If the Army designed ships, they would make sure it's wheeled, because.......Not a chance. Its the RCH 155 almost guaranteed. K9 Thunder doesn't meet the strategic mobility requirements. (wrong thread but there it is).
An RCD is useless if it can't keep up with the LAVs on the highway.If the Army designed ships, they would make sure it's wheeled, because.......
SK-Hanwha wants to make a deal for sure. In one way the German sub would be good, shared with Germany, Norway maybe Poland plus all the other German subs in NATOCan Germany offer that ?
Unless they finally drop that speed requirement.Not a chance. Its the RCH 155 almost guaranteed. K9 Thunder doesn't meet the strategic mobility requirements. (wrong thread but there it is).
I guess that means Carney needs to sign a contract tomorrow or else we're getting Korean submarines.
apparently Poland will be picking a sub this week
thats kinda what im thinking/hopingI guess that means Carney needs to sign a contract tomorrow or else we're getting Korean submarines.
![]()
I reiterate, whoever came up with that requirement was loading the deck against tracks and is someone who has no idea just how slowly a division moves tactically on highways (if at all as they are certain to be monitored by sensors and interdicted) or how necessary cross-country mobility is when doing shoot and scoot stuff in all weather conditions.Unless they finally drop that speed requirement.
I had been saying that this could be a real concern for us.I guess that means Carney needs to sign a contract tomorrow or else we're getting Korean submarines.
![]()
SK-Hanwha wants to make a deal for sure. In one way the German sub would be good, shared with Germany, Norway maybe Poland plus all the other German subs in NATO
as @FJAG said somewhere the Germans can sell us the RCH 155 modules and maybe some tanks
Puma is apparently too small on the inside and incredibly expensive.How good are the Lynx and Puma as alternatives to the CV90? A shipmentof Wiesels might be nice as well.
according to the delivery figures going SK even with Poland alongside would still give you 4 boats by 2036 instead of Germany's one boat maybeI had been saying that this could be a real concern for us.
If Poland goes SK, I bet we go German most likely but not for certain.
If Poland goes German, we go 97% for certain SK.
according to the delivery figures going SK even with Poland alongside would still give you 4 boats by 2036 instead of Germany's one boat maybe
A triangular partnership including Canada would be even better as Canada is roughly half way between the two and is extremely unlikely to be in the direct line of fire in either a North Korea/China-South Korea conflict or aA very good read on the ongoing deepening ties between SK and Poland.
From tanks to submarines: South Korea deepens defense footprint in Poland
Published : Sept. 8, 2025 - 15:23:15
![]()
From tanks to submarines: South Korea deepens defense footprint in Poland
KIELCE, Poland -- South Korean defense companies are accelerating their push into Poland’s expanding arms market, with new deals and ambitious bids unveiled atwww.koreaherald.com
Found these sentences at the end of this article very interesting -
He described the arrangement as only the start, pointing to contingency plans under which Polish and Korean factories could backstop one another in wartime — with Polish plants supplying ammunition to Seoul in an Asian conflict, and Korean facilities supporting Poland in Europe.
“The scope for cooperation is enormous,” he added
Yeah 7 total isn't happening, but at 4 by 2035 and one per year after, a little horse trading and collaboration sees us get 2 by 2035, the Poland order be completed in 2036, and us go one per year after."Company officials say that if a contract is signed this year, the first KSS-III submarine could be delivered by 2031, with all three boats in service by 2033" - That is the stated timeline for the Polish boats if they chose SK this week.
I'm not sure how the SK could deliver those 3 boats to Poland and then another 4 boats for us, a total of 7 boats, in the timeframe between 2031 and 2036.
That assumes the Koreans didn't already factor the Polish contract into their pitch to us, and that they have no ability to expand production."Company officials say that if a contract is signed this year, the first KSS-III submarine could be delivered by 2031, with all three boats in service by 2033" - That is the stated timeline for the Polish boats if they chose SK this week.
I'm not sure how the SK could deliver those 3 boats to Poland and then another 4 boats for us, a total of 7 boats, in the timeframe between 2031 and 2036.
I read a few weeks back that they are partnering with another yard in Korea so they would effectively have two lines going. As well, the above article seems to intimate that construction for the Polish version would be shared between the two countries. There is no indication though as to how much work would be done in Poland but the implication is the refurbishing of perhaps the Gdansk shipyard or one like it perhaps aiming for more off-shore contracts."Company officials say that if a contract is signed this year, the first KSS-III submarine could be delivered by 2031, with all three boats in service by 2033" - That is the stated timeline for the Polish boats if they chose SK this week.
I'm not sure how the SK could deliver those 3 boats to Poland and then another 4 boats for us, a total of 7 boats, in the timeframe between 2031 and 2036.
And I reiterate that all the tracked cultists consistently underestimate how tactically mobile modern 8x8 or 10x10 vehicles actually are.I reiterate, whoever came up with that requirement was loading the deck against tracks and is someone who has no idea just how slowly a division moves tactically on highways (if at all as they are certain to be monitored by sensors and interdicted) or how necessary cross-country mobility is when doing shoot and scoot stuff in all weather conditions.
![]()