Talk:Korean People's Army Air Force

List of Equipment

I have created the North Korean Air Force list of equipment section. Any updates, suggestions or comments would be appreciated. Mathieu121 10:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

You have done perfect job. in fact North Korea is a big mystery and is very difficult to know their real inventory in service in three arms. the only i am sure is that the SU-7 planes and the AA-1 Alkali is impossible to be in service today . they are extremely old to be in service. impossible to have spare parts for them. about the other eguipment i believe that at least the half of them is out of service. lack of money , spare parts . the only sure is that the best defence of country are the missiles that is the most dangerous threat for the countries close to North Korea. John Athens Greece . 9 June 2007

Needs update by an expert (I am not). The S-300P and NK-06 are both missing and are probably the most capable anti-aircraft SAMs the NK operates. Anyone know about this topic? 29 Sept 2017.

Names

Are the names translated from Korean, or are they external (e.g. US) names? Fg2 15:02, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe they are the Chinese version of the migs if that is what you mean. Mathieu121 10:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Most of these MIG-(number) are from Russia. But some of them goes to China then to North Korea. So any MIG from China have letter "C" after number (modify). Pclunixos 11:24, 5 Nov 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pclunixos (talk • contribs)

My guess is that what Fg2 asked was that are the names of KPAF units and such mentioned in the article translations from their official names used in the DPRK or are they just those used by other nations such as ROK, USA, China, Japan, Russia etc. Ape89 (talk) 18:51, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Sunchon Mig-29s

The article says that Mig-29s are suspected at Sunchon, but upon closer inspection of the Google Maps imagery, there appears to be one maybe two on the tarmac near a small hanger/ maintenance shed: Google Maps Anyone else see the same thing? Grunherz 20:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Those are Migs? They don't look the same shape. I think the real planes are just to the North-East. 192.147.171.225 05:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Those aren't MiGs, those are Sukhoi Su-25 "Frogfoot" ground-attack jets, the presence of one MiG-29 at an airbase shouldn't quantify it as their home base. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PTPLauthor (talk • contribs) 00:43, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Fix the table please

nuff said BQZip01 15:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

North Korea posessing MiG-29As or MiG-29C (Product 9.13)s?

Here's a shot of a NK Fulcrum

http://www.acig.org/artman/uploads/pic_16.jpg

A Mig-29C 9-13

http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/visits2-pages/moscow_2005_files/day_02_14.jpg

And a MiG-29A

http://letectvi.wz.cz/rusko/mig29/mig29_2.jpg

It's obvious that NK has the MiG-29C, since it has the characteristic "Fatback" airframe. I'm hearing that the variant is the Product 9.13 variant of the MiG-29C (or MiG-29S, if you want to get technical). Can anyone confirm that NK has the MiG-29C 9-13 and not the MiG-29A? (123)

Since nobody objects to the proof, I'll change the status shortly. I'll state that NK has the MiG-29S (possibly being the 9.13 variant), and that they also possibly possess the older MiG-29As. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.184.238 (talk) 00:58, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

Question

The article doesn’t answer the question of how the hell they actually ended up with the MD 500, an American chopper. There must be a story behind that... --Viva43 14:10, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

My guess is that the US exported the MD500 to Iran, back when they were allies (Before Khomeini and the Iranian Revolution in '79). Somewhere along the line (after the revolution), Iran may have bought some ballistic weapons or some sort of NK weaponry in exchange for their captured fleet of MD500s (captured from the pre-Khomeini US-Allied Iran, I assume Khomeini's army captured the MD500 the same way they captured the F-14s the US sold to Iran when they were allies).

Also, is it necesessary for the article to explain the process of NK's acquisition of the MD500s? ...maybe it is, but unless others think so, I find it unnessecary info as of now.(123)

K... All of this^^ is pure speculation... and very inaccurate information too. There are several sources about the MD-500, Air International, Global Security.org. This on is from FAS.org: http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/dprk/agency/af.htm

"P'yongyang was rather late in recognizing the full potential of the helicopter. During the 1980s, the North Korean armed forces increased their helicopter inventory from about forty to about 300. In 1985 North Korea circumvented United States export controls to indirectly buy eighty-seven United Statesmanufactured civilian versions of the Hughes MD-500 helicopters before the United States government stopped further deliveries. Reports indicate that at least sixty of the helicopters delivered were modified as gunships. Because South Korea licenses and produces the MD-500 for use in its armed forces, the modified helicopters were useful in North Korea's covert or deceptive operations. The transport fleet has some Soviet transports from the 1950s and 1960s."

By the way, can editor please sign any and all entries they make? (192.43.227.18 03:12, 17 October 2007 (UTC)Bobbo9000)

Oh cool! A source! Anyways, my "guess" above was... well, just a guess. No need to take it seriously, as it was indeed, just a guess. I think I made my point clear. (123) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.184.238 (talk) 21:50, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 21:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Possibly Possessing both MiG-29A and MiG-29C (video proof)

This video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HByXYxYN7H4

of the KPAF seems to show a MiG-29A, but I can't tell exactly because of the poor angle the shot was taken at. Can someone else share their opinion? Although I'm rather sure that it's a MiG-29A, someone else may provide better reasoning to justify it as the MiG-29C. I also believe that we've established that NK does indeed possess MiG-29S variats, yet we are unsure if it has the MiG-29A variant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.184.238 (talk) 05:47, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

NATO Names

I removed the nato names from the fleet table. It was unessesary. EZ1234 (talk) 07:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Capabilities

The Aircraft subtypes and capabilities is kinda not on the subject, I don't think it needs to be there. - Tourbillon ^A ? 09:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

For the MiG-29, it may be worthwhile to note which variants the KPAF has, certain variants have systems capable of delivering nuclear weapons, and this is something that should be noted, since North Korea is in the middle of an international debate over such weapons. Missiles aren't the only way that these weapons can be delivered, as I suspect the media is forgetting.PTPLauthor (talk) 01:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

The entire section is ridiculous. It sounds like it was written by a North Korean Air-force fanboy. Take this bit about the MiG-17 "It is obsolete because of its low maximum speed and a lack of radar and any sort of modern avionics, yet its agility and powerful cannons make it a serious dogfight threat." The first section clearly states it is obsolete, which is fine, yet the second part seems to be trying to counter balance the first part by talking about agility and cannons. This isn't a matter of an aircraft having some strengths and weaknesses. It's a matter of it having such huge crippling weaknesses, that it is virtually useless in modern warfare with the possible exception of causing their enemies to waste a missile in shooting it down. The same goes for the MiG-19. MiG-17s and MiG-19s in modern warfare will die and never know what hit them. The MiG-21 is a little better, in that it may actually see what kills it from 30km away while it's short range only weaponry is out of range. MiG-23s could possibly be a threat if they've been updated and maintained and equipped with modern missiles, although I see no sign that this has actually happened.. The MiG-29 is the only decent up to date aircraft they've got that's a threat to any first rate modern air-force. -OOPSIE- (talk) 11:59, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

All correct, though IAF MiG-21s have performed surprisingly well in mock dogfights against US air force aircraft :). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.56.49.217 (talk) 09:02, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but those IAF Mig-21 Bisons have received massive upgrades that include BVR air to air capabilities, RAM paint coatings and other advancements that have brought it inline with other modern day aircraft. There's nothing to suggest that the KPAF have upgraded them at all, let alone to an advanced standard. (118.210.17.165 (talk) 14:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC))

An-2 is very visible to radar

The An-2's large, metal rotary engine is actually a rather good radar reflection and so the section that says the An-2 is hard to see on radar is false.

Indeed, and any aircraft with a metal propeller is very visible, by default. And as someone who's flown in a An-2, let me assure the reader it is far from silent. This section is being removed. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:41, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Su-17

I don't know about Su-7(they are probably retired), but North Korea has more than 20 Su-17 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.190.195.86 (talk) 15:38, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

H-6/Il-28 basing

The section on the KPAF airbases notes two locations, Orang and Taetan with Beagle bombers, is there satellite imagery proof of their presence? I looked it up, and Uiju AB seems to have a good number of Beagles in three locations; two parking areas, and what seems to be an alert pad or a third parking area, near one end of the runway. The Uiju facility also has SAM batteries and defensive positions similar to what would be found near a high-value airbase. The coordinates for the base are: 40.147357N, 124.494270E PTPLauthor (talk) 02:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Aircraft Inventory

The intro section to the Aircraft Inventory has gotten ridiculous, and needs to be addressed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.56.49.217 (talk) 08:57, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Naming, "Army"?

The page is called "Korean People's Air Force", but the lead section starts with "Korean People's Army Air Force". Can somebody parse the "조선인민군 공군" and either move the page back or change the name?--ospalh (talk) 11:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Aug 18, 2010 crash

This material was cut from the "Defections" section. "On August 18, 2010, a North Korean plane (probably MiG-21 or MiG-15 - now they are using them to train pilots) crashed in China, killing the pilot.North Korean Military Pilot Killed" The link is dead. Also, an IP editor contends the death was a training accident. Without verification this info should stay off of the article page.--S. Rich (talk) 18:05, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

SA-1\S-25 Berkut

According to this(in russian) http://pvo.guns.ru/s25/s25.htm only 56 CA-1's were manufactured, all for Moscow AAnti-aircraft warfare. maybe there are no Berkuts in North Corean AF? Personal tools

   * Pvjatchkilev (talk) 16:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)PvjatchkilevPvjatchkilev (talk) 16:37, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Original Research

Editors should/must please stop adding their original research to this article. Sure, it is easy to look at Google Earth and give us amateur analysis as to what aircraft appears, but this is not what Wikipedia is about. WP:NOR is one of the Five Pillars of Wikipedia. Please respect this. --S. Rich (talk) 16:49, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

File:Dae-jang (Air Force).gif Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Dae-jang (Air Force).gif, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Dae-jang (Air Force).gif) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:33, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The photo was deleted. 76.102.1.193 (talk) 11:24, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

File:Supreme Leader of North Korea Kim Jong-un Kim Jong-eun or Kim Jung-eunWPK Central Military Commission, vice chairman north Korea air force 1017 Force MiG-29 fighter. Force fighter flight demonstration MiG-29 (4).jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Supreme Leader of North Korea Kim Jong-un Kim Jong-eun or Kim Jung-eunWPK Central Military Commission, vice chairman north Korea air force 1017 Force MiG-29 fighter. Force fighter flight demonstration MiG-29 (4).jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Supreme Leader of North Korea Kim Jong-un Kim Jong-eun or Kim Jung-eunWPK Central Military Commission, vice chairman north Korea air force 1017 Force MiG-29 fighter. Force fighter flight demonstration MiG-29 (4).jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:41, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Fair use candidate from Commons: File:Supreme Leader of North Korea Kim Jong-un Kim Jong-eun or Kim Jung-eunWPK Central Military Commission, vice chairman north Korea air force 1017 Force MiG-29 fighter. Force fighter flight demonstration MiG-29 (4).jpg

The file File:Supreme Leader of North Korea Kim Jong-un Kim Jong-eun or Kim Jung-eunWPK Central Military Commission, vice chairman north Korea air force 1017 Force MiG-29 fighter. Force fighter flight demonstration MiG-29 (4).jpg, used on this page, has been deleted from Wikimedia Commons and re-uploaded at File:Supreme Leader of North Korea Kim Jong-un Kim Jong-eun or Kim Jung-eunWPK Central Military Commission, vice chairman north Korea air force 1017 Force MiG-29 fighter. Force fighter flight demonstration MiG-29 (4).jpg. It should be reviewed to determine if it is compliant with this project's non-free content policy, or else should be deleted and removed from this page. Commons fair use upload bot (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Drones?

Are these the MQM-107-based drones? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.190.194.119 (talk) 11:05, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

KPAF Flag

Please note that the KPAF flag image on this page is incorrect in several aspects; see FOTW for my corrected image. I'm not familiar with working on .svg or .jpg images so could someone please kindly work on that. Milesli 08:30, 06 November 2012 (UTC)

Clarifying Democratic People's Republic of Korea is North Korea.

I have been reverted twice from adding "(North Korea)" as a clarification in the lead. The reply to my edit comment "There is no reason not to be immediately clear for the sake of two words" was "oh, there is", which seems to be an inadequate argument, so I have re-included it. The opinions of other editors would be of use. (Hohum ^@) 21:32, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

650 flights per day?

This edit looks dubious to me. I have trouble believing the country has enough aircraft, airstrips or fuel to make so many flights.I looked it up and 650 per day is what was reported. —rybec 23:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Significance of 4.25 on flag

Does anyone know the significance of the "4.25" marking on the KPAAF flag? (Hohum ^@) 14:05, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

It signifies the founding date of the Korean People's Army on April 25, 1932. Ripberger (talk) 02:29, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

That should probably be in the article, with a reference. (Hohum ^@) 17:33, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Ka-27 airframe family found on Google Earth... mostly likely Ka-32A

North Korea possesses at least two likely Ka-32 helicopters dating back to no later than 2007. These are based with several Mi-8s belonging to an already-noted civil air support unit nearby, so it is most likely (but unverifiable) that they are the civil transport Ka-32 rather than the Ka-27/Ka-28/Ka-29 variants of the airfame. Supporting this is the fact that they are relatively far from the coastline and thus unlikely to be for the prominent anti-sub mission of the Ka-27 airframe.

https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=39.531944,127.374722&q=loc:39.531944,127.374722&hl=en&t=h&z=14

Google Earth image from 2013. These are helipads near the Inhung labor collective, and extend somewhat towards the northeast to show more Mi-8s.

http://i.imgur.com/9PInzGz.png

I don't know how to link to older Google Earth imagery, but this is from a historical 2007 Google Earth image (using the full program to go back in time) showing the two aircraft next to a Mi-8, the contrast demonstrating that they are clearly of the Ka-25/Ka-27 airframe design. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.64.113.242 (talk) 19:19, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Editors using Google Earth and coming up with material for the article is pure, unadulterated violations of WP:NOR. 104.169.28.236 (talk) 05:04, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Possible copyright problem

This article has been revised as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. (See the investigation subpage) Earlier text must not be restored, unless it can be verified to be free of infringement. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Contributors may use sources as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously. Mkativerata (talk) 20:10, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Inventory needs immediate updates

Why the inventory was changed? The link provided bring to nothing: http://forms.flightglobal.com/WorldAirForces2015?product=PREM&mode=DOWNLOAD&DMDcode=FGWC4&fcid={05ceef25-b72e-4bea-9a83-a7ab7d02e55a}_FC078_PREM_201412&fcfileext=pdf Moreover the previous table (both for aircraft and anti-aircraft systems) included updates from recent additions and evaluation! The current list rely on OLD (and possibly wrong) '90s data.

I suggest to rely on this source for a more updated table: http://spioenkop.blogspot.it/2013/09/north-korea-and-her-air-force.html Stressing some details: as the fact that the North korean air force has NO Mi-24 helicopters (despite what claimed by old sources). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lupodimare89 (talk • contribs) 08:16, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Besides being a dead link (now), we don't use blogs as RS's. 104.169.28.236 (talk) 05:06, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Recent edits by WP:SPA

Would somebody who knows about the content of this article please review these recent edits. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:26, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Korean People's Army Air and Anti-Air Force. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2012/03/29/2012032901309.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:12, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Dubious

At least the Su-7 is found by analysts on maps. But the L-39 and Q-5, despite whatever source quotes, has never been found or reported upon outside of pure lists. Especially the Q-5, it used to be on the flightglobal list but was eventually removed. The Chinese sources that cite it are all circular references. Therefore, the Q-5 and L-39 should be removed from the list, but I wonder if anyone else has anything proving its existence? Gorden 2211 (talk) 05:45, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

I've added globalsecurity.org cites to equipment number. It's better to have multiple sources for such an unknown topic.Gorden 2211 (talk) 15:21, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

The new flag issued by Mr. DasREDeemr which does not meet the flags details and the lines in the bottom of the flag.

The flag is purely made on military fan wiki. DPRKRIGHTNOW (talk) 14:18, 17 August 2023 (UTC)