NOTE: Someone should really get up with Korean Army and tell them how NASTY those "watermarks" are on those pics. I'll have to figure out something or else stop using them all together. Its ruining fine work.
forgot the name but its a heavy, unwieldy, primitive piece of kit. why they're using something so obviously obsolete is beyond me but they really need to upgrade it.
Sol, jsi is a civilian photographer, the "Korea Army" part is a subject title.
The "next gen" AR is the K-11, which ... is problematic. It was basically a parallel program to the US OICW, but while the US canned the project for good reasons, the Koreans rushed it into service, even with the corresponding shortfalls.
As for "old/obsolete" etc, didn't the M-16 come out even before them? And people are still using M-16s and M-4s which are basically M-16s with a short barrel.
that's like saying a 1980 ford f-150 is the same as a 2014 version. systems evolve and the M-16 has hence the A1, A2, and so on designations. i don't know when the Korean rifle came out and i don't know about its replacement but i do know what they're using now is unsat...at least in my opinion.
The K2 actually replaced the M16A1 in ROKA service, and is derived from the AR15 action. The Standard variant was introduced in 1984 and is typical for the era without many of the modern conveniences like adjustable stocks and modular rail systems. Example pic: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Daewoo_K2_rifle_1.jpg
However ROKA is in the process of replacing them all with K2A rifles which are modernized to the same degree that the latest American rifles are. Mass deployment of this improved rifle begins this year. Example pics: http://s405.photobucket.com/user/DNAz5646/media/Seoul%20Airshow%202011/100_0515.jpg.html http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/data/10044/upfile/201403/thumb2/20140303105232_2.png
Something to note, that despite the K2 and K1 being introduced in the 80s, large numbers of ROKA units still use M16s, the K2A is meant to replace all current rifles. The is expected to be done around 2017-2018.
Well, as someone who has been using the different "models" of M-16s, there really has not been much drastic improvement, most of the guts are still the same as the old plain vanilla M-16.
Not that it is bad mind you, it still delivers steel on target, it's just that I find that most of the "model changes" tend to be nothing much, the guts of the system is still the same and it still functions the same way. Old does not mean bad.
Just have to clarify too. Sol, do you mean the K11 or the K2 as unsat? K2 is still ok functionally, it's just old. K11 has a lot of problems similar to the OICW, and some new ones that I suspect the Americans would have bumped into if they went to production on the OICW as well.
ok you're losing me. the difference between todays rifles and those of the earlier area have nothing to do with the actual mechanics of firing a round and everything to do with ergonomics. weapons handling, manipulation, weight...all the stuff that needs to be right for a Marine to put steel on target. yeah an old M1 Garand operates in much the same way as the more modern M4 but the ergonomics and weight and ease of use that comes with the M4 make it a much better beast. the same applies to the M16A4 versus the old M16. operating system might remain unchanged but because its a much more modern design its overcome alot of the characteristics that made the older rifle a beast to deal with. and yes, i'm talking about the K2. i have never heard of the K11
The K-11 is not a standard issue rifle, it costs $20K a piece and only a couple of soldiers in a squad get that. The standard issue is K-2, which is a bastard between M-16 and AK-47 designs. The K-2 rifle is available in the US as the DR-200 rifle in civilian version.
*grumble, grumble...newfangled new age soldiers just out from momma's skirts...grumble...* :)
When the rounds start flying, I doubt "Am I comfortable?" will be the most important factor in a soldier's ability to hit a target.
And if someone signed up to be comfortable...he's doing it wrong.
But then there really are different soldiers. I never found much difference between any of the M-16 models or even the M-4, but I also met people who could shoot with the M-16 but couldn't hit nuts with an M-4, and inversely, people who swore by the M-4 and couldn't stand the M-16A1.
What really wowed me were the new sights, not ergonomic changes. The new sights people have nowadays are scary awesome. No more "foresight tip/rear aperture" "Is it alighed straight?" crap, just point and shoot. Or at night where you got "Where the @#$%^ is the foresight tip? Stupid promethium tip!" Or when you had to roll coloured plasticine in a ring and paste it on the rear aperture so that you can see it in the dark.
overall the Korean military looks like one of the premier fighting forces in the region, so why do they still need our help? why do we keep 30K troops there?
Americans service as insurance policies, that they would come in rescue when the war does not go as planned and need reinforcements.
This is why the ROK government accepts wives and children of US servicemen as acceptable substitutes for USFK servicemen deployed to Afghanistan, since thousands of US servicemen's wives and children guarantee that the US would in fact return.
Another issue is Japan, which is considered a rogue imperialist nation in the region which even Russia is afraid of, and the presence of US troops calm things down. Should the US troops pull out of both Korea and Japan, then there is likely a war within a year to settle past scores.
My thought here is the absolute numbers the South Koreans are buying them in. Wikipedia says more than a 1000. For that small a nation with that mountaneous a terrain.
I really like mountaneous terrain where you can just bottleneck opposition entry points with superior firepower.....those M109's in mind.
ReplyDeleteBy the way....whats the standard South korean assault rifle ?
forgot the name but its a heavy, unwieldy, primitive piece of kit. why they're using something so obviously obsolete is beyond me but they really need to upgrade it.
DeleteSK assault rifle are the Daewoo K1 (carbine) and K2 (rifle).
DeleteSlowman....are your tanks not covered by ERA panels? If not what kind of stand-off armor are you guys using?
ReplyDeleteSol, jsi is a civilian photographer, the "Korea Army" part is a subject title.
ReplyDeleteThe "next gen" AR is the K-11, which ... is problematic. It was basically a parallel program to the US OICW, but while the US canned the project for good reasons, the Koreans rushed it into service, even with the corresponding shortfalls.
As for "old/obsolete" etc, didn't the M-16 come out even before them? And people are still using M-16s and M-4s which are basically M-16s with a short barrel.
that's like saying a 1980 ford f-150 is the same as a 2014 version. systems evolve and the M-16 has hence the A1, A2, and so on designations. i don't know when the Korean rifle came out and i don't know about its replacement but i do know what they're using now is unsat...at least in my opinion.
DeleteThe K2 actually replaced the M16A1 in ROKA service, and is derived from the AR15 action. The Standard variant was introduced in 1984 and is typical for the era without many of the modern conveniences like adjustable stocks and modular rail systems. Example pic: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/Daewoo_K2_rifle_1.jpg
DeleteHowever ROKA is in the process of replacing them all with K2A rifles which are modernized to the same degree that the latest American rifles are. Mass deployment of this improved rifle begins this year.
Example pics: http://s405.photobucket.com/user/DNAz5646/media/Seoul%20Airshow%202011/100_0515.jpg.html
http://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/data/10044/upfile/201403/thumb2/20140303105232_2.png
Something to note, that despite the K2 and K1 being introduced in the 80s, large numbers of ROKA units still use M16s, the K2A is meant to replace all current rifles. The is expected to be done around 2017-2018.
Well, as someone who has been using the different "models" of M-16s, there really has not been much drastic improvement, most of the guts are still the same as the old plain vanilla M-16.
DeleteNot that it is bad mind you, it still delivers steel on target, it's just that I find that most of the "model changes" tend to be nothing much, the guts of the system is still the same and it still functions the same way. Old does not mean bad.
Just have to clarify too. Sol, do you mean the K11 or the K2 as unsat? K2 is still ok functionally, it's just old. K11 has a lot of problems similar to the OICW, and some new ones that I suspect the Americans would have bumped into if they went to production on the OICW as well.
ok you're losing me. the difference between todays rifles and those of the earlier area have nothing to do with the actual mechanics of firing a round and everything to do with ergonomics. weapons handling, manipulation, weight...all the stuff that needs to be right for a Marine to put steel on target. yeah an old M1 Garand operates in much the same way as the more modern M4 but the ergonomics and weight and ease of use that comes with the M4 make it a much better beast. the same applies to the M16A4 versus the old M16. operating system might remain unchanged but because its a much more modern design its overcome alot of the characteristics that made the older rifle a beast to deal with. and yes, i'm talking about the K2. i have never heard of the K11
DeleteThe K-11 is not a standard issue rifle, it costs $20K a piece and only a couple of soldiers in a squad get that. The standard issue is K-2, which is a bastard between M-16 and AK-47 designs. The K-2 rifle is available in the US as the DR-200 rifle in civilian version.
Delete*grumble, grumble...newfangled new age soldiers just out from momma's skirts...grumble...* :)
DeleteWhen the rounds start flying, I doubt "Am I comfortable?" will be the most important factor in a soldier's ability to hit a target.
And if someone signed up to be comfortable...he's doing it wrong.
But then there really are different soldiers. I never found much difference between any of the M-16 models or even the M-4, but I also met people who could shoot with the M-16 but couldn't hit nuts with an M-4, and inversely, people who swore by the M-4 and couldn't stand the M-16A1.
What really wowed me were the new sights, not ergonomic changes. The new sights people have nowadays are scary awesome. No more "foresight tip/rear aperture" "Is it alighed straight?" crap, just point and shoot. Or at night where you got "Where the @#$%^ is the foresight tip? Stupid promethium tip!" Or when you had to roll coloured plasticine in a ring and paste it on the rear aperture so that you can see it in the dark.
Old soldier, new tricks. Woof...
a bastard between an AK and a M16? We call it the INSAS here.
DeleteIt's not really. It is more a mix of ideas for the AR-15 and AR-18 platforms.
Deleteoverall the Korean military looks like one of the premier fighting forces in the region, so why do they still need our help? why do we keep 30K troops there?
ReplyDeleteioe
DeleteAmericans service as insurance policies, that they would come in rescue when the war does not go as planned and need reinforcements.
This is why the ROK government accepts wives and children of US servicemen as acceptable substitutes for USFK servicemen deployed to Afghanistan, since thousands of US servicemen's wives and children guarantee that the US would in fact return.
Another issue is Japan, which is considered a rogue imperialist nation in the region which even Russia is afraid of, and the presence of US troops calm things down. Should the US troops pull out of both Korea and Japan, then there is likely a war within a year to settle past scores.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAnyone have any thoughts on those ROK K9 self propelled artillery vehicles? I know Poland is buying a bunch.
ReplyDeleteMy thought here is the absolute numbers the South Koreans are buying them in. Wikipedia says more than a 1000. For that small a nation with that mountaneous a terrain.
DeleteThat first pick of the Arty firing together in a saturation strike is freekin perfection.
ReplyDelete