean going cargo ships could reach Pyongyang and impress his dad. Kim Nam did the same thing on the west coast with the Nampo dam. Combined with some canals and dredging they connected the rivers so large cargo ships and even submerged subs can go from coast to coast without going around the RoK. These systems also connect to several rather large and deep reservoirs.

Their first missile launching sub is a modified Sang-o which is pretty small and can easily reach those reservoirs, their new sub probably can as well but it would be noticed, not that it really matters. .

So how to you reliably track and sink a sub at the bottom of an inland lake before it launches?

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >several reservoirs
    we have ~3,750 in-service nuclear warheads, about half deployed. If this is a concern I'm betting some crazy scientists in the 70s solved it.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      The US seriously considered this, making a nuke fleet for the great lakes.

      So you propose spending at least 20-25% of our ready force of nuclear weapons (all of them missiles so at least half our deterant force) to preemptively throw dozens of nukes at every one of the DPRKs inland water bodies as a viable stratagey?

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        If it was more than a few hundred feet deep even if a ICBM or cruise missile detonated directly above it it might not work, you would have to carpet bomb the entire lake and that just isn't viable.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >preemptively throw dozens of nukes at every one of the DPRKs inland water bodies
        Yes. The big warheads too. Just evaporate the fricking lakes and have a laugh.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          The US seriously considered this, making a nuke fleet for the great lakes.

          So you propose spending at least 20-25% of our ready force of nuclear weapons (all of them missiles so at least half our deterant force) to preemptively throw dozens of nukes at every one of the DPRKs inland water bodies as a viable stratagey?

          Did some reading, if you look at operation Crossroads, they found that a 21kt device was able to sink a submarine at 850 yards, so, considering that modern devices have yields at least 20x that, and that all parts of a lake are unlikely to be deep enough to hide a submarine, the number it would take is probably far less than you think.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        >The US seriously considered this, making a nuke fleet for the great lakes.
        Containerized underwater ICBMs are my favorite STRAT-X proposal.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          Exactly, based on the brilliant idea of 'lol just nuke all the water' because they are idiots.

          Of course if you pointed out that the USA considered this idea in a seperate thread the exact same idiots will be saying how dumb the USA was to abandon such a great idea. In fact i think i'll just that in a week or so.

          [...]
          You wouldn't even need a real sub, a launch tube capable on slowly orbiting under a lake with a few crew could fit on train cars. Just relocate every couple weeks and tether it to the bottom.

          What do you do when the lake freezes over in the winter?

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            Subs can easily be designed to break through ice, USA and USSR did it all the time. A quick serch shows that a typical sub can handle 3 feet or up to 9 if hardened.

            Since our hypothetical lake silo is basically stationary when not relocating it doesn't have to deal with alot of normal submarine design considerations, it would probably be shaped like a tadpole with the head pointed straight up. It would likely be tethered to the lake bed when not moving or even designed with landing gear, some North Korean subs are equipped that way.

            Remember noise and speed isn't a real issue as ASW threats are non existant. Such a shape could easily be reinforced to smash through typical lake ice. Another option would be what amounts to a reverse depth charge that floats up and detonates when it hits the underside of the ice.

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            tiny icebreaker nukes to pave the way for the main nukes, idiot

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            wait, am i a moron, i dont think i've ever seen lake michigan frozen

  2. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    How deep are these lakes?

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      couldn't find an actual depth, everywhere just says "generally deep"

  3. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    So /k/ honestly thinks the US military will carry out a first strike where they launch hundreds or more likely thousands of overlapping ICBM warheads at every significant body of water in an entire nation 'hoping' they hit a handful of underwater launchers?

    And of course, when China sees these things flying on paths that are directly arcing towards them they will just trust us that we aren't attacking them, we are just launching a massive attack on random lakes?

    /misc/ made /k/ moronic, i'll now wait while some idiot explains why it could be done with Gavins and A-10s because 'something something asiatics'

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      everyone in here's calling it a moronic idea

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        Exactly, based on the brilliant idea of 'lol just nuke all the water' because they are idiots.

        Of course if you pointed out that the USA considered this idea in a seperate thread the exact same idiots will be saying how dumb the USA was to abandon such a great idea. In fact i think i'll just that in a week or so.

        If you want to put that autism to more entertaining use try figure out which lakes are even connected and anything about their topography. Of course it’s a silly idea to evaporate every body of water in the country to find the sub but it’s fun to figure out how silly, IRL ground based mid course defence exists basically to nullify their handful of weapons

        You wouldn't even need a real sub, a launch tube capable on slowly orbiting under a lake with a few crew could fit on train cars. Just relocate every couple weeks and tether it to the bottom.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          >Consider the following:

          you can't eat nukes

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      If you want to put that autism to more entertaining use try figure out which lakes are even connected and anything about their topography. Of course it’s a silly idea to evaporate every body of water in the country to find the sub but it’s fun to figure out how silly, IRL ground based mid course defence exists basically to nullify their handful of weapons

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      This is a board about weapons not political viability anon. Sometimes it's about political viability, but not this time.

  4. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >Consider the following:

  5. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >reservoirs
    nothin' personnel kid

  6. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    US doctrine is more focused on missile defence.
    Don't get me wrong, every launcher you can kill on the ground is great, but THAAD and company aren't aimed at Russia, they're aimed at defanging North Korea and forcing China to spend more money as a stretch goal.

  7. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Citation unironically needed.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      Ya'll eastern dwarfs need some serious on the spot field guidance if you haven't heard of the Nampo dam:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nampo_Dam
      https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Nampo_Dam_panorama.jpg

      Anywhere in the dam's impound area could work to hide a few subs, you have the entire Taedong River which is pretty big and deep, if it can handle a 50,000 ton cargo ship i think hiding a 1650 ton Sinpo class sub would not be that hard.

      you can probably see a sub in a shallow canal with a satellite. probably even at night but idk

      These aren't shallow, they handle ocean going cargo ships and i don't think ICBMs are meant to hit moving targets. Since they only need to have one or two survive as retaliation and the DPRK has so many subs they could have dozens that are basically decoys.

      It wouldn't be foolproof but it would be one more really annoying thing about fighting them to add to the list of things that keep the peace.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        > "hiding a sub" above 300 feet
        water is clear

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          >agitates your lakebed
          nothin personal, water clarity

          • 9 months ago
            Anonymous

            > be born in NK
            > assigned 1 job to do for life
            > job assignment day
            > read job list excited to see what I got
            > fricking lakebed agitator
            > mfw

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              many worse jobs than just shaking silt around

            • 9 months ago
              Anonymous

              the dam is one of the few things NK is legitimately proud of, so if you get it there's a good chance the party likes you

  8. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    you can probably see a sub in a shallow canal with a satellite. probably even at night but idk

  9. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >and impress his dad
    For some reason that made me laugh more than it should have, why are dictators such insecure man children?

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      ,Kim Il sung chose Kim Jong Il based on him successfully managing the creation of tidal barriers, sub pens and coastal defenses on their east coast. Kim jong un did the same on the west coast, as mentioned above the Nampo dam/tidal barrier. It is an impressive feat, he made a land locked city a port city and made a huge amount of agricultural land.

      This is a board about weapons not political viability anon. Sometimes it's about political viability, but not this time.

      I'm pretty sure atomic weapons and their use is /k/ related.

      I have to say i do like the idea of hiding a sub in your own lake i bet they also have some bunker/service docks with underwater access along those rivers.

      Yes they do, who the hell is getting past that dam?

      https://i.imgur.com/4NJVjya.jpg

      > be born in NK
      > assigned 1 job to do for life
      > job assignment day
      > read job list excited to see what I got
      > fricking lakebed agitator
      > mfw

      many worse jobs than just shaking silt around

      >Be assigned to river dredging duty
      >Easy job, have food and after 8 years get considered for party membership which means kids get to go to university, maybe even a nice apartment or even *(whisper it!)* Pyongyang.
      >Salt loads of fish for the family back at home, life is good
      >Some western butthole insults you on a Maoist western manufacturing slave board that isn't even a .kp address
      >Harbor patrol gives him a few thousand rounds of 14.5mm because he didn't have a fishing lisence
      >Make smash burger sandwiches with blue crabs, go back to work the next day

      Seems pretty comfy, you get food, all the seafood you can eat to send back home, a important job that is helping your nation in several important ways and there are a few crazy guys in a tiny tug boat with two gattling guns whose sole job is to murder anyone who bothers you.

      Look behind the little gunboat i posted, it's a fishing trawler. The DPRK enforces fishing rights with extreme force.

      • 9 months ago
        Anonymous

        I never realised how tiny those 14.5mm gattling guns are, there is a small flap that goes over the gunners head so the spent shells don't hit him. Image 9000 hours in ms paint.

        the dam is one of the few things NK is legitimately proud of, so if you get it there's a good chance the party likes you

        Why wouldn't they be proud? It is impressive and it really does help their nation alot in terms of water conservation and crop yields.Any nation would be proud of it. It keeps salt water out of half of their croplands, that is a good thing. It shows that at least on some level they care.

        • 9 months ago
          Anonymous

          never said they shouldn't be proud of it

  10. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    I have to say i do like the idea of hiding a sub in your own lake i bet they also have some bunker/service docks with underwater access along those rivers.

  11. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    >So how to you reliably track and sink a sub at the bottom of an inland lake before it launches?
    Simple: You wait. Maybe observe their harbors and known bases for activity and once it flares up and then sharply falls beyond a certain threshold you assume it has sunk. We are still talking about Best Korea and their submarine safety record speaks for itself.

  12. 9 months ago
    Anonymous

    Now I wonder why the US doesn't hide a bunch of nuclear subs in the great lakes, treaties be damned.

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      like we would know

    • 9 months ago
      Anonymous

      like we would know

      It would be the best option, an anon mentioned it here:

      >The US seriously considered this, making a nuke fleet for the great lakes.
      Containerized underwater ICBMs are my favorite STRAT-X proposal.

      tiny icebreaker nukes to pave the way for the main nukes, idiot

      A simple depth charge but going up instead of down would work.

      wait, am i a moron, i dont think i've ever seen lake michigan frozen

      It dosen't, they are equating polar ice caps with freshwater lakes. Fresh water lakes rarely get more than 3-4 feet of ice, i live in the coldest part of the lower 48 US states and i have never in a few decades encountered ice that could not be drilled through with hand held equipment, axes or chainsaws while ice fishing on a lake that could hide a 2000 ton sub.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *