How many shells/rockets could North Korea plausibly fire at Seoul?

How many shells/rockets could North Korea plausibly fire at Seoul?

  • 1,000

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • 10,000

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • 25,000

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 50,000

    Votes: 1 8.3%
  • 75,000

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • 100,000 or more

    Votes: 9 75.0%

  • Total voters
    12
Status
Not open for further replies.
North Korea has over ten thousand artillery guns and multiple rocket launchers in addition to hundreds of missiles. If they invaded South Korea (excluding the use of nuclear weapons), how many shells/rockets/missiles would they plausibly be able to fire at Seoul before US/ROK forces disabled or destroyed their artillery and launchers?

How many South Korean civilian deaths/casualties would any large scale barrage on Seoul result in?
 
Last edited:

Ak-84

Banned
More than a million. And short of nuking the entire DMZ, the US cannot destroy or disable all the launchers.
 
I read ages ago that the artillery threat to Seoul is overblown by the media, that the only artillery that can hit Seoul from Nth Korea is the really long range stuff like 170mm artillery and 240 & 300mm MRLS. These would be the target of serious recon/surveillance efforts in peace and plans would be in place to give them a counter-battery pasting in war, which would be even more effective if the NthK artillery left SthK/US military targets alone to blast Seoul.

That said, I wouldn't want to be in Seoul's northern suburbs if the shooting starts.
 
I read ages ago that the artillery threat to Seoul is overblown by the media, that the only artillery that can hit Seoul from Nth Korea is the really long range stuff like 170mm artillery and 240 & 300mm MRLS. These would be the target of serious recon/surveillance efforts in peace and plans would be in place to give them a counter-battery pasting in war, which would be even more effective if the NthK artillery left SthK/US military targets alone to blast Seoul.

That said, I wouldn't want to be in Seoul's northern suburbs if the shooting starts.
While that is true to an extent it's a dangerous assumption. Seoul is approximately 55km from the border.

The most effective weapons against Seoul would be the MRLs; these are mobile, rapid-firing and have a relatively heavy payload. Take the 122mm models, based on the Soviet BM-21 designs, of which the DPRK have "several hundred" in service, mostly thirty or forty tube models. While the standard 122mm rockets only range out to 40km there are extended range rockets capable of 75km. With a warhead in the 15-25kg weight even a few much weapons can deliver a lethal payload of ICMs, incendiaries and chemical agents.
Then there are the more than two hundred 240mm MRLs, based on older Soviet designs but with indigenous long range rockets (the M1985/M1991 systems) which can deliver 50-75kg warheads out to 60-75km.
Finally there are the perhaps equally numerous 300mm systems, derived from the Russian 'Whirlwind' system but optimised for mobility ("shoot-and-scoot") with only eight tubes in pods per vehicle. These rockets have a range of over 150km and up to 200km in some versions. This means that targets other than Seoul are at risk; Daejeon, the Gyeryongdae military base and US bases at Pyeongtaek and Osan Air Base. The Russian 300mm rockets has warheads in the quarter-tonne range (HE, IC, ICM, SICM, FAE, unitary, minelaying) though DPRK rockets probably have lighter warheads (for longer range) and chemical dispersal types too.

US estimates put the DPRK's stock of MRLs at around 5,100 systems.
 
I read ages ago that the artillery threat to Seoul is overblown by the media, that the only artillery that can hit Seoul from Nth Korea is the really long range stuff like 170mm artillery and 240 & 300mm MRLS.

If you define "Seoul" as purely the Seoul city limits, then yeah sure it's overblown. But that ignores that there are millions of people living in the region who don't live inside the strictly defined city limits. Urban sprawl is a thing. If someone, somehow snuck a battery of artillery into Georgia and began shelling Roswell, I'm pretty sure the news headline would still read "Atlanta Under Artillery Fire"...
 
I read ages ago that the artillery threat to Seoul is overblown by the media, that the only artillery that can hit Seoul from Nth Korea is the really long range stuff like 170mm artillery and 240 & 300mm MRLS. These would be the target of serious recon/surveillance efforts in peace and plans would be in place to give them a counter-battery pasting in war, which would be even more effective if the NthK artillery left SthK/US military targets alone to blast Seoul.

That said, I wouldn't want to be in Seoul's northern suburbs if the shooting starts.

Those counter-battery guns are going to be subject to pretty serious counter-counter-battery themselves. The North Koreans have something better than a 10 to 1 advantage in arty along the DMZ.
 
Now that we have the smart munitions, the fact that pieces can fire a few rounds then be pulled back in a cave is somewhat less critical. Even if there are blast doors if those are trashed and the piece is stuck inside the cave that works well. The problem is there are a lot of these. Not all of the positions are known, and I would bet some positions are dummy/empty. How many of the smart munitions that can be steered in to a cave mouth do the US and ROK have - enough to take all of these out? How many days will it take to do so even with "unlimited" munitions? Remember you'll need to suppress air defense, you WILL lose some aircraft, and you can't send all attack aircraft to do this there will be other missions that need to be performed - attack artillery or support troops keeping the NKPA from actually getting to Seoul will be an issue. The key issue is how long will it take to trash enough of the artillery so that attacks on the Seoul metro area stop or become merely annoying, although random artillery fire in to a metro area of 15-20 million is not conducive to preventing panic.

To make matters even worse, I would expect the DPRK to mix in chemical shells with the HE ones. When the artillery starts folks will go to shelters, basements, the subway system etc. If 1:4 or 1:5 shells are nerve gas or mustard, which are heavier than air those underground shelters will become abbatoirs. As folks on this board should know, the only defense against nerve agents is full suits (MOPP-4 in US terms), and I doubt everyone in Seoul has a gas mask let alone a suit. Nice choice, stay underground and risk be poisoned or come up and risk being eviscerated. The point of this is to create mass panic, force the ROK/US forces to deal with refugees in all directions clogging the roads (and providing cover for NK SOF) and the NKs might believe that the ROK population would be too weak to stand up to this and would demand a surrender (wishful thinking but...).
 
If you define "Seoul" as purely the Seoul city limits, then yeah sure it's overblown. But that ignores that there are millions of people living in the region who don't live inside the strictly defined city limits. Urban sprawl is a thing. If someone, somehow snuck a battery of artillery into Georgia and began shelling Roswell, I'm pretty sure the news headline would still read "Atlanta Under Artillery Fire"...

I'd consider attached urban sprawl to be Seoul and am aware of the possibly millions of people living there that could be shelled and that sucks arse. But the point is the urban sprawl closest to the NthK border is in range of the most guns and rockets and the further south you go the less guns and rockets can reach houses to the point where suburbs in the south would be unlikely to be hit at all.

Those counter-battery guns are going to be subject to pretty serious counter-counter-battery themselves. The North Koreans have something better than a 10 to 1 advantage in arty along the DMZ.

Yes the opening minutes and hours would be a furious artillery battle with attack helicopters and fighter-bombers thrown in like its going out of style. However guns that are engaged in counter-battery fighting aren't going to be able to shell Seoul, which will be the focus of the SthK/US and maybe even Japanese efforts. Guns that are out of range of Seoul can be dealt with later as part of the fighting in the field.

I think that people envisage something like WW1 when they think of what will happen, but I don't think that is accurate. NthK won't be able to shell the bejesus out of Seoul with thousands of guns for days or weeks on end, there just aren't enough guns with the range and the counter-battery capability of the SthK/US will be highly effective.
 
Those counter-battery guns are going to be subject to pretty serious counter-counter-battery themselves. The North Koreans have something better than a 10 to 1 advantage in arty along the DMZ.
Counter-battery missions are an order of magnitude harder than city bombardment, especially if the initial positions are unknown. NK CB radars aren't nearly as good as their SK/US counterparts.
 
I think most people significantly underestimate what NK brings to the table. "They're poor, backward, starving, use obsolete technology, have fewer people, have an unstable apartheid social system"... yeah, all of those are true. All of those were also true of Sparta when it went toe to toe with Athens.
 

takerma

Banned
Depends on how much warning SK and US has. If US and SK artillery is prepositioned for counter battery, air is filled with drones armed and unarmed and SK military is ready to launch a ground counter attack. Not much. They would get some stuff off, suffer massive losses, then get over run and clobbered within days.

If this comes completely out of the blue, like Great Leader order every MLRS with extended range to drive to the border where it is in range of Seoul and just go for it. Then quit a bit.

If they use Chemical weapons.. well US will counter with tactical nukes and then again not much.

Watch Ukrainian conflict and see what effective properly used drone spotters and artillery counter battery radar has. You stay in one spot for more then a very short time, you die. This is without massive air force over head, just with counter battery.
 
I think most people significantly underestimate what NK brings to the table. "They're poor, backward, starving, use obsolete technology, have fewer people, have an unstable apartheid social system"... yeah, all of those are true. All of those were also true of Sparta when it went toe to toe with Athens.
Except in this case Athens is on the defense, even more heavily armed to the teeth than the Spartans, and has the Achaemenid Empire as a close ally ready to rumble at first notice.
 
Except in this case Athens is on the defense, even more heavily armed to the teeth than the Spartans, and has the Achaemenid Empire as a close ally ready to rumble at first notice.
It remains to be seen what Trump's America is going to bring to an actual street fight; keep in mind that not at all long ago Trumpy was demanding that SK pay for its own antimissile defense, etc.

In any case, my statement referred to purely NK vs SK, no outside actors coming to one side's assistance.
 
I think most people significantly underestimate what NK brings to the table. "They're poor, backward, starving, use obsolete technology, have fewer people, have an unstable apartheid social system"... yeah, all of those are true. All of those were also true of Sparta when it went toe to toe with Athens.
Japan in 1945 shows how successful Spartanism is against overwhelming firepower.We are beyond the day and age where greater determination can triumph over overwhelming odds.
 
Japan in 1945 shows how successful Spartanism is against overwhelming firepower.We are beyond the day and age where greater determination can triumph over overwhelming odds.

Japan surrendered because atomic weapons were used and all the world's superpowers had declared war on them. That's unlikely to happen to North Korea.
 
Japan surrendered because atomic weapons were used and all the world's superpowers had declared war on them. That's unlikely to happen to North Korea.
Mass bombardment of Seoul pretty much guarantees Chinese intervention, which is one thing North Korea knows it can't hold off even temporarily.
 
Thousands and thousands and half armed with various chemical weapons, it would take between 24-72 hours to stop it all at worse.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top