Talk:K21

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 13:46, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Critical design flaws

The K21's amphibious capability has been put into question after a soldier died as a result of design flaws relating to the vehicles buoyancy in water. The Korean Military is halting further production of the K21 until issues addressed can be corrected. The Defense Ministry expects to restrict the K21 program until tests can be conducted on updated models in February of 2011.-Lostend

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=5139768&c=LAN&s=TOP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.201.33.16 (talk) 06:27, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request its removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

• http://www.army-technology.com/projects/k21-fighting-vehicle/

  Triggered by \barmy-technology\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II ^Notify_Online 13:25, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Armament

Is the S&T Dynamics K40 a licensed version of the 40mm Bofors? 217.209.73.224 (talk) 15:07, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

No. Modified Nobong Naval cannon.Kadrun (talk) 08:16, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

The AS21 Redback variant is fitted with an Australian designed turret. Although the turret can go to 40mm as part of its design, it will feature a 30mm cannon for the Australian competition in order to match in with the 30mm of the recently selected wheeled armoured vehicle (Boxer). 144.139.103.173 (talk) 11:55, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Full weapons load (source):

• Northrop Grumman Mk44S Bushmaster II 30 mm cannon
• MAG58 7.62 mm coaxial machine gun
• 2x Spike LR2 antitank guided missiles
• EOS R400S Mk2 RWS (12.7mm, 7.62mm , or 40mm grenade launcher)

2403:580C:AE8C:0:F5BE:7C3D:152A:BE7D (talk) 02:44, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

2022

So after looking around it is clear that the gun is based on the Bofors 40/70B ifv gun, as its data is basically equal and visually you cannot tell them apart besides the fluted barrel.

Several Korean sources states that it fires the same ammo as well.

• https://m.blog.naver.com/neobio/220665816077
• https://m.blog.naver.com/dldmswls1001/220952386247

Others straight up says Bofors 40/70.

• http://news.tf.co.kr/read/economy/978396.htm

The only new feature that is found is the bottom carousell magazine which is fitted with an autoloader mechanism (see image), which i assume is of Korean origin.

• https://soapbox.manywords.press/2016/09/15/the-k21-ifv/

This needs to be corrected in the article.--Blockhaj (talk) 23:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

As you said, if the barrel appearance of K40 is similar to that of Bofors, the 120 mm gun of all MBTs is the same as claiming to be a variant of Rheinmetall RH120. (Merkava, Challenger 2, Ariete, Arjun, Type 10, K2,)

Currently, the 120 mm gun in countries with main battle tanks has a different design of barrel, recoil buffer, mount and autoloader than the Rheinmetall RH120. The only thing that the other MBT's 120 mm gun and RH120 have in common is the ammunition specification. Countries that can develop their own 120 mm guns are not technically assisted or licensed by Rheinmetall.

The K40's top-down autoloader indicates that the K40's main gun has a different design than the Bofos 40 mm. And the only military forum and article in Korea that I could find mentioned that K40 is a 40 mm autocannon that improved Nobong CIWS.

• https://www.asiae.co.kr/article/2020061212222475657
• http://www.defensetoday.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=1396
• https://bemil.chosun.com/nbrd/bbs/view.html?b_bbs_id=10158&num=5843

Some sources mention that Nobong developed it under the influence of Bofors' design, but do not mention that the K40 was designed based on Bofors. If you still insist that K40 is a variant of Bofors, you should mention the connection between Bofors and the Nobong developed by referring to the design of Bofors. Gasiseda (talk) 14:12, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

There are tens of variants of the Rheinmetall RH120: A1, A2, LLR/47, etc. Still the Merkava, Abrams, Ariete, Type 10 and K2 all use variants of the RH120.

As for the K40, it has a bottom feeding autoloader just like the Bofors 40/70B. After looking around it is clearly based on the 40/70B, but the design is altered. It has been slimmed down it seems and it weighs a bit more?, yet it retains the 300 rpm fire rate and 24 round 3 folder magazine. (Bofors 40/70B image vs K40 image 1, K40 image 2)

• 40/70B data (janes): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1u9Pg849BA1j0eqQz7CJcqj1L7waFpoEA/view?usp=sharing
• K40 data: (S&T Dynamic) http://faparts.net/catalog/product/73857

The Nobung 40/70K (K for Korea version) is also clearly a further development of the standard top-feeding Bofors 40/70, which like the K40 has been altered (mainly slimmed down), not to mention that its a twin-gun system. (Bofors 40/70 image vs 40/70K image)

In a nutshell it seems the K40 is a Korean further development of the Bofors 40/70B ifv gun based on the experience gained from the 40/70K development. Same thing goes for ammunition, were the early rounds are standard Bofors designs, with the later ones being indigenous designs, at least for APFSDS post the MkII Bofors design. But more digging is needed for concrete answers. Considering how similar the K40 is to the 40/70B i doubt its produced without some type of license in the background.--Blockhaj (talk) 16:04, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Most people would know the RH120 as the world's first NATO's 120 mm tank gun. You may not know, but the world's first NATO's 120 mm tank gun is not the RH120 but the Royal Ordnance L11 developed in 1957. The difference between these two is Rifled and Smoothbore. However, the L11 is the world's first 120 mm tank gun to be used in the main battle tank. No one is saying that RH120 is a variant of L11 even though RH120 was developed in 1979.

If the K40 had really copied Bofors without a license, there would have been controversy in some way. South Korea's artillery and main armed systems work hard not only on differences in appearance but also on reducing the weight of parts.

Also, it is no coincidence that Nobong is similar to Bofors' design because the Korean Navy used Bofors and Dardo on various ships. If I had to choose the most credible reasoning based on the data and articles I have found so far, it would be Bofors - Nobong - K40. Gasiseda (talk) 17:54, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Sources for armor

Are there any sources that describe the armor protection of the K21? Because the paragraph about the armor links only to a source stating that ceramics was used, no sources about the protection level seem to be available. Olekz17 (talk) 15:48, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Thoughts on spinning off the Redback section?

Does anyone object to the idea of the Australian/Redback information being spun off as a new article? I'll note that Hanwha see them as different vehicles and they have different turrets, weapons, tracks and armour schemes.

I think this is in-line with general Wikipedia precedence - I.e Ajax, General Dynamics Griffin and Sabrah light tank are separate to ASCOD and AIFV from the M113 armored personnel carrier.

Thanks!

Wooo gaming (talk) 07:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

References