4 ms·

How North Korea Smuggled 87 US Scout Helicopters

102 points by SEJeff 9y ago

dingaling 9y ago
> Pyongyang kept its substantial MD 500 fleet under wraps for decades, Well only to the extent that NK keeps everything under wraps. Their possession of the MD500s was well-known by the mid-1980s and South Korean authorities used to order snap-groundings of the type. Any still flying were treated 'robustly'.
toomanybeersies 9y ago
They also managed to smuggle in a PAC 750, made in New Zealand, last year (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAC_P-750_XSTOL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAC_P-750_XSTOL). They're designed to be used to drop parachutists, as well as fly low level for crop dusting, and have an extremely short take-off distance of 220 m. It turns out that PAC was aware that the plane (or planes) were going to North Korea and provided training to pilots in China. (https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/96724372/pacific-aerospace-guilty-of-unlawful-exports-to-north-korea https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/96724372/pacific-aerospace-...)
- gaius 9y ago
  They're designed to be used to drop parachutists Recreational skydivers are a world away from airborne troops, I was expecting something like a Hercules when I clicked the link! With all their gear you could probably put a single section in one of those, a Hercules can comfortably handle two whole platoons!
  - toomanybeersies 9y ago
    It would be a lot easier to sneak one of these across the border and insert a special forces team, than to try and fly a Hercules across the border. This is why North Korea is such a fan of the AN-2, a seemingly deprecated piston powered biplane. But it has STOL capabilities, and no effective stall speed. It can be flown low and slow, perfect for evading hostile air defense.
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      He's not kidding: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3tpV9vUTPo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3tpV9vUTPo
throwanem 9y ago
I'd hesitate to take these guys too seriously, seeing as one of the articles linked from this one is a transparently absurd attempt to play up the Kirov-class guided-missile cruisers, of which three out of the total four are currently laid up, as a serious threat to US carrier strike groups, despite the Kirov armament being so heavily focused on surface-to-air work, i.e. anti-air defense, that it barely bothers to carry any antisurface capability at all. Another recommended article is a multi-part series insisting the only sensible course of action available is that we invade North Korea now. Looking at National Interest's about page, I find the first billed founder is Irving Kristol - a man instantly recognizable to students of recent history as the father of neoconservatism. You'll have to judge for yourself whether the fruits of that particular political movement are such as to recommend the unskeptical consideration of any claim advanced by its adherents - especially when such claims tend in the direction of another pointless, long drawn-out fight that's of no ultimate benefit to anyone anywhere. It might, for example, be mildly invidious to say that the same "chickenhawks", who last decade suckered a credulous US leader into a new-styled yet no less horrific and pointless Middle Eastern Vietnam, here show that they have managed the - by some measure, very impressive! - feat of learning absolutely nothing from their manifold and grievous errors - not even the minimal good grace required to accept manfully the verdict of utter discreditation which history has delivered upon them; and then, not satisfied with the vast scope of human and economic ruin which they have already wrought, they continue to insist that their soi-disant "New American Century", to the very greatest possible extent, be one of utterly pointless blood and fire. But were someone to say something of the sort, one might, after consideration of relevant recent history, perhaps hesitate to castigate that person very harshly for so doing.
- vilhelm_s 9y ago
  Such bias is probably relevant for articles estimating current military strength, or evaluating national strategy, and so on; topics where you need judgment to make sense of ambiguous data. But I don't see why you would think this article should be distrusted. It just describes a historical event, which was widely covered by newspapers at the time.
  - throwanem 9y ago
Walf 9y ago
Plot twist: it was intentional and they're equipped with remote self-destruct and/or tracking devices.
- gaius 9y ago
  They are too small and simple a design to conceal anything like that from mechanics working on them. You could arrange for them to be made from substandard materials I suppose. That doesn't seem to be the case here tho'.
pavement 9y ago
tl;dr They simply bought them through Soviet front companies, operating in West Germany. Instead of trucking them to ports for shippment to NATO countries, they trucked them to a Soviet freighter, and floated them to North Korea. Hey, we’re buying helicopters, and we’re shipping them here. Surprise! They get shipped somewhere else. To maintain cover for a bugging operation, Western allies only busted the last shipment of 15, as a check on the operation, as if to say “oh look, we see you, but how?” Meanwhile, the intended purpose was to mingle with South Korean vehicles of the same make and model, over the DMZ, by matching paint jobs, so as to be extra confusing, opportunistically. The article seems to exclude details regarding a mysterious entity named “The Semler Brothers” which are mentioned twice, but uh... wait, who? Out of nowhere that name is dropped, and why? Who are they? Is this some kind of hamfisted redaction bleeding through from the research for the article? Slightly mysterious.
SerLava 9y ago
Every time I scroll on this damned website, a blank black 1 second video pops up and covers the screen and then goes back up into the upper left corner.

102 points by SEJeff 9y ago

> Pyongyang kept its substantial MD 500 fleet under wraps for decades, Well only to the extent that NK keeps everything under wraps. Their possession of the MD500s was well-known by the mid-1980s and South Korean authorities used to order snap-groundings of the type. Any still flying were treated 'robustly'.

toomanybeersies 9y ago

They also managed to smuggle in a PAC 750, made in New Zealand, last year (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAC_P-750_XSTOL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAC_P-750_XSTOL). They're designed to be used to drop parachutists, as well as fly low level for crop dusting, and have an extremely short take-off distance of 220 m. It turns out that PAC was aware that the plane (or planes) were going to North Korea and provided training to pilots in China. (https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/96724372/pacific-aerospace-guilty-of-unlawful-exports-to-north-korea https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/96724372/pacific-aerospace-...)

gaius 9y ago
They're designed to be used to drop parachutists Recreational skydivers are a world away from airborne troops, I was expecting something like a Hercules when I clicked the link! With all their gear you could probably put a single section in one of those, a Hercules can comfortably handle two whole platoons!
- toomanybeersies 9y ago
  It would be a lot easier to sneak one of these across the border and insert a special forces team, than to try and fly a Hercules across the border. This is why North Korea is such a fan of the AN-2, a seemingly deprecated piston powered biplane. But it has STOL capabilities, and no effective stall speed. It can be flown low and slow, perfect for evading hostile air defense.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    He's not kidding: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3tpV9vUTPo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A3tpV9vUTPo

throwanem 9y ago

I'd hesitate to take these guys too seriously, seeing as one of the articles linked from this one is a transparently absurd attempt to play up the Kirov-class guided-missile cruisers, of which three out of the total four are currently laid up, as a serious threat to US carrier strike groups, despite the Kirov armament being so heavily focused on surface-to-air work, i.e. anti-air defense, that it barely bothers to carry any antisurface capability at all. Another recommended article is a multi-part series insisting the only sensible course of action available is that we invade North Korea now. Looking at National Interest's about page, I find the first billed founder is Irving Kristol - a man instantly recognizable to students of recent history as the father of neoconservatism. You'll have to judge for yourself whether the fruits of that particular political movement are such as to recommend the unskeptical consideration of any claim advanced by its adherents - especially when such claims tend in the direction of another pointless, long drawn-out fight that's of no ultimate benefit to anyone anywhere. It might, for example, be mildly invidious to say that the same "chickenhawks", who last decade suckered a credulous US leader into a new-styled yet no less horrific and pointless Middle Eastern Vietnam, here show that they have managed the - by some measure, very impressive! - feat of learning absolutely nothing from their manifold and grievous errors - not even the minimal good grace required to accept manfully the verdict of utter discreditation which history has delivered upon them; and then, not satisfied with the vast scope of human and economic ruin which they have already wrought, they continue to insist that their soi-disant "New American Century", to the very greatest possible extent, be one of utterly pointless blood and fire. But were someone to say something of the sort, one might, after consideration of relevant recent history, perhaps hesitate to castigate that person very harshly for so doing.

vilhelm_s 9y ago
Such bias is probably relevant for articles estimating current military strength, or evaluating national strategy, and so on; topics where you need judgment to make sense of ambiguous data. But I don't see why you would think this article should be distrusted. It just describes a historical event, which was widely covered by newspapers at the time.
- throwanem 9y ago

Walf 9y ago

Plot twist: it was intentional and they're equipped with remote self-destruct and/or tracking devices.

gaius 9y ago
They are too small and simple a design to conceal anything like that from mechanics working on them. You could arrange for them to be made from substandard materials I suppose. That doesn't seem to be the case here tho'.

pavement 9y ago

tl;dr They simply bought them through Soviet front companies, operating in West Germany. Instead of trucking them to ports for shippment to NATO countries, they trucked them to a Soviet freighter, and floated them to North Korea. Hey, we’re buying helicopters, and we’re shipping them here. Surprise! They get shipped somewhere else. To maintain cover for a bugging operation, Western allies only busted the last shipment of 15, as a check on the operation, as if to say “oh look, we see you, but how?” Meanwhile, the intended purpose was to mingle with South Korean vehicles of the same make and model, over the DMZ, by matching paint jobs, so as to be extra confusing, opportunistically. The article seems to exclude details regarding a mysterious entity named “The Semler Brothers” which are mentioned twice, but uh... wait, who? Out of nowhere that name is dropped, and why? Who are they? Is this some kind of hamfisted redaction bleeding through from the research for the article? Slightly mysterious.

SerLava 9y ago

Every time I scroll on this damned website, a blank black 1 second video pops up and covers the screen and then goes back up into the upper left corner.