Talk:K9 Thunder

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 11:10, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

Requested Move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was moved. Although the requester of this move seems to misunderstand what a serial number is, there haven't been any arguments actually opposing the move. -- Aervanath (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

---

When it comes to weapons, we normally use the serial number then the nick/code name after (ex: M1 Abrams, F-15 Eagle, etc.). K9 Thunder is more appropriate than K-9 howitzer since howitzer is just a class of the weapon, not the name. Kadrun (talk) 22:14, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

• Comment this is a Korean weapons system, is it actually "Thunder"? Or is it 우레 ? If it's 우레 , then shouldn't it be K-9 우레 or K-9 Ure ? And why are you removing the dash? 70.29.213.241 (talk) 04:44, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

• Comment those are not "serial numbers". 70.29.213.241 (talk) 04:41, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
  • It is serial number. Every Korean military equipment has K for Korean and number after it. "Thunder" in Korean is "천둥", but they never write as K9 Chundoong in English. Thunder is actually the given English name for K9. Example, K2 Black Panther is never written as K2 Huk Pyo. I recommend to remove so it looks harmonic since most Korean equipment in wiki has no dash. For example, K1 88-Tank, K2 Black Panther, K200, K21, etc. Kadrun (talk) 07:06, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
    • Do you know what a serial number is? This is not a serial number, it is a military designation. F-15 is not a serial number it is a military designation in the unified designation scheme used by the US miltiary to identify aircraft models. A serial number would identify a specific F-15, not all F-15s, and there are notable serial numbers for F-15s, but F-15 is not a serial number. M1 is not a serial number. M1s have serial numbers, but M1 is a military designation (actually, it's several, all used by the US Army for several different things, from tanks to rifles). These numbers are not serially allocated, though they usually come serially assigned. 70.29.213.241 (talk) 07:48, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Yeonpyeong attack

2 K9s malfuntuioned by North Korea first attack.

합참 관계자는 "북한의 포 사격으로 연평부대가 보유한 K-9 자주포 6문 중 2문이 전자회로장애를 일으켰고 (2010-11-25) Donga Ilbo [1](in Korean)

"By North Korea's first artillery attack, two K9s electronic device damaged"

So, this thing should change as "two K9s were damaged by the North Korean attack". 660gd4qo (talk) 10:53, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Deliberate misrepresentation of sources

I am removing most of the material in "Operational History".

It appears to be a deliberate misrepresentation of information reported in the Korean sources to make the K9 appear less effective than it is. The sources read, for example "it was found that 14 of the 45 rounds hit fields and rice paddies, not the artillery sites" and "of the six K9 guns, only three were used"

Previous sources:

http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2930229

http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/11/113_77022.html

http://m.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/12/205_77338.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.210.50 (talk) 14:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Korean / Turkish Variations

Why is there such a big weight variation between the two? Licenced versions of an original often have local modifications but are usually minor improvements or the use of equivalent local components to support local companies (eg local engine, localy produced barrel, different electronics etc), but 9 ton is almost 20% heavier. They appear to use the same engine, gun & chassis. Electronics, although potentially a quite significant variation does not weigh much. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.171.145.83 (talk) 11:55, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Entire turret has been modified.Kadrun (talk) 04:26, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

Electronics has been simplified to meet Turkish needs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noob2013 (talk • contribs) 03:25, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

K9 Thunder and T-155 Firtina

We have an ongoing vandalism in both K9 Thunder and T-155 Firtina article by user Progressive288. This is not a first attempt of editor to trying to remove traits of K9 Thunder from T-155 Firtina. The user Progressive288 keep justifies his/her editing by saying "not verified by Turkish official", and does not provide sources to support claims. If this is ongoing, I will have to summon admin to end this.Kadrun (talk) 18:50, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Well If its verified by Korean and other sources as it seems to be that is enough for Wikipedia, regardless if Turkish sources do not exist. Do any Turkish sources claim otherwise? if no Turkish sources actively make other claims disagreeing with the sources provided I see no objection to include said content. Just because no Turkish sources exist doesn't mean it is not real verified information. Why do Turkish "claims" have more worth than Korean ones? I have watched this "edit war" going on for some time now and it all seems a little strange to me. If reliable sources exist the information should be included. Redalert2fan (talk) 19:52, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I have made a request at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history#Opinions/eyes_request_on_Talk:K9_Thunder_about_the_K9_Thunder_and_T-155_Fırtına for more opinions, for editors coming from there most of the discussion before happend on the edit summary before I asked the users to discuss it here. Redalert2fan (talk) 20:35, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kadrun, even the width and height of K9 Thunder, T-155 and AHS Krab are unique and these vehicles aren't exported K9 Thunder but instead, its subsystems as there is way difference between exporting K9 Thunder and exporting the subsystems of K9 Thunder. Majority of the references that were provided in order to say Turkey pays license pee to South Korea are only claimed by South Korea based sources and other sources refence it. It's not verified by Turkish officials. You're the one trying to prove that T-155 is exported K9 Thunder, meanwhile based on the agreement, subsystems of K9 Thunder were sold to Turkey and by those subsystems, Turkey made an indigenous self propelled artillery vehicle. Well, if it was K9 Thunder, then you could add this to K9 Thunder's "exports" section, but all of its trade-export rights belong to Turkey. Progressive288 (talk) 23:49, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Hello Redalert2fan, no one has said Turkish sources worth more than Korean one, Korean sources just makes 50% of reliability compared to Turkish sources on this issue, so it's not enough to prove anything. Secondly, the sources must be official, I don't see any ".gov" extension of the website, so how could I trust if it's an official statement by South Korean officials? .. A counter Turkish official source has to make a statement for the verification of the claims by those South Korean websites as the subject of T-155 and K9 Thunder is based on the agreements between two countries the Turkey and South Korea. If the user "Kadrun" claims T-155 is K9 Thunder, then he must accept K9 Thunder is M109 howitzer K55 as the K9 Thunder is based on the American howitzer. Progressive288 (talk) 23:54, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I feel you are misunderstanding sourcing on wikipedia, sources in no way need to be official, coming from a government source. please also note that many countries do not use.gov. Sources need to be reliable and verifiable, which in my opinion is the case with these sources. Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources. There are multiple sources from Korea and international website reporting on this case. No countries or language sources are only 50% reliable compared to others, they are either reliable and as such acceptable, or unreliable. No Turkish "officials" need to claim anything, again just because there is no Turkish sources it does not mean we can not include the information. The T-155 is a variant of the K9 because it is based on (uses systems of) the K9. The K9 is not a variant of the K55 as it is a newly designed system. The K55 is a variant of the M109 as is made clear in those articles. If Turkey exports the T-155 to another nation and it will build them locally they will become a variant of the T-155. Redalert2fan (talk) 21:08, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

In Korean source from year 2001 that I posted in article already contains information about South Korea expecting Turkey to sell T-155 to 3rd party in Middle East region and its close allies. In addition, the interview video (from YouTube) is created by & funded by Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Korea. Also, you stated that T-155 design has nothing to do with South Korea, which can be countered by source I posted on Export - Turkey section; Korea was involved in Firtina project since 1999. Kadrun (talk) 00:56, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

@Redalert2fan .. Bullsh, if T-155 is considered as based on K9 Thunder as well as South Korea's being involved, then K9 Thunder is based on M109 howitzer K55 as the whole chassis and turret has same shape. So K55 is based on M109, then there must be the US defined as the designer of K9 Thunder. I see you're biased on this issue. Progressive288 (talk) 15:53, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Please stay civil in this matter, no need to call me biased or use those words. I invited you to a discussion but so far you have not brought a single point to confirm your claims and keep blatantly ignoring others points. The US is not the designer of the K9, the K9 has been designed by South Korea - This is reliably sourced. The K9 having the same shape as the K55 so it must be a US design is one of the poorest arguments being brought up so far. This is also not the discussion at hand, we are talking here about your claims for which you have provided no evidence about the K9 vs the T-155. Redalert2fan (talk) 14:18, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

And again, I summarize from the sourced information on all of the pages you have brought up. The K55 is based on the US made M109 and as such is a direct Variant of the M109, just like the A2,A3,NL version etc. The K9 is a new design by South Korea. The T-155 is based on the K9, and is a variant of the K9. This information is all reliable sourced. If you do not agree with the T-155 being based on the South Korean K9 please provide actual sources instead of personal opinion. If Turkey exports the T-155 to another country by matter of technology sharing like Azerbaijan, Qatar or Saudi Arabia and they build it in their own country those will become a variant of the Turkish T-155 just like the T-155 is a variant of the South Korean K9, or are you saying that they will also then become a system wholly designed by those respective countries? Redalert2fan (talk) 14:57, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Again, zero source to confirm your argument. All you have to do is bring the source that the US participated in designing K9. I already posted sources to prove how Koreans were involved in designing T-155 yet you always fail to bring single source to prove it. Find the source and post on discussion that zero Korean involvement in designing T-155. Based on your words, all tank is designed by French and based on FT-17. Kadrun (talk) 06:52, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

A simple question, can anyone provide one RS to support their claim?Slatersteven (talk) 15:11, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Sure,

• [2] is a reliable source acording to WP:KO/RS, This article talks about the epxort value. A translation of the relevant section is: "Turkey has designed basic skeletons, such as body and appearance, based on the model of the K9 self-propelled artillery since 1999 with technical support from Samsung Techwin and the Defense Science Research Institute (ADD)."
• [3] Janes, a well established news agency on military hardware states; The first export customer for the K9 Thunder was the Turkish Land Forces Command, which deploys the system under the local name of the Firtina. This is manufactured in Turkey and it is understood that more than 300 have now been produced.
• [4] states that the T-155 is designed on the K9 and has information on the licence sharing and export.
• [5] A Turkish source which contains an explanation on that the T-155 is based on the K9 and goes in to detail on the differences made by turkey on the original design
• [6] Not directly related to the T-155 but includes some information about it because the polish AHS Krab is also based on the K9, a same kind of situation as the T-155

Please take a read yourself so my summary does not affect your opinion. In my opinion these clearly all confirm that the T-155 is based on and a variant of the K9. These are some of the sources used on the K9 page right now, more are present at the export and operator section. These have been presented to Progressive288 by Kadrun before, and I have referred Progressive288 to them. Redalert2fan (talk) 15:47, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

All seem OK to me (especially Janes), so do we have any RS that contest this?Slatersteven (talk) 16:59, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

That has been the problem so far, no RS that contested have been provided upon request, the only claim made was that because no Official Turkish Government sources said so the information was untrue, which seems to be a personal opinion. Redalert2fan (talk) 17:06, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

[7] This source is all the way from year 2001. In Korean (1) 터키측은 삼성테크윈과 국방과학연구소(ADD)의 기술지원 아래 99년부터 K9 자주포의 모형을 본떠 차체와 외형 등 기본골격을 설계했으며 (translated by google translator to be fair) Turkey has designed basic skeletons such as body and appearance since 1999, modeling the K9 self-propelled artillery with technical support from Samsung Techwin and the ADD (2) 나머지 부품은 한국으로부터 부품을 공급받아 현지 조립한다 -> The remaining parts are supplied from Korea and assembled locally. (3) 국방부 관계자는 “자주포 수출뿐만 아니라 앞으로 장사정 탄약과 탄약운반 장갑차 등 추가 협력사업도 기대된다” -> A Defense Ministry official said, “In addition to exporting self-propelled artillery, we are looking forward to further cooperation projects such as long-term ammunition and ammunition carriers.” (4) “터키가 주변 중앙아시아국가들에 대한 영향력이 큰 만큼 제3국 수출도 가능할 것”이라고 말했다. -> "Turkey has a strong influence on neighboring Central Asian countries, so third-party exports are possible," he said. Kadrun (talk) 07:30, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

As far as I can see we have RS saying it is based on it, no RS contesting this so its based upon it.Slatersteven (talk) 13:08, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• K9 001.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:48, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

Norwegian tests

It is claimed in the article that K-9 was able to start at -40 degrees. I don't think that kind of temperatures have ever been recorded in Norway, the Golf Stream keeps the fjords open and extreme cold at bay. 2001:14BA:502C:3400:2D06:AD0E:7C9F:27B9 (talk) 20:01, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

You may be right. I will have to revisit with that one. Kadrun (talk) 07:48, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Finland

It is possible that additional order of 48 is actually new production. Kadrun (talk) 18:35, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

Huntsman - Australian version?

looks like this belongs in "variants" but I'll leave it to those who know this stuff

https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/2024/hanwha-initiates-production-of-australia-s-first-huntsman-howitzers Fitzhugh (talk) 18:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)